اللهم صلي على محمد و آل محمد

the below quoted was posted earlier as part of the 3 evidence i promised to present.while two posts containing two evidence still appear in page #3,the post containing the third was deleted by "spam-bot".so therefore i have posted it again:

3RD SITUATION:EVENT CITED BY THE HOLY QURAN
Certainly your Master is :

“Certainly your Master is Allah and His Messenger and those who believe who eshtablish prayer and give charity [b]while [/b]they bow. And who ever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as a guardian, so surely the party of Allah will be victorious”. (Quran 5:55-56)

It is unanimous that the verse descended about Imam Ali (AS) when he gave away in charity his ring while he was in a state of kneeling in his prayer.This is also authenticated successively according to the 12 Imams. Here are some of the Shi'ite references

Bihar al-Anwar, by Allama Majlisi,Tafseer al-Mizan, by Allama Tabatabai,Tafseer al-Kashaf, by Allama Muhammad Jawad Mughniyah,al-Ghadir, by Allama Abdul Husain Ahmad al-Amini,Asbat al-Hudate, by Allama Muhammad Ibn Hasan Amuli

But for the sake of the readers I shall produce some Sunni references, and traditions in this respect through other sources. Many Sunni commentators of the Quran confirm the fact that the above verse descended on the honor of Imam Ali (AS) and many Sunni scholars have also mentioned the unanimity or consensus of opinion in their books. Here are some references in this regard:

Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tha'labi, under Verse 5:55
Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, pp 186,288-289
Tafsir Jamiul Hukam al-Quran, by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Qurtubi, v6, p219
Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68
Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 293-294
Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, Egypt 1373, v1, pp 505,649
Asbab al-Nuzool, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, Egypt 1382, v1, p73 on the authority of Ibn Abbas
Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi, on the authority of Ibn Abbas
Sharh al-Tjrid, by Allama Qushji
Ahkam al-Quran, al-Jassas, v2, pp 542-543
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38
Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p391, Tradition #5991
al-Awsat, by Tabarani, narrated from Ammar Yasir
Ibn Mardawayh, on the authority of Ibn Abbas
,  and more.

There is also a tradition related by Ibn Salam whose chain of sources rise up to the Prophet (PBUH&HF) himself. Please refer to the Sahih of Nisa'i or the commentary of Sura Ma'idah in Jam'a Bayn al-Sihah al-Sittah.

In Ghayah al-Maram, p18, Sayyid al-Bahrayni forwards twenty four (24) traditions from sources other than the Ahlul-Bayt, all supporting the above fact.

For the sake of brevity, I am going to confine my self to a tradition occuring in the commentary of the Quran by Abi Is'haq Ahmad Ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Nisaboori al-Tha'labi. A few comments on the respected personality: He died in 337 AH and Ibn Khallikan gives an account of his death saying: "He was unique as a commentator of the Quran and his Tafsir al-Kabir is superior to all other interpretations."

When he reached this verse he recorded this in his Tafsir al-Kabir on the
authority of Abu Dhar al-Ghifari, who said:

“Both of my ears may turn deaf and both of my eyes may become blind if I speak a lie. I heard the Messenger of Allah, Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity, saying, "Ali is the guide of the righteous and the slayer of the infidels. he who has helped him is victorious and he who has abandoned him is forsaken." One day I said my prayers in the company of the Prophet. A beggar came to the mosque and begged for alms, but nobody gave him anything. Ali was in a state of kneeling in the prayer. He pointed out his ring to the beggar, who appraoched him and removed the ring from his finger. Thereupon the Prophet, Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity, implored Allah the Mighty and Glorious, saying: "O Allah! My brother Moses begged you saying, 'My Lord, delight my heart and make my task easy and undo the knot in my tongue so that they may understand me, and appoint from my kinsmen, Haroon, my brother, as my vizier, and strenghthen my back with him and make him participate in my mission so that we may glorify You and remember You more frequently. Certainly You see us.' And You inspired him: 'O Musa! All your requests have been granted.' O Allah! I am your slave and your prophet. Delight my heart and make my task easy and appoint from among my kinsmen Ali as my vizier and strengthen my back with him."

Abu Dhar, then, proceeded:

By Allah, the Messenger of Allah, Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity had not yet finished his supplication when the trustworthy Gabriel descended to him with this Verse:

"Certainly Allah is Your Master, and His Prophet and those who believe who establish prayer and give charity while they bow. And whoever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as a guardian, so surely the party of Allah will be victorious."

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha'labi under the commentary of
                 verses 5:55-56 of Quran.


========================================
A few comments by the other Commentators
========================================
Allama al-Tabarsi, while commenting on this verse in Majma' al-Bayan states: "The plural form has been used for Ali, Commander of the faithful in order to express his honor and eminence." And masters of the Arabic language use the plural form for an individual to show respect.

Allama al-Zamakshari in his Tafsir al-Kashshaf, has mentioned another nice
point which is as follows:

If you inquire how this plural word is applicable to Ali, may Allah be gracious to him, who is an individual, I shall say that though this verse is about Ali, an individual, the plural form is used in order to presuade others to act similarly and to give alms as readily as Ali did. There is also an implied instruction that the faithful should keep themselves always on the look out for occasions of acts of sympathy, benevolence and charity to the poor and the needy, and readily do the needful without waiting till the completion of even so important a duty as saying a prayer.

Sunni reference: Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, v1, p649

deleted.double posting.

@Shiite and Lagosshia: « #90 on: Yesterday at 03:08:35 PM »
Modify message
Quote
As for the issue about Aisha,this isn't an issue about "them".this has to do with the precedence set by the Prophet (sa).it is to preserve the honor of the Prophet (sa).marriage includes intimacy.therefore muslim men having something intimate with the wives of their Prophet (sa) is forbidden and seen as indecent.that is that.even if any of them happens to be evil and rebellious and destined for the hell fire,it is forbidden to marry her after the Prophet (sa).so this is honor to prophet-hood.
Are you of the opinion that Allah did not know the future, therefore allowed His Last Messenger [as] to be a consort to those who will end up in hell fire, as you claimed above, whereas the Allah our Lord made sure that He forgave Hawa, told Nuh [as] that even his disbelieving son is not from his family, and told Lut [as] that his wife is one of those who lag behind, meaning a disbeliever?

Please explain yourself my brother and don't be emotional about it. Lets talk rationally because Islam is an advise.
Report to moderator 24.90.228.130
shiite
Posts: 6

Offline Offline


Re: What Is Eid-al-Ghadir ?
« #91 on: Yesterday at 03:19:07 PM »

The Qur'aan has actually both CONDEMNED and EXPOSED 'Aaishah in even Surah al-TaHreem. See verse 4. This is al-Mawdoodee's translation of verse 4:

If you both (women) repent to Allah, (it is better for you), for your hearts have swerved from the right path

This is his commentary:

The word saghat in the original is from Baghy which means to swerve and to become crooked. Shah Waliyullah and Shah Rafi'uddin have translated this sentence thus: "Crooked have become your hearts." Hadrat 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud, 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas, Sufyan Thauri and Dahhak have given this meaning of it: "Your hearts have swerved from the right path." Imam Razi explains it thus: "Your hearts have swerved from what is right, and the right implies the right of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace)." And 'Allama Alusi's commentary is Although it is incumbent on you that you should approve what the Holy Messenger (upon whom he peace) approves and disapprove what he disapproves, yet in this matter your hearts have swerved from conformity with him and turned in opposition to him."

See http://www.englishtafsir.com/Quran/66/index.html#sdfootnote7anc
Report to moderator Logged
shiite
Posts: 6

Offline Offline


Re: What Is Eid-al-Ghadir ?
« #92 on: Yesterday at 03:23:07 PM »

Some people are playing the emotional card here, and it is not helping the discussion. Both Prophet NooH (as) and Prophet LooT (as) were married to evil women. Yet, they NEVER divorced these two evil women. Does that in any way prove that those evil women were good people.

The fact that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, did not divorce 'Aaishah and Hafsah does not make them good people.
Report to moderator Logged
LagosShia
Posts: 1966

Offline Offline


Re: What Is Eid-al-Ghadir ?
« #93 on: Yesterday at 04:53:25 PM »

@Sweetnecta
Brother 'shiite' has beaten me to the reply in providing you a verse you asked for from the Quran that condemns Aisha.so you would know that Aisha was no different than the wives of Lot and Noah (as) when you look at all the evidence objectively.it is not easy to discover that your eyes were sealed to many facts in Islam for a brother like you practicing the sunni ways and beliefs.i know what i am saying.the bitter fact is you cant as a sunni see the truth,when the father of Aisha is Abu bakr.you can also say that you are neither sunni or shia,but that is not true.everything in your words smell 'sunni' without you knowing.unfortunately,our ancestors were given the sunni interpretation of Islam without them knowing it.they were told simply that what they are being taught is 'Islam'.that is not even my concern in what you think you are.i am only telling you that only the word 'shia' is synonymous with 'muslim'.i am telling you,take it or leave,if you are not following the shia interpretation and beliefs,you are really missing Islam!

the verse condemning Aisha and Hafsat were revealed at a time the Prophet Muhammad (sa) was alive.if the Prophet (sa) was still alive when Aisha committed the attrocities (after the demise of the Prophet) we could have had more verses in the Quran condemning Aisha.anyways brother 'Sweetnecta',i really respect you for your devotion to and love for Islam especially in your cyber-jihad against the missionary christians.i only want to appeal to you to consider the facts at hand and evidence thus far in this enlightening thread.do not let stubborness or anything stop you from accepting the truth.may Allah (swt) be with you.
Report to moderator Logged
4CHRISTIANS: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-739943.0.html
LagosShia
Posts: 1966

Offline Offline


Re: What Is Eid-al-Ghadir ?
« #94 on: Yesterday at 05:01:51 PM »

Special thanks and appreciation to brother 'shiite' aka 'kwara shia' for his contributions and great replies.[quote][/Quote]Allah is Akbar, truly. The verse is a warning, admonishing and obligating the women to return to the right course the had neglected. This is the first bold. We see a similar warning in Surah Azhab. The fact that the prophet [as] was not commanded to divorce any of his wives at the end of the day and died as their collective husband, they being his wives, remaining as such are collective evidence, in my mind and cognitive ability to see right for what it is and wrong for what it is, that i do not see them as anything but rightly guided women.

my opinion is derived from the Quran itself and the hadith;

From the Quran, Allah says in surah Nisaa that the person becomes disbeliever after belief. Then comes back to become believer and then goes back to disbelief. Then comes back to belief and then after it goes back to disbelief. Such a person continues in this way until it becomes a joke. We do not see the wives [ra] of the messenger [as] in this fashion, because Allah would not have allowed Muhammad [as] to continue to be their husband. To claim that they were condemned at the end of the day is contrary to Quran, if we look at the situations of the disbelieving wives of the earlier prophets [as], whose complete and final condemnation and tragic end happened in the lifetime of the individual prophet [as].

