Sunni-Shia Debate: Verse of Ulil-Amr 4:59 | Link vs Hamid

[MuslimK]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

This thread will be used by members: Link (Shia) and Hamid (Sunni) to debate the verse of Ulil-Amr 4:59. The next post (the second post) will be the start of the debate.

Link has said this about the verse:
"Ulil-Amr in 4:59 refers to divinely appointed/chosen leaders who are the successors of the Prophet starting with Imam Ali."

Link can begin the debate by posting under this post and provide evidences why his or the Shia stance of 4:59 is the correct belief. If there is any problem please message me or Farid.

But before you both begin please read and accept the following rules:

Debate rules:

Basic forum rules of no insults or abusive language need to be observed.

No copying and pasting.

In order for the topic to be readable it will have to be limited. Fifteen posts per person should be sufficient in my opinion. Nobody wants to read a twenty page forum debate. (I learned that the hard way a few years ago.)

Direct and relevant questions need to be answered by both parties.

Posts will be limited to a reasonable amount of words for ideas to get across. This isn't an essay writing competition. 150 words should be the limit for a single post.

[Link]

To start.

1. Argument from context of the verses before.

The verses talking about those who hide sayings, the witnesses from each people, to those leading the people of the book against Mohammad, their claim of purity while God attributes purity to who he pleases and asked whether they have a share in the authority, to the envied people who are compared to the family of Abraham, both which are contrasted to those taken as leaders from the people of the book and the subject is what the true authority regarding religion truly is.

2. "Therefore refer it to God and the Messenger"

The fa is saying so in obeying God and the Messenger and those who hold the authority from you, you are to refer to God and the Messenger in all matters of dispute showing Ulil-Amr always command according to Quran and Sunnah.

There is, ofcourse, more proofs.

[Hani]

Welcome to the forum brother Hamid, I didn't notice you until this thread was opened so forgive me. I'll be following this thread as long as posts are short and to the point. Thumbs up for Link's first post since it was brief, that'll make it easier for readers BUT try to limit your small posts to ONE or TWO points otherwise you'd need to elaborate more.

[Hamid ibn Askar]

Salam Aleykum

I apologise for my late reply but i have been very busy due to work and other commitments.

To make this very short and simple and in order not to waste your time and mines let me make this as simple as possible .

This ayah is general and can be applied to anyone who is invested with authority (ulu al-amr) which include all those entrusted with directing Muslims in matters of common concern. Hence, persons 'invested with authority' include the intellectual and political leaders of the community, as well as administrative officials, judges of the courts, tribal chiefs and regional representatives. In all these capacities, those 'invested with authority' are entitled to obedience, and it is improper for Muslims to cause dislocation in their collective life by engaging in strife and conflict with them. This obedience is contingent, however, on two conditions: first, that these men should be believers; and second, that they should themselves be obedient to Allah and the Prophet (peace be on him)

Now you believe that this applies to the 12 imams, i would like your to please provide your evidence for that belief.

[Link]

Alaikom asalam

You ignored what has been presented.

For example the context before brings the issue of the Jibt and Taghut not only with Tyrannically Kings like the Pharaoh but as well as people who were taken as religious authorities such as the those attributing purity to themselves while God is the one who attributes purity to who he pleases. This always happens with people praising them with righteousness while they accept such praise or are silent regarding it. It emphasizes on the authority vested one of the chosen families of the past in contrast and reminds that hell is the result of turning away from such authority. Who but the chosen ones with manifest proof can claim such authority? They are the "way" of believers, and they are compared to the family of Abraham.

Another proof: obedience owed to all Messengers emphasized in verses after shows what is meant.

[Hamid ibn Askar]

Dear Link

I didn't ignore anything you said. I explained to you this verse is general and applies to anyone in authority (provided they fullfill the conditions). However i reject your spin and misreading of this ayah which you still have failed to provide any textual evidence for why it applies to your 12 imams?.

So how about you just cut straight to the chase and give it to us?

in plain English terms how does this ayah prove your 12 infallible holy imams ?

[Link]

So far I have discussed the context of the verses before it. Until you can offer an explanation of how the context doesn't prove it's about the chosen family of Mohammad, there is no room for discussion.

You can assert all you want that it hasn't been proven, but that is not a discussion.

Talk about the verses I paraphrased and referred to that lead up to 4:59 and show an alternative plausible explanation.

[Hamid ibn Askar]

Dear Link

I don't have to prove anything to you.
You are the one making a claim that this ayah is referring to your 12 infallible holy imams so the burden of proof lies upon your shoulders not mine. Reading the ayah at face value alone without even resorting to tafaseer one can clearly understand the context of the ayah. If you want to limit it to a specific case then it's upon you to prove it.

If you can't prove it just say so and we can move on to the next topic.

[Link]

Salam

I paraphrased the context of some of the verses before as proof it refers to the chosen guides and leaders.  If you don't want to address the proofs presented, then it's not a discussion. Anyone can just deny something and say it is not evidence or has not been proven.

I will await your response about the context and await what your explanation of the context is.

Anyone can take a verse in isolation to the rest of Quran and say it means this and that. But the context shows what is meant.

[Hamid ibn Askar]

Salam

What you ''paraphrased'' is completely baseless and not applicable to your claim. I can use the exact same logic and apply it to Abu bakr, Omar and Uthman (AS) and that would even make more sense since they actually ruled and had authority unlike 10 out of the 12 imams.

you are simply clutching on straws and making claims based upon logical fallacies.

