Who really killed the Prophet Muhammad??

[famdigy]

Famdigy…
I only know generally that the sunnis are different from the shiah. Perhaps this is not the thread to answer my inquiries, but I am just courious to know what makes or made you two different to each other?

Is this thread also one of the reason. You believe a portion of a story, while they believe other portion of a story?

Thanks

Elwill, great job explaining the differences, it’s very rare to find a sunni who can speak about the differences objectively. In addition to what has been mentioned above. The shia view many of the companions as criminal and hold them responsible for the following:

• The attempted assassination of the Prophet (pbuh&hf) after the battle of tabuk, in what has been known historically as the incident of “aqaba”
• The successful assassination of the prophet by poison
• Usurping the right of Ali in alienating him from leading the Muslim
• Usurping the right of Lady Fatima daughter of the prophet in confiscating her property that was given to her by the Prophet
• Attacking the house of Lady Fatima, and threatening to burn the house down
• Fatally injuring Lady Fatima as they kicked the front door down
• Kicking Lady Fatima in the abdomen, causing her to lose her unborn son
• Fabricating hadiths and attributing them to the prophet, thereby corrupting the religion
• Forbidding what the Prophet had made permissible and permitting what he forbade
• Stealing from the Muslim treasury
• Killing of innocents who refused them a pledge of allegiance
• Aiding and abating the Prophet’s enemies
• Declaring War on Ali and fighting against him
• Killing the prophet’s grandson Hassan by poison
• Refusing the Prophet’s grandson to be buried beside his grandfather and shooting his body with arrows
• Depriving the Prophet’s second grandson Hussain and his family of water at the plains of Karbala
• killing Hussain’s children, including his 6 month old boy
• Killing Hussain in the plains of Karbala, he died while thirsty next to the river Euphrates
• Taking the Prophet’s children as prisoners of war and parading them in Damascus

There is more, this was just what I can think of from the top of my head.

you also asked why we believe in a portion of a story and they believe in another portion. The reason is because we don’t accept their hadith narrators as reliable. Many of the Narrators in the sunni collection were direct enemies to the Prophet’s household. Therefore, on principle we don’t accept their narrations. These include personalities like Aisha, Anas bin Malik and Abu Hurairah who you will see being quoted profusely in the sunni authentic collection of hadiths.

 

[jakasaki]

Hi Fam,

I’ve read somewhere that Shia only perform 3 prayers a day instead of the 5… is this true.?

**Now - I want to mention that in the koran and koran ONLY it states 3 pray times. **

The 5 prayer ritual comes from the hadiths.

Thanks much!

 

[famdigy]

Hi Fam,

I’ve read somewhere that Shia only perform 3 prayers a day instead of the 5… is this true.?

**Now - I want to mention that in the koran and koran ONLY it states 3 pray times. **

The 5 prayer ritual comes from the hadiths.

Thanks much!

We perform the 5 prayers but we do them at 3 times. 1 during the early morning. 2 in the early afternoon. 2 in the evening.

The 5 prayers are paryed individually but some prayers are performed consequtively in 1 time window, such as the 2 in the early afternoon and 2 in the evening.

It’s not mandatory to join the prayers in 3 time windows.

 

[seraphime2008]

From elwill and famdigy explanations above, I conclude my self that even the Muslim who thinks that the teachings from the Koran encompass complete aspect of human life, somehow Muhammad, or Allah forget to give a clear instruction of how to perform rightful succession?

In a religion which is very much intertwine with politics, such important aspects of succesion were left in a big hole.

Interesting…

 

[elwill]

From elwill and famdigy explanations above, I conclude my self that even the Muslim who thinks that the teachings from the Koran encompass complete aspect of human life, somehow Muhammad, or Allah forget to give a clear instruction of how to perform rightful succession?

In a religion which is very much intertwine with politics, such important aspects of succesion were left in a big hole.

Interesting…

what is quran said
38 - And Those who hearken to their Lord, and establish regular prayer; who (conduct) their affairs by mutual Consultation; who spend out of what we bestow on them for Sustenance;–​

• etc

Sunni Muslims agree with the position** taken by many of the Prophet’s companions**, that the new leader should be elected from among those capable of the job.

