Hmmmmm!

Salam zaki,

 Two questions for you.

1)Shia quote sunni hadeeth claiming them to be sahih or correct.Is there any shia book of hadeeth,which contains all sahih hadeeth?or you pick some hadeeth from your books and discard others?

2)Shia claim that Prophet had divine revelations,other than Quran.

But there are many verses in Quran that were pertinent to that time.
059.005
YUSUFALI: Whether ye cut down (O ye Muslim!) The tender palm-trees, or ye left them standing on their roots, it was by leave of Allah, and in order that He might cover with shame the rebellious transgresses.
This indicate the cutting of trees of banu quraiza.This verse do not contain any command important to us now.In fact the whole surah is about the distribution of wealth of banu quraiza,and how medinan should be given more share,

Chapter 29

67. Have they not seen that We have made (Makkah)a sanctuary secure, and that men are being snatched away from all around them? Then do they believe in B�til (falsehood - polytheism, idols and all deities other than All�h), and deny (become ingrate for) the Graces of All�h?
This refer to a time when dessert people killed each other,but mecca was safe.

For the protection of the Quraysh. The caravans to set forth safe in winter and in summer. So let them worship the Lord of this House. Who has fed them against hunger, and has made them safe from fear.) (106:1-4)

In the presence of other revealations,there was no need for these verses which point to local events.Because Quran is a message to all humanity.

Also,

About the Battle of Camel, al-Hakim and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and others recorded that:

We were in the camp of Ali on the day of Battle of Camel, where Ali sent for Talha to talk to him (before the beginning of war). Talha came forward, and Ali told him: I adjure you by Allah! Didn't you hear the Messenger of Allah (S) when he said: `Whoever I am his MAWLA, this Ali is his MAWLA. O God, love whoever loves him, and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him'?" Talha replied: "Yes." Ali said: "Then why do you want to fight me?"

- al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, pp 169,371
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, on the authority of Ilyas al-Dhabbi
- Muruj al-Dhahab, by al-Mas'udi, v4, p321
- Majma' al-Zawa'id, by al-Haythami, v9, p107

Salaam

I would, first, like to make a general point. I AM NOT A SCHOLAR. I have a very limited ability to read and understand the noble Arabic language. For this reason, I have been careful to quote the sources for my opinions, and invite others to make their comments on these sources. But more importantly, I challenge other's to read the works of these scholars, rather than simply dismissing them because of things you have heard from others (who probably have not read them either.)

The reason why I objected to Tijani is because I have read parts of his works where he claims that Shias showed him things he did not know even though he was a scholar or places where he shows things to "Sunni scholars" that they never knew before. And I have asked real Sunni scholars the same questions, and they were able to answer them without any problem, in fact giving more explanations on the issue at hand. So there is obviously something or the other wrong with Tijani's claim of scholarship.

About Murajaat and whether the discussions actually took place, there are many criticisms about this that can be further examined. However, I do not think I need to get into this, unless Ali Zaki thinks it appropriate.

Of course you will not hear any argument from me (or any other Shia) on this point. In fact, Imam Ali (a.s.) condemns his own followers more then his enemies. In fact, the greatest tragedy in human history, the murder of Imam Hussien ibn Abu Talib (a.s.) occured exactly because his shia abandoned him.

In this case, I am not talking about the Companions of the Imaams in general, but those Companions of the Imaams who are relied upon by most of the modern Shia Aalims as upright and correct in their behavior. Still, it will be surprising to see that even some of these followers who are relied by Shias to bring us the actions, words, and knowledge of the Imaams cannot be Shia as understood by the Imami Shia scholars of today. A detailed treatment of this is perhaps beyond the scope of thsi thread.

REGARDING THE COMPANIONS AND THE 'FOLLOWERS' OF THE IMAMS

"They seek to impress upon you that they accepted Islam as a favour to you: Say: 'Do not count your Islam as a favour to me. Allah has done you a favour by guiding you to the faith, if you are truthful'" (49:17).

"And among them are those who listen to you until, when they leave you, they say to those who have been given knowledge: 'What did he say just now?' They are those upon whose hearts Allah has placed a seal. They follow their desires" (47:16).

"And a group from the believers disliked it. They dispute with you about the truth after it was made clear, as if they were being driven to death whilst they were watching it" (8:6).

