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

  • Forum Administrators

 

1 hour ago, Cherub786 said:

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.

 

If you believe that Madelung supports your position, it is very much a backhanded agreement, because he also says this:

 

Quote

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 Banu Hashim

 

It's clear that Madelung believes that the Prophet's ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) will was undermined by the Quraysh.

 

My personal opinion is that Imam Ali's ((عليه السلام).) position is very similar to that of Haroun who also had his leadership usurped. So in my opinion not only is the Qur'an underlining the legitimacy of Imam Ali's position (by comparing him to Haroun) it is also highlighting the illegitimacy of the usurper (by taking the time to describe who Haroun's usurper was and his deficiencies). Surah Taha vs.: 82-100.

 

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)
1 hour ago, Haji 2003 said:

If you believe that Madelung supports your position, it is very much a backhanded agreement, because he also says this:

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 Banu Hashim

It's clear that Madelung believes that the Prophet's (pubh) will was undermined by the Quraysh.

Once again, you've misrepresented Madelung and quoted him out of context. This is not his own view. Quote the entire sentence from the beginning: "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 Banu Hashim"

So this view is neither endorsed by Madelung explicitly, and furthermore, it is pure speculation. Speculation doesn't carry much weight. The historians are free to speculate on the reason as to why the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم didn't appoint a successor, but what's important is that they have confirmed that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not appoint a successor, thereby demolishing the entire foundation of Shi'ism.

As for the reason, Madelung already suggested its because the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was expecting some divine revelation on the matter, but since he received none, he obviously didn't designate any successor.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Haji 2003 said:

My personal opinion is that Imam Ali's ((عليه السلام).) position is very similar to that of Haroun who also had his leadership usurped. So in my opinion not only is the Qur'an underlining the legitimacy of Imam Ali's position (by comparing him to Haroun) it is also highlighting the illegitimacy of the usurper (by taking the time to describe who Haroun's usurper was and his deficiencies). Surah Taha vs.: 82-100.

 

The Prophet Aaron عليه السلام was not the successor of Moses عليه السلام. Aaron died in Moses' lifetime. Moses' successor was Joshua son of Nun عليه السلام

The comparison between Aaron and Ali proves that the latter was not the Prophet's immediate successor. If Hadith al-Manzilah compared Ali to Joshua instead, then I would concede you have a case with regard to the succession claim.

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

Even Umar admits the pledge to Abu Bakr wasn't right,

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:

.....'O "Chief of the Believers!" What do you think about so-and-so who says, 'If `Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-andsuch person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established afterwards.'...

.....عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ

....يَا أَمِيرَ الفاسقين هَلْ لَكَ فِي فُلاَنٍ يَقُولُ لَوْ قَدْ مَاتَ عُمَرُ لَقَدْ بَايَعْتُ فُلاَنًا، فَوَاللَّهِ مَا كَانَتْ بَيْعَةُ أَبِي بَكْرٍ إِلاَّ فَلْتَةً، فَتَمَّتْ

https://sunnah.com/bukhari/86/57

Musnad Ahmed cuts out the underlined part in his hadith.

Edited by Ansur Shiat Ali
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Valerie Hoffman, Madelung mentions this at the beginning of his book:

"The Qur'an, as is well known, does not make any provisions for, or even allude to, the succession of Muhammad, and for this reason non-Muslim historians have virtually ignored it in this regard."

“While few if any modern historians would accept Sayf's legend of Ibn Saba, the underlying view that the succession of Abu Bakr to Muhammad was in itself - aside from the abortive attempt of the Medinan Ansar to seize the caliphate - unproblematic and that the conflict about it was artificially created by the Shi’a after the death of Ali and against his own lifelong attitude is widely taken for granted.”

So here is more confirmation on the view of that modern historians and non-Muslim historians

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

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 what Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had left of the property bestowed on him by Allah from the Fai (i.e. booty gained without fighting) in Medina, and Fadak, and what remained of the Khumus of the Khaibar booty....So Abu Bakr refused to give anything of that to Fatima. So she became angry with Abu Bakr and kept away from him, and did not task to him till she died. She remained alive for six months after the death of the Prophet. When she died, her husband `Ali, buried her at night without informing Abu Bakr and he said the funeral prayer by himself....`Ali had not given the oath of allegiance during those months (i.e. the period between the Prophet's death and Fatima's death).

https://sunnah.com/bukhari/64/278

So its confirmed that Ali Pledged allegiance after 6 months. Why? Why did Imam Ali (عليه السلام) reject the "Caliphate" of Abu Bakr?

Thank you brother. I am aware if this. I am trying to understand my dear Cherry's understanding of this issue between Saqifa and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) giving up his claim.

Also, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) did not pledge allegiance to Caliph Abu Bakr. He reached an understanding with his opposer  no different to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) reaching an understanding at Hudaibiya or Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) reaching an understanding with Muawiya.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
17 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

So here is more confirmation on the view of that modern historians and non-Muslim historians

Brother if non Muslim historians impress you so much then read this: http://mtrust.org.uk/trust-news/what-non-muslims-say-about-ali-the-first-successor-of-prophet-muhammad-peace-and-blessings-be-upon-them-both/

 

Also if your gonna take Non Muslims as a primary source for Islamic history then you might want to reply to my previous post

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, MaisumAli said:

I've read it, what's your point? Those are just quotes of non-Muslims praising the virtues of sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه. Which of them said the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم designated sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه his successor?

On the contrary, the vast majority of Western historians have confirmed that neither the Quran contains any revelation regarding the succession (contrary to Shi'ite claim), and that historically, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated any individual to succeed him (contrary to Shi'ite claim). So I rest my case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, MaisumAli said:

Also if your gonna take Non Muslims as a primary source for Islamic history then you might want to reply to my previous post

I'm only interested in discussing the succession to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم on this thread. Other issues are off topic and irrelevant. Read the title of this thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
27 minutes ago, ShiaMan14 said:

Thank you brother. I am aware if this. I am trying to understand my dear Cherry's understanding of this issue between Saqifa and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) giving up his claim.

Also, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) did not pledge allegiance to Caliph Abu Bakr. He reached an understanding with his opposer  no different to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) reaching an understanding at Hudaibiya or Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) reaching an understanding with Muawiya.

I also quoted another hadith above with Umar admitting that the pledge to Abu Bakr shouldn't have happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
1 hour ago, Cherub786 said:

Quote the entire sentence from the beginning: "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 Banu Hashim"

You may want to go back a bit further because the reason why he feels speculation is needed is because he does not believe the Sunni interpretation of Qur'an XXXIII 40 

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

I've read it, what's your point? Those are just quotes of non-Muslims praising the virtues of sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه. Which of them said the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم designated sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه his successor?

