₦airaland Forum

Final Part

Ok this tour is almost over,

here’s an important piece of Info that most of you (even shia) don’t know of, After al mahdi… There will be 12 other mahdis.

Narrated abI baseer: I Said to al Sadiq: O Son of rasul allah PBUH, I heard from your father that he said: After al Qa’em there will be 12 other Mahdies, Imam replied: He said 12 Mahdies not 12 Imams but they are a folks from our shia and they will call upon the people to follow our path and know our rights.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 53/145, Kamal Al Deen 335.

In another narration:
From us there will be 12 Mahdies from the son of hussein after al Qa’em.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 53/148, Ghaybat al Tusi 285.

Ameer Ali RAA Said: The prophet PBUH said: Ya Ali after me will be 12 Imams and after them 12 Mahdies and you O Ali are the first of the Imams.

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 105, Bihar al Anwar (36/261)(53/148).

Al baqir Said: By Allah Men from us will rule the earth each 300 years and nine, I asked; When will that be? He said: After the death of al Qa’em.

Source: Tafseer al Ayyashi 2/352, Mukhtasar al Basa’er 130, bihar al anwar 53/146, Ghaybat al nu’umani 231, Ghaybat al Tusi 286, al Ikhtisas 257, Al burhan 2/465.

So each one of those 12 Mahdies will rule for 300 years + 9, that’s very generous.

At the Same time The Mahdi ( main character ) according to Shiism will not die until 40 days before the day of judgement so how can they reconsile between these allah knows best, Sources are here:

Al irshad 345, I’ilam al Wara 435, Kamal al Deen 220, Al Mahasen 236, al kafi 1/329, al Basa’er 141, Bihar al Anwar (23/41)(53/145,146), ithbat al hudat 1/110, Ghaybat al Tusi 146,218.

Although According to all those sources he’ll die 40 days before the day of judgement, This Also contradicts other famous Shiite Narrations such as these:


Al Imam al Sadiq: The earth will not remain without an imam even for one day.

Source: Kamal al Deen 221, Al Basa’er 143,150, Bihar al anwar 23/42,50,53, ithbat al hudat 1/130.

Well not just one day, But he goes more specific and says not even for an hour:

Al Baqir said: If the imam was to be lifted from this earth for one hour Then it would start to shake like the sea shakes those (Sailing) in it.
Source: Kamal al Deen (194,195,196), Ghaybat al nu’umani 88, Al Basa’er 124, Al bihar 23/34,35.

Actually they go even more specific and say:

When al Sadiq was asked, he said: If for a Blink of an eye the earth remains with no imam then it will collapse and all those on it.

Source: Uyoun Akhbar al redah 1/247, ithbat al hudat 1/101,106, Kamal al Deen 197, Bihar al Anwar 23/29, ilal al Shara’e 77, al basa’er 144.

Actually they go even more specific:

Al Sadiq says: If the people of earth were only two, One of them would be al Qa’em as he will be the last to die unless The people will complain that they were without one.

Source: Ilal al Shara’e 76, Kamal al deen 117,134,135, Al Basa’er 134, Bihar al anwar 23/21,22,36,43,52,53, Al Kafi 1/180, ithbat al hudat 1/80.

Finally, there is no doubt That these Twelver Shiites attributed to the Imams more lies than we can ever imagine, what we mentioned here was just a few drops from a sea, an ocea even… And on the day of judgement they shall meet.


“…Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein many contradictions.”
[Quran 4:82]

As Salamu aleykum,

Part 5 (Continued)
Anyway regarding this affair they believe in something called Al Raja’ah or “الرجعة” and this means That Allah will revive some of the dead and they come back to life just as they were and Al Mahdi will humilate some and praise others, check this out in the following sources:

Aqa’ed al Imamayah P104.

Anyway let’s continue…

Al hurrawi said: I Said to Imam al redah: O Son of Rassul Allah, What say you about a Narration attributed to al Sadiq which says: If al Qa’em rises he will kill the Progeny of the killers of Hussein for the sins of their fathers?
Imam said: it shall be So.

Source: Ilal al Shara’e 1/219, Uyoun al Akhbar 1/247, Bihar al Anwar (45/295,296,298)(52/313), ithbat al hudat 3/455,497,530.

Badr bin Khalil al azdi says: I heard Abu Ja’afar say: If al Qa’em rises and is sent to bani Ummayah in Al Sham(Syria) they will run to the Roum(Christian Romans) and the Roum will say to them: We will not let you in unless you become christian, so they wear the cross on their necks and they enter(…).

Source: Rawdat al kafi 51, Al Ayyashi 343, Al Bihar 52/377,388, ithbat al hudat 3/450.

Here’s a good one:

Imam al Sadiq: thierteen Cities an sects will fight against al Qa’em and he will fight them: People of Mecca, People of Madinah, People of al Sham(Syria and its surroundings), Bani Umayyah, People of Basarah, People of Dmaysan, The Kurds, The wondering arabs, Dabbah, ghunay, Bahilah, Azd and the People of Al Rayy.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 52/363, ithbat al Hudat 3/544.

Al baqir narrated: When al Qa’em rises he will march to al Koufah and a people will come out from that city called al batriyah and they have weapons, They say to him: Go back from where you came we have No need for the children of fatima, So he starts with his sword until he finishes the last one of them, Then he enters the city and kils every hypocrite and will demolish its castles and kill its worriors until Allah is pleased.

Source: Al irshad 364, Bihar al Anwar 52/338, ( Al Batriyah are Zaidi shia group attributed to Mugheerah bin Sa’eed who is called al Abtar), I’ilam al Wara 431, ithbat al hudat 3/528.

So this guy pretty much destroys all of Arabia…heh

So What else can we talk about? Oh yes, The Mahdi is an Israeli Jew:

All who followed the hadiths of Shia will find the riwayah of al-Kulaini in al-Kafi(Vol.1, pg.387-398):


[b]Ali ibn Ibrahim narrated from – his father – from ibn Abi Umair – from Mansur – from Fadhl al-Aour – from Abi Ubaidah he reported: “When al-Qaim from the family of the prophet appears, he will rule according to the law of Daud and Sulaiman.”
Muhammad ibn Yahya narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from Muhammad ibn Sinan from Abaan who reported: “I have listened to Abu Abdullah [a.s.] said: ‘The world will not be gone (the occurrence of qiyamat) except after one from us appears and rules according to the rules of the household of Daud’”
Ahmad from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from Ibn Mahbub from Hisham ibn Salim from Ammar as Sabati he reported: “I asked Abu Abdullah [a.s.] : ‘In the name of what law would you rule with if you were to become a ruler?’ He answered: ‘According to God’s law and the law of Daud. And if we dispute over a situation where we cannot settle it, Jibril (Ruh al-Qudus) will reveal it to us.’”
Muhammad ibn Ahmad from Muhammad ibn Khalid from Nazr ibn Suwaid from Yahya al Halabi from Imran ibn A’yun from Jaeed al-Hamdani from Ali ibn al-Hussein [a.s.] he said: “I asked him, ‘With what law would you judge?’ He said: ‘With the law of Daud, and if there is an issue that cannot be settled, Jibril (Ruh al Quds) will reveal it to us.’”
Ahmad ibn Mahran [r.a] from Muhammad ibn Ali from Ibn Mahbub from Hisham bin Salim from Ammar as Sabati reported: “I asked Imam Abu Abdullah [a.s.]: ‘With what law will you rule?’ He answered: ‘With God’s law and the law of Daud.’”
Also He speaks Hebrew:
Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Saeed al Uqdah said: Ali ibn al-Hasan at-Taymali reported to us: al-Hasan and Muhammad bin Ali ibn Yusuf said, from Sa’daan ibn Muslim, from rijal (numerous transmitters), from al-Mufadhal ibn Umar he said: Abu Abdullah [a.s] said: “When Mahdi supplicates, he will supplicate to God in Hebrew language.”[/b] [Al-Ghaybah an Nu’mani, pg. 326]

Sheikh al-Mufid reported in his book, Al-Irshaad, from al-Mufadhal ibn Umar that Imam Abu Abdullah [a.s] had said: “There will appear together with Imam Mahdi.. people from the nation of Prophet Musa (Israel).” [Al-Irshaad al-Mufid, pg. 402]

According to a hadith from the book Al-Kafi, composed by al-Kulaini, when hidden Imam Mahdi learnt from a book called al-Jafr(one of the holy books of the Shia claimed to be authored by Imam Ali [a.s.]), which contains teachings from the religion of Israel:
Imam [a.s.] will remained hidden for a period of time and then said, “In our hand is al-Jafr. Do they know what al-Jafr is?” So I asked, “What are the contents of al-Jafr?” The Imams [a.s.] said, “It contains the knowledge of the Prophets and the accomplishers of their hopes and the knowledge of the Israeli intelligentsias of the past.” [al-Kafi, Hadith 635, Ch. 40, pg. 1]

He Will also have a Book other than the Quran (Maybe because it’s corrupted according to Shia):

Al-Majlisi narrated that, “al-Qaim will bring a new teaching, a new book anda new law.” [al-Majlisi, Buhar al-Anwar, vol. 52, pg. : 354 ]

Narrated from Imam Abu Abdillah [a.s.] he said: “If al-Qaim from the household of Muhammad appears, he will rule using the law of Daud and Sulaiman (teachings of Taurat), he will not ask for evidences.” [Usul al-Kafi, vol. 1, pg. : 397]

Ok So what did their Mahdi look like?

From huthayfa bin al Yaman that he said: The Prophet PBUH said: Al mahdi is from my children his face is like a shining planet and his color is like an Arab and his body looks Israeli and he will fill the earth with justice just as it was filled with opression and all creation will accept his caliphate even the birds in the sky and he will rule for 20 years.

Source: Abi Ja’afar muhammad bin Jareer bin Rustum al tabari al Sagheer (The Shiite) in his book Dala’el el Imamah page 196.
and here’s a similar one from the same book: See website

Maybe this Hadith from Sahih muslim (An Authentic islamic book) can clarify:

“Dajjal will be followed by 70,000 Jews from Isfahan, they will wear (robes) al-Tayalisah (Persian shawls – (today’s Shia)) which are seamless.” [refer Saheeh Muslim]

End of Part 5

PART (5)

[b]The folks narrate from al Mufaddal from al Sadiq in a long story which talks about the Mahdi as he appears, He says: And Then he travels to The City of my Grandfather(Prophet) Al Madinah and when he reaches it a Fantastic even will take place which will bring happiness to all believers and humiliation to the unbelievers(Kouffar), Al Mufaddal asked: How is that my Sayyed? The Imam replied: He will reach the Grave of my grandfather PBUH and he will say: O Ye Creatures, Is this the grave of my Grandfather PBUH? They said: Yes O Mahdi of Alu Muhamad, He says: And who is with him in this Grave? They Will Say: His two Beloved Companions, He says: And How is that from amongst all creation These two are buried with my grandfather PBUH, Maybe there is someone else there? The people will say: O Mahdi of Alu muhammad PBUH there is none there but them, they were buried with him because they were his two caliphs and successors and fathers of his wives PBUH. Then after three he says to them: Take them out of their graves and they appear Fresh and tender as if their features never changed nor their color. He says: Is there any amongst you who knows them? They say: We Know them by description and these are none other than his two beloved companions PBUH, He says: Is there any amongst you who says otherwise or doubts them? They say: No, So he delays taking them out of the grave for three days, Then he spreads the news amongst the people and he comes and exposes the walls of the two graves and tells his Men: Find them and dig them up, so they dig with their hands until they find them and bring them out Tender and Fresh as if their features never changed so he removes their Kafan(White Cloth cover) then orders that they be placed on a dried out dead Palm Tree and he crucifies them on it, Then the Tree lives again and flourishes and grows leafs, Then those who were in horror from this act say: By Allah this is an honor and we have won their Love and Wilayah. So a Fitnah happens to the people who witness this, Then the caller of al Mahdi calls: All those who love these two companions of the Prophet PBUH stand aside together, Then the people split into two groups one group is Muwali(in Favor of) the companions and another group disassociates itself from them. So Al Mahdi offers their supporters the chance to Disassociate themselves from the two Men So they Say: We never knew That The Mahdi and Allah regarded them as such and we only know of their virtues which appear to us, so should we disassociate ourselves from them this hour after we saw how fresh and tender they look and how they revived the tree? By Allah we should Disassociate ourselves from you and those who believe in you and those who crucified them and dug them up. Al Mahdi then orders a Black Wind which strikes them and renders them like old dead Palms, then he orders that they be brought down Then he revives them by the will of Allah and he orders all creation to gather around him then he starts to tell their stories and scandals starting from the story of how Habeel the son of adam PBUH killed, and how the fire was gathered for Ibrahim PBUH and how Yunus PBUH was trapped in the belly of the whale and how Yahya PBUH was killed and how Jesus PBUH WAS CRUSIFIED and the torment of Gergis and Daniel PBUT and how Salman al Farisi was beaten up and how the fire was light by the door of fatima and Ameer Ali and Hassan and hussein so that they would burn and how the hand of the Siddiqa kubrah Fatima was hit with a whip and how her child Mohassen fell and the poisoning of al Hassan and death of Hussein and slaughtering of his family and how the family of the prophet PBUH was looted and their blood spilt (…) and every Bad deed since Adam PBUH until today and he attributes all these crimes to them and they confess it, Then he crucifies them on trees and orders a fire coming from the earth to burn them Then orders a Wind which blows them away. al Mufaddal said: Ya Sayyidi, is this the last of their torment? He said: Not at all ya Mufaddal (…) They will be killed every day and night a thousand times until Allah wishes.
[/b]
Source: Bihar al Anwar 53/12.

Now after that bloodbath what’s his next target? as we know the Shia too well the next Target is also too obvious:

Abdul Raheem al Qaseer from abu ja’afar: And when our Qa’em rises al humeira’a(Aisha bint Abu bakr) will be resurected so that he can make al Hadd(Islamic punishment) on her and Lash her and so that he can also take revenge for the daughter of Muhammad Fatima, I said: May i Be sacrifice for you, and Why would he make al Hadd on her and Lash her? He said: Because of what she did to umm Ibrahim PBUH, I said: and why did Allah delay this until you appear? He said: Because Allah sent Muhammad PBUH as a mercy and sent al Qa’em as an Indignation.
Source: Ilal al Shara’e 2/267, Bihar al Anwar 52/314, ithbat al hudat 3/498, Dala’el al Imamah 256.
So he wants to Lash the Prophet’s PBUH Wife RAA because she commited Zinah!?

Al Sadiq says: When Al Qa’em from alu muhammad PBUH rises he will take 500 from Quraysh and cut their heads off, Then another 500 and he will do the same, and Then another 500 until he does so 6 times, They asked: and will there numbers be this much? He said: Yes from them and thier followers.

Source: Al irshad 343, Bihar al Anwar 52/338,349, I’ilam al Wara 431, Ithbat al hudat 3/527,540.

So this guy should be called the Quraysh terminator, you can tell how much they hate the companions so that they fabricate such narrations.

Another Narration the tribe of Quraysh says: Lead us to this tyrant! By Allah if he was from the progeny of Muhammad he wouldn’t do it and If he was from the children of Ali he wouldn’t do it and if he was from the children of Fatima he wouldn’t do it.

Source: Tafseer al ayyashi 2/57, bihar al anwar 52/342, Also look in Ithbat al hudat 3/539.

And that narration above proves this one:

Al Sadiq says: When al Qa’em rises there will be Only the Sword between him and The Arabs and Quraysh and He will only use the sword.
Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 155, Bihar al anwar 52/355, ithbat al hudat 3/540.

So this guy is a Racist anti-arab mass murderer, Hmmm… Could it be that the Persians are making these up

PART (4)

So what will the age of this Mahdi be when he appears?

In some narrations he is 30 years old, in another 32 years, in another 40 years, in Another 80 years, in Another ” Allah decides this ” and in another Al mufaddal asked al Sadiq: O Sayyed will he appear as a young man or an Old Man? He replied: Subhan Allah! And you think this is known? He Appears in whichever form and shape he decides!

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 258,259, Bihar al anwar (52/279,285,287,319) (53/7), Ghaybat al nu’umani 99,158, Kamal al Deen 2/366, ithbat al Hudat 3/575, I’ilam al Wara 401.

Honestly these infallibles should just make up their minds, this is ridiculous, I am not a Shiite and I am confused now.

Now How many years will he rule humanity when he appears?


in one narration it says 7 years, in another 19, in another 19 and a few months, in another 40 years, in another 70 years, in another 120 years, in another 309…

The Sources: Ghaybat al tusi 273,283, Al Ayyashi 2/326, Al Basa’er 130, Al bihar (52/280,287,291,298,299,337,338,339,340,386,390) (53/145,146) Ithbat al hudat 3/299,512,517,528,529,547,556,557,575,584 I’ilam al Wara 342,432,434, al irshad 363, ghaybat al nu’umani 99,231,232, al ikhtisas 257.

Now let’s take two more About “When” he will appear:

Narrated from al Sadiq: Al Qa’em will not appear unless 12 from bani Hashim appear Each one calling for himself.
Source: Ghaybat al Tusi 267, Al Irshad 358, Bihar al anwar 52/209.

My my, This is Serious…wouldn’t that make them 13 Imams then?


In Another version:

He will not appear Until the appearance of twelve from The Family of Abi Talib each one Claiming Imamah for himself.

Source: Al Irshad 357, Bihar al Anwar 52/220.

So Twelve Liars from the Children of Ali RAA will appear and Claim Imamah? bummer.


What will be the state of his Shia in his absence?

Ameer Ali Said: our Al Qa’em will have an occultation which will last a long time, and it is if I see our Shia(then) wondering the earth like Animals seeking Resources that they will not find.

Source: Kamal al Deen 286, Ghaybat al nu’umani 127, Bihar al Anwar (51/109,110,114,119), Ithbat al hudat 3/463,464,486, I’ilam al Wara 400.

And Ali Said:
“How will you become when there is No Imam of Huda(Amongst you), and No knowledge, and all of you will be disassociating yourselves from each other.”

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 207, bihar al Anwar (51/111)(52/112), Kamal al Deen 326, ithbat al hudat 3/473,511.

He also said:
“And these Shia Shall become the same as Goats with no Honor or Helper to help them in their affairs.”

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 127, Rawdat al Kafi 263, Bihar al anwar (51/114)(52/110,263).

Al baqir said: Then Allah will send For this affair him(Mahdi) which you(Shia) are insure of whether he is born or not.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 121,122, Al bihar 51/139.

So The Shia won’t even be sure if he’s alive or not just like Many of them today I am sure doubt his existence after 1200 years, Just like their forefathers before them doubted it thus the Shia Scholars had to invent such narrations

Al Sadiq Said: Our Qa’em has Two Ghaybas(Occultations) And it will be said in one of them that he is lost and dead.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 76,115, Kamal al Deen 2/16, Al Kafi 1/336, Ghaybat al Tusi 205,217, Bihar al Anwar 52/156,157,228,281, Ithbat al hudat 3/473,514,533.

And surprisingly They narrate something from the Prophet PBUH which they seem to usually ignore as if he never existed and they narrate nothing from him, According to them he said:
“From my children is Al Mahdi and he will have a Ghaybah(occultation) which will confuse the nations.”

Source: Bihar al Anwar 51/72.

Al Sadiq says: By Allah Al Mahdi will be away from you until the ignorant amongst you will start to say ‘Allah has no need for the Family of Muhammad’.

Source: Kamal al Deen 285,287, Ghaybat al Tusi 207, Bihar al Anwar (51/68,119,135,145) (52/101), Ithbat al hudat (3/459,463,464,472,510,532), I’ilam al Wara 400.

You See how they start to play on the emotions of their followers so they can dull their brains? “Allah has no need for the Family of Muhammad” What a JOKE!

He also said: The Owner of this affair(mahdi) has two occultations: one of them will last so long that some will say: he died or he was killed or he left us and no one from his companions will last on this belief except a few and none of his children will learn of his place no one except Allah will know.

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 111, Ghaybat al nu’umani 89, Bihar al Anwar (52/153)(53/324).

Imam Musa al Kathim Says: There should be an occultation for the owner of this affair(Mahdi) until those who believe in it no longer do.

Source: Kamal Al Deen 358, Ghaybat al tusi 204, Bihar al Anwar (51/150)(52/113), ithbat al hudat 3/476.

This Religion makes less and less sense as you go on.


Al Sadiq says: The owner of this affair has an occultation and he keep believing in this religion will be like the one whom clenches his fist while there are spikes in it.

Source: Bihar al anwar 52/111,135, ithbat al hudat 3/473.

Al Askari said: He has a Ghaybah (occultation) in which the ignorant will be confused and the Misguiding Men will perish and the Waqqatoon(those who claim a timing for it to end) will lie.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 51/160, ithbat al hudat 3/482.

Al Sadiq then said: And he will disappear on the last day of the year 266 and no one will see him.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 53/6.

Basically what we understand is that The Mahdi whom the Shiites claim exists right now, Serves absolutely no purpose, he will not guide them nor help them nor do anything at all… it’s just Like he doesn’t exist

Ok Now after this Brave Imam jumps out of his Sirdab what will he do? after centuries of Waiting and waiting and struggling and paying Khums what will this Awaited one finally accomplish?

Let’s find out what more the Shia have in store for us in those amazing books,

Narrated Bashir al Nabbal: Abu abdullah said: Do you know what is the first thing the Mahdi will do? after his appearance is to extract two individuals i.e. Abu Bakr and Umar, who are still wet and fresh, He will burn them and then throw them both using the wind and destroying the masjid.

Source: Bihar al anwar 52/386.

Now That’s Just Sick!

In Another Narration: He will Break the wall of the grave, then Allah will send Strong gusts of Wind and Storms and Lightning, (…) Then his Companions will leave him and he remains alone, he takes a Pickaxe with his hand and he is the first one who strikes with it then his companions will return to him and he who has most virtues is he who reaches him first and they will demolish the wall then he will bring them out(Abu Bakr RAA and Umar RAA) Wet and Fresh, He will curse them and disassociate himself from them and will crucify them and then bring them down and burn them and blow them with the winds.

Source: Same as above.

What Is Wrong with These people!? They’re Sick!
Now they start calling These two Abu bakr RAA and Umar RAA as “Al Laat” and “Al Uzzah” who were two famous Idols worshiped in the time of the Prophet PBUH,

Abdul Azeem al husseini from Imam al Jawad: and The enemies of Allah will continue to be killed until he is pleased, I asked: O Sayyed, and How does He Know that allah is pleased? He replied: Allah will grant his heart mercy, So if He enters Madinah he will extract Al Laat and al Uzzah (Abu bakr RAA and Umar RAA).

Source: Kamal al Deen 352, Bihar al Anwar 52/283, Ithbat al hudat 3/469.

When al Majlisi Narrated this Hadith in His Al Bihar (or Bihar al anwar) He said in all enthusiasm while clarifying ” He Means by Al Laat wal Uzzah, The two asnam(idols) of Quraysh: Abu bakr and Umar”.

Source: bihar al anwar 52/284.

Al Sadiq said: And He will extract Al Laat wal Uzzah while they’re Wet and Fresh and he will burn them, The Fitnah of the people by them on that day is worse than the Fitnah of Al Samiri and The Calf.

Source: Kamal Al Deen 1/364, Uyoun al Akhbar 1/58, Bihar al Anwar (36/245)(52/379).

Shiite Scholar Al Jaza’eri Writes:
The graves of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar al-Khattab RA are to be dug up, and they are to be crucified and flogged in front of the crowds. Both of them will be resurrected to receive their sentences.
[see, Ni’matullah al-Jazairi, Al-Anwar al-Nu’maniyyah, vol.2, pg. : 85 and Majlisi, Haqq al-Yaqin, vol. 2, pg. : 242 ]

And the Narrations where he resurrects them and burns them are many so you can refer to their books below for more:

Ithbat al Hudat (1/476)(3/584), Uyoun al Akhbar 1/61, Kamal al Deen 146, Dala’el al Imamah 238, Noor al Thaqalayn 3/120.

But Since I have time today I’ll translate one of their biggest stories of How The Shiite Mahdi will do these Crimes to the companions in the next Part…
End of Part 4

PART (3)
we continue…

Abu Baseer said to the Imam: Is there no time which we can know of so that we can rest ourselves?
He replied: yes but you have spread the news so Allah had delayed it.

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 265, Ghaybat al nu’umani 194, Bihar al anwar 52/105,117.

I’am guessing he’ll never appear since the Shiites of today keep on spreading the news about him and trying to guess when he’s gonna show up.
However it turns out I’am right as this new appointment seems to have been delayed as well,

The Imam said to Isaac bin Ammar: O Isaac this affair had been delayed twice.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 197, bihar al anwar 52/117.

However there is a narration which contradicts all the timings above:


Al Fadeel said: I asked Abu Ja’afar: Is there a time for this affair? He said: those who mention a time Are Liars, those who mention a time Are Liars, those who mention a time Are Liars!
Then he himself mentions a timing in another narration,
this Narration By Ja’afar al Sadiq in their books:

Al Sadiq RAA said: The Day of Nawrouz Is the Day in which al Qa’em(Mahdi) will appear, and we expect his appearance on every Nawrouz (For 1200 years LOL) becaue it is a special Day, the Persians have preserved this day and you(Arabs) have lost it.

Bihar al anwar 52/276,308 & 59/119, Ithbat al hudat 3/571.

Muzir al Jawar narrated from abu Abdullah: those who speak of timing are liars, we never gave any time in the past and we won’t give any in the future.

