Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Ghadeer khum, clear proof of appointment?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Moderators
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

Abu Bakr – ‘Amr b. Sa’d Abu Dawud al-Hafri – Sharik – al-Rakin – al-Qasim b. Hisan – Zayd b. Thabit:

The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said, “I AM LEAVING BEHIND AMONG YOU the two khalifahs after me: the Book of Allah and my bloodline, my Ahl al-Bayt. Both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Font.”

Allamah al-Albani declare

It is a sahih hadith.

https://www.al-islam.org/khilafah-ali-over-abu-bakr-toyib-olawuyi/preface

Hadith

The verse

"Verily Allah intends to ... (33:33)"

was revealed to the Prophet (S) in the house of Umm Salama. Upon that, the Prophet gathered Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, and covered them with a cloak, and he also covered ‘Ali who was behind him. Then the Prophet said: "O’ Allah! These are the Members of my House (Ahlul-Bayt). Keep them away from every impurity and purify them with a perfect purification.”Umm Salama (the wife of Prophet) asked: "Am I also included among them O Apostle of Allah?”the Prophet replied: "You remain in your position and you are toward a good ending."

Sunni reference: Sahih al-Tirmidhi, v5, pp 351,663

What you say now?

 

 

Albani not hujjah upon him.

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
9 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Post the arguements here. I don't have time to go to each websites and refute hundred of mistakes there. I am a human after all.

I am sorry brother but I have stopped debating for the sake of debating many years ago. There is no point in debating, when the person is not trying to understand or learn, but just refute. If you want to someday read and learn why Shia's believe what they believe, and why is it that they uphold views that directly match from the books of our brothers in the Sunni school of thought, then those books and research will always be there for you or anyone else to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Ethics said:

I am sorry brother but I have stopped debating for the sake of debating many years ago. There is no point in debating, when the person is not trying to understand or learn, but just refute. If you want to someday read and learn why Shia's believe what they believe, and why is it that they uphold views that directly match from the books of our brothers in the Sunni school of thought, then those books and research will always be there for you or anyone else to read.

I agree, this is my final post in this thread.

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/7/2022 at 7:47 PM, sunni muslim said:

Quote the refutations here. 

Salam un aliakum.

Sure lets discuss hadeeth of ghadeer e khum here and its context mentioned by Ahl-Sunnah.

You claimed Ali (عليه السلام) had s*x with a slave girl, you should quote complete hadith for that. I've read some say this also some say Ali (عليه السلام) forbade the army to take anything from the loot on which army got angry over Ali (عليه السلام).

Please go ahead and quote the hadeeths

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/7/2022 at 1:07 PM, sunni muslim said:

And second of all the verse did revealed for Ali but the verse is general which includes all believers. Since the verse is in plural. 

Do you know that plurals are used sometimes out of respect?

Like Quran ayat e Mubahila:

فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنْفُسَنَا وَأَنْفُسَكُمْ

Here أنفسنا نساءنا are plurals but misdaq of Anfusana is only Single person Ali (عليه السلام) and Misdaq of nisa'ana is only single lady Fatimah (عليه السلام).

وَلَمَّا نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الآيَةُ ‏{‏ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ‏}‏ دَعَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَلِيًّا وَفَاطِمَةَ وَحَسَنًا وَحُسَيْنًا فَقَالَ ‏"‏ اللَّهُمَّ هَؤُلاَءِ أَهْلِي

Sad Bin Abi Waqqas said:

when the (following) verse was revealed: "Let us summon our children and your children." Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) called 'Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain and said: O Allah, they are my family.

Ref: Sahih Muslim

كتاب فضائل الصحابة رضى الله تعالى عنهم

The Book of the Merits of the companions

Also there are many more examples in Quran but i don't remember them now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/8/2022 at 5:43 PM, sunni muslim said:

Hadith is fabricated. Scholars don't rely on him in authentication of Hadith. 

While you are saying this, but here is what al-Hakim thinks;

أوحى الله إليَّ في علي ثلاثا: إنه سيد المؤمنين وإمام المتقين وقائد الغر المحجلين". قال الحافظ: قال الحاكم في المناقب: صحيح الإسناد

And do you know there is a difference of opinion between your scholars on Ali bin Zaid bin Jad'aan. Here is what your rijal books said about him:

وقال الترمذي: صدوق، وكان ابن عيينة يلينه

وقال الترمذي: صدوق إلا أنه ربما رفع الشئ الذي يرفعه غيره

قال أبو زرعة الرازي وأبو حاتم الرازي: ليس بقوي

وقال أحمد بن حنبل: ضعيف،

وقال ابن خزيمة: لا أحتج به لسوء حفظه

Even if he is da'eef, do your scholars completely reject those ahadith which are da'eef? Here is the question and its answer:

هل يجوز للعالم أن يفتي ويستدل بالأحاديث الضعيفة؟

نعم، يجوز للعالم أن يفتي بالأدلة الشرعية، وإذا استشهد بالأحاديث الضعيفة التي تعددت طرقها

So We too are taking the "istidlaal" from these ahadith even if these ahadith are weak as per your standards.

On 8/8/2022 at 5:43 PM, sunni muslim said:

please provide the chain from ibn asakir

أخبرنا أبو المحاسن عبد الرزاق بن محمد في كتابه، أنبأنا أبو بكر عبد الغفار بن محمد الشيروي، قال: أنبأنا أبو بكر أحمد بن الحسن الحيري، أنبأنا أبو العباس الأصم، أنبأنا عبد الله بن أحمد بن محمد بن مستورد، أنبأنا يوسف بن كليب المسعودي، أنبأنا يحيى بن سلام، عن صباح، عن العلاء بن المسيب، عن أبي داوود، عن بريدة الأسلمي، قال: أمرنا رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) أن نسلم على علي بإمرة المؤمنين

Here is another:

ابن مردويه، عن سالم مولى حذيفة بن اليمان، قال: أمرنا النبي (صلى الله عليه وسلم) أن نسلم على علي بن أبي طالب ب‍ " يا أمير المؤمنين ورحمة الله وبركاته ".

Yet another:

ابن مردويه، حدثنا محمد بن المظفر بن موسى، قال: حدثنا محمد بن الحسين بن حفص الخثعمي، قال: حدثنا إسماعيل بن إسحاق الراشدي، قال: حدثنا يحيى بن سالم، قال: حدثنا صباح المزني، عن العلاء بن المسيب، عن أبي داوود، عن بريدة، قال: أمرنا رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) أن نسلم على علي (عليه السلام) بأمير المؤمنين

22 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Weak Hadith. Weak Hadith are not hujjah in aqeedah. 

رحم الله عليا، اللهم أدر الحق معه حيث دار". رواه الحاكم وقال: صحيح على شرط الشيخين

It is neither hujjah on us to accept any of your hadith. As for the Imamate/caliphate of Ali (عليه السلام), we have clear proofs with us from Quran & from our hadith books. That is sufficient for us.

Yet we see your hadith books and find that every hadith mentioning the merit of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was declared weak including "ana madinatul ilm wa Aliyyun baboha". It is further ridiculous that on one hand you deem even this hadith weak yet your champions have fabricated ahadith on the same pattern declaring Abu Bakr as roof of madinatul ilm, Umar as it windows etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
21 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

1) Even if we consider it as master it still doesn't explain the fact that it is vague even according topmost shia scholars.

2) It is so vague that none of the companions who were born arabs didn't understood the  'clear unambigious' proof and unknowingly transmitted it among the masses like it is some kind of a virtue while in actuality it was supposed to be his appointment. The reason they never understood is that no one appoint their successor using such a vague wording. Had the prophet used the clear cut simple wording like 'ali is my successor' then we wouldn't be having this debate in the first place.

3. Imagine debating over a hadith like ' ali is my successor' and arguing that it does not mean appointment. It would be impossible to interpret in any other way. And you wouldn't be even need to write lengthy articles, recording hours of video to prove that. People make their successor simply by saying so and so is my successor. Prophet using such a vague wording that his own companions never understood it is also ridiculous and an attack towards him. 

1. If you misunderstood any shia scholar's statement, cherry pick one sentence and ignore his 4 volumes of book, containing many arguments for proving Ali (عليه السلام) as true successor of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), it is not our fault.  

2. Quran has recorded the level of understanding of these Arabs, there is a phrase in chapter 47 ماذا قال أنفا is preserved there. 

وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ يَسْتَمِعُ إِلَيْكَ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا خَرَجُوا مِنْ عِنْدِكَ قَالُوا لِلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْعِلْمَ مَاذَا قَالَ آنِفًا ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ طَبَعَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَاتَّبَعُوا أَهْوَاءَهُمْ

47:16] And among them are men who listen to thee, but in the end, when they go out from thee, they say to those who have received Knowledge, "What is it he said just then?" Such are men whose hearts Allah has sealed, and who follow their own lusts.

3. Interestingly, your scholars have found a way out. Reject the key narrations mentioning the appointment as either fabrication or as weak and then twist the meanings of words. Unfortunately, this practice is not limited to ahadith, some of your scholars even dare to twist the meanings of verses of Quran. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
22 hours ago, Traveller_ said:

"من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه وانصر من نصره واخذل من خذله وأدر الحق معه كيف ما دار"
'Whoever follows me must follow him [Ali] oh god be guardian over those who follow him, be an enemy to those who take him [Ali] as an enemy, aid those who aid him, hinder those who hinder him and let justice commence wherever he commences'

This sentence made me contemplate much about Ali ((عليه السلام)) and his status even though I was never raised as a Shia. 
I don't see how anyone could read it and not be convinced of Ali ((عليه السلام)) 's status and significance; for the prophet has honoured him and only him with such words.  

Give the reference and chain of narrations. 

 

22 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

Why in the world Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) need to tell the prophet "convey what is revealed to you" and "If you do not do so" if he don't care about others. It is more logical that he had an concern about this issue but Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) calmed him down and commanded that no matter what you need to convey it and so did he do so.

For whatever it is revealed. We are sure that prophet was not afraid of them apostasizing. 

 

22 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

Here we go again Sunni narrative based on Sunni mindset with Sunni history. In Shia Narrative and Hadiths, The Ghadeer was an appointment. The Shia narrative also say that many of them apostated and that Abu Bakr and Umar were hypocrisy, so do you think a hypocrisy man will narrate this narration in Saqifah

And those 'apostates' later transmitted that same Hadith to the mass. Nice joke. 

 

22 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

If you want to not be biased, then do not quote Sunni or Shia narrative but focus on the context of hadith itself

Indeed. Anyone who read that Hadith without any shia narrative cannot see how that's an appointment. 

