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

Prove Adl' Of Sahaba (Companions) From Quran.

Rate this topic


kbsquare

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Often, the shia are asked to prove imamat from Quran because of two reasons being, 1). The issue of infalliabilty and 2). The mere fact the shia claim to receive the authentic sunnah of the rasul (saw) from these imams (amongst other reasons). So, I am asking for our sunni brothers/sisters in faith to prove the adl' of the Sahaba from Quran and the assertion that they cannot err in regards to the sunnah of the rassul (saw) . Thank you.

(wasalam)

Edited by kbsquare
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

We ask our Shia brothers to prove Imamat from the Qur'an because they say that Imamat is an usool-e-deen.

 

On the other hand, if I ask you to prove Tawheed, Nubuwah, Adalah and Qiyamah from the Qur'an, I am sure you can present tens of verses to support them.

 

Infallibility is a component (for the lack of a better term) of Imamat, which is why we ask for the proof for Imamat (not just infallibility of the Imams) from the Qur'an.  

 

As for receiving authentic sunnah, as I have mentioned before, the Sahihain contain more narrations from Ahlul Kisa [ra] than Al-Kafi.  Al-Kafi, by the way, contains more narrations than both Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim combined.  Another interesting fact is that ~15% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations.  If you do not count the repeats, only ~2% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic narrations from the Prophet [saw].  

 

Compare, and contrast, ~2% of Al-Kafi (made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations) with the Sahihain both of which are almost entirely made up of authentic narrations of Rasulullah [saw].

 

Now you have two problems.  You cannot prove Imamat from the Qur'an nor can you lay claim to narrating authentically, and exclusively, from the Prophet [saw].

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

We ask our Shia brothers to prove Imamat from the Qur'an because they say that Imamat is an usool-e-deen.

On the other hand, if I ask you to prove Tawheed, Nubuwah, Adalah and Qiyamah from the Qur'an, I am sure you can present tens of verses to support them.

Infallibility is a component (for the lack of a better term) of Imamat, which is why we ask for the proof for Imamat (not just infallibility of the Imams) from the Qur'an.

As for receiving authentic sunnah, as I have mentioned before, the Sahihain contain more narrations from Ahlul Kisa [ra] than Al-Kafi. Al-Kafi, by the way, contains more narrations than both Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim combined. Another interesting fact is that ~15% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations. If you do not count the repeats, only ~2% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic narrations from the Prophet [saw].

Compare, and contrast, ~2% of Al-Kafi (made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations) with the Sahihain both of which are almost entirely made up of authentic narrations of Rasulullah [saw].

Now you have two problems. You cannot prove Imamat from the Qur'an nor can you lay claim to narrating authentically, and exclusively, from the Prophet [saw].

(salam)

Thank you for your post but it in no way answered my question.

(wasalam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

We ask our Shia brothers to prove Imamat from the Qur'an because they say that Imamat is an usool-e-deen.

 

On the other hand, if I ask you to prove Tawheed, Nubuwah, Adalah and Qiyamah from the Qur'an, I am sure you can present tens of verses to support them.

 

Infallibility is a component (for the lack of a better term) of Imamat, which is why we ask for the proof for Imamat (not just infallibility of the Imams) from the Qur'an.  

 

As for receiving authentic sunnah, as I have mentioned before, the Sahihain contain more narrations from Ahlul Kisa [ra] than Al-Kafi.  Al-Kafi, by the way, contains more narrations than both Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim combined.  Another interesting fact is that ~15% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations.  If you do not count the repeats, only ~2% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic narrations from the Prophet [saw].  

 

Compare, and contrast, ~2% of Al-Kafi (made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations) with the Sahihain both of which are almost entirely made up of authentic narrations of Rasulullah [saw].

 

Now you have two problems.  You cannot prove Imamat from the Qur'an nor can you lay claim to narrating authentically, and exclusively, from the Prophet [saw].

 

The brother asked you to answer a simple question yet you evaded it and brought up 3 new topics. Hmm :shifty:  Anyway, trying to prove to you Imamate is in the quran is a waste of time, for we clearly understand, explicitly imamate and its ideology is used, however, the interpretation is where we differ. Many brothers have addressed this false misinformation you tend to spread about al kafi, and here is a perfect example:

Comparison Between Kafi and Bukhari or Click Here - The Failure & Bias of Sunni Rijal

 

(wasalam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Walaykum as salaam,

I do not speak, or understand, Arabic but I think a Qur'anic reference should suffice.

Umm it's a really long article, because it goes into the defition of a 'muhkam' ayah.

But basically, the two verses most focused on, is the verse on Ulil Amr and those who give Zakat whilst in prayer. If I have time, I will try to do a rough translation.

And Allaah (s.w.t) Knows Best. And He is The Almighty.

Wa Ma'asalamaa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

What's with you always saying sahihain contain more hadith from Ahlul kisa then Al kafi. Any hadith that is Imam jafer sadiqs(as) is a hadith of Imam Husain (as) or Imam Hassan (as). That's what is the chain about. It goes straight to the prophet Muhammad (s) going through Ahlul kisa. So 14000 hadith from Ahlul kisa if I am not mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Thank you for your post but it in no way answered my question.

