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

The Authenticity Of The Saheehain

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member
The Sunni classified their hadiths in sahihain, and anything which is not in sahihain basically doesn't matter. This gave a very high status to sahihain to the extent it made them equal to the Holy Quran (astafgurullah). Therefore, most hadiths rejected by the sahihain are not considered hadiths at all.

i doubt if thats the case otherwise all those imams after bukhari wud not have made compilations of hadith at all

On the contrary, al-Kafi collected numerous hadiths, without classifying them. It is left to each and every ulema to classify for his own work. There are some ulemas who have classified some of the hadiths of al-Kafi as sahih hadiths and even printed books too, but it is still up to other ulemas to accept or reject these hadiths either in its entirety or individual hadiths as not sahih, since not only they have the work of al-Kafi but the works of other ulemas.

so ur saying that uniformity is a bad thing ? and do the 12er scholars use the same criterea for judging hadith ? probably not but neither did muslim and bukhari let alone abu dawood , nasai etc

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Advanced Member

bro here what ur not getting

with khadija she died so early , few narraters from her alive after prophet her son hind b abihalah died in 37AH ,hasan b ali narrated from him

with ali many narrations in sahih books directly and indirectly from his disciples abu juhayfa , ibn abza , ziyad b mutarrif etc

from fatima i dont know of any i admit

from hasan and hussain they were very young at the time of Prophet's death so they quote from other sources

plus many companions and tabaeen very friendly to ali are notable narraters like abu ayyub jabir b abduallh and abu saeed khudri even then i admit bukhari esp seem to a very orthodox sunni twist and may i say bias to the narrations.A full deconstruction of bukhari's sources though is well beyound my level

It is beyond my level too. The three narrators in the sahih Bukhari make up about 60-65%. These are Abu Hurariah, Aisha and Abdullah bin Umar. I have already discussed in my above post about Abu Hurariah and Aisha. All these narrators are known of hatred of ahlul Bayt (as).

To give equal footing and proportional, at least 45% of hadiths narrations should be from ahlul Bayt (as), but this is not the case.

Add to that, the hadiths narrated by Aisha about herself, are at the expense of her father, rasool Allah Mohammad (pbuh) and other shahabis.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

What gives you this surety? Which ahâdîth are fabricated to please Bani Umayyah and Abbasid?

i think it was inevitable process but the illegal regimes needed justification for their crimes and best way to provide that by fabricating hadith and the evidence for that is from hadith books too.I guess the list would be too enormous to list here.I am surprised ur asking this afterall 12ers have done the same although for different reasons intially.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

i doubt if thats the case otherwise all those imams after bukhari wud not have made compilations of hadith at all

Discuss with any Wahhabi. If the hadiths are not in the sahihain then it is not a hadith, unless it serves their purposes. And, if it is not in sahih Bukhari and only in sahih Muslim, then it is not a hadith, unless again it serves their purpose.

The Sunni will consider sahih sitta, but the folks like Lord Botta will only have sahihain and four sunnan.

so ur saying that uniformity is a bad thing ? and do the 12er scholars use the same criterea for judging hadith ? probably not but neither did muslim and bukhari let alone abu dawood , nasai etc

No, I am not. Both the Sunni and Shia have learned from each other, and most of the ulemas in both sides of the isles have lots of respect for each other and learned from each other.

Sunnan Dawood, sunnan Tirmidhi, imam Hambal and so forth are much more objective in their work than the sahihain. They deserve nothing but high respect and praise!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
have already discussed in my above post about Abu Hurariah and Aisha. All these narrators are known of hatred of ahlul Bayt

i wouldnt go so far ....abu huraira was probably more of an opportunist than an outright enemy like nasibi

ibn umar was certainly more neutral in his views than abu huraira and many pro-ahlulbayt hadith are narrated from him as well

some prohalulbayt hadith come from aisha too but its hard to say whether its harmonizing accounts to defuse temsions between alids and her according to sunni beliefs or not

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it was inevitable process but the illegal regimes needed justification for their crimes and best way to provide that by fabricating hadith and the evidence for that is from hadith books too.I guess the list would be too enormous to list here.I am surprised ur asking this afterall 12ers have done the same although for different reasons intially.

