Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Intellectual Resistance

The real shia Adhan

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Hassan- said:
8 hours ago, Ya Allah Madad said:

Ok then doing 3 or 4 or 5 sujud in one rakah is also permissible unless deemed impermissible. Also praying 5 or 6 or 7 rakat in farz maghrib salah is permissible unless deemed impermissible. And the list goes on and on and on.

And intentions matter in everything except at fadak. Right. Allah looks at person's intentions except for abu bakr an dumar. Right.

Where is that intention part brother in their comments show me. I am asking 3rd time.

I told you salah is wajib, therefore each part of salah must be done the way it is. It is wajib to only do 2 sujuds in each rakat, therefore you can't add or subract things in it. Anything that's wajib must be done the way it is. Get it?

Only 2 rakah of fajr prayer, 4 of zuhr, 4 of asr, 3 or maghrib and 4 rakah of isha prayer are wajib. So for rest of salah can we do more than 2 sujud and as many rakah as we wish in nawafil instead of just 2 or 4.

As you said everything is permissible unless deemed impermissible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, S.M.H.A. said:

If No, what are you doing here? It is obvious that you will have an issue Saying / Testifying to 

Ash-hado an Aliyun Waleeullah, Wasi-o-Rasoolilah.  

What you mean by waleeullah and wasi e rasoolullah here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ya Allah Madad said:

Only 2 rakah of fajr prayer, 4 of zuhr, 4 of asr, 3 or maghrib and 4 rakah of isha prayer are wajib. So for rest of salah can we do more than 2 sujud and as many rakah as we wish in nawafil instead of just 2 or 4.

As you said everything is permissible unless deemed impermissible.

The reason for praying nawafil salah is to get more reward from Allah, and by doing that you must pray the nawafil the way it should be. If you change it up, it isn't haram, but you aren't getting the reward for it anymore. Also, salah consists of 2 sujouds for each rakat and anything more or less than 2 sujouds isn't considered "salah" anymore. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, S.M.H.A. said:

928. Ash hadu anna Amiral Muminina'Aliyyan Waliyyullah (i.e. I testify that the Commander of the Faithful Imam Ali (Peace be on him) is the vicegerent of Allah) is not a part of either Azan or Iqamah It is, however, better to pronounce it after Ash hadu anna Muhammadan Rasulul lah to seek Divine pleasure.

https://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/prayers#azan-and-iqamah

928. Ash hadu anna Amiral Mu'minina 'Aliyyan Waliyyullah ( I testify that the Commander of the faithful, Imam Ali (AS) is the vicegerent of Allah) is not a part of either Adhan or Iqamah. But it is preferable that it is pronounced after Ash hadu anna Muhammadan Rasulul lah with the niyyat of Qurbat.

http://www.sistani.org/english/book/48/2216/

928 َوِل اًّليِع َن َّاُ هد َشَ ْا)Ash'hadu anna Aliyyan wali'ullah) (“I bear witness that Ali (Peace be upon him) is the vicegerent of God”) is not a part of the azan, nor the iqamah. However, since the guardianship of Amir al-Mu’menin (Peace be upon him) is the completion of the religion, to recite it in any state, including after the statement لل ََّّا ل ُسو ُرَ bear I“اَ ْش َهدُ ا َّن ُم َح َّمدً witness that Muhammad (Peace be upon him and his progeny) is the messenger of

God” is the best means of attaining Divine proximity.

http://www.islamic-laws.com/download/Islamic Laws - Sheikh Wahid Khorasani.pdf

 

Q 452: What is your esteemed opinion on the third testimony for the master of believers, Imam Ali (a.), as being the commander and the leader, in the adhān and iqāmah of obligatory prayers?
A: Saying “Ashhadu anna ‘Aliyyan Waliyyullāh” in adhān and iqāmah with the intention of being a symbol for the Shī‘ah school of thought is good and important and it should be said only for the sake of nearness to Allah, but it is not a part of adhān and iqāmah. 

