Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis and its forgotten connection to Hadith al-Thaqalayn

[StrangerInThisWorld]

Salamun 'alaykum, 

when it comes to Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis, then a lot of people seem to forget to look at this [tragic] incident from a rational point of view and instead try to argue about things like whether 'Umar [and his group] accused our noble Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) to be in a delusional state or not or whether Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) wrote something down or not and similar to this. 

 

If one looks however at the incident and what is certain from it, then one will see a quite obvious and logical connection to Hadith al-Thaqalayn:

When Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) asked for a pen and paper in order to write something down that will give protection from deviance after him, then it should be known that he (peace and blessings be upon him) had already told to the people what would protect them from deviance after him: Kitab Allah wa 'Itrati, Ahlu Bayti! 

The religion was already complete and our noble Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) had already conveyed whatever was important for the people to know, so this incident was simply a reminder regarding what would protect his Umma from deviance from the correct way. 

And let no one try claiming that there was no reason for a reminder: Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) was already seeing clear signs of disobedience among some of his followers and this incidence is further proof for this! And the events that happened afterwards from Saqifa up to Jamal and Siffin and beyond clearly show that deviance and disunity happened and this clearly due to disobedience towards Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam)! 

Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis itself is a proof for disobedience from a group from among the companions and on the top of them: 'Umar bin al-Khattab! 

One can claim whatever one wants, but there is simply no justification for not accepting that a document is written down that protects from deviance! As for the claim that "the Book of Allah is sufficient", then it should be noted that the Book of Allah ta'ala was sent down upon Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam), who was the one asking for a pen and paper! So imagine! 

There is also another obvious point: The Book of Allah ta'ala is understood differently by different people, so which understanding should we take? Here the connection to Hadith al-Thaqalayn should again be obvious. 

 

 

Edited March 15, 2025 by StrangerInThisWorld

[StrangerInThisWorld]

This is the wording of Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis as narrated by al-Bukhari:

ائْتُونِي بِكِتَابٍ أَكْتُبُ لَكُمْ كِتَابًا لاَ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدَهُ

"Bring for me (writing) paper and I will write for you a statement after which you will not go astray." 

___

Now compare this with the wording of Hadith al-Thaqalayn as narrarted by al-Tirmidhi:

إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ تَمَسَّكْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدِي

"Indeed, I am leaving among you, that which if you hold fast to them, you shall not be misguided after me."

___

 

That which the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) mentioned as the protection from deviance in Hadith al-Thaqalayn (meaning: Kitab Allah wa 'Itrati, Ahlu Bayti!) must be that which he wanted to remind his companions before his death, especially when considering that both instances are concerning protection from deviance when he (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) is not present among them anymore. 

 

Edited April 7, 2025 by StrangerInThisWorld

[ServantOfMahdi]

Ja'far Sub'hani has made that connection in his biography of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

[StrangerInThisWorld]

On 6/3/2025 at 2:52 AM, ServantOfMahdi said:

Ja'far Sub'hani has made that connection in his biography of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

The connection is very obvious and the only reason it needs clarification is due to the systematic attempt by the early usurpers at Saqifat Bani Sa'ida to hide this information from the Umma of our Master Muhammad al-Mustafa (peace and blessings be upon him and his pure family). 

An interesting thing to know here is that in a narration in Sahih Al-Bukhari three points are mentioned that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) ordered in the incident of Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis. The third point - the actual information which protects one from deviation! - is mentioned in the following form:

وَالثَّالِثَةُ خَيْرٌ، إِمَّا أَنْ سَكَتَ عَنْهَا، وَإِمَّا أَنْ قَالَهَا فَنَسِيتُهَا 

The third order was something beneficial which either [Ibn `Abbas] did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot. 

___

 

The above statement is no coincidence! It's very common when the issue of successorship comes up that one of the narrators either tells us that he has "forgotten" the full information (like the above case, where there is a clear indication towards Hadith al-Thaqalayn through the statement "after which you will never go astray") or that he "didn't hear what exactly was said" (like in the case of the twelve successors!) or that he is "already old" and that one "shouldn't ask him more" (like in the case of the incident of Ghadir, where only the part regarding the Thaqalayn are mentioned without the absolutely mass transmitted statement "Whoever's master i am, then Ali is his master"). 

