Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mikhaeel
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Bismil View Post
    Its the opposite , majority did accept.

    The main point is that Abu Bakr & Umar did not benefit from the khilafat , material wise, so do not think there is any reason to usurp.

    There is a Hadeeth in baihaqi , which says that some people came to Ali and said to him to nominate Hassan as next khalifa , Ali said that since prophet did not nominate , he will not.
    I mean they the shia accuse the majority of the sahaba of directly disobeying a direct command from Allah and his Messenger :saw: in appointing Ali Radhi-yallaahu 'anhu as the Caliph after his death. They don't have to directly, state it, it is implied from the accusation they make.

    Leave a comment:


  • Musa Sadr
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Mikha’eel View Post
    And thank you for proving my point, you deem all those sahaba i mentioned as enemies of Ahlul Bayt. Too bad your own Imams did not agree with that, otherwise they would not be naming their children Abu Bakr, or Umar or Uthman.
    The name's were not exclusive to your caliph's at the time. Umar, Uthman and Abu Bakr unlike today were common universally used name's in that era.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bismil
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Musa Sadr View Post
    There's no but's or middle ground, did Abu Bakr appoint Umar as his successor, yes/no?.
    Yes , he did .

    But , is that such a big sin ? Remember prophet did not nominate anyone , also did not tell how should one nominate a khalifa.

    Leave a comment:


  • candyapple
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Bismil View Post
    Its the opposite , majority did accept.

    The main point is that Abu Bakr & Umar did not benefit from the khilafat , material wise, so do not think there is any reason to usurp.

    There is a Hadeeth in baihaqi , which says that some people came to Ali and said to him to nominate Hassan as next khalifa , Ali said that since prophet did not nominate , he will not.
    If rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wassallam nominated then it would have been taken as compulsory that all Khalifas nominate. Hence rasulullah sallallahu alaihi wassallam kept that option open. It's not illegal to nominate.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bismil
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Mikha’eel View Post
    It matters to them, they will until the day of Judgement, insist upon the idea that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman usurped the Khilafah from Ali, that they and the majority of sahaba that supported their Khilafah did nothing, inspite of supposedly having heard the Prophet :saw: affirm Ali as the next leader. The mere suggestion is an open slander against the honour of most of the sahaba,
    Its the opposite , majority did accept.

    The main point is that Abu Bakr & Umar did not benefit from the khilafat , material wise, so do not think there is any reason to usurp.

    There is a Hadeeth in baihaqi , which says that some people came to Ali and said to him to nominate Hassan as next khalifa , Ali said that since prophet did not nominate , he will not.

    Leave a comment:


  • candyapple
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Bismil View Post
    That hadeeth is not about chastity , its about the surah tahrim .
    I know. But what his trying to do is find loopholes to claim she wasn't noble thereby ultimately trying to support what the shias say about A'isha.

    I agree with the surah tahrim incident. We all agree she was human just like every other sahabi, but it doesn't mean she's disliked by Allah.

    You get him quoting the verse where Allah warns the wives of Rasulullah about the double punishment. See through his facade.

    Leave a comment:


  • candyapple
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Musa Sadr View Post
    There's no but's or middle ground, did Abu Bakr appoint Umar as his successor, yes/no?.
    It boils down to Allah's Qadr. Do you believe in Allah's Qadr?
    Then accept it. If you do believe in Qadrullah

    Leave a comment:


  • Mikhaeel
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Musa Sadr View Post
    There's no but's or middle ground, did Abu Bakr appoint Umar as his successor, yes/no?.
    I don't see how what i said could be anymore clear.

    Leave a comment:


  • candyapple
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Musa Sadr View Post
    Does him never nominating his own people to any important post's exclude him appointing Umar as his successor?.

    "And do not say of those who are slain in the way of Allah that they are dead. Instead, they are alive, but you perceive not." (2:154)

    Fine. Passed away from this life :)

    Leave a comment:


  • Mikhaeel
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Musa Sadr View Post
    That is true, we reject hadith's from people we deem to be enemies of Ahlul Bayt.

    And thank you for proving my point, you deem all those sahaba i mentioned as enemies of Ahlul Bayt. Too bad your own Imams did not agree with that, otherwise they would not be naming their children Abu Bakr, or Umar or Uthman.

    Leave a comment:


  • Musa Sadr
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Mikha’eel View Post
    He consulted with other major sahaba, before he appointed him, and it was the best decision he could have made because the rule of Umar was a blessing and mercy for the entire Ummah, though no doubt you Shia would claim otherwise.
    There's no but's or middle ground, did Abu Bakr appoint Umar as his successor, yes/no?.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mikhaeel
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Musa Sadr View Post
    Does him never nominating his own people to any important post's exclude him appointing Umar as his successor?.

    "And do not say of those who are slain in the way of Allah that they are dead. Instead, they are alive, but you perceive not." (2:154)
    He consulted with other major sahaba, before he appointed him, and it was the best decision he could have made because the rule of Umar was a blessing and mercy for the entire Ummah, though no doubt you Shia would claim otherwise.

    Leave a comment:


  • Musa Sadr
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Mikha’eel View Post
    Nice story, too bad its false.

    You only accept the narration of sahaba that you deem to be loyal to Ali & Ahlul Bayt, the rest of them you reject. You won't be finding narrations from Umar, Uthman, Talha, Zubayr, Aisha, Hafsah, Um Habiba, Abu Hurraira, Ibn Umar,Anas Ibn Malik, Amr ibn Al Aas [may Allah be pleased with them]
    That is true, we reject hadith's from people we deem to be enemies of Ahlul Bayt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mikhaeel
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Bismil View Post
    Brother , what difference does it make after centuries whether Ali or Abu Bakr should have been the Khalifa or not ? They are all dead now.

    Will any debate change anything now ?

    Though I personally rate Ali ( as ) as highly as well as ahle bayat , but at the same time you cannot deny the contibution of Abu bakr ( Ra ) towards Islam. Look at the life he lead and contrast that with banu Ummayah rulers , Abu Bakr ( ra ) lived at very small amount of money , he fought a lot of battles for Islam , in fact never nominated his own people to any important post.

    There is just no reason to doubt the Iman of Badr sahabis , they are the Sabiqoons.

    Please do think about this . Its a sincere advice.
    It matters to them, they will until the day of Judgement, insist upon the idea that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman usurped the Khilafah from Ali, that they and the majority of sahaba that supported their Khilafah did nothing, inspite of supposedly having heard the Prophet :saw: affirm Ali as the next leader. The mere suggestion is an open slander against the honour of most of the sahaba,

    Leave a comment:


  • Musa Sadr
    replied
    Re: Shi'ite VS sunni Islam

    Originally posted by Bismil View Post
    Brother , what difference does it make after centuries whether Ali or Abu Bakr should have been the Khalifa or not ? They are all dead now.

    Will any debate change anything now ?

    Though I personally rate Ali ( as ) as highly as well as ahle bayat , but at the same time you cannot deny the contibution of Abu bakr ( Ra ) towards Islam. Look at the life he lead and contrast that with banu Ummayah rulers , Abu Bakr ( ra ) lived at very small amount of money , he fought a lot of battles for Islam , in fact never nominated his own people to any important post.

    There is just no reason to doubt the Iman of Badr sahabis , they are the Sabiqoons.

    Please do think about this . Its a sincere advice.
    Does him never nominating his own people to any important post's exclude him appointing Umar as his successor?.

    "And do not say of those who are slain in the way of Allah that they are dead. Instead, they are alive, but you perceive not." (2:154)

    Leave a comment:

Collapse

Edit this module to specify a template to display.

Working...
X