A Question Regarding Infallibility Of The Aimmah

[Rocke]

How could there be 14 infallibles if there were only 5 covered by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam with the Kisaa including himself?

Sunni/Shia Valid references only please.

Thanks.

Edited August 11, 2011 by Rocke

[Something Given]

http://www.al-islam.org/thaqalayn/nontl/index.htm

The key word here is 'itrah (mentioned together with the word Ahlulbayt) which refers to the nine infallible Imams descended from Imam Husayn (as).

Edited August 11, 2011 by Something Given

[Rocke]

So much to read, can you please give some direct explanations from Shia / Sunni ahadeeth about why there are 14 infallibles despite there were only 5 person covered with the Kisaa; and now that you mention it... how come the word itrah is only limited to the Aimmah?

[Sword of Haq]

So much to read, can you please give some direct explanations from Shia / Sunni ahadeeth about why there are 14 infallibles despite there were only 5 person covered with the Kisaa; and now that you mention it... how come the word itrah is only limited to the Aimmah?

Salaam

You were given very nice and simple answer

Posted Today, 12:51 AM

http://www.al-islam....nontl/index.htm

The key word here is 'itrah (mentioned together with the word Ahlulbayt) which refers to the nine infallible Imams descended from Imam Husayn (as)

'Under Kisa were these five' is not the only hadith for Infallibility . As brother said the key word is Itrah especially whose duty is to carry the divine message of Muhammad s.a.w. Infallibility of our Imams is not only restricted to one verse but the whole concept of divine Imamat and the Imam as an infallible is present in Quran,

So thinking about this concept over this limited thought that only 5 were present then other 8 came under infallibility from where is wrong. There are so many flaws in such approach, One cay say ' those 9s son of Imam Hussain a.s were not born at that time so that's why they were not present.

Allah

never explain His divine laws including Imamat in this fashion. You need to read more than hadith e kisa.

JazakAllah

.

[Something Given]

So much to read, can you please give some direct explanations from Shia / Sunni ahadeeth about why there are 14 infallibles despite there were only 5 person covered with the Kisaa;

The link was for the references you requested, and the hadith explains the inclusion of the nine Imams (as) by the addition of the word 'itrah.

and now that you mention it... how come the word itrah is only limited to the Aimmah?

Because that is not the only narration by the Prophet (pbuh) speaking about the twelve Imams. Other (Sunni) narrations may be found here: http://www.al-islam.org/twelve/. The chapter 'The Twelve Imams According to the School of Caliphate' is most useful, especially the narration:

"I and Ali and Hasan and Husayn and nine of the descendants of Husayn are the purified ones and the infallible."

References may be found in the link, once again.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Something Given

[Rocke]

"I and Ali and Hasan and Husayn and nine of the descendants of Husayn are the purified ones and the infallible."

al-Juwayni, Fara'id al-Simtayn, pg 160.

Okay, that's one single hadith and according to this (footnote 15 & 16) it's a Shia reference from a Shi'i author, and surprisingly it's narrated by Ibn Abbas instead of Imam Ali himself.

This actually brings more question

1. According to this thread the Shiites only take their religion from the Golden chain, so why took the most important part of your religion from a narrator outside the golden chain?

2. Speaking about chain of narrators, can you bring the isnad and the status of that hadith? I mentioned earlier that I wanted valid Sunni/Shia sources only.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Rocke

[Something Given]

al-Juwayni, Fara'id al-Simtayn, pg 160.

Okay, that's one single hadith and according to this (footnote 15 & 16) it's a Shia reference from a Shi'i author

I thought it was a Sunni reference, my mistake. Although, that book from al-islam.org certainly makes it look that way ... :donno:

1. According to this thread the Shiites only take their religion from the Golden chain, so why took the most important part of your religion from a narrator outside the golden chain?