The Shia Muslims believe that following the Prophet Muhammad’s death, leadership should have passed directly to his cousin/son-in-law, Ali.

it isn’t the prooblem of quran nor the problem of mohammed (pbuh) , it’s just the problem of self desires of some minority of muslims in that time

 

[Holly3278]

Nobody. Why? Because Muhammad was not a prophet. If anything, he was a false prophet.

 

[Sam_777]

it isn’t the prooblem of quran nor the problem of mohammed (pbuh) , it’s just the problem of self desires of some minority of muslims in that time

What if those minority were right!, sometimes when I read about how Sunnis killed Alhusain in Karbala battle and how bloodiness was that battle I feel really bad, where at the end the head of Alhusain was mounted on a spear and carried around from Iraq till Syria passing by seven cities showing the head.
There is no excuse of what so ever to humiliate a dead body, and yet to whom, to another person from the same religion.

 

[seraphime2008]

Elwill
So another conclusion is that after Koran revealed, those first people who were affected by it were not guided to the real truth…not guided to be people of great examples…!

The prophet was just dead, they had already had intentions in mind to kill each other for the sake of money and power. Gosh…The earlier history of Muslims were full of blood spilling, not even by conflicting with others, but within themselves.

And what you just mention from the Koran really don’t say about succession. It’s a vague guidance of what to be taken as succession reference, seems.

 

[elwill]

Elwill
So another conclusion is that after Koran revealed, those first people who were affected by it were not guided to the real truth…not guided to be people of great examples…!

actualy , after the death of prophet mohammed (pbuh) , some muslims apostated either
what it should to mean afterall ?
the divisions happened after the death of mohammed (pbuh)!!! , wow i have to think about the type of power and love and wisdom he had to keep the people united under his rule through 23 years

The prophet was just dead, they had already had intentions in mind to kill each other for the sake of money and power. Gosh…The earlier history of Muslims were full of blood spilling, not even by conflicting with others, but within themselves.

actually you didn’t say sotmhing new , it was fortold in the quran that the conflicts will rise after his death

3-144 - Muhammad is no more than an apostle: many were the apostles that passed away before him. if he died or were slain,** will ye then turn back on your heels? if any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; but God (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve him) with gratitude.**

i don’t see any problem for existence of these conflicts after his death , muslims knew that it will happen after his death

actaully in many ahadeeth , mohammed (pbuh) prophised that these conflicts will arise after his death , so what is you point ?

And what you just mention from the Koran really don’t say about succession. It’s a vague guidance of what to be taken as succession reference, seems.

the verse is talking about affairs of muslims ,if you don’t consider the succession to be one of these affairs , so you are free with your logic and your understanding

 

[famdigy]

From elwill and famdigy explanations above, I conclude my self that even the Muslim who thinks that the teachings from the Koran encompass complete aspect of human life, somehow Muhammad, or Allah forget to give a clear instruction of how to perform rightful succession?

In a religion which is very much intertwine with politics, such important aspects of succesion were left in a big hole.

Interesting…

Seraphime, you’re right about the issue of succession. Considering all the bloodshed and unrest that took place after the prophet’s death, one can conclude, the issue of succession is such an important matter that It would be negligent not to provide clear instruction on who the successor should be. The Shia view is that clear instruction has been left behind, and an oath has been given by the companions to support the successor Ali, yet after the prophet’s death, rather, after they killed him with poison, they reneged the oath and assumed power for themselves.

 

[famdigy]

What if those minority were right!, sometimes when I read about how Sunnis killed Alhusain in Karbala battle and how bloodiness was that battle I feel really bad, where at the end the head of Alhusain was mounted on a spear and carried around from Iraq till Syria passing by seven cities showing the head.
There is no excuse of what so ever to humiliate a dead body, and yet to whom, to another person from the same religion.

And who would have thought it would be Muslims who would kill the grandson of the Prophet (pbuh&hf) and parade his head on a spear, God bless you for your solidarity with our master Al-Hussain (as).

I remember reading a story of the Christian monk who saw the head being paraded in Damascus, he asked who’s head that was," it’s the head of Hussain, the Messenger’s grandson" they answered, “you killed the grandchild of your own prophet? what an evil people you are, if Jesus had a son we would honor him and give him our best gardens to live in” he commented.

 

[elwill]

And who would have thought it would be Muslims who would kill the grandson of the Prophet (pbuh&hf) and parade his head on a spear, God bless you for your solidarity with our master Al-Hussain (as).

