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

The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

The full narration being alluded to is as follows:

 

 

“Zayd bin Abi Awfa said: ‘I went to Allah’s messenger in his mosque, then he (Zaid) mentioned the story of brotherhood amongst the companions of Allah’s messenger. Then Ali said to the Prophet (s): ‘I lost my patience and felt sorrow when I saw you doing that to your companions but not to me, if I have incurred your displeasure I wish to apologise’.
Allah’s messenger said: ‘I swear by He who sent me with the truth, I only left you for myself, your status to me is like the status of Harun to Musa except there is no Prophet after me, you are my brother and my inheritor’. (Ali) said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘You shall inherit from me what the prophets used to inherit’. (Ali) said: ‘What did the Prophets inherit?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘The book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, you are with me in my palace in paradise along with my daughter Fatima, you are my brother and my friend’. Then Allah’s messenger recited the verse { (they shall be) as brethren, on raised couches, face to face.} 015.047”

 

 

Honestly, in this blessed month, I do not have the time nor the patience to deal with your antics anymore.  This is a back-and-forth tennis match with no rules.  However, providing the entire narration does not dilute the core message, the point relevant to our discussion.

 

The question, by Imam Ali [ra], is clear....."what did the Prophets [asws] inherit" and the answer is even more clear which you, of course, did not bother to highlight.  

 

In so many cases, we see Prophets [asws] born to other Prophets [asws].  Surely, if material inheritance was what they inherited from their fathers, Rasulullah [saw] would have made mention of it.  But there is no mention of any material or monetary possession anywhere.

 

 

 

The verse about the prayer of Prophet Zakariya  (as) is clear evidence that he was asking for a heir to his material wealth so that it doesn't go to his evil relatives. Stop interpreting the verses to your liking and taking them out of context which even your caliphs didn't do.

 

 

Did Yahya [as] inherit the wealth or did Allah [swt] bless him with "wisdom, piety and kindness (to his parents"?  Talking about interpreting the verses to my liking, just read the verses that follow the prayer of Zakariya [as] and you need no interpretation.  Following the prayer of Zakariya [as], the Qur'an says:

 

(To his son came the command): "O Yahya! take hold of the Book with might": and We gave him Wisdom even as a youth,

And piety (for all creatures) as from Us, and purity: He was devout,

And kind to his parents, and he was not overbearing or rebellious.

So Peace on him the day he was born, the day that he dies, and the day that he will be raised up to life (again)!  (Surah Maryam, verses 12-15)

 

Incidentally, in the same surah, the last verse I have quoted - verse 15 - is said to have been said by 'Isa [as] for himself (when he spoke as an infant to defend his mother).

 

This alone should be sufficient to expose your lies against me and the Qur'an.

 

 

 

 

Few more addition to the lies. Verses 9:119 and 59:8 are not about Abu Bakr. Please stop your web of lies. For argument sake, if I go by your interpretation that verse 59:8 states that all the Muhajirs are truthful then even Bibi Fatima (s) and Imam Ali  (as) are muhajirs then why are you not accepting that they were speaking the truth when they said that Fadak was theirs? Your double standards have been clearly exposed again.

 

 

For us, since we do not see neither the Ahlul Bayt [ra] nor the Sahabas [ra] as infallible, a misunderstanding - or a situation where one did not hear something from Rasulullah [saw] - does not make him or her untruthful.  In your case, I won't be surprised if you make a case for Iblees being more truthful than the Sahabas [ra].  That is your prerogative.

 

But fact of the matter is that Imam Ali [ra] was one who had heard from the Prophet [saw] that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  I have provided you a list of over ten Companions [ra] who attested to this.  Furthermore, I shared another hadith in which Umar [ra] repeated the same message in the presence of Imam Ali [ra] and Abbas [ra] and none of the two contested what Umar [ra] said (the Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance).

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 332
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Bismihi Ta'ala   Assalamu Alaykum   Before I continue regarding what you posted about the hadith of the Prophets not bequeathing dirham or dinar, I'd like to state my view on it. I think this Hadith i

(bismillah)     You actually believe those are his صلى الله عليه وآله weapons and material? Different countries claim the same artifacts, as far as I remember hearing. Let's not forget the claims made

Don't mindlessly copy-paste me things (especially after having a history of condemning others for that) because I have a feeling that a person who cannot translate a page of arabic (with generous marg

  • Advanced Member

 

(a.) it was Ali (as) who was the heir of prophet  (b.)

  Ali in fact inherited prophet,

 

 

If scholars (plural) can be the heirs of the Prophets [asws] - as is mentioned in Al-Kafi - then why can't Imam Ali [ra] be a heir of Rasulullah [saw]?

 

You want to make this deen into something exclusive while your own narrations, and the deen itself, is all inclusive.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

Allah’s messenger said: ‘I swear by He who sent me with the truth, I only left you for myself, your status to me is like the status of Harun to Musa except there is no Prophet after me, you are my brother and my inheritor’. (Ali) said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘You shall inherit from me what the prophets used to inherit’. (Ali) said: ‘What did the Prophets inherit?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘The book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, you are with me in my palace in paradise along with my daughter Fatima, you are my brother and my friend’. Then Allah’s messenger recited the verse { (they shall be) as brethren, on raised couches, face to face.} 015.047”

 

 

If I am not mistaken, this "inheritance" is in line with the inheritance of scholars.  Al-Kafi says that scholars inherit knowledge from the Prophets [asws], therefore, Nahjul Balagha - when it says that Imam Ali [ra] said, "Verily, under the sky we had only Fadak as our personal property" - is rejected.  

 

Furthermore, we read on Al-Islam.org that "the Prophet (ص) taught Fatima ‎(‎ع‎) divine knowledge and endowed her with special intellectual brilliance, so much so that she realized the true meaning of faith, piety, and the reality of Islam."

 

http://www.al-islam.org/fatima-the-daughter-of-muhammad-a-brief-biography-yasin-al-jibouri

 

Humans, in a nutshell, can be scholars or possess partial knowledge or jaahil.  No Muslim can be placed in the "jaahil" category because saying, and having belief in, "la illaha illalah, Muhammad-ur Rasulallah" is significant amount of knowledge in of itself.

 

Now, either Fatima [ra] is a scholar or someone with partial knowledge.  If she is someone with partial knowledge (not having absolute knowledge), it is possible for her to not have heard what Abu Bakr [ra] and other Sahabas [ra] - including Imam Ali [ra] - had heard from the Prophet [saw] (that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance).

 

And if Fatima [ra] is a scholar, then, as per the narration in Al-Kafi, she does not inherit any material wealth from the Prophet [saw].

 

I will let the readers pick :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

If scholars (plural) can be the heirs of the Prophets [asws] - as is mentioned in Al-Kafi - then why can't Imam Ali [ra] be a heir of Rasulullah [saw]?

 

You want to make this deen into something exclusive while your own narrations, and the deen itself, is all inclusive.

 

Unfortunately for you, Ali himself didnt concur with the reasons you have advanced for his being an heir of prophet:

 

 

“Al-Fadl bin Sahl- Afan bin Muslim- Abu Awana- Uthman bin al-Mughira- Abi Sadeq- Rabeea bin Najed narrated that a man came to Ali and said: Oh commander of believers, why only you inherited your cousin excluding your uncle? He (Ali) replied: The messenger of Allah invited the children of Abdulmutalib and he cooked for them food, they ate till they get fulfilled and the food remained as if no one had touched it, then he (the prophet) brought water and all of them drank from it, but the water remained as if no one had touched it or drank from it.
Then he (the prophet) said: ‘Oh children of Abdulmutalib, I have been sent to you specially and to the people in general, and you saw the sign of that, therefore who among you give baya to be my brother, my companion, my inheritor and my minister.’
No one responded for that, hence I responded and I was the youngest among them, he (the prophet) said: ‘Sit down’ for three times. I responded and He say ‘Sit down’, till the third time he clapped by his hand on my thigh and said: ‘You are my brother, companion, inheritor and minister’. Hence I inherited my cousin without my uncle.” 
Khasais by Imam Nesai, page 85
Edited by B-N
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

Unfortunately for you, Ali himself didnt concur with the reasons you have advanced for his being an heir of prophet:

 

 

“Al-Fadl bin Sahl- Afan bin Muslim- Abu Awana- Uthman bin al-Mughira- Abi Sadeq- Rabeea bin Najed narrated that a man came to Ali and said: Oh commander of believers, why only you inherited your cousin excluding your uncle? He (Ali) replied: The messenger of Allah invited the children of Abdulmutalib and he cooked for them food, they ate till they get fulfilled and the food remained as if no one had touched it, then he (the prophet) brought water and all of them drank from it, but the water remained as if no one had touched it or drank from it.
Then he (the prophet) said: ‘Oh children of Abdulmutalib, I have been sent to you specially and to the people in general, and you saw the sign of that, therefore who among you give baya to be my brother, my companion, my inheritor and my minister.’
No one responded for that, hence I responded and I was the youngest among them, he (the prophet) said: ‘Sit down’ for three times. I responded and He say ‘Sit down’, till the third time he clapped by his hand on my thigh and said: ‘You are my brother, companion, inheritor and minister’. Hence I inherited my cousin without my uncle.” 
Khasais by Imam Nesai, page 85

 

 

 

Alright, so if Imam Ali [ra] was the only heir of Rasulullah [saw], then what about Fatima [ra]?  Did she not inherit the knowledge?  Now you will bring the narration that Imam Ali [ra] inherited his knowledge while Fatima [ra] inherited his wealth (Fadak).  Thus, you have downplayed Fatima [ra].  And if you say that she inherited knowledge, then she is from among the learned (scholars) who inherit only knowledge, not "dinars and dirhams", from the Prophet [saw].  Therefore, as per the narration in Al-Kafi (which is sahih), Fatima [ra] does not get to inherit material wealth from the Prophet [saw].

 

And since you agree that only Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw], then it is quite possible that Fatima [ra] did not hear the Prophet [saw] saying, "Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance."

 

Thank you for proving my point!

 

Thus far, I was reasoning with everyone while letting contradictions like "it was a gift but upon learning that it was usurped, she claimed it as inheritance" and "she demanded Fadak before the Sahabas attacked her house", et cetera, slip by.  Now I will expose everyone and everything without giving an inch of grace.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Alright, so if Imam Ali [ra] was the only heir of Rasulullah [saw], then what about Fatima [ra]?  Did she not inherit the knowledge?  Now you will bring the narration that Imam Ali [ra] inherited his knowledge while Fatima [ra] inherited his wealth (Fadak).  Thus, you have downplayed Fatima [ra].  And if you say that she inherited knowledge, then she is from among the learned (scholars) who inherit only knowledge, not "dinars and dirhams", from the Prophet [saw].  Therefore, as per the narration in Al-Kafi (which is sahih), Fatima [ra] does not get to inherit material wealth from the Prophet [saw].

 

And since you agree that only Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw], then it is quite possible that Fatima [ra] did not hear the Prophet [saw] saying, "Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance."

 

Thank you for proving my point!

 

Thus far, I was reasoning with everyone while letting contradictions like "it was a gift but upon learning that it was usurped, she claimed it as inheritance" and "she demanded Fadak before the Sahabas attacked her house", et cetera, slip by.  Now I will expose everyone and everything without giving an inch of grace.

 

 

1. Firstly good attempt to avoid the Sunni tradition which proves that Ali was the only (spiritual) heir and successor of prophet and only he inherited him (s). 

2. Fatima Zahra (as) inheriting estate of prophet (s) is very much proved from Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) as referred by you from al-kafi therefore your attempt to argue that she can either inherit dinar and dirhams or knowledge is nothing but an false attempt to play with the words, Ali inherited prophet being his successor and Fatima Zahra inherited prophet in material possessions in capacity of being biological heir, its simple as that. 

3. The fact which you call 'contradiction' i.e. it was a gift and then it was claimed as inheritance is nothing but an utter ignorance on your part, kindly read Al-Milal wa al-Nihal, page 13 which confirms so.

4. You are jumping up and down in an attempt to defend false act of your 'Kazab al akber' and trying to interpret verses in your own manner and why not, it has been observed that the later generation of Sunnies have tried to do so and have tried to portray the picture that the said verses were NEVER interpreted to have talked abot material inheritance of prophets by Abu Bakar or by early generation of Sunni scholars but when we turn the pages of history, we find that group of early (Sunni) scholars did believe that inheritance of prophets in terms of material possessions is not something prohibited or impossible. See Tafsir Qurtubi, v11 p81 and al-mabsoot, v12 p29. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1. Firstly good attempt to avoid the Sunni tradition which proves that Ali was the only (spiritual) heir and successor of prophet and only he inherited him (s). 

2. Fatima Zahra (as) inheriting estate of prophet (s) is very much proved from Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) as referred by you from al-kafi therefore your attempt to argue that she can either inherit dinar and dirhams or knowledge is nothing but an false attempt to play with the words, Ali inherited prophet being his successor and Fatima Zahra inherited prophet in material possessions in capacity of being biological heir, its simple as that. 

3. The fact which you call 'contradiction' i.e. it was a gift and then it was claimed as inheritance is nothing but an utter ignorance on your part, kindly read Al-Milal wa al-Nihal, page 13 which confirms so.

4. You are jumping up and down in an attempt to defend false act of your 'Kazab al akber' and trying to interpret verses in your own manner and why not, it has been observed that the later generation of Sunnies have tried to do so and have tried to portray the picture that the said verses were NEVER interpreted to have talked abot material inheritance of prophets by Abu Bakar or by early generation of Sunni scholars but when we turn the pages of history, we find that group of early (Sunni) scholars did believe that inheritance of prophets in terms of material possessions is not something prohibited or impossible. See Tafsir Qurtubi, v11 p81 and al-mabsoot, v12 p29. 

 

 

1.  Sunni tradition also says that when a woman approached Rasulullah [saw], she was told (by the Prophet s.a.w.) that in case she never finds him, she should look for Abu Bakr [ra].........and many other.  Our position is clear.  Yours, well it was a "gift" then maybe "inheritance".  The "gift" claim is a lie because every single narration says that Fadak was demanded as "inheritance".  "Gift" was a later concoction which is why there is no authentic narration to support it.

