Taqleed!

Brother you cannot pick and chose parts of the hadeeth and interpret them to suit you.

There is no question about what the hadeeth is saying, it is echoing abu bakrs(la) words that the prophet has no inheritance of financial property!

The hadeeth is explicitly stating that a prophet does not leave personal heirs as he does not leave any material wealth or possession.
The only legacy that a prophet leaves behind is knowledge and this goes to the scholars.

Now the question for you is simple!

At the demise of our Prophet (saww), did he leave any material possession's for his heir?

Wasi o rasool allah is unquestionably Mola Ali (as).

So for this hadeeth to claim what it is claiming is clear the hadeeth is fabricated!

Unless it is talking about legacy as the ongoing work of the Prophet(saww) and the heir being Mola Ameer (as).

Regardless of whether khumayni or any one else has tried to legitimise it by extended and conflated polemics, the fact of the matter is, it is a hadeeth that contraidcts the sermon of Paak Syeda (sa) and it cannot be accepted.

Furthermore if that is the hadeeth being used to justify wilayat e faqih, then im afraid WF is a pillar of dry sand built on quicksand! If it doesnt toplle or crumble, it will most certainly sink!

There is a hadeeth of Mola Imam Sadiq (as) which states there are 3 types of people in the world, scholars, seekers of knowledge and the common layperson.
Mola then go on to state that 'We the aimma(as) are the scholars, our followers are the seekers of the truth and the others are the laeity who are pulled this way and that'. [or words to these effects.
I will try and find the actual text of the hadeeth and the reference for you.

So this hadeeth kind of defines your above hadeeth to accepting that ONLY the Aimma (as) are scholars.
So if the Hadeeth is referring to Aimma (as) it excludes the followers as they can never be anything other than seekers of the knowledge.

Thus your argument about present day and non masoom scholars being the ones referred in this hadeeth doesnt wash! With it goes the concept of WF!

Quote

"At the demise of our Prophet (saww), did he leave any material possession's for his heir?"

I am not the one picking and and choosing the hadith here.This hadith is in referance to the "Scholars" and not Family (as). The Imams (as) have prohibited some heirs from inheriting certain items of their estates, including the Dhul Fiqar, the Quran, the Prophet’s (saw) ring, and his bodily garments. These items were excluded from the Quranic laws of inheritance and reserved for the new Imam (as), instead of being properly distributed amongst the other children and eligible heirs.

Yes true the Imam (as) are the scholars, but you can not apply this with every hadith you see where the word "Ulema" has been used. You have given me one hadith and I can give you hundreads. If you are applying that the Ulema in this hadith is refering to the Imams (as) then the same tradition says that the Ulema dont inherit the Dinars / Dirhams of Prophets - that automatically negates Syeda Fatima (as)'s Fadak claim.

Hazrat Fatima (a.s.) says, “ My father told me that Allah will provide the raiment from the Heaven to the Shia scholars on the Day of Resurrection as a reward for imparting knowledge to the orphans, acting as their guardians and guides in the absence (Ghaibat) of the Imam (a.s.) of the time. These scholars take care of the children because they are aware that the Imam (a.s.) would bestow more attention to the young seekers of knowledge than their own parents

Ain Hayat Allmah Majlisi Pg 119

Who are the Scholars above?

Muawiah bin Ammar narrates that he asked Imam Jafar e Sadiq (a.s.), “ Who is the of two persons, one who disseminates your traditions and exhortations or the one who keeps himself busy in prayer day and night? The Imam (a.s.) replied, “ The one who disseminates our traditions is the better of the two. He is better than a thousand pious persons.” Then the Imam (a.s.) added, “ Live in the world like a Scholar of the Faith (Aalim e Deen) and as a seeker of knowledge (Talib e Ilm) or as a friend of the possessors of knowledge.”

