The Nonexistent Wasiyyah (Will) Regarding Succession

We often see the Shia's argue that the Prophet (pbuh) explicitly mentioned the succession of Imam Ali (as) at Ghadir Khumm. However, this idea of hereditary succession was not supported by any explicit text. 

Sharif Murtadha in his book Al-Shafi:
Abbas bin Abd al-Muttalib spoke to Amir Al-Muminin (Ali bin Abi Talib) during the illness of the Prophet (peace be upon him), so that he asks the Prophet, who will be in charge of affairs after him, and that if it is for us (Ahl al-Bayt) he should reveal it; and if it is for some other people, he entrust it to us. The leader of the faithful (Ali) said, we went to the Messenger of Allah when his illness became serious and we said O Messenger of Allah, choose a successor for us, He said. “No, I fear that you will be divided regarding him, as the children of Israel became divided over Harun, but if Allah knows any goodness in you, He will choose for you (a leader).

Further, another version of the hadith which supports Imam Ali's (as) belief in Shura during the process:

“No, we did go to the Prophet of Allah and said,” Appoint (for us a leader), and he said” No, I fear that you will be divided on his affairs, as Harun, but if Allah finds any good in your hearts, he will choose for you’ They requested him to point to someone, but he did not . They then said to him,” If we lost you, we will not lose giving our oath of allegiance to Hassan. He said, “I do not command, nor prevent you, you can discern better”. 
Murtada: Al-Shafi, vol. 3 p. 295, Tathbit Dala'il al-Nubuwwah, vol.1 p. 212

This was  during the process of the Caliphate of Imam Hassan (as) when the Muslims came to him after the strike of Abdul Rahman bin Muljan on him, and requested him to appoint his son Hassan after him (as the leader).

We even have similar narrations in our books stating:

"They said to caliph Ali: Will you not appoint a successor? he said: No, but I leave you as the apostle of Allah left you. "
-Haythami in Mujama’a al Zawa’ed; "Sahih"

"They said to Ali: Will you not appoint a successor? He said: The Prophet PBUH did not appoint a successor  so that I may do so, If Allah wishes that something good happens to you  then he will make you all gather around the best (Man) amongst you just  like he made them gather around the best Man (i.e Abu bakr) after their  prophet PBUH."

-Al haythami in Mujama’a al Zawa’ed; "Sahih"

Narrated by Ibn Abbas:

 `Ali bin Abi Talib came out of the house of the Prophet (S.A.W.) during his fatal ailment. The people asked (`Ali), "O Abu Hasan! How is the health of Allah's Messenger (S.A.W.) this morning?" `Ali said, "This morning he is better, with the grace of Allah." Al-`Abbas held `Ali by the hand and said, "Don't you see him (about to die)? By Allah, within three days you will be the slave of the stick (i.e., under the command of another ruler). By Allah, I think that Allah's Messenger (S.A.W.) will die from his present ailment, for I know the signs of death on the faces of the offspring of `Abdul Muttalib. So let us go to Allah's Messenger (S.A.W.) to ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If the authority is given to us, we will know it, and if it is given to somebody else we will request him to recommend us to him. " `Ali said, "By Allah! If we ask Allah's Messenger (S.A.W) for the rulership and he refuses, then the people will never give it to us. Besides, I will never ask Allah's Messenger (S.A.W.) for it."-Bukhari

But wait, I thought Imam Ali (as) was already the appointed successor at Ghadeer? Why is he asking the Prophet (S.A.W.) for rulership if the Prophet (S.A.W.) had already appointed him? 

In fact, Sharif Murtadha goes even further and states that the event of Ghadir itself is unclear about succession:

“We do not claim absolute knowledge in the text (above), neither for ourselves nor against our opponents, and we do not know of any of our people who claim that." (Murtada: Al-Shafi, vol 2 p. 128)


Another proof regarding Imam Ali's (as) acceptance of the Shura and the right of the Ummah to elect its leader:
“What is obligatory in the laws of Allah and Islam is that the Muslims, of if their leader dies or is killed, they should not perform any act nor innovate something, nor move in order to do something new, unless they choose for themselves a chaste leader, who is learned, scrupulous, and well-versed in the legal and traditional matters.”

-Majlisi: Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 8 p. 555 

Even in the Sermon of Shaqshaqiya, Imam Ali (as) does describe himself the most deserving of the caliphate based on his closeness to the Prophet (pbuh), but never does he (as) point to any existence of any wasiyyah from the Prophet (pbuh) or even mentions the event of Ghadir in regard to the Prophet (pbuh) specifying him as the successor. If the event of Ghadir was so important which the Shia's claim, Imam Ali (as) would have referred to it in clear terms. In fact, here's a narration from Al-Hasan ibn Al-Hasan bin Ali bin Abi Talib (as) regarding this:

 "Hadn't the messenger of Allah (pbuh) said, "Whoever's mawla I am, then Ali is his mawla"? He said, "Yes, but by Allah, the Messenger did not intend by that the position of leadership and power. If he wanted that, he would have said it outright. Allah's messenger (PBUH) was more straightforward and the best adviser to the Muslims, if he wanted to say this, he would have said, "This is the one who will administer your affairs and look after you after me, so listen to him and obey." By Allah, if Allah and His messenger had picked Ali, Allah would have facilitated his position for him. If Ali did not step up to that position, Ali would have been the first one to disobey Allah and His messenger."