 

2.  Al-Kafi makes a two-fold claim.  Scholars inherit the Prophets [asws] and Prophets [asws] do not leave "dirhams and dinars".  Far more clear-cut than any other narration that Prophets [asws] do not leave material wealth.

 

Here is the contradiction.

 

‘Ali ibn Ibrahim narrates from his father, from Hammad ibn ‘Isa, on the authority of [‘Abdullah ibn Maymun] al-Qaddah that Abu ‘Abdillah [imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq] ‘alayhis salam said: Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-alihi wasallam said: “Whoever walks a path seeking therein knowledge, Allah will lead him on a road to Jannah... And the ‘Ulama are the heirs of the Ambiya; and the Ambiya did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance; but they left knowledge. Therefore whosoever takes knowledge has taken a great portion.” (al-Kafi, Kitab Fadl al-‘Ilm, Bab Sifat al-‘Ilm wa-Fadlihi, hadith no. 2)

 

Sheikh Saduq, in Al-Khisal, narrates:

 

Muhammad ibn al-Hassan narrated that Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Saffar quoted on the authority of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa, on the authority of Al-Hassan ibn Ali al-Vasha, on the authority of Ahmad ibn Aez, on the authority of Abi Khadijeh that Aba Abdullah as-Sadiq said, The people can be divided into three groups: the scholars, the seekers of knowledge and the scum. We are the scholars. Our shia are the seekers of knowledge and the rest of the people are the scum.

 

Forget the Sunni narrations, as per your traditions, Ahlul Bayt [ra] were scholars and therefore, they only inherit knowledge from Rasulullah [saw].

 

3.  First, the land of Fadak was not personal property to be gifted to anyone.  Second, Prophet [saw] cannot reward one of his children while leaving out the rest.  Three, what is illogical does not become logical because you say a book says so.

 

4.  Red herring!  Go read this and that.........bring the narrations if you have them otherwise it is best you do not employ the tactics of a "kazab al akbar" while trying to make such a case against someone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Honestly, in this blessed month, I do not have the time nor the patience to deal with your antics anymore.  This is a back-and-forth tennis match with no rules.  However, providing the entire narration does not dilute the core message, the point relevant to our discussion.

 

The question, by Imam Ali [ra], is clear....."what did the Prophets [asws] inherit" and the answer is even more clear which you, of course, did not bother to highlight.  

 

In so many cases, we see Prophets [asws] born to other Prophets [asws].  Surely, if material inheritance was what they inherited from their fathers, Rasulullah [saw] would have made mention of it.  But there is no mention of any material or monetary possession anywhere.

 

My antics??? You are the one who has been constantly incorrectly translating Quranic verses and quoting narrations out of context and then you have the audacity to accuse me? To add to that, you constantly evade the questions being asked and then reply only to a subset of the whole post. It is very clear who is the one who is playing tricks here.

 

The whole narration does prove your attempt futile as the question before what you have quoted proves the context in which this is being said. Look at what Imam Ali (as) asks   ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’. As we all know Imam Ali (as) was not asking about material inheritance as he was neither the son nor the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh). Again, your deceitful attempt is exposed.

 

 

 

Did Yahya [as] inherit the wealth or did Allah [swt] bless him with "wisdom, piety and kindness (to his parents"?  Talking about interpreting the verses to my liking, just read the verses that follow the prayer of Zakariya [as] and you need no interpretation.  Following the prayer of Zakariya [as], the Qur'an says:
 
(To his son came the command): "O Yahya! take hold of the Book with might": and We gave him Wisdom even as a youth,
And piety (for all creatures) as from Us, and purity: He was devout,
And kind to his parents, and he was not overbearing or rebellious.
So Peace on him the day he was born, the day that he dies, and the day that he will be raised up to life (again)!  (Surah Maryam, verses 12-15)
 
Incidentally, in the same surah, the last verse I have quoted - verse 15 - is said to have been said by 'Isa [as] for himself (when he spoke as an infant to defend his mother).
 
This alone should be sufficient to expose your lies against me and the Qur'an.

 

 
Firstly, the narration from Umar clearly proves that you were wrong in your translation of the Quranic verses and instead of apologizing for incorrectly translating the verses of Quran you seem to be accusing me of something which you do religiously. The above is a sufficient proof to expose your lies.
 
 
Looks like as usual, you haven't read my reply fully and are assuming things after partially reading it. I said that it is no guarantee that a prophet will be always be born in the house of a prophet. So if we look at the prayer of Prophet Zakariya (as), it quite clear he is praying for a heir to inherit him as he fears his relatives. Is this simple enough?
 
Your lies is quite evident in how you are presenting verses of two different timelines and saying that following comes after the prayer of Prophet Zakariya (as). I have already explained the prayer above and just because you want to mix and match Quranic verses to your liking it doesn't change the fact that you are making deceitful attempts at altering the meaning of Quranic verses.
 
 
The fact that Abu Bakr did not use these verses to prove his point is a clear indicator as to who is incorrectly translating the verses & going against his caliph.
 
 
For us, since we do not see neither the Ahlul Bayt [ra] nor the Sahabas [ra] as infallible, a misunderstanding - or a situation where one did not hear something from Rasulullah [saw] - does not make him or her untruthful.  In your case, I won't be surprised if you make a case for Iblees being more truthful than the Sahabas [ra].  That is your prerogative.
 
But fact of the matter is that Imam Ali [ra] was one who had heard from the Prophet [saw] that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  I have provided you a list of over ten Companions [ra] who attested to this.  Furthermore, I shared another hadith in which Umar [ra] repeated the same message in the presence of Imam Ali [ra] and Abbas [ra] and none of the two contested what Umar [ra] said (the Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance).
 

 

Misunderstanding???? Please tell me you are joking. The fact that the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) always deemed Fadak to be her property . She was angry with them and never used to speak to the usurpers till she died & also would curse them after every prayer is clearly ample proof to quash your desperate claim that "a misunderstanding - or a situation where one did not hear something from Rasulullah [saw] - does not make him or her untruthful."

 

If it was misunderstanding then it clear that who was right as we see Fadak being returned to the descendants of Bibi when the truth was uncovered. So your attempts are ridiculous.

 

 

Tell me logically, after a person dies if he wants to leave everything as charity would he first tell his children or a person who is no way impacted by it? If you can truthfully answer this then the assumptions you have made above will be very clear.

 

If you really want to know who the truthful are then read the verse of Mubahila and find out who were those truthful ones who went for the Mubahila. You can then come and talk here.

 

 

And most importantly, if all the emigrants are truthful then you are suggesting that there is a contradiction in the Quran based on the historical events which followed which is not possible. So either the verse doesn't encompass all the emigrants or there is a contradiction (nauzubillah). Which one do you pick?

 

 

You have only claimed that those names have attested it but when I asked to present those narrations, guess what, they were ever presented. I see no point in you repeating when I have clearly told you that the narration which you brought about Imam Ali (as) and Abbas (ra) is a clear case of fabrication to insult the family of the Prophet (pbuh). If that narration is true then you must also agree that they thought of Abu Bakr to be a sinful treacherous liar. Choice is yours.

 

 

 

Btw, as I do not see an answer to the question asked in my earlier post I take it that you agree with my stance that "Abu Bakr knew those Quranic verses and he didn't interpret them in the way modern day scholars like you are doing."

 

That pretty much sums up our discussion and proves once again how like running around in circles & don't accept your mistakes all because you do not want the truth to be revealed. But as I said before you can defend the mistakes of a certain individuals all you want but the TRUTH will not remain obscured InshaAllah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

If I am not mistaken, this "inheritance" is in line with the inheritance of scholars.  Al-Kafi says that scholars inherit knowledge from the Prophets [asws], therefore, Nahjul Balagha - when it says that Imam Ali [ra] said, "Verily, under the sky we had only Fadak as our personal property" - is rejected.  

 

Furthermore, we read on Al-Islam.org that "the Prophet (ص) taught Fatima ‎(‎ع‎) divine knowledge and endowed her with special intellectual brilliance, so much so that she realized the true meaning of faith, piety, and the reality of Islam."

 

http://www.al-islam.org/fatima-the-daughter-of-muhammad-a-brief-biography-yasin-al-jibouri

 

Humans, in a nutshell, can be scholars or possess partial knowledge or jaahil.  No Muslim can be placed in the "jaahil" category because saying, and having belief in, "la illaha illalah, Muhammad-ur Rasulallah" is significant amount of knowledge in of itself.

 

Now, either Fatima [ra] is a scholar or someone with partial knowledge.  If she is someone with partial knowledge (not having absolute knowledge), it is possible for her to not have heard what Abu Bakr [ra] and other Sahabas [ra] - including Imam Ali [ra] - had heard from the Prophet [saw] (that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance).

 

And if Fatima [ra] is a scholar, then, as per the narration in Al-Kafi, she does not inherit any material wealth from the Prophet [saw].

 

I will let the readers pick :)

 

Rejected? And why is that? Is it just because you took a narration out of context????? You can try better than that.

 

 

Another attempt to take narrations out of context. If you think by playing some more deceitful games you can win some brownie points then you are only living in some fantasy land. If she is a scholar how does that deny her rights mentioned in Quran that she would receive what her father leaves behind? You see how low you have stooped that you are now ignoring the Quranic verses just because you think you like to flatter yourself.

 

 

If you can prove that by being a scholar she has to forfeit her right as a daughter then we will talk. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

As you do not have an answer to my previous question, I take it that you have no narrations that prove that the Prophet (pbuh) informed his family members that they would not receive anything after his death. So lets move on to the next question:

 

Q. Do you have a verse from Quran which exempts the Prophets from inheritance?

A. NO. There is no verse which excludes the Prophets from the general inheritance laws.

 

Q. Do you have any narration which proves that Abu Bakr interpreted the verses like you are doing now?

A. NO narration is present about Abu Bakr interpreting the Quranic verses like it is being done recently.

 

Q. Do you have a narration to prove that Prophet  (pbuh) informed his family members that they would not receive anything after his death?

A. NO. There is no narration that Prophet (pbuh) informed his family that they would not receive anything after him.

 

 

As per Quran and your second caliph, Fai is meant ONLY for the Prophet. Do you deny?

 

 

 


Jazakallah khair bro. Another point is that in their feeble attempt to prove that prophets do not leave material possessions in inheritance  Sunnis/Nawasib shoot themselves in the feet by relying upon the above hadith because the hadith confirms that

(a.) it was Ali (as) who was the heir of prophet  (b.)

  Ali in fact inherited prophet,

 

and hence the humanly appointment caliph (Abu Bakar) looses his eligibility leaving Sunnies no where !!  

 

Thanks brother.

 

Yes, we have seen multiple times how he brings incorrect translation of verses and takes narrations out of context to prove his point but unfortunately for him they do him more harm than good. Not surprisingly he then ignores them in his reply and tries deviating the topic.

 

Edited by yam_110
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

 

1.  Sunni tradition also says that when a woman approached Rasulullah [saw], she was told (by the Prophet s.a.w.) that in case she never finds him, she should look for Abu Bakr [ra].........and many other.

 

 

Oh Yeah? is that why Abu Bakr in his inaugural speech made it clear that he was not the best among the ummah and he should be guided whenever he made mistakes in dispensation of his duties as a ruler lol? That is why he was so reluctant to become a ruler at the episode of saqifah and as per his own words he accepted rulership only because he feared that sahaba had recently converted to Islam and there were chances of their getting apostates on seeing dismal state of affairs? JIs that why he regretted at his death bed for few sins he committed in his life ? Just compare all this junk with a challenge of Salooni made by the heir and successor of Prophet (s) !! 

 

 

  Our position is clear.  Yours, well it was a "gift" then maybe "inheritance".  The "gift" claim is a lie because every single narration says that Fadak was demanded as "inheritance".  "Gift" was a later concoction which is why there is no authentic narration to support it.

 

 

 

Our position is also clear that it was a gift and hence witnesses were sought and were duly produced before the king but their testimonies were rejected. Hence it was claimed as inheritance the stubborn king again rejected the claim on bringing a false theory. The self made tafsir of quranic verses that talk about inheritance of prophet were later concocted by the defenders of caliph where as caliph himself or the early generation of sunni scholars did not opined with this view or at least, they did not rule out the possibility that prophets can leave material inheritance. 

 

 

 

2.  Al-Kafi makes a two-fold claim.  Scholars inherit the Prophets [asws] and Prophets [asws] do not leave "dirhams and dinars".  Far more clear-cut than any other narration that Prophets [asws] do not leave material wealth.

 

Here is the contradiction.

 

‘Ali ibn Ibrahim narrates from his father, from Hammad ibn ‘Isa, on the authority of [‘Abdullah ibn Maymun] al-Qaddah that Abu ‘Abdillah [imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq] ‘alayhis salam said: Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alayhi wa-alihi wasallam said: “Whoever walks a path seeking therein knowledge, Allah will lead him on a road to Jannah... And the ‘Ulama are the heirs of the Ambiya; and the Ambiya did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance; but they left knowledge. Therefore whosoever takes knowledge has taken a great portion.” (al-Kafi, Kitab Fadl al-‘Ilm, Bab Sifat al-‘Ilm wa-Fadlihi, hadith no. 2)

 

Sheikh Saduq, in Al-Khisal, narrates:

 

Muhammad ibn al-Hassan narrated that Muhammad ibn al-Hassan al-Saffar quoted on the authority of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa, on the authority of Al-Hassan ibn Ali al-Vasha, on the authority of Ahmad ibn Aez, on the authority of Abi Khadijeh that Aba Abdullah as-Sadiq said, The people can be divided into three groups: the scholars, the seekers of knowledge and the scum. We are the scholars. Our shia are the seekers of knowledge and the rest of the people are the scum.

 

Forget the Sunni narrations, as per your traditions, Ahlul Bayt [ra] were scholars and therefore, they only inherit knowledge from Rasulullah [saw].

 

 

 

Contradiction is no where but in your desperate mind that is trying hard to somehow give legal sanctity to the sin committed by your caliph. Ahlulbayt were no doubt scholars but that does not debar the biological progeny of Prophet (Fatima Zahrain this case) from inheriting the material possessions left by her father and as mentioned earlier, we have such sahih narration according to which she inherited the estate.  

