Adalat al sahaba

[Haji 2003]

Further discussion also in this thread by Rebecca Masterton:

https://x.com/rebecmasterton/status/1816752104838742448?s=46&t=cSBAFSCGH9dVrM-ogKDT2Q

[Abu Nur]

I find it amazing how they created the concept hundred years later after Prophet (saws) and for 1200 years they have tried to justify it. Same goes with trinity.

Edited July 26, 2024 by Abu Nur

[Abu Nur]

Correction, 5th/11th century it was  crystalized.

[Guest Imām Zayd al-Shahīd]

Salam alaykum

 

The Qur'an only praises the first foremost emigrants and helpers, and after that those who followed them in goodness

This means that other sahaba are conditional in praise, such as praising them after they gave bay'at al-ridwan

This conditionality is general, unless there's a mutawatir hadith about their akhira, like "Fatima is the lady of the women of paradise" and "al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the masters of the youth of paradise"

Even that phrase "followed them in goodness" indicates that the emigrants and helpers are praised for their long-standing goodness, and implying that if that goodness is removed, the praise is removed

However, this verse does obligate having good opinion about the generality of the early emigrants and helpers, which is the reading we get from some Imams of the Progeny ع

 

 

[shafii]

On 1/28/2025 at 1:01 AM, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

Salam alaykum

 

The Qur'an only praises the first foremost emigrants and helpers, and after that those who followed them in goodness

This means that other sahaba are conditional in praise, such as praising them after they gave bay'at al-ridwan

This conditionality is general, unless there's a mutawatir hadith about their akhira, like "Fatima is the lady of the women of paradise" and "al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the masters of the youth of paradise"

Even that phrase "followed them in goodness" indicates that the emigrants and helpers are praised for their long-standing goodness, and implying that if that goodness is removed, the praise is removed

However, this verse does obligate having good opinion about the generality of the early emigrants and helpers, which is the reading we get from some Imams of the Progeny ع

 

 

Abu Bakr, umar, usman were foremost among muhajiroon.

[shafii]

On 1/27/2025 at 1:31 PM, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

Salam alaykum

 

The Qur'an only praises the first foremost emigrants and helpers, and after that those who followed them in goodness

This means that other sahaba are conditional in praise, such as praising them after they gave bay'at al-ridwan

This conditionality is general, unless there's a mutawatir hadith about their akhira, like "Fatima is the lady of the women of paradise" and "al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the masters of the youth of paradise"

Even that phrase "followed them in goodness" indicates that the emigrants and helpers are praised for their long-standing goodness, and implying that if that goodness is removed, the praise is removed

However, this verse does obligate having good opinion about the generality of the early emigrants and helpers, which is the reading we get from some Imams of the Progeny ع

 

 

Quran has praised all the muhajiroon and ansar. 

 

59:8

لِلْفُقَرَآءِ ٱلْمُهَـٰجِرِينَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُخْرِجُوا۟ مِن دِيَـٰرِهِمْ وَأَمْوَٰلِهِمْ يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًۭا مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ وَرِضْوَٰنًۭا وَيَنصُرُونَ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُۥٓ ۚ أُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلصَّـٰدِقُونَ ٨

 

˹Some of the gains will be˺ for poor emigrants who were driven out of their homes and wealth, seeking Allah’s bounty and pleasure, and standing up for Allah and His Messenger. They are the ones true in faith.

 

 

59:

وَٱلَّذِينَ تَبَوَّءُو ٱلدَّارَ وَٱلْإِيمَـٰنَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ يُحِبُّونَ مَنْ هَاجَرَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَا يَجِدُونَ فِى صُدُورِهِمْ حَاجَةًۭ مِّمَّآ أُوتُوا۟ وَيُؤْثِرُونَ عَلَىٰٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ وَلَوْ كَانَ بِهِمْ خَصَاصَةٌۭ ۚ وَمَن يُوقَ شُحَّ نَفْسِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْمُفْلِحُونَ 

 

As for those who had settled in the city and ˹embraced˺ the faith before ˹the arrival of˺ the emigrants, they love whoever immigrates to them, never having a desire in their hearts for whatever ˹of the gains˺ is given to the emigrants. They give ˹the emigrants˺ preference over themselves even though they may be in need. And whoever is saved from the selfishness of their own souls, it is they who are ˹truly˺ successfull

[Panzerwaffe]

It’s a doctrinal necessity for Sunnis , just like justifying a God appointed imam is for imami  Shias 

[Abu Nur]

58 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

It’s a doctrinal necessity for Sunnis , just like justifying a God appointed imam is for imami  Shias 

One can reasonable prove that God appoints Imams, while proving by reason that Adalat al-Sahaba is a false concept as long as Sunni definition of sahaba holds.

Edited January 30 by Abu Nur

[Abu Nur]

Here is very good analysis:
 

 

 

 

[shafii]

40 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

One can reasonable prove that God appoints Imams, while proving by reason that Adalat al-Sahaba is a false concept as long as Sunni definition of sahaba holds.

You can't prove allah appoint imams to guide the humanity all the time. Shia Mahdi doesn't guide anyone.

[Abu Nur]

5 minutes ago, shafii said:

You can't prove allah appoint imams to guide the humanity all the time. Shia Mahdi doesn't guide anyone.

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) appoints Imams to guide the humanity by His own will. This is proven by Qur'an itself. As a claim that Imam Mehdi (عليه السلام) doesn't guide anyone, well you need to prove it. Just because he is in Ghaybah according to us, it is not a proof that he does not guide anyone.

[shafii]

19 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) appoints Imams to guide the humanity by His own will. This is proven by Qur'an itself. As a claim that Imam Mehdi (عليه السلام) doesn't guide anyone, well you need to prove it. Just because he is in Ghaybah according to us, it is not a proof that he does not guide anyone.

