Name: Ali ibn Al-Husayn (a.s.)
Mother : Ghazala, Shahzanaan
Kunniyat (Patronymic): Abu al-Hasan
Laqab (Title): Zayn al-'Abidin, Al Sajjad
Birth : He was born in 38 A.H. in Madina.
Martyrdom : He died of poison in the year 94 or 95 A.H. at Madina and is buried at Baqi near his uncle Hasan (a.s.).
His Birth and blessings
The 4th Imam after Imam Hussain(a.s.) was his son Imam Ali Zain-al-Abideen(a.s.). His mother was Bibi Shahar Bano who was a princess from Persia, the daughter of the Kind Yazd Gard II. She was brought as a prisoner of war during the caliphate period of mam Ali(a.s.) during 31 A.H. and Imam Ali(a.s.) got her freed and married her to Imam Hussain(a.s.). Imam Zain-al-Abideen was born from this wedlock. She, however, died within 10 days of the birth of Imam Sajjad(a.s.).
His title Zain-al-Abideen was granted to him by the Holy Prophet(pbuh&hf) himself who mentioned that on the day of judgement a call for Zain-al-Abideen will be made and my son Ali bin al-Hussain(a.s.) will responde to the call saying "Labbaik". His other Title, Syed-us-Sajideen, was given because of his devotion to prayers. He would pray for long durations specially during the nights and would pray a lot of prayers of gratitude - Namaz-e-Shukrana.
Imam Sajjad(a.s.) spent the first 2 years of his life under the care of his grandfater Imam Ali(a.s.) and after his death in 50 A.H., he was brought up under the care of the 2nd Imam Hasan(a.s.). Imam Sajjad(a.s.) was married to the Bibi Fatima(a.s.) - daughter of Imam Hasan(a.s.). Imam Hasan(a.s.) was martyred in 50 A.H. and the Imamate of Imam Hussain(a.s.) started which terminated on 10th Moharram 61 A.H. from where the Imamate of Imam Sajjad(a.s.) began.
Period of Imamate and events of Karbala
Imam Sajjad(a.s.) was about 22 or 23 years old when the sad event of Karbala occured. Since Allah(swt) mentions in his holy Book that this world cannot survive for a moment if there is no Masoom "Imam" present at all times, Allah(swt) arranged it such that Imam Sajjad(a.s.) became severly ill during that battle and could not participate as a warrior. He asked the permission to fight in the battle but Imam Hussain(a.s.) told him that he had been assigned a different type of "Jihad" that was to start after the martyrdom of Imam Hussain(a.s.) - namely leading the women and children of the household of Prophet Mohammad(pbuh&hf) into the bazars and courts of Kufa and Damascus. Imam Sajjad(a.s.) was made a prisoner of war together with the whole family of the Prophet Mohammad(pbuh&hf). It was at this time that he was given the responsibility of Imamate and his was one of the most difficult times when any Imam was given this responsibility. Truly speaking, for him, it would have been very easy to die on the battle field as a martyr than to be taken as prisoner of war and see all the insult and humiliations thrown on him and on the womenfolk of the house of the Prophet. However, he did what Allah wished him to do
After the martyrdom of Imam Hussain(a.s.), the survival of Islam depended on Imam Zainul Abideen(a.s.), and that also at a tender age of 22. He had a very hard job of letting the world know the mission of Imam Hussain(a.s.) and exposing the evil intentions of Yazid and the Bani Umayyah. He had to keep the message of Islam alive and save it from being confused by the evil Bani Umayyah.
The army of Yazid treated him very badly by putting him in heavy chains. As a prisoner of war, he was made to travel on the open back of a camel in burning sunshine from Kerbala to Kufa and then from Kufa to Shaam (Damascus) - a distance of about 750 kilometres. Sometimes, he would be made to walk on the burning sands of the desert. This was not all. Women and children of the family of the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh&hf), too, were hand-cuffed and treated like they were slaves. The daughters of Imam Ali(a.s.) and Bibi Fatima(s.a.) were treated worse than criminals, their Hijabs were taken away from them. A caller accompanied them introducing them to the passersbys as "Those who had disobeyed the Muslim ruler, Yazid". They were then presented as prisoners, first to Ibn-e-Ziyad in Kufa and then to Yazid in Damascus.
In the courts of Ibn-e-Ziyad and Yazid, Imam Sajjad(a.s.) gave lion-hearted lectures and presented the true Islam to the listeners and introduced himself and his accompanying members as the descendents of the Prophet Mohammad(pbuh&hf) and the leaders appointed by Allah(swt). His lectures had such an impact on the listeners that despite several attempts to kill him inside the court of both Yazid and Ibn-e-Ziyad could not materialize. Bibi Zainab(s.a.) and other women of the household of Prophet Mohammad(pbuh&hf) became the frontline protectors and were backed by the people in the court of Yazid who had still left some shame in them.
To quote one incidence, Yazid asked one of his employed preachersto go on the 'Mimber' (pulpit) of the Mosque and abused Imam Ali(a.s.) and his family. When the preacher finished his lecture, Imam Sajjad(a.s.) turned to him and said, "Be ashamed of yourself, you evil speaker. With your words you have displeased Allah so as to please people". Then the Imam(a.s.) asked Yazid to let him talk to the people. Yazid refused to do so. The people of Syria, however, forced Yazid to allow the Imam to go on the Mimber.
Once on the Mimber, Imam Zain al-Abideen(a.s.) first praised Allah(swt) and His Messenger(pbuh&hf). After that the Imam gave along and very powerful speech letting the Syrians know the great position of Imam Husain(a.s.) to Allah(swt), and how evil Yazid and his family were. Part of the speech is summarised below:
"O listeners Allah has given us (Ahle Bart) six things which no one else has. He has given us special Wisdom, Patience, Dignity, Power of speech, Courage and Respect. He gave us special benefit of belonging to the family of his Prophet. To us belong Hamza and Jafar. To us belong Asadullah (The lion of Allah, Imam Ali(a.s.)). To us belong the leader of the youths of paradise (Imam Hassan(a.s.) and Imam Hussain(a.s.)).
"Those who know me, know me. Those who do not, then know that I am the son of Mecca and Mina. I am the son of Zamzam and Safa. I am the son of he who gave Zakat to the poor. I am the son of the best of those who have ever put on Ihram and performed ceremonies of Hajj. I am the son of he who was taken on the night journey from house of Allah to the Mosque of Aqsa and then to Miraj. I am the son of he who was taken around by Gibrael to the Lote-tree of the boundary (Sidratul Muntaha).
"I am the son of Muhammad Mustafa(pbuh&hf). I am the son of Ali Al-Murtaza(a.s.) who fought the polytheists in the battle till they submitted to Islam and fought in the presence of the Prophet until his sword was broken and to whom Zulfikar was given. I am the son of he who had the honour to migrate twice in Islam. I am the son of Fatima the best women of the world...".
The effect of the speech was so powerful that everybody in the Mosque began to weep and to blame Yazid. Yazid was afraid that if the Imam continued his speech, there would be a revolution and revolt. At the same time Yazid could not stop the Imam and get him down from the Mimber. He therefore ordered a "Muazzin" to give Azan, knowing that this would automatically cut the Imam's speech. But he underestimated the Imam's bravery and intelligence. The Imam stopped his speech but did not get down from the Mimber. When the Muazzin said " Allahu Akber" the Imam testified Allah's greatness. When the Muazzin said, "Ash hadu anna Muhammaddan Rasulullah", the Imam stopped the Muazzin from going any further. He then turned to Yezid and asked him. "Tell me o Yazid, was Muhammad(pbuh&hf) your grandfather or mine? If you say he was your grandfather it will be an open lie and if you say he was my grandfather then why have you killed his son and imprisoned his family? Why have you killed my father and brought his women and children to this city as prisoners?"
Yazid had no reply to give.
The effect of this was to turn Syrians against Yazid. Everyone of them now found out about Yazid's crimes that he had committed against the Prophet (pbuh&hf) and his family. They began to blame him and ask for the release of Imam Zain al-Abidin(a.s.) and the womenfolk of the house of the Prophet. Yazid was now afraid that if he did not act fast his rulership would be lost. He therefore freed Imam Zain al-Abidin(a.s.) and let. him return to Medina with full honour and respect.
His Life in Madina
Yazid had to free the Imam(a.s.) out of fear of his own rulership, therefore, Imam(a.s.) was still not completely safe from his evil designs even upon reaching back to Madina. Once in Madina, Imam(a.s.) gathered the people and told them the horrifying stories of Karbala and informed them that his father Imam Hussain(a.s.) and his companions were martyred and his family members were made prisoners and were taken from one city to another and branded as traitors.
Imam Sajjad(a.s.) started regular mourning session right from the day he arrived in Madina and apprised the people of the hard times that the family of the Prophet(pbuh&hf) had to to through. Day in and day out, people used to go to Imam(a.s.) and present condolence and hear the events of Karbala. Once a visitor named Noman came to Imam(a.s.) and asked him which was the most difficult time he had to face and the Imam(a.s.) cried for a long time and three times said "AS-SHAAM AS-SHAAM AS-SHAAM". Another visitor asked him as to how long would he continue mourning and crying and he replied that Prophet Ayub(a.s.) had 12 sons and only one of them got lost and he know that he was still alive but he continued crying until his eyes became white and his back got bent - I had seen 17 members of my family being slaughtered around me like sheep and you ask me as to how long I would continue mourning.
Another task that Imam Sajjad(a.s.) did after coming back from Syria was that he started praying and saying supplications with full devotion. His devotion was so strong and felt by his companions and visitors that they started collection his supplications which still exist by the name of SAHIFA-E-KAMILA. It is also know as SAHIFA-E-SAJJADIA. It consists of 54 Duas, 14 additional duas and 15 Munajaat. In addition to the SAHIFA there are several other supplications of the Imam(a.s.) which appear under different cover names.
His martyrdom
Imam(a.s.) kept his life very personal and preferred to stay in a town close to Madina from where he would preach the true religion of Allah(swt) quietly and with character. His character and preaching inspired a large number of people specially in the vicinity of Madina and Makkah. Slowly the tyrrant rulers of his time began to realize the dangers that they faced from the Imam(a.s.)'s preaching and character. His period of Imamte was full of tyrant rulers such as Yazid untill 64 A.H., Moawiya bin Yazid and Marwan bin-al-Hakam until 65 A.H, then from 68 A.H. until 86 A.H. was the rulership of Abdul Malik bin Marwan and finally from 86 A.H. until 96 A.H. was the period of Walid bin Abdul Malik. Amid this growing threat, Walid decided to poison and kill the Imam and finally he succeeded in his ulterior motives and Imam Sajjad(a.s.) was poisoned by the governor of Madina and martyred on 25th Moharram 95 A.H. (713 A.D.)
http://www.ziaraat.org/sajjad.php

petomas:

Another Sycophant sited. Did u watch the video of how everything started and how the Nigerian army senior officers were begging the useless extremist to let them have their way to their destinations? In spite of that they were trowing stones and attacking the army convoy and u didn't condemn them? U see how biased u are in ur dealings?
So u expect the Chief of Army staff and his convoy to display cowardice and turn back and never attend the POP that was slated for that day. To hell with anyone who condemns the army or the federal government on the outcome of Army and Shi'it clash in Zaria and to hell with u for supporting the evil perpetrators.
Bleep U I billion times.

