Search the Community

A hadith is often presented and it is said that even Rasool (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) used to testify to Wilayah of Ameer Al Momineen (عليه السلام) in tashahud. Hadith is in Tafseer of verse 110 of Surah Al-Isra (17) which is: قُلِ ادۡعُوا اللّٰهَ اَوِ ادۡعُوا الرَّحۡمٰنَ ؕ اَ يًّا مَّا تَدۡعُوۡا فَلَهُ الۡاَسۡمَآءُ الۡحُسۡنٰى ۚ وَلَا تَجۡهَرۡ بِصَلَاتِكَ وَلَا تُخَافِتۡ بِهَا وَابۡتَغِ بَيۡنَ ذٰ لِكَ سَبِيۡلً Say to them (O Prophet!): "Call upon Him as Allah or call upon Him as al-Rahman; call Him by whichever name you will, all His names are beautiful. Neither offer your Prayer in too loud a voice, nor in a voice too low; but follow a middle course. It is said that imams (عليه السلام) interpreted this verse as: "Do not recite Wilayat e Ali aloud, do not hide till, and continue to ask me regarding this Amr" Now there are a series of references used by these people. There are two hadiths, One is hadith of Abu Hamza Sumali from Imam Muhammad Al Baqir (عليه السلام) and other one is from jabir from Imam Muhamamd Al Baqir (عليه السلام) 1. Tafseer Noor Us Saqalain: Author is عبد علي العروسي الحويزي who was a scholor of Late 11th century or Early 12th Century. Therefore it is not from among the early sources of Shia Mazhab. All he could've done is collect hadiths from older books. Here is reference of Hadith from his book Noor us Saqalain: The First Hadith and the Second hadith in this book has been Quoted without any chain from Tafseer e Ayashi so we would have to go to original source to find out status of these hadiths. In hadith of Jabir from Imam Muhammad Al Baqir (عليه السلام) following words can be seen: لا تجحر بولاية علي فهو في الصلاة Google Trans: Do not recite Wilayat e Ali aloud, it is in Namaz These words only appear in Tafseer Noor us Saqalain and aren't present in the original source thus they are a mistake in manu script of Tafseer Noor us Saqalain. InshaAllah you'll see that in other sources, فهو في الصلاة that 'fi' isn't present rather its just فهو الصلاة. 2. Tafseer Al Burhan: These Two hadiths again have been quoted in this book from Tafseer Al-Ayashi. Plus you can see hadith of Jabir has فهو الصلاة and not فهو في الصلاة. 3. Tafseer Al Ayyashi: Now this is the original source of those two Tafaseer. 1. The tradition of Abu Hamza Sumali (رضي الله عنه) has been quoted in Mursal fashion and has no chain. 2. The tradition of Jabir from Imam Al Baqir (عليه السلام) has been quoted in Mursal fashion and is chainless. More over, in original source, فهو الصلاة and not فهو في الصلاة. The tradition of Jabir is chainless thus its extremely weak since we don't know about the people who narrated it. But the tradition of Abu Hamza Sumaili has a chain in Book Basair Al Darjaat which can be seen here: Chain of narration is as follows: Muhammad bin Hassan Al-Saffar (رضي الله عنه) from Muhammad Bin Al-Hussein from Al-Nasr Bin Shuaib from Khalid Bin Ma'ad and Muhammad Bin Fuzail from Abu Hamza Sumali (رضي الله عنه) from Imam Muhammad Baqir (عليه السلام) and hadith continues. The narrator النصر بن شعيب is no where to be found in Rijaal Books hence Majhool النضر بن شعيب: مجهول - له روايات كثيرة في الكتب الأربعة، والراوي عنه كثيرا محمد بن الحسين ووقع في طريق النجاشي و الشيخ والصدوق إلى خالد بن ماد القلانسي ومع ذلك لم يذكر في كتب الرجال غير ما يأتي عن البرقي - ref: المفيد من معجم رجال الحديث - محمد الجواهري - الصفحة ٦٤٠ Link: http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/3021_المفيد-من-معجم-رجال-الحديث-محمد-الجواهري/الصفحة_648 This is sufficient to prove this hadith is baseless and is extremely weak. The next Narrator Khalid bin Ma'ad is Majhool as well. And Muhammad Bin Fuzail is disputed personality. Thus no Imam (عليه السلام) ever interpreted this verse like that.