Um, I don't think the OP in that thread was saying that we don't accept any narrator apart from those in 'the golden chain'. I mean, how else would any narration reach us? What he was trying to say, I think, was that while Sunni ahadith have people narrating all the way from the Prophet (pbuh), Shia ahadith are narrated from a more 'recent' infallible (who may narrate from a previous infallible and so on up to the Prophet (pbuh) -- which is 'the golden chain' he was referring to) and thus less discrepancies. However, not all ahadith of the Imams (as) are narrating from the Prophet (pbuh). But it makes no difference to us as they are all infallible.

2. Speaking about chain of narrators, can you bring the isnad and the status of that hadith? I mentioned earlier that I wanted valid Sunni/Shia sources only.

I'm afraid I can't help you here. Perhaps some other knowledgeable brother/sister may help?

I was trying to bring you only Sunni references before; will try and look up Shia ahadith, inshallah.

[Muntaqim Force]

al-Juwayni, Fara'id al-Simtayn, pg 160.

Okay, that's one single hadith and according to this (footnote 15 & 16) it's a Shia reference from a Shi'i author, and surprisingly it's narrated by Ibn Abbas instead of Imam Ali himself.

This actually brings more question

1. According to this thread the Shiites only take their religion from the Golden chain, so why took the most important part of your religion from a narrator outside the golden chain?

2. Speaking about chain of narrators, can you bring the isnad and the status of that hadith? I mentioned earlier that I wanted valid Sunni/Shia sources only.

Salaam

Brother Rocke, MashAllah you have good interest towards either learning the real Islam or trying to prove truth wrong, you alim or Allah hu Alim :)

Let me tell you one thing clearly that we, the follower of Ahle Bait a.s believe in the Infallibility of all the divinely appointed guides of Allah s.w.t. This makes Angels, Prophets and Messengers, Imams and the book of guidance, the Holy Quran. To break make it simple for you its something like this;

1-Prophets and Messengers.

2-Imams

3-Angels

4-Quran

Tell me do you have problem in understanding the Infallible 12 only or you have difficulty with all above four?

Now coming to your highly pathetic questions;

Golden Chain: Allah to Prophet s.a.w to Imams to us , for us 12 Imams for you whoever you want (4 i guess!!!?)

Now lets see it like this, Allah told His Prophet s.a.w some law and that law reached to your Imam Abu Hanifa or any other via some companions and you took it from a scholar or read it in any scholar's work. Very reasonable Golden chain for you.

And if in our chain Ibn Abbas is playing a role of "us" or a role of a "scholar", then why it does not seem reasonable to you.

Only because it is most important part of the religion thats why!!!? :) Well brother you are making it for shias 'most' important part of Islam otherwise for us it is just 1 of the important but not the most. look at it the golden chain from now Shia perspective Allah told His Prophet s.a.w some law and that law reached to our Imam Ali and he informed it to his companions (Ibn Abbas )and we took it from a scholar or read it in any scholar's work.

Now you said something "according to this thread" Lets have a look what is in link

​I think that in Shia fiqh the rijal is not that important as it is in Sunni fiqh. We have twelve holy Imams (Golden Chain) of narrations. The narrators who reported from these twelve holy Imams (a.s) in their respective times hold less importance. Our faith is based on direct sayings of Imams (a.s) in their respective times who were being heard by many people/followers and there were less chances of deception and lie.

above quote from that thread

Brother Just concentrate on those red letters;

Less Importance: Means less on the scale of importance not out of faith.

Direct sayings: 14 infallible

Heard by many follower: Ibn Abbas is one of the example of such followers (do you think he was not fine!!!?)

This was golden chain mentioned in that thread.

Plus as i said as previously concept of Infallible Imams and the 12 Imams is not only this one hadith but Quran speaks about it and for you information Torah also speaks about it. You just need to clear you point of difference among the 4 names i have mentioned as infallible.

​2. Speaking about chain of narrators, can you bring the isnad and the status of that hadith? I mentioned earlier that I wanted valid Sunni/Shia sources only.

you will be provided with chains and everything once we reach to ' H ' of this ABC of Infallible. First clear your mind from arising stupid questions.

I also advice you to read this thread http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234942060-if-14-masooms-then-bibi-zainab-as/page__st__25

and if you still wish to continue then answer where do you disagree in those 4 names?

