Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Hussain20

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    115
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Hussain20

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member
  • Birthday 01/04/1982

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

767 profile views
  1. or sale private plate

    HU55 SAN

    £10,000

    07833453477

  2. Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,

    Happy birthday Brother, hope you have a good day.

    And may we all hold onto the rope of guidance of Allah (S.W.T)

  3. Jazkallah Khair for the reply, sorry for the delay in responding but my shift ended at work and I was heading home. You said and I quote, Mirza Muhammad Amin al-Asterabadi,2 a traditionist who in his work al-Fawaid al-Madaniyah maintains that the traditions contained within the four books should be deemed as authentic and the existence of permissibility of adhering to them due to the fact that the traditions are continuous (mutawatir) in their transmission from the authors to their compilers. He goes on to mention twelve reasons in support of his claim. Astarabadi's views were supported by a group of scholars most of them traditionists like himself but in particular he was supported by Hur al-Amili3 the author of wasa'il al-Shi'ah. I would urge you to read the complete article http://almahdi.4t.com/issue5/page21.html Perhaps the most important thing we are forgetting is that the classical shia scholars themselves are stating that the representative of the hidden Imam (Imam Mahdi) himself has approved the book and named it Al-Kafi.
  4. you need to read the post again, this is just one example. Al-Tabrassi said: “Al-Kafi among the four Shia books (Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, Al-Faqih) is like the sun among the stars, and who looked fairly would not need to notice the position of the men in the chain of hadiths in this Book, and if you looked fairly you would feel satisfied and sure that the hadiths are firm and accurate.” (Mustadrak Al-Wasa’el, vol.3, p.532) Not one marja to my knowlodge has declared this, if you have fatwa's pls do supply them. also pls note Sayyid Mahdi Modaressi has to say
  5. I found this article quite interesting...I would appreciate members comments and refutations if the claim is untrue. Jazkallah Khair Imam Al-Kulayni is to the Shia what Imam Bukhari is to the Sunni. Imam Al-Kulayni is one of the most respected figures in Shi’ism and he is referred to as “Thiqat al-Islam” which translates to the “Trust of Islam.” His book, Al-Kafi, is referred to as Hujjat of Islam (Proof of Islam). ”Here, Imam Al-Kulayni is stating that the only way to discern the authenticity of the Hadith is by applying the following principle: “Test the various reports by the Book of God; whatever agrees with it take it, whatever disagrees with it reject it.” Imam Al-Kulayni then goes on to explain that this is what he has done when he was compiling the Hadith and that after he went through this process the result is his book Al-Kafi. In fact, Imam Al-Kulayni was asked by another Shia to compile a book with only Sahih Hadith because that particular Shia follower was confused as to which Hadith to follow and which not to. Imam Al-Kulayni declared that he had accomplished this task and says in the Preface of Al-Kafi: “…You wanted to have a book which would be sufficient (for your religious needs) (kafin), which would include all kinds of knowledge (’ilm) of religion, which would be adequate for the student, and to which the teacher might refer. Thus it could be used by anyone who wanted knowledge of religion and of legal practice (’amal) according to only sound traditions (athar) from the truthful ones (the Imams)…Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most Gracious, has made the compilation of the book that you had wished for possible. I hope it will prove to be up to your expectations” (source: Al-Kulayni in his Preface of Al-Kafi) Thus, Imam Al-Kulayni had completed the task, and therefore it is no longer upto the Shia follower to question the authenticity of Al-Kafi which is declared Sahih by the scholars. In fact, he has in this same preface strictly forbidden the followers from questioning Al-Kafi’s veracity: “Follow what is unanimously agreed upon (by the scholars) because there is no harm in what is unanimously agreed upon…refer to the scholar and accept that which is within the limit of his words, ‘Whichever you would follow in submission and obedience is excusable for you.’” (source: Al-Kulayni in his Preface of Al-Kafi) Thus, Answering-Ansar has employed a devious trick (staying true to their faith of Taqiyyah) by taking Imam Al-Kulayni’s words out of context. In his introduction, Imam Al-Kulayni explains what was the process that he underwent in order to verify that the Hadith he compiled were authentic. He is not asking the Shia follower to question any of the reports in Al-Kafi, but rather he is saying that he already has done this by testing all of the Hadith with the Book of God. How could the Shia possibly say otherwise, when we see that Imam Al-Kulayni has stated emphatically that the narrations in Al-Kafi are authentic, except two or three? When you debate with the Shia, keep asking him why the Shia can say that Al-Kafi is not authentic, when the compiler of Al-Kafi himself says they are authentic. The Shia propagandist will always dodge this point so it is important to hammer it in. It would be like the Sunni denying the authenticity of Sahih Bukhari despite the fact that Imam Bukhari has declared that they are authentic. Surely, the best one to ask if a Hadith is authentic is the one who compiles it! It is an accepted fact amongst the Shia community that Imam Al-Kulayni said that he only included authentic Hadith in his Al-Kafi. This is admitted by Shaykh Arif Abdulhussain of the Al-Mahdi Institute on their official website, in which he declares that the compilers of the four books of Hadith (which includes Al-Kafi) all declared that the narrations contained therein were completely authentic. It is very deceitful of Answering-Ansar to even insinuate that Imam Al-Kulayni did not claim that the narrations in Al-Kafi are authentic. It is a well-established fact that Imam Al-Kulayni was a prominent Shia scholar of Hadith and he declared that 99% of the Hadith in his book, Al-Kafi, were Sahih. Actually, it was the position of the Shia scholarship for many centuries, at least the first four centuries after Hijrah, that Al-Kafi (as well as the other three books of Hadith) were Sahih in totality. It was only very recently that the Shia scholars shifted from this policy and questioned the authenticity of Al-Kafi. This is why the Shia propagandists, like Answering-Ansar, avoid discussing how their scholars for so many centuries believed in the totality of Al-Kafi but then they suddenly abandoned it. Why? Shouldn’t the Shia follow