134 replies to this topic

[macisaac]

ensari, on 01 September 2010 - 04:47 AM, said:

1000-


Fe  la3natullahi 3elel kazibiyn... Muhammed bin nusayr (a.s.) bab elimam el3askeri fe la3natullahi 3elel mufteriyn.

`alayhi 's-salam for a heretic and nothing for the Imam ?  la`natullah `ala 'l-kadhibeen indeed.

[ensari]

La3natullahi 3alal kazibin ve 3alal muqassira ellezi qassaru fi menakib ahlal bayt a.s ve 5ezelu ebvabihim ve nasabu nevvab muzayyafin, misil nowbakhti ve ghayrahu...

[macisaac]

ensari, on 02 September 2010 - 08:51 AM, said:

La3natullahi 3alal kazibin ve 3alal muqassira ellezi qassaru fi menakib ahlal bayt a.s ve 5ezelu ebvabihim ve nasabu nevvab muzayyafin, misil nowbakhti ve ghayrahu...

Go to Hell, you and all the ghulat.




[ 34897 ] 7 ـ وعن الحسين بن الحسن بن بندار ، عن سهل بن زياد ـ في حديث ـ أن أبا الحسن العسكري ( عليه السلام ) كتب إلى بعض أصحابنا في كتاب في حق الغلاة ، قال : وإن وجدت من أحد منهم خلوة فاشدخ رأسه بالصخرة .



7 – And from al-Husayn b. al-Husayn b. Bundar from Sahl b. Ziyad in a hadith wherein Abu ‘l-Hasan al-`Askari عليه السلام wrote to some of our companions in a writing regarding the truth of the ghulat.  He said: And if you find one of them alone, then smash his head with a rock.


http://www.tashayyu....t-and-qadariyya

[Yasoob Al Deen]

macisaac, on 02 September 2010 - 09:11 AM, said:

Go to Hell, you and all the ghulat.

[ 34897 ] 7 Ü æÚä ÇáÍÓíä Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÈäÏÇÑ ¡ Úä Óåá Èä ÒíÇÏ Ü Ýí ÍÏíË Ü Ãä ÃÈÇ ÇáÍÓä ÇáÚÓßÑí ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ßÊÈ Åáì ÈÚÖ ÃÕÍÇÈäÇ Ýí ßÊÇÈ Ýí ÍÞ ÇáÛáÇÉ ¡ ÞÇá : æÅä æÌÏÊ ãä ÃÍÏ ãäåã ÎáæÉ ÝÇÔÏÎ ÑÃÓå ÈÇáÕÎÑÉ .
7 – And from al-Husayn b. al-Husayn b. Bundar from Sahl b. Ziyad in a hadith wherein Abu ‘l-Hasan al-`Askari Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã wrote to some of our companions in a writing regarding the truth of the ghulat.  He said: And if you find one of them alone, then smash his head with a rock.

http://www.tashayyu....t-and-qadariyya

Sahl bin Ziyad is weak, is he not?
Peace.

[89jghur32]

Perseverance, on 07 September 2010 - 05:19 PM, said:

Sahl bin Ziyad is weak, is he not?
Peace.

It doesn't matter in this case.  As I understand it, somebody who holds exaggerated beliefs (or any other beliefs that negate Allah's Unity) has left Islam and can be termed "wajib ul-qatl", and that narration is clearly in line with this.

[macisaac]

Perseverance, on 07 September 2010 - 05:19 PM, said:

Sahl bin Ziyad is weak, is he not?
Peace.

Salaam,

He is controversial.  Some of the rijal books mention him as weak, though actually there's some contradiction there too.  In Tusi's Fihrist he says he's weak, but in Tusi's Rijal it says he's thiqa...  Shaykh Kulayni relied on him a fair bit it seems as he'll show up in numerous chains in al-Kafi.  Apparently, he was exiled from Qum being accused of lying and being a ghali.  However (and I'm not the only one who thinks that this needs revising), I don't think his narrations should just get thrown out as such.  First, it's not uncommon to find him show up in the chain to a hadith that has another, sahih, chain which shows he wasn't (at least) always lying.  And it seems strange that someone who would have been a ghali would be narrating a hadith like the one above don't you think?

As to the hadith itself, even if one doesn't go around smashing the heads of ghulat with rocks, still it clearly and forcefully shows us that these deviants have nothing to do with Islam and what our approach and feelings towards them ought to be.  It's a lesson I think a lot of contemporary Shi`as would be advised to heed carefully.

