[sirmzereigMix]

Im trying to understand the conflict between Muawiyah (ra) and Ali (ra) and also the reason for Karbala.

What I dont understand is, why did Hasan (ra) agree with Muawiyah in appointing Yazid as the caliph when this would clearly turn the khilafa into a dynasty? Why did muawiyah (ra0 want to appoint his son as a caliph in the first place? I dont mean to question the decision of a sahabi, but Im just very confused.

Also, how did Hasan ibn Ali die? Shia's say that he was poisoned by his wife on the order of Muawiyah, is this true? This wouldn't make sense though.

Also, I came upon this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muawiya...flict_with_Ali

Its says that in the battle of the Vamel, Ali's (ra) army kill Talhah (ra) and al-Zubayr (ra) ! How can this be when these were all companions of the Prophet, why did they fight each other to death? I just don't understand how one Sahabi could kill another, especially one like Talhah (ra) who was one of the Promised Ten.


If someone could kindly explain the answer to these questions I'll be satisfied.

[13spebampiliece]

al-Salmu Aleykum,

Read the biography of `Ali (ra) in this book here:
http://www.kalamullah.com/ali-ibn-abi-talib.html

It talks about battle of Jamal and battle of Siffeen.

[r5YOPDyk]

Arsl

1. Al-Hasan did not agree with apointing Yazid as his successor, in fact, Al-Hasan passed away before Mu'awiyah. According to some narrations it also went against the explicit treaty agreed to by Al-Hasan and Mu'awiyah.

2. There are, as far as I know, no authentic narrations that Al-Hasan was poisoned at the order of Mu'awiyah. However, many Ulama of Ahl al-Sunnah lean towards believing in the narrations implicating Yazid, rather than his father.

3. Talha and Zubayr both decided to leave the battle field, as they were reminded of the Prophetic ahadith that Ali ibn Abi Talib will be on Haqq, etc. Zubayr was killed by Amr ibn Jurmuz after having left the battlefield, and Talha was shot by Marwan ibn al-Hakam.

May Allah Ta'ala be pleased with all the Sahaba.

wa Allahu a'lam

[evalayCap]

shia need to be annhilated inshallah (intellectually of course)

hope some good refutations are posted here inshallah

educating people about why shia are wrong is certainly worth doing bi ithnillah

[Qncvqpgfg]

Arsl

1. Al-Hasan did not agree with apointing Yazid as his successor, in fact, Al-Hasan passed away before Mu'awiyah. According to some narrations it also went against the explicit treaty agreed to by Al-Hasan and Mu'awiyah.

2. There are, as far as I know, no authentic narrations that Al-Hasan was poisoned at the order of Mu'awiyah. However, many Ulama of Ahl al-Sunnah lean towards believing in the narrations implicating Yazid, rather than his father.

3. Talha and Zubayr both decided to leave the battle field, as they were reminded of the Prophetic ahadith that Ali ibn Abi Talib will be on Haqq, etc. Zubayr was killed by Amr ibn Jurmuz after having left the battlefield, and Talha was shot by Marwan ibn al-Hakam.

May Allah Ta'ala be pleased with all the Sahaba.

wa Allahu a'lam

1) yazid wasnt hassans successor, muawiyyah was. and hassan agreed to this. a narration states taht teh prophet saw said hassan will bring two factions together

2) can you provide the narrations and which scholars lean this way?

3) the narration didnt exactly say that ali will be on haqh. bring the full narration so we can see the exact wording inshallah. be careful because shia will twist things. there is a narration in their most authentic book called usool al kafi that to bring someone to shia by lying is better than saving an oppressed person. they are habitual liars and willing to say whatever to bring you to shia. they will give half narrations, twist things and do anything possible with no care as to whether they are being truth or deceitful

[Wgnhqhlg]

assalamu alykum

Please show proper respect when taking the names of the Sahaba's Jazakallah

[AllAdobeOEMSoftDownload]

assalamu alykum

Please show proper respect when taking the names of the Sahaba's Jazakallah

[67Irralphaisa]

Shia are wrong basically because they allege that Islam failed and did not alter anything with the Prophethood of Muhammad . That a hidden imamat will restore justice near4 the end of time, that we have imperfection in government until the end of time. That we must weep for the family of the rasul because they died (not as shaheed which is a matter of happiness), and we must live in this world waiting for this hidden imam to emerge...just keep waiting and waiting and weeping and hoping the end of the world arrives soon. Crazy religion. It is not Islam.

