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
Give a Salawat Here!

Jondab_Azdi

Advanced Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    3,310

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Jondab_Azdi

  1. Jondab_Azdi
    Some scholars have argued that usually its Kitab al-Hajj which has the abwaab and riwayaat of Ziyaraat like Shaykh al-Kulayni in al-Kafi, Shaykh Hurr al-Amuli in al-Wasael, but again this would be a big assumption in case of Muhammad b. Ismail, because there is a possibility that Shaykh Tusi got it from a book of some other narrator(ÛíÑ ßÊÇÈ ãÍãÏ Èä ÇÓãÇÚíá). w/s
  2. Jondab_Azdi
    Shaykh al-Radhy said: ... ÃÏÚí Ãä ÇáÔíÎ ÇáØæÓí äÞáåÇ ãä ßÊÇÈ ãÍãÏ Èä ÅÓãÇÚíá Èä ÈÒíÚ æåÐÇ æÅä ßÇä áÇ ÔÇåÏ Úáíå Regardless of other weaknesses in the isnad of this ziyarah, how can we be sure that Shaykh Tusi narrated this from the book of Muhammad b. Ismail and not from the book of some other narrator? There is a narration in al-Misbah from Abdullah b. Sinan (ra) and al-Khoei graded it as mursal(daeef). The tareeq (in fihrist) of Shaykh Tusi to the book(s) of Abdullah b. Sinan is sahih and yet al-Khoei graded it as mursal(daeef). His argument is that the tareeq mentioned in al-Fihrist is lim
  3. Jondab_Azdi
    Looking at the other isnad, it seems very unlikely that al-Kulayni narrated from Abdullah b. Jafar directly without a wasitah. It seems that the isnad you mentioned in your last post are the case of 'wijadah'. I have read that scholars of rijaal don't consider Abdullah b. Jafar and even Sad b. Abdullah as direct mashaykh of al-Kulayni. Correct me if I am wrong but I think Syed al-Khoei also believed the same. He does mentions Muhammad b. Abdullah b. Jafar and Muhammad b. Yahya as the mashaykh of al-Kulayni but never said Abdullah b. Jafar as direct mashaykh of al-Kulayni. See point 18 and 25 h
  4. Jondab_Azdi
    Akhi, I didn't comment on the second sentence as its even more weaker usul. Muawiyah b. Hakeem did narrated from other majhool narrators. Syed al-Khoei has discussed this in very much detail and considered ahadith of those majaheel as daeef from whom even Muhammad b. Abi Umayr (ra) narrated. w/s
  5. Jondab_Azdi
    This would have been a considerable point only if the other narrators from which Humayd took usul were thiqah. Here are some other narrators from whom Humayd took a lot of usul: ÃÍãÏ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÒíÏ = majhool ÃÍãÏ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ãÓáãÉ = majhool ÇáÞÇÓã Èä ÅÓãÇÚíá ÇáÞÑÔí = waqifi daeef ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÍÇÒã = majhool So, this actually proves the opposite. w/s
  6. Jondab_Azdi
    (salam) Do you mean that Abdullah b. Jafar al-Himyari was also from the mashaykh of al-Kulayni? w/s
  7. Jondab_Azdi
    There is no clear proof that he was from the mashaykh of Najashi. From rijaal Najashi: ÞÇá ÃÈæ ÇáÍÓíä ãÍãÏ Èä åÇÑæä Èä ãæÓì ÑÍãå Çááå: ÞÇá ÃÈí: ÞÇá ÃÈæ Úáí Èä åãÇã: ÍÏËäÇ ÚÈÏ Çááå Èä ÇáÚáÇÁ ÞÇá: ßÇä ÃÍãÏ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÑÈíÚ ÚÇáãÇ ÈÇáÑÌÇá The word used by Najashi is "ÞÇá" (the narrator said) and not "ÃÎÈÑäÇ" (the narrator told us) etc. The word ÞÇá doesn't proves that the narrator met Shaykh Najashi or was from his mashaykh. Syed al-Khoei also didn't consider him from the mashaykh of Najashi. As for him being from mashaykh of Shaykh al-Mufeed (ar), then it's not of much significance. Ayatullah K
