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

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'hadith'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Religion Forums
    • General Islamic Discussion
    • Shia/Sunni Dialogue
    • Christianity/Judaism Dialogue
    • Atheism/Other Religions
    • Other Shia Sects
    • Jurisprudence/Laws
  • Other Forums
    • Politics/Current Events
    • Social/Family/Personal
    • Science/Health/Economics
    • Education/Careers
    • Off-Topic
    • Poetry and Art
    • Travel/Local Community
    • Guest Forum
  • Language Specific
    • Arabic / العَرَبِية
    • Farsi / فارسی
    • Urdu / اُردُو‎
    • Other languages [French / français, Spanish / español, Chinese / 汉语, Hindi / हिन्दी, etc.. ]
  • Site Support
    • Site Support/Feedback
    • Site FAQs
  • The Hadith Club's Topics
  • Food Club's Topics
  • Sports Club's Topics
  • Reverts to Islam's Topics
  • Travel Club's Topics
  • Mental Health/Psych Club's Topics
  • Arts, Crafts, DIY Club's Topics
  • The Premier League Club's Topics
  • Quit Smoking's Topics

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Facebook


Website URL


Yahoo


Skype


Location


Religion


Mood


Favorite Subjects

Found 229 results

  1. I have previously alluded to the existence of different view points among the Fuqaha in regards the level of use of Ilm al-Rijal in the Istinbat (derivation of Ahkam from the Adilla) process, the view point that has found itself in the forefront in recent years - thanks to the efforts of Sayyid al-Khoei has been the so-called 'Isnad-first Analysis', whereby, any Hadith whose Isnad does not meet Dirayah standards is cast off. Seeking to demonstrate alternative views, this is a short essay that attempts to describe Sayyid al-Burujerdi's Manhaj in Istinbat, and the role he gives to Ilm al-Rijal within it. Any questions and analysis is welcome. THE MANHAJ OF SAYYID AL-BURUJERDI IN ISTINBAT AND THE ROLE OF ILM AL-RIJAL WITHIN IT Based on what the Sayyid has written in relation to the utility of the solitary report (Khabar al-Wahid) for deriving Ahkam in his discussions concerning the principles of jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh), we discover that he propagates resorting to Isnad criticism [i.e. using Ilm al-Rijal] exclusively for cases where a real contradiction among the Akhbar has been identified and not otherwise. In other words, and if the point is to be reformulated, the use of Ilm al-Rijal is limited only to those cases where the harmonization of a seeming contradiction between the Akhbar by various legitimate means has failed [i.e. a real contradiction has been identified], even then, Ilm al-Rijal is just one tool to be used in a descending tiered process to overcome the quagmire and select the preferred set of Akhbar (i.e. to obtain the ruling from). Beyond theoretical espousal, we find that this methodology has been rigorously followed by the Sayyid throughout his derivation processes in practical jurisprudence, and that it can be characterized as going through four main stages: (i) The collection of relevant Akhbar on a problem, (ii) Identifying a seeming contradiction among them, (iii) Harmonization process, (iv) A descending tiered resolution process [i.e. only if the harmonization is unsuccessful]. A breakdown of these stages is as provided below: Initially, he collects all the Akhbar from the authoritative collections that relate in any way to the problem, thereafter, he identifies the presence of a seeming contradiction, after which, a harmonization process is carried out so as to resolve this seeming contradiction and unify the subject matter, if the harmonization process is unsuccessful - a real contradiction has been identified, as a consequence of which - resolution (Tarjih) [i.e. preferring one set of Akhbar, thereby, rejecting the other] due to the presence of a real contradiction becomes necessary. The Sayyid concentrates more of his effort in the harmonization process of the seeming contradiction since he believes that if this process is successful - it will mean that no Khabar has to be rejected (which is an inescapable outcome of the consequent resolution stage), thus he always prefers harmonization over resolution. Some concepts used in the harmonization process include: indicators of Taqiyyah usage, indicators from rules of Arabic itself, indicators from Urf (conventional usage), Khass specifying A’mm, Nasikh overruling Mansukh, Takhsis within a Mutlaq Hukm, presence of Qayd within an overall Hukm, etc. Assuming that the harmonization process is unsuccessful in untying the seeming contradiction, there is no option but to acknowledge it as a real contradiction, and the rules of Tarjih are applied to select the preferred opinion. Below are the descending tiers in making Tarjih: I. Shuhra (popularity) of the prior Fatawa The set of Akhbar whose purport aligns with the Fatawa of the majority (especially of the Qudama) is preferred to the Akhbar that find no support or trace in their Fatawa. The assumption is that since the Qudama had access to more material than us, and that too in its primary form, their Fatawa in these cases have weight, and the Akhbar used by them to arrive at their Fatawa will definitely have more I’tibar than the conflicting set. This is without considering the Asanid of both sets of Akhbar and without comparing the respective conditions of the narrators of the two conflicting set of Akhbar i.e. it may turn out that most Fatawa were based on Dhaif Isnad Akhbar, but according to the Sayyid they are preferred over the conflicting Mu’tabar Isnad Akhbar, which are treated as Shadh. If there are enough Fatawa supporting both sets of Akhbar, and one cannot be held up as being Mashhur in terms of prior Fatawa, the next step is to compare the conflicting Akhbar in terms of their number and quality. II. Contextual superiority of one set of Akhbar over the other There are two ways in which one set of Akhbar can have contextual superiority over the other contradicting sets. First, in terms of a greater number of strands within that set, this numerical advantage points to a greater diffusion which could reflect a greater dependence. The set that is not supported by as many strands is considered a case of Tafarrud. Second, the set of Akhbar whose narrations have a better Matn preservation and are more elaborative in preserving the kernel of the matter (reflect historicity) is preferred to the Akhbar that indicate Idhtirab within their Mutun. If both sets have equivalent supporting strands and a relatively similar Matn quality, only then is last option for Tarjih [i.e. Ilm al-Rijal] used. III. Evaluations of the authors of Rijal books. It is only after the above two steps have not provided a resolution when Ilm al-Rijal is put into use, whereby, the Akhbar that have weaker Asanid in terms of the Rijal within them are rejected. The Sayyid maintains that there are degrees of weakness: 1. Tadhif by Ghulu of one or some of its narrators 2. Tadhif by Irsal [disconnection in the Sanad] 3. Tadhif by Jahalat al-Hal [narration of a Majhul – unknown] 4. Tadhif by Madhhab of the Ruwat. SOURCES: 1. al-Manhaj al-Rijaliy – Sayyid Muhammad Ridha al-Husayni al-Jalali 2. Nihaya al-Taqrir – Sayyid al-Burujerdi 3. al-Badr al-Zahir – Sayyid al-Burujerdi
  2. Salams everyone :) This is my first topic here and I was just wondering if you guys can shed some light on this issue. I am not a very superstitious person but I of course believe that there are some things you cannot answer or know the reasons for, that our religion guides us on. So today I heard from a friend about this hadith their family knew about and 'practiced' in order to keep 'evil' and 'misfortune' away. I would like to know if anyone can clarify where this comes from and whether it is validated within Islam....or whether its just superstition and old world tale. So basically, apparently they say that if you keep pet birds in the house it pushes away any tragedy that may occur in the house. A friend of mine was telling me how she used to own two pet birds who suddenly died one day....no signs or anything...they just died and were lying at the bottom of their cage. She said she was heartbroken about her pets both dying, but then noticed a crazy coincidence. An otherwise deadly accident was prevented in her household on that same day....something prevented that they could not explain how on earth it was prevented. Logic dictated that this tragedy would occur because no one was home to stop it. She claims that from hadiths she knew..... if you have birds in your house it keeps tragedy away and that is the reason nothing happened to her family but the birds died. I did not say anything but felt like this might be just plain superstition...but I would like to have that clarified. Like...it just sounds kind of insane :P Anyone hear about this sort of thing? Can anyone verify whether it is true or not? thanks!
