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

[DEBATE: Now open for comments] Succession to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم

Rate this topic


Message added by Haji 2003

Thread is now open for comments

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

I'm glad you enjoyed it, as did I. But please prepare a closing statement. There's no rush, make a nice one and post it when its ready. Remember, you cannot put new evidence in the closing statement, only review and highlight the evidence you already presented and explain why you think you proved your claim or won the debate. After that, I will present my closing statement, then we will open the thread to everyone else.

If you want to debate me on any other topic just start a new thread.

For me, I think I proved my claim,

With all the evidence, the only thing stopping us from actually agreeing with each other is we (Shia and Sunnah) differ on the meaning of Hadiths and History,

Most Shia agree that Ghadir Khumm was an appointing of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) as the successor of Rasul Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم),

While Sunnis differ on that,

But I loved doing this because it was a peaceful Debate between Sunni and Shia, no cursing the people we love or talking about each other in a bad way, and I believe this is how every debate should go, you might say, 'But most debates do happen like this.', but I have seen horrible debates, just cursing each other and talking about each other in a bad way.

But thankfully, Allhamdulillah, we had a Peaceful Debate debate were we stated our opinions and tried to prove them.

I would like to end it with a beautiful verse from the Holy Quran ,

:bismillah:

49_10.png 

The believers are but brothers, so make Peace between your brothers. And fear Allah that you may receive mercy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 527
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The Hadith is long so I won't quote the whole thing, Narrated `Aisha: Fatima the daughter of the Prophet (ﷺ) sent someone to Abu Bakr (when he was a caliph), asking for her inheritance of wh

Ahsantum brother I agree with you.  For me it was good for the forum to have this alternative method of one-on-one debate. Both members were respectful and I also appreciate that the other m

Thank you for reminding everyone. Members who want to help them out can send a PM to @Ansur Shiat Ali or @Cherub786. 

Posted Images

Posted (edited)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على سيدى رسول الله

وعلى آله وصحبه ومن والاه

In my OP I stated that I would like to try my hand at a formal, written debate with the Shi’ah, as I have never engaged in one before (not bad for a beginner, eh?) Now I believe that either my opponent could have done much better arguing his case, or else, what seems to be more likely to me, there simply isn’t a case for the Shi’ah side that the Prophet (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) designated Ali bin Abi Talib (radi Allahu anhu) his immediate successor. Ansur Shiat Ali gave it his best shot, but in the end, he failed to justify his claim.

I compelled him to admit the fact that the Quran is not on his side in this issue. He brought up one or two Verses, but it quickly became apparent that there is nothing in them whatsoever that proves his claim. He then proceeded to quote some Hadith. Every single one of the Hadith he quoted fell into one of the two following categories:

 

  1. It was either weak or fabricated

  2. It didn’t justify his claim, as neither succession was mentioned, nor mention of sayyidina Ali

 

As we established at the very beginning of this debate, the onus was on Ansur to prove his claim, it was not upon me to disprove anything. Therefore, I conclude, without any bias, hot air, pride, or subjectivity, that Ansur decisively and definitively lost this debate, walhamdulillah (in other words, I am the winner)

And that, ladies and gentlemen, concludes my debate with Ansur. The thread should now be open for others to comment if they wish.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare
13 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

The thread should now be open for others to comment if they wish.

إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَمَلَائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ ۚ يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا صَلُّوا عَلَيْهِ وَسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا {56}

[Shakir 33:56] Surely Allah and His angels bless the Prophet; O you who believe! call for (Divine) blessings on him and salute him with a (becoming) salutation.
[Pickthal 33:56] Lo! Allah and His angels shower blessings on the Prophet. O ye who believe! Ask blessings on him and salute him with a worthy salutation.
[Yusufali 33:56] Allah and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا مُهِينًا {57}

[Shakir 33:57] Surely (as for) those who speak evil things of Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and the here after, and He has prepared for them a chastisement bringing disgrace.
[Pickthal 33:57] Lo! those who malign Allah and His messenger, Allah hath cursed them in the world and the Hereafter, and hath prepared for them the doom of the disdained.
[Yusufali 33:57] Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment.