Surah on Abi Lahab who is an uncle of the Messenger [as], goes contrary to anyone thinking that Allah Will condemn a person and it is not clear, because there is no ayah of Mercy that will revealed on that person. This is not the case with any of the spouses of the messenger [as].

And as to Hadith, there is no final condemnation from the messenger [as] about any of his wives. Allah would not have allowed him [as] to continue to share his life with wives who will not enter paradise. Muslims were allowed, and still allowed to marry people of the book; christian and jews and not pagans. There are 3 sets of people; 1 of them is a believing group, the muslims. The 2 other groups are disbelievers, consisting the pagans and people of the book. Neither of the wives of the prophet is a non muslim, being called mother of believers. Disbelievers in reality, will not be so honored as mothers of believers, especially when they are not the blood mother. And Allah would not allow the messenger to marry hypocrites. If they were not hypocrites in his lifetime, there was no reason for them to be hypocrites after him, and Allah did not expose their deceit and divorced them once and for all, It does not make sense, unless you will apply the idea that Muhammad [as] did not have Islam completed on him and hence he was with hypocrites?

Incidentally, you will have to invent another prophet, or a holy ghost, like the christian's holy ghost to make this even a conversation.

When Muhammad [as] warned Ali [ra] to be gentle with Aisha [ra], it tells us that he already knew the outcome. What did Ali [ra] do as the outcome was exactly the case? he was gentle. When Ali [ra] got to the place of his death, as the messenger predicted, he also knew it and he did not curse any of the wives or companions [ra]. In his Kalifah reign, he did not unearth the bodies of Abu Bakr and Umar Khattab [ra], who remained laid beside the messenger [as].

If Wahshi [ra] who killed Hamzah ibn Abu Mutallab [ra] was not cursed, but received Mercy from Allah, why would anyone think that the wives of the messenger [as] do not have just the same amount of Mercy, from Allah [SWT] who reminded them of the right that they momentarily neglect?

Noah [as] was admonished, making him realize that his son was a disbeliever. Allah would have made the position of the 2 wives clear, instead of warning them to come back and keeping them as wives of His Beloved [as]. I remember the condition of the people who did not go to the campaign, and how Allah had told the messenger [as] to separate or isolate them. The one of these people who received Mercy from Allah said after his "victory" bestowed on him by Allah in forgiveness, that he knew he was not a loss cause because often he had seen the prophet [as] looked at him, a sign that there is Mercy coming to him from Allah [SWT]. This also reinforces that if the wives were like the wives of Nuh and Lut [as], there is no reason for Allah to allow His Messenger [as] to remain as their husband. Didn't Allah show Mercy on Hawa the wife of Adam [as] as she returned for forgiveness?

Zhul-fiqar:

this is about giving honor to whom honor is due to please Allah (swt) and His Prophet (s).

My advice to you is not to pass judment and make conclusion upon what you have no knowledge.

You asked if Ghadir Khumm was marked by any of those you regard as 'rightly guided companions'.my answer is how can the criminals commemorate their crime?(with the exception of Imam Ali,you regard as fourth rightly guided).

My friend do not let blind hate and the fear of innovation (bid'ah) stop you from seeing the truth concealed from your eyes deliberately.i stated facts and historical events not only mentioned in Shia sources but also recorded in hadith compilations regarded by Sunnis to be reliable and authentic.

Nonetheless,the members of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) who Allah (swt) purified (holy Quran 33:33) including the 12 Imams (as) among whom is Imam Ali (as) himself marked the day of Ghadir Khumm and drew reference to it and reminded people of it on important occassions.

Typical

Allaah (SWT) has stated clearly that the hearts of 'Aaishah and Hafsah had deviated from the Truth. Read the verse again, and the tafseer of the SaHaabah quoted by 'Allaamah al-Mawdoodee. This is the verse again as translated by him:

If you both (women) repent to Allah, (it is better for you), for your hearts have swerved from the right path.


When it is said that the heart of a person has swerved from the right path, it is MORE serious than to say that that person him/herself has deviated. You know why? If a person is deviated but his heart is still pure, he will gain guidance later if Allaah wills. But, if the heart of a person itself is deviated, such a person has no more hope of guidance.

We can see that clearly in the cases of 'Aaishah and Hafsah. It was 'Aaishah's deviated heart that made her murder thousands of her own children, and to mount an armed rebellion against her own mawlaa.

BetaThings:

Typical

indeed!

My advice to you is not to pass judment and make conclusion upon what you have no knowledge.

@Sweetnecta

First,”Sweetnecta” you were given evidence from the Quran confirming and testifying that the two women were indeed not the angels you depict them to be. Whatever analysis and begging you want to do on their behalf does not change what happened during and especially after the demise of the Prophet (sa).

You keep saying that the Prophet (sa) didn’t divorce them so they were not that bad afterall.you have being told that Noah and Lot (as) also didn’t divorce their wives but they were nonetheless destined to hell. Whether destined for hell or not,Aisha isn’t someone praiseworthy to say the very least.till the day of judgment when your dream is that she would be forgiven,we would continue to reap the blessings through our sincerity and pure intention of being unfriendly and opposing anyone who disobeyed the Prophet (sa).being an opponent to someone disobedient to the Prophet (sa) is something I take pride in.

Basing your arguments on suppositions and leaving chances open that she could have believed again after disbelief is not worthy of a discussion.even if we do not go to the extent of passing takfir on anyone and calling Aisha a disbeliever,we simply want to let you know that even if she continued to be a muslim or claimed to be one,we are simply opposed to her wrong actions and those actions were displayed deep into her old age.

You spoke of Abi Lahab.that man never became muslim and died a kafir.in Aisha’s case it isn’t an instance of open disbelief or enemity especially during the lifetime of the Prophet (sa)

You also said that if Aisha was a hypocrite and a disbeliever the Prophet (sa) would not have continued sharing his bed with her and Allah will not allow that.yet you know fully well that Allah (swt) continued to allow Noah and Lot (as) keep their wives and not first divorce them.

Your analogies are actually very untihinkable because they don’t make sense.you are not basing your thinking on what really happened but on your fantasies and imaginations and analogies and by analysis and drawing parallels.do you except Imam Ali (as) at the point of his death to be shouting and cursing his enemies who were more than just one munafiq?

Let me remind you the saying of the Prophet (sa):”only a believer loves Ali and only a hypocrite hates him”. the Prophet (sa) also said:”Ali is with the truth and the truth is with Ali”. so you should think about the nature of someone who declared war against him!
“For instance, it has been reported in the Sunni books of Hadith including Musnad Ahmad, Musnad Ibn abi Shayba, Mu’jam At-Tabarani as well as Sahih Ibn Hibban with good chain of narrators (i.e. Sanad Hasan) on the authority of Zaid ibn al-Arqam and Abu Huraira, ‘the messenger of God looked towards Ali, Fatimah, Hassan, and Hussain (peace be upon them, this was also mentioned in the Hadith) and said, I am in war with those who wage war on you and in peace with those who are peaceful to you.’

the holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his pure family) said: ”If you find people of innovation and suspicion after me, then demonstrate disassociation from them and address them with much words of condemnation”.

if sunnis choose to turn a blind eye to the countless crimes committed by Aisha that include, “disobeying the order of the holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his pure family), inciting and rebelling against the Imam of her time (i.e. Imam Ali peace be upon him), shedding the blood of 3000 innocent Muslim, shooting arrows at the corpse of Imam al-Hassan (peace be upon him) to prevent his burial beside his grandfather, abusing Lady Fatimah al-Zahra (peace be upon her) and expressing happiness on the day she was martyred”, there is no way they can deny the fact that she has introduced the innovation of adult-breastfeeding in the religion of Islam.


You bring also the example of Wahshi. Wahshi was a slave and a kafir when he killed Hamzah (as).was Aisha a kafir? Hur who laid siege on Imam Hussain (as) and held him on the plain of Karbala became the first matyr for Imam Hussain (as) who is worthy of honor. Hur repented and sought the forgiveness of the Imam (as).did Aisha do likewise from Imam Ali (as)?didnt she continue with her opposition and hate for the Ahlul-Bayt (as).even if Aisha was praying 24/7,we cannot have a favorable view of her if she is an enemy or even someone who had hate or kept malice for the Ahlul-Bayt (as) members the Quran oblige us to love:

“Say O Muhammad:”I seek no reward from you but the love of my near ones”.

So based on your logic, since the Prophet (sa) knew Aisha was bad he should have divorced her. otherwise, since the Prophet (sa) knew Aisha was going to wage war after his death and did nothing to “isolate” her or divorce her then, it means Aisha was right in declaring war.

Imam Ali (as) knew his killer. But why didn’t Imam Ali (as) kill him first pre-emptively? Islam teaches us that we are innocent until we commit a sin. How can you judge a person for a sin he hasn’t yet committed or would commit that sin in the future? How can Allah (swt) judge us for what we have not yet committed? If that is the case, then there would be no need for us to live and be tested on earth. after all Almighty Allah (swt) have the power of knowledge of the unseen. He knows the future. So He simply should create us humans and directly apportion us between paradise and hell. He should not allow us to practice free wil and choose by ourselves to do or not to do good/bad.then that would be unjust and oppression (zulm).and Allah (swt) is not a zalim (oppressor/wrongdoer).He is just!

