The Great Debate

I recently had a lively discussion over the issue of khilaafa (political succession) in Islam, which is a central source of Shi’ism.
It started with this article:
*****
In the Name of our Lord and Creator, and peace and blessings be upon our master and prophet, MuHammad al-MuStafaa, and upon his pure and infallible Ahl al-Bayt, and upon the believers in them till the Day of Qiyaamah.

There is a Hadeeth in the books of the Ahl al-Sunnah which has given them so much trouble. It is the Hadeeth of the Khulafaa al-Raashideen. Shaykh al-Albaanee (d. 1420 H) in his Irwaa al-Ghaleel, vol. 8, p. 107, #2455 records that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, said:

أوصيكم بتقوى الله والسمع والطاعة , وإن عبدا حبشيا , فإنه من يعش منكم بعدى فسيرى اختلافا كثيرا , فعليكم بسنتى وسنة الخلفاء المهديين الراشدين , تمسكوا بها , وعضوا عليها بالنواجذ , وإياكم ومحدثات الأمور , فإن كل محدثة بدعة , وكل بدعة ضلالة

I advise you to fear Allaah, and to listen and obey, even if (the ruler is) an Ethiopian slave. Whosoever among you lives long after me will see a lot of differences and disagreements. Therefore, follow my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Khaleefahs who are divinely guided (al-mahdiyeen) and are rightly guided (al-raashideen). Adhere to IT and cling stubbornly to IT. Beware of the innovations in the (religious) affairs, for every innovation is a Bid’ah, and every Bid’ah is misguidance.”

Apart from grading it as SaHeeH, Shaykh al-Albaanee also says on the next page:

و قال: ” حديث حسن صحيح “.
وقال الهروى: ” وهذا من أجود حديث فى أهل الشام “.
وقال البزار: ” حديث ثابت صحيح “.
وقال ابن عبد البر: ” حديث ثابت “.
وقال الحاكم: ” صحيح ليس له علة “.
وصححه أيضا الضياء المقدسى

He (al-Tirmidhee) said: “A Hasan SaHeeH Hadeeth”.
Al-Harwee said: “This is one of the most magnificent Hadeeths from the Syrians.”
Al-Bazzaar said: “A firm, SaHeeH Hadeeth.”
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said: “A firm Hadeeth.”
Al-Haakim said: “SaHeeH. It has no defect.”
Al-Diyaa al-Maqdisee also declared it SaHeeH

This Hadeeth informs us about the sects – the differences among them. It also shows us that the proliferation of sects would occur right at the time of the SaHaabah after the Prophet’s death: “Whosoever among you lives long after me will see a lot of differences and disagreements”. He was addressing his SaHaabah. Our master and prophet now told his SaHaabah to do two things when sects started to proliferate among them:

1. Follow his Sunnah
2. Follow the Sunnah of the Khaleefahs after him, who are divinely guided and rightly guided.
Whosoever did these two things would forever be saved from evil and misguidance of the sects, and would be on the correct path.

What strengthens my supposition above is that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, described his Sunnah and that of the divinely and rightly guided Khaleefahs as absolutely one and the same: “Therefore, follow my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Khaleefahs who are divinely guided (al-mahdiyeen) and are rightly guided (al-raashideen). Adhere to IT and cling stubbornly to IT”. The true divinely and rightly guided Khaleefahs will never contradict the Sunnah of the Prophet, and will never follow a Bid’ah. This is why their Sunnah is also the Prophet’s Sunnah, and must therefore be followed as well.

The Qur’aan (Qur’aan 49:7) has confirmed my points:

وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ فِيكُمْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ لَوْ يُطِيعُكُمْ فِي كَثِيرٍ مِّنَ الْأَمْرِ لَعَنِتُّمْ وَلَـٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ حَبَّبَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْإِيمَانَ وَزَيَّنَهُ فِي قُلُوبِكُمْ وَكَرَّهَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكُفْرَ وَالْفُسُوقَ وَالْعِصْيَانَ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الرَّاشِدُونَ

And know that among you there is the Messenger of Allaah. If he were to obey you in much of the matter, you would surely be in trouble. But Allaah has endeared the Eemaan to you and has beautified it in your hearts, and has made disbelief, wickedness and disobedience hateful to you. Such are they who are the rightly guided (al-raashidoon).

Those who are rightly guided:

1. love Eemaan (true, complete faith in Allaah and his Messenger) dearly.

2. hate disbelief, wickedness and disobedience (to Allaah and His Messenger).
Therefore, apart from being absolute, to-the-letter followers of the Prophet’s Sunnah, the divinely and rightly guided Khaleefahs must be people who love Eemaan dearly and hate to disobey Allaah and His Messenger.

The Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamaa’ah argue that Aboo Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthmaan and Imaam ‘Alee were the divinely and rightly guided Khaleefahs, to the exclusion of all others. There are three fundamental problems with this position however:

1. There is no single reliable Sunnee Hadeeth to back up that claim.
2. There were irreconcilable differences among the four caliphs.
3. Some of the caliphs invented and followed Bid’ahs, meaning that they were neither divinely guided nor rightly guided.
To illustrate my points, I will only mention a Bid’ah and a disagreement among the four caliphs.

