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  
Ethics

Why Do Sunnis Fast In Muharram?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Fasting is a blessing, but at the same time the prophets grandson who he dearly loved died and his family....doesnt it mean when you fast like think Allah for everything? Would the prophet have fasted during the time of his families mourn or even his companions at that matter? I say we shouldnt fast at this month.....

Here is why I say dont fast.....clear proof

http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/fastofashura.htm

http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/fastofashura.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well these are some of the narrations from the Shia book, Wasail al Shia regarding fasting on Ashura. Now it is your choice whether you want to follow the sunnah of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and Ali (ra) and Imam Baqir or not.

ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä ÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÝÖÇá ¡ Úä íÚÞæÈ Èä íÒíÏ ¡ Úä ÃÈí åãÇã ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕÇã ÑÓæá Çááå ( Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã ) íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ

1 – Muhammad b. al-Hasan by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hasan b. Faddal from Ya`qub b. Yazid from Abu Hammam from Abu ‘l-Hasan Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The Messenger of Allah Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã fasted on the day of `Ashura.

æÚäå ¡ Úä åÇÑæä Èä ãÓáã ¡ Úä ãÓÚÏÉ Èä ÕÏÞÉ ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏÇááå ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) Úä ÃÈíå ¡ Ãä ÚáíÇ ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕæãæÇ ÇáÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ÇáÊÇÓÚ æÇáÚÇÔÑ ¡ ÝÇäå íßÝÑ ÐäæÈ ÓäÉ

2 – And from him from Harun b. Muslim from Mas`ada b. Sadaqa from Abu `Abdillah Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã from his father that `Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã said: Fast on `Ashura, the ninth and the tenth, for verily it atones for the sins of a year.

æÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä ÓÚÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÚÈÏÇááå Èä ãíãæä ÇáÞÏÇÍ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÃÈíå ( ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕíÇã íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ßÝÇÑÉ ÓäÉ

3 – And by his isnad from Sa`d b. `Abdullah from Abu Ja`far from Ja`far b. Muhammad b. `Abdullah [Ja`far b. Muhammad b. `Ubaydullah – in at-Tahdhib] from `Abdullah b. Maymun al-Qaddah from Ja`far from his father Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The fast of the day of `Ashura is an atonement of a year.

Edited by kalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well these are some of the narrations from the Shia book, Wasail al Shia regarding fasting on Ashura. Now it is your choice whether you want to follow the sunnah of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and Ali (ra) and Imam Baqir or not.

ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä ÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÝÖÇá ¡ Úä íÚÞæÈ Èä íÒíÏ ¡ Úä ÃÈí åãÇã ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕÇã ÑÓæá Çááå ( Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã ) íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ

1 – Muhammad b. al-Hasan by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hasan b. Faddal from Ya`qub b. Yazid from Abu Hammam from Abu ‘l-Hasan Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The Messenger of Allah Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã fasted on the day of `Ashura.

æÚäå ¡ Úä åÇÑæä Èä ãÓáã ¡ Úä ãÓÚÏÉ Èä ÕÏÞÉ ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏÇááå ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) Úä ÃÈíå ¡ Ãä ÚáíÇ ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕæãæÇ ÇáÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ÇáÊÇÓÚ æÇáÚÇÔÑ ¡ ÝÇäå íßÝÑ ÐäæÈ ÓäÉ

2 – And from him from Harun b. Muslim from Mas`ada b. Sadaqa from Abu `Abdillah Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã from his father that `Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã said: Fast on `Ashura, the ninth and the tenth, for verily it atones for the sins of a year.

æÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä ÓÚÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÚÈÏÇááå Èä ãíãæä ÇáÞÏÇÍ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÃÈíå ( ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕíÇã íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ßÝÇÑÉ ÓäÉ

3 – And by his isnad from Sa`d b. `Abdullah from Abu Ja`far from Ja`far b. Muhammad b. `Abdullah [Ja`far b. Muhammad b. `Ubaydullah – in at-Tahdhib] from `Abdullah b. Maymun al-Qaddah from Ja`far from his father Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The fast of the day of `Ashura is an atonement of a year.

