In Islam, is the Qur'an open to interpretation?

[mojtaba]

Walikom alsalam w rahamtu Allah wa barakatoh my brother
Let me first advices you (as this is one of your rights on me)
Don't take what is said as facts unless you verify your self
Hadeeth Althqalyen is not Mutwater.
Mutwater means many people narrated it from many people which is not the case with this Hadeeth.
The narrated one in Trmezy is Daeef weak, also other narrated in other books are Daeef weak except one in Muslim
Sorry it's in Arabic

وأنا تارك فيكم الثقلين أولهما كتاب الله فيه الهدى والنور فخذوا بكتاب الله وأستمسكوا به ) , قال زيد : فحث على كتاب الله ورغب فيه ثم قال : ( وأهل بيتي أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي ) أخرجه الإمام مسلم في صحيحه

Nevertheless, if you look deeper in all these Hadeethes you'll find that Prophet is directing us to take care of 2 high valued subjects. first is Qur'an and he detailed the benefits of Qur'an.
Then moved to the other subject take care of my family Ahlalbyt. he repeated several times take care of my family.
Nothing can be understood from Hadeethes that his family has better understanding of Qur'an or they should have exclusive understanding.
Ahlalbyt are part of Sahaba companions.

Companions specially ones who were there with Prophet from beginning. they've lived the history when Qur'an was revealed among them. they had the chance to learn Qur'an from Prophet himself, he was explaining, he was answering their questions.
We love Ahlalbyt, they're part of Sahaba, we're abide to Prophet instructions to take care of them.
When it comes to understanding of Qur'an Ali is one of the best Sahaba. he was there since early beginning same as Abubkr, Omar, Uthman.
Raydya Allah anhm gamyaa
Thanks dear brother
May Allah guide me and you to the truth and the straight way

Thank you my dear brother. May Allah bless you and your family.

My dear brother, Hadith of Thaqlayn is Mutiwatir. Al-Haythami (one of the eminent Sunni scholars of Hadith) in Al-Sawa'iq wrote that Hadith Al-Thaqlayn is narrated from about 20 Sahaba (companions of Prophet) [ثمَّ اعْلَم أَن لحَدِيث التَّمَسُّك بذلك طرقا كَثِيرَة وَردت عَن نَيف وَعشْرين صحابيا]. See here. So, this Hadith is certainly Mutiwatir (frequent).

Brother, what Tirmidhi has narrated is not Dha'if. Because Tirmidhi himslef has siad that the Hadith is Hasan( حسن ). Also, Tirmidhi has narrated this Hadith with another route of the narrators in his Sunan and has said that it is Hasan( حسن ), too. See here.

Ibn Hajar Asqalani( one of your eminent scholars of Hadith ) has narrated Hadith of Thaqlayn from Imam Ali (as) and has said that it is Sahih.( وَقَدْ تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كتاب الله تعالى، سَبَبُهُ بيدي، وَسَبَبُهُ بِأَيْدِيكُمْ، وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي : Prophet said, ' I have left among you, that which if you hold fast to it, you shall not go astray: The Book of Allah ... and my progeny )(هَذَا إِسْنَادٌ صَحِيحٌ: The route of the narrators is Sahih). See Al-Matalibul Aliyyah by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, V16, P142.

Also, Haakim has narrated the Hadith of Thaqlayn in his book, Al-Mostadrak Ala Sahihayn. See here and here. Haakim has said that both of them are Sahih (for the first Hadith see its below (هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين ، ولم يخرجاه بطوله), for the second one, see the previous page, i.e., here(وشاهده حديث سلمة بن كهيل ، عن أبي الطفيل أيضا صحيح على شرطهما)).

Also, Al-Haythami has narrated this Hadith in his book and has said that it is Sahih ( وَفِي رِوَايَة صَحِيحَة :إِنِّي تَارِك فِيكُم أَمريْن لن تضلوا إِن تبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله وَأهل بَيْتِي عِتْرَتِي). See Al-Sawa'igh.

Imam Ahmad ibn Hambal has also narrated this narration in his Musnad and Ibn Hajar Al-Heytamy has said that its route of the narrators does not have any problem (وَسَنَده لَا بَأْس بِهِ, See Al-Sawa'iq).

Also, Az-Zahabi has said that the Hadith of Thaqlayn is Sahih (قال شيخنا أبو عبد الله الذهبي : وهذا حديث صحيح). See here. Ibn Kathir Al-Demashqi has also said that the Hadith of Thaqlayn is Sahih. See Tafseer Ibn Kathir.

Brother, this Mutiwatir and Sahih Hadith says that we must hold fast to the progeny of Prophet. Also, Quran and 'Itrah (progeny of Prophet) never split from each other. But, Prophet Muhammad never said that Quran and Sahaba never split from each other. He (sawaws) never said that we must hold fast to Sahaba (Radhiyallahu Anhum).

