Who was in the wrong here?

Who was in the wrong here?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Muawiyah, Aisha and her supporters, and the useless Mesopotamians.

  2. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ali for murdering an innocent camel

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Obviously Mu'awiya. But about Al-Jamal

      According to Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba:
      >Ali said "I wish I died 20 years before this"
      >A'isha said: "Bury me with the wives of the Prophet for I did something (reprehensible) after him"
      >Talha was killed by Marwan ibn Al-Hakam who was on his own side
      >Al-Zubayr was murdered while leaving before the battle started
      >A'isha said to Muhammad ibn Talha, when they were losing the battle, "Be like the better of the two sons of adam", so Muhammad dropped his sword, defended the camel with his hands and was martyred
      Pretty much everybody regreted their actions

  3. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    in monarchist/legalist perspective, Ali was the rightful heir to Muhammad through personal union through marriage.
    Umayyads had a religious authority and legitimacy, as he got support from Aisha.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Umayyads weren't supported by A'isha. A'isha opposed Ali due to him associating with and being elevated as caliph by the killers of 'Uthman, whom A'isha actually opposed due to his alleged nepotism for Umayyads

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >A'isha opposed Ali due to him associating with and being elevated as caliph by the killers of 'Uthman
        She was literally one of the ones behind uthmans death

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >She was literally one of the ones behind uthmans death
          A'isha wasn't there. Her brother was, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr (i think), who took the side of Ali at Al-Jamal

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        The trio of Talha, Zubayr, and Aisha were aming those who agitated against Uthman. Nearly the entire city of Medina rose up against Uthman. They were seething when Ali became Caliph in the aftermath attacked in in an attempt to usurp him.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >They were seething when Ali became Caliph in the aftermath attacked in in an attempt to usurp him.
          According to Musannaf ibn Abi Shayba, they were actually upset because Ali immedietly rose as Caliph after the murder and deduced that Ali was behind everything. So them, including some Umayyads went against 'Ali.

          When the battle was losing, Marwan ibn Al-Hakam, who was on their side, shot Talha with an arrow because he "didn't do enough to prevent the death of 'Uthman"

          There were some that went against Ali in pursuit of power, but most were upset about the death of 'Uthman, even if they used to be 'Uthman's critics

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >they were actually upset because Ali immedietly rose as Caliph after the murder and deduced that Ali was behind everything
            Except Ali had nothing to do with it. The guys who blames him did. The Umayyads themselves hailed Marwan for avenging Uthman by killing Talha. Avenging Uthmam was a just a bs rallying cry.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >he "didn't do enough to prevent the death of 'Uthman
            Why are you lying? Talha was killed by Marwan because Marwan claimed he was one of Uthman's killers

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Talha was killed by Marwan because Marwan claimed he was one of Uthman's killers
            What's the source for this?

            >Except Ali had nothing to do with it.
            Yes, Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba records Ali as being coerced into receiving the caliphate

            >The guys who blames him did.
            What's the source?

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >What's the source for this?
            Literally all the islamic historians. Al Tabari, Ibn al Athir, etc

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Those are secondary sources. I haven't studied Ibn Al-Athir but Al-Tabari uses highly suspect primary sources such as (if im not mistaken) Lut ibn Yahya Abu Mikhnaf whom Shia like to quote. And likewise, Sunnis like to quote Sayf ibn Umar Al-Tamimi, who is also suspect

  4. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Prophet draped his cloak over Ali, Husayn, Hasan, and Fatima and declared them all to be purified and free of sin and then Sunnoids murdered all four of them.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Husayn and Fatima weren't murdered according to Shia sources

  5. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Barak Hussein Obama.

  6. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Egypt + Syria vs. Iraq + Iran
    striking how many times this occurred, guess that's just the natural dividing lines in the region
    Arabia's position should've given away that it was the First Fitna but not gonna lie it took me a moment

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      No

  7. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >God sends his prophet down to spread the word
    >Neglects to clarify how succession works and lets the nastiest, most sinful, murderous shitshow take place in him and his prophet's name
    What the frick did the Omnipotent Maker of the Universe mean by this

  8. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Aisha but the rise of the Umayyads was ultimately a good thing for Muslims since Islam saw its greatest expansion that time.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *