A Thread On Reasons Behind
《Silence Of Ali(AS)After Saqifa》

○Role of Holy Prophet(PBUH)
1) The Holy Prophet had told Imam Ali: "Your position is like that of Ka'bah. People (Muslims) go to Ka'bah but that august House never approaches anyone. Therefore after my death, if people come to you and swear the oath of allegiance you accept it,
and if they do not come to you and swear the oath of allegiance, then you do not go to them."

Usudul Ghabah fi Tamizis Sahaba, Allama Ali ibn Muhammad, vol. IV, p.31;

2) The Holy Prophet had advised Imam Ali(a) that,"After me you will have to face severe sufferings, but do not
get disheartened and do not lose patience; and when you find people craving for and trying their utmost to secure worldly gains, you mould your life for the Hereafter." [59]

Madarijun Nabuwwah, Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlavi, vol. II, p. 511.
○Lack Of Companions
1)When Holy Prophet(PBUH) Told Imam Ali(AS) That People Will Go Astray After Him Then Imam Ali(AS) Asked Holy Prophet(PBUH) What Should he Do

2)In Rijal Kashi, It Is Mentioned That Only 3 Sahaba Were Present Before Zohr Prayer's and After That Ammar(RA) came
4 Companions Were With Imam Ali(AS)
1)Salman
2)Ammar
3)Miqdad
4)AbuZar
(Mentioned In Rijal Kashi)

3)Sermon Of Imam Ali(AS) In Nahjul Balagha
Then, I looked and found that there is no supporter for me except my family {ahla bayti}, so I refrained from thrusting them unto death.”
○Discord Among Muslims
people then had newly embraced Islam and the religion was like a goatskin full of milk which has frothed and the least sluggishness and negligence would spoil it and the trivial difference would turn it upside down

Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, vol. 1, p. 308.
Syed Ali Khamenei in His Book 250 Years Old Man Also Mentioned the Same That Spread of Islam Was In its Initial Stage so It Was Better To Stay Behind Instead to Start A War.
MoreOver He Also Fought During Their Time In Incident Of "Radha"
○The Danger Posed by the Apostates {murtaddin}

After the demise of the Prophet (S), a large number of the Arab tribes that had accepted Islam during the last years of the Prophet’s (S) life turned back from the religion and became apostate, and this danger always seriously
threatened Medina. As such, in order not to weaken the government in Medina in front of them, ‘Ali (‘a) was forced to keep silent. ‘Ali (‘a) says:

I swear by Allah that at that juncture it could not even be imagined that the Arabs would snatch the seat of the caliphate from the
family and descendants of the Holy Prophet (S) and that they would be swearing the oath of allegiance for the caliphate to a different person. At every stage, I kept myself aloof from that struggle of supremacy and power-politics till I found the heretics had openly taken to
heresy and schism and were trying to undermine and ruin the religion preached by our Holy Prophet (S).
I felt afraid that, even after seeing and recognizing the evil, if I did not stand up to help Islam and the Muslims it would be a worse calamity to me than my losing authority
and power over you, which was only a transient and short-lived affair. Therefore, when I stood up amidst the sweeping surge of innovations and schism the dark clouds of heresy dispersed, falsehood and schism were crushed and the religion was saved.
3.Najh al-Balaghah, Letter 62
Imam al-Hasan (‘a) also writes in a letter to Mu‘awiyah: “Since we were afraid that the hypocrites and the other Arab parties could render a blow to Islam, we ignored our right.”

Ali ibn al-Husayn Abu’l-Faraj al-Isfahani, Maqatil at-Talibiyyin (Qum: Manshurat ash-Sharif ar-Radi)
In the event of Saqifah, these murtadin were also siding with the Quraysh. As narrated by Abu Mikhnaf, a number of Arabs, who had to the vicinity of Medina for transactions and were present in Medina during the demise of the Prophet (S), had physical role in urging the people to
pay allegiance to Abubakr

(Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn an-Nu‘man Mufid, Al-Jamal, 2nd edition (Qum: Maktab al-A‘lam al-Islami (Central Publication), 1416 AH), pp. 118-119)
○ The Safety of the Progeny of the Prophet (S)

فَنَظَرْتُ فِإِذا لَيسَ لي مُعينٌ إلاّ أهلُ بَيتى فَضَنَنْتُ بِهِمْ عَنِ المَوْتِ.

