TwelverShia.net Forum

Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hani

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #80 on: July 29, 2015, 09:26:18 PM »
Quote
Lol.. Please educate yourself about the basics of usool al hadeeth, instead of playing these silly word games.

And what Hani quoted puts an end to this report.

Quote
More importantly, the two experts abu Hatim and abu Zur`ah said in the book of `Ilal that this chain is Mursal and that the original report doesn't even have abu Sa`eed in it, it stops at `Atiyyah:

وَسألت أبي، وأبا زرعة، عَنْ حديث رَوَاهُ سَعِيدُ بْنُ خُثَيْمٍ، عَنْ فُضَيْلِ بْنِ مَرْزُوقٍ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ، قَالَ: لَمَّا نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الآيَةُ:ف وَآتِ ذَا الْقُرْبَى حَقَّهُق، دَعَا النَّبِيُّ  فَاطِمَةَ فَجَعَلَ لَهَا فَدَكًا. فقالا: إنما هو عَنْ عَطِيَّةَ، قَالَ: لما نزلت. مرسل. قَالَ: ليس فيه ذكر أَبِي سَعِيد قَالَ أَبُو زُرْعَةَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو نعيم، عَنْ فضيل، عَنْ عطية فقط قَالَ: لما نزلت. ليس فيه ذكر أَبِي سَعِيد

No, they are saying that his route from abu naeem to fudhayl to atiya to saeed al khudri is mursal where atiya doesn't mention saeed.


Also look at the way he talks about Abu hatim ibn hibban "The expert" Lol, he just told me not long ago that "Ibn hibban strengthens majaheel".

So hes an expert when you like??

No for the love of God man, abu Zur`ah says its from Fudayl from `Atiyyah only, it has no mention of abu Sa`eed
"قَالَ: ليس فيه ذكر أَبِي سَعِيد" Meaning it's a Mursal from `Atiyyah. Why else would it be a `Illah? A narrator mistakenly inserted abu Sa`eed in this chain to make it Muttasil, it's actually Mursal. This narrator is probably Sa`eed bin Khaytham who makes mistakes and isn't even a Thiqah, the one abu Zur`ah narrated from abu Nu`aym who is a Thiqah-Thabt is the actual chain and has no abu Sa`eed. In other words this story about Fadak being gifted is no more than a story circulating among the Koufans.

Secondly, Ibn Hibban is an expert but his conditions of Tawtheeq in his book are unreliable due to lenience and his Tawtheeq of Majaheel, his methodology in determining the Thiqaat is unreliable and the scholars never settled on it due to its flaws. It seems he will list anybody as Thiqah if no criticism is found, even though the man may be a liar at the end of the day.

Thirdly, the book of `Ilal is by Ibn abi Hatim al-Razi, it has nothing to do with Ibn Hibban, you confused Muhammad bin Idris abu Hatim al-Razi with Muhammad bin Hibban abu Hatim al-Busti !!!

Dude have some shame seriously, you've none of the qualities of the people of justice and piety.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2015, 09:35:27 PM by Hani »
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Hani

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #81 on: July 29, 2015, 10:03:13 PM »
WHERE IS THE NARRATION OF "`ALI IS THE BEST AMONG YOU IN JUDGEMENT" IN AL-TIRMIDHI'S BOOK!?

abuJay Herz said that this narration is found in al-Tirmidhi:

Quote
the same hadith is found with another authentic chain in Timrizi.


 حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ حَدَّثَنَا وَكِيعٌ عَنْ سُفْيَانَ عَنْ خَالِدٍ الْحَذَّاءِ عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ مِثْلَهُ عِنْدَ ابْنِ قُدَامَةَ غَيْرَ أَنَّهُ يَقُولُ فِي حَقِّ زَيْدٍ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْفَرَائِضِ. وأخرجه الترمذي (ج5ص665بتحقيق إبراهيم عطوة) وقال: هذا حديث حسن صحيح )

Or does Timrizi's manuscripts have the "added" phrase as well? Lol

This hadith is reported all over your books with "Ali is the best judge" now you're going to tell us that "oops the manscrupt just happen to not have this phrase".

Then when we searched and never found it you told us:

Quote
You're mistaken, the hadith is found here in his book.

I'm really curious as to where this is and I still can't find it? Would you mind showing me it?
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Khaled

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #82 on: July 29, 2015, 10:05:47 PM »
Those false quotes should be enough to make anyone doubt Shi'asm, the level that they stoop is outrageous.
كلُّ سُلامى من الناس عليه صدقة كلَّ يوم تطلع فيه الشمس، تَعدلُ بين اثنين صدقة، وتعين الرَّجل في دابَّته فتحمله عليها أو ترفع له عليها متاعَه صدقة، والكلمةُ الطيِّبة صدقة، وبكلِّ خطوة تَمشيها إلى الصلاة صدقة، وتُميط الأذى عن الطريق صدقة

Abu-jafar herz

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #83 on: July 29, 2015, 11:49:18 PM »
Quote
Just quick comments since you never wrote anything useful.


Quote
We can play the rijal and manuscript game all you like


Rijal is not a game, the fact that you said this shows your low-class level, your bias and your extremism.


Then like a twelve year old kid you copy and paste some list from a website thinking that it would impress us?


Quote

وى أحمد عن أبي البختري عن علي عليه السّلام قال: «بعثني رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم إلى اليمن وأنا حديث السن قال: قلت: تبعثني إلى قوم يكون بينهم أحداث ولا علم لي بالقضاء قال: انّ الله سيهدي لسانك ويثبت قلبك، قال: فما شككت في قضاء بين اثنين بعد»(1).
وروى الحاكم باسناده عن أنس بن مالك: «ان النبي صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم قال لعلي: أنت تبين لأمتي ما اختلفوا فيه بعدي»(2).
وروى الشبلنجي عن ابن مسعود، قال: «أفرض أهل المدينة وأقضاها علي»(3).
.
.
.


You quote a cocktail of narrations as if we think that `Ali is a bad judge or sumthing, SubhanAllah what a grasshopper. Heck half of this list is the exact same report being repeated.



Quote

You tried to attack the hadith from umar by saying that "he could of meant it only when abu bakr was dead" using ad hoc argument with no proof whatsoever that abu bakr was a better judge than Ali.


Already addressed this, He doesn't need to be a better judge, he can be a less better judge and still get it right.



Quote

This hadith says that Allah guides the tongue of Ali when it comes to judgement, this is actually stronger than the hadith we've been trying to argue over.....


