question again

[Sindbad05 2,045]

@just a muslim you saw that I proved to you the tradition is true through science as well but you are still doubtful about it. You asked for reference, it's here in three parts.

[Sindbad05 2,045]

The two pages are not downloading for which you should go to following link and download first volume of this book with the above page number. 

Continued after above page: 

http://www.ziyaraat.net/findbook.asp?srchwhat=Salooni&LibroID=1620&AgregarVista=Si&page=1&Archivo=SalooniQablAnTafqidooni1of2.pdf&escritor=All&tema=All&idioma=All&orderby=titulo

[Sindbad05 2,045]

2 hours ago, just a muslim said:

see this is circular. How do you KNOW certain people went against islam? From hadith?

From their acts narrated by themselves and confirmed by others.

Edited October 19, 2017 by Sindbad05

[Sindbad05 2,045]

3 hours ago, just a muslim said:

and even if it matches the quran, how do you know it is sahih? how do you know the infallible said it? and a narrator didnt just fabricate it? 

I just replied to you when I said cunning would claim a good quote but wise will not attribute his quote to be of infallible for it may be that wise be wrong and he Secondly he is responsible before God and therefore would never attribute his sayings on ahlebait for fear of humiliation in this world and hereafter. 

Wise knows the fate of Abu Huraira who was called as liar by Hazrat Ayesha and Imam Ali a.s.

[shadow_of_light 880]

2 hours ago, just a muslim said:

most likely, right? Okay. Lets take that. What makes the shia hadith more likely than the sunni hadith? I mean, for example, take the example of the iman of abu talib. It was recently discussed on the forum and it is clear that ahadith in sunni literature say he is in hell, while that in shia literature say his iman was great. One of them has to be an absolute fabrication. How do you know which one?

What makes a narration more likely authentic, is not if it is a shia hadith or a sunni one. It is its content and whether it is narrated by reliable people or not.

[eThErEaL 994]

6 hours ago, just a muslim said:

salam all. im back with one of my questions.

since sunnis and shias both agree on the quran, our main difference is due to our different hadith literature. hence, most of my questions revolve around hadith literature. and i know there have been questions asked previously about why should one choose sunni/shia hadith over the other, but i ask it again because i ask from a different perspective. and if any old member finds that i am repeating some old post, please link me to that post so i can benefit from it.

okay so, before you read on, please try to be objective. look at it like this. if you believe you are on the truth, then your arguments should always be superior to me, and you should be able to prove hujjah upon me no matter which sect i belong to, and that hujjah should be from my own sources. or at the very least, from sources which we both agree on. 

so, shias have ahadith. going back to the infallibles. and even though it wont matter, but let's not call them infallibles for now. FOR NOW. i repeat, FOR NOW. dont take this to your heart and try to move past it okay? okay. so, the ahadith go back to the imams. and there is a chain for every hadith. correct? so, my question is: why do you trust what the narrator is saying? because he is thiqa/honest/truthful/reliable/trustworthy? who told you that? your books of rijal? why do you trust those? why trust whatever is written in them? why trust the authors of those books? for all you know, and please hold tight to your seats and try not to lose it as i dont mean any disrespect or offence, it could be the work of the devil, men who had no good intention and just wanted to create division among the ummah? how do you know it wasnt that? why do you trust them?

P.S. this is not some form of hidden attempt to "prove" shiism wrong and give dawah to sunnism. no. i am just trying to understand why you guys believe what you believe. 

