حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ الْفَضْلِ، بِمِصْرَ قَالَ: نَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ شَرِيكٍ، قَالَ: نَا عُقْبَةُ بْنُ مُكْرَمٍ، قَالَ: نَا يُونُسُ بْنُ بُكَيْرٍ , عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ إِسْحَاقَ , عَنْ أَبِي جَعْفَرٍ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَلِيٍّ قَالَ: مَنْ لَمْ يَعْرِفْ فَضْلَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا فَقَدْ جَهِلَ السُّنَّةَ
فضائل الصحابة للدارقطني
[…] Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. ‘Ali (Al-Baqir) said: “Who does not know the virtues of Abu Bakr and ‘Omar, may Allah be pleased with him, is ignorant of the Sunnah.” [Fada’il Al-Sahabah by Al-Daraqutni, also in the Musnad, Fada’il Al-Sahabah by Imam Ahmad]
Detailed article about Imam Al-Baqir>>>
The deceitful Rafidah, just like the rest of the enemies of Islam, use one of the most pathetic (based on their ignorance of Arabic) lies to blame the death of the noble Prophet (peace be upon him) on the mother of the believers ‘Aaishah in particular. They argue by citing the following verses (you will find almost the exact same tactic on Anti-Islam websites!):
One of many Rafidi posters that can be found on the net, portraying two wives of the Prophet (‘Aaishah and Hafsa) as to ugly looking witches (whom the Prophet spent his time with!), who manhandled him (yet Rafidah Imams are some sort of Power Rangers, heck, they control the universe …) and poisoned him.
The Rafidah believe that `Ali b. Abi Talib had a weakness, what was that weakness? The mighty Anus of an alleged Nasibi (enemy of Ahl al-Bayt). Why would people who have turned our master `Ali (رضی الله عنه) into a demi-god would believe in such thing and degrade him like that? Well, it’s simply due to their fanatism and hatred for the Sahabah which most of the time makes them insulting and degrading the Ahl al-Bayt, albeit without realising it. Let me explain it to you further:
Allama of shias Muhammad ibn Muhammad ath-Thabzawari in his “Jami al-akhbar au maarij al yaqin fi usul ad deen” p 456 cited report: Continue reading
as Salam alaykum, we all know famous report from Imam Muslim that used by criteria by all shias. Whoever loves Ali, he is believer, whoever hates him – hypocrite. Basing on this report rafidah (upon them what they deserve) making takfir on each and everybody who opposed hz Ali. Continue reading
Kulayni narrated in his Kafi interesting hadith that we have shared at our blog before:
“al-Kafi” (1/65), and Majlisi said it’s hasan (good):
3 – علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن منصور بن حازم قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: ما بالي أسألك عن المسألة فتجيبني فيها بالجواب، ثم يجيئك غيري فتجيبه فيها بجواب آخر؟ فقال: إنا نجيب الناس على الزيادة والنقصان، قال: قلت: فأخبرني عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله صدقوا على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله أم كذبوا؟ قال: بل صدقوا، قال: قلت: فما بالهم اختلفوا؟ فقال: أما تعلم أن الرجل كان يأتي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فيسأله عن المسألة فيجيبه فيها بالجواب ثم يجيبه بعد ذلك ما ينسخ ذلك الجواب، فنسخت الاحاديث بعضها بعضا.
Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from his father from ibn Abi Najran from ‘Asim ibn Humayd from Mansur ibn Hazim who has said:”I said to (Imam) abu ‘Abdallah (alaihi salam), ‘It is confuses me that when I ask you a question and you give an answer and then other person comes and you give a different answer for the same question.’” The Imam replied, “We answer people in a larger and reduced forms.” I then asked, “Did the Sahabah, companions of the holy Prophet speak the truth or lies when narrating his Hadith?” The Imam replied, “They spoke the truth.” I then said, “Why then they have differences?” Have you not considered the fact that a man would come to the holy Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) and ask a question and would give him an answer and then he would answer that would abrogate the previous answer. Thus, Ahadith abrogated other Ahadith.”
This hadith in itself so not suitable for shias that some their scholars changed it in their own books.
Now, I want to present to dear readers commentary from shia scholar Sadratdin Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Shirazi, known like Mulla Sadra.
In Sharhul Usool al-Kafi (2/362 Tahran; 2/549 Beirut) Shirazi in the commentary of this hadith said:
بان اختلافهم ليس لكذبهم على رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله بل لدخول الشبهة عليهم لأجل عدم تمييز بعضهم بين ناسخ الحديث ومنسوخه.
They (companions) differed with each other NOT BECAUSE THEY LIED UPON PROPHET sallalahu alaihi wa alihi, but because they fall in doubt due to some of them didn’t differ between abrogated hadith and abrogating hadith.
Sayidina Uthman (r.a) prayed 4 rakahs instead of 2 during the Haj. This was enough reason for some hypocrites to accuse him.
But everything has own explanation.
al-Bayhaqi narrated in “al-Marifah” as a taliq, and declared its chain of transmission good: From Abdurrahman ibn Humayd from his father that Uthman ibn Affan completed prayer at Mina and then delivered the speech to people. He said: “People! The Sunnah is the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam)! And the Sunnah of his two companions. However, this year are many new people and I was afraid that they will take it as a sunnah”.
Note: Mean he has prayed 4 rakahs during the journey instead of 2, because he afraid that in case he will pray two, new comers will continue in this way even not during the journeys.
at-Tahawi and Abu Dawud narrated from az-Zuhri, and chain is strong mursal in accordance to allama Nimawi, that he said: “Uthman only prayed four at Mina because the desert Arabs were more numerous that year and he preferred to teach them that the prayer is four rakahs”.
Both reports taken from Athar as-Sunnah by allama Nimawi Hanafi pp 371-372.