Want some answers please..Shi'ite Polemics

[trustE]

Salam

I am new and curious about islam and islamic sects and would like to have some aswers so I can move forward inshallah and learn more...

Ok, first off I would like to ask what "sunnislam" means really?
Why would you choose "sunniislam" as opposed to other schools of thought if someone could explain?

Is salafi/wahabism also included as sunni?

Lastly, why is there differences in shiaislam and sunniislam as to which "people" ones holds more near at heart after the Prophet(saw)(ie. sahabas vs progeny)??


I would be most grateful for help in this,
Fi aman Allah

[bihari]

1-Sunni islam-
Sunni is a abriged version of actual word ahlesunnah wal jama'at - meaning on the path followed by sahbah raziallah ajmain and other salaf

Shia and sunni ?

It was a political difference aggrevated into a religious difference- shia'ism now being deviated so much in thier beliefs that they are no more considerd muslims by many..

Just to give you some hint--

Shia's abuse holy sahbah raziallah , and attribute special powers to thier imams ( a belief in contradiction with khatm e nabuwat ) whereas Ahle sunnah give equal love to all sahbah which include ahlebait --

This was the shortest answer i could have given - as i am short of time- hope some knowldgeable will continue from here

wasalam

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

Ok, first off I would like to ask what "sunnislam" means really?
Why would you choose "sunniislam" as opposed to other schools of thought if someone could explain?

Is salafi/wahabism also included as sunni?

as salamu alaykum

please read the following articles:

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/ahlsunna.htm

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/madhhabstlk.htm

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/ahm/newmadhh.htm

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/mhfatwa.htm

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/ikhtilaf.htm

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/ashari.htm

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=2252&CATE=24

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=3330&CATE=120

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=1685&CATE=91

that should get you started insha'Allah!!

[Muawiyah]

Rasoolallah (Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam) said: "Indeed the Children of Israil split up into seventy-one sects and my Ummah will split up into seventy-three, all of them are in the Fire except one." It was said: What is the one? He said: "ma ana alyhi wa ashabi" (That which I and my Companions are upon.) - Jami' at-Tirmidhee (no. 2792)

Ahl us Sunnah wal Jam'ah are the saved sect who stick to the way of the Messenger Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam and his companions. This was the way followed by the progeny of the Prophet Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam and Shi'ites (partisans) of `Ali (Radhi Allahu `anhu). Thus Ibn Abbas Radhi Allahu `anhu who was at the same time a companion of the Messenger Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam, a member of the family of the Messenger and a partisan (shi'ite) of `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu, said in commentry on the ayah 106 of Surah Aal Imran: {"On a day whereon faces become whitened and faces become blackened. Then as for those whose faces shall have become blackened: disbelieved ye after your profession of belief! taste the torment for that ye have been disbelieving."} that the people whose faces will be brightened on the day of Judgement will be the Ahl us Sunnah and those whose faces will be darkened will be the Ahl ul Bida'h (Tafseer Ibn Katheer and others.)





وقوله تعالى: {يوم تبيض وجوه وتسود وجوه} يعني يوم القيامة حين تبيض وجوه أهل السنة
والجماعة، وتسوّد وجوه أهل البدعة والفرقة، قاله ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما.
تفسير ابن کثير آل عمران ١٠٦

As for the twelver shi'ites of today, we do not accept their claim that they are the partisans of `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu and the family of the Messenger Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam, because their creed is contradicted by what has authentically reached us from `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu and the family of the Messenger. Similarly their claim to be on the madhhab of the Prophet's family in matters of jurisprudence does not bear up to scrutiny because firstly the scholars among the Prophet's family had many differing opinions on matters of jurisprudence, so the "Madhhab of the Ahl ul Bayt" does not exist in the first place!. Secondly most of the narrations the twelver attribute to some of the Ahl ul Bayt are all narrated through known liars and corrupt individuals whose words are inadmissible in the Deen, this is a fact that has been mentioned in shi'ite books as well, shi'ite books are full of quotes from the Prophet's progeny cursing the narrators of Shism and declaring them to be liars!

The "Salafis" of today are people who claim to be on the Madhhab of the Salaf (the three pious early generations of Muslims), but just like the claim of the Shi'ites, that they are on the Madhhab of the Ahl ul Bayt, the Salafi's claim does not bear up to scrutiny either. Because firstly the Salaf had differing opinions in matters of jurisprudence and secondly the Salafi's understanding of the words of the Salaf differs from that of the hundreds of generations of Muslims scholars who lived between the time of the Salafis and the time of the Salaf i.e the very people through whom these words of the Salaf have reached the Salafis.

[Gajji]

Sorry if this sounds offensive, but is trustE a non-muslim? In which case, the replies so far are a bit confusing as they contain a lot of jargon that many non-muslims wouldn't understand (and some muslims too!).

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

:insh: maybe I can help to shed some light on this issue. I became Muslim just over 2 years ago and have already been through the experience of different groups (most notably the Salafis / Wahhabis and Twelver Shi'a). :alhamd: I managed to find Sunni Islam in the end.

My reason for choosing Sunni Islam... I feel that none of the other sects can rival Sunni Islam, as it has the most authentic and rigourous scholarship.

In Sunni Islam, we can ascertain the authenticity of Sacred Knowledge that comes to us via two key concepts.

These concepts are 'chain of transmission' (isnad in Arabic) and 'authorisation' (ijaza in Arabic).

If a scholar is part of an isnad (chain of transmission), that means he is part of a chain of teachers and students which traces its origin back to the Companions (may God be well pleased with them) of the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace), and hence ultimately to the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace) himself.

If a scholar has an ijaza (authorisation) in a particular Islamic science, this means that his teacher is satisfied by his student's ability to teach and that he may transmit knowledge from hiim in that particular Islamic science.

So, in this sense, the ijazas (authorisations) form the links that bind an isnad (chain) together.

So the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace) authorised the Companions (may God be well pleased with them) to teach religious knowledge, and they in turn authorised their students, who in turn authorised their students etc.

Also, Sunnis understand that the scholars are the inheritors of the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace). By this, I mean that we place a lot of emphasis on taking Sacred Knowledge from those who are suitably knowldegeable and qualified to teach it - as trying to find out about certain rulings or stances in Islam on our own (without the necessary knowledge and understanding), could lead us and others astray (may God protect us from that).

Another reason I chose Sunni Islam is because it is very balanced in many respects, two of these being:

1) We have great love for the Companions and the Family of the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace) and for the Prophet himself (God bless him and give him peace), and as such we take Sacred Knowledge from both groups.

I, and I'm sure many others too, recognise that learning sacred knowledge from those who are of the Family of the Prophet (God bless them and give them peace) is of great benefit. This is shown in the history of Sunni Islam - many, many of those who descended from the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace) were individuals who contributed vastly to our religion (may God be well pleased with all of them!).

However, we don't restrict ourselves to taking knowledge from the Family of the Prophet. I think this is the main difference between us and the Shi'a (although they may also have a different definition of who is part of the Progeny of the Prophet (God bless him and give him peace)... and God knows best).

2) Sunni Islam, unlike some of the groupings, is very balanced in that we recognise that religion (din) has different facets, and this is confirmed by a very famous and rigorously authenticated Hadith from our Prophet (God bless him and give him peace). Whereas some other groups would maintain the position that Islam is just an outward form, we would say that religion (din) consists of three main parts - faith (iman), obedience (islam) and purification (ihsan). So a believer is someone who has faith, who adheres to the Sacred Law that has been revealed and who strives to purify his heart and his mind and rid himself of all bad traits and habits.

Generally, to my knowledge (and God knows best), Salafis and Wahhabis are not classified as Sunni.

This is because the main criteria for being Sunni are:

- Having beliefs that conform to the established theological schools (as far as I know, these are the Ash'ari, Maturidi, Athari schools).

- Following one of the four established legal schools (the Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki and Hanbali schools) for matters pertaining to implementing the Sacred Law.

From what the scholars have said, Salafis / Wahhabis do not generally meet these criteria.

At this point, I just want to clarify that although the scholars have said that Salafis / Wahhabis / Shi'a are not Sunni, they have also said that this does not necessarily mean they are outside the fold of Islam. Declaring someone to be a disbeliever is an enormity in Islam, and is not something that should be done lightly by any means.

I could probably write more... but I think I've gone on long enough. :)

If I've made any mistakes, please feel free to correct me.

:insh: I hope this information is useful in aiding your understanding of this issue. And God knows best.

