TwelverShia.net Forum

Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Sahabah-AhlulBayt => Topic started by: muslim720 on July 25, 2015, 07:07:37 AM

Title: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 25, 2015, 07:07:37 AM
Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,
Before the topic is closed or deleted, I would like to save my most recent back-and-forth because I think I have them on the ropes.

To expose their ignorance, I gave them a breakdown of how Fay is to be distributed.

Quote
Without wasting any more time on entertaining those who cannot grasp the difference between "gift" and "inheritance", it is time to shed some light on the distribution of Fay.  Before I do so, I would like to quote the Qur'an regarding Ghaneemah.  Comparing the Ghaneemah and Fay would clarify the matter for those who have some understanding.

 

"And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to God,- and to the Apostle, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in God and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For God hath power over all things."  (Surah Al-Anfal verse 41)

 

Four-fifths would go to those who took part in the war, meaning, four-fifths would be distributed among soldiers and they would keep whatever was assigned to them as their personal property.  The remaining fifth would be further divided into five parts and given to the aforementioned group.

 

Now, on to Fay:

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment."  (Surah Al-Hashr verse 7)

 

Leaving the technicalities aside for a minute, looking at both verses at a glance, one would almost think that the distribution is nearly identical with the same groups of people receiving from Fay.  The only difference, to the unlearned brain, is that the groups mentioned would receive a larger share from Fay (since four-fifths of it does not go to the soldiers) and this is where I will expose the ignorance of those who cry for Fadak.  In due time, it will be clear as to why there are narrations and commentaries referring to Fadak (which was Fay) to have "exclusively belonged to the Prophet [saw]" and that "no one else had a share in it".

 

The four-fifths that went to soldiers from Ghaneemah would remain with the Prophet [saw] in the case of Fay.  Allow me to say it differently because people here have not yet been able to comment on the distribution of Fay but they have already passed a verdict on Fay, its ownership and gifting.  Four-fifths of Fay would remain exclusively with the Prophet [saw] and the remaining fifth would be further divided into many parts and the beneficiaries (recipients) are named in Surah Al-Hashr.  Therefore, it is mentioned in various reports that Fadak (among other properties which were all Fay) belonged "exclusively to the Prophet [saw]" and that "no one else had a share in it".  Of course no one else had a share in it because their share was from the remaining fifth.

 

The Prophet [saw] used this four-fifths for the benefits of the Ummah (emergencies, war preparations, et cetera).  There is a sahih narration regarding this from Umar [ra] who says that Fadak "belonged exclusively to the Prophet [saw]."  He further adds that the Prophet [saw] would take a year's worth of sustenance for his family and spend the rest for military purposes.  Of course the Muslims were not in a constant state of war so the distribution of the four-fifths was exclusively the responsibility of the Prophet [saw].  When there was not an emergency or the nation was not under threat, the Prophet [saw] would set aside a year's worth of sustenance for his family.

 

So far so good!  In order to keep this as short as possible, without quoting narrations, we now know the distribution of Fay, the Sunnah of the Prophet [saw] when it came to four-fifths of Fay and why Fadak, in certain narrations and commentaries, has been said to belonged "exclusively to the Prophet [saw]" and that "no one else had a share in it".  Therefore, we now have an understanding of Fay in the light of Qur'an and Sunnah.

 

For those who can think clearly, the idea that Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra] should now sound far more ridiculous than it being her inheritance because the former stance, that it was a gift, makes no sense whatsoever.

 

If the Prophet [saw] gifted Fadak to Fatima [ra], or the four-fifths of Fay in his possession, how was he preparing the nation for wars, emergencies and catastrophes?  And if the Prophet [saw] was still carrying out the public service while only transferring ownership to Fatima [ra], as Herz has reasoned, then what was the purpose of this gift?  A gift that is given to you so that you can give it to others is not a gift.  It serves no purpose.

 

To drive this point home, in the light of Herz's line of thinking that Fatima [ra] was the owner of Fadak who would continue to use the land for public service, allow me to quote Imam Ali [ra] from Nahjul Balagha, letter 45:

"Verily, under the sky we had only Fadak as our personal property but we were deprived of it, it tempted them, they took it by force and we had to bear the wrench patiently and cheerfully, the best judge is the Lord Almighty."

 

That, to me, sounds like the plea of someone deprived of his own personal right.  If Imam Ali [ra] considered Fadak to be the personal property of his family, as mentioned in Nahjul Balagha, then there is no room for public service.  Someone may ask why and the answer is simple.  Abu Bakr [ra] maintained Fadak, and all of Fay, exactly like the Prophet [saw].  In fact, there is a narration that after Abu Bakr [ra] assured Fatima [ra] that he would maintain Fadak like the Prophet [saw] used to, she became happy and was no longer angry with him.  So if Imam Ali [ra] wanted Fadak for public service, then his statement found in Nahjul Balagha is a lie invented upon him.

 

Furthermore, it is a favorite of Shia brothers to say that the Ahlul Bayt [ra] were rendered helpless when Fadak was usurped.  In other words, if Fadak would have remained with Imam Ali [ra], he would have successfully opposed the "tyranny" of Abu Bakr [ra] and the rest.  Clearly, Imam Ali [ra] did not have public service on mind.  Or, brother Herz is pulling facts out of thin air.

 

Staying on the topic of gift, verse 10 of Surah Al-Hashr declares Tabi'een to have a share in Fay.

 

"And those who came after them say: "Our Lord! Forgive us, and our brethren who came before us into the Faith, and leave not, in our hearts, rancour (or sense of injury) against those who have believed. Our Lord! Thou art indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful."

 

If Fatima [ra] was the one to have received Fadak as gift, how were the Tabi'een able to receive their share?  Help me here.  Either I believe your words and disregard the Qur'an or I believe the Qur'an.

 

As for ownership, I cannot stress this enough and brothers are running around with their eyes shut and fingers jammed in their ears but verse 7 of Surah Al-Hashr clearly forbids anyone having ownership rights over Fay.  Since Fay does not have exclusive owners, the Qur'an stresses its wealth to be distributed evenly "In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you".

 

Al-Islam.org also states the same and says, "Such property is to be totally falls into the disposal of the head of the Muslim community which will be distributed amongst Muslims based on Divine Injunctions and his discretion."  After the Prophet [saw], that "head of the Muslim community" was Abu Bakr as-Siddique [ra].

 

Al-Islam.org further mentions, "In like manner, when the preceding Verse is saying that all such property belongs to Allah's Messenger (S) it does not intend to say that the Noble Prophet (S) uses the same for his own benefit, but since he is the head of the Islamic state and he is particularly the protector and guardian of the rights of the needy, he uses the same to their benefits."  Therefore, as the Prophet [saw] was the protector and guardian of the rights of the needy, he was also the protector and guardian of Fay.

 

As the protector and guardian of the rights of needy, is gifting Fadak to Fatima [ra] an act of guarding the rights of the needy or an injustice to the needy?

 

Al-Islam.org clarifies, "The blessed Verse reflects a fundamental principle of Islamic economy according to which despite respecting private ownership, the property is not supposed to be at the disposal of a limited number of people."

 

Then, after stating the truth, Al-Islam.org goes on a sudden self-refuting rampage by claiming that Fadak was the personal property of Rasulullah [saw] and mentions that Umar [ra] said that Fadak belonged exclusively to the Prophet [saw].  However, I have clarified that the four-fifths which remained in possession of the Prophet [saw], since he was the head of the Muslim community, was at his disposal but not under his sole personal ownership.  Here is the link: http://www.al-islam....ashr-chapter-59

 

The information I have shared comes (mainly) from the hours of explanation by Dr. Tahir ul Qadri, may Allah lengthen his life and bless him.  Furthermore, I took this issue to Sheikh Tarek ElGawhary (may Allah lengthen his life and bless him), a brother whom I know personally.  I confirmed the distribution of Fay with him and he agreed with every bit of it, as mentioned by Dr. Tahir ul Qadri.

 

I did not stop there.  I asked him if Fatima [ra] could inherit the four-fifths of Fay which "exclusively belonged" to the Prophet [saw].  Without a second's worth of hesitation, he replied, "Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance, they leave knowledge."  I never bothered to ask him if it was gifted to Fatima [ra] because the verses used to support this claim are both Meccan verses.  Lastly, it does not make sense for a property in which even Tabi'een had a share to be gifted to Fatima [ra].  Unless of course there are those who are willing to reject the Qur'an in order to maintain Fatima's [ra] supposed infallibility.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 25, 2015, 07:10:25 AM
Abu-Jafar Herz responded with the following points.  Please visit the link for his entire post, post # 92:  http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031127-the-clear-refutation-of-fadak/page-4#entry2824283

Quote
1.  The request of Fadak from Fatima from the aspect of it being inheritance was a concession for the sake of argument with the people who denied her testimony and the testimony of those who made witness for her that she was indeed gifted, so the issue of Fadak with the people was about the property of Rasullalh (saw), so it was as if zahra said to them “ If you do not accept Fadak as a gift then consider it as an inheritance that was given to me by the prophet (saw), so they answered her that that prophets do not give inheritance”.

 
2.  Surah Al Hashr has nothing to do with ghaneema, fai is not cut into 4/5, fai belongs solely to the messenger. This is your first error. Fadak also was the exclusive property of the messenger.

3.  Ok so far so good, thank you for admitting that Fadak was the personal property of the messenger which he was ordered to use for the poor. Very well.

 

4.  You agreed that Fadak was the exclusive property of the messenger.

 

5.  We agree that personal property may be done with as the owner wishes.

 

6.  If Fadak is gifted to Fatima (a.s) she may do as she wants with it.

 

7. Fatima (a.s) intent for the land was exactly the same as the intent as her father, this is why the land was still used for the poor.

 

8.  So the "management" of Fadak was for Fatima (a.s) not for Abu bakr.

 

9.  By logical necessity, the prophet (saw.) may give fadak to whoever he wishes.

 
10.  May god forgive you, are you that blind and deluded to think that Imam Ali (a.s) plea for Fadak was because of his own personal well being or for the well being of the state?

 
11.  Ya Jahil, Imam Ali (a.s) didn't want Fadak for his own personal amusement, he wanted Fadak out of the hands of Abu Bakr for the betterment of the state and for his leadership to be consolidated, not because he wanted to buy a bigger house and have farm land.

 

12.  This person just admitted that Fai is the personal property of Rasulallah, now he is trying to bring another verse completely irrelevant to Fadak or anything to do with wealth or inheritance, etc. to make it seem that everyone has a share of Fadak.

 
13.  That verse has absolutely nothing to do with Fadak, nor Fai, nor Ghaneema.

 

14.  And you just admitted that Fadak is the personal property of the Messenger (saw.)

 

15.  Why would the tabieen have rights over someone else's personal property?

 

16.  Imam al nawawi says the following in his famous sharh:
 
وكذلك نصف أرض فدك صالح أهلها بعد فتح خيبر على نصف أرضها وكان خالصا له وكذلك ثلث أرض وادي القرى أخذه في الصلح حين صالح أهلها اليهود وكذلك حصنان من حصون خيبر…. فكانت هذه كلها ملكا لرسول الله خاصة لا حق فيها أحد غيره
 
“Half the Land of Fadak, which was given by the Jews following the peace treaty, was purely the property of Rasool Allah (s). Similarly, one third of the Valley of Qura which was given by the Jews after the peace treaty and two forts of Khayber…all these were the exclusive properties of the Prophet (s) and no one else had a share of it”.
 
Imam Ibn Habban also testified that:
 
فكانت فدك لرسول الله خالصة
“Fadak was an exclusive property of Allah’s Apostle”

 

 

17.  Gifting Fadak to Fatima (a.s) did not hurt the poor, since she would of used Fadak for the poor.

 

18.  Also I don't see how Al-Islam is a proof that using, they are not Scholars but just writers, I also can write on Al-Islam if I wanted to so can anyone else.

And here is my response:

1.  Your evidence supporting your claim are both Meccan verses.  If I am repeating the same question it is not because I do not read.  It is because you have not accounted for your lie.  I will remind you, for the third time, that you quoted a narration which would make it clear that Surah Al-Israa verse 26 was revealed in Madina.  So far, you have only paid lip service to this claim without any proof.

2.  Really, then what is the difference between the two?  If four-fifths were not to stay with the Prophet [saw], why separate rules for Ghaneemah and Fay?  I know you will be quick to deny this, as is the habit of those who explain Fadak from a Shia perspective, but Fay differs from Ghaneemah in two aspects:

i)  Both are divided in five parts.  The fifth portion for Ghaneemah is divided according to Surah Al-Anfal verse 41 while four-fifths go to the soldiers.  The fifth portion of Fay is divided according to Surah Al Hashr, verses 7 through 10 while four-fifths of it remain with the Prophet [saw] or the head of the Muslim community.

ii)  Ghaneemah, once given away, becomes personal property.  Fay has beneficiaries not personal owners.  The fact regarding Fay has been made clear using the commentary listed on Al-Islam.org.

3.  Where did I say that?  I said four-fifths of Fay were to remain with the Prophet [saw], and then transferred to the head of the Muslim community, and they were the guardians of this property.

4.  As the guardian of the property, it was exclusively up to him when it came to its use.  When appropriate, the Prophet [saw] would take a year's worth of sustenance for his family and use the rest for military preparations.  Now ponder over this point.  The Prophet [saw] gifted Fadak to Fatima [ra] and then he would go ask her for a year's sustenance for his wives [ra].  Does this make sense?  Do you see what you are making out the Holy Prophet [saw] to be?

5.  Sure but Al-Islam.org refutes you in your understanding of Fay mentioned in Surah Al-Hashr.  Al-Islam.org clearly makes a distinction between personal property and assuming guardianship of Fay.  They then contradict themselves by stating that Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra] after Surah Al-Israa verse 26 was revealed.  But the verse was revealed in Mecca.  Then again, the fact that Al-Islam.org, after distinguishing personal property from assuming guardianship of Fay, says that Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra] is a contradiction in of itself.  To support it with a weak and inaccurate narration shows extreme desperation on their, and your, part.

6.  There is no question of gift.  Fatima [ra] was not the head of the Muslim community to assume the guardianship of the land of Fadak.  Furthermore, Fay is not to have individual, or an elite group of, owner(s).  It was under the exclusive control and management of the Prophet [saw] and he used it for certain purposes.  Abu Bakr [ra] maintained the same practice.  As such, the Prophet [saw] upheld the Qur'an and Abu Bakr [ra] followed the Prophet [saw] in upholding the Qur'an and thereby, he maintained the Sunnah as well.

7.  Abu Bakr [ra] maintained status quo and as the leader of the Muslim community, Fay had to go to him, including Fadak.  If public service was what Fatima [ra] desired, then she should have been happy with Abu Bakr [ra].  And indeed that is what we find in a narration.  But putting that aside for a minute, what good is a gift if you are to distribute it among others?  And if public service was what Fatima [ra] wished for, then what difference does it make if Abu Bakr [ra] distributes it or anyone else as long as the Qur'anic and Prophetic guidelines were followed?  How is it an injustice to Fatima [ra] if the recipients received their share according to the Qur'an and Sunnah?  Unless you believe that Fatima [ra] would have used Fadak for her personal gains, there is no reason to beat this dead horse any more.

8.  Wrong on two counts!  One, Fay goes to the leader of Muslims, as agreed by Al-Islam.org, and Fatima [ra] was never the head of Muslim community.  Two, in your other post, you said that Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra] while its management was for Imam Ali [ra].  Now the management was for Fatima [ra] too?

Too many switcheroos!

9.  The Qur'an forbids Fay from having individual owner(s) or making a circuit among a few.  By the logic of Qur'an, Fadak cannot be gifted to Fatima [ra].  How would the Tabi'een then receive from something gifted to Fatima [ra]?

10.  In fact his plea was not for his own well being.  I have read that letter and its context.  I just wanted you to admit that his plea was for the well being of the Muslims.  Now it is for you to prove that Abu Bakr [ra] did not use Fadak for the well being of Muslims.  Otherwise, you have no point because if Imam Ali [ra] hoped for the well being of the community, then Abu Bakr [ra] brought no changes in the Prophetic way of managing Fadak.  He maintained the practice of the Holy Prophet [saw].

11.  Why?  Tell us how Abu Bakr [ra] deviated from the Qur'an and Sunnah in regards to Fadak?  Did he sell it and use the money for himself?  You have no point unless you establish his deviance.  On the contrary, numerous sahih hadiths mention that Abu Bakr [ra] maintained Fadak exactly as the Prophet [saw] did.  Imam Ali [ra] and Abbas [ra] agreed to this fact too.

12.  Once again, where did I admit that Fadak was the personal property of Rasulullah [saw]?

13.  Wow, seriously?  Let us read Surah Al-Hashr verse 7, 8, 9 and 10.

"What God has bestowed on His Apostle (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to God,- to His Apostle and to kindred and orphans, the needy and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy among you. So take what the Apostle assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear God; for God is strict in Punishment.

(Some part is due) to the indigent Muhajirs, those who were expelled from their homes and their property, while seeking Grace from God and (His) Good Pleasure, and aiding God and His Apostle: such are indeed the sincere ones:-

But those who before them, had homes (in Medina) and had adopted the Faith,- show their affection to such as came to them for refuge, and entertain no desire in their hearts for things given to the (latter), but give them preference over themselves, even though poverty was their (own lot). And those saved from the covetousness of their own souls,- they are the ones that achieve prosperity.

And those who came after them say: "Our Lord! Forgive us, and our brethren who came before us into the Faith, and leave not, in our hearts, rancour (or sense of injury) against those who have believed. Our Lord! Thou art indeed Full of Kindness, Most Merciful."

Who are the groups mentioned as recipients of Fay in verses 8, 9 and 10?  Muhajir, Ansar and Tabi'een respectively.  Still want to lie and claim that it has nothing to do with Fay?  And Fadak is Fay.

14.  For the third time, where did I make such a claim?

15.  Do you not believe in the Qur'an?  Or can you not read?  Or are you playing dumb because you have been so badly refuted?  Told you none of you on this website even knew how Fay is to distributed.  You opened this thread without quoting anything regarding Fay from Surah Al-Hashr.  Starting to think you did not even know that Fay was outlined in the Qur'an, along with its distribution.

16.  I have already explained the reason behind the statements, "exclusively belonged to the Prophet [saw]" and "no one else had a share in it".  Because four-fifths of Fay remained in possession of the Prophet [saw], in other words, he had guardianship over them (as agreed upon by Al-Islam.org as well), it was purely and exclusively for the Prophet [saw] to distribute it however he wanted.

But let me complete the picture for you by first posting the Sharh and then a narration from Abu Dawood:

"Half the Land of Fadak, which was given by Jews after the peace treaty, was purely the property of Rasool Allah (s).  Similarly, 1/3rd of the Valley of Qari and 2 castles of Khaybar were the exclusive property of the Prophet (s) and no one else had a share of it.

The Apostle of Allah received three things exclusively to himself: Banu an-Nadir, Khaybar and Fadak.  The Banu an-Nadir property was kept for his emergent needs, Fadak for travellers, and Khaybar was divided by the Apostle of Allah into three sections: two for Muslims, and one as a contribution for his family.  If anything remained after making the contribution of his family, he divided it among the poor Emigrants."

Does not say Fadak was gifted, does it?

17.  Abu Bakr [ra] did with Fadak what the Prophet [saw] used to do with it.  So none of the needy or poor were short-changed.  In fact, as the leader of the Muslims, Fay, and therefore Fadak, had to go to him.  And it did.  Quit whining, will ya?

18.  Though a very weak source, Wikipedia says this regarding Al-Islam.org, "Since its launch, Al-islam.org has proven to be one of the most authentic sources of Islamic information, and is notable for being the top site in Yahoo!'s list of Shia sites by popularity".  In fact, they have been quoted by many universities.

But I will let you have this point.  Still, the fact that three Shias (just a random number) give three different answers regarding the same matter is suspicious in of itself.  Compare this with our approach.  If you ask ten Sunni Muslims who know regarding Fadak, ten out of ten will quote, "Prophets [asws] do not leave inheritance".  But you, "it was inheritance", "no wait, it was a gift which was usurped so she reclaimed it as inheritance", "it was gifted to Fatima [ra] when Qur'an 17:26 was revealed", "no, wait, it was gifted when Qur'an 30:38 was revealed".  On and on and on!

 
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 25, 2015, 07:15:27 AM
He had a side response where he made the following claims.  See post # 93: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031127-the-clear-refutation-of-fadak/page-4#entry2824283

Quote
1.  Yahya Ibn maeen clearly gave Atiya tawtheeq along with many other hadith scholars, thus this hadith is authentic

2.  Is Imam Ali (a.s) the best judge on earth after the messenger or not?
And is it likely that the best Islamic judge on earth would make a mistake on simple inheritance laws and persist on this mistake for years?
 
3.  If any Sunni can answer these two questions I will request the mods to close my thread and delete it.

Here is my response:

1.  Fine, the chain is authentic and Attiya is Seduq.  But having a sahih chain does not automatically confer the title of sahih upon the narration.  The point that still remains is that Surah Al-Israa verse 26 was revealed in Mecca.  Therefore, it does not support your lie but shows your ignorance.

2.  Fine!  I will let you have this one too.  He was the best judge.  Did he take Fadak during his leadership?  He did not, for whatever reason.  So since he was the best judge and seeing that he dropped the matter, shouldn't you drop it too?

3.  Delete it?  hahaha, already looking for an escape route.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 25, 2015, 12:38:38 PM
Good job brother Muslim 720

Also notice the intellectual fraud by Abu Jafar Hertz. He interprets Shia narrations in such a way that it turns the meaning of narration upside down.   

When you said:
Quote
    In Tafsir Saafi Imam Jafar  (as) has been quoted as saying that "Fai is that property.... which is for Allah and His Messenger (saw) and after him for one who is incharge" 
     
    In al-Kafi Imam Jafar  (as) says that after prophet such property goes to imam who can use it as per his wishes.

Knowing the fact that a very important Shia claim was endangered. Abu Jafar Hertz came up with this flimsy response.
Quote
100 percent correct. Imam Ali (a.s) was to manage the gift of Fatima, since he is her husband and her Imam.
Notice that if something is gifted, then the owner looses authority to dictate what is to be done with it. It's upto the gift receiver to use the way they want. But this narration apparently shows that it was not gifted.

Moreover, also notice that, the Shia narration doesn't mention Fatima(r.a) as one of the owners,  it just mentions Prophet Mohammad(pbuh) then the Imam after him. Wiping off any chance of Fatima(r.a) being one of the owners.

Also, the Shia narration mentions that, it BELONG to the Imam after Prophet Mohammad(Pbuh) and He will use it as the way he likes, which again clearly shows that the Fatima(r.a) was not one of the owner.

Abu ‘Abdallah said:”Al-Anfal is such property for the acquisition of which no camels or horses are use and no armed expeditions are undertaken. It is the property that may come as a result of negotiated settlement or certain people would give with their own hands, may come from a barren land or from inside the valleys. Such properties belong to the Messenger of Allah and it will belong to the Imam after the the Messenger of Allah. The Imam will spend them as he may consider proper. (Kafi).
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 25, 2015, 01:53:10 PM
Also the link  you posted brought forth a point about grammar of the verse, which should could have used.

Quote
The pronoun in the words of verse(17:26) that is { حَقَّهُ}( ḥaqqahu) is 3rd person MASCULINE singular pronoun not a FEMININE pronoun. It literally translates as (his due){ So give to the kinsman HIS due}, if this verse was revealed so that Prophet(saw) gives certain due to Fatima(ra) then the pronoun should have been FEMININE(i.e Her) not MASCULINE(i.e His).
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 25, 2015, 06:31:22 PM
Also the link  you posted brought forth a point about grammar of the verse, which should could have used.

Quote
The pronoun in the words of verse(17:26) that is { حَقَّهُ}( ḥaqqahu) is 3rd person MASCULINE singular pronoun not a FEMININE pronoun. It literally translates as (his due){ So give to the kinsman HIS due}, if this verse was revealed so that Prophet(saw) gives certain due to Fatima(ra) then the pronoun should have been FEMININE(i.e Her) not MASCULINE(i.e His).

JazakAllah khair for sharing this.  While I had read everything else you mentioned in the other post, I took note of this point.

Right now, they are in retreat mode in ShiaChat.  As a member, I used to have three stars.  I have been downgraded to two.  Most likely, they will delete the topic.  I wanted to preserve my key responses here so that it is an easy copy-paste from here on out.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 26, 2015, 01:38:24 AM
I see that they even quoted Muajam buldan and riyadh al nadira to claim that Fadak was owned by Fatima(r.a) during the life of Mohammad(pbuh). The quotes have been dealt here:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/3-sunni-answers-to-shiapens-article-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophetsaw-chapter-three/

Also you may quote those reports which state that Mohammad(pbuh) denied the request of Fatima(r.a) to grant her Fadak, so that you may bring back the OP to the academic style of discussion where its important to make claims on authentic reports not unreliable or baseless stories.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 26, 2015, 12:33:01 PM
I see that they even quoted Muajam buldan and riyadh al nadira to claim that Fadak was owned by Fatima(r.a) during the life of Mohammad(pbuh). The quotes have been dealt here:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/3-sunni-answers-to-shiapens-article-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophetsaw-chapter-three/

Also you may quote those reports which state that Mohammad(pbuh) denied the request of Fatima(r.a) to grant her Fadak, so that you may bring back the OP to the academic style of discussion where its important to make claims on authentic reports not unreliable or baseless stories.

The articles, to refute the lies of ShiaPen, on youpuncturedtheark are gold.  I thought instead of quoting narration after another, it is best to show them that they do not even understand the distribution of Fay.  Once I did that, statements like Fadak "belonged exclusively to the Prophet [saw]" and "no one else had a share in it" started making sense because four-fifths of Fay would remain in possession (guardianship) of the Prophet [saw].
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 27, 2015, 05:58:15 AM
review my research here and ask if you have any questions especially the Q&A:
http://twelvershia.net/detailed-research-on-prophetic-inheritance/

I'll try to read your discussion tomorrow.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 27, 2015, 06:46:59 AM
I can't believe you're bothering with a guy who still thinks `Atiyyah al-`Awfi's narrations are relied upon.

He quotes Ibn Hajar saying:

[صدوق يخطىء كثيرا وكان شيعيا مدلسا
(Honest, made a lot of mistakes and was a shii Mudallas).]

And he's happy with the word "honest" little does he know that the following part "makes a lot of mistakes" is enough to weaken all his reports. I add, that many times Ibn Hajar describes narrators as "Saduq" when they're not.

How about when `Atiyyah narrated this report where the Prophet (saw) says that Abu Bakr and `Umar are from the greatest of the dwellers of heaven and they're like shining planets?

إِنَّ أَهْلَ عِلِّيِّينَ لَيَرَاهُمْ مَنْ أَسْفَلُ مِنْهُمْ، كَمَا تَرَوْنَ الْكَوْكَبَ الدُّرِّيَّ فِي أُفُقِ السَّمَاءِ، وَإِنَّ أَبَا بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ مِنْهُمْ وَأَنْعِمَا

`Atiyyah suddenly is weak here ofcourse.

The fact that he's quoting this chain and claiming "authentic" shows deep bias and proves that he isn't qualified to even research:

قرأت على الحسين بن يزيد الطحان ، حدثنا : سعيد بن خثيم ، عن فضيل ، عن عطية ، عن أبي سعيد

The chain which claims that this land was gifted to Fatimah is composed of the following men:

Husayn
Sa`eed
Fudayl
`Atiyyah

All four men were Koufan and therefore Shiite in their beliefs. This on its own would be enough to cast doubt on the content of whatever they're going to narrate about Fadak.

Since abuJay is accepting of Ibn Hajar's opinions suddenly, let's rely on Ibn Hajar to see what he says about these four men.

Husayn: Ibn Hajar doesn't even mention him, the only opinion I spotted was abu Hatim's in al-Tahdheeb who said "Layyin" meaning "His narration has weakness(softness)."

Sa`eed: Truthful, said to be Shia, has mistakes.

Fudayl: Truthful, makes errors, said to be Shia.

`Atiyyah: Truthful, makes a lot of mistakes, he was a Shia who did Tadlees.

So abuJay's "authentic chain" about a matter related to banu Hashim is composed of four Koufan Shiites narrating what supports their innovation. A man who has weakness in his narrations reporting from a man who has mistakes in his narrations, who in turn narrates from a man who makes errors in narrating, who finally relates this story from a man who makes plenty of mistakes in his reports.

I'd feel ashamed if this were a chain I relied upon to prove my fragile beliefs but shame is a rare commodity it seems.

(Yes, the chain is terrible).
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 27, 2015, 12:17:23 PM
Salaam alaykum,
Things have hit rock bottom ever since he said that we are discussing "Fadak which is not Fay".  As for the report by Attiya, he quoted it to prove that the verse (Surah Al-Israa verse 26) was revealed in Madina.  He said, something to the effect, that it will prove (as in leave no doubt) that it was revealed in Madina.  The narration makes no mention of where it was revealed.  The verse occurs in a Meccan surah and is widely accepted to have been revealed in Mecca.  Therefore, Fadak had not even entered the picture when the verse was revealed, hence, there is no way the Prophet [saw] could have gifted Fadak to Fatima [ra] before the migration and Khaybar.

They are in shambles.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Khalifa on July 27, 2015, 01:10:54 PM
Why should we accept Fadak as a gift through a weak or unreliable narration when we have authentic narrations from most authentic books (Bukhari & Muslim) that Fatima R.a asked about Fadak as an Inheritance Instead of Gift. 
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 27, 2015, 07:06:53 PM
Let me answer his childish question:

[If Imam Ali (a.s) is the best Islamic judge on earth including being better in judgement than ibn abi quhafa,  umar, and uthman and one of the most knowledgeable person who has ever lived. Then is it likely or unlikely that he would err on a simple inheritance law presented to him and persist on this opinion for years and years?]

I can also say, based on the same narrator `Atiyyah whom you consider reliable (And a better chain than the one you provided), that the Prophet (saw) described Abu Bakr as being from the dwellers of the greatest positions of heaven, and that all other believers will look up to his bright shining light on that day as if looking at a glowing star. In this case, how can a man who is from the greatest creations of Allah be a cheater and a liar who selfishly took Fadak to satisfy his greed and oppress Aal-Muhammad (saw)? He can't have done what you said as it does not befit a man with his description.

Secondly, you talk about `Ali being a good judge. Well having the Prophet (saw) describe someone as a great judge or even make Du`a' for someone to be a good judge, in that he's able to settle disputes between individuals; this does not mean he's infallible, that he makes no mistakes nor does it mean that he's all knowing and can't miss certain details or fall into error as is human nature. So if `Ali never knew something or had forgotten something, this does not make him a bad judge and therefore there is no conflict. This weak understanding of yours is similar to one who finds a report where the Prophet (saw) asks Allah to guide someone and assumes the person's infallibility afterwards, if he (saw) asked Allah to make Ibn `Abbas knowledgeable this doesn't make Ibn `Abbas all-knowing and infallible in his verdicts, if he (saw) asked Allah to bless Ibn Mas`oud this doesn't mean that the man is sinless for the rest of his life and so on and so forth...

Finally, you said `Ali stuck to his opinion about inheritance, I say this isn't necessarily true as based on my research they weren't asking for Fadak nor was he asking for it as inheritance rather he was asking to be in control of the gardens of Madinah and to manage them due to his position from the Prophet's (saw) daughter while al-`Abbas was asking for the same due to his position from the Prophet (saw) and they kept fighting over who would manage it until `Abbas decided to drop the matter in `Uthman's reign.

This is quite clear if you read their conversation in Bukhari and Muslims when `Umar discussed with both men who would manage the land, he did not execute the laws of inheritance otherwise the split would have been very different, furthermore he told them to return it to him in case they failed to manage it properly, in other words they weren't discussing inheritance as `Ali and `Abbas clearly agreed to the prophetic narration with regards to inheritance.

