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

  • Main Forums
    • Ramadhan 1440/2019
    • Guest Forum
    • Theology and General Religion
    • Personalities in Islam
    • Prophets and Ahlul-Bayt
    • Jurisprudence/Laws
    • Politics/Current Events
    • Social/Family/Personal Issues
    • Science/Tech/Economics
    • Education/Careers
    • Medicine/Health/Fitness
    • Off-Topic
    • Poetry and Art
    • Polls
    • Shia/Sunni Dialogue
    • Christianity/Judaism Dialogue
    • Atheism/Philosophy/Others
    • Research into Other Sects
    • Arabic / العَرَبِية
    • Farsi / فارسی
    • Urdu / اُردُو‎
    • Other languages [French / français, Spanish / español, Chinese / 汉语, Hindi / हिन्दी, etc.. ]
    • North/Central/South America
    • Europe
    • Asia, Middle East, Africa
    • Australia and Others
    • Site Tech 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 223 results

  1. Asalaam Alaikum wr wb brothers and sisters, Have you come across this narration from Prophet Muhammad sawas? "The Messenger of Allah Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã said: Hijaz will be ruled by a man who has the name of an animal (i.e King Fahd (leopard). If you looked at him you will see that he is cross-eyed from far and if you came close to him, you will not see anything wrong with his eyes. A brother called Abdullah will succeed him. Woe unto the Shia from him, he repeated it three times, give me the glad tidings of his death, I will give you the glad tidings of the appearance of the Hujjah" - 250 Signs p.122 Muhammad Ali Tabatabai
  2. Asalamu aleykum wr wb my brothers and sisters I want to ask you if there are any Quranic and Hadith sources for those Bible verses. My mother is a Christian lady and she show me that verses. Another question is: How is it that the Bible calls Jesus son of God and Allah swt should be the father? I found even enough Bible verses who explain that God is one and almighty, however this son and father thing is confusing me a bit, but I can remember there was something about the difference of the translation of the Bible like differences in Latin, Hebrew, Aramean and Greek. I would be glad if someone can send me good sources. Wa salam
  3. Assalamu alaikum, I have saved up some money to buy some islamic books with and right now I can't choose between buying the first volume of al-Kafi in english or the shi'a hadith collection "The scale of wisdom", so I'm wondering if anybody has any of these books and can suggest one of them for me and the reasons why I should buy that one and not the other. Al-Kafi vol.1 costs about 13 pounds + shipping and The scale of wisdom 26 pounds + shipping (but it has over a 1000 pages). I don't have any other hadith collections so maybe the scale of wisdom would be a better choice?
  4. Assalamu Alaikom. One hadith I have heard goes like this: Shaykh Jalil al Fadl ibn Shadhan ibn Khalil narrarated from Muhammad ibn Abi Amierrda narrarated from Jamil ibn Durjan from Zaraarah ibn Aeyena, from Abu Abdallah (alaihe salam), who said: "And out of Yemen will come the Yamani, with bleached flags (white flags, البيض) on one day, one month, one year (meaning someday)." قال الشيخ الجليل الفاضل ابن شاذان بن الخليل (طيب الله مرقده): حدّثنا محمّد بن أبي عميررضي الله عنه قال: حدّثنا جميل بن دراج، قال: حدّثنا زرارة بن أعين، عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال: قال: وخروج اليماني من اليمن مع الرايات البيض في يوم واحد، وفي شهر واحد، وسنة واحدة. The problem is, I know none of these narrarators! I searched up Shaykh Jalil al Fadl, and I got this: A to Z of the Druze Page 148 Shaykh Al Fadil (1597-1640): "... a Druze sage known for his ascetic lifesryle and spiritual leadership." (His real name was Muhammad Abu Hilal) So is this the narrator?
