Henceforth Dais without "Nass" will rule us?

[anajmi]

humble servant,

Your logic is weird. If I were to accept your logic, then Islam has been in the wrong hands for 14 centuries. What difference did the sacrifice of Hazrat Ali and Imam Hussain make? Even the shia bohra leader, the Dai, turned out to be corrupt.

[mutmaeen]

humbles is a better perpective

[humble_servant_us]

History is full of instances where corrupt leaders have used the name of islam for their material benefits.
What is important for islam is protection of the message of Allah(swt) which is the quran and sunnah of the prophet(pbuh)

And this is what imam ali(as), imam husain(as) and other imams did to keep quran and "true" sunnah of prophet(pbuh) protected from corruption.

As long as these are alive its individiual's choice to take it or leave it. Dai turning out to be corrupt is his personal choice.

[mutmaeen]

that raises another question-are quran and islam there to protect the muslims or are muslims to protect quran and islam?

[humble_servant_us]

quran and sunnah is for the guidance of Mankind (not only muslims) and one of the roles of imams(chosen by Allah(swt)) is their protection.

We have seen wrong/false fabricated hadis made in the name of prophet(pbuh), it is the teachings and life of these imams which distinguish between the wrong and right hadis. Some thought should be given as why ahlulbait were important with quran as per the widely accepted hadis.- " I leave behind two weighty things Quran and ahlulbait....." Probably i have given one of the answers.

[anajmi]

humble servant,

Remember, the quran that Hazrat Ali protected was assembled and compiled by Uthman. So Uthman played a big part in making sure the quran was protected.

[S. Insaf]

That is the stuff that the Bohras are fed in the jamatkhana. Imam Hussein fought for the sake of Islam.

In the initial phase of the reform movement especially when its leader Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer had not been established as "Islamic Scholar", Sayedna Saheb’s establishment used to take the help of corrupt Muslim leaders and Ulema and used to raise the slogan of "Islam in danger" and "Bohra Conference is an attack on Islam." (See photo below.) They also used to brand reformists as "Muddai", "Kharjeen" and "Munafiqeen”. Of course they have stopped all this now, at least openly.

In fact it was not Islam which was in danger due to Dawoodi Bohra reform movement but Sayedna’s over-riding authority and huge wealth that was in danger.

So when Bohras says that "Imam Hussein fought for the sake of Islam" they need to define what they mean by "Islam".

[accountability]

it is the teachings and life of these imams which distinguish between the wrong and right hadis.

Imams include Hakim bi amr illah, I shall just reproduce a section from famous egyptian historian Al Maqirizi.

Al-Hakim repeatedly exhibited erratic, eccentric and contradictory behavior. He seemed to have been keen on the morality of his subjects, repeatedly issuing orders for this to be done or that not to be done. This goes as far as micromanaging what is eaten and what is not.

Moreover, he would forbid something then later allow it. He would repeatedly enforce trivial orders he issued.

Decorations and Night Life
Ordered the decoration of the streets and lighting them up by night. Orderedthat people should not be prevented by his guards from approaching him.He then ordered women not to go out at all.

وأمر الناس بالوقيد فتزايدوا فيه بالشوارع والأزقة وزينت الأسواق والقياسربأنواع الزينة وباعوا واشتروا وأوقدوا الشموع الكبيرة طول الليل وأنفقواالأموال الكثيرة في المآكل والمشارب والغناء واللهو‏

.‏
وزينت الصناعة وخرج سائر الناس بالليل للتفرج وغلب النساء الرجال علىالخروج في الليل وتزايد الزحام في الشوارع والطرقات وتجاهروا بكثير منالمسكرات وأفرط الأمر من ليلة التاسع عشر إلى ليلة الرابع والعشرين فلماخرج الناس عن الحد أمر الحاكم ألا تخرج امرأة من العشاء فإن ظهرت نكلبها‏.‏

ومنع الناس من الجلوس في الحوانيت‏

Certain Foods Forbidden
Orders that people should not eat Molokheya, the national dish of Egypt, since is was liked byMu'awya, nor water cress since it was liked by Aisha the prophet's wife.