The verses in which Allah says "allah made them imams" doesn't prove divine appointment. 

 

25:74

وَٱلَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ رَبَّنَا هَبْ لَنَا مِنْ أَزْوَٰجِنَا وَذُرِّيَّـٰتِنَا قُرَّةَ أَعْيُنٍۢ وَٱجْعَلْنَا لِلْمُتَّقِينَ إِمَامًا ٧٤

 

˹They are˺ those who pray, “Our Lord! Bless us with ˹pious˺ spouses and offspring who will be the joy of our hearts, and make us imams for the righteous.”

It is similar to if we says that allah made "khamenai the ruler of Iran", it doesn't mean that allah divinely appointed khamenai.

And it is upon you to prove that the Shia Mahdi is guiding not us. All you can do is say he guides us in a manner that sun benifit us behind the clouds which anyone can say about anyone. I can say ibn Abbas is guiding me in ghaibi manner, and the one who denies it should prove it to me that he isn't guiding me.

[shafii]

Plus we Shia scholars who denied that Shia Mahdi guide and benifit us. 

This Ghaybah that has taken more than a thousand years and maybe it shall keep going for thousands or millions of years. The believers living in it did not and do not benefit from their hidden Imam – may Allah hasten his appearance – in Usool or Furu`, and all else which is said is nothing but illusions and imaginations and playing with people’s minds. 

Mashra`at Bihar al-Anwar”, volume 1 page 408:

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Abu Nur]

11 minutes ago, shafii said:

The verses in which Allah says "allah made them imams" doesn't prove divine appointment. 

 

25:74

وَٱلَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ رَبَّنَا هَبْ لَنَا مِنْ أَزْوَٰجِنَا وَذُرِّيَّـٰتِنَا قُرَّةَ أَعْيُنٍۢ وَٱجْعَلْنَا لِلْمُتَّقِينَ إِمَامًا ٧٤

 

˹They are˺ those who pray, “Our Lord! Bless us with ˹pious˺ spouses and offspring who will be the joy of our hearts, and make us imams for the righteous.”

If Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) says And We made from among them leaders guiding by Our command. This is literally an divine appointment.

Quote

And it is upon you to prove that the Shia Mahdi is guiding not us. All you can do is say he guides us in a manner that sun benifit us behind the clouds which anyone can say about anyone. I can say ibn Abbas is guiding me in ghaibi manner, and the one who denies it should prove it to me that he isn't guiding me.

But if we have authentic narrations that he do benefit us in Ghaybah, that itself is a proof for us. When you say "Shia Mahdi doesn't guide anyone", according to your belief this is correct, because "Shia" Mehdi does not exist in your viewpoint. From our viewpoint He does exist and he also help us in the manner that only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) know best.

I want ask you a question. Where does it says in Qur'an that an Imam must be an guide for all time?

[Abu Nur]

27 minutes ago, shafii said:

Plus we Shia scholars who denied that Shia Mahdi guide and benifit us. 

This Ghaybah that has taken more than a thousand years and maybe it shall keep going for thousands or millions of years. The believers living in it did not and do not benefit from their hidden Imam – may Allah hasten his appearance – in Usool or Furu`, and all else which is said is nothing but illusions and imaginations and playing with people’s minds. 

Mashra`at Bihar al-Anwar”, volume 1 page 408:

This is his own opinion, other scholars says otherwise.

[shafii]

9 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

If Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) says And We made from among them leaders guiding by Our command. This is literally an divine appointment

That's about prophets.

9 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

If Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) says And We made from among them leaders guiding by Our command. This is literally an divine appointment.

But if we have authentic narrations that he do benefit us in Ghaybah, that itself is a proof for us. When you say "Shia Mahdi doesn't guide anyone", according to your belief this is correct, because "Shia" Mehdi does not exist in your viewpoint. From our viewpoint He does exist and he also help us in the manner that only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) know best.

I want ask you a question. Where does it says in Qur'an that an Imam must be an guide for all time?

It's a Shia belief that allah sent imams at all time time to guide people otherwise it is against the lutf of Allah. 

Ali bin Ibrahim, on the authority of his father, on the authority of Muhammad bin Abi Umair, on the authority of Mansour bin Yunus and Sa’dan bin Muslim, on the authority of Ishaq bin Ammar, on the authority of Abu Abdullah (peace be upon him), who said: I heard him say: The earth is not empty except that there is an Imam in it, so that if the believers add something, he returns them, and if they lack something, he completes it for them. 

Kafi 

Muhammad bin `Isa and Ahmad bin Muhammad both told us, from al-Hasan bin Mahboub, from Ya`qoub al-Sarraj that he said: I said to abu `Abdillah (as): “Would the earth be devoid from an apparent man of knowledge from among you, so that the people may seek him in their issues of Halal and Haram?” He (عليه السلام) replied: “O abu Yusuf, NO. This is clear in the book of Allah: {O you who have believed, persevere and endure} against your enemies who oppose you {and remain stationed} with your Imam {and fear Allah} with what he orders you to do.”

Basair ud darajaat.

Both narrations are authentic. Basically he has the duty to physically guide all the time.

10 minutes ago, Abu Nur said:

This is his own opinion, other scholars says otherwise.

That's just not his opinion. 