Can you show me some examples?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

i wouldnt go so far ....abu huraira was probably more of an opportunist than an outright enemy like nasibi

Being opportunist is one of the other criteria of ilum ul-rijal. The forthright criteria is the person known to be a liar or not. How can one accept narrations from someone who is known to be a liar. What kind of ilum al-rijal is this, which defies the common sense.

ibn umar was certainly more neutral in his views than abu huraira and many pro-ahlulbayt hadith are narrated from him as well

I am not an expert on the science of hadith and am not very familiar about his narrations. However, equal time requires proportional narrations by ahlul Bayt (as).

some pro halulbayt hadith come from aisha too but its hard to say whether its harmonizing accounts to defuse temsions between alids and her according to sunni beliefs or not

Your guess is good as mine. The suras 33 and 66 are not very complimentary about her. Add, to this the hadiths of Ifk which are very demeaning to rasool Allah Mohammad (pbuh). As a Muslim I don't believe that this matter ever took place. These narrations are either attributed to her, to make her look bad, or they are imagination of a very sick mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

bro i dont recall exact refs but hadiths are like this

sayyid b mussayyib talking to ibn umar , he says that we act differently in front of leaders of our times priase them but secretly hate them.ibn umar says that this we ( i.e sahaba) called hypocrisy in times of Prophet

marwan says he is from muhajireen abu saeed khudri disagrees , rafi b khadij and zayd b thabit say nothing to contradict marwan but when chided by abu saeed conform his statement

abu burda b musa ashari celebrates murder of ammar in front of muawiyah later he is a big mouthpiece of ummayyad propoganda in iraq

'

numerous hadiths in praise of muawiyah ( makes me wonder why prophet would say so many good things about a taliq, ibn taliq who esp in times of the prophet had accomplished nothing wothwhile ) esp since there are so many badris about whom not a single hadith of praise exists false or authentic

I am not an expert on the science of hadith and am not very familiar about his narrations. However, equal time requires proportional narrations by ahlul Bayt .

not neccasarily , one would argue why arent there more narrations from ansar than quraishis in sahih bukhari ? or more from hasan than hussain in 12er hadiths the possibilities are endless

hadith collection depended on the students and disciples of a particular figure, some important companions died with only their children as narraters e.g abu layla ansari a early convert surely he heard a lot from the prophet but all his narrations are from his son alone.While abu tufayl heard a lot from other sahaba plus had many disciples to pass it on so it a much bigger source of hadith despite being a very late companion

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

not neccasarily , one would argue why arent there more narrations from ansar than quraishis in sahih bukhari ? or more from hasan than hussain in 12er hadiths the possibilities are endless

hadith collection depended on the students and disciples of a particular figure, some important companions died with only their children as narraters e.g abu layla ansari a early convert surely he heard a lot from the prophet but all his narrations are from his son alone.While abu tufayl heard a lot from other sahaba plus had many disciples to pass it on so it a much bigger source of hadith despite being a very late companion

Bro you are missing the boat here. I am not discussing about the people in the chain of narrations, but the initial narrator of the chain. The initial narrator are the ones, who quote directly rasool Allah Mohammad (pbuh).

All the initial narrators were dead when the sahihain were complied.

The three initial narrators which make up 60-65% hadiths in the sahihain are Abu Hurariah, Aisha and ibn Omar. All these initial narrators belonged to one camp. Their narrations were narrated by the chain. Even though, the two top most of these initial narrators were known to be lairs, their narrations were considered as sahih.

The other camp had initial narrators too. Example being ibn Abbas (as), imam Ali (as), and other shahabis which belonged in this camp. Of course, the chain of narrators from these initial narrators were available to the sahihain. But due to dishonesty on the part of the authors of sahihain these narrators were rejected.

Both Imam Ali (as) and bibi Fatima (as) were born in the laps of bibi Khadijah (as) and rasool Allah Mohammad (pbuh), and rasool Allah (pbuh) died on the shoulders of imam Ali (as). Imagine the time spend together with each other and their children (as).