 

22 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

Is the narration weak and fabrication? Is the narration of "‘Alī is more deserving to be a ruler than him" weak and fabricated? 

Provide the chain. I can be 99 percent sure it is weak and fabricated. Even though ali is more deserving of caliphate than any one in his time, that doesn't mean we use weak and fabricated Hadith. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Salam un aliakum.

Sure lets discuss hadeeth of ghadeer e khum here and its context mentioned by Ahl-Sunnah.

You claimed Ali (عليه السلام) had s*x with a slave girl, you should quote complete hadith for that. I've read some say this also some say Ali (عليه السلام) forbade the army to take anything from the loot on which army got angry over Ali (عليه السلام).

Please go ahead and quote the hadeeths

The topic of debate is whether ghadeer is vague or not. Not why the ghadeer happens. So, answer my arguments as to why it is vague. 

 

4 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Do you know that plurals are used sometimes out of respect?

Like Quran ayat e Mubahila:

فَمَنْ حَاجَّكَ فِيهِ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَنِسَاءَنَا وَنِسَاءَكُمْ وَأَنْفُسَنَا وَأَنْفُسَكُمْ

Here أنفسنا نساءنا are plurals but misdaq of Anfusana is only Single person Ali (عليه السلام) and Misdaq of nisa'ana is only single lady Fatimah (عليه السلام).

وَلَمَّا نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الآيَةُ ‏{‏ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا نَدْعُ أَبْنَاءَنَا وَأَبْنَاءَكُمْ‏}‏ دَعَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم عَلِيًّا وَفَاطِمَةَ وَحَسَنًا وَحُسَيْنًا فَقَالَ ‏"‏ اللَّهُمَّ هَؤُلاَءِ أَهْلِي

Sad Bin Abi Waqqas said:

when the (following) verse was revealed: "Let us summon our children and your children." Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) called 'Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain and said: O Allah, they are my family.

Ref: Sahih Muslim

كتاب فضائل الصحابة رضى الله تعالى عنهم

The Book of the Merits of the companions

Also there are many more examples in Quran but i don't remember them now.

Completely irrelevant. What I'm saying is that the verse is indeed revealed for ali but the meaning is general to all believers. 

 

2 hours ago, Cool said:

While you are saying this, but here is what al-Hakim thinks;

أوحى الله إليَّ في علي ثلاثا: إنه سيد المؤمنين وإمام المتقين وقائد الغر المحجلين". قال الحافظ: قال الحاكم في المناقب: صحيح الإسناد

 

You didn't understand what I'm saying. Hakim is lenient in hadith. That's why many of the time, he authenticates weak and fabricated reports and one can see that in his mustadrak. 

 

2 hours ago, Cool said:

do you know there is a difference of opinion between your scholars on Ali bin Zaid bin Jad'aan. Here is what your rijal books said about him:

وقال الترمذي: صدوق، وكان ابن عيينة يلينه

وقال الترمذي: صدوق إلا أنه ربما رفع الشئ الذي يرفعه غيره

قال أبو زرعة الرازي وأبو حاتم الرازي: ليس بقوي

وقال أحمد بن حنبل: ضعيف،

وقال ابن خزيمة: لا أحتج به لسوء حفظه

Do you even know what you're quoting? Ibn uyayna says that he is layyin. Layyin is used by scholars to weaken a narrator. Abu zuraa and abu hatim says he is not strong. Ibn hanbal says he is weak. Ibn khuzaymah says he do not use his hadeeth as evidence because of his poor memorization. So first, learn about what you're quoting. 

 

2 hours ago, Cool said:

Even if he is da'eef, do your scholars completely reject those ahadith which are da'eef? Here is the question and its answer

They use weak hadith in fiqh not in aqeedah. Even you don't use solitary narrations in aqeedah. 

 

2 hours ago, Cool said:
On 8/8/2022 at 6:13 PM, sunni muslim said:

 

أخبرنا أبو المحاسن عبد الرزاق بن محمد في كتابه، أنبأنا أبو بكر عبد الغفار بن محمد الشيروي، قال: أنبأنا أبو بكر أحمد بن الحسن الحيري، أنبأنا أبو العباس الأصم، أنبأنا عبد الله بن أحمد بن محمد بن مستورد، أنبأنا يوسف بن كليب المسعودي، أنبأنا يحيى بن سلام، عن صباح، عن العلاء بن المسيب، عن أبي داوود، عن بريدة الأسلمي، قال: أمرنا رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) أن نسلم على علي بإمرة المؤمنين

Chain is extremely weak. 

أبو المحاسن عبد الرزاق بن محمد  majhool ul haal. We don't have any information regarding this guy nor do we have clear tawtheeq. 

عبد الله بن أحمد بن محمد بن مستورد majhool ul haal. 

يوسف بن كليب المسعودي he is also majhool ul haal. 

صباح المزني he is matrook ul hadith. 

 

الذهبي : متروك بل متهم

محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري : فيه نظر

3 hours ago, Cool said:

 

ابن مردويه، عن سالم مولى حذيفة بن اليمان، قال: أمرنا النبي (صلى الله عليه وسلم) أن نسلم على علي بن أبي طالب ب‍ " يا أمير المؤمنين ورحمة الله وبركاته

this chain is also same

There is disconnection between ibn marduwayh and salem moula hudhayfah bin yaman. 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

 

ابن مردويه، حدثنا محمد بن المظفر بن موسى، قال: حدثنا محمد بن الحسين بن حفص الخثعمي، قال: حدثنا إسماعيل بن إسحاق الراشدي، قال: حدثنا يحيى بن سالم، قال: حدثنا صباح المزني، عن العلاء بن المسيب، عن أبي داوود، عن بريدة، قال: أمرنا رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) أن نسلم على علي (عليه السلام) بأمير المؤمنين

This chain includes the same sabah muzani who is matrook. Ismail bin ishaq al rashidi is majhool ul haal. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

Yet we see your hadith books and find that every hadith mentioning the merit of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) was declared weak including "ana madinatul ilm wa Aliyyun baboha". It is further ridiculous that on one hand you deem even this hadith weak yet your champions have fabricated ahadith on the same pattern declaring Abu Bakr as roof of madinatul ilm, Umar as it windows etc. 

That's false. Sunnis don't weaken every report which contains merit of ali. And hadith about abu bakr as roofs is fabricated and chainless. Daylami related that in his musnad without any chain. 

 

2 hours ago, Cool said:

If you misunderstood any shia scholar's statement, cherry pick one sentence and ignore his 4 volumes of book, containing many arguments for proving Ali (عليه السلام) as true successor of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), it is not our fault.  

By that logic you shouldn't use any sunni books against sunnis since those books contain virtues of abu bakr and umar also.  First learn the principles of debate and then come here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
28 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

Hakim is lenient in hadith.

Your scholars must have raised their eyebrows, how can he authenticate these sort of reports which can be referred against your creed. Therefore declare him lenient.

28 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

Do you even know what you're quoting?

Yes, I know and you should also know what you have done:

28 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

Layyin is used by scholars to weaken a narrator. Abu zuraa and abu hatim says he is not strong. Ibn hanbal says he is weak. Ibn khuzaymah says he do not use his hadeeth as evidence because of his poor memorization

And you forgot to mention Tirmizi. Apart from that, for someone he is كَانَ شيخا جليلا. وكان يهم في الاخبار، and then he suddenly weakens him. For someone since he is rafidhi therefore not worthy for taking akhbar from him. He was not a rafidhi from the beginning, so not all reports which he has narrated could be weak.

37 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

They use weak hadith in fiqh not in aqeedah

Point is that you do use weak ahadith. Point is you do use weak ahadith for "istidlaal". 

40 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

That's false. Sunnis don't weaken every report which contains merit of ali.

Today I have seen about 300 ahadith declared as either fabricated or weak. Most of them were those which mentions the status of Ali (عليه السلام) and often quoted by Barelwi as well as Sufi branch of Sunni's.

42 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

By that logic you shouldn't use any sunni books against sunnis since those books contain virtues of abu bakr and umar also. 

I have just quoted from the book you have referred in OP. To refute your statement and to highlight your intellectual dishonesty as you have quoted a sentence out of 4 volume book containing nothing but evidence for the Imamate of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) 

Anyway, as I already pointed you out that this discussions would be a waste of time. Your objective of this thread has been already punctured by quoting you the clear ahadith from your own books. If you need ahadith from shi'i books, let me know and I quote you as many as I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Cool said:

Your scholars must have raised their eyebrows, how can he authenticate these sort of reports which can be referred against your creed. Therefore declare him lenient

Nope. They declared him lenient as he used to authenticate narrations narrated by narrators who were declare weak and fabricators by scholars who were way earlier than him. 

 

52 minutes ago, Cool said:

And you forgot to mention Tirmizi. Apart from that, for someone he is كَانَ شيخا جليلا. وكان يهم في الاخبار، and then he suddenly weakens him. For someone since he is rafidhi therefore not worthy for taking akhbar from him. He was not a rafidhi from the beginning, so not all reports which he has narrated could be weak.

Tirmizi tawtheeq is against the majority. He was alone in making tawtheeq of him

 

52 minutes ago, Cool said:

Point is that you do use weak ahadith. Point is you do use weak ahadith for "istidlaal

Point is that they did istidlaal in fiqh not aqeedah. I can quote you narrations in your collections which are against your aqeedah. May be we should also do istidlaal then. Weak narrations are not relied in creedal points. 

 

52 minutes ago, Cool said:

Today I have seen about 300 ahadith declared as either fabricated or weak. Most of them were those which mentions the status of Ali (عليه السلام) and often quoted by Barelwi as well as Sufi branch of Sunni's

Those 300 narrations were weak and fabricated. Sunnis weaken narrations in praise of abu bakr and umar all the time. 

 

52 minutes ago, Cool said:

I have just quoted from the book you have referred in OP. To refute your statement and to highlight your intellectual dishonesty as you have quoted a sentence out of 4 volume book containing nothing but evidence for the Imamate of Imam Ali (عليه السلام)

My OP was to claim that the hadeeth was vague and not a clear proof. And I quoted that sentence. What you quoted in reply of me was those scholars using different ahadith to prove Ali's appointment which was irrelevant to discussions. By that logic you should not quote bukhari to prove fatima was angry on abu bakr because that book contains virtues of abu bakr. When we quote a sentence from your book that doesn't mean that we consider your book as authentic. 

  •  
Edited by sunni muslim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Nope. They declared him lenient as he used to authenticate narrations narrated by narrators who were declare weak and fabricators

As it is proved that the narrator under discussion was mentioned as "Saduq" by one of your Imam, Imam Tirmzii (279 AH). Hakim existed till 394 AH. So by this standard you should call Imam Tirmizi lenient too.

