AlBaqir:
^Kindly go to the official website of Ayatullah al-Khoei and give us that. Only that your word can have a weight. Am done with you man. Salam

Always shifting the goal post, is it my fault that your scholars are full of inconsistencies?! Who wrote the book "Sharh-el-Urwatul-Wuthqa" where the quote is from?! The site I got the screen grab is a Shi'a site, So what exactly should I be looking for on Al -Khoei's website? Al-Khoei died in 1992, I'm sure he didn't think about having a website then!

I hope you are fasting like the Prophet (SAW) and his ahl-l-bayt did fast?! And hope it is a fast to follow the sunnah of the Prophet and his progeny not a fast to mourn Imam Husein?! Fasting for the sake of mourning is not a sunnah of the Prophet (SAW) nor the Ahl-l-bayt o! Well I hope you take heed.

tintingz:
OK.

For Male:

Y-chromosomal Adam

In human genetics, the Y-chromosomal Adam or Y-chromosomal most recent common ancestor (YMRCA) is the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) from whom all currently living people are descended patrilineally. The title of "Y-chromosomal Adam" is not permanently fixed to a single individual, and shifts over time as human inheritance and our knowledge of human ancestry changes. The current Y-chromosomal Adam is estimated to have lived 200,000 to 300,000 years ago.

The term YMRCA reflects the fact that the Y chromosomes of all currently living males are directly derived from the Y chromosome of this remote ancestor.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Adam

For Female:

Mitochondrial Eve

In human genetics, the Mitochondrial Eve is the matrilineal most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of all currently living humans. This is the most recent woman from whom all living humans today descend, in an unbroken line, on their mother’s side, and through the mothers of those mothers, and so on, back until all lines converge on one woman, who is estimated to have lived approximately 100,000–200,000 years ago. Because all mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) generally (but see paternal mtDNA transmission) is passed from mother to offspring without recombination, all mtDNA in every living person is directly descended from hers by definition, differing only by the mutations that over generations have occurred in the germ cell mtDNA since the conception of the original "Mitochondrial Eve".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

I hope its clear...?


Alright.

Okay, thank you for quoting, but I do not think the information above proves that the Y chromosomal Adam had only the Y chromosome, as well as the mt Eve. My understanding with regards to the above is the trace of the donor Y chromosome responsible for the present male sex to what is termed "Y chromosomal Adam". In fact they stated that this Y chromosomal Adam was not the only male during this period, it is not permanently fixed to an individual and would change depending on discovery of new ancestry.

The Y chromosome is said to be undergoing evolutionary deterioration, its gene which was as large as the X chromosome several generations ago is now dwindling.Source I believe this could be one of the pointers to a reducing male population compared to the females...The fact still remains that during reproduction, the male has the capacity to donate either a Y or X chromosome.

Determining the origin of the sex would require we go back to the beginning of evolution, especially the point where sex differentiation occurred. This is a problematic aspect for the evolutionists, and this is an example of the gaps I had talked about. There are theories proposed, but not verified or accurate. Even at that, it would still mean that a particular cell/organism, had both X and Y chromosomes, and then we would ask, which came first, the male or the female?! I don't know if you do have the answers bro.

I do not think Science have the answers you seek, be that as it may, I wouldn't fault your choice, sticking to both Adam and Eve were created from one nafs, but I would always go with the what the majority of Muslims are on, i.e, nafs wahidah means Adam (AS), and Zawjaha means Eve, and Eve was created from Adam (AS), whether from the rib or body, doesn't matter.

tintingz:
@bolded, I mentioned something scientists have shown about the early men having only Y-Chromosomal-Adam and early women having only Mitochondrial-Eve

If we're to follow the XY chromosome relating it to human creation in the Quran then we have to follow the evolutionary theories I mentioned above(scientists also discovered XXY chromosome) and it can make more sense if we say Adam and Eve were created alike from a single soul not from one another, if you want to stick to Eve coming out from Adam or his rib there is no problem as there are different opinions.

If you will, can you please quote where scientist show that early men had only Y-Chromosome as well as Females mt-Eve?! I am having difficulty understanding this.

tintingz:

It is nice discussing biology with you.

Same here, the reason I am still interested to continue....

tintingz:
Using the biology XY chromosome sex determination.

While the XY analogy make sense to the creation of humanity, it doesn't flow with Eve created from Adam.

Male owns the Y, while female owns the X which means Adam must have had a mother for him to retain the X(Y) if we assumed he had XY but since there are no parents as he was the first man, it will make more sense if we assume Adam had only Y and Eve had only X then along the ages XY, XX came up during procreation.

X is inherited from the mother and the Y from the father. Female is XX meaning a X is inherited from her mother and an X is inherited from his mother.

It is very possible for Allah to put both X and Y in Adam but this is science it has to go with scientific theories, infact it was said that early men had only Y chromosome-Adam and female had Mitochondrial Eve.

And secondly, Mammals also carries XY chromosome, are animals creation like that of Adam-like? Only Allah knows.

Am not saying all these are not possible by Allah(SWT) but since the Quran didn't mention any of this all i can accept is Adam and Eve were both created from a single nafs but I can still make use of the rib story tho.

I acknowledge your views dear brother, as I said, I just wanted to use "little" biology...Also, If we are to go with Adam (AS) having only Y and Eve only X, then their children would only be males, i.e Adam (AS) donates his Y and Eve X, given XY continuously, but if Allah (SWT) had incorporated the two chromosomes in Adam from creation, then no need to be thinking of parents for Adam (AS), Allah (SWT) created him and equipped him with all the necessary genetics to procreate, especially, after Eve was created...The evolutionary investigations are full of gaps, as well as in contrast with the Qur'an. They shouldn't be relied upon, in fact they may not be referring to the Adam and Eve which Allah (SWT) describes in the Qur'an.

With regards to Mammals and other Animals, Allah (SWT) had said:

"And of all things We created two mates; perhaps you will remember."

(Q 51:49)

This above verse also can be analyzed to put in proper context, but is another issue entirely.

And Allah knows best.

Contact17:
Ashoora is expected to be on Tuesday, 9th of October 2016. We are recommended to fast a day before it or after it as well,but if a person can fast both before and after then it is better. The more one fasts in Muharram, the better.

Additionally, if one fast these three days with the intention of fasting Ashoora and the three sunnah fasts of the month, then a person can have the reward of fasting the three days without decreasing the rewards of fasting Ashoora

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Fasting the day of ‘Arafah I hope Allaah will expiate thereby for the year before it and the year after it, and fasting the day of ‘Ashoora’ I hope Allaah will expiate thereby for the year that came before it.” Narrated by Muslim, 1162.
He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also said: “Whoever fasts one day for the sake of Allaah, Allaah will keep his face seventy years’ distance from Hell,” (al-Nasaa’i, 2247; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan al-Nasaa’i, 2121).

cc: sino , lexiconkabir , jay542 demmzy15 aminat508 Rosheedah haffaze777

gaffig abuhammaad aideesheks shabib omosuper masculity Certifiedbillio

Dullahi hadjipapiey FriendChoice mrreed lailerh abdelkabir empiree

Jazakillah khayran for the reminder

AlBaqir:


# No. I first quoted your favourite website to kill your goal.

It seems you do have a short memory, here is what you wrote:

AlBaqir:
# Sino, the Master copy-paster

I guess you copied here:
http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/fasting-in-'ashura-is-a-sunnah-not-a-umayyad-bid'ah/

Next time endeavour to site the link. However, a good debater will first neutralise all the submissions of his opponent before he attack with his own submission. Obviously fasting of Ashura in your books is myth.

How does the above relate to you trying to "kill your goal"?! Bros this your taqiyyah no be here o! Bro go and learn what is called an HYPERLINK!
I did not even quote from twelvershia website, and whenever I quote from other sites, I say so, It's called honesty, and having academic integrity! I am sure you are not familiar with such words...

AlBaqir:

# I know you love repeating classes arguing in circles especially when you cannot find "replies" to copy paste.

# Again here is what your lovely website says:

Objectively speaking, Al-Majlisi actually weakened all the hadiths in this chapter in his book Malath Al-Akhyar 7/116-118 due to the weakness of the chains, with the exception of one hadith, which is the twelfth in the chapter, which he authenticated. The narration simply states:

“The Messenger of Allah peace be upon him and his progeny fasted the day of Ashura.”

Al-Majlisi I also authenticates another narration his exegesis of Man La Yahtharhu Al-Faqeeh, Rawdhat Al-Mutaqeen 4/313. The narration from Mohammad bin Muslim and Zurarah states that Al-Baqir told them about fasting Ashura that, “it was fasted before Ramadhan, but after Ramadhan was made obligatory it was left.”

This too confirms with the Sunni teaching that fasting Ashura was obligatory for a period of time.
http://twelvershia.net/2015/10/22/the-truth-about-fasting-ashura/

# You can clearly see your desperation in copy-pasting what you cannot personally prove. I have given you two Shia sites - one belonging to the works of Ayatullah al-Khoei. The other site, you can easily download whatever Shia books. Kindly prove to us the authenticity of those narrations.

# Your favourite website further quoted an authentic Shia hadith which says Ashura fasting used to exist before it became an abandoned fasting with the arrival of Ramadan. This sealed the arguments as far as Shia fiqh is concerned. And any hadith that says otherwise (like that of Imam Ali et al above), even if authentic via its sanad, will be weakened via its matn because of this content that have Ramadan abrogating Ashura fasting.

I see you did not understand what the point of quoting Al-Majilis’s view by the twelvershia team, most importantly, affirming/confirming that the Prophet (SAW) and his ahl-l-bayt did indeed fast Ashura! It also means that Ashura was obligatory before Ramadhan! But as indicated by Al Sharani, you extremist shi’a, due to your hatred for the Muslims, and by extension, wanting to promote your bid’a, would claim the fast of Ashurah was prohibited or never was commanded. The narration said it was left, how does leaving something, equate being a deed of people of hell fire?! We do have authentic proof of the rewards of fasting Ashurah, it is not compulsory, it is only recommended, just like fasting the fast of Prophet Daud (AS), or fasting three days in a month. We follow the Sunnah, even Majilisi confirmed it, it was left means it was not made compulsory anymore! Try another angle bro, this no work for you. Your fiqh is weird, but unfortunately for you guys, your scholar said, that is Al Khoei, all the narrations prohibiting fast on Ashura, are WEAK!