On the contrary, the vast majority of Western historians have confirmed that neither the Quran contains any revelation regarding the succession (contrary to Shi'ite claim), and that historically, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated any individual to succeed him (contrary to Shi'ite claim). So I rest my case.

For the Shia the prophet (a) telling the people that Imam 'Ali (a) was closer to the believers than their own selves was enough. Imam 'Ali also reminded people of this event over 20 years later, he was known as "Sahib al-Rubha" named after the place where he would remind the people of Ghadir. Here is both hadiths from Zayd ibn Arqam who also narrates about Ghadir in Sahih Muslim!

Zayd ibn Arqam narrates:

On his way back from Farewell Pilgrimage, the Prophet (s) stayed at Ghadir Khumm and commanded his companions to sweep and clean the ground under the trees, and then delivered a speech saying:

“It is as if I have been called and I have responded. I am leaving among you the two weighty things, one of which is greater than the other: the Book of God, and my Family, my Household. So watch how you take care of them from me! They will not separate from each other until they come to be at the pool.’. Then he said: “God is my Master and I am the Master of all the believing men and women.

 

He then took ‘Ali’s hand and said:

“And whoever’s master I am, so too is this his Master. O God, be a master of whoever accepts Ali as mater, and an enemy to whoever is his enemy”.

 

Abu Tufayl, the narrator of the hadith from Zayd ibn Arqam, says: “I asked him to know if he had heard the hadith straight from the prophet. He said “Yes”, I did. And there was no one who did not see with his own eyes and hear with his own ears”.[1]

 

Narrated Abu Sarihah, or Zaid bin Arqam from the Prophet

 

"For whomever I am his Mawla then 'Ali is his Mawla."[2]

 

It was narrated that ‘Abdur-Rahman bin Abi Laila said: l saw ‘Ali (رضي الله عنه) in ar-Rahbah, adjuring the people, (saying): I adjure by Allah anyone who heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say on the day of Ghadeer Khumm:

`If I am a person`s mowla (friend and supporter) then ‘Ali is also his mawla”, to stand up and testify.

‘Abdur-Rahman said: And twelve men who had been at Badr stood up. It is as if I can see one of them. And they said:

We bear witness that we heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say on the day of Ghadeer Khumm; `Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves and my wives are their mothers?`

We said:

Yes indeed, O Messenger of Allah (ﷺ).

He said:

`If I am a person`s mawla (friend and supporter) then `Ali is also his mawla; O Allah, take as friends those who take him as a friend, and take as enemies those who take him as an enemy.”[1]

Imam ‘Ali said:

‘O Talha, ‘It is on falsehood what they have testified upon. The words of the Prophetsaww on the day of Ghadeer Khumm were: ‘The one to whom Isaww am higher that his own self, similarly Aliasws is also higher to him than his own self’. So, how can Iasws be higher than them than their own selves, whilst they are the Emirs over measws and rulers?’[2]


[1] Ahmad ibn Hanbal – Book 5 Virtues of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib

[2] Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays Hadith 11


[1] Abu al-Fida Ibn Kathir Dimashqi al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah Vol 5, Ahmad ibn Nisa’I in Khasa’is Amir al-Mu’minin, al-Manaqib Kharazmi, Abaqat al-Anwar Vol 1

[2] Jami al-Tirmidhi - Vol 1 Book 46 - Chapters on Virtues

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

I'm only interested in discussing the succession to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم on this thread. Other issues are off topic and irrelevant. Read the title of this thread

Reported from Sulaiman al-Taymi (student of Qays), from Abdullah bin Aws:

“Abu Bakr asked Ali to support him, but Ali refused, then Umar went toward Ali's house with a burning torch. At the door he met Fatima who said to him: "Do you intend to burn the door of my house?" Umar said: "Yes”! (Ansab al-Ashraaf, by al-Baladhuri Ahmed bin Yahya bin Jaber al-Baghdadi, v1, p 586)

al-Siyuti was among the ones who reported that Abu Bakr regretted what he had done to Lady Fatima (peace be upon her) as he said:

“I wish I had not searched for Fatima’s house, and had not sent men to harass her."

(Musnad Fatima by al-Siyuti p 34, Al-Mu'jam al-Kabeer by al-Tabarani v1 p 62, History of al-Tabari v3 p 430, al-Iqd al-Fareed, by Ibn Abd Rabbuh v2 p 254, and many more)

Ibn Humayd-Jarir-Mughirah-Ziyad b. Kulayb: 'Umar b. al- Khattib came to the house of 'Ali. Talhah, al-Zubayr, and some of the Muhdjirun were [also] in the house (with'All). 'Umar cried out,

"By God, either you come out to render the oath of allegiance [to Abu Bakr], or l will set the house on fire." Al-Zubayr came out with his sword drawn. As he stumbled [upon something], the sword fell from his hand, so they jumped over him and seized him.[1]

Imam ‘Ali said in reply to Mu’awiyah:

“You have said that I was dragged like a camel with a nose string to swear allegiance (to AbuBakr at Saqifah). By the Eternal Allah, you had intended to revile me but you have praisedme, and to humiliate me but have yourself been humiliated. What humiliation does it meanfor a Muslim to be the victim of oppression so long as he does not entertain any doubt in his religion, nor any misgiving in his firm belief! This argument of mine is intended for others, but I have stated it to you only in so far as it was appropriate.”[1]


[1] Nahj al-Balagha Part 2 Letter 28


[1] History of Tabari Volume 9 Last Years of the Prophet Pg 187

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Haji 2003 said:

You may want to go back a bit further because the reason why he feels speculation is needed is because he does not believe the stated Sunni views. 

Does he believe the Shi'ah view? Be honest, you initially quoted Madelung to say he is an exception to the prevalent view of historians that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated a successor. I exposed your misrepresentation and distortion of what Madelung said and meant. Madelung confirmed the fact that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated a successor. The non-Muslim historians have speculated as to the reason why, coming up with different explanations, but they are generally agreed that there was no "divine appointment", and that's the point.