Ain Hayat Allmah Majlisi Pg 120

Now I can give you hundread of hadiths where the Aima (as) have used the title of Ulema not only to them self but others. Now can you answer my Questions from before.....

Silat_warrior110 wrote:
I am not the one picking and and choosing the hadith here.This hadith is in referance to the "Scholars" and not Family (as). The Imams (as) have prohibited some heirs from inheriting certain items of their estates, including the Dhul Fiqar, the Quran, the Prophet’s (saw) ring, and his bodily garments. These items were excluded from the Quranic laws of inheritance and reserved for the new Imam (as), instead of being properly distributed amongst the other children and eligible heirs.

So a family Member of the Prophet( Saww) cannot be a scholar??!!
So you are accepting that the true heir to the Prophet (saww) gets the ring, bodily garments, dhul fiqar? How many of your so called modern day scholars have shown that they have such an item?

You are seperating signs of authority, symbol of office from personal estate.
Excellent, now explain to me how any body other than the Aimma (as) EVER inherited the status/symbol of office?
If knowledge is the symbol of the office of wilayat as the above mentioned objects, ONLY a Wali appointed by Allah (swt) can lay claim to it!
Everyone else will have to go through the Wali and be given his or her share through such a wali! No one can claim independant rights as an alternative heir to this property! That would make a joke of the whole institution.

Yes true the Imam (as) are the scholars, but you can not apply this with every hadith you see where the word "Ulema" has been used. You have given me one hadith and I can give you hundreads. If you are applying that the Ulema in this hadith is refering to the Imams (as) then the same tradition says that the Ulema dont inherit the Dinars / Dirhams of Prophets - that automatically negates Syeda Fatima (as)'s Fadak claim.

You have not provided me with any hadeeth showing the word alim, only your translation of words to scholar! A scholar is a talib e ilm, and an Alim is the possessor of knowledge.
Your english translation are neither proof nor reliable

.

which is why this hadeeth is fabricated as it opposes the quran and other hadeeth!

Hazrat Fatima (a.s.) says, “ My father told me that Allah will provide the raiment from the Heaven to the Shia scholars on the Day of Resurrection as a reward for imparting knowledge to the orphans, acting as their guardians and guides in the absence (Ghaibat) of the Imam (a.s.) of the time. These scholars take care of the children because they are aware that the Imam (a.s.) would bestow more attention to the young seekers of knowledge than their own parents

Ain Hayat Allmah Majlisi Pg 119

arabic text? what word is used? alim? or ulama or mulla or talib ilm?

.

Who are the Scholars above?

Muawiah bin Ammar narrates that he asked Imam Jafar e Sadiq (a.s.), “ Who is the of two persons, one who disseminates your traditions and exhortations or the one who keeps himself busy in prayer day and night? The Imam (a.s.) replied, “ The one who disseminates our traditions is the better of the two. He is better than a thousand pious persons.” Then the Imam (a.s.) added, “ Live in the world like a Scholar of the Faith (Aalim e Deen) and as a seeker of knowledge (Talib e Ilm) or as a friend of the possessors of knowledge.”

can a non masoom if no matter how long he has studied ever be anything other than a seeker of knowledge?
If no then he will always be a seeker!
Alim e Deen should not be translated as a scholar of the faith, but as a possessor of knowledge of the deen! and that is an Imam (as).
This is evident in the last line of the given hadeeth where it has been translated as "as a friend of the posssessors of knowledge" why did it not say as a friend of the scholar seeking more knowledge? That is not a hujjat on us! our duty is to follow the Possessor of knowledge not the seeker of knowledge.

Your own stated hadeeth is going against you

.

Ain Hayat Allmah Majlisi Pg 120

Now I can give you hundread of hadiths where the Aima (as) have used the title of Ulema not only to them self but others. Now can you answer my Questions from before.....

