The Messenger of Allah declared: "It seems the time approached when I
shall be called away (by Allah) and I shall answer that call. I am
leaving for you two precious things and if you adhere both of them,
you will never go astray after me. They are the Book of Allah and my
progeny, that is my Ahlul-Bayt. The two shall never separate from each
other until they come to me by the Pool (of Paradise)."

Then the Messenger of Allah continued: "Do I not have more right over
the believers than what they have over themselves?" People cried and
answered: "Yes, O' Messenger of God." Then Prophet (PBUH) held up the
hand of Ali and said: "Whoever I am his leader (Mawla), Ali is his leader (Mawla). O' God, love those who love him, and be hostile to those who are hostile to him."


Some of the Sunni references:


(1) Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298, v5, p63
(2) Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43
(3) Khasa'is, by al-Nisa'i, pp 4,21
(4) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p129, v3, pp 109-110,116,371
(5) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1, pp 84,118,119,152,330, v4, pp 281,368,370,
372,378, v5, pp 35,347,358,361,366,419 (from 40 chains of narrators)
(6) Fada'il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, pp 563,572
(7) Majma' al-Zawa'id, by al-Haythami, v9, p103 (from several transmitters)
( Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v12, pp 49-50
(9) Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthur, by al-Hafiz Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, v3, p19
(10) Tarikh al-Khulafa, by al-Suyuti, pp 169,173
(11) al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah, by Ibn Kathir, v3, p213, v5, p208
(12) Usdul Ghabah, by Ibn Athir, v4, p114
(13) Mushkil al-Athar, by al-Tahawi, v2, pp 307-308
(14) Habib al-Siyar, by Mir Khand, v1, part 3, p144
(15) Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, p26
(16) al-Isabah, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v2, p509; v1, part1, p319,
v2, part1, p57, v3, part1, p29, v4, part 1, pp 14,16,143
(17) Tabarani, who narrated from companions such as Ibn Umar, Malik Ibn
al-Hawirath, Habashi Ibn Junadah, Jari, Sa'd Ibn Abi Waqqas,
Anas Ibn Malik, Ibn Abbas, Amarah,Buraydah,,
(18) Tarikh, by al-Khatib Baghdadi, v8, p290
(19) Hilyatul Awliya', by al-Hafiz Abu Nu'aym, v4, p23, v5, pp26-27
(20) al-Istiab, by Ibn Abd al-Barr, Chapter of word "ayn" (Ali), v2, p462
(21) Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v6, pp 154,397
(22) al-Mirqat, v5, p568
(23) al-Riyad al-Nadirah, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, v2, p172
(24) Dhaka'ir al-Uqba, by al-Muhib al-Tabari, p68
(25) Faydh al-Qadir, by al-Manawi, v6, p217
(26) Yanabi' al-Mawaddah, by al-Qudoozi al-Hanafi, p297
, And hundreds more.

vedaxcool:

Now the fair well speech was held at Ghadir Khumm? why are you trying so hard to obscure the truth? Please for those following look the picture at my first post and then tell how the 120, 000 people all came from Medina, from the diagram I posted, people from Meccan would have not go Ghadir Khumm since they were already at home, people from Taif, Yeman would have simply turned back and head home, only a few people would have follow the prophet back to Medina thereby passing through Ghadir Khumm, that indeed would be only a hand full.

I am glad you have relinquish the lie that the incident of Ghadir was done in the presence of all Muslims, now this is a significant victory against falsehood, the Prophet pbuh made the most important announcement when nearly everybody had departed for home, those that make sense? well this mean one lie down another to go  

OMG,a sunni calling his own sunni hadith a 'lie' and attributing his own hadith to be a 'lie' by a shia.it is hadiths found in sunni books that put the figures in the thousands,right?

Also,i know that in Islam just four male adults are enough for witnesses in any case.i am sure if there were not thousands,there were hundreds accompanying your Prophet.and what do you say about the presence of the accused persons,abu bakr and umar,at the event?

Someone also said that Prophet Mohamad was leaving Makkah back to medina.so it is natural that many would accompany him even from Mecca.also from the map you presented i can honestly say that only those in Mecca and southward would have being absent.those in medina,the muslim capital city,those from mecca accompanying your Prophet and northward of mecca were present.also the spot of Ghadir looks strategic and a focal point which can be viewed as a junction for travellers.

I have been following this thread but i am really confuse at the point 'vedaxcool' is trying to make.all i can see are attempts to discredit a historical event which supports another person's case by creating unnecessary arguments and doubts that lack any basis.

Vedaxcool,please what is your point?

You have agreed the event took place and you have agreed that there scholars from your sunni side that consider the hadith authentic.so what is your point?

Please tell us what you want us to believe.

vedaxcool:

Now the fair well speech was held at Ghadir Khumm? why are you trying so hard to obscure the truth? Please for those following look the picture at my first post and then tell how the 120, 000 people all came from Medina, from the diagram I posted, people from Meccan would have not go Ghadir Khumm since they were already at home, people from Taif, Yeman would have simply turned back and head home, only a few people would have follow the prophet back to Medina thereby passing through Ghadir Khumm, that indeed would be only a hand full.

I am glad you have relinquish the lie that the incident of Ghadir was done in the presence of all Muslims, now this is a significant victory against falsehood, the Prophet pbuh made the most important announcement when nearly everybody had departed for home, those that make sense? well this mean one lie down another to go  

any lie you are trying to throw at me is actually from your hadith.

Clearly you are confused and in shock.

The hadith is saying with the Messenger (sa) returning back from the farewell pilgrimage in Makkah to Ghadir Khumm was 120,000.in other words those in Ghadir Khumm were the ones that performed the farewell pilgrimage in Makkah with the Prophet (sa).

Also since a major event took place at Ghadir Khumm after the farewell pilgrimage and the Prophet (sa) made a speech there,then that logically is the LAST speech.

vedaxcool:

In fact, there are only two additions to the Hadith which are considered authentic and that too only by some scholars. For the purpose of debate, however, we shall accept them as authentic. Again, these two additions are not in the Sahihayn but rather they are in the variant narrations in other books. As the student of Hadith knows, Hadith have various gradings; as for the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm, what is most authentic is that which is in Sahih Bukhari as reproduced above. However, there are other variant versions which have two additions:

1) The first addition is: “Man Kuntu Mawla fa `Ali Mawla.” (Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla.)

2) The second addition is: “Allahummu wali man walaah wa `adi man `adaah.” (O Allah, befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him.)

The first addition is generally accepted, and the second one is weaker but some scholars do consider it authentic. As far as any other additions are concerned, these are not contained in the authentic books and are “mawdoo” or fabricated. Generally, the Shia are content in basing their arguments upon these first two additions, but no doubt after they are refuted, they will oftentimes then resort to using obscure sources to produce further additions such as the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) saying Ali (رضّى الله عنه) is his Wasi, Caliph, Imam, etc. These are all fabrications, and historically the Shia have been manufacturers of fabricated Hadith. The Shia are able to produce lengthy lists of obscure references about Ghadir Khumm because they themselves have been responsible for the multitude of forgeries in regards to Ghadir Khumm.


in essence the obscure hadiths you quoted is unknown to me! the above are the only two hadiths that are available!

from the last sentence above,it is obvious you are confused.you either accept the event took place or not.

