Sunni Ali vs Shia Ali

[Optimus Prime]

My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,

Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",

Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better??? You sound like the Christians and Jews, that Muhammad (pbuh) came after and the others came before, so.....etc. Do you see the mirror???

If the companions were better then why don't you take Sunnah directly from them??? Or why haven't you taken Sunnah directly from them??? Why wait for Aaimah e Arbaa to come along? What was the belief of your kind before Aaimah e Arbaa???

Those who are part of the two incidents, the Mubahila and the Blanket and to whom the two verses apply (Tatheer and Mubahila) are far better and worthy than anyone put together. These verses were specific and are absolutely clear to whom they apply and to whom they don't. There is no disagreement here but the verses you have put forward are in general. A Sahabi is who spends all his life on the Prophet's (pbuh) sayings, not all the Prophet's (pbuh) life.

Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???

Yes, more worthy because they his disciples were with the Prophet (SAW) for their whole life, and Allah has praised the contribution of the companions (RA) countless times in the Qur'an where as your Imams came later, so don't compare. People who came after and prospered in their deen was thanks to the efforts the Prophet (SAW) and his students (RA) made to preserve this deen for future generations including the progeny of the Prophet (SAW). Brother Ebn Hussein isn't just picking and choosing he's using the book of Allah to support his claim. Show me a verse that supports your claim that the progeny of Ali (RA) are superir to the colleagues he grew up, learned and faught with, and I'll re-consider my thoughts.

We take most Sunnah directly from the Prophet (SAW) not the companions (RA), duh. Pull out Bukhari or Muslim, and you'll find the companions (RA) are narrating from the their teacher, geddit? That's least for what we can say about Shias since you barely have any narrations going back from the Prophet (SAW). Oh, wait, I forgot? That's because his great, great and GREAT grand children weren't alive when he (SAW) was, right? So, how could they? Having said that we take Sunnah from Ali, Abbas (RA),  ibn Abbas (RA), wives and other members of the Ahlul Bhayt (RA) who present at the time of the Prophet (SAW).

The verse relating to the events of Mubahila doesn't in anyway confirm why those 5 (RA) would be superior to the rest of the companions (RA). It was only them who were chosen because Zainab (RA), the last daughter of the Prophet (SAW) passed away before this incident otherwise you can betcha' your money she probably would've been there too and, Ali (RA) probably would've had to be excluded since he's a ghair-mehram to her.

Something to ponder.   

[Ebn Hussein]

My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,

Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",

Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better???

That's not what I came with or made up, that's what Allah says in his Qur'an:


Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)

The criteria is also be giving, so stop being an ostrich.

[Ebn Hussein]

Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???

^To illustrate to you all the stupidity of his claim, let me rephrase it:


Why wait till Kulayni the Zindiq and his ilk turn up and you have narrations through long chains to the Imams (up to Ali Ibn Abi Talib!), which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Imam do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? Where is his book of narration? Why didn't a SINGLE of the Imams write a book? Why didn't Allah safeguard one of their books, written by them? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Al-Kafi?

What an amateur he is ...

[Furkan]

And imam malik.had already muwatta.

Hadiths were already circulating. How.can Imam Abu hanifa and his teachers or students come to a fiqh conclusion otherwise?

[Ameen]

My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,

Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",

Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better??? You sound like the Christians and Jews, that Muhammad (pbuh) came after and the others came before, so.....etc. Do you see the mirror???

If the companions were better then why don't you take Sunnah directly from them??? Or why haven't you taken Sunnah directly from them??? Why wait for Aaimah e Arbaa to come along? What was the belief of your kind before Aaimah e Arbaa???

Those who are part of the two incidents, the Mubahila and the Blanket and to whom the two verses apply (Tatheer and Mubahila) are far better and worthy than anyone put together. These verses were specific and are absolutely clear to whom they apply and to whom they don't. There is no disagreement here but the verses you have put forward are in general. A Sahabi is who spends all his life on the Prophet's (pbuh) sayings, not all the Prophet's (pbuh) life.

Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???

