https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFsWyliO86A

Firstly my main concern is, i need a clarification from the books of the "infallible" imams proving or disproving what that ithna ashari sheikh said about the pillars of Islam, like seriously, no tawheed?

Secondly, what reply would the shias here give to the refutal of the concept of imamah by the ex-shia.

Note: I'm not cut out for long epistles, truth should must be short and concise, twistings comes in when a reply becomes uninterestingly long.

^^^I would have laughed my heads off watching the above video, but it's not a laughing matter at all, I am eternally thankful to Allah (SWT ) for His guidance of which I seek more for myself as well as all of us.

The folly in believing in the concept of Imamah according to the shi'ah is something quite straightforward. It needs not to be argued, it is not in the Qur'an SIMPLE! The principle cannot even be found in the Quran! Using semantics is quite revealing how they arrive at principles of the religion. Shi'as are never straightforward!

AlBaqir would claim the salafists are a takfiry loving bunch, but the reality is that shi'a consider sunnies(all) to be kafirs, because they do not believe in the concept of Imamah according them.

Let me also join you inawaiting their responses. ...

1.) "al-imamah aslon min usulud deen": this means imamate is a fundamental among the fundamentals of religion. that phrase by Sheiikh Yasser al-Habibi was mistranslated by the miscreants of the youtube video to: "imamah is the fundamental principle of the religion". this would sound as if the sheikh is putting imamah ahead of tawheed or negating tawheed. when Tawheed is the first fundamental of religion, among the five, to the Shia. so that answers lexiconkabir's curiosity. you now see how your people are lying and mistranslating in the name of "saving" you from "misguidance" of the Shia.

2.) i was expecting a two minute video. again, another deceit! the video is over ten minutes while we are told that in two minutes everything would be disproved.

3.) the second sheikh, Abdul Hameed al-Muhajir, mentioned "usus al-islam" (groundwork) and "arkan al-islam" (structures of the religion) are five. to everyone with little knowledge on Shia Islam would know that there is Usulud-deen (fundamentals) and furoo ul-Deen (branches). the branches is where salat and zakat and fasting etc. belong to as per Shia Islam. Tawheed is not in the Furoo but in the Usul. But in Sunni Islam, salat and zakat are five and includes Tawheed. To the Shia, Tawheed belongs to the Usul. That's the mix up.possibly deliberately ignored by the dishonest creator of that video for his YouTube channel. the Usulud-Deen has the first article to be Tawheed. again, the creator of the video is playing with words and mistranslated the words of the scholar and making it seem he is referring to the five pillars of Sunni Islam which starts with Tawheed. in Shia Islam, the Usul is categorized into five and the furoo is nine.

here are the Usul (fundamentals) :

1.) Tawheed 2.) Adl (Divine Justice) 3.) Nubuwwah 4.) Imamah 5.) Qiyamah (resurrection)

here are the furoo:

1.) Salat (Prayers) 2.) Saum (Fasting) 3.) Hajj (Pilgrimage) 4.) Zakat (Poor Rate) 5.) Khums (Wealth Tax) 6.) Jihad (Striving) 7.) Amr-Bil-Ma'roof (Enjoin what is good) 8.) Nahi-Anil-Munkar (Forbid what is wrong) 9.) Tawalla (To love and respect the Ahl-ul-Bait and their friends) and Tabarra (To disassociate from the enemies of the Ahl-ul-Bait).

http://www.shia.org/fundamental.html

4.) every religion passes takfir on the other. but it is only Wahhabis/Salafists who believe it is their duty to kill others who they pass takfir on. Lest my words be taken out of context, we do not regard anyone who believes in Tawheed and Nubuwwah to be kaffir. You are Muslim (submitter), but not a mu'meen (believer with complete faith) if you don't believe in Imamah and the other three fundamentals. The dichotomy between a Muslim and a mu'meen is clear in the Holy Quran.

5.) The verse of general Imamah in the Holy Quran is verse 2:124. This proves that Prophet Ibrahim (as) was given a position which was higher than the position he had already attained in prophethood. then, in specific reference to Imam Ali (as) is verse 5:55 which is mentioned in the above video. there are other verses too in the Holy Quran which points to the superiority of the chosen ones amongst the Prophet Muhammad's (s) relations or the Ahlul-Bayt (as). see link for the verses:

http://www.al-islam.org/imamate-and-infallibility-imams-quran-ridha-kardan/chapter-1-imamate-quranic-verse-ibtila

5.) is there proof in the Quran for the principle of caliphate? of how Sunnis should go about conducting an election? Abu Bakr was selected by a limitied number of sahaba in the coup of Saqifa Banu Saeeda. Umar was appointed by Abu Bakr, something Sunnis claim the Prophet (s) did not do before he left the world. Usthman got the caliphate through a committee of 6 people who were threatened by Umar to choose one person among themselves or face death. and Usthman died and did not leave anyone. and by the unanimity and appeal of the Ummah, Imam Ali (as) accept to take charge of the political affairs of the Muslim that he was denied to. so where is the Sunni principle of caliphate in the Quran, since despite the verses supporting Imamate, Sunnis still insist there is no proof in the Quran. so bring your proof. if you cannot, then something is wrong in you. Islam is a complete and perfect religion, right?

6.) there is no proof whatsoever that Hussein Moayad comes from a Shia family or brackground as per Shia sources. so the proof is upon Sunnis who made the claim to tell the world the genealogy of their hero:
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235025019-are-there-shia-who-really-reverted-to-sunni/?page=2

7.) Sayyid Kamal has a series of 125 lectures titled "al Imamah fil Quran" (Imamate in the Quran). I couldn't find the lectures on YouTube. But here are the lecture in audio for those who can understand Arabic without subtitles/translation:

http://www.al-islam.org/ar/media/al-imamah-fi-al-quran-lecture-001

the words of Ayatollah Kamal al-Haydari are taken out of context in the doctored video. he was most likely referring to a case or instance. Sayyid Kamal al-Haydari has many lectures on Imamate and the Quran on YouTube with translation which shows that Sayyid Kamal views Imamate as a fundamental of religion.

see below two videos:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJIU6-u2GKo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsMkJ6PleJM


NEXT DO NOT BRING RUBBISH SPREAD ON THE NET BY YOUR DISHONEST FELLOWS AND MAKE A DISCUSSION ON IT. ITS WASTE OF TIME. I WOULDNT PAY ATTENTION BECAUSE IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED REGURGITATED TRASH.

sino:
^^^I would have laughed my heads off watching the above video, but it's not a laughing matter at all, I am eternally thankful to Allah (SWT ) for His guidance of which I seek more for myself as well as all of us.
The folly in believing in the concept of Imamah according to the shi'ah is something quite straightforward. It needs not to be argued, it is not in the Qur'an SIMPLE! The principle cannot even be found in the Quran! Using semantics is quite revealing how they arrive at principles of the religion. Shi'as are never straightforward!
AlBaqir would claim the salafists are a takfiry loving bunch, but the reality is that shi'a consider sunnies(all) to be kafirs, because they do not believe in the concept of Imamah according them.
Let me also join you inawaiting their responses. ...

lexiconkabir:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFsWyliO86A
Firstly my main concern is, i need a clarification from the books of the "infallible" imams proving or disproving what that ithna ashari sheikh said about the pillars of Islam, like seriously, no tawheed?
Secondly, what reply would the shias here give to the refutal of the concept of imamah by the ex-shia.
Note: I'm not cut out for long epistles, truth should must be short and concise, twistings comes in when a reply becomes uninterestingly long.

@ShiaMuslim

1. I agree with you, the translation is not accurate literally; it should be “Imamah is a fundamental amongst the fundamentals of the religion.” If you would also be truthful to yourself, the Sheikh then states that there is no excuse for one who ignores it, or forgets about it for they would enter hell fire, I would like to know, if one ignores or forget the other fundamentals of the religion, and holds on to Imamah, is it the same? Would the person still be a Kafir and enters hell?
If we put the statement of the second sheikh into the picture, he stated emphatically that without Imamah, acts of worship i.e other fundamentals of the religion are null and void, hence in reality, Imamah is the fundamental principle on which the religion is based upon, thus, I wouldn’t be too critical if those who translated the video chose to use that particular translation. Again still on what you have up there, I find it dishonest that you claim Tawheed is one of the fundamentals, the second sheikh stated emphatically again, using all the vocabulary that is available to him, that Islam is built on five , and he listed them, without mentioning tawheed. We then ask you to bring proof from your infallible Imams if this is true, you have not produced any yet, and then you are claiming furoo and what have you, is the sheikh who said the above ignorant for him not to be able to distinguish branches and fundamentals of the religion?!

