Talk:The first four Sunni Caliphs and the Sunnah

Untitled
I think this page needs cleanup really bad... anyone else? 3L3CTRIC 33L 22:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Salam!


 * Told people to not do Salat, disaproveing of Tayammum, even though its in the Quran (Muslim, Muslim).

He was the supossed leader of the nation, his opinion is authorativ according to the Sunni school, how do you justify it by "he did not impose it"? People undertod it as a command, disputes arose regarding it... Was Umar the religios and political succesor, yes or no?

Of course yes, people undertod it as yes, he himself undertod it as yes Read:

Book 2, Number 2.21.85: Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham ibn Urwa from his father fromYahyaibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn Ha ib that he had set off for Mumra with Umar ibn al-Khattab in a party of riders, among whom was Amr ibn al-As. Umar ibn al-Khattab dismounted for a rest late at night on a certain road near a certain oasis. Umar had a wet dream when it was almost dawn and there was no water among the riding party. He rode until he came to some water and then he began to wash off what he saw of the semen until it had gone. Amr ibn al-As said to him, "It is morning and there are clothes with us, so allow your garment to be washed. Umar ibn al-Khattab said to him, "'''I am surprised at you, Amr ibn al-As! Even if you could find clothes, would everybody be able to find them? By Allah, if I were to do it, it would become a sunna. No, I wash what I see, and I sprinkle with water what I do not see'''."

Malik spoke about a man who found traces of a wet dream on his clothes and did not know when it had occurred and did not remember anything he had seen in his sleep. He said, "Let the intention of his ghusl be from the time when he last slept, and if he has prayed since that last sleep he should repeat it. This is because often a man has a wet dream and sees nothing, and often he sees something but does not have an emission. But, if he finds liquid on his garment he must do ghusl. This is because Umar repeated what he had prayed after the time he had last slept and not what was before it." http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muwatta/002.mmt.html#002.2.21.85

As you see, Umar did things beliving that he changed the Sunnah, and took that into consideration, since everybody might not be able to follow the Sunnah, and people consulted his Sunnah. And that is why people started to argue whether they should follow Umar version of the Sunnah or the Quran. Hence, he the argument that he did not impose it is not a accurate argument.

Ma Salam!

--Striver 02:04, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

By the way, Ali did not accept to all that, he did not whant to follow Umar's version of the Sunnah and therefor was not elected as the third caliph.

--Striver 02:14, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

About Abu Dharr:

Our Nabi (S) has warned us and afforded us a clear-cut guidance as to how we should behave towards our fellow-Muslims - of whatever school of thought. He said: "THREE

Things are the roots of faith: (1) Refrain from killing a person who utters "There is no god but Allah"; (2) DO NOT declare him/her an unbeliever no matter what sin he/she commits; (3) Do NOT ex-communicate him/her from Islam for any of his/her action(s)."

(Narrated by Anas ibn Malik in SUNAN ABU DAWOOD). http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_151_200/are_shias_kaafirs.htm

--Striver 04:27, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

First of all, note that there is no sign of controversy about tayammum as wudu. The hadith are referring to the question of whether it is valid after a seminal emission - ie whether tayammum can count as ghusl as well. Second, in the quote above, note that sunna is being used in its general Arabic meaning, not its technical one - not the sunna (custom) of the Prophet, but a sunna (custom) of Umar. - Mustafaa 17:56, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

"as ghusl as wel" ? "as wel" ? Where does Umar acknowledge that it can be used as Wudhu? Unless proven in som hadith, it is only conjecture. I have never seen any hadith where Umar acknowledged any type of tayamum. I wont change, since i might be wrong. Waiting for relpy.

--Striver 18:30, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

It is only conjecture that he would have banned Tayammum as Wudu. The circumstances described in the hadith require Ghusl, not Wudu. Unless you can find some indication that he banned Tayammum for people who had not ejaculated just previously, the sentence should neither imply that he accepted Tayammum as Wudu nor that he rejected it. - Mustafaa 23:23, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Ibadi
Ibadi POV is that Uthman and Ali both introduced Bid'ah, while Abu Bakr and Umar presumably did not. (IslamFact.com). I'm trying to find out what innovations they believe Uthman and Ali to have introduced. - Mustafaa 23:27, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Ok, great well add it as soon as you have more info :)

--Striver 23:32, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

mmm... Is that a Ibadi site?