Yes, more worthy because they his disciples were with the Prophet (SAW) for their whole life, and Allah has praised the contribution of the companions (RA) countless times in the Qur'an where as your Imams came later, so don't compare. People who came after and prospered in their deen was thanks to the efforts the Prophet (SAW) and his students (RA) made to preserve this deen for future generations including the progeny of the Prophet (SAW). Brother Ebn Hussein isn't just picking and choosing he's using the book of Allah to support his claim. Show me a verse that supports your claim that the progeny of Ali (RA) are superir to the colleagues he grew up, learned and faught with, and I'll re-consider my thoughts.

We take most Sunnah directly from the Prophet (SAW) not the companions (RA), duh. Pull out Bukhari or Muslim, and you'll find the companions (RA) are narrating from the their teacher, geddit? That's least for what we can say about Shias since you barely have any narrations going back from the Prophet (SAW). Oh, wait, I forgot? That's because his great, great and GREAT grand children weren't alive when he (SAW) was, right? So, how could they? Having said that we take Sunnah from Ali, Abbas (RA),  ibn Abbas (RA), wives and other members of the Ahlul Bhayt (RA) who present at the time of the Prophet (SAW).

The verse relating to the events of Mubahila doesn't in anyway confirm why those 5 (RA) would be superior to the rest of the companions (RA). It was only them who were chosen because Zainab (RA), the last daughter of the Prophet (SAW) passed away before this incident otherwise you can betcha' your money she probably would've been there too and, Ali (RA) probably would've had to be excluded since he's a ghair-mehram to her.

Something to ponder.   

You take most of the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh) What about the rest??? Why not take all the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh) You call yourself either Sunni Hanfi, Maliki, Shafi or Hambali and you claim to take the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh) Who are you kidding??? Who are you fooling???

Allah has praised countless times??? My friend Allah has spoken about those who died, who perished during battle in the name of Allah and for the sake of the Messenger (pbuh) and Islam. You can only guarantee Janah for those who are gone because they are no longer a subject to right and wrong and good and bad.

Allah is not speaking about those who are present, when he says "Sabeqoon al Awaloon", here Allah is speaking about those who have given their lives, lost their lives for Allah. Not about those who are still around and are fallible and still are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong.

Allah is not speaking about those who abandoned the Prophet (pbuh), left him stranded and fled for their lives from the battle field. These were half hearted Muslims, with half hearted Eemaan. Go do some research, do some home work before jumping up and down. These companions are fallible (ghair e Masoom).

As long as your alive, companion or not, wife or not, you are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong. You speak like the Christians who believe that God took Jesus's (as) life for our sins. So we are all granted heaven. This is how you sound about the companions who are still alive and very much a subject to everything.

[Ameen]

Why was it left to people like Bukhari and Muslim to come along and gather narrations leading to Hadiths??? Hadiths, such an important part of Islam, such an important heritage for the Muslims but the first Khalif didn't bother??? Why??? Did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once she saw her father burn 500 hadiths??? Why??? Is this true??? Shall we look it up???

You speak a lot about Tehreef e Quran, did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once certain verses were written on some material (paper etc) and was left under the pillow, we were all busy and a goat just walked in making its way around from one place to the other and got in to the bed room, started mouthing the pillow and bed sheets, the goat got hold of that material and ate it before anyone could stop the goat. Therefore those verses are no longer with us.

Is this narration true??? Shall we look it up??? There is hell of a lot in your so called authentic books where, Mr Rushdie got all his material from. If this is what you want to play at then it's down to you.

[Ameen]

My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,

Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",

Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better???

That's not what I came with or made up, that's what Allah says in his Qur'an:


Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)

The criteria is also be giving, so stop being an ostrich.

Those who fought before the conquest of Mecca are divided in to three categories,
1, Those who fought and perished.
2, Those who fought and succeeded.
3, Those who fought and fled.

So which is Allah talking about??? These companions you so eagerly speak and make a fuss about, were around well after the conquest of Mecca. So they are not equal to the ones who fought and perished before the conquest of Mecca. Is this what you're trying to tell me??? You need to get your facts right. You need to sort yourself out.