As for the reason for Ghaybah: It is the fear the oppressors caused him (عليه السلام) to have, and the restrains they placed on his hands, disabling him from exercising his authority which was given to him. Benefiting from the Imam is only possible if he was in authority, and if he was obeyed, and if he was free to fulfill his duties, to punish the criminals and fight the transgressors and apply the law, and to grant the oppressed justice from his oppressors, and all of this is not possible unless he is in authority. If he was prevented from doing so, then his obligatory duty to lead is also dropped from him, and if he fears for himself then Ghaybah becomes obligatory and hiding becomes necessary 

Shareef murtada, 

Ghaybah pg.52:

 

[Ashvazdanghe]

1 hour ago, shafii said:

It is similar to if we says that allah made "khamenai the ruler of Iran", it doesn't mean that allah divinely appointed khamenai

Salam respectfully he has been appointed by the Assembly of Experts of the Leadership or as the Council of Experts according to Article 111 of the Iranian Constitution, which has no relation to divine appointment which you have compared apples with oranges .

1 hour ago, shafii said:

I can say ibn Abbas is guiding me in ghaibi manner, and the one who denies it should prove it to me that he isn't guiding me.

Sunnis don't believe to guidance of anyone even alive people which you even have not believed to guidance of ibn Abbas during era of three sunni caliphs even you don't believe to guidance of three sunni caliphs which all of just deceased persons who you are revering as great persons in your history . 

[shafii]

52 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Sunnis don't believe to guidance of anyone even alive people which you even have not believed to guidance of ibn Abbas during era of three sunni caliphs even you don't believe to guidance of three sunni caliphs which all of just deceased persons who you are revering as great persons in your history . 

You clearly didn't understood anything

[Guest Imām Zayd al-Shahīd]

On 1/29/2025 at 2:24 AM, shafii said:

Quran has praised all the muhajiroon and ansar. 

 

59:8

لِلْفُقَرَآءِ ٱلْمُهَـٰجِرِينَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُخْرِجُوا۟ مِن دِيَـٰرِهِمْ وَأَمْوَٰلِهِمْ يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًۭا مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ وَرِضْوَٰنًۭا وَيَنصُرُونَ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُۥٓ ۚ أُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلصَّـٰدِقُونَ ٨

 

˹Some of the gains will be˺ for poor emigrants who were driven out of their homes and wealth, seeking Allah’s bounty and pleasure, and standing up for Allah and His Messenger. They are the ones true in faith.

 

 

59:

وَٱلَّذِينَ تَبَوَّءُو ٱلدَّارَ وَٱلْإِيمَـٰنَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ يُحِبُّونَ مَنْ هَاجَرَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَا يَجِدُونَ فِى صُدُورِهِمْ حَاجَةًۭ مِّمَّآ أُوتُوا۟ وَيُؤْثِرُونَ عَلَىٰٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ وَلَوْ كَانَ بِهِمْ خَصَاصَةٌۭ ۚ وَمَن يُوقَ شُحَّ نَفْسِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْمُفْلِحُونَ 

 

As for those who had settled in the city and ˹embraced˺ the faith before ˹the arrival of˺ the emigrants, they love whoever immigrates to them, never having a desire in their hearts for whatever ˹of the gains˺ is given to the emigrants. They give ˹the emigrants˺ preference over themselves even though they may be in need. And whoever is saved from the selfishness of their own souls, it is they who are ˹truly˺ successfull

Salam alaykum

 

This verse is also clear that this praise refers to the first Muhajirin رض, who were poor because they were expelled from their lives, homes and livelihoods, and the Ansar who embraced them, and is confirmed in the Aya in Tawba adds that qualification.

Those who migrated after the victories cannot be compared to those who migrated before the victories. As Allah says

Those of you who spent [their means] and fought before the victory are not equal [to others]. They are greater in rank than those who have spent and fought afterwards. Yet Allah has promised the best reward to each and Allah is well aware of what you do. [Hadid 10]

This is because there's a moral distinction between those who migrated to Madina and aided the Messenger ص when Islam was persecuted and weak and those who migrated when Islam had become secure and had achieved victories in Badr and Ahzab. 

The first foremost ones are أفضل and have the more secure praise, because they have proven themselves and have thus achieved a high level of divine grace; and those who migrated afterwards or who were from the children of Ansar and who did not make the same level of sacrifices have the conditional that they follow in the footsteps of those first and foremost who migrated, and then those who helped. 

 

Of course, this still does not mean that an early companion is infallible or cannot be corrupted or that their errors can't be identified by comparison with the Qur'an or the Consensus.

But it does seem to obligate having a default good opinion of the first Muhajirin and Ansar رض, as some scholars from the Progeny ع have maintained. 

[Guest Imām Zayd al-Shahīd]

On 1/29/2025 at 8:20 AM, shafii said:

Abu Bakr, umar, usman were (some of the) foremost among muhajiroon.

Yes. 

Edited January 30 by Imām Zayd al-Shahīd
Slight alteration of the quote for greater accuracy

[shafii]

3 minutes ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

This verse is also clear that this praise refers to the first Muhajirin رض, who were poor because they were expelled from their lives, homes and livelihoods, and the Ansar who embraced them, and is confirmed in the Aya in Tawba adds that qualification.

This verse refers to generality of muhajiroon. The "poor" doesn't only meant literal poor, it is is figurative. We also use "poor" for someone who was oppressed.

[shafii]

And most of the muhajiroon if not all were poor. Those who were rich, got their property stolen by the quraish. They became rich after they started their businesses in Medina.

[Abu Nur]

5 hours ago, shafii said:

That's about prophets.

Prove me that it is about the Prophets only and that among the Children of Israel means only the Prophets.

"And (remember) when his Lord tried Ibrahim with His commands, and he fulfilled them, He said: I have appointed you an Imam for mankind. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? He said: My covenant includes not the unjust." (Surah al-Baqarah, 2:124).