Muhzam al asadi said: I asked Abu Abdullah: When is this event you are waiting for? It is taking a long time, He said O Muhzam those who speak of a timing are liars and those who are hasty are going to fail.

Keep in mind the thing you read above contradicts the theory of 12 Imams because then they would’ve knew that he was gonna be the son of the 11th so they would know the timing.

You’ll find many more narrations here:

Ghaybat al tusi 262, bihar al Anwar (4/132) (52/103,104,111,118) (53/181) (78/380) ithbat al hudat (3/447,544), ghaybat al nu’umani 131,195.

However we see the Imams themselves giving more timings:

Muhammad Bin Muslim and Abu Baseer said that they heard Abu Abdullah say: he will not appear until 2/3 of the people disappear, we said: then who will remain? He said: Do you not accept to be in the remaining third?

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 206, Bihar al Anwar 52/113,207, ithbat al hudat 3/510.

Jaber al ju’ufi said: I told Abu ja’afar: When will the Mahdi appear? He said: Hayhat! Hayhat! He will not appear until your numbers diminish, diminish, diminish(Said it three times) until only the Best amongst you remain.

Source: Ghaybat al Tusi 206, bihar al anwar 52/113.

Ibrahim bin Haleel said: I told abu al Hasan: My father died in waiting and I’am getting older, will I die without knowing when he appears? He said: Abu Isaac you are hasty, I said: why not be hasty when I’am this old? He said: By Allah it won’t happen until your numbers diminish that only a few will remain.

Source: Ghaybat al Nu’umani 139, Al bihar 52/113.

Al Redah said: this will not take place until you diminish in numbers and none remains except a few.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 204, Al bihar 52/114, also another in Al Bihar 52/112, ghaybat al nu’umani 111, ghaybat al tusi 218, Al Kafi 1/370.

So maybe a world war will take place and 66% of the people of earth will disappear in the process then we go back to the age of swords and bows.

When was this Mahdi Created by Allah?


in one Hadith for example Abu Abdullah RAA is talking with Bin Mahran, and he orders him to bring him some Dates, so he eats then he plants the rest in the ground where it instantly grows and reveals a white material with something written on it…In brief what was written is that the Imams have been created 2000 years before Adam.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 56, al burhan 2/123, bihar al Anwar (24/243)(36/400)(38/46), Al Manaqib 1/307, Ta’aweel al Ayat 1/204, Ithbat al hudat 3/137,144, muntakhab al athar 30.

Another Hadith, Abu Ja’afar says they were created 14,000 years before Adam as lights ect…

Source: Kamal al Deen 315, Al mukhtasar 129, al umdah 44, Bihar al Anwar (15/23)(25/4,15)(38/147), ithbat al hudat 1/517.

Al Sadiq said that they were ghosts of light making tasbeeh around the throne 15,000 years before Adam was created.

Source: Amali al Saduq 115, Bihar al anwar (15/6)(25/2)(35/31)(57/168).

Musa Al Kathim had two narrations, one which he said they were created 22,000 years before Adam and another where he said 24,000 years before Adam.

Source: Ma’ani al akhbar 104, Al Khisal 640, Amali al Saduq 592, Al Manaqib 3/349, Ithbat al hudat 2/14,37,183, Dala’el al imamah page(22)

and in it is a narration of 220,000 years, al kafi 1/460, Bihar al Anwar 43/111.

here the prophet PBUH ascends to the sky and reads that Ali and the Imams are created 70,000 years before Adam.

Source: Al bihar 37/339.

BUT SOME PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY WEREN’T SATISFIED WITH Seventy thousand…so they made up a Hadith where Al Sadiq says That they were created 2000,000 years before All creation! and then they made Tasbeeh so the angels made Tasbeeh with them.

Source: Al bihar 25/1.

As for this last one, well How can the angels make tasbeeh with them if they weren’t created yet? or were they not a part of “Before all creation”? ”

Now How will this mahdi fight the Kouffar and enemies of Islam?

The Shiite narrations state he will do it with a sword, some narrations state Zulfiqar and others state The Sword of the Prophet PBUH, here are the sources:

ithbat al hudat 3/588, Kifayat al Athar 19, Ghaybat al nu’umani 209, Bihar al Anwar (36/335) (52/171, 307,361,380)

Not only him but also his companions will fight with a sword,

Al Sadiq said: When al Qa’em rises he will come to kufah and he will order his Companion to dig in a certain place, in it they will find 12,000 Shields, 12,000 swords & 12,000 “Eggs with two faces ” Then he will say: He who does not have what you Have, Kill him!

Source: Al ikhtisas 334, al bihar 52/377, Ithbat al hudat 3/558.

Wow the number of items is 12,000 which is similar to the number of Imams “12” this must be a miracle LOL… no honestly LOL! but I guess only 12,000 will kill the rest of humanity.

But other people didn’t like the idea of swords underground so they made them descend from the sky:

Al Sadiq said: When al Qa’em rises the swords of battle will descend from above on each one is the name of the Man and his father.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 162,214, Al bihar 52/356.

Now let’s go back to when this genius is gonna appear,

In a narration al Sadiq says: on the Saturday, the Day of Ashuraa.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 189, al irshad 362, Ghaybat al tusi 274, Muntakhab al Athar 464, 365, Bihar al Anwar 52/285,290,297, Ithbat al hudat 3/453,491,514,543,570.

In another narration the Imam says: on a Friday

Source: Al Khisal 394, Al bihar 52/279, Ithbat al hudat 3/496.

Ok where will he appear?

in one narration the Imam says: In Mecca.

source: ghaybat al tusi 112, Al Kafi 1/340, Ghaybat al nu’umani 119, Al bihar 52/153,157, muntakhab al Athar 467, ithbat al hudat 3/562,565,586.

in another narration:
Imam says he’ll appear: in a village in Yemen called Kara’ah.

Source: kifayat al Athar 20, Muntakhab al Athar 466, al Bihar al anwar (36/335) (51/95) (52/380)

End of Part 3

Part 2 (Continued...)

I say all of these supposed signs have passed 12 centuries ago and he still never appeared.


The gigantic narration above(see website) has al bizanty asking Imam al redah about this matter of when Al mahdi will appear then he says that the first sign is in the year 195 hijri and he keeps talking about each year until he reaches 200 then says that in the year 200 Allah does what he wills and finally at the end of this entire talk al bizanty asks al redah if he was al mahdi.

Source: Bihar al anwar 52/184, ithbat al hudat 3/50.

We are now in the fifteenth hijri century and still no sign of him.

When al Baqir was asked about the Mahdi he said:

When Baqir was asked about verse [70:01] “A questioner asked about a Penalty to befall-” He said: A fire coming from the west and a king drives it from behind it until he comes from the direction of the house of Bani Sa’ad bin Hammam near their mosque and it leaves no house of Bani Ummayah until it burns them and those inside them and that is Al Mahdi.

Source: Tafseer al Qummi 2/374, al burhan 4/381, noor al thaqalayn 5/412, al Safi 5/224, Al bihar 52/188, ithbat al hudat 3/553.

Well I’am not sure after 1400 years the fire will come from the direction of the house of ibn Hammam near their mosque and that it will burn the houses of Bani ummayah whose rule had ended so long ago… this one was invented by a Shiite scholar probably during the rule of the Umayyads to fool his followers.

Al Hassan bin Ibrahim said: I told al Imam Redah: They Claim the Suffiany will appear after the rule of Bani al Abbas has ended? He said: They Lied! He will appear during their reign.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 205, bihar al anwar 52/251.

I’am sure the Abbasi caliphate ended a long time ago however the guy who fabricated this lie to fool the Shiites didn’t know or care.

Al Baqir said: The Banu Abbas must reign during this time for if they did and then they became divided amongst themselves then Al kharasani & al Suffiany will both appear one from the left and the other from the right as they race to Al Kufah like the horses you bet on.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 117, bihar al anwar 52/234.

Well like we said it ended a long time ago and none of this happened and the Mahdi didn’t appear nor is the “Kufah” important in our days so no need for them to race there, The liar who made this to fool the Shiites in the Abbasi period is truly an ignorant and a bad liar, he wanted to buy the life with his lies instead of the afterlife.

Abi Baseer narrated from abu Abdullah: Allah is greater than to leave the earth without a Just Imam, I said: tell what would make me feel better, He said: o Abu Muhammad, the nation of Muhammad will not see prosperity and salvation while the sons of a certain person still rule over us, if their rule was to end then allah will grant you a Man from Us ahlulbayt who will act with justice, I know him by his name and his father’s name …

Source: Bihar al Anwar 52/269.

Is the reader noticing that these are all political messages and not religious ones? Using religion for political gain has been famous for a long time and not just in our days.

Salman the Persian said: I came to Ameer al mumineen(Ali) and asked when is the Mahdi? So he breathed deeply and said: If the kings of Bani abbas the blind misguiders with ugly faces were to be killed and the city of Basrah was destroyed only then will the Qa’em appear from the progeny of Hussein.

Source: Bihar al anwar 52/275.

But this is a lie since he never came out until today and their reign even in Egypt had ended around 481 years ago.

Ibn Yaqteen told his son Ali: What they told us had happened but what they told you still didn’t happen? Ali said: the ones who told you are the same as those who told us, they told you who your Imam was and it was fulfilled but for us it never was so we kept wishing and if they had told us: this will be in 200 or 300 years then our hearts would have turned to stone and we would’ve all left Islam but they decided to say that it was near and very close so that we keep on expecting it.

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 207, Ghaybat al nu’umani 198, Bihar (4/132)(52/102).

Basically above Yaqteen was from the supporters of the Abbasi Caliphate which the prophet PBUH prophesized but his son Ali was from the Shiites of al Kathim which didn’t get what they were promised (Mahdi) and kept wishing.

And that narration talks about how the hearts harden if he didn’t appear and how they would leave Islam in 200 or 300 years, well it’s been 1400 years and he didn’t appear.

End of Part 2

Part 2 (Continued....)

Now they bravely and again invent new more accurate Hadiths to fool the hasty Shiite laymen who wanted to see their savior as soon as possible.


Abdullah bin Sinan from Abu Abdullah: Al Qa’em will have a sunnah from musa bin imran, I said: what is his Sunnah?, He said: His Hidden birth and his Ghaybah(Occultation) from his people, I Said: and how many years was Musa in occultation from his people? He said: twenty eight years.

Source: Kamal al Deen 303, Ithbat al hudat 3/459,471, Bihar al Anwar 51/216.

Muhammad bin Muslim from Abu Abdullah: If the people lost their Imam they will spend a “Sabt” in confusion then Allah will reveal him.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 102, ithbat al hudat 3/547.

Also

Al Baqir: he will spend a “Sabt” from your age and you will be confused during this time and then Allah will reveal him so thank Allah.

Source: Ithbat al hudat 3/533, Al bihar 51/148.

Now what is a “Sabt”? the Sabt is thirty years and you can check that here:

Ma’ani al Akhbar 403, Al kafi 1/452, Al bihar (15/263)(35/6,77)(38/47), ithbat al hudat (1/153)(2/13).

I need not remind you it’s been 1200+ years since his disappearance.
I need not remind you it’s been 1200+ years since his disappearance.


Al Awdee said that the Mahdi asked him: Do you know me?, I Said: No, He said: I’am the Mahdi, I’am Qa’em el Zaman, I’am the one who will fill it with justice and love like it was filled with oppression and hatred, the earth will never be without a Hujjah and the people will not remain for more than the duration in which Bani Israel were lost, tell this to the people of the world.

Source: Ghaybatal tusi 63, Kamal Al Deen 2/199, Bihar al anwar 2/52.

This narration was fabricated around 14 centuries ago And the Period in which Bani Israel were lost according to the Quran in Surat al Mai’idah verse 26 is forty years.

Al Thamali said: I said to Abu ja’afar that Ali used to say: To Seventy Ordeals(Bala’a) and after the ordeal there is prosperity then I told him: The seventy have passed and we never saw prosperity?

Abu Ja’afar said: O thabit Allah had put a timing on this thing a seventy but when Hussein Died Allah’s anger grew on the people of the earth so he delayed it to 140 years and we told you guys about this so you spread the news and revealed the secret so Allah delayed it again.

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 263, Ghaybat al nu’umani 197, Al Kafi 1/368, bihar al Anwar (4/114,120) (42/223) (52/105).

I say whether it was the first timing of seventy or the second timing of hundred and forty how in god’s name could this work if the Shiites claim that the Mahdi is the son of Al Hassan al Askari and how are the 12 Imams supposed to appear in just 70 or 140 years? How can he appear if his father isn’t born yet? The first timing erases 8 imams and the second erases 5 out of 12.

And the strangest thing is what Al Sadiq says: “It was supposed to be in me but Allah delayed it and it shall be in my progeny”.

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 263, Bihar al anwar (4/114)(52/106).

Ali bin al hussein said: that the Mahdi will not rise until the Suffiany does . Al Qa’em is truth and the appearance of the suffiany is also truth from Allah, I asked ali: will Suffiany appear this year? He said: Allah does what he wants, I asked: in the next year? He said: Allah does what he wishes.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 52/182.

Also according to the text of this narration the theory of the twelve is destroyed when his companion asked him “Will he appear this year?” didn’t they know he was the son of the eleventh Imam? As for the Suffiany himself his existence is a matter of debate amongst the conflicting Shiite narrations:

Dawood bin abi al Qassim said: we were with abu Ja’afar al redah so someone mentioned Suffiany and the narration which states that his appearance is inevitable so I asked Abu Ja’afar: Can Allah do bida’a in an inevitable matter? He said: YES.

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 205, Al bihar 52/250, ithbat al hudat 3/544.

Now you may be asking what is “Bida’a”? This is a belief of the Shiites that Allah can change his mind or that something may appear to him in some way at first but then the circumstances would change so he changes his mind… and that He could change his mind regarding the appearance of Suffiany even if previous imams said that Allah says it is “inevitable”.


Al bizanty said: I heard Al Redah say: Ibn Abi Hamzah claims that Ja’afar claimed that My father is al Qa’em and Ja’afar had no idea what he talked about for Allah had said: Say: “I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear.” Abu Ja’afar used to say: 4 things will pass before the appearance of the Mahdi and three have passed there remains one.
We asked what they were, He said: Rajab(Arabic month) which the leader of Khurasan will be overthrown, Rajab which Ali bin Zubaydah appears, Rajab when Muhammad bin Ibrahim appears in kufah, we asked: Is the fourth Rajab directly connected to the past one? He said: this is what Abu Ja’afar said.

Source: Bihar al anwar 52/182.

Big Shiite scholar a Majlisi says in his commentary: the first Rajab is when al Ma’amoon was overthrown by al Ameen and was asked to erase his name from the Dirhams.
And the second is a sign to the removal of Muhammad al amen.
And the third is a sign to the appearance of Muhammad bin Ibrahim bin Ismail bin Ibrahim bin al Hassan bin al Hassan who is known as ibn Tabataba in Al kufah around the year 200 of Hijrah and it is possible by him saying that the fourth is connected to the third is that he had entered Khurasan the next year and it could have been in the month of Rajab.

Source: bihar al Anwar 52/184.

PART (2)

So how was the Imam brought up? Well after reading the narrations above he was around 2 years old when his supposed father Al Askari passed out… so the Shiites had to figure out some way to solve this issue.

Narrated by Hakimah (Who narrated a previous narration about his birth): After forty days have passed I entered on him and to my surprise he was a boy who could walk (Keep in mind only after 40 days), I said to Al Askari: By God! this is a boy of two years! So he smiled and said: The sons of the Awsiya’a and the prophets grow differently if they were Imams, and the boy amongst us if a month has passed on him is as if a year had passed, the boy amongst us worships Allah in the stomach of his mother and reads the quran and during breastfeeding period the angels obey him and descend to meet him day and night. Hakimah continues: I kept meeting this boy forty days later until he became a Man a few days after the death of Abu Muhammad (Al Askari) so I never recognized him then so I asked Abu Muhammad: Who is this Man that you tell me to sit with? He said: Son of Narjis and he is the Mahdi after me.

Source: Kamal al Deen 394, bihar al Anwar (51/14)(53/327).

BUT SOME SHIITES FELT THAT WAS TOO SLOW SO THEY NARRATED THIS,

Al Askari told Hakimah: We the Awsiya’a(imams) grow up in one day as much as a normal human would grow in one week, and in one week we grow up as much as any human would grow in one year.

Source: Bihar al Anwar 51/27.

Still that was way too slow for some busy people so they narrated that al Askari said: O Aunt, do you not know that we Successors grow in one day as much as anyone would grow in one year.

Source: Ghaybat al tusi 144, Al bihar 51/20,27,293.

That pretty much solves this issue… sigh, I wonder how old he is now.


As for his minor occultation they differed on whether it was 69 years or 74 years.

Source: Muntakhab al Athar 358, bihar al anwar 51/44,138,366.

Some calculated his minor occultation since the moment of his birth while others did that since the death of Al Askari (260 hijri) thus he now has 5 dates for the beginning of his occultation but what is weird are some who made it in 266 hijri and 276 hijri.

Source: bihar al Anwar (51/44)(53/6), ithbat al hudat 3/586.

But now we must know why… Why did he suddenly disappear and leave his loyal Shiites?

Hanan Bin Sidir from his father: Abu Abdullah said: Al Qa’em has a long period of occultation(Ghaybah), I said: Why is that O Son of Rassul allah? He said: Allah wanted him to have the time of all the prophets PBUT in their occultation and he has to spend this period.

Source: Ilal al Sharae’e 1/234, Kamal al Deen 437, bihar al Anwar (51/142)(52/90).

Others said he did so because he feared death.
Prophet PBUH said: The Boy must be in occultation, they asked why so he said: He fears he will be killed.

Source: Ilal al Sharae’e 1/234, Al bihar 52/90,97, Ithbat al hudat 3/498.

Zurarah said: I heard Abu ja’afar says: The boy has an occultation before his appearance, I asked why? He said: He fears “And he pointed to his stomach”, Zurarah said: He means murder.

Source: Kamal al Deen 321,325, ilal Al Sharae’e 1/246, Ghaybat al nu’umani 118, Ghaybat al tusi 202, Al bihar 52/91,95,97,98,146, ithbat al hudat 3/443,444,472,487,571.

In Another narration “He fears he will be slaughtered”

Source: Kamal al Deen 437, Bihar al Anwar 52/97, ithbat al hudat 3/487.

In Another narration al baqir said: If our Mahdi appears he will say: “So I fled from you (all) when I feared you; but my Lord has (since) invested me with judgment (and wisdom) and appointed me as one of the messengers.” [Shua’ra’a: 21]

Source: Ghaybat al nu’umani 116, Kamal al Deen 308, Al bihar 52/157,281,292,385, Noor al thaqalayn 4/49, Ta’aweel al ayat 1/388, Al Burhan 3/183, Ithbat al hudat 3/468,535,562,583.

Very brave Savior they’ve got there I have to congratulate them, the Man is running to save his own skin for 1200 years as for his shia well it’s ok if they die he has no problem with that.


Some said He went in occultation because he didn’t want to give Baya’ah (Allegiance) to any of the Caliphs (Very brave indeed).
Isaac bin Yaqoob narrated: It occurred to him from the holy side of Muhammad bin Uthman : As for the reason of his occultation Allah says: “O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble.” [Mai’idah: 101] He said: All of my Fathers before me gave baya’ah (Allegiance) to the tyrants of their times (this is interesting) and When I come out I will not have given it to any tyrant.

Source: Kamal Al Deen 436, Al ihtijaj 263, Al bihar (52/92,279)(53/181)(78/380), Ghaybat al tusi 177.

Abu Abdullah Said: The Mahdi’s birth will not be apparent for the creation because he shouldn’t give Baya’ah to anyone.

Source: Kamal Al Deen 53, bihar al Anwar (51/132)(52/95,96,289).

So all of these mean the Imams before him did give Baya’ah to the Caliphs of their times, very good.

Some people had another explanation so they fabricated other narrations,

They said that he is in occultation because of the corruption & bad works of human kind such as in this famous narration: “He is not occluded from you but your Bad deeds occlude him”

Source: Bihar al anwar 53/321.

Al Tusi said with regards to this: He which does not have bad deeds nothing can hide his imam from him.

According to that all Shiites are guilty sinners to the point where this guy just doesn’t wanna show up anymore.

Source: Bihar al anwar 53/321.

Marwan al Anbari said: Abu Jaafar said: If Allah hated for us the Imams to be with a people then he would take us away from them.

Source: Al bihar 52/90, ithbat al hudat 3/447.

It seems this hatred is still going on until now, may Allah have mercy on us all.

Others didn’t acknowledge all the above so they threw the reason into occultation as well and never gave any explanations.

Al Mahdi himself said: Close the doors of such questions which do not concern you and make plenty of Dua so that I may appear again.

Source: Kamal Al deen 2/162, Al Ihtijaj 263, Ghaybat Al tusi 177, Al bihar (52/92)(53/181).

Abdullah bin al fadl al Hashimi said: I heard al Sadiq say: The Mahdi must be in an occultation which every Wrongdoer fears. I told him: Why? He said: For a reason we were not ordered to reveal and this is a matter for Allah and one of his secrets and his knowledge of Ghayb.

Source: Al Bihar 52/91, ithbat al hudat 3/488.

Now The Biggest problem is, When will this Mahdi come out? And there are narrations which the shiite scholars fabricated to fool the laymen and keep them waiting and you’ll see this clearly:

Muhammad bin al Fadil from Abu Ja’afar that he said: You will remain a six from your age without knowing your Imam, I Said: and what is the six?, he said: Days or months or years or sixty years.

Source: Ithbat al hudat 3/576, Al bihar 51/118,134.

Notice how they are unsure so they jump from 6 days to 60 years, also notice “Without knowing your Imam” which according to them leads to Hell and finally has 60 years passed or not yet? Maybe 600 years?

Part 1 (Continued....)

Now you don’t need a genius to figure out why they made these narrations up. Anyway according to these narrations almost all shiites are kouffar because they all call him by his name and their books are full of it, heck they even made him a wikipedia page

And the Shiite scholars had some interesting opinions regarding this matter for example Al Saduq when he presented narrations in which his name was written he said in the commentary “this narration came like this with his name and I prefer to not call him by it”.

Source: Kamal al Deen 178, Iyoun al Akhbar 24, Bihar al anwar (36/194)(51/32).

Al Arbeely said: It is strange that sheikh al tabrasi and Sheikh al mufid both said: It is not allowed to say his Name or Kuniyah, Then they say: his name is that of the prophet PBUH and his Kuniyah is that of the prophet PBUH. By this they think that they never mentioned his name and Kuniyah and this is extremely strange! The way I see it is that this happened at a certain time in case of Taqqiyah(lying) But today it is permissible and Allah knows best.

Source: Kashf al ghummah 3/326, Al Hurr al amili in Ithbat al hudat (3/470,490), Kamal Al Deen 438 (Footnote), Iyoun al Akhbar 1/68 (Footnote).

Now you must be asking yourself why all this Taqqiyah business and all this mystery? Ask any twelver Shiite today and he will assure you that the prophet PBUH mentioned the 12 Imams during his life so many times by name thus everyone should know his name, How can we have these narrations today if they didn’t mention his name? Unless um… they made those narrations up.


Regarding the Famous Hadith in both Mainstream Islam and the twelver sect books which states: “Prophet PBUH said: his name matches mine and his father’s name matches mine” Or “his Kuniyah matches my kuniyah”there have been quite the confusion in the Shiite sect as they claim that his father’s name is “Al Hassan al Askari” and the Prophet’s PBUH father’s name is “Abdullah” thus it doesn’t fulfill the prophecy… Let’s check how they dealt with this issue.

Prophet PBUH said: His name matches mine and his father’s name matches my father’s name.

Source: Amali al tusi 362, Ghaybat al tusi 112, Kashf al ghummah (3/235,271,277), al bihar (28/46)(37/2) (51/42,74,82,84,86,102,103) (52/189), ithbat al hudat (3/594,598), Malahim Ibn Tawoos 132,162, Ghaybat al nu’umani 152.

Some Shiite scholars took a shortcut and said “this is a weak narration” while others tried to find other painful excuses.

For example some said: The word father in the tongue of the Arab is also used for grandfather .

Thing is his grandfather wasn’t called Abdullah anyway; they’re talking about his great great ect… grandfather maybe.

Others said The kuniyah of his father is “Abu Abdullah” and the prophet PPBUH said Name or “Ism” but he meant “kuniyah” so it’s like the prophet PBUH said: His name matches mine and the Kuniyah of his father matches the name of my father.

Source: Kashf al ghummah (3/240,277), Bihar al Anwar (51/103,86), Ghaybat al Tusi 113 (Footnote).

Thing is if what they say is true then his Father’s kuniyah is “Abu Abdullah” and the prophet’s PBUH father’s name was “Abdullah”, it doesn’t really match.

Others said: the Kuniyah of Al Hassan al Askari is “Abu Muhammad”, and Abdullah is the father of the Prophet PBUH thus his kuniyah would be “Abu Muhammad” and the two kuniyas match and this is all under the word “Ism” or Name.

Source: Bihar 51/103, Ghaybat al tusi 112 (Footnote).

Now I can’t really stress out how stupid and flawed this explanation was, I mean why would the Prophet PBUH go out of his way to say: “His name matches mine and his father’s name matches my father’s name” if this was the case? He would’ve just said His name matches mine because obviously the father of Muhammad would be called Abu Muhammad … how silly.

