THE ADMIN OF A SHIA FB FORUM SHIA AHLUL BAYT A.

S ANG NASA TAMANG LANDAS" DELETED THE DEBATE THREAD AFTER REALIZING THE CLEAR DEFEAT OF THE ULTIMATE DEBATER MALIK AL ASHTAR This was the link of the deleted debate thread: https://www.facebook.com/groups/287777881329895/467910333316648/?notif_t=group_comment. The Debate was about the 12 Caliphs: Sunni-Shia Debate Resolve: The 12 Caliphs Foretold by Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. Are NOT the 12 Shia Imams (12vers Shia) Affirmative: Abujaiyana Negative : Malik Al-Ashtar Alhamdulillah, the posts in the deleted thread were reposted in our forum. Click here https://www.facebook.com/groups/182400251905745/ Look for a thread entitled "ON GOING DEBATE WITH A SHIA APOLOGIST, MALIK AL ASHTAR, ON THE 12 CALIPHS" ----------------------Advice to my fellow Ahlus-Sunnah - Dont agree to debate any shia in their forum as it is the habit of their Admins to delete the thread when they realize that their apologist is about to be defeated. Jazakallahu Khair

Saved Copy of the Debate:

Sunni-Shia Debate
Resolve: The 12 Caliphs Foretold by Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. Are NOT the 12 Shia Imams (12vers Shia)

Affirmative: Abujaiyana Negative : Malik Al-Ashtar https://www.facebook.com/AbuJaiyana https://www.facebook.com/abuFarabi Representing Ahlus-Sunnah Representing Imamiya (Jafari) Shia

Debate Format and Rules

Format:

1. Presentation of Argument by Abujaiyana 2,500 words maximum 2. Presentation of Argument by Malik Al-Ashtar 2,500 words maximum 3. Cross-Examinations a. Malik Al-Ashtar to ask questions to Abujaiyana 5 questions maximum b. Response by Abujaiyan 2,000 words maximum

c. Abujaiyana to ask questions to Malik Al-Ashtar - 5 questions maximum d. Response by Malik Al-Ashtar 2,000 words maximum 4. Rebuttal by Abujaiyana 2,000 words maximum 5. Rebuttal by Malik Al-Ashtar 2,000 words maximum 6. Conclusion by Abujaiyana 1,000 words maximum 7. Conclusion by Malik Al-Ashtar 1,000 words maximum 8. Audience may then participate in the discussion; giving impressions, asking questions, et cetera. Rules: 1. No Ad hominem of any kind is allowed 2. 24hours limit for posting replies 3. References of evidences must be provided 4. Failure to follow the format and the rules renders the opponent winner in the debate. Like Unfollow Post Share Yesterday at 12:08pm September 10 at 1:57pm Like 1

Abu Jaiyana I begin by mentioning the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. I testify that there is no deity worthy of any form of worship but Allah alone. I further testify that Muhammad ibn Abdullah peace and blessings of Allah be upon him is the Messenger of Allah. May Allah s.w.t. shower His blessings to the noble and purified family of Prophet Muhammad, his blessed companions and those who follow their footsteps until the Last Day. After that: Peace be upon those who follow the right guidance. I welcome everyone for this another Sunni-Shia Debate. I think that most of the major issues between the mainstream Islam i.e. Ahlus-Sunnah popularly known as Sunnis, and the 12 Imamite Shiaism, also known as Jafari Shia or Shia Imamiya has already been debated by Sunni and Shia apologists. The last debate we had here was about the polytheistic teachings of the 12 Imamite Shiaism. Now, we have a minor issue to be debated by my old friend Malik Al Ashtar who is a prominent and devout 12 Imamite shii/shia. He has been parroting for a long time regarding the issue of the prophecy of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. about the 12 Caliphs to come on whom Islam will be on the upper hand under their leadership. The burden of proof is supposed to be on the Shia side because they are the ones making the claim. However, in this debate, I would put the burden of proof on my part as a sort of giving a favor to the Shia debater; I will prove in this debate that their claim is false, not even near to being true. I argue that the authentic hadiths recorded in the Hadith Books of the Ahlus-Sunnah regarding the prophecy about the 12 Caliphs after Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. are not the 12 Imams of the 12 Imamite Shiaism. The hadith in question is recorded in almost all, if not all, of the major hadith books of the Ahlus-Sunnah. The major hadith books of the Ahlus-Sunnah has it both in short, and in long version. The longer version is obviously the complete version of the hadith, and it is recorded, as far as I know, in Sahih Muslim Book 020, Number 4482:

IT HAS BEEN REPORTED ON THE AUTHORITY OF JABIR B. SAMURA WHO SAID: I WENT WITH MY FATHER TO THE MESSENGER OF ALLAH (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM) AND I HEARD HIM SAY: THIS RELIGION WOULD CONTINUE TO REMAIN POWERFUL AND DOMINANT UNTIL THERE HAVE BEEN TWELVE CALIPHS. THEN HE ADDED SOMETHING WHICH I COULDN'T CATCH ON ACCOUNT OF THE NOISE OF THE PEOPLE. I ASKED MY FATHER: WHAT DID HE SAY? MY FATHER SAID: HE HAS SAID THAT ALL OF THEM WILL BE FROM THE QURAISH. The 12vers Shia has been claiming that the authentic ahadith recorded in Sunni hadith books such as the one quoted above refer to none other than their 12 Imams. However, after scrutiny, the Shia claim is far from being true. The 12vers Shia insists that those 12 Caliphs must come from the descendants of Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. and Fatima bint Muhammad r.a. through Al Husain, the brother of Al Hassan. In this debate, I would defend 3 major arguments which prove that the 12 Caliphs prophesied by Prophet Muhammad to come after him are not the 12 Imams of the 12vers Shia. 1. Historical background/context of the hadith. 2. The obvious meaning of the very text of the hadith 3. The absence of any claim from the 2 Caliphs, Ali and Al Hassan that they were the prophesied 12 Caliphs from the Quraish. *4.Self-Fulfilling Prophecy Please continue to next post. about an hour ago Like 1 September 10 at 1:57pm Like

