Jump to content

Al-Hussayni

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    941
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

About Al-Hussayni

  • Rank
    Level 3 Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    UK
  • Religion
    إمامية

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

4,159 profile views
  1. Yes but then they should reference the Qur'an and Sunnah when making rulings so we know the origin of their rulings. Please read the following: Regarding the verse from Holy Qur'an: “And who is more erring than he who follows his low desires without any guidance from Allah?” (Holy Qur'an 28:50), Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) said “It means the one who takes his religion by his own opinion without the guidance from the guiding Imams (as)”. [Source: Basair Ul Darajat Chapter 8] What do you think scholars are doing when you ask them such questions that don't have an explicit answer from the ahadith? No brother, on the contrary, Hadith is noor and a guiding light. If you read the Qur'an and narrations of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), you will find that the ahadith itself will guide a reader on how to filter them.
  2. Not sure what you mean. The hadith clearly refers to taqleed (I.e blindly following a scholar) being haram. There are examples of marajas fatwas which contradict the narrations of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) and even matters of halal/haram.. That being said I'm not against referring to scholars, but all the rulings that are there in regards to taqlid have no basis in the Qur'an and Sunnah. I do tab'eed and try to look at a few marjas opinion on issues. By all means use their scholarly advice to guide you to the moral light and to aid your own study, but it's also important to do our own research into the Qur'an & Sunnah too.
  3. Which hadith brother? All ahadith that speak of taqleed pretty much condemn it, that is the Taqleed of a non-ma'soom. To blindly follow someone without reference to the two weighty thigs. See for example: The Holy Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq (عليه السلام) said: ‘Beware of taqleed! Whosoever adorns this in religion is destroyed! Surely Allah has Said: ‘They took their Rabbis and Monks as their Lords besides Allah (9:31). No, by Allah They did no pray nor fast but they made permissible which was forbidden to them and made the forbidden permissible. They did their taqleed (emulated them) in this and obeyed them, and they did not realise. Source: Tashih al-I'tiqad
  4. Again you're trying to justify the fatwas of your marjas - why can't you accept they have perhaps made mistakes? I'm not saying out of my own opinion. I'm saying what our Imams (as) have told us. We have the clear narrations which act as a hujjah (proof) upon us, not the fatwas of mujtahids. There is clear proof it is haraam or discouraged at the very least, you yourself have admitted that you wouldn't do tattoos because of the ahadeeth on this issue! Again, Ilm al rijaal has no basis in the Qur'an or ahadeeth, so to apply it in the first place is absolutely baseless. Sure, so then it they accept and take that which suits them? I mean when there's clear narrations on an issue and then they issue fatwas in opposition to that, then don't you think that's problematic? Particularly when they have contradictions between them on the most basic of issues? The verse says if some news/report is brought to us, then we should investigate that: "should bring you some news, verify it" I.e. verify the news or the report. It does not say verify the status of the reporters... You are saying Qur'an only, yet completely ignoring the words of the Aimmah (as). We have to look at everything as a whole. Abu Abdullah (asws) said: Do not belie the Hadeeth, whether it comes to you by (way of) the Murjiites, or the Qadiriyya, or the Harouriya, if it is referred to us (asws), for you do not know perhaps therein is something from the Truth, otherwise you would end up belying Allah (azwj) on top of His (azwj) Throne. [Source: Al Mahaasin V1 Bk 5 H 175] I heard Abu Jafar say: By Allah, that companion of mine is beloved to me, who narrates and ponders over our Hadith, and the evil one is the one who hears the Hadith which has been associated with us (asws) and has been reported form us (asws), so his mind does not accept it and his heart is constricted by what is contained in it, and he fights against it and denies it to make it his religion, and he does not know that it could be the hadith which is coming from us (asws) and to us (asws) is it’s link, so by that he has exited out of our wilayah (guardianship) [Source: Basair ul Darajat Chapter 22] It clearly says not to reject the narrations straight away, as there is a