IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Religion - Islam > Islamic INTRAfaith Dialogue
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - A Brief History of Islam  What is Islam What is Islam  Donate Donate
  FAQ FAQ  Quran Search Quran Search  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

A Brief History of Islam

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 7>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Fatah-Momin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fatah-Momin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 November 2005 at 8:29pm
DISASTER OF CAMEL 

Some people relate that when the pledge of allegiance to `Ali was completed, Talha and az-Zubayr asked `Ali for permission to go to Makka. (135) `Ali said, "Perhaps you mean to go to Basra and Syria?" They swore that they would not do that. (136) `A'isha was at Makka. (137) `Abdullah b. `Amr, the Governor of `Uthman over Basra and Ya'la b. Umayya, `Uthman's Governor over the Yemen, fled to Makka.

All of them met in Makka. They included Marwan b. al-Hakam. The Banu Umayya met and they wanted revenge for `Uthman's blood. Ya`la gave Talha, az-Zubayr, and `A'isha four hundred dirhams. He gave two hundred dinars. They wanted to go to Syria. Ibn `Amir stopped them and said, "You have not agreed to meet Mu`awiya. I have hirelings in Basra. Go to them instead."

They came to Ma'al-Hawa'ib (138) and the dogs barked. `A'isha asked and was told, "This is the water of al-Hawa'ib." She took his halter from him. That was because she had heard the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say, "Which of you will be the one with the thick- haired camel (139) when the dogs bark at her at al-Huwa'ib?" Talha and az-Zubayr testified that that was not Ma'al-Hawa'ib and fifty men added to them. (140) It was the first false testimony which had occurred in Islam. (141)

`Ali went to Kufa. (142) `Ali travelled from Madina to Iraq by way of ar-Rabadha, Fid, ath-Tha'labiya, al-Asawid and Dhu Qar. From ar-Rabadha, he sent Muhammad b. Abi Bakr and Muhammad b. Ja`far to Kufa. They came back to him while he was at Dhu Qar, saying that Abu Musa and the people of discernment among the Kufans wanted to refrain and not to go out. He sent al-Ashtar and Ibn `Abbas. Then he sent his son al-Hasan and `Ammar to win the people over to him. While he was on his way, `Uthman b. Hanif and Hukaym b. Jabala started to fight the People of the Camel. In al-Asawid, he received news of the death of Hukaym b. Jabala and the murderers of `Uthman. Then `Uthman b. Hanif came to `Ali while he was in ath-Tha'labiyya. `Uthman had his beard plucked out and he was helpless. `Ali set up his army in Dhu Qar. Then he went to Basra with his men, where the People of the Camel were located.

The two groups formed armies and met. (143) When `Ammar was near the howdah of `A'isha, he said, "What are you seeking?" They said, "We are seeking (revenge) for `Uthman's blood." He said, "On this day, Allah will kill the attackers and the one who seeks blood without a right." (144)
`Ali and az-Zubayr met. `Ali said to him, "Do you remember the words of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, that you would fight me?" az-Zubayr left him and went back. His son tried to make him return and he would not do it. Al-Ahnaf followed him (az-Zubayr) and then murdered him.(145)

`Ali called to Talha from a distance and said, "What do you want?" He said, "Revenge for `Uthman's blood." He said, "May Allah fight you! We are entrusted with the blood of `Uthman. Have you not heard the words of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, when he said, `Be a friend to the one who is his friend and be an enemy to the one who is his enemy and help the one who helps him and disappoint the one who disappoints him' You are the first to offer me allegiance and then break it." (146)

PROTECTION

As for their going to Basra, that is correct without any doubt.

But why did they go? There is no sound transmission regarding that and there is no one who is to be trusted in it because the reliable individuals did not tansmit anything. One does not listen to the words of the partisan, including the partisan who wants to attack Islam and find fault with the Companions.

It is possible that they went out to depose `Ali by something that seemed correct to them. (147) That was because they had offered homage to him in order to still the rebellion, but they still sought the truth.

It is possible that they went out to get power over `Uthman's murderers. (148)

It is possible that they went to join the groups of the muslims and to bring them together and refer them to the same law so that they would not be agitated and fight.