Also already addressed, he gave him more confidence to make his judgement since he was too scared due to his inexperience. Doesn't mean all his judgments will be right.


Man you repeat yourself a lot.



Quote

And Lastly, Imam Ali [as] himself says in authentic narrations in your books that he there would not be anything in the book of Allah that he did not know the minute details of.


We believe `Ali was from the most knowledgeable men, and maybe even the most knowledgeable man in his own reign. Doesn't mean that others didn't know anything or weren't close or near to his level if not better in certain sciences. Ibn Mas`oud died before `Ali and it has been authentically reported from him that he said that nobody alive knew more about Allah's book than himself.


I've never seen somebody try to dodge and wiggle as much as you.

1- Do you accept that Allah guided the tongue of Imam Ali [as] when he made judgement?
2- Do you accept that Umar called Ali [as] the best judge of the companions?
3- Do you accept that the narration with Ali [as] is the best judge is mutawatir? (btw I didn't claim it is mutawatir your "expert" scholars did).


Quote
I don't believe any of this which makes you a sinful liar. The Prophet (saw) said: The Muslim does not lie.

If you're not a salafi and you don't believe that Allah has fingers and hands (that are "unimingable") then the majority of your scholars do, including Ibn baz, albani, and the rest of the Sunnah ulema.

And actually the person sinning is you, making a disgraceful website like this creating sectarian hate between Sunnah and Shia, you should be ashamed of yourself. You attack Allah [swt] religion day and night.

Quote
1- There's two opinions: A- All prophets do not offer inheritance. B- Only our prophet did not wish to offer it. Either way doesn't work for  you.

Lets not play, we know you believe in B because A obviously doesn't work.

So lets talk about B, the prophet [saw] never gave away ownership of Fadak.

The waqf you keep mentioning here is not only irrelevant to the argument, its completely wrong.

Why?

You just admitted that the prophet [saw] owned Fadak personally but "gave it away", you're contradicting Abu Bakr who said that prophets don't inherit, meaning that his argument would only be valid if Muhammad [saw] had Fadak, otherwise AB would of just said "your father doesn't own it, he gave it away".


Quote
قَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : أَنَا وَلِيُّ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، فَجِئْتُمَا تَطْلُبُ مِيرَاثَكَ مِنَ ابْنِ أَخِيكَ وَيَطْلُبُ هَذَا مِيرَاثَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا ، فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : مَا نُورَثُ مَا تَرَكْنَاهُ صَدَقَةٌ


This is referring to when they went to Abu Bakr, this is actual evidence that it wasn't a "gift" for if it were then `Umar would have instead said: "And you both went to Abu Bakr asking for your property" Instead he said: "Asking him for the inheritance of your nephew and you asking for the inheritance of your wife etc..."

So?

Imam Ali [as] is clearly asking again for "inheritance" of Fatima from her father again from Umar.




قَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : أَنَا وَلِيُّ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، فَجِئْتُمَا تَطْلُبُ مِيرَاثَكَ مِنَ ابْنِ أَخِيكَ وَيَطْلُبُ هَذَا مِيرَاثَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا ، فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : مَا نُورَثُ مَا تَرَكْنَاهُ صَدَقَةٌ

Umar says Abu Bakr said " I am the the Wali of the prophet,so you both came asking you asking for your inheritance from your npehew and this person asking inheritance for his wife from her father."

Then he says....

"So Abu bakr said the prophet said we are not inherited from, what we leave is charity".

Then he continues and say essentially "you both came back asking for me to pay/give you Fadak".

 فَوَلِيتُهَا ثُمَّ جِئْتَنِي أَنْتَ وَهَذَا وَأَنْتُمَا جَمِيعٌ وَأَمْرُكُمَا وَاحِدٌ ، فَقُلْتُمَا : ادْفَعْهَا إِلَيْنَا

"So you both again then come to me, you and this person together with the same issue, and you both say "give it (fadak) to us".

This clearly shows that they still believe they have a right to Fadak even after Umar, as umar puts it...

Then umar clarifies as to what they are asking for :
فَقُلْتُ : إِنْ شِئْتُمْ دَفَعْتُهَا إِلَيْكُمَا ، عَلَى أَنَّ عَلَيْكُمَا عَهْدَ اللَّهِ أَنْ تَعْمَلَا فِيهَا بِالَّذِي كَانَ يَعْمَلُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ

"If you both wish I will give it (fadak) to you both on the condition that you do with it what the prophet [saw] did with it during his time".

^
This clearly shows that they are asking for the land back, and not just the produce of the land.

Then umar says..

"You both thought him a liar etc etc etc"...

"Now you both think of me the same etc etc etc"

Because they are rejecting what they are ruling in regards to the land so Umar is telling them basically...

"Do you both think us as liars and thieves"!?


This is 100 percent clear, you're trying to make these little side sleight of hands that aren't going to help you.


Quote
You mean al-Hakim al-Haskani? Here's a tip, NEVER say al-Hakim whithout clarifying who it is unless it's al-Hakim al-Nisabouri, otherwise it would be Tadlees (like the author of al-Muraja`aat does). Now According to your scholar Aqa Buzruq al-Tehrani the man was a Shiite.

آقا بزرالطهراني في الذريعة إلى تصانيف الشيعة ج 4 ص 194

The author of this book often quotes from the Rafidi Tafseer Furat so all in all his book Shawaahid al-Tanzil is not a Hujjah.


Actually the shawahid I gave you is fine, this is what Dhahabi says about Al hakim the dirty rafidhi...


الحسكانى القاضى المحدث أبو القاسم عبيد الله بن عبد الله بن احمد بن محمد بن احمد بن محمد بن حسكان القرشي العامري النيسابوري الحنفي الحاكم ويعرف بابن الحذاء الحافظ شيخ متقن ذو عناية تامة بعلم الحديث وهو من ذرية الأمير عبد الله بن عامر بن كريز الذي افتتح خراسان زمن عثمان وكان معمرا عالي الإسناد
“Al-Haskani, the judge, the muhadith, Abu al-Qasim Ubaidllah bin Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Haskan al-Qurashi al-Ameri al-Nisaburi al-Hanafi al-Hakim, popularly known as ibn al-Heda, Hafiz, a preserved Sheikh, very careful with the knowledge of hadith, he is from price Abdullah bin Amer bin Kuraiz decent, who conquest Khurasan during Uthman’s time, and he led along life and his chain (isnaad) was highly (preserved)”
Tadkirat al-Hufaz, Volume 3 page 1200 Translation No. 1032


Quote
No genius, Ibn Hajar listed Tadlees separately genius. Otherwise he would have said "Katheer-ul-Tadlees".

