Khalifa and Siritual guide
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
@asif, i knew this point would come up. they were a few select ppl. i clearly said in my post that there is no instance of curses on hz ali before his khilafat. i am not here to point out the differences b/w shia and sunni. so please focus on the theory i mentioned in my first post. if you can convince me that i am wrong usig logic and rhetoric i will change my opinion but dont throw propaganda at me.
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
asif786
Agakhanis have stopped doing it,
Tell your Maulana this fact. Ask him to stop cursing and ordrt his feet lickers to do the same.And this practice was stopped by Umar ibn Abdul Aziz , the bani ummaya leader
Agakhanis have stopped doing it,
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
regalRegal wrote:@asif, i knew this point would come up. they were a few select ppl. i clearly said in my post that there is no instance of curses on hz ali before his khilafat. i am not here to point out the differences b/w shia and sunni. so please focus on the theory i mentioned in my first post. if you can convince me that i am wrong usig logic and rhetoric i will change my opinion but dont throw propaganda at me.
I would only like to mention that your theory never existed during khilafat time and its a fairy tale .Now you can come to any conclusion which makes you happy.
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Now this i cannot answer maybe aqs or profastion will replyMuslim First wrote:asif786Tell your Maulana this fact. Ask him to stop cursing and ordrt his feet lickers to do the same.And this practice was stopped by Umar ibn Abdul Aziz , the bani ummaya leader
Agakhanis have stopped doing it,
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
asif, come out of your hypnosis. im trying to make logical arguments but all you revert to what "history" tells you. my fairytale contains more common sense than your fairytale. if all you can come up with is "your theory was not there at khalifas time" its better you go back to ignorance. try countering the arguments for Gods sake.
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Man whats wrong with you ? what you want to debate? the things which never were? its like ek tha raja aur ek thi rani and all lived happily ever after .Regal wrote:asif, come out of your hypnosis. im trying to make logical arguments but all you revert to what "history" tells you. my fairytale contains more common sense than your fairytale. if all you can come up with is "your theory was not there at khalifas time" its better you go back to ignorance. try countering the arguments for Gods sake.
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
ek tha raja aur ek thi rani ke liye hazaro log mar diye lekin phir bhi khatam na hui kahani lol...
theres nothing wrong with me. cuz im saying something other than what mullas normally talk abt doesnt make me wrong. its time we stop believing in mulla's hatestories and love other human beings. you keep saying "usurpers" "lanaeens" like a parrot everywhere, keep repeating what others taught you abt things that happened a millinium ago, have you ever tried to justify their claims? if their claims donot even pass the common sense test then why do you still believe in them? enough killing has been done on just a difference of a few words. would you like it if someone kills you for what your ancestors believed in a 1000 years ago?
what "things that never were"? produce a counter argument if you can not bs like "things that never were". what i want to debate? read my opening post.
1) there was no usurping by the first three khalifas.
2) Hz Ali a.s had no claim to becoming leader of arabs
3) there is a huge difference b/w leader of arabs and maula
4) hz Ali gave bayt to the first three caliphs why dont you give bayt aswell?
I have provided arguments for each in my opening post. kill my arguments if you can, dont unload ur history here. everyone has his own version of history. As i said before, i am not some ignorant, i will change my views if i am logically proved wrong.
theres nothing wrong with me. cuz im saying something other than what mullas normally talk abt doesnt make me wrong. its time we stop believing in mulla's hatestories and love other human beings. you keep saying "usurpers" "lanaeens" like a parrot everywhere, keep repeating what others taught you abt things that happened a millinium ago, have you ever tried to justify their claims? if their claims donot even pass the common sense test then why do you still believe in them? enough killing has been done on just a difference of a few words. would you like it if someone kills you for what your ancestors believed in a 1000 years ago?
what "things that never were"? produce a counter argument if you can not bs like "things that never were". what i want to debate? read my opening post.
1) there was no usurping by the first three khalifas.
2) Hz Ali a.s had no claim to becoming leader of arabs
3) there is a huge difference b/w leader of arabs and maula
4) hz Ali gave bayt to the first three caliphs why dont you give bayt aswell?
I have provided arguments for each in my opening post. kill my arguments if you can, dont unload ur history here. everyone has his own version of history. As i said before, i am not some ignorant, i will change my views if i am logically proved wrong.
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Regal
As you are not bias pls read my post and on thread eid e ghadeer with references from Sunni tafseers and books and decide for yourself that how much important was ghadeer event in the eyes of allah swt and rasullah saw . i rest my debate here .
wasalam
As you are not bias pls read my post and on thread eid e ghadeer with references from Sunni tafseers and books and decide for yourself that how much important was ghadeer event in the eyes of allah swt and rasullah saw . i rest my debate here .
wasalam
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
in fact for the sake of argument, i acknowledged that the events at khum took place. its like the second line of my post.
-
profastian
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:00 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
And why did you direct this at meRegal wrote: @profastian, atleast think before you believe anything. Hz Ali a.s was reverred in the muslim world. there are no recorded incidents before his khilafat in which someone has showered curses on hazrat ali. Even today sunnis respect him and his sons what are you talking about? i have been among sunnis most of my life and if you can believe me, the sunnis have great respect for hz ali a.s and his sons. i read that even non muslim warriors, decades after Hz Ali's death, used to write his name on their swords before going into battle. If the people cursed him in jummah prayers why did they chose him as khalifa? please dont show your ignorance. it is only aqa moulla who was caught cursing the three caliphs of islam and he had to appologise to the muslim world.
I never said it -
profastian
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:00 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
So? The last thing we want to do is to follow the AgaKhanis or Umar ibn Abdul Aziz...Muslim First wrote:asif786Tell your Maulana this fact. Ask him to stop cursing and ordrt his feet lickers to do the same.And this practice was stopped by Umar ibn Abdul Aziz , the bani ummaya leader
Agakhanis have stopped doing it,
-
Husain taher
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 8:26 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
when Rabia Basri(1st female Sufi Wali,introduced Divine Love) was asked if she hated Satan. Hazrat
Rabia replied: "My love to God
has so possessed me that no
place remains for loving or
hating any save Him."
Learn something from her cursing abdes
Rabia replied: "My love to God
has so possessed me that no
place remains for loving or
hating any save Him."
Learn something from her cursing abdes
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Lol profastian that was a typo. so if you dont want to follow agakhanis and keep on cursing, that means you want to follow muawiya cuz he kept cursing at khalifa. yazeediyat exposed!
@hussain taher. abdes need to vent their frustration, so they curse and cry and blame. love of Allah is replaced by love of dai. abdullah became abdulhussain then became abdesyedna.
so if you dont want to follow agakhanis and keep on cursing, that means you want to follow muawiya cuz he kept cursing at khalifa. yazeediyat exposed!@hussain taher. abdes need to vent their frustration, so they curse and cry and blame. love of Allah is replaced by love of dai. abdullah became abdulhussain then became abdesyedna.
-
ghulam muhammed
- Posts: 11653
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Ali’s Message (رضّى الله عنه) in Nahjul Balagha
The Nahjul Balagha is considered sacred by the Shia, which they consider the most reliable source for the words, sermons, and letters of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). Let us examine one of these sermons in particular, which is available on the popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org:
Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 126
Ali says:
“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
Let us now reflect on the words of Ali (رضّى الله عنه), line by line.
“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness…”
We could not possibly find a better description for the Shia than this. The Shia love Ali (رضّى الله عنه) so much that they exaggerate and exalt his status to a level of Shirk, thereby going away from rightfulness. The Shia give the names of Allah to Ali (رضّى الله عنه), calling him the Living “Ism-i Azam” of Allah, or the Living Supreme Name of Allah. They call Ali (رضّى الله عنه) the Mazhar Al Aja-ib (The Executor of Wonders) and Mushkil Kusha (the Remover of Hardships) . They exaggerate so much that they call Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to be the Yadullah (hand of Allah). They call him Asdadullah (unconquerable and ever-overpowering strength of Allah). They say Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was too powerful for even the angels to stop him, that all the atoms in the world submit to Ali (رضّى الله عنه), that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) is the speaking Quran, and is the Mirror of Allah.
Look how loving Ali (رضّى الله عنه) too much has caused them to exaggerate his status like the Christians did with Jesus (عليه السلام), and look how this leads to Shirk. It also leads to going away from rightfulness, such as how the Shia hate the wives and companions of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). Ali (رضّى الله عنه) warned the Shia on this matter. And the source is the Shia’s very own Nahjul Balagha.