http://www.leader.ir/en/book/23

“Ash hadu anna Amiral Mu'mineena 'Aliyyan Waliyyullah” (i.e. I testify that the Commander of the faithful, Imam Ali (AS) is the vicegerent of Allah) is not a part of either Adhan or Iqamah. But it is preferable that it is pronounced after “Ash hadu anna Muhammadan Rasuloollah” with the intention of Qurbah.

http://www.alnajafi.org/books/43-a-concise-guide-of-islamic-laws/143-rules-of-prayer.html

"Case: The phrase “Ash_hado an-na Aliy-yan waliy-yol-la>h” is the integral part of both adha>n and iqa>mah, as some narrations point to."

http://www.english.shirazi.ir/books/Islamic_Law_2013_SecondEdition.pdf

Modern jurists vs Classic shia scholars.

 

Sheikh al Sadooq in Ma la Yahduruhu al Faqih, Hadith 987:

وروى أبو بكر الحضرمي، وكليب الأسدي عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلامأنه ” حكى لهما الاذان فقال: الله أكبر، الله أكبر، الله أكبر الله أكبر، أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله، أشهد أن لا إله إلا الله، أشهد أن محمدا رسول الله، أشهد أن محمدا رسول الله، حي على الصلاة، حي على الصلاة، حي على الفلاح، حي على الفلاح، حي على خير العمل، حي على خير العمل، الله أكبر، الله أكبر، لا إله إلا الله، لا إله إلا الله، والإقامة كذلك

Allahu Akbar (4 times), Ash hadu Alla Ilaha Illallah (2 times), Ash hadu anna Muhammadan Rasulallah (2 times), Hayya Ala al Salaat (2 times), Hayya Ala al Falah (2 times), Hayya Ala Khairil amal (2 times), Allahu Akbar (2 times), La Ilaha Illallah (2 times).

After narrating this hadith Sheikh Sadooq (ra) says:

هَذَا هُوَ الْأَذَانُ الصَّحِيحُ لَا يُزَادُ فِيهِ وَ لَا يُنْقَصُ مِنْهُ وَ الْمُفَوِّضَةُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ قَدْ وَضَعُوا أَخْبَاراً وَ زَادُوا فِي الْأَذَانِ مُحَمَّدٌ وَ آلُ مُحَمَّدٍ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ فِي بَعْضِ رِوَايَاتِهِمْ بَعْدَ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً رَسُولُ اللَّهِ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ مِنْهُمْ مَنْ رَوَى بَدَلَ ذَلِكَ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ حَقّاً مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ لَا شَكَّ فِي أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ وَ أَنَّهُ أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ حَقّاً وَ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً وَ آلَهُ صَلَوَاتُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِمْ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ وَ لَكِنْ لَيْسَ ذَلِكَ فِي أَصْلِ الْأَذَانِ وَ إِنَّمَا ذَكَرْتُ ذَلِكَ لِيُعْرَفَ بِهَذِهِ الزِّيَادَةِ الْمُتَّهَمُونَ بِالتَّفْوِيضِ الْمُدَلِّسُونَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ فِي جُمْلَتِنَا

This is the correct Adhaan, nothing is to be added or subtracted from it.

The mufawwidah (who claimed that Allah has given the affair of creation and sustenance to Ahlulbayt), may Allaah curse them, have fabricated traditions and have added to the adhaan “Muhammad wa Ali Khairul Bariyya” (Muhammad and the f amily of Muhammad are the best of creatures) twice. In some of their traditions, after saying “Ash hadu anna Muhammadan Rasulallah” (I bear witness that Muhammad is the Prophet of Allaah) they add “Ash hadu Anna Aliyyan Wali Ullah” (I bear witness that Ali is the Wali of Allaah) twice.

Among them there are others who narrate this “Ash hadu anna Aliyyan Amir al Momineen”  (I bear witness that Ali is the commander of the faithful) twice.

