Jump to content


- - -


Photo
* * * * - 3 votes

Did Shia Add To The Azan?


94 replies to this topic

#51 Kaniz e Zahra

Kaniz e Zahra

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,321 posts
  • Religion:SHIA ISLAM

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:00 AM

Even the classical scholars were not agreed upon what ghuluw is actually. Sh Sadooq considered denial of sahw as ghuluw, and Sh mufeed considered believe in it as taqseer. So these are merely their views ,not any of the Aimma, (as) called Third Testimony bidah that we should take that as hujjah upon ourselves. As for not mentioning it in Ahadith. How could it be done, when simple praise of Ali, (as) could be a death warrant for any Shia, let alone mentioning it in Azaan. When they could remain silent on usurpation of their rights that their few lovers may not get butchered, how could they do so for the sake of their mentions in Adhaans.

Edited by Kaniz e Zahra, 04 February 2013 - 11:16 AM.


#52 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:14 AM

(bismillah)

(salam)
Where on earth do you get these things from..the third Shahada didn't appear due to that. It started by a group of Ghaalis (People who commit Ghulloow (Exaggeration of the Ahl al-Bayt)). It was harshly condemned by our famous scholars as I showed in the Fatawa of them, on top of that it contradicts the Mowatthiq Hadeeth of Imaam al-Baaqir [as], and changes the amount of pieces that are supposed to be in the Adhaan and Iqaamah. On top of that, it became popularized under Shah Isma`eel Safawi, scholars like the teacher of al-Majlisi 1 (Allamah Mohammad Taqi Majlisi) even resisted saying it, until they were accused of being Sunni and compelled to saying it by others. It's nothing more than a Bid`ah, and holds the sin of any other Bid`ah.



That actually is what a Bid`ah is. Okay, PureEthics, I know at some point in the copy-paste debates you do, you must have condemned `Umar Ibn al-Khattab for joining Taraweeh in a Jama`at. It's a Bid`ah, the same applies to this, the Prophet [saawaws] didn't practice it, and it's definitely related to religion seeing as it is implemented into a part of the Salaat (Adhaan and Iqaamah are Mostahab to recite before Salaat). Therefore, it's a Bid`ah.



The fact that Rasool Allah [saawaws] or any of the 12 Imaams [as] never said it, does mean it is a Bid`ah. Period.
(salam)



Oh, in that case you would have hated our classical scholars. http://www.shiachat....lars-muqassirs/



You dont seem to understand, just because the prophet didnt do something doesnt mean we cant. Times are different from his time to our time. Things changed, events happened. If you want to use your logic, dont pick and choose, Then everything is bidha now. The prophet never used a computer why should we? The car is a bidha, clothes, different foods, everything! It seems to me, none of you read history, Imam Ali's name was cursed for years on the pulpit, before and after prayer. His followers started added the verse to nullify it. Any shia who does not believe in the wilyat of Ali and still prays, their prayer doesnt get accept, otherwise your not a shia. Now if you want to argue the matter of it being allowed to be said, then I challenge you, prove to me, the athan came in one piece from the quran, you cannot, they were never set, nor did anyone say it cant be changed. If it was so vital for it to be kept, why wasnt their any notice. For the ghulat argument that every single one of you on this forum always tend to bring, which is getting irratating, its like the new wahabi excuse, what they specifically add makes the athan invalid and they make it a requirement which cannot be. My argument isnt making a requirement, im saying whats wrong with saying it by recommendation.

“Your guardian is only Allah, His Apostle, and the faithful who maintain the prayer and give the zakat while bowing down.” 5:55

#53 al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

    al-Kanadee

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,135 posts
  • Location:Rafidistan
  • Religion:Shi`ah Ithna `Ashari Usooli Muslim
  • Interests:Listening to Maulana Rizvi's Surah Jumu`ah: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXJbWV-InKs

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:50 AM

You dont seem to understand, just because the prophet didnt do something doesnt mean we cant. Times are different from his time to our time. Things changed, events happened. If you want to use your logic, dont pick and choose, Then everything is bidha now. The prophet never used a computer why should we? The car is a bidha, clothes, different foods, everything!

(bismillah)

(salam)

Come on, have some more intellectual integrity than that. We both know the definition of Bid`ah, it's an innovation to the religion. Computers, clothes, and food don't effect Islaam (unless you break the rules of Halaal and Haraam, but that's another issue).

It seems to me, none of you read history, Imam Ali's name was cursed for years on the pulpit, before and after prayer. His followers started added the verse to nullify it.


You don't seem to understand, so I'll reiterate myself. No they did not. It started with Ahl al-Ghulloow and our `Ulema condemned them for doing that.

Any shia who does not believe in the wilyat of Ali and still prays, their prayer doesnt get accept, otherwise your not a shia. Now if you want to argue the matter of it being allowed to be said, then I challenge you, prove to me, the athan came in one piece from the quran, you cannot, they were never set, nor did anyone say it cant be changed.


What a childish argument. If in Salaat, I decide in the first Rakaat between al-Fatiha and al-Kawthar, or al-Fajr, or al-Qadr, al-`Ala, or whichever Surah you recite second, that I want to do a Ruku and Sujjud out of love for Allah, it's a Bid`ah and Haraam and my Salaat is Batil. Funny thing is that the manner for doing Salaat is not found in the Qur`aan. If I change the method of doing Hajj, it's a Bid`ah and my Hajj is Batil, Hajj is not found in Qur`aan. It's a Bid`ah, period. If you add `Aliyun Waleeyu Allah in Adhaan and Iqaamah when it's not a part of either, it's a Bid`ah. None of the above are found in the Qur`aan, but if you change the method of doing it from what is told to us, it is a Bid`ah. Being in the Qur`aan is not a requirement for Bid`ah. Simple question, has an Imaam or the Rasool [saawaws] ever recited the third Shahadah? There is yet to be found a single Hadeeth about it that is Mo`tabar (chain does matter in this issue since you're not dealing with Mostahabat), when people try defending it, they should remember that they are committing Qiyaas (personal analogy/interpretation and it is a big sin) and thinking that they are smarter than the Ma`soomeen [as] in Islaam.

If it was so vital for it to be kept, why wasnt their any notice. For the ghulat argument that every single one of you on this forum always tend to bring, which is getting irratating, its like the new wahabi excuse, what they specifically add makes the athan invalid and they make it a requirement which cannot be. My argument isnt making a requirement, im saying whats wrong with saying it by recommendation.

“Your guardian is only Allah, His Apostle, and the faithful who maintain the prayer and give the zakat while bowing down.” 5:55


This is what it is, plain and simple. Ashaduana `Aleeyun Waleeyu-Allah in Adhaan and Iqaamah is a Bid`ah in Islaam and Shi`ism. There is no evidence beyond tying unrelated things together with Qiyaas.
  • Ali Musaaa :) likes this

#54 Kaniz e Zahra

Kaniz e Zahra

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,321 posts
  • Religion:SHIA ISLAM

Posted 04 February 2013 - 12:03 PM

Many people think they are using computer for Islamic purposes, and watching t.v for religious lectures, so they'll gain thwaab, so by default its a bidaah, as these things are getting associated with Religion. When these things were not used by Masoomeen, (as) for Mustahubaat.
Secondly, the analogy between Adhan, and Nimaaz can't be made, the established arkaan e Salaat can't be modified, as Salaat is waajib, whereas Adhan itself isn't wajib either, even if you speak worldly things in between there is no harm, then what is so biddati in Shahadut e Salisaa?
As for Hadith, Sh Sadooq's Al hidaya had one telling 42 parts of Adhan, and Iqamaah, chain doesn't matter because Sh Sadooq only mentioned those Ahadeeth, he found reliable from his shayookh. So why its not in other Ahadeeth? Then saying that it was taqqiyah is no qiyaas, when there is a contradictory Hadeeth there.

As for ghulaat started it, or whoever, Aimma, (as) haven't condemned this practice, so we can't impose this view upon ourselves.