Anyways, even if usurpers of Fadak had to come alive from the wrath of their graves that cannot prove from Shia text that "whatever is left by prophets is to be distributed as sadqa" which was a blatant lie advanced by the king  which he himself could not made implementation of and did not distribute some belongings of prophet as sadqa, such as houses of prophet, his sword, his garment etc. 

 

 

 

3.  First, the land of Fadak was not personal property to be gifted to anyone.

 

 

It was his personal/exclusive property

 

Al-Thuqat, by Ibn Haban, v2 p15
 
 
فكانت فدك لرسول الله خالصة 
 
  Second, Prophet [saw] cannot reward one of his children while leaving out the rest.  Three, what is illogical does not become logical because you say a book says so.

 

 

He can reward whatever and whomsoever he wants to and he did not need any permission either from 'Kazab al Akbar' or from you!! Same goes here, what is illogical does not become logical because you say so !!

Edited by B-N
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  Oh Yeah? is that why Abu Bakr in his inaugural speech made it clear that he was not the best among the ummah and he should be guided whenever he made mistakes in dispensation of his duties as a ruler lol?

 

2.  That is why he was so reluctant to become a ruler at the episode of saqifah and as per his own words he accepted rulership only because he feared that sahaba had recently converted to Islam and there were chances of their getting apostates on seeing dismal state of affairs?

 

3.  Our position is also clear that it was a gift and hence witnesses were sought

 

4.  Hence it was claimed as inheritance the stubborn king again rejected the claim on bringing a false theory.

 

5.  The self made tafsir of quranic verses that talk about inheritance of prophet were later concocted by the defenders of caliph where as caliph himself or the early generation of sunni scholars did not opined with this view or at least, they did not rule out the possibility that prophets can leave material inheritance. 

 

6.  Contradiction is no where but in your desperate mind that is trying hard to somehow give legal sanctity to the sin committed by your caliph. Ahlulbayt were no doubt scholars but that does not debar the biological progeny of Prophet (Fatima Zahrain this case) from inheriting the material possessions left by her father and as mentioned earlier, we have such sahih narration according to which she inherited the estate.  

 

7.  It was his personal/exclusive property

Al-Thuqat, by Ibn Haban, v2 p15

 

 

Salaam alaykum,

 

I begin with a polite phrase consisting of two simple words, thank you.  While it will be made clear as to why I am thanking you, I also would like to highlight something.  They say when people have fabricated stories, the more they talk (about it), the greater the chances that they would contradict themselves.  This is exactly why Yam_110 resorted to repeating the same questions over and over again without entertaining any of the narrations (brought forth from both Shia and Sunni texts) or responding to any of the refutations.

 

1.  The humility of Abu Bakr [ra] is something you will never grasp so what he [ra] said is not relevant to our discussion.  As said before, Sahabas [ra] are not infallible.  But you agree that only Imam Ali [ra] inherited Rasulullah [saw], therefore, as per your standards, Fatima [ra] is not a scholar.  Hence, it is possible that she [ra] did not hear what Abu Bakr [ra] quoted from Rasulullah [saw] (that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance) since her [ra] knowledge was not absolute (again per your standards).

 

2.  Reluctant?  I thought you believe that Abu Bakr [ra] conspired to gain the Caliphate.  There are lengthy posts and articles about this on Shia websites and blogs and now, all of a sudden, he [ra] was reluctant not a conspirator?!

 

3.  All the narrations say that Fatima [ra] asked for Fadak as her "inheritance" and every single narration (which says that Fadak was gifted to Fatima r.a.) is weak.  

 

4.  Again, none of the authentic narrations say that Fatima [ra] asked for Fadak on the basis that it was gifted to her.  After the wheels came off of the first argument (that Fadak was Fatima's [ra] inheritance), people made up another lie that it was "gifted" to her.

 

5.  There is no single verse in the Qur'an which says that Prophets [asws] leave inheritance.  On the contrary, we see that every time a Prophet [as] has asked for a heir - or a heir has been named for a Prophet [as] - the "inheritance" (or qualities being passed down) has been knowledge or wisdom or both.

 

6.  If Ahlul Bayt [ra] were scholars - and no doubt they were - then they themselves narrated that scholars inherit knowledge not dinars and dirhams.  Therefore, they only inherit knowledge, not material possession, from the Prophet [saw].

 

Remember what I said earlier?  The more you talk, the greater chances of you contradicting yourself.  Compare the two statements (in points 3 and 6) in red that I have highlighted.

 

"Our position is also clear that it was a gift and hence witnesses were sought 

 

we have such sahih narration according to which she inherited the estate."

 

Was it a "gift" or "inheritance"?  Your position is that it was a gift and there were witnesses but you also have sahih narration according to which Fatima [ra] inherited the state?  A gift is not inheritance and vice-versa.

 

I let this contradiction slip by earlier but seeing how things have played out, I won't let this slip by this time.

 

7.  If you read what Qur'an prescribes when it comes to fay, you will realize otherwise.  Is Al-Thuqat by Ibn Haban above the Qur'an?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The whole narration does prove your attempt futile as the question before what you have quoted proves the context in which this is being said. Look at what Imam Ali (as) asks   ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’. As we all know Imam Ali (as) was not asking about material inheritance as he was neither the son nor the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh). Again, your deceitful attempt is exposed.

 

Allah’s messenger said: ‘I swear by He who sent me with the truth, I only left you for myself, your status to me is like the status of Harun to Musa except there is no Prophet after me, you are my brother and my inheritor’. (Ali) said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘You shall inherit from me what the prophets used to inherit’. (Ali) said: ‘What did the Prophets inherit?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘The book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, you are with me in my palace in paradise along with my daughter Fatima, you are my brother and my friend’. Then Allah’s messenger recited the verse { (they shall be) 

 

Who said Imam Ali [ra] was asking for inheritance for himself?  What is relevant to our discussion is the question, "what did the Prophets inherit" and the answer which followed, "The Book of Allah and the sunnah of the Prophet".

 

Do you agree with the answer of Rasulullah [saw] to Imam Ali's [ra] question?

 

Spin it whichever way but the narration is clear that Prophets [asws] do not inherit wealth and therefore, they do not leave behind wealth (as inheritance).

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Salaam alaykum,

 

Allah’s messenger said: ‘I swear by He who sent me with the truth, I only left you for myself, your status to me is like the status of Harun to Musa except there is no Prophet after me, you are my brother and my inheritor’. (Ali) said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘You shall inherit from me what the prophets used to inherit’. (Ali) said: ‘What did the Prophets inherit?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘The book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, you are with me in my palace in paradise along with my daughter Fatima, you are my brother and my friend’. Then Allah’s messenger recited the verse { (they shall be) 

 

Who said Imam Ali [ra] was asking for inheritance for himself?  What is relevant to our discussion is the question, "what did the Prophets inherit" and the answer which followed, "The Book of Allah and the sunnah of the Prophet".

 

Do you agree with the answer of Rasulullah [saw] to Imam Ali's [ra] question?

 

Spin it whichever way but the narration is clear that Prophets [asws] do not inherit wealth and therefore, they do not leave behind wealth (as inheritance).

 

(wasalam)

 

Your old habit of taking narrations out of context or discussing only a part of a narration is at the fore again.

 

Have a read of the narration in totality again. The Prophet (pbuh) said you will be my brother & my inheritor. That is when the question about what will I inherit arises. Open you eyes and read the whole narration instead of wasting my time by quoting partial narrations.

 

Also, the narration proves that Imam Ali (as) is the leader in the absence of the Prophet (pbuh) and he holds a status similar to what Haroon (as) held to Musa (as). Is it that hard to interpret a simple narration???

 

Guess what, we all know why you are excluding the first part of the narration in your discussion.

 

 

This narration would have held any weight for you if the discussion was about what material inheritance have the Prophets left or if Imam Ali (as) was biological son or daughter of the Prophet. But unfortunately for you it is neither and since the discussion is about a completely different topic & in a totally different context, your talk is nothing but a waste of time. So another of your desperate attempt proves futile.

 

You don't have to spin it any way. You just need a clear head and logical thinking to derive an answer which if you possessed, you would have had an answer by now.

 

You are something to still linger around when your lies on the Quranic verses have been exposed by a narration from your own caliph. But I am not surprised at your desperate attempts of taking narrations out of context because that is all you have left to defend the mistakes of your caliphs as even Quran doesn't support your stance. So what do you do when Quran proves you wrong, turn to deceit and dishonesty.

 

Excellent!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  You don't have to spin it any way. You just need a clear head and logical thinking to derive an answer which if you possessed, you would have had an answer by now.

 

2.  Have a read of the narration in totality again. The Prophet (pbuh) said you will be my brother & my inheritor. That is when the question about what will I inherit arises. Open you eyes and read the whole narration instead of wasting my time by quoting partial narrations.

 

3.  Also, the narration proves that Imam Ali (as) is the leader in the absence of the Prophet (pbuh) and he holds a status similar to what Haroon (as) held to Musa (as). Is it that hard to interpret a simple narration???

 

4.  This narration would have held any weight for you if the discussion was about what material inheritance have the Prophets left or if Imam Ali (as) was biological son or daughter of the Prophet.

 

 5.  So what do you do when Quran proves you wrong, turn to deceit and dishonesty.

 

 

1.  Clear head and logical thinking would be the last two characteristics one would associate with you.

 

2.  The question posed was general, not specific.  "What did the Prophets inherit" and the answer is clear, "The Book of Allah and Sunnah". 

 

3.  This is outside the scope of our discussion but it is a fact that Yusha ibn Nun [asws], not Haroon [asws], succeeded Musa [asws].  There is also a context to that narration (you are to me as Haroon was to Musa) but we will let it be for the time being.

 

4.  So the narration would have had some weight if Imam Ali [ra] would have been the son of the Prophet [saw].  Well check this out:

 

Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said: “David inherited the knowledge of the prophets.  Solomon inherited David.  Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  (Al-Kafi, volume 1, page 225)  Majlisi graded this narration as sahih.

 

So Dawud [asws] inherited knowledge of the prophets [asws]. 

 

Who inherited from Dawud [asws]?  Sulaiman [asws].

 

How was Sulaiman [asws] related to Dawud [asws]?  Sulaiman [asws] was the son of Dawud [asws].

 

What did Sulaiman [asws] inherit from his father, Dawud [asws]?  Knowledge!

 

So there we see the inheritance of knowledge, not material possession, from one prophet to the next (both related by blood, one being the father of the other).

 

Another version in Al-Kafi, volume 1 says:

 

Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said, “Solomon inherited David. Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  We have the knowledge of Torah and the Gospel (Injil), the Psalms, (al-Zabur) and the explanation of what the tablets contained.”  I (the narrator) said, “This certainly is the knowledge.”

 

Now read, and try to understand, the narration in light of the above two narrations.

 

Allah’s messenger said: ‘I swear by He who sent me with the truth, I only left you for myself, your status to me is like the status of Harun to Musa except there is no Prophet after me, you are my brother and my inheritor’. (Ali) said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘You shall inherit from me what the prophets used to inherit’. (Ali) said: ‘What did the Prophets inherit?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘The book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, you are with me in my palace in paradise along with my daughter Fatima, you are my brother and my friend’. Then Allah’s messenger recited the verse { (they shall be)

 

By the way, the dilemma is whether Imam Ali [ra] was the only inheritor of the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw] or did the Ahlul Bayt [ra] also inherit the knowledge?  If you say Imam Ali [ra] was the sole inheritor of knowledge - like B-N - then that means that Fatima [ra] did not have absolute knowledge.  Thus, it is quite possible that she did not know, or had never heard the Prophet [saw] say, that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.

 

On the other hand, if you say that all of Ahlul Bayt [ra], including Fatima [ra], inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then they are all scholars.  And therefore, as per the narration in Al-Kafi, they are to only inherit knowledge from the Prophet [saw], not material inheritance.

 

5.  I read a fatwa on a website where a scholar had deemed lying, in order to prove an opponent wrong, permissible.  Without mentioning names and landing myself in trouble with the moderating team, I can assure you it was not an Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah scholar.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

H 1936, CH 62, h 2

It is narrated from him (narrator of the Hadith above) from Muhammad ibn Sinan from Mu'awiyah ibn Wahab from

abu ‘Abd Allah, recipient of divine supreme covenant, who has said the following: “Whoever likes to guarantee four things for me, I guarantee four homes in paradise. (He should guarantee me) to give charity without fear from his poverty, to speak out loud the greetings of peace in the world and quit excessive argumentation even though he is on the side of right. He must yield to justice for people against his own soul.”

(Wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  Clear head and logical thinking would be the last two characteristics one would associate with you.

 

2.  The question posed was general, not specific.  "What did the Prophets inherit" and the answer is clear, "The Book of Allah and Sunnah". 

 

3.  This is outside the scope of our discussion but it is a fact that Yusha ibn Nun [asws], not Haroon [asws], succeeded Musa [asws].  There is also a context to that narration (you are to me as Haroon was to Musa) but we will let it be for the time being.

 

4.  So the narration would have had some weight if Imam Ali [ra] would have been the son of the Prophet [saw].  Well check this out:

 

Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said: “David inherited the knowledge of the prophets.  Solomon inherited David.  Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  (Al-Kafi, volume 1, page 225)  Majlisi graded this narration as sahih.

 

So Dawud [asws] inherited knowledge of the prophets [asws]. 

 

Who inherited from Dawud [asws]?  Sulaiman [asws].

 

How was Sulaiman [asws] related to Dawud [asws]?  Sulaiman [asws] was the son of Dawud [asws].

 

What did Sulaiman [asws] inherit from his father, Dawud [asws]?  Knowledge!

 

So there we see the inheritance of knowledge, not material possession, from one prophet to the next (both related by blood, one being the father of the other).

 

Another version in Al-Kafi, volume 1 says:

 

Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said, “Solomon inherited David. Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  We have the knowledge of Torah and the Gospel (Injil), the Psalms, (al-Zabur) and the explanation of what the tablets contained.”  I (the narrator) said, “This certainly is the knowledge.”

 

Now read, and try to understand, the narration in light of the above two narrations.