-Ibn Katheer in al-Bidayah wal Nihayah 9/178 and al-Haythami in al-Sawa’eq al-Muhriqa p346:

al-Mezzi said in Tahtheeb al-Kamal 6/88: “And this is from the highest and most authentic Isnads."

 “Did not the Messenger of Allah say to Ali: ‘If i am Mawla of someone, Ali is his Mawla?’” He (Al Hasan) replied, “By Allah, if he meant by that Amirate and rulership, he would have been more explicit to you in expressing that, just as he was explicit to you about the Salah, Zakat and Hajj to the House. He would have said to you, ‘Oh people! This is your leader after me.’ The Messenger of Allah gave the best good counsel to the people (i.e. clear in meaning). “If it is like what you say, that Ali was chosen for this after the Prophet (pbuh), then he would be the most flawed from all the people, because he didn't do as the Prophet (pbuh) commanded.”
(Source: Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra, Volume 5) Similar is present in Ibn `Asakir (volume 4, page 166) and (awaasim min qawaasim page 115).

Ibn  Sa’d:
In a discussion between a Rafidhi and supposedly Hasan ibn Al-Hasan:
فقال له الرافضي ألم يقل رسول الله عليه السلام لعلي من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه؟ فقال أما والله أن لو يعني بذلك الامرة والسلطان لأفصح لهم بذلك كما أفصح لهم بالصلاة والزكاة وصيام رمضان وحج البيت ولقال لهم أيها الناس هذا وليكم من بعدي 
The Rafidhi said: ‘Did not the Messenger of Allah (saw) say to Alee (a.s): “Whomever I am his Master (Mawla) then Alee is his Master (Mawla)?”‘ He said: ‘By Allah (swt), if he meant by that the leadership, then he should have clarified that, like he clarified the issue of Salat and Zakat and fasting in Ramadan and the Hajj of the House. He should have rather said: “O people this is your Master (Wali) after me”‘.
Source: Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d. Vol. 7, Pg. # 314.

Al-Baqi

A rare picture of the shrine at Al-Baqi before it was destroyed by the Wahabi regime. Where is the love for the Pure Family of the Prophet (pbuh)? Now, all we have is this:

One word: despicable

Shiachat Members Already Respond To My Blog

I have just recently started this blog a few days ago, and it already seems it is gaining notice within the Shiachat community. The title of the topic at Shiachat: "Another Sunni Claims They Love Ahlulbayt (as) More."

The 12rs like to monopolize the term "Ahlulbayt" for themselves. They encourage us to love the Ahl Al Bayt  (as), but the reality is, there is a condition. We have to become 12r Shias and separate the love of some of the closest companions of the Prophet (pbuh), Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra), and Uthman (ra). If you do not convert into 12r Shiaism, they become irritated and claim you follow the enemies of the Ahl Al Bayt (as) and will brand you with the term "nasibi."If we take a look at a fatwa by Grand Ayatollah Al Khoei, he goes on to say that all non-12rs (even including other shia sects) are Muslims in the Dunya and kaffirs in the Akhira:

"We had already spoke about The Najasah(uncleanliness) of all the teams who differ with the Twelver Shias and their Tahara. And in brief that denying the Wilayah for ''all'' the Imams PBUT or ''some of them'''' is like denying the message and it brings Kufr and Najasah? Or that Denying The Wilayah necessarily means leaving Iman (Belief) with the Hukm of his Islam and Tahara. What is popular amongst the scholars Is the Tahara of those who differ with us Although the author of the book "Al Hada'eq" May Allah sanctify his secret has attributed to the modern scholars like al Sayyed al murtada that it was popular amongst them That those who differ are Kouffar and Najis even the ''other'' Shia teams(1). What we can use to prove the Najasah of those who differ with us is divided into three parts, Firstly what we Read in Countless and plenty of Narrations that those who differ with the Imams are Kouffar."

"And thus Other Shia teams like Zaidiyah, Kisaniyah, Ismaliyah and others their ruling is the same as that of those who differ with us because there is no difference between denying Wilayah of the Imams altogether and between accepting it for ''some ''Imams and denying it for other Imams, and it was mentioned that he who denies'' one'' denies'' all'', and I know that Denying this Wilayah does not mean Kufr or Najasah nor does denying Wilayah for some of the Imams, What is correct is The Tahara of all those who differ with the Twelver Shia and their Islam Based on what is ''Apparent'' Although ÍN REALITY They are All Kouffar and we have called them Muslims in The Dunyah and Kaffirs on The Day of judgement."