Ibn Hajar was referring to his tadlees!

This is what he was talking about, 99 percent of the accusations against Atiya is that he is a mudallas.


Quote
It's actually your translation which is faulty ya abuJay. When they say "Sadaqatihi bil-Madinah" this always refers to the Sawafi that he left as Sadaqah in Madinah, I don't know how the heck you invented this ((Fadak and the charities from it's city)) if anything it shows that you haven't opened a book of Amwal and Tarikah in your life nor do you even know what the Prophet (saw)left behind. The property gifted by the Jewish man in addition to the Fay' taken from Banu al-Nadeer are referred to as "Sadaqat Rasul-Allah fil-Madinah" and most were possessions of Salam bin Mushkim al-Nudayri.

The reason people called them Sadaqat was because he made them a Waqf and offered them as charity.

The Arabic says that she asked for the Tarikah, Tarikah is everything left behind, then it specifies what Tarikah she meant, it says "What Rasul-Allah (saw) left behind from Khaybar and Fadak as well as his Sadaqat in al-Madinah."

Now as for the tree hasty conclusions:

1- No he wasn't and this is written nowhere in the Arabic text you provided above.

2- No he didn't and this is written nowhere in the Arabic text you provided above.

3- No he didn't and this is written nowhere in the ARabic text you provided above.
« Last Edit: Today at 09:13:52 PM by Hani »

Lets start with point one I said

1- Ali (as) was still asking for inheritance even after abu bakr died.

You said..

Quote
1- No he wasn't and this is written nowhere in the Arabic text you provided above.

First..

ةِ فَدَفَعَهَا عُمَرُ إِلَى عَلِيٍّ وَعَبَّاسٍ فَغَلَبَهُ عَلَيْهَا عَلِيٌّ وَأَمَّا خَيْبَرُ وَفَدَكُ فَأَمْسَكَهُمَا عُمَرُ وَقَالَ هُمَا صَدَقَةُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم

"So Umar paid/gave it to Ali and Abbas, so Ali got the better of Umar. As for khaybar and Fadak then Umar held on to them etc etc "

This hadith is in reference to....


قَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : أَنَا وَلِيُّ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، فَجِئْتُمَا تَطْلُبُ مِيرَاثَكَ مِنَ ابْنِ أَخِيكَ وَيَطْلُبُ هَذَا مِيرَاثَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا ، فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : مَا نُورَثُ مَا تَرَكْنَاهُ صَدَقَةٌ

So yes, Ali [as] is clearly still asking for inheritance.


Quote
2- Ali (as) asked for payment from the produce of the land and was given it.

Wrong, both hadith when taken together show clearly he was asking for Fadak.

Why would someone ask for the produce of Fadak if he knows he clearly doesn't even have a right to the land?
This is like saying someone like Imam Ali [as] was told that this house doesn't belong to him, he admits it but is asking for food from the fridge......

Quote
3- Ali (as) asked for Fadak/Khaybr but was denied.

Again this is proven when the two hadith are put together.


Quote
No for the love of God man, abu Zur`ah says its from Fudayl from `Atiyyah only, it has no mention of abu Sa`eed
"قَالَ: ليس فيه ذكر أَبِي سَعِيد" Meaning it's a Mursal from `Atiyyah. Why else would it be a `Illah? A narrator mistakenly inserted abu Sa`eed in this chain to make it Muttasil, it's actually Mursal. This narrator is probably Sa`eed bin Khaytham who makes mistakes and isn't even a Thiqah, the one abu Zur`ah narrated from abu Nu`aym who is a Thiqah-Thabt is the actual chain and has no abu Sa`eed. In other words this story about Fadak being gifted is no more than a story circulating among the Koufans.

You're repeating what I said !

Also I gave you the shawahid above from the dirty Shii Al Hakim.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 12:19:22 AM by Abu-jafar herz »

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 255
  • +11/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #84 on: July 30, 2015, 02:23:56 AM »
And actually the person sinning is you, making a disgraceful website like this creating sectarian hate between Sunnah and Shia, you should be ashamed of yourself. You attack Allah [swt] religion day and night.

Coming from someone whose sect is based on sectarianism and hatred.
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

Hadrami

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #85 on: July 30, 2015, 02:54:21 AM »
at least we are back to discussing fadak not "ali the best judge". Besides how can shia believe he was the best judge when he did one of the worst judgement ever, by marrying off his daughters to whom shia consider the worst of man? We Sunni believe that was one of his best judgement though, marrying his daughter to one of the best man ever alive :P

Arabismo

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #86 on: July 30, 2015, 04:14:25 AM »
i don't mean to interrupt Hani schooling Herz session but i just wanted to comment on how fair the admins are here compared to SC

Herz is extremly rude to Hani yet he still remains

Quote
If you're not a salafi and you don't believe that Allah has fingers and hands (that are "unimingable") then the majority of your scholars do, including Ibn baz, albani, and the rest of the Sunnah ulema.

And actually the person sinning is you, making a disgraceful website like this creating sectarian hate between Sunnah and Shia, you should be ashamed of yourself. You attack Allah [swt] religion day and night.

In Shia chat if you were to just say uff to an Admin or a Mod you would get banned  ;D
An ant from the valley of the ants possesses more intellect than a Rafidhi - Fakhr Al-Din Razi

Abu-jafar herz

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #87 on: July 30, 2015, 04:51:10 AM »
Quote
at least we are back to discussing fadak not "ali the best judge". Besides how can shia believe he was the best judge when he did one of the worst judgement ever, by marrying off his daughters to whom shia consider the worst of man? We Sunni believe that was one of his best judgement though, marrying his daughter to one of the best man ever alive :P


No we are indeed still discussing Ali is the best judge, as I gave you an authentic report from bukhari which umar states it, along with an authentic report from ya3la who narrates the hadith that the prophet [saw] made dua for Ali's ability to judge, after that day Allah guided and established his tongue in judgement.

This isn't to mention that the meaning "Ali is the best judge" is tawatur in your books.

He just wants to play games with "this phrase is missing here" and "oh this person is weak here".

Qatada himself narrates with an authentic chain up to him (although mursal) the same hadith with the phrase "Ali is the best judge".

Imam ash-shafii accepts the mursal from the tabii if he was known for his virtue as if it was narrated as connected.