 

Allah’s messenger said: ‘I swear by He who sent me with the truth, I only left you for myself, your status to me is like the status of Harun to Musa except there is no Prophet after me, you are my brother and my inheritor’. (Ali) said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘You shall inherit from me what the prophets used to inherit’. (Ali) said: ‘What did the Prophets inherit?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘The book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, you are with me in my palace in paradise along with my daughter Fatima, you are my brother and my friend’. Then Allah’s messenger recited the verse { (they shall be)

 

By the way, the dilemma is whether Imam Ali [ra] was the only inheritor of the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw] or did the Ahlul Bayt [ra] also inherit the knowledge?  If you say Imam Ali [ra] was the sole inheritor of knowledge - like B-N - then that means that Fatima [ra] did not have absolute knowledge.  Thus, it is quite possible that she did not know, or had never heard the Prophet [saw] say, that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.

 

On the other hand, if you say that all of Ahlul Bayt [ra], including Fatima [ra], inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then they are all scholars.  And therefore, as per the narration in Al-Kafi, they are to only inherit knowledge from the Prophet [saw], not material inheritance.

 

5.  I read a fatwa on a website where a scholar had deemed lying, in order to prove an opponent wrong, permissible.  Without mentioning names and landing myself in trouble with the moderating team, I can assure you it was not an Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah scholar.

 

1. At least they would be associated with me. As for you, no sane person can even think of associating those traits with you based on your desperate & deceitful posts so far.

 

2. Here is where you are mistaken. That was a follow up question to something you are deliberately ignoring. As I said earlier, read the narration in totality again.

 

3. It definitely is out of scope but remember you brought a part of the narration to the table and I am giving you the real meaning of the narration. Just to clarify your incorrect statement about the successor to Prophet Musa (as). Read the history again, when Prophet Musa (as) left on a pilgrimage he appointed Haroon (as) as his deputy and the reason why he didn't succeed him was because he died before Prophet Musa (as). Is it the blind love for certain individuals or your ego which is not allowing you to think straight?

 

4. You have long been misquoting narrations to suite your whims and fancies. Add this to the list. Just because the narration says knowledge was also inherited doesn't mean that it was the only thing inherited. You are wrong in two ways:

 

(i) Tell me which prophet did not have knowledge?

(ii) The fact that Prophet Sulaiman (as) inherited his father's kingdom is a proof that knowledge was not the only thing he could have inherited. 

 

So either way you look at it your desperate attempt has failed again.

 

 

There is no dilemma if the narration is read with the context in mind. It is very clear to a sane mind that Prophet (pbuh) is talking about something in relation to the relationship of Haroon (as) and Musa (as). So the latter part is just an elaboration of the first part. Unless you think that Haroon or Imam Ali  (as) were sons or daughters to Prophet Musa (as) or Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), your logic holds no ground. 

 

 

To you narrations can modify Quranic verses but for us it is the other way round. The earlier you grasp this basic concept the better for you as it would save you future embarrassments  

 

So if Quran states that every man and woman have a share in what their parents leave behind then what weight does a narration taken out of context hold?

 

Fear Allah swt and stop translating Quranic verses to your liking.

 

 

5. I get it. So that is why you are now staunchly defending a lie despite being exposed and not being supported even by your own caliphs, Thanks for clarifying your position. Now we have heard it straight from the horse's mouth.

 

 

 

 

Let's finish the last question from the initial set of questions you have been running away from.

 

 

Q. Do you have a verse from Quran which exempts the Prophets from inheritance?

A. NO. There is no verse which excludes the Prophets from the general inheritance laws.

 

Q. Do you have any narration which proves that Abu Bakr interpreted the verses like you are doing now?

A. NO narration is present about Abu Bakr interpreting the Quranic verses like it is being done recently.

 

Q. Do you have a narration to prove that Prophet   (pbuh) informed his family members that they would not receive anything after his death?

A. NO. There is no narration that Prophet  (pbuh) informed his family that they would not receive anything after him.

 

Q. As per Quran and your second caliph, Fai is meant ONLY for the Prophet. Do you deny?

A. Fai was MEANT ONLY for the Prophet (pbuh).

 

 

 

Did everything Prophet Davood (as) leave behind get distributed as alms?

Edited by yam_110
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  The fact that Prophet Sulaiman (as) inherited his father's kingdom is a proof that knowledge was not the only thing he could have inherited. 

 

2.  There is no dilemma if the narration is read with the context in mind. 

 

3.  To you narrations can modify Quranic verses but for us it is the other way round. The earlier you grasp this basic concept the better for you as it would save you future embarrassments  

 

4.  So if Quran states that every man and woman have a share in what their parents leave behind then what weight does a narration taken out of context hold?

 

5. I get it. So that is why you are now staunchly defending a lie despite being exposed and not being supported even by your own caliphs, Thanks for clarifying your position. Now we have heard it straight from the horse's mouth.

 

 

1.  How, and from whom, was the kingdom transferred to Dawud [asws]?  

 

2.  Funny that you say that when you have disregarded the context of everything, including the kingdom which was transferred from Talut [asws] to Dawud [asws] before it got to Sulaiman [asws].  Yet, you prefer to discuss the latter while ignoring the former.

 

3.  As a knowledgeable brother defined it for me, it is called "takhsis" (loosely translated "specification") of a general (amm) Qur'anic injunction.  For example, everyone has a share in what their parents have but Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  Furthermore, they only inherit knowledge!

 

Another example would be that people can receive, and benefit from, Zakat but not the Prophet [saw] and his family [ra].

 

In both cases, authentic narrations - otherwise specifications - made a special case for a specific group of people.

 

Before you teach me, please find out if takhsis is accepted in your madhhab because if it is, then you are the only one to take heed, not me :)

 

4.  In other words, an authentic narration from the Prophet [saw] means nothing to you?  SubhanAllah!

 

Both Shias and Sunnis have hadiths that make an exception for Prophets [asws] when it comes to inheritance so this makes for a strong case for the authenticity of this message.  Clearly, the Prophet [saw] said this and I even provided you a list - which included Imam Ali [ra], Abbas [ra] and ibn Abbas [ra] - of people who heard the same from the Prophet [saw].

 

5.  What?  All I said was that there is a website which condones lying in order to defeat your opponent and that that website is not an Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah website.  I will leave it to your imagination.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Q. Do you have a verse from Quran which exempts the Prophets from inheritance?

A. NO. There is no verse which excludes the Prophets from the general inheritance laws.

 

Q. Do you have any narration which proves that Abu Bakr interpreted the verses like you are doing now?

A. NO narration is present about Abu Bakr interpreting the Quranic verses like it is being done recently.

 

Q. Do you have a narration to prove that Prophet    (pbuh) informed his family members that they would not receive anything after his death?

A. NO. There is no narration that Prophet   (pbuh) informed his family that they would not receive anything after him.

 

Q. As per Quran and your second caliph, Fai is meant ONLY for the Prophet. Do you deny?

A. Fai was MEANT ONLY for the Prophet  (pbuh).

 

 

1.  It is called "takhsis".  Please see above for definition and explanation.

 

2.  Never ever did I say that Abu Bakr [ra] interpreted the verses according to my, or anyone else's, interpretation.  ShiaPen did and you are still harping on it.  Embarrassing for ShiaPen, the narration they took support from was proven to be weak.  They have not retracted their statement and you have no shame to stop harping on it.

 

3.  Imam Ali [ra], Abbas [ra] and ibn Abbas [ra] heard from the Prophet [saw] that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  Furthermore, I provided another narration in which Umar [ra] confirmed with the Sahabas [ra] - in the presence of Imam Ali [ra] and Abbas [ra] - the statement of Rasulullah [saw] that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  They all agreed, including Imam Ali [ra] and Abbas [ra].

 

4.  Read the entire narration again before accusing me of taking only a part of a hadith.

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Here is what was said

 

 

This narration would have held any weight for you if the discussion was about what material inheritance have the Prophets left or if Imam Ali  (as) was biological son or daughter of the Prophet.

 

 

Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said: “David inherited the knowledge of the prophets.  Solomon inherited David.  Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  (Al-Kafi, volume 1, page 225)  Majlisi graded this narration as sahih.

 

We know that Shias believe that Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw].  The statement made was that the narration would have held weight if Imam Ali [ra] would have been the son of Rasulullah [saw].

 

The hadith from Al-Kafi clearly shows that even Sulaiman [asws] inherited knowledge from his father, nothing more, nothing less, thus, substantiating our position that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance, "dinars and dirhams" or any material possession.  

 

There is one contradiction - leaving "gift" or inheritance" contradiction aside - as of now.

 

Was Imam Ali [ra] the only one who inherited knowledge from Rasulullah [saw] or did Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherit the knowledge of the Prophet [saw]?

 

One Shia hadith says that Imam Ali [ra] inherited knowledge from the Prophet [saw] while Fatima [ra] inherited his wealth.  However, the narration I have brought forth from Abu Abdullah [ra] says that "we inherited Muhammad [saw]" meaning Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw].

 

Who inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw]?  Imam Ali [ra] only or Ahlul Bayt [ra]?

 

Here is the problem we run into.  If only Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then Fatima [ra] had partial knowledge so it is understandable that she did not know, or did not hear the Prophet [saw] saying, that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.

 

However, if Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then they are scholars and they have no share in inheritance.  They are to only inherit knowledge.  Therefore, Fatima [ra] does not qualify to receive any material possession from the Prophet [saw], as per the narration in Al-Kafi which is sahih.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  How, and from whom, was the kingdom transferred to Dawud [asws]?  

 

2.  Funny that you say that when you have disregarded the context of everything, including the kingdom which was transferred from Talut [asws] to Dawud [asws] before it got to Sulaiman [asws].  Yet, you prefer to discuss the latter while ignoring the former.

 

3.  As a knowledgeable brother defined it for me, it is called "takhsis" (loosely translated "specification") of a general (amm) Qur'anic injunction.  For example, everyone has a share in what their parents have but Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  Furthermore, they only inherit knowledge!

 

Another example would be that people can receive, and benefit from, Zakat but not the Prophet [saw] and his family [ra].

 

In both cases, authentic narrations - otherwise specifications - made a special case for a specific group of people.

 

Before you teach me, please find out if takhsis is accepted in your madhhab because if it is, then you are the only one to take heed, not me :)

 

4.  In other words, an authentic narration from the Prophet [saw] means nothing to you?  SubhanAllah!

 

Both Shias and Sunnis have hadiths that make an exception for Prophets [asws] when it comes to inheritance so this makes for a strong case for the authenticity of this message.  Clearly, the Prophet [saw] said this and I even provided you a list - which included Imam Ali [ra], Abbas [ra] and ibn Abbas [ra] - of people who heard the same from the Prophet [saw].

 

5.  What?  All I said was that there is a website which condones lying in order to defeat your opponent and that that website is not an Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah website.  I will leave it to your imagination.

 

 

I will try to be very brief in my reply as you have repeated a lot of stuff which has been refuted already.

 

 

1. If Abu Bakr had mentioned exceptions in the narration he coined you would have had scope to discuss about the transfer of the kingdom. Since he said Prophets do not leave inheritance this question of yours is irrelevant and what remains relevant is that Prophet Dawood's (as) kingdom was NOT distributed as alms.

 

2. As I have stated above, you can blame Abu Bakr for that as he generalized that all Prophets do not leave anything. Since Talut was not a prophet we do not have to worry about it. 

 

3. You can call it whatever you like but your deception isn't going to help you this time as Quran clearly outlines the laws of inheritance for children. Just because you deny Quranic verses it doesn't mean that everyone should do it. I have already proved from Quran the reason for zakat being prohibited for a few members of the Prophet (pbuh) and yet you incorreclty hang on to a generic statement about the family of the Prophet (pbuh) not receiving it. Desperation at it's best.

 

4. Excuse me? Authentic??? A narration going against the Quran, finds itself only in your books, heard only by ONE person who was not impacted  by this and none of the family members were aware of it. It tells a sane mind that it cannot be authentic coz if it was then it would (nauzubillah) be an insult to the Prophet (pbuh). 

 

As I have said before, any narration which goes against the Quran is to be rejected.

 

Don't lie again. Shia books do not state what you are saying. You are taking narrations out of context and partially from our books. If you want to know the real meaning then open the books and see if you can interpret them the way you are alleging. You only mentioned the list but when asked for a proof you have evaded it twice. All you have mentioned is a narration which was coined to insult the Prophet's (pbuh) family.,

 

I am repeating it hopefully for the last time. Any narration which contradicts the Quran is to be binned. Just because you think narrations can modify Quranic verses doesn't mean anything.

 

 

5. It doesn't matter whose website it is. The fact you are following it is sufficient to expose your dishonesty. 

 

 

Allah says in Quran "Fay is bestowed upon the Prophet"

 

Umar says "Those lands were meant for the Prophet"

 

 

Yet, you state contrary to the above.

 

 

To interpret the Quran whose words do we trust? Your's or your caliphs?

 

Quran & Narrations have both proven you wrong on numerous occasions and yet you have the audacity to accuse others????

 

 

 

1.  It is called "takhsis".  Please see above for definition and explanation.
 
2.  Never ever did I say that Abu Bakr [ra] interpreted the verses according to my, or anyone else's, interpretation.  ShiaPen did and you are still harping on it.  Embarrassing for ShiaPen, the narration they took support from was proven to be weak.  They have not retracted their statement and you have no shame to stop harping on it.
 
3.  Imam Ali [ra], Abbas [ra] and ibn Abbas [ra] heard from the Prophet [saw] that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  Furthermore, I provided another narration in which Umar [ra] confirmed with the Sahabas [ra] - in the presence of Imam Ali [ra] and Abbas [ra] - the statement of Rasulullah [saw] that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  They all agreed, including Imam Ali [ra] and Abbas [ra].
 
4.  Read the entire narration again before accusing me of taking only a part of a hadith.
 

 

 
1. I do not care what you call it as you have proven that you are only good at accusing others. You will see the reason for these questions very soon in my future posts InshaAllah.
 
 
2. Embarrassingly for you the narration you claim to be weak is authentic. Read the details on the link I gave you. You ignore my reply and continue making incorrect claims. Even if we leave aside the authentic narration, the fact that Abu Bakr didnt't interpret the Quranic verses like you are doing now is enough to prove you wrong. Not just Abu Bakr, people who lived during the era of the revelation of the Quran didn't interpret the verses that way. Even the tabaeen didn't interpret the verses in a way you are doing now as we have seen earlier. Doesn't it tell you something?
 