Also, it is narrated from Prophet Muhammad (sawaws) that Quran and his progeny are the complete Successors of him (إِنِّي تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمُ الْخَلِيفَتَيْنِ كَامِلَتَيْنِ: كِتَابَ اللَّهِ، وَعِتْرَتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ). The oldest book in which this Hadith is narrated, is the book of Ibn Abi Sheybah, the teacher of Al-Bukhari (See Musnad Ibn Abi Sheybah, V1, P.108). Imam Ahmad ibn Hambal in his Musnad, Imam Al-Tabarani in Al-Mo'jam Al-Kabir, and others have also narrated this Hadith in their books. Al-Haythami in two parts of his book - Majma' Al-Zawaeed(1 and 2) - has siad that the Hadith is Sahih. In addition, Albani has said that the Hadith is Sahih ( See here ).

Brother, according to the Hadith of Thaqlayn, only loving Ahlul Bayt is not sufficient. We must accept them as the true Successors of Prophet and hold fast to them and also Qur'an to be guided.

Brother, you should know that Umar learnt Sura Al-Baghara during 12 years. See, Sho'abol Iman by Beyhaghi, Al-Jami' li Ahkam Al-Ghor'an by Imam Ghortobi and others.

Waffaqakallah wa 'Iyyana!

 

[mojtaba]

The Abu Bakr thing is described here (from Death of a Prophet - S Shoemaker):
According to this tradition from Ibn Isḥāq’s Sīra, transmitted by both al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Hishām,
when ʿUmar heard the news of Muhammad’s passing, he forcefully denied
that Muhammad had died, swearing, “By God he is not dead: he has gone to
his Lord as Moses b. ʿImrān went and was hidden from his people for forty
days, returning to them after it was said that he had died. By God, the apostle
will return as Moses returned and will cut off the hands and feet of men
who allege that the apostle is dead.”255 As Ibn Isḥāq relates, when Abū Bakr
learned of this commotion, he came to the mosque, and after venerating
Muhammad’s remains he sought to restrain ʿUmar, who nonetheless persisted
in his ranting. Abū Bakr then addressed the crowd directly, hoping to
defuse the disturbance that ʿUmar was creating, first by insisting on the reality
of Muhammad’s death, followed then by recitation of Qurʾān 3:144,
which relates Muhammad’s death. The throng apparently was quieted, although
Ibn Isḥāq additionally and tellingly notes that “it was as though the
people did not know that this verse had come down until Abū Bakr recited it
that day. The people took it from him and it was (constantly) in their
mouths.”256 This tradition is more than a little peculiar, as Silvestre de Sacy
observes, and Ibn Isḥāq’s report that no one had ever heard the verse before
certainly suggests rather strongly that the verse was a late addition to the
Qurʾānic text, whose inclusion required this elaborate literary device to justify
its introduction.257 In light of Abū Bakr’s personal closeness to Muhammad,
his sterling reputation, and his status within the early community, he
would of course present a logical vehicle for such a textual addition, and
placing the verse in his mouth would certainly be an effective means of
quickly establishing its authenticity.

Lol!
A funny interpretation of that event.

 

[Kirran]

The goat ate the verse about stoning for adultery according to a hadith. Unsurprisingly, this hadith is considered weak by orthodox scholars. The story sounds a bit far fetched to me, sort of the kind of thing that would be invented to support a particular theological perspective versus a rival one (as many hadith seem to resemble). However the fact that it exists at all seems to hint at a diversity of views regarding the Quran.

There are also some stories in the Islamic tradition that seem to suggest other verses (and even chapters) existed. Obviously these will also be considered unreliable as one of the criteria for reliability is that it doesn't contradict orthodoxy. It's a bit of a dead end though as it's hard to find evidence for non-existent things. It is possible that later Muslims made these stories up out of self-interest, or it could represent a genuine tradition, no real way of knowing.

The Abu Bakr thing is described here (from Death of a Prophet - S Shoemaker):