Prove me that my offspring here means only Prophets and no one else among the offspring of Ibrahim. Think about it. If the Imamah is for Prophets only, then the statement "My covenant includes not the unjust."  will never exist, because Prophets are already just. When My covenant includes not the unjust is added, then it means that there are non-prophets (a non-prophet can be just or unjust) who are just and choosed as divine appoint of Imam (عليه السلام). The same way how God appointed Talut as divine appointed King.

Allah grants His authority to whom He pleases.(6) Allah cares for all and He knows all things.”(Qur’an 2:247)

Quote

It's a Shia belief that allah sent imams at all time time to guide people otherwise it is against the lutf of Allah. 

Ali bin Ibrahim, on the authority of his father, on the authority of Muhammad bin Abi Umair, on the authority of Mansour bin Yunus and Sa’dan bin Muslim, on the authority of Ishaq bin Ammar, on the authority of Abu Abdullah (peace be upon him), who said: I heard him say: The earth is not empty except that there is an Imam in it, so that if the believers add something, he returns them, and if they lack something, he completes it for them. 

Kafi 

Muhammad bin `Isa and Ahmad bin Muhammad both told us, from al-Hasan bin Mahboub, from Ya`qoub al-Sarraj that he said: I said to abu `Abdillah (as): “Would the earth be devoid from an apparent man of knowledge from among you, so that the people may seek him in their issues of Halal and Haram?” He (عليه السلام) replied: “O abu Yusuf, NO. This is clear in the book of Allah: {O you who have believed, persevere and endure} against your enemies who oppose you {and remain stationed} with your Imam {and fear Allah} with what he orders you to do.”

Basair ud darajaat.

Both narrations are authentic. Basically he has the duty to physically guide all the time.

Our belief is that there must be always an Imam (عليه السلام) yes. The only thing is that if Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) decide to put the Imam (عليه السلام) to ghaybah, then they don't have that access of apparent Imam. This why we have an concept of apparent and hidden Imam (عليه السلام). So in our belief it is not necessary that Imam (عليه السلام) must always guide people in this physical world. It is true that when it comes to Fiq and all apparent differences we don't have access to Imam (عليه السلام) to fix them, this is the whole point of the Ghaybah. Because the nature of Ghaybah is that if an scholar claim that he met the Imam and he advice him, then others scholars can come and disagree with them. While if he was an apparent, there would not be such an differences.

Quote

That's just not his opinion. 

As for the reason for Ghaybah: It is the fear the oppressors caused him (عليه السلام) to have, and the restrains they placed on his hands, disabling him from exercising his authority which was given to him. Benefiting from the Imam is only possible if he was in authority, and if he was obeyed, and if he was free to fulfill his duties, to punish the criminals and fight the transgressors and apply the law, and to grant the oppressed justice from his oppressors, and all of this is not possible unless he is in authority. If he was prevented from doing so, then his obligatory duty to lead is also dropped from him, and if he fears for himself then Ghaybah becomes obligatory and hiding becomes necessary 

Shareef murtada, 

Ghaybah pg.52:

This is different from previous text. It is again Scholar opinion. There are a lot Shia Scholars who believe that Imam do help his Shias in Ghaybah.

Edited January 30 by Abu Nur

[Guest Imām Zayd al-Shahīd]

5 hours ago, shafii said:

This verse refers to generality of muhajiroon. The "poor" doesn't only meant literal poor, it is is figurative. We also use "poor" for someone who was oppressed.

My emphasis wasn't on the poverty; it was on the time of the hijra.

There's a difference between the hijra before Islam had established itself in Madina and the hijra after the victory against the Ahzab and the Bay'a al-Ridwan when Islam established itself in Madina.

That is what Allah means when He specifies the First Foremost of the Emigrants.

Or, as some have said, it means those who prayed to both Qiblas.

The fundamental point is that the earlier the hijra with the Prophet ص, the more sincerity they have demonstrated in the cause of Allah, and so the greater praise they receive

The earlier emigrants are superior in merit to the later emigrants, and in that Aya in Tawba, they are given priority of praise, followed by those who risked their lives and livelihoods and reputations by embracing and housing and helping them, followed by those who emerged later, either from the children of Ansar, or new waves of emigrants, or from surrounding tribes. 

 

[shafii]

20 hours ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

My emphasis wasn't on the poverty; it was on the time of the hijra.

There's a difference between the hijra before Islam had established itself in Madina and the hijra after the victory against the Ahzab and the Bay'a al-Ridwan when Islam established itself in Madina.

That is what Allah means when He specifies the First Foremost of the Emigrants.

Or, as some have said, it means those who prayed to both Qiblas.

The fundamental point is that the earlier the hijra with the Prophet ص, the more sincerity they have demonstrated in the cause of Allah, and so the greater praise they receive

The earlier emigrants are superior in merit to the later emigrants, and in that Aya in Tawba, they are given priority of praise, followed by those who risked their lives and livelihoods and reputations by embracing and housing and helping them, followed by those who emerged later, either from the children of Ansar, or new waves of emigrants, or from surrounding tribes. 

 

I never said denied that early muhajireen and ansar were better than the latter. The point is all of them were praised even in the verse of surah Hadid that you quoted it clearly says allah promised all of them the best.

On 1/30/2025 at 4:22 PM, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

Those of you who spent [their means] and fought before the victory are not equal [to others]. They are greater in rank than those who have spent and fought afterwards. Yet Allah has promised the best reward to each and Allah is well aware of what you do. [Hadid 10]

 

Edited January 31 by shafii

[Guest Imām Zayd al-Shahīd]

1 hour ago, shafii said:

I never said denied that early muhajireen and ansar were better than the latter. The point is all of them were praised even in the verse of surah Hadid that you quoted it clearly says allah promised all of them the best.