31

Religion (whether it is ultimately from God or whether man created it) is believed in through social conditioning.  There is just no way around it.  For example, Democracy, Darwinism, Human Rights, Liberalism, America, Islam, Judaism, Living-to-Gamble, Living-to-Acquire-Wealth, Hedonistic-Lifestyle, are all religions.  Every way of life is a religion (whether or not you want to call it that or not).  Adopting a particular religion is all a matter of being socially conditioned.  Even if one converts, it can possibly be mere social conditioning.  There are no absolutes here; most of the time one isn't just a Muslim, or just a Jew or Just a Hedonist, or just an "American".  Most of us are a blend of these religions, but we end up calling ourselves by whatever we fancy so that we can fit in with our particular surroundings.  A person who calls himself a "Muslim" may be living as a Muslim for a fraction of his day (for example, when he sincerely prays, or when he sincerely fasts, or when he sincerely follows the Sunnah, or when he is sincerely kind to his neighbor etc..). but for the remainder of his day, he might be a hedonist and therefore a follower of the religion of hedonism.  He might only be calling himself a Muslim because it just works out better for him in society or with the community or family he is affiliated with.    He might have excellent reasons for why he calls himself a Muslim, but the motives for why he even uses excellent reasoning might ultimately be to preserve his identity as a Muslim.  In any case, everyone seems to have more or less good reasons for their religion.  

 

 

      

[father 85]

why do you trust the people who narrated the narrations?

Shia books of Hadith (Ahaadith), narrations

 

Hadith (Ahaadith) are narrations of Prophet Mohammed.

 

Shia don't rely on Sunni Hadith books (Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim etc), Shia have several reasons as to why Sunni hadith books are rejected. Sunnis, have six major authentic (Sihaa Sitta) hadith books and several others to their list which are secondary on level in their collection.

 

For a Sunni any doubt on any hadith from those six books are an act of blasphemy. That is the reason Sunni prefix the word 'Sahih' (Authentic) to those books, among those six book (Siha Sitta); Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are two ultra-correct books next only to Holy Quran or on par.

 

Shia are of opinion that since hadith are narrated by a chain of narrators who are fallible people bound to make mistakes no matter even if un-intentional, therefore, no hadith could be called 100% authentic (Sahih), thus, Shia don't prefix the names of books of hadith with word 'Sahih' (Authentic), because no matter how small but there are chances of error.
 

One major difference between Shia collection and Sunni collection are Sunni judge the person as right or wrong, if he/she is right; what ever he/she said is authenic. Shia rather check whether his/her hadith is right or wrong, since all people are fallible except Prophet Mohammed (saw), Fatima Zahra (as) and 12 Imams (as).
 

Shia have another set of books which are authentic but never ever 100% authentic since the chain of narration are taken from fallible people. There are four major books of Shia Hadith which are least in error, they are called 'Kutub al Arba' (Four books).

 

Four Major Shia Hadith book (Kutub al Arba) are:
 

1) Al Kafi (The Sufficient) by Mohammed bin Yaqub Kulaini, it has 15176 narrations/ Ahaadith.
 

2) Man La Yahdruhu Al Faqih (I am my own Jurist) by Shaikh Saduq Mohammed bin Ali, it has 9044 narrations/ Ahaadith
 

3) Tahdiib Al Ahkaam (The Refinement of Laws) by Shaikh Abu Ja'far Tusi, it has 13590 narrations/ Ahaadith
 

4) Al Istibsaar (Foresight) by Shaikh Abu Ja'far Tusi, it has 5511 narrations/ Ahaadith

 

Other Shia Hadith books are:
 

5) Bihar Al Anwaar (Ocean of Luminescence)
 

6) Wasaail Ush Shia (Details for Shia)
 

7) Haqq Al Yaqin (Reality of Certainty)
 

8) Ain al Hayaat (Essence of Life)
 

9) Kitab Sulaym bin Qays (Book of Sulaym bin Qays)
 

10) Sahifa Sajjadiya (Psalms of Sajjad/ 4th Imam), it is a prayer book.
 

11) Nahjul Balagha (Peak of Eloquence), compiled by Sayyed Radi, the book is collections of sermons, letters and quotations of 1st Imam Ali bin Abu Talib (as)

It is a Shia Islamic belief based on several Hadith found in above mentioned books, that there are several other books which are always under possession of current Imam, these books are never in possessions of people. These books include hand written Qur'an by Imam Ali Murtada, Jafr, Jabr and Mushaf Fatima (Codex of Fatima). Apart from these books current Imam also possesses original Suhuf Ibrahim (Scrolls of Abraham), Tauraat (Torah), Zabuur (Psalms), Injeel (Gospel) and original revealed books of every prophet of past times.