Abu Jaiyana HISTORICAL BACKGROUND/CONTEXT OF THE HADITH It must always be put into consideration that the teachings of the Prophet s.a.w. reached to us primarily through the Sahabah (the Prophets Companions). No prophetic hadith could be considered as Sahih (authentic) in and of itself if the Isnad of every hadith begins with someone who is not a Sahabi because the a continuous link of an Isnad is necessary in order to establish an unbroken chain of narrators; a hadith in which its isnad is broken, it is considered to be weak, unreliable. The Sahaba were the first recipient of the message/teachings of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. and from that historical fact we could rationally say that they were the one who understood the best the sayings, actions, approvals, et cetera, of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. The Prophet testifies to this effect: "Allah's Apostle said, 'The best of my followers are those living in my generation (i.e. my contemporaries), and then those who will follow the latter". In another report he s.a.w. said The best people are those living in my generation, and then those who will follow them, and then thos e who will follow the latter. Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 3. Anent to this, after establishing the authority of the Sahaba in their superiority over any group of people when it comes to the interpretation of the Prophetic traditions, we should consult, first and foremost, the understanding of the Sahabah about the hadith in question. Major Sahaba from the Muhajireen, and the Ansar knew the hadith very well and they understood it as it is, not what the shia interpret it to be. Proof: Shortly after the demise of the Prophet s.a.w. the Ansar gathered together in order to elect a leader that would succeed the leadership of the Prophet s.a.w. thinking that since they were the majority of the Sahaba and the fact that Madina is their own City. Abubakr as-Siddiq and company made an objection and presented the hadith in which the Prophet s.a.w. said that leadership i.e. Caliphate of the Muslims would remain with the hands of the Quraish. To make the long story short, the Ansar confirmed the truthfulness of the hadith and they agreed to the argument of Abubakr and company. They, the Muhajireen and the Ansar, eventually agreed that Abubakr is the best of all the Sahaba, thus elected him as the Prophets Successor. We can see from this historical event that the Sahaba were aware of the hadith about the leaders that would come from the

Quraish tribe, YET, none of them understood it to mean that they will all be Ali bin Abi Talib and his descendants through Al Husain r.a. On the contrary, the Sahaba understood the hadith based on its obvious text/wordings that those leaders would be from the tribe of the Quraish. This is why the Caliphs they elected were all Quraishi men. Ali bin Abi Talib is authentically reported to have confirmed the superiority of Abubakr over all the Sahabah. In a long hadith, Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. is recorded to have said: "I testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and that Muhammad is His Apostle," and added, "O Abu Bakr! We acknowledge your superiority." Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 60 It is also recorder in Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 26 in which Ali bin Abi Talib testified the superiority of Abubakr and then of Umar. With regards to the legitimacy of the election of Abubakr as the Prophet successor, both Sunni and Shia sources agree that Ali r.a. approved of it i.e. the Shura of the Muhajireen and the Ansar in Nahjul-Balaghah, Letter #6 regarding the legitimacy of electing a Caliph. We could deduce from the above historical facts that though Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. was not present in the election of Abubakr because of being busy, he confirmed and approved what has been agreed by the major Sahaba about Abubakr. Therefore, if my shia friend argue that the understanding of Abubakr, Umar, and Abu Ubaidah Al-Jarrah, and the Ansar were all wrong about the 12 Caliphs from the Quraish, then he has to agree that Ali r.a. were also wrong because of his confirmation and approval of what the group of Abubakr and the Ansar had agreed upon to be true. I would leave this issue for the readers of this debate to decide: WHO SHOULD WE BELIEVE IN, ABUBAKR, UMAR, ABU UBAIDAH IBN AL JARRAH, ALI AND THE ANSAR, OR THE SHIA WHO CONTRADICT THE VIEWS OF ALI? about an hour ago Like 1 September 10 at 1:57pm Like

Abu Jaiyana OBVIOUS MEANING OF THE TEXT OF THE HADITH Authentic hadiths in this regard don t mention any name, therefore, to specify the names of those 12 Caliphs would be based on 100% speculation. This is the reason why the scholars of the Ahlus-Sunnah have difference of opinions regarding this issue. The text of the hadith clearly indicates that those leaders would be from the Quraish, not from the family of Ali alone. To claim that those 12 Caliphs would be from the family of Ali only is a clear contradiction to the obvious text of the hadith because the family of Ali doesnt cant repres ent all the clans, sub-clans, families, et cetera of the Quraish. Had the Prophet meant that the 12 Caliphs would only be from the family of Ali, he would have said so very clearly. Moreover, the text of the hadith gives qualifications/indication of those 12 Caliphs that would lead the Muslim Ummah. a. He must be a leader of the Muslim Ummah i.e. a Caliph b. Islam would be superior THIS RELIGION WOULD CONTINUE TO REMAIN POWERFUL AND DOMINANT Based on the qualifications given in the text, the 12 Imam s of the Shia dont fit to it because of the following historical facts: 1. Majority of those Imams were not Caliphs. Only Ali and Al Hassan r.a. became Caliphs, but the rest were not. 2. Since most of the Shia Imams were not Caliphs, there is no logical to think that Islam did continue to remain powerful and dominant under their respective reign or era. On the contrary, history tells us that most of them were made prisoner by the existing Caliphs of their respective times, and some of them were killed through poison. Al Hassan r.a. surrendered his Caliphate to Muawiyah bin Abi Sufyan.

