Jump to content


- -


Photo
- - - - -

The Shia Science of Hadith?


202 replies to this topic

#176 SpIzo

SpIzo

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,419 posts

Posted 04 July 2005 - 12:09 PM

To them, it is right. Because they abide by the rules of hadith.


How can accepting extremely contradictory hadiths be "abiding by the rules of hadiths"???? :huh:

If abiding by rules of hadiths proves the authenticity of a "hadith" even though it contradicts the Quran and other hadiths of the Holy Prophet(saws), then I think it is a good thing that Shia scholars dont "abide by the rules of hadiths"!!!

If shias abide by the rules of hadith, they should be right too, according to shia standards.
The question then is, DO they follow the system?
THe reasons why sunnis are wrong even though they follow 'authentic' hadith is because many 'authentic' ahadith are actually fabricated. But surely shias have a uppoer-hand? And they should have more sahih ahadith, because there weren't part of the 'Muawiya hadith fabrication factory'.. Does that make sense?

ws.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


What do you mean by "they should be right"????? They ARE RIGHT!! :o

OK. Just clarify one thing, according to you, how do Shia ulemas "authenticate" hadiths????????? What do you think???

#177 SpIzo

SpIzo

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,419 posts

Posted 04 July 2005 - 12:12 PM

By the way, havent you still asked the scholar on Paltalk regarding this????

#178 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 04 July 2005 - 03:12 PM

Once again, Prince bhai, I will restate that what I meant by usool is Aqa'id. Usool can be tons of things. What *I* meant by it was fundamental doctrines.
Anything that doesn't fall under fiqh, would fall under usool (since its a doctrine/belief). e.g. the belief that all but 3 companions became kuffar after the Prophet  passed away, is not a fiqhi matter, it is a belief. So... how do I know if this is authentic or not?

We know it is authentic since it has been proved by the ulemas (Shias as well as Sunnis)!

Hmm.. so you are saying that ALL but three companions became kafir, huh? Hmm, quite a strong statement. I'd suggest you rethink your position on this.
And anyway, PrinceofSydney denied it, so I was asking him why. Clearly there is a difference of opinion. You think they DID become kafir, and Prince thinks did not. Who is right? Who is not? Is the hadith that states this really authentic? How do you know?

Why do you think the scholars or the aalims write books for the common Shias???? Obviously, to tell about their beliefs and to make their aqa'id strong and firm. (The only condition is that the Shia should READ and UNDERSTAND)

I would like you to direct me to a book that is written on aqa'id, in which every aqidah is explained, and backed by authentic shia ahadith.

By the way, havent you still asked the scholar on Paltalk regarding this????

I wanted to. Went there a couple of times as well. But I don't have a mic, nor can I read the arabic font (which appears garbled in the window), so pretty much all I can do is listen to what the guys are saying. I guess the only solution is someone else ask the questions for me..

ws.

#179 SpIzo

SpIzo

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,419 posts

Posted 04 July 2005 - 04:10 PM

Hmm.. so you are saying that ALL but three companions became kafir, huh? Hmm, quite a strong statement. I'd suggest you rethink your position on this.
And anyway, PrinceofSydney denied it, so I was asking him why. Clearly there is a difference of opinion. You think they DID become kafir, and Prince thinks did not. Who is right? Who is not? Is the hadith that states this really authentic? How do you know?


I was not making a statement against that PARTICULAR hadith, but I was speaking in general; since you doubted that how can we accept any hadith on face value without authenticating it!!

I would like you to direct me to a book that is written on aqa'id, in which every aqidah is explained, and backed by authentic shia ahadith.


Bro.Taha, you are NOT the first one to convert to Shiism. There were many before you who reverted to the Shiite faith due to its logical explanations and its practical dogmas and with such conviction that you have to see it to believe it!!!

Do you think they blindly accepted this faith????

Anyways, here is a book by Sheikh Saduq(one of our outstanding scholar) on our beliefs:

On the beliefs of the Shia Imamiya

One more thing, can you tell me all the books, references and sites which you have used/surfed to gain knowledge about Shiism????

Edited by Insiya, 04 July 2005 - 04:47 PM.