There is NO doubt that Ali is the wali of God and that he is the true commander of the faithful and that Muhammad and his family, peace be upon them, are the best of creatures. However, that is not (part) of the original Adhaan. I have mentioned this so that those who have been accused of concocting tafweed and have insulated themselves in our ranks should be known.

 

Muhaqqiq al-Hilli (d. 67611277) says in his Al Mu’tabar fi sharh Al Mukhtaaar,

و ما یقال من الزیادة عن ذلك بدعة

And anything that is added to this (adhaan & iqaamah) is a bid’ah (innovation).

Even in his popular book on Fiqh, Sharaa al Islam Fi Masael Halal wal Haram, Muhaqqiq Hilli mentioned Adhan without the third testimony.

 

Allamaa l-Hilli explicitly forbids the recitation of the third testimony in his Nihaayah Al Ahkaam fi ma’rif ah al-Ahkaam, declaring:

و لا یجوز قول إن علیا ولي الَّله و آل محمد خیر البریة في فصول الآذان، لعدم مشروعیته

And it is NOT permissible to say “Anna Aliyyan Wali Ullah” and “Aal Muhammad Khairul Bariyya” since there is no ruling f or it in the sharee’ah.

 

Shaheed al Awwal:

Fourteenth century Shia scholars based in Jabal Amil followed the example of their predecessors in prohibiting the utterance of the third testimony in the adhan.

Muhammad bin Jamal al-Din, also known as Shahid al awwal, says in Al-Lum’ah Al-Dimashqiyyah, pg. 37:

و لَا یَجُوزُ اعْتِقَادُ شَرْعِیِّة غَیْرِ هَذِهِ فِي الاذان و الاقامة كَالتَّشهُّد بِالْوِلَایَةِ و أ نَ مُحمدا و آلَهِ خَیْرُ الْبَرِیِّة و ا نِ كَانَ الْوَاقِعُ كَذَلِكَ

It is NOT permissible to believe in the legitimacy of Witnessing the Wilaayah of Ali and

that “Muhammad wa Aalih Khayrul Bariyyah” in the adhaan and iqaamah, even though these events are factual.

Shahid al Awwal is consistent in prohibiting the recitation of the wilaya in the adhan in all four of his major juridical works al-Luma, al-Dhikra, al-Bayan, and al-Durus.

 

On 8/20/2012 at 8:43 AM, Qa'im said:

A bit strange for Nakshawani to use the word wajib or obligatory. Saduq didn't believe it was mustahab, mubah, or makrooh either. He believed it was bid`a and therefore absolutely forbidden. You can clearly read the words of Saduq, but don't dare quoting them in our community.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hassan- said:

The reason for praying nawafil salah is to get more reward from Allah, and by doing that you must pray the nawafil the way it should be. If you change it up, it isn't haram, but you aren't getting the reward for it anymore. Also, salah consists of 2 sujouds for each rakat and anything more or less than 2 sujouds isn't considered "salah" anymore. 

Adhan also has a reward. And answering the call of adhan also has a reward. Many narrations explain this. So we should also say the adhan in its original form. Its not a minor issue. Thats why classic scholars took a harsh stand and categorically said its biddah and adding anything to it is absolutely forbidden.

Why double standards?

Sometimes shia quote and follow classic scholars and sometimes only modern scholars. Islam is not choice based.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ya Allah Madad said:

Adhan also has a reward. And answering the call of adhan also has a reward. Many narrations explain this. So we should also say the adhan in its original form. Its not a minor issue. Thats why classic scholars took a harsh stand and categorically said its biddah and adding anything to it is absolutely forbidden.

Why double standards?

Sometimes shia quote and follow classic scholars and sometimes only modern scholars. Islam is not choice based.

The issue whether it's more rewarding to say or not say the 3rd shahada is a completely different topic, and has its own debate. Our discussion here is whether it's bid3ah or not, and I have logically explained to you why it isn't bid3ah or haram to say it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets just try to get back to basics here:

1. The Imams [asws] never added the third Shahadah and never told their followers to [as per evidence we have]. 

2. The early scholars in shia islam never did it, and many of our best scholars in fact, told us that the origin for addicting into the adman came from the ghulat. Shaykh As Saudi [ra], Shaykh Tusi [ra], in fact most jurists until pre-Alama Majlisi did not add it and many warned others against adding it

3. It was only adopted by the Majlisi's, as part of safavid Iran and this is how it crept into mainstream shia islam and found popularity.