[Rocke]

Tell me do you have problem in understanding the Infallible 12 only or you have difficulty with all above four?

You seem to have the problem for yourself, according to Shia there are 14 infallibles, not 12.

Now lets see it like this...

Ahlussunnah wal Jama'ah accepts both Aal Bait and Sahaba as narrators, and that includes Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra), which means I will take that hadith from Faraid Simtayn with conditions that it's truly narrated from Ibn Abbas and not some weak / fabricated nonsense; on the other hand, Shia doesn't weigh much on ahadeeth narrated by the sahaba and concentrated on the golden chain.

Just to remind you... Imamah and their infallibility is the most important pillar of Shia, if someone doesn't acknowledge the legitimacy of 12 Shia Imam then he couldn't be considered as a Shia and will then be labeled Nasibi / the enemy of Aali Muhammad, which in some of the Shi'i reference they are worse than the Jews and Christians in the infidelity and filthier than dogs.

This is clearly not a cat and mouse game... you claim to follow the school of Aali Muhammad then it means you're obliged to bring valid references regarding this pillar of Shia from the Golden chain instead from a non-golden chain, moreover on important issues such as Imamah and their infallibility.

you will be provided with chains and everything once we reach to ' H ' of this ABC of Infallible. First clear your mind from arising stupid questions.

I also advice you to read this thread http://www.shiachat....as/page__st__25

and if you still wish to continue then answer where do you disagree in those 4 names?.

Disagree with what?

If you dont mind please bring forth some valid references from either Sunni / Shia rsources regarding the infallibility of the Aimmah, if you don't know then refrain from commenting or just openly say Allahu a'lam (Allah knows best) coz Imam Ali (ra) said it's part of the knowledge to say it if you don't know an answer to a question.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Rocke

[Muntaqim Force]

You seem to have the problem for yourself, according to Shia there are 14 infallibles, not 12.

A yazidi bakri will teach me what is according to shia!!! well this must be one minor sign of Qayamah. You made thread which says

"A Question Regarding Infallibility Of The Aimmah"

in other words Infallibility of the 12 Imams , 14 Infallible are known as Ma3someen.

Muntaqim Force, on 12 August 2011 - 11:33 PM, said:

Tell me do you have problem in understanding the Infallible 12 only or you have difficulty with all above four?

I hope now you understood why i said Infallible 12 and not 14.

Now stop crying and tell me Angels, Prophets and Messengers, Imams, Holy Book Quran out of these you have problem with whose Infallibility because seems you are confused in understand 5 12 14 :)

[Rocke]

Yes, a Yazidi Bakri (whatever that means) just taught you a first class Shia subject, read the first post again amigo, I said:

How could there be 14 infallibles if there were only 5 covered by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam with the Kisaa including himself?

I question the infallibility of the rest of the Aimmah, coz three of them were actually covered... supposing Quran 33:33 and hadith al-Kisaa were the dalael of them being Infallible.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Rocke

[Abbas.]

How could there be 14 infallibles if there were only 5 covered by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam with the Kisaa including himself?

Your question makes no sense because even if the Prophet Himself was the only person as being the subject of Hadith ul Kisaa, we'd give preference to anyone prescribed by Him. As per this rule/principle, the rest of the Masumeen in shia school are not democratically selected by ummah or politically chosen by the influential figures of ummah..... they are rather those personalities who were informed to us by our own Immaculate Imams (successors of the Prophet P.b.u.H) as being their successors.

[Muntaqim Force]

Yes, a Yazidi Bakri (whatever that means) just taught you a first class Shia subject, read the first post again amigo, I said:

I question the infallibility of the rest of the Aimmah, coz three of them were actually covered... supposing Quran 33:33 and hadith al-Kisaa were the dalael of them being Infallible.

What made you question rest 9 imams infallibility. Have you seen any of their such deed which made you question their divine position?