(wasalam)

 

 

Salaam alaykum,

You are building an argument and then attacking it to appear endowed with knowledge.  Adl' of Sahabas [ra], and their infallibility, is not an usool-e-deen for us.  Therefore, we are not required to prove it from the Qur'an.  Imamat is an usool-e-deen for you.  Therefore, I suggest you find us Imamat in the Qur'an.

 

Surah Al-Fath verse 29 says the following, "Muhammad is the apostle of God; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other........."

 

What I have shared in regards to Adl' of Sahabas [ra] is far more than you can bring from the Qur'an regarding Imamat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
 

We ask our Shia brothers to prove Imamat from the Qur'an because they say that Imamat is an usool-e-deen.

 

On the other hand, if I ask you to prove Tawheed, Nubuwah, Adalah and Qiyamah from the Qur'an, I am sure you can present tens of verses to support them.

 

Infallibility is a component (for the lack of a better term) of Imamat, which is why we ask for the proof for Imamat (not just infallibility of the Imams) from the Qur'an.  

 

As for receiving authentic sunnah, as I have mentioned before, the Sahihain contain more narrations from Ahlul Kisa [ra] than Al-Kafi.  Al-Kafi, by the way, contains more narrations than both Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim combined.  Another interesting fact is that ~15% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations.  If you do not count the repeats, only ~2% of Al-Kafi is made up of authentic narrations from the Prophet [saw].  

 

Compare, and contrast, ~2% of Al-Kafi (made up of authentic, Prophetic narrations) with the Sahihain both of which are almost entirely made up of authentic narrations of Rasulullah [saw].

 

Now you have two problems.  You cannot prove Imamat from the Qur'an nor can you lay claim to narrating authentically, and exclusively, from the Prophet [saw].

Islam was revealed to the people through the way of logic and not emotion. There are very clear verses from the Qur'an which prove the infallibility of the Prophets, including Prophet Muhamamd Pbuh and his family. And who could better lead people to Islam, than people from the Prophet's progeny and why wouldn't you want an Imam from the Prophet's progeny that were infallible?  It comes down to logic.

 

First, we see in Surah 38:82-83, Shytan telling Allah swt, "By your might , I will surely mislead them all, except among them Your chosen servants." This implies that Shytan knew there is a group  that he cannot entice or mislead them, because  Allah A.j. graced them with His Protection and purified them.

 

 Basically, Shytan has just confirmed that there are chosen servants who are infallible and that Allah A.j. has protected them and purified them from the need to commit a sin.

 

Then you have  many verses such as, 3:132 , "And Obey Allah and the Messenger that you may obtain mercy."  

 

Does Allah make mistakes? Of course not. Allah swt wants us to obey Him, because He leads us to the right path. Would Allah then tell us to obey the Prophets if they made mistakes? Of course not. Allah swt would not give us people who commit errors to follow, if He wants us to follow the correct path. So with Allah's mercy He gave us infallible Prophets, so that they become a role model for us. Would you have believed a Prophet, if  he used to drink, commit zina, and do bad things? No, because you would always refer to the sins he committed even if he had spent the rest of his life being clean. That is why Allah swt gave us the perfect role models whom did not sin.

 

What about the Imams?  Allah Swt  graced the progeny of Muhammad Pbuh so that they too would become infallible. Verse 33:33, "....Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet's] household, and to purify you with [extensive] purification." Who are people of the house? Muhammad (as), Fatima (as) Ali (as), and the sons of Fatima (as), which was not just limited to Hasan (as) and Hussein (as), but also  to the Imams from their bloodline.

 

If you could have any Imam or Calipha to be your leader wouldn't you rather want someone that Allah swt blessed from the Prophet (as)'s progeny and was purified, and applied Islam to their lives from the time they were small ,than a companion who  buried his baby daughter alive or used to worship an idol made from dates  back in the days before Islam?

 

And then you have the verse, 76:24: "So be patient for the decision of your Lord and do not obey from among them a sinner or ungrateful [disbeliever]." and verse 4:59:

 

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

 

Who are the authorities? It's Ahlul Bayt. Who else would have the rightful authority other than they? Were they not of the purified  ones that Allah swt had graced them with his protection to not desire any sin? 

 

 

And if you want to see a good lecture on  everything I said in more depth watch:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

you should proof it. the problem of caliphate and imamate is that we let everyone know that we believe in it while you make it a hidden doctrine.

 

you always ask for imamate but if someone do not believe in abu bakr and umar he isnt a muslim for the most sunnis i know of the grand scholars of your madhab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salaam alaykum,

You are building an argument and then attacking it to appear endowed with knowledge. Adl' of Sahabas [ra], and their infallibility, is not an usool-e-deen for us. Therefore, we are not required to prove it from the Qur'an. Imamat is an usool-e-deen for you. Therefore, I suggest you find us Imamat in the Qur'an.

