U think I havent heard of this before ? Did you seriously think thats an irrefutable proof of imamate ? why did so many sunni books record it then ? why do so many non-imami sources accept that as one of the great merits of ali b abitalib.
And so many sunni scholars have had no hesitation in mentioning it in their books ?
btw over 100 companions have narrated this not just 76 and many of them were not even sympathetic to cause of ali ,
simply the hadith of ghadir was not a political appointment of a successor as it presented today by 12ers. then there are nawasib infested scholars like ibn taymiyyah who go in the oppositte extreme in denying it.Its correct context is best given by tahir ul Qadri in this book titled Ghadir.
True but he didnt , just like umar and ali never appointed their successors ( hasan was ELECTED by unanimously by muslims of kufa & medina).
I agree with the example of Prophet, umar and ali in this regard.Abu bakr thought differently but he was wrong but to say he had malicious intentions is baseless their is no tangiable gain that abu bakr wud get in appointing umar.
Nor did umar completely follow abu bakr's policies , he did many things diffrently.
Well do u think "shiaism " is without its divisions ? Didnt it take nearly 2 centuries before the final doctrine of present day 12ers finally evolved ?
Why didnt all the shias or those who claimed to be unanimously agree on one imam after another ? if succession was so "perfect and complete"in their eyes.
[/QUOTE]
So I take, in your view, Quran and Sunnat do not have any answers to the very important question of choosing a leader.
Its unfortunate, but atleast we do believe in a religion that provides a perfect system of guidance. Neither we deny the very clear Wilayat of Imam Ali (as).
So I take, in your view, Quran and Sunnat do not have any answers to the very important question of choosing a leader.
[/QUOTE]
no explicit designations of a successor by name, but broad guidelines
[QUOTE]
Its unfortunate, but atleast we do believe in a religion that provides a perfect system of guidance. Neither we deny the very clear Wilayat of Imam Ali
[/QUOTE]
who are "we" ? 12ers if so show me consistency in your viewpoint since the time of Prophet ? and like i said if the wilayat was so clear why divisions existed within shaisim ?
STRANGE ! how much support did the imams of ahlulbayt get when they revolted ? popular support justify rebellion then abbassids are prolly more justified than anyone else
okay forget the caliphs , but will u accept a shariah system that is not based on jafari fiqah ?
Name them and we could discuss them.
In my view, a true Sharia system should encompass all the major Islamic fiqhs.
of what ? deen then surely sunnis will outnumber shias and will proclaim a state law based on sunni fiqah.
worldy education promotes corruption and nothing good ever comes out of it so u can forget shariah state that way
Haq/Truth.
Just like the great Prophets in their respective times educated their nations and opened the people's eyes to tauhid, equality, fairness, one humans rights upon another, day of judgement, etc.
Brother, if all the lies and propoganda is scrapped out then there will be 'Sunnis' left.
U think I havent heard of this before ? Did you seriously think thats an irrefutable proof of imamate ? why did so many sunni books record it then ? why do so many non-imami sources accept that as one of the great merits of ali b abitalib.
And so many sunni scholars have had no hesitation in mentioning it in their books ?
btw over 100 companions have narrated this not just 76 and many of them were not even sympathetic to cause of ali ,
simply the hadith of ghadir was not a political appointment of a successor as it presented today by 12ers. then there are nawasib infested scholars like ibn taymiyyah who go in the oppositte extreme in denying it.Its correct context is best given by tahir ul Qadri in this book titled Ghadir.
Irony is that despite all the Sunni books writing almost everything from Zul Asheera to Ghadir to hadith of Safina, the same books have continued to present variety of personal interpretions to belittle these great merits of Ali Ibn Abi Talib and the Ahlul Bayt. They have written, and conitnue to present, one meaning after another of the words such as 'Mawla' and 'Wali' . The latest of which is an attempt by Dr Tahir ul Qadri who has stated that Imam Ali (as) was indeed made a Guardian/master/mawla of the believers but he was the spiritual master, whereas the 'political' wilayat was a case of consent/election of the ummah and was given to Abu Bakr. Allah knows on what basis he has made these distinctions in wilayat. Nice book though as it contains many more fazail of Imam Ali (as).
no explicit designations of a successor by name, but broad guidelines
who are "we" ? 12ers if so show me consistency in your viewpoint since the time of Prophet ? and like i said if the wilayat was so clear why divisions existed within shaisim ?
please, show me those guidelines from the Quran and the Sunnat. Show me a leader chosen by 'voting' or a 'comittee' either by the Quran or any given time from the life of the Prophet (saww).
Historically there were divisions present in early Islam and the first one revealed itself right after the departure of the holy Prophet. After the death of the Holy Prophet, a small minority, following Imam Ali (as), refused to pay allegiance to Abu Bakr. At the head of the minority there were Salman, Abu Dharr, Miqdad, and Ammar (may Allah reward them all). At the beginning of the apparent caliphate of Imam Ali (as) also a sizable minority in disagreement refused to pay allegiance. Among the most persistent opponents were Ibn Aas, Walid ibn Uqbah, Marwan ibn Hakam, Amr ibn Ass, Samurah ibn Jundab, Mughirah ibn Shubah etc. By 'we' I mean the first group and their followers, i.e. Shiyaan e Ali.