I remember reading a story of the Christian monk who saw the head being paraded in Damascus, he asked who’s head that was," it’s the head of Hussain, the Messenger’s grandson" they answered, “you killed the grandchild of your own prophet? what an evil people you are, if Jesus had a son we would honor him and give him our best gardens to live in” he commented.

so do you think that sunni muslims hate Al_hussain ?

sunni muslims love ali and his wife and his sons , so what is your point ?

 

[famdigy]

so do you think that sunni muslims hate Al_hussain ?
sunni muslims love ali and his wife and his sons , so what is your point ?

No, I don’t think sunni muslims hate Al-Hussain, they love Ali and his family as you said, but they also love and admire his enemies. You may not be aware but many of the narrators in Bukhari and the top sunni hadith collections are haters of Ali. The Prophet (pbuh&hf) is reported to have said “Whoever abuses Ali, abuses me”. Yet the sunnis hearken to and learn the religion from those who abused the Imam.

One such example is the narrator Hariz al-Himsi, he narrated around 200 hadiths, is considered one of the reliable narrators, yet he was known to have hated Ali so much that he would curse him 70 times a day and 70 times a night.

I asked Ahmad ibn Hanbal about Hariz to which he said: “Reliable, Reliable”’… Duhaim said: ‘His chain of narration (isnad) is Authentic and said again: "Reliable’’ … Ahmad bin Abi Yahya narrates that Ahmad (Ibn Hanbal) said: Hariz’s hadith is Authentic but he hated Ali… …Ibn Haban narrated: “He used to curse Ali seventy times a day and seventy times a night”

Source: Tahdeeb al Tahdeeb, Volume 1 Page. 436

Many sunnis are not aware of the fact that their most reliable narrators in their most reliable collections of hadith hated and abused Ali profusely.

In principle we distance ourselves from these people, it’s the reason why the Shia do not accept the sunni hadith books as authoritative.

what is quran said
38 - And Those who hearken to their Lord, and establish regular prayer; who (conduct) their affairs by mutual Consultation; who spend out of what we bestow on them for Sustenance;–

Sunni Muslims agree with the position taken by many of the Prophet’s companions, that the new leader should be elected from among those capable of the job.

Going back to the comment you made earlier about the leader being elected from among those capable of the job. This argument is invalid for a number of reasons.

The matter of succession is not something that was up to the muslims to decide on. God did not give authority for anyone to decide on how to perform the pilgrimage, or the poor tax or the prayer, we have to take these from the Quran and from revelation, choosing a successor is also something we have to take from the Quran and from revelation, but for the sake of argument let’s assume for a moment you are correct and that the leader should be elected by the community.

The first Khalif Abu Bakr, was never elected by the community, rather, the matter was decided in a secret council by a handful of companions as the prophet’s body was being prepared for burial.

The second Khalif Omar was appointed directly by the first. Again, no mutual consultation took place.

The third Khalif was selected by a group of 6 people were hand picked by the 2nd Khalif, again no mutual consultaiton.

Moreover, the verse you mentioned above to support election of a leader through democracy and voting, was put forward by later muslims in order to justify what the companions did. When the companions were confronted by Ali and his followers of what they were doing, the companions never brought forward this verse in their favour. And even if we assume the argument is valid, we know that’s not how it played out historically because the 1st khalif Abu Bakr was the first one to break the injunction of democracy and directly appointed Omar.

In other words, he disobeyed the Quran, so either way you slice it, there’s no escape from the fact that companions were wrong

And finally, Abu Bakr was not the most capable, he himself admitted that they made a mistake when they chose him, that he wasn’t the best among them.

meanwhile Ali was the fountain of knowledge and wisdom, that even now, 1400 years later. the UN quotes Ali’s letter to his governor Malik al-Ashtar. In the 2002 Arab Human Development Report and frames the Imam as the role model to follow for human rights, democracy, political representation, and Women’s right.

 

[jakasaki]

Since you guys are going back and forth on Sunni and Shia, here is a question.

Was Sunni created with mohamad and passed to Abu Bakr?

Did the word (sect) Shia exist at mohamads time and Abu’s time?

Or was Shia created at Ali’s time?

 

[anjoh66]

The problem that the shia faced is that they could never agree as to who those imams are, the twelwer shia which is the biggest group accept the twelwe imams beginning with Ali and ending with Muhammad ibn al-Hassan, al-Mahdi.