What you are regarding as two separate and individual hadiths,in terms of tradition or 'additions' is not the case.you are dividing two sentences from the speech at Ghadir Khumm to make what you call 'two hadiths'!the hadith i am talking about here is about a historical event that took place.it is a single hadith of an event.what you quoted from bukhari is not part of it at all.
Also,not every authentic hadith must be found in your 'sahihayn'.talking about fabrications,you really got no evidence not even idea of who hadiths fabricators were.

Anyways,let me give you some info which should help you.the Hadith al-Ghadir also refered to as the 'Hadith of the Pond of Khumm' is narrated by close to 40 different chains of narrations in sunni sources alone.that is not even mentioning any shia hadith reference.also,the hadith is reported in not less than 30
major hadith compilation books by prominent sunni classical authors.when a hadith is widely reported as such,it becomes 'mutawatir' and common knowledge.when a hadith is 'mutawatir' its authenticity is guaranteed and unquestionable as agreement on it becomes unanimous.this issue of the hadith al-Ghadir is dealt with comprehensively and proven beyond doubt in a dialogue between a prominent sunni scholar from al-azhar and a shia scholar.the dialogue is found in the book titled:'AL-MURAJ'AT' BY ABDUL-HUSSAIN SHARAFIDEEN.you can google it.

I would have posted all the references but spam-bot would delete my post.

So please have in your mind that when we are talking about 'HADITH OF THE POND OF KHUMM' (Hadith al-Ghadir),we are talking about an historical event with a complete speech given by the Prophet -(sa).so talking about a sentence or two from the speech is rather over simplifying the matter.

LagosShia knows exactly when to let the others flow in. Until Ashura when their support would be needed again??

Wont be surprised if kwarashia=LagosShia.

[size=15pt]Two eids in Islam, Eid al adha, eid al fitr.
Yaom al jum'ah is termed an eid too but not a conventional eid.

Any other one is bid'ah. no right thinking muslim should pertake in it.[/size]

deols:

LagosShia knows exactly when to let the others flow in. Until Ashura when there support would be needed again??

Wont be surprised if kwarashia=LagosShia.

[size=15pt]Two eids in Islam, Eid al adha, eid al fitr.
Yaom al jum'ah is termed an eid too but not a conventional eid.

Any other one is bid'ah. no right thinking muslim should pertake in it.[/size]

you are a very funny girl!

Your last sentence though makes you sound like the female version of gaddafi or saddam;would've said hitler but hitler isn't a sunni taghoot (tyrant)

well,as everyone can see we all know what the truth is.you guys cannot hide it or from it.so your gaddafi approach is to pass a verdict to stop people from even thinking even when you were told the truth in page 1 about your 'bid'ah' imagination.

By the way,i am not 'kwara shia'.'kwara shia' is a very close friend of mine in Ilorin.i have invited him to join us in this thread.hopefully he would soon do that with an enlightening contribution on this topic.

Eid al-Ghadir Mubarak, 'deols'!

InshaAllah,i hope you will join us in the month of muharram to commemorate the matyrdom of Imam Hussain (as) by attending Ashura lectures and gatherings.Its just few weeks ahead.

Onyocha:

OMG,a sunni calling his own sunni hadith a 'lie' and attributing his own hadith to be a 'lie' by a shia.it is hadiths found in sunni books that put the figures in the thousands,right?

did you happen to have raw egg breafast? point to where I wrote that the figures was a lie, or that I indicated that the 120, 000 that the lying shia talked about was at the Fair well sermon not at Ghadir khumm which is 250 km away from mecca! or are you here trying play the court jester? we know how low lagoshia can go with almost pro - shia propanganda in most of your previous post, in any case the what I wrote was clear to any hones reader!

Onyocha:

Also,i know that in Islam just four male adults are enough for witnesses in any case.i am sure if there were not thousands,there were hundreds accompanying your Prophet.and what do you say about the presence of the accused persons,abu bakr and umar,at the event?

and you claimed to be following the thread! 4 witness is hardly the claim, the claim is the exaggerated lie by the shias is that the Prophet decided to make the pronouncement when nearly Muslims had departed home, it does not add up, looking at the fact that this pronouncement was suppose to have been made when everybody was there and so the shia claims make little to no sense

Onyocha:

Someone also said that Prophet Mohamad was leaving Makkah back to medina.so it is natural that many would accompany him even from Mecca.also from the map you presented i can honestly say that only those in Mecca and southward would have being absent.those in medina,the muslim capital city,those from mecca accompanying your Prophet and northward of mecca were present.also the spot of Ghadir looks strategic and a focal point which can be viewed as a junction for travellers.

Conjecture is what you follow Kafir! as a Junction must atleast lie on your route people with common sense can indeed take a second at the position of Ghadir Khumm at see how strategic it is to someone whose route is directly opposite it.

Onyocha:

I have been following this thread but i am really confuse at the point 'vedaxcool' is trying to make.all i can see are attempts to discredit a historical event which supports another person's case by creating unnecessary arguments and doubts that lack any basis.

Lagoshia might as well be called lagoshit for bringing such low filthy lucre to the table, the lies of the shia can never be accepted by sane individuals

Onyocha:

Vedaxcool,please what is your point?

You have agreed the event took place and you have agreed that there scholars from your sunni side that consider the hadith authentic.so what is your point?

Please tell us what you want us to believe.

My point have been clearly made, but being a deluded Kafir has made common sense more difficult than figuring adding one + one

Zhul-fiqar:


any lie you are trying to throw at me is actually from your hadith.

Clearly you are confused and in shock.

The hadith is saying with the Messenger (sa) returning back from the farewell pilgrimage in Makkah to Ghadir Khumm was 120,000.in other words those in Ghadir Khumm were the ones that performed the farewell pilgrimage in Makkah with the Prophet (sa).

Also since a major event took place at Ghadir Khumm after the farewell pilgrimage and the Prophet (sa) made a speech there,then that logically is the LAST speech.

Farewell speech boy farewell speech!!

Zhul-fiqar:

from the last sentence above,it is obvious you are confused.you either accept the event took place or not.

The event took place has long been talked about in post 22.

Zhul-fiqar:

What you are regarding as two separate and individual hadiths,in terms of tradition or 'additions' is not the case.you are dividing two sentences from the speech at Ghadir Khumm to make what you call 'two hadiths'!the hadith i am talking about here is about a historical event that took place.it is a single hadith of an event.what you quoted from bukhari is not part of it at all.
Also,not every authentic hadith must be found in your 'sahihayn'.talking about fabrications,you really got no evidence not even idea of who hadiths fabricators were.

by two hadiths I refer to these, and do note every other hadith you have brought to the table are obscure in source that finding their refrence are nowhere except in the trenhes of lies, which is the signature of thel lying theology of the shia:

Buraida narrated: “I invaded Yemen with Ali and I saw coldness from his part; so when I came (back) to the Messenger of Allah and mentioned Ali and criticized him, I saw the face of the Messenger of Allah change and he said: ‘O Buraida, am I not closer to the believers than they are to themselves?’ I said: ‘Yes, O Messenger of Allah.’ He (then) said: ‘Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla.’”

