Syrian Civil War (Graphic Photos/Vid Not Allowed)

[rmi5]

Instead of ranting like idiots, I asked about proof which says, Ahulul bayt MUST be the rulers of Muslim UMMAH, which you have failed to show as far as I can see.

Have you read the below Ayat:
إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاَةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ (*) وَمَن يَتَوَلَّ اللّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ فَإِنَّ حِزْبَ اللّهِ هُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ - المائدة - آية 55 - 56
This Ayat is about Ali R.A as ibn Abbas and many others have stated.

There is a book of Hazrat Ali (RA) sayings and narrations in Shia Fiqh, IIRC, I challenge any shia here to prove from there books, if Hazrat Ali (RA) ever accused ABu Bakr, Umar (RA) privately or publicly of Fatima (RA) death or Hazrat Hussain or Hassan (RA).

The book , which I think you have not even heard its name, is نهج البلاغة
Then try to read hadith al shaqshaqiya from this book

 

[Bratva]

Have you read the below Ayat:
إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاَةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ (*) وَمَن يَتَوَلَّ اللّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ فَإِنَّ حِزْبَ اللّهِ هُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ - المائدة - آية 55 - 56
This Ayat is about Ali R.A as ibn Abbas and many others have stated.

I fail to understand,how this verse makes Ahlul bayt the Sole leaders of Muslim Ummah and besides them no one can rule any muslim ?

 

[rmi5]

And I'm amazed at level of your sectarian bias, that you don't even comprehend the meaning of word Ahlul Bayt and consider Wives of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) as some aliens.

Easy ... As prophet himself said, his wives are not necessarily among Ahl ulBayt. Read Ayat Al-tathir, and what prophet said to أم سلمه when she asked if she as his wife is one of ahl-ulbayt or not.

 

[Bratva]

Have you read the below Ayat:
إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ الَّذِينَ يُقِيمُونَ الصَّلاَةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَهُمْ رَاكِعُونَ (*) وَمَن يَتَوَلَّ اللّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ فَإِنَّ حِزْبَ اللّهِ هُمُ الْغَالِبُونَ - المائدة - آية 55 - 56
This Ayat is about Ali R.A as ibn Abbas and many others have stated.



The book , which I think you have not even heard its name, is نهج البلاغة
Then try to read hadith al shaqshaqiya from this book

Is Nahj Ul Balagh consider Saheeh among Shiah Fiqh ?

 

[rmi5]

I fail to understand,how this verse makes Ahlul bayt the Sole leaders of Muslim Ummah and besides them no one can rule any muslim ?

Can you read arabic? if yes, and if you are not secterian, you can understand something from that Ayat.

Is Nahj Ul Balagh consider Saheeh among Shiah Fiqh ?

In contrast to Sunnis, shias do not consider any books other than Quran as a sahih book, which this logic makes sense. If you want to know about a hadith, you need to check who has said that, and such technical stuff, which is a more scientific way than just naming some books other than Quran, as Sahih books, and accept whatever they say.

 

[Bratva]

Easy ... As prophet himself said, his wives are not necessarily among Ahl ulBayt. Read Ayat Al-tathir, and what prophet said to أم سلمه when she asked if she as his wife is one of ahl-ulbayt or not.

If by Ayat Al tahtir, you mean Surah Al Ahzab ayaah's I qouted them above, do read the whole context instead of singling out single ayaah, and do read ayaah in arabic, so the confusion clears about whom Ayas is speaking about.

I would be grateful if you share the Arabic hadith of Um Salma you are talking about

Can you read arabic? if yes, and if you are not secterian, you can understand something from that Ayat.



In contrast to Sunnis, shias do not consider any books other than Quran as a sahih book, which this logic makes sense. If you want to know about a hadith, you need to check who has said that, and such technical stuff, which is a more scientific way than just naming some books other than Quran, as Sahih books, and accept whatever they say.