I know of the video you are talking about and I am happy to let you know that the video was shot the day following the Zariah tragedy, in it, the followers of the IMN were angrily protesting for the release of their leader, Sheik Zakzaky, the army officials were only there to soothe the tension and prevent the incident from escalating and arousing public sentiment, the fact that majority of the citizens of Zaria were sunni anti-Shi'a helped them considerably in this cause.

-Where have you ever seen such a case both local and abroad, where military begs civilians for passage?.
-What do you think the victims ever hoped to achieve by blocking the way of a military entourage?.
-Let us assume these innocents really blocked the road, preventing Buratai from passing, does that warrant the army usage of live ammunition on unharmed citizens?. Why was the case not treated in the routine manner, where the leader should be charged to court and sentenced based on judiciary verdict?. Why did Buratai take the law into his hands?
-Why is it only IMN in Nigeria?, roads are also blocked on Fridays during Jumu'ah rites, many instances do the Christians block the road during evangelism, have you not also experienced the sites of massive wedding ceremonies held on government roads? some deprive the road of traffic usage for more than 3 days!. Does anyone say anything about that?.
-The recent Zariah tragedy marks the third time, if not more that the government would crack down on shias, three of Sheik Zakzaky's son have been killed by the NIGERIAN ARMY during these crackdowns.
-Zakzaky has no possession of weaponry whatsoever as his house was searched times without number by the military as so did the victims of the Zariah tragedy has no weapons with them!.
It is clear the attack was pre-planded as everything happened so swifty, Zakzaky has also been in detention, tortured and demoralised for months without trial, this action itself automatically exposes the government's hypocrisy.
-Why was their place of worship destroyed? did they erected it on the road too?..
So before you start casting vulgar flows on people for stating their opinion which might be contrary to yours, always weigh your opinion and other's on the scale of justice without prejudices due to sectarianism.

It is actually the soldiers that killed hundreds of Shi'a civilians following the government directives and buried them in mass graves judging from the undisputable evidences.. So where did these ignorant protesters get their information from?.
Protesting to the government (who were actually the principal executors of the Zariah genocide) is rather rhetoric and absolutely biased, the protesters should try as much as possible to do away with sectarianism as justice is at stake, it does not matter if they are Shi'a and you are sunni, have pity on the souls of the dead and take their side against the government, the government are the real criminals, they are the violators of democracy as they did not respect the right to life and freedom of speech as installed in the Nigerian constitution.
It was the Shiites yesterday, today it may be you.

In The Name Of Allah,
The Most Compassionate, The Merciful
O Allah! Send your blessings to the head of your Messengers and the
Last of your Prophets Muhammad ( saw ),and his pure and cleansed progeny.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Part 1
The Glorious Quran Chapter 2 Verse 207
And among men there is one who selleth his self ( soul ) seeking the pleasure of God; and verily, God is affectionate unto His (faithful) servants.
It is held unanimious by the Scholars of the two Islamic schools, that this verse was revaled for Imam Ali ( as ), when he readily slept in the bed of the Prophet ( pbuh&f ) , when the latter to the will of God had to migrate from Mecca to Medina. The one who would agree to offer himself instead of the Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f ) who was wanted by the enemy must essentially have
- The safety of the Prophet ( pbuh&f ) prefered to his own safety
- Implicit faith in the duty of a man to earn the pleasure of the Almighty Allah and His Prophet Muhammad ( pbuh&f ), at any cost, even at the cost of his own life
- The courage of surrendering himself willingly with the utmost peace of mind, to sleep under the swords, ready to fall upon him
- The confidence and faith in God's protection
And on the night of Hijrah, Allah the glorious revealed to Jibrail and Mikail I have eshtablished brotherhood between you two and have ordained the life of one longer than the life of the other. Now, are you willing to make a present of the extra length of life to the other?
But each prefered the longer life for himself. Then Allah revealed
Why not follow the example of Ali ibn Abu Talib. I have established brotherhood between him and Muhammad (pbuh&f). He is now sleeping on the bed of Muhammad in order to save his life by sacrificing his own. Now descend both of you to the earth and protect him from his enemies.
Both the angels descended. Jibrail took up his position near Ali's head and Mikail near his feet. Jibrail was crying out aloud Excellent. Excellent. O son of Abu Talib! There is none like you. Allah is making boast of you before the angels.
And it was on this very occasion that the above verse was revealed.
- Tafsir al Kabir, by Fakhr ad Din al Razi, v 2 p 189 ( for the above narrt )
- Hakim al Mustadrak, v 3 p 4
- Ghayatul Maryam, p 344 -> 345
- Tafseer e Qurtubi, v 3 p 347
- Asadul Ghaiba fe Marifatil As Sahaba, v 4 p 25
- Tafseer Nishapoori ( Allama Nishapori ) , v 1 p 281
- Kifyatul Talib, p 114
- Zhakhiar al Uqba, p 88
- Noor ul Absar, p 86
Imam Ali ( as ) composed about this incident ( poetry )
I staked my life for the man who was the best of all those
who circumbulated the Ancient House and the Sacred Stone !
Part 2
Glorious Quran Chapter II - Verse 269
He granteth wisdom to whomsoever He willeth, and he who have been granted wisdom hath been given abundant good; and none shall mind it save those endowed with wisdom.
In the above verse the word "Wisdom " implies the best knowledge seeking to act with fullness and soundness of one's own conscience. True knowledge is spiritual illumination or divine guidance worked through the grace of God as and when the necessity occurs. This being the active result of the constant seeking for it by those who obtained nearness to the Allmighty!
It is held by many Sunni scholars, that this verse was revealed for Imam Ali ( as ). It is not surprising that, such a unique gift ( of being granted wisdom ) is inspiration (Ilhaam ) which is conferred upon the purified ones.
Sunni references:
- Shawahid al Tanzeel ( Allama Haskani ), v 1 p 106
- al Bidahiya wan Nihayiah, v 7 p 359 with a tradition from the Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f )
Wisdom has been divided into 10 ( ten ) parts, and 9 (nine) of these are possessed by Ali,
and the remaining has been divided among the rest of the people.
- Kanz al Ummal, v 6 p 154
- Asadul Bilagha, v 4 p 22 and v 1 p 22
- Kitabul Sagheer, p 15
- Manaqib Khawarizmi, p 49
- Dhakhair al Uqba, p 78
- Musnad of Ahmed Hanbal, v 1 pages 140 and 185
- Maqtal Hussain, v 1 p 43
Part 3
Glorious Quran Chapter 3 Verse 61
And unto him who disputeth with thee therein after the knowledge hath come unto thee, Say! ( O' Our Apostle Muhammad!) (Unto them) come ye, let us summon our sons, and (ye summon) your sons, and (we summon) our women and (ye) your women, and (we summon) ourselves and then let us invoke the curse of God on the liars!
This verse refers to the famous event of ' Mubahila ' which took place in the year 10 A.H against the Christians of Najran. A deputation of 60 Christians of Najran headed by Abdul Masih their chief monkpriest came and discussed with the Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f ) the personality of Hazrat Eesa ( as ). The Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f ) told them not to deify Jesus for he was only a mortal created by God, and not God Himself. Then they asked who the father of Jesus was. By this, they thought that since he was born without a father the Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f ) would helplessly accept Jesus' father being God himself. In reply to this question was revealed the Verse.
Verily, similitude of Jesus with God is as the similitude of Adam; He created him out of dust then said He unto him BE, and he became.
When the Christians did not agree to this line of reasoning, then this verse was revealed enjoining upon the Prophet (pbuh&f ) to call the Christians to Mubahila. To this the Christians agreed and they wanted to return to their place and would have the Mubahila the next day.
Early next morning the Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f ) sent Salman al Farsi ( May Allah be well pleased with him ) to the open place, fixed outside the city for the historic event, to erect a small shelter for himself and those he intended to take along with him for the contest. On the opposite side appeared the Christian priests, while at the appointed hour the Christians witnessed the Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f ) entering the field with Imam Hussain ( as ) in his lap, Imam Hasan ( as ) holding his finger, and walking beside him, Lady Fatima ( as ) and followed by Imam Ali al Murtaza ( as ). The Prophet ( as ) on reaching the appointed spot stationed himself with his daughter, her two sons and her husband, raising his hands towards the heaven said:
Lord these are the People of my House
The Chief Monk on knowing that the baby in the lap of the Prophet (pbuh&f) was his young grandson, Imam Hussain (as), the child walking holding the Prophet's ( pbuh&f ) hand was his first grandson, Imam Hasan ( as ), the Lady behind him was daughter, his only surviving issue was Fatima ( as ) the mother of the two children and the one who followed the Lady was his son in law, the husband of Fatima ( as ), addressed the huge crowd of the people who had gathered on the spot, and addressed them saying
By God, I see the faces which, if they pray to God for mountains to move from their places, the mountains will immediately move!
O believers in the Jesus of Nazareth, I will tell you the truth that should ye fail to enter into some agreement with Muhammad and if these souls whom Muhammad has brought with him, curse you, ye will be wiped out of existence to the last day of the life of the earth!
The people readily agreed to the advice counseled by their Leader. They beseeched the Holy Prophet ( pbuh&f ) to give up the idea of the agreed Mubahila and requested for themselves to be allowed to continue their faith, offering to pay ' Jizya '.
- Al Tabari, Commentary of the Quran, v 2 p 192 -> 193
This historic event of a unique triumph of Islam is taken by the Shias as a religious thanksgiving festival of the triumph against falsehood. Some of the significance of this event are as follows:
- this event unquestionably establishes the truth about the spiritual purity of the Ahl al Bayt
- it proves beyond any doubt as to who are the members of the house of the Prophet ( pbuh&f )
- the seriousness and the solemnity of the occasion demands absolute purity, spiritual as well as physical in the individuals to serve in the fateful occasion for the Holy Prophet to present them to God as the best one of His creation to be heard in the prayers of Truth!
Sunni references
- Ghayatul Maryam, p 300
- Sahih Muslim, v 4 p 1285 ( English Edition), the tradition is as follows:
...( The third occasion is this ) when the following verse was revealed : Let us summon our children and your children. Allah's messenger (pbuh&f) called Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Hussain and said : O Allah, these are my family ...
Part 4
Glorious Quran Chapter 3 Verse 103
And hold ye fast by the cord of God All together and be not divided ( among yourselves ) ...
Some Sunni scholars and commentators agree that the above verse reflects on the Ahl al Bayt. Here are some references
- Thalabi records on his Commentary Tafsir al Kabir from Aban ibn Tabligh that he heard Imam Jafer as Sadiq ( as ) say:
We are the Rope of Allah about whom Allah has said: Hold fast to the Rope of Allah ...
- Shafi'i is reported by Abu Bakr ibn Shabah al Din in Rishfaht al Sadi to have said:
When I saw People carried off
Their departure to the sea of error and ignorance
In the name of Allah I boarded the ship of Salvation
That is the Ahl al Bayt of Mustafa, the Seal of Prophecy
And I caught hold of the Rope of Allah, that is their Love
As He commanded us to hold fast to the Rope!
- A tradition from the Holy prophet ( pbuh&f )
I will soon be called away and will have to depart from you, but
I leave among you Two ( 2 ) weighty things, the Book of Allah and
my descendants. The Book of Allah is like a rope which extends from
the heavens to the earth, and my descendants are my people of the
house ( my Ahl al Bayt ). The Subtle and the Aware tells me that
the two ( 2 ) shall never part company until they come to me at the
Pool. So take care how you treat them after me.
As recorded in
- Musnad of Ahmed Hanbal, v 3 p 17
- Musnad of Ahmed Hanbal, v 3 p 26
- Sahih of al Tirmizi, tradition no. 874
- Kanz al Ummal, v 1 p 47, tradition no. 945 ( for the above hadeeth )
- Ghayatul Maryam, p 242
- Yanibul Muwaddah, p 118 -> 119
- Sawaiq al Muhriqah, v 1 chapter 11
- Safinatul Biharij ( Recorded by Allama Qummi from Allama Zamakhsari ) p 193