Imaam al-Bukhaaree records in his al-SaHeeH (Beirut: Maktabah al-‘ASriyyah; 1418 H), vol. 2, p. 175:

عن مروان بن الحكم قال: شهدت عثمان و عليّا وعثمان ينهى عن المتعة وأن يُجمع بينهما, فلما رأى عليٌّ أهلَّ بهما لبّيك بعمرة وحجّة, قال: ما كنت لأدع سُنَّة النبي لقول أحد

Narrated Marwaan bin al-Hakam:

I witnessed ‘Uthmaan and ‘Alee, and ‘Uthmaan was prohibiting (Hajj) Tamattu’ (in which one performs Hajj and ‘Umrah together) and prohibiting from joining the two together (.e. Hajj and ‘Umrah). When ‘Alee saw this, he performed BOTH, saying “At Your Service (O Allaah) with ‘Umrah and Hajj.” He also said: “I will never leave the Sunnah of the Prophet for the word of anyone.”

‘Uthmaan prohibited Hajj Tamattu’ despite that it was the Sunnah of Allaah’s Apostle. Imaam ‘Alee, one of the four caliphs, disobeyed him, and decided to stay with the Sunnah. Imaam al-Bukhaaree even records in the same source, vol. 2, p. 176 that Imaam ‘Alee challenged ‘Uthmaan, accusing him with these words:

ما تريد إلا أن تنهى عن أمر فعله النبي

You intend nothing but to prohibit (people) from something that the Prophet did.

But, in this clear Bid’ah, ‘Uthmaan was only following the “sunnah” of ‘Umar. Shaykh al-Albaanee in his SaHeeH Sunan al-Nisaaee, vol. 2, p. 578 records:

عن ابن عباس قال: سمعت عمر يقول: والله إني لأنهاكم عن المتعة, وإنها لفي كتاب الله, ولقد فعلها رسول الله يعني العمرة في الحج

صحيح

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbaas:

I heard ‘Umar saying: “By Allaah, I hereby forbid you from doing Hajj al-Tamattu’, even though it is in the Book of Allaah and the Messenger of Allaah did it”, meaning doing ‘Umrah during Hajj. (SaHeeH)

Would it be correct to say that ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan were people who hated to disobey Allaah and His Messenger? Would it be correct to say that their Sunnah was absolutely the same as the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah? Would it be correct to call ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan as divinely and rightly guided? In case the esteemed reader is wondering what the answer is, the Qur’aan says (33:36):

وما كان لمؤمن ولا مؤمنة إذا قضى الله ورسوله أمراً أن يكون لهم الخيرة من أمرهم، ومن يعص الله ورسوله فقد ضل ضلالاً مبينا

It is not for a male or female believer that when Allaah and His Messenger have decided a matter that they should have any choice in their affair. Whosoever disobeys Allaah and His Messenger, then he has gone astray in a clear misguidance.

Allaah also says (49:1):

يأيها الذين آمنوا لا تقدموا بين يدي الله ورسوله واتقوا الله إن الله سميع عليم

O you who believe! Never go ahead of Allaah and His Messenger and fear Allaah. Verily, Allaah is All-Hearing and All-Knowing.

‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan went ahead of Allaah and His Messenger in the matter of Hajj al-Tamattu’ and disobeyed Allaah and His Messenger in their decision that Hajj al-Tamattu’ is allowed. Both therefore were in clear misguidance.

Moreover, the prohibition of Hajj al-Tamattu’ was an innovation in the religion. It was NOT the case during the time of the Prophet MuHammad, peace be upon him and his family. It was NOT what the Prophet MuHammad, peace be upon him and his family, and his SaHaabah were upon during his lifetime. The Hadeeth we are examining has clearly said:

وإياكم ومحدثات الأمور , فإن كل محدثة بدعة , وكل بدعة ضلالة

Beware of the innovations in the (religious) affairs, for every innovation is a Bid’ah, and every Bid’ah is misguidance.”

Both ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan were therefore people of Bid’ah, and not followers of the Sunnah. If they are considered as the divinely guided and rightly guided Khaleefahs, then it would be impossible to follow the Hadeeth, since the four caliphs were divided. Moreover, the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, declared his Sunnah and those of the divinely and rightly guided Khaleefahs to be one and the same. This shows that all the true divinely and rightly guided Khaleefahs follow the same religion and practices in absolutely all affairs among themselves and with the Prophet MuHammad, peace be upon him and his family.

So, who exactly are the Khulafaa al-Raashideen? The following Hadeeth tells us who the Khaleefahs are. Shaykh al-Albaanee records in his SaHeeH wa Da’eef al-Jaami’ al-Sagheer wa Ziyaadatuh, vol. 1, p. 423, # 4222 that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, said:

إني تارك فيكم خليفتين : كتاب الله حبل ممدود ما بين السماء و الأرض و عترتي أهل بيتي و إنهما لن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض

صحيح

I will leave among you two Khaleefahs: the Book of Allaah, a rope stretching between the heaven and the earth, and my ‘itrah, my Ahl al-Bayt. Both shall never separate until they return to me at the Lake-Font. (SaHeeH)

These Khaleefahs are indeed divinely and rightly guided. Imaam AHmad records in his Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat al-Qurtuba) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaoot], vol. 3, p. 59, #11578:

