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
Sign in to follow this  
Al-Mufeed

Hadeeths About Crimes Of Enemies Of Ahlul Bayt

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Brother macisaac, can you post the actual hadith from the Arabic version of Kitab Sulaym [the link is posted above]?

I don't think the current version explicitly at least has it as such. I looked through quickly, and several times it mentioned that there was going to be twelve Imams. However, if what you posted above is correct, then the earliest manuscript we have is fairly late. Ancient texts (and it is old, no question there. question is, is it authentic) tend to go through changes over time, sometimes by copyist error, sometimes parts getting lost (or new material getting added in), sometimes deliberate changes to the existing text for whatever motivation. In the latter case, it's not too hard to believe a later copyist or someone would have changed the reference that seemed to be stating 13 imams, to make it line up with there being 12, maybe not maliciously but with the idea that the version before him couldn't be correct, so he'd "correct" it.

With the apparent lack of manuscript evidence, we'd have to look to see what the older sources reported about the book, and so far I have two (Najashi and ibn al-Ghadha'iri) that are both saying it said or indicated there were to be thirteen Imams.

Allahu A`lam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsence! Aban bin ayash is relaible the author of ayan ashia said his regarded as weak narrator becasue he is shia .

He means the origin of Aban bin ayash being regared as weak was started by the sunni scholars who regarded him as weak.

And later on he says his thiqah...

Many scholars have also replied to Al-ghatha'ri's comment such as AL-khoei and Al-Majlisi (ra)

Edited by albaqyr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nonsence! Aban bin ayash is relaible the author of ayan ashia said his regarded as weak narrator becasue he is shia .

He means the origin of Aban bin ayash being regared as weak was started by the sunni scholars who regarded him as weak.

And later on he says his thiqah...

Many scholars have also replied to Al-ghatha'ri's comment such as AL-khoei and Al-Majlisi (ra)

That sounds very weak. Where is there any indication from the old books of rijal (the primary ones, not later works like you're mentioning) that Aban b. Abi `Ayyash is thiqqa? To say that our early `ulama regarded him as weak because the Sunnis said he was itself sounds weak. Since when did our ancient `ulama follow the opinions of the `Aam in deciding the status of our narrators? How many of our narrators did the Sunnis reject, yet we still regard as thiqqa?

Also, found this regarding the Kitab Sulaym b. Qays from Shaykh Mufid (ar) from his Tashih al-`Itiqad:

æÃãÇ ãÇ ÊÚáÞ Èå ÃÈæÌÚÝÑ ÑÍãå Çááå ãä ÍÏíË Óáíã ÇáÐí ÑÌÚ Ýíå Åáì ÇáßÊÇÈ ÇáãÖÇÝ Çáíå ÈÑæÇíÉ ÃÈÇä Èä ÃÈí ÚíÇÔ ¡ ÝÇáãÚäì Ýíå ÕÍíÍ ÛíÑ Ãä åÐÇ ÇáßÊÇÈ ÛíÑ ãæËæÞ Èå æÞÏ ÍÕá Ýíå ÊÎáíØ æÊÏáíÓ ÝíäÈÛí ááãÊÏíä Ãä íÌÊäÈ ÇáÚãá Èßá ãÇ Ýíå æáÇ íÚæá Úáì ÌãáÊå æÇáÊÞáíÏ áÑæÇíÊå æáíÝÒÚ Åáì ÇáÚáãÇÁ ÝíãÇ ÊÖãäå ãä ÇáÇÍÇÏíË áíæÞÝæå Úáì ÇáÕÍíÍ ãäåÇ æÇááå ÇáãæÝÞ ááÕæÇÈ

Rough translation, but, in sha Allah, gives the gist of what he is saying:

And as to what Abu Ja`far (Shaykh Saduq) has attached from the hadith of Sulaym that comes from the book that is ascribed to him on the narration of Aban b. Abi `Ayyash, then the meaning of it is sahih however this book is not reliable (mawthuq). There has occured in it confusion and deceit, and the religious person ought to stay away from acting upon everything that is in it, not to depend on all of it and follow its narration, and he should take refuge with the `ulama in what he be in accord with of the hadiths that they may inform him of what is the sahih from it. wallahu al-muwaffiq lis-sawab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the latter case, it's not too hard to believe a later copyist or someone would have changed the reference that seemed to be stating 13 imams, to make it line up with there being 12, maybe not maliciously but with the idea that the version before him couldn't be correct, so he'd "correct" it.

There has to be some mention about this somewhere?

With the apparent lack of manuscript evidence, we'd have to look to see what the older sources reported about the book, and so far I have two (Najashi and ibn al-Ghadha'iri) that are both saying it said or indicated there were to be thirteen Imams.

What about an-Nomani?

Also, found this regarding the Kitab Sulaym b. Qays from Shaykh Mufid (ar) from his Tashih al-`Itiqad:

æÃãÇ ãÇ ÊÚáÞ Èå ÃÈæÌÚÝÑ ÑÍãå Çááå ãä ÍÏíË Óáíã ÇáÐí ÑÌÚ Ýíå Åáì ÇáßÊÇÈ ÇáãÖÇÝ Çáíå ÈÑæÇíÉ ÃÈÇä Èä ÃÈí ÚíÇÔ ¡ ÝÇáãÚäì Ýíå ÕÍíÍ ÛíÑ Ãä åÐÇ ÇáßÊÇÈ ÛíÑ ãæËæÞ Èå æÞÏ ÍÕá Ýíå ÊÎáíØ æÊÏáíÓ ÝíäÈÛí ááãÊÏíä Ãä íÌÊäÈ ÇáÚãá Èßá ãÇ Ýíå æáÇ íÚæá Úáì ÌãáÊå æÇáÊÞáíÏ áÑæÇíÊå æáíÝÒÚ Åáì ÇáÚáãÇÁ ÝíãÇ ÊÖãäå ãä ÇáÇÍÇÏíË áíæÞÝæå Úáì ÇáÕÍíÍ ãäåÇ æÇááå ÇáãæÝÞ ááÕæÇÈ

Rough translation, but, in sha Allah, gives the gist of what he is saying:

And as to what Abu Ja`far (Shaykh Saduq) has attached from the hadith of Sulaym that comes from the book that is ascribed to him on the narration of Aban b. Abi `Ayyash, then the meaning of it is sahih however this book is not reliable (mawthuq). There has occured in it confusion and deceit, and the religious person ought to stay away from acting upon everything that is in it, not to depend on all of it and follow its narration, and he should take refuge with the `ulama in what he be in accord with of the hadiths that they may inform him of what is the sahih from it. wallahu al-muwaffiq lis-sawab.

Can you post the link to this excerpt [the arabic]?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There has to be some mention about this somewhere?

Yes, so far the reference is in Najashi's and ibn al-Ghadha'iri's books of rijal. In terms of the book itself, if the earliest manuscripts we have only go back around 400 or so years, then that'd be too late to determine with certainty what it might have said during the time those two authors mentioned that it said that.

What about an-Nomani?

Yes, he would count as an early scholar. However, how reliable was everything he quoted himself might be the counter question. Remember, during the time of Shaykh Mufid and so on, there seems like there were some scholars who related a number of narrations and so forth that other scholars who were perhaps more critical minded would reject the reliability of.

Can you post the link to this excerpt [the arabic]?

http://al-shia.com/html/ara/books/lib-aqae.../t05.htm#link52

Close to the bottom there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you post the link to this excerpt [the arabic]?

Hmm, the version I linked to right now has a little more too, it also says within that quote:

æ áÇ íÌæÒ ÇáÚãá Úáì ÃßËÑå

And it is not permissible to act upon most of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, so far the reference is in Najashi's and ibn al-Ghadha'iri's books of rijal. In terms of the book itself, if the earliest manuscripts we have only go back around 400 or so years, then that'd be too late to determine with certainty what it might have said during the time those two authors mentioned that it said that.

I was talking about the alteration or modification. That, it must be mentioned somewhere if it has been modified?

Yes, he would count as an early scholar. However, how reliable was everything he quoted himself might be the counter question.

Can't the same thing be said for the two scholars you quoted?

Thank you very much.

Since we are talking of the opinion of early scholars, wouldn't Shaykh Saduq's opinion be more veritable than Shaykh Mufeed's? It seems Shaykh Saduq [RA] did not have any problem with quoting from it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was talking about the alteration or modification. That, it must be mentioned somewhere if it has been modified?

Not necessary really. If we have (that's _if_, again I'm trying to reserve full judgment on this) strong enough evidence that a work said one thing at one time, and then when we look at much later copies it doesn't, it's strongly implies that at some point it has been changed, even if we don't know when it occured, or by whose hand.

Can't the same thing be said for the two scholars you quoted?

Najashi's work of rijal is considered to be the most authoritative one out of all the primary works of rijal. Ibn al-Ghadha'iri is more controversial with some scholars (particularly recent ones it seems) because 1) they're not sure who wrote it 2) they find it overly critical. As to 2, the thing is the work is all about weak narrators, so of course it's going to come across as negative. (There's some suspicion, though we don't have it now, that he wrote or intended to write another work on the reliable narrators). I don't really agree with that assessment anyhow.

Since we are talking of the opinion of early scholars, wouldn't Shaykh Saduq's opinion be more veritable than Shaykh Mufeed's? It seems Shaykh Saduq [RA] did not have any problem with quoting from it?

Allah knows best. However I have generally found Shaykh Mufid (ar) to often be the more critical scholar out of the two, being more careful sometimes in what he would consider an authentic narration or teaching. Much as I respect Shaykh Saduq (ar) and love his books, there are narrations he quotes at times that really don't seem they could be authentic whether fully or partially, and often if you look into their isnads (if there is an isnad mentioned) contain narrators who are recorded to have been weak, liers, fabricators of hadiths, and/or extremists.

