Sie sind auf Seite 1von 23
http://www.facebook.com/groups/182400251905745/  PINNED POSTS  Dhulqarnin Bin AbdulJalil Limpao EXCLUSIVE

PINNED POSTS

Abu Jaiyana (Sunni) VS Abe Dalagan (Shia)

The topic : THE AHADITH ON "KITABULLAH WA SUNNATI" ARE AUTHENTIC.

Affirmative: Abu Jaiyana Negative: Abe Dalagan

PART I Introduction of debaters and Presentations of Arguments

1 Presentation of Arguments by Abujaiyana

2. Presentation of Arguments by Abe Dalagan

PART II - Cross-Examination

3. Abujaiyana to ask question to Abe Dalagan (5) questions maximum

4. Response by Abe Dalagan

5. Abe Dalagan to ask question to Abujaiyana (5) questions maximum

6. Response by Abujaiyana

PART III - Rebuttals

7. Rebuttal by Abujaiyana

8. Rebuttal by Abe Dalagan

PART 4 - Conclusions

9. Conclusion by Abe Dalagan

10. Conclusion by Abujaiyana

DEBATE RULES:

=============================

1. Presentation of arguments should not exceed 2000 word count (This can be checked by Microsoft office word

count).

In case Facebook refuses to accept a 2000 word count post at the same time, the debater/poster is allowed to divide his response in two or three posts right after the other but should not exceed the word count limit. Once posted, no editing is allowed.

2. Cross-exam questions should be limited to 5 questions maximum and all questions should not exceed 500 words.

All 5 questions are to be posted at the same time by the questioner.

3. Responses to all questions should not exceed 2000 words

4. Rebuttals should not exceed 2000 words

5. Conclusions should not exceed 1500 words

6. No edition of posts is allowed. Violation to this would render the violator lost by default or by technicality.

7. Both Debaters is given 24 hours to reply. Failure to do so the Moderator/Admin will automatically declare him lost

by default.

8. Links posted as reference/evidence is included in the word count allotted for each debater. Scriptural quotations

should be indicated, book, chapter, and verse/s.

9. No ad hominem (personal attacks) shall be allowed or posting of porno photos or anything indecent, or

disrespectful to any faith or religion.

10. Since there is no Debate Moderator both debaters are expected to follow the format's sequence, and the rules

correctly and in good faith.

11. All Observers are requested not to post any comment until both debaters have posted their respective

conclusions. Please cooperate with us for our own good and for the sake of God’s guidance.

12. Any violation to the above format and rules will render the violator lost by default.

The rules shall take effect as soon as Abujaiyana has posted his opening arguments.

Thank you.

Like · · Unfollow Post · 420 · Thursday at 11:58am

o

o

 

J.m. Singh and 3 others like this.

o

 

Dhulqarnin Bin AbdulJalil Limpao Members and Visitors, please be reminded that this thread is an exclusive thread for Abe Dalaganand Abujaiyana upon both debater request to go into a one-on-one debate.

It is therefore requested that others who may want to comment or join in the discussion you may post in the Peanut Gallery, where it would be a "free for all" discussion.

Thank you.

o

Abu Jaiyana I begin by mentioning the name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful

All praise due to Allah Alone, the sustainer, the cherisher of all the worlds.

May peace and blessings of Allah be on our beloved Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. his family, and all of his companions, and all those who follow their Sunnah until the Last Day.

I testify that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah alone. I further testify that Muhammad s.a.w is Allah’s last prophet and messenger.

Peace be unto those who follow the right guidance.

I welcome Sir Abe Dalagan for challenging me to debate this topic. He, being a shia, has a big problem with the ahadith recor ded by several muhaddith having the Matn “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati”. It seems that the ahadith related to it are annoying to shia theology.

These ahadith have been graded authentic by Muslim scholars, therefore, I don’t need to prove this as authentic to anyone. Th ose who question the authenticity of the hadith have the burden of proof to prove the contrary.

However, my opponent refused to put the burden of proof on him; he insisted that I have to present my case first even though I have no idea whatsoever about his possible objection to these ahadith. He is too technical in his position but for the sake of ent ertainment, I accepted his request that I should start first.

There are many reports from the hadith collectors that this instruction of Prophet Muhammad pbuh is undoubtedly correct, and Muslims from the very beginning adhered and followed this command of the Prophet pbuh. Contemporary scholars, after laborious efforts in collecting all the evidences and reports related to these ahadith, confidently conclude that this statement or instruction from the Prophet pbuh is a hundred percent correct.

The leading contemporary scholars, has graded this report as authentic. No reputable Muslim scholar on the face of the earth today

objected to this fact. There are shia scholars however who, as usually expected, always object
objected to this fact.
There are shia scholars however who, as usually expected, always object about reports related to the Qur’an and the Sunnah of Prophet
Muhammad. This is because they wanted to blind the people about their so-called love of the Ahlulbait and their obsessions about
Imamah.
“Kitabullah wa Sunnati” means the book of Allah and my tradition. This means the book of Allah which is the Noble Qur’an, and the
Prophetic Traditions of Prophet Muhammad pbuh.
Anything which the Prophet s.a.w said or did is considered to be a part of his Sunnah (i.e. way), which represents the practical
application of Islam according to divine guidance.
Term hadith in this discussion means whatever is transmitted from the Prophet of his actions, sayings, and tacit approvals .
An Authentic Hadith is one which has a continuous isnaad, made up of trustworthy narrators narrating from trustworthy narrators, which
is found to be free from any irregularities or defects.
In case of dispute about the Isnad of one hadith, its isnad is to be collated to the sanad of other sahih ahadith reporting about the same
subject matter in the Matn. If the sanad of the sahih ahadith corroborate the disputed hadith, the it is considered as sahih or authentic.
Such hadith is graded as authentic due to external corroboration or sahih due to supporting narrations.
A hadith has two parts: The “Matn” is the main body of the hadith . The “Isnad” is the chain of narrators on whom the “Matn” was
transmitted.
In this debate, we will ask ourselves this question:
Did Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. really say to the Muslims to follow the Book of Allah, and his Sunnah? (Kitabullah wa Sunnati)
Here is one of the examples of the ahadith which the shia people say not authentic:
#18722
َ
َ
نعَ ْ
،
ِ
يلِيِ دلا دٍ ز ن ب ر وَث نعَ
ي
ْ َ
ِ
ْ
ِ ْ
ْ
، ي ب أ انث ، س ي و ُ أ ي ب َ أ ن با ْ انث ، يِ د ج انث ، يُّ
ِ
ْ َ
ِ
ُ
َ
ِنا رعْ شلا لضْ فْلا ن ب دِ م ح م ن ب ليعِ ا م
َ
َّ
ِ
َ
ِ
ْ
َّ
َ
ُ
ُ
ْ
ُ
َ س ِ
ْ
إ يِن بخْ َ أ ، ُظِفا حْلا هِ َّللا دِ بعَ
ر
و أ اَن بخْ َ أ
ب
ر
ٍ
َ َ
َ
ْ
ُ
َ َ
َ
َ
تكْ ُ
ر َ َ ددَ ْ
يِن ِ إ ، سا نلا ا هيُّ أ ا ي ي " لااَفَ
ُ
َّ
َ
َ
َ
،
ِ
ا ا وْلا ةِ َ ج َ يِف سا نلا بَطخَ
َ َ
َّ
َ
َّ
َ
مَّل س َ و َ هِ يَلعَ
َ
ْ
هَّللا ىَّل ص هِ َّللا لو س ر ن أ ، ا م َ ه نعَ
ُ
َ
َ
ُ
َ
ُ ْ
هَّللا يضِ
ُ
َ
ر َ سا ٍ بعَ َّ
ن ِ با ْ نعَ
ِ
، ةَ
م َ ركْ ِ عِ
َ
هِ
ي
ِ بَن ِ ةُ
ن
س و َ ، هِ َّللا با تكِ
ُّ
َّ
ُ
ُ
َ
" ادًَ ب أ او لضِ َ نَلفَ هِ ب م م ص َ تعْ َ ا نِ إ ِ ا م مكُ يِف "
ْ
ِ
ْ
ت
ُ ْ
َ
ْ
Since I Muslims believed that this is an authentic report, and it has been graded as authentic, and I don’t know yet what is the shia
objection to it, I will present my argument first why I believe that they are authentic ahadith.
Friday at 7:34am · Like · 1

o

Abu Jaiyana Proof from the Qur’an:

With clear signs and Books (We sent the Messengers). And We have also sent down unto you (O Muhammad) the reminder and the advice (the Qur’an), that you may explain clearly to men what is sent down to them, and that they may give thought. [Surah Al Nahal,

16:44]

"O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger, and make not vain your deeds!" (Sura Muhammad, ayah #33)

"But those who disobey Allah and His Messenger and transgress His limits will be admitted to a Fire, to abide therein: And they shall have a humiliating punishment." (Sura An-Nisáa ayah # 14)

There are many ayat in the Qur’an emphasizing the obligation of the Muslims to obey Allah and the Prophet pbuh. This is because there are instructions in the Qur’an wherein their detail can only be found in the Prophet’s Sunnah such as the details of Salat, Z akat,Hajj, et cetera. Without the Sunnah, we would never understand Islam fully.

So there is no doubt that the instruction of Prophet Muhammad to follow the Qur’an and his Sunnah (Sunnati) is 100% true because the Qur’an testifies to it. All ayat of the Qur’an is transmitted in a tawaatur manner.

REJECTING THE “MATN” OF ANY HADITH RELATED TO “KITABULLAH WA SUNNATI” IS TANTAMOUNT OF REJECTING THE QUR’AN

So only the STUBBORN DEVIANT PEOPLE reject the ahadith about “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati”.

Allah warns this stubborn and deviant people in the Quran:

"Anyone who does not believe in Allah and His Messenger, We have prepared a Searing Blaze for the rejectors." (48:13)

I presumed that my opponent Abe Dalagan is not one of these stubborn and deviant people but he is a seeker of truth and guidance. He will accept the fact after this debate that Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. did really instruct the Muslims to cling to the Book of Allah, and his prophetic Sunnah.

Is there any authentic hadith that corroborates the following of the Sunnah of the Prophet pbuh?

In Sahih Al Bukhari Prophet Muhammad said “Whoever dislikes/abandon my Sunnah is not of me” [MAN RAGHIBA AN SUNNATI FA LAYSA MINNI]

Narrated Hudhaifa:

Allah's Apostle said to us, "Honesty descended from the Heavens and settled in the roots of the hearts of men (faithful belie vers), and then the Quran was revealed and the people read the Quran, (and learnt it from it) and also learnt it from the Sunnah." Both Quran and Sunnah strengthened their (the faithful believers') honesty. Volume 9, Book 92, Number 381 :

Some reports from the companions of Prophet Muhammad pbuh about following the Sunnah:

Ibn Mas`ud (RAA) used to say, "Doing a little of the Sunnah is better than striving hard in innovation."

Al-Hasan ibn Abi’l-Hasan (RH) said, "A little action following a Sunnah is better than a lot of action following an innovation."

Ali (RAA) said, "I am not a Prophet nor have I received revelation, but I act according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad as much as I can."

Reports from the early Muslim jurists:

Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal (RH) said: "Whoever rejects a statement of the Messenger of Allaah (SAW) is on the brink of destruction."