وقرئ سجل في الأطعمة بالمنع من أكل الملوخية المحببة كانت لمعاوية بن أبيسفيان والبقلة المسماة بالجرجير المنسوبة إلى عائشة رضي الله عنهاوالمتوكلية المنسوبة إلى المتوكل‏.‏



Orders not to knead dough with legs, andprevented eating of some foods, and the slaughter of cows that have noprogeny except in feast days, or those that are not good for plowingfields.

وفيه المنع من عجن الخبز بالرجل والمنع من أكل الدلنيس والمنع من ذبحالبقر التي لا عاقبة لها إلا في أيام الأضاحي وما سواها من الأيام لا يذبحمنها إلا ما لا يصلح للحرث‏.‏

Orderedthat fisherman should not go for fish that has no scales, nor that anysuch fish be sold or consumed. Note that this is similar to Jewish law,and in Egypt would forbid the Nile Catfish which is commonly consumedin Egypt.

ولا يباع شيء من السمك بغير قشر ولا يصطاده أحد من الصيادين

Arrested fishmongers who sold fish without scales, as well as bath house rules violators and those who drink a certain drink.

وقبض على جماعة من أصحاب الفقاع والسماكين وكبست الحمامات وضرب جماعة لمخالفتهم ما نهو عنه وشهروا.

Enforced rules about Molokheya and Fish

وضرب جماعة وشهروا لبيعهم الملوخية والسمك الذي لا قشر له‏.

Orderedthat weights and measures be calibrated and no one to cheat others onthose. Forbade the manufacture and sale of a certain drink because Aliforbade it.

وإصلاح المكاييل والموازين والنهي عن البخس فيهما والمنع من بيع الفقاعوعمله ألبتة لما يؤثر عن علي رضي الله عنه من كراهة شرب الفقاع‏.‏

Wine and intoxicating beverages
Rumors flew that wine will be forbidden, hence causing prices to go up and supply to dwindle.


وأشيع بين الناس بأن النبيذ يمنع من بيعه فازدحموا على شرائهوبيع منه شيء كثير فعز حتى بيع كل عشر جرار بدينار ولم يوجد لكثرة طلابه‏.‏


Ordered that wine and bananas be forbidden as well as other drinks, scaleless fish, stinky lupins


وقرئ سجل في ربيع الأول بالمنع من حمل النبيذ والموز وحذر منالتظاهر بشيء منه أو من الفقاع والدلينس والسمك الذي لا قشر له والترمسالمعفن

Went after those who make intoxicating drinks and broke the jars.

وفي ربيع الأول تتبعت الدور ومن يعرف بعمل المسكرات وكسر من أوعيتها شيء كثير

Also enforced, and people were arrested

وقبض على جماعة بسبب بيع النبيذ واعتقلوا وكبست مواضع ذلك‏.

Prayers
Ordered certain times for the Azan (Call to prayers) for the mid day and afternoon prayers.

وقرئ سجل آخر بأن يؤذن لصلاة الظهر في أول الساعة السابعة ويؤذن لصلاة العصر في أول الساعة التاسعة

Arrested and punished thirteen men who prayed a pre-noon prayer.

وقبض على ثلاثة عشر رجلا ضربوا وشهروا على الجمال وحبسوا ثلاثة أيام بسبب أنهم صلوا صلاة الضحى


Bath House Morality Rules and Woman

Bellsrang in the streets and ordered that no one should go into bathhousesunless wearing something to cover his mid body, and no woman is to showher face on the street, nor attend funerals nor wear revealing oronrate clothes.

وضرب في الطرقات بالأجراس ونودي ألا يدخل الحمام أحد إلا بمئزر وألا تكشف امرأة وجهها في طريق ولا خلف جنازة ولا تتبرج‏.‏

Also prevented women from going outside, going as far as closing the bathhouses for women, not differentiating between young and elderly, and preventing the shoe makers from making any footwear for women, causing some to go bankrupt.