  5. Salam to everyone out there! I urge everyone to read this post CAREFULLY. Being a sunni myself I find many sunni beliefs to be absolutely strange. I am born into a sunni family and have been practicing sunni Islam for decades. However, sunnis' blind belief in bukhari narrations have shocked me. It wasn't until I read bukhari myself. I found many ridiculous things in that book. In fact, many things found in bukhari are total non-sense and it looks like someone deliberately tried to corrupt this collection by adding false things in it. For example, bukhari contains a narration that states that monkey used to stone and kill each other for committing adultery. I find it strange that how can Sunnis believe in such a book that narrates such things. I asked a question about authenticity of bukhari from a strict bukhari believer some time ago. I told him that I don't believe in some narrations of bukhari, and he became furious and angry. He started to say things like "You are infected with believe that not all narrations in bukhari are authentic". The aim of this post is to investigate some claims sunnis put forward to make the case of bukhari strong. Here are some reasons for why sunnis believe in bukhari, and I want shia perspective on this. Reason #1. Sound chain of Narrators in Bukhari's collection Sunnis claim that bukhari's collection contain narrations that are extremely sound. It is very unlikely that bukhari's collection might contain fabricated narrations. Reason #2 Reliable Narrators Secondly, Sunnis also state that Bukharis collection is authentic because all the narrators in bukhari's collection are authentic, according to sunni Islam. Reason #3 Bukhari's criteria of hadith selection This third reason is also put forward by most sunnis. They claim that bukhari's criteria of selecting hadith was very strict. He never included anything in his collection until or unless he investigated and thoroughly examined narrations himself. So he cannot include fabricated narrations in his collection. Reason #4 Bukhari was a hadith expert Sunnis and many followers of bukhari also state that Bukhari was a hadith expert. He was a learned scholar who had great knowledge of hadith. Therefore, he should be trusted. My main question is: what is shia perspective on these reasons sunnis give for authenticity of bukhari? I think that the shia view is completely different from Sunni view of hadith. Shias believe that there is no such thing as "Sahih collection of hadith" because hadith collectors were fallible men. In fact, shias don't even consider their own hadith books as "100% authentic". I personally think that shias are RIGHT on this subject. I endorse this shia belief. However, I am not considering conversion to shia sect because of some issues associated with shia sect (I will create a new post about these issues later). However, can a sunni remain a sunni if he doesn't believe in SOME narrations of bukhari?
  6. Salam Everyone, Question# 1 I would like to know that what is the proof that the Hadith book of Bukhari contains fabricated hadiths? Qustion# 2 Do shias believe in SOME hadiths of bukhari? Or do they reject all of them? Question# 3 Moreover, what is the proof that the shia books of hadiths like Al-Kafi, Nahaj Al-Balagha, Bihar Al-Anwar contain hadiths that are authentic? I need to get all of these questions answered. Thanks.
  7. Excerpt: Reading and pondering over hadith and acquiring knowledge directly from our Imams (as) is not the prerogative of the mujtahids only. It is a duty and responsibility of each and every muslim. Unfortunately, the religious establishment has divided the society into two classes - clergy and layman. The layman are discouraged from accessing the hadith directly. One of the reasons often quoted is that the hadith literature has been corrupted and a layman will be unable to differentiate the sound (sahih) hadith from unsound (zaif). Nothing is further from the truth - our great collections of hadith are extremely reliable and a source of truth for us. Secondly we are not layman and should not consider ourselves as such. Knowledge of the hadith is an obligation on each and every one of us. If we doubt our hadith (specifically the collections sourced from the Masumeen (as)) then God forbid we will have attributed a lie (false claim) to the Holy Prophet (as) who mentioned in hadith al thaqalayn that he (sawas) leaves behind two weighty things - the book of Allah and the Ahlul bayt (as). After Ghaibat-e-Kubra, the reference to Ahlul bayt (as) includes the vast amount of recorded hadith left behind. The Imams (as) had laid great emphasis on their companions the necessity of recording and preservation of hadith and this was acted upon meticulously by them. Despite careful preservation, what should one do when encountered with contradictory hadith? The solution to this problem has also been provided by the Masumeen (as). In this post, we will quote a series of hadith by our Imams (as) which can be used to resolve disparities. What is most important to understand is that despite our best efforts if we are still not able to resolve the difference between two hadith then one can act on any one of them. We will be judged by Allah (swt) on our sincere efforts to follow the footsteps of the Masumeen (as). At least, we made the effort and did not resort to the short cut of acquiring religion from the mouth of men. At least we did not commit shirk by blindly following (taqleed) a fallible mujtahid. Link to full article: https://ahlulbaytmission.org/2016/10/18/resolving-disparities-in-hadith/