  3. (bismillah) (salam) The following hadith is narrated by many Imams and is very important to be practiced. That is what Imam Al-Ridha (as) said: "Revive our cause; may Allah have mercy on one who revives our cause". When asked how to do that he said: "Keep our cause alive. May Allah have mercy on those who keep it alive by learning our sciences, and spreading them among the people. If they know that we call for the good they will follow us." source : 'yoen agbar al Ridha (s) - sheikh al saduuq- volume 2- page 275- hadith 69 hadith 69 : حدثنا عبد الواحد بن محمد بن عبدوس النيسابوري العطار رضي الله عنه قال: حدثنا علي بن محمد بن قتيبة النيسابوري عن حمدان بن سليمان عن عبد السلام بن صالح الهروي قال: سمعت أبا الحسن علي بن موسى الرضا عليه السلام يقول: رحم الله عبدا أحيا أمرنا فقلت له: وكيف يحيى أمركم؟ قال: يتعلم علومنا ويعلمها الناس فإن الناس لو علموا محاسن كلامنا لاتبعونا عيون أخبار الرضا (ع) - الشيخ الصدوق - ج ٢ - الصفحة ٢٧٥
  4. Assalamu Alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh In Shia Sunni dialogue we usually try to convince the other party with our proof. Sometimes though we do agree on a hadith or a verse tafsir but we will disagree on the conclusion. This is mostly because we both are following 2 different methodology in dealing with the proofs. One of these situations is the situation where Shia are asked to prove Imamh from Quran. There are many verses that Shia will interpret as a proof for Welayiah but Sunnis will reject that conclusion. The verse will not be the issue of disagreement, nor the hadith that carries its tafsir, we will be accepting both as authentic, yet we will disagree on the conclusion. The question is though, should we reject all hadiths that their meaning dose not fit with tha'hir alquran?( the superficial meaning of Quran)
  5. Are there any fabricated Shia hadiths? If so, can an example be given.
  6. (bismillah) (salam) I hope you are all in the best of health and, more importantly, Imaan. As I am sure most of you must have realised, the title of the thread is an excerpt from a Hadith which says something like, "If you receive a Hadith of mine that contradicts the Quran, throw it against the wall" (not the exact words), which, I believe, is found in both Shia and Sunni collections and gives us one of the fundamental principles in the grading of aHadith. My question about it is, since there are many Hadith that seem to contradict the Qur'an on face value but we still accept them due to an explanation behind them, the Hadith must explicitly contradict the Quran for it to be rejected based on this premise, what objective criteria is there in the science of Hadith to determine whether a Hadith contradicts the Qur'an or not? To name an example (which is what gave birth to this question in my mind), as those who might be reading the "Illegitimate Children and Heaven" thread may recall, there are many aHadith found in our books that list the characteristics of those who are born out of wedlock and while those like MacIsaac are arguing that the aHadith must be rejected because they go against the Adalah of Allah, others have given an explanation to these aHadith and while I do not agree with the explanation, it does muddy the waters because it is logical (now, I am not saying I agree with it because sometimes logical things can be immoral or wrong - you can kill 2 million in a war to save another 4 million but that may not be the right thing to do). To add to the problem, if anyone read Haydar's recent threads about some videos of Jonathan Brown about how our morality should confirm to our religion, and not the other way round, for those who wish to reject these aHadith, when there is an explanation to them, aren't you just imposing your own moral values in rejecting the aHadith? Because, it's not like the aHadith explicitly contradict the Qur'an in the manner I understand the principle states - i.e. the Qur'an says it is Wajib to eat X, while the Hadith says it is Haraam to do so. So, what objective criteria is there to know whether a hadith is contradicting the Qur'an or not and what explanation may make it palatable and which explanation should be rejected (if you use the example I gave, all the better).
  7. I was doing quick research on the path that Ahlu Sunnah sect took to gather their hadiths amid the plethora of hadiths that were narrated by Ahlulbayt. It is well accepted that Hadith documentation and teaching was forbidden in the times of the 3 Khulafa. A closer look though shows that this forbiddance was not absolute. The history shows a number of companions who went against this law, taught hadiths to other Muslims and confronted the authority with it. Shia school usually focuses on the Ahlulbayt contribution and role in those hard times and usually ignores the rest of the companions. A great number of Shia scholars reasoned this ban to be directed against Ahlulbayt specifically. Ibn Um Abd or Ibn Masoud is an intersting hadith narrator, he is not usually associated with the Shia of Imam Ali, but in the same time he had narrated many hadiths about Ahlulbayt. Some Shia scholars concluded from this that the 3 banned the hadith to cover their defeciency in knowledge. Ibn Masoud was the sixth Muslim man, he was among the earlist men who recited Quran loudly in Mekkah and was one of those who attended Bay'atulRidhwan. He was forced to saty in Madinah during Umar time by a direct order from Umar. Umar forced many Sahabah to stop spreading the hadith of prophet, some were leashed, some were imprisoned and others were exiled. Among them was Ibn Masoud who was forced to stay in Madinah. It is also important to note that during Abu Bakr rule and Umar rule, there were a number of Muslims who wrote hadiths despite the ban. These incidents appear discreatly in history books while mentioning the ban of hadith documentation. Some narrations will mention the burning of hadith books that were written during Umar time which tells that people did not stop writing the hadiths. Ibn Masoud is thought to be one amongst those who did not stop documenting the hadith. It is also important to note that we some narrations mention that Ibn Masoud himself destroyed a book of hadith that was speaking specifically about the merits of Ahlulbayt. Acouple of other narrations mention that Ibn Masoud had rarely narrated something from the prophet and when he dide he shivered and sweat. It is worth telling as well that by the time Uthman was the Khalifah, total hadith ban policy proved to be ineffective, Uthman and the Umayad rulers allowed certain set of hadiths to be taught to people most of which were hadiths related to fiqh that Umar had approved. I wonder if any Sunni here will have the gut to tell me how Ibn Masoud died? It was during Uthamn time .....Uthman did not like Ibn Masoud, he beat him ... Ibn Masoud passed away later.
  8. (salam) I often observed that Sunnis say to us in live chat rooms "Please do not paste your Shia hadith here. It is not allowed you might get ban". Same is the situation in real life whenever you refer any of Shia hadith or text the Sunnis will straightway reject it. The bias is so much that Sunnis have stopped their children from reading Shia books or even befriending with Shia children. Yes being muslim we are required to recite and read Quran first then we can research on other divine books like Bible, gospel etc. Because we have confidence that Islam is true religion and in order to convince others we need to read their books. Many Sunnis consider Shia to be outside of the fold of Islam then it is their obligation to preach true Islam to Shias but in this case their attitude is quite different than what is their attitude towards other non muslims (presuming Shia are non muslims). Is it not so because Sunni know by default that if Sunni children will read Shia books they will know the truth and might they convert to Shia because reason demands that a good person should be respected and followed and the bad should not be respected or followed while in Sunni Islam good and bad all should be followed.