“Then, I looked and found that there is no supporter for me except my family {ahla bayti}, so I refrained from thrusting them unto death
The original inheritors of the Prophet (S) and the upright adherents of the religion are the members of the Prophet’s (S) family. They were the partner of the Qur’an, the second previous legacy of the Prophet (S) and the interpreters of the religious laws, and they showed to the
people the pristine and genuine Islam after the Prophet’s (S) demise. Their extinction would be an irreparable loss

Najh al-Balaghah, Sermon 26.
○ The Concrete Political Formation of the Shi‘ah after the Event of Saqifah
Although ‘Ali (‘a) distanced himself from the political scene with the formation of Saqifah, the Shi‘ah in the form of a particular group with a particular political orientation was formed after the
event in Saqifah and were collectively or individually defending ‘Ali(‘a).
They first gathered in Fatimah’s(‘a) house and refused to pay allegiance as they faced the onslaught of the Saqifah architects

Ahmad ibn Abi Ya‘qub ibn Wadhih, Tarikh al-Ya‘qubi, 1st edition vol.2,p. 126.
But since ‘Ali (‘a) was not pleased to act violently against them for the sake of the preservation of Islam, he challenged them to a debate and argumentation. Bara’ ibn ‘Azib thus narrates:

I missed the cases regarding Saqifah. As I went to the Mosque of the Prophet (S), I saw
Miqdad, ‘Ubadah ibn Samit, Salman al-Farsi, Abu Dharr, Hudhayfah, and Abu’l-Haytham ibn Tayyiham were talking about the event that took place after the demise of the Prophet (S). He went together to the house of Ubayy ibn Ka‘b who said that his view is the same with whatever
Hudhayfah would say"

Ibn Abi’l-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, vol. 2, p. 51.

Finally, on that Friday, the Shi‘ah of ‘Ali (‘a) went to the Prophet’s (S) Mosque to debate with and condemn Abubakr. In this regard, Tabarsi thus narrates
Aban ibn Taghlib asks Imam as-Sadiq (‘a): “May I be your ransom! When Abubakr sat in the place of the Messenger of Allah (S), was there anyone who protested?” The Imam (‘a) said: “Yes; there were twelve persons from among the Muhajirun and the Ansar such as Khalid ibn Sa‘id;
Salman al-Farsi; Abu Dharr; Miqdad; ‘Ammar; Buraydah Aslami; Abu’l-Haytham ibn Tayyihan; Sahl ibn Hanif; ‘Uthman ibn Hanif; Khuzaymah ibn Thabit Dhu’sh-Shahadatayn; Ubayy ibn Ka‘b; and Abu Ayyub al-Ansari.

They gathered in a certain place and discussed together the event in
Saqifah and were thinking of a solution. Some said: “We shall go to the mosque and let Abubakr come down from the pulpit. Some others did not agree with this idea, considering it unadvisable. They then came to ‘Ali (‘a) and said: “We will go and pull Abubakr down from the pulpit"
The Imam (‘a)said:“They are many. Once you go ahead with this and act violently, they will come and say: “You pay allegiance otherwise we shall kill you.”Instead, you have to go to him and tell him what you have heard from the Messenger of Allah (S)and this is all of the proof.
They came to the mosque and the first person among them who spoke was Khalid ibn Sa‘id al-Umawi, saying: “O Abubakr! You are aware that after the Battle of Banu Nadhir, the Holy Prophet (S) said: ‘You have to know and keep my will. After me, ‘Ali shall be my caliph and successor
among you. My Lord has thus ordered me’.” After him, Salman stood up and made his famous statement in Persian language: “Kardid, nakardid

After their argumentation, Abubakr descended from the pulpit, went to his house and did not go out for three days until such time that Khalid
ibn Walid, Salim Mawla Abu Hudhayfah and Mu‘adh ibn Jabal along with many others went to Abubakr’s house and gave him will power. ‘Umar went along with this group to the mosque entrance and said:“O Shi‘ah and supporters of ‘Ali! Be aware that if you would utter these words again
I will behead you"

(Abi Mansur Ahmad ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib Tabarsi, Al-Ihtijaj vol. 1, pp. 186-200)

In addressing ‘Ali (‘a), Khalid ibn Sa‘id said: “Come forward so that I could pay my allegiance to you as you are the most deserving person in the position of Muhammad (S).
(Ahmad ibn Abi Ya‘qub Ibn Wadhih, Tarikh al-Ya‘qubi, 1st edition vol. 2, p. 11)

Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud used to say, “Based on the injunction of the Qur’an, there are four caliphs, viz. Adam (Adam), Dawud (David), Harun (Aaron), and ‘Ali.”

(Manaqib Al Abi Talib,vol. 3, pp. 77-78)
■P.S: While Reading And Making This Wholeeeeeeeeeeeeee Thread I Didnt Find Even A Single Sentence Which States

"THEY WERE LINKED TO OUR HOLY PROPHET(PBUH), Thats Y Imam Ali(AS) Was Silence" .
If SomeOne Got That Sentence as a Reference, Kindly Show It To Me Please.
Silent*

More from Society

A long thread on how an obsessive & violent antisemite & Holocaust denier has been embraced by the international “community of the good.”

Sarah Wilkinson has a history of Holocaust denial & anti-Jewish hatred dating back (in documented examples) to around 2015.


She is a self-proclaimed British activist for “Palestinian rights” but is more accurately a far Left neo-Nazi. Her son shares the same characteristics of violence, racism & Holocaust denial.

