A Further Comment on Why 'The Qur'an and The Sunnah ' Why Not 'The Qur'an and The Ahl al-Bayet '? I am already well aware of your hostility toward Ahlul Bait (as). This is typical of the wahabi / salafi , which take their roots from Bani Ummaya 's hatred of Ahlul Bait (as). If you read Qur'an you will find their special status indicated in Qur'an 33:33 (I already anticipate you telling me this in mention of the wives of the Prophet, but if you read the Arabic you will see the gender change in it, in addition to the well known misadventures of some of the wives such as Aisha , instigator of the first civil war in Islam) in which they purified with a thorough purification. Also Qur'an 42:23 in which their love is required of us, and finally Qur'an 5:55. All commentators among the Sunni agree that the person who bowed down in prayer while giving alms to the poor was Imam Ali (as). You and your like are responsible for so much fitna , hatred, and misinformation about Ahlul Bait (as) it is nauseating. If you are true to your name, somewhat presumptuous in my opinion, you will investigate the above. In addition, when making salawat on the Prophet (saawaws) if you indeed claim to follow the sunnah , you will do as the Prophet (s) instructed, which is to not address him in short. When asked by his companinions what that was, he said to say peace be upon Muhammad only. He instructed us to nclude family in salawat . I can give you the references in Sahih Bukhari , but alas I forgot you are not a believer in " hadith " yet claim to follow the sunnah of the Prophet (s). How convenient!! Reply I have always wondered why, in our discussions, do we tend to lose our cool and become incited by differences of opinions. Whereas, if it was purely a matter of searching for the truth, a difference in opinion should only have encouraged us to review our own opinions, rather than provoke us. In my opinion, the reason is that we, generally do not go through the process of 'understanding'. We only follow what has previously been (presumably) understood by our ancestors. Thus, in our minds, the understanding of our ancestors is no longer, merely, an 'understanding' with a chance that it may be incorrect, but is as authentic as the Qur'an itself (that is, only if we believe the Qur'an to be authentic at all). Nevertheless, ignoring your baseless comments, I would only like to give my opinion and the basis of that opinion, regarding the verses of the Qur'an and the narratives that you have cited. You state: If you read Qur'an you will find their special status indicated in Qur'an 33:33... in which they purified with a thorough purification. The word ' Ahl ' in the Arabic language is a masculine word. It is because of this reason that the pronouns used for the phrase " Ahl al-Bayet " are masculine. Such gender is not real but is actually a linguistic gender in its nature. Thus, the masculine gender of the pronouns used for the phrase ' Ahl al-Bayet ' do not, in any way, hinder interpreting the phrase for 'the wives of the Prophet (pbuh) - the revered mothers of the believers. Just take a look at the verse under consideration, in its proper context. Al-Ahzaab 33: 28 - 34 reads as follows: O Prophet, say to your wives: If you seek the life of this world and its pleasures, come I shall make provision for you and release you in the best of manners. But if you seek [the pleasures of] God and His apostle and the [blessings of the] life hereafter, know that God has prepared a great reward for those among you who act in the best of manners. O wives of the Prophet, those who are guilty of clear lewdness, from among you, shall be doubly punished. That is extremely easy for God. But those who are obedient to God and His messenger, from among you, and do good deeds, We shall doubly reward her and for her We have made a rich provision. O wives of the Prophet, you are not like other women. If you fear God, then do not be overly complacent in your speech [with others], lest a flame of desire may light in the heart of the lecherous. And speak [to them] discreetly. And stay in your houses and do not display your adornments as was done in the days of ignorance, of old. And establish regular prayer and pay Zaka'h and obey Allah and His messenger. O household [of the Prophet] , God only desires to remove all uncleanness from you and to completely purify you. And, [O wives of the Prophet,] adhere to the remembrance of what is being recited in your dwellings from the signs [or verses] of God and His wisdom. Indeed, God is fully aware of even the minutest. Any one can see that the implication of the underlined phrase 'household' (" Ahl al-Bayet " in Arabic) in the above context can only be the 'wives of the Prophet'. When all the directives surrounding the phrase are meant only for the wives of the Prophet, how could the phrase 'household of the Prophet', which is actually a part of a verse, which describes the reason and the wisdom of the directives that precede and succeed it, be taken to imply anyone besides the wives. Thus, it is quite obvious that the phrase ' Ahl al-Bayet ' in the cited verses is meant only for the wives of the Prophet. You further write: Also Qur'an 42:23 in which their love is required of us, and finally Qur'an 5:55. Let us first take Al-Shooraa 42: 23. The verse reads as: Such is God's promise to His servants, who believe and do good deeds. Say: For this I