:salam:

Simon

[mospike]

Shukran for the info. May Allah reward you!@!

[trustE]

Salams

Thanks for your answers. Someone asked whether I was muslim or not...well I would say I'm a very new muslim. I don't consider myself ready to choose any type of sub-religion before I have seen different angles and before I have a fair chance of learning in-depth about everything I need to know. After that inshaAllah, I will see what's right for me.

From your answers I have concluded that:
- subreligion of sunni follow the path of sahaba/salaf
-as for why you choose sunni for subreligion I got some points...
-you "love" the sahabas ajmain and the ahle-e-bait, still the foremost and closest "people" to sunni are the sahabas ajmain

As for the various comments on shiaislam, these are not immediately relevant at this point and each subreligion is of course best to inquire and discuss with it's own followers. Thanks Simon Iskander for your personal view points and for pointing out the danger in proclaiming disbelief,
and also thanks to the rest of you as well for posting.

For the time being I want to consider myself "plain" muslim w/o adhering sunni/shia as subreligion indefinetly.
Let me leave with a few questions:
-Is it alright to criticize any of the sahabas or is it all or none for sunni?
-Why do sunni usually "Sallallah aleyhi wa sallam" after the Prophet and not include his family like shias do?
-Is the caliphate what a sunni should consider right for leadership of an islamic country?

Thank you for taking time
Salams

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

Let me leave with a few questions:
-Is it alright to criticize any of the sahabas or is it all or none for sunni?
-Why do sunni usually "Sallallah aleyhi wa sallam" after the Prophet and not include his family like shias do?
-Is the caliphate what a sunni should consider right for leadership of an islamic country?

Thank you for taking time
Salams


salams

1. no, the sahaba differed, and although we may accept the opinions of one over another, we never criticise any sahaba.

2. 'sallallahu alayhi wa sallam' is reserved for the prophet, and the companions themselves used to say it. we say 'alayhi-salam' for other prophets, and are permitted to say 'alayhi-salam' for ali. however, for the sahaba and salaf in general, we say 'radiyallahu anhu'.

3. caliphate is obligatory for muslims. this entails some sort of government which implements shari'a. the actual make-up of that government is open to interpretation.

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

I have heard some Sunni scholars use the salutation 'sallallahu 'alayhi wa 'ala alihi wa sallam'. One example being Shaykh Habib 'Ali al-Jifri (may God preserve him).

Does anyone have any information on whether it is recommended to use this salutation?

And God knows best.

:jazak:

:ws:

Simon

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

I have heard some Sunni scholars use the salutation 'sallallahu 'alayhi wa 'ala alihi wa sallam'. One example being Shaykh Habib 'Ali al-Jifri (may God preserve him).

Does anyone have any information on whether it is recommended to use this salutation?


salams

i have also heard the following salutation used by sunni scholars:

'sallallahu t'ala 'alayhi wa alihi [wa sahbihi] wa sallam'

...i believe this is simply the recommended salutation with a bit extra, which no doubt earns extra reward..

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:



As for the various comments on shiaislam, these are not immediately relevant at this point and each subreligion is of course best to inquire and discuss with it's own followers.

I would agree wholeheartedly with that statement. The information I gave was only what I had gathered from talking to some Shi'a brothers I used to know.

:ws:

Simon

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

Also the articles linked to in post #3 above are a much better source of information than what I've written.

:ws:

Simon

[trustE]

Salams again : )


1. no, the sahaba differed, and although we may accept the opinions of one over another, we never criticise any sahaba.

2. 'sallallahu alayhi wa sallam' is reserved for the prophet, and the companions themselves used to say it. we say 'alayhi-salam' for other prophets, and are permitted to say 'alayhi-salam' for ali. however, for the sahaba and salaf in general, we say 'radiyallahu anhu'.

3. caliphate is obligatory for muslims. this entails some sort of government which implements shari'a. the actual make-up of that government is open to interpretation.

Thanks for the repy Shaykhs-Pir Sahib very much. Still I would like some more clarification if possible since things are not all clear to me.

1)Do you mean differed as in bad deeds? And are you saying as a sunni it's accepted for me to have my own opinion about certain caliphs then? I intrepret that as being able to constructively criticize some deeds which I find wrong then or? Not being disrespectful, rather being able to openly only criticize I mean. It's still not clear to me, jazzakAllah khair please clarify.

2)I see, and it's not even an issue to me : ), I was merely curious since I have noticed that shia always do salute the Prophet(S)) in that manner so therefore I thought I'd ask what the reason was. I myself prefer to use the whole salutation including family like they do, since there are hadiths that say the Prophet(S) doesn't accept otherwise/or highly recommend it.

3)Do you mean I have to agree that the caliphate as displayed by history is the best or how should my standpoint be as sunni? I believe in democracy combined with sharia. I am critical to the ummayad dynasti because I think it represents dictatorship. "Some sort of government that implements shari'a"? Even dictatorial one with sharia?? Is it really necessary to believe in caliphate for sunni as the rolemodel for leadership? Sorry if I repeat the question but I have to confess I need clarification on this in a straightforward manner.

As a last note, can someone perhaps direct me to info/article on what Jihad is? I know what it is but I would like to read more.

Thanks a lot all of you for helping me out. I will continue my "studies"...
Salams

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:


1)Do you mean differed as in bad deeds? And are you saying as a sunni it's accepted for me to have my own opinion about certain caliphs then? I intrepret that as being able to constructively criticize some deeds which I find wrong then or? Not being disrespectful, rather being able to openly only criticize I mean. It's still not clear to me, jazzakAllah khair please clarify.

I think what brother Shaykhs-Pir Sahib (and Allah knows best) meant is that there were sometimes disagreements between Companions, and also that they differed in their opinions regarding legal issues.

I think one situation you may have heard of is the disagreement between Sayyiduna Ali :anhu: (and may Allah enoble his face) and Sayyiduna Mu'awiyah :anhu:.

The article linked below will hopefully :insh: explain the fact that Sunnis should have good opinions of all the Companions, and be silent regarding the disagreements between them.

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=4072&CATE=91

Hope this helps :insh:.

:ws:

Simon

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

1)Do you mean differed as in bad deeds? And are you saying as a sunni it's accepted for me to have my own opinion about certain caliphs then? I intrepret that as being able to constructively criticize some deeds which I find wrong then or? Not being disrespectful, rather being able to openly only criticize I mean. It's still not clear to me, jazzakAllah khair please clarify.

i meant they differed in legal judgments not in bad deeds.

and as a sunni, we respect all the sahaba. as for caliphs, well the later ones were not sahaba.

it would be permissible to believe that certain sahaba made 'mistakes' although the sunni ulama explain that this was their ijtihad (legal judgement) for which they would be rewarded, and rather than critising them or shunning them for that mistake, we accept that this was their ijtihad, and the ijtihad of another sahabi was preferred. with regards to the Sayyiduna Mu'awiyah and Sayyiduna `Ali fitna, i have heard sunni ulama openly state that Sayyiduna Mu'awiyah was wrong, although they do not say he sinned, nor do they speak ill of him. rather, he, like all other sahaba, still maintains his status as a sahabi.


3)Do you mean I have to agree that the caliphate as displayed by history is the best or how should my standpoint be as sunni? I believe in democracy combined with sharia. I am critical to the ummayad dynasti because I think it represents dictatorship. "Some sort of government that implements shari'a"? Even dictatorial one with sharia?? Is it really necessary to believe in caliphate for sunni as the rolemodel for leadership? Sorry if I repeat the question but I have to confess I need clarification on this in a straightforward manner.

The leadership of Muhammad, sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was the best, followed by the khulafa rashidun after him (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali).

this is the optimal khilafah, and it succeeded because not only were the leaders great men, the people were also model citizens.

when you say you believe in democracy and shari'a, you need to elaborate. there are certainly principles of democracy which are already evident in the selection of khalifa. although democracy in itself is not entirely compatible with shari'a, in my opinion. although you would need to speak to a scholar about this.


As a last note, can someone perhaps direct me to info/article on what Jihad is? I know what it is but I would like to read more.


have a look in the sunniforum archives. will haev a look for articles

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

Is Sayyiduna Hasan :anhu: regarded as being one of the Rightly Guided Caliphs?

Jalaluddin al-Suyuti :anhu: seemed to indicate that Sayyiduna Hasan :anhu: was, in his book 'The Caliphs who took the Right Way' (even though Sayyiduna Hasan :anhu: only ruled for 6 months).

