usermane:

Salaam,
You simply despise me don't you?

yes i simply and verily do.

usermane: And perhaps there may be nothing i can do about that.
I am no christian or non muslim as you think, neither am i a quraniyyun like ummsulaym speculated. Am a muslim. You clearly don't like my thread because it criticised some of your core beliefs, sorry if you got offended though. But Babylolraroy, why not settle down, devote two hours to read and digest the Op of my thread. Perhaps you will find that am not lying and my evidences especially the verses justify my write up.

There is no such time to digest that your write up cos i already did and i regret not spending that moment of my life doing some ibadah. i totally disagree that you are a muslim. av not caled yu quranniyum cos ion even know yu. But it is clear that a muslim wont attack his religious principles like that even if they are wrong..you attacked while trying to be 'polite'
you look at how al-baqir simply disagreed with some 'hadith' without sounding like an apostate buh yu ehn, nba. Except you show how quranly knowledgeable you are....

Hmmmm...seems like a lot of squabbling has been goin on here, me I still av 30 juz to memorise and understand before delving into troubled waters so pls resolve ds before my ship comes. My quota in this sha is that it is normal for muslims to have difference in opinions, but we shouldn't let it result in intolerances.
It is only logical that there be some mistakes in the sahih collections, but I don't see how that equates to throwing the whole lot out.
Lastly, don't know if this is derailing the thread, but do I sense a bit of hostility towards Abubakr and Umar (ra)?
Salam alaykum

Akin d archi: Hmmmm...seems like a lot of squabbling has been goin on here, me I still av 30 juz to memorise and understand before delving into troubled waters so pls resolve ds before my ship comes. My quota in this sha is that it is normal for muslims to have difference in opinions, but we shouldn't let it result in intolerances.
It is only logical that there be some mistakes in the sahih collections, but I don't see how that equates to throwing the whole lot out.
Lastly, don't know if this is derailing the thread, but do I sense a bit of hostility towards Abubakr and Umar (ra)?
Salam alaykum

Ya akhi, May Allah give you the Taofik to understand and memorize His words better.
I agree with you its normal we have difft of opinion among ourselves but this should be done within the guidelines of Qur'an i.e with "...wisdom and good morals...and reason with good argument..."(~Qur'an).

Abu Bakar & Umar!
Please be specific.
I made mention of these personalities within the context of "written/Forbidding" narration of Rasul.
In fact Dhahabi devoted many pages in one of his famous books on this. Why do they do what they did is best known to them. But my bet is had it been they were able to allow people to narrate and write down, document and verify those hadith at that time, we would have been closer to the truth than leaving it un-written for decades. Things got worse at the usurped regime of Mu'awiyyah. Thousands of hadith were fabricated by the Banu Umayyad.

The first written hadith document would have been the one the holy prophet (saws) ordered for at his death-bed when he said "bring pen and pad so I can dictate things in which if you follow will never go astray" had Umar not prevented him (saws) from written these documents whereby Muslims disagree; some re-chanting words of Rasul and some sided with Umar; we wouldn't have been at a cross road for ages. Abdullah Ibn Abbas (R) who knew the gravity of this event will cry till his clothe wet with tears and termed this event "Raziyatu wal Musibah yaomul khamis" (the calamity and misfortune of thursday).
Umar claim was "Book of God is enough". In fact this is another strong argument against those who claimed the holy prophet (saws) said he has left "Book of God and his sunnah". Had it been it was so, Umar will definitely say "Book of God and your sunnah is enough".

In all these context (and more), I believe a "rightly guided khalipha" can NEVER do such a thing. And since no scholar (from old till present) has EVER claim the holy prophet (saws) mention Abu Bakar and Umar as "Rightly guided khaliph" as people used to conjure, then the case is closed.

"Obey Allah, and Obey the prophet and Ulul Amr amongst you..."
*Here, Fakhrudeen ar-Razi in his famous Tafsir al-Kabir opined that since the "Obey (atiu)" of the prophet has been synchronized with that of "Ulul Amr(those vested with authority)", it is then imperative that Ulul Amr should also be Ma'sum (infallible) as the prophet himself (saws).

Here Ulul Amr = Khulafau Rashidun (rightly guided khaliph). For somebody to be Ma'sum (infallible), he has been constantly been guided by Allah in all his A,B and C.

These are definitely not hostility towards Abu Bakar and Umar (forget about certain people who curse them) but truth that can never be sweep under carpet. Many knew the gravity of "the event of pen and paper or calamity of thursday" thereby try to be more subtle, give a subtle interpretation esp where Umar accused the prophet of "Yahjur" (delirious). It has been falsely translated to "unconscious" whereas the Arabic word is still intact.

We have choice in life to follow whoever we wish but we shall be questioned on the day of judgement and raised along with our chosen Imam.

May Allah guide us to the truth.

Salam.

So then, what do u suggest is the way forward? That we discard the hadith totally and refer only to the quran? And if u say to discard the hadith only partially, how do we know which ones are "ok" and which shud be disregarded, or are u suggestg we boycott only the hadith narrated by a certain set of pple.
U can't just state a problem without giving viable solutions, if u know what I mean. Just so u know I still stand my ground to forstall these controversies till I am through with matters that no musilm has quams with...May Allah pardon our shortcomings, and may He put barakah in ur words as u reply @whoever replies with sincererity

babylolaroy:
normally, i dont av spare time to reply jerks buh today nd right nau i do. mr. misspelt username, ds thread is for MUSLIMS and we are trinna do some conversation right here. this is not a church shepherd gathering. you should face front when you arenot directly affected..lets solve and resolve ds without ur awful face around here. pls

this was exactly the attitude and language of the Pharisees when the Jesus challenged (with scriptural evidences) their biased and traditional beliefs.

Instead of you to sit down, study properly does same verses that usermane has given to back his points and then point out the contrary truth in them (at least for the sake of the non believers reading this threads), u instead resort to anger and denial.

I have not seen any point that guy has made here 'without' a clear backing of Quranic verses. I have not seen a single disputal from you 'with' a clear Quranic verse. Considering this, which of you two then is an unbias non-believer bound to follow? I leave u to answer that.

Akin d archi: So then, what do u suggest is the way forward? That we discard the hadith totally and refer only to the quran? And if u say to discard the hadith only partially, how do we know which ones are "ok" and which shud be disregarded, or are u suggestg we boycott only the hadith narrated by a certain set of pple.
U can't just state a problem without giving viable solutions, if u know what I mean. Just so u know I still stand my ground to forstall these controversies till I am through with matters that no musilm has quams with...May Allah pardon our shortcomings, and may He put barakah in ur words as u reply @whoever replies with sincererity

Ya akhi, if you re-read many of my comments (replies) well, you will see certain solution have been procure.
Hadith collections /books are definitely part of Islamic source of knowledge and are reflective of "Obey Allah and His prophet".

HOW DO WE SEPARATE GRAINS FROM SHAFT?

1. Imam Jafar as-Sadiq (a.s) stated: "any hadith that is in conformity with the principle of the Qur'an, is definitely from my father (Rasulullah); and if it derailed from it, its definitely not from him."

Qur'an is the criterion (Fur'qan) which separate truth from falsehood. So I ask you dear brother how many collectors of hadith put this into considerations before recording hadith? Little wonder why you see hadith blatantly opposite to the principle of the Qur'an; yet termed "sahih" because of a particular personality that report it. Here you now see many scholar giving "interpretation" just to calm the situation down since they too knew how it derailed from the Qur'an.

2. RETURNING BACK TO AHL AL-BAYT
Apart from the hadith where the prophet (saws) said he left two weighty things in "Book of God and Ahl al-bayt" that if we follow them, there's no question or fear of going astray (sahih sittah and other prominent sources) following are other saying of Rasul (saws) and commentary of certain ahlu sunnah's scholar:

What makes it compulsory to follow and refer to Ahl alBayt is another hadith of the Messenger of Allah(saws):

"The similitude of my household among you is that of the ark of Noah: whoever embarks upon it is saved, and whoever lags behind it is drowned in the sea of perdition"

[Ref:Al-Hakim quotes it from Abu Tharr on page 151, Vol. 3, of his Sahih Al-Mustadrak, Imam suyuti in his 'Ihyal Mayyit and hundreds of other sources]

" And the similitude of my Household among you is like the Gate of the repentance of Israelites:whoever enters it is forgiven."

[Ref: Al-Tabrani in his 'Al-Awsat' from Abu Sa`id. It is hadith 18 of the 25th Al- Arba`in [forty] ahadith of Nabhani's Al- Arba`in Al-Arba`in (the sixteen-hundred ahadith), p. 216; Imam suyuti in his 'Ihyal Mayyit]

Ibn Hajar, in the exegesis of Chapter 7 of the Holy Qur'an, in Chapter 11, page 91, of his "Al-Sawa`iq al-Muhriqa", has accepted it while saying, after quoting these and other similar traditions:

"The reason for their similitude to the ark is
that whoever loves and highly respects them as means of thanking the One Who gave them honours, following the guidance of their learned men, will be saved from the darkness of dissension, and whoever lags behind it is drowned in the sea of ingratitude and will perish in the paths of tyranny."

Then he adds the following: "As to the Gate of Salvation (meaning thereby their similitude thereto), Allah has made entering that gate, which probably was the gate of Shittim or of Jerusalem, in humility, seeking forgiveness, a reason for salvation, and He (likewise) has made loving Ahl al-Bayt a reason for this nation's salvation."

Since this is the status enjoyed by the scholars of Ahl al-Bayt (as), why do you then turn away from them?"

Salam.

Dewze:

this was exactly the attitude and language of the Pharisees when the Jesus challenged (with scriptural evidences) their biased and traditional beliefs.

Instead of you to sit down, study properly does same verses that usermane has given to back his points and then point out the contrary truth in them (at least for the sake of the non believers reading this threads), u instead resort to anger and denial.

I have not seen any point that guy has made here 'without' a clear backing of Quranic verses. I have not seen a single disputal from you 'with' a clear Quranic verse. Considering this, which of you two then is an unbias non-believer bound to follow? I leave u to answer that.

Dear brother,
I think it would have been better if you leave Username and the concerned Sisters to settle their feud rather than adding more fuel to fire.

I felt like replying but I latter caution myself since I did not know the genesis of their feud. I haven't for once seen or read any of 'Username's' article likewise my sister's comments; so its a little difficult for me to judge any of them. I believe both can settle the score maturely and amicably.

However, Quranic backing with various interpretations should be treated with caution! I have many books and lectures in which muslims and non-muslims backed their points with certain verses of the Qur'an. This is where one will try to exercise caution and compare different argument before jump into conclusion.

In Islam Qur'an is ONE but its interpretations are many and slightly different from each other depending on the primary/secondary beliefs of the interpreter; then his area of studies. Some interpret Qur'an based on modern science, some with philosophy, some with arabic linguistic, some with hadith and Tarikh (historical events), some used Qur'an itself etc.
If a student however restrict himself to one interpreter, then he still have a long way to go. One need to understand all these books of Tafsir, study the beliefs of their respective writer and weigh their respective arguments.