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

Talha Bin Ubeydullah – and he used to be called ‘the shrewd one of Qureiysh’ – said, ‘What should we make of what Abu Bakr and Umar had claimed and their companions had ratified and testified on their words, the day they brought you when (the situation) deteriorated and there was a rope around yourasws neck. So they  said to you "Pay allegience!" You argue with what you argued with from your virtues and precedence, so they agreed with you.  claimed that he had heard from the Prophetsaww having said that: ‘Allahazwj has Refused to Gather together for usasws the Peopleasws of the Household, the Prophet- hood and the Caliphate’. This was ratified by Umar, and Abu Ubeyda Bin Al-Jarrah, and Saalim, and Ma’az Bin Jabal?’ Then Talha came forward and said, ‘All that youasws have mentioned and claimed is true, and what youasws have argued by from the precedence and the virtues. We accept it and recognise it, but as for the Caliphate, those five have testified with the answer that youasws have heard before

 

So Aliasws stood up at that – and heasws was angry from the words of Talha – so heasws took out something which heasws had kept hidden, and explained something about it, and said about the day Umar died, and he (Talha) did not understand what heasws meant by it, and came in front of Talha – and the people were listening – so asws azwj asws he said: ‘O Talha, but by Allah , there is none from the parchments, that I shall meet Allahazwj with, which is more beloved to measws than the parchment (agreement) of those five who had vowed to remain faithful to it, which they placed in the Kaaba during the farewell Pilgrimage that, ‘If Allahazwj Kills Muhammadsaww or heasws were to pass away, they would collectively plot against measws so that Iasws would never arrive to the Caliphate’.

And heasws said: ‘O Talha, ‘It is on falsehood what they have testified upon. The words of the Prophetsaww on the day of Ghadeer Khumm were: ‘The one to whom Isaww am higher that his own self, similarly Aliasws is also higher to him than his own self’. So, how can Iasws be higher than them than their own selves, whilst they are the Emirs over measws and rulers?’[1]

 

The document was given to Abu U’baydah ibn Al Jarrah who sent someone with it to Mecca. It stayedthere, buried in the Ka’aba till Umar ibn Al Khattab became caliph. He extracted it then. This was thesame document Ameer Al-Mu’mineen (عليه السلام) referred to when he said while in front of Umar’s dead body,‘I would never like to meet Allah with the document of this man!’[2]

So the Umayyad scribes forged these hadiths below

 

Ibn Abu Mulaika reported:I heard Ibn 'Abbas as saying: When 'Umar b. Khattab was placed in the coffin the people gathered around him. They praised him and supplicated for him before the bier was lifted up, and I was one amongst them. Nothing attracted my attention but a person who gripped my shoulder from behind. I saw towards him and found that he was 'Ali. He invoked Allah's mercy upon 'Umar and said: You have left none behind you (whose) deeds (are so enviable) that I love to meet Allah with them. By Allah, I hoped that Allah would keep you and your two associates together. I had often heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: I came and there came too Abu Bakr and 'Umar; I entered and there entered too Abu Bakr and 'Umar; I went out and there went out too Abu Bakr and 'Umar, and I hope and think that Allah will keep you along with them. [1]

 

Ibn Abu Mulaika reported:I heard `A'isha as saying and she was asked as to whom Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) would have nominated as his successor if he had to nominate one at all. She said: Abu Bakr. It was said to her: Then whom after Abu Bakr? She said: `Umar. It was said to her. Then whom after `Umar? She said: Abu `Ubaida b. al-Jarrah, and then she kept quiet at this. [2]

 

The Ansar gathered in a roofed building (sagifah)12s9 of the Banu Sa'idah to render their oath of allegiance to Sa'd b. Ubadah. This news reached Abu Bakr, so he came to them with'Umar and Abu'Ubaydah b. al-Jarrah, asking [them] why [they had gathered]. They replied, "Let us have a ruler (amir) from us and another from you." Abu Bakr said, "The rulers (umard') will be from us, and the viziers (wuzard') from you." Abu Bakr then added, "I am pleased [to offer] you one of these two men: 'Umar or Abu 'Ubaydah. Some people came to the Prophet asking him to send a trustworthy man with them. The Messenger of God said that he would send a truly trustworthy man with them, and he sent Abu 'Ubaydah b. al-Jarrah. I am pleased [to offer] you Abu 'Ubaydah." 'Umar stood up saying, "Who among you would be agreeable to leave Abu Bakr whom the Prophet gave precedence? 11290 and he gave him the oath of allegiance. The people followed ['Umar]. The Angdr said, or some of them said, "We will not give the oath of allegiance [to anyone] except 'Ali."[1]
 

It was narrated that Qais bin 'Ubad[1] said:

 

"While I was in the Masjid in the first row, a man pulled me from behind and moved me aside, and took my place. By Allah, I could not focus on my prayer, then when he left I saw that it was Ubayy bin Ka'b.

He said:

 

'0 boy, may Allah protect you from harm. This is what the Prophet instructed us to do, to stand directly behind him.' Then he (Ubayy) turned to face the Qiblah and said: 'Doomed are Ah1 Al-'Uqd, by the Lord of the Ka'bah! - three times.'Then he said: 'By Allah, I am not sad for them, but I am sad for the people whom they have misled.' I said: '0 Abu Ya'qub, what do you mean by the people of the agreement (ah1 Al-'Uqd?)' He said: 'The rulers."'[2]

Then look how they tried to hide Imam 'Ali's name

According to Ibn Hibban's account, Abu Bakr then addressed people: "if you would prefer, you could gather and consult and give the guardianship to whomever you would like, and if you prefer my personal opinion, …". He cried at this time and people cried too. They told him, "O the successor of the messenger of God! You are better and more knowledgeable than us …". He then called 'Umar and gave him the letter so that he reads it to people. On his way to the mosque, a man[1] told 'Umar: "Abu Hafs! What is in the letter?" He replied, "I do not know. But whatever it is, I will be the first person to listen and obey." The man said, "I swear to God that I know what is in the letter. The first year you made him the emir, and this year he has made you the emir."[2]

 

The man is obviously Imam 'Ali - all of this is just the beginning I can show you many fabrications which were created during the era of Mu'awiyah and then propagated during the early Umayyad rule.


[1] The name of Imam ‘Ali has been obscured for political purposes.

 

[2] Ibn Qutayba, al-Imāma wa l-siyāsa, vol. 1, p. 19-20; Ibn Saʿd, al-Ṭabaghāt al-kubrā, vol. 3, p. 199-200; Ṭabarī, Tārīkh al-umam wa l-mulūk, vol. 3, p. 428-430.

