AlBaqir:




How on earth can you make an analogy between the two?! The basis of the infallibility of Aimmat Ahl al-Bayt is exclusively revealed in two divine messages:

# Surah Ahzab, the verse of purification. Here Allah purify them with absolute purification.

# Hadith Thaqalain especially the bolded part:

Imam Ibn Kathir (d. 774 H):

In the ṣaḥīḥ report, it is recorded that the Messenger of Allāh, peace be upon him, said in his sermon at Ghadīr Khumm: “I am leaving behind over you the Two Weighty Things (al-thaqalayn): THE BOOK OF ALLAH AND MY OFFSPRING, AHL AL-BAYT. Verily, both shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Fount.

Ref: {Abū al-Fidā Ismā’īl b. ‘Umar b. Kathīr al-Qurashī al-Dimashqī, Tafsīr al-Qur’ān al-‘Aẓīm (Dār al-Ṭaybah li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzī’; 2nd edition, 1420 H) [annotator: Sāmī b. Muḥammad Salāmah], vol. 7, p. 201}

These are part of several undeniable evidences which Ahlu Sunnah shy away from and Wahabiyyah deliberately misinterpret.

* So, what's the basis for the "infallibility" of Sahih Bukhari?

Empiree:
Don't complicate it at all. My aim is as clear as day light

AlBaqir:


Brother mi, your statement is as clear as daylight though it seemed to have contradicted your aim. Do you believe in the ismat of the Aimmat of Ahl al-Bayt or not? Why making comparison where none exist?! How can you compare the so-called sahih of a book that its supposed author know nothing about? And even if Imam Bukhari was the author, for argument sake, was he a masoom?

Empiree:
Even scholars dont believe ALL Shia are mushrik. You better slow down bro. This is not the way to go about differences. But like someone said earlier, it is your prerogative.

Empiree:
I can say we are really on the same page base on your reply. I don't have problems with them.


But this issue of Rajm, you will really have to write a CONVINCING EPISTLE to get me to believe this again. Yes, I grew up believing in it. I only changed my view in 2010 after some studies. I understand overwhelming scholars of Islam from the time gone by held this view so I can be wrong but i am yet to see anyone to convince me.

Again, I think you wrong about Shia here. They believe in hadd of Rajm as well. I remember demmzy15 opened a thread about it last year and AlBaqir criticized me but he later went off for a month and came back agreeing with me.

He was however sectarian by blaming it on Umar (ra)

I just had similar 2days debate with a brother on YouTube late last week. Rajm issue becomes problematic bcus its so called abrogation and chain doesn't reach the prophet (saw)
It stopped with Umar (ra). That's where I raised eyebrows.

Bcus I disagree, some think I'm pleasing non- Muslims but that's not the case unfortunately. It's just studies.

Forget about criticism of Qur'an. That's never gonna end. Even Qur'aniyun we have here doesn't criticize Qur'an, he only has mind of his own.

Newnas:


The beliefs that make this AlBaqir an infidel are his

# belief that the Quran has been distorted,

#belief that the companions are disbelievers,

#belief that their Imams are more virtuous than the messengers Alyhimussalam etc.

Newnas:


As for the men of Bukharee and Muslim who are shia, this doesn't confuse any student of knowledge because:

# The shia are not the only innovators accepted by the two sheikhs. This is a sign of justice among the people of sunnah, if a person posses knowledge and is known with truthfulness his report is accepted. Ahlu sunnah are not partisan.

Newnas:

# The innovation of shism started as given preference to Ali over Abu Bakr and Umar and Uthman. As far as this is wrong it doesn't take one out of the fold of Islam.

Newnas:


Then a cursed generation came after them and they innovated curses for Abu Bakr and Umar and other companions rodiyaLLaahu anhum.
They also innovated the belief of twelve imams and belief in their infallibility.

Newnas:


They innovated their time of Solah and type of ablution.

Newnas:


I remember when I first got to this section, AlBaqir always claimed that he doesn't curse any companion that it's only the zaydiyah (or yazeediyyah) that curse the companions. But with time he showed his true colours.

In other words he lied, this lie is not a mistake rather it's a basic shia creed known as TAQIYYAH!!!

sino:

Here is a brief explanation on abrogation of verses in the Qur’an:

Abrogation of Verses

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says in the Holy Qur’an:
ما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها نأت بخير منها أو مثلها
Whichever verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. (2:106)

The scholars have observed three kinds of abrogation. The first is the abrogation of the ruling alone. The second is the abrogation of the ruling and the recitation. The third is the abrogation of recitation alone.

Empiree:


Remember you used to believe in hadd of Rajm until I brought your attention to it last year?. So please try to sound neutral so that sino doesn't feel he's dealing with sectarian arguments. Thanks

AlBaqir:


I don't get it @underline. # That Prophet stoned or existence of ayat rajm?