[Rocke]

our question makes no sense because even if the Prophet Himself was the only person as being the subject of Hadith ul Kisaa, we'd give preference to anyone prescribed by Him. As per this rule/principle, the rest of the Masumeen in shia school are not democratically selected by ummah or politically chosen by the influential figures of ummah..... they are rather those personalities who were informed to us by our own Immaculate Imams (successors of the Prophet P.b.u.H) as being their successors.

Is it possible for you to share the info?

[Muntaqim Force]

Yes, a Yazidi Bakri (whatever that means) just taught you a first class Shia subject, read the first post again amigo, I said:

I question the infallibility of the rest of the Aimmah, coz three of them were actually covered... supposing Quran 33:33 and hadith al-Kisaa were the dalael of them being Infallible.

Amigo!! is this yazidian language!!? Anyways even then you are wrong. Because first of all you are yazidi nd secondly the name of the thread is "A Question Regarding Infallibility Of The Aimmah"

Aimmah in Shia Islam means 12 Imams. So you are opening a thread asking regarding Imams and then you post your 1st question about 14 ma3someen

How could there be 14 infallibles if there were only 5 covered by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam with the Kisaa including himself?

I helped you in removing this confusion of yours and now you claim yourself to be teacher of mine for first class topic!!!!

Now forget all and tell me again 14 infallibles or 9 Imams as 3 were already under the kisa?

[Aabiss_Shakari]

You seem to have the problem for yourself, according to Shia there are 14 infallibles, not 12.

Ahlussunnah wal Jama'ah accepts both Aal Bait and Sahaba as narrators, and that includes Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra), which means I will take that hadith from Faraid Simtayn with conditions that it's truly narrated from Ibn Abbas and not some weak / fabricated nonsense; on the other hand, Shia doesn't weigh much on ahadeeth narrated by the sahaba and concentrated on the golden chain.

Good. Let us suppose we had only golden chain for the infallibility of Imamain (a.s) or their divinity then you know what your objection would have been?

Then your stance would have been "The only evidence available with you is golden chain where Imamain (a.s) themselves claimed Imamat and their divinity and this can not be verified through some independent source" .

Basically you have no point in your favour. It is good that both types of reports are available. One you referred is by Abdullah Bin Abbas (r.a) and on the other hand Imamain (a.s) themselves declared the Imamat and divine leadership of the subsequent Imam and so and so on. So the Imamat and its infallibility is proved not only through golden chain but also through an independent reporter.

[ßÑíã]

Salam brothers & sisters,

A verse from the Qur'an which indicates that the remaining 9 are infallible:

(17:77) : "[This was Our) way with the apostles we sent before you, and you will find no alteration in any of our methods”

Allah s.w.t is informing us that we will find no alteration in any of his methods, includig the infallibility of the prophet (pbuh&hf)'s successors, so if the first three (Ali, Hassan & Hussein a.s) were directly spoken of as infallible in verse 33:33, this verse (17:77) proves the remaining 9 as also infallible, because IF they wern't then that would go against the Holy Qur'an, and that would mean that there is alteration in Allah s.w.t's methods, clearly the Qur'an indicates that there isn't so there is no question in regards to that. Verse 33:33 speaks of the first 5 being infallible, verse 17:77 indicates a confirmation of the remaining 9 being infallible, 5 + 9 = 14. These are clear signs from the principle perspective of Islam, hope it helped, wasallam.

[Aabiss_Shakari]

Jazak Allah brother Kareem.

[ßÑíã]

To you also brother, it is my pleasure.

[Rocke]

Good. Let us suppose we had only golden chain for the infallibility of Imamain (a.s) or their divinity then you know what your objection would have been?

The correct question is, is there really a valid text to support that Aali Muhammad and the Aimmah are all infallible, or it's just interpretation?

Then your stance would have been "The only evidence available with you is golden chain where Imamain (a.s) themselves claimed Imamat and their divinity and this can not be verified through some independent source" .

