94 replies to this topic

[power]

Sunnis version= Imam Ali   has very very high status.
Sunni version = Abu Bakr status is not as same parallel AS Imam Ali status

Shia splash sunni hadiths

[Ugly Jinn]

Haydar Husayn, on 22 June 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Well in that case what we then have to establish is what exactly Imam `Ali's status is, going by what we can agree on, and then see whether all the Sahaba recognised that status.

To many Sunnis, especially Salafis, to say prefer `Ali (a) over Abu Bakr and `Umar is a sign of deviancy. So it is clear that giving people their proper status is quite important.

I believe turning it into a competition isn't productive and won't get you anywhere.

You have to look at it from Sunni's perspective, they don't consider any of the 4 caliphs nor other sahabas as divine agents, hence comparison becomes subjective. That's why you won't see Shias comparing the status of their beloved non-divine personalities of that time - and even if discussed it will be subjective.

While the Shias consider Imam Ali as a divine agent hence very easy for them to compare Imam Ali (divine agent) to other non-divine sahabas.

[Haydar Husayn]

Ugly Jinn, on 22 June 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

I believe turning it into a competition isn't productive and won't get you anywhere.

You have to look at it from Sunni's perspective, they don't consider any of the 4 caliphs nor other sahabas as divine agents, hence comparison becomes subjective. That's why you won't see Shias comparing the status of their beloved non-divine personalities of that time - and even if discussed it will be subjective.

While the Shias consider Imam Ali as a divine agent hence very easy for them to compare Imam Ali (divine agent) to other non-divine sahabas.

Are you saying Sunnis don't have a consensus that Abu Bakr and `Umar are clearly better than all the other Sahaba?

The point of all this isn't to compare just for the sake of it, it's to test the theory that Imam `Ali (a) really was denied his rights after the death of the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã. Having other Sahaba continuously lower his status would be an indication of that.

[Ugly Jinn]

Haydar Husayn, on 22 June 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

Are you saying Sunnis don't have a consensus that Abu Bakr and `Umar are clearly better than all the other Sahaba?

I'm specifically speaking of the 4, because they were the first 4 caliphs. It is totally subjective, there is no right or wrong answer because Sunnis hold all 4 in a high regards.

Quote

The point of all this isn't to compare just for the sake of it, it's to test the theory that Imam `Ali (a) really was denied his rights after the death of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. Having other Sahaba continuously lower his status would be an indication of that.

Well, that's obvious.

But again, I've said this many times, the Muslims at that time did not think Imam Ali was as a divine agent. And this belief/statistic still holds true over a millennium later, overwhelimg majority of Muslims still do not consider Imam Ali as a divine agent. So they don't believe that he had divine rights because they don't believe he was a divine agent to begin with.

And even for the sake of argument, let's say you prove Imam Ali has a higher status than the other 3 and win this battle, it still won't equate to Imam Ali being divine from a Sunni's perspective. All it would do is make Sunnis realize that Imam Ali should've been the caliph earlier than later - that's all. It still won't change the fundamental issue that Shias consider him divine.

--------------

The point is simple, whether Imam Ali was 4th caliph or the 1st caliph after the Prophet is irrelevant, it doesn't change the fundamental issue that Muslims did not consider him divine. Hypothetically, even if Imam Ali was the 1st caliph (just how Shias wanted it), it would mean nothing more to Sunnis than Abu Bakr being the first caliph - they would still group all 4 in high regards. The overwhelming Muslims now and back then did not consider the 1st caliph (whoever it may be) to be a divine agent.

Edited by Ugly Jinn, 22 June 2012 - 02:52 PM.

[Haydar Husayn]

This isn't about proving that anyone is a divine agent, or about proving `Ali (a) is superior to the other three. It's about the bias many Sahaba held against `Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã.

[Ugly Jinn]

You stated, "Imam `Ali (a) really was denied his rights after the death of the Prophet", this is nothing more than divine rights. The right, according to Shias, were given by the Prophet, which is considered a divine command. Muslims do not believe Imam Ali nor anyone had any pre-determined rights, hence the political chaos to pick a leader.

And as I said above, hypothetically, even if Imam Ali was the 1st caliph, he would still be grouped with the 4 as he is now.