“…and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity.”
Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says not to hate him like the Nasibis (haters of Ahlel Bayt). He then says that the best of people are the ones who are on the middle course. Who else is that other than the mainstream Muslims ? The Ahlus Sunnah loves Ali (رضّى الله عنه) deeply, and considers him one of the greatest Sahabah. On the other hand, the Ahlus Sunnah does not exaggerate by giving him characteristics of Allah, nor do they hate the wives or friends of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).
Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says be with the majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. Can the Shia really get a clearer command than this? Who is the majority of the Muslims other than the mainstream ? Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says be with the great majority of Muslims, not split up into these tiny Shia sects.
“You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf.”
So why is it then that the Shia have schismed from the Ummah? Why do the Shia not follow Ali (رضّى الله عنه) when he says to be with the great majority of Muslims?
“Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
Even if someone claims to be a Shia’t Ali (i.e. under the headband of Ali), he really is an enemy of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) if he calls for sectarianism and the creation of a religious sect. This is Ali’s condemnation of all Shia sects that have split away from the mainstream Muslims. Ali (رضّى الله عنه) even commanded these heretics to be killed, so it can be seen that he has no compassion for any of these deviants even if they claim to love him.
The Nahjul Balagha is considered sacred by the Shia, which they consider the most reliable source for the words, sermons, and letters of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). Let us examine one of these sermons in particular, which is available on the popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org:
Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 126
Ali says:
“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
Let us now reflect on the words of Ali (رضّى الله عنه), line by line.
“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness…”
We could not possibly find a better description for the Shia than this. The Shia love Ali (رضّى الله عنه) so much that they exaggerate and exalt his status to a level of Shirk, thereby going away from rightfulness. The Shia give the names of Allah to Ali (رضّى الله عنه), calling him the Living “Ism-i Azam” of Allah, or the Living Supreme Name of Allah. They call Ali (رضّى الله عنه) the Mazhar Al Aja-ib (The Executor of Wonders) and Mushkil Kusha (the Remover of Hardships) . They exaggerate so much that they call Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to be the Yadullah (hand of Allah). They call him Asdadullah (unconquerable and ever-overpowering strength of Allah). They say Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was too powerful for even the angels to stop him, that all the atoms in the world submit to Ali (رضّى الله عنه), that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) is the speaking Quran, and is the Mirror of Allah.
Look how loving Ali (رضّى الله عنه) too much has caused them to exaggerate his status like the Christians did with Jesus (عليه السلام), and look how this leads to Shirk. It also leads to going away from rightfulness, such as how the Shia hate the wives and companions of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). Ali (رضّى الله عنه) warned the Shia on this matter. And the source is the Shia’s very own Nahjul Balagha.
“…and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity.”
Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says not to hate him like the Nasibis (haters of Ahlel Bayt). He then says that the best of people are the ones who are on the middle course. Who else is that other than the mainstream Muslims ? The Ahlus Sunnah loves Ali (رضّى الله عنه) deeply, and considers him one of the greatest Sahabah. On the other hand, the Ahlus Sunnah does not exaggerate by giving him characteristics of Allah, nor do they hate the wives or friends of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم).
Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says be with the majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. Can the Shia really get a clearer command than this? Who is the majority of the Muslims other than the mainstream ? Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says be with the great majority of Muslims, not split up into these tiny Shia sects.
“You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf.”
So why is it then that the Shia have schismed from the Ummah? Why do the Shia not follow Ali (رضّى الله عنه) when he says to be with the great majority of Muslims?
“Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
Even if someone claims to be a Shia’t Ali (i.e. under the headband of Ali), he really is an enemy of Ali (رضّى الله عنه) if he calls for sectarianism and the creation of a religious sect. This is Ali’s condemnation of all Shia sects that have split away from the mainstream Muslims. Ali (رضّى الله عنه) even commanded these heretics to be killed, so it can be seen that he has no compassion for any of these deviants even if they claim to love him.
-
profastian
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:00 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
What about Ruhullah, Khalilullah, Rasollullah? Is that shirk too?ghulam muhammed wrote:
“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
-
ghulam muhammed
- Posts: 11653
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
No, it is not shirk.profastian wrote:What about Ruhullah, Khalilullah, Rasollullah? Is that shirk too?
Ruh : Spirit/Soul.
Ruhullah : Spirit/Soul from Allah.
Khalil : Friend.
Khalilullah : Friend of Allah.
Rasul : Messenger/Apostle.
Rasulullah : Messenger of Allah.
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
I found the below article on net written by twelver shia and it seems a reply to the article posted by GM from wahabi website ahlelbayt.com
'Ali's Message in Nahjul Balagha'
The Nahjul Balagha is considered sacred by the Shia, which they consider the most reliable source for the words, sermons, and letters of Ali. Let us examine one of these sermons in particular, which is available on the popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org:
Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 126
Ali says:“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
What the author says about Nahjul Balagha, or Peak of Eloquence, is indeed true. It is a record of letters, sermons and sayings of Mawla Ali (AS), held in a very authentic regard.
Before i start to reply to the author's comments on the sermon, I must share with the readers that many sermons of Mawla Ali (AS) address his Shias, his followers, his soldiers, his armies, to be on the right path, to mend their ways. Just like how Islam is the true path and being a Muslim will not help you until you follow Islam in it's truest sense, similarly, we Believe that Shiaism is the actual movement which intends to restore Islam to it's original position, but a Shia is not saved until he strictly adheres to the orders of Rasool (SAW) and his righteous successors, Mawla Ali (AS) and the Imams from his offspring. Shias are not angels, they can kill, rob, steal. However, all these characteristics would be absent from a True Shia and it is they who are the real Shias of Ali (AS).
How will a shia feel if on the day of judgment, Rasool (SAW) and Mawla Ali (AS) turn their faces away from them? Thus we should strive towards piety and righteousness in order to ensure that our leaders, the Prophet (SAW) and their Ahlulbayt (AS) own us on the Day of judgment, rather than turning away from us telling us we were never their true followers, or Shias (the literal meaning of being a follower).
Let us now reflect on the words of Ali, line by line.
“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness…”
We could not possibly find a better description for the Shia than this. The Shia love Ali so much that they exaggerate and exalt his status to a level of Shirk, thereby going away from rightfulness. The Shia give the names of Allah to Ali, calling him the Living “Ism-i Azam” of Allah, or the Living Supreme Name of Allah. They call Ali the Mazhar Al Aja-ib (The Executor of Wonders) and Mushkil Kusha (the Remover of Hardships) . They exaggerate so much that they call Ali to be the Yadullah (hand of Allah). They call him Asdadullah (unconquerable and ever-overpowering strength of Allah). They say Ali was too powerful for even the angels to stop him, that all the atoms in the world submit to Ali, that Ali is the speaking Quran, and is the Mirror of Allah.
Look how loving Ali too much has caused them to exaggerate his status like the Christians did with Jesus, and look how this leads to Shirk. It also leads to going away from rightfulness, such as how the Shia hate the wives and companions of the Prophet. Ali warned the Shia on this matter. And the source is the Shia’s very own Nahjul Balagha.
With Regard to Mawla Ali (AS), two people will be ruined. The first group would be those who love him so much that takes one away from rightfulness. The author thinks that the Shias, the twelvers Ithna Asharis, make Ali (AS) a god in the name of love.
I would really expect the Author to research on a material before giving comments on any issue. Half knowledge is dangerous. Why was Ali (AS) special, you may never know, but his specialty has been vouched by Rasool (SAW) on every moment.
Taken from a Sunni website which describes the merits of the first three caliphs before mentioning Ali (AS):
Sayyidina Ali received the title Asadullah meaning Lion of Allah. Hadrat Ali was the cousin of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Hadrat Ali was born in the Ka’ba. His father was Abu Talib. He is one of the Asharatul Mubashara. When he first opened his eyes he saw Prophet Muhammad. He was raised up by Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). He slept in the bed of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) when the Prophet went on hijra. He is called the gate of knowledge. He was a Hafiz ul Qur’an. He is one of the first people to accept Islam. He was also the first youth to accept Islam. Hadrat Ali married Bibi Fatima. He had two children, Sayyidina Imam Hasan and Sayyidina Imam Husain. He fought in many battles with Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) including the battle of Badr. He killed the best warrior of the enemies in a man to man combat. He took part in man to man battles.
The author says that because the Shias call Ali (AS) the Ism-e-Azam, Yad Allah, Asadallah, Mushkil Kusha, Mazhar al Ajaib, they put Ali out of his original place and thus are sinners according to Mawla Ali's (AS) own Sermon.
