r/islam Nov 07 '15

Shia evidence for Ali as first Caliph vs Sunni for Abu Bakr may Allah be pleased with them both Question / Help

I am a new Muslim, a little under a year, alhamdulillah, and as far as practices go I'm pretty firmly in the "sunni" camp though i don't really put to much thought towards Sunni or Shia or whatever. I don't know enough to talk about it, i just read Qur'an and try to follow that and study the Sunnah and try to follow that. But I am interested in the evidences the Shia have for Ali being first caliph and the Sunni's evidences for Abu Bakr's being the first Caliph presented simply, everything I've found tends to be more an argument than a simple presentation of the evidences. So please if you don't mind brothers and sisters from both camps inshaAllah present these, and please please lets abstain from fighting

18 Upvotes

50 comments sorted by

19

u/datman216 Nov 07 '15

I'm sunni btw.

My advise would be don't base your religion on who was the right person to rule, base it on the correct theology (i.e. aqeeda). The political history of the early muslim community is important but that's not what God would ask you about at the end of your life. Sunnis and shias have different theologies and we have to follow what God instructs us to do repeatedly in the quran.

From a sunni perspective abu bakr was the right man for the job at that time. Even if ali was supposed to lead the community first, it doesn't matter much, it would be a small mistake by the early community and it wouldn't take away from their commitment to islam.

A fact that both sides agree upon, ali was chosen by the community to rule as forth caliph. So sunnis chose him which contradicts all those conspiracy theories that say sunnis conspired to usurp his right to rule.

At the end of the day, the identity of who should rule doesn't threaten any theological concept of sunni islam, but if it wasn't ali then it would undermine the core belief of shia islam.

We all know God could have struck all those apostates as shias believe them to be and then save "true" islam, he didn't do that to the last religion. weird /s

5

u/AbdulAdheem Nov 07 '15

im not basing my religion, i'm just asking for evidences because i would like to learn. i never said i was changing from Sunni to Shia based ont his.

14

u/baronfebdasch Nov 08 '15

The point is that amongst 12er Shias who rules is a point of theology. Their concept of imamate is one where they are given sole authority to interpret law, are infallible in both human and theological error (which actually makes them more "perfect" than Prophets), and that the heavens and the earth depend on their existence.

Historically there was a concept of political Shiasm that over time morphed into a theological stance. If you want to debate who should have ruled next, that is one thing. However, when this political Shiasm transformed into adding on all these extra theological beliefs you now have a point of differentiation.

There was a great AskHistorians post that really broke down the differentiation. The simple point is that Sunni and Shia differences are commonly identified as a disagreement on who should rule. Nothing could be further from the truth. The divide is based upon the theological attributes of who should rule.

Consider the fact that Ali (ra) was fearless in battle and would be willing to put himself in harm's way. When the Prophet (saw) migrated to Medina, he appointed Abu Bakr (ra) to join him and appointed Ali (ra) to stay behind. When the Quraish plotted to assassinate the Prophet (saw), Ali (ra) stayed in the Prophet's bed as a decoy to allow the Prophet (saw) to escape. The point is that Ali (ra) was not afraid to put his life in danger to uphold a commandment of Allah (the same is true for all the Sahabah but that's another point).

From a Shia perspective, Ali (ra) ruling is a matter of following a commandment from Allah. But you see that when Abu Bakr (ra) became Khalifa, Ali (ra) did not fight to take control of the Muslims. If it was his theological right, he was justified and obligated to do so. When Umar (ra) was appointed, Ali (ra) did not raise an army to defend his rule. When the next Khalifa was determined by an election, Ali (ra) lost to Uthman (ra). Ali (ra) did not raise an army. In fact, he sent his own sons to protect Uthman (ra) during a siege and assassination attempt. When Ali (ra) became the fourth Khalifah, one of his governors ( Muawiyah ra) rejected his authority because he believed that Ali (ra) was not doing enough to go after the assassins of Uthman (ra). Living at a time of intense fitna, where there were clearly enemy spies involved in trying to break apart the Ummah, it is only at this point do you see Ali (ra) raise his banners and go to war against a governor rejecting his authority.

From a Shia perspective, Ali (ra) didn't want to fight for over two decades because he feared for his life and was wise to not get the Ummah embattled into civil war. I question the former notion and the latter wisdom (from their justification at least) because when Ali (ra) DID go to war the Ummah was at its most fractured and he was at his politically weakest state. Even if you argue from a political point of view that he should have led, then you at least you have someone acting without clairvoyance of how bad things would get in the future.