-Source: kitab al tahara, Khoei, 2/87.
sheikh Muhammad Hassan Jawahiri in his book "Jawahir al-kalam" 6/67 quoted hadith:

ان الزيدية والواقفة والنصاب بمنزلة واحدة
"Zaydiya, Waqifiyah and Nawaseeb are at the same level".


This is hardly a surprising reaction. This makes me think of a verse in the Holy Quran:

"And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion. Say, "Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance." If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper." (2:120)

As Muslims, we believe in the Prophets Isa (as) and Musa (as) and love them as one of the major Prophets (as) of Allah (swt). Just because we claim that Isa (as) isn't the Son of God, does this take our love away from him (as)? Absolutely not. So how come the Shia's claim that we are enemies of  the Ahl Al Bayt (as) just because we don't follow 12r Shiaism or because we love the companions? 

MashAllah, Sheikh Ninowy (May Allah Preserve Him) has said it beautifully in his speech (5:40 in the video):

"We Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jammah do not see any difference between loving the Sahaba (ra) and loving the Ahl Al Bayt (as). For a Sahaba (ra) and Ahl Al Bayt (as) love each other so dearly."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Cl4TRQJ6r0M


Update:

After doing more research on some of the claims that they made regarding letter 6 in Nahjul Balagha where  Imam Ali (as) says to Muawiyah that the 3 calipahs were legit rulers, and their supporters gave him bayah.

Al Khoei a major 12er dismisses this sermon by saying
نصر: عمر بن سعد، عن نمير بن وعلة، عن عامر الشعبي

Two of narrators in chain are Mahjool (Unknown)

1st narrator in the chain is Amr as-Sha'abi and he is liar and enemy of Imam Ali
http://www.al-khoei.us/books/index.php?id=7469

Now if Al Khoei says that this sermon contains the enemy of Imam Ali (as) then what about sermon of ash-Shiqshiqiyyah which they supposedly claim dismisses the 3 calipahs. In fact it was Shaykh Saduq who presented this chain for ash-Shiqshiqiyyah

Muhammad ibn `Ali Majilawayh related this sermon to us and he took it from his uncle Muhammad ibn Abi'l-Qasim and he from Ahmad ibn Abi `Abdillah (Muhammad ibn Khalid) al-Barqi and he from his father and he from (Muhammad) Ibn Abi `Umayr and he from Aban ibn `Uthman and he from Aban ibn Taghlib and he from `Ikrimah and he from Ibn `Abbas. (`Ilal ash-shara'i`, vol.1, chap.122, p.l46; Ma`ani al-akhbar, chap.22, p.361)

Now the narrator Ikramah is also an enemy of Imam Ali (as). He too was a Nasibi so why the double standards ?

In sermon 92 Imam Ali (as) recommends the Muslims to appoint another Calipah and he in fact say to I will obey him.

This sermon disturbs the 12er/Dozeners because they believe a Calipah can only be among the 12 and the term obey is only used for the 12. They further go and dismiss the sermon by saying..

This sermon is taken from Sunni sources and it is weak - History of Tabari 3/456 (Does not exist in Shia sources)

Sayf bin Umar is in the chain!

كتب إلي السري عن شعيب عن سيف عن محمد وطلحة قالا

Now the 12er say this is weak because of Saif bin Umar. On the contrary, when they claim that Umar (ra) made threats to burn down the house of Bibi Fatima (sa) they have no issues with the narrator in the chain who is Sayf bin Umar. How ironic!

12 Caliphs & The Caliphate Will Last For 30 Years

We often see the Shia's use the hadith of the twelve caliphs in order to prove the imamate of the 12 Imams (as):

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.-Bukhari

It has been reported on the authority of Jabir b. Samura who said: I went with my father to the Messenger of Allah (may peeace 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.-Muslim

The Prophet said: "There will be after me twelve Amir (Prince/Ruler), all of them from Quraysh."-Tirmidhi

The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: "The affairs of people will continue to be conducted (well) as long as they are governed by the twelve men."-Muslim

“Verily this matter [of rule] shall [remain] in Quraysh so long as when they are asked for mercy, they show mercy, when they rule, they are just, and when they distribute, they are equitable, so whoever from them does not do this, then upon him is the curse of Allah, the angels and all of humankind, and compulsory acts and voluntary acts will not be accepted from him.” (Ahmad, al-Bazzar and al-Tabrani narrated and the narrators of Ahmad are trustworthy as [mentioned] in Majma’ al-Zawa’id (5:193))

It has been narrated on the authority of Jabir b. 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: People are the followers of Quraish in good as well as evil (i. e. in the customs of Islamic as well as pre-Islamic times).

