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

Why did rasool announce khilafat of mawla Ali in Ghadeer Khum not in Arafat

Rate this topic


Guest Ali

Recommended Posts

Guest Ali Redha Darwish

Both sides of the argument seem to be focusing on their respective preconceptions.

Firstly, the debate on the meaning of ‘Mawla’ centers on a word that has multiple meanings in Arabic such as master, friend, freedman, ally, supporter, etc. therefore the rule in Arabic is to  go to the context for the intended meaning. The prophet began the sermon of Al-Ghadeer by saying that he was human and would soon get an invitation from his Lord which he would not refuse (implying his impending passing away). It was at this  point that Abu Bakr wept, having understood the Prophet’s implication. (He may also have wept  expecting that the Prophet would now name his successor but that is inference). The  Prophet then continued by saying that he was leaving behind two weighty things, the Quran-the greater one- and his Ahl Al Bait-the lesser one. Consequently he was reassuring the community that he was not leaving them directionless but was leaving behind two weighty legacies for their guidance. 
He then went on to ask the Muslims present if he was not (Awla) to them than their own selves, meaning closer or more important or having a greater right upon them, than their own selves. When they all replied in the affirmative, he took Ali by the hand and said (Man Kunto Mawla fa haza Ali yun Mawlahu) - I.e. ‘Whosoever I was Mawla of, Ali is his Mawla’.

Note that the root for (Awla) and (Mawla) is the same in Arabic and the context for (Mawla) in the sermon is supplied by the preceding use of (Awla) and by the comparison to the Prophet’s own status as (Mawla) of the Muslims as well as the fact that he was saying this in the context of his approaching demise and the fact that the Ahl Al-bait were the principal human guides after him  for the community (next to the Quran obviously).
Can anybody dare suggest that the Prophet was merely a ‘friend’ of the Muslims? He was declaring Ali’s being Mawla in the same way that he himself was Mawla of the Muslims. And he was doing all this in the context of announcing his own demise; it was a testament and obviously not in the context of merely declaring Ali a ‘friend’ of the Muslims after his death since Ali was obviously a ‘friend’ of the Muslims ever since he became a Muslim! 

In the same sermon, while leading up to the announcement of Ali as Mawla, he specified only the Ahl Al bait as the human guides of the community, not any of his other Companions; and Ali was the chief of the Ahl Al-bait after the Prophet. Remember, Ali was also the only one of the first four Caliphs to be both a member of the Ahl Al Bait and a Companion. 

Secondly, the question of his making the announcement at Ghadeer Al-Khum instead of at Arafat is disingenuous. He made the announcement at Khum because at that point it would only be the senior Muhajireen/Qurei[Edited Out]es and Ansar/Medinites and his family members  accompanying him. (The claims of a hundred thousand witnesses are probably exaggerated-it was more likely about 5000). These were the people who were likely to dispute the succession or who had a say in the power structure at that time and who had to be given a clear declaration. Everybody also forgets logistics. With no loudspeakers etc announcements of this nature to a hundred thousand people would simply have meant that most of them would not have heard him and the relaying of what he was saying by those who could hear him to others would have meant a five hour lecture. His health would have precluded that; he was already frail by that time as the event was a few months before his final illness.   

Thirdly, the Shi’as need to acknowledge the importance of ‘bai’a’ or allegiance when it comes to temporal rule. The acceptance of the people plays an immutable part in the concept of temporal rule in Islam. Prophets are divinely ordained but that does not mean even they have an automatic right to temporal rule. Other than two or three Prophets, how many of those named in the Quran ruled their people? Mohammed certainly nominated Ali as his successor, but the temporal - which is by its very nature temporary - part of that succession was undoubtedly concomitant on the acceptance of the majority of the people. 
In conclusion, there can be little doubt Ali was the prophetically ordained spiritual successor of the Prophet but the right to temporal rule was still subject to the acceptance of the people, which is why Mohammed enjoined Ali to not fight for the rule unless he had sufficient support.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Agreed, there is some weight with regards tot the support of the people. I think it's the people loss. However, the point I'd like to make is, the bayah goes against what, as argued by Shias, has been put forward by Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

The outcome of the bayah is the people's wish, and Ali (عليه السلام) respected that. But it's definitely not what Rasullallah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) wanted.

IMHO, If you analyze one of the Hadith in Sahih Bukhari, you will see that Saqifah was not a conspiracy like what some say. However the people already had an idea of what they wanted after the demise of Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

The excerpt below is from a long Hadith narrated by Ibn Abbas (Sahih Bukhari 8,82,817). So the version that Ali (عليه السلام) immediately gave bayah can be thrown out the window, it's fabricated.

Quote

'Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr.

