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

Uthman bin Madhun

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Uthman bin Madhun

  • Birthday 01/01/1978

Profile Information

  • Location
    United States of America
  • Religion
  • Favorite Subjects
    May Allah be pleased with Uthman bin Ali, the namesake of Uthman bin Madhun

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. For a period of time in my life, i had undergone severe anxiety and depression. This caused me to start to have splits in my personality, at a time of severe upheaval of my life. Looking back now, i do not recognise the person i was, nor do i believe it was ever representative of me. Despite taking responsibility, it is so important to acknowledge mental health, particularly one caused by severe trauma in ones life, can take someone who otherwise was walking on firm ground and unbalance them. May Allah help all those going through or have been through any mental health problem. May he help you become stronger, and grow, and learn, and like Hurr, be willing to change for the better.
  2. The first thing is to make sure the youth have enough self-esteem. If you suffer from low self-esteem and you have someone interested, it can be in cases more difficult to stay true to yourself and your morals when for the first time someone has shown an interest. People need to be happy with their own-selves and marriage also should not be something they seek to fill gaps.
  3. Muratadha Mutahari has a great book on this. https://www.al-islam.org/message-thaqalayn/vol11-no-3-autumn-2010/duty-acquiring-knowledge-ayatullah-murtadha-mutahhari/duty
  4. علي بن إبراهيم ، عن أبيه ، عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن هشام بن سالم ، عن أبي عبد الله عليه‌السلام قال كان أمير المؤمنين صلوات الله عليه يقول ابن آدم إن كنت تريد من الدنيا ما يكفيك فإن أيسر ما فيها يكفيك وإن كنت إنما تريد ما لا يكفيك فإن كل ما فيها لا يكفيك. “Amir al-Mu’minin (Ali ibn abu Talib), would say, ‘O sons of Adam, if you want from the world that much that is sufficient for you, the little that is there will suffice you. However, if you are not satisfied with basic necessities but want more than the basic needs, then the whole thing that is there will not be sufficient for you.’” حسن كالصحيح
  5. Your statement far exceeds my worth [and this is not even said out of humility]. Allah has granted Muhammed and his purified progeny with Haqq. I on the other hand make mistakes and pray i do not delve into that which i do not have knowledge.
  6. Allah [the most exalted] has said quite clearly that part of the Wajib [compulsory] conditions he places upon muslim women is the wearing of the Hijab. This is by consensus what is agreed upon by muslims of all schools of thought. However we should try to covey this to each other in a way that is sensitive and respectful. There is a time and a place and a proper manner depending on the context of who we are talking to. If someone does not wear Hijab, it does not mean they are evil and we should start to judge anyone. However, we do know that they are not obeying a direct and important command of the Almighty. Unless they are our sisters, mothers, or wives, let us kindly give admonition, and then leave it be. Are we going to start to make them uncomfortable to attend the mosque out of fear of being judged? Or pushed away from seeking a path towards Allah [the exalted] ? Or feel ostracised by their own communities? What is a bigger tragedy is seeing muslim men, particularly the Shia men, not having beards. They have a clean shaven look, or a one millimetre beard and things not really considered a beard by Sharia, and get away with it. Social Hijab and interacting with the opposite gender is also of importance and something many people at some point might have found weakness in. This particularly effects men. As for myself, i am not going to preach to anyone and have enough fault in myself to be occupied with.
  7. Superstitious people will always put Dhann [speculation] over rational sense. Their religion thus becomes one of believing everything and anything, accepting hearsay and fantastical stories if it conforms to their desires and emotions.
  8. There are differing opinions about this. Some say that many of the alleged stories about meeting Imam al-Mahdi [ajfs] are hearsay and no-one can track down reliable routes to the original claimant. At other times, someone is helped by a man he had not seen before, and makes the assumption that he was al-Mahdi without any sort of backing. I heard from a reliable witness that a man went to Ayatullah Sistani [may Allah lengthen his life] and asked him if he had seen al-Mahdi [ajfs]. He said he had never seen al-Mahdi and to not believe in these claims [that he had]. Some brothers who were discussing this said he was only keeping it a secret and that he probably had met al-Mahdi [ajfs] but did not want people to start to undermine his credibility by making such a claim. However this is pure speculation and the kind that led many to exit this religion. Just be very skeptical. If our religion becomes one of Dhann [speculation] then we open ourselves to affirming anything and everything.