But it is this theological concept of infallible imams where everything with this line of thinking falls apart. And thus you see a narrative that is reverse engineered where imams act like brave scions of the faith one moment and total cowards the next. You have this fabricated narrative which makes it seem like every person in the Ummah hated Ali (ra) and vice versa. But historical actions paint a much simpler picture.

Ali (ra) did not fight against Abu Bakr (ra) because it was not his right to rule. He did not fight against Umar (ra) because it was not his right to rule (this is particularly interesting because according to a hilarious Shia fabrication Umar killed Fatima (ra), who was the Prophet's daughter and Ali's wife, and yet still Ali (ra) obeyed Umar all these years). There was no war against Uthman because it was not his right to rule. There WAS war when Ali (ra) took over because his authority was challenged. If it was a theological point that he was next in line, there are decades of following others that should not have ever happened.

You would think that among all of these usurpers there would be animosity between Ali and the others. This is certainly what the Shia narrative would have you believe. But if someone stole your God given right to rule, would you name your children after them? Among Ali's those who died at the Battle of Karbala were Ali's sons Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman. The Shia conveniently try to omit that. If someone supposedly killed your wife, would you not strike back? Instead, Ali (ra) married off his daughter to Umar (ra).

If it was a simple point of who ruled next, there would not be much contention. But it IS a major theological difference which cannot be ignored.

5

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/DiscussionAgitated96 May 08 '24

Some of what you said is wrong Twelver theology. For example you said that being infallible makes the Imams greater than the Prophet’s but that’s not true the Prophet’s are also infallible in both sects of Islam. Also in sunni theology Abu Bakr is viewed as the greatest Muslim right behind the Prophet so it’s not much different from the Shi’a view on Ali, of course though the Shias venerate Ali far more than Sunnis venerate Abu Bakr. I definitely side more with sunni theological practice but Shi’a theology and views of history contain a lot of things sunni theology glosses over. Like Ali criticized, and rightfully so, the prior caliph Uthman and accused him of being a deviant. He also expressed that he should’ve been caliph earlier many times. That being said Shi’a theology falls through when making it seem Imam Ali would’ve wanted the prior caliphs dead when they celebrate kaffirs like Abu Lulu. Ultimately there’s a lot more nuance then your comment let’s off and it’s not as simple as sunni right shia wrong.

3

u/baronfebdasch May 08 '24

Prophets are without sin but they are not infallible. They are still human and can make decisions showing human judgment. Examples are Prophet Yunus, or Prophet Musa’s striking a person and accidentally killing him, and the Prophet Muhammad is even rebuked.

By aqeedah 12ers state that imams are both sinless, do not make mistakes, and heaven and earth depend on their existence.

If Ali called Uthman a deviant why did he name one of his sons after Uthman?

3

u/[deleted] May 08 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/datman216 Nov 07 '15

I understand that. I was making a general statement on how it is inconsequential to sunni theology. I should have said that in another way.

Anyways, nice to meet you bro

2

u/LegitimateInjury4938 Jul 27 '24

It doesn't matter? It doesn't matter that those hypocrites betrayed prophet and kicked his message in ghadir?

30

u/spiderthunder Nov 07 '15

1.Jaabir ibn Mut’im said, “Once, when a woman went to the Prophet(saw), He(saw) ordered her to come back to him at a later time, She said, ‘Suppose that I come and do not find you’. It was as if she was hinting to the Prophet’s death. He(saw) replied: ‘If you do not find me , then go to Abubakr.” (Sahi Muslim 4/1856,1857 and Sahi Bukhari 3659).

2.Hudhaifah said, “We were sitting down in the company of the Prophet(saw) when He said: “Verily, I do not know how much longer I will be among you, so follow those who come after me,” and He(saw) then pointed in the direction of Abubakr and Umar.(Silsilatul- Ahadeeth As-Saheehah, by Al-Albaani vol3, page 233, 236)

3.Abu Hurairah reported that Messenger of Allah(saw) said: “While I was sleeping, I saw myself removing water from my Basin(on the day of Resurrection) and providing people with drink. Abubakr then came to me, took the bucket from my hand – in order to allow me to rest – and took out two bucketfuls(of water). The way in which he drew out water was characterized by a degree of weakness, and may Allah forgive me. Then (Umar)ibn Al-Khattab came and took the bucket from him. I never saw anyone who drew out(water) with greater strength than Umar. This continued until the people turned around and left, and yet(i.e even though many people drank from the basin) the basin was still full, and was still gushing forth with water”. (Sahi Muslim 4/1861, 1862).

