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
Sign in to follow this  
ServantOfTheOne

Belief in personalities after the Prophet (sawa)

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salam all,

I hope these couple of questions can be answered by people from the 4 sheikh schools of thought, especially Hanafi:

If a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believing in any of the first 3 caliphs, is that person still considered a muslim?

Also, if a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believeing in Imam Ali or Sayeda Fatima, is that person still considered a muslim?

 

I need to know the opinions of the general sunnis on these questions because the shia position is clear, however, I am lacking knowledge on the sunni opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ServantOfTheOne said:

Salam all,

I hope these couple of questions can be answered by people from the 4 sheikh schools of thought, especially Hanafi:

If a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believing in any of the first 3 caliphs, is that person still considered a muslim?

Also, if a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believeing in Imam Ali or Sayeda Fatima, is that person still considered a muslim?

 

I need to know the opinions of the general sunnis on these questions because the shia position is clear, however, I am lacking knowledge on the sunni opinion.

Wassalam. Bismillah 

As for your both questions being "follower" of Allah azza'wajal "Yes", those who obey Allah and fulfills commands of Allah and beliefs in Allah without associating partners with Him, and those who say firmly "La ilaha illallah Muhammad ur Rasool Allah" without any addition and subtraction can be considered muslim ! But to obey Messenger s.a.w one has to care/love/respect them (Sahaba and Ahl'al bait) both, and those who don't fulfills second condition by not "following" Prophet s.a.w they are considered out of Ahl'al Sunnah jamah (out of Prophet s.a.w jamah)! 

And Allah said: O believers ! obey Allah and obey His Messenger. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

[1] Anyone who recited the shahada and still went against the Ahlul Bayt عليهم السلام, are rebels and misguided, and were obliged to repent.

[2] Anyone who went further and did takfeer of any member of the Ahlul Bayt عليهم السلام are either munafiqeen or kuffar, depending on their behavior.

Those who witnessed Ghadir and ither proofs and still rejected the Wilaya of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) had committed apostasy, due to rejecting a clear sign of Allah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam brother @(patience)

40 minutes ago, (patience) said:

[2] yes ofcourse, those who does takfeer on "any member of Ahl'al bait" besides selected 12, and insults other Ahl'al bait then they are either munafiqun or Kuffar depending on behaviour, as you said ! 

I should clarify: when I said Ahlulbayt, I meant Ahlul Kisa' other than the Prophet. So that means Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussain.

 

19 minutes ago, (patience) said:

Ali r.a and his Sons didn't opposed them and they advices each other in fiqhi and other matters,

Sayeda Fatima had a problem with Abu Bakr, therefore Imam Ali, Imam Hassan and Imam Hussain had a problem with Abu Bakr. Omar had a problem with Sayeda Fatima and the people in her house. Imam Ali and Imam Hassan had a problem with Mu'awiya. Aisha had a problem with Imam Ali.

Imam Ali may have helped Abu Bakr, Omar and Uthman in Fiqh matters, but Fiqh matters are things that concern Islam. It is not personal. Therefore it cannot be used as an argument to suggest that there were no issues between Imam Ali and Omar or Abu Bakr.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ServantOfTheOne said:

Salam brother @(patience)

I should clarify: when I said Ahlulbayt, I meant Ahlul Kisa' other than the Prophet. So that means Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussain.

 

Sayeda Fatima had a problem with Abu Bakr, therefore Imam Ali, Imam Hassan and Imam Hussain had a problem with Abu Bakr. Omar had a problem with Sayeda Fatima and the people in her house. Imam Ali and Imam Hassan had a problem with Mu'awiya. Aisha had a problem with Imam Ali.

Imam Ali may have helped Abu Bakr, Omar and Uthman in Fiqh matters, but Fiqh matters are things that concern Islam. It is not personal. Therefore it cannot be used as an argument to suggest that there were no issues between Imam Ali and Omar or Abu Bakr.

 

Please correct me if I am wrong.???

Entire world is wrong according to shiites, and even shiism maked Allah "looser", far left even shaituan behind !

What is the topic a about, and where you can are going towards?

Edited by (patience)
^wasalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, (patience) said:

Entire world is wrong according to shiites, and even shiism maked Allah "looser", far left even shaituan behind !

What is the topic a about, and where you can are going towards?

Within the scope of my question, I just wanted to know if the position of Ahlul Kisa' was great than, equal to or lower than the first 3 caliphs. From that point onwards, the discussion evolved.

Personally, I believe that someone who rejects the Prophet's family and their teachings, at least, he or she is misguided. But someone who rejects the first 3 Caliphs and their teachings will end up losing the values of Ahlul Kisa'. But then again, that is my opinion; and I cannot force it on anyone.

I was looking to understand this by asking an indirect question. Through indirect questions, a conscious mind can sometimes be lead to realise a truth it has always harboured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the questions were posed to Sunnis and therefore Sunnis should be given the opportunity to try (sorry brother  and then some of your answers were either incomplete or incorrect....)

On 11/6/2016 at 12:40 PM, ServantOfTheOne said:

Salam all,

I hope these couple of questions can be answered by people from the 4 sheikh schools of thought, especially Hanafi:

If a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believing in any of the first 3 caliphs, is that person still considered a Muslim?