Any verse in Quran which mentions qualities of Momins or Muslims can be construed to be in Praise of Hazrat Ali(RA) or Hazrat Abubbakar(RA) or Hazrat Oman(RA) or Hazrat Usman(RA) or any other sahabi of the time.

I

 

[rmi5]

Dude, I am a busy man, that's why I just named those stuff and did not go into more details. A correct understanding Quran without knowing and reading the history behind it and comments of the prophet, himself, on each ayat is impossible. I suggest you to read that Hadith, because prophet himself says that who are the ones who are included in the context of this Ayat. Fatimah, Ali, Hasan, and Hussain RAs are the Ahl ul bait.

If by Ayat Al tahtir, you mean Surah Al Ahzab ayaah's I qouted them above, do read the whole context instead of singling out further ayaah, and do read ayaah in arabic, so the confusion clears about whom Ayas is speaking about.

I would be grateful if you share the Arabic hadith of Um Salma you are talking about

Any verse in Quran which mentions qualities of Momins or Muslims can be construed to be in Praise of Hazrat Ali(RA) or Hazrat Abubbakar(RA) or Hazrat Oman(RA) or Hazrat Usman(RA) or any other sahabi of the time.

Of course not. If an ayat comes from with a history, like most Ayats of Quran and this specific Ayat, it would refer to that specific person, which here it is about Ali RA. Of course it's better for any Mo'men to follow what that person has done, but it does not mean that the Ayat only has a general connotation That's why I told you that you cannot understand Quran properly, unless you read history behind it as well.

 

[Bratva]

Dude, I am a busy man, that's why I just named those stuff and did not go into more details. A correct understanding Quran without knowing and reading the history behind it and comments of the prophet, himself, on each ayat is impossible. I suggest you to read that Hadith, because prophet himself says that who are the ones who are included in the context of this Ayat. Fatimah, Ali, Hasan, and Hussain are the Ahl ul bait.

Like I said, this Ayaat is not a stand alone ayaah in Quran, It's a continuation of previous ayaas, instead of going in to Hadith, reading the Ayaah 30-36 would clear most of misconception what Allah is talking about.

But our debate is about leadership, what we are debating is the attributes of Ahlulbayt

Dude, I am a busy man, that's why I just named those stuff and did not go into more details. A correct understanding Quran without knowing and reading the history behind it and comments of the prophet, himself, on each ayat is impossible. I suggest you to read that Hadith, because prophet himself says that who are the ones who are included in the context of this Ayat. Fatimah, Ali, Hasan, and Hussain RAs are the Ahl ul bait.




Of course not. If an ayat comes from with a history, like most Ayats of Quran and this specific Ayat, it would refer to that specific person, which here it is about Ali RA. Of course it's better for any Mo'men to follow what that person has done, but it does not mean that the Ayat only has a general connotation That's why I told you that you cannot understand Quran properly, unless you read history behind it as well.

Did I just not tell you to read Ayyahs 30-36? Unless you read them, you would not understand Ayat of Tathir is not a standalone ayaah it is continuation of previous ayyas. Here read them once again and tell me if it looks standalone ayat.

Surat Al-'Ahzab [33:30-36] - The Noble Qur'an - القرآن الكريم

A narration attributed to 'A'isha reports:

“ that God's Apostle (may peace be upon him) went out one morning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped him under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said: God only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)" ”
Sunnis tend to view this as Sahih and have included it inSahih Muslim[3]

Dude, for the umpteenth time, Do come up factually ? Where it is mentioned AHLU BAYT LEADERSHIP IS OBLIGATORY FOR MUSLIM UMMAH? When Hazrat Mohammad (PBUH) explicitly mentioned the leaders in Jannah, Was he not explicit and to the point who would be the leader of women and young people in Jannat? So what stopped him from explicitly making Ahlul bayt leadership obligatory for whole muslim ummah ?