6 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Tirmizi tawtheeq is against the majority. He was alone in making tawtheeq of him

Tirmizi tawtheeq means there is a difference of opinion exist among your scholars about the narrator. Tirmizi made the tawtheeq even after Imam Bukhari statement. Apart from Tirmizi, there are at least two more scholars who consider him reliable until he became rafidhi.

6 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Tirmizi tawtheeq is against the majority. He was alone in making tawtheeq of him

That doen't hurt me. Point is that there is a difference of opinion among your scholars about Ali bin Zaid.

6 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Point is that they did istidlaal in fiqh not aqeedah

Point is that whether the appointment of "Ulil Amr" is a matter of fiqh or it is a matter of aqeedah in your creed? 

7 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Those 300 narrations were weak and fabricated.

Again, there is a difference of opinion among your scholars. That's why you have so many branches. Every Sunni is not agreed with Ibn Taymiyyah & his likes.

7 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

My OP was to claim that the hadeeth was vague and not a clear proof. And I quoted that sentence. What you quoted in reply of me was those scholars using different ahadith to prove Ali's appointment which was irrelevant to discussions.

For us, it is a clear proof. Quran testify it, ahadith of our Imams testify the appointment. 

فَإِذَا فَرَغْتَ فَانْصَبْ {7}

[Shakir 94:7] So when you are free, nominate.

And like "mowla", your creed just twist the meaning of فَانْصَبْ. 

إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ {55}

[Shakir 5:55] Only Allah is your Vali and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow.
The event of giving zakah in ruku is a problem for your creed because it mentions Ali (عليه السلام) as wali of believers.

I can present much more from Quran. Islam is a perfect religion which do not hesitate to state the minutest things even like what to say when entering into toilet or doing istinja. So it is illogical to say that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) & His Apostle (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) forget to (na'udobillah) mention the Islamic governance system or have deemed that issue unimportant which is deemed important by the companions at saqifah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 8/5/2022 at 10:57 AM, sunni muslim said:

I invite shias to prove how ghadeer khum is a clear appointment of sayyiduna ali. 

In the absence of you providing any acceptable criteria, I would like to state that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) is proof of his appointment for caliph regardless of whether Ghadeer happened or not.

BTW, did the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) name any successor? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 8/5/2022 at 8:57 PM, sunni muslim said:

I invite shias to prove how ghadeer khum is a clear appointment of sayyiduna ali. 

فَإِذَا فَرَغْتَ فَانْصَبْ {7}


[Shakir 94:7] So when you are free, nominate.

While the word فَانْصَبْ clearly means to fix or to nominate but the brothers of ahlul sunnah twist its meaning.

I would like to further elaborate the verses of this chapter. The 2nd verse of this chapter mentions:

وَوَضَعْنَا عَنْكَ وِزْرَكَ {2}


[Shakir 94:2] And taken off from you your burden,

Here the word وِزْرَكَ came from the root و ز ر، one of the word came into being from this root is وزير i.e., the one who shares burden. This is used in the dua of Prophet Musa (عليه السلام):

وَاجْعَلْ لِي وَزِيرًا مِنْ أَهْلِي {29}


[Shakir 20:29] And give to me an aider from my family:

هَارُونَ أَخِي {30}


[Shakir 20:30] Haroun, my brother,

اشْدُدْ بِهِ أَزْرِي {31}


[Shakir 20:31] Strengthen my back by him,

وَأَشْرِكْهُ فِي أَمْرِي {32}


[Shakir 20:32] And associate him (with me) in my affair,

The verse 31 is further matching with what was said in verse 3 of chapter 94

الَّذِي أَنْقَضَ ظَهْرَكَ {3}


[Shakir 94:3] Which pressed heavily upon your back

The heavy burden upon Prophet's back could only be shared by a wazir (the one who shares the burden) and the one who is associated in the "amr" given to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

Hence Prophet's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) saying in the day of Ghadir "man kunto mowla fahatha Aliyyun mowla" is a statement which not only mentions the nomination clearly but also making Ali (عليه السلام) as associate of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in his amr. And there are many narrations which can be included to see this fact.

And the verses of chapter 94 are referring to Ali bin Abi Talib (عليه السلام), hadith e mazilah is another example where Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) pointed towards these facts. Some one would say that since Haroon (عليه السلام) died in the life time of Musa (عليه السلام) therefore the manzilah doesn't prove appointment. Well it does prove the appointment in light of chapter 94. Where Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentioned that he has strengthened the Prophet's back by granting him a wazir hence taken off some of the burden of his duties.

وَوَضَعْنَا عَنْكَ وِزْرَكَ {2}


[Shakir 94:2] And taken off from you your burden,

And have commanded him to officially nominate Ali (عليه السلام) as his successor. Which Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did at Ghadir by asking the companions "الست اولى بالمومنين من انفسهم".  The reply of companions was in affirmation. The question of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was like Allah's asking "الست بربكم".

Then Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) further elaborate "whomsoever I am his master" which means his mastership in terms of Ulil Amr, his mastership in terms of Wali, his mastership in terms of unconditional obedience to him etc. And then said "this Ali is his Master". All the terms of mastership of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are included here. That is so clear that only the people who either do not use their intellect, can reject it and the ones who didn't like this nomination, rejects it out of takabbur.

The history of Prophet's life just before he was about to depart from this world, are sufficient to note that their do have issues among the companions. People have misinterpreted the statement of ghadir, twisted the meaning of Prophet's saying. Hence we see when the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) fell seriously ill, he asked for a paper & pen, so that he may permanently fix those issues & doubts created by some close companions among general public. Surprisingly, he was denied, paper and pen was not given to him.

Apart from that, many of the close companions started disobeying Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). We see companions violating clear command of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to go with Jesh e Osama but initially they objected on Osama bin Zaid's selection as a leader of Jesh e Osama then showed hesitence to go with it. And when Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) became angry on them, they went and stayed on the outskirts of Madina.

Everything is there in Islamic history,  well preserved. I don't really feel the need to quote every event. Just mentioned a few points to show what was the situation at the end of the Prophet's life. The truth seeker, one who has the ability to make a use of his intellect, can get to the truth.

Wassalam!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Cool said:

As it is proved that the narrator under discussion was mentioned as "Saduq" by one of your Imam, Imam Tirmzii (279 AH). Hakim existed till 394 AH. So by this standard you should call Imam Tirmizi lenient too.

Indeed. Tirmizi is lenient too. Few other scholars were regarded lenient by the hadith scholars. Like ibn hibban, diyauddin maqdisi, al ijli etc. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

That doen't hurt me. Point is that there is a difference of opinion among your scholars about Ali bin Zaid

Doesn't matter. In ilm ul rijal, when majority says so and so guy is weak, then the minority opinion is rejected until and unless those who made tausheeq provide a explained tadeel. And vice versa. Ali bin zaid is weakened by more than 12 scholars, and tirmizi making tautheeq of him is rejected since it goes against majority. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

Point is that whether the appointment of "Ulil Amr" is a matter of fiqh or it is a matter of aqeedah in your creed?

Point is who is the caliph of messenger of Allah is a matter of creed. Sunni believe that he is abu bakr, you believe it is ali. Don't make me waste my time in explaining you these basic things. Who is ulil amr after prophet is a matter of creed not fiqh. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

Again, there is a difference of opinion among your scholars. That's why you have so many branches. Every Sunni is not agreed with Ibn Taymiyyah & his likes

That's true. But there are ahadith you quote in which there is a consensus that it is fabricated like the hadith that every prophet needs to first accept the wilayah of ali and every prophet is sent to preach his wilayah. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

For us, it is a clear proof.

And for us, and everyone who reads that hadith on his own without shia interrupting him, it is vague. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

Shakir 5:55] Only Allah is your Vali and His Messenger and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor-rate while they bow.
The event of giving zakah in ruku is a problem for your creed because it mentions Ali (عليه السلام) as wali of believers.

It is not. Wali here cannot mean leader, since the leader was prophet. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

So it is illogical to say that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) & His Apostle (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) forget to (na'udobillah) mention the Islamic governance system or have deemed that issue unimportant which is deemed important by the companions at saqifah. 

It is more illogical to say that the prophet mention the Islamic governance in such a vague manner that his own companions never understood it that way, unknowingly put another guy in power, and later transmit the 'clear' proof of Ali's appointment to people thinking it's some kind of a merit. 

 

28 minutes ago, Cool said:

فَإِذَا فَرَغْتَ فَانْصَبْ {7}


[Shakir 94:7] So when you are free, nominate.

While the word فَانْصَبْ clearly means to fix or to nominate but the brothers of ahlul sunnah twist its meaning.

I would like to further elaborate the verses of this chapter. The 2nd verse of this chapter mentions:

وَوَضَعْنَا عَنْكَ وِزْرَكَ {2}


[Shakir 94:2] And taken off from you your burden,

Here the word وِزْرَكَ came from the root و ز ر، one of the word came into being from this root is وزير i.e., the one who shares burden. This is used in the dua of Prophet Musa (عليه السلام):

وَاجْعَلْ لِي وَزِيرًا مِنْ أَهْلِي {29}


[Shakir 20:29] And give to me an aider from my family:

هَارُونَ أَخِي {30}


[Shakir 20:30] Haroun, my brother,

اشْدُدْ بِهِ أَزْرِي {31}


[Shakir 20:31] Strengthen my back by him,

وَأَشْرِكْهُ فِي أَمْرِي {32}


[Shakir 20:32] And associate him (with me) in my affair,

The verse 31 is further matching with what was said in verse 3 of chapter 94

الَّذِي أَنْقَضَ ظَهْرَكَ {3}


[Shakir 94:3] Which pressed heavily upon your back

The heavy burden upon Prophet's back could only be shared by a wazir (the one who shares the burden) and the one who is associated in the "amr" given to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

Hence Prophet's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) saying in the day of Ghadir "man kunto mowla fahatha Aliyyun mowla" is a statement which not only mentions the nomination clearly but also making Ali (عليه السلام) as associate of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in his amr. And there are many narrations which can be included to see this fact.

And the verses of chapter 94 are referring to Ali bin Abi Talib (عليه السلام), hadith e mazilah is another example where Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) pointed towards these facts. Some one would say that since Haroon (عليه السلام) died in the life time of Musa (عليه السلام) therefore the manzilah doesn't prove appointment. Well it does prove the appointment in light of chapter 94. Where Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentioned that he has strengthened the Prophet's back by granting him a wazir hence taken off some of the burden of his duties.

