hadith showing the four caliphs?

[jim_darr]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

[zulfiqarchucknorris]

there is no "hadith" to this, the prophet NEVER SAID something like "after me, abu Bakr will rule, then Umar, then, uthman, then Ali, then Hasan..."
we know it from historical records
its exactly the same like we know that Charles de Gaulle was president of france, Ivan the terrible was czar of russia, we know it from historical records, they were democratically elected, they were not chosen by the prophet (PBUH) as rulers after him, although he did give them the hgighest of  praises, among other people.
Peace

[There is only one God]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

nope, you have to guess. and make sure your guess doesn't get you blown up. Also, if you guess the wrong successor you might be called a non-Muslim, so be VERY careful when guessing. If it was so straightforward, why would the Shiites and Sunnites continue to slice each other in half even to this day? Answer: politics. Yup, it's a politico-religious ideology. This contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age (apart from Crusades and Mongol conquests).

[Tanveer]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

nope, you have to guess. and make sure your guess doesn't get you blown up. Also, if you guess the wrong successor you might be called a non-Muslim, so be VERY careful when guessing. If it was so straightforward, why would the Shiites and Sunnites continue to slice each other in half even to this day? Answer: politics. Yup, it's a politico-religious ideology. This contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age (apart from Crusades and Mongol conquests).

Im kinda confused by how the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age. They helped to start it. The people who turned it into politics were the shias. They believe(d) in a monarchy. I do believe there is a hadith in Ibn Majah and Abu Dawood which says "Hold firmly to my example (sunnah) and that of the Rightly Guided Caliphs". As for their order and apointing. Like zulfiqar said, history.

[There is only one God]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

nope, you have to guess. and make sure your guess doesn't get you blown up. Also, if you guess the wrong successor you might be called a non-Muslim, so be VERY careful when guessing. If it was so straightforward, why would the Shiites and Sunnites continue to slice each other in half even to this day? Answer: politics. Yup, it's a politico-religious ideology. This contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age (apart from Crusades and Mongol conquests).

Im kinda confused by how the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age. They helped to start it. The people who turned it into politics were the shias. They believe(d) in a monarchy. I do believe there is a hadith in Ibn Majah and Abu Dawood which says "Hold firmly to my example (sunnah) and that of the Rightly Guided Caliphs". As for their order and apointing. Like zulfiqar said, history.

I meant the politics, not the Caliphs. The Caliphs contributed to the progression, not the downfall, of the golden age. Oh btw, there's a reason Muhammad (PBUH) did not mention a successor: It's not important!
Shi'as will use Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1873, Tradition #36 to cite the Ahlul-Bayt as successors, whereas Sunnis will cite the democratic side of things. The Qur'an precisely says democracy. I smell a contradiction.

[Tanveer]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

nope, you have to guess. and make sure your guess doesn't get you blown up. Also, if you guess the wrong successor you might be called a non-Muslim, so be VERY careful when guessing. If it was so straightforward, why would the Shiites and Sunnites continue to slice each other in half even to this day? Answer: politics. Yup, it's a politico-religious ideology. This contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age (apart from Crusades and Mongol conquests).

Im kinda confused by how the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age. They helped to start it. The people who turned it into politics were the shias. They believe(d) in a monarchy. I do believe there is a hadith in Ibn Majah and Abu Dawood which says "Hold firmly to my example (sunnah) and that of the Rightly Guided Caliphs". As for their order and apointing. Like zulfiqar said, history.

I meant the politics, not the Caliphs. The Caliphs contributed to the progression, not the downfall, of the golden age. Oh btw, there's a reason Muhammad (PBUH) did not mention a successor: It's not important!
Shi'as will use Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1873, Tradition #36 to cite the Ahlul-Bayt as successors, whereas Sunnis will cite the democratic side of things. The Qur'an precisely says democracy. I smell a contradiction.

The confusion has cleared up a bit now. A question if you dont mind me asking. Do you believe the title Rightly Guided Caliphs is justifiable? And do you agree with the Shia line of thinking or sunni? I always thought the Prophet PBUH didnt choose a successor because people might start to think too highly of the appointed one. I know its not important for you but could you tell me your reason as to why he didnt choose a successor?

[There is only one God]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

nope, you have to guess. and make sure your guess doesn't get you blown up. Also, if you guess the wrong successor you might be called a non-Muslim, so be VERY careful when guessing. If it was so straightforward, why would the Shiites and Sunnites continue to slice each other in half even to this day? Answer: politics. Yup, it's a politico-religious ideology. This contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age (apart from Crusades and Mongol conquests).

Im kinda confused by how the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age. They helped to start it. The people who turned it into politics were the shias. They believe(d) in a monarchy. I do believe there is a hadith in Ibn Majah and Abu Dawood which says "Hold firmly to my example (sunnah) and that of the Rightly Guided Caliphs". As for their order and apointing. Like zulfiqar said, history.