Edited by aladdin
Link to post
Share on other sites

bro i dont recall exact refs but hadiths are like this

sayyid b mussayyib talking to ibn umar , he says that we act differently in front of leaders of our times priase them but secretly hate them.ibn umar says that this we ( i.e sahaba) called hypocrisy in times of Prophet

marwan says he is from muhajireen abu saeed khudri disagrees , rafi b khadij and zayd b thabit say nothing to contradict marwan but when chided by abu saeed conform his statement

abu burda b musa ashari celebrates murder of ammar in front of muawiyah later he is a big mouthpiece of ummayyad propoganda in iraq

'

numerous hadiths in praise of muawiyah ( makes me wonder why prophet would say so many good things about a taliq, ibn taliq who esp in times of the prophet had accomplished nothing wothwhile ) esp since there are so many badris about whom not a single hadith of praise exists false or authentic

Can you give examples of ahâdîth in favour of Umayyâd and Abbasid?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
The three initial narrators which make up 60-65% hadiths in the sahihain are Abu Hurariah, Aisha and ibn Omar. All these initial narrators belonged to one camp. Their narrations were narrated by the chain.

not really neither abu huraira nor ibn umar supported aisha at jamal.

ibn umar was strictly neutral thruout the fitna even though his brother supported muaiwyah he never did

The other camp had initial narrators too. Example being ibn Abbas (as), imam Ali (as), and other shahabis which belonged in this camp. Of course, the chain of narrators from these initial narrators were available to the sahihain. But due to dishonesty on the part of the authors of sahihain these narrators were rejected.

some but not all, many pro-alid narraters are in bukhari & muslim

Both Imam Ali (as) and bibi Fatima (as) were born in the laps of bibi Khadijah (as) and rasool Allah Mohammad (pbuh), and rasool Allah (pbuh) died on the shoulders of imam Ali (as). Imagine the time spend together with each other and their children (as).

yes but like i said not many direct disciples of khadija as she died so early and before any serious attempts to organize hadith or even recall hadith

regarding ur question of intial narrater its a valid one but only when there are people available to narrate from them, e.g hamza another early sahabi and khubaib b adi very high status but not very useful as hadith narraters on account of their early deaths

however i dont disagree with the premise that the orthodox sunni tradition favored hadith from the hijazi neutrals ( in the civil war) than any of the partisan parties whether alid or ummayyad

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it was inevitable process but the illegal regimes needed justification for their crimes and best way to provide that by fabricating hadith and the evidence for that is from hadith books too.I guess the list would be too enormous to list here.I am surprised ur asking this afterall 12ers have done the same although for different reasons intially.

Panzerwaffe, there is no doubt that people fabricated hadiths in order to support their regimes. However, those hadiths didn't make it into the Saheehain. You will notice that most of the hadiths that are out there which were used to praise Mu'awiyah were declared weak by our scholars. As I've said above, hadiths are rejected only through the standards of hadith, and the Shaikhan didn't create their collection of hadiths based on their beliefs. If that were so, you would've found a lot more praise for Mu'awiyah. You would've found some of the hadiths that I mentioned in this thread:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

As I've said above, hadiths are rejected only through the standards of hadith, and the Shaikhan didn't create their collection of hadiths based on their beliefs.

This is your take on this. The two top most initial narrators of sahihain, who narrated more than 45% of the hadiths are proven to be lairs.

1. One by the sahihain themselves.

2. The other one trough the Holy Quran.

Where is your ilum al-rijal?

How can the hadiths be accepted from lairs?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(salam),

?!

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 72, Number 731:

Narrated Ali bin Abi Talib (as):

The Prophet (pbuh) gave me a silk suit. I went out wearing it, but seeing the signs of anger on his face, I tore it and distributed it among my wives.

This has to do with your understanding of the hadith. Where do Sunnis claim that Hawwa is going to be judged for every action committed by women? Where does it say in the hadith that women aren't responsible and only Hawwa is responsible?