[Keyclenef]

1. Al-Hasan did not agree with apointing Yazid as his successor, in fact, Al-Hasan passed away before Mu'awiyah. According to some narrations it also went against the explicit treaty agreed to by Al-Hasan and Mu'awiyah.

Are you sure Hasan didn't agree? Also, why did Muawiyah (ra) decide to appoint Yazid as his successor when this would clearly turn the khilafa into a dynasty? This was the whole reason for the Karbala, if Mauwiyah (ra) never appointed yazid as his successor, then Karbala would not have happened. So why did muawiyah (ra) do it?

2. There are, as far as I know, no authentic narrations that Al-Hasan was poisoned at the order of Mu'awiyah. However, many Ulama of Ahl al-Sunnah lean towards believing in the narrations implicating Yazid, rather than his father.

So some ulema believe yazid ordered the poisoning of Hasan? Why would yazid do this when Hasan (ra) did not even oppose him, rather Husain (ra) did.

3. Talha and Zubayr both decided to leave the battle field, as they were reminded of the Prophetic ahadith that Ali ibn Abi Talib will be on Haqq, etc. Zubayr was killed by Amr ibn Jurmuz after having left the battlefield, and Talha was shot by Marwan ibn al-Hakam.

This makes more sense,

[Atmotteenrift]

Muawiyah (RA) was a man, a sahabi is not like a nabi, he may have made a mistake in appointing his own son without knowing what he would do.

Shia ideas are foolish...ahlul bait are beloved but they were not supposed to be political leaders...if they had been leaders through our history they would have been deified or made into Gods...some of the shia give their hidden imams God like attributes. It is a silly religion no worth listening to, it is not Islam.

In the akhira yazid will be held responsible for all his crimes. Nuh alayhis salam son was a kafir, you cannot hold Nuh alahis salam responsible for this.

[ananciguinter]

One must prefer to remain quiet on the matter of Yazeed ibn Muawiyyah. Neither curse him, nor praise him.

The following may be read:

http://www.askimam.org/public/question_detail/16137

[socialkiiii]

Abu Fatimah

Allahumma salli ala sayyidina Muhammadin wa ala alihi wa sahbihi ajma'in.

المستدرك على الصحيحين للحاكم (3 / 413):
فَقَالَ لَهُ عَلِيٌّ أَنْشُدُكَ اللَّهَ: هَلْ سَمِعْتَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: «تُقَاتِلُهُ وَأَنْتَ لَهُ ظَالِمٌ» فَقَالَ: لَمْ أَذْكُرْ، ثُمَّ مَضَى الزُّبَيْرُ مُنْصَرِفًا


المستدرك على الصحيحين للحاكم (3 / 419):
أَخْبَرَنِي الْوَلِيدُ، وَأَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ قُرَيْشٍ، ثَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ سُفْيَانَ، ثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدَةَ، ثَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ، ثَنَا رِفَاعَةُ بْنُ إِيَاسٍ الضَّبِّيُّ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، قَالَ: كُنَّا مَعَ عَلِيٍّ يَوْمَ الْجَمَلِ، فَبَعَثَ إِلَى طَلْحَةَ بْنِ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ أَنِ الْقَنِي فَأَتَاهُ طَلْحَةُ، فَقَالَ: نَشَدْتُكَ اللَّهَ، هَلْ سَمِعْتَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ؟ يَقُولُ: «مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلَاهُ فَعَلِيٌّ مَوْلَاهُ، اللَّهُمَّ وَالِ مَنْ وَلَاهُ، وَعَادِ مَنْ عَادَاهُ» ؟ قَالَ: نَعَمْ، قَالَ: فَلِمَ تُقَاتِلُنِي؟ قَالَ: لَمْ أَذَكُرْ، قَالَ: فَانْصَرَفَ طَلْحَة

As for the poisoning of Al-Hasan (ra), Ibn Taymiyya brings the following in Minhaj al-Sunnah: إن بني أمية ليسوا بأعظم جرماً من بني إسرائيل ، فمعاوية حين أمر بسم الحسن فهو منباب قتال بعضهم بعضا
But like I said, I do not know of any authentic narrations establishing that. While others, like Al-Suyuti, implicated Yazid rather than his father. One of the reasons would be that the agreement between Al-Hasan (ra) and Mu'awiyah (ra) was that the khilafah goes back to Al-Hasan (ra) after Mu'awiyahs (ra) death. For obvious reasons Yazid may not have liked the idea of that. Al-Hasan was poisoned by his own wife, who according to narrations had been offered a large sum of money and to marry Yazid.