Verily, your Wali (Protector or Helper) is Allah, His Messenger, and the believers, - those who perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat, and they bow down (submit themselves with obedience to Allah in prayer).
409 – Narrated by Ath-Thabarani in Al-Ausath with sanad contain majhul, from ‘Ammaar bin Yaasir that he said : A beggar stood near to ‘Ali bin Abi Thaalib while he is performing ruku' in shalat tathawwu’. He freed his ring and gave it to him . Then came down the verse 'Verily, your Wali (Protector or Helper) is Allah, His Messenger- al-ayat – in it has syaahid :
410 – ‘Abdurrazzaq said : Narrated to us ‘Abdul-Wahhaab bin Mujaahid, from his father, from Ibnu ‘Abbas about the word of Allah “Verily, your Wali (Protector or Helper) is Allah, His Messenger”, then Ibnu ‘Abbas said : “Came down for‘Ali bin Abi Thalib”.
411 – Ibnu Marduyah narrated from other route from Ibnu ‘Abbas as mentioned
412 – He narrated also from ‘Ali as mentioned above
413 – Narrated by Ibnu Jarir from Mujaahid.
414 – And Ibnu Abi Haatim from Salmah bin Kahiil as above.
(As-Suyuthi said) : “This several syawaahid are strenthening each other”.
[Lubaabun-Nuquul fii Asbaabin-Nuzuul hal. 97-98].

Some Traditions on the Virtues of Imam ‘Ali (as)
ﺑِﺴْﻢِ ﺍﻟﻠَّـﻪِ ﺍﻟﺮَّﺣْﻤَـٰﻦِ ﺍﻟﺮَّﺣِﻴﻢِ
It is narrated that:
The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "He who wants to see Noah (as) in his determination, Adam (as) in his knowledge, Abraham (as) in his clemency, Moses (as) in his intelligence and Jesus (as) in his religious devotion should look at ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as)."
Sunni references:
• Sahih al-Bayhaqi
• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, as quoted in
• Sharh Ibn Abil Hadid, v2, p449
• Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhruddin al-Razi, under the commentary of the Verse of Imprecation (Mubahilah), v2 p288. He wrote this tradition has been accepted as all genuine.
• Ibn Batah has recorded it as a tradition related by Ibn Abbas as is stated in the book "Fat’h al-Mulk al-’Ali bi Sihah Hadith-e-Bab-e-Madinat al-Ilm", p34, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Siddeeq al-Hasani al-Maghribi.
• Among those who have admitted that Imam ‘Ali (as) is the store house of the secrets of all the Prophets is the Chief of Gnostics, Muhyiddin al-Arabi, from whom al-Arif al-Sha’rani has copied it in his al-Yawaqeet wa al-Jawahir (p172, topic 32).
It is also narrated that:
The Prophet (S) said: "There is amongst you a person who will fight for the interpretation of the Qur’an just as I fought for its revelation.”The people around him raised their heads and cast inquisitive glances at the Prophet (S) and at one another. Abu Bakr and Umar were there. Abu Bakr inquired if he was that person and the Prophet (S) replied in the negative. Then Umar inquired if he was that person and the Prophet (S), replied "No. He is the one who is repairing my shoes (i.e., ‘Ali)."
Abu Said Khudri said: Then we went to ‘Ali and conveyed the good news to him. He did not even raise his head and remained as busy as he was, as if he had already heard it from the Messenger of Allah (S)."
Sunni references:
• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p122, who said this tradition is genuine based on the criteria of al-Bukhari and Muslim.
• al-Dhahabi, also records it in his Talkhis al-Mustadrak and admitted that it is genuine according to the standard of the two Shaikhs.
• Khasa’is, by al-Nisa’i, p40
• Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 32-33
• Kanz al-Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p155
• Majma’ al-Zawa’id, by al-Haythami, v9, p133
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and al-Hakim recorded with authentic document from Abu Said al-Khudri, that the Apostle of God said to ‘Ali: "Verily you will do battle for (implementation of) the Qur’an, as you has done for its revelation."
Sunni reference: Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p173
al-Hakim recorded that Anas Ibn Malik narrated that the Holy Prophet said to ‘Ali:
“You shall inform my nation about the truth and what they dispute after me":
Sunni reference:
• al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p112, who wrote this is an authentic Hadith according to the stipulation of the two Shaikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim). (This would mean that the chain of narrators are considered to be authentic as stipulated by Bukhari and Muslim)
The First Muslim
It is an undisputed fact that Imam ‘Ali was the first man to embrace Islam after the Holy Prophet (S). Below are some of the references
Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn Asakir recorded on the authority of Salim Ibn Abi Jaad that he said: I asked of Muhammad Ibn Hanifah, "was Abu Bakr the first of the people to adopt Islam?”He replied: "No".
And Ibn Asakir on a reliable ascription from Muhammad Ibn Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, that he said to his father Sa’d: "was Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq the first of you in embracing the faith?”He said: "No, for there were more than five people in faith before him"
Ibn Kathir says: "it is clear that Muhammad’s family believed before every other - his wife Khadija, his freedman Zaid and the Wife of Zaid Umm Ayman and ‘Ali and Warakah."
Sunni reference:
• Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p33 (History of the Caliphs translated by Major Barrett) is also narrated that
Anas Ibn Malik said: "The Messenger was commissioned on Monday and ‘Ali believed in him on Tuesday."
Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p112
al-Hakim also narrated that:
Salman al-Farsi said that the Messenger of God said: "The first one of you to drink from the Basin on the Day of Judgment is your first Muslim, ‘Ali, the son of Abu Talib."
Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p112
Ibn Hisham recorded that:
‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib was the first male to believe in the Messenger of God and that he prayed with him while he was only ten years old.
Sunni reference: Biography of the Prophet, by Ibn Hisham, v1, p245
The famous Sunni Historian, al-Tabari also wrote:
The first three to offer prayers were Muhammad (S) , Khadija and ‘Ali (as).
Sunni reference: History al-Tabari, v2, p65
Also Khateeb al-Baghdadi, in his book quotes Imam ‘Ali that:
‘Ali said: "I was the first one to accept Islam at the hands of the Holy Prophet."
• Tarikh, by al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, v4, p333
From the book "Certainty Uncovered", the translation of "Kashf al-Yaqin"
Author: Allamah Jamal al-Din ibn Yusuf Hilli
‘Ali is the supervisor of the Kawthar Pond, the giver of permission to enter Paradise, the bearer of the standard on the Resurrection Day and during crossing the Discriminating Bridge (Sirat), and his two angels takes pride in him on the other angels1 The Messenger of Allah has been quoted by Ibn Abbas as saying: On the Day of Judgment, ‘Ali stands by the Pond of Kawthar. No one enters paradise without his permission.2
The Holy Prophet (S) has been reported by Jabir as saying : The two angels who are in charge of taking up ‘Ali’s deeds are more proud than other angels, for they present to God not any one of ‘Ali’s deeds which brings about Allah’s wrath. So they have a privilege over other angels.3 The Messenger of Allah has been quoted by Ibn Abbas as saying: On the Day of Judgment, on God’s order, Gabriel sits at the gate of paradise and blocks people’s entrance into paradise except those having a clean record signed by ‘Ali.4
Jabir ibn Samarah has reported : The Holy Prophet (S) was asked: O Messenger of Allah! Who is your banner bearer on the Day of Judgment? He said: My banner bearer on that day will be my banner bearer in the world. He is no one but ‘Ali ibn Abi-Talib.5 The Messenger of Allah has been quoted by Abdullah ibn Anas as saying: On the Day of Judgment when The Discriminating Bridge will be put over hell, no one can cross it unless he has a document in hand showing his love for ‘Ali..
At the beginning of his mission, the Prophet of Islam said in a speech: (In the Dawat e Zul Asheerah at the residence of Hazrat Abu Talib (a s )
“Who amongst you shall support me in this matter and be my brother, the executor of my will (wasi), and my successor (caliph)?"
All the listeners, with the exception of Ali, who was the youngest among them, kept silent.
Ali (a s) responded by saying: "I will be your helper, O' prophet of God."
The Messenger of Allah (s) then put his hand on the back of Ali’s neck and said: "This is my brother, executor of my will and successor;
therefore, listen to him and obey him."
Those present laughed and kept saying to Abu Talib: "Allah has commanded you to listen to your son, and to obey him!"
A sahih hadith reported in numerous sunni books including:
The History of Tabari , The History of ibn Asakir , Al-Durr al-Manthoor by suyuti ,Al-Mukhtasar, by Abul Fid.
Prophet Muhammad (s) said: "Ali is from me and I am from Ali and no one represents me except Ali."
Sunan ibn Majah, Hadith No.119.
The Messenger of Allah (s) said to Ali (a) : "Your position to me is like the position of Aaron to Moses, except that there shall be no Prophet after me"
S ahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Hadith Number 700. Sahih muslim Book 031, hadith Number 5913:
The Messenger of Allah said: "I am the city of knowledge and Ali is its gate; therefore, whoever wishes to attain knowledge, let him enter through the gate."
Reported in hundreds of Sunni books. Classified authentic by numerous Sunni scholars such as imam Hajr al Asqalani, imam Tabari, Imam Suyuti and Imamal Hakim.
During his tenure as Caliph, Umar ibn Khattab frequently sought the advice of imam Ali (a) to solve problems that perplexed him.
On many occasions, Umar said about Imam Ali (a): "If there was no Ali, Umar would have perished!"
Fadha'il al-Sahaba by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p647, Hadith 1100. Al-Isti'ab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr al qurtubi, v3, p39; Manaqib, by al-Khawarizmi, p48.Al-Riyadh al Nadhirah, by Muhibbuddin al-Tabari, v2, p194;.Tarikh al-Khulafaa, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, p171
The Quran says:
{10:35} "..Is He then Who guides to the truth more worthy to be followed, or he who himself does not go aright unless he is guided? What then is the matter with you; how do you judge?.
Prophet Muhammad (s) said: "Ali is from me and I am from Ali and he is the guardian of every believer after me"
Sunan Tirmidhi, volume 2, page 298. Mustadrak al-Hakim, volume 3, page 111. Sawaiq al-Muhriqa, page 122, published in Egypt .
"It has been revealed to me that `Ali has three exclusive merits: that he is the chief of the Muslims, the Imam of the righteous, and the leader of those whose foreheads radiate with the mark of faith."
Mustadrak al-Hakim page 138, Vol. 3. Kanz al Ummal, page 157, Vol. 6, is hadith 2628. Also quoted by al-Barudi, Ibn Qani`, Abu Na`im, and al-Bazzar.
His name is written on the Gate of Paradise.
The Messenger of Allah (s) said:
"It is written on the gate of Paradise : `There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, Ali is the Brother of the Messenger of Allah'. "
Al-Awsat by Tabarani. Al-Muttafaq wal-Muftaraq By al-Khatib. Kanz al-Ummal. Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal page 35, Vol. 5. Ibn `Asakir page 46.
These are just a small sample of the merits of imam Ali (a).
This presentation cannot do justice to the Commander of the Faithful.
Ahmed ibn Hanbal said: "Ali had
many enemies who searched
hard to find a fault attributable to
him, but they could not, so they
brought a man whom Ali had
fought and battled with, and
praised him because of their
hatred towards Ali.”
They could not find flaws in Imam Ali (a) so THEY fabricated traditions in favour of his enemies.