  8. Jondab_Azdi
    Authentic hadith in our book al-Kafi explicity states Azar as father of Prophet Ibrahim (as). . . علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن هشام بن سالم، عن أبي أيوب الخزاز، عن أبصير، عن أبي عبدالله (ع): أن آزر أبا إبراهيم (ع) كان منجما لنمرود ولم يكن يصدر إلا عن أمره فنظر ليلة في النجوم فاصبح وهويقول لنمرود: لقد رأيت عجبا، قال: وما هو؟ قال: رأيت مولودا يولد في أرضنا يكون هلاكنا على يديه ولا يلبث إلا قليلا حتى يحمل به، . . . w/s
  9. Jondab_Azdi
    ^This is not really the Akhbari methodology. See:
  10. Jondab_Azdi
    There has never been consensus among shi'a scholars regarding the superiority of Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) over Prophets (as). See: http://www.shiachat....ost__p__1980835 Regarding that hadith you posted, see: http://www.shiachat....ost__p__1981586 w/s
  11. Jondab_Azdi
    al-Majlisi graded it 'daif / muwaththaq' probably b/c of different opinions regarding Salim b. Mukarram. æÞÏ ÇÎÊáÝ Ýíå¡ ÝÐåÈ ÈÚÖ Åáì æËÇÞÊå¡ æÐåÈ ÂÎÑæä Åáì ÖÚÝå¡ æÊæÞøÝ Ýíå ÇÈä ØÇææÓ(1)¡ æÇáÚáÇøãÉ I read this today... ÈÖÚÝ ÇáÓäÏ ÈÇÈí ÎÏíÌÉ ÓÇáã Èä ãßÑã ÇáÌãÇá¡ ÍíË ÖÚÝå ßá ãä ÇáÔíÎ æÇÈä ÏÇæÏ æÇáÚáÇãÉ ÇáÍáí¡æÈÊÖÚíÝ ÇãËÇá åÄáÇÁ ÊÓÞØ ÇáÑæÇíÉ Úä ÇáÇÚÊÈÇÑ¡ æáÇ íÌÏí ÊæËíÞ ÇáäÌÇÔí Ýí ÇáãÞÇã¡ áãÚÇÑÖÊå ÈÊÖÚíÝþÇáÌãÇÚÉ ÝíÊÚÇÑÖÇä æíÊÓÇÞØÇä¡ æÊÈÞì ÇáÑæÇíÉ ÈáÇ ÊæËíÞ ÝáÇ íãßä ÇáÇÓÊäÇÏ ÇáíåÇ¡ æáÇ íãßä ÍíäÆÐ æÕÝåÇÈÇáÕÍíÍÉ Çæ ÇáãÚÊÈÑÉ ßãÇ ÞÏ íÑì Ýí ÇáÓäÉ ÇáÈÚÖ w/s
  12. Jondab_Azdi
    No b/c the sanad of this narration from Rijal Kashhi is also weak b/c of majhool narrators. Syed al-Khoei said: وهذا الطريق لم تثبت صحته عندي أما الرواية فقد ذكرها الكشي في ترجمته ( 517 ) كما نقل ، وهي ضعيفة ، فان الفضل بن كثير مهمل ، والحسن بن الحسين بن صالح مجهول ، فلا يمكن الاستدلال بها على المدح ، ولا على القدح . w/s
  13. Jondab_Azdi
    All three chains are weak. First b/c of Sahl b. Ziyad, second Hamza b. Bazi' (æÇÞÝí áã íæËÞ), third Muhammad b. Mansur b. Nasr (ãÌåæá). Syed al-Khoei says: åÐå ÇáÑæÇíÉ ÑæÇåÇ ãÍãÏ Èä íÚÞæÈ ÈæÌå ÃæÓÚ æÃÈÓØ ÈÃÓÇäíÏ ãÎÊáÝÉ ãäåÇ: ãÇ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä íÍíì¡ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓíä¡ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ÅÓãÇÚíá ÇÈä ÈÒíÚ¡ Úä Úãøå ÍãÒÉ Èä ÈÒíÚ¡ Úä Úáí Èä ÓæíÏ¡ æÇáÑæÇíÇÊ ÈÃÌãÚåÇ ÖÚíÝÉ w/s
  14. Jondab_Azdi
    Úä ãÍãÏ Èä íÍíì ¡ Úä ÓáãÉ Èä ÇáÎØÇÈ ¡ Úä ÓáíãÇä Èä ÓãÇÚÉ Úä Úãå ÚÇÕã ÇáßæÒí ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏÇááå Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã Ãä ÇáäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå ÞÇá : ãä ÃÕÈÍ áÇ íåÊã ÈÇãæÑ ÇáãÓáãíä ÝáíÓ ãäåã ¡ æãä íÓãÚ ÑÌáÇ íäÇÏí " íÇ ááãÓáãíä " Ýáã íÌÈå ÝáíÓ ÈãÓáã see: http://www.al-shia.org/html/ara/books/lib-hadis/behar71/133.htm w/s
  15. Jondab_Azdi
    See post # 313 w/s
  16. Jondab_Azdi
    ^Ok. Makarem Shirazi said Yasir al-Habib is either an "agent (traitor?) or stupid fool (foolish idiot?) ".
