original shia part 2

Society Religion & Philosophy
21

Re: original shia part 2

wait, hasnt the Quranic proof (in shia theology) for infallibility of Ali been covered yet? We trace it to the Hadith e Kissa sourced in Sahih Muslim amongst other Sunni books that basically mentions the nuzool of an ayah and explains that five people from the Ahl e bayt were the intended target of that Infallibility verse.

so you see, the infallibility wasnt by-the-way, it wasnt something the Prophet just said, the Prophet gathered five people into his cloak and an ayat was revealed about the purification of these five people. it IS mentioned in the Quran, depending on who u ask ofcourse.. :)

I Will Be Back !
22

Re: original shia part 2

Then why did what God WILLED never happen?

Depends on the translation and interpretation of that verse.

23

Re: original shia part 2

And also - what happened to the other 4 under the cloak? Why Ali and not them? And don’t tell me its because they had vaginas. :rolleyes: (no disrespect intended for female sahabah - they did have vaginas afterall).

24

Re: original shia part 2

erm pcg.. what did God will that didnt happen? perhaps I should dig up the specific hadees Im talking about.

and while I'm doing that they werent all men or women. they were basically the household of bibi fatima, her, imams hassan and hussain and hazrat Ali.

wait

25

Re: original shia part 2

Then why wasn't bibi fatima considered a prospect for caliph? Or why didn't it go straight down to imams hassan and hussain? And what about all the other kids the Prophet had? And what about Aisha? She's not part of the household?? But Fatima is?

Gimme a break.

OMG, please stop being childish - they're not wicked people, you duffle bag.

26

Re: original shia part 2

(in continuation)

pcg this is the hadees I am speaking about. the last line is a verse from the Quran

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/031.smt.html#031.5955

27

Re: original shia part 2

And that's another thing. Aisha, probably one of the closer wives that the Prophet had, is not infallible.

But Fatima is? Ali is? And how is Ali infallible? Again, there is no inheritance issue, right? So then you can't say that Aisha was not infallible becasue she wasn't a blood-relative. So why wasn't she infallible? Because she waged a war against Ali? But then Ali was infallible to raise a war against a warring woman? He was infallible to raise his hand against a woman?

All of Ali's political actions as a caliph were infallible?

Ravage there are too many questions here in this post and the many before that you aren't answering.

28

Re: original shia part 2

you notice that Hazrat Aisha is the narrator here.

you may disagree with our point of view here, but to say that we have no Quranic basis is simply wrong.

edit: pcg bibi mujhe time to dijiay parhney ka

29

Re: original shia part 2

Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)

This is a Quranic verse?

30

Re: original shia part 2

The same link you quoted - from there are the following verses that Shias might have some trouble answering except to say that they're fabricated. But you posted the link, ravage...

Book 031, Number 5877:
Ibn Abu Mulaika reported: I heard A'isha as saying and she was asked as to whom Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) would have nominated his successor if he had to nominate one at all. She said: Abu Bakr. It was said to her: Then whom after Abu Bakr? She said: Umar. It was said to her. Then whom after 'Umar? She said: Abu Ubaida b. Jarrab, and then she kept quiet at this.

Book 031, Number 5879:
A'isha reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) in his (last) illness asked me to call Abu Bakr, her father, and her brother too, so that he might write a document, for he feared that someone else might be desirous (of succeeding him) and that some claimant may say: I have better claim to it, whereas Allah and the Faithful do not substantiate the claim of anyone but that of Abu Bakr.

These are just two. There's a whole list of them on that site. Did you mean to link me up with something else?

31

Re: original shia part 2

bibi Ai'sha isnt considered infallible because she isnt considered to be part of those people whom the Quran guaranteed infallibility for. this does not automatically mean that she was bad, a lot of sahaba and ahl e bayt we love were at once worthy of respect, and are not considered infallible.