I will try my best in sha Allah to read my brother 'Username's articles and people's comments on it. Pls you can link me to some to make my search faster.

Many thanks

Salam.

Good morning, Al baqir. You know, i do like your threads. For one, you allow for exchange of alternate views without pointing accusing fingers on anyone. So lets please keep this up.
Do you know that enemies of Islam love hadiths books even more than sunnis and shiites? I, God willing shall open a thread on that.
Do you know that for decades and centuries after Ali(r.a) 's death,the shiites did not come up with any compilation?
Several times in the hadith book, it is stated that the Prophet disallowed writting of hadiths. How is it that for over 2 decades, the Prophet banned the hadith writting for fear of mixing up hadiths with Qur'an, when with the kind of man he was, he could find alternative means for recording hadiths without them getting mixed with Qur'anic verses?
Qur'an 59:7, you quoted is not talking about hadith. Its context is distribution of spoils of war. Pls read the whole verse again.
Qur'an tell us that it is explicit,easy to understand,explained in detail and the righteous are highly welcome to read and apply it.
Again is there a single hadiths where the Prophet explicitly taught anyone how to fully perform salat? No, most of them are varying accounts of persons who claimed to have seen the Prophet offer salat.

See? We are making progress...in my opinion. But u need to dumb it down alittle bit, what do u mean by follow ahl albayt? And y name urself a whole different sect just cuz u rever the family of the prophet? Do the "sunni" claim not to love the "ahl albayt"?

BetaThings:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovfz3xnsjJ0&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PL3FD62F6693963905

I was able to download and listen to this video you posted. Sayyid Murtadha spoke in pure Arabic (though translated into english). The posted video is just 3min+ displayed and edited by a salafi/wahabi source. Then am glad to watch the whole video from another source of about 1hour +. Then you can see Misinformation and full editing of the enemy!

Dear brother, I can only pray "may your enemy not quote a 'text' from your 'context' in a statement/lecture".
I believe have made my points in the early reply to prove Shi'a believe in the completeness of the Qur'an al-Majeed.

Not every quote directed @ me I reply cuz on NL, I don't stress myself going deep to explain things except very necessary... Funny you bro cuz the comment you quoted wasn't even directed @ you... Let me reply one more time after which I may not...

usermane:

Salaam
ummsulaym. We tend to clash often don't we? And it is because of the differences and beliefs. Am not a quraniyyun please. Am a muslim, a monotheist who accept the Qur'an as the sole and only message delivered from God through the final prophet; Muhammad. There are lots of evidences, proofs and verses from the Qur'an itself on why muslims should simply follow the Qur'an alone. So it is just too early to say am a misguided dude.

Oh yeah, we clash often and you already said why, so that's it. I smiled when I read ''am a muslim, a monotheist, not a quraniyyun''. That has fast became a national anthem muslims recite where 'I am not a quraniyyun' is replaced with 'I am not a shi'at(or sunni, sufist, Ahmadiyya et cetera')... That's what the lips say but we know who we really are in our hearts, right? YES!
Mr man, look here, we CANNOT follow only Qur'an. We all know it's the ONLY infallible book on earth but one thing is to know, another is to understand. If you follow only Qur'an, you might end up believing(wrongly) that muslim couples are allowed to go anal(shey, u get) in Qur'an 2:223 but -all Muslim jurists agree that anal sex is haram (prohibited), based on the hadith of the Prophet(peace and blessings be upon him). There are so many cases even more severe than this if you stand your Quraniyyun ground. All I can say here is *seek for knowledge* we all(esp. me) need it. Only Allah knows those who are guided, it's not mine to declare anyone, anything and please, don't make me guilty of that already...

usermane:
Again, you said i fail to interprete the verses of Qur'an correctly, i disagree with that. Please point out a single verse i misinterpreted. Please go back to my last thread please and read the Op between the lines along with a translated copy of Qur'an beside you. After then, you are free to call me a criminal.

Now get this, I AM NOT GOING BACK TO YOUR THREAD. What for? Oh, to get pissed again? I will call you no criminal yet(cuz you still have breath in your nostrils). You seems to be scared of what some of us call 'Hadith ambiguities,' well bro, don't be. Open your heart, head, eyes and everything you can and declare to yourself 'A quest for the truth' and seek Allah's help and In Shaa Allah, you might get rid of those concocted beliefs...
I just listened to 'the reckoning' by Muhammad Abdul Jabbar. Permit me to quote this part of his lecture in his exact words :
'' He, S.A.W said that: ''the day of judgement will not come until people will follow the Qur'an and they will reject the Hadith.'' The Hadith he said is in Abu Dawood. Isn't this the case today? Because when you meet this brothers, who only follow the Qur'an and they say we don't believe in the Hadith, there is no such thing as the hadith and you tell them to offer salat, they will say; prove it to me from the Qur'an...''

so bro usermane, somethings I need to take easy and just see as signs of end time but all in all, daw'ah must continue. Mine is to convey the little I know but with Allah, lies Guidance...
I may clash with you often but we are no enemies to eachother... #waleikumus-salam

Just replied usermane without even reading through the latest comments... We aren't @ loggerheads here and please, no one should make it look like we are...
And the brother who is memorizing @ hand, may Allah bestow upon you retentive memory, knowlege wisdom and understanding of IT and me too, cuz really, it's not being easy...

May Allah bestow His mercy upon the sincere seekers of salvation; guide us to the true path of Islam; to clarify for us the true meaning of shahada; and to protect us from the wispers of the accursed satan...

Dear brothers, sisters, readers and viewers, @ this juncture on this thread, from me to you all, it's assalamu aleikum.... *MASALAM*

usermane: Good morning, Al baqir. You know, i do like your threads. For one, you allow for exchange of alternate views without pointing accusing fingers on anyone. So lets please keep this up.
Do you know that enemies of Islam love hadiths books even more than sunnis and shiites? I, God willing shall open a thread on that.
Do you know that for decades and centuries after Ali(r.a) 's death,the shiites did not come up with any compilation?
Several times in the hadith book, it is stated that the Prophet disallowed writting of hadiths. How is it that for over 2 decades, the Prophet banned the hadith writting for fear of mixing up hadiths with Qur'an, when with the kind of man he was, he could find alternative means for recording hadiths without them getting mixed with Qur'anic verses?
Qur'an 59:7, you quoted is not talking about hadith. Its context is distribution of spoils of war. Pls read the whole verse again.
Qur'an tell us that it is explicit,easy to understand,explained in detail and the righteous are highly welcome to read and apply it.
Again is there a single hadiths where the Prophet explicitly taught anyone how to fully perform salat? No, most of them are varying accounts of persons who claimed to have seen the Prophet offer salat.

Dear brother, I admire your keen, critical and sensible opinion. May Allah guide our heart aright and give us much understanding. And thanks for the compliment; we as muslims can truly be follower of Muhammad (saws) once we are able to accommodate ourselves and others.

I agreed with you 100% that one of the plans of Islam's enemies is to study and use our books of hadith (and other books of repute) against us.

Yes centuries after the demise of Imam Ali (a.s), none of his Shi'a compiled any book. The sole reason being that (according to our belief and the saying of Rasul) there's always the presence of an Imam (a guide, leader) at every age in which problems are refer at all times. Remember the knowledge of Ali, the 1st Imam (primarily from Rasul) is being transmitted to his sons Hassan and Hussain (2nd and 3rd Imam) then passed on to the 4th...etc.
Remember the prophet said there will be 12 Imams or Khalipha or Ameer from Quraysh (Banu Hashim according to other versions of hadith in sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim etc) after him (saws). And he nailed it with: "whoever dies without recognizing the Imam of his time (imamu zamani) has died the death of Jahiliyah(ignorance)".

So in short, generally there's no need for the shia to write a sole book for the compilation of Imam Ali's knowledge or any other Imams from the ahl al-bayt of the prophet during their respective times just like the time of Rasul since he's still with them. That was done after them. On the other hand, there were many books compiled by their shia during their time according to the Imams instructions, dictations and sayings (if we put aside the compiled Tafsir of Qur'an written by Imam Ali himself or the Mushaf of Fatima written by her eminent).

As for the argument that Rasul banned people from writing his hadith during his blessed time, that has no source or basis with us (shia). Qur'an was given much more preference. His (saws) sole alternative in preserving his knowledge weather in written form, practice or memorizing was Ali ibn Abi Talib and this was evident in his saying:

"I am the city of knowledge and Ali is the gate to it; whoever want to enters the city should come through the gate" (sahih Tirmidhi, Mustadrak etc).

"Ali is with the Qur'an and the Qur'an is with Ali; the two will never separate..." (Muslim, Tirmidhi, Nisai, Mustadrak etc)

Then Ali himself said: "Everything is in the Qur'an and everything inside Qur'an is summarized in al-Fatiha; al-Fatiha is then fused in Bismillahi Rahmani Rahim; then bismillah...is fused in the letter 'Ba' of Bismillah and I am the dot under the 'Ba'. "
(Ahlu sunnah sources)

He (a.s) further says: "Ask me before you miss me...for there's nothing the holy prophet hasn't taught me...weather inside the Qur'an, pertaining to heavens or earth..."(Ahlu sunnah sources)

NB: I have given plenty of references in my replies to thaba1234 in one of my article (www.nairaland.com/1480939/concept-infallibility-isma).

As per Q59 vs 7: Literarilly you are right but generally you are not. The event (war) was the asbab nuzul (happening or reason) of that Ayah's revelation. How many command had been sanction in the Qur'an in which there were initially reason for their revelations but the command retained till day of Judgement!

And the fact that other verses repetitively commanded "...obey prophet" and "..he does not say nothing except from his Lord..."; and how many times had certain sahaba question the judgement of Rasul where Allah warned them not to speak above the voice of the prophet lest Allah make their deeds void? And prior to the event that lead to the revelation of Q59 vs 7, many of the companions have been questioning his (saws) judgement (e.g remember the treaty of hudaybiyyah) whereas Allah need to affirm "...whatever he gives you take it and whatever he forbids you refrain from it"

In fact the ayat is interpreted to be general with the word "... and what he has forbidden you - refrain from." This is because there's no need for the use of the word "forbid" had it been the ayah is specific to the event of distribution of spoil of war.

Lastly, your question : "...is there a single hadiths where the Prophet explicitly taught anyone how to fully perform salat?

Ali and Khadijah were taught how to perform salat ever before the holy prophet (saws) was appointed as a prophet and ever before salat was made obligatory for muslims. Only Muhammad, Ali and khadijah prayed years before prophet-hood. (There are plenty of reports on this). At least I expect you to know even salat had been established by the previous prophets before Muhammad (saws).

And this was also evident later when salat had been made obligatory. He taught all the converts how to pray and repeatedly say: "salu kamaraetum salih (pray as you see me pray)". He practicalized it by leading prayer for the entire 23years of his prophet-hood.