Others say that when the Mahdi appears after a long time from his birth, he cannot state his true identity as Muhammad bin al Hassan al Askari Bin Ali because that would be useless as the people of Mecca (SUNNIES) did not acknowledge his occultation for a long time and they do not accept the Imamah of his fathers before him, so he introduces himself as Muhammad bin Abdullah meaning: that he is Muhammad and that his father is some pious slave of Allah because Abdullah means slave to Allah.

Source: bihar al Anwar 28/46 (Footnote).

Some of their scholars claimed the word “Abi” meaning father in the hadith of the Prophet PBUH was changed and that it was originally “Ibnee” meaning son…thus they say that Al Hassan is the prophet’s PBUH son so it would make snese then.
Source: Bihar 28/46 & 51/104, Amali al tusi 362, Ghaybat al tusi 112 (footnote), ithbat al hudat 3/518, Mu’ujam Ahadith al Mahdi 1/178.
Others said Abi was originally “Nabi”.

Source: mu’ujam Ahadith al Mahdi 1/187.

Some said the word Abi was added in these hadiths.

Source: Kashf al ghumah 3/277, ithbat al hudat 3/518, mu’ujam Ahadith al Mahdi 1/178.

But let’s go back to his mysteriously forbidden name and mention that they claimed that it is lso Haram to even Write his name and many of their scholars believe in this so instead of writing his name they replace it with these letters (م ح م د). This is very common in twelver shiite books, check in the following references for example:


Kamal Al Deen 314,395,405, Mahj al Da’awat 345, Ghaybat al tusi 105,144,149, Amali al Tusi 182, bihar al Anwar (48/15) (50/314) (51/4,24,144,161) (52/16,17,34,40,110,171,378) (53/143,148,206) (86/61) ithbat al hudat (1/455)(3/441,509) Al Kafi (1/329,514,528) Al Mustadrak 5/74, I’ilam al Wara 404.

End of Part 1

Part (1)

Let’s look at their narrations:

They narrate from Hakimah bint Muhammad bin Ali bin Musa bin Ja’afar bin Muhammad bin Ali bin Hussein bin Ali bin Abi talib that she said: Abu muhammad called on me and said: O Aunt make your Iftar tonight with us because it is the night in the middle of the month of Sha’aban, For Allah will reveal on this night his Hujjah on earth, I asked: and who is his mother? He said: Narjis I said: By Allah she doesn’t look pregnant!

In Another Narration: She dashed to where Narjis is and checked on her thouroughly but found no sign of pregnancy and when she told him this he smiled and said: On Fajr the signs will appear.

In Another narration: He said to her: we the Awsiya’a (imams) are not carried in the stomachs but in the right thigh/hip of our mothers because we are the light of Allah which is pure and we are not defiled by impurity, then she(Narjis) took my Khuff (type of leather socks) Off and told me: O Sayyidah how do you fair tonight?

I replied to her: No you are my Sayyidah and the Sayyidah of my household, but she(Narjis) didn’t accept this and said: What is this O Aunt? I said: O child Allah will bestow upon you tonight a son who is a Sayyid in this life and the after life, Then she sat quietly in a shy way as I observed her until the time of Fajr came and she was asleep on my lap.

In Another Narration: When the time of the night prayer came and she was asleep with no signs of pregnancy I made the Witr prayer until I felt the Fajr had come and I had doubts and suspicion Then Abu Muhammad cried to me from his Majlis: “ Don’t be hasty O Aunt for it is near!” suddenly I got scared so I jumped to see her and said: May the name of Allah be upon you, Do you feel anything? She said Yes then I told her: Pull yourself together and pull your heart together Then suddenly I felt very sleepy and I slept and so did Narjis and we woke up to the feeling of the Mahdi and the cries of Abu Muhammad saying “Bring my boy…”

Source: Kamal al Deen 390,393, Bihar al Anwar (51/2,13,17,26) Ithbat al hudat (3/409,414) I’ilam al Wara 394, Dala’el al Imamah 264.

Now you can tell they made this up because the wife of Al Hassan al Askari was famous and no one saw her pregnant (because she never had children) so they made up the Hadith to show that she never shows signs of pregnancy…


In Another famous Narration: by Sa’ad bin Abdullah: When al Hassan al askari died the Sultan sent to his house that they may search it, and they took all of which was in it and asked about anything regarding “a son” and they brought in Women who knew the signs of pregnancy to check on Hassan’s Slaves/Maids, so they checked and some said that one of them might be pregnant. The Sultan took that slave girl to a room and assigned Nahrir the servant and his companions to guard her at all times.

When al Hassan was buried the Sultan wavered and kept asking for information regarding a son and they searched many houses and delayed dividing his inheritance until it was proven after two years that the woman was in no way pregnant then they divided the inheritance.

Source: Kamal al Deen 52, bihar al Anwar 50/329.

So when was this Awaited Mahdi Born according to the twelver Shiites? In one Narration 254 hijri, in another 255 hijri, in another 256 hijri, in another 257 hijri, in another 258 hijri.

Source: Bihar al anwar (51/2,4,15,16,22,23)(52/146)(53/4), Kamal al Deen 395,397, Al Irshad 346, ithbat al hudat (3/441,569,570,578,580), I’ilam al Wara 393, Ghaybat al tusi (139,143,147,164,241,258), Kashf al ghummah (3/234), Jami’i al Ruwah (2/467), Dala’el al imamah 267.

What was the Name of the Mahdi’s mother according to the twelvers?

In one narration Narjis, in another Saqil, in another Rayhanah, in another Sawsan, in another Hakimah, in another Khamt, in another Malikah, in another Maryam bint Zayd al Alawiyah.

Source: Kamal al Deen 289,396,397, Ghaybat al tusi 142,143,147,164,241, Al Irshad 346, Iyoun al Akhbar 24, bihar al Anwar (36/194)(51/2,5,13,15,17,19,23,24,28,121,293,360)(52/16) Ithbat al hudat (1/469)(3/365,409,410,414) I’ilam wara 394, al Wasa’el 16/244, Jami’I al Ruwat 2/467, Dala’el al imamah 264, muntakhab al Athar 320,321.
Very consistent these folks.

Speaking of inconsistencies some Shiite scholars claimed that she had a different name everyday!

Source: Muntakhab al Athar (320), Arba’eeniyat al Khatoon Abadi (2).

Also they have confusions on the permissibility of naming him and seeing him and they placed many narrations and attributed them to the twelve Imams.

[b]Al Baqir narrated that Amr asked Ameerul Mu’umeneen(Ali) about Al Mahdi: O Ameer Ali Tell me about Al Mahdi what is his name? Ali replied: As for his name I will not, Because My lover and Brother(Muhammad PBUH) told me not to until Allah sends him and Allah revealed this knowledge to his prophet PBUH.

Abu Khalid al kabili narrated: I entered on Muhammad al Baqir and told him how much I loved his father and was loyal to him, Al baqir confirmed this and asked what he wanted, He said: Your father has described this person (Mahdi) in a way that if I see him in the street I would take his hand, Al baqir said: then what else do you want? He said: I need to know him by his name, Al Baqir said: by Allah Abu Khalid you ask of me something difficult, and If I were to tell anyone it would be you and even if the children of Fatima knew this they wouldn’t tell.
Al mufaddal bin umar that he said: I was in a Majlis of Abu Abdullah and he told us to never give any hint of his name(Al Qa’em).
He also said: Al Mahdi is the fifth child of my seventh child, he will be in occlusion and you aren’t allowed to speak his name.
He also said: He who calls him by his Name is a Kaffir.

Musa al kazim said: his birth will not be apparent to the people and naming him will be forbidden.

Imam al Redah said: his body is unseen and he shouldn’t be called by his name.

Imam al Jawad said: Al Qa’em is he whose birth will not be revealed to the people, his self will be hidden, calling him by the name is forbidden and he will have the name of the prophet PBUH.

Narrated by Abu Ja’afar al Hashimi: I heard Abu al hassan al askari say: The Khalaf after my child Hassan, so how do you expect the Khalaf after the Khalaf? I said to him: Why? He said: because you do not see him and it is forbidden to call him by his name, I asked: then how are we supposed to call him? He said: Call him al Hujjah min AluMuhammad.

Abdul Azim al Hassani from Abi al Hassan al Thalith that he said about the Qa’em: it is forbidden to call him by his name.

Even Al Mahdi himself said it, Ali bin Asim al kufi said: In a message by Saheb al Zaman(Mahdi) he wrote: He is cursed he is cursed who calls me (by my name) in public.

In another narration: who calls me by my name in front of the people is cursed by Allah.

Al Hamiri asked al umari about Al Qa’em’s name, he replied: Never ask about this or search for it, because according to them(mainstream muslims) this progeny (of Imams) has been cut.[/b]

Sources: Bihar al Anwar (3/268) (26/308) (36/412) (50/240) (51/31,32,33,36,144,145,147,149,150,157,158) (52/28,198,283) (53/184) (69/1,2), ithbat al hudat (1/543)(3/393,395,440,477,490,510,579), Amali al Saduq 204, Kamal al Deen (313,318,345,353,378,405,438,586,587,588), Ghaybat al tusi (131,202,281) kifayat al athar (38,326) Al Kafi(1/332) Al irshad 338,349,363, I’ilam al Wara 351,434, ghaybat al nu’umani 194, Kashf al ghummah (3/245), Rawdat al Wa’izeen (2/266).

Al Imam Hassan bin Ali al Askari RAA died in 260 hijri, his followers or Shiites split to more than ten groups.

A group said that he didn’t die but he is in occultation and he is al Qa’em (Mahdi) and it is Haram to say he is dead because the earth will perish without an Imam, he also never had any children.

A group said that he died and then came back to life and he is al Qa’em al Mahdi. He is the Qa’em because he died and was resurrected and he has no children and if he did have a child then he wouldn’t have been resurrected because the Imamah would have been transmitted to his child, he didn’t give wasiyah to anyone thus he is surely the Qa’em .

A group said Al Hassan bin Ali died and his successor is his brother Ja’afar whom he gave the wasiyah thus he is the Imam and his children after him.

A group said that Ja’afar was the Imam but his brother Hassan wasn’t an Imam nor was his bother Muhammad. Because Muhammad died during the life of his father and al Hassan died without a son and he was a liar who claimed Imamah. The Proof was that an Imam never passes away until he gives wasiyah to his successor thus al Hassan never had any children so his Imamah wasn’t correct, Also al Hassan & Ja’afar couldn’t be Imams at the same time because abu Abdullah said “No two brothers shall become imams at the same time after Hassan & Hussein” so Ja’afar took the wasiyah from his father not his brother.

A group said The Imamah goes to Muhamad Bin Ali who died in the time of his father and that Hassan and Ja’afar claimed what isn’t rightfully theirs and that their father never pointed or assigned any of them as Imams and especially Ja’afar who has extremely negative qualities which make him unfit to receive it. As for Hassan he died without a son and that is unacceptable in an Imam. We now know that Muhammad is the Imam and his father pointed to him clearly.

A group said that Al Hassan had a son who was born eight months after his death and all those who claimed he had a son during his life are liars because if he did then he wouldn’t hide this nor would his family and companions hide it nor would that be acceptable of an imam. His father in his wasiyah ordered to call him Muhammad and the proof of this is a narration from abu al Hassan al redah.

A group said There is no son for Hassan because we searched for this and asked for it but never found anything to point to his son. We cannot claim that he had a hidden son because then we could claim this for every dead Imam or we could even say that the prophet PBUH had another son who was a prophet but is hidden also we could say Abdullah bin Ja’afar had a hidden son and that abu al Hassan al redah had three sons other than abu Ja’afar and one of them was the Imam because the news of al hassan’s death without a son is like that of the prophet PBUh dying without a son from his own blood or Abdullah bin Ja’afar having a son or Abu al Hassan having four sons.

A group said the death of Al Hassan’s father and grandfather is true thus the news of his death Is also true and there is no Imam after him and there is possibility that the Imamah will end at some point as we hear in the narration from the two Sadiqs that the earth will never be without an imam unless Allah is angry at the people because of their sins so the Hujjah will be lifted for some time and Allah does what he wants and this does not mean that the concept of Imamah is incorrect in any way. This had also happened in the time between Muhammad PBUh and Jesus PBUH in that there was no Imam or prophet then for 300 or 200 years and al Sadiq said: the Period is the time when the earth will be without an Imam or a prophet. The earth today is without an Imam until Allah sends one from the progeny of Muhammad PBUH.

A group said: Abu Ja’afar “Muhammad bin Ali” who died in his father’s life is the Imam by the order of his father who clearly mentioned his name.

A group said when asked “Is Ja’afar or his brothers the Imams?” they replied: We do not know if he is from Al Hassan’s brothers or from his progeny, Al Hassan was the Imam and he is now dead and the earth will never be without a hujjah so we can’t say anything until this matter becomes clearer.

A group said Al Hassan bin Ali was the Imam and he is dead so the Imamah goes to Ja’afar bin Ali just like Musa bin Ja’afar was an Imam after Abdullah bin Ja’afar because it was narrated that after an Imam passes away then the Imamah will be for the elder son. What Al Sadiq said “There will be no two brother Imams after Hassan and Hussein” this is true but if the first one didn’t have a son then it must necessarily go to his brother As for the narration which states that “An Imam will be washed only by another Imam” they said this is true and claimed that Ja’afar bin Muhammad was washed by Musa and they claimed that Abdullah ordered this because he was the Imam after him but it’s ok that Musa did it because he is a silent Imam in the presence of Abdullah. This team is the Fathiyah who allow the Imamah of two brothers after Hassan and Hussein if the first never had a son and according to this their Imam was ja’afar bin Ali.

A group said The Imam after al Hassan is his son Muhammad and he is al Hujjah but he is currently dead and when he is resurrected he will carry the sword and fill the world with justice and love after it was filled with hatred and oppression.

A group said that all the others were wrong and that Al Hassan did have a son during his life called Muhammad and he is al Qa’em and he is alive and he has two Ghaybas (occultations) a minor one when his father dies and a major one after the death of abu al Hassan ali bin Muhammad al samiri the final emissary and this has been going since that time.

Source: look for details of each team in the book “Firaq al Shia” Page 96 by Al Hassan bin Musa Abu Muhammad al Nawbakhti, also in the books “Al Fusool al mukhtara” 261 & “bihar al Anwar” (37/20) and (50/336).

This last team is the twelver Shiites of today in case you missed it.

[b]The Mahdi of the twelver Shiites is by no exaggeration a fictional character and this is why most Hadiths in regards to him are pure fabrications and you will see for yourselves that almost every single thing they wrote about this character has another saying which contradicts it in their books so the Twelver scholars got confused and confused their Shiites by these narrations. What basically happened is that Allah out of his wisdom took away the 11th Imam and left him with no son thus some smart Shiite scholar suggested that in order to save their Madhab and their positions they must tell the people that this final Imam did have a son which no one heard about and that this son disappeared in some cave or passageway and that only some chosen people might speak to him and transmit his orders to the oblivious followers, then all four of these “emissaries” who were granted this privilege died and the guy never came out and stayed in hiding and the Shiites still expect the Man to just spontaneously jump out of nowhere and lead them to victory against their enemies… they shout near his “Sirdab” or cave: “Ya Mahdi! O Mahdi! Give us strength, come help us! Lead us to victory!”[/b]

sadly this has been the case for 1200 years…

In the Name of Allah The Most Beneficient, The Most Merciful

The Yorubas have a saying which I loosely translate here as: “A man that intends to give another man clothings, we need to first look at what he himself is putting on” hence, we need to look at what can be found in the shi’a books about the Mahdi, are they authentic? Are they true? Does it in anyway align and in consistent with what the best of mankind, the Prophet of Islam (SAW) taught during his life time?...

Well, instead of the shi’a to focus on the mountain of lies cooked up by their scholars, they would rather be looking for whatever they can hang on to in the sunni traditions to claim they are right and the sunis are wrong or on falsehood, this is not only ridiculous, but outright deceptive. Unfortunately, they are only deceiving themselves and their ignorant followers. I wonder how AlBaqir and his cohorts have been battling with the huge discrepancies, contradictions and outright fabricated lies that were attributed to their Imams by their scholars as found in their books…reading the research below from a sunni brother, sheds light into the strange believes of AlBaqir and his shi’a group, and what they are calling Muslims to. Please endeavor to read till the end, it is a long post, but you will gain a lot from this research on the shi’a beliefs of the Mahdi which the OP is about.

I hope AlBaqir would enlighten us though, every narration from their books and their scholar’s analysis of these issues…I patiently await this…

PS: This post was copied from the gift2shia website, I’ll not be quoting links and most of the Arabic script, please go to the site for links to download books that are specifically pointed to in this research and the Arabic text…

Mahdi tour. (Who is Al Mahdi From the Shi’a Narrations)

Research prepared by brother Tripolysunni.

Introduction

FACT, the twelver Shiites base their entire religion on several points like Karbala, Imamah…and The Awaited Imam in occultation “Al Mahdi”.

Notes:

-there are many Variations of each Hadith which I will be posting however I shall post only one version and the rest will be in the sources.

-Al Mahdi has many names in Shia Books Such as: Muhammad Bin al Hassan al askari, Abu Saleh, Al Hujjah, 12th Imam, al Qa’em, Sahib al Amr/Owner of this Affair, Al Gha’eb/The occluded, Bakiyatu’Allah (Astaghfirullah from this Shirk), Saheb al Zaman, Al muntazar(Awaited one), Saheb al Asr ect…

bismillah,

Although nothing in the Quran points to this figure but still there are just so many Hadiths which leave no doubt about this truth. All Muslims believe that Al Mahdi who is a pious Man from the progeny of the Prophet PBUH will come as their savior at the end of time, the Twelver Shiites however have a couple of differences and the main topic which we will discuss won’t be the common Mahdi “Muhammad bin Abdullah” that all Muslims believe in and who is yet to be born But it is the Mahdi that the twelver Shiites believe in. Not only is his name different but they claim he is actually alive right now as we speak and he is in hiding for some mysterious reason and won’t show up and this has been the case since almost 1200 years ago and the twelvers still believe this guy is around and hiding. Every year they go to some sort of pilgrimage where they claim that he was last sighted (in some cellar or cave or passageway) and they shout his name and call for his help and place food and horses at the entrance for his return as well as write him letters about their troubles and hardships in life so that he may help them.

Firstly before we discuss the 12th imam we should talk a bit about what happened after the death of the 11th Imam (Supposedly his father) Al Hassan Al Askari RAA.

The Ancient Shiite Historian Abu Muhammad, Al Hassan bin Musa bin Al Hassan al Nawbakhti who was born in the 3rd century Hijri, writes in his Shia History book called “Firaq al Shia” about the various Shiite teams and sects and tribes during the life of the 11 Imams.

Here is what the Shia Scholars say about him:

Sheikh al Najashi says in his book of Rijal above that al Nawbakhti is his Sheikh and Speaker.

Sheikh Abbas al Qummi in his “Al Kuna wal Alqab” says That he is an outspoken philosopher of the Imami Shia.
Sayyed Ibn Tawoos says in Faraj al Mahmoum that Al Hassan bin Musa al Nawbakhti is a scientist in astrology and an example to others in that field.

Al Tusi Says in his Fehrest Page 98, India Print 1835: Abu muhammad, outspoken philosopher and he was an Imami Shia with sound beliefs and is trustworthy…He is a landmark amongst scholars.

Shia Scholar, Noor Allah al Testeri: Al Hassan Bin Musa one of the biggest scholars of the sect, he was an outspoken Philosopher with Imami belief. (From Majalis al mumineen for al Testeri P77, Print Iran quoted from the Intro of the book).

Refer to these websites for more on him:see website indicated above

MrOlai:
Thanks, Brother.

You are welcome bro.

AlBaqir:
Mr Sino since exactly when did you become like this?! Imagine you even "honestly-mistakenly" copied-pasted (1) the sanad which says "from some of our companions" and (2) that the hadith is Mar'fu?! ma sha Allah.

Those two things absolutely make the hadith Da'if Jiddan (very weak) at best. And Mawdoo (fabricated) if we are to be very strict. Oh boy! What were you thinking?! Anyway here's the hadith, comment by Sheik Tusi himself who recorded it and reference:

Aḥmad b. Muḥammad – Abu al-Ḥasan – one of our companions – Abu ‘Abd Allah, peace be upon him:

Do not do mut’ah with a muminah (believing woman), thereby humiliating her.

Then, al-Tusi himself declares:
This report has a disconnected chain, mursal.

So, it is da'if; and that basically deals with it

Ref: {Abu Ja’far Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan al-Tusi, al-Istibsar (Tehran: Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyah) [annotator: Sayyid Ḥasan al-Musawi al-Khurasan], vol. 3, p. 143, Ch. 93, # 4}

NB: Please quote more of this kind of hadith. I wanna see them.



you've never tell NL members you've become "baba suwe". In fact I like you brother when you use those big words [like Reckless attitudes, delusional] and now "conjectures and assumptions"

# You mean Imam Hazm, one of your greatest Aimmah of OLD and Allamah Nasir din al-Albani, of this age, are assuming and conjecturing that: Abdullah ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Amr ibn Hurayth, Asma bint Abi bakr, Mu'awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, Abu Sa'id al-khudri, Jabir ibn Abdullah, to mention but few from the Sahabah; then Sa'id ibn jubayr, Tawus and ALL the Sunni jurists of Madinah from among the Tabi'in DID CONTINUE TO BE PRACTICING MUT'AH LONG LONG AFTER THE DEMISE OF THEIR PROPHET?

Ma sha Allah

LOL! Now this is hilarious

Firstly, this is not my first time of quoting these narrations, and I included the so called grading from your scholars when I did the very first time I posted "my copy and paste". I am not deceitful, I wouldn’t stoop so low to try and deceive people by selectively removing the grading because it doesn’t support my argument, I’m way above that. Alhamdulilah!

Secondly, posting the narration was never about the authenticity, I had told you that I can’t accept any narration from your books as authentic, you guys are masters of fabrications…No wonder you rely heavily on our books, and yet you still undermine us…Lets read what your scholars say about the narrations found in your books:

Jafar al Najafi (Died 1227Hijri) who was the leader of the Shiites at his time said in Kashf el ghita’a ” كشف الغطاء ” Page 40 about the authors of the four Main Shii Books:
والمحمدون الثلاثة كيف يعول في تحصيل العلم عليهم ، وبعضهم يكذب رواية بعض … ورواياتهم بعضها يضاد بعضاً … ثم إن كتبهم قد اشتملت على أخبار يقطع بكذبها كأخبار التجسيم والتشبيه وقدم العالم ، وثبوت المكان والزمان

[b]And the Three scholars How can we be expected to take knowledge from them? When each Falsifies the narrations of the other…and their narrations contradict one another…[/b]And their Books contain News which is clearly lies like The Tajseem of Allah and the Tashbeeh and …”

Now the Modern Marja’a Abu al Qassim al Khoei’i Destroys the credibility of the modern day Books:

فالإجماع الكاشف عن قول المعصوم نادر الوجود ، وأما غير الكاشف عن قوله فهو لا يكون حجة ، لأنه غير خارج عن حدود الظن ، فأصحاب الأئمة وإن بذلوا غاية جهدهم واهتمامهم في أمر الحديث وحفظه من الضياع ، إلا أنهم عاشوا في دور التقية ولم يتمكنوا من نشر الأحاديث علناً فكيف بلغت هذه الأحاديث حد التواتر أو قريبا منه ، فالواصل إلى المحمدين الثلاثة [ الكليني وابن بابويه والطوسي ] إنما وصل إليهم عن طريق الآحاد فطرق الصدوق إلى أرباب الكتب مجهولة عندنا ولا ندري أيا منها كان صحيحاً وأيا منها كان غير صحيح ومع ذلك كيف يمكن دعوى العلم بصدور جميع هذه الروايات عن المعصومين ، وليت شعري إذا كان مثل المفيد والشيخ مع قرب عصرهما وسعة اطلاعهما لم يحصل القطع بصدور جميع هذه الروايات عن المعصومين فمن أين حصل القطع لجماعة المتأخرين عنهما زماناً ورتبة ؟! ) ، المصدر : معجم رجال الحديث ( المقدمة الأولى

Basically he says That there is No ijma’a that the Infallible Imam Said something except for in rare cases…for the fellows of the Imams lived in the age of Taqqiyah thus they had to lie and weren’t able to spread the knowledge of the Imams So How is it that The Hadiths have reached the Tawatur? Because all news prove that what reached the three scholars Kulayni, Ibn Babaweih and Al Tusi reached them through Ahad Hadith (Weak hadiths) because the methods used by Sheikh Saduk to the mother books are ambiguous and we don’t which is correct from which isn’t so how can we say our hadiths come from the infallibles? …And how can the late scholars say for sure that their Hadiths are from the infallible?!

source: Mu’ujam Rijal al Hadith, first introduction.