I first documented Sarah Wilkinson’s Holocaust denial back in July 2016. I believe I was the 1st person to do so.

Since then she has produced a long trail of written hate and abuse. See here for a good summary.


Wilkinson has recently been publicly celebrated by @XRebellionUK over her latest violent action against a Jewish owned business. Despite many people calling XR’s attention to her history, XR have chosen to remain in alliance with this neo-Nazi.

Former Labour Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell MP is among those who also chose to stand with Wilkinson via a tweet.

But McDonnell is not alone.

Neo-Nazi Sarah Wilkinson is supported and encouraged by thousands of those on the Left who consider themselves “anti-racists”.
Brief thread to debunk the repeated claims we hear about transmission not happening 'within school walls', infection in school children being 'a reflection of infection from the community', and 'primary school children less likely to get infected and contribute to transmission'.

I've heard a lot of scientists claim these three - including most recently the chief advisor to the CDC, where the claim that most transmission doesn't happen within the walls of schools. There is strong evidence to rebut this claim. Let's look at


Let's look at the trends of infection in different age groups in England first- as reported by the ONS. Being a random survey of infection in the community, this doesn't suffer from the biases of symptom-based testing, particularly important in children who are often asymptomatic

A few things to note:
1. The infection rates among primary & secondary school children closely follow school openings, closures & levels of attendance. E.g. We see a dip in infections following Oct half-term, followed by a rise after school reopening.


We see steep drops in both primary & secondary school groups after end of term (18th December), but these drops plateau out in primary school children, where attendance has been >20% after re-opening in January (by contrast with 2ndary schools where this is ~5%).
Two things can be true at once:
1. There is an issue with hostility some academics have faced on some issues
2. Another academic who himself uses threats of legal action to bully colleagues into silence is not a good faith champion of the free speech cause


I have kept quiet about Matthew's recent outpourings on here but as my estwhile co-author has now seen fit to portray me as an enabler of oppression I think I have a right to reply. So I will.

I consider Matthew to be a colleague and a friend, and we had a longstanding agreement not to engage in disputes on twitter. I disagree with much in the article @UOzkirimli wrote on his research in @openDemocracy but I strongly support his right to express such critical views

I therefore find it outrageous that Matthew saw fit to bully @openDemocracy with legal threats, seeking it seems to stifle criticism of his own work. Such behaviour is simply wrong, and completely inconsistent with an academic commitment to free speech.

I am not embroiling myself in the various other cases Matt lists because, unlike him, I think attention to the detail matters and I don't have time to research each of these cases in detail.

You May Also Like

This is NONSENSE. The people who take photos with their books on instagram are known to be voracious readers who graciously take time to review books and recommend them to their followers. Part of their medium is to take elaborate, beautiful photos of books. Die mad, Guardian.


THEY DO READ THEM, YOU JUDGY, RACOON-PICKED TRASH BIN


If you come for Bookstagram, i will fight you.

In appreciation, here are some of my favourite bookstagrams of my books: (photos by lit_nerd37, mybookacademy, bookswrotemystory, and scorpio_books)
12 TRADING SETUPS which experts are using.

These setups I found from the following 4 accounts:

1. @Pathik_Trader
2. @sourabhsiso19
3. @ITRADE191
4. @DillikiBiili

Share for the benefit of everyone.

Here are the setups from @Pathik_Trader Sir first.

1. Open Drive (Intraday Setup explained)


Bactesting results of Open Drive


2. Two Price Action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.

1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as


Example of PDC/PDH Setup given
**Thread on Bravery of Sikhs**
(I am forced to do this due to continuous hounding of Sikh Extremists since yesterday)

Rani Jindan Kaur, wife of Maharaja Ranjit Singh had illegitimate relations with Lal Singh (PM of Ranjit Singh). Along with Lal Singh, she attacked Jammu, burnt - https://t.co/EfjAq59AyI


Hindu villages of Jasrota, caused rebellion in Jammu, attacked Kishtwar.

Ancestors of Raja Ranjit Singh, The Sansi Tribe used to give daughters as concubines to Jahangir.


The Ludhiana Political Agency (Later NW Fronties Prov) was formed by less than 4000 British soldiers who advanced from Delhi and reached Ludhiana, receiving submissions of all sikh chiefs along the way. The submission of the troops of Raja of Lahore (Ranjit Singh) at Ambala.

Dabistan a contemporary book on Sikh History tells us that Guru Hargobind broke Naina devi Idol Same source describes Guru Hargobind serving a eunuch
YarKhan. (ref was proudly shared by a sikh on twitter)
Gobind Singh followed Bahadur Shah to Deccan to fight for him.


In Zafarnama, Guru Gobind Singh states that the reason he was in conflict with the Hill Rajas was that while they were worshiping idols, while he was an idol-breaker.

And idiot Hindus place him along Maharana, Prithviraj and Shivaji as saviours of Dharma.