Hussein ibn Ali(as) was martyred along with 72 of his family and companions by your caliph, Yazid(l.a) , it is established in history and no matter what, nothing , no one, no lies can wash away their blood from the books of history.
What would the kufans gain by killing the grandson of the prophet?? how can anyone even think like that!. besides, there is no convincing argument to back up your claim.
It is a pity people call themselves Muslims and do not even know about the greatest martyrdom in the history of Islam/the world for that matter, some of us even take it as a day of celebration, as was done by his enemies who saw to his end with all their might.
What is more sorrowful is how some people ignorantly defend the likes of Yazid(l.a), while fully knowing his crimes and sins against the prophet.
I thank Allah for making me one of the few aware.

Farmerforlife:


That statement was taken out of context from a long hadith, which you shia fail to ever reveal in its entirety. It was actually Ali bin abi Talib (ra) who was called 'liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest' by his uncle, alAbbass bin AbdulMuttalib, when they had a disputation on how to share income from the same Fadak placed under their joint guardianship (which the shia believe was not even theirs, but Fatima's). Any interested party can look it up here.

https://imaams./2011/01/10/neither-abu-bakr-nor-umar-was-a-“liar-sinful-treacherous-and-dishonest”/

Here is the full hadith (a bit long, but worth it to understand the context).

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349:

It is reported by Zuhri that this tradition was narrated to him by Malik b. Aus who said: Umar b. al-Khattab sent for me and I came to him when the day had advanced. I found him in his house sitting on his bare bed-stead, reclining on a leather pillow. He said (to me): “Malik, some people of your tribe have hastened to me (with a request for help). I have ordered a little money for them. Take it and distribute it among them.” I said: “I wish you had ordered somebody else to do this job.” He said: “Malik, take it (and do what you have been told).” At this moment (his man-servant) Yarfa’ came in and said: “Commander of the Faithful, what do you say about Uthman, Abd al-Rabman b. ‘Auf, Zubair and Sa’d (who have come to seek an audience with you)?” He said: “Yes, and permitted them.” So they entered. Then he (Yarfa’) came again and said: “What do you say about ‘Ali and Abbas (who are present at the door)?” He said: “Yes,” and permitted them to enter. Abbas said: “Commander of the Faithful, decide (the dispute) between me and this sinful, treacherous, dishonest liar (Ali).” The people (who were present) also said: “Yes, Commander of the Faithful, do decide (the dispute) and have mercy on them.” Malik b. Aus said: “I could well imagine that they had sent them in advance for this purpose (by ‘Ali and Abbas).” ‘Umar said: “Wait and be patient. I adjure you by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained, don’t you know that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: ‘We (prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity?’” They said: “Yes.” Then he turned to Abbas and ‘Ali and said: “I adjure you both by Allah by Whose order the heavens and earth are sustained, don’t you know that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: ‘We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity?’” They (too) said: “Yes.” (Then) Umar said: “Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, had done to His Messenger (may peace be upon him) a special favor that He has not done to anyone else except him.” He quoted the Quranic verse: “What Allah has bestowed upon His Apostle from (the properties) of the people of township is for Allah and His Messenger.” The narrator said: “I do not know whether he also recited the previous verse or not.” Umar continued: “The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) distributed among you the properties abandoned by Banu Nadir. By Allah, he never preferred himself over you and never appropriated anything to your exclusion. (After a fair distribution in this way) this property was left over.

“The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) would meet from its income his annual expenditure, and what remained would be deposited in the Bait-ul-Mal.” (Continuing further) he said: “I adjure you by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained. Do you know this?” They said: “Yes.” Then he adjured Abbas and ‘All as he had adjured the other persons and asked: “Do you both know this?” They said: “Yes.” He said: “When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said: ‘I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).’ Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah).” (Referring to Hadrat ‘Abbas), he said: “You demanded your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to ‘Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: ‘The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said: We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.’ So both of you (Ali and Abbas) thought him (Abu Bakr) to be a liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest. And Allah knows that he was true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. When Abu Bakr passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), you (Ali and Abbas) thought me (Umar) to be a liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest. And Allah knows that I am true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. I became the guardian of this property. Then you as well as he came to me. Both of you have come and your purpose is identical. You said: Entrust the property to us. I said: If you wish that I should entrust it to you, it will be on the condition that both of you will undertake to abide by a pledge made with Allah that you will use it in the same way as the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used it. So both of you got it.” He said: “Wasn’t it like this?” They said: “Yes.” He said: “Then you have (again) come to me with the request that I should adjudge between you. No, by Allah. I will not give any other judgment except this until the arrival of the Doomsday. If you are unable to hold the property on this condition, return it to me.”

The Hadith can thus be broken down into relevant parts:

1) Abbas calls Ali to be a “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest”

2) Umar repeats the words of Abbas and says that Ali and Abbas thought of Abu Bakr and Umar to be “liar[s], sinful, treacherous, and dishonest”

If the Shia propagandists are going to accept this Hadith and use it against the Ahlus Sunnah, then they must accept the entire narration. In order to accept the second part, they must accept the first part in which Abbas-–who is revered by the Shia and comes from the House of Muhammad-–called Ali to be a “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest.” Of course, the Shia will never accept this!

The Shia are thus left with two options: either they accept the Sahih Bukhari version of this Hadith as the Ahlus Sunnah does (in which case their claims that Ali called Umar such-and-such are no longer valid), or else they accept the fact that Abbas accused Ali of being a “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest.”