Ahlus Sunnah believe that those who were not able to pay allegiance to a legitimate leader/caliph due to some genuine reasons are excused. However, if one had no genuine reason and he had already seen that overall ummah had paid allegiance to a legitimate leader/caliph (who [a] neither commits or promotes shirk (b]neither compels people to commit sins [c] nor causes blood-shed amongst Muslims masses) then by not obeying the leader or not paying allegiance, he is committing a sin and if dies in such state then he died like a jahil.

The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: ‘Whoever parts from obedience, and splits away from the Jama’ah and dies, then he has died a death of Jahiliyyah. Whoever rebels against my Ummah, killing good and evil people alike, and does not try to avoid killing the believers, and does not pay attention to those who are under a covenant, then he is not of me. Whoever fights for a cause that is not clear, advocating tribalism, getting angry for the sake of tribalism, and he is killed, then he has died a death of Jahiliyyah. [Sunan an-Nasa’I Vol. 5, Book 37, Hadith 4119 ]

@Ali_ul_azeem

On 11/6/2016 at 12:40 PM, ServantOfTheOne said:

Also, if a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believeing in Imam Ali or Sayeda Fatima, is that person still considered a Muslim?

The question is not very clear... I mean what do you mean or yourself understand by "following" and "believing".

We Ahlus Sunnah love both as our Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) loved both and follow them and consider it an essential part of eemaan. If one hates them or any of the ahluy bait of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) I would say then such a person is a munafiq.

On 11/6/2016 at 12:40 PM, ServantOfTheOne said:

I need to know the opinions of the general Sunnis on these questions because the Shia position is clear, however, I am lacking knowledge on the Sunni opinion.

to us the Shia position is not clear on above questions really.

Quote

Umar: He was of the opinion that mut'a was forbidden, Ibn Abbas et al disagreed. He also established 20 rakats of Taraweeh in Ramadan, the Maliki schools again did not seem it necessary.

if you are answering on behalf of ahlus sunnah then your answer is wrong for obvious reasons.

In our authetic ahadith (which are repetitive) and in fact those are primarily from Ali al murtadha (رضي الله عنه) quoting the words of our holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) about prohibition of Muttah forever clearly annihilates any claim about its legitimacy in Islam. Ibn Abbas's opinion recorded in the books (which seems to be restricted to war time conditions and is contrary to the opinions of senior jamat of sahaba) thus has no match to the above narration narrated by Ali (رضي الله عنه).

We need to see a reliable narration on Umar (رضي الله عنه) establishing "20" rakat... where is it?

Quote

Uthman: He was of the opinion that there is no ghusl unless one ejaculated, I.e. entering alone does not necessitate ghusl. No school accepts that opinion. He was known to not wipe his feet in wudhu, which again, Ibn Abbas disagreed. Likewise, Ibn Masood disagreed with Uthman's burning of the Masahif and refused to submit his copy.

would request details/evidence of the first two points. Ibn Masud (رضي الله عنه) as stated in my initial response to OP must have felt that he had some genuine reason to refuse or delay the obedience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2016 at 12:59 PM, Bukhari8k said:

The question is not very clear... I mean what do you mean or yourself understand by "following" and "believing".

When I asked about the first 3 caliphs, the answer was clear to you. When the same question is asked about Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and Sayeda Fatime (عليه السلام), the question is no longer clear? Come on brother. Please be more congruent in your responses.

On 11/7/2016 at 12:59 PM, Bukhari8k said:

to us the Shia position is not clear on above questions really.

Quote

The Shia position is that if someone stop believing in and following the values of Ali (عليه السلام) and Fatima (عليه السلام), they have stop being Muslim; because those 2 personalities are the embodiment of the Islam of Muhammad (sawa).

On 11/7/2016 at 12:59 PM, Bukhari8k said:

if you are answering on behalf of ahlus sunnah then your answer is wrong for obvious reasons.

In our authetic ahadith (which are repetitive) and in fact those are primarily from Ali al murtadha (رضي الله عنه) quoting the words of our holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) about prohibition of Muttah forever clearly annihilates any claim about its legitimacy in Islam

I have seen authentic Hadith which proves that Umar was the person who prohibited the practice of Muta. Inshallah I will respond here with proof later on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2016 at 6:28 AM, ServantOfTheOne said:

When I asked about the first 3 caliphs, the answer was clear to you. When the same question is asked about Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and Sayeda Fatime (عليه السلام), the question is no longer clear? Come on brother. Please be more congruent in your responses.

When you had asked about following the first 3 caliphs, to me it meant paying allegiance and obeying their orders... and in response I gave an answer which covered not only the first 3 or 4 but all the legitimate caliphates.

I deemed it not useful to further talk about those people not believing in the first 3 since the answer to the question pretty much lied in my response on caliphate issue.

Why I was a bit confused to your second question is because.... caliphate has nothing to do with Syedah (رضي الله عنه) and Caliphate of Ali (رضي الله عنه) is already covered in my first answer.

As far as believing is concerned then I think there should be no question that both Sunni and Shias believe in Ali (رضي الله عنه) and Syedah Fatimah (رضي الله عنه). They may have different approaches of loving them. Since Ahlus Sunnah already hold them in high esteem so the question was not clear to me.

On 11/8/2016 at 6:28 AM, ServantOfTheOne said:

The Shia position is that if someone stop believing in and following the values of Ali (عليه السلام) and Fatima (عليه السلام), they have stop being Muslim; because those 2 personalities are the embodiment of the Islam of Muhammad (sawa).