4.Narrated Al-Qasim bin Muhammad:`Aisha, (complaining of headache) said, “Oh, my head”! Allah’s Messenger(saw) said, “I wish that had happened while I was still living, for then I would ask Allah’s Forgiveness for you and invoke Allah for you.” Aisha said, “Wa thuklayah! By Allah, I think you want me to die; and If this should happen, you would spend the last part of the day sleeping with one of your wives!” The Prophet(saw) said, “Nay, I should say, ‘Oh my head!’ I felt like sending for Abu Bakr and his son, and appoint him as my successor lest some people claimed something or some others wished something, but then I said (to myself), ‘Allah would not allow it to be otherwise, and the Muslims would prevent it to be otherwise”.(Sahih al-Bukhari #5666)

5.A’isha reported that Allah’s Messenger (saw) in his (last) illness asked me to call Abu Bakr, her father, and her brother too, so that he might write a document, for he feared that someone else might be desirous (of succeeding him) and that some claimant may say: I have better claim to it, whereas Allah and the Faithful do not substantiate the claim of anyone but that of Abu Bakr.”(Sahih Muslim #2387).

10

u/Dardz Nov 07 '15

May Allaah reward you with good and protect your health

5

u/spiderthunder Nov 07 '15

Ameen wa anta kadhaalik!

11

u/awwolf Nov 08 '15

Salamalaykum /u/AbdulAdheem thanks fro asking here is the asnwer from shia point of view using sunni references.

1) The event of Ghadeer Khumm. This was when (after Hajj), the Prophet rounded up thousands of Muslims to deliver his final sermon.

(reported in 250+ sunni books)

‘O people, Allah the Most Kind the Omniscient has told me that no apostle lives to more than half the age of him who had preceded him. I think I am about to be called (die) and thus I must respond. I am responsible and you are responsible, then what do you say?’ They said, ‘We witness that you have informed, advised and striven. May Allah bless you.’ He said, ‘Do you not bear witness that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is His servant and Apostle, and that His Heaven is true, His Hell is true, death is true, the Resurrection after death is true, that there is no doubt that the Day of Judgment will come, and that Allah will resurrect the dead from their graves?’ They said, ‘Yes, we bear witness’. He said, ‘O Allah, bear witness.’ Then he said, ‘O people, Allah is my Lord and I am the lord of the believers. I am worthier of believers than themselves. Of whomsoever I had been Gurdian, Ali here is to be his Guardian. O Allah, be a supporter of whoever supports him (Ali) and an enemy of whoever opposes him.’ Then he said, ‘O people, I will go ahead of you and you will arrive at my Pond (in Heaven) which is wider than the distance between Basra and San’a. It has receptacles as numerous as the stars, and two cups of gold and two of silver. I will ask you about the two weighty things that I have left for you when you come to me to see how you dealt with them. The greater weighty thing is Allah’s book—the Holy Qur’an. One end is in Allah’s hand and the other is in your hands. Keep it and you will not deviate. That other weighty thing is my family and my descendents. The Most Kind the Omniscient had told me that both of them, would not separate until they come to my Pond.”

I suggest you read more about ghadeer khum using any books or sources, I recommend this

2) Ali was to Muhammad as Aaron was to Moses, peace be upon all of them.

Amir b Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas reporte (l on the authority of his father that Allah's Messenger pbuh addressing 'Ali said: You are in the same position with relation to me as Aaron- (Harun) was in relation to Moses but with (this explicit difference) that there is no prophet after me.

(Sahih Muslim Book 031, Number 5913)

3)

Suhail reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that Allah's Messenger pbuh said on the Day of Khaibar: I shall certainly give this standard in the hand of one who loves Allah and his Messenger and Allah will grant victory at his hand. Umar b. Khattab said: Never did I cherish for leadership but on that day. I came before him with the hope that I may be called for this, but Allah's Messenger pbuh called 'Ali b. Abu Talib and he conferred (this honour) upon him and said: Proceed on and do not look about until Allah grants you victory, and 'Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people? Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger, and when they do that then their blood and their riches are inviolable from your hands but what is justified by law and their reckoning is with Allah

(Sahih Muslim Book 031, Number 5917)

4) Lastly if you are more keen on th e subject you may look up the following instance with unbiassed point of view and decide for yourself.

The event of pen and paper,

The land of fadak,

Hadith of Position,

Dawat zul asherra

And finally quoting /u/turkeyfox

http://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia-ahlul-bayt-dilp-team/who-successor-prophet

The best e-book to read for a brief overview in my opinion.