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا بن نمير ثنا عبد الملك بن أبي سليمان عن عطية العوفي عن أبي سعيد الخدري قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم : اني قد تركت فيكم ما ان أخذتم به لن تضلوا بعدي الثقلين أحدهما أكبر من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي الا وانهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا على الحوض

حديث صحيح

Narrated Aboo Sa’eed al-Khudree:

Allaah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, said: “I have left among you that which if you hold fast to it you will NEVER go astray after me: the two weighty things (al-thaqalayn). One of them is greater than the other: the Book of Allaah, a rope stretching from the heaven to the earth, AND my ‘itrah, my Ahl al-Bayt. Verily, both shall NEVER separate until they return to me at the Lake-font.” (SaHeeH Hadeeth)

Finally, these Khulafaa al-Raashideen are twelve in number, NOT four. Imaam Ahmad again records in his Musnad (Egypt: Muasassat al-Qurtubah), vol. 1, p. p. 398, #3781 and p. 406, # 3859:

حدثنا عبد اللَّهِ حدثني أبي ثنا حَسَنُ بن مُوسَى ثنا حَمَّادُ بن زَيْدٍ عَنِ الْمُجَالِدِ عَنِ الشعبي عن مَسْرُوقٍ قال: كنا جُلُوساً عِنْدَ عبد اللَّهِ بن مَسْعُودٍ وهو يُقْرِئُنَا الْقُرْآنَ فقال له رَجُلٌ: يا أَبَا عبد الرحمن هل سَأَلْتُمْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم كَمْ تملك هذه الأُمَّةَ من خَلِيفَةٍ؟ فقال عبد اللَّهِ بن مَسْعُودٍ: ما سألني عنها أَحَدٌ مُنْذُ قَدِمْتُ الْعِرَاقَ قَبْلَكَ ثُمَّ قال: نعم. وَلَقَدْ سَأَلْنَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال: اثْنَا عَشَرَ كَعِدَّةِ نُقَبَاءِ بني إِسْرَائِيلَ.

Narrated Masrooq:

We were sitting with ‘Abd Allaah bin Mas’ood and he was reciting the Qur’aan to us. Then a man said to him: “O Aboo ‘Abd al-RaHmaan! Did you (Sahaabah) ask Allaah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, the number of Khaleefahs that will rule this Ummah?” ‘Abd Allaah bin Mas’ood replied: “None before you has ever asked me concerning this since I arrived Iraaq. Verily, we asked Allaah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, and he said: ‘Twelve, like the captains of Banoo Israaeel.”

The chain of this Hadeeth has been graded Hasan by Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalaanee in FatH al-Baaree SharH SaHeeH al-Bukhaaree (Beirut: Daar al-Ma’rifah) [annotator: Muhibb al-Deen al-Khateeb], vol. 13, p. 212.

The true Khulafaa al-Raashideen are the twelve Imaams, peace be upon them, from the ‘itrah of the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family. Whoever disagrees with this conclusion, let him bring his proofs!

May Allaah save us from disbelief and hypocrisy, and purify the hearts of the Ummah for the acceptance of the Wilaayah of Imaam ‘Alee and his infallible progeny, peace be upon them all.

O Allaah! Send Your blessings upon MuHammad and his infallible family.
*******
Here’s the discussion that followed:
*******

Sayed Ali This is how I view this Hadith also, the rightly guided are the 14 (as) people like Umar misguided..
Yesterday at 11:24am • LikeUnlike

 Mark as Spam
 Report as Abuse…

Ahmad M Olawuyi اللهم صل على محمد وآل محمد وعجل فرجهم
Yesterday at 11:24am • LikeUnlike • 1Sayed Ali likes this.

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver now this is scholarly. you should have sent this before…
Yesterday at 1:13pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver You should always be careful to go beyond confirming what you already believe and what convinces you further, to presenting things in such a way that people who already don’t believe it will see the light. So I am not saying that I disagree, but rather that this presentation is incomplete.
Yesterday at 1:25pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Example 1: You narrated instances where ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan contradicted the Sunna, and were corrected by ‘Alee. Now, have you studied whether they accepted this correction and abandoned these prohibitions? My guess is that they have, because the Sunnees perform and teach Hajj atTamattu’. I think you need to research this point, because it seems to be a flaw in your argument. It will suggest to people that you have either stopped your research at what confirms what you want to know, or that you have left out what does not support your argument.
Yesterday at 1:28pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Example 2: Have the imaams that you have identified ever contradicted the sunna? If so, the argument you use against ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan applies to them, and your argument would have negated itself? It would be hard to prove, but can you assure the people that the imaams you have identified have never contradicted the Sunna? You would have to do this in fact.
Yesterday at 1:32pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Example 3: The ahlu-lBayt hadeeth lends weight to your conclusion, until you consider that some ahlu-lBayt progeny have obviously left the book of Allaah. I have met known descendants of ‘Alee, and they were nothing to scream about from the Islamic point of view. So there must be another meaning to this hadeeth, unless you are claiming that every descendant of Muhammad (sAaws) is following the book of Allaah. The fact is that there are many Muslims who are better examples to follow than some of the ahlu-lBayt descendants. Is this not so? If I find a misguided student who is a descendant of ‘Alee, and a pious person with another lineage, which one should I follow?
Yesterday at 1:39pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Example 4: On the matter of there being 12 khulafaa, there is more on the subject.