Edited by Kaniz e Zahra, 04 February 2013 - 12:26 PM.


#55 Hussainiyat Zindabad

Hussainiyat Zindabad

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 786 posts
  • Location:UK
  • Religion:Twelver Raafidhi
  • Interests:Religion, Business, Politics, Football, I.T, Technology,

Posted 04 February 2013 - 01:19 PM

Oh, in that case you would have hated our classical scholars. http://www.shiachat....lars-muqassirs/


Not really, anyone can claim to be an Aalim and copy/paste things from various websites & just believe it.

#56 al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

    al-Kanadee

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,135 posts
  • Location:Rafidistan
  • Religion:Shi`ah Ithna `Ashari Usooli Muslim
  • Interests:Listening to Maulana Rizvi's Surah Jumu`ah: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXJbWV-InKs

Posted 04 February 2013 - 02:46 PM

Not really, anyone can claim to be an Aalim and copy/paste things from various websites & just believe it.


So who are you accusing now, brother Nader who does his own research, or brother Haydar, and if it is him I invite you to read the books he's quoted.

#57 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 04 February 2013 - 02:53 PM

(bismillah)

(salam)

Come on, have some more intellectual integrity than that. We both know the definition of Bid`ah, it's an innovation to the religion. Computers, clothes, and food don't effect Islaam (unless you break the rules of Halaal and Haraam, but that's another issue).



You don't seem to understand, so I'll reiterate myself. No they did not. It started with Ahl al-Ghulloow and our `Ulema condemned them for doing that.



What a childish argument. If in Salaat, I decide in the first Rakaat between al-Fatiha and al-Kawthar, or al-Fajr, or al-Qadr, al-`Ala, or whichever Surah you recite second, that I want to do a Ruku and Sujjud out of love for Allah, it's a Bid`ah and Haraam and my Salaat is Batil. Funny thing is that the manner for doing Salaat is not found in the Qur`aan. If I change the method of doing Hajj, it's a Bid`ah and my Hajj is Batil, Hajj is not found in Qur`aan. It's a Bid`ah, period. If you add `Aliyun Waleeyu Allah in Adhaan and Iqaamah when it's not a part of either, it's a Bid`ah. None of the above are found in the Qur`aan, but if you change the method of doing it from what is told to us, it is a Bid`ah. Being in the Qur`aan is not a requirement for Bid`ah. Simple question, has an Imaam or the Rasool [saawaws] ever recited the third Shahadah? There is yet to be found a single Hadeeth about it that is Mo`tabar (chain does matter in this issue since you're not dealing with Mostahabat), when people try defending it, they should remember that they are committing Qiyaas (personal analogy/interpretation and it is a big sin) and thinking that they are smarter than the Ma`soomeen [as] in Islaam.



This is what it is, plain and simple. Ashaduana `Aleeyun Waleeyu-Allah in Adhaan and Iqaamah is a Bid`ah in Islaam and Shi`ism. There is no evidence beyond tying unrelated things together with Qiyaas.



bro, let me first do some more research and ill get back to you.

#58 al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

    al-Kanadee

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,135 posts
  • Location:Rafidistan
  • Religion:Shi`ah Ithna `Ashari Usooli Muslim
  • Interests:Listening to Maulana Rizvi's Surah Jumu`ah: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXJbWV-InKs

Posted 04 February 2013 - 03:45 PM

bro, let me first do some more research and ill get back to you.


InshaAllah

#59 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:13 AM

InshaAllah


Salaam brother Im back. First off, the main problem I see is concluding that saying Ali in athan is bidha. How can it be bidha if its indoctrinated within our religion? It isnt something new that we made up, Ali beign the wali is backed up by quran. We shias say it in our kalima, and there is nothing wrong with it. Why? Allah decreed it. Now I go back to my argument stating, if the prophet never mentioned that the athan CANNOT HAVE ADDED VERSES, then why would it not be allowed, besides its not like we are adding 999 different verses and different statements like prayer is better than sleep, we are starting our Fundamental Core shia belief. Its what makes us Muslim. The only reason why our ulema say it cannot be said as a requirement is because the athan itself isnt a requirement, nor was the original athan, before the wilyat of Ali A.S, the verse mentioning it. Another reason why it isnt bidha is because its in the quran. If Allah acknowledges Ali A.S, what more do we want?

Because you dont like me copying and pasting ill post these articles in which you can read, I hope you do:
http://en.shiapen.co...eclaration.html
-This article proves with logic why we are allowed to say Ali in kalima therefore it automatically allows it to be mentioned in athan. It also shows quranic verses pertaining to it.

Now about the cursing of Ali, Our enemies themselves stated they cursed Ali, so why do you think its made up? Saying Ali in athan wasn't solely for the cursing, im saying its part of refuting the cursing. Your saying it started by galis, im saying just because a gali said it does it make it wrong, if and only if its not breaking our fundamentals in the religion. If it was condemned by our "famous" scholars back then, why not now? Maybe there was lack of resources. Also, about imam Baqir's hadith, maybe it was taqiyya, it doesnt contradict the hadith because his hadith is true that is the original athan, but it doesnt make saying ali in athan wrong.
This is from their books, just because its in their books doesnt make it a lie.
http://en.shiapen.co...g-imam-ali.html

Now I found a wondeful article on a person refuting a muftee on calling the shahada a bidha because Majlisi and other shia scholars condemned it. A MUST READ
"
In the Name of Allaah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
An online “Muftee” wrote an article in which he declared the third Shahaadah in the Azaan and Iqaamah to be bid’a. Expectedly, Efendi (لعنه الله) and the other Nasibis (لعنهم الله) jumped up to “help” this supposedly “Shee’ah” brother spread his message over the Internet! We examined his arguments, and we found a lot of mistakes, misrepresentations and inconsistencies. In this article, we will inshaa Allaah be providing the answers of the Shee’ah (رضي الله عنهم) of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام) to the charge of this online “Muftee” against our noble creed. We seek Allaah’s Help, and the Prophet’s help, in this effort.
The online “Muftee” started his fatwa with these bold declarations:
The first thing I would like to mention is that the issue of the 3rd testimony in the Adhaan/Iqaamah was condemned by ALL major scholars before Al-Majlisi's father (Muhammad Taqee Al-Majlsi) who died in the year 1080 AH (See: Al-Majlisi I, RawDah Al-Muttaqoon). Al-Majlisi backed up his father and said that doing this 3rd testimony in the adhaan / iqaamah is a great act.

So for 1000 years, this issue was either condemned, called a bid'ah, calling the people who do this action a form of ghullah (exaggerator), or simply hasn't even been mentioned in their books(for it wasn't important).

There are 0 (zero) SaHeeH hadeeth from Shee'ah books that says that it is permissible to add the 3rd testimony in Adhaan or Iqaamah. Or ANY hadeeth that says that it is mustahab (recommended), or anything that says "do it with the intention of it NOT being part of the adhaan/iqaamah". None. Zero. Nada."

http://www.wilayat.n...n-online-muftee -Link for article above^^

Now I leave you with some hadiths. I dont know what their authenticity is but I believe they are sahih.