Sweetnecta says:

And as to Hadith, there is no final condemnation from the messenger [as] about any of his wives.

"If you both (women) repent to Allah, (it is better for you), for your hearts have swerved from the right path.But if you support one another against the Prophet, then surely Allah is his Protector; and after that Gabriel and all righteous believers and the angels are all his supporters.".(Holy Quran 66:4)

Needless to say, there is no single verse, which states that Aisha or Hafsa turned in repentance after their hearts had already deviated or that Allah the Most Exalted has accepted their repentance anywhere in the Quran. Whereas, we find in the Quran an example of three of the Prophet’s companions who had stayed behind and had not taken part in the battle of Tabuk but then asked Allah for forgiveness,

“And to the three who were left behind, until the earth became strait to them notwithstanding its spaciousness and their souls were also straitened to them; and they knew it for certain that there was no refuge from Allah but in Him; then He turned to them (mercifully) that they might turn (to Him); surely Allah is the Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.” (Holy Quran Holy Quran, 9:118)


Allah the Most Exalted has documented the repentance of those three companions as well as his acceptance of their repentance in the holy Quran, the most truthful book of all books. However, He has not documented any of that for Aisha after condemnation and describing her heart as "deviated from belief".

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi'a_view_of_Aisha#Battle_of_Jamal]Shi'a view of Aisha[/url]

Zhul-fiqar:

indeed!

My advice to you is not to pass judment and make conclusion upon what you have no knowledge.

And what about the admonition about blind hate?
I don't talk about what I have no knowledge. Yet I am knowledgeable enough to see contradictions
I also very well that I should enough call companions names or cause them. That in my opinion is BENEFICIAL knowledge.
In particular, I am knowledgeable enough to avoid pointless debates. That applies particularly when I am talking religion
We have filled pages here and what knowledge has come to light - Shias have their own way. We knew that. I posted here originally so that people who don't know would not be misled into embracing newly invented religious events. I never intended to dissuade any Shia. It is pointless. Afterall, they are "all-knowing"

BetaThings:

And what about the admonition about blind hate?
I don't talk about what I have no knowledge. Yet I am knowledgeable enough to see contradictions
I also very well that I should enough call companions names or cause them. That in my opinion is BENEFICIAL knowledge.
In particular, I am knowledgeable enough to avoid pointless debates. That applies particularly when I am talking religion
We have filled pages here and what knowledge has come to light - Shias have their own way. We knew that. I posted here originally so that people who don't know would not be misled into embracing newly invented religious events. I never intended to dissuade any Shia. It is pointless. Afterall, they are "all-knowing"

you sound bitter. And I could not find one sentence in your blabbing that is true and none of your name callings and adjectives can you defend.

am i the one hating blindly?

when you see contradiction point it out.

blessing evil companions is not only bid'ah but haram. the Quran which is our holy book is full of narrations pointing out the wrongs of evil men. So what benefit have you gained by calling yourself a Muslim if you cannot see evil for what it is and shun it? Can you honestly say with your “sit on the fence” approach you are among those described below?:

(Holy Quran 3:110)

Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, [/b]and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.

(Holy Quran 3:104)
Let there be people among you, who invite to the best [in religion]; and [b]command that which is just, and forbid that which is evil; and they shall be happy.


(Holy Quran 7:157)
"Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures), - in the law and the Gospel; - for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him, - it is they who will prosper."

(Holy Quran 9:71)
And the faithful men, and the faithful women are friends one to another: They[b] command that which is just, and they forbid that which is evil;[/b] and they are constant at prayer, and pay their appointed alms; and they obey God, and his apostle: Unto these will God be Merciful; for He [is] Mighty [and] Wise.


How can you even think of “dissuading” anyone when after 4 pages, you still call Eid al-Ghadir “newly invented religious event”? with all the evidence and information given ,you behave as if you are a wall that has no ear and no eye. If you call eid al-ghadir “newly invented”, would you be kind enough to tell us exactly where the event was “invented” and when and by who?

[Quote]« #104 on: Yesterday at 11:19:12 PM »

Sweetnecta says:

Quote
And as to Hadith, there is no final condemnation from the messenger [as] about any of his wives.


"If you both (women) repent to Allah, (it is better for you), for your hearts have swerved from the right path.But if you support one another against the Prophet, then surely Allah is his Protector; and after that Gabriel and all righteous believers and the angels are all his supporters.".(Holy Quran 66:4)

[b]Needless to say, there is no single verse, which states that Aisha or Hafsa turned in repentance after their hearts had already deviated or that Allah the Most Exalted has accepted their repentance anywhere in the Quran. [/b]Whereas, we find in the Quran an example of three of the Prophet’s companions who had stayed behind and had not taken part in the battle of Tabuk but then asked Allah for forgiveness,

“And to the three who were left behind, until the earth became strait to them notwithstanding its spaciousness and their souls were also straitened to them; and they knew it for certain that there was no refuge from Allah but in Him; then He turned to them (mercifully) that they might turn (to Him); surely Allah is the Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.” (Holy Quran Holy Quran, 9:118)


Allah the Most Exalted has documented the repentance of those three companions as well as his acceptance of their repentance in the holy Quran, the most truthful book of all books. However, He has not documented any of that for Aisha after condemnation and describing her heart as "deviated from belief".[/Quote]it will be redundant to give an ayah, because they were still married to the prophet [as], after that instead of giving them divorce. Earlier, Allah threatened them of divorce and they sat up straight and remained wives of their noble husband. The silence of Almighty therefore on the matter was an approval of their new attitude of obedience. Imagine if they were divorced at the time Allah threatened them in Surah Azhab; The would not have been considered wives of the prophet, hence mothers of believers [ra]. They would not have been true muslims but everyone would have looked at them as hypocrites or outright disbelievers like the one whose Zakat was rejected by Allah, and he then resorted to build rival mosque in Madina.
The women would have been free to marry, and no muslim will marry them, but the disbelievers who would think that they would get to the prophet [as] and the companions [ra], indeed Islam by such act would. But none of these happened and the hearts of these special women [ra] remained steadfast and married no one, muslim or not. Who strengthened their hearts, but Allah?
The wives were unlike other women, or wives if you wanna go there, just like their husband was not like other husbands or prophets, which you will agree?
Allah said about the prophet in Surah Abasa; He turned his face. Please read it from beginning to verse 11. Now, show me a verse where Allah says that the messenger [as] went to the blind man after this. If you can't know that it was not necessary, just as the declaration that the wives are obedient, again, after they have been warned.
Allah says to Muhammad [as] in Surah Azhab; Takillah. Was the prophet not the most who is tawakUllah? Of course, he has the greatest fear or consciousness of Allah. You can't then say if a person was called out, and not ultimately condemned that he or she is condemned, because you see where they were called out. If that was the case the whole of Makka was condemned and no muslim would have came out of her.

This opinion like this reminds me of the fake hadith that says if any change his religion he should be killed. It will not include women in this case because she will be her, not him. It will mean muslims will be killing adults who enter Islam. It will mean that it does against many ayat of the Quran.

Sweetnecta:

it will be redundant to give an ayah, because they were still married to the prophet [as], after that instead of giving them divorce. Earlier, Allah threatened them of divorce and they sat up straight and remained wives of their noble husband. The silence of Almighty therefore on the matter was an approval of their new attitude of obedience. Imagine if they were divorced at the time Allah threatened them in Surah Azhab; The would not have been considered wives of the prophet, hence mothers of believers [ra]. They would not have been true muslims but everyone would have looked at them as hypocrites or outright disbelievers like the one whose Zakat was rejected by Allah, and he then resorted to build rival mosque in Madina.
The women would have been free to marry, and no muslim will marry them, but the disbelievers who would think that they would get to the prophet [as] and the companions [ra], indeed Islam by such act would. But none of these happened and the hearts of these special women [ra] remained steadfast and married no one, muslim or not. Who strengthened their hearts, but Allah?

Should I remind you again that Noah and Lot (as) didn’t divorce their wives and they were condemned to hell?
There is nowhere Allah (swt) “threatened” them with divorce.Allah (swt) told them that He can provide the Prophet (sa) with better wives.and indeed someone like Umm Salamah (RA) was a better wife to the Prophet (sa) than both Aisha and Hafsa.

Again,please after Allah (swt) condemned them and said their hearts have deviated from faith,show us where they were forgiven.

Also,take in mind the atrocities committed after the Prophet’s (sa) death.

The wives were unlike other women, or wives if you wanna go there, just like their husband was not like other husbands or prophets, which you will agree?

Actions speak louder than words.i don’t see what sort of woman my wife would be seen as if she prevents my beloved grandson from being buried near me because she hated my daughter from another mother.there is no parallel that a Prophet’s wife must be angelic.the Quran testifies to that by presenting the wives of Noah and Lot (as) as examples.also,the wife of the pharaoh was good and believing while the pharaoh himself was evil.

Allah said about the prophet in Surah Abasa; He turned his face. Please read it from beginning to verse 11. Now, show me a verse where Allah says that the messenger [as] went to the blind man after this. If you can't know that it was not necessary, just as the declaration that the wives are obedient, again, after they have been warned.
Allah says to Muhammad [as] in Surah Azhab; Takillah. Was the prophet not the most who is tawakUllah? Of course, he has the greatest fear or consciousness of Allah. You can't then say if a person was called out, and not ultimately condemned that he or she is condemned, because you see where they were called out. If that was the case the whole of Makka was condemned and no muslim would have came out of her.

You keep denying that you’re not sunni.yet you even take sunni interpretations for Quranic verses.according to Shia tafseer and muhaddithin,that verse was not revealed regarding the Prophet (sa).it was not the Prophet (sa) who turned his face and frowned at a beggar.

But even if I am to agree with you for argument sake that it was the Prophet (sa),there are verses thereafter which reveal that Allah (swt) was well-pleased with the Prophet (sa).Surah al-Fath is a testimony to that.