Muhammad el Hussainy in his book “Buhooth fi Ilm al Rijjal” “بحوث في علم الرجال ” :
في الفائدة الرابعة :
( إن أرباب الجرح والتعديل كالشيخ النجاشي وغيرهما لم يعاصروا أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم وأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ومن بعدهم من اصحاب الأئمة عليهم السلام حتى تكون أقوالهم في حقهم صادرة عن حس مباشر وهذا ضروري وعليه فإما ان تكون تعديلاتهم وتضعيفاتهم مبنية على امارات اجتهادية وقرآئن ظنية أو منقولة عن واحد بعد واحد حتى تنتهي الى الحس المباشر أو بعضها اجتهادية وبعضها الآخر منقوله ولا شق رابع ، وعلى جميع التقادير لا حجية فيها أصلاً فإنها على الأول حدسية وهي غير حجة في حقنا اذ بنأ العقلاء القائم على اعتبار قول الثقة انما هو في الحسيات أو ما يقرب منها دون الحدسيات البعيدة وعلى الثاني يصبح أكثر التوثيقات مرسلة لعدم ذكر ناقلي التوثيق الجرح في كتب الرجال غالباً والمرسلات لا اعتبار بها

“The Fathers of Ta’adeel and Jarh like sheikh Najashi and others didn’t live in the time of companions of Muhammad PBUH or Ali PBUH or the Imams PBUH so that their narrations could come directly from them. So Either their weakening or strengthening of Hadith is just from guess work or personal Ijtihad or transmitted one by one until they reach the imam, However It is not a Hujja on us because it is mostly hearsay…”
If we are to apply the Sunni methodology to scrutinize your books, nothing would be found as authentic except maybe a few narrations…


Thirdly, you should be the one ashamed that your scholars could try to explain a weak narration, by saying[b] “it is possible that his intent by it is when the woman is from a noble family which scandal would be attached to and humiliation attached to her, and that would be disliked” [/b] and this: “It is possible that what is meant in this narration is that if a believing woman was from a noble household then it is not allowed to have Mutah with her as it will dishonour her parents and disgrace her and this would be Makruh (Disliked) without it being forbidden.” How can any sane individual rationalize this?

I hope you read the narrations from your brothers (Ismaili and Zaidi Shi’ah), clearly indicating its prohibition by the Prophet (SAW)and the ahl-l-bayt, perhaps they were influenced by the sunni right?!

Fourthly, we have authentic narrations in our books, Mut’ah was prohibited by the Prophet (SAW), fortunately, same narration of this prohibition can also be found in your books, but you would rather hold on to conjectures by your scholars who themselves seem confused, than hold on to the truth! I had already addressed all your skepticism and conjectures about those who you have listed, and FYI, an authentic hadith from the Prophet (SAW) defeats any other opinion that can slightly or strongly permit Mut'ah.

Only Allah Guides!

@MrOlai, please exercise caution with the words you use, May Allah (SWT) continues to guide us ameen.

There are other sects/groups within the shi'a who also have narrations from the Prophet (SAW) and Imams that prohibits Mut'ah, lets read and see:

The Isma`eeli Shia view on Mut`ah marriage:

The Imami Isma`eeli Shia are explicit in their condemnation of Mut`ah marriage in their books, and they quote Rasul-Allah (saw) as well as their Imams `Ali and his son Ja`far to prove their claims.

In the Isma`eeli book “Da`a’im-ul-Islam” volume 2, pages 228 and 229 by their scholar al-Qadi al-Nu`man al-Maghribi, we list some of the narrations they inherited from their Imams.

٨٥٨ وعن رسول الله (صلع) أنه حرم نكاح المتعة، وعن علي (ع) أنه قال: لا نكاح إلا بولي وشاهدين وليس بالدرهم والدرهمين، واليوم واليومين، ذلك السفاح ولا شرط في النكاح

[From Rasul-Allah (saw) that he forbade Mut`ah marriage, and from `Ali (as) that he said: “Marriage is invalid without a custodian and two witnesses, it is not for one or two Dirhams, nor is it for (the period of) a day or two, because that would be unlawful sexual intercourse and there are no conditions in marriage.”]

٨٥٩ وعن جعفر بن محمد (ع) أن رجلا سأله عن نكاح المتعة قال: صفه لي، قال: يلقى الرجل المرأة، فيقول: أتزوجك بهذا الدرهم والدرهمين، وقعة أو يوما أو يومين. قال: هذا زنا، وما يفعل هذا إلا فاجر

[From Ja`far bin Muhammad (as) that a man asked him concerning the Mut`ah marriage, Ja`far said: “Describe it for me.” He said: “A man meets a woman and tells her: I marry you with one or two Dirhams for a period of one or two days.” Ja`far said: “That is fornication, no one does this except the wicked.”]

Al-Shareef al-Murtada wrote in his book “Al-Fusoul al-Mukhtarah” pg.158, that the Twelver Shia scholar al-Mufid debated the Isma`eeli Shia scholar ibn Lu’lu’ about the permissibility of Mut`ah. Ibn Lu’lu’ tells al-Mufid:

فحظر الله تعالى النكاح إلا لزوجة أو ملك يمين, وإذا لم تكن المتعة زوجة ولا كانت ملك يمين فقد سقط قول من أحلها

[Thus Allah most high has forbidden all Nikah except with the permanent wife or what the right hand possesses (In Surat Mu’minoun verse 6). If the woman of Mut`ah is neither a permanent wife nor from what the right hand possesses, then the argument of those who permit it is invalid.]

The Zaydi Shia view on Mut`ah marriage:

The Zaydiyyah stick to the prohibition of the Mut`ah marriage and also quote Rasul-Allah (saw) and their Imams `Ali and his son Zayd and his progeny.

In their main book “Musnad al-Imam Zayd” volume 1 page 271, we read:

عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، عَنْ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ، قَالَ: لَا نِكَاحَ إِلَّا بِوَلِيٍّ وَشَاهِدَيْنِ، لَيْسَ بِالدِّرْهَمِ وَلَا بِالدِّرْهَمَيْنِ، وَلَا الْيَوْمِ، وَلَا الْيَوْمَيْنِ شِبْهِ السِّفَاحِ، وَلَا شَرْطَ فِي نِكَاحٍ

[From his father, from his grandfather, from `Ali may Allah be pleased with them: “There can be no marriage without a custodian and two witnesses, it cannot be for one or two Dirhams, nor for one or two days such as the unlawful sexual intercourse, and there are no conditions in marriage.”]

عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، عَنْ عَلِيٍّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ، قَالَ: نَهَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ عَنْ نِكَاحِ الْمُتْعَةِ عَامَ خَيْبَرَ

[From his father, from his grandfather, from `Ali may Allah be pleased with them: “Rasul-Allah (saw) has forbidden the Mut`ah marriage on the year of Khaybar.”]

They also write in one of their four main Fiqhi books “Majmou` al-Fiqh al-Kabeer” written by their scholar al-Sayyaghi, in volume 4 page 26:

وأما الباقر وولده الصادق فنقل في الجامع الكافي عن الحسن بن يحي بن زيد فقيه العراق أنه قال اجمع آل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم على كراهية المتعة والنهي عنها وقال أيضا أجمع آل رسول الله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم على أنه لا نكاح إلا بولي وشاهدين وصداق بلا شرط في النكاح وقال محمد يعني ابن منصور سمعنا عن النبي صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم وعن علي وابن عباس وأبي جعفر يعني الباقر وزيد بن علي وعبد الله بن حسن وجعفر بن محمد عليهم السلام أنهم قالوا لا نكاح إلا بولي وشاهدين

[As for al-Baqir and his son al-Sadiq, it was reported in “al-Jami` al-Kafi” from al-Hasan bin Yahya bin Zayd the jurist of `Iraq, that he said: “The family of Rasul-Allah (saw) have agreed to dislike Mut`ah and that it is forbidden.” He also said: “The family of Rasul-Allah (saw) have agreed that marriage is not valid except with a custodian and two witnesses and a dowry, without any conditions in it.” And Muhammad ibn Mansour said: “We heard from the Prophet (saw) and `Ali and ibn `Abbas and abu Ja`far al-Baqir and Zayd bin `Ali and `Abdullah bin al-Hasan and Ja`far bin Muhammad peace be upon them, that they said: “No marriage without a custodian and two witnesses.”]

As for their great Imam Yahya bin al-Husayn bin al-Qasim (d.298 AH) he narrates from his fathers who were also Imams from Ahlul-Bayt in his book “Al-Ahkam fil-Halal wal-Haram” pg.351:

حدثني أبي عن أبيه أنه سئل عن نكاح المتعة؟، فقال: لا يحل نكاح المتعة لان المتعة إنما كانت في سفر سافره النبي صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم، ثم حرم الله ذلك على لسان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم، وقد روي لنا عن أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام بما قد صح أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم نهى عنه. وأما من أحتج بهذه الآية ممن استحل الفاحشة من الفرقة المارقة في قول الله عزوجل: (فما استمتعتم به منهن فآتوهن أجورهن) فالاستمتاع هو الدخول بهن على وجه النكاح الصحيح، وإيتاؤهن أجورهن فهو إعطاؤهن مهورهن

[My father told me, from his father, that he was asked about Mut`ah marriage, he said: Mut`ah marriage is not permissible for it was only during an expedition of the Prophet (saw) then Allah forbade it through his Prophet (saw). It was authentically narrated to us from Ameer-ul-Mu’mineen `Ali ibn abi Talib (as) that Rasul-Allah (saw) had forbidden it. As for those who left Islam and permitted fornication (meaning Rafidah) through that verse (Al-Nisa’ verse 24) {So for whatever you enjoy from them, give them their due compensation} The enjoyment here is to have intercourse through lawful permanent marriage and the compensation is the dowry.]

Shia scholar al-Tusi narrated in his “Tahzeeb al-Ahkam” (7/253):

واما ما رواه أحمد بن محمد عن ابى الحسن عن بعض اصحابنا يرفعه إلى ابي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: لا تتمتع بالمؤمنة فتذلها.
فهذا حديث مقطوع الاسناد شاذ، ويحتمل ان يكون المراد به إذا كانت المرأة من اهل بيت الشرف فانه لايجوز التمتع بهالما يلحق اهلها من العار ويلحقها هي من الذل ويكون ذلك مكروها دون ان يكون محظورا.

As for what is narrated from Ahmad bin Muhammad from Abu al-Hassan from some of our companions which is Marfu’u to Abu Abdullah -alaihi salam- that he said: “Do not humiliate the believing woman by having Mutah with her.” and this Hadith has a Maqtu’u Isnad and has Shuzouz in the Matn.

It is possible that what is meant in this narration is that if a believing woman was from a noble household then it is not allowed to have Mutah with her as it will dishonour her parents and disgrace her and this would be Makruh (Disliked) without it being forbidden.”

A Shia scholar al-Hurr al-Amili in his “Wasailu shia” (21/26) narrated:

“And from him from al-Hasan b. `Ali [Abu ‘l-Hasan – in at-Tahdheeb, Abu ‘l-Hasan `Ali – in al-Istibsar] from one of our companions going up to Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: Do not do mut`a with the mu’mina as you would humiliate her.”

The Shaykh said: This is shaadh (odd), and it is possible that his intent by it is when the woman is from a noble family which scandal would be attached to and humiliation attached to her, and that would be disliked.

I say: And there has preceded what indicates upon permission and there is coming what indicates upon it.

The above are narrations from shia books, with explanation from shia scholars. We can easily deduce that these narrations clearly prohibits Mut'ah for believing women, in the words used in these narrations, it will humiliates her! I wonder why anyone would be propagating what will humiliate another individual, not to mention a Muslimah! Subhanallah!

@Op Alhamdulilah you did find about the prohibition by the Prophet (SAW), as regards to the shias stand, they have no authentic proof they hold on to except conjectures and assumptions... Allah (SWT) says:

"And most of them follow not except assumption. Indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all. Indeed, Allah is Knowing of what they do." (Qur'an 10:36)

There was a time I wouldn’t bother to check the original text of the narration, but now, I can never take narrations from AlBaqir as it is evident that he would quote what supports his distorted views and leave that which would destroy his conjectures, copy and paste translations that are poor and deceitful.

Jazakumullah khayran Empiree for that beautiful rebuttal, may I also add,

Firstly, in sahih Muslim, the word which Umar (ra) uttered after ‘Ammar made the statement “if you wish, I would not narrate this” was “"نوليك ما توليت "Nuwallika ma Tawallayt."

In Fath al-Bari by Ibn Hajar, he explains this expression:

أي لا يلزم من كوني لا أتذكره أن لا يكون حقا في نفس الأمر ، فليس لي منعك من التحديث به

Meaning: It is not necessary that If I do not recall it then it isn't true, so I cannot prevent you from narrating this.

In Sharh Sunan abu Dawoud by al-`Abad:

يعني: نكلك إلى علمك وإلى ما عندك، ولك أن تعمل وتفتي بهذا

Meaning: We leave you to your knowledge, and it is permitted for you to practice upon it and to offer it as a verdict.

AlBaqir failed to quote this, perhaps he does not know....

This clearly indicates that Umar (ra) was not in disagreement with ‘Ammar, but accepted his opinion as a verdict, that was why he told him to fear Allah (SWT) on what he narrates. As Empiree rightly put it, it is a matter of Ijtihad. Imam An-Nawawi in his Sharh Sahih Muslim (vol 4 pg. 63), opined that this issue was a case of ijtihad, since ‘Ammar himself did ijtihad with how to perform tayammum when you are junub. This shows to a great extent that it wasn’t a practice to perform tayammum when you are junub, for it requires washing of the whole body, no wonder ‘Ammar himself, according to the narration, rolled in dust using the idea that since the whole body is to be washed, then rolling in dust would also suffice, whereby the prophet (SAW) corrected him and taught him what would suffice.

Again, in the narration of ‘Ammar, there is nowhere that indicates Umar (ra) was with him when the Prophet (SAW) taught him how to perform tayammum to cleanse the body after being in the state of janabah.

Let us now look at the meaning of what Ibn Masood (ra) said to Abdullah (ra), firstly, Ibn Masood was not basing his judgement on Umar (ra)’s opinion (like AlBaqir wants us to believe), it was what was apparent in the meaning of the verse quoted by Abdullah (ra), and Ibn Masood even tried to show the reason for his opinion by saying [b]“There is a possibility that they would perform tayammum with soil even if water were available but cold.” [/b]Meaning that Ibn Masood (ra) himself was with the opinion that washing the whole body was the proper way to purify from sexual intercourse (janabah).

It would not only be ridiculous, but utterly irresponsible to say that these sahabas did not know of this verse of the Qur’an, these were people who memorized the Qur’an as it was being revealed, and put it to use immediately. Again to buttress the fact that Ibn Masood knew about this verse, and was of the opinion that Janaba (being impure due to intercourse) is different from touching a woman physically, without intercourse which do not require ghusl but tayammum will suffice if no water was available, please read the following analysis:

Allah (SWT) says:

{O you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying or in a state of Janabah, except those passing through [a place of prayer], until you have washed [your whole body]. And if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and find no water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and your hands [with it]. Indeed, Allah is ever Pardoning and Forgiving.} [4:43]

`Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) and `Abdullah ibn Mas`oud (ra) never heard of the narration of Tayammum apparently, and they practiced based on the apparent meaning of these Qur'anic verses:

{O you who have believed, when you rise to [perform] prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads and wash your feet to the ankles. And if you are in a state of Janabah, then purify yourselves. But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and do not find water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to make difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favor upon you that you may be grateful.} [5:6]

Notice how this verse separates the ruling of Janabah from the rest of the matters, it says: {And if you are in a state of janabah, then purify yourselves}.

Even in verse [4:43] quoted by the Shia, they understood from this part that Janabah can only be removed by washing: {O you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying or in a state of Janabah, except those passing through [a place of prayer], until you have washed [your whole body]. }

Both verse [5:6] and [4:43] state clearly that Janabah is removed by washing.

In other words, they did not hear the narration of Tayammum, and they did not see that the person on Janabah is included in this part of the verse:

{But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and do not find water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and hands with it.}

They also understood that "contacting women" is anything less than reaching a state of Janabah, such as touching your wife with or without lust without having intercourse.

This is proven by the fact that `Abdullah ibn Mas`oud (ra) narrates:

حدثنا حفص عن أشعث عن الشعبي عن أصحاب عبد الله عن عبد الله قال اللمس ما دون الجماع

[Hafs from al-Ash`ath from al-Sha`bi, from the companions of `Abdullah (ra) that he says: "Contact" is what is less than intercourse. Also narrated by Wakee` from Suffiyan from al-Mugheerah from Ibrahim from `Abdullah (ra)]

With the same chain from the companions of `Ali ibn abi Talib (ra) that he believed that "contacting women" means having intercourse with them. Ibn `Abbas (ra) also believed this but his student Sa`eed ibn Jubayr believed otherwise, and some Imams also differed on this, the reader can refer to the chapter in Musannaf ibn abi Shaybah about the meaning of "contacting women".

I had once told AlBaqir that this is an issue of fiqh and cannot be used to castigate any companion of the Prophet (SAW), but he never listens, he his hell bent on his ways…

Another point I would like to bring to the notice of the readers, is the fact that Qaadhi Al-‘Iyyaad (544H.) explained the meaning of the statement of Ibn Masood to Abdulah (ra) about the displeasure of Umar (ra) to ‘Ammar narration as follows:
وقوله : (ألم تر عُمَر لمِ يقنع بقول عمارٍ ) ؛ لاَنه أخبره خبراً ذكر أنه شاهَدَه ولم
يذكره فجوَّز عليه الوهم كما جَوز على نفسه النسيانَ له ، ثم تركه وما اعتقَدَه وصححه ، إذ لم يخهمْهُ بقوله : (نُوَليك من ذلك ما تَوَليْتَ " ، بخلاف لو قطع على خطئه فيه .

And his (Ibn Masood) statement: “Don’t you see Umar (ra) was not satisfied with what ‘Ammar said”: this is because, he(‘Ammar) narrated it in such a way that indicated that he (Umar) was present, a witness to the whole event, and he (Umar (ra)) did not remember, so it is possible to admit that he (‘Ammar) was mistaken/delusional, as he (Umar) himself admits that he had forgotten this incidence. Then he (Umar) left him and his believe (of the incident) and he accepted it to be correct, even if he doesn’t understand this (narration) by saying : “ we accept from that what you take upon yourself” (this statement of Umar (ra) has also been explained above)….

Our Scholars are not ignorant people, they explain issues based on evidences, and it is quite painful that most of these explanations are in Arabic, and we are not doing enough jihad to learn about the deen, and that is why people like AlBaqir would have the effrontery to criticize a companion of the Prophet (SAW) like Umar (ra).

To refute the narration of stoning, although I couldn’t locate the narration myself, but I found a rebuttal online and I did a little bit of editing:

Firstly, the translated Arabic phrase "fa hamm bi rajmiha" as "so he resolved to stone her to death" is wrong . The correct translation is "so he intended to stone" and this phrase is more explained in other version of this hadith which shows that Umar discussed it among Sahaba before judging and there he was told by Ali that the least time-limit of a pregnancy is six months. Hence he left that woman. This is reported by Abdur-Razzaq and Suyuti quoted it from Abdur-Razzaq, Ibn al-Mundhir and Abd bin Humaid. So we see that Umar did not finalize it until he was informed by Ali (ra).

Secondly, There are certain incidents which establish that Umar (ra) would not inflict the punishment only because of delivery rather he would give excuse if there is chance of forced intercourse. Ibn Qudamah quotes from Sunan of Sa'eed bin Mansur:

فَرَوَى سَعِيدٌ، حَدَّثَنَا خَلَفُ بْنُ خَلِيفَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا هَاشِمٌ، أَنَّ امْرَأَةً رُفِعَتْ إلَى عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ، لَيْسَ لَهَا زَوْجٌ، وَقَدْ حَمَلَتْ، فَسَأَلَهَا عُمَرُ، فَقَالَتْ: إنِّي امْرَأَةٌ ثَقِيلَةُ الرَّأْسِ، وَقَعَ عَلَيَّ رَجُلٌ وَأَنَا نَائِمَةٌ، فَمَا اسْتَيْقَظْت حَتَّى فَرَغَ. فَدَرَأَ عَنْهَا الْحَدَّ

This incident is also reported in Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaibah and other books. And Allah knows best.

This clearly shows that all what AlBaqir can bring against these companions of the Prophet (SAW) cannot be used to castigate them or vilify them. As mentioned earlier, Islamic knowledge is not based on quoting narrations and authenticating them, and definitely not based on conjectures, lies and deceit. That is why we have scholars; those who are have attained true scholarship, and are pious and sincere.

I have asked AlBaqir to produce authentic proof that what he is doing is sanctioned by the ahl-l-bayt and the “infallible” Imams, yet nothing has been produced, rather what I have presented shows the Imams and the ahl-bayt held Umar (ra) in high esteem. Would it then be out of place to say AlBaqir and his cohorts are not followers of the ahl-l-bayt?

AlBaqir who do you follow with these your castigation and slander of the companions of the Prophet (SAW)? Tell us who you are emulating, provide your proof if you are truthful…

@Empiree, you do not need to add “wa ‘ala ahl-l-bayt”, it is already covered in “wa ‘ala ahlihi” and Allah knows best.

ayinba1:
And is it true then, that when you are in the graves, you will be asked the following
1. Who is your Lord?
2. What is your deen?
3. Who is your Prophet?
4. HOW did you find Islam?
5. HOW did you leave Islam? (Your contributions)

Is this true that everyone will be asked?

It is True though that muslims are the ones responsible for the betterment of communities and the entire manlind, when and if they practice what Islam says.

If you do not have something nice to say, say nothing. Can you imagine how more.peaceful the world would be if muslims follow this simple rule?
@sino
I think you have done well to provide good information about the companions of the Prophet ( pbuh ). Don't be angry and get drawn into what is not necessary. Like you rightly said, some groups will see it only one way and no other. However, there are basic rules for living as a muslim and harming a fellow muslim ' s reputation is not one of it, not to talk of the Prophet's companions.
May Allah safeguard us, and count us among the rightly guided ones, ameen.

Ameen to your prayers, Jazakumullahu khayran. I'll try not to be angry, the Prophet (SAW) and his companions faced much severe treatment from the pagans, He (SAW) did not get angry, but the pagans did not find any profit from their actions other than regret, some of them where saved by the Prophet's mercy, many of them perished to burn endlessly in hell fire.

I'll try to the best of my ability to defend the truth, I pray Allah (SWT) guides us with it, and a source of hujah for us on the day of judgement Ameen.

Virtues of Umar(ra) reported by Ahlebayt
Ali bin abi Talib (RA) said: I was with the Prophet PBUH then Abu Bakr and Umar may Allah be pleased with them arrived so he PBUH told me: O Ali these two are the Masters of the elderly of the people of paradise and its youth after the Prophets and the messengers.

sources: Musnad Ahmad 2/38.
Hadith Grading: SAHIH.
– Takhreej Mishkat al Masabih 5/409
– Al Jami’i al Sagheer 4758
– Al Fath al Rabbani 11/5650

Comment: According to another narrations al Hassan(ra) and Hussein(ra) are the Masters of the youth of Paradise. However, we know from the correct and famous narrations that all Men and Women will be youth once they enter paradise and some sources says 33 years old to be specific. If everyone in heaven is youth does this mean al Hassan ad Hussein (RAA) will be the Masters of Ali (RA) and Abu Bakr (RA) for example?. What can be meant by the Hadith is that they will be the Masters of the youth from their generation and age, meaning all the young Muslim youth back at that time Or it can also be explained in this way that they are leaders of all the Muslims who died in the young age.
Similarly, Abubakar(ra) and Umar(ra) will be the Masters of the elderly people from their generation and age, meaning all the elderly Muslims back at that time, Or it can also be explained in this way that they are leaders of all the Muslims who died in the Old age. It is possible that the people of paradise will be sorted out after their judgment is done and before they enter the paradise the young and old men will be divided with their respective leaders, and after that they will be made to enter paradise where the old men will be again made young. The most important point to ponder in this narration to understand the fact that even there will be leaders for elderly people is by looking at the specification made by Prophet(saw) i.e Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) will be leader for “YOUTH” of paradise, but if you see the narrations which talk about leaders of women of paradise, you will not find such specification made, because it was a general to young and elder women. But in this case since there were two types of leaders(i.e for youth and old people) that is why Prophet(Saw) specifically notified that Hassan(ra) and Hussain(ra) will be leaders over YOUTH of paradise. Which proves that there even existed some other Leaders for Old people of paradise. Otherwise why would Prophet(saw) specifically say leaders of “YOUTH” when people were already aware that every one would enter paradise after they will be made young. And Prophet(Saw) would have used also specified in similar manner when he talked about the leaders of women of paradise, he would have said that Mariam and Fatima were leaders of YOUNG women of paradise, but nothing as such was said, which proves that, those ignorants who think that the narrations which talk about Leaders of young men and leaders of elderly men are contradictory are completely wrong because these narrations when understood properly shows us that it is not a contradiction but its a CONTRADISTINCTION.

Ibn Asakir in his “Arbain fi manaqib ummahatil muminin” (#24) narrated from Ali, that prophet (Peace be upon him) said: “May Allah have mercy on Abu Bakr. He married me to his daughter, took me the the Abode of Hijrah, and freed Bilal with his own property. May Allah have mercy on Umar. He spoke the truth even if he were to suffer on account of it , and he observed the truth which made people hate him and caused his loss of friends. May Allah have mercy on Uthman. The angels are shy before him. May Allah have mercy on Ali. O Allah, make him observe the truth wherever he goes”. [Ibn Asakir said: “This is a al-Hasan saheeh tradition”].