*****

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

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

You wrote/said this in the Thread linked below.

Quote

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم wasn't sent by Allah to establish a state, he was first and foremost a Prophet of God, sent to preach the Oneness of Allah, put an end to idolatry, deliver the Divine Law and Scripture, and be a moral exemplar. His becoming the Judge of Medina was incidental, it was never his objective or purpose to establish political or administrative authority. He did not appoint a successor because it is not a Divine matter, the Quran teaches Believers to conduct their affairs through consultation (Surah 42:38). If the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم designated his successor it would have set a bad precedent for all time, it would have from the very beginning established a dynastic, hereditary system. So Allah did not reveal anything to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم regarding appointing an individual as his successor, therefore, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not see it fit to appoint a successor from his own personal choice either. He knew that after he died, Allah Most High would manifest His Power and Favor upon the community and establish for them the Khilafah if they were worthy of it. So Allah Most High established the Khilafah of Sayyidina Abi Bakr رضى الله عنه, through him the Great Apostasy was crushed, the pretenders were eradicated. Through the Khilafah of Sayyidina Umar رضى الله عنه, the evil empires of Rome and Persia were decimated, Jerusalem, Damascus, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, North Africa were liberated from oppression.

Another anecdotal fallacy. Islam doesn't teach democracy or universal franchise, it teaches consultation and respecting the opinions of qualified, senior, learned, and pious men of the community.

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235067707-does-gadhir-khumm-imply-two-leaders-at-the-same-time/?page=3&tab=comments#comment-3305793

 

I am a Layman, I do not have the Knowledge (Maybe just general idea) of the Arabic Language, not the Hadith sciences or the Qur'an. So, I don't have Indepth technical discussion. 

However, the Concepts you describe above are fundamental and precursor to any discussion on Prophethood and later in Succession of Muhammad Al-Mustafa (peace be upon him and his pure progeny).

1) What is your understanding of a Role of a Prophet? 

2) What was the reason for many Prophets?

3) Based on your understanding of the role. What is the different in the Last Message/Book /Prophet compared to Prophet Musa(عليه السلام) and Prophet Isa(عليه السلام) and their books. 

With the above definition of Prophet and his role how do you explain Need and Finality of the Message(book) and Prophethood of Muhammad al-Mustafa (peace be upon him and his pure progeny)? 

I will have many many questions( regarding general concepts of Prohethood, finality of Prophethood, Last Book, Consultation, and who you link them to this word/concept Khalifa - where is the Conceptual precedent of anything you believe in the Book of Allah(عزّ وجلّ)etc.) to clarify your understanding, as you describe concepts (above) which are of concern to me. Maybe you will clarify them. 

I am not looking for a Debate(Highschool ) type I am looking for your Fundamental and Conceptual understanding of basic Concepts. A discussion. 

Layman 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 8/21/2020 at 2:19 PM, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

For me, I think I proved my claim,

With all the evidence, the only thing stopping us from actually agreeing with each other is we (Shia and Sunnah) differ on the meaning of Hadiths and History,

Most Shia agree that Ghadir Khumm was an appointing of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) as the successor of Rasul Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم),

While Sunnis differ on that,

But I loved doing this because it was a peaceful Debate between Sunni and Shia, no cursing the people we love or talking about each other in a bad way, and I believe this is how every debate should go, you might say, 'But most debates do happen like this.', but I have seen horrible debates, just cursing each other and talking about each other in a bad way.

But thankfully, Allhamdulillah, we had a Peaceful Debate debate were we stated our opinions and tried to prove them.

I would like to end it with a beautiful verse from the Holy Quran ,

49_10.png 

The believers are but brothers, so make Peace between your brothers. And fear Allah that you may receive mercy.

I agree with your comments that you  have successfully defended the and proven the concept of leadership after the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ie succession of the prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

wasalam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Last thing I want to Point out,

He Himself says that the Event of the Warning happens,

On 8/19/2020 at 6:06 PM, Cherub786 said:

We are not denying the historical incident of the Da'wat al-Ashirah

What happens in this Event?