Surah Al-Fath verse 29 says the following, "Muhammad is the apostle of God; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other........."

What I have shared in regards to Adl' of Sahabas [ra] is far more than you can bring from the Qur'an regarding Imamat.

(salam)

Again, please stop talking about Imamat, I only bought it up, and it's clear in my post, because it seems that the belief of the adl' of the Sahaba is tantamount to the belief of the infallibility of the imams. It is not as you say "you are building an argument and then attacking it to appear endowed with knowledge." Please just stick to the topic and if you don't have anything good to contribute then that's okay! We can hopefully both learn something from other members.

(wasalam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered

 

 

Infallibility is a component (for the lack of a better term) of Imamat, which is why we ask for the proof for Imamat (not just infallibility of the Imams) from the Qur'an.  

 

 

 

Now you have two problems.  You cannot prove Imamat from the Qur'an nor can you lay claim to narrating authentically, and exclusively, from the Prophet [saw].

 

 

(bismillah)

 

(salam)

 

“The revealed form of the religion started with the advent of Adam and passed through a continuous chain of divine vicegerency and the intermittent appearance of Prophets, reached its perfection and assumed its final form of Islam in the manner revealed to the last Prophet of Allah, Muhammad (peace be on him and his household) as the universal religion approved by Allah for mankind throughout the world and ages. The revelation period for the preaching of Islam in its final form to mankind comprised 23 years of the Holy Prophet’s ministry. During this period the revelational aspect of the religion of Allah ( Islam) was completed in the forms of:

 

Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã the recitative miraculous Word and Book of God, the Qur’an and

( the sayings, deeds and endorsement of the Holy Prophet.

 

Both the Qur’an and the life of the Holy Prophet, as the Qur’an asserts, ought to be taken as the inseparable and equally revealed parts of the constitution of Islam. But for explaining and expounding the implications of these two constitutional sources and their application to the various aspects of human life and to make the new converts, with all their divergent outlooks to grasp Islam, the said period of 23 years was not sufficiently long. The new period of consolidation began after the demise of the Holy Prophet. It took nearly 250 years to systemize the Islamic constitution with details which form the basis of the development of Islamic thought embracing all aspects of human life. It resulted in the various schools of thought in theology, ethics, philosophy, history, mathematics and the physical sciences. During this long period there was to be a supreme authority, Imamat, of the chosen persons of the Ahl al-Bayt (in other words Ale-Ibrahim) to insure the continuity of divine guidance along with the Qur’an. According to the Qur’an and the Holy Prophet the goal was to protect the purity of the universal message of Islam by disallowing any profane element to creep into it.

 

(2:124) Holy Qur’an

 

This divinely chosen form of Imamat (leadership) was not designed after any monarchical pattern. It was purely apostolic in nature. That was the reason why their number was divinely fixed and foretold by the Holy Prophet and many other Prophets who preceded him as ‘Twelve’, neither more or less. This divine lead which began with ‘Ali, the first Holy Imam, continued for almost 250 years till the requisite constitutional consolidation was completed, the Twelfth Imam (the promised Mahdi, whose name is the same as that of the Holy Prophet) though alive, disappeared from the sight of man, and in the light of the Qur’an, a new era of ijtihad (rationalization of revelation) followed to give complete opportunity to the believers to acquaint themselves with the revealed and divinely detailed constitution and use their reason, with knowledge and utmost piety and righteousness, to bring forth the implications of the constitution and apply their findings to the ever-changing, increasing and expanding aspects of human life. This was to give full freedom to every believer, irrespective of color, social and geographical distinction, to develop his faculties on the basis of the Islamic constitution towards the achievement of the Islamic ideals and values. During this period, every believer, as declared by the Imams”(naib Imam)”, who qualifies himself in the prescribed knowledge and piety, is entitled to act as the supreme authority of his time. Under certain conditions mentioned in detail under the topic ‘ijtihad and Taqlid’(Vide chapter ‘Occulation”). This era of ijtihad will continue till the time when individualism, nationalism and all other isms, tendencies and interests give way to the sense of the human race, the globe, and the whole solar system as small parts of the greater whole. Then time will be ripe for the reappearance of the last link in the chain of the divinely chosen guides, the ‘Twelfth Imam’. Not as an exponent of the constitution and teacher of Islam, but as the final Islamic executor, establishing universal justice on earth.

 

The vital issue of the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt as two inseparable parts of the constitution has been fully established above. Thus doubting the genuineness of the one leads to the denial of the divine authority of the other. Ibn Hajar Mecci (author of Al-Sawaiq) confirms it as the main reason why the Holy Prophet has dealt with the above mentioned two issues jointly in his ‘Declaration’ and ‘Sermon at Ghadir-e-Khum’ and on various subsequent occasions. Actually ‘Umar’s pronouncement ‘Hasbuna Kitaballah’[sufficient is for us the Book of God] was a denial of the Holy Prophet’s repeated declaration of the joint authority of the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt. Such is the brief outline of the apostolic stand, as confirmed by the explicit wordings of the Qur’an and the sayings of the Holy Prophet.”