2. Oga, did the part of the ex-shia exceed two (2) minutes?!

3. Yeah I have asked a pertinent question above in regards to what the sheikh stated clearly in the video, it is either you agree with the sheikh or you simply acknowledge his ignorance or perhaps mistake, for he claimed that the religion is based on five fundamentals, principles, pillars, and he went ahead to mention the five, we didn’t hear him mention tawheed, or tawheed is under Imamah?! I had mentioned you guys like using semantics to play games, which one is groundwork?! How is Salah, Zakah, Sawm and Hajj branches of the religion? Says who?! The infallible Imams?! Unfortunately for you, the sheikh did not mention the five to mean branches of the religion, and what you have given as fundamentals of the religion are by whom?! Bring your proofs if you are truthful.

4. Here we go again, your scholars says A, you people would say Z, who do we believe?!

Ayatullat Sadiq Shirazi said: [b]As for all the different Shiite groups, except for the Twelvers, then their disbelief has been proven according to many of our text and many of our classical narrations state that whosoever rejects a single Imam is like the one who says Allah is one of three [trinity].[/b]And Al-Kishi reported with a chain [of transmission], on the authority of Ibn Abi Omayr [broken chain] who said: ‘I asked Muhammad Ibn Ali Al-Ridha (AS) about the following verse:
[Some] faces, that Day, will be humbled [hard] and exhausted. Working [hard] and exhausted. [Surah Al-Ghashiyah, Verse 2-3]
He [Muhammad Al-Jawad son of Al-Ridha] said: ‘This verse was revealed about the Nawasib [Sunnis], Zaydi [Shiites] and Waqifi [Sevener Shiites] […]’

Source: https://gift2shias.com/2014/01/17/ayatullat-shirazi-disbelieving-in-the-imams-is-like-believing-in-trinty/

Yeah only the wahabis/salafist go on killing the kafirs SMH all of them abi? Please remind me which sect do Hezbollah belong to again? When you label someone a kafir, and condemn them to burn in hell because they do not believe in this your Imamah, what you say and do with them in this world is of no benefit and value spiritually and to a large extent physically, so what is the essence of calling ourselves brothers in Islam?! The point I am trying to make is that you guys always claim you do not do takfir, but alas, your level of takfir is even worse, because to your strange believes, all Sunni are Kafir, while we the ahlu Sunnah still find excuses for the laymen amongst you people and even try to believe they are still Muslims…

5. Bros what is requested is a clear cut verse just like we have for the oneness of Allah (SWT), believe in the Prophets, performing the salah, performing the Hajj, and observing the fast in the month of Ramadhan. The above verses you quoted cannot establish imamah like the verses that establishes the above fundamentals of the religion. Let me even go further, bring proof from the Prophet (SAW), the ahl-l-bayt, the companions (those you claim are mu’meen) that the above mentioned verses are about the belief in Imamah.

6. Bros, we do not hold caliphate as being a fundamental of the religion as you guys hold Imamah, so the above is lame. Try harder next time.


7. So?! Who cares if He doesn’t have shi’a background or shi’a family? Does that change the fact that what we can’t find a verse to prove Imamah according to the shi’ah from the Qur’an?! How could something this important, that can determine a person’s eternal end not specifically and emphatically stated in the Holy Qur’an?!

8. Subhanallah! Al-Haydari’s words in the video were clear, it is left for you to prove otherwise, and show that the authors of the video were dishonest…
Since you have listened to the lectures from the same Al-Haydari, therefore, avail us of our ignorance, bring out the verses of Imamah, and as you bring them, please bring the narrations from the Prophet (SAW) and the infallibles that agrees that those verses are about Imamah, and please make sure they are authentic narrations from trustworthy 4 books of the shi’ah.

Do not run away bro, yeah, yeah, the publishers of the video were dishonest, they put words into your scholars mouth to say what they said, in fact, I think they superimposed images too…

Bring irrefutable proofs from the Qur’an that states emphatically, the principles of Imamah…Also, bring authentic narrations from the infallibles that agrees that the verses you bring are about their Imamah and that Imamah is part of the fundamentals of the religion (I would prefer Imam Ali’s statement (ra) since he was the first Imam).

sino:
@ShiaMuslim
1. I agree with you, the translation is not accurate literally; it should be “Imamah is a fundamental amongst the fundamentals of the religion.”

Then apologize for bringing deceit and wanting to build an argument on it, both you and the OP. That's the honorable thing to do.

If you would also be truthful to yourself, the Sheikh then states that there is no excuse for one who ignores it, or forgets about it for they would enter hell fire, I would like to know, if one ignores or forget the other fundamentals of the religion, and holds on to Imamah, is it the same? Would the person still be a Kafir and enters hell?

It isn't a competition of the fundamentals. If you do not believe in Tawheed and Nubuwwah you are a kaffir. No excuse, even if you believe in Imamah. Imamah is an extension of prophethood.

However, that is not to say that Imamah is not fundamental. I would ask you to tell us based on Sunni texts, what is the ruling of a Muslim who abandons salat? Then you will understand the importance of Imamah. If you abandon salat and you believe in shahadatain, you are still nominally a Muslim. But what does the religion say about such a person? Likewise, if you believe in everything and abandon Imamah which the Prophet (s) made wajib, then it has a consequence. There is a Hadith unanimously agreed on by Sunnis and Shia that if you do not know the Imam of your time and you die, you have died the death of Jahiliyyah. Who is the imam of your time for Sunnis?

If we put the statement of the second sheikh into the picture, he stated emphatically that without Imamah, acts of worship i.e other fundamentals of the religion are null and void, hence in reality, Imamah is the fundamental principle on which the religion is based upon, thus, I wouldn’t be too critical if those who translated the video chose to use that particular translation. Again still on what you have up there, I find it dishonest that you claim Tawheed is one of the fundamentals, the second sheikh stated emphatically again, using all the vocabulary that is available to him, that Islam is built on five , and he listed them, without mentioning tawheed. We then ask you to bring proof from your infallible Imams if this is true, you have not produced any yet, and then you are claiming furoo and what have you, is the sheikh who said the above ignorant for him not to be able to distinguish branches and fundamentals of the religion?!

This has already been clarified. Sunnis have five pillars starting with Tawheed and including salat and zakat. Shia have five fundamentals (Usul) that do not have salat and zakat. Salat and zakat is part of the Furoo. Our categorizations are different. We have hadiths to back ours. Your categorization has a Hadith by Umar. Hence the mix up by the Sheikh. This man is aged and has undergone several surgeries but still climbing the pulpit to give lectures. Abdul Hameed al Muhajir is an icon. There is no need to ask for proof from the Imams when it has been stated to you that the first of the Shia fundamentals is Tawheed. You are using the mix up by one sheikh to make it seem like the Shia in unanimity believe in that mix up. It's dishonest. And you shouldn't find excuses for the creators of that video. They have a channel on YouTube and all they propagate are false claims and hatred.

2. Oga, did the part of the ex-shia exceed two (2) minutes?!

Well as you like. I've stated my point.

3. Yeah I have asked a pertinent question above in regards to what the sheikh stated clearly in the video, it is either you agree with the sheikh or you simply acknowledge his ignorance or perhaps mistake, for he claimed that the religion is based on five fundamentals, principles, pillars, and he went ahead to mention the five, we didn’t hear him mention tawheed, or tawheed is under Imamah?! I had mentioned you guys like using semantics to play games, which one is groundwork?! How is Salah, Zakah, Sawm and Hajj branches of the religion? Says who?! The infallible Imams?! Unfortunately for you, the sheikh did not mention the five to mean branches of the religion, and what you have given as fundamentals of the religion are by whom?! Bring your proofs if you are truthful.

Already answered.

4. Here we go again, your scholars says A, you people would say Z, who do we believe?!
Ayatullat Sadiq Shirazi said: [b]As for all the different Shiite groups, except for the Twelvers, then their disbelief has been proven according to many of our text and many of our classical narrations state that whosoever rejects a single Imam is like the one who says Allah is one of three [trinity].[/b]And Al-Kishi reported with a chain [of transmission], on the authority of Ibn Abi Omayr [broken chain] who said: ‘I asked Muhammad Ibn Ali Al-Ridha (AS) about the following verse:
[Some] faces, that Day, will be humbled [hard] and exhausted. Working [hard] and exhausted. [Surah Al-Ghashiyah, Verse 2-3]
He [Muhammad Al-Jawad son of Al-Ridha] said: ‘This verse was revealed about the Nawasib [Sunnis], Zaydi [Shiites] and Waqifi [Sevener Shiites] […]’
Source: https://gift2shias.com/2014/01/17/ayatullat-shirazi-disbelieving-in-the-imams-is-like-believing-in-

Already answered and the similitude of one who leave salat given.

You sound like you're shaken. You repeat the same thing like someone in shock. Take it easy. It's not your fault you're not familiar with these things. With time, effort and willingness you will understand in sha Allah. We weren't either knowledgeable. For us to leave the path we were born into is not an easy decision millions of us made after study. So just take it calm. Guidance is only from Allah!