This is what is sound and nothing else. The sound reports bring that.

As for the first possibilities, they are all false and weak. As for their giving homage by force, that is false as we have clarified.

As for their seeking to depose him, that is false, because deposing a person is only by a universal opinion, although it is possible that one or two many appoint. Deposing someone only occurs after evidence and clarification.

As for their going out because of the business of the murderers of `Uthman, that is weak because the root before it was unity. It is possible to combine both matters. (149)

It is related that part of the rabble among the people had made them absent. (150)

Talha, az-Zubayr and `A'isha, the Umm al-Mu'minun, may Allah be pleased with them, left hoping to return people to their source and to preserve the respect of their Prophet. As evidence againt her, (151) they quoted Allah ta'ala when he said, "There is no good in much of their conspiring secretly except for the one who commands sadaqa or something correct or to put things right between people (4:114)." The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, went out to make peace and he sent messenger for it. She hoped for the reward and used that story. She went out so that things would reach their proper conclusions.



================================================

135. `Abdullah b. `Umar b. al-Khattab was one of those who asked him for permission to go to Makka. The reason for that was that when the oath of homage to `Ali was finished, `Ali decided to fight the people of Syria. He delegated the people of Madina to go with him. He said, "I am a man of the people of Madina. If they go, I will go with them in full obedience. But I will not go out to fight this year." Then Ibn `Umar made provisions and left for Makka (Ibn Kathir, 7:230). Al-Hasan b. `Ali opposed his father about going out to fight the peope of Syria. `Ali left him in Madina as you will see later.

136. The words of `Ali to them, and their path to them, are part of what the perpetrators of the disaster and their transmitters added.

137. She and the Mothers of the Believers went to Makka when the attackers prevented water from reaching the Amir al-Mu'minin, `Uthman. He began to ask people for water. Umm Habiba brought water to him and they treated her with contempt. They struck the face of her mule and cut the rope of the mule with the sword (at -Tabari, 5:127). The Ummahat al-Mu'minin prepared to go on Hajj, to flee from the siege (Ibn Kathir, 7:229).

138. Al-Hawa'ib is one of the springs on the road to Basra. Abu'l-Fath Nasr b. `Abdu'r-Rahman al-Iskandari said that Yaqut quoted him in `The Collection of the Lands'. Abu `Ubayd al-Bakri said in his collection that it is some water near Basra on the Makkan road. It was named al-Hawa'ub bint Kalb b. Wabara al- Quda'iyya.

139. "Adib.": adabb. There is assimilation for the sake of the rhyme.Al-Adabb means much hair on the face, Ibn al-Athir said that in `The End'.

140. They did not testify and `A'isha did not say that nor did the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, say that. We will make that clear in its place in the Protection.

141. The false testimony came from rabble who did not fear Allah, like Abu Zaynab and Abu'l-Mawra' as was already stated. It came from those who claimed to have the power to create a personality which Allah did not create - like whoever fabricated the name of Thabit, the client of Umm Salama, as was already stated. As for Talha and az-Zubayr, they had been promised the Garden by the Prophet of mercy, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who did not speak from passion. They had the highest character and they were notable to themselves and to Allah to give false testimony. This lie against them came from men who hated the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. It is not the first lie they made in Islam nor was it the last of the lies that they forged against him and his people.

142. He left Madina at the end of the month of Rabi' al-Akhir in 36 A.H. in order to be near to Syria. His son al-Hasan wanted his father to stay in Madina and take it as the abode of the khalifate as the three Khalifs had done before him (at-Tabari, 5:171). Look at 5:163

143. After `Ali reached Dhu Qarr, al-Qa'qa' b. `Amr understood to attempt to reach an agreement, `Ali went to Basra with his men. The murderers of `Uthman were quick to scotch the attempts at peace by starting the battle.

144. The two groups were seeking an understanding and unity. As for the attackers, they were the murderers of `Uthman. Allah killed them all except for one. That will be made clear.