 

Page:41

Essence of the Holy Qur’an

Ayatullah Pooya

 

*****************

 

"And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee; Behold, I have blessed him and will make Him fruitful, and I will multiply him exceedingly, TWELVE PRINCES shall he beget and I will make him a great nation"

Genesis 18:20 (Bible:Old Testament)

 

Also if you read the Sahah's of the Muslim and Bukhari you will find hadiths of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.a.h.p) referring to Twelve Imams.

 

"Under the promised or the covenant which the Lord establish with Abraham and his seed, Abraham was endowed with the Divine Light of guidance (imamat)(see 2:124 H.Q)and to Abraham and Ishmael, was given the land now called Mecca and the country surrounding it, in which Abraham was first a stranger(Genesis 17-7,8 old testament), and which since its being inhabited by Abraham and his seed Ishmael(Genesis 17:7), had been uninterruptedly possessed by the descendants of Ishmael or his followers, to remain with them for ever.

 

The Divine Light endowed in Abraham was bifurcated and passed into the two channels of the seed of Abraham viz., Ishmael and Isaac. Through Isaac, it passed on till Jesus, and through Ishmael it descended down to Abdul Muttalib, and from Abdul Muttalib it was again bifurcated into two channels, Abdullah and Abu Talib, and again it was bifurcated into two channels of the seed of Ali and Fatima into Hasan and Husain, Hasan Destined to be the second Holy Imam and Husain to be the Third one and also the King of Martyrs. From Husain, it passed on to the Nine Holy Imams in his seed until the Twelfth or the Last one in the line of the Imamat i.e, Muhammad-al-Mahdi, who is kept alive to re-appear before the end of the world. As Jesus the last one in the seed of Abraham through Isaac is kept alive, this Holy Imam, the last one in the seed of Abraham through Ishmael, is also kept alive, and both these two manifestations of the Divine Light endowed in the seed of Abraham will meet before the end of the world, to fulfill the divine plan of cleaning the earth of falsehood once for all, and establish peace and harmony on it, in the place of aggression, iniquity, enmity and hatred which will be ruling the earth prior to their Final advent, and this will be the conclusion of the world"(1)

 

"When said thy Lord unto the angels, Verily, I am appointing a Khalifa (a Vicegerent) in the earth"

2:30

 

"Verily I know what ye know not"

2:30

 

(1)It is important to understand 'Khalifatullah' or the Vicegerent of Allah(s.w.t), is appointed by Allah (s.w.t) himself.

 

(2)The personal qualities of the 'Khalifatullah' are inconceivable by, or unknown even to the angels.

 

(3)The personal excellence of the 'Khalifatullah' is known only to Allah (s.w.t0. and Allah(s.w.t) does not deem even the angels as fit to bear the knowledge of it, hence Allah(s.w.t) did not give it out to them. The Angels were only told what Allah(s.w.t) knoweth about His 'Khalifa' even they knew not.

 

(4)The Term 'Khalifa' suggests that the one appointed is to rule the kingdom of Allah(s.w.t) on behalf of Allah(s.w.t). i.e, Allah(s.w.t)'s Wills.

 

(5)A 'Khalifa' is he who is vested with all the powers and the authority of Him whom he represents. Thus the 'Khalifatullah' will be endowed with all the powers and the authority over the Kingdom of Allah(s.w.t). All creation of the Lord will be under the 'Khalifatullah' and the 'Khalifatullah' being under the absolute submission to the Lord.

 

(6) The Holy Qur'an gives out another factor for our guidance that a 'Khalifa' or the Vicegerent of Allah(s.w.t), is given the store of knowledge necessary for the office, by Allah(s.w.t) Himself. Adam(a.s) was given knowledge by Allah(s.w.t) Himself and the angles were asked to give out what was taught to Adam(a.s), which they failed to do.

If you read (2:31-32), It means that what was taught to Adam(a.s) was not taught to the Angles.

 

(7)As the vicegerency will proceed further, according to the evolutionary progress of the human intellect with which the Vicegerent of the age and of the place will have to deal, so will the Lord, naturally gift His Vicegerent with higher intellect and an increased store of knowledge.

 

(8) When it is will of the Lord to send to mankind His Last or the Chief Vicegerent, (33:40), the Vicegerent now sent, will naturally and necessarily be endowed with Knowledge in its fullness-and such a Vicegerent alone will have the right and courage to say:'I am the City of Knowledge'. And only such a Vicegerent will naturally be nearest one to the Lord(53:9) and His dearest one. Being the nearest one, he would not speak or act but what the Lord reveals to him and only about such a Deputy of His, the Lord declared:-

 

"Nor does he (The Holy Prophet Muhammad(p.b.u.h.a.h.p) speaketh of his own inclination"

 

It IS NAUGHT BUT A REVELATION REVEALED.

