Does Ahlebayt of prophets include only Infallibles or divinely appointed Imams(leaders) ? Aren’t the righteous believers from their family included in Ahlebayt ?
Answer: We have refuted this argument of shian e dajjal in one of our article in a brief manner, providing relevant examples for that.
Refer in this article (Deception of shias by categorizing the Ahlebayt of prophets(pbut)), Argument #3(specifically) and Argument #1 which refutes the claim made by a shian e dajjal.
Are the Shia Imams “witnesses” which are mentioned in Quran?
A shia quoted this verse of Quran: 16:89 One day We shall raise from all Peoples(ummats) a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring thee as a witness against these (thy people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.
Now using this verse a shia raised a question: Who this witness is??
1)Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه و سلم??
its not possible, since he is not physically among us…
2)People who surround us??
not possible again….as the verses clearly say:
“raise from all Peoples a witness against them”
So who is it?? Isn’t these the Imams of time?
Well if this foolish interpretation is applied to Quran then the shias will have to believe that, even we should have Messengers among us. Since Quran says: And for every nation(ummat) there is a messenger.And when their messenger cometh (on the Day of Judgment) it will be judged between them fairly, and they will not be wronged. (Quran 10:47). Because we know that Messenger of Allah is not physically among us, so were there messengers(Rasools) after Muhammad(saw)?
If shias say no, and for this ummah(nation) Muhammad(saw) remains Messenger without his presence , then why can’t Prophet(Saw) be a witness over this Nation?
Moreover quran confirms this:
Thus We have made you a Wasat (just) (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger (Muhammad SAW) be a witness over you.(2:143)
This shows that Muslim Ummah will witness over previous nations too,(i.e complete mankind). So when they being not present could be witness over mankind then why can’t prophet(Saw) be?
Here are some authentic narrations which explain these above verse:
Imam Ahmad reported that Abu Sa` id narrated: Allah’s Messenger said:(Nuh will be called on the Day of Resurrect ion and will be asked, ` Have you conveyed (the Message)’ He will say, ` Yes. ‘ His people will be summoned and asked, ` Has Nuh conveyed (the Message) to you’ They will say, `No warner came to us and no one (Prophet ) was sent to us.’ Nuh will be asked, `Who testifies for you’ He will say, `Muhammad and his Ummah. ‘)This is why Allah said:(Thus We have made you aWasat nation. ) The Prophet said; (The Wasat means the ` Adl (j ust ). You will be summoned to test ify that Nuh has conveyed (his Message), and I will at test to your testimony. )It was also recorded by Al-Bukhari, At -Tirmidhi, An-Nasa’i and Ibn Maj ah.
Imam Ahmad also reported that Abu Sa` id Khudri narrated: Allah’s Messenger said:The Prophet would come on the Day of Resurrect ion with two or more people (his only following! ), and his people would also be summoned and asked, ` Has he (their Prophet ) conveyed (the Message) to you’ They would say, ` No. ‘ He would be asked, ` Have you conveyed (the Message) to your people’ He would say, ` Yes. ‘ He would be asked, `Who testifies for you’ He would say, `Muhammad and his Ummah. ‘ Muhammad and his Ummah would then be summoned and asked, ` Has he conveyed (the Message) to his people’ They would say, ` Yes. ‘ They would be asked, `Who told you that ‘ They would say, `Our Prophet (Muhammad) came to us and told us that the Messengers have conveyed (their Messages).
Thus we find in these verses and narrations, being witness doesn’t mean watching the acts or deeds of people, it just means making testimony(shahadah) of the message that was delivered by Prophets.
Does the narration(which was posted in our article “Explanation Of Hadith Ath-Thaqalayn”) which states that sadaqa(charity) was haram even on the wives of Prophet(saw) was not authentic?
The shia of dajjal accused us of pulling a fast one , he said: The Nasibi, realizing the extreme weakness of his position, tries a fast one here. The report which he has cited has no complete chain, or at least, he has not cited any chain for it! Yet, he grades it authentic! On whose word? Is this Nasibi a Hadith scholar? What is his qualification in the Hadith sciences? Who is he to grade Hadiths, especially when no proofs have been adduced?