Ali [as] also attests in your authentic narrations to his ability in knowing the Qur'an to the point where he knew if it was revealed at night or in day.

I'm going back and forth with Hani for the sake of argument and having information on this website, but in the end of the day the common sunni tactic of "oh this is weak" ," oh this manuscript has this" doesn't hold up when you see the amount of narrations you have along with all the external evidences that I provide.

The only reason why he doesn't want the phrase "Ali is the best judge" because he knows what I'll ask him next.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 04:57:07 AM by Abu-jafar herz »

Abu-jafar herz

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #88 on: July 30, 2015, 04:53:59 AM »
Quote
i don't mean to interrupt Hani schooling Herz session but i just wanted to comment on how fair the admins are here compared to SC

Herz is extremly rude to Hani yet he still remains


I don't want to be rude to Hani,  but I'm extremely angry from the fact that they opened a site like this that spends all its effort in attacking Allah's religion day and night.

So obviously I will be upset.

In the end of the day no one is convinced by debating, Allah guides who he wants,I'm only answering his statements for the sake of having information available online.

Arabismo

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #89 on: July 30, 2015, 05:07:19 AM »

Quote
I don't want to be rude to Hani,  but I'm extremely angry from the fact that they opened a site like this that spends all its effort in attacking Allah's religion day and night.
I think the purpose of the website is to show that the version of Islam you follow is not Allah's religion and therefore attacking it would not be attacking Allah's religion, in his view atleast.

Quote
So obviously I will be upset.
You should not engage in a discussion if your upset  ;D

Quote
In the end of the day no one is convinced by debating,

Then why did you open a thread to debate Fadak which has been debated 1000000000000000000 times?

Quote
I'm only answering his statements for the sake of having information available online.
I would say this information is widely avaible on the internet (Seeing as 99% of what you have written so far was taken from the Internet itself)




An ant from the valley of the ants possesses more intellect than a Rafidhi - Fakhr Al-Din Razi

Aba AbdAllah

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #90 on: July 30, 2015, 05:14:16 AM »
Aba when you post something, post it in Arabic as well or do not partake in the conversation.

you said :

This Hadeeth should answer your confusion.

Quote
We read in Sahi muslim Bk 19, Number 4354: Ayesha(ra) said: So far as the charitable endowments at Medina were concerned, ‘Umar handed them over to ‘Ali and Abbas, but ‘Ali got the better of him. And as far as Khaibar and Fadak were concerned ‘Umar kept them with him, and said: These are the endowments of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) (to the Umma). Their income was spent on the discharge of the responsibilities that devolved upon him on the emergencies he had to meet. And their management was to be in the hands of one who managed the affairs (of the Islamic State). The (sub)narrator said: They have been managed as such up to this day.

They wanted to be entrusted with the charitable endowments, for which they were disputing, since Ali(ra) got better of that.

The hadith is mistranslated extremely bad, and actually when we look at the hadith in Arabic the matter becomes clear...

 أَخْبَرَتْهُ أَنَّ فَاطِمَةَ بِنْتَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم سَأَلَتْ أَبَا بَكْرٍ بَعْدَ وَفَاةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنْ يَقْسِمَ لَهَا مِيرَاثَهَا مِمَّا تَرَكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مِمَّا أَفَاءَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ لَهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ لاَ نُورَثُ مَا تَرَكْنَا صَدَقَةٌ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ وَعَاشَتْ بَعْدَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم سِتَّةَ أَشْهُرٍ وَكَانَتْ فَاطِمَةُ تَسْأَلُ أَبَا بَكْرٍ نَصِيبَهَا مِمَّا تَرَكَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مِنْ خَيْبَرَ وَفَدَكٍ وَصَدَقَتِهِ بِالْمَدِينَةِ فَأَبَى أَبُو بَكْرٍ عَلَيْهَا ذَلِكَ وَقَالَ لَسْتُ تَارِكًا شَيْئًا كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَعْمَلُ بِهِ إِلاَّ عَمِلْتُ بِهِ إِنِّي أَخْشَى إِنْ تَرَكْتُ شَيْئًا مِنْ أَمْرِهِ أَنْ أَزِيغَ فَأَمَّا صَدَقَتُهُ بِالْمَدِينَةِ فَدَفَعَهَا عُمَرُ إِلَى عَلِيٍّ وَعَبَّاسٍ فَغَلَبَهُ عَلَيْهَا عَلِيٌّ وَأَمَّا خَيْبَرُ وَفَدَكُ فَأَمْسَكَهُمَا عُمَرُ وَقَالَ هُمَا صَدَقَةُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم كَانَتَا لِحُقُوقِهِ الَّتِي تَعْرُوهُ وَنَوَائِبِهِ وَأَمْرُهُمَا إِلَى مَنْ وَلِيَ الأَمْرَ قَالَ فَهُمَا عَلَى ذَلِكَ إِلَى الْيَوْمِ ‏.‏

"Fatima asked abu bakr after the passing away of Rasullah [as] to give her her share of her inheritance from what the prophet [saw] left from what allah restored to him (2faa2 Allah, fay). So Abu bakr said to her : The propher said that we are not inherited from, and what we leave is charity.  Aisha said that after rasulallah passed away, 6 months later Fatima asked Abu bakr what is owed to her from what the prophet left of Khaybr, Fadak and the charities from it's city (Not Al-medina as your mistranslation says), so abu bakr rejected her this and said I will not leave what the prophet [saw] did with it.............. As for the sadaqah from the city (of fadak) then umar paid it to Ali and Abbas , and ali got the better of umar, and as for khaybr and fadak then umar held onto them saying these two are sadaqa (to the end of the hadith..................


So we see that

1- Ali (as) was still asking for inheritance even after abu bakr died.
2- Ali (as) asked for payment from the produce of the land and was given it.
3- Ali (as) asked for Fadak/Khaybr but was denied.
Brother are you alright? Please think before you answer.

The word there is Sadaqa not payment. Moreover this hadeeth exposes your desperate attempts.