Brother you are going off topic! I am not denying that scholars seeking knowledge have a high status in the eyes of the Aimma (as). But Alim and talib e ilm are seperate things...and you cannot convince me by putting up english translations of hadeeth, you need to show me the original arabic that Alim refers to talib e ilm and not the possessors of knowledge given by Allah (swt).

An alim is one who knows without needing to seek or learn or ask.

Show me a million hadeeth but provide the arabic! And a scholar is not the same as an Alim neither is this translation accurate! An Alim is the possessor of knowledge! A seeker of knowledge does not possess it and is why he or she is seeking it!

Now dont go off topic and come back to the issue.

As for the rewards for a faqih, muhaddath or an abid etc, these are not in dispute.

Now how is this any different to what abu bakr (la) or umar (la) said?
Mullahs are NOT the Alims that are the heirs to the Prophets(saww) knowledge!

There is a hadeeth by the Prophet (saww) also describing an Alim saying the scholars of my ummat will have a higher status than the prophets of bani israel (hebraic semites).

Now if the status of these scholars is higher, then so must their attributes, and only the Aimma (as) satisfy this criteria.

UNLESS you are going to argue that a non masoom is more elevated than a masoom?? This would then be zulm and the whole basis of this hadeeth would be ridiculous.

The Aimma (as) have adequately pointed out who the scholars (ALIM) are and what status they have.

One who disseminates hadeeth is a muhaddith and not an Alim.

Now please come back on topic and explain how this hadeeth and others are referring to non masoom scholars!

Oh and please do not confuse definitins, do not translate muhadith, scholars, seekers of knowledge, narrators, wscribes and whatever else as scholars! That is really quite disingenious!

QUOTE

"An alim is one who knows without needing to seek or learn or ask.
Show me a million hadeeth but provide the arabic! And a scholar is not the same as an Alim neither is this translation accurate! An Alim is the possessor of knowledge! A seeker of knowledge does not possess it and is why he or she is seeking it!

Oh and please do not confuse definitins, do not translate muhadith, scholars, seekers of knowledge, narrators, wscribes and whatever else as scholars! That is really quite disingenious!

Once again I have answered your Question I am not the one confused here, I have reply to your Questions and yet you failed to answer mine.. I am unable to provide the Original arabic to these referacnces as the version I have of the book is only in english translation which does not include the arabic.

However let us look at the following:-


The Reward of the Teacher and the Student:





7/60: Muhammad ibn Yahya, from Ahmad ibn Muhammad, from al-Hasan ibn Matibub, from Jamil ibn Salih , from Muhammad ibn Muslim:

Abu Ja'far (al-'Imam al-Baqir) (A) said: `The teacher of Knowledge among you receives the reward of the student and has a merit over the latter. So seek Knowledge from its possessors and teach it to your brothers in the same way as the learned taught you.' (Al kafi)

NOTICE THE WORD "TEACHER OF KNOWLEDGE AMONG YOU RECIEVES THE REWARD IF A STUDENT". ONCE AGAIN STILL NOT CONVINCED THAT A ALIM DOES NOT ONLY HAVE TO BE A IMAM (AS)? LET US LOOK AT THE FOLLOWING HADITH....

15/101 Muhammad ibn Isma'il, from al-Fadl ibn Shadhan, from Hammad ibn `Isa, from Rib'i ibn `Abd Allah, from Muhammad ibn Muslim:



Abu `Abd Allah (A) said: "When a learned man is asked about some­thing he doesn't know, he should say, `God knows best.' But it is not for someone who is not learned to say that."



IF ALIM KNOWS EVERYTHING AS YOU SUGGESTED BEFORE, THEN WHY WOULD HE NEED TO SAY "ALLAH (SWT) KNOWS BEST?" IS A ALIM NOT SUPPOSE TO KNOW EVERYTHING? NOW WHAT WORD HAS BEEN USED IN ARABIC FOR TEACHER? ALIM OR TALIB ILME?