#180 SpIzo

SpIzo

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,419 posts

Posted 04 July 2005 - 04:20 PM

I wanted to. Went there a couple of times as well. But I don't have a mic, nor can I read the arabic font (which appears garbled in the window), so pretty much all I can do is listen to what the guys are saying. I guess the only solution is someone else ask the questions for me..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Isnt there a local Shia aalim in your area, so that you can directly ask your questions to him???????

Edited by Insiya, 04 July 2005 - 04:36 PM.


#181 SpIzo

SpIzo

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,419 posts

Posted 06 July 2005 - 01:32 PM

Ahh, ok. In that case, YOU can answer my question too. :)
Is the hadith that states all the sahaba became kuffar, authentic? If so, please tell me how you came to the conclusion. If not, again, please explain how you came to the conclusion.
(hint: the reason why I ask this question is because you can only know if its true IF you can authenticate it. In other words, you need to follow the hadith SYSTEM).


Do you mean that whatever we read in Al-Kafi, WE should sit down and authenticate each and every ahadiths????? :huh:
If thats what you are implying then I think it equal to saying that each and every Shia SHOULD/MUST become a scholar (which I dont think everybody can)!!!!

First of all, if you really want to know if the hadith's authentic or not, then you can email the scholars for their interpretation on the hadiths (they do answer aqaid doubts).

Secondly, can you translate the hadith in English (since my Arabic is not that good), with the chain of narrators and everything???? (I myself want to know what Imam(as) is exactly saying)

Thirdly, since you said that Sunnis follow a "HADITH SYSTEM", can you tell me how do the common Sunnis come to know about the authenticity of each and every ahadiths when they read and quote it???????

Yes, I know.
But *I* have questions, so *I* want answers.
I don't care if the whole world becomes hindu. I know I have genuine questions, and the only way to get the answers is through asking. :) And by the way, FYI, I have done my share of converting many ppl to shi'ism, and there are some at this very website who could testify to that.
Alhamdulillah, I have full faith in the ahlul-bayt (as). So it's not a matter of doubt. Rather, it is a matter of wanting to know the detail.


...and I can't for the life of me understand why some people are getting so irritated that I'm asking questions. :unsure:


My point was not to say that you should NOT ask questions, infact it is very much encouraged by the Infallibles(as) to ask questions and clear your doubts whatsoever you have since it increases your faith and iman; but when it has been answered and you persist on it, thats when it irritates the most! Anyways, no offence intended. You can continue with your questions and if we can (according to our limited knowledge), then we'll try to answer your questions. :)

But the fact is that to get your doubts on essential beliefs cleared , you should ask an aalim; who has spent his whole life studying religion; and not ignorant people like us. -_-

I started off at this website with absolutely no knowledge about shiism. I then visited websites like al-islam.org. Currently, I read books themselves, and not websites.
And don't worry, I am not 'influenced' by wahhabi propaganda websites. I don't visit ANY propaganda websites, be they sunni or shia.


I dint think you would view it from this perspective ("that I would think you are being influenced by wahabi propaganda websites") :D ; but actually I wanted to know this so that if you have by chance missed a good book (or also sites)which can help you clear your doubts, then I would have recommended it (knowing that you havent read it yet)!!!

Anyways, can you again tell me which books and sites you have referred to???? :)

I have asked local as well as other ulema. So far no one has satisfactorily been able to answer my questions.
That iswhy I really looked forward to getting them answered @ paltalk.
ws.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Well... what answer did they exactly give?????????? ;)

#182 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 07 July 2005 - 06:46 PM

Do you mean that whatever we read in Al-Kafi, WE should sit down and authenticate each and every ahadiths?????  :huh:
If thats what you are implying then I think it equal to saying that each and every Shia SHOULD/MUST become a scholar (which I dont think everybody can)!!!!

I am strongly against that. That is what the salafist do. They think that everyone should become a scholar, and that taqlid is wrong. I am strongly against this.
What *I* am saying is... only the ulema should authenticate every hadith, for the benefit of the average shia.

Let us forget about sunnis for now. :) Frankly, now I don't care about how/what they do. I am just concerned that we shias don't have a system when it comes to aqa'id. Or of there is, I am not aware of it being practiced.