SO HOW WOULD ISLAM CONTINUE TO REMAIN POWERFUL AND DOMINANT IF THOSE NARRATIONS ARE TRUE? about an hour ago Like September 10 at 1:58pm Like

Abu Jaiyana THE ABSENCE OF ANY CLAIM FROM THE 2 CALIPHS, ALI AND AL HASSAN THAT THEY WERE THE PROPHESIED 12 CALIPHS FROM THE QURAISH. Of the 12 Imams of the Shia, only two became Caliphs, the rest were not. What is interesting in this regard is the fact that neither of the two claimed that their Caliphate is based from the Prophetic tradition about the 12 Caliphs from the Quraish. Had it been so, they would have said it. On the contrary, Ali did acknowledge the legitimacy of Abubakrs, and Umars Caliphat es as discussed above, and Al Hassan also gave a Pledge of Allegiance to Muawiyah after giving up his leadership. If the above records are true, and we ride on the Shia claim that the 12 Caliphs should be from the Family of Ali, then the Prophecy which they use to support their claim BELIES them because we cant even infer any sort of being powerful and dominance of any leadership if the leader himself submits to the authority of another leader. It is like saying I SURRENDER AND I SUBMIT TO YOUR AUTHORITY, THEREFORE I AM YOUR BOSS. This is a clear cut contradictory statement. about an hour ago Like 1 September 10 at 1:58pm Like

Abu Jaiyana SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY A self-fulfilling prophecy is a prediction that, in being made, actually causes itself to become true . After the Prophet ( ) made this statement, there were many deviant sects which sought to exploit this Hadith and other similar prophecies in order to bring themselves to power. The Shia were one such group, who used this Hadith along with those about Imam Mehdiin order to place their own sect into power. It was based upon the Hadith of the twelve Caliphs that the Shia decided to limit their Imamah to the number twelve: These and other traditions (Hadith) were spread in both Imamit e and Zaydite circlesAccording to al-Saduq these traditions (Hadith) and others predicting the occurrence of the Ghayba were the main reason for the Imamite acceptance of the Ghayba and for their being satisfied that the series of the Imams should stop at the twelfth. The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam: A Historical Background, by Dr. Jassim M. Hussain, p.138 In the words of Ibn al-Hashimi he states: In other words, the Imamah of the Imami Shia would not have ended at the number twelve had it not bee n for this Hadith of the twelve Caliphs found in mainstream Muslim books of Hadith. It was this Hadith which was one of the main reasons that caused the Shia to terminate the Imamah at the number twelve. He continues: It is therefore based on very backwards and circular logic that the Shia should now use this Hadith as proof for their twelve Imams, when in fact it was they who based their belief on our Hadith! Today we have Shia youths who attack the Sunnis by saying HOW COULD IT SIMPLY BE A COINCI DENCE THAT YOUR HADITH ALSO TELLS YOU ABOUT THESE TWELVE IMAMS? Of course it is NOT A COINCIDENCE! It IS THE SHIA WHO BASED THEIR DEVIANT BELIEFS IN OUR HADITH, and so it is very queer of them to then further our Hadith as proof of their beliefs! This is very backwards and circular logic!