  9. (bismillah) Abu Jafar Muhammad b. Sinan al-Zuhri is one of the most disputed narrators in Shi’i Rijal where many people say “he’s clearly weak” or “he’s clearly reliabile” or they just give up and take no opinion – treating him majhool. And I think it is rather silly to say that he, nor any companion or narrator, was just always 100% and we can see that there ups and downs for even some of our biggest companions like Yunus b. Abd al-Rahman and Zurara b. A`yun [ra], but they still come out on top. So I’m going put forward here most of the information regarding his weakening and authentication, then briefly discuss what I think about Muhammad b. Sinan. Indications of Weakening: Shaykh Mufid in Risalat al-Adadiyya said after he presented a narration with Muhammad b. Sinan in it: In this narration is Muhammad b. Sinan and he is accused, the sect has does differ in his being accused and weakness and that which is of his path is not acted upon in the religion. ومحمد بن سنان مطعون فيه ، لا تختلف العصابة في تهمته وضعفه ، وما كان هذا سبيله لايعمل عليه في الدين Najashi mentions in his entry: Ibn Uqda said : He narrates from al-Rida [as]…he has a well known Masa’il from him, and he is a very weak man, not relied upon, not turned to what he narrates singly. وقال أبوالعباس أحمد بن محمد بن سعيد ، إنه روى عن الرضا عليه السلام ، قال : وله مسائل عنه معروفة ، وهو رجل ضعيف جدا لا يعول عليه ، ولا يلتفت إلى ما تفرد به Najashi continues: …Safwan [b. Yahya] said: Verily this is Ibn Sinan he surely had in mind that he would fly* more than once so we cut him [down] until he was firmly with us. And this indicates his confusion that was and passed. ، وهذا يدل على اضطراب كان وزال فقال صفوان : إن هذا ابن سنان ، لقد هم أن يطير غير مرة ، فقصصناه حتى ثبت معنا *fly here is from يطير which was a metaphor for the Tayyara, a group of ghulaat. Najashi says in the entry of Miyaah al-Mada’ini: …and its path is the weakest from them and he is Muhammad b. Sinan وطريقها أضعف منها ، وهو محمد بن سنان Tusi in al-Fihirist: He was has been attacked/accused and weakened وقد طعن عليه وضعف Tusi in his Rijal mentioned him among the companions of al-Kazhim [as] and al-Rida [as] and weakened من أصحاب الرضا عليه السلام(7)، قائلا : " محمد بن سنان ، ضعيف " . Tusi in al-Istibsaar brining forward a narration with Muhammad b. Sinan in the chain, he said: In the path of this narration is Muhammad b. Sinan…and Muhammad b. Sinan is accused, very weak, and he is not proceeded independently by his narration and and not joined with him in it other than him not acting upon it. محمد بن سنان : مطعون عليه ، ضعيف جدا ، وما يستبد بروايته ولا يشركه فيه غيره لايعمل عليه Kashi: Hamduway: I wrote the sayings of Muhammad b. Sinan from Ayub b. Nuh and he said: I do not deem it permissible that I narrate the sayings of Muhammad b. Sinan. وقال الكشي(245): " قال حمدويه : كتبت أحاديث محمد بن سنان ، عن أيوب بن نوح ، وقال : لاأستحل أن أروي أحاديث محمد بن سنان " . Kashi: A notebook was presented to Ayub b. Nuh – in it the sayings of Muhammad b. Sinan – he said to us: If you wish to write that, then do so. For verily I wrote from Muhammad b. Sinan. However, I do not narrate a thing from it for you for he said before his death: Everything I have said to you was not with me by hearing, nor reporting, it was only that I found it. ذكر حمدويه بن نصير ، أن أيوب بن نوح دفع إليه دفترا فيه أحاديث محمد بن سنان ، فقال لنا : إن شئتم أن تكتبوا ذلك فافعلوا ، فإني كتبت عن محمد بن سنان ، ولا أروي لكم أنا عنه شيئا ، فإنه قال له محمد قبل موته : كلما أحدثكم به لم يكن لي سماعة ولا رواية ، إنما وجدته " . Kashi: Muhammad b. Masud [from] Abdullah b. Hamduwayh said: I heard al-Fadhl b. Shathan saying: I do not permit that I narrate the sayings of Muhammad b. Sinan. al-Fadhl mentioned in some of his books: From the famous liars is Ibn Sinan, and he is not Abdullah. [Abdullah b. Hamduwayh is Majhool] قال محمد بن مسعود : قال عبدالله بن حمدويه : سمعت الفضل بن شاذان يقول : لا أستحل أن أروي أحاديث محمد بن سنان ، وذكر الفضل في بعض كتبه ، أن من الكاذبين المشهورين ، ابن سنان ، وليس بعبد الله " . Kashi: Abu al-Hasan Ali b. Muhammad b. Qutayba al-Nisaburi said: Abu Muhammad al-Fadhl b. Shathan said: Remove from the sayings of Muhammad b. Sinan. And he said: I do not love (OR “I do not permit”) that you narrate the sayings of Muhammad b. Sinan from me while I am still alive. He permitted his narrations after his death. أبوالحسن علي بن محمد بن قتيبة النيسابوري ، قال : قال أبومحمد الفضل بن شاذان : ارووا(ردوا)أحاديث محمد بن سنان عني ، وقال : لا أحب (أحل)لكم أن ترووا أحاديث محمد بن سنان عني مادمت حيا ، وأذن في الرواية بعد موته " . Kashi mentions in the entry of al-Mufadhal b. Umar after mentioning a group of the Ghulat, he said: Muhammad b. Sinan is like that. Kashi: al-Fadhl b. Shathan mentioned in some of his books from the famous liars is Abu al-Khattab, Yunus b. Zhabyan, Yazid al-Sa’igh, Muhammad b. Sinan, and Abu Sameena is the most famous of them. وذكر فضل في بعض كتبه من الكذابين المشهورين ، أبوالخطاب ، ويونس بن ظبيان ، ويزيد الصائغ ، ومحمد بن سنان ، وأبوسمينة أشهرهم Ibn al-Ghada’iri said: Weak, exaggerator, he fabricates, he is not turned to. ضعيف غال ، يضع ، لايلتفت إليه Ibn al-Ghada’iri said in the entry of Tharih: Verily his path is weak because the owner of the book said: Muhammad b. Sinan narrated from Abdullah b. Jabalah al-Kanani from Tharih. He weakened this path due to Muhammad b. Sinan. قال في ترجمة ذريح : إن طريقه ضعيف ، لان صاحب الكتاب ، قال : وروى محمد بن سنان Ibn al-Ghada’iri said in the entry of Ziyad b. al-Munthir [Abu al-Jarud]: Our companions hate what Muhammad b. Sinan narrated from him. وأصحابنا يكرهون ما رواه محمد بن سنان عنه Indication of Strengthening: al-Mufid included him in al-Irshad from those who report the appointment of Abu al-Hasan al-Rida [as] from his father and that he is from his special ones and reliable ones, the people of godliness, knowledge, and jurisprudence his Shi`ah. عده ممن روى النص على الرضا عليه السلام من أبيه من خاصته وثقاته وأهل الورع ، والعلم والفقه من شيعته . Tusi in al-Ghayba includes him amongst the Praised Representatives and he presents in his favor a narration from Abu Jafar the Second [al-Jawad] (as). He is from the narrators of Tafseer al-Qummi (both sections of Tafseer Jarudi and Qummi] The most esteemed narrators narrate from him, like Ayub b. Nuh, al-Fadhl b. Shathan, Muhammad b. Isa b. Ubayd, Yunus b. Abu al-Rahman, Muhammad b. al-Husayn b. Abi al-Khattab, al-Hasan b. Said, al-Husayn b. Said, Safwan b. Yahya, Ibn Abi Najran, Ibrahim b. Hashim, Ahmad b. Idris, Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa, al-Hasan b. Ali b. Yaqteen, al-Hasan b. Mahbub, Ibn Fadhal, Hamza b. Yalaa, Salih b. Abi Hamad, Abdullah b. Salt, Ali b. Asbat, Ali b. al-Hakam, Ali b. Numan, Amr b. Uthman, Muhammad b. Abi al-Sahban, Muhammad b. Abd al-Jabbar, Yaqub b. Yazid, al-Wasaha’, and many more. Kashi: Muhammad b. Quluwayh said: Sad b. Abdullah said to me saying: Abu Jafar Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa reported to me from a man from Ali b. al-Husayn b. Dawud al-Qummi, he said: I heard Abu Jafar the Second (as) mention Safwa b. Yahya and Muhammad b. Sinan by the best. He said: Allah be pleased pleased with them by my pleasure with them. They never opposed me ever. This was after what came from him in them two of what I heard of him from our companions. وقال في(360): 1 " حدثني محمد بن قولويه ، قال : حدثني سعد بن عبدالله ، قال : حدثني أبوجعفر أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى ، عن رجل ، عن علي بن الحسين بن داود القمي ، قال : سمعت أبا جعفر الثاني عليه السلام يذكر صفوان بن يحيى ، ومحمد ابن سنان بخير ، وقال : رضي الله عنهما برضائي عنهما ، لا(فما)خالفاني قط ، هذا بعد ما جاء عنه فيهما ما قد سمعته من أصحابنا " Kashi narrates a hadith from Abi Talib Abdullah b. al-Salt al-Qummi, he said: I entered upon Abi Jafar the Second [al-Jawad] (as) during the last of his life then I heard him saying: May Allah reward Safwan b. Yahya, Muhammad b. Sinan, and Zakariyya b. Adam from me the best, for they surely were faithful to me. He didn’t mention Sad b. Sad. He said: So I exited then I met a gathering, so I said to them: Verily our Master mentioned Safwan, Muhammad b. Sinan, and Zakariyya b. Adam and they be rewarded the best, but he didn’t mentioned Sad b. Sad. He said: So I returned to him then he [al-Jawad (as)] said: May Allah reward Safwan b. Yahya, Muhammad b. Sinan, Zakariyya b. Adam, and Sad b. Sad for they surely were faithful to me. 2 " عن أبي طالب عبدالله بن الصلت القمي ، قال : دخلت على أبي جعفر الثاني عليه السلام في آخر عمره ، فسمعته يقول : جزى الله صفوان بن يحيى ، ومحمد بن سنان ، وزكريا بن آدم عني خيرا ، فقد وفوا لي ، ولم يذكر سعد بن سعد ، قال : فخرجت فلقيت موفقا ، فقلت له : إن مولاي ذكر صفوان ، ومحمد بن سنان وزكريا بن آدم ، وجزاهم خيرا ولم يذكر سعد بن سعد ، قال : فعدت إليه ، فقال : جزى الله صفوان بن يحيى ، ومحمد بن سنان ، وزكريا بن آدم ، وسعد بن سعد عني خيرا ، فقد وفوا لي " *It is apparent that al-Kashi is not narrating this by Wijada (he indicates when he does that) and that this narration is connected to the chain before and it is from the previous chain up to Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa [ra]. Saduq [ra] notes that Abdullah b. al-Salt al-Qummis came and met Ibn Isa narrating to him prolifically, and his narrations for him are known. It is on this basis ulemaa, such as al-Khui and others, have authenticated it. Muhammad b. Sinan was not removed from Nawadir al-Hikma, and he narrates in it repeatedly. He is from the Ma`arif – his narrations top a thousand times. This is indicative of his reliability, especially amongst the Qummis. Many narrations come from Muhammad b. Sinan himself that indicate his praise. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The objective of my post is not to sit here and nullify all of Muhammad b. Sinan’s indications of weakening or authentication and then say that the other remains so he’s therefore X. That is false way to understand this narrator and is highly simplistic – including playing the “weak sanad” game for these narrations. One will notice that there are very strong criticisms against Muhammad b. Sinan, but there is also very strong praises in his favor. What is most apparent from al-Najashi is that he is weakening him for his confusion in his beliefs and doctrine, as is evidenced from what is quoted above from Safwan. He also pulls forward what Ibn Uqda says about his weakness but he specifies his tafarrud (what comes from him alone). This point of tafarrud from the Qudama is common in their methodology regarding people of incorrect doctrine. Ibn al-Ghada’iri is also of similar case. Similarly with that al-Mufid brings forward about the sect not differing about him [except that they did] with him being “muttaham.” Muhammad b. Sinan is from among the close companions of giants of the Mathhab like Safwan b. Yahya and Ibn Abi Umayr, and his students are among them like Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa al-Ashari, his brother, and others from the giant list above. Yes, it is interesting to note that Ayub b. Nuh and al-Fadhl b. Shathan criticize him, even call him a liar, but then go on their merry way narrating his ahadeeth. Why is this happening? It is known that our Ancient scholars had many more books and resources of information than we do, even having the Source (Usool) books in their original forms and even their authors’ own handwriting to identify it. What has happened is that Muhammad b. Sinan was an Imami who became associated with the ghulaat, and was even drawn to them at some point in his life. Kashi and others mention that his narrations are found in the books of the ghulaat and that they ascribed many narrations with his name. Safwan [ra] recounts, as quoted Najashi above from Kashi’s Rijal, that Ibn Sinan had come near the ghulaat a few times, but he prevented this and that he was solidly with them upon correct doctrine and narrator status. Even then al-Najashi says that this phase of his passed and was no more. So when people like al-Najashi and Ibn al-Ghada’iri inspected all that was attributed to him, they had found things that were, according them, very incorrect and lies upon the Imams [as] from his association with the ghulaat, and they just went off on him due to this. If you’ll notice, all the criticism comes from Baghdadis and those famous for grading via narration inspection. The Qummis have never made a peep about him and they were extremists in dropping anyone who even had a whiff of Ghuluw in them. Saduq, Ibn al-Walid, AND Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa al-Ashari who was also the student of Safwan, Ibn Abi Umayr, and al-Bazanti [ra], took his narrations and continued to take from him and al-Ashari is even the one who is narrating the ahadeeth from the Imam [a] in his praise. But if these praises are coming from the Imam, why are people weakening him so much? Because the Qudama prioritized correct hadith over all else – so when they see someone with what they deem ghuluw and manakeer [denied things], that person is a weak liar. But for Muhammad b. Sinan, this was not the case across the board. We can see in Nawadir al-Hikma that they trusted Muhammad b. Sinan and his narrations due to repeated occurrence there (meaning this was not some sort of one-time he’s narrating a Sahih hadith – in terms of meaning – nor that he was some accident they forgot to remove). Keep in mind that Ibn al-Walid [ra] removed ghulaat from there even if he was narrating a sahih narration such as al-Hasan b. Ali b. Abi Uthman. Ibn Sinan is all over their books – in al-Kafi and al-Faqih which were given authentication by their authors. Someone narrating that much in all sorts of sections and places shows his being trusted by them. So Muhammad b. Sinan was criticized heavily due to his closeness to ghuluw at a time in his life and even being students of people who also were accused with ghuluw (like Mufadhl b. Umar and Dawud b. Kathir al-Riqqi) but they, too, have been trusted been praised by the Imam [as] directly and, again, the Qummis trusted and praised. These different camps of scholars all had varying methodologies in Ilm al-Rijal. For example, Ibn al-Ghada’iri mentions the hatred of Ibn Sinan’s narrations from Abu al-Jarud, but that chain is all over the 4 books and occurs many times in Nawadir al-Hikma. So Muhammad b. Sinan [ra] is thiqa and from those who are very close to the Imams [as], but he had entertained ideas of the ghulaat at some point and they had began to attribute things to him even after Safwan and the rest of the core companions of the Ta’ifa [ra] prevented him from deviating and going astray. And the icing on the cake to all this is what Allamah Muhammad Taqi al-Tustari [rh] says in Ibn Sinan’s entry in his Qamus al-Rijal: And [even] if you refuse his goodness in his self then his reports are established/reliable where verily al-Shaykh [al-Tusi] narrates his reports except that which is in it of exaggeration and confusion and similarly a congregation of the just and reliable from the people of knowledge…as has been mentioned from al-Kashi so there is no doubt that they narrated from him the sound without the wicked for they surely were extremely critical of reports. و إن أبيت عن حسنه في نفسه فأخباره معتبرة، حيث إن الشيخ في الفهرست روى أخباره إلّا ما كان فيها غلوّ أو تخليط و كذا روى عنه جمع من العدول و الثقات من أهل العلم، كيونس بن عبد الرحمن، و الحسين بن سعيد الأهوازي و أخيه، و الفضل بن شاذان و أبيه، و أيّوب بن نوح، و محمّد بن الحسين بن أبي الخطّاب و غيرهم كما مرّ عن الكشّي فلابدّ أنّهم رووا عنه السليم دون السقيم، فإنّهم كانوا نقّاد الآثار . al-Kulayni, al-Saduq, al-Tusi who compiled books of Mu`tabar ahadeeth, gave them their authentication, are full of his narrations that are correct, even if one wants to deny Muhammad b. Sinan’s reliability. All of what we have has come through al-Shaykh al-Tusi [ra], also. Allah knows best. في امان الله