This opinion like this reminds me of the fake hadith that says if any change his religion he should be killed. It will not include women in this case because she will be her, not him. It will mean muslims will be killing adults who enter Islam. It will mean that it does against many ayat of the Quran.

Whatever!

@Lagosshia: « #109 on: Today at 02:30:12 PM »
[Quote]Quote from: Sweetnecta on Today at 01:09:38 PM
it will be redundant to give an ayah, because they were still married to the prophet [as], after that instead of giving them divorce. Earlier, Allah threatened them of divorce and they sat up straight and remained wives of their noble husband. The silence of Almighty therefore on the matter was an approval of their new attitude of obedience. Imagine if they were divorced at the time Allah threatened them in Surah Azhab; The would not have been considered wives of the prophet, hence mothers of believers [ra]. They would not have been true muslims but everyone would have looked at them as hypocrites or outright disbelievers like the one whose Zakat was rejected by Allah, and he then resorted to build rival mosque in Madina.
The women would have been free to marry, and no muslim will marry them, but the disbelievers who would think that they would get to the prophet [as] and the companions [ra], indeed Islam by such act would. But none of these happened and the hearts of these special women [ra] remained steadfast and married no one, muslim or not. Who strengthened their hearts, but Allah?
Should I remind you again that Noah and Lot (as) didn’t divorce their wives and they were condemned to hell?
There is nowhere Allah (swt) “threatened” them with divorce.Allah (swt) told them that He can provide the Prophet (sa) with better wives.and indeed someone like Umm Salamah (RA) was a better wife to the Prophet (sa) than both Aisha and Hafsa.

Again,please after Allah (swt) condemned them and said their hearts have deviated from faith,show us where they were forgiven.

Also,take in mind the atrocities committed after the Prophet’s (sa) death.[/Quote]As I have stated, Allah did not need to announce to the people witnessing the mistake and the correction that followed, that the women are now forgiven. The fact that they were wives to the end nullified all you have put together against them. May Allah forgive you and I. Amin. Muhammad [as] said to the people, to emphasize the lack of preferential treatment in Islam, unlike previous nations, not that Fatima [ra] will do evil [stealing, etc], if she were to do such a thing, she will be dealt with according to the Law of Allah. Allah forgives whosoever He Wills. Alah revealed to His Messenger [as] those who were hypocrites. And the messenger gave their names to a person not from his household, who was told not to attend the funeral prayer of each of the persons. None of the kalifah and the wives of the prophet [as] was among these people. That itself was an evidence that none of them deserves our calling them names or worse saying bad words after their mention, while we turn around and ask Allah to forgive all muslims.



[Quote]Quote
The wives were unlike other women, or wives if you wanna go there, just like their husband was not like other husbands or prophets, which you will agree?
[b]Actions speak louder than words.[/b]i don’t see what sort of woman my wife would be seen as if she prevents my beloved grandson from being buried near me because she hated my daughter from another mother.there is no parallel that a Prophet’s wife must be angelic.the Quran testifies to that by presenting the wives of Noah and Lot (as) as examples.also,the wife of the pharaoh was good and believing while the pharaoh himself was evil.[/Quote]While i will not go on with talking endlessly in opposition to a muslim, there is no guarantee that a child of a prophet will turn out to be angelic or even a believer. We see that Kabil was a killer and a son from Nuh [as] perished with the disobedient. Allah chooses where a person will end up, if one was not buried next to the prophet [as], it is not a sign of going to hell fire. Fatima [ra] was closer to the messenger than the grandchildren. This is a fact, because children are closer than grandchild. Non of my siblings who had passed is buried even in the same country with their father.



[Quote]Quote
Allah said about the prophet in Surah Abasa; He turned his face. Please read it from beginning to verse 11. Now, show me a verse where Allah says that the messenger [as] went to the blind man after this. If you can't know that it was not necessary, just as the declaration that the wives are obedient, again, after they have been warned.
Allah says to Muhammad [as] in Surah Azhab; Takillah. Was the prophet not the most who is tawakUllah? Of course, he has the greatest fear or consciousness of Allah. You can't then say if a person was called out, and not ultimately condemned that he or she is condemned, because you see where they were called out. If that was the case the whole of Makka was condemned and no muslim would have came out of her.
You keep denying that you’re not sunni.yet you even take sunni interpretations for Quranic verses.according to Shia tafseer and muhaddithin,that verse was not revealed regarding the Prophet (sa).it was not the Prophet (sa) who turned his face and frowned at a beggar.[/Quote]Just because did not choose the opinion of the Shia in this matter does not mean i will side with Sunni always. And even if I do, it does not make me a sunni because i do not hyphenate my Islam. I may not agree with shia in few things like Muta and insulting the wives and companions of the prophet [as], and a few other things, that will not mean that I disagree with them in all things. I am neither a sunni nor a shia. But i am definitely a muslim and InshaAllah I will die on that path.



[Quote]But even if I am to agree with you for argument sake that it was the Prophet (sa),there are verses thereafter which reveal that Allah (swt) was well-pleased with the Prophet (sa).Surah al-Fath is a testimony to that.[/Quote]My brother, you know that you do not love Muhammad [as] more than me. If you know this, then realize that my talking about Surah Abasa, is because it gives us good lessons and relative to this discussion. I must also tell you there are verses where Allah says that He is pleased with the Companions, who were also pleased with Him. This is the declaration of Allah in more than 1 verse. Allah also said that the messenger [as] should take from their wealth as mean of purity.



[Quote]Quote
This opinion like this reminds me of the fake hadith that says if any change his religion he should be killed. It will not include women in this case because she will be her, not him. It will mean muslims will be killing adults who enter Islam. It will mean that it does against many ayat of the Quran.
Whatever![/Quote]If you see anything bad in my character and you will not at least advise me, I think that is not good. I do hope that you forgive me, knowing fully that I am a weak soul. May Allah strengthen us all. Amin.
Allah knows best.

Zhul-fiqar:

you sound bitter. And I could not find one sentence in your blabbing that is true and none of your name callings and adjectives can you defend.

am i the one hating blindly?

when you see contradiction point it out.

blessing evil companions is not only bid'ah but haram. the Quran which is our holy book is full of narrations pointing out the wrongs of evil men. So what benefit have you gained by calling yourself a Muslim if you cannot see evil for what it is and shun it? Can you honestly say with your “sit on the fence” approach you are among those described below?:

(Holy Quran 3:110)

Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, [/b]and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.

(Holy Quran 3:104)
Let there be people among you, who invite to the best [in religion]; and [b]command that which is just, and forbid that which is evil; and they shall be happy.


(Holy Quran 7:157)
"Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures), - in the law and the Gospel; - for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him, - it is they who will prosper."

(Holy Quran 9:71)
And the faithful men, and the faithful women are friends one to another: They[b] command that which is just, and they forbid that which is evil;[/b] and they are constant at prayer, and pay their appointed alms; and they obey God, and his apostle: Unto these will God be Merciful; for He [is] Mighty [and] Wise.


How can you even think of “dissuading” anyone when after 4 pages, you still call Eid al-Ghadir “newly invented religious event”? with all the evidence and information given ,you behave as if you are a wall that has no ear and no eye. If you call eid al-ghadir “newly invented”, would you be kind enough to tell us exactly where the event was “invented” and when and by who?

Bitter? Blabbing? Me? Go and check ALL my posts! Bring one, just one evidence, of insults
Evil companion? but asked to lead prayers
And with the insults you freely dispense, you are one of the best people?
We don't curse, do we?
There is no profit in this for me. I prefer to spend my time on seeking beneficial knowledge. Meanwhile, I know bid'ah when I see it

BetaThings:

Bitter? Blabbing? Me? Go and check ALL my posts! Bring one, just one evidence, of insults
Evil companion? but asked to lead prayers
And with the insults you freely dispense, you are one of the best people?
We don't curse, do we?
There is no profit in this for me. I prefer to spend my time on seeking beneficial knowledge. Meanwhile, I know bid'ah when I see it

you raised two important points and two important topics.i will deal with them and i wouldn't go into exchanging personal arguments or turning the thread into something for quarrels.if i may remind you this thread is about EID AL-GHADIR.i am loving this thread because as time goes you guys are raising points which if we shia delve into will give you more knowledge and facts and ultimately get to the truth concealed from you sunnis deliberately.

You raised two points:
1.you are after knowledge.and inshaAllah that is what i will give you as you'd soon see.

2.you know bid'ah when you see it.that would be put to test again.when i treat two topics you raised in your above post,we shall see your truthfulness and sincerity to know the truth.

The two topics which i would deal with in my subsequent posts are:

1. Is cursing allowed in Islam? Is it the same as 'insult'?

2. Did abu bakr lead anyone in prayer? 'Beta Things' claimed that some of the companions we shia dislike led prayers.in particular there is an historical sunni lie to make cover for the usurpers that abu bakr was the one told by the Prophet (s) to lead prayer when the Prophet (saw) was very ill.infact they allege that since the Prophet (s) ordered abu bakr to lead the prayer in his absence,that is evidence that abu bakr should succeed the Prophet (s) and become caliph when the Prophet (s) leaves this world.i will present evidence in my subsequent posts citing sunni references to show how false the claim is and also how the Prophet (s) in severe illness humiliated both abu bakr and umar when they attempted to lead prayers in the absence of the Prophet (s).in simply terms,abu bakr and umar did not lead the prayer when the Prophet (s) was ill.

I see I miss nothing but shia lies and fabrications , in any case let me first take a stock of the tragedy of hinging ones "beliefs" on the Ghadir Khumm quagmire:

1. That it is illogical to believe that the Prophet left the Prophet decided to make the all "important" announcement after majority of the pilgrims had left Mecca.

2. That Majority of the Pilgrim could not have pass through Ghadir Khumm because it laid North wards of mecca, while as I have shown in the diagrams posted earlier, people that are from Yemen, villages south of Mecca, and Taif would have gone the opposite direction not going through Ghadir Khumm which is totally out of their direction, again the Pilgrims from Meccan would simply have stayed in Mecca. This would defy common sense, in essence the shia Claim is saying the Prophet left the most important appointment and decided to make it at a place he knew Majoirty of people would not be. That does not make sense in any way, it is noteworthy that the prophet pbuh after giving his sermon on arafat asked "Did I convey the message" and the people said "Yes" then he said "O Allah be my witness", after saying that he decided to make an all important speech 250 km away from Mecca. this lies the strongest inconsistency in the unbelievable tales inventd by the shias.

