A question to the Sunnis about early Shias...

[Shia_student]

Asalaam Alaikum.

Is it correct, the Sunnis weaken reliable reports of the early Shias  that somewhat support the Rafidhi beliefs of today?

For example, the words: "after me" in the Hadith,  Ali is your Wali after me,  are disputed because they come from the early Shias... But how is that fair, when the early Shias (according to the Sunni scholars) have nothing to do with the Rafidhis of today? Why is the news of a reliable Shia disputed as an innovation of the innovator?

How are the Shias innovators, when they are not Rafidhis?

[Hani]

Who told you early Shia are not related to today's Rafidah? Don't Ahlul-Sunnah say the earliest Madhabi Shia are the Sabaa'iyyah and they were alive in `Ali's time.

[adnan42]

Prime example abdullah ibn saba.

[Ameen]

Asalaam Alaikum.

Is it correct, the Sunnis weaken reliable reports of the early Shias  that somewhat support the Rafidhi beliefs of today?

For example, the words: "after me" in the Hadith,  Ali is your Wali after me,  are disputed because they come from the early Shias... But how is that fair, when the early Shias (according to the Sunni scholars) have nothing to do with the Rafidhis of today? Why is the news of a reliable Shia disputed as an innovation of the innovator?

How are the Shias innovators, when they are not Rafidhis?

Brother,

When Saqeefa took place and Hazrath Abu Bakar (ra) was chosen as first Khalif, a dispute broke out between the companions of the Prophet (pbuh). Some companions accepted the decision made in Sakeefa and swore allegiance to Hazrath Abu Bakar (ra). Some companions rejected the decision made in Saqeefa and refused to swear allegiance.

Those who swore allegiance were came to be known as "Hizb e iktedar" and those who refused to swear allegiance were came to be known as "Hizb e ikhtelaf". This was a dispute that developed amongst the companions and members of "Hizb e ikhtelaf" later on came to be known as Shia e Ali (as).

In the early days Shiaism was known and meant as followers and supporters. Shia was a political term used for the supporters and followers of those who had or fell in to political difference and dispute. For example Shia e Ali, Shia e Usman, Shia e Hassan, Shia e Muavia, Shia e Yazeed and Shia e Hussain.

Nowa days Shiaism is reserved for that sect that believes in Khilafat bila Fasal that, the Prophet (pbuh) named and appointed someone to govern after him. And that someone is Ali (as). And the followers of this sect and belief are know as Shias.

[Furkan]

Why are you saying abu bakar instead of abu bakr. Stop the taqiyah dude.

[Ameen]

Why are you saying abu bakar instead of abu bakr. Stop the taqiyah dude.

And how am I in Taqiyya or doing Taqiyya??? Also how do I come out of this??? Please enlighten me since you seem to know more about it.

[Ebn Hussein]

Furkan brother, may Allah bless you, here is no taqiyyah in writing abu bakr as abu bakr or abu bakar or abo bakr etc. since there is no standard transliteration for this word (or any other Arabic word).

[Furkan]

True that brother.

[Hani]

@Ameen,


That's not accurate since Zubayr was from those who never gave Bay`ah at first and so did Sa`d bin `Ubadah and they didn't become "Shia-e-`Ali"

[Hani]

@Shia_Student,


Them being "Shia" is not the only reason that addition is rejected, if I speak only from my memory I remember that the words "after me" come from the path of three individuals:


1- A man called Sulayman (I think), he's a Shia, and his addition is rejected because other narrators narrate his exact same tradition without the addition, meaning that he's the only narrator of this chain who includes these words and no one else does which shows that it's a weak addition.


2- A man from Kindah, he's a Shia and he's weak so his narration is rejected for that.


3- abu Balj, his narration is rejected because there's a question mark on his reliability and the scholars of Hadith said that he even made a mistake in the chain to ibn `Abbas. I add, it was authentically attributed to an early descendant of `Ali that there was no text that stated "after me". Thus it isn't possible that `Ali's descendant never knew it if it existed.


Additional point, the narration of Muwalat is Mutawatir and none of the texts say "After me".

[Optimus Prime]

Why are you saying abu bakar instead of abu bakr. Stop the taqiyah dude.

Asalamualaikum brother.

As brother Ebn Hussein said, and you still have to give him credit (if he's doing it out of sincerity) he still titles and addresses any companion he mentions with RA after their names and Hazrath before.

[Furkan]

My post was meant for Ameen and yes, Brother Ebn Hussein enlightened the issue.