وعن الصادق عليه السلام انه قال: الكلم الطيب قول المؤمن " لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله علي ولي الله وخليفة رسول الله


Imam Sadiq (as) said, "Al Kalam Al Tayyeb is the saying of a Momin - There is not God by Allah, Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah and Ali is the Wali of Allah and Successor of Prophet of Allah"


[Source: Tafseer Al Qummi Vol.2 Pg. 208]



تاج الملك، مكتوب عليه لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله علي ولي الله

The crown of Kingdom on the head of Prophet Muhammad (saww), it will be written on it - here is not God by Allah, Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah and Ali is the Wali of Allah"

[Source: Tafseer Al Qummi Vol.2 Pg. 325]



و بهذا الإسناد، عن علي بن الحسن، عن جعفر الأموي، عن العباس ابن عبد الله، عن سعد بن طريف، عن الأصبغ بن نباتة، عن أبي مريم، عن سلمان، قال كنا جلوسا عند النبي )صلى الله عليه و آله( إذ أقبل علي بن أبي طالب )عليه السلام(، فناوله النبي )صلى الله عليه و آله( حصاة، فما استقرت الحصاة في كف علي )عليه السلام( حتى نطقت، و هي تقول لا إله إلا الله، محمد رسول الله، رضيت بالله ربا، و بمحمد نبيا، و بعلي بن أبي طالب وليا ثم قال النبي )صلى الله عليه و آله( من أصبح منكم راضيا بالله و بولاية علي بن أبي طالب، فقد أمن خوف الله و عقابه

The Knowledgeable scholar Abu Ali Hasan bin Abi Jafar Al-Toosi narrated from his blessed father Abu Jafar Muhammad bin Hasan Al-Toosi, from Abu Muhammad Hasan bin Muhammad bin Yahya Al-Fahham, from Omar bin Yahya, from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Sulaimaan bin Aasim, from Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Muhammad Al-Abdi, from Ali bin Hasan bin Jafar Al-Amawy, from Abbas bin Ubaidullah, from Saad bin Tareef, from Asbagh bin Nobatah from Abi Maryam from Salman who said:

We were sitting with Messenger of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì when Ali bin Abi Taleb (as) entered. The Prophet (saww) gave Ali (as) a small stone.

When Ali (as) held the stone in his palm, the stone said, "There is no god but Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and Muhammad (saww) is the Messenger of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì. I am pleased with Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì as Lord, with Muhammas as a Prophet, and with Ali as a Wali."

Then the Prophet (saww) said, "Those of you who are pleased with Allah as your Lord and with the Wilayat of Ali bin Abi Taleb are safe from Allah's punishment."

[Source: Al-Amali, Sheikh Toosi, Pg. 289]


حـدثـنـا الشيخ ابو جعفر محمد بن الحسن بن علي الطوسي (رحمه اللّه ), قال : اخبرنا احـمد بن محمد بن الصلت الاهوازي , قال : اخبرنا احمد بن محمدبن سعيد بن عبدالرحمن الحافظ, قـال : حـدثـنـي محمد بن عيسى بن هارون بن سلا م الضرير ابو بكر, قال : حدثنا محمد بن زكريا المكي , قال : حدثني كثير بن طارق , من ولد قنبر مولى علي بن ابي طالب (عليه السلام ), قال : حدثني زيـد بـن عـلـي (عـلـيـه الـسـلام ) فـي جارسوج كندة بالكوفة : ان اباه حدثه عن ابيه (عـلـيـهـمـمـاالـسـلام ), عـن ابـن عـباس , قال : اعطى رسول اللّه (صلى اللّه عليه و آله )عليا (عليه السلام ) خاتما فقال : يا علي , خذ هذا الخاتم للنقاش , لينقش عليه محمدبن عبداللّه , فاخذه امير الـمـؤمـنـيـن (عليه السلام ) فاعطاه النقاش , وقال له : انقش عليه محمد بن عبداللّه , فنقش النقاش , واخطات يده , فنقش عليه : محمد رسول اللّه ,فجا امير المؤمنين (عليه السلام ) فقال : ما فعل الخاتم ؟ فـقـال : هو ذا, فاخذه ونظر الى نقشه , فقال : ما امرتك بهذا, قال : صدقت , ولكن يدي اخطات , فجا به الـى رسول اللّه (صلى اللّه عليه و آله ), فقال : يا رسول اللّه , ما نقش النقاش ما امرت به , ذكر ان يده اخـطـات , فـاخـذه النبي (عليه السلام ) ونظر اليه , فقال : يا علي , انا محمد بن عبداللّه , وانا محمد رسول اللّه , وتختم به , فلما اصبح النبي (صلى اللّه عليه و آله ) نظرالى خاتمه , فاذا تحته منقوش : عـلـي ولي اللّه , فتعجب من ذلك النبي (عليه السلام )فجا جبرئيل , فقال : يا جبرئيل , كان كذا وكذا فقال : يا محمد, كتبت ما اردت , وكتبناما اردنا

Sheikh Toosi Narrates from his chain of narrators from Ibn Abbas who said:

The Prophet (saww) gave a ring to Imam Ali (as) and said, "O Ali, take this ring to the inscriber, to inscribe on it "Muhammad son of Abdullah".

Amir Al-Momineen took the ring and gave it to the inscriber and told him to inscribe on it "Muhammad son of Abdullah". The inscriber inscribed on it and and his hand made a mistake and inscribed on the stone "Muhammad the Messenger of Allah".

Amir Al-Momineen went to him (inscriber) and said, "What did u do to the stone?", He (the inscriber) said, "it is this".

Amir Al-Momineen took it and saw the inscription on it and said, "I did not command (ask) you for this". He (the inscriber) said, "You say the truth. but my hands made a mistake.

Then he [Imam Ali (as)] brought the stone to the Messenger of Allah (saww) and said, "O Messenger of Allah (saww), the inscriber did not inscribe what I had ordered him to, He (the inscriber) says that his hands made a mistake.

The Prophet (saww) took the stone and looked towards it and said, "O Ali (as), I am Muhammad son of Abdullah and I am Muhammad the Messenger of Allah" and it concluded with it.

When in the morning the Prophet (saww) looked towards the stone, inscribed beneath the stone was the inscription "Ali is the Wali of Allah" and the Prophet (saww) was amazed with this. Then Jibraeel came and the Prophet (saww) said, "O Jibraeel this was this and this."

Jibraeel said, "O Muhammad, you wrote what you wanted to and we wrote what we wanted to.

[Source: Al-Amali, Sheikh Toosi, Pg. 705]

https://sites.google...wali-allah-in-h Where I got these hadiths^^

Wa Salaam

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit: Sorry brother but i must add this copy and past

Tribute to Muhammad and his Household (saying “اللهم صلِّ على مُحَمَّد وآل مُحَمَّد” Allahumma Salli Ala Muhammad(in) wa Aali Muhammad) after mentioning the name of the Prophet (a.s) is recommended as is completing the testimonies by the testimony to the Wilayah and Imamate of Ali (a.s), in both Adhan and iqamah.

Whoever has denied the testimony to Ali’s Wilayah in Adhan, regarding it as heresy, has made mistake and has as uncommon belief. The caller to Adhan in Islam [usually] added phrases to the beginning and the end of Adhan—phrases that are not derived from the religion, but still they are not heresy and adding them is not forbidden. The reason is that the callers to Adhan do not consider these phrases as parts of Adhan, and include them just due to the general arguments.[311] The testimony to Ali’s Wilayah is subject to these general arguments. Moreover, short phrases from the people themselves do not nullify Adhan and iqamah.[312] To say these during Adhan and iqamah is therefore not forbidden…”[313]

Consequently, since naming Ali (a.s) is as worship, there is no doubt about the preference of mentioning his name in general and in Adhan, in particular. As Muttaqi Hindi narrates in Kanz Al-Ummal:

ذِكْرُ عَلِيٍّ عِبادَةٌ.

Mentioning Ali’s name is as worship.[314]

Edited by pureethics, 09 February 2013 - 11:22 AM.

  • Kaniz e Zahra likes this

#60 Qa'im

Qa'im

    The Hadith Guy

  • Mods
  • 4,657 posts
  • Religion:Islam

Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:34 AM

^ The hadiths above (none of which are technically sahih by the way) are not discussing the issue of `Aliyun waliAllah in adhan, they are simply endorsing the benefit of the expression in general. Those who are against having the third shahada in adhan (myself included) are not trying to withdraw love to Amir al-Mu'mineen (as). Rather, we are recognizing that all things have a place. The adhan formula was revealed a certain way, just as salat was revealed a certain way, and wudu, etc. It was then subsequently taught and performed that way by the Imams, their Shi`a, and the scholars for over 1000 years.