[Ebn Hussein]

Listen Mr. Riddler, it's the Qur'an, does it hurt? Allah says it clearly:

Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)

Allah is talking about the great Sahaba who are superior than ALL your Imams (except Ali who is part of the Ayah). I know you wanna exclude some from the verse, but that's not the point, point is that SOME Sahaba are DEFINATELY superior to your Imams and that alone destroys your whole religion (since you believe ALL your Imams are superior to ALL Sahaba).

So Allah is only talking about the 2) you mentioned. Alright? Still it destroys your religion since those Sahaba are superior to your Naqi, Taqi, Sadiq and the likes of Shafi'i, Ahmad, Malik etc.

[Ameen]

Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???

^To illustrate to you all the stupidity of his claim, let me rephrase it:


Why wait till Kulayni the Zindiq and his ilk turn up and you have narrations through long chains to the Imams (up to Ali Ibn Abi Talib!), which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Imam do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? Where is his book of narration? Why didn't a SINGLE of the Imams write a book? Why didn't Allah safeguard one of their books, written by them? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Al-Kafi?

What an amateur he is ...

Have you completely forgotten??? How were the Imams treated??? They were either in captivity or under house arrest. Their family, relatives, friends, followers, supporters were tortured and killed. People were told and forced to stay away from them. The first Imam faced rebellion and rebellious challenges from day one. Since when were they given a chance??? The second on wards were slaughtered and killed cause the Ummah just didn't care or were too afraid of the Muslim tyrants.

[Ebn Hussein]

So what, Imam Ahmad was treated worse than Imam al-Sadiq, read it up (Imam Ahmad was almost whipped to deaht why al-Sadiq taught freely in the Mosque of the Prophet), how come he (Imam Ahmad) could compiled a book of hadith and none of your Imams (who are apparently guided and supported by Allah and surrounded by Angels) couldn't? None of them could bless us with a single book, we had to wait HUNDREDS of years after the demise of the Prophet (SAWS) till a Zindiq like Kafir compiles a book?

Is this what you're trying to tell me??? You need to get your facts right. You need to sort yourself out.

[Optimus Prime]

My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,

Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",

Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better??? You sound like the Christians and Jews, that Muhammad (pbuh) came after and the others came before, so.....etc. Do you see the mirror???

If the companions were better then why don't you take Sunnah directly from them??? Or why haven't you taken Sunnah directly from them??? Why wait for Aaimah e Arbaa to come along? What was the belief of your kind before Aaimah e Arbaa???

Those who are part of the two incidents, the Mubahila and the Blanket and to whom the two verses apply (Tatheer and Mubahila) are far better and worthy than anyone put together. These verses were specific and are absolutely clear to whom they apply and to whom they don't. There is no disagreement here but the verses you have put forward are in general. A Sahabi is who spends all his life on the Prophet's (pbuh) sayings, not all the Prophet's (pbuh) life.

Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???

Yes, more worthy because they his disciples were with the Prophet (SAW) for their whole life, and Allah has praised the contribution of the companions (RA) countless times in the Qur'an where as your Imams came later, so don't compare. People who came after and prospered in their deen was thanks to the efforts the Prophet (SAW) and his students (RA) made to preserve this deen for future generations including the progeny of the Prophet (SAW). Brother Ebn Hussein isn't just picking and choosing he's using the book of Allah to support his claim. Show me a verse that supports your claim that the progeny of Ali (RA) are superir to the colleagues he grew up, learned and faught with, and I'll re-consider my thoughts.

We take most Sunnah directly from the Prophet (SAW) not the companions (RA), duh. Pull out Bukhari or Muslim, and you'll find the companions (RA) are narrating from the their teacher, geddit? That's least for what we can say about Shias since you barely have any narrations going back from the Prophet (SAW). Oh, wait, I forgot? That's because his great, great and GREAT grand children weren't alive when he (SAW) was, right? So, how could they? Having said that we take Sunnah from Ali, Abbas (RA),  ibn Abbas (RA), wives and other members of the Ahlul Bhayt (RA) who present at the time of the Prophet (SAW).