What should i Call the author himself, who believes in the prophecy of Mawla Ali (AS) so much that he has used that sermon as his basis to call us Kaafirs? How could Ali (AS) know before hand and tell that in the future two groups will be ruined, those who love him too much and those who hate him too much? Was this a revelation revealed to Ali (AS)? Does the author agree that Ali (AS) had knowledge of the unseen as much as Allah gave him? Does this belief ruin some one?
The shias do not call Ali the Asadullah (or the lion of Allah). He earned that title during his heroics in Badr, Uhud, Khandaq, Khyber, Hunain. How is calling Ali a lion of Allah take us away from righteousness?
Wasn't it Ali (AS) who slept on the bed of Rasool (SAW) to assist in his (SAW) migration? During the battle of Khandaq when Medina was sorrounded by 23000 pagans, and Amr ibn Abd Wud crossed the trench and challenged any Muslim to fight him and send him to hell or be killed and go to paradise, and when all the companions of Rasool (SAW) stood motionless in fear and confusion and the Quran said:
When they (pagans) came upon you from above you and from below you, and
when the eyes turned dull, and the hearts rose up to the throats, and you began to think diverse thoughts of Allah.
Quran [33:10]
Wasn't it Ali (AS) who killed Amr ibn Abd Wud and removed hardship of the companions (RA)?
And during the battle of Khyber, when the last fort could not be conquered by the Islamic force Rasool (SAW) took with him (SAW), wasn't it Ali (AS) who executed his wonders (Mazhar al Ajaib) to pull out the door of Khyber with his hands, hands which had the mercy of Allah on them, will of Allah with them, strength bestowed by Allah (Yad Allah), and conquered the unconquerable fort easing the hardships and troubles (Mushkil Kusha) faced by the Sahaba (RA) during conquests of that fort.
How can calling Ali (AS) with these kuniyat and titles be committing shirk when the qualities of Ali (AS) are only attributed to the bounties of Allah bestowed on him (AS)?
Comparing our love to Ali (AS) with that to Christian's love for Jesus is immaturity. Christians love Isa (AS) as a son of God, as one of the Three, as a God himself. Shias love (AS) Ali (AS) as a slave of Muhammad (SAW), Chosen creation of One Allah, war hero for the Muslims, Mawla over all those who consider Rasool (SAW) as their mawla, Imam ul Mutaqeen or leader of the pious. Can any sane and mature mind see a link between the two?
So definitely, they are not Athna Asharis or twelvers who will be ruined because of their excessive love for Ali (AS). But because it is Ali (AS) who has said that a group will be ruined because of their love from him (AS), the Bab ul Ilm or gateway of knowledge as Rasool (SAW) himself has proclaimed, Ali (AS) cannot be wrong. There must be a group who will be ruined because of their excessive love for him (AS) which will take them on the wrong path.
History testifies that one such a group existed and maybe still exists, which confirms that what Mawla Ali (AS) said 1400 years ago, happened and stands before us all:
The belief in incarnation. The Nusayris believe that Ali is God in the flesh. Ali created Muhammad from his spirit, and Muhammad created Salman, an early Shi'ite saint. These three form a Trinity in which Ali is described as the 'meaning', Muhammad is the 'name' and Salman is the 'door'.
Any person irrespective of sect or religion, who associates any one with One supreme god Allah, is a Mushrik and will be ruined. Anyone who believes that any one is God, or God in flesh due to their love for that someone is ruined. Not only that but any one who calls a non-prophet a prophet, or who calls a non-Imam an Imam, or who calls a non-Wasilah-to-Allah a Wasilah-chosen-by-Allah will be ruined.
Knowledge of the unseen belongs to Allah alone. Power belongs to Allah alone. However, he might give them to anyone, as much as he wants, at anytime. Isa (AS) could cure the blind and bring back the dead to life. If we believe that Isa (AS) does it independently then that is Shirk however if we believe that it is a gift bestowed on Isa (AS) by Allah, who does the miracles through the will of Allah, then that is what the true stand is. If Allah indeed has chosen Ali (AS) to execute wonders to assist the prophet of Islam (AS), then how can that be shirk?
The author has concluded that hating the wives and companions of Rasool (SAW) is going away from rightfulness. We agree. But hating those wives of Rasool (SAW) and those companions of Rasool (SAW) who hated Ali (AS) is definitely a sign of love for Ali and thus, a testimony of belief.
The Messenger of Allah said: Loving Ali is the sign of belief, and hating Ali is the sign of hypocrisy.
Sahih Tirmidhi, volume 5, page 643
Sunan Ibn Majah, volume 1, page 142
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal volume 1, pages 84,95,128
Tarikh al-Kabir, by al-Bukhari (the author of Sahih), v1, part 1, p202
(Those who fought against Mawla Ali (AS) in the battles of Jamal, Siffin and Nahrwan definitely did not love Ali).
“…and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity.”
Ali says not to hate him like the Nasibis (haters of Ahlel Bayt). He then says that the best of people are the ones who are on the middle course. Who else is that other than the mainstream Muslims (i.e. the Ahlus Sunnah)? The Ahlus Sunnah loves Ali deeply, and considers him one of the greatest Sahabah. On the other hand, the Ahlus Sunnah does not exaggerate by giving him characteristics of Allah, nor do they hate the wives or friends of the Prophet.
Ali says be with the majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. Can the Shia really get a clearer command than this? Who is the majority of the Muslims other than the orthodox Ahlus Sunnah? Ali says be with the great majority of Muslims, not split up into these tiny Shia sects.
Intellectual laws of love and hatred state three things. Love your friend. Love your friend's friend. Hate your enemy. Hate your friend's enemy. How can i even claim to love my father or my mother, if I also love those who troubled them and abused them? Will you love your friend who abuses your righteous father? Can you claim to love your father if you equally love your uncle who over took your father's business by crook and destroyed him financially?
Definitely, the Ahlus Sunnah are not Nasibis (Salifis who praise Yazeed (the cursed) even), but do they really love Ali (AS), when they love his competitors in battle fields as well, like Ayesha, Talha, Zubair, Mawiya (the cursed)?
Do you think that giving Ali (AS) the title of Asadullah or Lion of Allah exaggerating his position? What if calling Ali (AS) a simple human being who could make mistakes and sins just like any other Sahabah really be diminishing his status, status of a Mawla, Wali and Imam?
Mawla Ali (AS) emphasizes on unity and we all should pay him heed being his Shias. What is this unity, is discussed later.
“You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf.”
So why is it then that the Shia have schismed from the Ummah? Are they not a prey of Shaitan’s now? And so it is that Shaitan has infiltrated the ranks of the Shia, leading so many millions of Shia astray. Why do the Shia not follow Ali when he says to be with the great majority of Muslims?
Ali (AS) definitely tells his followers not to divide amongst themselves and be with the majority of Muslims, not to split up in sects. Definitely, Allah himself does not like divisions.
Surely they who divided their religion into parts and became sects, you have no
concern with them; their affair is only with Allah, then He will inform them of what they
did.
Quran [6:159]
Before coming to what Allah orders and Mawla Ali (AS) advised, I would like to comment on what the Author deducted from the sermon.
The author says that we should be with the Orthodox Sunni because Mawla Ali (AS) said be with the great majority of Muslims. Who should we be with? Malikis? Hanafis? Shafis? Hanbalis? Ahle Hadith? Deobandis? Barelvis? Wahabis? And the author must remember that the day any other sect increases in population than his own, he must select that sect in order to justify and fulfill his own Analogy.
It is true that Quran orders us not to divide our religion into parts, but unfortunately, no sect believes it’s a part of Islam, everyone believes that they are the actual Islam. We are Shias, Sunnis, wahabis, deobandis, agakhanis, ismailis.. did I forget any one? We are tribes. We are sects but we claim to be the actual version of Islam and not a sect. So how can we not divide ourselves into sects today? We should stop pointing fingers at others about their “sect” and remember that Islamic brotherhood is above all. If we help some one, we should not see we are helping a shia or a sunni but that we are helping a Muslim, a human. If we pray salaat in a mosque it should not matter whose mosque is it, for prayer is for Allah only.
What Mawla Ali (AS) said is true, Allah's support is in unity and that is the only reason we , Muslims are suffering throughout the world. If only we all listened to Mawla Ali (AS) and remained united in the name of Islam even if we had different views regarding different companions and issues of Fiqh etc, Allah would have helped us all.