I dont know whether the chains are sahih but ill tell you one thing. You have not read history nor do you know what ashura is. Ashura means tenth of a/any month, originally. If there were hadiths they could be talking about the tenth of "A" month, not the day of ashura in the month of "MUHARRAM" (death of Hussain A.S) because the term changed to also mean Ashura day Imam hussain A.S died. So if for example, if Al-Sadiq A.S was talking about hearing from Ali A.S that fasting on 9/10 of ashura, Ashura can be any month, that doesnt mean its the tenth of Muharram. Plus I guarantee you no imam fasted on the day their grandfather died. Its illogical. Besides the fact the idea of fasting because of Moses story is completlely false. No jew even fasts on the tenth of Muharram nor does any of the chains where sunnis got this hadith works.

Go watch the link i posted and your hadith gets completely annihilated, pure false propaganda against the prophets family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know whether the chains are sahih but ill tell you one thing. You have not read history nor do you know what ashura is. Ashura means tenth of a/any month, originally. If there were hadiths they could be talking about the tenth of "A" month, not the day of ashura in the month of "MUHARRAM" (death of Hussain A.S) because the term changed to also mean Ashura day Imam hussain A.S died. So if for example, if Al-Sadiq A.S was talking about hearing from Ali A.S that fasting on 9/10 of ashura, Ashura can be any month, that doesnt mean its the tenth of Muharram. Plus I guarantee you no imam fasted on the day their grandfather died. Its illogical. Besides the fact the idea of fasting because of Moses story is completlely false. No jew even fasts on the tenth of Muharram nor does any of the chains where sunnis got this hadith works.

Go watch the link i posted and your hadith gets completely annihilated, pure false propaganda against the prophets family.

http://youtu.be/xScJEOb-ucc?t=4m13s

To be fair, we also have these narrations.

5 – And by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hasan from Muhammad b. `Abdullah b. Zurara from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr from Aban b. `Uthman al-Ahmar from Kathir an-Nawa from Abu Ja`far Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The ark adhere to al-Judi on the day of `Ashura, so Nuh Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã commanded whoever was with him from the jinn and man to fast on that day. Abu Ja`far Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã said: Do you know what this day is? This is the day in which Allah ÚÒ æÌá forgave Adam and Hawa. And this is the day in which the sea was split for the Children of Israel and Fir`awn and whoever was with him drowned. And this is the day in which Musa Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã defeated Fir`awn. And this is the day in which Ibrahim Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã was born. And this is the day in which Allah forgave the people of Yunus. And this is the day in which `Isa b. Maryam Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã was born. And this is the day in which the Qa’im Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã will rise.

The argument about ashura just meaning the tenth is very weak, because you see Imam al-Sadiq (a) and al-Baqir (a) narrating a lot of them, so do you think they did not know the significance of ashura?

If you look at the titles of the chapters about fasting on ashura, it clearly isn't supposed to be joyful.

Desirability of the fast of the ninth and the tenth of Muharram with grief

http://www.tashayyu....asts/chapter-20

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is just an informational hadith, that doesnt say we should fast. Plus dude, the argument isnt weak....it literally means 10th day......watch my video I have posted, but in conclusion, whether what ever good happens on this day, does not overcome the death of imam husaain. We have millions of hadith stating we should mourn by our imams. They also say if you fast, fast because imam hussain didnt have any food or water, but when you do break it before the hour before sunset because that is when he got killed. You cant keep your fast till sunset you have to break it before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Khoi says in the link you gave

ÝÇáÑæÇíÇÊ ÇáäÇåíÉ ÛíÑ äÞíøÉ ÇáÓÜäÏ ÈÑãøÊåÇ ¡ Èá åí ÖÚíÝÉ ÈÃÌãÚåÇ ¡ ÝáíÓÊ áÏíäÇ ÑæÇíÉ ãÚÊÈÑÉ íÚÊãÏ ÚáíåÇ áíÍãá ÇáãÚÇÑÖ Úáì ÇáÊÞíøÉ ßãÇ ÕäÚå ÕÇÍÈ ÇáÍÏÇÆÞ . æÃãøÇ ÇáÑæÇíÇÊ ÇáãÊÖãøäÉ ááÃãÑ æÇÓÊÍÈÇÈ ÇáÕæã Ýí åÐÇ Çáíæã ÝßËíÑÉ ¡ ãËá: ÕÍíÍÉ ÇáÞÏøÇÍ : «ÕíÇã íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ßÝøÇÑÉ ÓäÉ

The narrations of prohibition (of fasting on this day) are all weak, we don't have any authentic narration which we can present to place it against the taqiyyah opinion, and as far as the narrations of istihbab of of fast on this day, so they are plenty, for example the sahih narration of Qaddah : the fast of Ashura is atonement for the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well these are some of the narrations from the Shia book, Wasail al Shia regarding fasting on Ashura. Now it is your choice whether you want to follow the sunnah of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and Ali (ra) and Imam Baqir or not.

ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä ÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÝÖÇá ¡ Úä íÚÞæÈ Èä íÒíÏ ¡ Úä ÃÈí åãÇã ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕÇã ÑÓæá Çááå ( Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã ) íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ

1 – Muhammad b. al-Hasan by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hasan b. Faddal from Ya`qub b. Yazid from Abu Hammam from Abu ‘l-Hasan Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The Messenger of Allah Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã fasted on the day of `Ashura.

æÚäå ¡ Úä åÇÑæä Èä ãÓáã ¡ Úä ãÓÚÏÉ Èä ÕÏÞÉ ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏÇááå ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) Úä ÃÈíå ¡ Ãä ÚáíÇ ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕæãæÇ ÇáÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ÇáÊÇÓÚ æÇáÚÇÔÑ ¡ ÝÇäå íßÝÑ ÐäæÈ ÓäÉ

2 – And from him from Harun b. Muslim from Mas`ada b. Sadaqa from Abu `Abdillah Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã from his father that `Ali Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã said: Fast on `Ashura, the ninth and the tenth, for verily it atones for the sins of a year.

æÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä ÓÚÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÚÈÏÇááå Èä ãíãæä ÇáÞÏÇÍ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÃÈíå ( ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕíÇã íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ßÝÇÑÉ ÓäÉ

3 – And by his isnad from Sa`d b. `Abdullah from Abu Ja`far from Ja`far b. Muhammad b. `Abdullah [Ja`far b. Muhammad b. `Ubaydullah – in at-Tahdhib] from `Abdullah b. Maymun al-Qaddah from Ja`far from his father Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The fast of the day of `Ashura is an atonement of a year.

All of these narrations are weak.

5 – And by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hasan from Muhammad b. `Abdullah b. Zurara from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Abi Nasr from Aban b. `Uthman al-Ahmar from Kathir an-Nawa from Abu Ja`far Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã. He said: The ark adhere to al-Judi on the day of `Ashura, so Nuh Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã commanded whoever was with him from the jinn and man to fast on that day. Abu Ja`far Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã said: Do you know what this day is? This is the day in which Allah ÚÒ æÌá forgave Adam and Hawa. And this is the day in which the sea was split for the Children of Israel and Fir`awn and whoever was with him drowned. And this is the day in which Musa Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã defeated Fir`awn. And this is the day in which Ibrahim Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã was born. And this is the day in which Allah forgave the people of Yunus. And this is the day in which `Isa b. Maryam Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã was born. And this is the day in which the Qa’im Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã will rise

This is a very weak Hadith, Kathir al-Nawa is an accursed individual, and from the figureheads of the Zaydi Batriyya, from whom Abu Abdillah made Tabarra, thus it can never be accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

æÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä ÓÚÏ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÚÈíÏÇááå ¡ Úä ÚÈÏÇááå Èä ãíãæä ÇáÞÏÇÍ ¡ Úä ÌÚÝÑ ¡ Úä ÃÈíå ( ÚáíåãÇ ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕíÇã íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ßÝÇÑÉ ÓäÉ

There is no Tawthiq for Ja'far b. Muhammad b. Ubaydullah.

æÚäå ¡ Úä åÇÑæä Èä ãÓáã ¡ Úä ãÓÚÏÉ Èä ÕÏÞÉ ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÚÈÏÇááå ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) Úä ÃÈíå ¡ Ãä ÚáíÇ ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕæãæÇ ÇáÚÇÔæÑÇÁ ÇáÊÇÓÚ æÇáÚÇÔÑ ¡ ÝÇäå íßÝÑ ÐäæÈ ÓäÉ

There is no Tawthiq for Mas`ada, unless you consider all the narrators of Tafsir al-Qummi Mawthuqin, and this not the famous opinion in the Madhab, thus countless scholars rule him as Majhul.