Firstly, the hadiths are talking about caliphs/amirs, which equates to rulers over the Muslim world. None of the twelve Imams (as) but Imam Ali (as) and Imam Hassan (as) were actual rulers. So already, we can  deduce that this hadith is not talking about the 12 Imams of the Shias. Secondly, the hadith does not state that these rulers will be infallible, divinely appointed, will come successively, or from the Ahl Al Bayt (as). All it states is that they will be from the tribe of Quraish and that Islam will be dominant and powerful during their rule. Was Islam strong during the time of the Imams? Is Islam strong right now in the absence of the 12th Imam? Moreover, if this is the hadith that the Shia's are trying to deduce their concept of imamate from, how come the Prophet (pbuh) never hinted about this hadith at the event of Ghadeer? How come he (pbuh) didn't say that Ali (as) was the first of the twelve if the hadith is talking about them? Furthermore, there are more than 12 Imams from the Ahl Al Bayt (as), and I do not see why the Shia only limit it to twelve. There were many great Imams from the Ahl Al Bayt (as) such as Imam Zayd (as), Imam Muhammad al-Nafs al-Zakiyya (as), Imam Ismael bin Jaffar (as), and Imam Esa bin Zayd (as) only to name a few. Lastly, if this hadith is referring to the 12 Imams (as), how come the Prophet (pbuh) never named them? It would be only fitting to tell the ummah, especially at Ghadeer or the Farewell Sermon on who their rulers would be in order to avoid confusion. If this is a matter of usul/foundations of deen which is supposedly HIGHER than Prophethood (which the shia's claim), the Prophet (pbuh) would have named all the Imams in explicit and great detail. Yet, we see in the history of the Shia, after the death of each Imam, a number of  sects and sub sects arose just over the confusion on who the next Imam would be. Lastly, how come Imam Ali (as) or any of the other Imams (as) never used this hadith to justify their right to the caliphate? 

Nonetheless, Alhamdulillah, we have hadiths where the Prophet (pbuh) himself PROPHESIED the caliphate of the Khulafa al-Rashidun (ra):

"The Prophetic khilaafah will last for thirty years. Then Allaah will give the dominion to whomever He wills."-Saheeh al-Jaami' as-Sagheer, reported by Abu Dawud and Al-Haakim; declared "Sahih" by Imam al-Albaani (ra)

"The khilaafah after me in my Ummah will last for thirty years. Then there will be kingship after that."Reported in the Musnad Imaam Ahmad, by at-Tirmidhi, Musnad Abi Ya'laa, and Ibn Hibbaan;  "Saheeh"by Imaam al-Albaani (ra)

"The Prophethood will remain amongst you for as long as Allaah wills it to be. Then Allaah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be the khilaafah upon the Prophetic methodology. And it will last for as long as Allaah wills it to last. Then Allaah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be biting kingship, and it will remain for as long as Allaah wills it to remain. Then Allaah will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be tyrannical (forceful) kingship and it will remain for as long as Allaah wills it to remain. Then He will raise it when He wills to raise it. Then there will be a khilaafah upon the Prophetic methodology."-Silsilah as-Saheehah of Imaam al-Albani; "Sahih"

"Al-Nauman ibn Basheer told us: The Prophet PBUH said: ‘Prophethood will remain in you for as long as God decides for it to remain and then God will remove it when He decides to remove it. After Prophet hood, there will be a Caliphate on the style of prophethood and it will exist for as long as God decides for it to exist, then He will remove it when He decides to remove it. Then there will be a kingdom in which people will face trials and tribulations and it will continue to exist for as long as God decides for it to exist. Then He will remove it, when He decides to remove it. After this, there will be an oppressive kingdom and it will continue to exist for as long as God decides for it to exist. Then He will remove it, when He decides to remove it. Then there will once again be a rule on the style of prophet hood. After saying this, the Prophet (pbuh) was silent."Takhreej Mishat al Masabih #5306; Sahih

Hudhayfah son of Al-Yaman reported that the Messenger of Allah sallalluhu 'alayhi wa sallam said, "Prophethood (meaning himself) will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain, then Allah will raise it up whenever he wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood remaining with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, he will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Afterwards, there will be a reign of oppressive (The reign of Muslim kings who are partially unjust) rule and it will remain with you for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, there will be a reign of tyrannical rule and it will remain for as long as Allah wills it to remain. Then, Allah will raise it up whenever He wills to raise it up. Then, there will be a Caliphate that follows the guidance of Prophethood." Then Hudhayfah said, "The Prophet stopped speaking."-As-Sililah As Sahihah

If we have a look at the caliphate of Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra), Uthman (ra), Ali (as), and if you add Imam Hassan's (as) rule of 6 months, you will clearly see that it becomes 30 years. These narrations show that there is no such thing as 12 divinely appointed Imams (as) after the Prophet (pbuh) ruling over the ummah. If there were, the Prophet (S.A.W.) would have mentioned them. 