We have seen you incorrectly quoting Quranic verses to prove your point yet Abu Bakr did not think of it? The truth is if he thought the verses would help him he would have boasted about it to prove his stance. Yet he only confined himself to a narration which he coined. However, we see you going a step further and thinking that you are more knowledgeable that Abu Bakr himself and interpreting the Quranic verses to your liking. This is a clear case of deceit & dishonesty which even Abu Bakr didn't try.
 
So it is quite clear that your interpretation is something which has been fabricated centuries after the revelation of the Quran to defend the mistakes of the person who himself didn't interpret the verses that way.
 
 
3. Firstly that narration is from your books and secondly, I have refuted it already. Go back and read my posts instead of repeating the same stuff over and over again & wasting my time. As I have said before, if that narration is true then you must also agree that they thought of Abu Bakr to be liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.
 
 
4. Which narration? 
 
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
Here is what was said
 
 
 
Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said: “David inherited the knowledge of the prophets.  Solomon inherited David.  Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  (Al-Kafi, volume 1, page 225)  Majlisi graded this narration as sahih.
 
We know that Shias believe that Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw].  The statement made was that the narration would have held weight if Imam Ali [ra] would have been the son of Rasulullah [saw].
 
The hadith from Al-Kafi clearly shows that even Sulaiman [asws] inherited knowledge from his father, nothing more, nothing less, thus, substantiating our position that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance, "dinars and dirhams" or any material possession.  
 
There is one contradiction - leaving "gift" or inheritance" contradiction aside - as of now.
 
Was Imam Ali [ra] the only one who inherited knowledge from Rasulullah [saw] or did Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherit the knowledge of the Prophet [saw]?
 
One Shia hadith says that Imam Ali [ra] inherited knowledge from the Prophet [saw] while Fatima [ra] inherited his wealth.  However, the narration I have brought forth from Abu Abdullah [ra] says that "we inherited Muhammad [saw]" meaning Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw].
 
Who inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw]?  Imam Ali [ra] only or Ahlul Bayt [ra]?
 
Here is the problem we run into.  If only Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then Fatima [ra] had partial knowledge so it is understandable that she did not know, or did not hear the Prophet [saw] saying, that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.
 
However, if Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then they are scholars and they have no share in inheritance.  They are to only inherit knowledge.  Therefore, Fatima [ra] does not qualify to receive any material possession from the Prophet [saw], as per the narration in Al-Kafi which is sahih.

 

 
 

 

All through this post you have been repeating stuff and adding no value to this discussion.

 

I am not going to repeat myself just because you are not reading my posts. But I will only highlight two things.

 

i) The narration is talking about the successor to the Prophet (pbuh) and not the inheritor to his material wealth invalidates your attempt.

ii) As per Quran, sons and daughters would inherit the material wealth of the parents and this narration is not about material wealth. So to divert this topic to something which goes against Quran and say that Imam Ali (as) inherited the Prophet (pbuh) or Bibi Fatima (s) ; is a clear proof of you taking this narration out of context again.

 

 

To add to the above, as I have mentioned in my previous reply:

 

(i) Tell me which prophet did not have knowledge?

(ii) The fact that Prophet Sulaiman  (as) inherited his father's kingdom is a proof that knowledge was not the only thing he could have inherited. 

 

It would help you if you read my posts before repeating stuff over and over again as it would at least save you some embarrassment.

 

 

For argument's sake if I brush aside logic and accept your desperate position then it actually results in more problems for you than for me. 

 

If you agree that Imam Ali (as) had inherited the knowledge of the Prophet then as he sided with the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) on her stance on Fadak & said that "Verily, under the sky we had only Fadak as our personal property but we were deprived of it, it tempted them, they took it by force and we had to bear the wrench patiently and cheerfully, the best judge is the Lord Almighty." means that the person who had inherited the knowledge of the Prophet thought of Abu Bakr as an usurper.

 

 

Choice is now yours to make. 

 

(wasalam)

Edited by yam_110
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I will try to be very brief in my reply as you have repeated a lot of stuff which has been refuted already.

 

 

1.   that Prophet Dawood's (as) kingdom was NOT distributed as alms.

 

2.  As I have said before, any narration which goes against the Quran is to be rejected.

 

I am repeating it hopefully for the last time. Any narration which contradicts the Quran is to be binned. Just because you think narrations can modify Quranic verses doesn't mean anything.

 

3.  Umar says "Those lands were meant for the Prophet"

 
 
4.  Embarrassingly for you the narration you claim to be weak is authentic. 
 
 
5.  The narration is talking about the successor to the Prophet (pbuh) and not the inheritor to his material wealth invalidates your attempt.

 

6.  The fact that Prophet Sulaiman  (as) inherited his father's kingdom is a proof that knowledge was not the only thing he could have inherited. 

 

 

Indeed, you were very brief.

 

1.  Logical deduction evades you but try real hard to grasp this.  And I am sure you will not disappoint us.  It is imperative for you to prove that nothing, from the kingdom of Dawud [asws], was given as alms.  Also, it can be deduced that since nothing (from the kingdom) was given in charity, then none of it (kingdom) belonged to Dawud [asws] to being with.  That is what the Qur'an says and scholars agree to it.  

 

Transfer of kingdom is a matter of succession, not inheritance.  The "inheritance" of the kingdom by Sulaiman [asws] does not fit any inheritance prescription of any religion or law.  Succession, not inheritance, remember that.

 

2.  Really?  So then Zakat is permissible on Ahlul Bayt [ra], right?  Don't tell me that the Qur'an says that Ahlul Bayt [ra] are free from impurities and no impurities should reach them, et cetera, et cetera.  The only place where this specification is made clear - that Ahlul Bayt [ra] cannot take from sadaqa - is in hadiths.

 

3.  Meant for the Prophet [saw] to give Fadak as a gift and continue to distribute its proceeds?  The narration, understood in its entirety, is enough to refute that which you ascribe to it.

 

4.  You, in post 53, said:  

 

 

Quoting Ibn Sad’s Tabaqat Al-Kabeer, Vol-11, p393, by S. Moinul Haq:
 
Muhammad Ibn Umar informed us; (he said): Hisham Ibn Sa’d related to me on the authority of Abbas Ibn ‘Abd Allah Ibn Ma’bad, he on the authority of Ja’ffar; he said: Fatima came to Abu Bakr and demanded her share in the inheritance. Al-Abbas Ibn Abd al-Muttalib came to him and demanded his share in the inheritance. Ali came with them. Thereupon Abu Bakr said: The Apostle of Allah said: We leave no inheritance, what we leave behind us is sadaqah. I shall make provisions for those for whom the Prophet had made. On this Ali said: Sulayman (Solomon) inherited Dawud (David); and Zakariya said: He may be my heir and the heir of the children of Ya’qub. Abu Bakr said: This is as this is. By Allah! You know it as I know. Thereupon Ali said: This is the book of Allah that speaks. Then they became quite and retired.
 
 
-The first narrator is Muhammad bin `Umar al-Waqidi the historian, a man accused of fabricating narrations.
-The second narrator is Hisham ibn Sa`d al-Qurashy who makes so many mistakes that his narrations are not accepted without support.
-Then `Abbas bin Ma`bad is thiqah but he narrates this narration from Ja`far, and this Ja`far is unknown.
-The unknown Ja`far narrates from Fatimah and `Ali which shows a great gap in the chain, meaning it is disconnected.
-This narration opposes the most authentic of detailed narrations as there was no mention of such an argument between them.
 
5.  This is like atheists who, when asked as to where they derive objective morality from, say that they know what is objectively (morally) right because it just is!  It is called moral idealism but it does not answer anything.  
 
To say that the narration talks about X, not Y, therefore it invalidates your attempt is to just state something and say that it is as specified just because.
 
Knowledge is inherited.  Scholars only inherit knowledge (from Prophets [asws]).  Ahlul Bayt [ra] only inherited knowledge from the Prophet [saw].  Prophets [asws] only inherited knowledge from other Prophets [asws] (as we read in the hadith from Abu Abdullah [ra]).
 
The only time there is a mention of any material possession is in the narration of Al-Kafi which clearly states - after stating that scholars inherit knowledge of the Prophets [asws] - that Prophets [asws] do not leave dinars and dirhams.  There is not another narration more clear, explicit and specific than the one in Al-Kafi which deals with both "knowledge" and "dinars and dirhams".  The former is inherited, the latter is said to not be something that Prophets [asws] leave behind.
 
6.  Dawud [asws] had many sons.  By Islamic laws of inheritance, or any other law, can you prove the successorship of Sulaiman [asws] as "inheritance"?
 
But what about the contradiction?  Was Imam Ali [ra] the only one who inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw] or did Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited his knowledge?
 
Zurara narrated that Abi Jaffar (as) said: ‘Ali inherited the knowledge of Allah's messenger and Fatima inherited his property.’
 
So Fatima [ra] did not inherit the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], therefore, she [ra] did not know, or had not heard from the Prophet [saw], that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.
 
                                                                                           OR
 
Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said, “Solomon inherited David. Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  We have the knowledge of Torah and the Gospel (Injil), the Psalms, (al-Zabur) and the explanation of what the tablets contained.”  I (the narrator) said, “This certainly is the knowledge.”
 
Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw], including Fatima [ra], therefore, they were all scholars.  Hence - as per the narration in Al-Kafi which says, "And the 'Ulama are the heirs of the Ambiya; and the Ambiya did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance; but they left knowledge. Therefore whosoever takes knowledge has taken a great portion" - the Ahlul Bayt [ra], including Fatima [ra], were not to inherit any material possession from the Prophet [saw].
Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Let me also address the first contradiction.  Eleven pages and we are still arguing over inheritance.  Inheritance?

 

Zurara narrated that Abi Jaffar (as) said: ‘Ali inherited the knowledge of Allah's messenger and Fatima inherited his property.

 

Okay, so Fatima [ra] is said to have inherited the property of Rasulullah [saw].

 

But, in post # 56, you shared the following point:

 

"I know where you are alluding to but I do not want to expand this topic further. Let's see what is written about the gift.

 

In Shia books, we read in Tafseer al-Qumi, Volume 2 page 155:

 
My Father narrated from Ibn Abi Umayr from Uthman bin Isa and Hamaad bin Uthman that Abu Abdullah said: ‘…. she (Um Ayman) said: ‘I testify that Allah revealed to Allah’s apostle ‘{And give to the near of kin his due} thus he (s) gave Fadak to Fatima’."
 
According to one narration, Fatima [ra] inherited the property of Rasulullah [saw].  However, you say that Tafseer Al-Qumi supports that Fadak was a gift.
 
Contradiction!
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

 

Indeed, you were very brief.

 

1.  Logical deduction evades you but try real hard to grasp this.  And I am sure you will not disappoint us.  It is imperative for you to prove that nothing, from the kingdom of Dawud [asws], was given as alms.  Also, it can be deduced that since nothing (from the kingdom) was given in charity, then none of it (kingdom) belonged to Dawud [asws] to being with.  That is what the Qur'an says and scholars agree to it.  

 

Transfer of kingdom is a matter of succession, not inheritance.  The "inheritance" of the kingdom by Sulaiman [asws] does not fit any inheritance prescription of any religion or law.  Succession, not inheritance, remember that.

 

2.  Really?  So then Zakat is permissible on Ahlul Bayt [ra], right?  Don't tell me that the Qur'an says that Ahlul Bayt [ra] are free from impurities and no impurities should reach them, et cetera, et cetera.  The only place where this specification is made clear - that Ahlul Bayt [ra] cannot take from sadaqa - is in hadiths.

 

3.  Meant for the Prophet [saw] to give Fadak as a gift and continue to distribute its proceeds?  The narration, understood in its entirety, is enough to refute that which you ascribe to it.

 

4.  You, in post 53, said:  

 

-The first narrator is Muhammad bin `Umar al-Waqidi the historian, a man accused of fabricating narrations.
-The second narrator is Hisham ibn Sa`d al-Qurashy who makes so many mistakes that his narrations are not accepted without support.
-Then `Abbas bin Ma`bad is thiqah but he narrates this narration from Ja`far, and this Ja`far is unknown.
-The unknown Ja`far narrates from Fatimah and `Ali which shows a great gap in the chain, meaning it is disconnected.
-This narration opposes the most authentic of detailed narrations as there was no mention of such an argument between them.
 
5.  This is like atheists who, when asked as to where they derive objective morality from, say that they know what is objectively (morally) right because it just is!  It is called moral idealism but it does not answer anything.  
 
To say that the narration talks about X, not Y, therefore it invalidates your attempt is to just state something and say that it is as specified just because.
 
Knowledge is inherited.  Scholars only inherit knowledge (from Prophets [asws]).  Ahlul Bayt [ra] only inherited knowledge from the Prophet [saw].  Prophets [asws] only inherited knowledge from other Prophets [asws] (as we read in the hadith from Abu Abdullah [ra]).
 
The only time there is a mention of any material possession is in the narration of Al-Kafi which clearly states - after stating that scholars inherit knowledge of the Prophets [asws] - that Prophets [asws] do not leave dinars and dirhams.  There is not another narration more clear, explicit and specific than the one in Al-Kafi which deals with both "knowledge" and "dinars and dirhams".  The former is inherited, the latter is said to not be something that Prophets [asws] leave behind.
 
6.  Dawud [asws] had many sons.  By Islamic laws of inheritance, or any other law, can you prove the successorship of Sulaiman [asws] as "inheritance"?
 
But what about the contradiction?  Was Imam Ali [ra] the only one who inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw] or did Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited his knowledge?
 
Zurara narrated that Abi Jaffar (as) said: ‘Ali inherited the knowledge of Allah's messenger and Fatima inherited his property.’
 
So Fatima [ra] did not inherit the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], therefore, she [ra] did not know, or had not heard from the Prophet [saw], that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.
 
                                                                                           OR
 
Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) said, “Solomon inherited David. Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) inherited Solomon and we inherited Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ali).  We have the knowledge of Torah and the Gospel (Injil), the Psalms, (al-Zabur) and the explanation of what the tablets contained.”  I (the narrator) said, “This certainly is the knowledge.”
 
Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited the knowledge of Rasulullah [saw], including Fatima [ra], therefore, they were all scholars.  Hence - as per the narration in Al-Kafi which says, "And the 'Ulama are the heirs of the Ambiya; and the Ambiya did not leave dinars and dirhams as inheritance; but they left knowledge. Therefore whosoever takes knowledge has taken a great portion" - the Ahlul Bayt [ra], including Fatima [ra], were not to inherit any material possession from the Prophet [saw].
 

 

 

 
Indeed, all thanks to the amount of repeated stuff in your post.
 
1. You have lost your rights to talk of logic. So if you refrain from it then the better it would be for you. You sure have not disappointed us with the amount of illogical stuff you have posted so far. Your modern day scholars can change the meaning of the Quranic verses all they want but the fact that the people who lived during the time of the revelation of Quran didn't interpret the verses that way is clear evidence that Prophet Dawood's (as) land was not left behind as charity. The fact that the a Prophet did not distribute everything in his kingdom as alms is a clear proof that the narration by Abu Bakr is a fabrication.
 
Read what I had mentioned in my previous reply:
 
 
The fact that Abu Bakr didnt't interpret the Quranic verses like you are doing now is enough to prove you wrong. Not just Abu Bakr, people who lived during the era of the revelation of the Quran didn't interpret the verses that way. Even the tabaeen didn't interpret the verses in a way you are doing now as we have seen earlier. Doesn't it tell you something?
 
We have seen you incorrectly quoting Quranic verses to prove your point yet Abu Bakr did not think of it? The truth is if he thought the verses would help him he would have boasted about it to prove his stance. Yet he only confined himself to a narration which he coined. However, we see you going a step further and thinking that you are more knowledgeable that Abu Bakr himself and interpreting the Quranic verses to your liking. This is a clear case of deceit & dishonesty which even Abu Bakr didn't try.
 
So it is quite clear that your interpretation is something which has been fabricated centuries after the revelation of the Quran to defend the mistakes of the person who himself didn't interpret the verses that way.
 
 
If you have anyone to blame for leaving you stranded in the middle of no where it is none but Abu Bakr who coined the narration in haste which contradicts the Quran and also the historical facts. How unfortunate for you!
 
 
2. I am not sure why you want me to repeat myself. Read my posts again and you will find the link between the Quranic verses and the 
narrations loud & clear.
 
 
3. That's secondary. Let's first agree on the verse. So please let us know who is right you OR your caliph?
 
 
4. Firstly, it is another clear evidence about how deceitfully you take stuff out of context. Read the very next line after the one you have pasted above. It is clearly mentioned that I was talking about a link and the link I had giving on this subject was about the sermon of Fadak and secondly, on a random Google search for the first narrator 'Muhammad bin `Umar al-Waqidi' it is clear that he has been weakened by the modern day scholars which is line with what I have been saying so far. 
 
As I have stated in of my earlier posts as well. He may not be acceptable in Hadith and important religious injunctions such as the question concerning permissible (halal) and impermissible (haram) but was acceptable in the Maghazi and Siyar and in such events of early history which did not run against the principles of historical evidence or personal bias.
 
As the current discussion is about history he should be acceptable.
 
 
5. I like the way how when I turned your own logic against you, you completely ignored it in your reply.
 
The fact that you have not answered my questions and as I have proven to you how the converse also works against you is sufficient for me to ignore your ignorant rants and move on. To add to that you have taken a narration out of context whose interpretation based on your logic goes against Quran and will have to be rejected. The problem for you is that we only accept narrations which go in conjunction with Quran unlike your weird assumption that narrations can modify Quranic verses.
 
(i) Tell me which prophet did not have knowledge?
(ii) The fact that Prophet Sulaiman  (as) inherited his father's kingdom is a proof that knowledge was not the only thing he could have inherited. 
 
 
6. I am not surprised that you are still continuing with your desperate and illogical attempts. I  have already addressed this and you are only wasting my time by repeating stuff which has been refuted already. But let me go in detail.
 
Let's look at your assumptions. 
 
'Was Imam Ali [ra] the only one who inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw] or did Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited his knowledge?'
 
If Imam Ali (as) had inherited the knowledge of Prophet (pbuh) then as he ALSO was of the opinion that Abu Bakr was wrong and Fadak belonged to Bibi Fatima (s) is enough to find who the real owners of Fadak were.
 
'So Fatima [ra] did not inherit the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], therefore, she [ra] did not know, or had not heard from the Prophet [saw], that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.'
 
If we nauzubillah assume that Bibi Fatima had partial knowledge, then the fact that Imam Ali (as) supported her claim is a proof that as per the knowledge of the Prophet (pbuh) , Fadak was a property which belonged to the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh). 
 
 
Now tell me where is the contradiction? It's a win-win situation for me as Property of Fadak belonged to the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) based on the inherited knowledge of the Prophet (pbuh).
 
 
 
I will InshaAllah wrap up the discussion based on the questions discussed very soon. 
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

 

Let me also address the first contradiction.  Eleven pages and we are still arguing over inheritance.  Inheritance?

 

Zurara narrated that Abi Jaffar (as) said: ‘Ali inherited the knowledge of Allah's messenger and Fatima inherited his property.

 

Okay, so Fatima [ra] is said to have inherited the property of Rasulullah [saw].

 

But, in post # 56, you shared the following point:

 

"I know where you are alluding to but I do not want to expand this topic further. Let's see what is written about the gift.

 

In Shia books, we read in Tafseer al-Qumi, Volume 2 page 155:

 
My Father narrated from Ibn Abi Umayr from Uthman bin Isa and Hamaad bin Uthman that Abu Abdullah said: ‘…. she (Um Ayman) said: ‘I testify that Allah revealed to Allah’s apostle ‘{And give to the near of kin his due} thus he (s) gave Fadak to Fatima’."
 
According to one narration, Fatima [ra] inherited the property of Rasulullah [saw].  However, you say that Tafseer Al-Qumi supports that Fadak was a gift.
 
Contradiction!

 

 

 

The only reason why you are trying desperately to find contradictions is because you know you cannot prove anything from Quran or based on historical facts.

 

Now as both me and brother B-N have already clearly stated, Fadak was a gift which when denied was seeked as inheritance using Quranic verses. Now you bring a narration and claim that there is a contradiction. Let's see the narration:

 

Zurara narrated that Abi Jaffar  (as) said: ‘Ali inherited the knowledge of Allah's messenger and Fatima inherited his property.

 

 

Please tell me where does it say that it is about Fadak?

 

 

As mentioned in Quran, every son or daughter has a share in his/her father's property which is exactly what the narration is talking about. So it is evident that narrations in Shia books say that Prophets are inherited which is in conjunction with Quranic verses.

 

 

Please save yourself future embarrassments and read the narrations by understanding the context before making any claims.

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

1. You have lost your rights to talk of logic.

 
The fact that Abu Bakr didnt't interpret the Quranic verses like you are doing now is enough to prove you wrong.
 
So it is quite clear that your interpretation is something which has been fabricated centuries after the revelation of the Quran to defend the mistakes of the person who himself didn't interpret the verses that way.
 
 
If you have anyone to blame for leaving you stranded in the middle of no where it is none but Abu Bakr who coined the narration in haste which contradicts the Quran and also the historical facts. How unfortunate for you!
 
 
2. That's secondary. Let's first agree on the verse. So please let us know who is right you OR your caliph?
 
 
3.  As I have stated in of my earlier posts as well. He may not be acceptable in Hadith and important religious injunctions such as the question concerning permissible (halal) and impermissible (haram) but was acceptable in the Maghazi and Siyar and in such events of early history which did not run against the principles of historical evidence or personal bias.
 
 
4. (ii) The fact that Prophet Sulaiman   (as) inherited his father's kingdom is a proof that knowledge was not the only thing he could have inherited. 
 
 
5. I am not surprised that you are still continuing with your desperate and illogical attempts. I  have already addressed this and you are only wasting my time by repeating stuff which has been refuted already. But let me go in detail.
 
Let's look at your assumptions. 
 
'Was Imam Ali [ra] the only one who inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw] or did Ahlul Bayt [ra] inherited his knowledge?'
 
If Imam Ali (as) had inherited the knowledge of Prophet (pbuh) then as he ALSO was of the opinion that Abu Bakr was wrong and Fadak belonged to Bibi Fatima (s) is enough to find who the real owners of Fadak were.
 
'So Fatima [ra] did not inherit the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], therefore, she [ra] did not know, or had not heard from the Prophet [saw], that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.'
 
If we nauzubillah assume that Bibi Fatima had partial knowledge, then the fact that Imam Ali (as) supported her claim is a proof that as per the knowledge of the Prophet (pbuh) , Fadak was a property which belonged to the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh). 
 
 
Now tell me where is the contradiction? It's a win-win situation for me as Property of Fadak belonged to the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) based on the inherited knowledge of the Prophet (pbuh).

 

 

 

Apologies for the late response.

 

1.  Let us see who should be the last person to talk logic.  Even after the narration has been proven weak, you are still adamant that Abu Bakr [ra] did not interpret the verses like me, or any other Muslim who sides with Abu Bakr [ra].  Do you realize that when we say that this is a weak hadith that this incident did not happen at all?  After all, the first narrator in the chain is a fabricator.  Or are we to fabricate "historical events" or shuffle them up - like you so brazenly put demanding Fadak before the alleged burning of the house of Fatima [ra] - in order to suit our case?

 

2.  Imam Ali's [ra] Caliph (since Imam Ali [ra] gave him the pledge) and my Caliph [ra] did the same with Fadak as what Rasulullah [saw] used to do with it.  Troublesome it is for you to explain why Imam Ali [ra] would pledge allegiance to those who "usurped" Caliphate from him and Fadak from his wife [ra].

 

3.  Imam al-Shafi [rah], Imam Bukhari [rah], Imam Hanbal [rah], Imam al-Nasai [rah] and others declared him as nothing more than a story-teller.  You may learn history from him - and people like him have indeed impaired your sense of understanding and recognizing history - but we can do without just fine.  Let me prove it to you.

 

Here you are arguing with me that Fatima [ra] fought for her right (Fadak) at a time when she had a miscarriage and broken ribs.  As a mother, would she not be grieving over the loss of her son? What mother, after losing her son, would go around asking for "her land"?

 

Furthermore, the narrations you use - from the Sahihain - indicate that Fatima [ra] became angry with Abu Bakr [ra] when he refused to give her Fadak?  Ajeeb!  She was not angry with him when she had a miscarriage but only when Abu Bakr [ra] refused her Fadak?! 

 

You, indeed, rely on history from people like al-Waqidi.

 

4.  Please prove, using Islamic inheritance or any inheritance law that you know of, the transfer of kingdom from Dawud [asws] to Sulaiman [asws] as "inheritance".

 

5.  It is not a win-win situation, unless you are eager to win only Fadak....but even then, you end up conceding Fadak along with everything else.  First of all, you have entertained the idea that Fatima [ra] may not have full, absolute knowledge.  That is great!  In Islam, we do not see anyone, other than Rasulullah [saw], having absolute knowledge of the religion.

 

Second of all, Imam Ali [ra] never took Fadak back for his children.  To say Ahlul Bayt [ra] would not take back that which was unjustly taken from them is speaking out of your own whims.  This is like taking someone to court only to say, "well, I do not want my right, I just wanted the people to know who the culprit is" and walk out of the court.

 

Third of all, Imam Ali [ra] is said to have referred to Fadak as "our" property in Nahjul Balagha but he is also one, among 12 others, who heard the Prophet [saw] say that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  We have a chain for everything; Nahjul Balagha does not.  Any serious student of Islam would know what to side with.

 

As for siding with Fatima [ra], read this:

“When Fatima asked for Fadak from Abu Bakr and he refused to give it to her, she returned full of anger that could not be described and she was sick; and she was angry with Ali because he refused to help her.” (Al-Majlisi’s Haqq-ul-Yaqeen, pp.203-204; also recorded in Al-Tusi’s Amali, p.295)

 

Lastly, to help you a little, ShiaPen has a refutation for the narration I just quoted from Haqq-ul-Yaqeen and Amali.  I am waiting for you to use their refutation to try to get out of this uncomfortable situation ;)

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  Now as both me and brother B-N have already clearly stated, Fadak was a gift which when denied was seeked as inheritance using Quranic verses. Now you bring a narration and claim that there is a contradiction. Let's see the narration:

 

2.  Zurara narrated that Abi Jaffar  (as) said: ‘Ali inherited the knowledge of Allah's messenger and Fatima inherited his property.

 

Please tell me where does it say that it is about Fadak?

 

 

3.  As mentioned in Quran, every son or daughter has a share in his/her father's property which is exactly what the narration is talking about. So it is evident that narrations in Shia books say that Prophets are inherited which is in conjunction with Quranic verses.

 

 

 

1.  Brother B-N flopped really bad, hence, his early exit and departure from this discussion.  He said, in the same post, that we (Shias) have narrations that prove Fadak was a gift and then few sentences later, he said that we (Shias) have proof that Fadak was inherited by Fatima [ra].  Gift is not inheritance and inheritance is not gift.  Gifting someone does not have rules or laws that apply to it, inheritance does!

 

Again, your point that Fatima [ra] could not maintain Fadak as a gift so she asked it as inheritance is so ridiculous - and insulting to Ahlul Bayt [ra] - that we are to believe that the Leader of Women in Paradise was arguing over a piece of land, and changing her stance from gift to inheritance, to ensure she gets the land all while she had broken ribs and a miscarried son (whom she was not concerned about at all)!

 

2.  Going by your arguments, which other personal property (other than Fadak) did Rasulullah [saw] have?  Are you now saying that according to you, Fadak is not the property of Rasulullah [saw]?  If that is the case, then we have agreed that Fadak cannot be inherited, as personal property, by Fatima [ra] or anyone else for that matter.

 

That aside, do you agree that only Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw]?

 

If yes, then Fatima [ra] has partial knowledge and she did not know, or may not have heard the Prophet [saw] say, that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  It also contradicts other Shia narrations which say that Ahlul Bayt [ra] are inheritors of the knowledge of the Prophet [saw].  Finally, if you say that Ahlul Bayt [ra], including Fatima [ra], inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then as per the narration in Al-Kafi, they are scholars and not inheritors of any material wealth from Rasulullah [saw].