“It has been reported on the authority of Jabir b. Samura who said: I went with my father to Rasulullah (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) and I heard him say: This religion would continue to remain powerful and dominant until there have been twelve Khalifas. Then he added something which I couldn’t catch on account of the noise of the people. I asked my father: What did he say? My father said: He has said that all of them will be from the Quraish.”

This hadeeth is from Muslim. You have accepted ahadeeth from Ahmad’s collection as valid for evidence, and Muslim’s collection is generally seen as on par with Ahmad’s. So you would have to find something in the validity of these two ahadeeth, or a further, Islamically valid explanation to reconcile them.
Yesterday at 1:50pm • LikeUnlike

Sayed Ali Daniel you posted several Questions and to avoid jumping from topic to topic how about you tell me if you consider the enemy’s of Ahlulbayt (as) as a source of emulation?
Yesterday at 1:50pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Example 5: There is more on the matter of how many khulafaa there will actually be:

“Rasulullah (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “The Israelis used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Khalifas who will increase in number.” The people asked, “(O Allah’s Apostle!) What do you order us (to do)?” He said, “Obey the one who will be given the pledge of allegiance first. Fulfill their (i.e. the Kalifas) rights, for Allah will ask them about (any shortcoming) in ruling those Allah has put under their guardianship.”

This is a Bukhaaree hadeeth, again, a collection viewed as on par with others you have used for evidence. It says that the khulafaa will increase in number, not that there will only be 12. Again, you would need to present further research to show how your conclusion is valid in light of this hadeeth.
Yesterday at 1:53pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver Example 6: You have a lot more to do to disprove the validity of Abuu Bakr, ‘Urar, and ‘Uthmaan’s claim to the khilaafa. Aside from all the Islamic achievements of their reign, there is this hadeeth:

“Rasulullah (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) has said, “Khilafat after me will be for thirty years. Then there will be monarchy.”

This is in the Tirmithee collection, again seen as on par to the collections you have seen as valid sources of evidence. It seems to allege that the first thirty years after Rasuulu-llaah’s death were indeed khilaafa. There has certainly never been any 30-year period where members of ahlu-lBayt ruled over Muslims, to my knowledge. So there is much you need to do to support your conclusion in light of evidence, on par with the evidence you accept, that contradicts it.
Yesterday at 1:58pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver I’m not trying to argue or defend Sunnees, etc. I’m just pointing out that what you have presented thus far is only enough to convince people who already believe it. Further, it leaves you open to the accusation of choosing ahadeeth selectively and/or concealing some of your research and/or not having done much research at all. asSalaamu ‘alaykum…
Yesterday at 2:00pm • LikeUnlike

Sayed Ali Daniel are you just ignoring me on purpose or you just not sure in how to respond ? Seen that you quoted Bukhari I presume it is Hujjah for you? Do you consider it Sahih (authentic)?
Yesterday at 2:01pm • LikeUnlike • 1Loading…

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver I’m not ignoring you. I only now saw your question. If someone’s enmity against a proven member of ahlu-lBayt were established, I would not emulate them in that. Further, I would correct them with whatever Islamic evidence was available. As for Bukhaaree, I believe this much about it for now: that his ahadeeth are generally seen as authentic as the collections that ahadeeth were drawn from to prove this argument. For example, al-Albaanee, whose grades you have used in your argument, has graded many al-Bukhaaree ahadeeth similarly.
Yesterday at 2:04pm • LikeUnlike

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver If you ask me a question after this, you will not receive an answer for some time because I am leaving now, in shaa-a-llaah…
Yesterday at 2:05pm • LikeUnlike

Aboo FaaTimah Al-MuHammadee Brother Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver, thanks for your contributions. I will take the Bid’ahs of ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan first. As you must have seen, I have cited only ONE of their innumerable Bid’ahs. There are countless others that are still practiced by the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamaa’ah even today. One of them is the 3-in-1 Bid’ah which was founded by ‘Umar bin al-KhaTTaab. Another is Taraaweeh. What matters is that a truly divinely and rightly guided Khaleefah would NEVER follow or innovate a Bid’ah. Therefore, a single Bid’ah is sufficient for my purpose.

On the issue of whether ‘Umar later repented from his Bid’ah, my brother, you will NEVER find any evidence of that! In fact, it was because ‘Umar did NOT repent that ‘Uthmaan had to continue this Bid’ah during his own Khilaafah. In modern time, the people have abandoned this particular Bid’ah of ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan. But, that does not somehow remove the duo’s guilt. Both of them, or at least ‘Umar, died upon this Bid’ah!

Brother, you need to note that the Khaleefahs of the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, from his Ahl al-Bayt are only TWELVE in number – no more, no less. Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn does NOT include ANYONE else apart from this twelve. The fact that someone is a descendant of the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, does NOT automatically include him in the Hadeeth. In our Hadeeths, there are authentic and mutawaatir reports that establish the names of these twelve individuals, that are being referred to in the Hadeeth.

