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

Verse 4:59 - Ulil Amr.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

Regarding the disscussion for Those charged with authority, the following verses should be considered:

 

Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people to judge with justice. Excellent is that which Allah instructs you. Indeed, Allah is ever Hearing and Seeing. (4:58)

 

O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result. (4:59)

 

In the presence of verse no 4:58, how one can consider that the prophet has rendered the trust to those who are not capabale of it. It is a blaim on the prophet pbuh&hf, Similarly in the presence of this verse and the coming verse of 4:59 it is confirmed that the prophet has made the due people charged with authority instead of leaving the matter to the choice of fallible people.

 

Next question arises to whom the prophet has rendered the trust? The answer comes from the following verse:

 

O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people. (5:67)

 

Thus it is clear that the prophet handed over the Amr (ILeadership) to the right candidate ie Imam Ali AS. As per verse no 4:59 those charged with authority are to be obeyed like the prophet is obeyed unconditionally which means they are purified ones and not the fallibes.

Edited by skamran110
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 903
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Salam alaykum,   Just the truth, A word of advice: if you want to have a 'discussion' about something, maintain at least the basic level of akhlaq. I've been looking through this thread and in near en

رقم الحديث: 18485 (حديث مرفوع) حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى الصُّوفِيُّ ، قَالَ : ثنا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ الأَنْصَارِيُّ ، قَالَ : ثنا مُعَاذُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ بَيَّاعُ الْهَرَوِيِّ ، عَنْ عَ

They are all still of the opinion that the Ahlul Bayt [as] are the holders of divine authority. That's what is agreed upon.

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member

I have given you my explanation regarding verse 4:59 a million times please refute it then we will move forward.

Yes you have and you have been given an absolute and thorough response a million times over. You have continued with your confrontational stance by refusing to answer and comment on relevant questions and points. Here we go again and let's see if we can get a positive and constructive response out of you this time.

Q1, You claim that obedience towards the Ulul Amre is conditional and circumstantial. What are the terms and conditions??? What are the circumstances??? A direct order was given to obey the Ulul Amre, followed by which terms and conditions??? What circumstances???

Q2, You claim we have been given the right to differ with the Ulul Amre, on what basis??? What is the criteria for this difference??? Or do you just make and accept things as you go along??? Is there any reasoning and justification for this difference??? If yes then, what is it and if no then, why not???

Q3, In disagreement and difference with the Ulul Amre, the matter should be referred back to Allah and his Messenger (pbuh), you claimed referring back would be to the Quran and the Sunnah, now when it comes to the Quran, you and I both differ and disagree on the meaning of the verses and when it comes to the Sunnah, we both differ and disagree on the authenticity of hadiths, so basically the difference and the disagreement is still there, even in according to your explanation of referring back. So what does one do here??? We are back to square one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Brother just the truth,

Q1, What is the meaning and definition of "obey"??? Look it up and put it forward!

Q2, You mentioned Hazrath Abu Bakar (ra) as Ulul Amre and a pious and good leader and Yazeed as Ulul Amre and a corrupt and bad leader. What is the criteria to distinguish between, the pious and the corrupt and the good and the bad, regarding the Ulul Amre??? Or do we just follow our desires and who we support or may be just go with where our loyalties lie and where our link is???

Q3, Certain people do not consider Hazrath Abu Bakar (ra) as a pious and good leader because of certain things he did and how he handled certain matters, during his Khilaafath and certain people do not consider Yazeed to be a corrupt and a bad leader, they believe he was right (on Haq) and call him Hazrath and raziyallaho. These people believe they have a right to their opinion just as you. What would you say to these people and what is your justification, regarding your opinion???

Q4, What is the meaning and definition of dictatorship and a dictator and also terrorism and a terrorist??? With clear examples.

Q5, Can we disagree on anything and at anytime, when ever we like, with the Ulul Amre???? Or do we have principals regarding this???

Q6, what is the meaning and definition of rebel and revolt??? When and according to which circumstances, can one rise against the Ulul Amre???

Edited by Ameen
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Brother just the truth,

Q1, Hazrath Ali (as) was the 4rth rightly guided Khalif of the Muslims, the Ulul Amre of the time. Now those people who went against him (people of jamal and safeen), how would you classify these people??? Were they terrorists or was the Ulul Amre corrupt, since, according to the Ahle Sunnah, he harboured by giving refuge to the murderers of the 3rd Khalif???

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

And if you differ in anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger,

 

1. After Prophets (saww) dead, How will you refer to him?

2. In Quran there is no other appointment than divine appointment.

3. 'The Authority' is only from Allah in Quran

If you say ''Sunnah'' [i say]: Prophet (saww) left after him Quran and Ahl al-Bayt (as) as successors and it is well known fact both in Shia and Sunni books -

Which proves that if you want to refer to the Prophet (saww) after his dead you should refer to his successor (i.e. Ulul Amr)

It becomes clear that 'Ulul Amr' are not only the inheritors of Prophets (saww) position but also his knowledge and without any doubt they possess complete knowledge of Quran and Sunnah.

Lets see:

The Prophet (saww) said to Ali (a.s): "You explain to my Ummah after me what they differ about."

[Narration is Sahih/ Al-Mustadrak ala As-Sahihain, 3/132/ Hadith 218 / 4621]

...I heard the Prophet (saww) saying: "Ali is with the Qur'aan and the Qur'aan is with Ali' they will not separate till they come back to me at lake font."

[Narration is Sahih / Al-Mustadrak ala As-Sahihain, 3/134/ Hadith 226 / 4628]

Narrated Abu Tufayl: ‘I witnessed Alee (a.s) giving a sermon and saying, “Ask me for I swear by Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì there is not a single thing that you can ask me about until the day of Judgement except that I can tell you about it and ask me about the Book of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, for I swear by Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì there is not a verse in it except that I know whether it was revealed during the night or the day, whether it was revealed in a plain or on a mountain.”

[Narration is Sahih / Jaami' Bayan Al-'ilm Wa Fazlih. H # 726, Pg. # 464.]

I heard Abi Tufayl (r.a) who said I heard Alee (a.s) say "There is not such a thing you can as me from the book nor the Sunnah except that I can tell you about it."

Footnote: Narration is Saheeh (Authentic) according to the conditions of the two Sheikhs (Bukhari and Muslim).

Source: Tafsir Al-Tabari. Vol. 21, Pg. # 480.

 

Now here is where we get "confused". Now Allah says if you differ in anything. So now you tell me if ulil amr was appointed then why has Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì not said refer it to ulil amr??? Why has Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì said refer to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and his messenger (pbuh)???? Why did Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì not say refer it to ulil amr??? If he was appointed.,

 

Why? It is simple, because Prophet (saw) was alive when the verse was revealed. And it is clear that after Prophet (saww) death the one who possess the authority (i.e. Ulul Amr) takes the charge of the 'affairs'.

 

Also in letter 53 nahj ul balagah ali a.s has said that refer to Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì through the quran and refer to the prophet (pbuh) through his sunnah obviously the quran being most important.

We also have issues with ulil amr because Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì has not told us that the ulul amr will be an imam, whereas Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì has said that the prophet (pbuh) is the apostle of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì. There is not one single precise verse where Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì has said that he will send imams after prophet (pbuh) even though its an usul (according to shia).

 

First, you should prove authenticity of the letter 53

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Salaam brother just the truth. You said "sakeefa was wrong because it wasn't shura but the decision was right because Hazrath Abu Bakar(ra) was a good man"??? You have just admitted that, the process is wrong, so how can the result be right??? There were plenty of good men, infact there was others who were far better. So what does this prove??? Somebody might be good according to you but not so charming for the other. What kind of a procedure is this to select a khalif??? The Prophet (pbuh) didn't appoint a successor, to govern after him and who could be incharge and handle the Muslims affairs??? Ok! So what did he say or advise??? Did he leave it to the Ummah?? What did he exactly say regarding selecting a khalif???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Assalamu alaykum

THE ISLAMIC HISTORY

YOU SAID

The verse does not say If We differ In Uli Al amr, it just mentions everything we differ in, and does not Go Directly at Uli Al amr.

MY ANSWER

Ok I see you want to play that itsy bitsy detail game.

Very well two can play. Now you tell me where in that verse dies it say that Allah (swt) has appointed the ulil amr?? Or better still where in the quran dies it say that Allah (swt) will appoint imams for this ummah??

YOU SAID

(1) Who are the Uli al amr at the time of the prophet (s)?

(2) If You mention who they are at the time of the prophet (s), can you

Please tell me Where the prophet (s) says Obey them? and if so, how can

We differ on this issue?

MY ANSWER

1. They were leaders of armies sent by prophet (pbuh).etc.

2. Whenever the prophet (pbuh) sent an army to battle he would make someone in charge. He would be the ulil amr. Now if they ulil amr told them to do something un islamic then they would be referred to quran and prophet (pbuh).

Letter 53.

1. Correct

2. If you looked properly ali a.s said you can refer to the prophet )m(pbuh) through his sunnah.

3. Quran by obeying the orders. Ahle bayt by asking them for knowledge.

4. Why would he do shura do choose a governor. Next you'll be asking me why sunnis dont do shura before they go to the toilet!!

5. Says you.

6. Sorry you're wrong keep reading below.

7. What ???? The caliphate belonged to imam ali a.s when he wrote this letter and abu bakr r.a was long gone.

YOU SAID

Therefore Uli Al amr is not Abu Bakr.

And In Refutation to this, please look above.

are you blind?

it The Verse Which says We have made a guide For All people/nations???????

NY ANSWER

Keep reading the rest of the reply brother.

Brother I don't understand how you can say that the prophet (pbuh) is only a Warner and ali a.s is the guide.

Brother tell me what is your actual belief on this??

1. Do you believe the prophet (pbuh) was only a Warner from the start and ali a.s was the guide all the way through.

2. Or the prophet ( pbuh) was the Warner during his life and still is and isn't the guide now.

3. Or do you believe the prophet (pbuh) was the guide during his life but only a Warner now.

4. Or do you believe the prophet (pbuh) is neither Warner nor guide right now.

Personally us SUNNIS believe the prophet (pbuh) was and still is the Warner AND the guide.

Now I'm guessing you believe the prophet (pbuh) is not the guide after his death because your imams took over the duty of guidance and the prophet (pbuh) is only a Warner or isn't he a Warner either??

If your argument is like you've been saying regarding surah 4:59 that we can not refer to the messenger ( pbuh) literally because he isn't alive then this is easily refuted in the quran:

Surah 6:90

THOSE are the ones whom Allah has guided, SO FROM THEIR GUIDANCE YOU FOLLOW. Say, "I ask of you for this message no payment. It is not but a reminder for the worlds."

If you read from verse 84 and onwards Allah ( swt) talks about other prophets who have passed away and still we should take guidance from them.

So the argument that we cannot use guidance from the dead is baseless.

Now you're probably wondering how we have guidance from the prophet (pbuh) then again the quran tells us how:

And thus We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command. You did not know what is the Book or [what is] faith, but We have made it a light by which We guide whom We will of Our servants. And indeed, [O Muhammad], you guide to a straight path -

Now how does the prophet ( pbuh) guide us what is his guidance, well simple:

Surah 33:21

certainly is for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent example for who has hope in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah much.

Now ali a.s followed the example of the prophet (pbuh) and so did all your other imams a.s so then the question is why can't we?? Unless your imams were following something new??

The prophet (pbuh) was the guide to all your imams through his teachings them why can't we??

You say that the guide is your imam mahdi a.s yet you can't reach him!! You claim you're following their "lifestories sayings" etc etc. well the question is why can't we do the same with the prophet ( pbuh)??

Now this brings us to the verse that ( every nation (there is) a guide).

Salaam brother. You come out with a lot of points and questions, which are unrelated to the subject we are discussing and you totally disregard the points and questions that, you should be commenting on and answering. You probably do this to gain lost weight in this discussion, so you can save yourself from commenting on points mentioned and answering questions that are put forward to you. I would say a deliberate and desperate attempt, by you, to derail the subject.

AMEEN my brother you are massively mistaken if you think I'm in a state of desperation or I deliberately miss out any of your questions. I am nowhere near in a state of desperation because I know in on HAQQ.

I will answer all your questions but you have to reply to every single one.