وَوَضَعْنَا عَنْكَ وِزْرَكَ {2}


[Shakir 94:2] And taken off from you your burden,

And have commanded him to officially nominate Ali (عليه السلام) as his successor. Which Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did at Ghadir by asking the companions "الست اولى بالمومنين من انفسهم".  The reply of companions was in affirmation. The question of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was like Allah's asking "الست بربكم".

Then Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) further elaborate "whomsoever I am his master" which means his mastership in terms of Ulil Amr, his mastership in terms of Wali, his mastership in terms of unconditional obedience to him etc. And then said "this Ali is his Master". All the terms of mastership of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are included here. That is so clear that only the people who either do not use their intellect, can reject it and the ones who didn't like this nomination, rejects it out of takabbur.

The history of Prophet's life just before he was about to depart from this world, are sufficient to note that their do have issues among the companions. People have misinterpreted the statement of ghadir, twisted the meaning of Prophet's saying. Hence we see when the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) fell seriously ill, he asked for a paper & pen, so that he may permanently fix those issues & doubts created by some close companions among general public. Surprisingly, he was denied, paper and pen was not given to him.

Apart from that, many of the close companions started disobeying Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). We see companions violating clear command of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to go with Jesh e Osama but initially they objected on Osama bin Zaid's selection as a leader of Jesh e Osama then showed hesitence to go with it. And when Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) became angry on them, they went and stayed on the outskirts of Madina.

Everything is there in Islamic history,  well preserved. I don't really feel the need to quote every event. Just mentioned a few points to show what was the situation at the end of the Prophet's life. The truth seeker, one who has the ability to make a use of his intellect, can get to the truth.

Wassalam!!

The fact that you have to resort to long explainations to prove thai text is a clear is itself a proof that it is not a clear proof and rather vague. Had the prophet clearly said that 'ali is my successor', you wouldn't be giving me long explainations to prove this. Imagine explaining a clear text like ' ali is my successor' and then resort to long explainations to prove that it is clear. Absolutely make no sense. The hadith is completely vague. Noone in this whole world appoint their successor like this. No one says whoever I'm master so snd so is his master. 

And regarding hadith manzila, it is more vague than ghadeer. Imagine a ruler saying to his son, o my so you are to me like haroon is to moosa. Do anyone would even think that this is a 'clear' proof of his appointment. 

 

Edited by sunni muslim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Prophet (P.B.U.H) said: Whoever I am his prophet, Ali is his ruler.

- On the Khilafa of Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS):

Abdullah Ibn Masud narrated: The messenger of Allah (P.B.U.H) ordered me to follow him, on the night of the Jinn. I went with him until we reached the hight of Macca... (the prophet) said: "I was promised that the Jinn and human will believe in me. As to the human they believed in me, as to the Jinn you have seen"; he continued: "I feel that my end is drawing near." I said: O Messenger of Allah, won't you make Abu Bakr as your Caliph? He turned away from me, so I realized that he disagreed; I said: O Messenger of Allah, won't you make Umar as your Caliph? He turned away from me, so I realized that he disagreed; I said: O Messenger of Allah, won't you make Ali as your Caliph? He said: "(That's) him. By the One whom there is no God beside Him, if you chose him and obeyd him He (Allah) entered you into Paradise all together."

Sunni references: - Majma' al-Zawa'id, by al-Haythami, v8, p314 - Also mentioned by al-Tabarani

https://www.erfan.ir/english/90202.html

Key Elements of Imam Ali's (ʿa) Wilāyah in Relation to the Event of Ghadīr Khum from the Perspective of Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi

https://makarem.ir/news/en/News/Details/406390

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Prophet (P.B.U.H) said: Whoever I am his prophet, Ali is his ruler.

- On the Khilafa of Ali ibn Abi Talib (AS):

Abdullah Ibn Masud narrated: The messenger of Allah (P.B.U.H) ordered me to follow him, on the night of the Jinn. I went with him until we reached the hight of Macca... (the prophet) said: "I was promised that the Jinn and human will believe in me. As to the human they believed in me, as to the Jinn you have seen"; he continued: "I feel that my end is drawing near." I said: O Messenger of Allah, won't you make Abu Bakr as your Caliph? He turned away from me, so I realized that he disagreed; I said: O Messenger of Allah, won't you make Umar as your Caliph? He turned away from me, so I realized that he disagreed; I said: O Messenger of Allah, won't you make Ali as your Caliph? He said: "(That's) him. By the One whom there is no God beside Him, if you chose him and obeyd him He (Allah) entered you into Paradise all together."

Sunni references: - Majma' al-Zawa'id, by al-Haythami, v8, p314 - Also mentioned by al-Tabarani

https://www.erfan.ir/english/90202.html

Key Elements of Imam Ali's (ʿa) Wilāyah in Relation to the Event of Ghadīr Khum from the Perspective of Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi

https://makarem.ir/news/en/News/Details/406390

Provide the chain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
13 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

Indeed. Tirmizi is lenient too. Few other scholars were regarded lenient by the hadith scholars. Like ibn hibban, diyauddin maqdisi, al ijli etc. 

 

3 hours ago, Cool said:

That doen't hurt me. Point is that there is a difference of opinion among your scholars about Ali bin Zaid

Doesn't matter. In ilm ul rijal, when majority says so and so guy is weak, then the minority opinion is rejected until and unless those who made tausheeq provide a explained tadeel. And vice versa. Ali bin zaid is weakened by more than 12 scholars, and tirmizi making tautheeq of him is rejected since it goes against majority. 

 

Ghadir Khumm: From Oblivion to Recognition

The event of Ghadir Khumm is a very good example to trace the Sunni bias that found its way into the mental state of Orientalists. Those who are well-versed with the polemic writings of Sunnis know that whenever the Shias present a hadith or a historical evidence in support of their view, a Sunni polemicist would respond in the following manner:

Quote



Firstly, he will outright deny the existence of any such hadith or historical event.
Secondly, when confronted with hard evidence from his own sources, he will cast doubt on the reliability of the transmitters of that hadith or event.
Thirdly, when he is shown that all the transmitters are reliable by Sunni standards, he will give an interpretation to the hadith or the event that will be quite different from that of the Shias.
These three levels form the classical response of the Sunni polemicists in dealing with the arguments of the Shias.

A quotation from Rosenthals translation of Ibn Khalduns The Muqaddimah would suffice to prove my point. (Ibn Khaldun is quoting the following part from al-Milal wa n-Nihal, a heresiographic work of ash-Shahristani.) According to Ibn Khaldun, the Shias believe that
Ali is the one whom Muhammad appointed. The (Shiah) transmit texts (of traditions) in support of (this belief)...The authority on the Sunnah and the transmitters of the religious law do not know these texts. [1] Most of them are supposititious, or [2] some of their transmitters are suspect, or [3] their (true) interpretation is very different from the wicked interpretation that (the Shiah) give to them.[9]

 

Interestingly, the event of Ghadir Khumm has suffered the same fate at the hands of Orientalists.

Quote

With the limited time and resources available to me at this moment, I was surprised to see that most works on Islam have ignored the event of Ghadir Khumm, indicating, by its very absence, that the Orientalists believed this event to be supposititious and an invention of the Shias.
Margoliouths Muhammad and the Rise of Islam (1905), Brockelmanns History of the Islamic People (1939), Arnold and Guillaumes The Legacy of Islam (1931), Guillaumes Islam (1954), von Grunebaums Classical Islam (1963), Arnolds The Caliphate (1965), and The Cambridge History of Islam (1970) have completely ignored the event of Ghadir Khumm.
Why did these and many other Western scholars ignore the event of Ghadir Khumm? Since Western scholars mostly relied on anti-Shia works, they naturally ignored the event of Ghadir Khumm. L. Veccia Vaglieri, one of the contributors to the second edition of the Encyclopedia of Islam (1953), writes:
Most of those sources which form the basis of our knowledge of the life of Prophet (Ibn Hisham, al-Tabari, Ibn Sad, etc.) pass in silence over Muhammads stop at Ghadir Khumm, or, if they mention it, say nothing of his discourse (the writers evidently feared to attract the hostility of the Sunnis, who were in power, by providing material for the polemic of the Shiis who used these words to support their thesis of Alis right to the caliphate). Consequently, the western biographers of Muhammad, whose work is based on these sources, equally make no reference to what happened at Ghadir Khumm.[10]
Then we come to those few Western scholars who mention the hadith or the event of Ghadir Khumm but express their skepticism about its authority-the second stage in the classical response of the Sunni polemicists.
The first example of such scholars is Ignaz Goldziher, a highly respected German Orientalist of the nineteenth century. He discusses the hadith of Ghadir Khumm in his Muhammedanische Studien (1889-1890) translated into English as Muslim Studies (1966-1971) under the chapter entitled as "The Hadith in its Relation to the Conflicts of the Parties of Islam." Coming to the Shias, Goldziher writes:
A stronger argument in their [Shias] favour...was their conviction that the Prophet had expressly designated and appointed Ali as his successor before his death...Therefore the Alid adherents were concerned with inventing and authorizing traditions which prove Alis installation by direct order of the Prophet. The most widely known tradition (the authority of which is not denied even by orthodox authorities though they deprive it of its intention by a different interpretation) is the tradition of Khumm, which came into being for this purpose and is one of the firmest foundation of the theses of the Alid party.[11]
One would expect such a renowned scholar to prove how the Shias "were concerned with inventing" traditions to support their theses, but nowhere does Goldziher provide any evidence. After citing at-Tirmidhi and al-Nasai in the footnote as the source for hadith of Ghadir Khumm, he says, "Al-Nasai had, as is well known, pro-Alid inclinations, and also at-Tirmidhi included in his collection tendentious traditions favouring Ali, e.g., the tayr tradition."[12] This is again the same old classical response of the Sunni polemicists-discredit the transmitters as unreliable or adamantly accuses the Shias of inventing the traditions.

After citing at-Tirmidhi and al-Nasai in the footnote as the source for hadith of Ghadir Khumm, he says, "Al-Nasai had, as is well known, pro-Alid inclinations, and also at-Tirmidhi included in his collection tendentious traditions favouring Ali, e.g., the tayr tradition."[12] This is again the same old classical response of the Sunni polemicists-discredit the transmitters as unreliable or adamantly accuses the Shias of inventing the traditions.

https://www.pasokh.org/en/Article/View/200049/Ghadir-Khumm-and-the-Orientalists?CID=2317

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
26 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

Provide the chain. 