It's very clear that some of the narrators were under pressure and fear of saying "too much", which would lead to imprisonment or even worse, but still tried to inform us regarding what happened.

[Abu Nur]

On 10/26/2025 at 4:01 PM, StrangerInThisWorld said:

The connection is very obvious and the only reason it needs clarification is due to the systematic attempt by the early usurpers at Saqifat Bani Sa'ida to hide this information from the Umma of our Master Muhammad al-Mustafa (peace and blessings be upon him and his pure family). 

An interesting thing to know here is that in a narration in Sahih Al-Bukhari three points are mentioned that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) ordered in the incident of Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis. The third point - the actual information which protects one from deviation! - is mentioned in the following form:

وَالثَّالِثَةُ خَيْرٌ، إِمَّا أَنْ سَكَتَ عَنْهَا، وَإِمَّا أَنْ قَالَهَا فَنَسِيتُهَا 

The third order was something beneficial which either [Ibn `Abbas] did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot. 

___

 

The above statement is no coincidence! It's very common when the issue of successorship comes up that one of the narrators either tells us that he has "forgotten" the full information (like the above case, where there is a clear indication towards Hadith al-Thaqalayn through the statement "after which you will never go astray") or that he "didn't hear what exactly was said" (like in the case of the twelve successors!) or that he is "already old" and that one "shouldn't ask him more" (like in the case of the incident of Ghadir, where only the part regarding the Thaqalayn are mentioned without the absolutely mass transmitted statement "Whoever's master i am, then Ali is his master"). 

It's very clear that some of the narrators were under pressure and fear of saying "too much", which would lead to imprisonment or even worse, but still tried to inform us regarding what happened.

 

It is very horrible what the author and scholars is waiting for them in Day of Judgement. They could not touch the Qur'an but the hadiths they did. It was warned that: 

O  People of the Book! Why do you mix the truth with falsehood and hide the truth knowingly? 3:71

Even if you bring all the reason, their inner ego or blindness will always deny. 

[StrangerInThisWorld]

12 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

It is very horrible what the author and scholars is waiting for them in Day of Judgement. They could not touch the Qur'an but the hadiths they did. It was warned that: 

O  People of the Book! Why do you mix the truth with falsehood and hide the truth knowingly? 3:71

Even if you bring all the reason, their inner ego or blindness will always deny. 

The context you've mentioned the Aya is really spot on. 

I'm pretty sure by now that someone like al-Bukhari would knowingly hide information and even change wordings in Ahadith and this even in matters of Furu'. 

An example: 

حَدَّثَنَا ‌أَبُو دَاوُدَ ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا ‌شُعْبَةُ ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنِي ‌عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ بْنُ مَيْسَرَةَ ، قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ ‌النَّزَّالَ بْنَ سَبْرَةَ ، يَقُولُ: «صَلَّى ‌عَلِيٌّ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ الظُّهْرَ فِي الرَّحَبَةِ ثُمَّ جَلَسَ فِي حَوَائِجِ النَّاسِ حَتَّى حَضَرَتِ الْعَصْرُ، ثُمَّ أُتِيَ بِكُوزٍ مِنْ مَاءٍ، فَصَبَّ مِنْهُ كَفًّا فَغَسَلَ وَجْهَهُ وَيَدَيْهِ، وَمَسَحَ عَلَى رَأْسِهِ وَرِجْلَيْهِ، ثُمَّ قَامَ فَشَرِبَ فَضْلَ الْمَاءِ، وَهُوَ قَائِمٌ، ثُمَّ قَالَ: إِنَّ نَاسًا يَكْرَهُونَ أَنْ يَشْرَبُوا وَهُمْ قِيَامٌ، وَرَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَعَلَ مِثْلَ الَّذِي فَعَلْتُ، وَقَالَ: هَذَا وُضُوءُ مَنْ لَمْ يُحْدِثْ

___

The above is a narration from the Musnad of Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi and as you see it also contains a description of the Wudu of Amir al-Muminin 'Ali bin Abi Talib (peace be upon him): "... he WASHED his face and hands and WIPED over his head and feet...". 