All of Imam Ali's religious rulings are certainly considered without error, if they actually occurred as reported. furthermore his political moves, I dont know, I dont believe them to have been in error, although I believe that he never sinned which doesnt mean that he didnt do actions that someone else might supppose to be errors.

[quote]
But then Ali was infallible to raise a war against a warring woman? He was infallible to raise his hand against a woman?

[/quote]

I dont think he ever struck Hazrat Aisha, ever. He disabled her camel and then helped her up, and made sure that she was escorted with dignity back to her city. Thats what shias believe anyway. As for waging war, he fought a defensive war because she was seeking to arrest him, I dont think that is an error let alone a sin.

32

Re: original shia part 2

'A'isha reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) went out one norning wearing a striped cloak of the black camel's hair that there came Hasan b. 'Ali. He wrapped hitn under it, then came Husain and he wrapped him under it along with the other one (Hasan). Then came Fatima and he took her under it, then came 'Ali and he also took him under it and then said: Allah only desires to take away any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying)

As for this hadith - if you're using this to say Ali and his progeny are infallible, then that is a gross twisting of the verse.

Purifying does not mean making one infallible. It just means making them good. Keeping them away from sin. Allah desires to do that. Allah also desires us to pray 5 times a day, but do we all do that? No.

If Allah WILLED IT, that would be different. For what He Wills, does happen.

Difference between a desire that God has versus his Will.

33

Re: original shia part 2

see pcg, you are obviously new at this. the idea in shia/sunni conflicts is not to prove things from your own books, but to prove things from theirs. ofcourse you would find corroboratory evidence for your perspectives in books that were written by sunnis.

What you are doing is sourcing material from the Quran in order to convince a Christian, which wont work very well, whereas a Christian may well use Quranic verses to try and convince you that you’re wrong.

34

Re: original shia part 2

All of Imam Ali's religious rulings are certainly considered without error, if they actually occurred as reported. furthermore his political moves, I dont know, I dont believe them to have been in error, although I believe that he never sinned which doesnt mean that he didnt do actions that someone else might supppose to be errors.

Then we are back to the difference between "not erring" as said in the Quran (only with regards to the Prophet by the way, not ALI!) and "infallibility".

Infallibility goes into the realm of political and social decisions. Its a term that means "I have power over you, because I'm right all the time - therefore, I should be your leader".

To not err, in a sinful sense, as its mentioned in the Quran is different. That means you wont break God's laws as stated in the Quran.

Does not mean your community leadership will be free of errors.

35

Re: original shia part 2

Doesn't matter dude, its all on that website. If you show me a hadith of yours, I can show you one of mine. If your hadith's are fabricated and proof has been hidden over centuries, then I can't possibly argue against you using hadith, just like you can't argue against my hadith.

That's why I say - leave Hadith out of this stuff. Use what you know of history as a fact. And use the Quran.

Again, like I said before and I will soon stop repeating myself because its pissing me off that you're not responding to this earlier - the Quran does not speak of specifically Ali being infallible and his infallible progeny commanded to be leaders.

Its one thing to say these guys are good leaders and they should be leaders. Its another thing to say that God said so and then come short of not delivering evidence that God did say so.

36

Re: original shia part 2

a. i quoted the sahih Muslim version, other versions include additional people seeking permission to enter the group under the cloak, and being denied that.

b. if, as you say, the intent was only to show the desire of Allah to have these people purified, then dont you think that its a rather specious thing to say and do? why would this ayah be revealed exclusively at this point, specifically for these five people, if the injunction was so general?

37

Re: original shia part 2

I’m sorry, did he gather these people under his cloak in front of like hundreds of people and say “bear witness these guys are your leaders - you bow down to them after I die”?

No. Again. You’re taking something vague and twisting it.

Infallibility is HUGE. There should be some clear ayah about Ali being infallible and his progeny being infallible and being rightful leaders of our community. Infallibility of 12 Imams also should be clearly there. Its not.

So if you want to wave hadith’s at me, I’ll wave hadith’s back. Both of us are idiots, because we’re not arguing using 100% infallible sources to begin with.

