Jump to content
Guest Shia by nature

JAFAR the King of JINNs. Any info?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

On 1/14/2018 at 7:53 PM, Hameedeh said:

Maybe we should wait for the return of Imam Zaman, may Allah hasten his reappearance, to inform us what the reality is, lest we find we have slandered someone's beloved or put preference on another unjustly. 

Salamualaykum dear sister, i hope you are well.

The tradition regarding Imam Mahdi AJFS having a roman princess, daughter of the Caesar of Rome is not merely one report where we can claim it is a valid claim, and there are other valid claims, and all can be valid claims.

Rather this report comes to us from:

1 .Liars

2. Those cursed by our Imams for their beliefs ; people known to have been extremists and Ghali [exagerrators of the Imams].

3. Unknown people whose veracity we do not know.

The source we have that Imam Mahdji AJFS has a mother who is a black bondswoman comes from a reliable chain. This is the strongest position to hold. 

 
"Here is the famous story of the Narjis, mother of Imaam Mahdee (AS) being a Roman princess and being sold into slavery in order to marry our 11th Imaam (AS). Her name is really Narjis, but the LONG story of her being a Roman princess and being sold into slavery is mawDoo’ (Fabricated).

Here are the sources to this hadeeth:
1. Al-Sadooq, Kamaal Al-Deen, vol. 2, ch. 41, pg. 417 - 423, hadeeth # 1
2. Al-Toosi, Ghaybah Al-Toosi, pg. 208
3. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 51, ch. 1, pg. 6 - 10, hadeeth # 12

Here is the sanad (chain of narrators) to the story. (taken from Bihaar Al-Anwaar)
غط، [الغيبة للشيخ الطوسي‏] جَمَاعَةٌ عَنْ أَبِي الْمُفَضَّلِ الشَّيْبَانِيِّ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ بَحْرِ بْنِ سَهْلٍ الشَّيْبَانِيِّ قَالَ قَالَ بِشْرُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ النَّخَّاسُ وَ هُوَ مِنْ وُلْدِ أَبِي أَيُّوبَ الْأَنْصَارِيِّ أَحَدُ مَوَالِي أَبِي الْحَسَنِ وَ أَبِي مُحَمَّدٍ وَ جَارُهُمَا بِسُرَّمَنْ‏رَأَى

Abee / Aboo Al-MufaDDal Al-Shaybaanee (Muhammad bin 'Abd Allaah Aboo Al-MufaDDal) is Da'eef (Weak) according to:
1. Al-Najaashee, Rijaal, pg. 396
2. Al-Hillee, Al-KhulaaSah, pg. 256 & pg. 252
3. Al-GhaDaa-iree, Kitaab Al-Du'afaa, pg. 99
4. Al-Toosi, Fihrist, pg. 402
5. Al-Toosi, Rijaal, pg. 447
6. Al-Khoei, Mu'jam Rijaal Al-Hadeeth, vol. 16, pg. 444, person # 11115

Muhammad bin BaHr bin Sahl Al-Shaybaanee is Ghullah (exaggerator) & MufawwiDa according to:
1. Al-Toosi, Rijaal, pg. 447
2. Al-Hillee, Al-KhulaaSah, pg. 254
3. Al-Toosi, Fihrist, pg. 390
4. Al-Najaashee, Rijaal, pg. 384
5. Al-GhaDaa-iree, Kitaab Al-Du'afaa, pg. 98
6. Al-Khoei, Mu'jam Rijaal Al-Hadeeth, vol. 15, pg. 122, person # 10297

Bishr bin Sulaymaan Al-Nakhaas is Majhool (Unknown) according to:
1. Al-Khoei, Mu'jam Rijaal Al-Hadeeth, vol. 3, pg. 316, person # 1755

Based off of this sanad (chain of narrators), this hadeeth is graded as MawDoo' (Fabricated) or at least a minimum of Da'eef Jiddan (VERY WEAK)