[b]Mujahid, on the authority of Ibn Al-‘Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him) related that he had asked ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab why he had been given the epithet of Al-Farouque (he who distinguishes truth from falsehood), he replied: After I had embraced Islam, I asked the Prophet (Peace be upon him): ‘Aren’t we on the right path here and Hereafter?’ The Prophet (Peace be upon him) answered: ‘Of course you are! I swear by Allâh in Whose Hand my soul is, that you are right in this world and in the hereafter.’ I, therefore, asked the Prophet (Peace be upon him) ‘Why we then had to conduct clandestine activism. I swear by Allâh Who has sent you with the Truth, that we will leave our concealment and proclaim our noble cause publicly.’ We then went out in two groups, Hamzah leading one and I the other. We headed for the Mosque in broad daylight when the polytheists of Quraish saw us, their faces went pale and got incredibly depressed and resentful. On that very occasion, the Prophet (Peace be upon him) attached to me the epithet of Al-Farouqu.(the distinguisher between right and wrong) ( reported by Abu naeem and Ibn Asaakir)[/b] (Biographies of the rightly guided caliphs page 147-148 ) (“Rahiq al-makhtum” page 48)

View of Ahl-l-Bayt on the caliphate of Umar (ra)

Ibn Asakir related that Yasar Ibn Hamzah said: When Abu Bakr got gravely ill, he appeared to people from a small window; he said to them: “O people I have decided to entrust somebody to the caliphate, are you going to accept that ?” The people said: “We accepted that O the Caliph (successor) of the Messenger of Allah.” ^Ali Ibn Abi Talib stood and said: “We will never accept other than ^Umar.” Abu Bakr said: “It will be Umar.” This was mentioned by as-Suyutiyy in the “Tarikh al-Khulafa’”.

When Umar was appointed the Caliph ,
فقام علي فقال لا نرضى إلا أن يكون عمر بن الخطاب
Ali stood up and said : We will not agree upon anyone else in this matter except Umar.

Musannif , Kitabul Fazail
Asadul Ghaba, Vol. 4 ,p. 70
Riyadh un nadhra, Vol. 2, p. 88
Tarikh ul Khulufa, p. 61

Abd khair said (once)Ali(ra) while he was sitting on the minbar said: Prophet(Saw) passed away and abubakar(ra) was appointed as khalipha . He(ra) implemented his duty according to the way of prophet(Saw) and continued working according to the seerah of prophet(Saw) until he died, then umar(ra) became the khalipha, he too implemented his duty like the way prophet(saw) and abubakar(ra) did, and worked according to their seerah and died on the same way(Majmua al zawaid, vol 5, page 179).

We read in Kinzul Ammal
أشار لعمر ولم يألُ فبايعه المسلمون وبايعته معهم
Ali(ra) said: (Abu Bakr) pointed to Umar (i.e pointed that he should be caliph) and he didn’t err in it , hence the Muslims rendered allegiance to him, and I rendered allegiance alongwith them. [Kinzul Ammal, Kitabul Fatan, Vol. 6, p. 82]

Zaid bin Yathi’i narrated: from Ali (ra) that he said: it was said to the messenger of Allah PBUH: “Who becomes Ameer/Ruler after you?” He PBUH replied: ” If you(Muslims) choose Abu Bakr (ra) you will find him to be honest, a Zahed in this life and always seeking the afterlife. If you(Muslims) choose ‘Umar (ra) you will find him honest and strong, he does not fear anyone other than Allah. If you(Muslims) choose Ali (ra) and I do not see you doing this but if you do you will find him rightly guided and he will lead you to a straight path.
source:
-Musnad Ahmad 2/158, Ahmad Shakir said: SAHIH.
-al-Isabah 2/509, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani said: Has a good Isnad.

One of the most sacred shia book states:
Verily, the people who payed allegience to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegience to me based on the same principles as the allegience to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah. If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people. If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers. And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him. (Nahjul-Balaghah, Letter #6)

Similar narration is present in Bihar al anwar (32/368)(33/76), noor al thaqalayn(1/551).

Comment: This proves that Caliphate of Umar(ra) was with the pleasure of Allah according to Ahlebayt.

Ali said that he was loyal to umar, fought in the army in which he was commander, took what umar gave him, and went out to Jihad when he ordered it. He went on to say that he also used to meet out the punishments stipulated by Allah on the orders of umar. (Biographies of the rightly guided caliphs page 342).
[b]
Ibn Asaakir reports on the authority of hasan: when Ali arrived in Al basrah, Ibn Al kawwaa and Qays ibn Abaad went to him and said: tell us about this situation you have found yourself in; are you going to govern a nation wherein people attack each other? Didn’t the prophet(saw) promise you anything? Please inform us, as you are honest and trustworthy about what you heard from him. He(Ali) said: Concerning being promised something by the prophet(saw), he did not do that; by Allah I was the first person to believe his message, and would not be the first to lie against him. If he had promised me that(i.e caliphate), I would not have allowed the two brothers from the family of Taym Ibn Murrah, and umar Ibn khattab to stand on his (prophet’s) pulpit; I would have fought them single handed, even if I had no helmet but this garment of mine. But the prophet(Saw) was not murdered, nor did he die suddenly. He was sick for a number of days, and the Mu’zzin used to go to him, then call people to salaah. The prophet used to ask Abubakar to lead people in salaah, while he knew my status. One of his wives wanted him to choose someone else, instead of Abubakar, but he refused, became angry and said: you were even like the women that were with Joseph. Tell abubakr to lead the people in salah.[/b] (Biographies of the rightly guided caliphs page 341-342)

There are so many narrations whereby we see that there was no hostility between the ahl-l-bayt and Umar (ra), same can also be said for Abu Bakr and Uthman (ra), we now ask, where do these shia take their religion from? Who is their Imam that taught them these nasty behaviors against the companions of the Prophet (SAW)?

ayinba1:
This is really unfortunate. I was reading to learn but I see the goal. I don't think it is appropriate for a muslim to do this to the companions of the Prophet, pbuh.
So sad!

My sister, its just beyond me to understand how the shias think, I believe it is based on pure hatred and nothing more, they are well indoctrinated to think and behave like this, everyone of them I have read their comments online, behave the same way, they do not follow the Qur’an, the Prophet (SAW) or the ahl-l-bayt they keep shouting. I ask AlBaqir to show me authentic narrations that support what He and his masters are propagating, up till now, none, just conjectures, assumptions and suspicions. He stylishly avoided the below quotes from the Qur’an and hadith of the Prophet (SAW). Their game is deception, quote volumes upon volumes which upon analysis, exposes their deceit.

Here is what Islam teaches, but AlBaqir and his cohorts do not care about these…

Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an
“O ye who believe! Avoid suspicion as much (as possible): for suspicion in some cases is a sin: and spy not on each other nor speak ill of each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Nay ye would abhor it...but fear Allah: for Allah is Oft-Returning Most Merciful.” (Q 49:12)

The Prophet (SAW) 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)

Narrated AbuBarzah al-Aslami: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: O community of people, who believed by their tongue, and belief did not enter their hearts, do not back-bite Muslims, and do not search for their faults, for if anyone searches for their faults, Allah will search for his fault, and if Allah searches for the fault of anyone, He disgraces him in his house. - [/b]Sunan of Abu Dawood, Number 2283

Narrated Abu Huraira:[b] Allah's Apostle said, "Beware of suspicion, for it is the worst of false tales and don't look for the other's faults and don't spy and don't hate each other, and don't desert (cut your relations with) one another. O Allah's slaves, be brothers!" - Sahih Al Bukhari, Vol. 8 Number 717

Narrated Aisha: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "I do not like to speak of anyone's faults even if I should receive such and such." Tirmidhi transmitted it, calling it sahih. - Al Tirmidhi Hadith Number 1256

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) mounted the pulpit and called in a loud voice, "You who have accepted Islam with your tongues but whose hearts have not been reached by faith, do not annoy the Muslims, or revile them, or seek out their faults; for he who seeks out the faults of his brother Muslim will have his faults sought out by Allah and he whose faults are sought out by Allah will be exposed by Him, even though he should be in the interior of his house." - Al Tirmidhi Hadith Number 1308

These two narrations below are from shia sources, it seems they are at liberty to accept and deny as they feel, their goal is just to win arguments and not what Islam preaches…

In his speech to Mufaddhal ibn `Umar, Imam Ja`far ibn Muhammad as-Sadiq (peace be upon him) said:
“A person who talks about a believer’s conduct hoping that through this act, he is able to lower the other person’s value and worth in the eyes of others will be taken out of the guardianship of Allah and will be placed in the guardianship of the Shaitan.” [/b]Al-Mahajjat al-Baydha, Volume 5, Page 155.

Ja’far Ibn Muhammad Al-Sadiq said:
[b]“If something that you dislike reaches you about your brother then search for one excuse for him up to seventy excuses. If it hits the mark, (then good). If not, then say, ‘Perhaps he has an excuse that I am not aware of.‘ ” [Al-Jaami' Li Shu'ab Al-Eemaan, 14/442]

The case of Umar (ra) and the companions on the issue of pen and paper is so overblown that you would think the Prophet (SAW) coursed his companions on his deathbed, but what we read about the final moment of the messenger (SAW) is quite different:

Narrated Az-Zuhn: Anas bin Malik Al-Ansari, told me, "Abu Bakr used to lead the people in prayer during the fatal illness of the Prophet till it was Monday. When the people aligned (in rows) for the prayer the Prophet lifted the curtain of his house and started looking at us and was standing at that time. His face was (glittering) like a page of the Qur'an and he smiled cheerfully. We were about to be put to trial for the pleasure of seeing the Prophet, Abu Bakr retreated to join the row as he thought that the Prophet would lead the prayer. The Prophet beckoned us to complete the prayer and he let the curtain fall. On the same day he died." (sahih bukhari).

Sometimes I wonder, how can these nobodies cry more than the bereaved? How can you carry a matter on your head this much more than those who were concerned? This just shows that many of them are bunch of hypocrites, with no true love for the ahl-l-bayt they claim to follow.

Lets read the views of the Ahl-Bayt on Umar (ra), were they like AlBaqir and the shias of today? Read and see:

Abu Sariha said that I heard Ali saying on the pulpit “Indeed Abu Bakr was very kind hearted person and indeed Umar was a well wisher of God’s religion, hence Allah did good to him.(tabqat ibn saad, vol 3, page 121)

Ubaidullah bin Mussa narrates from Abu Aqeel that a man asked Ali about Abu Bakr and Umar, he said Indeed they were Imams of guidance, and righteous ones and guiders.(tabqat ibn saad, vol3, page 139)

Abdullah narrates that I heard Ali saying : Every Prophet is given 7 Najeeb from his Ummah, and Prophet (s) was given 14 Najeeb in his Ummah, and amongst them are Abu Bakr and Umar.(musnad ahmed, vol 1, page 132)

Abdullah ibn Ahmad narrated in his Sunnan(#1303):

From Salim ibn Abu Hafs: “I asked Abu Jafar and Jafar about Abu Bakr and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them). And they say: “O Salim, befriend to them, and dissolve from their enemies, indeed they were imams of guidance” And Jafar said to me: “O Salim, Abu Bakr is my grandfather, does man can abuse his grandfather? And may the intercession of Mohammad not reach me on the day of judgement, if I wouldn’t befriend with them, and wouldn’t dissolve from their enemies”


In his “Siyar” at page 259 Dhahabi narrated:

From AbdulJabar ibn Al-Abbas al-Hamadani: ”Jafar as-Sadiq came to them when they were leaving Madinah and told them: You are inshallah from amongst the best of people from your country (or from your Egypt) So report to them from me: He who claims that I’m an infallible imam who must be obeyed, I disassociate myself from him and he who claims that I disassociate myself from Abu Bakr and Umar, I disassociate myself from him.”


Abdullah ibn Abbas(ra) was asked: what have you got to say about umar: he answered: May Allah have mercy on Abu hafs(umar). I swear that he was an ally of islam, a shelter for the orphans, a residence for faith, an example of benevolence, a resort for the weak, a defender of the truth, a source of help for people. Armed with patience and seeking Allah’s reward, he strove till islam was victorious , provinces conquered, and the name of Allah(swt) mentioned on hills and landscapes. He glorified Allah in times of plenty and hardships, and was grateful to him all the time. Whoever hates him shall be doomed till Judgment day.[( quoted from Ar riyad An Nadirah) (Biographies of the rightly guided caliphs page 267)]

We read in al-Kafi (Shia hadith book) vol.7 pg.214:

Zurarah said: I heard abu Ja’far (as) say: ‘Ubeidullah bin ‘Umar was to be punished for drinking wine, so ‘Umar ordered that he be beaten as punishment but no one stepped up to do this task, then ‘Ali (as) stood up and hit him with a solid object forty times.
[Grading: Majlisi “Muwathathaq like Sahih.” al-Miraat 23/330].

Comment: The supposedly evil oppressor according to the Shias, punishes his own son and allows his supposed “enemy” to beat him up!

How Ahlebayt deal with those who wanted degrade the status of Umar (ra)

Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal narrated in his Sunnan (№1302, p 557)
Narrated to me my father, he said: narrated to me Asbat from Amr ibn Qays, which said: I heard Jafar ibn Muhammad saying: Allah disassociate himself from those who disassociate themselves from Abu Bakr and Umar.[Editor of book, Muhammad al-Qahtani noticed that chain is authentic. Dhahabi in “Siyar alamun nubala” (6/260) said: “This saying of Jafar is mutawater”.]

Ali [ra] said :
“I will lash anyone who prefers me over Abu Bakr and Umar, the lashing of a slanderer.” [Lisan al-Mizan, Vol. III P. 290]

In the Khutbah of Ali on the Mimbar of Kufah he said: “it had reached me that some folks have preferred me over Abu Bakr and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them) Whoever says anything of the sort is a slanderer and his punishment will be that of a slanderer. The best of people after the Prophet PBUH was Abu Bakr and then Umar, Then things happened after them in which it is for Allah to pass his judgement.

Muhaddiths are al Hakami in Ma’arij al Qubool and al Bayhaqi in Al I’itiqad.
Hadith rank: Famous, was narrated from him through countless chains and has many Shawahid.

[b]“Then some people from Iraq entered upon him (Al-Imam Zayn Al-Abideen Ali bin Al-Hussain) and said some bad things about Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. When they were done, Ali bin Al-Hussain told them, ‘Tell me, Are you the (Muhajirs, those who were expelled from their homes and their property, while seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure, and aiding Allah and His Messenger: such are indeed the sincere ones)? They answered, ‘No!’ Then Ali bin Al-Hussain said, ‘So, are you (those who, before them, had homes (in Medina) and had adopted the Faith, show their affection to such as came to them for refuge, and entertain no desire in their hearts for things given to the (latter), but give them preference over themselves, even though poverty was their (own lot))?’ They answered, ‘No!’ Ali bin Al-Hussain said, ‘Therefore, you disassociated yourselves from being one of these two groups and I bear witness that you are not the ones (who came after them say: “Our Lord! Forgive us, and our brethren who came before us into the Faith, and leave not, in our hearts, rancor (or sense of injury) against those who have believed. Our Lord! Thou art indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful.”) Get out of here, may Allah curse you!”[/b] Kashf Al-Ghummah, vol. 2, p. 291, under the subtitle of “Virtues of Al-Imam Zayn Al-Abideen”]

Zaid bin ali bin hussain(ra) who holds an honor of very pious and respectable personality among the shias was asked by his companions about Abubakar(ra) and umar(ra) he replied: I always speak good of them and I have never heard any members of the family of the prophet speak badly of them. They have never persecuted us nor did they maltreat any other citizen. Both of them strictly followed the quran and sunnah of the prophet(Saw). Hearing this they said you are not our companion , they separated from him. He said today they have left us , from today they will be called rafidah. (shia book, Nasikh al tawaarikh vol 2, page 590.(under the heading zain ul abedin’s saying)

Abdullah ibn Ahmad narrated in sunnan (#1303):

From Salim ibn Abu Hafs: “I asked Abu Jafar and Jafar about Abu Bakr and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them). And they say: “O Salim, befriend to them, and dissolve from their enemies, indeed they were imams of guidance” And Jafar said to me: “O Salim, Abu Bakr is my grandfather, does man can abuse his grandfather? And may the intercession of Mohammad not reach me on the day of judgement, if I wouldn’t befriend with them, and wouldn’t dissolve from their enemies”


Salim bin abi Hafsah asks the Imam about Abu Bakr and Umar: Ja’afar bin Muhammad told me: “O Salim, Abu Bakr is my grandfather, would a Man insult his own grandfather?” He (Ja’afar) also told me: ” May the intersession(Shafa’ah) of Muhammad peace be upon him never reach me on the day of judgement if I am not loyal to them and if I did not disassociate myself from their enemies”.

sources:
-Siyar A’alam al Nubalaa (6/258,259) by al Imam al Dhahabi, He said This Isnad is SAHIH in Tareekh al Islam (6/46).
-al-Sunnah by Abdullah (2/558) #1303.
-Usool I’itiqad ahlulsunnah by al Lalkaee (7/1301) #2465.

AlBaqir:
Definition of the Key word used
key words – hajara (هجر) and ahajara (اهجر) [and their nominal form is al-hujr (الهجر) - in the aḥadīth are often mistranslated or misinterpreted as simply “to become unconscious” or “to faint”.

However, one of the earliest classical Sunni grand Imams – Sufyan b. ‘Uyaynah (d. 198 H) – had longed exposed the meaning of the word used by the Sahaba. He was explicit that the Sahabah literally intended that the Prophet of Allah was “raving mad”, that the words they used meant exactly that.

This is equally confirmed by other classical ‘Ulama of the Ahl al-Sunnah.

1. Imam al-Shami (d. 942 H), for instance, states:

Al-Hujr: is raving madness and irrational talk, and it is (also) used to refer to obscene, immoral talk.

Source: Subul al-Huda al-Rashad fi Sirah Khayr al-‘Ibad (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1414 H) [annotators: ‘Adil Aḥmad ‘Abd al-Mawjud and ‘Ali Muḥammad Ma'ud], vol. 11,p.105

2. The ace Sunni linguist, Ibn Manzur (d. 711 H), says as well: Al-Hujr: is raving madness.

Source: Lisan al-‘Arab (Beirut: Dar Sadir; 1st edition), vol. 5, p. 250

3. Imam Ibn Salam (d. 224), an ancient, leading Sunni hadith expert, has this submission too:

As for "al-hujr" in statements, it is raving madness.

Source: Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim b. Salām al-Harwī, Gharīb al-Ḥadīth (Haydarabad: Majlis Dāirah al-Ma’ārif al-‘Uthmāniyyah; 1st edition, 1384 H), vol. 2, p. 64

4. Al-Hafiz Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalani (d. 852 H) does not say anything different either: Al-Hujr is raving madness

Source: Fatḥ al-Bari Sharḥ Sahih al-Bukhari (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah li al-Taba'ah wa al-Nashr; 2nd edition), vol. 8, p. 101

Second Definition of the same word
There is a second definition for the word which must be taken into account.

* Imam Ibn Salam comes in again after agreed that the word (al-Hujr) means "raving madness":

Al-Kisai – and part of it is from al-Asma'i and others: al-hujr is to say obscene things and to use obscene language. It is said from it: the man ahajara, yahjur, ihjaran.

Source: Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim b. Salam al-Harwi, Gharib al-Hadith (Haydarabad: Majlis Dairah al-Ma'arifah al-‘Uthmaniyyah; 1st edition, 1384 H), vol. 2, p. 63}

* Qadi ‘Iyad (d. 544 H), for instance, has given both meanings to ahajara (اهجر) – one of the words used by the Ṣaḥābah to qualify the Rasūl. He even specifically refers to the ḥadīth itself:

It is said “the man ahajara” when he says obscene things. His statement “the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, ahajara” – which is the correct form with fatḥah of the al-hā (i.e. pronounced as ahajara) - means raving madness; and al-hujr means raving madness.

Source: {Al-Qadi Abu al-Faḍl ‘Iyad b. Musa b. ‘Iyad al-Yahsubi al-Sibt al-Maliki, Mashariq al-Anwar ‘ala Sihah al-Athar (al-Maktabah al-‘Atīqah and Dar al-Turath), vol. 2, p. 529}.

Another sorry attempt to castigate the companions of the Prophet (SAW), giving the definitons of the word, does not mean that was what those who said it meant, and quoting dictionaries and scholars who just gave direct meaning to the word does not mean they agree that was what those who said it meant. Subhanallah! anyways here is a better analysis, one devoid of hate and prejudice:

What Was Meant By “Delirious”?

It is the phrase “he is delirious” that the Shia propagandist will use against the Ahlus Sunnah. Before we decide who said those words, let us be clear what was meant by the words “is he delirious?” Some of the Shia get overly emotional over the word “delirious”; in actuality, the meaning of the word “delirium” is simply “disturbance of consciousness”. In the United States, psychiatrists rely on the DSM-IV-TR classification scheme; we find that–according to DSM-IV-TR criteria–“disturbance of consciousness” is the core feature of delirium. Delirium can–and oftentimes is–associated with other symptoms such as hallucinations; however, this is not always the case and in fact frequently is not the case. These other symptoms such as hallucinations are merely associations, but they are not the core feature of delirium.

In fact, delirium does not have a psychiatric etiology, but rather it is classified as an “organic” or “physiological” condition. One of the commonest causes of such a disturbance of consciousness is a high grade fever. Patients who suffer from high grade fevers will oftentimes have clouding of consciousness, and this is what is known as delirium, irrespective of any other associations that may or may not be present. In other words, the one who is in a state of delirium is not considered a lunatic or a psychiatric nut, but rather a patient suffering from a severe medical condition of a biological–not psychiatric–origin.

If we look at the definition of the word used in the Hadith, we find:
Quote
hajara; yahjuru; hajran; hijranan; ahjara :- To desert, forsake, leave, renounce, abandon
tahajara; ihtajara :- To depart from one another, separate, or forsake one another; become alienated
(source: Wortabet’s Arabic - English Dictionary)

In the context of the Hadith, the word was used in the sense of someone who leaves or departs from his original state of mind; more specifically, it referred to a person who is separating from the people and this world, as in losing consciousness. In other words, the man who asked “is the Prophet delirious” did not mean that the Prophet was talking nonsense or that he had gone crazy. Instead, the man was simply asking if the Prophet was conscious or not, and we know from Shaykh Mufid’s description of the event that the Prophet was unconscious.

The words “is he delirious” appear in Sahih Bukhari, as follows:
Quote
…The ailment of Allah’s Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said, “Fetch me something so that I may write to you something after which you will never go astray.” The people (present there) differed in this matter, and it was not right to differ before a prophet. Some said, “What is wrong with him? (Do you think) he is delirious (seriously ill)? Ask him (to understand his state).”
(Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 716)

In the above narration, someone asked “is he delirious?” By this, he meant “is he in a state of altered consciousness?” In Sahih Muslim, we read:
Quote
The illness of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) took a serious turn (on Thursday), and he said: “Come to me, so that I should write for you a document that you may not go astray after me.” They (the Companions around him) disputed, and it is not right to dispute in the presence of the Apostle. They said: “How is (Allah’s Apostle)? Has he lost his consciousness? Try to learn from him (this point).”
(Sahih Muslim, Book 013, Number 4014)

And once again:
Quote
…He (the narrator) said that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: “Bring me a shoulder blade and ink-pot (or tablet and ink pot), so that I write for you a document (by following which) you would never go astray.” They said: “Allah’s Messenger (may peace upon him) is in the state of unconsciousness.”
(Sahih Muslim, Book 013, Number 4015)

The man who asked this question was simply wondering if the Prophet was conscious or not. He did not mean to imply any disrespect. And that is why the man said “ask him (to understand his state of consciousness)” and “try to learn from him (this point)”. This is a clear proof that the man did not mean that the Prophet was talking nonsense, because if that were the case, then there would be no point in asking the Prophet that. Medical practitioners and psychiatrists say that those who suffer from psychosis (i.e. a break from reality, hallucinations, etc.) do not have “insight” into their illness: they themselves will not admit that they are “crazy”. This is common sense: one does not ask a person who is talking nonsense if they are talking nonsense.

The man said “ask him” and “try to learn from him” which means that he wished for them to see if the Prophet was conscious. In the medical world, doctors routinely use the “Glasgow Coma Scale” (GCS exam) in order to test for the patient’s level of consciousness. The GCS exam is done by asking the patient various questions to see if he responds, and his responses confirm his level of consciousness. In plain English that means that to check if a man is conscious or not, the best thing to do is to ask him if he is OK. In fact, this is the first step of CPR: in order to check if the patient is conscious or not, the first thing that is done is that the person is asked “are you OK?” If he responds, all is well; if not, CPR maneuvers are begun.

To conclude the matter, the Shia should not get overly emotional over the word “delirious”, because all that was meant by this is “consciousness” or lack thereof. And it was Shaykh Mufid himself who said that the Prophet was unconscious during this time. He wrote in his book (emphasis is ours):
Quote
He (the Prophet) fainted from the fatigue which had come upon him and the sorrow which possessed him. He remained unconscious for a short time…The Apostle of Allah recovered consciousness and looked at them. Then he said: “Bring me ink and parchment so that I may write for you, after which you will never go astray.”

Again he fainted and one of those present rose to look for ink and parchment.

“Go back,” Umar ordered him. “He is delirious.”

The man went back. Those present regretted the dilatoriness (they had shown) in bringing ink and parchment and rebuked each other. They used to say: “We belong to God and to Him we will return, but we have become anxious about disobedience to the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family.”

When he (the Prophet), peace be on him, recovered consciousness…

(Kitab Al-Irshad, by Shaykh Mufid, p.130)

This narration found in one of the Shia’s most reliable books is the end of the debate altogether. Based on this narration above, we find that the order of events was:

1) The Prophet asked for a pen and paper.
2) Next, the Prophet fainted.
3) After that, a man got up to get the pen and paper.
4) Umar ordered him not to. (This Shia book attributes the word “delirious” to Umar but we know this part to be incorrect, as it was someone else who said that.)
5) The statement “he is delirious” is said.
6) The people bickered.
7) Only then did the Prophet recover consciousness.