1. According to AHLE sunnah as long as he abides by quran and sunnah then he is fine otherwise he can kiss his throne.....good bye

2. The second he goes against quran it sunnah we refer him to quran and sunnah and if he refuses to comply then he gets the same treatment as abdullah bin Zubair and zayd ibn ali a.s gave to the ulil and if their tune...and that's rebellion.

3. You're right we're back to square one. So why do t you refer me to the imam of our time??? Sorry I forgot you can't. Hold up but you've got hadith from imams...... Actually sorry we also differ in this.... Aaaahhhhhh... Bloody hell back to square one... BRILLIANT.

My brother if we had one precise verse where Allah (swt) said that he will send imams for this ummah then the whole matter would have been over.

Allah (swt) clearly says in quran that he sent imams for previous ummah/nations so I don't see why if he (swt) was going to send imams for us he couldn't have just said it as clearly as he said it in the quran for previous nations.

1. Obey means to obey of course. But brither do tell me one thing. As myslims we are told to obey our parents like if they give you an order to go to the shop you must obey or if they say be home for 9pm YIU must obey but what if your parents said dont pray salah!!! Wgat then would you still obey??? You see obedience can be conditional.

2. You've yourself distinguished between them when you've write raziallahu anhu after abu bakr (r.a) name and nothing after yazid.

If the ulil amr said drink alcohol don't pray then he is not to be obeyed but if he says pray don't drink then he is to be obeyed.

As long as he rules by quran and sunnah we obey as soon as he doesn't then goodbye.

3. Yazid was a laanti who killed the AHLE BAYT so whoever says he was good well...... May Allah (swt) guide them. Regarding abu bakr r.a he never committed any atrocities and red by quran and sunnah.

4. Dictatorship means a man/women who dictates. (Adolf hitler. Terrorism is when somebody terrorises another. (Bombings).

5. Principles of course. As long as he rules with quran and sunnah fine if he doesn't then good bye.

6. Rebel is referred to as somebody who rebels and revolt is the result of his rebellion. We can rebel against the ulil amr if he goes against quran and sunnah.

1. You finally get to the point.....finally.

The people who rebelled against the fourth rightly guided caliph were rebels because of their rebellion against the ulil amr.

They were rebels and they were in the wrong and the ulil and was not corrupt. The rebels especially umm ul momineen aisha r.a realised her mistake afterwards and was forgiven by ali a.s. she made a mistake.

If ali a.s had believed she was guilty of her actions and she carried out rebellion deliberately then he would have took her head of because under sharia law she was a myrderer but it all boils down to intention. Unless you're saying a.s never carried out a part of sharia.

No he never "harboured" the murderers you say it as though he only had 10 to 20 people in jus army.

Ali a.s had thousands of soldiers so his could he know who exactly infiltrated his camp.... What??? You think he did a head count with a register with names and addresses?

Edited by Just the truth
Link to post
Share on other sites

THE ISLAMIC HISTORY THIS IS THE REST OF THE REPLY TO MY PREVIOUS POST

Now qo'om means nation and nation means ummah.

So who are you the ummah of?? Prophet (pbuh) or imam mahdi a.s??

We are the nation/ummah of the prophet (pbuh) and he is A guide to us ALL.

So the prophet ( pbuh) is the guide of this ummah.

Your imams were themselves following the guidance of the prophet (pbuh) so why can't we refer to the prophet ( pbuh) as a guide and not only a Warner.

I see how you bought a hadith from mustadrak al hakim. Tell me did you even research as to what our ulema think of his book or did you just copy and paste because you read somewhere that it is an "authentic" book of sunnis.

You bought a hadith from that book and there are many many like it in that book but they are weak. Let me give you a little example below.

Imam al-Hakim al-Naysaburi in his al-Mustadrak also records:

أخبرنا أبو عمر و عثمان بن أحمد بن السماك ثنا عبد الرحمن بن محمد بن منصور الحارثي ثنا حسين بن حسن الأشقر ثنا منصور بن أبي الأسود عن الأعمش عن المنهال بن عمرو عن عباد بن عبد الله الأسدي عن علي : إنما أنت منذر و لكل قوم هاد قال علي : رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم المنذر و انا الهادي

Abu ‘Amr and ‘Uthman ibn Ahmad ibn al-Samak – Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Mansur al-Harithi – Husayn ibn Hasan al-Ashqar – Mansur ibn Abi al-Aswad – al-A’mash – al-Minhal – ‘Amro- Abaad ibn Abdullah al-Asdi – ‘Ali (ibn Abi Talib) who said: {You are only a warner and to every people there is a guide}. The Messenger of Allah, peace ne upon him, is the warner, and I AM THE GUIDE.”[Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Abdullah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn [4 Volumes] (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; first edition, 1990) [annotator: Mustafa Abd al-Qadir Ata] Volume 3, page 140, Number 4646]

Verification:

narrator: Abbad ibn Abdullah as-Suddi shia. Imam Bukhari said Fihi nadhar (meaning he is questionable, and that’s most severe type of criticism from Bukhari). Ali ibn Madini said he was weak. (Mizanul itidal 2/368/#4126)

Narrator: Husain al-Ashqar weak. From Mizan:

قال البخاري: فيه نظر. وقال أبو زرعة: منكر الحديث. وقال أبو حاتم: ليس بقوى. وقال الجوزجانى: غال شتام للخيرة. وقال ابن عدى: جماعة من الضعفاء يحيلون بالروايات على حسين الاشقر، على أن في حديثه بعض ما فيه. وذكر له مناكير، قال في أحدها: البلاء عندي من الاشقر. وقال أبو معمر الهذلى: كذاب. وقال النسائي والدارقطني: ليس بالقوى

Buhari said: He’s under question(: Fihi nadhar).Abu Dhurah: Munkar al-hadeeth.

Nasai, Daraqutni, Abu Hatim said he wasn’t strong. Abu Muamar al-Huzali said he was liar. (Mizanul itidal 1/531/#1986)

narrator: Al-Amash thiqat but mudalis, and he reported it in anana. he didn’t make clear that he heard it himself.

Thus even this narration have several defects, hence its very weak , that’s why its rejected.

Now brother this is why I said to you I don't trust you when you bring hadith to me and say its "sahih" from our books.

If you have any other hadith then bring them forward with authencity and references so I can verify them from our scholars but I wouldn't get my hopes up because I'm telling you that the prophet (pbuh) is the Warner and guide.

You will also find similar hadith in other books which are also weak let me give you another example;

حدثنا أحمد بن يحيى الصوفي قال حدثنا الحسن بن الحسين الأنصاري قال حدثنا معاذ بن مسلم بياع الهروي عن عطاء بن السائب عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس قال : لما نزلت : { إنما أنت منذر ولكل قوم هاد } وضع صلى الله عليه وسلم يده على صدره فقال : أنا المنذر { ولكل قوم هاد } وأومأ بيده إلى منكب علي فقال : أنت الهادي يا علي بك يهتدي المهتدون بعدي

Ahmad ibn Yahya al-Sufi – al-Hasan ibn al-Husayn al-Ansari – Mu’adh ibn Muslim Baya’ al-Harwi – ‘Ata ibn al-Saaib – Sa’id ibn Jubayr – Ibn ‘Abbas who said: When the verse {You are only a warner, and to every people there is a guide} was revealed, the Prophet placed his hand on his chest and said, “I am the warner {and to every people there is a guide}.” Then he placed his hand on the shoulder of ‘Ali and said: “You are the guide, O Ali! Through you will those seeking guidance after me attain it.” [Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Jarir ibn Yazid ibn Khalid al-Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan [12 Volumes], Volume 7, page 341]

Verification of narration:

narrator :Hasan-ibn-Husayn, that’s al-Ansari al-Aruni.

Dhahabi in Mizanul itidal noticed that he was from the leaders of shias. Ibn Adi said: His ahadeth does not looks like ahadeth of thiqat. He was criticised also by ibn Hibban and Abu Hatim. (Mizanul itidal 1/483/#1829).

Heythami said:

رواه الطبراني وفيه حسين بن حسن الأشقر وثقه ابن حبان وضعفه الجمهور

Basically he mentioned here that al-Ashqar was discredited by majority.

Al-Asqalani said in Taqreeb:

1318- الحسين ابن الحسن الأشقر الفزاري الكوفي صدوق يهم ويغلو في التشيع من العاشرة مات سنة ثمان ومائتين س

He said: Hussein ibn Hasan al-Ashqar saduq, erred and was ghulat in tashayoo(exaggerator in shiism)

narrator: Muaz ibn Muslim: Is Majhool(unknown) (Mizanul itidal 4/132/#8613)

narrator: Ata ibn Saaib thiqat from great tabein. But he got confuse in the end of his life. Imam Ahmad said that whoever heard from him in the past it was saheeh, but whoever heard from him in last time of his life, that was nothing. (Mizanul itidal 3/70/#5614)

This narration have several defects, hence its very weak , that’s why its rejected.

And another one;

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني عثمان بن أبي شيبة ثنا مطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خير عن علي : في قوله { إنما أنت منذر ولكل قوم هاد } قال: رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المنذر والهاد رجل من بنى هاشم

‘Abdullah – ‘Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah – Mutalab ibn Ziyad – al-Saddi – Abd al-Khayr – ‘Ali, while commenting on the verse {You are only a warner, and to every people there is a guide}, said: “Allah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, is the warner, AND THE GUIDE IS A MAN FROM BANU HASHIM.” [Abu ‘Abdullah Ahmad ibn Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad [annotator: Shaykh Ahmad Shakir], Volume 2, page 227, Number 140344]

Verification:

This one is also weak, though it doesn’t points out anyone as guide in particular , but still it is unreliable, not only because of its chain but even because of its text.

Narrator: Suddi, that’s Ismail ibn Abdurrahman ibn Abu Karima, and he was disputed. Some scholars weakened him others said he was upright.

Narrator: Muttalib ibn Ziyad. Imam Ibn Maeen and others said he was thiqat. Abu Dawud said he was salih. Abu Hatim noticed that he shouldn’t be relied upon. Ibn Sad said he was weak. (Mizanul itidal 4/128/#8591)

Regarding this narration Dhahabi in Mizan (3/38) said it’s very strange (odd) (ghareeb jidan)

Sheikh Shuayb Arnawut said:

1041 – حدثنا عبد الله حدثني عثمان بن أبي شيبة ثنا مطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خير عن علي : في قوله { إنما أنت منذر ولكل قوم هاد } قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم المنذر والهاد رجل من بنى هاشم

تعليق شعيب الأرنؤوط : إسناده ضعيف وفي متنه نكارة

Chain is weak, in the text is oddity (or unacceptable meaning).

So you see brother the Warner and guide is the holy prophet (pbuh)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You and your "sahih" ahadith. There is no particular science about it, narrators are weakened by their tashayyu'

Show me proof that the warner and guide is the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå, produce to me a narration?

Did you read the verses I pointed from the quran?? Or did you fall asleep on your keyboard when it came to that part.

The prophet (pbuh) guidance is his example which ALL Muslims took including your imams.

So when your imams are themselves following or followed the guidance of prophet (pbuh) then why can't we??

Edited by Just the truth
Link to post
Share on other sites

You and your "sahih" ahadith. There is no particular science about it, narrators are weakened by their tashayyu' 

 

Show me proof that the warner and guide is the Prophet Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå, produce to me a narration?

 

 

Don't Worry, I actually Will later on prove that its Sahih, you can see they give no proof when they mention Why its Munkar.

Really Ironic, I will prove that Ibn taiyaimha Also Approved the Hadith. Inshalla.

Inshalla When I will reply soon.  :)

(salam)

Edited by TheIslamHistory
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

The hitch with the Sunni argument is that they separate the Prophet (pbuh) from Imam Al-Mahdi (as). It is a matter of historical knowledge that we would know the Imam is from the lineage of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). So if someone says we are the Ummah of Imam Mahdi (I have yet to hear it, maybe it has been said but I have never heard it) we are knowledgable of the fact that Imam Mahdi (as) is from the lineage of the Prophet (pbuh) & therefore it also means that we are saying "We are the Ummah of Mohammed (pbuh)".

 

Unfortunately, our Sunni brothers take what we say as it is and not metaphorically, just as they do with the Qura'an. As an example, the aya that states:

 

 (وَالنَّجْمُ وَالشَّجَرُ يَسْجُدَانِ )

 

Pretty much every Shaikh will tell you that "Al-Najm" means a star in the sky. When in reality "Al-Najm" means any plant that grows out of the earth. The verb of "Najm" is "Yanjum" meaning to grow or retract outwardly from a certain place.