 

That's only because they are of those who followed the earlier Muhajirin and Ansar رض in goodness, as the Aya in Tawba says

The later ones who emulated the earlier ones and spent and fought are praised:

Those of you who spent [their means] and fought before the victory are not equal [to others] [Hadid 10]

So if ever they stopped emulating the earlier ones, then they would not be praised, and they would lose their deeds and lose their right to what was promised them for their good deeds

Allah warns of this possibility

They will not cease fighting you until they turn you away from your religion, if they can. And whoever of you turns away from his religion and dies faithless—they are the ones whose works have failed in this world and the Hereafter. They shall be the inmates of the Fire, and they shall remain in it [forever]. [Baqara 217]

And despite this warning, the trials during the Prophet's ص life did separate the wheat from the chaff. Allah says about such: 

As for those who believe and then disbelieve, then believe [again] and then disbelieve and then increase in disbelief, Allah shall never forgive them, nor shall He guide them to any way. [Nisaa 137]

Indeed, in truth, this verse applies even to the time after the Prophet's ص life. For no matter how great the praise of group of believer when they are believers, and the promise of great reward, that will always be conditional to their faith and obedience to the Allah and His Messenger ص

So my point is that the verse in Tawba obligates a default good opinion for the generality of the first and foremost Muhajirin and Ansar رض because there's no condition attached to them. But even this does not prove the doctrine of 'adalat for each individual on each matter at all times.

Having a good opinion of Zubayr for example is not the same as saying he was 'aadil in the Battle of Jamal. The truth is in that event he was not and we need to resign ourselves to truth.

Having a good opinion means that we don't ascribe bad motives to him and that we instead consider this error, however grave in consequence for the Umma, in light of all the service and sacrifice he did for the cause. 

[shafii]

14 minutes ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

Indeed, in truth, this verse applies even to the time after the Prophet's ص life. For no matter how great the praise of group of believer when they are believers, and the promise of great reward, that will always be conditional to their faith and obedience to the Allah and His Messenger ص

That's batil. If allah praises a group that means by default that the praise is unconditional. That would mean allah didn't knew that they will going to change. 

[shafii]

On 1/30/2025 at 7:39 PM, Abu Nur said:

Prove me that it is about the Prophets only and that among the Children of Israel means only the Prophets.

 

21:7

وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُۥٓ إِسْحَـٰقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ نَافِلَةًۭ ۖ وَكُلًّۭا جَعَلْنَا صَـٰلِحِينَ ٧

 

And We blessed him with Isaac ˹as a son˺ and Jacob ˹as a grandson˺, as an additional favour—making all of them righteous 

 

 

21:73

وَجَعَلْنَـٰهُمْ أَئِمَّةًۭ يَهْدُونَ بِأَمْرِنَا وَأَوْحَيْنَآ إِلَيْهِمْ فِعْلَ ٱلْخَيْرَٰتِ وَإِقَامَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةِ وَإِيتَآءَ ٱلزَّكَوٰةِ ۖ وَكَانُوا۟ لَنَا عَـٰبِدِينَ ٧٣

 

We ˹also˺ made them leaders, guiding by Our command, and inspired them to do good deeds, establish prayer, and pay alms-tax. And they were devoted to Our worship.

the verse was about ishaq, yaqoub and other prophets.

On 1/30/2025 at 7:39 PM, Abu Nur said:

Prove me that my offspring here means only Prophets and no one else among the offspring of Ibrahim. Think about it. If the Imamah is for Prophets only, then the statement "My covenant includes not the unjust."  will never exist, because Prophets are already just. When My covenant includes not the unjust is added, then it means that there are non-prophets (a non-prophet can be just or unjust) who are just and choosed as divine appoint of Imam (عليه السلام). The same way how God appointed Talut as divine appointed King.

 

You used a verse in which they were made imams guiding by Allah's command, to prove that they were divine appointment. That verse was clearly about the prophets. The verses in which Allah made imams who are other than prophets do not have "guiding by our command", thus that's not divine appointment.

25:74

 

وَٱلَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ رَبَّنَا هَبْ لَنَا مِنْ أَزْوَٰجِنَا وَذُرِّيَّـٰتِنَا قُرَّةَ أَعْيُنٍۢ وَٱجْعَلْنَا لِلْمُتَّقِينَ إِمَامًا 

 

 

˹They are˺ those who pray, “Our Lord! Bless us with ˹pious˺ spouses and offspring who will be the joy of our hearts, and make us imams for the righteous.

Surely Allah does not divinely appoint the imams of righteous.

On 1/30/2025 at 7:39 PM, Abu Nur said:

Allah grants His authority to whom He pleases.(6) Allah cares for all and He knows all things.”(Qur’an 2:247)

That also doesn't prove divine appointment.

 

27:62
أَمَّن يُجِيبُ ٱلْمُضْطَرَّ إِذَا دَعَاهُ وَيَكْشِفُ ٱلسُّوٓءَ وَيَجْعَلُكُمْ خُلَفَآءَ ٱلْأَرْضِ ۗ أَءِلَـٰهٌۭ مَّعَ ٱللَّهِ ۚ قَلِيلًۭا مَّا تَذَكَّرُونَ ٦٢

Or ˹ask them,˺ “Who responds to the distressed when they cry to Him, relieving ˹their˺ affliction, and ˹Who˺ makes you successors in the earth? Is it another god besides Allah? Yet you are hardly mindful!”
 

This verse is about allah making kuffar successors in the earth. It doesn't mean kuffar were divinely appointed.