PS: I would really recommend everyone to listen to the the debates between Dr. Essam al-Imad (salafi-->shia). You can find them here: http://aqaed.com/mos...t/most-3-1.html (scroll down to the letter '3ain').
It's all in arabic though.
ws.

#183 ahmed_2718

ahmed_2718
  • Advanced Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 07 July 2005 - 07:56 PM

^
Dr. Essam al-Imad is a big liar. I heard him saying that he converted from Wahabism to Shism whereas in reality he was Zaidi from a Zaidi mosque in my neighbor backhome.

What drove me nuts about him is the fact I heard him lying in the TV when he stated that he was teaching Wahabism in a mosque that is 100% pure Zaid (I used to go to it for short Jam3ah lecture).

I think that Taha likes to listen to liars. Good luck. :P :P

#184 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 07 July 2005 - 08:11 PM

Is it possible he was of Zaidi background, but influenced by salafi thought? Perhaps that occured when he went to study at King Sa'ud University.
You yourself have a Zaidi background, but are influenced the salafi thought, alaisa hakadha?

ws.

#185 SpIzo

SpIzo

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,419 posts

Posted 08 July 2005 - 03:04 PM

I am strongly against that. That is what the salafist do. They think that everyone should become a scholar, and that taqlid is wrong. I am strongly against this.
What *I* am saying is... only the ulema should authenticate every hadith, for the benefit of the average shia.


...and Ulemas do authenticate every hadith for the benefit of every Shia!

Now, you will ask where is the benefit or how do we come to know that a hadith is authenticated or not (which I'm assuming that this was the question you were asking all along these 8 pages):

The answer is that: All the authenticated hadiths are referred to in the books written by the scholars. Al-Kafi and Behaarul Anwar were just compilations of hadiths. But the books written by scholars on Aqaid, Akhlaq, Ahkam, History, etc. in which countless hadiths of Infallibles(as) are quoted; refer to the authenticated hadiths in Al-Kafi or Beharul Anwar, or any other important book.

So therefore, when we read a basic(or even advanced) book written by an aalim, who quotes hadiths of the Infallibles(as); we know that these hadiths have been authenticated and that is why they have been quoted in the book!

Let us forget about sunnis for now. :) Frankly, now I don't care about how/what they do.


You had started this in the first place! :P

I am just concerned that we shias don't have a system when it comes to aqa'id. Or of there is, I am not aware of it being practiced.


To somewhat answer your question; there is a system, but YOU are the one who is not aware of it!

This (somewhat) similar question was asked by a Shia to a scholar(Mustafa Jaffer). I dont whether you have read it on the net or not but nevertheless I'll C&P it:

QUESTION:
What are the Shia conditions for proper hadith verification?  A Sunni
brother was claiming that our conditions were more restrictive and
unaccepting of 'ackowledged' hadith of the Prophet?

ANSWER:
A hadith is mainly verified from the chain of its narrators. Scholars,
before deciding to either accept or reject any hadith, will spend time in
studying the lives of all the narrators of the hadith. Aspects to be studied
include the era in which the narrator lived - does it coincide with the era
of the authority he is reporting on? Was the narrator old and learned enough
to understand the hadith? Was the narrator a renowned fasiq(one who commits
sins openly)? Has the narrator ever been known to fabricate a hadith??

Moreover, a hadith is also deemed accepted or rejected based on its
contents. Do the contents of the hadith contradict the Holy Quran?? Is the
content of the hadith against logic??

There are many ahadith that have been acknowledged by all Muslims. Others
have been accepted by all, but with differences in versions.

In conclusion, a hadith is accepted because of the authenticity of the
narrators and the soundness of its content. Any doubts in the character and
personality of any one narrator out of a chain of narrators will render the
hadith unacceptable by Shia scholars.


Furthermore there are two Shia books on authenticating hadiths (which I think should answer your question) ; but you'll have to purchase it to read it (since I dont know whether it is available online or not)

1)THE PROHIBITION OF RECORDING THE HADITH CAUSES AND EFFECTS

2) A Probe into the History of Hadith by Allama Murtaza Askari.