(Musnad Ahmad [v5 / p347 / #22995] with a Sahih chain of transmission and all trustworthy [thiqa] narrators relied upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim; al-Nisa’i in Sunan al-Kubra [v5 / p45 / #8145]; al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak [v3 / p119 / #4578]; Abu Nu`aym; Ibn Jarir and others)

In a slightly different version:

Buraida narrated: “The Prophet sent me to Yemen with Ali and I saw coldness from his part; when I returned and complained about him to the Messenger of Allah, he (the Messenger of Allah) raised his head towards (him) and said: ‘O Buraida! Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla.’”

(Sunan al-Kubra, v5, p130, #8466; a similar report can be found in Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shayba [v6, p.374])

But note the joker shia telling us hadiths that are authentic but immediateoly the haidth does not follow their perverse fancy it is null abd viod, when dealing with such dishonest behavior one can only point to the lies that is the foundation of shiasm, in any case let us look at the the two hadiths that are the false thread of hope shias hold unto:

the word Mawla can have a variety of meanings. but reading within the context Mawla will mean friend or best friend as in

“So today no ransom shall be accepted from you nor from those who disbelieved; your abode is the fire; it is your beloved friend (Mawla) and an evil refuge it is.” (Quran, 57:15)

it cannot stand for leader in this particular verse, but trust shais to hold unto their thread of falsehood they quickly ignord the context that made the prophet pbuh make such a statement in other words Buraira was angry with Ali for certain things and maintained such anger till the prophet told him that whoevr . . . in essence the context of Mawla hear would mean in relation to anger and etc . . .

Zhul-fiqar:

Anyways,let me give you some info which should help you.the Hadith al-Ghadir also refered to as the 'Hadith of the Pond of Khumm' is narrated by close to 40 different chains of narrations in sunni sources alone.that is not even mentioning any shia hadith reference.also,the hadith is reported in not less than 30
major hadith compilation books by prominent sunni classical authors.when a hadith is widely reported as such,it becomes 'mutawatir' and common knowledge.when a hadith is 'mutawatir' its authenticity is guaranteed and unquestionable as agreement on it becomes unanimous.this issue of the hadith al-Ghadir is dealt with comprehensively and proven beyond doubt in a dialogue between a prominent sunni scholar from al-azhar and a shia scholar.the dialogue is found in the book titled:'AL-MURAJ'AT' BY ABDUL-HUSSAIN SHARAFIDEEN.you can google it.

Lol! Obscure hadiths which references can only be found in shite sites! we dey laugh at una . . . and as for denying hadith, it is very funny how your unle lagoshia denies hadiths at every given opportunity as long as it remains a stumbling block to being a shia, in any case your references remain obscure as I indicated

Zhul-fiqar:

I would have posted all the references but spam-bot would delete my post.

It should cause it is probably rooted in lies!

Zhul-fiqar:

So please have in your mind that when we are talking about 'HADITH OF THE POND OF KHUMM' (Hadith al-Ghadir),we are talking about an historical event with a complete speech given by the Prophet -(sa).so talking about a sentence or two from the speech is rather over simplifying the matter.

yeah obscure hadiths that cannot be found in sahihayn i think i will pass on that

Vedaxcool,
calling me names like 'kafir' only shows your frustration.i am a potential convert to Islam.that is why you see my interest.but this would be my last post here as the topic is going off topic.

You have tried to discredit the event at Ghadir Khumm which to me is convincing by talking about numbers and the authenticity of the hadith.yet you still admitted that the event had taken place and scholars admit the hadith is sound.

So really what is the point you are trying to make?or you just want to be a 'mood spoiler' and use argumentative tips to disrupt the course of the thread?stop beating around the bush.make your point.

The shia guy quoted a sunni hadith that says that the people at Ghadir Khumm were 120,000 from the companions,arabs,places around mecca and from medina.yet you accuse him of a lie.you yourself have no evidence other than conjecture you accuse me of to convince of how many people were present.well i know that aboki like you does not understand english.

Also,when you keep talking about common sense and why the Prophet did not make the announcement during the Hajj,i laugh at you.
Dont you think that the Prophet chose a separate time and place at Ghadir Khumm,so that the declaration would have its own significance and given its own importance? Also,making the declaration part of the last speech the pilgrims would witness at Ghadir Khumm would give no excuse for not recalling the event.i see wisdom in not making the declaration during the hajj itself.besides,from what i read it was the revelation of Allah that made the Prophet to halt the pilgrims and proclaim to them.

You are really attacking me for nothing.

vedaxcool:

did you happen to have raw egg breafast? point to where I wrote that the figures was a lie, or that I indicated that the 120, 000 that the lying shia talked about was at the Fair well sermon not at Ghadir khumm which is 250 km away from mecca! or are you here trying play the court jester? we know how low lagoshia can go with almost pro - shia propanganda in most of your previous post, in any case the what I wrote was clear to any hones reader!
and you claimed to be following the thread! 4 witness is hardly the claim, the claim is the exaggerated lie by the shias is that the Prophet decided to make the pronouncement when nearly Muslims had departed home, it does not add up, looking at the fact that this pronouncement was suppose to have been made when everybody was there and so the shia claims make little to no sense

Conjecture is what you follow Kafir! as a Junction must atleast lie on your route people with common sense can indeed take a second at the position of Ghadir Khumm at see how strategic it is to someone whose route is directly opposite it.

Lagoshia might as well be called lagoshit for bringing such low filthy lucre to the table, the lies of the shia can never be accepted by sane individuals

My point have been clearly made, but being a deluded Kafir has made common sense more difficult than figuring adding one + one

goodbye!

@Onyocha,some muslims just turn to insult when they are defeated,just leave vedaxcool.

@Onyocha,good to hear you are a new convert,may Almighty Allah continue to guide you to a straight path,i am a convert too from christianity,i wanna use this medium to say a big ASALAMU ALAYKUM to you.

Onyocha:

goodbye!

Bye, don't let the door hit you!

shia propagandist being masters in the art of lying, are in a habit of bringing fabricated and a times obscure hadiths whose reference cannot be found anywhere; in essence these are the only verifable hadiths:

The Hadith of Ghadir Khumm is narrated in Sahih Bukhari (volume 5, Book 59 Number 637):

Narrated Buraida:

The Prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a intimate act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, “Don’t you see this (i.e. Ali)?” When we reached the Prophet, I mentioned that to him. He (the Prophet) said, “O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?” I said, “Yes.” He said, “Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumlus.”


uraida narrated: “I invaded Yemen with Ali and I saw coldness from his part; so when I came (back) to the Messenger of Allah and mentioned Ali and criticized him, I saw the face of the Messenger of Allah change and he said: ‘O Buraida, am I not closer to the believers than they are to themselves?’ I said: ‘Yes, O Messenger of Allah.’ He (then) said: ‘Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla.’”

