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

Jaafar al-Shibli

Unregistered
  • Content Count

    400
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Jaafar al-Shibli

  1. Attention: Upon reading any material from this account, it should be kept in mind, that any posts associated with this account are no longer valid to the author.

    1. Muhammed Ali

      Muhammed Ali

      Why was it so sudden?

  2. I'm failing to recognize your presumption. Subjective. Many members fail to recognize the standard rules of this forum, which for the most part, are Islamic. The above derives from a certain amount of view-time, at your end.
  3. Feisal_90 banned. For blasphemy towards Allāh. You said you are an atheist and joined the forum to inquire about what you cannot understand. Perhaps you can learn a thing or two about standard good mannerism, and incorporate such in your 'decent human principles'.
  4. السلام عليكم Concerning your second request, denied without question. All members who have received a ban or any form of restriction, was upon grounds of violating forum rules and policy, each violation is explicitly independent, and a penalty is given under distinct conditions, with a warning prior. Should these members return, they must do so with a formal apology, and a proposition will be established for agreement. Any previously banned/ penalized members associated with your account, through IP-Addresses or any form of explicit indication, your account will be permanently banned accordingly.
  5. `al-salam `Alykum I have written a somewhat in depth analysis of the verse Here: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235032749-good-women-are-for-good-men/#comment-2842575
  6. السلام عليكم According to the Shīʿah ḥadīth, this name was given by Allāh (عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ), to the people of Fir’awn, who rejected Fir’awn and entered the religion of Prophet Mūsā [a.s]. The Imām [a.s] deemed this name as blessings, Allāh had given, specifically for those who take from their sayings and do not attribute lies to them. I can quote those narratives for you, but I strongly encourage you to put some effort into your research, to avoid apparent mistakes, such as the above. The Imām [a.s] had never accepted them as legitimate Islamic Caliphates. There is more than one account (overwhelmingly), where the Imāms [a.s] themselves describe their position, and the position of those who had turned away from Imam Alī's [a.s] allegiance. Tashayyu' by Sunnī terminology does not necessarily indicate Shīʿah twelverism, rather a person showing some aspects of Shīʿah(ism). Wa `al-salam
  7. السلام عليكم A post I made not long ago might be of benefit [link].
  8. "One only dies once, and if one does not die well, a good opportunity is lost and will not present itself again.” -Jose Rizal (letter to Mariano Ponce, 1890), Noli Me Tangere, pg. 10. The catastrophe of misusing time, that which was idle, and will not return.
  9. الفاتحة على روح المرحوم علي نقي al-Fātiḥa upon the soul, the late ‘Ali Naqi بِسْمِ الله الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ "In the name of Allah , the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful. الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ The Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful, مَالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ Sovereign of the Day of Recompense. إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ It is You we worship and You we ask for help. اهدِنَا الصِّرَاطَ الْمُسْتَقِيمَ Guide us to the straight path - صِرَاطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّينَ The path of those upon whom You have bestowed favor, not of those who have evoked [Your] anger or of those who are astray".
  10. السلام عليكم Please refer to my post here: [link]. A another informative post by a good brother here [link]. The topic was previously discussed in that thread. As for your question, it's clearly an output due to your lack of comprehension and contemplation on the matter. You are aware these same aḥādīth exist in Sunnī literature, right? The first post linked should mention these sources. Wa `al-salam