Also, here is what Al-Khoei has said regarding this hadeeth / story under Bishr bin Sulaymaan.
لكن في سند الرواية عدة مجاهيل، على أنك قد عرفت فيما تقدم أنه لا يمكن إثبات وثاقة شخص برواية نفسه. 
"But the sanad (chain of narrators) in the hadeeth / story has many majhool (unknown) people, and you know that it one cannot establish his own trustworthiness through his own narration about himself"Source:
1. Al-Khoei, Mu'jam Rijaal Al-Hadeeth, vol. 3, pg. 316, person # 1755
 
images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTuTxMno9gdM0kYRwMrVzw
 
Unfortunately, all those paintings of Imam al-Mahdi as some Iranian are disrespectful, given he is going to be mostly Black in race, according to our most accurate historical understanding of the fathers and mothers of the Aimmah [asws].
 
On 1/14/2018 at 7:53 PM, Hameedeh said:

We always appreciate all members. 

 
There is no doubt as i had mentioned in my post, everyone contributes to be part of this community, and may Allah strengthen our unity, remove enmity we may have from one another, and make us united in our love of Muhammed and his purified progeny.  Once more there is no doubt that everyone has their own particular roles, and i speak on behalf of everyone when i say the unwavering dedication you have shown on SC is known by all, and may Allah [swt] reward you for taking charge and managing this website with dignity.
 
Having said that, there are some users i mentioned who make a layman like me inspired, because they have learned the religion in depth, gained a good level of proficiency in its sciences and have brought original quality in the form of some of the most insightful works on more complex or deeper religious topics. Those users are our most knowledgable, and in my view, because they possess the most knowledge, they are able to guide people like me, help me learn a thing or two, and correct the errors of my thought pattern and gain a much deeper and richer understanding of my religion. 
 
You're not going to find anyone on here better in Rijal than Nader Zaveri or Cake. You won't find anyone who has the depth and breadth of knowledge on the level of Q'aim. No-one here comes close to what [edit] brings in all-round knowledge as well as Philosophy. These are individuals who when they post, i stop and i find myself re-reading their words. Even the Salafis respect these people while they wouldn't really think too much of someone like me.
Edited by Hameedeh
[edit] Member requested his name not be used at ShiaChat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/01/2018 at 3:29 PM, Intellectual Resistance said:

our Twelfth Imam ajfs was born from a mother who was a roman princess. You had people spreading Hazrat Abbas was sixteen feet tall and killed a thousand men. You had people bring up stories of mystical Jinns.

I think SC was less harmful in the years that you think it was more harmful. Those beliefs that you mentioned are less harmful than some of the callous things that the likes of the evil macissac* were promoting. I don't think we should underestimate how much harm people like him did. I wouldn't be surprised if people left Islam beacause of them. In fact I know of well-known SCers that did leave Islam.

The problem here is that an ill-minded person can use their knwoledge to fool people with less knowledge.

Also don't conflate sheer intellect with 'knowledge'.

Quote

People thinking anything quoted from a book is suddenly reliable, without ever scrutinising it further.

What if the books of rijal are not reliable? What authenticates them?

BTW I am trying to provoke thought with the last question.

Edited by Muhammed Ali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muhammed Ali said:

I think SC was less harmful in the years that you think it was more harmful. Those beliefs that you mentioned are less harmful than some of the callous things that the likes of the evil macissac* were promoting. I don't think we shouldn't underestimate how much harm people like him did. I wouldn't be surprised if people left Islam beacause of them. In fact I know of well-known SCers that did leave Islam.

The problem here is that an ill-minded person can use their knwoledge to fool people with less knowledge.

Also don't conflate sheer intellect with 'knowledge'.

 

You always bring really insightful points brother, i'm just a Layman here, i never knew my posts would be made into a thread, but i'll try to give you my view and hope you can guide me. I just want to make it clear to users i am not trying to give a view that conforms to what is widely accepted, i'm trying to throw up some of my own thoughts on this issue, and hope i can be corrected and moulded into a better way of thinking.