But even if you go with al-Khoei and rule Mas`ada Thiqah, then the path of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hassan b. Fadhal is weak.

ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä ÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÝÖÇá¡ Úä íÚÞæÈ Èä íÒíÏ ¡ Úä ÃÈí åãÇã ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕÇã ÑÓæá Çááå ( Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã ) íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ

Again, the chain of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hassan b. Fadhal is weak.

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no Tawthiq for Mas`ada, unless you consider all the narrators of Tafsir al-Qummi Mawthuqin, and this not the famous opinion in the Madhab, thus countless scholars rule him as Majhul.

But even if you go with al-Khoei and rule Mas`ada Thiqah, then the path of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hassan b. Fadhal is weak.

Mas'ada's narration has been authenticated by

1. Al jawahiri in jawahirul kalaam 35/224

2. Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq Ruhani in al Masail p. 149

3. Shaikh Ansari in Kitab us salat p. 114

4. Fayz Qasani in Usul al asaliya p. 84

5. Khomeini in al rasail 2/191

6. Shaikh Isfahani in al bayan p. 90

7. Shaikh Waheed Khorasani in Minhaj us saliheen 2/417

8. Aqa Hemdani in Misbahul faqih 2/244

9. Sayyid Khwansari in Jami ul Madarik 1/325

10. Muhaqqiq Bahrani in al Hadaiq al nadhira 5/280

etc

So his narration regarding fasting on ashura is also authentic according to these scholars.

Edited by kalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

I do not accept a Muta'akhir's Tawthiq, show a Mutaqadim who has made Tawthiq of him, and you will find that there is none.

Allamah Hilli makes Tadhi'f of him and so does Allamah Majlisi, but even their opinion does not hold weight, since they are from the Muta'akhirin.

Many consider him Majhul due to this.

The only thing in his favour is that he is a narrator in Tafsir al-Qummi, that is all that is used to make Tawthiq of him, and it is a flimsy and weak source of strengthening, which many scholars disagree with.

Can you bring any other reason for his Tawthiq?

As I said, even if you accept Mas`ada's Tawthiq due to him being a narrator in Tafsir al-Qummi, and there are a lot of scholars who have rejected this notion, there is still the problem of the path of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hasan b. Fadhal, which makes the Hadith Dhaif.

And you have not addresed that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

ãÍãÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä ÈÅÓäÇÏå Úä Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÝÖÇá¡ Úä íÚÞæÈ Èä íÒíÏ ¡ Úä ÃÈí åãÇã ¡ Úä ÃÈí ÇáÍÓä ( Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ) ÞÇá : ÕÇã ÑÓæá Çááå ( Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã ) íæã ÚÇÔæÑÇÁ

Again, the chain of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hassan b. Fadhal is weak.

Even if one were to consider this one authentic, it doesn't mean anything. The authentic narration about this from Zurara [ra] confirm it was practiced and then abrogated. So he [sawa] did fast it, true, but then he [sawa] abandoned it.

Even the other ones one have explanation that don't require rijali tahqeeq (Mas`ada is an `ammi or zaydi, taqiyya is a high possibility).

Ýí ÇãÇä Çááå

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not accept a Muta'akhir's Tawthiq, show a Mutaqadim who has made Tawthiq of him, and you will find that there is none.

Allamah Hilli makes Tadhi'f of him and so does Allamah Majlisi, but even their opinion does not hold weight, since they are from the Muta'akhirin.

Many consider him Majhul due to this.

The only thing in his favour is that he is a narrator in Tafsir al-Qummi, that is all that is used to make Tawthiq of him, and it is a flimsy and weak source of strengthening, which many scholars disagree with.

Can you bring any other reason for his Tawthiq?

As I said, even if you accept Mas`ada's Tawthiq due to him being a narrator in Tafsir al-Qummi, and there are a lot of scholars who have rejected this notion, there is still the problem of the path of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hasan b. Fadhal, which makes the Hadith Dhaif.

And you have not addresed that point.