 

So the choice is really yours:

1. Recite and verbalise the Adhan the way the Prophet [saw] and Imams verbalised it, no more no less, whatever intention you have to 'add it' or 'not add it' as part of the Adhan.

2. Recite the Adhan with additions the very people who fabricated falsehoods out of mistaken love or perversity with respect to the Imams [asws] and were cursed by them added.

 

You can show me Fatawah, but the matter remains that if you had been born pre-majlisi, you would have been quoting Saduq, Tusi, etc, who were all against it.  Really what is the difference between you and someone who blindly follows because of accident of what time era they are born with, and someone who is willing to reflect and think independently? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

21 hours ago, Intellectual Resistance said:

Lets just try to get back to basics here:

1. The Imams [asws] never added the third Shahadah and never told their followers to [as per evidence we have]. 

2. The early scholars in shia islam never did it, and many of our best scholars in fact, told us that the origin for addicting into the adman came from the ghulat. Shaykh As Saudi [ra], Shaykh Tusi [ra], in fact most jurists until pre-Alama Majlisi did not add it and many warned others against adding it

3. It was only adopted by the Majlisi's, as part of safavid Iran and this is how it crept into mainstream shia islam and found popularity.

 

So the choice is really yours:

1. Recite and verbalise the Adhan the way the Prophet [saw] and Imams verbalised it, no more no less, whatever intention you have to 'add it' or 'not add it' as part of the Adhan.

2. Recite the Adhan with additions the very people who fabricated falsehoods out of mistaken love or perversity with respect to the Imams [asws] and were cursed by them added.

 

You can show me Fatawah, but the matter remains that if you had been born pre-majlisi, you would have been quoting Saduq, Tusi, etc, who were all against it.  Really what is the difference between you and someone who blindly follows because of accident of what time era they are born with, and someone who is willing to reflect and think independently? 

1. Our Imams (as) constructed us to add Aliyan waliyullah in Adhan and Iqamah. I showed my evidence above.

Book Imali Suddook : Imam Ali Raza (as) says " God Almighty has said that He will NOT ACCEPT anyone's acts of worship unless he stands witness to Mawla Ali (as)'s Wilayat with Prophet's ( pbuh & hp ) Risalat."

2. Our scholars are not infallible, I'm not questioning them. Some scholars could have either done mistakes or practice taqqiyah. There were scholars who believed in the incompleteness of the holy Quran right? However the later scholars corrected them. Do you question Ayatollah Sayed Ali Sistani's (ha) status as a scholar?

3. Show me proof. Speculations and judgments based on chance are irrelevant in such issue. That's a very big and important thing to state without evidence.

This topic should be closed with: FOLLOW YOUR MARJA'S RULING... I believe that what you shared was not the Shia Adhan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/25/2017 at 5:09 PM, Hassan- said:

The issue whether it's more rewarding to say or not say the 3rd shahada is a completely different topic, and has its own debate. Our discussion here is whether it's bid3ah or not, and I have logically explained to you why it isn't bid3ah or haram to say it.

Logic? It means you are more knowledgable one than your classic scholars who had declared it a clear bidah no ifs and buts.

Its also possible that those who had introduced this bidah also invented narrations on adding 3rd shahadah on name of Imams. Otherwise there must  have been atleast one single narration showing the full adhan along with 3rd shahadah from Imams.

 

On 6/25/2017 at 5:06 PM, Ya Allah Madad said:

Why double standards?

Sometimes shia quote and follow classic scholars and sometimes only modern scholars. Islam is not choice based.