  10. (bismillah) (salam) Just sharing some interesting hadith and news: ".........At that time Berbers shall fight with Abbaside rulers ..........They [berbers / Abbasides / Sufyani] shall have a severe battle in the center of the Jordan valley and 60000 men shall be killed, and as a result of this Sufyani would be victorious." [The Life of Imam al-Mahdi, Allama Baqir Sharif al-Qarashi] Berbers = criminal wahhabi mercenaries in Syria from Libya / Tunisia / Algeria (so called 'FSA') Abbaside rulers = autocratic rulers eg. Bashar al-Assad Sufyani = most likely Israeli Although the rest of the hadith is a bit confusing with the colours of their flags, but anyways there is some relevant news: "Syrian rebels seized a major air defense base Saturday in a strategic region in the south near the Jordanian border, the latest battlefield triumph for fighters seeking to topple President Bashar al-Assad, activists said. Fighters with a rebel group active in the south stormed the base, used by the 38th Division, after a 16-day siege, according to a statement posted on Web sites of the group known as the Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade. The base, near the village of Saida in Daraa province, is situated along the international highway linking the Syrian capital, Damascus, with Jordan. Fighting in Syria’s southern provinces bordering Jordan and Israel has escalated sharply in the past few days." [source] I wouldn't be surprised if there was more fighting in that region in the future to come~ اللهم عجل لوليك الفرج
  11. Salaam, First post ever on this site. I do taqleed of Ayatullah sistani, and know that according to him, a host should start eating first, and finish last (guessing because it is to put the guest at ease - which makes sense to me personally). This is all fine. I have tried doing this, and many occasions in cultures that I am around, they consider this rude. Does anyone have specific Hadiths from the Prophet (saw) or the Imams (as) which explicitly describe this action? Wassalaam
  12. Salaam Alaykum, Does anyone know of a Hadith which I believe is from our 4th Imam (as) narrating what differentiated truth from falsehood in the event of Ashura in Karbala? It went something like this: "Both camps were Muslims in Karbala but what differentiated truth from falsehood was that one camp believed in Ali (as) un-Waliullah". Thanks in advance
  13. "Does the koran teach to kill, tax or convert infidels as a general principle? Also does the Koran teach that in the last day trees will cry out there is a Jew behind me come and kill him?" The simple answer is NO. It does NOT, and anti-Islamic propagandists that claim Islam is spread by the sword or evil like Pastor Terry Jones need to have that planted in their thick brainless skulls. We often suffer from the lies and propaganda that the wahabis spread to degrade Shia Islam but we pay less attention to the bigger enemies that attack our holy prophet and noble Quran. At the same time ,the dajjal and liar Terry Jones and his Shayteen(devils) in his church and the likes of them are the people who the media narrowly focuses on to portray Islam to others, so it is our wajib(duty) to go out there and refute their baseless claims. Unfortunately, we do not show much effort to refute them , and the only reaction coming from Muslims in general that the western media focuses on is from the Wahabis, in which they respond to them in the most uncivilized and uneducated manner. Fortunately,however, one of our Shia western Imams went out in public and had an open dialogue with terry Jones on public television and entirely refuted his baseless claims. The Imam is Hassan Al-Quizin and he is the leader of the Islamic mosque of Dearborn , which is the largest mosque in all of North America. Here is the video below showing how Imam Quizini destroyed Terry Jones. This also an article from a Sunni website refuting the idea that Islam is spread by the sword and gives a detailed answer to the question I wrote in italics above. It also explains how some of the verses in the Quran that mentions kuffar, jews and Christians can easily be misinterpreted. http://spa.qibla.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=9801&CATE=1427 I personally like this Sunni website. They are purely anti-wahabi and salafi. Plus they believe in unity with the Shias as well. Here are answers from their websites expressing their opinions on the Shias. http://spa.qibla.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=9787&CATE=24 http://spa.qibla.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=13662&CATE=1
  14. (salam) How authentic and sound are the narrations of our hadith compared to the 6 books of Sunnism (Bukhari muslim)? Our Sunni brethren argue that the hadith books that we refer to are a bunch of fabricated myths and stories. They say that the narrations are not very sound and that none of them root back to the prophet through a solid continuous chain of narrators. Do their scholars actually spend years to study our hadith like our scholars do in Hawza? I doubt that they do but how can this claim be refuted? I find this issue with hadith very hard to refute because I have limited knowledge on the basics of the science of Hadith (ilm al hadith) and the science of narrators(ilm al rejal). What do you guys think?
  15. Salaam alaykum, Does anyone have any sahih/authentic hadith in regards to the benefits & responsibility/duty of a person to attend an Islamic Seminary/hawza? Much appreciated (please provide the sources.)
  16. A salaamo alakum - Brothers and sisters! I'm a new member to this forum, altought ive been lurking around here for a month now and by the end i couldt refuse not to create an account! It contains alot of knowledge and i'm more than happy to join this site! But as it is my first topic i got some questions. My father brought me this ring from Iraq when he went for ziarat for a month. I couldt join him cause of school absent if i dont attend classes. Its this beautiful ring - Durr e najaf :) So my question is as following. Is it haram to pray with a ring that isnt made of silver? (This ring is pure silver though) because i was praying before with an fake ring. What benefits does it have to wear durr e najaf? (Salah for example) Is there any hadiths or surah in quran describing these rings of ahlul bayt (as) Thats it for now! Thank you very much, and i'm looking forward for more years on this forum and more knowledge to learn!