IT IS PLACING THE CARRIAGE BEFORE THE HORSE, REVERSING CAUSE AND EFFECT! This is the clear reason why the issue about who the 12 Caliphs of the Quraish are did not arise during the Caliphates of Abubakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, and Al Hassan r.a. It was the later Shia who made a big deal out of the Sunni Hadith because they decided that their Imams should end at # 12. The Ismaeli or the 7ners Shia and the Zaidiya Shia didnt have any issue about it. The 12vers Shia made a big deal out of it when they found out the hadith in Question and that their supposed 12th Imam existence cant be proven, so they have to stop at # 12. In summary, the claim of the Shia that the hadiths about the 12 Caliphs from the Quraish meant their 12 Imams is false. Historical facts shows that the companions of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. didnt understand it the way Shia understood it. The very text of the hadith disqualifies almost all of their Imams. Ali and Al Hassan r.a. didnt claim it for themselv es. It is in fact a Shia Self-Fulfilling Prophecy, a claim made by later Shia. I will be responding the evidences of my opponent in my rebuttal. I am expecting weak and fabricated hadiths that he would present in this debate such as Yanabi' al-Muwadat and others. We will see if he can prove its authenticity. Thank you for reading. May Allah guide us all. about an hour ago Like 1 Abu Jaiyana Malik Al-Ashtar, it is now your turn. Thanks about an hour ago Like September 10 at 1:58pm Like 1 Malik Al-Ashtar Simple lang po ang aing masasabi diyan. And here it is: Bismillahi ar-Rahman ar-Rahim. Salam to all of you dear friends. Una po sa lahat, hayaan ninyong i-describe muna natin kung ano ang sinasabing Muslim. Ang isa pong Muslim ay ang taong naniniwala sa Lailaaha ilallah Muhammad Rasulallah. Ang tao po kung naniniwala sa Allah swt, pero hindi maniwala sa Rasulallah, ay hindi po matatawag na Muslim, in the strictest sense of the word. Noong buhay pa po ang Rasulallah, lahat po ay naniniwala sa kanya, although meron din mangilan-ngilan na kumukontra sa kanyang mga decisions, gaya ni Umar al-Khattab; pero sa bandang huli ay nangingibabaw pa din ang kagustuhan ng Rasulallah. So ang magiging basehan na lang po ng ating judgment sa isang tao ay noon pong pumanaw na ang Rasulallah. Dahil noon pong buhay pa siya ay masasabi nating lahat ay sumunod sa kagustuhan niya, whether they like it or not. Ano po ba ang huling habilin ng Rasulallah? Sa Farewell Sermon ng mga Sunni, meron nasabing mga importanteng bagay doon. Pero kung titingnan natin, maliit na fraction lamang po yun ng mga teachings ng Islam. Napakarami pong teachings ang Islam na hindi makukuha sa isang farewell sermon lamang. Kung titingnan natin sa practical na buhay natin, kapag ang isang pinuno ng bansa or kahit isang department lamang ng upisina ay aalis, ang inihahabilin lang sa kanyang mga tauhan ay kung sino ang kanyang kahalili or successor, di ba? Hindi na po niya inihahabilin ang mga duties and responsibilities dahil alam na po ng lahat ang kani-kanilang duties and responsibilities. Ang sumunod na habilin ng isang pinuno sa kanyang mga tauhan ay to cooperate with his successor (or deputy). Likewise, ang h uling habilin ng Rasulallah ay ang successor niyang 12 leaders, at ang ating cooperation sa successors niya. Hindi po tutuo na ang farewell sermon niya ay duties and responsibilities ng mga Muslims dahil nasa Quran na po ito lahat at sa kanyang sunnah . Naniniwala po ang ating katunggali na si Abu Jaiyana na ang hadith of 12 caliphs ay authentic : Sahih Bukhari: Narrated Jabir bin Samura: I heard Muhammad saying, "There will be twelve Muslim rulers." He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said, "All of them (those rulers) will be from Quraish." Sa Sunan Abu Dawood ay 12 Vicegerents po ang sinabi; sa Sahih Muslim ay 12 Caliphs; sa Sunan at-Tirmidhi ay 12 Amirs. Samakatuwid po, ang ibig sabihin ng 12 successors na ito ay iisa lang - LEADERS sa wikang English (Imam sa Arabic), regardless of the terms or translations used. Ang atin pong katunggali ay napakagaling na Sunni naniniwala po ako diyan. Para sa kanya, ako ay pipitsugin lamang, or nuisance sa English. Kung meron lang pong Ayatullah na Pilipino ay yun po ang gusto niyang ka-level na i-debate. Pero nung tanungin natin ang napakagaling na taong ito (prior to this debate) kung nasaan ang 12 leaders na inihabilin ng Rasulallah, wala po siyang maipresenta. Therefore, nangangahulugan po na walang twelve leaders sa Sunni. Ibig sabihin, makikita natin na hindi sumunod ang Sunni sa huling habilin ng Rasulallah. At kaya naman masasabi nating hindi po Muslim ang mga Sunni. Maliwanag po yan. Napakagaling na Sunni na ang ating tinanong ngunit wala po siyang masabi. Hindi po sumunod ang Sunni sa nagiisang huling habilin ng Rasulallah bago siya pumanaw, na kasing-IMPORTANTE ng Islam itself. 3 hours ago Like 1

September 11 at 8:16am Like Malik Al-Ashtar Now, kung ang Sunni po ay hindi Muslim, wala na pong iba tayong alternatibo kundi ang mga Shia. RULED OUT na po ang Sunni sa Islam. Ang Shia Muslim na lang ang pag-asa natin. Kung hindi pa tunay na Muslims ang Shias, wala na pong Muslims na natitira sa mundo. Makikita po natin na ang Shia Ithna Ashari ay meron Twelve Imams. Kaya masasabi natin sa una pa lang na ang Shia ay tunay na mga Muslims dahil naniniwala sa Allah swt, at sa Rasulallah. Ang question lamang po ay kung ang 12 Shia Imams ba ay siyang binabanggit sa Hadith of 12 Caliphs, which is the topic of this deb ate? Well, kung hindi sila ay wala na tayong ibang alternatibo. Sila na po at wala nang iba pa. Nakita natin na walang maipresenta ang ating katunggali na 12 leaders sa Sunni Islam, kaya ito na lang pong Shia Imams ang ating maaasahan. Otherwise, wala na pong tunay na Muslims sa mundong ibabaw. Meron ba tayong proof na itong Shia Imams ang nabanggit sa Hadith na ito? Unang-una, ang first Imam ng mga Shia ay si Ali, at maraming hadiths ang nagsasabi na si Ali ang successor ng Rasulallah (Don't try to find f aults with Al, he is indeed from me and I am from him, he is your leader after me. Musnad ibn Hanbal). Pangalawa, marami din ang hadiths ang nagsasabing Muhammad ang pangalan ng pinakahuli sa Twelve Imams na ito, which is the name of the last Shia Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi (The world will not come to an end until the Arabs are ruled by a man from my family whose name is the same as mine. Sunan Abu Dawood). Hence, ang Shia Imams ay consistent sa mga authentic hadiths. Ito ang isa pang hadith na very clearly supporting the claim of Shias: Sheikh Sulayman Balkhi Hanafi in his Yanabiu'l-Mawadda, ch.76, reports from Fara'idu's-Simtain of Hamwaini, who reports from Mujahid, who reports from Ibn Abbas : that a Jew named Na'thal came to Muhammad and asked him questions about Tawhid (Unity of Allah). Muhammad answered his questions and the Jew embraced Islam. Then he said: "O Holy Prophet, every prophet had a wasi (vicegerent). Our Prophet, Moses Bin Imran, made a will for Yusha Bin Nun. Please tell me who is your wasi?" The Holy Prophet said: "My vicegerent is Ali Bin Abi Talib; after him are Hasan, and Husain and after them are nine Imams, who are the successive descendants of Husain." Maliwanag po na binanggit ang pangalan ng tatlong Shia Imams at nine other SUCCESSIVE descendants. Finally, let me share o you the commandment of Allah swt to the Prophet Muhammad in the Holy Quran, thus: Say (Oh Muhammad), that I do not ask anything from u except that you love The Family. And Prophet Muhammad reminded us in Sahih Tirmidhi for THREE TIMES that we should be careful about his Ahlul Bayt. Now, without the Shias, we would never be able to know about the Ahlul Bayt. Kung sinasabi po ng Sunni na si Ali ay pang-apat na Caliph lamang, pero ang sabi ng Rasulallah ay siya ang una, kanino po tayo maniniwala, sa kinagisnan nating Sunni ba or sa Rasulallah? Kung hindi po tayo maniwala sa Rasulallah, kahit gaano po natin sabihin na Muslim tayo, pero sa Mata ng Allah swt, hindi po tayo Muslim. 3 hours ago Like Malik Al-Ashtar Abu Jaiyana, your cross examination. 3 hours ago Like 1 September 11 at 8:16am Like Abu Jaiyana Malik Al-Ashtar, based on the format of this debate, you are the one to ask questions first> 3. Cross-Examinations a. Malik Al-Ashtar to ask questions to Abujaiyana 5 questions maximum b. Response by Abujaiyan 2,000 words maximum Fire your questions now. You 24 hours to post your questions, maximum of 5. This debate is in English not tag-lish. This is to be uploaded atwww.scribd.com and will be read not only by filipinos. So keep the language of this debate in English. Thanks Scribd www.scribd.com Read on your iPad, iPhone, Android, or your web browser. Scribd seamlessly syncs where you left off between your devices. 9 minutes ago Like Remove Preview