That's why I also asked a valid Sunni reference too

Allah s.w.t is informing us that we will find no alteration in any of his methods, includig the infallibility of the prophet (pbuh&hf)'s successors, so if the first three (Ali, Hassan & Hussein a.s) were directly spoken of as infallible in verse 33:33, this verse (17:77) proves the remaining 9 as also infallible, because IF they wern't then that would go against the Holy Qur'an, and that would mean that there is alteration in Allah s.w.t's methods, clearly the Qur'an indicates that there isn't so there is no question in regards to that. Verse 33:33 speaks of the first 5 being infallible, verse 17:77 indicates a confirmation of the remaining 9 being infallible, 5 + 9 = 14. These are clear signs from the principle perspective of Islam, hope it helped, wasallam.

So it's just interpretation?

Okay then, did you get this info from the golden chain or someone else? please share the references coz I tried to check random Shi'i tafaseer (got at-Tibyan by Shaykh Tusi and al-Mizan by Tabatabai) and the verse was talking about the way things going with the people of ignorance against the prophets and messengers throughout history; none of the two mentioned anything about infallibility or Imamate as far as I read it.

Edited August 13, 2011 by Rocke

[ßÑíã]

So it's just interpretation?

Okay then, did you get this info from the golden chain or someone else? please share the references coz I tried to check random Shi'i tafaseer (got at-Tibyan by Shaykh Tusi and al-Mizan by Tabatabai) and the verse was talking about the way things going with the people of ignorance against the prophets and messengers throughout history; none of the two mentioned anything about infallibility or Imamate as far as I read it.

Brother your not looking at the principle, forget who you got your interpretations from, use logic and reason, the end bit of the verse informs us that there is no alteration in any of his methods, the meaning for that particular phrase is as it is: you will find no alteration in any of his methods, someone saying that the remaiing 9 imams of the ahlul bayt a.s are not proven to be infallible goes against this verse because one of Allah s.w.t's methods was purifying the first 3 successors of Rasool Allah pbuh&hf, not purifying the remaining 9 means there is a change with the methods he sent down with his apostles. An example of something similar to what your asking me to do is as follows:

A man says: I don't know you

The stranger replies: which source of interpretation told you what you just said means you do not know me?

Sounds rediculous don't it? use reason my friend, after all, when Prophet Adam p.b.u.h was given a choice between a couple of things by Allah s.w.t, he chose reason, and along with reason came religion. I didn't mean to offend you with the example by the way, just breaking it down in an understandable way.

Wasallam

[Rocke]

My logic and reasons tell me that the verse is talking that history always and will always repeat itself, and that seems to be the closest with the meaning suggested by the interpreters.

I'm still waiting for some valid Shia / Sunni references, as for Shia references I would prefer to have ahadeeth which narrated from the golden chain since Shiites claim to follow the teachings of Aali Muhammad.

[Something Given]

I was trying to bring you only Sunni references before; will try and look up Shia ahadith, inshallah.

It seems I didn't have to go any further to look than this very site! :D

One thread I found was http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234979967-infallibility-of-imams/, the second page has a lot more relevant ahadith.

Brother, please try and use the search feature if you can. The topic has been discussed quite a lot of times before.

[ßÑíã]

JazakAllah brother something given, you have saved me time.

The link posted above should be sufficient for you Rocke, as included are some shia hadiths regarding infallibility that the Imams (as) spoke of themselves.

[Rocke]

Okay, thanks for your time... :)

[ßÑíã]

No problem, i'm pleased to see a sunni brother interested in this area and seeking the truth, keep it up :rolleyes:

[Muntaqim Force]

Salam brothers & sisters,

A verse from the Qur'an which indicates that the remaining 9 are infallible:

(17:77) : "[This was Our) way with the apostles we sent before you, and you will find no alteration in any of our methods”

Allah s.w.t is informing us that we will find no alteration in any of his methods, includig the infallibility of the prophet (pbuh&hf)'s successors, so if the first three (Ali, Hassan & Hussein a.s) were directly spoken of as infallible in verse 33:33, this verse (17:77) proves the remaining 9 as also infallible, because IF they wern't then that would go against the Holy Qur'an, and that would mean that there is alteration in Allah s.w.t's methods, clearly the Qur'an indicates that there isn't so there is no question in regards to that. Verse 33:33 speaks of the first 5 being infallible, verse 17:77 indicates a confirmation of the remaining 9 being infallible, 5 + 9 = 14. These are clear signs from the principle perspective of Islam, hope it helped, wasallam.