Now compare this with the narration found in al-Bukhari's Sahih:

حَدَّثَنَا آدَمُ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ بْنُ مَيْسَرَةَ، سَمِعْتُ النَّزَّالَ بْنَ سَبْرَةَ، يُحَدِّثُ عَنْ عَلِيٍّ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ أَنَّهُ صَلَّى الظُّهْرَ ثُمَّ قَعَدَ فِي حَوَائِجِ النَّاسِ فِي رَحَبَةِ الْكُوفَةِ حَتَّى حَضَرَتْ صَلاَةُ الْعَصْرِ، ثُمَّ أُتِيَ بِمَاءٍ فَشَرِبَ وَغَسَلَ وَجْهَهُ وَيَدَيْهِ وَذَكَرَ رَأْسَهُ وَرِجْلَيْهِ، ثُمَّ قَامَ فَشَرِبَ فَضْلَهُ وَهْوَ قَائِمٌ ثُمَّ قَالَ إِنَّ نَاسًا يَكْرَهُونَ الشُّرْبَ قَائِمًا وَإِنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم صَنَعَ مِثْلَ مَا صَنَعْتُ‏

___

Now look how he has simply changed the word "wiped over" to "mentioned" such that it states: "... he WASHED his face and hands and MENTIONED his head and feet.."

Have you ever heard of such an ablution, where you MENTION your head and feet?! 

 

Note that the chain of narrators is the same except for the first person (the chain starts in the Musnad of Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi with Abu Dawud himself, while in al-Bukhari's Sahih it starts with Adam [bin Abi Iyas]), which means it's the very same narration! 

Edited October 28, 2025 by StrangerInThisWorld

[ServantOfMahdi]

12 minutes ago, StrangerInThisWorld said:

وَقَالَ: هَذَا وُضُوءُ مَنْ لَمْ يُحْدِثْ

___

.....and he (عليه السلام) said: “This is the ablution of one who has not innovated.”
 

[Abu Nur]

Chatgpt is more honest translator than the Bukhari translators:

 

حَدَّثَنَا آدَمُ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ بْنُ مَيْسَرَةَ، سَمِعْتُ النَّزَّالَ بْنَ سَبْرَةَ، يُحَدِّثُ عَنْ عَلِيٍّ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ أَنَّهُ صَلَّى الظُّهْرَ ثُمَّ قَعَدَ فِي حَوَائِجِ النَّاسِ فِي رَحَبَةِ الْكُوفَةِ حَتَّى حَضَرَتْ صَلاَةُ الْعَصْرِ، ثُمَّ أُتِيَ بِمَاءٍ فَشَرِبَ وَغَسَلَ وَجْهَهُ وَيَدَيْهِ وَذَكَرَ رَأْسَهُ وَرِجْلَيْهِ، ثُمَّ قَامَ فَشَرِبَ فَضْلَهُ وَهْوَ قَائِمٌ ثُمَّ قَالَ إِنَّ نَاسًا يَكْرَهُونَ الشُّرْبَ قَائِمًا وَإِنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم صَنَعَ مِثْلَ مَا صَنَعْتُ‏

Chatgpt:

Adam narrated to us: Shu'bah narrated to us: 'Abdul-Malik bin Maisarah narrated to us: I heard An-Nazzal bin Sabrah narrating from 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) that he prayed the Zuhr prayer, then sat to attend to people's needs in the open space of Al-Kufah until the 'Asr prayer time arrived. Then water was brought to him; he drank, washed his face and his hands, and wiped his head and his feet. Then he stood up, drank the leftover water while standing, and said, "Indeed, some people dislike drinking while standing, but the Prophet (peace be upon him) did as I have done."

Sunni translation:

Narrated An-Nazzal bin Sabra:

`Ali offered the Zuhr prayer and then sat down in the wide courtyard (of the Mosque) of Kufa in order to deal with the affairs of the people till the `Asr prayer became due. Then water was brought to him and he drank of it, washed his face, hands, head and feet. Then he stood up and drank the remaining water while he was standing. and said, "Some people dislike to drink water while standing thought the Prophet did as I have just done."