Shias follow Mawla Ali (AS) and are with the great majority of Muslims because they themselves form a part of that majority. I am a Shia and my family has Shias as well as Sunnis, my friends in university, college, office have been Sunnis and even wahabis, the people i play sports with are Sunnis. We live togethor, as muslims, accepting the differences which exist amongst us, difference of opinions. Those people should be worried who declare us kaafirs, Faasiqs and who preach that we should be killed anywhere where we are found.
However, i would like to ask the author, did Imam Hussain (AS) commited a sin (god forbid), by not giving Bayah to yazeed the cursed, when main stream majority of the Muslims accepted Yazeed as the caliph? No doubt who follow literal approach to Islam label Mawla Hussain (AS) as a baghi or traitor.
“Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
Even if someone claims to be a Shia’t Ali (i.e. under the headband of Ali), he really is an enemy of Ali if he calls for sectarianism and the creation of a religious sect. This is Ali’s condemnation of all Shia sects that have split away from the mainstream Muslims. Ali even commanded these heretics to be killed, so it can be seen that he has no compassion for any of these deviants even if they claim to love him.
As said earlier, some one claiming to be a Shia is not necessarily a Shia, just like some one claiming to be a Muslim might not be one. Adultery, Usury, Interest, Murder, Theft, Cruelty, Bribery etc will not save you even if you are under the headband of Mawla Ali (AS), because if you really were under that blessed band, you would think a hundred times before doing something so shameful.
Any one who causes a division amongst the Muslim Ummah (which includes Shias and Sunnis) is an enemy of Islam, enemy of Rasool (SAW) and enemy of Mawla Ali (AS). These include, unfortunately:
1. Those who openly curse or abuse people revered by other Muslims in order to create Fitnah (such as ignorant or extremist shias using vulgar and shameful language for people who we do not keep in good regards)
2. Those who openly respect and love and revere personalities reviled by other Muslims in order to create Fitnah (such as ignorant and extremist Sunnis loving and respecting people like yazeed, Mawiya etc)
3. Those scholars or Maulvis who pass on fatwas against other groups or sects calling them Kaafirs, nonmuslims and Wajib-ul-Qatl.
4. Those learned men who have the following of the people, and instead of uniting them, they create more confusions.
Why not we all focus on what unites us rather than divisions? Why not open fasts under the same roof, pray under the same roof just like we perform pilgrimage together? You love Mawiya, pray for him in your heart. I hate Mawiya, i keep my hatred for him in my heart.
Let not these sensitive issues be brought into the public but be kept for those who are learned and who are interested in the issue for intellectual and educational reasons?
The fact remains, our graves our sufficient for what we believed and did. Accept each other as we are, accept the differences and live a unified life when fighting against the enemies of Islam. Let us follow the path of Rasool (SAW), who left us the Quran and the Ahlulbayt (AS) after him (SAW).
'Ali's Message in Nahjul Balagha'
The Nahjul Balagha is considered sacred by the Shia, which they consider the most reliable source for the words, sermons, and letters of Ali. Let us examine one of these sermons in particular, which is available on the popular Shia website, Al-Islam.org:
Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 126
Ali says:“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf. Beware! Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
What the author says about Nahjul Balagha, or Peak of Eloquence, is indeed true. It is a record of letters, sermons and sayings of Mawla Ali (AS), held in a very authentic regard.
Before i start to reply to the author's comments on the sermon, I must share with the readers that many sermons of Mawla Ali (AS) address his Shias, his followers, his soldiers, his armies, to be on the right path, to mend their ways. Just like how Islam is the true path and being a Muslim will not help you until you follow Islam in it's truest sense, similarly, we Believe that Shiaism is the actual movement which intends to restore Islam to it's original position, but a Shia is not saved until he strictly adheres to the orders of Rasool (SAW) and his righteous successors, Mawla Ali (AS) and the Imams from his offspring. Shias are not angels, they can kill, rob, steal. However, all these characteristics would be absent from a True Shia and it is they who are the real Shias of Ali (AS).
How will a shia feel if on the day of judgment, Rasool (SAW) and Mawla Ali (AS) turn their faces away from them? Thus we should strive towards piety and righteousness in order to ensure that our leaders, the Prophet (SAW) and their Ahlulbayt (AS) own us on the Day of judgment, rather than turning away from us telling us we were never their true followers, or Shias (the literal meaning of being a follower).
Let us now reflect on the words of Ali, line by line.
“With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness…”
We could not possibly find a better description for the Shia than this. The Shia love Ali so much that they exaggerate and exalt his status to a level of Shirk, thereby going away from rightfulness. The Shia give the names of Allah to Ali, calling him the Living “Ism-i Azam” of Allah, or the Living Supreme Name of Allah. They call Ali the Mazhar Al Aja-ib (The Executor of Wonders) and Mushkil Kusha (the Remover of Hardships) . They exaggerate so much that they call Ali to be the Yadullah (hand of Allah). They call him Asdadullah (unconquerable and ever-overpowering strength of Allah). They say Ali was too powerful for even the angels to stop him, that all the atoms in the world submit to Ali, that Ali is the speaking Quran, and is the Mirror of Allah.
Look how loving Ali too much has caused them to exaggerate his status like the Christians did with Jesus, and look how this leads to Shirk. It also leads to going away from rightfulness, such as how the Shia hate the wives and companions of the Prophet. Ali warned the Shia on this matter. And the source is the Shia’s very own Nahjul Balagha.
With Regard to Mawla Ali (AS), two people will be ruined. The first group would be those who love him so much that takes one away from rightfulness. The author thinks that the Shias, the twelvers Ithna Asharis, make Ali (AS) a god in the name of love.
I would really expect the Author to research on a material before giving comments on any issue. Half knowledge is dangerous. Why was Ali (AS) special, you may never know, but his specialty has been vouched by Rasool (SAW) on every moment.
Taken from a Sunni website which describes the merits of the first three caliphs before mentioning Ali (AS):
Sayyidina Ali received the title Asadullah meaning Lion of Allah. Hadrat Ali was the cousin of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Hadrat Ali was born in the Ka’ba. His father was Abu Talib. He is one of the Asharatul Mubashara. When he first opened his eyes he saw Prophet Muhammad. He was raised up by Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). He slept in the bed of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) when the Prophet went on hijra. He is called the gate of knowledge. He was a Hafiz ul Qur’an. He is one of the first people to accept Islam. He was also the first youth to accept Islam. Hadrat Ali married Bibi Fatima. He had two children, Sayyidina Imam Hasan and Sayyidina Imam Husain. He fought in many battles with Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) including the battle of Badr. He killed the best warrior of the enemies in a man to man combat. He took part in man to man battles.
The author says that because the Shias call Ali (AS) the Ism-e-Azam, Yad Allah, Asadallah, Mushkil Kusha, Mazhar al Ajaib, they put Ali out of his original place and thus are sinners according to Mawla Ali's (AS) own Sermon.
What should i Call the author himself, who believes in the prophecy of Mawla Ali (AS) so much that he has used that sermon as his basis to call us Kaafirs? How could Ali (AS) know before hand and tell that in the future two groups will be ruined, those who love him too much and those who hate him too much? Was this a revelation revealed to Ali (AS)? Does the author agree that Ali (AS) had knowledge of the unseen as much as Allah gave him? Does this belief ruin some one?
The shias do not call Ali the Asadullah (or the lion of Allah). He earned that title during his heroics in Badr, Uhud, Khandaq, Khyber, Hunain. How is calling Ali a lion of Allah take us away from righteousness?
Wasn't it Ali (AS) who slept on the bed of Rasool (SAW) to assist in his (SAW) migration? During the battle of Khandaq when Medina was sorrounded by 23000 pagans, and Amr ibn Abd Wud crossed the trench and challenged any Muslim to fight him and send him to hell or be killed and go to paradise, and when all the companions of Rasool (SAW) stood motionless in fear and confusion and the Quran said:
When they (pagans) came upon you from above you and from below you, and
when the eyes turned dull, and the hearts rose up to the throats, and you began to think diverse thoughts of Allah.
Quran [33:10]
Wasn't it Ali (AS) who killed Amr ibn Abd Wud and removed hardship of the companions (RA)?
And during the battle of Khyber, when the last fort could not be conquered by the Islamic force Rasool (SAW) took with him (SAW), wasn't it Ali (AS) who executed his wonders (Mazhar al Ajaib) to pull out the door of Khyber with his hands, hands which had the mercy of Allah on them, will of Allah with them, strength bestowed by Allah (Yad Allah), and conquered the unconquerable fort easing the hardships and troubles (Mushkil Kusha) faced by the Sahaba (RA) during conquests of that fort.