  17. (bismillah) One the various compilation that our Qudamaa’ [ra] put to gether, one of the most interesting ones, to me, is Qurb al-Isnad by `Abdullah b. Jafar al-Himyari [ra]. A famous thiqa scholar who’s trustworthiness and knowledge is undoubted. His book is narrated from by the 3 Muhammads [as] in their large compilations. However, upon the majority, the book form that has reached us is not reliable in its tareeq or it’s contents Majalisi included in Bihar. However, the tareeq of Sh. Hurr al-Amili to the book is reliable and he has included many narrations from the book in Wasaa’il al-Shi`ah. Therefore, the `ulemaa’ take into consideration the book’s narrations as found in Wasaa’il. One of the usool books that Himyari [ra] relies on heavily in his book is the Masaa’il of `Ali b. Jafar b. Muhammad al-`Alawi al-Uraydi [ra], the son of al-Sadiq [as] and brother al-Kathim [as] – he is thiqa as mentioned by Tusi in his Fihirist. His book is where he asks his brother [as] questions and he answers them. This masaa’il is also no reliable in its sanad as it is found in Bihar. But Himyari has a different tareeq and it is not related to what Majalisi compiled. This is the only one book he had and that was narrated from. The tareeq of al-Himyari [ra] as found in Qurb is the following, always: حدثنا عبد الله بن الحسن العلوي، عن جده علي بن جعفر قال: سألت أخي موسى بن جعفر عليه السلام `Abdullah b. al-Hasan al-`Alawi narrated to us from his grandfather `Ali b. Ja`far, he said: I asked my brother Musa b. Ja`far [as]… Unfortunately, this tareeq is weak because the intermediary between al-Himyari [as] and the Masaa’il, Abdullah b. al-Hasan, is majhool – very majhool. So it unfortunately would make everything al-Himyari [ra] takes from this Masaa’il as unreliable (this is if we put aside ideas like shuhra of the book and other reasons to accept it). However, if we examine al-Tusi’s [ra] turuq to the Masaa’il of `Ali b. Jafar in his Fihrist, we discover that al-Himyari [ra] received the book from another tareeq: ورواه أبو جعفر محمد بن علي بن الحسين بن بابويه، عن ابيه، عن سعد والحميري واحمد بن ادريس وعلي بن موسى، عن احمد بن محمد، عن موسى بن القاسم البجلي، عنه. And Abu Ja`far Muhammad b. Ali b. al-Husayn b. Babuwayh [al-Saduq] narrated it from his father from Sa`d & al-Himyari & Ahmad b. Idris & Ali b. Musa from Ahmad b. Muhammad from Musa b. al-Qasim al-Bijli from him. This tareeq is saheeh. So we see that al-Himyari [ra] has a parallel chain running along with whatever he narrates through Abduallah b. al-Hasan, he also has from this tareeq which is saheeh. Why would he list this tareeq instead of the Saheeh one? Well, putting aside that rijal/dirayah was not always their goal, the point of Qurb al-Isnad (as evidence from his title, “Nearness of the Chain”) is to have the shortest chains possible. So the chain with the majhool grandson is shorter because then al-Himyari [ra] has one intermediary between him and the Masaa’il rather than 2. Therefore, everything al-Himyari [ra] narrates from the Masaa’il in Qurb al-Isnad, upon accepting this argument, is saheeh. والله أعلم All mistakes are my own and all guidance and correct information is from Allah [swt]. في امان الله
  18. (bismillah) Nawadir al-Hikmah was a mashhoor and reliable book compiled by the esteemed Qummi Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya al-Ash`ari. This is his tarjima in Najashi’s Fihirist: محمد بن أحمد بن يحيى بن عمران بن عبد الله بن سعد بن مالك الاشعري القمي أبو جعفر، كان ثقة في الحديث. إلا أن أصحابنا قالوا: كان يروي عن الضعفاء ويعتمد المراسيل ولا يبالى عمن أخذ وما عليه في نفسه مطعن في شئ وكان محمد بن الحسن بن الوليد يستثنى من رواية محمد بن أحمد بن يحيى ما رواه عن Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya b. Imra b. Abdullah b. Sa`d b. Maalik al-Ash`ari al-Qummi, Abu Ja`far, He was reliable in hadith except that our companions said: He was narrating from dhu`afaa’ (weak narrators) and he was depending on maraseel and he did not care from whom he took from and there no accusations against him personally in anything. And Ibn al-Waleed excised from Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Yahya’s narrations that which he narrated from… Then Najashi proceeds to give the list of persons that Ibn al-Waleed removed from Nawadir al-Hikmah, here is the list: Muhammad b. Musa al-Hamadani “A man” “Some of our Companions” Muhamamd b. Yahya al-Mu`aadhi Abi `Abdillah al-Razi al-Jaamoorani Abi `Abdillah al-Sayyari Yusuf b. al-Sakht Wahb b. Manbah Abi `Ali al-Nishaburi Abi Yahya al-Wasiti Muhammad b. Abi `Ali, Abu Sameena “In a hadith” “A book” and he didn’t bring it forward Sahl b. Ziyad al-Aadami Muhammad b. Isa b. Ubayd through a broken chain Ahmad b. Hilal Musa b. Ali al-Hamadani `Abdullah b. Muhammad al-Shami `Abdullah b. Ahmad al-Razi Ahmad b. al-Husayn b. Sa`eed Ahmad b. Basheer al-Raqqi Muhammad b. Harun Mamuwayh b. Ma`roof Muhammad b. `Abdullah b. Mahraan al-Hasan b. a-Husayn al-Lu’lui’s lone narrations Ja`far b. Muhammad b. Malik Yusuf b. al-Haarith `Abdullah b. Muhammad al-Dimishqi al-Tusi pretty much says the same thing in the tarjima, quotes Saduq [ra], he has 1 extra name on that list: al-Haytham b. `Addi Najashi goes on to say that Abul `Abbas b. Nuh – one of his big Mashayikh – and Saduq agreed with Ibn al-Waleed in this and follow him on it, except Ibn Nuh disputed Muhammad b. `Isa b. `Ubayd and “does not know what he [ibn al-Waleed] saw in him” because according to Ibn Nuh is upon “clear `adalah and withaqah.” The mashhoor opinion is that everyone who was removed from Nawadir by Ibn al-Waleed [ra] is weak, arguments say that due to what Ibn Nuh [ra] is disputing about al-`Ubaydi and that they mention this removal in the taraajim of weakened narrators, it shows that they were weak in the eyes of Ibn al-Waleed. However, it is arguable to say that this isn't necessarily true and that some of these people are just majhool. Firstly, al-`Ubaydi’s removal and weakening is found in other places in Saduq’s works, quoting Ibn al-Waleed as well, so his tadheef is not solely relied upon here. They explicitly call him weak, also. Some of the Excised individuals, who are indeed weakened, have no mention of this excision as part of that weakening, for example: Najashi on Ahmad b. Hilal: أحمد بن هلال أبو جعفر العبرتائي صالح الرواية، يعرف منها وينكر، وقد روى فيه ذموم من سيدنا أبى محمد العسكري عليه السلام. ولا أعرف له إلا كتاب يوم وليلة، وكتاب نوادر ... قال أبو علي بن همام: ولد أحمد بن هلال سنة ثمانين ومائة ومات سنة سبع و ستين ومائتين Ahmad b. Hilal, Abu Jafar al-`Ibartaa’I, Righteous narration, some from them are recognized and some rejected and it is narrated regarding him defaming from Our Master Abi Muhammad al-`Askari [ra] and I do not know of his except the Book of A Day and a Night and a Book of Nawadir…[chains to books]… Abu `Ali b. Hamaam said: Ahmad b. Hilal was born in the year 186 and died in the year 267. أحمد بن محمد بن سيار أبو عبد الله الكاتب، بصري، كان من كتاب ال طاهر في زمن أبي محمد عليه السلام. ويعرف بالسياري، ضعيف الحديث، فاسد المذهب، ذكر ذلك لنا الحسين بن عبيدالله. مجفو الرواية، كثير المراسيل... إلا ما كان من غلو وتخليط. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Sayyaar, Abu `Abdullah, the Correspondent, Basran, He was from the book of Aali Taahir in the time of Abi Muhammad [as] and he is known by al-Sayyari, weak hadith, deviant sect, al-Husayn b. Ubaydallah mentioned to us rough narration(?) and many maraseel… [chains to books]…[receiving them] except what was from exaggerations and confusion. These are the two examples I’m showing for brevity. Tusi mentions Ibn Hilal as well (nothing in Fihirist, as a ghali in his Rijal) but no reference to Nawadir. He makes comment elsewhere about not taking his infiraad, but that’s what the Qudama did regarding people of non-Imami mathhab. He says almost verbatim the same thing about al-Sayyari in his fihirist, nothing about him in Rijal. Some people, they actually strengthen, aside from those Tusi references himself as a disagreement. Najashi محمد بن علي بن إبراهيم بن محمد الهمداني روى عن أبيه عن جده عن الرضا عليه السلام. وروى إبراهيم بن هاشم، عن إبراهيم بن محمد الهمذاني، عن الرضا عليه السلام... وكيل الناحية، و أبوه وكيل الناحية، وجده علي وكيل الناحية، وجد أبيه إبراهيم بن محمد وكيل [ الناحية] Muhammad b. Ali b. Ibrahim b. Muhammad al-Hamadani, narrated fromhis father from his grandfather from al-Rida [as]. And narrated Ibrahim b. Hashim from Ibrahim . Muhammad al-Hamadani from Rida [as]… Wakeel of the locality [for the Imam], his father was a wakeel and his gradfather, and his father’s grandfather was a wakeel. So Najashi makes no reference to this narrator's removal from Nawadir as any form of weakening and instead mention his Wukalah from the Imam. Najash is either strengthening him due to his wukalah or just mention random facts and leaving him majhool (depends on your imaraat). Tusi just weakens him with no commentary, Ghada’iri say he is “yu`raf wa yunkar” and narrates from Dhu`afaa and relied on Maraseel - no reference to Nawadir. الحسن بن الحسين اللؤلؤي كوفي ثقة كثير الرواية له كتاب مجموع نوادر. al-Hasan b. al-Husayn al-Lu’lu’i, Kufi, Thiqah, many narrations, he has a book of compiled Nawadir So Najashi gives him tawtheeq, explicitly! No mention of disagreement here, as would be possible given the tarjima of al-`Ubaydi. Tusi mentions this person, says Saduq [ra] weakened him, though no reference to Nawadir like he does for al-`Ubaydi. The Majaheel Yusuf b. al-Sakht – no mention in both Fihirist, mentioned in Rijal Tusi only commenting on who he narrated from/to Abdullah b. Muhammad al-Shami – only mentioned in Rijal as narrating by al-Ash`ari Abdullah b. Ahmad al-Razi – muhmal Yusuf b. al-Harith – mentioned in Rijal as a butri Haytham b. `Addi – just mentioned in rijal as narrated by al-Ash`ari There are many examples of where one of the two leaves them without commentary, but the other says something. This is also indicative that removal from the Nawadir was not always seen as a sign of weakening. According to some `ulemaa, the non-excision and removal from Nawadir al-Hikmah is a sign of withaqah upon the opinion of Ibn al-Waleed. Sh. Muslim al-Daawiri [ha] has a good bahth on this subject. The first few things people say in response to this imarah are: - He removed Dhu`afaa, he may have left majaheel - The Qudamaa’ believed in Asaalat al-`Adaalah - Tasheeh of books by the Qudama is upon qara’in The first point I addressed above, some of the people removed from Nawadir are majhool, not everyone removed has been marked as weak, some even strengthened. Also, in the case of being majhool, Ibn al-Waleed also removed forms of irsal and ibhaam (things like “a man” or “from some of our companions”) – which in principle is the same as jahaalah, although viewed as irsal. The information about Ibn al-Waleed removing these doesn’t even specify them all as weak people, and al-Ash`ari not caring from who he took from implies jahalaat and dh`if. It is not established that the Qudamaa’ believed in asaalat al-`adaalah. Khui [ra], and his students who followed him on this, are working off a “possibility.” Many scholars put aside this accusation as untrue for many reasons, such as the known and recorded legacy of the Qudamaa’ and the extremeness of the Qummis in rijal and finding `adalah of narrators, etc. (Dawiri [ha] also has a good bahth on this when discussing Saduq’s al-Faqeeh). Another point that was brought forward by someone is when the chain would narrate from “a group of our companions.” This is a wording indicative of the unnamed person(s) to be Imami/Shi`i – if they believed in the asaalat, why excise them and remove their narrations? The Qudamaa' also labeled riwayah from Majaheel has a type of discrediting - so how would they all just depend on them themselves? A few taraajim regarding this for example: جعفر بن محمد بن مالك: قال النجاشي: «كوفي، أبو عبد الله، كان ضعيفاً في الحديث. قال أحمد بن الحسين: كان يضع الحديث وضعاً ويروي عن المجاهيل Ja`far b. Muhammad b. Malik: Najashi said: Kufi, Abu Abdullah, he is weak in hadith, Ahmad b. al-Husayn said: He was fabricating hadith a fabricating (emphatic grammar) and narrating from majaheel. Bakr b. Ahmad b. Ibrahim b. Ziyad وقال ابن الغَضائري: «يروي الغَرائب، ويعتمد المجاهيل، وأمره مُظْلَم» and Ibn al-Ghadaa'iri said: He narrates strange narrations and he depended on Majaheel, his affair is dark. قال ابن الغضائري: (كان ضعيفاً جداً، فاسد الرواية والمذهب، وكان أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى الأشعري أخرجه من قم، وأظهر البراءة منه، ونهى الناس عن السماع منه والرواية، ويروي عن المراسيل، ويعتمد المجاهيل) (2). Sahl b. Ziyad Ibn al-Ghadaa'iri said: He was very weak, fasid narration and madthhab and Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa al-Ash`ari expelled him from Qum and made clear his baraa'ah from him and he forbad the people form hearing and narrating from him, he narrated maraseel and depended on majaheel The final point is about the Qudamaa’ using the external evidences (al-qara’in al-khaarijiyya) to accept narrations. Saduq [ra] made tasheeh of the book. It is far to say the tasheeh was based upon Qara’in as the book was already going through rijal filtering by Ibn al-Waleed. Also, if the contents of these narrations were the point of tasheeh for this book, why remove all these majaheel and dhu`afaa WITH their narrations absolutely? Tasheeh can be made and narrations filtered without necessitating rijal by the Qudamaa, as is witnessed with Saduq’s al-Faqih – he leaves a lot of famous weak people but accepts their narrations as supporting qara’in, like Sahl b. Ziyad. Actually, you can open up Tahtheeb al-Ahkam and find some of the narrations that Ibn al-Waleed [ra] has removed with those same narrators. This is because Tusi [ra] received the book from different turuq apart from passing through Ibn al-Waleed. In these narrations you can find things that are 100% unproblematic and there would be no reason to remove such a narration from Nawadir, even if dhi`f of a Rawi was one qareena to the Qudamaa, as exampled from the inclusion of dhu`afaa narrations in their other filtered works. Here is an example: وعنه عن محمد بن عبد الله ابن أحمد عن الحسن بن علي ابن أبي عثمان - وأبو عثمان اسمه عبد الواحد بن حبيب - قال: زعم لنا محمد بن أبي حمزة الثمالي عن معاوية بن عمار الدهني عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: صلاة الليل تحسن الوجه وتذهب الهم وتجلو البصر. …. From Abi `Abdillah (as) he said: The prayer of the night beautifies the face, drives away worries, and sharpens vision Even if dhu`afaa is just one qareena for the Qudamaa, it is strange that they would even remove such unproblematic narrations as the above HERE but not in other works (like al-Faqeeh) that are unproblematic, but still narrated by dhu`afaa or majaheel – unless this book was authenticated on the basis of rijal only and putting aside Qara’in in this instance. So these are some insights and reason why some `ulemaa accept those not removed from Nawadir as a imarah of tawtheeq and I think it is a logical and reliable argument, putting aside extreme cynicism. والله أعلم All correct and good things here are from Allah, and all mistakes are my own. Allah [swt] have mercy and forgive us, especially our `ulemaa who give their lives in His cause. في امان الله