So we are both fine with believing in them and following their values (we would love to follow their footsteps because they in turn followed the footsteps of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) themselves.

however the question remains about Shia view on those people, who although consider him ameer ul momineen (رضي الله عنه), while consider him to be the 4th rightly guided caliph as well?

On 11/8/2016 at 6:28 AM, ServantOfTheOne said:

I have seen authentic Hadith which proves that Umar was the person who prohibited the practice of Muta. Inshallah I will respond here with proof later on.

I would also like to see if there is one...

Quote

Please refer to Qurtubi et al Maliki works, as well as Qadhi Yahya bin Aktham from the Ahnaaf that Mut'a is permissible.

but Qurtubi maliki or Yahya hanafi or any other individual will have no effect on the Ijma of Jamaat ahlus Sunnah on this matter as we can find authentic mutawatir ahadith recorded in sihah.

Quote

Also, I wrote: " Umar: He was of the opinion that mut'a was forbidden".

yes... you are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam  brother @Bukhari8k

Thanks for your clarifications.

 

22 hours ago, Bukhari8k said:

however the question remains about shia view on those people, who although consider him ameer ul momineen (ra), while consider him to be the 4th rightly guided caliph as well?

All 14 infallibles are considered rightly guided. Imam Ali (as) is not considered 4th in any dimension of the Shia school of thought. He is number 1 following by the 11 imams thereafter.

 

22 hours ago, Bukhari8k said:

i would also like to see if there is one.

You may have see these sources online, but I thought I would extrapolate this from a video I have seen on Youtube with the book sources clearly shown:

 

1st source:
Saheeh Sunan Al-Nasai Investigated by Al-Albani.
Al-Riyadh Edition, Volume 2, Page 268.
Al-Albani says: The chain of narrators is Authentic
Hadeeth: From Ibn Abbas who said: I hear Umar saying: "By Allah, I forbid you from Mut'ah, even though it is in the Book of Allah and the Messenger of Allah did it too."

2nd source:
Al Bidaya Wa Al-Nihaya Wal By Al-Hafiz Ibn Katheer Al-Dimashqi.
Investigated by Dr. Al-Turki.
Volume 7 Aalaam Al-Kutub, Page 460
Chain of Narrators is "Hasan"
Hadeeth: From Ibn Abbas who said: I hear Umar saying: "By Allah, I forbid you from Mut'ah, even though it is in the Book of Allah and the Messenger of Allah did it too."

3rd source:
Al-Jaamia Al-Sahih Mima Laysa Fi Al-Saheehain by Allama Al-Wadi'i (Yemeni Salafi Scholar)
Dar Al-Athar
Volume 2, Page 390.
Hadeeth: "Umar's forbidding of Mut'a was desirability from him". In other; his own views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ServantOfTheOne said:

Salam  brother @Bukhari8k

Thanks for your clarifications.

 

All 14 infallibles are considered rightly guided. Imam Ali (as) is not considered 4th in any dimension of the Shia school of thought. He is number 1 following by the 11 imams thereafter.

 

You may have see these sources online, but I thought I would extrapolate this from a video I have seen on Youtube with the book sources clearly shown:

 

1st source:
Saheeh Sunan Al-Nasai Investigated by Al-Albani.
Al-Riyadh Edition, Volume 2, Page 268.
Al-Albani says: The chain of narrators is Authentic
Hadeeth: From Ibn Abbas who said: I hear Umar saying: "By Allah, I forbid you from Mut'ah, even though it is in the Book of Allah and the Messenger of Allah did it too."

2nd source:
Al Bidaya Wa Al-Nihaya Wal By Al-Hafiz Ibn Katheer Al-Dimashqi.
Investigated by Dr. Al-Turki.
Volume 7 Aalaam Al-Kutub, Page 460
Chain of Narrators is "Hasan"
Hadeeth: From Ibn Abbas who said: I hear Umar saying: "By Allah, I forbid you from Mut'ah, even though it is in the Book of Allah and the Messenger of Allah did it too."

3rd source:
Al-Jaamia Al-Sahih Mima Laysa Fi Al-Saheehain by Allama Al-Wadi'i (Yemeni Salafi Scholar)
Dar Al-Athar
Volume 2, Page 390.
Hadeeth: "Umar's forbidding of Mut'a was desirability from him". In other; his own views.

Salam brother

here is the actual text and translation. 

Sunan an-Nasa'i 2736; The Book of Hajj - كتاب مناسك الحج 


It was narrated that Ibn 'Abbas said:
"I heard 'Umar say" 'By Allah, I forbid you to perform Tamattu,' but it is mentioned in the Book of Allah and the Messenger of Allah did it" meaning 'Umrah with Hajj.
أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَلِيِّ بْنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ شَقِيقٍ، قَالَ أَنْبَأَنَا أَبِي قَالَ، أَنْبَأَنَا أَبُو حَمْزَةَ، عَنْ مُطَرِّفٍ، عَنْ سَلَمَةَ بْنِ كُهَيْلٍ، عَنْ طَاوُسٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ عُمَرَ، يَقُولُ وَاللَّهِ إِنِّي لأَنْهَاكُمْ عَنِ الْمُتْعَةِ، وَإِنَّهَا، لَفِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَلَقَدْ فَعَلَهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَعْنِي الْعُمْرَةَ فِي الْحَجِّ ‏.‏
Grade    : Sahih  
 

There are 3 types of hajj.... Tamattu, Ifrad, Qiran. So it has got nothing to do with that mutah. Hajj tamattu which is relatively easier hajj (with easier ihram conditions etc) was discouraged or forbidden (but not for ever and not strictly as some ashabs still did hajj tamttu and did not agree with caliph's view and they were not forced to follow) for local residents or makkans only in order to encourage people performing hajj qiran specially those coming from distant areas because of the conditions during those times. Those tougher conditions are not there any more and majority of ahlus Sunnah perform hajj tamattu now a days. No one can forbid for ever something which is halal but only under certain circumstances people can be asked to refrain. Like under certain circumstances haram things can also become halal. so anyhow, the narrations that you shared were about hajj tamattu.