 

Quote


14144 - وَعَنْهُ قَالَ: «أَتَانَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - فَقَالَ: " إِنِّي قَدْ أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أَقْرَأَ عَلَى إِخْوَانِكُمْ مِنَ الْجِنِّ فَلْيَقُمْ مَعِيَ رَجُلٌ، وَلَا يَقُمْ رَجُلٌ فِي قَلْبِهِ مِثْقَالُ حَبَّةٍ مِنْ كِبْرٍ ". فَقُمْتُ مَعَهُ فَأَخَذْتُ الْإِدَاوَةَ فِيهَا نَبِيذٌ، فَانْطَلَقْتُ فَلَمَّا بَرَزَ خَطَّ لِي خَطًّا وَقَالَ: " لَا تَخْرُجْ مِنْهُ، فَإِنَّكَ إِنْ خَرَجْتَ مِنْهُ لَمْ تَرَنِي وَلَا أَرَاكَ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ ". قَالَ: فَانْطَلَقَ وَتَوَارَى عَنِّي حَتَّى لَمْ أَرَهُ، فَلَمَّا سَطَعَ الْفَجْرُ أَقْبَلَ فَقَالَ لِي: " أَرَاكَ قَائِمًا؟ ". فَقُلْتُ: مَا قَعَدْتُ، فَقَالَ: " مَا عَلَيْكَ لَوْ فَعَلْتَ؟ ". قُلْتُ: خَشِيتُ أَنْ أَخْرُجَ مِنْهُ. قَالَ: " أَمَا إِنَّكَ لَوْ خَرَجْتَ مِنْهُ لَمْ تَرَنِي وَلَمْ أَرَكَ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ، هَلْ مَعَكَ وَضُوءٌ؟ ". قُلْتُ: لَا. قَالَ: " مَا هَذِهِ الْإِدَاوَةُ ". قُلْتُ: فِيهَا نَبِيذٌ. قَالَ: " تَمْرَةٌ طَيِّبَةٌ وَمَاءٌ طَهُورٌ ". فَتَوَضَّأَ وَأَقَامَ الصَّلَاةَ، فَلَمَّا قَضَى الصَّلَاةَ قَامَ إِلَيْهِ رَجُلَانِ مِنَ الْجِنِّ فَسَأَلَاهُ الطَّعَامَ قَالَ: " أَلَمْ آمُرْ لَكُمَا وَلِقَوْمِكُمَا بِمَا يُصْلِحُكُمْ؟ ". قَالَا: بَلَى، وَلَكِنْ أَحْبَبْنَا أَنْ يَشْهَدَ بَعْضُنَا مَعَكَ الصَّلَاةَ. قَالَ: " فَمَنْ أَنْتُمَا؟ ". قَالَا: نَحْنُ مِنْ أَهْلِ نَصِيبِينَ، قَالَ: " قَدْ أَفْلَحَ هَذَانِ وَأَفْلَحَ قَوْمُهُمَا ". فَأَمَرَ لَهُمَا بِالرَّوْثِ وَالْعِظَامِ طَعَامًا وَلَحْمًا.» فَذَكَرَ الْحَدِيثَ.
رَوَاهُ الطَّبَرَانِيُّ، وَفِيهِ أَبُو زَيْدٍ وَقَيْسُ بْنُ الرَّبِيعِ أَيْضًا وَقَدْ ضَعَّفَهُ جَمَاعَةٌ.
 

 

Quote

14145 - «وَعَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ أَيْضًا قَالَ: اسْتَتْبَعَنِي رَسُولُ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - لَيْلَةَ الْجِنِّ فَانْطَلَقْتُ مَعَهُ حَتَّى بَلَغْنَا أَعْلَى مَكَّةَ فَخَطَّ لِي خَطًّا وَقَالَ: " لَا تَبْرَحْ ". ثُمَّ انْصَاعَ فِي أَجْبَالِ الْجِنِّ، فَرَأَيْتُ الرِّجَالَ يَنْحَدِرُونَ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ رُءُوسِ الْجِبَالِ، حَتَّى حَالُوا بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَهُ فَاخْتَرَطْتُ السَّيْفَ وَقُلْتُ: لَأَضْرِبَنَّ حَتَّى أَسْتَنْقِذَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - ثُمَّ ذَكَرْتُ قَوْلَهُ: " لَا تَبْرَحْ حَتَّى آتِيَكَ ". قَالَ: فَلَمْ أَزَلْ كَذَلِكَ حَتَّى أَضَاءَ الْفَجْرُ، فَجَاءَ النَّبِيُّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - وَأَنَا قَائِمٌ فَقَالَ: " مَا زِلْتَ عَلَى حَالِكَ؟ ". قُلْتُ: لَوْ لَبِثْتَ شَهْرًا مَا بَرِحْتُ حَتَّى تَأْتِيَنِي، ثُمَّ أَخْبَرْتُهُ بِمَا أَرَدْتُ أَنْ أَصْنَعَ فَقَالَ: " لَوْ خَرَجْتَ مَا الْتَقَيْنَا أَنَا وَأَنْتَ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ ". ثُمَّ شَبَّكَ أَصَابِعَهُ فِي أَصَابِعِي ثُمَّ قَالَ: " إِنِّي وُعِدْتُ أَنْ يُؤْمِنَ بِي الْإِنْسُ وَالْجِنُّ، فَأَمَّا الْإِنْسُ فَقَدْ آمَنَتْ بِي وَأَمَّا الْجِنُّ فَقَدْ رَأَيْتَ ". قَالَ: " وَمَا أَظُنُّ أَجَلِي إِلَّا قَدِ اقْتَرَبَ ". قُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أَلَا تَسْتَخْلِفُ أَبَا بَكْرٍ؟ فَأَعْرَضَ عَنِّي، فَرَأَيْتُ أَنَّهُ لَمْ يُوَافِقْهُ فَقُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أَلَا تَسْتَخْلِفُ عُمَرَ؟ فَأَعْرَضَ عَنِّي، فَرَأَيْتُ أَنَّهُ لَمْ يُوَافِقْهُ. فَقُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أَلَا تَسْتَخْلِفُ عَلِيًّا؟ قَالَ: " ذَاكَ وَالَّذِي لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّاهُوَ إِنْ بَايَعْتُمُوهُ وَأَطَعْتُمُوهُ أَدْخَلَكُمُ الْجَنَّةَ أَكْتَعِينَ».


رَوَاهُ الطَّبَرَانِيُّ، وَفِيهِ يَحْيَى بْنُ يَعْلَى الْأَسْلَمِيُّ وَهُوَ ضَعِيفٌ.
 

Question about successor of prophet Muhammad (pbu) has been asked by Abdullah Ibn Masud (رضي الله عنه) nevertheless I know that you will reject reliabilty of Hadith due to mentioning "Yahya b.Ya'la al-Aslami" in similar fashion of calling him weak because he has narrated some Hadith in favor of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) so then you will deny hadith anyway I have provides full hadith just for record.

https://lib.efatwa.ir/43322/8/314

https://lib.efatwa.ir/43322/8/315

https://books.google.com/books?id=ztahJV58oLcC&pg=PA404&lpg=PA404&dq=Yahya+ya'la+Aslami&source=bl&ots=1sctlbMqQR&sig=ACfU3U0hIOQg61q_N1qNkezd3ARNHS3v2g&hl=fa&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjf-K-58Lv5AhW_if0HHb1rDKEQ6AF6BAgTEAM#v=onepage&q=Yahya ya'la Aslami&f=false

 

Quote

image.png.10eada65556fc92058562d1253129db0.png

 

Quote

Ali (عليه السلام) explains his stand at Jamal
He said: Abul Hasan Ali b. Bilal al-Mahalabi – may Allah bless him with His mercy, reported to me on Friday, of the last two days of Sha’ban, in the year 353, from Muhammad b. al-Hussain b. Hameed b. al-Rabee’ al-Lakhmi, reporting from Suleiman b. al-Rabee’ al-Nahdi, who reported from Nasr b. Mazahim al-Munqari, who reported from Yahya b. Ya’la al-Aslami, who reported from Ali b. al-Huzawwar, from Al-Asbagh b. Nubatah – may Allah bless him with His mercy, that once a man called upon Amirul Mo’mineen Ali b. Abi Talib ((عليه السلام).) at Basra and said:
“O Amirul Mo’mineen, between us and these people against whom we are fighting, the call is one, the Prophet is one, the daily prayer is one, Hajj is one, then how shall we classify them?”
Amirul Mo’mineen, peace be upon him, said: “Classify them the same way as Allah, Most High, has classified them in His Book. Have you not heard the verse:
‘Those messengers We excel some above the
others, among them is he to whom Allah spoke,
and some He raised in rank, and We gave
Jesus the son of Mary the clear signs and
strengthened him with the holy spirit. And if
Allah had pleased, those who came after them
would not have fought one against the other,
after the clear signs had come to them, but
they fell into variance and some of them believed
and some disbelieved….’
(al-Baqrah V:253)
So, when the confrontation occurred, we were worthier with Allah, His faith, the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, the Book and the Truth. We are the ones who believed and they are the ones who disbelieved. And Allah willed that we fought against them, so we fought in accordance with His will, His command and His pleasure.”

https://shiastudies.com/en/3840/the-sun-returned-for-ali-a-s-2/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, sunni muslim said:

Provide the chain. 

 

Those who are well-versed with the polemic writings of Sunnis know that whenever the Shias present a hadith or a historical evidence in support of their view, a Sunni polemicist would respond in the following manner:

Firstly, he will outright deny the existence of any such hadith or historical event.
Secondly, when confronted with hard evidence from his own sources, he will cast doubt on the reliability of the transmitters of that hadith or event.
Thirdly, when he is shown that all the transmitters are reliable by Sunni standards, he will give an interpretation to the hadith or the event that will be quite different from that of the Shias.
These three levels form the classical response of the Sunni polemicists in dealing with the arguments of the Shias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, sunni muslim said:

Point is who is the caliph of messenger of Allah is a matter of creed. Sunni believe that he is abu bakr, you believe it is ali. Don't make me waste my time in explaining you these basic things. Who is ulil amr after prophet is a matter of creed not fiqh. 

How can it be a matter of creed?

It can either be a matter of Aqeedah, if you believe Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) appoints His chosen ones as Imam/caliph or either it is a matter of fiqh. Because there exist clear cut directions in Quran who should you obey and whom you shouldn't. So if it is people who are going to nominate any caliph, there has to be shar'i & fiqhi guidance/criteria and appointment/nomination must be done by keeping those rules in mind. 

1 hour ago, sunni muslim said:

It is not. Wali here cannot mean leader, since the leader was prophet

Well, Who said wali here means leader? There is only one wali in that verse "innama waliyokum Allah" the next personalities are the bearers of or the extension of that one wilayah. So what does wali means here? Leader? Or Master/Guardian? Decide for yourself.