  9. I advise caution. Duas.org contains many beautiful supplications, but also contains many supplications whose source or roots really are not known. Which of the Masumeen said that reciting this Dua will grant a photographic memory? Which book is it in, and what is the route of narrators from that book to the Masumeen? It could be very easy to create an entire website making all kinds of claims if we did not have to source our claims.
  10. So are we to believe he wanted to poison everyone else in the house who had either witnessed it or were merely around? The traditions are also transmitted by Aisha herself. Should we believe she poisoned the Prophet and then decided to tell everyone about it? A good read by Shaykh Mansour Leghai: http://www.askthesheikh.com/was-the-holy-prophet-poisoned-or-killed-did-he-die-a-natural-death/
  11. A great video on distinguishing Ha (ح) and ha (ه)
  12. Part two: What can we make of the following traditions? Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ibn Mahbub from ‘Amr ibn abu al-Miqdam from Jabir who has said that he heard abu Ja‘far (a.s.) say the following. "No one from the people has claimed to have collected the whole of the Holy Quran (in a book form) as it was revealed. If anyone would come up with such a claim, he is liar. No one collected this Holy Book and memorized as Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High revealed it except Ali ibn abu Talib (a.s.) and the Imams after him." H 608, Ch. 35, h 2 Muhammad ibn al-Husayn has narrated from Muhammad ibn al-Hassan from Muhammad ibn Sinan from ‘Ammar ibn Marwan from al-Munakhkhal from Jabir from abu Ja‘far (a.s.) who has said the following. "No one is able to claim that with him is the whole of the Holy Quran; its apparent and hidden essence, except the executors of the will of the Holy Prophet (s.a.). We know that Ali [alahisalam] is said to have had a Quran which was compiled exactly as it was revealed in the correct ordering. Such that the contents of the Quran itself were the same, but was collected in the exact manner as it was revealed by Ali ibn Abi Talib. We also know that there are two aspects of the Quran - the apparent and the hidden, and only the Prophet and his purified progeny possessed both of these. This is what is implied perhaps by the 'whole Quran' - someone who can encompass both the inner and outward, the clear and the Mutashabihat [unclear]. These are quite popular interpretations among the Shia who do not believe in Tahreef. We find this supplication from the Prophet [peace be upon him] in Al Kafi: “The Messenger of Allah has said, ‘I like to instruct you with a supplication to help you not to forget the Holy Quran when you say, “O Lord, favor me to avoid, for ever, disobeying You, as long as You will keep me alive, favor me from being burdened with that which does not concern me, grant me beautiful appearance in that which pleases You from me, hold my heart on memorizing Your book as You have taught me. Confer upon me the opportunity to read the way it will please You with me. " If the Quran was full of distortions in that the verses revealed were not as Allah [azawajal] had taught us, why would this supplication be included? The supplication is clear that we should recite the Quran with a supplication where we affirm we want to memorise it and that it is what Allah has taught [i.e revealed to us]. Would Allah be pleased if we read his words by taking out some of the things he revealed?
