The Noble Quranic Verse Which Doomed Shi’ite Concept Of Imamate.

[iceman]

Lol that just kills it off completely .......”touched an optical nerve”.....no such saying, is fasting effecting your brain? It is by the looks of your below par responses and especially this optical nerve one.

Since when did you get a PhD in English 😂😄

[iceman]

Not sure but, there were others too who were purified and rijz was removed from them. May be they were being prepared to make Shura(consultation) after Prophet(saws).

إِذْ يُغَشِّيكُمُ النُّعَاسَ أَمَنَةً مِّنْهُ وَيُنَزِّلُ عَلَيْكُم مِّن السَّمَاءِ مَاءً لِّيُطَهِّرَكُم بِهِ وَيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمْ رِجْزَ الشَّيْطَانِ وَلِيَرْبِطَ عَلَى قُلُوبِكُمْ وَيُثَبِّتَ بِهِ الْأَقْدَامَ

When He caused calm to fall on you as a security from Him and sent down upon you water from the cloud that He might thereby purify you, and take away from you the uncleanness of the Shaitan, and that He might fortify your hearts and steady (your) footsteps thereby.(8:11).

Fatima(ra) was also purified, and she couldn't govern or rule. Which nullifies your argument.

According to authentic narrations, Fatimah (RA), the daughter of the Prophet (SAS) will be the leader of the women in Jannah. In this regard, it is narrated by Aisha (RA) that when the Prophet (SAS) told Fatima that he thinks that his time is coming close to an end, Fatima (RA) began to weep. Upon this, the Prophet (SAS) said to her, ‘O Fatima, are you not pleased that you will be the leader of the women in paradise’. (Bukhari, Muslim). In another tradition, Huzaifaa (RA) narrates that the Prophet (SAS) stated that he received the glad tidings from an angel that Fatima will be the leader of the women in Paradise, and Hasan and Husain will be the leaders of the youths in Paradise. (Tirmizi)

If she is worthy of being the leader of women in paradise then what kept her from being a leader, role model and inspiration for the girls and women on earth? She must have been really something special but certain people had their own agenda which the signs can clearly be seen during the final days of the Prophet (pbuh).

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

According to authentic narrations, Fatimah (RA), the daughter of the Prophet (SAS) will be the leader of the women in Jannah. In this regard, it is narrated by Aisha (RA) that when the Prophet (SAS) told Fatima that he thinks that his time is coming close to an end, Fatima (RA) began to weep. Upon this, the Prophet (SAS) said to her, ‘O Fatima, are you not pleased that you will be the leader of the women in paradise’. (Bukhari, Muslim). In another tradition, Huzaifaa (RA) narrates that the Prophet (SAS) stated that he received the glad tidings from an angel that Fatima will be the leader of the women in Paradise, and Hasan and Husain will be the leaders of the youths in Paradise. (Tirmizi)

If she is worthy of being the leader of women in paradise then what kept her from being a leader, role model and inspiration for the girls and women on earth? She must have been really something special but certain people had their own agenda which the signs can clearly be seen during the final days of the Prophet (pbuh).

If you say purification was done to become role models. Then Quran commands us to follow the foremost muhajireen and Ansar in goodness, which means taking them as role models too.

Moreover, wives of Prophet(saws) were also made an example for faithful women, as per Shia tafseer.

Moreover, we read in shia commentary for verse 29 of surah Ahzaab: Thus, Allah made the duty of the Prophet’s wives clear forever, that they must be an example for the faithful women. ((The Light of The Holy Qur’an by Ayatullah Sayyid Kamal Faghih Imani and A Group of Muslim Scholars, under explanation of verse 33;29)

[iceman]

If you say purification was done to become role models. Then Quran commands us to follow the foremost muhajireen and Ansar in goodness, which means taking them as role models too.

Moreover, wives of Prophet(saws) were also made an example for faithful women, as per Shia tafseer.