the founders of their faith, those who compiled their Hadith and who they supposedly revere? Who is a more reliable Hadith scholar: Answering-Ansar or Imam Al-Kulayni? Let us see what Al-Shia.com has to say about the greatness of Imam Al-Kulayni and his proficiency as a Hadith scholar. It should be noted that these quotes are from the Preface of Al-Kafi as posted on Al-Shia.com. “ Based on the above, we see that there is a very long list of classical Shia heavy-weights that deemed Imam Al-Kulayni to be the authority when it comes to Hadith. If they believed him to be the authority, then shouldn’t we believe Imam Al-Kulayni when he says that Al-Kafi contains authentic Hadith and the book is Sahih? His word should certainly be taken above that of Answering-Ansar’s! Just take a gander at the classical Shia Maraje’ (top scholars) who endorsed Imam Al-Kulayni. Indeed, the dominant view amongst the classical Shia was that Al-Kafi was indeed authentic in its entirity. We read the following statements by the leading classical Shia scholars: Al-Tabrassi said: “Al-Kafi among the four Shia books (Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, Al-Faqih) is like the sun among the stars, and who looked fairly would not need to notice the position of the men in the chain of hadiths in this Book, and if you looked fairly you would feel satisfied and sure that the hadiths are firm and accurate.” (Mustadrak Al-Wasa’el, vol.3, p.532) Al-Hur Al’amily said: “The authors of the four Books of the Shia (Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, Al-Faqih) have testified that the Hadiths of their books are accurate (Sahih), firm and well conducted from the roots that all Shia agreed on, and if you consider those scholars (the authors of the four books) are reliable then you must accept their sayings and their narrations.” (Al-Wasa’el, vol.20, p.104) Sharaf Al Din Musawi said: “Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, and Mun La Yahdu-Ruhu Al-Faqih are Mutawatirah (100% accurate) and agreed on the accuracy of its contents (the Hadiths), and Al-Kafi is the oldest, greatest, best and the most accurate one of them.” (The book of Al-Muraja’aat, Muraj’ah number 110) Muhammad Sadiq Al-Sadr said: “The Shia are unanimous as to the four books (Al-Kafi, Al-Tahzeeb, Al-Istibsar, Al-Faqih) being accepted and all the narrations in them are accurate.” (”Kitab Al-Shia”, The Book of Shia, p.127) It is very interesting that the great classical scholars of the Shia are of the opinion that Al-Kafi is Sahih and that it is only recently that the contemporary Shia scholars claim otherwise. But the fact is that the Shia religion is based upon the sayings of people like Imam Al-Kulayni, who himself was in contact with the Hidden Imam via his representative during the Minor Occultation. Imam Al-Kulayni was alive during the time of the Minor Occultation of Imam Mehdi. The Shia believe that during the Minor Occultation, there were four representatives who were able to contact Imam Mehdi personally and get religious advice from him. Imam Al-Kulayni was a companion of all four of these men, and thus, he had access to the Hidden Imam through them. The authoratative Shia website, Al-Shia.com, quotes the preface of Al-Kafi: Thus, as stated on Al-Shia.com, Al-Kafi was compiled in Baghdad during the Minor Occultation of the Hidden Imam (also refer to Aqa Buzurg Tehrani in “adh-Dhari‘ah”, vol.17, p.245) at a time when the representative of the Imam resided in that city, which afforded the opportunity for its contents to be scrutinized and ratified by the Hidden Imam himself (as stated by Ibn Tawus in his book “Kashf al-Mahajjah”, p.159) This is in itself proof of the authenticity of the narrations contained in the book (says al-Hurr al-‘Amili in “Wasa’il ash-Shi‘ah”, vol.20, p.71). Al-Kafi actually bears the seal of approval of the Hidden Imam himself, and he was the one who named it “Al-Kafi” (meaning “sufficient”) by saying, as reported by al-Khwansari in “Rawdat al-Jannat” (vol.6, p.116): “hadha kafin li-shi‘atina” (This is sufficient for our Shia). Now let us examine the flimsy response by Answering-Ansar. Answering-Ansar has manipulated the Arabic here to make it sound as if some of the Ulema claimed one thing and some Ulema of the time claimed another thing. This is a narration in the Preface of Al-Kafi which is reported on the authority of some Ulema. Obviously, the Isnad would not be from all of the scholars of the world, but rather a group amongst them. This is true for all narrations. The truth is that there is not a single classical Shia scholar of that time who did not believe that Imam Al-Kulayni presented this book to Imam Mehdi. Says who? Certainly not the Shia Maraje’ (top scholars) of that time. It seems that Answering-Ansar is inventing its own Madhab. And why is Answering-Ansar claiming that they are unable to ascertain which of Ulema held this opinion? The names of the Shia scholars who upheld Imam Al-Kulayni’s position are mentioned in the Preface of Al-Kafi and this is available on Al-Shia.com (as we have stated above). Thus, these are not un-named individuals, but rather these are the Shia heavy-weights, including: Al-Najashi, Al-‘Allama al-Hilli, ibn Dawud, Al-Tusi, Al-Sayyid Radi al-Din ibn Tawus, Ibn al-Athir, Al-Tayyibi, Ibn Hajar, Al-Shaykh Husayn ibn ‘Abd al-Samad al-Harithi al-Hamdani, Al-Qadi Nur Allah al-Shushtari, Muhammad Taqi al-Majlisi, Mirza ‘Abd Allah al-Afandi …amongst others. Those who verified Imam Al-Kulayni’s Al-Kafi as 100% authentic that are not mentioned on Al-Shia.com include: Sharaf Al Din Musawi, Ali ibn Akbar al Ghifari, Faydh al Kashani, Shaikh Muhammad Sadiq Sadr, Al Tabrisi, and Shaikh Abbas al Qummi, and many others. In fact, even in the preface of Al-Kafi, we read that the book can be considered an interview with Imam Qaem himself: to continue inshallah. Sayyid Mahdi Modaressi is the son of Ayatollah al Udhma Modaressi who he studied under; he is also related to Grand Ayatollah Modaressi. According to the Shia website, www.al-hewar.com, we read that Sayyid Mahdi Modaressi is the official representative of some Maraje’. Sayyid Mahdi Modaressi’s official website can be seen here: http://66.221.74.102/english/index.htm I encourage the reader to actually visit this site so that he feels assured of his authority to the Shia. Sayyid Modaressi was invited to Shia Chat to answer questions. He said: The above is a bit implicit, but what we have below is stated explicitly. As we see from the above, the representative of the Maraje’ declares “there are many high ranking scholars who believe in the authenticity of all the traditions narrated by the Four Books” which includes Al-Kafi. Al-Kafi was presented to the legendary Imam Qaem who liked it and said: “It suffices our Shia” (al-Tharee’ah ela Tasaneef al-Shi’a: Agha Buzurg al-Tahraani; vol.17, p.245) He gave it his seal of approval, and it was on this basis that Imam Al-Kulayni declared that it was Sahih.