  17. Jondab_Azdi
    ^JazakAllah. Rightly said by Ayat. Makarem Shirazi [Edited] w/s
  18. Jondab_Azdi
    ^Fabrication. See: http://www.fileden.com/files/2010/6/24/2896028//Aboo%20Bakr%20and%20Umar%20hung%20from%20a%20tree_fabricated.pdf w/s
  19. Jondab_Azdi
    Did you even read that quote from the book of ash-Shahid ath-Thani? If you think what I said is just 'assumptions' then you have no idea about rijaal and what is being discussed. ^And this confirms you have no idea about what I was discussing with Nader. w/s
  20. Jondab_Azdi
    We have many ahadith with similar matn: http://www.al-shia.org/html/ara/books/lib-hadis/behar28/a1.html w/s
  21. Jondab_Azdi
    There are two possibilities. If Shaykh Tusi (ar) took this hadith from Kulayni's book, then it's an obvious mistake by Shaykh (ar) in copying the isnad as mentioned by ash-Shahid ath-Thani (ar). Another possibility is that Shaykh Tusi (ar) took this narration from Muhammad b. Yahya through this tareeq: æØÑíÞ ÇáÔíÎ Åáíå Ýí ãÔíÎÉ ÇáÊåÐíÈ : ÇáÍÓíä Èä ÚÈíÏÇááå ¡ æÃÈæÇáÍÓíä ÇÈä ÃÈí ÌíÏ ÇáÞãí ¡ ÌãíÚÇ Úä ÃÍãÏ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä íÍíì ¡ Úä ÃÈíå ãÍãÏ Èä íÍíì ÇáÚØÇÑ (See Mujam ar-Rijal) This tareeq is also daif b/c of majhool narrator in the sanad. ØÑíÞ ÇáÔíÎ Çáíå Ýí ÇáãÔíÎÉ ( 1 ) ÖÚíÝ w/s
  22. Jondab_Azdi
    : ) Bro, this is obviously a mistake by Shaykh Tusi (ar) in copying the isnad from Kulayni's book. Shaykh al-Radhy has discussed this in detail. He quotes ash-Shahid ath-Thani (ar) . . . موقف ابن الشهيد الثاني : الشيخ حسن ابن الشهيد الثاني المتوفى 1011 هـ روى هذا الحديث في كتابه منتقى الجمان عن التهذيب ثم التفت إلى ما في التهذيب من سقط ثم قال : وظن بعض الأصحاب صحة هذا الخبر كما هو قضية البناء على الظاهر ، وبعد التصفح يعلم أنه معلل أو واضح الضعف لأن الكليني رواه ([17]) عن محمد بن يحيى ، عن محمد بن الحسين ، عن محمد بن إسماعيل بن بزيع ، عن الخيبري ببقية الاسناد ، وهذا كما ترى عين الطريق ال
  23. Jondab_Azdi
    In Falah al-Sa'il, Syed ibn Tawoos mentioned this. . . ÍÏøËäÇ ãÍãøÏ Èäþ(20) ãæÓì Èä ÇáãÊæßøá ÑÍãå Çááøóå ÞÇá: ÍÏøËäÇ Úáíø Èä ÅÈÑÇåíã¡ Úä ÃÈíå ÅÈÑÇåíã Èä åÇÔã¡ Úä ãÍãøÏ Èä ÃÈí ÚãíÑ ÞÇá: ÍÏøËäí ãä ÓãÚ ÃÈÇ ÚÈÏÇááøóå ÇáÕÇÏÞ(Ú) íÞæá: «ãÇ ÃÍÈø Çááøóå ãä ÚÕÇå. Ëãø ÊãËøá ÝÞÇá: ÊóÚúÕöí ÇáÅáåó æÃóäúÊó ÊõÙúåöÑõ ÍõÈøóåõ åÐÇ ãõÍÇáñ Ýí ÇáÞöíÇÓö ÈóÏöíÚõ áæßÇäó ÍõÈøõßó ÕÇÏöÞÇð áÃóØóÚúÊóåõ Åäøó ÇáãõÍöÈøó áöãóäú íõÍöÈøõ ãõØöíÚõ»(21). (ÃÞæá: æáÚáø ÞÇÆáÇð íÞæá: åÐÇä ÇáÈíÊÇä áãÍãæÏ ÇáæÑøÇÞ. ÝäÞæá: Åäø ÇáÕÇÏÞ(Ú) ÊãËáø ÈåãÇ¡ æÑæÇÉ ÇáÍÏíË ËÞÇÊ ÈÇáÇÊøÝÇÞ http://www.alhikmeh.com/arabic/mktba/doa/falah/12.htm Ther
  24. Jondab_Azdi
    From what I understand, Shaykh al-Hurr al-Amuli (ar) did considered it makruh to recite poetry about Ahlul Bayt (as) in ramadhan. In Wasael Vol. 14, he mentions a hadith (weak) which is about the permissibility of reciting/writing(?) poetry about Ahlul Bayt (as) in ramadan. He reconciled this hadith by saying: æáÚá åÐÇ ãÎÕæÕ ÈÅäÔÇÁ ÇáÑËÇÁ Ïæä ÅäÔÇÏå ¡ Ãæ Úáì ÇáÌæÇÒ ¡ æãÇ ãÑ Úáì ÇáßÑÇåÉ http://www.rafed.net/books/hadith/wasael-14/14030.html , pg. 599 From what I understand, he considers writing poetry about Ahlul Bayt (as) in Ramadhan as mustahab, but to recite it in Ramadhan or Friday or nig
  25. Jondab_Azdi
    A/c to Syed al-Khoei it's Esa b. Muhammad and he said: æáÇä Ýí ÓäÏ ÇáÇæáì ÚíÓì Èä ãÍãÏ æáã íæËÞ http://www.ali12.com/mybooks/find.php?do=show_reslusts&id=2509&table=table_fiqh_s w/s
×
×
  • Create New...