Frankly speaking, there are more than a dozen giant Shia scholars authenticating his narrations, and you tell me you don't accept his tawthiq because it was for this or that reason? Anyhow, my point is proved, this narration is authentic according to giant Shia scholars which includes Khomeini and al Khoi. Whether you accept it or not, I have no problem with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Frankly speaking, there are more than a dozen giant Shia scholars authenticating his narrations, and you tell me you don't accept his tawthiq because it was for this or that reason? Anyhow, my point is proved, this narration is authentic according to giant Shia scholars which includes Khomeini and al Khoi. Whether you accept it or not, I have no problem with it.

Kalaam, you seem not to be a Salafi (ie those devoid of any understanding regarding usool al-fiqh) so I hope you can see beyond "weak" and "reliable" chains. Simply because they have authenticated these narrations, does not mean they believe they have hujjiyya. Our usool and `ilm of hadeeth is different from Sunnism's version especially in light of the other narrations that explain these other narrations.

Ýí ÇãÇä Çááå

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kalaam, you seem not to be a Salafi (ie those devoid of any understanding regarding usool al-fiqh) so I hope you can see beyond "weak" and "reliable" chains. Simply because they have authenticated these narrations, does not mean they believe they have hujjiyya. Our usool and `ilm of hadeeth is different from Sunnism's version especially in light of the other narrations that explain these other narrations.

Didn't many Shia scholars say the fast of Ashura is mustahab?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly speaking, there are more than a dozen giant Shia scholars authenticating his narrations, and you tell me you don't accept his tawthiq because it was for this or that reason? Anyhow, my point is proved, this narration is authentic according to giant Shia scholars which includes Khomeini and al Khoi. Whether you accept it or not, I have no problem with it.

Do not look at people, look at their reasons.

Even today, if I told you, for example, that al-Albani has made Tawthiq of X, you will not rest assured, rather you will check his Tahqiq and look upon what he bases his Tawthiq from the past scholars.

When you look at the reason for the Tawthiq of Mas`ada, then there is nothing to support it except for:

1. al-Majlisi I said his Ahadith are similar to the narrations of the Thiqat, so we can accept them.

2. He is a narrator in Tafsir al-Qummi.

3. He is one and the same with the clearly Thiqah Mas`ada b. Ziyad.

Now these three reasons are not at all strong, therefore the man remains Majhul for a lot of scholars and his Ahadith not Mu'tabar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Even if one were to consider this one authentic, it doesn't mean anything. The authentic narration about this from Zurara [ra] confirm it was practiced and then abrogated. So he [sawa] did fast it, true, but then he [sawa] abandoned it.

Ýí ÇãÇä Çááå

Yes, the Hadith of Abu Hammam does not prove anything, as you have rightly mentioned, the Sahiha of Zurara shows that the practise of fasting was Matruk after the legislation of the fast of Ramadhan.

Even the other ones one have explanation that don't require rijali tahqeeq (Mas`ada is an `ammi or zaydi, taqiyya is a high possibility).

al-Khoei rules that the Mas`ada who is A'mmi and Zaydi Batri is not this one, rather he is the one who is the companion of Imam al-Baqir, and he is different from this Mas`ada who is a companion of as-Sadiq.

Though others consider them the same person.

All three Hadith quoted are Ghayr Mu'tabar.

1. The first one due to Ja'far b. Muhammad b. Ubaydallah.

2. The second one due to Mas`ada AND the chain of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hasan b. Fadhal.

3. Due to the chain of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hasan b. Fadhal.

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not look at people, look at their reasons.

Even today, if I told you, for example, that al-Albani has made Tawthiq of X, you will not rest assured, rather you will check his Tahqiq and look upon what he bases his Tawthiq from the past scholars.

When you look at the reason for the Tawthiq of Mas`ada, then there is nothing to support it except for:

1. al-Majlisi I said his Ahadith are similar to the narrations of the Thiqat, so we can accept them.

2. He is a narrator in Tafsir al-Qummi.

3. He is one and the same with the clearly Thiqah Mas`ada b. Ziyad.

Now these three reasons are not at all strong, therefore the man remains Majhul for a lot of scholars and his Ahadith not Mu'tabar.

