The verse that Shias quote has purity and Rijs. Now, we know from the alleged Tafsir of Ahlulbayt that was attributed to them is that Rijs means doubt. So it has nothing to do with infallibility. Rather, it is a matter of having one’s doubts removed.(A reminder that it is forbidden according to Shiasm for one to dismiss the specific interpretation of the Imam by turning a specific meaning into a general one.) Ja’far Al-Sadiq explains, “Al-Rijs means doubts, I swear by Allah that we never doubt in our Lord.” The narration can be found in Al-Kafi. It is the first hadith in the chapter entitled: The Chapter of the Appointment by Allah and His Messenger of the Imams (as) One by One. The narration was graded as authentic by Al-Majlisi, Al-Khoei, and Al-Bahbudi. (This is the equivalent of having the narration in the Sahihayn). Now, the only wording that refers to infallibility is "purify you". Allah سبحانه وتعالى says in the Qur'an: وَسَيُجَنَّبُهَا ٱلْأَتْقَى ١٧ ٱلَّذِى يُؤْتِى مَالَهُۥ يَتَزَكَّىٰ ١٨ وَمَا لِأَحَدٍ عِندَهُۥ مِن نِّعْمَةٍۢ تُجْزَىٰٓ ١٩ إِلَّا ٱبْتِغَآءَ وجْهِ رَبِّهِ ٱلْأَعْلىٰ ٢٠ وَلَسَوْفَ يَرْضَىٰ ٢١ And Al-Muttaqûn will be far removed from it (Hell). He who spends his wealth for increase in self-purification, And who has (in mind) no favour from anyone to be paid back, Except to seek the Countenance of his Lord, the Most High. He surely will be pleased (when he enters Paradise). [Surah al-Layl 92:17-21] According to Ahlus-Sunnah, ٱلْأَتْقَى refers to Abu Bakr and was revealed regarding him whereas the Shi'a say this refers to Ali. Now for some context: This is a Makki surah, and Ali during this time was poor, so he did not have wealth to spend. During the time of Makkah, the Prophet took Ali into his home, so he did have a dunyawi favor from the Prophet which could be paid back, whereas Abu Bakr had no dunyawi favor from the Prophet but rather only the favor of deen. How does Allah describe الأتقى here? they give their wealth to purify themself & they don't have a favor from anyone to be paid back So how would this ayah fit for Ali, who was not wealthy during this time & had a wordly favor from Rasoolullah that could be paid back? And if it does not fit for Ali, the only other option would be Abu Bakr- Allah would be describing him with Taqwa and a promise to save him for Hellfire. Would these 5 small ayat from Juz Amma disprove Tashayu?

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 عليك نووور يا بطل و المصيبة أنهم ينادونه بالأستاذ ويصفونه بالمفكر 😂😂😂😂😂

Yes why don't Shias follow Ahlulbayt??