Edited by Bukhari8k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me @Bukhari8k, the first source's text does actually say the hajj part correct. It is second one does not. Although one could argue that both hadeeths are in the same context. I can carry on the argument of Mut'a by bringing more sources but this thread was not created for the discussion of Mut'a, so I prefer to move on if that's alright instead of derailing the main purpose.

 

The hadith mentioned above, Umar swore by Allah that he will forbid something that is allowed in the Quran. In itself that's not a very Islamic thing for a Caliph to do. Doing something against the Quran is one thing, doing it while being a caliph is another, and doing it while also swearing by Allah is exceptional. Why should a muslim have confidence in following someone who emphatically swears to go against Allah and the Quran and the Prophet on any subject area? Unless there is something else that I am not seeing here?

JZK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Requested Evidence entirely from Sunni sources:

[1] Evidence that Umar did stipulate 20 rak'aat for taraweeh:

البيهقي في المعرفة بسنده عن السائب بن البرقان ، قال : كنا نقوم زمن عمر بن الخطاب بعشرين ركعة والوتر

That does not help. The translation of the above is:

Al-Saaib bin Yazeed (رضي الله عنه) narrated that we used to offer twenty raka'at followed by Witr in the reign of ‘Umar (رضي الله عنه) (Sunan Al-Baihaqi, v1, p296)

It does not prove what you said:

Quote

Umar: He was of the opinion that mut'a was forbidden, Ibn Abbas et al disagreed. He also established 20 rakats of Taraweeh in Ramadan, the Maliki schools again did not seem it necessary.

and does not answer what I was asking:

On 11/7/2016 at 12:59 PM, Bukhari8k said:

We need to see a reliable narration on Umar (رضي الله عنه) establishing "20" rakat... where is it?

Here are two more narrations from the same book

Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) narrated that the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) used to pray twenty raka'at by himself followed by Witr in the
month of Ramadan (Sunan Al-Baihaqi, h12102) 


Abi ‘Abdul Rahman Al-Salami (رضي الله عنه) narrated that ‘Ali (رضي الله عنه) called for the Huffaz Al-Qur’an in the month of Ramadan and asked one of them to lead people in offering twenty raka’at Salat (Al-Taraweeh) while he himself used to lead the Witr prayer.(Sunan Al-Baihaqi, v2, p496)

Quote

[2] Uthman’s wudhu:

أخرج المتّقيّ الهنديّ ، عن أبي مالك الدمشقّي ؛ قوله : حدّثت أنّ عثمان بن عفّان اختلف في خلافته في الوضوء

مسلم في صحيحه ، عن قتيبة بن سعيد ، وأحمد بن عبدة الضّبّي ؛ قالا : حدّثنا عبد العزيز وهو الدراوردي عن زيد بن أسلم ، عن حمران مولى عثمان ؛ قال : أتيت عثمان بن عفّان بوضوء ، فتوضّأ ثمّ قال : إنّ ناساً يتحدّثون عن رسول الله (ص) بأحاديث ، لاأدري ما هي ! إلاّ أنّي رأيت رسول الله توضّأ مثل وضوئي هذا ثمّ قال : « من توضّأ هكذا غفر له ما تقدّم من ذنبه

[3] Ibn Abbas’ wudhu different to Uthman’s:

تفسير الطبري: حدثنا أبو كريب قال، حدثنا محمد بن قيس الخراساني، عن ابن جريج، عن عمرو بن دينار، عن عكرمة، عن ابن عباس قال: الوضوء غَسْلتان ومَسْحتان

what is related from Al-Dimashqi (likely the scholar who belonged to 16th century, just like Mutaqqi al Hindi) is not in detail that what did he actually mean.

I don't see anything wrong in the second riwayah from al-Muslim. Can you explain what you think?

Humran, the freed slave of 'Uthman reported:
I brought for Uthman b. 'Affan the ablution water. He performed ablution and then said: Verily the people narrate from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) a hadith. I do not know what these are. but (I know this fact) that I saw the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) perform ablution like this ablution of mine and then he said: He who performed ablution like this, all his previous sins would be expiated and his prayer and going towards the mosque would have an extra reward. In the tradition narrated by Ibn 'Abda (the words are):" I came to Uthman and he performed ablution."

Regarding 3rd riwayah... then it does not mention Uthman (رضي الله عنه) and Ibn Abbas' statement is quite brief where he is talking about washing and wiping (we do wipe heads).

Quote

مناهل العرفان في علوم القرآن: أن شقيق بن سلمة يقول: خطبنا عبد الله بن مسعود على المنبر فقال: {وَمَنْ يَغْلُلْ يَأْتِ بِمَا غَلَّ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ} . غلوا مصاحفكم. أي اخفوها حتى لا تحرق

As I have already said that Abdullah Ibn Masud did what he thought was right... Uthman (رضي الله عنه) did what he thought was right. Our jamaat stands with Uthman (رضي الله عنه) on the matter of burning scattered/incomplete/mansookh copies of ayahs written over different objects against the standard mushaf which was forwarded to different corners of the caliphate.