Peace and blessings of Allah be upon Muhammad s.a.w and his pure,pious and Infallible progeny p.b.u.t

JazakAllah

[Abbas.]

Your question makes no sense because even if the Prophet Himself was the only person as being the subject of Hadith ul Kisaa, we'd give preference to anyone prescribed by Him. As per this rule/principle, the rest of the Masumeen in shia school are not democratically selected by ummah or politically chosen by the influential figures of ummah..... they are rather those personalities who were informed to us by our own Immaculate Imams (successors of the Prophet P.b.u.H) as being their successors.

Is it possible for you to share the info?

They are lengthy texts. I am going to scan one for you:

[Rocke]

First topic is here and currently is half solved, coz no second opinion from a non-shia source (ie. Sunni) to back the claim if the rest of the Aimmah were infallibles, here in this topic and inshaAllah on there will be another threads, I'm going to give some other questions to know weather the were actually infallibles or not.

Note: If you feel these questions in any way disrespecting the Aimmah, then I'm sorry... coz I never intend to do so.

Questions regarding Imam Ali (ra)

As a Sunni I believe that Imam Ali (ra) never had any disputes with Abu Bakr as-Siddiq (ra) regarding the Caliphate, he gave his allegiance to Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and worked along with him and it's recorded in both Shia & Sunni references despite the negative commentaries circulating in the Shia references, the Questions are.

a. Why Imam Ali (ra) didn't just leave Abu Bakr and hijra to somewhere else (ie. Yemen, he's well known there) to preach the better Islam and gain followers to free the land from oppressors, what holds him to stay with those who deprived him from his rights?

b. Not just once, but he give the bay'ah to Abu Bakr TWICE, first when Abu Bakr was elected as Caliph and the second was after the death of Sayyeda Fatima az-Zahra (as), seems like he wanted to show to the people that he's with them, the question is if the will of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam in Ghadeer Khum was really about he become the infallible successor of the Prophet, then why Imam Ali (ra) didn't do it somewhere else instead of giving bay'ah to Abu Bakr TWICE?

c. Some Nasibi would say this in their disrespect to Imam Ali, which is not true.

"He hates Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, but astoundingly he's there meddling with the affairs of the Caliphate, seems he's keen to get himself into power."

We wouldn't have any problem answering this uncouthness coz we know that even though there are some small frictions between them... they're still brothers in Islam and Iman and they love and support each other (al-Fath: 29), but what your reply would be?

Next questions are regarding his approach as an infallible person toward problems around him .

d. He sent his two infallible sons to protect a fallible person and rebelled leader which some stories mentioned that it's due to his bad policies he was rebelled, the question is what infallibility actually means to Him... didn't He had better priorities than protecting the status quo?

e. Some sources mentioned that Imam Ali have predicted that Muawiya will raise some blank papers in order to disintegrate the ranks of Imam Ali by thinking that they wanted tahkim, which actually is wrong; because one of the reasons of the Khawarij declaring Imam Ali, Muawiya, Amr ibn As, and Abu Musa al-Ashari as kafirs was because they didn't leave the matter to Allah / al-Qur'an but rather on arbitrators (Amr ibn As and Abu Musa); Which means it was Imam Ali himself who responded positively to the tahkim before then he was leaved by the Khawarij after they learned that both Imam Ali and Muawiyah use arbitrators to solve the situation, but lets back to your case.

I've read some of his sermons in Nahj al-Balaghah and I can see there that he contradicted himself, first, first he predicted that Muawiya will raise some blank papers in order to disintegrate the ranks of Imam Ali by thinking that they wanted tahkim but then Imam Ali defends himself infront of the Khawarij regarding the arbitration (Sermon 40 & 58), so where's the infallibility here?