Many thanks for your time
Salam

Akin d archi: See? We are making progress...in my opinion. But u need to dumb it down alittle bit, what do u mean by follow ahl albayt? And y name urself a whole different sect just cuz u rever the family of the prophet? Do the "sunni" claim not to love the "ahl albayt"?

Ya akhi,
I agreed we are making progress here. May Allah give us much of His Taofik for us to understand ourselves fully.

A. Following ahl al-bayt (a.s)!
NB: please in addition to this reply, try to read my reply to 'Username' on this same thread. Thanks

1. The holy prophet (saws) himself commanded us to follow his ahl al-bayt (a.s) when he said he left two weighty things behind for us that if we adhere to them we will never go astray. (Pls read my other article for more details

How do we treat Qur'an? So much we revere it, we follow every command and its details. Likewise the ahl al-bayt who have been pair with the Qur'an should be revere and follow in every matter of our religious and political and social lives.

2. At the last Hajj performed by the holy prophet (saws) when reached a place called Ghadir khum...after talked at length to his companions, he asked: "Alastu Mawla bikum min anfusikum (Do I have authority over yourselves (than you have on your own self))? When they all responded affirmatively, the prophet then said: "Man kumtu Mawlau fa adha Aliyy Mawla...(Of whomsoever I am his Master, Ali is his master)" (Musnad Ahmad Ibn hanbali and hundreds of Ahlu sunnah sources.)

What does that translated to? In fact the first person to greet Ali was Umar Ibn al-khattab saying: "Congratulations! Congratulations O Abul Hassan for today you have become the leader of all muslim -male and female".

3. Holy prophet in one occasion before the event of the last Hajj (quoted above) was reported to have said:

" Don't try to find faults with ‘Alī, he is indeed from me and I am from him, HE IS YOUR LEADER AFTER ME. He is from me and I am from him, HE IS YOUR LEADER AFTER ME"

Ref: Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbali, vol. 5 p. 356; Ahmad bin Hanbal, al-Musnad, annotated by Ahmad Muhammad Shākir in 15 volumes, Dār al-Ma‘ārif, Cairo, 1949-1958, hadith no. 883.

B. Ibn Abbas narrated: that a Jew named Na'thal came to Muhammad and asked him questions about Tawhid (Unity of Allah). Muhammad answered his questions and the Jew embraced Islam. Then he said: "O Holy
Prophet, every prophet had a wasi
(vicegerent). Our Prophet, Moses Bin Imran,
made a will for Yusha Bin Nun. Please tell me who is your wasi? " The Holy Prophet said: "My vicegerent is Ali Bin Abi Talib; after him are Hasan, and Husain and after them are nine Imams, who are the successive descendants of Husain. "

Ref: Sheikh Sulayman Balkhi Hanafi in his Yanabiu'l-Mawadda, ch.76. (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_the_Twelve_Successors)

B. "And y name urself a whole
different sect just cuz u rever the family of the prophet? Do the "sunni" claim not to love the "ahl albayt"?

(I)We do not named ourselves or form a separate sect. In fact those who did not follow the legacy (and hadith as stated above) of the holy prophet (saws) were the ones who formed a separate sect and deviated from the command of the holy prophet (saws).

In fact the first person that uses the word "Shi'a" as regard to Ali was the holy prophet (saws) himself(despite Qur'an using the word both in its plural and singular form) when Allah revealed in sura al-bayyina "RadiAllahu anhum waradu anhum dhalika liman khashia Rabba". Then upon seeing Ali and his associates (like Salman al-Farsi, Miqdad, Ammar ibn Yassir, Ibn Abbas etc), the holy prophet (saws) said: "Adha Aliyy wa SHIATu..." (This Ali and his Shia are the most successful on the day of Judgement). (Read Tafsir ad-Darul Manthur of Imam suyuti).

The word "Shi'a" has been in use since esp after the death of the prophet during the first and second Fitnah (civil war) instigated by Mu'awiyyah + Aisha vs Imam Ali. Here we have people calling themselves "Shiat Mu'awiyyah (supporters of Muawiyyah)", and others "Shi'at Ali (supporter of Ali). After the wars, those who broke away from Ali were termed "Khawarij" while those who remained steadfast with him still maintained the word "Shia". Mu'awiyyah managed to changed the word "Shiat Mu'awiyyah" and renamed it "Ahlusunnah wal Jama'a". May Allah never let me have affiliation with Somebody whom the holy prophet (saws) said: "“At the time of his death, Mu’awiyah shall not be counted as member of my Muslim Ummah.” (Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir. Ta'rikh Al-Rusul Wa'l-Muluk(Vol. 8, Pg. 186)). He was even cursed by the holy prophet as reported by Imam Nasai.

(ii). Sunni claimed to love the ahl al-bayt?
1. Sunni's interpretations of Ahl al-bayt is different from that of Shi'a despite so many source(s) in the Qur'an and their books of hadith to justify Shi'a claim of who ahl al-bayt's were.

Shi'a believe Ahl al-bayt were Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain (together with 9 Imams from the progeny of Hussain).

Sunni believed it to be Muhammad, his wives and Ali, fatima, hassan and hussain.

Then as to the "love of ahl al-bayt (here am talking of Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain)" by the sunni, what kind of love do they claim when you don't follow or recognize their leadership after Rasul?

Please ask yourselves sincerely what you do know about Fatima despite being given the title "Sayyidatu Nisail alameen (Leader of all women of universe)? Please read my thread: (www.nairaland.com/1482471/lady-fatima )
Compare with Aisha, who for example was the 2nd highest narrator of hadith with more than 3000 hadith. As big and voluminous sahih bukhari and Muslim, they only manage to record just TWO narrations from Fatima, a woman her father revere to the extent that whenever she visit him, the prophet will stand up for her and call her "Umu Abiha (her father's mother). He shaped her himself.

Or you wanna talk about Ali (a.s) vs Abu Hurairah. It is disheartened! Abu hurairah to the sunnah narrated the largest hadith (over 6000) yet he barely knows the prophet. He accepted Islam 3years before the death of the prophet in Sham; he never participated in any expenditure or even managed to spend a FULL single day alone with the prophet. Compare to Ali who was raised, bred, thought, trained, shaped by Rasul starting from age 3 till prophet died. Indeed truth is the word of Rasul: "I am the city of knowledge and Ali is the gate...".
What kind of "love" is that?

Or you'd like to talk about Hassan and Hussain, the leader of the youth of paradise(hadith)? What do you know about them?

"Qul Inkuntum tu ibunAllah fatabi uni..." "Say(O Muhammad): if you truly love God, follow me...".

There's no love or reverence without following, accepting and recognize as the leader after Muhammad (saws)

Thanks dear brother for your precious time.

Wa salam alaykum

ummsulaym: Just replied usermane without even reading through the latest comments... We aren't @ loggerheads here and please, no one should make it look like we are...
And the brother who is memorizing @ hand, may Allah bestow upon you retentive memory, knowlege wisdom and understanding of IT and me too, cuz really, it's not being easy...

May Allah bestow His mercy upon the sincere seekers of salvation; guide us to the true path of Islam; to clarify for us the true meaning of shahada; and to protect us from the wispers of the accursed satan...

Dear brothers, sisters, readers and viewers, @ this juncture on this thread, from me to you all, it's assalamu aleikum.... *MASALAM*

May Allah fill your heart with salam (and everyone of us too).
Wa alaykum salam.

Ma' salam too.

Peace be upon you.
The fact is, every sect have their own hadiths books. The only way to resolve the sect issue is for everyone to return to the Qur'an, the only Book, the Prophet swore to have preached with(Qur'an 6:19). The earliest hadith book came 200+ years after the messenger 's death. This is serious joke! A book meant to explain the Qur'an only surface nearly 2 centuries post prophet 's death? The messenger of God was an intelligent man. He knew people would fabricate teachings in his name after his departure(Qur'an 6:112) and therefore banned the writting of hadith, fully aware that the Qur'an is sufficient for us(25:31). Infact, that is the only thing he knew of the future. Abubakar, Umar, Uthman, Ali who muslims revere so much as role models did not record any hadiths.
The messenger wount complain that his hadith or sunnah has been deserted like an abudawood hadith state. The prophet 's only complain on Judgement day will be that Qur'an has been deserted(Qur'an 25:30). This is exactly what the muslims did right after his death, passing it down to us.

Once a non muslim debated with me over Islam permitting sex slaves. He tried to defend this claim by citing various hadiths that authorize muslims to own sex slave along with their wives. I insisted that hadith books have nothing to do with Islam. Then he started speaking like sunnis and shiites, he said i need hadiths to understand Qur'an, quoting the common poorly interpreted verses, like "obey the messenger" or "the messenger is an excellent example for mankind". It was only till i proved to him with even hadiths,common sense and Qur'an verses that hadiths books were never authorised by God that he finally gave up.

I thank God recently, no more will i accept pope,reverend,mullah or sheikh between me and God, no more will i accept messengers between me and God. All messengers of God came to eliminate the clergymen. They didn't come to be intermediary between man and God. They lived according to the complete, fully detailed and self explained scripture they delivered without adding to or taking away anything from the Book.

Al-Baqir:


I was able to download and listen to this video you posted. Sayyid Murtadha spoke in pure Arabic (though translated into english). The posted video is just 3min+ displayed and edited by a salafi/wahabi source. Then am glad to watch the whole video from another source of about 1hour +. Then you can see Misinformation and full editing of the enemy!

Dear brother, I can only pray "may your enemy not quote a 'text' from your 'context' in a statement/lecture".
I believe have made my points in the early reply to prove Shi'a believe in the completeness of the Qur'an al-Majeed.

Please can you give us the full version and put the "salafi/wahabi" source to shame?

I am sorry - we are all anonymous here.
What you, an anonymous poster - say here cannot overturn what the likes of Kulayni - the author of Al Kafi have said
All the Shia scholars listed below believe that the Qur'an was tampered with. That is a grave matter

Muhammad ibn Yaqub Al-Kulayni
Mirza Habibullah al-Khui
Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi
Abbas al-Qummi - he has another version of Ayat ul Kursi
Ayatollah Tabatabai
Ayatollah Mirza Jawad at-Tabrizi

Al-Baqir:


Bismihi Ta a'ala

@Betathings,
Here we go again bro! Why bringing 'Shi'a' in this fold? Here we talk about certain hadith discrediting Rasul; you try to be defensive by bringing out your pains about Shi'a. Haven't you read the very first comment of this OP where I said:

" ...These books contain many authentic narrations as it also contains flaws. Not only Bukhari and Muslim, there abound many revere books of hadith, tafsir and tarikh (history) in both Sunni and Shi'i works."

My pains about Shia??
Can you please truthfully tell us the % of the threads you opened that are not designed rubbish sunnis
The figure will be less than 30%
Most of your posts are designed to launch insiduos attack on Sunnis
Yet, I know you will claim that Shias want unity!