ثُمَّ جِئْتَنِي أَنْتَ وَهَذَا وَأَنْتُمَا جَمِيعٌ وَأَمْرُكُمَا وَاحِدٌ فَقُلْتُمَا ادْفَعْهَا إِلَيْنَا فَقُلْتُ إِنْ شِئْتُمْ دَفَعْتُهَا إِلَيْكُمَا عَلَى أَنَّ عَلَيْكُمَا عَهْدَ اللَّهِ أَنْ تَعْمَلاَ فِيهَا بِالَّذِي كَانَ يَعْمَلُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَأَخَذْتُمَاهَا بِذَلِكَ قَالَ أَكَذَلِكَ قَالاَ نَعَمْ ‏.‏ قَالَ ثُمَّ جِئْتُمَانِي لأَقْضِيَ بَيْنَكُمَا وَلاَ وَاللَّهِ لاَ أَقْضِي بَيْنَكُمَا بِغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ حَتَّى تَقُومَ السَّاعَةُ فَإِنْ عَجَزْتُمَا عَنْهَا فَرُدَّاهَا إِلَىَّ ‏.‏
Both of you have come and your purpose is identical. You said: Entrust the property to us. I said: If you wish that I should entrust it to you, it will be on the condition that both of you will undertake to abide by a pledge made with Allah that you will use it in the same way as the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used it. So both of you got it. He said: Wasn't it like this? They said: Yes. He said: Then you have (again) come to me with the request that I should adjudge between you. No, by Allah. I will not give any other judgment except this until the arrival of the Doomsday. If you are unable to hold the property on this condition, return it to me.(Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349)

Both of them asked that they be entrusted AND THEY WERE ENTRUSTED WITH IT,  So now are you going to say that they received Fadak and Khaybar? 

Then comes more interesting part which shatters your childish arguments. Umar said: If you are unable to hold the property on this condition, return it to me.

What did Umar ask to be returned? Fadak or payment?
This report has put the silly run arounds you are making to rest.

Hadrami

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #91 on: July 30, 2015, 05:31:42 AM »
Quote
at least we are back to discussing fadak not "ali the best judge". Besides how can shia believe he was the best judge when he did one of the worst judgement ever, by marrying off his daughters to whom shia consider the worst of man? We Sunni believe that was one of his best judgement though, marrying his daughter to one of the best man ever alive :P


No we are indeed still discussing Ali is the best judge, as I gave you an authentic report from bukhari which umar states it, along with an authentic report from ya3la who narrates the hadith that the prophet [saw] made dua for Ali's ability to judge, after that day Allah guided and established his tongue in judgement.

This isn't to mention that the meaning "Ali is the best judge" is tawatur in your books.

He just wants to play games with "this phrase is missing here" and "oh this person is weak here".

Qatada himself narrates with an authentic chain up to him (although mursal) the same hadith with the phrase "Ali is the best judge".

Imam ash-shafii accepts the mursal from the tabii if he was known for his virtue as if it was narrated as connected.

Ali [as] also attests in your authentic narrations to his ability in knowing the Qur'an to the point where he knew if it was revealed at night or in day.

I'm going back and forth with Hani for the sake of argument and having information on this website, but in the end of the day the common sunni tactic of "oh this is weak" ," oh this manuscript has this" doesn't hold up when you see the amount of narrations you have along with all the external evidences that I provide.

The only reason why he doesn't want the phrase "Ali is the best judge" because he knows what I'll ask him next.

Come on, if i was a shia who believe shia version of history, i would have doubted Ali as the best judge. Like i said, marrying off your beloved daughter to whom shia believe to be one of the worst man ever alive is really not an example of sound judgement, let alone best judge :P

Ibn Yahya

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #92 on: July 30, 2015, 07:01:11 AM »

Quote
A good judge looks at the evidence, scrutinises it and deduces which is the correct opinion. If it was to do with knowledge he would have said the 'Alim of this Ummah is 'Ali.

Yes we agree to to this definition, this means that Imam Ali [as] was presented with all the evidences including the hadith that Abu Bakr brought and judged that he is wrong.

Not only that, Imam Ali [as] was one of the most knowledgeable companions according to both schools.

So you're telling me that the best judge on earth including being one of the most knowledgable people would make a mitake on a simple inheritance law and persist on it for years?

But Moulana Hani, the researcher.

And his sidekick muslim720 also known as the decimator got it right but Imam Ali [as] the best judge to ever live after the prophet got it wrong?

Come come now children.....

apparently so wrong that he pledged allegiance to them shortly after, unless you want to say he was bullied into it which would mean he submitted to a Kafir. Submitting to a Kafir is Haram so that would mean 'Ali wasn't infallible. Also the Hadith says itself "the most knowledgeable of the rules of inheritance (Fara'id) is Zaid bin Thabit". And Zayd was one of the originals to give the Bay'ah to Abu Bakr and he didn't oppose Abu Bakr's rules on inheritance nor did he side with 'Ali and Fatimah so put two and two together.

Yes let's highlight the One of part of that.

You do know sarcastic and to be quite frank unfunny comments doesn't really constitute a response to an argument.

« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 07:05:00 AM by Ibn Yahya »

Abu-jafar herz

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #93 on: July 30, 2015, 02:23:58 PM »
Quote
I ain't kidding. Fadak, Sulalim, al-Wateeh and the areas between them are from the lands of Khaybar some of which were taken by force and others in peace.


As for what `Ali and al-`Abbas asked for, it was the seven gardens which were surrounded by walls and located in and around Madinah, they are: al-Dallal, Barqah, al-A`waf, al-Safiyah, al-Maythib, Husna and Mashrabat Umm Ibrahim. They are the Sawafi of banu al-Nadeer and some of them belonged to Mukhayreeq

Fadak and Khaybar are the same land, and these lands are a part of the same land that Fatima [as] is asking for, and these are from banu nadeer which Allah gave to the prophet [saw] as fay. This is the land that I am speaking about, and this is the land that She and Ali [as] were both asking for.

1- Abu bakr denied giving the land of banu nadeer to Fatima.

2- The sources then go on to say that Fatima [as] lived 6 months after the prophet, before she passed away she asked for the proceedings of Fadak, Abu bakr denied.

3- Ali [as] again comes to Umar asking for the land, Umar gives him the same opinion that abu bakr gave.

He says essentially "abu bakr said that prophets dont inherit,you thought him to be a liar, now you think I'm doing the same thing and lying, my opinion is the same as abu bakr".