To make this matter clearer to you: Sayyid Khomeini is a descendant of the Prophet BUT he is NOT part of the Ahl al-Bayt mentioned in Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn. Therefore, all those Saadat (i.e. Sayyids and Sayyidahs) that you see, who disgrace Islaam, are NOT part of the Ahl al-Bayt of Khilaafah. Rather, even if they are saints, they still are NOT part of the Ahl al-Bayt in that Hadeeth. The Ahl al-Bayt in that Hadeeth have been fixed at TWELVE MEN (no woman whatsoever, not even Sayyidah FaaTimah, is included).

As for whether these twelve men are not like ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan, followers of Bid’ahs, the Prophet himself has given the guarantee (as I have cited above):

اني قد تركت فيكم ما ان أخذتم به لن تضلوا بعدي الثقلين أحدهما أكبر من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي الا وانهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا على الحوض

I have left among you that which if you hold fast to it you will NEVER go astray after me: the two weighty things (al-thaqalayn). One of them is greater than the other: the Book of Allaah, a rope stretching from the heaven to the earth, AND my ‘itrah, my Ahl al-Bayt. Verily, both shall NEVER separate until they return to me at the Lake-font.”

If they had been followers of Bid’ah like ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan, holding fast to them would have result in misguidance in at least an instance! Look at the Ahl al-Bayt (as). You will NEVER, not even for a split second, be misguided as long as you hold fast to them. They are like the Qur’aan in this area. As long as you hold fast to the Qur’aan, you will never go astray. The same is the situation of the Ahl al-Bayt (as).

Moreover, the Ahl al-Bayt NEVER contradict the Qur’aan and the Qur’aan never contradicts them. These are firm commendations and guarantees from the Messenger of the Lord of the worlds himself.

You mentioned this Hadeeth (as a challenge):

“It has been reported on the authority of Jabir b. Samura who said: I went with my father to Rasulullah (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) and I heard him say: This religion would continue to remain powerful and dominant until there have been twelve Khalifas. Then he added something which I couldn’t catch on account of the noise of the people. I asked my father: What did he say? My father said: He has said that all of them will be from the Quraish.”

I do not know exactly what you want to pick out from here. The Hadeeth establishes my point: that as long as Islaam exists, there will be ONLY twelve Khaleefahs. I guess you are toeing the Sunnee argument here – and assuming that the Hadeeth is talking about the Sunnee caliphates. The matter is not so brother. As you can see, the Hadeeth says “this religion”. It does not talk about anyone’s country or empire. It talks about Islaam. Islaam itself will continue to be powerful and dominant through these twelve Khaleefahs. I am sure you know there is a difference between an Islaamic state and Islaam. Islaam may be weak while an Islaamic state is strong. It is the PURITY of the religion that determines its strength. If the entire world are Muslims but they practice Bid’ahs, Islaam CANNOT be said to be strong in such an instance. However, the so-called Islaamic state that spans the entire world over such a Bid’ah-invested Ummah can be described as powerful and dominant.

The purity of Islaam as practiced by the Ummah is its strength. The military prowess of a state is its own strength.

You mentioned this Hadeeth too:

“Rasulullah (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “The Israelis used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Khalifas who will increase in number.” The people asked, “(O Allah’s Apostle!) What do you order us (to do)?” He said, “Obey the one who will be given the pledge of allegiance first. Fulfill their (i.e. the Kalifas) rights, for Allah will ask them about (any shortcoming) in ruling those Allah has put under their guardianship.”

Saying the Khaleefahs will increase in number does not somehow tell us they will be more than twelve! It is rather saying that there will times when there will be more than one Khaleefah on the earth. There would be two or more. This is why they are advised to give bay’ah to the first of them.

This last Hadeeth and the 30-year Khilaafah Hadeeth which you have mentioned both stink of Umayyad Sunneeism. Hadeeth that the Ummah will have only twelve Khaleefahs are mutawaatir, having been mass-transmitted. Ahead reports that contradict mutawaatir Hadeeths, like the above two, are thrown into the dustbin, in honest circumstances. Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn is mutawaatir. Hadeeth of the twelve Khaleefahs is mutawaatir. Hadeeths about Imaam al-Mahdee (as), the last Khaleefah, are mutawaatir! How then can any ahaad Hadeeth validly state that Khilaafah is only for 30 years or that there can be more than one Khaleefah at a time?!!!
23 hours ago • LikeUnlike • 2Loading…

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver as-salaamu alaykum. your proofs establish that the ahlu-lBayt will never separate from the book of Allaah. It also establishes that there will be 12 khulafaa will rule the umma. But they do not establish:
1) who is and isn’t ahlu-lBayt (including not in the way you defined it in the comment above this one).
2) that the 12 khulafaa will be from ahlu-lBayt
3) any specific identify for the khulafaa
4) that every khaleefa will be guided (he says “follow the guided khulafaa who take the right way”, which implies that a khaleefa may be one who is not guided and takes the wrong way. Allah says in Qur-an 2.32 that he is going to make khaleefa on the earth. if this word khaleefa is referring to humans in general, or those of them who will hold authority, then it certainly means “khaleefa” and “guided” “take the right way” are not synonymous)

Like I said, I’m not a sunnee. I just don’t see a strong, clear connection between your evidence and your conclusions.