Here's the text of what I wrote in my research with regards to this:

Quote
WHAT WERE AL-`ABBAS AND `ALI ASKING `UMAR FOR?
`Ali and al-`Abbas, when they came to `Umar, they were not asking for Fadak or Khaybar, they just asked for control of the Sadaqat of Madinah from the property of banu al-Nadeer(Jews) and Mukhayreeq as they believed they were at least entitled to do so.
We read in the books of Sunan:
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.]
Two years into his Khilafah, `Umar ibn al-Khattab out of good will towards them entrusted the Sadaqat of Madinah to both men since they were the heads of Ahlul-Bayt, he never gave it to them as inheritance, but just appointed them over it to care for it and benefit from it and to distribute its produce as the Prophet (saw) and Abu Bakr did before.
`Ali asked for his wife’s part and al-`Abbas asked for his nephew’s part, so `Umar reminded them of the Prophet’s (saw) Hadith, then said what we read in al-Bukhari:
قُلْتُ: إِنْ شِئْتُمَا دَفَعْتُهُ إِلَيْكُمَا عَلَى أَنَّ عَلَيْكُمَا عَهْدَ اللَّهِ وَمِيثَاقَهُ، لَتَعْمَلَانِ فِيهِ بِمَا عَمِلَ فِيهِ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ وَمَا عَمِلْتُ فِيهِ مُنْذُ وَلِيتُ وَإِلَّا فَلَا تُكَلِّمَانِي، فَقُلْتُمَا ادْفَعْهُ إِلَيْنَا بِذَلِكَ، فَدَفَعْتُهُ إِلَيْكُمَا
[If you two wish, I hand it to you but you give me an oath by Allah to use it as the messenger of Allah (saw) and Abu Bakr used it and like I used it since I was given authority, otherwise never mention it to me ever again. Then you both said: “We accept, give it to us.” And I did.]
Al-`Abbas and `Ali later had a fight over how the money the land produces is divided, it appears as if al-`Abbas was angry at `Ali so much that he called him names, `Abbas might have thought `Ali took more than his need or that he used the money without consulting him, so they both went to `Umar asking him to divide it between them or to rule for one of them against the other.
`Umar refused to give any other judgment and told them to return it if they’re unable to manage it.
He also said:
فَإِنْ عَجَزْتُمَا عَنْهُ فَادْفَعَا إِلَيَّ فَأَنَا أَكْفِيكُمَاهُ
[If you are unable to run this land, then return it to me and I shall save you the effort.]
It was later written that `Uthman ibn `Affan during his Khilafah convinced al-`Abbas to hand the entire land to `Ali and it remained with his children for many years.
In another narration from Musnad Ahmad, it says that ibn `Abbas convinced his father during the Khilafah of `Uthman to allow `Ali to control it on his own:
فلما استخلف عثمان اختصما إليه، فسكت عثمان ونكس رأسه. قال ابن عباس: فخشيت أن يأخذه أبي، فضربت بيدي بين كتفي العباس، فقلت: يا أبت أقسمت عليك إلا سلّمته
[When `Uthman received Khilafah, they both came and disputed in front of him and asked him to settle the matter, but he remained silent and lowered his head. Ibn `Abbas said: So I feared that he would take it (meaning the land) back from them, so I patted my hand on al-`Abbas’ chest and said: “O father, by Allah just hand it to him (meaning to `Ali).”]
As for the Fay’ of the lands of Khaybar including Fadak, `Umar held on to them and kept them well managed and properly taken care of as the Prophet (saw) used them for the urgent needs of the nation.
A question may be asked, does this mean that since both went to `Umar each man asking for his part, and that `Umar reminded them of the narration, does it mean that they reject the prophet’s (saw) narration? As clarified above the answer is NO, they themselves in the same narration declare they heard the messenger (saw) say so, and both know full well that `Umar was present when Abu Bakr made his ruling and agreed with him, this can only mean -as is apparent from the narration- that they only asked to control it, each claiming he has the right to do so through their closeness to the Prophet (saw), `Ali through his wife and al-`Abbas being his paternal uncle.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 27, 2015, 07:21:15 PM
AbuJay says about `Ali being the best judge:

[Let's go back to my intro post.
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ يُونُسَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سَلَّامٌ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ، عَنْ أَبِي الصِّدِّيقِ النَّاجِي، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: " أَرْحَمُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَقْوَاهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ
قَالَ التِّرْمِذِيّ : هَذَا حَدِيث حسن صَحِيح . وَقَالَ الْحَاكِم : إِسْنَاده صَحِيح عَلَى شَرط الشَّيْخَيْنِ
The prophet said “The most merciful of my ummah is Abu Bakr, the most steadfast on the religion is Umar, the most  sincere is Zayd Ibn Thaabit, and the best judge among them is Ali”.
Tirimizi said :Hasan Sahih. Haakim said: Sahih on the conditions of bukhari and muslim.]


The part about `Ali being the best judge is a weak addition and is not contained in the original narration, Muhammad Moin already proved this without a doubt in the past forum while refuting Toyib's book, so NO the Prophet (saw) never said this.
Link: http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=20491


Here is what Moin said and I copy:



I'll be touching few points for now.


1. It starts with the discussion on Hadeeth al-Qadha. Toyib quotes this hadith from Ibn Majah and also the authentication of scholars. I say: This hadith with the addition of "the best judge among you is 'Ali" is not present in Ibn Maja's manuscripts as stated by Shaykh Arnaut in Tahqeeq of Ibn Majah (1/107). He also said: This is present in published version and the Sharh of As-Sindi. I say: The addition is obviously a mistake. Many scholars have copied this hadith without this addition. Even Shaykh Al-Albani when discussed the hadith of Ibn Majah in his "As-Saheeha" he did not show any indication of the addition. Hafiz Ibn Abdul Hadi has a treatise on the hadith "the most knowledgeable about Faraidh is Zaid bin Thabit" which is a part of this tradition. He quoted this hadith even from Ibn Majah but did not mention this addition. Hafiz Sakhawi discussed the hadith al-Qadha in Al-Maqasid al-Hasanah but did not reference Ibn Majah as its source. There could be many proof for this. But this is enough.



2. Toyib (pg.6) quoted this hadith i.e. "The best judge among you is Ali" from Majma' az-Zawaid as a tradition of Jabir bin Abdullah, and that Al-Haythami said that it was reported by At-Tabrani in Al-Mu'jam al-Kabeer and declered it Hasan. Toyib made a remark that this hadith had gone missing after the time of Al-Haytami the autheor of As-Sawa'iq al-Muharrqah. I say: this hadith was never present in Al-Awsat, rather it is in Al-Mu'jam as-Sagheer (556). Hafiz Al-Haythami did a mistake when he attributed it to Al-Awsat and who was coppied by Faqih Al-Haytami. Otherwise he has attributed it to both As-Saghir and Al-Awsat. In any case Mindal bin Ali in Isnad is weak.



Mindal bin Ali is weak. While reading the treatise of Ibn Abdul Hadi in his Majmo ar-Rasail (pg. 64-65) i found that he said: The burden of this hadith is on Muhammad bin Al-Waleed who was Ibn Aban al-Qalanisi al-Baghdadi mawla of Bani Hashim and he was a liar. Hafiz Ibn 'Adi said: He would fabricate hadith, and would attribute it to prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam), and also steal (narrations), and mix up Isnad..... till all the Jarh.
So even if Al-Haythami called it Hasan it is not actually Hasan. These kind of mistakes are many in the book of Hafiz Haythami.



Alot of scholars consider this hadith to be Mursal of Abu Qilabah. Among them Hafiz Daarqutni, Khateeb, Ibn Abdul Barr, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Abdul Hadi. Al-Albani also retracted his authentication as mentioned by Mashhoor Hasan. Only the part which says "Abu Ubaidah is the Ameen of this Ummah" is connected all other things were declared to be Mursal. This also seems to be the view of Bukhari as he has only reported the part which speak of Abu Ubaydah in his sahih from this sanad of Khalid from Abu Qilabah from Anas. And Allah knows best.


FARID SAYS:



What supports this fact is that Al-Haythami himself in Majma’a Al-Bahrain fi Zawa’id Al-Mu’jamain 6/418 mentions this narration via a single chain that is the same chain that exists in the modern version of Al-Mu’jam Al-Sagheer. He does not include another chain.


Furthermore, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, in Al-Talkhees Al-Habeer, mentions the path of Jabir that Al-Haythami has quoted and indicated clearly that Al-Tabarani mentioned it in Al-Mu’jam Al-Sagheer. He makes no mention of it being in Al-Mu’jam Al-Awsat. More importantly, Ibn Hajar died in the year 852 AH, and is therefore a predecessor of Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami, which means that the non-existence of the narration in Al-Mu’jam Al-Awsat has been established before Ibn Hajar Al-Haytami.


MUHAMMAD MOIN SAID:



3. On pg.4 he quotes another tradition which is the same tradition of Anas and it contains the word "And the best judge among you is Ali". He quotes it from Zawaid Ibn Hibban which was compiled by Al-Haythami. This is present in that book but the additional wording is not present in the actual book by Ibn Hibban from where the Zawaid were compiled. So most probably it is a mistake in copying. Few points will make it more clear:
In the published Ibn Hibban (which is actually the tarteeb done by Ibn Balban al-Farisi from the original book) Imam Ibn Hibban has made coment on the hadith and said that these description were made with the hazaf of "min". He repeats the wording by adding min to each description of companions mentioned in the narration, but did not mention the addition regarding Ali. Here is what he said under hadith no. (7131):


قَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمٍ: هَذِهِ أَلْفَاظٌ أُطْلِقَتْ بِحَذْفِ الْـ "مِنْ" مِنْهَا يُرِيدُ بِقَوْلِهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: "أَرْحَمُ أَمَّتِي" أَيْ: مِنْ أَرْحَمِ أُمَّتِي وَكَذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: "وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ" يُرِيدُ: مِنْ أَشَدِّهِمْ ومن أصدقهم حياء ومن أقرأهم لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَمِنْ أَفْرَضِهِمْ وَمِنْ أَعْلَمِهِمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ يُرِيدُ أَنَّ هَؤُلَاءِ مِنْ جَمَاعَةٍ فِيهِمْ تِلْكَ الْفَضِيلَةُ وَهَذَا كَقَوْلِهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لِلْأَنْصَارِ: "أَنْتُمْ أَحَبُّ النَّاسِ إِلَيَّ", يُرِيدُ مِنْ أَحَبِّ النَّاسِ مِنْ جَمَاعَةٍ أُحِبُّهُمْ وَهُمْ فيهم


Secondly, Ali Muttaqi Al-Hindi quotes this hadith in Kanzul 'Ummal and reference Ibn Hibban as one of its source but did not mention the part regarding Ali being best Judge, although he did listed this wording in the hadith of Jabir and Abu Sa'eed. If this wording had been there in Ibn HIbban then Ali Muttaqi would have quoted it in Kanz.
Thirdly, a lot of scholars have done takhrrej on this hadith of Ali being best judge but they do not mention the hadith of Abu Qilabah from Anas as its source neither in the book of Ibn Hibban nor in any book of Hadith. ALthough they do mention other hadith like that of Jabir and Abu Sa'eed and others.
Fourthly, the hadith of Abdul Wahhab Ath-Thaqafi from Khalid from Abu Qilabah from Anas has been narrated by many scholars like Tirmidhi and others but they do not mention this Isnad.


All these factors indicates that the part of the narration under discussion was never in Sahih of Ibn HIbban, rather it is a mistake by the author of Mawarid az-Zamaan or the copyist. And Allah knows best.



4. On page 7 he has quoted the narration of Ibn 'Umar from Sahih Jami as-Saghir along with the authentication of Shaykh Al-Albani. Firstly I must say that in some of the abridged books of Shaykh Al-Albani the way of ruling on hadith is weird according to me. In Sahih al-Jami he ruled on the hadith of Ibn 'Umar that it is authentic while in As-Saheehah (3/224) he pointed out the weakness in the hadith of Ibn 'uMar, although he declared the hadith as a whole authentic. And in Sahiha the part which he declared to be authentic based on support does not contain the portion under discussion, i.e. Ali is the best judge. So basically in Sahih al-Jami' he declared the hadith as whole to be authentic due to various Shawahid but the portion "the best judge among them is Ali" has been declared weak by him in As-Sahiha. So what is explained and clear should be given priority over that which is unexplained and unclear.
Note: - Shaykh Albani finally ruled out the whole hadith to be weak as said previously. Link: http://kulalsalafiyeen.com/vb/showthread.php?t=9730


After the discussion on the ruling of Shaykh Albani let us get back to the analysis of Isnad. Now Toyib has quoted the narration of Ibn 'Umar. It was related by Ibn Adi in Al-Kamil under the entry of Kawthar bin Hakeem. Kawthar relates it from Nafi' from Ibn 'Umar.
Ibn Abdul Hadi said: This narration is Batil in this form and the burden is on Kawthar, for scholars have weakened him and abandoned him. ABdullah bin Imam Ahmad said: Kawthar is nothing. His narrations are falsehood... More than one people have narrated from Ibn Ma'een that he said: Kawthar was nothing. Abu Hatim and Abu Zur'ah said: He was weak in hadith... Bukhari and Darqutni said: Munkar al-Hadith...till all criticism.


There is another route for it. Abu Ya'la has narrated it. It contains Muhammad bin Harith al-Harithi and Muhammad bin Abdur-Rahman al-Bilmani both of whom were unreliable as described by Hafiz Ibn Abdul Hadi in his Juz.



Summarizing the evidences given by Toyib to prove the authenticity of the hadith al-Qadha:
1. Hadith of Abu Qilabah from Anas: The part regarding Ali does not exist in it. Relying on a mistake Toyib wasted his time proving the isnad authentic.
2. Hadith of Jabir: It contains Muhammad bin Waleed who was highly unreliable.
3. Hadith of Ibn 'Umar: It contain several weak narrators the weakness of whom are to such extant that they cannot be taken for support.

Next time I will inshaALlah discuss some other routes which Toyib did not bring.


The hadith of Al-Qadha has also been reported as a hadith of Abu Mihjan ath-Thaqafi. It contains Abu Sa'eed al-Baqqal. Hafiz Ibn Abdul Hadi said in his treatise: Abu Sa'eed al-Baqqal's name is Sa'eed bin Mirzban. Scholars have weakned him with different rulings... Ibn Abi Maryam and Abbas Ad-Duri narrate from Ibn Ma'een that he said. "He is nothing." Ibn Abi Maryam adds in his report, "His narrations are not to be written." Al-Falas said, "He was Da'eef al-Hadith, Matrook al-Hadith." While Abu Zur'ah said, "He was slightly weak in hadith and a mudallis." He was asked, "Was he truthful?" He said, "yes, he did not lie." Abu Hatim said, "His narrations are not to be taken as Hujjah." Bukhari said, "Munkar al-Hadith." Nasai said, "weak" and another time he said, "He was not reliable and his reports are not to be written."


Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said: he did not meet Abu Mihjan. [Al-Isabah (7/299)] I say: he died after 140 AH. This is something interesting about Al-Baqqal and probably that is what Abdullah bin Mubarak indicated in a report. Ibn Mubarak was asked regarding him that did he know him. He replied: Yes by Allah I know him. He is the person of very high Isnad. I narrated to him from Abdul Kareem AL-Jazari from Ziyad bin Abi Maryam from Abdullah bin Mughaffal from Ibn Mas'ud that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said, "Feeling regret is repentence". So he dropped me, Abdul Kareem and Ziyad and narrates from Abdullah bin Mughaffal. {juz of Ibn Abdul Hadi]



Another report which Ibn Abil Fawaris narrates in his Amali which ineterestingly also contain the praise of Muawiyah bin Abi Sufyan (ra). It contain a liar and two weak narrators. Liar is 'Amr bin Subuh, and the two weak narrators are Basheer bin Zadhaan and Abdur-Raheem bin Waqid as described by Ibn Abdul Hadi.


There is a Mursal tradition of Hasan Basari which also contain the word on Ali being best Judge. It was recorded by Ibn Abdul Barr in Al-Istai'ab and Ibn Abdul hadi attributes it to Al-Hulwani. this is mursal and Maraseel of Hasan Basari are considered worse kind of Maraseel as he narrates from all kind of narrators.


However the part "The best judge among us is Ali" is proven as a statement of Umar bin Khattab (ra) as reported by Bukhari and others. Toyib was trying to falsify Ibn Taymiyyah's statement while Ibn Taymiyyah was referring to this report as a saying of the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam). Otherwise Ibn taymiyyah has himself affirmed it as a statement of Umar.



From page 8 onwards Toyib talks about statements of Sahaba regarding Ali (ra) being the best judge. He goes on discussing the Isnad of statement of Umar in length while giving the reference of Sahih Bukhari would have been sufficient for it. He also quoted a similar statement of Ibn Mas'ud then tried to portray as though these statements necessitate superiority of Ali (ra) over other Sahaba.
I say: Ibn Taymiyyah has discussed this in detail and the rafidhi, considering his work to be a refutation of Ibn Taymiyyah, should have dealt with it. In short the Qadha here is referring to resolving disputes of people. Basically Qadha is related to two types of issues: First when two parties are in fight like when a group claim something on the other group. So this need analysis based on witnesses and other things. Second is when two groups do not oppose each but they only want to know the islamic ruling regarding what they deserve or what not like their share in inheritance etc. So it is the first type which is said regarding Ali (ra) and this is not a criteria to be the best as compared to others otherwise if we count Qadha of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alaahii wa sallam) then it would not even reach ten judgement as compared to his ruling regarding Halal and Haram which is the basis of the religion. Related to this is a narration narrated by Umm al-Mumineen Umm Salamah (ra) that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said, "You people present your case to me and some of you may be more eloquent in presenting his argument. So if I give someone's right to another because of the latter's presentation of the case then I am really giving him a peice of fire; so he should not take it." [Agreed upon]
This was the argument presented by Ibn Taymiyyah. Besides, as Toyib has also quoted the statement of Ibn Mas'ud that we used to say that the best Judge among people of Madinah is Ali. The isnad is good but it weakens the argumet of shi'i more than it strengthen it. It is well known that Abdullah bin Mas'ud used to consider other Khulafa superior than Ali. In fact he said explicitly that Uthman (ra) was the best of them after the death of 'Umar (ra). Ibn Mas'ud's love for Umar is well famous. For example: Ibn Abi Shaibah and Tabrani relates through Zaidah from Abdul Malik bin Umair fro Zaid bin Wahb that Ibn Mas'ud said, "Umar was the most knowledgeable of us about Allah, the most learned of us regarding the book of Allah and most knowledgeable regarding the religion of Allah." It is also authentically proven as reported by Ibn Abi Shaibah, Tabrani in Al-Kabeer and Hakim that Abdullah used to say, "I really think that if the knowledge of Umar is placed in one side of the balance and knowledge of all the living people in the other side then the side of Umar will proved to be weighty." A'amash considered it an exaggresion and compalined to Ibrahim Nakh'i to which Ibrahim said, "What are you so shocked about. Abdullah has said even greater statement about Umar. He has said "I believe has gone with the nine out of ten parts of knowledge." Ibn Mas'ud also said as reported by Tabrani, Ibn Abi Shaibah: Whenever I see Umar it appears as though there is an angel between his eyes to guide or correct him."
This is regarding Umar, as for Uthman then it has been reported by Ahmad in Fadhail, Ibn Sa'd, Fasawi, Tabrani, Ibn Battah in Al-Ibanah al-Kubrah and others that Ibn Mas'ud said among his companions, "We the companions of Muhammad gathered and selected over us the best of us (i.e. Uthman)." This is also authentically proven.
So if being the best judge would necessitate being the best as a whole then Ibn Mas'ud would not be considering Umar and Uthman as best of all. They knew what they were speaking of unlike Rawafidh who misrepresent any statement they feel going against them.
Similarly if being the best of judge would mean the best of all in all then why Umar did not indicated only to Ali (ra) during his last time. Rather he selected six people. A person at his death bed would hardly speak lie. And if really wanted to hide facts he would have totally avoided Ali as he avoided his brother-in-law Sa'eed bin Zaid and no one would have objected to that great Caliph.


Note:- Some variant of the hadith of Ibn Masud regarding Ali being the best judge has the wording: We used to say the best of people of Madinah was Ali. It has been reported in Fadhail as-Sahabah of Ahmad and Musnad Bazzar. I say: There seems to be some mistake and the actual "aqdha ahlal madina" has been changed to "Afadhala ahlal madina". It could have been done by either some narrator who has some weakness or it is a mistake of a copyist. The former seems to be the case with Fadhaill as-Sahaba while the latter with Bazzar. And Allah knows best. I have some detail regarding it but it is irrelevant here. Some people like Mahmud Sa'eed Mamduh, in Ghayat at-Tabjeel, use it to show that Ibn Mas'ud considered Ali to be best of all the companions including Abu Bakr and Umar, that is why I notified it.



As it was my personal observation it could have been doubted but recently I found Ibn Abdul Barr also considered it a mistake while the wording "Aqdha ahl al-Madinah" to be correct. It is in Al-Istidhkar (14/242) under Kitab al-Jihad

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 27, 2015, 07:39:40 PM
Secondly, this report about `Ali being the best of judges is an argument against abuJay, since the same report shows that others were equal if not superior to `Ali in matters of Halal and Haram and inheritance such as Mu`adh and Zayd. Add on top that the narration says that Abu Bakr is "the most merciful man towards my nation" so how can the most merciful man be an oppressive tyrant!?

Here's the full text from al-Hakim whom BuJay quoted:

إِنَّ أَرْأَفَ أُمَّتِي بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَإِنَّ أَصْلَبَهَا فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرَ، وَإِنَّ أَشَدَّهَا حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَإِنَّ أَقْرَأَهَا أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَإِنَّ أَفْرَضَهَا زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَإِنَّ أَقْضَاهَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ، وَإِنَّ أَعْلَمَهَا بِالْحَلالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَإِنَّ أَصْدَقَهَا لَهْجَةً أَبُو ذَرٍّ، وَإِنَّ أَمِينَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، وَإِنَّ حَبْرَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ لِعَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَبَّاسٍ
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 27, 2015, 09:32:27 PM
Secondly, this report about `Ali being the best of judges is an argument against abuJay, since the same report shows that others were equal if not superior to `Ali in matters of Halal and Haram and inheritance such as Mu`adh and Zayd. Add on top that the narration says that Abu Bakr is "the most merciful man towards my nation" so how can the most merciful man be an oppressive tyrant!?

I touched this point but since these people deny the Qur'an, how can we expect them to follow our narration?

As of now, I have been suspended till tomorrow because I had to show a scumbag his worth.  Tomorrow I will share your points with him.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 27, 2015, 09:33:08 PM
I just read the first post in the SC thread which is abuJay's little weak piece in which he claims to provide all the answers, fact is his research is terrible and not up to standard, it's basically a poor man's version of my research. I don't intend to brag but he clearly didn't do much reading on the subject and his methodology is one of the worst and most biased of methods. In fact if he just read my piece it would have saved him a lot of time and maybe even enlightened him as I went through all early Tafseer books and graded every single report that is even remotely related to the subject:
http://twelvershia.net/detailed-research-on-prophetic-inheritance/ (http://twelvershia.net/detailed-research-on-prophetic-inheritance/)

Quote
As of now, I have been suspended till tomorrow because I had to show a scumbag his worth.  Tomorrow I will share your points with him.

Don't share my points, give him a link to my entire research and let him read and be educated on this matter before he plays hero.

Refer to my conclusion as to what can Fatimah get from this land:

Quote
IN CONCLUSION, IS FATIMAH ENTITLED TO RECEIVE ANYTHING FROM FADAK?
Let us sum this up as well and be very clear, there can only be two cases:
1-      If the Prophet (saw) had turned this land into a Waqf for the people during his own life, as mentioned in the books of Amwal and Hadith, this means that this land no longer belongs to him, he (saw) only manages how its produce is divided since he is the leader and nothing more, and after him his successor does this job. In this case she doesn’t get anything from it since it’s no longer an inheritance.
2-      If the Prophet (saw) never made it a Waqf, it remains a Fay’ as it was and it remains in his possession, he divides from it and gives to the people as its owner and when he dies his successor in authority continues working this land and using it the same way the Prophet (saw) used it, as a Khalifah must succeed him (saw) in his economic policies and follow his example. In this case she also doesn’t get it as his possessions (saw) are not inherited.
What she gets is what the Khalifah gives, Abu Bakr says that Rasul-Allah (saw) permitted his family to eat from this land and so he will continue feeding them as if he (saw) was still alive.
Another question would be: Did Abu Bakr leave the prophetic-household (including his daughter) to starve? Did he leave them in poverty?
Let me just say this, there are authentic narrations regarding the written will of `Ali ibn abi Talib in the books of Ahlul-Sunnah and in the books of the Shia, such as volume seven from al-Kafi, I’d recommend all our readers to check them out and see if they were left in poverty or not; just read about the lands they bequeathed and the number of slaves and female servants and water wells and the rest. This can also be seen in the book Tareekh al-Madinah by ibn Shubah under the chapter of Sadaqat `Ali ibn abi Talib and it mentions a lot more detail as it was copied from Hasan bin Zayd bin Hasan bin `Ali ibn abi Talib’s letter.
I add, the Prophet (saw) himself left his family in poverty, he preferred poverty for them, and in the Sahih narration from Bilal ibn Rabah, he was talking about how the Prophet (saw) was in debt because he spent his money on the people, then finally he received some money and asked Bilal to pay his debts as well as Bilal’s:
قَالَ: ” فَفَضَلَ شَيْءٌ؟ ، قُلْتُ: نَعَمْ، قَالَ: ” انْظُرْ أَنْ تُرِيحَنِيَ مِنْهَا، فَإِنِّي لَسْتُ دَاخِلا عَلَى أَحَدٍ مِنْ أَهْلِي حَتَّى تُرِيحَنِي مِنْهُ
[The Prophet (saw) asked Bilal: “Anything left from the money?” Bilal said: “Yes.” He (saw) said: “Make sure you relieve me from (possessing) it, I won’t enter the house of any of my wives (for the night) until you do.”]
As the reader can see, the Prophet (saw) paid his debts but never kept any of the money that remained, he wouldn’t even go home and sleep unless he made sure Bilal got rid of this money.
Why does the Prophet (saw) do this? Allah answers:
{The example of those who spend their wealth in the way of Allah is like a seed [of grain] which grows seven spikes; in each spike is a hundred grains. And Allah multiplies [His reward] for whom He wills.} [2:261]
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 27, 2015, 11:08:31 PM
pwned.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 27, 2015, 11:15:33 PM
What research?

You think you do research? Let me show you an example of your research, let us look at your first point.

Quote
IN CONCLUSION, IS FATIMAH ENTITLED TO RECEIVE ANYTHING FROM FADAK?
Let us sum this up as well and be very clear, there can only be two cases:
1-      If the Prophet (saw) had turned this land into a Waqf for the people during his own life, as mentioned in the books of Amwal and Hadith, this means that this land no longer belongs to him, he (saw) only manages how its produce is divided since he is the leader and nothing more, and after him his successor does this job. In this case she doesn’t get anything from it since it’s no longer an inheritance.
2-      If the Prophet (saw) never made it a Waqf, it remains a Fay’ as it was and it remains in his possession, he divides from it and gives to the people as its owner and when he dies his successor in authority continues working this land and using it the same way the Prophet (saw) used it, as a Khalifah must succeed him (saw) in his economic policies and follow his example. In this case she also doesn’t get it as his possessions (saw) are not inherited.
What she gets is what the Khalifah gives, Abu Bakr says that Rasul-Allah (saw) permitted his family to eat from this land and so he will continue feeding them as if he (saw) was still alive.
Another question would be: Did Abu Bakr leave the prophetic-household (including his daughter) to starve? Did he leave them in poverty?
Let me just say this, there are authentic narrations regarding the written will of `Ali ibn abi Talib in the books of Ahlul-Sunnah and in the books of the Shia, such as volume seven from al-Kafi, I’d recommend all our readers to check them out and see if they were left in poverty or not; just read about the lands they bequeathed and the number of slaves and female servants and water wells and the rest. This can also be seen in the book Tareekh al-Madinah by ibn Shubah under the chapter of Sadaqat `Ali ibn abi Talib and it mentions a lot more detail as it was copied from Hasan bin Zayd bin Hasan bin `Ali ibn abi Talib’s letter.
I add, the Prophet (saw) himself left his family in poverty, he preferred poverty for them, and in the Sahih narration from Bilal ibn Rabah, he was talking about how the Prophet (saw) was in debt because he spent his money on the people, then finally he received some money and asked Bilal to pay his debts as well as Bilal’s:
قَالَ: ” فَفَضَلَ شَيْءٌ؟ ، قُلْتُ: نَعَمْ، قَالَ: ” انْظُرْ أَنْ تُرِيحَنِيَ مِنْهَا، فَإِنِّي لَسْتُ دَاخِلا عَلَى أَحَدٍ مِنْ أَهْلِي حَتَّى تُرِيحَنِي مِنْهُ
[The Prophet (saw) asked Bilal: “Anything left from the money?” Bilal said: “Yes.” He (saw) said: “Make sure you relieve me from (possessing) it, I won’t enter the house of any of my wives (for the night) until you do.”]
As the reader can see, the Prophet (saw) paid his debts but never kept any of the money that remained, he wouldn’t even go home and sleep unless he made sure Bilal got rid of this money.
Why does the Prophet (saw) do this? Allah answers:
{The example of those who spend their wealth in the way of Allah is like a seed [of grain] which grows seven spikes; in each spike is a hundred grains. And Allah multiplies [His reward] for whom He wills.} [2:261]



The land doesn't belong to him?

Really?

Please translate this for me ...

Sharh from An-nawawi The shaykh who you take your Mutamad rulings from.

وكذلك نصف أرض فدك صالح أهلها بعد فتح خيبر على نصف أرضها وكان خالصا له وكذلك ثلث أرض وادي القرى أخذه في الصلح حين صالح أهلها اليهود وكذلك حصنان من حصون خيبر…. فكانت هذه كلها ملكا لرسول الله خاصة لا حق فيها أحد غيره
 
and this

from ar-razi

{ وَمَآ أَفَآءَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُولِهِ مِنْهُمْ فَمَآ أَوْجَفْتُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ خَيْلٍ وَلاَ رِكَابٍ وَلَـٰكِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُسَلِّطُ رُسُلَهُ عَلَىٰ مَن يَشَآءُ وَٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ }
ومعنى الآية أن الصحابة طلبوا من الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام أن يقسم الفيء بينهم كما قسم الغنيمة بينهم، فذكر الله الفرق بين الأمرين، وهو أن الغنيمة ما أتعبتم أنفسكم في تحصيلها وأوجفتم عليها الخيل والركاب بخلاف الفيء فإنكم ما تحملتم في تحصيله تعباً، فكان الأمر فيه مفوضاً إلى الرسول يضعه حيث يشاء.


فصارت تلك القرى والأموال في يد الرسول عليه السلام من غير حرب فكان عليه الصلاة والسلام يأخذ من غلة فدك نفقته ونفقة من يعوله، ويجعل الباقي في السلاح والكراع

and this

Tafseer Ibn katheer

قال تعالى: { فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَامَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَـٰكِينِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ } إلى آخرها، والتي بعدها، فهذه مصارف أموال الفيء ووجوهه. قال الإمام أحمد: حدثنا سفيان، عن عمرو ومَعْمر، عن الزهري، عن مالك بن أوس بن الحدثان، عن عمر، رضي الله عنه قال: كانت أموال بني النضير مما أفاء الله على رسوله مما لو يوجف المسلمون عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، فكانت لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خالصة،

and this from ibn hibban

فكانت فدك لرسول الله خالصة
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 27, 2015, 11:24:27 PM
Quote
Secondly, this report about `Ali being the best of judges is an argument against abuJay, since the same report shows that others were equal if not superior to `Ali in matters of Halal and Haram and inheritance such as Mu`adh and Zayd. Add on top that the narration says that Abu Bakr is "the most merciful man towards my nation" so how can the most merciful man be an oppressive tyrant!?

Here's the full text from al-Hakim whom BuJay quoted:

إِنَّ أَرْأَفَ أُمَّتِي بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَإِنَّ أَصْلَبَهَا فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرَ، وَإِنَّ أَشَدَّهَا حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَإِنَّ أَقْرَأَهَا أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَإِنَّ أَفْرَضَهَا زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَإِنَّ أَقْضَاهَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ، وَإِنَّ أَعْلَمَهَا بِالْحَلالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَإِنَّ أَصْدَقَهَا لَهْجَةً أَبُو ذَرٍّ، وَإِنَّ أَمِينَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، وَإِنَّ حَبْرَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ لِعَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَبَّاسٍ


Muadh and Zayd are completely irrelevant to the statement "Ali (as) is the best islamic judge on earth".

Just like when Muslims try to prove Muhammad [saw] in the bible, the verses in the bible that says jesus is the son of god is completely irrelevant to us, all that is relevant to us is the point we are trying to prove.

So you bringing me hadith with additions such as "muadh is the best in halal and haram" and " zayd is the best in inheritance laws" is 100 percent irrelevant as the statement "Ali is the best Islamic judge on earth" still holds and stands as a valid statement.

So my question to you is this, Is Ali the best Islamic judge, yes or no?

Do you agree or disagree? Once you agree to this point we will show the knowledge of Imam Ali [as] in your own books.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 27, 2015, 11:37:42 PM
Quote
What research?

The one that's bigger better and a lot more detailed than yours because I had to read books rather than copying and pasting the same quotes from the same 2-3 scholars.

Quote
The land doesn't belong to him?

Yes, haven't you heard? If you offer something as a Waqf it ceases to belong to you. Weird huh?


Quote
Your three quotes

Oh wow what a discovery, and where did I say it wasn't his? I said that he offered it to the people AFTER it was his own. Allah gave it to him and he gave it to the people, too complicated right?

That's what I mean when I said you didn't read anything.

Quote
So my question to you is this, Is Ali the best Islamic judge, yes or no?

The narration you quoted is weak sir. The entire post above from brother Moin is to show its weakness.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:20:19 AM
Lets go step by step and speak and first about the term "Ali is the best judge".

We see here in the authentic athaar from from Sahih Bukhari from Baba Umar.


2 - قال عُمَرُ رضي اللهُ عنه : أقرَؤُنا أُبَيٌّ، وأقضانا عليٌّ، وإنا لندَعُ من قولِ أُبَيٍّ، وذاك أن أُبَيًّا يقولُ : لا أدَعُ شيئًا سمِعْتُه من رسولِ اللهِ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّم، وقد قال اللهُ تعالى : { مَا نَنْسَخْ مِنْ آيَةٍ أَوْ نُنْسِهَا } .
الراوي : عبدالله بن عباس | المحدث : البخاري | المصدر : صحيح البخاري


Narration: Sahih.


Regarding the hadith with the so called "addition", then Sunan Ibn Majah original manuscripts did indeed have the phrase because 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".


Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ibn Yahya on July 28, 2015, 12:22:39 AM
Don't bother debating with him because he doesn't even understand how debating works. I was debating him one time on whether 'Ali was the correct person to be the Khalifah and he used the hadith where it says the best judge of this ummah is 'Ali, and I then refuted his notion that this meant 'Ali was more knowledgeable than Abu Bakr and 'Umar because in that exact same hadith (which he shockingly cut off) it declares other individuals to be the most knowledgeable in certain subjects of Shari'ah and he wouldn't let me use that against him because he doesn't have to accept our Ahadith. Half of his response to me were sarcastic remarks
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:26:12 AM
More hilariousness regarding their claim that Ibn Majah's manuscript was corrupted, the exact same hadith is found in another book "Ad-duafa al kabeer" with the phrase....



(2 / 158)( حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ يُونُسَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سَلَّامٌ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ، عَنْ أَبِي الصِّدِّيقِ النَّاجِي، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: " أَرْحَمُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَقْوَاهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ بْنُ عَفَّانَ، وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، وَأَقْرَأُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ وِعَاءٌ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ، وَسَلْمَانُ عَلَمٌ لَا يُدْرَكُ، وَمُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ أَعْلَمُ النَّاسِ بِحَلَالِ اللَّهِ وَحَرَامِهِ، وَمَا أَظَلَّتِ الْخَضْرَاءُ وَلَا أَقَلَّتِ الْبَطْحَاءُ، أَوْ قَالَ: الْغَبْرَاءُ، مِنْ ذِي لَهْجَةٍ أَصْدَقَ مِنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ " رِضْوَانُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِمْ قَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ: لَا يُتَابَعُ عَلَى هَذِهِ الْأَحَادِيثِ، وَالْغَالِبُ عَلَى حَدِيثِهِ الْوَهْمُ، وَالْكَلَامُ عَنْهُ مَعْرُوفٌ بِغَيْرِ هَذِهِ الْأَسَانِيدِ، بِأَسَانِيدَ ثَابِتَةٍ جِيَادٍ )

The author says

 الْأَسَانِيدِ، بِأَسَانِيدَ ثَابِتَةٍ جِيَادٍ )

Its chains are proven/established and good.


There is you and moins "research".

You'll notice that the author Abu jafar Muhammad book was written in 322 and has its own manuscripts seperate from Ibn Majah.

Of course they'll claim now that Abu jafar was really a Shia in taqiyya.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ibn Yahya on July 28, 2015, 12:29:16 AM
Quote
Secondly, this report about `Ali being the best of judges is an argument against abuJay, since the same report shows that others were equal if not superior to `Ali in matters of Halal and Haram and inheritance such as Mu`adh and Zayd. Add on top that the narration says that Abu Bakr is "the most merciful man towards my nation" so how can the most merciful man be an oppressive tyrant!?

That same Hadith says that they were the most knowledgeable in those subjects, a judge, or Qadhi is supposed to be good at making judgements, technically he doesn't have to have any knowledge himself. 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. You can't just randomly assert that he's a tyrant. Last time we debated you brought up a hadith that Abu Bakr said he would have been lost without 'Ali. A tyrant would let 'Ali speak, a tyrant would've had 'Ali killed. I don't think you shias really understand what a tyrant is because bat around the word a lot.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ibn Yahya on July 28, 2015, 12:29:53 AM
More hilariousness regarding their claim that Ibn Majah's manuscript was corrupted, the exact same hadith is found in another book "Ad-duafa al kabeer" with the phrase....



(2 / 158)( حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ يُونُسَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سَلَّامٌ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ، عَنْ أَبِي الصِّدِّيقِ النَّاجِي، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: " أَرْحَمُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَقْوَاهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ بْنُ عَفَّانَ، وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، وَأَقْرَأُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ وِعَاءٌ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ، وَسَلْمَانُ عَلَمٌ لَا يُدْرَكُ، وَمُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ أَعْلَمُ النَّاسِ بِحَلَالِ اللَّهِ وَحَرَامِهِ، وَمَا أَظَلَّتِ الْخَضْرَاءُ وَلَا أَقَلَّتِ الْبَطْحَاءُ، أَوْ قَالَ: الْغَبْرَاءُ، مِنْ ذِي لَهْجَةٍ أَصْدَقَ مِنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ " رِضْوَانُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِمْ قَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ: لَا يُتَابَعُ عَلَى هَذِهِ الْأَحَادِيثِ، وَالْغَالِبُ عَلَى حَدِيثِهِ الْوَهْمُ، وَالْكَلَامُ عَنْهُ مَعْرُوفٌ بِغَيْرِ هَذِهِ الْأَسَانِيدِ، بِأَسَانِيدَ ثَابِتَةٍ جِيَادٍ )

The author says

 الْأَسَانِيدِ، بِأَسَانِيدَ ثَابِتَةٍ جِيَادٍ )

Its chains are proven/established and good.


There is you and moins "research".

You'll notice that the author Abu jafar Muhammad book was written in 322 and has its own manuscripts seperate from Ibn Majah.

Of course they'll claim now that Abu jafar was really a Shia in taqiyya.

Is it Sahih?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:37:12 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.....

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 28, 2015, 12:51:06 AM
You said:

Quote
We see here in the authentic athaar from from Sahih Bukhari from Baba Umar.

Great so now you rely on `Umar? I need not remind you that there is a big difference between `Umar saying this and the Prophet (saw). Also notice that `Umar thinks that Ubay is a better reciter than `Ali, do you agree with him on this? I add, that `Umar may have said this after Abu Bakr passed away, which won't serve your purpose much.

Furthermore, if  Ronaldo said that Messi is the best striker in the team, this doesn't mean he'll definitely score every time he shoots, it just means he's more likely to score than the others by a certain ratio. Simple enough for you? `Umar's statement cannot handle more than this so don't overload it with your weird conclusions.


You say:

Quote
Regarding the hadith with the so called "addition", then Sunan Ibn Majah original manuscripts did indeed have the phrase because 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 )

I checked Tirmidhi's Hadith from abu Qilabah and found nothing from what you mentioned. As for what you  quoted by Ibn Qudamah it also doesn't show that this mistake is found in Ibn Qudamah's book.

I'll give you a shortcut so you don't overheat, check Risalat Ibn `Abdul-Hadi Fi Fada'il al-Sahabah. You'll realize that `Ali's addition to abu Qilabah's Hadith is none existant.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 28, 2015, 01:01:34 AM
Moving on to your next thing:

Quote
More hilariousness regarding their claim that Ibn Majah's manuscript was corrupted, the exact same hadith is found in another book "Ad-duafa al kabeer" with the phrase....
(2 / 158)( حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ يُونُسَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا سَلَّامٌ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا زَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ، عَنْ أَبِي الصِّدِّيقِ النَّاجِي، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: " أَرْحَمُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَقْوَاهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ بْنُ عَفَّانَ، وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، وَأَقْرَأُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ وِعَاءٌ مِنَ الْعِلْمِ، وَسَلْمَانُ عَلَمٌ لَا يُدْرَكُ، وَمُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ أَعْلَمُ النَّاسِ بِحَلَالِ اللَّهِ وَحَرَامِهِ، وَمَا أَظَلَّتِ الْخَضْرَاءُ وَلَا أَقَلَّتِ الْبَطْحَاءُ، أَوْ قَالَ: الْغَبْرَاءُ، مِنْ ذِي لَهْجَةٍ أَصْدَقَ مِنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ " رِضْوَانُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِمْ قَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ: لَا يُتَابَعُ عَلَى هَذِهِ الْأَحَادِيثِ، وَالْغَالِبُ عَلَى حَدِيثِهِ الْوَهْمُ، وَالْكَلَامُ عَنْهُ مَعْرُوفٌ بِغَيْرِ هَذِهِ الْأَسَانِيدِ، بِأَسَانِيدَ ثَابِتَةٍ جِيَادٍ )

Oh how nice, do you even understand that we were talking mainly about abu Qilabah's Hadith? Not this anomalous report you brought forth now? I doubt you accept a report that says that abu Hurayrah is a "container of knowledge" and that Salman's knowledge cannot be challenged, and that Mu`adh is the most knowledgeable of the people concerning Allah's Halal and Haram.

If you do accept it then let me know as it topples your entire beliefs.

However, the chain has two terrible narrators and here's what you should know about this corrupt odd version you just provided:

فَالْجَوَابُ: أَنَّ هَذَا إِسْنَادٌ ضَعِيفٌ، مُشْتَمِلٌ عَلَى رَجُلَيْنِ ضَعِيفَيْنِ أَحَدُهُمَا أَضْعَفُ مِنَ الآخَرِ، فَأَمَّا الأَوَّلُ فَزَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ، وَهُوَ ابْنُ الْحَوَارِيِّ الْبَصْرِيُّ، قَالَ يَحْيَى بْنُ مَعِينٍ: لا شَيْءَ، وَقَالَ مُرَّةُ: ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو زُرْعَةَ: لَيْسَ بِقَوِيٍّ، وَاهِي الْحَدِيثِ، ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمٍ: ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ يُكْتَبُ حَدِيثُهُ، وَلا يُحْتَجُّ بِهِ، وَقَالَ أَبُو عُبَيْدٍ الآجُرِّيُّ: قِيلَ لأَبِي دَاوُدَ: زَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ قَالَ: حَدَّثَ عَنْهُ شُعْبَةُ وَلَيْسَ بِذَاكَ، وَقَالَ النَّسَائِيُّ: ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمِ بْنِ حِبَّانَ يَرْوِي عَنْ أَنَسٍ أَشْيَاءَ مَوْضُوعَةً لا أَصْلَ لَهَا، حَتَّى يَسْبِقَ إِلَى الْقَلْبِ أَنَّهُ الْمُتَعَمِّدُ لَهَا، وَكَانَ يَحْيَى يُمَرِّضُ الْقَوْلَ فِيهِ، وَهُوَ عِنْدِي لا يَجُوزُ الاحْتِجَاجُ بِخَبَرِهِ، وَلا كَتَبة حَدِيثِهِ إِلا لِلاعْتِبَارِ، سَمِعْتُ الْحَنْبَلِيَّ يَقُولُ: سَمِعْتُ أَحْمَدَ بْنَ زُهَيْرٍ يَقُولُ: سَمِعْتُ يَحْيَى بْنَ مَعِينٍ يَقُولُ: لا يَجُوزُ حَدِيثُ زَيْدٍ الْعَمِّيِّ، وَكَانَ أَمْثَلَ مِنْ يَزِيدَ الرَّقَاشِيِّ.
وَقَالَ أَبُو أَحْمَدَ بْنُ عَدِيٍّ: عَامَّةُ مَا يَرْوِيهِ، وَمَنْ يَرْوِي عَنْهُمْ ضُعَفَاءُ هُمْ وَهُوَ عَلَى أَنَّ شُعْبَةَ قَدْ رَوَى عَنْهُ، وَلَعَلَّ شُعْبَةَ لَمْ يَرْوِ عَنْ أَضْعَفَ مِنْهُ، وَقَدْ رَوَى الإِمَامُ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ، وَيَحْيَى بْنُ مَعِينٍ، وَالدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ، أَنَّهُمْ حَسَّنُوا أَمْرَهُ، وَقَالُوا: هُوَ صَالِحٌ، وَكَذَلِكَ الْجَوْزَجَانِيُّ قَالَ: هُوَ مُتَمَاسِكٌ، وَالْمُتَحَصِّلُ مِنْ أَمْرَهِ أَنَّ الأَكْثَرَ عَلَى تَضْعِيفِهِ، وَعَدَمِ الاحْتِجَاجِ بِهِ، وَلَوْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِي الإِسْنَادِ ضَعِيفٌ غَيْرُهُ، فَكَيْفَ إِذَا كَانَ فِيهِ مَنْ هُوَ أَضْعَفُ مِنْهُ، وَهُوَ سَلامٌ الطَّوِيلُ، وَهُوَ الضَّعِيفُ الثَّانِي الَّذِي فِي الْحَدِيثِ، وَهُوَ أَضْعَفُ مِنْ زَيْدٍ بِكَثِيرٍ، قَالَ أَبُو أَحْمَدَ بْنُ عَدِيٍّ: الْبَلاءُ مِنْهُ لا مِنْ زَيْدٍ.
وَقَالَ الإِمَامُ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ: سَلامٌ رَوَى أَحَادِيثَ مُنْكَرَةً.
وَضَعَّفَهُ عَلِيُّ ابْنُ الْمَدِينِيِّ.
وَقَالَ يَحْيَى بْنُ مَعِينٍ: لَيْسَ بِشَيْءٍ.
وَقَالَ مَرَّةً: ضَعِيفٌ لا يُكْتَبُ حَدِيثُهُ، وَقَالَ: مَنْ لَهُ أَحَادِيثُ مُنْكَرَةٌ، وَقَالَ ابْنُ عَمَّارٍ الْمَوْصِلِيُّ: لَيْسَ بِحُجَّةٍ، وَقَالَ السَّعْدِيُّ: غَيْرُ ثِقَةٍ، وَقَالَ أَبُو زُرْعَةَ: ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمٍ: ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ تَرَكُوهُ، وَقَالَ الْبُخَارِيُّ: تَرَكُوهُ، وَقَالَ النَّسَائِيُّ: مَتْرُوكٌ، وَقَالَ مَرَّةً: لَيْسَ بِثِقَةٍ، وَلا يُكْتَبُ حَدِيثُهُ، وَقَالَ أَبُو الْقَاسِمِ الثَّغْرِيُّ: ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ جِدًّا، وَقَالَ ابْنُ خِرَاشٍ: مَتْرُوكٌ، وَقَالَ مَرَّةً: كَذَّابُ، وَقَالَ ابْنُ الْجُنَيْدِ، وَالدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ، وَالأَزْدِيُّ: مَتْرُوكُ الْحَدِيثِ، وَقَالَ ابْنُ حِبَّانَ: يَرْوِي عَنِ الثِّقَاتِ الْمَوْضُوعَاتِ كَأَنَّهُ كَانَ الْمُتَعَمِّدَ لَهَا، وَقَالَ الْحَاكِمُ: رَوَى أَحَادِيثَ مَوْضُوعَةً، وَرَوَى لَهُ ابْنُ عَدِيٍّ أَحَادِيثَ، وَقَالَ دِعَامَةُ: مَا يَرْوِيهِ عَنْ مَنْ يَرْوِيهِ عَنِ الضُّعَفَاءِ وَالثِّقَاتِ لا يُتَابِعُهُ أَحَدٌ عَلَيْهِ، فَظَهَرَ لَنَا مِنْ أَقْوَالِ الأَئِمَّةِ، رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ، أَنَّ هَذَا الْحَدِيثَ بِهَذَا الإِسْنَادِ سَاقِطٌ لا يَجُوزُ الاعْتِمَادُ عَلَيْهِ، وَاللَّهُ الْمُوَفِّقُ لِلصَّوَابِ

Salam al-Tawil is abandoned and Zayd al-`Ami is weak.

I add, when the author says:

وَالْكَلَامُ عَنْهُ مَعْرُوفٌ بِغَيْرِ هَذِهِ الْأَسَانِيدِ، بِأَسَانِيدَ ثَابِتَةٍ جِيَادٍ

This means that this version is weak and there's other versions which are considered good according to him. You just need to prove that those versions that are good actually contain `Ali's judgement. I say The author probably means abu Qilabah's version which is the closest out of all of them to being authentic and does not contain `Ali's judgement.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 01:55:37 AM
Quote
Great so now you rely on `Umar? I need not remind you that there is a big difference between `Umar saying this and the Prophet (saw). Also notice that `Umar thinks that Ubay is a better reciter than `Ali, do you agree with him on this? I add, that `Umar may have said this after Abu Bakr passed away, which won't serve your purpose much.

Furthermore, if  Ronaldo said that Messi is the best striker in the team, this doesn't mean he'll definitely score every time he shoots, it just means he's more likely to score than the others by a certain ratio. Simple enough for you? `Umar's statement cannot handle more than this so don't overload it with your weird conclusions.

Your comparison of Ronaldo and Messi is laughable, because if Imam Ali [as] is indeed the best judge on earth, then it is extremely unlikely that with all the evidences presented to him he wouldn't know the ruling regarding a simple inheritance law and persist on it for years.

Regarding your statement that Umar was only saying this hadith after AB passed away then this is also an ad hoc argument without any proof just conjecture that his hadith was said when AB was in the ground nor do you have any proof that abu bakr was the best judge.  Also we shall prove this further as umar is only repeating what the prophet [saw] said.

 صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم بعث عليا قاضيا إلى اليمن ، قال : يا رسول اللَّه ، بعثتني أقضي بينهم ، وأنا شاب لا أدري ما القضاء ، فضرب رسول اللَّه صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم في صدره ، وقال : اللَّهم اهده وثبت لسانه ، قال : فوالذي فلق الحبة ما شككت في قضاء بين اثنين ، رواه أبو داود ، والحاكم ، وابن ماجه ، والبزار ، والترمذي ، من طرق عن علي أحسنها رواية البزار عن عمرو بن مرة عن عبد اللَّه بن سلمة عن علي ، وفي إسناده عمرو بن أبي المقدام ، واختلف فيه على عمرو بن مرة ، فرواه شعبة عنه عن أبي البَخْتَري ، قال : حدثني من سمع عليا ، أخرجه أبو يعلى وسنده صحيح

" The prophet [saw] sent Ali [as] as a judge to yemen, so Imam Ali [as] said : Ya Rasulallah send me as the best judge between them since I am a still young and do not know Qadha. So the prophet [saw] hit his chest and said "Oh Allah guide and establish his tongue, then Imam Ali said : by the one who split the seed I did not doubt at all judging between two people.

yuala reported this hadith with a sahih chain.

So Ali [as] tongue is the guided and established by Allah when it comes to judgement!

Quote
I checked Tirmidhi's Hadith from abu Qilabah and found nothing from what you mentioned. As for what you  quoted by Ibn Qudamah it also doesn't show that this mistake is found in Ibn Qudamah's book.

I'll give you a shortcut so you don't overheat, check Risalat Ibn `Abdul-Hadi Fi Fada'il al-Sahabah. You'll realize that `Ali's addition to abu Qilabah's Hadith is none existant.

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

https://www.islamware.com/app/

(if the link doesn't take you directly to timirzis book, then the hadith number is 151 in Timirzi's book, if you still need help finding it let me know)

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ أَلَا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ 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

Both Timirzi as well as Ibn Majah have this hadith with the exact same chain, with Timirzi also having the phrase "Ali is the best judge among them".

Lets go over the chain found in both Ibn Majah and timirzi...

The first narrator Ibn Hajr :

محمد بن المثنى بن عبيد العنزي بفتح النون والزاي أبو موسى البصري ….ثقة ثبت

وى عنه) خ (مائة حديث وثلاثة أحاديث ومسلم سبعمائة واثنتين وسبعين حديثا

The second narrator Ibn Hajr :

عبد الوهاب بن عبد المجيد بن الصلت الثقفي أبو محمد البصري ثقة تغير قبل موته بثلاث سنين

لكنه ما ضر تغيره حديثه فإنه ما حدث بحديث في زمن التغير

The third narrator Zahabi :

الإمام الحافظ الثقة أبو المنازل البصري المشهور بالحذاء ، أحد الأعلام .

The fourth narrator Zahabi

عبد الله بن زيد بن عمرو أو عامر بن ناتل بن مالك ، الإمام ، شيخ الإسلام ، أبو قلابة الجرمي البصري . وجرم بطن من الحاف بن قضاعة ، قدم الشام وانقطع بداريا ، ما علمت متى ولد .

Shaykh Arnout says

إسناده صحيح على شرط البخاري رجاله ثقات رجال الصحيح غير علي بن المديني فمن رجال البخاري

It's chain is authentic upon the conditions of bukhari and their men are thiqaat, rijaal as-sahih except for Ali ibn medini that he is from the men of bukhari.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 02:04:38 AM
Quote
Oh how nice, do you even understand that we were talking mainly about abu Qilabah's Hadith? Not this anomalous report you brought forth now? I doubt you accept a report that says that abu Hurayrah is a "container of knowledge" and that Salman's knowledge cannot be challenged, and that Mu`adh is the most knowledgeable of the people concerning Allah's Halal and Haram.

If you do accept it then let me know as it topples your entire beliefs.

However, the chain has two terrible narrators and here's what you should know about this corrupt odd version you just provided:

فَالْجَوَابُ: أَنَّ هَذَا إِسْنَادٌ ضَعِيفٌ، مُشْتَمِلٌ عَلَى رَجُلَيْنِ ضَعِيفَيْنِ أَحَدُهُمَا أَضْعَفُ مِنَ الآخَرِ، فَأَمَّا الأَوَّلُ فَزَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ، وَهُوَ ابْنُ الْحَوَارِيِّ الْبَصْرِيُّ، قَالَ يَحْيَى بْنُ مَعِينٍ: لا شَيْءَ، وَقَالَ مُرَّةُ: ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو زُرْعَةَ: لَيْسَ بِقَوِيٍّ، وَاهِي الْحَدِيثِ، ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمٍ: ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ يُكْتَبُ حَدِيثُهُ، وَلا يُحْتَجُّ بِهِ، وَقَالَ أَبُو عُبَيْدٍ الآجُرِّيُّ: قِيلَ لأَبِي دَاوُدَ: زَيْدٌ الْعَمِّيُّ قَالَ: حَدَّثَ عَنْهُ شُعْبَةُ وَلَيْسَ بِذَاكَ، وَقَالَ النَّسَائِيُّ: ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمِ بْنِ حِبَّانَ يَرْوِي عَنْ أَنَسٍ أَشْيَاءَ مَوْضُوعَةً لا أَصْلَ لَهَا، حَتَّى يَسْبِقَ إِلَى الْقَلْبِ أَنَّهُ الْمُتَعَمِّدُ لَهَا، وَكَانَ يَحْيَى يُمَرِّضُ الْقَوْلَ فِيهِ، وَهُوَ عِنْدِي لا يَجُوزُ الاحْتِجَاجُ بِخَبَرِهِ، وَلا كَتَبة حَدِيثِهِ إِلا لِلاعْتِبَارِ، سَمِعْتُ الْحَنْبَلِيَّ يَقُولُ: سَمِعْتُ أَحْمَدَ بْنَ زُهَيْرٍ يَقُولُ: سَمِعْتُ يَحْيَى بْنَ مَعِينٍ يَقُولُ: لا يَجُوزُ حَدِيثُ زَيْدٍ الْعَمِّيِّ، وَكَانَ أَمْثَلَ مِنْ يَزِيدَ الرَّقَاشِيِّ.
وَقَالَ أَبُو أَحْمَدَ بْنُ عَدِيٍّ: عَامَّةُ مَا يَرْوِيهِ، وَمَنْ يَرْوِي عَنْهُمْ ضُعَفَاءُ هُمْ وَهُوَ عَلَى أَنَّ شُعْبَةَ قَدْ رَوَى عَنْهُ، وَلَعَلَّ شُعْبَةَ لَمْ يَرْوِ عَنْ أَضْعَفَ مِنْهُ، وَقَدْ رَوَى الإِمَامُ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ، وَيَحْيَى بْنُ مَعِينٍ، وَالدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ، أَنَّهُمْ حَسَّنُوا أَمْرَهُ، وَقَالُوا: هُوَ صَالِحٌ، وَكَذَلِكَ الْجَوْزَجَانِيُّ قَالَ: هُوَ مُتَمَاسِكٌ، وَالْمُتَحَصِّلُ مِنْ أَمْرَهِ أَنَّ الأَكْثَرَ عَلَى تَضْعِيفِهِ، وَعَدَمِ الاحْتِجَاجِ بِهِ، وَلَوْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِي الإِسْنَادِ ضَعِيفٌ غَيْرُهُ، فَكَيْفَ إِذَا كَانَ فِيهِ مَنْ هُوَ أَضْعَفُ مِنْهُ، وَهُوَ سَلامٌ الطَّوِيلُ، وَهُوَ الضَّعِيفُ الثَّانِي الَّذِي فِي الْحَدِيثِ، وَهُوَ أَضْعَفُ مِنْ زَيْدٍ بِكَثِيرٍ، قَالَ أَبُو أَحْمَدَ بْنُ عَدِيٍّ: الْبَلاءُ مِنْهُ لا مِنْ زَيْدٍ.
وَقَالَ الإِمَامُ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَنْبَلٍ: سَلامٌ رَوَى أَحَادِيثَ مُنْكَرَةً.
وَضَعَّفَهُ عَلِيُّ ابْنُ الْمَدِينِيِّ.
وَقَالَ يَحْيَى بْنُ مَعِينٍ: لَيْسَ بِشَيْءٍ.
وَقَالَ مَرَّةً: ضَعِيفٌ لا يُكْتَبُ حَدِيثُهُ، وَقَالَ: مَنْ لَهُ أَحَادِيثُ مُنْكَرَةٌ، وَقَالَ ابْنُ عَمَّارٍ الْمَوْصِلِيُّ: لَيْسَ بِحُجَّةٍ، وَقَالَ السَّعْدِيُّ: غَيْرُ ثِقَةٍ، وَقَالَ أَبُو زُرْعَةَ: ضَعِيفٌ، وَقَالَ أَبُو حَاتِمٍ: ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ تَرَكُوهُ، وَقَالَ الْبُخَارِيُّ: تَرَكُوهُ، وَقَالَ النَّسَائِيُّ: مَتْرُوكٌ، وَقَالَ مَرَّةً: لَيْسَ بِثِقَةٍ، وَلا يُكْتَبُ حَدِيثُهُ، وَقَالَ أَبُو الْقَاسِمِ الثَّغْرِيُّ: ضَعِيفُ الْحَدِيثِ جِدًّا، وَقَالَ ابْنُ خِرَاشٍ: مَتْرُوكٌ، وَقَالَ مَرَّةً: كَذَّابُ، وَقَالَ ابْنُ الْجُنَيْدِ، وَالدَّارَقُطْنِيُّ، وَالأَزْدِيُّ: مَتْرُوكُ الْحَدِيثِ، وَقَالَ ابْنُ حِبَّانَ: يَرْوِي عَنِ الثِّقَاتِ الْمَوْضُوعَاتِ كَأَنَّهُ كَانَ الْمُتَعَمِّدَ لَهَا، وَقَالَ الْحَاكِمُ: رَوَى أَحَادِيثَ مَوْضُوعَةً، وَرَوَى لَهُ ابْنُ عَدِيٍّ أَحَادِيثَ، وَقَالَ دِعَامَةُ: مَا يَرْوِيهِ عَنْ مَنْ يَرْوِيهِ عَنِ الضُّعَفَاءِ وَالثِّقَاتِ لا يُتَابِعُهُ أَحَدٌ عَلَيْهِ، فَظَهَرَ لَنَا مِنْ أَقْوَالِ الأَئِمَّةِ، رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ، أَنَّ هَذَا الْحَدِيثَ بِهَذَا الإِسْنَادِ سَاقِطٌ لا يَجُوزُ الاعْتِمَادُ عَلَيْهِ، وَاللَّهُ الْمُوَفِّقُ لِلصَّوَابِ

Salam al-Tawil is abandoned and Zayd al-`Ami is weak.

I add, when the author says:

وَالْكَلَامُ عَنْهُ مَعْرُوفٌ بِغَيْرِ هَذِهِ الْأَسَانِيدِ، بِأَسَانِيدَ ثَابِتَةٍ جِيَادٍ

This means that this version is weak and there's other versions which are considered good according to him. You just need to prove that those versions that are good actually contain `Ali's judgement. I say The author probably means abu Qilabah's version which is the closest out of all of them to being authentic and does not contain `Ali's judgement.

It seems like you're pulling a 720 on us, the author is telling you that there exists authentic chains for this hadith, he is also quoting the same matn with the correct version. So what is the point? My point is that how can you have dozens of reports with "Ali being the best judge" found in all the versions of this hadith in different manuscripts weak and strong, then you come all of a sudden and say "this manscript didn't have the phrase Ali is the best judge".

All of these hadith are shawahid for this phrase including sahih narrations, are you implying that these narrators corrupted the hadith and added Ali is the best judge or that they took from weak material all of them at the same time? This is my point, none the less I provided you with two authentic narrations of the same hadith in two different books that has his phrase. So your theory that "Ibn majah's" manuscript is corrupted" doesn't hold any weight.

Now, do you accept that Imam Ali [as] is the best judge on earth after the prophet?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 02:27:54 AM
قال ابن كثير في التفسير: قال شعبة بن الحجاج، عن سماك بن خالد بن عرعرة، أنه سمع عليا- رضي الله عنه- وشعبة أيضا عن القاسم بن أبي بزة، عن أبي الطفيل، أنه سمع عليا- رضي الله عنه- وثبت أيضا من غير وجه عن أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب- رضي الله عنه- أنه صعد منبر الكوفة فقال: لا تسألوني عن آية في كتاب الله تعالى ولا عن سنة عن رسول الله- صلى الله عليه وسلم- إلا أنبأتكم بذلك. فقام ابن الكواء، فقال: يا أمير المؤمنين، ما معنى قوله تعالى: «وَالذَّارِياتِ ذَرْواً» ؟ قال علي- رضي الله عنه: الريح.

Ibn Katheer says

" Shuaba from ibn khaalid that he heard from Ali [as] and shuaba also from Al qaasim ibn abi bazza from ibn abi tufayl that he heard from Ali and it is also proven from more than one ways on Ameer al mumineen Ali ibn abi talib [as] that he ascended the pulpit in kufa and said " You do not ask me about the book of Allah nor on the sunnah of the messsenger of Allah except that I inform you of it" !

So they asked him " Ya ameer al mumineen What is the meaning of the verse  الذَّارِياتِ ذَرْواً So he responded "the wind.

Then they asked him about the verse " فَالْحامِلاتِ وِقْراً so he said the accounting.

Then they asked him about the verse فَالْجارِياتِ يُسْراً so he said, the ships.

Then they asked him about the verse فَالْمُقَسِّماتِ أَمْراً so he said, the angels.


Are you telling me that Ali [as] being described as the best judge and the one who the companions relied upon for their tafseer of both the sunnah and Qur'an didn't know what he was talking about?

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 28, 2015, 04:11:27 AM
Are you telling me that Ali [as] being described as the best judge and the one who the companions relied upon for their tafseer of both the sunnah and Qur'an didn't know what he was talking about?
There is NO AUTHENTIC narration which says that Ali(r.a) made tafseer of any verse of Quran to claim inheritance from Prophet Mohammad(pbuh), for his wife. Nor did he make tafseer to claim it as gift. You are just clutching at straws by forcing Sunnis to accept munkar(denounced) traditions from terrible chains to prove your flimsy argument.

As for the advice of Ali(ra), to ask him about tafseer, then he was not unique to it, Check this out:
Quote
We also find in Sahih al-Bukhari that ibn Mas`oud said:

وَاللَّهِ الَّذِي لَا إِلَهَ غَيْرُهُ مَا أُنْزِلَتْ سُورَةٌ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ إِلَّا أَنَا أَعْلَمُ أَيْنَ أُنْزِلَتْ، وَلَا أُنْزِلَتْ آيَةٌ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ إِلَّا أَنَا أَعْلَمُ فِيمَ أُنْزِلَتْ، وَلَوْ أَعْلَمُ أَحَدًا أَعْلَمَ مِنِّي بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ تُبَلِّغُهُ الْإِبِلُ، لَرَكِبْتُ إِلَيْهِ

“By Allah the one and only, not one Surah descended from the book of Allah except that I know when it was revealed, nor was an Ayah from Allah’s book revealed except that I am the most knowledgeable about its cause of revelation, if I knew that anybody had more knowledge than I in Allah’s book in a location I can reach with my camel, I would have traveled to him.”

Even Imam al-Shafi`i would say as in Sunan al-Bayhaqi:

سَلُونِي مَا شِئْتُمْ أُجِبْكُمْ مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ  وَمِنْ سُنَّةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ

“Ask me whatever you wish, I will answer with Allah’s book and the Sunnah of Rasul-Allah (saw).”

However the crux of the matter is that, Ali(ra) gained knowledge from Abu Bakr(ra), which shows that Ali(ra) was not aware of some Islamic knowledge. Here is an example:
Quote

حَدَّثَنَا مُسَدَّدٌ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ، عَنْ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ الثَّقَفِيِّ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ رَبِيعَةَ الأَسَدِيِّ، عَنْ أَسْمَاءَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ الْفَزَارِيِّ، قَالَ سَمِعْتُ عَلِيًّا، - رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ - يَقُولُ كُنْتُ رَجُلاً إِذَا سَمِعْتُ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم حَدِيثًا نَفَعَنِي اللَّهُ مِنْهُ بِمَا شَاءَ أَنْ يَنْفَعَنِي وَإِذَا حَدَّثَنِي أَحَدٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ اسْتَحْلَفْتُهُ فَإِذَا حَلَفَ لِي صَدَّقْتُهُ قَالَ وَحَدَّثَنِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَصَدَقَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ - رضى الله عنه - أَنَّهُ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ ‏"‏ مَا مِنْ عَبْدٍ يُذْنِبُ ذَنْبًا فَيُحْسِنُ الطُّهُورَ ثُمَّ يَقُومُ فَيُصَلِّي رَكْعَتَيْنِ ثُمَّ يَسْتَغْفِرُ اللَّهَ إِلاَّ غَفَرَ اللَّهُ لَهُ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ ثُمَّ قَرَأَ هَذِهِ الآيَةَ ‏{‏ وَالَّذِينَ إِذَا فَعَلُوا فَاحِشَةً أَوْ ظَلَمُوا أَنْفُسَهُمْ ذَكَرُوا اللَّهَ ‏}‏ إِلَى آخِرِ الآيَةِ ‏.‏
 Asma’ bint al-Hakam said: I heard Ali say: I was a man; when I heard a tradition from the Messenger of Allah(saw), Allah benefited me with it as much as He willed. But when some one of his companions narrated a tradition to me I adjured him. When he took an oath, I testified him. AbuBakr narrated to me a tradition, and AbuBakr narrated truthfully. He said: I heard the apostle of Allah (saw) saying: When a servant (of Allah) commits a sin, and he performs ablution well, and then stands and prays two rak’ahs, and asks pardon of Allah, Allah pardons him. He then recited this verse: “And those who, when they commit indecency or wrong their souls, remember Allah” (Al-Qur’an 3:135). (Sunan Abi Dawud #1521; Grading: Sahih).