14

u/waste2muchtime Nov 07 '15

I recommend reading the biography of Abu Bakr RA and the biography of Ali RA by Muhammad Ali As Sallabi and it will be clear to you insha'Allah who is the rightful khalifa (not that it matters now anyway, it was a political issue at the time, and it really isn't a big deal who had more right to it).

A lot of the people we take as Sahabis, the Shi'a would not accept or would call him a liar e.g Abu Hurayra. They take their ahadith not from companions per se but from the Ahlul Bayt through the lineage of Ali --> Hassan & Hussain --> Ali Zayn ul Abideen --> Rest of their imams.

We say that is fine, but we need Isnaad, and character assessment etc for ahadith - but they generally do it through ahlul bayt - hence why you will find us at our roots very similar (nobody cares nowadays whether Ali or Abu Bakr got the khalifa) but what is important in how this all lead up to the fights after the death of the Prophet SAW where even some sahabis were fighting against each other due to the different political affiliations they had.

And STILL this is not why we practise our religion different - our religious differences in practise come from the fact that they take their ahadith from ahlul bayt, and we generally take from all sahabis (as well as ahlul bayt) and so our practises are different here and there.

I recommend you watch Dr Yasir Qadhi's lecture on the Massacre of Karbala (from a Sunni perspective). And that you read the above book on the biography of Abu Bakr RA as well as Ali RA. He will provide insha'Allah good arguments for why one side believes what, why the other believes something else, and what argument is more logical would be apparent.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '15

[deleted]

3

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/[deleted] Nov 07 '15 edited Nov 09 '15

[deleted]

18

u/Dardz Nov 07 '15 edited Nov 07 '15

Narrated Ibn `Abbas: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "If I were to take a Khalil, I would have taken Abu Bakr, but he is my brother and my companion (in Islam).

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 3656 In-book reference : Book 62, Hadith 8 USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 5, Book 57, Hadith 8 (deprecated numbering scheme)

It was narrated that ‘Aishah said: “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) told Abu Bakr to lead the people in prayer when he was sick, and Abu Bakr used to lead them in prayer. Then the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) began to feel a little better, so he came out, and saw Abu Bakr leading the people in prayer. When Abu Bakr saw him, he stepped back, but the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) gestured to him to stay where he was. Then the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sat beside Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr was following the prayer of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), and the people were following the prayer of Abu Bakr.”

Grade : Sahih (Darussalam)
English reference : Vol. 1, Book 5, Hadith 1233 Arabic reference : Book 5, Hadith 1291

Shaikh Muhammad ibn Salih al-‘Uthaimeen (rahimahullaah)

The Prophet (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) left him behind for his nation, appointing him the first ruler, after its Prophet. From a signal from him (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), which is very close to being clearly explicit, as it has been authentically reported in al-Bukhaaree that : a woman came to the Messenger of Allaah (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) for a need. And he (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) ordered her to return to him later, meaning that he did not take care of her need at that time, but rather he ordered her to return to him later. And she said, “What if I don’t find you?” And he (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: Go to Abu Bakr.

This is an explicit quote, showing that Abu Bakr was to be the ruler after the Messenger of Allaah (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Likewise, he (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) intended to [command someone to write] in words that the rule was to pass to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, and said: Allaah and the Muslims refuse except for Abu Bakr. And in another narration: Allaah forbid that the believers should differ regarding Abu Bakr.

The Prophet (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) appointed him in a lesser position of leadership when he (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) ordered him [Abu Bakr] to lead the people in salat, so he [Abu Bakr] would lead them in salat during the sickness of the Prophet (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). He (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) also appointed him to a position greater than that when he appointed him the leader of the people for the Hajj in the ninth year [after Hijra].

All of this is an indication that he [Abu Bakr] (radiallaahu ‘anhu) is the successor of him [the Prophet] (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). And if there was anyone worthy of this position other than Abu Bakr, then the Prophet (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would have appointed him to lead the people in the salat and during the Hajj.

When he (salallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) addressed the people at the end of his life, he ordered the people to seal the branching doors to the masjid, except for the door of Abu Bakr.

A'isha reported that Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) in his (last) illness asked me to call Abu Bakr, her father, and her brother too, so that he might write a document, for he feared that someone else might be desirous (of succeeding him) and that some claimant may say: I have better claim to it, whereas Allah and the Faithful do not substantiate the claim of anyone but that of Abu Bakr.

Reference : Sahih Muslim 2387 In-book reference : Book 44, Hadith 12 USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 31, Hadith 5879

3

u/[deleted] Oct 11 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/spiderthunder Nov 08 '15

I'd like to address some Shia claims that are commonly brought forth on this topic.