As an addendum, if the shia accept this hadith in its entirety, then they must also accept this portion of it...

Then he (Umar) turned to Abbas and ‘Ali and said: “I adjure you both by Allah by Whose order the heavens and earth are sustained, don’t you know that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: ‘We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity?’” They (too) said: “Yes.”

This asserts unshakeably that their first 'infallible Imam' Ali bin abi Talib, confirmed and swore by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained, that he knew that the prophet (ﷺ) said that he had no heirs, and that all property he left behind (including Fadak) was to be given in charity.

In which case, this whole article was based on a strawman. Fatima (ra) had no inheritance, even according to Ali bin abi Talib (ra) and his true followers.

“Allah’s statement {And Solomon was David’s heir}, al-Hassan said: ‘It is material possessions, because Prophethood is a gift”
We read in Tafseer al-Bahar al-Muheet by Abi Hayan:
DQ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ : ﻭﺭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻝ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻮﺓ ﻋﻄﻴﺔ ﻣﺒﺘﺪﺃﺓ
al-Hassan said: ‘Inherited material possessions because Prophethood is a gift’.

Hassan said it is a material possession because prophet hood is a gift here means that an inheritance can not be a gift ( just as prophet hood here is a gift) and rather, that the inheritance was material e.t.c there... simple as pie.


I like the way you skillfully circumvented the fact that the prophet can never preach what he could not practice, terming it a childish stuff or so, do I have to remind you that the prophet practiced polygamy and recommended it to his companions? why on earth would he then not want his daughter to have a co-wives(that is if Ali wished for it in the first place), or do you think the prophet is a cunning and unjust person (God forbid) who preaches what he himself dislikes?.
As to why it defames Ali(a.s), there are many a reason, which one I think will suffice to satisfy your curiosity;
There is an hadith called hadith of Ghadir, which is as follows;
The Prophet [s] held up the hand of 'Ali st Ghadir khum and said:
"For whoever I am his Leader (mawla ), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla )."
[In some narrations the word used was
wali rather than mawla
- with the same implication]
The Prophet [s] continued:
"O' God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him."
These were the key parts of the speech of the Prophet [s]. There are also more detailed versions of this sermon which are recorded by many Sunni authorities.
For someone to be given the same authority as the prophet, the person must as necessity implicates be error-free so as to be able to imitate the prophet perfectly, the actions of the person must be exactly as the action of the prophet, such a man was Ali, whose Immaculateness is attested to by Quran Al Majid (33:33), it is therefore absurd and impossible to say such a man would anger the prophet, it would contradict what the prophet said at Ghadir and of course the Qur'an.

You also stated that you can not imagine Aisha insulting Uthman Affan?, well I hate to break it to you that she being one the prophet's wives does not make her infallible as history has recorded her doing 'unimaginable' things like waging a war against Imam Ali (as) while mounting a camel thereby defying Allah ( “ And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of before. .”- Al Ahzab) and fulfilling a certain prophecy of the prophet (sawa) ( The Prophet (sawa ) said to his wives: “ I wonder which one of you will be the
instigator of the Camel Affair, at whom the dogs of Haw’ ab will bark, and she will be the one who has deviated from the straight path . As to you Humayra (i . e . , Aisha ), I have warned you in that regard.”
Source (Sunni ): History of Ibn al- Athir , v 3 , p 120 ; al - Imamah wa al- Siyasah , by Ibn Qutaybah
When A’ isha heard the barking dogs , she realised once again her mistake.. but did that stop her? This prophecy of the Messenger of Allah (sawa ) took place 28 years later in the plain of al- Haw’ ab.
The story that all historians tend to agree is that during her journey to Basra (to lead the war of Camel ), Aisha passed by the waters of al- Haw’ ab and heard the dogs barking. She remembered the warning of the Prophet, and she cried and said : “ Take me back ! Take me back!”
But Talha and Zubair brought fifty men and bribed them to testify in front of her that the place was not the plain of al-Haw’ ab.
Source (Sunni ): al- Tabari ; Ibn al- Athir ;
Al - Haakim narrates a variation where who graded it Sahih (See Image )
Qays said: ‘ When Ayesha reached Bani Amer ’ s well at night, some dogs were barking at her, so she said: “ Where is this place?” , so they said: “ Al - Haw’ ab” , she said : “ I must go back !” , Al- Zubair said : “ No , you shall go forward so that the Muslims shall see you and Allah makes peace between them”, she said : “ Allah ’ s messenger (pbuh) once said: ‘ Then what would you (the wives of the prophet) do when you hear the barking of Al -Hawab dogs ?”) this false testimony was the first in the history of Islam and yet you regard these people as honoured companions of the prophet and put r.a at the end of their names.

Farmerforlife:


That statement was taken out of context from a long hadith, which you shia fail to ever reveal in its entirety. It was actually Ali bin abi Talib (ra) who was called 'liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest' by his uncle, alAbbass bin AbdulMuttalib, when they had a disputation on how to share income from the same Fadak placed under their joint guardianship (which the shia believe was not even theirs, but Fatima's). Any interested party can look it up here.

https://imaams./2011/01/10/neither-abu-bakr-nor-umar-was-a-“liar-sinful-treacherous-and-dishonest”/

Here is the full hadith (a bit long, but worth it to understand the context).

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349:

It is reported by Zuhri that this tradition was narrated to him by Malik b. Aus who said: Umar b. al-Khattab sent for me and I came to him when the day had advanced. I found him in his house sitting on his bare bed-stead, reclining on a leather pillow. He said (to me): “Malik, some people of your tribe have hastened to me (with a request for help). I have ordered a little money for them. Take it and distribute it among them.” I said: “I wish you had ordered somebody else to do this job.” He said: “Malik, take it (and do what you have been told).” At this moment (his man-servant) Yarfa’ came in and said: “Commander of the Faithful, what do you say about Uthman, Abd al-Rabman b. ‘Auf, Zubair and Sa’d (who have come to seek an audience with you)?” He said: “Yes, and permitted them.” So they entered. Then he (Yarfa’) came again and said: “What do you say about ‘Ali and Abbas (who are present at the door)?” He said: “Yes,” and permitted them to enter. Abbas said: “Commander of the Faithful, decide (the dispute) between me and this sinful, treacherous, dishonest liar (Ali).” The people (who were present) also said: “Yes, Commander of the Faithful, do decide (the dispute) and have mercy on them.” Malik b. Aus said: “I could well imagine that they had sent them in advance for this purpose (by ‘Ali and Abbas).” ‘Umar said: “Wait and be patient. I adjure you by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained, don’t you know that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: ‘We (prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity?’” They said: “Yes.” Then he turned to Abbas and ‘Ali and said: “I adjure you both by Allah by Whose order the heavens and earth are sustained, don’t you know that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: ‘We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity?’” They (too) said: “Yes.” (Then) Umar said: “Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, had done to His Messenger (may peace be upon him) a special favor that He has not done to anyone else except him.” He quoted the Quranic verse: “What Allah has bestowed upon His Apostle from (the properties) of the people of township is for Allah and His Messenger.” The narrator said: “I do not know whether he also recited the previous verse or not.” Umar continued: “The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) distributed among you the properties abandoned by Banu Nadir. By Allah, he never preferred himself over you and never appropriated anything to your exclusion. (After a fair distribution in this way) this property was left over.

“The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) would meet from its income his annual expenditure, and what remained would be deposited in the Bait-ul-Mal.” (Continuing further) he said: “I adjure you by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained. Do you know this?” They said: “Yes.” Then he adjured Abbas and ‘All as he had adjured the other persons and asked: “Do you both know this?” They said: “Yes.” He said: “When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said: ‘I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).’ Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah).” (Referring to Hadrat ‘Abbas), he said: “You demanded your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to ‘Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: ‘The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said: We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.’ So both of you (Ali and Abbas) thought him (Abu Bakr) to be a liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest. And Allah knows that he was true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. When Abu Bakr passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), you (Ali and Abbas) thought me (Umar) to be a liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest. And Allah knows that I am true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. I became the guardian of this property. Then you as well as he came to me. Both of you have come and your purpose is identical. You said: Entrust the property to us. I said: If you wish that I should entrust it to you, it will be on the condition that both of you will undertake to abide by a pledge made with Allah that you will use it in the same way as the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used it. So both of you got it.” He said: “Wasn’t it like this?” They said: “Yes.” He said: “Then you have (again) come to me with the request that I should adjudge between you. No, by Allah. I will not give any other judgment except this until the arrival of the Doomsday. If you are unable to hold the property on this condition, return it to me.”

The Hadith can thus be broken down into relevant parts:

1) Abbas calls Ali to be a “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest”

2) Umar repeats the words of Abbas and says that Ali and Abbas thought of Abu Bakr and Umar to be “liar[s], sinful, treacherous, and dishonest”

If the Shia propagandists are going to accept this Hadith and use it against the Ahlus Sunnah, then they must accept the entire narration. In order to accept the second part, they must accept the first part in which Abbas-–who is revered by the Shia and comes from the House of Muhammad-–called Ali to be a “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest.” Of course, the Shia will never accept this!

The Shia are thus left with two options: either they accept the Sahih Bukhari version of this Hadith as the Ahlus Sunnah does (in which case their claims that Ali called Umar such-and-such are no longer valid), or else they accept the fact that Abbas accused Ali of being a “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest.”

As an addendum, if the shia accept this hadith in its entirety, then they must also accept this portion of it...

Then he (Umar) turned to Abbas and ‘Ali and said: “I adjure you both by Allah by Whose order the heavens and earth are sustained, don’t you know that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: ‘We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity?’” They (too) said: “Yes.”

This asserts unshakeably that their first 'infallible Imam' Ali bin abi Talib, confirmed and swore by Allah by Whose order the heavens and the earth are sustained, that he knew that the prophet (ﷺ) said that he had no heirs, and that all property he left behind (including Fadak) was to be given in charity.

In which case, this whole article was based on a strawman. Fatima (ra) had no inheritance, even according to Ali bin abi Talib (ra) and his true followers.