Oh Allah! Peace and Salutation be upon Mohammed and House-hold of Mohammed.

[father 85]

For Shia scholars Shia and Sunni hadith has no difference and with the same methods of checking authenticity are checked. If a hadith is known authentic it is used but if not, it is left weather it is recorded by Shia or Sunni scholars. Shia scholars do not reject Sunni hadith books completely. But say every individual hadith (from Shia or Sunni) should be investigated for authenticity.

Shia scholars use authentic hadith from Sunni hadith book in their works and books. For example the hadith from Sahih Muslim and other Sunni hadith books are used in Imam Khomeini books. And many other Shia scholars.

Please note there are different methods of determining the health of a hadith and this makes some conflict in scholars about considering a hadith authentic or not. This conflict exist in Shia scholars. for example a Shia scholar may consider a hadith and other not authentic due to different methods of determining the health of a hadith and this may lead to different fatwa an a subject.

The main fundamental difference of Shia and Sunni is conflict in Imamat which is a very big conflict and this conflict makes big different in every aspect of Islam including hadith collections, Madhab, prayers, beliefs and everything else. There are tens of thousands of hadith that accepting them as authentic in fact means accepting Imamat as a pillar of Islam and in a way are related to Imamat. So those kind of hadith are totally censored in main Sunni hadith books but still many of them can be found in many Sunni hadith books.

Sunni scholars are different about recording hadith related to Imamat and it depends on the relation of that scholar to King of his time and pressures of King of times on scholars. In fact Imamat is opposite of Kings. if a Kings accept Imamat in fact is accepting himself is not qualified for governing Islamic society so no King will never accept Imamat (if accept he is not a King anymore) and this causes Kings always controlled scholars and hadith books to do not write anything related to Imamat.

In Shia view a good hadith narrator for Sunni Kings and hadith recorders is who be silent about Imamat and Caliphate and support power of Sunni Caliphs and Kings even if that narrator is from Kharijates. instead if a narrator oppose Sunni Caliphs and Kings he should not be used as narrator even if he is Imam Ali a.s. or Imam Sadiq a.s. unless their hadith not talking about Caliphate.

After Malik the golden age of hadith started and Sunni collections were written in this age.

This is some of views of Shia scholars regarding 6 main Sunni hadith collections:

1- Sahih Bukhari (year 194-256): the Sunni hadith recorders have had many exaggerations about this book while this book narrates hadith from Kharijates and Nasibi people. But from Imam Sadiq a.s. and next Imams who Bukhari was living at their time even one hadith is not narrated. His ancestors were Zoroastrian and first one of their family who converted to Islam was his 3th father Mughayrah. When Bukhari was child his father died and left a wealth that he used for travels for collecting hadith. Firstly he was respected by scholars of Nishabur but later due to his serious conflicts with Muhammad Ibn Yahya Nishaburi (the Grand Hadith Sheykh of Nishabur) he was forced to immigrate from his city.

2- Sahih Muslim (year 204-261): although this book has advantages that Bukhari book does not have but is in lower rank and popularity.

3- Sahih Abu Dawood: its ahadith are mostly about Sunni Fiqh.

4- Sahih Abu Isa Muhammad Ibn Isa Tarmazi: he was the first one who categories ahadith in 3 category of Sahih, Hasan, Zaif instead of 2 category.

5- Sahih Ahmad Ibn Shoaib Nesai.

The last 4 are called Sunan also because the terms considered for Sahih hadith by first two are not considered in these 4.

6- Sahih Muhammad Ibn Yazid Ibn Abdullan Ibn Majeh Ghazwini: some consider Sunan Darami higher than this book and consider it as 6th Sahih.

