The conclusion drawn by Ansar.org was as follows:
CONCLUSION
From this discussion the following conclusions may be drawn:
Firstly,
the context of the verse is general, and gives no cause for believing it to refer to any specific person.
Secondly,
the incident of the beggar is recorded in reports narrated from four different Sahabah. Not a single one of those four reports is free from serious defects in the chains of narration. They are further contradicted by other narrations which are more reliable.
Thirdly,
narrations from the Tabi’in suffer from a common defect, in that the names of the sources who relate the incident are not disclosed. Some of them suffer from the further defect of untrustworthy narrators. They are contradicted by a report in which Imam Muhammad al-Baqir himself attests to the fact that the verse is general and unrestricted in meaning.
The Nasibi obviously doesn’t have much intellect and certainly cannot argue any point with in a decent manner.
Firstly a tradition that he claims has four narrators and seven isnad is in fact a Mutawatir tradition and not Dha’eef (weak). The Nasibi has accepted that there are at least four narrators and seven isnad. As we have now proven that this is not true, there are ten companions who have narrated this narration and with several insad. This makes the narration not only Mutawatir but a Sahih narration without a shadow of a doubt.
For the sake of an argument let’s accept that this narration is weak (Dha’eef) and unacceptable on the basis that it only has four narrators and seven isnad. We are more then pleased to draw your attention to the tradition that the Nasibi always recall as one of Omar’s great merits. The Hadeeth is that the holy Prophet (pbuh) said: “if there were a prophet after me, it would have been Omar” (Tirmidhi, Volume 2 page 754). Let’s now, examine and analyze this narration and tradition itself.
This Hadeeth has been mentioned in Sunan Tirmidhi but surprisingly, no one from rest of the book of ‘Saha Sitta’ compilers (the six canonical authentic Sunni works) recorded it. The narrator of this tradition is Ukba bin Amir, who is the sole narrator of what is just a single chain of narration.
Taking Ansar.Orgs argument on board, if a tradition with four narrators and seven chains is deemed weak, what should be their stance towards a narration that only has one narrator and one chain? If the tradition about Hadhrath Ali [as] is weak then this tradition about Hadhrath Omar should not even be worth looking at.
We have seen that some Sunni commentators evidenced the sole reason behind the revelation was that descended in honour of Ali bin Abi Talib [as]. Whilst others offered different interpretations of this verse, they did not negate the possibility that it was specifically revealed for Ali bin Abi Talib [as] unlike the filthy attempt of Ansar.org.
We submitted as evidence, numerous narrations that state that the verse “Inna ma walliyo kumullah” was revealed in honour of Hadhrath Ali [as]. Ansar.Org lied by claiming that this incident can only be attributed to four narrators and seven chains (isnaad) and that are all weak in Isnad. We have narrated this event from thirty one narrators, among those the Sahaba are:
While the Tabayeen and Taba Tabyeen who testified for the verse 5:55 includes:
With all the sources we cited uptil now, it is clear that the fact that the verse under discussion was revealed in favour of Ali bin Abi Talib [as] is Mutawati (successive). Let us cite the definition of Mutwatir form of hadith from Sunni sources. Imam Jalaluddin Suyti records in ‘Tadrib al-Rawi’ Volume 2 page 174:
Al-Estakhari said: ‘The minimum limit is ten narrators and that is the chosen view’
Modern day Sunni scholar and the cheif of Islamic research center in Syria, Dr. Muhammad Habash (born in 1962) records in Sharh al-Umdah, Volume 1 page 44:
“The ‘Mutwatir’ is what has been narrated by ten or more”
Modern day Sunni scholar Ibrahim Abdulmuqtader states in Manzilat al-Sunnah, page 11:
“To be narrated in every generation (tabaqa) a large number reach to Tawatur level, there is disagreement about the minimum number of the many, the chosen are ten persons or nine, which is that the tradition narrated by nine of the Sahaba and from them nine of Tabyeen and from them nine of their followers and so on.”
Once we have proven that the reason for the revelation of the verse 5:55 is Mutawatir, it should be kept in mind that according to Sunni sources there is no need to check the authenticity of the narrators in a chain, once a tradition has been provenas Mutawatir. Despite this,l we have provided an analysis of diffenret narrators in some of the chains and have proved these chains as authentic and acceptable ones. Imam of Ahle Sunnah Ibn Hajar Asqalani records ‘Nuzhat al-Nadhar’ page 10:
“The Mutwatir do not require to have their narrators checked, verily one must work with it without checking”
Sunni scholar and a teacher of university of Makka Allamah Ahmad bin Umar bin Salim records in Al-Muqtareb fi Bayan al-Mutareb, page 10:
“The Tawatur do not require checking of narrators, verily one must work with it without checking because it is acceptable”
Present day Salafi scholar and one of the students of Shaykh Bin Baz namely Abdulkarim al-Khudhair (born in 1374 H) records in Tahqiq al-Raghba fi Tawdih al-Nukhba, page 44:
The Mutwatir: Traditions that should be believed because they are absolutely true, there is hence no need to check through its narrators”
We read the aspect of a Mutawatir tradition in Tadrib al-Rawi by Jalaluddin Seuti, Volume 2 page 173:
“Hence one must work with it without checking the narrators.”
Although there remains little opportunity to reject the tradition as Mutawatir, since we are living a world inundated with stubborn Nawasib determined to reject any merit of Ahlulbayt [as] we shall scupper their efforts further. We have provided a number of chains, even if Nawasib deem them all weak, we will argue that according to the Sunni school, if weak incidents are narrated with multiple chains, they are deemed “Hasan le Ghayrhu” that are acceptable and correct traditions. One of the most beloved scholars of Salafies Ibn Uthaimin records in Sharh al-Manduma al-Bayqunya, page 26;
Hasan le Ghayreh: Is the weak (tradition) if they carry multiple chains, that support each other, then they are deemed “Hasan le Ghayreh”, why?
Because if we look at each chain separately, it will not reach to ‘the level of being ‘Hasan’ but by gathering all the chains with each other, they become ‘Hasan’.
We read in Muqadima fi Usool al-Hadith by Abdul Haq al-Dehlawi, page 59:
Hasan le Ghayreh: Is the weak with multiple chains and if weak reports support each other, it will be called “Hasan le Ghayreh”
The followers of Muawiyah are desperate to cover up the Wilayah of Imam Ali [as] from the Sunni mindset. Alhamdolillah they will never succeed in doing this, the divine authority bestowed Imam Ali [as] is just that, a divine one, wherein our Imam was crowned as Master over the believers, for giving zakat whilst submitting to his Creator (swt). That is why Surah Maida verse 55 descended and the Shi’a accordingly deem him [as] the Imam with the mandate to rule the Ummah after Rasulullah (s). This fact is recorded in Muttawatir narrations in Sunni sources. Rather than run away from this reality, would in not better for sincere Sunnis to question the doctrine of man made imamah that has no basis from the Qur’an or Sunnah of Muhammad (s). Would it not be better to take a position in that now, before it is too late?