(Musnad Ahmad [v5 / p347 / #22995] with a Sahih chain of transmission and all trustworthy [thiqa] narrators relied upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim; al-Nisa’i in Sunan al-Kubra [v5 / p45 / #8145]; al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak [v3 / p119 / #4578]; Abu Nu`aym; Ibn Jarir and others)

In a slightly different version:

Buraida narrated: “The Prophet sent me to Yemen with Ali and I saw coldness from his part; when I returned and complained about him to the Messenger of Allah, he (the Messenger of Allah) raised his head towards (him) and said: ‘O Buraida! Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla.’”

(Sunan al-Kubra, v5, p130, #8466; a similar report can be found in Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shayba [v6, p.374])

As for the 120, 000 hadiths i have not found any refrence to it so far from credible sources.

THE HADITH OF GHADIR KHUMM NARRATION

On the way back to Medina from Makkah, the Prophet Muhammad (sa) ordered his Companions to stop at Ghadeer Khum and delivered a sermon of which, a brief version is quoted below,

O people, Allah the Most Kind the Omniscient has told me that no apostle lives to more than half the age of him who had preceded him. I think I am about to be called (die) and thus I must respond. I am responsible and you are responsible, then what do you say?’ They said, ‘We witness that you have informed, advised and striven. May Allah bless you.’ He said, ‘Do you not bear witness that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is His servant and Apostle, and that His Heaven is true, His Hell is true, death is true, the Resurrection after death is true, that there is no doubt that the Day of Judgment will come, and that Allah will resurrect the dead from their graves?’ They said, ‘Yes, we bear witness’. He said, ‘O Allah, bear witness.’ Then he said, ‘O people, Allah is my Lord and I am the lord of the believers. I am worthier of believers than themselves.

Of whomsoever I had been Master (Mawla), Ali here is to be his Master. O Allah, be a supporter of whoever supports him (Ali) and an enemy of whoever opposes him.

Then he said,

‘O people, I will go ahead of you and you will arrive at my Pond (in Heaven) which is wider than the distance between Basra and San’a. It has receptacles as numerous as the stars, and two cups of gold and two of silver.

I will ask you about the two weighty things that I have left for you when you come to me to see how you dealt with them. The greater weighty thing is Allah’s book—the Holy Qur’an. One end is in Allah’s hand and the other is in your hands. Keep it and you will not deviate. That other weighty thing is my family (Ahl al-Bayt) and my descendents. The Most Kind the Omniscient had told me that both of them, would not separate until they come to my Pond

REFERENCES IN THE NEXT POST.

FEW SUNNI REFERENCES ON THE HADITH GHADIR KHUMM:

Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, under commentary of verse 5:67,v12, pp 49-50, narrated on the authorities of Ibn Abbas, al-Bara Ibn Azib, and Muhammad Ibn Ali.

Durr al-Manthur, by al-Hafiz al-Suyuti, under commentary of verse 5:67

Sahih Tirmidhi, v2, p298, v5, p63

Sunan Ibn Maja, v1, pp 12,43

al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v2, p129, v3, pp 109-110,116,371

Sawaiq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, p26

SUNNI REFERENCES FROM THE MUSNAD OF AHMAD IBN HANBAL ALONE:


Musnad, Narrated by Zathan, from thirteen persons, vol. 1 p. 84
Musnad, Narrated by Ziyad bin Abu Ziyad, from twelve persons, who had fought in the battle of Badr. vol. 1 p. 88
Musnad, Narrated by Sa’id bin Wahhab, from five or six persons, vol. 5 p. 366
Musnad, Narrated by Sa’id bin Wahhab and Zayd bin Yathigh, from twelve persons vol. 1 p. 118
Musnad, Narrated by Zayd bin Arqam, from sixteen persons, vol. 5 p. 370
Musnad, Narrated by Abut-Tufayl, from many persons, vol. 4 p. 370
Musnad, Narrated by Abut-Tufayl, from thirty persons, vol. 4 p. 370
Musnad, Narrated by Riyah bin al-Harith, from some of the Ansar- vol. 5 p. 419
Musnad, Narrated by Riyah bin al-Harith, from some people-vol. 5 p. 419
Musnad, Narrated by Sa’id bin Ubayda, from ibn Burayda, from his father, vol. 5 p. 358
Musnad, Narrated by Sa’id bin Ubayda from another direction vol. 5 p. 358
Musnad, Narrated by Umar bin Maymun, from Ibn Abbas, vol.1 p. 331
Musnad, Narrated by Abu Ubayd, from Ibn Maymun, from Zayd bin Arqam, vol.4 p. 372
Musnad, Narrated by Abdul-Malik, from Zayd bin Arqam, vol.4 p. 370
Musnad, Narrated by To Atiya, vol.4 p. 370
Musnad, Narrated by Al-Bara’ bin Aazib from another chain of narrators, vol.4 p. 281
Musnad, Narrated by Al-Bara’ bin Aazib from another chain of narrators, vol.4 p. 282
Musnad, Narrated by Abu Maryam and one of Imam Ali’s Companions, vol.1, p. 152
Musnad, Narrated by Ibn Abbas, vol.1 p. 331

vedaxcool:

The event took place has long been talked about in post 22.

you soon would get to know,what you are refering to is not the event that took place at Ghadir Khumm.you are refering to a different situation entirely.

by two hadiths I refer to these, and do note every other hadith you have brought to the table are obscure in source that finding their refrence are nowhere except in the trenhes of lies, which is the signature of thel lying theology of the shia:

Buraida narrated: “I invaded Yemen with Ali and I saw coldness from his part; so when I came (back) to the Messenger of Allah and mentioned Ali and criticized him, I saw the face of the Messenger of Allah change and he said: ‘O Buraida, am I not closer to the believers than they are to themselves?’ I said: ‘Yes, O Messenger of Allah.’ He (then) said: ‘Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla.’”

(Musnad Ahmad [v5 / p347 / #22995] with a Sahih chain of transmission and all trustworthy [thiqa] narrators relied upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim; al-Nisa’i in Sunan al-Kubra [v5 / p45 / #8145]; al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak [v3 / p119 / #4578]; Abu Nu`aym; Ibn Jarir and others)

In a slightly different version:

Buraida narrated: “The Prophet sent me to Yemen with Ali and I saw coldness from his part; when I returned and complained about him to the Messenger of Allah, he (the Messenger of Allah) raised his head towards (him) and said: ‘O Buraida! Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this Ali is also his Mawla.’”

(Sunan al-Kubra, v5, p130, #8466; a similar report can be found in Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shayba [v6, p.374])

these two hadiths you have brought out do not refer to the event that took place at Ghadir Khumm after the farewell pilgrimage in Makkah where the Prophet (sa) is said to have delivered a speech in a formal occassion to declare the leadership of Imam Ali (as).

the two hadiths you presented refer to an encounter between the Prophet (sa) and Buraida[b] in Makkah [/b] after they returned from Yemen[b] before the event at Ghadir Khumm[/b].


i really dont know why you insist on fetching out hadiths from different occassions and tag them as "hadith of ghadir" and then present them instead of presenting the hadiths that mention the event at ghadir khumm and not some other place.

are you trying to be dishonest,funny,annoying,misleading,ignorant or is that just part of being sunni?