145. Az-Zubayr's murderers were `Umayr b. Jurmuz, Faddala b. Habis and Nufay' at-Tamimi. Al-Ahnaf had too much fear of Allah to command them to kill him. He did hear them grumbling about the muslims fighting each other. Then they caught up to az-Zubayr and murdered him (at-Tabari, 5:197).

146. Talha was too true in belief and high in character to give allegiance and then break it. He wanted to unify things by investigating the murderers of `Uthman. `Ali agreed to this as will come in the following study. However, those who had committed a crime against Islam the first time when they attacked `Uthman were the enemies of Allah the next time by starting the fight between these two groups of muslims.

147. This possibility is remote in respect of those right-acting excellent ones. Nothing they did indicated this. All the events indicate that they were above it. This is what Ibn Hajar believed in `The Opening of the Creator' (13:41-42). In the book, `The Reports of Basra' by `Umar b. Shabba he quotes what al-Muhallab said, "No one transmitted that `A'isha and those with her debated `Ali out of desire for the Khalifate nor did any of them ask to be appointed Khalif."

148. This is what they used to say. However, they meant that they would reach an agreement with `Ali in any manner by which they could do that. This is what the Striving Companion al-Qa'qa' b. `Amr attempted to do. Both parties accepted him as will be mentioned.

149. The combination of the two matters very nearly took place if it had not been that the Saba'ites foiled it. The People of the Camel came about `Uthman's murderers. That was all that they sought. However, they wanted to reach an understanding about it with `Ali because reaching an understanding with him was the first way to obtain their goal.

150. i.e. Talha and az-Zubayr and `A'ishah were absent from Madina.

151. When they induced her to go to Basra


Edited by Fatah-Momin
Back to Top
Fatah-Momin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fatah-Momin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 November 2005 at 10:24pm

You say "proceed with caution" and when I do you say  "conclusion that fears me alot from too precautionary a note" Make up your mind, which route you want to take.



Edited by Fatah-Momin
Back to Top
AhmadJoyia View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 20 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1647
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AhmadJoyia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 November 2005 at 12:56pm

Originally posted by Fatah-Momin Fatah-Momin wrote:

I think bro either you do not want to understand the issue or you have an hidden agenda in both the cases it is intentional.

Your thinking is not logical, though I am very sorry to say this, my brother. I have neigther any "hidden agenda" nor it is true that I don't want to understand the issue. Rather, I shall appreciate that there is some one who is bringing the other side of the story as well, which is new to me at least. However, one must proceed with caution with all the logical analysis of the material to sift right from the wrong. It is in this context that all my questions are from your own material that you have posted uptill now, not from "bad" but sincere intentions to understand them in their right perspective. Since its you who is providing this info, therefore, its understanding is assumed to be with you. But if you are simply cutting and pasting from the book that you referred, though the efforts are still commendable, but understanding of the issue becomes even more important. It is in this regard that my questions become even more important to look at. 

In the end, I don't have any opinions about early personalities of Islam except that they all were humans.

Back to Top
Fatah-Momin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fatah-Momin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 November 2005 at 10:11am
I think bro either you do not want to understand the issue or you have an hidden agenda in both the cases it is intentional. This is why I requested you to have a open debate with me on the issue of your choice, let us debate this very issue,what is your stand on Yazid Bin Mu'awiyah. We will begin from here.
Back to Top
AhmadJoyia View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 20 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1647
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AhmadJoyia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 November 2005 at 7:31am

Originally posted by Fatah-Momin Fatah-Momin wrote:

See how craftly you mix ,....

Thanks bro again for being typical. Your persistant abuses on my intentions are now coming to the understanding of everyone on this forum more than any where else.

Quote ... two posts togather the post I continued the siege of constantinople is different from the one where I quote from Book about the life of the Blessed prophet. Hercules was the king during the life time of Nabi Allah[saw] and the siege happened in 48 Hijrah right after the Constantine passsed away. Why do you not do the math at home before you post any responses. Please also learn difference between Dawah and Invasion.