(53:3)

 

(9) If the first 'Khalifa' or the Vicegerent of Allah (S.W.T), WAS SUPERIOR TO THE ANGELS, iN HIS PERSONAL EXCELLENCE AS TO ENTITLE TO THE 'SIJDAH' OR THE PROSTRATION OF THE ANGELS(20:116)

 

THE LAST OR THE CHIEF OF THE APOSTLES WILL NATURALLY BE OF A SUPERIOR-MOST EXCELLENCE. HIS PURITY PHYSICAL AND SPiRITUAL, WILL BE MATCHLESSLY DIVINE AMONG THE CREATION AS A WHOLE.

 

NATURALLY SUCH A SUPER-FINE PERSONALITY CAN NEVER BE SUCCEEDED BUT BY THOSE OF THE SAME PURITY. REFERRING TO THE PURITY OF THE LAST APOSTLE AND THE PEOPLE OF HIS HOLY HOUSE, THE AHLUL-BAIT Allah(S.W.T) HAS DECLARED:-

 

"Allah only willeth that He keepeth away uncleanliness from you, O'Ahlul-Bait, and PURIFY YOU A THOROUGH PURIFICATION."

(33:33)

 

"That (this) is indeed a noble Qur'an, In a Book kept hidden, which none TOUCHET SAVE THE PURIFIED"

(LVI:77-79)

 

"Nay these are clear communications in the breasts of those who are GRANTED KNOWLEDGE."

(24:49)

 

"So ask the followers of the REMINDER if you do not know"

(16:43)

Your prominent Ulema like, Suyuti and others have recorded that the 'PEOPLE OF DHIKR' means Ahlul-Bayt.

 

(1)

Page:27 & 94.

Husain

The Saviour of Islam

By:S.V.Mir Ahmed Ali

 

 

 

(as)

Edited by S.M.H.A.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

1.  because it seems that the belief of the adl' of the Sahaba is tantamount to the belief of the infallibility of the imams.

 

2.  It is not as you say "you are building an argument and then attacking it to appear endowed with knowledge." 

 

 

1.  It is your fault, therefore incumbent upon you to do independent research, for listening to - and believing - "scholars" who lied to you.  The belief that the adl' of Sahabas [ra] is tantamount to the belief of the infallibility of the Imams [ra] is what you were told, not what we believe.

 

2.  That is exactly what it is.  To account for your incapability (and helplessness) in explaining Imamat, you build a premise, ascribe to Sunnis and then attack (and debunk) it.  That does not substantiate Imamat nor does it require an answer from us except you were lied to and that your premise is weak and it is yours, not ours.

 

Now do you want to prove Imamat from the Qur'an or will you build another premise?

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.  It is your fault, therefore incumbent upon you to do independent research, for listening to - and believing - "scholars" who lied to you.  The belief that the adl' of Sahabas [ra] is tantamount to the belief of the infallibility of the Imams [ra] is what you were told, not what we believe.

 

2.  That is exactly what it is.  To account for your incapability (and helplessness) in explaining Imamat, you build a premise, ascribe to Sunnis and then attack (and debunk) it.  That does not substantiate Imamat nor does it require an answer from us except you were lied to and that your premise is weak and it is yours, not ours.

 

Now do you want to prove Imamat from the Qur'an or will you build another premise?

 

1- You refused to Read my own research with One of the debates concerning this issue of yours on "Imamah" and yet your complaining?.

2- What Adl Did Companions (Meaning your Companions) Have? They fled away from the battle field while Imam Ali (as) stayed and fought.

3- Which of the "Scholars" are you Referring to? Supposedly lied to us? That is a hasty generalization your making, with an indirect negative?  

4- Please return to me, when you have made an effort to read what I wrote concerning this issue. On post: "4:59 Uli-Al-Amr".

 

___________________________________________

 

و عليكم السلام

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

1. It is your fault, therefore incumbent upon you to do independent research, for listening to - and believing - "scholars" who lied to you. The belief that the adl' of Sahabas [ra] is tantamount to the belief of the infallibility of the Imams [ra] is what you were told, not what we believe.

1 - when and where did I say that this question of mine came about from something I heard from a scholar?

2. That is exactly what it is. To account for your incapability (and helplessness) in explaining Imamat, you build a premise, ascribe to Sunnis and then attack (and debunk) it. That does not substantiate Imamat nor does it require an answer from us except you were lied to and that your premise is weak and it is yours, not ours.

2- this thread, for the last time is not about imamat. Your're the one who is helpless, you are trying to derail this topic by diverting the attention to imamat because you cannot and do not have an answer. This is not gonna happen here. I have seen you employ this tactic far too many times on other members to fall for it myself. The best thing to do is to report you for off topic posts/spamming and not feed your ploy by responding to you concerning imamat. A devious one you are. I also hope other members don't respond to you on imamat on this thread.

Now do you want to prove Imamat from the Qur'an or will you build another premise?

It is....incumbent upon you to do independent research, for listening to - and believing - "scholars" who lied to you.

(wasalam)

Edited by kbsquare
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

1- You refused to Read my own research with One of the debates concerning this issue of yours on "Imamah" and yet your complaining?.

2- What Adl Did Companions (Meaning your Companions) Have? They fled away from the battle field while Imam Ali (as) stayed and fought.