Now can you answer my Questions.. also as previously mentioned before, If Fadak was bestowed upon Fatima (as) as a gift, then why did she (sa) claim it as her inheritance and not say anything about a gift as you mentioned before? (I am not sayying it was not a Gift) however why is there no mention of this in the Sermon of Bibi Fatimah (sa)?

Bibi Fatimah (sa) says "It is become clear as daylight (like a shining sun), that I am his daughter [daughter of your Prophet Muhammad ( SWS)]. O Muslims! Will I be overcome and denied my inheritance?"

As for your question, read the post 10 posts above your post and you will see i have given ample evidence of fadak having been handed over during the Prophets(saww) lifetime. If not then answering islam have addressed this issue of fadak being a gift in superb detail with proofs. It would be fruitless and futile of me to copy and paste their arguments for you on here...heres the link: http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/fadak/en/chap4.php

Now coming back to the hadeeth, i cannot believe how you are going to such lengths to validate such a weak interpretation. The hadeeth ONLY makes sense if you take it to mean that the Aimma (as) the Imams(As) are the inheritors of the Prophetic legacy of Islam.

It is clearly stating that prophets (saww) leave no inheritance which is
monetary (dinar or dirham) so according to this hadeeth, fadak was not
inheritance. That kind of shoots you in the foot where it comes to
arguing fadak was not a gift during the lifetime of the Prophet (Saww)
which has been proven at the above mentioned link.

The hadeeth states that the 'Persons with knowledge' [alims] are the inheriters of the Prophets (saww) mission/ legacy/Islam.

Persons with knowledge is the accurate translation of Alim (one who knows or possesses knowledge).

Islam is the legacy, as is the knowledge of islam, and the alims are the heirs of the Prophet(saww).

Now read this very carefully, the hadeeth is calling 'THOISE WHO POSSESS knowledge' as the inheritors, NOT those who will possess or will learn. How can this refer to ANY fallible non masoom who is NOT a part of the ayat rasikhoon fil ilm, those firmly rooted in knowledge?!

Now another matter, the hadeeth states that the Alims are the inheritors
of the Prophets (saww) legacy.

Please see, the hadeeth mentions Alims as inheritors not the inheritors who then become alims! So for anyone to say they come under the ambit of this hadeeth, they would have to show they were an alim when this hadeeth was first stated at the minimum!

Also please do notice that the hadeeth is equating an alim [the possessor] of knowledge as a heir to the Prophetic (saww) legacy! However much anyone can know, they can not know everything unless they are rasikhoona fil ilm, imamun mobeen, sirat e mustaqeem.

So someone has to be an alim to be an inheritor.

Now inheritance has been define in the quran, and it is given in pre apportioned shares! It is the right of family and not any tom dick and harry so this hadeeth is not only denying fadak it is denying inheritance laws and the list of beneficiaries to inheritance upon your construction!

But according to the way i am stating, it makes perfect sense if the Aimma (as) are the inheritors of the legacy for they are masoom and responsible for islam.

They are the ones who possess knowledge and they are the guardians of Islam and have inherited this legacy of protecting islam and explaining it!

Now the Alim (possessor of knowledge) in the hadeeth is unqualified, so before you try and twist it to mean any two penny mullah claiming to be an alim you must realise that possessor of knowledge here is unqualified. Which means the hadeeth is referring to someone who possesses the whole of the knowledge that the Prophet(saww) has, otherwise it would be qualified.

It would also not be just or certain if Allah (swt) gave us guides who themselves knew pretty much next to nothing even in their totality!
The only person who was the inheritor of the Prophet(saww) to the legacy (islam/ and its guardianship) is the one who possesses ALL the knowledge of the Prophet (saww).

Now if someone claims to be an alim in the total sense and says wallahhu alim, then it becomes encumbent on you to take him to the nearest crossroads and get every passer by to whip him until he either remembers or agrees to stop using the term alim in an unqualified manner!