As for the hadeeth about the khulafaa increasing in number, you are correct: it doesn’t say that there will be more than 12. But it doesn’t say that there will only be 12. Again, it is not something I’m bringing in to contradict your argument. I’m showing it to you to show that your research and presentation are not complete without taking this into account, particularly because it is a hadeeth that is generally considered as valid as others you have used.

As for the hadeeth about the deen remaining powerful and dominant until there have been 12 khulafaa, this does not cap the number of khulafaa at 12. It says the deen’s strength will last until the 12th khaleefa. It could be that there are khulafaa after that, but in a period of weakness. There is nothing to contradict that that I have seen. And, as we agree that Islaam- because of its followers- is weak now, unless you find a reason to question the validity of this hadeeth, it establishes the following fact: there have already been 12 khulafaa. Therefore, if there are only to be 12 khulafaa, as you state, then they have all come and gone. If this hadeeth is valid, then to get someone to accept your conclusion you would have to name and date these 12, and the 12th would have to coincide with the beginning of the umma’s decline. That’s if you consider this hadeeth valid. I am willing to accept that you may not, but people will be more ready to believe you if you can show why you don’t.

As for the 30-year hadeeth, it does not matter what it is “stinks” of. I brought it to your attention because you have accepted certain muhaddithuun as reliable, and presented their ahadeeth. This hadeeth is generally seen as on par with the collections and grades of the same muhaddithoon. Other people will also realize that, so you will need to address it if you want your conclusions to be taken seriously. Moreover, this hadeeth is consistent with history.

I have to warn you that you will have a really difficult time convincing people that Abuu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan were illegitimate, in light of their historical achievements for Islam. Any knowledgeable historian can see that the lands they opened for Islaam are not only still Muslim, but Arabic-speaking until today. The only exceptions at least use an Arabic-based script. Allaah chose to give Islam’s 3rd holiest mosque to ‘Umar (incidentally, it was Salahu-dDeen, who was a Sunnee, or at least not a Shee’a, who re-opened it for Islaam.) And there are more examples. So unless your evidence is much more expansive in scope, and accounts in some way for this historical reality, you will have extreme difficulty convincing anybody.

Last but not least, history does not support your theory. No ahlu-lBayt member or Shee’a has ruled over a majority of the Umma for any substantial amount of time, if ever. So unless everyone who has not followed the imaams you identify is not a Muslim, then the 12 khulafaa from ahlu-lBayt “theory” (for lack of better word, my apologies) doesn’t seem consistent with objective realities that we can all agree on.
17 hours ago • LikeUnlike

Aboo FaaTimah Al-MuHammadee We take this one by one. Do you accept that a bid’ah doer cannot possibly be called a divinely, rightly guided? Do you also accept that ‘Umar, for instance, cannot possibly be divinely, rightly guided with his bid’ahs? PLEASE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS EXPLICITLY. Now, it seems you confuse the Ummah with the religion. The strength of the religion is in its purity and not in the number or military conquests of those who profess it. Do you agree with this submission? PLEASE PROVIDE AN EXPLICIT ANSWER.
16 hours ago • LikeUnlike • 1Loading…

Radwan Hamoud Salam,i’m following you guys.would have loved to contribute,and answer some questions of brother Daniel but i’d rather take the spectator’s seat in order not to drift the course of the discussion.brother Aboo FaaTimah Al-MuHammadee may Allah (swt) reward you.and brother Daniel,inshaAllah you will see the truth.you seem like someone with an open mind.this is definitely an opportunity to make you a follower of the Ahlul-Bayt (as).
13 hours ago • LikeUnlike

Radwan Hamoud from what i have read so far,brother Daniel needs to know and be enligghtened on:
1.) Who the Ahlul-Bayt (as) refers to.proof that the members we Shia follow and abide by are the only ones “purified” refered to in verse 33:33.this can be done through hadith al-mubahela,hadith al-kisa,commentary on the “verse of mawaddah”,and hadith ath-thaqalain itself.the event of Ghadir Khumm started the imamate and leaders of these particular members of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) through the declaration in favor of Imam Ali (as) as mawla of every muslim.

2.) are there instances where Imam Ali (as) was declared by the Prophet (sa) as successor?take into consideration hadith al-manzila.also see commentary on verse 26:214.ofcourse you have to be careful while examining sunni commentaries on verse 26:214 because of deliberate tahreef that have befallen various hadiths dealing with the event of “warning the near ones” aimed at either obscuring or concealing the words of the hadiths.

3.) the issue of “sahih bukhari” and similar sunni hadith compilations.there is need to know that the compilations of bukhari and muslim were not the most honest.many hadiths which are regarded as sahih by prominent sunni scholars were left out by bukhari and muslim for obvious reasons.one such hadith is the “hadith of ghadir khumm”.this is a hadith that is regarded as mutawatir.so therefore,the questioning and scrutiny of bukhari and muslim is the beginning of wisdom.