Edited by Insiya, 20 July 2005 - 12:58 PM.


#186 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 01 October 2005 - 08:44 PM

(bismillah)
(salam)

A little something I put together, and I hope others find it beneficial. Note that it's not even a millionth of the complete system of the science of rijal, but perhaps people will learn at least a bit from it. :P

ws

Attached Files


Edited by tahasyed, 01 October 2005 - 10:11 PM.


#187 shunni

shunni

    shunni

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,874 posts
  • Location:Florida USA
  • Interests:truth and justice

Posted 01 October 2005 - 09:10 PM

(bismillah)
(salam)

A little something I put together, and I hope others find it beneficial. Note that it's not even a millionth of the complete system of the science of rijal, but perhaps people will learn at least a bit from it. :P

ws

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


beleive or not, first time i read about sceice of rijal. thanks

#188 Link

Link

    ...for those who intend not to exult themselves in the earth...

  • Banned
  • 5,515 posts
  • Location:Ottawa, Canada

Posted 03 October 2005 - 12:45 PM

(salam)

jazikallah for that article u wrote Taha, I suggest everyone reads it :)

#189 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 05 October 2005 - 11:19 PM

(salam)

I am still unclear on the shia definition of 'mutawatir' hadith, and have yet to see an example of one.
Anyone know of any?

For now, here's my understanding of sunni and shia mutawatir ahadith:

Posted Image

Note that the sunni mutawatir ahadith have many narrators from the beginning to the end of the chain, while the shia mutawatir ahadith (from my understanding) only have many narrators near the end of the chain.

#190 SpIzo

SpIzo

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,419 posts

Posted 06 October 2005 - 01:25 PM

(salam)

Wowwy! Bro.Taha, you've put that very well!! Just like a real scholar. May Allah reward you for your efforts. :)

I had told you I had read that book of Quran and Hadith by Seyyid Saeed Akhtar Rizvi. I did write that Ahadith part, but din't know where to post it, therefore, I dropped the idea. But now since you've brought up this topic again, I'm posting that topic here. Hope it helps you and all of us:

#191 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 06 October 2005 - 02:16 PM

(salam)
Jazakallahu khair for sharing the file, sis. Very informative.
Also, I guess the shia and sunni definition of mutawatir is the same.
I guess now I just want to see an example of a mutawatir shia hadith.

#192 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 08 October 2005 - 08:39 PM

(salam)

Hmm.. after some reading, it seems my fear is confirmed. :(
Allama Muhammad Sanad, in his book "Al-Imámatul Iláhiyah" p.43-45, states that a hadith does not necessarily have to be mass-conveyed in every era of the transmitted chain to be mutawatir. So, even a mass-conveyance of a certain hadith in a single era would make it mutawatir.

I guess it would imply that a hadith narrated by a single person to a single person, to a single person, who narrates it to 500 men, would make that hadith mutawatir. I do not find this definition of mutawatir anywhere as convincing as the sunni definition, which stresses the mass-existance/conveyance of a hadith in ALL eras leading up to the Prophet (pbuh).

Since the very meaning of mutawatir is supposed to imply complete trust in a report due to its ever-existant wide popularity in all eras, I fail to see how the shia definition meets that criteria. :squeez:
And if I'm not mistaken, shia mutawatir ahadith are virtually all mutawatir ma'nawi (mutawatir in meaning. For example, imam Ja'far being the 6th imam), as opposed to mutawatir lafdhi (mutawatir in the exact wording. For example, "seeking knowledge is incumbent upon every muslim). Hence, it seems no single shia hadith has been transmitted with tawatur, but different ahadith, with a common element in them, are viewed collectively to be mutawatir.

If any shia can prove otherwise, and present a mutawatir shia hadith, it would be much appreciated.

ws

Edited by tahasyed, 08 October 2005 - 08:46 PM.


#193 Abbas

Abbas

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,520 posts

Posted 11 October 2005 - 06:24 AM

Salam Alaikum br. Taha

Getting to the point first, the majority of the Shia fuqaha believe that there must be tawatur reached at every stage of the isnad of a hadith for it to be called “mutawatir”. I’ll get back to this later, but first I’ll examine what you have extracted from Shaikh Sanad’s book.

