Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Ali Ra Declared Abu Bakr Ra And Umar Ra Greater Than Him

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Learner,

It is pathetic that you could not provide proof for your claim that Prophet (pbuh) consulted people such as Umar in any part of his life.

Please go through this ayah before you could claim something without any proof against the Prophet (pbuh).

053.003

SHAKIR: Nor does he speak out of desire.

053.004

SHAKIR: It is naught but revelation that is revealed

053.005

SHAKIR: The Lord of Mighty Power has taught him,

Why should the Prophet (pbuh) consult with ordinary people such as Umar when Allah himself was his (pbuh) teacher? and please do not give the example of Qidr (as) and Musa (as). Their knowledge was from Allah unlike Umar. What knowledge will a person have who denied pen and paper to the Prophet (pbuh)?

See post 27.

Anybody to come back on the statement of Ali ra? If not, the whole of shiasm falls here. There is no doubt that Ali ra said this statement to the people, and yet shiah are not willing to accept it. Either accept what Ali ra said and elevate Abu Bakr ra and Umar ra above him or deny what he said and show to the world that it is the Sunnis who are the true "Shiah of Ali".

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Either accept what Ali ra said.

uamr's own words- So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest --> Sahih Muslim, Book 19, Number 4349 .... one of the two referred is imam ali (as) and his thoughts are of abu bakra...

wallahi i accept whatever Imam Ali (as) has said about abu bakra... what about you bro?

Link to post
Share on other sites
uamr's own words- So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest --> Sahih Muslim, Book 19, Number 4349 .... one of the two referred is imam ali (as) and his thoughts are of abu bakra...

wallahi i accept whatever Imam Ali (as) has said about abu bakra... what about you bro?

Firstly, I accept ALL of what Ali ra said, not just pick and choose. Secondly, the above hadith is no where near as authentic as the hadith in question. The statement of Ali ra is mutawatir, that hadith posted above is a khabar ahad, although it is sahih. Thirdly, in the hadith you provided above, Ali ra said nothing; it merely presents Umar's sentiments "you thought him to be...". The words "liar, sinful etc." do not exist in other versions of the hadith, in particular the version in Bukhari and all the other collections. So you take a hadith, that is not mutawatir, but inconsistent also, and base your whole reliance on that? Why? I accept both hadiths. The one from Muslim can be interpreted - that's another topic - the mutawatir statement of Ali ra is unambiguous and clear: he says Abu Bakr ra and Umar ra are greater than him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Firstly, I accept ALL of what Ali ra said, not just pick and choose. Secondly, the above hadith is no where near as authentic as the hadith in question. The statement of Ali ra is mutawatir, that hadith posted above is a khabar ahad, although it is sahih. Thirdly, in the hadith you provided above, Ali ra said nothing; it merely presents Umar's sentiments "you thought him to be...". The words "liar, sinful etc." do not exist in other versions of the hadith, in particular the version in Bukhari and all the other collections. So you take a hadith, that is not mutawatir, but inconsistent also, and base your whole reliance on that? Why? I accept both hadiths. The one from Muslim can be interpreted - that's another topic - the mutawatir statement of Ali ra is unambiguous and clear: he says Abu Bakr ra and Umar ra are greater than him.

MUTAWATIR??? hahahahahah.. by whose standards???.. even if it was by the a chain of the sunni imams it won't be considered MUTAWATIR by the shi3as :D... thats no proof.. probably some jolly old mulla all drenched in the love of the first three wrote this and the sunnis went "WAAAOOOOW.. tell us mooore"... mutawatir :P :D.. sorry buddy.. you sound knowledgable.. but this won't lead to the 'crumbling of shi3ism' :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Learner

I went through your post #27 both Quran and Tafsir but could not find anything related that Prophet took advice from Umar, Abu Bakr, or Uthman. I am displaying the ayah reference given by you. Please point to me where did the Prophet (pbuh) took advice from them

Quran

008.067

SHAKIR: It is not fit for a prophet that he should take captives unless he has fought and triumphed in the land; you desire the frail goods of this world, while Allah desires (for you) the hereafter; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

008.068

SHAKIR: Were it not for an ordinance from Allah that had already gone forth, surely there would have befallen you a great chastisement for what you had taken to.