Yeah only the wahabis/salafist go on killing the kafirs SMH all of them abi? Please remind me which sect do Hezbollah belong to again?

Does hezbollah go about blowing up Sunni civilians in mosques because they rejected Imamah?

When you label someone a kafir, and condemn them to burn in hell because they do not believe in this your Imamah, what you say and do with them in this world is of no benefit and value spiritually and to a large extent physically, so what is the essence of calling ourselves brothers in Islam?! The point I am trying to make is that you guys always claim you do not do takfir, but alas, your level of takfir is even worse, because to your strange believes, all Sunni are Kafir, while we the ahlu Sunnah still find excuses for the laymen amongst you people and even try to believe they are still Muslims…

There is a difference between Takfir and believing in punishment in the hereafter. We do it in a general sense. If you do this, you will get this. Just like you also promise homosexuals and those who abandon salat with punishment in the hereafter. Yet, Allah is ghafurur rahim. Thus it's not on a personal or individual level we judge. We talk on concepts. Also we do not regard Sunnis as kaffir or anyone who believes in shahadatain. However that is not to say it is okay to abandon Imamah. You will be asked of it. When you warn those who abandon salat, even if they be Sunnis, you still promise them things that no one wishes for, right?

5. Bros what is requested is a clear cut verse just like we have for the oneness of Allah (SWT), believe in the Prophets, performing the salah, performing the Hajj, and observing the fast in the month of Ramadhan. The above verses you quoted cannot establish imamah like the verses that establishes the above fundamentals of the religion. Let me even go further, bring proof from the Prophet (SAW), the ahl-l-bayt, the companions (those you claim are mu’meen) that the above mentioned verses are about the belief in

The above is your opinion of how you perceive things. Imamah is an extension or reflection of Nubuwwah. It is mentioned in the Quran in a general and specific sense. In the specified sense, it is reflected along with obedience to Allah and His messenger. Believing or understanding these verses is a choice. You don't have to claim there is no Imamah mentioned in the Quran when you ignore the meaning of the verses we have presented as evidence of Imamah in the Holy Quran.

6. Bros, we do not hold caliphate as being a fundamental of the religion as you guys hold Imamah, so the above is lame. Try harder next time.

That is not an answer. If it's not in the Quran and Sunnah, anything, would be considered as bid'ah. So you don't practice or believe in something and then tell us it is not a fundamental of your belief. Yet, it is based on the rejection of the first three caliphs that you call other Muslims "rawafid" and label them as apostates. If you can label the Shia as apostates because of caliphate then you must bring out proof for it in the Quran and Sunnah. Even if you can present verses that hint on the caliphate. We have given verses on Imamah. Islam is a perfect and complete religion. Yet no backing for caliphate in the Quran and Sunnah, and also you have no established mechanism on how to choose a caliph. The first four caliphs got power differently. Why? The matter of caliphate is even more serious on your side because you have excommunicated us while we insist you're Muslims even if you reject Imamah and even if you end up punished in the hereafter and that will be decided by Allah!

7. So?! Who cares if He doesn’t have shi’a background or shi’a family? Does that change the fact that what we can’t find a verse to prove Imamah according to the shi’ah from the Qur’an?! How could something this important, that can determine a person’s eternal end not specifically and emphatically stated in the Holy Qur’an?!

When you claim someone is ex Shia, you have to substantiate your claim.

8. Subhanallah! Al-Haydari’s words in the video were clear, it is left for you to prove otherwise, and show that the authors of the video were dishonest…
Since you have listened to the lectures from the same Al-Haydari, therefore, avail us of our ignorance, bring out the verses of Imamah, and as you bring them, please bring the narrations from the Prophet (SAW) and the infallibles that agrees that those verses are about Imamah, and please make sure they are authentic narrations from trustworthy 4 books of the

If you have watched the two videos of al Haidary I presented you won't still bring up this issue. Those videos have translations. Or are you trying to conserve your data? :p

Do not run away bro, yeah, yeah, the publishers of the video were dishonest, they put words into your scholars mouth to say what they said, in fact, I think they superimposed images too…

You're ridiculous. I've been eagerly waiting for a reply since yesterday. You're arguing based on a deceitful video and no apology; on false premises and you insist on reply.

Bring irrefutable proofs from the Qur’an that states emphatically, the principles of Imamah…Also, bring authentic narrations from the infallibles that agrees that the verses you bring are about their Imamah and that Imamah is part of the fundamentals of the religion (I would prefer Imam Ali’s statement (ra) since he was the first Imam).

Brother, we've given two indisputable verses you can check up. I also have given you a link to a total of seven verses of the Quran on Imamah. If it's knowledge you seek, read! If its argument, you're wasting your own time.

I guess i cant comment in my own thread again, whenever i try replying your lies i keep getting banned, anyway all i can say is

"l'anatu Allah 'ala Al-kadhibin"

"THE CURSE OF ALLAAH BE UPON THE LIARS"
{Quran3:61}

@ShiaMuslim,

First and foremost, Thank God you are not running away, and for the record, I post when I deem it fit and necessary as well as prevailing circumstances; I am not under any obligation to respond to your post immediately, it is my prerogative to apply myself on this forum accordingly.

Secondly, this is a forum, and it is expected that members should exhibit a level of intellectual capacity and ability. You are expected to post your opinions and if necessary, backed up with appropriate evidences for discussion.. pointing me to a link does not answer the questions posed on this thread thus far, and I find this act of yours similar to Al-Haydari in the video above by the OP, when confronted with similar question, beating about the bush and not going straight to the point…I guess it is a tough one to answer, if the scholars amongst you find it difficult, no wonder you are also afraid to give substantive answers…

Lastly, again I would ask, and this time, I would rephrase putting to cognizance what had transpired so far.

1. You have claimed that verses in the Qur’an are about Imamah (and this is referring to shi’a concept of Imamah), please post them, and give us the authentic narrations from the Prophet (SAW) that support this understanding from these verses…If you can, please post understandings of the ahl-l-bayt on the verses you quote

2. Prove the principles of Imamah (according to your shi’ah beliefs) from the Qur’an, note, if you may, the five pillars (fundamentals) of Islam according to authentic narration from the Prophet (SAW) can be proven (i.e their principles) from the Qur’an.

3. With respect to the Al-Muhajir’s statement being a mix-up due to his old age and several surgeries, making him to forget Tawheed as a fundamental of Islam, and listing zakah, sawm etc, as part of the fundamentals, you then posted the 5 Usul (Fundamentals) of the Shi’a to be; 1.) Tawheed 2.) Adl (Divine Justice) 3.) Nubuwwah 4.) Imamah 5.) Qiyamah (resurrection), hence, I request you provide evidences to support this list from the Prophet (SAW) and the ahl-l-bayt…

Now these are straightforward questions that do not require dillydallying, if you are sure of what you believe in being a command from Allah (SWT) then you should provide answers…But if you do not have answers and want to keep pointing to external links for me to visit, then I doubt you know what you are doing…

@lexiconkabir, perhaps you should mail the mods, seems the anti-spam bot has picked on your posts…

Brother Sheriff.shatterz wrote:

"One verse in the Qur'an completely destroys the shia imamate belief

As the active Members on this group know that, in any of previous post the Shias miserably failed to prove their fundamental belief of Imamate after Prophet(SAWS) from any CLEAR verse of Quran WITHOUT the help of any Tawil or ahadeeth, as they themselves admitted, hence which proved them to be a deviant sect as per Quranic verse (3:7).

Now in this post let us see that how a CLEAR verse of Quran destroys the whole concept of Imamate after Prophet(SAWS). The verse is So deadly for the Shias that, they attributed reports to their Imams where they suggested additional wordings in the verse, claiming that this is how it was revealed. And the Shia Scholar like Majlisi went ahead to explain this hadeeth by saying that the wordings HAS BEEN REMOVED from Quran. So this verse was so deadly for their belief that they had to claim Tahreef of this verse in order to save their belief.

Here is the Quranic verse:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِن كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ذَٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا
O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.(4:59).

(I). In this clear verse, we find that in matters of disagreement between those in authority and those under authority, we need to refer back to Allah and the Messenger. Had it been that, those in authority were divinely appointed then, Allah wouldn't have given any scope to disagree with them.

(ii). If those in authority were divinely appointed then, Allah would have asked the believers to refer them along with Allah and Messenger in matters of disagreement.

But Allah(swt) giving the possibility of disagreement with those in authority, and asking us to refer back to Allah and Messenger is a clear evidence that those in authority were not divinely appointed and their obedience is conditional, unlike the obedience to Allah and Messenger, which is unconditional.