This may be something to do with the oft-narrated Hadith about the (rightly guided) caliphate lasting for 30 years after Sayyiduna Muhammad :saw:, and after that there being kings.

Anyone have any information on this?

:jazak:

:ws:

Simon

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

:Is Sayyiduna Hasan :anhu: regarded as being one of the Rightly Guided Caliphs?

Jalaluddin al-Suyuti :anhu: seemed to indicate that Sayyiduna Hasan :anhu: was, in his book 'The Caliphs who took the Right Way' (even though Sayyiduna Hasan :anhu: only ruled for 6 months).



shaykh muhammad al-yaqoubi says yes.

[trustE]

Salams
Thanks again, hope you're patient with me because I'm new afterall.


I think what brother Shaykhs-Pir Sahib (and Allah knows best) meant is that there were sometimes disagreements between Companions, and also that they differed in their opinions regarding legal issues.

I think one situation you may have heard of is the disagreement between Sayyiduna Ali (and may Allah enoble his face) and Sayyiduna Mu'awiyah .

The article linked below will hopefully explain the fact that Sunnis should have good opinions of all the Companions, and be silent regarding the disagreements between them.

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view....ID=4072&CATE=91


There is scholarly consensus, as is the position of Sunni Islam, that

Sayyiduna Ali (Allah be pleased with him) was correct in the differences

that existed between him and Sayyiduna Mu`awiya

I don't realise what it explains to be honest, nor the sentiment(?). That someone is considered correct in a heavy disagreement still no stand should be taken because both sides are right?? How can one be right but still both parts be right?? That is contradictary.


The position of our Imams of the Ash`ari school of Sunni beliefs is

that Sayyiduna Mu`awiya (Allah be pleased with him) is from the

Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). All the

Companions of high rank in the Shariah, because of the honor of having

met our Noble Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace),

and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) died pleased with them


I am not interested in claming anyone a disbeliever, it is not relevant all I wanted clarified was why I have to be silent to become a sunni about critical aspects? I am used to questioning things rationally that is part of whom I am. Also, this happened long after the Prophets(S) death so how would anyone know whether the Prophet(S) died pleased before anything had happened in the first place...as this is one of the reasons all sahaba are in "high rank" together with having met him, please explain.


Our duty is to be silent regarding the dispute between the Companions(Allah be pleased with them), and to have a good opinion of them all.

On exactly what grounds?
Does this means one is not considered a sunni if one is not agreeing 100%?

Is it not correct that Sayedna Ali(as) was condemned in the prayers for 80 years?? Is it wrong to criticize someone in constructively, and on basis of evidence and healthy reasoning? I want to follow the Quran and Sunnah only.

Please explain this clearly inshaAllah
Thanks for your time

Salams

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:


shaykh muhammad al-yaqoubi says yes

:jazak:

:ws:

Simon

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

:mash: a lot of questions. I doubt I can answer all of them, but I'll try my best :insh:.

I hoped the article may help... though from reading it again, it does seem that it wasn't completely relevant to your question. I apologise for that.

I think the concept of having a good opinion of the Companions (may Allah be well pleased with them) of the Prophet :saw: essentially goes back to the issue of making excuses for and having good opinions of other people, whenever reasonably possible.

By that, I mean we should have a good opinion of them unless they have clearly done something very wrong. But even then, passing judgements upon people (and advising or correcting them) are things that require a great deal of sincerity, wisdom and understanding.

The scholars of Sunni Islam have always maintained that this is very important.

So if this is the case in relation to other people we know and come across in our daily lives, imagine the enormity of attributing wrongdoing to the Companions (may Allah be well pleased with them) of the Prophet :saw:!

The Prophet :saw: has mentioned in many rigourously authenticated Hadiths that having bad or dubious opinions of any of the first 3 generations of Muslims is a great enormity - as according to the Prophet :saw:, these are the best 3 generations.

Also, to approach this issue from a different angle, how does it benefit us to know which companion was correct and which was wrong? Will Allah ask us about this on the Day of Judgement?

As for the various ranks of the Companions (may Allah be well pleased with them), I'm not really qualified to comment on that.

Shaykh Amjad Rasheed (may Allah preserve him) did say that there are different ranks, and the position of a particular companion in those ranks would depend on his or her contribution to the religion.

Maybe one of the more knowledge bros / sisters would be able to help with this :insh:.

I had heard about Sayyiduna 'Ali (may Allah be well pleased with him and enoble his face) being cursed... though I don't know the details of this.

I do know that Shaykh Hamza Yusuf (may Allah preserve him) said in one of his talks that Caliph 'Umar bin 'Abdul 'Aziz (may Allah be well pleased him) was the one who got this stopped though.


I want to follow the Quran and Sunnah only

Could you please clarify what you mean by the above statement?

And Allah knows best.

:ws:

Simon

[Muawiyah]

I don't realise what it explains to be honest, nor the sentiment(?). That someone is considered correct in a heavy disagreement still no stand should be taken because both sides are right?? How can one be right but still both parts be right?? That is contradictary.

Oh my! you seem very interested and well versed in shi'ite polemics. Other new muslims are mostly interested in learning to make wudhu :).

To answer your question:

When we say Sayyidina `Ali radhi Allahu `anhu was right, we mean that Haqq was with both groups while the Haqq was greater on the side of `Ali radhi Allahu `anhu






عن أبي سعيد ؛ أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ذكر قوما يكونون في أمته. يخرجون في فرقة من الناس. سيماهم التحالق. قال: هم شر الخلق (أو من أشر الخلق). يقتلهم أدنى الطائفتين إلى الحق... قال أبو سعيد: وأنتم قتلتموهم. يا أهل العراق !

- صحيح مسلم باب ذكر الخوارج وصفاتهم


From Abu Sa`eed al-Khudri Radhi Allaahu `anhu {he said}:

Nabi Sallallahu `alayhi wa Sallam spoke of a group from his ummah, which will emerge from amongst the rival parties of the people. They will be distinguished by their shaved heads, He {sallallahu `alayhi wa Sallam} said: They will be the worst creatures, ({or He Sallallahu `alyhi wa sallam said} that they will be among the very worst of the creation). They will be killed by the party that is closer to the truth among the two parties...Abu Sa`eed Radhi Allaahu `anhu said: "You are the ones who killed them Oh people of Iraq"
- Sahih Muslim Kitab uz-Zakah bab Zikr ul Khawarij

This shows that the truth lay with both of them, but the stance of `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu was more righteous than that of Muawiyah Radhi Allahu `anhu.


In exactly what grounds?
Does this means one is not considered a sunni if one is not agreeing 100%?

We have many explicit ahadeeth of Rasoolullah Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam forbidding criticism of his companions. And yes one is not considered a Sunni if he or she reviles any of the companions..


Is it not correct that Sayedna Ali(as) was condemned in the prayers for 80 years?? Is it wrong to criticize someone in constructively, and on basis of evidence and healthy reasoning?

There is a narration in Sahih Bukhari:

A man came to Sahl bin Sa`d and said, "This is so-and-so," meaning the Governor of Medina, "He is calling `Ali bad names near the pulpit." Sahl asked, "What is he saying?" He (i.e. the man) replied, "He calls him (i.e. `Ali) Abu Turab." Sahl laughed and said, "By Allah, none but the Prophet called him by this name and no name was dearer to `Ali than this." So I asked Sahl to tell me more, saying, "O Abu `Abbas! How (was this name given to `Ali)?" Sahl said, "`Ali went to Fatima and then came out and slept in the Mosque. The Prophet asked Fatima, "Where is your cousin?" She said, "In the Mosque." The Prophet went to him and found that his (i.e. `Ali's) covering sheet had slipped of his back and dust had soiled his back. The Prophet started wiping the dust off his back and said twice, "Get up! O Abu Turab (i.e. O. man with the dust).

It shows the Marwan used to refer to `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu as "Abu Turab", people who did not know that it was a name beloved to `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu mistook it for cursing. There are other narrations through which shi'ites try to prove that it was a widespread practice among the Ummayad rulers to curse `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu, but none of them has been reliably transmitted.

[trustE]

Salams

Thank you Simon for your straightforward replies to me, they are greatly appreciated.


I think the concept of having a good opinion of the Companions (may Allah be well pleased with them) of the Prophet essentially goes back to the issue of making excuses for and having good opinions of other people, whenever reasonably possible.

This is a very nice thought, it is sympahetic. The whole reason to my inquiry was a result of my first posting where I stated that I was new to islam and was interested in knowing about the different sects of islam.