I do want to correct, what I said, but I did not say that (the hadith said that). I said (that the hadith said) that Hawwa (as) was responsible for all the mischief of all the women. While I meant to say (that the hadith said that) Hawwa (as) was responsible for all the women who were unfaithful towards their husbands. Neither did I say (that the hadith said that) only Hawwa (as) was responsible for women being unfaithful. Here are the ahadith:

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 55, Number 611:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Were it not for Bani Israel, meat would not decay; and were it not for Eve, no woman would ever betray her husband."

Sahih Muslim:Book 008, Number 3471:

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Had it not been for Eve, woman would have never acted unfaithfully towards her husband.

Tell me what's wrong with my interpretation of the hadith, if it's wrong. =)

Moreover, these were just examples. What about Bani Israel being the reason for meat decaying? Isn't meat decaying a natural phenomenon? :o

What about Allah 'descending' from the seventh heaven, what about Allah (and his shin) being seen on the Day of Judgement, when the Quran states the opposite (6:103).

That is because there have been those that have previously done so. The Shaikaan aren't the first two that have collected Sunni hadiths and they wanted to do the following generations a favor.

Compiling ahadith and labelling them unquestionably 'sahih', all of which are to be accepted, otherwise he is criticized, is doing the future generations a favour?

Uhh... no. What makes you arrive at the conclusion?

My question was, was there a reason why they did not include ahadith in their books, which could not be graded as Sahih. Surely, they must have realised that many ahadith which they did not include in their Sahihs, and which really are worth including in Sahihs, will be lost and not available to future generations.

I've mentioned that they didn't intend to collect all Saheeh hadiths and have left a good chunk out, so no, there was still a lot of work to be done by future generations. If you meant something else then please elaborate.

:huh: If they did not intend to collect all Sahih ahadith, what did they intend? Please elaborate.

Fine, your whole paragraph was built upon responding to the term "attacked". It is as if you've never seen a Shia mock Ahlul Sunnah for their views regarding the Saheehain. In any case, let's assume that Shias never attack Sunnis. What they do is criticize them, which is perfectly fine... but they don't criticize their own, that have fallen into the same "hole" of believing in fully authentic works.

Akhbaris aren't criticized (if that is the right word) to the same level as the Sunnis. Yes, you're right. But that is only because Sunnis have more things we can argue with them over, as compared to the Akhbaris. A person who differs more with you, will naturally will have more disagreements with you. But it wouldn't be right to say that we don't highlight the fact, that Akhbaris are not the correct ones, among the Shi'ites and why so. We very well do.

You will never see Shi'ite a'alims today, criticizing either Sunnis or Akhbaris. It is the common Shi'ites who criticize the Sunni beliefs, which is not what they should be doing. Rather tell them why they think what they're doing is wrong, and leave it to them, to accept it or reject it. Same for the Akhbaris.

Yes, and I appreciate your honesty towards yourself and your views. I wasn't warning you about the consequences of doing so, but I was merely confirming that you felt this way. However your statements seem contradictory. You've mentioned a couple of paragraphs ago that the Sunnis are your brothers. Yet, you've also mentioned that those that accept that a book other than the Qur'an is completely authentic is a kaffir. So, which is it really?

Maybe you remember wrong what I said. The Sunni view, as far as I remember, is that Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim stand next to the Quran (behind it) with regard to authenticity. I didn't know they were (believe by Sunnis to be) equal to the Quran. :o

I said those who reject the Quran's feature of being unique because being fully authentic (due to it being a word of an infallible God) are Kafirs. I'm sure the Sunnis don't do that.... do they? :unsure:

wa (salam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Panzerwaffe, there is no doubt that people fabricated hadiths in order to support their regimes. However, those hadiths didn't make it into the Saheehain. You will notice that most of the hadiths that are out there which were used to praise Mu'awiyah were declared weak by our scholars. As I've said above, hadiths are rejected only through the standards of hadith, and the Shaikhan didn't create their collection of hadiths based on their beliefs. If that were so, you would've found a lot more praise for Mu'awiyah. You would've found some of the hadiths that I mentioned in this thread:

I remember you saying LB that it may be weak but it is still hujjah for you to believe that Muwayia (LA) was a righteous sahabi

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I remember you saying LB that it may be weak but it is still hujjah for you to believe that Muwayia (LA) was a righteous sahabi

If it serves their purpose that a weak hadith is accepted, but when it doesn't serve their purpose than a strong hadith is rejected.