2 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

It is more illogical to say that the prophet mention the Islamic governance in such a vague manner that his own companions never understood it that way, 

This section was addressed in my earlier post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Provide the chain. 

If you just want to rely to chain so then you will deny any hadith about Ghadir khum which in similar fashion you will deny any Hadith about ppointing Imam ali (عليه السلام) as successor of prophet Muhammad 9pbu) because anyone from narrators who has  had positive  inclination toward Imam Ali (عليه السلام) & Shias so then has been categorized as weak or unreliable in Sunni ooks but in opposition to it anyone who has been from enemies of Imam Ali (عليه السلام)  & shias so then has been categorized as trustworthy (Thiqa) naraator in Sunni books which if you just want to play with this card so therefore you never accept truth until death  so then judgment day .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Cool said:

Point is that whether the appointment of "Ulil Amr" is a matter of fiqh or it is a matter of aqeedah in your creed? 

This is a 100,000$ question. 

We have "aqeedah e imamate" with us. And we also have signs/traits with which we can recognize the Imam. 

In case of appointment/selection by people, there is a sharia which has already set rules whom should we obey and whom we shouldn't. So either the matter is related to aqeedah or either it becomes a shara'i/fiqhi matter. 

Since Sunni says its a matter of "creed" therefore they don't have any rules of business. So they can even accept Yazid (L) as their caliph. They can even accept hypocrite & rebel like Muawiyah (L) as their caliph.

Some times matter of caliphate becomes a matter of shura for them, some times it become a matter of nomination and some times it becomes the matter of 6 member committee.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Which word did the hadith of the two weighty things come from in the sources of Ahl as-Sunnah, and how are their chains of transmission? Which word of the two weighty things came frequently in the sources of the Sunnis? Is what is meant by 12 caliphs after me in the hadith of the two weighty things, Ahl al-Bayt? In which books of the Sunnis did the two narrations come to follow Ali after me, and follow his  Imamate  , and to imitate the imams after me, or something similar?

Quote

بأی لفظ جاء حدیث الثقلین فی مصادر أهل السنة و کیف أسانیدهم؟ أی لفظ حدیث الثقلین جاء متواترا فی مصادر أهل السنة؟ هل المراد من ۱۲ خلیفة من بعدی فی حدیث الثقلین أهل البیت؟ فی أیّ کتب من أهل السنة، جیء روایتا فلیوال علیّاً من بعدی، ولیوال ولیّه، ولیقتدِ بالأئمّة من بعدی أو ماشابه ذلک؟

 

Quote

عزیزی الباحث

السلام علیکم ورحمة الله وبرکاته

اما بالنسبة حدیث الثقلین والشبهات حول الثقلین راجع کتاب محاضرات فی الاعتقادات لسماحة السید علی المیلانی المجلد الاول

رابط الموقع:

http://al-milani.com/library/lib-mas.php?booid=۳۰

و ایضا الی کتاب: حدیث الثقلین فی کتب اهل السنة للدکتور السید علاء الدین السید امیر محمد القزوینی و کتاب حدیث الثقلین ومقامات اهل البیت علیهم السلام للشیخ احمد الماحوزی و حدیث الثقلین للسید علی المیلانی و رد أباطیل عثمان الخمیس على حدیث الثقلین للحسن عبدالله العمانی و حدیث الثقلین للخلیفه عبید الکلبانی و... .

اما حول حدیث فَلْیَتَوَلَّ عَلِیَّ بْنَ أَبِی طَالِبٍ، رواه حاکم النیسابوری بسند صحیح کما صرح نفسه:

۴۶۴۲ حدثنا بکر بن محمد الصیرفی بمرو ثنا إسحاق ثنا القاسم بن أبی شیبة ثنا یحیى بن یعلى الأسلمی ثنا عمار بن زریق عن أبی إسحاق عن زیاد بن مطرف عن زید بن أرقم رضی الله عنه قال قال رسول الله صلى الله علیه وسلم من یرید أن یحیى حیاتی ویموت موتی ویسکن جنة الخلد التی وعدنی ربی فلیتول علی بن أبی طالب فإنه لن یخرجکم من هدى ولن یدخلکم فی ضلالة هذا حدیث صحیح الإسناد ولم یخرجاه .

المستدرک على الصحیحین، ج ۳ ص ۱۳۹ ، اسم المؤلف: محمد بن عبدالله أبو عبدالله الحاکم النیسابوری الوفاة: ۴۰۵ هـ ، دار النشر : دار الکتب العلمیة - بیروت - ۱۴۱۱هـ - ۱۹۹۰م ، الطبعة : الأولى ، تحقیق : مصطفى عبد القادر عطا.

وایضا الشجری الجرجانی فی امالیه بسند لا بأس به:

أخبرنا محمد بن علی بن محمد أبو أحمد المکفوف بقراءتی علیه بأصفهان ، قال أخبرنا أبو محمد عبد الله بن محمد بن جعفر بن حیان ، قال حدثنا الحسن بن محمد بن أبی هریرة ، قال حدثنا عبد الله بن عبد الوهاب ، قال حدثنا محمد بن الحارث القرشی ، قال حدثنا محمد بن جابر ، قال حدثنا حبیب بن الشهید ، عن عطاء بن أبی رباح عن ابن عباس رضی الله عنه ، قال قال رسول الله صلى الله علیه وآله وسلم : ' من سره أن یحیا حیاتی ویموت میتتی ویدخل جنة عدن التی غرسها ربی عز وجل بیده ، فلیتول علی بن أبی طالب وأوصیاه ، فهم الأولیاء والأئمة من بعدی ، أعطاهم الله علمی وفهمی ، وهم عترتی من لحمی ودمی ، إلى الله عز وجل أشکو من ظالمهم من أمتی ، والله لتقتلنهم أمتی لا أنالهم الله عز وجل شفاعتی ' .

کتاب الأمالی وهی المعروفة بالأمالی الخمیسیة ، ج ۱ ص ۱۷۹ ، اسم المؤلف: المرشد بالله یحیى بن الحسین بن إسماعیل الحسنی الشجری الجرجانی الوفاة: ۴۹۹ هـ ، دار النشر : دار الکتب العلمیة - بیروت / لبنان - ۱۴۲۲ هـ - ۲۰۰۱م ، الطبعة : الأولى ، تحقیق : محمد حسن اسماعیل.

و ایضا بسند نظیف:

أخبرنا أبو بکر محمد بن عبد الله بن أحمد بن ریذة ، قال أخبرنا أبو القاسم سلیمان بن أحمد بن أیوب الطبرانی ، قال حدثنا علی بن سعید الزرار ، قال حدثنا إبراهیم بن عیسى التنوخی ، قال حدثنا یحیى بن یعلى ، عن عمار بن رزیق عن أبی إسحاق عن زیاد بن عوف عن زید بن أرقم ، قال قال رسول الله صلى الله علیه وآله وسلم : ' من أحب أن یحیا حیاتی ویموت موتی ، ویسکن جنة الخلد التی وعدنی ربی ، فإن ربی غرس قضیبها بیده ، فلیتول علی بن أبی طالب ، فإنه لن یخرجکم من هدى ، ولن یدخلکم فی ضلال ' .

کتاب الأمالی وهی المعروفة بالأمالی الخمیسیة ، ج ۱ ص ۱۸۹ ، اسم المؤلف: المرشد بالله یحیى بن الحسین بن إسماعیل الحسنی الشجری الجرجانی الوفاة: ۴۹۹ هـ ، دار النشر : دار الکتب العلمیة - بیروت / لبنان - ۱۴۲۲ هـ - ۲۰۰۱م ، الطبعة : الأولى ، تحقیق : محمد حسن اسماعیل.

و ایضا ابی نعیم الاصبهانی:

حدثنا فهد بن إبراهیم بن فهد قال ثنا زکریا الغلابی قال ثنا بشر بن مهران قال ثنا شریک عن الاعمش عن زید بن وهب عن حذیفة بن الیمان قال قال رسول الله صلى الله علیه وسلم من سره أن یحیا حیاتی ویموت میتتی ویتمسک بالقصبة الیاقوتة التی خلقتها الله ثم قال لها کن أو کونی فکانت فلیتول علی بن أبی طالب من بعدی غریب من حدیث الأعمش تفرد به بشر عن شریک .

حلیة الأولیاء وطبقات الأصفیاء ، ج ۴ ص ۱۷۴ ، اسم المؤلف: أبو نعیم أحمد بن عبد الله الأصبهانی الوفاة: ۴۳۰ ، دار النشر : دار الکتاب العربی - بیروت - ۱۴۰۵ ، الطبعة : الرابعة.

و...

والحمد لله

http://www.new.valiasr-aj.tel/show_question.php?id=23009

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Question about successor of prophet Muhammad (pbu) has been asked by Abdullah Ibn Masud (رضي الله عنه) nevertheless I know that you will reject reliabilty of Hadith due to mentioning "Yahya b.Ya'la al-Aslami" in similar fashion of calling him weak because he has narrated some Hadith in favor of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) so then you will deny hadith anyway I have provides full hadith just for record

Thanks for pointing out the weakness in the report. You just made my job easier. 

 

1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Those who are well-versed with the polemic writings of Sunnis know that whenever the Shias present a hadith or a historical evidence in support of their view, a Sunni polemicist would respond in the following manner:

Firstly, he will outright deny the existence of any such hadith or historical event.
Secondly, when confronted with hard evidence from his own sources, he will cast doubt on the reliability of the transmitters of that hadith or event.

Those who are well versed in sunni shia polemics also know that whenever shia are shown hadith from their books which goes against their creed, they flat out denie that by saying imam just said that in the state of taqiyyah. This taqiyyah excuse of yours is much sillier than weakening reports of sunnis. Either quote an authentic hadith from our books and stop whining how sunnis weaken the reports that show clear appointment of ali Or don't come to debate :).

1 hour ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Thirdly, when he is shown that all the transmitters are reliable by Sunni standards, he will give an interpretation to the hadith or the event that will be quite different from that of the Shias.
These three levels form the classical response of the Sunni polemicists in dealing with the arguments of the Shias.

This is because shia use any reported and try to prove that this shows appointment of ali, while the report has nothing to do with it. Hilli in minhaj ul karamah does this a lot. He said hadith kisa also proves appointment of ali. His point is so silly that i don't  even have to refute it. 

 

49 minutes ago, Cool said:

ow can it be a matter of creed?