  11. السلام عليكم Here is the ḥadīth in sunnī literature: أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو زَكَرِيَّا يَحْيَى بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ الْعَنْبَرِيُّ ، ثنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ السَّلامِ ، ثنا بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، أَنْبَأَ جَرِيرٌ ، عَنِ الأَعْمَشِ ، عَنْ أَبِي ظَبْيَانَ ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ الله عَنْهُمَا ، قَالَ : " إِنَّ أَوَّلَ شَيْءٍ خَلْقَهُ الله الْقَلَمُ ، فَقَالَ لَهُ : اكْتُبْ ، فَقَالَ : وَمَا أَكْتُبُ ؟ فَقَالَ : الْقَدَرُ ، فَجَرَى مِنْ ذَلِكَ الْيَوْمِ بِمَا هُوَ كَائِنٌ إِلَى أَنْ تَقُومَ السَّاعَةُ ، قَالَ : وَكَانَ عَرْشُهُ عَلَى الْمَاءِ ، فَارْتَفَعَ بُخَارُ الْمَاءِ ، فَفُتِقَتْ مِنْهُ السَّمَاوَاتُ ، ثُمَّ خَلَقَ النُّونَ فَبُسِطَتِ الأَرْضُ عَلَيْهِ ، وَالأَرْضُ عَلَى ظَهْرِ النُّونِ فَاضْطَرَبَ النُّونُ فَمَادَتِ الأَرْضُ ، فَأُثْبِتَتْ بِالْجِبَالِ ، فَإِنَّ الْجِبَالَ تَفْخَرُ عَلَى الأَرْضِ " , هَذَا حَدِيثٌ صَحِيحٌ عَلَى شَرْطِ الشَّيْخَيْنِ وَلَمْ يُخَرِّجَاهُ . 3768- Reported to us Abū Zakirīyā Yaḥyā b. Muḥammad al-‘Anbarī, told us Muḥammad b. ‘Abd al-Salām, told us Ibn Ibrāhīm, reported to us Jarīr, from al-‘Amash, from Abī ẓabyān, from Ibn ‘Abbas (May Allah be pleased with them), said: "The first thing Allāh created was the pen (al-Qalam), so He [Allāh] said to it, 'write', so it said: 'and what shall I write?', so He said: 'write the fate (of everything)'. So it came to pass (the pen wrote) from that day, from everything existing, until the hour rises (judgment day). Said: And His throne was upon water, then the water of the oceans elevated, so the skies from it gashed. Then He created the whale, upon which the earth was laid flat on, and the earth upon the back of the whale. So then the whale quivered (became nervous) and the earth began to sway, so then it stabilized by the mountains. For the mountains be proud upon the earth (/lest the earth should move). [And this ḥadīth is Ṣaḥīḥ on the conditions of the Shaykhayn, and they did not issue it]. Sources [sunnī]: al-Ḥākim al-Nīsābūrī, al-Mustadrak ‘Ala al-Ṣaḥīḥayn, vol. 2, pg. 497, N. 3768. Ibn Jarīr al-Tabarī, al-Tarīkh, vol. 1, pg. 28-9, N. 72, 73, 74, 75. al-Bayhaqī, Sunan al-Kubrā, vol. 8, pg. 344 N. 16265. al-ḍiya’ al-Maqdisī, al-Aḥādīth al-Mukhtārah, N. 3379. ‘Abd al-Razāq al-Sin‘ānī, vol. 3, pg. 329, N. 3186. Muḥammad b. Isḥāq b. Mundah, al-Tawḥīd, vol. 1, pg. 43, N. 59. Grading: al-Ḥākim said this ḥadīth is Ṣaḥīḥ (Authentic) on the conditions of the Shaykhayn, and they did not issue it. al-Dhahabī said on the conditions of Bukhārī and Muslim. →al-Mustadrak ‘Ala al-Ṣaḥīḥayn, vol. 2, pg. 497, N. 3768. I say: the narration is Mawqūf Mawṣūl (Connected halted), hence, this would be classified as `Athar (account). Notes: al-Albanī includes a similar version of the narrative from the Prophet [sa], in his compilation of fabricated and weak ḥadīths, and denounces the narrative to be from the Isrā’īlīyat (Israeli ḥadīth), followed by weakening of the chains. (see: al-Albanī, Silsilat al-Aḥādīth al-ḍa‘īfah wa al-Mawḍū‘ah, vol. 1, pg. 462-3, N. 294) However, he does not go through the chain that leads to Ibn ‘Abbas, with the similar content, because there are significant differences overall in the matn, and the narration is Mawqūf (halted). It is not far, that the narrative is from Israeli literature, as some have deduced, more specifically from Ka‘ab al-Aḥbār. That is to say: Ibn ‘Abbas, either received the narrative from an external Israeli source, or a highly potential Israeli source Ka‘ab al-Aḥbār. This stems from the following indications: Firstly, the narrative above is not from the Prophet , rather they are the words of Ibn ‘Abbas alone. Secondly, Ka‘ab al-Aḥbār narrates a ḥadīth mentioned in Abū Na‘īm's Ḥilyat al-Awlīya’ (vol. 6, pg. 8-9) that corresponds with the above narration from Ibn ‘Abbas, and Ka‘ab al-Aḥbār does not narrate it from the Prophet , rather on his own account. The narrative says that Shayṭan entered to the whale and whispered to him, to overthrow the earth, so Allah sent a creature into his brain, so it clamored to Allah, and the creature left, so the whale stabilized. The investigators of Tafsīr al-Tabarī, Dr. ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Abd al-Muḥsin al-Turkī and Muḥammad Raḍwān ‘Arqaswasī, comment in the footnotes after al-Tabarī had mentioned the narrative: 'This report is an Israeli, no basis for it, and the author should have deemed his work higher above such reports' (see: al-Tabarī's , vol. 1, pg. 385). See how this narrative specifies further intricacies, which returns back to Ka‘ab al-Aḥbār. It is well known that Ka‘ab al-Aḥbār use to narrate Isrā’īlīyat (Israeli aḥadīth) to the companions from his previous texts (but not attributing them to the Prophet ), according to Sunnī rijāl compilers/scholars (see: al-Dhahabī, Sīyar `A‘lām al-Nubalā’, vol. 3, pg. 490). However, whether they have been ascribed to the Prophet or not, externally (e.g. scholars, copyist, compilers..etc) or internally (e.i, narrator), or whether they are deemed true for consistency with Islamic Law, Qur'an, and ḥadīth, that is an entire different matter. According to the conditions set by Ibn Taymīya concerning these narratives (Isrā’īlīyat), if it is silent in the Islamic Law, and there is no form of indication (Dalīl), in proving its falsehood, then it is halted upon. On the other hand, if it does coincide with the Islamic Law, then it is acceptable taken. Otherwise, it is false (Bāṭil) (see: Ibn Taymīya, Muqadimat Fī Uṣūl al-Tafsīr, pg. 26-29). The principle derives from the following Sunnī Ṣaḥīḥ (Authentic) ḥadīth, from the Prophet , said: "Convey from me even an Ayah of the Qur'an; relate traditions from Banu Israel, and there is no restriction on that; but he who deliberately forges a lie against me let him have his abode in the Hell." (see: al-Bukhārī's Ṣaḥīḥ, vol. 4, Book of knowledge [13], N. 1380).