But note the joker shia telling us hadiths that are authentic but immediateoly the haidth does not follow their perverse fancy it is null abd viod, when dealing with such dishonest behavior one can only point to the lies that is the foundation of shiasm, in any case let us look at the the two hadiths that are the false thread of hope shias hold unto:

we do not deny at all that the Prophet (sa) on a number of other informal occassions have declared Imam Ali (as) as his successor and the leader of Muslims as the Prophet (sa) himself is our leader.

if at all,the two hadiths you presented only prove our case and what we have being saying all along that the Prophet (sa) on many occassions have said Imam Ali (as) would be his successor.you are making my case easy because you are saying what we have said.i can cite for you more occassions where the Prophet (sa) made that statement from Sunni sources.

what happened at Ghadir Khumm was the formal declaration at a major gathering infront of thousands.also,it was a significant event because it was immediately after the farewell pilgrimage when many accompanied the Prophet (sa) on his way to Medinah knowing that they would not have the chance to see him again.

when the verse :"warn thy near ones" was revealed and Allah ordered the Prophet (sa) to declare his prophethood and invite his relatives from the banu hasim he made the same statement that Imam Ali (as) who was then a boy would suceed him in leadership of the muslims.

in hadith al-manzila,the Prophet (sa) likened his relationship with Ali (as) to that of Moses and Aron (as),with the exception that Aron was a prophet and Ali (as) would not be a prophet.

in the following hadith recorded by prominent scholars of sunnis,we read:

The Prophet Muhammad (s) is recorded to have said: 'You (Ali) is the master (wali) of all believers after me'.

Sahih Tirmidhi vol.5,p.236.
Sahih Ibn Habban vol.1,p.383.
Sunan al-Nasai vol.5,p.132. 

the word Mawla can have a variety of meanings. but reading within the context Mawla will mean friend or best friend as in

“So today no ransom shall be accepted from you nor from those who disbelieved; your abode is the fire; it is your beloved friend (Mawla) and an evil refuge it is.” (Quran, 57:15)

it cannot stand for leader in this particular verse, but trust shais to hold unto their thread of falsehood they quickly ignord the context that made the prophet pbuh make such a statement in other words Buraira was angry with Ali for certain things and maintained such anger till the prophet told him that whoevr . . . in essence the context of Mawla hear would mean in relation to anger and etc . . .

please dear readers,note that our dear friend vedaxcool has brought in a new lie to continue his blind denial of what happened at ghadir khumm.

this is the most common lie sunnis tell when faced with the event at ghadir khumm.since they cannot deny the event indeed took place,they play tricks especially on the meaning of "mawla".

now what our sunni friend is telling us is that the Prophet (sa) kept informing muslims on smaller occassions that Imam Ali (as) is their "friend".later on before he died,he again gathered a multitude at ghadir khumm and again told them Ali (as) was their friend.

was Ali (as) not their friend that they needed the Prophet (sa) to remind them?

doesn't the Quran tell us that the believers are brothers in faith?

so even if two people who are muslim have a quarrel must they be reminded they are "friends"?or would you remind them that they are "brothers in faith"?so instead of using a deep rooted word like "mawla" the Prophet should have used "okhowa" to mean "brotherhood".

the word "mawla" can mean "friend,supporter,loyalist,master,protector,e.t.c".so from such a deep rooted word,how can a sunni justify that the word in the context of the Prophet's declaration means "friend" only?they just picked out one word from the word and throw away the other meanings.

also,from the sequence of the speech at Ghadir Khumm,when the Prophet says he would soon die and he is leaving us with the two weighty things (Quran and the Household members,among whom is Imam Ali),one can only see that the Prophet (sa) is putting things in place for after his departure.

lastly,before the Prophet (sa) made his declaration,he implicitly gave us the meaning of "mawla" in the context of his speech by asking rhetorical questions.he asked:"dont i have more authority over the believers (awla) than the believers over themselves",people said yes!then he said :"of whoever i am his mawla,Ali is his Mawla.may Allah support those loyal to him and be hostile to those hostile to him".

furthermore,in the hadith stated above from sahih tirmidhi and sahih ibn habban and sunan al-nasai  the Prophet said:"Ali is the mawla of all believer AFTER ME".i.e. after the death of the Prophet.if we are to interprete "mawla" as friend,it would mean that Ali is the "friend of all the believer after the prophet death".so what happens when the Prophet was alive?it means that Ali (as) according to the Prophet (sa) is the "enemy" of all the believers when he is alive and only their friend when is Prophet (sa) is dead.does that make sense?  lol at sunni logic and common sense!

Lol! Obscure hadiths which references can only be found in shite sites! we dey laugh at una . . . and as for denying hadith, it is very funny how your unle lagoshia denies hadiths at every given opportunity as long as it remains a stumbling block to being a shia, in any case your references remain obscure as I indicated

why didnt you ask for the references first before concluding that they are "obscure" hadiths?

hadiths in "sahih al tirmidhi",sunan ibn maja,al-tabari,al-tabarani, and the rest of sunni sources "obscure"?

you are calling your hadith books "obscure" just to deny the evidence i present you from your book?have some shame!

how did you even conclude that we shia deny the two hadiths you presented? the two hadiths you presented actually is more evidence for us.

yeah obscure hadiths that cannot be found in sahihayn i think i will pass on that

"sahih bukhari" and "sahih muslim" are not the only two books sunnis have.you have what you refer to as "sihah sittah" or the "six authentic books of hadiths".and among these six,you find in them the hadith of Ghadir Khumm.

vedaxcool:

Now the fair well speech was held at Ghadir Khumm? why are you trying so hard to obscure the truth? Please for those following look the picture at my first post and then tell how the 120, 000 people all came from Medina, from the diagram I posted, people from Meccan would have not go Ghadir Khumm since they were already at home, people from Taif, Yeman would have simply turned back and head home, only a few people would have follow the prophet back to Medina thereby passing through Ghadir Khumm, that indeed would be only a hand full.

I am glad you have relinquish the[b] lie[/b] that the incident of Ghadir was done in the presence of all Muslims, now this is a significant victory against falsehood, the Prophet pbuh made the most important announcement when nearly everybody had departed for home, those that make sense? well this mean one lie down another to go 

vedaxcool:

As for the 120, 000 hadiths i have not found any refrence to it so far from credible sources.

first i was the one lying about 120,000.later,he could not find "credible" source.vedaxcool thinks he is more "credible" than Ibn Jawzi,one of their scholars!




"There were with the Messenger (PBUH) from the companions, Arabs,
     residents around Mecca and Medina one hundred and twenty thousand    (120,000) and they are those who were present in the Farewell
     Pilgrimage and heard this speech."

Sunni reference: Manaqib, by Ibn al-Jawzi

@Zhul-fiqar, a job well done,may Allah enrich you,jazakallahu khair.