ومنع النساء أن يخرجن إلى الطرقات في ليل أو نهار سواء أكانت المرأة شابةً أم عجوزاً فاحتبسن في بيوتهن ولم تر امرأة في طريق وأغلقت حماماتهن وامتنع الأساكفة من عمل خفاف النساء وتعطلت حوانيتهم‏

To the extent that some elderly women and female servants were arrested

واشتد الأمر في منع النساء من الخروج وحبس عدة عجائز وخدم وجدن في الطرقات

Ordered that people should cover their body in bathhouses and that Christians and Jews have to wear different dress, and punished those who didn't do so.

ونودي ألا يدخل أحد الحمام إلا بمئزر ولا يمشي اليهود والنصارى إلا بالغيار وضربوا على ترك ذلك‏.‏

Again punished those who violated bathhouse rules

وكسبت الحمامات وأخذ منها جماعة وشهروا من أجل أنهم وجدوا بغير مئزر

Enforced the bath house rules and had some violators beaten.

وتتبعت الحمامات وقبض على جماعة وجدوا بغير مئزر فضربوا وشهروا‏.‏

Orderthat at the celebration of the Nile's annual flooding there will be nosinging, and no drinking in the boats, and arrested some people.‏

وفي تاسعه وهو نصف توت أشيع وفاء النيل وخلع على ابن أبيالرداد فابتدأ في النقص قبل أن يوفى ستة عشر ذراعا من تاسع عشر توت فأمرالناس كافةً بألا يتظاهر أحد منهم على شاطىء النيل بشيء من الغناء ولايسمع في دار ولا يشرب في المراكب‏.‏وكبست عدة دور وقبض على جماعة‏.‏

Preventedonlookers from going to the slave market unless they are selling orbuying, and separated males from females and made them on alternatedays.

ومنع أن يدخل أحد إلى سوق الرقيق إلا أن يكون بائعا أو مشتريا وأفرد الجواري من الغلمان وجعل لكل منهم يوم‏.‏

Prevented women from erecting makeshift shades in graveyards when they visited.

ومنع من نصب الشراعات التي كانت النساء تنصبها في المقابر أيام الزيارة‏.‏

Curfew

If you go through the above, most of the attitudes can be found in our present practices as ordained by syedna saheb. I have come to this conclusion, that for obvious reason a slightly modified Hakimid version of Ismailism is being enforced. It is best suited to the intrest of royal family.

[accountability]

Morever, Hakim, according to various historical accounts was assissinated by his own sister, as she came to know, that he is going to execute her for her extra marital affair. Hakim ordered the desecration of the church of holy sepulcher. which was quoted by christians pope as a reason for crusade.

[humble_servant_us]

anajmi

Remember, the quran that Hazrat Ali protected was assembled and compiled by Uthman. So Uthman played a big part in making sure the quran was protected.

Your history is wrong. Uthman unified the arabic dialect for quran and not compiled it.

By protection it does not mean a physical protection of a book, it is the protection of the message of Allah(swt) in actions which i think you will agree what Ali(as) and his son's did.

[humble_servant_us]

accontability

You have good points, which should make us scrutinise the imamat as we did khilafat.

[accountability]

Usman did compile the quran, by collecting and collobrating different versions prevalent in that time. He ordered all huffaz to come to one conclusive version. Hazrat Ali was also in that committee.

[anajmi]

humble servant,

You might want to brush up on your history a little bit.

By protection it does not mean a physical protection of a book, it is the protection of the message of Allah(swt) in actions which i think you will agree what Ali(as) and his son's did.

Yes, I absolutely agree they did. So that would mean that supporting the first three khalifas during their khilafat was according to the message of the quran. The shias/bohras are going against the message of the quran by cursing the khalifas and opposing them.

In a few more posts, I will have you saying that the quran that we have today is not the real quran and that Hazrat Ali has the real quran.