On 1/30/2025 at 7:39 PM, Abu Nur said:

Our belief is that there must be always an Imam (عليه السلام) yes. The only thing is that if Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) decide to put the Imam (عليه السلام) to ghaybah, then they don't have that access of apparent Imam. This why we have an concept of apparent and hidden Imam (عليه السلام). So in our belief it is not necessary that Imam (عليه السلام) must always guide people in this physical world. It is true that when it comes to Fiq and all apparent differences we don't have access to Imam (عليه السلام) to fix them, this is the whole point of the Ghaybah. Because the nature of Ghaybah is that if an scholar claim that he met the Imam and he advice him, then others scholars can come and disagree with them. While if he was an apparent, there would not be such an differences.

Read the ahadith again. The ahadith is that there must always be an imam who is a Marja to people in matters of halal and haram. That's the Shia belief. They believe Qur'an and sunnah are not enough that's why we need an imam to guide us. Then by default allah can't command him to hide and guide. That's like someone who believe that principal must always appoint a teacher so that students can ask him regarding any subject but also believe in the same time that principal commanded him hide and because of that he couldn't guide the students. It will be said either it is obligatory upon the principal to appoint a teacher or it is not. A hidden teacher is like non existent teacher in terms of benifit.

On 1/30/2025 at 2:59 PM, shafii said:

Ali bin Ibrahim, on the authority of his father, on the authority of Muhammad bin Abi Umair, on the authority of Mansour bin Yunus and Sa’dan bin Muslim, on the authority of Ishaq bin Ammar, on the authority of Abu Abdullah (peace be upon him), who said: I heard him say: The earth is not empty except that there is an Imam in it, so that if the believers add something, he returns them, and if they lack something, he completes it for them. 

Kafi 

Muhammad bin `Isa and Ahmad bin Muhammad both told us, from al-Hasan bin Mahboub, from Ya`qoub al-Sarraj that he said: I said to abu `Abdillah (as): “Would the earth be devoid from an apparent man of knowledge from among you, so that the people may seek him in their issues of Halal and Haram?” He (عليه السلام) replied: “O abu Yusuf, NO. This is clear in the book of Allah: {O you who have believed, persevere and endure} against your enemies who oppose you {and remain stationed} with your Imam {and fear Allah} with what he orders you to do.”

Basair ud darajaat.

 

When he was in ghaybah sughra in which he was in contact with his Shia via his deputies, he didn't guide them either. Kulayni lived in the same time, and he has to write kafi since he had a letter from a Shia that he was very confused regarding contradictory ahadith. Look up the tawqi'at of the Shia Mahdi and see how little his letters were about fiqh and mostly about khums.

On 1/30/2025 at 7:39 PM, Abu Nur said:

This is different from previous text. It is again Scholar opinion. There are a lot Shia Scholars who believe that Imam do help his Shias in Ghaybah

It is a scholarly text but it is supported by Shia ahadith. It is authentically reported that the main reason why the imam will go in ghaybah is that of fear. And Shia scholars accept this opinion, so it isn't just lone opinion of a scholar.

 

 

 

 

[Guest Imām Zayd al-Shahīd]

15 minutes ago, shafii said:

That's batil. If allah praises a group that means by default that the praise is unconditional. That would mean allah didn't knew that they will going to change. 

 

The doctrine you speak of is: When Allah praises a group, He knows they will not change. 

That is a doctrine of a sect which has no basis in Qur'an, Consensus Sunna or 'Aql. 

And it is contrary to Qur'an, Sunna and 'Aql.

As to Qur'an, it is that Allah praised the generality of believers in early Medinan verses, but in later Medinan verses mentions how some believers became disbelievers.

In early Medina: 

Indeed those who believed and those who have migrated and waged jihad in the way of Allah—it is they who expect Allah’s mercy, and Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful. [Baqara 218]

You are the best nation [ever] brought forth for mankind: you bid what is right and forbid what is wrong, and have faith in Allah. [Aal 'Imran 110]

In later Medina:

As for those who believe and then disbelieve, then believe [again] and then disbelieve and then increase in disbelief, Allah shall never forgive them, nor shall He guide them to any way. [Nisaa 137]

That is because they believed and then disbelieved, so their hearts were sealed. Hence, they do not understand. [Munafiqun 3]

They swear by Allah that they did not say it. But they certainly did utter the word of unfaith and renounced faith after their submission [Tawba 74]

That falsifies the doctrine. These verses decisively show that praising a group at one point does not preclude the possibility that a part of that group will lose that praise in the future by altering their behaviour.

As to Sunna, it is authenticated by scholars of tradition and relied on by the Umma that: 

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, 'My companions!' Then it will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you."

As to 'Aql, the language in "Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Allah" is does not mean that they will never commit wrongs in future that would displease Allah. 

It is a point of consensus that baghy or transgression against a just Imam, especially 'Ali ع, is haram and to initiate a violent uprising that causes division and sheds blood of believers is haram, and Allah is never pleased with haram or with division of the Umma and bloodshed among believers.

And it is a point of Consensus as to who stepped into this displeasing act, and they were from among the Muhajirin and Ansar. 

So it is an established point in Consensus history that that verse does not preclude the commission of displeasing acts.

Allah was pleased with them and later, some acted in a way that violated the Qur'an and went counter to the severe warning of the Prophet ص and so displeased Allah. 

They severed the friendship with 'Ali ع and acted as enemies when the Prophet ص had said:

"O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him, and be the enemy of whoever treats him as an enemy."

 

Abdullah ibn Mas’ud reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Disparaging a Muslim is an act of wickedness, and fighting him is an act of unbelief.”

 

Jarir reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, asked me to make the people quiet on the occasion of the farewell pilgrimage. Then, the Prophet said,

“Do not return to unbelief after me by striking the necks of one another.”