Here's a sahih hadith with someone giving a third and even fourth testimony. Again, there is nothing wrong with this, but context is crucial:

عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبي نصر قال: جاء رجل إلى أبي الحسن الرضا عليه السلام من وراء نهر بلخ فقال: إني أسألك عن مسألة فإن أجبتني فيها بما عندي قلت بإمامتك، فقال أبو الحسن عليه السلام: سل عما شئت فقال: أخبرني عن ربك متى كان؟ وكيف كان؟ وعلى أي شئ كان اعتماده؟ فقال أبو الحسن عليه السلام: إن الله تبارك وتعالى أين الاين بلا أين وكيف الكيف بلا كيف وكان اعتماده على قدرته، فقام إليه الرجل فقبل رأسه وقال: أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدا رسول الله وأن عليا وصي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله والقيم بعده بما قام به رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وأنكم الائمة الصادقون وأنك الخلف من بعدهم.



Several of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr.

He said: A man came to Abu’l Hasan ar-Rida عليه السلام from beyond the Balkh river and said: I will ask you a question, if your answer to me is the same as what which is with me [I will accept your cause]. So Abu’l Hasan عليه السلام said: Ask whatever you wish. So he said: Inform me about your Lord, when did He come into being? And how is His state? And upon what thing does He rely? So Abu’l Hasan عليه السلام said: Allah تبارك وتعالى was there before there was a “there”, and He was being before there was a “how”, and His reliance is upon His power. So the man rose to him and kissed his head, and said: I bear witness that there is no god except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and that `Ali is the deputy of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and the succeeding upholder of what the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله established, and that you are the righteous Imams and the successors after them. (al-Kafi, Volume 1, hadith 233)

(sahih) (صحيح)

If we had a strictly fiqh discussion, at the most you can argue that `Aliyun waliAllah is not a part of the adhan, but it is a mustahab expression to say aside from the adhan. Then why disguise and decorate it as if it's part of the adhan, fooling the laymen and even those more knowledgeable? Why say it in every adhan? Why not add more statements into the adhan, like ash-hadu annal Mahdi wali Allah? Why say it in the iqama, when talking during the iqama is makrooh? Why scold those who do not say it?
  • Ali Musaaa :) and Naruto like this

#61 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 11:46 AM

^ The hadiths above (none of which are technically sahih by the way) are not discussing the issue of `Aliyun waliAllah in adhan, they are simply endorsing the benefit of the expression in general. Those who are against having the third shahada in adhan (myself included) are not trying to withdraw love to Amir al-Mu'mineen (as). Rather, we are recognizing that all things have a place. The adhan formula was revealed a certain way, just as salat was revealed a certain way, and wudu, etc. It was then subsequently taught and performed that way by the Imams, their Shi`a, and the scholars for over 1000 years.

Here's a sahih hadith with someone giving a third and even fourth testimony. Again, there is nothing wrong with this, but context is crucial:

عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبي نصر قال: جاء رجل إلى أبي الحسن الرضا عليه السلام من وراء نهر بلخ فقال: إني أسألك عن مسألة فإن أجبتني فيها بما عندي قلت بإمامتك، فقال أبو الحسن عليه السلام: سل عما شئت فقال: أخبرني عن ربك متى كان؟ وكيف كان؟ وعلى أي شئ كان اعتماده؟ فقال أبو الحسن عليه السلام: إن الله تبارك وتعالى أين الاين بلا أين وكيف الكيف بلا كيف وكان اعتماده على قدرته، فقام إليه الرجل فقبل رأسه وقال: أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وأن محمدا رسول الله وأن عليا وصي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله والقيم بعده بما قام به رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وأنكم الائمة الصادقون وأنك الخلف من بعدهم.



Several of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Khalid from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr.

He said: A man came to Abu’l Hasan ar-Rida عليه السلام from beyond the Balkh river and said: I will ask you a question, if your answer to me is the same as what which is with me [I will accept your cause]. So Abu’l Hasan عليه السلام said: Ask whatever you wish. So he said: Inform me about your Lord, when did He come into being? And how is His state? And upon what thing does He rely? So Abu’l Hasan عليه السلام said: Allah تبارك وتعالى was there before there was a “there”, and He was being before there was a “how”, and His reliance is upon His power. So the man rose to him and kissed his head, and said: I bear witness that there is no god except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and that `Ali is the deputy of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله and the succeeding upholder of what the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله established, and that you are the righteous Imams and the successors after them. (al-Kafi, Volume 1, hadith 233)

(sahih) (صحيح)

If we had a strictly fiqh discussion, at the most you can argue that `Aliyun waliAllah is not a part of the adhan, but it is a mustahab expression to say aside from the adhan. Then why disguise and decorate it as if it's part of the adhan, fooling the laymen and even those more knowledgeable? Why say it in every adhan? Why not add more statements into the adhan, like ash-hadu annal Mahdi wali Allah? Why say it in the iqama, when talking during the iqama is makrooh? Why scold those who do not say it?

First off, i dont think you looked at my links at all...
Im just arguing the fact that it is allowed to be said. I, in all honestly, dont have any hadith books that i can research or have many sources that i can look at, in which I cant come to a conclusion based on what you said. Though, I am on the marja side sense them being more knowledgeable. The reason why we dont add more statements is because we dont have hadiths using those statements. Most of our hadiths say Ali Wali ulaah, plus it is backed up by the quran. The athan was not revealed. It was said by the prophet. Nor was it said it cant be changed. The prayer on the other hand, was directly from Allah with the command that it cannot be changed. Also the athan isnt a requirement for prayer. For wudu goes with prayer, it cannot be changed, but what is said in the wudu, has its own recommendations. Im not scolding those who dont say it, im defending its position. I dont consider those who dont say it, less of a muslim. IF you want to say it, if you dont its fine. I just dislike those who shove their opinions down peoples throats on this website.
  • Hussainiyat Zindabad and Kaniz e Zahra like this

#62 Qa'im

Qa'im

    The Hadith Guy

  • Mods
  • 4,657 posts
  • Religion:Islam

Posted 09 February 2013 - 12:03 PM

Habibi, the only people shoving their opinion are those who insist on `Aliyun waliAllah being said in every adhan and scold those who think differently. By the way, this critique is not just for Shi`is, but Sunnis too who added as-salatu khayrun min al-nawm to fajr as if it were a part of the adhan.

The athan was not revealed. It was said by the prophet. Nor was it said it cant be changed.


The adhan was revealed, actually:

وعنه ، عن أبيه ، عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن حماد ، عن منصور ابن حازم ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : لما هبط جبرئيل ( عليه السلام ) بالأذان على رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) كان رأسه في حجر علي ( عليه السلام ) ، فأذن جبرئيل وأقام ، فلما انتبه رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) قال : يا علي ، سمعت ؟ قال : نعم ، قال : حفظت ؟ قال : نعم ، قال : ادع بلالاً فعلمه ، فدعا علي ( عليه السلام ) بلالاً فعلمه.
ورواه الصدوق بإسناده عن منصور بن حازم .
ورواه الشيخ بإسناده عن علي بن إبراهيم ، مثله.

2 – And from him from his father from Ibn Abi `Umayr from Hammad from Mansur b. Hazim from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: When Jibra’il descended with the adhan upon the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله, his head was upon the lap of `Ali عليه السلام. So Jibra’il called the adhan and the iqama. So when the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله regained consciousness, he said: O `Ali, you heard? He said: Yes. He said: You have memorized (it)? He said: Yes. He said: Call for Bilal, and teach him. So `Ali عليه السلام called for Bilal and he taught him.

And as-Saduq narrated it by his isnad from Mansur b. Hazim.
And the Shaykh narrated it by his isnad from `Ali b. Ibrahim likewise.

http://www.tashayyu....iqama/chapter-1

The reason why we dont add more statements is because we dont have hadiths using those statements.


There are many hadiths talking about the benefits of declaring your love and lotalty for the Imam of your time. Does this mean we should sing a new phrase in the middle of the adhan? What do you think people will say if I did that, even though the majority of them are doing the same thing?