Edited by Ugly Jinn, 22 June 2012 - 03:36 PM.

[Chaotic Muslem]

Ugly Jinn, on 22 June 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

You stated, "Imam `Ali (a) really was denied his rights after the death of the Prophet", this is nothing more than divine rights. The right, according to Shias, were given by the Prophet, which is considered a divine command. Muslims do not believe Imam Ali nor anyone had any pre-determined rights, hence the political chaos to pick a leader.

And as I said above, hypothetically, even if Imam Ali was the 1st caliph, he would still be grouped with the 4 as he is now.

it is an islamic right
poor have rights by divine , we do know about them by quraan and sunnah
kids have rights , divine , we know about them by quraan and sunnah
and imam ali had a right , it was an order , therefore a divine order , by prophet , it was a hadith that no one denies in any islamic school , some followed the order and refused abu bakr khilafah , they were called muratadeen , some were more than eager to deny imam ali right cause they were munafiqeen

[Vigilare]

Haydar Husayn, on 22 June 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

This isn't about proving that anyone is a divine agent, or about proving `Ali (a) is superior to the other three. It's about the bias many Sahaba held against `Ali عليه السلام.

What are you basing Imam Ali's status on? The Quran, sunni hadith or shia hadith or a combination of the three?

[Haydar Husayn]

Vigilare, on 24 June 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

What are you basing Imam Ali's status on? The Quran, sunni hadith or shia hadith or a combination of the three?

For the purposes of a discussion with Sunnis, I'm willing to just go by Sunni hadiths. I believe there is enough contained in them to prove that the status of `Ali was higher than the impression given by the statements of certain Sahaba.

[Ibrahim786]

brother hayder

dont you think its strange that you select a sunni hadtih to try and prove that the sahbahs would degrade ali ra when its not the belief of the sunnis, when its not the belief of those very compilers and narrators of the hadiths and hence we all believe this was certainly not the belief of the sahabahs ra.

Then this only results in one outcome which is you are misinterpreting the hadiths which is what I believe you have done as this hadith to me indicated leader of hajj and not the khalifah. The illness in question is not exactly fatal is it and plus rememeber the uthman ra was told by the prophet pbuh that he would be murdered (according to sunnis).

I also think the other points made by viglaire and Ugly Jinn are good points aswell

[Haydar Husayn]

Ibrahim786, on 25 June 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

brother hayder

dont you think its strange that you select a sunni hadtih to try and prove that the sahbahs would degrade ali ra when its not the belief of the sunnis, when its not the belief of those very compilers and narrators of the hadiths and hence we all believe this was certainly not the belief of the sahabahs ra.

No, I don't find it strange. To me, the evidence clearly points in that direction, regardless of whatever beliefs certain people may have held.

Quote

Then this only results in one outcome which is you are misinterpreting the hadiths which is what I believe you have done as this hadith to me indicated leader of hajj and not the khalifah. The illness in question is not exactly fatal is it and plus rememeber the uthman ra was told by the prophet pbuh that he would be murdered (according to sunnis).

Why was he asked to make a will then? And why talk of a successor, rather than a replacement? You haven't really given a very good explanation of what `Uthman meant.

[Ibrahim786]

Haydar Husayn, on 25 June 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

No, I don't find it strange. To me, the evidence clearly points in that direction, regardless of whatever beliefs certain people may have held.

Why was he asked to make a will then? And why talk of a successor, rather than a replacement? You haven't really given a very good explanation of what `Uthman meant.

a will meaning that such a person will be the leader of the hajj i.e. his successor to the hajj in uthman ra absence. To me it makes perfect sense.

[Haydar Husayn]

Ibrahim786, on 25 June 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

a will meaning that such a person will be the leader of the hajj i.e. his successor to the hajj in uthman ra absence. To me it makes perfect sense.

No, this does not make sense, since `Uthman had already made his will before asking who the people had chosen as his successor. You hardly need to write a will in order to name a replacement to go on Hajj anyway.

Also, the fact is that `Uthman was quite old by this stage, and nosebleeds can be fatal.

Edited by Haydar Husayn, 25 June 2012 - 09:24 AM.