3. That Sunni hadiths stating the issues of Mawla used the term in the context of friendship, and not leader, as the term Mawla was used in the context of the report in which certain soldiers under Ali r.a command had cause to be dissatisfied with him, and in relation to this dissatisfaction did the Prophet pbuh emphasised why they should not be angry with Ali r.a due to his close ties with the Prophet pbuh, this again is confirmed by shia sources, that there was such an incident.

4. That the use of the Term Mawla in sunni sources that are known to authentic never used the expression "after Me Ali is your Mawla". Hence rendering the term clearly not as an appointment but in terms of friendships, as the term is apparently indefinite in nature, that again indicates that it is used in the sense of friendship.

5. that the term cannot mean leader because it will by de facto mean the Muslims had two leaders ruling at the same time, this again blankets the lie they make out of the Mawla claim, there was no point in time during the life time of the Prophet pbuh did the Muslims took Ali to be a co - equal leader with Muhammad pbuh, no time, even if Mr. shite might want to make illogical claims that there can be two leaders in one place at the same time, it never happened during the life time of the Prophet pbuh, as Muslims alive then never took Ali to be the prophet co - equal in leadership.

6. furthermore the shia contradict themselves by insisting that the hadiths : "after me Ali is your Mawla" and "if I am your Mawla Ali is your Mawla" are authentic,then they are both contradictory , as one is saying after me Ali is your leader and the other both me and Ali are your leaders ; which do the shia take? let leave it to their every mouthful lies to choose.

this should be sufficient to refute the enormous lies the shia want to foist on the Muslim ummah. The statement of the prophet pbuh his clear. See if you want to.

To call Hadeeth al-Ghadeer a lie is the height of dishonesty. It is SaHeeH and mutawaatir. Every honest person knows and upholds this. Well, we cannot force you to accept the Truth. You know what the Sunnee scholars have said about anyone denying a mutawaatir Hadeeth? The Indian Sunnee scholar, Shaykh Nazaam al-Deen as well as the group of Indian Sunnee 'ulamaa in their book, Fataawa al-Hindiyyah, vol. 2, p. 265 states:

[size=14pt]وَمَنْ أَنْكَرَ الْمُتَوَاتِرَ فَقَدْ كَفَرَ[/size]

Whoever denies a mutawaatir report is a Kaafir.

The founder of Wahaabism, MuHammad bin 'Abd al-Wahaab in his Risaalah fee Radd 'alaa RaafiDah, vol. 1, p. 41, also says something very similar:

[size=14pt]ومن أنكر ذلك فقد أنكر المتواتر وحال منكره معلوم أقل مراتبه أن يكون فاسقاً.[/size]

Whoever denies it has denied the mutawaatir. The condition of its denier (i.e. denier of mutawaatir), his lowest condition, is that he is a Faasiq (evil doer)!

So, we know what these people who deny Hadeeth al-Ghadeer are.

One of them also claims that there is contradiction between Hadeeth al-Ghadeer (i.e. whomsoever I am his mawlaa, 'Alee is his mawlaa) and Hadeeth al-Wilaayah (i.e. 'Alee is the Walee of all believers after me). What kind of brain is that? If Imaam 'Alee (as) was the second mawlaa of the believers towards the end of the Prophet's lifetime, does that not make him the Walee after him? Both Hadeeths are actually complementary, and explain each other. It makes logical sense that the mawlaa of the believers during the Prophet's lifetime continues as such after his death. So, where is the contradiction?

[size=14pt]Did the Holy Prophet (pbuh) during his illness, order Abu Bakr, to lead the congregational prayer?[/size]

Question
The Sunni historians claim that when the Holy was unable to attend the public prayers because of his illness, he ordered Abu Bakr to lead the congregational prayers. Is it true?

General Answer
Some narrations have been related in the Sunni sources concerning the appointment of Abu Bakr by the Holy Prophet (pbuh) as a prayer leader.  In case we accept them, some unacceptable complications and ambiguities will arise.  Even if it is assumed that the Holy Prophet ordered Abu Bakr to act as an Imam (prayer-leader), it is still not clear how it became an "endorsement" of his candidacy for succession because there were other people also whom the Prophet (pbuh) had introduced as eligible for leadership in prayers but no one has considered them as qualified for candidacy for succession and caliphate.

Detailed Answer
The Sunni sources claim that when the Holy Prophet was unable to attend the public prayers because of his illness, he ordered Abu Bakr to lead the congregational prayers, and they put this forward as "proof" that he wanted him (Abu Bakr) to become his successor. There are various versions of this story none of which is acceptable.
Muslim (author of Sahih Muslim) quotes "Aisha" as having said:  The Prophet asked those around him if the time for prayer had come. They said that it had, whereupon he asked them to tell Abu Bakr to lead the congregation. But his wife, Ayesha, said that her father was a very tenderhearted man, and if he recited the Quran, he (Abu Bakr) would cry, and no one would be able to hear his voice. Aisha asked the Prophet (pbuh) twice or thrice to appoint someone else as a prayer leader but he (the Prophet) said: "Tell Abu Bakr to lead the prayers; truly, you resemble the women in the story of Joseph".( Sahih Muslim, Kitabl al-Salat, vol.1, pg.313; Sahih Bukhari, Kitab al-Adhan, vol.1, pg.87; Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, vol.6, pg.229).

In another tradition, Aisha is quoted as having said that when the Messenger of Allah became ill (the illness that led to the Prophet's demise), Bilal came to ask the Prophet if he would lead the prayer, and he said: "No, tell Abu Bakr to lead the prayer… truly, you resemble the foolish women in the story of Joseph." We sent out for Abu Bakr and he was with the people offering prayers when the Prophet (pbuh) recovered a bit and he walked out of the house with two men supporting him. When Abu Bakr felt the presence of the Prophet (pbuh), he wanted to step back to let the Prophet (pbuh) lead the prayers but the Prophet (pbuh) signaled him to stay on his place. Then the Prophet stood beside Abu Bakr and he followed him (Abu Bakr). So did the people”. (Sahih Bukhari, Kitab al-Salat, vol.1, pg.85 and 92; Sahih Muslim, vol.1 vol.1 pg.85 and 92; Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal, vol.6, pg.210; Sunan Nesai, vol.3, pg.99 and 100).

As per the story mentioned in Tarikh al-Tabari, the Prophet asked those around him if the time for prayer had set in. They said that it had, whereupon he asked them to tell Abu Bakr to lead the congregation. But his wife, Ayesha, said that her father was a man of tender heart. She asked the Prophet (pbuh) to order Umar to lead the prayers. Then the Prophet (pbuh) asked them to tell Umar to lead the congregational prayers. Umar said, "I will not precede Abu Bakr as long as he is present." Then Abu Bakr walked ahead and the Prophet (pbuh) recovered a little from the fever. So he went out of the house and when Abu Bakr heard that the Prophet (pbuh) was coming to the mosque, he moved back and the Prophet (pbuh) pulled his clothe and he himself stood in Abu Bakr's place. The Messenger of Allah sat down (offered the prayers in sitting posture) and he continued the prayers from where Abu Bakr had stopped."(Tarikh al-Tabari, vol.2, pg.230, Beirut Publication).

These narrations need to be contemplated over. Many questions arise as to the validity and correctness of these stories, and insofar as those questions are not appropriately answered, one cannot become certain about the authenticity of the narrations. Some of those questions are as under:
Question 1: If the Holy Prophet (pbuh) ordered Abu Bakr to lead the prayers, why did he go to the mosque to lead the prayers despite suffering from a severe illness on account of which he could not walk?
Question 2: Was the Prophet's presence in the mosque an endorsement of Abu Bakr? If so, why did he pull him aside and he himself stood in his place to lead the prayers?
Question 3: If Abu Bakr followed the Prophet (pbuh), as stated in the narration, then it meaningless to say that he led the congregational prayers. The question arises as to whether or not it is possible for a person to be a prayer leader and a follower at the same time and in the same prayer.
Question 4: Which prayer did Abu Bakr lead in the Prophet's stead? Was it Fajr prayer or Zuhr or Isha prayers?  Where did Abu Bakr act a prayer leader? Why have the Sunni narrators narrated this story in various and conflicting versions?
Question 5: If this prayer confers any merit upon the leader himself, then why did the migrants, the locals of Medina and also Abu Bakr not put this forward as "proof" on the day of Saqifah?
Question 6: If Abu Bakr's prayer in place of the Prophet (pbuh) confers any merit upon him to become his successor, why was Abdu Rahman bin 'Awf not merited for succession? Haven't the Sunni narrators unanimously quoted the Holy Prophet (pbuh) as saying "Offer prayers behind him(Abdu Rahman bin 'Awf)?
"(Maghazi, Waqedi, vol.3, pg.1012; Tahzibul Kamal, vol.14, pg.122).
Question 7: Even if it is assumed that such an incident happened, can it challenge all those explicit traditions from the Holy Prophet (pbuh) about the Commander of the Faithful, Ali (a.s) whose relation to the Prophet (pbuh) was like that of Harun (Aaron) to Moses? (Ibid).