According to this tradition from Ibn Isḥāq’s Sīra, transmitted by both al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Hishām,
when ʿUmar heard the news of Muhammad’s passing, he forcefully denied
that Muhammad had died, swearing, “By God he is not dead: he has gone to
his Lord as Moses b. ʿImrān went and was hidden from his people for forty
days, returning to them after it was said that he had died. By God, the apostle
will return as Moses returned and will cut off the hands and feet of men
who allege that the apostle is dead.”255 As Ibn Isḥāq relates, when Abū Bakr
learned of this commotion, he came to the mosque, and after venerating
Muhammad’s remains he sought to restrain ʿUmar, who nonetheless persisted
in his ranting. Abū Bakr then addressed the crowd directly, hoping to
defuse the disturbance that ʿUmar was creating, first by insisting on the reality
of Muhammad’s death, followed then by recitation of Qurʾān 3:144,
which relates Muhammad’s death. The throng apparently was quieted, although
Ibn Isḥāq additionally and tellingly notes that “it was as though the
people did not know that this verse had come down until Abū Bakr recited it
that day. The people took it from him and it was (constantly) in their
mouths.”256 This tradition is more than a little peculiar, as Silvestre de Sacy
observes, and Ibn Isḥāq’s report that no one had ever heard the verse before
certainly suggests rather strongly that the verse was a late addition to the
Qurʾānic text, whose inclusion required this elaborate literary device to justify
its introduction.257 In light of Abū Bakr’s personal closeness to Muhammad,
his sterling reputation, and his status within the early community, he
would of course present a logical vehicle for such a textual addition, and
placing the verse in his mouth would certainly be an effective means of
quickly establishing its authenticity.

All of these stories are from the Islamic tradition, not things that were made up by anti-Muslim polemicists. Even if they are all untrue (as most Muslims will argue), it still shows that there was a diversity of perspectives among early Muslim communities and that later scholars were willing to discuss things and entertain possibilities that would today be considered 'off limits'.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Interesting to hear that one.

I've seen it written (by a Muslim scholar, no less) that one of the main reasons they wanted to get the Qur'an written down and compiled was because there were variants of all the oral traditions of it in different areas, and groups like the Syrians and Iraqis were annoyed at Arabians telling them that their versions weren't right. So the Arabians put theirs in a book.

My personal thoughts are that Muhammad made his teachings, but not word for word as we receive them - rather people said it in their words or in the form of poetry, and that was what went into the Qur'an. With some other stuff piled in from various sources, presumably.

Do you think views such as the modern "liberal Muslim" view of the Qur'an, seeing it as not being directly the word of God or infallible but as a record of the revelations of Muhammad and the development of early Islam's relating to God, would have been around during the first couple centuries AH?

 

[Kirran]

Lol!
A funny interpretation of that event.

From a non-Muslim perspective (or indeed a liberal Muslim perspective) it seems quite reasonable.

 

[Limo]

Thank you my dear brother. May Allah bless you and your family.

My dear brother, Hadith of Thaqlayn is Mutiwatir. Al-Haythami (one of the eminent Sunni scholars of Hadith) in Al-Sawa'iq wrote that Hadith Al-Thaqlayn is narrated from about 20 Sahaba (companions of Prophet) [ثمَّ اعْلَم أَن لحَدِيث التَّمَسُّك بذلك طرقا كَثِيرَة وَردت عَن نَيف وَعشْرين صحابيا]. See here. So, this Hadith is certainly Mutiwatir (frequent).

Brother, what Tirmidhi has narrated is not Dha'if. Because Tirmidhi himslef has siad that the Hadith is Hasan( حسن ). Also, Tirmidhi has narrated this Hadith with another route of the narrators in his Sunan and has said that it is Hasan( حسن ), too. See here.

Ibn Hajar Asqalani( one of your eminent scholars of Hadith ) has narrated Hadith of Thaqlayn from Imam Ali (as) and has said that it is Sahih.( وَقَدْ تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كتاب الله تعالى، سَبَبُهُ بيدي، وَسَبَبُهُ بِأَيْدِيكُمْ، وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي : Prophet said, ' I have left among you, that which if you hold fast to it, you shall not go astray: The Book of Allah ... and my progeny )(هَذَا إِسْنَادٌ صَحِيحٌ: The route of the narrators is Sahih). See Al-Matalibul Aliyyah by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, V16, P142.

Also, Haakim has narrated the Hadith of Thaqlayn in his book, Al-Mostadrak Ala Sahihayn. See here and here. Haakim has said that both of them are Sahih (for the first Hadith see its below (هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين ، ولم يخرجاه بطوله), for the second one, see the previous page, i.e., here(وشاهده حديث سلمة بن كهيل ، عن أبي الطفيل أيضا صحيح على شرطهما)).

Also, Al-Haythami has narrated this Hadith in his book and has said that it is Sahih ( وَفِي رِوَايَة صَحِيحَة :إِنِّي تَارِك فِيكُم أَمريْن لن تضلوا إِن تبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله وَأهل بَيْتِي عِتْرَتِي). See Al-Sawa'igh.

Imam Ahmad ibn Hambal has also narrated this narration in his Musnad and Ibn Hajar Al-Heytamy has said that its route of the narrators does not have any problem (وَسَنَده لَا بَأْس بِهِ, See Al-Sawa'iq).