So notice that there is proof that Ali(ra) received knowledge of Sunnah from Abu Bakr(ra), where as there is no proof that Abu Bakr(ra) received knowledge from Ali(ra). Therefore consider the matter of inheritance too one of the issues regarding which Ali(ra) and other Ahli bait weresn't aware, but they received knowledge from their Shiekh Abu Bakr.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 28, 2015, 04:34:00 AM
As for the issue of bringing the issue of Ali(ra) being the best judge then this has nothing to do with the topic, because Ali(ra) didn't make any judgement, infact during his reign he kept the properties the same way they were, he didn't revoke the judgement of Abu Bakr(ra) and Umar(ra) over Fadak.

And even if it is supposed that Ali(ra) made any judgement, then since when did a judge became impeccable? The judges are prone to error, especially in cases where they aren't aware of hadeeth of Prophet(pbuh). Take example of Ali(ra) making a wrong judgement when he wasn't aware of the hadeeth.

Quote
Ja’far b Muhammad reported on the authority of his father, Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. Husain from jabir bin Abdullah:  Ali came from the Yemen with the sacrificial animals for the Prophet(saw) and found Fatimah(ra) to be one among those who had put off Ihram and had put on dyed clothes and had applied antimony. He (Hadrat’Ali) showed disapproval to it, whereupon she said: My father has commanded me to do this. He (the narrator) said that ‘Ali used to say in Iraq: I went to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) showing annoyance at Fatimah for what she had done, and asked the (verdict) of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) regarding what she had narrated from him, and told him that I was angry with her, whereupon he(saw) said: She has told the truth, she has told the truth.(Sahi Muslim, Book 7 ,Number 2803).

So I guess arguing over Ali being the best judge itself is pointless, because Hertz needs something to keep beating behind the bush.


Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 04:35:17 AM
Quote
There is NO AUTHENTIC narration which says that Ali(r.a) made tafseer of any verse of Quran to claim inheritance from Prophet Mohammad(pbuh), for his wife. Nor did he make tafseer to claim it as gift. You are just clutching at straws by forcing Sunnis to accept munkar(denounced) traditions from terrible chains to prove your flimsy argument.

So you're saying that Imam Ali [as] when asking for Fadak for years didn't know of the existence of Surah maryam?

Lol.

Quote
As for the advice of Ali(ra), to ask him about tafseer, then he was not unique to it, Check this out:

We don't care what your book says about ibn Masud, habibi give me a sahih tradition that says Abu bakr didn't have a shadow and would talk to the angels, it doesn't change the premise of the argument. The premise if the argument is simple....

Was Imam Ali [as] extremely knowledgeable of the Qur'an and Sunnah?

And secondly at the same time as this, was Imam Ali [as] the best judge on earth including being a better judge than ibn masu'd, umar, and Ab?

You bringing me narrations about X person, and this person was also very smart, and this person was promised paradise, etc etc has no bearing whatsoever on anything I'm asking you.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 04:40:59 AM
Quote
As for the issue of bringing the issue of Ali(ra) being the best judge then this has nothing to do with the topic, because Ali(ra) didn't make any judgement, infact during his reign he kept the properties the same way they were, he didn't revoke the judgement of Abu Bakr(ra) and Umar(ra) over Fadak.

And even if it is supposed that Ali(ra) made any judgement, then since when did a judge became impeccable? The judges are prone to error, especially in cases where they aren't aware of hadeeth of Prophet(pbuh). Take example of Ali(ra) making a wrong judgement when he wasn't aware of the hadeeth.

Who brought this guy to speak to me?

Imam Ali [as] in your own authentic bukhari requested Fadak from Abu bakr and umar rejecting their interpretation of the hadiths they brought including their interpretation of the Qur'an.

Why do you think Hani and his buds are working so hard to weaken this hadith?

Also no one is telling you that Imam Ali [as] is masum, I'm just asking you a simple question which you haven't even answered yourself.

If Imam Ali [as] is the best judge on earth after the prophet (the meaning of a judge is someone who analyzes evidences and makes a ruling), including being one of the most knowledgeable companions to have ever lived, is it likely that he would make a mistake on a simple inheritance law and persist on this mistake for years and years?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Farid on July 28, 2015, 07:10:51 AM
Brother Abu Ja'afar, the hadith about Ali being the best judge, also know as Hadith Arham Umati bi Umati Abu Bakr and also known as Hadith Aalamakum bil Fara'idh Zaid, is a famous hadith of Fadha'il that praises many companions, each of them excelling in a merit over the other. Yet, it was weakened by many early scholars. Ibn Abdul Hadi also wrote a book about its weakness. See Majmu' Rasa'il Al Hafith Abdul Hadi p. 45-81. Mashhoor Al Salman also wrote a book in which hr gathers all the statements of scholars that weakened it.

In short, the narrator from Anas didn't hear this hadith from him. Most narrators narrate this hadith from him from the Prophet peace be upon him. Yet, some put between them Anas, which makes the hadith seem authentic and connected.

We can discuss this in detail if you like.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 10:06:41 AM
Before we do anything, I would like you to confirm that there is no manuscript error and they were wrong in regards to this.

Also I find it funny how Sunnis are always fast to weaken something that is in their books whenever a hadith is brought to them, they quickly jump to "the chain is not authentic".


This hadith is authentic that is found in your books, can you please prove that abdullah ibn yazid did not take this hadith from Anas ibn Malik?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Farid on July 28, 2015, 11:20:11 AM
Who said it was a manuscript error? I said it was an error.

Nobody weakened this hadith because Shias are using it against us. It has been weakenes in the fourth and fifth centuries by Al Daraqutni, Abu Nuaym, Al Hakim, Al Bayhaqi, and Ibn Abd Al Barr.

There is not dispute that the narrator heard hadiths from Anas, but the argument is that he didn't hear this hadith, except for the part about Abu Ubaidah.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 11:52:20 AM
You're wrong regarding this hadith, and Inshallah it will bear clear.

1- Show me why Abi qilaaba didn't hear this hadith from Anas. (So convenient that he happen just not to hear this hadith).

2- Show me where Hakim, bayhaqi, and all these scholars you are quoting weakened the chain that I gave above.

Because many scholars from the past and present strengthen this chain, including Ibn baz, arnaut, and albani from the present day Ulema.

Regarding the manscrusipt error, then your comrades are claiming that Ibn Majah's manuscript is missing the phrase "Ali is the best judge".


So which is it boys?

Is it tadlees or manuscript error?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 28, 2015, 12:20:01 PM
Imam Ali [ra], as I have conceded before so as to not lose sight of the main issue, was the best judge.  The "best judge", in his best judgment, did not take back Fadak (when he could have easily done so) and he assumed the stance of Abu Bakr [ra] regarding Fadak.  Majority of Muslims have followed suit.  Shias, on the other hand, think they have a case and an even better judgment than the "best judge".

If Abu Bakr [ra] was the cause of injustice, then Imam Ali [ra] was an accomplice in this crime. 

Since Imam Ali [ra] did not take Fadak, brother Herz, was the decision due to his infallibility or independent reasoning?  Which one?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:23:33 PM
These are your modern scholars opinion on this hadith, including the meaning "Ali is the best judge".


2 - أرحم أمتي بأمتي أبو بكر، وأشدهم في دين الله عمر، وأصدقهم حياء عثمان، وأقضاهم علي بن أبي طالب، وأقرؤهم أبي بن كعب، وأعلمهم بالحلال والحرام معاذ، وأفرضهم زيد بن ثابت، ألا وإن لكل أمة أمينا وأمين هذه الأمة أبو عبيدة بن الجراح.
الراوي: - المحدث: ابن باز - المصدر: حاشية بلوغ المرام لابن باز - الصفحة أو الرقم: 564
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح

Ibn Baz: Its chain is sahih.

 أرحم أمتي بأمتي أبو بكر وأشدهم في دين الله عمر وأصدقهم حياء عثمان وأقضاهم علي بن أبي طالب وأقرؤهم لكتاب الله أبي بن كعب وأعلمهم بالحلال والحرام معاذ بن جبل وأفرضهم زيد بن ثابت ألا وإن لكل أمة أمينا وأمين هذه الأمة أبو عبيدة بن الجراح
الراوي: أنس بن مالك المحدث: الألباني - المصدر: صحيح ابن ماجه - الصفحة أو الرقم: 125
خلاصة حكم المحدث: صحيح

Albani : Its chain is sahih.

أرأف أمتي بأمتي أبو بكر ، وأشدهم في دين الله عمر ، وأصدقهم حياء عثمان ، وأقضاهم علي ، وأفرضهم زيد بن ثابت ، وأقرؤهم أبي ، وأعلمهم بالحلال والحرام معاذ بن جبل ، ألا وإن لكل أمة أمينا ، وأمين هذه الأمة أبو عبيدة بن الجراح
الراوي: عبدالله بن عمر المحدث: الألباني - المصدر: صحيح الجامع - الصفحة أو الرقم: 868
خلاصة حكم المحدث: صحيح

Albani says again in his jaami3 , Sahih.

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ، حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ، عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، أَنَّ ّرَسُولَ اللَّهِ (ص) قَالَ: " أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ، وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، أَلَا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا، وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ "، 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 "
الحكم على المتن: صحيح
إسناده متصل ، رجاله ثقات

Muhammad abdul baaqi regarding the chain I gave you says : The judgement upon the matn is that it is sahih, the chain is connected, and its men are thiqaat.


Next is Muhammad Uthman Al-5asht, he brings us a lot of information regarding this.

يا علي لك سبع خصال، لا يحاجك فيها أحد، وكلها واهية، وأثبت منها كلها أنه (ص) بعث عليا قاضيا إلى اليمن، قال: يا رسول اللَّه، بعثتني أقضي بينهم، وأنا شاب لا أدري ما القضاء، فضرب رسول اللَّه (ص) في صدره، وقال: اللَّهم اهده وثبت لسانه، قال: فوالذي فلق الحبة ما شككت في قضاء بين اثنين، رواه أبو داود، والحاكم، وابن ماجه، والبزار، والترمذي، من طرق عن علي أحسنها رواية البزار عن عمرو بن مرة عن عبد اللَّه بن سلمة عن علي، وفي إسناده عمرو بن أبي المقدام، واختلف فيه على عمرو بن مرة، فرواه شعبة عنه عن أبي البَخْتَري، قال: حدثني من سمع عليا، أخرجه أبو يعلى وسنده صحيح

This hadith contains the dua of the prophet when he said " Ya Allah guide and make thaabit his tongue" in regards to judgement. Muhammad Uthman says that Abu yuala narrated this hadith with a sahih chain.

He goes on


أقضانا، وأبيٌّ أقرأنا، ونحوه عن أبيٍّ [ ج 1 : ص 98 ] وآخرين، وللحاكم في مستدركه عن ابن مسعود قال: كنا نتحدث أن أقضى أهل المدينة علي، وقال: إنه صحيح، ولم يخرجاه، قلت: ومثل هذه الصيغة حكمها الرفع على الصحيح. قضاء علي، وعلمه، وشجاعته، من المتواترات، فليس في الصحابة من يفوقه في ذلك

He says regarding the judgement of Ali " Sahih and he has not narrated it, this phrase's judgement is that it is be raised to sahih, the judgement of Ali, and his knowledge, and his bravery is from the mutwatiraat and there isn't any companion who surpasses him in this".


Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:29:29 PM
Hadith regarding Ali [as] being the best in judgement has so many chains in your books and is mutawatir that trying  to weaken this hadith is rather ridiculous and a weird tactic from you.

You can play the rijal game all you like, in fact, you can play the rijal game with any hadith you want. This is Sunnism, anything and everything has ikhtilaf in it.

This is why every time a Sunni is confronted with a narration they do not use logic and reasoning, they quickly jump to "the chain is weak". In all my years debating Sunnis this is the most common tactic.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Farid on July 28, 2015, 12:30:22 PM
Read Bayhaqis Baab Tarjeeh Zaid bin Thabit

And chapter 27 of Maarifat Uloom Al Hadith by Al Hakim.

Unlike modern scholars, they have provided evidences to back their claims. Modern scholars gave a hukum based on the apparent chain.


Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:35:05 PM
Read Bayhaqis Baab Tarjeeh Zaid bin Thabit

And chapter 27 of Maarifat Uloom Al Hadith by Al Hakim.

Unlike modern scholars, they have provided evidences to back their claims. Modern scholars gave a hukum based on the apparent chain.

No you misunderstood, you said that Abi qilaaba did not hear from Anas. Can you provide evidence from Bayhaqi and Haakim where they proved this?

Can you yourself prove that Abi qilaaba did not hear from Anas?

We can play "this scholar said this" game back and forth it won't help you. Bring the evidence with the nass or accept the chain as sahih like your scholars did.

Because many early scholars far better than Al haakim and bayhaqi graded this chain sahih.

Modern scholars do research on the early scholars and see what they say regarding hadith, I'm sure you'd agree so your claim is baseless.

Also modern scholars were not the only ones who graded this hadith as sahih many early scholars did as well.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:39:10 PM
Heres chapter 27 of Marifat al ulum by al hakim

النَّوْعُ الثَّامِنُ مِنْ هَذَا الْعِلْمُ , مَعْرِفَةُ الْمَرَاسِيلِ الْمُخْتَلَفِ فِي الاحْتِجَاجِ بِهَا , وَهَذَا النَّوْعُ مِنْ عِلْمِ الْحَدِيثِ صَعْبٌ , قَلَّ مَا يَهْتَدِي إِلَيْهِ إِلا الْمُتَبَحِّرُ فِي هَذَا الْعِلْمِ , فَإِنَّ مَشَايِخَ الْحَدِيثِ لَمْ يَخْتَلِفُوا فِي أَنَّ الْحَدِيثَ الْمُرْسَلَ هُوَ الَّذِي يَرْوِيهِ الْمُحَدِّثُ بَأَسَانِيدَ مُتَّصِلَةٍ إِلَي التَّابِعِيِّ ، فَيَقُولُ التَّابِعِيُّ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهُ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ , وَأَكْثَرُ مَا تُرْوَى الْمَرَاسِيلُ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيِّبِ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ مَكَّةَ عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ أَبِي رَبَاحٍ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ مِصْرَ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ أَبِي هِلالٍ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الشَّامِ عَنْ مَكْحُولٍ الدِّمَشْقِيِّ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْبَصْرَةِ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ أَبِي الْحَسَنِ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْكُوفَةِ عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ يَزِيدَ النَّخَعِيِّ , وَقَدْ يُرْوَى الْحَدِيثُ بَعْدَ الْحَدِيثِ عَنْ غَيْرِهِمْ مِنَ التَّابِعِينَ , إِلا أَنَّ الْغَلَبَةَ لِرِوَايَاتِهِمْ ، وَأَصَحَّهَا مَرَاسِيلُ سَعِيدُ بْنُ الْمُسَيِّبِ , وَالدَّلِيلُ عَلَيْهِ أَنَّ سَعِيدًا مِنْ أَوْلادِ الصَّحَابَةِ , فَإِنَّ أَبَاهُ الْمُسَيِّبَ بْنَ حَزْنٍ مِنْ أَصْحَابِ الشَّجَرَةِ وَبَيْعَةِ الرِّضْوَانِ , وَقَدْ أَدْرَكَ سَعِيدٌ عُمَرَ وَعُثْمَانَ وَعَلِيًّا وَطَلْحَةَ وَالزُّبَيْرَ إِلَى آخِرِ الْعَشْرَةِ , وَلَيْسَ فِي جَمَاعَةِ التَّابِعِينَ مَنْ أَدْرَكَهُمْ ، وَسَمِعَ مِنْهُمْ غَيْرُ سَعِيدٍ وَقَيْسِ بْنِ أَبِي حَازِمٍ , ثُمَّ مَعَ هَذَا فَإِنَّهُ فَقِيهُ أَهْلِ الْحِجَازِ وَمُفْتِيهِمْ ، وَأَوَّلُ فُقَهَاءِ السَّبْعَةِ الَّذِينَ يَعُدُّ مَالِكُ بْنُ أَنَسٍ إِجْمَاعَهُمْ إِجْمَاعَ كَافَّةِ النَّاسِ.

أَبَا عَبَّاسٍ مُحَمَّدَ بْنَ يَعْقُوبَ ، يَقُولُ : سَمِعْتُ الْعَبَّاسَ الدُّورِيَّ ، يَقُولُ : سَمِعْتُ يَحْيَى بْنَ مَعِينٍ ، يَقُولُ : " أَصَحُّ الْمَرَاسِيلِ مَرَاسِيلُ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيِّبِ ، وَأَيْضًا فَقَدْ تَأَمَّلَ الأَئِمَّةُ الْمُتَقَدِّمُونَ مَرَاسِيلَهُ ، فَوَجَدُوهَا بِأَسَانِيدَ صَحِيحَةٍ ، وَهَذِهِ الشَّرَائِطُ لَمْ تُوجَدْ فِي مَرَاسِيلِ غَيْرِهِ ، فَهَذِهِ صِفَةُ الْمَرَاسِيلِ عِنْدَ أَهْلِ الْحَدِيثِ ".

أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ حَنْبَلَ ، قَالَ : وَجَدْتُ بِخَطِّ أَبِي ، ثنا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عِيسَى مَوْلَى ابْنِ الْمُبَارَكِ ، قَالَ " حَدَّثْتُ ابْنَ الْمُبَارَكِ بِحَدِيثٍ لأَبِي بَكْرِ بْنِ عَيَّاشٍ ، عَنْ عَاصِمٍ ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، قَالَ : حَسَنٌ.

فَقُلْتُ لابْنِ الْمُبَارَكِ : إِنَّهُ لَيْسَ عَنْهُ إِسْنَادٌ.

فَقَالَ : إِنَّ عَاصِمًا يَحْتَمِلُ لَهُ أَنْ يَقُولَ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ".

قَالَ : فَغَدَوْتُ إِلَى أَبِي بَكْرٍ ، فَإِذَا ابْنُ الْمُبَارَكِ قَدْ سَبَقَنِي إِلَيْهِ وَهُوَ إِلَى جَنْبِهِ فَظَنَنْتُهُ قَدْ سَأَلَهُ عَنْهُ.

قَالَ الْحَكَمُ : فَأَمَّا مَشَايِخَ أَهْلِ الْكُوفَةِ فَكُلُّ مَنْ أَرْسَلَ الْحَدِيثِ عَنِ التَّابِعِينَ وَأَتْبَاعِ التَّابِعِينَ وَمَنْ بَعْدَهُمْ مِنَ الْعُلَمَاءِ فَإِنَّهُ عِنْدَهُمْ مُرْسَلٌ مُحْتَجٌّ بِهِ ، وَلَيْسَ كَذَلِكَ عِنْدَنَا ، فَإِنَّ مُرْسَلُ أَتْبَاعِ التَّابِعِينَ عِنْدَنَا مُعْضَلٌ ، وَسَيَأْتِي ذِكْرُهُ وَشَرْحُهُ بَعْدَ هَذَا إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ.


I just read it, it doesn't even talk about Abi qilaaba.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 12:48:03 PM
Bayhaqis book

11862 [ ص: 210 ] باب ترجيح قول زيد بن ثابت على قول غيره من الصحابة - رضي الله عنهم أجمعين - في علم الفرائض .

( أخبرنا ) أبو الحسين بن بشران العدل ببغداد ، أنا أبو جعفر محمد بن عمرو بن البختري الرزاز ، ثنا حنبل بن إسحاق ، ثنا قبيصة بن عقبة ، ثنا سفيان بن سعيد ، عن خالد ، وعاصم ، عن أبي قلابة ، عن أنس بن مالك ، قال : قال رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم : " أرحم أمتي أبو بكر ، وأشدهم في دين الله عمر ، وأصدقهم حياء عثمان ، وأفرضهم زيد ، وأقرؤهم أبي ، وأعلمهم بالحلال والحرام معاذ ، وإن لكل أمة أمينا ، وأمين هذه الأمة أبو عبيدة بن الجراح " .

وكذلك رواه قطبة بن العلاء ، عن سفيان ، عن خالد الحذاء ، عن أبي قلابة ، عن أنس موصولا .

وكذلك رواه وهيب بن خالد ، وعبد الوهاب بن عبد المجيد الثقفي ، عن خالد الحذاء موصولا .

He says that the chain with qutba ibn 3la2, from sufyan from khalid from Abi qilaaba from Anas is connected.

He also says again that the chain with waheeb ibn khaalid and abdul wahaab from khalid is connected.

Bayhayi is disgareeing with you, he is saying that Abi qilaaba from Anas is not disconnected.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 28, 2015, 01:13:19 PM
Herz, on ShiaChat, is gloating that he is going Godzilla mode on us.  I am glad he thinks he is tasting some success after hitting rock bottom on ShiaChat.  He did not even know that Fadak was Fay.

For the moment, I am suspended from ShiaChat because of what I said - it is understandable, I have no complains - so allow me to bring everyone's attention back to the topic at hand.  FADAK!

Even if we concede that Imam Ali [ra] was the best judge, how does that prove anything?  In fact, the best judge never reclaimed Fadak, even when he had all the power to do so.

Obviously, by stretching this out, Herz wants to prove that he knows better than the best judge.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 01:23:49 PM
Here is my very first post on that thread....

Was Fadak the property of Rasulallah (saw) and how was it granted to the prophet (saw) as “fay”?

The famous Shafii Mujtahid who the current school relies upon today for mutamad rulings Imam al nawawi says the following in his famous sharh:
 
وكذلك نصف أرض فدك صالح أهلها بعد فتح خيبر على نصف أرضها وكان خالصا له وكذلك ثلث أرض وادي القرى أخذه في الصلح حين صالح أهلها اليهود وكذلك حصنان من حصون خيبر…. فكانت هذه كلها ملكا لرسول الله خاصة لا حق فيها أحد غيره
 
“Half the Land of Fadak, which was given by the Jews following the peace treaty, was purely the property of Rasool Allah (s). Similarly, one third of the Valley of Qura which was given by the Jews after the peace treaty and two forts of Khayber…all these were the exclusive properties of the Prophet (s) and no one else had a share of it”.


I never said that Fadak isn't Fay habibi.

I said that the narration you're quoting from Al-Kafi isn't talking about Fadak, its talking about fay that has remained with the prophet [saw] until his death which then goes to Imam Ali [as].

However the Shia don't believe that Fadak remained with the prophet [saw] until his death, we believe he gave it away, thus this hadith isn't talking about Fadak.

I never said that Fadak isn't fay, the problem is 720 you have a reading disorder.

Also let Farid and Hani speak, just sit down.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Farid on July 28, 2015, 01:25:58 PM
How about you try again?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 01:27:36 PM
Why did they suspend you?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 28, 2015, 01:49:39 PM
Here is what you said in post # 172:

"The hadith isn't talking about Fadak, this hadith is under the chapter title of Khums and is talking about that property which the prophet has in his possession from Fai and during his death [saw]."

You said that in response to the following narration:
Abu Abdallah (a.s) said:”Al anfal is such property for the acquisition of which no camels or horses are use and no armed expeditions are undertaken.  It is the property that may come as a result of negotiated settlement or certain people would give with their own hands, may come from a barren land or from inside the valleys.  Such properties belong to the Messenger of Allah and it will belong to the Imam(leader) after the Messenger of Allah.  The Imam(leader) will spend them as he may consider proper.”(Al Kafi, Chapter The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums, page 186).[Majlisi in Mirat al Uqul vol 6, page 255 graded it as Hasan(good)]

There is no evidence that Fadak was ever managed by anyone else other than the Prophet [saw], up until his death, therefore, it never left his possession.  Hence, it leaves no room for any "gifting" argument.  A transaction through which you give a certain something to someone while maintaining possession of it does not fit the definition of a gift.  You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Lastly, try not to refer to me as "habibi" after having called me "Nasibi720" on ShiaChat.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 28, 2015, 01:51:06 PM
Why did they suspend you?

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235031659-i-refuse-to-pray-with-sunni-muslims-anymore/

I commend the moderators for at least not editing my comment.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 01:54:25 PM
This is why I don't like speaking to you, you have 0 reading comprehension.

Quote
Here is what you said in post # 172:

"The hadith isn't talking about Fadak, this hadith is under the chapter title of Khums and is talking about that property which the prophet has in his possession from Fai and during his death [saw]."

You said that in response to the following narration:
Abu Abdallah (a.s) said:”Al anfal is such property for the acquisition of which no camels or horses are use and no armed expeditions are undertaken.  It is the property that may come as a result of negotiated settlement or certain people would give with their own hands, may come from a barren land or from inside the valleys.  Such properties belong to the Messenger of Allah and it will belong to the Imam(leader) after the Messenger of Allah.  The Imam(leader) will spend them as he may consider proper.”(Al Kafi, Chapter The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums, page 186).[Majlisi in Mirat al Uqul vol 6, page 255 graded it as Hasan(good)]

There is no evidence that Fadak was ever managed by anyone else other than the Prophet [saw], up until his death, therefore, it never left his possession.  Hence, it leaves no room for any "gifting" argument.  A transaction through which you give a certain something to someone while maintaining possession of it does not fit the definition of a gift.  You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Lastly, try not to refer to me as "habibi" after having called me "Nasibi720" on ShiaChat.

I said the hadith isn't talking about Fadak, its talking about fay that remains with the prophet until he passes away.

Fadak did not remain with the prophet until he passed away.

Thus it concludes, the hadith isn't talking about Fadak.

Do you understand now rain man?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 01:57:11 PM
Hani already admitted that the prophet [saw] owned and gave away Fadak.

So you're arguing with me nothing. :)

If he owned and gave away Fadak to the people on the order of Allah, then there is nothing stopping him from giving it to Fatima [as] on the order of Allah.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 28, 2015, 02:14:51 PM
Hani says:

Quote
The fact that he's quoting this chain and claiming "authentic" shows deep bias and proves that he isn't qualified to even research:

قرأت على الحسين بن يزيد الطحان ، حدثنا : سعيد بن خثيم ، عن فضيل ، عن عطية ، عن أبي سعيد

The chain which claims that this land was gifted to Fatimah is composed of the following men:

Husayn
Sa`eed
Fudayl
`Atiyyah

All four men were Koufan and therefore Shiite in their beliefs. This on its own would be enough to cast doubt on the content of whatever they're going to narrate about Fadak.

Since abuJay is accepting of Ibn Hajar's opinions suddenly, let's rely on Ibn Hajar to see what he says about these four men.

Husayn: Ibn Hajar doesn't even mention him, the only opinion I spotted was abu Hatim's in al-Tahdheeb who said "Layyin" meaning "His narration has weakness(softness)."

Sa`eed: Truthful, said to be Shia, has mistakes.

Fudayl: Truthful, makes errors, said to be Shia.

`Atiyyah: Truthful, makes a lot of mistakes, he was a Shia who did Tadlees.

So abuJay's "authentic chain" about a matter related to banu Hashim is composed of four Koufan Shiites narrating what supports their innovation. A man who has weakness in his narrations reporting from a man who has mistakes in his narrations, who in turn narrates from a man who makes errors in narrating, who finally relates this story from a man who makes plenty of mistakes in his reports.

I'd feel ashamed if this were a chain I relied upon to prove my fragile beliefs but shame is a rare commodity it seems.

(Yes, the chain is terrible).

First narrator Hussayn

ذكره ابْن حبان في الثقات

Ibn Hibaan mentions him in his thiqaat.

Second narrator Saeed
يَحْيَى بْن معين : ثقة

Yahya ibn maeen: Thiqa

Third narrator Fudhayl

وثقه سفيان بن عيينة ، ويحيى بن معين

Yahya ibn maeen and Sufyan say he's thiqa.

Fourth narrator Atiya

Yaha Ibn maeen gives him tawtheeq, Timrizi includes him in an authentic chain, many other scholars give him tawtheeq.

Regarding the contradicting reports that yahya ibn maeen said he is weak, than these reports are weak.

Ibn Hajr said he is saduq but does tadlees.

Regarding the accusation that he did tadlees than this has already been answered that in fact that he didn't do tadlees. They accused him of making tadlees from al-kalbi as already mentioned on the other forum.








Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 28, 2015, 02:28:34 PM
Fadak did not remain with the prophet until he passed away.

WHAT?  Then please explain this narration in the light of what you said.

It has been narrated on the authority of Umar, who said: The properties abandoned by Banu Nadir were the ones which Allaah bestowed upon His Prophet for which no expedition was undertaken either with cavalry or camelry.  These properties were particularly meant for the Prophet (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam).  He would meet the annual expenditure of his family from the income thereof, and would spend what remained for purchasing horses and weapons as preparation for Jihad.  (Sahih Muslim, hadith 4347)

The Prophet [saw], by your logic, would go to Fatima [ra] asking for yearly sustenance for himself and his wives [ra]? 

Furthermore, your speculation holds no weight in the face of the following narration:

"The Apostle of Allah received three things exclusively to himself: Banu an-Nadir, Khaybar and Fadak. The Banu an-Nadir property was kept for his emergent needs, Fadak for travellers, and Khaybar was divided by the Apostle of Allah into three sections: two for Muslims, and one as a contribution for his family. If anything remained after making the contribution of his family, he divided it among the poor Emigrants."  (Sunan Abi Dawood Book 19, Number 2961)
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 28, 2015, 02:29:37 PM
Hani already admitted that the prophet [saw] owned and gave away Fadak.

I would like to see where he made such an admission.  Furthermore, you are trying make it appear as though we disagree over Fadak whereas you (Shias) cannot argue without flip-flopping between "gift" and "inheritance", a dichotomy.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 28, 2015, 02:57:00 PM


Fourth narrator Atiya

Yaha Ibn maeen gives him tawtheeq, Timrizi includes him in an authentic chain, many other scholars give him tawtheeq.

Regarding the contradicting reports that yahya ibn maeen said he is weak, than these reports are weak.

Ibn Hajr said he is saduq but does tadlees.

Regarding the accusation that he did tadlees than this has already been answered that in fact that he didn't do tadlees. They accused him of making tadlees from al-kalbi as already mentioned on the other forum.
Atiyya awfi has been declared by Giant Sunni rijalists. He has been weakened by more than 40 Scholars, none but only a biased innovator tries to argue that Atiyya is reliable, even after seeing ample evidence proving his weakness.

The weakness of atiyya is of two types, first is he was mudallis, second is that  he was weak(in memory due to which he used to make excessive mistakes).

The weakness of Atiyya is explained(mufassar), hence it takes over the praise(tadeel) given to him. Jarh Mufassar takes over tadeel.

As for the issue of him being Mudallis, then scholars of Ahle Sunnah have accepted, even Ibn Hajr asqalani, who have included atiyya in tabqat mudalliseen.

As for Kalbi being the one exposing Atiyya awfi then both Kalbi and Atiyya were Shiites, and Atiyya was Kalbi's student, so for Sunnis this is indeed acceptable.

Now you might argue that why are we accepting or why did the big Sunni scholars like ibn hajar accept the testimony of kalbi? The answer is that, the narrations of Atiyya are a proof in itself. You will find Atiyya attributing strange or odd reports to Abu Saeed(ra), which you won't find from any of his other students. Which is a real proof that Kalbi was right when he said Atiyya was Mudallis.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 28, 2015, 03:25:44 PM
Also, let us not forget that the narration by Attiya is also rejected in the light of its content.  It says that after Surah Al-Israa verse 26 was revealed, the Prophet [saw] gave Fadak to Fatima [ra].  The verse was revealed in Mecca since it occurs in a Meccan surah.  Nearly all scholars, with the exception of Shia scholars (surprise surprise), agree that the verse was revealed in Mecca.

Therefore, the report is rejected based on its chain and matn.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 28, 2015, 03:51:16 PM
Quote
There is NO AUTHENTIC narration which says that Ali(r.a) made tafseer of any verse of Quran to claim inheritance from Prophet Mohammad(pbuh), for his wife. Nor did he make tafseer to claim it as gift. You are just clutching at straws by forcing Sunnis to accept munkar(denounced) traditions from terrible chains to prove your flimsy argument.

So you're saying that Imam Ali [as] when asking for Fadak for years didn't know of the existence of Surah maryam?

Lol.
Fadak belonged to the Caliph after Prophet Mohammad(pbuh), even as per Shiee hadeeth, which you try to misinterpret and were busted. Refer Post #3.

Claims made on assumptions are worthless. So when I said, there is no authentic hadeeth, you came up with an assumption. That's Funny.

And there is no proof that Ali(ra) kept demanding Fadak, there's only an ambiguous report where Ali(ra) and Abbas(ra) disputed with each other and approached Umar(ra) for judgement(LOL IT SEEMS ABBAS DIDN'T KNOW FOR DECADES THAT ALI WAS BEST JUDGE).

And Ismail al-Qazi said:

فقال إسماعيل القاضي فيما رواه الدارقطني من طريقه لم يكن في الميراث إنما تنازعا في ولاية الصدقة وفي صرفها كيف تصرف

‘They(Abbas and Ali) were not disputing about the inheritance, but they were disputing about the charity what they shall be the guardian of and how to distribute it’ (Fathul Bari).