 

3.  What?  You just denied that point 2 (the narration I brought forth) has anything to do with Fadak and now you are saying that children inherit their parents as per the Qur'an.  All this time, you have been fighting for Fadak being the personal property of Rasulullah [saw].  Now you are casting doubt upon it by saying that the narration does not talk about Fadak.

 

Seriously, you need to get your story right, make sure all the angles match and all the numbers add up to what you have in your head before you present it.

Edited by muslim720
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1.  Brother B-N flopped really bad, hence, his early exit and departure from this discussion.  He said, in the same post, that we (Shias) have narrations that prove Fadak was a gift and then few sentences later, he said that we (Shias) have proof that Fadak was inherited by Fatima [ra].  Gift is not inheritance and inheritance is not gift.  Gifting someone does not have rules or laws that apply to it, inheritance does!

 

 

LOL.. Till date i have not received answer of the following from you and the point is still unattended, i.e, since you are more than keen to prove that Shia text also says that prophets do not leave inheritance but you have miserably failed to prove, from Shia text, the concluding part of the Hadith fabricated/claimed by Abu Bakar, according to which 'whatever prophets leave is to be distributed as sadqa' !!! In fact Abu Bakar himself did not make implementation of this part of his lie thats why we see that not 'everything' prophet (s) left was distributed by him as sadqa such as apartments of prophets, prophet's ring, his garment etc. Thus, if anyone has been flopped badly, its the 'kazab al akber' whose adherents are till date making all false attempts to defend his act but in vain :)

 

And yes, we have proof that Fatima Zahra (sa) demanded Fadak and in this regard Um e Ayman testified (tafsir al qummi), and yes we know that when usurper denied the claim on one pretext or the other than Fatima Zahra (sa) claimed it as inheritance but since king's was adamant thus she was denied this right as well. So you are rather advised not to play with the 'either gift or inheritance' card because you are making no favour to your client (Abu Bakar) like this and its only adding to his already tarnished character. 

 

The bottom line is, the fact that your early generation of scholars did not rule out the possibility of prophets leaving behind material possessions as inheritance has actually left your generation of Abu Bakar's advocates in a rather awkward situation, but still, keep trying. And yes, even if any window was left open for you, it was subsequently shut by your subsequent caliphs who handed over the fadak to the Ahlulbayt (as) deeming it their right.  

Edited by B-N
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Apologies for the late response.

 

1.  Let us see who should be the last person to talk logic.  Even after the narration has been proven weak, you are still adamant that Abu Bakr [ra] did not interpret the verses like me, or any other Muslim who sides with Abu Bakr [ra].  Do you realize that when we say that this is a weak hadith that this incident did not happen at all?  After all, the first narrator in the chain is a fabricator.  Or are we to fabricate "historical events" or shuffle them up - like you so brazenly put demanding Fadak before the alleged burning of the house of Fatima [ra] - in order to suit our case?

 

2.  Imam Ali's [ra] Caliph (since Imam Ali [ra] gave him the pledge) and my Caliph [ra] did the same with Fadak as what Rasulullah [saw] used to do with it.  Troublesome it is for you to explain why Imam Ali [ra] would pledge allegiance to those who "usurped" Caliphate from him and Fadak from his wife [ra].

 

3.  Imam al-Shafi [rah], Imam Bukhari [rah], Imam Hanbal [rah], Imam al-Nasai [rah] and others declared him as nothing more than a story-teller.  You may learn history from him - and people like him have indeed impaired your sense of understanding and recognizing history - but we can do without just fine.  Let me prove it to you.

 

Here you are arguing with me that Fatima [ra] fought for her right (Fadak) at a time when she had a miscarriage and broken ribs.  As a mother, would she not be grieving over the loss of her son? What mother, after losing her son, would go around asking for "her land"?

 

Furthermore, the narrations you use - from the Sahihain - indicate that Fatima [ra] became angry with Abu Bakr [ra] when he refused to give her Fadak?  Ajeeb!  She was not angry with him when she had a miscarriage but only when Abu Bakr [ra] refused her Fadak?! 

 

You, indeed, rely on history from people like al-Waqidi.

 

4.  Please prove, using Islamic inheritance or any inheritance law that you know of, the transfer of kingdom from Dawud [asws] to Sulaiman [asws] as "inheritance".

 

5.  It is not a win-win situation, unless you are eager to win only Fadak....but even then, you end up conceding Fadak along with everything else.  First of all, you have entertained the idea that Fatima [ra] may not have full, absolute knowledge.  That is great!  In Islam, we do not see anyone, other than Rasulullah [saw], having absolute knowledge of the religion.

 

Second of all, Imam Ali [ra] never took Fadak back for his children.  To say Ahlul Bayt [ra] would not take back that which was unjustly taken from them is speaking out of your own whims.  This is like taking someone to court only to say, "well, I do not want my right, I just wanted the people to know who the culprit is" and walk out of the court.

 

Third of all, Imam Ali [ra] is said to have referred to Fadak as "our" property in Nahjul Balagha but he is also one, among 12 others, who heard the Prophet [saw] say that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  We have a chain for everything; Nahjul Balagha does not.  Any serious student of Islam would know what to side with.

 

As for siding with Fatima [ra], read this:

“When Fatima asked for Fadak from Abu Bakr and he refused to give it to her, she returned full of anger that could not be described and she was sick; and she was angry with Ali because he refused to help her.” (Al-Majlisi’s Haqq-ul-Yaqeen, pp.203-204; also recorded in Al-Tusi’s Amali, p.295)

 

Lastly, to help you a little, ShiaPen has a refutation for the narration I just quoted from Haqq-ul-Yaqeen and Amali.  I am waiting for you to use their refutation to try to get out of this uncomfortable situation ;)

 

I have wasted enough time in repeating myself over and over again just because you do not read my posts fully just as you do NOT read narrations in totality

 

 

1. As I have already mentioned the narrators were being weakened much later and the fact that the narration you are trying to weaken is not the one I am talking about. Secondly, if we keep the narration aside and think logically. We have seen you boasting about narrations out of context and incorrectly translating the Quranic verses to earn brownie points so many times. So if Quran had something which Abu Bakr could use to prove his stance then wouldn't he use it? The fact that not just Abu Bakr no person at the time of the revelation of Quran interpreted the verses as you are doing now is a clear proof to all those who are incorrectly translating the Quranic verses to their liking without fearing Allah's wrath. Something to ponder over for you.

 

 

2. You have still evaded answering the question which will expose your lies. Whose interpretation of the Quranic verse is correct? Your's OR your caliph's?

 

 

3. I have given you the general opinion of the Ahlul sunnah yet you cling on to a few people despite me mentioning about a completely different narration in my recent posts.

 

You are lying again. Show me which post have I stated that she fought for her rights after the miscarriage? I have always stated that the burning of her house happened after she demanded her rights. Your deceit is becoming very evident to readers as your posts are nothing but dishonest statements being made in desperation.

 

 

4. Look at the narration by Abu Bakr which states that everything prophets leave behind is charity but the kingdom of Prophet Dawood (as) which Allah  swt granted him as mentioned in verse 2:251 was not distributed as charity. So it is up to you to prove that the land and other materialistic possession of the Prophet was distributed as charity. Otherwise it is clear that you are going against Quran.

 

 

5. One more instance where you have proved yourself to be dishonest. 

 

Read my response about Bibi Fatima (s),  it starts with nauzubillah. I will ignore your desperate attempts at maligning the family of the Prophet (pbuh) and move on.

 

Firstly you accepted the knowledge of the Prophets was inherited by Imam Ali (as). So the fact that he sided with his wife on this issue and claimed that Fadak was the property of the daughter of the prophet (pbuh) is enough to quash your incorrect assumption that ONLY knowledge is inherited from prophets.

 

Secondly, I have already proven using a narration about the Prophet's house in Makkah  (pbuh). If you deny, then prove that Prophet (pbuh) took back his house when he had the authority to do so after the conquest of Makkah. Until you do so, we all know who is rejecting the characteristics of certain family members of the Prophet (pbuh) and that they are being denied based on your whims & fancies.

 

Thirdly, it was mentioned in a letter. You claim he heard but have no proof to justify. All you have is a forged narration in your books to insult the family of the Prophet (pbuh). So another of your attempt proves futile.

 

 

Double standards at the helm again. Regarding Imam Ali (as) siding with Bibi Fatima (s), instead of trying to prove your point using a weak narration which has already been refuted why don't you look at your own books which state that Imam Ali (as) was a witness to Bibi Fatima's (s) testimony on Fadak.

 

If ONLY you could ever think logically, then try analyzing the situation before you make any false claims in future. Can any married woman leave her house with the permission of their husband? Pause for a second and think that we are talking about the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) who is the leader of the women of paradise here. How can anyone with a sane mind ever think of attributing such a haraam action to such a pious lady who is cleaned of all impurities by Allah?

 

Any sane person can at best only laugh at your arguments which are so full of hared towards the family of the Prophet (pbuh).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

1.  Brother B-N flopped really bad, hence, his early exit and departure from this discussion.  He said, in the same post, that we (Shias) have narrations that prove Fadak was a gift and then few sentences later, he said that we (Shias) have proof that Fadak was inherited by Fatima [ra].  Gift is not inheritance and inheritance is not gift.  Gifting someone does not have rules or laws that apply to it, inheritance does!

 

Again, your point that Fatima [ra] could not maintain Fadak as a gift so she asked it as inheritance is so ridiculous - and insulting to Ahlul Bayt [ra] - that we are to believe that the Leader of Women in Paradise was arguing over a piece of land, and changing her stance from gift to inheritance, to ensure she gets the land all while she had broken ribs and a miscarried son (whom she was not concerned about at all)!

 

2.  Going by your arguments, which other personal property (other than Fadak) did Rasulullah [saw] have?  Are you now saying that according to you, Fadak is not the property of Rasulullah [saw]?  If that is the case, then we have agreed that Fadak cannot be inherited, as personal property, by Fatima [ra] or anyone else for that matter.

 

That aside, do you agree that only Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw]?

 

If yes, then Fatima [ra] has partial knowledge and she did not know, or may not have heard the Prophet [saw] say, that Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance.  It also contradicts other Shia narrations which say that Ahlul Bayt [ra] are inheritors of the knowledge of the Prophet [saw].  Finally, if you say that Ahlul Bayt [ra], including Fatima [ra], inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw], then as per the narration in Al-Kafi, they are scholars and not inheritors of any material wealth from Rasulullah [saw].

 

3.  What?  You just denied that point 2 (the narration I brought forth) has anything to do with Fadak and now you are saying that children inherit their parents as per the Qur'an.  All this time, you have been fighting for Fadak being the personal property of Rasulullah [saw].  Now you are casting doubt upon it by saying that the narration does not talk about Fadak.

 

Seriously, you need to get your story right, make sure all the angles match and all the numbers add up to what you have in your head before you present it.

 

 

1. Please let us know if you have problems in reading posts in entirety? You can re-read my previous post on this topic as you will find an answer to the question on gift & inheritance there.

 

Read my signature to understand the real purpose of Bibi Fatima's (s) fight against the injustice. You are trying desperately to mix & portray two separate incidents by changing the order of the events in which they occurred. It ain't going to work.

 

 

2. I have provided enough refutation already. A very simple answer to prove your assumption false. Can't the houses of the Prophet (pbuh) be counted as something other than the property of Fadak he owned apart from many other things which you would dismiss as in the past as being ones which are of not much monetary value?  If we look closely at your books, they have a mention of many things belonging to the Prophet (pbuh) being present with others.

 

The only thing which gets proved if I agree to your assumption is that Knowledge is NOT the ONLY thing inherited from the Prophets as Imam Ali (as) who had inherited the knowledge of the prophets deemed Fadak to be a property of Bibi Fatima (s). In essence, it means that as per the knowledge of the prophet (pbuh) Fadak belonged to Bibi Fatima Zehra (s).

 

We see another deceitful attempt of yours turning against you and proving that you are only good at taking narrations out of context to back your dishonest statements.

 

 

3. Alhumdulillah I have historical facts to back my claim unlike you who is relying on incorrect translation of Quranic verses & narrations taken out of context to prove your point despite them clearly going against Quran and logic.

 

I am only stating that the narration is in conjunction with the Quranic verses unlike you who accepts any fabricated narrations even if they go against the Quran. This narration you have presented also exposes your lies about Shia books stating that prophets do not inherit. You should stop repeating the lie from here on as you have presented a narration which states the contrary yourself.

 

 

You are defending the actions of an individual who didn't take help from Quran himself while taking back Fadak from the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) as you had agreed earlier. You should save yourself future embarrassments and agree with the words of Allah.

 

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The only thing which gets proved if I agree to your assumption is that Knowledge is NOT the ONLY thing inherited from the Prophets as Imam Ali (as) who had inherited the knowledge of the prophets deemed Fadak to be a property of Bibi Fatima (s). In essence, it means that as per the knowledge of the prophet (pbuh) Fadak belonged to Bibi Fatima Zehra (s).

 

 

 

 

 

Nicely summarized in a sentence, jazakallah khair :)

 

Unfortunately for you, Ali himself didnt concur with the reasons you have advanced for his being an heir of prophet:

 

 

“Al-Fadl bin Sahl- Afan bin Muslim- Abu Awana- Uthman bin al-Mughira- Abi Sadeq- Rabeea bin Najed narrated that a man came to Ali and said: Oh commander of believers, why only you inherited your cousin excluding your uncle? He (Ali) replied: The messenger of Allah invited the children of Abdulmutalib and he cooked for them food, they ate till they get fulfilled and the food remained as if no one had touched it, then he (the prophet) brought water and all of them drank from it, but the water remained as if no one had touched it or drank from it.
Then he (the prophet) said: ‘Oh children of Abdulmutalib, I have been sent to you specially and to the people in general, and you saw the sign of that, therefore who among you give baya to be my brother, my companion, my inheritor and my minister.’
No one responded for that, hence I responded and I was the youngest among them, he (the prophet) said: ‘Sit down’ for three times. I responded and He say ‘Sit down’, till the third time he clapped by his hand on my thigh and said: ‘You are my brother, companion, inheritor and minister’. Hence I inherited my cousin without my uncle.” 
Khasais by Imam Nesai, page 85

 

 

 

Alright, so if Imam Ali [ra] was the only heir of Rasulullah [saw], then what about Fatima [ra]?  Did she not inherit the knowledge?  