Scribd www.scribd.com Read on your iPad, iPhone, Android, or your web browser. Scribd seamlessly syncs where you left off between your devices. September 11 at 8:16am Like Remove Preview Malik Al-Ashtar Wala naman sa rules na english ito, meron ba? 7 minutes ago Like September 11 at 8:18am Like 1 Abu Jaiyana It's a lame alibi my friend; all of my debates against shia are in engish be they filipinos or otherwise because they are to be uploaded at scribd.com and you are a witness to that. That's why the title and the format as well as the rules are written in English. Fire your questions now Malik Al-Ashtar Thanks 2 minutes ago Edited Like September 11 at 8:18am Like 1 Malik Al-Ashtar If you can rmember, you have said before that our debate can be in tagalog, english , or taglish. So what's the problem? Tha is ad hominem. You are supposed to be disqualified. a few seconds ago Like September 11 at 8:18am Like 1 Abu Jaiyana That's why I did not appeal to the rules, I am appealing to precedence. Had I put it as a rule it would be a violation on your part. Please know/understand your terminology; there is no ad hominem in asking your opponent to keep the language of the debate in English. You must have a weird definition of Ad Hominem fallacy. Dont waste time, fire your questions now. Thanks a few seconds ago Like September 11 at 8:23am Like 1 Komandar Toro kahit tagalog yan dahil para sa mga pilipino yan.. hindi sa americans.. 22 minutes ago Like 1 Al Farouk Hahaha... parang AHMAD DEEDAT vs. Barcelon ito. 21 minutes ago via mobile Like Komandar Toro Dalawa lang ang salitang ginagamit sa pinas in academics, english and tagalog.. wag lang bisaya at waray and maranao.. 19 minutes ago Like 1 Abu Jaiyana Okay, if Malik Al-Ashtar cant keep his language in English, in order not to waste our time, he may do it in taglish. Thanks 18 minutes ago Edited Like 1 Malik Al-Ashtar Anyway, let's proceed. We cannot even agree on the meaning of ad hominem. My refutations to your argumens will follow, not necessarily questions. Bedause the fallacies in your arguments are as long as your aguments itself. 15 minutes ago Like

Abu Jaiyana Malik Al-Ashtar, when the format and the rules and format of this debate was presented to you, you agreed to, hence you are duty bound to follow the format. Here is your post "approval of the format and rules" Malik Al-Ashtar approved. just tag me if your have posted your argument. September 9 at 12:11pm via mobile Like 2 If you want to break your words, it's up to you. a few seconds ago Like September 11 at 9:12am Like 1 Al Farouk Ang galing ng palusot mo Kumander Turo...eh ituro! Hehe 5 hours ago via mobile Like Komandar Toro ANO? 4 hours ago Like Komandar Toro saang palusot? tulog ka ata.. 4 hours ago Like Al Farouk Everybody is expecting that the debate is going to be in English language just like the previous debate of Aj against Hussein Abinal and Datu ko mas challenging. Eh Noli de Castro pala ito Malik Ashtar pero ok lng basta ba maihahayag mo saloobin mo. Palusot is di naman tayo amerikano. Sabagay tama din nmn. Ahehe.. 4 hours ago via mobile Like 1 Malik Al-Ashtar Did I break any of the format or the rules? Technicalities na lang ba tayo? Abu Jaiyana 4 hours ago Like Komandar Toro Rules: 1. No Ad hominem of any kind is allowed 2. 24hours limit for posting replies 3. References of evidences must be provided 4. Failure to follow the format and the rules renders the opponent winner in the debate. 4 hours ago Like Komandar Toro HEHE! ENGLISH OR TAGALOG is allowed in this forum, hindi lahat ng tao dito i nakaka intindi ng english.. LOLS! 4 hours ago Like Hussien Bin Ali GAYA MO KAMANDER TOTOY ESTE TORO...BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 4 hours ago via mobile Like 1 Komandar Toro Oo nga.. bweeeee! 4 hours ago Like Hussien Bin Ali EL TORO ANO BANG HOMINem? 4 hours ago via mobile Like 1 Al Farouk Tuloy tuloy lng tayo pardon my wrong observation. Cge Malik Asthar your questions to AJ magaling k nmn mgfilipino ang masama ko mali mali . Honestly napabilib mo ako sa tagalog mo. Reading mode muna. News: sa kabilang page tapos na ang debate between Hussein Abinal and Altar. Natapos hindi dhil tapos ang usapan, tapos dhil hindi magkasundo sa rules, ahehe. 4 hours ago via mobile Like 2