1-Sunni islam-
Sunni is a abriged version of actual word ahlesunnah wal jama'at - meaning on the path followed by sahbah raziallah ajmain and other salaf

Ahl us Sunnah wal Jam'ah are the saved sect who stick to the way of the Messenger Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam and his companions

If a scholar is part of an isnad (chain of transmission), that means he is part of a chain of teachers and students which traces its origin back to the Companions
From this I concluded the importance of sahabas for the subreligion sunni as a whole.

to approach this issue from a different angle, how does it benefit us to know which companion was correct and which was wrong? Will Allah ask us about this on the Day of Judgement?
As it stands that the Companions is a heavy foundation for this subreligion(as I have come to know) I wanted to question as to what is wrong in reasoning critically about certain of these rolemodels whose path one should follow as sunni. For me as being new to Islam, I am constantly reading all day long for several months to learn...I can't learn if I don't ask right? These are my questions and my intention is to find truth and find peace in my heart thats all. I don't know what the Almighty Lord will ask me on the Day of Judgement. But I'm sure devotion in finding truth will not be surpassed! InshaAllah I will find answers to my questions, I only want to serve Allah the best I can and to find peace in my heart, I hope Allah gives me the strength and endurance I need to do so!

I had heard about Sayyiduna 'Ali (may Allah be well pleased with him and enoble his face) being cursed... though I don't know the details of this.
This is some of what I have read, these are sunni ref. How can this be?

Sahih Muslim, Chapter of Virtues of Companions, Section of Virtues of Ali - see Chapter p1284, Tradition #5916
Muawiyah, the son of Abu Sufyan, gave ORDER to Sa'd, and told him: "What prevents you that you are refraining from cursing Abu Turab (nickname of Ali)?" Sa'd replied: "Don't you remember that the Prophet said three things about (the virtue of) Ali? So I will never curse Ali."

Al Bidayah wa al Nahayah" page 341 Volume 7 the Chapter "The virtues of 'Ali" (http://history.al-islam.com/display.asp?f=bdy01752.htm)
”.…Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas said to Mu'awiya you have sat me next to you on your throne and begun to curse Hadhrath 'Ali…."

Sunan Ibn Majah page 12 Dhikr 'Ali (http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=5&ID=57837&SearchText=%D8%B3%D8%B9%D8%AF%20%D8%A8%D9%86%20%D8 %A3%D8%A8%D9%8A%20%D9%88%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%B5%20%D9%8 5%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%88%D9%8A%D9%87&SearchType=root&Scope=all&Offset=100&SearchLevel=QBE)
"On his way to Hajj, Sad met Mu'awiya and his companions mentioned 'Ali upon which Mu'awiya showed disrespect towards Ali, Sad got angry and asked 'why do you say such things?'"
Shaykh AlAlbani says the hadith in ibn majah mentioned in the article is sahih
Reference:
Book Name: Sahih Sunnan Ibn Majah Ba-Iktisaar al-Sanad
Author: Muhammad Nasirud Din Albani.asp
Publishe: Al-Maktab al-Tarbiyyah Al-Arabi, Riadh.

In Tarikh Kamil Volume 1 page 203 Chapter "Dhikr Sulh Hasan" we read that during the negotiations with Mu'awiya:
"Hasan placed a condition that Mu'awiya stop the practice of cursing 'Ali, a condition that he rejected. Hasan then asked that he refrain from cursing 'Ali in his presence. Mu'awiya agreed but did not fulfil this condition either".
(This tradition can also be found in History of Tabari, "The Khilafat of Muawiyah" Rendering of Allegainace of al Hasan" Pg. 5.)

Moreover, same account of Muawiyyah’s cursing Ali in presence of his family is found in the following books:

Also see this hadith:

Ibn Kathir (al-Badaya wa al-Nahaya) in his book on Imam Hassan (as):
"When Marwan was a governor of Muawiyyah in Madina, he used to do Curse Hadhrat Ali (as) on each Friday from the Minbar. And Hadhrat Hassan bin Ali said to him: "Allah then cursed your father by the tongue of His messenger when you were in his "Sulub" (loin) and has said that Curse of Allah be upon Hakam and his progeny.
Albadaya wa Alnahaya, Ibn Kathir, vol. 8, page 259 (http://www.al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.asp?BID=251&CID=134&SW=%DA%E1%ED%C7#SR1)

al-Tabari reported:

When Muawiyah Ibn Abi Sufyan put al-Mughairah Ibn Shubah in charge of Kufah in Jumada 41 (September 2- October 30, 661), he summoned him. After praising and glorifying God, he said:
"Now then, indeed a forbearing person has been admonished in the past... The wise might do what you want without instruction. Although I have wanted to advise you about many things, I left them alone, trusting in your discernment of what pleases me, what helps my regime and what sets my subjects [raiyyah] on the right path. I would continue to advise you about a quality of yours- do not refrain from abusing Ali and criticizing him, not from asking God's mercy upon Uthman and His forgiveness for him. Continue to shame the companions of Ali, keep at a distance, and don't listen to them. Praise the faction of Uthman, bring them near, and listen to them."
History of Tabari, English version, events of year 51 AH, Execution of Hujr Ibn Adi, v18, pp 122-123

The Messenger of Muawiyah then came to them with orders to release six and to kill eight, telling them:
We have been ordered to let you disavow Ali and curse him. If you do so, we shall release you, and if you refuse, we shall kill you.History of Tabari, English version, events of year 51 AH, v18, p149

In her letter, Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet (saw) wrote to Muawiyah: "...You are cursing Allah and His messenger on your minbar, and that is because you are cursing Ali Ibn Abi Talib and whomever loves him, and I am a witness that Allah and His messengerloved him." But no one paid any attention to what she said.al-Aqd al-Fareed, v2, p300

Sunnan Abu Dawud: (http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=4&Rec=5207)
… Al-Maqdam Bin Mo’di Karb and Amro Ibn Al-Aswad and a Man from Bani Asad from the people of Qitisreen came to Mo’wiya Ibn Abi Sufyan and Mom’wiya said to Al-Miqdam: “Did you know that Al-Hasan Ibn Ali has died?” So Al-miqdam didn’t answer, but a man said (to him): “Do you see it as catastrophe? Al-Miqdam answered: “And why shouldn’t I see it as a catastrophe as for the Prophet (Peace be upon him) has placed him on his lap and said: He is from me, and Hussayn is from Ali” So the Asadi (the man from Banu Asad) said: He was a hot Ember which Allah extinguished – Al-miqdam said: “As for I, I will not be happy till I upset you, and make you hear what you do not like (I think he’s speaking to Mo’wiya, I’m not sure), He said: “oh Mo’wiya, if I was truthful, believe me, and if I was a liar, tell me” – He said: “I will” – Al-Miqdam said: “Do you swear by Allah that you know that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) has prohibited wearing Gold?” – He said: “yes” – then he continued: “then do you testify by Allah all mighty that you knew that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) has prohibited the wearing of silk?” – He said: “Yes” – he said: “do you testify by Allah all mighty that you knew that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him) has prohibited the wearing of Tiger Fur (or the fur of vicious animals) or riding on them?” He said “yes” – He said: “I swear by Allah that I have seen all of those in your house oh Mo’wiya” – Mo’wiya said: “I know I wouldn’t survive from (your criticism) of Miqdam….......

9th Traditon is from Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal. Here quoting Commentry of Hadith of Miqdam, which also covers this 9th Tradition of Musnad of Ahmad bin Hanbal.