Honestly, i dnt know why people are so blind to see the truth?

these rafidah are major liars.
since their sect first started.
they were well known to be liars.

1. there is not such thing as "sahih" Tirmidhi.
it is called al jame' or sunan at Tirmidhi.
not all hadiths in that book are authentic (sahih or hasan), there are some weak narrations in it too.

2. Only 2 of the 6 books are sahih books, in which their collecters only put authentic hadiths in it, which is bukhari and Muslim, the other 4 (Tirmidhi, abu dawud, Nisa'i and Ibn Majah) are not all authentic, they also include weak hadiths.

Mosnad of Ahmed:
Ibn Namir told us that Abd Al-Malik (Ibn Abi-Sulayman) told us according to Attia Al-`ufi who said: I asked Zayd Ibn Arqam and I told him that some people told me a hadeeth according to you about Ali (rah) in the day of Ghadeer Khumm and I want to hear it from you. So Zayd said: You people of Iraq, you have what you have. I told him: Do not worry about me. He said: Yes we were in Al-Juhfa and the prophet(peace be upon him) came to us holding the hands of Ali (rah) and said: O people don't you know that I am with the believers from their selves. They said: Yes. He said: kuntu mawlaah fa Ali mawlaah. [Attia] said: Did he say: man waalah wa `ad man `adaah (O Allah: Befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him). [Zayd] said: I told you as I heard it.


This is their point regarding this hadeeth. The difference, then, is the meaning of "man kuntu mawlah, fa Ali mawlah". The shi`ah says that it means "man kuntu waleeh, fa Ali waleeh". The Sunnah says that it means love and close relation. Muwalat is the opposite of Mu`adat. The proof comes from the
first addition: "oh Allah waali man walaah wa `adi man `adaah". (O Allah befriend whosover befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him). So we are talking about muwalah and mu`adat (love and enmity). It is about the love of the people to Ali (rah).

Hence Mawla in this regard refers to the Love and friendship of the prophet pbuh and Ali. which was done in the context of the fact that Buraira and some other muslims were angry with Ali over the spoils of War. Q.E.D

Is Hadeeth al-Ghadeer a lie? Apparently, whosoever says so is either ignorant or dishonest. It is not just SaHeeH. It is also mutawaati[/i]r. A Pakistani Sunnee scholar wrote an entire book on it, where he detailed 53 SaHeeH reports of the incident in the Sunnee books (in the Introduction, he states that he is compiling only SaHeeH Hadeeths). Of course, that Pakistani scholar is a verified and multiply certified Hadeeth expert (read about him on Wikipedia or elsewhere). This is an online link to that book: The Ghadir Declaration (http://www.minhajbooks.com/english/bookid/248/The-Ghadir-Declaration-by-Shaykh-ul-Islam-Dr-Muhammad-Tahir-ul-Qadri.html). Anyone who wishes to verify the authenticity and [i]tawaatur of that Hadeeth can see this detailed research (http://www.alalbany.net/books_view.php?id=5448&search=%E3%E4%20%DF%E4%CA%20%E3%E6%E1%C7%E5&book=sahiha) by Shaykh NaaSir al-Deen al-Albaanee, who declared SEVERAL chains of the Hadeeth to be SaHeeH, and declared the Hadeeth itself to be both SaHeeH and mutawaatir.

This is the 5th Hadeeth, as cited and translated by that Pakistani scholar, Shaykh al-Islaam Prof. Dr. MuHammad Taahir al-Qadree:

[size=14pt][/size]
“It is narrated by Barā’ bin ‘Āzib (RA): We were on a journey with Allāh’s Messenger (SAW). (On the way) we stayed at Ghadīr Khum. There it was announced that the prayer was about to be offered. The space under two trees was cleaned for Allāh’s Messenger (SAW). Then he offered the zuhr (noon) prayer, and, holding ‘Alī’s hand, he said: Don’t you know that I am even nearer than the lives of the believers? They said: Why not! He said: Don’t you know that I am even nearer than the life of every believer? They said: Why not! The narrator says that he said while holding ‘Alī’s hand: One who has me as his master has ‘Alī as his master. O Allāh! Befriend the one who befriends him (‘Alī) and be the enemy of one who is his enemy. The narrator says that after this ‘Umar (bin al-Khattāb (RA)) met ‘Alī (RA) and said to him: O Ibn Abī Tālib! Congratulations, you have become the master of every male and female believer, morning and evening (for ever).”

About this particular Hadeeth, Mulla ‘Alee al-Qaaree, in his Mirqaat, vol. 11, p. 78 states:

[size=14pt]رواه أحمد أي في مسنده، وأقل مرتبته أن يكون حسنا فلا التفات لمن قدح في ثبوت هذا الحديث.[/size]

Ahmad recorded it in his Musnad. The least grading it has is Hasan. There is no excuse for anyone who criticizes the authenticity of this Hadeeth.

Can any Sunnee venture to explain WHY ‘Umar CONGRATULATED Imaam ‘Alee, peace be upon him?

Let’s go with the theory that Imaam ‘Alee was only being declared the buddy of the believers as many Sunnee scholars claim. What is worth congratulation there? Is every Muslim not already a brother and buddy of the other? Moreover, note ‘Umar’s words (… you have become …). That explains why he congratulated Imaam ‘Alee, peace be upon him: he had BECOME the mawlaa of all believers. In other words, he was NOT a mawlaa of the believers in the sense that ‘Umar understood it BEFORE the Day of Ghadeer.

The Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamaa’ah on this forum are advised to correct ‘Umar here!

Zhul-fiqar:

you soon would get to know,what you are refering to is not the event that took place at Ghadir Khumm.you are refering to a different situation entirely.

these two hadiths you have brought out do not refer to the event that took place at Ghadir Khumm after the farewell pilgrimage in Makkah where the Prophet (sa) is said to have delivered a speech in a formal occassion to declare the leadership of Imam Ali (as).

the two hadiths you presented refer to an encounter between the Prophet (sa) and Buraida[b] in Makkah [/b] after they returned from Yemen[b] before the event at Ghadir Khumm[/b].

Lol can't you comprehend simple things or are you just ignorant? good we are agreed that the such an event took place, the fact remains that the mere fact the Prophet pbuh used exactly the same wording that he used when he spoke Buraira in ghadir khum indicates clearly he was still refering to the same issue.

 

Zhul-fiqar:

i really dont know why you insist on fetching out hadiths from different occassions and tag them as "hadith of ghadir" and then present them instead of presenting the hadiths that mention the event at ghadir khumm and not some other place.

Neither can i fathom why denying the truth when it stares you at the face is what you are doing, as the haidth that "validates" Ali caliphacy must be understood within it context.

 

Zhul-fiqar:

are you trying to be dishonest,funny,annoying,misleading,ignorant or is that just part of being sunni?
we do not deny at all that the Prophet (sa) on a number of other informal occassions have declared Imam Ali (as) as his successor and the leader of Muslims as the Prophet (sa) himself is our leader.

Strangely he appointed Abubakar r.a to lead prayer when he  was ill, I take you consider that being part of the successor business?