Quote

Evidence required from you:

[1] Please post these repetitive narrations which you claim where Ali al-Murtadha عليه السلام quoted the words of our holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله that mut’a was prohibited forever.
[2] Please prove that Ibn Abbas said Mut’a was restricted to times of war.
[3] Please provide a list of companions besides the Ahlul Bait عليهم السلام who were greater mufassireen than Ibn Abbas and said that Mut’a was restricted to warfare.
[4] Please prove that there is Ijma on the prohibition of Mut’a. there isn’t because if it was there would be hadd of zina for it. The very reason there is no hadd for mut’a is because of the ikhtilaf on the issue.

I think that if I will quote

a) the order of the holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) from Sihah Sittah

b) which has been narrated by Ali al-Murtadha (رضي الله عنه) [I am not quoting narrations from other ashabs at this point]

c) Which is repetitive and clear in its meaning

Then I don't see much room for any more questions..... UNLESS you can provide a source bigger and better or a verdict superior to the verdict of the personalities in the narrations mentioned below:

Reference     : Sahih Muslim 1407 c:

Muhammad b. 'Ali narrated on the authority of his father 'Ali that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) on the Day of Khaibar prohibited for ever the contracting of temporary marriage and eating of the flesh of the domestic asses.


Reference     : Sunan an-Nasa'I 3365:

It was narrated from Al-Hasan and 'Abdullah, the sons of Muhammad, from their father, that 'Ali heard that a man did not see anything wrong with Mut'ah (temporary marriage). He said: "You are confused, the Messenger of Allah forbade it, and the meat of domestic donkeys on the day of Khaibar."

other references    :  Sahih al-Bukhari 4216, Sunan an-Nasa'I 3366, Ibn Majah Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1961 , Sahih Muslim 1407 a,c,d & f (different chains), Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1121, Sahih Muslim 1407 e, Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1794, Sunan an-Nasa'I 4334, Muwatta Malik Book 28, Hadith 41, Sunan an-Nasa'I 4335, , 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2016 at 11:38 PM, ServantOfTheOne said:

The hadith mentioned above, Umar swore by Allah that he will forbid something that is allowed in the Quran. In itself that's not a very Islamic thing for a Caliph to do. Doing something against the Quran is one thing, doing it while being a caliph is another, and doing it while also swearing by Allah is exceptional. Why should a muslim have confidence in following someone who emphatically swears to go against Allah and the Quran and the Prophet on any subject area? Unless there is something else that I am not seeing here?

JZK

First thing is that Umar (ra) did not made Tamattu unlawful as a caliph but forbade Makkans as an individual.

Secondly, he presented an argument however before seeing that a hadith seems relevant:

It was narrated that Ummul Momineen Aisha (ra) said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: “There is no prayer when food is ready or when one is trying to stop oneself doing either of the two things that break wudu’ (i.e., urination and defecation).” Narrated by Muslim, 560

although prayer is obligatory however if you are hungry and your hunger will disturb you while offering prayers then you should first eat food and should delay prayer which also has been ordered in Quran by Allah. So under normal circumstances, one should not delay prayers but if situation demands then one can delay.

Similary in case of Tamattu, when Islam reached to far regions and Muslims began journeying for hajj, it was not easy for them. They did not find luxury rooms, toilets, bathrooms, laundry etc those days and they usually traveled in groups but without wives etc.

So when people from far regions or countries reached makkah for hajj and those who wore Ihram of hajj Qiran and remained under the restrictions of the same. They saw local people benefiting from Tamattu although locals had not much problem arranging hadi. And since locals were doing Tamattu and they were at ease so it was possible that that did not sit well with the outsiders. That was the situations and the reason for discouraging makkans.

Secondly, as per authentic ahadith. Prophet himself along with Talha (ra) and Ali (ra) had performed hajj Qiran while he asked his other companions to do hajj Tamattu. And Umar was favoring the same hajj Qiran for Makkans.

Sahih al-Bukhari

Narrated Jabir bin `Abdullah:
The Prophet (ﷺ) and his companions assumed Ihram for Hajj and none except the Prophet (ﷺ) and Talha had the Hadi with them. `Ali had come from Yemen and he had the Hadi with him. He (`Ali) said, "I have assumed Ihram with an intention like that of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) has assumed it." The Prophet (ﷺ) ordered his companions to intend the Ihram with which they had come for `Umra, to perform the Tawaf of the Ka`ba (and between Safa and Marwa), to get their hair cut short and then to finish their Ihram with the exception of those who had the Hadi with them.

Sahih al Bukhari

Narrated Abu Musa:
I came upon Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) when he was at Al-Batha. He asked me, "Have you intended to perform the Hajj?" I replied in the affirmative. He asked, "For what have you assumed lhram?" I replied," I have assumed Ihram with the same intention as that of the Prophet (ﷺ) ." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You have done well! Go and perform Tawaf round the Ka`ba and between Safa and Marwa." Then I went to one of the women of Bani Qais and she took out lice from my head. Later, I assumed the Ihram for Hajj. So, I used to give this verdict to the people till the caliphate of `Umar. When I told him about it, he said, "If we take (follow) the Holy Book, then it orders us to complete Hajj and `Umra (Hajj-at- Tamattu`) and if we follow the tradition of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) then Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) did not finish his lhram till the Hadi had reached its destination (had been slaughtered i.e. Hajj-al-Qiran).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

ابن أبي شيبة: 7682 - حدثنا وكيع، عن مالك بن أنس، عن يحيى بن سعيد، «أن عمر بن الخطاب أمر رجلا يصلي بهم عشرين ركعة»

Thanks for sharing however the above narration is not reliable as it is maqtu and daeef.