The concept of holding onto Ahl Al-Bayt may seem synonymous with Shiasm, yet, the claim sometimes seems like nothing more than a marketing gimmick to reel Sunnis in. According to the Shia understanding of the narration, one is supposed to hold onto the Twelve Imams from Ahl Al-Bayt. However, there is nothing in the narration that limits it to those Twelve. If that was the intended purpose of the Prophet - peace be upon him - , he would have said, “Hold onto the Imams from Ahl Al-Albayt,” or perhaps, “hold onto the twelve from my Ahl Al-Bayt,” instead. Besides, it is not possible for one to follow the Twelve Imams due to their countless contradictions due to taqiyyah. It should be known that Ahl Al-Sunnah do not believe that notable scholars like Al-Baqir and Al-Sadiq ever practiced taqiyyah, and that they were god-fearing men that would rather die before teaching their followers false rulings. Keep in mind that we are led to believe that the proper understanding of the narration is to hold onto Ahl Al-Bayt as a whole, instead of limiting Ahl Al-Bayt to a small group. It should come as no surprise that the Sunnis abide by this teaching. Not only do Sunnis take knowledge from Ali bin Abi Talib, Al-Hassan, Al-Hussain, Zain Al-Abideen, Al-Baqir, Al-Sadiq, Al-Kathim, etc, but they took knowledge from all the scholars of Ahl Al-Bayt. Al-Hakim Al-Nisapuri (Ma’rifat Uloom Al-Hadith p. 221) said, “There are authentic narrations from the children of the Prophet - peace be upon him - , from Fatima, Al-Hassan, Al-Husain, Al-Hassan bin Al-Hassan bin Ali, Abdullah, Hassan, Ali, and Zayd bin Al-Hassan bin Al-Husain bin Ali, Amr bin Al-Hassan bin Ali, Muhammad bin Amr bin Hassan bin Ali, Al-Hassan bin Zayd bin Hassan bin Ali, Musa bin Abdullah bin Al-Hassan bin Al-Hassan, Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Al-Hassan bin Al-Hassan bin Ali, Ali bin al Husain bin Ali, Fatima bint Al-Husain bin Ali, Muhammad, Abdullah, Zayd, Omar, and Al-Husain bin Ali bin Al-Husain, Jafar bin Muhammad bin Ali, and Al-Hussein bin Zayd bin Ali are those that have authentic narrations, and we have over two hundred narrators from Ahl Al-Bayt both men and women.” Sunnis were also known to have taken knowledge from the scholars of Ahl Al-Bayt that happened to be scholars from the Hanafi (108 scholars), Maliki (168 scholars), Shafi’ee (200 scholars), and Hanbali (143 scholars) schools of fiqh. Note: The full list and biographies of these scholars can be obtained in the following works: A’alam Al-Hanafiyyah min Ahl Al-Bayt by Wa’el bin Mohammad Al-Hanbali, A’alam Al-Malikiyya min Ahl Al-Bayt by Rizq Mohammad Abdul-Haleem, A’alam Al-Shafi’eeya min Ahl Al-Bayt by Bassam Abdul-Kareem Al-Hamzawi, and A’alam Al-Hanabila min Ahl Al-Bayt by Mohammad Yusuf Al-Muzaini. In total, Ahl Al-Sunnah took knowledge from over eight-hundred­ members of Ahl Al-Bayt.