--Striver 00:43, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

yeah - the only one I can find in English. (There are more in French and Arabic.) - Mustafaa 00:54, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Ok, then another question: In which whay was that a change to the sunnah?


 * In the same way that exiling Abu Dharr is. - Mustafaa 01:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

lol :P

Ok, lets go for it :)

--Striver 01:27, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Umar & Quran
http://www.quranbrowser.com/ make a query for "4:43, 5:6"

The Quran clearly says that tayamum can be used as ghusl. Umar desition was against the Quran. Soments? Will you still remove that if i add it?

I know that Kahlifa is not a Muslim, but whould you say that this translation of the meaning is incorrect in the relevant part of the vers and subject?

004:043 O you who believe, do not observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) while intoxicated, so that you know what you are saying. Nor after sexual orgasm without bathing, unless you are on the road, traveling; if you are ill or traveling, or you had urinary or fecal-related excretion (such as gas), or contacted the women (sexually), and you cannot find water, you shall observe Tayammum (dry ablution) by touching clean dry soil, then wiping your faces and hands therewith. GOD is Pardoner, Forgiver.

005:006 O you who believe, when you observe the Contact Prayers (Salat), you shall: (1) wash your faces, (2) wash your arms to the elbows, (3) wipe your heads, and (4) wash your feet to the ankles. If you were unclean due to sexual orgasm, you shall bathe. If you are ill, or traveling, or had any digestive excretion (urinary, fecal, or gas), or had (sexual) contact with the women, and you cannot find water, you shall observe the dry ablution (Tayammum) by touching clean dry soil, then rubbing your faces and hands. GOD does not wish to make the religion difficult for you; He wishes to cleanse you and to perfect His blessing upon you, that you may be appreciative.

--Striver 01:03, 19 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Hmm, fair point. - Mustafaa 01:13, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

The supporters of Umar would rather twist the Qur'an than call Umar wrong! Armyrifle

Uthman doubling prayer
The link to Sahih Muslim, Book 4, Number 1477 only claims that Uthman read the normal number of rakat when he traveled, as oppossed to the shortened number allowed by the Prophet. Furthermore, it only claims that he did so on that instance, rather than commanding others to do so during his caliphate. This particular hadith, which the article links, makes no mention of the prayer read (which this article refers to as the morning prayer). Pepsidrinka 04:59, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I see that the point has been removed and replaced with another. According to Islamic Voice, a monthly newspaper out of India, printed in English, they provide an explanation to Uthman praying the full prayer as opposed to the concession for travelers to shorten their prayer. The short article can be read here. Pepsidrinka 16:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

After reading each provided hadith on this topic, none of them support the claim that Uthman "annuled the two rak'ah journey prayer." Although they do state that he did read the prayers in full, it does not neccessitate that he annuled it for everyone else. According to a majority of Sunni scholars, an alim may decide on his own to read the full prayer or the shortened concession. For the time being, unless conclusive evidence can point to an annulment for the entire Ummah, I will remove the claim and place it into the Shia view for Uthman. Pepsidrinka 06:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I have not yet read the article you kindly posted. Is not the Ummah supposed to follow the Sunnah of the rashidun, in Sunni fiqh? --Striver 06:56, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

This article is POV and should be deleted
The very title of the article reflects a Shi'a POV -- that the first three caliphs did not follow the sunnah of Muhammad, but followed their own thoughts in the matter. It's part of the general Shi'a critique of the caliphs regarded as "usurpers". The Sunni believe that the first four caliphs were Rashidun, rightly-guided, and DID follow the sunnah.

The problem is that the "sunnah of Muhammad" is a later concept, and Muslims do not agree on what it was. Crone and Hinds, in their book God's Caliph, argue that it took quite some time for Muslims to agree to frame their debates in terms of what was really the sunnah and what wasn't. The early Muslims, they say, allowed much more religious authority to the caliphs than later Muslims, who had become cynical and saw caliphs as mere worldly rulers. By the time that arguments started focusing on finding the TRUE sunnah, it was hundreds of years and many civil wars and religious schisms later, and any version of the TRUE sunnah was hopelessly polemic and political.