 

Or we can say there are two versions of twelver shiism, a classic one and a modern one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2017 at 1:06 PM, Ya Allah Madad said:

Otherwise there must  have been atleast one single narration showing the full adhan along with 3rd shahadah from Imams.

قال صادق علیه السلام : الاذان و الاقامة مثنی مثنی الاذان عشرون حرفا و الاقامة اثنان عشرون حرفا

Imam Jafar e Sadiq (as) said: 

“The Recitations in Azaan and Iqamat are double. The recitations in Azaan are 20 and in Iqamat are 22”

[Al Hidaya (Sheikh Sadooq) Pg: 30, Bihar Al Anwar Vol: 84 Pg: 111, Mustadrak ul Wasail Vol: 1 Pg: 253]

Got this from: http://www.shahadat-e-salisa.com/home/shahadat-e-salisa-in-azaan

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SheikhAlHabib'fan said:

قال صادق علیه السلام : الاذان و الاقامة مثنی مثنی الاذان عشرون حرفا و الاقامة اثنان عشرون حرفا

Imam Jafar e Sadiq (as) said: 

“The Recitations in Azaan and Iqamat are double. The recitations in Azaan are 20 and in Iqamat are 22”

[Al Hidaya (Sheikh Sadooq) Pg: 30, Bihar Al Anwar Vol: 84 Pg: 111, Mustadrak ul Wasail Vol: 1 Pg: 253]

Got this from: http://www.shahadat-e-salisa.com/home/shahadat-e-salisa-in-azaan

 

Salam,

Going by this narration, what is the adhan?

This is the commonly accepted narration regarding the number:
علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى بن عبيد، عن يونس، عن أبان بن عثمان، عن إسماعيل الجعفي قال: سمعت: أبا جعفر (عليه السلام) يقول: الاذان والاقامة خمسة وثلاثون حرفا فعد ذلك بيده واحدا واحدا الاذان ثمانية عشر حرفا والاقام  سبعة عشر حرفا  (موثق)    

 
3. Ali bin Ibrahim from Muhammad bin Isa bin Ubayd from Yunus (bin Abdir-Rahman) from Aban (bin Uthman) from Ismail al-Jufi who said : I heard Aba Ja’far (a.s) saying : the Adhan and the Iqamah are thirty five clauses, and He (a.s) counted them, with His hand - one after the other, (so) the Adhan (was) eighteen clauses, and the Iqamah seventeen clauses. (Muwathaq due to Aban)

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2011/07/origins-of-adhan-and-iqamah-and-its.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SheikhAlHabib'fan said:

[Al Hidaya (Sheikh Sadooq) Pg: 30

Shiekh Sadooq condemned people who added the third shahada as part of adhan.

Quote


هَذَا هُوَ الْأَذَانُ الصَّحِيحُ لَا يُزَادُ فِيهِ وَ لَا يُنْقَصُ مِنْهُ وَ الْمُفَوِّضَةُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ قَدْ وَضَعُوا أَخْبَاراً وَ زَادُوا فِي الْأَذَانِ مُحَمَّدٌ وَ آلُ مُحَمَّدٍ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ فِي بَعْضِ رِوَايَاتِهِمْ بَعْدَ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً رَسُولُ اللَّهِ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ مِنْهُمْ مَنْ رَوَى بَدَلَ ذَلِكَ أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ حَقّاً مَرَّتَيْنِ وَ لَا شَكَّ فِي أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ وَ أَنَّهُ أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ حَقّاً وَ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً وَ آلَهُ صَلَوَاتُ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِمْ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ وَ لَكِنْ لَيْسَ ذَلِكَ فِي أَصْلِ الْأَذَانِ وَ إِنَّمَا ذَكَرْتُ ذَلِكَ لِيُعْرَفَ بِهَذِهِ الزِّيَادَةِ الْمُتَّهَمُونَ بِالتَّفْوِيضِ الْمُدَلِّسُونَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ فِي جُمْلَتِنَا
Translation: "This is the Authentic / Correct (SaHeeH) adhaan; nothing is to be added or subtracted from it. The mufawwidah's (form of ghullah), may Allaah curse them, have fabricated traditions and have added to the adhaan مُحَمَّدٌ وَ آلُ مُحَمَّدٍ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ (Muhammad and the family of Muhammad are the best of mankind) twice. In some of their traditions, after saying أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّداً رَسُولُ اللَّهِ (I bear witness that Muhammad is the Prophet of Allaah) (they add) أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً وَلِيُّ اللَّهِ(I bear witness that 'Alee is the Walee of Allaah) twice. Among them there are others who narrate this أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ عَلِيّاً أَمِيرُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ (I bear witness that 'Alee is the commander of the faithfull) twice. There is NO doubt that 'Alee is the walee of God and that he is the true commander of the faithful and that Muhammad and his family, peace be upon them, are the best of creatures. However, that is not [part] of the original adhaan. I have mentioned this so that those who have been accused of concocting tafweed and have insulated themselves in our ranks should be known."
Source:
1. Al-Sadooq, Man Laa YaHduruh Al-Faqeeh, vol. 1, pg. 290 - 291