The knowledgeable Shias will know that if we go on asking the reason for the tawthiq of every narrator, there will be plenty of thiqa narrators for whom we will not be able to find any reason for their tawthiq. So you will have to discard them, and this would create a huge mess. More than ten shia top scholars considering the narrations of mas'ada as authentic is no joke to discard easily.

al-Khoei rules that the Mas`ada who is A'mmi and Zaydi Batri is not this one, rather he is the one who is the companion of Imam al-Baqir, and he is different from this Mas`ada who is a companion of as-Sadiq.

Though others consider them the same person.

All three Hadith quoted are Ghayr Mu'tabar.

1. The first one due to Ja'far b. Muhammad b. Ubaydallah.

2. The second one due to Mas`ada AND the chain of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hasan b. Fadhal.

3. Due to the chain of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hasan b. Fadhal.

al Khoi did authentication of this very hadith of mas'ada and mas'ada was thiqah according to him, see his books, so there might be more than one mas'ada but the mas'ada here is the one who is thiqah according to al Khoi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

The knowledgeable Shias will know that if we go on asking the reason for the tawthiq of every narrator, there will be plenty of thiqa narrators for whom we will not be able to find any reason for their tawthiq. So you will have to discard them, and this would create a huge mess. More than ten shia top scholars considering the narrations of mas'ada as authentic is no joke to discard easily.

To each their own usool of rijal and dirayah.

Khoi did authentication of this very hadith of mas'ada and mas'ada was thiqah according to him, see his books, so there might be more than one mas'ada but the mas'ada here is the one who is thiqah according to al Khoi.

al-Khui [rh] originally did give Mas`ada b. Sadaqa tawtheeq, yes. However, this tawtheeq was upon the basis of his narrating in Tafsir al-Qummi, which is a position he went against and returned from at the end of his life, which is why you find his books affirming this older position of his.

Not saying I agree with all the rijal stuff being said here, but this is just what it is about al-Khui [ra].

As to "many" Shi'a scholars affirming istihbaab for fast of Ashura, I have found no such thing. The majority if not all seem to condemn it and/or say it has no special importance due to its abrogation and matrook status, as far as I know.

Ýí ÇãÇä Çááå

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to "many" Shi'a scholars affirming istihbaab for fast of Ashura, I have found no such thing. The majority if not all seem to condemn it and/or say it has no special importance due to its abrogation and matrook status, as far as I know.

What I find really sad is the fact that far too many shias flatly deny this fast was ever kept in the first place. To deny the link to the Jews is one thing, but to deny a sunnah of the Prophet (albeit perhaps an aboragated one) just to oppose sunnis is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find really sad is the fact that far too many shias flatly deny this fast was ever kept in the first place. To deny the link to the Jews is one thing, but to deny a sunnah of the Prophet (albeit perhaps an aboragated one) just to oppose sunnis is ridiculous.

maybe they did not know better? give them 70 excuses ,teach them and ask hedayah and guidance for them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find really sad is the fact that far too many shias flatly deny this fast was ever kept in the first place. To deny the link to the Jews is one thing, but to deny a sunnah of the Prophet (albeit perhaps an aboragated one) just to oppose sunnis is ridiculous.

To be fair, based on the evidences presented above, if you are strict with your ilm al-rijal, then it would seem the narrations are not authentic.

However, the problem arises when we have people who are not consistent with this approach, who normally rely on the weakest of narrations, even sunni narrations just because it proves their point (3rd shahada, Owais al-Qarni etc), but in this case, just to oppose the sunnis, they go all out and become mega strict with this science.

Also, to many scholars, past and present, they clearly are considered authentic, so the public speakers do need to stop this out and out denial of them, because it just makes them look bad, once people see that what our scholars have said about them.

Rijal angle aside, if you take out the narrations from bukhari, I really don't see the what the big deal is about, from what I can see, there isn't a strong connection between fasting and 'day of joy' (aside from the people who want to claim that the Prophet fasting on his birthday gives us carte blanche to throw a party with cake and balloons etc)

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe they did not know better? give them 70 excuses ,teach them and ask hedayah and guidance for them?

maybe they did not know better? give them 70 excuses ,teach them and ask hedayah and guidance for them?

While I agree in principle I don't think it's applicable to those who give lectures to millions of shias worldwide, telling them what they want to hear and not what they should hear. For example I sat in a quite a long lecture by a well known shia speaker who used 'numerous proofs ' to 'destroy' the myth of the Ummayad Ashura fast. And this came from a highly intelligent individual.