I find your argument rather confusing as it contains a lot of absurd and contradictive narratives.
Those who concocted the hadith probably forgot that if Ali(as) (who was never far from his master, the prophet all his life) 'knew' (as we can't say he forgot) that the prophet(sawa) 'said' he wouldn't leave inheritance after he died, Ali would never have gone to umar to demand for it in the first place.
Ali is someone whom the prophet (sawa) praised in the hadith ( I am the city of knowledge and 'Ali is its gate" is not present in the current editions of the Sahih (alternatively called Jami` or Sunan) of al-Tirmidhi (d. 279 AH). This book is one of the Sihah Sittah or Six Authentic hadith books for the Ahl al-Sunnah). Can we then say someone like Ali(as) forgot about the prophet's word about the fadak and thoughtlessly went to umar to demand for it. If you believe this, then you are indirectly calling the prophet a liar (God forbid) for praising Ali as the source to his knowledge.
You were right, no one can accept that Abbas called Ali a liar and a treacherous person because we have seen countless narrations about Ali's love for Abbas, we also saw him fighting side by side with Ali(as) against Muawiya(L.A) during the battle of siffin. So how on earth will believe such an hadith that tends to portray the two like they have been lifelong enemies?
This tends to make one doubt the authenticity of the almighty sahih bukhari.

The question of happiness is one of the oldest of the philosophical topics of mankind, which belongs to the field of practical philosophy. The learned men of ethics and sociology are engaged in the discussion of its nature. conditions, causes, barriers, and its inconsistencies; and if the question of happiness and adversity is raised in speculative philosophy and theology, it is related to one of the minor points of this problem, that is, whether happiness (as well as adversity) is confined to the physical and material, or it is of the following two types:
(i) Physical and material happiness
(ii) Spiritual and mental happiness
Theologians propound this question for this reason that they wish to prove spiritual and mental happiness and adversity to be much greater and more considerable.
Bu-Ali (Avicenna) in section eight of "Esharat", and Sard-ol-mot'ale-hin in vol.4 of "Asfar,, in propounding this matter, consider only this branch of the question of happiness, and have disregarded other aspects of it. On the other hand, we have not so far come across a comprehensive discussion of this topic in Islamic and non-Islamic books of philosophy.
Although what the reader meets in this essay cannot be considered a complete discussion of this topic, yet it may be regarded as a brief survey. The questions raised here are as follows:
1 - What is happiness?
2- Happiness and pleasure
3- Is man by nature desirous of happiness?
4 - Happiness and aspiration.
5 - Happiness and satisfaction.
6 - A social discourse.
7 - Types of happiness.
8 - Stages of happiness.
9 - Factors and causes of happiness.
10 - An overview of a series of discussions.
11 - Does man need guidance to attain happiness?
At first both happiness and adversity seem to be clear in meaning, and if there is an ambiguity and difficulty, it is related to other problems, for, if you ask anyone whether he desires happiness, he will without hesitation give an affirmative answer. And if you ask: "What about adversity?" you will undoubtedly hear a negative answer. No one pauses before this question, and no one says: "Explain the meaning of happiness and adversity first, so that I may see which one I desire," Therefore, it is evident that both happiness and adversity have a clear meaning for all people, and so they are among the matters which need no definitions.
But I should say that it is not enough to suppose that happiness needs no definition. Many ideas seem like that at first, but as soon as we employ the Socratic Method, and compare that meaning with other meanings which are close to it and analyse it, we see that clarity gradually gives its place to a kind of ambiguity and indefiniteness.
Happiness is for many people synonymous with pleasure, tranquility, success, attainment of desires, joy, satisfaction with the course of events and similar others. But as soon as we compare happiness with each of these, we see that those are appropriate in meaning, yet these ideas are not quite the same. Therefore, it is necessary first to make their comparisons so that later on during these comparisons we find a definite meaning for happiness.
There is no need to discuss the literal root of happiness and pleasure, to see whether happiness is used in its special cases with the meaning of assistance, so that a happy person may supposedly be one who is helped by the turn of the world, while adversity may be considered its opposite, or that word has from the beginning had the senses of distress, pain and misfortune, while happiness was taken to mean its opposite, that is, freedom from pain and hardship.
Apparently from a lexicological point of view, we cannot find two opposite meanings for these two words, but in their general and particular usage they are placed on opposite sides, as they are so in the case of the Qur'an : "A day will come when no one speaks without His permission, and some are fortunate and some unfortunate; those who are unfortunate groan in the fire.... while those who are fortunate are in heaven." (11: 104-5).
Happiness and Pleasure
Happiness and pleasure are very close together (like adversity and pain) but they are not synonymous and securing pleasure is not the same as attaining happiness. In the same way bearing pain is not absolutely adversity, for a pleasure may be followed by a greater pain, as a pain may be the prelude to a greater and more important pleasure. It is also possible that getting a pleasure causes greater and more important pleasures to be lost, or a pain prevents greater and more severe pains.
In all these cases the reality of pain and pleasure is preserved, that is, we should not suppose that a pleasure which prevents a greater pleasure, or causes a greater pain is no longer a pleasure. But such a pleasure is not happiness. In the same way a pain which is the prelude to a greater pleasure or checks a greater pain must not be viewed adversely.
Happiness is applied to something the attainment of which causes no regret, and adversity is tolerating something which cannot by any means be accounted for; that is, man has adopted the sense of happiness for his final desire, and adversity for its opposite point, namely, what he should always avoid.
In other words, happiness is man's unconditional wish, and adversity is his unconditional abhorrence. Therefore, if a person or a faith or school claims bringing happiness to mankind, it means : "What I claim to show direction for, is not something better than which could be supposed." But pleasure is not so. If someone claims giving a pleasure, whether it involves a greater pain or the loss of a greater pleasure the case is different.
Pleasure is related to a special power and ability of men or animals, but happiness depends on the whole powers and abilities and living aspects of man. Pleasure is the ruler of the pleasant and unpleasant, while happiness is the ruler of what is advisable and inadvisable. Pleasure is related to the present, while happiness extends equally over the present and future. Pleasure as well as pain arc related independently to every aspect of man's life, while happiness is an overall matter.
For this reason it is easy to distinguish pleasure and pain, while it is very difficult and sometimes impossible to distinguish happiness and its opposite. A psychologist who recognizes only rnental processes, is able to express an opinion about pain and pleasure, while expressing an opinion about happiness and adversity is a philosopher's concern, since he claims to know the world, the society and rnan. The kind of opinion of that philosopher about happiness and adversity comple1ely depends on his knowledge of men and of the world. For this reason the suggestions of philosophers about happiness are so very much different from one another. One of them considers happiness as securing pleasure, while another thinks it to be abandoning pleasure and killing the will.
Someone pays attention to material things, and another to the spiritual. One of them considers this moment important, and another chooses far-sightedness as his motto. But as pleasure and pain arc the special products of the self, they are subject to investigation and testing, and it is easy to reach unanimity of opinion about them.
The reason why people, in spite of their claim that they desire happiness, follow different goals and choose different ways of attaining them, is this that they differ in the personal way of thinking or their attachment to a particular school or faith concerning man and the world. There is also another reason for this, which will be discussed in the question as to whether happiness is absolute or relative.
Is Man by Nature Desirous of Happiness?
The difference which we mentioned between happiness and pleasure shows that pleasure is one-sided and happiness many-sided. Pleasure is one aspect of the self's special product and subject to the conscience, while happiness is a general and independent matter which is obtained by the comparison and calculation of all pains and pleasures.
The idea of happiness has occurred to man by his ability to compare pains and pleasures and study their various aspects, and adopt a way of securing greater and better pleasure and enjoyment on the whole and reduce to naught all pains and sufferings. But pleasure is a mental state, depending on the mildness of something or a power, or an ability or a human organ. So, pleasure and pain are distinguished by nature and instinct.
But instinct and nature do not distinguish happiness and adversity; this is done by intellect.
Whether intellect directly claims to make this distinction or guide man to the faith or school which leads to happiness, anyhow the act of distinguishing happiness is not instinctive.
Therefore, when it is said that everyone is by nature desirous of happiness and always seeks it, it is not true. What people seek is pleasure. We can say someone seeks happiness, whether he chooses the right way or not, only when he makes a proper calculation and compares the losses and benefits and chooses a way from among them .
So, in answer to this question as to whether man by natured desires happiness, it must be said that if it is meant that all people always run after lost happiness, but only they often err in their distinct ion, it is not right, for, people often follow their nature, not their intellect , and desire pleasure, not happiness. And if it is meant that if human intellect distinguished his happiness and naturally sought it, it would be a correct statement.
Happiness and Aspiration
Certainly everyone has a number of wishes and has a great desire to attain them. If he is asked to describe in what things his happiness lies in order to attain them, he would present his needs and aspirations.
Some people suppose that happiness is the attainment of aspirations and success in desires, and whoever reached them all has attained perfect happiness, and he who has not attained any of them is quite unhappy; or he who attained some of his aspirations, has to the same extent secured some happiness in that shape of its. Thus, he has not only not been treated unfairly, but has also been granted benefits as a member of an unfortunate class.
But we may say that happiness is the attainment of maximum possible enjoyments and the banishment of maximum pains or minimizing them. In other words, happiness is derived from an harmonious use of one's material and intellectual resources, in the process of overcoming any situational obstacles and contradictions leading to pain and suffering.
This assumes, of course, that one is aware of his inborn abilities and is able to recognize the possibility of using the same, as provided for in the natural order of the world of creation. In this context, it is notable that sometimes an exploited or weak section of people may decide that they are happy with the material advantages that their exploiters find it necessary to extend to them.
Actually, their happiness cannot be real while they allow themselves to be exploited by the shrewd opportunists and self-seekers. The injustice that is caused in this way is much more tragic than that produced by dissatisfaction, for, the injustice that is felt by the other party, is like a painful illness which compels a patient to seek a remedy, but an injustice like the above is like a painless sickness which prevents the patient from seeking a remedy.
The maximum service rendered by the well-to-do class to the weaker class is to have removed their sufferings by mea ns of creating satisfaction in them, but happiness is not only freedom from suffering; it is not the negation of pain, but securing overall joys, benefits and pleasures. As it was said, such sufferings cannot be compared with physical pains like eye-ache and toothache, and in any case their removal may not be thought a service. Such sufferings are the means of social awakening and alertness, and their diminution in this respect is another sin and crime.
http://www.imamreza.net/eng/imamreza.php?id=13455