[Son Of Adam]

I want to know what is the position of Mohammed ibn Sinan and Al-Mufadhal bin Umar within the shiites. Have they ever been accused of being exagerrators?

Wa'Salam!

[macisaac]

Son Of Adam, on 08 September 2010 - 06:09 AM, said:

I want to know what is the position of Mohammed ibn Sinan and Al-Mufadhal bin Umar within the shiites. Have they ever been accused of being exagerrators?

Wa'Salam!

Both of them are controversial as well.

[doobybrother]

macisaac, on 02 September 2010 - 09:11 AM, said:

[ 34897 ] 7 Ü æÚä ÇáÍÓíä Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÈäÏÇÑ ¡ Úä Óåá Èä ÒíÇÏ Ü Ýí ÍÏíË Ü Ãä ÃÈÇ ÇáÍÓä ÇáÚÓßÑí ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ßÊÈ Åáì ÈÚÖ ÃÕÍÇÈäÇ Ýí ßÊÇÈ Ýí ÍÞ ÇáÛáÇÉ ¡ ÞÇá : æÅä æÌÏÊ ãä ÃÍÏ ãäåã ÎáæÉ ÝÇÔÏÎ ÑÃÓå ÈÇáÕÎÑÉ .

7 – And from al-Husayn b. al-Husayn b. Bundar from Sahl b. Ziyad in a hadith wherein Abu ‘l-Hasan al-`Askari Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã wrote to some of our companions in a writing regarding the truth of the ghulat.  He said: And if you find one of them alone, then smash his head with a rock.

Isn't it strange that Sahl ibn Ziyad, a man accused of Ghuluw by some scholars would narrate such a tradition?

[Socrates]

macisaac, on 08 September 2010 - 06:48 AM, said:

Both of them are controversial as well.

What is controversial about Mufaddhal? I know this is a little offtopic, but I am curious (since the hadith of Tawheed through Mufaddhal is narrated quite frequently).

[macisaac]

doobybrother, on 08 September 2010 - 10:25 AM, said:

Isn't it strange that Sahl ibn Ziyad, a man accused of Ghuluw by some scholars would narrate such a tradition?

Yup, one reason why I'd question the validity of the accusation against him.

Socrates, on 08 September 2010 - 10:37 AM, said:

What is controversial about Mufaddhal? I know this is a little offtopic, but I am curious (since the hadith of Tawheed through Mufaddhal is narrated quite frequently).

Mufaddal is a very difficult case, and frankly I don't know what to make of him.  The so-called Tawhid al-Mufaddal you can forget about though, it's positively a fabrication (and that's something I only _very_ rarely will state about any hadith, out of precaution).  Being discussed here right now:

http://www.shiachat....th-of-muffadal/

As to the man himself, here's a summary as taken from Tafrishi's book:


ÇáãÝÖá Èä ÚãÑ (9): ÃÈæ ÚÈÏ Çááå¡ æÞíá: ÃÈæ ãÍãÏ¡ ÇáÌÚÝí¡ ßæÝí¡ ÝÇÓÏ ÇáãÐåÈ¡ ãÖØÑÈ ÇáÑæÇíÉ¡ áÇ íÚÈà Èå¡ æÞíá: Åäå ßÇä ÎØÇÈíÇ¡ æÞÏ ÐßÑÊ áå  ãÕäÝÇÊ áÇ íÚæá ÚáíåÇ¡ Ñæì Úäå: ÇáÒÈíÑí æãÍãÏ Èä ÓäÇä¡ ÑÌÇá ÇáäÌÇÔí (1).

al-Mufaddal b. `Umar: Abu `Abdillah and it is said: Abu Muhammad.  Kufan.  Corrupt in madhhab.  Confused in narration.  He is not called upon.  And it is said that he was a Khattabi.  And there are writings mentioned for him, they are not relied upon.  az-Zubayri and Muhammad b. Sinan narrated from him. (Rijal an-Najashi)

áå æÕíÉ íÑæíåÇ (2)¡ Ñæì Úäå: ÃÈæ ÔÚíÈ ÇáãÍÇãáí¡ ÇáÝåÑÓÊ (3).

He has a testimony (wasiyya) that he narrates.  Abu Shu`ayb al-Muhamili narrated from him (al-Fihrist of at-Tusi)

ÖÚíÝ¡ ãÊåÇÝÊ¡ ãÑÊÝÚ ÇáÞæá¡ ÎØÇÈí¡ æÞÏ ÒíÏ Úáíå ÔÆ ßËíÑ¡ æÍãá ÇáÛáÇÉ Ýí ÍÏíËå ÍãáÇ ÚÙíãÇ¡ æáÇ íÌæÒ Ãä íßÊÈ ÍÏíËå¡ Ñæì Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå æÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã¡ ÑÌÇá ÇÈä ÇáÛÖÇÆÑí (4).

