The Shia-Sunni divide
- Thread starter Awesome
- Start date
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
Here is my version. I dont expect anyone to agree with me as this has been going on 1300 years. I am only giving historical facts and would not comment as to who is right or better.
Our Holy Prophet (PBUH) didnot openly nominate anyone as his succsssor. However Hazrat Abu Bakr had on occasions been nominated to lead the prayers and Hazart Ali was a preferred Army commander. On the occasion of the Haj ( before Hajjatul Wida)) it is documented that Hazrat Abu Bakr was leader of the Hajis and Hazart Ali was the Naqeeb. Thus it appears that these two were the most prominet among the Sehabas. Hazrat Osman and Hazart Omer didnot figure as leaders during that period. Hazart Osman is reputed to have financed the first Hijrat to Abyssinia and Prophet(PBUH) reputedly prayed to Allah to convert either Abu Jahl or Hazart Omer into a muslim. There are other sehabas such as Zubair, Salamn Farsi and Jaafer Tayyar, Ammar Yaasir who are mentioned more often in various events during the Prophet's(PBUH) lifetime.
After the passing away of the 'Holy Prophet' Medinites gathered in a place called 'Saqifa benu Saad' While Hazart Ali and all of the Hashmites were busy preparing the funeral ( Hoply Prophet PBUH was bathed by Hazart Ali) a party of Meccans were sent to Saqifa Benu Saad to find out what was happening.
Our holy Prophet ( PBUH) had been invited to Medina by the Ansaars who accepted him as their Ruler. The contract expired with his passing away. Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Omar were among those sent by the Meccans to inquire. They found that Ansaars were meeting to decide on the next head of the government. Hazrat Omar successfully agrued that the head should be a Quraish and nominated Hazart Abu Bakr. First Caliph had therfore been chosen before the holy Prophet ( PBUH) was buried. It is debated by Shia historians whether Hazart Ali and Salman Farsi actually did Ba'at but there was no documented reaction from the Hashmites. One English historian has written that it may be because Hazrat Ali; thru his father Abu Talib and being the fIrst Hashmite to accept Islam was thus leader of the Hashmites; was only 33 years old and considered too young ??
Hazrat Abu Bakr nominated Hazart Omar and every one else joined in. Hashmites swallowed this as well. After Hazrat Omar two candidates were short listed, both sons in law of the holy Prophet ( PBUH) that is Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Osman. The casting vote was of Hazrat Adbur Rahman bin Auf, who decided in favour of Hazrat Osman. This did not go down well with the Hashmites and specially since Hazrat Osman belonged to the Omayyads, a branch of Quraish rival to Benu Hashim in honour and respect.
When Kufiites came down to Medina and martyred Hazrat Osman, most of the Omayyads never accepted Hazrat Ali as Khalifa. Battle of Siffin between Hazrat Ali and Muwayya was the main dividing factor. Muslims siding with Hazarat Ali came to be Known as Shi-aan e Ali or the group of Ali.
Untimely assasination of Hazrat Ali, and martydom of Imam Hussein a couple of decades later cemented Omayyads grip on power and for 80 years this family ruled the Islamic World.
Hashmites on their part had been working to take the revenge of Karbala and Abu Muslim Khurasani with the support of progeny of Hazrat Abbas ( Uncle of Holy Prophet PBUH) annihilated the Ommayyad tribe, only one member of the royal house of Benu Omayya was left alive who ran away to Spain and founded a new Khalifat.
Until that time, the divide between Muslims was purely political, however 80 years of Ommayyad rule had left some impact on the muslim ummah. Shias ( followers of Hazart Ali's family) were few. It was at this time that a divide between the practices started to appear.
At that time Imam Abu Hanifa ( born in Afghanistan) was probably the foremost scholar of Islam. ( He is known to favour rebellion of Nafs uz Zakia, politically a Shia uprising) Imam Abu Hanifa was offered the highest religious post by Abu Mansoor Al Saffah, the Abbaside Khalifa but refused instead recommended his pupil Qazi Abu Yusaf. Majority of the Ummah followed Imam Abu Hanifa and Qazi abu Yusaf and are known today as Sunnis.
From the Shia side Imam Jaafer Al Saadiq was considered as scholar equal to Imam Abu Hanifa. Fiqah and Sharia divide started at this point. Nearly all Shias including Ismailis accept Imam Jaafer's Fiqah.
This was about 110 years after the passing away of our holy Prophet ( PBUH). By this time nearly all the Sehabas had passed away and very few Taabieens ( people who had direct contact with one of the Sehabas) were left. Most of the Islamic teachings and Sharia as we know today is from this time onwards.