3- Which of the "Scholars" are you Referring to? Supposedly lied to us? That is a hasty generalization your making, with an indirect negative?  

4- Please return to me, when you have made an effort to read what I wrote concerning this issue. On post: "4:59 Uli-Al-Amr".

 

___________________________________________

 

و عليكم السلام

   

 

 

(salam)

1 - when and where did I say that this question of mine came about from something I heard from a scholar?

2- this thread, for the last time is not about imamat. Your're the one who is helpless, you are trying to derail this topic by diverting the attention to imamat because you cannot and do not have an answer. This is not gonna happen here. I have seen you employ this tactic far too many times on other members to fall for it myself. The best thing to do is to report you for off topic posts/spamming and not feed your ploy by responding to you concerning imamat. A devious one you are. I also hope other members don't respond to you on imamat on this thread.

(wasalam)

 

 

Okay, no verses from the Qur'an.  More than 1400 years have passed, we will wait till the end of times.  Hopefully you will find it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, no verses from the Qur'an.  More than 1400 years have passed, we will wait till the end of times.  Hopefully you will find it.

 

 

1- Find Exactly What?

2- do you conclude that there are not verse of Imammah in the Quran? Then where does the justification of the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and Umar come in? 

3- If you Revise my post on "Immamah" on the post: "4:59 Uli alamr" I would appreciate your refutation. Check the last pages 30-36.

 

____________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Often, the shia are asked to prove imamat from Quran because of two reasons being, 1). The issue of infalliabilty and 2). The mere fact the shia claim to receive the authentic sunnah of the rasul (saw) from these imams (amongst other reasons). So, I am asking for our sunni brothers/sisters in faith to prove the adl' of the Sahaba from Quran and the assertion that they cannot err in regards to the sunnah of the rassul (saw) . Thank you.

(wasalam)

 

(wasalam)

"the assertion that they cannot err" This is not what adl of Sahaba is.

 

Imam Jafar [rah] explains the Adalah of Sahaba:

 

3 – علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن منصور بن حازم قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان، قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله أم كذبوا؟ قال: بل صدقوا، قال: قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا؟ فقال: أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك ما ينسخ ذلك الجواب، فنسخت الاحاديث بعضها بعضا.

...I then asked, “Did the Sahabah, companions of the holy Prophet (saw) speak the truth or lies when narrating his Hadith?” The Imam replied, “They spoke the truth.” I then said, “Why then they have differences?” Have you not considered the fact that a man would come to the holy Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) and ask a question and would give him an answer and then he would answer that would abrogate the previous answer. Thus, Ahadith abrogated other Ahadith.”

 

[Kulayni narrated in his “al-Kafi” (1/65), and Majlisi said it’s hasan (good)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Now do you want to prove Imamat from the Qur'an or will you build another premise?

You claim he's using a strawman when in reality you cannot answer his post so you build another and attempt to debunk that in hopes that he'd fall for it

What's with you always saying sahihain contain more hadith from Ahlul kisa then Al kafi. Any hadith that is Imam jafer sadiqs(as) is a hadith of Imam Husain (as) or Imam Hassan (as). That's what is the chain about. It goes straight to the prophet Muhammad (s) going through Ahlul kisa. So 14000 hadith from Ahlul kisa if I am not mistaken.

Here is the reference to that statement found in al-kafi

 

Meaning that even if a hadith is from Imam al-askari (as) it is as though it came from the Prophet (saww)

 

al kafi H 151, Ch. 17, h 14
Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Sahl ibn Ziyad from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ‘Umar ibn 'Abd al-‘Aziz from Hisham ibn Salim, Hammed ibn ‘Uthman and others who have said the following."Abu ‘Abdallah (as) said, ‘My Hadith is the Hadith of my father. The Hadith of my father is the Hadith of my grandfather. The Hadith of my grandfather is the Hadith of Imam Husayn.The Hadith of Imam al-Husayn is the Hadith of Imam al- Hassan. The Hadith of Imam al-Hassan is the Hadith of Imam Ali (as). The Hadith of Imam Ali is the Hadith of the holy Prophet (s.a.) and the Hadith of the holy Prophet is the words of Allah, the Majestic, the Glorious.’"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

(wasalam)

"the assertion that they cannot err" This is not what adl of Sahaba is.

 

Imam Jafar [rah] explains the Adalah of Sahaba:

 

3 – علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن منصور بن حازم قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان، قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله أم كذبوا؟ قال: بل صدقوا، قال: قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا؟ فقال: أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك ما ينسخ ذلك الجواب، فنسخت الاحاديث بعضها بعضا.

...I then asked, “Did the Sahabah, companions of the holy Prophet (saw) speak the truth or lies when narrating his Hadith?” The Imam replied, “They spoke the truth.” I then said, “Why then they have differences?” Have you not considered the fact that a man would come to the holy Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) and ask a question and would give him an answer and then he would answer that would abrogate the previous answer. Thus, Ahadith abrogated other Ahadith.”