Also, Az-Zahabi has said that the Hadith of Thaqlayn is Sahih (قال شيخنا أبو عبد الله الذهبي : وهذا حديث صحيح). See here. Ibn Kathir Al-Demashqi has also said that the Hadith of Thaqlayn is Sahih. See Tafseer Ibn Kathir.

Brother, this Mutiwatir and Sahih Hadith says that we must hold fast to the progeny of Prophet. Also, Quran and 'Itrah (progeny of Prophet) never split from each other. But, Prophet Muhammad never said that Quran and Sahaba never split from each other. He (sawaws) never said that we must hold fast to Sahaba (Radhiyallahu Anhum).

Also, it is narrated from Prophet Muhammad (sawaws) that Quran and his progeny are the complete Successors of him (إِنِّي تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمُ الْخَلِيفَتَيْنِ كَامِلَتَيْنِ: كِتَابَ اللَّهِ، وَعِتْرَتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ). The oldest book in which this Hadith is narrated, is the book of Ibn Abi Sheybah, the teacher of Al-Bukhari (See Musnad Ibn Abi Sheybah, V1, P.108). Imam Ahmad ibn Hambal in his Musnad, Imam Al-Tabarani in Al-Mo'jam Al-Kabir, and others have also narrated this Hadith in their books. Al-Haythami in two parts of his book - Majma' Al-Zawaeed(1 and 2) - has siad that the Hadith is Sahih. In addition, Albani has said that the Hadith is Sahih ( See here ).

Brother, according to the Hadith of Thaqlayn, only loving Ahlul Bayt is not sufficient. We must accept them as the true Successors of Prophet and hold fast to them and also Qur'an to be guided.

Brother, you should know that Umar learnt Sura Al-Baghara during 12 years. See, Sho'abol Iman by Beyhaghi, Al-Jami' li Ahkam Al-Ghor'an by Imam Ghortobi and others.

Waffaqakallah wa 'Iyyana!

Aslam alikom warahmatu Allah
My dear brother, this subject has been discussed a lot. Debate on what are the authorized saheeh /Daeef hadeeth will take a long time.
The strongest Hadeeth and the best is narrated by Imam Moslem. this is the best and strongest Hadeeth
No debate about the true of incident. the debate is about the meaning and what is exactly said
Prophet was giving 2 important separate instructions to pay Sahaba attention to follow Qur'an and after he finishes detailing the benefits of doing so, he started talking about the second Theqal wich is his family. Nothing else said in Hadeethes saheeh, anything added is not authorised by sunah scholars of hadeeth.
So in the true and authorised Hadeethes, there is nothing explicitly about only Ahlalbyt are the only people who has the best explanation of Qur'an.
There is no explicit appointment of Ahlalbyt being Caliphs at all
I know that this is one of the big disagreement between Sunnis and Shiis but let me tell you something,
If the authorized hadeeth are pointing to whatever you say:

• Why all Sahaba attended and listened to this instructions didn't have the understanding that you've?
• Did Aly rady Allah anh, get the same understanding that you've?

Why Aly rady Allah anh didn't insist to apply these instructions? vice versa, he accepted and gave blessings and loyalty to Caliphs Abubkr, Umar, and Uthman?

Last comment, did you wonder, why Sunnis keep these Hadeethes in their books?
Hadana Allah gameean

 

[Kirran]

Jeez, get a One-on-One Debates thread you two

 

[gnomon]

In Christianity, there are many denominations. This is because there are many individual interpretations of the Bible. Many Christians (mainly fundamentalists) feel that interpreting the Bible is wrong, and it should be viewed in a literal sense, in its entirety. I explored Islam last year before returning to Christianity, and have heard mixed things about how to interpret the Qur'an. So my question is, are Muslims permitted to interpret the Qur'an as they wish? Or must it be viewed, literally, in its entirety?

Islam also has many denominations and specific cultural norms based upon the evolution of that religion upon numerous disparate cultures.

It is not unique in any sense. The works are as open to interpretation as any other sacred works you may have heard of.

 

[DragonHawk1959]

In Christianity, there are many denominations. This is because there are many individual interpretations of the Bible. Many Christians (mainly fundamentalists) feel that interpreting the Bible is wrong, and it should be viewed in a literal sense, in its entirety. I explored Islam last year before returning to Christianity, and have heard mixed things about how to interpret the Qur'an. So my question is, are Muslims permitted to interpret the Qur'an as they wish? Or must it be viewed, literally, in its entirety?

There aren't as many denominations in Islam but it is denominational:
Sunni Muslims are the largest denomination of Islam and are known as Ahl as-Sunnah wa'l-Jamā'h or simply as Ahl as-Sunnah. The word Sunni comes from the word sunnah, which means the teachings and actions or examples of the Islamic prophet, Muhammad.
Islamic schools and branches - Wikipedia.