Imam Ali (as) and the Caliphate

We often see the 12er  Shia reference  the event of the  Ghadir declaration against their opponents to prove the Imam Ali (as) was divinely appointed to rule over the ummah. However, if we read  the mainstream   books on  Imam Ali (as) we will realize that there are many examples that prove Imam Ali (as) was not divinely appointed.

In the book "The Role of Aisha in the History of Islam" by the Shia scholar Allamah Sayyid Murtada Askari, the alim quotes an incident that runs totally contradictory to the mainstream Shia understanding dealing with succession:

Ali and the issue of caliphate

"Ali had no doubt that after the Prophet, the caliphate would belong to him and there would be no rival.(89) It was owing to this assurance that when his uncle al-’Abbas at the Prophet’s ablution ceremony said to him: “Give me your hand that I may swear allegiance to you so that the people would say that the uncle of the Prophet has sworn allegiance to his cousin. This would benefit you and no one would oppose you any longer,” he answered: “O uncle! Is there anyone beside me who covets the caliphate?”

He answered: “You will see soon enough.”

‘Ali said: “I have no wish to see the issue of my caliphate being settled behind closed shutters and I want all people to participate openly in it, and vote for me.” Then he remained silent."

Now this poses a very interesting question to the Shia's. If Imam Ali (as) was openly appointed at Ghader by the Prophet (pbuh), how come he wanted people to vote for his acceptance to the caliphate and not wanting to settle it behind closed doors? Hmm...it seems Imam Ali (as) himself was also keen on the idea of shura and election. 

In fact, Imam Ali (as) himself even rejected the notion of being appointed at Ghader: 


Narrated Rayeh bin al harith: A Group of Ansars came to Ali (as) in al Rahbah and said: Al Salamu Aleykum Ya Mawlana, He replied: How Can I be your Mawla and you are Arabian people? They Said: We heard the Prophet of Allah PBUH say on the Day of Ghadeer Khum: Whomsoever’s Mawla I am, this (Ali) is also his Mawla. Riyah said: When they left I followed them and asked whom they were, They said some folks from the Ansars and amongst them was Abu Ayoub al Ansari.

Narrated Imam Ahmad in His Munad 5/419, Shu'eib al Arna'out said Its Isnad is "Sahih", and it was mentioned in the Virtues of companions 2/570 #967.

Even Imam Ali (as) didn't even understand the word "Mawla" as leader/caliph.

We see in Sermon 127 of Nahjul Balagha, Imam Ali (as) states:

"O' people. the most rightful of all persons for this matter (namely the caliphate) is he who is most competent among them to maintain it, and he who knows best Allah's commands about it. If any mischief is created by a mischief-monger, he will be called upon to repent. If he refuses. he will be fought. By my life, [1] if the question of Imamah was not to be decided unless all the people were present, then there would be no such case. But those who agreed about it imposed the decision on those who were absent, so much so that he who was present could not dissent and the one who was absent could not choose (any one else). Know that I shall fight two persons - one who claims what is not his and the other who ignores what is obligatory upon him."

So if Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra) usurped his divine position to the caliphate, how come Imam Ali (as) didn't fight? So either Imam Ali (as) is contradicting himself and disobeying Allah's (swt) command to be the first divine caliph, or, there was no such announcement at Ghadeer regarding succession. Allah (swt) says in the Holy Quran: "And Allah gives His sovereignty to whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing [in favor] and Knowing."Quran 2:247. If it was Imam Ali's (as) divine right to rule, Allah (swt) would have made it happen. 

Furthermore, we read in Sermon 92 of Nahjul Balagha:

When people decided to Swear allegiance at Amir al-mu'minin's hand after the murder of Uthman, Ali said:

"Leave me and seek someone else. We are facing a matter which has (several) faces and colors, which neither hearts can stand nor intelligence can accept. Clouds are hovering over the sky, and faces are not discernible. You should know that if I respond to you, I would lead you as I know and would not care about whatever [anyone else] may say. If you leave me, then I am the same as you are. It is possible I would listen to and obey whosoever you make in charge of your affairs. I am better for you as a counselor than as chief."

How can the 12r Shias claim that he was divinely appointed when Imam Ali (as) himself is refusing to be the caliph after people came to him? Would Imam Ali (as) refuse the position which was granted to him by Allah (swt)? Imam Ali (as) was even ready to obey the person put in charge and even stated he would be better as a counselor as opposed to being the leader. Is this what a divine Imam does when people come to him to give him allegiance? 

Additionally, Imam Ali (as) states in Sermon 205 of Nahjul Balagha:

“By Allah, I had no liking for the caliphate nor any interest in government, but you yourselves invited me to it and prepared me for it.”

Imam Ali (as) states that he had no liking for the caliphate and that people forced him into the position. No mention of divine succession anywhere. 