Quote

This is the point, one does not necessarily need to agree with the 3 caliphs. One can disagree if he thinks he is right and still be Muslim.

yes, to us after Rasool Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), none was infallible and this is also derived from ayah 4:59 when it talks about having differences with Ul il amr.

Quote

النسائي أخبرنا أبو داود سليمان بن داود قال حدثنا عبد الله بن وهب قال أخبرني يونس ومالك وأسامة عن بن شهاب عن الحسن وعبد الله ابني محمد بن علي عن أبيهما

عن علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه قال : نهى رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم عن متعة النساء يوم خيبر وعن لحوم الحمر الأنسية

Please post the Arabic text with the words ‘forever’.  This is not what Muslim or Nasai said.

Thanks for pointing out that the Arabic word "abadan" is not there and its in the english translation of the quoted one taken from sunnah .com however there is another saheeh hadith from another companion mentioning حَرَّمَ ذَلِكَ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ which I will bring later on. Here is the one making it a bit more clear as to what Ali (رضي الله عنه) meant to say:

 'Ali (رضي الله عنه) heard that Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) gave some relaxation in connection with the contracting of temporary marriage, whereupon he said:
Don't be hasty (in your religious verdict), Ibn 'Abbas, for Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) on the Day of Khaibar prohibited that forever - along with the eating of flesh of domestic asses.
وَحَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ نُمَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي، حَدَّثَنَا عُبَيْدُ اللَّهِ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ، وَعَبْدِ اللَّهِ، ابْنَىْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَلِيٍّ عَنْ أَبِيهِمَا، عَنْ عَلِيٍّ، أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ، يُلَيِّنُ فِي مُتْعَةِ النِّسَاءِ فَقَالَ مَهْلاً يَا ابْنَ عَبَّاسٍ فَإِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم نَهَى عَنْهَا يَوْمَ خَيْبَرَ وَعَنْ لُحُومِ الْحُمُرِ الإِنْسِيَّةِ ‏.‏

Reference     : Sahih Muslim 1407 d

 

Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) was around 12-13 years old when Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) had passed away. So at that point or before that point in the lifetime or in the presence of Rasool Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) it seems very odd that young Ibn Abbas would give verdicts which would be corrected by Ali (رضي الله عنه).

As mentioned earlier, I would use another prophetic hadith of Saheeh al-Muslim which proves that that was prohibited forever:

Sabra al-Juhani reported on the authority of his father that while he was with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) he said:
O people, I had permitted you to contract temporary marriage with women, but Allah has forbidden it (now) until the Day of Resurrection. So he who has any (woman with this type of marriage contract) he should let her off, and do not take back anything you have given to them (as dower).

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ نُمَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْعَزِيزِ بْنُ عُمَرَ، حَدَّثَنِي الرَّبِيعُ بْنُ سَبْرَةَ الْجُهَنِيُّ، أَنَّ أَبَاهُ، حَدَّثَهُ أَنَّهُ، كَانَ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي قَدْ كُنْتُ أَذِنْتُ لَكُمْ فِي الاِسْتِمْتَاعِ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ حَرَّمَ ذَلِكَ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ فَمَنْ كَانَ عِنْدَهُ مِنْهُنَّ شَىْءٌ فَلْيُخَلِّ سَبِيلَهُ وَلاَ تَأْخُذُوا مِمَّا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْئًا‏"‏ ‏.‏

Reference :Sahih Muslim 1406 d & I, Ibn Majah Vol. 3, Book 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hadith Maqtoo', which is da'eef per se, does not necessitate that the report is false. Most reports once they become popular become maqtoo' due to their shawahid.

The narration was not reliable. However, it can be argued that a daeef narration should also be examined as to what kind of duaf it contains. there is no record of Yahya seeing Umar (رضي الله عنه). Anyways, even that narration does not say that it was Umar (رضي الله عنه) who actually "established" or "introduceed" 20 rakat. He only commanded someone to do so and as we can see in other narrations from Bayhaqi suggesting that people were already offering 20 rakats.

 

Quote

مستدرك للحاكم: حدثنا : أبو العباس محمد بن يعقوب ، ثنا : الحسن بن علي بن عفان ، وأخبرني : محمد بن عبد الله الجوهري ، ثنا : محمد بن إسحاق بن خزيمة ، ثنا : الحسن بن علي بن عفان العامري ، ثنا : زيد بن الحباب ، ثنا : فضيل بن مرزوق الرواسي ، ثنا : أبو إسحاق ، عن زيد بن يثيع ، عن علي (عليه السلام) ، قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله: وإن تولوا عليا تجدوه هاديا مهديا يسلك بكم الطريق ، هذا حديث صحيح الاسناد ، ولم يخرجاه ، وشاهده حديث حذيفة بن اليمان

One is required to follow the one that is: هاديا مهديا

We know them as Rightly guided caliphs or Khulafa e Rashideen wal Mehdi'een and obviously Ali (رضي الله عنه) was a khalifah Rashid or Mahdi... and why not.