You will also find that things were already planned:

Quote

Where are you going?' We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go to them.'

If you read the Hadith towards the end you'd see that Umar (رضي الله عنه) didn't want to see the khilafah to fall in the hands of the Ansar

Quote

By Allah, apart from the great tragedy that had happened to us (i.e. the death of the Prophet), there was no greater problem than the allegiance pledged to Abu Bakr because we were afraid that if we left the people, they might give the Pledge of allegiance after us to one of their men, in which case we would have given them our consent for something against our real wish, or would have opposed them and caused great trouble.

So Umar's (رضي الله عنه) real wish was to never hand over the reigns of leadership to the Ansar, even though he did say he would agree to it if that happened. But things were already planned by them.

I didn't find any source wrt Saqifah where one of the companions said "Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) already gave signs that Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه), who led the prayer, was the most beloved, was in the gave with him, had qualities of a prophet, should be the khalifa" . I see people quoting Tarikh Al-Islam. Could someone point to me if I have missed this where people presented the fadhail of all the candidates at Saqifah in Sahih as-sittah?

Seems to me the justifications of certain individuals for the khilafat were made by post-Saqifah scholars. These arguments were not cited during Saqifah according to the sources I've seen, except for the Tarikh Al-Islam which shows Umar citing some fadhail of Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه).

 

Edited by 145_turbo_16V
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ali Redha Al-Lawati

Agreed. Of course the Prophet wanted Ali to succeed him both as political leader and as spiritual guide, but the political leadership was still left to the will of the people. Which is why Ali’s refusal of the political leadership on two occasions (at the time of omar’s shura and initially after Othman’s death) does not detract from the divine will of his being the spiritual heir of Mohammed. What people do doesn’t affect the spiritual leadership although it may affect the temporal realm just as Zakaria remained a prophet of God even though his people persecuted and eventually killed him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, Guest Ali Redha Darwish said:

Everybody also forgets logistics. With no loudspeakers etc announcements of this nature to a hundred thousand people would simply have meant that most of them would not have heard him and the relaying of what he was saying by those who could hear him to others would have meant a five hour lecture. His health would have precluded that; he was already frail by that time as the event was a few months before his final illness.   

Salam at first about loudspeaker which from ancient days  until using loudspeaker in mosques from 20th century there was a trick for solving this problem which in some distances some people were standing in certain places for repeating word of main speaker for example someone few meters away from main speaker have been repeating words of main speaker loudly in order to next person in next stand hears it & repeats it again which by making a network of people which they have been repeating words of previous person loudly in order to a large number of people could hear words of main speaker by repeating of his words loudly  by appointed person to another appointed  person repeating  in loud sound also prophet Muhammad (pbu) himself ordered to people that they repeat his lecture & event to anyone that has been present there or has been absent so consequently a large number of people have repeated his lecture & event for anyone which has been there also his lecture & story of  event has been spread by everyone who returned from hajj in every corner of muslim community before demise of prophet because of importance of it & order of prophet & eagerness of absent people for hearing every detail of last Hajj of prophet Muhammad (pbu) for following his procedure & commands with full details after his demise.

also even without using this tachnique there is narrations which Imam Mahdi (aj) after reappearance will talk with all people of world without using any device for sending his voice as one of signs of his reappearance  which all people will hear his voice around the world at same time & they will understand his message without need to translation .

in addendum process of giving lecture & taking allegiance has happened during three days not after five hour in just one day so consequently a large number of people have heard the lecture besides of documention of it by many prople.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, Guest Ali Redha Darwish said:

Thirdly, the Shi’as need to acknowledge the importance of ‘bai’a’ or allegiance when it comes to temporal rule. The acceptance of the people plays an immutable part in the concept of temporal rule in Islam. Prophets are divinely ordained but that does not mean even they have an automatic right to temporal rule. Other than two or three Prophets, how many of those named in the Quran ruled their people? Mohammed certainly nominated Ali as his successor, but the temporal - which is by its very nature temporary - part of that succession was undoubtedly concomitant on the acceptance of the majority of the people. 
In conclusion, there can be little doubt Ali was the prophetically ordained spiritual successor of the Prophet but the right to temporal rule was still subject to the acceptance of the people, which is why Mohammed enjoined Ali to not fight for the rule unless he had sufficient support.   

It has been a permanent ‘Bai’a’ until martyrdom of Amir al muminin Imam Ali(عليه السلام) & continous ‘Bai’a’ according to word of prophet Muhammad (pbu) from his progeny from lineage Amir al muminin Imam Ali(عليه السلام) then Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) of until end of world .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 11/4/2021 at 12:58 AM, Debate follower said:

Then he asked his followers to confirm that he had delivered all the message of Allah Almighty to the Mankind. His followers confirmed this, and he then asked Allah Almighty to bear witness three times that he had delivered the full message. Nothing important was left out!