Imaam ash-Shaafi (RH) reported a consensus among the scholars of the Sahaabah, the Taabi`oon and their followers that:

"If a Sunnah of Allah's Messenger, sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam, becomes manifest to a person, he does not have any choice but to follow it, regardless of what other people say." [Quoted in Ar-Risaalah at-Tabookiyyah of Ibn ul Qayyim]

So, as we can see here that we have very solid statements of reliable people from generation to generation to make us conclud e with certainty that the ahadith about “kitabullah wa sunnati” was really said by Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

Moreover, and most importantly, there are numerous ayat in the Qur’an fully supporting and corroborating the ahadith to follow Allah i.e. the Qur’an, and also follow the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

I believe that my statement is 100% correct that only the stubborn and deviant people would dare to question the ahadith related to “kitabullah wa sunnati”

When Imam Malik, may God’s mercy be on him, recorded in his book Al Muwatta the hadith in which the Prophet pbuh is reported to have said during his last Hajj that he pbuh, instructed the Muslims to cling on the book of Allah and his Sunnah, people from different faith questions the authenticity of this hadith for nonsensical reasons. As if they haven’t read the Qur’an or they haven’t h eard of any other hadith corroborating to it, or they haven’t heard or read the statements of the companions of Prophet Muhammad pbuh.

#1601

ي ِ بَن ِ ةَ

س و َ هِ َّللا با تكِ

َّ

ن

ُ

َ

َ

ُّ

" ا م ب م تكْ س مَ ا م او لضِ َ

َ

ه

ْ

ُ

َّ

َ

َ

نَل ن ي ر م َ أ مكُ يِف تكْ رَ ي " لادَ مَّل س َ و هِ يَلعَ

ْ

ْ َ ْ

ْ

ُ

َ

َ

َ

َ

ْ

ُ

َ

َ

ُ

َ

ُ

َ

ُ

َ

 

ِ ِ

ِ

هِ

هَّللا ىَّل ص هِ َّللا لو س ر نَّ َ أ ، هغََل ب هَّن أ كِلا م نعَ

َ

ْ

Imam Hakim has graded it sahih, Imam Dhahabi remained silent in talkhis so it shows his approval, and Shaikh Albani and Ibn Hazm (in al ahkam) also authenticated it.

Also reported in Mustadrak al Hakim, Kinzul Ummal by Ali al Muttaqi al hindi, Mishkat al Masabih by Tibrizi, Jami al Saghir by Imam Suyuti, Sunan by Imam Darqutni, Sunan al Kubra by Imam Baihaqi (two different asnaad ) al-aitqad by Abul Qasim, al Targheeb by Ibn Shaheen

Shia apologists are trying to find technical problem in this hadith. They solicit opinions of some Muslim scholars to support their view that these ahadith is not authentic.

I understand that some Muslim scholars in the past had different opinions about the technicality of this specific hadith when it comes to

the acceptability of the chain of narrators (isnad). However, after gathering all evidences related to this dispute, contemporary Muslim scholars are now unanimous that this hadith is authentic especially when Shaykh Nasiruddin Al Albani and others graded this hadith as authentic after thorough investigation of the evidences.

Moreover, this hadith is also corroborated by other sahih ahadith. The dispute with the isnad in this hadith is cleared out by the isnad by other authentic ahadith corroborating to it. Therefore, it is futile for anyone to painstakingly question the authenticity of Imam M alik’s hadith because other ahadith which are authentic, authenticate this hadith.

This is from the book of Al Kafi and Majlisi has graded it sahih:

ملاسلا هيلع الله دبع ابأ تعمس "لاد رحلا نب بويأ نع ،يبلحلا ىيحي نع ،ديوس نب رضنلا نع ،هيبأ نع ،دلاخ نب دمحم نب دمجأ نع ،انباحصأ نم ةدع ةنسلاو باتكلا ىلإ اوارم ئش لك "لواي

Emphasis [ةنسلاو باتكلا]

So I leave the burden to my elderly shia opponent from Tawi-Tawi Mr. Abe Dalagan to prove to us that the ahadith about “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati” are not authentic.

1. He has to explain also his objection about the ahadith about “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati” when the Qur’an, and other authentic ahadith, the Companions of the Prophet, the early Muslim jurists, as well as the book Al Kafi unanimously agree to it.

2. He has to refute the “Matn” as well as the different transmitters (Sanad) of the different ahadith corroborating each other. The ahadith in question are posted above.

3. He has to cite to us contemporary prominent hadith authority recognized by the majority of Muslim scholars falsifying Shaykh Nasiruddin Al Albani’s and others in grading the hadith to be authentic (Sahih).

I pray to God to guide the misguided members of this group who want to be guided, Ameen.

Thank you very much.

Abe Dalagan Bismillahir rahmanir rahim Alhamdulillahil-ladzi khalaqana wasaqana waja‘alana minal muslimin. Ashhadu alla ilaha illallah wahdahu la sharikalah Wa ashhadu anna Muhammadan ‘abduhu wa rasuluh Allahumma salli ‘ala Muhammad wa Ali Muhammad ‘wa ba’ad:

Faqad qala ta’ala fiy kitabihil aziz: “Wama ata-kumur rasu-lu fakhudzûhu wama naha-kum ‘anhu fantahû, wattaqulla-ha innalla-ha shadi-dul ‘iqab.”

Wa qa-la rasu-lallah, sallalla-hu ‘alayhi wa a-lihi wasallam:”Ya ayyuhannas! Inniy ta-rikun fiykum ma in akhadztum bihi lan tadilluw, Kita-bullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti.”

Sala-mun ‘alaykum!

The ahadith on “Kitabullah wa Sunnati” are not authentic. Or, in simple ‘Arabic, “Laysa Sahih.”

They are not authentic. They are something else!

They are mu’dzal (its isnad is broken in the sense that two or more of its consecutive narrators are missing), mursal (the narrator between the Tabi’un and the Holy Prophet is omitted from the isnad), and da’if (weak, in the sense that one or two of its narrators are liars or matruk, one who is abandoned already by the muhaddithun for being a liar)!

And, this is strictly speaking of their isnad. For how can one proceed to the authentication of the matn if such a hadith has already failed to meet the criteria for authenticating isnads?

“A hadith consists of two parts: its text, called matn, and its chain of narrators, called isnad. Comprehensive and strict criteria were separately developed for the evaluation of matn and isnad. The former is regarded as the internal test of ahadith, and the latter is considered the external test. A hadith was accepted as authentic and recorded into text only when it met both of these criter ia independently.” (Ali, Maulana Muhammad. A Manual of Hadith. London: Curzon Press, 1988)

Yet, this inauthentic ahadith have been told and retold from mimbars and in majlises for 1400 centuries now! Yes, and without Sunni leaders and scholars pausing at that to seriously study its isnad, and think of the quirks of fate and the hypocrisy that unfolded in insisting on the acceptability of its matn.

Inauthentic ahadith should not be the bedrock of Sunnism, for that would make Sunnism a travesty. Is the phrase “Ahlus Sunnah” an allusion to “Kitabullah wa Sunnati”? In Christianity, Jesus (as) has never used the term “Catholic” or “Catholicism” during his ministry. The word is a later coinage, put forward by a pope and accepted afterwards without afterthought by ignorant people.

Now, how could one attribute words to Prophet Muhammad (saw) he has never uttered!

Didn’t the Prophet (saw) warn us that “Whoever narrates a hadith from me that he knows is false is one of the liars” as repor ted in Sahih Muslim?

Should fabricated ahadith be attributed to the Prophet (saw) if their matn sounds fair? No! Because, whatever the Prophet (saw) teaches us is from Allah (SWT). “Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire. It is no less than inspiration sent down to him.” (al- Najm: 2, AYA translation)

The Most Glorious, Most High said: “Who doth greater wrong than one who invents falsehood against Allah, even as he is being invited to Islam? And Allah guides not those who do wrong.” (al-Saff: 7, AYA translation)

Would one think that he is better than the Prophet (saw) that he attributes false ahadith to him if only to ‘advance’ or ‘strengthen’ his own sect, or denomination?

God, The Most High, said: “O Ye who believe! Put not yourselves forward before Allah and His Messenger. But fear Allah, for Allah is He Who hears and knows all things.” (al-Hujurat: 1, AYA translation)

The ahadith on “Kitabullah wa Sunnati” are not in Sahih al-Bukhari. Alas, al-Bukhari did not live to see the preponderance of these ahadith in the Sunni world centuries later.

[Note: Al-Bukhari was anti-Shi’ah! He once said: “I don’t see any difference between praying salah behind a Jahmi (i.e., Sunni and Mu’tazilah Muslims who believed that the Qur’an was created) or a Rafidi (i.e., Shi’ah) and a Christian or a Jew. They (Jahmis/Rafidis) are not to be greeted, nor are they to be visited, nor are they to be married, nor is their testimony to be accepted, nor are their

sacrifices to be eaten.” (Khalq Af’al al-‘Ibad)]

True to his anti-Shi’ah character, al-Bukhari also did not include in his “Sahih” the ahadith on “Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti.”

The ahadith on “Kitabullah wa Sunnati” are not found in any of the “Kutub al-Sittah” or Six Collections of Sunni Hadiths of

1. al-Bukhari (died in 256 AH or 870 CE)

2. Imam Muslim (died in 261 AH or 875 CE)

3. ibn Majah (died 273 AH or 887 CE)

4. Abu Dawud (died in 275 AH or 889 CE)

5. al-Tirmidzi (died in 279 AH or 893 CE), and

6. al-Nasa’i (died in 303 AH or 916 CE).

Where can one find the ahadith on “Kitabullah wa Sunnati”? Who were the narrators? What did “unbiased” Sunni scholars say about its

isnad?

A version of the hadith is this: (i.e., the first of al-Hakim’s two versions)

The Holy Prophet (saw) said: “I have left among you two things after which none of you will go astray, namely: the Book of Allah and my Sunnah, and they will never separate until they return to me at the pond.

It is also found in its matn in the following books (and in much later ones).

1. Al-Muwatta’, by al-Malik (born 93 AH or 711 CE, died 179 Ah or 795 CE)

2. Sunan, by al-Darqutni (born 306 AH or 918 CE)

3. Al-Mustadrak, by al Hakim (born 321 AH or 933 CE, died 403 AH or 1012 CE)

4. Sunan al-Kubra, by al-Bayhaqi (born 384 AH or 994 CE, died 458 AH or 1066 CE)

Except for al-Malik, these Sunni collectors of hadith were born decades, if not centuries, after the death of al-Bukhari, Muslim, ibn Majah, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidzi and al-Nasa’i.

Are these later collections preferred by Sunnis over those earlier collections? Certainly, not!

Now, al-Malik was the earliest from among the above who has recorded the hadith. (In fact, many afterwards and until recently were just quoting from him).

Here is al-Malik’s version.

In al-Muwatta’, Hadith No. 2618, it says:

‘Narrated to me by Malik, who heard that the Prophet of Allah said, “I leave with you two things, you will not go astray if you hold on to them, the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet.”

That was all!

No isnad! Al-Malik didn’t provide any!

It is evidently hearsay when you say, ‘He narrated to me that he was told that the Holy Prophet said.’

al-Malik was born in 93 AH, or 82 years after the death of the Holy Prophet (saw)! Where did al-Malik get the hearsay?

I will cite three other versions, in addition to al-Malik’s. A 20th century Sunni scholar, Dr. Bashar Awad Ma‘ruf, bared the isnad for each of the three versions. He wrote in his Commentary to al-Muwatta’ that these isnads are, as follows:

Abe Dalagan Isnad 1 is in the first version of al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak (in Volume I, Page 93):

Thus, “al-Dabi relating on the authority of Salih ibn Musa al-Talhi, from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Rafi‘, from Abi Salih, from Abu Hurayrah.”