possibility it could be from them. So of course let me repeat again, when I get any hadeeth from the Imams (as) with a proper reference, then I will never reject it straight away. I will then investigate that report by comparing it with the Holy Qur'an and other Ahadeeth on the issue. Mind you, these narrations above clearly specifies the word 'hadeeth'. The verse in the Qur'an is quite general and mentions any report/news. When it comes ahadeeth, they have a much higher status and are equal with the Qur'an compared to any other news or report. So tell me, what is the opposite of rejecting? Based on our standards of differentiating between ahadith, although the ones commending the ashura fast may have been said by the Imams (they were most likely said out of taqiyya or could be fabrications as there are similar ones found in sunni hadith collections too), It is enough to say that our Imams have commanded us that when we see the 'amma upon something, then we must act in opposition to that as that is where true guidance of lies. Therefore, fasting on Ashura is definitely not Mustahabb. One should read those narrations which condemn the practice (taken from Al-kafi) and then read those which encourage the practice - A true Shi'a will know which narrations to act upon. Tahdhib is not a primary source, it was compiled after the Ghayba. Primary sources are those which were compiled before or during the minor occultation of Imam zaman (ajf). Again, that is his own commentary, but the simple question to refute all this is: Would a person fast when close family member or friend has died? Fasting is usually associated with happiness and no sane person would even think to fast on these occasions! Let alone upon the martyrdom of Sayyidus-shuhada (asws)! Of course, keeping fakah (abstaining from water/food for few hours out of grief) is different, but keeping a full day fast with the sehri and iftar is different. This statement is not accurate at all. Even the man-made usool e deen are not the same, for some these are only three and for some there are differences on halal and haraam. Are you saying that the basics of halaal and haraam were not clear in that time? As this was most definitely not the case with the early Shi'as after the ghayba. As far as the marjas are concerned, they cannot even get the BASICS between them right! Also, these differences between the ordinary shias were there and will always be there until the time of the reappearance of the 12th Imam (ajf), but not the devout shias, i.e., Salmaan, Abu Dharr had a brotherhood with different level of Eman, but these kind of devotees have always been very few ( negligible) in few to those who claim to be Shias! And if you think differences are a good thing, then that is a big fallacy: علي بن الحسين المرتضى في رسالة ) المحكم والمتشابه ( نقال من )تفسير( النعماني بإسناده االتي عن إسماعيل بن جابر ، عن أبي عبدهللا ) عليه السالم ( ، عن آبائه ، عن أمير المؤمنين ) عليه السالم ( ـ في حديث طويل ـ قال : وأما الرد على من قال بالرأي والقياس واالستحسان واالجتهاد ، ومن يقول : إن االختالف رحمة ، فاعلم أنا لما رأينا من قال : بالرأي والقياس قد استعملوا الشبهات في األحكام لما عجزوا عن عرفان إصابة الحكم، H 33188 – Ali Bin Al Husayn Al Murtaza In ‘Al Muhkam And Al Mutashabih’ (The Decisive and the Allegorical) copied from the Tafseer Al Nu’mani by its chain which is from Ismail Bin Jabir who narrates the following: Abu Abdullah [asws] from his [asws] forefather from the Amir-ul-Momineen [asws] – in a lengthy Hadith – said: ‘As for the refutation of the one who speaks by his opinion and analogy and approval and Ijtihad and the one who says that ‘differences are a Mercy’, know that we have seen that the one who speaks by opinion and analogy utilises the allegorical in the decisive orders when he gets frustrated from understanding the true Orders. ] 44115 ] وفي ) معاني األخبار ( وفي ) العلل ( عن علي بن أحمد ابن محمد بن عمران الدقاق ، عن أبي الحسين محمد بن جعفر األسدي ، عن صالح بن أبي حماد ، عن أحمد بن هالل ، عن ابن أبي عمير ، عن عبد المؤمن االنصاري قال قلت البي عبدهللا ) عليه السالم( : إن قوما يروون : أن رسول هللا ) صلى هللا عليه وآله ( قال : اختالف امتي رحمة ، فقال : صدقوا ، فقلت : إن كان اختالفهم رحمة فاجتماعهم عذاب ؟ قال : ليس حيث تذهب وذهبوا ، إنما أراد قول هللا ع ّز وج ّل : ) فلوال نفر من كل فرقة منهم طائفة ليتفقهوا في الدين ولينذروا قومهم إذا رجعوا إليهم لعلهم يحذرون ( فأمرهم أن ينفروا إلى رسول هللا ) صلى هللا عليه وآله( ، فيتعلموا ، ثم يرجعوا إلى قومهم فيعلموهم ، إنما أراد اختالفهم من البلدان ، ال اختالفا في دين هللا ، إنما الدين واحد ، إنما الدين واحد . H 33425 – And in Ma’ani Al Akhbaar and in Al Illal from Ali Bin Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Bin Umran Al Daqaaq, from Abu Al Husayn Muhammad Bin Ja;far Al Asady, from Saleh Bin Abu Hamaad, from Ahmad Bin Hilal, from Ibn Abu Umeyr, from Ab Al Mo’min Al Ansary who says: ‘I said to Abu Abd Allah [as], ‘Surely the people are narrating from the Messenger of Allah [saws] that he [saws] said: ‘Differences in my [saws] community is a Mercy’. He [saws] said: ‘This is true’. I said, ‘If their differences is a Mercy, then is their consensus a Punishment?’ He [asws] said: ‘This is not as you deem it to be. Surely, his [saws] intention was the Words of Allah [azwj] Mighty and Majestic And it does not beseem the believers that they should go forth all together; why should not then a company from every party from among them go forth that they may apply themselves to obtain understanding in religion, and that they may warn their people when they come back to them that they may be cautious? – 9:122 They have been ordered to go as a group to the Messenger of Allah [saws] learn from hims, then return to their own people and teach them. He (saws) has intended the differences within their cities, not differences in the Religion of Allah. Surely the Religion of Allah is one, surely the Religion of Allah is one’. How to differentiate between the differences amongst the Shias: محمد بن أبي القاسم الطبري في ) بشارة المصطفى ( عن إبراهيم بن الحسين بنن إبنراهيم البصنري ، عنن محمند بن الحسين بن عتبة ، عن محمد بن الحسين بن أحمد الفقيه ، عن حمويه بن علي بن حمويه ، عن محمد بن عبدهللا بنن المطلنب الشيباني ، عن محمد بن علي بن مهدي الكندي ، عن محمد بن علني بنن عمنر بنن طرينف الحجنري ، عنن أبينه عنن جمينل بنن صالح ، عن أبي خالد الكابلي ، عن االصبغ بن نباتة ، عن أمير المؤمنين ) عليه السالم ( ـ في حنديث ـ أننه سنئل عنن اخنتالف الشيعة ، فقال : إن دين هللا ال يعرف بالرجال ، بل بآية الحق ، فاعرف الحق تعرف أهله ، إن الحق أحسن الحديث ، والصنادع به مجاهد وبالحق اخبرك فأرعني سمعك ، وذكر كالما طويال ، حاصنله االمنر بنالرجوع إلنيهم ) علنيهم السنالم ( فني االحكنام ، وتفسير القرآن ، وغير ذلك . H 33413 – Muhammad Abu Al Qasim Al Tabary in Bashaarat Al Mustafa from Ibrahim Bin Al Husayn Bin Ibrahim Al basary, from Muhammad Bin Al Husayn Bin Otba, from Muhammad Bin Al Husayn Bin Ahmad Al Faqiya, from Hamawiya Bin Ali Bin Hamawiya, from Muhammad Bin Abd Allah Bin Al Muttalib Al Shaybani, from Muhammad Bin Ali Bin Mahdi Al Kindi, from Muhammad Bin Ali Bin Umar Bin Tareef Al Hajary, from his father from Jameel Bin Saleh, from Abu Khalid Al Kabily, from Al Asbagh Bin Nabata who says: Amir-ul-Momineen [asws] – in a Hadith – when they questioned him about the differences among the [Edited Out]es, said: ‘The Religion of Allah cannot be recognised through men, but by the signs of truth. When you understand the truth you will come to recognise its people, for the truth is the best narration, and those that speak it are the true warriors and it is the truth that you are hearing from me, so lend me your ears’. And he delivered a lengthy speech, the summary of which is that it is to him that reference has to be made in the affairs regarding the orders, and the explanation of the Quran, and other things like that.
  5. I'm not against scholarship just for the record and all our books that have been preserved have bene thanks to so much effort and hardwork by our classical scholars like Shaykh al-Kulayni, Sheikh Hurr al-Aameli, Sheikh Sadooq, Mulla baqir Majlisi etc. The present day maraja would not even dare to compare themselves with these individuals. What I am against is the present day system of marja'iyyat and taqleed, which is a recent innovation and which the classical scholars spoke greatly against. Blind taqleed (without proof) is haraam and equivalent to shirk according to many of our narrations. The problem with such taqleed can be summarised in the hadeeth below from Imam sadiq (as): ِم ْن ُدو ْرباباً َ ْحبا َر ُه ْم َو ُر ْهباَن ُهْم أ َ وا أ ِن َّهللا و قال ع إياكم و التقليد فإنه من قلد في دينه هلك إن هللا تعالى يقول ات ِ فال و هللا َّ َخذُ ما صلوا لهم و ال صاموا و لكنهم أحلوا لهم حراما و حرموا عليهم حالال فقلدوهم في ذلك فعبدوهم و هم ال يشعرون The Holy Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq [as] said: ‘Beware of taqleed! Whosoever adorns this in religion is destroyed! Surely Allah 'azza wa jal has Said: ‘They took their Rabbis and Monks as their Lords besides Allah (9:31). No, by Allah! They did no pray nor fast but they made permissible which was forbidden to them and made the forbidden permissible. They did their taqleed (emulated them) in this and obeyed them, and they did not realise. The above narration makes it clear, that such scholars will make the halal into haraam and haraam into halaal, which is exactly what is happening today. What 'Islamic sciences' exactly? Most of which are not even required when Wanting to study the Qur'an and ahadeeth. This notion that the marajas spend 'their whole lives researching and studying' is a big fallacy. I used to think this as well by the way.