Also, as with Christian priest many imams more or less preach their on interpretation of scripture.

 

[DragonHawk1959]

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Interesting to hear that one.

I've seen it written (by a Muslim scholar, no less) that one of the main reasons they wanted to get the Qur'an written down and compiled was because there were variants of all the oral traditions of it in different areas, and groups like the Syrians and Iraqis were annoyed at Arabians telling them that their versions weren't right. So the Arabians put theirs in a book.

My personal thoughts are that Muhammad made his teachings, but not word for word as we receive them - rather people said it in their words or in the form of poetry, and that was what went into the Qur'an. With some other stuff piled in from various sources, presumably.

Do you think views such as the modern "liberal Muslim" view of the Qur'an, seeing it as not being directly the word of God or infallible but as a record of the revelations of Muhammad and the development of early Islam's relating to God, would have been around during the first couple centuries AH?

There was likely more diversity in the teachings in the first century, or two. that is the way it was with Christianity. Each of the Apostles taught their own interpretation. And then their disciples taught their version of what they had been taught. Which gives us a more or less geometric expansion in variations.
All but one of the early Christian sects were forcibly suppressed by the Holy Roman Emperor Constantine in 337. And even so we now have some 4,000.

 

[Rival]

All but one of the early Christian sects were forcibly suppressed by the Holy Roman Emperor Constantine in 337.

No they weren't. Constantine was theologically illiterate and very taken by Arianism, iirc. Constantine didn't care much for theological squabbles, he just wanted peace in the Empire.

 

[Deidre]

Not sure he wanted peace, considering he was responsible for ordering the killing of Gnostics, during his reign.

 

[Rival]

Not sure he wanted peace, considering he was responsible for ordering the killing of Gnostics, during his reign.

This is Roman style peace.

 

[Deidre]

This is Roman style peace.

LMAO!

 

[Deidre]

Even Islamic experts refuse to debate the Quran and justify its contents in public.

Well, I think there are two definitions of interpretation when it comes to this...there is interpretation in terms of helping people to even understand what they're reading, but then there is interpretation when it comes to deciphering what is literal and what might be metaphorical.

The Bible can be considered literal AND metaphorical, depending on the passages.

 

[psychoslice]

No they weren't. Constantine was theologically illiterate and very taken by Arianism, iirc. Constantine didn't care much for theological squabbles, he just wanted peace in the Empire.

That's not the Constantine I know of, that's what the church wants you to believe.

 

[Deidre]

The impression I have is that only scholars may interpret it. Rather like pre-Reformation Christianity, it has to be in a certian language (arabic) and it is the "church" that decides rather than the individual.

Ahhh, so like Catholics tend to believe that only the Pope can ''interpret'' Scripture a particular way, and teach it to the masses? I wouldn't doubt that.

 

[mojtaba]

From a non-Muslim perspective (or indeed a liberal Muslim perspective) it seems quite reasonable.

OK. Let me explain for you the correct interpretation of that event. first see the summary of the tradition in Sahih Al-Bukhari.

When Prophet (peace be upon him and his pure progeny) passed away, Abu Bakr was not in Medina (the city in which Prophet passed away) and he was indeed in As-Sonh (a city which was around Medina). He was in that city because his house was there.

Because Abu Bakr was not in Medina at the time of death of Prophet(S), Umar feared that people pledge allegiance to Imam Ali (who was appointed as the Successor of Prophet Muhammad by Prophet in Ghadir Khom), so that he with his group tried to deny the death of Prophet until the arriving of Abu Bakr to Medina, and he frightened Muslims that if one of them says that Prophet has died, he will kill him by the sword (إِنَّ عُمَرَ ، يَقُولُ : لا يَتَكَلَّمُ أَحَدٌ بِمَوْتِهِ إِلا ضَرَبْتُهُ بِسَيْفِي هَذَا, one of the Sunni authentic sources: Sunan Al-Kobra by Al-Nisa'i ). Umar called those Sahaba (companions of Prophet) that said that Prophet has died (a true thing) hypocrite!!! (لَمَّا تُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ص قَامَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ، فَقَالَ: إِنَّ رِجَالا من المنافقين يزعمون ان رسول الله تُوُفِّيَ, one of the Sunni authentic sources: Tarikh al-Tabari). During the rejection, they sent Salim Ibn Ubayd to inform Abu Bakr about the death of Prophet(فذهب سالم إبن عبيد وراء سنح، فاعلمه بموت رسول الله, Sunni source: Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah by Ibn Kathir ). When Abu Bakr arrived, his acknowledgement was accepted by Umar and his group, because they reached to their goal. Then, they went to Saqifa to debate for Khilapha!!(فرجع القوم إِلى قوله وبادروا سقيفة بني ساعدة, Sunni source: Tarikh Abi al-Fida).