Weak, collapsed, a proponent of irtifa` in doctrine, Khattabi.  Many things have been added (i.e. attributed) upon him, and his hadith carry a great amount of weight with the ghulat.  It is not permissible to write his hadith.  He narrated from Abu `Abdillah and Abu ‘l-Hasan ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã. (Rijal Ibn al-Ghada’iri)

æÞÇá ÇáãÝíÏ ÑÍãå Çááå Ýí ÅÑÔÇÏå: Åäå ãä ÔíæÎ ÃÕÍÇÈ ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã æÎÇÕÊå æÈØÇäÊå æËÞÇÊå ÇáÝÞåÇÁ ÇáÕÇáÍíä (5) (6).

And al-Mufid ÑÍãå Çááå said in his Irshad that he was from the shuyukh of the companions of Abu `Abdillah Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã and his select ones and his entourage and his thiqat (of?) the righteous fuqaha.

æÃæÑÏ ÇáßÔí ÃÍÇÏíË ÊÞÊÖí ãÏÍå (7)¡ æÃÍÇÏíË ÊÞÊÖí Ðãå æÇáÈÑÇÁÉ ãäå (8).

And al-Kashshi has brought ahadith that require his praise and ahadith that require his censure and bara’at from him.

[Socrates]

macisaac, on 08 September 2010 - 12:00 PM, said:

Yup, one reason why I'd question the validity of the accusation against him.




Mufaddal is a very difficult case, and frankly I don't know what to make of him.  The so-called Tawhid al-Mufaddal you can forget about though, it's positively a fabrication (and that's something I only _very_ rarely will state about any hadith, out of precaution).  Being discussed here right now:

http://www.shiachat....th-of-muffadal/

As to the man himself, here's a summary as taken from Tafrishi's book:


ÇáãÝÖá Èä ÚãÑ (9): ÃÈæ ÚÈÏ Çááå¡ æÞíá: ÃÈæ ãÍãÏ¡ ÇáÌÚÝí¡ ßæÝí¡ ÝÇÓÏ ÇáãÐåÈ¡ ãÖØÑÈ ÇáÑæÇíÉ¡ áÇ íÚÈà Èå¡ æÞíá: Åäå ßÇä ÎØÇÈíÇ¡ æÞÏ ÐßÑÊ áå  ãÕäÝÇÊ áÇ íÚæá ÚáíåÇ¡ Ñæì Úäå: ÇáÒÈíÑí æãÍãÏ Èä ÓäÇä¡ ÑÌÇá ÇáäÌÇÔí (1).

al-Mufaddal b. `Umar: Abu `Abdillah and it is said: Abu Muhammad.  Kufan.  Corrupt in madhhab.  Confused in narration.  He is not called upon.  And it is said that he was a Khattabi.  And there are writings mentioned for him, they are not relied upon.  az-Zubayri and Muhammad b. Sinan narrated from him. (Rijal an-Najashi)

áå æÕíÉ íÑæíåÇ (2)¡ Ñæì Úäå: ÃÈæ ÔÚíÈ ÇáãÍÇãáí¡ ÇáÝåÑÓÊ (3).

He has a testimony (wasiyya) that he narrates.  Abu Shu`ayb al-Muhamili narrated from him (al-Fihrist of at-Tusi)

ÖÚíÝ¡ ãÊåÇÝÊ¡ ãÑÊÝÚ ÇáÞæá¡ ÎØÇÈí¡ æÞÏ ÒíÏ Úáíå ÔÆ ßËíÑ¡ æÍãá ÇáÛáÇÉ Ýí ÍÏíËå ÍãáÇ ÚÙíãÇ¡ æáÇ íÌæÒ Ãä íßÊÈ ÍÏíËå¡ Ñæì Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå æÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã¡ ÑÌÇá ÇÈä ÇáÛÖÇÆÑí (4).