Remember one of Allah(swt) attributes is Alim possessor of knowlege.
If Allah(swt) poossesses knowledge and he gives his knowledge to someone then that person is without doubt and unequivocally an alim.

You can possess knowledge (be an alim) in many things.

If someone learns a specific subject from this person endowed by Allah (swt) then he is a student, who may possess knowledge on a certain subject (ie be an alim in one field) but is not a alim in an unqualified manner because he would have to reply 'wallahu alim' at sometime!

And if someone says, i dont know this, Allah (swt) possess this knowledge, then that person is themself disclaiming ilm and being an alim. So how can you call that person a lier and say no he or she IS an alim?

As far as the title, the title of Alim as described in hadeeth has to be seen in a qualified way ie possessor of some knowledge who are still seeking. So they are limited alims with ongoing talib ilm ventures.

Now would you call someone who is training to be a doctor a doctor? or a trainee doctor/ student doctor?

Mola (as) also use the term ulema e soo and ulema e haqq in hadeeth. Ulema Haqq are those knowledgeable in truth ie Aimma (as) ulema e soo are the decievers the liers!

So my brother, care to use another hadeeth to justify your view that
'scholars' are the inheritors to the Prophets (saww) legacy of guarding Islam?!

QUOTE
"As for your question, read the post 10 posts above your post and you will see i have given ample evidence of fadak having been handed over during the Prophets(saww) lifetime. If not then answering islam have addressed this issue of fadak being a gift in superb detail with proofs. It would be fruitless and futile of me to copy and paste their arguments for you on here...heres the link: http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/fadak/en/chap4.php"

Brother why are you giving me a link which does not answer my Question?. I think the best thing is If deal with one point at a time. Now according to you Fadak was a gift? if that is the case why is there no mention of it been a gift in the sermon of Bibi Fatimah (as)? to help you I shall post part of the sermon...

O you people of reflection; will I be usurped the inheritance of my father while you hear and see me?! (And while) You are sitting and gathered around me? You hear my call, and are included in the (news of the) affair?

http://www.duas.org/Sahife%20Zehra/dua74.htm

Please dont give me Sunni Hadiths about it been a gift, it might have well have been but from the Sermon of Bibi Fatimah (sa) there is no mention of it been a gift. Please answer in light of the sermon, then inshallah we can move to the next point.


GIVE ME ONE SHIA HADITH SAYYING IT WAS A GIFT!

Where in the sermon does it say it wasnt a gift??!!

Show me where? One hadeeth where it states that fadak hadnt been given over as a gift as per the quranic ayat during the lifetime of the Prophet (saww).

If you accept it was given during the life of the Prophet (saww) as per the hukm of the quran, then how can it be argued as inheritance? Inheritance as what a heir gets after the demise of a person, whatever someone gets during the benefactors lifetime is a gift!
Inhyeritance is the making good of a promised thing AFTER The person who promised it passes from this world.

So you prove fadak was NOT a gift! And no the sermon does not prove that!

Or maybe you will come to realise the sermon was addressed to the courtiers AFTER the testimony of the Aimma (as) was refused by abu bakr (la) as fadak being something that the Paak Syeda (sa) had in her possession as her property.

Abu bakr (la) then claimed it wasnt a gift, but inheritance and Prophets(saww) did not leave inheritance other than sadaqa!

It was this point that Paak syeda (sa) addressed in the sermon which dealt with the inheritance aspect.

At first Paak Syeda (sa) showed it was her property and when the sanad (hand written testimony) of the Prophet (saww) was ripped to shreds and Mola Hassan and Hussain (as) declared as unreliable and inadmissable witnesses, then Paak Syeda (sa) proved the second point raised by abu bakr (la).

The second point being that fadak would be hers under the rules of inheritance also.
Since she was the only child of the Prophet(saww) and there was no other heir, and since only a co-heir could dispute the ownership of fadak, or the executor of the will/estate could, then abu bakr (la) had no right to do this.