 

There are many hadiths posted by our members here that prove Bukhari and all of your scientists to have quoted the Prophet (pbuh) saying that there will be 12 leaders from Quraish after his death. Yet many of our Sunni brothers neglect it because it is hard to accept facts. I absolutely understand that, but do not turn down a genuine and real argument merely because you do not desire to have believed many incorrectness in life.

Edited by itinerary
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't Worry, I actually Will later on prove that its Sahih, you can see they give no proof when they mention Why its Munkar.

Really Ironic, I will prove that Ibn taiyaimha Also Approved the Hadith. Inshalla.

Inshalla When I will reply soon. :)

(salam)

No proof???? Are you having a laugh.... Did you even read the footnotes???

Regardless you still can't answer why the prophet (pbuh) is no longer the guide!!! When you refer to your imam mahdi a.s as a guide who in turn is on the guidance of the prophet (pbuh).

Your excuse that prophet (pbuh) cannot be the guide because he is dead holds no weight because in the quran it talks about past prophets and how we should follow their guidance.

Edited by Just the truth
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will prove that Ibn taiyaimha Also Approved the Hadith. Inshalla.

Inshalla When I will reply soon. :)

Ibn tamiyyah????? Sorry pal but he is not hujjah on me. Just like fadlullah is not hujjah on you.... Remember????

We are not followers of ibn tamiyyah so go and find his followers and try to convince them

(salam)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I will prove that Ibn taiyaimha Also Approved the Hadith. Inshalla.

Inshalla When I will reply soon. :)

Ibn tamiyyah????? Sorry pal but he is not hujjah on me. Just like fadlullah is not hujjah on you.... Remember????

We are not followers of ibn tamiyyah so go and find his followers and try to convince them

(salam)

 

 

 

Don't Worry not just him,

 

many more :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

and I know which Website your using.

(salam)

So...... I know which websites you've been using for the past month!!!

If you want to refute the website which you think I'm using then refute them because I've not agreed with everything any sunni website says, or any insults they have hurled at you.

Like I said .... Best of luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So...... I know which websites you've been using for the past month!!!

If you want to refute the website which you think I'm using then refute them because I've not agreed with everything any sunni website says, or any insults they have hurled at you.

Like I said .... Best of luck.

But I have not Claimed I have Asked a Scholar Dear friend.

As you have lied.

+ you did not Refute any of them.

I added Some parts of my own.

:) (salam)

Edited by TheIslamHistory
Link to post
Share on other sites

But I have not Claimed I have Asked a Scholar Dear friend.

As you have lied.

+ you did not Refute any of them.

I added Some parts of my own.

:) (salam)

How have I lied.

Exactly you've relied on google when I told you most of the stuff on google is garbage. If you want answers then go to a reliable sunni scholar who is very knowledgeable and not some layman scholar.

By you debating on shia chat it won't get you anywhere. If you want to know the truth of ahle sunnah tell me what county you from and il tell you a good knowledgeable scholar.

I'm not asking for your address just your county if you want the 100 per cent truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Statement:
Ok I see you want to play that itsy bitsy detail game. 


Come again?
 

Statement:
Very well two can play. Now you tell me where in that verse dies it say that Allah  has appointed the ulil amr?? Or better still where in the quran dies it say that Allah  will appoint imams for this ummah??


It must be noted brother that although the names of the pure Imams (s) are not specified in the Qur`an, the Prophet (s) did assert their names, especially the name of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s). A very clear instance of such assertion occurs in hadith Ghadir, which is considered the official announcement of the caliphate of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s). Regarding the question of transmission, this hadith is mutawatir [i.e. it has been narrated through so many lines of transmission that it can be accepted without doubt.] and its content reveals clear evidence for the Imamate of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s).

 

Moreover, there are several verses in the Qur`an that pertain to the status of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s), the most important of which is verse 55 of Surat al-Ma`idah;

 

“Your guardian is only Allah, His Apostle, and the faithful who maintain the prayer and give the zakat while bowing down.”

 

In books of exegesis and history, both among the Shi’ite and Sunni sources, it has been pointed out that this verse was revealed after the event in which Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s)gave his ring to a poor beggar as charity while he was bowing down in prayer, and so this verse refers to no other than Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s). Thus, although Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s)has not been mentioned in the Qur`an by name, there are evident references to him.

 

 

But as to why the Imams (s) have not been mentioned by name, at least two answers could be propounded.

 

Firstly, the normal pattern of the Qur`an is to deal with issues in a general tone, providing the general principles and rules, without getting into the explanation of the minute details. This is the method the Qur`an takes up in many instances and it is for this reason that when Imam Ja’far b. Muhammad as-Sadiq (s) was asked about this question, he replied that, “It is the same case with the daily prayer, the zakat, and hajj: Allah has mentioned only their general rules in the Qur`an but has not elucidated the details. It was the Prophet (s) who expressed the precise method of carrying out such duties and their related details. In the same vein, regarding the question of succession, the Prophet (s) himself specified the names of ‘Ali and his household (s) as his successors and so there was no need for their names to have been expressed in the Qur`an itself.

 

Secondly, in such an issue, where there was a good chance of opposition, prudence necessitated that the Qur`an mention the issue indirectly and through allusions for there was the possibility that opposition to the issue of Imamate might lead to opposition to the Qur`an and the main core of Islam, which was certainly not in the interest of the Muslims. That is, if there were a verse specifying the succession of ‘Ali (s), the opponents would have distorted it out of their opposition to him, and this would have violated the value of Islam and the Qur`an as the final religion and the eternal and divine book. For, it should be borne in mind that one of the ways by which the Qur`an could be preserved—for Allah (awj) has asserted, “Indeed We have sent down the Reminder [i.e. the Qur`an] and indeed We will preserve it.” —is to remove the natural motives for opposition and distortion.

 

Hence, the Qur`an, firstly, refrains from expressing the names of the Imams (s); and secondly, places the verses that are related to the question of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s) successorship, the Verse of Tabligh (which regards the official announcement of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib’s (s) successorship), and the Verse of Tathir (which regards the infallibility of the Prophet’s household) between other apparently unrelated verses so as to diminish, as much as possible, the motives for distortion and in so doing secure the Qur`an against all possible attacks.


Again I will make it more Clearer...

Certainly your Master is Allah and His Messenger and those who believe who eshtablish prayer and give charity while they bow. And who ever takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believeas a guardian, so surely the party of Allah will be victorious. (Quran 5:55-56)

It is unanimous that the verse descended about Imam Ali (s) when he gave away in charity his ring while he was in a state of kneeling in his prayer. This is also authenticated successively according to the 12 Imams. Here are some of our references

- Bihar al-Anwar, by Allama Majlisi
- Tafseer al-Mizan, by Allama Tabatabai
- Tafseer al-Kashaf, by Allama Muhammad Jawad Mughniyah
- al-Ghadir, by Allama Abdul Husain Ahmad al-Amini
- Asbat al-Hudate, by Allama Muhammad Ibn Hasan Amuli

But for the sake of the readers I shall produce some Sunni references, and traditions in this respect through other sources. Many Sunni commentators of the Quran confirm the fact that the above verse descended on the honor of Imam Ali (as) and many Sunni scholars have also mentioned the unanimity or consensus of opinion in their books. Here are some references in this
regard:

(1) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ahmad Ibn Muhammad al-Tha'labi, under Verse 5:55
(2) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, v6, pp 186,288-289
(3) Tafsir Jamiul Hukam al-Quran, by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Qurtubi, v6, p219
(4) Tafsir al-Khazin, v2, p68
(5) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Suyuti, v2, pp 293-294
(6) Tafsir al-Kashshaf, by al-Zamakhshari, Egypt 1373, v1, pp 505,649
(7) Asbab al-Nuzool, by Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, Egypt 1382, v1, p73 on the
authority of Ibn Abbas
(8) Asbab al-Nuzool, by al-Wahidi, on the authority of Ibn Abbas
(9) Sharh al-Tjrid, by Allama Qushji
(10) Ahkam al-Quran, al-Jassas, v2, pp 542-543
(11) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v5, p38
(12) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, p391, Tradition #5991
(13) al-Awsat, by Tabarani, narrated from Ammar Yasir
(14) Ibn Mardawayh, on the authority of Ibn Abbas
... and more.


There is also a tradition related by Ibn Salam whose chain of sources rises up to the Prophet (PBUH&HF) himself. Please refer to the Sahih of Nisa'i or the commentary of Sura Ma'idah in Jam'a Bayn al-Sihah al-Sittah.

In Ghayah al-Maram, p18, Sayyid al-Bahrayni forwards twenty four (24) traditions from sources other than the Ahlul-Bayt, all supporting the above
fact.

For the sake of brevity, I am going to confine my self to a tradition occuring in the commentary of the Quran by Abi Is'haq Ahmad Ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Nisaboori al-Tha'labi. A few comments on the respected personality: He died in 337 AH and Ibn Khallikan gives an account of his death saying: "He was unique as a commentator of the Quran and his Tafsir al-Kabir is superior to all other interpretations."

When he reached this verse he recorded this in his Tafsir al-Kabir on the authority of Abu Dhar al-Ghifari, who said:

Both of my ears may turn deaf and both of my eyes may become blind if I speak a lie. I heard the Messenger of Allah, Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity, saying, "Ali is the guide of the righteous and the slayer of the infidels. he who has helped him is victorious and he who has abandoned him is forsaken." One day I said my prayers in the company of the Prophet. A beggar came to the mosque and begged for alms, but nobody gave him anything. Ali was in a state of kneeling in the prayer. He pointed out his ring to the beggar, who appraoched him and removed the ring from his finger. Thereupon the Prophet, Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity, implored Allah the Mighty and Glorious, saying: "O Allah! My brother Moses begged you saying, 'My Lord, delight my heart and make my task easy and undo the knot in my tongue so that they may understand me, and appoint from my kinsmen, Haroon, my brother, as my vizier, and strenghthen my back with him and make him participate in my mission so that we may glorify You and remember You more frequently. Certainly
You see us.' And You inspired him: 'O Musa! All your requests have been granted.' O Allah! I am your slave and your prophet. Delight my heart and make my task easy and appoint from among my kinsmen Ali as my vizier and strengthen my back with him."

Abu Dhar, then, proceeded

By Allah, the Messenger of Allah, Allah's blessings and peace be upon him and his posterity had not yet finished his supplication when the
trustworthy Gabriel descended to him with this Verse

"Certainly Allah is Your Master, and His Prophet and those who believe who establish prayer and give charity while they bow. And whoever
takes Allah and His Messenger and those who believe as a guardian, so surely the party of Allah will be victorious."


Sunni reference:

 

Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha'labi under the commentary of

verses 5:55-56 of Quran.

 
  are more Detailed Answer. 

To begin with, the reader’s attention should be drawn to the fact that the names of the Imams (s) were mentioned expressly by the Prophet (s), especially the blessed name of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s), whose successorship was affirmed by the Prophet (s) on several occasions.

 

One occasion was at the beginning of the Prophet’s (s) mission when he embarked on spreading his message to his clan and family, saying, “The first [of you] to believe in me will be my spiritual heir (wasi), my vizier, and my successor.” To this offer no one gave a positive answer except for Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s), and so finally the Prophet (s) said, “After me, you will be my spiritual heir, my vizier, and my successor.”

 

Another occasion was the event at Ghadir Khum in which he expressly said, “Whomever I am his master, then ‘Ali (s) is also his master.”

 

Another of such assertions appears in the hadith of Manzilat in which the Prophet (s) is related as having told Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s), “You are to me what Harun was to Musa, except that there will be no prophet coming after me."

 

It should be noted that the related sayings of the Prophet (s) regarding the successorship of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s) are too numerous to be impugned, and this point has been alluded to in many Sunni and Shi’ite books.

 

In another hadith, the Prophet (s) is recorded to have specifically mentioned the names of all the Imams—starting with Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s) and up to Imam Mahdi (s) — to Jabir b. ‘Abdullah Ansari.

 

Thus this fact must be kept in mind that although the names of the Imams (ع) do not appear in the Qur`an, but the Prophet (s) — whose sayings are, according to the Qur`an, all true and are essentially revelations—did specify their names and reiterated their successorship and leadership.