This shows the lack of honesty of shian e dajjal, because when we already stated that the narration was authentic it was obviously the ruling from a scholar. And it seems the shian e dajjal didn’t have the courage to look up the book and point out the weakness in narration(if at all it existed), before making such ridiculous and unacademic accusations, or may be he saw that but when he found that there was nothing that he could use to deceive people, he made such moronic arguments. But the readers shouldn’t be surprised because this is nothing strange coming out from the shia of dajjal because these are the teachings they get from their scholars and as obedient followers they implement on these commands, For example see this:
Question”1245″: Is it Possible to Lie or produce Arguments which contain Lies when Debating with a person who Is a Follower of Bida’a (Innovation/ they probably mean Sunnis) and a spreader or Dala’la (Ignorance/ us as well) If this Lie would Destroy my Opponent’s Arguments?
Imam Khoei’i Answers: If it will stop his Falsehood then it is Permissible to do So. (Imam Khoei’i, Sirat el Najat, Volume 1, Page 447)
Anyways this time Insha Allah we will put an end to all the deceptions of shian e dajjal on this issue. Here is the complete narration with the chain:
Here is the info of narrators :
Narrator: Wakiya is a famous imam, Wakiya ibn al-Jarrah who needs no introduction. He was thiqat. See Taqrib 7414
Narrator: Muhammad ibn Sherik, Abu Uthman, he was thiqat(trustworthy). (“Taqrib” #5957).
Narrator: Ibn Abu Muleyka, that’s Abdullah ibn Ubeydullah. Thiqat(trustworthy). (“Taqrib” #3454).
Thus this hadees(narration) is authentic. Which was even said by sheikh Abdul Muhsin bin Hammad Al-‘Abbad Al-Badr in his book the status of Ahlebayt in the sight of Ahle Sunnah, page 12 .
Regarding the objection raised by shian e dajjal on credibility of the view of Ayesha(ra), then it sufficient to see this narration from companion of prophet(saw).
ما أشكل علينا أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حديث قط فسألنا عائشة إلا وجدنا عندها منه علما.
Abu Musa al-Ash’ari said.”Whenever we (the Companions) of Prophet peace be upon him had any difficulty on hadeeth, of which we approached Aisha and (always) found that she had the knowledge of the hadith “. [SunanTirmidhi hadith no: 3883]
Comment: This proves that Ayesha(ra) was the teacher of companions of Prophet(Saw).
Secondly, when Imam Zainul Abedin(fourth shia Imam) didn’t have any problem narrating narrations from Ayesha(ra) then who are shian e dajjal to object?
This narration is present in Sahi muslim.
وحدثنا محمد بن بشار حدثنا عبد الرحمن حدثنا سفيان عن أبي الزناد عن علي بن الحسين عن عائشة رضي الله عنها أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم كان يقبل وهو صائم
صحيح مسلم:ج2/ص778 ح1106
This is sufficient to establish the credibility of Ayesha(ra) in sight of honest , unbiased Muslims.
Scholars who considered that sadaqa was prohibited even on wives of Prophet(Saw)
مِمَّا ذكره ابن القيِّم في كتابه (( جلاء الأفهام )) (ص:331 – 333) للاحتجاج للقائلِين بدخول أزواجه صلى الله عليه وسلم في آل بيته قوله: (( قال هؤلاء: وإنَّما دخل الأزواجُ في الآل وخصوصاً أزواجُ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم تشبيهاً لذلك بالنَّسَب؛ لأنَّ اتِّصالَهُنَّ بالنَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم غيرُ مرتفع، وهنَّ محرَّماتٌ على غيرِه في حياتِه وبعد مَمَاتِه، وهنَّ زوجاتُه في الدنيا والآخرة، فالسَّببُ الذي لهنَّ بالنَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قائمٌ مقامَ النَّسَب، وقد نصَّ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم على الصلاةِ عليهنَّ، ولهذا كان القولُ الصحيح – وهو منصوص الإمام أحمد رحمه الله ـ أنَّ الصَّدقةَ تحرُمُ عليهنَّ ، لأنَّها أوساخُ الناسِ، وقد صان اللهُ سبحانه ذلك الجَنَابَ الرَّفيع، وآلَه مِن كلِّ أوساخِ بَنِي آدَم
“And as it has been related by Ibn Qayyim in his book “Jalaa al afham” page 331-333 as proof that his (pbuh) wives are part of Ahl al Bayt. “Wives are part of the Ahl, and specifically, the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) are Ahl al Bayt, because they are connected to the Prophet (pbuh) without disconnect, and because they are forbidden to others in marriage in this life and the next, and they are his wives in this life and the next, so the connection here is a fixed relationship, and the Prophet (pbuh) has said that one must send peace and blessings upon them, and that’s the correct position, and it’s related by Imam Ahmed that sadaqa is forbidden for them, because it is the refuse of people, and because God has protected the family of the Prophet (pbuh) from any filth.”