[father 85]

The definition of Sahih Hadith by early scholars is different with it by recent ones. From early scholars' point of view, a Sahih Hadith is a narration its being issued from Imams (a) would be proved from any possible way. They simply classified Hadith to acceptable and unacceptable. The new classification of Hadith to Sahih, Hasan, Muwaththaq and Da'if was proposed at the time of al-'Allama al-Hilli or his prophesier al-Sayyid b. Tawus. The first three kinds was counted as acceptable before early scholars.

Classification of Sahih Hadith from Shi'a Point of View

Sahih's degrees are as follows:

1. A'la: all the narrations of the chain of Hadith are authentic weather we know the fact or we accept it from two impartial witnesses.
2. Awsat: all the narrations or one of them are authentic just based on a report of one impartial witness.
3. Adna: this authenticity is based on Ijtihad assumption.

[father 85]

Why would any unbiased individual, who embraced Islam and accepted Allah and his messenger (saw) and believed in his holy book, why would this individual decide to choose the books of one group over the other?

Obviously the matter cannot be left to desires and emotions, rather it should be based on evidence and proof, since Allah most high criticized those who only follow desires and those who follow guesswork when He سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى said:

{Say, “Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance.” If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper.} [2:120]

{So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just.} [4:135]

{But those who wrong follow their [own] desires without knowledge. Then who can guide one whom Allah has sent astray? And for them there are no helpers.} [30:29]

As for those who follow assumptions and guesswork, Allah has criticized them saying:

{They follow not except assumption, and they are not but falsifying.} [10:66]

{They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance.} [53:23]

{And they have thereof no knowledge. They follow not except assumption, and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all.} [53:28]

In summary, one should not follow a path just because it appeals to him if it contradicts clear evidence and truth, and one must not base his beliefs on hearsay and baseless assumptions unless he can back it with proof.

[Sindbad05 2,045]

@father absolutely marvelous posts, I read three of them. @just a muslim you should read these.  

[Sindbad05 2,045]

3 hours ago, father said:

9) Kitab Sulaym bin Qays (Book of Sulaym bin Qays)

Kitab Sulaym consists of 91 narrations attributed to or about ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib passed on through a disciple of his named Sulaym ibn Qays, said to have died while al-Hajjaj (d. 95 ah) was in power. While there is disagreement over whether Sulaym ibn Qays was the compiler’s real name or a pseudonym, the content indicates the compiler was aligned with the Shi’i cause, was against the Umayyads, and was situated in the early period of Islam. The question of the authenticity of Kitab Sulaym is complex, with the possibility that different narrations (or even portions of single narrations) date to different eras. Hossein Modarressi feels that the core of Kitab Sulaym traces back to the early Umayyad era, with later insertions, revisions, and accretions; he is optimistic that the original text can be identified and recovered. Specifically, he notes that a good portion of the book can be established to date to the reign of Hisham ibn ‘Abd al-Malik (r. 105-125 ah).1

He feels that the content itself is reflective of popular Shi’ism in the Umayyad period; as he puts it, ‘It is a display of primitive, unsophisticated beliefs among the rank and file of the Shi’ites of Kufa during the late Umayyad period with clear residues of the usual Kaysani exaggerations on the virtues of the House of the Prophet. It also refers to the Umayyad positions on some of the matters discussed’, and that that ‘[m]any such popular, unsophisticated Shi’ite lines of interpretation and belief were later transformed and developed by the Shi’ite rationalists of the fourth and fifth centuries.’2 Amir-Moezzi, on the other hand, favours the idea that Kitab Sulaym is essentially authentic, but that it is impossible to discern the original manuscript from the revisions and accretions.3

[just a muslim 106]

4 hours ago, father said:

why do you trust the people who narrated the narrations?

Shia books of Hadith (Ahaadith), narrations

 

Hadith (Ahaadith) are narrations of Prophet Mohammed.

 

Shia don't rely on Sunni Hadith books (Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim etc), Shia have several reasons as to why Sunni hadith books are rejected. Sunnis, have six major authentic (Sihaa Sitta) hadith books and several others to their list which are secondary on level in their collection.