Haven't you? Yet you talked with not a single reference that Shia believe in the 'incompleteness' of the Qur'an. Many of you pride so much in checking "internet" for references or follow a so-called scholar like Bilal phillips. Have you ever seen shia Usul kafi or other books not to mention of checking those so-called quotations? In fact, the very introduction of Usul al- Kafi is enough where Sheik Kulayni warns of many hadith in his book! How many of your scholars did that?

You guys quote your scholars. Please allow us quote ours
Bilal Philips book refers to a lot of books of Ahadeeth.
So why is Usul Kafi so difficult to lay hands on while Bukhari and Muslim are all over the place
Transparency
BTW - don't assume that we are just regurgitating

Contrary to your assertion, this is the description of Usul Al Kafi from within the book itself

The contents of al-Kafi are precious gifts from Ahl al-Bayt(the fourteen infallible family members of Prophet Muhammad, (Divine Supreme Covenant Body) to their followers.)

‘Once I went to see abu ‘Abd Allah (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)and said to him, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause, I would like to ask you a question. Is there anyone else in this house who may hear my words?’"

The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) then folded the curtain between his room and the next room and looked into it. Then the Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)said, "O abu Muhammad, ask whatever you wish."

I said, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause, your followers say that the Messenger of Allah taught Ali (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) a thousand chapters of knowledge and from each chapter there opened a thousand chapters. I then said, "This, I swear by Allah, is knowledge."

He would mark the ground with his staff (perhaps a sign of thinking) for a while. He then said, "That is knowledge but it is not that." The narrator has said that the Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)said, "O abu Muhammad, with us there is al-Jami‘a. Do they know what al-Jami‘a is?"
I asked, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause. What is al-Jami‘a?"

The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)said, "It is a parchment seventy yards long by the yards of the Messenger of Allah. It contains his dictations from his very own mouth that are recorded onto it in the handwriting of Ali (DivineSupremeCovenantBody). It contains all the lawful and unlawful, and all matters that people need. Even the law of compensation for a scratch caused to a person." He then extended his hand towards me and asked, "May I, O abu Muhammad?" I replied, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause, I am entirely at your disposal." He pinched me with his hand and said, "The law of compensation, even for this much, is included therein." He seemed angry. I said, "This, I swear by Allah is knowledge."

The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)said, "It certainly is knowledge but not that one." The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) remained silent for a while and then said, "With us there is al-Jafr. Do they know what al-Jafris?"I asked, "What is al-Jafr?"

The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) said, "It is a container made of skin that contains the knowledge of the prophets and the executors of their wills. It is the knowledge of the scholars in the past from the Israelites."

I said, "This certainly, is the knowledge."

The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)said, "It certainly is knowledge but not that knowledge." The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) remained silent for a while and then said, "With us there is the book (Mushaf) of Fatima, (DivineSupremeCovenantBody). Do they know what Mushaf of Fatima is?"

The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) said, "Mushaf of Fatima is three times bigger than your Quran.
There is not even a single letter therein from your Quran." I then said, "This, I swear by Allah, is the knowledge."
The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) said, "This certainly is knowledge, but it is not that." The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) remained silent for a while and then said, "With us there is the knowledge of whatever has been, and the knowledge of everything that will come into being to the Day of Judgment."

I said, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause. This, I swear by Allah, certainly, is the knowledge."
The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)said, "It certainly is knowledge but not that knowledge."

I asked, "May Allah take my soul in service for your cause. What is the knowledge?"
The Imam (DivineSupremeCovenantBody)said, "It is whatever takes place during the night and during the day, one matter after the other matter, and one thing after the other to the Day of Judgment.

Que: Where are these so-called verses in the present Qur'an as claimed?
These are tip of the ice-berg from books of Ahl sunnah. I will be glad to provide you more should you request.

Please unveil the iceberg so that we can deal with the entire thing once and fir all.
No need for games

SHIA SCHOLARS OPINION:

»Sayed Khoie (rh) states:
“Although it is true that the version of Ali’s
Quran had some texts that are not in the
present Quran this does not mean that Ameer al Momineen (as) had an additional Quran that is not in the present Quran rather that addition means that this version contained divinely revealed Tafseer and Taweel in it that is not present in the existing Quran”
(Ref:Al Bayan fi Tafseer al Quran, page 223)

This is prevarication.
The references you cited are supposed to counter those shias that say the Qur'an is changed, distorted etc
Note
We have been told that Shias don't talk anyhow. That Shias always hold uniform positions
Since Shias claim ti be guided by infallible imams, that is easy to understand
Sunnis never claim that the Qur'an is altered - Only Shias do
So why are the Shias refuting themselves?
Only one answer - the taqiyya. I am not talking of taqiyya from fear of physical injury
But taqiyya to make others like the Shias

I will be glad if you can present to me a copy of the so-called Shi'a Qur'an or a book where shi'a claimed Qur'an is incomplete.

Just like the Christians ask Muslims to show them a copy of the authentic, uncorrupted Bible
Very frighteningly similar methodology
BTW it is your imams that claim that we have adulterated Qur'an
And that is obvious - if somebody the Shias regards as an "usurper" compiled the Qur'an, then Shias will easily believe that the Qur'an is also tainted
Of course, If an FRSC official claims I have a "fake" driver's licence, it does not mean that I will have a "genuine" DL to show to people

Lastly,
Like what a reknow Egyptian Sunni scholar said: if truly Shi'a have a different Qur'an, how come all these ages they've manage to hide it from people? Their Qur'an is the same as ours unless the doubters could present a copy of the so-called 'shia-Qur'an.

But the Shias have been hiding their Imam for ages. Why would it be so difficult for them to hide a book

Our belief is that both Sunni and Shia books of hadith contains many fabricated hadith among which are those that talked about tahrif of the holy Qur'an. It is suprising seeing certain sunni scholars (esp the Wahabis) accusing shia of belief in tahrif while their myopic eyes deceive them of not knowing vast narration in their pride books.

I disagree. You shias regards your book of ahadeeth as sahih. You only don't use the word "sahih"

AlTabRassy said : " Alkafi among the four shia books ( AlTahzeeb , Alkafi , AlIsTibSar , mun la YahDuruhu Alfaqeeh ) is like the sun among the stars , and who looked fairly would not need to notice the position of the men in the chain of hadiths in this Book , and if you looked fairly you would feel satisfied and sure that the hadiths are firm and accurate . "

[ MusTaDrak AlWasa'el , volume 3 , page 532 ]

AlKhomeini said : " Do you think it is enough for our religious life to have its laws summed up in AlKafi and then placed upon a shelf?"

[ Al-Hukumah Al-Islamiyyah page 72 ]

AlHur Al'amily said " The authors of the Four Books of shia ( Alkafi , AlIstibsaar , AlTahzeeb , Mun La YahDuruHu Alfaqeeh ) have testified that the Hadiths of their books are accurate (saheeh) , firm and well conducted from the roots that all shia agreed on , and if you consider those scholars ( the authors of the four books ) are reliable then you must accept their sayings and their narrations . "

[ Alwasa'el , volume 20 , page 104 ]

We disregard the notion that says sahih Bukhari or Muslim are the most authentic after Qur'an.

Please feel free

What were the evidences of Bilal phillips that Bukhari did this and that before compiling even a single hadith in his sahih? That's conjectures. Bukhari should have included it in the preface of his sahih.

Imam al-Hakim nisabouri compiled "al-Mustadrak ala sahihain" in which he added to so many hadith in his books: "this hadith is authentic according to the Criteria stipulated by the two sheik (Bukhari and Muslim) but they do not record it in their sahih"
So al-Hakim revealed to us here that Bukhari and Muslim actually follow certain standard in recording their hadith; so where's Mr Bilal phillip conjure his statement?

Have you read Bilal philips' book?
Otherwise this question is unnecessary

Thanks for the posts, so far what I av concluded:
1) The quran is complete and authenthic regardless of whatever whispers of tamperings may be flying around
2) I shud not treat any hadith like I treat the quran, ie I wud av to be more careful when accepting hadith regardless of if it is classified sahih, and if it contradicts the quran I wud just boycott it
3) To carry out no2 I need a very sound knowledge of the quran
4) I have to learn all there is to know about the family of the prophet *which in my opinion includes all the wives,fatimah, Ali an his progeny
5) Concerning the suspicion of the conducts of some of the sahaba after the prophet, I refuse to entertain any doubt about them, their case is with Allah. Allah is Al-adl and Al-Aleem
If there is anything anyone feels I am getting wrong, please suggest, jazakumullah khayran wasalam alaykum

In my opinion, the whole episode of the prophet trying to write a will on his death bed and being stopped by Umar seems questionable to say the least, for the following reasons:
1) The prophet himself had already asked his followers during the hajj if he "delivered the message", this signifies he had finsihed his obligations as d final prophet, if there was still such an important message like his willi do not think he wud av asked that question
2) Accepting that the prophet had a message that he wanted to deliver but was stopped from doing so means accepting that d prophet didn't finish his duty as a prophet
3) If f the prophet knew the weight of such a will to d ummah, I find it hard to believe he wud forskae delivering the will just because some sahaba stopped him, that goes against the character of the prophet as he was depicted to always be worried of the ummah
So whether he delievered his will or not, there are controversies surrounding this very narration about the writing of the will, and if I were to follow the line of thought of not accepting any hadith that is not in line with d quran....
Allah knows best

BetaThings:

My pains about Shia??
Can you please truthfully tell us the % of the threads you opened that are not designed rubbish sunnis
The figure will be less than 30%
Most of your posts are designed to launch insiduos attack on Sunnis
Yet, I know you will claim that Shias want unity!



You guys quote your scholars. Please allow us quote ours
Bilal Philips book refers to a lot of books of Ahadeeth.
So why is Usul Kafi so difficult to lay hands on while Bukhari and Muslim are all over the place
Transparency
BTW - don't assume that we are just regurgitating

Contrary to your assertion, this is the description of Usul Al Kafi from within the book itself





Please unveil the iceberg so that we can deal with the entire thing once and fir all.
No need for games



This is prevarication.
The references you cited are supposed to counter those shias that say the Qur'an is changed, distorted etc
Note
We have been told that Shias don't talk anyhow. That Shias always hold uniform positions
Since Shias claim ti be guided by infallible imams, that is easy to understand
Sunnis never claim that the Qur'an is altered - Only Shias do
So why are the Shias refuting themselves?
Only one answer - the taqiyya. I am not talking of taqiyya from fear of physical injury
But taqiyya to make others like the Shias


Just like the Christians ask Muslims to show them a copy of the authentic, uncorrupted Bible
Very frighteningly similar methodology
BTW it is your imams that claim that we have adulterated Qur'an
And that is obvious - if somebody the Shias regards as an "usurper" compiled the Qur'an, then Shias will easily believe that the Qur'an is also tainted
Of course, If an FRSC official claims I have a "fake" driver's licence, it does not mean that I will have a "genuine" DL to show to people



But the Shias have been hiding their Imam for ages. Why would it be so difficult for them to hide a book



I disagree. You shias regards your book of ahadeeth as sahih. You only don't use the word "sahih"
[ MusTaDrak AlWasa'el , volume 3 , page 532 ]

[ Al-Hukumah Al-Islamiyyah page 72 ]

[ Alwasa'el , volume 20 , page 104 ]


Please feel free


Have you read Bilal philips' book?
Otherwise this question is unnecessary

someone has bitten more than he can chew

vedaxcool:

someone has bitten more than he can chew

Yes for once i do agree with you.al-Baqir has bitten more than he can chew because he is dealing with people who justify and feel good about their own beliefs by denying beliefs of others through unfounded claims and wet-dreams.