It is nothing but hypocrisy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Basim:

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 72, Number 731:

Narrated Ali bin Abi Talib (as):

The Prophet (pbuh) gave me a silk suit. I went out wearing it, but seeing the signs of anger on his face, I tore it and distributed it among my wives.

The Arabic doesn't contain the term "wives", but says "women".

Here is the sharh by Ibn Hajar:

Þæáåþ:þ þ(þÝÔÞÞÊåÇ Èíä äÓÇÆíþ)þ Ãí ÞØÚÊåÇ ÝÝÑÞÊåÇ Úáíåä ÎãÑÇ¡ æÇáÎãÑ ÈÖã ÇáãÚÌãÉ æÇáãíã ÌãÚ ÎãÇÑ ÈßÓÑ Ãæáå æÇáÊÎÝíÝþ:þ ãÇ ÊÛØí Èå ÇáãÑÃÉ ÑÃÓåÇ¡ æÇáãÑÇÏ ÈÞæáåþ:þ þ"þ äÓÇÆí þ"þ ãÇ ÝÓÑå Ýí ÑæÇíÉ Ãí ÕÇáÍ ÍíË ÞÇáþ:þ þ"þ Èíä ÇáÝæÇØã þ"þ ææÞÚ Ýí ÑæÇíÉ ÇáäÓÇÆí ÍíË ÞÇáþ:þ þ"þ ÝÑÌÚÊ Åáì ÝÇØãÉ ÝÔÞÞÊåÇ¡ ÝÞÇáÊþ:þ ãÇÐÇ ÌÆÊ Èåþ¿þ ÞáÊ äåÇäí ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã Úä áÈÓåÇ ÝÇáÈÓíåÇ æÇßÓí äÓÇÁß þ"þ æÝí åÐå ÇáÑæÇíÉ Ãä ÚáíÇ ÅäãÇ ÔÞÞåÇ ÈÅÐä ÇáäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáãþ.þ

ÞÇá ÃÈæ ãÍãÏ Èä ÞÊíÈÉþ:þ ÇáãÑÇÏ ÈÇáÝæÇØã ÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ÇáäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã æÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ÃÓÏ Èä åÇÔã æÇáÏÉ Úáí æáÇ ÃÚÑÝ ÇáËÇáËÉþ.þ

æÐßÑ ÃÈæ ãäÕæÑ ÇáÃÒåÑí ÃäåÇ ÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ÍãÒÉ Èä ÚÈÏ ÇáãØáÈþ.þ

æÞÏ ÃÎÑÌ ÇáØÍÇæí æÇÈä ÃÈí ÇáÏäíÇ Ýí þ"þ ßÊÇÈ ÇáåÏÇíÇ þ"þ æÚÈÏ ÇáÛäí Èä ÓÚíÏ Ýí þ"þ ÇáãÈåãÇÊ þ"þ æÇÈä ÚÈÏ ÇáÈÑ ßáåã ãä ØÑíÞ íÒíÏ Èä ÃÈí ÒíÇÏ Úä ÃÈí ÝÇÎÊÉ Úä åÈíÑÉ Èä íÑíã - ÈÊÍÊÇäíÉ Ãæáå Ëã ÑÇÁ æÒä ÚÙíã - Úä Úáí Ýí äÍæ åÐå ÇáÞÕÉ ÞÇáþ:þ þ"þ ÝÔÞÞÊ ãäåÇ ÃÑÈÚÉ ÃÎãÑÉ þ"þ ÝÐßÑ ÇáËáÇË ÇáãÐßæÑÇÊ¡ ÞÇáþ:þ æäÓí íÒíÏ ÇáÑÇÈÚÉþ.þ