# Again there are too numerous ahadith about stoning for adultery but not that ayat rajm existed. The later (ayat rajm) is found in both Sunni and Shia ahadith but I simply don't believe them. I believe its part of traditions of the Prophet (due to numerous ahadith).

# I believe so much in Allah's mercy for sinners. Death punishment is however for the unrepentant sinners who defiantly continue to cause mischief on the land. Interestingly, my favourite Sahabi reported this hadith (thank Allah the hadith is par with the Quran):

Narrated Abu Huraira:


The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "The one who commits an illegal sexual intercourse is not a believer at the time of committing illegal sexual intercourse and a thief is not a believer at the time of committing theft and a drinker of alcoholic drink is not a believer at the time of drinking. Yet, (the gate of) repentance is open thereafter."

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 6810
In-book reference : Book 86, Hadith 40
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 8, Book 82, Hadith 801
(deprecated numbering scheme)

Empiree:
Will be back here In sha Allah @sino. I'm very uncomfortable using my mobile. The whole arguments of yours devoid of simple


"Qola Allah Qola Rosullu"



The ONLY weight you have is you bombarded me with 'ijma' of SCHOLARS which is understandable.


As for your last paragraph, please desist from that bcus I'm not shy from implementation of hudud of Rab. I think you are being emotional by saying that. I don't want emotions involved.

@albaqir, thanks for your brief contributions. However, I think you should stand on neutral ground rather than your common tune "your scholar".


Remember you used to believe in hadd of Rajm until I brought your attention to it last year?. So please try to sound neutral so that sino doesn't feel he's dealing with sectarian arguments. Thanks

AlBaqir:


What destroyed your shallow and usual copy-paste is the very ayat Sherif you quote. Its a straight forward ayah with no hanky panky esp the underlined phrase. Where are authentic evidences linking the Prophet that support the views of your scholars on abrogation?

# The case here is about ayat rajm which can never and will never be found in the holy Quran. According to the ayat Sherif you quoted, which ayah was revealed to replace it? You must give an authentic narration to support it please.

# Apart from the fact that you can never provide a single narration to the Prophet that support the theories of your scholars, give us another "another erased recitation ayah but intact ruling" in the "Quran"?!

Only the second Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab talked about Ayat Rajm (and probably Umm al-mu'mininah Aisha who claimed the verses had been eaten by a goat during the burial of the Nabi) out of 114,000 Sahabah of which less than 20% were recorded in the books of your ahadith. And the second Caliph clearly stated that the ayah exist in the Quran at least up till his time. Yet you want to shamelessly cover that under the carpet and push the silly argument of tahrif to the Shia despite given you tens of evidences to prove multitude of tahrif ahadith in your books. You've never disappointed me a day.

Rafidi:


Brother, our claim of infallible 12 Imams from the progeny and Ahlul-Bayt of Prophet Muhammad (s) cannot be on par with Sunnis believing in the infallibility of books of hadiths conveyed, compiled and composed by fallible men.

It was the Prophet (s) himself who equated the Quran and his Ahlul-Bayt in Hadith al-Thaqalayn. We did not make that equation. Thus if you believe in the perfection of the Quran, then we must believe also that Allah (swt) perfected the selected/chosen ones of the Ahlul-Bayt to guide us by the Quran. It is common knowledge, even to Sunnis who would superficially deny the superiority of the Ahlul-Bayt, that without contributions of the Imams, particularly Imam Sadeq and Imam Hussein (as), Islamic knowledge would have been lost. Imam Sadeq (as) tutored the imams of the four Sunni schools of thought and Imam Hussein (as) sacrificed himself, his blood, his baby, his family and companions to say NO to Yazeed who was a faajir, kaafir, munafiq, etc. and who wanted to destroy Islam from inside.

Second, in the verse of purification in the Quran (33:33), Allah states that He has purified the Ahlul-Bayt and kept sin away from them. If that isn't infallibility then what is infallibility? Forget about those who insist this verse includes the wives. It doesn't because the actions of Aisha alone in the Battle of Jamal and disregarding the Prophet's advice and the Quran's instruction that she shouldn't leave her house is more than enough to make the point she wasn't sinless or infallible and the verse cannot include her as part of those Allah has kept sim away from; that is even if we are to turn a blind eye on Surat Tahreem which states that her heart swayed from faith.

For the fact that the Prophet (s) in Hadith al-Thaqalain states that the Quran and the Ahlul bayt will never separate till the Day of Judgment is a further indication in our belief that the Imamate of the Ahlul bayt will never end in this world. In another Sahih Hadith we are told by the Prophet that the earth will never be left with a hujjah (proof/prophet/messenger/holy imam chosen by Allah to guide mankind). Also for the fact there is another Hadith in Sahih Muslim among others that the successors of the Prophet Muhammad (s) are 12 in number, we have no doubt that the 12th Imam is still alive. Anyone who doubts this is doubting the truthfulness of the holy Prophet himself and Islam in its entirety.