Betathing is talking about taqiyyah,yet Taqiyyah is found in the Quran.

He is talking about Shia having belief that the Quran have been altered/distorted (tahreef),yet the very Sunni books he is defending (like bukhari and muslim) contain hadiths that state the Quran has been altered.yet because he is programmed to believe it is only the Shia that hold such belief,he disregards the skeletons in his own cupboard.even when the Shia in every home have the same Quran (even ones printed in majority Sunni countries) and the Shia deny tahreef,the likes of Betathing would insist the Shia believe in tahreef.ask him for proof,he would quote hadiths from Shia books that the Shia themselves reject.and ironically when the Shia bring hadiths from his "sahih" about Aisha narrating that a verse of the Quran,known as the "Verse of Stoning",was allegedly lost when a goat chewed it,he would pretend ignorance.our al-kafi,biharul-anwar,wasael al-shia,etc are not tagged by the Shia with the "sahih" label as sunnis have their hadith books.the Shia insist that only the Holy Quran is "sahih".when you tag a book as "sahih" (authentic/unadulterated),you must accept everything in it.based on that and since hadiths supporting tahreef are found in bukhari and muslim,it is 100% honest to say sunnis believe in tahreef.he will still disagree,but wants us to believe it is the Shia misusing taqiyyah and not his likes.amazing nonsense! Do you believe your books are "sahih" or not? Do you believe in tahreef or not? Its either your books are not "sahih" as the OP has been preaching,or if you say they are then you believe in tahreef because there are reports therein supporting tahreef.choose!

Zhul-fiqar:


Yes for once i do agree with you.al-Baqir has bitten more than he can chew because he is dealing with people who justify and feel good about their own beliefs by denying beliefs of others through unfounded claims and wet-dreams.

Betathing is talking about taqiyyah,yet Taqiyyah is found in the Quran.

He is talking about Shia having belief that the Quran have been altered/distorted (tahreef),yet the very Sunni books he is defending (like bukhari and muslim) contain hadiths that state the Quran has been altered.yet because he is programmed to believe it is only the Shia that hold such belief,he disregards the skeletons in his own cupboard.even when the Shia in every home have the same Quran (even ones printed in majority Sunni countries) and the Shia deny tahreef,the likes of Betathing would insist the Shia believe in tahreef.ask him for proof,he would quote hadiths from Shia books that the Shia themselves reject.and ironically when the Shia bring hadiths from his "sahih" about Aisha narrating that a verse of the Quran,known as the "Verse of Stoning",was allegedly lost when a goat chewed it,he would pretend ignorance.our al-kafi,biharul-anwar,wasael al-shia,etc are not tagged by the Shia with the "sahih" label as sunnis have their hadith books.the Shia insist that only the Holy Quran is "sahih".when you tag a book as "sahih" (authentic/unadulterated),you must accept everything in it.based on that and since hadiths supporting tahreef are found in bukhari and muslim,it is 100% honest to say sunnis believe in tahreef.he will still disagree,but wants us to believe it is the Shia misusing taqiyyah and not his likes.amazing nonsense! Do you believe your books are "sahih" or not? Do you believe in tahreef or not? Its either your books are not "sahih" as the OP has been preaching,or if you say they are then you believe in tahreef because there are reports therein supporting tahreef.choose!

Why don't address betathings, Betathings have answered the thread see here https://www.nairaland.com/1501204/how-true-narrations-sahih-bukhari#19276820 his very first word answered the thread, he raised a very important issue which is more than you or the op can chew!

vedaxcool:

Why don't address betathings, Betathings have answered the thread see here https://www.nairaland.com/1501204/how-true-narrations-sahih-bukhari#19276820 his very first word answered the thread, he raised a very important issue which is more than you or the op can chew!

Ignorance is not good.the only thing left unanswered in Betathing's post is his propaganda video on Sayyid Murtaza Qazwini.

The hadith Sayyid Qazwini was quoting that the verse: "God favored Adam,the family of Noah,the family of Ibrahim and the family of Imran over mankind",also included "family of Muhammad",is a hadith that is found (also) in Sunni books.this hadith has been refuted by the great Shia alim,Ayatollah Abu'l Kassim al-Khu'i,and proven to be weak.furthermore,the video Betathing presented of Sayyid Qazwini is doctored.Sayyid Qazwini does not believe the Quranic text has been distorted,but was merely quoting what is found in some Sunni reports.instead of showing us 1minute 28 seconds of his lecture,those Sunni (definitely wahhabi/salafist sunnis) should have provided the full lecture let us hear the statement in context.

I will present this 10 minute video to get more refutations to such claims by Salafist pseudo-scholar,Usthman al-Khamees:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&persist_app=1&v=xXPA5bmKMMc

The real problem is in the Sunni "sahih" books because you have reports from people like Aisha,Umar and Abdullah Ibn Masood-upon whose shoulders the foundations of the Sunni sect lies-that the Holy Quran has suffered tahreef.these figures were among the Sahaba Sunnis do hold in high honor.

As for us,the words of the 12 holy Imams (as) of Prophet Muhammad's (s) Ahlul-Bayt (as) are decisive over whatever anyone says.Imam Ja'far as-Sadeq (as) said:

"'Test the various reports by the Book of God; whatever agrees with it take it,whatever disagrees with it reject it."'Take what is agreed upon (by scholars). Certainly the universally accepted should not be doubted.'"

The above is found in al-Kafi by al-Kulayni.al-Kulayni was a Shia hadith recorder/compiler (just like Bukhari and Muslim for Sunnis),and he considers the Quran (as per the saying of Imam Sadeq) to be the yardstick for separating truth from falsehood.

This is what we read in the Holy Quran:

“and most surely ” (41:41) it is a Mighty Book: (42) Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the Praised One”, and “(15:9) Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian”.

What the classical Shia scholars of the highest prominence have said:

The completeness of Quran is so indisputable among Shia that the greatest scholar of Shia in Hadith, Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn al-Husain Ibn Babwayh, known as "Shaykh Saduq" (309/919-381/991), wrote:

"Our belief is that the Quran which Allah revealed to His Prophet Muhammad is (the same as) the one between the two covers (daffatayn).And it is the one which is in the hands of the people, and is not
greater in extent than that. The number of surahs as generally accepted is one hundred and fourteen ...And he, who asserts that we say that it is greater in extent than that, is a liar."

Shi'i reference: Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq, English version, p77.

1- It should be noted that Shaykh Saduq is the greatest scholar of Hadith among the Imami Shia and was given the name of Shaykh al-Muhaddithin (i.e., the most eminent of the scholars of Hadith). And since he wrote the above in a book with the name of "The beliefs of the Imami Shia," it is quite impossible that there could be any authentic Hadith in contrary to it.
It is noteworthy that Shaykh Saduq was one of the earliest Shia scholars.

2- Another prominent Shia scholar is Allama Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar who wrote in his Shia Creed book that:

"We believe that the Holy Quran is revealed by Allah through the Holy Prophet of Islam dealing with every thing which is necessary for the guidance of mankind. It is an everlasting miracle of the Holy Prophet
the like of which can not be produced by human mind. It excels in its eloquence, clarity, truth and knowledge. This Divine Book has not been tampered with by any one. This Holy Book which we recite today is the same Holy Quran which was revealed to the Holy Prophet. Any one who
^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^
claims it to be otherwise is an evil-doer, a mere sophist, or else he is sadly mistaken. All of those who have this line of thinking have gone astray as Allah in Quran said: "Falsehood can not reach the Quran
from any direction (41:42)"

- Shi'i reference: The Beliefs of Shi'ite School, by Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar, English version, pp 50-51

3-Sayyid al-Murtadha, another prominent Shi'ite Scholar said:

"... our certainty of the completeness of the Quran is like our certainty of the existence of countries or major events that are self evident. Motives and reasons for recording and guarding the Holy Quran
are numerous. Because the Quran is a miracle of the Prophethood and the source of Islamic Knowledge and religious rule, their concern with the Quran made the Muslim Scholars highly efficient concerning
grammar, its reading, and its verses."

4-With this various concern by the most eminent Shia scholars, there is no possibility that the Quran was added or deleted in some parts.

5-Besides what Allah mentioned in Quran about its protection, we can use our logic to derive the same result. Allah sent his last Messenger to show people (to the end of the time) His Right Path. Therefore if Allah does not preserve His message, He would be contradicting His own aim. Obviously, such negligence is evil according to reason. Thus, in essence, Allah preserves His message as He preserved Moses in the house of His Enemy,Pharaoh.

Conclusion:

Shia Muslims collectively believe that the Qur'an we have is free from all textual distortions. It's the same Qur'an God revealed upon Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his descendants). Yes, distortion was made in the arrangement of the verses as we all know that Q. 96 is the first chapter of Qur'an revealed and Q. 5:3 is the last verse revealed. Fabricated interpretation of Qur'an is also a kind of distortion but the letters in Qur'an are indeed the word of God. See this:

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/tahreef/shia-scholars-completeness-quran.html

BetaThings:
Please can you give us the full version and put the "salafi/wahabi" source to shame?

I am sorry - we are all anonymous here.
What you, an anonymous poster - say here cannot overturn what the likes of Kulayni - the author of Al Kafi have said
All the Shia scholars listed below believe that the Qur'an was tampered with. That is a grave matter

Muhammad ibn Yaqub Al-Kulayni
Mirza Habibullah al-Khui
Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi
Abbas al-Qummi - he has another version of Ayat ul Kursi
Ayatollah Tabatabai
Ayatollah Mirza Jawad at-Tabrizi

Bismihi Ta a'ala!

Dear betathing, Islam is not a religion of dogmatism. For you to maintain a balance in your research, you need to open up your heart and research truthfully into argument and counter-argument of two opposing party. There's no win or lose in religious issue for this is a concern of salvation!

Many people today rely so much on the info gotten from ANY internet sources -reliable or not. Even if you want to read any book whatsoever, you need to have a hint about the beliefs of the author because his belief will reflect on his writings.