It can either be a matter of Aqeedah, if you believe Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) appoints His chosen ones as Imam/caliph or either it is a matter of fiqh. Because there exist clear cut directions in Quran who should you obey and whom you shouldn't. So if it is people who are going to nominate any caliph, there has to be shar'i & fiqhi guidance/criteria and appointment/nomination must be done by keeping those rules in mind

It is a matter of creed. You believe ulil amr after prophet is ali while we believe he is abi bakr. How that ulil amr would be selected is irrelevant to the debate. To prove ali is ulil amr after the prophet, you chose to throw any report which suits your desire and expect us to believe in it without any scrutinity. Please learn some basics before debate. 

 

51 minutes ago, Cool said:

Well, Who said wali here means leader? There is only one wali in that verse "innama waliyokum Allah" the next personalities are the bearers of or the extension of that one wilayah. So what does wali means here? Leader? Or Master/Guardian? Decide for yourself.

Whatever it means. We know for sure that he wali here doesn't mean a political leader. Since that was the prophet at that time. 

 

52 minutes ago, Cool said:

This section was addressed in my earlier post

You addressed nothing. You just said according to shia narrations, it is a clear proof. If quoting from one's books is what needed here, then I can quote sunni books as well where ali himself didn't knew he was appointed and alo a grandson of ali stating ghadeer was vague. To prove ghadeer was vague, I didn't use any sunni books, I just use logic which none of you were able to answer. 

56 minutes ago, Cool said:

This is a 100,000$ question. 

We have "aqeedah e imamate" with us. And we also have signs/traits with which we can recognize the Imam. 

In case of appointment/selection by people, there is a sharia which has already set rules whom should we obey and whom we shouldn't. So either the matter is related to aqeedah or either it becomes a shara'i/fiqhi matter. 

Since Sunni says its a matter of "creed" therefore they don't have any rules of business. So they can even accept Yazid (L) as their caliph. They can even accept hypocrite & rebel like Muawiyah (L) as their caliph.

Some times matter of caliphate becomes a matter of shura for them, some times it become a matter of nomination and some times it becomes the matter of 6 member committee.  

Completely irrelevant. The topic is whether ghadeer is vague or not. 

 

54 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Which word did the hadith of the two weighty things come from in the sources of Ahl as-Sunnah, and how are their chains of transmission? Which word of the two weighty things came frequently in the sources of the Sunnis?

Well, in the books of ahlus sunnah, both wording i.e quran and sunnah, quran and ahlul bayt are authentic. Both of them don't contradict each other. Prophet said adhere to quran and sunnah at his last hajj, and said adhere to quran and i remind you of my ahlul bayt in ghadeer. 

 

57 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Is what is meant by 12 caliphs after me in the hadith of the two weighty things, Ahl al-Bayt?

Nope. 

 

57 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

In which books of the Sunnis did the two narrations come to follow Ali after me, and follow his  Imamate  , and to imitate the imams after me, or something similar

I don't know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest NewGuy
34 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

Prophet said adhere to quran and sunnah at his last hajj,

Can you provide the sahih source for this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest NewGuy
4 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

It is more illogical to say that the prophet mention the Islamic governance in such a vague manner that his own companions never understood it that way, unknowingly put another guy in power, and later transmit the 'clear' proof of Ali's appointment to people thinking it's some kind of a merit. 

Again, I am new so please excuse my ignorance. If you, my sunni brother, and the shia brothers here can enlighten me on a doubt. 

Logically, when the Prophet (عليه السلام) mentioned that his time was coming and that he would be dying soon, was there some sort of government or set election in place after his death? Logically, if the current leader has announced their death, the first thing people would do is figure out a way to elect a new leader. Better yet, elect that leader while the Prohpet (عليه السلام) is alive or have the Prophet (عليه السلام) chose that leader. 

So, my question is, is there a concrete statement from Sunni books where the Prohpet (عليه السلام) specifically states that people can or cannot elect a leader after him? Otherwise, there is absolutely no way nobody asked about the leadership and type of government from the time of the death announcement until the Prohpet's death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
12 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

It is a matter of creed. You believe ulil amr after prophet is ali while we believe he is abi bakr

lol, and I am simply asking you the basis of your such belief. It must be either aqeeda or it must be either a shara'i/fiqhi matter. 

As for us, you know very well that imamate is our "aqeedah". So we have a basis at least. Your "creedal" thought seems hangup neither it has basis nor any support from skies lol.

17 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

How that ulil amr would be selected is irrelevant to the debate.

lol, & how it is irrelevant, While you claim that Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) left this world without nominating anyone and asking us the proof of nomination? 

You believe in saqifah, you must show us any shara'i ruling for it. Like some of your scholars mention caliphate is the matter left on ummah & present the verse of shura in support of their statement. 

You are running hard from my questions lol.

22 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

To prove ali is ulil amr after the prophet, you chose to throw any report which suits your desire and expect us to believe in it without any scrutinity. Please learn some basics before debate. 

Well, you need to learn some basics first. The narrations thrown at you were deemed sahih by your scholar, as written with them and acknowledged by you. We don't have any solution if you start criticizing your scholars and start calling them lenient etc., that is not our problem. And this goes against the rules of debate to start denying or refusing your own scholars. 

28 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

Whatever it means. We know for sure that he wali here doesn't mean a political leader. Since that was the prophet at that time. 

lol, as already pointed you out that the verse started with the phrase انما وليكم الله and there is no wali mentioned afterwards. So only Allah is our wali i.e., Master/Guardian. The و afterwards before رسوله & والذين أمنوا mentions tye extension of the wilayah of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). 

This wilayah is not just the tashri'i wilayah, the wilayah here is tashri'i & takwini both. 

If you believe that the political leader at that time was Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), then again his command at ghadir من كنت مولاه فهذا علي مولاه making Ali (عليه السلام) as political leader of Muslims. 

And while Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) started his sermon of ghadir with the phrase كأنّي قد دعيت فأجبت as me tioned by al-Nisai, me tioning people that soon he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) may depart from this world. So whatever said by him afterwards must be his guidance for ummah & command of nominating his successor:

وإنّي تارك فيكم الثقلين، أحدهما أكبر من الآخر: كتاب اللّه وعترتي أهل بيتي، فانظروا كيف تخلّفوني فيهما، فإنّهما لن يفترقا حتي يردا عليّ الحوض

ثمّ قال: إنّ اللّه مولاي وأنا وليّ كلّ مؤمن. 
ثمّ إنّه أخذ بيد علي ( رضي اللّه عنه ) وقال : من كنت وليه فهذا وليه، اللّهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه

But all this is vague for you. This statement reminds me a verse:

فَإِنَّهَا لَا تَعْمَى الْأَبْصَارُ وَلَكِن تَعْمَى الْقُلُوبُ الَّتِي فِي الصُّدُورِ

22:46) verily, it is not their eyes that have become blind - but blind have become the hearts that are in their breasts!

50 minutes ago, sunni muslim said:

You addressed nothing. You just said according to shia narrations, it is a clear proof.

lol, you are very confused now! Here is the post, I said our evidence is Quran as well as hadith:

4 hours ago, Cool said:

فَإِذَا فَرَغْتَ فَانْصَبْ {7}


[Shakir 94:7] So when you are free, nominate.

While the word فَانْصَبْ clearly means to fix or to nominate but the brothers of ahlul sunnah twist its meaning.

I would like to further elaborate the verses of this chapter. The 2nd verse of this chapter mentions:

وَوَضَعْنَا عَنْكَ وِزْرَكَ {2}


[Shakir 94:2] And taken off from you your burden,

Here the word وِزْرَكَ came from the root و ز ر، one of the word came into being from this root is وزير i.e., the one who shares burden. This is used in the dua of Prophet Musa (عليه السلام):

وَاجْعَلْ لِي وَزِيرًا مِنْ أَهْلِي {29}


[Shakir 20:29] And give to me an aider from my family:

هَارُونَ أَخِي {30}


[Shakir 20:30] Haroun, my brother,

اشْدُدْ بِهِ أَزْرِي {31}


[Shakir 20:31] Strengthen my back by him,

وَأَشْرِكْهُ فِي أَمْرِي {32}


[Shakir 20:32] And associate him (with me) in my affair,

The verse 31 is further matching with what was said in verse 3 of chapter 94

الَّذِي أَنْقَضَ ظَهْرَكَ {3}


[Shakir 94:3] Which pressed heavily upon your back

The heavy burden upon Prophet's back could only be shared by a wazir (the one who shares the burden) and the one who is associated in the "amr" given to Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)

Hence Prophet's (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) saying in the day of Ghadir "man kunto mowla fahatha Aliyyun mowla" is a statement which not only mentions the nomination clearly but also making Ali (عليه السلام) as associate of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) in his amr. And there are many narrations which can be included to see this fact.

And the verses of chapter 94 are referring to Ali bin Abi Talib (عليه السلام), hadith e mazilah is another example where Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) pointed towards these facts. Some one would say that since Haroon (عليه السلام) died in the life time of Musa (عليه السلام) therefore the manzilah doesn't prove appointment. Well it does prove the appointment in light of chapter 94. Where Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentioned that he has strengthened the Prophet's back by granting him a wazir hence taken off some of the burden of his duties.

وَوَضَعْنَا عَنْكَ وِزْرَكَ {2}


[Shakir 94:2] And taken off from you your burden,

And have commanded him to officially nominate Ali (عليه السلام) as his successor. Which Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did at Ghadir by asking the companions "الست اولى بالمومنين من انفسهم".  The reply of companions was in affirmation. The question of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was like Allah's asking "الست بربكم".

Then Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) further elaborate "whomsoever I am his master" which means his mastership in terms of Ulil Amr, his mastership in terms of Wali, his mastership in terms of unconditional obedience to him etc. And then said "this Ali is his Master". All the terms of mastership of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are included here. That is so clear that only the people who either do not use their intellect, can reject it and the ones who didn't like this nomination, rejects it out of takabbur.

The history of Prophet's life just before he was about to depart from this world, are sufficient to note that their do have issues among the companions. People have misinterpreted the statement of ghadir, twisted the meaning of Prophet's saying. Hence we see when the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) fell seriously ill, he asked for a paper & pen, so that he may permanently fix those issues & doubts created by some close companions among general public. Surprisingly, he was denied, paper and pen was not given to him.

Apart from that, many of the close companions started disobeying Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). We see companions violating clear command of Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to go with Jesh e Osama but initially they objected on Osama bin Zaid's selection as a leader of Jesh e Osama then showed hesitence to go with it. And when Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) became angry on them, they went and stayed on the outskirts of Madina.

Everything is there in Islamic history,  well preserved. I don't really feel the need to quote every event. Just mentioned a few points to show what was the situation at the end of the Prophet's life. The truth seeker, one who has the ability to make a use of his intellect, can get to the truth.