Salaamun Alaikum brother!

Are you sure Nothing was left out in Arafaat? Who said that nothing important was left out in arafaat? It is a claim without any evidence. You might use the logic of ifs and buts but that doesn't make sense while talking about Rasoolullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). 

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) obeyed Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). People followed him and people had no right to interpret his actions and his sayings according to what suits them.

The verse of completion of Islam and the verse that warns Rasoolullah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) about a message were both revealed in khum.

All the shia scholars as well as many sunni scholars have made this claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 11/16/2021 at 3:34 AM, Debate follower said:

Assalama alaykum brother -Your philosophy is deep; I’m trying to understand it. I’m not trying to be ‘difficult’.

– In this world falsehood exists.

And say: The truth has come, and the falsehood has vanished; surely falsehood is a vanishing (thing).81 Al-Isra

if, it didn’t exist then how would it vanish?

And my thanks for being polite.

Wa Aleikum salaam. No one is saying that evil does not exist, of course it does, because we witness it everyday, but what we are talking about is non-existential and relative thing. If evil does not exist then why we are being judged for in the day of judgment? 

I can only give an example to make sense out of this. For example blindness is not a tangible reality that exists in the eye of the blind person. Rather blindness is nothing more than lack of sight and it has no reality. God can give a sight which is a creation and He can also take the sight out, but we can not anymore say that what is left in the eye is creation that is blindness. Blindness is nothingness and emptiness and no property, but sight is something and it is real. The person is still a creation but lack of sight. This lack of sight is not an creation but nothingness, because God took the creation (sight) out and what is left is nothingness (lack of sight). Only label to refer to nothingness exist in knowledge. 

So every creation have both of these together, being and non-being and non - being refers the lack of that being. 

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is The Creator of All things and all things (Beings) includes the non-being of the being too. What is in reality manifested is only beings. And all things that can not anymore be called beings we call them non-beings, And evil is non-being thus not creation.

As for Falsehood is not real because you can not witness its being in reality (because it is non-being of truth) while all truth can be witness their beings in reality. Vanishing of Falsehood means that truth have come to us and that we can now witness its being in reality while before we could only witness the non-being, thus the lie. Thus the reality only contain truths and making an lie about the truth is not even real but only nothingness. When kafirs make lies, they make things about reality that does not even exist, thus this is exactly what we call nothingness, non-being, vacuum. 

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 11/17/2021 at 1:21 AM, Guest Ali Redha Al-Lawati said:

Agreed. Of course the Prophet wanted Ali to succeed him both as political leader and as spiritual guide, but the political leadership was still left to the will of the people. Which is why Ali’s refusal of the political leadership on two occasions (at the time of omar’s shura and initially after Othman’s death) does not detract from the divine will of his being the spiritual heir of Mohammed. What people do doesn’t affect the spiritual leadership although it may affect the temporal realm just as Zakaria remained a prophet of God even though his people persecuted and eventually killed him. 

If Imam Ali (عليه السلام) refuses something, it does not mean that he agrees that political leadership should give to people to decide. Imam Ali (عليه السلام) knows very well the truth that it is him who succeeded the Prophet as the master of believers, and everyone who disagree with it and start to make their saqifas and choose political leadership among themselves is nothing but an sinful person even if Imam Ali (عليه السلام) ignores them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 11/9/2021 at 12:35 PM, Debate follower said:

Not only me but all Scholars including the three eminent scholars mentioned by you never took the word Mawla to mean a Successor or Khalifa. Even if you refer to Sermon 92 of Nahjul Balagha, if Hz.Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was Divinely appointed a successor or khalifa, he would not dare give option to the people to choose another Chief/leader.

Leave me and seek someone else. We are facing a matter which has (several) faces and colours, which neither hearts can stand, nor intelligence can accept. Clouds are hovering over the sky, and faces are not discernible. You should know that if I respond to you, I would lead you as I know and would not listen to the utterance of any speaker or the reproof of any reprover. If you leave me then I am the same as you are. It is possible I would listen to and obey whomever you make in charge of your affairs. I am better for you as a counsellor than as chief. Sermon 92 Nahjul Balagha

What is very funny is that sadly you guys don't actually read your books. I love how you guys go around and hold this Khutbah to the full standard as if it destroys Shiism. Before we get into why this Khutbah is most likely a fabrication and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) probably never said it, let me teach you about Nahj al Balagha.

 

In Qabasat min Ilm al-Rijal, By Sayyid Muhammad Ridha al-Sistani (حفظه الله), Vol.2, Page 142-143,

 

"Nahj al-Balagha....