[accountability]

Cursing anyone is immoral and pathetic. But opposing on principals may make sense. Even some sunni ulema agrees, that in osman's era banu ummayad was controlling khilafat. Muaviya was made governer and he was equal or more than khalifa himself. you may refer to Khilafat o malukiat by maulana mododi.

omar did go to Ali's house, and while opening the door, he caused the abortion to Hazrat Fatima, who was standing behind. He had gone there to make Ali give baya to Abu Bakar.

Abu Bakar was gathring votes while Rasulilah's body was still lying, he was convassing to become khalifa.

while Ali had refused to accept khilafat in the first place, but utlimately accepted.

[humble_servant_us]

He ordered all huffaz to come to one conclusive version.

Quranic version was always one. There were seven different Arabic dialects in which it was recited. As i said uthman unified one Arabic dialect for quran. Compiling and standardising are two different things.

Yes, I absolutely agree they did. So that would mean that supporting the first three khalifas during their khilafat was according to the message of the quran. The shias/bohras are going against the message of the quran by cursing the khalifas and opposing them.

As i have said earlier the highest priority for Ali(as) was protecting the integrity and unity of islam. So accordingly the situation was handled. Message of quran is to protect islam and stand by its teachings and for this if required compromises and sacrifices can to be made.
In sharia if you are dying and nothing is available you can eat dead meat , this is because life is more precious, so if someone does this to save his life it does not mean eating dead meat is halal. Ali(as) also did the same thing because islam was the most precious to him and it was required to be saved from the munafiqoon.

I agree the message of quran is unity of one ummah and bohras/shias should not be cursing them openly for a major sect of muslims rever them. But this does not mean we have to accept them. It is in the best interest of islam to refrain from differences between us so that the external enemies do not take advantage of our division. This is what Imam Ali(as) also did.

In a few more posts, I will have you saying that the quran that we have today is not the real quran and that Hazrat Ali has the real quran.

I do not have the slightest doubt that the present quran is the same quran which was revealed to the prophet(pbuh). I think no one should have a doubt about it as this would kill the foundation of islam.

Cursing anyone is immoral and pathetic. But opposing on principals may make sense.

Laanat is not an abuse it is a dua to allah(swt) to cut his rehmat. Bohras/shias understand that khalifas had usurped the right of Ali(as) which was a divinely given right hence they are enemies of Allah(swt), so they want to disassociate themselves from them. But as i mentioned earlier for the unity of Ummah which is the need of the day any open curse/laanat to the khalifas should be avoided.

[mutmaeen]

absolutely well said bro humble

and bro accountability if u say its morally appaling to curse anyone u shud raise ur voice when foulest language is used against the dai as well

[East Africawalla]

Mutmaen,

Well said

[anajmi]

As i have said earlier the highest priority for Ali(as) was protecting the integrity and unity of islam. So accordingly the situation was handled. Message of quran is to protect islam and stand by its teachings and for this if required compromises and sacrifices can to be made.
In sharia if you are dying and nothing is available you can eat dead meat , this is because life is more precious, so if someone does this to save his life it does not mean eating dead meat is halal. Ali(as) also did the same thing because islam was the most precious to him and it was required to be saved from the munafiqoon.

humble servant,

So Hazrat Ali protected the unity of Islam and the shias have destroyed it, correct? Hazrat Ali supported the khalifas for the sake of Islam and now the shias have undone everything that Hazrat Ali did.

this does not mean we have to accept them.

You just said that Hazrat Ali accepted them for the sake of Islam. Are you better or smarter or more knowledgeable than Hazrat Ali?

Bohras/shias understand that khalifas had usurped the right of Ali(as) which was a divinely given right

A divinely given right cannot be usurped. Read the quran and you will get an idea of what a divinely given right is. If a right can be usurped, then it wasn't divine in the first place. People normally refer to a right as "divinely given" when the person actually has the right, not when he doesn't. Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman weren't more powerful that Almighty Allah to usurp Hazrat Ali's "divinely given" right.