Norjanah Adam Yusoph wala na pong tunay na Muslims sa mundong ibabaw.>>> MALIK AL-ASHTAR YAN YUNG MSG. MO LATELY SAAN MO NLAMAN AT NABASA NA WALA NG MUSLIMS SA MUNDONG IBABAW? SO IT DOESNT MEAN YOU ARE NOT MUSLIM? mag isip ka nga muna mbuti sa msg. mo bago ipost lam mo bang pinagtatawanan k nmin dto 4 hours ago via mobile Like 4 Al Farouk Hayaan natin si Abu Jaina sumagot kay Malik..plz. 4 hours ago via mobile Like 1 Dhulqarnin Bin AbdulJalil Limpao Mga pasaway talaga ang shia 4 hours ago via mobile Like 1 Malik Al-Ashtar Cross examination is so easy:) First fallacy par excellence in your arguments: You claim that the subject about the Hadith of 12 Leaders is a MINOR thing. (Do not insist on Caliphs because some Muhaddiths termed it Amir, Vicegerent, and Ruler). It is like you are belittling thi s final will of Rasulallah, and it is as if the issue of leadership is not a major issue. Second fallacy: You are saying that the claim of Shia Imamate on this hadith is not even near to being true. You are just closing your eyes and mind to the congruity of this hadith to the historical facts, that even the names of the Imams are the same. Again, if the Shia claim is fallacy, give me the 12 leaders in Sunni that is irrefutable. Third fallacy: That this religion would continue to REMAIN powerful and dominant until there have been twelve Caliphs. We can assume that Islam became powerful and dominant fOr several centuries, but it did not remain as powerful and dominant UNTIL THE TWELVE CALIPHS. Caliphate is gone even before the Sunni 12 Caliphs even come. W e do not even have any idea when they will come. (If you notice, the passage itself is so ambiguous. I wonder if you can explain it in an intelligible way. This means the hadith is interpolated.) Fourth fallacy: You claimed that Ali acknowledged the legit imacy of Abubakrs Caliphate. That is a lie a fallacy. Even the Sunni books say that Ali gave bayah to Abubakr six months later. If Ali acknowledged its legitimacy, he could have pledged his allegiance outright without any delay. Fifth fallacy, but not the last: You said that the sahabah did not understand this hadith the way the shias understand it. You said that the sahabas were the best in interpreting hadiths. Now, give us how the sahabah understood this hadith. Everything you said here are fallacy. But I have limited myself to only five as stipulated. Abu Abu Jaiyana, your response first to my cross-examination, then your cross examination to my arguments. 4 hours ago Like September 11 at 2:59pm Like 1 Abu Jaiyana Malik Al-Ashtar, based on the format you are to ask 5 questions after your presentation. 3. Cross-Examinations a. Malik Al-Ashtar to ask questions to Abujaiyana 5 questions maximum b. Response by Abujaiyana 2,000 words maximum What you did was a rebuttal to my presentation instead of asking 5 questions. I will response to your rebuttal after my cross examination for you. c. Abujaiyana to ask questions to Malik Al-Ashtar - 5 questions maximum d. Response by Malik Al-Ashtar 2,000 words maximum 45 minutes ago Like 5 Malik Al-Ashtar I have told you I am not going to question, not realizing that cross-examination means questioning. 25 minutes ago Like 1 Malik Al-Ashtar I am waiting for your questions. 19 minutes ago Like 1

Dhulqarnin Bin AbdulJalil Limpao Talo na si Malik wala kwenta mga shia 10 minutes ago via mobile Like 2 Abu Jaiyana Here are my 5 questions for you Malik Al-Ashtar: Question #1. In my presentation, I only quoted hadiths which are rated as authentic by majority of Muslim Scholars because I have understood that dubious hadiths cant be used as evidence. In your presentation, it seems that you were not cautious whether the hadiths you used as proof is sahih or not. My Question is this: IN YOUR SECT, 12 IMAMITE/JAFARI/IMAMIYA SHIA, DO YOUR SCHOLARS ACCEPT WEAK OR DUBIOUS HADITHS AS EVIDENCE? Question # 2. In your presentation, I think that you committed a fallacy called Non Sequitur. You argued that since the Sunnis cant identify the names of the 12 Caliphs mentioned in the Prophecy, therefore the 12 Imams of the Shia must be true. WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN TO US HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH THAT CONCLUSION? Non Sequitur is a fallacy in which a conclusion does not follow logically from what preceded it. Question #3. The hadith that we are debating here indicates that the people being referred in the prophecy are Caliphs i.e. leaders of the Muslim Ummah (Muslim Nation) whether you call them Amirs or otherwise. My question is this: HOW MANY OF YOUR 12 IMAMS BECAME CALIPHS OF THE MUSLIM UMMAH? Question #4. You seem to deny that Ali bin Abi Talib r.a. confirmed the legitimacy of Abubakr's Caliphate des pite the fact that many authentic ahadith in the Sahihain in which Ali did acknowledge the superiority of Abubakr over all the Sahaba. HOW WOULD YOU RECONCILE THAT WITH THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE CLEARLY ADMITTED THAT ALI DID GIVE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO ABUBAKR AND IN NAHJUL BALAGHA LETTER # 6 HE CONFIRMED THE LEGITIMACY OF THE ELECTION OF ABUBAKR? Here is the exact text of the letter: Verily, those who took the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman have sworn allegiance to me. Now those who were present at the election have no right to go back against their oaths of allegiance and those who were not present on the occasion have no right to oppose me. And so far as Shura (selection) was concerned it was supposed to be limited to Muhajirs and Ansars and it was also supposed that whomsoever they selected, became caliph as per approval and pleasure of Allah. Question #5. You cited the report from Yanabiu'l-Mawadda, ch.76. The book is bogus and not a book of hadith. To give benefit of a doubt in your side, COULD YOU GIVE ANY REPUTABLE HADITH SCHOLAR ATTESTING THE AUTHENTICITY OF THAT NARRATION?