Edited October 28, 2025 by Abu Nur

[StrangerInThisWorld]

On 10/28/2025 at 4:26 PM, ServantOfMahdi said:

.....and he (عليه السلام) said: “This is the ablution of one who has not innovated.”
 

I think what is intended here is not innovation, but not having broken ones ablution. Renewing ablution is recommended for every prayer. 

On 10/28/2025 at 6:15 PM, Abu Nur said:

Chatgpt is more honest translator than the Bukhari translators:

 

حَدَّثَنَا آدَمُ، حَدَّثَنَا شُعْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ بْنُ مَيْسَرَةَ، سَمِعْتُ النَّزَّالَ بْنَ سَبْرَةَ، يُحَدِّثُ عَنْ عَلِيٍّ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ أَنَّهُ صَلَّى الظُّهْرَ ثُمَّ قَعَدَ فِي حَوَائِجِ النَّاسِ فِي رَحَبَةِ الْكُوفَةِ حَتَّى حَضَرَتْ صَلاَةُ الْعَصْرِ، ثُمَّ أُتِيَ بِمَاءٍ فَشَرِبَ وَغَسَلَ وَجْهَهُ وَيَدَيْهِ وَذَكَرَ رَأْسَهُ وَرِجْلَيْهِ، ثُمَّ قَامَ فَشَرِبَ فَضْلَهُ وَهْوَ قَائِمٌ ثُمَّ قَالَ إِنَّ نَاسًا يَكْرَهُونَ الشُّرْبَ قَائِمًا وَإِنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم صَنَعَ مِثْلَ مَا صَنَعْتُ‏

Chatgpt:

Adam narrated to us: Shu'bah narrated to us: 'Abdul-Malik bin Maisarah narrated to us: I heard An-Nazzal bin Sabrah narrating from 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) that he prayed the Zuhr prayer, then sat to attend to people's needs in the open space of Al-Kufah until the 'Asr prayer time arrived. Then water was brought to him; he drank, washed his face and his hands, and wiped his head and his feet. Then he stood up, drank the leftover water while standing, and said, "Indeed, some people dislike drinking while standing, but the Prophet (peace be upon him) did as I have done."

Sunni translation:

Narrated An-Nazzal bin Sabra:

`Ali offered the Zuhr prayer and then sat down in the wide courtyard (of the Mosque) of Kufa in order to deal with the affairs of the people till the `Asr prayer became due. Then water was brought to him and he drank of it, washed his face, hands, head and feet. Then he stood up and drank the remaining water while he was standing. and said, "Some people dislike to drink water while standing thought the Prophet did as I have just done."

In the above case I can't even blame them, because al-Bukhari KNOWINGLY exchanged "masaha" (wiped) with "dhakara" (mentioned), so the sentence doesn't make any sense anymore if one were to translate it as it is found in al-Bukhari's Sahih. To al-Bukhari's dismay not all people are ignorant and we even know the real wording of the narration. 

If I think about it how "our" Mashayikh told us all these years that his Jami' al-Sahih is the most authentic book after the Book of Allah ta'ala and that pretty much all that is found in it is correct I seriously feel deceived. If I add to this how much al-Bukhari and his likes narrated from those close to the rulers and from Nasibis (even according to Sunni standards!) and how much he distorted the Sira of the Best of Creation (may peace and blessings be upon him and his family) and even other Messengers (peace be upon them) I feel disgusted. 

Well I guess from now on, they should not just hide early Islamic history (they were so successful in this to the degree that their Mashayikh have no idea regarding it anymore!), but add to it hiding all the ugly things found in their "Sahih" books. 

[StrangerInThisWorld]

On 10/26/2025 at 3:01 PM, StrangerInThisWorld said:

or that he is "already old" and that one "shouldn't ask him more" (like in the case of the incident of Ghadir, where only the part regarding the Thaqalayn are mentioned without the absolutely mass transmitted statement "Whoever's master i am, then Ali is his master"). 

It's very clear that some of the narrators were under pressure and fear of saying "too much", which would lead to imprisonment or even worse, but still tried to inform us regarding what happened.