  6. Typical rant trying to justify your so called marja's fatwa. Can you give us one proof to suggest that Sistani's fatwa on tattoo is in line with the ahadeeth? What proof has he acted upon to suggest it's halal? As the only ahadeeth on the matter of tattoos are the ones I mentioned above which clearly state it is haraam. Did Sistani say anywhere those ahadeeth are weak to him? For the sake of argument, I will assume that Sistani has said those ahadeeth on tattoos are weak to him and therefore cannot come to a judgement on them, but then he has given a fatwa saying it is halaal, essentially REJECTING those ahadeeth! To suggest that the probability of a hadeeth coming from Imam (as) is not strong and rejecting it is pretty much near the same thing. It's just a mischevious tactic used by usoolis to justify their marjas fatwas. It makes absolute sense to the one who thinks with reason and open-mindedness - Yes the verse mentions to investigate the report, not the reporters! Other ahadeeth state to look into reports irrespective of whom they are narrated from. This is why Ilm al-rijaal is in direct opposition to this ayah because it commands to look at ahadeeth based on who narrated them, not the actual report themselves! Based upon the ahadeeth of the Imams (as) narrated above, we must not reject a hadeeth straight away without looking into it. Tell me, what is the opposite of rejection? ANY Hadeeth of the ahlulbayt (as) we must take it and then look into it. I'm not saying to ACT upon it straight away. Of course, acting on the hadeeth is then another step forward. But getting to the main point, we have clear narrations on the prohibiton of tattoos and the narrations are very harsh on this matter. Ilm al-rijaal which is a man made fallacy CANNOT BE used to judge ahadeeth! Another example on this is that Mr Khoei weakens all narrations in regards to the prohibition of the fast of ashura and he strengthens those narrations which commend the fast of ashura - This is also based on Ilm al rijaal. He then mentions that the strongest opinion is to fast on this day. This is such a big deviation because the narrations which prohibit the fast all come from our main primary sources - reading them would be enough to convince someone definitely not to fast. The narrations which commend the fast all come from secondary sources (many of them found in sunni books, which suggests they are fabrications or were uttered under taqiyyah). Do you understand now why applying ilm al-rijaal is so problematic now? Because it is making those things haraam as halal/mustahab! Simply based on ilm al-rijaal, khoei has essentially ignored all those narrations which prohibit the fast (which are more authentic & if you read them, they would tell you why we should not fast this day) he's just saying to act on these commendable ones purely based on rijaal - not forgetting that we are supposed to act in opposition to the 'amma based on the principles of hadeeth from the Imams (as) Absolute nonsense because that's exactly what these marjas are doing, i.e. Rejecting/weakening the hadeeths simply based on a man-made principle! If they weren't rejecting them, then they would not be issuing fatwas in direct opposition to them (Which I've stated so many times now)! Of course, they aren't going to come out straight and say we are rejecting these hadeeths, but in principle & from their fatwas, that's exactly what they are doing. My first reaction is that there is a possibility that they could be coming from the Imams (as), so I don't reject them. What is the opposition of rejection!??? Acting on the hadeeths are different like i said! But the fact of the matter is, in regards to tattoos, if we bring all the narrations altogether you will find that it is not only 1 hadeeth, but many ahadeeth which are stating the same thing. There are no ahadeeth which state it is halal. Exactly, thank you for proving my point, there are NO AHADEETH whatsoever stating that we must apply ilm al-rijaal to our narrations! Therefore it is a big deviation. What we are arguing is all essentially linked to Ilm al-rijaal, i.e. grading and filtering hadeeth by evaluating the biographies of the narrators instead of by examining the content (Text)- this is what Ilm al-rijaal is and the Qur'an quite clearly rejects this idea. It says to investigate the report not the reporters!! MashaAllah thanks for pointing that out - differences amongst experts/mujtahids, differences amongst their standards and methods, which all leads to people following different marjas and then you get each group essentially forming their own tariqah, creating even more divisions & opinions. I'm pretty sure this is what Imam al-mahdi (as) wanted for us. Yes and I've already pointed out how the concept of following the most knowledgeable is so flawed. Again it's a pretty sly tactic from those who initiated ilm al-rijaal - saying how 'weak' doesn't mean 'rejection' when alot of times it actually is, otherwise they wouldn't be acting in opposition to the ahadeeth. It gives them a leeway to accept and reject narrations according to their own desires. There's no proof for Ilm al-rijaal in the first place anyway! So it should not be applied in the first place. Mujtahids are not equivalent to fuqaha. Fuqaha are people who narrate ahadeeth, but the mujtahids do not do this. Agha Sistani has not narrated any ahadeeth in regards to the permissibility of tattoos. Infact, I emailed a question to his office in London yesterday: Assalamu 'alaykum, I would like to know whether Tatoos are halal, haraam or makrooh in Islam? Please provide me with references from the Qur'an or Ahadith of the ahlulbayt (as) The response: In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful It is permissible to have a tattoo if: a. The tattoo allows the water of wudhu and ghusl to reach the skin while performing wudhu or ghusl. b. Having a tattoo does not involve forbidden touch or look. c. The tattoo does not encourage corruption or corrupted ideas or beliefs. d. The tattoo does not have the names of Allah his almighty or Quran script. e. for woman, if that is considered as a beauty item then it must be concealed from non-mehram man Wassalamu Alaykum Once again, I was not given proof for any of the above! Which proves that the fatwas that the maraja' are issuing are not based on the Qur'an or ahadeeth at all. Even if their fatwas maybe in compliance to the ahadeeth, they haven't narrated any verses of the Qur'an or ahadeeth in regards to their rulings. Correct if in compliance with the Holy Qur'an and other ahadeeth