Lets see what authentic Shia hadeeth had to say about this clear verse destroying their belief, see how they claimed that the verse had additional wording:

In Rawdat Al-Kafi #212 we read:

عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ أُذَيْنَةَ عَنْ بُرَيْدِ بْنِ مُعَاوِيَةَ قَالَ تَلَا أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ( عليه السلام ) أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ تَنَازُعاً فِي الْأَمْرِ فَأَرْجِعُوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَ إِلَى الرَّسُولِ وَ إِلَى أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ثُمَّ قَالَ كَيْفَ يَأْمُرُ بِطَاعَتِهِمْ وَ يُرَخِّصُ فِي مُنَازَعَتِهِمْ إِنَّمَا قَالَ ذَلِكَ لِلْمَأْمُورِينَ الَّذِينَ قِيلَ لَهُمْ أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ

[`Ali bin Ibrahim, from his father, from ibn abi `Umayr, from `Umar bin Udhaynah, from Burayd bin Mu`awiyah that abu Ja`far (as) RECITED: {Believers, obey Allah, obey His Messenger, and your leaders, if ye fear that you would differ among yourselves then refer it to Allah and the messenger and your leaders} Then he (as) said: “How can he order their obedience then allow you to differ with them? He only meant the ones who are under orders when he said {Obey Allah and obey the messenger}.]

The narration was declared as “Hasan(GOOD)” by Al-Majlisi in his book “Mir’at al-`Uqoul” 26/76.

Esteemed Shia scholar Al-Majlisi adds:

و ظاهر كثير من الأخبار أن قوله:” وَ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ” كان مثبتا هيهنا فأسقط

[It is apparent from many of the narrations that the term “and the leaders among you” was affirmed here, but was then removed.](“Mir’at al-`Uqoul).

In the footnotes of Hayat ul Quloob(3/165), the Shia translator Molvi Basharat Hussain states that:

[ “The author(Baqir Majlisi) says, Hazrat(Imam) meant that, If ulil amr is not mentioned in the end(of verse), it would be the evidence that the ummah can disagree with them, and this is against the order of obedience towards them which is in the beginning of the verse”]. (Hayat ul Quloob 3/165).

So see respected readers, when a Clear verse of Quran destroys the myth of divinely appointed leaders after Muhammad(SAWS), how these people try to manipulate the verse of Quran by claiming that, it had an extra wording, which was removed.

May Allah Guide the truth seeking and objective Shias."

http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/one-verse-in-the-qur'an-completely-destroys-the-shia-imamate-belief/msg11705/#new

^^ This is nice!!! Youtube actually opened my eyes to their deviance, they always claim that they dont believe in tahreef of the Quran, i later got to find out that its all Taquiyya!!

Na'udhubillahi minashayateen.

sino:
Brother Sheriff.shatterz wrote:

"One verse in the Qur'an completely destroys the shia imamate belief

As the active Members on this group know that, in any of previous post the Shias miserably failed to prove their fundamental belief of Imamate after Prophet(SAWS) from any CLEAR verse of Quran WITHOUT the help of any Tawil or ahadeeth, as they themselves admitted, hence which proved them to be a deviant sect as per Quranic verse (3:7).

Now in this post let us see that how a CLEAR verse of Quran destroys the whole concept of Imamate after Prophet(SAWS). The verse is So deadly for the Shias that, they attributed reports to their Imams where they suggested additional wordings in the verse, claiming that this is how it was revealed. And the Shia Scholar like Majlisi went ahead to explain this hadeeth by saying that the wordings HAS BEEN REMOVED from Quran. So this verse was so deadly for their belief that they had to claim Tahreef of this verse in order to save their belief.

Here is the Quranic verse:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِن كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ذَٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا
O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.(4:59).

(I). In this clear verse, we find that in matters of disagreement between those in authority and those under authority, we need to refer back to Allah and the Messenger. Had it been that, those in authority were divinely appointed then, Allah wouldn't have given any scope to disagree with them.

(ii). If those in authority were divinely appointed then, Allah would have asked the believers to refer them along with Allah and Messenger in matters of disagreement.

But Allah(swt) giving the possibility of disagreement with those in authority, and asking us to refer back to Allah and Messenger is a clear evidence that those in authority were not divinely appointed and their obedience is conditional, unlike the obedience to Allah and Messenger, which is unconditional.

Lets see what authentic Shia hadeeth had to say about this clear verse destroying their belief, see how they claimed that the verse had additional wording:

In Rawdat Al-Kafi #212 we read:

عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ أُذَيْنَةَ عَنْ بُرَيْدِ بْنِ مُعَاوِيَةَ قَالَ تَلَا أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ( عليه السلام ) أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ تَنَازُعاً فِي الْأَمْرِ فَأَرْجِعُوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَ إِلَى الرَّسُولِ وَ إِلَى أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ثُمَّ قَالَ كَيْفَ يَأْمُرُ بِطَاعَتِهِمْ وَ يُرَخِّصُ فِي مُنَازَعَتِهِمْ إِنَّمَا قَالَ ذَلِكَ لِلْمَأْمُورِينَ الَّذِينَ قِيلَ لَهُمْ أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ

[`Ali bin Ibrahim, from his father, from ibn abi `Umayr, from `Umar bin Udhaynah, from Burayd bin Mu`awiyah that abu Ja`far (as) RECITED: {Believers, obey Allah, obey His Messenger, and your leaders, if ye fear that you would differ among yourselves then refer it to Allah and the messenger and your leaders} Then he (as) said: “How can he order their obedience then allow you to differ with them? He only meant the ones who are under orders when he said {Obey Allah and obey the messenger}.]

The narration was declared as “Hasan(GOOD)” by Al-Majlisi in his book “Mir’at al-`Uqoul” 26/76.

Esteemed Shia scholar Al-Majlisi adds:

و ظاهر كثير من الأخبار أن قوله:” وَ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ” كان مثبتا هيهنا فأسقط

[It is apparent from many of the narrations that the term “and the leaders among you” was affirmed here, but was then removed.](“Mir’at al-`Uqoul).

In the footnotes of Hayat ul Quloob(3/165), the Shia translator Molvi Basharat Hussain states that:

[ “The author(Baqir Majlisi) says, Hazrat(Imam) meant that, If ulil amr is not mentioned in the end(of verse), it would be the evidence that the ummah can disagree with them, and this is against the order of obedience towards them which is in the beginning of the verse”]. (Hayat ul Quloob 3/165).

So see respected readers, when a Clear verse of Quran destroys the myth of divinely appointed leaders after Muhammad(SAWS), how these people try to manipulate the verse of Quran by claiming that, it had an extra wording, which was removed.

May Allah Guide the truth seeking and objective Shias."

http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/one-verse-in-the-qur'an-completely-destroys-the-shia-imamate-belief/msg11705/#new

the verse does not at all refer to disagreement between the Muslims and "those in authority". the verse refers to disagreement among ordinary Muslims themselves. how the author of the above article managed to smuggle "disagreement between Muslims and those in authority" into this verse is mind-boggling. this is an act of tahreef.

lexiconkabir:
^^ This is nice!!! Youtube actually opened my eyes to their deviance, they always claim that they dont believe in ta'reef of the Quran, i later got to find out that its all Taquiyya!!

Na'udhubillahi minashayateen.

do not accept blindness, or another person using his palms to blind your eyes in the name of hatred. do not let shaitan use your brain. let me quote from another thread a reply to this your claim:

you are either misleading ignorant folks, or you are lying. either case is bad. Al-Kulayni has a disclaimer to his book, Usul al-Kafi:

"'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.

in Sihah al-Sittah of the Sunnis, traditions on Tahreef of the Quran, even narrated by Aisha, abound. not to go into details, you can take a look at the examples given in the below link:
http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/creed-of-shia-explained/tahreef-of-quran.html

does this mean we as Shia would accuse Sunnis collectively as believing in Tahreef because classcial Sunni scholars of past recorded hadiths supposedly "sahih" ones in their hadith collections? we do not.

sino:
@ShiaMuslim,

First and foremost, Thank God you are not running away, and for the record, I post when I deem it fit and necessary as well as prevailing circumstances; I am not under any obligation to respond to your post immediately, it is my prerogative to apply myself on this forum accordingly.

Secondly, this is a forum, and it is expected that members should exhibit a level of intellectual capacity and ability. You are expected to post your opinions and if necessary, backed up with appropriate evidences for discussion.. pointing me to a link does not answer the questions posed on this thread thus far, and I find this act of yours similar to Al-Haydari in the video above by the OP, when confronted with similar question, beating about the bush and not going straight to the point…I guess it is a tough one to answer, if the scholars amongst you find it difficult, no wonder you are also afraid to give substantive answers…

Lastly, again I would ask, and this time, I would rephrase putting to cognizance what had transpired so far.