قال الحموي : وفي المغني عن عائشة رضي الله عنها : أنا آل محمد لا تحل لنا الصدقة
al Hamwee said: and in the Mughni from Aisha’ (may God be pleased with her) that she said: “We the family of the Prophet (pbuh) aren’t permitted Sadaqa” this is evidence that it is forbidden for them. [In the margin of Rad al Muhtar of Ibn Abidin, Volume 2, page 384.]
كشاف القناع – البهوتي ج 2 ص 337 :
في المغني والشرح عن ابن أبي مليكة : أن خالد بن سعيد بن العاص أرسل إلى عائشة بسفرة من الصدقة فردتها وقالت : إنا آل محمد لا تحل لنا الصدقة رواه الخلال . فهذا يدل على تحريمها عليهن . ولم يذكر ما يخالفه ، مع أنهم لم يذكروا هذا في الوصية والوقف . وهذا يدل على أنهن من أهل بيته في تحريم الزكاة . وذكر الشيخ تقي الدين : أنه يحرم عليهن الصدقة . وأنهن من أهل بيته في أصح الروايتين ورده المجد .
In the Mughni and explanation by Ibn Aby Malika: that Khalid bin Sa’eed bin Al Aas sent to Aisha some sadaqa but she returned it saying: We the family of the Prophet (pbuh) aren’t permitted sadaqa, narrated by Al Khalaal. And this is evidence that it is forbidden for them. And he didn’t mention what opposes this. Even though they didn’t mention this in Wills and Donations. And this is evidence that they are from his family in being forbidden zakat. And sheikh Taqee al Deen said: Sadaqa is forbidden for them. And they are from his Ahl al Bayt in the more correct of the narrations. Kashshaf al Fattah, Al Bahooti, volume 2, page 337
وقال السخاوي في القول البديع في بيان صيغة الصلاة في التشهّد: فالمرجع أنّهم من حرمت عليهم الصدقة، وذكر أنّه اختيار الجمهور ونصّ الشافعي، وأنّ مذهب أحمد أنّهم أهل البيت، وقيل: المراد أزواجه وذرّيّته… (عن هامش الصواعق المحرقة لعبد الوهاب عبد اللطيف: 146 ط. مصر 1385 هـ ).
Al Sakhawi says in “Al Qawl al badee fee bayaan Seeghat al Salaat fee altashahud”: and the conclusion is that they are those for whom charity is forbidden, and it has been mentioned that this is the opinion of the majority, and this is related from Al Shaf’ee, and in the school of Ahmed bin Hanbal that those are the Ahl al Bayt, and it was said: what is meant are his wives and his descendents.
وقال القسطلاني: ان الراجح أنّهم من حرمت عليهم الصدقة، كما نص عليه الشافعي واختاره الجمهور ويؤيده قوله صلّى الله عليه وسلّم للحسن بن عليّ: إنّا آل محمّد لا تحل لنا الصدقة، وقيل المراد بآل محمّد أزواجه وذرّيّته.
Al Qastalani said: the correct answer is that they are those for whom charity is forbidden, as was recorded by al Shaf’ee and what was selected by the majority and supported by what was said by al Hassan bin Ali: The family of Muhammad, charity is not permitted for us, and it was said that what is meant by the family of Muhammad are his wives and descendents. [Al Kashf wal Bayaan by Al Thaalabi]
Note: The views we provided were not of any ordinary or contemporary scholars but those were the views of Imams of Ahlesunnah.