The chain is ‘singular’, through Abu Hurayrah and in it is Salih ibn Musa al-Talhi. The latter is a matruk narrator, one whose report is abandoned because he is a fabricator and liar. This makes this chain weak. (Salih ibn Musa al-Talhi was regarded as weak and abandoned by al-Bukhari, al-Nasa’i, al-Dzahabi, ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, ibn Abi Hatim, ibn Hibban, Abu Nu‘aym and al-Haythami). Isnad 2 is in the version of ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhid (Volume 24, Page 331):

Thus, “‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Yahya relating on the authority of Ahmad ibn Sa‘id, from Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-Dubayli, from ‘Ali ibn Zayd al-Fara’idi, from al-Hunayni, from Kathir ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amru ibn ‘Awf, from his father, from his grandfather.”

This chain is through ‘Amr ibn Awf, through his grandson, Kathir ibn ‘Abdullah, who is matruk. This makes the narration weak. (Kathir ibn ‘Abd Allah was regarded as a liar, weak and unreliable by al-Shafi‘i, Abu Dawud, al-Nasa’i, al-Darqutni, ibn Hanbal, ibn Mu‘in

and ibn Hajar). And, here, Dr. Ma‘ruf said: “These two narrations are virtually nothing!”

Then, he cited the third isnad:

Isnad 3 is in the second version of al-Hakim as found in al-Mustadrak, also in Volume 1, Page 93.

Thus, “’Abbas ibn Abi Uways narrates on the authority of Abi Uways, from Thawr ibn Zayd al-Daylami, from ‘Ikrimah, from Ibn ‘Abbas.”

(Dr. Ma‘ruf said): This is also a weak chain by virtue of ibn Abi Uways, who is a weak narrator and disregarded by both al-Bukhari and Muslim.

All three isnads are weak, thus, making all the three ahadith on “Kitabullah wa Sunnati” above not authentic!

Is there still either fervor or honor in authenticating the matn of a hadith after its isnads have already been proven not au thentic? Even non-Muslims can just present a ‘hadith’ that purports to say that the Prophet (saw) said such and such a thing. Will Sunnis or Shi’ites then challenge only its matn, and not the sanad? It’s scandalous! Sacrilegious!

In contrast, the ahadith on “Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti” are authentic! They ar e found in Sahih Muslim and in the collections of al- Tirmidzi, ibn Hanbal (born 164 AH or 780 CE, died 241 AH or 855 CE) and others, in many different versions and through many different isnads, thereby making them mutawatir.

Al-Nasa’i in his Khasa’is ‘Ali, which is part of his Sunan al-Kubra (Hadith No. 79), narrates from Muhammad ibn al-Muthanna, from Yahya ibn Hammad, from Abu ‘Awwanah, from Sulayman, from Habib ibn Abi Thabit, from Abu al-Tufayl, from Zayd ibn Arqam, who said:

“When the Messenger of Allah returned from the last hajj and came down at Ghadir Khumm

Then, he declared:

‘I am about to answer the call (of death). Verily, I have left two precious things (al-Thaqalayn) among you, one of which is greater than the other: the Book of God and my ‘Itrat, my Ahl al-Bayt. So, watch out how you treat them after me. For, indeed, they will never separate until they return to me by the side of the Pond.’

Then, he said:

‘Verily, God is my Master (i.e., Mawla-ya) and I am the Wali of every believer.’

Then, he took ‘Ali’s hand and declared:

‘To whomever I am his Wali, this one is also his Wali. My God, befriend whoever befriends him and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him.’”

Abu al-Tufayl says: “I said to Zayd, ‘Did you hear it from the Prophet?’ He replied: ‘There was no one in the caravan who did not see it with his eyes and hear it with his ears.’”

Al-Bukhari also reported this, not in his Sahih, but in his al-Tarikh al-Kabir, Volume III, Page 96. And Muslim in his Sahih and ibn Hanbal in his Musnad, Volume III, Page17 and Volume IV, Page 366.

The Most High said: “(This was Our) way with the apostles We sent before thee: thou wilt find no change in Our ways.” (al-Isra’: 77, AYA translation)

He said to His Prophet (saw): “Say: ‘Verily, my Lord hath guided me to a way that is straight a religion of right the path trod by Abraham the true in Faith, and he certainly joined not gods with Allah.’” (al-‘An’am: 161, AYA translation)

Why isn’t the authentic ahadith on “Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ali Bayti” spoken by Sunnis? Are their leaders and scholars ignorant of these ahadith? If they are, then it is a disaster for them and the whole Ummah! But, if they know these ahadith and that they are just hiding them, then the disaster is much worse. It’s a misfortune!

We should no longer stop the Ummah from knowing and following the ahadith on “Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti!”

We should no longer let them languish in their ignorance of True Islam!

We should no longer leave them at the hands of tyrants and oppressors!

Walhamdulillah!

1. You and I are not authorities on grading ahadith. People in authority are more authoritative when it comes to grading disputed

ahadith.

I cited names of contemporary scholars who graded the ahadith as sahih such as Imam Hakim, Ibn Hazm, and Shaikh Albani after laborious gathering of evidences related to the ahadith in question. These contemporary hadith scholars are recognized by majority of Muslim scholars today.

Do you have any reference of any contemporary scholars recognized by majority of Muslim scholars today having said that Ibn H azm, and Shaikh Albani for example were wrong in their conclusion? If you have any please provide it for us here.

2. If you encounter several ahadith talking about the same subject matter but with different sanad; some are undisputedly aut hentic

while the others have some dispute about the reliability of some people in the isnad; would you conclude that the disputed ahadith are sahih because other ahadith confirm them to be sahih, or would you conclude that the hadith is weak because of the dispute in the isnad even though there are authentic ahadith confirming the correctness of the disputed ahadith?

3. I cited several ayat from the Qur’an confirming and giving very high emphasis in following the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. Moreover, I also cited sahih ahadith from other compilers of hadith that reports or ahadith about “kitabullah wa sunnati” is a statement which no doubt was said by Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.

Would you at least confirm that the “Matn” of the hadith that you were attacking in your opening statement confirms the Qur’anic mandate which is to follow the Qur’an and the Prophet’s Sunnah? If your answer is No, please explain why.

4. I also mentioned that there are lots of compilers who have recorded the ahadith related to “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati”, have you gone

through of the isnad of each hadith, or can you cite for us any reputable scholar recognized by majority of Muslim scholars t oday

saying that he has studied all the different sanad and he found them to be all inauthentic?

5. In my presentation, I cited not only the Quran and many sahih ahadith, even from sahih Bukhari which you seem to accept as

authority, and also statements of the Sahabah and early Muslim jurists proving that there is no doubt, the Prophet could have said to

the people to cling to the Quran, and his prophetic Sunnah. Your book Al Kafi also supports this conclusion.

What do you think is the logical reason, if there is any, that the Prophet could not have said to the people to cling to the Book of Allah and his prophetic Sunnah?

Thank you.

 

Dhulqarnin Bin AbdulJalil Limpao Thanks for that nice presentation Abujaiyana as well as the Negative Side Constructive. Both of you presented well and the exact word count limit.

Abe Dalagan it’s your turn now to answer Abujaiyana cross examination.

Thank you.

Abe Dalagan Responses to Abu Jaiyana’s 5 Questions

Salam to all in this Page and to all those in Facebook whom this post may reach, to the moderator and to my opponent.

Abu Jaiyana, it is not you, but the set of rules of this debate, that dictates the course and nature of the exchanges. If I i mmediately engaged with your affirmative points, it would have been a rebuttal. I do not wish to be deprived of my right and time to present my Introduction and Opening Arguments.

Answer to Question No. 1

The question is a red herring! Even your first two statements, (You and I are not authorities on grading ahadith. People in authority are more authoritative when it comes to grading disputed ahadith), are by themselves fallacious. They serve as a Smoke Scr een to the real topic that we are debating.

Ibn Hazm of Spain was a prominent Zahiri thinker and a leading scholar on comparative religious studies who died in the year 1064. Shaykh Nasiruddin Albani of Albania was a 20th century Islamic scholar specializing in hadith and fiqh who died in the 1999 (or, 13 years ago). They were 900 years apart and farther apart in fields of specialization. But they were not even during their times the only high- ranking Sunni scholars in those fields.

It is not the habit of your Sunni scholars to personally and publicly censor each other by saying (on TV and in publications) that one is wrong and the other is right. What is common among them is for each of them (or a group of them) to present their own views a nd opinions, without going at length into attacking or debasing each other. Each of them (or each group) can issue fatwa (or religious verdict) on a given subject matter that relates to theology or jurisprudence, and that which is also of immediate importance and relevance to people’s lives.

But, this is only true for among Sunni scholars. Against their counterparts in the Shi‘ah world (e.g., Ayatollahs), Sunni sch olars most often than not always have that tendency to become rude, angry and biased.

Yes, there are Sunni references in the past and in the present which have challenged the position and views of al-Hakim, Ibn Hazm and Shaykh Albani on certain subject matters pertaining to fiqh, hadith and theology. Some of the writers of these books were their contemporaries, and some not. And, when it is said that these two scholars were proven wrong in their conclusions (e.g., pertaining to the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati), it is not meant that their names or works were specifically mentioned or targeted by the writers.

Thus, I don’t even have to mention your name in proving you wrong. I just have to present my dissenting opinion. And, then, i t is up to the readers to think or suppose who are those I am actually proving them wrong. It could be not just you, but inclu ding all those past and present who share your views and opinion on the subject matter at hand.

The red herring in your question becomes all the more clear if a similar question is herein posted, thus: “Are there books of Sunni scholars past and present that proved wrong al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Tirmidzi, ibn Majah, Abu Dawud and al-Nasa’i in their non-inclusion of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati in their hadith collections?

Anyway, for your question, you may refer it three books, namely (1) al-Muwatta’ by Imam al-Malik, Commentary by Dr. Bashar Awad Ma‘ruf published in 1997, (2) al-Izamat wal Tatabbu’ by ibn Hasan al-Darqutni, Commentary by ‘Allamah al-Wa’idi published in 2009, and (3) al-Fatawa al-Manhajiyyah by Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani, Commentary by ‘Umar ‘Abdul Mun‘im Salim.

Answer to Question No. 2

Your hypothetical questions only serve to veer away our debate from the stated topic. You really are fond of repetitive and circular arguments. The ahadith in question are the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati. Indeed, a whole compendium of ahadith might as well be correlated. After all, they are all supposed to be the sayings and actions of the Holy Prophet (saw).

The Holy Prophet (saw) for sure does not contradict himself. The problem lies primarily with the reporters and narrators of his ahadith.

If a hadith is weak, or, if a hadith is not authentic, you cannot make it strong or authentic through ijma or reasoning, for that would make the Prophet’s words and actions subservient to them and modifiable. In authenticating ahadith, the established principles and rules of Usul al-Hadith and ‘Ulum al-Hadith must prevail.

Answer to Question No. 3

You already said in your first question above that you and I are not authorities on authenticating the ahadith. You are then belying yourself now in that you are now asking me to ‘confirm’ the matn of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati. I really have that feeling that what you aim in ‘confirming’ the matn of those ahadith is in fact ‘authenticating’ the ahadith, per se. Which neither you nor I should ever do.

The best that we can do now is to quote scholars (your scholars, if you may wish so) on that. The burden is yours, not mine, because you were the one insisting that authenticating or ‘confirming’ the matn of the ahadith in question is just alright. Or, is it really so?