But really, I don't like to say one of their opinions somehow has some more inherent value to it just because he said it. It's like what I think a scholar said about Shaykh Saduq's I`tiqad and Shaykh Mufid's Sharh on it (the Tashih I'm quoting from here), which of them is true (as in numerous places Mufid will critique and disagree with Saduq's text)? The truth is between the two of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there are narrations he quotes at times that really don't seem they could be authentic whether fully or partially, and often if you look into their isnads (if there is an isnad mentioned) contain narrators who are recorded to have been weak, liers, fabricators of hadiths, and/or extremists.

That maybe true; but I think that would go for any scholar, wouldn't it?

To give you an example, Shaykh Saduq [RA] rejected the insertion of 'Aliyyan Waliyallah' in the adhan because he considered it to be biddah by the ghuluw or that he considered the notion that the Prophet (S) could forget as the first sign of extremism.

He then quotes from his teacher Mohammad ibn Al-Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn Al-Waleed as saying: "The first stage of extremism is denying the forgetfulness of the Prophet ."

(See Man La Yahdharahul-Faqeeh)

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?sh...t&p=1387212

Whilst Shaykh Mufeed [RA] rejected the definition of ghuluw as defined by Shaykh Saduq [RA] itself. So, it would appear that the discrepancies in their opinions is based on the different definitions which they took.

Therefore, you are correct. Who is right, and who is wrong; it's difficult to tell. But for now, I think those who want to refer to Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays, will refer to it; and those who do not; for whatever reason; will not. And could we say, that both are right in their stances?

Edited by SpIzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That maybe true; but I think that would go for any scholar, wouldn't it?

To give you an example, Shaykh Saduq [RA] rejected the insertion of 'Aliyyan Waliyallah' in the adhan because he considered it to be biddah by the ghuluw

None of the early scholars so far as we know approved of it. Shaykh Saduq simply vocalizes it very clearly, whereas others such as Shaykh Mufid would in describing the correct adhan just not make mention of the addition.

or that he considered the notion that the Prophet [RA] could forget to be the first sign of extremism.

He then quotes from his teacher Mohammad ibn Al-Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn Al-Waleed as saying: "The first stage of extremism is denying the forgetfulness of the Prophet ."

(See Man La Yahdharahul-Faqeeh)

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?sh...t&p=1387212

Whilst Shaykh Mufeed [RA] rejected the definition of ghuluw as defined by Shaykh Saduq [RA] itself. So, it would appear that the discrepancies in their opinions is based on the differences of definitions which they took.

Actually, the difference is on what narration they were accepting and some of the logic underlying this. Shaykh Saduq accepted a hadith that said that the Prophet (pbuh) made a mistake of some sort (I'd have to refer to it to refresh my memory) once when leading prayers. Shaykh Mufid rejected this.

In many cases the crux of their differences was because Shaykh Saduq would quote a hadith to explain some point or other (as was his usual method), but then Shaykh Mufid would say that the hadith Saduq is quoting is shadh and not to be acted upon. He might then precede to offer a different understanding of said article of belief.

Therefore, you are correct. Who is right, and who is wrong; it's difficult to tell. But for now, I think those who want to refer to Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays, will refer to it; and those who do not; for whatever reason; will not. And could we say, that both are right in their stances?

Sure, people will do what they will do. But that said, it can't both be authentic and a forgery at the same time, so one of the two are wrong (or alternatively, that it'd be a work which has a mixture of authentic and inauthentic traditions, to whatever extent. The way I'm reading Mufid here seems to imply that, though that the majority of it is problematic. Whereas the view ibn al-Ghadha'iri is reporting seems to be that it is a complete forgery.)

Edited by macisaac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None of the early scholars so far as we know approved of it. Shaykh Saduq simply vocalizes it very clearly, whereas others such as Shaykh Mufid would in describing the correct adhan just not make mention of the addition.

Actually, the difference is on what narration they were accepting and some of the logic underlying this. Shaykh Saduq accepted a hadith that said that the Prophet (pbuh) made a mistake of some sort (I'd have to refer to it to refresh my memory) once when leading prayers. Shaykh Mufid rejected this.

In many cases the crux of their differences was because Shaykh Saduq would quote a hadith to explain some point or other (as was his usual method), but then Shaykh Mufid would say that the hadith Saduq is quoting is shadh and not to be acted upon. He might then precede to offer a different understanding of said article of belief.

My point here was that both the scholars differed on the understanding of the ahadith. Therefore, while Shaykh Saduq (perhaps) considered the hadith authentic enough to support a particular belief, Shaykh Mufeed did not. And the differences came about, in their taking different definitions of a particular "concept/term".

Sure, people will do what they will do. But that said, it can't both be authentic and a forgery at the same time, so one of the two are wrong (or alternatively, that it'd be a work which has a mixture of authentic and inauthentic traditions, to whatever extent. The way I'm reading Mufid here seems to imply that, though that the majority of it is problematic. Whereas the view ibn al-Ghadha'iri is reporting seems to be that it is a complete forgery.)

Of course, there is only one truth. But I was talking about the masses.

Anyway, even if Shaykh Mufeed considers the book unreliable not to quote from it; Shaykh Saduq considered it "reliable" enough. As did an-Numani, Allamah Majlisi and Sayyed Khu'i [who is apparently of the opinion that while the contents of the book are correct; the fact of the book being attributed to Sulaym is doubtful].

Shaykh Mufeed did advise to refer to the scholars who will inform about what is sahih in it and what is not. So as you said, he does not reject it outrightly; but appears to have advised the masses to adopt a more cautious approach towards accepting/rejecting that is in the book. Which, I guess, would go for any other book.

And that's precisely what we are doing.

Edited by SpIzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam U Alaykum,

I had forgoten about this thread, however today while doing some reading I came across an interesting book written by Alamah Sayed Jafar Murtada al Amili called "Tragedy of Al-Zahra (as) doubts cast and rebuttals" and it had a section dedicated to refuting claims that kitab al sulaim is false. I think he adresses alot of the points fairly well.

“They Relied Upon SALIM’s Book, Which is Not Reliable”

There are some people who are not pleased by deriving evidence from the traditions recorded in the book written by SALIM ibn Qais which deal with al-Zahra’ (A.S.). Says one of them, “Bring me anything recorded in a book other than this one.” What is the secret of taking such a stand towards SALIM and his book?

He even says, “The book of SALIM ibn Qais, which is the authority on the subject (these are his own words), is not reliable according to the testimony of Shaikh al-Mufid and others, and there is in it a great deal of mix-up as everyone knows.”

We say the following:

FIRST: SALIM’s book is not the authority in what has come to us of the bulk of events which al-Zahra’ (A.S.) underwent. Added to what SALIM’s book contains are numerous narrations consecutively reported from the Infallible Imams (A.S.) as well as historical texts which support each other and which historians of various sects have reported. Int this book, we will cite many of them by the will of Allah Almighty.

SECOND: SALIM’s book is regarded to be one of the first of what the ancient generations wrote, and it represents the basics and what is fixed of this sect in general terms and what the scholars endorsed and accepted and with which they were pleased. We do not find in it any traces of the alleged “mix-up” nor did the person who makes such a claim provide one single example in support of his claim. Nothing in it suggests to us the existence of any “mix-up” other than such a claim.

Perhaps some people are not pleased with it because they do not agree with a great deal of its contents. Rather, it contradicts what the man suggests. We have no reason to exclude SALIM’s book from our historical and doctrinal education. Its seniority and the personal interaction between its author and the Commander of the Faithful (A.S.) and a number of Imams after him gives it preference over all other books written scores of years after it.

In order to make the picture clearer, so that it may become more obvious and more precisely expressive of the truth about this book and the prestige it enjoys and the “justifications,” if any, of such doubts, we would like to say the following:

Origin of Casting Doubt About SALIM’s Book

There are two reasons why some people cast doubts about the book by SALIM ibn Qais:

FIRST: A statement made by Muhammed ibn (first caliph) Abu Bakr to his father as the latter was nearing his death:

It is recorded in SALIM’s book that SALIM met `Abd ar-Rahman ibn Ghunm who informed him what Mu`ath ibn Jabal, Salim slave of Aba Huthayfah and Aba `Ubaydah told him with regard to when their own demise would approach. They said that when they saw the Messenger of Allah (A.S.) and Ali (A.S.) at the time of their demise, each one of them informed the other of going to hell. Then SALIM met Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr who told him what Abu Bakr, too, told him shortly before his demise. Then Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr told him that `Abdullah ibn `Omer [ibn al-Khattab) had heard his father saying the same at the time of his death. He provided him with details of what went on between him and his father. These are very serious charges which cannot be taken seriously by a child two or three years old. Rather, someone with full awareness, understanding and knowledge of the affairs is needed to digest them. Then Muhammed informed SALIM that he visited the Commander of the Faithful (A.S.) and informed him of what he had heard his father saying and what (`Abdullah) ibn `Omer said as he quoted his father. The Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him said, “Someone who is more truthful than these five individuals[1], someone more truthful than you and than the son of `Omer, had confided in him. (He [a] meant the Messenger of Allah (A.S.) who confided in Ali (A.S.) prior to his demise, or he was informed by the angel who spoke to the Imams, peace be upon them.

After the martyrdom of Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr in Egypt, SALIM met the Commander of the Faithful (A.S.) and asked him about what Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr had said to him. He (A.S.) said to him, “Muhammed, may Allah be merciful to him, said the truth. By Allah, he is alive, receiving his sustenance.” Then he endorsed Muhammed’s statement that all his wasis are narrators of hadith.[2] As regarding the details of what went on between Muhammed (son of Abu Bakr) and his father at the time of the latter’s death, it is recorded in SALIM’s book[3]; so, whoever wishes may refer to it.