 

 


[1] Qays bin ‘Ubad is likely Abbad ibn Qays aka Sulaym ibn Qays

[2] Sunan an-Nasa'i Book 10 - The Book of Leading the Prayer

 


[1] History of Tabari Volume 9 Last Years of the Prophet Pg 186

 

 

 


[1] "Sahih Muslim" Book 44 - The Book of the Merits of the Companions

[2] Ibid

 


[1] Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays Hadith 11

[2] The Narration of Hudhayfah al-Yamani - Irshad Al Qulub (Guidance for The Hearts), Vol. 1,

Edited by gharib570
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Imam ‘Ali said:

It is strange that during his lifetime he wished to be released from the caliphate but he confirmed it for the other one after his death. No doubt these two shared its udders strictly among themselves.[1]

Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Baqir said:

They (the people of the contract/agreement) confused the people who ratified them and turned them on their backs, and took it (Caliphate) out from its origin (Amir-ul-Momineenasws) from where Allahazwj had Made it to be. And they argued against the Helpers of ourasws rights and ourasws arguments. They pacified them to Abu Bakr. Then Abu Bakr returned it (Caliphate) to Umar, thereby paying him back by it.[2]


[1] Nahj al-Balagha Sermon 3

[2] Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays Hadith 10



Then Mu'awiya came back home. In all cities the tribulation became intense against 'Ali's Shi'a and his household. Kufa was liable to intense persecutions, for it had many Shi'a. He appointed Ziyad as a governor over it. He (Mu'awiya) gathered the Iraqis for him (Ziyad). He (Ziyad) followed the Shi'a. He was acquainted with their condition, for he was among them.

So he killed them everywhere. He whipped and frightened them, cut off their hands and legs, hanged them on the trunks of the date palms, knocked out their eyes, dismissed them, and made them homeless. Mu'awiya wrote to his judges and his governors in the cities to prevent them from accepting the witness of those Shi'a who narrated his ('Ali's) outstanding merits and spread his laudable deeds. He (i.e., Mu'awiya) wrote to his governors: Look for the Shi`a of `Uthman, who narrate his qualities and talk about his laudable deeds, so honor them.

Write to me the full name of the person who narrates about `Uthman. Then he sent them gifts and clothes. He gave the Arabs and the non- Arab supporters many country estates. So they became many and competed with each other for the houses and the country estates. For this reason they became rich. Then he (i.e., Mu'awiya) wrote to his governors: Indeed the traditions concerning `Uthman have become numerous. So when this letter of mine comes to you, then summon them (i.e., the Arabs and non-Arab supporters) to report traditions about Abu Bakr and `Umar. So every judge or emir read Mu'awiya's letter to the people.

"Then he (i.e., Mu'awiya) wrote a letter in which he collected all what was reported concerning Abu Bakr and `Uthman. Then he sent the letter to his governors and ordered them to read it on the pulpits, in every city, and at every mosque. Also he ordered them to send the letter to the teachers of the schools to teach it to their boys to narrate it and learn it as they learned the Qur'an. Moreover, they taught the letter to their daughters, their wives, and their servants. Then Mu'awiya wrote one copy (i.e., a letter) (to his governors):`

When you prove that someone loves 'Ali and his household, then omit him from the register.'

Then he wrote another letter:

`Whomever you accuse and do not prove (his innocence), then kill him.' So they killed the Shi'a of 'Ali everywhere because of accusation, doubt, and suspicion to the extent that the man (of them) was beheaded because of a certain word. Mu'awiya made the situation very dangerous.

The followers of the Umayyads increased in number. They fabricated many traditions. So the people followed them and learned traditions from them only. The most dangerous of all people in that were the hypocrite readers (of the Qur'an) who affected sadness, piety, and asceticism while they told lies to find (an important position) with their rulers and to obtain, through that, money, country estates, and houses. Some people thought that their traditions were true, so they learned them, narrated them, and taught them (to the people). Also the religious persons who thought that falsehood was illegal learned (their traditions).

They accepted the traditions and thought that they were true. If they had known that the traditions were false, they would have not narrated them, nor would have they adopted them. When al-Hasan b. 'Ali, peace be on him, died, the discord and the tribulation became greater and more intense."

I (i.e., the author) say: Abu al-Hasan al-Mada'ini has narrated a full text similar to the above- mentioned one. Ibn Abu al-Hadid has reported the account on his authority in his book called (`Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, vol. 3, pp. 15- 16). He (i.e., Abu al-Hasan al-Mada'ini) has said at the end of the account:

"The situation went on that manner till al-Hasan b. 'Ali, peace be on him, died. So the tribulation and the discord increased so that everybody of this kind (i.e., of 'Ali's Shi'a and his household) were afraid of killing or homelessness in the earth."

Sulaym also narrates:

And the matter did not increase except for its intensity, and most of the ones in his (Muawiya) presence were theirasws enemies, and they manifested false Hadith and attributed to themasws and to their companions fabrications and slanderous. So the people grew up on that and did not know except from them, and their judges and their governors and their jurists and died upon that.

The people who were the greatest (accusers) during that affliction and strife were the reciters, and the hypocrites and the fabricators, who displayed their grief, and their reverence, and their ascetism. They used to lie and fabricate Ahadith in order to benefit by that in the presence of their governors, and get closer to them in their gatherings, and acquire by that a share of the wealth, and the pieces of land, and mansions.

This went on to the extent that their (false) Ahadith and reports ended up in the hands of the ones who concluded that these are right and that these are the truth. So they narrated these, and accepted these, and learnt these, and taught these, and loved and hated on the basis of these, to the extent that they gathered upon these in their gatherings,

So they accepted these and they were narrating these as truth, and had they known that these are false, they would not have narrated these nor would they have made these to be their Religion, nor would they have reduced the ones who disagreed with them. In that era the truth became falsehood and the falsehood became the truth, and what was true became the lies and the lies became the true.

And the Rasool Allahsaww had said:

‘You will be engulfed by strife during which the young will be nourished by it and the adults will grow old in, and the people will flow towards it and will take (the innovations) as the Sunnah. If anything is altered in it they will say, ‘The people have become deniers and have changed the Sunnah’.

Instead of mentioning ‘Ali, Abd al-Rahman ibn abi Layla would say: “One of god’s messengers comapnions”. Hasan al-Basri would say: “Zaynab’s father[1]

Sha’bi says: “I used to hear that the Umayyad preachers vilify Ali ibn Abi Talib when preaching in the mosques – as if lifted by their arms to Heaven – and I would hear them praise their ancestors, as if disinterring putrefaction.

I [Sulaym] said,

‘Allahazwj! O Abu Saeed, what are you reporting regarding Aliasws and what has been heard from you saying regarding himasws?’

He said,

‘O brother, I am trying to save my blood from these oppressive tyrants, may the Curse of Allahazwj be upon them. O my brother, had it not been for that, I would have been lifted by the wood (my funeral would have taken place), but, I am saying what you have heard so that it would reach them and they would hold back from me. But what I mean by hatred. For him there are numerous is hatred towards other than Ali Bin Abu Talib so that they will count me as a friend to them. Allahazwj has Said “Repel evil by what is towards Ali best”[2], it means the ‘Taqqiya’ (dissimulation)’.[3]

In his book `Ta'rikh', b. `Arafa known as Naftawayh, who was a great traditionist, said :

 

"( A group of people) fabricated most traditions concerning the outstanding merits of the Companions (of the Prophet) during the days of the Umayyads to approach them. Through that they (i.e., the Umayyads) thought that they would defeat the Hashimites." 