4.) regarding the sahaba like abu bakr and umar said to have contributed so much to Islam.did they really disobey the Prophet (sa) on other instances? or are the shia imagining things about these “two angels” who were very “obedient” as the sunnis see them?you need to check the “hadith of pen and paper”.you need to check commentary on verse 3:144.you need to know what happened at hudaibiyyah when umar doubted the prophet (sa).you need to know what happened in the cave between the Prophet (sa) and abu bakr.ofcourse sunnis see that event as something of great honor to abu bakr.but we do not.why?find out.did abu bakr and umar disobey the Prophet (sa0 regarding the expedition og Usamah Ibn Zaid or not?what happened at “saqifah banu saeda”?

5.) as for the hadith of 12 Imams (as),i really have not found where we can understand from it that after the 12 Imams (as) or 12 caliphs a state of weakness would commence.that is brother Daniel’s supposition.also,from the various versions of the hadiths,we can ONLY understand that there would be 12 caliphs.also,if we are to take into perspective the hadith:”follow my sunnah and the sunnah of the rightly guided caliphs”.if truly the number of caliphs are not ONLY 12 then why do sunnis regard only four as “rightly guided”?why is yazeed for instance not among the first “rightly guided” 12 caliphs of the sunnis? it goes to show something is lacking somewhere within sunnism.who also numberes the “rightly guided caliphs” at 4?was it the Prophet (sa) or sunni historians?

these are random observations i have made from the discussion so far.i hope these points would add substance and more evidence to the course of the discussion between brother Daniel and brother Aboo FaaTimah Al-MuHammadee.i leave you guys to continue and inshaAllah reach at a good conclusion of guidance.
12 hours ago • LikeUnlike • 1Loading…

Aboo FaaTimah Al-MuHammadee Thanks a lot brother Radwan. May Allaah bless you abundantly. As you probably know, my style is to go from the general to the specific. I also want to lay a proper foundation for our brother before digging into the “specific” verses of the Qur’aan and authentic Sunnee Hadeeths. Brother Daniel, I am still expecting your clear answers to the above questions so that I can make the next submissions. Thanks.
8 hours ago • LikeUnlike • 1Loading…

Daniel Al-Qãhırıï Oliver A person who establishes a reprehensible or heretical bid’a would not be acting under right guidance at the time of establishing. Islam will always be pure regardless of the conditions of the Muslims. It is a proff for or against them. They are not a proof for or against it. So whether the deen is strong or not, in my mind, is a comment on how it is implemented, not on its inherent qualities or status. Those are from Allaah.

Now the simple truth is that I’m going to be out for at least 3 days, in shaa-a-llaah. So I will leave you with this:

1. I am not commenting on whether we should adhere to 12 khulafaa from the ahlu-lBayt. I am saying that the article that started this stream, if taken at face value, does not establish:
A) who ahlu-lBayt are,
B) that every khulafaa will be from ahlu-lBayt (it could be an Ethiopian slave, according to the opening hadeeth), or
C) that every khaleefa will be guided and take the right way

When I look at the wording in ‘Arabic and english, I just don’t see it.

2. Further, in addition to the Qur-aan, you have used the following as proofs in your article:
1) ahadeeth from the collection of Ahmad, and
2) ahadeeth graded by al-Albaanee.

This implies that:
A) you consider Ahmad to be credible, and
B) you consider al-Albaanee to be credible.

Neither Ahmad or al-Albaanee were shi’a or “twelvers”, so:
A) It would seem to follow then, that they are misguided in your view for considering ahadeeth to be valid but refuse to adhere to their mandates. So I question your choice of them as sources of evidence.

B) They must have seen that there was more to the story, i.e. other valid ahadeeth related to the subjects of Abuu Bakr, ‘Umar & ‘Uthmaan, ‘Alee and ahlu-lBayt, khilaafa that when taken together lead to views different from your own. You have not adressed this. How can muhaddithoon who you consider credible offer proof that supports your conslusion but at the same time oppose your conclusion?

C) Other hadeeth collections are considered credible by the same people tho consider Ahmad credible. In those collections, there are ahadeeth related to the subject of khilaafa that contradict your conclusion. You have not mentioned or addressed these. If they are invalid (weak, fabricated, etc.), then show them to be so. If they are valid, then you need to include them in your discussion and re-evaluate your conclusion.

ou can’t just pick and choose what suits you and arbitrarily exclude what doesn’t. I am not accusing you of doing this, but you have left yourself open to such an accusation.

3. Regardless of all this, history does not support your conclusion.
A) Khulafaa from ahlu-lBayt have never ruled over the majority of Muslims for any significant period of time. The argument you are presenting may have been valid at the time, but it is clear for anyone to see that Allaah has not chosen ahlu-lBayt for khilaafa. It just hasn’t happened, as far as I am aware. So I do not questions ayaat of Qur-aan or saheeh ahadeeth. I question the conclusion you are drawing from (a seemingly-selective few of) them.
B) The accomplishments of the umma under Aboo Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan are well-known facts. Why did Allaah allow this if they were so evil, or evil at all?

4. Muhammadu-rRasuulu-llaah (sAaws).
We all agree on that. How could he not have known that his closest companions, his fathers-in-law, and son-in-law, were evil, as you claim them to be? How could he have not known that so many of his companions were rebellious apostates? Allaah revealed verses about the munaafiquun, how did all these people go unnoticed? I’m sorry, but what you’re saying just doesn’t make sense. How could a guided person, the most-guided person, be so mistaken? Why wouldn’t Allaah have protected his final revelation for even a day after the prophet’s death?