Almost every lecture on this issue focuses on proving sunni hadiths as fake, and never even mention the shia narrations. I wonder why...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree in principle I don't think it's applicable to those who give lectures to millions of shias worldwide, telling them what they want to hear and not what they should hear. For example I sat in a quite a long lecture by a well known shia speaker who used 'numerous proofs ' to 'destroy' the myth of the Ummayad Ashura fast. And this came from a highly intelligent individual.

Almost every lecture on this issue focuses on proving sunni hadiths as fake, and never even mention the shia narrations. I wonder why...

do you know that in some communities there are actually some festivals held in the day of Ashura? if that isnt Ummayad thing then i dont know what it should be called

fasting in islamic tradition is an expression of joy and thankfulness , though them speakers you are talking about have taken things to the extreme denial, i dont see why we should ignore the piece of truth in what they were preaching

anyways, most maulana will respond to their audience demands, if the audiance demanded more academical research on a topic they will get it through one scholar or another but the truth is that many shia dont go to these majalis to listen to long scholarly research rather they'd like to hear some peotry , pay salam to the people of their community then abandon the mosque for the next few months

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to "many" Shi'a scholars affirming istihbaab for fast of Ashura, I have found no such thing. The majority if not all seem to condemn it and/or say it has no special importance due to its abrogation and matrook status, as far as I know.

I'm afraid that's just not true. The vast majority I've checked have said it is a mustahabb fast to observe (some saying there is ijma` on this even), though often they add the provision of it being fasted upon the aspect of mourning the affliction of the family of the Prophet (sawa). The only one I know who said it was outright haram was Shaykh Yusuf al-Bahrani, but everyone else I've checked that mentioned it counts it as either a voluntary fast one has a choice in or mustahabb. I suspect it's more a recent thing to say it is makrooh (though there are exceptions, such as Sayyid al-Khoe'i saying it's a mustahabb fast, dismissing as weak the evidence against it). Though even those who say it is makrooh, it can be understood in the sense of having less reward than a regular fast, not that it's actually a disliked thing to do in itself.

I suspect this is more a reactionary thing against Sunnis and hence why you get such strong opinions amongst the lay people against it, as one might say the opponents emphasis on its celebration goes back to a reactionary thing against the Imams and the Shi`a (even if they don't realize that nowadays).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Past or Present, the real thing is "Proofs".

What do the Proofs say?

What brother Islamic Salvation posted, I don't see that has been answered here.

He brought this argument: But even if you go with al-Khoei and rule Mas`ada Thiqah, then the path of at-Tusi to Ali b. al-Hassan b. Fadhal is weak.

Together, there may be some strength to them, but if any Marja disagree to it then it is also understandable while there exist another Hadith about it. Since it is not any thing "Compulsory" after the Ramadhan fast, therefore no big deal in this disagreement.

Unfortunately, the Bani Umayyad & anti-Shia people (Nasibies) have made it a bigger deal. In Morocco and in many other places, they are celebrating it in name of fabricated tradition of Passover of Bani Israel.

Moroccans celebrate Ashura with water & fire

Here is one link to the legacy of Bani Umayyah and how it has penetrated in Sunni societies in name of fabricated tradition of Passover.

Edited by zainabia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly just common sense, fasting is giving the ultimate form of thanks to Allah, so when you fast on ashura and you know 100% its the day the prophets most beloved grandson Hussain got butchered with his whole family, it shouldnt be done period, it doesnt matter what the other prophets did on that day because the bad out ways the good, obviously the prophet would mourn for his family, I know if someones mom or dad died on a day of happiness, no way would the son or daughter fast or be happy, all they would think about is their loved ones who passed away. Just fast on another day, its not that hard, show respect.....as the prophet said, "Hussain is from me and Im from Hussain, his flesh is my flesh, his blood is my blood", we shias mourn for the prophet as well, not only Imam Hussain....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you know that in some communities there are actually some festivals held in the day of Ashura? if that isnt Ummayad thing then i dont know what it should be called

fasting in islamic tradition is an expression of joy and thankfulness , though them speakers you are talking about have taken things to the extreme denial, i dont see why we should ignore the piece of truth in what they were preaching

anyways, most maulana will respond to their audience demands, if the audiance demanded more academical research on a topic they will get it through one scholar or another but the truth is that many shia dont go to these majalis to listen to long scholarly research rather they'd like to hear some peotry , pay salam to the people of their community then abandon the mosque for the next few months