4- He then goes on to say if you want me to give you the land, you have to spend the money the same way the prophet [saw] did (meaning, you can only have this land as an administrators spending how the prophet spent it)


Your claim is that this land they are asking for isn't Fadak, however this is wrong, as we see in the commentary of fat7 al mana3m he says that are asking for the land of banu nadeer (which includes Fadak).


http://www.sonnaonline.com/DisplayExplanation.aspx?ExplainId=51486,59186,99635,82303,90527,119715

Abu-jafar herz

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #94 on: July 30, 2015, 03:14:08 PM »
Quote
عَلِيًّا، وَالْعَبَّاسَ رضي الله عنهما يختصمان فيما أفاء الله على رَسُولِ اللَّهِ مِنْ أَمْوَالِ بَنِي النَّضِير
[`Ali and al-`Abbas both disputed over what Allah has given as Fay’ to his messenger from the property of banu al-Nadeer.]


هُمَا يَخْتَصِمَانِ فِي الصَّوَافِي الَّتِي أَفَاءَ اللَّهُ عَلَى رَسُولِهِ مِنْ أَمْوَالِ بَنِي النَّضِير
[And they were disputing regarding the pure possessions that Allah granted as Fay’ to his messenger (saw) from bani al-Nadeer.]

Sawaafi means properties/lands,not pure possessions. I'm being specific here because I don't want you to think that they are just asking for the produce of the land but for the land itself.

So you're two quotes is saying exactly what I'm saying, they came asking for the properties that Allah gave as fay to the prophet [saw], and this is Fadak, as well as the gardens in Medina that Banu nadeer left.


Quote
لم يكن في الميراث إنما تنازعا في ولاية الصدقة وفي صرفها كيف تصرف
[Their dispute was not regarding inheritance, they only fought about controlling the Sadaqah and how it should be divided and spent.]


No, this is what the quite is referring to.

Abbas and Ali were receiving shares from the land, they argued because Abbas thought Ali was getting more than him. So they went to Umar to settle the dispure, at this time they asked to be given Fadak, they were denied and told they could only adminster it.

He says "I will give it to you if you promise to do with it what the prophet saw did with it"

meaning I'm not going to give you ownership of the land, only administration.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 03:33:27 PM by Abu-jafar herz »

Abu-jafar herz

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #95 on: July 30, 2015, 03:47:42 PM »
Quote
No for the love of God man, abu Zur`ah says its from Fudayl from `Atiyyah only, it has no mention of abu Sa`eed
"قَالَ: ليس فيه ذكر أَبِي سَعِيد" Meaning it's a Mursal from `Atiyyah. Why else would it be a `Illah? A narrator mistakenly inserted abu Sa`eed in this chain to make it Muttasil, it's actually Mursal. This narrator is probably Sa`eed bin Khaytham who makes mistakes and isn't even a Thiqah, the one abu Zur`ah narrated from abu Nu`aym who is a Thiqah-Thabt is the actual chain and has no abu Sa`eed. In other words this story about Fadak being gifted is no more than a story circulating among the Koufans.

Secondly, Ibn Hibban is an expert but his conditions of Tawtheeq in his book are unreliable due to lenience and his Tawtheeq of Majaheel, his methodology in determining the Thiqaat is unreliable and the scholars never settled on it due to its flaws. It seems he will list anybody as Thiqah if no criticism is found, even though the man may be a liar at the end of the day.

Yaha ibn maeen gives saeed al khaytham tawtheeq, what are you talking about?

Does yahya ibn maeen give him tawtheeq yes or no?

And is yahya ibn maeen not one of leaders of your rijal scholars?


Quote
Thirdly, the book of `Ilal is by Ibn abi Hatim al-Razi, it has nothing to do with Ibn Hibban, you confused Muhammad bin Idris abu Hatim al-Razi with Muhammad bin Hibban abu Hatim al-Busti !!!

Dude have some shame seriously, you've none of the qualities of the people of justice and piety.

I'm sorry I confused your Abu hatims, that must make me a person who doesn't have shame,is unjust and impious.

A person with piety and justice wouldn't open a website like this whose sole purpose is to Attack Shia. You're obsessed with us habibi, you need to spend your time on something else.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2015, 03:53:03 PM by Abu-jafar herz »

Aba AbdAllah

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #96 on: July 30, 2015, 07:29:03 PM »
Yaha ibn maeen gives saeed al khaytham tawtheeq, what are you talking about?

Does yahya ibn maeen give him tawtheeq yes or no?

And is yahya ibn maeen not one of leaders of your rijal scholars?

Lol, This guy is funny on the top of being ignorant. He leavea the main response and runs after the side issues. The main answer here is that, there is ilal in it and it is Mursal, as mentioned by the Giants of Sunni rijal system. Which closes the doors to your imaginary arguments.

As for the side issue that the mistake was PROBABLY from saeed bin khaytam, then its just a probability made by Hani. So you won't achieve any point over these side issues, so concentrate on the main ones, if you are seeking the truth.


Quote
The "mistakes" you're mentioning was regards to tadlees genius.

Ibn Hajar was referring to his tadlees!

This is what he was talking about, 99 percent of the accusations against Atiya is that he is a mudallas.
Brother, please spare yourself from making these ignoramus claims, and try to educate yourself. With these stupid argument you are giving no benefit to Shiism, rather harming it.

 Tadlees in itself is a pattern/style of narrating. Just like Irsaal. Some Mudalliseen were Thiqa take example Am'ash, even though he was known for doing tadlees. Therefore, when Ibn hajar said that atiyya makes lots of mistakes it was not about tadlees, rather it was regarding his memory like mixing the chains or the narrators.

Aba AbdAllah

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #97 on: July 30, 2015, 07:52:23 PM »
No, this is what the quite is referring to.

Abbas and Ali were receiving shares from the land, they argued because Abbas thought Ali was getting more than him. So they went to Umar to settle the dispure, at this time they asked to be given Fadak, they were denied and told they could only adminster it.

He says "I will give it to you if you promise to do with it what the prophet saw did with it"

meaning I'm not going to give you ownership of the land, only administration.

Keeping repeating the refuted arguments, that won't bring any benefit to you.

They disputed over something else and approached umar for the judgement, but there they asked Fadak(imaginary claim of yours) and granted administration. But how did it resolve their original dispute? Just see how your foolish misinterpretations makes the reports meaningless.

The below report clearly shows that Fadak and Khaiber  were in the hands of Umar, and He was the one who was managing it. Not Ali or Abbas.

