Sunni Perspective on Shia Traditions

[PyariCgudia]

Re: Sunni Perspective on Shia Traditions

@badabing

Sweetheart, you keep going back to “where is it explicitly stated there are 12 imams with devine right etc” - but what you are either not grasping or choosing not to is that you start from a position of bias by basing your opinions solely on sunni literature which is pro banu ummaya yet “zuban pur tala laga huwa” when it comes to banu hashim. I was like you once (raised hanafi from 5-16) , until I started to read everythng and anything and base my beliefs upon the “Kirdaar” of the individual narrating a hadith or making a judgement (and yes, this required further reading!) rather then simply that it is shaih because imams muslim and bukhari had done the edited work already.

Actually no, I don’t buy all the hadith in those collections. There is plenty of stuff that goes against women, and surprise surprise, it’s all narrarated by Abu Hurraira. So I get that part.

If I can have an element of academic doubt regarding the Sunni scholars, why can’t I have an element of doubt on Shia beliefs too?

Even if we argue about a purity of a blood line, that Fatima (R), Ali (R) couldn’t have been closer to Muhammad (SAW), then Aisha (R) was family too. She did a lot of narrarations of what the Prophet (SAW) did and said, since she spent time with him. So we can’t discount that.

That’s what I’m saying, if the concept of “immamat” is true, then hadith’s and education given by anyone other than Ali (R) at the time of Ali (R)'s existence is negated. If Ali (R) and any other Sahabah had a point of difference, then Ali (R) was automatically right.

If Hasan (R), Hussain (R) had any differences with the other Sahabas kids, then they were automatically correct, and everyone else was wrong. Leaving aside the corruption from any political leader at the time.

For example, Aisha (R) wanted Ali (R) to deliver justice to the rebels who murdered Uthman (R), and it was this that the two fought over. It ended up in a war. Called the Battle of the Camel. Was Aisha (R)'s stance automatically wrong? Do murderers of Uthman (R), not get punished? They can just join Ali (R)'s camp and get away with it without investigations?

Hussain (R) was warned to not go to Karbala, and still went, and he was told, ok if you go, then don’t take the women and children with you. He went anyway. If he had divine knowledge that others didn’t have, then how did he die? How did Hasan (R) get poisoned if he had divine knowledge? Couldn’t he forsee that his wife was going to hand him poison? If Ali (R) had divine knowledge, then how did he not escape his assasins?

So the question is over not just the purity over the blood line - maybe there is a “goodness” gene that runs in them. But does that make them “spiritual” leaders that are to be the SUCCESORS of the Prophet? Because now we’re talking about religious power, and whoever has religious power, automatically has political power.