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) says Ali (عليه السلام) is my Brother, my Wasi, and my Caliph (after me). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)

I like to add the comments about discussion  conducted so far on one to one basis between the two SC members regarding the succession to the prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). These may include the following sections :

1- General comments on  the posts added

2.  Reasons of the proven  claim (by Ansur Shiat Ali)

3. Further areas (that could have been discussed in detail)

...........Continued.

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

I like to add the comments about discussion  conducted so far on one to one basis between the two SC members regarding the succession to the prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). These may include the following sections :

1- General comments on  the posts added

2.  Reasons of Win (by Ansur Sihatul Ali)

3. Further areas (that could have been discussed in detail)

...........Continued.

Messed up a little on the name bro,

But yeah go ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)

1. General Comments on the posts:

Topic: Succession to the prophet Muhamamd (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم):

i- Posts by Ansur Shiat Ali:

Claim: Rasul Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) would be the successor after him.

He has added the posts about the following:

- Verse of Baligh (5:67)

- Verse of Wilaya (5;55)

- Verse of completion of Religion (5:3)

- Verse for prophet authority over believers (33:6)

- Hadith Ghadeer (Whoever I am his leader (Mawla), ‘Ali is his leader (Mawla)

- Hadith for khalifaten (Khalifaten ie Quran and Ahl alabayt)

- Hadith for Day of Warning (Khalifati and Wasi)

- Hadith of Wali of believers

- References for hadith from sunni sources

- Evidence from books for proof

- Relevant discussion 

- Closing statement

(Important posts area have been mentioned)

i- Posts by Cherub786:

Claim: The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله did not designate any individual to immediately succeed him upon his death.

He added the posts about the following:

-Most Posts for counter arguments and criticism on the posts

 presented by SC member 1 above.

- Mostly arguments that the verse or hadith does not prove the claim

- Picture of hadith book pages

- Counter responses for criticism on the above evidences

- Hadith thaqlyn  (Quran and Ahl bati)

- Text from Rijal book

- Relevant discussion

- Closing statement

(Important posts area have been mentioned)

...................Continued

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Last thing I want to Point out,

He Himself says that the Event of the Warning happens,

What happens in this Event?

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) says Ali (عليه السلام) is my Brother, my Wasi, and my Caliph (after me). 

The Event is not in dispute, your version of the Event, where the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم allegedly said Ali is his brother, wasi and caliph, is disputed.

The major narrations of this Event do not mention such a statement. The most well known narrations of the Event simply mention that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم called the members of his tribal clan and announced to them that he was a Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Guest Pschological Warfare said:

1) What is your understanding of a Role of a Prophet? 

2) What was the reason for many Prophets?

3) Based on your understanding of the role. What is the different in the Last Message/Book /Prophet compared to Prophet Musa(عليه السلام) and Prophet Isa(عليه السلام) and their books. 

With the above definition of Prophet and his role how do you explain Need and Finality of the Message(book) and Prophethood of Muhammad al-Mustafa (peace be upon him and his pure progeny)? 

I will have many many questions( regarding general concepts of Prohethood, finality of Prophethood, Last Book, Consultation, and who you link them to this word/concept Khalifa - where is the Conceptual precedent of anything you believe in the Book of Allah(عزّ وجلّ)etc.) to clarify your understanding, as you describe concepts (above) which are of concern to me. Maybe you will clarify them. 

I am not looking for a Debate(Highschool ) type I am looking for your Fundamental and Conceptual understanding of basic Concepts. A discussion. 