Humbly stated, your reply is far away from the logical reasoning I have presented. Kindly see if one needs tutoring to understand "logic". Obviously, this forum is not the right place for such an activity. Nevertheless, it is exactly this math that provides total refutation of your understanding of the hadith that you quoted for invasion. In fact, its not me who is joining the two occassions, but you yourself when you said in one of your earliest posts "This was the first campaign by the Muslims to occupy Constantinople. The Prophet[saw] had given the good tiding of paradise who took part in the campaign." Hopefully, now you may realise the point I have highlighted. Hope to hear logical reasoning than emotional from you. May Allah bless us all.

Back to Top
Fatah-Momin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fatah-Momin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 November 2005 at 8:09pm
Originally posted by AhmadJoyia AhmadJoyia wrote:

 

Thanks bro for your concern for me, though not without malice, that too, by completely ignoring to respond to my other questions as well. Ok, coming back to the topic, it is interesting to note that you provided two names for the Byzantine emperor, i.e when you say "In the year 48 Hijrah when the Byzantine emperor Constantine was murdered, it was Mu'awiyah's turn to take advantage of the situation." in one of the narrations and another when you say "Al-Bukhari gave a long narration of the contents of the letter sent by the Prophet to Hercules, king of the Byzantines". In this view, can you provide any explanation as which emperor and / or city was being referred by Rasullalah in your quoted hadith?

Secondly, if we critically look at the situation that you are trying to portray, it seems like that on one end Prophet was sending dawah messages through peace missions and on the other side he was instigating Muslims to invade the Christian capital without providing any reason to it. How these two apperantly  mismatch strategies can be reconciled, keeping in view the verses of Quran for the Christians as you also quoted from the Shahi Bokhari? I shall reinstate them here for completion purposes.

Quote "Say (O Muhammad ): �O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but All�h, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides All�h.� Then, if they turn away, say: �Bear witness that we are Muslims.� " [3:64] 

See how craftly you mix two posts togather, the post I continued the siege of constantinople is different from the one where I quote from Book about the life of the Blessed prophet. Hercules was the king during the life time of Nabi Allah[saw] and the siege happened in 48 Hijrah right after the Constantine passsed away. Why do you not do the math at home before you post any responses. Please also learn difference between Dawah and Invasion.

 

Back to Top
AhmadJoyia View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 20 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 1647
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AhmadJoyia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 November 2005 at 7:17am

Originally posted by Fateh-Momin Fateh-Momin wrote:

Let me continue on the event of Seige of Constantinople, before I answer the post by AhmadJoyia as he use to making statement which he regrets in the end.

Thanks bro for your concern for me, though not without malice, that too, by completely ignoring to respond to my other questions as well. Ok, coming back to the topic, it is interesting to note that you provided two names for the Byzantine emperor, i.e when you say "In the year 48 Hijrah when the Byzantine emperor Constantine was murdered, it was Mu'awiyah's turn to take advantage of the situation." in one of the narrations and another when you say "Al-Bukhari gave a long narration of the contents of the letter sent by the Prophet to Hercules, king of the Byzantines". In this view, can you provide any explanation as which emperor and / or city was being referred by Rasullalah in your quoted hadith?

Secondly, if we critically look at the situation that you are trying to portray, it seems like that on one end Prophet was sending dawah messages through peace missions and on the other side he was instigating Muslims to invade the Christian capital without providing any reason to it. How these two apperantly  mismatch strategies can be reconciled, keeping in view the verses of Quran for the Christians as you also quoted from the Shahi Bokhari? I shall reinstate them here for completion purposes.

Quote "Say (O Muhammad ): �O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but All�h, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides All�h.� Then, if they turn away, say: �Bear witness that we are Muslims.� " [3:64] 

Back to Top
Fatah-Momin View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fatah-Momin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2005 at 10:35pm

 " Th first amongst my followers who will invade Ceaser's city will be forgiven their sins."
[Sahi Al; Bukhari, Vol. I P. 109, Translation by Mohd. muhsin Khan]

 

Now if we read the hadith wording carefully it explicitly state "INVADE CEASER'S CITY" Mr.AhmadJoyia has different meaning of the the word "invade" in his vocabulory it mean to send "Envoy with a letter of Dawah"

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.