But yes we know that some scholars erred when they gave their judgment basing their views on the narration of zaid ibn arqam, but these were brilliantly refuted by Imam ibn Qayyim(rah) in his book Jila al afhaam, page 331-333) and also in our article (Explanation Of Hadith Ath-Thaqalayn). Now taking the view of those scholars who erred and saying that we lied, and asking us to believe in scholars who erred is indeed hypocrisy. Its something similar like someone quoting the great shia classical scholars who believed in corruption of Quran(for example see this), and claims that those few shias who reject the view of these scholars are liars and people should follow these shia scholars who believed that Quran was corrupted. Now will it be correct? We know the shias will spin around wailing, and saying that they are free from the blasphemous beliefs of their classical scholars. So we ask now that why then should Ahlesunnah follow the scholars who erred?
Uncovering the true face of frustrated shian e dajjal
When the shia of dajjal, realized that the report we had provided was indeed authentic, the hypocrisy that was in the heart of shia of dajjal came out. So in order to reject that report the shia of dajjal went on to call the mother of believers a liar(mazallah). The beloved wife of Prophet(Saw), on whose purity several verses of Quran were revealed was called as liar by the shian e dajjal. We used to wonder that why did Allah termed wives of Prophet(Saw) as mother of believers(momineen), Allah could have said mothers of muslims. When we came across such hypocrites we realized the reason for Allah specifically terming wives of Prophet(saw) as Mothers of Momineen(believers). Because in general Muslimeen could also include hypocrites, but the word Momineen only includes true believers and expels the hypocrites. That is why Allah termed wives of Prophet(Saw) as mother of Believers, because Allah knew very well that there will be some hypocrites who will outwardly say that they respect the wives of Prophet(Saw), but their hearts would be filled will hatred and enmity towards wives of Prophet(Saw).
Here is an example of such hypocrites, the shian e dajjal said: Now, if we were, arguendo, to agree that the above report is authentic, it still does not help the case of this Nasibi! Aisha was a known LIAR, and her words alone cannot serve as evidence.
Shian e dajjal further said: In case this Nasibi disagrees, we ask him to tell us what Aisha has done here:
Narrated Yusuf bin Mahak:Marwan had been appointed as the governor of Hijaz by Muawiya. He delivered a sermon and mentioned Yazid bin Muawiya so that the people might take the oath of allegiance to him as the successor of his father (Muawiya). Then ‘Abdur Rahman bin Abu Bakr told him something whereupon Marwan ordered that he be arrested. But ‘Abdur-Rahman entered ‘Aisha’s house and they could not arrest him. Marwan said, “It is he (‘AbdurRahman) about whom Allah revealed this Verse:–And the one who says to his parents: ‘Fie on you! Do you hold out the promise to me..?'”On that, ‘Aisha said from behind a screen, “Allah did not reveal ANYTHING from the Qur’an about us EXCEPT what was connected with the declaration of my innocence (of the slander).” Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 352
So, the only verses Allah ever revealed on any member of the family of Abubakr were those declaring her innocence?! What about verses like this:
[al-hilali and khan 9:40] If you help him (Muhammad SAW) not (it does not matter), for Allah did indeed help him when the disbelievers drove him out, the second of two, when they (Muhammad SAW and Abu Bakr) were in the cave, and he (SAW) said to his companion (Abu Bakr): “Be not sad (or afraid), surely Allah is with us.” Then Allah sent down His Sakinah (calmness, tranquillity, peace, etc.) upon him, and strengthened him with forces (angels) which you saw not, and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowermost, while it was the Word of Allah that became the uppermost, and Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.
Before exposing the deception of shian e dajjal, we pray to Allah that he gives hidaya to shian e dajjal. And May Allah save innocent muslims from the traps of these shian e dajjal. Now let us shatter before you this masterpiece of deception from shian e dajjal.
In the first narration which shian e dajjal cited, he claimed that from that narration we came to know that “the only verses Allah ever revealed on any member of the FAMILY of Abubakr were those declaring innocence of Ayesha(ra)”. But if any reader with open eyes and brain reads that narration, he/she will not find the words FAMILY OF ABUBAKAR in that narration, those words were inserted by the shia, in order to achieve his satanic goal. In that narration we find that “Marwan said, “It is he (‘AbdurRahman) about whom Allah revealed this Verse”, Now Marwan didn’t say that this verse was revealed for complete family of Abubakar(ra), but he said that it was revealed for one of the sons of Abubakar(ra). Thus the one being addressed was OFFSPRING of Abubakar(ra), as we see from the context the verse because the verse which marwan quoted talks about the TREATMENT OF CHILDREN WITH PARENTS ( But he who says to his parents: “Uf f to you! (46:17)), So in that context Ayesha(ra) replied that: No verse except the verses declaring her innocence were revealed regarding THEM(children of Abubakar). If we see the context in which marwan made the accusation we find that he was addressing son of abubakar(ra), so in same context ayesha(ra) refuted him saying no verse was revealed for CHILDREN OF ABUBAKAR(RA) expect about her innocence.