[Ibrahim786]

Haydar Husayn, on 25 June 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

No, this does not make sense, since `Uthman had already made his will before asking who the people had chosen as his successor. You hardly need to write a will in order to name a replacement to go on Hajj anyway.

Also, the fact is that `Uthman was quite old by this stage, and nosebleeds can be fatal.

If you say was true then this would have been raised after the death of uthman ra between the companions what uthman ra "willled". but this was never raised.

wasnt uthman ra just checking if his thoughts matched theirs which it did showing his good judgement !!!!

I think we have to agree to disagree brother on this - we are reading the hadith in a different manner. I believe that my version is correct as there is no historical account of uthman ra "will" with regards to zubair ra ever coming up either when uthman ra was under seige or after his ra murder. Nor are there other accounts saying that uthman ra wanted zubair ra as the next khalifah. History and the lack of narrations prove my point in my humble opinion. As this appears as a one of hadith it must have been for a one off occassion such as the leader of the hajj in his ra absence through illness which was not exactly life threatening (the chances of nose bleeds killing even a relatively fit old guy is still remote!!!!)

We will agree to disagree !!!!

Edited by Ibrahim786, 26 June 2012 - 05:56 AM.

[Haydar Husayn]

Who said that he named a successor in his will?

[Vigilare]

Haydar Husayn, on 24 June 2012 - 09:34 AM, said:

For the purposes of a discussion with Sunnis, I'm willing to just go by Sunni hadiths. I believe there is enough contained in them to prove that the status of `Ali was higher than the impression given by the statements of certain Sahaba.

You’ll probably find many hadiths on the merits of other companions as well. However, if you focus on just Imam Ali then no doubt you’ll have a good case, but if you’re using Sunni hadiths you need to understand the bigger picture – which they paint themselves, not which you want to see.  

As for Uthman’s statement, I don’t think we’ve got the bigger picture here, and it’s also worth taking into account the narration that states Umar had said if Khalid bin Waleed were still alive then he would have been chosen as the next Caliph….

Sunnis don’t necessarily have a unified position on superiority of the Sahaba and there are some differences of opinion and that khilafah isn’t necessarily indicative of superiority (otherwise Muawiyah was superior to ibn Umar, etc):

Imam Abu Mansur Al-Bagdadi said in his book “Usul-Addin”: “Our people (Ahlus Sunnah) have differed on who is better, Ali or Uthman”.

Imam Abul Hasan Ash’ari mentioned that in his “Al Maqalat”, page 147: “They disagreed in who is better (among the four). Some said: Abu Bakr, then Umar, then Uthman, then Ali”. Others said: Abu Bakr, then Umar, then Ali, then Uthman.

Imam Ibn Abdil Barr in “Al-Isti’aab”, 3\52 said: “The pious predecessors differed in who is better Ali or Abu Bakr”. He also said –in the same book- 3\197: “It was narrated from Salmaan-al farisi-, Abi Tharr, Al-Miqdad, Jaber, Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri, and Zayd bin Al-Arqam, that Ali is the first to become Muslim, and they favoured him (considered him superior) over the rest”.

Imam Ibn Hazm said in “Al-Fisal” 4\182: “Muslims differed on who is better among people after the Prophets, alayhem assalam. Some of Ahlus Sunnah, some Mu’tazilah, some Mur’ji’a, and all Shia groups, said that Ali bin Abi Taleb is the best of the Ummah after the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), and we have narrated this saying as a text said by some Sahaba, and many
Tabi’in and Fuqaha’”.

Imam Al-Qadi Abu Bakr Al-Bakillani said in his Book: the “Manaqeb of the Four”, page 294: “Lots of Sahaba have a famous saying that Ali is superior to Abu Bakr, such as the narrations to Abdullah bin Al-Abbas, Huthayfah bin Al-Yaman, Ammar, Jaber bin Abdillah, Abil Haytham bin At-tayyihan, and others”.

[Haydar Husayn]

Vigilare, on 26 June 2012 - 07:22 AM, said:

You’ll probably find many hadiths on the merits of other companions as well. However, if you focus on just Imam Ali then no doubt you’ll have a good case, but if you’re using Sunni hadiths you need to understand the bigger picture – which they paint themselves, not which you want to see.  