Right, its ironic. We use fallible hadith’s to prove the infallibility of a non-Prophet human.

:k:

38

Re: original shia part 2

[quote]

Then we are back to the difference between "not erring" as said in the Quran (only with regards to the Prophet by the way, not ALI!) and "infallibility".

Infallibility goes into the realm of political and social decisions. Its a term that means "I have power over you, because I'm right all the time - therefore, I should be your leader".

To not err, in a sinful sense, as its mentioned in the Quran is different. That means you wont break God's laws as stated in the Quran.

Does not mean your community leadership will be free of errors.
[/quote]

who then would you have as your leaders. people who can make political decisions that may be errors but never sins (and ruling unjustly and unkindly is a sin by the way, as is allowing moral decadence, nepotism, etc etc etc). if you even accept the lesser definition of infallibility for Hazrat Ali/Imam Hassan/Imam Hussain, then I'm fairly satisfied, because that'll give later shia posters much ammo (prepare for stuff from texan dude :D)

[quote]

Doesn't matter dude, its all on that website. If you show me a hadith of yours, I can show you one of mine. If your hadith's are fabricated and proof has been hidden over centuries, then I can't possibly argue against you using hadith, just like you can't argue against my hadith.

That's why I say - leave Hadith out of this stuff. Use what you know of history as a fact. And use the Quran.

[/quote]

but Im not bringing anything from my own books PCG. Thats the difference, Im not bringing any hadith that is not present in one of the sahih books. You'll notice more experienced sunni posters do that too, they argue with shias based on shia sourced ahadith. so you would be confronted with both of 'your' ahadith.

[quote]

Again, like I said before and I will soon stop repeating myself because its pissing me off that you're not responding to this earlier - the Quran does not speak of specifically Ali being infallible and his infallible progeny commanded to be leaders.

Its one thing to say these guys are good leaders and they should be leaders. Its another thing to say that God said so and then come short of not delivering evidence that God did say so.

[/quote]

sufficiently is as you define it. a vast majority of Muslims, shias and sunnis use hadith as a means of interpreting and lending context to the Quran. I gave you a Sahih hadees that is one of the most corroborated hadiths that exist, reported by two of the Prophet's wives, that lends context to a specific verse from the Quran about the infallibility of Ali.

39

Re: original shia part 2

God desires to purify Ali does not mean that Ali is our infallible leader that should have been in Abu Bakr's place.

It just means God desires to purify Ali. Whether that purification really took place, who knows?

And why leave Fatima out of it? Was she purified too? Then is she infallible? How come she's not infallible? She's the blood relation of infallible Prophet Muhammed. So then she must be infallible.

Damn. Fatima got the short stick in the draw.

40

Re: original shia part 2

who then would you have as your leaders. people who can make political decisions that may be errors but never sins (and ruling unjustly and unkindly is a sin by the way, as is allowing moral decadence, nepotism, etc etc etc). if you even accept the lesser definition of infallibility for Hazrat Ali/Imam Hassan/Imam Hussain, then I’m fairly satisfied, because that’ll give later shia posters much ammo (prepare for stuff from texan dude )

Every leader will have his problems. His drawbacks. I’d rather have the leader that is elected democratically. That people agree on to lead. I’m not saying the first 3 caliphs were brought into office the right way. I’m saying there is nothing that says Ali should have been in office day one, and that none of the sahabah had a RIGHT to even try for the office.

The Prophet was dead set against power transmitted thru inheritance. And that’s what Shias wanted. Otherwise, you’d see the Prophet talking about how his tribe the Quraish are what everyone should bow down to. And the Prophet spent his whole life fighting his own tribe!!!

So, no. I dont buy your arguments.

Desiring purity for someone does not mean you are granting them the power of infallibility.

Again, bring me proof from the Quran. Verse and all. And if its not in our Quran, tell me the verse that was hidden from all of the ummah, despite the fact that initially most of the sahabah had memorized the Quran. :rolleyes: