Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Debate On Imamah On Shiachat

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Once again, this debate is not about accepting Ali as his successor, since this is a view shared by tens of deviant Shia sects. This debate is about the Twelvers.

I have given you a freebie by letting this one go and accepting this nass, as long as you can prove the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Yes. Al Ghadeer is not explicit proof of the Imamah of Ali. It can be understood as an appointment, but it is open to interpretation. I will not be getting into those interpretations. If you are interested, then you can go to my site.

I do not want to get side-tracked. I have, once again, conceded this point to you. Believing in the Imamah of Ali does not lead me to believing in the Imamah of the Twelve.

Please proceed by providing evidence for the appointment of Al Hasan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

I am not going to your site, because you agreed for the debate to be conducted here. 

Now please summarize your arguments as to how Ghadeer is not explicit proof 

 

I am not trying to be difficult, but logically we cannot move from Step 1 to Step 2 until Step 1 is agreed by us both. 

That is how debates are conducted, as opposed to merely arguments.

I am not interested in arguing, I am here to debate. 

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Abu Hadi, the title of the debate is: Proof for the Imamah of the Twelve.

If your intention is to drag this by discussing Al Ghadeer, then hadith Al Manzilah, then hadith Al Dar, then Ayat Al Wilayah, then Ayat Al Mubahala, then Ayat Uli Al Amr, and forcing a simple debate into one that spans tens of pages, then I accuse you of intentionally avoiding the original request of providing evidence for THE TWELVE.

You are showing weakness by not moving forward when I have conceded a point.

Ali is an appointed Imam. Now what? Who did he appoint next?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

29giozs.png

^ Stop dodging my question. You are making yourself look bad in the eyes of other Shias.

@shiachat mods:

We never had this issue in the "Nasibi" forum HCY. They made a debate thread between me and Wasil and nobody could post in them except for the two of us as exceptions. This is inexcusable, no matter how you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Like I said before Brother, I came to debate not to argue. 

Jumping from one point to the next without resolving issues is not what I expected from a knowledgeable brother such as yourself. Because you know that is not productive. It only creates arguments and doesn't solve anything. 

 

Especially nowadays, with the world in the state it is in, with brothers killing each other right and left over nonsense, We have a responsibility to resolve issues, not just jump around from topic to topic. 

When you are ready to proceed in this fashion, I am ready. 

Salam. 

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

For those that are curious, my concession of this point is academically and legally known as an arguendo.

arguendo

prep. Latin meaning "for the sake of argument" used by lawyers in the context of "assuming arguendo" that the facts were as the other party contends, but the law prevents the other side from prevailing. Example: "assuming arguendo" that the court finds our client, the defendant, was negligent, the other party (plaintiff) was so contributorily negligent he cannot recover damages. In short, the lawyer is not admitting anything, but wants to make a legal argument only. The word appears most commonly in appeals briefs.

Example from a Shi'ee scholar:

Al-Mufeed in Al-Ifsah said:

If one were to say: If Ameer Al Mu'mineen is the Imam after the Prophet peace be upon him and his progeny, then how did Abu Bakr, Omar, and Uthman, step ahead of him and claimed to be Imams and claimed to be more deserving of it?

It is said to him: This is due to them taking from him his right and what he deserves, which is not an impossible act, since they were not infallible, even if they appeared to be of great character.

Then, if he (the Sunni) said: How is this possible and they the best of the companions of the Prophet peace be upon him and were from the earliest of Muslims?

Al Mufeed replies after listing out who he believes are the best companions:

For the sake of the argument that these are of high merit, this doesn't make them infallible from misguidance, for they can fall into error and forget and it is not impossible that they were stubborn.

As I have insisted, time and time again, even if one is to accept that Ali was appointed by the Prophet peace be upon him, there are no evidences that suggest that the rest of the Imams were appointed. This fact is amplified in Abu Hadi's insistence in diverting and dragging the topic to prove the Imamah of Ali.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Abu Hadi, let us say that we decided to debate Al Ghadeer in another thread, and I whole-heartedly accepted your evidences. Heck, I climbed a minaret and called out the third shihada. We will still end up in this thread even after I have accepted Ali as the successor of the Prophet peace be upon him, because I need evidences to accept the rest of the Imams.

Hence, I am saving you the time and trouble and conceding that Ali is the successor.

You may proceed with evidences for the Imamate of the Twelve, the topic that all other moderators and members avoided, since they knew that they would have nothing to show for it.

Don't let the Shia down akhi. Don't let the Imams down. Do it for Al Hussain akhi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Just in case some Shias are wondering why I am not interested in debating the Imamah of Ali, I will list the possible outcomes of that discussions that will without a doubt be tens of pages long, since the Imamah of Ali can be derived through many evidences, like Hadith Al Manzilah, Al Ghadeer, Al Thaqalayn, Ayat Al Tatheer, Ayat Al Mubahala, Ayat Al Mawadda, and many many fabricated hadiths.