How can calling Ali (AS) with these kuniyat and titles be committing shirk when the qualities of Ali (AS) are only attributed to the bounties of Allah bestowed on him (AS)?
Comparing our love to Ali (AS) with that to Christian's love for Jesus is immaturity. Christians love Isa (AS) as a son of God, as one of the Three, as a God himself. Shias love (AS) Ali (AS) as a slave of Muhammad (SAW), Chosen creation of One Allah, war hero for the Muslims, Mawla over all those who consider Rasool (SAW) as their mawla, Imam ul Mutaqeen or leader of the pious. Can any sane and mature mind see a link between the two?
So definitely, they are not Athna Asharis or twelvers who will be ruined because of their excessive love for Ali (AS). But because it is Ali (AS) who has said that a group will be ruined because of their love from him (AS), the Bab ul Ilm or gateway of knowledge as Rasool (SAW) himself has proclaimed, Ali (AS) cannot be wrong. There must be a group who will be ruined because of their excessive love for him (AS) which will take them on the wrong path.
History testifies that one such a group existed and maybe still exists, which confirms that what Mawla Ali (AS) said 1400 years ago, happened and stands before us all:
The belief in incarnation. The Nusayris believe that Ali is God in the flesh. Ali created Muhammad from his spirit, and Muhammad created Salman, an early Shi'ite saint. These three form a Trinity in which Ali is described as the 'meaning', Muhammad is the 'name' and Salman is the 'door'.
Any person irrespective of sect or religion, who associates any one with One supreme god Allah, is a Mushrik and will be ruined. Anyone who believes that any one is God, or God in flesh due to their love for that someone is ruined. Not only that but any one who calls a non-prophet a prophet, or who calls a non-Imam an Imam, or who calls a non-Wasilah-to-Allah a Wasilah-chosen-by-Allah will be ruined.
Knowledge of the unseen belongs to Allah alone. Power belongs to Allah alone. However, he might give them to anyone, as much as he wants, at anytime. Isa (AS) could cure the blind and bring back the dead to life. If we believe that Isa (AS) does it independently then that is Shirk however if we believe that it is a gift bestowed on Isa (AS) by Allah, who does the miracles through the will of Allah, then that is what the true stand is. If Allah indeed has chosen Ali (AS) to execute wonders to assist the prophet of Islam (AS), then how can that be shirk?
The author has concluded that hating the wives and companions of Rasool (SAW) is going away from rightfulness. We agree. But hating those wives of Rasool (SAW) and those companions of Rasool (SAW) who hated Ali (AS) is definitely a sign of love for Ali and thus, a testimony of belief.
The Messenger of Allah said: Loving Ali is the sign of belief, and hating Ali is the sign of hypocrisy.
Sahih Tirmidhi, volume 5, page 643
Sunan Ibn Majah, volume 1, page 142
Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal volume 1, pages 84,95,128
Tarikh al-Kabir, by al-Bukhari (the author of Sahih), v1, part 1, p202
(Those who fought against Mawla Ali (AS) in the battles of Jamal, Siffin and Nahrwan definitely did not love Ali).
“…and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity.”
Ali says not to hate him like the Nasibis (haters of Ahlel Bayt). He then says that the best of people are the ones who are on the middle course. Who else is that other than the mainstream Muslims (i.e. the Ahlus Sunnah)? The Ahlus Sunnah loves Ali deeply, and considers him one of the greatest Sahabah. On the other hand, the Ahlus Sunnah does not exaggerate by giving him characteristics of Allah, nor do they hate the wives or friends of the Prophet.
Ali says be with the majority of Muslims because Allah’s hand of protection is on keeping unity. Can the Shia really get a clearer command than this? Who is the majority of the Muslims other than the orthodox Ahlus Sunnah? Ali says be with the great majority of Muslims, not split up into these tiny Shia sects.
Intellectual laws of love and hatred state three things. Love your friend. Love your friend's friend. Hate your enemy. Hate your friend's enemy. How can i even claim to love my father or my mother, if I also love those who troubled them and abused them? Will you love your friend who abuses your righteous father? Can you claim to love your father if you equally love your uncle who over took your father's business by crook and destroyed him financially?
Definitely, the Ahlus Sunnah are not Nasibis (Salifis who praise Yazeed (the cursed) even), but do they really love Ali (AS), when they love his competitors in battle fields as well, like Ayesha, Talha, Zubair, Mawiya (the cursed)?
Do you think that giving Ali (AS) the title of Asadullah or Lion of Allah exaggerating his position? What if calling Ali (AS) a simple human being who could make mistakes and sins just like any other Sahabah really be diminishing his status, status of a Mawla, Wali and Imam?
Mawla Ali (AS) emphasizes on unity and we all should pay him heed being his Shias. What is this unity, is discussed later.
“You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is a prey to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is a prey to the wolf.”
So why is it then that the Shia have schismed from the Ummah? Are they not a prey of Shaitan’s now? And so it is that Shaitan has infiltrated the ranks of the Shia, leading so many millions of Shia astray. Why do the Shia not follow Ali when he says to be with the great majority of Muslims?
Ali (AS) definitely tells his followers not to divide amongst themselves and be with the majority of Muslims, not to split up in sects. Definitely, Allah himself does not like divisions.
Surely they who divided their religion into parts and became sects, you have no
concern with them; their affair is only with Allah, then He will inform them of what they
did.
Quran [6:159]
Before coming to what Allah orders and Mawla Ali (AS) advised, I would like to comment on what the Author deducted from the sermon.
The author says that we should be with the Orthodox Sunni because Mawla Ali (AS) said be with the great majority of Muslims. Who should we be with? Malikis? Hanafis? Shafis? Hanbalis? Ahle Hadith? Deobandis? Barelvis? Wahabis? And the author must remember that the day any other sect increases in population than his own, he must select that sect in order to justify and fulfill his own Analogy.
It is true that Quran orders us not to divide our religion into parts, but unfortunately, no sect believes it’s a part of Islam, everyone believes that they are the actual Islam. We are Shias, Sunnis, wahabis, deobandis, agakhanis, ismailis.. did I forget any one? We are tribes. We are sects but we claim to be the actual version of Islam and not a sect. So how can we not divide ourselves into sects today? We should stop pointing fingers at others about their “sect” and remember that Islamic brotherhood is above all. If we help some one, we should not see we are helping a shia or a sunni but that we are helping a Muslim, a human. If we pray salaat in a mosque it should not matter whose mosque is it, for prayer is for Allah only.
What Mawla Ali (AS) said is true, Allah's support is in unity and that is the only reason we , Muslims are suffering throughout the world. If only we all listened to Mawla Ali (AS) and remained united in the name of Islam even if we had different views regarding different companions and issues of Fiqh etc, Allah would have helped us all.
Shias follow Mawla Ali (AS) and are with the great majority of Muslims because they themselves form a part of that majority. I am a Shia and my family has Shias as well as Sunnis, my friends in university, college, office have been Sunnis and even wahabis, the people i play sports with are Sunnis. We live togethor, as muslims, accepting the differences which exist amongst us, difference of opinions. Those people should be worried who declare us kaafirs, Faasiqs and who preach that we should be killed anywhere where we are found.
However, i would like to ask the author, did Imam Hussain (AS) commited a sin (god forbid), by not giving Bayah to yazeed the cursed, when main stream majority of the Muslims accepted Yazeed as the caliph? No doubt who follow literal approach to Islam label Mawla Hussain (AS) as a baghi or traitor.
“Whoever calls to this course [of sectarianism], kill him, even though he may be under this headband of mine.”
Even if someone claims to be a Shia’t Ali (i.e. under the headband of Ali), he really is an enemy of Ali if he calls for sectarianism and the creation of a religious sect. This is Ali’s condemnation of all Shia sects that have split away from the mainstream Muslims. Ali even commanded these heretics to be killed, so it can be seen that he has no compassion for any of these deviants even if they claim to love him.
As said earlier, some one claiming to be a Shia is not necessarily a Shia, just like some one claiming to be a Muslim might not be one. Adultery, Usury, Interest, Murder, Theft, Cruelty, Bribery etc will not save you even if you are under the headband of Mawla Ali (AS), because if you really were under that blessed band, you would think a hundred times before doing something so shameful.