Question 8: If this incident is assumed to be true, why is the Prophet (pbuh) not considered to be delirious on his deathbed when he ordered Abu Bakr to lead the congregational prayers in the mosque but when on the same bed he ordered them to bring pen and paper to write something that would protect them from going astray, then he was described by Umar as being delirious (God forbid!)? (In order to prevent the Prophet (pbuh) from leaving a Will, Umar said:  «دعو الرجل فانه لیهجر!!! حسبنا کتاب الله» “Leave the man (Messenger of Allah) as he is delirious!! The Book of Allah would suffice us.”  Apart from the consensus among the Shiite scholars, Sunni scholars have also narrated the same saying in different wordings)
Sahih Bukhari, Kitab al-Ilm, Bab Kitabatul Ilm, vol.1, pg.39, vol.2, pg.118 – vol.4, Bab Qawl al-Maridh from “Al-Mardha”, pg.5 – Vol.6, Bab Maradh al-Nabi wa wafatuhu, pg. 11 – Vol.4 Kitab al-Jihad, Bab Jawaez al-Wafd, pg.85.Sahih Muslim, vol.6, Kitab al-Wasiyah, Bab tark al-Wasiyah, pg.76.Sharh Nahjul Balagha ibn Abil Hadid Mu’tazili, vol.2, pg.536 and vol.2 pg.20.Kamil ibn-e Athir, vol.2, pg.217.
If the Holy Prophet (pbuh) was talking deliriously on his deathbed, then why did you turn to his saying about Abu Bakr’s prayer?! And if he was not talking deliriously, then why did Umar tell others that he was delirious?!
Question 9: When the Holy Prophet (pbuh) was on deathbed, he ordered the companions to join Osama’s army. He said: “Send off quickly the army of Osama. (History of the City of Damascus, Ibn-e Asakir, vol.2, pg.57 and vol.8 pg.60; Mu’jam al-Kabir, Tabarani, vol.3, pg.130; Kanzul Ummal, vol.10, pg.576.)
May Allah curse those who retire from Osama's army.(Al-Melal wa al-Nehal, Shahristani, vol.1, pg.23; Tarikh Khalifa Ibn Khayyat, pg.63-64; Sharh Nahjul Balagha, Ibn Abil Hadid, vol.6, pg.52.)

In addition, Osama had not returned until the demise of Holy Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family. Now the question arises whether Abu Bakr joined Osama’s army or not? If he did not join the army, then he had disobeyed the Prophet’s command.(Additionally, if we say that Abu Bakr did not join Osama’s army, he is included in the Holy Prophet (pbuh) because according to some reports as was mentioned in footnote No.8, the Messenger of Allah cursed those who did not go with Osama’s army).
And if he had joined the army, he was not in Medina to lead the prayers in the Holy Prophet’s stead.( [10] - Most Sunni historians say that Abu Bakr was in Osama’s army including the following:
Tabaqat al-Kubra, Ibn-e Sa’ad, vol.4, pg.46 and 136; Tahzib ibn-e Asaker, vol.2, pg.391 and vol.3 pg.215; Kanzul Ummal, vol.5, pg.312; Tarikh al-Khamis, vol.2, pg.172; Tarikh Ya’qubi, vol.2, pg.93; Sharh Nahjul Balaghah ibn Abil Hadid, vol.1, pg.53 and vol.2, pg.21).

Given the above contradictions, how do you say that Abu Bakr offered prayers in place of the Holy Prophet (pbuh)?
Question 10: Why does the Prophet (pbuh) reproach his wives and consider them to be like the foolish women who wanted to misguide Joseph? What had Aisha done to be entitled to the Prophet’s rebuke?!
Considering that these questions remain unanswered, it is difficult to accept that these narrations about Abu Bakr are authentic and reliable. Aren’t these questions sufficient to make us think as to how these injunctions and narrations have been?

Courtesy: [url=http://ahlulbayt-portal.com/en.php/page,29768Unit74313.html?PHPSESSID=192f7b60c0d46dd18cf1d54ab96931a6]The Ahlul-Bayt Portal[/url]

You can read more on this topic from:

[url=http://en.rafed.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4063%3Athe-prophets-last-prayer&catid=182&Itemid=966&limitstart=5]rafed.net[/url]
al-islam.org
And :
[url=http://en.rafed.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4063%3Athe-prophets-last-prayer&catid=182&Itemid=966&limitstart=2]Here also[/url]

Sweetnecta:

@Lagosshia: « #109 on: Today at 02:30:12 PM »As I have stated, Allah did not need to announce to the people witnessing the mistake and the correction that followed, that the women are now forgiven. The fact that they were wives to the end nullified all you have put together against them.

You have being told that Noah and Lot (as) both did not divorce their wives and both were hell-bound.so divorce plays no part here.

May Allah forgive you and I. Amin. Muhammad [as] said to the people, to emphasize the lack of preferential treatment in Islam, unlike previous nations, not that Fatima [ra] will do evil [stealing, etc], if she were to do such a thing, she will be dealt with according to the Law of Allah.

That is called justice which you have tried to avoid.

Allah forgives whosoever He Wills. Alah revealed to His Messenger [as] those who were hypocrites. And the messenger gave their names to a person not from his household, who was told not to attend the funeral prayer of each of the persons. None of the kalifah and the wives of the prophet [as] was among these people. That itself was an evidence that none of them deserves our calling them names or worse saying bad words after their mention, while we turn around and ask Allah to forgive all muslims.

The Prophet (sa) did not outlive them.he died before them.and the Prophet (sa) has this to say about what would happen after him:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount." 'Abdullah
     added: The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and
     some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and
     then they will be taken away from me and I will say, 'O Lord, my
     companions!' It will be said, 'You do not know what they did after you
     had left.'( Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.578)

While i will not go on with talking endlessly in opposition to a muslim, there is no guarantee that a child of a prophet will turn out to be angelic or even a believer. We see that Kabil was a killer and a son from Nuh [as] perished with the disobedient. Allah chooses where a person will end up, if one was not buried next to the prophet [as], it is not a sign of going to hell fire. Fatima [ra] was closer to the messenger than the grandchildren. This is a fact, because children are closer than grandchild. Non of my siblings who had passed is buried even in the same country with their father.

I wasn’t talking about the grandson who is our second imam,Imam Hassan (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).i was talking about Aisha and how out of her hate for the family of Ali (as) she prevented Imam Hassan (as) from being buried close to his grandfather,the Messenger of Allah (sa).

Just because did not choose the opinion of the Shia in this matter does not mean i will side with Sunni always. And even if I do, it does not make me a sunni because i do not hyphenate my Islam. I may not agree with shia in few things like Muta and insulting the wives and companions of the prophet [as], and a few other things, that will not mean that I disagree with them in all things. I am neither a sunni nor a shia. But i am definitely a muslim and InshaAllah I will die on that path.

inshaAllah,I will soon start a thread on the “shia view of the companions”.and you will get to read and reflect.

My brother, you know that you do not love Muhammad [as] more than me. If you know this, then realize that my talking about Surah Abasa, is because it gives us good lessons and relative to this discussion. I must also tell you there are verses where Allah says that He is pleased with the Companions, who were also pleased with Him. This is the declaration of Allah in more than 1 verse. Allah also said that the messenger [as] should take from their wealth as mean of purity.

Allah (swt) in the verse you are talking about did not say all the companions He is pleased with them.even Allah (swt) in His infinite wisdom made an exception.let us read the verse:

"Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are
     strong against the unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each
     other.  Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer),
     seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure.  On their faces are
     their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration.  This is their
     similitude in the Taurat (Torah); And their similitude in the Gospel
     is: Like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it
     then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the
     sowers with wonder and delight.  As a result, it fills the Unbelievers
     with rage at them.  Allah has promised those among them who believe
     and do righteous deeds Forgiveness, and a great Reward. [48:29]"

These companions (May Allah (SWT) be Pleased With Them), the Shia and the
Sunnis have NO quarrel about.  As such, they will not be discussed here.
However, note what Allah (SWT) in His (SWT) infinite wisdom states in the
last line: "Allah has promised those among them who believe and do
righteous deeds Forgiveness, and a great Reward."  Now, note ", those
among them, "  Why didn't Allah (SWT) say "Allah has promised ALL OF
THEM?"  Because not all of them were righteous!  That's what the Shia are
trying to convey to the world!  The Sunnis, whenever they bless the Prophet
(PBUH&HF), they also bless ALL the companions, with NO exception.  Why did
Allah (SWT), their Creator (SWT), make an exception, while the Sunni
Muslims don't?  This is a sign for those who reflect,

If you see anything bad in my character and you will not at least advise me, I think that is not good. I do hope that you forgive me, knowing fully that I am a weak soul. May Allah strengthen us all. Amin.
Allah knows best.

There is nothing bad in your character.it is only annoying the way you debate.you divert into too many irrelevant points.you asked for a verse condemning Aisha and you were provided.i then asked you for a verse that abrogates the condemnation,you were unable to provide.and you further went on to suppose that there is no need for Allah to reveal a verse to abrogate the former because the Prophet (sa) was still married to them.in that line,I can also tell you that since Allah revealed condemnation and told us that Aisha’s iman was in question,why didn’t  Allah (swt) order the Prophet (sa) to directly divorce Aisha?i also pointed out that,previous prophets did not divorce their hell-bound wives.i also showed evidence where companions sought Allah’s forgiveness,and for them to be vindicated Allah (swt) revealed a verse forgiving them but that wasn’t the case with Aisha.furthermore,there is evidence of the atrocities she committed after the Prophet’s death and how she disobeyed him (sa).

You want us to forget all that and turn a blind eye and base our faith and beliefs on assumptions and irrelevant talk.even when you discuss with the Christians,I would advice you to stick to the topic.you bring in too many irrelevant comments.you may be right in what you are trying to prove,but your method takes you off point!

lol!   , for anybody to claim that vedaxcool denied the Ghadir Khum hadith and called it a lie, is the lowest of low any living shia can go to prove the fraudulent claims using the hadiths of Ghadir Khumm, it is more pathetic that due to their woeful failure to refute the irrefutable point I wrote which clearly proves that the use of the term Mawla was indeed in reference to close ties and friendship which in essence does not deny the hadith but appropriately interprets it, no amount of shia lies and charges of Kuffar can change the facts I have listed above, no wonder Ali r.a called the shias hypocrites and traitorous, they not only play with hadiths but they also change what is clearly written for all tro see, this attempt to obfuscate the issues being discussed only goes to show the falsehood that is typically shia in nature. as for quoting Abd al Wahab,let me state that before he will condemn me or any Sunni for Kuffar, he would have condemed the shias ( who utter the blaspehmy Ya Ali Madad) millions of times over as being Fasiqun, Munafiqun and Kaffirs, as we all know the Shias are in a habit of denying any Sunni Hadith and even shia hadiths that does not suit their low lying aims, I ask what kind of brain is that? indicting your ownself as being a kaffir since the statements listed applies  mainly to shias who deny, insult and condem Sunni Hadiths. This is especially funny, I hope since you were quick to label me Kafir to prove your usually silly and unintelligent points, to be willing to label yourself a Kafir for denying the majority of Sunni Hadiths, Alhamdulilah, how easy the Munafiq is shown his hypocrisy.  