Weak, collapsed, a proponent of irtifa` in doctrine, Khattabi.  Many things have been added (i.e. attributed) upon him, and his hadith carry a great amount of weight with the ghulat.  It is not permissible to write his hadith.  He narrated from Abu `Abdillah and Abu ‘l-Hasan ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã. (Rijal Ibn al-Ghada’iri)

æÞÇá ÇáãÝíÏ ÑÍãå Çááå Ýí ÅÑÔÇÏå: Åäå ãä ÔíæÎ ÃÕÍÇÈ ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã æÎÇÕÊå æÈØÇäÊå æËÞÇÊå ÇáÝÞåÇÁ ÇáÕÇáÍíä (5) (6).

And al-Mufid ÑÍãå Çááå said in his Irshad that he was from the shuyukh of the companions of Abu `Abdillah Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã and his select ones and his entourage and his thiqat (of?) the righteous fuqaha.

æÃæÑÏ ÇáßÔí ÃÍÇÏíË ÊÞÊÖí ãÏÍå (7)¡ æÃÍÇÏíË ÊÞÊÖí Ðãå æÇáÈÑÇÁÉ ãäå (8).

And al-Kashshi has brought ahadith that require his praise and ahadith that require his censure and bara’at from him.

I see. What were the beliefs of the Khattabi?

[MysticKnight]

ShahHussain, on 08 September 2010 - 12:06 PM, said:

that's what i'm talking about  

People should be allowed to do mistakes and learn from them, although shirk is the greatest crime, it's against Allah, whom doesn't need hastening in punishing for crimes against his right.

I was a ghulat and I hope I have left it.

[JimJam]

Quote

I see. What were the beliefs of the Khattabi?

Taken from The Ismailis, Their History & Doctrines by Fahad Daftary

Quote

Besides a number of jurists-traditionists who concentrated mainly on legal problems, Jafar’s close circle of associates included some of the most famous speculative theologians (mutakallimun) of the time. These theologians, such as Zurara b. Ayan, Mumin al-Taq, Hisham b. Salim al-Jawaliqı, Alı b. Ismaıl al-Maythamı, and above all Hisham b. al-Hakam, the foremost representative of Imamı kalam or scholastic theology, made significant contributions to the formulation of the Imami doctrine of the imamate. Separate mention may be made of the enigmatic Jabir b.Hayyan, the renowned alchemist, who regarded Jafar al-Sadiq as his master and who was greatly influenced by the gnosticism of the early Shı'i ghulat. There has been much debate concerning the authorship of the corpus of writings attributed to him. Some of these works, in which the occult properties of the letters of the alphabet play an important part, were probably produced by circles close to the Ismaılıs of much later times. There were also several noteworthy ghulat contributing to the rich and varied intellectual life of Jafar al-Sadiq’s coterie. These included not only individuals such as Jabir al-Jufı (d. 128/745–746),97 whom Jafri has classified among the so-called semi-ghulat,but most significantly Abu’l-Khattab b. Abı Zaynab Miqlas. al-Ajdaal-Asadı, the most prominent of all the early ghulat.

Abu’l-Khattab, a Kufan and a mawla of the tribe of Asad, was probably the first Shı'ı to have organized a movement of a specifically batinı type, namely, esoteric and gnostic. For quite some time, he was an intimate associate of Jafar al-Sadiq, who had appointed him as his chief daiı in Kufa, the centre of Jafar’s partisans whom the imam visited occasionally from Medina. Abu’l-Khattab acquired many followers of his own, known as the Khattabiyya, while he remained a zealous disciple of the Imam Jafar and made exaggerated claims about him, in addition to holding other extremist views. As might be expected, this outspoken disciple eventually became intolerably dangerous for his quiescent imam. Consequently, Abu’l-Khattab, who had apparently found one of the imam’s sons, Ismaıl, somewhat responsive to his activist views and objectives, was accused of erring and was publicly cursed by Jafar al-Sadiq. This repudiation,which probably took place soon after al-Mansur’s accession in Dhu’l-Hijja 136/June 754, caused great consternation among the imam’s followers. Shortly afterwards, in 138/755–756, seventy of Abu’l-Khattab’s enthusiastic supporters, in the company of their denounced leader, assembled in the mosque of Kufa under obscure circumstances and possibly for rebellious purposes. They were attacked and massacred by the troops of the city’s governor, Isa b. Musa, who later crushed the revolt of the Hasanid brothers. Abu’l-Khattab was arrested and then crucified on the governor’s orders. On the death of Abu’l-Khattab, who had remained loyal to Jafar al-Sadiq till the very end, the Khattabiyya, identified by al-Nawbakhtı and al-Qummı with the nascent Ismaıliyya, split into several groups. Some of the Khattabıs transferred their allegiance to Ismaıl b. Jafar, the eponymof the Ismaıliyya, and to the latter’s son Muhammad b. Ismaıl. Further discussion of these developments belongs in our next chapter. Suffice it to say here that with Abu’l-Khattab , the early Khattabiyya and Ismaıl we are already dealing with the immediate milieu that gave rise to proto-Ismaılism.