But about the verse 3:144, it should be said that before arriving of Abu Bakr to Medina, one of the Sahaba (Amro ibn Qays) recited that verse (وَعَمْرُو بْنُ قَيْسِ بْنِ زَائِدَةَ بْنِ الْأَصَمِّ بْنِ أُمِّ مَكْتُومٍ قَائِمٌ فِي مُؤَخَّرِ الْمَسْجِدِ يَقْرَأُ {وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ. .} إِلَى قَوْلِهِ {وَسَيَجْزِي اللهُ الشَّاكِرِينَ} [144: 3] Sources, 1.Dala'il Al-Nobowwah by Al-Beyhaqi, 2.Al-Sira Al-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hisham, etc.). So that the saying that Abu Bakr entered that verse to Holy Quran is not correct. Indeed, Umar and his group who were trying to reject the death of Prophet(sawaws) until arriving of Abu Bakr to Medina, when Abu Bakr arrived and then recited that verse, lied and said that they have not already heard that verse!! Umar said:
فَقَالَ عمر: أَو إِنَّهَا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ؟ مَا شَعَرْتُ أَنَّهَا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ. ثُمَّ قَالَ عُمَرُ: يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ هَذَا أَبُو بكر وَهُوَ ذوشيبة الْمُسلمين، فَبَايعُوهُ( Oh! Was it in the Book of Allah? I did not think that it is in the Book of Allah!! Then Umar said, O people! This is Abu Bakr, so pledge allegiance to him!!!)(one of Sunni authentic sources: Al-Sira Al-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hisham). Also, the people of group of Umar who helped him lied and said that they have not already heard that verse.


Good luck!

 

[Kirran]

OK. Let me explain for you the correct interpretation of that event. first see the summary of the tradition in Sahih Al-Bukhari.

When Prophet (peace be upon him and his pure progeny) passed away, Abu Bakr was not in Medina (the city in which Prophet passed away) and he was indeed in As-Sonh (a city which was around Medina). He was in that city because his house was there.

Because Abu Bakr was not in Medina at the time of death of Prophet(S), Umar feared that people pledge allegiance to Imam Ali (who was appointed as the Successor of Prophet Muhammad by Prophet in Ghadir Khom), so that he with his group tried to deny the death of Prophet until the arriving of Abu Bakr to Medina, and he frightened Muslims that if one of them says that Prophet has died, he will kill him by the sword (إِنَّ عُمَرَ ، يَقُولُ : لا يَتَكَلَّمُ أَحَدٌ بِمَوْتِهِ إِلا ضَرَبْتُهُ بِسَيْفِي هَذَا, one of the Sunni authentic sources: Sunan Al-Kobra by Al-Nisa'i ). Umar called those Sahaba (companions of Prophet) that say that Prophet has died (a true thing) hypocrite!!! (لَمَّا تُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ص قَامَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ، فَقَالَ: إِنَّ رِجَالا من المنافقين يزعمون ان رسول الله تُوُفِّيَ, one of the Sunni authentic sources: Tarikh al-Tabari). During the rejection, they sent Salim Ibn Ubayd to inform Abu Bakr about the death of Prophet(فذهب سالم إبن عبيد وراء سنح، فاعلمه بموت رسول الله, Sunni source: Al-Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah by Ibn Kathir ). When Abu Bakr arrived, his acknowledgement was accepted by Umar and his group, because they reached to their goal. Then, they went to Saqifa to debate for Khilapha!!(فرجع القوم إِلى قوله وبادروا سقيفة بني ساعدة, Sunni source: Tarikh Abi al-Fida).

But about the verse 3:144, it should be said that before arriving of Abu Bakr to Medina, one of the Sahaba (Amro ibn Qays) recited that verse (وَعَمْرُو بْنُ قَيْسِ بْنِ زَائِدَةَ بْنِ الْأَصَمِّ بْنِ أُمِّ مَكْتُومٍ قَائِمٌ فِي مُؤَخَّرِ الْمَسْجِدِ يَقْرَأُ {وَمَا مُحَمَّدٌ إِلَّا رَسُولٌ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ الرُّسُلُ. .} إِلَى قَوْلِهِ {وَسَيَجْزِي اللهُ الشَّاكِرِينَ} [144: 3] Sources, 1.Dala'il Al-Nobowwah by Al-Beyhaqi, 2.Al-Sira Al-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hisham, etc.). So that the saying that Abu Bakr entered that verse to Holy Quran is not correct. Indeed, Umar and his group who were trying to reject the death of Prophet(sawaws) until arriving of Abu Bakr to Medina, when Abu Bakr arrived and then recited that verse, lied and said that they have not already heard that verse!! Umar said:
فَقَالَ عمر: أَو إِنَّهَا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ؟ مَا شَعَرْتُ أَنَّهَا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ. ثُمَّ قَالَ عُمَرُ: يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ هَذَا أَبُو بكر وَهُوَ ذوشيبة الْمُسلمين، فَبَايعُوهُ( Oh! Was it in the Book of Allah? I did not think that it is in the Book of Allah!! Then Umar said, O people! This is Abu Bakr, so pledge allegiance to him!!!)(one of Sunni authentic sources: Al-Sira Al-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hisham). Also, the people of group of Umar who helped him lied and said that they have not already heard that verse.