We would like to say the following in comment to all the above:

Shaikh al-Islam, `allama al-Majlisi, may Allah have mercy on him, the researcher-scholar and the genius renown man that he was, said the following:

“This narrative is one of the reasons for assaulting SALIM’s book because Muhammed (ibn Abu Bakr) was born during the year of Hijjatul-Wada’ (the Farewell Pilgrimage), as is well documented. So, his age at the time of his father’s death was two years and a few months. How could he, then, speak such words, and how could he remember such tales?! This may be the insertion of copyists or narrators. Or it may be said that this is one of the miracles of the Commander of the Faithful (A.S.) which he manifested to others. Some men of virtue have said that `Abdullah ibn `Omer admonished his father at the time of the latter’s death. The truth is that such an accusation cannot be directed at a book so well known to the traditionists, one upon which men in the caliber of al-Kulayni and al-Saduq and other ancient scholars reliable. Most of its contents are in agreement with what is narrated through authentic isnad in major reliable references. It is seldom that we find a book dealing with usal and which is free from such stuff.”[4]

Added to what `allama al-Majlisi states are the following points:

1. Shaikh Muhammed Baqir al-Zanjani has said, “Al-Saffar, al-Saduq, Shaikh al-Mufid, Ibrahim ibn Muhammed al-Thaqafi before them narrated the exact tradition ver batim through isnad to SALIM but through venues other than his book.”[5]

2. Segments of this tradition are narrated in other books such as Taqrab al-Ma`arif by the respected Faqih Shaikh Abul-Sal ah, Al-amali by the latter’s professor, Shaikh al-Mufid, in Al-K afiya fa Ibtal Tawbat al-Khati’a, also by al-Mufid, in Madanat al-Ma`ajiz by the revered `allama Sayyid Hashim al-Bahrani who quotes Ibn `Abbas and Ka`b al-Ahbar.[6]

The issue of Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr talking to his father at the time of his death is mentioned by the authority al-Tabari in his book titled Kamil Baha’i and by al-Ghazali in Sirr al-`alaman and by Ibn al-Jawzi in his Tathkirat al-Khawass.[7]

3. Remains to indicate is that what is stated about how old Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr was at that time is not the final argument here, for some have stated that he was about five years old when his father died, if he was born in 8 A.H. or four if he was born during Hijjatul-Wada`, 9 A.H., for that child could have been a genius.

`Allama al-Majlisi thinks that it could have been a miracle which Allah, Praise to Him, bestowed upon the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him.[8]

[1]These five individuals are: Mu`ath ibn Jabal, Salim slave of Aba Huthayfah, Aba `Ubaydah [ibn al-Jarrah], `Omer and Aba Bakr, and they are the ones who wrote down the covenant wherein they swore to expel Ali (A) from the position assigned to him by the Prophet (A) as ordered by the Almighty.

[2]Refer to the Introduction to Salam’s book by Shaikh Muhammed Baqir al-Ansari al-Khoeni, Vol. 1, pp. 187-88 and Vol. 2, pp. 816-824.

[3]Refer to the book by Salam ibn Qais, Vol. 2, pp. 821-23 edited by Shaikh Muhammed Baqir al-Ansari al-Khoeni.

[4]Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 30, pp. 133-34.

[5]Refer to Basa’ir al-Darajat, p. 372. `Ilal al-Shara’i`, Vol. 1, p. 182. Al-Ikhtisas, p. 324. Al-Kafiya fa Ibtal Tawbat al-Khati’a by Shaikh al-Mufid as quoted by al-Majlisi in his book Bihar al-Anwar (an old edition), Vol. 8, p. 199. Al-Thaqafi, Al-Gharat, Vol. 1, p. 326.

[6]Refer to the Introduction by al-Ansari al-Khoeni to the book of Salam ibn Qais, Vol. 1, pp. 191-92.

[7]Refer to the Introduction to Salam’s book by al-Ansari al-Khoeni, Vol. 1, p. 194 and in its footnote from Istiqsa’ al-Afham, Vol. 1, p. 514 and from Kashf al-Hujub, p. 445 and Tathkirat al-Khawass.

[8]Refer to the Introduction to Salam’s book, Vol. 1, pp. 91-196.

Section’s Conclusion

No matter what, the existence of one problematic tradition in a book does not justify s[Edited Out]ping the whole book altogether. There is always the possibility that there is an insertion in it by someone, or the author himself may have had an oversight, that is, when he meant to say `Abd al-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr (rather than saying Muhammed ibn Abu Bakr), or some other possibility. In respected books, there are many such matters, yet nobody undermined their reliability.

The Second Issue: the Thirteen Imams

SALIM’s book contains a narrative about the Prophet (A.S.) saying, “Surely Allah cast a look at the people of the earth and chose from among them two men: one of them is I, so He sent me as His Messenger, and the other is Ali ibn Abi Talib...,” till he comes to say, “Surely Allah cast a second look, and He chose after us twelve wasis from among my Ahl al-Bayt, so He made them the elite among my nation, one after the other.”[1]

We say that this cannot be used to discredit the book for the following reasons:

1. It is quite likely that the phrase “...He chose after us twelve wasis” may somehow contain an error in transcribing: one letter looking like another. `Allama al-Majlisi and others have all said, “We have found in some copies accurate wording without any insinuation.”[2] Al-Majlisi has also suggested that the original text referred to eleven Imams but the copyists distorted it.[3] What leads to this conclusion is the fact that the same tradition contains the accurate wording in another part of the book.[4]

2. SALIM’s book, according to someone’s statistics[5], contains a list of twenty-four other references besides the one under discussion. They all contain the text that the Imams are twelve in clear and unambiguous way.[6] So, it does not make any sense to stick to the last text in order to cast doubt about the entire book in the pretext that it counts thirteen Imams.

If this single place is indicative of the book being labelled as “inaccurate,” let twenty-four others prove its accuracy and originality especially in the light of the very strong possibility that there was a mistake in transcribing one word as we have referred to above.

3. Ayatullah Sayyid [Abul Qasim] al-Khoei (may Allah sanctify his resting place) has said, “If a book contains something wrong in one or two places, this does not indicate that it is inaccurate. What would you say about the existence of many more in most books, including Al-Kafi, which is the most reliable book of hadith and the best written?”[7]

`Allama al-Majlisi has said, “... and this cannot be a reason for discrediting, for seldom do we find a book containing many times as many insinuations and alterations. These things exist in Al-Kafi and in other highly respected books as every researcher finds out.”[8]

4. Al-Mas`adi, who died in 345 A.H., has said, “... The final answer regarding the Twelve Imams, the ones counted by SALIM ibn Qais al-Hilali in his book, ...”[9]

A number of scholars have counted it among the ancient references which discuss the Twelve Imams, peace be upon them, so refer to it.[10] This proves that someone made an error in writing this tradition while making copies of the original.

5. The critic, Shaikh Muhammed Taqi al-Tasatturi, has mentioned many such places in Al-Kafi, and we would like here to cite what Shaikh al-Tasatturi[11], may Allah have mercy on his soul, has said:

“This is an error of expression committed by the narrators; otherwise, the same exists in Al-Kafi, too. For example, in a chapter regarding the Twelve Imams, the Prophet (A.S.) is quoted as having said, “I and twelve from among my offspring, and you, Ali, are the button of the earth... If the Twelve from among my offspring are gone, the earth will collapse with its people.”[12]

In another narrative, he (A.S.) is also quoted as having said, “From among my offspring are Twelve naqabs instilled with knowledge, the last of them is al-Qa’im.”[13] Both traditions were narrated by Aba Sa`ad al-`Asfari in the original of which the text says “eleven.”[14]

In a third transmission (of the same tradition), Jabir [ibn `Abdullah] al-Ansari says, “I visited Fatima (A.S.) and she was holding a tablet in her hands on which the names of the wasis from among her offspring were recorded. I found them to be twelve in number.”[15] The same transmission is recorded by al-Saduq in his book titled Ikmal ad-Din wa Itma m al-Ni`ma as well as in `Uyan Akhbar al-Rida (A.S.) and Al-Khisal without the phrase “from among her offspring.”[16]

In a yet fourth transmission (of the same tradition), Imam al-Baqir (A.S.) is quoted as having said, “The Twelve Imams from the Progeny of Muhammed (A.S.), from among the offspring of the Messenger of Allah (A.S.) and from the offspring of Ali ibn Aba Talib, blessings of Allah be upon both of them, are all informed of hadith.”[17] And he narrated it in Al-Khisal and in `Uyan Akhbar al-Rida (A.S.) in this wording: “After the Messenger of Allah (A.S.) they all are spoken to, and Ali ibn Aba Talib is one of them.”[18]

In a fifth narrative from Aba Sa`ad al-Khudri, in the incident involving a Jew asking about the Imams after the Prophet (A.S.) and the Commander of the Faithful (A.S.), blessings of Allah be upon both of them, he (A.S.) said to him, “This nation has Twelve Imams of Guidance from among the Progeny of its Prophet, and they are from me...” till he came say, “As to those who are with him in his house, they are twelve from among his offspring.”[19]

The gist of this narrative is recorded by al-Nu`mani without the phrase “from among the Progeny of its Prophet.”[20] Such is the wording of Shaikh al-Tasatturi as exists in Qamas al-Rijal.[21]

[1]Book of Salam ibn Qais, Vol. 2, p. 857.

[2]Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 22, p. 150. See the Introduction to Salam’s book, Vol. 1, p. 181.

[3]Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 22, p. 150.

[4]Refer to the book by Salam ibn Qais, Vol. 2, p. 686.

[5]This is a reference to Shaikh Muhammed Baqir al-Ansari al-Khoeini.

[6]Refer to the Introduction written by Muhammed Baqir al-Ansari al-Khoeini to the book by Salam ibn Qais.

[7]Mu`ujam Rijal al-Hadith, Vol. 8, p. 225. He is also quoted in the Introduction to Salam’s book written by Shaikh Muhammed Baqir al-Ansari al-Khoeini, p. 170.

[8]Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 22, p. 150. He is quoted in the Introduction by Shaikh Muhammed Baqir al-Ansari to Salam’s book.

[9]Al-Tanbeeh wal Ishraf, p. 198.

[10]Refer to the Introduction by al-Ansari al-Khoeini to the book of Salam ibn Qais, Vol. 1, p. 172.

[11]See the Introduction to the book by Salam ibn Qais, Vol. 1, p. 183, written by al-Ansari al-Khoeini as cited by the critic Shaikh al-Tasatturi, may Allah have mercy on him.