 

For a Sunni any doubt on any hadith from those six books are an act of blasphemy. That is the reason Sunni prefix the word 'Sahih' (Authentic) to those books, among those six book (Siha Sitta); Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are two ultra-correct books next only to Holy Quran or on par.

 

Shia are of opinion that since hadith are narrated by a chain of narrators who are fallible people bound to make mistakes no matter even if un-intentional, therefore, no hadith could be called 100% authentic (Sahih), thus, Shia don't prefix the names of books of hadith with word 'Sahih' (Authentic), because no matter how small but there are chances of error.
 

One major difference between Shia collection and Sunni collection are Sunni judge the person as right or wrong, if he/she is right; what ever he/she said is authenic. Shia rather check whether his/her hadith is right or wrong, since all people are fallible except Prophet Mohammed (saw), Fatima Zahra (as) and 12 Imams (as).

this has got to be a joke, right? you can't possibly be serious? where are you getting your information from? i honestly try my best to not lose my mind at things people say. but quite frankly, you are pushing it. and i say without intending any offence.

1. sunnis have no such thing as SIHAH SITTA. it is kutub sitta. nobody considers all six of them sahih. the sahih ones are only bukhari and muslim. the remaining are sunans and jami'. for the sake of Allah, do not ascribe incorrect statements to people and pass them on as facts while you have no knowledge. 

2. again, who on earth told you that rejecting a hadith from those six books is blasphemy for sunnis? are you crazy? i cant believe you would actually believe that and i wonder how many other shias believe so. there are fabricated ahadith even in one of them. how can you make such a claim, brother. fear Allah. such an attitude towards knowledge does not fare well with people who seek the truth.

3. NO. we call them sahih because their NAME is sahih, just like we call sahih ibn khuzaimah and sahih ibn hibban, other books of hadith, because it is their name. 

4. correct books ON PAR with the quran? any sunni who says that has done nothing less than kufr and shirk.

5. since when did you become a sunni hadith science expert? i have studied it and this is not what the sunnis do. 

4 hours ago, father said:

For Shia scholars Shia and Sunni hadith has no difference and with the same methods of checking authenticity are checked. If a hadith is known authentic it is used but if not, it is left weather it is recorded by Shia or Sunni scholars. Shia scholars do not reject Sunni hadith books completely. But say every individual hadith (from Shia or Sunni) should be investigated for authenticity.

Shia scholars use authentic hadith from Sunni hadith book in their works and books. For example the hadith from Sahih Muslim and other Sunni hadith books are used in Imam Khomeini books. And many other Shia scholars.

Please note there are different methods of determining the health of a hadith and this makes some conflict in scholars about considering a hadith authentic or not. This conflict exist in Shia scholars. for example a Shia scholar may consider a hadith and other not authentic due to different methods of determining the health of a hadith and this may lead to different fatwa an a subject.

The main fundamental difference of Shia and Sunni is conflict in Imamat which is a very big conflict and this conflict makes big different in every aspect of Islam including hadith collections, Madhab, prayers, beliefs and everything else. There are tens of thousands of hadith that accepting them as authentic in fact means accepting Imamat as a pillar of Islam and in a way are related to Imamat. So those kind of hadith are totally censored in main Sunni hadith books but still many of them can be found in many Sunni hadith books.

Sunni scholars are different about recording hadith related to Imamat and it depends on the relation of that scholar to King of his time and pressures of King of times on scholars. In fact Imamat is opposite of Kings. if a Kings accept Imamat in fact is accepting himself is not qualified for governing Islamic society so no King will never accept Imamat (if accept he is not a King anymore) and this causes Kings always controlled scholars and hadith books to do not write anything related to Imamat.

In Shia view a good hadith narrator for Sunni Kings and hadith recorders is who be silent about Imamat and Caliphate and support power of Sunni Caliphs and Kings even if that narrator is from Kharijates. instead if a narrator oppose Sunni Caliphs and Kings he should not be used as narrator even if he is Imam Ali a.s. or Imam Sadiq a.s. unless their hadith not talking about Caliphate.

After Malik the golden age of hadith started and Sunni collections were written in this age.