MashAllah, we have a very similar narration in our books where Imam Ali (as) states:

"Ibrahim the son of Abdul-Rahman Ibn Awf narrated to us that (his father) Abdul-Rahman Ibn Awf was with Omar Ibn Al-Khattab when Muhammad Ibn Maslamah broke the sword of Al-Zubayr, Abu Bakr began his speech and apologised to the people and said: "By Allah, I have not been eager for power (Al-Imama/Rulership) in the slightest way and I was not interested in it, neither did I asked Allah in secrecy nor in public for it."

Thereupon the Muhajirs (Sahabah) emrabced him and accepted his excuse and Ali (Ibn Abi Talib) and Al-Zubayr said: "We got only upset for being delayed in the matter of  MASHAWIRAH (Shura/consultation) [at Saqifah], we believe that Abu Bakr is the most deserving of the Caliphate after Rasulullah, peace and blessings be upon him, for he He was the companion of the Messenger of Allah in the cave, THE SECOND OF TWO, and verily, we are well aware of his privilege and greatness. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessing be upon him, had ordered him to lead the prayers while he was alive.” 

-Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihain;  Ibn Kathir in his Al Bidayah wa Al-Nihayah, Vol 5 said:'It's chain is authentic

A similar narration states:

Ali ibn Abi Talib said to Zubair: “(Although) we got angry momentarily at the time of consultation (i.e. Saqifah), we can now see that Abu Bakr is the most deserving of the Caliphate: He was the companion of the Messenger of Allah in the cave. We know of his life and we know that the Messenger of Allah had ordered him to lead the prayers.” And then he (Ali) gave his Baya’ah (to Abu Bakr).


Sharh Nahjul-Balagha; Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed; Vol.1, p.132

Moreover, Imam Ali (as) states in Letter 6 to Muawiyah:

"Verily, the people who payed allegiance to Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, have payed allegiance to me based on the same principles as the allegiance to them. So anyone who was present has no right to go against his pledge of allegience, and anyone who was absent has no right to oppose it. And verily shura (consultation) is only the right of the Muhajirs and the Ansar. So if they decide upon a man and declare him their imam, then it is with the pleasure of Allah. If anyone goes against this decision, then he must be persuaded to follow the rest of the people. If he persists, then fight with him for leaving that which has been accepted by the believers. And Allah shall let him wander misguided and not guide him."

First, we see the people at al-Islam.org make tahreef to this letter by adding the word "supposed" in the third sentence  in an attempt to change the actual meaning of the letter. 

The actual Arabic text with no mention of the word "suppose" anywhere:

إنه بايعني القوم الذين بايعوا أبا بكر وعمر وعثمان ، على ما بايعوهم عليه ، فلم يكن للشاهد أن يختار ولا للغائب أن يرد ، وإنما الشورى للمهاجرين والأنصار ، فإن اجتمعوا على رجل وسموه إماماً كان ذلك لله رضى فإن خرج منهم خارج بطعن أو بدعة ردوه إلى ماخرج منه فإن أبى قاتلوه على اتباعه غير سبيل المؤمنين ، وولاه الله ما تولى


In the letter, Imam Ali (as) is legitimizing himself in front of Muawiya by using Saqifa as a justification. Imam Ali (as) is telling Muawiya not to use double standards because he (as) himself was selected as the caliph by the Muslims in the same process as the previous three caliphs (ra) were. The same must go for Imam Ali (as), because if Imam Ali (as) claimed that the process of Saqifa was invalid, then he is also using double standards by attaining the caliphate the same way as the previous caliphs (ra) and legitimizing himself in front of Muawiya. Furthermore, Imam Ali (as) explicitly states that whomever the Muhajirs and Ansars appointed as the Imam through shura, has the "pleasure of Allah (swt)" and they must be obeyed. 

 In Tabari vol. 3, p 202:
"When Abu Bakr (ra) became Calipah, Abu Sufyan came to Imam Ali (as) and inquired why in his presence the caliphate is being assigned to a junior tribe. He requested Imam Ali (as) to extend his hand for taking allegiance, and if people opposed him, he would post a huge contingent of soldiers and horsemen in Madinah for his support. Imam Ali (as) replied " Abu Sufyan, you are always in pursuit of inflicting harm to Islam. I do not your require counsel and admonition. We have selected Abu Bakr (ra) as calipah finding him most competent.