Perhaps it is time to kill the government?, the government that has nothing to show for but a circle of corruption since it began administrating in 1963?.
Perhaps it is time to be free of their menace? do you not think it is time to put an end to the system which works only to enrich the rich and neglect the poor?.
The past regimes were a failure, the present one which is built on the failure of the past regimes will also fail, no I am not a prophet to foresee what will happen to Nigeria in the future but I am a human with a brain just like anyone else with a brain can see doom ahead for the country, an utter failure, a country that cannot cater for the basic needs of its people is a failure!.
And believe me when I tell you, no president elected can save this nation so long its administration is built on the failed and to fail previous regimes.
The only salvation is to kill the government, pull out the weeds and allow good pasture to grow, remove darkness and let light shine.
We do not need weapons or guns, we need something a million times better, we need each other, we need to opt for action instead of words, stop complaining and start acting, let us unify against those who utilize our division for their own gains, leaving us in the shadows of doom where we kill each other for light.
This is our country, no one can take it from us.
The power is in the people, not the government!.
If you ever want to enjoy this country as a citizen of Nigeria, start thinking of a revolution, the revolution of the weak and deprived.

Farmerforlife:


Due to the fact that the rafidi twelver shia are the only sect purporting to be Muslim on eartthat revile Abubakar (ra) and indeed almost all of the friends and companions and family of the prophet (ﷺ) not descended from the Persian princess concubine of alHussein (ra), I infer that you must be a rafidi twelver shia. I understand that your sect do not have any system purporting to either the authentication, or the derivation of fiqh from sources of Islamic laws, so I shall lovingly endeavour to pass along this important knowledge.

First, to eliminate tadlees (wrong ruling based on deliberate ignoring of context or quote) any hadith must be looked at in context, otherwise, it may not be used to make a ruling; in this case, the ruling that Abubakar (ra) is not fit to be a ruler. Let us look at your quote of this hadith and its context...

The same Miswar b. Makhramali reported that he heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) say, as he sat on the pulpit: The sons of Hisham b. Mughira have asked my permission to marry their daughter with 'Ali b. Abi Talib. But I would not allow them, I would not allow them, I would not allow them except that 'Ali should divorce my daughter and then marry their daughter, for my daughter is part of me. He who disturbs her in fact disturbs me and he who offends her offends me.
Sahih Muslim 5999.

The same hadith has been narrated in a similar way through one of the twelver shia 'imams' , Zain al Aabideen, Ali bin alHussein bin abi Talib (ra). I do not know why this transmission was not accepted, while the other was...

'Ali b. Husain (Zain alAabideen) reported that Miswar b. Makhramah informed him that 'Ali b. Abi Talib sent the proposal of marriage to the daughter of Abu Jahl as he had Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), as his wife. When Fatima heard about it, she came to Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) and said: The people say that you never feel angry on account of your daughters and now 'Ali is going to marry the daughter of Abu Jahl. Makhramah said: Thereupon Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) rose up and I heard him reciting Tashahhud and say: Now to the point. I gave a daughter of mine (Zainab) to Abu'l-'As b. Rabi, and he spoke to me and spoke the truth. Verily Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad, is a part of me and I do not approve that she may be put to any trial and by Allah, the daughter of Allah's Messenger cannot be combined with the daughter of God's enemy as the co-wives of one person. Thereupon 'Ali gave up the idea of his intended marriage.
Sahih Muslim 6002

This supporting evidence (through various more chains too many to show here) goes to show that the statement concerning angering Fatima, was made concerning Ali bin abi Talib (ra) after his proposal to marry the daughter of Abu Jahl. If this statement establishes that Abubakr (ra) does not deserve the Khilafah, how much more does it establish that Ali (ra) who was the actual basis of the context behind this statement, also does not deserve the khilafah... may Allah forbid that either case is correct. Rather, we prefer to affirm your exaggerated inference is wrong.


Secondly, in fact, the Prophet (s) said many similar things about other people as well.

The Prophet said:

“Allah, Allah! Fear Him with regard to my Sahabah! Do not make them targets after me! Whoever loves them loves them with his love for me; and whoever hates them hates them with his hatred for me. Whoever bears enmity for them, bears enmity for me; and whoever bears enmity for me, bears enmity for Allah. Whoever bears enmity for Allah is about to perish!”

Narrated from Abdallah ibn Mughaffal by Al-Tirmidhi by Ahmad with three good chains in his Musnad, al-Bukhari in his Tarikh, al-Bayhaqi in Shu`ab al-Iman, and others. Al-Suyuti declared it hasan in his Jami` al-Saghir #1442)

There are numerous similar narrations about the sahabah, both collectively and as individuals. One wonders why the rafidi twelver shias ignore the one and fawn over the ones concerning Fatima (ra), which as we have shown, even indicts their own first 'Imam'.

Secondly, on the issue of Fadak, it is established that the prophet Muhammad said...

"We prophets do not have any heirs, what we leave is Sadaqah".

Since you will likely not want to accept evidence from sunni sources, here is a more acceptable one from your point of view. Shia 'Imam' Khomeini cited a narration from alKafi by Kulaini, and authenticated by alMajlisi stating the same thing...

Ayatollah Khomeini’s book: الحكومة الإسلامية الخميني صفحة93
(Al-Hukamah Al Islamiyyah, page 93):

"Abu Abdullah (Ja’far Al-Sadiq) (ع) said that the Messenger of Allah (ص) said: “[…] verily, the scholars are the INHERITORS of the Prophets, and the Prophets DO NOT leave dinars and dirhams (i.e. money/wealth) as inheritance but they leave behind knowledge so whoever takes from it then he has acquired a huge fortune.”
Ayatollah Khomeini’s comment: This Hadith is SAHIH (authentic).
[Even Mullah Baqir Al-Majlisi authenticated the Hadith].

Also...

“The Prophets did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance, but they left knowledge.”
(al-Kafi, vol. 1 p. 42)
(The same Hadith can be found in Sunni books. In Tirmidhi).

In the face of direct evidence from the prophet (ﷺ), there was no way that Abubakr (ra) would ignore a command of the prophet (ﷺ) to appease Fatima (ra).

It is also often forgotten by the rafida that Fatima (ra) would not have been the only heir of the prophet (ﷺ). For example...

When the Messenger of God (ﷺ) died, his wives made up their minds to send Uthman ibn Affan as their spokesman to Abu Bakr to demand from him their share from the legacy of the Holy Prophet. At this, Aisha said to them: Hasn't the Messenger of God said: "We (Prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is to be given in charity"? Sahih Muslim.

This shows that the wives of the prophet (ﷺ) who also would have been a part of the inheritance, were aware of this hadith, and Abubakr's daughter herself was entitled to a portion of the inheritance, and they did not push for Abubakr (ra) to disobey the prophet's command (ﷺ), unlike the worldly resentment and materialism that the shia try to attribute to the daughter of the prophet (ﷺ), a lady of the women of Paradise, who the shia say was so materialistic that she stayed up 6 months until her death, cursing Abubakr for not disobeying a command of her father, the prophet (ﷺ) and bestowing upon her some forbidden worldly wealth.

Also, the rafida tend to ignore the fact that Abubakr (ra) continued to provide the family of the prophet (ﷺ), including Fatima (ra), with the khumus provided for them during the prophet's lifetime, and this continued during the rule of Umar (ra) Uthman (ra) Ali (ra) etc.

Furthermore, if the rafidi shia want to impugn Abubakr (ra) with the issue of Fadak, then they must of necessity impugn Ali (ra), for Ali was the Khalifah some years later, and most of those who would have been entitled to a portion of Fadak were still alive then. There is no evidence that Ali (ra) redressed the purported 'oppression' attributed to Abubakr and Umar (ra) and that he gave the 'rightful heirs' their portion of Fadak, so that would make him as much an oppressor as Abubakr according to this view, and therefore should also destroy Ali's right to the Khilafah if it destroys Abubakr's.

I think we can close this chapter with a quote from Ali bin abi Talib (ra) himself, through his son, Muhammad bin Ali (aka ibn al Hanafiyyah), who narrated...

"I asked my father (Ali); who of the people is the best after the prophet (ﷺ)? He (Ali) said; Abubakr. I asked, then who? He said; Then Umar. Fearing that he would then say Uthman, so I asked him; then you? He replied; I am naught but a man of the Muslims".
Bukhari 20/7, Muslim 154/15, Abu Dawud 4605, ibn abi Shaybah 11994... ranked as Sahih.

Ali (ra) was an adviser and a soldier who defended the khilafah of Abubakr (ra) against the attacks by the apostates. Centuries later, his purported shia claim they know better than him.

and about Abubakr (ra), when he had had an argument with Umar (ra), the prophet (ﷺ) said...

"Verily, Allah sent me to you all, and you accused me of falsehood, except Abubakr, who affirmed the truth and believed in me. And he aided me with his person and his wealth. So will you not let my friend alone for me? Will you not let my friend alone for me? (Twice). And Abubakr was not disturbed after that."
Narrated by Bukhari 18/7, alHaythami 44/9 and alTabarani through other authentic chains of transmission.

So will you not let the prophet's friend alone for him? Will you continue this nonsensical campaign against the best of the ummah after the prophet (ﷺ) in the words of your very first 'infallible imam'?

Peace.
Though Rafidi has already refuted your claims, I'll like to add little more for the benefit of all.
First of all, not only shias or rafidis as you claim dislike Abubakar, there are a of sunni ulema who also agree that he did bad things after the death of the prophet (like usurping the rights of Fatima, unjust massacre of the clan of Malik ib Nuweirra among many others) but they, the sunni ulema nonetheless claim these sins of his were mistakes and regard him and love him as a caliph of God. This is the same as saying I love Firoun and love Allah at the same time, that is just ridiculous, Allah has just created for you one heart, which is solely for living Him and hating His enemies.