 

Zhul-fiqar:

if at all,the two hadiths you presented only prove our case and what we have being saying all along that the Prophet (sa) on many occassions have said Imam Ali (as) would be his successor.you are making my case easy because you are saying what we have said.i can cite for you more occassions where the Prophet (sa) made that statement from Sunni sources.

Mawla meant befriend, as it has a number of meanings, as the other hadiths gives us an indication of tje context that was happening.

 

Zhul-fiqar:

what happened at Ghadir Khumm was the formal declaration at a major gathering infront of thousands.also,it was a significant event because it was immediately after the farewell pilgrimage when many accompanied the Prophet (sa) on his way to Medinah knowing that they would not have the chance to see him again.

that lie has already been dealth with, as a hand full of pilgrims actually witness the even, no hadith ever claimed Pilgrims accompanied him to Ghadir khum, rather the liar in you is now claiming the Pilgrims all knew the Prophet pbuh would be dying soon; is this how low you go to prove your falsehood?

 

Zhul-fiqar:

when the verse :"warn thy near ones" was revealed and Allah ordered the Prophet (sa) to declare his prophethood and invite his relatives from the banu hasim he made the same statement that Imam Ali (as) who was then a boy would suceed him in leadership of the muslims.

in hadith al-manzila,the Prophet (sa) likened his relationship with Ali (as) to that of Moses and Aron (as),with the exception that Aron was a prophet and Ali (as) would not be a prophet.

in the following hadith recorded by prominent scholars of sunnis,we read:

The Prophet Muhammad (s) is recorded to have said: 'You (Ali) is the master (wali) of all believers after me'.

Sahih Tirmidhi vol.5,p.236.
Sahih Ibn Habban vol.1,p.383.
Sunan al-Nasai vol.5,p.132. 

They are only two sahihs that are known to sunnis, the lies that the rafidhi shia pop these days is very strange, is there no more fear of Allah?


   

Zhul-fiqar:

please dear readers,note that our dear friend vedaxcool has brought in a new lie to continue his blind denial of what happened at ghadir khumm.


this is the most common lie sunnis tell when faced with the event at ghadir khumm.since they cannot deny the event indeed took place,they play tricks especially on the meaning of "mawla".

now what our sunni friend is telling us is that the Prophet (sa) kept informing muslims on smaller occassions that Imam Ali (as) is their "friend".later on before he died,he again gathered a multitude at ghadir khumm and again told them Ali (as) was their friend.

it does not make sense does it? that the Prophet pbuh decided to gather multitudes ( another lie of shias) at Ghadir Khum when he could have made such statements during Arafat? Funny we thought Ghadir Khum was a strategic point for people travelling back, how did you come about that the Prophet gather Multitude on a part that was on his way home? does what you say make any atom of sense to you? all the hadith you have quoted never claimed the prophet gathered multitudes rather common sense tells us that the prophet was on his way to Medinah, and made a stop at ghadir khum which is a watering hole in the desert, again no hadith you have quoted indicated that the Prophet gathered multitudes to Ghadir khum, now we sunnis read and understand with the context of what we talking about, the prophet was rebuking Buraira and other whon still grudges against the Ali due to the issue of the spoils of war, the Prophet pbuh probably sensed the resentment against Ali and decided to rebuke the soldiers, now that will make more sense that claiming that he gathered Multitudes, sorry the hadith never spoke of Multitudes, the prophet stressing his friendship with Ali will be understandable once you read it with the context.

[b]There are other examples as well but I think that the above is sufficient to make the point. It is also important to point out that the prophet ( peace be upon him ) did not say "after me" (in any authentic narration). He only said "man kuntu mawlah fa Ali mawlah" without giving any time frame. This means that this fact is timeless. If the prophet ( peace be upon him ) had meant "whoever among you is under my leadership, he is also under the leadership of Ali", which is the meaning that the Shi`a understands, if the prophet had meant it as such, then there would be a big problem. Two leadership for the Muslim ummah at the time of the prophet ( peace be upon him ) does not make a lot of sense. Of course, the prophet did not mean it that way and also the companions at that time did not understand it that way, otherwise there would be a great fitnah. However, it is possible to have more than one mawla at the same time - to love, help and aid the prophet and to love help and aid Ali (rah).[/b]


 

Zhul-fiqar:

was Ali (as) not their friend that they needed the Prophet (sa) to remind them?

Yes, if you are too slow in understanding I will give it to u gently, the soldiers lead by Buraira where angry with Ali, as in the hadith I quoted Buraira even expressed hatred for Ali hence the prophet pbuh told them hating Ali is like hating me. Granny hope you get the message!  

doesn't the Quran tell us that the believers are brothers in faith?

[/quote]

go thru the context of the event then all your yapping will make next to no sense to you, the event was clear, the soldiers led by Ali where angry with a command he gave hence, the Prophet pbuh gave them a lesson if you are my friend then Ali must be your friend!

 

Zhul-fiqar:

so even if two people who are muslim have a quarrel must they be reminded they are "friends"?or would you remind them that they are "brothers in faith"?so instead of using a deep rooted word like "mawla" the Prophet should have used "okhowa" to mean "brotherhood".

then so also Wali would have suffice rather than Mawla, the context of the whole issue is what makes sense now saying the prophet pbuh using certain chioce of words to convey a message holds no water.

 

Zhul-fiqar link=topic=801527.msg9561195#msg9561195 date=1321357482:

the word "mawla" can mean "friend,supporter,loyalist,master,protector,e.t.c".so from such a deep rooted word,how can a sunni justify that the word in the context of the Prophet's declaration means "friend" only?they just picked out one word from the word and throw away the other meanings.

also,from the sequence of the speech at Ghadir Khumm,when the Prophet says he would soon die and he is leaving us with the two weighty things (Quran and the Household members,among whom is Imam Ali),one can only see that the Prophet (sa) is putting things in place for after his departure.

thats your theory, sorry the shia theory!

 

Zhul-fiqar:

lastly,before the Prophet (sa) made his declaration,he implicitly gave us the meaning of "mawla" in the context of his speech by asking rhetorical questions.he asked:"dont i have more authority over the believers (awla) than the believers over themselves",people said yes!then he said :"of whoever i am his mawla,Ali is his Mawla.may Allah support those loyal to him and be hostile to those hostile to him".

in which hadith? are you so desperate that you now joggle hadiths ?

 

Zhul-fiqar:

furthermore,in the hadith stated above from sahih tirmidhi and sahih ibn habban and sunan al-nasai  the Prophet said:"Ali is the mawla of all believer AFTER ME".i.e. after the death of the Prophet.if we are to interprete "mawla" as friend,it would mean that Ali is the "friend of all the believer after the prophet death".so what happens when the Prophet was alive?it means that Ali (as) according to the Prophet (sa) is the "enemy" of all the believers when he is alive and only their friend when is Prophet (sa) is dead.does that make sense?  lol at sunni logic and common sense!

n which hadith? are you so desperate that you now joggle hadiths ? in verse what page?? I see desperation

  [quote author=Zhul-fiqar link=topic=801527.msg9561195#msg9561195 date=1321357482]
Do you have it, comon sense!

that question should directed at the followers of shiasm

why didnt you ask for the references first before concluding that they are "obscure" hadiths?

hadiths in "sahih al tirmidhi",sunan ibn maja,al-tabari,al-tabarani, and the rest of sunni sources "obscure"?