So the doctrine you have pointed to is batil; not because a sect thinks this, (every sect makes claims of what is haqq and batil based on its narrow sectarian evidence).

It is batil because it is against the Qur'an, the Consensus Sunna, and 'Aql, aided further by consensus history and authentic transmission from the Prophet ص

 

*

Our good opinion based on those verses goes no further than to recognise that Allah was pleased with their service and sacrifice, and so we do not assume evil motives to their hearts, and instead hope for them the forgiveness of the Lord. And to Him we return. 

[shafii]

6 minutes ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

 

Indeed those who believed and those who have migrated and waged jihad in the way of Allah—it is they who expect Allah’s mercy, and Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful. [Baqara 218]

You are the best nation [ever] brought forth for mankind: you bid what is right and forbid what is wrong, and have faith in Allah. [Aal 'Imran 110]

In later Medina:

As for those who believe and then disbelieve, then believe [again] and then disbelieve and then increase in disbelief, Allah shall never forgive them, nor shall He guide them to any way. [Nisaa 137]

That is because they believed and then disbelieved, so their hearts were sealed. Hence, they do not understand. [Munafiqun 3]

They swear by Allah that they did not say it. But they certainly did utter the word of unfaith and renounced faith after their submission [Tawba 74]

The verse of surah baqarah is for those who believed, migrate and waged jihad. The verse of surah nisa, munafiqoon and tawba isn't clear that it is talking about the those muhajireen. It can be very well talking about some random arab converts. 

 

8 minutes ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

As to Sunna, it is authenticated by scholars of tradition and relied on by the Umma that: 

The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, 'My companions!' Then it will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you

This hadith according to us was about those who apostated and followed false prophets, such as musailama. It isn't about people of badr or people of tree who are people of Jannah according to authentic ahadith.

12 minutes ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

As to 'Aql, the language in "Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Allah" is does not mean that they will never commit wrongs in future that would displease Allah. 

It is a point of consensus that baghy or transgression against a just Imam, especially 'Ali ع, is haram and to initiate a violent uprising that causes division and sheds blood of believers is haram, and Allah is never pleased with haram or with division of the Umma and bloodshed among believers.

And it is a point of Consensus as to who stepped into this displeasing act, and they were from among the Muhajirin and Ansar. 

So it is an established point in Consensus history that that verse does not preclude the commission of displeasing acts

That's also not a problem. If a companion fell into some sin, he would be forgiven either due to repentance or other good deeds. You do know very well if you are well versed in history that  zaidi imams usually fought and killed each other over authority. The excuse you would give to those imams will be our excuse for the sahabah.

 

 

 

 

[Muslim2010]

20 minutes ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

So the doctrine you have pointed to is batil; not because a sect thinks this, (every sect makes claims of what is haqq and batil based on its narrow sectarian evidence).

It is batil because it is against the Qur'an, the Consensus Sunna, and 'Aql, aided further by consensus history and authentic transmission from the Prophet ص

Our good opinion based on those verses goes no further than to recognise that Allah was pleased with their service and sacrifice, and so we do not assume evil motives to their hearts, and instead hope for them the forgiveness of the Lord. And to Him we return. 

I like to add further in the light of verses of Quran, there are three groups of companions of the prophet s.a.a.w:

The Quran addresses the companions in three tones ie praising, warning and taunting that they may turn from the religion, thus divides them into three groups :

1-    The First group addressed by Quran as believers, and they are righteous. Quran praises them.

All Muslims respect them as Quran praises them.

2-    The Second Group addressed by Quran as believers and they are not sincere in their actions. Quran warns them.

The believers are companions, they are similarly addressed as in the verses for the first group, but they are warned for their actions.

Authentic Sunni traditions confirm that there have been some companions who used to oppose the Prophet's order and quarrel with him in several occasions, etc.

3.    The Third Group addressed by Quran who are hypocrites (Munafiqeen) among sahaba they may turn away from religion. Quran taunts them.

I quote one verse confirming the presence of hypocrites (munafiqeen) among the sahaba:

وَمِمَّنْ حَوْلَكُم مِّنَ الْأَعْرَابِ مُنَافِقُونَ ۖ وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ ۖ مَرَدُوا عَلَى النِّفَاقِ لَا تَعْلَمُهُمْ ۖ نَحْنُ نَعْلَمُهُمْ ۚ سَنُعَذِّبُهُم مَّرَّتَيْنِ ثُمَّ يُرَدُّونَ إِلَىٰ عَذَابٍ عَظِيمٍ

And among those around you of the Arabs (Bedouins) are hypocrites, and [also] from the people of Madinah. They have become accustomed to hypocrisy. You, [O Muhammad], do not know them, [but] We know them. We will punish them twice [in this world]; then they will be returned to a great punishment. (9:101)

Allah talks about the hypocrites in this verse who are around the Prophet who pretend to be his sincere companions and even Prophet does not know them according to the above verse.

Further details can be seen at the given link:

 

wasalam

Edited January 31 by Muslim2010

[Guest Imām Zayd al-Shahīd]

1 hour ago, shafii said:

The verse of surah baqarah is for those who believed, migrate and waged jihad. The verse of surah nisa, munafiqoon and tawba isn't clear that it is talking about the those muhajireen. It can be very well talking about some random arab converts. 

 

This hadith according to us was about those who apostated and followed false prophets, such as musailama. It isn't about people of badr or people of tree who are people of Jannah according to authentic ahadith.

That's also not a problem. If a companion fell into some sin, he would be forgiven either due to repentance or other good deeds. You do know very well if you are well versed in history that  zaidi imams usually fought and killed each other over authority. The excuse you would give to those imams will be our excuse for the sahabah.