Repeating the lies about the Mawla claim is becoming asurd by every reply, how does one hadith explain the other, when both are simply different version of the same event even at that if we were to agree, there is no way that A and B are your leaders can be claimed to be explained by B is your Leader after me, it is easier to force and Camel thru the eye of a needle than prove the claim that one of the two hadith explains the other. I restate that it is easier to prove Bush attack on Iraq was to promote Islam than such an absurd claim that one of the two hadiths can be used to explain the other.  

vedaxcool:

lol!  , for anybody to claim that vedaxcool denied the Ghadir Khum hadith and called it a lie, is the lowest of low any living shia can go to prove the fraudulent claims using the hadiths of Ghadir Khumm,

You are confused.you started by denying it.you even called the encounter between Buraida and the Prophet (sa) “hadith of Ghadir Khumm”.you later changed your stance after we provided you with irrefutable references from sunni books that the event took place at Ghadir Khumm.you then changed tune to be questioning the meanings and interpretation of the hadith.the thread is open for everyone to review.but as brother “Shiite” rightly said,we cannot force you to believe the truth.you keep repeating your points and your views even after replies have being made to you.that is nothing less than a display of stubbornness.but that is your choice.

it is more pathetic that due to their woeful failure to refute the irrefutable point I wrote which clearly proves that the use of the term Mawla was indeed in reference to close ties and friendship which in essence does not deny the hadith but appropriately interprets it, no amount of shia lies and charges of Kuffar can change the facts I have listed above,

Your points which represented the sunni view have being refuted.the shia view is there and the sunni view is also there for all to see.brother  “Shiite” even provided references to show the true meaning of the word “mawla” when it was used by the Prophet (sa) at Ghadir Khumm.you have being presented with sunni hadiths that backs the shia interpretations and even prove that the event at Ghadir Khumm happened with the revelations of two Quranic verses.i also provided you with 3 other instances where the Prophet (sa) nominated Ali (as) to be his successor.

no wonder Ali r.a called the shias hypocrites and traitorous, they not only play with hadiths but they also change what is clearly written for all tro see, this attempt to obfuscate the issues being discussed only goes to show the falsehood that is typically shia in nature.

There is also a chapter in the Quran called “al-Munafiqun”.so should I also conclude that you and I are hypocrites because there were among the muslims hypocrites and traitors? You have the good and bad followers/believers everywhere.you cling on to your assumptions and hate out of ignorance.you just freak out and post endlessly when you hear the word “shia”.

as for quoting Abd al Wahab,let me state that before he will condemn me or any Sunni for Kuffar, he would have condemed the shias ( who utter the blaspehmy Ya Ali Madad) millions of times over as being Fasiqun, Munafiqun and Kaffirs, as we all know the Shias are in a habit of denying any Sunni Hadith and even shia hadiths that does not suit their low lying aims, I ask what kind of brain is that? indicting your ownself as being a kaffir since the statements listed applies  mainly to shias who deny, insult and condem Sunni Hadiths.

So far you have being the one to deny your sunni hadiths (as we are not in the habit of presenting shia hadiths when debating with sunnis).you are the one who branded your hadith as “not credible sources”.

Are you suffering from memory loss?review the thread.

This is especially funny, I hope since you were quick to label me Kafir to prove your usually silly and unintelligent points, to be willing to label yourself a Kafir for denying the majority of Sunni Hadiths, Alhamdulilah, how easy the Munafiq is shown his hypocrisy.   

First you cannot provide evidence that brother “Shiite” called you a “kafir”.
Secondly,there is nowhere we have denied a hadith in this thread.if we deny any hadith anywhere be it in sunni or shia sources,we will thoroughly show you that even within sunni sources the hadith is rejected.we don’t just reject hadiths for fun.also,what claim have you made that you backed with a hadith which we rejected?how can you make such an allegation?

Repeating the lies about the Mawla claim is becoming asurd by every reply, how does one hadith explain the other, when both are simply different version of the same event even at that if we were to agree, there is no way that A and B are your leaders can be claimed to be explained by B is your Leader after me, it is easier to force and Camel thru the eye of a needle than prove the claim that one of the two hadith explains the other. I restate that it is easier to prove Bush attack on Iraq was to promote Islam than such an absurd claim that one of the two hadiths can be used to explain the other. 

The point brother “Shiite” made is very clear.if Ali (as) is the “mawla” of every believer (regardless what you interprete “mawla” to mean) then he is during and after the Prophet’s (sa) time on earth.so if you find a hadith that uses the phrase “after me” in sunni hadiths,that is more detail for understanding.[b]please dont mix the hadith of Ghadir Khumm and the Hadith al-Wilayah.[/b]they are separate.also,let me remind you that in hadith al-manzila which I presented as one of the 3 instances the Prophet (sa) nominated Ali (as) to be successor,the phrase”after me” was also used there.that was an event before the event at Ghadir Khumm.you are denying your hadith when it doesn’t suit you and then you accuse us of doing that.

People reading are not silly.using childinsh ways like replying with multiple emoticons does not add any value to your replies.it only shows your confusion.

LOl!   the shias have only made their case against Islam not against the Sunni. the Shia questions the Competency of the Prophet pbuh to pick reliable companions and wives. But their questions does not stop there, they also questions Allah's words, for who are we if Allah is to bestow great title on Aisha r.a such as Mother of Believer for these liars to question her character and stll havethe audacity to claim they are Muslims, if they pretend that Allah has foresight to see into the future yet with all the now knowledge he had about her future exploits still went ahead to give her such a title is simply indicting Islam. Man can be mistaken to give honor to his fellow man but not Allah. They agree that Allah refereed to Aisha as being amongst the mother of Believers, yet they still open their hypocritical mouths and insults her. they deny her as not being Ahlul Bayt yet it is written in the Qur'an :

“O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:32-33)

The transliteration reads: “Ya nisa al-nabiyi lastuna kahadin mina alnisa-i ini itaqaytuna fala takhdaAAna bialqawli fayatmaAAa allathee fee qalbihi maradun waqulna qawlan maAAroofan Waqarna fee buyootikunna wala tabarrajna tabarruja aljahiliyyati al-oola waaqimna alssalata waateena alzzakata waatiAAna Allaha warasoolahu innama yureedu Allahu liyuthhiba AAankumu alrrijsa Ahlul Bayt-i wayutahhirakum tatheeran” (Quran, 33:32-33)

We ask Allah to shower His infinite blessings upon Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها), the Mothers of the Believers, and to protect them from the slander of the Nasibis who, while proclaiming what has been mentioned above, can not possibly claim to love the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) despite whatever they claim of the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه).

vedaxcool:

LOl! the shias have only made their case against Islam not against the Sunni. the Shia questions the Competency of the Prophet pbuh to pick reliable companions and wives. But their questions does not stop there, they also questions Allah's words, for who are we if Allah is to bestow great title on Aisha r.a such as Mother of Believer for these liars to question her character and stll havethe audacity to claim they are Muslims, if they pretend that Allah has foresight to see into the future yet with all the now knowledge he had about her future exploits still went ahead to give her such a title is simply indicting Islam. Man can be mistaken to give honor to his fellow man but not Allah. They agree that Allah refereed to Aisha as being amongst the mother of Believers, yet they still open their hypocritical mouths and insults her. they deny her as not being Ahlul Bayt yet it is written in the Qur'an :

“O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word. And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:32-33)

The transliteration reads: “Ya nisa al-nabiyi lastuna kahadin mina alnisa-i ini itaqaytuna fala takhdaAAna bialqawli fayatmaAAa allathee fee qalbihi maradun waqulna qawlan maAAroofan Waqarna fee buyootikunna wala tabarrajna tabarruja aljahiliyyati al-oola waaqimna alssalata waateena alzzakata waatiAAna Allaha warasoolahu innama yureedu Allahu liyuthhiba AAankumu alrrijsa Ahlul Bayt-i wayutahhirakum tatheeran” (Quran, 33:32-33)

We ask Allah to shower His infinite blessings upon Aisha (رضّى الله عنها) and Hafsa (رضّى الله عنها), the Mothers of the Believers, and to protect them from the slander of the Nasibis who, while proclaiming what has been mentioned above, can not possibly claim to love the Ahlel Bayt of Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) despite whatever they claim of the Ahlel Bayt of Ali (رضّى الله عنه).

You have just provided evidence against yourself with many nonsensical claims against the shia.

When your beloved Aisha left her house and led men into war against other believers did she go against the order of Allah (swt) in Quran 33:32-33 or not?

Read the verse again and look carefully at the phrase I have highlighted:

“O wives of the Prophet!You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word. [b]And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; [/b]and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, [b]you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:32-33)

On the issue of Ghadir Khumm, it is clear for those who want to see what the Prophet pbuh said on the issue, the sunni understand the matter within the context that the hadith was revealed. the above refutation adds no new point to what is being discussed rather it merely relies on emotional spewing of rhetorics as evidence, the 6 points I stated clearly shows those that are chasing flying elephants.