No doubt. Ignorance exists everywhere. Broadly I agree with you and also believe that it applies not just to shias and sunnis, and pretty much all religious groups out there (ie how some speakers and scholars are), however there is a tendency by shia speakers to focus on sunni narrations and not shia narrations which results in shias not being aware of what their own sources say about a particular issue/topic such as this. A speaker/scholar should spread knowledge, not ignorance.

I'm afraid that's just not true. The vast majority I've checked have said it is a mustahabb fast to observe (some saying there is ijma` on this even), though often they add the provision of it being fasted upon the aspect of mourning the affliction of the family of the Prophet (sawa). The only one I know who said it was outright haram was Shaykh Yusuf al-Bahrani, but everyone else I've checked that mentioned it counts it as either a voluntary fast one has a choice in or mustahabb. I suspect it's more a recent thing to say it is makrooh (though there are exceptions, such as Sayyid al-Khoe'i saying it's a mustahabb fast, dismissing as weak the evidence against it). Though even those who say it is makrooh, it can be understood in the sense of having less reward than a regular fast, not that it's actually a disliked thing to do in itself.

I suspect this is more a reactionary thing against Sunnis and hence why you get such strong opinions amongst the lay people against it, as one might say the opponents emphasis on its celebration goes back to a reactionary thing against the Imams and the Shi`a (even if they don't realize that nowadays).

Thanks for your reply in the other thread on this.

Think you've hit the nail on the head with that.

Where you say it's mustahab to fast, I take it that it refers to fasting until Zuhr?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt. Ignorance exists everywhere. Broadly I agree with you and also believe that it applies not just to shias and sunnis, and pretty much all religious groups out there (ie how some speakers and scholars are), however there is a tendency by shia speakers to focus on sunni narrations and not shia narrations which results in shias not being aware of what their own sources say about a particular issue/topic such as this. A speaker/scholar should spread knowledge, not ignorance.

Thanks for your reply in the other thread on this.

Think you've hit the nail on the head with that.

Where you say it's mustahab to fast, I take it that it refers to fasting until Zuhr?

which sources book and page number?

Edited by pureethics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

al-Khui [rh] originally did give Mas`ada b. Sadaqa tawtheeq, yes. However, this tawtheeq was upon the basis of his narrating in Tafsir al-Qummi, which is a position he went against and returned from at the end of his life, which is why you find his books affirming this older position of his.

Not saying I agree with all the rijal stuff being said here, but this is just what it is about al-Khui [ra].

Actually brother, it is well established that al-Khoei recanted his views about all the narrators of Kamil az-Ziyarat being Thiqah, and constrained this only to the direct narrators from whom Ja'far b. Muhammad takes.

But him recanting his views about the narrators of Tafsir al-Qummi is not proven, and infact this is baseless according to his students such as al-Radhy, al-Dawiri, al-Jawahiri and others.

Look at this q/a from al-Radhy

هل رجع الخوئي عن القول بوثاقة رجال تفسير القمي؟

الإجابة:

سيدنا الأستاذ السيد الخوئي ( قدس سره ) رجع في رأيه عن القول بوثاقة كل رواة كامل الزيارات واقتصر على مشايخ ابن قولويه المباشرين – كما هو الصحيح - أما ما جاء في تفسير القمي فلم يتغير رأيه ونحن نختلف معه في هذه الحيثية

Did al-Khoei return from his belief about the Wathaqa of all the narrators found in Tafsir al-Qummi?

Answer:

The Sayyid our teacher al-Khoei [qs] returned from his opinion about all the narrators of Kamil az-Ziyarat being Thiqah, and he limited this to the direct Mashayikh of Ibn Qulawayh - and this is correct (i.e. that only the direct Mashayikh are Thiqat according to al-Radhy ) - as for Tafsir al-Qummi, then he did not change his opinion, and we differ with him on this.

Edited by Islamic Salvation

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...