How does the Hadith of the pond of Khumm not prove Shia Islam

>>295405
Who reported these? Because I can't imagine Sunnis accepting this.

>>295506
Sunnis do accept it and I find it difficult to interpret as meaning anything other than a official declaration but apparently Sunnis can.

The Iranians got it right.

>>295405
But 'Ali *was* a caliph after Muhammad, even in the Sunni tradition.

>>295405
There are several anhadith with good isnad that show all kinds of things like this.

Basically, Aisha's meddling and being buttmad that Muhammad loved Khadija more than her is the cause of this whole thing. Even if there aren't several anhadith like this, the fact that 'Ali was given Fatima in marriage over Abu Bakr and others who had asked says it all.

If I were a Muslim, I'd tend towards the party of 'Ali except for their spoopy, Christian-style eschatology.

>>295405
Daily reminder: Aisha is called "the whore" by Shia.

>>297418

the shia should get lives

Are Shias less violent than Sunnis?

The Shia are basically a Persian conspiracy.

File: 1448190923143.png (591KB, 1600x808px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 1600x808px

>>295405
>>295582

Sufis are mostly Sunni. They understand it more in terms of like how like there is a difference between the papacy and the kings. Ali is in charge of the spiritual aspect while the caliphs were supposed to be in charge of the secular aspect. Ali is the interpreter of mystical knowledge while the caliphs were meant to manage worldly affairs.

Shi'a differ in that they accept both absolute secular and spiritual authority belonged to the Imam.

non-Sufi Sunnis criticized Sufis because they saw them as crypto-Shia. For example, the Naqshbandi Order is Sunni but they also believe in the Twelve Imams of the Shi'a, including the Hidden Imam, but they accept the first three Rashidun Caliphs and reject the idea that there was any serious conflict between Ali and them. Sometimes, in the past too, many Sufi Orders that were otherwise Sunni developed Shi'a tendencies, sometimes even going to more extreme lengths than the average Shi'a. For example, the Safavid dynasty which established Iran as a Shi'ite Empire were leaders of the Sufi Order of the Safaviyyah, which is related to the Alevi-Bektashis of Turkey. But as far as we know they were probably Sunni up until a few generations before they took over Iran (they claimed it was all taqiyya). The Ottoman chronicles also tended to omit the Umayyad dynasty from the list of legitimate kings/caliphs. And Ibn Taymiyyah. who is a favorite scholar of many radical Sunnis today, was in fact hated by many Sunnis in his own day for his attempts to degrade Ali's position

Generally, the hadith of the pond of Khumm is accepted by all Orthodox Sunnis and Shi'a and the debate had mostly been on their interpretation, with those who tried to say otherwise often being stigmatized by Sunnis and Shi'a alike. Really, the debate centered around the hadith's use of the term "mawla" and whether that referred to just a kind of religious authority or a more far reaching one.

>>297524

you tell me

>>298670
so it basically boils down to whether or not Islam should have a separation of church and state for the higher echelons of Islam

>>295405
Shi'ism isn't islam. It's polytheism.

>>298922
>>>/Dabiq/

>>298888

More or less. Although you could say there is no "church" in Islam or that there is one but every Muslim is essentially a priest in it in their own right (a Muslim with a little instruction can learn to perform his own marriage for example and it would perfectly halal religiously speaking).

It has more to do with the nature of religious authority I'd say. For most Shi'a, the caliph or successor to Muhammad had to be someone who shared in the same perfection of spirit or character that he had. He couldn't simply be a good warrior or a good administrator, he had to be a perfect portrait of all the moral virtues expected of human beings. The caliph couldn't be someone who was known to lie or do the slightest sin and he could not even be someone who was once a sinner and had become more pious over time like many other Muslim saints are known to have been. This developed into the doctrine of "ismah" or "infallibility" of Muhammad, his daughter Fatima and the Shi'ite Imams.

Really, the Shi'a, while believing in the absolute authority of the Imam in both political and religious matters, still often had a doctrine which differentiated more secular kingship from religious authority. This was explained something like this:

"The Imam is the perfection of the virtues of both pen and sword. In the Imam's absence, no one can claim such authority that is befitting one who is the perfection of these virtues. The kings more strongly represent the sword while the ulama more strongly represent the pen. These two should work together but respect one another's private spaces of influence until the Imam returns."

Of course, this is Twelver Shi'a, Ismailis believe their Imams are with them right now and are the rightful caliphs, so it's no wonder Ismailis were more likely to fight with the Sunnis while Twelvers often could acknowledge Sunni caliphs, Ismaili Imams, Christian kings and Twelver monarchs as temporal leaders.

>>297049
I may tend towards party of 'Ali, but even Ali accepted Abu Bakr and Umar leadership. It was in Uthman leadership he disputed several things. Unless you accept the concept of taqiyya, shit means Ali had done taqiyya in accepting Abu Bakr and Umar.

Now about their spoopy eschatology, I'm sure it was later innovation.

>>297524
Funy things is, around 2004-2006 when US Army fighting in Iraqi shia neighborhood and Israel was fighting the Hezbollah many article popped up in western media trying to explain about Shiite's crazy mentality.

>>298962
when I say that I mean the duties one focuses on actually ruling the caliphate seeing to the administration of the realm military affairs and the economy.
while the other handles theological spiritual philosophical matters and advises the person in the position of running the state how religion would affect those matters.

How did the Hadiths become so revered in Islam?

If the Qur'an is the self-stated highest book with the highest authority from God himself, why are these other scriptures held to nearly the same level?

Why should muslims take them as seriously when there's no mention of following them in the Qur'an?

>>299031
Sunnis believe Muhammad was ma'sum, God keep him free of sin. This means his deed and words are the embodiment of quran and God's will. Would you believe in someone who are not an example of his words/message?

Thus report of his words and deeds become source of fiqh.

CMIIW, but I heard shia believe this extend to Ali and imams after him (depends on how much imam you believe).

>>297524

Yeah, but I get the feeling that it's cause there are fewer of them.

File: 1448351118209.png (132KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1920x1080px

>>299031
>read a quran

>read where it say to follow sunnrah(5: 92.- 4: 59- 24: 54- 4:13 -33:71 -4:64)
>read a seerah or listen to anwar al awlakis excellent 50 part series on youtube
>come back to me

>>295405
mawla has over 50 meanings, no one in rasullah(s) time believed it to mean master or eles the ansar and the muhairj would never have argued over who was khalif

>>299074
>gives the sources of the answer to the question I asked
>doesn't actually gives the answer
>tells me to look it up as if I was asserting something and not just asking a question

Don't be such a goober, anon.

>>299064
your right ahki the shia do extend the masum to the rest of ahul bayt qouteing the hadith of ) the hadith of mine is the saying of my father and my fathers...until rasulallah(s) i dont know the lineage of said hadith nor which imam who said it nor do i know the authenticity but the shia use so it safe to assume it daeef

>>298987

After the Mongol conquest, the Sunni and Shi'a weren't too different in that regard, though the Ottomans later practiced a more centralized control over religion, imitating the Orthodox/Catholic state/religion structure, much more closely than the Shi'a Safavids/Qajars.