Moreover, we read in shia commentary for verse 29 of surah Ahzaab: Thus, Allah made the duty of the Prophet’s wives clear forever, that they must be an example for the faithful women. ((The Light of The Holy Qur’an by Ayatullah Sayyid Kamal Faghih Imani and A Group of Muslim Scholars, under explanation of verse 33;29)

But which only two weighty things were left behind, this is what it all boils down to. The book of Allah which is the code of conduct and the progeny who are the governors. This is what we believe in.

I understand your point that you have to defend Saqifa and Caliphate. These are the two pillars on which the foundation of Ahle Sunah stand on.

[iceman]

Allah says in the Qur'an: O ye who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those vested with authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Apostle, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end (4:59).

This verse obliges the Muslims to two obedience's: First, the obedience of Allah; second, the obedience of the Apostle and 'those vested with authority from among you' (uli'l-amri minkum). The arrangement of the words shows that the obedience of Ulu 'l-amr is as much obligatory as is the obedience of the Apostle. Naturally, it means that Ulu 'l-amr should be of the same caliber as the Apostle; otherwise Allah would not have joined them together in this verse.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

But which only two weighty things were left behind, this is what it all boils down to. The book of Allah which is the code of conduct and the progeny who are the governors. This is what we believe in.

They were left behind to be taken care. Infact the one who heard it and transmitted it explained that it meant anyone from family of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of charity is forbidden are the ones meant in the hadeeth. Which destroys your whole argument.

Infact Shia and Sunni hadeeth states that the out of 73 sects the one sect which will enter paradise is the one which is upon the path of Prophet(saws) and his Sahaba.

I know you need to reject these facts in order to save the destroyed myth of Imamate. But you are failing miserably.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Allah says in the Qur'an: O ye who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those vested with authority from among you; then if you quarrel about anything, refer it to Allah and the Apostle, if you believe in Allah and the last day; this is better and very good in the end (4:59).

This verse obliges the Muslims to two obedience's: First, the obedience of Allah; second, the obedience of the Apostle and 'those vested with authority from among you' (uli'l-amri minkum). The arrangement of the words shows that the obedience of Ulu 'l-amr is as much obligatory as is the obedience of the Apostle. Naturally, it means that Ulu 'l-amr should be of the same caliber as the Apostle; otherwise Allah would not have joined them together in this verse.

The absence of the word “obey” before Ulil Amr, but it being present before Allah and Prophet is a clear evidence that the obedience of Ulil Amr is conditional not unconditional like for Allah and Prophet.

Moreover your own Imam and big Shia scholar Majlisi understood that the current version of the verse of Quran implies that people can dispute with Ulil Amr. Which again shatters your argument.

[iceman]

They were left behind to be taken care. Infact the one who heard it and transmitted it explained that it meant anyone from family of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of charity is forbidden are the ones meant in the hadeeth. Which destroys your whole argument.

Infact Shia and Sunni hadeeth states that the out of 73 sects the one sect which will enter paradise is the one which is upon the path of Prophet(saws) and his Sahaba.

I know you need to reject these facts in order to save the destroyed myth of Imamate. But you are failing miserably.

Not one but in fact two weighty things were left behind for the Ummah, why take care of one (progeny) but follow the other (Qur'an)? Why not take care of both and follow your own set of Principles, rules and regulations and set of guidelines instead of the Qur'an just as the progeny was disregarded and reduced to care and the companions did as they pleased.

As far as transmitting and collection of hadiths is concerned the rulers after Muhammad (pbuh) didn't bother because the matter was clear. In fact the collection of hadiths was banned as I hear and only those hadiths were collected and transmitted that fell in the favour of the rulers and what ever was useful to them.

Like I said before that why was it left so long to Muslim and Bukhari to collect hadiths? What happened to the so called beloved companions who later on became rulers?

"Infact Shia and Sunni hadeeth states that the out of 73 sects the one sect which will enter paradise is the one which is upon the path of Prophet(saws) and his Sahaba."