If we did a comparison between the narrations on the merits of `Ali (a) and the merits of Zubair, do you really think there would be any doubt as to who comes off better? Is there any serious doubt about who was closer to the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã? Or between `Ali (a) and `Uthman even. If we deal simply with history, what has `Uthman done to put him in the same league as Imam `Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã?

Quote

As for Uthman’s statement, I don’t think we’ve got the bigger picture here, and it’s also worth taking into account the narration that states Umar had said if Khalid bin Waleed were still alive then he would have been chosen as the next Caliph….

Yes, no doubt there must be some fuller picture to explain such an obvious absurdity. Insha'Allah someone can provide it at some point.

As for the statement of `Umar, do you have a source for that? If it is authentic, then that really would be incredible.

Quote

Sunnis don’t necessarily have a unified position on superiority of the Sahaba and there are some differences of opinion and that khilafah isn’t necessarily indicative of superiority (otherwise Muawiyah was superior to ibn Umar, etc):

Imam Abu Mansur Al-Bagdadi said in his book “Usul-Addin”: “Our people (Ahlus Sunnah) have differed on who is better, Ali or Uthman”.

Imam Abul Hasan Ash’ari mentioned that in his “Al Maqalat”, page 147: “They disagreed in who is better (among the four). Some said: Abu Bakr, then Umar, then Uthman, then Ali”. Others said: Abu Bakr, then Umar, then Ali, then Uthman.

Imam Ibn Abdil Barr in “Al-Isti’aab”, 3\52 said: “The pious predecessors differed in who is better Ali or Abu Bakr”. He also said –in the same book- 3\197: “It was narrated from Salmaan-al farisi-, Abi Tharr, Al-Miqdad, Jaber, Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri, and Zayd bin Al-Arqam, that Ali is the first to become Muslim, and they favoured him (considered him superior) over the rest”.

Imam Ibn Hazm said in “Al-Fisal” 4\182: “Muslims differed on who is better among people after the Prophets, alayhem assalam. Some of Ahlus Sunnah, some Mu’tazilah, some Mur’ji’a, and all Shia groups, said that Ali bin Abi Taleb is the best of the Ummah after the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), and we have narrated this saying as a text said by some Sahaba, and many
Tabi’in and Fuqaha’”.

Imam Al-Qadi Abu Bakr Al-Bakillani said in his Book: the “Manaqeb of the Four”, page 294: “Lots of Sahaba have a famous saying that Ali is superior to Abu Bakr, such as the narrations to Abdullah bin Al-Abbas, Huthayfah bin Al-Yaman, Ammar, Jaber bin Abdillah, Abil Haytham bin At-tayyihan, and others”.

Ok, but as I said, my point here isn't to discuss who Sunnis consider better than the other. I just want to discuss the statement of `Uthman, and how he could have possibly held that opinion.

[Ibrahim786]

Haydar Husayn, on 26 June 2012 - 07:12 AM, said:

Who said that he named a successor in his will?

Is that not what you imply???

if you dont then please elaborate how you interpret the hadith.

[Haydar Husayn]

Ibrahim786, on 27 June 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

Is that not what you imply???

if you dont then please elaborate how you interpret the hadith.

Ok.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 63:

Narrated Marwan bin Al-Hakam:

'Uthman bin 'Affan was afflicted with severe nose-bleeding in the year when such illness was prevelant and that prevented him from performing Hajj, and (because of it) he made his will. A man from Quraish came to him and said, "Appoint your successor." 'Uthman asked, "Did the people name him? (i.e. the successor) the man said, "Yes." Uthman asked, "Who is that?" The man remained silent. Another man came to 'Uthman and I think it was Al-Harith. He also said, "Appoint your successor." 'Uthman asked, "Did the people name him?" The man replied "Yes." 'Uthman said, "Who is that?" The man remained silent. 'Uthman said, "Perhaps they have mentioned Az-Zubair?" The man said, "Yes." 'Uthman said, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is, he is the best of them as I know, and the dearest of them to Allah's Apostle ."


`Uthman was old and ill (to the extent that he couldn't even go on Hajj). He therefore made a will (as Muslims should do before dying). He was then asked if he had nominated a successor, which is what a dying Caliph had to power to do. He asked if the people had mentioned anyone. The other man said yes, but then was reluctant to say who. `Uthman then suggested the name of Zubair. The man said that was indeed who they named. And then `Uthman says Zubair was the best of the possible candidates and the closest to the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã.