AlBaqir:

# Besides, the same Ayatullah Abul Qassim al-Uzma al-Khoei (may Allah raise his status) that you copy-pasted his quote have authenticated another hadith which I have posted earlier. The hadith further says Ramadan made Ashura fasting an abandoned fasting. This is what made Ayatullah al-Khoei to rule that it is ABOMINABLE to fast on the day of Ashura. Yet your unverified copy-pasting says Ayatullah al-Khoei claimed, "all ahadith that say Ashura fasting has been abrogated or abandoned are weak".

I had said it is either your scholars doublespeak or they are just plain ignorant, let me give you a screen grab of Al Khoei statement, not only authenticating the narrations, but also stating that fasting on Ashurah is recommended. Now it is left to you and your sect to go figure the discrepancies in what was attributed to your scholar, who is lying, who is saying the truth…The evidences are against you!

Source of the image below: https://ballandalus.files./2013/11/image0011.png

AlBaqir:

# Show us a single ayah in the Quran that talks about Ashura fasting. Just one ayah please. If you cannot, then it confirm the authenticity of the saying of Imam, "it is a fast about which there is not anything in the book". "Book" here refer to Quran.

# Second, is Ashura from the established Sunnah of Nabi, salallahu alayhi wa ahli? Your ahadith and a Shia weak hadith says it was from the sunnah of Musa. Even if it was borrowed, its never belong to Muhammad ibn Abdullah. And the advent of Ramadan fasting buried it to the eternal ground. Only the cursed Ibn Ziyad's family revived it as a "sunnah".

Have you forgotten the purpose of the Prophet (SAW)?! Allah (SWT) commanded us to follow the Prophet (SAW), that is enough proof from the Qur’an to a Muslim, and secondly, authentic narrations abound, both in Sunni sources and Shi’a, stating that the Prophet (SAW) and his companions, including the ahl-l-bayt fasted Ashura! This is an established Sunnah, there is no direct prohibition from the Prophet (SAW), there is no narration attributed to him saying people should not fast! Saying it was abandoned, after Ramadhan was made compulsory, does not equate prohibition Mr AlBaqir, it only means that it was not obligatory, and there are authentic prove for this, and not your fabricated narration of fasting Ashurah leads to hell fire!

Now, would you kindly inform us how these people you have mentioned revived the fasting of Ashura?! What did they intend to gain, by telling people to fast on the day which the Prophet and his progeny did fast?! Aren’t they responsible for the murder of Husein?! The reward of fasting this day is documented, it expiates the sins of a year (minor sins), so I ask again, what do they intend to gain?!

AlBaqir:

# Below hadith simply shows the gravity of following the "sunnah" of Ibn Marjanah that is Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad.

I asked an important question already, is fasting Ashura a sunnah of the Propeht (SAW) or that of the Abu Ziyad’s?! Evidences brought so far shows that it was a sunnah of the Prophet (SAW) and his progeny, you should provide evidences (authentic) how it was the sunnah of the Abu Ziyads!

AlBaqir:
As-Salam 'Alaikum brothers,

For those of us who are now doing researches, let me introduce the two most important websites that you will need. They are:

1. www.waqfeya.com (for Sunni/Salafi books)

2. www.alfeker.net (for Shi'a books)

Any Sunni, Salafi or Shi'a book that you need, you will find it on one of these websites. Then, you can download the book.

All the books on these websites are scanned copies of the real books, and are in PDF.

cc. sino

Many thanks, Indeed!

@AlBaqir,

I wonder if it is your ignorance, or your desperation that made you to respond the way you did. Firstly, I did indicate the source of what I had presented, and it is not from twelvershia, if you had been patient to read, you would have seen the HYPERLINK!

Secondly, If I was to be in your shoes, I would be so ashamed to put the narrations you just did, which are in contradiction to the ones, also attributed to the Imams, which I had quoted initially.

Now lets look at the narrations again:

Sa’ad bin ‘Abdullah from abu Ja’afar from Ja’afar bin Muhammad bin ‘Ubeidullah from ‘Abdullah bin Maymoun al-Qaddah from Imam Ja’afar from his father (as): “The fasting of ‘Ashura removes the sins of a year.”(Tahtheeb al-Ahkam 4/300 & Wasael al-Shia 10/457).[Grading: Sahih(authentic)]

‘Ali bin al-Hassan bin Faddal from Haroun bin Muslim from Masa’adah bin Sadaqah from Imam abu ‘Abdullah from his Father that ‘Ali (as) said: “Fast on ‘Ashura the ninth and tenth for it removes the sins of a whole year.” (Tahtheeb al-Ahkam 4/299 & Wasael al-Shia 10/457).[Grading: Muawaththaq(reliable)]

These two narrations would suffice; here it clearly states the benefit of fasting Ashura. The second narration is quite more specific, being that it is from the first Imam of the shi’a, he said, fast on Ashura, the 9th and 10th, it was a direct and specific command. These narrations are after the death of the Prophet (SAW), as well as after Ramadhan had already been legislated. The funny thing is that, I had also presented where a shi’a scholar (Al Khoei) had no choice but declare that these narrations are authentic, and those in the contrary are weak! Not only that, another Shi’a scholar advised the extremist Shi’a not to destroy the foundation of their religion based on the hatred for the Muslims, but here is AlBaqir and his sidekick, trying too hard to disprove the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW) and the ahl-l-bayt.

So AlBaqir decided to quote the following, as prove:

Chapter: Book of fasting part 2, chapter 14 hadith number 4

Najabah ibn Al Harith Al attar said I once asked Abu Jafar(as) about fasting on the day of ashura. He(the imam) said It is a discarded fast after the coming of Shahr Ramadan and what is discarded and abandoned is Heresy. Najabah then asked Abu Abdullah(as) after his father about it and he answered just like his father and then said “ it is a fast about which there is not anything in the book or the established sunnah except the sunnah of the family of Ziyad for their murdering Al-Husayn Ibn Ali(as)

This above is the most ridiculous fabrication about ashura. The same Abu Jafar, that said the fast expiates the sins of a year, now all of a sudden, realized that it is a discarded fast?! Not only that, then another Imam said, it is not an established sunnah (see bold in red)?! Howcome?! Was it a discarded fast or it was never a sunnah?! Which is it?! Not to mention the fact that it was a sunnah of those who murdered Husayn?! When the Prophet (SAW) and the companions fasted ashura, as corroborated by the shi’a narrations already presented, were they following the sunnah of the family of Ziyad?! Subhannalah! This is very pathetic, and I pity those who would even think for a second you guys do have a point…

Let’s look at another of AlBaqir’s “authentic” narration presented:

Chapter: Book of fasting part 2, chapter 14 hadith number 6

I heard Zurarah(RAA) asking Abu Abdullah(as) about the fast on the day of Ashura, Abu Abdullah(as) said whoever fasts on this day, his share for such fasts is like the share of ibn Marjana and the family of Ziyad, I then asked what was their share that day? he said(as) it is the fire, I seek protection with Allah against it and against the deeds against the deeds that take one closer to the fire.

The same Abu Abdullah again! How can a fast that would expiate a sin of one year, turns automatically into a deed of the people of hell fire?! If you pay close attention dear readers, this fabrication was made so as to discredit the sunnah of the Prophet (SAW) in order to promote the bid’a of what the shi’a do in mourning the death of Husayn ibn Ali on this day!

Like seriously AlBaqir, those who fabricated these narrations no try at all, the motive is so clear, and they did have poor intellect, and I am more surprised that any educated fellow would fall for such cheap lies!

With regards to Al Khoei, it seems you guys like to double speak, who made the statements quoted from the books, Was it not Al Khoei?! It seems you couldn’t refute Al Sharani’s advice for you guys right?!

Lastly, this is not the first time I’ll be exposing you on this Ashura issue, so don’t expect me to start analyzing your usual conjectures, I had presented a link that had done justice to that already!

"Here are the ahadeeth from the Imams regarding fasting on Ashura from Shia books:

(i). Sa’ad bin ‘Abdullah from abu Ja’afar from Ja’afar bin Muhammad bin ‘Ubeidullah from ‘Abdullah bin Maymoun al-Qaddah from Imam Ja’afar from his father (as): “The fasting of ‘Ashura removes the sins of a year.”(Tahtheeb al-Ahkam 4/300 & Wasael al-Shia 10/457).[Grading: Sahih(authentic)]

(ii). ‘Ali bin al-Hassan bin Faddal from Haroun bin Muslim from Masa’adah bin Sadaqah from Imam abu ‘Abdullah from his Father that ‘Ali (as) said: “Fast on ‘Ashura the ninth and tenth for it removes the sins of a whole year.” (Tahtheeb al-Ahkam 4/299 & Wasael al-Shia 10/457).[Grading: Muawaththaq(reliable)]

(iii). Also from him, from Ya’aqoub bin Yazid, from abu Hamam, from Imam abu al-Hassan (as): “The messenger peace be upon him and his household fasted the day of ‘Ashura.” (Tahtheeb al-Ahkam 4/299-300).

(iv). Muhammad bin al-Hassan with its Isnad from ‘Ali bin al-Hassan bin Faddal from Ya’aqoub bin Yazid from abu Hamad from abu al-Hassan (as): “The Prophet(saw) fasted the day of ‘Ashura.”(Wasael al-Shia 10/457).

(v). Ali (ra) said: “Fast on the day of Ashoora 9th and 10th for substitution, for it is an expiation for the the past year, and if someone of you eats (by mistake) should continue his fasting.”

1- Al-Haj Hussein Al-Nuri Tabarsi in Mustadrak Al-Wasael 1/594,

2- Haj Brujardi in Jaa’me Ahadeeth Al-Shia 9/475.