The prayer on the other hand, was directly from Allah with the command that it cannot be changed.


Though we can add additional du`a' at any time of our prayer, right? Let's imagine that there is a du`a' that is famous among the ghulat or a lying-sinning community. Remember that the ghulat to us are equal to the polytheists. If it became common that this same du`a' was being said in every prayer by every Shi`i, and all of those people believed that this du`a' was a part of the prayer, shouldn't someone voice that the du`a' is actually not a part of the prayer? At the very least it should not be disguised, and those who do not do it cannot be scolded.

Also the athan isnt a requirement for prayer.


Some have said that adhan is fard kifaya for fajr and maghrib.

  • al-`Ajal Ya Imaam, Ali Musaaa :) and Naruto like this

#63 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 12:34 PM

Habibi, the only people shoving their opinion are those who insist on `Aliyun waliAllah being said in every adhan and scold those who think differently. By the way, this critique is not just for Shi`is, but Sunnis too who added as-salatu khayrun min al-nawm to fajr as if it were a part of the adhan.

If you read this thread people here are accusing some who consider saying it a recommended act as bidha. They dont give their opinion, they enforce it. That is the difference, sunnis add their own from actual bidat, where we add it from the quran.


The adhan was revealed, actually:

وعنه ، عن أبيه ، عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن حماد ، عن منصور ابن حازم ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : لما هبط جبرئيل ( عليه السلام ) بالأذان على رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) كان رأسه في حجر علي ( عليه السلام ) ، فأذن جبرئيل وأقام ، فلما انتبه رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) قال : يا علي ، سمعت ؟ قال : نعم ، قال : حفظت ؟ قال : نعم ، قال : ادع بلالاً فعلمه ، فدعا علي ( عليه السلام ) بلالاً فعلمه.
ورواه الصدوق بإسناده عن منصور بن حازم .
ورواه الشيخ بإسناده عن علي بن إبراهيم ، مثله.

2 – And from him from his father from Ibn Abi `Umayr from Hammad from Mansur b. Hazim from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام. He said: When Jibra’il descended with the adhan upon the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله, his head was upon the lap of `Ali عليه السلام. So Jibra’il called the adhan and the iqama. So when the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله regained consciousness, he said: O `Ali, you heard? He said: Yes. He said: You have memorized (it)? He said: Yes. He said: Call for Bilal, and teach him. So `Ali عليه السلام called for Bilal and he taught him.

And as-Saduq narrated it by his isnad from Mansur b. Hazim.
And the Shaykh narrated it by his isnad from `Ali b. Ibrahim likewise.

http://www.tashayyu....iqama/chapter-1

Thanks brother. Is there any hadith where it is mentioned it cant be changed?

There are many hadiths talking about the benefits of declaring your love and lotalty for the Imam of your time. Does this mean we should sing a new phrase in the middle of the adhan? What do you think people will say if I did that, even though the majority of them are doing the same thing?

As I mentioned before, are they in the quran?

Though we can add additional du`a' at any time of our prayer, right? Let's imagine that there is a du`a' that is famous among the ghulat or a lying-sinning community. Remember that the ghulat to us are equal to the polytheists. If it became common that this same du`a' was being said in every prayer by every Shi`i, and all of those people believed that this du`a' was a part of the prayer, shouldn't someone voice that the du`a' is actually not a part of the prayer? At the very least it should not be disguised, and those who do not do it cannot be scolded.



Some have said that adhan is fard kifaya for fajr and maghrib.


Brother I appreciate your comments with perfect aqlaq, and I just wanted to say, I respect you and thank you, wa salaam

#64 YariAzQuran

YariAzQuran

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • Pip
  • 129 posts
  • Location:California
  • Religion:Islam

Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:17 PM

Did Shia's add to the Adhan?

Yes. Yes they did. Post #33 al-Ajal that was one of the better replies I've ever heard about this issue. Thanks a lot.

However I'd also like to add:

Did Sunni's add to the Adhan?

Yes. i.e. As-Salaatu khairu minan-nawm (prayer is better than sleep).

They argue that saying this w/ the intention that it's not part of the adhan or iqamah is alright. Sounds oddly familiar.

Did Sunni's subtract from the Adhan?

Yes. Hayyalaa khairil Amal. See http://www.shiachat....a-khayril-amal/ for sources and commentary.

Edited by YariAzQuran, 09 February 2013 - 02:17 PM.

  • al-`Ajal Ya Imaam and Ali Musaaa :) like this

#65 al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

al-`Ajal Ya Imaam

    al-Kanadee

  • Unregistered
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,135 posts
  • Location:Rafidistan
  • Religion:Shi`ah Ithna `Ashari Usooli Muslim
  • Interests:Listening to Maulana Rizvi's Surah Jumu`ah: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXJbWV-InKs

Posted 09 February 2013 - 02:23 PM

Salaam brother Im back. First off, the main problem I see is concluding that saying Ali in athan is bidha. How can it be bidha if its indoctrinated within our religion? It isnt something new that we made up, Ali beign the wali is backed up by quran. We shias say it in our kalima, and there is nothing wrong with it. Why? Allah decreed it. Now I go back to my argument stating, if the prophet never mentioned that the athan CANNOT HAVE ADDED VERSES, then why would it not be allowed, besides its not like we are adding 999 different verses and different statements like prayer is better than sleep, we are starting our Fundamental Core shia belief. Its what makes us Muslim. The only reason why our ulema say it cannot be said as a requirement is because the athan itself isnt a requirement, nor was the original athan, before the wilyat of Ali A.S, the verse mentioning it. Another reason why it isnt bidha is because its in the quran. If Allah acknowledges Ali A.S, what more do we want?

(bismillah)

(salam)
I don't think the first sentence was done and you completely jumped off track. Now to just explain shortly what a Bid`ah is, let us look at this Hadeeth:

و بهذا الإسناد عن أحمد بن أبي عبد الله عن عبد الله بن محمد الحجال عن عاصم بن حميد رفعه قال جاء رجل إلى أمير المؤمنين ع فقال أخبرني عن السنة و البدعة و عن الجماعة و عن الفرقة فقال أمير المؤمنين ع السنة ما سن رسول الله ص و البدعة ما أحدث من بعده و الجماعة أهل الحق و إن كانوا قليلا و الفرقة أهل الباطل و إن كانوا كثيرا
From `Aasim bin Humayd, in a marfoo` manner said, that a man came to Ameer al-Mu'mineen (عليه السلام), and he said: “Inform me about sunnah, bid`ah, and about al-jamaa`ah, and about al-firqah.” So Ameer al-Mu’mineen (عليه السلام) said: “al-Sunnah is whatever the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) did, al-bid`ah is whatever has been innovated after him (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), al-jamaa`ah are the people of truth, even if they are little, and al-firqah are the people of falsehood even if they are a lot”

al-Sadooq, Ma`aani al-Akhbaar (Qum: Inshārāt Islāmī, 1361), pg. 154 - 155, Hadeeth # 3

Further Scholarly Definitions:


البدعة:
زيادة في الدين، أو نقصان منه من إسناد إلى الدين.