During the 80 odd years between the death of Imam Abu Hanifa and the death of Imam Ahamed bin Hanbal. There have been quite a few developments of the Sunni doctrines such as Ashaarites, Mutaziliites etc. Finally we are left with 4 main Fiqah of Sunni Islam those being Hanifis, Shaafais, Malikis and Hanbalis. Wahabis follow the fiqah of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal.
Shias split into two main groups after death Imam Jaafer. The twelvers (Athana Ashaari doctorine) was codified by Sheikh Mufeed, approx 100 years after the death of Imam Jaafer)
Atha Ashaaris never took up arms againt Abassides and continued to live in Iraq in the area south of Baghdad where they are in majority even today.
There were other Shia groups such the Zaidis ( some say Mamun ur Rashid was partial to this sect) These are today found in Yemen. Ismailis ( branched after Imam Jaafer) continued fighting and eventually gained control of Egypt and the Hijaz. For nearly two hundred years there were two Khalifa in the Islamic world. Khutba in Kaaba being in the name of Fatimid caliphs of Egypt. After Salahuddin ended Ismaili rule in Egypt around 1170 AD, those who fled to Iran became Ismailis ( Agha Khanis) and other branch from Yemen became Bohris.
It is is said that Druze of Lebenan are also of Ismaili origin. Shia-ism is basically a cult of Hazrat Ali. Some groups who were neither wholy Ismailis or Jaafaries existed in Iran ( Bu Wahids of Iran who also became wazirs of later Abbaside Khalifas) and had been living in Iran from quite sometime. After the Mongol invasion, first Mongol king who converted to Islam ( Khuda Banda) chose Shia Islam as his faith. A lot of Azeri's and Turkmans ( Qizilbash) and Hazaras are therefore Shias.
In the late 15th century Turkmen Tribes of Ardibil ( near Tabriz, Irani Azerbaijan) conquered Iran from the turko mongol tribes and founded Safavid dynasty. Ismael safavi was the spritual leader of Shia Turkmen tribes. Until this time in Iran, even though there was substantial Shia population, majority were Hanafi Muslims. Safavid reign saw the full scale conversion to Shia Athna Ashaari Islam.
In my humble opinion and I am no Islamic scholar, main difference between Sunni and Shia Islam is still political, Hazrat Ali is number 1 for Shia and number 4 for the Sunnis. Other differences are in some minor laws such inheritence of the female children, and mutaa and dropping hands during prayers. Shias dont offer Travih ( started a formal prayer during the time of Hazart Oamr. Mutaa was also banned by Hazart Omar). Shias include Ali un Wali allah in their Kalima. If I was a non muslim looking in, I would find these differences in beliefs to be of no consequence. However, Shias and Sunnis have killed each other for that. Me being a Syed, I have relations who are Shias as well as Sunnis. I prefere to call myself simple mussalman.
Our Holy Prophet (PBUH) didnot openly nominate anyone as his succsssor. However Hazrat Abu Bakr had on occasions been nominated to lead the prayers and Hazart Ali was a preferred Army commander. On the occasion of the Haj ( before Hajjatul Wida)) it is documented that Hazrat Abu Bakr was leader of the Hajis and Hazart Ali was the Naqeeb. Thus it appears that these two were the most prominet among the Sehabas. Hazrat Osman and Hazart Omer didnot figure as leaders during that period. Hazart Osman is reputed to have financed the first Hijrat to Abyssinia and Prophet(PBUH) reputedly prayed to Allah to convert either Abu Jahl or Hazart Omer into a muslim. There are other sehabas such as Zubair, Salamn Farsi and Jaafer Tayyar, Ammar Yaasir who are mentioned more often in various events during the Prophet's(PBUH) lifetime.
After the passing away of the 'Holy Prophet' Medinites gathered in a place called 'Saqifa benu Saad' While Hazart Ali and all of the Hashmites were busy preparing the funeral ( Hoply Prophet PBUH was bathed by Hazart Ali) a party of Meccans were sent to Saqifa Benu Saad to find out what was happening.
Our holy Prophet ( PBUH) had been invited to Medina by the Ansaars who accepted him as their Ruler. The contract expired with his passing away. Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Omar were among those sent by the Meccans to inquire. They found that Ansaars were meeting to decide on the next head of the government. Hazrat Omar successfully agrued that the head should be a Quraish and nominated Hazart Abu Bakr. First Caliph had therfore been chosen before the holy Prophet ( PBUH) was buried. It is debated by Shia historians whether Hazart Ali and Salman Farsi actually did Ba'at but there was no documented reaction from the Hashmites. One English historian has written that it may be because Hazrat Ali; thru his father Abu Talib and being the fIrst Hashmite to accept Islam was thus leader of the Hashmites; was only 33 years old and considered too young ??