Esteemed Shia Ayatullah authenticated ahadeeth regarding fasting on Ashura:

Ayatullah Abul-Qasim Al-Khoie (former head of the Hawzah in Najaf and one of the greatest Shia Hadith scholars, teacher of Ayatullah Sistani) in his book al-Mustanad fi Sharh il-`Urwat il-Wuthqa, volume 12 stated:

‘As for the encompassing narrations commanding and recommending the fast of this day, they are many, like the authentic(Sahih) narration of al-Qadaah [from Abu `Abdillah(as), from his father Abu Ja`far(as), who said: “The fasting of the day of Ashura is atonement for a year.” And the[b] reliable(Muwaththaq) narration of Mas`ada b. Sadaqa from Abu `Abdillah(as), from Abu Ja`far(as), who said that Imam `Ali(as) said:[/b] “Fast on Ashura, the ninth and the tenth, for verily it atones for the sins of a year.”(Source: al-Mustanad fi Sharh il-`Urwat il-Wuthqa)

Esteemed Shia Ayatullah admits that the Shia ahadeeth which forbid fasting on Ashura are all Weak:

Ayatullah Abul-Qasim Al-Khoie(former head of the Hawzah in Najaf and one of the greatest Shia Hadith scholars, teacher of Ayatullah Sistani) states:

“The narrations that forbid this (Fasting) do not have proper Sanad, they are all weak, in fact we don’t have any respectable narrations that we can rely on to prove that those that differ with them are Taqqiyah. As for the narrations that speak about fasting this day and that it is favourable to fast there are plenty of them, such as the SAHIH of al-Qidah: “Fasting the day of ‘Ashoora removes the sins of a year.” and the Muwaththaq of Masa’adah bin Sadaqah: “Fast ‘Ashoora the ninth and the tenth for it removes the sins of an entire year.” and others like them. This is acceptable taking into consideration the unimaginably great hunger and thirst and pain that Ahlul-Bayt had to go through on that hard day. So the strongest opinion would be that it is favoured to fast this day.“ (Kitab al-Sawm by al-Khoei 2/305).

Similarly Al-Khoie, in al-Mustanad fi Sharh il-`Urwat il-Wuthqa, volume 12 states:

“So it is correct what we have claimed, that the prohibitive narrations are all da`if(weak) in sanad. So, the authoritative is free of opposition, and the karahat (dislike) of the fast of Ashura is not established, let alone its prohibition which was the view hold in al-Hada’iq(of Yusuf al-Bahrani). Rather, it is permissible, recommended especially (if done) mournfully according to what you have recognized by what there is no exceeding upon it. “( al-Mustanad fi Sharh il-`Urwat il-Wuthqa).

Who deviated from the teaching of Ahlelbayt(as) in regards to fasting on Ashura; Sunnis or Shia?

Famous Shia scholar al-Muhaqqiq al-Sha’rani says in his commentary on the book “al-Wafi” by al-Faydh al-Kashani, 22/505:

[It happens that some of the narrators who are extreme in their hatred for the Mukhalifeen (Sunnis), those who exaggerate the differences and deviate from the school of Ahlul-Bayt (as), that they may go overboard in certain beliefs un-intentionally only so they may oppose the Mukhalifeen. They do this because of their strong relation to Tashayyu`, as we see a group in the late times who deny that fasting `Ashura is liked (Mustahabb) by agreement, just so they can oppose the Mukhalifeen, and they stick to the belief that the Qur’an is corrupted so they can use this to criticize the enemies of Ahlul-Bayt (as), although there are many criticisms against them and there is no need to prove Tahreef(corruption) and demolish the foundations of the religion.]"

After reading the above dear Muslim, shouldn’t you wonder why these shi’as have neglected the teachings of the Prophet (SAW) and the ahl-l-bayt?! Why are they going against the sunnah of the Prophet (SAW)?! Are they really following the ahl-l-bayt as they claim?! For refutations of the shi’a’s misconceptions and doubts as presented here by AlBaqir, please go HERE

Contact17:


Jazakallahu Khiran

Learnt from this.

Wa anti, fa jazakillah khayran

Alhamdulilah.

I would like to share something which I believe could be beneficial. I have read a couple of tafsirs on this ayah, Tafsir At-Tabariy, Tafsir At-Thaalaby, Tafsir, At-Thawry, and Tafsir Ar-Raazi. These tafsir establishes the fact that “nafs wahidah” means Adam (AS) and “Zawjaha” means Eve.

I would have quoted Tafsir At-Tabariy, especially, the narrations that backs the fact that “nafs wahidah” means Adam (AS) as well as “zawajaha” means Eve but Tafsir Ar-Raazi by Muhammad bin Imran bin Al-Husain Ar-Raaziy As-Shaffiyy was quite interesting in his explanation because he brought the two views.

He said: “When it is said, “how is it possible that the whole creation was from just one person even when that person is small (i.e compared to the number of creation)”

We say: “Allah (SWT) had already explained what this means, because Eve was created after Adam (AS), thereafter, from their (sperm and egg) their children were created and thus continuous. Hence, attributing all (human (creation to Adam (AS) is conceivable.”

Also Imam Ar-Raaziy states, “ The Muslims agree that what was intended with “nafs wahidah” as used in this ayah means Adam (AS), [/b]however, the feminine form “wahidah” used is as a result of the word “nafs” (which is feminine), an example of this, is Allah’s statement: “qala aqatalta nafsan zakiyyatan bighayri nafsin” (18:74)….”

From the above submission, it is quite easy to understand why “nafs wahidah” is understood by scholars to mean Adam (AS). And this is the view of the majority of Muslims.

Imam Ar-Raazi continued with respect to the following statement “wa khalaqa minha zawjaha”

“[b]What was intended with “zawj” here is Eve; there are two views with respect to the existence of Eve being created from Adam (AS).

The first, which the majority (of Muslims) are on, is that when Allah created Adam, he was made to sleep, and Eve was created from a rib among his left ribs, he saw her when he woke up and loved her, because she was created from part of himself. This was further given credence due to the statement of the Prophet (SAW): “for the woman was created from a rib and the most curved part of the rib is its uppermost part. If you try to straighten it you will break it…”

The second view states: And this is the preferred by Abu Muslim Al-‘asfhaaniy: that what was intended with Allah’s statement “wa khalaqa minha zawjaha” is from the same kind/specie/category just as Allah (SWT) states : "Wallahu jaAAala lakum minanfusikum azwajan" “And Allah has made for you from yourselves mates" (16:72) And His statement “ith baAAatha feehim rasoolan min anfusihim” when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves (3:164), also He says: “Laqad jaakum rasoolun min anfusikum” There has certainly come to you a Messenger from among yourselves. (9:128).

Al-Qaadiy said “the first view is the stronger view, because it puts in order Allah’s statement “khalaqakum min nafsin wahidah”, for if Eve was created in the beginning, then mankind would have been said to be created from “nafsayn” (two nafs) not from “nafs wahidah (one nafs). It is possible to respond to this with the fact that the preposition “min” is that of “ibtida’a al-gaayah (the start of destination), since the beginning of creation started with Adam (AS), then it is correct to say: “khalaqakum min nafsin wahidah”. Also it is established that Allah (SWT) has the power to create Adam (AS) from dust, Allah (SWT) also has the power to create Eve from dust, and if this is the case, what would be the need to create her from one of Adam’s rib."

NB: Any mistake above would be from my translation

If we look at the narrative of the Qur’an with respect to the creation of Adam (AS), we would know that Adam (AS) was the first human to be created, and how he was created was established, from dust, life blown into him etc. But Eve, we do not have any information that we can hold on to which would give credence to the fact that she was also created like Adam (AS). If there is any such verse or authentic narration, please share, if not, we would only be speculating. On the other hand, we do have authentic narration and statements from the righteous predecessors that Eve was created from Adam’s (AS) rib. I would like also to state that isn’t it a wonderful coincidence that the Prophet (SAW) would use rib metaphorically, when the belief that Eve was created from Adam’s (AS) rib was already known, especially among the people of the book?!

If we go into a little bit of biology, we know that the male is always responsible for the sex of the child, males can either donate the X or Y chromosome, while the female only has the X chromosome, X chromosome representing females, and Y chromosome representing male, so we can even say, till now, the male is still capable of having both the female and male chromosome (within him), which would perfectly make sense to state that the creation of the female was from the male!

Lastly, I still strongly say, this shouldn’t be an issue, there happens to be no need to be confused or be bothered.

And Allah (SWT) knows best!

tintingz:
^ sino.

You said Shi'a narration are not reliable? Is it because of the differences in ideology?

Anyways I still don't follow the rib story completely.

Jazakallah khairan.

Wa anta fa jazakallah khayran.

With regards to Shi'a narrations, it is not only ideology, but also their methodology, in fact they never had a science of hadith until much later after the sunni had standardized their own science of hadith. Their earlier scholars accepted narrations without recourse to verify the chains of narrators, to simply put, they believed every narration to be authentic regardless of who said what, hence, majority of the narrations found in their books are either fabricated or weak (and very weak in most cases). You can read more HERE

As I opined earlier, rib story is not an issue, we just need to be careful in dismissing authentic narrations without strong evidence(s).

Honestly I am not surprised that the Shi'as couldn't refute any of the evidences provided by the author of the article presented here, rather, they resorted to looking for whatever they can find to accuse the Ahlu Sunnah. Although some present day Shi'a try to hide these mind-boggling revelations, but we are now in the information age, there is absolutely no hiding place again, and taqqiyah has become useless!

tintingz:
Let me start by saying I use to believe the rib story from the bible and the popular phrase "I've found my missing rib" I use to believe the Quran also mention the rib story until I decided to confirm how Eve was created in the Quran and wholaa! I didn't find any rib mentioned in the Quran, i did my research on scholars tafsir, what I found were different opinions and as you can see e.g Shi'ism doesn't believe in the rib story and there are hadiths that rejects the rib story since it was not mentioned in the Quran.