Concerning the video of Ayatullah Mur'tadha Qazwini, I would have posted the link had it been my "source" is through internet. Ayatullah Qazwini is a renown scholar in Karbala, Iraq. Most of his collections I have is either in Arabic or Farsi subtitled. Dear brother I pride so much in having a personal library since my days as a Sunni not to mention of what I possess as a Shi'a. My collections (books,videos etc)...All these are side-talk!

However, in sha Allah I shall give you the gist of the said lecture ("Ahle Muhammad" as against "Ahle Ibrahim" and associated shi'i narration at an appropriate section of this reply.

As I said earlier books of both Sunni and Shia are full of traditions which 'whisper' the thought of "incompleteness" of the holy Qur'an. I have already quoted certain naql for you in classical Sunni books and in sha Allah I will quote some in Shii traditions too and as well as commentaries and response of Shi'a Ulama.

Dear brother, I am not that sentimental to accuse Bukhari, Muslim, Suyuti, Ibn kathir, Tabari et al of believing in the "incompleteness" of the holy Qur'an because of what they narrated and affirmed to be "Sahih". It is however suprising that you(or Bilal pillips or any other salafi scholars except the core Sunni scholars) don't want to do the same for authors of Shi'i books of narration. Where's justice here?

I asked you humbly once again if you have ever sighted or read "Usul al-Kafi"? In fact the introduction of al-Kafi is enough where Sheik Kulayni maintained the state of certain hadith as regard the Qur'an; and his personal belief. Whatever synchronize with Qur'an is accepted! Whatever suggest opposition to the Qur'an is rejected even if its chain of transmission (Isnad) is complete. Al-kulayni or any scholars of repute are (were) not infallible Imams or representative of Imams and therefore shia doesn't take his fundamental belief from them. They were just great collectors of hadith.

I gave you an insight of Imam al-Hakim (author of "al-Mustadrak ala shahihain), prominent hadith collector after Bukhari and Muslim who maintained there are rules and regulations followed by these persian scholars in recording hadith. Many hadith were collected in al-Hakim's Mustadrak where he affirmed: "This hadith is sahih according to standards stipulated by the two Sheiks (Bukhari and Muslim). Yet you said your scholar Abu Ameena Billal phillips 'said' bukhari used to 'do certain ritual(pray)' before recording. Who is Billal Phillips compare to Imam al-Hakim? Where does Billal phillip brought his legend? Why hasn't Imam bukhari himself said something of such in the preface of his sahih?
Am sorry dear brother I know more about Abu Ameena Billal phillip more than you do.

Please dear brother research your beliefs deeply first. You will discover Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, Zaid et al have different ways (difft phrases) and texts of reciting the Qur'an until Uthman 'unify' them on one source and then burned the rest. An example here is the verse of wudhu (sura al-Maidah); according to Sheik Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn kathir (and many others),that some companion will recite "...arjuLAKUM..." While some recite as "...arjuLIKUM..." Thereby justify their respective practice where some WASH(faghsilu)their feet while some WIPE (masih) their feet respectively based on different recitation: www.nairaland.com/1448545/ablution-wudu-under-microscope
What does that suggest? Today we only have "arjulakum and not arjulikum".

ON ACCUSED SHI'I SCHOLARS!
Initially you started with Murtadha Qazwini, now you've found new list comprises of Allama Hussain Tabatabai, Hajj. Abbas Qumi et al. What do you sincerely know about these scholars my dear brother? One of the most comprehensive, reliable and pride books of Shia are "Tafsir al-Mizan" by Allama Tabatabai; and "Mafatih al-Jinan" by Hajj. Abbas Qumi. Have you EVER sight any of these books and read their beliefs about the Qur'an? Dear brother Fear Allah. Conjecture, hear-say, dogmatism, false and sentimental talk of enemies are acts condemned in the Qur'an. For Allah's sake, read the introduction of "Tafsir al-Mizan" of Allama Tabatabai and see his belief on the holy Qur'an:www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/
As per Sheik Abbas Qumi, search for "Mafatih aljinan" on www.getjar.com; if you can handle arabic, download and go through. Mafatih al-jinan is a Shia 'ritual' book of Du'a.

TRADITIONS OF SHI'A & RESPONSES!
1. The first are those traditions in which "Tahreef (change)" has been used. E.g:

A tradition which stated that on the day of judgment after the holy prophet (saws) has accused of certain people of his Ummah what they've done to the "Thaqalayn (two weighty things)", they will reply: "Of the two precious things you left behind, the greater one (Book of God) we have DISTORTED(tahreef) and thrown behind our backs and ignored, and the lesser one we opposed and hated".

NB: there are many traditions of this sort.

2. The 2nd group of traditions is that which claims that in some verses of the holy Qur'an the name Ali, in particular or of other members of ahl al-bayt in general were originally mentioned but were omitted or altered later on. E.g:

A. The tradition from al-Kaafi that in verse 2:23, after the phrase "Ala Abdina", was the phrase "Fi Aliyyin" which was later omitted.

B. There are traditions which show that "Ahle Muhammad" was originally mentioned in some verses, but omitted or altered lately, (Q3:32, 3:33) after "Ahle Ibrahim"; and that "Ahle Imran" was later inserted. (Remember Qazwini's video here).
NB: plenty traditions here too.

3. Some traditions talked about verses e.g in al-Kaafi, a tradition ascribed to Imam Jafar sadiq (a.s) that the Qur'an which Gabriel brought to the prophet (saws) contained 7000 verses.

4. Some tradition assert that a large portion of the Qur'an has been omitted and some non-Qur'anic materials inserted.

NB:Now I fear hypocritical mind will not just quote these alone without the responses. Lol

RESPONSES
For brevity I will only touch the one concern your posted video.(As given in 2B above) unless you sincerely ask for the others' explanation.

Here's the explanation of S.V. Mir Ahmed Ali in his "A commentary on the holy Qur'an"page 52 (Ansariyan publication, 1996):

"...Such a tradition, if it be true, means not only omission but also the addition of non-Qur'anic matter in the Qur'an. This is against the unanimous verdict of all schools, particularly the Ithna-Ashari School. Besides being reported by a single reporter (which is unacceptable as already pointed out), the insertion of the term "Aale Muhammad" instead of "Aale Imran" would exclude Ali from from "Aale Muhammad" thereby denying the fact as well as the Shia faith, because of the subsequent appositional phrase, "thuriyatan ba'zoha min ba'dh," as Ali is not a descendant of Muhammad; and if the subsequent phrase is discarded, the term "Aale Muhammad" will include not only the members of the family, but all the followers as in the case of "Aale Fir'aun" (3:32, 33). However, in the case of the present version of the Qur'an, both Muhammad and Ali, along with their issue, are included in "Aale Ibrahim"(descendants of Abraham). "

Whatever your comment is now, I reply with "Lahaola wala quwata wala ilma illah billah. "
I thank you for your precious time.
Salam.

BetaThings:

My pains about Shia??
Can you please truthfully tell us the % of the threads you opened that are not designed rubbish sunnis
The figure will be less than 30%
Most of your posts are designed to launch insiduos attack on Sunnis
Yet, I know you will claim that Shias want unity!



You guys quote your scholars. Please allow us quote ours
Bilal Philips book refers to a lot of books of Ahadeeth.
So why is Usul Kafi so difficult to lay hands on while Bukhari and Muslim are all over the place
Transparency
BTW - don't assume that we are just regurgitating

Contrary to your assertion, this is the description of Usul Al Kafi from within the book itself





Please unveil the iceberg so that we can deal with the entire thing once and fir all.
No need for games



This is prevarication.
The references you cited are supposed to counter those shias that say the Qur'an is changed, distorted etc
Note
We have been told that Shias don't talk anyhow. That Shias always hold uniform positions
Since Shias claim ti be guided by infallible imams, that is easy to understand
Sunnis never claim that the Qur'an is altered - Only Shias do
So why are the Shias refuting themselves?
Only one answer - the taqiyya. I am not talking of taqiyya from fear of physical injury
But taqiyya to make others like the Shias


Just like the Christians ask Muslims to show them a copy of the authentic, uncorrupted Bible
Very frighteningly similar methodology
BTW it is your imams that claim that we have adulterated Qur'an
And that is obvious - if somebody the Shias regards as an "usurper" compiled the Qur'an, then Shias will easily believe that the Qur'an is also tainted
Of course, If an FRSC official claims I have a "fake" driver's licence, it does not mean that I will have a "genuine" DL to show to people



But the Shias have been hiding their Imam for ages. Why would it be so difficult for them to hide a book



I disagree. You shias regards your book of ahadeeth as sahih. You only don't use the word "sahih"
[ MusTaDrak AlWasa'el , volume 3 , page 532 ]

[ Al-Hukumah Al-Islamiyyah page 72 ]

[ Alwasa'el , volume 20 , page 104 ]


Please feel free


Have you read Bilal philips' book?
Otherwise this question is unnecessary

You challenge my posts being "designed to rubbish" Sunni!

I don't know if you've ever read my thread with good heart; anyway here's the summary of my posts so-far:

1. "How true are narrations of sahih bukhari and Muslim"
Here I tried my best to absolved my (and your)prophet of silly characters(nauthubillah) attributed to his blessed self. Instead of you commenting positively, you derailed bringing up another topic entirely which I called "your Shia pain". Well am sorry and ask your forgiveness if offended.
Where do I rubbish "Sunni" after concluding that both Shia and Sunni books are not free of certain hadith of such?

2. "Islam supremacy over christianity"
Here I brought the event of Mubahala refer to in the Qur'an, which happened in the 9the -10th year of Hijrah before the blessed soul of prophet departed us

3. "Was Aisha 9 or 17years when she married the prophet?"
Here I used other classical sunni argument and sources to tackle "Bukhari's" claim that prophet married Aisha @ 6years only to consumated the marriage @9years. What's my crime believing in other source which says Aisha was 17years not 6 or 9years when she married prophet?

4. "Devils stoned devils" changed by Maclatunji as "Are you in a position to stone the devil?"
Here I talked about muslims hypocritical attitude with our "make-up sunnah" whereas lack in morals. Thank God both shia and sunni paraded beard, short-ankled troussier, turban etc.
My crimes please?

5. "Muhammad: Error-free prophet"
My crimes for Allah's sake? Is your own prophet a sinner or error proned prophet?

6. "The concept of infallibility(ismah)"
I presented my belief that Muhammad and the ahl al-bayt are free from sins, mistakes and error being guided and protected by Allah; as against (here people's comments) sunni believe(though not sunni-sufi) that he's not free from sins.

7. "Our lady of Fatima"
Are you feel threatened in any way on the blessed status of "Leader of all women of the universe"?

8. "Dua kumayl"
Any problem with this?

9. "Legacy of Muhammad: Qur'an and What?"
All my references and quotations here, were from the reliable sources of Ahlu Sunnah (sunni). The challenge here is:

"Ask (them): Produce your evidence if you are truthful" ~Qur'an.

Etc etc...