This is some of views of Shia scholars regarding 6 main Sunni hadith collections:

1- Sahih Bukhari (year 194-256): the Sunni hadith recorders have had many exaggerations about this book while this book narrates hadith from Kharijates and Nasibi people. But from Imam Sadiq a.s. and next Imams who Bukhari was living at their time even one hadith is not narrated. His ancestors were Zoroastrian and first one of their family who converted to Islam was his 3th father Mughayrah. When Bukhari was child his father died and left a wealth that he used for travels for collecting hadith. Firstly he was respected by scholars of Nishabur but later due to his serious conflicts with Muhammad Ibn Yahya Nishaburi (the Grand Hadith Sheykh of Nishabur) he was forced to immigrate from his city.

2- Sahih Muslim (year 204-261): although this book has advantages that Bukhari book does not have but is in lower rank and popularity.

3- Sahih Abu Dawood: its ahadith are mostly about Sunni Fiqh.

4- Sahih Abu Isa Muhammad Ibn Isa Tarmazi: he was the first one who categories ahadith in 3 category of Sahih, Hasan, Zaif instead of 2 category.

5- Sahih Ahmad Ibn Shoaib Nesai.

The last 4 are called Sunan also because the terms considered for Sahih hadith by first two are not considered in these 4.

6- Sahih Muhammad Ibn Yazid Ibn Abdullan Ibn Majeh Ghazwini: some consider Sunan Darami higher than this book and consider it as 6th Sahih.

i dont even want to respond to this. 

4 hours ago, father said:

Why would any unbiased individual, who embraced Islam and accepted Allah and his messenger (saw) and believed in his holy book, why would this individual decide to choose the books of one group over the other?

Obviously the matter cannot be left to desires and emotions, rather it should be based on evidence and proof, since Allah most high criticized those who only follow desires and those who follow guesswork when He سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى said:

{Say, “Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance.” If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper.} [2:120]

{So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just.} [4:135]

{But those who wrong follow their [own] desires without knowledge. Then who can guide one whom Allah has sent astray? And for them there are no helpers.} [30:29]

As for those who follow assumptions and guesswork, Allah has criticized them saying:

{They follow not except assumption, and they are not but falsifying.} [10:66]

{They follow not except assumption and what [their] souls desire, and there has already come to them from their Lord guidance.} [53:23]

{And they have thereof no knowledge. They follow not except assumption, and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all.} [53:28]

In summary, one should not follow a path just because it appeals to him if it contradicts clear evidence and truth, and one must not base his beliefs on hearsay and baseless assumptions unless he can back it with proof.

i agree with you a 1000% in this. but ironically, you have been going on about sunni literature and sciences without knowledge, on hearsay, and making a ton of baseless assumptions about it.

so please tell me without following your desires and falsifying and emotions, tell me what your evidence is for following the shia books of hadith?

[just a muslim 106]

i will inshaAllah respond to the other brothers, all of you, when i get the time. somewhat busy right now.

Edited October 20, 2017 by just a muslim

[Sindbad05 2,045]

1 hour ago, just a muslim said:

1. sunnis have no such thing as SIHAH SITTA. it is kutub sitta. nobody considers all six of them sahih. the sahih ones are only bukhari and muslim. the remaining are sunans and jami'. for the sake of Allah, do not ascribe incorrect statements to people and pass them on as facts while you have no knowledge. 

 

hey bro, this is not a new thing, it was known as Sahaha-e-Sitta, not as Sunun-e-Sitta...And then people said that among them two are Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim and remaining as Sunun Dawud, Sunun Nisai, Sunan Ibn Maja and Sunun Nisai....but these six books are often connoted as Sahah-e-Sitta, but this change of Kutub-e-Sitta is new. 