  6. I guess then this quote makes perfect sense.... And words of Jafar Subhani in Kulliyat Fi 'Ilm ar-Rijal . æÞÏ ÚÑÝÊ Ãä ÇáÊÖÚíÝ Èíä ÇáÞÏãÇÁ áÇÌá ÇáÚÞíÏÉ áÇ íæÌÈ ÓáÈ ÇáæËæÞ Úä ÇáÑÇæí¡ áÇä ÃßËÑ ãÇ ÑÂå ÇáÞÏãÇÁ ÛáæÇ ÃÕÈÍ Ýí ÒãÇääÇ ãä ÇáÖÑæÑíÇÊ Ýí Ïíä ÇáÇãÇãíÉ http://www.alkadhum.org/hawza/doros/alderaeh/01.htm "You've known that the mechanism of weakening based on the Creed among the early scholars does not necessarily deprive the narrator of his trustworthiness. This is because what the early scholars have considered exteremism (Ghuluw) [in the past] became in our contemporary time an indispensible part of Imamiyah religion". Interesting isn't it?
  7. As Salam Alikum I'm sure many of you remember when TahaSyed posted an article on why he left the shia faith and he quoted some classical shia scholars on tahreef. Well I took the liberty to ask for an ifta from the Grand Ayatollah and about four months later he responsded back which I am very excited about. I really thought he just ignored it and wouldn't respond. I will post it for others to see too, its a very detailed response to the accusations of tahreef in the Qur`an. If someone has time please translate it for everyone to read. Jazkallah Khair.
  8. As Salam Alikum After seeing the various reasons Shias give for rejecting the marriage of Umm Kulthum, Daughter of Ali and Fatima, to Umar Khattab i decided to look into the matter myself. I inquired regarding it and now i shall present my views. I request ALL to read everything present in this thread. I have included the Isnad and sources etc to prevent any confusion. MISREPRESENTATION OF HISTORY ( For all those who are new to Shia/Sunni issues) A major part of the edifice upon which Shiism has constructed itself is its idiosyncratic portrayal of the early history of Islam. It is especially in its representation of the relationships that existed between Ali ibn Abi Talib t and the eminent Sahabah like Abu Bakr and Umar that Shiism has acquired a character of its own. Shii historians seemed little troubled by the fact that their own reconstruction of history would inevitably involve the invention of events, or versions of actual events, that would be at variance with standard sources. They seem to have been considerably confident that the emotional appeal of their version of history would override, and indeed obviate the need for a critical comparison of their narratives with those of other historians of repute. Their confidence appears to have been well founded, for a milennium has passed and still there is evidence in abundance of an emphatically emotional and sentimental approach to issues whose historicity needed to have been critically scrutinised in a spirit of emotional detachment. In this belated century that prides itself on the advancement of research methodology and techniques, the anomaly of a methodology that has emotive appeal as its central component stands out like a very sore thumb. It is this spirit—of emotional prejudice overriding objective scholarship—that Shii propagandists up to this very day insist on "revealing" to their Sunni audiences the "truth" about the "persecution" suffered by the Ahl al-Bayt at the hands of the Sahabah . They can often be found launching into their particular misrepresentations of history, with no respect for standards of historic authenticity, and even less in awe of the way in which they are in actual fact bringing disgrace upon the Family of Rasulullah. Their audiences too, are just as often completely captivated by these "revelations". The last thing on the mind of both propagandist and audience is the grievous contradictions the writer or speaker makes himself guilty of in his emotionally laden corruption of history. THE MARRIAGE OF UMM Kulthoom Umm Kulthoom was the second daughter of Ali and Fatimah, and the youngets of their four children. She was born in about the year 6 AH. She became of marriagable age during the khilafah of Umar ibn al-Khattab, and the khalifah asked for her hand in marriage. This is recorded by Ibn Sa‘d in his work at-Tabaqat al-Kubra (vol. 8 p. 338, ed. Muhammad ‘Ab al-Qadir ‘Ata, Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut 1990) as follows: I was informed by Anas ibn ‘Iyad al-Laythi, who reports on the authority of Ja‘far ibn Muhammad [as-Sadiq], and he from his father [Muhammad al-Baqir]— that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab asked ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib for the hand of Umm Kulthoom in marriage. ‘Ali said, "I had kept my daughters for the sons of Ja‘far." ‘Umar said, "Marry her to me, O Abul Hasan, for by Allah,there is no man on the face of the earth who seeks to achieve through her good companionship that which I seek to achieve." ‘Ali said, "I have done so." Then ‘Umar came to the Muhajirun between the grave [of Rasulullah r ] and the pulpit. They—‘Ali, ‘Uthman, Zubayr, Talhah and ‘Abd ar-Rahman—used to sit there, and whenever a matter used to arrive from the frontiers, ‘Umar used to come to them there and consult with them. He came to them and said, "Congratulate me." They congratulated him, and asked, "With whom are we congratulating you, O Amir al-Mu’minin?" He replied, "With the daughter of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib." Then he related to them that the Nabi said, "Every tie of kinship, and every association will be cut off on the Day of Qiyamah, except my kinship and my association." [‘Umar said,] "I have had the companionship of Rasulullah r ; I would like also to have this [kinship]." Two children were born from this marriage, namely Zayd and Ruqayyah. After the martyrdom of Umar she was married to her cousin Awn ibn Jafar, and after his death to his brother Muhammad ibn Jafar. Ultimately she died while married to a third of the sons of Jafar, namely Abdullah during the first half of the fourth decade after the Hijrah. Her son Zayd died on the same day as his mother, and the funeral prayer for mother and son was performed together. The marriage of Umm Kulthoom has been unanimously accepted as a fact of history by all major biographers and historians. Its authenticity has never been contested by anyone—not even the staunchest Shi‘ah—during the first four centuries after the Hijrah. It was only during the fifth century that ash-Shaykh al-Mufid (died 413 AH) appears to have woken up to the threat that the acceptance of this marriage holds for the doctrine of the Shi‘ah and their particular view of history. ISNAD FOR ABOVE **At this moment it needs to be noted that the above narration was recorded by Ibn Sa‘d from a man called Anas ibn ‘Iyad al-Laythi, who report directly on the authority of Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq, and he from his father Muhammad al-Baqir. In other words, we have here a purely Shii chain of narration. Anas ibn ‘Iyad al-Laythi is regarded by reputable Shii rijal, critics such as an-Najashi and Ibn Mutahhar al-Hilli, as a companion of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq who was "thiqah, sahih al-hadith" (reliable, a transmitter of authentic hadith). (See al-Ardabili, Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 1 p. 109, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1983) Since he narrates directly from the "infallible" Imam, there can be no question about the veracity of his report. Thereupon, his report is corroborated by a wealth of other narrations all of which affirm the historicity of this marriage. Above it all is the fact that for over three centuries this marriage remained uncontested. In later centuries the marriage of Umm Kulthoom would become a major bone of contention for Shii polemicists. This marriage as a topic in Shii theology owes its importance to its open contradiction to Shii views of religion and history. This is expressed by the Shii authors Muhammad al-Hassun and Umm ‘Ali Mashkur in their book A‘lam an-Nisa al-Mu’minat (p. 182) in the following terms: Shii writings on the marriage of Umm Kulthoom The same authors then proceed to enumerate a list of five independent books on the marriage of Umm Kulthoom written by the ‘ulama of the Shi‘ah from as early as the 4th century, down to as late as the present age. This list is not exhaustive, and excludes discussions of the same issue in other larger works. The works listed are: al-Mas’alah al-Muwaddihah ‘an Asbab Nikah Amir al-Mu’minin by ash-Shaykh al-Mufid (died 413 AH). It is alternatively entitled Inkah Amir al-Mu’minin Ibnatahu min ‘Umar. This book is metioned by Aqa Buzurg Tehrani in adh-Dhari‘ah (vol. 2 p. 396 no. 3641) and a manuscript of it is kept at the library of Ayatullah Mar‘ashi Najafi in Qum. Jawab as-Su’al ‘an Wajh Tazwij Amir al-Mu’minin Ibnatahu min ‘Umar by Sayyid Murtada (died 436 AH). It is also mentioned by Aqa Buzurg Tehrani (vol. 5 p. 183 no. 811) and a copy is preserved at the library of Ayatullah Mar‘ashi Najafi in Qum. Tazwij ‘Umar li-Umm Kulthoom by Shaykh Sulayman ibn Abdullah al-Mahuzi (died 1121 AH). It is mentioned by Tehrani in adh-Dhari‘ah. Tazwij Umm Kulthoom bint Amir al-Mu’minin wa-Inkar Wuqu‘ihi by Shaykh Muhammad Jawad al-Balaghi (died 1352AH/1932). It is mentioned by Tehrani at two places in adh-Dhari‘ah (vol. 4 p. 172 and vol. 11 p. 146). an independent treatise by Sayyid Nasir Husayn of Lucknow, India (died 1361AH/1941). The above clearly demonstrates the attention the marriage of Umm Kulthoom has enjoyed with Shii authors, and indicates the strategic importance of this marriage in Sunni-Shii polemics and dialogue. Chronologically speaking, attitudes amongst the Shiah towards the marriage of Umm Kulthoom can be divided into three stages: (1) before the 5th century AH, (2) after the 5th century AH, and (3) after the establishment of the Safavid Empire in the 10th century. Each of these stages will now be dealt with separately. PRIOR TO THE FIFTH CENTURY Shiia activity during the first century after the Hijrah had been confined to a large extent to revolutionary insurrections, starting from the campaign of the Tawwabun who sought to avenge the murder of Husayn, and continuing in the exploits of people like Mukhtar ath-Thaqafi and Abu Muslim al-Khurasani. It was only during the latter half of the second century that evidence begins to surface of some sort of intellectual activity amongst the Shiah. However, here too, the scope of that activity was limited to the documentation of the sayings which the Shiah ascribe to their Imams. The fourth century after the Hijrah witnessed the compilation of Muhammad ibn Ya‘qub al-Kulayni’s monmumental work al-Kafi. This work enjoys the following distinctions: -In it the author sought to document the minor compilations of Shi‘i hadith by previous authors into one major compendium It was compiled in Baghdad during the Minor Occultation of the Hidden Imam (as stated by Aqa Buzurg Tehrani in adh-Dhari‘ah, vol. 17 p. 245) at a time when the representative of the Imam resided in that city, which afforded the opportunity for its contents to be scrutinised an ratified by the Imam himself (as stated by Ibn Tawus in his book Kashf al-Mahajjah, p. 159) This is in itself proof of the authenticity of the narrations contained in the book (says al-Hurr al-‘Amili in Wasa’il ash-Shi‘ah, vol. 20p. 71). -It actually bears the seal of approval of the Hidden Imam himself, and he was the one who named it "al-Kafi" (meaning "sufficient") by saying, as reported by al-Khwansari in Rawdat al-Jannat (vol. 6 p.116): "hadha kafin li-shi‘atina" (This is sufficient for our Shi‘ah). In this work the author has documented at least FOUR traditions to the Imams which affirm the marriage of Umm Kulthoom to Umar. In fact, he has devoted the 23rd chapter in the Book on Marriage (Kitab an-Nikah) in Furu‘ al-Kafi to the marriage of Umm Kulthoom (bab tazwij Umm Kulthoom). Two of the four traditions are contained in this chapter, while the other two are found in a related chapter on where a widow whose husband has died should spend her waiting period, or ‘iddah (bab al-mutawaffa ‘anha zawjuha al-madkhul biha ayna ta‘taddu wa ma yajibu ‘alayha). However some of these traditions impart a unique flavour to the entire episode, in that now for the first time it becomes presented as a marriage concluded by sheer force and terror, in which Ali ibn Abi Talib, for all his nobility and courage, could not protect his young daughter, and was compelled, on threat of physical violence to his person, to give her to the khalifah. The traditions documented in al-Kafi are as follows: 1) Ali ibn Ibrahim—from his father—from Ibn Abi ‘Umayr—from Hisham ibn Salim and Hammad—from Zurarah, who narrates that —Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq said regarding the marriage of Umm Kulthoom: "That was a ‘woman’ who was taken from us by force." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 5 p. 347, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992) 2) Muhammad ibn Abi ‘Umayr—Hisham ibn Salim, who narrates that —Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq said: "When [‘Umar] proposed to Amir al-Mu’minin, he said, ‘She is a child.’ Then he [‘Umar] met ‘Abbas and asked him, ‘What is wrong with me? Is there a problem with me?’ ‘Abbas asked, ‘Why?’ ‘Umar replied, ‘I asked your nephew for his daughter’s hand in marriage, and he rejected me. Oh, I swear by Allah, I will fill the well of Zamzam with earth, I will destroy every honour that you have, and I will set up two witnesses to testify that he stole, that I may cut off his right hand.’ Abbas thereupon came to ‘Ali and informed him of what had transpired. He asked ‘Ali to put the matter in his hands, and ‘Ali complied." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 5 p. 347-348, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992) 3) Humayd ibn Ziyad—Ibn Sama‘ah—Muhammad ibn Ziyad—‘Abdullah ibn Sinan—Mu‘awiyah ibn ‘Ammar—Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq: —[Mu‘awiyah ibn ‘Ammar says:] I asked him about a woman whose husband died: Should she spend her ‘iddah in her house, or where she wants to? He replied, "Where she wants to. When ‘Umar died, ‘Ali u came and took Umm Kulthoom to his house." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 6 p. 117, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992) 4) Muhammad ibn Yahya and others—Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa—al-Husayn ibn Sa‘id—an-Nadr ibn Suwayd—Hisham ibn Salim—Sulayman ibn Khalid, who says:—I asked Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq about the woman whose husband has died: Where should she spend her ‘iddah? In her husband’s house, or where she wants to? He said: "Where she wants to. When ‘Umar died, ‘Ali came, took Umm Kulthoom by the hand, and took her to his house." (Furu‘ al-Kafi, vol. 6 p. 117, Dar al-Adwa, Beirut 1992) These are the narrations whose isnad will now be analyzed. Authenticity of the above narrations We have here four chains of narration up to Imam Jafar as-Sadiq. An investigation into the authenticity of these chains of narration by Shii—and not Sunni—standards reveals that each and every one of them is a highly reliable and accurate chain. NARRATION 1 al-Kulayni received the reports from Ibn Abi ‘Umayr through his teacher ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Hashim al-Qummi, who is his source for about one third of the material in al-Kafi. ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim is the author of an early Tafsir of the Shi‘ah, and is highly regarded by Shi‘i rijal critics such as an-Najashi and Ibn Mutahhar, who declare him to be "thiqatun fil hadith, thabt, mu’tamad, sahih al-madhhab" (reliable in hadith transmission, reliable dependable, correct in belief.) (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat vol. 1 p. 545) ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi reports from his father Ibrahim ibn Hashim al-Qummi. He is reputed to have been the first to spread the hadith of the Shi‘ah from Kufah to Qum. Reports via him abound in al-Kafi, through his son. He has been generally accepted by the Shi‘ah as a reliable narrator. He is even mentioned by Abu Ja‘far at-Tusi as having met the 9th Imam. (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat vol. 1 p. 38) His reliability as a narrator is attested to in a contemporary work on the authority of his son, Ali ibn Ibrahim, Ibn Tawus and al-‘Allamah al-Hilli. (Abu Talib at-Tajlil at-Tabrizi, Mu‘jam ath-Thiqat, p. 5) Ibrahim ibn Hashim al-Qummi reports on the authority of Muhammad ibn Abi ‘Umayr. This Ibn Abi ‘Umayr is one of the most reliable Shi‘i narrators ever. Abu Ja‘far at-Tusi says of him: "kana min awthaq an-nas" (he was of the most reliable of people). (al-Fihrist p. 169) More importantly, he was of the elect group of Shi‘i narrators called the Ashab al-Ijma‘ (Men of the Consensus). What this means is that when the chain of narration is proven authentic up to one of these men, the rest of the chain up to the Imam may automatically be assumed to be authentic too. (See the details of this consensus in al-Mamaqani, Miqbas al-Hidayah fi ‘Ilm ad-Dirayah, vol. 2 pp. 171-208) The authenticity of this narration is therefore proven on grounds of this consensus. NARRATION 2 This report also came down to al-Kulayni through ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim, from his father, from Ibn Abi ‘Umayr. The discussion on the first chain of narration is therefore fully applicable to this chain too. NARRATION 3 al-Kulayni reports this narration from his teacher Humayd ibn Ziyad. This Humayd is graded by the Shi‘i rijal critics as "‘alim jalil al-qadr, wasi‘ al-‘ilm, kathir at-tasnif, thiqah" (a learned scholar, of great status, wide knowledge, a prolific author, reliable) (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 1 p. 284) Ibn Sama‘ah is properly known as al-Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn Sama‘ah. He was one of the foremost Shi‘i fuqaha of Kufah, and is described as "kathir al-hadith, faqihun thiqah" (a prolific narrator of hadith, a jurist, reliable). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 1 p. 225) Muhammad ibn Ziyad is properly known as Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn Ziyad al-‘Attar. He is described as "thiqah" (reliable). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 2 p. 91) ‘Abdullah ibn Sinan was an eminent Imami Shi‘i of Kufah about whom it is stated: "thiqatun min ashabina, la yut‘anu ‘alayhi fi shay’" (one of our reliable associates against whom no criticism whatsoever can be levelled). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 1 p. 487) Mu‘awiyah ibn ‘Ammar was an eminent and leading Shi‘i narrator of Kufah who narrates from Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq. His Shi‘i biographers have documented about him that he was "wajhan min ashabina muqaddaman, kabir ash-shan, azim al-mahall, thiqah" (a leading figure amongst our associates, pre-eminent, great in status, exalted in position, reliable). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 2 p. 239) The opinions of the Shi‘i critics of hadith regarding the narrators of this report as reproduced here unequivocally indicate that what we have here is a authetic report. NARRATION 4 al-Kulayni recorded this report on the authority of his several of his teachers, one of whom is Muhammad ibn Yahya al‘Attar al-Qummi. He was regarded as "shaykhu ashabina fi zamanihi, thiqah, ‘ayn, kathir al-hadith" (the shaykh of our associates in his time, reliable, an outstanding personality, a prolific narrator of hadith). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 2 p. 213) Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa al-Qummi was "shaykh al-Qummiyyin, wa-wajhuhum, wa-faqihuhum, ghayra mudafa‘" (the shaykh of the people of Qum, and their undisputed leader and jurist). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 1 p. 69) Abu Ja‘far at-Tusi and al-‘Allamah al-Hilli have unequivocally declared him "thiqah" (reliable). (ar-Rijal p. 366; and al-Khulasah p. 13) al-Husayn ibn Sa‘id is described as "‘ayn, jalil al-qadr" (an outstanding personality of great stature) and"thiqah" (reliable). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 1 p. 241) an-Nadr ibn Suwayd is rated as "Kufi,thiqah, sahih al-hadith" (a reliable Kufan who transmits authentic hadith). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 2 p. 292) Hisham ibn Salim is credited with having been a student of Imam Ja‘far as-Sadiq. His reliability as a transmitter of hadith is attested to by the emphatic statement of al-‘Allamah and an-Najashi: "thiqatun thiqah" (reliable, and once again reliable). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 2 p. 315) Sulayman ibn Khalid is mentioned as having been a student of Imam al-Baqir. His death is recorded to have caused Imam Ja‘far extreme grief. He is universally acclaimed as "thiqah" (reliable). (Jami‘ ar-Ruwat, vol. 1 p. 378) This investigation concludes that each of the narrators of the four narrations affirming the marriage of Umm Kulthoom documented in al-Kafi was a reliable Imami Shii transmitter with whose abilities and trustworthiness in hadith transmission the Shii authorities have expressed their satisfaction. The significance of this fact will come to light when we discuss the turnabout that occurred after the development of Shi‘i kalam (scholastic theology) at the hands of ash-Shaykh al-Mufid in the fifth century. Besides al-Kulayni, there were during this time other Shii authors too who affirmed the marriage of Umm Kulthoom in a way much similar to that of al-Kulayni. One of these was Abul Qasim al-Kufi (died 352 AH). He devoted a number of pages in his book al-Istighathah fi Bida‘ ath-Thalathah to the marriage of Umm Kulthoom, and after presenting several arguments and counter arguments, he concludes the following: Abul Qasim al-Kufi seems not to spare a moment’s thought for the fact that this was not just any woman. This was the daughter of Ali and Fatimah. This was the granddaughter of Rasulullah. This was the sister of Hasan and Husayn. What the Shiah here seek to subject their Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib to is unspeakable. Which father would sit by idly while his daughter is being forcibly taken by an abominable enemy? This is the extent to which their twisting and corruption of history has led them—that they are prepared to place upon their Imams the kind of shame that even the simplest ones amongst themselves would never bear. And the evil plot only entraps its own people. (al-Fatir:43) In addition, this attempt by Abul Qasim al-Kufi to explain the marriage of Umm Kulthoom is full of discrepancies, some of which we will make mention of hereunder: The comaprison between Umm Kulthoom and Asiyah is unjustified. Asiyah was not the daughter of a Nabi who was forced to hand her over in marriage to a tyrant. She was married to him even before Musa was born. Her marriage to Firawn was not concluded under threat and compulsion, neither could it have been caused her father (whoever he was) any sort of embarrasment. Abul Qasim’s report speaks of Rasulullah r informing Ali of exactly what would be done to him by each of the three khulafa. He must therefore have known that Umar will demand his daughter. Yet when the time comes to pass he refuses the marriage on grounds that she is too young (see the second narration from al-Kafi), and even Abul Qasim’s own report mentions him weighing his options. Someone who knows what is coming has no need to weigh his options. The reason for preserving the peace with the three khulafa is given as the fear that people will revert into apostasy. Yet in a narration from Imam al-Baqir documented in al-Kafi, apostasy is mentioned to have set in immediately after the death of Rasulullah r : "Kana n-nasu ahla riddatin ba‘da Rasulillahi r illa thalathah" (After the death of Rasulullah r the people were apostates, except three.) (Rawdat al-Kafi, vol. 8 p. 167, no. 341) If they were thus already apostate, what reason did he have to sacrifice his own daughter’s honour and chastity in order to preserve the non-existent? However, despite all Abul Qasim al-Kufi’s effort in working out a logical explanation of why Ali ibn Abi Talib gave his daughter in marriage to Umar ibn al-Khattab, later Shii scholars like al-Mufid could find no place for his arguments within their recension of Shii doctrines. AFTER THE FIFTH CENTURY With the ascendancy of the Shii Buyids at Baghdad during the latter half of the fourth century, Shii scholarship gained the patronage it required, and there developed under ash-Shaykh al-Mufid a school of Shii theology that was to leave its lasting upon Shiism. This school took full advantage of the methods and techniques of the existing schools of theology, especially the rationalist approach of the Mutazilah. It adopted and appropriated Mutazili methods to its own advantage, and rationalised much of what had earlier been left to the domain of textual authority. The marriage of Umm Kulthoom did not escape this process of rationalisation. When this issue was discovered to run against the grain of Shii theology—a theology that has its roots in a particular perspective of history—there was but one of two options open to the rationalisers. They could choose the way of Abul Qasim al-Kufi, al-Kulayni and other traditionists, and accept the marriage as a union achieved by force and threats of violence. But this option, instead of solving the problem, created another problem. The other option left open to them was to do a complete trunabout and deny that this marriage ever took place. Ash-Shaykh al-Mufid The lead was taken by ash-Shaykh al-Mufid himself. He wrote an independent treatise about the marriage of Umm Kulthoom, and discussed it in his other works as well, most notably al-Masa’il as-Sarawiyyah. The tenth question in this books deal with the marriage of Umm Kulthoom. It reads as follows: At this point the benefit of investigating the authenticity of the four reports in al-Kafi will become apparent. It can be seen here that al-Mufid places the responsibility for inventing the marriage of Umm Kulthoom on the shoulders of the historian Zubayr ibn Bakkar. However, even a cursory comparison with the narrations in al-Kafi and the one quoted earlier from Tabaqat Ibn Sa‘d (all of which are but a drop in the ocean) demonstrates clearly that Zubayr ibn Bakkar features nowhere in any of those chains of narration. Each of the narrators of those reports was a Shi‘i about whose trustworthiness the ulama of the Shiah were fully satisfied. Not a single on of those reports originated with Zubayr ibn Bakkar. On the contrary, each one of them is traced back to Imam Jafar as-Sadiq. Al-Mufid’s protestations are thus completely bereft of substance. If anything, it shows the man’s desperation for finding some grounds, no matter how flimsy or spurious, on which to dismiss the marriage of Umm Kulthoom. Aside from trying to make Zubayr ibn Bakkar responsible for the invention of the marriage of Umm Kulthoom, al-Mufid tries to dismiss the incident by drawing attention to the discrepancies regarding certain lesser details. A simple response to this is that when a multitude of reports all share one common element, the common element cannot be dismissed because of differences negligible details. An objective scholar who is not prejudiced by his idiosyncratic notion of what history should actually be like will never stoop to the level al-Mufid has. Objectivity here would require thoroughly sifting through the available historical material and accepting the version that fulfils the criteria of authenticity, such as have been demostrated in the case of al-Kulayni’s narrations in al-Kafi. If an historical incident could be denied for a reason as flimsy as discrepancies in minor details, one could well reject the battle of Badr on grounds of the fact that there are differences regarding the exact date on which it took place, or differences in the amount of combatants, or even the amount of persons killed and taken captive. Here we are once again treated to the spectacle of a scholar’s desperation to superimpose the idiosyncracies of his theology over the facts of history, even if it means he has to discard the most basic standards of objectivity. At the end al-Mufid’s nonchalance failed to convince anyone—including himself. Therefore, two paragraphs after denying the occurrence of Umm Kulthoom’s marriage he comes back to fall into the queue of traditional Shi‘i scholarship behind people like al-Kulayni and Abul Qasim al-Kufi, and writes: There is no end to one’s amazement at seeing how this man would place the safety of the Shiah ("for his own safety and that of his Shiah") over the chastity and honour of his Imam’s daughter, and the