Only fragmentary information is available on the doctrines upheld by Abu’l-Khatt ab and the early Khattabıs. Before being disavowed, Abu’l-Khattab claimed to be the deputy and wası of the Imam Jafar, who had allegedly taught him the Greatest Name of God (ism Allah al-azam), with its miraculous implications. Aside from speculating about broad issues, like other ghulat, Abu’l-Khattab and his disciples seem to have been particularly concerned with spiritual ranking and spiritual adoption. They ranked persons as angels, prophets, divine messengers, or even gods, though not in real rivalry with the one God, Allah, but rather as His representatives. Abu’l-Khattab is said to have taught that at all times there must be two prophets, one speaking (natiq) and the other silent (samit). In Muhammad’s time, he had been the speaking prophet and Alı the silent one, and now Jafarand Abu’l-Khattab were, respectively, the speaking and silent prophets. The early Khattabıs preached the divinity of the imams, on the basis of the divine light or nur inherited by them. They are also credited with emphasizing the batinı tawıl, the esoteric or allegorical interpretation of the Quran and the sacred prescriptions, a method adopted and refined to its fullest extent by the Ismaılis. In cosmogony, they replaced the use of the letters of the alphabet, as introduced by al-Mughıra, by their corresponding numerical values. Some of the ideas or terminologies introduced by or attributed to Abu’l-Khattab were also adopted by the early Ismaılıs who, like the Khattabıs, were preoccupied with esotericism, cyclicism, hierarchism and symbolical exegesis.

Edited by JimJam, 08 September 2010 - 01:33 PM.

[Son Of Adam]

macisaac, on 08 September 2010 - 12:00 PM, said:

Yup, one reason why I'd question the validity of the accusation against him.




Mufaddal is a very difficult case, and frankly I don't know what to make of him.  The so-called Tawhid al-Mufaddal you can forget about though, it's positively a fabrication (and that's something I only _very_ rarely will state about any hadith, out of precaution).  Being discussed here right now:

http://www.shiachat....th-of-muffadal/

As to the man himself, here's a summary as taken from Tafrishi's book:


ÇáãÝÖá Èä ÚãÑ (9): ÃÈæ ÚÈÏ Çááå¡ æÞíá: ÃÈæ ãÍãÏ¡ ÇáÌÚÝí¡ ßæÝí¡ ÝÇÓÏ ÇáãÐåÈ¡ ãÖØÑÈ ÇáÑæÇíÉ¡ áÇ íÚÈà Èå¡ æÞíá: Åäå ßÇä ÎØÇÈíÇ¡ æÞÏ ÐßÑÊ áå  ãÕäÝÇÊ áÇ íÚæá ÚáíåÇ¡ Ñæì Úäå: ÇáÒÈíÑí æãÍãÏ Èä ÓäÇä¡ ÑÌÇá ÇáäÌÇÔí (1).

al-Mufaddal b. `Umar: Abu `Abdillah and it is said: Abu Muhammad.  Kufan.  Corrupt in madhhab.  Confused in narration.  He is not called upon.  And it is said that he was a Khattabi.  And there are writings mentioned for him, they are not relied upon.  az-Zubayri and Muhammad b. Sinan narrated from him. (Rijal an-Najashi)

áå æÕíÉ íÑæíåÇ (2)¡ Ñæì Úäå: ÃÈæ ÔÚíÈ ÇáãÍÇãáí¡ ÇáÝåÑÓÊ (3).

He has a testimony (wasiyya) that he narrates.  Abu Shu`ayb al-Muhamili narrated from him (al-Fihrist of at-Tusi)

ÖÚíÝ¡ ãÊåÇÝÊ¡ ãÑÊÝÚ ÇáÞæá¡ ÎØÇÈí¡ æÞÏ ÒíÏ Úáíå ÔÆ ßËíÑ¡ æÍãá ÇáÛáÇÉ Ýí ÍÏíËå ÍãáÇ ÚÙíãÇ¡ æáÇ íÌæÒ Ãä íßÊÈ ÍÏíËå¡ Ñæì Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå æÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã¡ ÑÌÇá ÇÈä ÇáÛÖÇÆÑí (4).