1. You have claimed that verses in the Qur’an are about Imamah (and this is referring to shi’a concept of Imamah), please post them, and give us the authentic narrations from the Prophet (SAW) that support this understanding from these verses…If you can, please post understandings of the ahl-l-bayt on the verses you quote

2. Prove the principles of Imamah (according to your shi’ah beliefs) from the Qur’an, note, if you may, the five pillars (fundamentals) of Islam according to authentic narration from the Prophet (SAW) can be proven (i.e their principles) from the Qur’an.

3. With respect to the Al-Muhajir’s statement being a mix-up due to his old age and several surgeries, making him to forget Tawheed as a fundamental of Islam, and listing zakah, sawm etc, as part of the fundamentals, you then posted the 5 Usul (Fundamentals) of the Shi’a to be; 1.) Tawheed 2.) Adl (Divine Justice) 3.) Nubuwwah 4.) Imamah 5.) Qiyamah (resurrection), hence, I request you provide evidences to support this list from the Prophet (SAW) and the ahl-l-bayt…

Now these are straightforward questions that do not require dillydallying, if you are sure of what you believe in being a command from Allah (SWT) then you should provide answers…But if you do not have answers and want to keep pointing to external links for me to visit, then I doubt you know what you are doing…

@lexiconkabir, perhaps you should mail the mods, seems the anti-spam bot has picked on your posts…

most of you stupid folks think people come to online forum to waste their time with long posts and senseless argument. i do not aim to win arguments here or win any trophy or impress anyone. i have pointed out that the Quran supports imamate. there is the Verse of Imamate in the Quran, the Verse of Wilyah, the Verse of Tathir, the Verse of Mawaddah etc. there is absolutely NOTHING we believe that CANNOT be backed by the Quran. brother Albaqir has the patience to spoon feed your and make long replies, and provide you with references and isnad, but not everyone will. maybe he can help you. but of course, with all his effort, hatred has not departed from your heart.

if you want truth, go find it yourself. google is your friend. if you are an agent of Iblis, stay in your darkness. i have given you replies, but you still want to prove to be a philosopher in ignorance. i will give you answers, and you keep asking questions of denial. if you want to know more, search. if you want to argue, deny the truth. very simple. the choice is yours.

ShiaMuslim:


do not accept blindness, or another person using his palms to blind your eyes in the name of hatred. do not let shaitan use your brain. let me quote from another thread a reply to this your claim:

What are you saying? Isnt it obvious that it is you guys shaytan(l.a) is using?

you are either misleading ignorant folks, or you are lying. either case is bad. Al-Kulayni has a disclaimer to his book, Usul al-Kafi:

"'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.'"

Why didn’t he dismiss them(The allegations of Tahreef texts found in his Al-kafi) then? Instead, we find that he includes them and quotes a lot of them in his book.

The context is that the people that requested him to provide a trustworthy book was describing to al-Kulayni how it is impossible for them to differentiate between all contradicting narrations coming from the Imams.

This is why al-Kulayni’s book does not have much contradictions, since al-Kulayni did not include the reports that oppose what he thinks are the correct teaching of Ahlul-Bayt. Al-Kulayni included only what he wished for the Shia to adhere to including plenty of reports about Tahreef.

Al-Kulayni tells them in the introduction that the Imams specified three ways to distinguish what’s correctly attributed to them:

1- Present the conflicting reports to Allah’s book and reject what opposes it.
(This does not conflict with the belief in the corruption of the Qur’an, because al-Kulayni and his likes believed the Qur’an was simply missing some of `Ali’s merits and the flaws of his opponents. As for the general context and rulings, they are intact and thus one is able to present narrations to it and see which ones hold-up.)

2- Present the conflicting reports to the beliefs of Ahlul-Sunnah and dismiss what agrees with them.
(Ahlul-Sunnah believe the Qur’an is un-distorted and so the opposite would be to accept the Shia reports declaring the corruption of the Qur’an)

3- Follow the consensus of the Shia.
(Shia have a lot of disagreements and that’s why Kulayni wrote al-Kafi in the first place. This option is invalid)

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

Whoever claims that the Qur'an has been subjected to tahreef, can we call such a muslim?

NOTE: I AM VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN THIS PART

in Sihah al-Sittah of the Sunnis, traditions on Tahreef of the Quran, even narrated by Aisha, abound. not to go into details, you can take a look at the examples given in the below link:

The only version of this hadith that says that verse was lost instead of abrograted is the report of ibn ishaq, that of imam Malik and imam Yahya ibn Sa‘eed al-Ansaari clearly stated that this verse was abrogated and replaced with five definite breastfeedings instead of the initial Ten definite breastfeedings, while that of ibn ishaq says IT WAS LOST, this alone is sufficient for the scholars of hadith to grade that of ibn ishaq as da'if, because that of ibn ishaq was odd!

http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/creed-of-shia-explained/tahreef-of-quran.html

does this mean we as Shia would accuse Sunnis collectively as believing in Tahreef because classcial Sunni scholars of past recorded hadiths supposedly "sahih" ones in their hadith collections? we do not.

Mr! Your Taquiyya will not work here, you know very well that you guys don't consider Sunnis as Muslims, so dont play that card here, Whatever hadith that you people use for the alleged Sunni beliefs in tahreef are nothing but misconceptions(or i should say, deliberate misunderstanding of these hadiths) refers to verses that have been abrogated, moreover in the sunni school of thought, anyone who claims that the Qur'an has be altered is a kafir! So i ask you again, what's the ruling in the shia school of thought?

lexiconkabir:
^^ This is nice!!! Youtube actually opened my eyes to their deviance, they always claim that they dont believe in ta'reef of the Quran, i later got to find out that its all Taquiyya!!

Na'udhubillahi minashayateen.

Bro, I wasn't quite sure about the shi'ah beliefs before, I only listened to scholars condemn their beliefs, but my first encounter with them showed they were mostly filled with hate and curses, that was a red flag, then I started a little research, and the more I read, the more I realized their beliefs are not only strange, but false, mostly, their belief system are always antagonistic against the sunni, its like without the sunnis, they wouldn't exist in the first place, a sect created just to oppose the sunnis... And their deceit is legendary, not to mention the fact that their books are filled with mind boggling contradictions and fabrications.

May Allah continue to guide us right Ameen.

ShiaMuslim:


the verse does not at all refer to disagreement between the Muslims and "those in authority". the verse refers to disagreement among ordinary Muslims themselves. how the author of the above article managed to smuggle "disagreement between Muslims and those in authority" into this verse is mind-boggling. this is an act of tahreef.

Well from the verse, Allah (SWT) knows that those in authority are also ordinary Muslims, so when He (SWT) made the directive on how to resolve conflicts among ordinary Muslims, HE (SWT) said go back to Allah (SWT) and His messenger (SAW) to solve your differences, and no one else, because those in authority are not divinely appointed (they do not receive any form of revelation from Allah (SWT) ), we are the ones who appoint them, hence we are to obey them, and we may disagree with them (especially when they call to disbelieve and what the shari'ah never sanctioned). It is very simple bro, or is the verse missing some more information?!

sino:


Bro, I wasn't quite sure about the shi'ah beliefs before, I only listened to scholars condemn their beliefs, but my first encounter with them showed they were mostly filled with hate and curses, that was a red flag, then I started a little research, and the more I read, the more I realized their beliefs are not only strange, but false, mostly, their belief system are always antagonistic against the sunni, its like without the sunnis, they wouldn't exist in the first place, a sect created just to oppose the sunnis... And their deceit is legendary, not to mention the fact that their books are filled with mind boggling contradictions and fabrications.

May Allah continue to guide us right Ameen.

Yea, their main aim is to oppose whatever the Ahlul-Sunnah does, even Al-Kulayni mentioned in his Al-kafi that one of the ways to distinguish "false" reports from "healthy" ones is to juxtapose the conflicting reports to the beliefs of Ahlul-Sunnah and dismiss what agrees with them....

ShiaMuslim:


most of you stupid folks think people come to online forum to waste their time with long posts and senseless argument. i do not aim to win arguments here or win any trophy or impress anyone. i have pointed out that the Quran supports imamate. there is the Verse of Imamate in the Quran, the Verse of Wilyah, the Verse of Tathir, the Verse of Mawaddah etc. there is absolutely NOTHING we believe that CANNOT be backed by the Quran. brother Albaqir has the patience to spoon feed your and make long replies, and provide you with references and isnad, but not everyone will. maybe he can help you. but of course, with all his effort, hatred has not departed from your heart.

if you want truth, go find it yourself. google is your friend. if you are an agent of Iblis, stay in your darkness. i have given you replies, but you still want to prove to be a philosopher in ignorance. i will give you answers, and you keep asking questions of denial. if you want to know more, search. if you want to argue, deny the truth. very simple. the choice is yours.