The verse relating to the events of Mubahila doesn't in anyway confirm why those 5 (RA) would be superior to the rest of the companions (RA). It was only them who were chosen because Zainab (RA), the last daughter of the Prophet (SAW) passed away before this incident otherwise you can betcha' your money she probably would've been there too and, Ali (RA) probably would've had to be excluded since he's a ghair-mehram to her.

Something to ponder.   

You take most of the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh) What about the rest??? Why not take all the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh) You call yourself either Sunni Hanfi, Maliki, Shafi or Hambali and you claim to take the Sunnah from the Prophet (pbuh) Who are you kidding??? Who are you fooling???

Allah has praised countless times??? My friend Allah has spoken about those who died, who perished during battle in the name of Allah and for the sake of the Messenger (pbuh) and Islam. You can only guarantee Janah for those who are gone because they are no longer a subject to right and wrong and good and bad.

Allah is not speaking about those who are present, when he says "Sabeqoon al Awaloon", here Allah is speaking about those who have given their lives, lost their lives for Allah. Not about those who are still around and are fallible and still are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong.

Allah is not speaking about those who abandoned the Prophet (pbuh), left him stranded and fled for their lives from the battle field. These were half hearted Muslims, with half hearted Eemaan. Go do some research, do some home work before jumping up and down. These companions are fallible (ghair e Masoom).

As long as your alive, companion or not, wife or not, you are a subject to good and bad and right and wrong. You speak like the Christians who believe that God took Jesus's (as) life for our sins. So we are all granted heaven. This is how you sound about the companions who are still alive and very much a subject to everything.

My dear brother Ebn Hussein, what a brilliant master piece. Lets take a look at some of your points. You said,

Who are Al Baqir, Al Sadiq etc compared to the companions when they came after",

Excuse me??? They came after, so they are less worthy. And the companions became before, so they are more worthy??? Is this the best you can do??? Before and after is your criteria upon who you judge as more or less worthy/better???

That's not what I came with or made up, that's what Allah says in his Qur'an:


Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)

The criteria is also be giving, so stop being an ostrich.

Those who fought before the conquest of Mecca are divided in to three categories,
1, Those who fought and perished.
2, Those who fought and succeeded.
3, Those who fought and fled.

So which is Allah talking about??? These companions you so eagerly speak and make a fuss about, were around well after the conquest of Mecca. So they are not equal to the ones who fought and perished before the conquest of Mecca. Is this what you're trying to tell me??? You need to get your facts right. You need to sort yourself out.

Bravo bravo. This post also stretches your silliness (for the lack of a better word) beyond the realms of sanity.

First you shoot yourself in the foot by claiming we take Sunnah directly from the companions not realising (unless you're just being ignorant), and then after clarifying that they were the carriers of the Sunnah you go onto suggest we take it from those four Imams? I think brother Husayn confirmed this nicely in another thread that each one of them simply represents how the Sunnah can be derived, but the source still goes back to the Prophet (SAW) with the first person started the chain being a companion or someone who knew/saw/met him (SAW) to be technically correct. Notice, how that can be any of your Imams with the exception of the first three.

So, following any of the 4 still means you are upon the Sunnah, but your chain of Islam has come via certain scholars. Such differences even exist in Rafidhism. So, I'll throw the ball back in your court. Al-Kufri for example many of the narrations are not directly from the Prophet (SAW), but Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA)? Am, I right? We can accept that in principle since also we take/accept take narrations from Ali (RA), but solely because he was with the Prophet (SAW) during his lifetime. So, what beef do you have us taking the Sunnah narrated by others who also knew the Prophet (SAW)?

Kindly make an effort to keep your bakwaas fixed on the point and not fly off radar.

Second, regarding the status of the companions. Again lLet's not fly off course because we're not discussing whether they're all heavily personalities, but why those who did live and die with Iman surpass all of Ali's (RA) progeny.