Weak, collapsed, a proponent of irtifa` in doctrine, Khattabi.  Many things have been added (i.e. attributed) upon him, and his hadith carry a great amount of weight with the ghulat.  It is not permissible to write his hadith.  He narrated from Abu `Abdillah and Abu ‘l-Hasan ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã. (Rijal Ibn al-Ghada’iri)

æÞÇá ÇáãÝíÏ ÑÍãå Çááå Ýí ÅÑÔÇÏå: Åäå ãä ÔíæÎ ÃÕÍÇÈ ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã æÎÇÕÊå æÈØÇäÊå æËÞÇÊå ÇáÝÞåÇÁ ÇáÕÇáÍíä (5) (6).

And al-Mufid ÑÍãå Çááå said in his Irshad that he was from the shuyukh of the companions of Abu `Abdillah Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã and his select ones and his entourage and his thiqat (of?) the righteous fuqaha.

æÃæÑÏ ÇáßÔí ÃÍÇÏíË ÊÞÊÖí ãÏÍå (7)¡ æÃÍÇÏíË ÊÞÊÖí Ðãå æÇáÈÑÇÁÉ ãäå (8).

And al-Kashshi has brought ahadith that require his praise and ahadith that require his censure and bara’at from him.

Yeh well he, mohammed ibn sinan and abul-khattab are both praised by the alawites and ismailis. Very interesting.

Wa'Salam!

[Qa'im]

Perseverance, on 07 September 2010 - 05:19 PM, said:

Sahl bin Ziyad is weak, is he not?
Peace.

He is controversial and usually considered a weak narrator; though in this case, the matn of his narration does not disagree with what has been established on this topic. I think its only fault is the idea of taking legal matters into one's own hands (?), though there are ahadith out there where `Ali killed ghulat by suffocation (fire smoke) or burning when they worshiped him.

Though I'd still be weary of narrations by the likes of Sahl ibn Ziyad, Muhammad ibn Sinan, etc. and make sure what they say has been established by other ahadith before I take it.

[macisaac]

I took a look for the complete narration that was partially quoted above and found it in Kashshi's book. It's really quite extraordinary and very relevant.  Here it is:


997- ÍÏËäí ÇáÍÓíä Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÈäÏÇÑ ÇáÞãí¡ ÞÇá ÍÏËäÇ Óåá Èä ÒíÇÏ ÇáÂÏãí¡ ÞÇá¡ : ßÊÈ ÈÚÖ ÃÕÍÇÈäÇ Åáì ÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ÇáÚÓßÑí (Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã) ÌÚáÊ ÝÏÇß íÇ ÓíÏí Åä Úáí Èä ÍÓßÉ íÏÚí Ãäå ãä ÃæáíÇÆß¡ æ Ãäß ÃäÊ ÇáÃæá ÇáÞÏíã¡ æ Ãäå ÈÇÈß æ äÈíß ÃãÑÊå Ãä íÏÚæ Åáì Ðáß¡ æ íÒÚã Ãä ÇáÕáÇÉ æ ÇáÒßÇÉ æ ÇáÍÌ æ ÇáÕæã ßá Ðáß ãÚÑÝÊß æ ãÚÑÝÉ ãä ßÇä Ýíå ãËá ÍÇá ÇÈä ÍÓßÉ ÝíãÇ íÏÚí ãä ÇáÈÇÈíÉ æ ÇáäÈæÉ¡ Ýåæ ãÄãä ßÇãá ÓÞØ Úäå ÇáÇÓÊÚÈÇÏ ÈÇáÕáÇÉ æ ÇáÕæã æ ÇáÍÌ¡ æ ÐßÑ ÌãíÚ ÔÑÇÆÚ ÇáÏíä Ãä ãÚäì Ðáß ßáå ãÇ ËÈÊ áß¡ æ ãÇá ÇáäÇÓ Åáíå ßËíÑÇ¡ ÝÅä ÑÃíÊ Ãä Êãä Úáì ãæÇáíß ÈÌæÇÈ Ýí Ðáß ÊäÌíåã ãä ÇáåáßÉ ÞÇá¡ ÝßÊÈ (Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã) ßÐÈ ÇÈä ÍÓßÉ Úáíå áÚäÉ Çááå æ ÈÍÓÈß Ãäí áÇ ÃÚÑÝå Ýí ãæÇáí ãÇ áå áÚäå Çááå Ýæ Çááå ãÇ ÈÚË Çááå ãÍãÏÇ æ ÇáÃäÈíÇÁ ÞÈáå ÅáÇ ÈÇáÍäíÝíÉ æ ÇáÕáÇÉ æ ÇáÒßÇÉ æ ÇáÕíÇã æ ÇáÍÌ æ ÇáæáÇíÉ¡ æ ãÇ ÏÚí ãÍãÏ (Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã) ÅáÇ Åáì Çááå æÍÏå áÇ ÔÑíß áå¡ æ ßÐáß äÍä ÇáÃæÕíÇÁ ãä æáÏå ÚÈíÏ Çááå áÇ äÔÑß Èå ÔíÆÇ¡ Åä ÃØÚäÇå ÑÍãäÇ æ Åä ÚÕíäÇå ÚÐÈäÇ¡ ãÇ áäÇ Úáì Çááå ãä ÍÌÉ Èá ÇáÍÌÉ ááå ÚÒ æ Ìá ÚáíäÇ æ Úáì ÌãíÚ ÎáÞå¡ ÃÈÑà Åáì Çááå ããä íÞæá Ðáß æ ÃäÊÝí Åáì Çááå ãä åÐÇ ÇáÞæá¡ ÝÇåÌÑæåã áÚäåã Çááå æ ÃáÌÆæåã Åáì ÖíÞ ÇáØÑíÞ ÝÅä æÌÏÊ ãä ÃÍÏ ãäåã ÎáæÉ ÝÇÔÏÎ ÑÃÓå ÈÇáÕÎÑ.