Any one who causes a division amongst the Muslim Ummah (which includes Shias and Sunnis) is an enemy of Islam, enemy of Rasool (SAW) and enemy of Mawla Ali (AS). These include, unfortunately:
1. Those who openly curse or abuse people revered by other Muslims in order to create Fitnah (such as ignorant or extremist shias using vulgar and shameful language for people who we do not keep in good regards)
2. Those who openly respect and love and revere personalities reviled by other Muslims in order to create Fitnah (such as ignorant and extremist Sunnis loving and respecting people like yazeed, Mawiya etc)
3. Those scholars or Maulvis who pass on fatwas against other groups or sects calling them Kaafirs, nonmuslims and Wajib-ul-Qatl.
4. Those learned men who have the following of the people, and instead of uniting them, they create more confusions.
Why not we all focus on what unites us rather than divisions? Why not open fasts under the same roof, pray under the same roof just like we perform pilgrimage together? You love Mawiya, pray for him in your heart. I hate Mawiya, i keep my hatred for him in my heart.
Let not these sensitive issues be brought into the public but be kept for those who are learned and who are interested in the issue for intellectual and educational reasons?
The fact remains, our graves our sufficient for what we believed and did. Accept each other as we are, accept the differences and live a unified life when fighting against the enemies of Islam. Let us follow the path of Rasool (SAW), who left us the Quran and the Ahlulbayt (AS) after him (SAW).
-
ghulam muhammed
- Posts: 11653
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Bro asif786,
I agree to most of the things you have said in the post as long as it keeps the ummah united, the only strong objections are with regard to certain sectarian leaders who fabricate history with the sole purpose of dividing the ummah and split it into multiple sects which is part of their hidden agenda. The reasons are many and most of it are well known. With due respect to you, the problem is that even a person like you who agrees to the concept of unity are swayed away by parts of history which are highly questionable and which needs to be looked at with an unbiased mind. Needless to say that it concerns the conduct of the other 3 khalifas and ummul mumineen, you question the authenticity of hadiths which praises them but agree with the same narrators who praise Mola Ali (a.s.). This is called selective preferences, you agree to things which agrees to your own beliefs only because you have already made up your mind due to the constant hammering by these leaders and even parents which is done right from childhood and which has penetrated deep down. Even I was brought up in an orthodox bohra family and had the same hatred like you but by the grace of Allah I did some comparative study of religion and became aware of the falsehood around me. I dont consider myself to be an expert, neither a sunni or shia. I consider myself to be a believer of Islam having love, faith and belief in Allah, Prophet (s.a.w.), the sahabas and Panjatan Pak (a.s.). No amount of lies is going to change my belief because in the end I know that Iam answerable to Allah for MY deeds and not for what an xyz has done.
The greatness of Mola Ali (a.s.) is uncomparable and in my personal view I regard him as the best only next to Prophet (s.a.w.). For this I dont need to take refuge of the ills of the other khalifas (which are blatant lies) because Mola Ali's greatness is unique in itself, it is not "mohtaj" of any cooked up stories. Regarding sheer fabrication, distortion and twisting of Islamic history by vested interests (of both sects), we should start a new thread for people who are keen to study the events in their proper context and not just accept blindly any shit which is served to them.
I agree to most of the things you have said in the post as long as it keeps the ummah united, the only strong objections are with regard to certain sectarian leaders who fabricate history with the sole purpose of dividing the ummah and split it into multiple sects which is part of their hidden agenda. The reasons are many and most of it are well known. With due respect to you, the problem is that even a person like you who agrees to the concept of unity are swayed away by parts of history which are highly questionable and which needs to be looked at with an unbiased mind. Needless to say that it concerns the conduct of the other 3 khalifas and ummul mumineen, you question the authenticity of hadiths which praises them but agree with the same narrators who praise Mola Ali (a.s.). This is called selective preferences, you agree to things which agrees to your own beliefs only because you have already made up your mind due to the constant hammering by these leaders and even parents which is done right from childhood and which has penetrated deep down. Even I was brought up in an orthodox bohra family and had the same hatred like you but by the grace of Allah I did some comparative study of religion and became aware of the falsehood around me. I dont consider myself to be an expert, neither a sunni or shia. I consider myself to be a believer of Islam having love, faith and belief in Allah, Prophet (s.a.w.), the sahabas and Panjatan Pak (a.s.). No amount of lies is going to change my belief because in the end I know that Iam answerable to Allah for MY deeds and not for what an xyz has done.
The greatness of Mola Ali (a.s.) is uncomparable and in my personal view I regard him as the best only next to Prophet (s.a.w.). For this I dont need to take refuge of the ills of the other khalifas (which are blatant lies) because Mola Ali's greatness is unique in itself, it is not "mohtaj" of any cooked up stories. Regarding sheer fabrication, distortion and twisting of Islamic history by vested interests (of both sects), we should start a new thread for people who are keen to study the events in their proper context and not just accept blindly any shit which is served to them.
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Br GM
The shias have there own hadith books which may be narrated by different sahaba for the same topic, the common hadith between sunni/shia are used for debate purposes to prove a point . You will agree with me that when bukhari started collecting hadith he had collected around 70,000 hadiths and out of that he selected around 3000( not sure) of them .this proves that there were many fabricators during that time .how can one rely on narrators like abu huraira , Anas etc who were not trusted by mola Ali a.s , Bibi Ayesha and Umar? . Hence we reject the hadiths which have not been endorsed by Imams a.s and not as per quran and sunnah .example would be the ones being discussed on Islam today under the heading shahih bukhari.
The following article is apt for Unity between different sects
Yes. Unity and uniformity can be achieved if you release Ahl alBayt's sect and view it as you view any of your own sects so that the Shafi`is, Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis may consider the followers of Ahl alBayt just as they consider each other. Only then can the unity of Muslims be achieved, and they will be unified in one fold.
The difference among Sunni sects is not less than it is between the Sunni and Shi`a schools of thought as thousands of books on the principles and branches of the creed of both groups testify; therefore, why have several people among you condemned the Shi`as for differing from the Sunnis? Why have they not, by the same token, condemned the Sunnis for differing from the Shi`as, or even for differing from one another? If sects can be four, why cannot they be five? How come it is alright to have four sects but not five? How can four sects be considered as "unifying" Muslims, and when they increase to five unity is shattered and Muslims are divided unto themselves? I wish when you invited us to "sectarian unity" you also invited the followers of the four sects to the same. The latter will be a lot easier for you and for them. But why have you singled us out for your invitation anyway? Do you find the followers of Ahl alBayt breaking the unity while the followers of others unite the hearts and determination eventhough their sects and minds are different, their tastes and inclinations are numerous? I think of you to be above that, knowing your love for your kinfolk, and peace be with you.
The shias have there own hadith books which may be narrated by different sahaba for the same topic, the common hadith between sunni/shia are used for debate purposes to prove a point . You will agree with me that when bukhari started collecting hadith he had collected around 70,000 hadiths and out of that he selected around 3000( not sure) of them .this proves that there were many fabricators during that time .how can one rely on narrators like abu huraira , Anas etc who were not trusted by mola Ali a.s , Bibi Ayesha and Umar? . Hence we reject the hadiths which have not been endorsed by Imams a.s and not as per quran and sunnah .example would be the ones being discussed on Islam today under the heading shahih bukhari.
The following article is apt for Unity between different sects
Yes. Unity and uniformity can be achieved if you release Ahl alBayt's sect and view it as you view any of your own sects so that the Shafi`is, Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis may consider the followers of Ahl alBayt just as they consider each other. Only then can the unity of Muslims be achieved, and they will be unified in one fold.
The difference among Sunni sects is not less than it is between the Sunni and Shi`a schools of thought as thousands of books on the principles and branches of the creed of both groups testify; therefore, why have several people among you condemned the Shi`as for differing from the Sunnis? Why have they not, by the same token, condemned the Sunnis for differing from the Shi`as, or even for differing from one another? If sects can be four, why cannot they be five? How come it is alright to have four sects but not five? How can four sects be considered as "unifying" Muslims, and when they increase to five unity is shattered and Muslims are divided unto themselves? I wish when you invited us to "sectarian unity" you also invited the followers of the four sects to the same. The latter will be a lot easier for you and for them. But why have you singled us out for your invitation anyway? Do you find the followers of Ahl alBayt breaking the unity while the followers of others unite the hearts and determination eventhough their sects and minds are different, their tastes and inclinations are numerous? I think of you to be above that, knowing your love for your kinfolk, and peace be with you.