  12. Banned: Thicksheikh, Banned. Any form of blasphemy towards Islam or the Prophet SA, whether it be implicit or explicit will not be tolerated. Read the rules and policy before posting in the forums. http://www.shiachat.com/forum/guidelines/
  13. السلام عليكم I'm all in for political discussions, and the aftermath of these recent events. However, the thread has been derailed and turned into reciprocating arguments, that include: Off-topic replies.Personal remarks.Derogatory language.Abusive behavior.Objectionable content. Upon which a warning had already been given, indicating the unacceptable behavior. Posts that include the above have been removed and the thread is now reopened. However, should such behavior continue, the thread will be permanently locked, with the accompany of warnings and further consequences. Wa `al-salam
  14. السلام عليكم Millions? The Iranian and Iraqi currency isn't that extortionate in comparison to First-World countries. The money in those shrines are given as charity, and often spread among the workers and staff who support and manage the shrine. Usually, around the sanctuary, there are boxes of donations, that are delivered to impoverished areas, poverty-stricken families, and charity organizations. When you fail to provide compelling evidence (In a previous post [link]) for classical Shīʿah scholars professing in Tahrīf (distortion) al-Qurān, you take refuge in deceitful political prospects. Does your duplicitous attempt go any further than a mere maunder?
  15. السلام عليكم 1.`Āṣif al-Muḥsinī: “It is axiomatic that the report of a liar is nullified in evidence and nullified in its authenticity of consideration, and including the report that is dubious in its truth and untruth. Hence, inevitably every report or saying must be considered, from the acquisition of its truth with knowledge of absolute conscious definite reliability (al-Wijdānī); or with traditional (‘Urfī) knowledge, that is: assurance, for it is a rational proof, like the knowledge in the intellect (‘Aql), and is not deterred from the lawgiver [islamic], but acted upon by the Prophet and the Imams [a.s], like the rest of the intellectuals. And, what pertains with assurance is at times of emanation of report from the infallible(s) [a.s]; with an internal indication or external, or another, the trust of the reporter, and that is to say: assurance in the truthfulness of the report, if (by) making it necessary in being sure of the report with action, then there are no complications/abstruseness in considering it. And if not making it necessary, then there is hesitancy. ِAnd in other terms: is qualitative assurance like the personal assurance in evidence (Ḥujjīyah) and consideration, or not? The first half is not very far, with the observation of the methods taken by the intellectuals. Furthermore, the truthfulness of the reporter, is either [established] through evidencing his trustworthiness or justice; or either through his goodness (favorable indications) and commendation of a sufficient amount that proves his trust in his Kalām (speech), and disproves his falsity (in him), and no more, and (even) if his piety is not proven in the rest of his actions. If you know that, then know, to prove his justice (‘Adālah) or immortality, or truthfulness alone, or falsity alone, there are rules that must be maintained (/conditions that must be met) upon whomever is searching for the conditions of the narrators, whereby if he overlooks only one of them, he will Inevitably not be correct...” (see: `Āṣif al-Muḥsinī, Buḥūth fī 'Ilm al-Rijāl, Ch. 1, pg. 21).2. Abū al-Qāsim al-Khū’ī: “And the derivation of the Injunction of the law [islamic] is predominantly only from the reports that are narrated from the Ahl al-Bayt [a.s] of infallibility. And to deduce from those reports to prove the Injunction of the law [islamic] stops upon proving two matters. The first, in proving the evidence of the solitary report, for, if we do not profess in its evidence, then the matter ends to oblige with the occlusion of the door of knowledge and learned. And the result of that is the demeaning in the stage of abidance to the suppositive abidance, or professing in the evidence of al-ḍan (supposition) in that condition, upon which some have went to. The second, in proving the externals of the narrations, additionally, to us as well. For, if we professed in its specification, that