 

Concerning the time of Mu'awiya, al-Mada'ini said:

"Many fabricated traditions appeared, and false accusations spread. The jurists, the judges, and the governors adopted that.""The most dangerous of all people in that were the hypocrite readers (of the Qur'an), and those, whom were deemed weak, who pretended piety, and asceticism. So they fabricated traditions to find favor with their governors, to approach their board, and to get money, country estates, and houses. Then those reports and traditions were transmitted to the religious persons who regarded lying and false accusations as illegal. So they accepted them and narrated them. They thought that they (i.e., the reports and the traditions) were true. If they had known that they were untrue, they would have not narrated them, nor would they have adopted them."

Ibn Abu al-Hadid said:

 "Our Shaykh Abu Ja'far al-Iskafi mentioned that Mu'awiya had appointed a group from the Companions (of the Prophet) and a group from the later (Companions of the Prophet) to narrate obscene traditions concerning 'Ali, peace be on him, to defame him and to renounce him. Mu'awiya fixed wages for them to (achieve) that. So they fabricated what pleased him. Among them were Abu Hurayra, `Amr b. al-`As, and al-Mughira b. Shu'ba. Among the later (companions of the Prophet) was `Urwa b. al-Zubayr."

Sulaym Bin Qays mentioned that he was seated with Salman , and Abu Dharr , and Al-Miqdadar during the rule of Umar Bin Al-Khattab, when a man from Al-Kufa came up and sat down among them in order to be guided by them .so he  said to him,

 

‘To you is the Book of Allahazwj which is necessary for you, and (also) Ali Bin Abu Talib , for he is with the Book, not being separate from it. And wear hereby testify that wear heard the Rasool Allahsaww saying that: ‘Aliasws is with the Quran and the truth, wherever heasws turns to, so do these. Heasws is the first oneasws who believed in Allahazwj and the first one who will shake mysaww hand on the Day of Judgement, from my community, and heasws is the Great Truthful (Al Siddique Al-Akbar), and the Differentiator (Al-Farouq) between the truth and is my successor , and my Vizier, and my and the falsehood, and he Caliph in mysaww community, and heasws will fight (to preserve) mysaww Sunnah’.

 

Thehe man said to them ,

 

 ‘So what about the people naming Abu Bakr as ‘The Truthful’ (Al-Siddique), and Umar as The Differentiator (Al-Farouq)?’

 

Theyar said to him,

 

‘The people entitled them by a name which was not for both of them, just as they entitled them both with the Caliphate of the Rasool Allahsaww and entitled them as ‘Amir-ul Momineen’, and it is a title which is not for the both of them because it is a title which is for someone else other than them both. Surely, Aliasws is the Caliph of the prophet and was made ‘Amir al mumineen. The rasullah had ordered us and he ordered both of them along with us so we all greeted Ali as Amir al-Mumineen.[1]

 

Imam Muhammad ibn Al al-Baqir gives examples of forgeries:

 

And (they narrate) to remain firm/steadfast, how can it not be a blessing for you when there is not upon you except for the Prophet (Nabi), and a truthful (Siddiq) and a witness (Shahid)[2]’ – to the extent that Abu Ja’far recounted more than one hundred such reports which were regarded as being the truth.

 

From these are clear forgeries and from these are distorted ones. As for the distorted, it is that:

 

“There is nothing upon you except for the Prophet (Nabi), and a truthful (Siddiq) and a Witness (Shahid)”

 

It (Siddiq and Shahid) means ‘Ali. So accept it. Similar to it is also “How can it considered to be a blessing for. You  And upon you is a Prophet, a truthful and a witness?, it means ‘Ali and the generalised corrupted version. It is a lie and a forgery and invalid.[3]

 

It was narrated that 'Abbad bin 'Abdullah[4] said:

"'Ali said: 'I am the slave of Allah and the brother of His Messenger. I am the greatest teller of the truth (Siddiq Akbar), and no one will say this after me except a liar. I prayed seven years before the people."[5]


[1] Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays Hadith 52

[2] “Sahih” al-Bukhari – The Book on the Companions

[3] Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays Hadith 10

[4] Abbad ibn Abdillah is Sulaym ibn Qays who also narrates this tradition in his book

 


[1] Ibn Shahr Ashub, al-Manaqib Vol 1

[2] Quran 23:96

[3] Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays Hadith 5

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

So they fabricated the shaking mountain hadith were they gave titles al-Shahid al-Siddiq to others. Sometimes they say it was mount Uhud or Hira that shook, and even sometimes it has the ten promised paradise on it! It's all Umayyad fabrications which the speakers today still teach from the pulpits. Imam al-Baqir in my previous posts has told us this is forged.

https://sunnah.com/bukhari/62/50

https://sunnah.com/abudawud/42/56

https://sunnah.com/muslim/44/78

It's very strange how early Sunnis like ibn abi al-Hadid had no problem narrating that Mu'awiyah paid people to write hadiths, but these days people go to great lengths to defend Mu'awiyah and uphold these nonsense narrations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
11 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

Does he believe the Shi'ah view? Be honest, you initially quoted Madelung to say he is an exception to the prevalent view of historians that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated a successor. I exposed your misrepresentation and distortion of what Madelung said and meant. Madelung confirmed the fact that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated a successor. The non-Muslim historians have speculated as to the reason why, coming up with different explanations, but they are generally agreed that there was no "divine appointment", and that's the point.

 

I think my quotation on its own was a good reflection of what Madelung said and meant.

The quotation in my original post made it quite clear that while he did not believe in the designation of a successor there were reasons for this. Now you choose to ignore those reasons, that's your choice - but he's not giving Sunnis a free pass. And my subsequent post showed how is also does not agree with Sunni interpretations of Surah 33 Vs. 40.

Having already shown from the start of the extract that Madelung agreed with you, I went on to highlight the bit where Madelung says that Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) had the full support of the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)).

I didn't need to copy/paste what came next, because the start of the quotation had already made Madelung's position clear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
45 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

On the contrary, the vast majority of Western historians have confirmed that neither the Quran contains any revelation regarding the succession (contrary to Shi'ite claim), and that historically, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم never designated any individual to succeed him (contrary to Shi'ite claim). So I rest my case.