For detailed answer refer Arguemnt 5,6,7 in this article:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/8-sunni-answers-to-shiapens-article-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophetsaw-chapter-eight/


Quote
As for the advice of Ali(ra), to ask him about tafseer, then he was not unique to it, Check this out:

We don't care what your book says about ibn Masud, habibi give me a sahih tradition that says Abu bakr didn't have a shadow and would talk to the angels, it doesn't change the premise of the argument. The premise if the argument is simple....

Was Imam Ali [as] extremely knowledgeable of the Qur'an and Sunnah?

And secondly at the same time as this, was Imam Ali [as] the best judge on earth including being a better judge than ibn masu'd, umar, and Ab?

You bringing me narrations about X person, and this person was also very smart, and this person was promised paradise, etc etc has no bearing whatsoever on anything I'm asking you.

Try to be rational brother I have provided an authentic hadeeth which shows that Abu bakr(ra) has more knowledge regarding Sunnah than Ali(ra). Because Abu Bakr(ra) informed certain hadeeth to Ali(ra) which he did not know. And yes, Ali(ra) was the most knowledgeable Man during his reign WHEN HE SAID THAT ON THE PULPIT, during his Khilafah, but Abu Bakr(ra) was dead by then.

And do you know that Prophet(pbuh) asked to appoint Imam of prayer the man who has more knowledge of Quran and Sunnah, and He(pbuh) himself gave preference to Abubakr(ra) over the rest of Sahaba including Ali(ra) to lead the prayer during his final illness. Isn't it a decisive proof?.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 28, 2015, 04:42:04 PM
You wrote:

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

https://www.islamware.com/app/ (https://www.islamware.com/app/)

(if the link doesn't take you directly to timirzis book, then the hadith number is 151 in Timirzi's book, if you still need help finding it let me know)

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ أَلَا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ 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

Both Timirzi as well as Ibn Majah have this hadith with the exact same chain, with Timirzi also having the phrase "Ali is the best judge among them".]

I went to the website you gave me, in Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Hadith #151 is this:

[حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَلِكِ بْنِ أَبِي الشَّوَارِبِ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ عَنْ بَشِيرِ بْنِ ثَابِتٍ عَنْ حَبِيبِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ النُّعْمَانِ بْنِ بَشِيرٍ قَالَ أَنَا أَعْلَمُ النَّاسِ بِوَقْتِ هَذِهِ الصَّلَاةِ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُصَلِّيهَا لِسُقُوطِ الْقَمَرِ لِثَالِثَةٍ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَبَانَ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ مَهْدِيٍّ عَنْ أَبِي عَوَانَةَ بِهَذَا الْإِسْنَادِ نَحْوَهُ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى رَوَى هَذَا الْحَدِيثَ هُشَيْمٌ عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ عَنْ حَبِيبِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ النُّعْمَانِ بْنِ بَشِيرٍ وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ فِيهِ هُشَيْمٌ عَنْ بَشِيرِ بْنِ ثَابِتٍ وَحَدِيثُ أَبِي عَوَانَةَ أَصَحُّ عِنْدَنَا لِأَنَّ يَزِيدَ بْنَ هَارُونَ رَوَى عَنْ شُعْبَةَ عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ نَحْوَ رِوَايَةِ أَبِي عَوَانَةَ.]

This isn't what you'e referring to I guess?

The only two narrations I found for it were these two in al-Jami`:

#3723

[حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ بْنُ وَكِيعٍ حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ عَنْ دَاوُدَ الْعَطَّارِ عَنْ مَعْمَرٍ عَنْ قَتَادَةَ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ أُبَيٌّ وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينٌ وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ قَالَ هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ لَا نَعْرِفُهُ مِنْ حَدِيثِ قَتَادَةَ إِلَّا مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ وَقَدْ رَوَاهُ أَبُو قِلَابَةَ عَنْ أَنَسٍ عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَحْوَهُ وَالْمَشْهُورُ حَدِيثُ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ.]

#3724

[حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ الثَّقَفِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ أَلَا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا وَإِنَّ أَمِينَ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ]

Now the report you're quoting is abu Musa Muhammad bin al-Muthanna from `Abdul-Wahhab bin `Abdul-Majid from Khalid al-Hadha'. You also say this is in Tirmidhi and it includes `Ali's judgement.

I never found it in Tirmidhi with this chain so maybe you can help me out in that.

However, I found it only in three sources with the exact same chain:

1st in Sunan ibn Majah and we discussed how it's a recent mistake.

2nd in Risalat ibn `Abdul-Hadi and it doesn't contain `Ali's judgement:

قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنُ مَاجَهْ فِي سُنَنِهِ، ثنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، ثنا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ، ثنا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ، عَنْ أَبِي قِلابَةَ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ  قَالَ: " أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، أَلا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا وَإِنَّ أَمِينَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ

As you can see he's actually quoting Ibn Majah's Sunan with the same chain but no mention of `Ali's judgement.

3rd in Sahih ibn Hibban with the same chain without `Ali's judgement:

 وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ خَالِدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ، وَأَبُو مُوسَى، قَالُوا: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ الثَّقَفِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ، عَنْ أَبِي قِلابَةَ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ : " أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَشَدَّهُمْ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينٌ، وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ

So far I don't see where you got this from Tirmidhi.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 28, 2015, 05:27:53 PM
You said:


Quote
[Your comparison of Ronaldo and Messi is laughable, because if Imam Ali [as] is indeed the best judge on earth, then it is extremely unlikely that with all the evidences presented to him he wouldn't know the ruling regarding a simple inheritance law and persist on it for years.]


Your Madhab is laughable, basically human worshipers. There is no Hadith that says "`Ali is the best judge on earth" when you find that let us know. As for `Ali knowing inheritance laws, seems Zayd knew more about Fara'id and inheritance from that narration you insist on quoting. Also he seems to have been reminded of the special prophetic case of inheritance by other Sahabah.



Quote
Regarding your statement that Umar was only saying this hadith after AB passed away then this is also an ad hoc argument without any proof just conjecture that his hadith was said when AB was in the ground nor do you have any proof that abu bakr was the best judge.  Also we shall prove this further as umar is only repeating what the prophet [saw] said.


Add hoc or minus hoc, doesn't matter. Abu Bakr only ruled for two years, `Umar ruled for many years after him so most likely `Umar said it after his death. I add, If `Ali is a good judge this doesn't mean the rest are terrible, your argument that the better judge will always get it right as opposed to the slightly less better ones is laughable and childish. Go ask a lawyer about how some of the biggest judges don't always make sound decisions let alone our case where `Ali seems to have completely forgotten a religious ruling. As for `Ali insisting on it for years, I disagree and based on my reading he never asked for it as an inheritance he only asked to be allowed to manage it due to his close tie to the Prophet (saw). Otherwise it was an injustice on the part of al-`Abbas and `Ali to only split the land between eachother and leave out the rest of the heirs.


Quote
صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم بعث عليا قاضيا إلى اليمن ، قال : يا رسول اللَّه ، بعثتني أقضي بينهم ، وأنا شاب لا أدري ما القضاء ، فضرب رسول اللَّه صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم في صدره ، وقال : اللَّهم اهده وثبت لسانه ، قال : فوالذي فلق الحبة ما شككت في قضاء بين اثنين ، رواه أبو داود ، والحاكم ، وابن ماجه ، والبزار ، والترمذي ، من طرق عن علي أحسنها رواية البزار عن عمرو بن مرة عن عبد اللَّه بن سلمة عن علي ، وفي إسناده عمرو بن أبي المقدام ، واختلف فيه على عمرو بن مرة ، فرواه شعبة عنه عن أبي البَخْتَري ، قال : حدثني من سمع عليا ، أخرجه أبو يعلى وسنده صحيح


" The prophet [saw] sent Ali [as] as a judge to yemen, so Imam Ali [as] said : Ya Rasulallah send me as the best judge between them since I am a still young and do not know Qadha. So the prophet [saw] hit his chest and said "Oh Allah guide and establish his tongue, then Imam Ali said : by the one who split the seed I did not doubt at all judging between two people.


This means that he became a confident judge it doesn't mean his judgements were all correct and that he cannot err. The same way the Prophet (saw) made Du`a' for abu Hurayrah's memory yet he still forgot at the end of the day. Also this happened at the end of the Pophet's (saw) life, are you saying as an Imami that `Ali was such an ignorant man that he couldn't handle a few cases of judgement? I thought he had divine knowledge and guidance according to your myths but here we see a man towards the end of the Prophet's (saw) life, too scared to judge between a few Yemenis.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 28, 2015, 05:40:04 PM
You wrote:


Quote
It seems like you're pulling a 720 on us, the author is telling you that there exists authentic chains for this hadith, he is also quoting the same matn with the correct version. So what is the point? My point is that how can you have dozens of reports with "Ali being the best judge" found in all the versions of this hadith in different manuscripts weak and strong


If there's authentic chains then go ahead and show us some. Gimme like 3 authentic ones from those "dozens".



Quote

Are you telling me that Ali [as] being described as the best judge and the one who the companions relied upon for their tafseer of both the sunnah and Qur'an didn't know what he was talking about?


`Ali didn't say "ONLY I KNOW ABOUT THE QURAN AND SUNNAH", there were loads of scholars among the companions who were relied upon. Your ignorance of this matter is no excuse.



Quote

So you're saying that Imam Ali [as] when asking for Fadak for years didn't know of the existence of Surah maryam?


They asked for Fadak ONLY ONCE during Abu Bakr's reign. `Ali and al-`Abbas, when they came to `Umar, they were not asking for Fadak or Khaybar, they just asked for control of the Sadaqat of Madinah from the property of banu al-Nadeer(Jews) and Mukhayreeq as they believed they were at least entitled to do so.


We read in the books of Sunan:


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.]



Quote

Why do you think Hani and his buds are working so hard to weaken this hadith?


Because it is weak. I don't mind believing that `Ali was the best judge yet was incorrect in his judgement.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 28, 2015, 06:10:38 PM
Your unqualified biased opinion on the chain of `Atiyyah's Hadith.


Last you were quoting Ibn Hajar, now it seems Ibn Hajar's opinions do not suite you since based on his verdict all four narrators make errors and mistakes in their Hadith. You now jump all over the place to pick the Tawtheeq of WHOEVER it is even if most experts weaken a person you will side with the minority who authenticated a man just so you can consider it "Hasan". How misguided you are...


SO here's your post:


Quote
First narrator Hussayn


ذكره ابْن حبان في الثقات


Ibn Hibaan mentions him in his thiqaat.


Second narrator Saeed
يَحْيَى بْن معين : ثقة


Yahya ibn maeen: Thiqa


Third narrator Fudhayl


وثقه سفيان بن عيينة ، ويحيى بن معين


Yahya ibn maeen and Sufyan say he's thiqa.


Fourth narrator Atiya


Yaha Ibn maeen gives him tawtheeq, Timrizi includes him in an authentic chain, many other scholars give him tawtheeq.


Well this report falls right from the first narrator Husayn, since Ibn Hibban makes Tawtheeq of Majaheel, so the man is Majhool and the Hadith is weak. Give us the first guy's Tawtheeq then we'll discuss the other narrators.


Quote
Ibn Hajr said he is saduq but does tadlees.


Oh sorry, let me correct that for you since you appear to have missed a part of what Ibn Hajar said.


Ibn Hajar: "Saduq, makes a lot of mistakes, he was a Shia who did Tadlees."


You Shia are such honest academic folks, very reliable in your selective quotations.


Now Ibn abi Hatim said that the Saduq narrator who makes a lot of mistakes, his narrations in case of Tafarrud are rejected unless they are related to matters of Adab and Zuhd and Akhlaq.


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

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 29, 2015, 01:30:00 PM
Quote
You wrote:

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

https://www.islamware.com/app/

(if the link doesn't take you directly to timirzis book, then the hadith number is 151 in Timirzi's book, if you still need help finding it let me know)

حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ وَأَقْضَاهُمْ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ أَلَا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ 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

Both Timirzi as well as Ibn Majah have this hadith with the exact same chain, with Timirzi also having the phrase "Ali is the best judge among them".]

I went to the website you gave me, in Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Hadith #151 is this:

[حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَلِكِ بْنِ أَبِي الشَّوَارِبِ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ عَنْ بَشِيرِ بْنِ ثَابِتٍ عَنْ حَبِيبِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ النُّعْمَانِ بْنِ بَشِيرٍ قَالَ أَنَا أَعْلَمُ النَّاسِ بِوَقْتِ هَذِهِ الصَّلَاةِ كَانَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُصَلِّيهَا لِسُقُوطِ الْقَمَرِ لِثَالِثَةٍ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَبَانَ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ مَهْدِيٍّ عَنْ أَبِي عَوَانَةَ بِهَذَا الْإِسْنَادِ نَحْوَهُ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى رَوَى هَذَا الْحَدِيثَ هُشَيْمٌ عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ عَنْ حَبِيبِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ النُّعْمَانِ بْنِ بَشِيرٍ وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ فِيهِ هُشَيْمٌ عَنْ بَشِيرِ بْنِ ثَابِتٍ وَحَدِيثُ أَبِي عَوَانَةَ أَصَحُّ عِنْدَنَا لِأَنَّ يَزِيدَ بْنَ هَارُونَ رَوَى عَنْ شُعْبَةَ عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ نَحْوَ رِوَايَةِ أَبِي عَوَانَةَ.]

This isn't what you'e referring to I guess?

The only two narrations I found for it were these two in al-Jami`:

#3723

[حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ بْنُ وَكِيعٍ حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ عَنْ دَاوُدَ الْعَطَّارِ عَنْ مَعْمَرٍ عَنْ قَتَادَةَ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ أُبَيٌّ وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينٌ وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ قَالَ هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ لَا نَعْرِفُهُ مِنْ حَدِيثِ قَتَادَةَ إِلَّا مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ وَقَدْ رَوَاهُ أَبُو قِلَابَةَ عَنْ أَنَسٍ عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَحْوَهُ وَالْمَشْهُورُ حَدِيثُ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ.]

#3724

[حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ الثَّقَفِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ عَنْ أَبِي قِلَابَةَ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلَالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ أَلَا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا وَإِنَّ أَمِينَ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ]

Now the report you're quoting is abu Musa Muhammad bin al-Muthanna from `Abdul-Wahhab bin `Abdul-Majid from Khalid al-Hadha'. You also say this is in Tirmidhi and it includes `Ali's judgement.

I never found it in Tirmidhi with this chain so maybe you can help me out in that.

However, I found it only in three sources with the exact same chain:

1st in Sunan ibn Majah and we discussed how it's a recent mistake.

2nd in Risalat ibn `Abdul-Hadi and it doesn't contain `Ali's judgement:

قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنُ مَاجَهْ فِي سُنَنِهِ، ثنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، ثنا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمَجِيدِ، ثنا خَالِدٌ الْحَذَّاءُ، عَنْ أَبِي قِلابَةَ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ  قَالَ: " أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَشَدُّهُمْ فِي دِينِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، أَلا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينًا وَإِنَّ أَمِينَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ

As you can see he's actually quoting Ibn Majah's Sunan with the same chain but no mention of `Ali's judgement.

3rd in Sahih ibn Hibban with the same chain without `Ali's judgement:

 وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ خَالِدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ بَشَّارٍ، وَأَبُو مُوسَى، قَالُوا: حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ الثَّقَفِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدٌ، عَنْ أَبِي قِلابَةَ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ : " أَرْحَمُ أُمَّتِي بِأُمَّتِي أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَأَشَدَّهُمْ فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرُ، وَأَصْدَقُهُمْ حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَأَقْرَؤُهُمْ لِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَأَفْرَضُهُمْ زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَأَعْلَمُهُمْ بِالْحَلالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ أَمِينٌ، وَأَمِينُ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ

So far I don't see where you got this from Tirmidhi.

We can play the rijal and manuscript game all you like, but the fact of the matter is this hadith is Mutawatir in your books with multiple chains, including a statement from Umar in bukhari that backs the statement up.

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).
وروى الخوارزمي بأسناده عن أبي سعيد الخدري: «قال رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم: ان اقضى أمتي علي بن أبي طالب»(4).
وروى ابن عبد البر باسناده عن أبي فروة قال: سمعت عبد الرحمن بن أبي ليلى، قال: قال عمر: «علي أقضانا»(5).
وروى المتّقي عن عليّ: «انطلق فاقرأها على النّاس، فانّ الله يثبّت لسانك ويهدي قلبك، انّ الناس سيتقاضون اليك، فاذا أتاك الخصمان فلا تقض لواحد حتى تسمع كلام الآخر، فانّه أجدر أن تعلم لمن الحق»(6).
وروى ابن عساكر باسناده عن عبدالله، قال: «أقضى أهل المدينة علي بن أبي طالب»(7).
وروى ابن حجر باسناده قال: «قال رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم: أقضاكم علي»(8).
وروى الشنقيطي باسناده عن معاذ بن جبل قال: قال رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم: «أنت اولهم ايماناً بالله وأوفاهم بعهد الله، وأقومهم بأمر الله، وأقسمهم بالسوية وأعدلهم في الرعية وابصرهم بالقضية واعظمهم عند الله»(9).
وروى ابن عساكر باسناده عن ابن عبّاس قال: «قال رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم: «علي أقضى أمتي بكتاب الله فمن أحبني فليحبه، فان العبد لا ينال ولايتي الاّ بحب علي»(10).
وباسناده عن ابن عبّاس قال: «بعث النبي صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم علياً إلى اليمن، فقال: علّمهم الشرائع واقض بينهم قال: لا علم لي بالقضاء، قال: فدفع في صدره وقال: اللّهم اهده الى القضاء، فنهاهم عن الدّباء والحنتم والمزفّت»(11).
روى المتّقي باسناده عن علي، قال: «أتى النبي صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم ناس من اليمن، فقالوا ابعث فينا من يفقهنا في الدين، ويعلمنا السنن، ويحكم فينا بكتاب الله، فقال النبي صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم: انطلق يا علي الى أهل اليمن، ففقههم في الدين وعلّمهم السنن واحكم فيهم بكتاب الله، فقلت: ان أهل اليمن قوم طغاة يأتوني من القضاء بما لا علم لي به. فضرب النبي صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم على صدري، ثم قال: اذهب فان الله سيهدي قلبك ويثبت لسانك. فما شككت في قضاء بين اثنين حتى الساعة»(12).
قال الزبيدي: «الديان: القاضي، ومنه الحديث: كان علي ديان هذه الامة بعد نبيها، أي قاضيها»(13).
قال محمّد بن طلحة: «نقل القاضي الإمام أبو محمّد الحسين بن مسعود البغوي في كتابه المسمى بالمصابيح مروياً عن أنس بن مالك: ان رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم لما خَصّ جماعة من الصحابة كل واحد بفضيلة، خَصَصَ علياً عليه السّلام بعلم القضاء فقال: وأقضاهم علي. فقد صدع هذا بمنطوقه وصرح بمفهومه ان انواع العلم واقسامه قد جمعها رسول صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم لعلي دون غيره فان كل واحد ممن خصصه رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم بفضيلة خاصة لم يتوقف حصول تلك الفضيلة على غيرها من الفضائل والعلوم، فانه صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم قال: أفرضهم زيد، وأقرؤهم أبيّ، وأعلمهم بالحلال والحرام معاذ، ولا يخفى أن علم الفرائض لا يفتقر إلى علم آخر، ومعرفة القراءة لا يتوقف على سواها، وكذلك العلم بالحلال والحرام. بخلاف علم القضاء فالنبي صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم قد أخبر بثبوت هذه الصفة العالية لعلي عليه السّلام مع زيادة فيها فان صيغة أفعل يقتضي وجود أصل ذلك الوصف والزيادة فيه على غيره، وإذا كانت هذه الصفة العالية قد أثبتها له فتكون حاصلة، ومن ضرورة حصولها له ان يكون متصفاً بها ولا يتصف بها الا بعد أن يكون كامل العقل صحيح التميز، جيّد الفطنة، بعيداً عن السهو والغفلة، يتوصل بتفضيله إلى وضوح ما استكمل، وفصل ما اعضل، ذا عدالة تحجزه عن أن يحوم حول حمى المحارم ومروة تحمله على محاسن الشيم، ومجانبة الدّنايا، صادق اللهجة، ظاهر الامانة، عفيفاً عن المحظورات مـأموناً في السخـط والرضا، عارفاً بالكتاب والسنة والاتفاق والاختلاف والقياس ولغة العرب، بحيث يقدم المحكم على المتشابه، والخاص على العام، والمبين على المجمل، والناسخ على المنسوخ ويبني المطلق على المقيد ويقضي بالتواتر دون الآحاد وبالمسند دون المرسل، وبالمتصل دون المنقطع وبالاتفاق دون الاختلاف... ليتوصلّ بها إلى الاحكام فليس كل حكم منصوصاً عليه، ويعرف اقسام الاحكام من الواجب والمحظور والمندوب والمكروه، فهذه امور لا يصحّ اتصاف الانسان بعلم القضاء ما لم يحط بمعرفتها ومتى فقد علمه بها لا يصلح للقضاء ولا يصلح اتصافه به فظهر لك ـ أيدك الله تعالى ـ ان رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم حيث وصف علياً بهذه الصفة العالية بمنطوق لفظه المثبت له فضلا، فقد وصفه بمفهومه بهذه العلوم المشروحة المتنوعة الأقسام فرعاً واصلا، وكفى بذلك دلالة لمن خص بهدية الهداية قولا وفعلا على ارتقاء علي عليه السّلام في مناهج معارج العلوم الى المقام الاعلى، وضربه في اعتناء الفضائل المجزاة بالتساهم بالقدح المعـلى حصول هـذه المناقب والآلاء وشمول هذه المطالب السنية، الحاصلة لعلي عليه السّلام من مواد علم القضاء كان مناط افاضة انوارها عليه، ان رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم قبل ذلك لما انتدبه وانتضاه، وآثره وارتضاه، وفوض اليه قضاء اليمن وولاه أحجم إحجاماً، فلما أحس رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم ذلك منه أخبره بان الله عزوعلا سيرزق قلبه الهدى والتثبيت له من الله تعالى فلن يضل ابداً. فمن ذلك ما نقله الإمام أبو داود سليمان بن الاشعث في مسنده يرفعه بسنده إلى علي عليه السّلام قال: أرسلني رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم إلى اليمن قاضياً، فقلت: يا رسول الله، ترسلني وأنا حديث السن ولا علم لي بالقضاء، فقال لي رسول الله: ان الله سيهدي قلبك ويثبت لسانك، فإذا جلس بين يديك الخصمان، فلا تقضين حتى تسمع من الآخر كما سمعت من الأول فانه أحرى أن يبين لك القضاء، قال: فما زلت قاضياً وما شككت في قضاء بعد، فهبت عليه النسمات الآلهية من العناية النبوية بألطاف التأييد ونزل عليه الملكان الموكلان بالمحقين، فألبساه رداء التوفيق والتسديد فوفرت حقائق علم القضاء في صدره حتى ما على احاطته بهما من مزيد، وأثمرت حدائق فضائله، فنخلها بالمعرفة باسقات ذوات طلع نضيد، فلما رسخ علمه عليه السّلام بمواد القضاء رسوخاً لا تحركه الهواب ورسا قدم فهمه في قواعد معرفته بحيث لا يعترضه الاضطراب، وصفه رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم بقوله: أقضاكم علي، اذ وضحت لديه الاسباب وتفتحت بين يديه الابواب، وشرحت له السنن والآداب، حتى قال قال له رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم: ليهنك العلم أبا الحسن لقد شربه العلم شرباً ونهلته نهلا»(14).



 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.

Secondly there is a sahih report from ya3la where I quoted the following hadith

 صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم بعث عليا قاضيا إلى اليمن ، قال : يا رسول اللَّه ، بعثتني أقضي بينهم ، وأنا شاب لا أدري ما القضاء ، فضرب رسول اللَّه صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم في صدره ، وقال : اللَّهم اهده وثبت لسانه ، قال : فوالذي فلق الحبة ما شككت في قضاء بين اثنين ، رواه أبو داود ، والحاكم ، وابن ماجه ، والبزار ، والترمذي ، من طرق عن علي أحسنها رواية البزار عن عمرو بن مرة عن عبد اللَّه بن سلمة عن علي ، وفي إسناده عمرو بن أبي المقدام ، واختلف فيه على عمرو بن مرة ، فرواه شعبة عنه عن أبي البَخْتَري ، قال : حدثني من سمع عليا ، أخرجه أبو يعلى وسنده صحيح

" The prophet [saw] sent Ali [as] as a judge to yemen, so Imam Ali [as] said : Ya Rasulallah send me as the best judge between them since I am a still young and do not know Qadha. So the prophet [saw] hit his chest and said "Oh Allah guide and establish his tongue, then Imam Ali said : by the one who split the seed I did not doubt at all judging between two people.

yuala reported this hadith with a sahih chain.


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.....

Thirdly, Umar himself says that Ali is the best judge among the people, do you know Ali better than Umar? When it comes to Umar you people will sing his praises day and night but when it comes to Umar saying something you don't like you push it aside as a mere opinion.

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.

قال ابن كثير في التفسير: قال شعبة بن الحجاج، عن سماك بن خالد بن عرعرة، أنه سمع عليا- رضي الله عنه- وشعبة أيضا عن القاسم بن أبي بزة، عن أبي الطفيل، أنه سمع عليا- رضي الله عنه- وثبت أيضا من غير وجه عن أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب- رضي الله عنه- أنه صعد منبر الكوفة فقال: لا تسألوني عن آية في كتاب الله تعالى ولا عن سنة عن رسول الله- صلى الله عليه وسلم- إلا أنبأتكم بذلك. فقام ابن الكواء، فقال: يا أمير المؤمنين، ما معنى قوله تعالى: «وَالذَّارِياتِ ذَرْواً» ؟ قال علي- رضي الله عنه: الريح.


عن معمر عن وهب بن عبد الله عن أبي الطفيل قال شهدت عليا وهو يخطب وهو يقول سلوني فوالله لا تسألوني عن شيء يكون إلى يوم القيامة إلا حدثتكم به وسلوني عن كتاب الله فوالله ما من آية إلا وأنا أعلم بليل نزلت أم بنهار أم في سهل أم في جبل.


This is not to mention the amount of hadith you have in your books attesting to the superiority of Ali's [as] knowledge which number into beyond mutwatir.


Quote
Your Madhab is laughable, basically human worshipers.

This is coming from a person who thinks Allah has fingers, two right hands, two legs, eyes,a shin,comes and goes, laughs, descends like an elevator (Ibn taymiyya would demonstrate this with his break dancing on the pulpit).


Quote
There is no Hadith that says "`Ali is the best judge on earth" when you find that let us know.
As for `Ali knowing inheritance laws, seems Zayd knew more about Fara'id and inheritance from that narration you insist on quoting. Also he seems to have been reminded of the special prophetic case of inheritance by other Sahabah.

Ibn Taymiyyah says that Zayd ibn thaabit was never known for inheritance laws. :) This is why he rejected the hadith I gave you, just for that reason....

it doesn't matter what additional details your hadith says, again, you can give me a hadith where umar makes shaytan run away, or uthman making the angels blush, it doesn't matter to me. What matters to me is that the statement "Ali is the best judge", is established.

Quote
Add hoc or minus hoc, doesn't matter. Abu Bakr only ruled for two years, `Umar ruled for many years after him so most likely `Umar said it after his death. I add, If `Ali is a good judge this doesn't mean the rest are terrible, your argument that the better judge will always get it right as opposed to the slightly less better ones is laughable and childish. Go ask a lawyer about how some of the biggest judges don't always make sound decisions let alone our case where `Ali seems to have completely forgotten a religious ruling. As for `Ali insisting on it for years, I disagree and based on my reading he never asked for it as an inheritance he only asked to be allowed to manage it due to his close tie to the Prophet (saw). Otherwise it was an injustice on the part of al-`Abbas and `Ali to only split the land between eachother and leave out the rest of the heirs.

Do you know what a strawman is? You're setting a strawman up and getting it to death. I never made the above argument.

My argument is...

1- The case is simple, prophets don't inherit, this is a single piece of information its either true or not.
2- Ali is the best judge.
3- Ali persisted on his rejection even until umar's time.

Quote
They asked for Fadak ONLY ONCE during Abu Bakr's reign. `Ali and al-`Abbas, when they came to `Umar, they were not asking for Fadak or Khaybar, they just asked for control of the Sadaqat of Madinah from the property of banu al-Nadeer(Jews) and Mukhayreeq as they believed they were at least entitled to do so.


We read in the books of Sunan:


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.]


Are you kidding me, do you even know what you're talking about?

this is fadak.

The only land that was given as Fay from banu nadheer is Fadak.

Go back to shiachat, see our debate where 720 makes the same arguments you're using, see my responses and stop wasting my time.

Also look at the hadith..

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349
“When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said:” I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).” Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah). (Referring to Hadhrat ‘Abbas), he said: You demanded your share from the property of your nephew,
Quote
Quote
and he (referring to ‘Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father.
Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said:” We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.” So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.  And Allah knows that he was true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. When Abu Bakr passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), you thought me to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest”.

The Arabic is more clear

 وَيَطْلُبُ هَذَا مِيرَاثَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا

Umar : " And he is requesting his wife's inheritance from her father".

So even after abu bakr's death, Ali [as] is still requesting inheritance meaning that he disagreed with abu bakr's interpretation of the hadith that prophets leave knowledge for the ummah.

Also He is clearly requesting the Fay from Banu nadeer that Fatima requested, which is Fadak. There is no other land that was given as fay from banu nadeer except Fadak.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 29, 2015, 01:41:22 PM
1.  The only land that was given as Fay from banu nadheer is Fadak.

2.  Go back to shiachat, see our debate where 720 makes the same arguments you're using, see my responses and stop wasting my time.

1.  You have not established that.  Even if we assume that Imam Ali [ra] was the best judge, literally word for word as the narration states, it does not mean that Fadak was given to Fatima [ra].  You add the fact that the best judge never reclaimed Fadak, in fact he maintained the same stance as Abu Bakr [ra], then it is obvious that you are not following the best judge [ra] or you think you might know better than him.

Also, there is a huge logical, religious and historical gap between Fay belonging exclusively to the Prophet [saw] and him [saw] gifting it to Fatima [ra].

Lastly, I have provided you narrations stating what the lands were used for, one which explicitly states that Fadak was used for travelers.

2.  Do you realize that I started this thread to show people how helpless you were in ShiaChat?  The fact that you are comfortable expressing your opinion over certain narrations while overlooking Fadak altogether - hoping that your reckless leap from "best judge" to "Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra]" would work wonders - says very little about you.

Hence, you have yet to prove that the Prophet [saw] gave Fadak to Fatima [ra] because the commentary for verse 26 of Surah Al-Israa is rejected based on its chain and matn.  Attiya is weak and the verse was revealed in Mecca to begin with.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 29, 2015, 01:54:34 PM
^
The land that was given as Fay from Banu Nadeer is fadak.


Tafseer Ibn katheer

قال تعالى: { فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَامَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَـٰكِينِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ } إلى آخرها، والتي بعدها، فهذه مصارف أموال الفيء ووجوهه. قال الإمام أحمد: حدثنا سفيان، عن عمرو ومَعْمر، عن الزهري، عن مالك بن أوس بن الحدثان، عن عمر، رضي الله عنه قال: كانت أموال بني النضير مما أفاء الله على رسوله مما لو يوجف المسلمون عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، فكانت لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خالصة،
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 29, 2015, 01:56:21 PM
Muslim720 if you're going to complain and cry like you did in the other thread, please just leave the conversation.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 29, 2015, 02:27:31 PM
Are you kidding me, do you even know what you're talking about?

this is fadak.

The only land that was given as Fay from banu nadheer is Fadak.
This Hadeeth should answer your confusion.

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.

Quote
Also look at the hadith..

Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349
“When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) passed away, Abu Bakr said:” I am the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).” Both of you came to demand your shares from the property (left behind by the Messenger of Allah). (Referring to Hadhrat ‘Abbas), he said: You demanded your share from the property of your nephew,
Quote
Quote
and he (referring to ‘Ali) demanded a share on behalf of his wife from the property of her father.
Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had said:” We do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.” So both of you thought him to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.  And Allah knows that he was true, virtuous, well-guided and a follower of truth. When Abu Bakr passed away and (I have become) the successor of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him), you thought me to be a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest”.

Read the FULL hadeeth to understand it, quoting parts of hadeeths shows the weakness of your arguments. This was an issue of Guardianship as explained by scholars and as apparent from the hadeeth itself.

Umar said: 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 (may peace be upon him) used it. (Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349)

We read in Sunan Nisai:

Umar said: I took control of it after Abu Bakr, and I did with it what he used to do. Then these two came to me and asked me to give it to them so that they could dispose of it as the Messenger of Allah disposed of it, and as Abu Bakr disposed of it, and as I disposed of it. So I gave it to them and I took promises from them that they would take proper care of it.( Sunan an-Nasa’i 4148, Grading Sahih)

when Ali and Abbas approached Abubakr, the usage of words is different, compared to when they came to Umar. When they approached Abubakr(ra) they asked for inheritance(miraas), whereas when they approached Umar during his rule, they didn’t ask for inheritance(miraas).

When they went to Abubakr:

فَجِئْتُمَا تَطْلُبُ مِيرَاثَكَ مِنَ ابْنِ أَخِيكَ وَيَطْلُبُ هَذَا مِيرَاثَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا

“You both came to me, you asked to inherit your nephew and…”(Sahih Muslim).