This correct understanding which we gave can be even found in the English version of tafseer ibn katheer: Aishah responded: “Allah did not reveal any Qur’an in our regard (i.e. the children of Abu Bakr), except for the declaration of my innocence. ”(online English tafseer ibn katheer).
Now based on this report the shian e dajjal made some serious accusation on mother of believers. He brought the verse of Quran (9:40) which was revealed for abubakar(ra). But the problem with these shian e dajjal is that they create their own satanic interpretations of narrations by putting their own words in it and they accuse noble personalities. In this case, how could ayesha(ra) say that the even the verse (9:40) was revealed for them(children of abubakar), when she intended to say, about the verses which were REVEALED FOR CHILDREN OF ABUBAKAR(RA)? If at all the context of the scenario would have been that the verses revealed for the complete families was being discussed then surely Ayesha(ra) would have included the verse (9:40) in her response, but since she was only intending to address those verses which were revealed for CHILDREN OF ABUBAKAR(RA), she didn’t mention the verse (9:40).
Now the shian e dajjal didn’t stop here, he went on to mention some other verses, he said: And:
[al-hilali and khan 33:30] O wives of the Prophet! Whoever of you commits an open illegal sexual intercourse, the torment for her will be doubled, and that is ever easy for Allah.
[al-hilali and khan 66:3-4] And (remember) when the Prophet (SAW) disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his wives (Hafsah), so when she told it (to another i.e. ‘Aishah), and Allah made it known to him, he informed part thereof and left a part. Then when he told her (Hafsah) thereof, she said: “Who told you this?” He said: “The All-Knower, the All-Aware (Allah) has told me”. If you two (wives of the Prophet SAW, namely ‘Aishah and Hafsah) turn in repentance to Allah, (it will be better for you), your hearts are indeed so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet SAW likes), but if you help one another against him (Muhammad SAW), then verily, Allah is his Maula (Lord, or Master, or Protector, etc.), and Jibrael (Gabriel), and the righteous among the believers, and furthermore, the angels are his helpers.
Look at Aisha’s LIE again:
On that, ‘Aisha said from behind a screen, “Allah did not reveal ANYTHING from the Qur’an about us EXCEPT what was connected with the declaration of my innocence (of the slander).”
Indeed pathetic! What the shian e dajjal didn’t realize here was that, none of these verses where EXCLUSIVELY revealed for CHILDREN OF ABUBAKAR(ra), both the verses the shian e dajjal cited, included other wives of Prophet(Saw), who were not the children of ABUBAKAR(ra).That is why ayesha(ra) didn’t mention those in her response to Marwan. Importantly, this is why we don’t find any counter reply from Marwan, if at all Ayesha(ra) would have lied(mazalalh), then surely Marwan would have replied Ayesha(ra) saying didn’t Allah reveal verses such as (33:30) or (9:40) etc for you people. But even Marwan understood the reply of ayesha(ra) that is why he was left answerless, but these shian e dajjal didn’t understood such simple issue because their brains are nothing but devils workshops. How could any one use these verses to accuse Ayesha(ra) of lying? Indeed the shian e dajjal have no shame at all. They lie blatantly, accuse innocent and noble personalities. But this is nothing strange, because these are the teachings of this cult. Since they are taught such deception which we witnessed here by labeling them as teachings of Ahlebayt, if you don’t believe then here is an example from shia narration(which was falsely attributed to innocent shia imam, by Allah he is free from this filth that shias attribute him):
Imam Al-sajjad (as) said: If you see people of suspicion and innovation – other than shias or new shia – then show disownment from them and abuse them much, backbit them, make false accusations on them – that is, backbite them by attributing lies on them and make false accusations on them (‘Buhtaan’) …
[tanbiah al-khawatir v.2 p.162 – wasael al-shia v.11 p. 508 – Nahj al-intisaar p.152]
And based on such of these narrations, there great SHIA scholars gave verdicts of similar kind: Question”1245″: Is it Possible to Lie or produce Arguments which contain Lies when Debating with a person who Is a Follower of Bida’a (Innovation/ they probably mean Sunnis) and a spreader or Dala’la (Ignorance/ us as well) If this Lie would Destroy my Opponent’s Arguments?