I understand the fact that we, as Muslims, need to do our own research about our beliefs. Islam enjoins us to seek knowledge and ask questions, to ask the people of knowledge when we do not know. There are guidelines for this, as well as proper approach. The reason I am interested in what you intend to gain from knowing how Eve was created is basically as a result of understanding what beneficial knowledge is, what we as Muslims should take as a priority, when we embark on a personal research. For example, I listened to Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan commentary/lecture on Surah Al-Khaf, wherein he mentioned how Allah (SWT) teaches us how to focus on what is important with respect to the companions of the cave. People were speculating they were 3, 4, etc. but Allah (SWT) dismissed these people and their argument without even mentioning the exact number i.e the information about their number is not important! Focus on the lessons to learn, what you need to know to improve your Iman, and be a better Muslim. A lot of us fall into irrelevancies when we lose focus on what is important with respect to acquiring knowledge. So the Qur'an did not mention rib, but scholars have different opinions, since it was a research you are doing, you should be able to weigh these diverse opinion based on the evidences presented. The fact that rib is not mentioned in the Qur'an does not invalidate the opinion that Eve was created from Adam's rib, have you forgotten the role of the Prophet (SAW)?! For instance, the Qur'an didn't mention all what the Prophet (SAW) saw when he went on the night journey, but the Prophet (SAW) narrated to his companions in details, do we reject these narrations because we can't find them in the Qur'an even after such narrations had been authenticated?!

Shi'a narrations are not reliable, this is not me bashing them, it is a fact corroborated by their own scholars!

tintingz:

So what if I am asked, was Eve created from Adam's rib? I guess I will start giving different opinions.

Bro, there is no harm in saying you do not know, and yes, you can always give the different opinions of scholars, that is after you must have stated what Allah (SWT) says in the Qur'an (i.e Allah (SWT) created Eve from Adam (AS)), this is acceptable if you are academic in your approach. As stated above, it is important, if you do have the requisite skills to verify the evidences provided by these scholars so as to reach an appropriate conclusion.

tintingz:

@bolded, i should ask did Allah mention rib in the Quran?

It is very possible for Allah to create Eve from Adam's rib but since it is not mentioned in the Quran why must i believe in the rib story?

My response above should suffice for this, also, I had presented an authentic narration which gives credence to such story. The Qur'an didn't mention rib, but that doesn't mean it is wrong to believe in the rib story, at least, we can understand from the Qur'an that Allah (SWT) did create Eve from Adam (AS). So if an authentic narration says from the rib, Eve was created, I see no reason you should doubt it.

tintingz:

I said "some" hadiths were said to be corrupted by the Jews, are there no ex-jews that converted to Islam during the Prophet(SA) time?

Okay, some hadiths, and yes some Jews converted to Islam. And some narrations were fabricated by the Jews (I'm not sure of corrupted), and I write with respect to the narration I presented, stating that such may be as a result of Jewish fabrication is farfetched.

tintingz:

Ok.

Thank you for your contribution.

You are welcome.

@tintingz

I am quite interested to know what you would gain by knowing how Eve was created…

Well, I see no reason this should be an issue, Allah (SWT) states that Eve was from Adam (AS), which is the most important point to understand, whether it is from his soul, body or rib has no impact on the original belief.

Why are you confused?! You do not like that Eve was created from Adam’s rib?! Would believing this affect your faith?! How?! Is it impossible for Allah (SWT) to create Eve from Adam’s rib?!

Scholars do what they do best; explain in details the noble verses with evidences. You said you read somewhere that “hadiths were corrupted by the Jews”, I do not take such statements seriously, perhaps the narration in question has been corrupted, but that would be a huge task to prove, where, when and how?! (i.e the narration quoted by Ibn Kathir which is authentic by the way).

Know that you cannot fault the mufaasir for his opinion presented, especially if backed by authentic evidences, the narration quoted by Ibn Kathir is quite clear and simple to understand, I do not see any reason to claim literal meaning and metaphorical meaning. Anyway, Allah (SWT) in His divine wisdom has stated in His Book, what we all can understand to mean: Eve was created from Adam (AS), this is simple and straight forward, it doesn’t contradict the narration in question, and the narration does not conflict with the Qur’an (whether taken literally or not).

Below is the appropriate translation of the narration:

Abu Huraira reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “I enjoin you to treat women well, for the woman was created from a rib and the most curved part of the rib is its uppermost part. If you try to straighten it you will break it, but if you leave it as it is it will remain curved. So be good to women.”

Source: Sahih Bukhari 3153, Sahih Muslim 1468

You may click HERE to read the narration in Arabic.

And Allah Knows best!

^^^ Jazakillah khayran for sharing Slitz, Nigeria shall be great again in sha Allah!

AlBaqir:
# Sino, am very sorry I don't discuss my personal quest to religious research publicly.


However, wallahi am done with our back and forth argument that doesn't yield anything. If you like make a 100 pages copy-paste replies. What I am solely concern of is for you to give the meaning of Mawla and Wali as used by the Prophet:

[size=15pt]Do you not testify that Allāh and His Messenger are more entitled to you than yourselves and that Allāh the Almighty and His Messenger are your Mawlā?” They said, “Yes, we do”. He said, “So, whosoever Allāh and His Messenger are his Mawlā, verily this one – or ‘Alī - is his mawlā[/size].

# Wa Salam alaykum

Who cares about your personal quest for religious research?! I asked a simple and direct question, answer yes or no, and then let us see who you really are!

I had always overlooked your allegations of “copy and paste”; it seems you do not have any understanding of what you write. I can bring examples of how I had exposed your lies on here by quoting what you yourself never verified. Secondly, do you know what is called Academic Integrity and Academic Dishonesty?! You couldn’t answer my question because you have been plagiarizing other people’s works and claiming they are research carried out by you (even if indirectly).

If you want to come as someone with honesty and integrity (who does not plagiarize), you should give credits to those who had done the research you are here pasting (including the scan pages) and claiming to be your “personal quest for religious research” whatever that means.

Your creed is as a result of excuses, my question which you haven’t answered still stands, you are here giving excuses which Ali (RA) himself never gave, are you all (shi’ah) more intelligent than Ali (RA) to help him find excuses?! Give us an authentic narration where Ali (RA) used the narration at Ghadir Khumm to claim succession after the Prophet (SAW)!

With respect to the word mawlah and its meaning, I would treat that in sha Allah, just answer my question first, I have made the bold up there again!

udatso:

رفعت الأقلام وجفت الصحف
This is so far one of the best reply to this shia ghadir kum issue

Don't mind these shi'a, they like cherry picking, and looking for vague statements to support their unfounded claims. May Allah not make us deviate on the right path of Islam Ameen.

udatso:

Jazakallahu khairan. Your reply to baqir is a classical example of إن كنت ريحا فقد لاقيت اعصارا

و إياكم، تمام يا موالي، أتلك العبارة المذكورة آنفا من أبواب شعر؟ أحبها جداً

AlBaqir, before I respond to your posts accordingly, are all the narrations, scan pages etc. Researched by you?! Are you the original individual that brought these evidences including the scan pages from the original sources?

Thank you in anticipation of an honest and sincere answer.

Examples from Sahaba:

(vi). Umar bin al-Khattab(RA)

Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar: It was said to `Umar, “Will you appoint your successor?” `Umar said, “If I appoint a Caliph (as my successor) it is true that somebody who was better than I (i.e., Abu Bakr) did so, and if I leave the matter undecided, it is true that somebody who was better than I (i.e., Allah’s Messenger (SAWS)) did so.” On this, the people praised him. `Umar said, “People are of two kinds: Either one who is keen to take over the Caliphate or one who is afraid of assuming such a responsibility. I wish I could be free from its responsibility in that I would receive neither reward nor retribution I won’t bear the burden of the caliphate in my death as I do in my life.” [Sahih al-Bukhari #7218]

Comment: Umar(RA) never understood Ghadeer declaration to be Ali’s appointment as the Successor of Prophet(SAWS). Rather he believed that Prophet(SAWS) didn’t appoint his successor.

(vii). Abdullah ibn Umar(RA)

(a). We read

Uqbah bin Aws al Sadusi narrated: Ibn Umar said: In this nation there shall be twelve Caliphs, Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq, you got his name right, Omar Al-Farouq as an iron horn you got his name right, Othman who is Zhu Nourain (the one with two lights) has been given two portions of mercy for he was innocently killed, you got his name right.

[Takhreej Kitab al Sunnah #1154 by Sheikh al Albani ; Hadith Grading: Chain SAHIH].

Comment: Here we find that Abdullah ibn Umar(RA) counted Abubakr(RA) as the first rightful Caliph, which implies that even he didn’t believe Ghadeer event to be an appointment of Prophet’s successor.

(b). We read in [Sahih al-Bukhari #7218] that Abdullah ibn Umar(RA) narrated a hadeeth where Umar(RA) said Prophet(SAWS) didn’t appoint his successor, without making any objection to it, or claiming that Ali(RA) was already appointed a Caliph during Ghadeer event. This proves that even Abdullah ibn Umar agreed with Umar that Prophet (SAWS) didn’t appoint his successor.

(viii). Safinah ibn Farrukh(RA)

Narrated Safinah: The Prophet (SAWS) said: The Caliphate upon the Prophetic methodology will last thirty years; then Allah will give the Kingdom of His Kingdom to anyone He wills. Sa’eed told that Safinah said to him: Calculate Abu Bakr’s caliphate as two years, ‘Umar’s as ten, ‘Uthman’s as twelve and ‘Ali so and so. Sa’eed said: I said to Safinah: They conceive that ‘Ali was not a caliph. He replied: ‘Bani Az-Zarqa’ told a lie. Meaning the Bani Marwan.

[Sunan Abi Dawud #4646 ; Grade: Hasan Sahih (Al-Albani)].

Comment: We see that Safinah(RA) or Mihran – as was his actual name – believed that the Caliphate of first four Caliphs, that is Abu Bakr(RA), Umar(RA), Uthman(RA) and Ali(RA) was the Caliphate on the Prophetic methodology, as it was Prophesied by the Messenger of Allah(SAWS). If he believed that Prophet (SAWS) had appointed Ali (RA) as his successor, then undoubtedly Safinah (RA) wouldn’t have counted the Caliphate of the first three Caliphs among the Caliphate upon the Prophetic methodology.

(ix). Abdullah bin Abi `Aufa(RA)

Narrated Talha: I asked `Abdullah bin Abi `Aufa, “Did the Prophet (SAWS) make a will (to appoint his successor or bequeath wealth)?” He replied, “No.” I said, “How is it prescribed then for the people to make wills, and they are ordered to do so while the Prophet (SAWS) did not make any will?” He said, “He made a will wherein he recommended the Muslims to adhere to Allah’s Book.”[Sahih al-Bukhari #5022].