Authentication and Comments on this Hadith in Awn-ul-Mabood عون المعبود شرح سنن أبي داود (Commentary on Sunnan Abu Dawud in Arabic)
Commentary (http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display...?Doc=4&Rec=5207)
(فقال له فلان ) ‏
‏: وفي بعض النسخ وقع رجل مكان فلان , والمراد بفلان هو معاوية بن أبي سفيان رضي الله تعالى عنه , والمؤلف لم يصرح باسمه وهذا دأبه في مثل ذلك . ‏
‏وقد أخرج أحمد في مسنده من طريق حيوة بن شريح حدثنا بقية حدثنا بحير بن سعد عن خالد بن معدان قال وفد المقدام بن معد يكرب وفيه فقال له معاوية أيراها مصيبة الحديث ‏
‏( أتعدها ) ‏
‏: وفي بعض النسخ أتراها أي أنعد يا أيها المقدام حادثة موت الحسن رضي الله تعالى عنه مصيبة والعجب كل العجب من معاوية فإنه ما عرف قدر أهل البيت حتى قال ما قال , فإن موت الحسن بن علي رضي الله عنه من أعظم المصائب وجزى الله المقدام ورضي عنه فإنه ما سكت عن تكلم الحق حتى أظهره , وهكذا شأن المؤمن الكامل المخلص
“...Fa Qaala Lahu Fulan...” (And so-and-so said to him)
In some texts, the word “Rajul” (“a man”) occurs in the place of “Fulan” (so-and-so), and what is intended by “Fulan” is Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, The author (i.e. Imam Abu Dawood?) did not let it be known, as this was his practise.
Ahmad (ibn Hanbal) has reported in his Musnad, through Haiwah ibn Shareeh: Baqiyyah narrated to us: Baheer ibn Sa’d narrated to us: from Khalid ibn Ma’dan, who said: “And Muawiyah asked him whether he thought it was a calamity…”(the rest of the above hadeeth).


“…A-Ta’addaha…” (Do you consider this…?)
In some texts it is “A-Taraaha” (“Do you see this…?”), that is to consider. This means: ‘Do you regard, oh Miqdam, this event of the death of Al-Hasan, RA, as a calamity?’ Astonishment upon astonishment at Muawiyah!! Surely he never recognised the status of the Ahlul-Bait, (Muawiyah) saying what he said. For surely the death of Al-Hasan ibn Ali, RA, is the greatest of tragedies. May Allah reward Miqdam, and may He be pleased with him, for he did not stay silent from speaking the truth, until he proclaimed it.

In Iqd al Fareed Volume 1 page 246:

"Following the deaths of 'Ali and Hasan, Mu'awiya issued an order to all Mosques including Masjidun Nabi that the people curse 'Ali".

And there is more, unfortunately...


Fi aman Allah
Thanks for your time, and your help I am truly thankful.
/TrustE

[trustE]

Salams


Oh my! you seem very interested and well versed in shi'ite polemics. Other new muslims are mostly interested in learning to make wudhu
Please be patient with me, it has been hard I have been reading on both sides and I have to ask, it is only for my OWN sake! I have been reading about this in particular because people asked me "what sect will you be?" and I want to see for myself...I want to question!


yes one is not considered a Sunni if he or she reviles any of the companions.
Is it 100% sure one cannot CRITICIZE ANY of the companions??
It's only for my own sake as I've stated, it's hard everything...maybe I will not end up having any subreligion then...is that so wrong? Then let me be wrong, in the meantime I want to learn and move forward. Allah Knows best, he knows I'm a believer and it is hard I need to ask and see what comes. InshaAllah I get answers.

Salams

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

:jazak: for the Hadith references. I'm not qualified to comment on them though, so you may wish to refer any queries regarding them to people who are more knowledgeable.

There are scholars and students of knowledge on this board (if you want to ask a question, post a thread in the Islam Q&A section), and also you can refer questions to Sunni Path (qa.sunnipath.com).

:ws:

Simon

[trustE]

Mod. can you help me with commenting the hadiths of evidence plus this question to the Q&A section/or any other way, please:

Q:Is it permissable to criticize ANY of the companions in sunniislam?


I tried but it doesn't work, I got a vBulletin message :(
Thank you for helping me,
Salams

[Muawiyah]

Shi'ites are not able to discern between a narration in a book of Hadeeth and one in a book of Tarikh. Mere historical accounts cannot be proof in the Deen since Tarikh writers take narrations from anybody and everybody and do not subject their narrations to authentication. The contents of a historical narration cannot be accepted unless the chain of narration is presented and authenticated.

In the quotes given here 5 are historical reports, 2 directly from at-Tabari and 2 from al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah where Ibn Kathir has marked the narration with a "jeem" ج to show that he is quoting at-Tabari, total 4 narrations from at-Tabari and one from Tarikh al-Kamil of Ibn Athir (which is probably also a quote from at-Tabari). These are not worth anything unless the chains of narration are authenticated. 2 of the quotes are from the literary work Iqd al Farid by the poet Ibn Abd Rabah and are not worth anything at all in proving the historical authenticity of an event.

Now of what is left:

1- The hadith in Sahih Muslim which the shi'ite has translated as

Muawiyah, the son of Abu Sufyan, gave ORDER to Sa'd, and told him: "What prevents you that you are refraining from cursing Abu Turab ?"
The actual hadith goes:



أمر معاوية بن أبي سفيان سعدا فقال ما منعك ان تسب أبا التراب
Here the rawafidh have translated أمر معاوية بن أبي سفيان سعدا as "Muawiyah, the son of Abu Sufyan, gave ORDER to Sa'd" in order to confuse people into thinking that Muawiyah bin abi Sufyan ordered Sa'd to curse `Ali. What "gave order to Sa`d" means is that Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan Radhi Allahu `anhuma appointed Sa`d Radhi Allahu `anhu as a governer!

The next sentence is "What prevents you from making sabb of Abu Turab?" Here the Rawafidh have translated Sabb as "cursing". In reality Sabb has numeous meanings in the arabic language it may mean revilement and also may mean mild criticism or expression of disapproval. So the correct translation would be:

What prevents you from criticizing Abu Turab"
Even if the rafidhite mistranslation of this Hadith was true it would be of be of no help to them in proving their contention that `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu was cursed upon the minbar

Second is the narration of Ibn Majah which says that Muawiyah Radhi Allahu `anhu walked in one of the many pilgrimages that he made when Sa'd Radhi Allahu `anhu came upon him. He mention `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu and spoke of him derisively Sa'd Radhi Allahu `anhu became angry and said do you say this about a man regarding whom Rasoolullah Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam said. "The one who loves me, Ali is his beloved...."

This narration (assuming it is really sahih) is in no way helpful to the rawafidh for proving that `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu was cursed upon the minbars rather it shows that the muslims were extremely protective of the honour of `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu and would not tolerate any percieved insults towards him. how could such people have tolerated `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu being cursed from a minbar?

I wonder what the Rawafidh intend by quoting such incidents, do they mean that we since one of our elders may have at some time said something negative about another of our elders, we should become extreme partisans of one of them an revile the other? If so is that what they do regarding the differences among the Ahl ul bayt that are narrated in their books and in ours?

For example it is claimed in al-Ihtijaj of al-Tabarsi that Fatimah Radhi Allahu `anha became angry at `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu and said to him:



اشتملت شملة الجنين ، وقعدت حجرة الظنين
الإحتجاج الطبرسي، ج ١/ص١٠٧
You have folded in upon yourself like the folding of a fetus and sat in your room like one suspected of crime...link (http://www.aqaed.com/shialib/books/06/etjaj1/etjaj1-10.html)

In Jila ul `Uyoon (pg 131) and Bihar ul Anwar Mulla Baqar Majlisi claims that Fatimah suspected Ali Radhi Allahu `anhuma of sleeping with a slave woman that Ja'far Radhi Allahu `anhu had gifted him. Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu swore by Allah that he did nothing but Fatimah Radhi Allahu `anha (upset with him) asked him to allow her to leave for the house of Rasoolullah Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam and Ali Radhi Allahu `anhu allowed her.



عن أبي ذر أنه قال :
كنت أنا وجعفر بن أبي طالب مهاجرين إلى بلاد الحبشة ، فأُهديت لجعفر جارية قيمتها أربعة آلاف درهم ، فلما قدمنا المدينة أهداها لعلي (ع) تخدمه ، فجعلها عليّ في منزل فاطمة ، فدخلت فاطمة عليها السلام يوماً فنظرت إلى رأس عليّ عليه السلام في حجر الجارية ، فقالت : يا أبا الحسن !! فعلتها ؟؟ فقال : والله يا بنت محمد ما فعلت شيئاً ، فما الذي تريدين ؟ قالت : تأذن لي في المسير إلى منزل أبي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم . فقال لها : قد أذنت لك ، فتجلببت بجلبابها ، وأرادت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم
- بحار الأنوار ص 43 ، 44 باب (كيفية معاشرتها مع عليّ ) - جلاء العیون ص ١٣١


In Sahih Muslim it is narrated that during the khilafah of `Umar Radhi Allahu `anhu Abbas and `Ali Radhi Allahu `anhuma had a disagreement and came to Umar Radhi Allahu `anhu to settle it and Abbas said regarding `Ali:



يا امير المؤمنين اقض بيني وبين هذا الكاذب الاثم الغادر الخائن

Oh Commander of the Faithful, judge between me and this sinful, treacherous, dishonest liar
These are lapses of the tongue which occur when someone is in an emotional state. If mistakes occur from the Sahabah, Radhi Allahu `anhum, it is only to be expected, because none of them is infallible.