[just a muslim 106]

3 minutes ago, Sindbad05 said:

hey bro, this is not a new thing, it was known as Sahaha-e-Sitta, not as Sunun-e-Sitta...And then people said that among them two are Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim and remaining as Sunun Dawud, Sunun Nisai, Sunan Ibn Maja and Sunun Nisai....but these six books are often connoted as Sahah-e-Sitta, but this change of Kutub-e-Sitta is new. 

no. people didnt say that. those are the actual names of the books. 

you have no idea about this. this didnt even used to be kutub sitta. ibn majah wasnt initially considered a good enough compilation to be considered with the other five. ibn salah, a hadith expert of the 5th century AH mentions only 5 in his book of introduction to hadith sciences. and you are claiming that it used to be sahaha sitta. come on man. ibn majah is the one which has fabricated ahadith. even the compilers of the remaining 3 books, they themselves labeled some ahadith as daeef and some as sahih. 

[Sindbad05 2,045]

1 minute ago, just a muslim said:

no. people didnt say that. those are the actual names of the books. 

you have no idea about this. this didnt even used to be kutub sitta. ibn majah wasnt initially considered a good enough compilation to be considered with the other five. ibn salah, a hadith expert of the 5th century AH mentions only 5 in his book of introduction to hadith sciences. and you are claiming that it used to be sahaha sitta. come on man. ibn majah is the one which has fabricated ahadith. even the compilers of the remaining 3 books, they themselves labeled some ahadith as daeef and some as sahih. 

Well, different scholars have different opinions in your fiqh but these are known and famous among the people as Sihaha-e-Sitta, I have seen even in official government examinations....However, if you did not accept this, then probably you would accept that Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are not entirely Sahih but many sunnis believe it to be totally Sahih. 

[father 85]

6 hours ago, just a muslim said:

this has got to be a joke, right? you can't possibly be serious? where are you getting your information from?

yes we are humans we can make mistake that is the point which goes again to collection and narrations of ahadiths

 

6 hours ago, just a muslim said:

. sunnis have no such thing as SIHAH SITTA. it is kutub sitta

 

[father 85]

6 hours ago, just a muslim said:

. again, who on earth told you that rejecting a hadith from those six books is blasphemy for sunnis?

 

[just a muslim 106]

6 minutes ago, father said:

yes we are humans we can make mistake that is the point which goes again to collection and narrations of ahadiths

 

 

this only proves my point. and by the way, if this is your source of information, then good luck with life.

[just a muslim 106]

4 minutes ago, father said:

 

what does this have anything to do with what you said? the guy is talking about ahadith in totality. you said rejecting a hadith from the six books is considered blasphemy among sunnis. please dont try to twist the words.

[father 85]

7 hours ago, just a muslim said:

NO. we call them sahih because their NAME is sahih,

Sahih (صَحِيْح) is an Arabic word that means genuine/authentic/sound

so u r wrong again

[just a muslim 106]

3 minutes ago, father said:

Sahih (صَحِيْح) is an Arabic word that means genuine/authentic/sound

so u r wrong again

i know what sahih means. i am saying that the author/compiler of the book named the book "sahih bukhari" or "sahih muslim" in short. they have full names as well but these are the short names. if calling a book sahih meant it was authentic, sahih ibn hibban and sahih ibn khuzaimah would have the same status as bukhari and muslim. stop trying to prove something that isnt there.

[father 85]

7 hours ago, just a muslim said:

since when did you become a sunni hadith science expert? i have studied it and this is not what the sunnis do.

dont you know a hadees where imam bukhari visited a man who lived very far and he visited the man who fooled a lamb cub and imam bukhari didnot take hadees from him

[father 85]

Tradition One: Prophet Moses [as] ran naked (naudobillah)

We read in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 616:

Hammam b. Munabbih reported that Abu Huraira reported many ahadith from Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and one, of them speaks that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) is reported to have said: Banu Isra’il used to take bath (together) naked and thus saw private parts of one another, but Moses (peace be upon him) used to take bath alone (in privacy), and they said: By Allah, nothing prevents Moses to take bath along with us; but scrotal hernia. One day when he (Moses) was taking bath (alone) he placed his clothes upon a stone, but the stone began to move along with his clothes. Moses raced after it saying: My garment, stone; until (some of the people) of Banu Isra’il looked at the private parts of Moses, and they said: By Allah, there is no trouble with Moses. The stone stopped after he (Moses) had been seen. He took hold of his garments and struck the stone. Abu Huraira said: I swear by Allah that there were six or seven scars on the stone because of the striking of stone by Moses (peace be upon him).

ype of rubbish? The dash of the stone with the clothes of Moses and the sprint of Moses (nude) after it is such a fabricated story that no rational mind is ready to accept it. This hadith can only best be described as a fable, narrated by Abu Hurayra it cannot be a hadith of The Holy Prophet (s).