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
this is a valid argument. but the trouble here is started by shias themselves. the shias hate the first three khalifas and would not be in league with those who revere them. they think that only they love the ahlebayt and the sunnis dont, whereas this is completely false. ahlebayt are loved by both shias and sunnis. so shias, unfortunately, will never agree to such an arrangement.Yes. Unity and uniformity can be achieved if you release Ahl alBayt's sect and view it as you view any of your own sects so that the Shafi`is, Hanafis, Malikis and Hanbalis may consider the followers of Ahl alBayt just as they consider each other. Only then can the unity of Muslims be achieved, and they will be unified in one fold.
The difference among Sunni sects is not less than it is between the Sunni and Shi`a schools of thought as thousands of books on the principles and branches of the creed of both groups testify; therefore, why have several people among you condemned the Shi`as for differing from the Sunnis? Why have they not, by the same token, condemned the Sunnis for differing from the Shi`as, or even for differing from one another? If sects can be four, why cannot they be five? How come it is alright to have four sects but not five? How can four sects be considered as "unifying" Muslims, and when they increase to five unity is shattered and Muslims are divided unto themselves? I wish when you invited us to "sectarian unity" you also invited the followers of the four sects to the same. The latter will be a lot easier for you and for them. But why have you singled us out for your invitation anyway? Do you find the followers of Ahl alBayt breaking the unity while the followers of others unite the hearts and determination eventhough their sects and minds are different, their tastes and inclinations are numerous? I think of you to be above that, knowing your love for your kinfolk, and peace be with you.
and what abt the differences among the shias themselves?
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Al-Azhar Shia Fatwa
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Azhar_Shia_Fatwa
hatread and of 3+1 is rampant in Shias. Maulana Burhanuddin or Zadas or Aamils ever read this? Is there secrete farman for Bohras to stop this prectice?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Azhar_Shia_Fatwa
hatread and of 3+1 is rampant in Shias. Maulana Burhanuddin or Zadas or Aamils ever read this? Is there secrete farman for Bohras to stop this prectice?
-
ghulam muhammed
- Posts: 11653
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
WHY MOLA ALI (a.s.) COULD NOT BE FIRST KHALIFA OF PROPHET (s.a.w.) ?
If the argument of those who say that Mola Ali (a.s.) should have been the "First Khalifa of Islam" was correct then on that basis the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) should have been the First Prophet on planet Earth ? Did Allah do so ?
a) If such a thing had happened then the position of honour which Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) now enjoys as the greatest prophet would have been lost completely.
b) If Muhammad (s.a.w.) was to be the first Prophet then there would be no necessity whatsoever for any of the thousands of prophets that came from Adam till Esa (Jesus, son of Virgin Mary – peace be on them) ! Thus Prophet Muhammad's position would be reduced from "The Greatest Prophet" to that of a "mere" Prophet ! As there would be no other prophets with whom he could be compared to give him the honoured position of the greatest prophet.
c) If Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) had been the first prophet at the time of Adam then he would have had to communicate with the primitive people by signs of the hands and sounds from the mouth instead of words. The primitive people would require over 4,000 years of time to learn to speak fluently, read, write and understand what he was teaching.
d) Then the important question arises : Would any purpose be served by the greatest Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) becoming the first Messenger ? Who knows better ? Allah or those who want to make Ali the first Khalifa ?
e) Similarly Maula Ali (a.s.) would have lost his position of the maker of the first three earlier Khalifas.
f) Also Mola Ali's position of seal of the rightful Khalifas of the Rasul (s.a.w.) would be lost.
g) Then the honoured position Maula or spiritual guide of the first three Khalifa-e-Rashideen would also have been lost.
h) If Mola Ali (a.s.) was the first Khalifa then besides losing his honoured position he would have to give up his spiritual position in religion and waste his precious time to become a manager, a police officer and a maulvi instead of a Pir or Maula to guide the world on how to attain to Allah. Would that be the right thing to do ?
WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO EDUCATE YOUR CHILD?
It is the duty of every parent to give the best possible education to their children. The most learned person in the area is the "Dean" or the person in charge of the university in the area. Because the Dean is the most learned person is it right to take the children to him to teach them "A, B, C" ? Would it not be completely wrong on the part of the parents, in spite of the fact that the "Dean" is the most learned person in the area ? Is it right to reduce him from the honoured position of a Dean to that of a primary teacher just because he is the most learned person ?
The child has to be taken first of all to a Montessori or kindergarten, then to the primary school teacher, after that to a high school master to be followed by the teachings of a professor in the college. When all these have been completed comes the question of the dean to educate how to attain Ph.D. Is not that the right thing to do ?
These principles apply to everyday life of human beings. Similar were the necessities of Islam on the departure of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.). Just because Maula Ali (a.s.) was the most learned and had the best spiritual knowledge he could not be expected to waste his time to teach the elementary requirements of the mass of people, who had suddenly accepted Islam and who were illiterate, many of them not knowing even the Arabic alphabets.
EVEN SCIENTISTS CONFIRM LAST CREATION IS THE BEST
This is also supported vividly by the findings of scientists that human beings, the highest form of creation on earth has also come last i.e. after the other creations so that humanity may be able to realise how very great is the difference between the intelligence of animals and us. It is Allah's rule to send the highest and the best of His creations at the end.
So Ali (a.s.) had to come as the last of the Khalifa-e-Rashideen or the Rightful Khalifas of the Prophet (s.a.w.) to get all the honour and respect that was rightly due to him as the appointor, the guide and the greatest Khalifa. All those who follow the Sunnah or teachings of the Prophet accept Ali as Khatimul Khilafat or Seal of the Rightful Khalifas of the Holy Prophet (p. 10 of Nafahat-ul-Uns by Nooruddin Muhammad Abdur Rahman Jami Nakshbandhi).
CONCLUSION
One day Hazrat Abu Bakr (r.a.), during his period of Khilafat, smiled when he saw Ali (a.s.) come into Masjid-e-Nabavi. So Ali (a.s.) enquired for the reason. Hazrat Abu Bakr replied :
"I had heard the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) say : 'No one shall cross "Pul Sarat" i.e. the bridge to heaven across Hell without the permission of Ali' ".
At this remark Ali (a.s.) smiled. So Hazrat Abu Bakr (r.a.) asked out of curiosity for the cause. Ali (a.s.) replied :
"I shall not permit any one to cross Pul Sarat who does not love and respect you, O Abu Bakr".
This is in the knowledge of Shias is confirmed by the Shia Scholar Allama Jaurullah Zamakhshari in his research "Al - Mawafekatoe-Baina Ahlal-Bait was Sahaba".
The Arab Shia scholar Muhammad Ali Al-Haj Salmin in his Preface to "Ali the Caliph" has recorded :
"Ali has set the best example in this respect. He accepted Caliphate when many years had elapsed and already three Caliphs had finished with their administration. He never spoke a word against them.
"If we call ourselves lovers of Ali, we must follow in his way.
"Mola Ali (a.s.) never spoke ill of anyone, then why should the admirers of Mola Ali (a.s.) cross his path in this respect".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the argument of those who say that Mola Ali (a.s.) should have been the "First Khalifa of Islam" was correct then on that basis the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) should have been the First Prophet on planet Earth ? Did Allah do so ?
a) If such a thing had happened then the position of honour which Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) now enjoys as the greatest prophet would have been lost completely.
b) If Muhammad (s.a.w.) was to be the first Prophet then there would be no necessity whatsoever for any of the thousands of prophets that came from Adam till Esa (Jesus, son of Virgin Mary – peace be on them) ! Thus Prophet Muhammad's position would be reduced from "The Greatest Prophet" to that of a "mere" Prophet ! As there would be no other prophets with whom he could be compared to give him the honoured position of the greatest prophet.
c) If Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) had been the first prophet at the time of Adam then he would have had to communicate with the primitive people by signs of the hands and sounds from the mouth instead of words. The primitive people would require over 4,000 years of time to learn to speak fluently, read, write and understand what he was teaching.
d) Then the important question arises : Would any purpose be served by the greatest Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.) becoming the first Messenger ? Who knows better ? Allah or those who want to make Ali the first Khalifa ?
e) Similarly Maula Ali (a.s.) would have lost his position of the maker of the first three earlier Khalifas.
f) Also Mola Ali's position of seal of the rightful Khalifas of the Rasul (s.a.w.) would be lost.
g) Then the honoured position Maula or spiritual guide of the first three Khalifa-e-Rashideen would also have been lost.
h) If Mola Ali (a.s.) was the first Khalifa then besides losing his honoured position he would have to give up his spiritual position in religion and waste his precious time to become a manager, a police officer and a maulvi instead of a Pir or Maula to guide the world on how to attain to Allah. Would that be the right thing to do ?
WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO EDUCATE YOUR CHILD?
It is the duty of every parent to give the best possible education to their children. The most learned person in the area is the "Dean" or the person in charge of the university in the area. Because the Dean is the most learned person is it right to take the children to him to teach them "A, B, C" ? Would it not be completely wrong on the part of the parents, in spite of the fact that the "Dean" is the most learned person in the area ? Is it right to reduce him from the honoured position of a Dean to that of a primary teacher just because he is the most learned person ?
The child has to be taken first of all to a Montessori or kindergarten, then to the primary school teacher, after that to a high school master to be followed by the teachings of a professor in the college. When all these have been completed comes the question of the dean to educate how to attain Ph.D. Is not that the right thing to do ?
These principles apply to everyday life of human beings. Similar were the necessities of Islam on the departure of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.). Just because Maula Ali (a.s.) was the most learned and had the best spiritual knowledge he could not be expected to waste his time to teach the elementary requirements of the mass of people, who had suddenly accepted Islam and who were illiterate, many of them not knowing even the Arabic alphabets.
EVEN SCIENTISTS CONFIRM LAST CREATION IS THE BEST
This is also supported vividly by the findings of scientists that human beings, the highest form of creation on earth has also come last i.e. after the other creations so that humanity may be able to realise how very great is the difference between the intelligence of animals and us. It is Allah's rule to send the highest and the best of His creations at the end.
So Ali (a.s.) had to come as the last of the Khalifa-e-Rashideen or the Rightful Khalifas of the Prophet (s.a.w.) to get all the honour and respect that was rightly due to him as the appointor, the guide and the greatest Khalifa. All those who follow the Sunnah or teachings of the Prophet accept Ali as Khatimul Khilafat or Seal of the Rightful Khalifas of the Holy Prophet (p. 10 of Nafahat-ul-Uns by Nooruddin Muhammad Abdur Rahman Jami Nakshbandhi).
CONCLUSION
One day Hazrat Abu Bakr (r.a.), during his period of Khilafat, smiled when he saw Ali (a.s.) come into Masjid-e-Nabavi. So Ali (a.s.) enquired for the reason. Hazrat Abu Bakr replied :
"I had heard the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) say : 'No one shall cross "Pul Sarat" i.e. the bridge to heaven across Hell without the permission of Ali' ".
At this remark Ali (a.s.) smiled. So Hazrat Abu Bakr (r.a.) asked out of curiosity for the cause. Ali (a.s.) replied :
"I shall not permit any one to cross Pul Sarat who does not love and respect you, O Abu Bakr".
This is in the knowledge of Shias is confirmed by the Shia Scholar Allama Jaurullah Zamakhshari in his research "Al - Mawafekatoe-Baina Ahlal-Bait was Sahaba".
The Arab Shia scholar Muhammad Ali Al-Haj Salmin in his Preface to "Ali the Caliph" has recorded :
"Ali has set the best example in this respect. He accepted Caliphate when many years had elapsed and already three Caliphs had finished with their administration. He never spoke a word against them.
"If we call ourselves lovers of Ali, we must follow in his way.
"Mola Ali (a.s.) never spoke ill of anyone, then why should the admirers of Mola Ali (a.s.) cross his path in this respect".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Br GM
Thanks but you are doing what they say "Bhense ni aagal Bhagwat"
Wasalaam
Thanks but you are doing what they say "Bhense ni aagal Bhagwat"
Wasalaam
-
Hussain_KSA
- Posts: 874
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 4:01 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Brother GM
Kudos to you. I hope if every one thinks like that. Thank you.
Kudos to you. I hope if every one thinks like that. Thank you.
-
sixfeetunder
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:48 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
The Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was responsible for both spiritual and political matters. Logic dictates that his successor would have to be responsible for both - the spiritual well-being of the community as well as political authority. In Islam, there is no differentiation between religion and politics. Political matters are governed by spiritual laws.
Yazeed and Muawiya are foremost shining examples in the long list of Islamic politics without spiritual content.
Imagine Ali, Hasan and Husayn at the helm of Islamic affairs right after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). The world would have been a different place today.
Yazeed and Muawiya are foremost shining examples in the long list of Islamic politics without spiritual content.
Imagine Ali, Hasan and Husayn at the helm of Islamic affairs right after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). The world would have been a different place today.
-
sixfeetunder
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:48 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
My father owns a small workshop in Mumbai. Whenever he goes out of town, even for two days, he appoints the manager as a deputy to look after the affairs of the workshop. And they tell me that the 'mercy to the worlds' - The greatest man to have walked the earth - The seal of the Prophets - Who was to go away forever - went without appointing anyone to look after the affairs of the ummah? He left us orphaned?
My father being a fallible, sinning, ordinary human being has some foresight and sense of responsibility. And the infallible Prophet (s.a.w) who has knowledge of the seen and unseen - Who tells us about the world and the hereafter, doesn't appoint a successor?
My father being a fallible, sinning, ordinary human being has some foresight and sense of responsibility. And the infallible Prophet (s.a.w) who has knowledge of the seen and unseen - Who tells us about the world and the hereafter, doesn't appoint a successor?
-
incredible
- Posts: 1034
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:44 pm
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
sixfeetunder wrote:My father owns a small workshop in Mumbai. Whenever he goes out of town, even for two days, he appoints the manager as a deputy to look after the affairs of the workshop. And they tell me that the 'mercy to the worlds' - The greatest man to have walked the earth - The seal of the Prophets - Who was to go away forever - went without appointing anyone to look after the affairs of the ummah? He left us orphaned?
My father being a fallible, sinning, ordinary human being has some foresight and sense of responsibility. And the infallible Prophet (s.a.w) who has knowledge of the seen and unseen - Who tells us about the world and the hereafter, doesn't appoint a successor?
yes thats true,as u are ithna ashari so tell me now how imaam mehdi(a.s) went into occulation without appointing his deputy?
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Now this is getting interesting,yes thats true,as u are ithna ashari so tell me now how imaam mehdi(a.s) went into occulation without appointing his deputy?
A Ithna and DB incredible feet kissing Idiot getting into debate of who is true Imam.
Let Fairy tales fly. 1000+ old Mehdi or some women called Urva somthing appointing Dai who degenarate into worst then Hosni.
-
ghulam muhammed
- Posts: 11653
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
Hussainbhai,Hussain_KSA wrote:Brother GM
Kudos to you. I hope if every one thinks like that. Thank you.
Thanks, but sadly the hatred rooted in some is difficult to remove. To give you a simple example, if I ask someone to read the following:-GODISNOWHERE, people with a pre-set ideology will read it as GOD IS NOWHERE but the wise will read it as GOD IS NOW HERE. Now what more can we do to help those having a biased mind ?
Re: Khalifa and Siritual guide
The Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was responsible for both spiritual and political matters. Logic dictates that his successor would have to be responsible for both - the spiritual well-being of the community as well as political authority. In Islam, there is no differentiation between religion and politics. Political matters are governed by spiritual laws.
Yazeed and Muawiya are foremost shining examples in the long list of Islamic politics without spiritual content.
Imagine Ali, Hasan and Husayn at the helm of Islamic affairs right after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). The world would have been a different place today.
1. there is no logic which dictates that spiritual and political leadership must be in the hands of one person or one bloodline. Rasullah had both offices because of his religious AND political revolution in arabia. This doesnot mean that lesser personalities should wield such power. When he named Ali a.s as maula, it does in no way mean political leadership.
2. lol political matters were still being governed by spiritual laws even when Ali a.s was not khalifa. so still, Ali a.s has no claim.
3. Yazeed and muawiya is another matter which have nothing to do with the khilafat/spiritual guide issue in this thread.
firstly we cant speculate on what "could" have happened as there is no way of knowing it right?Imagine Ali, Hasan and Husayn at the helm of Islamic affairs right after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w). The world would have been a different place today
secondly, GMs views are credible when he posted that Imam Ali A.S should have had carried out his religious responsibilities better w/o the added burden of running an infant state. you have to take care of finances, security, dimlomacy, trade, treatys, police/army, and what not as a khalifa.
finally, Ali, Hasan and Husayn WERE at the helm of islamic affairs. Ali a.s was maula. he gave sermons and answered peoples questions and preached islam. whereas Abu bakr was NOT at the helm of islamic affairs. he was the leader of ARABS after the prophet pbuh. not the leader of muslims or leader of spiritual guides. just arabs.