SUMMARY
1. Ya akhi, if in anyway I "rubbished" Sunni beliefs or practice, what I expected of you is to counter my points one by one with same Sunni references I used or ask around for tips. What I hate most is you (and many others) derailing from the main topic. You don't contest what you have no or little knowledge of. You research if you are trully seeker of truth.

2. Other argument of yours have already been answered in the previous reply.

3. THAT WE "hide" our Imam so why would it be so difficult to hide a book !

You claimed we have a different Qur'an and all efforts to prove you otherwise meet already sealed heart. The only question left is produce the so-called "Shia Qur'an".
As per hiding of Imam al-Mahdi (a.s), has Allah not protect and hide prophet Isa, Idris and Khidr from vicinity? Had it been its human protection and not Allah's, they would have been discovered.
Your believe as a sunni on al-Mahdi is different from mine as a shia. So what's the fuss?

If Allah can "hide"(protect) Nabi Musa right before the eyes of his avowed enemy (Fir'aun) where he sees but cannot recognized; then His protection of al-Mahdi exit under His supreme majesty.

Now I challenge you dear brother (and any other concerned fellas) who is your present Imam as stated in the following hadith found in your classical work:

"Whoever dies without knowing the Imam of his time (Imam zaman), will die the death of the time of ignorance (Jahili)"

Who is your Imam?

4. "Sahih"
You claimed we regard our books of hadith as "sahih" only that we don't call it so. Thank God! So how "sahih" is your books which you directly named "Sahih"?

The only sahih book on earth is al-Qur'an al-kareem. In fact all other books failed when apply the challenge from the Qur'an:

"Have you consider the Qur'an, had it been from any other aside Allah, you would have found much discripancies" ~Qur'an

Sunni pride so much in Sahih sittah. Initially they were limited to two out of six "sahih"; Bukhari and Muslim. Thank God sunni scholars have agreed sahih muslim contain certain fabricated hadith. Remain agreement on Bukhari.

5. Al-Jami'a and Mus'haf of Fatima (a.s)
In fact just as you like "copy-pasting" too much without even bother to comprehend what it says, you derail too much also. From what you pasted on this headlines, where in anyway does it suggest to you that all those refer to Qur'an?
Is the holy Qur'an the only revealed words of God in Islam? What about hadith al-Qudsi? Hadith al-Qudsi are divinely revelation from Allah but not part or recorded in the Qur'an.
If the holy prophet (saws) could say: "I am the city of knowledge and Ali is the gate...(Tirmidhi et al), then only Ali could teach you what you no not out of prophet's ilm. Kindly see my reply to Thaba1234 on the "Concept of Infallibility (ismah)".

Many Thanks

Akin d archi: In my opinion, the whole episode of the prophet trying to write a will on his death bed and being stopped by Umar seems questionable to say the least, for the following reasons:
1) The prophet himself had already asked his followers during the hajj if he "delivered the message", this signifies he had finsihed his obligations as d final prophet, if there was still such an important message like his willi do not think he wud av asked that question
2) Accepting that the prophet had a message that he wanted to deliver but was stopped from doing so means accepting that d prophet didn't finish his duty as a prophet
3) If f the prophet knew the weight of such a will to d ummah, I find it hard to believe he wud forskae delivering the will just because some sahaba stopped him, that goes against the character of the prophet as he was depicted to always be worried of the ummah
So whether he delievered his will or not, there are controversies surrounding this very narration about the writing of the will, and if I were to follow the line of thought of not accepting any hadith that is not in line with d quran....
Allah knows best

Hmmm...good thought my dear brother. Islam is so unique that we are given the freedom of using our aql (intellect).

Reply:
1. I agreed 100% with you that he delivered Allah's message perfectly and asked his companions which they affirmed. Here at his death-bed, sick bed he only wanted to write his last-will. Remember that's an instruction from the Qur'an to he who death has approach: writing of will -wasiyyah.
There's a difference in verbal pronounciation and documenting it.

After a long conversation between Umar and Ibn Abbas on the issue of caliphacy, following are the conclusion:

`Umar said: "O `Abdullah! I implore you not to be shy but tell me if he (Ali) is still concerned about the issue of caliphate." He answered in the affirmative. Then `Umar asked: "Does he claim that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) has selected him for it?" Ibn `Abbas answered: "Yes, indeed; moreover, I even asked my father if there was any statement made by the Messenger of Allah regarding selecting him for the caliphate, and my
father informed me that that was the truth." `Umar then said: "The Messenger of Allah held him in very high esteem through his speeches and actions in a way that
left no argument nor excuse for anyone, and he kept testing the nation regarding him for some time; nay, even when he was sick [prior to his demise], HE WISHED TO NOMINATE HIM FOR IT, BUT IT WAS I WHO
STOPPED HIM."

Sunni References:
1. Tarikh al-kamil by Ibn Athir
conclusion of `Umar's biography among the events of
the year 23 A.H., page 24, Vol. 3, and it is also quoted
by the Mu`tazilite scholar in `Umar's biography, too,
page 107, Vol. 3, of Sharh Nahjul Balaghah
[2] This is quoted by Imam Abul-Fadl Ahmed
ibn Abu Tahir in his book Tarikh Baghdad,
indicating his reliable source to be Ibn `Abbas. It is also quoted by the Mu`tazilite scholar who discusses `Umar in his Sharh Nahjul Balaghah, page 97, Vol. 3.

[3] This dialogue is quoted by authors of books of biographies in their discussions of `Umar, and we have quoted it here from Sharh Nahjul Balaghah by the Mu`tazilite scholar; so, refer to page 105 of its third
volume.
[4] Ibn Hajar has quoted both cases in his fifth maqsad of the verse enjoining kindness to the Prophet's kin, and it is verse 14, of the ones dealt with in Chapter 11 of his book Al- Sawa`iq al-Muhriqa; so, refer to page 160. Al-Dar Qutni has quoted the
case of al-Hasan with Abu Bakr, and Ibn Sa`d has quoted the case of al-Husayn with `Umar in his biography of the latter in his Tabaqat.

2. Prophet was not stopped from talking but from writing. The fact that he had severally used the word "...so that you will not go astray" showed that its the same admonition of leaving two weighty things in book of God and ahl al-bayt (of which Ali is the head). He only wanted to put it documented and sealed but prevented.

3. Dear brother, our noble prophet (saws) was seriously ill to the extent that he's always being supported to even stand.
How many prophets were even killed by their society? Prophet Noah and Lut were betrayed by their wives and son! Prophet Isa was betrayed by one of his companions! Prophet Zakariyyah was stoned to death in a market place by the jew while his son, Nabi Yahya was beheaded by the king of the time despite affirming to be prophet and man of God.
Prophet (saws) was only stopped from documenting, let's thank Allah the fitnah stopped there.

Lastly there are no controversy on the authenticity of the hadith of pen and paper because it appear virtually in all books of hadith. Some try to absolve Umar of wrong doing while others accused Umar of wrong doing. We are free to choose where we sided based on our conviction with sincerity.

Salam.

Akin d archi: Thanks for the posts, so far what I av concluded:
1) The quran is complete and authenthic regardless of whatever whispers of tamperings may be flying around
2) I shud not treat any hadith like I treat the quran, ie I wud av to be more careful when accepting hadith regardless of if it is classified sahih, and if it contradicts the quran I wud just boycott it
3) To carry out no2 I need a very sound knowledge of the quran
4) I have to learn all there is to know about the family of the prophet *which in my opinion includes all the wives,fatimah, Ali an his progeny
5) Concerning the suspicion of the conducts of some of the sahaba after the prophet, I refuse to entertain any doubt about them, their case is with Allah. Allah is Al-adl and Al-Aleem
If there is anything anyone feels I am getting wrong, please suggest, jazakumullah khayran wasalam alaykum

I agreed with you on all your points except no. 4

Who are the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s)?

1. The only place in the Qur'an where the word "ahl al-bayt (household)" is used is in surah ahzab vs 33:

"...God only wishes to remove al-rijz from you, O ahl al-bayt, and to make you pure and spotless."

Here most all ahlu sunnah believed that because of the context in which this 'text' was found (revealed or arranged), it address the wives of the holy prophet along with Ali, Fatima Hassan and Hussain.

A. The previous verses from verse 30 addressed wives of the prophet where FEMININE gender were used until the gender changed to MASCULINE (ankum) at the tail end of verse 33.

Ahlu sunnah believed the shift or change of the gender form is just to accomodate a new group (comprises of Ali, Fatima, hassan and Hussain) which altogether with the wives (Feminine gender) refer to "Ahl al-bayt".

NB: You can get a gist of this in the commentary of Abdullah Yusuf Ali's english translation of the Qur'an with commentary under the verse. Unfortunately his commentary where he made mention of Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain in the old edition has been REMOVED in the so-called new edition.

B. Shia believe on the contrary that the new group with masculine gender is far different from previous group comprises of wives. And only this group has been refer as "ahl al-bayt"(Ali, Fatima, hassan and Hussain).

HOW DOES MUHAMMAD INTERPRET THIS VERSE?
1. Umm salam (R), one of the wives of the prophet (saws) reported the verse was revealed in her house whereupon the holy prophet (saws) immediately called upon Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain. She said he (saws) wrapped them under a cloak, recited "...Allah only wishes to remove from you al-rijz, O ahl al-bayt...". Ummu salama said: "I sought Allah's prophet permission to enter the cloak to be part of this blessing but by Allah the prophet did not grant me saying: 'Tanakhyi fa'innaka ala khair" (keep your distance, for you are on the right path. "

(Sunni Ref: Sahih al-Tirmidhi vol. 5 p. 351, 663; al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim vol. 2 p. 416; Tafsir ad-Durr al-Manthur of Imam suyuti, vol. 5 p. 198; Usdul Ghabah of Ibn al-Athir vol. 2 p. 289; Tafsir al-Tabari vol. 22 p. 7 etc etc)

2. Aisha also reported similar tradition where she only reported that the prophet called for these blessed four, covered them and recited the verse (above).
(Sunni Ref: sahih Muslim, chapter of virtues of companions, section of the virtues of the ahl al-bayt, 1980 edition pub. In saudi Arabia, Arabic version vol. 4 p. 1883 tradition no. 61)

3. A similar hadith from safiyya (another wife) where she said when the verse was revealed, the prophet said: "call for me! Call for me! Safiyya said: "call who, O messenger of Allah?" He (saws) then said: "Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain". When they came, he put them under a cloak and recited the verse.
(Ref: al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim vol. 3 p. 148; Talkhis of al-Dhahabi vol. 3 p. 148 etc)

NAIL ON THE COFFIN
4. In the 9th-10th year of Hijrah just before the death of the prophet (saws), Allah revealed to His prophet to challenge the christian of Najran to a Mubahala contest:

"SO IF SOMEONE ARGUES WITH YOU IN THIS AFTER WHAT HAS COME TO YOU OF THE KNOWLEDGE, say, "COME, LET US CALL OUR SONS AND YOUR SONS, OUR WOMEN and YOUR WOMEN, OURSELVES AND YOURSELVES, THEN PRAY AND INVOKE THE CURSE OF ALLAH UPON THE LIARS."" ~Sura Al-Imran vs 60-62

ON THE FIELD OF MUBAHALA!
The christian accepted the contest and on that day, gathered most nobles among them. The holy prophet (saws) as instructed by His Lord carried Hussayn in his arm while Hassan held his finger, followed by Bibi Fatima and concluding with Ali (a.s). These blessed five souls marched to the field of Mubahala.