Hazrat Abu Bakr nominated Hazart Omar and every one else joined in. Hashmites swallowed this as well. After Hazrat Omar two candidates were short listed, both sons in law of the holy Prophet ( PBUH) that is Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Osman. The casting vote was of Hazrat Adbur Rahman bin Auf, who decided in favour of Hazrat Osman. This did not go down well with the Hashmites and specially since Hazrat Osman belonged to the Omayyads, a branch of Quraish rival to Benu Hashim in honour and respect.
When Kufiites came down to Medina and martyred Hazrat Osman, most of the Omayyads never accepted Hazrat Ali as Khalifa. Battle of Siffin between Hazrat Ali and Muwayya was the main dividing factor. Muslims siding with Hazarat Ali came to be Known as Shi-aan e Ali or the group of Ali.
Untimely assasination of Hazrat Ali, and martydom of Imam Hussein a couple of decades later cemented Omayyads grip on power and for 80 years this family ruled the Islamic World.
Hashmites on their part had been working to take the revenge of Karbala and Abu Muslim Khurasani with the support of progeny of Hazrat Abbas ( Uncle of Holy Prophet PBUH) annihilated the Ommayyad tribe, only one member of the royal house of Benu Omayya was left alive who ran away to Spain and founded a new Khalifat.
Until that time, the divide between Muslims was purely political, however 80 years of Ommayyad rule had left some impact on the muslim ummah. Shias ( followers of Hazart Ali's family) were few. It was at this time that a divide between the practices started to appear.
At that time Imam Abu Hanifa ( born in Afghanistan) was probably the foremost scholar of Islam. ( He is known to favour rebellion of Nafs uz Zakia, politically a Shia uprising) Imam Abu Hanifa was offered the highest religious post by Abu Mansoor Al Saffah, the Abbaside Khalifa but refused instead recommended his pupil Qazi Abu Yusaf. Majority of the Ummah followed Imam Abu Hanifa and Qazi abu Yusaf and are known today as Sunnis.
From the Shia side Imam Jaafer Al Saadiq was considered as scholar equal to Imam Abu Hanifa. Fiqah and Sharia divide started at this point. Nearly all Shias including Ismailis accept Imam Jaafer's Fiqah.
This was about 110 years after the passing away of our holy Prophet ( PBUH). By this time nearly all the Sehabas had passed away and very few Taabieens ( people who had direct contact with one of the Sehabas) were left. Most of the Islamic teachings and Sharia as we know today is from this time onwards.
During the 80 odd years between the death of Imam Abu Hanifa and the death of Imam Ahamed bin Hanbal. There have been quite a few developments of the Sunni doctrines such as Ashaarites, Mutaziliites etc. Finally we are left with 4 main Fiqah of Sunni Islam those being Hanifis, Shaafais, Malikis and Hanbalis. Wahabis follow the fiqah of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal.
Shias split into two main groups after death Imam Jaafer. The twelvers (Athana Ashaari doctorine) was codified by Sheikh Mufeed, approx 100 years after the death of Imam Jaafer)
Atha Ashaaris never took up arms againt Abassides and continued to live in Iraq in the area south of Baghdad where they are in majority even today.
There were other Shia groups such the Zaidis ( some say Mamun ur Rashid was partial to this sect) These are today found in Yemen. Ismailis ( branched after Imam Jaafer) continued fighting and eventually gained control of Egypt and the Hijaz. For nearly two hundred years there were two Khalifa in the Islamic world. Khutba in Kaaba being in the name of Fatimid caliphs of Egypt. After Salahuddin ended Ismaili rule in Egypt around 1170 AD, those who fled to Iran became Ismailis ( Agha Khanis) and other branch from Yemen became Bohris.
It is is said that Druze of Lebenan are also of Ismaili origin. Shia-ism is basically a cult of Hazrat Ali. Some groups who were neither wholy Ismailis or Jaafaries existed in Iran ( Bu Wahids of Iran who also became wazirs of later Abbaside Khalifas) and had been living in Iran from quite sometime. After the Mongol invasion, first Mongol king who converted to Islam ( Khuda Banda) chose Shia Islam as his faith. A lot of Azeri's and Turkmans ( Qizilbash) and Hazaras are therefore Shias.
In the late 15th century Turkmen Tribes of Ardibil ( near Tabriz, Irani Azerbaijan) conquered Iran from the turko mongol tribes and founded Safavid dynasty. Ismael safavi was the spritual leader of Shia Turkmen tribes. Until this time in Iran, even though there was substantial Shia population, majority were Hanafi Muslims. Safavid reign saw the full scale conversion to Shia Athna Ashaari Islam.