  8. I always see quotations from Imams cited as "Hadiths". Aren't Hadith only from the Prophet PBUH?
  9. Salam I just came across an informative talk about a hadith on Amr Al-duhani. I've never heard this hadith before and didn't understand much about the term rafidah either (besides its association with Shia). Turns out, we shouldn't be using it so lightly. The clip explains why beautifully. Enjoy
  10. Salaam, While believing in religion and God necessarily entails belief in the "supernatural" and miracles, at times it can feel too much and inconsistent with the reality. While the history of our own prophet and Aimmah (peace be on them) seems rather mundane and believable, the stories of the prophets of old feel a bit different. Although many of the stories contain powerful moral lessons, we shouldn't be prone to interpret them as allegories, as we believe these prophets were real historical figures and the stories are real. I'll illustrate just a few of many examples from a great book recently published by Sheikh Rizwan Arastu "God's Emmissaries: Adam to Jesus." I will provide sources for any of these upon request. Woman during the time of Noah menstruated yearly, instead of monthly People did not grow gray hair until Abraham did Mary was miraculously transported to Karbala to give birth, while Musa was transported there to receive his prophethood. Solomon commanded an army of jinns, birds and talked to ants. The entire Nile river turned to blood, but only to the disbelievers. When the believers drank from it, it was clear water. Noah lived 2500 years and most of the other prophets of old lived at least few hundred years old (without seemingly any comments from the population). ------------------------- These are to just name a few of several stories. I have found it hard to understand many of stories in historical context and many modern historians have their own scathing criticisms of these prophets and their stories (such as Exodus, the flood etc..), albeit from a Biblical perspective. At first, I was nervous and perhaps even ashamed to make a thread like this. Most people seem to read these narratives and it has little effect on their certainty of Islam. It makes one feel their faith is deficient and by pointing out difficulties, you are insulting the religion and scripture and demeaning God's ability . However, I wish to be honest with myself that such stories do cause doubts for me and haven't sat well with me for years. If someone were to ask me to defend and make sense of many of these stories and histories, I would have a lot of trouble doing so and feel it to be unnatural. I have always craved a faith that is perfect and can have certainty without having lingering doubts and things swept under the mental rug. Although certainty none of these are core Islamic tenets, they are in our tradition and we have to deal with them. How would do you guys deal with stories like these? How do you guys deal with Islamic issues that go against what you deep down inside think is right?
  11. (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
  12. Assalam O Alaikum, Wa Rehmatullah, Wa Barakatuhu. Respect the difference of opinion if there is no clear indication of shirk or kufr in it.
  13. Salam Alaykum, I've been wondering if there are any hadiths that both the Sunnis and the Shias have in common? In other words, do Shias accept any of the Sunni hadiths? Of course, Wikipedia isn't reliable a source, but it says the following in the Shia-Sunni relations article: Is this true? What hadiths might those be? :-P Thanks!
  14. Naturally, the Holy Quran is the highest authority of Islam in all respects. However, if Quran leaves room for interpretation or does not explain something in full extent, which one comes next in hierachy: Tafsir (interpretation of Quran by Islamic scholars), or the Hadith (the record of the sayings of Prophet Muhammad [pbuh])? Which one is to be consulted first? Thanks a lot in advance!