OUR SONS: Hassan and Hussayn
OUR WOMEN: Fatima ONLY
OURSELVES: Muhammad (saws) and Ali

The holy prophet declared: "Lord these are the People of my House, Ahl al-Bayt", and he covered his family with a cloak. ~sahih Muslim vol. II p. 287

STATUS OF AHL AL-BAYT
Nearly all muslims especially the chiefs as at that time would have dreamt of being part of the contest to represent al-Islam. But the holy prophet (saws) took along, his ahl al-bayt comprises of Ali, Fatima, Hassan and Hussain (a.s).

Here all the scholars of Tafsir unanimously explained that "Our women" referred to Fatima alone. She's the only woman worthy to represent Islam. They maintained that though "our women" is in a plural form but this kind is called "royal plural" which Allah normally used for Himself.

Ourselves (Anfusana) translated to be the holy prophet (saws) and Ali (a.s).

Our sons: Hassan and Hussain; the leader of the youth of paradise.

(Sunni Ref: sahih Muslim, arabic version vol. 4 p. 1871 hadith no. 32; sahih al-Tirmidhi, vol. 5 p. 654; al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim vol. 3 p. 150 who said this hadith is authentic based on the criteria set by two sheiks (bukhari and Muslim); Dhakha'ir al-Uqba by Muhibuddin al-Tabari, p. 25)

If there's any doubt as regard whom the ahl al-bayt (household) of the holy prophet (saws) were, this holy verse and incident is enough to dispel the doubt.

WHY NOT THE WIVES INCLUDED IN THE AHL AL-BAYT?
1. Naturally ones wife is part of the 'famly' but in the case of Muhammad, especially if the word "ahl al-bayt" is used, his wives are not. Here's Zaid ibn Arqam's argument when asked if the wives of the prophet were included in his ahl al-bayt. Zaid said:
"No, by Allah! A woman lives with a man (as his wife) for a while; he then divorce her and she goes back to her parents and her people. The ahl al-bayt of the prophet are his lineage and his descendants for whom the acceptance of sadaqa is forbidden"

Sunni Ref: sahih Muslim, arabic version vol. 4 p. 1874 hadith no. 37

2. Surah Tahrim, chapter 66 was revealed because of Aisha and Hafsa's misconduct where Allah reproach them,asked them to repent for their heart has deviated, threatened them with divorce and replace them with BETTER women with exalted qualities (of Taqwa, steadfast, truthfulness 2tc); warned them with example of the wives of prophet Noah and Lut whose wives betrayed...(Pls read the whole chapter).

This and more (space do not permit)Coupled with Aisha's active role in causing and fully participating in the first Civil war of Islam (battle of jamal against the khalipha of their time, Imam Ali) where thousands of muslim died; all these affirmed that prophet wives can not be among those whom Allah has been cleansed with thorough purification from AL-RIJZ (all abominable acts, sin, error etc).

Please confirm all my references from A-Z from Sunni sources.

May Allah guide us to the truth and open our heart to follow the truth.

"There's a difference between knowing a path and following the path"~Mophius( Lawrence Fishburne) in the Film "Matrix".

Salam.

Zhul-fiqar:


Ignorance is not good.the only thing left unanswered in Betathing's post is his propaganda video on Sayyid Murtaza Qazwini.

The hadith Sayyid Qazwini was quoting that the verse: "God favored Adam,the family of Noah,the family of Ibrahim and the family of Imran over mankind",also included "family of Muhammad",is a hadith that is found (also) in Sunni books.this hadith has been refuted by the great Shia alim,Ayatollah Abu'l Kassim al-Khu'i,and proven to be weak.furthermore,the video Betathing presented of Sayyid Qazwini is doctored.Sayyid Qazwini does not believe the Quranic text has been distorted,but was merely quoting what is found in some Sunni reports.instead of showing us 1minute 28 seconds of his lecture,those Sunni (definitely wahhabi/salafist sunnis) should have provided the full lecture let us hear the statement in context.

I will present this 10 minute video to get more refutations to such claims by Salafist pseudo-scholar,Usthman al-Khamees:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&persist_app=1&v=xXPA5bmKMMc

The real problem is in the Sunni "sahih" books because you have reports from people like Aisha,Umar and Abdullah Ibn Masood-upon whose shoulders the foundations of the Sunni sect lies-that the Holy Quran has suffered tahreef.these figures were among the Sahaba Sunnis do hold in high honor.

As for us,the words of the 12 holy Imams (as) of Prophet Muhammad's (s) Ahlul-Bayt (as) are decisive over whatever anyone says.Imam Ja'far as-Sadeq (as) said:

"'Test the various reports by the Book of God; whatever agrees with it take it,whatever disagrees with it reject it."'Take what is agreed upon (by scholars). Certainly the universally accepted should not be doubted.'"

The above is found in al-Kafi by al-Kulayni.al-Kulayni was a Shia hadith recorder/compiler (just like Bukhari and Muslim for Sunnis),and he considers the Quran (as per the saying of Imam Sadeq) to be the yardstick for separating truth from falsehood.

This is what we read in the Holy Quran:

“and most surely ” (41:41) it is a Mighty Book: (42) Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the Praised One”, and “(15:9) Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian”.

What the classical Shia scholars of the highest prominence have said:

The completeness of Quran is so indisputable among Shia that the greatest scholar of Shia in Hadith, Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn al-Husain Ibn Babwayh, known as "Shaykh Saduq" (309/919-381/991), wrote:

"Our belief is that the Quran which Allah revealed to His Prophet Muhammad is (the same as) the one between the two covers (daffatayn).And it is the one which is in the hands of the people, and is not
greater in extent than that. The number of surahs as generally accepted is one hundred and fourteen ...And he, who asserts that we say that it is greater in extent than that, is a liar."

Shi'i reference: Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq, English version, p77.

1- It should be noted that Shaykh Saduq is the greatest scholar of Hadith among the Imami Shia and was given the name of Shaykh al-Muhaddithin (i.e., the most eminent of the scholars of Hadith). And since he wrote the above in a book with the name of "The beliefs of the Imami Shia," it is quite impossible that there could be any authentic Hadith in contrary to it.
It is noteworthy that Shaykh Saduq was one of the earliest Shia scholars.

2- Another prominent Shia scholar is Allama Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar who wrote in his Shia Creed book that:

"We believe that the Holy Quran is revealed by Allah through the Holy Prophet of Islam dealing with every thing which is necessary for the guidance of mankind. It is an everlasting miracle of the Holy Prophet
the like of which can not be produced by human mind. It excels in its eloquence, clarity, truth and knowledge. This Divine Book has not been tampered with by any one. This Holy Book which we recite today is the same Holy Quran which was revealed to the Holy Prophet. Any one who
^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^
claims it to be otherwise is an evil-doer, a mere sophist, or else he is sadly mistaken. All of those who have this line of thinking have gone astray as Allah in Quran said: "Falsehood can not reach the Quran
from any direction (41:42)"

- Shi'i reference: The Beliefs of Shi'ite School, by Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar, English version, pp 50-51

3-Sayyid al-Murtadha, another prominent Shi'ite Scholar said:

"... our certainty of the completeness of the Quran is like our certainty of the existence of countries or major events that are self evident. Motives and reasons for recording and guarding the Holy Quran
are numerous. Because the Quran is a miracle of the Prophethood and the source of Islamic Knowledge and religious rule, their concern with the Quran made the Muslim Scholars highly efficient concerning
grammar, its reading, and its verses."

4-With this various concern by the most eminent Shia scholars, there is no possibility that the Quran was added or deleted in some parts.

5-Besides what Allah mentioned in Quran about its protection, we can use our logic to derive the same result. Allah sent his last Messenger to show people (to the end of the time) His Right Path. Therefore if Allah does not preserve His message, He would be contradicting His own aim. Obviously, such negligence is evil according to reason. Thus, in essence, Allah preserves His message as He preserved Moses in the house of His Enemy,Pharaoh.

Conclusion:

Shia Muslims collectively believe that the Qur'an we have is free from all textual distortions. It's the same Qur'an God revealed upon Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his descendants). Yes, distortion was made in the arrangement of the verses as we all know that Q. 96 is the first chapter of Qur'an revealed and Q. 5:3 is the last verse revealed. Fabricated interpretation of Qur'an is also a kind of distortion but the letters in Qur'an are indeed the word of God. See this:

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/tahreef/shia-scholars-completeness-quran.html

Ma sha Allah Ya akhi,
Indeed you are Zul Fiqar! I appreciate your responses. However, what have been able to understand with many of my brethren on the web-page (since am a new comer) are:

1. Many of them just copy-past from any internet source not even bother to verify or understand the content before posting.

2. They still come with the believe : "this Shia will not defeat us" not knowing in Islamic discussion there's nothing like WIN or LoSE.
Sincerity is the key here!

3. Many don't even understand their creed or which creed does he belong in his belief and practice

4. They love Derailing from the main topics; that's immaturity. And they deliberately do this just to avoid taking the main topic head-long since they have little knowledge of it despite sighting sources from their own back-yard.

5. They forget one can either be a scholar or a student who ask. Anything "new" to them is being attack instead of doing research.

6. Their scholars :"Misquoting Shi'ee texts, whether that be in terms of translation or context.

Referencing major Shi'ee scholars and
their works without ascertaining if the
reference is authentic or not."

And many more. Although I appreciate a lot of people who are very sincere.

It is only disheartened seeing people debating on what they have little knowledge of. Imagine betathing quoting "Billal phillips?". Then I realize you can judge the student easily by their teacher.

I appreciate your effort dear brother. Ma Allah bless you. And my condolences on the matyrdom of Aba Abdullah (a.s).

Salam

vedaxcool:

Why don't address betathings, Betathings have answered the thread see here https://www.nairaland.com/1501204/how-true-narrations-sahih-bukhari#19276820 his very first word answered the thread, he raised a very important issue which is more than you or the op can chew!

Vedaxcool! In fact you are a good supporter club!
Your comment always keep me bemused.

Anyway the so-called issues raised (esp the hadith narrated in the posted video) have been answered. Hope you will read it with open heart. You can decided before you even read the reply to lock up your heart. You don't contest what you have no knowledge of. My advice is please go back to Madrasa and learn.

Salam.

@ brother/sister al-Baqir,

Ameen.may Allah (swt) reward us on the martyrdom commemoration of Imam Abi Abdillah al-Hussain (as),and condolences to our great maraji and the Imam of the time (ajtfs) and every lover of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) of our beloved Prophet,Muhammad (s).