997 – al-Husayn b. al-Hasan b. Bandar al-Qummi said: Sahl b. Ziyad al-Adami narrated to us.  He said: One of our companions wrote to Abu ‘l-Hasan al-`Askari Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã: May I be made your ransom, O my master, verily `Ali b. Haska is proclaiming that he is from your awliya, and that you are the Pre-eternal First, and that he is your bab and your prophet that you commanded to call to that.  And he claims that salat, and zakat, and hajj, and fasting, all of that is your recognition (ma`rifa) and the recognition of whoever is in the like of the state of Ibn Haska in what he proclaims of bab-hood and prophethood, so (such a one would be) a perfect believer from whom is dropped the subjugation to salat and fasting and hajj.  And he mentioned all of the laws of the religion, that the meaning of all of that is what is established for you.  And the people have inclined to him much.  So if you regard to do so, grant your mawali with an answer in regards to that saving them from destruction.

So he Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã wrote: Ibn Haska has lied, upon him be the curse of Allah.  And it is enough for you that verily I do not recognize him to be amongst my mawali. What is the matter with him, may Allah curse him, for Allah did not send Muhammad and the prophets prior to him except with the hanafiyya and salat and zakat and fasting and hajj and walaya.  And Muhammad Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã did not call but to Allah, by Himself, there is no partner for Him.  And likewise we the awsiya from his sons are the slaves of Allah, we do not associate anything with Him.  If we obey Him He has mercy on us and if we disobey Him He punishes us.  We do not have any argument upon Allah rather the argument is for Allah ÚÒ æ Ìá upon us and upon all of His creation.  I am free to Allah from whoever says that and I fear (?) to Allah from this doctrine.  So expel them, may Allah curse them, and compel them to narrowness (?) of the road.  And you find one of them alone, then smash his head with a rock.

[Son Of Adam]

I want to know why were there many people at the time of the Imams (a.s) who claimed and beleived that they were divine, and also with the idea of a hijab and (some claim they were the bab to the Imams etc). When did this all start and where did these beleifs come from?

Wa'Salam!

Edited by Son Of Adam, 08 September 2010 - 10:58 PM.

[JimJam]

^The Imams said they were divinely appointed, that they are rightful inheritors of religious authority, not that they were divine beings

[Nader Zaveri]

Lets just say Aboo Al-KhaTTaab isn't liked very much according to our Imaams.

قال سمعت أبا عبد الله (ع) و ذكر أبا الخطاب فقال: اللهم العن أبا الخطاب فإنه خوفني قائما و قاعدا و على فراشي اللهم أذقه حر الحديد.
“He said he heard Abaa `Abd Allaah and Abaa Al-KhaTTaab was mention. So he said: May Allaah (SWT) curse Abaa Al-Khattaab that I dread him (whether) I stand, and sit and in my bed, May Allaah (make) him taste hot iron.”

Source:

• Al-Kashee, Ikhtiyaar Ma`aarifah Al-Rijaal, pg. 290

Edited by Nader Zaveri, 09 September 2010 - 06:25 PM.