Edited August 13, 2011 by Rocke

[Guest Monad]

AHL-E-BAIT AND CALIPHATE Author: Murtaza Muthahhari

http://www.al-ijtiha...ait%28as%29.pdf

Also if you believe the Prophet was infallible then this should give an answer to Imam Ali's infallibility.

From the point of view of light, Amiru'l-Mu'minin occupied the foremost place, as many of your illustrious ulema point out. Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal in his Musnad, Mir Seyyed Ali Hamdani Faqih Shafi'i in his Mawaddatu'l-Qurba; Ibn Maghazili Shafi'i in his Manaqib and Muhammad Bin Talha Shafi'i in Matalibu's-Su'ul Fi Manaqib-e-alu'r-Rasul narrate from the Holy Prophet that he said, "I and Ali Bin Abi Talib both were a single light in the presence of Allah 14,000 years before the creation of Adam. When Allah created Adam, he deposited that light in Adam's loins. We remained together as one light until we separated in Abu'l-Muttalib's loins. Then I was endowed with Prophethood and Ali with the caliphate."

Mir Seyyed Ali Hamdani Faqih Shafi'i in his Mawaddatu'l-Qurba, Mawadda VII, mentions this point. "Ali and the Holy Prophet are from one Light. Ali was endowed with such qualities as were not given to any one else in all the world."

Among hadith which have been recorded in this Mawadda, there is a report from the third Caliph, Uthman Bin Affan, who said that the Holy Prophet said, "I and Ali were created from one light 4,000 years before the creation of Adam. When Allah created Adam, He deposited that light into Adam's loins. We remained as one light until we were separated in Abdu'l-Muttalib's loins. Then I was endowed with prophethood and Ali with vicegerency."

In another hadith he writes that the Holy Prophet, addressing Ali, said: "So prophethood and messengership came to me. Vicegerency and the Imamate came to you, Ali."

The same hadith has been narrated by Ibn Abi'l-Hadid Mu'tazali in his Sharh-e-Nahju'l-Balagha, vol.II, p.450 (printed in Egypt) from the author of Kitab-e-Firdaus. Also Sheikh Sulayman Balkhi in his Yanabiu'l-Mawadda, part I, reports from Jam'u'l-Fawa'id, Manaqib of Ibn Maghazili Shafi'i, Firdaus of Dailami, Fara'idu's-Simtain of Hamwaini and Manaqib of Khawarizmi, with slight difference in wording but not in purport, that the Holy Prophet Muhammad and Ali were created from light thousands of years before the creation of the universe and that both of them were one light until they were separated from each other in the loins of Abdu'l-Muttalib. One part was placed in the loins of Abdullah and through it was born the Holy Prophet. The other part was placed in the loins of Abu Talib and through it was born Ali. Muhammad was selected for prophethood and Ali for vicegerency, as was disclosed by the Holy Prophet himself.

Abu'l-Mu'ayyid Mu'affaq Bin Ahmad Khawarizmi and many others have reported from reliable sources that the Holy Prophet said: "I and Ali were born of one light. We remained together until we reached the loins of Abu Talib where we were separated from each other."

[Abbas.]

As a Sunni I believe that Imam Ali (ra) never had any disputes with Abu Bakr as-Siddiq (ra) regarding the Caliphate, he gave his allegiance to Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and worked along with him and it's recorded in both Shia & Sunni references despite the negative commentaries circulating in the Shia references, the Questions are.

As an unbiased observer, it is hard to believe that Imam Ali a.s (one of the most knowledeable companions of the Prophet p.b.u.H) would not protest the caliphate system established by Abu Baqr and his companions. Sunni muslims quite often use the argument that just cz Imam Ali a.s assisted those three caliphs and other muslims in jurispruential affairs of Islam, it is a proof in itself that Imam Ali a.s accepted their wrong doings and their leadership. As per shia school, that is untrue because Imam Ali a.s did not offer advice cz he acknowledged the caliphate of the first three; rather, he answered every questioner or assisted every layman because it was His responsibility as a guide after the Prophet P.b.u.H. Same goes for rest of the Imams a.s.