Layman 

I encourage you to register an account on Shiachat so we can have a discussion, as you have proposed

Now to answer your questions:

1. The primary role of a Prophet is to prophesy, to receive and convey news of the unseen from Heaven

2. Most of the Prophets appeared in Israel. Because God made a covenant with them at Mount Sinai, He sent them numerous Prophets to prophesy to them about their doom and destruction if they did not adhere to the Covenant and the Mosaic Law of the Torah. When Allah wished to establish the final Covenant with all humanity, He sent His last and final Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم to convey that news to the people, to explain the final divine Law, and to prophesy to the people regarding what would happen to them in the future

3. The difference between the Last Prophet and Book and the previous Prophets and Scriptures is that the Last is universal, for all time and people until Judgment Day. It is perfect and complete

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare
On 8/23/2020 at 6:43 PM, Cherub786 said:

 

1. The primary role of a Prophet is to prophesy, to receive and convey news of the unseen from Heaven

 

I will shelve some answers for now. I want to get a comprehensive understanding of basic concepts and I might bring back or point to what I have shelved for now. 

You mentioned primary role. Educate me regarding your understanding of the Complete and Comprehensive role/responsibilities of a Representative of Allah(عزّ وجلّ)/Messenger/Prophet as per the Book of Allah(عزّ وجلّ). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2020 at 10:26 PM, Guest Pschological Warfare said:

I will shelve some answers for now. I want to get a comprehensive understanding of basic concepts and I might bring back or point to what I have shelved for now. 

You mentioned primary role. Educate me regarding your understanding of the Complete and Comprehensive role/responsibilities of a Representative of Allah(عزّ وجلّ)/Messenger/Prophet as per the Book of Allah(عزّ وجلّ). 

That would be too broad and detailed of a lengthy discussion, which quite frankly, I am not qualified to do. I have explained the basic function of a Prophet. If you have anything to add, or would like to ask me if I consider some other specific thing part of the function of prophesy, please feel free.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare
11 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

That would be too broad and detailed of a lengthy discussion, which quite frankly, I am not qualified to do. 

I appreciate your honesty, May Allah(عزّ وجلّ) guide as to the Straight path(1:6-7).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Check this out:

“Western historians largely reject as fabrications of history Shi'i claims that Muhammad appointed Ali as his successor and say there is no evidence that Muhammad appointed anyone as his successor.” (Valerie J. Hoffman, The Essentials of Ibadi Islam, p. 6)

title.pngWestern%2BHistorians%2BReject%2BFabrications%2Bof%2BHistory%2BShia%2BClaims%2BAppointment%2Bof%2BAli%2Bas%2BSuccessor%2B%2528Essentials%2Bof%2BIbadi%2BIslam%2Bp.6%2529.png

So here we have the verdict of neutral, unbiased Western historians, who are neither Sunni nor Shi'i. And that was my original claim, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated any individual to be his immediate successor, as confirmed by Western historians.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 8/22/2020 at 6:06 AM, Cherub786 said:

leaving behind 2 Caliphs. I already disproved that Hadith, it is weak,

Zaid ibn. thabit, he said: “The Messenger of Allah said: I am leaving with you two Caliphs, the book of Allah; the rope between the heavens and the earth and my offspring, my Ahlulbayt. They will not separate until they meet me at the pond (of kawther)”

[“The chain is hassan(good)”]

Sunni references:

Book: Musnad Ahmad Ibn hanbal, verified and commented(footnotes) by Hamza Ahmad al-zain, volume 16, page 28.

 

The Messenger of Allah said:”I am leaving with you two CALIPHS, Allah’s Book, a rope between the heavens and the earth and my offspring, my Ahlulbayt. They will

Not separate until they meet me at the pond (of kawther)”

[“the documentation is Sahih(authentic)”]

Sunni: references 

Book: Sahih of Al-jami’i Al Sagheer for the scholar Al-Albani, volume 1, page 482, Hadith number 2457.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
20 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

Check this out:

“Western historians largely reject as fabrications of history Shi'i claims that Muhammad appointed Ali as his successor and say there is no evidence that Muhammad appointed anyone as his successor.” (Valerie J. Hoffman, The Essentials of Ibadi Islam, p. 6)

title.pngWestern%2BHistorians%2BReject%2BFabrications%2Bof%2BHistory%2BShia%2BClaims%2BAppointment%2Bof%2BAli%2Bas%2BSuccessor%2B%2528Essentials%2Bof%2BIbadi%2BIslam%2Bp.6%2529.png

So here we have the verdict of neutral, unbiased Western historians, who are neither Sunni nor Shi'i. And that was my original claim, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated any individual to be his immediate successor, as confirmed by Western historians.