So, twenty to a hundred pages from now, we will arrive at the possible scenarios:

- Abu Hadi admits that there is no explicit proof of the Imamah of Ali in Sunni sources, but will find the ones in Shia sources sufficient for him. In other words, this is a waste of time for both of us.

- I am unconvinced by Abu Hadi's arguments, where in which he will accuse me of being stubborn, and will formally end the debate since there is no point in arguing the Imamah of the Twelve if I will not accept the first Imam. Once again, a waste of time for both of us.

- I accept the arguments of Abu Hadi and choose to accept Ali is the first appointed Imam. Which will bring us back to where we are right now, since I have consistently said that I have conceded this point and I would like evidences of the Imamah of the rest of the Imams.

Inshallah this will be clear to those that ponder upon it with an open heart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Subhanallah! I did not say hadith Al Ghadeer is weak. It is unfortunate that you have prohibited yourself from entering my website as I have personally authenticated the hadith of Al Ghadeer from the path of several companions, like Buraida, Sa'ad bin Abi Waqqas, Zaid bin Thabit, and Sa'eed bin Wahb!

Yes, I authenticated this hadith four times, and now I am accused of weakening it?!

I mentioned those topics as examples of topics that you will drag the debate to. I then added that you will also be derailing the topic to include many many other hadiths which will happen to be fabricated.

Please address my reasons for avoiding the diverting of the topic in post #48.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Abu Hadi, this is obviously going no where. Not only have you failed to address my request for evidence for the Imamah of the Twelve, but you have also failed to address my reasons that I presented in which I have requested that you avoid diverting the topic.

It seems that your persistence in asking me to debate you about Al Ghadeer is because you firmly believe that I have no good answer to it.

Since you sincerely seem to believe that this is the case, I will discuss Al Ghadeer with you if the following conditions are met:

1- The debate will take place in a new thread which will be entitled: Al Ghadeer Debate.

2- You will stick to proving the Imamah of Ali using ONLY Al Ghadeer and will not be changing the topic.

3- Nobody will be allowed to participate except for the two of us.

4- I will be given privileges to post without having the need to get my posts approved by moderators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Salam Br, 

I could stick to all conditions except #2. 

Like I have stated previously, in order to prove the context of Ghadeer, it is required to use other hadith, such as Hadith Thaqalain, etc.I can stick to my original condition, that I will only use hadith in which the Tawatir can be established by both Sunni and Shia sources.But to say that I can only use one hadith, well that is a ridiculous condition. I have been in many debates on SC before as well as offline, and I have never had someone ask for this condition.

As I said before Ghadeer was the culmination of a process of establishing the Wilayat and Imamate of Imam Ali((عليه السلام)). It was not merely an isolated incident. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is more Just than to ask us to place our absolute trust in a person, i.e. Imam Ali((عليه السلام)) without firmly establishing him, on many occasions as the most qualified person besides Rasoulallah(p.b.u.h) for this, and leaving no doubt whatsoever in the minds of the people with regards to this. It is unfortunate, the time, energy, and effort spent by some of our Sunni brothers to hide most of this process of establishment of Wilayat and Imamate from their brothers and make this into a sectarian issue, rather than an issue of establishing the Haqq.

Also, i asked you a simple question, and you never answered it. That is why the debate is being held up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Like I have stated previously, in order to prove the context of Ghadeer, it is required to use other hadith, such as Hadith Thaqalain, etc.I can stick to my original condition, that I will only use hadith in which the Tawatir can be established by both Sunni and Shia sources.

I'm somewhat surprised that this would be a problem.

I thought you believed that the Ghadeer Event was clear explicit proof of the appointment of Ali. You also said that you will be using your strongest arguments first. Now you say that you need to use supporting hadiths to make sense out of Al Ghadeer.

Subhan Allah.

Please be clear Abu Hadi. You and me both know that Ali has many merits. However, establishing a merit does not equate to appointing a successor, as you are aware.

Since Al Ghadeer is not a clear declaration, as you have implied from your previous post, are there any clear declarations from the appointment of Ali?

Also, you have once again mentioned that you will be quoting Mutawatir hadiths. I will hold you to this and this will be my fifth condition. So, jazak Allah khairan for making my life easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

If Al Ghadeer needs to be reinforced and clarified with other hadiths, then it is not sufficient proof of the Imamah of Ali.

I do not see how this is a waste of time. In the last couple of days we barely spent ten minutes posting. However, I accept your wishes to end the debate.

Jazakum Allah khairan for your time and patience, and I wish you guidance my brother.

Wa alaykum alsalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...