Shi'a view on the wives of the Prophet (s) | Sayyid Ammar Nakshawani | Bayt Naqawi

Shi'a view on the wives of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.s) explained.

[@BaytNaqawi]

That's just a nice way of saying 'never debate a Shi'a because their arguments are very good'

[@BaytNaqawi]

Yes Abu Bakr and Umar both asked A'isha to be buried next to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.w.s) and she said yes. This does not mean Allah (s.w.t) decided that they should be with the Prophet (s.a.w.w.s).

[@BaytNaqawi]

Ok Insha'allah. May Allah protect you and guide you. Take Care. Assalamu Alaykum

[@anonymous_anonymous]

I have probably watched this at least 6 times at different time intervals.

[@BaytNaqawi]

I will be online in 1 hour. The subject is infallibility, so please collect anything you need for the debate.

[@BaytNaqawi]

Imam Kadhim (a.s) had 19 Daughters according Shaykh Al-Mufid in Kitab Al-Irshad. If you claim the Imam wanted to name his daughters after the wives then he would have had included Juwayriyya, Safiyya, Sawda, Ramla or Maria. Instead there were names like Lubaba, Aliyya, Amina, Hasana etc. The fact that Imam Kadhim (a.s) had enough daughters to be named after each wife of the Prophet (s.a.w.w.s) reveals his intention behind the naming. Aisha means 'full of life'.

[@BaytNaqawi]

We have narrators in our books who are called Mu'awiya for example. That does not mean their names were after Mu'awiya Ibn Abu Sufyan. Imam Ali (a.s) had many companions named Othman for example like Othman Ibn Madh'oon was who Imam Ali (a.s) named his son after. Umar Ibn Salama was a companion of Imam Ali (a.s) who fought alongside him in the battle of Jamal. Othman Ibn Hunayf was another companion. Plus these were all common names. So I don't see nothing in my face :-)

[@janjan55555]

added you on MSN :)

[@BaytNaqawi]

Ok No Problem. Have you got MSN ?

[@BaytNaqawi]

Plus Imam Ali (a.s) had twelve sons

[@BaytNaqawi]

Why should Imam Kadhim (a.s) be deprived of using that name just because of one woman ?

[@BaytNaqawi]

Just to paralyse you completely. Imam Ali (a.s) named no son Abu Bakr. He was Muhammad Al-Asghar who only became known as Abu Bakr during the reign of the Ummayads. What is your point ? If Imam (a.s) was to name his sons after the 3 caliphs then he had enough sons to name all three from birth. But according to Shaykh Mufid there was no son called Abu Bakr. How do you feel ?

[@janjan55555]

Check your MSN plz

[@BaytNaqawi]

That is nonsense. Imam Ali (a.s) did not double the names according to our sources. Allah (s.w.t) never decided for Umar and Abu Bakr to be buried next to the Prophet (s.a.w.w.s) it was A'isha. If Allah (s.w.t) decides then why was Othman not given the Tawfiq to be buried next to Rasoolallah (s.w.t). I am posting a video now only because of you. See how special you are.

[@BaytNaqawi]

Make a video in rebuttal to mine and I will answer. I don't want childish arguments. Thanks

[@BaytNaqawi]

Let me know when you have added me

[@janjan55555]

Oke, I am not an internet wizard so I wouldn't know how?! I can easily give you my contact information and have a direct chat which is much easier for both of us

[@BaytNaqawi]

[e-mail]

[@janjan55555]

So do you really think Aisha Ra made the unilateral decision in deciding who has the honor to be buried next to the Prophet?! HAHA, even if a hadieth in Sahih Bukhari/Sahih Muslim says so, I can dismiss it right away as false! And judging from this Sermon I understand why Sunnis hate Shias when it comes to religious views!!! DId you know that Aisha (ra) was chosen to Mohammad by Allah?!

[@BaytNaqawi]

Take a rest, you are so full of anger