Not only this but this haramzadah stated that Prophets (as) have no inheritqance at all! Their children do not inherit.

This is why it is being said 'am i to be denied my inheritance' as this is in contradiction to Paak Syedas (sa) rights under shariah!

please read the full sermon and it will make more sense to you

What kind of reply is this??? I have read the whole sermon, but I really don't think you have... I want facts which sadly you can not give me. You claim it was a gift, (Ok Fine let us say it is) why is there no mention of it in the Sermon? why is Bibi claiming it as inheritance in her (sa) sermon and not a gift? (if it was a gift) give me one single Shia hadith to prove it...

Please post with evidance...

Now you are being obstinate brother. You prove it wasnt

Silat_warrior110 wrote:

stop playying games... I am asking a simple Question.

IF IT WAS A GIFT, GIVE ME ONE SHIA HADITH TO PROVE THAT?


"Yet-now you claim that there is not inheritance for us! "

From the Sermon of Fadak!

Now you prove it was a gift...

I will give you verses from the quran sura Hashr verses 6 and 7:


وَمَا أَفَاءَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُولِهِ مِنْهُمْ فَمَا أَوْجَفْتُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ خَيْلٍ وَلَا رِكَابٍ وَلَٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ يُسَلِّطُ رُسُلَهُ عَلَىٰ مَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ وَاللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ {6}
[Shakir 59:6] And whatever Allah restored to His Messenger from them you did not press forward against it any horse or a riding camel but Allah gives authority to His messengers against whom He pleases, and Allah has power over all things.
[Pickthal 59:6] And that which Allah gave as spoil unto His messenger from them, ye urged not any horse or riding-camel for the sake thereof, but Allah giveth His messenger lordship over whom He will. Allah is Able to do all things.
[Yusufali 59:6] What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (and taken away) from them - for this ye made no expedition with either cavalry or camelry: but Allah gives power to His messengers over any He pleases: and Allah has power over all things.
[Pooya/Ali Commentary 59:6]

As has been asserted in several verses of the Quran whatsoever is in the heavens and the earth and between them belongs to Allah. They are made available to people as a trust. When disbelieving possessors turn hostile and aggressive against Allah and His Prophet, then, if their possessions are returned to the prophet of Allah without any effort or exertion on the part of the believers, such possessions become the property of His prophet. In this way it is distinguished from anfal (spoils), taken after fighting. Even in the case of anfal the authority of the prophet of Allah is unchallengeable. See commentary of Anfal: 1.

The voluntary submission of the enemy in verse 2 has been referred to here.

The Jews of Madina had come from outside and seized the lands of the original inhabitants. Since then they had been scheming and plotting to retain the usurped properties by hook or by crook. Seeing the growth of Islam they became more active and aggressive against the people of Madina. It was a just and wise decree of the Lord of the worlds to restore the lands to their original owners and thus bring peace and order in the region.

Fa-i is derived from afa which means "returned to". The warriors are not entitled to any share in the property of fa-i as stated above. It belongs to Allah and His Prophet and is to be distributed among the relatives of the Holy Prophet (see commentary of Anfal: 41; Nahl: 90; Rum: 38), orphans, the needy and the wayfarer, so that it does not concentrate in the hands of a few rich-this serves as a basis for the socio-economic system of Islam.

After the Holy Prophet his share has to be given to the Imam of his Ahl ul Bayt in addition to the share of his relatives. To know the real and genuine relatives (Ahl ul Bayt) of the Holy Prophet see commentary of Baqarah: 124; Ali Imran: 61; Ahzab: 33 and Shura: 23.

Also see commentary of Bani Isarail: 26; Naml: 15, 16; Nahl: 90 and Maryam: 2 to 15 for the unjust, unislamic and unquranic deviation of the so-called followers of the Holy Prophet resorted to for depriving the Ahl ul Bayt from their rightful share decreed by Allah. They began to misappropriate the share of the Holy Prophet in the name of "baytul mal" (public treasury), which is an open transgression of the explicit ordinance of Allah.