 

Furthermore, in the Qur`an there is an allusion to the Commander of the Faithful’ position of leadership, and although his name has not been mentioned there, nevertheless, the majority of the exegetes, whether Shi’ite or Sunni, admit that the allusion refers to ‘Ali’s (ع) status, and as such applies to no other than him.  The verse in which that allusion occurs is verse 55 of Surat al-Ma`idah, which reads,

 

“Your guardian is only Allah, His Apostle, and the faithful who maintain the prayer and give the zakat while bowing down.”

 

Considering that in Islam there is no such rule that the Muslim should give zakat while bowing down in prayer, it becomes evident that this verse is referring to an incident that really took place. That incident took place on the day when Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s) was performing the ritual bow in the prayer, a beggar came up to him and asked him for some help. In response, Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s) pointed to his ring, and so the beggar took the ring off of his finger and left.

 

According to the reading derived from the aforementioned historical incident, the verse asserts that the leadership of the Muslims is “only” in the hands of Allah (awj), his Apostle, and Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s), and no other but them enjoys that status.

 

Hence, up to this point, it has been clarified that the names of the Imams (s) were expressly mentioned by the Prophet (s) and that there is an unmistakable allusion in the Qur`an to the Commander of the Faithful’ position of leadership. These points are such that if an impartial person intends to clarify the truth for himself, he will, with only a little amount of research, realize that the Prophet’s (s) opinion regarding the question of successorship and leadership was in favour of Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s) and his pure sons.

 

But as to why their names are not specifically mentioned in the Qur`an, two justifications could be proposed.

 

First, the normal procedure that the Qur`an takes up is dealing with issues in a general manner and in the form of general rules and principles without enumerating their details, such as is the case about many of the fundamental and minor principles mentioned in the Qur`an. This answer has been suggested in a hadith narrated from Imam Ja’far b. Muhammad as-Sadiq (s), and according to the narration, the Imam (s) corroborates his answer by providing three examples.

 

(1). One is how the issue of the ritual prayer is dealt with in the Qur`an. The Qur`an’s mention of the prayer is only a general description without elucidating the quality [i.e. the method] or quantity [i.e. how many times each act must be repeated during the course of a prayer] of every prayer. But the Prophet (s) explained to the Muslims the manner in which the prayer should be preformed and the number of the raka’at [pl. of rak’ah, the most general part of the ritual prayer, consisting of recitation of parts of the Qur`an while erect, then bowing, thereafter standing up and from there going down for prostration, after which one sits up and then again falls in prostration before Allah (s)].

 

(2). Another example that the Imam (s) cited was the issue of zakat, which has been introduced in the Qur`an in a general manner, and it was the Prophet (s) who determined the items to which zakat pertained and the amounts with which the zakat of each item is identified.

 

(3). His third example was the issue of hajj, about which the Qur`an only expresses its obligatory nature, while it was the Prophet (s) who personally demonstrated to the Muslims the method by which this ritual should be carried out.

 

Thus, it is unreasonable to expect that the Qur`an should examine the details of all religious issues. And so it is with regards to the issue of the leadership of the Prophet’s household (s), the fact that the names of the Imams (s) have not been specified should not be cited as grounds for rejecting the school of the Ahlul Bayt (s) (the household of the Prophet), just as one should not curtail the noon prayer from four rak’ats to two rak’ats, for instance, with the excuse that the Qur`an does not specify that it should be four rak’ats, or just as one should not refrain from performing the ritual cycles around the Ka’bah with the excuse that it has not been expressed in the Qur`an.

 

The second justification is that regarding such a controversial issue, where there existed a high risk of opposition, prudence dictated that the Qur`an mention the issue in an implicit manner, for there was the risk that opposition to the issue of the Commander of the Faithful’ leadership might even jeopardize the integrity of the Qur`an itself. Thus a direct mention of the issue was certainly not in the interest of the Muslim community. For, it should be noted that one of the methods for preserving the Qur`an from any distortion, as promised by Allah (awj),

 

 “Indeed We have sent down the Reminder, and indeed We will preserve it;”,

 

 is precisely this: To express the issues in such a way as to eliminate any motives on the side of the pseudo-Muslim hypocrites for distortion, so that groups that do carry strong motives for distortion, out of material desires or opposition to the truth, would not alter the Qur`an to conform it to their inclinations, thereby violating the integrity of the Qur`an.

 

Ayatullah Mutahhari expresses this explanation in the following manner: “As to the question of why the Qur`an has not specifically mentioned the issue of ‘Ali’s (s) successorship, they answer is as follows: Firstly, the norm of the Qur`an is to express issues in the form of general principles, and secondly, the Prophet (s) or Allah (awj) did not want to propound this issue [i.e. the issue of the leadership of the Muslim community]—an issue that was at risk of being manipulated by men out of egocentrism and ambition—so bluntly. For, just as they [i.e. the opponents] so readily disregarded what the Prophet (s) had said about this issue on the basis of various excuses—including the claim to ijtihad [i.e. that what the Prophet (s) said in this regard was his own personal view and we also have the right to put forward and follow our own opinions]—and so justified their position by claiming that the Prophet (s) did not intend the leadership of ‘Ali (s) when he said those things about him, but rather he actually meant such and such, if there were a verse in this relation, they would just as well have misinterpreted it.

 

The Prophet (s) in his statements said very clearly, “This here ‘Ali (s) is his [i.e. the Muslim’s] master.” Would you like anything more frank than this! But there is a difference between discarding a statement of the Prophet (s), albeit so clear, and that of a verse of the Qur`an clearly mentioning the issue, especially only a day after the demise of the Prophet (s). It was for this reason that I related the following story in the preface to my book, Succession and Leadership: During the Commander of the Faithful reign, a Jew wanted to scold the Muslim community concerning the events surrounding the Prophet’s death—and they did really deserve scolding! He told ‘Ali (s), “You had not buried your prophet before you opposed each other regarding him.” The Commander of the Faithful retorted, “We opposed each other not regarding him but regarding a verdict that he had addressed to us. But as to you; your feet were still soaked from the sea [which Musa had miraculously split in half] when you told your prophet, ‘make for us a God like the gods that they have.’  He [i.e. Musa] said, ‘You are indeed an ignorant lot.’  So there is a big difference between what happened amongst us and what happened amongst you. We did not quarrel over the Prophet himself, but rather about what was the actual content of his command. These two are very different.”

 

It is very different to justify a mistake—although this justification might not be the real cause for the mistake but only a pretext for the real cause of the mistake—by saying that those who made the mistake thought their claim was in accordance with what the Prophet (s) intended, and in so doing manipulated the Prophet’s statement—such justification is better than to say that those who made the mistake discarded the related Qur`anic verse despite its clarity, to say that they distorted the Qur`an.

 

Therefore, it can be said that the main point in not specifying the names of the Imams (ع) in the Qur`an, or at least the name of the Commander of the Faithful, was securing the Qur`an against any distortion.

 

Thus, as can be witnessed, the Verses of TathirTabligh, andWilayat are inserted among the verses regarding the wives of the Prophet (s), or the verses about the rules pertaining to the People of the Book and those explaining that Muslims should not make friends with them [i.e. the People of the Book], which apparently have no bearing on the issue of the leadership of the pure Imams (s) and Imam ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (s). Thus an impartial researcher can, with the slightest attention realize that the tone of the part of the verse pertaining to the issue in question diverges from the main body of the verse and that it has been placed there for a certain reason [namely, concealment].

 

 

Statement:
They were leaders of armies sent by prophet (s).


Bring me a Sunni Tafsir or a Shia tafsir what says so please.
I want your beliefs and not assumptions, And if they were the Leaders of the Armies in the time of the prophet:
Then therefore:


badr: ALI!
khaybar: ALI!
KHANDAQ: ALI!

 

 

ALI! YA ALI!
 
 

 

Statement:
Whenever the prophet (s) sent an army to battle he would make someone in charge. He would be the ulil amr. Now if they ulil amr told them to do something un islamic then they would be referred to quran and prophet (s).


yes my dear friend, and therefore ALI!.
Did Ali (s) commit a Mistake tell me? One? no please Go ahead?!.

 

 

 

Statement:
If you looked properly ali a.s said you can refer to the prophet )m(pbuh) through his sunnah.

(1) Sunnah Was not mentioned. Please Quote.
(2) If Malik Al ashtar was lost at an issue he Would refer to the book of Allah and the messenger. But Our
Main Topic Is Who is the guide after the prophet (s)? Did you now read the Introduction before you read the letter:


"[ Maalik al-Ashtar was a famous companion of Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He was the head of the Bani Nakha'i clan. He was a faithful disciple of Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He was a brave warrior and had acted as a Commander-in-Chief of the armies of Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. His valour had earned him the title of "Fearless Tiger". Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã had specially taught him the principles of administration and jurisprudence. He venerated and loved Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã sincerely and earned Mu'awiya's enmity on that account. Mu'awiya had conspired against him and got him killed by his gang of hirelings. His untimely death deeply grieved Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã who, expressing his grief said: "He was to me what I was to the Holy Prophet (s)". The following instructions in the form of a letter were written to him by Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã who appointed him as the Governor of Egypt in place of Muhammad bin Abi Bakr:

 

This letter is a précis of the principles of administration and justice as dictated by Islam. It deals with the duties and obligations of rulers, their chief responsibilities, the question of priorities of rights and obligations, dispensation of justice, control over secretaries and subordinate staff; distribution of work and duties amongst the various branches of administration, their co-ordination with each other and their co-operation with the centre. In it Imam Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã advises Maalik to combat corruption and oppression amongst the officers, to control markets and imports and exports, to curb evils of profiteering, hoarding, black-marketing. In it he has also explained stages of various classes in a society, the duties of the government towards the lowest class, how they are to be looked after and how their conditions are to be improved, the principle of equitable distribution of wealth and opportunities, orphans and their up-bringing, maintenance of the handicapped, crippled and disabled persons and substitutes in lieu of homes for the aged and the disabled."

 

 

 

Keep in mind Imam Ali (s) was giving him advice, so your Objection holds no stance of proof.
 

 

Statement:
Quran by obeying the orders. Ahle bayt by asking them for knowledge.


No My dear brother, its Obeying the Quran and Ahlulbayt.  In other Words, How would you ask them for knowledge at this period of time Constantly? and the matter of Hadith  Al Thaqlian is not a matter of just loving the Ahlulbayt, Becuase it was so the prophet Would d have said: "I have left in you Two, the Quran so Obey it, and My Ahlulbayt so love them"??? No this he did not say, he rather said: " HOLD ON AND YOU WILL NEVER GO ASTRAY", thus the matter is a matter of Obeying Ahlulbayt (s).


Statement:
Why would he do shura do choose a governor. Next you'll be asking me why sunnis dont do shura before they go to the toilet!!


Brother, Either respect your self, or don't say anything at all, you did not answer my Question.




Statement:
What ???? The caliphate belonged to imam ali a.s when he wrote this letter and abu bakr r.a was long gone. 


If Imam Ali (S) then was the first Caliph at the time, then He was live and living even after the death of the prophet (s),
How can Abu Bakr take the Khilafa from him?

Please give me a Ahadith where the prophet Says to Ali: "The next Khalifa is Abu bakr." form our sources please.

 

The prophet (s) in the Wanrner in His time, and Imam Ali (s) is the guide.

No Doubt the prophet we follow (S), but the guide he left us with is Ali (s).


 

 

Statement:
If your argument is like you've been saying regarding surah 4:59 that we can not refer to the messenger ( pbuh) literally because he isn't alive then this is easily refuted in the quran:


Surah 6:90

THOSE are the ones whom Allah has guided, SO FROM THEIR GUIDANCE YOU
FOLLOW. Say, "I ask of you for this message no payment. It is not but a reminder for the worlds."

 

I read the verse in Arabic, and It does not say follow, but "Iqtado" it means take example:

Those are the ones whom Allah has guided, so from their guidance take an example. Say, "I ask of you for this message no payment. It is not but a reminder for the worlds."

 

You make no point? No doubt we have to  Believe in All of the prophets from prophet Adam (s),
But Also the Successor before the prophet in other prophets times, and before  

 

If you read from verse 84 and onwards Allah ( swt) talks about other prophets who have passed away and still we should take guidance from them.