Imam Khoei’i Answers: If it will stop his Falsehood then it is Permissible to do So. (Imam Khoei’i, Sirat el Najat, Volume 1, Page 447)
A similar fatwa was even issue by Grand ayatullah sistani, a esteemed SHIA scholar.
So people beware of these shian e dajjal, who are professionally trained to lie and make false accusation, do not fell into their traps of deception, you will not only ruin your life in this world but even your hereafter.
Note: After this shattering response and exposition of shian e dajjal, they might try to bombard us with narrations, which they interpret in the similar deceptive and satanic way as we have seen above, just in order to over come the humiliation and embarrassment. And this is the only thing they often do in order to make an escape, or to derail the attention of people from the blatant lies which were caught red handed. But for sane people, just few examples are needed to understand the true nature of shian e dajjal. Moreover we demand justice before our biased and honest readers. Shouldn’t before moving to another issue the shian e dajjal should be asked to repent for making this serious accusation against mother of believers which turned out to be a lie(self made accusation)? Shouldn’t these liars be punished? Because we know that shian e dajjal will surely make an attempt to bombard us with such cheap tactics of theirs inorder to derail the attention of people from their exposed deceptions, Though we will surely in future articles answer all those deceptive tactics of shian e dajjal, Inshallah.
Claim of shian e dajjal that, We find several narrations & quranic verses where Sahaba were condemned, So why should we love and respect them?
Let us clear before our readers some tactics which shian e dajjal use to deceive people:
1. They use the verses from Quran which were revealed for hypocrites and they claim that see hypocrites were among Sahaba as Quran says, but what the shian e dajjal either deliberately or ignorantly don’t realize is that Ahlesunnah only considers those people among Sahaba who shared the company of Prophet(saw) while believing in him and died as believers. So using those verses of Quran is nothing but deception of Shias.
2.They forget or want people to forget that Sahaba(ra) were not infallibles(like they think there Imams are), Sahaba did commit sins or errors. The shian e dajjal bring up some examples of Sahaba where there committed mistakes, as though Ahlesunnah believes that they were infallible. But the fact is that, Ahlesunnah believes that none of the sahaba was infallible, they did commit mistakes.
When the shian e dajjal quote the verses of Quran proving that sahaba did commit errors they often hide the later part of the context of those verses because often, we find that when sahaba committed some mistakes, Allah forgave them. This case is similar to the case of Hz adam(as) were he disobeyed Allah, yet Allah forgave him and honored him. Similarly the fact is that even after you find that though sahaba used to commit mistakes, yet Allah honored them and praised them, and Prophet(saw) called them the best people, as reported in the books of shias and sunnis. Lastly, even ahlebayt committed errors see this article(link) (see proof 5) where we have proved from shia and sunni books the mistake of Ali(ra). Though these mistakes doesn’t degrades the great status of Ali(ra) or Ahlebayt, similar is the case for the mistakes of other Sahaba.
3. They often quote the narrations where people accused sahaba(ra) either due misunderstanding, which can be clarified or they quote the accusation of the ones who are not credible reliable when they go against sahaba.(like tabain etc)
There is much more we could have said, but when we find that these shian e dajjal, didn’t spare Prophets of Allah, then how could they have spared Sahaba? So its indeed worthless to answer heretics like shias whose hearts are filled with hatred for true muslims. (shias accuse Prophets of Allah)
Should the narrations of shia Imams be a touchstone to verify the narrations of Prophet?
Shin e dajjal in response to our original article said: Narrations can be taken from anyone as long as they are speaking the Truth, even if they are absolute liars. If they agree with certain truths, then they can be taken. Otherwise, they are to be rejected. This is how we take narrations from the Sahabah. Whatever of their narrations is confirmed by the teachings of our Imams (عليهم السلام), we accept. Whatever of their teachings is denied by our Imams (عليهم السلام), we reject.