æÝí ÑæÇíÉ ÇáØÍÇæí þ"þ ÎãÇÑÇ áÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ÃÓÏ Èä åÇÔã Ãã Úáí¡ æÎãÇÑÇ áÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ÇáäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã¡ æÎãÇÑÇ áÝÇØãÉ ÈäÊ ÍãÒÉ Èä ÚÈÏ ÇáãØáÈ¡ æÎãÇÑÇ áÝÇØãÉ ÃÎÑì ÞÏ äÓíÊåÇ þ"þ ÝÞÇá ÚíÇÖ áÚáåÇ ÝÇØãÉ ÇãÑÃÉ ÚÞíá Èä ÃÈí ØÇáÈ æåí ÈäÊ ÔíÈÉ Èä ÑÈíÚÉ¡ æÞíáþ:þ ÈäÊ ÚÊÈÉ Èä ÑÈíÚÉ¡ æÞíáþ:þ ÈäÊ ÇáæáíÏ Èä ÚÊÈÉþ.þ

The women were Fatima, Ali's mother, the daughter of Hamza, and the wife of Aqeel... not the wives of Ali.

I do want to correct, what I said, but I did not say that (the hadith said that). I said (that the hadith said) that Hawwa (as) was responsible for all the mischief of all the women. While I meant to say (that the hadith said that) Hawwa (as) was responsible for all the women who were unfaithful towards their husbands. Neither did I say (that the hadith said that) only Hawwa (as) was responsible for women being unfaithful. Here are the ahadith:

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 55, Number 611:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Were it not for Bani Israel, meat would not decay; and were it not for Eve, no woman would ever betray her husband."

Sahih Muslim:Book 008, Number 3471:

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Had it not been for Eve, woman would have never acted unfaithfully towards her husband.

There is a similar hadith that says that Adam forgot and so his people forgot. It doesn't necessarily mean that Adam is responsible for everytime someone forgets to do something.

Moreover, these were just examples. What about Bani Israel being the reason for meat decaying? Isn't meat decaying a natural phenomenon? :o

Meat decaying is natural. The idea that meat didn't decay in the past is not likely, but possible. Didn't people use to sin Jinn run around in the past? There were many strange things that were going on, that are unlikely... but once again, quite possible.

What about Allah 'descending' from the seventh heaven

Why is that impossible?

what about Allah (and his shin) being seen on the Day of Judgement, when the Quran states the opposite (6:103).

Good example. However, there is a difference of opinion regarding how that verse is to be interpretted. Some say that the verse is referring to this life, while others believe that the term tadrikahu means more than just "seeing".

On the other hand, scholars like Al-Shafi'i use this verse to point out that the Believers will see Allah:

83:15 - Verily, from (the Light of) their Lord, that Day, will they be veiled.

Refer to the Arabic verse.

Compiling ahadith and labelling them unquestionably 'sahih', all of which are to be accepted, otherwise he is criticized, is doing the future generations a favour?

Refer to my first post. There are other scholars that have claimed that their works are Saheeh, yet their works were not accepted to be at the level of the Saheehain. They are not criticized for their views.

My question was, was there a reason why they did not include ahadith in their books, which could not be graded as Sahih. Surely, they must have realised that many ahadith which they did not include in their Sahihs, and which really are worth including in Sahihs, will be lost and not available to future generations.

No, they believed that Allah will preserve His religion. Even if the Shaikhain didn't exist, Allah would have brought others that would do their work for them.

If they did not intend to collect all Sahih ahadith, what did they intend? Please elaborate.

I'm not sure if you are aware, but there are levels of Saheeh hadiths. The highest level is the mutawatir and the lowest level would be a "lesser" hasan hadith. Even hasan hadiths have levels. Al-Bukhari, for one, wouldn't settle for anything less than liqa'a in his hadiths. You will find that he authenticates other hadiths with only imkaan al-liqa'a outside his Saheeh. Muslim, on the otherhand, focused on hadiths that were agreed according to a concensus by four certain hadith scholars.

Akhbaris aren't criticized (if that is the right word) to the same level as the Sunnis. Yes, you're right. But that is only because Sunnis have more things we can argue with them over, as compared to the Akhbaris. A person who differs more with you, will naturally will have more disagreements with you. But it wouldn't be right to say that we don't highlight the fact, that Akhbaris are not the correct ones, among the Shi'ites and why so. We very well do.