When to came to Umar:

جِئْتُمَانِي وَكَلِمَتُكُمَا وَاحِدَةٌ، وَأَمْرُكُمَا جَمِيعٌ، جِئْتَنِي تَسْأَلُنِي نَصِيبَكَ مِنِ ابْنِ أَخِيكَ، وَأَتَانِي هَذَا يَسْأَلُنِي نَصِيبَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا
“You came to me and you were in agreement (back then), you asked me for your share from your nephew…”(Sahih Bukhari)

Hence, there remains no doubt that, Abbas(ra) and Ali(ra) went to Umar(ra) with a different request than to Abubakr(ra). They went to Umar(ra) with the request to entrust them the property.

For detailed explanation, I suggest you to stop acting arrogantly and to read the answers to common Shiee arguments over this event:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/8-sunni-answers-to-shiapens-article-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophetsaw-chapter-eight/
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 29, 2015, 02:31:23 PM
Quote
Well this report falls right from the first narrator Husayn, since Ibn Hibban makes Tawtheeq of Majaheel, so the man is Majhool and the Hadith is weak. Give us the first guy's Tawtheeq then we'll discuss the other narrators.

He isn't Majhul, Ibn Hibban gives him tawtheeq and no one calls him majhul, his hadith are hassan.

Also this is irrelevant since there is another route without him in it from haakim

نا : الحاكم الوالد أبو محمد ، قال : ، حدثنا : عمر بن أحمد بن عثمان ببغداد شفاها ، قال : أخبرني : عمربن الحسن بن علي بن مالك قال : ، حدثنا : جعفر بن محمد الأحمسي قال : ، حدثنا : حسن بن حسين ، قال : ، حدثنا : أبو معمر سعيد بن خثيم ، وعلي بن القاسم الكندي ويحيى بن يعلى ، وعلي بن مسهر ، عن فضيل بن مرزوق ، عن عطية : ، عن أبي سعيد ، قال : لما نزلت : وآت ذا القربى حقه أعطى رسول الله (ص) فاطمة فدكا.

Regarding the second narrator, then the second narrator also has Ali ibn al-qaaslim, yahya ibn ya3la, and Ali ibn mashur narrating alongside with him from Fudhayl.

Yahya ibn maeen gives Fudhayl tawtheeq.

That just leaves us with Atiya al Awifa.


Quote
Oh sorry, let me correct that for you since you appear to have missed a part of what Ibn Hajar said.


Ibn Hajar: "Saduq, makes a lot of mistakes, he was a Shia who did Tadlees."


You Shia are such honest academic folks, very reliable in your selective quotatio

The "mistakes" you're mentioning was regards to tadlees genius.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on July 29, 2015, 02:32:08 PM
^
1.  The land that was given as Fay from Banu Nadeer is fadak.


2.  Tafseer Ibn katheer

قال تعالى: { فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَامَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَـٰكِينِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ } إلى آخرها، والتي بعدها، فهذه مصارف أموال الفيء ووجوهه. قال الإمام أحمد: حدثنا سفيان، عن عمرو ومَعْمر، عن الزهري، عن مالك بن أوس بن الحدثان، عن عمر، رضي الله عنه قال: كانت أموال بني النضير مما أفاء الله على رسوله مما لو يوجف المسلمون عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، فكانت لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خالصة،


1.  You just made a statement without backing it up with proof.  Thus far, you have only held on to the "Imam Ali [ra] was the best judge" argument.  You have failed to bring anything authentic which states that Fadak was gifted to Fatima [ra]. 

2.  It does not say that Fatima [ra] received Fadak as gift.  In fact, there is no mention of Fatima [ra]. 

Quote
Muslim720 if you're going to complain and cry like you did in the other thread, please just leave the conversation.

Of course you would want me to leave because you want to stretch this out to the point that the discussion loses its focus from Fadak to proving the authenticity of a narration that has nothing to do with Fadak.

Precisely the reason why you requested the moderators in ShiaChat to close the topic.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 29, 2015, 02:39:09 PM
Quote
Well this report falls right from the first narrator Husayn, since Ibn Hibban makes Tawtheeq of Majaheel, so the man is Majhool and the Hadith is weak. Give us the first guy's Tawtheeq then we'll discuss the other narrators.

He isn't Majhul, Ibn Hibban gives him tawtheeq and no one calls him majhul, his hadith are hassan.

Also this is irrelevant since there is another route without him in it from haakim

نا : الحاكم الوالد أبو محمد ، قال : ، حدثنا : عمر بن أحمد بن عثمان ببغداد شفاها ، قال : أخبرني : عمربن الحسن بن علي بن مالك قال : ، حدثنا : جعفر بن محمد الأحمسي قال : ، حدثنا : حسن بن حسين ، قال : ، حدثنا : أبو معمر سعيد بن خثيم ، وعلي بن القاسم الكندي ويحيى بن يعلى ، وعلي بن مسهر ، عن فضيل بن مرزوق ، عن عطية : ، عن أبي سعيد ، قال : لما نزلت : وآت ذا القربى حقه أعطى رسول الله (ص) فاطمة فدكا.

Regarding the second narrator, then the second narrator also has Ali ibn al-qaaslim, yahya ibn ya3la, and Ali ibn mashur narrating alongside with him from Fudhayl.

Yahya ibn maeen gives Fudhayl tawtheeq.

That just leaves us with Atiya al Awifa.


Quote
Oh sorry, let me correct that for you since you appear to have missed a part of what Ibn Hajar said.


Ibn Hajar: "Saduq, makes a lot of mistakes, he was a Shia who did Tadlees."


You Shia are such honest academic folks, very reliable in your selective quotatio

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

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
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 29, 2015, 02:45:47 PM
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.


Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 29, 2015, 02:57:06 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??
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 29, 2015, 03:18:41 PM
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?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Moin on July 29, 2015, 03:44:47 PM
Herz if you want we can discuss any of the following issue separately in different posts:
1. Existence of the wording أقضاكم علي in Ibn Majah and more broadly in the version of Abu Qilabah.
2. Authenticity of the wording أقضاكم علي in marfoo form.
2. Status of Atiyya as a hadith narrator.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 29, 2015, 06:18:26 PM
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.



Quote

This is coming from a person who thinks Allah has fingers, two right hands, two legs, eyes,a shin,comes and goes, laughs, descends like an elevator (Ibn taymiyya would demonstrate this with his break dancing on the pulpit).


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



Quote
Ibn Taymiyyah says that Zayd ibn thaabit was never known for inheritance laws. :) This is why he rejected the hadith I gave you, just for that reason....


Maybe he was maybe he wasn't, we can't be sure after 1,400 years. The narration you keep quoting says so though.


Quote
it doesn't matter what additional details your hadith says, again, you can give me a hadith where umar makes shaytan run away, or uthman making the angels blush, it doesn't matter to me. What matters to me is that the statement "Ali is the best judge", is established.


It's not established.


Quote
1- The case is simple, prophets don't inherit, this is a single piece of information its either true or not.
2- Ali is the best judge.
3- Ali persisted on his rejection even until umar's time.


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.


2- Doesn't matter.


3- I say he didn't persist and he was only asking for guardianship of the seven gardens. Nor did he return the land to Fatimah's children.


Quote
Are you kidding me, do you even know what you're talking about?


this is fadak.


The only land that was given as Fay from banu nadheer is Fadak.


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. Banu al-Nadeer were kicked out of Madinah after their treachery and their gardens remained and they made a deal to carry as much as they could from their possessions.


Quote
Also look at the hadith..


Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349


I know this Hadith and based on my reading this is what `Ali and al-`Abbas were asking for:



WHAT WERE AL-`ABBAS AND `ALI ASKING `UMAR FOR?


`Ali and al-`Abbas, when they came to `Umar, they were not asking for Fadak or Khaybar, they just asked for control of the Sadaqat of Madinah from the property of banu al-Nadeer(Jews) and Mukhayreeq as they believed they were at least entitled to do so.


We read in the books of Sunan:


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.]


Two years into his Khilafah, `Umar ibn al-Khattab out of good will towards them entrusted the Sadaqat of Madinah to both men since they were the heads of Ahlul-Bayt, he never gave it to them as inheritance, but just appointed them over it to care for it and benefit from it and to distribute its produce as the Prophet (saw) and Abu Bakr did before.


`Ali asked for his wife’s part and al-`Abbas asked for his nephew’s part, so `Umar reminded them of the Prophet’s (saw) Hadith, then said what we read in al-Bukhari:


قُلْتُ: إِنْ شِئْتُمَا دَفَعْتُهُ إِلَيْكُمَا عَلَى أَنَّ عَلَيْكُمَا عَهْدَ اللَّهِ وَمِيثَاقَهُ، لَتَعْمَلَانِ فِيهِ بِمَا عَمِلَ فِيهِ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ وَمَا عَمِلْتُ فِيهِ مُنْذُ وَلِيتُ وَإِلَّا فَلَا تُكَلِّمَانِي، فَقُلْتُمَا ادْفَعْهُ إِلَيْنَا بِذَلِكَ، فَدَفَعْتُهُ إِلَيْكُمَا
[If you two wish, I hand it to you but you give me an oath by Allah to use it as the messenger of Allah (saw) and Abu Bakr used it and like I used it since I was given authority, otherwise never mention it to me ever again. Then you both said: “We accept, give it to us.” And I did.]


Al-`Abbas and `Ali later had a fight over how the money the land produces is divided, it appears as if al-`Abbas was angry at `Ali so much that he called him names, `Abbas might have thought `Ali took more than his need or that he used the money without consulting him, so they both went to `Umar asking him to divide it between them or to rule for one of them against the other.


We read what al-Daraqutni reported from Imam Isma`eel al-Qadi al-Maliki (199-282AH) in Tuhfat-ul-Ahwadhi Sharh-ul-Jami`:


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.]


`Umar refused to give any other judgment and told them to return it if they’re unable to manage it.
He also said:


فَإِنْ عَجَزْتُمَا عَنْهُ فَادْفَعَا إِلَيَّ فَأَنَا أَكْفِيكُمَاهُ
[If you are unable to run this land, then return it to me and I shall save you the effort.]


It was later written that `Uthman ibn `Affan during his Khilafah convinced al-`Abbas to hand the entire land to `Ali and it remained with his children for many years.


In another narration from Musnad Ahmad, it says that ibn `Abbas convinced his father during the Khilafah of `Uthman to allow `Ali to control it on his own:


فلما استخلف عثمان اختصما إليه، فسكت عثمان ونكس رأسه. قال ابن عباس: فخشيت أن يأخذه أبي، فضربت بيدي بين كتفي العباس، فقلت: يا أبت أقسمت عليك إلا سلّمته
[When `Uthman received Khilafah, they both came and disputed in front of him and asked him to settle the matter, but he remained silent and lowered his head. Ibn `Abbas said: So I feared that he would take it (meaning the land) back from them, so I patted my hand on al-`Abbas’ chest and said: “O father, by Allah just hand it to him (meaning to `Ali).”]


As for the Fay’ of the lands of Khaybar including Fadak, `Umar held on to them and kept them well managed and properly taken care of as the Prophet (saw) used them for the urgent needs of the nation.



Quote
The Arabic is more clear


 وَيَطْلُبُ هَذَا مِيرَاثَ امْرَأَتِهِ مِنْ أَبِيهَا


Umar : " And he is requesting his wife's inheritance from her father".


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..."


Then after Abu Bakr's death, `Ali and `Abbas came to `Umar and they were united at that time and had no conflicts:


فَوَلِيتُهَا ثُمَّ جِئْتَنِي أَنْتَ وَهَذَا وَأَنْتُمَا جَمِيعٌ وَأَمْرُكُمَا وَاحِدٌ ، فَقُلْتُمَا : ادْفَعْهَا إِلَيْنَا ، فَقُلْتُ : إِنْ شِئْتُمْ دَفَعْتُهَا إِلَيْكُمَا ، عَلَى أَنَّ عَلَيْكُمَا عَهْدَ اللَّهِ


[So I took charge of it and then you both came to me united and told me: "Hand it to us." I said: "If you wish I will hand it to you..."]


Our interpretation is that they were asking to be placed in charge of those Amwal and felt that they had more right to be in charge due to their closeness, but not for inheritance. `Ali and `Abbas did receive it based on that and they both clearly confirmed the Hadith narrated by Abu Bakr in public and never objected at all.


Later `Ali and al-`Abbas had a fight over the land and returned to `Umar. The two weren't in agreement and asked `Umar to split it into two parts, `Ali felt he was entitled to a part due to his wife and `Abbas due to his closeness. `Umar felt like the two went overboard and that they were acting as if the land belonged to them, so he reminded them again of that narration and told them "Either you both manage it as previously agreed upon or I shall take it back" Meaning they didn't own it, nor was this a splitting of inheritance because there were other heirs who were also entitled for it.







Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 29, 2015, 06:47:25 PM
You said:

Quote
The land that was given as Fay from Banu Nadeer is fadak.


Tafseer Ibn katheer

قال تعالى: { فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَامَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَـٰكِينِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ } إلى آخرها، والتي بعدها، فهذه مصارف أموال الفيء ووجوهه. قال الإمام أحمد: حدثنا سفيان، عن عمرو ومَعْمر، عن الزهري، عن مالك بن أوس بن الحدثان، عن عمر، رضي الله عنه قال: كانت أموال بني النضير مما أفاء الله على رسوله مما لو يوجف المسلمون عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، فكانت لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خالصة،

Dude stop confusing yourself, who the heck told you that Fadak was the only Fay'!? Many lands were received as Fay' and others as Khums and Ghaneemah. al-Kateebah was a Khums for example, Shiqq and Nattah were divided between the Muslims, the Sawafi of Madinah were Fay' etc...

Quote
He isn't Majhul, Ibn Hibban gives him tawtheeq and no one calls him majhul, his hadith are hassan.

Don't invent rules for me man please. Ibn Hibban's book is loaded with Majaheel whom he labels "Thiqah", if you think he's not Majhool then please offer me the opinions of early Hadithists about him, if you can't find any then that's because he's Majhool.

I thought you already knew basic rules such as that the Tawtheeq of Ibn Hibban or `Ijli amount to nothing.

I add, the only opinion you'll find is probably abu Hatim al-Razi saying he's layyin, another word for weak.

Quote
Also this is irrelevant since there is another route without him in it from haakim

نا : الحاكم الوالد أبو محمد ، قال : ، حدثنا : عمر بن أحمد بن عثمان ببغداد شفاها ، قال : أخبرني : عمربن الحسن بن علي بن مالك قال : ، حدثنا : جعفر بن محمد الأحمسي قال : ، حدثنا : حسن بن حسين ، قال : ، حدثنا : أبو معمر سعيد بن خثيم ، وعلي بن القاسم الكندي ويحيى بن يعلى ، وعلي بن مسهر ، عن فضيل بن مرزوق ، عن عطية : ، عن أبي سعيد ، قال : لما نزلت : وآت ذا القربى حقه أعطى رسول الله (ص) فاطمة فدكا.

Regarding the second narrator, then the second narrator also has Ali ibn al-qaaslim, yahya ibn ya3la, and Ali ibn mashur narrating alongside with him from Fudhayl.

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.

But anyway, I see that this chain contains `Umar bin al-Hasan bin `Ali and he's a liar according to al-Hakim, Daraqutni and al-Dhahabi.

Now on to `Atiyyah again

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

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

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 29, 2015, 07:11:46 PM
Bro what the heck is this train-wreck!?

Quote
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.

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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 29, 2015, 07:26:18 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 29, 2015, 08:03:13 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?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Khaled on July 29, 2015, 08:05:47 PM
Those false quotes should be enough to make anyone doubt Shi'asm, the level that they stoop is outrageous.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 29, 2015, 09:49:18 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: MuslimK on July 30, 2015, 12:23:56 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hadrami on July 30, 2015, 12:54:21 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
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Arabismo on July 30, 2015, 02:14:25 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
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 30, 2015, 02:51:10 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 30, 2015, 02:53:59 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Arabismo on July 30, 2015, 03:07:19 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)




Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 30, 2015, 03:14:16 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hadrami on July 30, 2015, 03:31:42 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
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ibn Yahya on July 30, 2015, 05:01:11 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.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 30, 2015, 12:23:58 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
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 30, 2015, 01:14:08 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 30, 2015, 01:47:42 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 30, 2015, 05:29:03 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on July 30, 2015, 05:52:23 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.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 30, 2015, 06:52:57 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.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 30, 2015, 07:18:10 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".

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 30, 2015, 07:59:54 PM
Your comments on Fadak.


Fadak is a part of Khaybar, but Khaybar contains a lot more than just Fadak, other parts of Khaybar were also Fay' and some were taken as Ghaneemah.


I quoted to you this:


((We read in the books of Sunan:
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.]))


The word Sawaafi means what he purely possessed on his own as it comes from the word Safi. This is the property Allah gave to his Prophet (saw) alone, it was especially for him and they are the lands taken after the Jews were chased out of Madinah.


Banu al-Nadeer are ONE of the many Jewish clans in the Arabian peninsula, Khaybar was a large land divided between MANY Jewish clans. All I am saying is, banu al-Nadeer were not the clan of Fadak, so when `Ali and `Abbas ask for guardianship of the Prophet's (saw) purely possessed lands of banu al-Nadeer, they're talking about what this Jewish clan owned in Madinah. Fadak is a completely different land and this would have been quite clear if you spent a short time researching as the narrations and the early scholars always make distinctions between Fadak and the property of banu al-Nadeer since they're two different things.


For example:



In Tareekh al-Madinah by ibn Shubah we read in the narration of `Umar ibn al-Khattab:


[The messenger (saw) acquired (the Fay’) from Khaybar and Fadak and banu al-Nadeer. As for Banu al-Nadeer it was saved for his urgent needs, as for Fadak it was for the stranded travelers, and as for Khaybar it was divided into three: Two thirds for the Muslims and a third for his family then what remained of it would be returned on the poor Mouhajireen.]


The link you gave me contains this sentence, read it carefully:


وكذلك أهل فدك من اليهود


Meaning the Jewish people of Fadak then followed suit, so they also surrendered peacefully after they heard about what happened to the other clans.


This is written in other sources:



In Tareekh ibn Shubah from the report of Husayl al-Ashja`i:


[That the Prophet (saw) made peace with the people of Fadak, and then made peace with the people of Wateeh and Sulalim from the lands of Khaybar, so all of these became in his possession purely, as for Kateebah it was from the Khums and it was near Wateeh and Sulalim so they were all combined into one land, and were from what the Prophet (saw) left as a Sadaqah and what fed his wives.]


You will find more details on how the people of Fadak surrendered in the books of history and islamic-economy.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 30, 2015, 08:26:15 PM
I forgot this bit

Quote
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.

This is after he reminded them of the Prophetic narration that they agreed to hearing, which is the biggest evidence they weren't asking for inheritance at this point. I add, nor did they treat the land as personal property after they were allowed to manage it. `Umar said the above because he knew that it was his duty to manage this land just as Abu Bakr did and the Prophet (saw) before them, he knew that it was his own neck on the line on judgement day if he hands it to someone who doesn't manage it in the prophetic way, so he made them both promise (and he trusted them) that they would manage it upon prophetic guidance.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 30, 2015, 08:57:02 PM

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



When your mistakes are in this pathetic format:


Quote
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"


Quote
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??


Then Yes, you've little shame and piety. Make no mistake, we keep our respect to those who deserve it.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Farid on July 30, 2015, 10:42:02 PM
Brother Herz. I do not understand the reason behind the holier than thou attitude. Please watch your tone.

Response to your attempt at quoting. You quoted this from Mustadrak Al-Hakim:

Quote
Heres chapter 27 of Marifat al ulum by al hakim

النَّوْعُ الثَّامِنُ مِنْ هَذَا الْعِلْمُ , مَعْرِفَةُ الْمَرَاسِيلِ الْمُخْتَلَفِ فِي الاحْتِجَاجِ بِهَا , وَهَذَا النَّوْعُ مِنْ عِلْمِ الْحَدِيثِ صَعْبٌ , قَلَّ مَا يَهْتَدِي إِلَيْهِ إِلا الْمُتَبَحِّرُ فِي هَذَا الْعِلْمِ , فَإِنَّ مَشَايِخَ الْحَدِيثِ لَمْ يَخْتَلِفُوا فِي أَنَّ الْحَدِيثَ الْمُرْسَلَ هُوَ الَّذِي يَرْوِيهِ الْمُحَدِّثُ بَأَسَانِيدَ مُتَّصِلَةٍ إِلَي التَّابِعِيِّ ، فَيَقُولُ التَّابِعِيُّ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهُ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ , وَأَكْثَرُ مَا تُرْوَى الْمَرَاسِيلُ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيِّبِ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ مَكَّةَ عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ أَبِي رَبَاحٍ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ مِصْرَ عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ أَبِي هِلالٍ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الشَّامِ عَنْ مَكْحُولٍ الدِّمَشْقِيِّ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْبَصْرَةِ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ أَبِي الْحَسَنِ , وَمِنْ أَهْلِ الْكُوفَةِ عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ يَزِيدَ النَّخَعِيِّ , وَقَدْ يُرْوَى الْحَدِيثُ بَعْدَ الْحَدِيثِ عَنْ غَيْرِهِمْ مِنَ التَّابِعِينَ , إِلا أَنَّ الْغَلَبَةَ لِرِوَايَاتِهِمْ ، وَأَصَحَّهَا مَرَاسِيلُ سَعِيدُ بْنُ الْمُسَيِّبِ , وَالدَّلِيلُ عَلَيْهِ أَنَّ سَعِيدًا مِنْ أَوْلادِ الصَّحَابَةِ , فَإِنَّ أَبَاهُ الْمُسَيِّبَ بْنَ حَزْنٍ مِنْ أَصْحَابِ الشَّجَرَةِ وَبَيْعَةِ الرِّضْوَانِ , وَقَدْ أَدْرَكَ سَعِيدٌ عُمَرَ وَعُثْمَانَ وَعَلِيًّا وَطَلْحَةَ وَالزُّبَيْرَ إِلَى آخِرِ الْعَشْرَةِ , وَلَيْسَ فِي جَمَاعَةِ التَّابِعِينَ مَنْ أَدْرَكَهُمْ ، وَسَمِعَ مِنْهُمْ غَيْرُ سَعِيدٍ وَقَيْسِ بْنِ أَبِي حَازِمٍ , ثُمَّ مَعَ هَذَا فَإِنَّهُ فَقِيهُ أَهْلِ الْحِجَازِ وَمُفْتِيهِمْ ، وَأَوَّلُ فُقَهَاءِ السَّبْعَةِ الَّذِينَ يَعُدُّ مَالِكُ بْنُ أَنَسٍ إِجْمَاعَهُمْ إِجْمَاعَ كَافَّةِ النَّاسِ.

أَبَا عَبَّاسٍ مُحَمَّدَ بْنَ يَعْقُوبَ ، يَقُولُ : سَمِعْتُ الْعَبَّاسَ الدُّورِيَّ ، يَقُولُ : سَمِعْتُ يَحْيَى بْنَ مَعِينٍ ، يَقُولُ : " أَصَحُّ الْمَرَاسِيلِ مَرَاسِيلُ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيِّبِ ، وَأَيْضًا فَقَدْ تَأَمَّلَ الأَئِمَّةُ الْمُتَقَدِّمُونَ مَرَاسِيلَهُ ، فَوَجَدُوهَا بِأَسَانِيدَ صَحِيحَةٍ ، وَهَذِهِ الشَّرَائِطُ لَمْ تُوجَدْ فِي مَرَاسِيلِ غَيْرِهِ ، فَهَذِهِ صِفَةُ الْمَرَاسِيلِ عِنْدَ أَهْلِ الْحَدِيثِ ".

أَبُو الْعَبَّاسِ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَعْقُوبَ ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ حَنْبَلَ ، قَالَ : وَجَدْتُ بِخَطِّ أَبِي ، ثنا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ عِيسَى مَوْلَى ابْنِ الْمُبَارَكِ ، قَالَ " حَدَّثْتُ ابْنَ الْمُبَارَكِ بِحَدِيثٍ لأَبِي بَكْرِ بْنِ عَيَّاشٍ ، عَنْ عَاصِمٍ ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، قَالَ : حَسَنٌ.

فَقُلْتُ لابْنِ الْمُبَارَكِ : إِنَّهُ لَيْسَ عَنْهُ إِسْنَادٌ.

فَقَالَ : إِنَّ عَاصِمًا يَحْتَمِلُ لَهُ أَنْ يَقُولَ : قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ".

قَالَ : فَغَدَوْتُ إِلَى أَبِي بَكْرٍ ، فَإِذَا ابْنُ الْمُبَارَكِ قَدْ سَبَقَنِي إِلَيْهِ وَهُوَ إِلَى جَنْبِهِ فَظَنَنْتُهُ قَدْ سَأَلَهُ عَنْهُ.

قَالَ الْحَكَمُ : فَأَمَّا مَشَايِخَ أَهْلِ الْكُوفَةِ فَكُلُّ مَنْ أَرْسَلَ الْحَدِيثِ عَنِ التَّابِعِينَ وَأَتْبَاعِ التَّابِعِينَ وَمَنْ بَعْدَهُمْ مِنَ الْعُلَمَاءِ فَإِنَّهُ عِنْدَهُمْ مُرْسَلٌ مُحْتَجٌّ بِهِ ، وَلَيْسَ كَذَلِكَ عِنْدَنَا ، فَإِنَّ مُرْسَلُ أَتْبَاعِ التَّابِعِينَ عِنْدَنَا مُعْضَلٌ ، وَسَيَأْتِي ذِكْرُهُ وَشَرْحُهُ بَعْدَ هَذَا إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ.


I just read it, it doesn't even talk about Abi qilaaba.

ذكر النوع السابع والعشرين من علوم الحديث هذا النوع منه معرفة علل الحديث ، وهو علم برأسه غير الصحيح ، والسقيم ، والجرح والتعديل

حدثنا أبو العباس محمد بن يعقوب ، حدثنا العباس بن محمد الدوري قال : ثنا قبيصة بن عقبة ، عن سفيان ، عن خالد الحذاء أو عاصم ، عن أبي قلابة ، عن أنس قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : « أرحم أمتي أبو بكر وأشدهم في دين الله عمر ، وأصدقهم حياء عثمان وأقرأهم أبي بن كعب ، وأعلمهم بالحلال والحرام معاذ بن جبل ، وإن لكل أمة أمينا ، وإن أمين هذه الأمة أبو عبيدة » قال أبو عبد الله : وهذا من نوع آخر علته ، فلو صح بإسناده لأخرج في الصحيح ، إنما روى خالد الحذاء ، عن أبي قلابة أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : « أرحم أمتي » ، مرسلا وأسند ، ووصل : « إن لكل أمة أمينا ، وأبوعبيدة أمين هذه الأمة » هكذا رواه البصريون الحفاظ ، عن خالد الحذاء ، وعاصم جميعا ، وأسقط المرسل من الحديث وخرج المتصل بذكر أبي عبيدة في الصحيحين والجنس الثالث من علل الحديث


Then you said:

Quote
Bayhaqis book

11862 [ ص: 210 ] باب ترجيح قول زيد بن ثابت على قول غيره من الصحابة - رضي الله عنهم أجمعين - في علم الفرائض .

( أخبرنا ) أبو الحسين بن بشران العدل ببغداد ، أنا أبو جعفر محمد بن عمرو بن البختري الرزاز ، ثنا حنبل بن إسحاق ، ثنا قبيصة بن عقبة ، ثنا سفيان بن سعيد ، عن خالد ، وعاصم ، عن أبي قلابة ، عن أنس بن مالك ، قال : قال رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم : " أرحم أمتي أبو بكر ، وأشدهم في دين الله عمر ، وأصدقهم حياء عثمان ، وأفرضهم زيد ، وأقرؤهم أبي ، وأعلمهم بالحلال والحرام معاذ ، وإن لكل أمة أمينا ، وأمين هذه الأمة أبو عبيدة بن الجراح " .

وكذلك رواه قطبة بن العلاء ، عن سفيان ، عن خالد الحذاء ، عن أبي قلابة ، عن أنس موصولا .

وكذلك رواه وهيب بن خالد ، وعبد الوهاب بن عبد المجيد الثقفي ، عن خالد الحذاء موصولا .

He says that the chain with qutba ibn 3la2, from sufyan from khalid from Abi qilaaba from Anas is connected.

He also says again that the chain with waheeb ibn khaalid and abdul wahaab from khalid is connected.

Bayhayi is disgareeing with you, he is saying that Abi qilaaba from Anas is not disconnected.

Al-Bayhaqi says a couple of sentences after:

ورواه بشر بن المفضل واسمعيل ابن علية ومحمد بن أبى عدى عن خالد الحذاء عن أبى قلابة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم مرسلا لقوله في أبى عبيدة فانهم وصلوه في آخره فجعلوه عن انس بن مالك عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وكل هؤلاء الرواة ثقات اثبات والله اعلم

This shows that he disagrees with the connected hadith and that the disconnected hadith is the correct variation.

Please get off your high horse. Allah yahdeek.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on July 30, 2015, 11:16:31 PM
First.


Quote
((We read in the books of Sunan:
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.]))


Sawafi MEANS PROPERTIES OR LAND, IT DOESN'T MEAN "PURE POSSESSIONS".

صَوافي: ( اسم )
الصَّوافِي : الأملاك ، والأرضُ مات أهلها ولا وَارثَ لها

Possessions/properties, or land whose people has died and no one has inherited/taken it.

They were asking for the properties of banu nadeer.

Secondly.

Can you give me a commentary from your scholars who say that they weren't returning asking for Fadak?

Thirdly.

They were asking for Fadak, however even if they were only asking for the gardens of Medina left by Banu Nadeer, this is 100 percent irrelevant as Imam Ali [as] is still asking for the land that Fatima [as] asked for, proving that he didn't agree with Abu bakr's position.

Lastly.

They were not asking for only the produce of the land, they were for the land itself, however let us say that they were asking for the proceedings of the land,this still proves that Imam Ali [as] disagreed with Abu bakr's position and ruling towards Fatima who denied her the proceedings on the basis that prophet do not inherit. If Imam Ali [as] agreed with Abu bakr's ruling on this hadith, he would not be at Umar's door step causing umar to repeat abu bakr's position.

So either way, if you want to say "they are only asking for the proceedings of the land", then Imam Ali [as] still rejected Abu Bakr's understanding of the hadith he used, since Abu bakr denied fatima the same request.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 31, 2015, 12:29:36 AM
I was teaching you some Arabic, the definition you gave is exactly what I'm saying, "Amlaak" The Mulk is the full possession, in our case the Sawaafi or Safayaa, so don't google weak definitions from commercial websites!!

Here's what Lisan al-`Arab says so that you know where I got the "pure" from:

الصَّفْوُ والصَّفَاءُ ، مَمْدودٌ : نَقِيضُ الكَدَرِ ، صفَا الشيءُ والشَّرابُ يَصْفُو صَفاءً وصُفُوًّا ، وصَفْوُهُ وصَفْوَتُه وصِفْوَتُه وصُفْوَتُه : ما صَفَا منه ، وصَفَّيْتُه أَنَا تَصْفِيَةً . وصَفْوَةُ كُلِّ شيءٍ : خالِصُهُ من صَفْوَة المالِ وصَفْوَةِ الإخَاء . الكسائي : هو صُفْوَةُ المَاءِ وصِفْوَةُ الماءِ ، وكذلك المالُ . وقال أَبو عبيدة : يقال له صَفْوَةُ مالِي وصِفْوَةُ مالِي وصُفْوَة مالِي ، فإذا نَزَعُوا الهاءَ قالوا له صَفْوُ مالِي ، بالفتح لا غير . وفي حديث عَوفِ بن مالك : لَهُمْ صِفْوَةُ أَمْرِهِمْ ؛ الصِّفْوةُ ، بالكَسْرِ : خِيارُ الشيء وخُلاصَتُه وما صَفَا منه ، فإذا حذفت الهاء فتحت الصاد ، وهو صَفْوُ الإهالَة لا غيرُ . والصَّفاءُ : مَصْدَرُ الشيءِ الصافي . وإذا أَخَذَ صَفْوَ ماءٍ من غدِيرٍ قال : اسْتَصْفَيْتُ صَفْوَةً . وصَفَوْتُ القِدْرَ إذا أَخَذْتَ صَفْوَتَها . والمِصْفَاةُ : الرَّاووُقُ . وفي الإناءِ صِفْوَةٌ مِن مَاءٍ أَوْ خَمْرٍ أَي قَلِيلٌ . وصَفَا الجَوُّ : لم  تكن فيه لُطْخَةُ غَيْمٍ . ويومٌ صافٍ وصَفْوانُ إذا كان صَافِيَ الشَّمْس لا غَيْمَ فيه ولا كَدَرَ وهو شدِيدُ البَرْدِ . وقولُ أَبي فَقْعَسٍ في صِفَةِ كَلإٍ : خَضِعٌ مَضِغٌ صافٍ رَتِعٌ ؛ أَراد أَنَّه نَقِيُّ من الأَغْثَاءِ والنَّبْتِ الذي لا خَيْرَ فيه ، فإذا كان ذلك فهو من هذا الباب ، وقد يكون صَافٍ مقلوبًا من صائِفٍ أَي أَنه نَبْتٌ صَيْفِيٌّ فقُلِبَ ، فإذا كان هذا فليس من هذا الباب وإنما هو من باب ص ي ف . أَبو عبيد : الصَّفِيُّ من الغنيمة ما اخْتارَه الرئيس من المَغْنَمِ واصْطَفاه لنَفْسِه قبلَ القسْمَةِ منْ فَرسٍ أَو سيفٍ أَو غيره ، وهو الصَّفيَّةُ أَيضًا ، وجَمْعُه صَفايا
وفي الحديث : إنْ أَعْطَيْتُمُ الخُمُس وسهمَ النبي ، صلى الله عليه وسلم ، والصَّفِيَّ فأَنْتُم آمِنُونَ ؛ قال  الشعبي : الصفيّ عِلْقٌ تَخَيَّرَهُ رسولُ الله ، صلى الله عليه وسلم ، منَ المَغْنم ، كانَ منه صَفِيَّةُ بنتُ حُيَيٍّ ؛ ومنه حديث عائشة : كانت صَفِيَّةُ من الصَّفَايا ، تَعْني صَفِيَّة بنْتَ حُيَيٍّ كانتْ من غَنيمَةِ خَيْبَرَ . واسْتَصْفَيْتُ الشيء إذا اسْتَخْلَصْتَه . ومن قرأَ : فاذكُروا اسمَ اللهِ عَلَيْها صَوافِيَ ، بالياء ، فَتفسيرهُ أَنَّها خالصَة لله تعالى يذْهَب بها إلى جمع صافية ؛ ومنه قيل للضِّيَاع التي يَسْتَخْلِصُها السلطانُ لخاصته : الصَّوَافِي . وفي حديث عليّ والعباس ، رضي الله عنهما : أَنهما دَخَلا على عمر ، رضي الله عنه ، وهُما يَخْتَصِمان في الصَّوافِي التي أَفاءَ اللهُ على رسولِه ، صلى الله عليه وسلم ، من أَموال بَني النَّضِير ؛ الصَّوافِي : الأَمْلاكُ والأَرض التي جَلا عَنْها أَهْلُها أَو ماتُوا ولا وارِثَ لَها ، واحدتها صافِيَةٌ . واسْتَصْفَى صَفْوَ الشيء : أَخَذَه . وصَفَا الشيءَ : أَخَذَ صَفْوَه

Meaning after the Jews left it it became purely his.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on July 31, 2015, 12:31:51 AM
Man this thread is a waste of time, the readers got the full picture by now and further details can be found in my reseach. No need to continue so you now have our permission to go celerate at SC and say you defeated us with your divine arguments (even though this thread is ur public humiliation literally, you couldn't even find Farid's quotes even after he gave you the book and chapter names).
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on August 01, 2015, 01:45:44 AM
Salam,

I wish to apologize for the brothers since I suddenly locked this thread, I was upset at the silliness of the Saba'i Shiite, he already made loads of mistakes (Most of which he doesn't admit) since he never opened a book yet he acts as if he's some infallible saint who knows what he's talking about. I judged it as a waste of time after 100 posts as we proved our point and he obviously will never submit. I did however pin it as it contained much benefits and clarifications as well as showing the complete ignorance of the Saba'i.