(x). Abdullah ibn Masood(RA) & All the Sahaba of Prophet(SAWS)

Abdullah ibn Masood(RA) said: “What the Muslims saw as good was good for Allah, and what the Muslims saw as bad was bad for Allah, and all the companions saw that they should make Abu Bakr the successor.”[Mustadrak al-Hakim vol 3, page 78-79].

Comment: Sahaba didn’t understand Ghadeer event to be an appoint of Prophet’s Successor, hence they made Abubakr(RA) the Successor of Prophet(SAWS). The occurrence of Saqifa incident, where Ansar and Muhajireen gathered to appoint a successor of Prophet (SAWS), itself is a proof that they didn’t believe Ghadeer event to be an appointment of Prophet’s successor.

Moreover, the strong Ansar in their homeland giving up their claim of appointing a Successor from among them, and eventually accepting a Man from a weak and small tribe of Bani Taym from Quraysh(i.e Abubakr), is another solid evidence that they had no idea about Ghadeer event being an appointment of Prophet’s Successor.

Sufyan(Thawri) said: If anyone thinks that ‘Ali (RA) was more deserving for the Caliphate than both of them, he imputed error to Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, the Muhajirun (Immigrants), and the Ansar (Helpers) Allah be pleased with all of them. I think that with this (belief) none of his action will rise to the heaven. [Sunan Abi Dawud #4630]

Important Note:

This fact that Prophet (SAWS) didn’t appoint any Successor is Mutawatir bi’l-ma’na. Narrations that reach the level of Tawatur with the common
meaning found in all of them, even though they differ in wording or incident. This is called Mutawatir bi’l-ma’na (conceptual Mutawatir). For example, one report says that Zaid gave a book, the other says, he gave a pen, the third says, he gave money. Now, collectively all the reports indicate that Zaid gave, however they differ as to what he gave. Therefore, tawatur will be considered in that Zaid gave. Examples of this kind of Mutawatir are numerous in the Hadith. (See Imam Suyuti’s Tadrib al-Rawi, 460-461).

Therefore, the odd Shia interpretation of Hadeeth al-Ghadeer, claiming that Prophet (SAWS) appointed his successor goes against a Mutawatir fact (100% authentic) that Prophet (SAWS) didn’t appoint his successor, thus it is outright rejected."


Honestly, I do not understand how you people would just pick a narration or a verse, and give them your interpretations with absoluterly no recourse to the understanding of the righteous predecessors, including the ahl-l-bayt you keep saying you follow, and then try to sell that as the truth for people to believe and follow. My question still stands, and if you do not have the answer, you should rethink the path you have chosen for yourself!

AlBaqir:

* Kindly check the OP: The documentations of Ghadir "man kuntu mawla fa Aliyyu mawla (For whosoever I am his Mawla, Ali is his Mawla)" which is reported by various sahabah has a context which is "Do you not testify that Allāh and His Messenger are more entitled to you than yourselves and that Allāh and His Messenger are your Awliyā?” They said, “Yes, we do”. He (then) said, “So, whosoever Allāh and His Messenger are his Mawlā, verily this one (i.e. ‘Alī) is his mawlā".

* This context above, is far different from this context of the event of Rahbah: "man kuntu mawla fa Aliyyu Mawla. Allahuma wali ma wala wa adi man Ada (O Allah! Befriend whoever befriend him and make enemy whoever makes him (Ali) enemy".

# While it is very unfortunate that none of you address the hadith of Ghadir as stated in the OP and perhaps question the meaning of "Mawla" within that specific context, you have deviated to hadith of Rahbah in which both myself and your author could only assumed what might have happened while "this new context" was used in this hadith.

# While no doubt the first context signify "someone with higher authority over others", the second context signify that "you can never make Ali your enemy". Observe those that were present Rahbah have already gave bay'a to him. Therefore I can safely conclude that the hadith Ghadir is like a sword with two sharp edges. You can never neglect one edge and embrace the other provided the two contexts are authentic.

* The new context referenced the hadith in sahih Muslim that only the believer loves Ali and only Munafiq hates him. So hadith Ghadir in these two contexts highlights:

1. The Wilayah of Ali over every believer, in the context of Allah's and Nabi's Walayah

2. Loving Ali as a sign of Iman and hating him as a sign of Nifaq.

First and foremost, you brought the narration of Rahbah, not me; I only asked a question of which you haven’t answered.

If truly that was the context, “of higher authority over others” then the companions would have understood it as such, even, it would have been easier to use it as evidence against his predecessors because it would be an irrefutable proof against them. Then again, have you forgotten what brought about the whole issue at Ghadir Khumm?! That is the context, not what you are trying to explain here, the theme of all the narration is same, people insulting, criticizing, hating, fighting against Ali (RA), it was never about the Prophet (SAW) wanting to appoint a successor. Ali (RA) and the Sahabahs applied the message of Ghadir Khumm accordingly. This is just you trying too hard to give the narration your own interpretation. Again, the Prophet (SAW) was still alive and was the authority over the Muslims, how can he then say another person has authority over the Muslims?! There is no double edge sword anywhere; the context of the narration is clear, the word used for Ali (RA) is mawlah, the Prophet (SAW) was speaking Arabic, his audiences were Arabs, there cannot be any case of misunderstanding!

Now let me present narrations from the site I had presented earlier, where it clearly shows that the sahabahs (including the ahl-l-bayt) never understood or apply the hadith of Ghadir Khumm the way you shi’ahs do…

NB: The quote below is from the same source as indicated in my previous post.

"Ahlelbayt and Sahaba never understood Ghadeer declaration to be an appointment of Prophet’s Successor; so does Ahlus-Sunnah.

To understand the context and real message of a Hadith all similar ahaadith must be analysed and ahaadith on related topics should also be analysed. So, all the similar or related Ahaadith from all the available Hadith collections must be brought together under the same category for related topics dealing with the same issue.

Abdullah ibn Mubarak said:

If you want to check a hadeeth then study it by comparing it with other hadeeths.

[Jami‘ li Akhlaq al-Rawi wa Adab al-Sami, vol 2, page 295]

So, let us check the Hadeeth al-Ghadeer by comparing it with other authentic hadeeth, where we clearly find that Ahlelbayt and Sahaba never understood Ghadeer declaration to be an appointment of Prophet’s Successor, which nullifies the arguments of deviant groups that emerged decades later claiming Ghadeer was an appointment of Prophet’s Successor.

Examples from Ahlelbayt:

(i). Ali ibn Abi Talib(RA)

Ali(RA) never understood Ghadeer declaration to be his appointment as the Successor of Prophet(SAWS). Here are few examples from authentic reports which clearly shows that Ali(RA) didn’t believe that Prophet(SAWS) had appointed his Successor.

(a). Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) during his fatal illness. The people asked, “O Abu Hasan (i.e. `Ali)! How is the health of Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) this morning?” `Ali replied, “He has recovered with the Grace of Allah.” `Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, “In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah’s Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of `Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us.” `Ali said, “By Allah, if we asked Allah’s Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) for it.”[ Sahih al-Bukhari# 4447].

Comment: Ali ibn abi Talib(RA) did not know who the one in authority would be, after Prophet(SAWS), and this occurred during the final illness of Prophhet(SAWS) much after the Event of Ghadeer.

(b). Authentic Hadith of `Ali ibn abi Talib from Tareekh al-Tabari, when the six men gathered after the passing of `Umar to elect a successor, each man spoke, when it was `Ali’s turn he said:

[…If the messenger(SAWS) had promised us anything (with regards to leadership) we would have fulfilled his wish, and we would have argued about it until we die, no one will beat me to call people to the truth…] [Tareekh al-Tabari 4/428]

(c). Amro bin Sufiyan said: When Ali came on the day of Jamal he said: “O people, the Apostle of Allah(SAWS) did not promise us anything regarding this Imarah (Caliphate/Succession) until we saw in our own opinion that we must appoint Abu Bakr and he took a straight path then he left us, Then Abu Bakr saw it in his opinion to appoint Umar who in turn walked a straight path then he left us, Then came people who were after the Duniyah (life’s pleasures) and many things happened in which only Allah is the judge” [Source: Ahmad and al Bayhaqi and al Mubarakpoori with good chain].

(d). We read:

They said to `Ali: Will you not appoint a successor? He said: The Prophet(SAWS) did not appoint a successor so that I may do so, If Allah wishes that something good happens to you then he will make you all gather around the best (Man) among you just like he made them gather around the best Man (i.e Abu Bakr) after their prophet PBUH. [Al Haythami in Mujama’a al Zawa’ed, he said: “All narrators are that of the SAHIH except Ismail bin Abi al Harith and he is Trustworthy.”]

(e). We read:

They said to caliph Ali: Will you not appoint a successor? he said: No, but I leave you as the apostle of Allah left you. [Haythami in Mujama’a al Zawa’ed 5/200 ; Rank: All narrators are trustworthy.]

(ii). Al-Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib(RA)

Al-Abbas too never understood Ghadeer declaration to be Ali’s appointment as the Successor of Prophet(SAWS). Here are few examples from authentic reports which clearly shows that Abbas(RA) didn’t believe that Prophet(SAWS) had appointed his Successor.

(a). Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) during his fatal illness. The people asked, “O Abu Hasan (i.e. `Ali)! How is the health of Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) this morning?” `Ali replied, “He has recovered with the Grace of Allah.” `Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, “In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah’s Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of `Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us.” `Ali said, “By Allah, if we asked Allah’s Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) for it.”[ Sahih al-Bukhari# 4447]

(b). We read in Tareekh al-Madinah:

al-`Abbas told `Ali: I never sent you to do anything except you come back when it is too late with bad news, I advised you during the sickness of Rasul-Allah (saw) that you should ask him who would be in authority but you refused, I also advised you after his death to attend to this matter with haste but you refused, I also advised you to not participate in the consultation when `Umar named you but you refused. [Tareekh al-Madinah].

Comment: The beloved uncle of Prophet- Abbas(RA) did not know who the one in authority would be, after Prophet(SAWS), and this occurred during the final illness of Prophhet(SAWS) much after the Event of Ghadeer.