[Ibrahim786]

Haydar Husayn, on 27 June 2012 - 07:35 AM, said:

Ok.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 63:

Narrated Marwan bin Al-Hakam:

'Uthman bin 'Affan was afflicted with severe nose-bleeding in the year when such illness was prevelant and that prevented him from performing Hajj, and (because of it) he made his will. A man from Quraish came to him and said, "Appoint your successor." 'Uthman asked, "Did the people name him? (i.e. the successor) the man said, "Yes." Uthman asked, "Who is that?" The man remained silent. Another man came to 'Uthman and I think it was Al-Harith. He also said, "Appoint your successor." 'Uthman asked, "Did the people name him?" The man replied "Yes." 'Uthman said, "Who is that?" The man remained silent. 'Uthman said, "Perhaps they have mentioned Az-Zubair?" The man said, "Yes." 'Uthman said, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is, he is the best of them as I know, and the dearest of them to Allah's Apostle ."


`Uthman was old and ill (to the extent that he couldn't even go on Hajj). He therefore made a will (as Muslims should do before dying). He was then asked if he had nominated a successor, which is what a dying Caliph had to power to do. He asked if the people had mentioned anyone. The other man said yes, but then was reluctant to say who. `Uthman then suggested the name of Zubair. The man said that was indeed who they named. And then `Uthman says Zubair was the best of the possible candidates and the closest to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم.

ok - thats what I thought you were arguing. here are the reasons why I think your view of this is wrong

1) uthman ra was already told by the prophet pbuh that he was going to be murdered abd the murderers would insist on him leaving the khalifa but at the behest of the prophet pbuh he did not give up the khalifah and spill blood in madinah. This is especially apparant when uthman ra although having the power to deal with the rebels did not fight them.

2) if zubair ra was seen as the best choice by uthman ra then would have been mentioned by uthman ra before he died or after his ra death. then when ali ra was made the khalif those very same people who nominated zubair ra would have kicked up a fuss or atleast mention that zubair ra was the man we nominated - yet there were no such thing, no mention, no problems and the bayah was given to ali ra. there was no mention by zubair ra.

3) this is only a one off hadith and appears to have been made on a one off occasion yet if your argument was true then you would expect similar narrations here and there

4) nose bleeds are not exactly fatal even at his age - I have never heard anyone die of nose bleeds at any age. I admit I am no medical expert.

thats why I think that was a one off for hajj hence hajj was mentioned in the hadith otherwise what relevance does it have.

[Rasul]

The funniest thing is that so called 'Rebels' were Sahaba...

[Ibrahim786]

Rasul, on 27 June 2012 - 08:24 AM, said:

The funniest thing is that so called 'Rebels' were Sahaba...

no they were not and you know that.

hassan ra and hussain ra were protecting uthman ra - a great sahabi that you love to hate. shows how much you follow ahlelbayt

[Rasul]

Please go read History of Tabari you need to do that

I am not talking about Hassan and Hussain

Sahaba actually rebelled against Uthman if you did not know....

[Ibrahim786]

Rasul, on 27 June 2012 - 09:03 AM, said:

Please go read History of Tabari you need to do that

I am not talking about Hassan and Hussain

Sahaba actually rebelled against Uthman if you did not know....

no they did not - I know you are referring to talha ra and aisha ra and ammar ra.

just a bit of advice - when you read sunni seerah you still need to check the authenticity of narrations so I would not advise just picking up and reading books like tabari without knowing their narrations. You will still need to know if they are authentic as seerah of the sahabah and fadhail were collected with less strictness than issues of fiqh, aqeedah and masa'il.

the sunni scholars have highlighted fabricated narrations and authentic ones - why dont you listen to a sunni scholar on the murder of uthman ra

[Haydar Husayn]

Ibrahim786, on 27 June 2012 - 09:11 AM, said:

the sunni scholars have highlighted fabricated narrations and authentic ones - why dont you listen to a sunni scholar on the murder of uthman ra

You mean the saba'ite ninja version they tell?