This hadith is considered weak according to some of the Sunni brothers on this site. I'll post you the thread/link. I believe it was bro Khaled who I was discussing with
But I will check. Since mention 73 sects or groups the Ahle Sunah have four different schools of thought and various sects.

So how can it be you? It's only one sect and one alone which considers itself on the true path. Not different schools of thought along with different sects putting themselves under one umbrella.

I don't have a mindset when I'm discussing.  Lets keep Imamah out of it if you can do that and live with it. I do not believe the in the coincidental, unfortunate, immature and hasty decision made in Saqifa all of sudden and out of the blue.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Not one but in fact two weighty things were left behind for the Ummah, why take care of one (progeny) but follow the other (Qur'an)? Why not take care of both and follow your own set of Principles, rules and regulations and set of guidelines instead of the Qur'an just as the progeny was disregarded and reduced to care and the companions did as they pleased.

Because both needs to be taken care in the respective sense it was mentioned. For example,

وَعَنْ اِبْنِ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اَللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالَ: { بَعَثَنِي رَسُولُ اَللَّهِ ‏- صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏-فِي اَلثَّقَلِ, أَوْ قَالَ فِي اَلضَّعَفَةِ مِنْ جَمْعٍ بِلَيْلٍ .‏

Ibn ‘Abbas(ra) narrated, ‘The Messenger of Allah(saws) sent me at night from al-Muzdalifah (to Mina) with the Thaqal or the weak members of his family (women and children).’ [Sahih Muslim #1293]

So here the Thaqal are the weak family members because they can’t defend themselves and as such are described as at-Thaqal i.e. a heavy responsibility for those who take care of them as they have to defend them in case of a surprise attack by an enemy. Here Weighty thing(Thaql)  doesn't mean that Prophet(saws) sent ibn Abbas with those whom he needs to follow. Rather it needs to be understood in the respective sense.

And because Prophet(saws) command to adhere Quran alone in the authentic version of the hadeeth. We read:

Prophet(saws) said: I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to IT(singular). He exhorted (us) (to hold fast) to the Book of Allah(singular) and then said: The second are the members of my Ahlelbayt(household)! I remind you of Allah with regard to the people of my household(Ahlelbayt). (Sahih Muslim, #2408).

As far as transmitting and collection of hadiths is concerned the rulers after Muhammad (pbuh) didn't bother because the matter was clear. In fact the collection of hadiths was banned as I hear and only those hadiths were collected and transmitted that fell in the favour of the rulers and what ever was useful to them.

It's a doubt which is very weak and based on incorrect information, and this doubt have been thoroughly refuted.

Like I said before that why was it left so long to Muslim and Bukhari to collect hadiths? What happened to the so called beloved companions who later on became rulers?

As i said this argument is due to utter ignorance. You don't even know some Sahaba had their own books of reports. There were many hadeeth books written before Bukhari and Muslim, its just your ignorance. Secondly, the impact that the concept of Taqiyyah caused on hadeeth transmission, nothing impacted it more. This problem was even mentioned by your own Scholars.

This hadith is considered weak according to some of the Sunni brothers on this site. I'll post you the thread/link. I believe it was bro Khaled who I was discussing with
But I will check. Since mention 73 sects or groups the Ahle Sunah have four different schools of thought and various sects.

That's not a valid reason to weaken or reject a hadeeth. It's like someone saying that the hadeeth in Shia books about Shias being praised are weak because Shias have different sects like Akhbari and Usooli or those who follow Wilayat al Faqih or those who don't. Or they do taqleed of different Marjaiyya.

And the hadeeth i gave is supported by Quran, infact Quran says this.

And they say: Be Jews or Christians, you will be on the right course. Say: Nay! (we follow) the religion of Ibrahim, the Hanif, and he was not one of the polytheists. : Say: We believe in Allah and (in) that which had been revealed to us, and (in) that which was revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and (in) that which was given to Musa and Isa, and (in) that which was given to the prophets from their Lord, we do not make any distinction between any of them, and to Him do we submit. If then they believe AS YOU BELIEVE in Him, they are indeed on the right course, and if they turn back, then they are only in great opposition, so Allah will suffice you against them, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing.(Quran 2:135-137)

You is in reference to Sahaba here.