In my humble opinion and I am no Islamic scholar, main difference between Sunni and Shia Islam is still political, Hazrat Ali is number 1 for Shia and number 4 for the Sunnis. Other differences are in some minor laws such inheritence of the female children, and mutaa and dropping hands during prayers. Shias dont offer Travih ( started a formal prayer during the time of Hazart Oamr. Mutaa was also banned by Hazart Omar). Shias include Ali un Wali allah in their Kalima. If I was a non muslim looking in, I would find these differences in beliefs to be of no consequence. However, Shias and Sunnis have killed each other for that. Me being a Syed, I have relations who are Shias as well as Sunnis. I prefere to call myself simple mussalman.
Averroes
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 455
- Reaction score
- 0
You forget that the Prophet said, Man Kuntu Mawla fi Haza Aliun Mawla, whosever master I am, Ali is his master.
Dr. Tahir ul Qadri (Allah protect him), one of the best scholars of our time, has written a book on this topic named after the event, Ghadir Khum, where he proves this saying using 50 Sahih Hadith and the conclusion that he comes to is that Imam Ali (AS) is the spiritual successor of the Prophet. Something that all Sufis and Philosophers agree on.
Hadīth No. 9
عن زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنه, قال: خرجنا مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم حتى انتهينا إلى غدير خم, فأمر بروح فكسح في يوم ما أتى علينا يوم كان أشدّ حرًا منه, فحمد الله وأثنى عليه, وقال: يا أيها الناس! أنه لم يبعث نبي قط إلا ما عاش نصف ما عاش الذي كان قبله, وإني أوشك أن أدعى فأجيب, وإني تارك فيكم ما لن تضلوا بعده كتاب الله عز وجل. ثم قام فأخذ بيد علي رضي الله عنه, فقال: يا أيها الناس! من أولى بكم من أنفسكم؟ قالوا: الله ورسوله أعلم. ألست أولى بكم من أنفسكم؟ قالوا: بلى. قال: من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه.
“Zayd bin Arqam (رضي الله عنه
narrates: We set out with Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم until we reached Ghadīr Khum. He commanded that a canopy should be put up. He looked tired on that day and it was a very hot day. He praised Allāh and then said: O people, out of the prophets Allāh sent, each new prophet had a life span half as much as that of his predecessor, and it seems to me that soon I may be called (to breathe my last) which I shall accept. I am leaving in your midst something that will never let you go astray, and that is the Book of Allāh . Then he stood up, held ‘Alī’s hand and said: O people, who is he who is nearer than your lives? All of them said: Allāh and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم know better. (Then added
Am I not nearer than your lives? They said: Why not! He said: One who has me as his master has ‘Alī as his master.”[9]Hadīth No. 10
عن سعد بن أبي وقاص رضي الله عنه, قال: لقد سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم يقول في علي رضي الله عنه ثلاث خصال, لأن يكون لي واحدة منهن أحب إلي من حمر النعم:
سمعته يقول: إنه بمنزلة هارون من موسى, إلا أنه لا نبي بعدي, وسمعته يقول: لأعطين الراية غدا رجلا يحب الله ورسوله, ويحبه الله ورسوله, وسمعته يقول: من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه.
“Sa‘d bin Abī Waqās (رضي الله عنه
says that he heard Allāh’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم describe three qualities of ‘Alī (رضي الله عنه. Had I possessed anyone of them, it would have been dearer to me than red camels. “I heard him say: Indeed, he (‘Alī
is in my place as Hārūn was in Mūsā’s place, but there is no prophet after me. And I heard him say: Today I shall bestow the flag on the person who loves Allāh and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, and Allāh and His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم love him too. And I heard him say: One who has me as his master has ‘Alī as his master.”[10]Harun was Musa's successor - the Prophet points out, your position to me is like Harun to Musa.
If there was just 1 hadith like this in regards to Abu Bakr, there would be NO DOUBT that he was the successor, however they WASNT any, and there are at least 50 sahih hadith about Imam Ali, yet people still dont accept.
Abu Hanifa, was Imam Jafer as Sadiq (AS)'s student. As was Imam Malik. At Al Azhar, all 5 fiqhs are taught.
Sunnis revere the Prophets companion and hold them in higher esteem than his family, saying that the right to rule comes from consensus. Although the first was elected by a few people (several prominent sahaba, ansar were missing from the meeting because they were concered with burying the Prophet SAWW), the second appointed by the first and the third elected by a committee of 6 whereas the entire ummah turned to Imam Ali to be caliph when the third died.
Shias revere what they believe to the righteous companions and hold the Prophets family in highest esteem, and claim the right to rule comes from Allah. We have a different account of the characteristics of the first three caliphs which we can prove using Sunni books, where we can cite inconsistencies and lack of islamic knowledge. But then again, that is not stripping them of any of their accomplishments we simply maintain they were not purified as the Ahlul Bayt were (Qur'an 33:33) and were not entitled to rule.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shi'a_view_of_Umar
Shias follow 12 Infallible Imams after the Prophet with the last being Imam Mahdi, who we await and belive is alive. Prophet said he would be of my progeny, this strenghtens the case for his progeny to succeed him.
