look, i'n not trying to get caught up in examples - that's all the taraweeh point was meant to be. my point is it isn't a sunnah. RasulAllah never did taraweeh. so it can only become a part of Islam through an interpretive science which requires a logical framework. and yes, multiple frameworks exist. you can debate which is better all day if you want. i'm not interested in that. i'm pointing out that behind all the different sciences (alqeeda, hadith, fiqh, hikma, etc...) there is a logical foundation grounding all this discourse. and behind logic is metaphysics which is an even deeper and more important discussion that most people can never get to if they remain caught up in sectarian categorization.
"the most noble to Allah are the most righteous" (Hujurat 13)
righteousness is not limited to location and temporality. the sahaba undoubtedly had a special proximity but they were not more or less righteous than others. i've discussed this before over the past few months but the sunni position of the categorical elevation of the sahaba is logically equivalent to the shia doctrine of the infallibility of the imams. history proves both are likely wrong.
also, how do we know the greeks weren't muslim? they are pre-christian even and pre-socratic tradition is clearly one of tawhid (which is why some muslim scholars have claimed Plato may have been a prophet). there's a valid argument they could be ahl kitab even if you look at them as a European branch of Zoroastrianism.