And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.(Quran 2:13).

People is in reference to Sahaba here.

And whoever acts hostilely to the Messenger after that guidance has become manifest to him, and follows other than the way of the believers, We will turn him to that to which he has (himself) turned and make him enter hell; and it is an evil resort.(Quran 4:115).

Believers are Sahaba here again.

And did the anyone weaken this hadeeth as well?

Sahih Muslim Bk 31, Number 6147 Prophet(Saw) said: The stars are a source of security for the sky and when the stars disappear there comes to the sky, i. e. (it meets the same fate) as it has been promised(it would plunge into darkness). And I am a source of safety and security to my Companions and when I would go away there would fall to the lot (of my Companions) as they have been promised with and my Companions are a source of security for the Umma and as they would go there would fall to the lot of my Umma as (its people) have been promised.

So how can it be you? It's only one sect and one alone which considers itself on the true path. Not different schools of thought along with different sects putting themselves under one umbrella.

The Scholars have described the characteristics of that group. And the evidence you will find is that, all their beliefs will match the beliefs of Sahaba, even their actions, etc. I doubt any deviant sect could prove it.

I don't have a mindset when I'm discussing.  Lets keep Imamah out of it if you can do that and live with it. I do not believe the in the coincidental, unfortunate, immature and hasty decision made in Saqifa all of sudden and out of the blue.

After Quran(4:59) being against Imamah, the incident of Saqifa is another clear proof that Sahaba had no idea about any divinely appointed leaders. Had they any idea the Ansar wouldn't have gone to Saqifa.

[iceman]

Reported by Aisha bint Abu Bakr:

"My father collected the Hadith of the Prophet (s), and they were five-hundred in number. He spent the night being undecided [about them]. I said that he was undecided because of a complaint or something that had reached him. In the morning he said: "Oh my daughter! Bring me all the Hadiths that are with you". I gave them to him and he burnt them..."

Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Vol 1, pg 4, and also in Kanz ul Ummal, Vol 3, pg 126

"You don't even know some Sahaba had their own books of reports. There were many hadeeth books written before Bukhari and Muslim, its just your ignorance"

Ok, for example?

"After Quran(4:59) being against Imamah, the incident of Saqifa is another clear proof that Sahaba had no idea about any divinely appointed leaders. Had they any idea the Ansar wouldn't have gone to Saqifa"

How exactly is the Qur'an against Imamah? The Qur'an isn't against it  you are. The sahabah had a very clear idea but the greed of authority and power gets to your head and makes you blind.

The Ansar gathered in Saqifa to select THEIR OWN LEADER, why? The Muslims didn't gather in Saqifa to select their own leader. Why did only the Ansar gather? Because they knew and learned that the Muhajir wouldn't let Ali succeed.

[Muhammad Tazin]

Reported by Aisha bint Abu Bakr:

"My father collected the Hadith of the Prophet (s), and they were five-hundred in number. He spent the night being undecided [about them]. I said that he was undecided because of a complaint or something that had reached him. In the morning he said: "Oh my daughter! Bring me all the Hadiths that are with you". I gave them to him and he burnt them..."

Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Vol 1, pg 4, and also in Kanz ul Ummal, Vol 3, pg 126

"You don't even know some Sahaba had their own books of reports. There were many hadeeth books written before Bukhari and Muslim, its just your ignorance"

Ok, for example?

"After Quran(4:59) being against Imamah, the incident of Saqifa is another clear proof that Sahaba had no idea about any divinely appointed leaders. Had they any idea the Ansar wouldn't have gone to Saqifa"

How exactly is the Qur'an against Imamah? The Qur'an isn't against it  you are. The sahabah had a very clear idea but the greed of authority and power gets to your head and makes you blind.