I meant the politics, not the Caliphs. The Caliphs contributed to the progression, not the downfall, of the golden age. Oh btw, there's a reason Muhammad (PBUH) did not mention a successor: It's not important!
Shi'as will use Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1873, Tradition #36 to cite the Ahlul-Bayt as successors, whereas Sunnis will cite the democratic side of things. The Qur'an precisely says democracy. I smell a contradiction.

The confusion has cleared up a bit now. A question if you dont mind me asking. Do you believe the title Rightly Guided Caliphs is justifiable? And do you agree with the Shia line of thinking or sunni? I always thought the Prophet PBUH didnt choose a successor because people might start to think too highly of the appointed one. I know its not important for you but could you tell me your reason as to why he didnt choose a successor?

He didn't choose a successor for either one of these two reasons:
1) He wanted us to fight each other to the death for it
2) He thought it was a political issue, not a religious one. And I agree.

[Tanveer]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

nope, you have to guess. and make sure your guess doesn't get you blown up. Also, if you guess the wrong successor you might be called a non-Muslim, so be VERY careful when guessing. If it was so straightforward, why would the Shiites and Sunnites continue to slice each other in half even to this day? Answer: politics. Yup, it's a politico-religious ideology. This contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age (apart from Crusades and Mongol conquests).

Im kinda confused by how the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age. They helped to start it. The people who turned it into politics were the shias. They believe(d) in a monarchy. I do believe there is a hadith in Ibn Majah and Abu Dawood which says "Hold firmly to my example (sunnah) and that of the Rightly Guided Caliphs". As for their order and apointing. Like zulfiqar said, history.

I meant the politics, not the Caliphs. The Caliphs contributed to the progression, not the downfall, of the golden age. Oh btw, there's a reason Muhammad (PBUH) did not mention a successor: It's not important!
Shi'as will use Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1873, Tradition #36 to cite the Ahlul-Bayt as successors, whereas Sunnis will cite the democratic side of things. The Qur'an precisely says democracy. I smell a contradiction.

The confusion has cleared up a bit now. A question if you dont mind me asking. Do you believe the title Rightly Guided Caliphs is justifiable? And do you agree with the Shia line of thinking or sunni? I always thought the Prophet PBUH didnt choose a successor because people might start to think too highly of the appointed one. I know its not important for you but could you tell me your reason as to why he didnt choose a successor?

He didn't choose a successor for either one of these two reasons:
1) He wanted us to fight each other to the death for it
2) He thought it was a political issue, not a religious one. And I agree.

Ah. Thanks TIOOG. I think we can discard the 1st one. I find it hard to imagine the Prophet PBUH, the best example to mankind, would do something like that, ya know?

[There is only one God]

What Hadith show that the first four Caliphs were and in this order-

Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali ?

Or each one being appointed by the previous one?

And how do we determine that they were all within the best first three generations?

nope, you have to guess. and make sure your guess doesn't get you blown up. Also, if you guess the wrong successor you might be called a non-Muslim, so be VERY careful when guessing. If it was so straightforward, why would the Shiites and Sunnites continue to slice each other in half even to this day? Answer: politics. Yup, it's a politico-religious ideology. This contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age (apart from Crusades and Mongol conquests).

Im kinda confused by how the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs contributed to the downfall of the Islamic golden age. They helped to start it. The people who turned it into politics were the shias. They believe(d) in a monarchy. I do believe there is a hadith in Ibn Majah and Abu Dawood which says "Hold firmly to my example (sunnah) and that of the Rightly Guided Caliphs". As for their order and apointing. Like zulfiqar said, history.

I meant the politics, not the Caliphs. The Caliphs contributed to the progression, not the downfall, of the golden age. Oh btw, there's a reason Muhammad (PBUH) did not mention a successor: It's not important!
Shi'as will use Sahih Muslim, Chapter of the virtues of the companions, section of the virtues of Ali, 1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia, Arabic version, v4, p1873, Tradition #36 to cite the Ahlul-Bayt as successors, whereas Sunnis will cite the democratic side of things. The Qur'an precisely says democracy. I smell a contradiction.

The confusion has cleared up a bit now. A question if you dont mind me asking. Do you believe the title Rightly Guided Caliphs is justifiable? And do you agree with the Shia line of thinking or sunni? I always thought the Prophet PBUH didnt choose a successor because people might start to think too highly of the appointed one. I know its not important for you but could you tell me your reason as to why he didnt choose a successor?

He didn't choose a successor for either one of these two reasons:
1) He wanted us to fight each other to the death for it
2) He thought it was a political issue, not a religious one. And I agree.

Ah. Thanks TIOOG. I think we can discard the 1st one. I find it hard to imagine the Prophet PBUH, the best example to mankind, would do something like that, ya know?

Here's a quote about the "best example to mankind":
 
"If a man like Muhammed were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness." George Bernard Shaw (Nobel prize holding journalist, now retired)

[Tanveer]

Indeed. What a great man our Prophet PBUH was.