Um, sorry but that's not what it claims, Sunni Tafsir please? or a Shia Tafsir would be great?
 

 

 

Statements:
Now you're probably wondering how we have guidance from the prophet (s) then again the quran tells us how: And thus We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command. You did not know what is the Book or [what is] faith, but We have made it a light by which We guide whom We will of Our servants. And indeed, [O Muhammad], you guide to a straight path -

 

Now how does the prophet ( pbuh) guide us what is his guidance, well simple: Surah 33:21

certainly is for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent example for who has hope in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah much.

Now ali a.s followed the example of the prophet (s) and so did all your other imams a.s so then the question is why can't we?? Unless your imams were following something new??


(1) Imams are Divinely Appointed.
(2) No doubt the the prophet (s) is the best example, but that does not prove your point.
(3) Read the verse Mentioned at the start of this post.
(4) the verse does not say the prophet Will be guiding all the worlds? 
(5) If what you Claim, then therefore the people Before the prophet (s) did not get a chance to see him?
So who were their hope at the time? please Explain?



Statement:
The prophet (s) was the guide to all your imams through his teachings them why can't we??

(1) They are Appointed by Allah.
(2) What the prophet (s) does, he only does by the orders of Allah,
(3) thus, Guided by the prophet ,By, by Allah And Appointed by him Only.

 

statement:
You say that the guide is your imam mahdi a.s yet you can't reach him!! You claim you're following their "lifestories sayings" etc etc. well the question is why can't we do the same with the prophet (s)??



(1) Appointed By Allah.
(2) prophet Spoke of him.
(3) We are Ordered to obey him.

(4) for the last, last, last, last, last time I Would like you to refute my post on Imam Mahdi (s), 
that I made for you Concerning this issue.



____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Concerning: The prophet (s) is the Warner and Ali (s) is the guide.

 

Statement:
So who are you the ummah of?? Prophet (s) or imam mahdi a.s??


We are of the Ummah of Rasool Al Allah, and the prophet (s) before he left he Appointed Imam Ali (s) as Successor.


Statement:
We are the nation/ummah of the prophet (s) and he is A guide to us ALL.



Why Not Prophet Adam (s)? is he not a guide to us All?
Why not Prophet Ibrahim (s)? Was he not a guide to us All?
Before the prophet (s) there was Jesus (s), was he not a guide to All?
Who was the guide Between Prophet Muhammad & Jesus (s)? Since 
the time length was Almost 600 Years? Please Explain. with Narrations.



Statement:
So the prophet ( pbuh) is the guide of this ummah.

 

And Therefore he left a guide for his Ummah before he past away, 
Which was Ali (s).

 

Statements:
Your imamats were themselves following the guidance of the prophet (s) so why can't we refer to the prophet ( pbuh) as a guide and not only a Warner.

 

(1) No, they are the guides them Selves.
(2) Give me One hadith where the prophet (s) tells them: "Follow me I am your guide" , Just one Authentic Hadith please.
(3) Give me a Hadith Where the prophet says: "I am the Warner and I am the Guide."


 


Statement:
Imam al-Hakim al-Naysaburi in his al-Mustadrak also records:

أخبرنا أبو عمر و عثمان بن أحمد بن السماك ثنا عبد الرحمن بن محمد بن منصور الحارثي ثنا حسين بن حسن الأشقر ثنا منصور بن أبي الأسود عن الأعمش عن المنهال بن عمرو عن عباد بن عبد الله الأسدي عن علي : إنما أنت منذر و لكل قوم هاد قال علي : رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم المنذر و انا الهادي

Abu ‘Amr and ‘Uthman ibn Ahmad ibn al-Samak – Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Mansur al-Harithi – Husayn ibn Hasan al-Ashqar – Mansur ibn Abi al-Aswad – al-A’mash – al-Minhal – ‘Amro- Abaad ibn Abdullah al-Asdi – ‘Ali (ibn Abi Talib) who said: {You are only a warner and to every people there is a guide}. The Messenger of Allah, peace ne upon him, is the warner, and I AM THE GUIDE.”[Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Abdullah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn [4 Volumes] (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah; first edition, 1990) [annotator: Mustafa Abd al-Qadir Ata] Volume 3, page 140, Number 4646]

Verification:

narrator: Abbad ibn Abdullah as-Suddi shia. Imam Bukhari said Fihi nadhar (meaning he is questionable, and that’s most severe type of criticism from Bukhari). Ali ibn Madini said he was weak. (Mizanul itidal 2/368/#4126)


 


(1) In Mustadrak Al Kahkim the Hadith Is Sahih,Yet I wonder Why did he not Criticize Al Asadi?
(2) They Have only Claimed he is Weak because he is a Shia? Follower of Ahlulbayt (s)? Is that the proof that proves his weak?

(3) They only say he is Questionable, but Where is the proof> usually When there is a Weak Narration, the Narrator is Criticized for example in Characteristics or Bad Manner, But here they only claim he is lair? does that make sense to you? So who is telling the Truth, the Scholar Before them? (Al Hakim), or after? and how did they Come to that Conclusion?    


He Only narrated from Imam Ali (s), So how does that make him Weak? 
عباد بن عبد الله الأسدي

روى عن علي وعبد الله وله أحاديث‏.‏

Link:
http://www.al-eman.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A8/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B7%D8%A8%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%89%20**/%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AF%20%D8%A8%D9%86%20%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%AF%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%B3%D8%AF%D9%8A%20/i54&d56588&c&p1



 

( In the Sunni Book: Tabqat al Kubra.)
 

 

 

Stated:
Narrator: Husain al-Ashqar weak. From Mizan:
قال البخاري: فيه نظر. وقال أبو زرعة: منكر الحديث. وقال أبو حاتم: ليس بقوى. وقال الجوزجانى: غال شتام للخيرة. وقال ابن عدى: جماعة من الضعفاء يحيلون بالروايات على حسين الاشقر، على أن في حديثه بعض ما فيه. وذكر له مناكير، قال في أحدها: البلاء عندي من الاشقر. وقال أبو معمر الهذلى: كذاب. وقال النسائي والدارقطني: ليس بالقوى

 

 

We would like to Question the same thing as above.

Stated: 

Buhkari said: He’s under question(: Fihi nadhar).Abu Dhurah: Munkar al-hadeeth.


We would like to ask Ms. Bukhari why? Since Bukkari narrated from liars such as Ibn Muljam ( killer of Imam Ali (as),
And Abu Hurraiyar, and some of the Sahabahs Who Fought Imam Hussain (s)??


 

Statement:

Nasai, Daraqutni, Abu Hatim said he wasn’t strong. Abu Muamar al-Huzali said he was liar??. (Mizanul itidal 1/531/#1986)

 

We are asking the same Question Above.

 

Stated:
narrator: Al-Amash thiqat but mudalis, and he reported it in anana. he didn’t make clear that he heard it himself.



says Where? What type of Excuses are these?
 

 

Statement: 
Thus even this narration have several defects, hence its very weak , that’s why its rejected.


Give us a narration Where he is a lair? ( Al Asadi)  How do you rate?

Why did Al Hakim Consider him to be Sahih? plus on the two Shaykhayin?

 

StatementL
Now brother this is why I said to you I don't trust you when you bring hadith to me and say its "sahih" from our books.


Excuse me:

 

post-83202-0-94177200-1378892391_thumb.jpost-83202-0-11254100-1378892359_thumb.j



Statement:
If you have any other hadith then bring them forward with authencity and references so I can verify them from our scholars but I wouldn't get my hopes up because I'm telling you that the prophet is the Warner and guide.


When I copy and past something I make sure its Correct and not a Bunch Of non senses. and through out this Whole Argument I have never Said that I check with my Scholar, But you on the other hand Copied and pasted and said that you checked when you lied, as you copied from here:

 

http://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/part-1shia-interpretation-of-hadith-thaqalayn-under-microscope/

 



 

 

Statement:
narrator :Hasan-ibn-Husayn, that’s al-Ansari al-Aruni.
Dhahabi in Mizanul itidal noticed that he was from the leaders of shias. Ibn Adi said: His ahadeth does not looks like ahadeth of thiqat. He was criticised also by ibn Hibban and Abu Hatim. (Mizanul itidal 1/483/#1829).

Heythami said:
رواه الطبراني وفيه حسين بن حسن الأشقر وثقه ابن حبان وضعفه الجمهور

Basically he mentioned here that al-Ashqar was discredited by majority.

 

 

(1) just because he was Considered in your case " the leader of the Shias" How does that make him Weak? makes no sense?

(2) When a Weak Narrator is mentioned it is usually Mentions (The Investigator) The Fact of the Characteristic where and from what
narrations. 

 

 

(3) its Al Ah'arim and ot Al-Aruni? please give at least Check before you copy and past something.

 

(4) I don't Understand Why in this Hadith he becomes Weak and in another he is strong?
 

(5 Concerning Hussain ibn Hassan Al Ashqar:



قال الهيثمي: «رواه الطبراني، وفيه: حسين بن حسن الأشقر، وثقه ابن حبّان، وضعّفه الجمهور، وبقية رجاله حديثهم حسن أو صحيح»(1).
قلت:

«الحسين بن حسن الأشقر» من رجال النسائي في (صحيحه)، وقد ذكروا أن للنسائي شرطاً في صحيحه أشدّ من شرط الشيخين(2).. وقد روى عن

 

Husain Ibn Hassan Al ashqar is from the men of Al Nis'a'i, and (SAHIH) and and mentioned that for the Nis'a'i he had Criteria in its Correction, from the Criteria of the Shaykhain.  

 

الأشقر كبار الأئمة الأعلام: كأحمد بن حنبل، وابن معين، والفلاّس، وابن سعد، وأمثالهم(3)

Al Ashraq is one of the High ranked Scholars like Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and Ibn Ma'a'in, and Ibn' Sa'ad and there Figures.

.

وحكى الحافظ بترجمته، عن العقيلي، عن أحمد بن محمد بن هانىء، قال:

قلت لأبي عبد اللّه ـ يعني ابن حنبل ـ تُحدِّث عن حسين الأشقر؟!
قال: لم يكن عندي ممّن يكذب.
وذكر عنه التشيّع، فقال له العباس بن عبد العظيم: أنه يحدّث في أبي بكر وعمر. وقلت أنا: يا أبا عبد اللّه! إنه صنّف باباً في معايبهما.
فقال: ليس هذا بأهل أن يُحدّث عنه»(4).
وكأن هذا هو السبب في تضعيف غير أحمد، قال الجوزجاني: غال، من الشتّامين للخيرة(5).
ولذا يقولون: له مناكير، وأمثال هذه الكلمة مما لا يدلّ على طعنهم في الرجل نفسه، ولذا قال ابن معين: كان من الشيعة الغالية. فقيل له: فكيف حديثه؟! قال: لا بأس به. قيل: صدوق؟ قال: نعم، كتبت عنه(6).
ومن هنا قال الحافظ: «الحسين بن حسن الأشقر، الفزاري، الكوفي، صدوق، يهم ويغلو في التشيّع، من العاشرة، مات سنة 208، س»(7).


(1) مجمع الزوائد 9 / 102.
     Tathkirat al Hafith Volume 2 page 700 (2) تذكرة الحفّاظ 2 / 700.
Tathib al Zawaid volume 2 page 291 (3) تهذيب التهذيب 2 / 291.
(4) تهذيب التهذيب 2 / 291.
(5) تهذيب التهذيب 2 / 291.
(6) تهذيب التهذيب 2 / 292.
(7) تقريب التهذيب 1 / 214.



Surprising Since more than 4 narrators Who are Shia, are mentioned In Sahih Al Bukhair,
So I don't Understand how one could become a lair or an Exaggerator because he is a follower 
of Ahlulbayt (s), can you give me the Hadith where he is Exaggerating?




Statement:
And another one;

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني عثمان بن أبي شيبة ثنا مطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خير عن علي : في قوله { إنما أنت منذر ولكل قوم هاد } قال: رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المنذر والهاد رجل من بنى هاشم

‘Abdullah – ‘Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah – Mutalab ibn Ziyad – al-Saddi – Abd al-Khayr – ‘Ali, while commenting on the verse {You are only a warner, and to every people there is a guide}, said: “Allah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, is the warner, AND THE GUIDE IS A MAN FROM BANU HASHIM.” [Abu ‘Abdullah Ahmad ibn Hanbal al-Shaybani, Musnad [annotator: Shaykh Ahmad Shakir], Volume 2, page 227, Number 140344]

Verification:


Narrator: Suddi, that’s Ismail ibn Abdurrahman ibn Abu Karima, and he was disputed. Some scholars weakened him others said he was upright.