 

What I intended here is the following narration as found in Sahih Muslim:

حَدَّثَنِي يَزِيدُ بْنُ حَيَّانَ، قَالَ انْطَلَقْتُ أَنَا وَحُصَيْنُ، بْنُ سَبْرَةَ وَعُمَرُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ إِلَى زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ فَلَمَّا جَلَسْنَا إِلَيْهِ قَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا رَأَيْتَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم وَسَمِعْتَ حَدِيثَهُ وَغَزَوْتَ مَعَهُ وَصَلَّيْتَ خَلْفَهُ لَقَدْ لَقِيتَ يَا زَيْدُ خَيْرًا كَثِيرًا حَدِّثْنَا يَا زَيْدُ مَا سَمِعْتَ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم - قَالَ - يَا ابْنَ أَخِي وَاللَّهِ لَقَدْ كَبِرَتْ سِنِّي وَقَدُمَ عَهْدِي وَنَسِيتُ بَعْضَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أَعِي مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَمَا حَدَّثْتُكُمْ فَاقْبَلُوا وَمَا لاَ فَلاَ تُكَلِّفُونِيهِ ‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَالَ قَامَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَوْمًا فِينَا خَطِيبًا بِمَاءٍ يُدْعَى خُمًّا بَيْنَ مَكَّةَ وَالْمَدِينَةِ فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ وَوَعَظَ وَذَكَّرَ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ أَمَّا بَعْدُ أَلاَ أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ فَإِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ رَسُولُ رَبِّي فَأُجِيبَ وَأَنَا تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ ثَقَلَيْنِ أَوَّلُهُمَا كِتَابُ اللَّهِ فِيهِ الْهُدَى وَالنُّورُ فَخُذُوا بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَاسْتَمْسِكُوا بِهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَحَثَّ عَلَى كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَرَغَّبَ فِيهِ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏"‏ وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي ‏"‏ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ لَهُ حُصَيْنٌ وَمَنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ يَا زَيْدُ أَلَيْسَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ قَالَ نِسَاؤُهُ مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ وَلَكِنْ أَهْلُ بَيْتِهِ مَنْ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ بَعْدَهُ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَمَنْ هُمْ قَالَ هُمْ آلُ عَلِيٍّ وَآلُ عَقِيلٍ وَآلُ جَعْفَرٍ وَآلُ عَبَّاسٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ كُلُّ هَؤُلاَءِ حُرِمَ الصَّدَقَةَ قَالَ نَعَمْ 

Yazid b. Hayyan reported, I went along with Husain b. Sabra and 'Umar b. Muslim to Zaid b. Arqam and, as we sat by his side, Husain said to him:

Zaid. you have been able to acquire a great virtue that you saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) listened to his talk, fought by his side in (different) battles, offered prayer behind him. Zaid, you have in fact earned a great virtue. Zaid, narrate to us what you heard from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). He said: I have grown old and have almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that. He then said: One day Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) stood up to deliver sermon at a watering place known as Khumm situated between Mecca and Medina. He praised Allah, extolled Him and delivered the sermon and. exhorted (us) and said: Now to our purpose. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Lord and I, in response to Allah's call, (would bid good-bye to you), but I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it. He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said: The second are the members of my household I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family. He (Husain) said to Zaid: Who are the members of his household? Aren't his wives the members of his family? Thereupon he said: His wives are the members of his family (but here) the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. And he said: Who are they? Thereupon he said: 'Ali and the offspring of 'Ali, 'Aqil and the offspring of 'Aqil and the offspring of Ja'far and the offspring of 'Abbas. Husain said: These are those for whom the acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. Zaid said: Yes.