"The desert Arabs say: 'We believe'. Say: 'You have not believed. Rather, say: 'We have submitted ourselves to Allah' for faith has not yet entered your hearts" (49:14).

"We have come to you with the truth, but most of you hate the truth" (43:78).

I will begin with Verse 43:78. I am not aware of how this can refer to the Companions, since the context of the Ayah is with reference to the Mujrimun in general. Allah says:

[43:74]  Verily, the Mujrimun (criminals, sinners, disbelievers, etc.) will be in the torment of Hell to abide therein forever.
[43:75]  (The torment) will not be lightened for them, and they will be plunged into destruction with deep regrets, sorrows and in despair therein.
[43:76]  We wronged them not, but they were the Zalimun (polytheists, wrong-doers, etc.).
[43:77]  And they will cry: "O Malik (Keeper of Hell)! Let your Lord make an end of us." He will say: "Verily you shall abide forever."
[43:78]  Indeed We have brought the truth (Muhammad SAW with the Qur'an), to you, but most of you have a hatred for the truth.
[43:79] Or have they plotted some plan? Then We too are planning.
[43:80] Or do they think that We hear not their secrets and their private counsel? (Yes We do) and Our Messengers (appointed angels in charge of mankind) are by them, to record.

If Ali Zaki wants to show that this is reference to the Companions in specific, then he will have to show us a good number of tafseers were this is mentioned. I am afraid that not even most of Shia commentators would take this Verse in the meaning Ali Zaki is trying to give it. Anyway, Insha allah we will see further into this matter.

Next is Ayah 47:16, its context being:

[47:16]  And among them are some who listen to you (O Muhammad SAW) till, when they go out from you, they say to those who have received knowledge: "What has he said just now? Such are men whose hearts Allah has sealed, and they follow their lusts (evil desires).
[47:17]  While as for those who accept guidance, He increases their guidance, and bestows on them their piety.
[47:18]  Do they then await (anything) other than the Hour, that it should come upon them suddenly? But some of its portents (indications and signs) have already come, and when it (actually) is on them, how can they benefit then by their reminder?
 
Again, how do we know that these are the Companions of the Prophet? If Ali Zaki maintains this, then he will need to:

1. Show us the tafseers were the Companions are specified as belonging to this group
2. Show us the stories where these Companions met "those who had received knowledge" and said things similar to those contained in this Ayah.

 I think we should discuss these two Ayats first, then we cam move on to the remaining three Ayats.

This, again, is incorrect. Please read the hadith again.

"O you people! Know it well that Jibril came down to me several times bringing me orders from the Lord, the Merciful, that I should halt at this place..."

Jibrial CAME DOWN to me several times BRINGING ME ORDERS is not the same as Jibril came down several times ordering me to stop (which implies "Stop where you are!"). If that was the case, then the prophet would have stopped at a different place, and not the place he was ordered to stop at. If that doesn't make sense, then imagine that you are on the freeway and you hear a siren behind you. The policeman says several times, "Get off the freeway at the next off ramp", and you continue driving to the next off ramp and then exit. Can someone accuse you of disobedience?

Insha Allah if I have the time, I will bring the references from Ali Zaki's Shia scholars about the specific things Jibril said to the Prophet before the Ghadeer Khumm event. In the meantime, I would like him to seriously look into how many people where actually present at the event and who was absent, and at the background of Ali's trip that he undertook to Yemen immediately before the Hajj.

IN GENERAL, REGARDING THE ACCEPTENCE BY THE HADITH OF GHADEER KHUMM BY SUNNI ULAMA.

I do not own these books (honestly), and do not know where (or if) they are online to provide the link to the source (which I would prefer). I can tell you that I have, in the past, looked up these hadith for myself in the books (when I had access to them from a Sunni mosque library)  mentioned and have found them to be there.

Regarding the commentary on these hadith, I don't expect that the Sunni scholars will agree with the Shia regarding the significance or meaning of them. Again, if someone can tell me if these books are online I will be happy to attempt to provide exact links.

I doubt that most of these books will be available online in English (or online in Arabic even). But still, Insha Allah it will be acceptable if I can get the verification of these from whichever source is available to me.