On Abubakar r.a, i do say the following:

This was the miracle of the spider’s web, which saved the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه). This story is mentioned in the Quran in Verse 9:40. Allah says:

   “If you will not aid him (the Prophet), Allah certainly aided him when those who disbelieved expelled him; he (the Prophet) had no more than him, him being the second of the two (i.e. Abu Bakr), when they were both in the cave, when he (the Prophet) said to his companion (Abu Bakr): ‘Grieve not, surely Allah is with us.’ Then Allah caused His Sakinah (serenity, peace, tranquility, etc.) to descend upon him (Abu Bakr)” (Quran, 9:40)


Alhamdulilah how easy Allah makes it to guide men that Ali called Hypocrite and traitorous!
The Quran refers to Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) as the “second of the two” citing Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) as the sole partner of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) in this miraculous event. This was indeed such a great honor that the Ansar forfeit their right to Caliphate and gave it instead to Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) based on this verse alone. It could be said that during the Hijra, a spider’s web saved Islam, and Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was there to witness this miracle, Allah referring to him as the “second of the two.” In fact, Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and the Prophet’s journey is so monumental that it is the day we start our Hijri calender from.

Allah sent his Sakinah (serenity, peace, tranquility, etc.) down upon Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه). Allah sends Sakinah down upon the believers; if Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was an evil-doer as the Shia claim, then Allah would have sent his Wrath upon him, not his Sakinah. The Shia consider Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) to be an agent of Satan. Would Allah send his Sakinah down upon Satan?

Zhul-fiqar:

You have just provided evidence against yourself with many nonsensical claims against the shia.

When your beloved Aisha left her house and led men into war against other believers did she go against the order of Allah (swt) in Quran 33:32-33 or not?

Read the verse again and look carefully at the phrase I have highlighted:

“O wives of the Prophet!You are not like any other of the women; If you will be on your guard, then be not soft in your speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease yearn; and speak a good word. [b]And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; [/b]and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, [b]you Ahlel Bayt (People of the House), and to make you pure and spotless.” (Quran, 33:32-33)

This is what you are hinging your slander on? I pity you, in any case I shall do justice to this tomorrow insha Allah

THE CURSES OF ALLAH (swt) AS EVIDENT IN THE QURAN:

Holy Quran 33:68:
“ Our Lord! Oh, give them double torment and curse them with a mighty curse"

Holy Quran 3:86 to 87:
“ How shall Allah guide a person who disbelieved after their believing and (after) they had borne witness that the Messenger was true and clear arguments had come to them; and Allah does not guide the unjust people. (As for) these, their reward is that upon them is the curse of Allah and the angels and of men, all together"

Holy Quran 3:61:
“ But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and ourselves and yourselves, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars".

brother Lagosshia, you won. I give you the victory trophy. You wanna continue to abuse the wives of the messenger [as], you are the owner of your lips, tongue and thinking heart.

I will wait for Allah's decision on me, since I will not insult the wives of the messenger [as] who he did not insult.

No man or woman from my bloodline will insult my wife and when I find out about it, the individual will hear my roar for insulting me via the insult hauled on my wife.

My children will not have the gut to insult their mother or stepmother, because it is me they are insulting.

Hopefully you are married. If you are not, wait till you are and the little boys in your bloodline insult your wife, it will priceless to see you smile and say my little grandnephew you are right; she is truly a rotten and bad wife.

vedaxcool:

On the issue of Ghadir Khumm, it is clear for those who want to see what the Prophet pbuh said on the issue, the sunni understand the matter within the context that the hadith was revealed. the above refutation adds no new point to what is being discussed rather it merely relies on emotional spewing of rhetorics as evidence, the 6 points I stated clearly shows those that are chasing flying elephants.

On Abubakar r.a, i do say the following:

This was the miracle of the spider’s web, which saved the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه). This story is mentioned in the Quran in Verse 9:40. Allah says:

“If you will not aid him (the Prophet), Allah certainly aided him when those who disbelieved expelled him; he (the Prophet) had no more than him, him being the second of the two (i.e. Abu Bakr), when they were both in the cave, when he (the Prophet) said to his companion (Abu Bakr): ‘Grieve not, surely Allah is with us.’ Then Allah caused His Sakinah (serenity, peace, tranquility, etc.) to descend upon him (Abu Bakr)” (Quran, 9:40)


Alhamdulilah how easy Allah makes it to guide men that Ali called Hypocrite and traitorous!
The Quran refers to Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) as the “second of the two” citing Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) as the sole partner of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) in this miraculous event. This was indeed such a great honor that the Ansar forfeit their right to Caliphate and gave it instead to Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) based on this verse alone. It could be said that during the Hijra, a spider’s web saved Islam, and Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was there to witness this miracle, Allah referring to him as the “second of the two.” In fact, Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) and the Prophet’s journey is so monumental that it is the day we start our Hijri calender from.

Allah sent his Sakinah (serenity, peace, tranquility, etc.) down upon Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه). Allah sends Sakinah down upon the believers; if Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) was an evil-doer as the Shia claim, then Allah would have sent his Wrath upon him, not his Sakinah. The Shia consider Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) to be an agent of Satan. Would Allah send his Sakinah down upon Satan?

First let me commend you for copying verbatim from the anti-shia website below and presenting it here as a diversion topic to raise a point you imagine supports your case.here is the website and the words copied are verbatim:
schiiten.com

secondly,I would not even bother to go into the cat and mouse game of whether the verse praises abu bakr or it depicts him as someone that was terribly struck by fear of the disbelievers when he was in the presence of the Prophet (sa) in the cave and that translates to little or no faith or plain hypocrisy.

I would not go into that game at all if that is what you’re dreaming of.this attempt of yours shows that you do not rely upon your knowledge and whatever sunni position you claim to represent is outrageously biase and based on copy/paste for which you boast no knowledge yourself and you have not studied prior to putting up your staunch defense.

Anyone who wants to follow the cat and mouse game,should look for a shia website as the one below to counter the arguments presented by the anti-shia website.
Answering-ansar.org

As for my own reaction to the verse presented by “vedaxcool” which he supposes is in “praise” of abu bakr,it is very plain and simple to note that what happened in the cave was actually during the lifetime of the Prophet (sa) and the usurpation of the caliphate and disobeying the orders of the Prophet (sa) came toward the final days of the Prophet (sa) and after his death.i would back myself up by borrowing a hadith presented earlier by my brother “LagosShia” and use the words of the Prophet (sa) as evidence that his companions were in danger of going astray after his death:

The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount." 'Abdullah
    added: The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor at the Lake-Fount, and
    some of you will be brought in front of me till I will see them and
    then they will be taken away from me and I will say, 'O Lord, my
    companions!' It will be said, 'You do not know what they did after you
    had left.'( Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 8.578)

Sweetnecta:

brother Lagosshia, you won. I give you the victory trophy. You wanna continue to abuse the wives of the messenger [as], you are the owner of your lips, tongue and thinking heart.

I will wait for Allah's decision on me, since I will not insult the wives of the messenger [as] who he did not insult.

No man or woman from my bloodline will insult my wife and when I find out about it, the individual will hear my roar for insulting me via the insult hauled on my wife.

My children will not have the gut to insult their mother or stepmother, because it is me they are insulting.

Hopefully you are married. If you are not, wait till you are and the little boys in your bloodline insult your wife, it will priceless to see you smile and say my little grandnephew you are right; she is truly a rotten and bad wife.

Brother,I did not insult anyone.i don’t know why you feel it is insulting for stating the facts as they happened and distancing myself from those I hold an unfavorable view about.also,a curse is not the same as an insult.

I would just leave you to read what is in the below link.may be you only then would you understand me better:

http://www.al-islam.org/falsafa/104.htm

Zhul-fiqar:

As for my own reaction to the verse presented by “vedaxcool” which he supposes is in “praise” of abu bakr,it is very plain and simple to note that what happened in the cave was actually during the lifetime of the Prophet (sa) and the usurpation of the caliphate and disobeying the orders of the Prophet (sa) came toward the final days of the Prophet (sa) and after his death.i would back myself up by borrowing a hadith presented earlier by my brother “LagosShia” and use the words of the Prophet (sa) as evidence that his companions were in danger of going astray after his death:

Again the shia mocks the words in the Qur'an, thereby mocking Allah's words auzobillah! he goes to the low of calling Abubakr a coward  who despite being with prophet a.s still was struck by fear is besides the point, as abubakar r.a was fearful for the prophet's life not his, the prophet pbuh was afraid when angel Gabriel came to him in cave hirah,again there are numerous verses in the Qur'an in which Allah uses the phrase grieve not in relation to Prophets a.s and even Mariam when she was apprehensive of the fact that she delivered Jesus a.a, what does this all prove? I think your pathetic argument should become self evident to you that, this shias would not mind belittling the Qur'an in order to prove their silly points. But we know their points holds no sensible ground the same liars will go as far as claiming that the reason Ali r.a refuse to take Fadak when he became caliph was becasue he feared the reaction of those that oppose him, in Ali r.a who they claim rules over the atoms etc feared doing justice because of the possible reaction of mere mortals! what a pathetic situation the shia find themselves , their thinking is very shallow to say the least. again let us recap the issues around the verse:

1. The Prophet pbuh choose Abubakar to emigrate with him, this meant he choose someone who we took to be close with him.

2. Allah sent his tranquility upon Abubakar, very few times does the Qur'an speaks of the companions of the prophet pbuh, Allah sent his Tranquility upon Abubakar r.a.

3. The only logical explanation is that Abu Bakr r.a was the Prophet’s top lieutenant, bodyguard, and trusted friend.

4. From a logical standpoint, we know that Abu Bakr r.a was more worried about the Prophet pbuh than himself for the simple fact that the Quraish infidels had a warrant for the arrest and capture of the Prophet pbuh not of Abu Bakr r.a. In fact, Abu Bak r.a was immune from the persecution of the Quraish infidels because he had powerful tribal connections to protect him. This simply trounce the inept argument of the shias!


The prophet specifically wanted to emigrate with Abubakar:

So some people emigrated to Medinah, and most of those people who previously emigrated to the land of Ethiopia returned to Medinah. Abu Bakr also prepared to leave for Medinah but Allah’s Messenger said to thim: “Wait for awhile, because I hope that I will be allowed to emigrate also.” Abu Bakr asked: “Do you hope that?” He (the Prophet) replied with yes. So Abu Bakr did not emigrate for the sake of Allah’s Messenger in order to accompany him. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, no.3905).

Allhamdulilah how easy Allah makes it to show guidance to men that Ali refereed to as cowards, hypocrites and traitors!