مَا أَفَاءَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُولِهِ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْقُرَىٰ فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ وَلِذِي الْقُرْبَىٰ وَالْيَتَامَىٰ وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنْكُمْ ۚ وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانْتَهُوا ۚ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۖ إِنَّ اللَّهَ شَدِيدُ الْعِقَابِ {7}
[Shakir 59:7] Whatever Allah has restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns, it is for Allah and for the Messenger, and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, so that it may not be a thing taken by turns among the rich of you, and whatever the Messenger gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back, and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; surely Allah is severe in retributing (evil):
[Pickthal 59:7] That which Allah giveth as spoil unto His messenger from the people of the townships, it is for Allah and His messenger and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, that it become not a commodity between the rich among you. And whatsoever the messenger giveth you, take it. And whatsoever he forbiddeth, abstain (from it). And keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is stern in reprisal.
[Yusufali 59:7] What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (and taken away) from the people of the townships,- belongs to Allah,- to His Messenger 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 Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you. And fear Allah; for Allah is strict in Punishment.
[Pooya/Ali Commentary 59:7] (see commentary for verse 6)

As per this verse, the land of Fadak was given to the dhul Qurba (the near kin) and this was fadak.

The Shi'ah traditionalists and exegets and some Sunni scholars write: "When the verse: Give the kinsmen his due, and the needy, and the wayfarer........(Surah Isra, 17:26) was revealed the Prophet called his daughter Fatimah and made over Fadak to her".
And the narrator of this incident is Abu Sa'id Khadri who was one of the distinguished companions of the Prophet.
the shia reference for this is: Majma'ul Bayan, vol.III, p. 411.
The sunni reference is: Sharh-i Ibn Abil Hadid, vol. XVI, p.248.

Nahjul Balaghah”, letter 45 « بلى كانت في ايدينا فدك من كل ما اظلته السماء فشحت بها نفوس قوم وسخت عنها نفوس آخرين، ونعم الحكم الله ... »
“Of course, all that we had in our possession under this sky was Fadak, but a group of people felt greedy for it and the other party withheld themselves from it. Allah, is after all the best arbitrator.”

In our possession shows it had already been given, and not something to be divided after inheritance. If it had not been gifted, how could it be in their possession?

incidentally, the Sermon of Syeda (sa) you have given, what is your source for it?

Maybe you can explain how someone can be in control of something without possessing it?
What a silly argument!

The arabic denotes possession to mean personal property and if you look at the English translation at Al-Islam.org under nahjul balagha the english translation is much better explained as: 'Verily, under the sky we had only Fadak as our personal property'.

Personal property, or possession, both under the simple rules of grammer show something that belongs to the possessor or owner of personal property.
I have shown you the reference from one of the Aimma (as). Whether you chose to believe or not is your choice.

This is the end of the matter here because the reference you are giving from duas.org is not a source, duas. org has copied it from sunni sources.
Strange your double standards, you will use sunni sources to refute what i am saying, but kick up a hue and cry when i give reference to historical sources from sunni books!

Unless you can now show a hadeeth of the Aimma (as) stating fadak was NOT a gift, we c an conclude the matter.

If you want to discuss it further open up a dedicated thread to it.

Quote

Maybe you can explain how someone can be in control of something without possessing it?
What a silly argument!


If I have given you my car to use, does this make you the rightfull owner of it? "NO!" yes you are in possession of my car but If I was to pass away does not mean that you are entitled to having my car? "NO!" specialy if it is not part of my Will. What should be noted is that any sermon you find of Bibi Fatimah (sa) the land of Fadak was been claimed as inheritance. Now have you got the sermon where Bibi (sa) is claiming it as a Gift?