___

 

Several things are to be noted here:

- Zaid bin Arqam chooses the incident of Ghadir Khumm out of all the things that happened during the Prophetic mission, which means that he believes that it is important for the Muslim to know about it

- It's clear from the wording he uses that he is still somehow afraid to get more into details and therefore even starts by basically saying "I will tell you about an important incident, but don't ask too much about it" 

- The part where the Prince of the Believers (peace be upon him) is mentioned (meaning him being the Mawla of all believers) is not narrated here, but interestingly the narration is still found in the chapter regarding the "virtues of 'Ali bin Abi Talib" (peace be upon him) 

- Another interesting point is that he even states that the Ahl al-Bayt that are intended here are not the wives (even though the rest of the definition is not really accurate) 

 

(One could obviously still criticize some aspects of the narration, but let's not forget here that we don't know how much the narrators even narrated from the actual words of Zaid bin Arqam.) 

[ServantOfMahdi]

17 hours ago, StrangerInThisWorld said:

On 10/28/2025 at 8:56 PM, ServantOfMahdi said:

.....and he (عليه السلام) said: “This is the ablution of one who has not innovated.”
 

I think what is intended here is not innovation, but not having broken ones ablution.

Sunnis prefer translating من لم يحدث here as "one who has not nullified his ablution" to escape the fact that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) used to wipe his feet in wudu and regarded washing them bid‘ah, and they thus misinterpret this narration to mean that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) wiped his feet only in mustahabb wudu and washed them in fard wudu.

But other Sunni reports in Ma‘ānī al-Āthār of al-Tahāwī and al-Musannaf of Ibn Abī Shayba clearly state his wiping his feet in fard wudu.

[StrangerInThisWorld]

3 hours ago, ServantOfMahdi said:

Sunnis prefer translating من لم يحدث here as "one who has not nullified his ablution" to escape the fact that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) used to wipe his feet in wudu and regarded washing them bid‘ah, and they thus misinterpret this narration to mean that Imam Ali (عليه السلام) wiped his feet only in mustahabb wudu and washed them in fard wudu.

But other Sunni reports in Ma‘ānī al-Āthār of al-Tahāwī and al-Musannaf of Ibn Abī Shayba clearly state his wiping his feet in fard wudu.

The basics of Wudu are mentioned in the following Aya:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُوا ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ مَرْضَىٰ أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ مِنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لَامَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُوا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُوا بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ مِنْهُ ۚ مَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ مِنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَٰكِنْ يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ | O you who have faith! When you stand up for prayer, wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, and wipe a part of your heads and your feet, up to the ankles. If you are junub, purify yourselves. But if you are sick, or on a journey, or any of you has come from the toilet, or you have touched women, and you cannot find water, then make tayammum with clean ground and wipe a part of your faces and your hands with it. Allah does not desire to put you to hardship, but He desires to purify you, and to complete His blessing upon you so that you may give thanks. | Al-Maaida : 6 

___

What is obvious from the Aya is that Wudu consists of washing the face and hands and wiping the head and feet, while in Tayammum one should wipe what usually should be washed (meaning: face and hands) and leave out what usually should be wiped (meaning: head and feet). 

It's quite straightforward, but as you know Sunnis will come up with the issue of Qiraat and tell you that in "Arjulakum" it could also mean that the feet should be washed. The problem for them here is that in the other Qiraa ("Arjulikum") it could only mean wiping the feet and even in "Arjulakum" both options could theoretically apply, so why give precedence to the weaker understanding? What basically destroys their argument is the fact that the same Aya mentions Tayammum, which consists of wiping over what is usually washed (meaning: face and hands). 

 

Anyways, if Muslims differed in a matter, which they did several times every single day, then this should be enough to show that the claim that "the Book of Allah is sufficient" can not be true and that different people will understand things differently. 

So which understanding should we take? The understanding of the companions, who differed with each other and drew their swords against each other? Or the understanding of the 4 Madhahib in jurisprudence and the understanding of the Asha'ira, Maturidiyya and the Hanabila in creed, who differed greatly with each other and were all fallible men? 

The most logical answer - and the one supported by Nass! - are the Thaqalayn, because both are infallible. 

Edited November 1, 2025 by StrangerInThisWorld

[StrangerInThisWorld]

The reason why it's important to highlight the connection between Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis and between Hadith al-Thaqalayn / Ghadir Khumm is the following:

Sunni Mashayikh / debaters will answer by saying "so you're saying that Umar was able to stop revelation? And you're saying that our Prophet had not proclaimed all that was necessary upon his followers up to that point in time?". 

