Fate- a Tragedy of the Muslim history.



  • When the Prophet (PBUH) died , Umar Bin Khattab was responsible for preventing a riot amongst the two Muslim groups of the Ansar and the Muhajeroon and thus Abu Bakr became the leader of the faithful. When Abu Bakr was dying he named Umar as his successor and by taking this rather bold step on his death bed he did the greatest service to the Muslim Ummah.

    When Umar was assassinated, before he died he left instructions for 6 of the Prophet’s compatriots who were very close to him to select one of them to be Khalifah.

    As everyone knows that Hazrat Umar was a very strict man and for 10 years he ran a very tight ship of the state. He foresaw many of the problems which were to arise during the reign of Hazrat Uthman and prevented them from happening. Most people did not like that and when he died they wanted someone who would allow them to do what they wanted.

    Now everyone knew that Hazrat Ali was in the same mould as Hazrat Umar as regarded ethics, sharia and religious duties. Specifically that is the reason a soft easy going gentleman like Hazrat Uthman was selected because people were tired of the strict regime of Hazrat Umar and did not want the continuation of the same with Hazrat Ali.

    Well , everyone knows what happened next.

    If Hazrat Ali had become the Khalifah after Hazrat Umar- the history of the Muslims would have been different and in a much better way.



  • "If Hazrat Ali had become the Khalifah after Hazrat Umar- the history of the Muslims would have been different and in a much better way."

    ST, None of the great Muslim scholars have dwelved into that and came to that conclusion. It is mute point and we can say the same thing about Ali RA. If someone else was 4th Khalifa rather than Ali RA, the orthodox caliphate would have continued.

    ALL Khalifas earned the title of Mubashireen and promised Jannah in hereafter during their life span and it is not correct to dig into mute points of history and debate. We certainly have to learn from history but such topics should be better left for learned scholars. I am sure none of the them would like to open the pandora's box.



  • Shimatoree, we, or rather I in this case definitely agree with you. We could consider the third Caliph of Islam a bit of a setback. But at least it gave Hazrat Ali some 25 years of freedom from governmental care to concentrate on the faith and the grooming of the Muslim community, so that when he finally acceded to the highest function, short though it was, he was able to take the Islamic world in a totally different direction from his predecessors, leaving behind him ethical and religous standards at such a superbly high level that they are even today a model of their kind and a guide to any Muslim leader who may come to power.



  • as per request



  • AR, we were posting our comments at practically the same time, so I didn't see yours before mine had already been posted.

    Actually, I find it brave of shimatoree to take on such a delicate topic. As Muslims, I don't quite see why we can't express our views on this delicate topic as well. Knowing shimatoree, I think what he means is Islam would have benefitted ethically from such a succession. No one is questioning the right to heaven of all four Khalifas.

    Now may I ask you one thing, please. You write: "If someone else was 4th Khalifa rather than Ali RA, the orthodox caliphate would have continued." If you felt upto explaining what you meant exactly by this, I'd be very interested in reading your point of view. Thanks.



  • MG,

    There was no such debate througout Muslim history on topics like: if Abu Bakr was no 2 , or Umar was number 3 or Ali was no 3 and Osman was no 4 rather than no 3. Please provide any reference if there was one.

    Those Khalifas and Sahabas RA were the BEST of generations until the end of the world. On same token, whatever they did and left for us is the best anyone could ever do until the end of the world. So how can we point out their flaws in the selection process and come to conclusion that if Ali RA was no 3, things would have been better? May be it would have been worst. Allahu Alam



  • My purpose is just that- to look into What did go on- from an objective and historical perspective.

    I disagree vehemently with the assertion that " pandora's box" should be left un-opnened.

    No we need to open the Pandora's Box so that we may get some perspective and not just live by MYTHOLOGY.

    I intend to bring forth more specific issues which have in FACT affected as to what is going on today.

    I also reject the notion that some " scholars" need to look into this. With the historical information available through the internet to-day- we can study and we do not need to wait for scholars to issue their Fatwas. We can read what they have written and I am doing just that. Therefore I shall have something to add to this thread and I do hope so will everyone else.



  • ST,

    If we have to suppose things then I have also a supposition. I think you know about Abdullah bin Saba a jew convert to Islam. He was founder of Shian Ali Movement. He was behind the killing Hazrat Talha and Hazrat Zubair, who were returning after successful negotiation in before Jang-e-Jamal. He was also responsible for Kharjitis movement who killed Hazrat Usman.

    He was the root cause of almost everything so if he was prevented from creating the chaos at that time then. Please post your reply academically.



  • Hazrat Uthman lived with a modest lifestyle and never used treasury funds for his own private use.

    But he did make lavish payments to Ansar and Muhajeroon from the treasury.

    This created envy , greed, and completely discredited the austerity and self denial that umar had set an example about.Hazrat Ali was equally known to be auster like Umar.

    There were ten sahabah who were promised paradice by the Prophet. Amongst them were-

    Saad b. Waqas- At the conquest of Makkah- he was penniless. He commanded the army in the battle of Qadsiah against the Iranians.When he died in his mansion he left 300,000 dirhams.

    His son Omar was offered governorship of a province in Iran if he would lead the army against Imam Hussein and compell him to accept Yazid as khalifah. His ambition won and he shot the first arrow at Imam Hussein.

    He obviously had forgotten verse 34 of sura at-Tawba which say-

    Quote " those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend it in God's cause, give them notice of painful punishment" end of quote

    What happened to Abu Dharr Ghafari -( a devout companion of the Prophet)-

    first in Damascus and then in Madina for repeating the above truths- where he was flogged and then expelled from Madina- spending the rest of his life in a cave.

    More to come.