You either hold something for someone or you hold it as your possession.
You have not answered the question, which hadeeth book did you get the sermon from? Who is tha narrator, what is the sanad?
Apply your criticism of others references to your own post.

Now i have shown you the ayat telling the prophet (saww) to give fadak to the near kin ( dhul qurba), i have given a reference where Mola (as) have stated that it was in their ownership and i have provided hadeeth which also show this.

What you have done is pick and chose from a sermon of syeda (sa) which is addressing the specific issue of prophets leaving inheritance without providing an accurate reference for the sermon and use it as disproving the abundance of hadeeth showing that the first issue to be rejected by abu bakr (la) was the issue of fidak being in the ahlebaits(as) possession and claiming ownership had not been passed to the aimma(as).
This is when syeda (sa) showed the written document showing fadak had been given over to Her(sa) ownership.
The document was torn and the caliph(la) stated this is still the prophets (saww) property and needs to be inherited.
Then the statement was made that prophets (saww) dont leave any inheritance to which paak syeda (sa) replied with the sermon.

This is the context of the sermon so care to now give a reference other than online website?

hey you guys

salaam aleikom,

there is something I am going to share, not debating it, but you all need to rethink wilayah al faqih very seriously......

I am now following in taqleed and have beleief in the WF

you are not seeing/realizing the whole picture..... its time everyone rethinks everything

it sounds insane, it did to me at first too, but we HAVE to! this is so important....

you guys need to really really open your eyes and rethink everything

Moula Waris

MoulaKaram wrote:hey you guys

salaam aleikom,

there is something I am going to share, not debating it, but you all need to rethink wilayah al faqih very seriously......

I am now following in taqleed and have beleief in the WF

you are not seeing/realizing the whole picture..... its time everyone rethinks everything

it sounds insane, it did to me at first too, but we HAVE to! this is so important....

you guys need to really really open your eyes and rethink everything

Moula Waris

Mashallah

There are some Mujtahids who do not permit Qamazani. I am just wondering who you follow in particular...

MoulaKaram wrote:hey you guys

salaam aleikom,

there is something I am going to share, not debating it, but you all need to rethink wilayah al faqih very seriously......

I am now following in taqleed and have beleief in the WF

you are not seeing/realizing the whole picture..... its time everyone rethinks everything

it sounds insane, it did to me at first too, but we HAVE to! this is so important....

you guys need to really really open your eyes and rethink everything

Moula Waris

Wsalam and LOL

Well on the above Notes, be it serious or not, I would just like to add to that. Well as for a start not all Mujtahids say Qama is Haram. There is a list of 100 rullings of various Mujthids which allow Qama. The concept of WF was not established by the Imam (ajf) himself. Furthermore it can be seen from the conduct of Rasulollah (saw) that in many cases his policies in managing the affairs of the country were based on Shura (consultation) even though he (saw) did not need to consult others, but this was in aid of encouraging the Muslims to adopt the policy of Shura - consultation in managing their affairs.

There have been many cases where Rasulollah (saw) consulted with others and took the view of the majority. In today's terminology this is a ‘democratic' system, although there are differences between today's democratic system of government and the consultative system of government that was implemented by Rasulollah in Medina more than 14 centuries ago. Other hadith which emphasise on the collective / consultative system of leadership by fully qualified Faqhi' are in the form of orders to the Muslims from the Imam-of-our-time, Imam al-Mahdi(ajf)

''Whoever amongst the Fuqaha who guards himself against evil, protects his religion, counters his base desires, and obeys the commands of his Lord, then the general public may follow him.''


"And as for the new events and developments, refer them to the 'narrators of our hadith' - (scholars of hadith) for they are my Hujjah (authority) upon you, and I am the Hujjah of Allah upon them."

It is clearly obvious that in both of the above two hadith, Imam al-Mahdi (AS) is instructing the Ummah to refer to Faqhi. The issues arises on how much authority a Faqhi has well the Imam (ajf) is in Gaybah.