I had declared this thread locked here:
http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/moved-most-recent-fadak-discussion-on-shiachat/msg7524/#new

I also answered one of his dumb questions in that same thread above.

There is also another very minor clarification I made about the translation of Sawaafi as "pure possessions" instead of just "possessions" here:
http://forum.twelvershia.net/sahabah-ahlulbayt/fadak-and-hani-a-story-of-love-and-betrayal/msg7523/#new

I don't even know why this Jahil is wasting our time with how to best translate Sawaafi since the addition of the word "pure" makes not much difference other than eloquence.

Anyway this is now opened again for further questions (if any of you have any) and I have moved it to the "Sahabah & Ahlul-Bayt" section instead of the general section.

Enjoy,

 ; )
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Abu-jafar herz on August 01, 2015, 03:06:37 AM
Quote
Oh and let me fix your translation of this Arabic sentence:

Quote
As sawafi : Amlaak (which means properties), and the land which there does remain its people or die without an inheritor of it'.

الصَّوافِي : الأَمْلاكُ والأَرض التي جَلا عَنْها أَهْلُها أَو ماتُوا ولا وارِثَ لَها

[Al-Sawaafee: The properties/possessions and the land whose owners were exiled/expelled or they passed away without heirs.]

This describes banu al-Nadeer who were kicked out of Madinah and left their properties behind.

No actually allow me to fix your translation, when I first translated the sentence I wrote :

Possessions/properties, or land whose people has died and no one has inherited/taken it.

So obviously I wasn't writing does but doesn't, but you locked the thread before I could edit the typo, I even explained what lisan al arab meant : They were describing Fadak as a land where there is no inheritor, not "pure possessions" as you put it. So the definition i gave you isn't from google its from Lisan al arab.


Moving on, allow me to educate you on Arabic.

الصَّوافِي : الأَمْلاكُ والأَرض التي جَلا عَنْها أَهْلُها أَو ماتُوا ولا وارِثَ لَها

If you want to be literal, as you are trying to be, the literal translation is

"As-Sawafi, properties and the land which its people have evacuated it or they died and there is no inheritor of it(their land)".


جَلا عن : خَرَجَ مِنْ
clear out of ; depart from ; evacuate ; go away from ; leave ; move out of ; pull out of ; quit ; vacate ; withdraw from

You translated it as : [Al-Sawaafee: The properties/possessions and the land whose owners were exiled/expelled or they passed away without heirs.]



It doesn't say that they were exiled or expelled, it says that they left.

Do you want some more Arabic education? No problem.

As-Sawafi in your quote was referring to land ya [EDIT OF FILTHY SHIA LANGUAGE], since sawafi refers to a land which there is no inheritor not because it is "pure possession" .

The point is, Ali [as] was asking Umar for the land from banu nadeer not "the pure possesions" as your illiterate self put.

When I translate Arabic texts on forums many times I skim through and translate quikcly, sometimes I miss a part or two but my goal is to quickly get the general meaning/understanding out. However your problem is, is that you mistranslate things and build your argument on it, you're like an illiterate farmer from trablos who opened a website attacking Shia and he doesn't know how to use a dictionary, billah 3layk just close your webstie down and save us from your "research".

As-Sawafi in the quote is referring to LANDS/PROPERTIES, not "pure possession". If you honestly think that the hadith you translated comes out to "pure possession" then hang yourself, no one can help you.

I'm not arrogant nor am I ignorant, I actually only responded to you firmly because you were insulting my madhab and religion before I even stepped on this forum, including calling me impious and evil. Regarding my mistake with Timirzi then actually it wasn't my mistake,the website gave me the book title as Timirzi with the hadith being Ibn majah, if you want I'll give you a picture of exactly what I mean.

Don't try to score cheap points, especially if you have no reason to.

Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on August 01, 2015, 03:38:55 AM
Herz banned for wasting time with nonsense and using filthy language.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on August 01, 2015, 07:28:35 AM
For those wondering why this thread was closed, AbuJay Herz left us the best example in his above post. Here is what he wrote:

Quote
No actually allow me to fix your translation, when I first translated the sentence I wrote :

Possessions/properties, or land whose people has died and no one has inherited/taken it.

So obviously I wasn't writing does but doesn't, but you locked the thread before I could edit the typo, I even explained what lisan al arab meant : They were describing Fadak as a land where there is no inheritor, not "pure possessions" as you put it. So the definition i gave you isn't from google its from Lisan al arab.


Moving on, allow me to educate you on Arabic.

الصَّوافِي : الأَمْلاكُ والأَرض التي جَلا عَنْها أَهْلُها أَو ماتُوا ولا وارِثَ لَها

If you want to be literal, as you are trying to be, the literal translation is

"As-Sawafi, properties and the land which its people have evacuated it or they died and there is no inheritor of it(their land)".


جَلا عن : خَرَجَ مِنْ
clear out of ; depart from ; evacuate ; go away from ; leave ; move out of ; pull out of ; quit ; vacate ; withdraw from

You translated it as : [Al-Sawaafee: The properties/possessions and the land whose owners were exiled/expelled or they passed away without heirs.]



It doesn't say that they were exiled or expelled, it says that they left.

Do you want some more Arabic education? No problem.

As-Sawafi in your quote was referring to land ya [EDIT OF FILTHY SHIA LANGUAGE], since sawafi refers to a land which there is no inheritor not because it is "pure possession" .

The point is, Ali [as] was asking Umar for the land from banu nadeer not "the pure possesions" as your illiterate self put.

When I translate Arabic texts on forums many times I skim through and translate quikcly, sometimes I miss a part or two but my goal is to quickly get the general meaning/understanding out. However your problem is, is that you mistranslate things and build your argument on it, you're like an illiterate farmer from trablos who opened a website attacking Shia and he doesn't know how to use a dictionary, billah 3layk just close your webstie down and save us from your "research".

As-Sawafi in the quote is referring to LANDS/PROPERTIES, not "pure possession". If you honestly think that the hadith you translated comes out to "pure possession" then hang yourself, no one can help you.

I'm not arrogant nor am I ignorant, I actually only responded to you firmly because you were insulting my madhab and religion before I even stepped on this forum, including calling me impious and evil. Regarding my mistake with Timirzi then actually it wasn't my mistake,the website gave me the book title as Timirzi with the hadith being Ibn majah, if you want I'll give you a picture of exactly what I mean.

Don't try to score cheap points, especially if you have no reason to.

Do you guys see this entire paragraph above? Well at first you must think the guy has something important to say, but after you read the entire thing you discover that it's completely devoid of any content, it serves no purpose other than making this thread longer and wasting people's valuable time.

Then he talks about "scoring cheap points" by exposing his Jahl and ignorance. For instance one of his shameful mistakes which he was forced to admit was attributing something to al-Tirmidhi which wasn't even there, he says:

Quote
Regarding my mistake with Timirzi then actually it wasn't my mistake,the website gave me the book title as Timirzi

Do you think that exposing your ignorance in this example is "scoring cheap points"? Well guess what, it's not, because the false attribution you made was quite the serious one and it could have made the outcome of the entire Hadithi research different!! So highlighting your ignorance isn't just about scoring cheap points, rather it exposes your falsehood and proves our point when we say you havn't researched anything nor are you even qualified for research.

But if you want to see who's after the cheap stuff, then this last post of yours is the biggest example of how cheap you are. This entire long thing you wrote is because you wanted me to translate the word Sawaafi to "properties" instead of "possessions".

You left Fadak and inheritance and abandoned the entire topic (after your ignorance was exposed) and you found it appropriate to waste our time because you wanted us to change this:

Quote
((We read in the books of Sunan:
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.]))

INTO THIS:

Quote
((We read in the books of Sunan:
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 property that Allah granted as Fay’ to his messenger (saw) from bani al-Nadeer.]))

Wow what a difference!! As if by possessions we meant anything else other than the lands and property left behind by those Jews.

So yes, we have every right to close this thread after we answered all the relevant questions you had while you decided to just keep going and waste everyone's time with nothing but whining and ranting like a kid about the most useless and minor of things.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on August 05, 2015, 08:33:52 PM
First.

Sawafi MEANS PROPERTIES OR LAND, IT DOESN'T MEAN "PURE POSSESSIONS".

صَوافي: ( اسم )
الصَّوافِي : الأملاك ، والأرضُ مات أهلها ولا وَارثَ لها

Possessions/properties, or land whose people has died and no one has inherited/taken it.

They were asking for the properties of banu nadeer.

Secondly.

Can you give me a commentary from your scholars who say that they weren't returning asking for Fadak?

Here's a funny bit, remember how abuJay was bangging our heads about how we shouldn't translate Sawaafi as "possessions" yet if you read the above he himself wrote "Possessions/properties, or land whose people has died..."

Also just for the benefit, here's some additional clarification for what we previously said about what `Ali was asking for. Herz insisted that `Ali was asking for Fadak (because he doesn't know the difference between Fadak and Banu al-Nadeer), here is what `Umar said in the narration of Ibn Hadthan from Sunan abi Dawoud:

كَانَتْ لِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ثَلَاثُ صَفَايَا بَنُو النَّضِيرِ وَخَيْبَرُ وَفَدَكُ ، فَأَمَّا بَنُو النَّضِيرِ فَكَانَتْ حُبُسًا لِنَوَائِبِهِ ، وَأَمَّا فَدَكُ فَكَانَتْ حُبُسًا لِأَبْنَاءِ السَّبِيلِ ، وَأَمَّا خَيْبَرُ فَجَزَّأَهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ثَلَاثَةَ أَجْزَاءٍ جُزْأَيْنِ بَيْنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَجُزْءًا نَفَقَةً لِأَهْلِهِ فَمَا فَضُلَ عَنْ نَفَقَةِ أَهْلِهِ جَعَلَهُ بَيْنَ فُقَرَاءِ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ

[Rasul-Allah (saw) had three properties/possessions/lands: Banu al-Nadeer, Khaybar and Fadak. As for banu al-Nadeer he kept it for his urgent needs etc...]

Now read the narration where `Ali and `Abbas go to ask `Umar and see what those narrations say:

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 property that Allah granted as Fay’ to his messenger (saw) from bani al-Nadeer.]

In other words, so that no one may be the least bit confused, `ALI NEVER ASKED FOR FADAK AGAIN as the Rafidah claim. This piece of land they obsess over, `Ali never asked for it nor did he attempt to acquire it during his own reign or even give it to Fatimah's progeny.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Aba AbdAllah on August 05, 2015, 10:17:02 PM
Brother, that guy hertz understood that he is no match for you, that is why he chose to escape.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ebn Hussein on August 17, 2015, 02:51:03 PM
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.

That must have been the funniest joke so far on this board. Rafidism = Islam? Attacking Rafidism = Attacking Islam?! What a twisted logic. What Hani set up is a thorn in your throats, which is good to know. Refuting and exposing the people of Bida3 and Zandaqah is pure worship, we worship Allah by refuting your human worshipping dozener sect. Also he said most of Sunni scholars are like Bin Baz etc. although he is very well aware that Salafi scholars are a minority compared to Ash'aris and Maturidis and Atharis. What a dishonest person.

[billah 3layk just close your webstie down and save us from your "research".

Subhanallah who put such a fear in the heart of the Rafidah. No doubt Hani is doing a good job, for if his website wasn''t exposing their Rafidi Deen, then they would care less and not beginning more than once (like Theodor Herzl guy) like a desperate person, asking us to shut the site down.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ibn Yahya on August 18, 2015, 03:33:55 PM
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.

That must have been the funniest joke so far on this board. Rafidism = Islam? Attacking Rafidism = Attacking Islam?! What a twisted logic. What Hani set up is a thorn in your throats, which is good to know. Refuting and exposing the people of Bida3 and Zandaqah is pure worship, we worship Allah by refuting your human worshipping dozener sect. Also he said most of Sunni scholars are like Bin Baz etc. although he is very well aware that Salafi scholars are a minority compared to Ash'aris and Maturidis and Atharis. What a dishonest person.

[billah 3layk just close your webstie down and save us from your "research".

Subhanallah who put such a fear in the heart of the Rafidah. No doubt Hani is doing a good job, for if his website wasn''t exposing their Rafidi Deen, then they would care less and not beginning more than once (like Theodor Herzl guy) like a desperate person, asking us to shut the site down.

wasn't Theodore Herzl that bloke who made zionism?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on August 19, 2015, 04:32:03 AM
@Ebn Hussein

I also noticed the same, he's literally begging to close the site down.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hadrami on August 19, 2015, 05:21:23 AM
@Ebn Hussein

I also noticed the same, he's literally begging to close the site down.

well he begged you to ban him by using foul language. I notice when shia realise they can't refute someone, they use that tactic to get banned and then cried foul about being banned.

It's like them crying takfiri when theyre the biggest takfiri sect around.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ebn Hussein on August 19, 2015, 04:40:08 PM
The irony is he started whinning like in Muharram, portraying Hani and this website as secterian project, attacking the Deen of Allah (to him the heretical sect of tomb and human worship is the Deen of Allah!) while his sect is secterianism by definition and the Rafidah have set up endless websites throwing shubuhat at Ahl Al-Sunnah. I was just amused at his desperations and how he literally begged Hani to close down the website.

Again, excellent job Hani, may ALlah reward you, Herzl and other Sabaites know well that this century is the century that has exposed their Sabaite Batiniyyah more than ever in their entire history.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on November 07, 2015, 09:40:19 PM
There is a new thread on SC about Fadak, he has 12 questions, please remind me to refute all of them later bros.

link: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234969323-12-questions-concerning-fadak-baagh-e-fidak/

Anybody on SC can post these answers to their questions.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on November 08, 2015, 07:11:01 AM
My replies in blue:



1. Regarding the claim of Fadak, the claim of Fatima (p.b.u.h) was enough because Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) is the main spirit of the verse of Tatheer. She would never talk or utter anything which is not true and correct. Under these circumstances, non-acceptance of her claim tantamounted to casting aspersions on Ayat Tatheer wherein God had certified the purity of the characters of the persons of the Cloak.


We disagree with you that purification meant infallibility and we disagree on who this verse was revealed for. So saying that "We Shia are right because Fatimah (as) can never be wrong" This is a weak lazy argument.


2. Why the witnesses of Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h) and others were not accepted when the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) had repeatedly said, “Wherever Ali (p.b.u.h) goes, Truth goes with him.” Ayat Tatheer was revealed in connection with Hazrat Imam Hasan and Imam Husain (p.b.u.h). Were not these two princes, the leaders of the youths of Paradise? Why the witness of Umme Salma, may God be pleased with her, and Umme Aiman, was not accepted even thought they were among those promised paradise by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h)? Whether the Qur’an for giving witness was not complete? No, because the witness of two men and one woman or two women and one man was enough to complete the Qur’an. Were the witnesses not the upholders of justice? Leave alone the question of being upholders of justice, their infallibility personified.


The event of the witnesses is a fabricated story by some Koufans and even if it were Sahih Abu Bakr's judgement would still be sound and if they cannot provide more than two female witnesses to prove that a giant piece of land belongs to them, not even documents, then that makes absolutely no sense and is very suspicious.


3. Before arriving at the decision, the wtinessess of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) were driven out. Why? Whther this act was not to be construed as tyrannical or that of high-handedness?


Because this event never took place.


4. This is an undisputed act of Muslim Law that whoever is in possession of anything, be it a property or anything else, it belongs to the person who is possessing it. He would simply say under the oath that a certain property belongs to him. Moreover, witnesses are required by the party who is claiming and not by the one who is having the property in his possession. Under this law calling for witness does not conform with the requirements of Justice. Thus, calling for witnesses from Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) was not right. Her responsibility was to simply say an oath. Presenting witnesses was the duty of the first Caliph. Why then Islamic law was tampered with and circumvented?


Fatimah (as) herself refutes your claim since it's authentically and popularly established that she asked for it as inheritance, she did not claim it to be her possession.


5. On many occasions, the first Caliph had agreed to the problems presented by the companions of Prophet (p.b.u.h) without calling for witnesses. For instance, once Janab Jabir came to the Caliph saying that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had promised that he would pay him some amount.


The first Caliph paid him one thousand five hundred dirhams without calling for witnesses. Similarly, once Abu Basheer Maazani had said that the Prophet (p.b.u.h) had promised to pray him some amount. The Caliph paid him 1400 dirhams (Sahih Bukhari).


Then what was the reason, that in these cases no witnesses were called for. In some cases only companionship of Prophet (p.b.u.h) was enough for consideration. But, in the case of the Prophet’s daughter why witnesses were required? There were the very persons about whom the verse of Tatheer was revealed.


The fact that Abu Bakr helped the Companions and fulfilled the Prophet's (saw) promises is evidence that he was honest and sincere, thus your claims against him are baseless.


6. When Fadak was not considered as a property of Fatima (p.b.u.h), why then on previous occasion the first Caliph had issued a certificate of property in her favour, when earlier she had represented in the matter? Why then the second Caliph seeing the certificate in the hands of Fatima (p.b.u.h) had torn it into pieces and had spat on it? (Sharh Nahjul Balagha, of Ibn Abil Hadeed vol. 16, p.174; Seera Halbiya, vol. 3, p.362)


When Fadak was not the property of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h), why was it given to her in the first instance? And if at all it was hers, why was it usurped?


This is a fabricated story that has no sound chain, it contradicts your above story of witnesses, the source quoted by yourself is a non-Sunni one. As for al-Seerah al-Halabiyyah, it mentions that she asked for it as inheritance and it mentions that Abu Bakr told her the narration and it also mentions that `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz returned the land to be a Sadaqah just as it was in the Prophet's (saw) time. Here are the texts:

 ولما مات صلى الله عليه وسلم وولى أبو بكر رضى الله عنه الخلافة سألته فاطمة رضى الله عنها أن يجعلها أو نصفها لها فأبى وروى لها أنه صلى الله عليه وسلم قال إنا معاشر الأنبياء لا نورث ما تركناه صدقة أى على المسلمين

فلما صارت الخلافة لعمر بن عبد العزيز رضى اله عنه فقيل له إن مروان اقتطعها أى جعلها أقطاعا له فقال أرأيتم أمرا منعه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فاطمة أى بقوله صلى الله عليه وسلم لا نورث ما تركناه صدقة ليس لى بحق وإنى أشهدكم أنى قد رددتها على ماكانت على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أى صدقة على المسلمين

As for your story, it's not a part of the author's words rather he was quoting Sabt-ibn-al-Jawzi who is a rejected deviant:

وفى كلام سبط ابن الجوزى رحمه الله أنه رضي الله تعالى عنه كتب لها بفدك ودخل عليه عمررضى الله تعالى عنه فقال ما هذا فقال كتاب كتبته فاطمه بميراثها من ابيها فقال مماذا تنفق على المسلمين وقد حار بتك العرب كما ترى ثم احذ عمر الكتاب فشقه


7. If the first Caliph was right in the case of Fadak, then why did he repeatedly repent at the time of remembering Fadak? And why he himself was ashamed of his own act?


Where's the evidence that he repented because his decision on Fadak was wrong? Also we can bring authentic evidence that `Ali regretted his wars in Jamal and Siffeen, does this mean he was wrong?


8. The hadith that was quoted by the first Caliph for not conceding Fadak was clearly against the spirit of the Qur’an. In Qur’an, there is reference to the property of Sulaiman, Dawood, ‘Aal-e-Yaqub, Zacharia and Yahya – all of them were prophets and property holders (Surah Naml, verse 16; Surah Mariam, verse 46).


Apart from the above, Janabe Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) was infallible, virtue and honest. Why then her statement was not taken as true? The hadith recited by the first Caliph was not conforming with Qur’anic spirit and teachings, and hence, cannot be accepted. Why then was Fatima Zahra (p.b.u.h) deprived and denied her own property?


1-The authentic narration from Abu Bakr does not necessarily state that all prophets do not leave inheritance. (So referring to other prophets serves no purpose).

2-The inheritance in the Qur'an is that of prophet-hood and knowledge and not money. (So it doesn't apply to your situation)


9. If it is true, that the Messenger of Allah had not let any property and if at all there is any, it belongs to the government or to all Muslims, why then the wives of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) specially Abu Bakr’s daughter, Ayesha, were not told to vacate possession of their premises? This was also the property left by the Prophet (p.b.u.h). Whether the denial of the right of property was applicable only to Janabe Fatima Zahra(p.b.u.h)?


Because he (saw) had given them those houses to live in since they cannot remarry after him and several other reasons but this is sufficient.


10. If the property left by the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), does not belong to any particular person, then why did Abu Bakr seek permission only from his own daughter, Ayesha, for getting buried besides the Prophet (p.b.u.h)?


If at all the inheritance of property is considered, the wives are not entitled to get a share in it. At the most they can have residential rights. If the property rights are accepted, in the presence of children, a wife’s share is only 1/8th. And in this very 1/8th only, all wives would get equal share. If it is to be distributed among nine wives, the share of each wife would come to 1/72. In this way, Ummul Mo’mineen, Ayesha could give permission only upto her own share. Why other were not approached and consulted?


Because it was her house, she does whatever she wants.


11. If it is accepted that the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h) did not gift Fadak to Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h) and that there was no property belonging to the Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h), even then, why were the Ahlul Bayt deprived of the Khums of the Khaibar and the wars? Has Qur’an not ordained to pay Khums to all your relatives (Zul Qurba) (Surah Tawba: 41, Surah Isra: 28)? In regards to booty, the question of inheritance does not arise.


Are you accusing the Prophet (saw) of depriving them of their right? Because you said this Khums was from the Khaybar wars during the life of the Prophet (saw) therefore it was his responsibility (saw) to divide and give each his share.


12. Had the argument and the stand of the Khilafat been right regarding Fadak, then why Omar II, Omar bin Abdul Aziz, Omavi, Saffah, Mehdi and Mamoon Abbasi, had made offers to return Fadak to the progeny of Janabe Fatima (p.b.u.h)?


Just above in the sources you quoted (Seerah Halabiyyah) it says the opposite, that `Umar II returned it as a Sadaqah just as it was, he didn't give it to Fatimah (as).
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ibn Yahya on November 08, 2015, 10:58:20 AM
I think this guy is missing out the fact that Fatimah had been dead for decades by the time of 'Umar Ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz? Sometimes I feel they're not even trying to make a cohesive argument anymore
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: ibnemasood on March 13, 2016, 11:43:28 AM
"Who really upset Fatimah - Abu Bakr or Ali radhi Allaho anhum ?"

How ironic that the hadeeth of the prophet sallallaho alaihe wasallam mentioned in Shia and sunni books,
"Fatimah is a part of me, who ever upsets her , upsets me ," was said by the prophet sallallaho alaihe wasallam not when Abu Bakr  upset Fatimah  but when it was infact Ali radhi Allaho anhum  who upset her. But Shias use it exclusively to condemn Abu Bakr r.a, totally overlooking the fact that it was really   Hazrat Ali r.a who upset Hazrat Fatimah not just once but according to Shia books at least on FOUR separate occasions while she was supposedly upset with Abu Bakr on ONLY ONE occasion and even that was because of NO fault of Abu Bakr. Those four occasions when Fatimah radhi Allaho anha  became upset with Hazrat Ali are:

1. When Hazrat Ali decided to marry the daughter of Abu Jahl and Hazrat Fatimah became aware, she took her children and went to the house of the prophet. The prophet sallallaho alaihe wasallam said,
" I won't make haraam what is halaal but the daughter of the prophet of Allah will not remain in the same house as the daughter of the enemy of Allah . If Ali wants to marry her , he will have to divorce  Fatimah first. Fatimah is a part of me who ever upsets her upsets me." When Hazrat Ali became aware of the prophet's disapproval, he abandoned the whole idea.
( jilaaul uyoon by Baqir Majlesi & illalush-shraai' by Qummi).

2. Once after praying fajar, the prophet sallallaho alaihe wasallam left the masjid hurriedly and anxiously and proceeded towards Fatimah radhi Allaho anha's house. She and Hazrat Ali had had an argument and were both upset. The prophet made them reconcile and left happily.
( Bihaarul anwaar by Majlesi vol 10)

3. Ja'far radhi Allaho anho,  the elder brother of Hazrat Ali on his return from Abysinnia gave  Hazrat Ali  a maidservant as a present. Hazrat Fatimah had been out and when she came back, she saw Hazrat Ali sitting with her head in his lap. On seing this, she became angry, left and went to the prophet's house. On this occasion again, the prophet intervened, Hazrat Ali sought forgiveness and the issue was settled.(jilaaul-uyoon & Bihaarul anwaar).

4. After the prophet passed away and Hazrat Fatimah came to Abu Bakr radhi Allaho anhuma  to request ownership of fadak, an orchard from which the prophet used to provide for his family, Abu Bakr radhi Allaho anho told her that he had heard from the prophet sallallaho alaihe wasallam that,
"Whatever the prophets leave behind is sadaqah". Hazrat Fatimah was disappointed and became angry with Hazrat Abu Bakr. She went home and according to Shia narration , she said to Hazrat ALI,
 "You used to be brave in battlefields and have now become a coward. When I am being rejected and refused my right , you have gone into hiding like a child in the womb." 
(Haqqul-yaqeen by Mullah Baqir majlesi).
Hazrat Fatimah radhi Allaho anha was upset with Abu Bakr radhi Allaho anho  because  allegedly he did not give her what she asked for. But this was all in line with the teachings of the prophet of Allah sallallaahu alayhi wasallam  and in any case happened only once and Hazrat Abu Bakr  did not do anything deliberately which should have upset Hazrat Fatimah . But according to Shia books She became upset with Hazrat Ali on at least four different occasions and with genuine reasons to be upset. So if shias curse  Hazrat Abu Bakr  for upsetting her, then where does that  leave Hazrat Ali ?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Qalander Rafidhi on March 25, 2016, 01:27:48 AM
Do Prophets not inherit according to Quran ?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on March 29, 2016, 04:35:07 PM
Do Prophets not inherit according to Quran ?
They do inherit immaterial possession. But not material possessions.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Qalander Rafidhi on April 12, 2016, 02:56:03 AM
Do Prophets not inherit according to Quran ?
They do inherit immaterial possession. But not material possessions.

Please bring forward a surah or aya that says that.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on April 12, 2016, 03:42:11 AM
There is no verse which talks about a prophet's material inheritance being inherited by his children.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ijtaba on April 12, 2016, 10:20:34 AM
There is no verse which talks about a prophet's material inheritance being inherited by his children.

Verses which talks about a Prophet's material inheritance being inherited by his children.

Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children’s (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half.
Al-Qur’an, Surah an-Nisa, Ayah 11, translated by Yusufali

To (benefit) every one, We have appointed shares and heirs to property left by parents and relatives. To those, also, to whom your right hand was pledged, give their due portion. For truly Allah is witness to all things.
Al-Qur’an, Surah an-Nisa, Ayah 33, translated by Yusufali
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on April 12, 2016, 08:36:16 PM


Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children’s (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half.
Al-Qur’an, Surah an-Nisa, Ayah 11, translated by Yusufali

To (benefit) every one, We have appointed shares and heirs to property left by parents and relatives. To those, also, to whom your right hand was pledged, give their due portion. For truly Allah is witness to all things.
Al-Qur’an, Surah an-Nisa, Ayah 33, translated by Yusufali

First verse does not support your argument.

Second verse does not support your argument.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on April 21, 2016, 07:19:11 PM
This was added to the Fadak article:

WHY DO THE SHIA FIND IT OBJECTIONABLE THAT PROPHETS HAVE AN EXCEPTIONAL RULING OF INHERITANCE?

The opponents will make it sound as if all regular rulings that apply to Muslims must apply to their Prophet (saw) as well. This is a faulty idea since prophets do not necessarily follow the same rulings as everybody else and the researcher will find that there are exceptions in how laws apply to them. For instance, they will ask: Why didn’t the Prophet (saw) offer inheritance like everyone else?
This question cannot be taken seriously since the Imams according to Shia narrations do not offer inheritance like everyone else.
We quote the following narration from Fatimah which can be found in the sixteen Usool and in al-Kafi with al-Majlisi’s authentication with these two chains:
عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي نَجْرَانَ عَنْ عَاصِمِ بْنِ حُمَيْدٍ عَنْ أَبِي بَصِيرٍ قَالَ قَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ع‏
And
عَنْهُ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ حَمَّادِ بْنِ عُثْمَانَ عَنْ أَبِي بَصِيرٍ قَالَ: قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع أَ لَا أُقْرِئُكَ وَصِيَّةَ فَاطِمَةَ ع قُلْتُ بَلَى قَالَ فَأَخْرَجَ إِلَيَّ صَحِيفَةً هَذَا مَا عَهِدَتْ فَاطِمَةُ بِنْتُ مُحَمَّدٍ ص فِي مَالِهَا إِلَى عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ ع وَ إِنْ مَاتَ فَإِلَى الْحَسَنِ وَ إِنْ مَاتَ فَإِلَى الْحُسَيْنِ فَإِنْ مَاتَ الْحُسَيْنُ فَإِلَى الْأَكْبَرِ مِنْ وُلْدِي دُونَ وُلْدِك‏
[Aba `Abdillah (as) said: Would you like to read Fatimah’s (as) will? I said: Yes. He (as) brought it and began reading: “This is what Fatimah bint Muhammad (saw) willed concerning her possessions, she has passed them to `Ali ibn abi Talib (as), after he dies then it may pass to al-Hasan, after he dies it may pass to al-Husayn, if he dies then to the eldest of my own children, not yours etc…]
As the reader can see, the above has nothing to do with the laws of Islamic inheritance. This isn’t how regular Mulims inherit nor should all her money have went to her husband after her death as Allah did not allow it. In this case the Shia will claim that Ahlul-Bayt have an exceptional ruling therefore they must accept that the Prophet (saw) too had an exceptional ruling.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Ijtaba on April 22, 2016, 11:33:38 AM
This was added to the Fadak article:

WHY DO THE SHIA FIND IT OBJECTIONABLE THAT PROPHETS HAVE AN EXCEPTIONAL RULING OF INHERITANCE?