  7. The real question should be, what is the proof that you can use man made methods such as Ilm al-rijaal on ahadeeth? Again, you may say that rejection and weakening are two different things, but many people and scholars will reject ahadeeth purely based on this rijaal system. Also, you made an explanation of the above point earlier that how ilm al rijaal is not used to reject hadeeth, but rather to establish the likelihood of a report coming from an Imam (as) through the particular chain A simple reply to this is: Our religion is based on yaqeen (certainty) and not doubt. Ilm al-rijaal creates doubt in hadeeth and doubt ultimately destroys religion, which is why it was created in the first place, to deter people from reading ahadeeth and accepting the fatwas of the marjas blindly. I didn't say to blindly accept it, I am saying that it is better to accept it and then look further into it (Using the qur'an & supporting narrations), rather than shunning them outright because that's what the Imams (as) have said. On the contrary, there aren't any narrations that tell encourage us to place doubt in their hadeeth Let me quote the narrations again: Abu Abdullah (asws) said: Do not belie the Hadeeth, whether it comes to you by (way of) the Murjiites, or the Qadiriyya, or the Harouriya, if it is referred to us (asws), for you do not know perhaps therein is something from the Truth, otherwise you would end up belying Allah (azwj) on top of His (azwj) Throne. [Source: Al Mahaasin V1 Bk 5 H 175] Al Safar narrated from Muhammad son of Al Hussein from Muhammad son of Ismael from Hamza son of Bazee from Ali AlSinany from Abi Al Hassan (as) that he (as) wrote to him in a letter “Do not say to what has been mentioned by us Baatil(false/void) even if you know that it is the opposite, you do not know why we have said it and on what face and description.” [Source: Basaer AlDarajat Muhammad son of AlHassan AlSafar p.558/AlKafi v.8 p.25/Bihar Al Anwar v.2 p.209] --------------------------------------------------------------- Then we go to the Qur'anic verse which you mentioned: O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful. [49:6] I've already mentioned earlier, that I agree that we must investigate into the report, but that is irrespective of whether the narrator is fasiq or not (according to other ahadith of the Imams which i mentioned before). IMPORTANT POINT: THE VERSE DOESN'T SAY TO INVESTIGATE INTO THE PROFILE OF THE NARRATORS. In addition, there is no tafsir of the above verse from the masumeen [as] linking it to the promotion of ilm al-rijaal. And how are we supposed to know who the people of khibra are? People who do follow a marja usually pick for themselves based on their personal preferences. If it was so clear to these 'experts' then they would all come to the same conclusion. But today, there are a variety of different marjas and each one essentially claiming to be the most knowledgeable one. Also did the Imams (as) ever mention that we must follow the most knowledgeable marja? It is impossible for people to identify a person who is all together pious, trustworthy and the most learned. Even Prophet musa (as), when charged with identifying pious men, ended up selecting hypocrites! How then can ordinary Shias or so-called 'experts' identify a perfect mujtahid? No one has the right to issue fatwa, not even a mujtahid or a faqih. Only Qur'an or hadith must be presented. Abu Ja’far (as) said (in a reply to arriving at a best judgement-fatwa): If you get it right you will get no reward for it, but if you get it wrong you will have ascribed a lie to Allah (azwj). — Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, Wasail ul Shia H. 33185 I said to Abu Jafar (as): “Matters get referred to us whose existence we do not find in the Book and the Sunnah, and we speak on them by opinion’. Imam (as) said: “If you get it right you will get no reward for it, and if you make a mistake you will have forged a lie against Allah (azwj). [Reference: Wasail ul Shia, H. 33185] In other words, people who issue fatwas will either get no reward or get punished for issuing a wrong one You don't even know the sources of the fatwa for crying out loud! and the mujtahid himself is never sure of his judgement. Don't they themselves write: 'Wallahu alim bil thawaab'? The marja shouldn't say anything of his own opinion, but should only narrate from the Qur'an or hadeeth. Anyone who issues his own fatwas (personal opinions) is following his low desires. He has violated the limits set by Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى who is the only original source of Shariah. One thing i have noticed throughout this entire discussion so far: You brought zero evidences from the Qur'an (apart from the one verse we are discussing) and ahadeeth for your various claims. On the contrast I have brought many ahadeeth in support of my stance. Everything you've stated is bases on mere speculation so far: e.g. That a faqih is equivalent to a mujtahid, that fatwas are in accordance with ahadeeth, justifying the use of ilm al rijaal without proof, claiming only mujtahids can issue fatwas (when in reality no one can)