Since shias take narrations from narrators like donkeys so now the shian e dajjal have started behaving like donkeys. The reason we say so is because what all this shian e dajjal said, was already answered and refuted in our original article. The first point(check here) in our original article itself was a refutation to the stupidity of the shian e dajjal. Anyways let us try to explain these empty headed creatures in a different way.
What we follow are narrations from Prophet(saw) and Sahaba are reporters of those narrations. And you(shias) have narrations from your Imams, So the companions of your Imams were narrators of the narrations of Imams, Shias can’t claim that the narrations they have from their Imams were whispered to them directly by their Imams. Those narrations reached them through the route of the companions of their Imams. Now here is where the greatest stupidity lies, because the shian e dajjal are keen to reject the narrations reported by Sahaba of Prophet(Saw) but they have no problem in accepting traditions from the companions of their Imams. On the contrary the shian e dajjal are comparing the narrations by the their Imams with the narrations narrated by companions of Prophet(Saw), but they completely missed the point that the narrations they want to use as touchstone were reported by the companions of their Imams, their Imams didn’t deliver those reports directly to shias. So in other way they want to use narrations of their Imams to verify narrations of Prophet(saw).
So how on earth can the narrations of Imams be a touchstone to verify which narrations are correct? Infact the narrations of Prophet(saw) should be the touch stone to verify which of the narrations were authentically narrated from the companions of shia Imams. Because the companions of Prophet(Saw) who narrated the narrations of Prophet were those with whom Allah was pleased, who learned the religion directly from Prophet(Saw), multiple verses of Quran were revealed in their honor and praise. Where as the companions of Shia Imams were those who were always under taqiyyah that is why we find contradictory narrations from them. They were insulted by their OWN (shia)IMAMS. They were called hypocrites by shia Imams, etc etc. All these points were already given and discussed in brief in our original article here we are just summarizing it. So the shian e dajjal by bringing up this silly argument have actually exposed the extreme weakness in their arguments, because what shias do is actually the opposite of what should be done. Since prophet(Saw) is the basic source of Islamic knowledge, so his narrations are to be the touchstone to verify the reports coming from shia Imams(who too were under taqiyyah), And the narrations of shia Imams can never be a touchstone to verify the narrations of Prophet(saw) since it is he(saw) from whom mankind got the teachings of Islam.
So we find that the shian e dajjal had nothing that they could have refuted from our original article that is why they just made some ridiculous run arounds for the issues which were already shattered by us in our original article. We urge our readers to read our original article (Explanation Of Hadith Ath-Thaqalayn) for a brief understanding.
Note: In this article we said that shias have some narrators who were donkeys. In wasn’t said in metaphoric sense, it is indeed true. Here is narration from renowned shia book:
Al kafi volume 1, page 237:
وروي أن أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام قال: إن ذلك الحمار كلم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فقال: بأبي أنت وامي إن أبي حدثنى، عن أبيه، عن جده، عن أبيه أنه كان مع نوح في السفينة فقام إليه نوح فمسح على كفله ثم قال: يخرج من صلب هذا الحمار حمار يركبه سيد النبيين وخاتمهم، فالحمد لله الذي جعلني ذلك الحمار
Ali bin abi Talib RAA was told that the Prophet’s donkey, Ufair, committed suicide!So Ali said: That donkey spoke to the Prophet(saw), he said: May my father and mother be sacrificed for you, my father told me that his father told him, that his grandfather told him, that his father was with Noah ASWS on the arc, so Noah ASWS approached him and wiped over his back and said: from the offspring of this donkey there will come a donkey which will be ridden by the best and final prophet. Ufair then said: so Alhamdulillah, that He made me this donkey.
Did Prophet(Saw) really named the 12 shia Imams or was it a shia fabrication?
Well before we expose this absurd fabrication, we would like to expose some deceptions of shian e dajjal even on this matter. The shian e dajjal often label shia books as sunni books which contains some fabrications like the names of 12 shia imams in order to support their creed. These are the books of two scholars they often quote, both of these were shia books.