Good luck!

Well, thanks for your further information on it. Views abound!

I've heard the story from three different people now, and always something new

 

[mojtaba]

Aslam alikom warahmatu Allah
My dear brother, this subject has been discussed a lot. Debate on what are the authorized saheeh /Daeef hadeeth will take a long time.
The strongest Hadeeth and the best is narrated by Imam Moslem. this is the best and strongest Hadeeth
No debate about the true of incident. the debate is about the meaning and what is exactly said
Prophet was giving 2 important separate instructions to pay Sahaba attention to follow Qur'an and after he finishes detailing the benefits of doing so, he started talking about the second Theqal wich is his family. Nothing else said in Hadeethes saheeh, anything added is not authorised by sunah scholars of hadeeth.
So in the true and authorised Hadeethes, there is nothing explicitly about only Ahlalbyt are the only people who has the best explanation of Qur'an.
There is no explicit appointment of Ahlalbyt being Caliphs at all.

Wa Alayka s-Salam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatoh.

Dear brother, please do not reject the facts.
1.Tirmidhi (one of the most eminent Sunni Imams of Hadith) has narrated two Hasan(authentic) Hadiths in which Prophet has ordered us to hold fast to his progeny and follow them.

2.Ibn Hajar Asqalani (one of the most eminent Sunni Imams of Hadith) has narrated a Sahih Hadith from Imam Ali that Prophet said that if we take our religion from Quran and his progeny we will not go astray (وَقَدْ تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كتاب الله تعالى، سَبَبُهُ بيدي، وَسَبَبُهُ بِأَيْدِيكُمْ، وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي). Ibn Hajar Asqalani wrote that the Hadith is Sahih (هَذَا إِسْنَادٌ صَحِيحٌ).

3.Haakim (one of the most eminent Sunni Imams of Hadith) has narrated two Sahih Hadith in which Prophet said that we must follow his progeny (not Sahaba) to be guided (أيها الناس ، إني تارك فيكم أمرين لن تضلوا إن اتبعتموهما ، وهما : كتاب الله ، وأهل بيتي عترتي) and also he (sawaws) said that his progeny (not Sahaba) and Qur'an never split from each other until the Day of Resurrection ( فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهما ، فإنهما لن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض). Haakim wrote that both of the Hadiths are Sahih (هذا حديث صحيح على شرط الشيخين ، ولم يخرجاه بطوله / حديث سلمة بن كهيل ، عن أبي الطفيل أيضا صحيح على شرطهما).

4.Al-Heytami (one of the most eminent Sunni Imams of Hadith) narrated a Sahih Hadith in which Prophet said that we must follow his progeny (not Sahaba) (إِنِّي تَارِك فِيكُم أَمريْن لن تضلوا إِن تبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله وَأهل بَيْتِي عِتْرَتِي). Al-Heytami wrote that the Hadith is Sahih (وَفِي رِوَايَة صَحِيحَة).

5.Ahmad Ibn Hambal (one of the most eminent Sunni Imams of Hadith) narrated a Hadith in his Musnad in which Prophet said that if we take our religion from Qur'an and his progeny we will never go astray (إني قد تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا بعدي الثقلين أحدهما أكبر من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ألا وإنهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا علي الحوض ). Also, Prophet said in another Hadith that his progeny and Qur'an will never split from each other until the Day of Resurrection (وَإِن اللَّطِيف الْخَبِير أَخْبرنِي أَنَّهُمَا لن يفترقا حَتَّى يردا عَليّ الْحَوْض فانظروا بِمَ تخلفوني فيهمَا) . Al-Heythami wrote that there is not any problem in the route of the narrators of this Hadith (وَسَنَده لَا بَأْس بِهِ).

6.Az-Zahabi (one of the most eminent Sunni Imams of Hadith) has said about a Hadith in which Prophet said that his progeny (not Sahaba) and Qur'an will never split from each other until the Day of Resurrection (فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهما ، فإنهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا علي الحوض), that it is Sahih (قال شيخنا أبو عبد الله الذهبي : وهذا حديث صحيح).