Wa Allahu a'lam

[Rupeviv]

^ This is a lie quoted from a Shia website, Ibn Tayymiyah (rah) said:

قال ابن تيمية « أما قوله – أي الرافضي ابن المطهر – أن معاوية سم الحسن فهذا مما ذكره بعض الناس ولم يثبت ذلك ببينة». ثم قال « فإن كان قد وقع شيء من ذلك فهو من باب قتالهم بعضهم بعضا» (منهاج السنة النبوية2/225).

As for al-Hasan being poisoned by so and so, this is not proven, but we read several narrations stating the Khawarij made several attempts on his life so accusing them is actually common sense.

Also Mu`awiyah (ra) narrated virtues of al-Hassan (ra), he wouldn't do this if he hated him or didn't want him to become Caliph.

[allemnendup]

تِلْكَ أُمَّةٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ ۖ لَهَا مَا كَسَبَتْ وَلَكُم مَّا كَسَبْتُمْ ۖ وَلَا تُسْأَلُونَ عَمَّا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ
That was a nation which has passed on. It will have [the consequence of] what it earned, and you will have what you have earned. And you will not be asked about what they used to do. [2:134]

[ttiokjbnhjjillp]

TriploySunni,

With all due respect, but no, it was not "quoted from a Shi'a site". Either way, since there are no authentic narrations proving conclusively that Mu'awiya (ra) was behind it, it is not permissible to state such, unless, of course, one can provide sufficient proof. But any attempt to do so will most likely fail miserably. And implicating anyone in such a hideous crime, let alone a Sahabi of Rasulu'Allah (salla'Allahu alayhi wa alihi wa sallam), without solid proof is prohibited. As for Yazid, then there is a case for that, although not necessarily conclusive. All that can be said for sure is that Al-Hasan (ra) was poisoned by his wife Ja'da bint Al Ash'ath, and that she had been promised wealth and marriage to Yazid. Who made those promises? We cannot say for sure.

Wa Allahu a'lam

[JoZertekAdv]

TriploySunni,

With all due respect, but no, it was not "quoted from a Shi'a site". Either way, since there are no authentic narrations proving conclusively that Mu'awiya (ra) was behind it, it is not permissible to state such, unless, of course, one can provide sufficient proof. But any attempt to do so will most likely fail miserably. And implicating anyone in such a hideous crime, let alone a Sahabi of Rasulu'Allah (salla'Allahu alayhi wa alihi wa sallam), without solid proof is prohibited. As for Yazid, then there is a case for that, although not necessarily conclusive. All that can be said for sure is that Al-Hasan (ra) was poisoned by his wife Ja'da bint Al Ash'ath, and that she had been promised wealth and marriage to Yazid. Who made those promises? We cannot say for sure.

Wa Allahu a'lam

I don't know where you quoted it from, but this sentence you quoted was originally written by the Shia and attributed to Ibn Tayymiyah (rah), the entire sentence is wrong and it contains:

1- a lie.

2- Tadlees.

[SasV7ReJ]

All that can be said for sure is that Al-Hasan (ra) was poisoned by his wife Ja'da bint Al Ash'ath, and that she had been promised wealth and marriage to Yazid.

^ This is not proven, how can you say it is for sure?

[majestictwelve]

^ This is not proven, how can you say it is for sure?

I think you're right. I tried to do some research and couldn't find any source or narration indicating that Hasan (ra) was poisoned. Only the shia sites say this, which can't be trusted.

[rozalinasi]

I think you're right. I tried to do some research and couldn't find any source or narration indicating that Hasan (ra) was poisoned. Only the shia sites say this, which can't be trusted.

I was just talking about the part of his wife poisoning him, I don't think this was proven or accepted.

Also al-Hassan (ra) himself wasn't sure according to the Hadith so I doubt we'd know:

وعن عمير بن إسحاق قال: دخلت أنا ورجل على الحسن بن علي نعوده فقال: يا فلان سلني؟ قال: لا والله لا نسألك حتى يعافيك الله ثم نسألك، قال: ثم دخل ثم خرج إلينا فقال: سلني قبل أن لا تسألني، فقال بل يعافيك الله ثم أسألك، قال: لقد ألقيت طائفة من كبدي وإني سقيت السم مرارا فلم أسق مثل هذه المرة، ثم دخلت عليه من الغد وهو يجود بنفسه والحسين عند رأسه، وقال: يا أخي من تتهم؟ قال: لم؟ لتقتله؟ قال: نعم، قال: إن يكن الذي أظن فالله أشد بأسا وأشد تنكيلا، وإلا يكنه فما أحب أن يقتل بي بريء ثم قضى رضوان الله تعالى عليه .