[Qa'im]

From ibn al-Ghada`iri's "Kitab ad-Du`afa":

( 11 ) – 11 – Óóåúáõ Èäõ ÒöíÇÏ¡ ÃÈõæ ÓóÚíÏ¡ ÇáÂÏóãíøõ¡ ÇáÑÇÒíøõ.  ßÇäó ÖóÚíÝÇð ÌöÏøÇð¡ ÝÇÓöÏó ÇáÑöæÇíÉö æÇáÏöíäö.(23)  æßÇäó ÃóÍúãóÏõ Èäõ ãõÍóãøóÏ Èä ÚöíúÓìþ ÇáÃÔÚÑíøõ ÃÎúÑóÌóåõ ãä Þõã¡ æÃÙúåóÑó ÇáÈóÑÇÁóÉó ãäåõ¡ æäóåóì ÇáäÇÓó Úä ÇáÓãÇÚ ãäåõ æÇáÑöæÇíÉ Úäåõ.  æíóÑæöí ÇáãóÑÇÓöíúáó¡ æíóÚúÊóãöÏõ ÇáãóÌÇåöíúáó.(24)

11 – Sahl b. Ziyad, Abu Sa`id, al-Adami, ar-Razi.  He was very weak, corrupt in narration and religion.   Ahmad b. Muhammad b. `Isa al-Ash`ari exiled him from Qum, declared bara’at from him, and forbade the people from listening to him and narrating from him.  He narrates mursal narrations and depends (on them).

( 23 ) – 15 – ãõÍóãøóÏõ Èä ÓöäÇä¡ ÃÈõæ ÌóÚúÝóÑ¡ ÇáåóãúÏÇäíø¡ ãæáÇåã – åÐÇ ÃÕÍø ãÇ íóäúÊóÓöÈõþ(47) Åáíå -.  ÖóÚöíúÝñ¡ ÛÇáò¡ íóÖóÚõ (ÇáÍÏíËó)(48) áÇ íõáúÊóÝóÊõ Åáíå.(49)

15 – Muhammad b. Sinan, Abu Ja`far, al-Hamdani, their client – this is the most correct of what he is  related to -.  Weak, ghal, fabricates (hadith), he is not turned to.

http://www.tashayyu....ibn-al-ghadairi

[asphyxiated]

One of the many problems with groups like this is that we lack access to any of their texts. So do their followers. Because of this, you tend to find a religion filled with syncretic elements. Musa al-Sadr spent a considerable time with 'Allawis and he came to the conclusion that there appear to be members of the 'Allawi community that are essentially Imami. But that's the nature of syncretic religion - that what we believe at this particular moment in time differs from what we used to believe in and in what others from the same community may believe in.

From what I can muster from this group, their exaggeration is second to none. Yet those part of more mainstream circles (Shi'a or Sunni) probably don't know the extent of the exaggeration. So it's really difficult to assess their belief structure, although I have talked to 'Allawis who have enraged me with their filth, many of whom add (swt) after the name of our first imam. And these are the people parading as Shi'is. I would be very interested to know more about the guys Sadr consulted with and the extent of their reconciliation with the Ja'fari madhab.

But perhaps this lifestyle lends itself to the Druze. The Druze religion is essentially what you make of it. Most followers know nothing and are told nothing until they reach mid-life adulthood (i.e. all that weird stuff with al-Hakim).

Whatever the case may be, each and every Ja'fari is best advised to be critical of any group practicing ghuluw. The reality is that remarkable men often acquire inappropriate and dangerous adulation. And that has to be separated from Shi'a belief. Because we can argue up and down but the proof of the authority of the Ahlul Bayt lies in the Aimmah itself. Everything else just boils down to pointless debate.

Edited by asphyxiated, 14 October 2010 - 12:22 AM.

[MuslimUnity]

[Pickthal 5:73] They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no Allah save the One Allah. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve.

[AitchEss]

macisaac, on 23 July 2010 - 07:22 AM, said:

Check your email

Hi i know this is an old topic but im very intrested can u also send me an email of the follwing ?
Al-Husayn ibn Hamdân al-Khasîbî: A Historical Biography of the Founder of the Nusayrî- 'Alawite Sect" written by Yaron Friedman and Yaron Frieman

wasalam

[AitchEss]

Son Of Adam, on 23 July 2010 - 07:17 AM, said:

Thanks alot for the useful information. do you know where I can gain access to the book youve mentioned above about Al-husayn ibn hamdan al-khasibi?

Wa'Salam!

Hi i was wondering if you ended up getting your hands on the book mentioned above ??