 

[rmi5]

Like I said, this Ayaat is not a stand alone ayaah in Quran, It's a continuation of previous ayaas, instead of going in to Hadith, reading the Ayaah 30-36 would clear most of misconception what Allah is talking about.

But our debate is about


Did I just not tell you to read Ayyahs 30-36? Unless you read them, you would not understand Ayat of Tathir is not a standalone ayaah it is continuation of previous ayyas. Here read them once again and tell me if it looks standalone ayat.

Surat Al-'Ahzab [33:30-36] - The Noble Qur'an - القرآن الكريم

I have read this surat, many times before, but what is your point?
Try not to read my posts with a heavy bias, and be an independent thinker.

 

[Bratva]

I have read this surat, many times before, but what is your point?
Try not to read my posts with a heavy bias, and be an independent thinker.

Our debate is about leadership being obligatory, not about Ahlul bayt attributes. Ayat of tathir is about Ahlul bayt After life status. Not there Worldly status !

 

[rmi5]

Our debate is about leadership being obligatory, not about Ahlul bayt attributes. Ayat of tathir is about Ahlul bayt After life status. Not there Worldly status !

Dude, for the umpteenth time, Do came up factually ? Where it is mentioned AHLU BAYT LEADERSHIP IS OBLIGATORY FOR MUSLIM UMMAH?

have you read حديث الثقلين?
It is not just about afterlife

انی تارک فیکم الثقلین کتاب الله وعترتی ما ان تمسکتم بهما لن تضلوا

 

[Bratva]

have you read حديث الثقلين?
It is not just about afterlife

انی تارک فیکم الثقلین کتاب الله وعترتی ما ان تمسکتم بهما لن تضلوا

Unless you have read our Sunni explanation as well

 

[rmi5]

Unless you have read our Sunni explanation as well

uhh come on. The hadith, itself, has a very strict meaning, unless you want to treat it with heavy bias and apologizing
ختم الله على قلوبهم وعلى سمعهم وعلى أبصارهم غشاوة

 

[Daneshmand]

There is a book of Hazrat Ali (RA) sayings and narrations in Shia Fiqh, IIRC, I challenge any shia here to prove from there books, if Hazrat Ali (RA) ever accused ABu Bakr, Umar (RA) privately or publicly of Fatima (RA) death or Hazrat Hussain or Hassan (RA).

Your challenge is meaningless and certainly not authoritative in addition being inconsequential. It is a fallacy to demand proof of a historical event from a single book (which is not a book of history by the way, its a book of morals and ethics), specially when you put your premise on such a shaky ground that since the author of that book did not include a matter of his personal life in his book and highlight it then the event did not occur.

As I said, the event has been written in detail in the most authoritative books of Sunnah for instance Sahih-al-Bukhari. Either these Sunnah authors were trying to propagate a lie or the said event did occur. There are only two possibilities here. It is not really complicated to see and decide using reason. If you deny the occurrence, you believe that these noble writers of Sunnah were liars. If you accept then you are basically saying the same thing as Shia say. This is your predicament. Think about it.

 

[Bratva]

uhh come on. The hadith, itself, has a very strict meaning, unless you want to treat it with heavy bias and apologizing
ختم الله على قلوبهم وعلى سمعهم وعلى أبصارهم غشاوة

What has been the Sunni understanding of the hadith:
>
> "I have left you 2 weighty things; the Book of Allah and my descendents
> ("itrah"). Both of these will not be separated from each other until the
> Day of Judgement."?

The Sunni scholar Muhammad `Abd al-Rahman al-Mubarkufuri says in his
Book Tuhfah al-Ahwadhi bi Sharh al-Tirmidhi for this
hadith (a narration of which is found in Tirmidhi, hadith #3718):

The meaning of sticking to them (i.e. the Prophet's family) is that one should
love them, respect them, act according to their [authentic] narrations, and depend
upon the statements of [the authorized scholars among] them. *All of this does not
negate taking `ilm from other than them* as the Prophet (May Allah bless him and
give him peace) has also said, "My Companions are like guiding stars, whichever
one you follow, you will become rightly guided."