From this account it becomes clear that the words “is he delirious” were said when the Prophet was unconscious (i.e. before he recovered consciousness)! Does an unconscious person talk? Surely not! This is the coup de grâce to the Shia argument, and so whenever a Shia creates a ruckus about the words “is he delirious”, then we direct him here. If the words “is he delirious” were said while the Prophet was unconscious, then there is no issue of “nonsense talk” as an unconscious person cannot talk let alone talk nonsense. On the other hand, understanding the word “delirium” to be be a disorder in consciousness makes total sense; a man who is slipping into unconsciousness is said to be “departing” (hajara) from the people and this world.

To conclude the matter, the man who asked the question “is he delirious” meant to ask about the Prophet’s level of consciousness, and nothing more. He did not say it in a sarcastic or demeaning tone, but rather he was asking a sincere question. This man cannot be blamed for that any more than the Shia’s own Shaykh Mufid can be, for both of them were indicating that the Prophet had slipped into a state of unconsciousness.

AlBaqir:
Imam al-Bukhari documents:

Ibrahim b. Musa – Hisham – Ma’mar – al-Zuhri – Ubayd Allah b. 'Abd Allah – Ibn ‘Abbas:

When the time of the death of the Prophet, peace be upon him, approached, and there were some men in the room, and among them was ‘Umar b. al-Khattab. He (the Prophet) said, “Come near. Let me write for you a document after which you will never go astray.” ‘Umar said, Verily, the illness has now fully possessed the Prophet, peace be upon him. And you have the Qur'an. So, the Book of Allāh is sufficient for us].”

The people in the room disputed. Among them were those who said, “Come near so that the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, may write for you a document after which you will never go astray.” And among them were those who were repeating what ‘Umar said. When their noise and dispute became very rowdy in the presence of the Prophet, peace be upon him, he said, “Stand up and leave me.

Narrated ‘Ubayd Allah: Ibn ‘Abbas used to say: “It was a great disaster that their dispute and noise prevented the Messsenger of Allah, peace be upon him, from writing that document for them.

Source: al-Bukhari al-Ju'fi, al-Jami' al-Sahih al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Mustafa Dib al-Bagha], vol. 6, p. 2680, # 6932}.

Imam Ibn Athir writes:

In the narrations of the illness of Allah's Apostle (saws), they said: "What is wrong with him? Has he lost his consciousness? Ask him." It means that 'is the Prophet talking nonsense because of his illness.' they wanted to know, and it means that 'is he delirious because of his illness?' This is the best way to interpret that narration and it should not be said as a declarative sentence, because it means either talking nonsense or delirious. AND THE PERSON WHO SAID THAT IS UMAR, AND THIS IS NOT AN ACCUSATION MADE AGAINST HIM.

Ref: Al-Nihaya Fi Gharib Al-Hadith, vol.1, p.#246.


RAISING ONE'S VOICE ABOVE THAT OF PROPHET

Allah declares: {"O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet nor address him the way you do each other lest your deeds be in vain and you perceive not. Those that lower their voices in the presence of the Prophet, they are those whose hearts Allah has tested for piety; for them is forgiveness and a great reward"}

Case 1
Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 6, pg. 46 in "The chapter on the Interpretation of Sura al-Hujurat of the Quran"; also Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. 8, pg. 145 in "The chapter concerning Adherence to the Quran and Sunnah", under the heading of "What is disliked about embroiled and contention", Imam Bukhari documents:

"Waki' informed us from Nafi' b. Umar from Ibn Abi Malika that: 'The Two righteous ones, Abu Bakr and Umar, were nearly destroyed when the delegation of Banu Tamim came to the Prophet. One of them pointed to al-Aqran. Habis al-Tamim al-Hanzali, the brother of Banu Majasha, and the other indicated someone else. Then Abu Bakr said to Umar: Surely, you only wish to contradict me.' Umar said: 'I did not wish to contradict you'. And their voices rose in front of the Prophet, and the verse was revealed: {"O you who believe, do not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet nor address him the way you do each other lest your deeds be in vain and you perceive not. Those that lower their voices in the presence of the Prophet, they are those whose hearts Allah has tested for piety; for them is forgiveness and a great reward"}

Ibn Abi Malika said that Ibn al-Zubayr [later] said: "Thereafter 'Umar didn't mention the matter regarding his father, i.e Abu Bakr, and whenever he spoke to the Prophet about something, he would do so in a whisper and could not be heard to the extent that the Prophet had to tell him to speak up."

# The incident of 'The Calamity of Thursday' where Umar assertively accused the Prophet of Allah of being fully possessed by his illness exposed the cover up of Ibn Zubair ^as read above.

Prophet Defend Himself

# Imam al-Bukhari (d.256H) further reports in a summarized version:

Qubayṣah – Ibn ‘Uyaynah – Suleiman al-Aḥwal – Sa'id b. Jubayr – Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both:

“Thursday! And what a Thursday it was!” Then, he (Ibn ‘Abbas) wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. Then, he said, “The illness of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, became severe on Thursday, and he said, ‘Bring me a sheet of paper so that I may write a document for you after which you will never go astray’. They differed, and it is not proper to differ in front of a prophet. So, they said, ‘The Messenger of Allah is RAVING MADNESS. He (the Prophet) replied, ‘Leave me, as I am in a better state than what you are calling me towards.’ Then, he ordered them, when he was about to die, to do three things: ‘Expel the idolaters from the Arabian Peninsula and show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do.’ And I forgot the third.”

Source: al-Bukhari al-Ju'fi, al-Jami al-Sahih al-Mukhtaṣar (Beirut: Dar Ibn Kathir; 3rd edition, 1407 H) [annotator: Dr. Mustafa Dib al-Bagha], vol. 3, p. 1111, # 2888.

Bros when next you want to quote an hadith, quotethe full hadith, and not do special editing to it.

Narrated by Ibn 'Abbas:

When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was 'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said: "Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray." 'Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us." The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, "Come near so that Allah's Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray," while the others said what 'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them, "Go away and leave me." Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah's Apostle from writing a statement for them.
Sahih al Bukhari Arabic-English Volume 9 hadith number 468 and Volume 7 hadith 573

You narrate the hadith as if Umar (ra) was responding to the Prophet (SAW), when the truth was that he was responding to those who were eager for the Prophet (SAW) to write. Umar (ra) was only bothered about the health of his beloved Prophet (SAW), in fact when it was said that the Prophet (SAW) had died, Umar (ra) was in denial. but we know you would never quote these narrations, as I said earlier, your thread on pen and paper would be the appropriate place to paste a beautiful analysis and response.

From the narrations you have posted, all those who were present were guilty of raising their voices and arguing in front of the Prophet (SAW), and he told all of them to leave, not only Umar (ra) and the group that said the Qur'an is sufficient but everyone. So what is your issue?

I have asked you to bring a proof that says Umar (ra) was the one who said the word about the prophet (SAW), but you can't, you can only bring up assumptions and conjectures.

And was the Prophet (SAW) not seriously ill? we read in some narrations that he (SAW) fainted, so what is wrong with Umar (ra) statement?

Finally, the Prophet (SAW) did not die that day, so we need to ask what was his feeling about his companions at the final moment?

Narrated Az-Zuhn: Anas bin Malik Al-Ansari, told me, "Abu Bakr used to lead the people in prayer during the fatal illness of the Prophet till it was Monday. When the people aligned (in rows) for the prayer the Prophet lifted the curtain of his house and started looking at us and was standing at that time. His face was (glittering) like a page of the Qur'an and he smiled cheerfully. We were about to be put to trial for the pleasure of seeing the Prophet, Abu Bakr retreated to join the row as he thought that the Prophet would lead the prayer. The Prophet beckoned us to complete the prayer and he let the curtain fall. On the same day he died." (sahih bukhari).

AlBaqir:
The case of Hunayn

# Sino, my submission is very simple. Bukhari reported Umar FLED at Hunayn among those who fled. Plenty of other reporters claimed Umar was among the steadfast.

No doubt we have contrasting reports. You have settled for other reports and throw Bukhari's report into dust bin. All I need is your amiable, scholarly declaration that Bukhari's narration is Mawdoo (fabrication). That's all I've asked for.

# Sino, your case became worsen when you try to explain Bukhari's hadith to exonerate Umar. It is very shameful when people like you try to "edit report" to suit your agenda.

Here's your/copied statement:


Here's the original report for the tenth time:

Imam al-Bukhari documents:

AlLayth - Yahya b. Sa'id - Umar b. Kathir b. Aflah - Abu Muhammad, freed slave of Abu Qatadah - Abu Qatadah:

" On the day of Hunayn... The Muslims fled ( وانهزم المسلمون), and I too fled with them (وانهزمت معهم ). Suddenly, I met 'Umar b. al-Khattab amongst THE PEOPLE (فإذا بعمر بن الخطاب في الناس ) and I asked him, "What is wrong with THE PEOPLE?" He said, "It is the command of Allah." Then THE PEOPLE returned to the Messenger of Allah ( شم تراجع الناس الی رسول الله)."

Abu Qatadah revealed he met Umar amongst THE PEOPLE....and THEN, THE PEOPLE RETURNED TO THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH.

Here's your/copied word again:


Sino, are STEADFAST FIGHTERS have any course RETURNING (BACK) TO THE PROPHET?! You should have jeje continue your arguments on the fact that other reporters vindicate Umar rather than trying to explain hadith of Bukhari which clearly expose Umar's great flight along some others.

# Quran is a unique book that gives precise evaluation of things. Again the GENERAL PRONOUN used by Allah is crystal clear that ALL FLED except whom there is clear evidence he remained with the Prophet:

"Truly, Allah has helped you on many battlefields, and on the Day of Hunayn when you rejoiced at your great number but it availed you naught and the earth, as vast as it is, was straitened for you. Then you fled away." {surah Tawbah:25}

This is the same GENERAL PRONOUN used in the case of Uhud:

"When you ran off precipitately and did not wait for any one, and the Apostle was calling you from your rear, so He gave you another sorrow instead of (your) sorrow, so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor (at) what befell you; and Allah is aware of what you do" [surah Aal Imran: 153].

Imam Muslim documents this confirmation:

Abu Uthman:
"None remained with the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, on some of the DAYS in which the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, was fighting apart from Talhah and Sa'd. They both (i.e Talhah and Sa'd) narrated that to me."
Ref: Sahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi)[annotator: Muhammad Fuad Abd al-Baqi], vol.4, p.1879, #2414.

So how come 80 - 100 people will remained with the Prophet, and in such a heated battle somebody will be comfortable to make the head count. It is nothing but an exaggeration to cover the shame of cowards.

This is just plain repetition, saying the same thing in a different way does not make it the truth bro, read again, slowly this time:

By highlighting the phrase “the people” the Rafidi(Saba’ee) here wants to show us that everyone from the companions fled without exception. The only exception he might give to anyone is ‘Ali(ra). This is a fact that by a generalized term many a times a large portion is also intended instead of each and every individual. This is something obvious, not only in Arabic, but in any language.

The second contention in the hadith of Abu Qatadah is that since Abu Qatadah found ‘Umar (ra) among the people that means he must be running away. We say: Abu Qatadah did not say ‘Umar was also fleeing with others. If Umar (ra) was with Abu Qatada and those Muslims who were defeated (fleeing), then why did not Abu Qatada say “And Umar was amongst us” instead of saying Umar was amongst the people?. Abu Qatada only found ‘Umar in the rush of the people, this is all what the narration indicates and whatever these Rawafidh conclude from it is based on mere conjecture and speculation. It is possible that ‘Umar was stopping them and trying to make them silent and steady. Even the Prophet(saw) was calling them and stopping them from running away. This is besides the fact that there is a narration quoted earlier which shows that ‘Umar(ra) did not run away.

There is another version for the same hadeeth found in Bukhari which also does not give slightest indication that Umar (ra) was amongst those who took to flight”

Narrated Abu Qatada: We set out in the company of Allah’s Messenger (saw) on the day (of the battle) of Hunain. When we faced the enemy, the Muslims retreated and I saw a pagan throwing himself over a Muslim. I turned around and came upon him from behind and hit him on the shoulder with the sword He (i.e. the pagan) came towards me and seized me so violently that I felt as if it were death itself, but death overtook him and he released me. I followed `Umar bin Al Khattab and asked (him), “What is wrong with the people (fleeing)?” He replied, “This is the Will of Allah,” (Sahih al-Bukhari #3142)

And had the Rafidi taken up little effort to look into the sharh of the hadeeth, he would have saved some dignity, in case they have it.
Sharh Muslim (by Imam Nawawi)
قوله: (كانت للمسلمين جولة) بفتح الجيم أي انهزام وخيفة ذهبوا فيها، وهذا إنما كان في بعض الجيش.
Imam Al-Nawawi commenting on this hadeeths said…that the retreat or defeat was in some of the army (not all).

Sharh Bukhari (by Ibn Hajar)
قوله‏:‏ ‏(‏فلما التقينا كانت للمسلمين جولة‏)‏ بفتح الجيم وسكون الواو أي حركة فيها اختلاف، وقد أطلق في رواية الليث الآتية بعدها أنهم انهزموا، لكن بعد القصة التي ذكرها أبو قتادة، وقد تقدم في حديث البراء أن الجميع لم ينهزموا‏.
Similar comment was also made by Ibn Hajr in his sharh Bukhari who said: ‘and it is mentioned in the narration of Al-Laith which will follow that they were defeated, but (the defeat was) after the story which Abu Qatada mentioned, and it has been preceded in the hadeeths of Al-Bar’a that all were not defeated.’


If we go by the narration you posted from sahih Muslim of Abu Uthman, then it also means Ali (ra) also fled na, don’t be partial, everyone fled except Talha and Sa’ad, where was Ali (ra) in these narration? I have provided you with hadith and seerah proofs that Umar (ra) was not among those who fled, it is left for you to accept or deny, your conjectures have no value.

I wonder why your assumptions must always be the truth, the numbers reported are estimates, and worst case scenario, a guess. anyone with acuity can do this, regardless of the situation, and this report was after the battle, when the sahaba must have rested and refreshed. in most cases, you tend to recall events better, after it had happened and you have rested and relaxed. But all these are not important, a good number of Muslims stood with the prophet (SAW), it wasn't the Prophet and Ali (ra) that were alone, and authentic reports state that Umar (ra) was amongst those who stood with the prophet (SAW), I know this hurts you, but you cannot change these narrations or wipe them off...you can go back and read them again if you wish.

AlBaqir:
You are not mistaken at all. You've said so earlier that the hadith of al-Hakim and al-Hindi are 'suspected' and daef respectively. And I concurred with you.

However you agree with the one documented by Imam Ahmad that both of them (Abu Bakr and Umar) went and returned without achieving success.

@underlined, why? Is it because Abu Bakr and Umar were no match of them or they were too powerful than the Jews? And when you use the word "they" in the context of face to face combat, Imam Muslim reported that ONLY the Jews best fighter, Marhab challenged Ali b. Abi talib. Observe, even at that time, the Jews were still locked themselves in their fortress. Only Marhab, their bravest, and some few soldiers accompanied him came out. It was only when Ali killed Marhab that he broke their giant gate and the force of Islam had entrance into the fortress. This is what Imam Muslim and others reported. So, there is no doubt, that was exactly what happened to Abubakar and Umar - the gate of the fortress was locked up, Marhab came out to have a duel combat with them... But they both RETURNED WITHOUT ACHIEVING VICTORY.

On the other hands, that underlined statement of yours will even strengthened my assertions provided that report is Sahih/Hasan, as you shall see below.

So we are basing our discussion on the Sahih report of Imam Ahmad in his Musnad. Kindly read it once again so that you don't come back and give further excuses.

Now let us together look at this information given by the Prophet in the same hadith of Ahmad:

لا يرجع حتی يفتح له [/b]اني دافع الوا غدا الی رجل يحبه الله ورسوله ويحب الله ورسوله

"I will pass the flag to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger and Allah and His Messenger love him, [b]he will not escape /run/return (لا يرجع) UNTIL he succeeds(حتی يفتح له)".

1. Why does Prophet went to such extent explaining the characteristics of the new man he will send after the initial failures by the two Sheiks?

# Prophet said: "...he (the man) loves Allah and His Prophet and Allah and His Prophet loves him..."

Apparently others too (i.e Abu Bakr and Umar) also love Allah and His Prophet but the love is not of a degree that "...he will not escape /run/return UNTIL he succeeds". That is a die-hard love.

2. Success/victory is used by the Prophet in that hadith. The opposite of success is failure. In one word, Abu Bakr and Umar failed in conquering Khaybar.

* In previous battles (e.g Uhud and later Hunayn), it was the same troop that "ran away/retreat" who came back to finished off and won the battles. If the two Sheiks"returned" as a result of failed strategies (according to you or the Jews locked up themselves in the castle, also according to you), why were they not sent back individually or as large group to finish what they started?!

Other Narrations
# Imam Ibn Abdul Barr:

It has been narrated through a group of Sahaba like Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqqas, Sahl Ibn Sa’d, Aboo Huraira, Buraida Al-Aslami, Aboo Sa’eed Al-Khudri, Abdullah Ibn Umar, Imraan Ibn Al-Hussain and Salama Ibn Al-Akwah all of them with the same meaning from the Prophet (saw) who said in the day of Khaybar:

"Tomorrow I will pass the flag to a man who loves Allah and his Messenger (saw), and Allah and his Messenger (saw) loves him. He does not run away/turn back (ليس بفرار ) Allah (swt) will give put the victory on his hands. And then He called Ali while He had a ailment in his eyes, so the Prophet (saw) put his saliva on his eyes and gave him the flag, and Allah (swt) gave him victory. And these narrations all of them are firm and valid.

Ref: Al-Isti’ab. Vol. 3, Pg. # 1099 - 1100

# Imam Abi Shaybah with entirely another chain reports:

Ubaidallah - No’aim Ibn Hakim - Abi Maryam - Ali who said:

"The Messenger of Allah (saw) went out to Khaybar, when he reached it he sent Umar and a group of people with him to their town or their castle they went and fought them, but they could not do anything, and Umar with his companions came back to the Prophet (saw), his companions were saying that Umar is a coward and he was saying that his companions are cowards (فجاه يجبنهم ويجبنو نه ) and the Messenger of Allah (saw) got annoyed (فساه ذلك رسول اللّه صلی الله عليه وسلم فقال: ) and he said:'I will send a man towards them who loves Allah (swt) and his Messenger (saw) and Allah (swt) and his Messenger (saw) love him, he will fight with them until he succeeds, he does not run away (ليس بفرار ) The people raised their necks to see whom the Messenger of Allah (saw) will call, they wished to be that man. The Messenger of Allah (saw) remained silent for a while and then said: 'Where is Ali?' They said: 'He has an ailment in his eyes,' He (saw) said: 'Bring him to me.' When I came to him (saw), he opened my eyes and put his saliva on them and passed me the flag and then I went fast fearing that maybe the Messenger of Allah (swt) would change his decision. When I reached their castle and fought them, then Al-Marhab invited me singing epic verses, and I went to him singing epic verses like people do until we met and Allah (swt) killed him with my hands and his companions ran away and closed the door of their castle behind themselves. We went to the door and I did not stop trying to break it until Allah (swt) opened it.

Footnote: Narrated by Al-Bazzar and narrated also by Al-Hakim whom has Authenticated it and Al-Dhahabi has confirmed it. In Kanz-ulUmmal Al-Muttaqi Al-Hindi has said that it is Hasan 'Reliable.'

Ref: Al-Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah. Vol. 20, Pg. # 446



@underlined, you meant "to Abu Bakr and then to Umar. Understood.I hope you are not faulting the Prophet in whatever way. I trust you can never.

To your question, you need to read the full statement of the Prophet to understand why he made such pronouncement. {He (saw) said: "he (the man - Ali) loves Allah and His Prophet and Allah and His Prophet love him too. He will not return unless he has achieved victory"}

This is not a prophecy rather it is expression of Ali's die-hard characteristics. This is testified to by all the battles Ali fought with the Prophet. He never retreated/turn back and then return. Compare to others.

However if you insist its a Prophecy (perhaps using the fact that every decision of the Prophet is wahy), that even add strength to my point:

# Does the Prophet sent the Shaykhain on his own accord or he received wahy to send them?

# Those statement about Ali is wahy that means Abu Bakr and Umar did not have those qualities before Allah otherwise Prophet would have said so concerning them before leaving for Khaybar.

Whichever way you look at it, it does not pay your candidates at all.

I have addressed this issue of khaybar earlier, quit asking me to come up with conjectures and assumptions as you do, the authentic narrations, showed that Abu Bakr and Umar (ra) went to khaybar, the Jews didn’t confront them, and rather they stayed locked up, so they returned. You can come up with your usual conjectures and assumptions, over stretch facts as much as you can, it does not change the fact that Abu Bakr and Umar (ra) were respected companions of the Prophet (SAW) and his trusted close aides.

Yeah yeah, Ali (ra) the brave, the Prophet (SAW) specifically picked at khaybar, he loves Allah (SWT) and the Prophet (SAW), he never escapes/run/return until he achieves success, but who could only go to Abu Bakr and Umar (ra) just for fadak issue and not khalifah right? And eventually followed their rulings and guidance…Abeg when you have something tangible to say let me know… I won’t go down to the level of conjuring opinions and information with you, I give it to you, you are good at that.

I have a narration for you to chew on:
When the issue of denying fadak reached Ali (during his caliphate) so he Ali’s reply (ra) was: “I am ashamed before Allah to overturn something that was prohibited by Abu Bakr and (prohibition) continued by Umar.” {ibn Abil Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, vol. 4 p. 130]

OMG it is in the almighty Nahj al-Balagah!!! Oh it is a fabrication abi? AlBaqir?

@ Narration by Imam Abu Shaiba, the hadith is deaf (weak), stop quoting same hadith from different books, it is the same chain, and it is deaf.

AlBaqir, let me ask you, do you think I am responding to you so as to show that Abu Bakr and Umar were better than Ali (ra)? There is narration up there for you to chew on, tell us AlBaqir, give us the authentic narrations were Ali (ra) accused Abu Bakr or Umar of any wrong doing, where he called them names and said they were cowards, were he said they were lying and that they are just Muslims not Mu’mins, not the sahih Muslim which have already been dismantled. Please show us that you are truly a follower of Ali (ra), bring your proofs if you are truthful!

We believe Ali (ra) was a brave companion, one of the heroes of the Ummah, a lion heart, we hold him in high esteem, and we narrate his excellent qualities, we never undermine him, nor vilify him, nor slander him for any reason, it is you shia, that would be finding fault with the companions of the Prophet (SAW), after a stern warning from the Prophet (SAW) against doing such.

the Prophet (SAW) 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)

AlBaqir: Umar's prohibition of Mut'ah was during his Khilafah. By that time, he had assumed the military and financial authority as against during the time of the Prophet.

1. Imam Muslim documents:

Ibn Abbas: I hesitated for a year, and I had intended to ask 'Umar b. al-Khattab concerning a verse. But I could not ask him OUT OF FEAR OF HIM, until he went out for Hajj and I accompanied him....and (I) said, "O Amir al-Mu'minin! Who were the two women who helped each other against the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, among his wives? He replied, "They were Hafsah and Aishah."
Ref: Sahih Muslim, vol.2, p.1105, #1479(31).

# During the time of the Prophet, you can read how Talhah rebuked him when he was woeing and blaming Aishah: 'Woe to you Umar! You said too much today...

Though at other times (during the lifetime of the Prophet), Umar used to be harsh to people especially the women. But Prophet always came to their rescue. Example:

2. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal reports:

When Ruqayyah daughter of the Messenger of Allah (saw) died, the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Join our good friend, Uthman Ibn Madh‘oon," whereupon the women started to cry. Then Umar started to beat them with his whip, whereupon the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Let them cry!" And then said to the women: "But be careful not to whoop like Satan!" And then continued: "When the eye weeps and the heart becomes sad for a person, it is from Allah the Almighty and of His mercy, and what comes from the hand and the tongue it is from the Satan..."

Sheik al-Arnaut: This Hadeeth is Sahih

Ref: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. Vol. 3, Pg. # 345 - 346


3. Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also documents:

(About women in attendance at a funeral) what Ibn Abi Shayba has narrated is a proof, he has narrated it through Muhammad Ibn Amr Ibn Ata from Abi Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (saw) was in a funeral and Umar saw a women who cried. Umar shouted at her and the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "O Umar leave her alone!" ....

Ref: Fathul Bari Sharh Saheeh Al-Bukhari. Vol. 4, Pg. # 18 - 19

Narrations are too many on Umar's harsh attitudes.

He Continues After The Death of the Prophet
Traditions aplenty here too. Example:

4. Imam Al-Tabari:

Narrated Younis from Ibn Wahab from Younis Ibn Yazid from Al-Zahri from Sa’eed Ibn Mosayyib who said: 'When Abu Bakr died, A'isha held a mourning gathering for him in which eulogies had been read, Umar was informed of it, so he came to her door and forbade them from mourning on Abu Bakr. They (the women) refused, so he (Umar) said to Hisham Ibn Al-Walid: "Enter and bring out for me the daughter of Abi Qohafa sister of Abi Bakr," when A'isha heard this she said to Hisham: "I forbid you from entering into my house!" Umar said to Hisham: "Enter, I allow you to do that!" So Hisham entered and brought out Umme Farwa sister of Abi Bakr to Umar, whereupon Umar started beating her with his whip for a while, when the mourners heard this they escaped.