008.069

SHAKIR: Eat then of the lawful and good (things) which you have acquired in war, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

008.070

SHAKIR: O Prophet! say to those of the captives who are in your hands: If Allah knows anything good in your hearts, He will give to you better than that which has been taken away from you and will forgive you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

008.071

SHAKIR: And if they intend to act unfaithfully towards you, so indeed they acted unfaithfully towards Allah before, but He gave (you) mastery over them; and Allah is Knowing, Wise.

and the ayath regarding consult, you have only pointed about consultation but not about the final decision. The final decision was of Prophet (pbuh) only

003.159

SHAKIR: Thus it is due to mercy from Allah that you deal with them gently, and had you been rough, hard hearted, they would certainly have dispersed from around you; pardon them therefore and ask pardon for them, and take counsel with them in the affair; so when you have decided, then place your trust in Allah; surely Allah loves those who trust.

Tafsir of which is

Pooya/M.A. Ali Engl. Commentary

"Take their counsel in the affairs" has been mentioned in this verse to educate the companions to reflect and use their intelligence, to understand the issues which confronted them in their lives so that by consulting each other they might arrive at a rational conclusion and follow the reasonable advice. Whatever be the counsel of the companions but the Holy Prophet has been asked to put his trust in Allah and act according to his own judgement.

First of all, you should not forget that there were two types of companions, the good and bad so advices could have been good and bad.

Secondly, the decision was finally of the Prophet (pbuh).

So where does it say in Quran and Tafsir that the Prophet (pbuh) took advice from Umar, Abu Bakr, or Uthman like as you had given the example of Allah ordered Musa (as) to learn from Qidr (as)? If Umar, Abu Bakr, and Uthman were so knowledgable then Allah would have taken their decison as final and not have place the final decision power on the Prophet (pbuh).

Edited by Mehek
Link to post
Share on other sites
MUTAWATIR??? hahahahahah.. by whose standards???.. even if it was by the a chain of the sunni imams it won't be considered MUTAWATIR by the shi3as :D... thats no proof.. probably some jolly old mulla all drenched in the love of the first three wrote this and the sunnis went "WAAAOOOOW.. tell us mooore"... mutawatir :P :D.. sorry buddy.. you sound knowledgable.. but this won't lead to the 'crumbling of shi3ism' :)

I believe it was al-Dhahabi who said it is mutawatir. Also Shaykh Gibril Haddad wrote:

The above is actually mutawatir from`Ali in Kufa, in the wording: "The best of this Umma after its Prophet are Abu Bakr and `Umar." - http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/fiqha_e94.html

Anyhow, it is clear from the number of people narrating from Ali ra himself, and the number of people narrating from them, and so on, that this narration has many routes - too many to all agree to a lie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
I believe it was al-Dhahabi who said it is mutawatir. Also Shaykh Gibril Haddad wrote:

The above is actually mutawatir from`Ali in Kufa, in the wording: "The best of this Umma after its Prophet are Abu Bakr and `Umar." - http://www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/fiqha_e94.html

Anyhow, it is clear from the number of people narrating from Ali ra himself, and the number of people narrating from them, and so on, that this narration has many routes - too many to all agree to a lie.

Learner.. please.. stop with the mutawatir stuff cuz noone's gonna buy it.. can I have some proof?.. see bro.. I have as much trust in your ahadith as you have in mine :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Learner.. please.. stop with the mutawatir stuff cuz noone's gonna buy it.. can I have some proof?.. see bro.. I have as much trust in your ahadith as you have in mine :)

If a shiah hadith is mutawatir then I would accept it. This is because it is rationally impossible to reject a mutawatir narration.