whom(ever) it was meant for apprehension, and that they are the addressed only, (then) it is not possible to deduce with it upon proving a law from the laws absolutely. And these two matters have filled our speech in them, in our `Uṣūl discussions. But, we have mentioned that every report from a Ma‘ṣūm (infallible Imam/member of Ahl al-bayt [a.s]) is not an evidence (Ḥujjah), and rather, what is evidence [established] is specifically report of a Thiqah (trustworthy) or Ḥasan (good). And clearly to distinguish that, it can only be through the biographical evaluation of the narrators (`Ilm al-Rijāl), and knowing their conditions, and to differentiate between the Thiqah and the Ḥasan, from the ḍa‘īf (weak). Likewise the condition, if we professed in the evidence (Ḥujjīyah) in the report of a truthful [just], only. For the decision (decisive) in the justice of a narrator [man] or approval (trustworthy) with it, does not meet, except with examining him.” (see: al-Khū’ī, Mu‘jam rijāl al-ḥadīth, vol. 1, pg. 20).3. Shahīd al-Thānī ḍa‘īf (weak) is a report that does fulfill the conditions of the thee categories (e.i., Ṣaḥīḥ, Ḥasan, Muwathaq), because its chain comprises a report who has been defamed because of his immorality, etc. or because he is unknown or because he is a fabricator. There are varying degrees of weakness according to how far the report is from fulfilling the prerequisites of authenticity: the further the report is from attaining that level, the weaker it is, and similarly the more weak and defamed reporters there are in the chain, the weaker it is. There is a unanimous consensus that the 'rejected' ḍa‘īf (weak) report is invalid and inauthoritative. However, the area in which dispute does arise between scholars is when considering the authoritativeness of the 'acceptable' weak report, which is known in juristic terminology, as al-ḍa‘īf al-Munjabar (the 'reinforced weak' report). According to those who do consider this type of report 'reinforcement' is achieved by one of two ways: i. Renown through transmission: al-Shahīd al-Thānī has explained this by saying that, 'this is when the report has been transmitted and quoted a numerous amount of times, be it word for word or in meaning. ii. Renown through a legal ruling: This is when the jurists have relied upon the report for deducing legal rulings, have furnished it as a proof in legislation and have formed legal rulings according to its content, provided that it is renowned both in the books of deductive jurisprudence and on the lips of jurists in their research and extrapolation al-Shahīd al-Thānī said: “Most people are of the opinion that it is absolutely forbidden to act in accordance with the weak report, though others have deemed it permissible it is backed up by its own renown in transmission and legislation”. It must be noted here that scholarly opinion and discussion restrict content of the report'. They justify this by saying that the very fact that the report has achieved renown through widespread action in accordance with it is proof that its origin was a Ma‘ṣūm. Or, as Shahīd al-Thānī expressed it, 'The report's renown, attained through implementation of it, strengthens the speculation about the reporter, "even thought the path of transmission may be weak, for a report may well be established because of the renown of its content, in spite of its weak chain of transmission"'.[Translator:Abd al-Hadi al-Fadli] (see: al-Shahīd al-Thānī, Sharḥ al-Bidāyah Fī 'Ilm al-Darāyah, pg. 27-30). [*] I can give you a numerous amount of narrators where no criticism has reached our literature concerning their conditions, and they are not hard to find. What seems to be the problem, is that you are trying to find a justification to overlook weaknesses in Aḥādīth, by assuming that condition X is possible when really, X is null. Similarly, the article mentioned, tries to demean the biographical evaluation of the narrators to a uncertain stage, that is dubious, whereby approach is more subjective. Instead of reading a few 'unreviewed' articles, it would be more productive to expose yourself to more reputable Shīʿah works concerning the science (of ḥadīth).[**] There is a reason why we have another branch in ḥadīth science, called Jarḥ wa Ta‘dīl (criticism and praise). If it is not backed up by its own renown in transmission and content, or through other reliable routs? In most cases yes. And some scholar have higher standards. Wa `al-salam
  16. Claim? Perhaps you are not well acquainted with the two schools (al-`Akhbārīyah and al-Uṣūlīyah), in their approach and proposed principles in jurisprudence [deduction]. You can start by reading an introduction to ‘Ilm al-Uṣūl/Uṣūl al-Fiqh by an Uṣūlī scholar (e.g.,al-Khū’ī, al-`Arākī, al-Tabāṭabā’ī, etc..), and authored works by `Akhbārī's, such as al-Istrābādī and al-Hurr al-`Āmilī.