REGARDING THE ISSUE OF ' AS HAROON WAS TO MUSA, EXCEPT THAT THERE WILL BE NOT PROPHET AFTER ME'

"Ali, the son of Abu Talib, is my brother, my executor (Wasi), and my
successor (Caliph), and the leader (Imam) after me. His position to me
is the same as the position of Haroon (Aaron) to Moses, except that
there shall be no prophet after me. He is your master after Allah and
His Messenger."

SOURCES:

- A'alam al-Wara, pp 132-133
- Tadhkirat al-Khawas al-Ummah, Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi, pp 28-33
- al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, by Noor al-Din al-Halabi, v3, p273

In fact, the prophet (a.s.) clarifys this point in this speech, by explaining that he (Ali) is your master (mawla) AFTER Allah and his messenger. Or, in other words, his authority comes after the authority of the messenger.

This particular series of references will need to be checked, as I am afraid that perhaps Ali Zaki has not done the verification by himself to see whether they meet the Sunni criteria. Still, if this narration is correct, why did the Prophet Muhammad mention two qualities of Ali with respect to Muhammad that Haroon did not possess with respect to Moses ??? Again, I am forced to reiterate that the Prophet seemed to know some of the relationships between Haroon and Moses and how they were applicable between himself and Ali (and also that there is not another Prophet after Muhammad), but on the most crucial and elementary link, he was not aware that the Haroon and Musa similitude was not applicable.... why ???

One more issue to consider about "No Prophethood" after Muhammad (SAW). A good number of Shias I have discussed with consider the post of Imaamah to be higher than the post of Prophethood in general. Also, many consider that the Imaams are higher than Prophets, which would obviously entail that an Imaam is a Prophet plus something additional to that. This is also obvious from the fact that the Imaams in some Shia Ahadeeth explain that they are higher than Musa, or Ibrahim, or Jesus, and that they possess all the qualities, miracles, and knowledge of the previous Prophets. So I believe that this puts a question mark over the "No more Prophethood" claim by the Imami Shias.

REGARDING OMAR AND ABU BAKR CONGRATULATING IMAM ALI

After his speech, the Messenger of Allah asked every body to give the oath of allegiance to Ali (AS) and congratulate him. Among those who gave him the oath were Umar, Abu Bakr, and Uthman. It is narrated that Umar and Abu Bakr said:

     "Well done Ibn Abi Talib! Today you became the leader (Mawla) of all believing men and women."

Sunni references:
(1) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p281
(2) Tafsir al-Kabir, by Fakhr al-Razi, v12, pp 49-50
(3) Mishkat al-Masabih, by al-Khatib al-Tabrizi, p557
(4) Habib al-Siyar, by Mir Khand, v1, part3, p144
(5) Kitabul Wilayah, by Ibn Jarir al-Tabari
(6) al-Musannaf, by Ibn Abi Shaybah
(7) al-Musnad, by Abu Ya'ala
(8) Hadith al-Wilayah, by Ahmad Ibn `Uqdah
(9) Tarikh, by Khatib al-Baghdadi, v8, pp 290,596  from Abu Hurayra
... and more.

If you want to say that there is a difference (in Arabic) between mawla and Imam, this is true, however, I challenge you (again) to explain the difference between "Amir al Muminin" (which is used in Shia sources, and a few Sunni sources) and "Mawla al Muminin" (which is used in most Sunni sources).

If the Companions and the rest of the Muslims took an oath of allegiance with respect to Ali, then the Shia would have to say that the Ghadeer event took  many days to complete... Why ? Because according to the Shia claim, 100000 people were present, and each one had to individually take the oath of allegiance at Ali's hand. Now, an oath of allegiance is a highly important event, not merely based on "congratulation". The Shia may check how the Prophet (SAW) took the oath of allegiance from people during his lifetime, when they became Muslims, or at other important occasions (such as Hudaybiyah). And if the same technique was used in this case (as the Shia claim) then this would would be the "Days of Ghadeer" rather than the "Day of Ghadeer". However, we do not find any such historical trace among Sunni or Shia history about a formal bayah, and even if such a thing is implied, the time it would take is not considered in the whole of the explanation.

I think we should consider this issue above before moving to the difference between Amir and Mawla in linguistic terms.

Salaam

Well, I am answering to the general points raised by Ali Zaki. Insha Allah later I will gather all the evidences from Shia laymen and scholars about my assertion, but I suppose this should be for a later time.

Wa Salaam