We often see each side quoting dha’if reports from even his own sources...

We often see each side quoting dha’if reports from even his own sources, as well as from those of the opposing party, to drive home his weak points! In most cases, no original research is ever done on the topic by either side. Rather, each of them merely copy-pastes heavily from websites and parrots statements by others. In the end, nothing useful is achieved from the debate. On a lot of occasions, the discussion turns into a cursing contest; and the party with the vilest tongue declares victory.

It is our absolute conviction that whatever is worth doing at all, is worth doing best. It is more advisable for pseudo-debaters to take time to train themselves in the necessary skills – academic and emotional – needed for a real debate before (re-)taking the podiums. The damage and evil caused by the pseudo-debates outweigh any benefits that might come from them. Let us take the question of “Ibn Saba” as a case study for the ten rules above.

Our brothers from the Ahl al-Sunnah always make the following claims about him: He was a descendant of Saba, and belonged to one of the Sabai tribes. He was a black Arab with a black slave mother. He was a Jew from Sana in Yemen. He accepted Islam during the khilafah of ‘Uthman b. ‘Affan. He stirred up the public, especially the Egyptians, against ‘Uthman and caused the latter’s bloody overthrow.

He was the first to claim that ‘Ali, ‘alaihi al-salam , was the designated successor of the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi . He was the first to proclaim belief in al-raj’ah – that is, that the return to this world after death by certain dead people. He was the first to publicly criticize or revile Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. He was popularly called Ibn al-Sawda – son of the black mother.

Imam ‘Ali was frustrated with him, and abused him by calling him “the black container” and also banished him to al-Madain. Amir al-Muminin ‘Ali b. Abi Talib saw it as legitimate to execute him for reviling Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and would have done so had people not talked him out of the decision. ‘Ali burnt him (i.e. Ibn Saba) and his followers alive for calling him (i.e. ‘Ali) Allah.

Since it is the Sunni in any debate who makes these claims, the onus is on him to provide reliably transmitted evidence for each and every point. The Shi’i – who denies them – has no initial obligation or responsibility to bring any evidence to refute them[^1]. Normally, the question is: who exactly is the Sunni trying to convince on these matters?