Ebn Hussein's comments on that verse is clear, so I won't bother commenting on that further. However, it's funny how you're also just mentioning those verses that reprimanded the companions, but totally turn a blind to those where Allah collectively praises them in the present tense? Shall, we go through each verse one by one and work out how many times they were praised vs the number of times some of them reprimanded then come to the conclusion whether Allah was pleased with all of them or not? You're forgetting how Allah was pleased with them and vice versa when they made hijrah and when they were under the tree? Ring any bells?

We have never denounced and dismissed the notion that Sahabas (RA) never erred. Of course they did as they were also human beings. There are many examples or narrations we can put forward to confirm as we don't overlook nothing unlike you guys. There's the incident where Ka'ab ibn Malik and two other companions (RA) were  reprimanded and punished for not taking part in the Battle of Tabouk, Abu Dar (RA) calling Bilal (RA) the son of a black women, Nauman bn Amar i who used to get drunk much of the time and used to be flogged, and oh, let's not forget how Ali (RA) proposed for the daughter of an ignoramus dude namely Abu Jahal that upset the Prophet (SAW) when he found out. What on EARTH was he (RA) thinking? Ironically because of that desire it resulting the Prophet (SAW) uttering that statement to the nearest meaning "Fatima is apart of me, whoever upsets her has upset me, and whoever upsets me has upset Allah", and the list goes on. So, they were not infallible nor did I ever claim that. Only (not your Imams) the Prophets (AS) were infallible. Having said that Allah has promised all those who lived and died with Imam Jannah in the Qur'an, and even previewed what's in store for them up there - gardens with rivers flowing beneath? Dayam. It's like when you make it to your hotel, and the check out they preview your suite in the Pent House at the top.

So, you're right we're all subject to judgement whilst we are alive, and these people have been judged by the Lord of the universe and by their mentor (SAW). All you gotta' do is flip over the pages of the Qur'an and read it for yourself. Are you gonna' disagree and argue with these adjudicators?

[Furkan]

Lol the fatima-anger hadith. Shias use this against us aalways wile it was against ameer ul mumineen Ali ra

[Optimus Prime]

Lol the fatima-anger hadith. Shias use this against us aalways wile it was against ameer ul mumineen Ali ra

Exactly. They don't realise this narration unlike many other exposes their stupidity in all of areas. Especially how they were not infallible at all. It gets better the narration in Bukhari is narrated by Ali's (RA) grandson, which also throws the concept of taqiyah out the window. An Imam of Allah narrating an incident that's going to cripple the very fabric of their foundation? Heh! 

[Optimus Prime]

Why was it left to people like Bukhari and Muslim to come along and gather narrations leading to Hadiths??? Hadiths, such an important part of Islam, such an important heritage for the Muslims but the first Khalif didn't bother??? Why??? Did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once she saw her father burn 500 hadiths??? Why??? Is this true??? Shall we look it up???

You speak a lot about Tehreef e Quran, did Hazrath Aisha (ra) narrate that once certain verses were written on some material (paper etc) and was left under the pillow, we were all busy and a goat just walked in making its way around from one place to the other and got in to the bed room, started mouthing the pillow and bed sheets, the goat got hold of that material and ate it before anyone could stop the goat. Therefore those verses are no longer with us.

Is this narration true??? Shall we look it up??? There is hell of a lot in your so called authentic books where, Mr Rushdie got all his material from. If this is what you want to play at then it's down to you.

Sure. Start a separate thread on each of those, and we'll more than happy to put your confused mind at rest.  You also seem to be overlooking one fundamental point here, but I'll mention it in my next post since it's more fitting.

[Optimus Prime]

Why was the Ummah neglected from Hadiths straight after the Prophet's (pbuh) death??? Why wait till Bukhari and Muslim turn up and you have narrations through long chains, which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Khalif do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Bukhari and Muslim???

^To illustrate to you all the stupidity of his claim, let me rephrase it:


Why wait till Kulayni the Zindiq and his ilk turn up and you have narrations through long chains to the Imams (up to Ali Ibn Abi Talib!), which raise suspicion and doubt about their authenticity??? What did the first Imam do about gathering and safe keeping narrations??? Where is his book of narration? Why didn't a SINGLE of the Imams write a book? Why didn't Allah safeguard one of their books, written by them? This would have been first hand experience, so what happened that the Ummah had to wait a long time for Al-Kafi?