You are chipping away at the character, guidance and wisdom or Rasuulu-llaah, and you’re goign to have a hard time making people agree with you.

Further, you are questioning what is clear of Allaah’s Qadr.

What you have in this article is about the quality of a pamphlet or flyer. It is only good enought to convince people who already believe it, or who are impressionable. I encourage to do more research. The subject you’re dealing with needs a book, at least, to be fully expounded upon.

As for me, I will follow the leadership and rule of any person whom I see to be guided and taking the right way, regardless of their lineage. I say my du’aa for Rasuulu-llaah and his family in all of my Salaa, in tash-shaahud, and at the beginning of all my du’aa. That is as far as I can go with you. as-salaamu alaykum.
about an hour ago • LikeUnlike

Radwan Hamoud i am eagerly waiting for brother Aboo FaaTimah Al-MuHammadee’s reply.someone is really jumping the gun and making conclusions like “How could he (the Prophet) have not known that so many of his companions were rebellious apostates?” (ARE YOU SURE)

and :

“Khulafaa from ahlu-lBayt have never ruled over the majority of Muslims for any significant period of time”.(WHAT ABOUT IMAM ALI,ISN’T ACCEPTED EVEN BY SUNNIS TO HAVE BEING THE 4TH CALIPH AND EVEN SOME SUNNIS GO AS FAR AS RECOGNIZING IMAM HASSAN AS THE 5TH?)

and:

“I am saying that the article that started this stream, if taken at face value does not establish:
A) who ahlu-lBayt are,
B) that every khulafaa will be from ahlu-lBayt (it could be an Ethiopian slave, according to the opening hadeeth)”.

(FROM MY OPINION THIS ARTICLE IS BASED ON JUST ONE TOPIC FROM AMONG THE MANY THAT HAVE TO DO WITH SUNNI-SHIA DISCOURSE.FROM THE PROOF WE HAVE,THE WILL OF ALLAH AND THE MESSENGER IS FOR US TO ABIDE BY THE QURAN AND THE AHLUL-BAYT IN ORDER NOT TO GO ASTRAY AND FOR US TO FOLLOW THE 12 IMAMS,STARTING WITH IMAM ALI WHOM THE PROPHET DECLARED TO BE HIS SUCESSOR.NOW IF YOU DECIDE TO FOLLOW SOMEONE ELSE,THAT WOULD DEFINITELY NOT BE ALLAH’S WILL AND DESIGN FOR YOU.SO YOU STAND THE CHANCE OF GOING ASTRAY.YOU CAN FEEL FREE TO FOLLOW SOMEONE ELSE WHO YOU THINK IS RIGHTEOUS TO LEAD.BUT WHY DO THAT WHEN ALLAH’S CHOICE SUPERCEDES YOUR CHOICE BASED ON A KNOWN QURANIC VERSE?ALLAH HAS CREATED US MALE AND FEMALE.YOU CAN DECIDE TO GO GAY AS WELL.THAT WOULD BE YOUR CHOICE.BUT YOU CAN’T SAY YOU WERE NOT CREATED MALE AND FEMALE.I THINK BROTHER ABOO FATIMAH WILL CONVINCINGLY ESTABLISH THAT IMAM ALI,THE FIRST OF THE 12 IMAMS WAS THE ONE DECLARED BY THE PROPHET TO BE HIS SUCCESSOR AND NOT SOMEONE ELSE PEOPLE SEE AS OKAY TO LEAD).

As for a shia quoting sunni authors of hadiths,well,we do quote the bible and even the books of paul.that by no means translate to accepting what the authors may have believed.we are firstly quoting to convince you from what YOU (not us) regard as your books of authority.and secondly to make a pointon certain issues which could lead to establishing or identifying the absolute truth.

sorry for the big fonts.i used capitals to seprate my statements from that of brother Daniel.

i look forward to brother Aboo Fatimah’s reply.i just deemed it constructive to make a few points.

Advertisements

3 comments on “The Great Debate

  1. Pingback: Shariah and Sexuality: A Seeker’s Findings | qãhırıï

  2. I don’t think this debate could ever truly end. Both sides are arguing for a point which cannot be argued in such little space or time.

    • asSalaamu ‘alaykum

      The point for me is not to end the debate. I’m not a sunni or a shee’a. I was trying to point out how and why many people will find their article unconvincing, as a way of aiding their research. The problem for me isn’t the conclusion, it’s the thinking: the methods of analysis, approaches to evidence, etc. Right thinking leads to right action, and the opposites are also true. A poor application of the ‘aql (restraint/”intellect”) leads to abusive actions in the nafs (soul). So as actions and conclusions are only corollaries of thought, there is almost no need to address them directly.

      I tried, in as loving a manner as possible, to point out the weaknesses I found in the argument, rather than refuting the conclusion. I didn’t intend to address the conclusion directly, but they were more adamant about it than the points I was trying to elaborate, so I did offer some commentary as a means of bringing the conversation back from specifics to general, fundamental issues. It is true that I disagree with the conclusion, but that is only a necessary result of the flaws I found in their analytical methods and approaches to evidence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s