 

And Al-Muhaqiq al-Tustari (اعلى الله مقامه) mentioned that al-Sayyid [Al-Sharif] Al-Radhi (رضي الله عنه) that a great amount of his book (Nahj al-Balagha) is taken from the books of the Jumhur. That is why sometimes that he narrates in his book what goes against the books of our companions (the Shia). Then he (Tustari) mentioned a few examples."

 

So, let's see where Al-Sharif al-Radhi got it from

image.png.4e65ca3815cfe7c306dce0bdac4b6540.png

 

OH MY GOD!!! WHAT IS THIS?????? IT'S FROM TARIKH AL-TABARI? WITH SAYF IBN UMAR AL-TAMIMI IN THE CHAIN?

 

Yes that is indeed right. Who's Sayf Ibn Umar btw?

 

الأسم : سيف بن عمر

الشهرة : سيف بن عمر الضبي

النسب : السعدي, البرجمي, الضبي, التميمي, الأسيدي, الكوفي

الرتبة : متهم بالوضع

عاش في : البصرة, الكوفة

 

أبو أحمد بن عدي الجرجاني : ضعيف، وبعض أحاديثه مشهورة وعامتها منكرة لم يتابع عليها وهو إلى الضعف أقرب منه إلى الصدق

أبو جعفر العقيلي : لا يتابع على كثير من حديثه

أبو حاتم الرازي : متروك الحديث يشبه حديثه حديث الواقدي

أبو حاتم بن حبان البستي : يروي الموضوعات عن الأثبات، اتهم بالزندقة، قالوا إنه كان يضع الحديث

أبو دواد السجستاني : ليس بشيء

أبو عبد الله الحاكم النيسابوري : اتهم بالزندقة وساقط الروايه

أبو نعيم الأصبهاني : متهم في دينه مرمي بالزندقة ساقط الحديث لا شيء

أحمد بن شعيب النسائي : ضعيف

ابن حجر العسقلاني : ضعيف الحديث، صاحب كتاب الردة عمدة في التاريخ، أفحش ابن حبان القول فيه

ابن عراق : متهم بالزندقة ووضع الحديث

الدارقطني : ضعيف، متروك، ذكره في الضعفاء والمتروكين

مجلي بن جميع : كان يضع الحديث وكان قد اتهم بالزندقة

مصنفوا تحرير تقريب التهذيب : متروك، فحديثه ضعيف جدا

يحيى بن معين : ضعيف الحديث، ومن رواية أبي جعفر الحضرمي سئل عنه فقال: فليس خيرا منه

يعقوب بن سفيان الفسوي : ليس بشيء

http://hadith.islam-db.com/narrators/3737/سيف-بن-عمر

Mashallah. He is matruk, a fabricator, dhaeef/weak. And get this, He was said to a Zindeeq/Heretic?!?!?

 

So my advice is:

 

1. Read your books

2. Go read about why Nahj al-Balagha was written

3. And finally, go read Nahj al-Balagha from beginning to end.

 

:grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

In Qabasat min Ilm al-Rijal, By Sayyid Muhammad Ridha al-Sistani (حفظه الله), Vol.2, Page 142-143,

 

"Nahj al-Balagha....

 

And Al-Muhaqiq al-Tustari (اعلى الله مقامه) mentioned that al-Sayyid [Al-Sharif] Al-Radhi (رضي الله عنه) that a great amount of his book (Nahj al-Balagha) is taken from the books of the Jumhur. That is why sometimes that he narrates in his book what goes against the books of our companions (the Shia). Then he (Tustari) mentioned a few examples."

 

image.thumb.png.ff8d08d99680173fb6b2ff2030453319.png

 

What I posted about Qabasat above if anyone wants it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 11/24/2021 at 1:05 PM, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

What is very funny is that sadly you guys don't actually read your books. I love how you guys go around and hold this Khutbah to the full standard as if it destroys Shiism. Before we get into why this Khutbah is most likely a fabrication and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) probably never said it,

I actually find it funny that you think ‘we’ don’t read ‘our’ books. We read Qur’an the most as therein is the Guidance from Allah Almighty (I’ll vouch the same for you). Then ‘we’ read the books on the Sunnah of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to follow the straight path to please Allah Almighty.

And (know) that this is My path, the right one therefore follow it, and follow not (other) ways, for they will lead you away from His way; this He has enjoined you with that you may guard (against evil) 153 al-An’am

This is sufficient for earning Salvation. History books are good to get knowledge but then everybody has their own slant on events.