If you don't have any concrete evidence why this ayah applies to your 12 holy imams just say so and we can move on.

[Hani]

In summary:

Shia debater: Context leading to verse is clearly pointing to 12 infallible Imams.

Sunni debater: Context leading to verse is general and can be better applied to the first 3 Caliphs.

[Link]

Salam

1. The great authority God gave Abraham's family was an authority designated by him, proven and manifested by God. That is applicable to the family of Mohammad in Shiism while not applicable to Abu Baker, Umar, Uthman in Sunnism.

2. The warning of turning from such authority such that hell is the result of doing so which is in contrast to believing in it, doesn't apply to "general" type. 

3. The subject is about guidance believers vs that of the Taghut. There is nothing in the Surah that talks about general government of people, rather subject is that of false religious authorities leading people against the guidance of believers, while they acknowledge such guidance and authority through a chosen family in the past, they deny the need of it now and seek to replace the authority of God vested and trust in his chosen ones, to that of Taghut/Jibt.

[Hamid ibn Askar]

Salam

Dear Link yet again you are committing logical fallacies and making empty claims.

Let me ask you this in order for us not to go around in circles. If i apply the exact same standard and claim which you are making instead i apply it to the first 3 caliphs how would you refute me ?

give me your best shot

[Link]

Salam


That has already been explained in the last post. I will give a different example though in this one.
One thing neglected in the various commentaries is how the verse "The day we call every people with a witness from themselves and call you against these a witness".  Go open the Quran and go back verses from 4:59 and you will see the clear flow if you reflect.

The talk about witnesses with those who hide sayings is linked to refuting those who hide the truth among those taken as leaders and authorities from the people of the book, as it shows, indeed there always exists one who is best fit to lead humanity, one who God manifested their purity so to be fit for religious leadership as opposed to the decided by people and attributed by people.

Sunni concept of leadership is not at all hinted from context.

[Hamid ibn Askar]

Salam

Link you are yet again making empty claims based upon your own shallow understanding of the Quran.

As a Sunni Muslim i follow not the understanding of an unknown Shia called Link living in the 21st century rather i follow the understanding of the Prophet peace be upon him and his companions and the students of the companions and their respective students. In other words i follow the Salafs understanding of the Quran since they hail from a blessed generation who possessed the most knowledge.

Even from a rational perspective this ayah fits more the Ahl Sunnah understanding since throughout history the hejaz and two holy cities Mecca and Medina has always been under the control of Sunnis and Shias have always according to themselves lived under humiliation and oppression under Sunni rule.

So again your claim falls right flat.

[Link]

Salam

As Sunni Muslim, you do so. But why should you choose to be Sunni Muslim as opposed to believe hadiths shias have from the Prophet and his Twelve Successors, that it refers to the twelve leaders and guides after the Prophet? 

Please bring a better argument than those who acquire power get to dictate the truth.

Let us clarify your stance.

1. Do you believe the context clarifies who the Ulil-Amr and that the Quran through out clarifies who the Ulil-Amr is?

1a. If yes, where is the clarification that it refers to government and it is generally about those who hold positions of power given by the people as opposed to the main subject of the Quran which is submission to God (ie. submit through the authority of his books which are leaders and the leaders the divine books testify to and prove)?

1b. If neither context nor other parts of Quran clarify who Ulil-Amr is, then I want to know why?

[Hamid ibn Askar]

SALAM

So lets just get this clear. You are the one making the claim and now you shift the burden on to me?. I will proceed to show you the correct understanding of this verse if you concede that you can't prove your claim without resorting your own Ta'weel. Do that and then we can move on.

[Link]

Salam

So I take your stance neither context or other parts of Quran confirm the Sunni view.

As for you saying it's my own Taweel, this Taweel is supported by ahadith to the family of the reminder, who people were meant to turn to when confused and in need of clarification. For example regarding “a great authority” they said it refers to obedience own to the pure chosen ones, regarding “share in the authority..” they said it refers to the “succession and leadership”. Regarding envied people, said they are that.

There is a claim the context clarifies by me, while your stance seems to be it does not clarify either stance.  Reason dictates that God would clarify it clearly both by context and other verses.

To say otherwise is to seek to impose one's own interpretation over that which the Quran and the family of the reminder both clarify.

[Hamid ibn Askar]

Salam

We have authentic narrations that state we should obey the ruler even if he is an Abyssinian slave or if he is a unjust ruler as long as he doesn't compel us into kufr and we don't see clear kufr from him.

When it comes to Quranic Ayaat we take them as the apparent meaning state unless there is a nass which can be authentically traced back to the Prophet (SAW) or any of the sahaba.

Your "Logic" or Shi'i books is not a hujja for me so unless you can bring your claim out of our books and back it up you shouldn't waste your time and my time neither with this.

[Link]

Salam

This is my closing remark so it will be longer than 150 words as it doesn't seem you are going to respond to any of the points I bring but just bark and puff when reasoning and bright indications of the truth are shown to you.

Reasoning and logic, even it's just me showing it, is a proof, if it's the truth. And the best reasoning is that of Quran, but to see the reasoning in Quran, one has to reflect and use their mind.

I will bring some new points. In Quran, there are past examples of leaders who were appointed in the past.

The Quran first brings the issue of the family of Abraham because it shows by this to even the people of the book, that this was a way of God

What I have not talked too much is about the verses after. The Quran continues to emphasize on the true authority, and in this Surah, it emphasizes on obedience owed to all Messengers after.


Edited by Farid: Post was over a thousand and two hundred words, and thus, was limited. Please stick to the rules.