If I said something, and somebody else said the same thing, then there is low probability that both of them would agree on the same lie (as the lies are many, while the truth is one). Now, if there are many who all say the same thing, the probability that they all agree on the same lie becomes close to zero - mathematically/statistically impossible. If many say it from one generation, and many take it from them and so on, such that there is a great body of people narrating the same thing in every era, the narration becomes mutawatir - and this is impossible to call a fabrication, as the narration must have come from the source.

Take the Qur'an, for example. Thousands of Sahabah claimed these words are from the Prophet (saw), and they passed it to their successors and so on, until it has reached us in this form. Therefore the Qur'an definitely, without a shadow of a doubt, came from the lips of the Prophet (saw) - whether it is from Allah or not, cannot be established statistically for this claim is from one man - the Prophet (saw).

The same is with this narration. There have been many who have heard the words from Ali ra and many who transmitted it from them until collectors, who number in their hundreds, collected it from them, like Imam Ahmad, ad-Daraqutni, Ibn Abi Shaybah and Bukhari. Therefore it is impossible the narration is a lie. So you, as a rational human being, have to accept Ali ra said this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Bismillah al Rahman al Raheem

Salam Alaikom wa Rahmatollahi wa Barakatuhu

Allahumma Salle Ala Mohammadin wa Aal e Mohammad wa Sahbihi Muntajibeen wa Jamee ul Awliyah Allah al Saaliheen.

I am going to make this a very short message for those who are arguing childishly (out of ignorance or ta'sub) from both sides:

- First of all you need to learn the basics of hadith science. mutawatir does not mean sahih nor is tawatur any absolute gurantee in a hadith being SAHIH. There are far many more factors which are required for a hadith to be classified as SAHIH in ilm ul rijaal. There are MANY MANY ahadith in hadith literature from both Shi'a and Sunni Side which are Mutawatir and have been classified by lot of muhaditheen and rijal scholars as DAEEF, MATROOK, MAWDOO, KIZB etc. I already wrote a very big article on one of those traditions and exposed how its Mutawatir and yet its classifed by more then 3 dozen sunni scholars as daeef or mawdoo..

The most important factor that would be used as a deciding factor in the quality of any hadith (whether narrated by one chain or dozen) by a researcher in hadith science is the study of the "al jerah wal ta'deel" or the critique of the "rijaal" (narrators) of each of the chains with a sepcific matn (content) in a hadith. It is here where the actual quality of the hadith's authenticity is developed. In lay man's term let me explain this scenario in this way:

If i murder someone and being an influential or corrupt manipulative person, forge 50 different witnesses in court saying im innocent then by technical terms it becomes mutawatir (witness through various sources) that im innocent. However, the fact remains that Islam requires the witness of just and upright people in such matters and specially so in transmission of ahaadith literature attributed to the Prophet (s). Merely producing 50 corrupt witnesses who are agents of corruption or falsehood does not establish that im SAHIH or innocent.

Likewise, in Hadith literature if a tradition is coming from various sources (which could be either sahih or corrupt in origin from the hadith factories of banu omayyah and other kings or for that matter even ghaali shia) then mere tawatur of this tradition does not establish its correctness unless it is not authenticated that the entire chain of persons narrating each tradition is pure.

- Secondly those attacking the sunni brethren for not liking their hadiths (without ever giving justification) dont need to use bias and t'asub and deviate from a technical discussion into an act of jahaliyyah. These topics can all be easily discussed and solved in light of academic research and scholarly analysis even if you do not agree with someone's school of thought. (some of the hadiths in question posted on this issue in bukhari and other books are already discussed and refuted in my other posts and as i indicated some time back im also in the process of writing a book to discuss and refute them all without using ta'sub...so kindly refer to my other posts on this forum and on my website given in signature).

- Thirdly, there is no need to create shia sunni divide and rule politics as this attitude will not solve any of the questions nor satisfy any truth seeking reader. Instead, i recommend, that the brothers and sisters from both madhahibs work hand in hand and discuss these issues amicably as truth seekers, rather then screaming "we shia are this" and "you sunnis are this" and the like.

I am being brief in this message because i noticed it is drifting from where it started and inshallah, if Allah wills, the answers shall be coming soon either in the book that im writing or future messages on the forum. If i have hurt anyone's feelings, i apologize in advance.