For those who are new to this stuff, ahadith are broadly divided into two types: mutawatir and ahad. There is a further third type called mashoor. Mashoor is when lots of people narrate a hadith but does not reach the level of a mutawatir hadith. The results of this is that a mutawatir hadith gives qat’i daleel while an ahad hadith gives zanni daleel.

I think, with my limited knowledge of Arabic, you may have misunderstood what Shaikh Sanad was trying to express.

He covers this discussion over three pages, so I’ll just pick out a couple of few key sentences:

He writes:
وما دام انتاج الخبر المتواتر للعلم عبر تلك الضابطة الرياضية فاننا نخلص إلى عدم اشتراط تساوي دائرة التواتر في كل الطبقات، بل قد يكون في بعض الطبقات واسع الانتشار بينما ينحسر ذلك في دائرة أضيق في الطبقات الاخرى
And:
فتحصل ان التواتر على درجات فقد يكون واسع الانتشار بين الناس وقد يختص بطبقة دون أخرى وبفئة معينة دون أخرى، لكن ذلك كله لا يخدش بالتواتر

In conclusion he writes:
ونتيجة لما تقدم لا وقع للتعجب من تتواتر الخبر الواصل إلينا وإن اضيقت دائرة التواتر وهذا ما نراه في بعض الأحاديث التي هي مواد خلاف بين المسلمين كحديث الغدير والثقلين حيث نجد أن دائرة التواتر في الصدر الأول واسعة ثم تنحسر هذه الدائرة في العصور المتأخر حتى تكاد تقتصر في نطاق ضيق لدى المتخصصين في هذا الفن.

The summary of these statements is that there need not be an equal level of tawatur in all stages of the narration, because in one stage there may be many narrators and very clearly mutawatir, but in another stage there may be less narrators (but may also reach the level of tawatur).
Its this “tasawi” (mathemtical equality) that he is arguing against.
As an example he takes the ahadith of Al-Ghadeer and Al-Thaqlain. In the beginning there were literally dozens and hundreds of people who reported this, and this then decreased at each subsequent stage in the narration until we only get a few hadith compilers who recorded it.

I think its obvious from Shaikh Sanad’s example that when he says “a few” and when he speaks of the narrowing of narration (like a bottle-neck), this does not mean one or two, it still means many but relatively-few in relation to the other levels of the isnad. The compilers of the hadith of Al-Ghadir/Al-Thaqlain are relatively few, but still reach a level of tawatur.

This discussion of Shaikh Sanad seems to be in answer to those (mostly amongst the Sunnis) who say that the tawatur must be equally present at each tabaqah/stage of a mutawatir hadith, or it is just clarifying and elucidating on a generally accepted basic definition of a mutawatir khabar.

Even if I am wrong in my understanding of Shaikh Sanad’s words, the most that he is doing is dividing the ahadith in two broad groups: ahad and mutawatir, and as included at least some of the “mashoor” ahadith with the mutawatir ahadith, and regarded these mashoor ahadith as also qat’i.
If this is so, which I doubt, then in comparison with the Sunnis this is no big deal, as some scholars like Abu Hanifah regarded mashoor and mutawatir ahadith as generally the same, both giving qat’i daleel.

However, with what I know, most of the Shia ulama pair mashoor and ahad ahadith together.

To clarify the position of Shia fuqaha on mutawatir akhbar, I will now quote from a few extracts from three books I have written by some of our esteemed scholars.

Al-Sheikh Mohammad Reza Al-Muzaffar (d.1384 AH)

Al-Mutawatir: that (report) which provides such tranquility (sukoon) of the self (nafs) that all doubt (shakk) is removed and definitive absolute certainty is attained by the great number of reports of a group which prevents (the possibility of) any agreement on a lie...
...It is necessary – so that the mutawatir report is a source of actual knowledge – that the conditions of tawatur (as defined above) is found true for level (tabqah) in the middle of the narration. Otherwise this is not a mutawatir report.
...So it is inescapable that the first group have their mutawatir report from a mutawatir report and so on.
...And when the report does not fulfill the condition of tawatur in any one level (tabqah), the report as a whole can no longer be mutawatir and becomes one of the ahaad reports.
(Usool-ul-Fiqh)