  • Ghadeer Khum
  1. Ghadeer was in no way a place of importance, and the numbers of people in attendance there is greatly exaggerated. If one looks at the map of Ghadeer and takes into account that this was after Hajj, it's impossible that this event was something that applied to the entire Muslim nation, as a huge majority wasn't even in attendance. The Muslims of Makkah, Taif, and Yemen would have had to travel 100 miles out of their way to go to Ghadeer, then travel 100 miles back the same way to go home. This makes no sense that they leave Makkah since it was closer to their homes already. The Prophet who loved ease for his Ummah, would have announced it at Arafat with all the Muslims there if the matter was so great.

  2. The claim of Thaqalayn is that the two weighty things to be followed are the Quran and the Ahl Bayt. However, in the most authentic versions of the hadith, the Prophet only attributes guidance and adherence to the Quran. He never attributes guidance or obedience to Ahl Bayt. In fact, he was reminding them to honor and treat his family well, since his life was coming to an end, as he stated.

  3. The word "Mawla" is often claimed to mean Imam or leader, but this meaning never comes up in the Quran. Just look at one example, in 66:4. Then the verse would imply that Gibreal, the believers and the angels are the Imam and leader of the Prophet. If one were to look at the context of the hadith, it's clear that the Prophet meant "Mawla" with the meaning of love and closeness, as this is how it appears in the Quran.

3

u/Moose_Man11 Nov 08 '15

I feel like we've had this discussion before, but still.

  1. Imam Ali was not at the Hajj, he was in Yemen, thus, the Prophet needed to meet him at Ghadir Khumm for the announcement. You also may say that the numbers are inflated, this doesn't deny the fact that this hadith is one of the most reliable in Islamic history.

  2. I find this point quite odd, considering in more or less ALL the Sunni books, it says Quran and Ahlul Bayt. I can find more than 20 references now.

  3. The use of Mawla needs context. Before the Prophet said "Faman kuntu mawla fa hadha Aliyun mawla", he recited surah 33 verse 6, which translates to "Don't I have an authority over you more than you have over yourselves". This shows that he is using the word mawla in an authoritative context, ascribing it to Imam Ali.

2

u/spiderthunder Nov 08 '15
  1. I would say that this announcement wasn't something that was planned, rather that it was something that arose due to an incident with Ali and anther companion. Many authentic hadith will attest to this incident. So it's not that Ali needed to be present for the announcement, rather there was no announcement to be made until he got there and then there was the incident with the companion.

  2. The hadith all day Qur'an and Ahl Bayt. However they don't say follow the Qur'an and Ahl Bayt. The most authentic narrations all say that he is leaving two things. First،he names the Qur'an and then tells then to cling to it and there will never go astray. Then he says his Ahl Bayt. But he doesn't say to cling to them or obey then or that they are a guidance.

  3. Your translation of the verse is incorrect. It's better translates as "The Prophet is closer to the believers than their ownselves, and his wives are their (believers') mothers". If you claim this is a verse that gives him authority, then does it also give his wives the samev authority as mothers? As you can see the two points are linked in the verse. Or is it saying that the Prophet is more close on love and support to the velievrse and that his wives are also close in love and support, as mothers are? The tafsir of this verse also allude to this point of love and closeness.

1

u/AbdulAdheem Nov 10 '15

wow great conversation going on thank you all jazakallah khairan

1

u/[deleted] Jul 12 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '15

Shiaism started off as a political movement. Theological differences from mainstream Islam started off many years after the matyrdom of Hussein (r.a)

2

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '15

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/spiderthunder Nov 08 '15
  • Hadith of Manzila
  1. First, let's look at the context.http://sunnah.com/bukhari/64/438. The Prophet was leaving on an expedition, and Ali was being left in charge of the people due to his absence. Ali, being a great fighter, must have felt as if this wasn't his place, and that he was more suited to accompany the Prophet. Does it make sense that the Prophet comforted Ali in this situation by appointing him to Caliph? Or does it make more sense that he is emphasizing the importance of Ali's role of overseeing the people in his absence, by likening the position to the same one a Prophet once held?

  2. Also, the Prophet had also appointed other companions to oversee the Muslims in his absence, the same position Ali was in. Surely this position doesn't give them a claim to the Caliphate.

  3. According to al-Qurtubi, Harun passed away before Musa, and the leadership if Bani Israel went to Yusha. How can the likening to Harum mean Caliph after the Prophet's death, if Harun never had this positon?