(iii) Abdullah ibn Abbas(RA)

It is related from Ka’b ibn Malik, who was one of the three to whom Allah turned that Ibn ‘Abbas informed him that:`Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) during his fatal illness. The people asked, “O Abu Hasan (i.e. `Ali)! How is the health of Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) this morning?” `Ali replied, “He has recovered with the Grace of Allah.” `Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, “In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah’s Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of `Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us.” `Ali said, “By Allah, if we asked Allah’s Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah’s Messenger (SAWS) for it.”[ Sahih al-Bukhari #4447]

Comment: Abdullah ibn Abbas(RA) narrated this incident without objecting to it, or claiming that Ali(RA) was already appointed a Caliph during Ghadeer event. This proves that even Abdullah ibn Abbas(RA) agreed with Abbas and Ali that Prophet(SAWS) didn’t appoint his successor neither during Ghadeer, nor after that.

(iv). Mother of Believers- Sayyida Ayesha(RA) :

(a). Narrated Al-Aswad: In the presence of `Aisha some people mentioned that the Prophet (SAWS) had appointed `Ali by will as his successor. `Aisha said, “When did he appoint him by will? Verily when he died he was resting against my chest (or said: in my lap) and he asked for a wash-basin and then collapsed while in that state, and I could not even perceive that he had died, so when did he appoint him by will?” [ Sahih al-Bukhari #2741 ]

Comment: The other Member of Ahlulbayt, who rejected the view that Ali(RA) was appointed as the Successor of Prophet(SAWS) at Ghadeer or after that, was Sayyida Ayesha(RA). She had no idea about Ali(ra) being appointed as Prophet’s Successor at anytime. In this report we find that, some people influenced by the ideology of Abdullah Ibn Saba, claimed that Ali(ra) was appointed by Prophet(saws) as his successor by his will, hence Ayesha(ra) rejected this corrupt and baseless view of the Saba’ees.

(b). Ibn abi Mulaykah said: I heard `A’ishah when she was asked about who Rasul-Allah (saw) would have appointed as successor (in leadership) if he had decided to do so? She replied: “Abu Bakr.” they asked: “Then who?” She said: “`Umar.” They asked: “Who after `Umar?” She said: “Abu `Ubaydah bin al-Jarrah.” She never went beyond this. [Sahih Muslim #2385].

Comment: It is apparent from this report that the beloved wife of Prophet -Ayesha(RA) didn’t have any idea about Prophet(SAWS) appointing Ali(RA) as his Successor at Ghadeer.

(v). al-Ḥasan bin al-Ḥasan bin al-Ḥasan bin ‘Alī – the great grandson of Ali(RA) :

We read:

The Rafidhi (a person who rejects the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and Umar) said to him (Al Hasan ibn Hasan), “Did not the Messenger of Allah say to Ali: ‘If i am Mawla of someone, Ali is his Mawla?’” He (Al Hasan) replied, “By Allah, if he meant by that Amirate and rulership, he would have been more explicit to you in expressing that, just as he was explicit to you about the Salah, Zakat and Hajj to the House. He would have said to you, ‘Oh people! This is your leader after me.’ The Messenger of Allah gave the best good counsel to the people (i.e. clear in meaning). “If it is like what you say, that Ali was chosen for this after the Prophet (pbuh), then he would be the most flawed from all the people, because he didn’t do as the Prophet (pbuh) commanded””
(Source: Source: Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d. Vol. 7, Pg. # 314; Chain is Good) Similar is present in Ibn `Asakir (volume 4, page 166) and (awaasim min qawaasim page 115).

Comment: Hence lastly, we have from Ahlelbayt al-Ḥasan bin al-Ḥasan bin al-Ḥasan bin ‘Alī – the great grandson of Ali(RA) – who rejected the view that Ghadeer declaration was an appoint of Prophet’s Successor.

AlBaqir:


It answer your question perfectly. Again how would Imam Ali used the hadith Ghadir or any hadith pertaining to his Khilafah at all when the first khalifah and the second Khalifah had been sworn in secretly?

# There is absolutely nothing left for him again unless he simply want to cause disturbances within the Ummah which he patiently avoided. I don't know what you want again o.

Bros, still you haven’t answered my question. The fact remains that Ali (RA) did not make reference to Ghadir Khumm as evidence against anyone in terms of succession whether they (his predecessors) were chosen in secrecy or not is immaterial, since he (RA) also pledged allegiance to them after all, and also when he did so does not matter. In fact, we have a narration which clearly states the position of Ali (RA) with regards to khilafah.

From Al haythami in Mujama’a al Zawa’ed 9/50:

They said to Ali: “Will you not appoint a successor?” He said: “The Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) did not appoint a successor so that I may do so, If Allah wishes that something good happens to you then he will make you all gather around the best (Man) amongst you just like he made them gather around the best Man (i.e. Abu Bakr) after their Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wa sallam)”

[Rank: All narrators are that of the Sahih except Ismail bin Abi al Harith and he is Trustworthy].

Authentic Hadith of `Ali ibn abi Talib from Tareekh al-Tabari 4/428, when the six men gathered after the passing of `Umar to elect a successor, each man spoke, when it was `Ali’s turn he said:

[…If the messenger (saw) had promised us anything (with regards to leadership) we would have fulfilled his wish, and we would have argued about it until we die, no one will beat me to call people to the truth…]

Now to your opinion why Ali (RA) didn’t bring the narration at Ghadir Khumm is quite poor, firstly, you have no evidence to back this, and secondly, you guys claim that Imamah is a divine appointment, and maula means authority over the Muslims, did Ali (RA) now deny himself this position of authority by keeping quiet?! And none of the sahabah remembered this appointment made by the Prophet (SAW) at Ghadir Khumm?! Thirdly, the personality of Ali (RA) is that of a warrior and a courageous Muslim, he would never shy away from speaking the truth to anyone (as evident in the above narration), yet we cannot find him stating that his caliphate was usurped. So for over 25 years, Ali (RA) couldn’t find an opportunity to remind the people, including Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, whom he happened to have direct access to, and also amongst his students. Fourthly, Ali (RA) had nothing contrary to say about his predecessors except praises and respect and prayers, there was no enmity between themselves…It is obvious that you guys are the ones really claiming what the Prophet (SAW) and Ali (RA) never claimed.

AlBaqir:

# What is not clear there? You mean the "context" that is what took place? Yes like I also said one can assume. I brought this text because it is sahih. I believe my screenshot is clear enough to be seen.

Yeah the narration is vague, what brought about asking for people to stand up and bear witness, i.e what was the reason?! And as I said earlier, your assumption holds no water, the incidence happened close to his death, if it was about being appointed as the successor of the Prophet (SAW), he would have said so during the time of Abu Bakr (RA), Umar (RA), and Uthman (RA), in fact, those loyal to him would have brought the narration of Ghadir Khumm as evidence to back him. But it was not so, and I shall bring evidences that shows the understanding of the sahabas (including ahl-l-bayt) of the narration, and how they applied it.

AlBaqir:

Please read this gently and with sincerity:

# The narration you brought above is not authenticated. Can you prove its authenticity? And you can simply appreciate the statement of the writer @underlined. The author himself admitted that the narration of Abi Shaybah with that context is vague. So all his submissions is nothing but assumption. Besides, the narration of Abi shaybah says "six people stood up" while the narration of al-Albani says "thirty men (or large) stood up".

The narration is authentic based on the fact that there are similar authentic narrations (which you brought one of them); there is also a similar narration with same chain that was authenticated by Shuaib Al-Aranuut by stating (Sahih li ghayrihi), apparently, there is an issue with the sanad. But, authenticity of the narration I brought is not an issue; even the number of those that stood up is also not an issue. Since we can get more information from the narration which does not render the narration to be rejected, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Be that as it may, as I hinted earlier, I would be bringing the understanding of how the narration of Ghadir Khumm was understood and applied by the sahabahs subsequently…

AlBaqir:

# However I still want to comment within the author's assumption. According to him, for Imam Ali reminding those people at Rahbah of the hadith of Ghadir suggest that he was not using it to prove his Khilafah because of that period. Meaning he's already assumed power. Wallahi I love this assumption. Its not far at all to what I suggested. However try to consider these facts:

Bros, it is not an assumption, it is a fact, and the evidences are there for all to read (on the link I presented). Your own assumption has no evidence(s); you just sat down and brought it out of thin air! Ali (RA) would use the narration of Ghadir Khumm to defend himself against his opponents, not and never to state him having right to the caliphate. Here is evidence for this:

“Rifā‘ah bin Iyās ad-Dabbī relates on the authority of his father who relates it on the authority of his grandfather. He said: We were with ‘Alī (RA) on the day of the Battle of Jamal. He sent a message for Talhah bin ‘Ubaydullāh (RA) who called on him. He said: I make you swear by Allāh! Have you heard from the Messenger of Allāh (SAW): One who has me as his Mawla has ‘Alī as his Mawla O Allāh! Befriend him who befriends him and be his enemy who is his enemy. Talhah (RA) said: Yes. ‘Alī (RA) said: Then why do you fight with me? Talhah (RA) said: I did not remember it. The narrator said: (After this) Talhah (RA) went back.”

[ Hākim narrated it in al-Mustadrak vol 3, page 371 # 5594 ; Bayhaqī in al-I‘tiqād wal-hidāyah ilā sabīl-ir-rishād ‘alā madhhab-is-salaf wa ashāb-il-hadīth page 373; Ibn ‘Asākir in Tārīkh Dimashq al-kabīr vol 27, page 76].

Again Ali (RA) clarified issue of caliphate during the same battle above, which puts all your assumptions to eternal rest, we read:

Amro bin Sufiyan said: When Ali came on the day of Jamal he said: “O people, the Apostle of Allah(SAWS) did not promise us anything regarding this Imarah (Caliphate/Succession) until we saw in our own opinion that we must appoint Abu Bakr and he took a straight path then he left us…
[Source: Ahmad and al Bayhaqi and al Mubarakpoori with good chain].

Again, the sahabahs also do same to defend Ali (RA), Example:

Amr ibn Maymun said: “I was sitting once in the company of ibn Abbas when nine men came to him and said, ‘O ibn Abbas! Either come to debate with us, or tell these folks that you prefer a private debate.’ He had not lost his eye-sight yet he said: ‘I rather debate with you.’ So they started talking, but I was not sure exactly what they were talking about. Then he stood up and angrily said: “Woe to them! Woe to them! They insult a man who gathered ten (virtues)!.… Prophet(SAWS) also said: Whosoever I am Mawla of, Ali is his Mawla. [Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. Vol. 3, Pg. # 331 – 333.]