 

[Kulayni narrated in his “al-Kafi” (1/65), and Majlisi said it’s hasan (good)]

 

First off, you cut of the significant part of the hadith:

 

Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from his father from ibn abu Najran from ‘Asim ibn Humayd from Mansur ibn Hazim who has said the following.

"I said to (Imam) abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.), ‘It is confuses me that when I ask you a question and you give an answer and then other person comes and you give a different answer for the same question.’" The Imam replied, "We answer people in a larger and reduced forms." I then asked, "Did the Sahabah, companions of the holy Prophet speak the truth or lies when narrating his Hadith?" The Imam replied, "They spoke the truth." I then said, "Why then they have differences?" Have you not considered the fact that a man would come to the holy Prophet (s.a.) and ask a question and would give him an answer and then he would answer that would abrogate the previous answer. Thus, Ahadith abrogated other Ahadith."

 

Now prove to me the sahaba that is mentioned includes your caliphs and "sahaba from the sunni school of thought". You cant. It is absurd that you are misinterpreting this hadith, to suit your own agenda. I call that desperation. Clearly this hadith is speaking of those companions who narrated hadith but had different answers, not because they were lying but speaking the truth. Besides, there is no rationality behind calling all companions truthful, it is absurd. Not to mention our own hadiths speak of distinguishing truthful and false hadith, which shows the interpretation you gave clearly goes against our school of thought.

 

Shia View of Companions

Edited by PureEthics
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(wasalam)

"the assertion that they cannot err" This is not what adl of Sahaba is.

 

Imam Jafar [rah] explains the Adalah of Sahaba:

 

3 – علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن منصور بن حازم قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان، قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله أم كذبوا؟ قال: بل صدقوا، قال: قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا؟ فقال: أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك ما ينسخ ذلك الجواب، فنسخت الاحاديث بعضها بعضا.

...I then asked, “Did the Sahabah, companions of the holy Prophet (saw) speak the truth or lies when narrating his Hadith?” The Imam replied, “They spoke the truth.” I then said, “Why then they have differences?” Have you not considered the fact that a man would come to the holy Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) and ask a question and would give him an answer and then he would answer that would abrogate the previous answer. Thus, Ahadith abrogated other Ahadith.”

 

[Kulayni narrated in his “al-Kafi” (1/65), and Majlisi said it’s hasan (good)]

 

 

1- You have Cut out a chunk of the narration (Please check what you copy from others), let us state the full narration:

 

 علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن منصور بن حازم قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان، قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله أم كذبوا؟ قال: بل صدقوا، قال: قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا؟ فقال:
أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك ما ينسخ ذلك الجواب، فنسخت الأحاديث بعضها بعضا.

 

"I said to (Imam) abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.), ‘It is confuses me that when I ask you a question and you give an answer and then other person comes and you give a different answer for the same question.’" The Imam replied, "We answer people in a larger and reduced forms." I then asked, "Did the Sahabah, companions of the holy Prophet speak the truth or lies when narrating his Hadith?" The Imam replied, "They spoke the truth." I then said, "Why then they have differences?" Have you not considered the fact that a man would come to the holy Prophet (s.a.) and ask a question and would give him an answer and then he would answer that would abrogate the previous answer. Thus, Ahadith abrogated other Ahadith."

 

 

1- First of all, clearly at beginning there was difference in giving answers, as they differed among whom asked, but they were answered with either larger or reduces forms, thus in question it is the right for that individual.

 

2-Mentioning the companions, does not mean Abu-Bakr or Umar, in our terms, how we define companions is not of your definition, we value for example Abu-Thar, Almiqdad, Salman al-Farisi, Yasir, and so on. So to old us accountable for such is no evidence.

 

3-If in your case all companions were truthful, that would be out of nonsense, seeing the amount of narrations they differed in, and whom some fought Imam Ali (a.s) in hatred.

 

4- Can you please reference where Al-Majilisi said its "hasan"? its not my interest in the narration, however I'm Interested if you can show me.

 

_________________________________________

(wasalam) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

 

2-Mentioning the companions, does not mean Abu-Bakr or Umar, in our terms, how we define companions is not of your definition, we value for example Abu-Thar, Almiqdad, Salman al-Farisi, Yasir, and so on. So to old us accountable for such is no evidence.

 

 

I love how you say "and so on" like you respect multitude of Sahabas [ra].  Last time I checked, brother Logical Islam was compiling a list and his number was at (or around) 30 Sahabas [ra].  By the way, it took him days to only come up with the name of 20 plus, 30 maximum, Sahabas [ra].

 

Out of over a 100,000 Sahabas [ra] you cannot name more than a handful.

 

Lastly, you say "and so on" here in this discussion but if we turn the conversation to Imam Ali [ra] not doing anything when Fatima [ra] was allegedly attacked and Fadak was supposedly usurped, you will say, "...but Imam Ali [ra] did not have enough people to support him, therefore, he did not do anything".