 Jami` at-Tirmidhi : Chapters on Knowledge 

Narrated Al-'Irbad bin Sariyah:
"One day after the morning Salat, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) exhorted us to the extent that the eyes wept and the hearts shuddered with fear. A man said: 'Indeed this is a farewell exhortation. [So what] do you order us O Messenger of Allah?' He said: 'I order you to have Taqwa of Allah, and to listen and obey, even in the case of an Ethiopian slave. Indeed, whomever among you lives, he will see much difference. Beware of the newly invented matters, for indeed they are astray. Whoever among you sees that, then he must stick to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khulafa', cling to it with the molars.'"
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ حُجْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا بَقِيَّةُ بْنُ الْوَلِيدِ، عَنْ بَحِيرِ بْنِ سَعْدٍ، عَنْ خَالِدِ بْنِ مَعْدَانَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو السُّلَمِيِّ، عَنِ الْعِرْبَاضِ بْنِ سَارِيَةَ، قَالَ وَعَظَنَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَوْمًا بَعْدَ صَلاَةِ الْغَدَاةِ مَوْعِظَةً بَلِيغَةً ذَرَفَتْ مِنْهَا الْعُيُونُ وَوَجِلَتْ مِنْهَا الْقُلُوبُ فَقَالَ رَجُلٌ إِنَّ هَذِهِ مَوْعِظَةُ مُوَدِّعٍ فَمَاذَا تَعْهَدُ إِلَيْنَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ قَالَ ‏ "‏ أُوصِيكُمْ بِتَقْوَى اللَّهِ وَالسَّمْعِ وَالطَّاعَةِ وَإِنْ عَبْدٌ حَبَشِيٌّ فَإِنَّهُ مَنْ يَعِشْ مِنْكُمْ يَرَى اخْتِلاَفًا كَثِيرًا وَإِيَّاكُمْ وَمُحْدَثَاتِ الأُمُورِ فَإِنَّهَا ضَلاَلَةٌ فَمَنْ أَدْرَكَ ذَلِكَ مِنْكُمْ فَعَلَيْهِ بِسُنَّتِي وَسُنَّةِ الْخُلَفَاءِ الرَّاشِدِينَ الْمَهْدِيِّينَ عَضُّوا عَلَيْهَا بِالنَّوَاجِذِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ ‏.‏ 
Grade    : Hasan Sahih    
Reference     : Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2676/ Abi Dawood / Ibn Majah


Safinah reported the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as saying:
The caliphate of Prophecy will last thirty years; then Allah will give the Kingdom to whom he wishes; or his kingdom to whom he wishes.
حَدَّثَنَا عَمْرُو بْنُ عَوْنٍ، حَدَّثَنَا هُشَيْمٌ، عَنِ الْعَوَّامِ بْنِ حَوْشَبٍ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُمْهَانَ، عَنْ سَفِينَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ خِلاَفَةُ النُّبُوَّةِ ثَلاَثُونَ سَنَةً ثُمَّ يُؤْتِي اللَّهُ الْمُلْكَ مَنْ يَشَاءُ - أَوْ مُلْكَهُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ - ‏"‏ ‏.‏
Grade    : Hasan Sahih
Reference     : Sunan Abi Dawud 4647

Infact Rasool Allah prayed to Allah to make some of his companions Hadi wa Mahdi... would that mean that Rasool Allah prayed so that they become infallible? No. But that they should no go astray or misguided in religion.

 

Quote

OP: If a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believing in any of the first 3 caliphs, is that person still considered a Muslim?

A: Yes, we have seen companions disagree with the caliphs for whatever reason they believed they were right and the caliphs were wrong in their opinion.

yes, one can have a difference of opinion with them as they are not infallibles.

Quote

OP: Also, if a member of Ahlul Sunna stops following or believeing in Imam Ali or Sayeda Fatima, is that person still considered a Muslim?

Ali عليه السلام is "Hadi and Mahdi", to not follow him would be to become a ضال مضل

right, because he as a caliph Ali (رضي الله عنه) was Hadi, Mahdi, and Rashid.

Quote

The permission for mut'a was allowed as known by tawatur and through the Qur'an. The abrogation must come either from the Qur'an itself or tawatur, not a khabrul wahid. Again, the very reason there is no hadd for mut’a is because of the ikhtilaf on the issue.

ابن قدامة في المغني: [فصل إقامة الحد بالوطء في نكاح مختلف فيه] (7160) فصل: ولا يجب الحد بالوطء في نكاح مختلف فيه، كنكاح المتعة، والشغار، والتحليل، والنكاح بلا ولي ولا شهود

Brother, the riwayah is not khabr e wahid as there are 3 different chains, atleast. I think there is no defined hadd but the matter comes under tazeer. like sexual intercourse with an animal also has no defined hadd but falls under tazeer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Hadith mutawatir explicitly mentions '12 caliphs' therefore it overrules the one that states 'only 30 years'. Therefore the khulafa mahdiyyeen must be 12 whose sunnah must be held on to. Had the first 3 caliphs been from them the As'haab would have been obliged to hold on to their teachings. However, they saw that they were simply their 'opinions' and therefore did not see it necessary to hold on to them. As for the 12, there is no choice unless one wants be leave the mahdiyyeen. Also, I never used the word 'infallible'. It is one thing to be able to do something wrong and another not to do it. Would a sane person burn his money despite the ability to do so? A 'Mahdi' is simply smarter than disobeying Allah for little worldly pleasure.