I don't think I have the energy to put this on AfD right now, but I'll try to do so this weekend. Zora 05:12, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It was realy tempting to let you do the avf before showing you how wrong you are, but im not like you, stalking me and stuff...


 * ''As narrated in other Hâdîth, the Prophet r stressed that we should always stick to the Qur’ân and the reported authentic Sunnah and the Sunnah of the four righteously guided Caliphs.


 * ''stressed that we should always stick to the Qur’ân and the Sunnah and the Sunnah of the four righteously guided Caliphs.


 * C'mon Zora, Sunnis admit that Umar changed the adhan, Denied that tayammum could constitute ghusl, Reinstituted triple talaq, Forbade Mut'ah of Hajj, Forbad to combine Umrah and hajj and so on... Are you telling me that is not a change?


 * How come that the very well verse Sunni that you yourself called, Mustafaa, did not raise any such objections? You think he forgot? You think you know Sunni Islam better than Mustafaa? --Striver 06:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It's not a matter of if she knows better than Mustafaa. Being Muslim gives you no special privilege to knowledge.  I agree with Zora.  The title makes presumptions.  We can do a historical study of the Sunnah and the evolving views of it.  When were the first Shia complaints about Sunni changes made... were they in 700 or 1400... it makes a big difference.  And if Sunnis belive that Umar added the "prayer is better than sleep bit" do they frame it has "he added that" or "he changed the Sunnah".  The whole thing hinges also on what is change?  Is a car changing the Sunnah?  Muhammad surely didn't ride in one.  It's perfectly reasonable because this ttle presumes a change which ignores the Sunni case. A change implies contrary to the will of Muhammad... when Uthman doubled the morning prayer do Sunnis believe he was doing this contra the prohet or in line with the Prophet's will.  This is oversimplistic and under this title can't discuss what is important. gren グレン 06:16, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

So, you are saying that reintroducing the triple talaq,, somthing that Muhammad exlicitly forbad, is done "in line with his will"?

Are you sayin that denying that tayammum could constitute ghusl, even though the Quran says it does, twice, is "in line with his will"?

Im not talking about cars, im talking about issues directly related to faith, like how to become ritualy pure, how to pray, how to do talaq, things directly relevant to core Sharia issues --Striver 06:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * This is exactly the problem Striver. You are convinced that what the Sunnis did was not Muhammad's will.  I don't really know or care what his will was, I just know we need to present what their opinion is and not try to patch up the logic ourselves.  That is original research. gren グレン 06:56, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure, what should we rename it to? The Rashidun and Sunnah? Muhammads Sunnah and the Rashiduns Sunnah? What do you propose`? --Striver 07:09, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

You know what? I just figured out that "Rashidun" is also pov. How about The first four Sunni Caliphs and the Sunnah?--Striver 07:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * You are completely right that Rashidun is completely right as it's a concept and we are discussing the reality. Please don't create a new article yet until we talk about it.  Let Zora and whomever else weigh in... but, I think that title is better than this.  I was thinking of just adding this to Sunnah since it's not too large yet and finding a logical break if we need it.  This list style we have now won't do though... it's very misleading... there needs to be discussion.  So, jsut wait for Zora but your point about using the right guided in the title is correct. gren グレン 07:16, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I dont like the idea of merging this. But if a proposal for re-write is made, like in here, we could evaluate it. But i do not support giving Zora free hand to butcher this, and then demand her version to be taken for granted. --Striver 07:31, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. Having looked at Sunnah -- it's short, it doesn't explain the full complexity of the concept, and it's just the right place to discuss the Shi'a charge that the first three caliphs innovated in bad ways. I'd also like to have some clarification -- the Sunnah article currently says that the Shi'a say that Muhammad and the Twelve Imams can establish Sunnah ... does that mean that it was OK for the Imams to overrule the sunnah of Muhammad? did they ever do so? Also, the Sunnah article seems to assume that the Twelvers are the only Shi'a. But that isn't true. The Nizari Ismailis recognize a living Imam, the Aga Khan -- can he change the Sunnah?