Here Ibn Abbas defended Ali (RA) with the narration when those people were insulting him, so Ibn Abbas knew this narration, but did not understand it to mean caliphate of Ali (RA) after the death of the Prophet (SAW).

So it is not out of place for the author of the comment, backed by these evidences, and the narration found in Ibn Abi Shaybah to state that the context (reason) for Ali’s (RA) statement was to defend himself against the criticisms leveled against him by his opponents and detractors.

Faith

I have often wondered what faith is,

I claim faith; I am a believer I say,

I am one who surrenders to the creator,

His love overshadows others, my heart, His forever

But then I listened to tales of old,

Of Prophets, their companions, the righteous predecessors

Lo! Those are the ones with faith

Abraham had faith; he obeyed his Lord without question

Would you have wanted to sacrifice your only son, if commanded?

Would you still believe, if left in a desert, with no sustenance?

Is it the tale of that female sahabah narrated?

She lost her only child to ill health

Still, her faith was unshaken

Welcoming her hubby with a smile and conjugal bliss!

She is a believer, she owns nothing, Allah owns everything!

Lo! These are the people of faith!

And when one sahabah was told

A tale of his beloved who had travelled to the heavens and back

In a single night with a strange animal by flight

He believed with conviction in his heart

He is As Siddiq, his beloved had named him so

Again! Those were the forerunners of faith

And I can go on and on

The tales are there for those who seek

I listened…

I read…

I learned…

Thus, I became overwhelmed with fear…

What kind of faith do I claim?

What sort of faith do you seek?

Do you have faith?!

........sino

AlBaqir:


And in sha Allah I will give you a straight up answers.

* Appointment of Abubakar

This took place at Saqifah of Bani Saidah. Only Abubakar, Umar and Abu Ubaydah al-Jarrah were Muhajirun present there to wrestled the Khilafah from the Ansar.

Imam Ali, the entire Ahl al-Bayt and Ali's supporters were never at Saqifah when Abubakar was appointed.

# And Sahih Bukhari documents the sermon of Umar ibn al-Khattab who admitted that when Abubakar was appointed, Ali and his supporters opposed them. What were the wordings of opposition? Umar did not say. And Aisha in her own account revealed Ali did not give bay'ah (allegiance) until after six months when Bibi Fatima died and people were nursing animosity towards Ali {sahih Bukhari}.

May Allah bless Muhammad and his offspring. Kudo to Imam Ali who never took up arms against the government over the issue of Khilafah otherwise the cradle Islam and innocent lives would have suffered.

* Appointment of Umar

Abubakar on his deathbed asked Uthman ibn Affan to write his wasiyah. As Abubakar was dictating this will while Uthman writes, he fainted and before he could wake up, Uthman has written the name of Umar ibn al-Khattab as his successor. When Abubakar woke up, he demands that the will should be read to him. And when the name of Umar was read, he was happy and simply said, "how do you know what I intend to say?".

# This, too was done secretly without the consent of Ali or any prominent Sahabah.

* Appointment of Uthman

# Ali was officially included by Khalifah Umar in his six-man committee which include: Uthman, Ali, Talha, Zubair, Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf and Abdullah ibn Umar.

# Umar gave specific instructions guiding the appointment of his successor from these 6-man committee.

To be more accurate, I will need to quote appropriate historical documentations to highlights these terms and conditions, and why Ali rejected this.

NB: I'm far away from home so it could take weekend in sha Allah.

The above did not answer my question, please read my question again.

AlBaqir:


* During the Khilafah of Ali

Abu Tufayl reported that:
At Rahbah in Kufa, Imam Ali asked the people to stand up (or raised their hands) if they witnessed the Prophet at Ghadir khumm with the declaration about him, "man kuntu Mawla fa Adhan (Ali) Mawla, Allahuma Wali man walah wa adi man adah"

Thirty men stood up (in another riwayat, great number stood up).

# Why did Imam Ali brought this issue again after he has assumed authority? Obviously some still doubt his Khilafah even at that time.

See the scanshot atttached.

This narration above is not clear, what was the context?! You yourself tried to come up with an assumption behind this narration, but that does not hold water, if you cannot support it with authentic evidences that states the reason behind the above narration was because "some still doubt his Khilafah".

But let me bring another narration to the mix,

Zaid bin Yathee’that he said: Ali was told that people were talking about him(badly), so he climbed the pulpit and said: May Allah beseech a man, and I don’t beseech except the companions of Mohammad(SAWS), those who heard the Prophet(SAWS) who heard saying something, for him to stand up. So six people stood up, and after Sa’ad bin Wahb six people said: We swear that the Messenger of Allah peace be upon him said: Man kuntu mawlah fa Aliyun Mawlah(Whosoever I am Mawla of, Ali is his Mawla), Allahuma wali man walaah wa aadi man aadah. [Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah , Chapter of the Merits of Ali, Hadeeth #28)

The above narration gives us a glimpse of the context, fortunately, there is an appropriate commentary written by Mohammad ibn Aminah-as found on click HERE

"Comment: The authentic narrations of Ghadeer Khum, when attributed to `Ali, are Mutawatir to him since he uttered those words in the area of Al-Rahabah near the outskirts of Al-Kufa. Due to the large amount of people around, the narration was documented and then spread near and far, and through a large number of his students.

Even though most narrations are not clear in what was the reason that `Ali spoke those words, we do find this vague narration from Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah (Hadith #28 of the Chapter of the Merits of `Ali) that suggests that this was done when `Ali was told that people “Yaquloon Feeh,” which roughly translates into: they spoke about him. Which most likely shows that they spoke badly about him, due to which Ali(RA), in order to defend himself besought the companions of Prophet(SAWS) to testify that they heard the hadeeth al-Ghadeer from Prophet(SAWS). It must be known that, the opponents of Ali(RA) during his Caliphate didn’t deny Ali(RA) being a Caliph of Muslims. But some of them like the Khawarij whom he fought at Al-Nahrawan, hated him and criticized him.

Fitr bin Khalifa testified that this event(at Al-Rahabah) occurred only a hundred days before the death of Ali. [See Saheeh Ibn Hibban #7057]. In other words, this event occurred way after the battles of Siffeen and Al-Nahrawan, which puts to rest the idea that Ali was attempting to prove his legitimacy by quoting the narration of the Prophet (SAWS), since Al-Nahrawan occurred in the year 39 AH, and Ali died in Ramadhan, 40 AH. Unless `Ali was not aware of how to prioritize quoting the Prophet(SAWS), we can safely say that he did not understand the Hadith al-Ghadeer to be an appointment of successor-ship.

Interestingly, Ali(RA) never besought companions of Prophet(SAWS) in this fashion, neither when Abubakr(RA) was appointed as the first Caliph(successor), nor when Umar(RA) was appointed as second Caliph, nor when Uthman(RA) was appointed as the third Caliph. He only did when people who came after , who were unaware about merits of Ali(RA) were speaking badly about him, due which he besought the companions of Prophet(SAWS) who knew his merits."

A simple question which I hope AlBaqir shall avail us with a befitting answer backed with authentic evidence(s) is; DID ALI (RA) USE THIS INCIDENCE at GHADIR KHUMM AS EVIDENCE FOR HIS RIGHTFUL SUCCESSOR IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE DEATH OF THE PROPHET AND ALSO AGAINST HIS PREDECESSORS IN LEADERSHIP I.E ABU BAKR, UMAR AND UTHMAN (RODIYALLAHU 'ANHUM)?!

lanrexlan:
Was about to ask the same oo. Meat and cashew nuts? Bro sino, is it yummy?

Yummy?! I dislike cashew nuts it always leaves an awful aftertaste in my mouth...But I was served both on that special day, and then I found my pen

AlBaqir:
^On this note, I finally bid you farewell on this argument.

Fi amanillah

Ma' Salam

BetaThings:

Shias always rail against "Wahhabis" and PRETEND they have no issue with "mainstream sunnis"

Now who are Wahhabis? And who are mainstream Sunnis?
Anyway it does not matter. If you don't believe in 12 imams, Shias believe you will go into hellfire - Wahhabi or not


Recall the way Shias protested the terrorists levelling of graves in Mali about 2 years ago

Now this is what they did - The terrorists levelled graves the Shias DESECRATED the grave of who?

Imam Abu Hanifah - they took out his bones and buried a dog inside. Now they talk about hate and extremism !!

No one can rival Shias in Falsehood and duplicity



https://sonsofsunnah.com/2016/08/03/the-graveworshipping-shiite-safavids-defiled-abu-hanifahs-grave/

This is quite despicable, such level of hatred and extremism, I wouldn't be surprised, they do have narrations in their most revered books saying that when their Imam comes as the Mahdi, he would bring out some companions of the Prophet (SAW) from their graves and do all sought of things to them, there is even a narration about Ummul-mu'minin Aisha (RA), that she would be tried by the imam...Well our resident shi'as would deny all these and call you names...

AlBaqir:


# Please remind me of those irrefutable evidences you have brought o?!

Hope you do not have issues with your eyes? You can scroll up and SEE them again!

AlBaqir:

* Kindly lower your pride and hatred. Let me quickly remind you of our debate so far:

# One of your wicked fabrications claim Nabi salallahu alayhi wa ahli was bewitched for days to the extent that it affected his senses.

Now it is not "copy and paste" again, it is now pride and hatred

I see you have dropped the use of "black evil magic", now it is bewithced?! lol...Tell us o wise AlBaqir, When Allah says in the Qur'an what the magicians did, which made Musa (AS) see that their ropes and sticks were moving (like that of a snake), did the magic not affect Musa's (AS) senses?! SMH

AlBaqir:

* You displayed lots of ignorance in this hadith. You were exposed yet you proved to be unrepentant. You can review your ignorance.

Lol, what ignorance? You should even be ashamed, you that did not know that Allah (SWT) is the creator of evil, including black evil magic, not to mention your confusion about black magic, spells and the likes. I can see you are desperate, I understand how you must be feeling

AlBaqir:

# Our justification to expose this lies called "sahih hadith" is that shaitan can never have dominance over the Prophet of Allah based on ayah of the Quran.