All Sufi orders trace their spiritual knowledge back to Imam Ali via most of the Shia imams, Qadriyyah trace it from our 8th Imam back through 7 Imams to Imam Ali, others via Jafar as Sadiq etc. Naqshbandi are supposed to derive from Abu Bakr, however their chain includes Jafar as Sadiq.
All of our Imams were killed by the caliphs of the time, and Shias were always persecuted.
In the Absense of the Imam, Shias in terms of spiritual and worldy matters refer to who they believe to be the most learned. The most knowledgeable scholars are called Marjas, and they have the title of Ayatullah.
We were all knowns as Shias, You were either Shia of Ali, or Shia of Uthman in history books. So the split didn't come after them, it was always there as is noted by authors like ibn Kathir who referred to us as Shia of Uthman or Ali.
Shias and Sunnis differ in that Sunni scholars of hadith mainly took hadith from companions and companions of companions whereas Shia scholars of hadith relied on Ahlul Bayt as their prime source.
Sunni books include Sahih Bukhari and Muslims,
Shia books include Al Kafi and Bihar al Anwar.
muawiyah (lanatullah) waged jihad against the Righteous Caliph Amir ul Momineen Ali ibn Abu Talib, and he was the first one to coin the phrase Ahle sunnah wal jamah. He was also responsible for killing Muhammed bin Abu Bakr.
Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
I think its a moot point whether or not the Prophet nominate a successor. And its not enough to argue with one liners that Prophet nominated anyone. Nor is it enough that Hazarat Abu Bakr lead the prayers when the Prophet got sick so he should be the successor in political life as well.
It all boils down to one thing. Who did the people WANT to be the successor.
Hazarat Ali did eventually become Caliph, but I guess Muawiya played politics against him.
There was a whole bunch of Arab politics that went on at that time. The more you read about it, the more you are bound to say Ok those guys of that time were really up to no good. But that's that. It should be treated as history and we should move on.
It all boils down to one thing. Who did the people WANT to be the successor.
Hazarat Ali did eventually become Caliph, but I guess Muawiya played politics against him.
There was a whole bunch of Arab politics that went on at that time. The more you read about it, the more you are bound to say Ok those guys of that time were really up to no good. But that's that. It should be treated as history and we should move on.
Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
Differences in practices are ok. Even amonst Sunnis people pray differently, for example. Islam was unveiled in 23 years and a lot of travelers to Mecca/Madina accepted Islam from what they learned in their visits. Praying styles were changed in the course of those 23 year and new portions of the Quran we revealed.
Averroes
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2006
- Messages
- 455
- Reaction score
- 0
But one thing is certain.
Who are the leaders of youth in Heaven?
Who is the leader of women in Heaven?
Who is the one who hands out water at the well of Kauthar in Heaven?
If that is the position they hold in Heaven, then nothing on earth can compare.
sorry I forgot to link the book by Tahir ul Qadri former minister of religion in Pakistan,
http://www.research.com.pk/home/fmri/books/index.minhaj
Qaddafi's speech in March was amazing regarding this though. This divide is the most politically charged and something zionists love to exploit, Imam Khomeini said No Shia No Sunni.
Who are the leaders of youth in Heaven?
Who is the leader of women in Heaven?
Who is the one who hands out water at the well of Kauthar in Heaven?
If that is the position they hold in Heaven, then nothing on earth can compare.
sorry I forgot to link the book by Tahir ul Qadri former minister of religion in Pakistan,
http://www.research.com.pk/home/fmri/books/index.minhaj
Qaddafi's speech in March was amazing regarding this though. This divide is the most politically charged and something zionists love to exploit, Imam Khomeini said No Shia No Sunni.
I agree. What the use of calling each other Kaffirs... lets be united once again and support each other. If people in other countries of the different religions can live peacefully heck why not Muslim with sects!
araz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2006
- Messages
- 9,291
- Reaction score
- 81
Brothers in Islam AsSalam o Alaikum.
My humble opinion is that this is a question to which we do not have an answer.Nobody in their right mind can even think of comparing the sahaba of the Prophet(SWAH). each and every one of them was a gem in their own rights. How can mere sinners like us compare and contrast the great Sahaba e Karam, who have been granted Jannah while they were still alive. We as Sunnis and Shias should not just be thinking ourselves as such, but as Musalmans. Howsoever wer pray, we should still pray to the One God and follow the Sunnah of the one Prophet(PBUH). beyond that are mere political and historical discussions , and we as one Ummah should let the decisions of who was right or wrong, If at all, to Allah SWT. It is important to remember that the Sahaba may have had their differences, but there is no incidence of open confrontation and argment between them, at least the khulafe e Rashideen themselves. we should learn from their ways and spend our time making ourselves better muslims and better human beings. Brothers please remember, on the day of judgement, you would only be accountable for your own sins and good deeds. So why waste time discussing others. So please preach the goood deeds of the Sahaba e Karam, and leave any shortcomings behind.I only mention shortcomings in the context of all of us being humans and therefore imperfect.