Thus this is clearly a fabricated Hadith, that has clearly been based on folk lore.

Tradition Two – the Holy Prophet exposed himself in public (naudobillah)

We read in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Number 360:

Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
While Allah’s Apostle was carrying stones (along) with the people of Mecca for (the building of) the Ka’ba wearing an Izar (waist-sheet cover), his uncle Al-’Abbas said to him, “O my nephew! (It would be better) if you take off your Izar and put it over your shoulders underneath the stones.” So he took off his Izar and put it over his shoulders, but he fell unconscious and since then he had never been seen naked.

We are sure that any rational mind would agree that for anyone to remove his trousers in broad day light in public is a deplorable act of indignity. No matter how exhausted a person maybe he would never commit such an appalling act, let alone the beloved Prophet Mohammed (s). This is an absolute lie fabricated by the Nasibi Banu Ummayya to degrade Banu-Hashim.

This is hence another tale!

Tradition Three – Further traditions attacking the pious character of the Prophet (s)

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 267:

Narrated Muhammad bin Al-Muntathir:
on the authority of his father that he had asked ‘Aisha (about the Hadith of Ibn ‘Umar). She said, “May Allah be Merciful to Abu ‘Abdur-Rahman. I used to put scent on Allah’s Apostle and he used to go round his wives, and in the morning he assumed the Ihram, and the fragrance of scent was still coming out from his body.”

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268:

Narrated Qatada:
Anas bin Malik said, “The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.” I asked Anas, “Had the Prophet the strength for it?” Anas replied, “We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).” And Sa’id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 6, Number 296:

Narrated ‘Aisha:
The Prophet used to lean on my lap and recite Qur’an while I was in menses.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 2, Book 26, Number 789:

Narrated ‘Aisha:
We performed Hajj with the Prophet and performed Tawaf-al-ifada on the Day of Nahr (slaughtering). Safiya got her menses and the Prophets desired from her what a husband desires from his wife. I said to him, “O Allah’s Apostle! She is having her menses.” He said, “Is she going to detain us?” We informed him that she had performed Tawaf-al-Ifada on the Day of Nahr. He said, “(Then you can) depart.”

According to these ‘authentic’ traditions we can see clearly that the above hadith prove that the Holy Prophet (s), The Master of all the Prophets was:

So fond of Sexual Intercourse that he used to sleep with his eleven wives in just one night

He couldn’t be patient even in the days of Hajj (pilgrimage)

May Allah give us protection from such vulgar thoughts! As far as his (s) strength and health is concerned Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى had blessed his Apostle (s) distinctly. He (s) was exceedingly strong both mentally & physically with vital senses many fold more sensitive & powerful then an ordinary human being. Despite this favour, the Holy Prophet (s) used his strengths modestly. He would not utilize this strength by satisfying his libido by sleeping with his wives in one sitting.

Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى praises his (s) manners in the Holy Qur’an in Surah-Al-Kalam (The Pen) Verse 4

“And verily, you (O Muhammad SAW) are on an exalted standard of character.”

The Holy Prophet (s) was a just person. He (s) treated all his wives justly He (s) spent a day with each of them. He (s) visited only one wife in a night. He (s) preferred to sleep early after the Isha prayers and wake up soon after the midnight for Tahajjud prayers he then continued various ‘Ibadaat’ (worship & veneration) until the Fajr (Morning Prayers), this was his routine.

Edited October 21, 2017 by Hameedeh
To remove accidental strikethrough fonts.