But as i mentioned earlier for the unity of Ummah which is the need of the day any open curse/laanat to the khalifas should be avoided.

Do you know what the quran says about people who do something different in the open and then the opposite behind closed doors?

[accountability]

mutmaeen, I do not condone any name calling, let alone cursing. I have time and again requested to indulge in constructive and reform oriented dialogue. I have condemned any foul language against syedna saheb. But at the same time cursing from dawat side is more and serious. They condemn everyone who raises even the slightest of voice against any material intrest, and curse them day in and day out. I have never heard or come accross any hadith or conversation by Rasulilah, in which he has condemned anyone or sent lanat on the person. So sending lanat is not and cannot be a divine phenomenon.

Hazrat Ali whose right was perse usurped did not sent lanat or curse on any of the caliph.

[mutmaeen]

agree with u bro accountability

[humble_servant_us]

So Hazrat Ali protected the unity of Islam and the shias have destroyed it, correct? Hazrat Ali supported the khalifas for the sake of Islam and now the shias have undone everything that Hazrat Ali did.

Lets not generalize this statement for all shias. For the sake of unity of islam both shias and sunnis have to follow on the path of Ali(as).

You just said that Hazrat Ali accepted them for the sake of Islam. Are you better or smarter or more knowledgeable than Hazrat Ali?

Today i think the Dai and his system is wrong and do not accept him, but if an enemy tries to harm him to "HARM ISLAM", I will support the Dai and his system.

On similar lines shias and sunnis should jointly work for unity but it doesn;'t mean one party will accept the ideology of other. We may have difference of opinions among our selves but we should be one outside. We have many common points to unite, Allah(Swt), quran, prophet(pbuh), kaaba, madina and Ali(as).

A divinely given right cannot be usurped. Read the quran and you will get an idea of what a divinely given right is. If a right can be usurped, then it wasn't divine in the first place. People normally refer to a right as "divinely given" when the person actually has the right, not when he doesn't. Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman weren't more powerful that Almighty Allah to usurp Hazrat Ali's "divinely given" right.

Logic accepted. Rephrasing my lines. Ali(as) was appointed the leader/successor/khalifa/imam by the prophet(pbuh) by the order of Allah(swt). After the prophet(pbuh) the ummah should have been under the leadership of Ali(as) but the khalifas proclaimed them selves leaders of the ummah. Yes, No one could usurp the divinely right given by Allah(swt) to Ali(as) and that is why Shias continue to believe in Ali(as) as their Imam.

Do you know what the quran says about people who do something different in the open and then the opposite behind closed doors?

The people discussed by quran is different than what we are discussing. Do you visit a Bohra maslid/jamat khaana?

I have never heard or come accross any hadith or conversation by Rasulilah, in which he has condemned anyone or sent lanat on the person. So sending lanat is not and cannot be a divine phenomenon.
Hazrat Ali whose right was perse usurped did not sent lanat or curse on any of the caliph.

Befriending the friend of ALlah(swt) and Disassociating oneself from the enemies of Allah(swt) is part of Faith. As mentioned in earlier post Laanat is not an abuse, it is a dua to cut the rehmat.

Some examples
- Surah Lahab-
- Dua -e- Ashura (Ziyarat e ashura)- It has laanats on Yazid and his likes.
- Laanat on Shaytan (Auzobillah-e-minash shaitan "laeen" ar-rajeem)

But at the same time cursing from dawat side is more and serious. They condemn everyone who raises even the slightest of voice against any material intrest, and curse them day in and day out.

Agreed.

[SBM]

^
was appointed the leader/successor/khalifa/imam by the prophet(pbuh) by the order of Allah(swt).
Any order of Allah given to Prophet was dictated by Jibreel and was noted down in the form of Quran Where does it say in Quran to appoint Imam Ali was an order given by Allah.