  8. And I've already mentioned that based on the teachings of ahlulbayt (as), we can't 'weaken' (as you put it) or reject hadith on the basis of Ilm al rijaal. We can only reject hadith if it goes against Qur'an or against other well established hadith. We cannot apply man made methods on the ahadith. Well it would be better to accept these narrations and make the rule of haraam based upon it because that what they say. As I've mentioned before, even if they turn out to be wrong, then there would be no consequence for it as the ahadeeth are hujjah (proof) upon us and we would have done our duty in terms of adhering to the ahadeeth, in contrast to adhering to a baseless fatwa. Otherwise, 1000s of Shias who are getting tattoos done (even though the ahadeeth have condemned them) will all be held accountable and even more, the greater sin would be upon those marjas who declared such things as halal! The rule in Islam, is that it is better to refrain from something that is doubtful at the very least, so the marajas should have atleast made the rule to refrain from doing such things rather than just outright declaring them halal upon no basis whatsoever. Indirectly that's exactly what they are doing, rejecting them. Not acting upon ahadith which are clear and using their own man made tools to say they aren't satisfied with them. These man made systems are not based upon any sort of evidence or ahadeeth. Simply saying they are aql principles or usooli principles suggests they are making their own stuff up as it suits them. Aql and intellect is very important generally speaking, but not when determining matters of Islamic shariat! A true faqih (one who narrates ahadith) will not use tools other than what the Holy Prophet (saws) left behind Well firstly, we don't even know what their fatwas are based on as many maraja' have contradicting opinions on many issues. Secondly, they are not narrating hadith as has been commanded by Imam mahdi (as). Thirdly, they have devised their own methods which is totally wrong. In regards to following the A'lam (most learned) - I've pondered alot over this concept which I have concluded makes no sense. If someone is to believe that one marja is more knowledgeble than another marja, they must have enough knowledge themselves to justly deduce that. For example, if someone had to pick between Sistani or Shirazi or Khamenei, as a layman how could someone know who knows more about tashayu'!!?? This is such flawed reasoning. Of course, Sistani isn't going to come out and blatantly state that 'This is halal in opposition to the hadiths'. He's done that already indirectly; not just the ruling on tattoos but also other rulings! With absolutely no ahadith supporting his fatwas. Other marjas may have differed with him too on these matters. When I emailed the office of sistani in london in regards to some questions years back (when i used to do blind taqleed), I asked for evidence and i was given nothing! Only then to realise that the risalahs actually state we are not supposed to demand evidences from them. Not strong according to their man-made methods, yeah sure, but I do not agree with that and I will come out and quote the ahadiths which state it is haraam, unless one can give evidence to suggest otherwise. Therefore, tattoos are haraam and at best, it is a confusing matter, and the guidelines of the Imams (as) is to hold back in such matters: Abu Abd Allah (asws) said: ‘Holding back in confusing matters is better than falling into destruction. For every truth there is a reality, and on all correctness there is a light. Whatsoever is in agreement with the Book of Allah azwj, take it, and whatsoever is against the Book of Allah azwj, leave it’. [Source: H33368 Wasail us Shia] In many matters it maybe futile to determine ultimate verdict whether it is haram or halal, rather if we come to know that Imam disliked an act (even if they didn't say it is forbidden) then it is enough for us to refrain from it out of love and obedience to them. This is what Agha sistani should have advised people! The Shias also need to understand that for many matters we need to wait for re-appearance of the Imam so we can ask him for clarification. Until then we simply pause. If these so called "marjas" have ready answers and fatwas for every question placed before them, then why are their followers praying for re-appearance of the Imam?
  9. I understand you've made it clear from your understanding, but declaring it weak technically does mean rejecting it. If they weren't rejecting it, then they would quote the narrations to suggest tattoos are haraam or highly discouraged at the very least. Well the only reason why they say it isn't the words of the Imams (as) is due to applying the man made criteria. Yes faqih means jurist, who issues only a verse of the Qur'an or hadith, not their own fatawa. One who issues a fatwa in the absence of hadith, related to any islamic issue cannot be a true faqih, since they attempt to extract the meanings of Islamic rulings while employing the man-made system of Ijtihad, which consists of the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Ijmah and 'Aql, whereas a true faqih only uses what the Prophet (saws) left behind, i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah. What methods exactly? So now Agha sistanis methods are different from the others? How do we know which ones are correct? Especially so when there are contradictions between the marjas themselves. There is no proof to suggest that their fatwas are in line with the ahadith of ahlulbayt (as). Firstly, bllind taqleed of a non-ma'soom is haraam and tantamount to shirk. The main issue is that they are issuing fatwas with the absence of Qu'ran and hadith (i.e. without true knowledge). Infact a true order from Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى can only be a verse of the Qur'an or a hadith. Again, the narrations are clear in declaring tattoos are haraam so why would they still declare it halal!? Saying that the hadiths aren't 'strong' enough according to man-made principles and then issuing a fatwa in complete opposite to what the narrations state is tantamount to rejecting the ahadith themselves, I see no difference here!