demand of you no recompense. I ask you only to love the kindred. He that does a good deed shall be repaid many times over. God is forgiving and bountiful in His rewards. I really do not know what exactly do you intend to prove from this verse. Nevertheless, it is quite obvious that it has absolutely nothing to do with the definition of the ' Ahl al-Bayet ' or their status with reference to being a source of Islam. Al-Maaidah 5: 55 reads as: Indeed, your true friends are only Allah, His Prophet and those who have believed, who establish regular prayer, pay Zaka'h and those who remain bowed [to God's will]. Once again, it should be quite clear for the reader that the verse has absolutely nothing to do with the definition of the phrase ' Ahl al-Bayet ' or their position as a source of Islam. Nevertheless, what our absolutely 'neutral' friend is trying to prove is that there is a narrative according to which, the qualities mentioned in this verse are actually those of Ali (ra). I have absolutely no doubt that Ali (ra) was indeed one of the many companions of the Prophet (pbuh), who fulfilled the qualities mentioned in the cited verse. However, we should not forget that the point under discussion is not whether Ali (ra) is amongst those mentioned in the verse. On the contrary, the point actually is whether the ' Ahl al-Bayet ' of the Prophet (pbuh) are a source of Islam or not. Obviously, the cited verse is not even remotely related with the point under debate. The above discussion clearly shows that our 'neutral' friend has based his opinion regarding the sources of Islam purely on narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh). The opinion has absolutely no basis in the Qur'an. In fact, our friend had stated in his first letter: I am wondering if you are aware of the famous hadith al-thaqalyn (two weighty things), which the Prophet (saawaws) said he left for us on his last pilgrimage. He clearly and specifically said "Qur'an and Ahlul Bait ." He NEVER said Qur'an and Sunnah . This hadith is present in ONLY ONE book ( al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim ), has ONLY ONE narrator and is regarded as WEAK by the criteria of Bukhari and Muslim . It is NOT present in ANY of the Sahih Sittah . You are welcome to verify this. The "Quran/ Ahlul Bait " version is present in 5/6 Sahih Sittah and its tawatur and isnad is not questioned. Of course, all Muslims must follow the sunnah , but the Prophet (s) clearly tells us here who carries it. The above statements clearly imply the fact that the opinion, which holds the ' Ahl al-Bayet ' to be a source of Islam is not based on the Qur'an, but tries to find support from narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) - i.e. Hadith . Thus, it would seem pertinent that the particular narrative ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), termed as ' Hadith al-thaqalayn ' by our 'neutral' friend should be briefly analyzed, before any decisions are derived from it. In the more accepted compilations of narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), the ' Hadith al-Thaqalayn ' has been reported by Muslim , Tirmidhi , Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and Daarimiy . Another important aspect to note about the ' Hadith al-Thaqalayn ' is that it has been narrated in two different versions. In one of these versions, the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: 'I am going to leave in you two heavy burdens [1] . The first of them is the Book of Allah in it is the true guidance and the light. Therefore, hold fast to it'. Then he [i.e. the Prophet (pbuh)] prompted and induced the Muslims to adhere to the Book of God. Then he said: 'And my household. I remind you of God in matters relating to my household. I remind you of God in matters relating to my household. I remind you of God in matters relating to my household [2] .' This version has been reported (with very minor variations, if any) by Muslim , Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Daarimiy . An important thing to note about the words ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) in this version is that it does not place the ' Ahl al-Bayet ' at the level of being a source of Islam. It only directs the Muslims to refrain from adopting an uncalled for attitude toward them. Obviously, the words: "I remind you of God, in matters relating to my household", can in no way be construed to imply that the Prophet intended to give his household the position of the source of Islam, parallel to that of the Qur'an. Thus, this version, obviously, is not of much use for those who would like to establish that the two sources of Islam are the Qur'an and the ' Ahl al-Bayet '. In the second version of the ' Hadith al-Thaqalayn ', the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said: I have left in you something, which if you strictly adhere to, you shall never go astray - The book of God and my progeny - i.e. my Ahl al-Bayet . This version, with some variation has been narrated by Tirmidhi and Ahmad ibn Hanbal . Following are the chain of narrators of this version of the narrative: The first chain of narrators, as reported by Tirmidhi , includes Nasr ibn Abd al-Rahmaan al-Koofi - Zayed ibn al-Hasan al-Anmaatiy - Ja`fer ibn Mohammed - Mohammed ibn Ali ibn Hussain ... The second person in the chain is Zayed ibn al-Hasan . Zahabiy in his book " Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal " has quoted Abu Haatim as saying that Zayed is ' Munkir al-Hadith ' - i.e. Zayed narrates repudiated and abominable narratives. Ibn Hajar has considered him to be Dha`eef - i.e. a weak or an unreliable narrator ( Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb ). Even Tirmidhi , who has reported the said narrative, does not consider it to be ' Sahih '. On the contrary, Tirmidhi , in his comments says that this narrative is ' Hasan ' (which is less than ' Sahih ') and is Ghareeb - i.e. strange in its content and not widely recognized. The second chain of narrators, as reported in Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal is: Al-Aswad ibn `aamir - Shareek ibn Abd Allah ibn Abi Shareek - Al-Rakeen ibn al-Rabiy` -- Al-Qaasim ibn Hassaan - Zayed ibn Thaabit ... The second person in this chain is Shareek ibn Abd Allah ibn Abi Shareek . Yahya ibn Sa`eed has considered him 'extremely unreliable' ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). Mohammed ibn Yahya says that his father said: 'I have noticed confusion in Shareek' s principles' ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). Abd al-Jabbaar ibn Mohammed says that once he asked Yahya ibn Sa`eed whether Shareek had become confused in his last days, to which Yahya ibn Sa`eed replied: "He (i.e. Shareek ) was always confused" ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). Ibn al-Mubaarak says: 'Narratives of Shareek are worthless' ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). Juzjaaniy says: '[ Shareek had a] faulty memory, [was] confused [in] narrating, [was] prejudiced' ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). Ibraheem ibn Sa`eed al-Jauhariy says: ' Shareek committed mistakes in four hundred narratives' ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). Ibn Mu`een says: When Shareek' s narratives contradict with someone else's, the other person is preferable to me' ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). The fourth person in this chain is Al-Qaasim ibn Hassaan . Bukhari says: 'His narratives are Munkar (i.e. repudiated and abominable) and nothing is known about him' ( Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ). Ibn al-Qattaan says: 'nothing is known about him' ( Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb ). The third chain of narrators as reported in Tirmidhi is: Ali ibn al-Munzir al-Koofiy - Mohammed ibn Fudhayl - Al-A`mash -- `Atiyyah - Abu Sa`eed . The first and the second narrator in this chain i.e. Ali ibn al-Munzir al-Koofiy and Mohammed ibn Fudhayl are both known to be Shi`ahs (i.e. Shiites). It is an established principle of most of the scholars of Hadith that if the content of a narrative is peculiar to a particular school of thought (as is the case in this narrative), then such a narrative would not be acceptable, if it is narrated by a person who ascribes to such a school ( Al-Kifaayah fi `ilm al-Riwaayah ). Besides this, Mohammed ibn Fudhayl is also criticized by Ibn al-Mubarak as not being liked by his contemporaries. ( Dhu`afaa al-`Uqayliy ). Moreover, Mohammed ibn Sa`d has said that 'his narratives are not considered by many to evidence a true saying of the Prophet (pbuh)' ( Siyar A`laam al-Nubalaa ). The fourth narrator in this chain is `Atiyyah ibn Sa`d . Yahya ibn Mu`een considers him to be dha`eef - i.e. unreliable ( Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa ). Ahmad ibn Hanbal says that he incorrectly ascribes narratives that he hears from al-Kalabiy to Abu Sa`eed ( Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa ). The same thing is reported by Ibn Hibbaan ( Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb ). Ahmad ibn Hanbal says that Sufiyaan al-Thauriy considered him unreliable ( Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa ). Ibn Hajar says that he commits a lot of mistakes ( Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb ). Al-Nasaaiy and ibn Hibbaan consider him to be unreliable ( Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb ). Abu Dawood says: 'He cannot be trusted' ( Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb ). Besides these three chains, all other chains of narration of this version of the narrative include one or more of those narrators who have been strongly criticized by scholars of Hadith (cited above). In view of the cited criticism on the chain of narrators of this narrative, it is obvious that no one can safely ascribe this saying to the Prophet (pbuh). It is, therefore, very respectfully submitted to our 'neutral' friend to kindly provide the chain of narrators, which in his opinion is clear of criticism and on the basis of which, this narrative can safely be ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh). It gives me great pain to write on a topic, which entails criticism on a point of view ascribed to by a Muslim group. Nevertheless, it seems that however hard one may try to remain aloof of such topics there are certain 'neutral' minds that won't let you avoid these topics. May the Almighty guide us to the path of His liking. The Learner [1] Implying, in my opinion, two heavy responsibilities. [2] The phrase: "I remind you of God in matters relating to my household", implies that the Muslims should not forsake them and should always be respectful toward them. The repetition of the directive is to stress its importance.