Fi Aman Allah

Taair-al-Quds

Edited by Taair-al-Quds
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Bismillah al Rahman al Raheem

Salam Alaikom wa Rahmatollahi wa Barakatuhu

Allahumma Salle Ala Mohammadin wa Aal e Mohammad wa Sahbihi Muntajibeen wa Jamee ul Awliyah Allah al Saaliheen.

I am going to make this a very short message for those who are arguing childishly (out of ignorance or ta'sub) from both sides:

- First of all you need to learn the basics of hadith science. mutawatir does not mean sahih nor is tawatur any absolute gurantee in a hadith being SAHIH. There are far many more factors which are required for a hadith to be classified as SAHIH in ilm ul rijaal. There are MANY MANY ahadith in hadith literature from both Shi'a and Sunni Side which are Mutawatir and have been classified by lot of muhaditheen and rijal scholars as DAEEF, MATROOK, MAWDOO, KIZB etc. I already wrote a very big article on one of those traditions and exposed how its Mutawatir and yet its classifed by more then 3 dozen sunni scholars as daeef or mawdoo..

The most important factor that would be used as a deciding factor in the quality of any hadith (whether narrated by one chain or dozen) by a researcher in hadith science is the study of the "al jerah wal ta'deel" or the critique of the "rijaal" (narrators) of each of the chains with a sepcific matn (content) in a hadith. It is here where the actual quality of the hadith's authenticity is developed. In lay man's term let me explain this scenario in this way:

If i murder someone and being an influential or corrupt manipulative person, forge 50 different witnesses in court saying im innocent then by technical terms it becomes mutawatir (witness through various sources) that im innocent. However, the fact remains that Islam requires the witness of just and upright people in such matters and specially so in transmission of ahaadith literature attributed to the Prophet (s). Merely producing 50 corrupt witnesses who are agents of corruption or falsehood does not establish that im SAHIH or innocent.

Likewise, in Hadith literature if a tradition is coming from various sources (which could be either sahih or corrupt in origin from the hadith factories of banu omayyah and other kings or for that matter even ghaali shia) then mere tawatur of this tradition does not establish its correctness unless it is not authenticated that the entire chain of persons narrating each tradition is pure.

- Secondly those attacking the sunni brethren for not liking their hadiths (without ever giving justification) dont need to use bias and t'asub and deviate from a technical discussion into an act of jahaliyyah. These topics can all be easily discussed and solved in light of academic research and scholarly analysis even if you do not agree with someone's school of thought. (some of the hadiths in question posted on this issue in bukhari and other books are already discussed and refuted in my other posts and as i indicated some time back im also in the process of writing a book to discuss and refute them all without using ta'sub...so kindly refer to my other posts on this forum and on my website given in signature).

- Thirdly, there is no need to create shia sunni divide and rule politics as this attitude will not solve any of the questions nor satisfy any truth seeking reader. Instead, i recommend, that the brothers and sisters from both madhahibs work hand in hand and discuss these issues amicably as truth seekers, rather then screaming "we shia are this" and "you sunnis are this" and the like.

I am being brief in this message because i noticed it is drifting from where it started and inshallah, if Allah wills, the answers shall be coming soon either in the book that im writing or future messages on the forum. If i have hurt anyone's feelings, i apologize in advance.

Fi Aman Allah

Taair-al-Quds

I knew THAAT :D.. nicely put.. JazaakAllah :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
- First of all you need to learn the basics of hadith science. mutawatir does not mean sahih nor is tawatur any absolute gurantee in a hadith being SAHIH. There are far many more factors which are required for a hadith to be classified as SAHIH in ilm ul rijaal. There are MANY MANY ahadith in hadith literature from both Shi'a and Sunni Side which are Mutawatir and have been classified by lot of muhaditheen and rijal scholars as DAEEF, MATROOK, MAWDOO, KIZB etc. I already wrote a very big article on one of those traditions and exposed how its Mutawatir and yet its classifed by more then 3 dozen sunni scholars as daeef or mawdoo..