The Ansar gathered in Saqifa to select THEIR OWN LEADER, why? The Muslims didn't gather in Saqifa to select their own leader. Why did only the Ansar gather? Because they knew and learned that the Muhajir wouldn't let Ali succeed.

1. about the report of burning hadith, Dhahabi said in Tadhkiratul Huffaz, this is not reliable.

2. Among the sahaba:- Abdullah ibn amr ibn as(ra) had Sahifa as sadiqa, Jabir ibn abdullah(ra) had his written collection of ahadith about hajj, the son of Samura ibn Jundub(ra) used to teach from his fathers hadith collection,  Abdur Rahman ibn Masud used to teach from his brother Abdullah ibn Masud(ra)'s written copy etc.
Musannaf Sufyan ibn Uyaynah, Kitabul Athar of Abu Hanifa, Jami' Sufyan Thawri etc. are books before Bukhari.

3. What happened to Muhajirin, when Allah said about them in al Quran-
" And their Lord responded to them, "Never will I allow to be lost the work of [any] worker among you, whether male or female; you are of one another. So those who emigrated or were evicted from their homes or were harmed in My cause or fought or were killed - I will surely remove from them their misdeeds, and I will surely admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow as reward from Allah , and Allah has with Him the best reward." {3:195}

"Indeed, those who have believed and emigrated and fought with their wealth and lives in the cause of Allah and those who gave shelter and aided - they are allies of one another. But those who believed and did not emigrate - for you there is no guardianship of them until they emigrate. And if they seek help of you for the religion, then you must help, except against a people between yourselves and whom is a treaty. And Allah is Seeing of what you do." {8: 72}

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

Reported by Aisha bint Abu Bakr:

"My father collected the Hadith of the Prophet (s), and they were five-hundred in number. He spent the night being undecided [about them]. I said that he was undecided because of a complaint or something that had reached him. In the morning he said: "Oh my daughter! Bring me all the Hadiths that are with you". I gave them to him and he burnt them..."

Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Vol 1, pg 4, and also in Kanz ul Ummal, Vol 3, pg 126

I wasnt able to find this report in Musnad Ahmad, And Kanz ul Ummal, usually doesn't quotes the chain of narrators. So if you can quote it or give a proper reference like Hadeeth number, then that would be good.

Anyways Imam Dhahabi has weakened these reports, as the brother pointed out.

"You don't even know some Sahaba had their own books of reports. There were many hadeeth books written before Bukhari and Muslim, its just your ignorance"

Ok, for example?

Apart from what the other brother quoted. Refer the book, THE COMPILATION OF HADEETH by Shaykh Abdul Ghaffar Hassan Rehmaanee. Its translated into English, on page 12 you will get the names of those manuscripts.

How exactly is the Qur'an against Imamah? The Qur'an isn't against it  you are.

Re-read the article, you are running in circles:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2018/05/12/the-noble-quranic-verse-which-doomed-shiite-concept-of-imamate/

The sahabah had a very clear idea but the greed of authority and power gets to your head and makes you blind.

The Ansar gathered in Saqifa to select THEIR OWN LEADER, why? The Muslims didn't gather in Saqifa to select their own leader. Why did only the Ansar gather? Because they knew and learned that the Muhajir wouldn't let Ali succeed.

So why didn't Ansar appoint the leader from among them? What stopped them? They were the majority of Madinah, they had the military power. Yet handful of old and weak Mujahireen were able over power them and the issue was sorted out without anyone being killed. This actually shows that the concept of Imamah is a myth.

[iceman]

I wasnt able to find this report in Musnad Ahmad, And Kanz ul Ummal, usually doesn't quotes the chain of narrators. So if you can quote it or give a proper reference like Hadeeth number, then that would be good.

Anyways Imam Dhahabi has weakened these reports, as the brother pointed out.