Lastly, Imam Suyuti narrates in Jami Al Masaneed wal Maraseel and Al Muttaqi Al Hindi in Kanzul Ummal: عن زيد بن عليَ عن أَبِيهِ أَنَّ أَبَا سُفْيَانَ جَاءَ إِلٰى عَلِيَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ فَقَالَ: «يَاعَلِيُّ بَايَعُوا رَجُلاً أَذَلَّ قُرَيْشٍ قَبِيلَةً، وَاللَّهِ لَئِنْ شِئْتَ لَنُصَدعَنَّهَا عَلَيْهِ أَقْطَارَهَا، وَلأَمْلأَنَّهَا عَلَيْهِ خَيْلاً وَرَجَلاً، فَقَالَ لَهُ عَلِيٌّ : يَا أَبَا سُفْيَانَ إِنَّ المُؤمِنِينَ وَإِنْ بَعُدَتْ دِيَارُهُمْ وَأَبْدَانُهُمْ قَوْمٌ نَصَحَةٌ بَعْضُهُمْ لِبَعْضٍ، وَإِنَّ المُنَافِقِينَ وَإِنْ قَرُبَتْ دِيَارُهُمْ وَأَبْدَانُهُمْ قَوْمٌ غَشَشَةٌ بَعْضُهُمْ لِبَعْضٍ، وَإِنَّا قَدْ بَايَعْنَا أَبَا بَكْرٍ وَكَانَ لِذٰلِكَ أَهْلاً

Hadith by Zayd bin Ali, through his father, that Abu Sufyan came to Ali (at the announcement of the Khilafa of Abu bakr) and said: "O Ali, they gave Bay'ah to a man who is from the most humuliated tribe in Quraysh!!. If you allow me we (Bani umawyyah) will destroy the whole thing on them, and I will fill it (Madina Sharif) with Horses and Men (fighters) (to overturn the Bay'ah of Abu Bakr). Ali replied: O Abu Sufyan: " The believers even when their homes and bodies are far apart, but are with each other. And the Munafiqin even when they are close with their bodies and residences, are cheaters (not sincere) to each other, and we have given Bay'ah to Abu Bakr and he is worthy of it".


We in Ahl Al Sunnah follow the sunnah of Imam Ali (as) when he gave bayah to Abu Bakr (ra). 

Taqiyah

We repeatedly see the 12rs always try to cover up their beliefs about taqiyyah by saying its only for critical situations, but within their own books, we see this is not the case:

"Taqiyya is an obligatory duty (farida wajiba) upon us under the governance of the oppressors, thus whoever abandons it has opposed the religion of the Imamiyyah and has separated from it.As-Sadiq (as) said, “Even if I said ‘the one who abandons taqiyya is as the one who abandons salat,’ I would be speaking the truth.”Taqiyya is in all things, until it reaches bloodshed. If it reaches bloodshed then there is no taqiyya. Allah, sublime be His name, has given validity to the appearance of friendship (muwalah) to the deniers (kafirin) in the state of taqiyya. He, `azza wa jalla, has said, “The believers do not take the unbelievers as awliya instead of the believers, then whoever does that has nothing from Allah, except if you have a fear of them.”It is related from as-Sadiq (as) that he was asked about the saying of Allah, `azza wa jalla, “Verily the most noble of you with Allah is the most fearing”. He said “The one from you who most practices taqiyya.”He (as) said, “Mix with the people on the outside, and oppose them on the inside, so long as the affair is a longing.”He (as) said, “Allah have mercy on a command we urge the people towards and it has not made us to be hated by them.”He (as) said, “Visit their sick, attend their funerals, and pray in their masaajid.”He (as) said, “One who prays in the first row with them is as though he had prayed in the first row with the Messenger of Allah (sawas).”He said, “Ostentation (riya’) with the hypocrite in his house is worship, and with the believer, is shirk.”Taqiyya is obligatory; it is not allowed to abandon it until the Qa’im (as) comes forth. Whoso abandons it has entered in the interdiction of Allah, `azza wa jalla, and the interdiction of His Messenger and the Imams, the blessings of Allah be upon them all. "
(Kitab al-Hidaya Shaykh Saduq) 

"He (as) said, “Mix with the people on the outside, and oppose them on the inside, so long as the affair is a longing.”

The use of Taqiyah to cover against their hatred against the Sunni's.


"He (as) said, “Allah have mercy on a command we urge the people towards and it has not made us to be hated by them.”

In using taqiyah to hide their actual beliefs, when debating, they are filled with so much pride, emotion, and nationalism, they feel it's right for them to lie just so you can convert into their school of thought. Ultimately, they want to see you defeated. When they have no academic response, they will use emotion against you in order to achieve this. 

In Addition, we have Khoei's Fatwa stating:

Grand Ayatullah Al Khoei'i Says in reply to a question in one of his books(Sirat al Najat / صراط النجاة):
Question"1245": Is it Possible to Lie or produce Arguments which contain Lies when Debating with a person who Is a Follower of Bida'a (Innovation) and a spreader or Dala'la (Ignorance) If this Lie would Destroy my Opponent's Arguments?
Imam Khoei'i Answers: If it will stop his Falsehood then it is Permissible to do So.