What an amateur he is ...

Have you completely forgotten??? How were the Imams treated??? They were either in captivity or under house arrest. Their family, relatives, friends, followers, supporters were tortured and killed. People were told and forced to stay away from them. The first Imam faced rebellion and rebellious challenges from day one. Since when were they given a chance??? The second on wards were slaughtered and killed cause the Ummah just didn't care or were too afraid of the Muslim tyrants.

Just to extend on brother Ebn Hussein's point. Have you forgotten what the companions (RA) went through for almost 14 years in Makkah at the hands of the Qur'aish? Have you forgotten or not aware of the trials and tribulations they faced after the passing of the Prophet (SAW)?

That sure as hell didn't stop them from compiling the entire Qur'an did it? Yet your Imams never wrote or put any sort of framework together did they? Yet they were able to seek divine guidance from Jibreel (AS)? The Prophets (AS) went through hard yards, but Allah has made mention of the books given to them and that they preached successfully. The work of four Imams reached us, but nothing from your Imams. Yes, we have narrations that's been cascaded from them to us as narrators, but nothing along the lines they were in or supposed to be in some commanding role over the Muslims.  Or perhaps that was never supposed to the case and instead cascaded how the future generations of the people of Khufah hounded them like hyenas and attributing to kufr to them.

So, we can conclude 2 things here:

- The companions did compile something even though it wasn't Hadiths, but something more important, the book of Allah
- Your Imams are in gratitude (like we all are) to the companions for the deen reaching them

The two points mingled together just rips the spectrum of retardation of your religion wide open. It refutes your point how the companions were the deliverers of the Sunnah meaning we as Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah take from the Prophet (SAW), and they as a result justified why Allah is indeed pleased with them all (RA).

Isn't that a kick in the lugknuts?

[Furkan]

Ameen, my sincere advise. First read the articles on twelvershia.net

Once done, i am sure you will have a different look on things. And then come back on the forum and ask questions you have.

I am saying this because you are getting confused about many basic things and you wildly throw incidents at us, which are so simple and also refuted.

[Ameen]

Listen Mr. Riddler, it's the Qur'an, does it hurt? Allah says it clearly:

Not equal among you are those who spent before the conquest [of Makkah] and fought [and those who did so after it]. Those are greater in degree than they who spent afterwards and fought. But to all Allah has promised the best [reward]. And Allah , with what you do, is Acquainted. (57:10)

Allah is talking about the great Sahaba who are superior than ALL your Imams (except Ali who is part of the Ayah). I know you wanna exclude some from the verse, but that's not the point, point is that SOME Sahaba are DEFINATELY superior to your Imams and that alone destroys your whole religion (since you believe ALL your Imams are superior to ALL Sahaba).

So Allah is only talking about the 2) you mentioned. Alright? Still it destroys your religion since those Sahaba are superior to your Naqi, Taqi, Sadiq and the likes of Shafi'i, Ahmad, Malik etc.

I'm not including or excluding anybody. You're just trying to use a general verse to show certain individuals superior and infallible that Jannah is a must for them when, they still had to live the rest of their lives and therefore are a subject to good and bad also right and wrong. Some funny ideology you have going here.

As far as destroying is concerned then let me tell you and give you sum advise, when you have the intention and are eager to destroy someone then you self destruct. We have no intentions in destroying anyone or anything because this is Allah's job and I suggest that you stop associating yourself to Allah by such ridiculous remarks and behaviour.

[Ameen]

My dear brother Imam Ali, I will leave all the rest of your post since there is something important that you have brought to my attention. My dear brother do you believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was infallible (Masoom) What is the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jama'ah Aqeedah on this???

[Taha]

My dear brother do you believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was infallible (Masoom) What is the Ahle Sunnah Wal Jama'ah Aqeedah on this???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiM6zZG-Lm0

[Furkan]

Yes masoom so sinless but still human which can causse forgetfulness. Even in al kafi there are narrations to support this if I recall it right.