granddaughter of Rasulullah. After al-Mufid The first explanation produced by al-Mufid—that of denying the historicity of the marriage—was so ludicrous that he failed to convince even himself. His own student, the eminent Sayyid Murtada (died 436 AH), brother of the compiler of Nahj al-Balaghah, Sayyid Radi, was even less impressed by his teacher’s artifices. He solemnly stuck to the line of traditional Shii scholarship, insisting that the marriage was one of coercion and force. He dealt with the marriage of Umm Kulthoom in two of his books. In the book ash-Shafi he discussed it at considerable length, the gist of which he later incorporated into his other book Tanzih al-Ambiya wal-Aimmah, where he writes: After Sayyid Murtada, Abu ‘Ali al-Fadl ibn Hasan at-Tabarsi, the Shi‘i mufassir of the 6th century (died 502 AH) stuck to the same line. He writes in his book I‘lam al-Wara bi-A‘lam al-Huda (p. 204): A later Shi‘i scholar, Shaykh ‘Abd an-Nabi al-Kazimi, writes in his book Takmilat ar-Rijal: Having found this niche of the "forced taking" of Umm Kulthoom, these ulama of the Shiah took refuge in it from the torrent of questions and the utter indignation of anyone who witnesses the way in which they have shed their own shame and dishonour upon the memory of Sayyiduna Ali, Sayyidah Fatima, and their daughter Umm Kulthoom, the granddaughter of Rasulullah . Year in and year out they wail and lament the death of Sayyiduna Husayn, but for the honour of his sister Umm Kulthoom they have not the slightest sympathy, blithely asserting that she was "forcibly taken" by Umar ibn al-Khattab. Wouldn’t it be simpler, easier and indeed more honourable and truthful just to accept the course of history as it was? But no, to them that would mean the destruction of this edifice of theirs called Shiism. So it is better for them to sacrifice the honour of the granddaughter of Rasulullah than to forgo the doctrines which their own minds facshioned. As al-Mufid indicated, rather secure the safety of the Shiah than protect the honour of Umm Kulthoom bint Ali. AFTER THE FOUNDING OF THE SAFAVID EMPIRE The founding of the Safavid empire in Iran at the dawn of the 16th century CE opened a new chapter in Shii history. Shii scholarship in particular benefitted from the patronage of the Safavid monarchs who invited them to fill the void left by the extermination and exile of the Sunni ulama of Iran. Though at first reluctant, they soon flowed into Iran in large numbers from Iraq, Bahrain and Syria, to fill posts created by the newly established Shii state, and to spread their faith amongst the people of Iran, the vast majority of whom were at that stage still Sunni. The establishment of a Shii state did not bring discussion around the marriage of Umm Kulthoom to an end. Inshallah i have provided enough evidence. Sallam
  9. The event of Ghadeer Khum in Quran, Sunnah & History By Seif As you know that the Shi`a say that Ali (rah) is the one who should have been the first khalifa and not Abu Bakr (rah) (or Umar (rah) or Uthman (rah)). They bring some evidences from the Sunni books (Bukhari, Muslim,..) and one of them is the hadeeth of Ghadeer Khumm. Before we start, we should Say that Ali (rah) is the husband of the daughter of the prophet (peace be upon him), Fatima (rah, the best woman of the people of the Jannah), he is the cousin of the prophet (peace be upon him), and he is the fourth of the rightly-guided khalifahs and his qualities are all well known to us. However, we are not talking about the qualities of Ali (rah), because we all know it. We are discussing whether or not the hadeeth of Ghadeer Khumm is evidence that Ali should have been the first khalifa. The hadiths mentioned are Sahih Muslim Book 031, Number 5920, This hadeeth is also narrated in other books: Tirmithi, Ahmed, an-nasai, al-hakem and others. Almost all the links are for pages in Arabic. I will translate the important points inshaAllah as I go along. Musnad of Ahmed: Ibn Namir told us that Abd Al-Malik (Ibn Abi-Sulayman) told us according to Attia Al-`ufi who said: I asked Zayd Ibn Arqam and I told him that some people told me a hadeeth according to you about Ali (rah) in the day of Ghadeer Khumm and I want to hear it from you. So Zayd said: You people of Iraq, you have what you have. I told him: Do not worry about me. He said: Yes we were in Al-Juhfa and the prophet(peace be upon him) came to us holding the hands of Ali (rah) and said: O people don't you know that I am with the believers from their selves. They said: Yes. He said: . [Attia] said: Did he say: (O Allah: Befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him). [Zayd] said: I told you as I heard it. The saying "man kuntu mawlah fa Ali mawlah" is correct and strong. The addition , "O Allah: Befriend whosoever befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him" is also correct, albeit weaker. However, the scholars of hadeeth classify any extra additions as and hence we will not talk about. We will only talk about the authentic versions shown above. This hadeeth is used to prove that Ali is the khalifa. The Shia says that "mawla" means "wali" (leader) and hence this incident means that the prophet is telling the Muslims that Ali is the next khalifa. This is their point regarding this hadeeth. The difference, then, is the meaning of "man kuntu mawlah, fa Ali mawlah". The shi`ah says that it means "man kuntu waleeh, fa Ali waleeh". The Sunnah says that it means love and close relation. Muwalat is the opposite of Mu`adat. The proof comes from the first addition: "oh Allah waali man walaah wa `adi man `adaah". (O Allah befriend whosover befriends him and be the enemy of whosoever is hostile to him). So we are talking about muwalah and mu`adat (love and enmity). It is about the love of the people to Ali (rah). Before we talk about that, let us talk about why the prophet said so. The Shi`ah claim that the prophet ( peace be upon him ) stopped people in this place in the hot weather and they say that their number was more than 100 thousand and that this was the place where all the people of Hajj were gathered and the main reason is that the prophet ( peace be upon him ) wanted to tell the people "man kuntu mawlah fa Ali mawlah" in addition to their additions. The reason for the hadith that was uttered at Ghadeer Khum was because of another hadith as reported in the Sahih of Bukhari volume 5, Book 59 Number 637. Ibn Katheer (ra) said that the people in the army started to talk about Ali (ra) because he prevented them from riding the camels and took back the new clothes that they acquired. Because of that, after the Prophet ( peace be upon him ) was done with the Hajj and while returning back to Madina, he stopped to explain to the people how some of the qualities of Ali and stress the closeness of Ali to him and the importance of loving Ali. He did so to remove what was in many of the hearts of some of the people against Ali. That's why the prophet ( peace be upon him ) delayed talking about this topic until they were close to Madina and he didn't talk about it in Makkah during the Hajj. On the day of Arafa, the prophet ( peace be upon him ) spoke to the people and and he never mentioned this