Ref: Tarikh Al-Tabari. Vol. 3, Pg. # 423

5. Imam Abdul Razzaq Al-San‘ani:

Abdul Razaq - Ibn Oyaina - Amr Ibn Dinaar who said:

'When Khalid bin Al-Waleed died, the women gathered in the house of Maymoona (wife of the Messenger of Allah) and were crying, so Umar came and Ibn Abbas was with him and Umar had his whip (Darrah) with him, so he said: "O Aba Abdullah! Enter the house of the mother of believers and tell her to take her veil, and bring out the women for me," he said: Then he brought them out and Umar was hitting them with his whip, so the veil of one of those woman fell, whereupon the people said to Umar: "O Amir Al-Momineen! Her veil!" So he said: "so be it! She has no honour!" And Mo’ammar was astonished by his saying: "She has no honour!"

Ref: Al-Musannaf al' San'ani. Vol. 3, Pg. # 557

Umar's Treatment of Slaves

6. Imam Ibn Hajar:

Narration of Umar: "Take off your your veil, you stinky! Are you resembling yourself to free women?" I haven’t seen it in this form, but it is famously known that Umar has beaten a slave-girl who had veil and he said "Take off your veil, and do not resemble yourself to free women", it has been narrated by AbdulRazaq through an Authentic chain. And from Abdulrazaq from Ibn Jarij who said: "Umar beat Aqeela a slave-girl of Abi Musa because she wore Jilbaab (full veil)."

And Ibn Abi Shayba recorded another incident through an Authentic chain from Anas that:

Umar saw a slave-girl wearing Jilbaab (Full veil), whereupon he said: "Have you been freed?" She said: “No! He said: “put it off your head.” Jilbaab is for the freed women. She hesitated, so he went up to her with the whip (Darrah), and he hit her on the head, until she threw it. And narrated it Muhammad ibn AlHassan in Al-Athaar from Abi Hanifa from Himad from Ibraheem that Umar used to beat the slave-girls who wore veil and used to say: "Do not resemble yourselves to free women!"

Ref: Al-Diraya Fi Takhrij Ahadeeth Al-Hidayah. Vol. 1, Pg. # 124

7. Allamah Al-Albani:

Al-Bayhaqi has narrated through Hamad Ibn Salama from Thamana Ibn Abdullah Ibn Anas from his grandfather Anas who said: "The slave-girls of Umar were serving us with uncovered hair and their breasts were shaking/wobbling ( تضطرب)."

Al-Albani: The chain of this Hadeeth is 'Jayyid' (at a level between Hasan and Saheeh) and all of it’s narrators are trustworthy except the teacher of Bayhaqi Abul Qasim Abdul Rahman Ibn Ubaidullah Al-Harbi and he is very Truthful as Al-Khatib says and Al-Bayhaqi said: "And the reports from Umar Ibn Al-Khattab concerning that matter are authentic."

Ref: Irwa Al-Ghalil. Vol. 6, Pg. # 204

Such Is The Behaviour Of Umar b. al-Khattab
I hope you guys (Empiree, MrOlai, Sino, Kazlaw2000 {Oh sorry bros, na Astaghfirullah you dey seek for him}, et al find a good role model in Umar). Like I said, ahadith plenty on this should you need more so that you see something to emulate. These kinds of ahadith are what people like username see that made them run away from hadith. My brother Rilwayne001 is starting have that. May Allah guide our hearts aright to see the truth.

I have been able to show your conjectures, assumptions and suspicions, your twisted translation, and your lack of Islamic ethics. Right from when I was little, I have heard from sermons that Umar (ra) was a tough individual who was strict and harsh, that is his nature, that is how Allah (SWT) created him, and when he accepted Islam, the effects were apparent in his character. The Prophet (SAW) was reported to have said:

Ibn ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him and his father, reported that the Messenger of Allah, prayers and peace of Allah be upon him, has said, “The most compassionate person from my nation upon my nation is Abu Bakr and the most sever in the religion of Allah is ‘Umar” [Narrated by Ibn Majah 125 and authenticated by al-Albani]

Some of these narrations posted by AlBaqir have weakness, and some can only be understood in proper context, coupled with other narrations of which a reputable scholar of hadith (or Islam) is in the best position to explain. We do not take some random narrations, and form an opinion based on these random narrations, the evil in that is quite obvious, as we have seen here how AlBaqir has been castigating companions based on his own prejudiced opinions and suspicions. This is never the ways of people of knowledge, or even students of knowledge.

Be that as it may, I’ll not fail to expose the lies to the best of my ability (especially the treatment of slaves issue) as I am not a Scholar.

This is the narration from As-Sunan Alkubra by AlBayhayqi, from which I believe Sheikh Albany also quotes from:
وَأَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو الْقَاسِمِ : عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ الْحُرْفِىُّ بِبَغْدَادَ أَخْبَرَنَا عَلِىُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الزُّبَيْرِ الْكُوفِىُّ حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عَلِىِّ بْنِ عَفَّانَ حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدُ بْنُ الْحُبَابِ عَنْ حَمَّادِ بْنِ سَلَمَةَ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِى ثُمَامَةُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَنَسٍ عَنْ جَدِّهِ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ قَالَ : كُنَّ إِمَاءُ عُمَرَ رَضِىَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ يَخْدُمْنَنَا كَاشِفَاتٍ عَنْ شُعُورِهِنَّ تَضْرِبُ ثُدِيَّهُنَّ. {ق} قَالَ الشَّيْخُ : وَالآثَارُ عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ الْخَطَّابِ رَضِىَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ فِى ذَلِكَ صَحِيحَةٌ وَإِنَّهَا تَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّ رَأْسَهَا وَرَقَبَتَهَا وَمَا يَظْهَرُ مِنْهَا فِى حَالِ الْمِهْنَةِ لَيْسَ بِعَوْرَةٍ ، فَأَمَّا حَدِيثُ عَمْرِو بْنِ شُعَيْبٍ فَقَدِ اخْتُلِفَ فِى مَتْنِهِ فَلاَ يَنْبَغِى أَنْ يُعْتَمَدَ عَلَيْهِ فِى عَوْرَةِ الأَمَةِ ، وَإِنْ كَانَ يَصْلُحُ الاِسْتِدْلاَلُ بِهِ وَبِسَائِرِ مَا يَأْتِى عَلَيْهِ مَعَهُ فِى عَوْرَةِ الرَّجُلِ وَبِاللَّهِ التَّوْفِيقُ.

Before I translate, I’ll like to first state that this hadith is narrated in the chapter titled, the ‘awrah of the female slave. The narrations of Umar (ra) and beating of the slave girl was also narrated in this chapter, but important information about these narrations, which I have said some are weak, can be found in the above narration. Again just to give a little context, during the time of the Prophet (SAW) there were slaves, most of whom were captured after wars (wars against disbelievers), but Islam had a systemic way of eradicate slavery, part of which is, emancipating a slave being a great virtue was recommended. It can be understood that Islam is never forced on anyone, not even the slaves, so when Allah (SWT) sent down the revelation of the hijab, it is directed at the believing women, I stand to be corrected.

Translation of the above narration in Arabic:

Thamama Ibn Abdullah Ibn Anas reported from the authority of his grandfather, Anas Ibn Malik who said: we were attended to by the female slaves of Umar (ra) with their hair uncovered, touching their bossoms. Sheikh said: the narration from Umar Ibn Khattab (ra) on this is authentic because this points at the fact that her hair and her neck and what is visible about her in the condition of her occupation are not part of her ‘awrah (unclothedness). But the narration of ‘Amri Ibn Shu’ayb (the ones about Umar (ra) beating a slave girl and who was putting on jilbab), this report has variations in its content, it cannot be relied upon as evidence for the ‘awrah of a female slave…

In Sheikh Albany’s book (which AlBaqir quoted from), this same hadith from the same narrator was also presented, but the word used is not tadribu (translated here to mean to touch), but tadtaribu which is translated to mean shake and wobble by AlBaqir. It can be clearly seen that, this is a mistake, perhaps from the Sheikh himself or from another person. But due to the love to slander Umar (ra) by the shia, they would rather choose the wobble and shake, so as to portray Umar (ra) in a bad light. The question is, if it was wobble and shaking bosoms, like AlBaqir and his masters have said, was it during the life time of the Prophet (SAW) or it was after?! If it was after the demise of the Prophet (SAW), so no single Muslim, including the brave Ali (RA) who loves Allah (SWT) and the Prophet (SAW) could confront him and this supposed perverse activities in his house, and all the guest who came to his house were all just ogling? Including Anas Ibn Malik (ra)? They were all perverted Muslims too?! We read from one of the Ahl Bayt:

Ja’far Ibn Muhammad Al-Sadiq said:
“If something that you dislike reaches you about your brother then search for one excuse for him up to seventy excuses. If it hits the mark, (then good). If not, then say, ‘Perhaps he has an excuse that I am not aware of.‘ ” [Al-Jaami' Li Shu'ab Al-Eemaan, 14/442]

In regards to the repeated hadith of Umar (ra) beating a slave girl for putting on the jilbab of the Muslim woman, here is what the Sheikh AlBany said about a narrator of the narration
قلت : رجاله ثقات غير أحمد بن عبد الحميد فلم أجد له ترجمة
The narrators are trustworthy, except for Ahmad Ibn Abdul Hammed; I couldn’t find any introduction or explanation on him, i.e he is unknown.

these are all from the same book our shia brother is quoting from, it is mind boggling the lenght the shias can go to, just to dicredit a sahabah...twisting narrations, quoting parts that suits their goals, and criticizing the ones that do not, crazy translations, using weak narrations. there is no other name to call this than deceit!

For the sincere seeker of truth, it shouldn’t be difficult to see why it is very essential that one needs to be careful where one takes his/her knowledge, there are people who are ready to distort text, translate wrongfully and use any form of deceit just to propagate their agenda. This is never the way of truth. This is not what Islam teaches at all.

AlBaqir:
Fair enough @underlined. But information given in the hadith is enough to ask questions which you ran away from answering. Lets take it again.

# Agreed the hadith never named the garden.

# Bold, we have vital information as per its location. Aisha said:
{"I went out in the day of Al-Khandaq and I was standing behind the people, then I heard sounds of ground coming from behind me, I turned around and saw Sa'd Ibn Ma'az and his nephew ..."}

Aisha never made it upfront where the trench is. She only stood behind the warriors who were manning the trench preventing the enemies. This is some meters away from the trench (backward where people were standing).

She (Aisha) continues:
Then I entered a garden, and I saw that a group of people who had been there, among them was Umar Ibn al-Khattab.

* {"Then" Means: 'soon afterwards'}
* {I entered a garden - meaning she's no longer behind the warriors. Obviously she was not moving forward but going backward}

The fact that Aisha was at the back of EVERYONE, all indication is that the garden was AT THE BACK of the people.

You have the right to re-evaluate my submissions if it is faulty in anyway.

More conjectures and assumptions, so there is no sideways, to the left or right? Only backwards? The narration did not say she turned back, and was it the direction she came from initially? Because that would mean that she passed the garden when she was coming to the battlefield abi? Are these the conjectures you want me to believe and be arguing with? I do facts, not your assumptions and suspicions; the religion is not based on assumptions and conjectures.

ALBaqir: @Bold, it is a privilege to always be where His grace is. Not to mention the fact that Quran says: {Say (O Muhammad): 'If you love Allah, follow me...}

# Why would Prophet be looking for Umar when: {"If you help him (Muhammad) not, (it is no matter): For GOD did Indeed help him..."} [Quran].

# Why would Prophet be looking for Umar when he himself was ever busy preventing the evil allied forces from crossing the trench?!

# Why would Prophet be looking for Umar when the BRAVEST warrior (Ali), who never back down until victory is achieved, is by his side?

It is for Umar's sake to be by Prophet's side all the time and follow his every step. That is the only one thing that guarantee Allah's love and forgiveness.

This is you trying too hard to cover up your behind that you cannot answer my question, there is an authentic narration that indicates the Prophet (SAW), Abu Bakr and Umar (ra) where always moving together, in all books of history i have read, Abu Bakr and Umar are not just ordinary companions, they were close companions of the Prophet (SAW), the verse of the Qur'an does not help your twisted logic, it is on record that Abu Bakr and Umar (ra) followed the Prophet (SAW) of which Ali (ra) attest to it, an example is the issue of fadak, you may go back up and read to refresh you memory...

AlBaqir: If we are to judge by Bukhari's documentation, Aisha should be around 9 - 11years at 5 A.H. Obviously, a small girl of her age is not expected outside AT ALL near the battlefield. So even coming out, making it to the field (behind the warriors), seeing warriors coming from her back and entering the field is too much.

# So Aisha's getting outside to the field is illegal therefore asking what Umar and his colleagues in their "safe haven" doing is not wise. Besides how will a child question men older enough to be her grandpas'. It is considered to be rude anywhere there is sense of humour.

# Umar came with the first attack.
Upon seeing Aisha when she entered, {Umar said: 'woe to you, what brought you here?! By God you are a bold woman, what made you think that you are safe of getting captured or get into trouble! She (Aisha) said: 'He kept blaming me so much until I wished that the earth splits so that I enter into it.'}.

# @underlined, I laughed in Ijebu. A good man will rather send the child back home where her mate hides under their mothers. After all the garden is at the back of the battlefield and absolutely enemies never crossed the trench, not to mention of defeating the Muslims or entering the city.

bros I need to advice you seriously, you will do astonishing well in the movie industry, or even novels, you should choose fiction, it suits you so perfectly...in fact, the way you are narrating this story, it is as if you were there do you shias receive special training for this? I've read a lot of these kind of write up from shia all over the internet.

Anyways, for Umar (ra) to have been that harsh and saying how brave she was, and why does she think that she can’t be abducted and something bad happens to her, indicates that where they were was not safe. So if the Prophet (SAW) knew she came to the battlefield, he would do what exactly? I’m quite interested, are women prohibited from fighting or coming to the battlefield? Which is it?

AlBaqir: # Arabs use their turbans to cover their nose down not eyes. They only use the same turban to cover their eyes when wind blow sands/particles. This time, they are inside the garden (where there can be no wind blowing) and none of the warriors seen by Aisha outside going to the battlefield used mask, where there might be strong wind. The hadith says the man used MASK TO COVER HIS FACE (not even Turban).
# Once the ring leader (Umar) has been seen, and apparently others too, what's the point of the man-in-mask continue covering his face? Asiri ti tu naw.

# Talhah's statement of submission (to fate) was only out after he had fired back at Umar (to shot his mouth) who was raining woes on poor little Aisha, the great discoverer. Talhah said: {'Woe to you Umar! You said too much today, where is the place to escape or flee except towards Allah?'}

This statement clearly revealed those Sahabah were hiding but upon their busted plans, Talhah finally resigned to fate.
Quran revealed that EVERYBODY'S eye and throat is up not knowing what could befell.

Bros the proper translation of the word use nasyfah is a veil, not mask, please tell me how using a veil to cover your face automatically indicates you are hiding? Again these are more assumptions, conjectures and suspicion; you should bring facts, authentic proof, so far you have not brought one!

AlBaqir: # That is "suicide" telling the Prophet because she herself went out illegally. So its a case of covering each other's secret - "mon sinu mon sikun"

What was Aisha, a girl of 9, doing outside very near the battlefield? That can never be sanctioned by the Prophet.

# Una don made Allah revealer of every event. One of the most daring event in the life of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny) was the assassination attempt on his blessed life by a group of Munafiq among the Sahabah on his way back from Tabuk.

The event never merited a single ayah in the Quran. There are other daring events like that which never made it to the Quran.

If you fight in the battle, wounded or killed; or you choose to hide or sit at home, it does not hurt Allah and His Prophet in anyway. Everything you do, it is for your own sake. Please don't ask such a question again o.

More conjectures and assumptions, if it is not worthy for Allah (SWT) to mention it, and even the Prophet (SAW) did not hear of it or make mention of it, but Allah (SWT) mentioned those who flee, the munafiqs who lied and excused themselves, then what is your problem?! There is no single report that they were hiding, it means your statement is a lie, one not worth mentioning. If Allah (SWt) did not mention it, and the Prophet (SAW) did not mention it, who is AlBaqir, to come with his assumptions and suspicions about these companions of the Prophet (SAW)? Mind you, I do not mean a Quranic verse alone, there other forms of revelation to the prophet which are not documented as an ayah of the Qur’an. I keep on asking you AlBaqir, bring just one single narration that they were hiding? And none have been brought up till now. SMH

AlBaqir: Heh...who told you Prophet no angry and react? Mind you it was not Umar alone. It was he along his usual culprits.

No doubt Prophet had the most exalted character. But when nuisance and reckless attitudes become increase and especially from a senior Sahabi, naturally Prophet reacts.

# Imam Al-Waqidi documents:

Abu Sa’eed Al-Khudri said: "... Umar and some of the men of companions of the Prophet (saw) who were with Umar said: 'Didn't you tell us that you will enter the Ka`ba and hold the door of it and and perform Tawaf around it?' And now neither our sacrifices reached Makkah nor we.' He said: 'Did I tell you that we would visit the Ka`ba this year?' Umar said: 'No.' The Messenger of Allah (saw) said, 'So you will enter the Ka’ba, and I will hold the door of Ka’ba and shave my head and your heads in the center of Makkah and will perform Tawaf around it?' "Then He came to Umar and said: 'Did you forget the day of Uhud when you were going up, and paid no heed for anyone, and I was calling you from behind? [Qur’aan 3:153], Did you forget the day of Al-Ahzaab (battle of Khandaq) that their army came on you from above and from below, and when your eyes swerved and your hearts leaped to your throats? [Qur’aan 33:10] And the Messenger of Allah (saw) kept asking them, did you forget the day of such and such? Until the Muslims said: 'Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw) told the truth, O Messenger of Allah (saw), we had not thought what you had, you are more knowledgeable in Allah (swt) and His decisions than us.' When the Messenger of Allah (saw) entered the Ka’ba next year and shaved his head, he said: 'This is what I had promised to you'. On the day of Fath (conquering Makkah) he took the door of Ka’ba and said: 'Bring Umar Ibn Al-Khattab to me!' And then said: 'This is what I told you.' And when it was Hajjatul Wida he said: 'O Umar, this is what I told you.' Then Umar said: 'O Messenger of Allah (saw), yes there is no victory greater than this victory in Islam.'

Ref: Al-Maghazi. Vol. 2, Pg. # 609

I (albaqir) say: Absolutely there is no better way of convincing DOUBTER(S) other than showing him manifest evidences.

My question was, was the Prophet angry at Umar’s questions? If yes, provide your proof. I don’t want your conjectures and assumptions, you are not the Prophet (SAW) and you do not know what was in his heart, so quit trying to re-narrate history.

What you have quoted is even against you. How can one be this blinded by hate I ask?

“Then Umar said: 'O Messenger of Allah (saw), yes there is no victory greater than this victory in Islam.”

Does this statement indicate someone who is still in doubt? I had already posted that during that hudaybiyyah, and the verse of victory was revealed, the Prophet called Umar (ra) and gave him the good news, and telling them again on fath Makkah does not in any way portray that the people were still in their state of doubt. “And the Messenger of Allah (saw) kept asking them, did you forget the day of such and such? Until the Muslims said: 'Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw) told the truth, O Messenger of Allah (saw), we had not thought what you had, you are more knowledgeable in Allah (swt) and His decisions than us” it is clearly written that the Muslims said, [b]“we had thought” [/b]a past tense indicating that day they were in a poor state of mind, so why do you infuse your prejudices into narrations? Did Allah (SWT) not grant them all the victory? Did Allah (SWT) say this victory is only for those who did not doubt at hudaybiyyah? Even today, we are beneficiaries of this victory; it was a victory for Islam.

Like I have said earlier, your opinion amounts to nothing, its your choice to hold on to your prejudices…

AlBaqir: Umar did worst than that (i.e doubting) at Prophet's sick bed. A thread is already opened for you to reply. We don't need to derail this further. Empiree can gist you. And besides I have given you above Al-Ghazali and Ibn Athir's submissions. Meaning he continued his RECKLESS ATTITUDES.

Bro I didn’t ask about what is worse than doubt, I said clearly, provide proof that Umar (ra) doubted the prophet (SAW) after this incident. Simple! If you cannot, then you should just say you cannot, and stop spamming with unnecessary information.

FYI, I have a good response to that your thread you speak of, will be there perhaps by the weekend, in sha Allah.

AlBaqir: # First you've admitted yourself that such attitudes of Umar were RECKLESS. And you admitted Umar went to Abu Bakr who had never doubted the Prophet before. Now Listen to yourself again using "not in a good mood". And I put it to you that going to meet Abu Bakr for confirmations thereby calmed down instead of Prophet's answers to his questions is a Salt upon your injury. If Prophet cannot convince you, who else will do?

# Second, there is no record that other sahabah (Umar's gangs) asked those reckless questions directly from the Prophet. Though they were also showing their reckless grievances.

Imam al-Dhahabi also have a nice document on this just like al-Waqidi quoted above.

Third, @cancelled. He was the most doubter with RECKLESS ATTITUDES.

This is getting ridiculous, so there is no other reason for Umar (ra) to go and ask Abu Bakr these questions again other than he did not believe the Prophet (SAW)?! And when did I say that meeting Abu Bakr (ra) was what calmed him down?! This is the perverse logic, assumptions and conjectures you have been applying to your arguments so far, it’s quite unfortunate. There is so much I can do to help you in this aspect.

ALBaqir: Honestly you are right and I agree with you. You cant blame me for I assumed too much from your man not realizing he's just being over-hyped. However the believers are always pray for death in the battlefield. They want to become Sha'eed and meet their beloved (Allah) quick. In fact they are always overjoyed whenever there is battle with Mushriqun.

Listen to Umm al-Mu'minin Aisha as she witnessed the battle of Khandaq:
she said: Sa'd passed by singing epic verses: 'Very soon the battle of the brave man begins...what a good thing it is that the DEATH COMES"

Indeed only the brave men wish to meet death in the battlefield. Cowards will run, turn back, jumping like mountain goats, and hide in a garden.

Salute the brave, the dead: Hahoo! Hahoo!! Hahoo!!!

When the stories of the sahabas are being narrated, we all are awed at their steadfastness and valour, even when their shortcoming are mentioned, it is never to diminish their efforts, cast aspersions or slander them, they were human beings after all, but they suffered for the deen, they sacrificed everything for Islam, and these good and enviable qualities are what our scholars emphasize. Allah (SWT) will judge each person according to their deeds and intentions, not AlBaqir, or your shia masters.

I have read a narration that states how Umar (ra) prayed to die as a martyr, read below:

Ibn Kathir said, “When ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, finished performing hajj (pilgrimage) in the year twenty two of the Hijri calendar, and the Mothers of the Believers were with him, he supplicated Allah, Glorified and Exalted, and complained to Him that he has become old. He also supplicated Him that he has become weak and the subjects have increased; and that he was afraid of being negligent. He asked Allah to take him and bestow martyrdom upon him in the city of the Prophet (Medina), prayers and peace of Allah be upon him. It was established in the authentic books of Hadith that he used to say, “O Allah! I ask You a martyrdom in your cause, and a death in the city of Your Messenger.” Allah has responded to this supplication and gathered for him the two things. He was martyred in the city of the Prophet. This is too dear but Allah is the Most Courteous and Kind unto whom He wills, Glorified and Exalted He is.

On the morning of Wednesday in Dhul-Hijja, he was stabbed while standing for prayer, in the mihrab (prayer niche). He was stabbed by Abu Lulu Fairuz the Magi. He hit him with a two edged dagger. He hit him three strokes, or six; one of them under the navel, that he fell to the ground. The infidel came back with his dagger; he did not pass by anyone but that he hit him. He hit thirteen men, of whom six died. Abdullah ibn Awf threw over him a garment and he committed suicide. May Allah curse him.

‘Umar was carried to his home, bleeding from his wound, before sunrise. He started to wake up and then faint, and then they reminded him of prayer and he says, “Yes, there is no luck in Islam for those who left it.” (The Beginning and the End 7/137-138)

Praying to die on the battlefield is different from taking an oath to die on the battlefield, the former is commendable, while the latter is suicide...just to clarify for you again.

AlBaqir: 2. Imam al-Ghazali (d. 450 H) writes:

The people and scholars agree upon the context of the narration of the sermon on the day of Ghadir Khum in which the Prophet (saw) said, "Whoever I am the Mawla then Ali (a) is the Mawla." Then Umar Ibn Khattab said: 'Congratulations! Oh Abal Hasan, you have become my Mawla and the Mawla of every believer.'

This shows his (Umar) submission and acceptance and confirmation (of Ali's Mawla-ship). However after that, he (i.e Umar) was defeated by his desire and love of power in flag of leadership, and he was dominated by desire, and the desire to hold the flag of Caliphate, and the joy to open and conquer states, and by that they (i.e Umar and his cohorts) reverted to the early phase, they dispensed with the agreement (of Ghadir Khum) and sold it at a low price. And also the Prophet (saw) in his last illness before his death said: "Bring me a tablet and ink-pot, so that I may write for you a document by following which you will never go astray" whereupon Umar said: "Don't bring it, the man is talking nonsense.'"

Ref: Sirr al-Alamayn wa kash'f ma fid Darayn, pg.23.

Imam Sibt b. Jawzi also quoted this in his: Tadhkirat Ul-Khawa'is, pg.62.

1. Firstly, the narration quoted here is weak (i.e Umar (ra) saying congratulations to Ali (ra)), in all the books this narration it is found, it is transmitted via Ali ibn Zayd ibn Jadan. Weak rafidi in accordance to almost majority of all scholars.