So please do not equate the 12 holy Imams of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) with fallible Hadith books of and by fallible men when the Prophet (s) had equated them with the book of Allah (the Quran) which is perfect and free from errors.

In fact, this little explanation is enough to clarify the truth of Islam entirely in the heart of any seeker of truth.

Empiree:
^^^^
I think i have explained myself [above] what i meant

AlBaqir:

# What a true Shia don't engage in is cursing Abubakar, Umar, Uthman, Aisha et al despite their innovations which they confessed, and documented in your authentic books.

TheLight001:
So in essence, you accept that the shi'a do send la'an to Abu Bakr As-Sadiq (RA), Umar Ibn Khattab (RA), Usthman (RA) , and Muawiya (RA)?

LagosShia:

yes, we do in Ziyarat Ashura, the "first zalim (oppressor) who oppressed the rights of Al-Muhammad" refers to Abu Bakr, the "second" refers to Umar, and the "third" to Usthman. then Muawiya, Yazeed, and al-Abi Sufyan (the family of abi sufyan) and banu umayyah are stated explicitly. dua sanamay q . then Muawiya, Yazeed, and al-Abi Sufyan (the family of abi sufyan) and banu umayyah are stated explicitly. dua sanamay quraysh (supplication against the two idols of quraysh) refers to the two perpetrators of Saqifah Banu Saeeda, i.e. Abu bakr and Umar. there is no taqiyyah in this as some lunatics want to dramatize.

lexiconkabir:
^^ believe me he will find something to say, shaytan will give him wahy.

MrOlai:


Liar!
Shia rain curses on Abubakr, Umar and Uthman(R. A. Ajmain) during their ziyaratul ashura. Shia rain curses on them hundreds of times on that single day not to talk of other curses they rain on those noble Companions of the Prophet(SAW) on other days and in their individual curses!

This is a response from your brother on the curses you rain on those Companions(R.A):



.



Shia and deceptions!

Busted!!!!!

sino:

It suffices me that the issue of rajm is an issue of abrogation and abrogation are of different types, and the type as explained by scholars, is an abrogation of the verse without the abrogation of the rulings.

And I was talking about shi’ah and believe of their scholars that the Qur’an is incomplete is quite different from the understanding of abrogated verses.

Here is a brief explanation on abrogation of verses in the Qur’an:

Abrogation of Verses

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says in the Holy Qur’an:
ما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها نأت بخير منها أو مثلها
Whichever verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. (2:106)

The scholars have observed three kinds of abrogation. The first is the abrogation of the ruling alone. The second is the abrogation of the ruling and the recitation. The third is the abrogation of recitation alone.

The existence in the abrogation of recitation is a commonly accepted view according to many Islamic scholars, even ones from outside the Sunni school. Jalal Al-Deen Al-Suyuti in his Al-Itqaan quotes several examples of this form. Such narrations usually include a companion saying, [size=20pt]“We used to read such and such during the life of the Prophet.”[/size] When returning to the Qur’an, we do not find these verses within it. Scholars refer to such as an abrogation of verses.

Even though the abrogation of recitation has been something that has always been accepted by Muslim scholars, we do find that there are some that have doubted the existence of it. Their main argument is that they do not see the wisdom of such a thing and that abrogation of recitation creates nothing but confusion.

However, such an argument holds no weight, since it is not required for the creation to understand the wisdom of the actions of Allah as a requirement to accepting those actions.

According to Sulaiman Al-Lahim, in his introduction to Al-Nahhas’ Al-Nasikh wal Mansookh (1/118), one of the wisdoms of the existence of the abrogation of recitation is that it makes the Qur’an easier to memorize. He quoted the following verse:
الآن خفف الله عنكم وعلم أن فيكم ضعفا
For the present Allah has made light your burden, and He knows that there is weakness in you. (8:66)

By returning to the context of the verse, we find that Allah is decreasing what He expects from the Muslims at war. This is indeed a mercy upon them, for they were expected to stand up to armies that are up to ten times in number, but then the number was decreased to twice in number.

Similarly, the abrogation of those verses is a form of mercy as well, since Allah’s words can never run out, and having the Qur’an in its final state makes it easier to memorize than what it could have been if no abrogation of recitation existed.

Please note again, this belief of the ahlu sunnah is far from what the scholars of shi’ah believe, I had already posted a link for your perusal.

Again your arguments and debates must stem from genuine facts, and supported by scholarly opinions, if you think just that stoning the adulterer is barbaric, hence your argument, then we may also look at cutting of the hands for a thief, and even whipping a fornicator 100 lashes can also be viewed as barbaric, not to mention the continuous pressure from some quarters to abolish death sentence. The last paragraph of the above post is very instructive. The Question to ask yourself are: Are the narrations on rajm authentic according to Islamic scholars?! If yes, why do you reject them?! If no, then who weakened them, and on what basis were the reasons for the weakness of the narrations?!