I am glad that you have not outrightly rejected Sermon 92 Nahjul Balagha and have left possibility that it could be RIGHT by saying:

On 11/24/2021 at 1:05 PM, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

why this Khutbah is most likely a fabrication and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) probably never said it

Just as the above is your stance below is my stance:

“this Khutbah is most likely NOT a fabrication and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) probably said it”

 

Now, let’s refer to Sermon 127 Nahjul Balagha (quoted below)

Certainly, you are the most evil of all persons and are those whom Satan has put on his lines and thrown out into his wayless land. With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority (of Muslims) because Allah's hand (of protection) is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is (a prey) to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is (a prey) to the wolf. Sermon 127 Nahjul Balagha

Please conduct an experiment and go to some unbiased person, say a Christian or a Hindu who have fairly good general knowledge and ask them to read it. Once they have read it well and understood it. And keep it in mind that Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was very articulate and eloquent and never talked in riddles. Now ask this person: “Who do you think Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) is referring as the great majority (of Muslims) who have Allah's hand (of protection)”?

You will ALWAYS get the answer that be with the great majority of Muslims!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you were to refer to Shia commentaries, they would say:
they ones who love him too much are Ghulaat -
‘exaggerators', 'extremists
they ones who hate him too much are Nasibis - "those who have hatred"
The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course – these of course are the 12er Shias – great majority (of Muslims)!

What about Sunnis? Conveniently they are lumped with the Nasibis!!!!! How conveniently done! Without any qualms whatsoever!

90% of Muslims lumped up with Nasibis!!??????!!!!!

Even though Sunni books are full of ‘Virtues of Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib and all the Ahlul Bayt (may Allah be pleased with them all – here I am referring to the Sunni version) and regard him as the fourth Righteous Khalif!!!!!!??????

It is a historical fact that Sunnis have always been that great overwhelming majority of Majority of Muslims. And prior to 1500 AD that ‘overwhelming majority’ was even more greater as by this time the Safavids had not yet brutally and savagely turned Iran and Azerbaijan into Shia majority states!  Don’t believe me? Read the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam

*Imposing Shiism as the state and mandatory religion for the whole nation and much forcible conversion of Iranian Sufi Sunnis to Shiism
* He reintroduced the Sadr (Arabic, leader) – an office that was responsible for supervising religious institutions and endowments. With a view to transforming Iran into a Shiite state, the Sadr was also assigned the task of disseminating Twelver doctrine
* He killed Sunnis and destroyed and desecrated their graves and mosques. This caused the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid II (who initially congratulated Ismail on his victories) to advise and ask the young monarch (in a "fatherly" manner) to stop the anti-Sunni actions. However, Ismail was strongly anti-Sunni, ignored the Sultan's warning, and continued to spread the Shia faith by the sword.

Now, what have you to say on the Sermon 127 Nahjul Balagha?

Care to share the results of your experiment with us?

Now, let’s refer to Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha

A letter sent by Imam Ali ((عليه السلام).) to the people of various provinces, giving them the causes of the Battle of Siffin.

Verily, those who swore allegiance to Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman have sworn allegiance to me on the same basis on which they swore allegiance to them. (On this basis) he who was present has no choice (to consider), and he who was absent has no right to reject; and consultation is confined to the muhajirun and the ansar. If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.

If anyone keeps away by way of objection or innovation they will return him to the position from where he kept away. If he refuses, they will fight him for following a course other than that of the believers and Allah will put him back from where he had run away.  Letter 6 Nahjul Balagha

Any unbiased person can clearly see that Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) is justifying his election as the Khalif as legitimate on the same grounds as that of his 3 predecessors (Hz. Abu Bakr, Hz. Umar bin Al Khattab and Hz. Uthman bin Affan (may Allah Be pleased with them all).

And he deemed their selection as earning Allah Almighty’s Pleasure!!!!!!

Now refer to Arabic version – the actual words uttered by Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him).

“If they agree on an individual and take him to be IMAM, it will be deemed to mean Allah's pleasure.”

He used the word IMAM – Well knowing all the meanings and implications of this word.

إِنَّهُ بَايَعَنِي الْقَوْمُ الَّذِينَ بَايَعُوا أَبَا بَكْر وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمانَ عَلَى مَا بَايَعُوهُمْ عَلَيْهِ، فَلَمْ يَكُنْ لِلشَّاهِدِ أَنْ يَخْتَارَ، وَلاَ لِلغَائِبِ أَنْ يَرُدَّ، وَإنَّمَا الشُّورَى لِلْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالاْنْصَارِ، فَإِنِ اجْتَمَعُوا عَلَى رَجُل وَسَمَّوْهُ إِمَاماً كَانَ ذلِكَ لله رِضىً، فَإِنْ خَرَجَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِمْ خَارِجٌ بِطَعْن أَوْبِدْعَة رَدُّوهُ إِلَى مَاخَرَجَ منه، فَإِنْ أَبَى قَاتَلُوهُ عَلَى اتِّبَاعِهِ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَوَلاَّهُ اللهُ مَا تَوَلَّى.