Also, I noticed that you know so much about Imam Ali Zain Al Abidin(as) but I find it perplexing as to how you don't about how much he loves his grand Father (Imam Ali(a.s) and hates his enemies, its hard for someone like Imam Zain Al Abidin(as) to testify against his grandfather. Imam Zain was someone who spent his day and night weeping for his Father Imam Hussein (as) who was the son of Imam Ali(as) and his companions that were killed during the battle of Karbala, a battle whose root could be traced to the ascension of Abubakar to the throne of caliph.
The story of Imam Ali(as)'s proposal to Abu Jahl's daughter is in itself faulty in the sense that this story makes Prophet Muhammad (S) appear as someone who refuses to practice what he preaches, or, feel above the Islamic law to himself, and those related to him while requesting others to abide by them. For instance, he (Prophet (S)) deems it lawful for others to marry more than one wife, but refuses this law when it comes to his daughter. This indeed is a disastrous fabrication against the Prophet (S) that the enemies of Islam were able to insert in the pages of our history books, depending on unscruent narrators who report such stories without reflecting upon them.
The story also defames ‘Ali (as) by showing him as someone who angered both Fatima az-Zahra (sa), and her father, and defames Fatima az-Zahra (sa) for refusing to practice Allah's commands, which He revealed to her father.
I shall not verify the discredibility of the authority on which the narration was based, for it within itself proves its own discredibility. Yet, it is inevitable to ask: Why have the narrators, who fabricated this story, insisted on saying that he (‘Ali (as)) wanted to marry Abu Jahl's daughter, and not any other woman?! How come they did not claim that ‘Ali (as) attempted to marry another woman? Surely, Abu Jahl's daughter did not enjoy beauty and perfection, which no other Arab girl enjoyed!
The fact is that they wanted their defamation of ‘Ali (as) to be graver and more effective; for in their story, ‘Ali (as) specifically chose the daughter of the chief of the enemies of Islam.
This plot exposed itself, and those who perpetuated it, when they praised themselves while discrediting Prophet Muhammad (S), his daughter (Fatima az-Zahra (sa)), and his cousin (‘Ali (as)). They claimed in the same story that he mentioned his other son-in-law, who is a young man from Bani Abd Shams, and praised him as "a noble son-in-law"; they claim that the Prophet said:
"He, the young man from Bani Abd Shams was truthful in his speech and executed his promises to me."
They want us to believe that the Prophet praised his Umayyad son-in-law (the Umayyads belong to the tribe of Bani Abd Shams), which in turn means that he was trying to discredit his first son-in-law [‘Ali (as)] who, according to the story, lied to the Prophet, and violated his promises to him by being an unfaithful husband to his daughter!!
Another aim for fabricating this story was to divert the attention from the actual people who angered Fatima az-Zahra (sa), and put ‘Ali (as) under the spotlight as if he was the one who did so. It was for this reason that they mentioned the following tradition at the beginning of the story:
"The Prophet (S) said:
"Fatima is part of me, discomforts me that which discomforts her, and harms me that which harms her."
They interpret it as:
The meaning of this tradition is that Allah prohibited ‘Ali from marrying another woman besides Fatima, which would harm Allah's Messenger!! (www.al-islam.org).

If the prophets didn't leave inheritance, then what would you say about this Quranic verse?;
Allah (swt) declares in Surah Naml 027.016:
And Solomon was David’s heir. He said: “O ye people! We have been taught the speech of birds, and on us has been bestowed (a little) of all things: this is indeed Grace manifest (from Allah.)”
Al-Qur’an, Surah 27, Ayah 16, translated by Yusufali
The verse is clear proof that Suleiman (as) the son of a Prophet inherited from his father,hence the claim that the Prophet’s leave no inheritance for their children is a blatant lie. Sayyida Fatima (as) inherited her Prophet father, in exactly the same way that Suleiman (as) inherited from his Prophet father. Any ruling rejecting her entitlement to her father’s inheritance, contradicts the Qur’an.
You might say the inheritance here means knowledge, it is not so because sunni commentators and exegesists claim the
inheritance is material for example, We read in Tafseer Kashaf:
“Waris refers to Kingdom and Prophethood”
Al-Kashaf, Vol. 3, Page 140
Tafseer Khazan:
ﻗﻮﻟﻪ ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ } ﻭﻭﺭﺙ ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﻭﺩ { ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﻧﺒﻮﺗﻪ ﻭﻋﻠﻤﻪ، ﻭﻣﻠﻜﻪ
“Allah’s statement {And Solomon was David’s heir} means (he inherited) prophethood, knowledge and kingdom.”
Tafseer Durre Manthur:
“Sulayman inherited both Kingdom and knowledge”
Dur al-Manthur fi Tafseer al-Mathur, Vol. 5, page 193
Allamah Nisaburi records in Tafseer Gharaib al-Quran:
ﻗﻮﻟﻪ } ﻭﻭﺭﺙ ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﻭﺩ { ﻋﻦ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ ﺃﻧﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻝ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻮﺓ ﻋﻄﻴﺔ ﻣﺒﺘﺪﺃﺓ
“Allah’s statement {And Solomon was David’s heir}, al-Hassan said: ‘It is material possessions, because Prophethood is a gift”
We read in Tafseer al-Bahar al-Muheet by Abi Hayan:
ﻭﻗﺎﻝ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻦ : ﻭﺭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺎﻝ ﻷﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﺒﻮﺓ ﻋﻄﻴﺔ ﻣﺒﺘﺪﺃﺓ
al-Hassan said: ‘Inherited material possessions because Prophethood is a gift’.

You also claimed Fatima al Zahra(s.a) was not the only heir, true in some way (as she was the only child of the prophet) but of course, wives are also liable to inheritance and so we find the mother of the faithful, Aisha bint Abubakar asking for her inheritance from Uthman bn Affan, the 3rd caliph, now my question is, didn't Aisha, one who is reputed to know a lot about Islamic laws and has also transmitted innumerable hadith know that the prophets didn't leave inheritance (that's if they truly didn't) for her to ask Uthmab ibn Affan for her share of inheritance?? WHAT A CONTRADICTION! the fitting reply Uthman ibn Affan gave her was what her father Abubakar had told Fatima (s.a), when she asked for the same thing , that the prophets didn't leave inheritance!, though the reply was rather in a mocking manner which angered Aisha who then said in a brutal manner to Uthman "kill this Nath'al", he is an unbeliever!.

The truth is clear undiluted, you just need to sort it out amongst falsehood. It is up to you.

Ma Salam.

Elohim1:

See What We Are Talking About Educate Urself The Big bang Is Not A Blast Its An Expansion Of Energy!!! I Don't Know Where This Olodo are coming from

Call it an expansion of energy or whatever you want, however, alternative nomenclature does not make it an endothermic phenomenon, rather anything that lets out energy (as is the case with energy expansion here) is an exothermic phenomenon and is normally associated with blast or explosions. And believe me, any expansion that has to bring about change, a change like establishment of new life can never be endothermic, such energy can never be contained by anything whatsoever, so we are left with the only option of the energy expansion (as you term it) being an exothermic phenomenon which in turn is not acceptable scientifically or logically because an energy of a magnitude of such that can bring about life is simply impossible, if it was, its products I.e man, should be able to withstand an energy of trillions of degrees of heat which is a form of energy , just one of the forms of energy itself!.
It is funny how a person that does not understand something as simple as the principle of physics approve of the disputed "big bang theory' and oh, last time I checked, 'bang' actually means explosion and not expansion.

allanphash7:
Yor parent will soon see the light






Give your parent this image

So apparently, you are one of those people who think life started with a blast and everything came into order (big bang theory) but last time I checked, a blast is an explosion that scatters everything, so how can a blast then bring about order? Let's assume it did, who made the blast happen?.
Atheism is simply an illogical and stupid theory.

They are probably treating you bad because they want you to turn back from the crooked road and walk on the straight path..
why would anyone be an atheist in the first place when it is a glaring fact that God exists.. besides it is better to live believing there is God and die realising there 'isn't' than to live believing there is none and die to find out there is!.
I advice you go on thorough research as your hereafter depends on it. Ignorance is not an excuse before God.

al-Bukhari reported in his Sahih that Abu Walid said that Ibn 'Uyayna reported on the authority of 'Amr b. Dinar on the authority of Ibn Abi Malika, on the authority of al-Miswar b. Mukhrima that the Prophet of Allah (S.A.W.) said: "Fatima is a part of me, and whoever angers, her angers me". "Fatima is a part of me, and whatever she detests, I detest and what hurts her, hurts me". If the Prophet of Allah (S.A.W.) becomes angry when his part, al-Zahra, gets angry, and suffers for her suffering, it follows therefore that she is preserved from all errors; otherwise it would not have been permissible for the Prophet (S.A.W.) to say something like this. This is because it is permissible to cause suffering and to anger anyone who commits a misdemeanor, regardless of his status, as the Islamic shari'a does not allow leeway for [special treatment for] ties of kinship, far or near, aristocrat or peon, rich or poor. If the matter is as stated, then who was Abu Bakr to hurt al-Zahra and not heed to her anger? In fact he angered her until she died; she was offended and even shunned him, not speaking to him until she passed away, supplicating against him in every prayer she prayed, as is reported in the history of Ibn Qutayba and other historians.
Momin.com.

After the death of the prophet (sawa), Fatima(s.a) asked Abubakar to give her her share of the land of fadak which the prophet owned in his lifetime. Abubakar denied her this thus angering the prophet's daughter whom the Quran had attest to her infallibility, the weak argument that Abubakar gave was that prophets didn't leave inheritance, this argument isn't supported by the Quran of hadith whatsoever.
My question now is, how can someone who unjustlyustly usurped the property of the prophet's daughter, thus angering her and consequently angering the prophet(sawa) and Allah(azwj) be considered a leader fit to be followed?.