Ayatullah Al-Mirza Ali Al-Mishkini Al-Ardabeli

And one of (the types of reports) is Al-Mutawatir. This is a report of a group which in itself provides actual knowledge of its truthfulness, and there is no doubt in its possibility and its occurance....
... Now know that attaining actual knowledge with tawatur is based on the fulfilment of a set of conditions, some of them (to be found) in the Reported and some of them (to be found) in the Listener...
Condtion #3: the regularity of the two ends and middle (of the chain of narration); I mean: That every level (tabaqaat) of the reporters in the beginning, middle and end reaches the numbers for tawatur.
(Tahrir-ul-Ma’alim)

Sayyid Hasan Sadr-ud-Deen (d.1354 AH)

Al-Mutawatir: If its chain reaches, in every level (tabqah), a limit at which it is safe from being an coincidental agreement (tawatu’) on falsehood, then it is mutawatir.
(Nihayat-ud-Dirayah)

These are the quotes that I could find in a short period of time, and I have full confidence that this is the view of the vast majority of our Shia fuqaha.

Sayyid Hasan Al-Sadr also discussed in his book Nihayah the claim of Sunnis of tawatur and said that the claims of many Sunni mutawatir reports is false, and such claims were only made (by scholars like Ibn Hajr and Suyuti) in order to praise the fabricated ahadith of the Umayyads in favour of their elders (the sahabah/tabi’een). After that they became mutawatir. They (who make this claim) do not know that the Ahl-e-ilm have said that the conditions of tawatur have not been fulfilled in the early part of the chains.

In answer to those who say that Shias have hardly any mutawatir ahadith (some say we only have one report in all our books), Sayyid Hasain said that we have numerous, and even mutawatir lafzi are not rare, due to the compilations of the 400 usool in the time of the Aimmah [a].
He then quotes Sayyid Murtadha who said that most of our ahadith are in fact mutawatir if we examine the way they were compiled in the beginning. Sayyid Murtadha said that even if we have a number of reporters of apparently ahad ahadith, most of them are in fact mutawatir and a source of actual knowledge.

Sayyid Hasan then states that there is ishkal in the present existance of mutawatir ahadith in the kotob-ul-arbah but there is no doubt that the compilers of these books received these reports in tawatur.

The above is in regards to tawatur-e-lafzi. However there is no doubt at all that we have many reports categorised under tawatur-e-ma’nawi.

I hope this dispells some of your fears.

Wassalam

#194 Άbbas

Άbbas

    Member

  • Admins
  • 6,912 posts
  • Religion:Islam

Posted 11 October 2005 - 06:46 AM

(salam)
I guess it would imply that a hadith narrated by a single person to a single person, to a single person, who narrates it to 500 men, would make that hadith mutawatir. I do not find this definition of mutawatir anywhere as convincing as the sunni definition, which stresses the mass-existance/conveyance of a hadith in ALL eras leading up to the Prophet (pbuh).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


(salam)

This standard of mass-existance/conveyance of hadith in all eras is not possible if we consider the relative population ratio & the immense critism & opposition of majority throughout the history of Islam.

#195 tahasyed

tahasyed

    slave of Allah

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,444 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Eating, sleeping, thinking, reading, religion, surfing the net, calligraphy, drawing, painting.. <br /><br /><br />..did I mention sleeping?

Posted 11 October 2005 - 12:48 PM

(salam)
Ahsant, and jazakallahu khair, Abbas bhai.
Thank you for clarifying what Sheikh Sanad said, and you are indeed correct. :blush:

As for the very last bit, where it states the ishkal of having mutawatir lafdhi ahadith in the kutub al-arba'ah... how then can we know which ahadith were/are mutawatir and which ones aren't?
Also, what is the minimum agreed-upon number of people in a certain era for a hadith to be mutawatir?

Thanks again.