Akhbar (reports) are of three types: those which are certainly authentic, those which contain slight doubt and those which have definite doubt. The first is Mutawatir narrations in which there is NO doubt of its authenticity. The second is mashhur narrations in which there is slight doubt. And the last is the khabar ahad (which are sahih) and in these there are some doubt. Most of the ahadith in Bukhari and Muslim are from the latter type, so contain definite doubt, and therefore provide speculative (zanni) proof.

Can you give me an example of a mawdu' mutawatir hadith? The term is almost paradoxical.

The most important factor that would be used as a deciding factor in the quality of any hadith (whether narrated by one chain or dozen) by a researcher in hadith science is the study of the "al jerah wal ta'deel" or the critique of the "rijaal" (narrators) of each of the chains with a sepcific matn (content) in a hadith. It is here where the actual quality of the hadith's authenticity is developed.

In regards to ahad narrations, ilm ar-rijal is very important. For mutawatir narrations, majority of the scholars say ilm ar-rijal is insignificant, due to the shear number of the narrators, it is impossible it could be a lie.

Regardless, if you look at the chains of the narrations, most of the narrators are those whom even the shia respect i.e. the close companions of Ali ra, and their close companions and so on. Therefore, even by this means the narration is definitely sahih. But not only is it sahih, it is mutawatir.

If i murder someone and being an influential or corrupt manipulative person, forge 50 different witnesses in court saying im innocent then by technical terms it becomes mutawatir (witness through various sources) that im innocent. However, the fact remains that Islam requires the witness of just and upright people in such matters and specially so in transmission of ahaadith literature attributed to the Prophet (s). Merely producing 50 corrupt witnesses who are agents of corruption or falsehood does not establish that im SAHIH or innocent.

Witnessing is different from narrating. In order to witness a murder, there must be at least two upright Muslims. If all fifty are corrupt the witness does not hold. In terms of narration, it is different because tawatur creates an impossibility of forging.

Imagine I tell you through a certain chain of narrators, that a person who was at the murder in 1963 named the man who killed JF kennedy. Of course you wouldn't believe me. But then you travel across the world and different people narrate the same thing to you through chains of narration that can be interlinked, you would conceive it impossible that all of these people could agree on a lie, because the chances are so low. Therefore it becomes a fact that that person did name who killed JF kennedy. Whether that person who named was truthful or not cannot be verified.

How is it that all these narrators have agreed through various chains of narration that Ali ra said this? Many of these narrators come from different areas and eras and have never met, and yet they narrated the same thing. This is how tawatur is established.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Akhbar (reports) are of three types: those which are certainly authentic, those which contain slight doubt and those which have definite doubt. The first is Mutawatir narrations in which there is NO doubt of its authenticity. The second is mashhur narrations in which there is slight doubt. And the last is the khabar ahad (which are sahih) and in these there are some doubt. Most of the ahadith in Bukhari and Muslim are from the latter type, so contain definite doubt, and therefore provide speculative (zanni) proof.

Can you give me an example of a mawdu' mutawatir hadith? The term is almost paradoxical.

In regards to ahad narrations, ilm ar-rijal is very important. For mutawatir narrations, majority of the scholars say ilm ar-rijal is insignificant, due to the shear number of the narrators, it is impossible it could be a lie.

Regardless, if you look at the chains of the narrations, most of the narrators are those whom even the shia respect i.e. the close companions of Ali ra, and their close companions and so on. Therefore, even by this means the narration is definitely sahih. But not only is it sahih, it is mutawatir.

Witnessing is different from narrating. In order to witness a murder, there must be at least two upright Muslims. If all fifty are corrupt the witness does not hold. In terms of narration, it is different because tawatur creates an impossibility of forging.

Imagine I tell you through a certain chain of narrators, that a person who was at the murder in 1963 named the man who killed JF kennedy. Of course you wouldn't believe me. But then you travel across the world and different people narrate the same thing to you through chains of narration that can be interlinked, you would conceive it impossible that all of these people could agree on a lie, because the chances are so low. Therefore it becomes a fact that that person did name who killed JF kennedy. Whether that person who named was truthful or not cannot be verified.