Are there ‘corroborating’ ahadith which say that the Holy Prophet (saw) allowed us on occasions to just merely confirm the matn of ahadith which we have judged or thought to be just alright in subject matters?

Now, on following the Holy Prophet (saw), we, Shi‘ites, believe that we are in fact more meticulous and passionate than you, Sunnis, are!

There are explicit verses in the Holy Qur’an that admonish the believers to follow Allah (SWT) and His Prophet (saw). We strongly believe them and we strictly follow them. (Although, there is not a single verse anywhere in the Qur’an that says “Sunnati Rasul” or “Sunnati Muhammad”)

What are explicitly found in the Qur’an are such verses as, “Wa ma ata-kumur rasu-lu fakhudzu-hu wa ma nahâ-kum ‘anhu fantahû (al-Hashr:7),” or “Ati-‘ulla-ha wa ati-‘ur rasu-la wa uwlil ‘amri minkum (al-Nisa’: 59),” or “Innama waliyyakumulla-hu wa rasu-luhu walladzi-na a-manulladzi-na yuqimu-nassala-ta wa yu’tu-nazzaka-ta wahum raki’un (al-Ma’idah: 55),” and the like.

Without frailty or faltering, the Prophet’s ‘Itrat and Ahlulbayt (as) and their Shi‘ites have believed in and have followed these ayats in faith and in practice since the beginning of Islam until today. Thus, your denunciation that the Shi’ites are what you (ignorantly and shamelessly) call ‘stubborn and deviant’ is completely wrong and unwarranted.

Now, let me expose your governing fallacy in this debate, as is evident in the nature of your questions here and in the main paragraphs of your Opening Arguments.

Argument: The acceptability of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati is not dependent on their isnad to be authentic but rather on their matn to be that sound enough as to conform to the established tenets of the Islamic religion. And, that is, for instance, in the Sunnah as being next to the Qur’an as the primary source for Islamic knowledge.

This is Petitio Principii (Begging the Question), the classic example of the Fallacy of Weak Induction.

It is just similar to these: (1) “A is true because A is true;” (2) “You should always drive on the right side of the road because that is what the law says, and the law is the law;” and (3) “We know God exists because we can see the perfect order of His Creation, an order which demonstrates supernatural intelligence in its design.

So, why debate? What is there to debate? Why are we debating that the ahadith Kitabullah wa Sunnati are authentic?

Nay, this debate is all about the authenticity of the ahadith Kitabullah wa Sunnati based on the method and primary principle of authenticating ahadith in Usul al-Hadith and ‘Ulum a-Hadith!

Abe Dalagan Answer to Question No. 4

Why not enumerate those compilers, yourself? You mentioned it. You want me to help you prove your claim? Hello?

Don’t debate with me using circular and repetitive arguments. Better use citations from your muhaddithun!

Answer to Question No. 5

Your citations from the Holy Qur’an and the ahadith only painted your stand with another fallacy. Argumentum Verbosum!

Now, let me post something in relation to the Shi‘ah hadith you quoted from al-Kafi. And, let me as well help you with your arguments.

You should have said that “Even if those particular ahadith on ‘Kitabullah wa Sunnati’ is not authentic, nevertheless, following the Sunnah is still the ‘primary thing’ in that the Sunnah is the second source of Islamic knowledge after the Holy Qur’an. ”

We read in al-Kafi (Volume I, Page 69) this hadith (i.e., Shi‘ah hadith):

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from his father, from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd, from Yahya al-Halab, from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr, who has said the following.

Abu ‘Abdallah (as) has said: ‘Everything must be referred to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah.’”

“Abu ‘Abdallah” is a kunyah for Imam al-Husayn (as).

Now, Abu ‘Abdallah (as) did not say that the Holy Prophet (saw) said those words (i.e., ‘Everything must be referred to the H oly Quran and the Sunnah’). Or, that the Holy Prophet (saw) has said that he left behind the Qu’ran and his Sunnah for the ummah to refer to or follow. Instead, those particular words were the words of Imam al-Husayn, himself.

Now, do Shi’ites believe this hadith? Do Shi’ites follow the Sunnah? Of course, yes!

But these and your arguments will not change the status of the ahadith on “Kitabullah wa Sunnati” from its being inauthentic in its isnad (as scientifically proven through the established principles and rules of authenticating ahadith) into becoming authent ic overnight (merely through argumentative reasoning in defense of its matn).

As I have implied in my Opening Arguments, debating not on the isnad, but on the authenticity (or, more correctly, “acceptabi lity”) of the matn (not being the intention in this debate), not only renders this debate prejudiced, but also abuses the inviolability of Hadith as the second primary source of Islamic knowledge.

In Shi’ism (as opposed to Sunnism), Sunnah means the words and sayings (ahadith), deeds and routines, silence and encouragements, commandments and prohibitions, approval and disapproval, either reported and received orally or through reliable transmission, of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) and his Household (i.e., Fatimah, ‘Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn) and Progeny (the Imams ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn Zayn al-‘Abidin, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Baqir, Ja‘far ibn Muhammad al-Sadiq, Musa ibn Ja‘far al-Kazim, ‘Ali ibn Musa al-Rida, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Taqi, ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al-Hadi, al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali al-‘Askari and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al- Mahdi), peace be upon them all; and, that which pertains to the teachings and injunctions of Islam, complementing and explicating the verses of the Holy Qur’an.

This is one explanation of Hadith al-Thaqalayn (i.e., Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti).

As to those ahadith of the Holy Prophet (saw) transmitted through the Companions, the principle is this: If they deal with the words and actions of the Holy Prophet (saw) and do not contradict the ahadith of the Prophet’s Household and Progeny (as), they are acceptable. If they contain only the views or opinions of the Companions, themselves, and not those of the Holy Prophet (saw), they are not authoritative as sources for religious injunctions. In this respect, the fatwa or ruling of the Companions is just like the ruling of any other Muslim. In the same way, the Companions, themselves, dealt with the other Companions only in questions of Islamic law, as they would be so with any Muslim, thus, not as someone special.

I am forced to provide the Shi‘ah perspective of what Sunnah is because you cited for your argument a hadith from al-Kafi, which is the Shi‘ah counterpart to both the Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim of the Sunni world.

Alla-humma salli ‘ala Muhamad wa a-li Muhammad!

Abe Dalagan Five (5) Questions as Cross-Examination for Abu Jaiyana

Salam to everyone!

Question No. 1

You said, “These ahadith (on Kitabullah wa Sunnati) have been graded authentic by Muslim scholars.”

Kindly give the names of these Muslim scholars you are referring to, their years of birth or death, the titles of their major works (i.e., books), and their verbatim statements or pronouncements relative to the authenticity of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati.

Question No. 2

You said, “An Authentic Hadith is one which has a continuous isnad, made up of trustworthy narrators narrating from trustwort hy narrators, [and] which is found to be free from any irregularities or defects.”

Kindly cite three examples or versions of the hadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati that fit your definition of an Authentic Hadith ?

Question No. 3

You said, “All ayat[s] of the Qur’an [were] transmitted in a tawaatur manner.” What do you mean by this?

Question No. 4

Compared to the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati, what can you say about the ahadith on Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti?

Question No. 5

You said, “He (i.e., Abe Dalagan) has to explain also his objection [to] the ahadith [on] “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati” when the Qur’an, [the] other authentic ahadith, the Companions of the Prophet, the early Muslim jurists, [and] as well as, the book Al-Kafi [have all] unanimously agree[d] to it.

Why did ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab say “Hasbuna Kitabullah!” or “The Book of Allah is sufficient for us!” when the Holy Prophet (saw) in his illness asked for paper and ink presumably as he wanted to write his Wasiyyah? Or, why did ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab forbid the writing of the Prophet’s ahadith during the caliphate of Abu Bakr and during his caliphate?

Thank you and good luck.

Abu Jaiyana Thank you for your questions Mr. Dalagan.

1. I believe I cited their names in my presentation, re-read them.

With regards to their works, I will refer you to Silsilah al-Ahaadith ad-Da‘eefah by Shaykh Albani because it is the most recent and it is accepted by Majority of Muslim scholars today. Shia are very minority as you know, and many Muslim scholars such as Abu Hanifa, Bukhari, and others as well as contemporary reputable scholars say that Shia are not considered as Muslims except those among them who haven’t read or known the message of Islam. I am of the opinion that Shiism is guilty of polytheism (Shirk) which made it detached from the fold of Islam We can debate on that issue if you dare.

This recent study about authenticating or rejecting a hadith is more persuasive because the conclusion of whether a hadith is authentic or weak or fabrication is based on a large numbers of evidences possible.

All the positive and the negative evidences were weighed before a conclusion is made. Unfortunately, though frequently cited by Muslim scholars, this book is still in Arabic as far as I know. I will inform you when it is uploaded in the internet.

Shaykh Albani is also quoted to have said “The texts of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah make obedience to the Messenger obligatory on Muslims.” Usool Al Hadeeth – The Methodology of hadith evaluation p.95

So, what you are presenting to be a problem is actually a settled one. We believe in these contemporary scholars not just because they are pious Muslims but they are looked up by majority of reputable Muslim scholars today in the field of hadith evaluation.

They are not just unknown or scholars in the corner. In other words, it is a matter of Authority. That is the reason why I asked you whether if you know any scholar in the field of hadith that contradicts or opposes the work of these authorities such as of Albani. I knew that you can’t give any because there is none, but I purposefully asked that question in order for you and the audience to re alize that my knowledge about this issue is updated, while yours is obsolete.

With regards to his date of birth, I don’t think it is necessary. Anyway here it is. You can verify this in their NSO counterpart for you to find out whether Shaykh Nasiruddin Al Albani did actually exist in this world.

The challenge still stands Provide for us a reputable contemporary scholar in the field of hadith evaluation who opposes the

evaluation of Albani about the ahadith in question. When I say reputable scholar, I mean a scholar in the field recognized by Muslims scholars as authority in that field.

If all you can provide is certain Dr.Ma’ruf, then I will consider that as a joke unless you can provide for me a hadith literature where scholars in the field of hadith quotes Dr. Ma’ruf as authority.

2. Good question!

Here they are Mustadrak al Hakim Kinzul Ummal by Ali al Muttaqi al hindi Mishkat al Masabih by Tibrizi Jami al Saghir by Imam Suyuti Sunan by Imam Darqutni

Sunan al Kubra by Imam Baihaqi (two different asnaad) Muwatta by Imam Malik al-aitqad by Abul Qasim

al Targheeb by Ibn Shaheen

Example:

#18722

نعَ ْ

،

يلِيِ دلا دٍ ز ن ب ر وَث نعَ

ِ

ْ َ

ي

ِ

ْ

ِ ْ

ْ

َ

 

َ

، ي أ انث ،

ب

ِ

س و أ ي ب َ أ ن با ْ انث ، يِ د ج انث ، يُّ

ٍ

ُ

ْ َ

ي

ُ

َ

ِنا رعْ شلا لضْ فْلا ن ب دِ م ح م ن ب ليعِ ا م س إ يِن بخْ َ أ ، ُظِفا حْلا هِ َّللا دِ بعَ

َ

َّ

َ

ْ

َّ

َ

ُ

ُ

ْ

ُ

َ

َ

ْ

َ َ

ر

َ

ْ

ِ

ِ

ِ

َ َ

أ

َ َ

و ب أ اَن ر بخْ

ُ

ُ

َ

ْ

ُ

َّ

َ

َ

َ

َ َ

ِ َّ

َ

َّ

َ

َ

َ

َ

ْ

ُ

َ

 

َ

ُ

َ

َ

ُ ْ

ُ

َ

َ

َّ

تكْ رَ د دَ يِن

إ ، سا نلا ا هيُّ أ ا ي ي " لااَفَ

ا ا وْلا ةِ َ ج َ يِف سا نلا بَطخَ

مَّل س و هِ يَلعَ

هَّللا ىَّل ص هِ َّل لا لو س ر ن أ ، ا م ه نعَ

هَّللا يضِ ر سا بعَ

ٍ

ن ِ با ْ نعَ

ِ

َ ركْ ِ عِ

، ةَ م

 

ْ

 
 

،

 

َ

هِ

ي

ِ بَن ِ ةُ

ن

َّ

س و َ ، هِ َّللا با تكِ

ُ

ِ

ُ

َ

 

ُّ

ْ

ِ

ِ

ْ

ت

ُ ْ

َ

َ

َ

" ادًَ ب أ او لضِ َ نَلفَ هِ ب م م ص تعْ ا نِ إ ِ ا م مكُ يِف "

Other corroborating hadith Volume 9, Book 92, Number 381:

As I have said, ahadith related to this report has been graded authentic by scholars in the field such as Imam Hakim, Ibn Haz m (in al ahkam), and Shaikh Albani. They are high authority in that field.