  10. Yes I agree, the Qur'an does say that. Let's quote the verse again to make it clear: O you who have faith! If a fasiq (evil-doer, profligate person) should bring you some news, verify it, lest you should visit [harm] on some people out of ignorance, and then become regretful for what you have done. [Surah Hujurat, 49:6] Reading this ayah carefully, it is actually opposed to the concept of ilm al rijaal. This verse asks to investigate the report even when the narrator known to be an evil-person, because there is a chance that it could come from the Imams (as). It is NOT asking us to evaluate the profile of the reporter. In other words, to not to reject a report even if it's from an evil person. However, the principle of Ilm al rijaal dictates we reject the narration if there are unjust people in the chain. A clever tactic used by the perpetrators who initiated the false concepts Taqleed and Ijtihad in the Shia school. They wanted to deter people away from ahadith and get a stronghold on the shia community, so the ilm al rijaal was a good invention by them! The marjas are not equivalent to fuqaha by the way. Fuqaha are people who narrate ahadith, marajas do not do this - they issue their own fatwas based on no evidence. You said 'they don't reject the hadith because they fear attributing a lie to the Imam (as), unless there is proof it is mawdhoo (fabricated), but at the same time nor do they accept it in the realm of Fiqh and declare halal or haram by it unless there is sufficient evidence that this is the word of the Imam (as)." My comment: But many of them have declared it halaal without any evidences! Whilst there are sufficient evidences to suggest that tattoos are haraam, yet why have they still declared it halal? Why don't they accept it? Especially when the hadiths are so clear and are in conformity with the principles of hadith outlined by the ma'sumeen [as]. You tell me yourself, if you found the fatwa of a marja to be in direct contradiction to the hadith, would you follow the fatwa or the hadith? The only way that they could declare tattoos halal is if there are other conflicting narrations which say it's halal, but there aren't any! So why should I be in doubt? Even for the sake of argument, let's say the narrations cannot be verified by other supporting narrations, then it doesn't mean one can reject it based on man-mad principles like ilm al rijaal. Who decides if a person is fasiq or not? You are telling me you will reject a narration simply because the matter isn't clearly mentioned in the Holy Qur'an according to your understanding? That can be applied to quite a few things! Below is a clear ahadith where we should only Act/say in Accordance with hadith, even if the matter isn't clearly mentioned in the Qur'an! ] 44461 ] سعيد بن هبة هللا الراوندي في ) رسالته ( التي ألفها في أحوال أحاديث أصنحابنا وإثبنات صنحتها ، عن محمد ، وعلي ابني علي بن عبد الصمد ، عن أبيهما ، عن أبي البركات علي بنن الحسنين ، عنن أبني جعفنر ابن بابويه ، عن أبيه ، عن سعد بن عبدهللا ، عن أيوب بن نوح ، عن محمد ابنن أبني عمينر ، عنن عبند النرحمن بن أبي عبدهللا ، قال : قال الصادق ) عليه السالم ( : إذا ورد عليكم حديثان مختلفان فاعرضوهما على كتاب هللا ، فما وافنق كتناب هللا فخنذوه ، ومنا خنالف كتناب هللا فنردوه ، فنان لنم تجندوهما فني كتناب هللا فاعرضنوهما علنى أخبار العامة ، فما وافق أخبارهم فذروه ، وما خالف أخبارهم فخذوه . H 33362 – Saeed Bin Habtullah Al Rawandy in his letter which he has written the conditions of the Hadith of our companions and established their strength, from Muhammad, and Ali Bin Abdul Samad, from their fathers, from Abu Al-Barkat Ali Bin Al Husayn, from Abu Ja’far Ibn Babuwayh, from his father, from Sa’d Bin Abdullah, from Ayoub Bin Nuh, from Muhammad Ibn Abu Umeyr, from Abdul Rahman Bin Abu Abd Allah who says: Al-Sadiq [asws] said: ‘If two differing Ahadith get referred to you then present both of them to the Book of Allah [azwj]. If they are in agreement with the Book of Allah [azwj], take them, and if they are against the Book of Allah [azwj] leave them. If you do not find about them in the Book of Allah [azwj], present them both to the Ahadith of the generality of the Muslims, whatever is in agreement with what they transmit leave it, and whatever goes against their narrations, take it’. As you can see, even if the subject of the narrations aren't mentioned directly in the Qur'an, we must still refer them to other narrations on this matter. As far as I'm aware, I've only ever come across narrations (in quite a few sources) which condemn tattoos and not those which deem it permissible, therefore there remains no doubt about the matter. Anyways so far on this subject I've come to the following conclusion: 1. The hadiths found in many sources of Shia hadith (both primary and secondary) clearly condemn the practice of tattoos 2. There are no conflicting narrations on this subject 3. We must adhere to the hadiths of the ma'sumeen [as] for rejecting them is tantamount to rejecting Allah's orders 4. We must look into all reports (irrespective if narrated by a righteous person and a fasiq) according to the Qur'an 49:6 and hadith of Imam sadiq (as) & compare them all with the Qur'an and other ahadith
  11. Another hadith against Ilm al-rijaal: Abu Abdullah (asws) said: Do not belie the Hadeeth, whether it comes to you by (way of) the Murjiites, or the Qadiriyya, or the Harouriya, if it is referred to us (asws), for you do not know perhaps therein is something from the Truth, otherwise you would end up belying Allah (azwj) on top of His (azwj) Throne. [Source: Al Mahaasin V1 Bk 5 H 175]
  12. Brother, it's technically the same thing. One can still say 'not proven' even though the hadiths are pretty clear on the issue, which is the same as rejecting or dismissing them. however as quoted above, the imams (as) have warned us not to dismiss their narrations so quickly. When the marjas 'weaken' narrations, it is usually due to ilm al rijaal, which is not a valid criteria for determining the correctness of a hadith. As stated before, if one were to apply ilm-e-rijaal to Shia collections of hadith, then most of them would be 'weak' according to this standard. In regards to the subject (on tattoos), the narrations are pretty clear on this issue; they are haraam, unless one can prove otherwise, the hadiths are proof upon us so one should and is better off sticking to the hadith rather than disputing them. Mind you, the hadiths that forbid tattoos in shia sources, even in primary ones like in Al-Kafi, can also be found in sunni sources. In the hadith, there is guidance and a hujjah (proof) upon us. Even if we misunderstand the meaning of the hadith, because we followed that which was hujjah, we have a legitimate excuse and are off the hook, whereas the same cannot be said for weakening a hadith based upon man made criteria.