Secondly, I read somewhere that this book was not authored by Imam Ghazali…. But that is not really important

Thirdly, reading the whole passage from the book, which was titled constituting the caliph and kings (my literal translation), clearly establishes the fact that, consultation and consensus is the way to go in terms of choosing a khalifah, the author went against those who have the opinion that it is divinely revealed/selected/written down. So it really goes against your shia understanding of khilafah of Ali (ra).

Even if we agree for a moment, that what you stated is true, that the statement was from Imam Ghazali (which I strongly doubt), it remains an opinion, not substantiated by any fact that Umar (RA) was overtaken by desires to become the khalifah, since we all know that Abu Bakr (ra) became the first khalifah, and the majority of people, including Umar (ra) and Ali (ra) and Abbas (Ra) gave him the pledge of allegiance, whether some tarried, that is of no importance, did they give their allegiance? YES! Was it a consensus? YES!

AlBaqir: 3. Imam Ibn Athir writes:

In the narrations of the illness of Allah's Apostle (saws), they said: "What is wrong with him? Has he lost his consciousness? Ask him." It means that 'is the Prophet talking nonsense because of his illness.' they wanted to know, and it means that 'is he delirious because of his illness?' This is the best way to interpret that narration and it should not be said as a declarative sentence, because it means either talking nonsense or delirious. AND THE PERSON WHO SAID THAT IS UMAR, AND THIS IS NOT AN ACCUSATION MADE AGAINST HIM.

Ref: Al-Nihaya Fi Gharib Al-Hadith, vol.1, p.#246.

While to Allah alone is the truth, ALL these are facts not suspicion, slandering, backbiting as you paint it. Just like Imam Athir said, "...this is not an accusation made against him". I (Albaqir) say: IT IS RATHER A FACT.

3. This is desperation bro, prove to us that it was Umar (ra) that utter that word to the prophet (SAW), I know you know the drill, not someone’s opinion, or your assumptions and suspicions.
Here is the Arabic:
ومنه حديث مَرضِ النبي صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم [ قالوا : ما شأنُه ؟ أهَجَرَ ؟ ] أي اخْتَلَف كلامُه بسبب المرضِ على سبيل الاستفهام . أي هل تَغَيَّر كلامُه واخْتَلَط لأجل ما به من المرض ؟ وهذا أحْسَنُ ما يقال فيه ولا يُجْعل إخباراً فيكون إمَّا من الفُحْش أو الهَذَيان . والقائل كانَ عُمَر ولا يُظَنُّ به ذلك

Firstly, the most important translation here is what is in the brackets; the word is qaluu, the plural form of qala, which means to say. So if we are to translate this, it would be, they said: how is his condition? Is he delirious? So if AlBaqir says it was Umar (ra) that said this, how come it is a plural form?! This quote does not help you.

Secondly, your strange translation is quite interesting, Alhamdulilah there are those who understand Arabic on this forum; I hope they will correct me when I err. After the bracket, Ibn Athir explains what is meant by those who said the Prophet (SAW) was delirious. “That is, his speech changed due to his illness, being expressed as an inquiry. Again another interpretation “That is, mixing his speech as result of what has affected him from the illness.” Then he said this is the best way of what is said” meaning these two explanations are the best way to interpret the word used in the hadith.

Personally, I think Ibn Athir said what he said that this is not a suspicion of him (which you translated to not to accuse) is based on the direct translation he gave for the word hajara, which also could mean raving madness, or nonsense, removing Umar (ra) from suspicion of making such a remark. What Ibn Athir has written does not in any way equate what you are doing here, so your argument falls flat on the face. Bring proof from the narrations that it was Umar (ra) who said this (ahajara?), authentic proof.

by the way, him when does "zana/yuzanu" mean accuse? Na wa o for your masters and how they translate Arabic

I do not see facts in all what you have been doing on this thread, assumptions, suspicions and conjectures, and then half truth.

AlBaqir: A thread is coming in sha Allah. We don't need to derail this like I said earlier.

First underline sentence: In one word Umar DOUBTED the Prophet.

Excellent! Bravo!! Ofvarin!!! This is my point bro. Allahu Akbar! Sino used (or unknowingly copied the word "RECKLESS ATTITUDES" to describe Umar. When have you become a Shia? That language is hot! I thought only Shia used that. Betatron, Empiree, MrOlai et al can you beat that?

There are lots of command in the Quran where Allah commanded the Sahabah to follow the Prophet unconditionally without questioning.
Based on that, attitude of Umar was reckless.Those questions were silly.

I also told you the report in Bukhari by al-Zuhri showed that Umar said he need to work extra to expiate his silly attitudes. Am glad you quote it yourself rather than defending his only expressing his anger.

Therefore, it makes perfect sense when Umar himself confessed his RECKLESS ATTITUDES on that day:

Umar b. al-Khattab:
"By Allah! I NEVER DOUBTED SINCE I ACCEPTED ISLAM EXCEPT ON THAT DAY (Hudaybiyah). So, I went to the Prophet, peace be upon him, and said, "Are you not truly the Messenger of Allah?"

So Mr sino, dont take it upon us (the Shia) when we quote the holy Quran verbally saying: "The Believer are only those who have believed in Allah and His Messenger, AND DO NOT DOUBT AFTERWARDS...

So this is your state of mind?! Subhanallah! Have I disagreed with the narration that states Umar (ra) said he never doubted the prophet (SAW) except the day of hudaybiyyah? Go back and carefully read my posts on this issue.

Why do you keep acting like a wailing wailer?! Keep on wailing that Umar (ra) doubted the Prophet (SAW), he (ra) had moved on, did so many good deeds and died a martyr, why should I or anyone be dwelling heedlessly on an issue that the Prophet (SAW) did not take personal? I had said the companions of the Prophet (SAW) are not infallible, was his action reckless? Yes, did he regret it? Yes, so what is your problem? Even when you commit grave sins, and you do a sincere repentance, Allah (SWT) says he is oft forgiving most merciful. You are not the Prophet (SAW) and you are not Allah (SWT), if you cannot see beyond your hatred for these companions of the prophet (SAW), then you should check your faith.

AlBaqir:
Suspicion? Slandering? Backbiting? Finding fault? Oh boy, Na where you see all that? There are facts in your books against Umar b. al-Khattab.

1. Imam Muslim documents Ali and Abbas thought of Abu Bakr and Umar. Umar himself confessed:

"When the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, died, Abu Bakr said: "I am the walī of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him.".... So both of you (Ali and Abbas) thought him (i.e. Abu Bakr) to be a LIAR, SINFUL, A TRAITOR and DISHONEST. And Allāh knows that he was really truthful, pious, rightly-guided and a follower of the truth. Abu Bakr died and I became the wali of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and the wali of Abu Bakr. So both of you thought me to be a LIAR, SINFUL, A TRAITOR and DISHONEST. {Sahih Muslim (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi), vol. 3, p. 1376, #1757}

Allah (SWT) says: : O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful.”
1. Quoting half truth, and then lying would not save you on judgment day, this is the full hadith from sahih Muslim:

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.” Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349

Funny, this hadith even defeats your claim, because if we are to understand anything from this narration, it is that Umar (RA) and Abu Bakr, were true, well-guided and a follower of truth. But I won’t belabor myself; I’ll just copy and paste (with little editing) for you, to defeat your lies:

Firstly before answering the tricky arguments of the shia, let us bring your attention to some important facts present in this narration which will never go down the throat of the shia. If we read the complete narration which the shia deliberately wouldn’t quote then following points are found.

1. We find that Ali (ra) went to Abubakar (ra) and Umar (ra) asking for his wife’s(Fatima) share from her father’s(Prophet) property. But we don’t find Ali (ra) going to these people to demand his Caliphate (OMG!). Had it been that Caliphate was the right of Ali(ra) and it was wrongfully taken away by Abubakar (ra) as the shia claim, then why didn’t Ali(ra) approached Abubakar(ra) or Umar(ra) in order to Claim his right? Was asking share of property MORE IMPORTANT for Ali(ra)than asking the right of Caliphate? The only reasonable answer to this is that Caliphate was never the right of Ali(ra), had it been so then he would have surely approached Abubakr(ra) or Umar(ra) demanding that, because guidance of Ummah is more important than the personal matter of Ali(ra). So how could Ali(ra) approach Abubakr(ra) for asking things related to personal matters but not related to religious. This proof just destroys the false claims of shiat that Ali(ra) was appointed as Caliph.

2. 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 said: “YES.”

3. The property was Managed by Abubakar(ra) and Umar(ra) IN THE SAME WAY as it was managed by PROPHET(SAW). Ali (ra) acknowledged this. (refer bukhari hadees 2884).

4. Those words were said firstly by Abbas (ra) FOR ALI(RA) and then by Umar(ra), but Ali(ra) never uttered those words. Now let us explain that why Umar (ra) had to use those words.

Firstly it was Abbas who referred to Ali as “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest.” Therefore, Umar repeated the words of Abbas verbatim in order to prove a point. Umar was making use of rhetoric. The problem is that the Shia have no hold of Arabic Balagha. If they did, they would know that direct translation in English would not give the proper understanding. If we apply the Arabic Balagha, the phrase actually means: “So you both thought Abu Bakr was a liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest?” This is an example of reductio ad absurdum. Reductio ad absurdum (Latin: “reduction to the absurd”) also known as an apagogical argument(reductio ad impossibile, or proof by contradiction) is a type of logical argument where one assumes a claim for the sake of argument, derives an absurd or ridiculous outcome, and then concludes that the original assumption must have been wrong as it led to an absurd result. The following dialogue is an example of reductio ad absurdum:

Father- Why did you start smoking?
Daughter – All my friends were doing it.
Father- You’re saying that if all your friends jumped off a cliff, you would do that too?
In this case, Umar used the exact same words (i.e. verbatim) that Abbas used for Ali in order to make a point. Umar was basically saying: “If you think Ali is such-and-such, then you must also think that Abu Bakr and Umar are also that?”

Another analogy of this is a mother and a father who had told their two sons that the capitol of France was Paris. A few days later, the two sons get in an argument over the capitol of France. One brother says the capitol is Berlin, whereas the other says the capitol is London. When they go to their father to arbitrate over this matter, one brother says about the other: “Father, can you settle this dispute of mine with my idiot brother who thinks the capitol of France is Berlin?” The father is not appalled at the fact that his two little sons forgot the capitol of France; this is a mistake that anybody can make. But what he is appalled at is the language used by this son, calling his brother an “idiot.” The father then says: “So you thought of Mom as an idiot when she said that Paris was the capitol of France, and you thought I was an idiot when I said that too?” By saying this, the father is trying to dissuade the son from jumping to conclusions about his brother’s character, because in such a process, he would also believe his mother and father to be idiots as well.

Umar was simply repeating the words of Abbas verbatim. How can the Shia ignore this “coincidence” especially in light of Arabic Balagha? It is obvious from this that Umar was proving a point, and his words should thus be analyzed in this context.

So we find that the claim of Shia that it was Ali who called Abu Bakr and Umar to be a “liar, sinful, treacherous, and dishonest” was THEIR OWN SELF MADE CLAIM, in order to deceive people. But the reality is that, it was merely Umar who said that Abbas was implying this.

5. When Ali(ra) became Caliph, he did not revoke the decision of Abu Bakr and Umar(ra) on the propety of Fadak. What stopped Ali (ra) from doing this? Why don’t the Shia hate Ali (ra) for failing to return Fadak? Why don’t they hate Ali (ra) for reaping the gains of Fadak while he was Caliph? Why the double standard with Abu Bakr and Umar(ra)? This is also a slap on the face of shias who think that Ali(ra) considered Abubakar and Umar to be liars , had it been so then nothing would have stopped him from revoking the decision of Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra). Infact Ali(ra) continued the same ruling regarding that property during his caliphate in the same was as it was done in the caliphate of Abubakr and Umar(ra). If supposedly he considered Abubakr and Umar dishonest on this matter like the shia claim then why would he follow their footsteps? On the contrary we find in the book of Shia Mutazili Scholar that Ali(ra) said:

إ ن الأمر لما وصل الأمر إلى علي ابن أبي طالب كلّم في رد فدك ، فقال : ” إني لأستحيي من الله أن أرد شيئاً منع منه أبو بكر وأمضاه عمر

When the issue of denying fadak reached Ali(during his caliphate) so he Ali’s reply (ra) was: “I am ashamed before Allah to overturn something that was prohibited by Abu Bakr and (prohibition)continued by Umar.” {ibn Abil Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, vol. 4 p. 130]
Thus the fact is that Ali(ra) never Insulted Abubakr(ra) and Umar(ra), and he is free from being included in the category of most deviated shia cult.

Empiree:
^Lol. ...

I still don't understand what exactly is albaqir's interest castigating baami(RA)

Brother mi, I don't really get him, as Muslims, the best example to follow is the Prophet (SAW), and then his companions, which also includes his ahl-l-bayt. No where have we read that the prophet (SAW) accused Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman of what AlBaqir and his cohorts accuse them of, Ali(RA) respected and gave his allegience to them.

AlBaqir:
# First, you have a task then to re-translate the verse. Don't you have the Arabic with you?

# Now lets review the ayahs altogether:

{Certainly Allah helped you in many battlefields and on the day of Hunain, when your great numbers made you vain, but they availed you nothing and the earth became strait to you notwithstanding its spaciousness, then you fled.} [surah tawbah:25]

Obviously after the fleeing of the largest number of Muslim army, then Allah sent sakinah upon the Prophet and the believers (the steadfast) [verse 26]. Quran made a clear distinction between a Muslim and a Mu'minin. Allah never sends sakinah upon "heart with fear". You need to be a believer (Mu'minin) with certain level of faith in your heart to receive His sakinah. Interestingly ALL the places in the Quran where sakinah was sent to the Prophet, it was in conjunction with "The Believers" EXCEPT surah Tawbah:40. Only the Prophet received the sakinah while his companion in the cave was denied of Allah's sakinah. Why? Because he exercise FEAR while the Prophet tells him "Do not fear, Allah is with us"! Sahih Bukhari/Muslim has a ample narrations on this.

Allah ONLY send Sakinah into a heart with degree of faith to STRENGTHENED and ADD to his established faith.

{He it is Who sent down tranquillity into the hearts of the believers that they might have more of faith added to their faith, and Allah's are the hosts of the heavens and the earth, and Allah is Knowing, Wise}[surah Fath:4]

The difference between Muslim and Mu'minin is express thus:

{The dwellers of the desert say: We believe. Say: You do not believe but say, We submit (aslamna); and faith has not yet entered into your hearts, and if you obey Allah and His Apostle, He will not diminish aught of your deeds; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.{surah Hujurat: 14}

That's why some will ever be steadfast no matter be the situation. And some will always take their flight.



# Quran use the general term not me {THEN YOU FLED}, and the pronoun in the ayah only refer to the Muslims Not the Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny)

# Prophet NEVER FLED AND NEVER RETREAT OR NEVER DEFEATED/SURRENDER.

# Ali is the self (clown) of the Prophet [Quran says], yet his Master (saws) boasts of him:{He (Ali) will not return except he achieved victory}.



First this is not about "is Bukhari only the authentic book of hadith"! Its about the most authentic of your creed. Therefore academically within your creed, while you investigate the authenticity of other books, Bukhari needs no verification.

Second, here we talk about two contrasting hadith. Bukhari vs whatever [which is never among the 6 Sunni books of hadith]. You have a choice to declare to the whole world.

Sahih Bukhari's narration of UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB FLEEING ALONG WITH OTHERS AND CLAIMING ITS ALLAH'S COMMAND [while Allah says NEVER run away from the pagan], IS IT FABRICATION or not? You cant eat your cake and have it. If you are proving by the book of God, I have no choice for all books will be examine by it and not vice versa.

It seems you skipped reading my response on this issue earlier, i'll help post it again for you to digest slowly:

Muhammad bin Ishaq, the Imam of Maghazi, narrates from ‘Aasim bin ‘Umar bin Qatadah from Abdur-Rahman bin Jabir bin ‘Abdullah from his father and in it he mentions those who remained with the Prophet (saw):
Among his family members:
1. ‘Ali
2. Abu Sufyan bin Harith bin ‘Abdul Muttalib
3. Rabi’ah bin Harith bin ‘Abdul Muttalib
4. Fadhl bin ‘Abbas
5. ‘Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib
Among others:
1. Abu Bakr
2. ‘Umar
3. Usamah bin Zaid
4. Ayman bin ‘Ubaid
It was recorded by Ibn Hisham in Seerah (2/443), Ahmad bin Hanbal in Musnad (15027) and Al-Bayhaqi in Dalail an-Nubuwwah (5/126-127). Most of the authors on Seerah do mention it.

At-Tirmidi narrated: After giving chain of narrator till Ibn Umar who said: I have seen on the day of Hunain two groups turned their backs and there was with the messenger of Allah (saw) 100 men.

Ahmed and Al-Hakim narrated from hadeeths of Abdul Rahman bin Abdullah bin Masud from his father who said: “We were with the messenger of Allah (saw) on the day of Hunain when people deserted him, and those who stood firm where 80 men from Muhajirin and Al-Ansar.

We say: There is an agreement that a group of companions remained with the Prophet (saw) and they did not flee. In a tradition narrated by Tirmidhi (1689) –Ibn Hajar said it is Hasan and Al-Albani considered it Sahih – through Ibn ‘Umar (ra) that less than hundred people remained with the Prophet (saw) during Hunain. Hence, as long as there is a possibility that a companion could be among those who were steady with the Prophet (saw) one must abstain from speculating that such and such person fled from the battlefield. If Allah wanted to character-assassin someone He would have done so by taking names but rather He forgave them. We know from the above narration that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were steady in the battlefield, but even those who are not mentioned should not be accused directly of fleeing unless if there is a proof that so and so person left the battlefield. This is the best and safe methodology based on Qur’anic principles.

Also, it is to be mentioned that after fleeing from the battlefield they returned back to the Prophet (saw). Hence, they were forgiven by Allah.
Another thing is that they did not flee because they were coward. Qur’an never calls them coward. If they were coward then how come they came to face the enemy who was larger in number? Even when they left away they returned back again to fight with the enemy. A coward never endangers his life for someone else. We know the cases of hypocrites who would leave the army before entering the battlefield or rather give excuses to not join the battle. The Hunain incident was in when the army of Hawazin all of a sudden started shooting arrows, so the Muslims were shattered and dispersed to save their life leaving aside the Messenger of Allah(saw). This no doubt was a sin but Allah had forgiven them and they again went for Tabuk to fight for the cause of Allah.

Narrated Abu Qatada: We set out in the company of Allah’s Messenger (saw) on the day (of the battle) of Hunain. When we faced the enemy, the Muslims retreated and I saw a pagan throwing himself over a Muslim. I turned around and came upon him from behind and hit him on the shoulder with the sword He (i.e. the pagan) came towards me and seized me so violently that I felt as if it were death itself, but death overtook him and he released me. I followed `Umar bin Al Khattab and asked (him), “What is wrong with the people (fleeing)?” He replied, “This is the Will of Allah,” (Sahih al-Bukhari #3142)

Sharh Muslim (by Imam Nawawi)
Imam Al-Nawawi commenting on this hadeeths said…that the retreat or defeat was in some of the army (not all).

Sharh Bukhari (by Ibn Hajar)
Similar comment was also made by Ibn Hajr in his sharh Bukhari who said: ‘and it is mentioned in the narration of Al-Laith which will follow that they were defeated, but (the defeat was) after the story which Abu Qatada mentioned, and it has been preceded in the hadeeths of Al-Bar’a that all were not defeated

Hadeeth and Books of Seerah explicitly state that Umar(ra) was among those who did not flee.

(i). We read the SAHIH Hadith in “Musnad Ahmad” volume 23 page 274 Hadith #14731:
Ya’qoub narrated from his Father from Ibn Ishaq from ‘Assim ibn ‘Umar bin Qatada from ‘Abdul-Rahman ibn Jabir from Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah: The people retreated but the Prophet(saw) was accompanied by a group from the Mouhajirun and the Ansar and his Ahlul-Bayt, Those who held their ground and stayed with him were Abu Bakr an ‘Umar and from his Ahlul-Bayt ‘Ali ibn abi Talib and al-‘Abbas bin ‘Abdul-Mutallib and his son al-Fadl and Abu Suffiyan bin al-Harith and Raba’iyah bin al-Harith and Ayman bin ‘Ubeid and he is ibn Umm-Ayman and Usamah ibn Zaid, he said: and a Man from Hawzan (until the end of the narration).

(ii). This is also mentioned in the book “Majma’a al-Zawaed” under “Kitab al-Maghazi wal Siyar” in the chapter “Ghazwat Hunein” Hadith # 10265:

(iii). Al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya of Ibn Kathir:
It mentions the names of those who stood firm with prophet…(and group of Al-Ansar: Among them Abu Bakr, Umar and Abbas…)
Similarly, we read in Tafsir Ibn Kathir:
There remained between a hundred and eighty Companions with the Prophet . These included Abu Bakr, `Umar, Al-`Abbas, `Ali, Al-Fadl bin `Abbas, Abu Sufyan bin Al-Harith, Ayman the son of Umm Ayman and Usamah bin Zayd. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

(iv). Al-Seerah Al-Nabawi of ibn Hisham:
Those who stood firm with the Messenger :
And those who stood firm with him from among the Muhajirin were Abu Bakr and Umar, and from Ahlul Bayt Ali bin Abi Talib and Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib…

(v). Tariq Al-Rusool Wal-Mulook of At-Tabari
At-Tabari narrated in his book Tariq Al-Rusool Wal-Mulook where he mentions the firmness of Abu Bakr, Umar and Ali (may Allah be pleased with them all) on the day of Al-Hunain.
There remain with Messenger of Allah (saw) group of Muhajirin and Ansar and from his Ahlul Bait. And among those who stood firm from Al-Muhajirin were Abu Bakr, Umar and from his Ahlul Bayt Ali bin Abi Talib, Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib,…

(vi). Al-Maghazi

Al-Waqidi in his book Al-Maghazi mentions hadeeths of Jabir bin Abdullah
The Messenger of Allah (saw) remained with a group of al-Muhajirin and al-Ansaar and from his Ahlul Bait Al-Abbas, Ali, Al-Fadl bin Abbas, Abu Sufyan Ibn Al-Harith and Rabee’a bin Al-Harith…. Abu Bakr and Umar.

(vii). Zaad Al-Ma’ad
Imam ibnul Qayyim(rh) in his book Zaad Al-Ma’ad mentions same hadeeths of Jabir bin Abdullah but through different narrator.
And there remain with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings upon him) group from al-Muhajirin and al-Ansaar and from his Ahlul Bait, among them who stood firm from al-Muhajirin were Abu Bakr and Umar, and from his Ahlul Bayt Ali, Al-Abbas….

(viii). Al-Seerat al-Halabiyah
The Messenger (saw) moved to his right and with him were few people, among them Abu Bakr and Umar and Ali and Abbas and his son, Al-fadel Abu Sufyan….. those who stood firm with him (saw) there are different narrations, it is said hundred, and it is said eighty, and it is said twelve, and it is said ten, and it is said three hundred.

(ix). Muhammad bin Ishaq, the Imam of Maghazi, narrates from ‘Aasim bin ‘Umar bin Qatadah from Abdur-Rahman bin Jabir bin ‘Abdullah from his father and in it he mentions those who remained with the Prophet (saw): Among his family members: ‘Ali, Abu Sufyan bin Harith bin ‘Abdul Muttalib, Rabi’ah bin Harith bin ‘Abdul Muttalib, Fadhl bin ‘Abbas, ‘Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib. Among others: Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, Usamah bin Zaid, Ayman bin ‘Ubaid [It was recorded by Ahmad bin Hanbal in Musnad (15027) and Al-Bayhaqi in Dalail an-Nubuwwah (5/126-127).]

By reading this hadeeth carefully and also after looking at other reports, the event thus can be explained in the following manner: “When the enemy launched its brutal and surprise attack on Muslim fighters, Abu Qatada was busy fighting and repelling the aggression when all of a sudden he notices that Muslims forces retreating, so in a confused state he too retreats with them. While retreating, he notices Umar(ra) among group of people (i.e. steadfast fighters) and asks him about the retreat of those Muslim fighters. To that Umar(ra) replies, “It is the decree of Allah”.

On your accusation of Umar saying it is the decree of Allah,

If the Rafidah(Saba’ees) are unaware of something called Qadha and Qadr or Al-Lauh Al-Mahfuz, then they must take some basic Islamic education before criticizing Sahaba out of ignorance. Everything which happens, good or bad is Allah’s decree upon his slave. Similarly when Umar (ra) was asked why were Muslims defeated or fleeing, his reply was of a steadfast believer, that is “It was Allah’s will or decree”
We read in Quran: {No calamity befalls on the earth or in yourselves but is inscribed in the Book of Decrees (Al-Lauh Al-Mahfuz), before We bring it into existence. Verily, that is easy for Allah}. (Quran 57:22)

Infact it was Allah’s will that Muslims should be taught a lesson, so that they never again take up the notion that victory could be gained by large numbers, but victory only comes from Allah.

[Truly Allah has given you victory on many battle fields, and on the Day of Hunain (battle) when you rejoiced at your great number but it availed you naught and the earth, vast as it is, was straitened for you, then you turned back in flight. (Quran 9:25)]

So the decree of Allah on the day of Al-Hunain was to give victory to Muslims just with few steadfast fighters (like Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali etc)..…so indeed how true were the words of the great Sahabi Umar (ra) when he said… “It is the decree of Allah”.

NB: I omitted the Arabic scripts, the fear of spam bot is the beginning of wisdom