I would also request the mods most humbly to close this thread. This will only lead to arguments and waste of time, and divide Brother from Brother. Thisis the last thing that we need in these divisive times.
WaSalam
Araz
My humble opinion is that this is a question to which we do not have an answer.Nobody in their right mind can even think of comparing the sahaba of the Prophet(SWAH). each and every one of them was a gem in their own rights. How can mere sinners like us compare and contrast the great Sahaba e Karam, who have been granted Jannah while they were still alive. We as Sunnis and Shias should not just be thinking ourselves as such, but as Musalmans. Howsoever wer pray, we should still pray to the One God and follow the Sunnah of the one Prophet(PBUH). beyond that are mere political and historical discussions , and we as one Ummah should let the decisions of who was right or wrong, If at all, to Allah SWT. It is important to remember that the Sahaba may have had their differences, but there is no incidence of open confrontation and argment between them, at least the khulafe e Rashideen themselves. we should learn from their ways and spend our time making ourselves better muslims and better human beings. Brothers please remember, on the day of judgement, you would only be accountable for your own sins and good deeds. So why waste time discussing others. So please preach the goood deeds of the Sahaba e Karam, and leave any shortcomings behind.I only mention shortcomings in the context of all of us being humans and therefore imperfect.
I would also request the mods most humbly to close this thread. This will only lead to arguments and waste of time, and divide Brother from Brother. Thisis the last thing that we need in these divisive times.
WaSalam
Araz
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
In my opinion we should not be afraid to hear or listen to other people's views no matter how distasteful. My faith is strong enough to withstand reading or listening to people not of my faith or maslak, I dont have to agree with them.
Shia Sunni divide has been going from the first century of Hijra. If we think we can resolve the issues in this thread. This is not going to happen and if that was the purpose of this thread, then it should be closed.
However one should not be afraid nor be annoyed by what other people think. As an example, until the ascension of Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz , family of Hazart Ali was openly called bad names during the Ommayaad rule. Similarly first three Khalifas were called bad names during the reign of Isamael Safavi in Iran. Also I found some of the Shia sects such as Alawites of Syria and Ali Allahis ( some Kurdish tribes in North of Iran) attribute divine powers to Hazrat Ali.
Does that mean one should hate Shias or Shia should hate Sunnis ???. Why should people be ostracised for the sins of other people specially when these lived hundred of years ago.
I can only only say about myself, that having family members both Shias as well Sunnis. I find hardly any difference between actual beliefs of the two sects. Main difference appears during Muharram. Even then most of the Sunni members attend Majlis only they dont do Maatam.
However, I may have been lucky to be brought up in a tolerant family. In my honest opinion, whole of Punjab before the partition and until the Ayub Khan era was a very tolerant society. Most of the muslims being converted by the Sufis who were mostly Sunnis but with a very strong attachment to Hazrat Ali. I found this totally changed after Zia ul Haq and with the mushrooming of madrassas. Thought this thread would help reduce the misconception. However it is upto to Mods to decide either way.
Shia Sunni divide has been going from the first century of Hijra. If we think we can resolve the issues in this thread. This is not going to happen and if that was the purpose of this thread, then it should be closed.
However one should not be afraid nor be annoyed by what other people think. As an example, until the ascension of Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz , family of Hazart Ali was openly called bad names during the Ommayaad rule. Similarly first three Khalifas were called bad names during the reign of Isamael Safavi in Iran. Also I found some of the Shia sects such as Alawites of Syria and Ali Allahis ( some Kurdish tribes in North of Iran) attribute divine powers to Hazrat Ali.
Does that mean one should hate Shias or Shia should hate Sunnis ???. Why should people be ostracised for the sins of other people specially when these lived hundred of years ago.
I can only only say about myself, that having family members both Shias as well Sunnis. I find hardly any difference between actual beliefs of the two sects. Main difference appears during Muharram. Even then most of the Sunni members attend Majlis only they dont do Maatam.
However, I may have been lucky to be brought up in a tolerant family. In my honest opinion, whole of Punjab before the partition and until the Ayub Khan era was a very tolerant society. Most of the muslims being converted by the Sufis who were mostly Sunnis but with a very strong attachment to Hazrat Ali. I found this totally changed after Zia ul Haq and with the mushrooming of madrassas. Thought this thread would help reduce the misconception. However it is upto to Mods to decide either way.
alamgir
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 380
- Reaction score
- 0
most important thing is to see the behavier of hazrat ali(ra) with first three caliphs Hadrat Ali (R.A.) had taken pledge of loyalty on the hands of all the three past Khalifahs. However he was late in taking pledge at the hand of Hadrat Abu Bakr (R.A.).