[12]Al-Kulayni, Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 534.

[13]Ibid.

[14]Aba Sa`ad al-`Asfari, Al-Asl, p. 1.

[15]Al-Kulayni, Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 532.

[16]Al-Saduq, Ikmal ad-Dan, Vol. 3, p. 311. `Uyan Akhbar al-Rida (A) Vol. 1, p. 37. Al-Khisal, Vol. 49, Chapter 12.

[17]Al-Kulayni, Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 533.

[18]Al-Saduq, `Uyan Akhbar al-Rida (A) Vol. 1, p. 46; Al-Khisal, Vol. 49, Chapter 12.

[19]Al-Kulayni, Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 232.

[20]Al-Nu`mani, Al-Ghayba, p. 67.

[21]Al-Tasatturi, Qamus al-Rijal, Vol. 4, p. 452.

http://almujtaba.com/books/tragedy/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
His worst criticism is reserved Uthman and you dont wont me to quote the ugly specifics unless compelled to do so.

(salam) (bismillah) Is there something that is not mentioned,

please tell us who dont have the posibility to read the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Muwiyah made Ziyad Bin Sumaya governor over the people of Kufa and linked it with Basrah. As Ziyad had lived in Kufa during the time of Ali[ra], he was aware of all Shias living there. He dragged Shias from every stone and mount and murdered them, threatened them, cut off their hands and legs, made needles pierce their eyes, hanged them over trees, exiled them from Iraq and made them homeless to the extent that no renowned Shia remained there in Iraq”

Nisaih Kafia, page 70

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Attack on the House of Imam Ali (as), the Beating/Murder of Fatima Zahra and Sayedna Mohsin, and Hadhrat Ali's bayyat to Abu Bakr by force.

Kitab al Sulaim ibn Qais al Hilali, Hadith #4

Aban ibn Abi Ayyash has narrated from Sualym ibn Qays. He (Sulaym) heard from Salman Farsi, who said: "After the Holy Prophet (pbuh) passed away and people did what they did, Abu Bakr, Umar, Abu Ubaydah ibn Jarrah came to people and told the Ansar their argument. The Ansar told them the argument of Hadhrat Ali (as) , They (Abu Bakr, Umar, Abu Ubaydah) said, "O group of Ansar, the Quraysh are more deserving of the Amr (caliphate) than you, because the Holy Prophet (pbuh) was form Quraysh, and Muhajireen are better than you since Allah in his Book has spoken about them first, and has given them merits. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) has said, "Imam will be from Quraysh".

Salman says: "I went to Hadhrat Ali (as) when he was giving the ghusl to the Prophet (pbuh) since the holy Prophet had said that non other than Ali must give him ghusl. When the Holy Prophet said to Hadhrat Ali that non other than him should give him the ritual bath, Hadhrat Ali had asked "O Prophet of Allah, who would help me in giving the bath?" The Holy Prophet had replied "Archangel Jibra'eel will help". So when giving the bath when ever Hadhrat Ali wanted to turn any part of the Holy Prophet's body, the part would turn itself.

After Hadrhat Ali had completed giving the ritual bath, hunut and shroud, he let me in, and he also let Abu Dhar, Miqdad and Lady Fatimah, Hassan and Hussayn in. Hadhrat Ali stood in front and we stood behind him and recited the prayer. And Ayesha was in her room - she did not know any thing. Allah had put a curtain over her eyes.

After that ten people from Muhajireen and ten people from Ansar- they were coming in and praying and going out until such time that there was no one left from the Muhajireen and Ansar who had not prayed."

Salman said: "I todl Hadrhat Ali when he was giving the bath to the Holy Prophet what the community had done and I told him Abu Bakr is at this time on the pulpit of the Holy Prophet and people are not happy to pay allegiance with one hand but they are paying allegiance with both hands , left and right!" (meaning they are very excited to give him allegiance)

Hadhrat Ali replied, " O Salman, do you know who was the first to pay allegiance to him on the pulpit of the Holy Prophet?

Salam:"No, but I can say that I saw him in the shade of Bani Saeedah at the time when the Ansar were quarreling. The first one who paid allegiance was Mughirah ibn Sha'abah, after him Bashir ibn Saeed paid allegiance, then Abu Ubaydah Jarrah, then Umar ibn Khattab, then Saalim Mawla Abi Huzyifah and Ma'aaz ibn Jabal."

Hadhrat Ali said, "I am not asking about these people, but do you know who was the first to pay allegiance when he first went on the pulpit?"

Salman: "No, but I saw one very old man who supported himself with a stick and had a mark in between his two eyes; the mark was very dry. He went to the pulpit first of all and bowed and was crying and sayig, "Praise is due to Allah wo did not make me die until I saw you in this place. You stretch your hand." So he (Abu Bakr) stretched his hand and the old man paid allegiance. Then the old man said: "This religion is like the religion of Adam." Then he got down from the pulpit and walked otu fo the masjid."

At the time Hadhrat Ali asked, "O Salman, do you know who that person was?" Slaman said: "No but I did not like his talk-it was like he was pleased with the sad demise of the Holy Prophet."

Hadhrat Ali said, "This was Iblis -May Alalh curse him. The Holy Prophet had informed me that Iblis and his top companions were present when, by God's command, the Holy Prophet had declared me Caliph in Ghadir Khum, and the Holy Prophet had informed people that I was Mawla of everyone and he (the Prophet) had commanded people present that they should pass this message to those that were not present at Ghadir. So the companions of Iblis (Shaytan) came and told him: "This community is blessed and is infallible. Now you and we have no power to manipulate them since they have been told who is their refuge and who is their leader after their Prophet." At that time iblis was saddended and he went away from there."

Hadhrat Ali said "After this I was informed by the Holy Prophet when he said: "People will pay allegiance to Abu Bakr in the shade of Bani Sa'eedah, when they will quarrel through my right and authority. After that they will come to mosque and the first person that will pay allegiance to him on my pulpit will be Iblis who will come in the form of an old man and say so and so. After that he will go out and gather his companions, Shaytan and Iblis. They will all go in to prostration and say: Oh my Lord and my Almighty You are the one who made Adam come out of Heaven and said which community is it that which will not deviate after the death of our Prophet? Never - You thought that I will not be able to manipulate them (and I will have no ways)- Now how do you people find me with what I did with them when they left Allah's obedience and the command of their Prophet, and this is what Allah has said:

"And certainly the Shaitan found his conjecture concerning them so they follow him except a party of believers." (Surah Saba:20)

Iblis made his thought a true action and people obeyed him except a few faithful ones"

Salman said: "When it was night, Hadhrat Ali made Lady Fatimah ride and took the hands of his sons Hassan and Hussain and went to each and every house of those Muhajireen and Ansar who were of Badr, and reminded them of his rights and called them to help him. But except for four people nobody came forward to help. He asked the helpers to shave their heads and in the morning go to him with their weapons ready to help and pay allegiance to death. In the morning except four, no one kept their promise."

So I (Sulaim) asked: "Who were these four?"

Salman replied: "Myself, Abu Dhar, Miqdad and Zubayr ibn Awam.

Then on the second night Hadhrat Ali returned to all those who did not come and reminded them to fulfil their promise. They all said they would turn up the next morning but except us no one turned up. On the thrid night Hadhrat Ali went again and again on the third day except us no one turned up.

When hadhrat Ali saw their treachery and disloyalty, he remained inside his house and started compiling the Quran, and did not come out of the house until the whole Quran was compiled. At that time verses were written in wood, skin and pieces.

After he had collected all the verses and wrote with his own hands in the manner the verses were revealed with their meanings, and wrote those verses that were revealed to replace previous verses, and also the verses that were those on which action was no longer required, then Abu Bakr sent people to his house to come out and pay allegiance to him. He (Ali) sent a message saying that he was busy and he had taken an oath that except for prayers he wil not wear a cloak until he has collected and compiled the Quran. So for a few days they kept quiet. Hadhrat Ali compiled and completed the whole quran in one piece of cloth and came to people when they were with Abu Bakr in Masjd e Nabawi. He very loudly said "O People since the passing of the Holy Prophet I was busy giving him the ritual bath, and compiling the Quran, until it has been collected in one piece of cloth. There is not any verse that Allah t'ala has revealed which is not n the compilation, and there is not a single verse that the Holy Prophet did not make me read, and there is no verse of which the Holy Prophet did not tell me the meaning. " Then Ali Said to those people: "So that you do not tell me Surely we were heedless of this. " (surah Araf 172)

Then Hadhrat Ali said to them, "So that on the Day of Judgement you do not say that I did not call you to help me and did not remind you of my right, and I did not call you to the book of Allah from beginning to end."

Umar said, "You are calling us to you, but the Quran that we have is sufficiant for us." Then Hadhrat Ali went home.

Umar told Abu Bakr, "Send somebody to Hadhrat Ali to ask him to pay allegiance since until such time he does not pay allegiance there is no value attached to the caliphate, and if he pays allegiance, we will give him amnesty." Abu Bakr then sent a man to Hadhrat Ali to say: "The caliph of the Prophet of Allah was calling you." The man came and said this to Hadhrat Ali. Hadhrat Ali replied: "Glory be to Alalh, how soon have you wrongly accused the Holy Prophet! Abu Bakr knows it and those present near him also know it that Allah and his prophet have not appointed any caliph except my self". The man returned and told Abu Bakr what Hadhrat Ali had said.

Abu Bakr asked the man to return to Hadhrat Ali and say: "Amirul Mumineen, Abu Bakr, is calling you." The man returned to Hadhrat Ali's house and said what Abu Bakr had told him. Hadhrat Ali replied: "Glory be to Allah, by god, it has not been long, when everything is forgotten. By God, he knows that this title is not appropriate for any one except my self. The Holy Prophet orderd him and he was seventh in number, who had saluted me as Amirul Mumineen. So Abu Bakr and his companion Umar, from the seven people asked him (the Prophet) "Is this an order from Allah and his Prophet?", and the Holy Prophet said to both of them: "Yes surrely, this is true from Allah and his Prophet. No doubt, he is Amirul Mumineen (leader of believers), Saydul Muslimeen (leader of Muslims), Sahibu Liwail (the standard bearer on the Day of Judgement), Ghuml Muhajileen (the one whos forehead shines). On the day of Judgment Allah will make him sit on Sirat (the path) and he will make his friends go to Paradise and his enemies to Hell."