*It is a disappointment that the mathhab that has prided itself on championing the thaqalain, have failed to uphold the greater of the two; the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). As well as the minor thiql (as Sunnis have more narrations from Ahlulbayt).* Where is the Mushaf which the Imams narrate and transmit from each other? Where is the chain of: Al-‘Askari from the way of Al-Hadi from Al- Jawad from Al-Ridaa form Al-Kazim from Al-Sadiq from Al-Baqir from Zayn Al-‘Abideen from Al-Husien (the grandson of the Prophet) or Al-Hasan (the grandson of the Prophet) from Ali [May Allah be pleased with them all]? *Did the students of these Imams narrate everything from them except the Quran?* *If the Companions were Apostates, especially the famous ones from among them, and they were the ones that transmitted the Quran: How can a Shi’ah trust the narration of those who he believe are Apostates? This Quran that is between our hands today, is from the narration of those companions of the Prophet [May Blessings of Allah and Peace be upon him and his household].* The difference between Sunni and Shia is that our scholars unanimously agree that the Quran is not distorted you can use as many weak hadith as you want. *You won't hear any ridiculous scholars and personalities of Sunni Islam mouthing off these ridiculous things like Shias do despite the Shias being only 10% and Sunnis being majority. You'd think since there are more Sunnis you'd find more ridiculous claims like this coming from Sunnis but it is opposite.* For that reason you will find that *the scholars of Ahl Al-Sunnah are strict in this matter, and say that whoever says that the Quran is Muharaf is a Kaffir.* and they clearly declare such a thing based on what Allah the Exalted said: {Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian}Hijr 15:9 Any sunni who believes that a part of Qur'an has been lost due to goats eating it or men changing it, is a kafir. There is no difference of opinion on this in sunni Islam. No buts no ifs. Your misunderstanding does not change our stance. Aisha (ra) did not believe in tahreef. Stop putting your own view on the hadith. You are just seeing what you want to see. It wouldn't have mattered if goats ate it because people memorise the Qur'an. What you're basically going to find is that this will likely lead into the topic of abrogation and abrogation was completed whilst the Prophet (pbuh) was alive. Islamqa covers this very well. *Shias might attempt to steal the chains in the Sunni books and attribute them to themselves, which is pathetic and shows the weakness of their way.* `Asim bin abi al-Nujoud, Hafs bin Sulayman and Hamzah al-Zayyat are all great Imams of Ahlul-Sunnah, the Twelvers cannot prove that they were Rafidhi imami Shia neither through their books or ours. If they were to prove that they were Shia, the Shia of the time were Sunni in their worship, and even if they try their best to prove that they were Rafidhah, then even the Imamiyyah at the time had different sects all of them enemies who make Takfeer on each-other. By consensus`Asim and Hafs are two great Imams of Qira’at. The weakness attributed to Hafs is in regards to his skills as narrator, and the accusation of him being a liar is a baseless exaggeration. And if true still doesn’t strengthen Shia’s view. The rules for the authentication of a narrator in a Hadithi chain are different than the rules for the authentication of a Qur’ani recitation. Hundreds of narrations from their infallibles prove that the followers of Ibn Saba claim distortion. *and the statement that the chains of transmission of these narrations are weak cannot be accepted for reasons such as:* First: The Shiites do not consider the chains of transmission and their lim il rijjal (hadeeth sciences) is very inconsistent Second: The narrations of distortion are abundant (mutawatir) according to them, and if this were the case, their chain of transmission should not be of concern Third: There are Shiite scholars who authenticated the chains of narrations of Hadiths regarding distortion Fourth: Whoever rejects the many narrations about distortion, which amount to nearly two thousand narrations, is obligated to reject the narrations of the Imamate and the narrations of the rajah, the bidaa, and the infallibility, because as their their scholar, Yusuf Al-Bahrani, said: If these narrations aren’t accepted (i.e. the narrations of distortion), despite their abundance and spread, it would be possible to reject to the other narrations related to the religion, since the principles are one, as are the chains, narrators, sheikhs, and transmission. M. Baqir al-Majlisi also said that Shia narrations that speak of the corruption and distortion of the very text of the Qur’an area at the same level as narrations that support the Shia belief in Imamah. There are over 1000 [Shia] Hadiths confirming speaking of the corruption of the Qur’an. If the Hadiths of Tahrif in Shia books are rejected by sensible Shias, then they are no longer in any position to object why their entire collections of Hadiths should be rejected from A-Z as the same “liars” who attributed the “lie” of the distortion of the Qur’an to the Ahl al-Bayt, narrated also others “lies and exaggerations” [Imamah, Wilayah, ‘Ismah, Ghuluw etc.]. The narrations of distortion that the Shiites have are narrated from the twelve imams who believe in their infallibility, while all those who narrate the absence of distortion from him are the scholars, not the imams. They do not narrate from the imams, and not a single narration says that there is no distortion. Rather, they transmit two thousand narrations from the imams that say there is distortion, and those from whom they quote that there is no distortion are scholars who can aren’t infallible. As for the infallible ones, they quoted from them the statement of distortion, so the Shiites are required to take the words of the infallible ones and not the words of others. Nimat Allah Al-Jazairi said: The narrations that indicate distortion exceed two thousand hadiths. Then he said: He did not come across a single hadith that said otherwise. Yusuf Al-Bahrani said: However, there is no opposition to this narration, as I know, other than a mere claim that is devoid of evidence and does not go beyond mere gossip. All shias should either follow their infallibles or leave this evil religion. here is a list of references of Shia scholars: Fihrist of shia scholars and their believe in tahrif of Quran

@@Angelo-Rules Your argument is facile one. When the Prophet said I leave behind Quran and Ahl Bait AS as caliphs. And in another narration that there will be twelve caliphs after me it should have been accepted. But as is the tradition with Ahlul Sunnah they never accept the truth and make their own qiyas and guesswork. No one wants to reel in Ahlul nawasib wal Jamaat. It stayed a deviant sect and will remain one.

@@thecominglightofgood583 there is not a single narration where he says "as caliphs". Also only two of Ahlulbayt where caliphs

ستقف بين يدي الله بما كتبته ..

@@Medo0o0o-s1u هذا هو الظاهر لنا والباطن عند الله وهم شر البليه