05-20-2004, 05:33 AM
Just because a hadith is "sahih" doesn't mean it is undeniably true. This is why I contend that there is still room for debate and discussion regarding what "Islam" is. Just look at the Sunni schools of law - they may agree on what all sahih ahadith are (I'm not certain if they do or don't), but they don't all implement the same rules and they don't all interpret the traditions in the same ways.
As for the prayer issue, sunni and shia muslims rely on very different bodies of tradition to establish law and belief systems (as you've already pointed out). Jafar asSadiq and Ali ibn Abi Talib are very frequently involved in the chain of transmission, and the hadith regarding prayer is ultimately said to come through Ali. According to it, there are five prayers and three prayer times.
I call myself a "historical Shia" because I believe parts of the Shia version of history more than the sunni accounts. I do think that the Prophet appointed Ali as his rightful successor and as such I consider myself a Shiat-e-Ali for political reasons. Along with this, I revere Amir ulMumineen for his wisdom and I commemorate Hussein's sacrifice at Karbala. But, I do not believe that Ali was endowed with divine wisdom or any such thing, nor do I feel there is any evidence to support the existence of a line of Imams who are the rightful rulers of the ummah. However, Shias, who do believe these things, have entire bodies of what they consider authentic traditions that support these (and other) views. So of course, the question then becomes how do you decide whose traditions are the correct ones? I don't know. I don't think anyone really can, but I've made my best guess based on the history I have learned. I've already revised my ideas several times as I learned more, and may well do so again. What I can say is that because of these problems regarding history and interpretation, I am firmly against deciding on a single world view for the rest of my life and calling it -- to the exclusion of all else -- Islam.
cheers