7.Ibn Abi Sheyba (teacher of Al-Bukhari and one of the most eminent Sunni Imams of Hadith), Imam Ahmad Ibn Hambal, Imam Al-Tabarani, etc. have narrated a Sahih Hadith in which Prophet said that his progeny and Quran are the complete Successors of him and they never split from each other until the Day of Resurrection (إِنِّي تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمُ الْخَلِيفَتَيْنِ كَامِلَتَيْنِ: كِتَابَ اللَّهِ، وَعِتْرَتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ). Al-Bani (whom Sunni scholars have called current Al-Bukhari) and Al-Heytami, both of them wrote that the Hadith is Sahih.

See the post #61 for the sources.

So, the progeny of Prophet Muhammad are his true Successors and also they are the true interpreters of Quran, because they and Quran will never split from each other and also we must follow them. Dear brother, I do not know, why do you reject these facts while the Hadiths are completely clear?!

I know that this is one of the big disagreement between Sunnis and Shiis but let me tell you something,
If the authorized hadeeth are pointing to whatever you say:

• Why all Sahaba attended and listened to this instructions didn't have the understanding that you've?
• Did Aly rady Allah anh, get the same understanding that you've?

Why Aly rady Allah anh didn't insist to apply these instructions? vice versa, he accepted and gave blessings and loyalty to Caliphs Abubkr, Umar, and Uthman?

Last comment, did you wonder, why Sunnis keep these Hadeethes in their books?
Hadana Allah gameean

1. They have exactly the understanding which Shi'ites have.
Note 1: According to the traditions in your authentic books, e.g., Sahih al-Bukhari, the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and Allah saved Muslims from its evil!
Note 2: At-Tabari and Ibn Athir wrote in their authentic history books that Ansar said that we do not pledge allegiance except to Ali. Imam Ali (as), Bani Hashim, etc. rejected the Khilapha of Abu Bakr. Imam Ali and Bani Hashim did not pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr until the martyrdom of Lady Fatima(as) by Umar and Abu Bakr (i.e., 6 months after the death of Holy Prophet).
Also, Zubayr Ibn Bakkar wrote in his book that Muhajirin in general, and the most of the Ansar did not have any doubt that the Successor after Prophet (sawaws) is Ali (as) (وَكَانَ عَامَّةُ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَجُلُّ الأَنْصَارِ لا يَشُكُّونَ أَنَّ عَلِيًّا هُوَ صَاحِبُ الأَمْرِ بَعْدَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ). See the text in the book on Shamela and Islamweb libraries (two Sunni authentic websites).

2. See this authentic Hadith,
Abi Al-Tofayl narrated,
Ali summoned the people in Rahabah and said, 'I swear you to God; every Muslim that remembers the Ghadir Khom and has heard the remark from the Messenger of God (peace of Allah be upon him and his descendants) on that day stand up!'. Thirty people stood up to attest -and Abu Naeim has said, 'A lot of people attested'- and announced that when the Messenger of God (S) took the hand of Ali, he said, 'Do you know that I have more authority over the believers than themselves?' Muslims replied, 'Yes, O Messenger of Allah'. Then Prophet said, 'Whoever I was his/her Master, so this (i.e., Ali) is his/her Master. O Allah! Be friend with the friend of Ali and be enemy with the enemy of Ali, and help those that help him and make despised those that make him despised'.

Abi Al-Tofayl said, 'I left the population as I felt sad and when coming back, I visited Zeid Bin Argham and said to him, ' I heard such and such remarks from Ali and I became sad'. Zeid said, 'Do not deny what you heard because I heard from the Messenger of God (S) what you heard'.

This narration is narrated in Musnad Al-Bazzar, Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hambal, etc. Al-Bani (see here) and Al-Heytami (see here and here) wrote that the Hadith is Sahih and has different routes of the narrators.

3. According to Sahih Al-Bukhari, Imam Ali did not pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr until the martyrdom of Lady Fatima (as) (It should be said that Shias believe that Imam Ali never pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr at all). Imam Ali believed that he himself is the Successor of Prophet. See the previous Hadith. In addition, Lady Fatima (as) said after death of Holy prophet (sawaws), َ'Allah obligated ... the obedience to us (i.e.,Ahlul Bayt, the progeny of Prophet) for setting up order [in the community], and our Imamah (leadership) for saving the people from differences (ففرض الله ... طاعتنا نظاماً وامامتنا أمنا من الفرقة). See Sunni source: Balaqat An-Nisa.
It should be said that according to the Sahih Moslim, Sahih Ibn Habban, etc., Imam Ali believed that Abu Bakr and Umar were liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.

4. See the verse 5 of the Sura Al-Jumu'a.

Waffaqakallah brother!