 

 
 

 

Here is an authentic hadith that says adhan is 18, not 20.

Quote


عَلِيُّ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عِيسَى بْنِ عُبَيْدٍ عَنْ يُونُسَ عَنْ أَبَانِ بْنِ عُثْمَانَ عَنْ إِسْمَاعِيلَ الْجُعْفِيِّ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا جَعْفَرٍ ع يَقُولُ الْأَذَانُ وَ الْإِقَامَةُ خَمْسَةٌ وَ ثَلَاثُونَ حَرْفاً فَعَدَّ ذَلِكَ بِيَدِهِ وَاحِداً وَاحِداً الْأَذَانَ ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ حَرْفاً وَ الْإِقَامَةَسَبْعَةَ عَشَرَ حَرْفاً
Imam Baqir (AS) said: The Adhaan and the Iqaamah have 35 characters/parts, just check it by his hand one by one, the adhaan has 18 characters/parts and the Iqaamah has 17 characters/parts."
Source:
· Al-Kaafi, Al-Kulaynee, vol. 3, pg. 302 - 303, hadeeth # 3
Grading:
· Al-Majlisi has said this hadeeth is Muwwaththaq (Reliable)
--> Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 15, pg. 82

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Ali_Hussain said:

Salam,

Going by this narration, what is the adhan?

This is the commonly accepted narration regarding the number:
علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى بن عبيد، عن يونس، عن أبان بن عثمان، عن إسماعيل الجعفي قال: سمعت: أبا جعفر (عليه السلام) يقول: الاذان والاقامة خمسة وثلاثون حرفا فعد ذلك بيده واحدا واحدا الاذان ثمانية عشر حرفا والاقام  سبعة عشر حرفا  (موثق)    

 

 
3. Ali bin Ibrahim from Muhammad bin Isa bin Ubayd from Yunus (bin Abdir-Rahman) from Aban (bin Uthman) from Ismail al-Jufi who said : I heard Aba Ja’far (a.s) saying : the Adhan and the Iqamah are thirty five clauses, and He (a.s) counted them, with His hand - one after the other, (so) the Adhan (was) eighteen clauses, and the Iqamah seventeen clauses. (Muwathaq due to Aban)

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2011/07/origins-of-adhan-and-iqamah-and-its.html

 

10 minutes ago, Hassan- said:

Shiekh Sadooq condemned people who added the third shahada as part of adhan.

 
 

 

Here is an authentic hadith that says adhan is 18, not 20.

 

 

I believe that I have answered you above. Why would there be contradictions between Sheikh Sadooq's views other than he was practicing taqqiyah? There are scholars saying that as well, Muhammad Taqi Majlisi, Muhammad Raza Najafi etc... look at:

http://www.shahadat-e-salisa.com/home/shahadat-e-salisa-in-azaan

for more info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SheikhAlHabib'fan said:

 

I believe that I have answered you above. Why would there be contradictions between Sheikh Sadooq's views other than he was practicing taqqiyah? There are scholars saying that as well, Muhammad Taqi Majlisi, Muhammad Raza Najafi etc... look at:

http://www.shahadat-e-salisa.com/home/shahadat-e-salisa-in-azaan

for more info.