The man returend to tell Abu Bakr what Hadhrat Ali (as) had told him. That day the man kept quiet.

At night Hadhrat Ali made Lady fatimah ride and held the hands of his two sons Hassan and Hussain and there was no companion of the Holy Prophet left to whose house he did not go, and bearing Allah as his witness, told of his rights and called them to help him, but except for us four no one agreed. We shaved our heads and offered our help to him. Amongst us the one who had most intelligently helped him was Zubayr.

When Hadhrat Ali saw that people had left him and did not help him, and all of them had joined Abu Bakr and showed him respect and obeyed him, he stayed at home.

Umar asked Abu Bakr, "What is it that has stopped you from sending somebody to Ali to ask him to pay allegiance because, except him and them four, there was nobody left who had not paid allegiance?" Abu Bakr was little softer at heart, kinder cleverer and more thoughtful. The other one was very short-tempered hard-hearted and an oppressor.

Abu Bakr replied by asking whom he should send to Ali, to which Umar replied that he was sending Qunfuz, who was veyr tough, short tempered, an opressor and from Tulaqa (those people who accepted Islam in mecca only after the prophet took over the city) and was from the tribe of Adi ibn Ka'ab.

Abu Bakr sent him to Hadhrat Ali (as) and sent more men to help him.

He went and requested permission from Hadhrat Ali. Hadhrat Ali refused permission. The helpers of Qunfuz returned to Abu Bakr and Umar. These two were siting in the mosque with pepole gathered around them. They all told they were not given permission by Hadhrat Ali. Umar told them to go back and if Hadhrat Ali refuses, enter with out permission. They went and asked permission. Lady Fatimah told them that she was not permitting them to enter. They returned, but Qunfuz, the cursed, remained. His companions told Umar that Lady Fatimah had said such and such and she was not permitting them to enter. Umar said angrily, "What do we have to do with women?"

Then Umar todl those people who had gathered around him to collect wood. They all collected, and Umar himself carried the wood and went to the house of Hadhrat Ali, Lady Fatimah and their two sons and aranged wood all around the house and then said in a voice loud enough to make Hadhrat Ali and Lady Fatimah hear: "By God, O Ali, come out and pay allegiance to the caliph of the Propeht of Allah, otherwise we will burn your house."

Lady Fatimah (as) said: "O Umar, what do you ahve to do with us?"

He replied: "Open the door, otherwise we will burn your house."

Lady Fatimah (as) said: "O Umar, are you not affaid of Allah and are you entering our house?"

Umar refused to return. He asked fire to be brought and he set the door on fire, then he pushed it and entered. Lady Fatimah came in front and scrambled loudly: "O Father, O Prophet of Allah."

Umar raised his sword with the shield and hit her on the side. She screamed: "O Father". He then lifted a whip and hit her on the hand and she cried: "O prophet of Allah, Abu Bakr and Umar have acted very badly after you."

Hadhrat Ali rushed, held him by the neck and pushed him away and Umar fell down and hurt his neck and nose. Hadhrat Ali intended to kill him. He remembered what the Holy Prophet had said and he said, "By him who gave Muahmmad the status of Prophethood, O son of Sahak, if the Book from Allah had not been revealed and if the Holy Prophet had not taken a promise from me before then you would have known you could have never entered my house."

Umar, complaining, sent somebody, and some people came and entered the house. Hadhrat Ali went forward to lift his sword so Qunfuz returned to Abu Bakr and Abu bakr was frightened that Hadhrat Ali would come at him with his sword, since he knew Hadhrat Ali's bravery and determination.

Abu Bakr said to Qunfuz: "Return to Ali's house and if he comes out then fine, otherwise enter the house. If he (Ali) refuses then set the house on fire." Qunfuz, the cursed, returned and entered the house, with out permission, with his companions. Hadhrant Ali went forward with his sword- these people who were so many went forward against him, got hold of him, raised their swords, arrested him and tied a rope around his neck.

Lady Fatimah came in between Hadhrat Ali and those people near the door of the house, so Qunfuz hit her with a whip. When she passed away the mark of the wound was still on her shoulder. May Alalh curse Qunfuz and the one who sent him.

Then they pulled Ali by force until they brought him to Abu Bakr. Umar was standing with a sword behind Abu Bakr. Khalid ibn Walid, Abu Ubaydah ibn Jarrah and Salim Mawla Abu Huzayfah, Ma'az ibn Jabal, Mughirah ibn Sha'aba and others were siting near Abu Bakr with weapons in their hands."

Sulaym says: " I asked Salman: "Did these people enter the house of Lady Fatimah without permission?". He replied: "Yes by God, when she did not even have a chaddor over her. So she screamed: "O father, O Prophet of Allah, Abu Bakr and Umar behaved so badly after you, while your eyes have not even closed in the grave." and she was saying this loudly".

Salman said, " I saw Abu Bakr and those siting near him crying with tears and whoever was there was crying except Umar, Khalid ibn Walid, and Mughirah ibn Sha'aba. Umar was saying, "We have nothing to do with women and their opinion."

Salman said: "Hadhrat Ali was taken to Abu Bakr and he was saying: "By God, if I had my sword in my hand, then you would see that you would have never reached this stage. By God, I do not consider myself bad in doing jihad with you. If I had even forty people then I would disperse your community. May God curse that community who paid allegiance to me and then became disloyal."

When Abu Bakr saw Hadhrat Ali he scramed and loudly said, "Realse him."

Hadhrat Ali said "O Abu Bakr, how soon did you act against the Holy Prophet! And with what rights and reasons you called people to pay you allegiance? Did you not pay allegiance to me (yesterday) by the command of Allah and his Prophet?"

Qunfuz the cursed, had hit Lady Fatimah with a whip when she came in between Ali and the people and Umar had sent him saying: "If Fatimah comes in between you and her husband, hit her", so Qunfuz, the cursed forced her to take refuge behind the door and he pushed the door so her rib hear the side got broken and she had a miscarriage. So she was continuously ill until she attained martyrdom in this.

Salman said: "When Ali was taken to Abu Bakr, Umar very rudely told Ali: "Pay allegiance to Abu Bakr and leave your useless talks." Ali asked: "If I do not pay allegiance what will you people do?" People said "We wil kill you with humiliation and degradation. Ali said: "That will mean that you killed Abdullah and the brother of the Prophet of Allah." Abu Bak said: "As far as Abdullah is concerned it is correct but we do not accept you as the brother of the Prophet of Allah." Ali said: "Do you deny that the Holy Prophet had declared brotherhood between him and myself?" Abu bakr said "Yes". Ali repeated this thrice.

Then Ali turned towards those people who had gathered around Abu Bakr and said: "O group of Muslims, Muhajireen and Ansar. I am asking you to swear By Alalh that you had heard the Holy Prophet say such and such in Ghadeer Khum and say such and such in the Battle of Tabuk." He did not leave anything that the Holy Prophet had said, until he reminded them of absolutely everything.

Everyone replied: "Indeed, Yes" (i.e. we heard it)

When Abu Bakr heard this he got frightened that people might help Ali (as) to stop what was being done. He quickly said: "What you have said is true and I have heard it with my own ears, I knew and my heart remembered it but I also heard after that the Holy Prophet say: "We Ahlulbayt are those whom Allah has chosen and gave us status and has chosen the hereafter against this world for us. And Allah has not decreed that Prophethood and caliphate be the same."

Ali asked: "Is there any one among the companions of the Holy Prophet who can be a witness to what you have said?" Umar said: "The caliph of the Holy Prophet is saying the truth. I have heard the Prophet of Allah saying this." Abu Ubaydah, Salim Mawla Abu Huzayfah and Ma'az ibn Jabal said: "He has told the truth. We have heard it from the Prophet of Allah."

Ali (as) said to him: "You have completed your cursed Sahifa, which you agreed upon in Ka'abah (i.e if Muhammad is killed or dies you people will take away the Amr from Ahlubayt.)

Abu Bakr asked: "How did you know about this? We did not tell you."

Ali said, "O Zubayr you, and Salman you, and Abu Dhar and Miqdad you - I am asking you for the sake of Allah and for the sake of Islam, did you not hear the Holy Prophet say when you were listening: "This one and that one- until he counted upto five- they have made between them a written agreement and have vowed to keep it if I am killed or I die?" They replied: "Indeed, yes we heard that these people have made an agreement and vowed to keep it if he is killed or dies. They will overpower you and O Ali, they will remove you from this caliphate."

Ali said: "When the Holy Prophet said this I asked "O Prophet of Allah may my parents be sacrificed for you, when this happens what do you instruct me to do?" Salman, Abu Dhar, Miqdad and Zubair said, "He instructed you that if you find helpers then you fight against them and get your rights, if you do not get helpers then you pay allegiance and save your blood." Ali said: "By God if those forty peopel who paid allegiance to me had been loyal to me then I would have fought against you in the way of Allah. But remember By God, until the Day of Judgement your generation will not get it (caliphate). And what makes your talks a lie - which you have attributed to the Holy Prophet is Allah's saying: "Or do they envy the people for what Allah has given them of his grace? But inded we have given to Ibrahim's children the book and wisdom and we have given them a grand kingdom. (Surah Nisa : 54)."

What is ment by Book here is Propehthood, wisdom is tradition and grand kingdom is caliphate and we are Ibraheem's children."

Miqdad stood up and said: "O Ali, what is your command for me? By god if you command me I will fight with this sword and if you command me I will stop. Ali replied: "O Miqdad, STOP and remember what promise the Holy Prophet took from you and his will."