, i see sense has fallen completely off your heads, like i indicated all the references you gave are obscure not the book themselves

 

Zhul-fiqar:

you are calling your hadith books "obscure" just to deny the evidence i present you from your book?have some shame!

Actually yo are the one calling them obscure!like i indicated the references are obscure

 

Zhul-fiqar:

how did you even conclude that we shia deny the two hadiths you presented? the two hadiths you presented actually is more evidence for us.


"sahih bukhari" and "sahih muslim" are not the only two books sunnis have.you have what you refer to as "sihah sittah" or the "six authentic books of hadiths".and among these six,you find in them the hadith of Ghadir Khumm.

this reply says it all
2. Only 2 of the 6 books are sahih books, in which their collecters only put authentic hadiths in it, which is bukhari and Muslim, the other 4 (Tirmidhi, abu dawud, Nisa'i and Ibn Majah) are not all authentic, they also include weak hadiths

Thank you very much brother 'shiite' for the detailed and informative post.

As for 'vedaxcool',you are arguing blindly on the premise of hate and ignorance and based on hearsay.you're a wannbe wahabi.but it does not even fit you because you make petty points and try to be over argumentative.

If one narrator leaves out a sentence or phrase while the others include it,it doesn't challenge the authenticity of the hadith nor can it cast doubt that the event took place.a large collection of authentic hadiths the sunnis themselves have and recognize is enough to support what happened at Ghadir Khumm as we shia believe and narrate the event.you're just examining details and making prolonged arguments for nothing.you can win any argument in the world but you cannot win an argument on the event of Ghadir Khumm,except if you want to lie and live in denial.you sound lost and ridiculous.

Regardless of what name you tag your hadith books,you got what you refer to as 'sihah sittah' or the 'six authentic books'.Tirmidhi's compilation is one of them.saying that only bukhari and muslim's compilations contain 100% authentic hadith is laughable.you sound like a christian who still believes the bible is the 'infallible word' of God.in all hadith books you find good and bad hadiths.bukhari and muslim have funny hadiths that are not only false and fabricated but also unbelieveably laughable.as for the hadith of Ghadir Khumm,thanks to brother 'shiite's' post,you got a chance to see for yourself the authenticity of the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm according to sunni hadith scholars and their standards.

Have fun!

uplawal:

@Zhul-fiqar, a job well done,may Allah enrich you,jazakallahu khair.

thank you sister.may Almigty Allah bless you.

Ibn Katheer narrates that the people in the army (i.e. the contingent sent to Yemen) started to criticize Ali (رضّى الله عنه) because he prevented them from riding the camels and took back the new clothes that they had acquired. It was these men that accompanied the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to Medinah via Ghadir Khumm, and it is they who were being addressed in the famous Hadith of Ghadir Khumm.

In fact, in “Tareekh al-Islam”, the event of Ghadir Khumm falls under the heading “The Consolation of Ali”. We read:

The Consolation of Ali

During the Hajj, some of the followers of Ali who had been with him to Yemen complained to the Prophet about Ali. Some of the misunderstandings of the people of Yemen had given rise to misgivings. Addressing the Companions at Ghadir Khumm, the Prophet of Allah said admiring Ali: “The one who is my friend is the friend of Ali…” Following the address, Umar congratulated Ali saying: “From this day on you are a very special friend of mine.” The Prophet then came back to Al-Medinah and his son Ibrahim passed away.

(Tareekh al-Islam, Vol.1, p.241)

this is the gist of the whole story of Gadhir Khum, no amount of shia obscurism can help explain the fraudulent lies thay heap on Islam. The same liars are responsible for the death of Ali because of their over sabi, they killed Hussein because of their Hypocrisy and they stab Hassan because of their cruelty, the lies of Shiasm commenced the very day they took to insulting the Prophet's pbuh wife in the person of Aisha r.a as a religious duty, a woman Allah proclaimed her purity in the Qur'an , a woman Allah refereed to as being one of the Mother of the Believers, that is how accursed one can get when shia lies sips thru, their lies has no bearing because if the Prophet had appointed Ali r.a with the Mawla hadith, he would have been very clear to all hearing, instead of being indirect, He would have used the expression after me, Ali is your Mawla, yet no authentic Sunni hadith points to such lie, the repugnancy of shia goes low that they even have the audacity to insult the prophet's pbuh companions, men and women of Honor who put in all they had for Islam, how accursed can some one get, this men that where promised AL jannah when they were still living all this is in the Qur'an, when you weigh the the shia gist on a scale of responsibility, you discover that madness is what alone can describe such a theology. The incident of Ghadir Khum is clear to those who want to reason.

lots of love and Laughter from Veda

First let me advice 'vedaxcool' to ask Allah (swt) to guide and forgive him.you should read and ponder on the story of al-Hur,the general in Yazid's army who laid siege on Imam Hussain (as).ironically,Hur was the first person to be killed fighting for Imam Hussain (as) against the army he led to fight Imam Hussain (as).Hur changed sides and repented by asking for Imam Hussain's forgiveness which he got from the Imam (as).Hur who was an enemy became a shia of Hussain (as) and a sincere believer destined for paradise.while those who labelled themselves 'shia' in kufa turned out to be hypocrites who did not leave up to their promise to defend Imam Hussain (as) and fight for him against Yazeed (la).some of the kufans were bribed while others got intimidated from the threats of Ibn Ziyad,yazid's governor in kufa.‎

The moral ‏of the story is it is never too late to repent.you can call yourselve whatever label but if you cannot be sincere and honest and you resist sincerity and honesty,then you are a vain person.

vedaxcool:

Ibn Katheer narrates that the people in the army (i.e. the contingent sent to Yemen) started to criticize Ali (رضّى الله عنه) because he prevented them from riding the camels and took back the new clothes that they had acquired. It was these men that accompanied the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) to Medinah via Ghadir Khumm, and it is they who were being addressed in the famous Hadith of Ghadir Khumm.

first you denied Ghadir Khumm.then you questioned its authenticity and then you play with words and meanings and now you give it your interpretation.

Ibn Kathir like yourself is free to understand the event as he likes and he is entitled to his opinion.what is of use to me is not the mockery of an interpretation Ibn Kathir gives from his head.what is important is that Ibn Kathir whose work is a source to you confirms that the event took place.people would use their brains to examine the evidence presented thus far and the event itself and what happened to make their conclusion.no amount of tricks to conceal the truth would work for you on the event of Ghadir Khumm.

@Vedaxcool,even if you proclaim your version of sunni till tomorrow,it can't even make you better muslim,cos you show no trace of a muslim talk more of a sincere mumeen,you sound too rude with your way of arguying,and your fake humour is rude and disgusting,does this section look like a comedy section?