(salam)

This standard of mass-existance/conveyance of hadith in all eras is not possible if we consider the relative population ratio & the immense critism & opposition of majority throughout the history of Islam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What I meant was mutawatir from any ma'soom, and surely that would be possible. Alhamdulillah, Abbas bhai has shown above that the shia definition of mutawatir also indicates mass-conveyance in all eras. :)

(salam)

#196 -Asadullah-

-Asadullah-

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPip
  • 406 posts

Posted 09 December 2005 - 11:24 PM

From a Private chat Group:

To a person who is even slightly knowledgable in the Ahlus-Sunnah usul of hadith and fiqh, the shia 'system' not only seems silly, but also makes one wonder whether the average shias even have a clue as to how weak their system is.
The shias rejected most of the major early hadith transmitters beginning with the companions down to the fourth century, a rather late time to begin the compilation of hadiths. That was, of course, after the mass-bewilderment of the shia community due to the absence of a living imam, which itself brought about the fabrication and 'self-consoling' ahadith, aside from the already abundant 'wealth' of accumulated forgeries of four centuries.

So what IS the shi'ite science of hadith?

If we were to simply put it in Hurr Amili's (author of Wasa'il ash-Shia) words, there is none. It was invented as a defense to the sunni criticism of the shias for not having any system/methodology.
We know for sure that the akhbari shias do not follow a system, and their only 'methodology' is to reject anything that contradicts the Quran (which is ironic, as the tahreef of the Quran is a popular view among them). Besides that, there is no other system that is applied to the body of narrations, to discern the true from the false ones.
al-Kulayni in the foreword to his Al-Kafi makes a sweeping admission of the possible spuriousness of the reports his book contains then turns to narrate reports attributing all-encompassing knowledge of all that is in the heavens and the earth to the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt (ra) and countless other similar reports.
He also says, ""Know... that no one can distinguish narrations of the Possessors of Knowledge [i.e. the infallible Twelve Imams] by his opinion, except according to the words of the Possessor of Knowledge: 'Compare them to the Qur'an. Accept that which is in accordance with it, and reject that which contradicts it'" and his words: 'Avoid whatever agrees with the plebs (i.e. the Ahlus-Sunnah)'".

Therefore, his methodology was:
1) Quran
2) Opposing the Ahlus-Sunnah.

And what a methodology, eh? -_-
Of course, NOW the shia ulema have set out the methodologies and principles, but again it is interesting to note that they are merely ink on paper, and you will rarely, if ever, see a shia scholar actually saying 'according to the sahih hadith....'.

And yet.... what is sahih? The shias boldly and proudly state that they do not have any sahih book, almost as if it is something GOOD. Thanks to the hodgepodge of fabrications whose problematic nature shia scholars realized, they upheld the notion that everything has to be examined and constantly re-examined with a critical eye'. While the first part of this sentence is not problematic, the latter portion clearly shows that shi'ism is not made of solid substance - rather, it is based on beliefs that keep evolving with time. And the merest unrelated verse in the Quran becomes a 'blatant proof' of Ali's (ra) wilayat, or the fact that the entire universe was created simply for the ahlul-bayt, or any occurance of 'ghayb' (unseen) in the Quranis talking about the 12th hidden imam.


May Allah guide us all!

#197 Άbbas

Άbbas

    Member

  • Admins
  • 6,912 posts
  • Religion:Islam

Posted 09 December 2005 - 11:35 PM

^

If you had read the entire thread, you would not have copy/pasted this.

There are very useful comments & links within its pages. Go and browse to have an unbias view.

Salam u ALaikum.

#198 Link

Link

    ...for those who intend not to exult themselves in the earth...

  • Banned
  • 5,515 posts
  • Location:Ottawa, Canada

Posted 10 December 2005 - 03:41 PM

Of course, NOW the shia ulema have set out the methodologies and principles, but again it is interesting to note that they are merely ink on paper, and you will rarely, if ever, see a shia scholar actually saying 'according to the sahih hadith....'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



When things are soo well known in hadiths, for example, the importance of prayer, their is no need to comment on the authenticity of the hadith, however like in islamic government, Khomeini (ra) does talk about the isnads of the some of the hadiths he is bringing as a daleel, when it comes to shariah, they do care about isnads more then they would of quoting things about the god-fearing for example

hadithal kisaa that he told me was fabricated (the long one) for example is mentioned to have an isnad that is Sahih and declared so in some books that i've read

here is one example of scholars mentioning when a hadith is Sahih from one book that is online:

A Noteworthy Point:

The learned Shaykh Baha'i, may Allah have mercy upon him, says, "The Chain of authorities of this hadith is sahih [authentic], and it is a tradition 'well-known (mashhur) among the Shi`is (khassah) as well as the generality Ammah, i.e. the Sunnis], who have narrated it in their sihah with a slight `variation." Thereafter, he cites the tradition with a slight difference [of Wording] from their sihah. In the gloss on the Arba'in, he remarks, "One of `the `several' mentioned in the chain of authorities of the tradition is 'Ali ibn 'Ibrahim, and for this reason, this narration is sahih. The `Ammah have also transmitted it through a sahih chain of authorities, and this is a tradition that is mashhur and considered authentic by the consensus (muttafaq `alayh) of all followers of lslam:



miraqatal uqool also discusses the isnads of Usool Al-Kafi, and rates which ones are Sahih, which are thiqah or hassan, and which are weak, and which are fabricrated

I also don't believe what he says of the sunni system of hadith being strong, there are differences of opinion on who is strong and who is weak, and from some articles i read from sunnis refuting salafis, its not what Taha is making it out to be , and I think everyone should do their own research about this and not depend on just on one person saying

inshallah i am going to study the two systems of hadith, see it from you own eyes how they both work, i think when it comes down to it, it is about studing the difference of opinion on narrators and the reasons, and making a decission, the ahlul-sunna all differ in fiqh, etc, is this all based on a pefect system of hadith developped so earyly? if you go on yanabi.com, u will see that they differ on hadiths too, and it comes down who's opinion u trust about ilmel rijaal

the sunnis always make it as if they have consensus on this and that, but they don't, when u quote a scholar saying the uluma have consensus on a hadith that supports shism, all of a sudden they show the difference of opinion, but then they quote a scholar saying the uluma have a consensus on this and we trust them, I think Taair al quds in the 12 Imams (as) thread showed thats not how it is, actually within ahlul-sunna their are different aqeedas and different scholars trust different people

ma;asalama

Edited by Link, 10 December 2005 - 03:57 PM.


#199 .InshAllah.

.InshAllah.

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,922 posts
  • Interests:http://godandphilosophy.wordpress.com/

Posted 10 December 2005 - 04:08 PM

(salam)

Its worth mentioning that according to Shaykh Hasan Bahbahani, who is a Shia that studied ilme Hadith under the contemporary Sunni scholar Shaykh Hasan Saqqaf, the Sunni system of hadith is a mess (to put it bluntly) whereas and the Shia system is far more advanced and ordered in comparison. Its also worth mentioning that hes been requesting a debate with the Salafi scholars on paltalk for the past few years on this very topic, without much success.

And btw Shaykh Bahbahani is on paltalk quite alot for anyone who wants to discuss the shia and the sunni system.

I think everyone should do their own research about this and not depend on just on one person saying


I agree 100%. I only mentioned the Shaykh above to show that there are people who have studied both sides properly who come to the complete opposite conclusion that SunniBro has posted.

May Allah increase us all in knowledge.

ws

Edited by .InshAllah., 10 December 2005 - 04:09 PM.


#200 Link

Link

    ...for those who intend not to exult themselves in the earth...

  • Banned
  • 5,515 posts
  • Location:Ottawa, Canada

Posted 11 December 2005 - 02:55 PM

(salam)

Salmany:

The scholar seems not to know how to go about with hadith authentication. The problem is that your whole approach is wrong. You do not take what 4 scholars said and then somehow conclude that the narrator is dhaeef. It shows that the author is not aware of the science of hadith at all.

You will ALWAYS find differences in narrator credibility amongst the Muhaditheen. There are books which state the final verdict such as the taqrib of Ibn hajar.

LAstly, it is not only Sanad that counts.


Salmany himself said this, there is no unanimously accepted hadith, by Syed Rehan standards sunnis don't have Sahih hadiths either :blush:



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users