Irrelevant issues discussed in Sunni/Shia debates

[Khaled]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

I wanted to start a thread on issues that I feel are irrelevant, and therefore divert most Sunni/Shi'i debates.  I think, generally speaking, if we can get past this issues, we can debate and come to an agreement (or disagreement) about the main differences between Mainstream Muslims and Twelvers.  I think I will just list these issues without stating why, and we can start a discussion on whichever issues you guys think need further clarification.

1) The Iman of Abu Talib or other family members of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.
2) Fiqh differences such as wiping on the feet or combining prayers for no reason.
3) Political criticisms of Iran, and by extension the Safavid Empire, or Saudi.
4) Bringing up ibn Saba.
5) Bringing up the Shi'as don't have hadeeths from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.
6) Discussing the faith of Abu Sufyan, Mu'awiyah, or Yazid.
7) Arguing who was the first male Muslim.

These are just a few issues that I think can start this conversation.  You guys can add some or we can discuss these.

[glorfindel]

Wa 'Aleikum As-Salam,

Point 5 - surely that point is highly relevant?

[Khaled]

Wa 'Aleikum As-Salam,

Point 5 - surely that point is highly relevant?

No its not, because they argue that a hadeeth from the Imam is like a hadeeth from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Imam is the position of the narrator, like we have ahadeeth from Abu Hurayrah and Ayesha, not the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.

I find the argument to just go in circles, and that the Shi'as would have a point if you believed in their theology.

[glorfindel]

No its not, because they argue that a hadeeth from the Imam is like a hadeeth from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Imam is the position of the narrator, like we have ahadeeth from Abu Hurayrah and Ayesha, not the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.

I find the argument to just go in circles, and that the Shi'as would have a point if you believed in their theology.

That's the point isn't it? We don't agree on theology.  Hence for anyone to accept the authority of anyone after the prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم you must have a narration from him to announce this. We agree the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم is our authority, surely one should invest in what he had to say otherwise it's circular reasoning - the descendents of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم are our religious authority, who says so? The descendents do.

[iceman]

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

I wanted to start a thread on issues that I feel are irrelevant, and therefore divert most Sunni/Shi'i debates.  I think, generally speaking, if we can get past this issues, we can debate and come to an agreement (or disagreement) about the main differences between Mainstream Muslims and Twelvers.  I think I will just list these issues without stating why, and we can start a discussion on whichever issues you guys think need further clarification.

1) The Iman of Abu Talib or other family members of the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.
2) Fiqh differences such as wiping on the feet or combining prayers for no reason.
3) Political criticisms of Iran, and by extension the Safavid Empire, or Saudi.
4) Bringing up ibn Saba.
5) Bringing up the Shi'as don't have hadeeths from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم.
6) Discussing the faith of Abu Sufyan, Mu'awiyah, or Yazid.
7) Arguing who was the first male Muslim.

These are just a few issues that I think can start this conversation.  You guys can add some or we can discuss these.

Well you can start off with rephrasing,

"we can debate and come to an agreement (or disagreement) about the main differences between Mainstream Muslims and Twelvers"

'between mainstream Muslims and the twelvers'? What are you trying to get at when you're alienating the twelvers to begin with.