[SBM]

Laanat on Shaytan (Auzobillah-e-minash shaitan "laeen" ar-rajeem)

Did you add "Laeen" in Auzobillah....rajeem I never heard that one before. Is this a new addition like 2 Rakat namaz for Syedna and Mataam after every Farad Namaz. Where do you Mumineen aka Abdes draw the line in changing the Order of Allah thru Prophet Mohammed (PBUH). Another thing Mumineen aka Abdes follow the strict rule on KASAR namaz but if you perform KASAR (which is cutting 2 Rakah) in Farad then why does Aamil asks to do another 2 RAKAH for Syedna. At one point you cut the FARAD NAMAZ as ordered by Allah to make it more flexible but then add a nonsensical 2 Rakah for Syedna. I rather do 4 Rakah of Farad Salah then 2 Rakah for Syedna

[anajmi]

This "order of Allah" is a myth created by the shias. If the order of Allah was fulfilled and Hazrat Ali became the Imam which was his divine right, then why keep cursing the khalifas? Or, the order of Allah was for him to become the khalifa, but to become the Imam was his divine right. So the order of Allah was overturned by Hazrat Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman but his divine right, which apparently, according to the shias, is not the same as order of Allah cannot be overturned.

The people discussed by quran is different than what we are discussing. Do you visit a Bohra maslid/jamat khaana?

The people in the quran are defined by their acts not by the time or place they lived in. If you behave like them, then you are one of them.

Being good when together and then cursing when away, is a sign of a hypocrite. No, I do not visit a bohra masjid/jamat khaana. Haven't, in maybe 7 or 8 years.

[humble_servant_us]

This "order of Allah" is a myth created by the shias.

I am sorry but I have differ on this. The event of ghadeer, the numerous hadis of prophet(pbuh) regarding the successorship of Ali(as) quoted by sunni/shia sources is no myth to me. Moreover my logic dictates the necessity of leadership in the socio-political growth of mankind and it is against rational to accept that prophet(pbuh) could leave this important aspect unexplained before leaving. The selection of the 3 khalifas by 3 different ways in-itself is food for thought.

[anajmi]

The event of Ghadeer is not a myth. The "order of Allah" is a myth. The prophet (saw) has said similar things about all of his close sahabas at one point of another. None of the others created a new sect like the shias did. And none of those sunni hadis are accepted by the shias.

Besides if your logic is unwilling to accept that the prophet (saw) left without appointing Hazrat Ali as his descendent, then why can't your logic accept that it would be impossible for the first 3 khalifas to overrule this "order of Allah". I hope you don't think that this order was like other orders of Allah in the quran like pray, or fast, which Muslims disobey pretty much every day.

[ghulam muhammed]

A lesson from Quran that I have understood is this. That Muslims should let Allah do what he does and that Muslims should do what Allah has commanded them to do.

In common usage amongst some Muslims, the word "laanat" is used as a form of abuse, a practice condemned by Allah in Quran. (Remember 'waylul li-kulli humazatil lumazah'?)

Whereas, Quran generally talks about 'laanat' it means 'rejection' of the ways of the kuffar and the latter's removal from Allah's grace on the day of Judgement.

When Allah invokes laanat on Kuffar, that does not give Muslims a command to do likewise. That encroaches on Allah's privilege, a clear case of arrogance. Only Allah can judge who to reject.

Those who take over Allah's exclusive priveleges are bigots, who have caused so much grief to both Muslims and non-Muslims alike in today's world.

Contrast this with ayat 33:56, where Allah clearly commands Mumineen to invoke Salawaat and Salaams on the Prophet. Allah does not just say that Allah blesses Prophet but extends the command to all.

There is no ayat in the Quran which asks Muslims to invoke 'laanat' on anyone. In any case, that would be against the spirit of the Quran.

[ghulam muhammed]

Moreover my logic dictates the necessity of leadership in the socio-political growth of mankind and it is against rational to accept that prophet(pbuh) could leave this important aspect unexplained before leaving.