Wassalam!!

 

4 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

The fact that you have to resort to long explainations to prove thai text is a clear is itself a proof that it is not a clear proof and rather vague.

lol, one single verse has settled the matter. Infact one word settles the matter i.e., فَانْصَبْ

Whatever done by Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) at ghadir was a result of 2 verses one is that which contain the word فَانْصَبْ, while the other is verse of "balligh".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, Guest NewGuy said:

Can you provide the sahih source for this?

Mustadrak alal sahihayn. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

lol, and I am simply asking you the basis of your such belief. It must be either aqeeda or it must be either a shara'i/fiqhi matter. 

As for us, you know very well that imamate is our "aqeedah". So we have a basis at least. Your "creedal" thought seems hangup neither it has basis nor any support from skies lol.

Your question is irrelevant to the topic. The topic was hadeeth ghadeer a clear proof or not. You didn't provide any clear logical proof that why hadith ghadeer is clear. All you did was argue whether ulil amr is a matter of creed or not. Answer my arguments rather than shifting from topic to topic. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

lol, & how it is irrelevant, While you claim that Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) left this world without nominating anyone and asking us the proof of nomination?

It is irrelevant. The topic is whether ghadeer is a clear proof or not. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

You believe in saqifah, you must show us any shara'i ruling for it. Like some of your scholars mention caliphate is the matter left on ummah & present the verse of shura in support of their statement. 

You are running hard from my questions lol

Ijma. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

Well, you need to learn some basics first. The narrations thrown at you were deemed sahih by your scholar, as written with them and acknowledged by you

None of the scholars deemed it sahih. All you can provide is hakim ruling the hadith to be sahih on the rule of shaykhain. Anyone who has a bit of knowledge in hadith knows that hakim is a lenient scholar. If you can't comprehend that then that's not my problem. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

We don't have any solution if you start criticizing your scholars and start calling them lenient etc., that is not our problem. And this goes against the rules of debate to start denying or refusing your own scholars

It's you who first rejected your scholars murtaza and muhaqqiq al hilli. You can reject your scholars based on evidence not me. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

If you believe that the political leader at that time was Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), then again his command at ghadir من كنت مولاه فهذا علي مولاه making Ali (عليه السلام) as political leader of Muslims

You understanding is completely illogical and total nonsense. Two political leaders can't exist at one time. Don't you even know this. It's like  a president of a country saying whoever I am president my cousin is also his president. No country have two presidents at one time genius. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

And while Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) started his sermon of ghadir with the phrase كأنّي قد دعيت فأجبت as me tioned by al-Nisai, me tioning people that soon he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) may depart from this world. So whatever said by him afterwards must be his guidance for ummah & command of nominating his successor:

Even then your understanding is illogical. Imagine a president in a healthy state, 3-4 months before his death saying I may depart soon whoever I'm president so and so as his president. Political leaders don't make partners in their leadership even if their death is near. They simply say my successor is so and so. If we consider your explaination of ghadeer, then it would mean after the ghadeer incident, prophet and ali were both political leader for 3 months of islamic empire. Any logical person would laugh at you illogical, and ludicrous scenario. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

But all this is vague for you

Not just me. It was vague for all those companions who narrated this hadeeth. 

 

34 minutes ago, Cool said:

فَإِذَا فَرَغْتَ فَانْصَبْ {7}


[Shakir 94:7] So when you are free, nominate.

While the word فَانْصَبْ clearly means to fix or to nominate but the brothers of ahlul sunnah twist its meaning.

I would like to further elaborate the verses of this chapter. The 2nd verse of this chapter mentions:

وَوَضَعْنَا عَنْكَ وِزْرَكَ {2}


[Shakir 94:2] And taken off from you your burden

How does this prove that ghadeer was clear proof. And where is the proof that when this ayah revealed prophet nominated ali. Are you this desperate. You think you can quote any ayah and think you have proven your point. All you quoted was ambigous. 

Edited by sunni muslim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Basic Members
1 hour ago, sunni muslim said:

How does this prove that ghadeer was clear proof. And where is the proof that when this ayah revealed prophet nominated ali. Are you this desperate. You think you can quote any ayah and think you have proven your point. All you quoted was ambigous. 

Salam. I've read this entire thread and the arguments are started to become very circular in nature. My view, as you cited another shia scholar saying, is that the event of ghadeer khum isn't be a crystal clear appointment unless the Prohpet (عليه السلام) stated something along the lines of: "Ali is going to be my successor after me. He is the leader. Don't choose a leader or elect someone and follow him"

But that didn't happen and so we are having this debate many centuries later. As the shia brothers have cited, in the shia books the event is very clear and the ayats revealed are interpreted to go along with this event. So, without all this back and forth, it is extremely clear USING OTHER evidence (not just the words stated at Ghadeer) that this is the appointment of Ali (عليه السلام). Of course, the thread started to now have mixtures of different topics and is going off track. 

I doubt this issue will get resolved in this thread but perhaps it would be better to start from points of agreement and move there. Firstly, can we agree on how many people were present at the event of ghadeer khum? What is your view on this sunni muslim (or, let me know if I should call you by something else)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Completely irrelevant. What I'm saying is that the verse is indeed revealed for ali but the meaning is general to all believers. 

You just contradicted yourself.

First said verse is revealed for Ali (عليه السلام), then saying its general to all believers.

Wilayah of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) includes His authority over us, ita'at etc. That is not true for all believers.

2 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Not just me. It was vague for all those companions who narrated this hadeeth. 

Not vague, they broke the oath they made at Ghadeer. Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) had said to Ali thay he is in same position to Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as Harun was to Musa. After Musa left, his ummah betrayed Harun so did this ummah!

Kindly read ehtejaj Al-Tabrisi where Imam (عليه السلام) has presented proofs of his imamah against the companions. Enough to prove it wasnt vague for companions but they ignored it.

Any unbiased person, when reads full hadith of Ghadeer can see it refers to imamah, caliphate of Ali (عليه السلام).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

You just contradicted yourself.

First said verse is revealed for Ali (عليه السلام), then saying its general to all believers

I didn't. Many of the time an ayah was revealed for a specific individuals but it's implication is general. Like the ayah which says don't raise your voices in front of messenger of Allah. It was revealed for abu bakr and umar, but it's implication is general. 

1 hour ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Wilayah of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) includes His authority over us, ita'at etc. That is not true for all believers

We don't believe that wilayah here means leadership. 

 

1 hour ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Not vague, they broke the oath they made at Ghadeer. Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) had said to Ali thay he is in same position to Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as Harun was to Musa. After Musa left, his ummah betrayed Harun so did this ummah!

It is vague. The fact that companions knows the meaning of ghadeer is appointment but rejected it and put another guy of a not so powerful tribe, and then transmitted that to mass of people is utterly ridiculous. It is like saying saying a king appointed his successors in front of all his associates and viziers, but after his death they betrayed his rightful successor and then put another guy in power, and then transmit the clear proof of his appointment to mass of people. Usurpers don't act like this brother. They don't go and preach the appointment of the usurped one to the public. 

 

1 hour ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Kindly read ehtejaj Al-Tabrisi where Imam (عليه السلام) has presented proofs of his imamah against the companions. Enough to prove it wasnt vague for companions but they ignored it.

Your books are not hujjah upon me. I can provide you authentic narrations from my books that even ali had no clue that he was appointed. 

 

1 hour ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Any unbiased person, when reads full hadith of Ghadeer can see it refers to imamah, caliphate of Ali (عليه السلام

Any unbiased person who reads the hadeeth on its own would not even get the gist of appointment. Every guy knows that no one appoint their successor by saying whoever I'm master so and so is his master. Rulers appoint by saying so and so is my successor. As simple as that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Your question is irrelevant to the topic

You are running away from my question purposely. This question was originated from your statement that you only use weak ahadith in fiqhi matters but not in aqeedah. So what is caliphate for you? Aqeedah or Shara'i matter? If this is shara'i/fiqhi matter, that would mean you can even use weak hadith for doing the "istidlaal". You know that and that's why you are running away. 

Now after having proved this, I don't feel the need to continue this discussion. 

2 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

It is irrelevant. The topic is whether ghadeer is a clear proof or not. 

 

2 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Ijma

lol, where was that ijma for electing the 2nd & 3rd caliph?

3 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

None of the scholars deemed it sahih. All you can provide is hakim ruling the hadith to be sahih on the rule of shaykhain.

It is proved that you can make use of weak ahadith in shara'i/fiqhi issues. So I have done my job. Infact Hakim declared many of them sahih al-sanad. Go back and see those ahadith again.

3 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

It's you who first rejected your scholars murtaza and muhaqqiq al hilli.

Please quote where I rejected any of these two. It seems to me you are full now lol.

3 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

You understanding is completely illogical and total nonsense. Two political leaders can't exist at one time.

lol, Vice President cannot exist with President. Deputy Prime Minister cannot exist with Prime Minister. How illogical is your statement that even Quran refutes you:

وَاجْعَلْ لِي وَزِيرًا مِنْ أَهْلِي {29}

[Shakir 20:29] And give to me an aider from my family:

هَارُونَ أَخِي {30}

[Shakir 20:30] Haroun, my brother,

اشْدُدْ بِهِ أَزْرِي {31}

[Shakir 20:31] Strengthen my back by him,

وَأَشْرِكْهُ فِي أَمْرِي {32}

[Shakir 20:32] And associate him (with me) in my affair,

3 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Imagine a president in a healthy state, 3-4 months before his death saying I may depart soon whoever I'm president so and so as his president.

President can nominate his successor any time. Even immediate after assuming the office. 

3 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Political leaders don't make partners in their leadership even if their death is near.

Illogical, see the verse above "wa ashrikhu fe amri"

Seems to me you are out of ammunition now 

3 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

Not just me. It was vague for all those companions who narrated this hadeeth. 

All, are you sure or should I prove you wrong once again?

According to various sources, there was a significant number of people who did not pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr immediately following the event of Saqifah.

3 hours ago, sunni muslim said:

1) How does this prove that ghadeer was clear proof.

2)And where is the proof that when this ayah revealed prophet nominated ali.

Are you this desperate. You think you can quote any ayah and think you have proven your point. All you quoted was ambigous

lol, you are really lost.

1) Prophet nominated Ali (عليه السلام) at ghadeer by saying whomsoever I am his master this Ali is his master. Hence proved!!

2) As the ayah itself says فَإِذَا فَرَغْتَ, so Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did it when he felt that he became free now and when then Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) commanded him by revealing ayah e balligh.

That's all!! 

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...