 * I'd prefer a merge. I think Striver could actually contribute there to adding info on Shi'a concepts of Sunnah, which includes all the material in this article plus more. Zora 07:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * That sounds good to me. Striver, as far as butchering goes this article is butchered.  I don't mean that as in totally useless or wrong... but it's choppy.  Random ideas thrown in place and not explained.  You may disagree with how Zora or I or anybody tries to bring it together... but, it does need to come together, so help us do that. gren グレン 08:11, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

answer
Why not creat some section in the Sunnah article, and when we have reached a agreed version, we can VFD this article. --Striver 10:29, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
 * If there's no fight about merging, then we don't need to jump through administrative hoops. We just have to give notice of the proposed merge and leave the matter open for a few days, to give other people time to comment. Zora 11:31, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Point is, i dont know if i support a merge, since i dont know what you have in mind. But im prepared to look and see. Make the additions to Sunnah, if that reders this article supeficial, then we might think about deleting it.--Striver 01:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Claim that Umar changed the athan
It is related by Ahmad and Abu Dawud that the Prophet authorized the addition of "prayer is better than sleep" in the morning athan. Source. Pepsidrinka 04:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, cool, that puts it down to the "Shi'a view" instead of the "Sunni view". --Striver 05:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

You again asserted the Sunni view is that Umar changed the athan. However, the source you cite is the following
 * Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the muadhdhin came to Umar ibn al-Khattab to call him to the subh prayer and found him sleeping, so he said, "Prayer is better than sleep," and Umar ordered him to put that in the adhan for subh.

It is obvious from this that the adhan is not mentioned in the general, but rather just the athan for subh, or fajr. Furthermore, I have provided reference to where the "Sunni view" is that the Prophet originally allowed for the phrases to be added to the Fajr athan, does refuting the claim that Umar "changed the sunnah." Pepsidrinka 05:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I apologise, i meant to move it to the "Shi'a view", but forgot to delet it from the "Sunni view". Thanks for the help. --Striver 05:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Shia's and Sunni Hadith
I was under the impression that Shias don't accept hadith reported by Imams Bukhari or Muslim, or any of the prominent Sunni hadith collectors. I could be wrong, but how are these Shia views substantiated by Sunni sources. I am not saying that these views are false, just the proofs given for them, atleast as far as I know, are incorrect. Perhaps a Shia could clarify this issue for me. Pepsidrinka 01:55, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Shi'a and Sunni have differet ways of authenticating. This particular topics are autheticated by Shi'a sources, but i dont have them right now. If you want, i could try to find them, but i have other things i prefer to do. We have for exampel a hadith wher Imam Ali is complaining abut people crying "Sunnah of Umar" when he tried to stop people from doing the Ramadan 20 rakat prayar. --Striver 04:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * My only objection is the use of Sunni hadith to "prove" a Shia viewpoint when most Shia's would not agree with the narrator. For example, on one of the points, there is a hadith narrated by Abu Huraira, whom I am almost positive Shia's don't accept his testimony. Shia views should be backed up with Shia hadith. Pepsidrinka 20:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Pepsidrinka, the attempt to prove the Sunni wrong from sources they accept has long been a feature of Shi'a polemic. It's a well-worn path, prominently featured in Shi'a publication and on Shi'a websites, which is why Striver can cut-n-paste the relevant hadith easily, and why Shi'a have given the hadith names (the same way chessplayers have names for various "gambits"). Zora 21:59, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, I am aware of these Shi'a sites. However, the difference with what Striver is doing and what those Shi'a sites are doing is significant. Those sites are essentially trying to prove to the Sunni that their beliefs are wrong based on their own sources. What an encyclopedia should be is to convey to a layman the sunni/shi'a stance from their own sources and let people decide on their own. Unless you can back these Shi'a claims with Shi'a sources, they are no longer relevant.


 * I dont agree. It only means they are not perfectly sourced. Nobody denies they are Shi'a views.--Striver 17:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Gasib-e-fidak
What does it mean? Pepsidrinka 20:45, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Complete OR
As of now the article is purely original research, citing not a single secondary source. If sources are not added, most of the content may have to be removed.Bless sins 16:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)