As for the third narration it concerns Miqdam being angry at Muawiyah Radhi Allahu `anhu because some people in the household of Muawiyah Radhi Allahu `anhu commited sins of wearing fur and silk. This narration is not sahih. It has Baqiyyah ibn ul Waleed in it regarding whom Imam Bayhiqi says:


اجمعوا على ان بقية ليس بحجة - تهذيب التهذيب جلد ١ ص ٤٧٨

(The muhadditheen) agree that Baqiyyah is not a Hujjah

Shams ul haqq `Azimabadi's comments are due to his Tafdheeli shi'ite tendencies which were common among the Indian "Salafies" of the previous century.

[trustE]

Salams


I wonder what the Rawafidh intend by quoting such incidents, do they mean that we since one of our elders may have at some time said something negative about another of our elders, we should become extreme partisans of one of them an revile the other? If so is that what they do regarding the differences among the Ahl ul bayt that are narrated in their books and in ours?

Essentially they are prooving that what constitutes their school of thought and that which is in their chains of narrations, can be supported by material in the ahlul sunnahs material but not vice versa.


These are lapses of the tongue which occur when someone is in an emotional state. If mistakes occur from the Sahabah, Radhi Allahu `anhum, it is only to be expected, because none of them is infallible.

What do you mean by saying it's "expected because none of them is infallible"?
And can you give the scholar "verdict" on the question about whether it is permissable to criticize any of the Companions in sunniislam/being a sunnimuslim?

JazzakAllah khair for your help so far!

Salams
/trustE

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

Here are two fatwas (legal verdicts) given on this issue. Both of these scholars have been authorised (by their teachers) to derive legal rulings from the primary texts (fiqh) and in the science of answering questions (ifta'):

http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=13&CATE=24
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=4072&CATE=91

Both of these legal verdicts make it very clear that criticising or disparaging (having bad opinions of) any of the Companions :anhum: of the Prophet :saw: is not permissible for a Sunni Muslim.

:ws:

Simon

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

Shaykh Amjad Rasheed (may Allah preserve him) said the following:


What is entailed by having good opinion of the Noble Companions of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) is that if they sinned they hastened to repentance; and that through the blessing of their having been with the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) they were honoured by death on Islam and in the best of states.

:ws:

Simon

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

Also, I think another thing to consider is, how can we Muslims today possibly hope to intervene in disputes or disagreements that may have occurred between certain Companions of the Prophet :saw:? That is, to say 'This one is right and that one was wrong', or 'I don't think this Companion acted in the right way'.

How do we know whether or not the people who lived before us regretted the bad things that they had done and repented sincerely to Allah? The answer is we don't, and we shouldn't go drawing conclusions about things that, firstly, we haven't been given knowledge of, and secondly, don't concern us. The scholars have said that a person will not be asked about these things on the Day of Judgement.

The Companions were the best generation of Muslims.

This is attested to by our Beloved Prophet :saw: himself. He :saw: warned us against having bad opinions of them. So even if a person does not accept what the Sunni 'ulama (scholars) have been saying for the last 1,400 years (and they are the ones who are the inheritors of the Prophet :saw: and whom Allah has blessed and favoured with knowledge of His religion)... they should at least accept what the Prophet :saw: himself said about this.

Also the Companions, after the Prophet :saw:, were the most knowledgeable of people regarding Islam. So how can we hope to reconcile disagreements between them when we have nowhere near as much knowledge about the Sacred Law as they would have done? If you want to criticise someone on an issue, you must know at least as much as him about the issue, or preferably more.

All of this can be found in the Hadith literature and the narrations have been rigorously authenticated by numerous scholars.

May Allah increase us in our love for the Prophet :saw:, his Family and his Companions, and all those who follow them until the Day Judgement.

And Allah knows best.

:ws:

Simon

[trustE]

:salam:

Also, I think another thing to consider is, how can we Muslims today possibly hope to intervene in disputes or disagreements that may have occurred between certain Companions of the Prophet :saw:? That is, to say 'This one is right and that one was wrong', or 'I don't think this Companion acted in the right way'.
As-salamo aleykum
Of course this is not about me trying to be a "judge" on the contrary I'm reseraching to see which school of thought suits me best, and I am only doing this because of sincerety and to serve Allah best I can. Since the Companions are heavy foundation for sunni, I am was intersetd in knowing what the relationship is, I had no idea it was absolutely forbidden to question any of the many. I cannot totally ignore on a supposed rolemodels bad behavior and cursing, then I would cheating myself and I can't in my heart. And as a consequence I'm not accepted as a sunni? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate if this demand of faith was explicit in the first place?



How do we know whether or not the people who lived before us regretted the bad things that they had done and repented sincerely to Allah? The answer is we don't, and we shouldn't go drawing conclusions about things that, firstly, we haven't been given knowledge of, and secondly, don't concern us. The scholars have said that a person will not be asked about these things on the Day of Judgement.
Only Allah knows all. So isn't equally wrong to assume they did as that they didn't from this view? And if so, wouldn't it be most appropriate to fully substantiate which is more likely and to disregard some of the less suitable as rolemodels based on evidence, facts and behavior?


The Companions were the best generation of Muslims.

This is attested to by our Beloved Prophet :saw: himself. He :saw: warned us against having bad opinions of them. So even if a person does not accept what the Sunni 'ulama (scholars) have been saying for the last 1,400 years (and they are the ones who are the inheritors of the Prophet :saw: and whom Allah has blessed and favoured with knowledge of His religion)... they should at least accept what the Prophet :saw: himself said about this.
I'm not claiming otherwise. Rather I'm critical of promptly deeming all followers as good, each and every one without any room for questioning whatsoever. And in the hadith wonderland there are more issues being attested as well I have come to see.


Also the Companions, after the Prophet :saw:, were the most knowledgeable of people regarding Islam. So how can we hope to reconcile disagreements between them when we have nowhere near as much knowledge about the Sacred Law as they would have done? If you want to criticise someone on an issue, you must know at least as much as him about the issue, or preferably more.
The Companions yes, but I'm merely critical to this idea that each and every one was the ultimate rolemodel and accepting anything.


May Allah increase us in our love for the Prophet :saw:, his Family and his Companions, and all those who follow them until the Day Judgement.
Well said!

Thanks again for your time and efforts
Salams

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:


Only Allah knows all. So isn't equally wrong to assume they did as that they didn't from this view?

According to the scholars, it's not right to assume anything. That is why we've been commanded to stay silent regarding these disagreements, to maintain good opinions of people wherever possible and to consign knowledge of these things to Allah.


I'm not claiming otherwise. Rather I'm critical of promptly deeming all followers as good, each and every one without any room for questioning whatsoever. And in the hadith wonderland there are more issues being attested as well I have come to see.

When I say a Hadith has been rigorously authenticated, what I really mean is that the scholars have deemed it to be so - it is not my opinion, as I am nowhere near qualified to authenticate and derive meanings from Hadith. Maybe I should make my position more clear in future :iinsh:. I apologise for any confusion so caused.

Reading Qur'an and Hadith is indeed very virtuous, but there is a big difference between reading them, and attempting to understand them and derive conclusions from them.

Also, another thing that the scholars have re-iterated many times is that the way to seek and learn Sacred Knowledge is to find knowledgeable and pious people who are qualified to teach. There is a great deal of blessing and virtue in the teacher-student relationship in Sunni Islam.

The scholars have said that the religion is not just learnt from books - there is much virtue in sitting with a shaykh and having him explain a book or text, many of the apparent inconsistencies or doubts in the text will be made clear.

This is the way of the Prophet :saw: as clarified in this answer given by Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari:

http://www.daruliftaa.com/questions.asp?intPage=1&strNavDir=next&txt_CategoryID=CAT0000008#


And as a consequence I'm not accepted as a sunni? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate if this demand of faith was explicit in the first place?

To my knowledge (and Allah knows best), all the Sunni scholars I have ever referred to, and the Sunni scholars of the past, have always made this point very clear in their teaching and written works.

It really depends on which sources you take religious knowledge from.


The Companions yes, but I'm merely critical to this idea that each and every one was the ultimate rolemodel and accepting.

The Prophet :saw: is the ultimate role model. The reason the Companions (may Allah be well pleased with them) are so important is that they lived with and knew the Prophet :saw: and they are his students. He :saw: taught them and they are the direct inheritors of the knowledge of religion that was revealed to him :saw: by Allah.

:ws:

Simon

[trustE]

As-salamo aleykum!



When I say a Hadith has been rigorously authenticated, what I really mean is that the scholars have deemed it to be so - it is not my opinion, as I am nowhere near qualified to authenticate and derive meanings from Hadith. Maybe I should make my position more clear in future :iinsh:. I apologise for any confusion so caused.

I apologise for any confusion on my behalf as well : ) But there are scholars of the shia branch with profound knowledge as well, so I'm really looking forward to indulge into this ocean...InshaAllah


The Prophet is the ultimate role model. The reason the Companions (may Allah be well pleased with them) are so important is that they lived with and knew the Prophet and they are his students. He taught them and they are the direct inheritors of the knowledge of religion that was revealed to him by Allah.

The Prophet(S) is THE rolemodel indeed. I don't have the slightest doubt about that the Prophets(S) Companions are important, I'm looking at the issue from a wider perspective only. Also, his own family lived with him before all so things can be viewed from a different angle here indeed. I don't think any teohistorian doubt that the Prophets(S) adopted son-in-law wasn't the very first to enter islam and his mother raised Muhammed(S) when he was young, later Khadidja became most likely the first of any woman to enter etc etc. In short, I believe the truth lies in the middle view.
So for me it's probably more likely from this aspect that I adhere to the shia school of thought as it lies closer to what I believe.

Thank you for taking time to answer and to give your thoughts, jazzak Allah kheir it was greatly appreciated as always

Salams
/trustE

[Simon Iskander]

:salam:

Wa inti min ahl al-jaza - and may you be of those who are rewarded.

:ws:

Simon

[Pendarth]

TrustE,

As you are new to Islam - may I request a couple of things.

A person's actions are controlled not by what the mind "understands" but what the heart "believes." The "understanding" of the mind is often there to help strengthen the belief of the heart - not vice versa. My request with most people who are new to Islam is that keep praying (salaat), making du'aa, obeying all of allah s.w.t.'s commands - as best you can. Masha' allah, since you already believe in Islam, start practicing it. I have found most debators to be just that. Keep looking, asking, making du'aa - Allah s.w.t. and only Allah s.w.t. can guide us all to the correct path - and only He chooses whom he will guide. If you are sincere in your desire to please allah s.w.t. and keep making sacrifices to seek the path to His pleasure, He will guide you to the correct path :)

Was salaam

[Paint Me As I Am]

Very well said my friend.. i totally agree with that since i still consider my self new to Islam- Still a baby desireing the word to make me grow..

W'salam. Jannah

[laughinglion]

Very well said my friend.. i totally agree with that since i still consider my self new to Islam- Still a baby desireing the word to make me grow..

W'salam. Jannah


:salam: Little Sister. On the subject of growing;

Bury your existence in the earth of obscurity.
If something sprouts before it is buried,
its fruits will never ripen.


The root of every act of rebellion, every appetite
and every moment of heedlessness
is satisfaction with one's self.


The root of every act of obedience, every restraint
and every moment of wakefulness
is lack of satisfaction with one's self.

Do not give up invocation of Allah
because you are not present with Allah in it.
It is worse to forget to invoke Him
than to be inattentive while invoking Him.

He might raise you up from invocation with heedlessness
to invocation with wakeful attention,
and from invocation with wakeful attention
to invocation with presence,
and from invocation with presence
to invocation with withdrawal from all that is other than the Invoked.
That is not difficult for Allah.


The branches of abasement only grow from the seeds of greed.

If you find the fruit of your deeds quickly,
that is a proof of your acceptance!

The best you can seek from Him
is what He seeks from you.

A sign of being deluded is:
sorrow over loss of obedience while failing to get on with it.



From The Hikam of Ibn `Ata'Allah :rahim: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ABewley/hikam.html

Please make du`a for me.

May Allah bless you with all good and accept your du`a.

With peace

[Paint Me As I Am]

Alhamdullah,

I saved that link... Shukran

Jannah

[Ansari]

I had no idea it was absolutely forbidden to question any of the many. I cannot totally ignore on a supposed rolemodels bad behavior and cursing, then I would cheating myself and I can't in my heart. And as a consequence I'm not accepted as a sunni? Wouldn't it have been more appropriate if this demand of faith was explicit in the first place?



Perhaps some other people can explain this more. But i thought it is not wrong to simply say "so and so companion regretted it, or he was in the wrong". Thats something different than really criticize a companion.

Like scholars have stated that Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) erred in his ijtihad. And other scholars have stated that AIsha (may Allah be pelased with her) regretted going out on the day of the battle with Ali (may Allah be pleased with him).

And there are other incidents were 'faults' of the sahaba are put on the screen. Like Habib ALi Jiffri mention in his article on Jihad the incident of Usama (may Allah be pleased with him) and him killing the person who sad La Ila ha Illallah.

Then there is the statement of the prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) on Khalid ibn Walid when Mekka was being re-captured.

Then you have other incidents between the sahaba. Like one companion calling Bilal (may ALlah be pleased with him) "son of a Black woman" and the prophet (peace be upon him) correcting him.

All these incidents are mentioned by Ullama. So perhaps there is a difference in criticizing the companions and just simply mention an incident.

I hope some other brothers can explain it more clearly and correct me.

[godilali]

Noone claims the Sahaba were infallible, but they were all upright people.

[trustE]

:bism:
:salam:


A person's actions are controlled not by what the mind "understands" but what the heart "believes." The "understanding" of the mind is often there to help strengthen the belief of the heart - not vice versa. My request with most people who are new to Islam is that keep praying (salaat), making du'aa, obeying all of allah s.w.t.'s commands - as best you can. Masha' allah, since you already believe in Islam, start practicing it. I have found most debators to be just that. Keep looking, asking, making du'aa - Allah s.w.t. and only Allah s.w.t. can guide us all to the correct path - and only He chooses whom he will guide. If you are sincere in your desire to please allah s.w.t. and keep making sacrifices to seek the path to His pleasure, He will guide you to the correct pathThanks for this post, I feel exactly like this. Jazzak Allah khayr.

[trustE]

:bism:
:salam:


Noone claims the Sahaba were infallible, but they were all upright people.

What do you mean by "noone claims the Sahaba were infallible" ? Someone said a similar thing earlier, yet I didn't get an explanation to what it means.

Wassalam

[godilali]

This means that if the Sahaba commited sins, they sought forgiveness and regret them, and they were not major sinners, but they may have made mistakes of ijtihad (eg: Muawiyah radiallahu anhu did not rebel against Ali radiallahu anhu for the sake of gaining power, but his ijtihad was that a more aggressive search for Uthman's radiallahu anh killers was necessary).

[trustE]

ws

Ok, I was just wondering why the word "infallible" was used in this context pretty much. I guess you are using it to refer to the word ma3somin in the shia school of thought? I think it's confusing to use that term to explain sunniislamic stance on these issues.
Sins, not sins, Allah(swt) knows best. The issue here is that I must believe that Yazid and Muawiya were good, I have to believe this unquestionably or I'm not accepted as in the subreligion sunni. I never knew that this was a absolute must until I raised my questions, and to me it wasn't made explicit in the first place that's all.

Fi aman Allah
/ TrustE

[godilali]

Yazeed was not a Sahabi. Most ulama hold an unfavorable view of him, but say that one should not curse him.

[Ansari]

ws

Ok, I was just wondering why the word "infallible" was used in this context pretty much. I guess you are using it to refer to the word ma3somin in the shia school of thought? I think it's confusing to use that term to explain sunniislamic stance on these issues.
Sins, not sins, Allah(swt) knows best. The issue here is that I must believe that Yazid and Muawiya were good, I have to believe this unquestionably or I'm not accepted as in the subreligion sunni. I never knew that this was a absolute must until I raised my questions, and to me it wasn't made explicit in the first place that's all.

Fi aman Allah
/ TrustE

Well how hard is it to think good of the sahaba? Just like muslims think good of Ali, Hasan, Husayn and other companions (may Allah be pleased with them), the same case applies for Muawiyah (May Allah be pleased with him).

But i think there is a difference in saying that someone is wrong in his ijtihad. This is also what shaikh nuh said in his suhba.