 

Reference?

Narrator: Muttalib ibn Ziyad. Imam Ibn Maeen and others said he was thiqat. Abu Dawud said he was salih. Abu Hatim noticed that he shouldn’t be relied upon. Ibn Sad said he was weak. (Mizanul itidal 4/128/#8591)
 

(1) قال النجاشي: " مطلب بن زياد الزهري، القرشي المدني: ثقة، روى عن

جعفر بن محمد عليه السلام نسخة.

Al Khashani said: "Mutlab ibn Ziyad: Trustworthy he narrted from (Imam) ja'far ibn Muhammad (s).

 

note: Imam Jafar al sadiq (s) was the first school of thought and Abu Hanifa and Malik studies under him.

جعفر بن محمد عليه السلام نسخة.
أخبرنا أحمد بن علي، قال: حدثنا الحسن بن حمزة، قال: حدثنا ابن بطة،
قال: حدثنا أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن المطلب بالنسخة ".
وقال الشيخ (755): " المطلب بن زياد: له كتاب رويناه بهذا الاسناد، عن
أحمد بن أبي عبد الله، عن المطلب ".
وأراد بهذا الاسناد: عن أبي المفضل، عن ابن بطة، عن أحمد بن
أبي عبد الله.
وعده في رجاله من أصحاب الصادق عليه السلام (641) قائلا:
" المطلب بن زياد القرشي: مولاهم، كوفي ".
وعده البرقي أيضا في أصحاب الصادق عليه السلام، قائلا: " المطلب بن
زياد الثقفي ".
ثم لا يخفى اختلاف طريق النجاشي والشيخ إليه، فالراوي عنه أحمد بن
أبي عبد الله على ما في الفهرست، وأبوه على ما في النجاشي، وما ورد في الروايات
موافق للنجاشي، فلعل في طريق الشيخ سقطا.
 

 

http://almilani.org/%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%AC%D8%A7%D9%84/12428

 

Regarding this narration Dhahabi in Mizan (3/38) said it’s very strange (odd) (ghareeb jidan)

What Kind of Excuses is this? Is it because It Did not Much His beliefs?


Statement:
Sheikh Shuayb Arnawut said:

1041 – حدثنا عبد الله حدثني عثمان بن أبي شيبة ثنا مطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خير عن علي : في قوله { إنما أنت منذر ولكل قوم هاد } قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم المنذر والهاد رجل من بنى هاشم
تعليق شعيب الأرنؤوط : إسناده ضعيف وفي متنه نكارة


Therefore Shuayb's Refutation falls, since there is not Solid proof to his Refutation to Mutalib ibn Ziyad. 



Hadith Approved Alhakim al haskani:


http://kingoflinks.net/ImamAli/1AlAyat/4Mondher/6Hsakani.htm

 


(bismillah) 



بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم


مسند أحمد ج1ص126ح1041 : " حدثنا عبد الله - ثقة حافظ - حدثني عثمان بن أبي شيبة - ثقة حافظ - ثنا مطلب بن زياد - صدوق - عن السدي - ثقة واحتج به مسلم - عن عبد خير - ثقة - عن علي في قوله ( إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ ) قال : رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المنذر والهاد رجل من بنى هاشم ".

المعجم الأوسط ج2ص94ح1361 : " حدثنا أحمد محمد بن صدقة - ثقة حافظ - قال حدثنا عثمان بن أبي شيبة قال حدثنا مطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خيرعن علي بن أبي طالب في قوله ( إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ ) قال رسول الله المنذر والهاد رجل من بني هاشم ".

الأحاديث المختارة ج: 2 ص: 286ح668 بسنده ( عبدالله بن أحمد حدثني أبو بكر بن أبي شيبة ثنا مطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خير عن علي في قوله ( إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ ) قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المنذر والهاد رجل من بني هاشم . ) وقال ( إسناده حسن ) .

والحديث نص صريح على صحة هذا ، تفسير الطبري ج: 13 ص: 108 : " ذكر من قال ذلك حدثنا أحمد بن يحيى الصوفي قال ثنا الحسن بن الحسين الأنصاري قال ثنا معاذ بن مسلم ثنا الهروي عن عطاء بن السائب عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس قال لما نزلت ( إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ ) وضع صلى الله عليه وسلم يده على صدره فقال أنا المنذر ولكل قوم هاد وأومأ بيده إلى منكب علي فقال أنت الهادي يا علي بك يهتدي المهتدون بعدي ".

نقول : من جمع بين الآية والرواية ،،، يسأل نفسه سؤالا فيه إجابته ،،

من الهادي من بني هاشم فيما بعد وفاة النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم أغير علي بن أبي طالب ؟! 
ومن الهادي في زمن الحسن أغير الحسن ؟! 
ومن الهادي في زمن الحسين أغير الحسين ؟! 
ومن في زمن زين العابدين .؟ ومن ... ومن .... الخ ؟!!

لِيَهْلِكَ مَنْ هَلَكَ عَنْ بَيِّنَةٍ وَيَحْيَا مَنْ حَيَّ عَنْ بَيِّنَةٍ }(الأنفال/42).

 

لنتعرف على سلسلة الكذب

أثبتنا بأن الحديث إسناده حسن - بل الصحيح كما سيأتي عن الألباني - أن أول مصداق للهادي في قوله ( إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ ) هو علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام وقلنا أن هذا تصحيح صريح للرواية التي حسّن سندها العسقلاني في فتح الباري وهي :

تفسير الطبري ج : 13 ص: 108 : " ذكر من قال ذلك حدثنا أحمد بن يحيى الصوفي قال ثنا الحسن بن الحسين الأنصاري قال ثنا معاذ بن مسلم ثنا الهروي عن عطاء بن السائب عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس قال لما نزلت ( إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ ) وضع صلى الله عليه وسلم يده على صدره فقال أنا المنذر ولكل قوم هاد وأومأ بيده إلى منكب علي فقال أنت الهادي يا علي بك يهتدي المهتدون بعدي ".

لننظر الآن في كلمات أوركسترا الكذب ، أو قل سلسلة الكذب المعهودة :

( ابن تيمية الحراني )

قال في منهاجه ج7 ص139 عن رواية ( أنا المنذر وعلي الهادي ) : " ان هذا لم يقم دليل على صحته فلا يجوز الاحتجاج به ".

نقول : بل قام !! في رواية " والهاد رجل من بني هاشم ".

وقال : " ان هذا كذب موضوع باتفاق أهل العلم بالحديث فيجب تكذيبه و رده " .

نقول : ابن تيمية !! مرة واحدة كن صادقا !!!


وقال متساخفا في منهاجه ج7ص142 : " و أما تفسيره بعلي فانه باطل لأنه قال و لكل قوم هاد و هذا يقتضي أن يكون هادي هؤلاء غير هادي هؤلاء فيتعدد الهداة فكيف يجعل علي هاديا لكل قوم من الأولين و الآخرين ".

نقول : من قال هذا ؟! ، العلامة الحلي رضوان الله تعالى عليه لم يقل أن عليا هو المتصدي لهداية كل الناس من الأولين والآخرين !! ، رواية الطبري فيها قيد ( بك يهتدي المهتدون من بعدي ) ، ولا علاقة لي بهذا .

( الذهبي )

فقد غالا في نصبه وأفرط حتى قذف الرواية الحسنة بل الصحيحة التي في مسند أحمد بالوضع !!

قال في تلخيص المستدرك ج3ص129 معقبا على قول الحاكم : " قال علي : رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المنذر وأنا الهادي هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد ولم يخرجاه . قلت -أي الذهبي- : بل كذب ، قبح الله واضعه ".

نقول : مضمونه ثابت بإسناد حسن من مسند أحمد والمعجم الكبير للطبراني والأوسط والصغير ، ومن الأحاديث المختارة ، فلماذا الكذب والتدليس ؟!

( ابن كثير )

البداية والنهاية ج7 ص358 : " ولم ينزل في علي شىء من القرآن بخصوصيته وكل ما يريدونه في قوله تعالى انما انت منذر ولكل قوم هاد وقوله ويطعمون الطعام على حبه مسكينا ويتيما واسيرا وقوله اجعلتم سقاية الحاج وعمارة المسجد الحرام كمن آمن بالله واليوم الآخر وغير ذلك من الآيات والاحاديث الواردة في انها نزلت في علي لا يصح شىء منها ".

نقول : إلى متى الكذب ؟!


( الألباني )

أما هذا !! فالعجب العجاب ! ، كذب وتدليس وخداع ! ، فما فعل ؟!

قال عن الحديث في سلسلته الضعيفة ح4899 : " موضوع " !!

وهذا ليس بجهل من الألباني بل كذب ! لماذا ؟ لأنه عثر على رواية مسند أحمد ( والهاد رجل من بني هاشم ) التي بمضمون الحديث ، ولكنه قلب رواية مسند أحمد وحرفها نصا وخطا !! وهذه هي الطامة الكبرى !!

قال في سلسلته الضعيفة المجلد العاشر (الجزء الثاني ) ص537 وسأنقل عبارته ورسم قلمه بالنص والدقة بلا أي تغيير ولو بالنقاط والفواصل : 
" ومما يؤيد نكارة الحديث : أن عبد خير رواه عن علي في قوله ... فذكر الآية ، قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : " المنذر والهادي : رجل من بني هاشم " .

أخرجه عبد الله بن أحمد في زوائد المسند (1/126) ، ومن طريقه ابن عساكر : حدثني عثمان بن أبي شيبة : حدثنا مطلب بن زياد عن السدي عنه . 
وهذا إسناد صحيح ، رجاله ثقات ". انتهى كلام الألباني .

نقول : لاحظوا كيف حرف الألباني الرواية فجعل حديث علي بن أبي طالب هو حديث رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم !! ، إذ الرواية في مسند أحمد والأوسط للطبراني والأحاديث المختارة هكذا : " عن علي في قوله ( إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ ) قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المنذر والهاد رجل من بنى هاشم ".

وهي ظاهرة في أن المفسر هو علي بن أبي طالب ، بل هي نص في ذلك لأسباب :

1- لو كان المتكلم هو رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم لما صح أن يقول ( المنذر والهاد رجل من بني هاشم ) كما في الأصل - الذي جاء بسياق حكاية الإمام علي عين ألفاظ الآية وتفسيرها- بل يجب أن تكون ( والهادي ) بالياء .

لذلك قام الألباني - الأمين على السنة - بتحريفها من ( والهاد ) كما في أصلها إلى ( والهادي ) بالياء حتى تتماشا مع هواه وإجحافه بأهل البيت عليهم السلام !!


2- لو كان المتكلم هو رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم لأبـهم الأمر الذي صرح به الله في القرآن !!! إذ أن الله يقول ( إنما أنت منذر ) و ( أنت ) من أعرف المعارف ، فكيف يقول النبي عن المنذر ( أنه رجل من بني هاشم ) !!! أفتونا مأجورين !

بل فيه من إخراج الرسول عن مقام الرسالة ما لا يخفى !! ، لأنه في هذه الحالة لا يكون هو المخاطب ب ( إنما أنت ) !!

نعم يصح هذا التركيب ( المنذر والهاد (!) رجل من بني هاشم ) مع وضوح أن المنذر هو ( أنت ) في حالة واحدة وهي كون الهادي رجل من بني هاشم غير النبي ، فيكون النبي بصدد إعطاء الضابطة والقاعدة الكلية من أن المنذر والهادي هما من بني هاشم ولا يخرجان عنها .

فيرجع الأمر كما كان ، فتصبح الجملة ( المنذر والهادي رجل من بني هاشم ) بتحريف الألباني في قوة الأصل ( رسول الله المنذر والهاد رجل من بني هاشم ) ، فما فعل الألباني بتحريفه شيئا !!

3- والأمر والأدهى أن الألباني نفسه قبل تحريفه لهذه الرواية كتب رواية المستدرك بخط يده وهي : " قال علي : رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم المنذر وأنا الهادي ". ، أفلا تعد قرينة على أن المفسر هو علي عليه السلام ؟!!!