But what would the 22 parts of the iqama be?

Also why would he practice taqiyya in al-Faqih but not here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hassan- said:

Shiekh Sadooq condemned people who added the third shahada as part of adhan.

 

1 hour ago, Ali_Hussain said:

Also why would he practice taqiyya in al-Faqih but not here?

 
Sayed Husain Tabrizi:
 

و فی بعض الروایات وردت الشهادة علی الولایة كما ذكره الصدوق و من صدوق و شیخ طوسی یظهران الشهادة بالولاية وردت فی بعض الاخبار مستد لا 

علی انه , قدورد فی الاحادیث 

المعتبرة ان الولایة و لرسالة مقرونتان و ان اسم امیر المومنین و اسم رسول الله مقرون و مذكور فی كل مكان

In some narrations there exits the declarations of Wilayat like Sheikh Sadooq has quoted. It becomes evident from the words of Sheikh Sadooq and Sheikh Toosi that it has come in authentic narrations that Wilayat and Risalat are into one another and that the names of Prophet (saww) and Amir-ul-Mumineen (as) are always taken together.

[Ref: Qawaid-ud-Deen Pg: 227]

 

Muhammad Taqi Majlisi

 
یمكن ان تكون جزاء واقعیا لولا التقیة
It’s possible that this (Shahadat-e-Salisa) would be a Juz (part) if there had been no Taqayya.

[Ref: Rauzat-ul-Muttaqeen, Vol: 2, Pg: 246]

 

Sheikh Muhammad Raza Najafi:

 

الذی یقوی انها جزء للاذان لولا التقیة

Shahadat-e-Salisa not being a Juz (part) of Aazan is due to Taqayya. 
 
[Ref: Sirr-ul-Eeman, Pg: 41]
 
Look at Ayatollah Sayed Abu Qasim Khoei's (r) stance on this issue:
 
We don’t need any Hadees to prove Ali-un-Wali-Allah in Azaan & Iqamat, because Wilayat is a means for Completion of Risalat & strengthening of Eeman. And Wilayat is 1 of those 5 things which are the basis of Deen. It is a clear sign and means of identification of Shiat.

[Ref: Mustanad Urwat-ul-Wusqa, Vol:2, Pg:288]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SheikhAlHabib'fan said:

 

 
Sayed Husain Tabrizi:
 

و فی بعض الروایات وردت الشهادة علی الولایة كما ذكره الصدوق و من صدوق و شیخ طوسی یظهران الشهادة بالولاية وردت فی بعض الاخبار مستد لا 

علی انه , قدورد فی الاحادیث 

المعتبرة ان الولایة و لرسالة مقرونتان و ان اسم امیر المومنین و اسم رسول الله مقرون و مذكور فی كل مكان

In some narrations there exits the declarations of Wilayat like Sheikh Sadooq has quoted. It becomes evident from the words of Sheikh Sadooq and Sheikh Toosi that it has come in authentic narrations that Wilayat and Risalat are into one another and that the names of Prophet (saww) and Amir-ul-Mumineen (as) are always taken together.

[Ref: Qawaid-ud-Deen Pg: 227]

 

Muhammad Taqi Majlisi

 
یمكن ان تكون جزاء واقعیا لولا التقیة
It’s possible that this (Shahadat-e-Salisa) would be a Juz (part) if there had been no Taqayya.

[Ref: Rauzat-ul-Muttaqeen, Vol: 2, Pg: 246]

 

Sheikh Muhammad Raza Najafi:

 

الذی یقوی انها جزء للاذان لولا التقیة

Shahadat-e-Salisa not being a Juz (part) of Aazan is due to Taqayya. 
 