Your hypocrisy knows no bound; you should be ashamed of yourself and the sect you belong to. You on another thread would quote articles from different websites to buttress your points, but all of a sudden, you cannot do same on this thread, why?! You people have the same MO, when brought face-to-face with facts, superior arguments, and most importantly, the truth, you become venomous, defensive, redundantly asking silly questions or bringing up superfluous conjectures and applying deceit…

You claim the Qur’an talks on Imammah, we ask you prove it, you go typing several responses with no substance…If a non-Muslim asks you to prove Allah (SWT) is one, that the Prophet (SAW) is His messenger from the Qur'an, do you go on a ranting spree?! As I had said, your scholars would say A, you guys would thereafter say xyz, one wonders what type of religion you people practice, you guys have no solid foundation to stand your belief(s) on…

Here is one of your scholars confirming that the concept of Imammah cannot be found in the Qur’an:

Al-Khomeini said: Had the matter of the Imamah been fixed in the Quran, then those who do not care for Islam or the Quran except where it comes to matters of this worldly life and [matters of] Leadership, they would have used the Quran as a mean to fulfill their suspicious objectives, and would have omitted these verses from its pages121 …

This can be found in his book “Kashf Al-Asrar” p. 131.

I await your spin, as well as your rants, I am not into nonsense arguments, if what you believe is true, bring your proof(s) from the Qur’an kapish!

By the way, this is another verse that destroys your false believe in Imammah. Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an:

“It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and each and every act of obedience to Allah etc.) that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers); but Al- Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allah, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to Al-Masakin (the poor), and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free, performs As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and gives the Zakat, and who fulfill their covenant when they make it, and who are patient in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of fighting (during the battles). Such are the people of the truth and they are Al-Muttaqun (pious). (Q2:177)

The above verse is so clear, we do not find your skewed belief in Imammah, We see Tawheed clearly, we see Salat, we see Zakah, even we see freeing of the slaves, and even further, we see Sabr being mentioned by Allah (SWT) as prerequisite for piety and embodiment of righteousness, no believe in Imammah, give me one good reason to believe that Imammah is any important to Islam, and why Allah (SWT) didn’t mention it in the Qur’an…

If you do not have answers, it is not by force to reply, just quietly move along...

sino:


Your hypocrisy knows no bound; you should be ashamed of yourself and the sect you belong to. You on another thread would quote articles from different websites to buttress your points, but all of a sudden, you cannot do same on this thread, why?! You people have the same MO, when brought face-to-face with facts, superior arguments, and most importantly, the truth, you become venomous, defensive, redundantly asking silly questions or bringing up superfluous conjectures and applying deceit…

You claim the Qur’an talks on Imammah, we ask you prove it, you go typing several responses with no substance…If a non-Muslim asks you to prove Allah (SWT) is one, that the Prophet (SAW) is His messenger from the Qur'an, do you go on a ranting spree?! As I had said, your scholars would say A, you guys would thereafter say xyz, one wonders what type of religion you people practice, you guys have no solid foundation to stand your belief(s) on…

Here is one of your scholars confirming that the concept of Imammah cannot be found in the Qur’an:

Al-Khomeini said: Had the matter of the Imamah been fixed in the Quran, then those who do not care for Islam or the Quran except where it comes to matters of this worldly life and [matters of] Leadership, they would have used the Quran as a mean to fulfill their suspicious objectives, and would have omitted these verses from its pages121 …

This can be found in his book “Kashf Al-Asrar” p. 131.

I await your spin, as well as your rants, I am not into nonsense arguments, if what you believe is true, bring your proof(s) from the Qur’an kapish!

By the way, this is another verse that destroys your false believe in Imammah. Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an:

“It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and each and every act of obedience to Allah etc.) that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers); but Al- Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allah, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to Al-Masakin (the poor), and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free, performs As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and gives the Zakat, and who fulfill their covenant when they make it, and who are patient in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of fighting (during the battles). Such are the people of the truth and they are Al-Muttaqun (pious). (Q2:177)

The above verse is so clear, we do not find your skewed belief in Imammah, We see Tawheed clearly, we see Salat, we see Zakah, even we see freeing of the slaves, and even further, we see Sabr being mentioned by Allah (SWT) as prerequisite for piety and embodiment of righteousness, no believe in Imammah, give me one good reason to believe that Imammah is any important to Islam, and why Allah (SWT) didn’t mention it in the Qur’an…

If you do not have answers, it is not by force to reply, just quietly move along...

May Almighty Allah bless you guys abundantly. God that has made you know the truth will not deviate you. You- Sino, lexicon and other al-husunnah have opened my eyes.in my own little way,I will spread the message on the danger these people portend for our deen.

ddude:

May Almighty Allah bless you guys abundantly. God that has made you know the truth will not deviate you. You- Sino, lexicon and other al-husunnah have opened my eyes.in my own little way,I will spread the message on the danger these people portend for our deen.

JazakAllah ya akh, if you can do that, it will be great!

ddude:

May Almighty Allah bless you guys abundantly. God that has made you know the truth will not deviate you. You- Sino, lexicon and other al-husunnah have opened my eyes.in my own little way,I will spread the message on the danger these people portend for our deen.

Ameen, Jazakumullah khayran. May Allah (SWT) continue to guide us on His right path ameen.

sino:


Bro, I wasn't quite sure about the shi'ah beliefs before, I only listened to scholars condemn their beliefs, but my first encounter with them showed they were mostly filled with hate and curses, that was a red flag, then I started a little research, and the more I read, the more I realized their beliefs are not only strange, but false, mostly, their belief system are always antagonistic against the sunni, its like without the sunnis, they wouldn't exist in the first place, a sect created just to oppose the sunnis... And their deceit is legendary, not to mention the fact that their books are filled with mind boggling contradictions and fabrications.

May Allah continue to guide us right Ameen.

Who existed first: Shia or Sunni? The Shia!

Who change the Sunnah just to oppose the other group? Sunnis! Example: you wear rings on the left hand instead of the right which is the correct Sunnah. Why? Because the Shia have adopted this Sunnah of the Prophet and emphasize on it and it has become a trademark. To look different, Sunnis put the ring on the left hand even though the Prophet (s) insisted on the right hand first of its only one ring.

sino:


Well from the verse, Allah (SWT) knows that those in authority are also ordinary Muslims, so when He (SWT) made the directive on how to resolve conflicts among ordinary Muslims, HE (SWT) said go back to Allah (SWT) and His messenger (SAW) to solve your differences, and no one else, because those in authority are not divinely appointed (they do not receive any form of revelation from Allah (SWT) ), we are the ones who appoint them, hence we are to obey them, and we may disagree with them (especially when they call to disbelieve and what the shari'ah never sanctioned). It is very simple bro, or is the verse missing some more information?!

Your claim can be refuted in two ways:

1. The verse has a context. It refers to the time of the Prophet (s) before the commencement of the Imamate.

2. The Shia too have ordinary Muslim leaders, even in the times of the 12 Holy Imams who took directives from them. Example: Malik al-Ashtar (ra) who was appointed the ruler of Egypt by Imam Ali (as).

Even three ways:

3. The 12 Holy Imams (as) have never been or claimed to be a separate authority from the Prophet (s) and whatever they judged or ruled was based on the Sunnah of the Prophet (s). In fact this is the point that made Imam Ali (as) not to be chosen by the committee of six imposed by Umar to choose a caliph. They conditioned that Imam Ali (as) must abide guy me Sunnah of the Prophet (s) and the sunnah of the shaikhain (Abu Bakr and umar). Imam Ali (as) refused and said he will only abide by the Sunnah of the Prophet (s). Had gone two shaykhain ruled by the Sunnah of Muhammad (s), there wouldn't have been need to insist Imam Ali (as) also abide by their own teachings and actions. But apparently based on this condition, they had deviated. The Imamate is a reflection of prophethood. And it is based on the Sunnah of Allah and His Prophet (s) the 12 Imams (as) ruled and judged. Thus the Imamate did not introduce any new rule or Sunnah or sharia or laws that they maybe the source for judgment. The Imams ruled and judged based on the Prophet's teachings. When there is a dispute, the 12 Imams (as) themselves would insist the matter is resolved based on the Quran and Sunnah of Muhammad (s). Anything more or short of that is not acceptable.

So you guys should stop acting like Christians and speaking based on conjectures. The Christians are lost on finding the source of the Quran. They devise different and contradictory arguments. Now you guys are lost on interpreting Quran verses that uphold Imamate. Take it easy. Learning is gradual and so also seeing and accepting the truth. Accepting the truth is a habit too. With time and training you will get there, Allah willing!

sino:


Your hypocrisy knows no bound; you should be ashamed of yourself and the sect you belong to. You on another thread would quote articles from different websites to buttress your points, but all of a sudden, you cannot do same on this thread, why?! You people have the same MO, when brought face-to-face with facts, superior arguments, and most importantly, the truth, you become venomous, defensive, redundantly asking silly questions or bringing up superfluous conjectures and applying deceit…

You claim the Qur’an talks on Imammah, we ask you prove it, you go typing several responses with no substance…If a non-Muslim asks you to prove Allah (SWT) is one, that the Prophet (SAW) is His messenger from the Qur'an, do you go on a ranting spree?! As I had said, your scholars would say A, you guys would thereafter say xyz, one wonders what type of religion you people practice, you guys have no solid foundation to stand your belief(s) on…

Here is one of your scholars confirming that the concept of Imammah cannot be found in the Qur’an:

Al-Khomeini said: Had the matter of the Imamah been fixed in the Quran, then those who do not care for Islam or the Quran except where it comes to matters of this worldly life and [matters of] Leadership, they would have used the Quran as a mean to fulfill their suspicious objectives, and would have omitted these verses from its pages121 …

This can be found in his book “Kashf Al-Asrar” p. 131.