How is it that all these narrators have agreed through various chains of narration that Ali ra said this? Many of these narrators come from different areas and eras and have never met, and yet they narrated the same thing. This is how tawatur is established.

Alright.. can you tell me the names of the people who were at the very begining of the chain of narrators for this saying?.. you said that there are many DIFFERENT chains right?.. so can you name the first one from each chain?.. wassalaamun alaikum :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
  • Advanced Member
Firstly, I accept ALL of what Ali ra said, not just pick and choose. Secondly, the above hadith is no where near as authentic as the hadith in question. The statement of Ali ra is mutawatir, that hadith posted above is a khabar ahad, although it is sahih. Thirdly, in the hadith you provided above, Ali ra said nothing; it merely presents Umar's sentiments "you thought him to be...". The words "liar, sinful etc." do not exist in other versions of the hadith, in particular the version in Bukhari and all the other collections. So you take a hadith, that is not mutawatir, but inconsistent also, and base your whole reliance on that? Why? I accept both hadiths. The one from Muslim can be interpreted - that's another topic - the mutawatir statement of Ali ra is unambiguous and clear: he says Abu Bakr ra and Umar ra are greater than him.
Let us see what the Holy Prophet of Allah s.a.w.s has said about Abu Bakr :

"Polytheism is hidden in you better than the movement of the ant." So Abu Bakr said,"Is there Polythesim that one claims there is a god other than Allah?" The Messenger of Allah repeated, "Polytheism is hidden in you better than the movement of the ant."

[Hafiz Abu Ya'la,Imam Ahmad Hanbal and Imam Baghavi have narrated this tradition and present in the books of Ahl Sunnah wal Jamah such as Tafsir of Ibne Kathir printed on the margins of Fathul Bayan,Tafsir Durre Manthur by Allamah Suyuti and Kanzul Ummal.]

It is decribed more explicitly (having the mention of Abu Bakr's name) in Kazul Ummal :"O Abu Bakr ! Polytheism is hidden in you better than the movement of the ant."

Hakim Tirmidhi,Ibne Rahuyah,Imam Bukhari in Adab-e-Mufrad and Allamah Damiri in Hayatul Haiwan have narrated this tradition on the Authority of Ma'qal bin Yasar.Muhaddith Dehlavi has narrated it from Ibne Jurair in Izalatul Khifa.As if the Holy Prophet has given a certificate of polythesim to Abu Bakr.

Not only this,it is mentioned in Durre Manthur and Izalayul Khifa to such an extent that the Holy Prophet swore before saying this.He said,"By the One in Whose control is my life,Polytheism is hidden in you better than the movements of the ant."

This was the saying of the Messenger of Allah.

Now sample of the blessed sayings of the great leader of Ahl SunnahAbu Hanifa,regarding the faith of Abu Bakr :"The faith of Abu Bakr and the faith of Satan is one." (Tarikh,Khatib Baghdadi)

This was the glimpse of the faith of Abu Bakr.Now turn your attention to Umar.You have already read about his living the whole life in doubts.I will repeat it once again before we conclude.He used to very often ask Huzaifah Yamani,with whom the Holy Prophet had confided the names of hypocrites,"Did the Messenger of Allah mention my name among the hypocrities?".

This query of Umar is mentioned in books such as - Tafsir of Ibne Kathir,Ihya Al-Uloom by Imam Ghazzali and Tafsirut Taiful Bayan,Translation of Fathul Bayan.

Firstly , the question itself makes the faith of Umar doubtful.Then finally he himself swore that he was hypocrite.

It is quoted in Mizanul Etidal,by Allamah Dhahabi :Umar said,"O Huzaifah! By Allah,I am from the hypocrites."