  17. [Auto-Reply] This issue has been marked as "Resolved". If you have reasons to believe it's not, reply below
  18. السلام عليكم This Campaign has taken its course and results are finalized. For further comments or inquirers concerning the wining candidates and their proposals, they have each separately created a thread highlighting their gratitude and final words: starlight: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235033438-thank-you-everyone/ magma: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235033440-weve-made-shiachat-great-again/ We thank all members for their participation. Thread locked.
  19. السلام عليكم Both narratives are deemed ḍa‘īf (weak) per al-Khū’ī's standards. First ḥadīth mentioned in al-Ṣadūq Thawāb al-A‘māl, pg. 89, ḍa‘īf (weak), due to Bashīr al-Dahān and Ṣālḥ b. ‘Uqba. The former is considered Majhūl (unknown) to al-Khū’ī (see: al-Jawāhirī's al Mufīd, person. 1184, pg. 89), while the latter is considered Thiqah (trustworthy), however only upon the basis of al-Khū’ī's view of Tafsīr al-Qumī (see: al-Jawāhirī's al-Mufīd, person. 5840, pg. 273), which is very weak because the Tafsīr itself is not reliably established, and it was also said al-Khū’ī retracted his view later on Tafsīr al-Qumī. Excluding this, Ṣālḥ b. ‘Uqba is Majhūl (unknown). `Āṣif al-Muḥsinī said the ḥadīth is ḍa‘īf (weak) (see: Mashra`ah Bihār al-Anwār, vol. 2, pg. 480). Second ḥadīth has no relation to Zīyārah ‘Arafah, and also ḍa‘īf (weak) due Bashīr al-Dahān and other complications. Please note, al-Khū’ī has contradicted himself a number of times with his authentications, here is a good example [link]. Generally, Uṣūlī scholars don't need a ḥadīth explicitly defining a practice to be deem as something Mustaḥab (e.g., Third testimony, Taṭbīr, etc), while `Akhbārī scholars can only deem something to be Mustaḥab, from Ahl al-Bayt [a.s] explicitly.
  20. There is no Mu'tabr (reliable) rout to the Zīyārah of `Ashurā. However, some scholars deem the Zīyārah reliable collaboratively upon inclusion of various routs. This was previously discussed: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235005122-investigation-of-ziyarat-ashura/. While other scholars have issues with specific parts of the Zīyārah, such as the specific cursing (La‘an) at the third segment (e.g., Sayed Kamāl al-Ḥaydarī [link]).
  21. I said: ',on a particular day (e.i.,`Arba‘īn)', and I was referring to the narrations in question. As for both these narratives, they are ḍa‘īf (weak). Bashī al-Dahān is Majhūl (unknown) per Shīʿah standards (see: al-Jawāhirī's al Mufīd, person. 1184, pg. 89), additionally, with other complications within their Sanad. Wa `al-salam
  22. السلام عليكم Because of the gravity of this topic, I'm moving this to the Thinkers discourse for the benefit. Only serious replies will be allowed.
  23. This is invalid. Those narrations are affirming the Zīyārah to Imam al-Ḥusayn generally, and not specifically, on a particular day (e.i.,`Arba‘īn). There are no aḥādīth on the Zīyārah of `Arba‘īn. Wa `al-salam ‘Alykum
×
×
  • Create New...