I think that you are toning down the issue a little too much. Most Shias aren't even aware that this is the Akhbari position regarding their hadiths, which is why they criticize Sunni for what those that are closer to home are guilty of. I also disagree with your view that those that one is further away should be criticized more. Would you feel more obligated to criticize a relative for committing a specific sin, or would you feel more obligated to criticize a complete stranger?

Maybe you remember wrong what I said. The Sunni view, as far as I remember, is that Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim stand next to the Quran (behind it) with regard to authenticity. I didn't know they were (believe by Sunnis to be) equal to the Quran. :o

I said those who reject the Quran's feature of being unique because being fully authentic (due to it being a word of an infallible God) are Kafirs. I'm sure the Sunnis don't do that.... do they? :unsure:

You ask any average Sunni if the Saheehain are completely Saheeh and they will tell you that they are. When we say that Saheeh Al-Bukhari is the second most Saheeh book, we are referring to it as second in rank, not in the level of authenticity. Don't hate us for feeling that way though, Akhbaris feel the same way.

---------------

@ Righteous:

I remember you saying LB that it may be weak but it is still hujjah for you to believe that Muwayia (LA) was a righteous sahabi

Mu'awiyah was a righteous Sahabi for the few positive hadiths about him that ARE authentic, not for the collection of lies that aren't.

@ Basim:

If you don't mind... I'd rather we focus on one point instead of ten. My last post took way too much of my time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@LB despite the following facts that he spilled Muslim blood (Hujr RA amongst others), he fought against the "righteous" caliph, he nominated his drunkard son as ruler of Muslims, cursed and had others curse Imam Ali (as) in friday sermons? You still consider him righteous?

* Sighs *

One will, if one is retarded.

These are the morals of Ummah, thieves, murderers, nepotists are considered righteous.

They know the Quran, but the mind doesn't grasp it.

What you expect from a follower of Abdul Wahhab, who was a mass murder!

Link to post
Share on other sites

@LB despite the following facts that he spilled Muslim blood (Hujr RA amongst others), he fought against the "righteous" caliph, he nominated his drunkard son as ruler of Muslims, cursed and had others curse Imam Ali (as) in friday sermons? You still consider him righteous?

If you look into Sunni history, you will find those that have condemned Mu'awiyah for those actions. However, his actions do not erase the hadiths that were said in praise of him, nor does it erase his other good deeds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

If you look into Sunni history, you will find those that have condemned Mu'awiyah for those actions. However, his actions do not erase the hadiths that were said in praise of him, nor does it erase his other good deeds.

Hadiths taken form Mawiya (LA) :unsure:

I thought hypocrisy erases all good deeds since a hypocrite is in the worst part of the hell according to Quran and love of Ali (as) is the basis of deciding whether one is a hypocrite or not according to Sahih hadith.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hadiths taken form Mawiya (LA) :unsure:

I hope you aren't implying that the authentic hadiths that praise him are narrated by himself.

I thought hypocrisy erases all good deeds since a hypocrite is in the worst part of the hell according to Quran and love of Ali (as) is the basis of deciding whether one is a hypocrite or not according to Sahih hadith.

No, not at all. Can you read Arabic? There is an explanation of that hadith that I would like to link to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

No, not at all. Can you read Arabic? There is an explanation of that hadith that I would like to link to you.

If a hadith tallies with Quran, I do not think there is need for any explanation.

This is what Quran says

[shakir 42:23] That is of which Allah gives the good news to His servants, (to) those who believe and do good deeds. Say: I do not ask of you any reward for it but love for my near relatives ; and whoever earns good, We give him more of good therein; surely Allah is Forgiving, Grateful.

Sahih Muslim - Book 001, Number 0141:

Zirr reported: 'Ali observed: By Him Who split up the seed and created something living, the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) gave me a promise that no one but a believer would love me, and none but a hypocrite would nurse grudge against me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Alright, then let's just assume that Sunni scholars over the past fourteen centuries were just stupid and never put two and two together like you just did. Sure beats looking up their point of view.