Now, please can we have your informed view on the above?

Weak hadith?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Now, let’s refer to Letter 58 Nahjul Balagha: (Written by Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) to the people of various localities describing what took place between him and the people of Siffin)

The thing began in this way: We and the Syrians were facing each other while we had common faith in one Allah, in the same Prophet (peace be upon him and his household) and on the same principles and canons of religion. So far as faith in Allah and the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his household) was concerned we never wanted them (the Syrians) to believe in anything over and above or other than what they were believing in and they did not want us to change our faith. Both of us were united on these principles. The point of contention between us was the question of the murder of Uthman. It had created the split. They wanted to lay the murder at my door while I am actually innocent of it. Letter 58 Nahjul Balagha

Clearly, Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) has stated the differences between him and his opponents were not on basis of Faith but rather political!

* we had common faith in one Allah
* in the same Prophet (peace be upon him and his household)
* and on the same principles and canons of religion

And

* So far as faith in Allah and the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his household) was concerned we never wanted them (the Syrians) to believe in anything over and above or other than what they were believing in
* and they did not want us to change our faith


And

* Both of us were united on these principles.
* The point of contention between us was the question of the murder of Uthman. It had created the split.
* They wanted to lay the murder at my door while I am actually innocent of it.

Now, what’s your spin on the above.? 

This is the ONE which can tie you into knots!!! The only escape is to declare it to be FAKE!

Also, note that Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) has said that Hz. Abu Bakr, Hz. Umar and Hz. Uthman (may Allah be pleased with all) were selected as Imams. And yet you disagree with him!

Now, all you can do is to dismiss this as fake, forged, or weak sources.

Shias mostly refer to Sermon 3 also popularly known as the Sermon of ash-Shiqshiqiyah as proof of Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) claiming his Divine Right to Khilafat/Imamate

https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons/sermon-3-allah-son-abu-quhafah

This actually goes against Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him)

This is nearly twenty odd years too late! This can be dated to around 18 to 20 years after passing away of the blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). (2 years for Hz. Abu Bakr, 10 years for Hz. Umar Al Khattab and around 6 years midway of Hz Uthman bin Affan (may Allah be pleased with these three Noble Souls immensely)). This is 20 odd years too late.

This sermon goes against Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him). As I had said earlier, Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was one of the foremost Believers in Islam. He was known for his wisdom and bravery.

In this Sermon Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) comes out as a weak man just protesting that he has been robbed of his rightful Divinely appointed status which was being dismantled right in front of his eyes, but he could do nothing but protest 20 odd years too late. On top of it be their advisor!

If, he was Divinely chosen to succeed the Blessed Prophet (peace be upon him) he was duty bound to fight for it and restore it not worrying for the consequences.

He would have followed the illustrious example of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and fought for his cause not caring for the consequences. Following is reply of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) when his dear Uncle had requested him mute down his opposition to the Mushrikeens!

“By Allah, if they put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left hand on condition that I abandoned this course, I would not abandon it until Allah has made it victorious, or I perish therein.”" 

Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) would have done the same, no doubt about this.

This Sermon should have been said just after the funeral of the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) if he was Divinely Ordained.

Note also that he never recalled the event of Khum Ghadeer. Never mentioned his Divine Appointment. This is the oft-repeated mantra by our Shia brethren (sisters included) as the strongest point in the Divine Appointment.

 As per Shia beliefs the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) had conveyed the message and Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) is duty bound to implement it come what may, trusting that Allah Almighty will protect him just as Allah Almighty had promised to protect the Blessed Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

Now this blessed Surah comes into effect.

O Messenger! Convey everything revealed to you from your Lord. If you do not, then you have not delivered His message. Allah will ˹certainly˺ protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the people who disbelieve. Al-Maida:67

On 11/24/2021 at 1:05 PM, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

1. Read your books

Trust me, I do whenever I get the time – which is always in such a short supply.

On 11/24/2021 at 1:05 PM, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

2. Go read about why Nahj al-Balagha was written

After reading Shia response to many queries, I have no clue.