Is any explaination required after this sworn confession ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Salam

What do shias say about the saying of Ali ra that his two predecessors were greater men than him. In another forum it says adh-Dhahabi considered this narration to be mutawatir from Ali ra - and a mutawatir narration can't be wrong because it comes from so many different routes, that it is impossible, or a massive coincidence, that there could have been a conspiracy or forgery with the exact same plot. According to another forum, some of the references are (from the following narrators directly from Ali ra):

1. Abu Juhayfah

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...=1002&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=794&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=795&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=796&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=792&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=836&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=837&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=838&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=829&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://www.al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.as...&CID=131#s7 (Majma’uz zawaid, 14357, quoting At-Tabrani in his Awsat)

http://feqh.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mode=...amp;Diacratic=0 (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, numbers 28 and 29)

2. Abdullah Ibn Salamah

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=103&doc=5 (Ibn Majah)

http://feqh.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mode=...amp;Diacratic=0 (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, number 41)

3. Wahb As-Suwai

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/D...hnum=793&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

4. Abd Khayr

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=979&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=890&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=889&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=888&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=865&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=864&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...m=878&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...=1008&doc=6 (Musnad Ahmad)

5. Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyyah

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...=3395&doc=0 (Bukhari)

http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display...=4013&doc=4 (Abu Dawud)

http://feqh.al-islam.com/Display.asp?Mode=...amp;Diacratic=0 (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, number 23)

6. Al-Hussayn Ibn Ali

http://www.al-eman.com/Islamlib/viewchp.as...137&CID=446 (Kanzul Ummal, number 35606, quoting Ad-Daghuli)

Many of these narrations come from Imam Ahmad, who came before Imam Bukhari and most of the hadith collectors, so it can't be said it was forged by the later collectors of hadith.

Is it not clear, therefore, that Abu Bakr ra and Umar ra were the greatest men to walk the earth after the Prophets (as)?

ws

ps looking at the many other threads, i find it impossible for a sunni ever to be able to respond. Each thread is filled with so many questions, it is unclear which to respond to. It would be better if one question is posed in one thread (as in this one) rather than bombarding the reader hundreds of questions. thanku

Salam

In Shia Islam, there are some cardinal principles which we strongly believe in, and we think Sunnis should join us. Let me highlight them:

1. ANY hadith, however mutawatir, that contradicts the Holy Qur'an is false. The Verse of Purification establishes the inerrancy and purity of Ali (as). How then can a fallible person be superior to Ali (as)? Also the Verse of Wilayah expressly declares Ali (as) to be master to ALL Muslims, including Abu Bakr and Umar. How then can ANY hadith abrogate these verses. The Hadith of al-Ghadir cited by one of my brothers is certainly relevant, since it is MORE mutawatir than your hadith and thus clearly abrogates it. For more information on all these assertions, visit http://al-islam.org/encyclopedia/

2. Imamate is the highest rank that Allah (SWT) has ever bestowed on ANY human. The Apostolic Imam is the leader of absolutely ANYTHING or ANYONE on the planet during his time. For instance, before Prophet Ibrahim's (as) promotion to Imamate, he was a colleague to all the thousands of other prophets on the planet. But, on his ascension to Imamate, he became the leader of ALL his former colleagues. Therefore, it is impossible for anyone to be superior to the Imam of his time. If ANY hadith is then attributed to such Imam declaring himself to be inferior to certain people, SUCH HADITH IS CERTAINLY FALSE, however mutawatir. On Imamate, visit http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/imamate/en/index.php

Clearly, Sunnis forged the hadith to justify their flawed position on the caliphate. Now, let me ask:

1. Was the Holy Prophet (SAW) ignorant when he (SAW) declared Ali (as) the MAWLA (absolute master) of ALL Muslims, including Abu Bakr and Umar, and in fact ordered them to congratulate him?

2. Is the Holy Qur'an in error for declaring Ali (as) the Wali (guardian) of ALL Muslims, including Abu Bakr and Umar?

3. Why did Allah (SWT) purify Ali (as) and the wider Ahlul Bayt (as)? Was it to guarantee their admission into Paradise? If that was the reason, then it was a wholly unnecessary step. So, why?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...