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how you say "and so on" like you respect multitude of Sahabas [ra].  Last time I checked, brother Logical Islam was compiling a list and his number was at (or around) 30 Sahabas [ra].  By the way, it took him days to only come up with the name of 20 plus, 30 maximum, Sahabas [ra].

 

Out of over a 100,000 Sahabas [ra] you cannot name more than a handful.

 

Lastly, you say "and so on" here in this discussion but if we turn the conversation to Imam Ali [ra] not doing anything when Fatima [ra] was allegedly attacked and Fadak was supposedly usurped, you will say, "...but Imam Ali [ra] did not have enough people to support him, therefore, he did not do anything".

 

 

1- By saying "So on" you conclude that I am Ignorant in my history of the companions? and your concluding that 100,000 Allah may he be pleased with them? So those who attacked Imam Ali (a.s) and fought him, Allah is pleased with them? when the Prophet (s.a.w.a.s) said Ali (a.s) must be obeyed, and his Hatred (to him) is mine"?

 

2- He was Kept by the Wasiy'a if the Prophet (s) and this has been Disucssed. In what respect does this have to do with our topic?

________________

(wasalam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I love how you say "and so on" like you respect multitude of Sahabas [ra].  Last time I checked, brother Logical Islam was compiling a list and his number was at (or around) 30 Sahabas [ra].  By the way, it took him days to only come up with the name of 20 plus, 30 maximum, Sahabas [ra].

 

Out of over a 100,000 Sahabas [ra] you cannot name more than a handful.

 

Lastly, you say "and so on" here in this discussion but if we turn the conversation to Imam Ali [ra] not doing anything when Fatima [ra] was allegedly attacked and Fadak was supposedly usurped, you will say, "...but Imam Ali [ra] did not have enough people to support him, therefore, he did not do anything".

Why do you keep trying to change the subject?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

1- By saying "So on" you conclude that I am Ignorant in my history of the companions? and your concluding that 100,000 Allah may he be pleased with them? So those who attacked Imam Ali (a.s) and fought him, Allah is pleased with them? when the Prophet (s.a.w.a.s) said Ali (a.s) must be obeyed, and his Hatred (to him) is mine"?

 

2- He was Kept by the Wasiy'a if the Prophet (s) and this has been Disucssed. In what respect does this have to do with our topic?

________________

(wasalam)

 

 

1.  No but I am only calling you out on your bluff.  Coming from you, "so on" means nothing when you ascribe it to Sahabas [ra].  And the Prophet [saw] also spoke highly of those whom you divert your hatred towards.

 

2.  lol, another fairy tale.  It has to do with exposing your bluff.  If you claim to respect such and such Companions [ra] and "so on", there must have been enough to support Imam Ali [ra] in reclaiming his "Wilayat" and Fadak.  The fact that our Shia brothers say that Imam Ali [ra] had little, almost no, support shows how many Sahabas [ra] you actually revere.  This reverence is dependent on how a certain person treated, or behaved toward, the Ahlul Bayt [ra].  

 

Therefore, when you say "so on", you are only putting on a garb to appear good.

 

 

 

 

 

Why do you keep trying to change the subject?

 

 

Off-topic but catching someone's bluff does not need a special forum, a separate topic.

Edited by muslim720
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

No but I am only calling you out on your bluff.  Coming from you, "so on" means nothing when you ascribe it to Sahabas [ra].  And the Prophet [saw] also spoke highly of those whom you divert your hatred towards.

 

1- You are concluding something which you cannot now personally, and from "So on" I have become Ignorant.

2- Not All the Companions were faithful.

3- If you are saying (r.a) to all the companions, then you are pleased with those who fought with Muwaiyah against Imam Ali (a.s).

4- We have no hatred towards whom the Prophet (s.a.w.a.s) loved, and you have hatred for those who have hated Ahlulbayt (a.s).

 

 

 

lol, another fairy tale.  It has to do with exposing your bluff.  If you claim to respect such and such Companions [ra] and "so on", there must have been enough to support Imam Ali [ra] in reclaiming his "Wilayat" and Fadak.  The fact that our Shia brothers say that Imam Ali [ra] had little, almost no, support shows how many Sahabas [ra] you actually revere.  This reverence is dependent on how a certain person treated, or behaved toward, the Ahlul Bayt [ra]

 

 

 

(bismillah)

 

1- I can hardly understand your statement, here brother, and you have mentioned Fadak and Wiliayt, and your not clear on what your saying. Since you have so much faith in what you believe, and you hesitate no to say anything about us (Example: mentioning that we Believe in Tahreef, when you had no proof, at which I replied to). Let me start by asking you this Question, and I would like you to build your argument scientifically according to "Sahih" narrations. So: "What proof do you have from the narrations from Us and the Quran, that Abu bakr and Umar were the rightful Caliphate and better than Imam Ali (a.s).

 

 

 

 

Therefore, when you say "so on", you are only putting on a garb to appear good

 

 

I really have no idea what you are referring to. But we only consider those who are loyal to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.s) and to Ahlulbayt (a.s) to be "Companions".

 

________________________

(wasalam)

Link to comment
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...