Thank you. 6 minutes ago Like

AT THIS JUNCTURE, THE ADMIN OF THE FORUM DELETED THE THREAD:

This was supposed to be my rebuttal: REBUTTAL Peace be unto those who follow the right guidance. Folks, at this point of the debate you can see very clearly which argument is stronger/logical, the Sunnis or the Shias . My friend Malik Al Ashtar accused me of many fallacies in my presentation YET he was not able to name a single type of fallacy. He would consider an argument as fallacy if he thinks that it doesnt agree with his line of argument, or of his belief system. A fallacy is defined as an error in reasoning that renders an argument logically invalid. You cant call an argument a fallac y simply because it doesnt agr ee with your idea. Anyway, here are my responses to his presentation and in his early rebuttal: My Shia friend confidently declare the Sunnis as non-Muslims because they dont believe in the 12 Caliphs in the prophecy. I have 2 responses to this FOOLISH Shia accusation: 1. It is not true that the Sunnis dont believe that there will be 12 Caliphs to come. As a matter of fact I cited several hadiths about the 12 Caliphs which all Sunni hadith scholars rated them as Sahih (authentic) and they are recorded in almost all of Sunni hadith books. So how come that the hadith that the Sunnis rated to be auth entic is an evidence that the Sunni dont believe in the 12 Caliphs?

There is a difference between believing that there will be 12 Caliphs to come, and not making speculations about who those 12 Caliphs are Malik Al Ashtar must not have understood what he is saying. 2. Not making speculations/wild guess about the identity of those 12 Caliphs due to lack of authentic evidence cant and will never make a Muslim a disbeliever no Muslim scholar on earth past and present ever made a ruling like this, not even the worst extremist shia. In fact, it is better to say I dont know yet, or I am not sure yet than invent a lie . The first Shia to give this kind of WEIRD and FOOLISH FATWA is allamah Malik Al Ashtar Shia are notorious of inventing lies just to prove their point. Alhamdulillah! Im not a shia. Our shia friend is somehow obsessed with the #12. Since the prophecy mentions 12 people, and the shia has 12 Imams, he concluded that they must be what the prophecy is referring to despite the fact that t hey COULDNT FIT in the criteria mentioned in the prophecy it is all about #12 and not about the criteria given. Moreover, the same argument also falls under the category of another fallacy called FALSE DILEMMA. It is an argument in which only two alternatives are provided when in fact additional options are available. The other possibility is that the unidentified Caliphs could have their reign before the advent of the Mahdi. The Sunnis and Shia agree that the last of the 12 Caliphs is the Mahdi. Sunnis have already identified at least 7 Caliphs that could fit the Prophecy i.e. Abubakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Hassan, Umar bin Abdul Aziz, and the Mahdi. Between Umar bin Abdul Aziz and the Mahdi is a long time that only Allah knows what would take place. To say that there will be no more Caliphs to come between Umar bin Abdul Aziz and the Mahdi is purely an ignorant guess. Therefore Malik Al Ashtars argument the only alternative is their 12 Imams is a clear fallacy called FALSE DILEMMA .

Malik Al Ashtar cited a hadith in which the Prophet s.a.w. was supposed to have said that Ali would be the leader after the Prophet, yet he didnt give the specific reference of the hadith, and I know that because he got that from Shiekh Google. He simply mentioned Musnad Ahmad. However, in Musnad Ahmad 5/382 this is what we could find: Narrated by Hudhaifa (ra), he said: Prophet (saw) said, Follow those after me: Abu Bakr and Umar. The same text we find in Tahqeeq Sunan Tirmidhi 6/43, h-3662. In the Sahihain, there is a very clear indication to Prophets preference of Abubakr which also corroborates the hadiths mentioned above: It is recorded in Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 11: Narrated Jubair bin Mutim: A woman came to the Prophet who ordered her to return to him again. She said, "What if I came and did not find you?" as if she wanted to say, "IF I FOUND YOU DEAD?" The Prophet said, "If you should not find me, GO TO ABU BAKR." Also recorded in Sahih Muslim Book 031, Number 5878 So beware of bogus references folks. Shia are notorious of editing the texts of Sunni Hadiths. It is a form of Taqiya because taqiya is 9/10 of their religion according to their books. Malik Al Ashtar, in my first cross-exam question, replied that neither Shia scholars nor laymen accept weak or bogus hadith as evidence. Exactly!!! Mr. Al Ashtar, no sane person would do that next time, when you present any hadith as evidence, try to establish its authenticity first dont just assume that since it supports your claim then it is authentic because that is not how a hadith is graded as authentic. For example, he cited Yannabi Mawadda ch.76 which is not a source of hadith for the Sunnis nor its author a hadith scholar you have to establish first its authenticity before presenting it as evidence against any Sunni opponent, otherwise you are