  13. Introduction There are some who allege that the author of Al Kafi , Al-Kulayni believed in Tahreef of the Quran. Among these are not only detractors of the Jafferi madhab but some major scholars, such as Sayed al-Khui'. However, there is not a single statement from Kulayni whereby he affirms his belief. In his introduction when speaking about the Quran he never mentions nor details at any time that there are missing verses or that it had undergone Tahreef, nor that the true Quran that has all of the verses is with the Aimmah. Instead this is inferred indirectly from the narrations he includes in his own book stating that certain verses had been revealed in a certain way, namely to include the nams of Ali , Hasan and Hussain [peace be upon them all] but were not in the Quran available to most muslims They allege that the Shia of old believed that many of their key beliefs were not in the Quran and so amongst themselves proposed a theory: the companions deviously removed aspects in these verses - particularly those which were supposed to name Ali ibn Abi Talib as the successor. If we move the discussion on and claim that al-Kulayni did not affirm everything in his book was authentic, and that we should place everything according to the Quran and reject what is not inline with it, they will then come to us and say that he is not asking us to place this criteria in his book, but claiming he himself had applied it and the result is Al Kafi. Therefore they contend that the inclusion of narrations in the book is akin to his affirmation of the veracity of these narrations. Let us examine the discussion in the following three stages: 1. Are there any narrations implying Tahreef, in such a way that the names of Ali ibn Abi Talib was supposed to be in the Quran but was removed? 2. Are there any narrations which actually equivocally show that the names were not in the Q'uran and thus contradicting those narrations. 3. Conclusion Are there any narrations implying Tahreef, in such a way that the names of Ali ibn Abi Talib was supposed to be in the Quran but was removed? The reality is that there indeed are several narrations among which some which imply that the names of Ali ibn Abi Talib and some of the other Imams had been in the Quran, but were removed. These are weak and solitary single chained narrations, and were rejected by scholars such as Mufid, Saduq and Tusi. Al-Kafi 1/414:[(with his chain) Abu Basir, from abi `Abdillah (as), regarding Allah’s saying: “And whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger in loving `Ali and loving of the leaders after him has certainly attained a great attainment” He (as) said: “This is how it was revealed.”]Whereas the verse in our Qur’an today only says: {And whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly attained a great attainment} [33:71] Al-Kafi 1/416:[(with his chain) from `Abdullah bin Sinan, from abi `Abdillah (as) regarding Allah’s saying: “And We had already taken a promise from Adam concerning Muhammad, `Ali, Fatimah, Hasan, Husayn and the leaders from their progeny, but he forgot” He (as) said: “By Allah, this is the way it was revealed upon Muhammad (saw).”] Whereas the verse in our Qur’an today only says: {And We had already taken a promise from Adam before, but he forgot; and We found not in him determination.} [20:115] Al-Kafi 1/417:[(with his chain) from Jabir, from abi Ja`far (as), he said: “Jibril (as) revealed this verse to Muhammad (saw) like this: How wretched is that for which they sold themselves – that they would disbelieve in what Allah has revealed about `Ali through [their] outrage.”] Whereas the verse in our Qur’an today only says{How wretched is that for which they sold themselves – that they would disbelieve in what Allah has revealed through [their] outrage} [2:90] Looking at these traditions , it is therefore assumed al-Kulayni believed that these verses were originally part of the Quran and then removed. The verses above concern the name of Amirulmu'mineen in the Quran. So they conclude that the early shia and al-Kulayni believed that the name of Ali was originally part of the Quran under the command of divine leadership, and that these were al-Kulayni's beliefs because of the supposed argument he affirmed everything in his book as true , or would at least refute what which he did not accept. Are there any narrations which actually equivocally show that the names were not in the Q'uran and thus contradicting those narrations. If al-Kulayni really did believe everything he put into al-Kafi, which is an enormous work of traditions more numerous than almost all of the major Sunni books combined, then we would expect in this palicular instance only those traditions affirming the Quran had been removed from and originally included the names of Ali, Hasan and Hussain [peace be on them all]. If we were