  15. Assalam o Alaikum wa rehmatullah wa barakutuhu, Muqaddimah or Introduction of Sahih Muslim. It explains some of the most important aspects and principles of hadith science, importance of sahih hadith and fitna of zaeef, mozzu hadith. Imam Muslim Neshapuri wrote this entire book for the benefit of common muslims, as he himself said in the introduction. Every muslim must know atleast these rules and principles, so that he may remain safe from the fitna of zaeef, false and fabricated ahadith, which is now a days very common issue, among both sunnies and shias. It's a must read document. It will surely remove many of your doubts. Read online: http://sunnah.com/muslim/introduction Download (English): http://www.kalamullah.com/muqaddimah-sahih-muslim.html Download (Urdu): http://ahlesunnatpak.com/research-papers/ (Paper no. 15) جزاك اللهُ خيرًا
  16. Imam Ali (as) wrote to Salman al Farsi (ra) : To continue, surely, the likeness of this world is that of a snake: it is soft to touch, and deadly poisonous. The ignorant child is distracted by it, and the one with understanding and intellect is cautious of it. So turn away from what fascinates you in it, for how little of it stays with you.
  17. Salam All, I have often heard that one only visits the holy Shrines(Specifically of the Masoom/infallibles from which Imam Hussain) only if you get invited by them and it is not possible to visit otherwise no matter how hard you try, I have come across wealthy & resourceful individuals who wish to visit yet face an obstacle every time they want to do so and have also come across poor individuals who have no resources and yet somehow get to visit on atleast a yearly basis, bearing this in mind while being blessed with the opportunity of being able to visit these holy shrines, I have there come across people from around the world who I know from personal experience are not of a very good character to say the least(although I feel it could be that only one act from any human could be sufficient to please and we do not have the capacity to truly judge someone as we are not fully aware of their circumstances and should never judge a person), Just wanted to know if any of this is backed by any references from scholars or the hadith.
  18. This is a translation of the first chapter (more chapters to hopefully follow) of Durus al-Tamhidiyya Fi Qawaid al-Rijaliyya, which is an introductory primer on Ilm al-Rijal, authored by Shaykh Baqir al-Irwani, who was a foremost student of Sayyid al-Sistani, and who currently teaches Dars al-Kharij in the Hawza at Najaf. More advanced students of Ilm al-Rijal will realize that it generally falls within the bounds of the school of Sayyid al-Khoei [and the Modern Usulists] in accepting as default the foundations of Hiss [as a requirement for the bindingness of the rulings of Tawthiq and Tadh'if from the Qudama] and restricting the provenance of Qarain-based Ijtihad from the Muta'akhirin. Thus, any comments that contend or argue against these two principles of this school are outside the scope of the treatment presented here, which is rudimentary by admission. Arabic words used throughout include - Shahada which can be translated as testimony, Wathaqa which can be translated as moral probity [and integrity in relay], A'lam which can be translated as learned scholars, Tawthiq [ruling someone as Thiqah], Tadhi'f [ruling someone as Dhaif]. Questions are welcome. Chapter One The Methods Through Which the Wathaqa of a Narrator Can be Established Their are a number of methods through which the Wathaqa of a narrator can be established, we will mention the following among these: A. The Shahada of the Ma’sum If a Ma’sum gives a Shahada of Wathaqa for a given individual then their is no doubt that this will be a valid method to establish the Wathaqa of said individual. An example of this is what has been narrated about Zurara (in Rijal al-Kashshi) via a Sahih chain that ends up with Jamil bin Darraj from Imam al-Sadiq who said: ‘Give glad tidings of paradise to the humble ones – Burayd bin Muawiya al-Ijli and Aba Basir Layth bin al-Bukhturi al-Muradiy and Muhammad bin Muslim and Zurara – four chiefs and trustees of Allah upon his Halal and Haram. If it were not for these then the traces of prophethood would have disappeared and been destroyed’[1]. Obviously, it is necessary that the one who narrates the Shahada from the Imam (that is to be used to establish Wathaqa) not be the same individual whose Tawthiq is sought for by the same said Shahada. Otherwise