Shia scholars who are introduced as sunni scholars by shian e dajjal
1.Sulayman Ibn Muhammad Al-Qunduzi Al-Hanafi:
He is the author of Yanabi’ Al-Mawada. shia scholar Aga Buzurg Tehrani included his book “Al-Thareea” , which is an Encyclopedia on Shia books. He said [25/290] : “ Even though the Shiasm of the author is not known, but he is Gnostic, and the Book is considered to be one of the books of Shia” Refer this (link)
2. Ibrahim Ibn Muhammad Al-Juwaini (also called Al-Hamweeni):
He is the author of “Faraid Al-Simtayn” He has been included in the book “Ayan Al-Shia” , an Encyclodia of Shia prominent figures, by Al-Ameen Al-Amili. Aga Buzurgh Tehrani, in “Thayl Kashf Al-Dhunoon” p. 70, pointed out that the chief of the Mongols, Ghazan, embraced Islam through him and became a Shiite, and also his brother Shah Khudabanda who made his Shiasm apparent. Amongst the sheikhs that he was taught by, are Ibn Al-Muttahir Al-Hili and Khawaja Nusair Al-Din Al-Tusi. These are two prominent 12er figures. (refer this link)
Now as far as authentic sunni reports are concerned then they prove, shia doctrine to be incorrect , because according to authentic narrations from Prophet(Saw), he(saw) didn’t appoint any Imam or caliph.
Sahi muslim 4.661: Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “The Israelis used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Caliphs who will increase in number.” The people asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What do you order us (to do)?” He said, “Obey the one who will be given the pledge of allegiance first. Fulfil their (i.e. the Caliphs) rights, for Allah will ask them about (any shortcoming) in ruling those Allah has put under their guardianship.”
Comment: This narration proves that there were no divinely appointed Imams, otherwise Prophet(saw) would have commanded and warned that obey the ones who are divinely appointed by Allah, or would have said, obey the one to whom I made caliph. But prophet(saw) said obey the one “who will be given the pledge of allegiance first”. This proves that there was no divinely appointed leader after prophet(Saw).
Secondly, according to authentic narrations the name of the father of final caliph(i.e Mahdi) will be Abdullah.
Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) said: “The world will not come to an end until the Arabs are ruled by a man from my family whose name is the same as mine and whose father’s name is the same as my father’s.” (Sunan Abi Dawud, 11/370).
Note: We know that the name of prophet’s(saw) father was Abdullah, That’s why Prophet(saw) was called Muhammad ibn Abdullah. However the name of father of 12th shia imam was Hassan Al askari .
What about the narrations present in shia books, considered authentic by them which contains the names of 12 Shia imams?
Answer: Well the answer to this question is that those were outright fabrications. We have even shown readers the authentic sunni reports and as even proved from historical evidences produced by reliable shia scholars.(which we will see later). As for those fabrications of shias, then the words of some esteemed hadees scholars are sufficient to understand the reality of those narrations.
Hafidh shaykh-ul islam ibn Hajar said:
واما الفضايل فلا تحصى كم وضع الرافضة في فضل اهل البيت
“As for narrations about /fadail/, it’s impossible to count how many of them were fabricated by rawafidh about ahlel-bayt“. Source: “Lisanul mizan” 1/13.
Al-Hafidh Abu Yala al-Khaleele said: “Rawafidh fabricated 300 000 narrations about Ale and ahlel-bayt“.
Source: ibn Qayum “Al manar wa munif fi saheeh wa dhaif” p 292, Darul “Karincha” Turkey. thk. AbdulFatah Abu Ghudda.
So its apparent that those narrations are nothing but fabrications from these 300000 narrations which were fabricated by shian e dajjal.
History proves them to be fabrications:
Moreover, Not only sunni authentic narrations but even history testifies that those narrations were fabrications, because even the shias themselves never knew that who was going to be the next Imam right after the death of almost every Imam, so saying that the Prophet(saw) actually defined who those were, such that there would never be a dispute regarding their identity is a blatant lie.
Refer this article: History proves that the twelve shia Imams were never named by Prophet(saw). (from the books of reliable shia historians)
Note: The shias might try to bring up the narrations present in sunni books which speak about 12 caliphs/ameers to deceive people claiming that those were shia Imams, But there is a difference of chalk and cheese between Caliph/Ameer and Imam. Please refer this article for detailed info with poofs.
“Truth has (now) arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish.” Quran (17:81)