This had already been addressed, but you said you didn't read, I guess you read, but were too scared to reply accordingly

AlBaqir:

# You instantly cited the case of Nabi Ayub who was afflicted with trials. You claimed those trials were from shaitan. Here again you messed up multifold. Again, try to review your ignorance. Yet you stubbornly dragging this issue.

LOL, you are more confused than I thought, the Qur'an clearly states that Ayub (AS) said that the trials were from shaitan (la) (please READ the Qur'an!), you were above arguing that it was an exception of which shaitan (la) had to go through some bureaucracy to afflict Prophet Ayoub (AS) of which I tried to clear this your confusion, but Alas! here we are again!

AlBaqir:

# Interestingly you ask me to go and read the Tafsir of the two suwar - Nas and Falaq. Another display of ignorance, Mr Sino. The wish of your Mufassir is to link the lies (called sahih hadith) of Nabi being bewitched as asbab nuzul of those two suwar. Unfortunately there is no link whatsoever.

this is what I said with regards to the two surah

"So when Allah (SWT) test His servants, it can never be through shaitan?! Are there shaitan amongst men and jinn?! When Allah (SWT) taught His Prophet (SAW) as well as the Muslims to seek protection from shaitan, amongst men and jinn, do you think it is just for their whispering?! Even at that, whispering of shaitan is also a test from Allah (SWT). Please go and study the surah Falaq and Nas properly. And please consult reputable books of tafsir..."

O Albaqir, where did I make mention of sabau nuzul?! See all these your futile efforts are becoming ridiculous, you just conjure things in your mind and voila! Did Allah (SWT) not teach His beloved prophet how to seek refuge in Him against evil amongst men and jinn?! I told you to read tafsir (a proper one at that) so that you wouldn't fall into the mistakes you later made and are still making. SMH. I asked a question in the above quote of which you never answered, so are others you feign ignorance of...

AlBaqir:

# You continue bringing stories upon stories that doesn't count. Again I don't waste my time reading your copy-past stories. And I remembered I said, "those who will read will read".

Ha! when I had thought there wouldn't be any of you people's favorite anthem, here it is, "copy and paste" Stories from the Qur'an that clearly shows you need proper learning to do.

AlBaqir:

# My last submission is up there: A golden ayah that should keep your mouth shut till eternity but as usual no shame. The ayah says only the wicked ones give attribute of bewitching to the Prophet.

Bros, did you read the tafsir of the said ayah?! Just asking, because if you did, you wouldn't have quoted the verse as evidence against me. Again, just with just a little effort, scroll up, those who claimed that the Prophet (SAW) was bewitched, were saying so because of the miracle of miracles, the Qur'an, they couldn't phantom how an illiterate man could produce such a thing of beauty and eloquence, full of truth that strikes fear into their wicked souls, and for your information, the Prophet (SAW) was also called a magician, a mad man, a man of tales of old (get a copy of Tafsir Tabary please... I never claimed the Prophet (SAW) was bewitched to have received the revelation (the Qur'an), this is how your sect keep picking verses at random and interpret based on whatever suits them. SMH

AlBaqir:

Here you are with yet another set of ayahs. Lets examine them:



# Alhamdulillah you clearly highlight yourself that the power of Shaitan was on Nabi Yusuf's brothers @underline. Do I have anything else to say? Sino try your might and treachery you will continue to fail unless you remove your blindfold.

* Here we discuss Magic and its effect!. As usual you try to bend and twist what Yusuf's brothers did as a "dominance of Shaitan over Yusuf, an-Nabi". Where is your senses Mr Sino?

Thank God you read this one

First question (which I know you wouldn't answer), Did Yusuf (AS) not acknowledge the fact that the enmity between his brothers and him was the handywork of shaitan?!

Second question, Did shaitan not succeed initially in his efforts?

Lastly, Was it not as a result of this shaitan's inducement and instigation that resulted in the afflictions faced by Yusuf (As) and his father Yaqub (AS)?!

Allah (SWT) in His divine wisdom and ways puts us all in trials and tests, and He (SWT) can use any means He (SWT) deems fit, these stories I had presented are also lessons for us, teaching us how to respond when we are being tested and tried.

I can't help but laugh at your desperate attempt to say we are only discussing Magic and its effect, the "black evil magic" lol, it seems you do not even understand what black magic is and what tricks people who stand at street corners call magic.

AlBaqir:

NB: Read Sura Ibrahim: 22. Shaitan only whispers evil into the ears of those who follow him but the deed afterwards is exclusively the doer. This ayah says shaitan can only invites but does not have the power to compel. And for the record, enviness is what overwhelmed the brother of Yusuf to turn against him, and they yield the invitation of Shaitan.

Of course shaitan whispers, but he has foot soldiers among men and jinn, do I need to even tell you this?! Please this is getting too pathetic, must you sound like this just because you want to argue?! Did the narration says shaitan (la) dominated the Prophet (SAW)?! Na wa o!

AlBaqir:

# Again you want to "twister" your shaitan card as the outcome of temporary loss of eyes of Yusuf's father, Yaqub. Haba!

O wise Albaqir, can you tell us what caused Yaqub's loss of his sight?! Does it not go back to what shaitan (la) did amongst Yusuf's brothers?!

AlBaqir:

# Oluwa o oooooo! So you mean the fear that Musa conceived was as a result of magical effect upon him? Just because you want to authentic that silly lie called sahih hadith, you go to this extent of foolishness?! Subhan'Allah!

Na wa o, the Qur'an said so, abi you now disbelieved in the Qur'an now?! The verses are clear, you can read them again!

AlBaqir:

Anyway here's your Tafsir Ibn Kathir on the ayah:

"Concerning Allah's statement,

(So Musa conceived fear in himself.) This means that he feared for the people that they would be tested and deceived by their magic before he could even have a chance to throw what was in his right hand.
http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=915&Itemid=74

# You see how deeper your ignorance is, Mr Sino?

This is the height of ignorance on your part, the above is attributed to who?! what narration of the Prophet (SAW) or companions or the salafs backs the above statement?! It's even funny you remember tafsir now, are the verses not clear enough?! Na so you go dey cherry pick upandan.

AlBaqir:

Again, trials are different from magical effect. Stop calling white, black.

# Trials/tests are from Allah exclusively, Quran established.

So the enmity between Yusuf's brothers is not a trial abi?! and the magic performed in front of Musa (AS) that made him scared was not also a trial?! So Allah (SWT) would send down trials and tests through..... (please fill in the gap)?! So Shaitan (la) and his foot soldiers created themselves abi?! SMH

I know you would never answer my questions, it has always been your way...

AlBaqir:

# Magic is handiwork of Shaitan. No Prophet of Allah was ever affected by Magic.

Lol, but your infallible Imams can be poisoned to death by agents of shaitan abi?!

AlBaqir:
Honestly I haven't read your as usual pathetic replies and I can never bother myself reading it. Quran has sealed the arguments. I only wish you will put down your ignorance and arrogance and hear the Quran not the lies documented in your Sahihain.

"[size=14pt]We know best what they listen to when they listen to you (O Muhammad!) and when they take counsel secretly, the wicked say: You (the believers) follow none other than a man bewitched.

See what they liken you to (i.e a man bewitched)! So they have gone astray and cannot find the way.[/size]."

# Surah Isra'i is among the earliest Makkan's Surah.

# This ayah clearly established that only the wicked ones give Nabi the bad attributes i.e being bewitched.

Are you among the wicked ones, Mr Sino?

# This wicked hadith says Nabi was bewitched for days (some narrations say six months) to the fact that it affected his rationality.

# My Nabi, salallahu alayhi wa ahli, was not bewitched at any time of his lives. Only the wicked ones say something like that.

I bid you farewell.

As usual when irrefutable evidences are brought, you run away, why did you not read?! Yet you are quick to quote a verse which if you had read my reply, you wouldn't have quoted for me in the first instance!

It is an open secret that you Shi’a do not cultivate a proper relationship with the Qur’an, it is not a surprise you make statements which obviously goes against the Qur’an as shown thus far. I would just give you more examples, perhaps, you would reflect!

"And he raised his parents upon the throne, and they bowed to him in prostration. And he said, "O my father, this is the explanation of my vision of before. My Lord has made it reality. And He was certainly good to me when He took me out of prison and brought you [here] from bedouin life after Satan had induced [estrangement] between me and my brothers. Indeed, my Lord is Subtle in what He wills. Indeed, it is He who is the Knowing, the Wise." (Qur’an 12:100)

In the above verse, we read how Yusuf (AS) accused shaitan of instigating the evil thoughts and plans to his brothers which made them to commit the sins, causing different kinds of hardship for Yusuf (AS). Perhaps, Yusuf (AS) did not know what he was saying abi AlBaqir?! (Audhubillah!). Did the effect of shaitan’s plan to cause Yusuf (AS) to suffer not happen?! Did Yusuf’s (AS) father (Yaqub) AS, not also suffer from this?! He became blind!

Another example,

[Musa (Moses)] said: "Nay, throw you (first)!" Then behold, their ropes and their sticks, by their magic, appeared to him as though they moved fast.

So Musa (Moses) conceived a fear in himself.

We (Allah) said: "Fear not! Surely, you will have the upper hand.

(Qur’an 20:66-68)

Above is another good example that shows the effect of magic on Musa (AS) a Prophet of Allah (SWT), even Allah (SWT) mentions that Musa (AS) became scared/afraid, but like Allah (SWT) would always be at the aid of His righteous slaves, He strengthened him, just has Allah (SWT) strengthened other Prophets (‘Alayhim Salam) including the Prophet (SAW) in the narration in question.

These were all tests from Allah (SWT) and part of Allah’s wisdom and plan…How then does the narration, which clearly stated that the Prophet (SAW) prayed, his prayer was answered as everything was revealed to him and he was cured become something so difficult to understand and believe?! No, this is not about a genuine concern about the said narration, it is just due to hatred, lack of faith and knowledge, a very dangerous combination, if found in one person!

Empiree:
Woooooooooord!

Meat and cashew nuts?

How did that taste altogether?

That sounds like supplement hamburger

Bros, I am giving you "nankali" for inspiration to also write a poem, I hope you still have access to sallah meat?!

I hope to read from you soonest