it will be akin to circular logic[2]. B. The Shahada of one of the A’lam Shaykh Abu al-Abbas Ahmad bin Ali bin al-Abbas famously known as al-Najashi – a contemporary of Shaykh al-Tusi and his colleague in some of their common classes (under the same tutors) – wrote his famous book ‘Fihrist Musannifi al-Shia’ in which he gathered the names of those who had authored books (Shia authors prior to him), while also indicating, in most cases, whether these authors were Thiqah or Dhaif. Similarly, Shaykh al-Tusi wrote two books in this regard, one titled Fihrist and the second known as Rijal Shaykh al-Tusi, and he sometimes mentions Tawthiq and Tadh’if of some narrators in them (i.e. his two books). Likewise, Shaykh Abu ‘Amr Muhammad bin Umar bin Abd al-Aziz famously known as al-Kashshi – who is considered to have lived in the same generation as al-Kulayni – also authored his book famously known as Rijal al-Kashshi. He aimed to collect the narrations which talk about (pertain to) different narrators, he predominantly does this without directly commenting upon the Tawthiq or Tadh’if of the narrators (just quoting narrations that impinge on a narrator’s credibility in some way, mainly from the Aimmah). The Shahada of one of these three A’lam with regards the Wathaqa of a specific narrator is a certain method to establish his Wathaqa, this is justified by the practice of the intelligent ones (Seerah al-Uqala) who do demonstratedly act upon the reports of a Thiqah in all spheres of life – among them – evaluations of people[3]. And since these three A’lam are Thiqah, then their reports in regards the Wathaqa of various narrators can be justifiably acted upon based upon the aforementioned principle of compliance with the practice of the intelligent ones. And the Shahada of just a single one of these A’lam is enough and it does not require multiplicity (more than one A’lam giving Shahada), since the aforementioned practice of the intelligent ones is seen as confirming the act of granting of utility to such reports even when the reporter is one (solitary). Is the Shahada of some of our Ulama from the Muta’akhirin like Ibn Tawus and the Allamah and Ibn Dawud and the Shahid al-Thani - a method to establish Wathaqa? In this is there is disagreement which we shall broach in the second section – if Allah wills[4]. C. Ijma’a Upon the Wathaqa Their are some narrators for whom the A’lam like al-Najashi and the others - have not given a Shahada to effect their Wathaqa, but they are individuals about whom al-Kashshi has claimed Ijma’a (unanimity) of the Shia over the acceptance of their Riwayat. So, for example, Aban bin Uthman who is famously known as Aban al-Ahmar[5]; al-Najashi or someone other than him (from the A’lam) have not given a Shahada in regards his Wathaqa, but he is one of the six companions of al-Sadiq about whom al-Kashshi claimed the Ijma’a of the Isaba (unanimity of the community) in considering them truthful, this is when he (al-Kashshi) said – ‘the community is united in considering authentic what is authentically narrated from these, and in considering them truthful in what they say, and they have all acknowledged their priority in Fiqh (these are) – Jamil bin Darraj and Abdallah bin Bukayr and Hammad bin Uthman and Hammad bin Isa and Aban bin Uthman’. And the secret behind giving credence to the Ijma’a mentioned above in proving Wathaqa is as follows: If al-Kashshi is correct in his claim of the existence of an Ijma’a over these narrators, and if the Ijma’a actually existed, then this is what we want (i.e. it is enough to prove the Wathaqa of these individuals and more, since it is based on the unanimity of the community, among whom would necessarily be a large number of A'lam), and if he was not correct (mistaken) in his stating of the existence of an Ijma’a over this, and if the Ijma’a did not exist in reality, then it is sufficient for us in establishing the Wathaqa of these - the implicit Shahada of al-Kashshi himself in this regard, since his claim of an Ijma’a reveals that he too was agreed with the implication of the Ijma’a (i.e. Wathaqa of these narrators) as one of the members of the community forming the Ijma’a (i.e. since he did not go on to criticize the Ijma’a which he claims to have existed), and since he is one of the A’lam, then, his Shahada alone is enough to establish Wathaqa (falling under method B above). D. Wakala for the Imam Wakala (deputyship) can be a general one where one deputises for the Imam in all his affairs, or it can be an