topic at all. After he finished his sermon, he said "Did I convey the message" and the people said "Yes" then he said "O Allah be my witness". Why did he delay the topic till after Hajj? Because this topic is only of concern to the people of Madina because those who talked about Ali were from Madina as they were the ones who went with Ali to the battle. He talked about it in a place called ghadeer khumm in a place called Ju?fa, which is about 250 km from Makkah. (See map: A simple look at the map is enough to refute the shi`ah claim that this is the gathering place of the the Hajeej. People gather for Hajj at Makkah and leave the Hajj at Makkah. The Hajeej don't leave from a place 250 km from Makkah. After Hajj, the people of Makkah stay at Makkah. The people of Al-Taif go to Al-Taif. The people of Yemen go to Yemen. The people of al-kufa go to al-kufa and so on. All the tribes go back to their homes. The people that went with the prophet(peace be upon him) were the people of Madinah and those who are using the road of Madina to go to their dwellings. These are the ones that the prophet( peace be upon him ) talked to when he said: "man ..". Also the speech was not only about Ali despite the fact that Ali deserves the speech and more (may Allah be pleased with him). But in the speech, the prophet ( peace be upon him ) reminded the people with the Quran and its importance. He also reminded the people of the love of his household (may Allah be pleased with them) and then he mentioned Ali (rah). So there were more than one topic that the prophet ( peace be upon him ) talked about. The meaning of ( Mawla ) Ibn Al-Atheer says that the word (mawal) in the Arabic language could only mean: rabb = Lord malik = owner mun`im = benefactor mu'tiq = liberator naser = helper muheb = lover haleef = ally aabd = slave (for example: Zaid ibn haretha was the mawla of the prophet ( peace be upon him )) sihr = brother-in-law ibn al `am = cousin The arabs would use the word mawlah to mean all of the above. But what did the prophet ( peace be upon him ) mean by his word? First the hadeeth has no evidences for the imamah (leadership) because if the prophet ( peace be upon him ) wanted to mean khilafah or imamah, he wouldn't have used a word that can have all these meanings. He would have said something like: Ali is your khalifa (or imam) after me, or when I die, listen and obey to Ali ibn Abi Talib. But the prophet didn't use any of these clear words. He said: "man kuntu ...". Imam Shafi'i says that this is the walaa of Al-islam because Allah(swt) says in the Quran (Surat Muhammad,verse 11: That is because Allah is the Protector (mawala) of those who believe, and because the unbelievers shall have no protector for them (47:11) In the Quran (Surat Al-hadid (The Iron), verse 15), Allah (swt) says: So today ransom shall not be accepted from you nor from those who disbelieved; your abode is the fire; it is your friend (mawlakum) and evil is the resort. He called the hell fire "mawla" for the extreme closeness to it by the kuffar. Note also that the word mawlah is different than the word waly. The waly comes from walayah which is the leadership. Whereas mawlah comes from wilayah which is love and nusrah (help and aid). Allah (swt) says in the Quran (Surat At-tahrim ,verse 4): Then surely Allah it is Who is his Guardian (mawlah), and Jibreel and -the believers that do good, and the angels after that are the aiders. It means love, nusrah and help. The prophet ( peace be upon him ) used the word mawla not only to describe Ali but to others as well. The following hadeeth is narrated in Bukhari Volume 4, Book 56, Number 715 & and others. Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "The tribes of Quraish, Al-Ansar, Juhaina, Muzaina, Aslam, Ghifar and Ashja' are my helpers (mawaalii),, and they have no protector (i.e. Master) except Allah and His Apostle." There are other examples as well but I think that the above is sufficient to make the point. It is also important to point out that the prophet ( peace be upon him ) did not say "after me" (in any authentic narration). He only said "man kuntu mawlah fa Ali mawlah" without giving any time frame. This means that this fact is timeless. If the prophet ( peace be upon him ) had meant "whoever among you is under my leadership, he is also under the leadership of Ali", which is the meaning that the Shi`a understands, if the prophet had meant it as such, then there would be a big problem. Two leadership for the Muslim ummah at the time of the prophet ( peace be upon him ) does not make a lot of sense. Of course, the prophet did not mean it that way and also the companions at that time did not understand it that way, otherwise there would be a great fitnah. However, it is possible to have more than one mawla at the same time - to love, help and aid the prophet and to love help and aid Ali (rah). I hope that the above is simple and clear. If, however, you have any particular doubts or confusions, please let me know and inshaAllah I can delve more into it. The Sunni view is that the hadeeth of ghadir khum has nothing to do with who the leader is after the prophet(peace be upon him). It means, however, that Ali is loved by the prophet (peace be upon him) and that we should love him and give nusrah to him. May Allah (swt) join us with Ali and the rest of the companions (may Allah be pleased with them all) on the pool to drink from the honorable hands of the prophet ( peace be upon him). By Mufti Muhammad Ibn Adam www.daruliftaa.com
  10. their is nothing wrong with the fact with what he (ra) did, infact if it was wrong the Prophet (saw) himself would have said something. The reason I did was to clarify the error in translation.
  11. common sense would dictate that someone who believes in tahreef of the Qur`an to be a kafir yet many shia's and the Ulema hold opinion to the contrary? does it not sound absurd? Secondly this is only your understanding of the verse something even which your most eminent Ulema disagree with :0 If your ulema can't even form an IJMA on this issue why would u accept anyone else to blindly believe in it?
  12. it is well known that it is custom and in some cases permissible to hit your child (such as not praying as per hadiths of the Prophet saw). Secondly these events have passed so what would be the use of discussing them? We are aware the Companions are not infalliable but it is IJMA that they are the best community and the best people.
  13. true perhaps to the Shia it means infalliability but under our Usul it refers to something different, but I not addressing that issue, nor am I asking for your opinion with all due respect. It would be interesting to see what the Marja's think of poiuyt claim, I have never seen an fatwa from a Marja stating this, so please do present me with a fatwa or else take heed of the Prophets saying in regards to these matters. And with Allah is all Success.
  14. Could u please furnish me with a fatwa from a Marja stating whoever denies 33:33 (infallibility of the Ahl-Bait) is an apostate. If that is what u mean. Jazkallah Khair
  15. the english translation is incorrect, please read the original arabic.
×
×
  • Create New...