to find a tradition which explicitly demonstrates that the names were not part of the original Quran, it would be strong evidence that Kulayni neither affirmed nor denied that the verses had originally been part of the Quran containing their names, and then subsequently removed. In fact one could argue this just shows he collected everything in his book he could generally find and felt was of importance, including the various views about the Quran and its preservation. We do not have many books from al-Kulayni in existence now and the only one that has really survived among the many he authored is Al Kafi. It would have been interesting to have his book on Rijal, as well as other ones that may have discussed Aqeedah in further depth. in Usool Al-Kafi (اصول الكافي), By Sheikh Al-Kulaini ( للكليني) . Volume 1, Page # 172-173 [from two authentic chains of narrators]: Alee ibn Ibraheem has narrated from Muhammad ibn Isa from Yunus and Alee ibn Muhammad from Sahl ibn Ziyad, Abu Sa‘id from Muhammad ibn ‘sa from Younis from ibn Muskan from Aboo Basir (r.a) who has said the following: “I asked Aboo Abd Allah (a.s) about the words of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High: ‘Believers, obey Allah, His Messenger, and your leaders (who possess Divine Authority). . . .’ (Qur'aan 4:59). “The Imam (a.s) said, ‘This was sent from the heavens about Alee ibn Aboo Talib, Al-Hassan and Al-Hussain, (peace be upon them all).’ I then said, ‘People say, “Why did He not specify Alee (a.s) and his family by their names in the Book of Allah , the Most Holy, the Most High?’ “The Imam said, ‘Say to them, “The command for prayer came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) but He has not specified (the number of the Rak‘ats) for them as being three or four. It, in fact, was the Messenger of Allah (saw) who explained to them this matter. The command for Zakat (a form of income tax) came to the Messenger of Allah (saw) and there was no specific taxable number such as one Dirham on every forty Dirham. It was the Messenger of Allah (saw) who explained it for them. The command for Hajj came to the Messenger of Allah (saw). It did not say walk seven times around the Ka‘ba. It was the Messenger of Allah (saw) who explained it for them. The verse about obedience came, ‘Believers, Obey Allah ÓÈÍÇäå æÊÚÇáì, His Messenger and your leaders (who possess Divine Authority)...’ (Qur'aan 4:59) From the above tradition, the Imam is asked why he did not specify Ali or his sons [peace be on them all] in the Quran by their names. The Imam then affirms that they were not specified by name, but neither were some of the other verses specifying in great detail other key branches of faith; it was upon the Prophet [peace be upon him] to elucidate and expound upon them. This tradition is in clear contradiction with the many single chained and weak narrations which imply their names were in the Quran. If al-Kulayni allegedly only included whatever he found authentic in his book, why did he include these traditions which give polar opposite views as to whether the names of were included in the Q'uran? Conclusion Al-Kulayni may well have believed in Tahreef [though the definition of what is Tahreef varies]. It also does seem to point towards this owing to certain narrations in his book. However, the presence of narrations in and of themselves does not prove anything definitely. Shaykh Saduq , who was born in the life time of Kulayni, and was firmly against the belief in any addition or subtraction in the Quran himself included many traditions which seemed to imply Tahreef in his books of hadith. We can even find similar traditions in the works of Sunni's. It may have been the case that further study was required on them, or an interpretation given to them, or that they may have been good for reference. If whatever al-Kulayni included in his book was a clear indicator of his belief, he would not have included clear contradictions in the belief of Tahreef. On one hand he records traditions implying that the names of the Imams were in numerous verses. On another he records multiple chains implying that they were not in the Quran and an elaborate explanation given behind the philosophy of the Quran to only mention fundamental aspects of Islam in a general sense and allow the Prophet [peace be upon him] to elucidate on them. We do not know al-Kulaynis actual belief in this regard and arguments made to try to prove he had the belief by what he recorded in al-Kafi fall apart when when critically examined. It is highly plausible given the volume of al-Kafi and the fact in it are contradictions at times to understand that it may have been al-Kafi playing the role of collecting all of the main traditions as a work that is then saved and preserved and can be examined in more detail by scholars of his age and later scholars.
  14. We know that for Sunnis , they hold onto six books as their most authentic. If we add to this other books like the Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, the Muwatta of Imam Malik, and number of other major books, we come to a total number of narrations without repetition is roughly 10,000. To see how that number was reached, here is a website detailing the method in detail: https://islamicsciences.wordpress.com/2006/08/10/the-total-number-of-authentic-hadiths/ In Al Kafi on the other hand, we have 16,000 traditions in total, in just one book. The number without repetitions is not known by myself, but i can vouch that this number will not be anything less than 12,000. I have gone through most of the contents myself to try to get to this and i am being very conservative. So we now see that in one Shia book alone, there are more traditions than in the majority of Sunni hadith books in existence. The number of reliable traditions in Al Kafi [by chain alone] is around seven thousand. If we account for possible repetitions, we can place a conservative estimate of around 5000. In most of the major books [all of the six, Musnad, Muwatta and others], the number of reliable traditions amounts to between 4000-5000. If you take into account the reality that we have four major books, being Al Kafi [ Kulayni d.329] Man La Yadhuru al Faqih [ Saduq] and the two works by Tusi [Tadhib Al Ahkam, istibsar], as well as other words like Mahasin of Barqi Kamil Ziyarat, Tawhid, we have far more traditions at our disposal. Not only traditions, but the number of supplications we have far outweigh any other sect in Islam. If one compares the beauty of the supplications in Al Kafi to it is unmatched. I am not claiming quantity is quality, but rather, that we have both quantity and quality. Murtadha Mutahhari has an excellent book which anyone capable must read on the lives of the Aimmah, in which he notes: "Since we believe that the Prophet (s) has directed us towards them, we have accepted the leadership of Ahl al-Bayt13 (‘a) and regard their sayings and deeds as testament. Therefore, we are more affluent in evidence and sayings than the Sunnis. We have more traditions [hadiths] and valuable prayers (which themselves act as gates to Islamic culture and education, and must be discussed separately) than the Ahl al-Sunnah. Since they do not have as many traditions as we do, this places Shi‘ism in a richer state. Those who have counted the number of hadiths in the Sunni Sihah al-Sittah14 and Al-Kafi15 have said that there are not as many hadiths in those six authentic books as there are in Al-Kafi. I have not counted the number myself, but those who have read the books have said that it contains more than 16,000 hadiths, making this book a jewel for the Shi‘ahs. For this reason, the Shi‘ism has never seen the need for qiyas16 (analogical reasoning) and istihsan17 (juristic preference), which has always been a source of pride." https://www.al-islam.org/survey-lives-infallible-imams-murtadha-mutahhari/introduction-comparison-between-imam-al-husayns I personally own physical copies of books like the Sahih of Imam Bukhari. While there is much in it we can probably agree on or at least not judge , a good percentage of traditions in that book are of little value to jurisprudence or theology, but consist of anecdotal tales of Aisha, such as her superiority being like a certain kind of food, or a certain companion remembering the Prophet [salau alayI wasalam] throwing water on his face. The chain of narrators between Kulayni and any M'asum is much shorter given his relative proximity to them as compared to the length of chains in works like Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Muslim, Nasai', and others.
  15. Alhamdullilah Egypt have set a great example: https://muslimvillage.com/2015/06/28/83307/egypt-bans-salafi-books-from-mosques/ Ibn Taymiyyah according to the Barelvi's who constitute about a third of the total number of Sunni's today generally say they do not make outright Takfir on him because he contradicted himself. Large groups do though. He is followed by the modern Salafi movement, and those in Saudi Arabia as well as Somalia, and parts of the west. If you strike him and show his ignorance and total deviance in the most fundamental aspect of Aqeedah, you take out the entire Salafi establishment who go around calling others deviants and inciting hatred. I am actually reading a few Aqai'd books of the Salafi's and works by Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Uthaymeen. If Allah so wills i will write a rebuttal and quote some of the alarming things he writes in that book. If anyone wants to take a look, here they are: Sharh Aqeedah Al Wasitiyah [Ibn Taymiyyah on Attributes]: https://www.kalamullah.com/Books/Sharh Al-Aqeedat-il-Wasitiyah.pdf Explanation of Aqeedatul Hamawiyyah - Ibn Uthaymeen: https://www.kalamullah.com/Books/Explanation_of_a_Summary_of_Aqeedat_Hamawiyyah.pdf I have recently observed Shia youtube channels and Shia's in general ensuring the first thing they use when abused by the Salafi's is the doctrine of Tawheed. I must say, i wish we had done it sooner, because we can not lose. They might call us 'jamiyyah' and 'rationalists' and 'deniers of the attributes of God'. These are all knee-jerk defence mechanisms when one must throw labels and slanders. Their blind adherence to what is clearly incorrect reminds me of what i have seen among trinitarians.
  • Create New...