[QUOTE]
please, show me those guidelines from the Quran and the Sunnat. Show me a leader chosen by 'voting' or a 'comittee' either by the Quran or any given time from the life of the Prophet (saww).
why should there be a leader choosen in the time of Rasool allah when he was THE leader and still alive.
Your logic seems circular , by same token nawasib attack Ali saying he fought muslims and stopped conquests and there is no precedent from the Prophet.
How can there be ? such a situation did not exist in Prophet's time but he warned Ali of it by Prophecies.
So it was decisions of Ali that became SUNNAT for sunni muslims when fighting muslim rebels and khawarij , and example of abu bakr became SUNNAT for fighting apostates
[QUOTE]
Historically there were divisions present in early Islam and the first one revealed itself right after the departure of the holy Prophet. After the death of the Holy Prophet, a small minority, following Imam Ali (as), refused to pay allegiance to Abu Bakr. At the head of the minority there were Salman, Abu Dharr, Miqdad, and Ammar (may Allah reward them all). At the beginning of the apparent caliphate of Imam Ali (as) also a sizable minority in disagreement refused to pay allegiance. Among the most persistent opponents were Ibn Aas, Walid ibn Uqbah, Marwan ibn Hakam, Amr ibn Ass, Samurah ibn Jundab, Mughirah ibn Shubah etc. By 'we' I mean the first group and their followers, i.e. Shiyaan e Ali.
[/QUOTE]
Bro, todays 12ers beliefs are VERY DIFFERENT from the beliefs of Ali's earlier followers.If you study their individual biographies you will come to know.Most of them had no problem with first 2 caliphs and in many instances praised them too but were open enemies of the third.btw zuabir b awwaam a much maligned sahabi for 12ers was one of ali's staunchest supporter at that time.Also mughira was not an opponent he pledged allegience to ali but refused to participate in his wars.
To think that shiaism is one monolithic belief that dates back to the time of saqifa is a oversimplification and to delibrately ignore centuries of intra-shia theological schisms.
And when we look at the discourses ( even from proto-shia sources) it becomes clear.Furthermore believeing that Ali or some other sahabi should have been the successor does not guarnetee that you can prove fiqah jafaria as true islam.ALL sources are unanimous that there was INTIALLY disagreement between sahaba as to who the successor would be .its NOT a uniquely shia or 12er position.
Irony is that despite all the Sunni books writing almost everything from Zul Asheera to Ghadir to hadith of Safina, the same books have continued to present variety of personal interpretions to belittle these great merits of Ali Ibn Abi Talib and the Ahlul Bayt. .
Well thats a matter of personal opinion then and the reliability of sources.
The christians may say the same thing about jesus that muslim sources may talk favorably of jesus but by making him a propohet they belittle his true status as son of God.
Just like the great Prophets in their respective times educated their nations and opened the people's eyes to tauhid, equality, fairness, one humans rights upon another, day of judgement, etc.
Brother, if all the lies and propoganda is scrapped out then there will be 'Sunnis' left.
lies and propoganda have been perpetuated by both sides 12ers and sunnis, its unfair to blame only one
which imams of ahlulbayt ( apart from ali b abitalib and hasan b ali ) lead popular govrments ? as you say that u will agree that
[QUOTE]
One condition for a revolt is the support of the people.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
In my view, a true Sharia system should encompass all the major Islamic fiqhs
[/QUOTE]
I concur , ideally fiqah points from all 7 fiqahs should be accomodated as much as possible.
why should there be a leader choosen in the time of Rasool allah when he was THE leader and still alive.
Your logic seems circular , by same token nawasib attack Ali saying he fought muslims and stopped conquests and there is no precedent from the Prophet.
How can there be ? such a situation did not exist in Prophet's time but he warned Ali of it by Prophecies.
So it was decisions of Ali that became SUNNAT for sunni muslims when fighting muslim rebels and khawarij , and example of abu bakr became SUNNAT for fighting apostates
Bro, todays 12ers beliefs are VERY DIFFERENT from the beliefs of Ali's earlier followers.If you study their individual biographies you will come to know.Most of them had no problem with first 2 caliphs and in many instances praised them too but were open enemies of the third.btw zuabir b awwaam a much maligned sahabi for 12ers was one of ali's staunchest supporter at that time.Also mughira was not an opponent he pledged allegience to ali but refused to participate in his wars.
To think that shiaism is one monolithic belief that dates back to the time of saqifa is a oversimplification and to delibrately ignore centuries of intra-shia theological schisms.