Apart from what the other brother quoted. Refer the book, THE COMPILATION OF HADEETH by Shaykh Abdul Ghaffar Hassan Rehmaanee. Its translated into English, on page 12 you will get the names of those manuscripts.
Re-read the article, you are running in circles:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2018/05/12/the-noble-quranic-verse-which-doomed-shiite-concept-of-imamate/
So why didn't Ansar appoint the leader from among them? What stopped them? They were the majority of Madinah, they had the military power. Yet handful of old and weak Mujahireen were able over power them and the issue was sorted out without anyone being killed. This actually shows that the concept of Imamah is a myth.

"Anyways Imam Dhahabi has weakened these reports, as the brother pointed out."

Yes of course. That is exactly what I was expecting. What ever has been put forward by Shias in any discussion or argument has always and I mean always been either seemed to be considered weak or fabricated. And that is anything and everything. This is something beyond understanding. So where do we have a balanced argument/discussion?

There is another issue put forward by the other side to Shias giving a reason that 'we consider this to be weak or that to be fabricated because of this particular narrator' what about this narrator? 'Well we consider him to be unreliable' Why? Because he's narrated something which you don't want to hear because it doesn't suit you and it  goes against your view?

"So why didn't Ansar appoint the leader from among them? What stopped them? They were the majority of Madinah, they had the military power. Yet handful of old and weak Mujahireen were able over power them and the issue was sorted out without anyone being killed. This actually shows that the concept of Imamah is a myth"

I will respond to this with reference.

[iceman]

"So why didn't Ansar appoint the leader from among them? What stopped them? They were the majority of Madinah, they had the military power. Yet handful of old and weak Mujahireen were able over power them and the issue was sorted out without anyone being killed. This actually shows that the concept of Imamah is a myth"

The first question you need to ask yourself is, why did the Ansar all of a sudden and out of the blue gather in Saqifa to select THEIR OWN LEADER?  What all of a sudden happened to the Ummah and to Muslim unity? What all of a sudden went wrong?

Then you need to ask yourself that when Ubaid ibn Al Jarah got to know about this gathering in Saqifa why didn't he announce this so a group of people could go to Saqifa and address this with the knowledge, acceptance and approval of the others?

Why did Ubaid ibn Al Jarah just only inform Umar and he grabbed just only the attention of Abu Bakr and the three of them quietly slipped away to Saqifa to address the matter? Why was it kept secret rather than open and in general? 

Because if it was addressed openly and in general with the knowledge, acceptance and approval of others then there are two things here, either Abu Bakr's coincidental, illegitimate and immature appointment wouldn't have been as such but it would have been a legitimate and mature appointment by being approved and backed by others.

Or the trio who quietly and secretly slipped away to Saqifa wouldn't have got their way because others would have a say in it which they should have in the first place. Saqifa wasn't a public gathering and people didn't assemble there to select a leader and successor to Muhammad  (pbuh).

If the Ansar didn't accept then there would have been Civil war which the Ansars prevented. It's not about old Muhajir and who has more weight, authority and power. It only takes a few or a minority to cause disturbance and unrest, like Muawiyah and his handful in safeen and Aisha and her handful in Jamal.

The weight, authority and power was with Ali and lets not forget he was the 4th RIGHTLY GUIDED CALIPH OF THE MUSLIMS. But still disturbance and unrest was caused by the others on separate occasions because of their influence.

"The issue was sorted out without anyone being killed"? The coincidental, immature and unapproved  decision in Saqifa was forced on others either by violence or by threatening behaviour. But any references that I put forward will be rejected in advance because the mind is already set in saving Saqifa and the reputation and honour of those who quitely and sectetly slipped away to Saqifa to get their desired result then enforce and work on it which they eventually did.

[iceman]

This is what Abu Bakr said in Saqifa;

He (Abu Bakr) said: ‘All the good that you have said about yourselves (the Ansar) is deserved. But the Arabs will recognize authority only in this clan of Quraysh, they being the best of the Arabs in blood and country. I offer you one of these two men: accept which you please.' Thus saying he took hold of my hand and that of Abu Ubayda b. al-Jarrah's...”