If you could name these historians and the works where they demonstrated this it would be helpful. We can then see their arguments for ourselves.

Although we don't take our madhab from non muslim historians, for academic purposes it would be interesting to see their approach.

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

If you could name these historians and the works where they demonstrated this it would be helpful. We can then see their arguments for ourselves.

Although we don't take our madhab from non muslim historians, for academic purposes it would be interesting to see their approach.

Apparently coins and archeology.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

I've read it, what's your point? Those are just quotes of non-Muslims praising the virtues of sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه. Which of them said the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم designated sayyidina Ali رضى الله عنه his successor?

Are you sure because you seemed to have missed this:

Edward Gibbon

(1737-1794)  Considered the greatest British historian of his time.

q  “The zeal and virtue of Ali were never outstripped by any recent proselyte.  He united the qualifications of a poet, a soldier, and a saint; his wisdom still breathes in a collection of moral and religious sayings; and every antagonist, in the combats of the tongue or of the sword, was subdued by his eloquence and valour.  From the first hour of his mission to the last rites of his funeral, the apostle was never forsaken by a generous friend, whom he delighted to name his brother, his vicegerent, and the faithful Aaron of a second Moses.”

Remind me what does Vicegerent mean  again?

 

2 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

I'm only interested in discussing the succession to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم on this thread. Other issues are off topic and irrelevant. Read the title of this thread

The reason why I brought it up was because you quoted a Non Muslim and in turn I did the same, but the point was that non Muslims aren't primary sources of Islamic History

Here I'll give you a hadith:

قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ عَلِيٌّ مِنِّي وَأَنَا مِنْ عَلِيٍّ وَلاَ يُؤَدِّي عَنِّي إِلاَّ أَنَا أَوْ عَلِيٌّ 

Narrated Hubshi bin Junadah:
that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "'Ali is from me and I am from 'Ali. And none should represent me except myself or 'Ali."
 
 
Grading: Hasan
 
 
Surely if Ali(عليه السلام) is the ONLY one who can represent The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) then the only logical explanation would be that he should succeed him?
 
 
Not enough, well lucky you I have more proof
 
Please Note the words in bold have the same meaning
 
Let's see what Abu Baker says about himself:
Excerpts from Sahih Muslim 1757c:
 
قَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ أَنَا وَلِيُّ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسل
Abu Bakr said:" I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ).
 
Hmm. Interesting now let's see what Umar has to say about himself:
Sahih Muslim 1757c:
 
ثُمَّ تُوُفِّيَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَنَا وَلِيُّ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَوَلِيُّ أَبِي بَكْرٍ
 
When Abu Bakr passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him)
 
So when the word وَلِيّis out next to the likes of Abu Baker and Umar it means Person of Authority? Correct?
 
 
 
Now let's go back to Ghadeer e Khum shall we?
 
مَنْ كُنْتُ مَوْلاَهُ فَعَلِيٌّ مَوْلاَهُ
 
Now I'm sure you know that the word  مَوْلاَهُ comes from the root word وَلِيّ
 
One may also look at this and say why didn't The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) just use the word Wali, it would of saved us alot of time? Let's take a look:
Tidmidi 3712:
رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَالْغَضَبُ يُعْرَفُ فِي وَجْهِهِ فَقَالَ ‏ "‏ مَا تُرِيدُونَ مِنْ عَلِيٍّ مَا تُرِيدُونَ مِنْ عَلِيٍّ مَا تُرِيدُونَ مِنْ عَلِيٍّ إِنَّ عَلِيًّا مِنِّي وَأَنَا مِنْهُ وَهُوَ وَلِيُّ كُلِّ مُؤْمِنٍ بَعْدِي
 
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) faced him, and the anger was visible on his face, he said: "What do you want from 'Ali?! What do you want from 'Ali?! Indeed 'Ali is from me, and I am from him, and he is the ally of every believer after me."
 
Funny how Wali now means "Ally" now
 
So how come when the word Wali appears next to Ali(as)'s name everybody hesitates?
 
While I do agree The word Wali has multiple meanings, it can mean Friend/Ally or at times mean someone with authority, but we as Shia Muslims are unanimous that when The Propeht (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) calls Ali(عليه السلام) his Wali then he means Master, if you have a difference in opinion then it seems we have reached a dead end
 
 
Salam
 
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

If you could name these historians and the works where they demonstrated this it would be helpful. We can then see their arguments for ourselves.

Although we don't take our madhab from non muslim historians, for academic purposes it would be interesting to see their approach.

Madelung himself has quoted some of them:

"Caetani's earlier view that Muhammad, had he made a choice, would most likely have preferred Abu Bakr as his successor and that, in any case, Abu Bakr was the natural choice for the Muslims on account of his merits in Islam has become the prevalent opinion among non-Muslim historians of Islam. It is expressed, for instance, by W. M. Watt in his standard biography of Muhammad in the words: 'Certainly before Muhammad left Mecca for Medina Abu Bakr had established himself as his chief lieutenant and adviser; and this position he maintained to Muhammad's death, so that he was the obvious choice for successor.'"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Curious
On 8/14/2020 at 3:55 AM, Cherub786 said:

.... Let me demonstrate for you by stating my own position:

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

Quran [3:103] says “….be not disunited”.

In your opinion, what does the Quran say, how this unity can be achieved?

IMO, during Prophet’s life time, it’s obedience to the Prophet which ensured this unity was intact.

After the Prophet’s life time, it’s obedience to ulil amri which can ensure this unity is intact.

 

Now, Quran [6:159] also says the division into sects has nothing to do with the Prophet.

What do you think the Prophet had done to ensure there would be no division in islam after him?

IMO, advocating the ummah to elect its’ own leader is the quickest way to being divided. This is based on:

 

[Shakir 11:118] And if your Lord had pleased He would certainly have made people a single nation, and they shall continue to differ.

[Shakir 11:119] Except those on whom your Lord has mercy; and for this did He create them;

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MaisumAli said:

Edward Gibbon

(1737-1794)  Considered the greatest British historian of his time.

Gibbon of the 18th century is hardly a modern historian. Nor was early Muslim history and the life of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم his field of expertise. And as I've already pointed out, comparing Ali bin Abi Talib كرم الله وجهه to the Prophet Aaron makes no sense if the intention is to establish him as the Prophet Muhammad's صلى الله عليه وسلم immediate successor, as Aaron died in the lifetime of his younger brother Prophet Moses عليه السلام, whose actual successor was Prophet Joshua عليه السلام

So undoubtedly, sayyidina Ali was the Aaron of the Mohammedan dispensation, but sayyidina Abu Bakr is the Joshua of the Mohammedan dispensation. With regard to the word ولي it has multiple meanings, I never denied that one of its meanings is "guardian" in the sense of leader, ruler, etc., but to determine the actual meaning of the word in a sentence, context is key. The context of Ghadir Khumm clearly indicates that Mawla cannot mean "guardian" in the sense of leader, ruler, etc. but rather means beloved friend, ally

 

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

Quran [3:103] says “….be not disunited”.