Bid`ah: (anything) increased (added) in the religion, or shortened (subtracted) from it from the source of the religion
al-Murtada, Risaa'il al-Shareef al-MurtaDa (Qum: Daar al-Qur'aan al-Kareem, 1405 AH), vol. 2, pg. 264


الحدث في الدين، و ما ليس له أصل في كتاب و لا سنة، و إنما سميت بدعة لأن قائلها ابتدعها هو نفسه
"It is an invention in the religion, which is from not from principle books or (from) the sunnah, and it is named bid`ah, because the caller innovates it from himself"
al-Turayhi, Majma` al-BaHrayn (Tehran: Maktabah al-MurtaDawwi, 3rd ed., 1416 AH), vol. 4, pg. 298 - 299

http://www.shiachat....50#entry2270935


So it's concluded that a Bid`ah is: what is changed in religious matters after the Prophet [saawaws], anything added or subtracted in the religion. So you argue if `Ali [as] is the Walee of Allah, it should be allowed. We know `Ali [as] is the Walee of Allah because Allah states it, Rasool Allah [saawaws] states it and he declares `Ali [as] as our Mawla, however, that is not sufficient reason to change the Adhaan. And if we want to attest everything we believe in the Adhaan, shouldn't we also testify our beliefs in `Adalat and Qiyamat, why if we add something to the Adhaan after the Prophet [saawaws] didn't add it, is it only Wilayat? Also, adding this to the Adhaan when our Nabi [saawaws] did not have it in his Adhaan, nor did our A`ima [as] evidently recite it, so do we know more about this religion and know what is better for this religion then them? If there is no direct reliable evidence and we rely on only proven the known thing of Imaam `Ali [as]'s Wilayat to announce this Bid`ah in Adhaan, that should be answered.

Because you dont like me copying and pasting ill post these articles in which you can read, I hope you do:
http://en.shiapen.co...eclaration.html
-This article proves with logic why we are allowed to say Ali in kalima therefore it automatically allows it to be mentioned in athan. It also shows quranic verses pertaining to it.


It's not that I don't like it, I just don't like those mass articles you copy paste from al-islam.org in debates which gets annoying to see, we can easily go on the site and see them ourselves. Also, I'm not Sunni, so have a bit more respect than giving me an unreliable debate website. Also, this link is about declaring our beliefs in Kalima, where we testify what we believe in faith. Adhaan is not a chance to testify our beliefs, it is the calling to prayers.

Now about the cursing of Ali, Our enemies themselves stated they cursed Ali, so why do you think its made up? Saying Ali in athan wasn't solely for the cursing, im saying its part of refuting the cursing. Your saying it started by galis, im saying just because a gali said it does it make it wrong,


I'm sorry, did you actually just say you're leaving your religion on Ahl al-Ghulluw? I want you to go to any scholar (The two I've gone to to myself to make sure are Sayyed Mothafar al-Qazwini and Shaykh Danial), and you'll hear that you cannot take opinions or religion from them.

if and only if its not breaking our fundamentals in the religion.


We have problems accepting them for Hadeeth, you think we're going to take them at all for Fiqh?

If it was condemned by our "famous" scholars back then, why not now?


There is a fine line between the scholars who decided it. After it was popularized by the Safavids, scholars tried rationalizing it, for example to quote al-Majlisi in Bihaar al-Anwaar:

وأقول : لايبعد كون الشهادة بالولاية من الاجزاء المستحبة للاذان ، لشهادة الشيخ والعلامة والشهيد وغيرهم

And I say: It might not be unlikely that the testimony of Wilayah is from parts of the Mostahab Adhaan, reflecting the testimony of al-Shaykh and al-Allamah and al-Shaheed and other such.

Bihaar al-Anwaar volume 81 page 111
http://www.al-shia.o...behar81/111.htm


As well as others, this is after it was established and popularized by the Safavids who were, as you can say, ultra-Shi`a, it seems scholars have tried rationalizing it after as a Mostahab part, and obviously people like you and others who are trying so hard to protect this declare it as Mostahab.

Maybe there was lack of resources. Also, about imam Baqir's hadith, maybe it was taqiyya, it doesnt contradict the hadith because his hadith is true that is the original athan, but it doesnt make saying ali in athan wrong.
This is from their books, just because its in their books doesnt make it a lie.
http://en.shiapen.co...g-imam-ali.html


Do you seriously hear yourself "Maybe there was a lack of resources", most of the books that came after took the Isnaad from the books of Sadooq [ra], Kolaynee [ra], and Toosee [ra], as well as other books, Bihaar al-Anwaar is a collection of such. The scholars would not have just "not heard this". Also, this Hadeeth does not follow the path of a Hadeeth of taqiyya, there are ways you can tell it is a Hadeeth, such as it matches the rulings and/or beliefs of the Sunnis. This in no way does that, if you can see it does not match the Sunni Adhaan, there are other ways to tell Ahadeeth of Taqiyya, but that is a usually quick way to.

Now I found a wondeful article on a person refuting a muftee on calling the shahada a bidha because Majlisi and other shia scholars condemned it. A MUST READ
"
In the Name of Allaah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
An online “Muftee” wrote an article in which he declared the third Shahaadah in the Azaan and Iqaamah to be bid’a. Expectedly, Efendi (لعنه الله) and the other Nasibis (لعنهم الله) jumped up to “help” this supposedly “Shee’ah” brother spread his message over the Internet! We examined his arguments, and we found a lot of mistakes, misrepresentations and inconsistencies. In this article, we will inshaa Allaah be providing the answers of the Shee’ah (رضي الله عنهم) of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام) to the charge of this online “Muftee” against our noble creed. We seek Allaah’s Help, and the Prophet’s help, in this effort.
The online “Muftee” started his fatwa with these bold declarations:
The first thing I would like to mention is that the issue of the 3rd testimony in the Adhaan/Iqaamah was condemned by ALL major scholars before Al-Majlisi's father (Muhammad Taqee Al-Majlsi) who died in the year 1080 AH (See: Al-Majlisi I, RawDah Al-Muttaqoon). Al-Majlisi backed up his father and said that doing this 3rd testimony in the adhaan / iqaamah is a great act.

So for 1000 years, this issue was either condemned, called a bid'ah, calling the people who do this action a form of ghullah (exaggerator), or simply hasn't even been mentioned in their books(for it wasn't important).

There are 0 (zero) SaHeeH hadeeth from Shee'ah books that says that it is permissible to add the 3rd testimony in Adhaan or Iqaamah. Or ANY hadeeth that says that it is mustahab (recommended), or anything that says "do it with the intention of it NOT being part of the adhaan/iqaamah". None. Zero. Nada."

http://www.wilayat.n...n-online-muftee -Link for article above^^


http://www.revivinga...nd-iqaamah.html The "Muftee" as they are calling him is brother Nader Zaveri. And this link you have is about Post-Safavi scholars writing about the opinions of Pre-Safavi scholars, and these are all Fatawa, these are not narrations. And at the end of the article, they fail to write about any Ahadeeth supporting it as a Mostahab action. Most of the narrations brought are Dha`eef regardless, as discussed by Nader.

Now I leave you with some hadiths. I dont know what their authenticity is but I believe they are sahih.


That's not how `Ilm al-Hadeeth works.

وعن الصادق عليه السلام انه قال: الكلم الطيب قول المؤمن " لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله علي ولي الله وخليفة رسول الله


Imam Sadiq (as) said, "Al Kalam Al Tayyeb is the saying of a Momin - There is not God by Allah, Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah and Ali is the Wali of Allah and Successor of Prophet of Allah"


[Source: Tafseer Al Qummi Vol.2 Pg. 208]



تاج الملك، مكتوب عليه لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله علي ولي الله

The crown of Kingdom on the head of Prophet Muhammad (saww), it will be written on it - here is not God by Allah, Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah and Ali is the Wali of Allah"

[Source: Tafseer Al Qummi Vol.2 Pg. 325]



و بهذا الإسناد، عن علي بن الحسن، عن جعفر الأموي، عن العباس ابن عبد الله، عن سعد بن طريف، عن الأصبغ بن نباتة، عن أبي مريم، عن سلمان، قال كنا جلوسا عند النبي )صلى الله عليه و آله( إذ أقبل علي بن أبي طالب )عليه السلام(، فناوله النبي )صلى الله عليه و آله( حصاة، فما استقرت الحصاة في كف علي )عليه السلام( حتى نطقت، و هي تقول لا إله إلا الله، محمد رسول الله، رضيت بالله ربا، و بمحمد نبيا، و بعلي بن أبي طالب وليا ثم قال النبي )صلى الله عليه و آله( من أصبح منكم راضيا بالله و بولاية علي بن أبي طالب، فقد أمن خوف الله و عقابه

The Knowledgeable scholar Abu Ali Hasan bin Abi Jafar Al-Toosi narrated from his blessed father Abu Jafar Muhammad bin Hasan Al-Toosi, from Abu Muhammad Hasan bin Muhammad bin Yahya Al-Fahham, from Omar bin Yahya, from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Sulaimaan bin Aasim, from Abu Bakr Ahmad bin Muhammad Al-Abdi, from Ali bin Hasan bin Jafar Al-Amawy, from Abbas bin Ubaidullah, from Saad bin Tareef, from Asbagh bin Nobatah from Abi Maryam from Salman who said:

We were sitting with Messenger of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì when Ali bin Abi Taleb (as) entered. The Prophet (saww) gave Ali (as) a small stone.