It is your duty to find out how all those recorded ahadith are all inauthentic because you are the one questioning it. Be sure to give us

a scholar that is considered by Muslim scholars as reliable authority in this field. We need an updated study about this part icular issue. Don’t give us an outdated disagreement of scholars because they are already been settled by contemporary authorities in the field.

Abu Jaiyana 3. Oh about tawaatur. Tawaatur manner means the transmission of a text is via the report of a large number of narrators whose agreement on a lie inconceivable on all levels. Any text narrated in this manner is labeled as Mutawaatir (Continuously Recurrent). This is the case of all the ayat of the Quran. This is the reason why Muslims have the certainty (yaqeen) that what they are reading in the Qur’an is word for word true verbatim.

The shia scholars, since they are not considered as Muslims, they believed that the Qur’an in the hands of the Muslims is corrupted. They have the so-called hypothetical Mushaf of Fatima r.a. in which the size is three times larger than our Qur’an. They also believe that the original Qur’an is with your hiding Mahdi – That’s in your book Al Kafi

If a given narrated text is the same or virtually in consonance with what is in the Qur’an, it is considered as mutawaatir bil-ma’naa (mutawaatir in meaning) because the Qur’an, which is mutawaatir by itself, corroborates the narration.

In my opening I cited explicit ayat from the Qur’an which explicitly give high emphasis in obeying following the Book of Allah which is the Qur’an, and the examples of Prophet Muhammad (Sunnah fi’liyah). That was in connection to the “matn” of the many ah adith in Question, which you are very hesitant to admit

If the Qur’an, which is mutawaatir by itself, confirms that correctness of a narrated text then that text is considered authentic by external corroboration.

Illustration:

I narrated a report about such and such. I got it from somebody who is reliable, who got it from you, who got it from so and so.

Some Muslims will not rate my narration as authentic per se because there is a shia, that is you, in the isnad.

However, if there are other people who narrated virtually the same report but all his isnad are undisputed, therefore it is authentic by itself.

If you put the two reports together, the authenticity of the second report authenticates the first report despite the problem or dispute

in its isnad. It is now elevated to the status of sahih. It is not sahih by itself but it is sahih by external corroboration.

This is why the format of the topic of this debate is “The Ahadith About “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati” are authentic. We compare all related ahadith talking about the adherence of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad. As we can see, even if there are no other sahih ahadith which corroborate the hadith which you are questioning, the mere corroboration of the Qur’an to it extinguishes the problem, unless you don’t believe in the Qur’an because you are shii.

Your misunderstanding the topic nails your arguments. We are not debating whether or not Imam Malik’s record about “Kitabulla h wa

Sunnati” is authentic per se. We are debating whether the statement of the Prophet ABOUT “THE BOOK OF ALLAH AND MY SUNNAH” is authentic based on the MANY AHADITH. That’s the reason why I asked you whether you know of any scholar who scrutinized all the sanad of all the hadith talking about the Prophet’s statement about the Book of Allah and My Sunnah.

Here they are:

Mustadrak al Hakim Kinzul Ummal by Ali al Muttaqi al hindi Mishkat al Masabih by Tibrizi Jami al Saghir by Imam Suyuti Sunan by Imam Darqutni Sunan al Kubra by Imam Baihaqi (two different asnaad) Muwatta by Imam Malik al-aitqad by Abul Qasim al Targheeb by Ibn Shaheen

Available online at Islamport.com

If you don’t have any record of reputable scholars having scrutinized all those ahadith and concluded that they are all laysa sahih, it therefore means that those ahadith are sahih by default because they were graded as sahih by reputable scholars such as Imam Dhahabi, Imam Hakim, Ibn Hazm, and Shaikh Albani; sahih by external corroboration.

4. “Itratihi Ahlil Bayti” is I believe the weak version of “Kitabullah wa Ahlil Bayti” recorded in Sahih Muslim. If the former is understood

as the same as the latter, then it is considered sahih by corroboration because the latter is sahih by itself.

You have to understand though that that is the short version of the hadith. Many people were misled because of it. They thought that “Kitabullah wa ahlil Bayti” contradicts the “kitabullah wa sunnati”.

Here’s the comprehensive version of the hadith:

“I am going to leave with you two heavy burdens. The first of them is the Book of Allah: in it is the true guidance and the light. Therefore, hold fast to it.” Then he (the Prophet) prompted and induced the Muslims to adhere to the Book of God. Then he said: “And my household. I remind you of Allah in matters relating to my household. I remind you of Allah in matters relating to my household. I remind you of Allah in matters relating to my household.

In Sahih Muslim #5922, we also find that the following was said: “The Book of Allah contains right guidance, the light, and whoever adheres to it and holds it fast, he is upon right guidance and whosoever deviates from it goes astray.

The Prophet replied: “One of them is the Book of Allah and the other one is my select progeny (Itrat), that is family (Ahlul-Bayt). Beware of how you behave (with) them when I am gone from amongst you, for Allah, the Merciful, has informed me that these two (i.e., Quran and Ahlul-Bayt) shall never separate from each other until they reach me in Heaven at the Pool (of al-Kawthar). I remind you, in the name of Allah, about my Ahlul-Bayt. I remind you, in the name of Allah, about my Ahlul-Bayt. Once more! I remind you, in the name of Allah, about my Ahlul-Bayt. Shia ref. A’alam al-Wara, pp 132-133

It is clear therefore that the Hadith al-Thaqalayn is in reference to taking care of and behaving with the Prophet’s family after his death. The context of this hadith I will discuss in my rebuttal.

5. “Hasbuna Kitabullah” said by Umar r.a. has it’s own context of it’s own. This was said by him when the Prophet s.a.w. was at the

point of death wherein the Prophet told the men around him to get a paper because he wanted to write something. There were new converts with him that time. When the Prophet fainted, Umar r.a. felt pity on the Prophet’s condition so he stop the people from getting a piece of paper for it will worsen the situation. He also said that the Book of Allah is sufficient for them which is absolutely true(see Sahih Muslim #5922).

Does that mean that the Sunnah of the Prophet is not needed? Of course not because the Qur’an itself commands the Muslims to obey, follow, emulate and take what the Prophet had given.

There was no sahihayn that time my friend Dalagan, but the Sahabah know fully the asbab an-nuzol of each revelation and they have understood very clearly what each ayah of the Qur’an mean because they were eyewitnesses of the revelation. Umar r.a. accepte d and implemented ahadith narrated to him by other Sahabah.

That’s why when Umar r.a. said “Hasbuna Kitabullah” he was ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

The wasiya, by the way, is the preference of the Prophet for Abubakr to be his successor. See Sahih Muslim Book 031, Number 5 879. Your Hadith Ghadeer is a fabrication; see Al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah, vol. 7, p. 347.

Thank you.

In the name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful

Peace be unto those who follow the right guidance.

Subhanallah! I really believe that my opponent has no idea whatsoever regarding the issue in this debate. This is why his argument is far from engaging the points I presented in my affirmative opening arguments.

I already said that there was a difference of opinions of some scholars in the past regarding the reliability of some people in the sanad of some ahadith about “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati”, however the dispute has already been settled by contemporary scholars such as Ibn Hazm (in al ahkam) and Shaikh Nasiruddin Albani.

Folks, those scholars are beyond, beyond, beyond the levels of AbuJaiyana and Abe Dalagan. They are looked up by reputable sc holars in the field of hadith literature.

Merely parroting the fact that some scholars had a dispute regarding the reliability of some narrators after knowing that this dispute has already been settled by highly reputable scholars in the field is a fallacy called BEGGING THE QUESTION.

Mr. Dalagan said that the ahadith on “kitabullah wa sunnati” is not recorded in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, therefore he alluded that it must not be true; OMG!!!

This is the most PREPOSTEROUS argument you can present. Mr. Dalagan is giving us the presumption that Bukhari and Muslim knew all the ahadith which is absolutely WRONG!

Moreover, that type of argument is a fallacy called ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE. It a fallacy folks which goes like this “I don’t know about it therefore it doesn’t exist”

It doesn’t mean that since you can’t find the hadith in Bukhari and Muslim, therefore it doesn’t exist. Imam Bukhari himself said that he had compiled and memorized 300,000 - 600,000 ahadith. The reason why he didn’t codify them all is because many of them is they are redundant to each other.

That is why I quoted two ahadith from Sahih Al Bukhari emphasizing about the Book of Allah and the Sunnah just in case Mr. Dalagan would ask ahadith from Sahih Bukhari related to the instruction of Prophet Muhammad on clinging to the Book of Allah and his sunnah. Read it again Mr. Dalagan - Volume 9, Book 92, Number 381

So Mr. Dalagan, in his appeal to Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, dug a hole for himself so to speak.

Mr. Dalagan also misunderstood the topic of this debate. The topic of this debate is THE AHADITH ON "KITABULLAH WA SUNNATI" ARE AUTHENTIC.

Ahadith is the plural number of hadith. We are actually discussing here whether or not the MANY ahadith talking about the ins truction of the Prophet s.a.w. to cling the Book of Allah (i.e. the Qur’an) and the Prophetic Sunnah are authentic. Mr. Dalagan attacked Imam Malik’s record for not reaching the level of being Sahih due to some technicalities in the Isnad. That is totally useless, with all due respect, because scholars in the field had already settled the dispute about it, and they came up with the conclusion after comparing all the evidences that the hadith is in fact sahih

Moreover, that is not the CRUX of this debate. The main issue in this debate is to find out whether the reports about the Pr ophet’s instruction to the Muslims to cling to the Book of Allah and his Sunnah is true after comparing and consolidating all the reports related to it.

If one of the ahadith has some problem in its isnad, you don’t reject it automatically. You have to find out whether there are other ahadith corroborating with the subject matter and resolving the problem of the Isnad of the other hadith. That method is call ed JAM‘ (Harmonization).

One can’t simply say that this hadith is false because there’s a problem in the isnad. If there are sahih ahadith that corroborate the text of that hadith, then that hadith is elevated to the level of sahih. In hadith literature it’s called sahih by external c orroboration.

Consider this illustration because my opponent seems to be unaware of this so-called sahih by external corroboration; two ahadith with virtually the same text.