والأطم أن الألباني -الأمين المنصف الذي يتهكم على السيد شرف الدين والإمام الخميني- قد اطلع على كلام ابن كثير في تفسيره ج2 ص503 ونقل هذه الجملة : " وهذا الحديث فيه نكارة شديدة " ، مع أن بعد هذه الجملة مباشرة أتبعها ابن كثير بقوله : " وقال ابن أبي حاتم حدثنا علي بن الحسين حدثنا عثمان بن أبي شيبة حدثنا المطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خير عن علي ( ولكل قوم هاد ) قال : الهادي رجل من بني هاشم . قال الجنيد هو علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه قال ابن أبي حاتم وروي عن ابن عباس في إحدى الروايات وعن أبي جعفر محمد بن علي نحو ذلك ".


وهذا تفسير ابن أبي حاتم ج7 ص2225ح12152 : 
" حدثنا علي بن الحسين ثنا عثمان بن أبي شيبة ثنا المطلب بن زياد عن السدي عن عبد خير عن علي ( لكل قوم هاد ) قال : الهاد رجل من بني هاشم "

فأين قول النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم هنا ؟!!!

فهذا نص صريح صحيح في أن المفسر هو علي عليه السلام وقد الذي رآه الألباني بعينيه !!!

ومع ذلك يحرف ويتلاعب في نص حديث مسند أحمد حتى لا يكون مصححا لمضمون قول النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم : " أنا المنذر ولكل قوم هاد وأومأ بيده إلى منكب علي فقال أنت الهادي يا علي بك يهتدي المهتدون بعدي ". والحمد لله !

فلعن الله الكاذبين وخذلهم وأعد للمبغضين الحاقدين نارا سجرها لغضبه آمين رب العالمين .

الكاتب / ابن تيمية ، الذهبي ، ابن كثير ، الألباني ومن لف لفهم ، { سَتُكْتَبُ شَهَادَتُهُمْ وَيُسْأَلُونَ }(الزخرف/19).

____________________________________________




 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning the verse of Uli Al Amr You seem to have Missed a very important verse in the Surah:

 

 

 

 

وَإِذَا جَاءَهُمْ أَمْرٌ مِّنَ الْأَمْنِ أَوِ الْخَوْفِ أَذَاعُوا بِهِ ۖ وَلَوْ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى الرَّسُولِ وَإِلَىٰ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْهُمْ لَعَلِمَهُ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَنبِطُونَهُ مِنْهُمْ ۗ وَلَوْلَا فَضْلُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَتُهُ لَاتَّبَعْتُمُ الشَّيْطَانَ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا

 

And when there comes to them news of security or fear they spread it abroad; and if they had referred it to the Messenger and to those in authority among them ( uli al amr) , those among them who can search out the knowledge of it would have known it, and were it not for the grace of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have certainly followed the Shaitan save a few.

Verse 4:83 Surah An-Nisa.


 

And when there comes to them news of security or fear, they spread it: al-Idha'ah (to publish, to spread, to an­nounce). The verse contains a sort of condemnation and reproach to them for this rumor-mongering. The following sentence, and were it not for the grace of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have certainly followed the Satan, save a few, clearly shows that the be­lievers were in danger of going astray because of this adverse propaganda. The danger was of disobeying the Prophet (s.a.w.); because this is the theme of these verses. This view is supported by the next verse where the Prophet is ordered to fight the disbelievers even if he remained alone without any helper.

 

All this together proves that the "news of security or fear" refers to the false rumors which the disbelievers' agents used to bring to Medina for creating disharmony and discord among the believers; and the believers of weaker faith spread it without thinking over it. This in its turn caused loss of courage and vigor in the believers. However, Allah saved them from following those satans who had brought such news for discouraging the believers.

 

 

These verses fit completely on the events of the Lesser Badr, which was described in the chapter of "The House of'Imran". The verses agree in theme with those in that chapter, as will be clear on meditation. Allah says there: (As for) those who responded to the call of Allah and the Messenger (even) after the wound had afflicted them, those among them who do good (to others) and guard (against evil) shall have a great reward. Those to whom the people said: "Surely men have gathered against you, therefore fear them"; but this (only)increased their faith, and they said: "Allah is sufficient for us and most excellent Protector is (He)". So they returned with favor from Allah and (His) grace; no evil touched them and they followed the 

 

pleasure of Allah; and Allah is the Lord of the mighty grace. That is only the Satan that frightens his friends; so do not fear them, and fear,
Me if you are Believers (3:172-5).

 

 

As you see, these verses describe how the Messenger of Allah , (s.a.w.) was calling the people, "after the wound had afflicted them" : in the calamity of Uhud, to come with him to meet the disbelievers,  -and how some people were demoralizing the believers, trying to turn them away from the Prophet (s.a.w.) and frightening them that the polytheists were gathered together against the believers. Then, the verses assert that all this was a plan of the Satan who spoke through his friends; and exhort the believers not to fear the Satan and his friends; rather they should fear Allah if they were believers.

 

 

Ponder on these verses and then again on the verses under discussion (And when there comes to them news of security or fear ...). You will find no room for doubt that the verses under discussion too describe the same episode of the lesser Badr. The Qur'an includes that episode in the list of the behaviors for which it blames the believers of the weaker faith. For example: but when fighting was prescribed for them...; "Our Lord! why hast Thou ordained fighting for us?"... and if a benefit comes to them...; And they say: "Obedience". And then it goes on to say in the same tone: "And when there comes to them news of security or fear, they spread it."

QUR'AN: and if they had referred it to the Messenger and to those in authority among them, those among them who (can) draw out the truth of it, would have known it: Here they are not required to refer it to Allah as was done in the preceding verse 59: then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the last day. It is because in that verse the talk was about a disputed legislative order; and on one has any authority in that field except Allah and His Messenger. But in the verse under discussion they are told to refer a news of security or fear, and such a news cannot be referred to Allah and His book; the people who could decide about it were the Messenger and those in authority among them. If the news were referred to them they could find out its reality and explain to the believers whether it was true or false, right or wrong.

 

 

 

The knowledge [in "would have known"] means distinguishing truth from falsehood and right from wrong; it is the same connotation as is found in the verses: that Allah might know who fears Him in secret(5:94); And most certainly Allah will know those who believe, and most certainly He will know the hypocrites(29:11).

al-Istinbat (to draw out a talk from ambiguity to distinctness and knowledge); it is derived from an-nabat (to gush out, to stream forth). The phrase, "those among them who (can) draw out the truth of it", may point to the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and those in authority; that they may investigate the matter and find out the truth. Or, it may point to those who are required to refer it to the Messenger and the people of authority; in that case, it would mean that the believers would know the truth as shown by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and those in authority.

 

 

According to the former interpretation (which is the obvious meaning of the verse), the verse says that the Messenger and the people of authority will distinguish the truth if they draw out the reality, that is, if they think that doing so is in the interest of the religion and society. According to the second interpretation, it will mean: Those believers who ask and are eager to know the truth of the matter will know it [from the Messenger and the people of authority].

 

 

 

The phrase, ulu'l-amr (= those vested with authority; those in authority) has the same connotations in the preceding verse 59: O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority from among you. As described there, the exegetes have differed much in the explanation of this phrase; however mainly there are five interpretations. The meaning which we have mentioned here is more obvious from this verse [as is explained below].

 

 

 

1. The view that ulu'l-amr means the leaders of the fighting detachments is not relevant here. Those leaders had no authority except over a particular band of fighters in a particular combat; they had no knowledge or authority beyond that. But the verse here talks about something much bigger and more important:

 

Disturbance of security, spreading of fear and general fright which the polytheists caused by infiltrating spies and secret agents who spread rumors to demoralize the believers. What concern the leaders of fighting bands had with such matters? How could they explain the truth or otherwise of such news if the people referred it to them?

 

 

2. The opinion that ulu'l-amr means scholars is equally irrelevant. The scholars - and in that era they were the narrators of tradi­tions, jurisprudents, reciters of Qur'an and theologians - had expertise in tradition, jurisprudence, etc. But this verse speaks about matters of security and general feeling of terror; it is concerned with such news which was deeply connected with political affairs, which if ignored or wrongly handled could disturb the Muslims' lives and result in such sociological calamities which no reformer could ever put right. It could nullify the nation's endeavors in the path of its felicity; or could rob them of their supremacy and make them prey of humiliation and degradation, or leave them to be killed or imprisoned. What expertise did the scholars - in their capacity as narrators of traditions, experts of jurisprudence or reciters of Qur'an and so on - have in these matters, that Allah would order the people to refer such news to them? How could they solve such problems in the political arena?

 

 

 

3. The opinion that it refers to the 'rightly guided' caliphs (Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman and 'Ali) is more baseless. First of all, there is no proof for it in the Book of Allah or a definitely accepted tradition. Secondly, we have a right to ask: Was the order given in this verse limited to the time of the Prophet (s.a.w.)? Or, was it general - for his time as well as after him? If it was meant for his time only, then the four personalities should have been known as the people of authority to all the people and particularly to the Companions of the Prophet; but the history and traditions do not record any such especial

 

status for them at all. In case it was valid for the post-Prophetic era too, then its validity was bound to expire after those four caliphs had passed away. If so, then the verse should have contained some indication to that effect as is the case with other verses which announce some especial rules for the Prophet (s.a.w.); but the verse does not hint at any such limitation.

 

 

4. The interpretation of ulu'l-amr as the people who 'tie and open', the influential persons, is equally out of place. Such exegetes know that there was no group, in the days of the Prophet (s.a.w.), known as ahlu'l-halli wa'l-'aqd, like other civilized societies which do have well-defined committees and councils, e.g. cabinet of ministers, delegations sent to conferences, etc. At that time the only rule implemented in the ummah was of Allah and His Messenger. This difficulty complied him to say that ulu'l-amr were those Companions whose advice was sought and whom the Prophet (s.a.w.) consulted.

 

But, the fact remains that the Prophet (s.a.w.) included in his consultations not only the believers but even hypocrites like 'Abdullah ibn Abi and his band. The story of his consultation in the battle of Uhud is well-known. How can Allah order the believers to refer such sensitive news to such people?

 

 

 

Moreover, no one denies that 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn 'Awf was among those who had this status in the life of the Prophet (s.a.w.) and even after him. And these verses, which admonish the believers of weaker faith and put them to shame for what they had done, have begun with exposing him and his group in these words: Have you not seen those to whom it was said: "Withhold your hands..." This tradition has been narrated by an-Nasa'i (in his as-Sahih), al-Hakim (in his al-Mustadrak, declaring that it is a correct tradition) and at-Tabari and others in their books of tafsir (commentary). And the said traditions have been given under "Traditions" under the preceding verses. Keeping this in view, how can one say that the believers were ordered to refer this matter to such people?

 

 

Now, remains only the fifth interpretation which we had preferred under the verse: obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those vested with authority from among you... (4:59). [That is: The ulu'l-amr are the Twelve sinless successors of the Holy Prophet, s.a.w.]

 

QUR'AN: and were it not for the grace of Allah upon you and his mercy, you would have certainly followed the Satan save a few: As

stated earlier, the verses apparently point to the events of the lesser Badr when Abu Sufyan had sent Na'im ibn Mas'ud al-Ashja'i to Medina to spread fear and fright among the people in order that they should not go forth to Badr. Hence, following of Satan means accept­ance of the said news and failure to go to Badr.

In that case, the exception, "save a few", is quite in place; there is no need to strive artfully and stretch its meaning. Na'im had informed the Muslims that Abu Sufyan had gathered many groups and readied huge armies; therefore the Muslims should not go out to fight against them, otherwise they (the Muslims) would beannihilated. This rumor demoralized the people and they offered many excuses for not going to Badr. Only the Prophet and a few persons nearest to him remained steadfast, and it is they who are mentioned in the exception phrase, "save a few". Most of the people had wavered and tried to avoid going out, except a few steadfast ones; then some more joined them and the group proceeded out.

 

This interpretation of the exception clause is supported by the earlier-mentioned context and association, and the meaning is quite clear.