This Mahdi who is supposed to return and establish the true islamic state has now been alive according to shia belief, in occultation for approx 1000 years.
This is because the shia believe that the earth can not be without an imam, therefore they invented this doctrine of occultation.

Mahdi became imam when he was just a young boy, then he dissapeared into occultation even though the shia believe that it is fully possible that he is walking amongst us in this time, Khomeini proved his view that as long as the imam doesnt establish himself, it is a proof that the islamic republic of Iran is pleasing Allah and the imam.

Other sects from the shia such as the Zaydiyya divided from the twelwers and choosed other Imams, They parted at the time of the fifth imam, Muhammad al-Baqir and held the view that the rightful imam was his brother Zayd ibn Ali.

Moreover there is the Ismailiyya which parted at the time of the sixth imam choosing Muḥammad bin Ismail bin Jafar as their seventh imam.

The Ismaili line of Imams continues undivided till Mustansir Billah (d. 1094), after which it divides into the Nizari and Mustali sects.

The Aga Khan is the 49th hereditary Imam of the Nizari Ismaili Muslims - which remains the only Shia community today led by a present and living (hadir wa mawjud) Imam.

From this we can see clearly that even if God willed that Ali be the successor of the prophet, still this didnt help and the shia themselves could not stay unified under the banner of the prophets household.

Conclusion:
Jesus predicted that there will be many false prophets and false messiahs claiming that they are the true ones, but from their fruits ye shall know them.

It is amazing that islam could not stay unified even a week after the prophets demise, it must be the biggest failure of a political system in world history

 

[The_Fool]

It is amazing that islam could not stay unified even a week after the prophets demise, it must be the biggest failure of a political system in world history

I know it is off topic, but can a “political system” be limited to only Mohammad, or do you mean Islam under one person, like a monarchy of sorts?

Anyway, there are several governments or systems that collapse after the death of a charismatic leader. We might take it for granted, the stability of well-to-do countries, but years ago any change in head-of-state meant massive changes and heads rolling. Even now, we acknowledge that a young system may experience instability after the first leader dies. The succession in question here seems largely dependent on humans to enact it, and so there are bound to have problems in the works. Uh… actually, I’m curious if Shia Muslims believe that a leader is always promised, sort of like how there is always a successor to Peter.

 

[seraphime2008]

The succession in question here seems largely dependent on humans to enact it, and so there are bound to have problems in the works.

Well…they were not supposed to be just ordinary guys…they were the best companions of Muhammad that he had promised (sort of) to enter heaven! To worst disappointment, they were really not transformed as we supposed to hope, to be different than their predecessor…

 

[The_Fool]

Well…they were not supposed to be just ordinary guys…they were the best companions of Muhammad that he had promised (sort of) to enter heaven! To worst disappointment, they were really not transformed as we supposed to hope, to be different than their predecessor…

I always figured promises in a religious context were conditional. For example, “You’re all my bestest friends, and I’m going to take you up to Heaven with me, but only if you’re good. If you ain’t, I’m gonna open my can of… where is my can?” Alternatively, it could be, “I’m promising you Heaven, but you probably aren’t going to be worthy of it until you’re sorry for all the junk you did, which is probably at the hour of your death by a miracle.” Either way, I don’t think they were ever considered on the save level as him, although they might have disputed that. Haven’t you heard? Unless you’ve communicated with the Boss directly, you’re supposed to be small fry.

 

[anjoh66]

Yes the shia believe in successors to the prophet in a similar way that catholics believe in the pontiff.

The difference should be that they were only twelwe and that the last Imam has now been alive for 1000 years although he doesnt make himself known but remains in occultation, observing the muslims and preparing to establish himself at the end of times.

Shias consider their Imams infallible in every little action just as they consider the prophet infallible, the sunnis do not hold this view of infallibillity.

 

[The_Fool]

Thank you, anjou66. I should have clarified my question. What I meant was, will there always be an imam until the “end of the world”? For instance, one may assume there will always be a Pope (ignoring sede vacante) even until He returns. Of course, I think that is an assumption as the Church may continue to exist without one if need be. Note, none of our Popes disappear and reappear to the physical world(which implies following elections are nothing), so is it the same with the Imam? I suppose it also implies a secondary question as to is the occultation a perpetual concealment in the physical world, or is it a moving to another while still being able to interact.