D.M from my experience, was someone who was anti-establishment, who went against our orthodox books and views. For example, we all know Ibn Mahbub is someone who is regarded as Thiqah, trustworthy about whom we don't have doubt. D.M proposed that because he happened to be in the chains of some odd traditions, he is weak, and he himself decided to go ahead and weaken him. He thought he knew so much, he was above the system, until the time came when he left it entirely to make his own. Time and time again reading his posts and having Salafis use him in arguments, they ignore that while he was well read, knew Arabic and the like,  as you've so rightly said, Knowledge and Intellect are not synonymous.  Islamic Salvation in his latest book, talked about real intellect and perfection of intellect (in his compilation of reliable traditions and in his commentary) based on the words of our Aimmah [asws].

D.M went to Iran, hated it, and then claimed he almost left Shia Islam. To question your Madhab based on your view on an institutional academic system is bizarre.  I've read his posts and arguments, and it's like what i read from non-Muslims attacking the Quran or valid arguments for the existence of God. They will use linguistic gymnastics, small little points that can be blown up and manipulated, and disguise it under 'academic rigour and eloquence'. I made the mistake years ago of conflating intellect and knowledge, and some of what he said disturbed me, but Alhamdullilah for being free of that.

Edited by Intellectual Resistance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Muhammed Ali said:

.

I've had time to think about this after what i wrote above, so here are some condensed points [to save you reading the wall of text i've just deleted. Once more please feel free to correct me, i am just a Layman, and these are just my own thoughts based on my limited understanding]:

1. Even if we throw out the books of Rijal, key fundamental beliefs of Shia Islam can be evidenced by that which we know has been transmitted via mass transmission by both Shias and Sunnis, such that denying it is akin to claiming a conspiracy that is untenable. In other words, the testimony is so widely given and strong, it would be dishonest to dispute. These are what we find at Ghadir Khumm, and Hadith at-Thaqalayn among other beliefs, which to the unbiased mind, are clearly in support of fundamental Shia teachings.

2. We know that even without Rijal, there are Muttawatir sayings of companions of our Imams and those who came after them. To allege this was a conspiracy would mean that the Imams purposefully taught, associated with these people, sometimes multiple Imams were the teachers of some of these companions. This is what Bukhari tried to do in weakening all of the students of Imam Jaffer as-Sadiq [as]. In doing so, it is a revealing thing: everyone Imam Jaffer as Sadiq chose to teach and closely associate with, and who naturally would say and teach what he taught, are all liars apparently because they all someone united in a conspiracy to promote Shia beliefs. One would wonder why multiple Aimmah closely associated with people they knew were distorting their views and lying upon them?

3. The Matn of the text is paramount, and sometimes it is not just the chain, but looking at whether the text conforms to the Quran and that which has been widely established. This is why  a recent attempt by Hani and TSN Salafi-polemicists in creating a 'Nahjul Balagha' website and showing how by Shia standards almost all of it would be weak in chain fell flat on its face. Much of the Matn in many key sermons and sayings conform to the Quran and what has generally widely been established by our Aimmah. 

4. Allah would not have created a universe in which verification was impossible. It only makes sense that by the laws of the universe there is a valid way and means for someone to know if someone else is truthful or not. A science, like Rijal , to ascertain as best as it can what individuals are reliable or not. Allah has allowed two major groups of Muslims to reign dominant: Sunnis and Shias, and so it only makes sense one of these groups is closer to ascertaining the reliability of what the Prophet [saw] taught, else both groups are in darkness.