He sent his two infallible sons to protect a fallible person and rebelled leader which some stories mentioned that it's due to his bad policies he was rebelled, the question is what infallibility actually means to Him... didn't He had better priorities than protecting the status quo?

This is a long story and a while ago we gathered sunni references to prove the errors of the 3rd caliph and how/why muslims rebelled against him (lemme know if you'd like to read the e-book). In short, it was uthman who was begging Imam Ali a.s for assistance. And since Imam Ali knew the ill-intentions of those muslims who intended to kill Uthman, he did offer assistance but at the same time kept on advising him (Uthman) on what is the best course of action. Unfortunately, Uthman failed to follow his advice till he found himself in deep trouble.

[Rocke]

An unbiased observer would simply deny the infallibility of Imam Ali (ra) based on his decision to place himself inside / in the range of a broken / corrupt system instead of leaving it, and they would back their denial by showing that Imam Ali (ra) caught himself into a lot of trouble caused by the broken / corrupt system, more denial when they show the assessments of Imam Ali (ra) to those problems to fix them just to fail in the end.

[a believer]

(bismillah)

Salaam,

An unbiased observer would simply deny the infallibility of Imam Ali (ra) based on his decision to place himself inside / in the range of a broken / corrupt system instead of leaving it, and they would back their denial by showing that Imam Ali (ra) caught himself into a lot of trouble caused by the broken / corrupt system, more denial when they show the assessments of Imam Ali (ra) to those problems to fix them just to fail in the end.

Imam Ali (as) was appointed by Allah (SWT) to be a guide to the Muslims/Mu'mins. He would have done that whether he had the Caliphate or not.

The fact that he participated to assist in the exercising the true Shariah of Islam, even though the system was corrupt shows that he played his part as a guide.

Those who chose to learn from him are inshAllah successful, and those who did not, well, boohoo to them.

Edited August 13, 2011 by a believer

[Abbas.]

An unbiased observer would simply deny the infallibility of Imam Ali (ra) based on his decision to place himself inside / in the range of a broken / corrupt system instead of leaving it, and they would back their denial by showing that Imam Ali (ra) caught himself into a lot of trouble caused by the broken / corrupt system, more denial when they show the assessments of Imam Ali (ra) to those problems to fix them just to fail in the end.

Infallibility is not about level of success in this (materialistic) world. Imam Ali a.s could have avoided being the 4th caliph (when muslims started begging him to take leadership) but He took ownership of the affairs of the ummah as it was His responsibility. Had he refused the request of Muslims for being the 4th caliph, muslims of past, present and future could have questioned why a divine leader refused to assist ummah upon request. Similarly, Imam Hussain a.s could have prevented the killing of his family and companions. But had he refused to react upon the request of the people of Kufa, history would not have accepted him as a divine leader.

[Muntaqim Force]

An unbiased observer would simply deny the infallibility of Imam Ali (ra) based on his decision to place himself inside / in the range of a broken / corrupt system instead of leaving it, and they would back their denial by showing that Imam Ali (ra) caught himself into a lot of trouble caused by the broken / corrupt system, more denial when they show the assessments of Imam Ali (ra) to those problems to fix them just to fail in the end.

May Allah forgive you over this sin. And indeed Satan is man's worse enemy.

You should be get washed along with other dirty clothes :) , can someone answer him!!! i want the most junior of age among us should answer him over this. Please any youngster under 16 can answer this follower of Bakra or Bakrism !!! Why you want to prove Imam Ali a.s bad? You hate him? i mean if you were his lover as per you claim then why did not your mind tell you over this question

deny the infallibility of Imam Ali (ra) based on his decision to place himself inside / in the range of a broken / corrupt system instead of leaving it

that Allah did not order Imam Ali a.s to migrate and for him chooses they way of spreading the message in what the Planners of all Planner the mighty Allah planned. !!!!! but rather your Muawiyah influence but you think opposite. Please first stand among right group. Imagine saffin and chose group.

Edited August 13, 2011 by Muntaqim Force