directly condemning yourself for not following the principle of your own scholar which is not accepting a weak or bogus hadith as evidence. Malik Al Ashtar also raised a point that what he cited as evidence from Sunni books must be authentic because he couldnt believe that Sunnis would fabricate hadith for the Shia. Well, that is due to lack of knowledge on his part. It is obvious that Malik Al As htar, with all due respect, hasnt read any book about Usool Hadith. It doesnt mean folks that since it is written in Sunni books then it is authentic - No hadith book, or hadith Scholar says that. The reason why we have categories of hadith such as Sahih, Daef, Mawdu, ect is because not all hadiths are authentic had Sunnis believe that all hadiths are authentic, there would not have been categories of hadiths. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons why a hadith is rejected and classified as weak or fabricated is if one of the narrators is A LIAR, or an EXTREMIST SHIA RAFIDA. Those hadith are recorded for the purpose of making the people aware about them, and not because they are to be considered as authentic. Therefore, Malik Al Ashtars statement, Like, yung kukuha ka ng bato na ipukpok mo sa sarili mong ulo. That is insane. Is not really insanity but simply LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT USOOL HADITH. Please read usool hadith books under the topic Motivation for fabricating hadiths so that you will kno w that what you have said is really based on ignorance about Mustalahul hadith. Malik Al Ashtar tried to distort the contextual meaning of the word Caliph in the hadith. He used different terminologies such as vicegerency, leader, and then finally, Imam in order to somehow make their 12 Imams ride on. That would only work for the novice Malik Al Ashtar. The kind of leaders being referred in the hadith is a Caliph because the hadith clearly indicates that those 12 people Islam would continue to be powerful and dominant under their leadership. In other words, they are not just leaders of a minority certain group or sect but they are the leaders of the Muslim Ummah as a whole. This kind of leadership in Islamic history is called Caliphate which is headed by a Caliph. Shia Imams were never Caliphs except for Ali and Al Hassan r.a. The rest of them were NEVER Caliphs. The existence of the Shias 12th Imam cant even be proven in the first place it is BOGUS. Malik Al Ashtar completely misinterpreted the quotation from Nahjul Balagha Letter #6. I never said that in that letter Ali said that he gave pledge of allegiance to Abubakr. What I said was very clear, that Ali did acknowledge the LEGITIMACY of the Caliphate of Abubakr when he cited the enforceability of the Shura of the Muhajirs and the Ansar when they elected Abubakr as the first Caliph. Read the text carefully Malik Al Ashtar. I didnt lie when I said that Ali did give his pledge of allegiance to Abubakr. In fact Malik did confirm that ALI GAVE HIS PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AFTER 6 MONTHS. In fact according to Al Bidayah wal Nihayah (5/281) and in Sunan al Kubrah (8/143) Zubair r.a. and Ali r.a. gave their pledge of allegiance SHORTLY after the Muhajirs and the Ansar elected Abubakr. The bottom line is that Ali did give his pledge of allegiance to Abubakr. So who is lying now? Malik Al Ashtar said that there is no evidence that Abubakr is better than Ali, I dont think so . Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 20: Narrated Muhammad bin Al-Hanafiya: I asked my father ('Ali bin Abi Talib), "Who are the BEST people after Allah's Apostle?" He said, "ABUBAKR." I asked, "Who then?" He said, "Then 'Umar. " I was afraid he would say "Uthman, so I said, "Then you?" He said, "I am only an ordinary person. So there it is Malik Al Ashtar its FROM ALIS OWN WORDS !

And here is the corroboration Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 7: Narrated Ibn 'Umar: We used to compare the people as to who was BETTER during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle. We used to regard ABUBAKR as the best, then 'Umar, and then Uthman . How about those SAHIH HADITHS Malik Al Ashtar? Malik argued that Abubakr could not be the best companion because Fatima r.a. got angry with him. Thats very ludicrous argument indeed. Is there any principle that whoever Fatimah r.a. got angry with could not be a noble person? Was Fatimah r.a. a Goddess? What is IRONIC in that argument, aside from being LOUSY, is that Fatima r.a. and the Prophet s.a.w. also got angry with Ali when Ali intended to marry another woman. So does that mean that Ali was a bad person, more evil than Abubakr because both Fatima r.a. and the Prophet s.a.w. got angry with him? The truth is that Fatimah was wrong about Abubakr. She was not aware of the hadith of the Prophet that Prophets properties cant be inherited. This is another issue in and of itself. The Shia has been refuted in so many time regarding th e issue of Fadak. It suffices for me to say that Maliks criticism of the authenticity of the hadiths about Abubakr being the best of the Sahabah is ironic, lousy, and doesnt hold water . Finally folks, in my presentation I discussed in great detail how and why the 12 Imams of the Shia could NOT FIT to the criteria mentioned in the Prophecy. On the other hand, Malik Al Ashtar did not even make any attempt to discuss how their 12 Imams could fit to the criteria of the prophecy, except that they have 12 Imams who are themselves the very subject of this debate. Malik Al Ashtar is simply BEGGING THE QUESTION. VERY IMPORTANT POINT TO NOTE: The Shia confirm the authenticity of the hadith about the prophecy of the 12 Caliphs and insist that their 12 Imams are the ones being referred in the prophecy yet they fail to prove that their 12 Imams fit in in the criteria given in the prophecy, then they are in effect ACCUSING PROPHET MUHAMMAD TO BE A FALSE PROPHET for making A FALSE PROPHECY. Let us see in Maliks rebuttal if he can refute the three main arguments which I presented in my presentation, and my refutations to his arguments in this rebuttal. Jazakallahu Khair