 

 

The exegetes have, however, interpreted this clause in various artful ways, none of them free from distortion or misrepresentation. For example:

 

 

1. The grace and mercy of Allah points to the divine guidance which led them to the obedience of Allah, His Messenger and those in authority; and the excepted 'few' refers to the good-natured pure-hearted believers. Thus, the verse means: If Allah had not guided you to the obedience by ordering you to refer the matter to those in authority, you would certainly have followed the Satan by falling into error and going astray, except a few good-natured believers among you who would not have deviated from truth and goodness.

COMMENT: This interpretation confines the divine grace and mercy to a certain order while there is no reason for such restriction. It is not in keeping with the Qur'anic style. Moreover, the verse apparently describes Allah's favor for something which had already passed and was completed.

 

 

2. The verse means what it apparently says. The believers of weaker faith need extra grace and mercy from Allah, although the sincere ones too cannot manage without divine care.

 

COMMENT: If it is its apparent meaning, then the Qur'an, in its sublime literary style, must have rebutted it here and now. But it has not. Allah says: and were it not for Allah's grace upon you and His mercy, not one of you would have ever been pure (24:21); and He says to His Prophet (s.a.w.) who was the best of the human beings: And had it not been that We had already established you, you would certainly have been near to incline to them a little; in that case We would certainly have made you to taste a double (punishment) in this life and a double (punishment) after death... (17:74-75).

 

 

3. The divine grace and mercy means the Qur'an and the Prophet (s.a.w.).

4. It means the victory. The exception then is perfectly in place; because the majority stands firm on truth only when their hearts are happy as a result of victory and similar [worldly] benefits, which prove to them that God cares for them. Otherwise, if they were to taste bitter truth, then only a few believers would submit to it, that is, those only who might be having deep insight of the religion.

5. The exception, "save a few", is related to the verb, "they spread it".

6. No. It is related to the verb: who (can) draw out the truth of it.

7. The exception is in word only; it actually has the connotation of comprehensiveness. Thus the verse actually means: 'and were it not for the divine grace and mercy, all of you would have certainly followed the Satan'. It is not unlike the verse: We will make you recite so you shall not forget, except what Allah pleases (87:6-7). Because in this case too, the exception emphasizes the comprehensiveness of 'not forgetting'.

COMMENT: All these explanations are merely literary affection and trickery.

QUR'AN: Fight then in Allah's way; this is not imposed on you except in relation to yourself, and rouse the believers to ardour... exemplary punishment: at-Taklif ' is derived from al-kulfah (discomfort, hardship) and means imposition of duty and responsibility, because the person concerned undergoes hardship in discharging his duties. at-Tankil is derived from an-nakal (exemplary punishment). According to Majma 'u'l-bayan, it means: a punishment which discourages the guilty from committing that error again and makes him into a lesson to others; in short, a punishment fear of which prevents people from doing such mischief in future.

"Fa" (then, so) in "Fight then in Allah's way" signifies that the order to fight, [even alone, if necessary] is based on the sum-total of the preceding verses, that is, the people's apathy and lethargy in going forth to face the enemy. It is clearly reflected in the sentences that follow: "this is not imposed on you except in relation to yourself..." The meaning, therefore, is as follows: As they are lethargic concerning jihad and are unwilling to fight, then you, O Messenger of Allah! should fight the unbelievers on your own; do not be disheartened because of their apathy and disobedience of the divine command; you will not be asked about their obligation, you are responsible only for your own duties. As for the others, your only responsibility is to exhort and rouse them to fight. Therefore, you go forth for fighting and at the same time rouse the believers to ardor. May be, in this way Allah will prevent the unbelievers from fighting. The sentence, "this is not imposed on you except in relation to yourself, actually means, 'except concerning your own deed'. In other words, there is in this excepted clause a deleted first construct of possessive case.

"may be Allah will restrain...": It was mentioned that'asa (may be) expresses hope. That hope can be found in the mind of the speaker, or the addressee, or it may arise because of the situtation. As such, there is no need to assert that 'may be', when used by Allah, denotes certainty.

Through this verse, Allah further reviles those people who showed apathy towards jihad until Allah ordered His Prophet to go forth for fighting alone; and told him to turn aside from those sluggish people. He should not exhort them to answer the call for jihad; rather he should leave them alone. He should not be discouraged by their behavior. His only responsibility is in relation to his own self; apart from that, he should rouse the believers to ardor - and then let him who wants answer the call, and him who wants disobey Allah and His Prophet.

Traditions[al-Kulayni narrates] through his chains from Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan that he said: "I heard Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) saying: 'Allah had put some people to shame because of their spreading [rumors], as He, the Mighty, the Great, says: And when there comes to them news of security or fear, they spread it. Therefore, take care not to spread [rumors]'." (al-Kafi)

 

Also he narrates from 'Abdu'l-Hamid ibn Abi 'd-Daylam from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "Allah, the Mighty, the Great, has said: Obey Allah and the Messenger and those vested with authority from among you; also He has said: and if they had referred it to the Messenger and to those in authority among them, those among them who (can) draw out the truth in it would have known it. Thus He has returned the people to ulu'l-amrfrom among them, ordering them (the people) to obey them (ulu'l-amr) and refer all affairs to them." (ibid.)

 

 

The author says: This hadith supports the explanation given by us that ulu'l-amr in this verse refers to the same Imams who were mentioned in the 59th verse.

'Abdullah ibn 'Ajlan narrates from Abu Ja'far (a.s.) about the words of Allah: and if they had referred it to the Messenger and to those in authority among them, that he (the Imam, a.s.) said: "They are the Imams." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

 

 

 

The author says: This meaning has also been narrated from 'Abdullah ibn Jundab from ar-Rida (a.s.) in a letter which the Imam (a.s.) had written about al-Waqifiyyah. The same meaning is narrated by al-Mufid in al-lkhtisasfrom Ishaq ibn 'Ammar from as-Sadiq (a.s.), inter alia, in a long tradition.

 

 

 

Muhammad ibn al-Fudayl narrates from Abu'l-Hasan (a.s.) about the word of Allah: and were it not for the grace of Allah upon you and His mercy, that [the Imam, a.s.] said: "Grace is the Messenger of Allah and His mercy is the Commander of the Believers." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

Zurarah has narrated from Abu Ja'far (a.s.), and Humran from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.), that they said: "Allah's grace is His Messenger and His mercy is al-wilayah (love and obedience) of the Imams." (ibid.)

 

 

Muhammad ibn al-Fudayl narrates from al-'Abdu 's-Salih [the 7th Imam, a.s.] that he said: "The mercy is the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) and the grace, 'Ali ibn Abl Talib (a.s.)." (ibid.)

 

 

The author says: These traditions are based on the flow of the Qur'an; and they explain the divine grace and mercy in terms of messengership and imamate. These are the two connected ropes with which Allah has rescued us from the pit of straying and the trap of the Satan. One of them is the source of bringing the Truth, while the other is the means of keeping it alive. The last tradition is more in keeping with the Qur'anic point of view, because Allah has named His Messenger (s.a.w.) 'Mercy', as He says in His book: And We have not sent you but as a mercy to the world (21:107).

 

'Ali ibn Hadid narrates through Murazim from Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) that he said: "Allah imposed a duty on the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) which He had not imposed on anyone before him; then he imposed on him to go forth all alone against all the people, even if he did not find any group to stand by him; and He had not obliged anyone before or after him to do so." Then he recited this verse: Fight then in Allah's way; this is not imposed on you except in relation to yourself. Then the Imam (a.s.) said: "And Allah granted him to take for himself what Allah has taken for Himself. Thus Allah, the Mighty, the Great, says: Whoever brings a good deed, he shall have ten like it." And likewise He has made salawatfor the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) (equal to) ten good deeds." (al-Kafi)

 

Sulayman ibn Khalid says: "I informed Abu 'Abdillah (a.s.) about what the people said concerning 'Air (a.s.): 'If he had any right then what prevented him from standing up for it?' (The Imam, a.s.) said: 'Verily Allah has not imposed such duty to anyone except the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) as He says: Fight then in Allah's way; this is not imposed on you except in relation to yourself, and rouse the believers to ardor. So, this is not except for the Messenger; and He has said about the others: [And whoever shall turn his back to them on that day] unless he turns aside for the sake of fighting or withdraws to a company... ; and at that time there was no group to support him ('Ali, a.s.) in his affair'." (at-Tafsir, al-'Ayyashi)

 

 

Zayd ash-Shahham narrates from Ja'far ibn Muhammad (peace be on both) that he said: "The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) never said 'No' when he was asked for anything. If he had it, he gave it; if he did not have it, he said: 'It will be if Allah so wishes'; and he never took revenge of any evil (done to him); and he never met any expedition but he himself was on head of it - ever since the verse was revealed to him: Fight then in Allah's way; this is not imposed on you except in relation to yourself, (ibid.)

 

 

There are other traditions too of the same meaning.

 

 


__________________

Revise page 

1-13 In Appointing a Successor for the Ahadith.
1-2: Who are the blind.
____________________



(salam)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you think I only have one source??

Don't worry today I'm going to teach you who is on haqq.

When did I say I checked all then hadiths from a scholar??

I said being them so I can get them checked

 

your On Haq? 

In our Argument its not about on Which on is on Haq,

It about Coming to a Conclusion of Understanding,

But we have failed to do so, I presume the Resources 

You gave me, that are Anti-Shia, that Disrespect me many times,

I hold you accountable for very word on the sites you mention to me.

thats Why I Refuted Ibn Taiyimah because of the people who made the site

Mentioned him and tried to Link him to us? which makes no sense .

I understand from the phrase you just said, That your Reason for being here is to Win,

And not to Discover.

(salam)  

Can you Also Explain to me the purpose of Ghadir Khum?

Why did it happen? Was it necessary?

(salam)

Link to post
Share on other sites

your On Haq?

In our Argument its not about on Which on is on Haq,

It about Coming to a Conclusion of Understanding,

But we have failed to do so, I presume the Resources

You gave me, that are Anti-Shia, that Disrespect me many times,

I hold you accountable for very word on the sites you mention to me.

thats Why I Refuted Ibn Taiyimah because of the people who made the site

Mentioned him and tried to Link him to us? which makes no sense .

I understand from the phrase you just said, That your Reason for being here is to Win,

And not to Discover.

(salam)

Can you Also Explain to me the purpose of Ghadir Khum?

Why did it happen? Was it necessary?

(salam)

Brother you're right we need to come to a conclusion because this has dragged on long enough. It's been over a month so il refute your answer regarding the evidence you gave for ulil amr and then we will start concluding and come to some sort of agreement.

What do you say??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother you're right we need to come to a conclusion because this has dragged on long enough. It's been over a month so il refute your answer regarding the evidence you gave for ulil amr and then we will start concluding and come to some sort of agreement.

What do you say??

 

 

Pleased to hear so.

But If One is taken Wrongly, Of Course I have to Reply.

Beyond that, Perhaps Lay Some Grounds Before Debating.

Perhaps State your Interpretation of Uli Al amr, and I will state mine of Uli al amr.

and We Will start by One Point at a time, Lets try to keep it short, Maybe 7 points of text (short) 

Maximum?

(salam)  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pleased to hear so.

But If One is taken Wrongly, Of Course I have to Reply.

Beyond that, Perhaps Lay Some Grounds Before Debating.

Perhaps State your Interpretation of Uli Al amr, and I will state mine of Uli al amr.

and We Will start by One Point at a time, Lets try to keep it short, Maybe 7 points of text (short)

Maximum?

(salam)

Mash Allah brother beautiful. I'm happy that us to brothers will inshallah come to some sort of agreement.

To be honest I need to leave this site ASAP because I have a full time job and and a son who I hardly get to spend time with because I'm always here on this site. Also my Ibadan has slowed down because of this forum.

Please wait for my reply and hopefully we can come to an agreement

Inshallah.

Assalamu alaykum

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mash Allah brother beautiful. I'm happy that us to brothers will inshallah come to some sort of agreement.

To be honest I need to leave this site ASAP because I have a full time job and and a son who I hardly get to spend time with because I'm always here on this site. Also my Ibadan has slowed down because of this forum.

Please wait for my reply and hopefully we can come to an agreement

Inshallah.

Assalamu alaykum

In this case, Perhaps Lets Take time.

Because I also have Studies and Other Forms of Progresses I must Resort to Complete.

I therefore Agree.

 

Allah Bless you.

(salam)

Edited by TheIslamHistory
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...