 

 

 

Wait wait wait, first of all i would like to see your argument that it was strictly the 'inheritance of knowledge' which was being talked about in the narration of nasai? 

Edited by B-N
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who?  Me?  How can I be a Muslim if I do not revere Ahlul Bayt [ra]?  The essence of Islam, at least mainstream Islam, is that it stands on these foundations: Qur'an, Sunnah, Ahlul Bayt [ra] and Sahaba [ra].  I do not want to pinch any nerves but I have heard many Muslims say that if not for mainstream Muslims (Sunnis), there would not have been any merits of Ahlul Kisa [ra] documented anywhere.

 

You honestly believe that if it were not for Sunni narrations, there would not be fadhaail ahlul bayt (3) documented? If anything the Sunni narrators suppress to a large degree many merits for the Ahlul Bayt(3), and to make this statement and to actually believe that the shia books are devoid of merits for Ahlul Bayt(3) really show how brain washed you are (with all due respect).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We have more narrations from the Prophet [saw] and Ahlul Kisa [ra] in our Sahihain than you have in Al-Kafi (which has more narrations than Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim combined).

 

Good day to you!

 

Where do you think As-Saadiqayn (Imam jafar and baqir) received their narrations from? 

 

If we actually look at the major narrators of your books we find that they are...

 

Amr Ibn al As, an Umawwi supporter who fought in a war against Imam Ali (as).

 

Aisha, who fought in a war against Imam Ali (as).

 

Amr ibn al As and Aisha report such a vast compendium of Ahadeeth that if their narrations were missing, your fiqh would look completely different today or at least change to a large degree, so in essence the pillars of your religion were excreted from the mouths of those who spoke against al-haydar, and passed along  upon the hands who took the sword against him. So I ask you my friend which group is taking from the fountain, and which from the sewer?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Where do you think As-Saadiqayn (Imam jafar and baqir) received their narrations from? 

 

If we actually look at the major narrators of your books we find that they are...

 

Amr Ibn al As, an Umawwi supporter who fought in a war against Imam Ali (as).

 

Aisha, who fought in a war against Imam Ali (as).

 

Amr ibn al As and Aisha report such a vast compendium of Ahadeeth that if their narrations were missing, your fiqh would look completely different today or at least change to a large degree, so in essence the pillars of your religion were excreted from the mouths of those who spoke against al-haydar, and passed along  upon the hands who took the sword against him. So I ask you my friend which group is taking from the fountain, and which from the sewer?

 

(salam)

You believe they were divinely appointed Imams so their narrations came from their own selves?

 

As for the Sunni narrations they are the narrations of the Prophet (saw) of Allah narrated by his companions (that includes Ahlulbayt).

Thats why they are called Sunni or Ahl-Sunnah, those who preserved and follow the actions/sayings of the Prophet (saw).

 

 

Unfortunately for you, Ali himself didnt concur with the reasons you have advanced for his being an heir of prophet:

 

 

“Al-Fadl bin Sahl- Afan bin Muslim- Abu Awana- Uthman bin al-Mughira- Abi Sadeq- Rabeea bin Najed narrated that a man came to Ali and said: Oh commander of believers, why only you inherited your cousin excluding your uncle? He (Ali) replied: The messenger of Allah invited the children of Abdulmutalib and he cooked for them food, they ate till they get fulfilled and the food remained as if no one had touched it, then he (the prophet) brought water and all of them drank from it, but the water remained as if no one had touched it or drank from it.
Then he (the prophet) said: ‘Oh children of Abdulmutalib, I have been sent to you specially and to the people in general, and you saw the sign of that, therefore who among you give baya to be my brother, my companion, my inheritor and my minister.’
No one responded for that, hence I responded and I was the youngest among them, he (the prophet) said: ‘Sit down’ for three times. I responded and He say ‘Sit down’, till the third time he clapped by his hand on my thigh and said: ‘You are my brother, companion, inheritor and minister’. Hence I inherited my cousin without my uncle.” 
Khasais by Imam Nesai, page 85

 

Report is a fabrication. 

 

Read my signature to understand the real purpose of Bibi Fatima's (s) fight against the injustice. You are trying desperately to mix & portray two separate incidents by changing the order of the events in which they occurred. It ain't going to work.

 

 

Your signature refers to Khutba Fadak which is not even reliable according to Shia standards (not even mentioned in Sunni sources at all). So far you have only relied on weak, chainless and fabricated reports. 

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani
Link to post
Share on other sites
 
You believe they were divinely appointed Imams so their narrations came from their own selves?

 

 

And you follow companions who themselves narrated their own status as authorities? What's the difference between us then? Their source of tawtheeq comes from themselves narrating about themselves, or via your school of thought giving weight to these narrations, I suggest a good book from a Sunni scholar from the ghumari brothers called Al- Atb al jameel Ala Ahl jarh wa tadeel, and you can see this for yourself.

 

Which Imam are you speaking about? If you are speaking about Imam al baqir (as) then his authority comes from his father, which came from his father, all the way to the appointment of ameer al mumineen (as), each step having both mu[Edited Out]ir narrations from us and you for their appoints (the hadith of the 12 imams, hadith of ghadeer, the appointment of Al hassan (as) as the 5th khalifa, and Imam l hussein (as) and the next correct one).

 

You have a major problem, you don't know who to follow to give you the proper interpretation upon the Qur'an, you have circulatory logic which says "my interpretation of the Qur'an will tell me who to follow", when in fact the verses of the Qur'an which I'm sure you are aware can be debated and have different meanings, so what will you do?

 

 
As for the Sunni narrations they are the narrations of the Prophet (saw) of Allah narrated by his companions (that includes Ahlulbayt).
Thats why they are called Sunni or Ahl-Sunnah, those who preserved and follow the actions/sayings of the Prophet (saw).

 

 

How do you cling to personalities to take your religion from who are dubious? The pillars of your religion are Aishah, Amr ibn l aws, abu hurarya, anas ibn malik, etc, don't you ever question yourself why these people narrated 90 percent of your material each showing some type of animosity towards ahlul bayt(as) yet the narrations from Ahlul bayt (as) are peanuts compared to them? Is there something wrong?

 

Your scholars said they were young and from the later generation, what about Amr ibn l aws? What about Hassan and Hussayn? Amr ibn l aws was from the old generation yet narrated more then the sons of Imam Ali (as) who were from the later generations ? hmm...

 

The companions of the messenger of Allah under the Sunni definition are indeed good and righteous people, the problem is we differ on our definition as to what is a "companion". You think that anyone who even glanced at the prophet (as) is an authority upon the religion, what is worse you have the audacity to actually defend this belief without any type of tawatur proof from your books or from the Qur'an.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

How do you cling to personalities to take your religion from who are dubious? The pillars of your religion are Aishah, Amr ibn l aws, abu hurarya, anas ibn malik, etc, don't you ever question yourself why these people narrated 90 percent of your material each showing some type of animosity towards ahlul bayt(as) yet the narrations from Ahlul bayt (as) are peanuts compared to them? Is there something wrong?

 

Your scholars said they were young and from the later generation, what about Amr ibn l aws? What about Hassan and Hussayn? Amr ibn l aws was from the old generation yet narrated more then the sons of Imam Ali (as) who were from the later generations ? hmm...

 

The companions of the messenger of Allah under the Sunni definition are indeed good and righteous people, the problem is we differ on our definition as to what is a "companion". You think that anyone who even glanced at the prophet (as) is an authority upon the religion, what is worse you have the audacity to actually defend this belief without any type of tawatur proof from your books or from the Qur'an.

 

 

(salam)

 

Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) is from our top narrators. Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) is from our top narrators. They are from the Ahlul-Bayt. Sayyida Aisha (ra) is also from the Ahlul-Bayt. We also have narrations from Jafar bin Muhammad [rah] or Muhammad bin Ali [ra] in our books. We also have narrations from other people from Ahlul-Bayt.These are from the people who narrated to us the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw). It is not that they gave their own opinions. They narrated the words of the Prophet (saw). 

 

You said they our 'pillars' this is not true. Most Hadiths of Abu Huraira (ra) are repetitive, meaning they were also narrated by other companions. 

 

How many narrations of Hasan and Hussain are in your books? How many narrations of the Prophet (saw) are in your books? Rare. 

 

Your narrators are people like Zurarah, Mufadhal bin Umar, Ibrahim bin Hashim etc who narrated to you the sayings of your Imams. Our narrators are the Companions who narrated the sayings of the Prophet (saw). This is the difference.

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani
Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

 

Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) is from our top narrators. Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) is from our top narrators. They are from the Ahlul-Bayt. Sayyida Aisha (ra) is also from the Ahlul-Bayt. We also have narrations from Jafar bin Muhammad [rah] or Muhammad bin Ali [ra] in our books. We also have narrations from other people from Ahlul-Bayt.These are from the people who narrated to us the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw). It is not that they gave their own opinions. They narrated the words of the Prophet (saw). 

 

You said they our 'pillars' this is not true. Most Hadiths of Abu Huraira (ra) are repetitive, meaning they were also narrated by other companions. 

 

How many narrations of Hasan and Hussain are in your books? How many narrations of the Prophet (saw) are in your books? Rare. 

 

Your narrators are people like Zurarah, Mufadhal bin Umar, Ibrahim bin Hashim etc who narrated to you the sayings of your Imams. Our narrators are the Companions who narrated the sayings of the Prophet (saw). This is the difference.

 

 

You said that Imam Ali Ibn abi Talib (as) is one of your top narrators, however dear brother abul hussin, when we look at your hadith works may Allah have mercy upon you, we see that his narrations are extremely sparse compared to the other companions. I think in the sahihayn, you're two most authentic works, his narrations are a handful. When we also look at the people who narrated from as-sadiqayn, we see that they also narrated very little and many of the early 'awwam(non-shia) refused to narrate from Imam jafar (as), and even claimed he had bias towards his family including bukhari who your scholars themselves narrated that he had some suspicions, since Shii narrations from him were reaching the limit of tawatur. Most of the narrations from Imam jafar and imam al baqir (a) are weakened anyways.

 

 

 
You said they our 'pillars' this is not true. Most Hadiths of Abu Huraira (ra) are repetitive, meaning they were also narrated by other companions. 

 

 

You're right, but out of these which are authentic? Which are unique?  If we wish to speak about pure authentic and unique hadith, then abu hurayrah is indeed a pillar if not the pillar of your school of thought. Most of the repetitive hadith that are narrated matching abu hurayrah are not sahih in your school of thought and do not connect to other companions. However let us say that other companions narrated the hadith he narrated, they would of most likely been the 4-5 companions I mentioned.

 

Aisha and Abu huraira are the pillars of your religion brother Abul hussain, since the vast majority of your narrations that are unique and non repetitive come from the following five, and you can even do search on shamela for the most non-repetitive sahih hadith, they are in order Abu huraira, Aisha, Anas ibn Malik, Ibn Abbas, and Amr ibn l aws with the most unique and non-repetitive sihaah coming from abu hurarya. Regarding Ibn abbas he narrates shii fiqh in your books but most of it was not recorded, they are rejected not due to the chain, but to the content, and some of this shii fiqh was even written down and recorded to be his final position such as joining the prayer and Mutah. Imam al awzai had a famous saying and I'm paraphrasing. "if the believer were to follow the minority opinions then he would be on another religion, such as taking the opinion of drinking from the kufans, the opinion of mutah from the meccans etc etc".  The meccan madhab was from Ibn Abbas, he was their leader brother abul hussain,

 

 

 
How many narrations of Hasan and Hussain are in your books? How many narrations of the Prophet (saw) are in your books? Rare. 

 

 

Every single one of our hadith as I mentioned to you, leads all the way back up to Al-mustafa (saw), our chains contain the best of the best.

 

 

Your narrators are people like Zurarah, Mufadhal bin Umar, Ibrahim bin Hashim etc who narrated to you the sayings of your Imams. Our narrators are the Companions who narrated the sayings of the Prophet (saw). This is the difference.

 

 
 
I don't get your point, if we have an established hadith from Imam jafar as-saadiq (as) who claims he takes all his material from his fathers, are you saying that it's the same abu hurarya narrating hadith from the Prophet (saw)?  The shia material that is narrated from Imam jafar as-saadiq (a.s) is tawatur and it is even attested by your scholars and caused them to doubt him. Some of them even claimed he had bad memory.
 
Zurarah is mostly a narrator on fiqh which by the way is also narrated by other companions since much of our fiqh if not all have multiple chains, Mufadhal Ibn umar ? (how is he relevant) ? And ibrahim Ibn hashim  who was the father of Ali ibn ibrahim al qommi, if you read his biography and learned about him  you'd know that he was one of the best scholars and even famous among the masses for this knowledge, and ibrahim Ibn hashim was his father and one of the first narrators that brought iraqi narrations to qom. Our usul ad deen is tawatur, take for example the hadith of the 12 imams, there are hundreds upon hundreds of chains for this leading up to the Imams (a.s), did they all lie? Ibrahim ibn hashim doesn't change our foundation, the five I mentioned to you do.
 
 
 
Can you show me where in the Qur'an does it say to take the religion from the companions?
Can you show me where in the Qur'an does it say that the companions are those who saw the prophet once and died believers?
Can you shoe me where in your hadith books that we should take the religion from the companions?
 
Can you show me in the Qur'an where it says that some of the muhjirun,ansar, could never change or turn back? A funny example we see is that the sunnis claim all these verse came down to condemn abu sufyan, yet not a single one came down to remove this condemnation, they say that there are general verses for repentance and it's reward. Then I must ask, what is the difference between specific praise for some of the companions, and the general verses warning them not to apostate?
 
You say that Allah praised every single companion, how about the companions who left the religion? We both agree they recieved praised and yet became apostates, isn't religion suppose to be clear? Didn't Allah tell you clearly who to follow after the prophet (saw)? He did indeed, look at your own books and you'll see the answer. 
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...