If no one clarifies to the Sunni laymen that Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) was actually REMINDING those present of that which he had already stated in the farewell pilgrimage and at Ghadir Khumm (and even at other occasions), then he will either end up not understanding the importance of Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis or maybe  even loose faith altogether due to the mindless response of Sunni debaters. 

The idea of holding to the Book of Allah ta'ala and the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) was clearly and openly stated by the Messenger of Allah (may peace and blessings be upon him and his pure family). The idea that we're supposed to follow the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) was emphasized to such a degree that even today ALL muslims send peace and blessings upon "Muhammad and Al-i Muhammad" in their ritual prayers. 

The problem however is that the [Sunni] Mashayikh never mention anything about the Thaqalayn or Ghadir or Hadith al-Safina, which means that the lay-Sunni doesn't understand the context of Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis when he hears it and that's why the context should be explained. 

Edited November 9, 2025 by StrangerInThisWorld

[StrangerInThisWorld]

Salamun 'alaykum,

I was listening to a video, where a Sunni Shaykh tries to respond to the Shaykh Ahmad Salman:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3URcI0EXGmg&pp=ygUT2KfYrdmF2K8g2LPZhNmF2KfZhg%3D%3D

He mentions the Hadith of Ghadir and the Hadith of Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis and discusses them. During the discussion it becomes clearer and clearer that he's trying to defend falsehood and even the host becomes uneasy with his response. 

He claims that Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) was only giving his companions the option to write a document and was not commanding them to do it. 'Umar bin al-Khattab supposedly understood this meaning and saw that Rasulullah (sallallahu' alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) was very weak and stated "the Book of Allah is sufficient". This however lead to an argument among the companions themselves and this is the calamity. 'Umar was not among those, who made the "delusional"-comment. 

He also claims that the proof of this not being a command, but rather an option, is that Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) did not respond to 'Umar. 

 

Just imagine the amount of false claims in the above defense. It's quite sad that these type of dishonest people have been able to fool the majority of Muslims and this first and foremost by hiding many informations from them! 

Let me tell the following to this Sunni Shaykh: You and your ilk have not even once mentioned the incident of Ghadir in front of the people in let's say a Friday sermon or what is similar to it and this despite the fact that it's the single most narrated incident of all of Islamic history! And you likewise have never mentioned Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis or anything that would make people understand that a significant group of the companions had disobeyed and deviated from the correct path! Did Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) give so much importance to his proclamation at Ghadir to the degree that so many people narrated it, so that you end up not even mentioning it once upon the Minbar? A Muslim lives his whole life without hearing a single word about it! Who gave you the right to hide what the Messenger (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) had proclaimed?! And what about your ilk not mentioning the correct wording of Hadith al-Thaqalayn (meaning: The Book of Allah and my Family) in front of the people, which is present in pretty much all of your Hadith books, but instead using a wording  that is not established (meaning: The Book of Allah and my Sunna). 

As such you have no right to lecture anyone about the "correct meaning" of these incidents, because your intention is clearly not to clarify, but to distort after you couldn't hide the information anymore! 

 

Then: What kind of Islam is this that you want us to follow? The Best of Creation (may endless peace and blessings be upon him and his pure family) is about to leave this world and tells to those present to bring him something to write for them a document that protects them from misguidance and somehow we're supposed to defend those who DISOBEYED him and were causing disunity among the Muslims even in his presence!? And Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) did respond to 'Umar and his group by throwing them out, because they chose misguidance and did not want to be REMINDED what they already knew from so many incidents prior to it!

Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) had already explicitly stated what would protect them from misguidance, so this incident was a last reminder and whoever stood with 'Umar had in reality rejected divine guidance and preferred the life of this world! 

 

Look how they have deceived the Muslims!

Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) stated to Amir al-Muminin 'Ali bin Abi Talib (peace be upon him)  prior to Tabuk that their relationship is like that between Musa and Harun (peace be upon them) with the exception of Prophethood and this with the knowledge that Harun is the Khalifa of Musa (as explicitly established in the Book of Allah ta'ala!), but they say "rather Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman are his Khulafa and only thereafter 'Ali". 

Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) stated concerning Amir al-Muminin (peace be upon him) that none loves him except a believer and none hates him except a hypocrite, but they say "rather those who loved and those who hated 'Ali are all believers". 

Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) stated concerning 'Ammar bin Yasir that he will by martyred at hands of the rebellious group and that he will be calling them to paradise while they will call him to hellfire, but they say "rather 'Ammar and 'Ali made the correct Ijtihad and therefore have earned two good deeds, while their enemies made a wrong Ijtihad and have therefore earned one good deed". 

Rasulullah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) stated concerning Fatima (peace be upon her) that Allah ta'ala is displeasured for her displeasure and pleased for her pleasure, but they say "rather Allah is pleased with those, who displeased and oppressed Fatima". 

And we can keep on and on! 

Edited January 6 by StrangerInThisWorld

[layman]

Assalamualaikum,

My take on this issue:

1. At Ghadir Khum: Three months before his wafat (passing), the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) sought to inform his companions and the future ummah of the Allah's (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) selected person who would lead them, ensuring the ummah would not go astray.

 

2. Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis: Just three days before his passing, the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) intended to inform the ummah about the exact person who would disobey him and the first one who will to lead the ummah toward astray.

Wallahualam 

 

Layman

[ServantOfMahdi]

8 hours ago, layman said:

Assalamualaikum,

My take on this issue:

1. At Ghadir Khum: Three months before his wafat (passing), the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) sought to inform his companions and the future ummah of the Allah's (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) selected person who would lead them, ensuring the ummah would not go astray.

 

2. Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis: Just three days before his passing, the Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) intended to inform the ummah about the exact person who would disobey him and the first one who will to lead the ummah toward astray.

Wallahualam 

 

Layman

Yes just like Allah knew that iblis won't obey but He still commanded the angels prostration to Adam (عليه السلام), thus iblis got exposed and thrown out from an "alayhimussalam" assembly to be called "rajim" forever; likewise the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) knew that umar won't obey but he still commanded the writing of his will about Ahl al-Bayt, thus umar got exposed and thrown out from the "radiyallahu anhum" assembly and the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)'s house to be remembered as the foremost rajim from this Ummah.

[StrangerInThisWorld]

4 hours ago, ServantOfMahdi said:

Yes just like Allah knew that iblis won't obey but He still commanded the angels prostration to Adam (عليه السلام), thus iblis got exposed and thrown out from an "alayhimussalam" assembly to be called "rajim" forever; likewise the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) knew that umar won't obey but he still commanded the writing of his will about Ahl al-Bayt, thus umar got exposed and thrown out from the "radiyallahu anhum" assembly and the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)'s house to be remembered as the foremost rajim from this Ummah.

Indeed. 

'Umar and his group were thrown out by the Best of Creation (sallallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) himself and this with the knowledge that the Messengers of Allah (peace and blessings be upon them) do not this with the believers. 

 

In the Book of Allah ta'ala Nuh (peace be upon him) is quoted saying:

وَمَا أَنَا بِطَارِدِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ 

I will not drive away the faithful. | Ash-Shu'araa : 114

And Allah ta'ala revealed the following to the Best of Creation (peace and blessings be upon him and his pure family):

وَلَا تَطْرُدِ الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ رَبَّهُمْ بِالْغَدَاةِ وَالْعَشِيِّ يُرِيدُونَ وَجْهَهُ ۖ مَا عَلَيْكَ مِنْ حِسَابِهِمْ مِنْ شَيْءٍ وَمَا مِنْ حِسَابِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ مِنْ شَيْءٍ فَتَطْرُدَهُمْ فَتَكُونَ مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ 

Do not drive away those who supplicate their Lord morning and evening desiring His face. Neither are you accountable for them in any way, nor are they accountable for you in any way, so that you may drive them away and thus become one of the wrongdoers. | Al-An'aam : 52

 

The above should be enough for the one who ponders to understand the state of those who were driven out on the incident of Raziyyat Yawm al-Khamis. 

Edited Friday at 09:15 PM by StrangerInThisWorld