Ex. Hadith X has the isnad of 1,2,3, and 4. Hadith Y has the isnad of 5,6,7, and 8. Within the isnad of hadith X #3 is somehow problematic, disputed and therefore can’t be considered as sahih by itself. The isnad of hadith Y has no problem therefore, it is sahih by itself.

What would be the status of hadith X now?

The answer is that hadith X is now elevated to the level of Sahih because its problem with #3 is solved by the unproblematic isnad of Hadith Y. Hadith X therefore is considered as sahih by external corroboration.

So even without appealing to the authority and expertise of contemporary highly reputable scholars, we can confidently conclu de that what the shia have been barking all along is actually a mirage. What they need is a little study about usool hadith.

Abu Jaiyana Mr. Dalagan also presented another FALLACY called STRAWMAN. This is a fallacy wherein a debater attributed something to his opponent something false.

Mr. Dalagan said that the term Ahlus-Sunnah Wa Al Jamaah was somehow concocted by the Muslims from the hadith “Kitabullah wa Sunnati” – OMG!

That’s a lie folks. That’s a classic example of Shia fabricating a story before our very eyes.

The truth is that Muslims simply call themselves Muslims because Allah called them Muslims in the Qur’an. Allah also instructed them to follow the Qur’an and whatever is given by Prophet Muhammad and emulate as much as they can about the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad because he is the best example to follow, hence Ahlus-Sunnah. Allah also instructed the Muslims to hold fast to the rope of Allah and not be divided, hence, Jamaah or the main body.

When deviant people like the Shia and their elk introduced practices in Islam which have neither precedent from the Prophet’s Sunnah nor from the Practices of the Sahabah, they were labeled as ahlul-bid’ah or people who innovate new practices in the religion of Al Islam. The main body of Muslims call themselves as Ahlus-Sunnah wa al Jamaah which means the main body of Muslims strictly adhering to the Sunnah of the Prophet s.a.w. according to the understanding of the Sahabah or righteous predecessors.

The Prophet s.a.w. is reported to have said that this Ummah will be divided in many sects/ groups, all of them will go to hell except one group. They asked, “what is that one group?” He s.a.w. replied that that one group is the one who follow the way of the Prophet and his Sahaba.

In another hadith, the Prophet also instructed the Muslims to stick to the main body of Muslims.

So don’t propagate your fabrication here Mr. Abe Dalagan, especially in my presence; it won’t work here.

Mr. Abe Dalagan mistakenly thought that the Prophet could not have instructed the Muslims to cling to the Book of Allah and h is Sunnah because the sahih version is the Book of Allah and the Prophet’s family or progeny.

This is very horrible. The two ahadith don’t contradict each other folks. Abe Dalagan only needs to read a bit of history fro m the Seerah.

The instruction of the Prophet to cling to the Book of Allah and his Sunnah was given in his Khutba in Arafah during the last Hajj of the Prophet s.a.w. while the instruction to follow the Qur’an and to take care the Ahlulbait was given in Khumm miles and miles a way from Makkah when they were going home to Al Madina.

There was a story behind why the Prophet s.a.w. emphasized to the remaining Muslims with him to take care the Ahlulbait and their attitude towards them. The context was that there was a serious complaint from the soldier under the command of Ali r.a. abou t his alleged harsh type of leadership and being unfair in the distribution of the spoils of war. This was shameful for the Prophet. After investigation, the Prophet found out that this shameful allegation against Ali r.a. is false and based on ignorance. So the Prophet reminded the people in general about the Book of Allah and their attitude towards his household. And by the way, the Prophet’s household includes his wives.

So the two ahadith are not contradictory. It is true that Muslims must cling to the Book of Allah and the Prophetic Sunnah an d also they have to take care of the household of the Prophet and their attitude towards them after his death. So Muslims actually believe, respect, and follow the Ahlulbait as well.

That of course doesn’t mean that we should believe in everything attributed to them by the Shia such as they are like little gods knowing the unseen, where they will die, they know whether a person would go to hell or paradise et cetera. These are famous fabrications of the shia known to majority of Muslim scholars since the beginning.

With regards to the hadith cited by Abe Dalagan that the Prophet said to the people that “The Prophet took hold of ‘Alee’s hand in the presence of the Companions, on his way back from the farewell Hajj and said ‘To whomever I am his Wali, this one is also his Wali. My God, befriend whoever befriends him and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him.’”

Folks that is a shia fabricated hadith. Shia should feel ashamed in presenting that to the Muslims especially in debate.

Mr. Abe Dalagan, next time be sure of your evidences; your hadith is classified as fabrication (mawdu) by majority, if not all, of Muslim scholars long, long time ago. Please read Al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah, vol. 7, p. 347.

A great deal of hadeeths were fabricated in favour of ‘Alee and the household of the Prophet (r) by Shee‘ah themselves, as admitted by a well-known Shee‘ah sources.

Ibn Abee al-Hadeed says:

“Lies were introduced in hadeeths on merits originally by the Shee‘ah. In the beginning they fabricated many hadeeths in favour of their man motivated by enmity towards their opponents. When the Bakriyyah found out what Shee‘ah had done, they fabricated on their part hadeeths in favour of their man.” Sharh Nahj al-Balaaghah, vol. 1, p. 135.

This is why Shia sources are rejected by Muslim scholars. This is why Al Bukhari, as quoted by Abe Dalagan, said that shia are rejecters (rafida/rafidi). Interestingly, Mr. Dalagan cite Bukhari as authority when Bukhari believed in the clinging of the Book of Allah and his Sunnah I call this “THE DALAGAN’S BLUNDER”

Another Argument from Ignorance Fallacy: Mr. Dalagan alluded that since the ahadith kitabullah wa sunnati is not found in the “Kutub al-Sittah” therefore it must be false.

Folks, “Kutub al-Sittah” means the six famous books of hadith. That doesn’t mean that Muslim scholars only accept ahadith from “Kutub al-Sittah” This is very ludicrous argument indeed.

They are just the famous collections of ahadith but there are other collections which are recognized by all Muslim scholars t o be reliable collections of ahadith in general. As a matter of fact, the Muwatta of Imam Malik was the first to be codified and c onsidered as reliable my Muslim scholars even before the Bukhari and Muslim and others.

Therefore, the dating of compilations given by Mr. Dalagan is actually a trap for his own self. What he did is a fallacy called CHERRY- PICKING; he accepts sunni ahadith if they suit his shia view and reject them when they contradict him. There you can see the inconsistency of his arguments.

Lastly, something about Dr. Ma’ruf; who is that guy, a shia in taqiyyah? That’s interesting authority in hadith, I call it THE DALAGAN JOKE!

Audience: Please post your comments in the gallery if you think that there are Dalagan’s points which I have overlooked here.

Jazakallahu Khair

Abe Dalagan Abe Dalagan’s Rebuttal

Assalamu ‘alaykum!

ABU JAIYANA: “

He, being a [Shi‘ah], has a big problem with the ahadith … the ahadith related … are annoying to Shi‘ah theology.

Argument: “Abe Dalagan is a Shi‘ah, therefore, he has a problem with the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati.”

This is Argumentum ad Hominem as it is based on personal considerations.

My opponent actually has employed fallacies after fallacies, thereby committing all throughout this debate incorrect arguments in logic.

It is not the Shi‘ah that has problems with ahadith. Shi’ites have more business to do and undertakings to be preoccupied with than to be annoyed by other people’s beliefs. It is a fact that more and more Sunnis are becoming Shi‘ites by the day, than the other way around.

Many former Sunnis in becoming Shi’ites merely saw the truth in Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti. Its isnads are authentic, and there is not only deep meaning and wisdom in the hadith, but purpose and direction.

ABU JAIYANA: “These ahadith have been graded authentic by Muslim scholars, therefore, I don’t need to prove this as authentic to anyone. Those who question the authenticity of the hadith have the burden of proof to prove the contrary.

This is Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Appeal to Authority).

What then is the layman’s measure for ascertaining that those Muslim scholars you are referring to were actually or in the first place right in authenticating ahadith? That such and such were Sunni scholars? What methods and criteria were they using? Where those methods and criteria free also from deficiency and error? For a basketball game, a team’s homecourt advantage does not necessarily mean a sure victory for the team.

Argument: “I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false.”

This is Onus Probandi, the Fallacy of Shifting the Burden of Proof.

Reap what you sow! Let not your debate opponents build your arguments for you.

ABU JAIYANA: “… though I have no idea whatsoever about his possible objection to these ahadith …”

is an admission of ignorance of the requirements (e.g., reflection and research) when debating on the subject matter.

ABU JAIYANA: “… but for the sake of entertainment, I accepted his request that I should start first”

is plain arrogance!

ABU JAIYANA: “No reputable Muslim scholar on the face of the earth today objected to this fact.”

What about those reputable, contemporary commentators to Ibn Hazm’s and al-Albani’s works?

ABU JAIYANA: “… [Shi‘ah] scholars however … always object about reports related to the Qur’an and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad. This is because they wanted to blind the people about their so-called love of the Ahlulba[y]t and their obsessions about Imamah.”

Argumentum ad Hominem (or Purely Personal Considerations) and Non Sequitur (the Fallacy of False Cause). A total lie and misrepresentation!

Shi‘ites don’t despair for being the minority. Even in the early period of Islamic history, the Shi‘ites always were small in number. At Karbala’, Imam al-Husayn (as) and his fighting men numbered only less than a hundred. They faced an army of 30,000 misguided, irreligious Syrians.

We object to ahadith as being not authentic not because they are Sunni ahadith but because they have weak and in authentic is nands!

ABU JAIYANA: “REJECTING THE ‘MATN’ OF ANY HADITH RELATED TO ‘KITABULLAH WA SUNNATI’ IS TANTAMOUNT [TO] REJECTING THE QUR’AN).”

The argument is fallacious. It is just like saying that “Sunnis have already accepted as truth the matn or subject matter of the ahadith Kitabullah wa Sunnati, simply because believing in and following the Book of God and the Sunnah are already the established tenets of the Islamic religion.”

A case of Petitio Principii (Begging the Question) as I have cited in the Cross Examination.

ABU JAIYANA: “… we have very solid statements of reliable people from generation to generation to make us conclude with c ertainty that the ahadith about “kitabullah wa sunnati” was really said by Prophet Muhammad … ”

You insist on putting words to the mouth of the Holy Prophet (saw)!

Now, as to the instance referred where the Prophet (saw) in a sermon has purportedly utter ed the words “Kitabullah wa Sunnati”, namely, the Prophet’s last hajj, know that al-Malik and other scholars had the same problem: The hadith is wanting of authentic isnads and corroborative versions.

The Prophet’s last hajj was a grand affair (with more than a hundred thousand Sahabah in attendance). But why is there a dearth of Companions narrating the hadith?

al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Tirmidzi, Ibn Majah, Abu Dawud and al-Nasa’i have not recorded that hadith or that sermon.

And, at Ghadir Khumm, why did the Prophet (saw) instead admonish the people to adhere to Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ali Bayti?

In his Responses and Rebuttal, Abu Jaiyana displayed not only lack of good manners and sophistication, but also guilty conscience and ignorance.

His characteristic sarcasm and anger only served to weaken all the more his rather deceptive and fallacious arguments.

Are you a gentleman? A refined Muslim? The nature and style of your posts in this debate say otherwise.

ABU JAIYANA: “

Shia are not considered as Muslims except those among them who haven’t read or known the message of Islam.”

many Muslim scholars such as Abu Hanifa, Bukhari, and others as well as contemporary reputable scholars say that

This is Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Appeal to Authority) and vulgar. You are inserting an accusation in order to divert the debate from the topic.