And when we look at the discourses ( even from proto-shia sources) it becomes clear.Furthermore believeing that Ali or some other sahabi should have been the successor does not guarnetee that you can prove fiqah jafaria as true islam.ALL sources are unanimous that there was INTIALLY disagreement between sahaba as to who the successor would be .its NOT a uniquely shia or 12er position.
Prophet (saww) appointed many leaders to serve different duties in his time. He never left Madina without nominating a person to lead in his absence. He chose people to lead expeditions, army commanders, ministers, etc. What was his method of choosing a leader? did he hear the opinions of the close companions or set up committees?
We believe in the absolute authority of Allah and his Messenger (saww). And this authority was passed on to Imam Ali (as) by a direct command of Allah (swt) [verse 5:55]. Prophet (saww) himself got people to testify to the Guardianship/wilayat of Imam Ali (as). Thus, any action of Imam Ali (as) is a 'Hujjat/proof' for the followers of the Prophet (saww).
Abu Bakr, Umar of Uthman had no leverage to act on the name of Sunnat. Where did they get their authority from? The most elite of the companions of the Holy Prophet refused to acknowledge their right to the leadership. Imam Ali (as) himself refused the condition of following the course of the 'sheikhayn' when presented by the condition by Ibn Awf saying;
"So far as the Holy Quran and the orders and traditions of the Holy Prophet are concerned, I agree to abide by them and follow them faithfully and sincerely, but so far as the rulings and decisions of the previous two caliphs are concerned, if these are according to the orders of Allah or the Holy Prophet who could dare arefuse them and if they are against the orders of Allah or the Holy Prophet, who would dare accept and follow them? I refuse to bind myself with those rulings and decisions. I shall act according to my knowledge and my discretion." (Tarikh Tabari, Ibn Khuldun, Tarikh Abul Fida, etc).
Fiqah e Jaffariya and its followers have not claimed it to be perfect nor they claim to have monopoly over everything that is good. Thats why we do not posses fatwa factories of kufr, neither we like to blow other Muslims up. Our school is the school that prides itself in belonging to the doorstep of the household of the Prophet (saww). You guys, with your own fiqhs, can continue to follow whoever you deem better.
Well thats a matter of personal opinion then and the reliability of sources.
The christians may say the same thing about jesus that muslim sources may talk favorably of jesus but by making him a propohet they belittle his true status as son of God.
Christians and Muslims do not have a common source that they both uphold. We believe their bible is corrupt and they believe our Quran is not the word of God. This is not the case for inter-Muslim conflict where the main sources are identical, i.e. Quran and the Prophet.
One analogy that can be drawn though is how Muslims tell Christians, and present them evidence from the bible, of the coming of the last messenger from Arabia, but they persist with their ignorance and keep coming up with various interpretions and meanings of these clear verses. Many many Muslims too like to dodge the clear verses from the Quran regarding Ali Ibn Abi Talib (as). I was in a mosque once for a friday prayer where the Imam had said in his khutba how Abu Sufyan was so humbled by the force of the Islamic mission that he submitted to Islam and ended by being "Momin Aal e Quraysh". I was with an Arab friend and we looked at eachother and smiled but we had had enough and stood up and left once the Imam sahab stated how Abu Talib (as), the uncle of the Prophet, was not so fortunate and had died a sorry death of a disbeliver!
lies and propoganda have been perpetuated by both sides 12ers and sunnis, its unfair to blame only one
All Muslims should come together to the Ahlul Bayt (as). Their path is the Sirate Mustaqeem and their love is the wage of Risalat and is demanded by Allah (swt). The Prophet (saww) said "my Ahlul Bayt are like the arc of Noah (as), for whoever takes refuge in them, finds salvation".
so you agree that shariah state that incorporates fiqah views of all major fiqahs is acceptable to you ? thats a good start
better than the munafiqoon like policies of Jinnahism and Kemalism
I agreed with you right from the start of the thread on this, Das. Most if not all of the Muslims would.
I still say that any leader or movement must have the authority stemming out of the will of the people otherwise it is bound to fail and becomes one big joke. It is the people who need to change themselves first in order to bring about a real change.
You call Jinnah a munafiq- I am guessing because of his secular values. In my view, there is nothing wrong with the secular laws as long as they serve the people and are in consistent with the Islamic laws.
Re: Plan to restore Pakistan- Reclaiming the founding moment
If sharia was so great why it has not been implemented anywhere in the world in its full form, phir to aaj tak baaqi sub ghass ki kat-tay rahay sadiyon say.
Re: Plan to restore Pakistan- Reclaiming the founding moment
Pagluu I dont wish to start the debates on sayyidna umar's shura , eman of abu talib , and other favourites of debaters her.Its been discussed a gazillion times.I am very comfortable with my views on the 4 caliphs and the history surrounding that, I have also read/heard the 12er viewpoint of that in detail from scholars like SHM Jafri , Moderrassi to charlatans like talib jauhari.There is nothing new that you can tell me here that I have not already known or debated.