  13. But there are clear references for the narrations and we must act upon them. We cannot just reject them, which is tantamount to rejecting the orders of the Aimmah (as). If the hadith, with sanad and reference is quoted then we must take it on face value and accept it. Even for sake of argument if it's a wrong narration or wrong reference, then we will not be punished for that because we will have fulfilled our duty on acting with accordance with the divine command. Unless one can provide other conflicting narrations in this regard, then it is obligatory to act upon these ahadith above. The Imams (as) have also explained that verse of the Qur'an, which makes it clear we must investigate irrespective if a person is righteous or immoral. Abu Abdillah (as) said:"O Muhammad, whatever comes to you in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that agrees with the Quran, then take hold of it. And whatever comes to in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that contradicts the Quran, then do not take hold of it." It's strange how people will easily reject a narration (because it goes against what they believe) but will blindly accept a fatwa without any evidences for it. According to the following hadith we are not allowed to just reject a narration attributed to an Imam (as): حدثنا محمد بن الحسين عن محمد بن اسماعيل عن حمزة بن بزيع عن على السنانى عن ابى الحسن ع انه كتب إليه في رسالة ولا تقل لما بلغك عنا أو نسب الينا هذا باطل وان كنت تعرفه خلافه فانك لا تدري لم قلنا وعلى أي وجه وصفة. Muhammad b. al-Husayn narrated to us from Muhammad b. Isma`il from Hamza b. Bazi from Ali the as-Sinani from Abu ‘l-Hasan (as) that he wrote to him in an epistle, "And do not say for what reaches you from us and is attributed to us “this is false” even if you have known its opposite, for verily you do not know why we said (it) and upon which aspect and attribute." [Source: Basair Al-Darajat Pg. 538] According to the following hadith, one who chooses not to refer to the aimmah (as) will be counted as a mushrik: وباالسناد عن يونس، عن داود بن فرقد، عن حسان الجمال، عن عميرة، عن أبي عبد هللا )عليه السالم( قال: امر الناس بمعرفتنا والرد إلينا والتسليم لنا ثم قال: وإن صاموا وصلوا وشهدوا أن ال إله إال هللا، وجعلوا في أنفسهم أن ال يردوا إلينا، كانوا بذلك مشركين It is narrated from Yunus from Dawood Bin Farqad from Hisan Al amaal from Ameer from Abu Abdullah [asws] that: ‘The affairs of the people are on recognising us and referring to us and accepting us.’ Then he said: ‘And if they were to observe fast and pray and bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and if they have it in their hearts that they will not refer to us, then they will be among the ‘Mushrikeen’ (polytheists).
  14. Astaghfirullah. Rejecting even one hadith just like that (especially using a man-made method) is equivalent to rejecting the orders of ahlulbayt (as). We may only suspect a narration if it is in conflict with the book of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and other narrations. Another side note: If we apply Ilm-e-rijaal on Shia collections of hadith, then we will come to find that most of them are weak according to this false method! وعنه عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علي بن الحكم، عن حسان أبي علي عن أبي عبد هللا )عليه السالم( - في حديث - قال: حسبكم أن تقولوا ما نقول، وتصمتوا عما نصمت، إنكم قد رأيتم أن هللا عز وجل لم يجعل ألحد في خالفنا خيرا And it is reported from Ahmad Bin Muhammad, from Ali Bin Al Hakam, from Hisaan Abu Ali from Abu Abd Allah (as) in a Hadith that: ‘It is sufficient for you that you should say that which we say, and observe silence in that in which we keep silent, as you have seen that Allahazwj has not kept any good in any of our adversaries. [44164 ] أحمد بن أبي عبدهللا البرقي في ) المحاسن ( عن أبيه ، عن النضر بن سويد ، عن يحيى بن عمران الحلبي ، عن عبدهللا بن مسكان ، عن أبي بصير ، قال : قلت ألبي عبدهللا ) عليه السالم ( : أرأيت الراد على هذا االمر كالراد عليكم ؟ فقال : يا با محمد من رد عليك هذا االمر فهو كالراد على رسول هللا ) صلى هللا عليه وآله ( . H 33463 – Ahmad Bin Abu Abd Allah Al Barqy in Al Mahasin from his father, from Al Nazar Bin Suweyd, from Yahya Bin Amran Al Halby, from Abdullah Bin Muskan, from Abu Baseer who said: ‘I said to Abu Abd Allah [asws], ‘Do you see the rejection of this order as if rejecting you?’ He [asws] said: ‘O Abu Muhammad! One who rejects this order (Hadith) to you has rejected the Messenger of Allah [saww]’
  15. Plus, let's say for the sake of argument that we are acting upon wrong narrations or those narrations which are wrongly referenced. Imam ali (as) has clarified this: Amir-ul-mu'mineen [as] said upon presenting our Hadith, you must mention the name of the person from whom you have originally heard it. Thus, if the Hadith is true then you will get the reward (for narrating it) but if it is false, then he will be held responsible for attributing a lie to us." The point here is that our intentions should be on following the divine commands of the ahlulbayt (as). We are bound to act upon a single hadith which is hujjah (proof) for us, but later on if we come across some conflicting narrations, then we may look further into this. Of course, it is our firm belief as shias that the Aimmah (as) never contradicted themselves or with the teachings of the Prophet (saws).
×
×
  • Create New...