On 11/24/2021 at 1:05 PM, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

3. And finally, go read Nahj al-Balagha from beginning to end.

I would but then whatever I find anything ‘interesting’ it turns out to be weak, fake, or it is interpreted 180o to apparent meaning of what Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) had stated! His words are stretched to fit their own meaning :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 12/3/2021 at 12:30 PM, Debate follower said:

Now, let’s refer to Sermon 127 Nahjul Balagha (quoted below)

Certainly, you are the most evil of all persons and are those whom Satan has put on his lines and thrown out into his wayless land. With regard to me, two categories of people will be ruined, namely he who loves me too much and the love takes him away from rightfulness, and he who hates me too much and the hatred takes him away from rightfulness. The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course. So be with him and be with the great majority (of Muslims) because Allah's hand (of protection) is on keeping unity. You should beware of division because the one isolated from the group is (a prey) to Satan just as the one isolated from the flock of sheep is (a prey) to the wolf. Sermon 127 Nahjul Balagha

Please conduct an experiment and go to some unbiased person, say a Christian or a Hindu who have fairly good general knowledge and ask them to read it. Once they have read it well and understood it. And keep it in mind that Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was very articulate and eloquent and never talked in riddles. Now ask this person: “Who do you think Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) is referring as the great majority (of Muslims) who have Allah's hand (of protection)”?

You will ALWAYS get the answer that be with the great majority of Muslims!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you were to refer to Shia commentaries, they would say:
they ones who love him too much are Ghulaat -
‘exaggerators', 'extremists
they ones who hate him too much are Nasibis - "those who have hatred"
The best man with regard to me is he who is on the middle course – these of course are the 12er Shias – great majority (of Muslims)!

What about Sunnis? Conveniently they are lumped with the Nasibis!!!!! How conveniently done! Without any qualms whatsoever!

90% of Muslims lumped up with Nasibis!!??????!!!!!

Even though Sunni books are full of ‘Virtues of Hz. Ali ibn Abu Talib and all the Ahlul Bayt (may Allah be pleased with them all – here I am referring to the Sunni version) and regard him as the fourth Righteous Khalif!!!!!!??????

The reply is sent in response to your false interpenetration:

1. Nehjul balagha is the book of collection of sermons and Letter collected by Sayyid al-Razi (420 A.H.) and compiled in the book titled Nahjul-Balagha that were present in sunni sources. This book does provide the historical background by sermons & letters and views of Imam Ali a,s on some pertinent matters during his life and the period of his caliphate (apparently as 4th caliph). This does not form the book of the principles and Usul of Shia fiqh as these were established well before the writing of Nahjul balagha. This was written in the mentioned period but the book of Shia fiqh Al-kafi was written earlier during the period of minor occultation (329 A.H).

Thus there are many sermons and letters that seem to be presenting sunni views due to their dominance as they were taken from sunni sources. Thus we need to verify each and every letter & sermon to get their authenticity instead of taking all of the content as authentic unlikely to the sunni who consider all of the written text in Sahih as authentic by them.. Even Shia do not take their 4 major books as 100 % authentic but our scholars verify each and every hadith and these collection even provide an important background of incidents happened in history but it does not form a basis of shia fiqh.

This is misconception spreaded by sunni just to try get some false assistance for their concept of man made caliphate which is absent in the quran.

2:  Sermon 127 describes the background on particular event of battle of Nehrawan where khawarij were in minority and they were determined to fight with army of Imam Ali (عليه السلام). Imam Ali (عليه السلام) asked them to join those who gave him bayah and they were in large numbers no one denies but this statement cannot be generalize for muslim ummah as this is against the verses of quran when evaluated with the verses of quran. Like:

The Quran mentions the principles in its verse that the Believers are in Small number and it does not favour the majority to be followed. The following verse makes obvious this fact.

 حَتَّىٰ إِذَا جَاءَ أَمْرُنَا وَفَارَ التَّنُّورُ قُلْنَا احْمِلْ فِيهَا مِن كُلٍّ زَوْجَيْنِ اثْنَيْنِ وَأَهْلَكَ إِلَّا مَن سَبَقَ عَلَيْهِ الْقَوْلُ وَمَنْ آمَنَ ۚ وَمَا آمَنَ مَعَهُ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ

Until when Our command came and water came forth from the valley, We said: Carry in it two of all things, a pair, and your own family-- except those against whom the word has already gone forth, and those who believe. And there believed not with him but a few. (11:40)

أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الْمَلَإِ مِن بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ مِن بَعْدِ مُوسَىٰ إِذْ قَالُوا لِنَبِيٍّ لَّهُمُ ابْعَثْ لَنَا مَلِكًا نُّقَاتِلْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ ۖ قَالَ هَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِن كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْقِتَالُ أَلَّا تُقَاتِلُوا ۖ قَالُوا وَمَا لَنَا أَلَّا نُقَاتِلَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَقَدْ أُخْرِجْنَا مِن دِيَارِنَا وَأَبْنَائِنَا ۖ فَلَمَّا كُتِبَ عَلَيْهِمُ الْقِتَالُ تَوَلَّوْا إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّنْهُمْ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ بِالظَّالِمِينَ