In your opinion, what does the Quran say, how this unity can be achieved?

IMO, during Prophet’s life time, it’s obedience to the Prophet which ensured this unity was intact.

After the Prophet’s life time, it’s obedience to ulil amri which can ensure this unity is intact.

 

Now, Quran [6:159] also says the division into sects has nothing to do with the Prophet.

What do you think the Prophet had done to ensure there would be no division in islam after him?

IMO, advocating the ummah to elect its’ own leader is the quickest way to being divided. This is based on:

 

[Shakir 11:118] And if your Lord had pleased He would certainly have made people a single nation, and they shall continue to differ.

[Shakir 11:119] Except those on whom your Lord has mercy; and for this did He create them;

Unity is only required in that which Allah and His Apostle صلى الله عليه وسلم have ordained in the Shari'ah. Otherwise, Islam allows for difference of opinion. Islam is not a dictatorship. You ignored the fact that the Quran actually tells Believers to conduct their affairs through mutual consultation (Surah 42:38). So according to you the Quran is creating disunity because it tells Believers to conduct their affairs through consultation? Your objection and argument is extremely weak and childish.

As for dividing into sects and breaking the unity of the Muslims, that is actually what your side is guilty of, because you go against the Jama'ah of the Muslims, which recognize sayyidina Abi Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali رضى الله عنهم as the Prophet's first four successors in that sequence. The quickest way to become divided is not to consult, which the Quran commands, but to go against the consensus of the Believers and start your own sect with your own doctrines that have no basis in the texts of Divine Revelation.

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

as Aaron died in the lifetime of his younger brother Prophet Moses عليه السلام, whose actual successor was Prophet Joshua عليه السلام

And when We did appoint for Moses thirty nights (of solitude), and added to them ten, and he completed the whole time appointed by his Lord of forty nights; and Moses said unto his brother, Aaron: Take my place among the people. Do right, and follow not the way of mischief-makers. Quran 7:142

And appoint for me a minister from my family. Quran 20:29

Aaron my brother. Quran 20:30

[ Allah ] said, "You have been granted your request, O Moses.- 20:36 Quran

 

Doesn't matter wether he died first or not, what matters is the Position, and he clearly made Aaron (عليه السلام) his successor when he left, brother I think that if you ever read about the relationship that Musa(عليه السلام) had with Aaron(عليه السلام) in the Quran(Which Im sure you have) It is clear and without a doubt that if Aaron(عليه السلام) was alive after Musa(عليه السلام) he would have been his immediate successor

 

Now before you deny this, lemme ask you what happened to the people of Musa(عليه السلام) after Musa(عليه السلام) left for only 40 days? They started Worshipping a Calf For Crying Out Loud! Do you seriously think the same Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) who wouldn't leave a city without appointing a successor would leave this world without appointing a successor?!?

 

Beats me!

 

3 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

With regard to the word ولي it has multiple meanings

Understand, but how do you interpret:

 رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ "‏ عَلِيٌّ مِنِّي وَأَنَا مِنْ عَلِيٍّ وَلاَ يُؤَدِّي عَنِّي إِلاَّ أَنَا أَوْ عَلِيٌّ 

Narrated Hubshi bin Junadah:
that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "'Ali is from me and I am from 'Ali. And none should represent me except myself or 'Ali."
 
 
Grading: Hasan
 
Surely if Ali(عليه السلام) is the ONLY one who can represent The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) then the only logical explanation would be that he should succeed him?
 
3 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

The context of Ghadir Khumm clearly indicates that Mawla cannot mean "guardian" in the sense of leader, ruler, etc. but rather means beloved friend, ally

Oh so I guess when the Prophet(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said "`Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves"?(Musnad Ahmed 961))twas just to signify friendship right? Of course how could it possibly mean authority? Of course! Shias are Soo stupid for believing that Ali was appointed at Ghadeer E Khum am I right? Like the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was probably just joking right? 

Soo yeah enough of that, I don't think my Propeht(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) would keep the people 3 days in the middle of the schorching Desert just to say that Ali is my Friend as if he was the enemy of Islam before that! Gimme a break!

 
 
 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

Two historians?

Ok, thanks. 

You're most welcome. By the way, I have just formulated a very powerful argument to refute the concept of the necessity of divine appointment for succession. There was an element of Ilham in the realization of this truth, which I am positive has never been employed by any Sunni prior to myself. I would like to share it here, would you like to be the first one to engage with it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
13 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

I would like to share it here, would you like to be the first one to engage with it?

I am still reading through the discussion on the first 3-4 pages of this thread and will probably have some comments, but feel free to share anything you like. The thread is open for comments now, so anyone who wants to comment on it will do so inshaAllah. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MaisumAli said:

Doesn't matter wether he died first or not, what matters is the Position, and he clearly made Aaron (عليه السلام) his successor when he left, brother I think that if you ever read about the relationship that Musa(عليه السلام) had with Aaron(عليه السلام) in the Quran(Which Im sure you have) It is clear and without a doubt that if Aaron(عليه السلام) was alive after Musa(عليه السلام) he would have been his immediate successor

The verses you have quoted say that Prophet Aaron عليه السلام was a minister for Prophet Moses عليه السلام

Minister is not the same as successor. A leader can have more than one minister too, in fact, in most governments, there is an entire cabinet of ministers. We definitely recognize sayyidina Ali كرم الله وجهه as a Minister of the Prophet, but not the only one. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم deputized sayyidina Ali to supervise Medina when he left on the expedition for Tabuk, just as Prophet Moses deputized his brother Aaron to supervise the children of Israel when he ascended Mount Sinai for forty nights. The comparison is limited and not unrestricted or absolute, as the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم made clear that unlike Aaron, Ali is not a prophet and does not possess prophetic authority in the absence of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم.

Keep in mind the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم delegated other Companions of his with similar responsibility. But perhaps the most significant is that during his final illness, he delegated sayyidina Abi Bakr as-Siddiq رضى الله عنه to the position of imamate, in leading the congregational worship in the Mosque, to stand where only the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم had stood. And the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was very keen on this, which we regard as a strong proof that although he did not designate sayyidina Abi Bakr his successor, he desired that the Ummah understand the latter's rank as the Prophet's right-hand man, and thereafter elect him to the office of Caliph.