I await your spin, as well as your rants, I am not into nonsense arguments, if what you believe is true, bring your proof(s) from the Qur’an kapish!

By the way, this is another verse that destroys your false believe in Imammah. Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an:

“It is not Al-Birr (piety, righteousness, and each and every act of obedience to Allah etc.) that you turn your faces towards east and (or) west (in prayers); but Al- Birr is (the quality of) the one who believes in Allah, the Last Day, the Angels, the Book, the Prophets and gives his wealth, in spite of love for it, to the kinsfolk, to the orphans, and to Al-Masakin (the poor), and to the wayfarer, and to those who ask, and to set slaves free, performs As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and gives the Zakat, and who fulfill their covenant when they make it, and who are patient in extreme poverty and ailment (disease) and at the time of fighting (during the battles). Such are the people of the truth and they are Al-Muttaqun (pious). (Q2:177)

The above verse is so clear, we do not find your skewed belief in Imammah, We see Tawheed clearly, we see Salat, we see Zakah, even we see freeing of the slaves, and even further, we see Sabr being mentioned by Allah (SWT) as prerequisite for piety and embodiment of righteousness, no believe in Imammah, give me one good reason to believe that Imammah is any important to Islam, and why Allah (SWT) didn’t mention it in the Qur’an…

If you do not have answers, it is not by force to reply, just quietly move along...

Oga, Kulayni compiled narrations on tahreef and so did bukhari and Muslim. Why do you forget or ignore that point? And even of Kulayni himself believed in tahreef, not just compiling different hadiths narrated by some people, Kulayni isn't one of the Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt (as). His faith or the lack of it on tahreef is his own headache. And even believing in tahreef doesn't put one out of the fold of Islam even though it is a sin and doing so belies the word of Allah that no blemish shall touch the Quran.

ShiaMuslim:


Your claim can be refuted in two ways:

1. The verse has a context. It refers to the time of the Prophet (s) before the commencement of the Imamate.

2. The Shia too have ordinary Muslim leaders, even in the times of the 12 Holy Imams who took directives from them. Example: Malik al-Ashtar (ra) who was appointed the ruler of Egypt by Imam Ali (as).

Even three ways:

3. The 12 Holy Imams (as) have never been or claimed to be a separate authority from the Prophet (s) and whatever they judged or ruled was based on the Sunnah of the Prophet (s). In fact this is the point that made Imam Ali (as) not to be chosen by the committee of six imposed by Umar to choose a caliph. They conditioned that Imam Ali (as) must abide guy me Sunnah of the Prophet (s) and the sunnah of the shaikhain (Abu Bakr and umar). Imam Ali (as) refused and said he will only abide by the Sunnah of the Prophet (s). Had gone two shaykhain ruled by the Sunnah of Muhammad (s), there wouldn't have been need to insist Imam Ali (as) also abide by their own teachings and actions. But apparently based on this condition, they had deviated. The Imamate is a reflection of prophethood. And it is based on the Sunnah of Allah and His Prophet (s) the 12 Imams (as) ruled and judged. Thus the Imamate did not introduce any new rule or Sunnah or sharia or laws that they maybe the source for judgment. The Imams ruled and judged based on the Prophet's teachings. When there is a dispute, the 12 Imams (as) themselves would insist the matter is resolved based on the Quran and Sunnah of Muhammad (s). Anything more or short of that is not acceptable.

So you guys should stop acting like Christians and speaking based on conjectures. The Christians are lost on finding the source of the Quran. They devise different and contradictory arguments. Now you guys are lost on interpreting Quran verses that uphold Imamate. Take it easy. Learning is gradual and so also seeing and accepting the truth. Accepting the truth is a habit too. With time and training you will get there, Allah willing!

Your efforts are well appreciated, I do understand you abhor arguments and rather want me to learn, which happens to be is one of my hobbies.

1. Could you please clarify this? was there a period when Imamate was in abeyance? Considering the verse you claimed was in regards to "general Imamate" of which you made the below statement:

"5). The verse of general Imamah in the Holy Quran is verse 2:124. This proves that Prophet Ibrahim (as) was given a position which was higher than the position he had already attained in prophethood.This would put Imamate at the time of Ibrahim (as)."

This your statement above is quite informative, for you clearly want us to believe that the appointment of Imamate, is higher than that of Prophethood...

2. Well, I cannot really see how this helps to clarify issues, the verse does not recognize your Imamate as divinely appointed individuals. Since they are not the messengers of Allah (SWT), they fall under the heading " 'wulul Amr " and this can be anybody and there can be dispute with them which we would have to resolve by going back to the Qur'an and Sunnah. It is important to state here that nowhere else in the Qur'an does Allah (SWT) make reference to obey any divinely appointed Imamate. If you do have proof(s), you may present it/them.

3. If the Imamate are not separate authority from the Prophet (SAW), they do not go against the Qur'an and Sunnah, then why do we have to take them as anything special?! They have no other guidance except for the guidance of the Prophet (SAW), they must follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW), in other words, they are below the prophets. Any good Muslim leader can uphold the Qur'an and Sunnah and some of these Imams never even attained the position of authority in their land. For the fact that Imam Ali (ra) didn't overturn the rulings of his predecessors after he became the Imam, but rather followed their footsteps, clearly indicates that his predecessors were upon the Qur'an and Sunnah. I had asked your other brother to prove from authentic narrations, Imam Ali's opinions of his predecessors, did he considered them misguided? did he consider them the way you shi'ah portray them to be today?!

All in all, you haven't been able to bring a clear-cut verse from the Qur'an that clearly explains the concept of Imamah according to you shia'ah thus far.

sino:

Your efforts are well appreciated, I do understand you abhor arguments and rather want me to learn, which happens to be is one of my hobbies.
1. Could you please clarify this? was there a period when Imamate was in abeyance? Considering the verse you claimed was in regards to "general Imamate" of which you made the below statement:

when the Prophet (s) was alive, he was also the Imam of all Muslims. so Imam Ali's (as) imamate was not active or has not commenced. so you can say it was in abeyance.

"5). The verse of general Imamah in the Holy Quran is verse 2:124. This proves that Prophet Ibrahim (as) was given a position which was higher than the position he had already attained in prophethood.This would put Imamate at the time of Ibrahim (as)."
This your statement above is quite informative, for you clearly want us to believe that the appointment of Imamate, is higher than that of Prophethood...

yes, imamate can be higher than prophethood. imamate combines spiritual and worldly leadership while prophethood is only spiritual. this is the case, except for the Prophet Muhammad (s) who is superior to all prophet, messengers and holy/divinely appointed imams.

2. Well, I cannot really see how this helps to clarify issues, the verse does not recognize your Imamate as divinely appointed individuals. Since they are not the messengers of Allah (SWT), they fall under the heading " 'wulul Amr " and this can be anybody and there can be dispute with them which we would have to resolve by going back to the Qur'an and Sunnah. It is important to state here that nowhere else in the Qur'an does Allah (SWT) make reference to obey any divinely appointed Imamate. If you do have proof(s), you may present it/them.

do we say this verse points out the imamate is a divine station? no we do not. the verse we hold and claim points out imamate is made through divine appointment is verse 2:124. the verse of obeying ulil amr only maintains our obedience to the 12 holy Imams (as). in other words, even if we must obey ordinary Muslims in dispensing the day to day affairs of Muslims, their legitimacy must come from Allah through the 12 Imams (as) who must have appointed them or endorse them directly or through their teachings. in all ways, leadership is divine because man is the khalifa of Allah on earth.