[Ref: Sirr-ul-Eeman, Pg: 41]
 
Look at Ayatollah Sayed Abu Qasim Khoei's (r) stance on this issue:
 
We don’t need any Hadees to prove Ali-un-Wali-Allah in Azaan & Iqamat, because Wilayat is a means for Completion of Risalat & strengthening of Eeman. And Wilayat is 1 of those 5 things which are the basis of Deen. It is a clear sign and means of identification of Shiat.

[Ref: Mustanad Urwat-ul-Wusqa, Vol:2, Pg:288]

All this literally doesn't mean anything because they are just assumptions and opinions. Show me one saheeh Hadith that says to add third shahada in adhan, or show me one saheeh Hadith that adding third shahada is mustahab, with the sanad and source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read here http://www.revivingalislam.com/2010/06/3rd-testimony-in-adhaan-and-iqaamah.html?m=1  @SheikhAlHabib'fan you can see that there is 0 saheeh hadiths with third shahada. I'll quote what it says:

"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."

I disagree with the intention part, but as you can see there are no authentic hadiths. If you keep reading the page, it shows you the opinions of our greatest classical scholars regarding the third shahada in adhan, and all of them either condemned it or called it bidah.

Edited by Hassan-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hassan- said:

I disagree with the intention part, but as you can see there are no authentic hadiths

2 hours ago, Hassan- said:

All this literally doesn't mean anything because they are just assumptions and opinions.

Well, all I can tell is using "my marja says so" argument... 

Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (ha):

Case: The phrase Ash_hado an-na Aliy-yan waliy-yol-la>his the integral part of both adha>n and iqa>mah, as some narrations point to. 

(Islamic Law, Page 146).

Grand Ayatollah Sayed Muhammad Shirazi (r):

Ash-haduanna Ali-an-Wali-Allah is a Juz (part) of Adhan.

(Al-Fiqh, Volume 9, Chapter on the Adhan)

Since there were two contradictory views from the same Sheikh Sadooq, then practicing taqqiyah for one and telling the truth for another makes more sense to me (and so did for other scholars as well).

And there are Hadiths, but considering them as fabricated is a different thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SheikhAlHabib'fan said:

Well, all I can tell is using "my marja says so" argument... 

Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (ha):

Case: The phrase Ash_hado an-na Aliy-yan waliy-yol-la>his the integral part of both adha>n and iqa>mah, as some narrations point to. 

(Islamic Law, Page 146).

Grand Ayatollah Sayed Muhammad Shirazi (r):

Ash-haduanna Ali-an-Wali-Allah is a Juz (part) of Adhan.

(Al-Fiqh, Volume 9, Chapter on the Adhan)

Since there were two contradictory views from the same Sheikh Sadooq, then practicing taqqiyah for one and telling the truth for another makes more sense to me (and so did for other scholars as well).

And there are Hadiths, but considering them as fabricated is a different thing.

I know your marja' says it, my marja' says we can say it too. As long as your marja' says it's optional to say it, than it's completely fine. But if your marja' says it's wajib or it's part of the adhan, than your marja must prove it with an authentic Hadith, and disprove the authentic hadiths that say not to add it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hassan- said:

I know your marja' says it, my marja' says we can say it too. As long as your marja' says it's optional to say it, than it's completely fine. But if your marja' says it's wajib or it's part of the adhan, than your marja must prove it with an authentic Hadith, and disprove the authentic hadiths that say not to add it.

I have shown the authentic Hadith. Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (ha) believes that such narrations that indicate prohibition to the 3rd shahada in Adhan and Iqamah are a result of taqqiyah.

Sheikh Sadooq has two narrations that contradict the earlier statements that state  for 3rd Shahada to be Bidah in Adhan and Iqamah. To me it makes more sense for him to have been using taqqiyah.

I personally respect Ayatollah Sayed Ali Sistani's (ha) rulings to the biggest extent as I believe that he's (ha) the most knowledgeable after Grand Ayatollah Sayed Sadiq Shirazi (ha). You follow your judgment, I can't question any of them (ha).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×