agency for a specific outlined purpose. As for the first type of Wakala (i.e. the general one) then this is what is termed al-Safara, and their is no debate in regards the fact that it (someone being appointed as a Safir by the Ma’sum) establishes the Wathaqa of the one appointed, rather it points to a greater position for the appointed one beyond mere Wathaqa. On the other hand, their is debate in regards whether the other type of Wakala (one appointed for a specific mission) establishes Wathaqa or not, a number have rejected its utility in establishing Wathaqa, for example, Sayyid al-Khoei has rejected that it does point to Wathaqa, he does so by arguing that we find a lot of the Wukala who were censured by the Aimmah and from whom the Aimmah disassociated themselves. As an example, Shaykh al-Tusi included a whole chapter in his Kitab al-Ghyaba wherein he enumerates the blameworthy Wukala who were criticized by the Aimmah for their activities as Wakils. And the correct opinion is that any form of Wakala for the Imam is enough to establish Wathaqa due to the practice of the intelligent ones not to deputize those who are not Thiqah over any part of their affairs, and this is more so for the Imam, because the non-Thiqah individual they deputize could attribute to the office of the Imamate something which is anathema to the Imam, which could effect the Madhhab and the role of the Imam in a negative way. And if it is said: How can we reconcile this with the censure and disassociation that originated from the Aimmah for some of their Wakils? The answer will be: this [censure and disassociation] arose after their appointment as Wakils and not before it (i.e. they were Thiqah when appointed and changed after becoming Wakils as the Thiqah’s condition can change from that of Wathaqa to Dhi’f). And it is not hidden that if we accept the principle that Wakala for the Imam indicates Wathaqa we will have the advantage of ruling as Thiqah a number of narrators previously considered among the Majahil and the Dhuafa, we will mention one among them as Ali bin Abi Hamza al-Bataini – for he was a Wakil for Imam al-Kadhim, and the one who oversaw his properties for him. And the scholars differ among themselves over his status, so if we agree that Wakala indicates Wathaqa, then, we are able to rule for his Wathaqa based upon that [for a period in his life], and use this fact to rule as Sahih a large number of narrations that al-Bataini occurs in its chains, since he is someone who has occurred in a large number of chains. E. The Narration of the Thiqat from someone Mirza Husayn al-Nuri – the author of al-Mustadrak - ruled that the narration of a Thiqah from someone proves the Wathaqa of that person (the one the Thiqah narrated from). While, we maintain that the correct opinion is that the narration of a Thiqah from someone does not indicate his Wathaqa, for how many narrations are their in our books where we observe the Thiqat narrating from those who are non-Thiqah. And if the narration of a Thiqah on someone’s authority was an indication of that person’s Wathaqa then the Wathaqa of most of the narrators would be established thereby, since, for example, Shaykh al-Tusi is Thiqah, so if he narrates in his books from someone it would mean that that person is Thiqah, and if that person [from whom Shaykh al-Tusi narrates who we have established is Thiqah through this principle] narrates from a third person - he too becomes Thiqah [because a Thiqah has narrated from him], and so on. Yes, if the Ajilla [meritious] ones from the Thiqat and the Kibar [great] ones from the Thiqat increase in narrating [narrate a lot] from someone, then it is not farfetched to conclude that person’s Wathaqa (who is narrated from alot by the Ajilla and the Kibar), because of the improbability of an intelligent person to narrate a lot from someone whose Wathaqa he is not sure of, it would be a wastage of time on his part without any advantage, since there is no benefit in collecting a lot of narrations from the weak ones. And if we accept this opinion, we will obtain important results, we will mention among these, as a case in point, Muhammad bin Ismail; for al-Kulayni has narrated a lot in al-Kafi from Muhammad bin Ismail from al-Fadhl bin Shadhan. And it has been said that he [Muhammad bin Ismail] is Majhul, so all these multitude of narrations will drop from the level of I’tibar (if we insist on ruling that he is Majhul), while, based upon this aforementioned principle, it is possible to rule his