Besides that; everything has its basis in the quran and the hadiths. When we read the quran we see that Allah praised the sahaba and we also have hadiths of the prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) containing praises of the sahaba. Now how can we think wrong about them when Allah and His messenger praised them?

You should read a book about the status of the sahaba. So you can notice how pious they were, and what kind of amazing deeds they performed. And if you have trouble accepting Muawiya (may Allah be pleased with him) as a good person, perhaps this book can help:

Mu'awiya : Restorer of the Muslim Faith (Aisha Bewley)
http://store.yahoo.com/islamicbookstore-com/b7551.html

[laughinglion]

:salam:

I personally feel that there is far to much to discussion of others faults (although sister TrustE is legitmate in her request). And to save us from this we've been advised to err on the side of caution and make 70 excuses for our fellow Muslim. Know doubt the companions had their faults (Abu Bakr :anhu: was sometimes to soft (according to his daughter `A'isha :anha: , `Umar :anhu: is known for being harsh, Abu Dharr :anhu: was sent to live in the desert because he was to pious, etc, etc.) they were human beings (although the best community ever raised up and this is statement of Allah :taala: ) . So to judge them by super-human or prophetic standards is our mistake.

TrustE I suggest you just take time and review whats at issue. Its not necessary that you feel obliged to believe this or that, because as you say you would not be being sincere to youself. And that aint right. But what you must reflect on is that the shortcomings of certain companions :anhum: are mentioned in al-Quran so its clear they were not infalliable. Recognise they had faults, but to dwell on them serves us no benefit, but to dwell on their good actions may prove more beneficial. As a new Muslim do your own research, see whats out there, because unfortunately there are many Muslims who take dogmatic positions or get trapped in dialectics. But as I've already stated it does one no good to dwell on such things. Its up to those who dont have that baggage or have shed it to raise the bar.

Myself I have love for Mu'awiyya, that I'd call him the fifth rightly-guided. Of course he done things differently to those who proceeded him. But at the same time he achieved much against a very difficult background :anhu: . I also have a lot of respect for the Umayyads, even though they get a hard time historically. One needs to recognise that very rarely one gets the whole story so you must be patient and let things unveil themselves in the course of time.

And as I said from the top, 'make seventy excuses for our fellow believers'. This is part of Islam.

http://bewley.virtualave.net/muawiya.html Here is the article about Mu`awiyya :anhu: , put together by people who converted to Islam and faced the same problems that you have had to/will have to deal with. So they went to the root of the matter, beyond the historical accretions.

May Allah guide us and make us successful in this world and the next. 'Aameen.

With Peace.

[caravan of shuhada]

Salam

I am new and curious about islam and islamic sects and would like to have some aswers so I can move forward inshallah and learn more...

Ok, first off I would like to ask what "sunnislam" means really?
Why would you choose "sunniislam" as opposed to other schools of thought if someone could explain?

Is salafi/wahabism also included as sunni?

Lastly, why is there differences in shiaislam and sunniislam as to which "people" ones holds more near at heart after the Prophet(saw)(ie. sahabas vs progeny)??


I would be most grateful for help in this,
Fi aman Allah


if you would like to know about sects e-mail me on
Sharing email addresses is not allowed on mixed gender forums

[caravan of shuhada]

Yazeed was not a Sahabi. Most ulama hold an unfavorable view of him, but say that one should not curse him.



astaghfirullah
by Ahhal i have never heard so much monkey business in my life
beware of ehat your tongue speaks

dare you curse Yazeed if he(ra) was not a sahaba then why is he mentioned in one hadith in bhukhari
SAHEEH bhukhari
imam bhukhari did not take any weak hadith so why did he include a narration from Yazeed(ra)
let me tell you that staement can directly take you out of islam

if you curse the sahaba you are a kaafir

by allah trepent and sya you are sorry

and learn your A B C'S IN ISLAM

Knowledge of Issues is strongly recommended when posting in the In-Depth Islam Section. Yazeed the son of Muawiyah Radhi Allahu `anhu was born in the 26th year of hijrah so there's no possiblity of his being a sahabi. Unwarranted Takfeer on fellow members may result in banning

[Hamood]

You can be assured that Yazid was not a sahabi.

In any case, Brother godilali said "one should not curse him" .... Don't rush to judgment so quickly ... Take it easy sis and no takfiring please. :jazak:

[caravan of shuhada]

You can be assured that Yazid was not a sahabi.

In any case, Brother godilali said "one should not curse him" .... Don't rush to judgment so quickly ... Take it easy sis and no takfiring please. :jazak:


takfeer is sunnah

[godilali]

"if you curse the sahaba you are a kaafir

by allah trepent and sya you are sorry
"
Never cursed a Sahabi in my life; never will. Plus, I don't hold any opinion about Yazeed (I don't consider him good or bad, which is the safest position), but great people such as ibn Jawzi, Imam adh Dhahabi, and Umar ibn Abdul Aziz ra have. So maybe you should direct your takfeer at them.

I forgive you for slandering me though.

[trustE]

Salams

"In-depth-Aqeedah> Want some answers please....Shi'ite Polemics"

Why has the heading(topic name) of my thread been changed from what I wrote to "shi'ite polemics"? After "Want some answers please" I had wrote and indicated that I was searching truth as newcomer.

And I see that it has been moved from the new muslim forum to in depth aqeedah, didn't notice this earlier...

ws

[caravan of shuhada]

[QUOTE=caravan of shuhada]if you would like to know about sects e-mail me on


Salam

you asked about sunni

sunni is just a term that differntiates the shia's of today
generally when you say you are a sunni muslim you say that you follow the Prophet and the next 3 generations

the shi'as of today?
Many scholars of today have made takfeer on shi'as for the following reason:
1. They do not have the correct shadah (adding Ali's name)
2. they believe that Ali was also an messenger
3. They believe that the quran will be completed when Mahdi comes
4. They completely curse the Prophet's wife A'isha
5. they curse the sahabas like Abu Bakr
6. they are now assisting the war against muslims in iraq
7. they fight the sunni muslims
8. they believe in 12 imams and some go to the extreme to seeking help from them


the term salafi and wahabi?

Slafi means those who follow the path of the messenger and the next 3 generations - the salaf-us-saalih

wahabi means the same

but the salafis of today are a bit dodgy and the term wahabi has been used against the scholars of the haq to call them extreme or radical

[shunni]

"if you curse the sahaba you are a kaafir


.

why is it then the sahaba used to curse

[shunni]

it looks like posts are disapearing too. something caught my attention about Abu Dharr being sent to the desert for being pious.. now i cant find it

[laughinglion]

it looks like posts are disapearing too. something caught my attention about Abu Dharr being sent to the desert for being pious.. now i cant find it

:salam:

That post is still in situ. I think #48 look for my flag (I hate to say my avatar)

With Peace

[laughinglion]

"if you curse the sahaba you are a kaafir.

:salam:

I think we need some clarification, on two points. What is meant by curse in this context? and If we mean by curse, to disparage have a bad opinion of, to this take one out of the deen, according to 'ahlu's-sunnah?

Thanx.

With Peace.

PS. I'm just going to re-read the thread in case I overlooked the answers to my questions, already. Peace.

[godilali]

Just to clarify, I'm not the one who said that. (that was the person who called me a kafir for saying Yazeed was not a Sahabi) If you look in the old Shiah/Sunni thread most of this stuff has been discussed.

Also see:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6671&page=5&pp=10

[trustE]

Salam

you asked about sunni

sunni is just a term that differntiates the shia's of today
generally when you say you are a sunni muslim you say that you follow the Prophet and the next 3 generations

the shi'as of today?
Many scholars of today have made takfeer on shi'as for the following reason:
1. They do not have the correct shadah (adding Ali's name)
2. they believe that Ali was also an messenger
3. They believe that the quran will be completed when Mahdi comes
4. They completely curse the Prophet's wife A'isha
5. they curse the sahabas like Abu Bakr
6. they are now assisting the war against muslims in iraq
7. they fight the sunni muslims
8. they believe in 12 imams and some go to the extreme to seeking help from them

Is this poster being serious? Why this is absolutely repulsive and ignorant to the extremes!

May Allah(swt) guides us all, and increase our knowledge and understandings

Salams
/trustE

[LovinMyDeen]

Asalamu alaikum
I have a shia'h friend and i dont remember her saying she beleives in the things the brother posted up? well i really dont talk about her status of being a shia'h so im not really sure? Inshallah i will ask when i get back to school! (melbourne is in school holidays YEY)
Sister Yasmin