Bismillah. i used to consider third Testimony a part of Azaan / Iqamah but i have left pronouncing it in Azaan / Iqamah. In This Thread, i will discuss in detail a few things: 1. What made me leave it. 2. Some References and Refutation of Argument that Imams performed Taqqiyah thus left Third Testimony in Adhan. 3. Old arguments that i used to defend third testimony. 4. Its must not be said whether as Mustahab or as a part. 1. What made me leave it: Reference Kitab-Al-Tauheed by Sheikh Sadooq Chapter 34 "Tafseer of Sentences of Azaan / Iqamah" Arabic: Page 232 Urdu: Page 198 It was from Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and he explained Azaan / Iqamah without mention of "Haya Ala Khair ilamal" Then Sheikh Sadooq said: Narrator has left it in narrating due to Taqqiyah. Of course i didn't check sanad and i think there was no need since many other examples are avaliable and i will list them down. Point is, Sheikh Sadooq didn't say this or that narrator is "Majhool" or "Weak" rather he said narrator left it due to Taqqiyah and this stance is completely logical. Since in those times, it was impossible to call it aloud 5 times a day. That would've been an invitation to death. Point is, Sheikh Sadooq never mentioned that narrator also left "Ali un wali ullah" due to Taqqiyah. It proved to me that when Sheikh Sadooq cursed people who added Third Testimony in Azaan / Iqamah, it were his words. Idk why in past, i used to deny that it was said by Sheikh Sadooq. This further testified to the fact that he never considered Third Testimony a part and has even cursed the people who say so. Ok now I will list some narrations in which Haya-Ala-Khair-ilmal was left out in narrations due to Taqqiayh. Man-La-Yahzarahu-Al-Faqih - Volume: 1 Arabic: Page 281 Chapter 44 Urdu: Page 188 Hadith: 846 Imam Jaffer-e-Sadiq (عليه السلام) mentioned Azaan given by Jibreal (عليه السلام) without mention of Haya-Ala-Khair-il-Amal at Miraj. Taqi Majlisi said: Sahih in Rawzat-ul-Muttaqeen Volume 3 page 334 Thus this is Taqqiyah in narrating of course. Similarly Tehzeeb-Al-Ahkam Volume: 2 Page: 66 Ch: 7 Hadith: 5 (212) Complete Adhan from Imam Jaffer-e-Sadiq (عليه السلام) has been narrated (maybe with a weak chain) without mention of Haya-Ala-Khair-il-Amal. But it can serve as an evidence since we already have quoted a Sahih Hadith. Even without these, its logical that shias left it due to Taqqiyah. 2. Some References and Refutation of Argument that Imams performed Taqqiyah thus left Third Testimony in Adhan. Tehzeeb-Al-Ahkam Volume 2 page 64 Hadith 2-209 Hussein Bin Saed - From- Al-Nasr - From - Abullah Bin Sinan - From - Abu Abdullah Jaffer Bin Muhammad (عليه السلام) (Marked as Sahih) Imam (عليه السلام) narrated full Azaan with Haya-Ala-khair-ilamal without Ali-un-wali-ullah Hence proved that no one performed Taqqiyah. If it was Taqqiyah, Haya-ala-kahir-ilamal would've been hidden. Tehzeeb-Al-Ahkam Volume 2 page 64 Hadith 3-210 From - Zurarah && From - Fuzail Bin Yassar Both from Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) the Azaan Given by Jibreal at Miraj (Marked as Hasan Sahih) Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) narrated full Azaan with Haya-Ala-khair-ilamal without Ali-un-wali-ullah Tehzeeb-Al-Ahkam Volume 2 page 65 Hadith 4-211 From - Abi Bakar && From - Kulaib Al-Asadi Both from Imam Jaffer-e-Sadiq (عليه السلام) (Marked has Mosaq but i heard from people that its weak) They narrated full Azaan with Haya-Ala-khair-ilamal without Ali-un-wali-ullah Note:- Even if weak, it has strong support. Look at the list: Zurarah && Fuzail Bin yasar, Thiqa Companions of Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) narrated full Azaan / Iqamah without Ali-un-wali-ullah. Abdullah Bin Sinan - Abi Bakr - Kulaib Al-Asadi , thiqa companions of Imam jaffer e Sadiq (عليه السلام) narrated full Azaan / Qiamah without Ali un wali ullah. Haya-ala-kahri-il-amal has been mentioned this there is no chance of Taqqiyah. 5 of them narrated it and not even 1 mentioned third testimony. This is the real Azaan / Iqamah that Imams narrated without Taqqiyah. Thus this alone is clear cut refutation for all arguments used to pronounce third testimony in Azaan. but inshaAllah in next post i will cover them. When Imams themselves, never added it to Azaan, then being a shia you shouldn't either. Also Qias in Mazhab is haram.

As-salam-o-aliakum. Most of irani scholors have issued fatwas that namaz is invalid when third testimony is recited (in tashahud) and recitation of third testimony in azaan and iqamah considering it a part of it makes them invalid as well. My Questions: 1) Is it okay to recite third testimony in kalima or not? 2) If one considers it a part of kalima then it (kalima) is valid or not? 3) If one believes that Ali((عليه السلام)) was rightful successor of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and doesn't consider third testimony a part of kailma and doesn't recite it in kalima then would he be a Shia? 4) What is the evidence of third testimony? Has Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) ever recited it? Any proofs? 5) If it is only to be said with the niyat of dua etc what is the evidence of it (evidence connected with Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم))? 6) "Ali un Wali ullah is written on the doors of heaven(etc)" is it a truth? If yes then the thing that invalidates namaz and azan, whats the purpose of it being there? 7) Where in Qur'an, third testimony is mentioned? if yes then how come it invalidates namaz and azaan? 8) Where in Qur'an, two testimonies shahadatein have been mentioned? (word) 9) If Third testimony IF is a part of kailma, what do we testify in namaz then? (Tashahud and its meaning). Isn't that hypocrisy of us Shias? 10) In which hadith, is there complete azaan from "Allah hu Akbar" to "La ilaha illalah "? Please let your ans precede the number of question you want to ans. Thanks. Ws-Salam.