Shia Hadiths

This is a very interesting excerpt I came by today regarding  Shia hadiths. Further convinces me that their hadiths are nothing but pure fabrications on the pure Ahl Al Bayt (as):


 "There is another important point that must be discussed here briefly. A considerable number of traditions are to be found, especially in the earliest Shi‘i collection of hadith, Al-Kafi, which describe the Imams as supernatural human beings. What was the origin of these traditions, and to what extent are the Imams themselves responsible for them? These traditions are reported, as indeed are all Shi‘i traditions, on the authority of one of the Imams, in this case from Al-Baqir and Ja‘far. But were these Imams really the authors of such traditions, which describe their supernatural character? The first thing which must be noted in this connection is that while Al-Baqir and Ja‘far themselves lived in Medina, most of their followers lived in Kufa. This fact brings us to a crucial problem. Kufa had long been a centre of ghulat speculations and activities. Whether ‘Abd Allah bin Saba, to whom the history of the ghulat is traced, was a real personality or not, the name as-Saba’iyya is often used to describe the ghulat in Kufa who believed in the supernatural character of Ali. According to the heresiographers, Ibn Saba was the first to preach the doctrine of waqf (refusal to recognise the death of ‘Ali) and the first to condemn the first two caliphs in addition to ‘Uthman." (Jafri, The Origins and Early Development of Shi‘a Islam, p. 300, Ansariyan Publications, Qum)

Even More:
Al-Kashi narrated in his book Al-Rijal on the authority of Ibn Sinan who said:"Abu Abdullah [Al-Sadiq] said:"Verily we the Ahl Al-Bayt are truthful (Sadiqoon),yet we are not left without the liars who lie about us, thus our truthfulness being ruined in front of the people. The Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was the most truthful of the creation yet Musaylamah [false Prophet] used to lie about him. The commander of the Faithful (عليه السلام) was the most truthful after the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), yet the people used to lie about him and tried to ruin his truthfulness by their slander like the lies of Abdullah Ibn Saba (Allah's curse be upon him). Abu Abdullah Al-Hussein Ibn Ali (عليه السلام) was afflicted with Al-Mukhtar. Abu Abdullah [Al-Sadiq] then mentioned Abu Abdullah Al-Harith Al-Shami and Al-Banan and said:"They used to lie about Ali Ibn Al-Hussein [Al-Sajjad] عليه السلام , then he mentioned Al-Mughayrah Ibn Saeed and Abu Al-Khattab and Muhammar and Bashaar Al-Ash'ari and Hamzah Al-Yazidi and Sa'ib Al-Hindi - i.e. his companions - and said:

"Allah's curse be upon them! We are not left without the liars who lie about us - Allah is sufficient for us and he will let every liar taste the heat of the iron [hellfire]".

[Rijal Al-Kishi, page 257, 258]

Further, 

ويقول شيخ الطائفة الطوسي في تهذيبه: إن أحاديث أصحابنا فيها من الاختلاف والتباين والمنافاة والتضاد حتى لا يكاد يتفق خبر إلا وبإزائه ما يضاده، ولا يسلم حديث إلا وفي مقابلته ما ينافيه حتي جعل مخالفونا ذلك من أعظم الطعون على مذهبنا وتطرقوا بذلك إلى إبطال معتقدنا، إلى أن قال: أنه بسبب ذلك رجع جماعة عن اعتقاد الحق ومنهم أبوالحسين الهاروني العلوي حيث كان يعتقد الحق ويدين بالإمامة فرجع عنها لما إلتبس عليه الأمر في اختلاف الأحاديث وترك المذهب ودان بغيره لما لم يتبين له وجوه المعاني فيها، وهذا يدل على أنه دخل فيه على غير بصيرة واعتقد المذهب من جهة التقليد

And the Shaykh of the sect (Al-Ta’efa/Shiism) says in his Tahtheeb:

And among the Hadiths (narrated) by our companions (Shia scholars/companions of the Imams) are so many disparities, contrast, contravening and contradictions that you will not find a single report that we agree upon which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and not a single Hadith is safe from another which denies it. These (contradictions) are to such an extent that our opponents (the Muslims/Ahl Al-Sunnah) have used it as the biggest accusation/attack against our school and as a proof for the falsehood of our creed.

(Until he said): ‘… and this is why a number (of Shias) have left the true creed and amongst them are the likes of Abu Al-Hassan Al-Harouni Al-Alawi, who used to be on the true creed, upon the creed of Imamah (Imamate), but he turned away from it when confusion overtook him due to the issue of the contradicting Hadiths. So he left the school (of Shiism) and attached himself to another (school), as he could not grasp the different understanding (of our text) and this is an indication that the did not embraced it (Shiism) without insight, rather based on Taqleed.


Source: Tahtheeb Al-Ahkam 1/8 by sheikh of the sect al Tusi.

Here's an excellent video on the rijal of the 12r Shia:

Just goes to show you where they derive their narrations from.