When Ali (as) held the stone in his palm, the stone said, "There is no god but Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì and Muhammad (saww) is the Messenger of Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì. I am pleased with Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì as Lord, with Muhammas as a Prophet, and with Ali as a Wali."

Then the Prophet (saww) said, "Those of you who are pleased with Allah as your Lord and with the Wilayat of Ali bin Abi Taleb are safe from Allah's punishment."

[Source: Al-Amali, Sheikh Toosi, Pg. 289]


حـدثـنـا الشيخ ابو جعفر محمد بن الحسن بن علي الطوسي (رحمه اللّه ), قال : اخبرنا احـمد بن محمد بن الصلت الاهوازي , قال : اخبرنا احمد بن محمدبن سعيد بن عبدالرحمن الحافظ, قـال : حـدثـنـي محمد بن عيسى بن هارون بن سلا م الضرير ابو بكر, قال : حدثنا محمد بن زكريا المكي , قال : حدثني كثير بن طارق , من ولد قنبر مولى علي بن ابي طالب (عليه السلام ), قال : حدثني زيـد بـن عـلـي (عـلـيـه الـسـلام ) فـي جارسوج كندة بالكوفة : ان اباه حدثه عن ابيه (عـلـيـهـمـمـاالـسـلام ), عـن ابـن عـباس , قال : اعطى رسول اللّه (صلى اللّه عليه و آله )عليا (عليه السلام ) خاتما فقال : يا علي , خذ هذا الخاتم للنقاش , لينقش عليه محمدبن عبداللّه , فاخذه امير الـمـؤمـنـيـن (عليه السلام ) فاعطاه النقاش , وقال له : انقش عليه محمد بن عبداللّه , فنقش النقاش , واخطات يده , فنقش عليه : محمد رسول اللّه ,فجا امير المؤمنين (عليه السلام ) فقال : ما فعل الخاتم ؟ فـقـال : هو ذا, فاخذه ونظر الى نقشه , فقال : ما امرتك بهذا, قال : صدقت , ولكن يدي اخطات , فجا به الـى رسول اللّه (صلى اللّه عليه و آله ), فقال : يا رسول اللّه , ما نقش النقاش ما امرت به , ذكر ان يده اخـطـات , فـاخـذه النبي (عليه السلام ) ونظر اليه , فقال : يا علي , انا محمد بن عبداللّه , وانا محمد رسول اللّه , وتختم به , فلما اصبح النبي (صلى اللّه عليه و آله ) نظرالى خاتمه , فاذا تحته منقوش : عـلـي ولي اللّه , فتعجب من ذلك النبي (عليه السلام )فجا جبرئيل , فقال : يا جبرئيل , كان كذا وكذا فقال : يا محمد, كتبت ما اردت , وكتبناما اردنا

Sheikh Toosi Narrates from his chain of narrators from Ibn Abbas who said:

The Prophet (saww) gave a ring to Imam Ali (as) and said, "O Ali, take this ring to the inscriber, to inscribe on it "Muhammad son of Abdullah".

Amir Al-Momineen took the ring and gave it to the inscriber and told him to inscribe on it "Muhammad son of Abdullah". The inscriber inscribed on it and and his hand made a mistake and inscribed on the stone "Muhammad the Messenger of Allah".

Amir Al-Momineen went to him (inscriber) and said, "What did u do to the stone?", He (the inscriber) said, "it is this".

Amir Al-Momineen took it and saw the inscription on it and said, "I did not command (ask) you for this". He (the inscriber) said, "You say the truth. but my hands made a mistake.

Then he [Imam Ali (as)] brought the stone to the Messenger of Allah (saww) and said, "O Messenger of Allah (saww), the inscriber did not inscribe what I had ordered him to, He (the inscriber) says that his hands made a mistake.

The Prophet (saww) took the stone and looked towards it and said, "O Ali (as), I am Muhammad son of Abdullah and I am Muhammad the Messenger of Allah" and it concluded with it.

When in the morning the Prophet (saww) looked towards the stone, inscribed beneath the stone was the inscription "Ali is the Wali of Allah" and the Prophet (saww) was amazed with this. Then Jibraeel came and the Prophet (saww) said, "O Jibraeel this was this and this."

Jibraeel said, "O Muhammad, you wrote what you wanted to and we wrote what we wanted to.

[Source: Al-Amali, Sheikh Toosi, Pg. 705]

https://sites.google...wali-allah-in-h Where I got these hadiths^^

Wa Salaam


These are talking about Imaam `Ali [as] being a Walee, this is not discussing Adhaan, and as I said, Adhaan is not an opportunity to declare everything we believe.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit: Sorry brother but i must add this copy and past

Tribute to Muhammad and his Household (saying “اللهم صلِّ على مُحَمَّد وآل مُحَمَّد” Allahumma Salli Ala Muhammad(in) wa Aali Muhammad) after mentioning the name of the Prophet (a.s) is recommended as is completing the testimonies by the testimony to the Wilayah and Imamate of Ali (a.s), in both Adhan and iqamah.

Whoever has denied the testimony to Ali’s Wilayah in Adhan, regarding it as heresy, has made mistake and has as uncommon belief. The caller to Adhan in Islam [usually] added phrases to the beginning and the end of Adhan—phrases that are not derived from the religion, but still they are not heresy and adding them is not forbidden. The reason is that the callers to Adhan do not consider these phrases as parts of Adhan, and include them just due to the general arguments.[311] The testimony to Ali’s Wilayah is subject to these general arguments. Moreover, short phrases from the people themselves do not nullify Adhan and iqamah.[312] To say these during Adhan and iqamah is therefore not forbidden…”[313]

Consequently, since naming Ali (a.s) is as worship, there is no doubt about the preference of mentioning his name in general and in Adhan, in particular. As Muttaqi Hindi narrates in Kanz Al-Ummal:

ذِكْرُ عَلِيٍّ عِبادَةٌ.

Mentioning Ali’s name is as worship.[314]


1. Don't give me Sunni Ahadeeth and Sunni Ahadeeth books, I don't believe in them.
2. This is a Fadhl of of Ameer al-Mo`mineen `Alee [as], this is not a declaration for us to add to the Adhaan.

I must ask you, you must recognize after all that this practice was started by people who we consider as weak minded and unreliable, and I've been informed by some that they are even seen as Najis.
(salam)

#66 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:07 PM

(bismillah)

(salam)
I don't think the first sentence was done and you completely jumped off track. Now to just explain shortly what a Bid`ah is, let us look at this Hadeeth:



So it's concluded that a Bid`ah is: what is changed in religious matters after the Prophet [saawaws], anything added or subtracted in the religion. So you argue if `Ali [as] is the Walee of Allah, it should be allowed. We know `Ali [as] is the Walee of Allah because Allah states it, Rasool Allah [saawaws] states it and he declares `Ali [as] as our Mawla, however, that is not sufficient reason to change the Adhaan. And if we want to attest everything we believe in the Adhaan, shouldn't we also testify our beliefs in `Adalat and Qiyamat, why if we add something to the Adhaan after the Prophet [saawaws] didn't add it, is it only Wilayat? Also, adding this to the Adhaan when our Nabi [saawaws] did not have it in his Adhaan, nor did our A`ima [as] evidently recite it, so do we know more about this religion and know what is better for this religion then them? If there is no direct reliable evidence and we rely on only proven the known thing of Imaam `Ali [as]'s Wilayat to announce this Bid`ah in Adhaan, that should be answered.