Then I (Salman) stood up and said, "By him in whose hands is my life if I knew that I will be able to remove any oppression and the religion of Allah will attain status then I would put my sword on my neck and would fight at each and every step." Then, adressing people, I said: "What! are you attacking the one who is the brother of the Prophet of Allah, his wasi, caliph of his community and the father of his sons? Then I am givin you good news that trouble will come to you and do not hope for any type of ease."

Abu Dhar stoop up and said: "O that community, who after the death of its prophet is puzzled, and whom Allah has stopped helping due to their sins, surely Allah says: "Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendents of Ibrahim and the descendents of Imran above the nations. Offspring, one of the other, and Allah is hearing, knowing. (sura Ale Imran: 33 and 34).)"

And the children of Muhammad are the descendents of Nuh and they are children of Ibrahim from Ibrahim and they are chosen ones from Ismaeel and they are progeny of Prophet Muhammad and are a household of Prophethood, are a place for Messages and are those to whom the angels descend and ascend. And they are like high skies and are like those mountains that are firm, and they are like that Ka'abah over which teh veil hangs, and are those springs which are clear and stars who guide people, and a tree like a blessed tree that produces light and its oil is blessed. And Muhammad is the seal of Prophets and is the leader of Bani-Adam and Ali is wasi of Awsiya and Imam of Muttaqeen (pious) and is the leader of those whose forehead shines and he is the Siddique Akbar (the one who never tells a lie), Farooqe Azam (one who differntiates between truth and falsehood) and is wasi of Muhammad, the inheritor of his knowledge and has more rights than any one over the faithfuls. Like what Allah has said: "The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithfuls than they have on themselves, and his wives are as their mothers; and the possessors of relationship have the better claim in the ordinance of Allah to inheritance, one with respect to another, than (other believers, and (than) those who have fled their homes), except that you do some good to your freinds; this is written in the book" (Surah Ahzab: 6)

So you also bring him forward whom Allah has brought forward and put behind him whom Allah has left behind and give wilyat and inheritance to the one whom Allah has given. "Umar stood up and said to Abu Bakr who was sitting on the pulpit. " You are sitting on the pulpit and this man is sitting and is prepaired for war - he is not getting up to pay you allegiance. Give us the order to cut his neck off."

At this time Hassan and Hussain were standing and when they heard what Umar said they started crying. Ali hugged both of them and told them, "Do not cry, By God these people are not able to kill your father."

Umme Ayman, who had brought up the Holy Prophet came forward and said, "O Abu Bakr, how soon have you all revealed your hypocrisy and jealousy!" Umar gave order and she was removed from the Mosque. he said, "What do we have to do with women?"

Buraydah Aslami stood up and said: "O Umar are you attacking the brother and the father of the children of the Holy Propeht? And You are the very person whose reputation in Quraysh is known to us. Are you tow not the ones to whom the Holy Prophet had told to go to Ali and greet him saying 'Amirul Mumimneen'? And you two had asked if this was in accordance with Allah and his Prophet's command, and the Prophet had said yes."

Abu Bakr said:"Yes it was like that but the Prophet of Allah had after that said: "For us Prophethood and caliphate cannot be combined together." Buraydah said: "The holy Prophet had not said that. By God, I will not remain in that city in which you stay Amir."

Umar gave the order and he was beaten and thrown out of the mosque.

Then he (umar) said: "O ibn Abi Talib, stand up and pay allegiance". Ali asked "If I do not do it then?" He said: " At that time we will cut your neck." Ali said it three times. Then he, without opening his palm, stretched his hand and Abu Bakr put his hand on his (Ali's) hand and was happy with that. Before allegiance Ali, with a rope tied to his neck said loudly:

"Son of my mother! Surely the people reckoned me weak and had well nigh slain me .. "(surah Araf: 150).

Zubair was told to pay allegiance - he refused. Umar, Khalid ibn Walid and Mighnirah ibn Sha'aba with a few people rushed to him took away his sword from his hand, threw it on the floor and broke it, and held him by neck. Zubayr said when umar was on his chest: "O son of Sahhak, by God, if my sword was in my hand, then you would not have got away from me." He then paid allegiance.

Salman says: "Then they held me and twisted my neck until it became like a piece of flesh, then took my hand and twisted it, and then forcefully I paid the allegiance. Then Abu dhar and Miqdad also paid allegiance forcefully. And among us there was nobody as outspoken as Zubayr because when he paid allegiance he said: "O son of Sahhak, By God, if these evil people who supported you were not present then you would not be able to come to me, and my sword would be with me, because I know of your cowardice and disgrace, but you have got a few evil people from whom you gained strength and are attacking."

Umar became very angry and said: "Are you talking about Sahhak?" Zubair asked: "Sahhak who? And can you stop me talking about Sahhak, when Sahhak was a prostitute. Do you deny that? Was she not an Ethiopian slave of my grandfather Abdul Muttalib? Your grandfather Nufail commited adultry with her so your father Khattab was born. After Adultery that slave was girl was given to your grandfather by Abdul Muttalib, then your father was born, so he was my father's slave who was born by adultry." Then Abu Bakr made peace between these two (Zubayr and Umar) and then both of them stopped quarreling."

Sulaim ib Qays says: " I said to Salman, " O Salman, you paid allegiance to Abu Bakr and you did not say anything?" Salman replied: "After allegiance I said to all "Forever and forever may you be destroyed. Do you know what you have done to yourselves? You have done good and did bad = it is good because you chose the tradition of those who passed away before - that is fighting and disuniting. And it is bad because you left the tradition of your Prophet, when you removed caliphate from its mines and from him whos right it was."

Umar said: "O Salman, now that your companion has paid allegiance and you have paid too, say what you like and do what you like, and your companion can say what he wants."

Salman said: " I said to Umar, " I have heard the Holy Prophet say that until the day of Judgment the sins of the entire community will be on you (umar) and your companion whom you have paid allegiance and the punishment of that will equale the punishment of the entire community.""

So Umar said: "Say what you like. What! Have you not paid allegiance? And God has not made your eyes calm in a way that your companion gets caliphate."

Salman said, he said: " I bear witness that I have read in various books of Allah that you, with your names, ancestors and attributes are one of the doors of hell." Umar said to me: "Say what you like, has Allah not taken away the caliphate away from the ahlulbayt whom you have made your God, apart from Allah?" SO I said to him: " I bear witness that I have heard from the Holy Prophet. He said it when I asked him about this verse. But on that day shall no one chastise with (anything like) His chastisement. And no one shall bind with (anthing like) His binding (surah Faj: 25,26)

He told me that it ment YOU (Umar)"

Umar said: "Shut up- May Allah make you die - O slave, O the son of the evil tongued."

Ali said, "O Salman I hold you by oath - keep quiet." Slaman said: "By God if Ali had not ordered me to keep quiet I would have told him all that has been revealed relating to him, also all that I have heard from the Holy Prophet concerning him and his companion. When Umar saw that I was quiet, he told me "No doubt, you are very obedient to him and listen to what he says."

When Abu Dhar and Miqdad paid allegiance they did not say anything. Umar said: "O Salman, why did you not keep quiet like your two comapnons who kept quiet? By God, you do not love ahlulbayt any more than these two. You saw them pay allegiance quietly."

Abu Dhar said: "O Umar, are you taunting me about the love of Ale-Muhammad and the respect of their rights? May Allah curse, and he does curse those people who held enmity with them, accused them and took away their rights, and made people ride over their necks and reversed the community to their previous beliefs (deen)". Umar said "Ameen- May Allah curse those who took away their rights. By God, Ale-Muhammad dont have any right in this, and all people and Ale-Muhammad are eqaual in this."

Abu Dhar said: "So why did you challenge Ansar through Ale-Muhammad and their rights?" Ali said to Umar: "O son of Sahhak, if we did not have any right in this, then is it yours and the son of a woman who eats flies (Abu Bakr)?"

Umar said: "O Abul Hassan, now that you have paid allegiance, keep quiet because people were happy with my companion and were not happy with you - what is my fault in this? Ali said: "But God and his Prophet are not happy with anyone except myself so you, your companion and those who obeyed you and those who supported you, good news be for you on Allah's anger with you and His punishment and his degradation of you.

O ibn Khattab may evil befall you, if only you knew how you have erred! If you knew of what you have come out and in what you have entered and what eveil you have done for yourself and your companion!"

Abu Bakr said: "O Umar, now that he has paid alegiance to us and we have been saved from any harm from him, leave him to say what he wants to say."

Ali said: "Except one thing, I do not say anything. O four people (Abu Dhar, Salman, Zubayr and Miqdad) I am reminding you Ihave heard the Holy Prophet say: "No doubt, there will be one coffin of fire in which there will be twelve people - six from Awwaleen (begening) and six from Akhireen (end), that will be in a well which is in the bottom level of the Hell. And this coffin will be the one that will be locked. There will be a stone kept on the well. When Allah wishes the hell fire to be lighted, he will remove that stone from the top of the well. At that time the Hell will set alight with the flames and the heat of the well."

Ali continued: "I asked the Holy Prophet, and you were present, who are the ones from Awwaleen?. He replied, that from Awwaleen there will be Adam's son who killed his brother, and Pharaoh of Pharaohs, and the one who argued with the Prophet Ibrahim concerning God and two people of Bani Israel who changed their Book and their Tradition - one of these two is the one who made Yahudi, a Yahudi, and the other made Nasrani a Nasrani. And the sixth one is Iblis. And from Akhireen there is Dajjal, and these five who are of Sahifah, and Kitab, and are Jibt and Taghut, O my brother, who made an agreement and contract of enmity towards you. This one and this one, until he gave names and counted also."

Salman says he said: "You have told truth - we bear witness that we heard the Holy Prophet say that."

Uthman said: "O Abul Hasan, have you or your companions not got any hadith concerning me?"

Ali said: "Yes, why not? I have heard the Holy Prophet saying that he has cursed you twice, and that he did not even repent when he cursed you."

Uthman got angry at that and said: "What do I have to do with you? You never leave me, neither during the time of the Prophet nor after him."