Wathaqa, and through this step, a large number of narrations will attain Hujiyya [probative force to effect legalities]. F. Being a Shaykh of Ijaza Bearing (taking or receiving) a Riwaya from someone has a number of formal forms, so sometimes, a student hears the Riwaya from his teacher, and in other cases, the student reads over the Riwaya to his teacher, and in a third case, the teacher permits [licences] his student to narrate a specific work that he has authored or has authority over (without the student neccesarily hearing or reading over the Riwayat to the teacher). And this third form of bearing is what is known as the method of reception by Ijaza, similarly, the one who gave the Ijaza is known as Shaykh al-Ijaza. And there is a difference of opinion whether being Shaykh al-Ijaza [having handed out Ijazat] is enough for establishing the Shaykh al-Ijaza’s Wathaqa or not. And the discussion over this point is an important one - because - many of the primary works (Usul) of Hadith that were authored and which were incorporated into the major compilations such as al-Tahdhib and al-Istibsar and Man La Yahdhuruhu al-Faqih reached Shaykh al-Saduq and Shaykh al-Tusi through the intermediary of personages who do not have explicit Tawthiq in their own right, the most that can be said about them is that they were Shuyukh al-Ijaza who licensed al-Saduq and al-Tusi these primary works (Usul) of Hadith which they had authority over - to allow these two (i.e. al-Saduq and al-Tusi) to use these works in their compilations. Examples of these Shuyukh al-Ijaza include Ahmad bin Abdun, and Ahmad bin Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin al-Walid and Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Yahya al-Attar … And perhaps it can be affirmed that the famous opinion among the Qudama was that - simply being a Shaykh al-Ijaza was enough to establish that Shaykh al-Ijaza’s Wathaqa, in opposition to modern scholars such as Sayyid al-Khoei who consider being a Shaykh al-Ijaza as not having any relation to Wathaqa. And one can argue against this principle by noting that the impetus behind Ijaza is not anything else but that someone like Shaykh al-Mufid, for example, will be granted the right due to an Ijaza he receives, to say ‘reported to me Ahmad bin Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin al-Walid[4] these reports which were found in the book which he gave me an Ijaza to narrate on his authority’ and he (al-Mufid) becomes as someone who heard these Riwayat from him (since hearing was the strongest form of reception). And since we have already pointed out that just the mere act of a Thiqah hearing a narration from someone does not establish the Wathaqa of the one who is heared from, in the same way, a Thiqah obtaining an Ijaza from someone should not be used to establish the Wathaqa of the one who handed out the Ijaza (i.e. the Shaykh al-Ijaza). NOTES: [1] The Shahada from the Ma’sum should meet two other conditions to be accepted: It should be clear (Imam’s words should infer Tawthiq) and It should be through a Mu’tabar chain. [2] Someone narrating the Shahada of the Imam for himself is taken to be giving a self-testimony in his favour - something which cannot be accepted rationally. [3] Practice of the intelligent ones is a Hujjah, since the Aimmah are considered members of the assembly of the intelligent ones, and a Dalil al-Aql is by necessity supported by the Shar even if not explicitly stated in the revelatory texts. [4] As will be seen later, it is the Ihtimal that the Wathaqa (as preserved in the Shahada) is based upon Hiss (observation by a contemporary) that allows the acceptance of the Qudama’s Shahada in matters of Tawthiq and Tadh’if as opposed to the Muta’akhirin for whom there is no Ihtimal of Hiss. [5] Emphasis here is on Aban al-Ahmar since he does not have independent Tawthiq [from the other methods] as the rest of Ashab al-Ijma'a have. [6] Ahmad bin Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin al-Walid was a Shaykh al-Ijaza to his students (eg. al-Mufid) for the works of his father, the famous Ibn al-Walid, since he inherited these works from his father. Shuyukh al-Ijaza, in most cases, did not author works of their own (thus they did not merit a place in the Fihrist works being non-authors - where they could potentially be given Tawthiq), rather, they had the authority to license people to quote from books they had received via the formal means of reception.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...