[end quote]

> Does this not justify the Shia position of taking the deen from the Ahlul Bayt?

No, as their position is one of unjust discrimination and our Prophet (May Allah
bless him and give him peace) did not endorse such unjust discrimination. Additionally,
we, personally, would be very sad if Imam Malik or his student Ibn Qasim (none of
whom was part of the Prophet's family) were not allowed to teach and transmit the din
as if it were not for these two people and also Sahnun, this great coherent madh-hab
al-maliki would never have reached us.

Everybody should be given an equal chance and those who are truly gifted will
outshine others by the will and decree of Allah. .

Also, their view is not backed up the actions of Ja`far as-Sadiq on his death bed
as narrated by Ibn Rushd al-Kabir (See entry #9 of the Notes of Sources) - who
specifically appointed a non-descendent (i.e. Malik ibn Anas) as a successor to him.


When we were sitting with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), he talked about periods of trial (fitnahs), mentioning many of them.

When he mentioned the one when people should stay in their houses, some asked him: Messenger of Allah, what is the trial (fitnah) of staying at home?

He replied: It will be flight and plunder. Then will come a test which is pleasant. Its murkiness is due to the fact that it is produced by a man from the people of my house, who will assert that he belongs to me, whereas he does not, for my friends are only the God-fearing. Then the people will unite under a man who will be like a hip-bone on a rib. Then there will be the little black trial which will leave none of this community without giving him a slap, and when people say that it is finished, it will be extended. During it a man will be a believer in the morning and an infidel in the evening, so that the people will be in two camps: the camp of faith which will contain no hypocrisy, and the camp of hypocrisy which will contain no faith. When that happens, expect the Antichrist (Dajjal) that day or the next.

Book of Trials and Fierce Battles (Kitab Al-Fitan Wa Al-Malahim) - Sunan Abi Dawud - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم) (search hadith 3704)
[{Abu Dawud, al-fitan wa l-malahim, dhikr al-fitan wa dala'iliha hadith #3704}]

What we can learn from this hadith coupled with the first one is that following/imitating
the Prophet's family is conditional on their uprightness.

As for loving and respecting the Prophet's family, the scholars say that one is obliged
to love them even if they are not people of taqwa (as long as they are believers)
[due to the verse:

Say: I do not ask from you any fee (ajran) except for love of
the[/my] close relatives. [{al-Qur'an 42:23}]

Thus, loving the Prophet's household is a wajib duty on us according to the
the vast majority of the mufassirin of this ayah.

Hadith Thaqalayn

On one hand you say, you are a busy man and on other hand, you are refusing to read up sunni explanation and acting all high and mighty

Your challenge is meaningless and certainly not authoritative in addition being inconsequential. It is a fallacy to demand proof of a historical event from a single book (which is not a book of history by the way, its a book of morals and ethics), specially when you put your premise on such a shaky ground that since the author of that book did not include a matter of his personal life in his book and highlight it then the event did not occur.

As I said, the event has been written in detail in the most authoritative books of Sunnah for instance Sahih-al-Bukhari. Either these Sunnah authors were trying to propagate a lie or the said event did occur. There are only two possibilities here. It is not really complicated to see and decide using reason. If you deny the occurrence, you believe that these noble writers of Sunnah were liars. If you accept then you are basically saying the same thing as Shia say. This is your predicament. Think about it.

Instead of verbiage, open another thread, quote all the specific hadiths from Saha Sittah about that particular incident and we will debate further on that and do me a favour, read all those ahadith once again before posting, Unless they specifically says, Bibi fatimah was MURDERED by those companions, you have every right to post them, if not, don't bother to engage me on useless semantic debates

P.S. Where Did I deny about the authenticity of those ahadith ?