إِنِّي أَخْشَى إِنْ تَرَكْتُ شَيْئًا مِنْ أَمْرِهِ أَنْ أَزِيغَ فَأَمَّا صَدَقَتُهُ بِالْمَدِينَةِ فَدَفَعَهَا عُمَرُ إِلَى عَلِيٍّ وَعَبَّاسٍ فَغَلَبَهُ عَلَيْهَا عَلِيٌّ وَأَمَّا خَيْبَرُ وَفَدَكُ فَأَمْسَكَهُمَا عُمَرُ وَقَالَ هُمَا صَدَقَةُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم كَانَتَا لِحُقُوقِهِ الَّتِي تَعْرُوهُ وَنَوَائِبِهِ وَأَمْرُهُمَا إِلَى مَنْ وَلِيَ الأَمْرَ قَالَ فَهُمَا عَلَى ذَلِكَ إِلَى الْيَوْمِ ‏.

We read in Sahi muslim Bk 19, Number 4354: Ayesha(ra) said: So far as the charitable endowments at Medina were concerned, ‘Umar handed them over to ‘Ali and Abbas, but ‘Ali got the better of him. And as far as Khaibar and Fadak were concerned ‘Umar kept them with him, and said: These are the endowments of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) (to the Umma). Their income was spent on the discharge of the responsibilities that devolved upon him on the emergencies he had to meet. And their management was to be in the hands of one who managed the affairs (of the Islamic State). The (sub)narrator said: They have been managed as such up to this day.

Hani

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #98 on: July 30, 2015, 08:52:57 PM »

Oh my God how arrogant and ignorant you are... it's the worse combination.


let's very quickly reply to your repetitive junk.


Your point about `Ali's judgement and your conclusion that those two narrations you quoted imply infallibility in judgement.


Read some samples of `Ali's judgements and see how he would change his mind and go back on his opinions.



Perhaps one of the strongest arguments against the infallibility of Ali is that he would at times change his mind regarding his position towards certain Islamic laws. Such a matter is not a sign of the weakness of his character, or his mind, but rather, it demonstrates his objectivity and modesty. However, one that changes his mind regarding laws is obviously not an infallible since those that are described as such do not change their minds.


In this article, we will list some of the opinions of Ali that he let go off in preference of others. We will be using the book Al-Masa’il Al-Fiqhiya alati Hukiya fiha Rujoo’ Al-Sahaba by Khalid Babtain as our main reference. This book uses Sunni sources only and does not use Shia sources. For those that are interested in the contradictions of the Imams, please refer to Al-Tusi’s Istibsaar for a plethora of contradictions.


On p. 111, he said:
Al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated in their Saheeh, from Ata’a bin Yasar that Zaid bin Khalid Al-Juhani told him that he asked Uthman bin Affan: What if a man had intercourse with his woman and did not excrete semen? Uthman replied: He makes wud’u like one would make wud’u for prayer, then he washes his private parts. Uthman said: I heard this from the Messenger (salalahu alaihi wa salam). He said: So I asked Ali, Al-Zubair, Talha, and Ubai bin Ka’ab and they ordered to do the same. (Al-Bukhari 1/284 and Muslim 1/270)


However, Ali then changes his mind. On p. 114 we find the following narrations:
Abu Ja’afar (Al-Baqir) from Ali that he used to say: Upon it is the Hadd, but not a Qadah of water?! (Musannaf Abdulrazaq 1/246)
Note: The narration is disconnected, but we mentioned anyways since it is through the narration of the descendent of Ali, the fifth Imam, Al-Baqir.


Explanation (by TwelverShia): In this narration, Ali is saying that if a man enters a woman, then he is to be punished by Islamic law. If that is the case, how is it possible for someone to not have to wash since bathing is a much smaller deal than being punished?!


The next narration is even clearer. 


From Zir bin Hubaish from Ali that he said: If the private parts meet, then they must bathe. In another narration: If they enter one another… (Musanaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 1/84 and Al-Awsat 2/80)


As we can see from the above, Ali at one stage in his life states that the private parts meeting do not require bathing if one does not excrete semen. However, he changes his opinion in the other narrations.


The next issue is regarding the inheritance of grandfather. On page 423 we find the following narrations:


It is famous that Ali bin Abi Talib (raa) used to give the grandfather along with brothers a third and nothing less, and there are two narrations that suggest this:


1- From Abeeda bin Nadhala that Ali bin Abi Talib used to give the grandfather a third…
2- From Qatada in the hadith of Omar’s (raa) consultation of the Sahaba, he said: Omar bin Al-Khattab called in Ali bin Abi Talib, Zaid bin Thabit, Abdullah bin Abbas, and asked them about the grandfather? Ali said: A third in all cases…” (Musanaf Abdulrazaq 10/226)


His (raa) change in opinion:


It appears as though Ali (raa) has changed his mind, and saw that a grandfather should only be given a sixth and nothing more. Those that mentioned this are four of his companions, Al-Sha’bi, Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Abdullah bin Salima, and Abeeda Al-Salmani, may Allah have mercy on them. Ibrahim Al-Nakha’ee also mentioned this in a disconnected report.


These are their narrations:


1- Al-Darami with his chain to Amer Al-Sha’bi that he said: Ibn Abbas wrote to Ali while in Al-Basra that a grandfather and six brothers came. Ali wrote back: Give the grandfather a sixth. (Al-Darimi 2/254)
2- From him as well about six brothers and a grandfather: Give the grandfather a sixth. Al-Darimi said: It seems that this is also his (Al-Sha’bi’s) report from Ali. (Al-Darimi 2/254)
3- From Al-Hasan Al-Basri: Ali would give a grandfather that was with brothers a sixth. (Al-Darimi 2/254)
4- From Abdullah bin Salima from Ali (raa): He used to divide to a grandfather with brothers a sixth. (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 6/262)
5- From Abeeda Al-Salmani: Ali used to give a grandfather that had brothers a third, but Omar used to give them a sixth. Omar then wrote to Abdullah: I am afraid that we have taken from the rights of the grandfather, so give him a third! Then, Ali came and gave him a sixth. Abeeda said: When your opinion was with the group, we preferred it more than when it went against the group. (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi 6/407)


The next issue that Ali changed his mind in has to do with his view of Umahaat Al-Awlaad. These are the female slaves that give birth to the children of their slave masters.


On page 462, we find the author collecting narrations of his opinion that one cannot sell them:


1- From Abeeda Al-Salmani from Ali bin Abi Talib (raa) that he told the people: I consulted Omar about the Umahaat Al-Awlaad and we both saw that they should be freed. (Sunan Sa’eed bin Mansoor 2/60)
The author then mentions another narration, but it is not at the level of authenticity of the first one.