  19. We should listen if they decide to speak... (Video)
  20. Salamun Alaikum, I came across a very stunning hadith, and I would like to share it and receive your reflection. I got it from Chapter 12 of Ghaybah Nu'mani. 4 - ÍÏËäÇ ÃÈæ ÓáíãÇä ÃÍãÏ Èä åæÐÉ ÇáÈÇåáí¡ ÞÇá: ÍÏËäÇ ÃÈæ ÅÓÍÇÞ ÅÈÑÇåíã Èä ÅÓÍÇÞ ÇáäåÇæäÏí ÓäÉ ËáÇË æÓÈÚíä æãÇÆÊíä ÞÇá: ÍÏËäÇ ÚÈÏ Çááå Èä ÍãÇÏ ÇáÃäÕÇÑí ÓäÉ ÊÓÚ æÚÔÑíä æãÇÆÊíä¡ Úä ÑÌá¡ Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå A: Ãäå ÏÎá Úáíå ÈÚÖ ÃÕÍÇÈå ÝÞÇá áå: ÌÚáÊ ÝÏÇß¡ Åäí æÇááå ÃÍÈß æÃÍÈ ãä íÍÈß¡ íÇ ÓíÏí ãÇ ÃßËÑ ÔíÚÊßã¡ ÝÞÇá áå: ÃÐßÑåã¡ ÝÞÇá: ßËíÑ¡ ÝÞÇá: ÊÍÕíåã¿ ÝÞÇá: åã ÃßËÑ ãä Ðáß. ÝÞÇá ÃÈæ ÚÈÏ Çááå A: ÃãÇ áæ ßãõáÊ ÇáÚÏøÉ ÇáãæÕæÝÉ ËáÇËãÇÆÉ æÈÖÚÉ ÚÔÑ ßÇä ÇáÐí ÊÑíÏæä¡ æáßäø ÔíÚÊäÇ ãóä áÇ íÚÏæ ÕæÊå ÓãÚå æáÇ ÔÍäÇÄå ÈÏäå æáÇ íãÏÍ ÈäÇ ãÚáäÇð æáÇ íÎÇÕã ÈäÇ ÞÇáíÇð æáÇ íÌÇáÓ áäÇ ÚÇíÈÇð æáÇ íÍÏË áäÇ ËÇáÈÇð æáÇ íÍÈ áäÇ ãÈÛÖÇð æáÇ íÈÛÖ áäÇ ãÍÈÇð. (4) Abu Sulayman Ahmad bin Hawtha al-Bahili narrated from Abu Iss~haq Ibraheem bin Iss~haq an-Nahawandi from Abdullah bin Hammad al-Ansari from someone that one of the companions had come to Abu Abdullah as-Sadiq (s) and said to him: “May I die for you! By Allah, I love you and love whoever loves you. O my master, how many your Shia are!” Abu Abdullah as-Sadiq (s) said: “Would you please mention them?” The man said: “They are too many.” He said: “Could you count them?” The man said: “They are much more than to be counted.” Abu Abdullah as-Sadiq (s) said: “If the number becomes three hundred and a little more then what you want will happen. Our Shia are those, whose voice dose not pass beyond their ears, nor does their zeal go beyond their body, nor do they praise us openly, nor quarrel with anyone because of us, nor sit with anyone criticizing us, nor talk with anyone abusing us, nor love whoever hates us and do not hate whoever loves us.” ÝÞáÊ: ÝßíÝ ÃÕäÚ ÈåÐå ÇáÔíÚÉ ÇáãÎÊáÝÉ ÇáÐíä íÞæáæä Åäåã íÊÔíÚæä¿ ÝÞÇá: Ýíåã ÇáÊãííÒ æÝíåã ÇáÊãÍíÕ æÝíåã ÇáÊÈÏíá¡ íÃÊí Úáíåã Óäæä ÊÝäíåã¡ æÓíÝ íÞÊáåã¡ æÇÎÊáÇÝñ íÈÏÏåã. ÅäãÇ ÔíÚÊäÇ ãä áÇ íåÑø åÑíÑ ÇáßáÈ æáÇ íØãÚ ØãÚ ÇáÛÑÇÈ¡ æáÇ íÓÃá ÇáäÇÓ ÈßÝøå æÅä ãÇÊ ÌæÚÇð. ÞáÊ: ÌÚáÊ ÝÏÇß¡ ÝÃíä ÃØáÈ åÄáÇÁ ÇáãæÕæÝíä ÈåÐå ÇáÕÝÉ¿ ÝÞÇá: ÃØáÈåã Ýí ÃØÑÇÝ ÇáÃÑÖ¡ ÃæáÆß ÇáÎÝíÖ ÚíÔåã¡ ÇáãäÊÞáÉ ÏÇÑåã¡ ÇáÐíä Åä ÔåÏæÇ áã íÚÑÝæÇ¡ æÅä ÛÇÈæÇ áã íÝÊÞÏæÇ¡ æÅä ãÑÖæÇ áã íÚÇÏæÇ¡ æÅä ÎØÈæÇ áã íÒæøÌæÇ¡ æÅä ãÇÊæÇ áã íÔåóÏæÇ¡ ÃæáÆß ÇáÐíä Ýí ÃãæÇáåã íÊæÇÓæä¡ æÝí ÞÈæÑåã íÊÒÇæÑæä¡ æáÇ ÊÎÊáÝ ÃåæÇÄåã æÅä ÇÎÊáÝÊ Èåã ÇáÈáÏÇä. The man said: “Then how do we deal with these different groups, who pretend that they are Shia?” He said: “They will be tried, purified and distinguished. Years come that will perish them, a sword that will kill them and disagreement that will scatter them. Our real Shia are those, who do not growl like a dog, do not covet like a crow and do not ask people for alms even if they die of hunger.” The man said: “May I die for you! Where can I find such a kind of people?” He said: “You can find them in the far sides of the world. They are those, whose lives are so simple, whose abodes move from place to another, who if are seen, will not be known, if absent, will not be missed, if become ill, will not be visited, if propose to a woman, will not be married and if die, their funerals will not be attended. It is they, who divide their monies among them, who visit each other in their graves and who never disagree even if their countries are different.”[1] The same was narrated by Muhammad bin Hammam from Hameed bin Ziyad al-Kufi from al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Suma’a from Ahmad bin al-Hasan al-Maythami from Ali bin Mansoor from Ibraheem bin Muhzim al-Asadi from his father from Abu Abdullah as-Sadiq (s) but with an addition: æÅäú ÑÃæÇ ãÄãäÇð ÃßÑãæå¡ æÅä ÑÃæÇ ãäÇÝÞÇð åÌÑæå¡ æÚäÏ ÇáãæÊ áÇ íÌÒÚæä¡ æÝí ÞÈæÑåã íÊÒÇæÑæä… “If they see a believer, they will honor him and if they see a hypocrite, they will leave him aside. They do not worry when about to die and they visit each other in their graves…”[2] [1] Biharul Anwar, vol.68 p.164, Mo’jam Ahadeeth al-Imam al-Mahdi, vol.4 p.10. [2] Ibid.
  21. Salamon Alaykum ! Peace be upon you all I met some memebrs here who hold beliefs that I thought are mentioned in Shia books but the way they understand these beliefs was diffrent than my way particularly memebers from south Asia One of the latest encounters is the nour/bashar (light/flesh) nature of our prophet and all the infallables which upon it they based their other belief that prophet had no shadow These beliefs are held by the Barelvis as well, so I am not sure which was the root of this belief for some of the shia bretherns here There were some topics about Barelvis discussing them in general, i find some of the posts there to be helpful but i am interested more about this specific belief of the nature of the prophet and its origin According to wiki , the vast majority of muslims in India and Pakistan adhere to Barelvis along with about 35 % of mosques in UK. Thats some huge number of Muslims that believe in things that shia believe in but in diffirent way . Where did it all start? Is there some ancient agreement between scholars of muslims back in time about the nour belief? is it in Sunni books? is it in Sufi teachings ?Is it solid Shia beleif? Which of these schools influenced the others ?
  22. Asalamu Alaikum brothers and sisters,, i have heard this hadith,, im pretty sure its from Imam Ali AS,, and i wanted to see if anyone has a source for it,, or is able to give me a similar Hadith to this one,, "someone came to the Imam and asked him,, how can we follow you if your unable to sin,, the Imam replies and says that its not that we are unable to sin,, its that we dont allow ourselves to sin,," W/Salam
  23. Praise Be Allah and Salawat upon Prophet PBUH and His Ahlulbayt AS Ajmaeen! All of us know well about the frequently projected hadith "Ashra e Mubashara" which creates whirlwind amongst the thinking or evil thinkers even succeed to get benefit of giving us tough time, for a time being though. Thus we should prepare ourselves as well as teach our youth to fight with the opponents in a positive way. I, therefore, request all of ShiaChat members to participate in the discussion and share their knowledge to bring the facts on file and be on the right side as they are! God bless you all... KR Syed
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...