Therefore, I believe that while the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not designate sayyidina Abi Bakr رضى الله عنه his successor, being a Prophet, he was informed through divine inspiration that sayyidina Abi Bakr would become his immediate successor, and thereafter sayyidina Umar رضى الله عنه. This is why the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم actually said:

اقْتَدُوا بِاللَّذَيْنِ مِنْ بَعْدِي أَبِي بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ

"Stick to those after me, Abi Bakr and Umar" (Tirmidhi)

This is actually a Hasan hadith. If there is an argument to be made that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم designated anyone his successor, it is that he designated Abu Bakr and Umar his successor based on this and similar narrations. Because as you have seen in this debate, Ansur Shiat Ali failed to bring a single authentic or sound Hadith where the succession of sayyidina Ali is proven. He either brought fabricated narrations, or narrations that are not explicit in speaking about succession or mentioning sayyidina Ali by name.

This is also why, as I quoted from Madelung, who quoted Caetani and Watt as arguing that Abu Bakr was the obvious choice to succeed the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and this is agreed upon by the vast majority of Western, modern and non-Muslim historians.

Nonetheless, this Hadith "Stick to those after me, Abi Bakr and Umar", we don't interpret it as them being divinely appointed to caliphate. We interpret this as a purely predictive statement. Meaning the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, since he was a Prophet, he obtained news of the unseen that after his death he will be succeeded by Abu Bakr and then Umar رضى الله عنهما

Now my point is, if their succession was illegal and an example of usurpation (God forbid), and the Prophet knew that it would happen, since he was a Prophet and received revelation regarding it, why didn't he clearly condemn them for it? Why didn't he warn his Ummah to reject them when they become Caliphs? We find no evidence of that from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم

This is why majority of Western, modern historians have completely dismissed and rejected the Shi'ite thesis that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed Ali bin Abi Talib كرم الله وجهه, but that his divine right was usurped by sayyidina Abi Bakr and Umar رضى الله عنهما

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

This is why majority of Western, modern historians have completely dismissed and rejected the Shi'ite thesis that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed Ali bin Abi Talib كرم الله وجهه, but that his divine right was usurped by sayyidina Abi Bakr and Umar رضى الله عنهما

Im sorry but, Western "Historians" clearly haven't done their homework on Shia Hadith then have they? Also what do you think about the representative hadith I put up? I await your answer

Also that was not the only Quran verse that I brought to prove Musa(عليه السلام) appointed Aaron(عليه السلام) as his successor when he left for 40 days, rather it is actually a Fact that Musa(عليه السلام) appointed Aaron (عليه السلام) as his successor for the 40 days, I dare anyone to defy

And why would the Propeht (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) say "`Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves"?(Musnad Ahmed 961)" before calling Ali(عليه السلام) Maula?

Lastly, please do let me know about you argument against Divine appointment, I find that interesting, Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
33 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

The verses you have quoted say that Prophet Aaron عليه السلام was a minister for Prophet Moses عليه السلام

Another verse in quran uses the word khulfni, which isnt just Vazir, and is rooted in word Khalifa. Here, Prophet Musa gives all encompassing authority to Haroun. 

Quote

In verse 7:142 Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentions the words of Nabi Musa [as] to Harun [as] before he went up into the Mountain:

وَقَالَ مُوسَى لأَخِيهِ هَارُونَ اخْلُفْنِي فِي قَوْمِي

The word ukhulfni is the root origin of the Arabic word Khalifa (Caliph), by whose use Allah, who is above all error, is directly implying that Harun (عليه السلام) would now take Musa (as)’ s role among the people as their khalifa, the position that Musa (عليه السلام) had now been passed to his brother Harun (عليه السلام)

Then Rasoullalah cements this with: 

Quote

Prophet (sa) said to Imam Ali (عليه السلام), “Your position to me is like the position of Harun to Musa, except that there will be no prophet after me.” (Bukhari, Vol 5, Book 59, #700)

 

35 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

قْتَدُوا بِاللَّذَيْنِ مِنْ بَعْدِي أَبِي بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ

"Stick to those after me, Abi Bakr and Umar" (Tirmidhi)

This hadith is not valid to Shia's, hence analyzing it is pointless. It goes back to using Sunni accepted hadith against shia's. Would shia accepted hadith prove anything to a sunni? please stick to accepted hadith from both sides.

- Also using non muslim Historians, as amusing as that is, is no proof for anything. If these people had capacity to do proper research, and seek out truth, they would become muslims. There is corruption and darkness in their hearts that disallows them to seek out truth and the see the light of guidance. It reflects on their research as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, MaisumAli said:

Im sorry but, Western "Historians" clearly haven't done their homework on Shia Hadith then have they? Also what do you think about the representative hadith I put up? I await your answer

Also that was not the only Quran verse that I brought to prove Musa(عليه السلام) appointed Aaron(عليه السلام) as his successor when he left for 40 days, rather it is actually a Fact that Musa(عليه السلام) appointed Aaron (عليه السلام) as his successor for the 40 days, I dare anyone to defy

And why would the Propeht (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) say "`Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves"?(Musnad Ahmed 961)" before calling Ali(عليه السلام) Maula?

Lastly, please do let me know about you argument against Divine appointment, I find that interesting, Thank you

1. Honestly, Western historians don't really take Shi'ah Hadith seriously. They don't take most Sunni Hadith seriously either, but they have more credibility in their eyes than Shi'ite Hadith. Don't ask me, ask the historians.

2. It is important to understand the context of the Hadith you are quoting. Context reveals it is not related to the issue of succession, but the issue of the Prophet's صلى الله عليه وسلم representation in the nullification of a treaty on his behalf. So a published commentary, by Darussalam of this narration explains:

"In Arab society it was customary that if some tribe wanted to break a treaty, the head of the tribe had to do this job himself or some near relative had to be appointed to accomplish this work. When Sürat Bara was revealed and it was commanded that the treaty between the Prophet and the Mushrikun of Makkah be broken or kept for sometime, the Prophet in 9 A.H., had already made Abu Bakr the leader of the Hajj party and the party had left for Makkah. The Sürah was revealed after their departure from Al-Madinah, so the Prophet sent Ali, as the custom of the day, to deliver the message to the people of Makkah, but Abu Bakr kept his position as the leader of the Hajj party."

3. That only serves to reinforce our interpretation of the meaning of Mawla in that context, which is a meaning of closeness and intimacy as in beloved friendship and alliance. Remember, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said that no one is a true Believer until they love the Prophet more than themselves. You are actually presenting a proof for our argument that Mawla means beloved friend, not guardian in the sense of political leadership and rule.

4. In sha Allah

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...