The authentic ahadith of 12 caliphs from Quresh does not say that they will come after one after another without any break. So, the hadith mentioning 30 years for khulafa e Rashideen Mehdieen is not in conflict.

Following their views which they gave in their personal capacity on the matter of furu or such types which do not harm the unity or peace of community is not mandatory however when it comes to their implementing orders as a caliph or maintaining law & order, one has to follow and one is not supposed to disturb the administration and peace of the community. There are 3 basic conditions when one can or should revolt against a leader depending on his ijtihad/resources 1. in matter of shirk 2. if leader causes bloodshed amongst Muslim masses or 3. if he compels people to commit sins.

Quote

Please post all 3 chains that explictly say it was haram until the day of judgement. Also, 3 as'haab make a report mash'hoor, not mutawatir.

I will quote those 3 narrations with different chains leading up to Sabrah al-HJuhaini (رضي الله عنه), thus making it clear that the hadith is not khabar e wahid. Secondly, those narrations along with other authentic narrations on prohibition of Mutah by the same companion and Ali (رضي الله عنه) where he also corrects Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) and Umar (رضي الله عنه) and Ibn Zubair (رضي الله عنه) all after the demise of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) certainly makes the ahadith related to prohibition of mutah as Mutawatir. Even if the hadith specifically mentioning "forbidden it until the day of resurrection" is mashoor(+saheeh+prophetic+musnad/marfu) then in the absence of a stronger "prophetic" hadith talking otherwise, should be good enough.

 وَحَدَّثَنِي سَلَمَةَ بْنُ شَبِيبٍ، حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ أَعْيَنَ، حَدَّثَنَا مَعْقِلٌ، عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عَبْلَةَ، عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا الرَّبِيعُ بْنُ سَبْرَةَ الْجُهَنِيُّ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ : Sahih Muslim 1406 l

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدَةُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ بْنِ عُمَرَ، عَنِ الرَّبِيعِ بْنِ سَبْرَةَ : Ibn Majah Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1962

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدَةُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ بْنِ عُمَرَ، عَنِ الرَّبِيعِ بْنِ سَبْرَةَ : Sahih Muslim 1406 d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The very meaning of khilafa is continuation.

This makes the narration from Sabura mash'hoor.

The Fuqaha of Ahl Sunnah for centuries later have clearly explained that nikah mut'a is mukhtalaf, yet you continue to argue it isn't.

تفسير الثعلبي 427 هجري: وقال آخرون: هو نكاح المتعة، ثم اختلف في الآية أمحكمة هي أم منسوخة؟

فقال ابن عباس: هي محكمة ورخّص في المتعة، وهي أن ينكح الرجل المرأة بولي وشاهدين إلى أجل معلوم، فإذا انقضى الأجل فليس له عليها سبيل

تفسير الخازن 741: ... واختلفت الروايات عن ابن عباس في المتعة فروي عنه أن الآية محكمة وكان يرخص في المتعة.

قال عمارة سألت ابن عباس عن المتعة أسفاح هي أم نكاح؟ فقال لا سفاح ولا نكاح .قلت: فما هي؟ قال متعة

Mufassireen upto the 8th century AH (the 4 schools had been established by then) did not say that Ibn Abbas specified it to war etc etc, they clearly stated that it remained a matter of dispute. If it was mutawatir they would have said so.
One cannot over rule the Qur'an except with tawatur.  The jurists who prohibited mut'a did so based on non-mutawatir narrations and the Act passed by the second caliph.

مالك في المؤطآ: أخبرنا الحسن بن أبي بكر، أخبرنا دعلج بن أحمد، حدثنا موسى بن هارون، حدثنا يزيد بن سنان البصري بمصر، حدثنا مكي بن إبراهيم، حدثنا مالك بن أنس، عن نافع، عن ابن عمر، قال، قال عمر متعتان كانتا على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أنهى عنهما، وأعاقب عليهما، متعة النساء ومتعة الحج

البخاري: حَدَّثَنَا مُسَدَّدٌ حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى عَنْ عِمْرَانَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو رَجَاءٍ عَنْ عِمْرَانَ بْنِ حُصَيْنٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالَ أُنْزِلَتْ آيَةُ الْمُتْعَةِ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ فَفَعَلْنَاهَا مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَلَمْ يُنْزَلْ قُرْآنٌ يُحَرِّمُهُ وَلَمْ يَنْهَ عَنْهَا حَتَّى مَاتَ قَالَ رَجُلٌ بِرَأْيِهِ مَا شَاءَ

They did not claim it was tawatur. This is your claim and you will need to post at least 10 other companions with the words 'forever' to prove that it was tawatur. Since it is not tawatur, the fuqaha could not outright  criticise those who said it was permissible, rather due to their academic honesty they clearly mentioned it was a matter of difference like many other issues that are prohibited in some madhahib and not in others... it is a matter of agreeing to disgaree and moving on.

 

I liked reading your posts and seeing some decent arguments. your posts were free from offensive or aggressive words. I was also able to learn a thing or two. Thank you. I do appreciate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the example of the brother. Look at how he was polite, kept it civil, yet his command of hadith literature and knowledge in the area [I.e only debating an area you are proficient in] came through.

Even if brother Bukhari still disagree's, at least he can better understand where we come from.

An excellent example I will try to learn from myself, inshAllah.

The discussion he had sends in me sparks of the way our Imams asws would have done, and wanted us to do.

Share this post


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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...