Can you please confirm that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was wrong in his claim for the caliphate after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ShiaMan14 said:

Can you please confirm that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was wrong in his claim for the caliphate after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

No I can't confirm, because I don't believe he ever made such a claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Cherub786 said:

No I can't confirm, because I don't believe he ever made such a claim.

Than why did Imam Ali (عليه السلام) deny the "Caliphate" of Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance, after 6 months, under the threat of the sword and his house being burned down?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Than why did Imam Ali (عليه السلام) deny the "Caliphate" of Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance, after 6 months, under the threat of the sword and his house being burned down?

This is a loaded question:

Quote

A loaded question or complex question is a question that contains a controversial assumption (e.g., a presumption of guilt). Such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
15 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

No I can't confirm, because I don't believe he ever made such a claim.

How long after Saqifa did Imam Ali (عليه السلام) make amends with Caliph Abu Bakr?

What was the source of contention between them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, ShiaMan14 said:

How long after Saqifa did Imam Ali (عليه السلام) make amends with Caliph Abu Bakr?

What was the source of contention between them?

What difference does it make and how is it relevant to the subject of this thread?

What is your answer to Valerie Hoffman's statement: "Western historians largely reject as fabrications of history Shi'i claims that Muhammad appointed Ali as his successor and say there is no evidence that Muhammad appointed anyone as his successor."

That really hammers the final nail in the coffin, doesn't it?

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
52 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

What difference does it make and how is it relevant to the subject of this thread?

What is your answer to Valerie Hoffman's statement: "Western historians largely reject as fabrications of history Shi'i claims that Muhammad appointed Ali as his successor and say there is no evidence that Muhammad appointed anyone as his successor."

That really hammers the final nail in the coffin, doesn't it?

Western historians may impress you Cherry but not me.

I still need to know 

How long after Saqifa did Imam Ali (عليه السلام) make amends with Caliph Abu Bakr?

What was the source of contention between them?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@Cherub786 - from the other thread,

Can you confirm what sources Valerie Hoffman used to reach this conclusion? Last I checked, all historians use ahadith as their ultimate source for writing about Islam and Seerah so it is no surprise VH reaches this conclusion if all her ultimate sources were sunni ahadith.

Also, "Western" doesn't impress me. She could be Chinese or Indian for all I care. It is a sign of inferiority complex if you believe "western" will impress me or anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ShiaMan14 said:

@Cherub786 - from the other thread,

Can you confirm what sources Valerie Hoffman used to reach this conclusion? Last I checked, all historians use ahadith as their ultimate source for writing about Islam and Seerah so it is no surprise VH reaches this conclusion if all her ultimate sources were sunni ahadith.

Also, "Western" doesn't impress me. She could be Chinese or Indian for all I care. It is a sign of inferiority complex if you believe "western" will impress me or anyone.

Historians use a variety of sources, both Muslim and non-Muslim, to make judgments on early Islamic history and the life of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. They do not rely exclusively on Hadith, they also use records, coins, archaeological findings, and then they have their specific methods for weighing the value of all these records to determine what likely happened. Since I'm not a historian, I can't go into detail. I simply trust the findings of the majority of these professional, accredited historians, especially when they have a consensus. So Hoffman has merely conveyed the general consensus of Western historians on this issue. Also, the term Western historian doesn't necessarily mean a White European historian, it means historians, regardless of race or background, who study history based on the established Western tradition of scientific inquiry, the tradition that is now universally regarded as the most accurate and superior of the time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
3 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

historians, regardless of race or background, who study history based on the established Western tradition of scientific inquiry, the tradition that is now universally regarded as the most accurate and superior of the time.

So there's one tradition of Western scientific inquiry is there? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

Historians use a variety of sources, both Muslim and non-Muslim, to make judgments on early Islamic history and the life of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. They do not rely exclusively on Hadith, they also use records, coins, archaeological findings, and then they have their specific methods for weighing the value of all these records to determine what likely happened. Since I'm not a historian, I can't go into detail. I simply trust the findings of the majority of these professional, accredited historians, especially when they have a consensus. So Hoffman has merely conveyed the general consensus of Western historians on this issue. 