The reason why he was late in taking pledge on the hands of Hadrat Abu Bakr (R.A.) was the serious illness of his beloved wife, Hadrat Fatima (R.A.) and that he was busy in collection of the Holy Qur'an. It is mentioned in the famous history book, Tabaqat ibn Sa'd: When Hadrat Abu Bakr (R.A.) enquired of Ali (R.A.) why he was so late in taking pledge of loyalty and whether he disliked his "Khilafat", Ali (R.A.) replied, "I do not dislike your leadership but the fact is that I had taken an oath after the death of the Holy Prophet not to put on my sheet (i.e. not to engage in any work) except for performing Salat until I have collected all the parts of the Holy Qur'an." The Hadrat Ali (R.A.) took pledge of loyalty on the hand of Abu Bakr and helped him throughout his Khilafat. He was very active during the time of Hadrat Umar and also married his daughter, Umm-i-Kulthum to him. In the matter of Hadrat Uthman's election he voted in his favour as has been mentioned before.
Hadrat Ali (R.A.) was one of the very important members of "Shura" (Advisory Council) during the time of the first three Khalifahs. He was also the great jurist (Mufti) of Medina during the time of past Khalifahs. He was among the panel of six persons who had to select the Khalifah amongst themselves after Hadrat Umar (R.A.). Hadrat Uthman had great regard for him and consulted him in all the matters. His sons were the main guards at Uthmans residence when the rebels laid siege to his house. Hadrat Ali (R.A.) gave his fullest possible support to all of his predecessors.
HAZRAT ALI ON HAZRAT ABU BAKR AND HAZRAT UMAR
(RADI ALLAHU ANHUM AJMA'IN)
The Muslim Revivalist (Mujaddid) of the 14th Century, A'LA HAZRAT IMAAM AHMED RAZA AL-QADERI (Reh) in his book, "GHAYATUT TAHQEEQ FI IMAAMATUL 'ALI AS SIDDEEQ," quotes from "SAWA IQUL MUHARRIQAH" that: "Imaam Abul Qaasim Ismaeel Muhammad Bin Al Fazl Balkhi in his Kitaab, 'AS SUNNAH' stated that Imaam ibn Hajjar Makki reported that Alqamah (radi Allahu anhu) narrated that Hazrat Ali (radi Allahu anhu) was once informed that some people declared that he (Hazrat Ali) is higher in status than Hazraat Shaykhain (Abu Bakr and Umar) - radi Allahu anhuma.
"Upon hearing this, he (Hazrat Ali) stood on the mimbar and declared after praises to Allah and His Messenger (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), 'O People! News had reached me that some people are saying that I have a higher status than Abu Bakr (radi Allahu anhu) and Umar (radi Allahu anhu). Had I clarified the ruling earlier on this matter, then the subscribers to such a view would have certainly been punished by me.
" 'As from today, whosoever is heard to make such utterances is a slanderer (MUFTARI), and he shall be liable for the punishment of a slanderer, which is 80 lashes.'
"Thereafter, he (Hazrat Ali) said, 'Without any doubt, after Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), the most excellent in the Ummah is Hazrat Abu Bakr (radi Allahu anhu), followed by Umar, and after him Allah knows best whose status appears next.'"
"Alqamah states that Sayyiduna Hassan Mujtaba (radi Allahu anhu) was present in that gathering and remarked, 'By Allah! If he (Hazrat Ali) was to make mention of the third name (after Umar Farooq), he would have mentioned the name of Uthman (radi Allahu anhu).' "
The reason why he was late in taking pledge on the hands of Hadrat Abu Bakr (R.A.) was the serious illness of his beloved wife, Hadrat Fatima (R.A.) and that he was busy in collection of the Holy Qur'an. It is mentioned in the famous history book, Tabaqat ibn Sa'd: When Hadrat Abu Bakr (R.A.) enquired of Ali (R.A.) why he was so late in taking pledge of loyalty and whether he disliked his "Khilafat", Ali (R.A.) replied, "I do not dislike your leadership but the fact is that I had taken an oath after the death of the Holy Prophet not to put on my sheet (i.e. not to engage in any work) except for performing Salat until I have collected all the parts of the Holy Qur'an." The Hadrat Ali (R.A.) took pledge of loyalty on the hand of Abu Bakr and helped him throughout his Khilafat. He was very active during the time of Hadrat Umar and also married his daughter, Umm-i-Kulthum to him. In the matter of Hadrat Uthman's election he voted in his favour as has been mentioned before.