The opponents will make it sound as if all regular rulings that apply to Muslims must apply to their Prophet (saw) as well. This is a faulty idea since prophets do not necessarily follow the same rulings as everybody else and the researcher will find that there are exceptions in how laws apply to them. For instance, they will ask: Why didn’t the Prophet (saw) offer inheritance like everyone else?
This question cannot be taken seriously since the Imams according to Shia narrations do not offer inheritance like everyone else.
We quote the following narration from Fatimah which can be found in the sixteen Usool and in al-Kafi with al-Majlisi’s authentication with these two chains:
عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي نَجْرَانَ عَنْ عَاصِمِ بْنِ حُمَيْدٍ عَنْ أَبِي بَصِيرٍ قَالَ قَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ع‏
And
عَنْهُ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي عُمَيْرٍ عَنْ حَمَّادِ بْنِ عُثْمَانَ عَنْ أَبِي بَصِيرٍ قَالَ: قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع أَ لَا أُقْرِئُكَ وَصِيَّةَ فَاطِمَةَ ع قُلْتُ بَلَى قَالَ فَأَخْرَجَ إِلَيَّ صَحِيفَةً هَذَا مَا عَهِدَتْ فَاطِمَةُ بِنْتُ مُحَمَّدٍ ص فِي مَالِهَا إِلَى عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ ع وَ إِنْ مَاتَ فَإِلَى الْحَسَنِ وَ إِنْ مَاتَ فَإِلَى الْحُسَيْنِ فَإِنْ مَاتَ الْحُسَيْنُ فَإِلَى الْأَكْبَرِ مِنْ وُلْدِي دُونَ وُلْدِك‏
[Aba `Abdillah (as) said: Would you like to read Fatimah’s (as) will? I said: Yes. He (as) brought it and began reading: “This is what Fatimah bint Muhammad (saw) willed concerning her possessions, she has passed them to `Ali ibn abi Talib (as), after he dies then it may pass to al-Hasan, after he dies it may pass to al-Husayn, if he dies then to the eldest of my own children, not yours etc…]
As the reader can see, the above has nothing to do with the laws of Islamic inheritance. This isn’t how regular Mulims inherit nor should all her money have went to her husband after her death as Allah did not allow it. In this case the Shia will claim that Ahlul-Bayt have an exceptional ruling therefore they must accept that the Prophet (saw) too had an exceptional ruling.

Salaam.

Can you provide evidence for your claim? Correct me if I am mistaken, are you saying that the Rulings and Commandments given by ALLAH (SWT) to Muslims regarding Inheritance, Business Transactions, Marriage, Divorce, Adoption, Employment, Engaging in Battle, Converstaion etc are different from Prophets?

I only knew that they were three exceptions relating to Prophet (s) and these exceptions are mentioned in Al-Quran:

01. Prophet's (s) wives cannot marry any man after Prophet's (s) death as they are Mothers of Faithful.
02. Prophet (s) was allowed to marry more than 4 women at a single time.
03. Lowering voices before Prophet (s)

There could be more as I don't have much knowledge but my understanding is that All Rules that apply to Muslims also apply to Prophets (as) and if there are any exceptions then the exceptions would be highlighted in Al-Quran to avoid any disagreements as in the case of Inheritance.

*Just one question which is in my mind. If Imam Ali (a.s), Hadhrat Fatima (s.a), Hadhrat Abbas ibn Abdul Muttalib (a.s), Ummhat ul Momineen (r.a) knew that Prophet (s) did not leave any inheritance for them then why did they keep asking Caliphs of their time for Inheritance?

Were they so greedy for money that they did not care to take Sadqah? By doing so they were doing two wrong deeds:

01. Asking for something which did not belong to them - Prophet's (s) Property. (Prophet (s) Property becoming Sadqah for people and his (s) family having no share in Prophet's (s) property)
02. Taking something which was not allowed for them (i.e. Bani Hashim) - Sadqah.


Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on April 22, 2016, 12:47:47 PM
Brother Ijtaba, I recommend you to take some time out and read this series of articles on this subject, all the questions you have raised, have been answered here:

The decisive word on Fadak and Inheritance of Prophet Muhammad(saw).

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/the-decisive-word-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophet-muhammadsaw/
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on April 22, 2016, 06:52:18 PM
There's more bro Ijtaba, for instance prophets are to be buried exactly where they die, do you find this in the Qur'an? Nope.

However, there is no real need to list more than the ones you listed above to show that not all laws run exactly as they do for regular people as they do for prophets. No need as well for such matters to be listed in the Qur'an "to solve disagreements" since no one will disagree with the Prophet (saw) if he decides a matter except a hypocrite. Imagine people objecting to the Prophet's (saw) actions because they're not in the Qur'an, they would have objected to stoning adulterers then.

Can you tell me where is it highlighted in the Qur'an that Fatimah's wealth be transmitted to `Ali, then after to al-Hasan, then after to al-Husayn? Where's this in the Qur'an? That's a lot stranger than a prophet simply offering his wealth as charity, it's a new and foreign system of inheritance altogether.

As for your question about why they would ask for it, read the following sections here:

((Did `ali, al-`abbas and fatimah understand the hadith of the prophet (saw) as abu bakr did?))

((Why was fatimah angry?))

http://twelvershia.net/2014/05/08/fadak-prophetic-inheritance-qa/

So as you can see, from those who asked for inheritance are two groups: A group that didn't know they weren't supposed to inherit and a group who knew but didn't understand from it that the lands would be taken away from them and thought they could still be in control. As for the wives who sent `Uthman to Abu Bakr to ask for their share of the Fay', they weren't greedy since they never asked for anything after they heard the narration nor did they argue or object. The report says that from among the men `Ali, `Abbas, Zubayr, `Uthman, Ibn `Awf, Abu Bakr, `Umar and abu Hurayrah all heard the Hadith but it seems that `A'ishah and Juwayriyyah are the only two women who knew about it.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on April 23, 2016, 08:45:44 AM

There could be more as I don't have much knowledge but my understanding is that All Rules that apply to Muslims also apply to Prophets (as) and if there are any exceptions then the exceptions would be highlighted in Al-Quran to avoid any disagreements as in the case of Inheritance.
It is true that Allah(swt) has specified things which were exclusive to the Prophet(saw) in the Quran, but the remaining part of the truth is that, Allah(swt) didn’t mention everything that was exclusive to the Prophet(saw) in Quran. There were things which were exclusive to Prophet(saw) which were mentioned in ahadeeth. The simple example to prove the incorrectness of Shia claim is; the things which were made prohibited on the Muslims to consume, Allah(swt) did specify some of the things regarding this in Quran, but not everything was specified, and the other things which were made prohibited were reported in ahadeeth.

Some other rulings which were exclusive to the Prophet(saw) mentioned in ahadeeth:

(i). Unlike the Muslims, Prophet(saw) should be buried where he died.

Aishah(ra) narrated:”When the Messenger of Allah(saw) died, they disagreed over where to bury him. So Abu Bakr(ra) said: ‘I heard the Messenger of Allah(saw) saying something which I have not forgotten, he said: “Allah does not take (the life of ) a Prophet except at the location in which He wants him to be buried.'” So they buried him at the spot of his bed.”( Jami` at-Tirmidhi 1018, Grading: Sahih).

Similarly we read in Shia hadeeth:

Ali (a.s.) said, “He(saw) had said that he must be buried in the place where he died.( Al-Kafi).

(ii). Unlike the Muslims, the funeral prayer of Prophet(saw) was not lead by any Imam.

We read in Shia hadeeth from Al-Kafi:

Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from his father from ibn abu ‘Umayr from Hammad from al- Halabi from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said the following. “Al-‘Abbass came to Amir al- Mu’minin Ali (a.s.) and said, “O Ali, people have come in a group to bury the Messenger of Allah in Baqi’, the prayer place. Amir al-Mu’minin Ali (a.s.) then came out to the people and said, “O people, the Messenger of Allah is the Imam whether dead or living. He had said that he must be buried in the place where he died. He then stood at the door and prayed for him. Then he commanded every ten people to come in and pray for him and come out”.( Al Kafi, vol 4, part 3 Ch. 111, h# 36).

(iii). Prophet is given choice to die or survive before his soul is taken.

Narrated ‘Aisha: (the wife of the Prophet) When Allah’s Apostle was in good health, he used to say, “No prophet’s soul is ever captured unless he is shown his place in Paradise and given the option (to die or survive).” So when the death of the Prophet approached and his head was on my thigh, he became unconscious for a while and then he came to his senses and fixed his eyes on the ceiling and said, “O Allah (with) the highest companions.” (See Qur’an 4:69). I said’ “Hence he is not going to choose us.” And I came to know that it was the application of the narration which he (the Prophet) used to narrate to us. And that was the last statement of the Prophet (before his death) i.e., “O Allah! With the highest companions.” (Sahih Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 76, Number 516).

(iv). Prophet(saw) and his close relatives are prohibited from accepting charity.

Note: Point worthy to note is that, most of these exclusive rulings for Prophet(saw) mentioned in ahadeeth were regarding the scenarios that would occur near or after the death of Prophet(saw), similar to Prophet(saw) not leaving behind inheritance.

Now, if Shiapen wants to reject Sunni view that certain exception for Prophet(saw) were reported in ahadeeth, which we have proven quoting valid proofs, then we challenge Shiapen to provide one verse of Quran or authentic Sunni hadeeth, which says that, all the exceptions for Prophet(saw) were mentioned in Quran. If, they can’t then that proves the invalidity of their baseless claim.

Moreover, even the highly revered Shia scholars believed in some exclusive rulings for Prophets(as), Such as they were not allowed to practice Taqiyyah(dissimulation).

Esteemed Shia scholar al-Tusi in al-Tibyan 7/259-260 stated:

الطوسي كتابه التبيان 7/ 259 و260
“وعلى كل حال فلا يجوز على الانبياء القبائح ولايجوز ايضاً عليهم التعمية في الاخبار ولا التقية في اخبارهم لأنه يؤدي الى التشكيك في اخبارهم فلا يجوز ذلك عليهم على وجه”
“In any case it is not permissible for prophets to commit ugly acts, nor is it allowed for them to speak in a coded (unclear) way nor to use Taqqiyah because it would lead some to question their sayings, so it’s not allowed in any way.”

Esteemed Shia scholar al-Tabrasi in Tafseer Majma’a al-Bayan 7/97 states:

الطبرسي كتاب تفسير مجمع البيان 7/97
” فقد دلت الأدلة العقلية التي لاتحتمل التأويل على أن الانبياء لايجوز عليهم الكذب وان لم يقصدوا به غروراً ولاضرراً كما لايجوز عليهم التعمية في الاخبار ولا التقيّة لأن ذلك يؤدي الى التشكيك في أخبارهم
“Intellectual evidence that cannot be mis-interpreted shows us that it is not allowed for prophets to lie even if they do not mean any harm by it, also it is not allowed for them to speak in a coded (unclear) language nor is Taqqiyah allowed because it would cast doubt on their sayings.

Esteemed Shia scholar al-Majlisi in Bihar al-Anwar 28/400 stated:

المجلسي بحار الانوار ج28 ص400
(فأما الرسول (صلى الله عليه وآله) فانما لم تجز التقية عليه لان الشريعة لا تعرف إلا من جهته ولا يوصل إليها إلا بقوله )
“As for rassul-Allah SAWS, Taqqiyah is not permissible for him because the religious laws can only be known from him and cannot be reached except through his sayings.”

Taken from
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/6-sunni-answers-to-shiapens-article-on-fadak-and-inheritance-of-prophetsaw-chapter-six/

Quote
*Just one question which is in my mind. If Imam Ali (a.s), Hadhrat Fatima (s.a), Hadhrat Abbas ibn Abdul Muttalib (a.s), Ummhat ul Momineen (r.a) knew that Prophet (s) did not leave any inheritance for them then why did they keep asking Caliphs of their time for Inheritance?
Fatima(RA), Abbas(RA), Mothers of believers(RA) just asked ONCE for their inheritance. After they were informed, they stopped asking it. As for the second time Ali(RA) and Abbas(RA) approaching Umar(RA), then they asked to be the care takers of charitable endowments.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: NaveenHussain on May 09, 2016, 06:32:17 PM
Do Prophets not inherit according to Quran ?
They do inherit immaterial possession. But not material possessions.
Which immaterial possessions do they inherit?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on May 09, 2016, 08:37:54 PM
Do Prophets not inherit according to Quran ?
They do inherit immaterial possession. But not material possessions.

Which immaterial possessions do they inherit?

[Ahmad bin Idris, from Muhammad bin `Abdul-Jabbar, from Safwan bin Yahya, from Shu`ayb al-Haddad, from Durays al-Kanasi that he said: I was with abu `Abdillah (as) and with him was abu Basir, so abu `Abdullah (as) said: “Dawud inherited the knowledge of the prophets, and Sulayman inherited Dawud, and Muhammad (saw) inherited Sulayman, and we inherited Muhammad (saw), and we have the Mushaf of Ibrahim and the tablets of Musa…]
Source: al-Kafi by al-Kulayni, volume 1 page 225. al-Majlisi declared its authenticity in Mir’aat-ul-`Uqool 3/20.

[Some of our companions, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa, from ibn Mahboub, from Hisham bin Salim, from Yazid al-Kanasi, he said: I asked abu `Abdillah (as) … Zakariyyah was Allah’s proof on the people, two years after `Isa’s silence, then he died so his son Yahya inherited his book and his wisdom while still young, have you not heard Allah’s words {O Yahya hold on to the book firmly, and we have granted him the judgement while still young}…]
Source: al-Kafi by al-Kulayni, volume 1 page 382. al-Majlisi declared its authenticity in Mir’aat-ul-`Uqool 4/246.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: NaveenHussain on May 10, 2016, 05:47:47 AM
Do Prophets not inherit according to Quran ?
They do inherit immaterial possession. But not material possessions.

Which immaterial possessions do they inherit?
So, in other words, Fatimah (as) inherited knowledge from her father (saww)? If so, surely, she was correct in her arguments against Abu Bakr, in regards to Fadak.

[Ahmad bin Idris, from Muhammad bin `Abdul-Jabbar, from Safwan bin Yahya, from Shu`ayb al-Haddad, from Durays al-Kanasi that he said: I was with abu `Abdillah (as) and with him was abu Basir, so abu `Abdullah (as) said: “Dawud inherited the knowledge of the prophets, and Sulayman inherited Dawud, and Muhammad (saw) inherited Sulayman, and we inherited Muhammad (saw), and we have the Mushaf of Ibrahim and the tablets of Musa…]
Source: al-Kafi by al-Kulayni, volume 1 page 225. al-Majlisi declared its authenticity in Mir’aat-ul-`Uqool 3/20.

[Some of our companions, from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin `Isa, from ibn Mahboub, from Hisham bin Salim, from Yazid al-Kanasi, he said: I asked abu `Abdillah (as) … Zakariyyah was Allah’s proof on the people, two years after `Isa’s silence, then he died so his son Yahya inherited his book and his wisdom while still young, have you not heard Allah’s words {O Yahya hold on to the book firmly, and we have granted him the judgement while still young}…]
Source: al-Kafi by al-Kulayni, volume 1 page 382. al-Majlisi declared its authenticity in Mir’aat-ul-`Uqool 4/246.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on May 10, 2016, 08:57:18 AM
So, in other words, Fatimah (as) inherited knowledge from her father (saww)? If so, surely, she was correct in her arguments against Abu Bakr, in regards to Fadak.

No brother, you lack knowledge about your own hadeeth, as per your own Shia hadeeth, Fadak didn't belong to Fatima(AS), it belonged to the Leader after Prophet(SAWS). Hence Fatima(AS) was mistaken when he demanded Fadak as her inheritance. So, before making arguments try to learn your own hadeeths.

In Al-Kafi we read:

علي بن إبراهيه، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عنير، عن حفص بن البختري، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلاو قال:

الأىفال ما له يوجف عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، أو قوو صالحوا، أو قوو أعطوا بأيديهه، وكل أرض خربة

وبطون الأودية فهو لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وهو للاماو من بعده يضعه حيث يشاء

Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) said:”Al-Anfal is such property for the acquisition of which no camels or horses are use and no armed expeditions are undertaken. It is the property that may come as a result of negotiated settlement or certain people would give with their own hands, may come from a barren land or from inside the valleys. Such properties belong to the Messenger of Allah and it will belong to the Imam(leader) after the the Messenger of Allah. The Imam(leader) will spend them as he may consider proper.”(Al Kafi, Chapter The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums, page 186).[Majlisi in Mirat al Uqul vol 6, page 255 graded it as Hasan(good)]

Esteemed Shia scholar Al-Kulayni(author of Al-Kafi) who is considered Thiqatul Islam by Shias, said:

وأما الانفال فليس هذه سبيلها كان للرسول عليه السلام خاصة وكانت فدك لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله خاصة، لانه صلى الله عليه وآله فتحها وأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام، لم يكن معهما أحد فزال عنها اسم الفئ ولزمها اسم الانفال وكذلك الآجام(2) والمعادن والبحار والمفاوز هي للامام خاصة

The case of al-Anfal is different. It belongs to the Messenger only. Of such properties was Fadak that belonged to the Messenger of Allah only. It is because he and Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s.) conquered it and there no one else took part. The name al-Fay’ therefore does not apply to it. Al-Anfal applies to it. Similar to al-Anfal are such properties as the marshes, mines, oceans and the wilderness. They all belong to Imam(leader) exclusively.(Al-Kafi, Chapter 130, The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums).

Comment: Thus from Shia hadeeth we find that after Prophet(saw) the property given to Prophet, will belong to the successor of Prophet, the leader of Muslims. Since Abubakr(ra) became the Imam(Leader) after Prophet(saw), the property that was granted by Allah to Prophet(saw), became the property of the Leader(i.e Abubakr). And it was upon Abubakr(ra) to manage it in the best possible charitable activities.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: NaveenHussain on May 10, 2016, 10:42:12 AM
Quote
No brother, you lack knowledge about your own hadeeth, as per your own Shia hadeeth, Fadak didn't belong to Fatima(AS), it belonged to the Leader after Prophet(SAWS). Hence Fatima(AS) was mistaken when he demanded Fadak as her inheritance. So, before making arguments try to learn your own hadeeths.
Wrong. Please don't attempt at interpreting our ahadeeth. There are many other ahadeeth that mention Fadak was gifted to Fatimah (as) as per Allah's orders, which even some Sunni scholars have recorded in their own books. Fatimah (as) is a female, thus we address her as a "she," and not a "he." Fatimah (as) wasn't mistaken at all; the arguments go to show that Abu Bakr didn't have proper knowledge of Quraan.

Quote
In Al-Kafi we read:

علي بن إبراهيه، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عنير، عن حفص بن البختري، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلاو قال:

الأىفال ما له يوجف عليه بخيل ولا ركاب، أو قوو صالحوا، أو قوو أعطوا بأيديهه، وكل أرض خربة

وبطون الأودية فهو لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وهو للاماو من بعده يضعه حيث يشاء

Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) said:”Al-Anfal is such property for the acquisition of which no camels or horses are use and no armed expeditions are undertaken. It is the property that may come as a result of negotiated settlement or certain people would give with their own hands, may come from a barren land or from inside the valleys. Such properties belong to the Messenger of Allah and it will belong to the Imam(leader) after the the Messenger of Allah. The Imam(leader) will spend them as he may consider proper.”(Al Kafi, Chapter The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums, page 186).[Majlisi in Mirat al Uqul vol 6, page 255 graded it as Hasan(good)]

Esteemed Shia scholar Al-Kulayni(author of Al-Kafi) who is considered Thiqatul Islam by Shias, said:

وأما الانفال فليس هذه سبيلها كان للرسول عليه السلام خاصة وكانت فدك لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله خاصة، لانه صلى الله عليه وآله فتحها وأمير المؤمنين عليه السلام، لم يكن معهما أحد فزال عنها اسم الفئ ولزمها اسم الانفال وكذلك الآجام(2) والمعادن والبحار والمفاوز هي للامام خاصة

The case of al-Anfal is different. It belongs to the Messenger only. Of such properties was Fadak that belonged to the Messenger of Allah only. It is because he and Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s.) conquered it and there no one else took part. The name al-Fay’ therefore does not apply to it. Al-Anfal applies to it. Similar to al-Anfal are such properties as the marshes, mines, oceans and the wilderness. They all belong to Imam(leader) exclusively.(Al-Kafi, Chapter 130, The Fay’, al-Anfal, al-Khums, its rules and the properties subject to al-Khums).

Yes, it belongs to the Infallibles (as). My understanding is that Imam Ali (as) would do with Fadak the same as would Rasool (saww) or Fatimah (as); they were as one, in terms of choosing Allah (swt) before anything else. Keep in mind that the Imam after Rasoolullah (saww) was Imam Ali (as), Fatimah's (as) husband.

Quote
Comment: Thus from Shia hadeeth we find that after Prophet(saw) the property given to Prophet, will belong to the successor of Prophet, the leader of Muslims. Since Abubakr(ra) became the Imam(Leader) after Prophet(saw), the property that was granted by Allah to Prophet(saw), became the property of the Leader(i.e Abubakr). And it was upon Abubakr(ra) to manage it in the best possible charitable activities.
Abu Bakr wasn't the leader of the Muslims, as he usurped the position from the rightful leader, Imam Ali (as). Imam Ali (as) and Fatimah (as) were way more knowledgeable than Abu Bakr; they knew what to do with Fadak, while Abu Bakr relied on his mis/disinformation, in order to steal Fadak, hence why it's said Abu Bakr eventually wrote-over to deed of Fadak to Fatimah (as), but Umar ripped the paper because of his own personal inclinations. This is only one reason why we consider them enemies of Ahlul Bayt (as).
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on May 10, 2016, 11:20:58 AM
Quote
No brother, you lack knowledge about your own hadeeth, as per your own Shia hadeeth, Fadak didn't belong to Fatima(AS), it belonged to the Leader after Prophet(SAWS). Hence Fatima(AS) was mistaken when he demanded Fadak as her inheritance. So, before making arguments try to learn your own hadeeths.
Wrong. Please don't attempt at interpreting our ahadeeth. There are many other ahadeeth that mention Fadak was gifted to Fatimah (as) as per Allah's orders, which even some Sunni scholars have recorded in their own books. Fatimah (as) is a female, thus we address her as a "she," and not a "he." Fatimah (as) wasn't mistaken at all; the arguments go to show that Abu Bakr didn't have proper knowledge of Quraan.
Please don't make false accusations on me, its a failed trick of Rafidah. I'm not interpreting, rather I quoted you the words of your Imam and the explanation given by your Scholar Kulayni. So blame them for your humiliation not me.

And it was a typo, I meant "SHE", but I believe it was Qadr of Allah, to show the double standards of Rafidah, the claim you make that Fadak was gifted to Fatima(RA) on order of Allah(SWT), is a clear fabrication. Because the verse those reports mention after which Fadak was allegedly gifted to Fatima(RA), has a MASCULINE PRONOUN I.E HIS.  I hope you will accept that Allah(SWT) won't address Fatima(RA) with masculine pronoun(HIS), as you don't address her with the pronoun(HE).  Unless you wish to take a U-turn now.

Quote
Yes, it belongs to the Infallibles (as). My understanding is that Imam Ali (as) would do with Fadak the same as would Rasool (saww) or Fatimah (as); they were as one, in terms of choosing Allah (swt) before anything else. Keep in mind that the Imam after Rasoolullah (saww) was Imam Ali (as), Fatimah's (as) husband.
It doesn't say infallibles, it just says Imam(leader). So stop your desperate and failed misinterpretations.

And sorry no one cares of your non-sensical understanding. There is no mention of Fatima(RA) in this report, the Imam(leader) is mentioned as the SOLE owner of it. Unless you believe that Fatima(RA) is also an Imam now. But that would make you people Thirteeners not Twelvers.

Anyways, what these reports prove is that, Fadak DIDN'T BELONG TO FATIMA(RA), this is clear as a sun, in a cloudless day.

Quote
Abu Bakr wasn't the leader of the Muslims, as he usurped the position from the rightful leader, Imam Ali (as).
Ok, Abu Bakr was the leader of Momineen then (wink). And let me share you the thoughts of a Momin about Caliphate of Abu bakr(AS).

حَدَّثَنَا عُثْمَانُ بْنُ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ إِسْمَاعِيلَ السَّبِيعِيُّ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا هِلالُ بْنُ الْعَلاءِ بْنِ هِلالٍ الْبَاهِلِيُّ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا إِسْحَاقُ الأَزْرَقُ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو سِنَانٍ ، قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا الضَّحَّاكُ بْنُ مُزَاحِمٍ ، عَنِ النَّزَّالِ بْنِ سَبْرَةَ الْهِلالِيِّ ، قَالَ : وَافَقَنَا مِنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ذَاتَ يَوْمٍ طِيبُ بِشْرٍ وَمُزَاحٌ ، قُلْنَا لَهُ : يَا أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ، حَدِّثْنَا عَنْ أَصْحَابِكَ . قَالَ : مَا كَانَ لِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَاحِبًا إِلا كَانَ لِي صَاحِبًا . قُلْنَا : حَدِّثْنَا عَنْ أَصْحَابِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ . قَالَ : سَلُونِي . قُلْنَا : حَدِّثْنَا عَنْ أَبِي بَكْرٍ ، قَالَ : ” ذَلِكَ امْرُؤٌ سَمَّاهُ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ صِدِّيقًا عَلَى لِسَانِ جِبْرِيلَ ، وَلِسَانِ مُحَمَّدٍ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، كَانَ خَلِيفَةَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَلَى الصَّلاةِ ، رَضِيَهُ لِدِينِنَا فَرَضِينَاهُ لِدُنْيَانَا ” .

Uthman bin Ja’afar bin Muhammad bin Ismael al Subei’ee told us: Hilal bin al ‘Alaa bin Hilal al Bahili told us: my father told me: Ishaq al Azraq told us: Abu Sinan told us: al-Dahhaq bin Muzahim told us from al Nazzal bin Sabrah al Hilali: We were with Ali bin abi Talib (ra) one day and we told him: “O Ameer al Mumineen, tell us about your companions.” He said:”Every companion of the Prophet PBUH was also my companion.” They said: “then tell us about the companions of the Prophet PBUH” He said: “Ask me” we said: “Tell us about Abu bakr” He replied: ” That is a Man called al-Siddiq by Allah through Gabriel and Muhammad PBUH, He was the successor of the messenger of Allah in leading the prayer, He PBUH had accepted him for our religion so we accepted him for our life.“[al-Lalikaee made Takhreej for this in #2455, , Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al-Imam said in the commentary: Isnaduhu Hasan.]

حدثنا أبو حفص عمر بن أيوب السقطي ، قال : حدثنا محمد بن معاوية بن مالج ، قال : حدثنا علي بن هاشم ، عن أبيه ، عن أبي الجحاف ، قال : قام أبو بكر رضي الله عنه بعدما بويع له وبايع له علي رضي الله عنه وأصحابه قام ثلاثا ، يقول : ” أيها الناس ، قد أقلتكم بيعتكم هل من كاره ؟ قال : فيقوم علي رضي الله عنه أوائل الناس يقول : ” لا والله لا نقيلك ، ولا نستقيلك قدمك رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ، فمن ذا الذي يؤخرك ” .

[abu Hafs `Umar bin Ayyub al-Siqati told us, Muhammad bin Mu`awiyah bin Malaj said, `Ali bin Hisham told us, from his father, from abu al-Jahhaf that he said:
Abu Bakr (ra) stood up three times after he received Bay`ah from `Ali (ra) and his companions, saying: “O people, I shall return your Bay`ah to you, does anyone dislike this?” he said: So `Ali (ra) would stand among the first of them and say: “No by Allah we shall not let you retire, if the messenger of Allah (SAWS) placed you ahead (means leading Salat), then who can put you behind.”] ( al-Shari`ah lil-Aajurri (b.280 – d.360 AH).]

Quote
Imam Ali (as) and Fatimah (as) were way more knowledgeable than Abu Bakr; they knew what to do with Fadak,
And ironically, Ali(AS) dealt with Fadak he same way Abu Bakr(AS) did, which gives a tight slap on the face of those who make false allegations on Abu bakr(AS).

When Ali(ra) became the Caliph he was approached about returning Fadak. Ali’s reply(ra) was:

إ ن الأمر لما وصل الأمر إلى علي ابن أبي طالب كلّم في رد فدك ، فقال : ” إني لأستحيي من الله أن أرد شيئاً منع منه أبو بكر وأمضاه عمر
“I am ashamed before Allah to overturn something that was prohibited by Abu Bakr and (same decision)continued by Umar.” (Ibn Abil Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balaghah, vol. 4 p. 130)

Infact, Ali(ra) followed the Sunnah of the first three righteous Caliphh.

كان أبو بكر يأخذ غلتها فيدفع إليهم منها ما يكفيهم ويقسم الباقي وكان عمر كذلك ثم عثمان ثم كان على كذلك
Abu Bakr would send the produce of Fadak to Ahlel bayt, as much was enough for them , and would distribute the rest (amongst the needy) , and same did Umar, and after him, Uthman, and after him Ali.
(Sharh nahjul balagha, Ibn Abil hadeed, Vol. 2 ,p. 292
It has also been recorded by :
Sharh nahjul balagha, ibn maitham, Vol. 5, p. 107
Durr al najafia, Sharh nahjul balagha, p. 332
Sharh Nahjul balagha, by Faizul Islam Ali Naqi, Vol. 5, p. 920).

Shaykh of shias al-Murtada in his book “ash-Shafi fil Imama” (4/92) brought this report:

ان الامر لما انتهى الى امير المؤمنين عليه السلام – اي علي رضي الله عنه – ترك فدك على ماكانت عليه – أي في عهد ابي بكر وعمر رضوان الله عليهما – ولم يجعلها ميراثا ولد فاطمة عليها السلام

When ruling passed to commander of faithful, alaihi salam  (meaning Ali), he left Fadak in the same place it was upon, and he didn’t make it inheritance to the children of Fatima. [“ash-Shafi fil Imama” (4/92)]
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on May 10, 2016, 12:23:13 PM
Fatimah (as) wasn't mistaken at all; the arguments go to show that Abu Bakr didn't have proper knowledge of Quraan.

Since you are in the habit of misquoting our texts and participating in word-gymnastics, let me address this tidbit.  You claimed that Fatima [ra] was not mistaken.  Let us see her level of knowledge as per your own narrations.

"Ali inherited the knowledge of Allah’s messenger and Fatima inherited his property."  (Al-Kafi, Volume 7 page 86). [Allamah Majlisi declared it Hasan in Mirat al-Uqool, Volume 23 page 32].

Therefore - as per your own hadith - Fatima [ra] only inherited property, not knowledge.  So, it is possible that she was mistaken.

Let me put it to you in another way.  From the above narration, it is alleged that only Imam Ali [ra] inherited the knowledge of the Prophet [saw].  What did Imam Ali [ra] say in this matter?  He sided with the three [ra] before him.  What did Imam Ali [ra] do with Fadak (even when he was the Caliph and had all the power at his disposal)?  He did exactly what Abu Bakr [ra], Umar [ra] and Uthman [ra] did with Fadak.  Imam Ali [ra] never took Fadak for his family.

In conclusion, the one with knowledge did not think Fadak was his wife's inheritance.  In fact, he never reclaimed it when he had all the power.  To make matters worse, even Imam Hassan [ra] did not claim Fadak during his brief rule. 

So here is my question to you?  If you follow the Imams [ra], why don't you follow the example of Imam Ali [ra] and Imam Hassan [ra]?
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: Hani on May 10, 2016, 05:52:17 PM
Bro muslim720, don't quote many Shia narrations, they're full if contradictions.

As for Naveen, the imam is talking about himself and the rest of the imams. Fatima is not an imam so there's no reason for her to inherit knowledge.

I add, I never quoted the report except to show you that this inheritance is that of knowledge and position not of wealth. Ahlul Sunnah interpret it as such without your Shia report.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: muslim720 on May 10, 2016, 06:56:29 PM
Bro muslim720, don't quote many Shia narrations, they're full if contradictions.

As for Naveen, the imam is talking about himself and the rest of the imams. Fatima is not an imam so there's no reason for her to inherit knowledge.


I try to steer clear but if his rebuttal is a mere statement such as "Fatima [ra] wasn't mistaken" without any backing evidence, then it is best for him to learn what his own books say.
Title: Re: Most Recent Fadak Discussion on ShiaChat
Post by: AE on March 12, 2017, 05:14:41 AM
Quote
Secondly, this report about `Ali being the best of judges is an argument against abuJay, since the same report shows that others were equal if not superior to `Ali in matters of Halal and Haram and inheritance such as Mu`adh and Zayd. Add on top that the narration says that Abu Bakr is "the most merciful man towards my nation" so how can the most merciful man be an oppressive tyrant!?

Here's the full text from al-Hakim whom BuJay quoted:

إِنَّ أَرْأَفَ أُمَّتِي بِهَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ، وَإِنَّ أَصْلَبَهَا فِي أَمْرِ اللَّهِ عُمَرَ، وَإِنَّ أَشَدَّهَا حَيَاءً عُثْمَانُ، وَإِنَّ أَقْرَأَهَا أُبَيُّ بْنُ كَعْبٍ، وَإِنَّ أَفْرَضَهَا زَيْدُ بْنُ ثَابِتٍ، وَإِنَّ أَقْضَاهَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ، وَإِنَّ أَعْلَمَهَا بِالْحَلالِ وَالْحَرَامِ مُعَاذُ بْنُ جَبَلٍ، وَإِنَّ أَصْدَقَهَا لَهْجَةً أَبُو ذَرٍّ، وَإِنَّ أَمِينَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ أَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ بْنُ الْجَرَّاحِ، وَإِنَّ حَبْرَ هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ لِعَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَبَّاسٍ


Muadh and Zayd are completely irrelevant to the statement "Ali (as) is the best islamic judge on earth".

Just like when Muslims try to prove Muhammad [saw] in the bible, the verses in the bible that says jesus is the son of god is completely irrelevant to us, all that is relevant to us is the point we are trying to prove.

So you bringing me hadith with additions such as "muadh is the best in halal and haram" and " zayd is the best in inheritance laws" is 100 percent irrelevant as the statement "Ali is the best Islamic judge on earth" still holds and stands as a valid statement.

So my question to you is this, Is Ali the best Islamic judge, yes or no?

Do you agree or disagree? Once you agree to this point we will show the knowledge of Imam Ali [as] in your own books.

Ali is the best of judges was reported like a part of hadith. Judging hadith should be on knowledge not wishes and desires.

If you accept part about Ali, you should do the same with complete hadith. The way you act is the way of jews, that use to accept parts that been in their favor and reject one which was not suitable.