The renowned mufti of al-Azhar in Cairo, Shaykh Mahmud Shaltut, outrightly gives the lie to your accusation when he said in a famous fatwa, thus:

“The Ja‘fari School of Thought, which is also known as al-Shi‘ah al-Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariah, is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as other Sunni schools of thought.

ABU JAIYANA: “I am of the opinion that Shiism is guilty of polytheism … which made it detached from the fold of Islam – We can debate on that issue if you dare.”

You are entitled to your rude and misguided opinion!

Abe Dalagan ABU JAIYANA: “… if you know any scholar in the field of hadith that contradicts or opposes the work of these authorities such as of Albani. I knew that you can’t give any because there is none, but I purposefully asked that question in order for you and the audience to realize that my Knowledge about this issue is updated, while yours is obsolete.”

How arrogant! You said “Any scholar”? Even a Shi‘ah scholar?

I am a Shi‘ah and my marja‘ is Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Rida al-Husayni Nassab. Presently living in Canada, he has two doctorate degrees in Islamic studies. Here is his statement on the authenticity of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati:

“The tradition, which mentions the phrase, ‘sunnati’ (my tradition) instead of ‘ahli bayti’ (members of my Househ old), is a fabricated hadith, which apart from the weakness of its chain of transmission, was concocted and transmitted by ‘Umayyad agents. ”

On the dates of birth and death of Islamic scholars, their usefulness is in the comparative analysis of the immediacy of preference for their works. The earlier a hadith collection is, the nearer it is to the narrators. Albani was born in 1914 and died in 1999. That is more than 1400 years after the last of those narrators has died.

You are in-love with Shaykh Nasiruddin al-Albani. How cute!

Your answer to Question No. 2 is incomplete. I challenge you to give three of those ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati that fit your definition of an authentic hadith. And you mentioned only one that failed even to fit your definition.

It is because two of the narrators, ‘Abbas ibn Abi Uways and his father, Uways, are classified as

1.

Weak (da’if), by Yahya ibn Mu‘in

2.

Weak and not trustworthy, al-Nasa’i

3.

Strange, by ibn ‘Adi (who said that “Ibn Abi Uways, a maternal uncle of Malik, narrates strange hadiths, which nobody accepts”)

4.

Unreliable, by Abu Hatam al-Razi

ABU JAIYANA: “… Don’t give us an outdated disagreement of scholars because they are already been settled by contemporary authorities in the field.

That’s a classic Wahhabi approach into the study of ahadith. I am beginning to wonder if you are really a Sunni. I smell the foul stench of Wahhabism in your argumentation.

Ah, yes. al-Albani was a Wahhabi! This Page should then be changed to Wahhabi-Shi‘ah Debate Series!

As to your Answer to Question No. 3, please be reminded of the verse, “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).” (al-Hijr: 9).

Don’t render the Holy Qur’an to be lesser than it is. Don’t treat it the way ahadith are treated (as to its authenticity and inviolability).

As to the ahadith on Kitabullah wa ‘Itrait Ahli Bayti” your understanding of it again confirms my suspicion that yours is of the Wahhabi persuasion.

As to your response to Question No. 5, know that what ‘Umar said (“Hasbuna Kitabullah!”) is ‘Umar’s opinion. Not that of the Prophet’s!

The Prophet’s asking for paper and ink is already “Sunnah” by itself. ‘Umar’s disrespectful reaction was not!

What the Prophet (saw) was about to write (namely, his wasiyyah) was in compliance to a Qur’anic injunction.

‘Umar’s refusing the Prophet (saw) to write his wasiyyah is not a Prophet’s Sunnah, but ‘Umar’s behavior.

Your arguments in lawyering for ‘Umar is Argumentum ad Misericordiam.

In your rebuttal, you are shooting at your feet! You are the one that is misrepresenting the topic of the debate. You are onl y for the matn, not the isnad of the ahadith. And, to accuse me of having no idea of what is being debated here is your being also mistaken in treating only the authenticity of ahadith by their matn. You mean you want to change the established rules and principles of authenticating ahadith? Ponder on my answer to your Third Question in the Cross examination.

You also have to study philosophy again. Your citations of fallacies are rather misplaced.

ABU JAIYANA: “… The main issue in this debate is to find out whether the reports about the Prophet’s instruction to the Muslims to cling to the Book of Allah and his Sunnah is true after comparing and consolidating all the reports related to it.”

So, you are now giving another title to the topic we have been so far debating.

And, don’t use your flawed Algebraic notations in this debate. In school, where your grades in Algebra and Philosophy all Excellent?

As to your point on Muslims to divide into sects, phrasing the Sahabah’s generation, I bring into your attention a hadith in Sahih al- Bukhari (Volume IX, Page 173), thus:

Narrated ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said: “I am your predecessor at the Fount (al-Kawthar) and some men amongst you will be brought to me, and when I will try to hand them some water. They will be pulled away from me by force, whereupon I will say, ‘O Lord, my Companions!’ Then, the Almighty will say, ‘You do not know what they did after you left, they introduced new things into the religion after you.’”

ABU JAIYANA: “Mr. Abe Dalagan mistakenly thought that the Prophet could not have instructed the Muslims to cling to the Book of Allah and his Sunnah because the sahih version is the Book of Allah and the Prophet’s family or progeny.”

Indeed, Abu Jaiyana, your worst nightmare is Kitabullah wa Itrati Ahli Bayti! No sane and educated Muslim will deny its authenticity. As to its interpretation, one more debate with you, I think, is needed.

You also missed the mark when I said in my citation that al-Bukhari was anti-Shi‘ah, the point being the twin traits of hypocrisy and disbelief are always present in every Nasibi (like you). Theirs are double standards, impartialities and inconsistencies when treating the Prophet’s ahadith.

Lastly, I have to admit that your name-calling hurts. It pulls the wool over your eyes. Meaning, you are a lost sheep!

With Salam.

Abe Dalagan ABE DALAGAN’S CONCLUSION

Salâm!

Right at the start and many times after that, Abu Jaiyana, resorted to a fallacy called argumentum ad antiquitatem (or argument to antiquity or tradition), as if desperate already in trying to affirm his proposition.

His implied argument was that Sunnis today think and believe that the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati are unquestionably authentic simply because these ahadith have also already been thought and believed to be such by their past and preceding generations ( and, particularly, by their scholars).

But that fact does not justify continuing such thought and belief.

For in that case, Catholics have been in their belief in the Trinity since the time of St. Paul. And, that, Muslims have been taught that the Trinity (e.g., The Father, the Son and The Holy Ghost) is a falsehood.

The Most High said in His Great Book: “And unto Allah leads straight the Way, but there are ways that turn aside: if Allah ha d willed, He could have guided all of you.” (al-‘Ankabut: 9, Abdullah Yusuf Ali translation)

In the art of debate, an argument directed at the person (e.g., the Negative Side), attacking or maligning his character or motive s for stating his idea, rather than the idea, itself, is argumentum ad hominem. It is of course an erroneous argument. “The relevan t question is not who makes the argument, but whether the argument is valid.

But, in this debate, Abu Jaiyana, has maliciously resorted to such tactic as if unaware that what he is actually doing is dig ging his own hole. Also, in debates, it is wrong to argue that something is true simply because it hasn’t been proven false. This is a fallacy called argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance). Thus, it should not be said that the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati are authentic because nobody has de monstrated conclusively that they are not. But failing to prove the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati as not authentic is not the same as proving them authentic? Do you understand English properly, Abu Jaiyana? Now, the burden of proof may lie on both the affirmative and negative sides; but, in most debates, the affirmative side is assumed to have the burden of proof. Moreover, since in this debate the negative side (Mr. Abe Dalagan) has presented a succession of solid proofs, all pointing to the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati as weak and inauthentic, and in the absence from him of objective, convincing refutations of those proofs, Abu Jaiyana should have presented his own solid proofs affirming his proposition, and not to relish on repetitive and circular deductive arguments. He has not done it and, for that, he lost in the debate! Abu Jaiyana resorted to fallacies. And it is always as if he spoke for the Sunni scholars. He miserably failed to quote them or any of them in his affirmation. I was always waiting for him to quote al-Albani in this regard. For instance, did al-Albani say in his book that “If the matn of the hadith in question agrees with the general teachings of Islam, the hadith is deemed authentic even if its isnad is not.

Abu Jaiyana has failed to cite anything like that, and, for that, he lost in the debate. Or, if not al-Albani, then any reputable Sunni scholar. Because al-Albani is a Salafi or not belonging to any particular madzhab of the Ahlus Sunnah. He has taught for a time at the Islamic University of Madinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, thereby establishing the fact of his being associated with the Wahhabis. The Wahhabi attitude towards the ahadith on Kitabullah wa ‘Itrati Ahli Bayti is one of denial and hypocrisy. In denying the authenticity of the ahadith, they mean to denounce Shi‘ism as deviant. In affirming their authenticity, they mean to hide their disinteres t in, indifference to and disconnection from the Prophet’s Household and Progeny (as), particularly, Fatimah, ‘Ali, al-Hasan and al-Husayn (as). All the same, Wahhabis always insist on the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati as being authentic based on their matn.

In the study of hadith, the isnad (or sanad) is important. ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak (died 181 AH), one of the illustrious teachers of al- Bukhari, said: “The isnad is from the religion; were it not for the isnad, anyone could just say anything he wanted.” (As reported by Muslim in his introduction to his Sahih)

A

sahih hadith as defined by the 6th century muhaddith, ibn Salah, "… is the one which has a continuous isnad, made up of reporters

of

trustworthy memory from similar authorities, and which is found to be free from any irregularities (i.e., in the text) or defects (i.e.,

in

the isnad)."

Now, all the versions of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati fail to meet the definition of ibn al-Salah for sahih hadith. His book, ‘Ulum al-Hadith, has become the standard reference for thousands of scholars and students of hadith over many centuries un til the present day. And, although, al-Shafi‘i’s definition of sahih hadith is lengthier, the main point is still that “each reporter should be trustworthy in his religion.”

In the different versions of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati, we find in the isnads (or, chain of narrators/reporters) such names as Salih ibn Musa al-Talhi, ‘Abbas ibn Abi Uways, Abi Uways and Kathir ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn Awf who were all by the unanimity of those great Sunni muhaddithun regarded as weak (or, da’if), abandoned (by the traditionists), liar (used to fabricate ahadith), untrustworthy, unreliable and strange.

7

 

Abe Dalagan At best, the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati are mursal (hurried, or its isnad is broken in the sense that two or more of its consecutive narrators are missing) or mu‘allaq (hanging).

But never sahih (authentic, or sound)! None from among those great Sunni muhaddithun has ever graded the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati as sahih!

Abu Jaiyana has never refuted these objective arguments. And, not having done that, he lost in this debate!

As to those ahadith that Abu Jaiyana put forward as corroborative of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati, the isnads of most of them are also questionable based on the veracities of their transmitters.

One example is the hadith “‘Alaykum bi sunnati wa sunnatil khulafa-ir ra-shidi-nal mahdiyyi-na min ba‘di. Tamassakuw biha wa ‘adduw ‘alayha bin nawa-jid.”