Hadrat Ali (R.A.) was one of the very important members of "Shura" (Advisory Council) during the time of the first three Khalifahs. He was also the great jurist (Mufti) of Medina during the time of past Khalifahs. He was among the panel of six persons who had to select the Khalifah amongst themselves after Hadrat Umar (R.A.). Hadrat Uthman had great regard for him and consulted him in all the matters. His sons were the main guards at Uthmans residence when the rebels laid siege to his house. Hadrat Ali (R.A.) gave his fullest possible support to all of his predecessors.
HAZRAT ALI ON HAZRAT ABU BAKR AND HAZRAT UMAR
(RADI ALLAHU ANHUM AJMA'IN)
The Muslim Revivalist (Mujaddid) of the 14th Century, A'LA HAZRAT IMAAM AHMED RAZA AL-QADERI (Reh) in his book, "GHAYATUT TAHQEEQ FI IMAAMATUL 'ALI AS SIDDEEQ," quotes from "SAWA IQUL MUHARRIQAH" that: "Imaam Abul Qaasim Ismaeel Muhammad Bin Al Fazl Balkhi in his Kitaab, 'AS SUNNAH' stated that Imaam ibn Hajjar Makki reported that Alqamah (radi Allahu anhu) narrated that Hazrat Ali (radi Allahu anhu) was once informed that some people declared that he (Hazrat Ali) is higher in status than Hazraat Shaykhain (Abu Bakr and Umar) - radi Allahu anhuma.
"Upon hearing this, he (Hazrat Ali) stood on the mimbar and declared after praises to Allah and His Messenger (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), 'O People! News had reached me that some people are saying that I have a higher status than Abu Bakr (radi Allahu anhu) and Umar (radi Allahu anhu). Had I clarified the ruling earlier on this matter, then the subscribers to such a view would have certainly been punished by me.
" 'As from today, whosoever is heard to make such utterances is a slanderer (MUFTARI), and he shall be liable for the punishment of a slanderer, which is 80 lashes.'
"Thereafter, he (Hazrat Ali) said, 'Without any doubt, after Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), the most excellent in the Ummah is Hazrat Abu Bakr (radi Allahu anhu), followed by Umar, and after him Allah knows best whose status appears next.'"
"Alqamah states that Sayyiduna Hassan Mujtaba (radi Allahu anhu) was present in that gathering and remarked, 'By Allah! If he (Hazrat Ali) was to make mention of the third name (after Umar Farooq), he would have mentioned the name of Uthman (radi Allahu anhu).' "
HAIDER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 21, 2006
- Messages
- 33,771
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
Two major reason, lack of education. Majority of mosque run by narrow minded uneducated Molvies. And last most important factor, we kept the holy book quran in our shelves and all published 95% quran in circulation are in arabic only, not in translation in Urdu. We also invented hadees on the basis of hate and making oneself superior then the others.
We know the facts of hate, but we deny.....
AoA
Education I feel is the last reason for Shia-Sunni hate. The differences have been used by govts for whatever agenda they have. Read about how certain groups were supported during afghan jihad because of their sects.Even in pakistan govts have supported certain sectarial groups.
Hell untill the early 80s when I lived in Skardu, Baltistan was a very pacificst society . The fact that these areas were populated by religious minorities (almost all of Baltistan is Twelver Shia, Hunza is Ismaili, as is most of the upper Chitral, while Gilgit has an equal mix of Shias, Sunnis and Ismailis) was NOT a source of contention or conflict.
Enter the Zia era and we know what happened.
So my point is education or not if the educated among the govt support it for whatever reasons then why blame the uneducated.
Education I feel is the last reason for Shia-Sunni hate. The differences have been used by govts for whatever agenda they have. Read about how certain groups were supported during afghan jihad because of their sects.Even in pakistan govts have supported certain sectarial groups.
Hell untill the early 80s when I lived in Skardu, Baltistan was a very pacificst society . The fact that these areas were populated by religious minorities (almost all of Baltistan is Twelver Shia, Hunza is Ismaili, as is most of the upper Chitral, while Gilgit has an equal mix of Shias, Sunnis and Ismailis) was NOT a source of contention or conflict.
Enter the Zia era and we know what happened.
So my point is education or not if the educated among the govt support it for whatever reasons then why blame the uneducated.
HAIDER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 21, 2006
- Messages
- 33,771
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
First interaction of personality is me myself.(if i don't know how to handle myself, this mean other person can handle my thoughts and immagination) Second comes some religious leader. Govts comes third. Cuz myself is always their, Molvi is always their, but govt agenda changes...
aksingh
BANNED
New Recruit
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2007
- Messages
- 75
- Reaction score
- 0
Finally a decent bloke on this forum...Cheers to you bruv...
Only the strong are not afraid to hide behind their weaknesses...kudos
If more people like you come to the fore it shall bode well for mankind...
Similar threads