  • AR, I asked you a precise question on the supposition you yourself had put forward regarding Hazrat Ali's position as the 4th Khalifa. You failed to answer it. Any specific reason?

    Where's the harm in questioning our early history again, AR? Do you think it might weaken our faith in Allah or cause harm to Islam? On the contrary, I'd say. The more we understand our religion better ourselves and not only through the eyes of one of the ulema, the more we assume it as our own.

    shimatoree, please, not to feel upset if we're transferred to Faith and Religion once more. After all, it would be the logical place for this particular thread, wouldn't it?



  • MG, In my humble opinion there is nothing worthwhile for the benefit of Ummah in discussing the ascension of orthodox Khalifas and pros and cons of the order in which they were chosen . You go ahead and comment but I feel it is not fair at this juncture in Islamic history to dwelve into this topic.



  • Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @shimatoree: Most of what you wrote is utter BS!.



  • OK, AR, point taken. And having cudgelled my brains I managed to come up with an answer my own question. Let's see where shimatoree wants to go with this one. It's also my duty to stand by him in his musings, But I'll bear your objections in mind certainly, as well as HK's elegantly expressed comment.



  • Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    ALLAH ALMIGHTY has given each and every human being, the 'ability' to make decisions, take actions.

    Each and every human being is responsible for their! own! decisions, their! own! actions.

    Having said that, ALLAH ALMIGHTY has also given a path for human beings to follow. If human beings make decisions, take actions to be loyal to ALLAH ALMIGHTY, to HIS messenger Muhammad (SAW), they will succeed, they will prosper.

    Otherwise, they are doomed to failure, not only in this life, but in the afterlife as well. They'll destroy not only their own lives, but the lives of countless others, as well.



  • Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @shimatoree: You'r putting forward the case of Hazrat Ali (RA, RAA) to be Khalifah, and portraying it as if Hazrat Usman's (RA, RAA) turn to be Khaleefah was a 'bad turn' of 'fate', when you;

    (1) already know, or

    (2) have been apprised of

    the fact that this was not the decision of Hazrat Ali (RA, RAA) himself, through the following threads;

    (1) Video: Hazrat-e-Umer Aur Usman (RA) Ki Shahadat Ka Tarikhi Pas-e-Manzar

    (2) Video: Hazrat e Ali Aur Hazrat e Hussain RA Ki Shahadat Ka Tarikhi Pas e Manzar

    ..as a result, you choose to be unjust. That is your! decision. You are the only person responsible for taking that path. No one else shares your burden.



  • Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @shimatoree: Having said the above, I want to add, that you are welcome to your opinion.



  • HK-

    Unlike you whose sources are Video clips to suite your view point( which you have a right to)-

    I study quite a bit and give the subject matter a lot of thought before I write something here.

    The views I have put forth here are all documented based on historical research done by people who have spent a lot of time just doing that.

    Perhaps it is unpleasent for some here to be forced to face up to some of the facts. The reaction from most has been negative including you.

    You have called it BS.

    AR has felt that these things should be left alone.

    I am not a little child that I will be satisfied with your CANNED answers and they are CANNED- very well CANNED but Canned nonetheless.

    Perhaps I am naive in thinking that we can have an intelligent and thoughtful conversation about the issues through this medium .

    The comments from various sections of the community here tends to confirm that.

    What I have found instead is Knee Jerk reactions from people with a superficial perspective who do not even pay attention to what is written and who fail to see the relevance of what I am trying to bring in front of everyone.

    I wrote something about 1937 and I was accused of being wrong about something in 1945!

    One gentlman says that since I am a surgeon therefore I cannot have the ability to write what he thinks are Humanities issues.

    Let me just give you one example-

    The topics which have something to do with religious subjects- are seperated and banished to the Siberia of Faith and Religion.

    Now Islam does not have seperation of Church and state- that is ideas of religion and life and politics belong in the same place.

    As yet here the subject of religion is delegated to the back bench so to say.

    It appears that this time that has not happened yet to this thread.

    You may label me UNJUST- but let me tell you something. You are unlikely to meet anyone in your life who is more driven by justice.

    I was not going to reply to you but then I decided that I did need to write just one more time.

    You may rest assured I shall not reply to you again.



  • Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    Perhaps, I could have used a 'less' 'harsh' words to convey my message.

    I feel, the thing I'm lacking in .. is 'communication', more-so 'human' 'communication'. I 'communicate', as if I'm talking to an 'pre-programmed' 'drone', rather than a 'human being'.

    I find, its the 'choice of words', that you want me to 'refine'.



  • HK, You've made a tremendous amount of progress in what you call communication skills. Only sometimes you still get a bit carried away. But less and less so, thank God. Someday, you might even become a leader of Pakistan and then you'll think back to these days and some of shimatoree's wise pronouncments and feel glad you got to know him at the crossroads.

    shimatoree, let's get back to the topic of the thread. I take it your fundamental meaning was that corruption might not have been introduced into the Muslim world had events gone differently at the very start. Or am I wrong?

    But as you say, Fate had a hand in it, not just human free will. Amd then there's such a thing as human nature made up more or less in equal parts of greed, lust and a yearning for goodness, which last named remains just that, a simple yearning, never really followed up.

    Now you tell us what you really meant, dear shimatoree. Was it then, perhaps, that had the Imamat not taken place, the Muslim world might have evolved in ways which would have made our present decadence impossible?



  • During Hazrat Usman's regime, many great events took place. The first naval fleet of the Muslims was developed and Hazrat Mavia was appointed as the admiral. Egypt and some more areas were conquered. Hazrat Mavia being the governor of Syria performed very well for the development of the Islamic society.

    During Hazrat Usman's regime, a lot of work was done on the compilation of the Holy Quran. However, the soft nature of Hazrat Usman provided opportunities to the miscreants to act upon their agenda.