Can this be proven and justified from the Qur'an, the following;

"But the Arabs will recognize authority only in this clan of Quraysh, they being the best of the Arabs in blood and country."

Muhammad (pbuh) the Messenger of God, had not been dead an hour yet when Abu Bakr revived the arrogance of the Times of Ignorance by claiming before the Ansar that the Quraysh, the tribe to which he himself belonged, was “better” than or “superior” to them (the Ansar) “in blood and country!”

How did Abu Bakr know about this “superiority” of the Quraysh? Qur’an and its Bringer, Muhammad, never said that the tribe of Quraysh was superior to anyone or that it had any superiority at all.

In fact, it were the Quraysh who were the most die-hard of all the idolaters of Arabia. They clutched their idols, and they fought against Muhammad and Islam, with cannibalistic fury, for more than twenty years. The Ansar, on the other hand, accepted Islam spontaneously and voluntarily. They entered Islam en bloc and without demur.

[iceman]

Only a few days earlier, Umar had withheld pen, paper and ink from Muhammad (pbuh) when the latter was on his deathbed, and wished to write his will. A will, Umar said, was unnecessary because “the Book of God is sufficient for us.” But in Saqifa, he and Abu Bakr forgot that Book, according to which superiority is judged not by blood and country but by piety. In that Book this is what we read:

Verily, the most honored of you in the sight of God is he who is most righteous of you. (Chapter 49; verse 13)

In the sight of God only those people are superior who have high character, who are God-fearing and who are God-loving. But the one thing to which Abu Bakr and Umar did not advert in Saqifa, was the Book of God. Before entering Saqifa, they had forgotten that the body of the Apostle of God was awaiting burial; and after entering, they forgot the Book of God – a curious “coincidence” of forgetfulness!

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

"Anyways Imam Dhahabi has weakened these reports, as the brother pointed out."

Yes of course. That is exactly what I was expecting. What ever has been put forward by Shias in any discussion or argument has always and I mean always been either seemed to be considered weak or fabricated. And that is anything and everything. This is something beyond understanding. So where do we have a balanced argument/discussion?

Rather, We see it in a different way. That is, Shias base their arguments on weak and unreliable reports. Unfortunately they can't base anything that is authentic in the view of Sunnis.

And interestingly, we Sunnis quote you something from Shia books, they either that becomes weak for you, or even if authentic you say that Imam was doing Taqiyyah. Great! And you have the audacity to accuse Sunnis. This is a clear example of double standards.

[Noor-us-Sunnah]

I will respond to this with reference.

In all what you said, I dont see any reference, nor does it respond the question. All what I see are counter questions, and illusions. Which again proves weakness and failure of your argument.

[iceman]

In all what you said, I dont see any reference, nor does it respond the question. All what I see are counter questions, and illusions. Which again proves weakness and failure of your argument.

Absolute failure on your behalf to address anything. You couldn't touch anything.

This is what Abu Bakr said;

"But the Arabs will recognize authority only in this clan of Quraysh, they being the best of the Arabs in blood and country."

Did he not say the above in his wonderful  speech at Saqifah?

And this is what the Qur'an says;

"Verily, the most honored of you in the sight of God is he who is most righteous of you. (Chapter 49; verse 13)"

ANYTHING TO SAY?😊

[iceman]

Rather, We see it in a different way. That is, Shias base their arguments on weak and unreliable reports. Unfortunately they can't base anything that is authentic in the view of Sunnis.

And interestingly, we Sunnis quote you something from Shia books, they either that becomes weak for you, or even if authentic you say that Imam was doing Taqiyyah. Great! And you have the audacity to accuse Sunnis. This is a clear example of double standards.

Is there anything or any part you can answer to? Is there absolutely anything that you would consider authentic and reliable? Yes of course, anything that praises the shaykhain would be reliable and authentic. And anything and everything that even slightly goes against them would be.....let me take a wild guess, oh yes...it would automatically be unreliable and unauthentic. It seems like we're dealing with absolute saints here.