It's not that I don't like it, I just don't like those mass articles you copy paste from al-islam.org in debates which gets annoying to see, we can easily go on the site and see them ourselves. Also, I'm not Sunni, so have a bit more respect than giving me an unreliable debate website. Also, this link is about declaring our beliefs in Kalima, where we testify what we believe in faith. Adhaan is not a chance to testify our beliefs, it is the calling to prayers.

Brother why are you accusing me of calling you a sunni. How is giving you a website disrespectful. Why are people on this website so aggressive? I felt the website gave a good logical perspective.


I'm sorry, did you actually just say you're leaving your religion on Ahl al-Ghulluw? I want you to go to any scholar (The two I've gone to to myself to make sure are Sayyed Mothafar al-Qazwini and Shaykh Danial), and you'll hear that you cannot take opinions or religion from them.

For example, what if there are gulus who pray like us, do we stop because they do it? I was saying maybe, maybe, we cannot conclude ourselves if our marja has not. I feel like they have other reasons, they dont just say something for no reason.


We have problems accepting them for Hadeeth, you think we're going to take them at all for Fiqh?



There is a fine line between the scholars who decided it. After it was popularized by the Safavids, scholars tried rationalizing it, for example to quote al-Majlisi in Bihaar al-Anwaar:



As well as others, this is after it was established and popularized by the Safavids who were, as you can say, ultra-Shi`a, it seems scholars have tried rationalizing it after as a Mostahab part, and obviously people like you and others who are trying so hard to protect this declare it as Mostahab.



Do you seriously hear yourself "Maybe there was a lack of resources", most of the books that came after took the Isnaad from the books of Sadooq [ra], Kolaynee [ra], and Toosee [ra], as well as other books, Bihaar al-Anwaar is a collection of such. The scholars would not have just "not heard this". Also, this Hadeeth does not follow the path of a Hadeeth of taqiyya, there are ways you can tell it is a Hadeeth, such as it matches the rulings and/or beliefs of the Sunnis. This in no way does that, if you can see it does not match the Sunni Adhaan, there are other ways to tell Ahadeeth of Taqiyya, but that is a usually quick way to.



http://www.revivinga...nd-iqaamah.html The "Muftee" as they are calling him is brother Nader Zaveri. And this link you have is about Post-Safavi scholars writing about the opinions of Pre-Safavi scholars, and these are all Fatawa, these are not narrations. And at the end of the article, they fail to write about any Ahadeeth supporting it as a Mostahab action. Most of the narrations brought are Dha`eef regardless, as discussed by Nader.



That's not how `Ilm al-Hadeeth works.



These are talking about Imaam `Ali [as] being a Walee, this is not discussing Adhaan, and as I said, Adhaan is not an opportunity to declare everything we believe.



1. Don't give me Sunni Ahadeeth and Sunni Ahadeeth books, I don't believe in them.
2. This is a Fadhl of of Ameer al-Mo`mineen `Alee [as], this is not a declaration for us to add to the Adhaan.

I must ask you, you must recognize after all that this practice was started by people who we consider as weak minded and unreliable, and I've been informed by some that they are even seen as Najis.
(salam)



Well, I thank you for your input. But for me its still not enough, I need to see it within our books for myself, plus ill keep reasearching. I also have this inner feeling, there is something missing. So once again thanks brother. I wasnt trying to offend or disrespect or hurt you, please forgive me if you felt i did.

wa salaam

#67 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:44 PM

Brothers, everytime i find a hadith please let me know if its sahih or not.

Halbi narrates a tradition from Imam Muhammad Baqir(as) that o my master arewe allowed to take the names of Imams in namaz? Imam replied “al mustahab zikrul ayma wa tasmeeatu jumlatan fi qunood waghaeera” yes it is mustahab by taking names of he ayma properly in qunood and other parts of namaz…
References: 1-(Manla yahzar-ul-faqia vol 1 page 318 hadith 938 written by sheikhsudooq)
2-(Al tehzeeb vol 2 pages 133 and 236)
3-(Wasayel-ul-shia vol 6 page 285chapter zikr –ul-ayma)
Here are the most authentic books two of them are the books of usool-e-arba thereare four rijaals of this tradition near wasayel-ul-shia…
First rijaal: Muhammad bin Ali bin Hussain(a,w,s) ba asnaad anal halbi
Second rijaal: Muhammad bin Al Hassan ba asnaad Aban bin usman
Third rijaal: An bakar bin Muhammad azdi ba asnaad aban bin usman
Fourth rijaal: Ahmed bin Muhammad bin al Hassan ba asnaad anal halbi
These are the four rijaals in wasayel-ul-shia vol 6 page 285

#68 Naruto

Naruto

    Member

  • Banned
  • 459 posts
  • Religion:Shi`ah Islam

Posted 09 February 2013 - 03:52 PM

Brothers, everytime i find a hadith please let me know if its sahih or not.

Halbi narrates a tradition from Imam Muhammad Baqir(as) that o my master arewe allowed to take the names of Imams in namaz? Imam replied “al mustahab zikrul ayma wa tasmeeatu jumlatan fi qunood waghaeera” yes it is mustahab by taking names of he ayma properly in qunood and other parts of namaz…
References: 1-(Manla yahzar-ul-faqia vol 1 page 318 hadith 938 written by sheikhsudooq)
2-(Al tehzeeb vol 2 pages 133 and 236)
3-(Wasayel-ul-shia vol 6 page 285chapter zikr –ul-ayma)
Here are the most authentic books two of them are the books of usool-e-arba thereare four rijaals of this tradition near wasayel-ul-shia…
First rijaal: Muhammad bin Ali bin Hussain(a,w,s) ba asnaad anal halbi
Second rijaal: Muhammad bin Al Hassan ba asnaad Aban bin usman
Third rijaal: An bakar bin Muhammad azdi ba asnaad aban bin usman
Fourth rijaal: Ahmed bin Muhammad bin al Hassan ba asnaad anal halbi
These are the four rijaals in wasayel-ul-shia vol 6 page 285


It is most likely Saheeh, but I don't see how it proves your point that the third testimony is legitimate in the adhan.

#69 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:03 PM

It is most likely Saheeh, but I don't see how it proves your point that the third testimony is legitimate in the adhan.


athan is part of prayer, therefore mentioning Ali A.S is alright

#70 Naruto

Naruto

    Member

  • Banned
  • 459 posts
  • Religion:Shi`ah Islam

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:07 PM

athan is part of prayer, therefore mentioning Ali A.S is alright


The adhaan is a part of prayer? :wacko: I don't think so.

#71 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:18 PM

The adhaan is a part of prayer? :wacko: I don't think so.

then why do we say it before prayer only?

#72 Naruto

Naruto

    Member

  • Banned
  • 459 posts
  • Religion:Shi`ah Islam

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:24 PM

then why do we say it before prayer only?


That does not mean it's a part of the prayer.

#73 PureEthics

PureEthics

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,582 posts
  • Religion:"MainStream" Shia - Layman
  • Interests:Following the Path of Muhammad A.S and His Holy Ahlulbayt A.S by Striving towards Perfection.

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:28 PM

That does not mean it's a part of the prayer.


its part of the prayer system. hence we say it before prayer.

#74 Ali Musaaa :)

Ali Musaaa :)

    أبو إسحاق‎

  • Mods
  • 4,231 posts
  • Location:The wonderful land of Aus
  • Religion:Imāmī

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:39 PM

^ Brother, sometimes we need to let go of the things we blindly latch on too.
  • Naruto likes this

#75 Naruto

Naruto

    Member

  • Banned
  • 459 posts
  • Religion:Shi`ah Islam

Posted 09 February 2013 - 04:40 PM

its part of the prayer system. hence we say it before prayer.


That's not a valid argument brother.



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users