For Shia belief the Quran is the supreme authority. Is anything more of an authority over Quran and Prophet (pbuh)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

^ No, but you speak as if you have complete knowledge of the Qur'an and the meaning of its verses. You also seem to believe that you have a better understanding of Sunni hadiths than the scholars of Ahlul Sunnah. Looking back, I'm starting to have my doubts regarding your fluency in the Arabic language.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

^ No, but you speak as if you have complete knowledge of the Qur'an and the meaning of its verses. You also seem to believe that you have a better understanding of Sunni hadiths than the scholars of Ahlul Sunnah. Looking back, I'm starting to have my doubts regarding your fluency in the Arabic language.

I did not claim I have complete knowledge of Quran.

All I did was post Quranic verse and Sahih hadith

and saw your reaction.

Edited by naheed
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Botta,

What do you mean about Allah descending from the 7th Heaven? You mean what he said about descending from the minbar? This was said by Ibn Batoota but was said to be false as Ibn Taymiyya was in jail at that time. However it is said that his disciple Sulayman Al-Tufi Al-Hanbali said that about him and was reported by Ibn Hajr Asqalani.al-Ta'sis al-radd `ala asas al-taqdis

....But Allah's elevation over the world is not like that, rather He is elevated over it literally (i.e. in space). And this is the known elevation and the known precedence in his book al-Ta'sis al-radd `ala asas al-taqdis.

Ibn Taymiyya and probably you believe that Allah (SWT) has a form, but the form as you have stated is not exactly known. However Allah (SWT) having some sort of a form is 100% correct. Is this true?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Alright, then let's just assume that Sunni scholars over the past fourteen centuries were just stupid and never put two and two together like you just did. Sure beats looking up their point of view.

^ No, but you speak as if you have complete knowledge of the Qur'an and the meaning of its verses. You also seem to believe that you have a better understanding of Sunni hadiths than the scholars of Ahlul Sunnah. Looking back, I'm starting to have my doubts regarding your fluency in the Arabic language.

^ What was my reaction? I asked if you spoke Arabic and offered you a detailed explanation of the text, which you rejected.

I have nothing more to say to you.

The usual Wahhabi ploy to browbeat and to say that since you don't know Arabic, therefore you don't know Islam.

And, better understanding of Sunni hadiths, I guess rasool Allah Mohammad pbuh.gif was a Sunni.

Nothing, new here bro. [Edited]

Edited by inshaAllah
Inappropriate language. Member is advised to keep the discussion civil and friendly.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Panzerwaffe, there is no doubt that people fabricated hadiths in order to support their regimes. However, those hadiths didn't make it into the Saheehain. You will notice that most of the hadiths that are out there which were used to praise Mu'awiyah were declared weak by our scholars. As I've said above, hadiths are rejected only through the standards of hadith, and the Shaikhan didn't create their collection of hadiths based on their beliefs. If that were so, you would've found a lot more praise for Mu'awiyah. You would've found some of the hadiths that I mentioned in this thread:

can you tell us where to look more into the methodology of bukhari and how it compared with that of other traditionalists

only then we can explore this question further

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to post
Share on other sites

^ To keep things simple, in his Saheeh, he only collects authentic traditions and lists them out according to subject. You should also know that he sets a very strict criteria, which is that the narrators of each of the chains must have met the narrator that is above him. This is different than the conditions set by other traditionalists that say that the possibility of the meeting of the two narrators is sufficient.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

^ but bro that does not solve the problem, 2 people might have meet but who knows if they really passed some information honestly to each other.

e.g if i dont believe in the honesty of anyone of the narrater the whole excercise if futile.I understand that hadith science is not 100 percent perfect and i do understand the logic behind bukhari's criterea ( which is sound if all narraters are reliable).But here is my problem with this overemphasis on technicality, were narraters who had shia, khariji mutazila or qadari sympathies weeded out ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

^ To keep things simple, in his Saheeh, he only collects authentic traditions and lists them out according to subject. You should also know that he sets a very strict criteria, which is that the narrators of each of the chains must have met the narrator that is above him. This is different than the conditions set by other traditionalists that say that the possibility of the meeting of the two narrators is sufficient.

Which sahih you are talking about. The sahih Bukhari or the sahih Muslim?

As far as I know the above criteria is for only sahih Muslim and not sahih Bukhari!

Edited by aladdin
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.


×
×
  • Create New...