 

 

 

 

Actually, we don't give excuse. We say that in any fighting between two claimants of Imamate, either one or both are committing a grave sin, and if they do not repent, they will face Allah with that sin.

The blood and wealth of a believer and the security of the Umma is not something we take lightly. 

All we say about these claimants is that today we do not know which is which, so we can't make a judgment, and we take what is good from them, and as to the ambiguous we refer it back to Allah.

 

Calling them 'Imams' is equivalent to calling them political leaders, whether Just عادل or Unjust جائر. 

But in cases where we have Imams who are verified by subsequent consensus to be Just, such as Zayd ع and al-Nafs al-Zakiyya ع and al-Hadi ع and al-Nasir ع and the like, then we call them Imam as in Just Imam. 

There's no individual infallibility or consensus Sunna giving us Prophetic guarantees for them - so we focus on those who we know are major Imams of Justice ع and try to emulate them and call upon our leaders to emulate them.

We apply the same reasoning to the Companions, except that we have greater hope for the repentance of the Sabiqun Awwalun (first foremost) from the Muhajirin and Ansar رض‌ because of their celebrated past, to which we all owe a great debt. But we do not include in the religion of Allah any guarantees of paradise based on isolated reports or speculative arguments - and it would be speculative to assume that all Imams from Ahl al-Bayt will be just. 

Indeed, we narrate what warns of the opposite: that the Prophet ص prayed that Allah would remove His aid from those "Imams" from his descendants who would act unjustly and transgressively. The report contains the phrase الإمام الجائر المعتدي

So calling them Imams is not always a praise, just as it is not always a praise in the Qur'an. It is sometimes a political fact or a case of ambiguity. 

*

The point is that Allah does not make that distinction when praising the believers in general at a time when the later culprits were believers.

This is a decisive counterexample to the assumption that Qur'anic praise for a mentioned group is a sign that all the individuals in that mentioned praised group will remain steadfast or that they will never commit something that displeases Allah. 

 

Edited January 31 by Imām Zayd al-Shahīd

[shafii]

15 minutes ago, Imām Zayd al-Shahīd said:

Actually, we don't give excuse. We say that in any fighting between two claimants of Imamate, either one or both are committing a grave sin, and if they do not repent, they will face Allah with that sin.

The blood and wealth of a believer and the security of the Umma is not something we take lightly. 

All we say about these claimants is that today we do not know which is which, so we can't make a judgment, and we take what is good from them, and as to the ambiguous we refer it back to Allah.

 

Calling them 'Imams' is equivalent to calling them political leaders, whether Just عادل or Unjust جائر. 

But in cases where we have Imams who are verified by subsequent consensus to be Just, such as Zayd ع and al-Nafs al-Zakiyya ع and al-Hadi ع and al-Nasir ع and the like, then we call them Imam as in Just Imam. 

There's no individual infallibility or consensus Sunna giving us Prophetic guarantees for them - so we focus on those who we know are major Imams of Justice ع and try to emulate them and call upon our leaders to emulate them.

We apply the same reasoning to the Companions, except that we have greater hope for the repentance of the Sabiqun Awwalun (first foremost) from the Muhajirin and Ansar رض‌ because of their celebrated past, to which we all owe a great debt. But we do not include in the religion of Allah any guarantees of paradise based on isolated reports or speculative arguments - and it would be speculative to assume that all Imams from Ahl al-Bayt will be just. 

Indeed, we narrate what warns of the opposite: that the Prophet ص prayed that Allah would remove His aid from those "Imams" from his descendants who would act unjustly and transgressively. The report contains the phrase الإمام الجائر المعتدي

So calling them Imams is not always a praise, just as it is not always a praise in the Qur'an. It is sometimes a political fact or a case of ambiguity. 

*

The point is that Allah does not make that distinction when praising the believers in general at a time when the later culprits were believers.

This is a decisive counterexample to the assumption that Qur'anic praise for a mentioned group is a sign that all the individuals in that mentioned praised group will remain steadfast or that they will never commit something that displeases Allah. 

 

We don't give excuse either. We say companions may fell into sin, minor or major, but they will repent or be forgiven because Allah praised them all. You don't want to accept that since you are mutazili in belief that allah doesn't forgive major sins except if they repented from.

Your "decisive counterexample" doesn't prove what you are trying to prove. 

[Muslim2010]

7 minutes ago, shafii said:

We don't give excuse either. We say companions may fell into sin, minor or major, but they will repent or be forgiven because Allah praised them all. You don't want to accept that since you are mutazili in belief that allah doesn't forgive major sins except if they repented from.

Your "decisive counterexample" doesn't prove what you are trying to prove. 

Shia view on companions is crystal clear as the verses of quran define and distinguish the groups of companions. Further hadith of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) classify them with evidence. The link has been mentioned in the last post and as given below:

Conclusion from the relevant thread, "We have seen that Quran addresses the groups of companions (Sahaba) in different tones including praising, warning and taunting that they may turn away from religion. Thus in this manner when Quran categorizes the sahaba we believe that truth is revealed in Quran"

wasalam

Edited January 31 by Muslim2010

[shafii]

5 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

Shia view on companions is crystal clear as the verses of quran define and distinguish the groups of companions. Further hadith of the prophet s.a.a.w classify them with evidence. The link has been mentioned in the last post and as given below:

Conclusion from the relevant thread, "We have seen that Quran addresses the groups of companions (Sahaba) in different tones including praising, warning and taunting that they may turn away from religion. Thus in this manner when Quran categorizes the sahaba we believe that truth is revealed in Quran"

wasalam

All you did was copy paste same old arguments that's not even worth refuting. I was looking at this chat and one thing that I noticed is that even if your points are refuted many times you still copy paste the same points in order to have the last word. That's not a person I would consider having discussion with.