Have you not considered the chiefs of the children of Israel after Musa, when they said to a prophet of theirs: Raise up for us a king, (that) we may fight in the way of Allah. He said: May it not be that you would not fight if fighting is ordained for you? They said: And what reason have we that we should not fight in the way of Allah, and we have indeed been compelled to abandon our homes and our children. But when fighting was ordained for them, they turned back, except a few of them, and Allah knows the unjust. (2:246)

وَقَالَ لَهُمْ نَبِيُّهُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ بَعَثَ لَكُمْ طَالُوتَ مَلِكًا ۚ قَالُوا أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُ الْمُلْكُ عَلَيْنَا وَنَحْنُ أَحَقُّ بِالْمُلْكِ مِنْهُ وَلَمْ يُؤْتَ سَعَةً مِّنَ الْمَالِ ۚ قَالَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ اصْطَفَاهُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَزَادَهُ بَسْطَةً فِي الْعِلْمِ وَالْجِسْمِ ۖ وَاللَّهُ يُؤْتِي مُلْكَهُ مَن يَشَاءُ ۚ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ

And their prophet said to them: Surely Allah has raised Talut to be a king over you. They said: How can he hold kingship over us while we have a greater right to kingship than he, and he has not been granted an abundance of wealth? He said: Surely Allah has chosen him in preference to you, and He has increased him abundantly in knowledge and physique, and Allah grants His kingdom to whom He pleases, and Allah is Amplegiving, Knowing. (2:247)

وَإِن تُطِعْ أَكْثَرَ مَن فِي الْأَرْضِ يُضِلُّوكَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ ۚ إِن يَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا الظَّنَّ وَإِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا يَخْرُصُونَ

 And if you obey most of those in the earth (majority), they will lead you astray from Allah's way; they follow but conjecture and they only lie. (6:116)

Many verses can be found in Quran condemning the majority.

3. The sunni takes their favorite term of Jamah (جماعۃ) as describe the sermon (127) for majority.  Imam Ali peace be upon him gave us a thorough definition for the term Jammah. Al Mutaqi Al Hindi, a prominent Sunni scholar, )in Kanzu Al Umal vol 16 page 184( said that Imam Ali peace be upon him was asked:

“Who are the people of Jama’a (congregation, flock or assembly)? Who are the people of disunity and dissension? Who are the people of Sunna (traditions of the prophet)? And who are the people of innovation”?

Imam Ali peace be upon him replied: “Now that you asked, do store in your mind what I advise you! You must not ask anyone else after I inform you! As for the people of Jama’a (congregation or assembly), they include me and whoever follows me despite their little number (Our Path). That has been confirmed as the Truth by Allah’s command and his prophet peace be upon him and his family. As for the people of disunity and religious nonconformity, they include all those who oppose me and my followers despite their large numbers. (Your Sect) As for the people of Sunna ( traditions and practices of the prophet peace be upon him and his family), they include those who strictly abide by those traditions and practices despite their little numbers. And as for the people of innovation, they include all those who opposed Allah’s commands, contested the Quran, went up against the prophet peace be upon him and his family and observed their self made decisions and choices despite their huge numbers. The early flock had gone past. Many more flocks are yet to follow. I ask Allah to uproot those deviators from the face of Earth!”

 Also Imam Ali mentions in Sermon no. 200: Nehjul Balagha:

 One should not be afraid of the scarcity of those who tread on the right path

 O' people, do not wonder at the small number of those who follow the right path, because people throng only round the table (of this world) whose edibles are few but whose hunger is insatiable.

Thus our stance is clear inline with the verses of quran and sayings of Imam Ali .(عليه السلام). That rejects clearly sunni view that they falsely and allegedly misquote to save their concept of manmade caliphate that does not exist in quran.

4.   The population of Christians combined with the hidus in the world is more than the Muslims do you agree that they are on the right path because they are in majority?

 

People of Jamaa-1.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Debate follower

 

Salam.

I actually really love that you ignored the point that I made. Clearly Nahj al-Balagha was not written for authenticity and what I quoted from Qabasat Ilm al-Rijal proves this. 

What I wanted to show is that just because it's in Nahj al-Balagha doesn't mean it's hujjah, bring the original source when you want to quote it.

Since you do seem very confident and happy that you quoted a Khutbah fabricated by a Zindeeq/Heretic (Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi), so give yourself a pat on the back. 

الحمد لله رب العالمين

وصل الله على محمد وآل محمد 

 Wa Salamu Alykum wa Rahmat Allah

Edited by Ansar Shiat Ali
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

×
×
  • Create New...