Bro humble_servant,

Iam pasting below a post which was earlier written by me on another thread but as the same is relevant to your above question Iam posting it once again :

" Iam pasting below an article downloaded from the net which will clear your doubts to some extent:-

The Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) took the earliest opportunity to build his mosque at Madinah in 1 A.H. He invited all to this public function. They comprised of Jews of the tribes of Bani Nadir and Bani Quraizah, the local tribes of Aws and Khasraj in addition to the two groups of Muslims i.e. the Muhajirs (the Muslims from Mecca) and the Ansars, the Muslim converts of Madinah.

At this public function Muhammad minced no words in making Allah's emphatic decision well known to the public.

The Holy Prophet personally laid the foundation stone of this mosque known as Masjid-e-Nabavi. Beside it he instructed Abu Bakr to place a stone and affix the same. When this was done, he commanded Omar to place a stone beside Abu Bakr's and to affix it. After that he ordered Osman to place a stone besides Omar's stone and to affix it. Thereupon the Holy Prophet Muhammad announced publicly before the entire gathering :

a) Abu Bakr would be the first Khalifa of Islam
b) Omar would be the second Khalifa of Islam
c) Osman would be the third Khalifa of Islam

The people present there asked who would be the next Khalifa ? The Prophet replied that it would be Ali the leader of the Saints (p. l16, Vol. 2, Tafrihul Azkia Fil Ahwal Ul Anbia, also p. 12 of Mojezat-e-Muhammadia by Mufti EnAyatullah published by Hajee Malik Din Muhammad & Sons, Lahore, 1939).

This famous Hadith of Masjid-e-Navabi has made it absolutely clear as to who would be the temporal heads of the State of Islam founded by Holy Prophet Muhammad. This Khalifat would last for 30 years after his departure from earthly life (p. 13, Mojezat-e-Muhammadia). After that it would become a kingship under the control of worldly rulers. The spiritual religious heads would however continue from Ali.

[humble_servant_us]

The event of Ghadeer is not a myth. The "order of Allah" is a myth. The prophet (saw) has said similar things about all of his close sahabas at one point of another. None of the others created a new sect like the shias did. And none of those sunni hadis are accepted by the shias.

Good, ghadeer is not myth for you. On ghadeer Is declaring Ali(as) as Maula by prophet(pbuh) a myth. By whose permission did prophet(pbuh) proclaim this.

Shias have a very stringent way of accepting hadis from prophet(pbuh) which depends on many factors, Quran, chain of narrators, the credibility of narrators etc. I would suggest we should study what procedure shias and sunnis follow in separating right hadis from false. It is a intresting topic to know.

Besides if your logic is unwilling to accept that the prophet (saw) left without appointing Hazrat Ali as his descendent, then why can't your logic accept that it would be impossible for the first 3 khalifas to overrule this "order of Allah". I hope you don't think that this order was like other orders of Allah in the quran like pray, or fast, which Muslims disobey pretty much every day.

You already have an answer with your question. You are right, Muslims disobeying Allah(swt) is very common whether it be imamat, salat or fast. Order of appointment of a successor after prophet(pbuh) was more important than other orders given by allah(swt) (Refer the quaranic ayat revealed during the event of ghadeer-ayah-e- baligh). The reason for this was imamat was required/important to protect the orders of Allah(swt) (refer hadis-e-thaqlayn).

ghulam mohammed

It is easy to quote anything from anywhere to prove a point. Why not resort to hadis which is considered "sahi" by both shias and sunnis and discuss.

The spiritual religious heads would however continue from Ali.

This means Islam divides spritualism and materialism into two leadership which if further deduced means 3 khalifas were materialistic leaders and ali(as) and his sons were spritual leaders.

Good atleast you accept Ali(as) and his sons as spritual leaders. This itself is suffice to prove imamat which shias claim to be better than the khilafat of sunnis as spritualism outweighs materialism.

[mutmaeen]

valid points humble

besides that compare the xploits of war of the so called first three via a vis that of ali-compare the ilm and intelligence of ali with those 3-its plain that ali and only ali qualified to succeed rasul e khuda and none else