5. Sunnis , by the Matn of their traditions, affirm place, descent, feet [but not like ours], and other such traditions 'authenticated' but clearly going against basic rational sense and clear Quranic verses. Salafis have accepted them, and orthodox Sunnis knowing that by denying them they would severely compromise the integrity of their authenticating system have sort to metaphorically explain them away, or claim they mean anything and Allah only knows what they truly mean , and referring [Tafwid] the entire true meaning to him, which Salafis have hotly disputed as being a cop-out. This tells me immediately that their Rijal system is flawed. While the Shia Rijal system is not perfect, it does not lead us to catastrophic errors like that, giving me confidence in addition to the system used for it, that it is accurate. This is also based on what i feel is only just for humanity as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2018 at 7:02 PM, Intellectual Resistance said:

You always bring really insightful points brother, i'm just a Layman here, i never knew my posts would be made into a thread, but i'll try to give you my view and hope you can guide me. I just want to make it clear to users i am not trying to give a view that conforms to what is widely accepted, i'm trying to throw up some of my own thoughts on this issue, and hope i can be corrected and moulded into a better way of thinking.

D.M from my experience, was someone who was anti-establishment, who went against our orthodox books and views. For example, we all know Ibn Mahbub is someone who is regarded as Thiqah, trustworthy about whom we don't have doubt. D.M proposed that because he happened to be in the chains of some odd traditions, he is weak, and he himself decided to go ahead and weaken him. He thought he knew so much, he was above the system, until the time came when he left it entirely to make his own. Time and time again reading his posts and having Salafis use him in arguments, they ignore that while he was well read, knew Arabic and the like,  as you've so rightly said, Knowledge and Intellect are not synonymous.  Islamic Salvation in his latest book, talked about real intellect and perfection of intellect (in his compilation of reliable traditions and in his commentary) based on the words of our Aimmah [asws].

D.M went to Iran, hated it, and then claimed he almost left Shia Islam. To question your Madhab based on your view on an institutional academic system is bizarre.  I've read his posts and arguments, and it's like what i read from non-Muslims attacking the Quran or valid arguments for the existence of God. They will use linguistic gymnastics, small little points that can be blown up and manipulated, and disguise it under 'academic rigour and eloquence'. I made the mistake years ago of conflating intellect and knowledge, and some of what he said disturbed me, but Alhamdullilah for being free of that.

Brother I have a whole list of posts to respond to and I leave them trailing. So this time I thought I would reply but forgive me if the answer is a bit short and not precise.

I called DM evil. I didn't say that lightly. As an ex-mod I know of things that others don't. It's rather horrible. On the forum, he and people like him made Islam seem like an uncompassionate religion. E.g. his attitude towards women.

You mentioned Islamic Salvation, now there is a brother that has knowledge and is intelligent*. People like him did improve the forum and we need more of them. However I must say the misguidance of DM, Bookha etc will make us stronger in the longer term. Because they gave us some of that bad material early and it is better than getting it late from other sources or when we become old and have little time to study and learn the truth. However their misguidance did leave many doubtful about the religion, in my opinion.

You made many valid points in response to my rijal comment. I am rather impressed! However I will add that another way to solve the matter is to take a Quran centric approach. By that I mean not only what you mentioned in point 3, but also that we should try to put much more emphasis on the Quran to obtain an overall understanding of the religion. We should be more cautious with ahadith that contradict the Quran (e.g. Sayyid Akhtar Rizvi reject the standard story about Badr because it contradicts the Quran in his opinion) because the Quran is so much more easy to authenticate. Secondly I also tend to focus a lot on natural theology. What is known via philosophy and science is stronger for us than a narration that is ancient and weak. I believe Allah gave us natural theology in a time when we are far away from the messengers {s}. E.g. we have some amazing information proving the existence of Allah and demonstrating that wisdom behind many Islamic laws, but many (almost all) that come out of the hawzah don't know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2011 at 5:28 PM, Philip said:

(salam)

In battles such as the battle of badr, we have narration of "angels" helping out and heads getting chopped off by invisible beings.

The Hadith does not state what kind ( please correct me if I'm wrong )

Perhaps it was angels from all or several orders .. Including Muslim angels made out of smokeless fire.

Salam Alekum

Angels are made of pure light. . . 

I'm amazed how people still think jinns and angels are the same thing.

Jinns are different from angels !!!!! 

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


×