3. If the Imamate are not separate authority from the Prophet (SAW), they do not go against the Qur'an and Sunnah, then why do we have to take them as anything special?! They have no other guidance except for the guidance of the Prophet (SAW), they must follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW), in other words, they are below the prophets. Any good Muslim leader can uphold the Qur'an and Sunnah and some of these Imams never even attained the position of authority in their land. For the fact that Imam Ali (ra) didn't overturn the rulings of his predecessors after he became the Imam, but rather followed their footsteps, clearly indicates that his predecessors were upon the Qur'an and Sunnah. I had asked your other brother to prove from authentic narrations, Imam Ali's opinions of his predecessors, did he considered them misguided? did he consider them the way you shi'ah portray them to be today?!
All in all, you haven't been able to bring a clear-cut verse from the Qur'an that clearly explains the concept of Imamah according to you shia'ah thus far.

the 12 Imams (as) are only below the Prophet Muhammad (s). Prophet Muhammad (s) through was revealed the Quran, the final message and the most advanced shariah. the knowledge thus given to him is superior to the other prophets. the 12 Imams (as) are inheritors and heirs of the knowledge, wisdom and revelations of Muhammad (s). by this virtue, and being protectors of the sharia of Muhammad (s) based on divine knowledge and wisdom, they are superior to all other prophets who had lesser revelations to the Quran and lesser sharia to that of Muhammad (s). you assertion that he followed in their footsteps is utterly false. if he acted in their footsteps, he wont have refused the condition for taking power over from Umar. and talking about his opinion on his predecessors, you can examine this as tip of the iceberg:

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349 that Umar acknowledged the following to Imam ‘Ali (as):

Umar’s Words:
When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said:” I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).” Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah). (Referring to Hadhrat ‘Abbas), he said: You demanded your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to ‘Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said:” We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.” So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.

copied from:
https://www.nairaland.com/3232005/fatima-angered#47640468

ShiaMuslim:


when the Prophet (s) was alive, he was also the Imam of all Muslims. so Imam Ali's (as) imamate was not active or has not commenced. so you can say it was in abeyance.

Interesting, first, you need to understand my question properly, since Imamah was established during the time of Ibrahim (AS), and Allah (SWT) directly appointed him as an Imam, so how , where and when were other Prophets or other Imams appointed? Was Imamah suspended after Ibrahim (AS)?

ShiaMuslim:

yes, imamate can be higher than prophethood. imamate combines spiritual and worldly leadership while prophethood is only spiritual. this is the case, except for the Prophet Muhammad (s) who is superior to all prophet, messengers and holy/divinely appointed imams.

Who is a Prophet? Why did Allah (SWT) appoint Prophets for mankind?! In the Qur’an, I had even posted a verse establishing believing in Prophets, but we cannot find anywhere in the Qur’an this status of this your Imamah, except for you people’s interpretation of Q 2: 124, as being an higher position from Prophethood…I have not read anywhere that a Prophet is not an Imam, as in a person who leads others, in which other people follow and emulate towards achieving success in life and hereafter, pick any Prophet mentioned in the Qur’an, and you would see how this your classification is false.

ShiaMuslim:

do we say this verse points out the imamate is a divine station? no we do not. the verse we hold and claim points out imamate is made through divine appointment is verse 2:124. the verse of obeying ulil amr only maintains our obedience to the 12 holy Imams (as). in other words, even if we must obey ordinary Muslims in dispensing the day to day affairs of Muslims, their legitimacy must come from Allah through the 12 Imams (as) who must have appointed them or endorse them directly or through their teachings. in all ways, leadership is divine because man is the khalifa of Allah on earth.

Do you know what is most beautiful about the Qur’an? It is quite simple to understand if you are willing to, it is self-explanatory, and Allah (SWT) in His Wisdom would always make clear whatever anyone wants to use to create issues…I agree with you, Qur’an 2:124 is the verse of Imamah according to you Shi’ah. I also agree with you, we are the Khalifa of Allah (SWT) on earth, thus anyone of us can be given the mantle of leadership, especially when we are righteous, and follow the Qur’an and Sunnah. It is even one of the prayers found in the Qur’an:

“And those who say: O our Lord! Grant us in our wives and our offspring the joy of our eyes, and make us Imams” (25:74)

So is the above not also a verse of Imamah?!

But I disagree with your claim that legitimacy must come through the 12 Imams, bring proofs from the Qur’an for this!

Now let me quote verses of the Qur’an which should clear any doubts with regards to verse 2:124 (although I would have gone with the tafsir, but these verses, actually addresses all your points at a go)

I’ll quote Qur’an 2:124 first:

And [mention, O Muhammad], when Abraham was tried by his Lord with commands and he fulfilled them. [ Allah ] said, "Indeed, I will make you a leader for the people." [Abraham] said, "And of my descendants?" [ Allah ] said, "My covenant does not include the wrongdoers."

Allah (SWT) states in another chapter of the Qur’an after narrating how Ibrahim (AS) was guided:
[b]
“And that was Our Proof which We gave Ibrahim (Abraham) against his people. We raise whom We will in degrees. Certainly your Lord is All-Wise, All-Knowing.

And We bestowed upon him Ishaque (Isaac) and Ya'qub (Jacob), each of them We guided, and before him, We guided Nuh (Noah), and among his progeny Dawud (David), Sulaiman (Solomon), Ayub (Job), Yusuf (Joseph), Musa (Moses), and Harun (Aaron). Thus do We reward the good-doers.

And Zakariya (Zachariya), and Yahya (John) and 'Iesa (Jesus) and Iliyas (Elias), each one of them was of the righteous.

And Isma'il (Ishmael) and Al-Yas'a (Elisha), and Yunus (Jonah) and Lout (Lot), and each one of them We preferred above the 'Alamin (mankind and jinns) (of their times).

And also some of their fathers and their progeny and their brethren, We chose them, and We guided them to a Straight Path.

That is the guidance of Allah by which He guides whomever He wills of His servants. But if they had associated others with Allah , then worthless for them would be whatever they were doing.

Those are the ones to whom We gave the Scripture and authority and prophethood. But if the disbelievers deny it, then We have entrusted it to a people who are not therein disbelievers."[/b]
(Q6:83-89)

When you juxtapose these verses together, it becomes clear, the Prayer of Ibrahim (AS) was accepted, and what Allah (SWT) gave the offspring of Ibrahim (AS) were:

1. Scripture
2. Authority (on the scriptures i.e understanding, and applications of the rulings therein)
3. Prophethood

I still humbly await who among those listed here that the Imams are higher than, the Imams that were not given scriptures, not given revelations, depends on the authority of the Prophet (SAW), and are not Prophets…

ShiaMuslim:

the 12 Imams (as) are only below the Prophet Muhammad (s). Prophet Muhammad (s) through was revealed the Quran, the final message and the most advanced shariah. the knowledge thus given to him is superior to the other prophets. the 12 Imams (as) are inheritors and heirs of the knowledge, wisdom and revelations of Muhammad (s). by this virtue, and being protectors of the sharia of Muhammad (s) based on divine knowledge and wisdom, they are superior to all other prophets who had lesser revelations to the Quran and lesser sharia to that of Muhammad (s). you assertion that he followed in their footsteps is utterly false. if he acted in their footsteps, he wont have refused the condition for taking power over from Umar. and talking about his opinion on his predecessors, you can examine this as tip of the iceberg:

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349 that Umar acknowledged the following to Imam ‘Ali (as):

Umar’s Words:
When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said:” I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).” Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah). (Referring to Hadhrat ‘Abbas), he said: You demanded your share from the property of your nephew, and he (referring to ‘Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said:” We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.” So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.

copied from:
https://www.nairaland.com/3232005/fatima-angered#47640468

Allah (SWT) says in the Qur’an:

“Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam)." (Q 2:136)

Here we read believe in Prophets and not making distinctions, such as you have introduced as some being Imams, and others not Imams, or making distinctions in the revelations given to them. The Prophets were all saddled with the same responsibility; guide their people to Allah (SWT). So how can you now say Imams who are not even Prophets are higher than some Prophets?!

Another verse from the Qur’an:

“And whoever obeys Allah and the Apostle, these are with those upon whom Allah has bestowed favors from among the prophets and the truthful and the martyrs and the good, and a goodly company are they! This is grace from Allah, and sufficient is Allah as the Knower.” (Q4:69-70)

Here again, no Imams mentioned. But Prophets clearly mentioned, the truthful ones, the martyrs and even the good…How could this important Imams be omitted continuously?! Why?! Again, what the Prophet (SAW) left to be inherited is still with us, the Qur’an and Sunnah! Every Muslim on the surface of the earth is entitled to this inheritance, it was never reserved for a selected few, rather Allah (SWT) sent His messenger to the whole of mankind, and who ever chooses, inherits the Prophet’s divine knowledge, wisdom and revelations embedded in the Qur’an and Sunnah. Or what other revelation apart from the Qur’an and authentic narrations do you want to call us to?!

With the proofs thus far, how can you then still say that Imamah (according to you Shi’ah) is in the Qur’an?!

Now don’t see this as me wanting to argue with your points, but rather, I do have proofs from the Holy Qur’an, and I cannot ignore clear verses provided thus far to follow some conjectures, the reason I respectfully ask for your proofs from the Qur’an as well.

With regards to Abu Bakr’s khalifah and the narration and link you put up, I’ll rather pass, reason being that it is not really important to the topic, and it had been handled on the thread you even posted…