Ali said: "Yes May Allah humiliate you." Uthman said: "By god I have heard the Holy Prophet saying:"Zubayr will be killed when he has become an apostate of Islam."

Salman says: "Ali told me, and this was between him and myself: "Uthman has said truth, and this will be when after Uthman is killed, he will pay allegiance to me and then will break it and be killed an apostate." "

Slman says: "Then Ali said: "Except four, after the Holy Prophet every one has become an apostate. After the Holy Prophet people became like haroon and those who followed him and like the cow and those who followed it. "So Ali is like Haroon and Atiq (Abu Bakr) like cow, and Umar like Samiri."

I heard the Holy Prophet saying: "No doubt a community of my companions will come who will have a high status with me so that they pass the Sirat and when they will see me and I will see them, they will recognize me and I will recognize them. They will come very near to me. I will say "O god these are my companons, my companions. " It will be said "Do not you know what they did after you? Indeed, they reverted when you parted from them." I will say to them: "Go away and get destroyed."

And I have heard the Holy Prophet say: "My community will choose the tradition of Bani Isreal in exactly the same manner that one foot falls on the other foot, one span equal to another span, one hand like the other, one distance like the other distance, until if they enter a hole, then these people will also enter that hole. Surely Torah and the Quran were written by one Angel and one skin, and with one pen, and all examples with tradition became like one!"

Edited by Al-Mufeed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont see how that is Umar's crime ??

Anyways, I just wanted to say that Hazrat Abu Bakr (ra) and Hazrat Umar (ra) were the Father-in-laws of our beloved Prophet (pbuh). If they had such bad characters, Prophet (pbuh) in all his wisdom wouldnt have maintanied such relations with them and wouldnt have made them part of his family. And Hazrat Ali (ra) with such an impeccable personal character must not have said anything Ludicrous regarding their characters, since being Father-in-law of the Prophet (pbuh), they were his seniors as well.

Anyone who ridicules the Prophet (pbuh) or his Father-in-Laws or anyone of his family or anyone of the Sahaba has questionable IMAN. True Muslims will never commit such things. Such were and still are the tactics of Jews and Munafiqoon. And those who stand by their ridicules in this world, will stand by them in the next world as well.

Asalaam Alaykum

I know you are the victim of 1,400 years of sociocultural religious propaganda.

You're a big boy now. Time to wake up wake up from the sunni fairytale.

Santa Claus does not exist. Nor does Omar Claus.

Most of this is also found in loads of sunni books like Ibne Qutayba's, the shia accounts are just less polite about criminals like Omar - the facts are the same in sunni and shia accounts/. Several times the Holy Prophet (saws) says in Sahih Bukhari that most of his companions are going to burn in hell. What is your response to that? If you want the actual hadith email me.

Is there more? This is excellent reading.

Wa salaam

Edited by husainshahid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

I heard that some prominent ulama discredited Sulaym ibn Qays. Is that true?

Allamah ibn Dawud al-Hilli in tarjuma of Aban ibn Abe Ayash wrote:

2 - ÃÈÇä Èä ÃÈí ÚíÇÔ¡ ÈÇáíÇÁ ÇáãËäÇÉ ÊÍÊ æÇáÔíä ÇáãÚÌãÉ¡

ÝíÑæÒíä (ÌÎ ÛÖ) ÖÚíÝ¡ Þíá Åäå æÖÚ ßÊÇÈ Óáíã Èä ÞíÓ

My arabic is bad, but as it seems there he said: It was said that he (i.m Abban ibn Abe Ayash) fabricated book of Sulaym ibn Qays".

And in tarjuma of Sulaym her said:

226 - Óáíã Èä ÞíÓ ÇáåáÇáí ì¡ ä¡ Óíä¡ íä (ÌÎ) íäÓÈ Åáíå ÇáßÊÇÈ ÇáãÔåæÑ æåæ ãæÖæÚ ÈÏáíá Ãäå ÞÇá: Åä ãÍãÏ Èä ÃÈí ÈßÑ æÚÙ ÃÈÇå ÚäÏ ãæÊå. æÞÇá Ýíå: Åä ÇáÇÆãÉ ËáÇËÉ ÚÔÑ ãÚ ÒíÏ. æÃÓÇäíÏå ãÎÊáÝÉ (ÛÖ): áã íÑæÚäå ÅáÇ ÃÈÇä Èä ÃÈí ÚíÇÔ æÝí ÇáßÊÇÈ ãäÇßíÑ ãÔÊåÑÉ¡ æãÇ ÃÙäå ÅáÇ ãæÖæÚÇ

"....chains of it (i.m book of ibn Qays) are mixed, it wasn't transmitted from him, by other than Abban ibn Abe Ayash.."

Edited by Azeri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Ayatuallah Sistani. . .

ÇáÓÄÇá:

ßÊÇÈ Óáíã Èä ÞíÓ ÇáåáÇáí ÇáÚÇãÑí ÇáßæÝí ÕÇÍÈ ÃãíÑ ÇáãÄãíä Úáí Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ÇáãÊæÝì ÓäÉ 90 åÌÑíÉ ¡ ÇáÐí ÞÇá ÇáÃãÇã ÇáÕÇÏÞ Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã Úä ßÊÇÈå : Ãäå ÓÑ ãä ÃÓÑÇÑ Âá ãÍãÏ . ÝãÇ ãÏì ÕÍÉ åÐÇ ÇáßÊÇÈ æãÇÐÇ íÞæá ÇáÚáãÇÁ Úäå ÎÇÕÉ ãÚ ÇÎÊáÇÝ ØÈÚÇÊå Ýí ÇáæÞÊ ÇáÍÇÖÑ ¿

ÇáÝÊæì:

Ýí ÓäÏå ÅÔßÇá

http://www.alseraj.net/ar/fikh/2/?ohJCgBXY...1&180&6

w/s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^What's the arabic word for 'matter' in the answer I quoted?

AFAIK, Ishkal means 'problematic'.

I haven't done a word-to-word translation. But ishkal is usually used in the edicts when the ruling isn't decisive.

In the glossary, it's given: Ishkal: Problematic or grey area: Difficult to approve of or consent to.

He hasn't rejected it outrightly saying it's weak or whatever. It's still open to debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^You seem to apply the fiqhi concept of 'Ishkal' here.

I did not know the concept of ishkal is applied differently in other fields. Has any scholar expounded on the difference?

I would translate the answer(Ýí ÓäÏå ÅÔßÇá) as 'Problematic in sanad'. Correct me if I'm wrong.

If it is 'problematic' as you have taken it [ie, weak or fabricated], then he'd have mentioned it clearly. But ishkal is generally referring to the fact that it is a matter which is debatable. So according to him, the sanad is open to debate. It isn't a decisive answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fii sanadihi ishkal means there is a problem in its sanad.

I'd still say that it isn't a decisive answer since he has used the term 'ishkal' unless this term denotes a different meaning in other sciences.

Edited by SpIzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah) (salam)

A Kufān Kidnaps the Imām (as)

A Kufān Kidnapped the Imām (as) , hid him in his house, entertained and treated him kindly.

When he saw the Imām (as) , he burst into tears. The Imām (as) thought that the Kufān was trustworthy.

A short time later, the caller of b. Ziyād announced: “Whoever finds ‘Ali b. al-Husayn (as) and brings him

will have three hundred dirhams.”

When the Kufān heard the caller, he put a rope around the Imām’s (as) neck, tied his hands with the robe,

and took the dirhams.

Ref : Mir’āt al-Zamān fi Tawārikh al-A’yān, p. 98. Ibn al-Jawzi, vol. 5. Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqāt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

I have the copy of this book myself.

The reason why Kitaab Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hilaalee is considered to have a "problematic sanad (chain)" is mainly because of Abaan ibn Abi 'Ayyaash. He is the weak link. No one doubts the greatness of Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hilaali, it has been said that he was one of the great companions of Imaam Ali (as) and a great companion of Salmaan (ra) and Miqdaad (ra). The issue is Abaan ibn Abi 'Ayyaash

Abaan is considered weak by:

  1. Shaykh Toosi, Rijaal, pg. 126
  2. Al-GhaDaa'iri, Kitaab Al-Du'afavol. 1, pg. 32
  3. Allamah Hilli, Al-KhulaaSah, pg. 207, he called him ÖÚíÝ ÌÏÇ "Very weak"

The issue with this book is when there is ONE weak narrator in a tradition, the whole tradition is deemed as Weak. This is according to Shaheed Al-Thaani, in his book Dirayat Al-Hadeeth. A lot of these ahaadeeth that can be found in Kitaab Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hilaalee have been mentioned in Al-Kaafi, and Al-Majlisi & Bahboodee has graded is weak basically everytime.

For example in Al-Kaafi (not putting the full hadith):

Example 1:

ãõÍóãóøÏõ Èúäõ íóÍúíóì Úóäú ÃóÍúãóÏó Èúäö ãõÍóãóøÏö Èúäö ÚöíÓóì«» æó Úóáöìöø Èúäö ÅöÈúÑóÇåöíãó Úóäú ÃóÈöíåö ÌóãöíÚÇð Úóäú ÍóãóøÇÏö Èúäö ÚöíÓóì Úóäú ÚõãóÑó Èúäö ÃõÐóíúäóÉó Úóäú ÃóÈóÇäö«» ÇÈúäö ÃóÈöí ÚóíóøÇÔò Úóäú Óõáóíúãö Èúäö ÞóíúÓò ÇáúåöáóÇáöíöø ÞóÇáó ÓóãöÚúÊõ ÃóãöíÑó ÇáúãõÄúãöäöíäó Ú íõÍóÏöøËõ Úóäö ÇáäóøÈöíöø Õ Ãóäóøåõ ÞóÇáó Ýöí ßóáóÇãò áóåõ ÇáúÚõáóãóÇÁõ ÑóÌõáóÇäö ÑóÌõáñ ÚóÇáöãþ

Source:

Al-Kaafi, vol.1, pg. 44, under Chapter: Utilization of Knowledge, hadeeth #1

Grading:

Al-Majlisi has said: "Da'eef 'ala Mashhoor.."

- Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 1, pg. 142

Al-Bahboodee has said: "Da'eef"

- SaHeeH Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg 6

Example 2:

[1] ãõÍóãóøÏõ Èúäõ íóÍúíóì Úóäú ÃóÍúãóÏó Èúäö ãõÍóãóøÏö Èúäö ÚöíÓóì æó Úóáöíõø Èúäõ ÅöÈúÑóÇåöíãó Úóäú ÃóÈöíåö ÌóãöíÚÇð Úóäú ÍóãóøÇÏö Èúäö ÚöíÓóì Úóäú ÚõãóÑó Èúäö ÃõÐóíúäóÉó Úóäú ÃóÈóÇäö Èúäö ÃóÈöí ÚóíóøÇÔò Úóäú Óõáóíúãö Èúäö ÞóíúÓò ÞóÇáó ÓóãöÚúÊõ ÃóãöíÑó ÇáúãõÄúãöäöíäó Ú íóÞõæáõ ÞóÇáó ÑóÓõæáõ Çááóøåö Õ ãóäúåõæãóÇäö áóÇ íóÔúÈóÚóÇäö ØóÇáöÈõ ÏõäúíóÇ æó ØóÇáöÈõ Úöáúãþ

Source:

Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg. 46, under Chapter: Those who use knowledge for personal fulfillment..., hadeeth # 1

Grading:

Al-Majlisi has said: "Da'eef 'ala Mashhoor.."

- Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 1, pg. 147

Al-Bahboodee has said: "Da'eef"

- SaHeeH Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg 6

Example 3:

[1] Úóáöíõø Èúäõ ÅöÈúÑóÇåöíãó Èúäö åóÇÔöãò Úóäú ÃóÈöíåö Úóäú ÍóãóøÇÏö Èúäö ÚöíÓóì Úóäú ÅöÈúÑóÇåöíãó Èúäö ÚõãóÑó ÇáúíóãóÇäöíöø Úóäú ÃóÈóÇäö Èúäö ÃóÈöí ÚóíóøÇÔò Úóäú Óõáóíúãö Èúäö ÞóíúÓò ÇáúåöáóÇáöíöø ÞóÇáó ÞõáúÊõ áöÃóãöíÑö ÇáúãõÄúãöäöíäó Ú Åöäöøí ÓóãöÚúÊõ ãöäú ÓóáúãóÇäþ

Source:

Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg. 62, Ch. Differences in Hadeeth, hadeeth #1

Grading:

Al-Majlisi has said: "Da'eef 'ala Mashhoor.."

- Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 1, pg. 210

Al-Bahboodee has said: "Da'eef"

- SaHeeH Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg 11

Example 4:

ÚöÏóøÉñ ãöäú ÃóÕúÍóÇÈöäóÇ Úóäú ÃóÍúãóÏó Èúäö ãõÍóãóøÏö Èúäö ÎóÇáöÏò Úóäú ÚõËúãóÇäó Èúäö ÚöíÓóì Úóäú ÚõãóÑó Èúäö ÃõÐóíúäóÉó Úóäú ÃóÈóÇäö Èúäö ÃóÈöí ÚóíóøÇÔò Úóäú Óõáóíúãö Èúäö ÞóíúÓò Úóäú ÃóãöíÑö ÇáúãõÄúãöäöíäó Ú ÞóÇáó ÞóÇáó ÑóÓõæáõ Çááóøåö Õ Åöäóø Çááóøåó ÍóÑóøãó ÇáúÌóäóøÉó Úóáóì ßõáöø ÝóÍóøÇÔþ

Source:

Al-Kaafi, vol. 2, pg. 323, Baab Al-Badhaa, hadeeth # 3

Grading:

Al-Majlisi has said: "Mukhtalaf feehi..."

- Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 10, pg. 270

Al-Bahboodee has said: "Da'eef"

- SaHeeH Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg 112

There are some Rijaal scholars who have said some good stuff about the book.

ßÊÇÈ Óáíã Èä ÞíÓ ÇáÚÇãÑí Ëã ÇáåáÇáí ÏÝÚå Åáì ÃÈÇä Èä ÃÈí ÚíÇÔ æ ÞÑÃå æ ÒÚã ÃÈÇä Ãäå

ÞÑÃå Úáì Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓíä ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã ÞÇá ÕÏÞ Óáíã ÑÍãÉ Çááå Úáíå åÐÇ ÍÏíË äÚÑÝåþ

Rough Translation: Abaan ibn Abi 'Ayyaash read the book to Imaam Zayn Al-'Aabideen (as) and he (as) said: "Allaah's (SWT) mercy be upon Sulaym, who was truthful. We know such traditions"

Source:

Al-Kashi, Rijaal, pg. 104-105, under person # 167

Al-Aamili, Wasaa'il Al-Shee'ah, vol. 27, pg. 101, hadeeth # 33323

Abu Al-Faraj Muhammad ibn IsHaaq Al-Nadim has said about Kitaab Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hilaalee:

  1. “When the time of Sulaym’s death was very near, he said to Aban , “I have a right over you, and I am going to die soon. Oh the son of my brother, what events took place during the time of the Holy Prophet!” and he gave the book to Aban i.e. the Book of Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hillali, which is famous”
  2. “The first book that reached Shi’as was the Book of Sulaym (ibn Qays al-Hillali)”
  3. "The origination of surety in the Imaams of Ithna ‘Ashari is that which Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hilali has mentioned in his book”
  4. “The first book that was written in Shi’ahs was the Book of Sulaym (ibn Qays al-Hillali)”

Source:

Al-Nadim, Al-Fihrist, pg. 307

ÞóÇáó ãóäú áóãú íóßõäú ÚöäúÏóåõ ãöäú ÔöíÚóÊöäóÇ æó ãõÍöÈöøíäóÇ ßöÊóÇÈõ Óõáóíúãö Èúäö ÞóíúÓò ÇáúåöáóÇáöíöø ÝóáóíúÓó ÚöäúÏóåõ ãöäú ÃóãúÑöäóÇ ÔóíúþÁñ æó áóÇ íóÚúáóãõ ãöäú ÃóÓúÈóÇÈöäóÇ ÔóíúÆÇð æó åõæó ÃóÈúÌóÏõ ÇáÔöøíÚóÉö æó ÓöÑñø ãöäú ÃóÓúÑóÇÑö Âáö ãõÍóãóøÏò

Translation: “If anyone from our Shi’a and lovers (of the Ahlul Bayt (as)) does not have the book of Sulaym ibn Qays al-Hilali, then he does not have any of our things, and he does not know any of our matters. This is the first book of the Shi’as and is one of the secrets of Ahle Muhammad (as)”

Source:

Shaykh 'Abd Al-Nabi Al-Kaadhimee, Takmilah Al-Rijaal

Mustadark al-Wasaa'il, vol. 17, pg. 298, hadeeth # 21397

äõÓúÎóÉõ ßöÊóÇÈö Óõáóíúãö Èúäö ÞóíúÓò ÇáúåöáóÇáöíöø ÏóÝóÚóåóÇ Åöáóì ÃóÈóÇäò æó ÞóÑóÃóåóÇ Úóáóíúåö ÞóÇáó ÃóÈóÇäñ æó ÞóÑóÃúÊõåóÇ Úóáóì Úóáöíöø Èúäö ÇáúÍõÓóíúäö Ú ÝóÞóÇáó ÕóÏóÞó Óõáóíúãñ ÑóÍöãóåõ Çááóøåõ ÞóÇáó Óõáóíúãñ ÝóÔóåöÏúÊõ æóÕöíóøÉó ÃóãöíÑö ÇáúãõÄúãöäöíäó

Rough translation: Abaan read Kitaab Sulaym ibn Qays to our 4th Imaam (as). And he (as) said: Sulaym is truthful. May Allaah (SWT) have mercy on him....

Source:

Shaykh Toosi, Al-Ghaybah

Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 43, ch. 127, pg. 212, hadeeth # 12

Al-Majlisi has sourced out Kitaab Sulaym ibn Qays all over Bihaar Al-Anwaar.

For example:

  1. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 2, ch. 9, pg. 35, hadeeth # 37
  2. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 2 ch. 28, pg. 218, hadeeth # 14
  3. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 22, ch. 4, pg. 245, hadeeth # 15
  4. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 27, ch. 9, pg. 211, hadeeth # 15
  5. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 28, ch. 2, pg. 53, hadeeth # 22
  6. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 28, pg. 211, hadeeth # 45
  7. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 29, pg. 465
  8. Al-Majlisi, Bihaar Al-Anwaar, vol. 33, ch. 18, pg. 224, hadeeth # 513
  9. and a lot more...

The issue arises is if this very Kitaab Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hilaalee the same Kitaab that has been mentioned by Kashi, Aamili, Toosi, Majlisi, etc? As we have seen there has been some things that the scholars of hadeeth have said about this book that is not found in todays edition whether in Arabic or in English.

If the book has changed over time as we have seen the difference., this will put a big doubt on anyone who reads it because no one knows whether something has been changed, added or subtracted from this book.

Now, even though if it had a narration that has said there were "13 Imaams", that would not deem the book to be "all wrong". There are many "wrong narrations" that can be found in all of our books, that doesn't deem the entire book to be considered false.

This discussion is kind of reminding me of the Ibn Al-GhaDaa'iri's book Kitaab Al-Du'afa. It seems since he is very strict and harsh on a lot of narrators and sometimes even curses them. This correlates with Kitaab Sulaym ibn Qays Al-Hilaalee, it seems to be very strict and harsh towards the "major Sahabas" (and I use that term very loosely), that could be another reason why the scholars could be against it.

My suggestion about this book is...

Do not read this book as your PRIMARY means of getting information.

---> What I mean is do not just read this book and derive all of your historical information about Islaam.

Make sure there are other places throughout various books both from Shee'ah and Sunni that have information that correlates to what has been said.

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...