Recorded by Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidzi and ibn Majah, all the transmitters in the isnads are questionable people, thus:

(1) al-‘Irbad ibn Sariyah, the sole narrator from whom the tradition is narrated is not reliable because of the untenable statement that he has made in his own praise (“I am one-fourth of Islam!”) (2) Hajar ibn Hajar al-Kila’i is from a Syrian town notorious for its people’s enmity towards ‘Ali (as) (3) Khalid ibn Ma’dan ibn Abi Karib al-Kitabi, was the chief of police of Yazid ibn Mu‘awiyah, the most infamous ruler in the history of Islam (4) Thawr ibn Yazid, who hated ‘Ali (as) because it was ‘Ali (as) who had killed his father in a battle (5) al-Walid ibn Muslim, accused of forgery by Abu Mushar, as mentioned by al-¬Dzahabi in Mizan al-I’tidal These were some of Abu Dawud’s authorities. The transmitters of the narration as recorded by al-Tirmidzi and ibn Majah, namely Abu ‘Asim, Hasan ibn ‘Ali al-Khallal, Buhayr ibn Sa‘id, Baqiyyah ibn al-Walid, Yahya ibn Abi al-Muta’, ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Ala’, Mu‘awiyah ibn Salih, Isma‘il ibn Bishr ibn Mansur, and ‘Abd al- Malik ibn al-¬Sabbah, are all weak (da’if) transmitters, as mentioned by Sunni authorities on al-Rijal in their works.

All throughout, I have dutifully explained my objection to the authenticity of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati. I followed the established rules and principles on authenticating ahadith, which gives primary importance to the chain of narrators.

As to the Sunnah, itself, which is the second source of Islamic knowledge, teachings and injunctions, the argument is not about whether or not the Shi’ites accept its authority; but, whether or not the isnads or chains of narrators to each of the ahadith are authentic. This despite differences in the way Sunnah is defined by the two sects (i.e., Shi‘ah and Sunni).

Refuting the soundness and validity of the matn (text, subject matter) of the ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati does not take precedence over refuting the authenticity of their isnad (chain of narrators).

If the isnad has already been proven to be not authentic (using the established principles and rules of ‘Ulum al-Hadith when treating isnads), then the idea or act of authenticating instead the matn is simply absurd.

Also, if such is allowed in Islamic jurisprudence, then the integrity and inviolability of the ahadith as the second source of Islamic knowledge, teachings and injunctions are already compromised.

Fortunately, the study of prophetic traditions (ahadith) and the science of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) are two separate disciplines.

Shi‘is and Sunnis in this Page, I now rest my case.

The ahadith on Kitabullah wa Sunnati are not authentic!

Abu Jaiyana has lost in the debate!

Wa aquwlu qawli hadza liy wa lakum.

7

Abu Jaiyana Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Raheem

Peace be unto those who follow the right guidance.

Ladies and Gents, it is now time to sum up and evaluate this debate.

=======================================

THE ACCUSATIONS TO AND FRO

Mr. Abe Dalagan accused me of Ad Hominem, but he didn’t indicate which statement I made he considers as ad hominem. If I call Mr. Dalagan as Mr. Nice Guy, he would also accuse me of being sarcastic. I can understand this because elderly people are so sensitive and very emotional rather than being practical and open-minded.

I believe that I didn’t commit ad hominem fallacy because I only attacked Mr. Dalagan’s arguments, such as presenting a con firmed

fabricated hadith, criticizing an person which he himself used as authority when it is pointed out to him that such person wh om he present as authority in the field actually doesn’t agree with his position (Dalagan’s Blunder).

He also cited a certain person who is not even known, let alone recognized by the majority of scholars in the field, to counter the authority/ies I appealed to in this debate who are looked up and recognized by the majority of scholars in the field.

Can you imagine if I cite Dr. Keith Moore as authority in embryology, then Mr. Dalagan would counter it by citing certain Doctor somewhere out there to nullify Dr. Moore’s findings? That must be a joke right? So I called that the Dalagan Joke. It is clear now I’m attacking Mr. Dalagan’s argument, not the person of Mr. Dalagan.

Mr.Dalagan called me a wahabi, a lost sheep, can’t understand English properly, et cetera – that is a clear cut ad hominem because it has nothing to do whatsoever with the arguments I presented, but I won’t mind that because I understand that elderly people becomes very infuriated when they got pawned in a debate. I will just consider that as ANOTHER DALAGAN JOKE.

Mr. Dalagan also accused Imam Bukhari of being a Nasibi, and Shaykh Albani for being a wahabi et cetera. How is that relevant to the discussion here?

So it is clear now that, it is in fact, Abe Dalagan is guilty of ad hominem and red-herrings in this debate. People, especially the elderly, who can’t control their emotions, should not engage in any debate.

======================================

APPEAL TO AUTHORITY

Folks, it is not a fallacy. Mr. Dalagan must have forgotten his lessons. It is only considered as fallacy when you appeal to the wrong authority.

Example:

If I say that Mr. D’s birth certificate is authentic because the National Statistics Office (NSO) has authenticated it. I am committing a fallacy there? The answer is obviously NO because NSO is the right authority when it comes to authenticating birth cer tificates.

It would be fallacious if I cite DILG or DENR instead of NSO because that is an appeal to a wrong authority.

Mr. Dalagan should review his notes about this because he clearly doesn’t understand what he is accusing me of.

======================================

DALAGAN’S CRITICISM TO MY ARGUMENTS: EXTREMELY POOR.

Example:

He said that I was implying in my argument that Muslims today believe that the ahadith about kitabullah wa sunnati are authen tic because they have been thought by Muslim scholars since the past preceding generation.

That is extremely poor and erroneous analysis folks.

I quoted ayat after ayat of the Qur’an as proof that the mandate of the Prophet to cling to the Book of Allah and his prophet ic Sunnah is rooted primarily in the Qur’an and not somewhere else. May be Mr. Dalagan is the one who needs to re-enroll English 101 here, not me. This has something to do with reading comprehension skills.

Folks, you can read the flow my presentation again; I started with several ayat from the Qur’an to prove that the instruction of the Prophet to cling to the Book of Allah and his prophetic Sunnah is undeniably rooted in the Qur’an.

People can simply cite ayat of the Qur’an and formulate new doctrine and create a new religion. Classic example and the most popular group is the Shia. They cited ayat from the Qur’an and say that it is about Ali or about Imamah in which no companion of the Prophet understood those verses that way.

I cited words of the companions of the Prophet and words of early Muslim jurists about their affirmation that following the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. is a must. This is to emphasize here that this fundamental belief in the Quran and the Sunnah is not a new interpretation or understanding of Muslims in modern time.

Mr. Dalagan also lied in accusing me of citing Sunni scholars only. As a matter of fact, I purposefully quoted the words of Ali bin Abi Talib because the shia consider him to be an infallible man. Here is the quotation I cited:

Ali (RAA) said, "I am not a Prophet nor have I received revelation, but I act according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the

Prophet Muhammad as much as I can."

So there it is Abe Dalagan, it’s your Imam’s word for you.

====================================

Abu Jaiyana CONFLICT APPROACH VERSUS HARMONIZATION

Mr. Dalagan’s approach to the issue is called conflict approach. He didn’t allow harmonization of the ahadith.

In the field of interpretation, you should try to harmonize first before resorting to conflict approach, not the other way around.

Mr. Dalagan’s argument is that since some people in the past said that some of the narrators of some ahadith is unreliable, therefore all ahadith related to what they have narrated must be false.

That is a fallacy called hasty generalization. It is so because it is presuming that only those suspected unreliable narrators could possibly narrate such hadith. That is absolutely false Ladies and Gents.

The reports about “Kitabullah wa Sunnati” are numerous, and I posted the list of compilers in my opening and in my answer to Mr. Dalagan’s cross-exam.

I gave only one example because I have to save my word count. The point is that I gave one example of the many ahadith and

allowed Mr. Dalagan to point out the problem with that hadith which is graded sahih by Imam Imam Hakim, and Imam Dhahabi.

What is frustrating yet funny is that Mr. Dalagan, instead of pointing out the problem of that hadith; he criticized me instead of giving him one example instead of three. The point is, if he can’t pinpoint the problem in that one example, then what more if there are

three?

He kept on parroting the criticism of scholars in the past which is already been settled by contemporary scholars. That is not a progressive type of scholarship. We are not following a stagnant type of scholarship Ladies and Gents.

I believe that my method of harmonization is logical. Mr. Dalagan did not even attempt to refute my illustrations about how a disputed hadith can be elevated to an authentic one by means of harmonization. It is called authentic by external corroboration Sahih li Ghayrih.

The reason for this is that I studied Usool Hadith while Mr. Dalagan …no comment.

What Mr. Dalagan wants us to do is to reject all the ahadith talking about the book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet s. a.w. because some people in the past found problems in the isnad of some compilers.

We may ask him “But what about those ahadith which are not disputed and graded as sahih by other Muhaddith, would you not allow any harmonization?”

Mr. Dalagan would say, “Reject them as well so that I will win in this debate.” Duh! Smile

======================================

WHAT IS MUTAWAATIR, SAHIH???

I was surprised why Mr. Dalagan asked me what it means. It seems that he has no idea whatsoever about the types of sahih narration.

A sahih narration has many types. We have sahih by itself (Saheeh li Thaatih), and we have sahih by external corroboration (Sahih li

Ghayrih)

There is also such thing as sahih bil-ma’naa ( sahih in meaning).

The narration or isnad of these types of Sahih could either be ahad (Isolated or Rare), or Mutawaatir (Continuously Recurrent ) which is the case of the narrations of all the ayat of the Qur’an. Its transmission of a text is via the report of a large number of narrators whose agreement on a lie is inconceivable on all levels. It is therefore 100% true.

I asked Mr. Dalagan with regards to the explicit ayat in the Qur’an mandating the Muslims to follow the book of Allah and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad. This is very critical folks because the Qur’an is Mutawaatir.

You know what, Mr. Dalagan can’t afford to admit that the Qur’an explicitly mandates the Muslims to follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

We ask why?

It is because, according to Mr. Dalagan himself, that if he says YES, then he is actually admitting that the ahadith about Kitabullah Wa Sunnati are authentic.

The question is, does Mr. Dalagan has the choice to deny those explicit ayat of the Qur’an? The answer is obviously NO whether he likes it or not.

=======================================

THE LOVE AFFAIR AND THE JEALOUSY

Mr. Dalagan even went to the extent of accusing me of being in love with Shaykh Nasiruddin Albani. “How cute” he said. It’s very funny indeed.

We’ll I didn’t see that scholar in person. I read some of his works and some videos recordings of his lectures, and the works of other prominent scholars citing him as a highly reputable authority in hadith evaluation.

That is the reason why I cited the man as an authority, not because I’m in love with him. I love him as a fellow human being just like I love any other human being, and I respect him because of his authority in Muslim scholarship.

Mr. Dalagan seems to be very jealous with us. I am now thinking whether my opponent is a he or a she.

“Ayyy ffaf-fah”! Bakit ka nagladlad ditwoww! That’s Abujaina’s Joke!

=====================================

THE FABRICATIONS

Abe Dalagan made up a false story about how the main body of Muslims identify themselves as Ahlus-Sunnah Wa Al Jamaah. He said that it is concocted from the ahadith about “Kitabullah Wa Sunnati” – I accused him of fabricating lies before our very eyes. He did not deny it so it means it is true.

He also cited the Hadith in Ghadeer. I also pointed out that it is a classified shia fabrication long long time ago and I cited the reference No counter argument from Dalagan he accepted it to be true. Shia are expert in fabricating lies as evidenced in this debate.

========================================

THE AUDIENCE IS THE JUDGE

Unlike Abe Dalagan who already declared himself to be the winner (self-declaration), I rest my case to the logical and neutral minds of the audience.

As-Salamu Alaikum!