He then quoted narrations of his other view:


1- From Abeeda Al-Salmani, he said: Ali said: I debated Omar on selling Umahaat Al-Awlaad. I said: They are to be sold. He said: They aren’t to be sold. Then Omar kept on coming revising the issue with me until I said the same then judged upon this during his life, but now that things have come to me, I see that they are to be sold. Abeeda said: I told Ali: Your opinion with Omar in agreement is more favorable to me than your opinion alone. (Sunan Sa’eed bin Mansur, Sunan Al-Bayhaqi 10/575, and Musanaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 4/414)


The author mentions the hadith through two other chains with very similar statements from both Ali and Abeeda. All the narrations imply that Ali changed his view more about the subject after he came into power.


These examples clearly show that Ali has changed his mind due to his own Ijtihad. These all imply that Ali saw that his previous views were incorrect, and that the new stances that he took were the correct positions. For more contradictions please review the above mentioned book by Shaykh Khalid.

عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Hani

Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
« Reply #99 on: July 30, 2015, 09:18:10 PM »
Replying to you point on prophetic inheritance (don't mind if I skip some of your points as not everything you write deserves attention)


You wrote:


Quote
Lets not play, we know you believe in B because A obviously doesn't work.


So lets talk about B, the prophet [saw] never gave away ownership of Fadak.


The waqf you keep mentioning here is not only irrelevant to the argument, its completely wrong.


Why?


You just admitted that the prophet [saw] owned Fadak personally but "gave it away", you're contradicting Abu Bakr who said that prophets don't inherit, meaning that his argument would only be valid if Muhammad [saw] had Fadak, otherwise AB would of just said "your father doesn't own it, he gave it away".


Although based on my research I do believe that the narration was only referring to our Prophet (saw) as did al-Tabari, yet I have argued for the other opinion as well and defended it and proved its validity as well. (review the research)


Also correct your understanding, we say "The Prophet (saw) gave it away" this is because he says "Everything left behind by me is given in charity" there is absolutely no contradiction between Abu Bakr telling her "The Prophet (saw) gave it away" and "The Prophet (saw) said everything he leaves is given as charity" Besides Fadak was not the only property Fatimah asked for.


She asked for the following:


1- The inheritance of the seven gardens which were surrounded by walls and located in and around Madinah.


2- Their property from the land of Fadak which was a Fay’ from the land of Khaybar, its people surrendered peacefully when they heard they wouldn’t be harmed and this land became purely his property (saw). Fatimah and al-`Abbas thought it would be divided between the members of the household.


3- The share of the household from the Khums of what was taken by force from the lands of Khaybar, also possibly anything left from the share of the Prophet (saw), their Khums was mainly taken from the valley of the fort of al-Kateebah while other areas of Khaybar were all given to his soldiers.


You wrote:


Quote
Then he continues and say essentially "you both came back asking for me to pay/give you Fadak".


 فَوَلِيتُهَا ثُمَّ جِئْتَنِي أَنْتَ وَهَذَا وَأَنْتُمَا جَمِيعٌ وَأَمْرُكُمَا وَاحِدٌ ، فَقُلْتُمَا : ادْفَعْهَا إِلَيْنَا


"So you both again then come to me, you and this person together with the same issue, and you both say "give it (fadak) to us".


This clearly shows that they still believe they have a right to Fadak even after Umar, as umar puts it...


Then umar clarifies as to what they are asking for :
فَقُلْتُ : إِنْ شِئْتُمْ دَفَعْتُهَا إِلَيْكُمَا ، عَلَى أَنَّ عَلَيْكُمَا عَهْدَ اللَّهِ أَنْ تَعْمَلَا فِيهَا بِالَّذِي كَانَ يَعْمَلُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ


"If you both wish I will give it (fadak) to you both on the condition that you do with it what the prophet [saw] did with it during his time".


Dude why all this clowning? Where did you read the word "Fadak" so that you keep shoving it into your translations? The "Ha" in this is just referring to the seven gardens at this point, and they received them and they didn't complain and say "No, we didn't want this we were asking for Fadak." Nor did they ever ask him for Fadak.


You wrote about al-Hasakani:


Quote
Actually the shawahid I gave you is fine, this is what Dhahabi says about Al hakim the dirty rafidhi...


Well your scholar says he's a Shiite, maybe you guys should agree on his identity then come quote him. Unless Aqa Buzruq is a liar who uses this methodology to increase the number of Shiite authors in his book and make his sect look important.


I add, the chain is very weak as clarified so don't waste our time with irrelevant drivel.


You wrote:


Quote
Ibn Hajar was referring to his tadlees!


This is what he was talking about, 99 percent of the accusations against Atiya is that he is a mudallas.


Tadlees is not a "mistake", he was referring to his mistakes and you can slam your head against the wall if you don't like it.


Next you wrote about `Ali still asking for Faducks


Quote
First..


ةِ فَدَفَعَهَا عُمَرُ إِلَى عَلِيٍّ وَعَبَّاسٍ فَغَلَبَهُ عَلَيْهَا عَلِيٌّ وَأَمَّا خَيْبَرُ وَفَدَكُ فَأَمْسَكَهُمَا عُمَرُ وَقَالَ هُمَا صَدَقَةُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم


"So Umar paid/gave it to Ali and Abbas, so Ali got the better of Umar. As for khaybar and Fadak then Umar held on to them etc etc "


This hadith is in reference to....




قَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : أَنَا وَلِيُّ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، فَجِئْتُمَا تَطْلُبُ مِيرَاثَكَ مِنَ ابْنِ أَخِيكَ وَيَطْلُبُ هَذَا مِيرَاثَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا ، فَقَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : مَا نُورَثُ مَا تَرَكْنَاهُ صَدَقَةٌ


So yes, Ali [as] is clearly still asking for inheritance.


This isn't clear at all nor do I agree with you. Fact is that the beginning of the Hadith explains exactly what they were asking for and it was the property of banu al-Nadeer in Madinah.


Regarding the `Illah mentioned in Kitab-il-`Ilal, you said:


Quote
You're repeating what I said !


No I'm not repeating, you said something completely different. If you agreed with what I said then you'd know that the narration you're quoting is Mursal, it's disconnected and the real chain doesn't contain "Abu Sa`eed".

عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
74 Replies
18686 Views
Last post December 28, 2014, 10:51:40 PM
by Hani
16 Replies
5850 Views
Last post March 29, 2015, 02:35:47 PM
by Hani
45 Replies
21072 Views
Last post September 22, 2015, 12:01:45 AM
by Bolani Muslim
0 Replies
1359 Views
Last post July 31, 2015, 03:05:01 AM
by Hani