Records - ahadith

Coins - nope

Archeological findings - nope

Conclusion: Western historians use ahadith to make determinations and issues "facts".

3 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

Also, the term Western historian doesn't necessarily mean a White European historian, it means historians, regardless of race or background, who study history based on the established Western tradition of scientific inquiry, the tradition that is now universally regarded as the most accurate and superior of the time. 

The fact that Hoffman had to say "Western" historians means that there may differing opinions from non-Western historians otherwise she would have said "historians" so there is that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

Check this out:

“Western historians largely reject as fabrications of history Shi'i claims that Muhammad appointed Ali as his successor and say there is no evidence that Muhammad appointed anyone as his successor.” (Valerie J. Hoffman, The Essentials of Ibadi Islam, p. 6)

title.pngWestern%2BHistorians%2BReject%2BFabrications%2Bof%2BHistory%2BShia%2BClaims%2BAppointment%2Bof%2BAli%2Bas%2BSuccessor%2B%2528Essentials%2Bof%2BIbadi%2BIslam%2Bp.6%2529.png

So here we have the verdict of neutral, unbiased Western historians, who are neither Sunni nor Shi'i. And that was my original claim, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated any individual to be his immediate successor, as confirmed by Western historians.

What did he base this claim on?

 

The Prophet cannot chose a successor. This is mandated by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
Posted (edited)

Hoffmann stating that 'Western historians' believe something doesn't make it a consensus. If a Salafi scholar declares that the scholars of the Ahl us Sunnah believe that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) had fingers, this doesn't automatically become an ijmah (see: Link). One must verify the claim.

 

Edited by Mahdavist
Reference to Madelung provided by Hajji below
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Haji 2003 said:

Well this is what Wilferd Madelung has to say on page 17 of his book:

Why then did Muhammad fail to make proper arrangements for his succession, even though he presumably hoped for a successor from his family? Any answer must remain speculative. A simple Islamic explanation would be that in an important decision of this nature he expected a Qur'anic revelation, but did not receive one. Non-Muslim historians may be more inclined to speculate that Muhammad hesitated because he was aware of the difficulties a Hashimite succession might face given the intense rivalry for leadership among the clans of Quraysh and the relative weakness of the BanuHashim. In the year 10/631 Muhammad sent 'Alias his representative to the Yemen, where his conduct seems to have provoked some criticism. Upon his return, just three months before the Prophet's death, Muhammad found it necessary to make a strong public statement in support of his cousin.

Madelung, W., 1997. The succession to Muhammad: A study of the early Caliphate. Cambridge University Press.

If we read the part you bolded in context, it is clear that when Madelung writes the Prophet made a "strong public statement in support of his cousin" he does not mean a public statement announcing his succession, for the very next sentence (which you neglected to quote) says:

"It was evidently not a suitable occasion to appoint him successor. Muhammad might also have delayed a decision hoping to live long enough to be able to appoint one of his grandsons. His death was generally unexpected among his followers even during his mortal illness. He himself may also have been unaware of the approaching end until it was too late."

I'm quite surprised as to how you consider this passage proof that Madelung believed the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه his successor. On the contrary, Madelung has made the same interpretation of the announcement at Ghadir Khumm as the Sunnis, namely, that the Prophet intended to defend sayyidina Ali from "criticism" that was a consequence of his conduct in Yemen. Throughout this passage Madelung informs us that the Prophet may have intended to appoint someone his successor, but never had the opportunity to do so. Ponder over his statement: "Why then did Muhammad fail to make proper arrangements for his succession, even though he presumably hoped for a successor from his family? Any answer must remain speculative. A simple Islamic explanation would be that in an important decision of this nature he expected a Qur'anic revelation, but did not receive one."

Not only did Madelung confirm that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم "failed" to make proper arrangements for his succession, more importantly, he confirmed that there is nothing in the Quran which has instructions for the matter of succession.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...