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  
Abu Tufayl

Sihha Of Masaa'il Ali B. Jafar From Qurb Al-Isnad

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(bismillah)

One the various compilation that our Qudamaa’ [ra] put to gether, one of the most interesting ones, to me, is Qurb al-Isnad by `Abdullah b. Jafar al-Himyari [ra]. A famous thiqa scholar who’s trustworthiness and knowledge is undoubted.

His book is narrated from by the 3 Muhammads [as] in their large compilations. However, upon the majority, the book form that has reached us is not reliable in its tareeq or it’s contents Majalisi included in Bihar. However, the tareeq of Sh. Hurr al-Amili to the book is reliable and he has included many narrations from the book in Wasaa’il al-Shi`ah. Therefore, the `ulemaa’ take into consideration the book’s narrations as found in Wasaa’il.

One of the usool books that Himyari [ra] relies on heavily in his book is the Masaa’il of `Ali b. Jafar b. Muhammad al-`Alawi al-Uraydi [ra], the son of al-Sadiq [as] and brother al-Kathim [as] – he is thiqa as mentioned by Tusi in his Fihirist. His book is where he asks his brother [as] questions and he answers them. This masaa’il is also no reliable in its sanad as it is found in Bihar. But Himyari has a different tareeq and it is not related to what Majalisi compiled.

This is the only one book he had and that was narrated from. The tareeq of al-Himyari [ra] as found in Qurb is the following, always:

حدثنا عبد الله بن الحسن العلوي، عن جده علي بن جعفر قال: سألت أخي موسى بن جعفر عليه السلام

`Abdullah b. al-Hasan al-`Alawi narrated to us from his grandfather `Ali b. Ja`far, he said: I asked my brother Musa b. Ja`far [as]…

Unfortunately, this tareeq is weak because the intermediary between al-Himyari [as] and the Masaa’il, Abdullah b. al-Hasan, is majhool – very majhool. So it unfortunately would make everything al-Himyari [ra] takes from this Masaa’il as unreliable (this is if we put aside ideas like shuhra of the book and other reasons to accept it).

However, if we examine al-Tusi’s [ra] turuq to the Masaa’il of `Ali b. Jafar in his Fihrist, we discover that al-Himyari [ra] received the book from another tareeq:

ورواه أبو جعفر محمد بن علي بن الحسين بن بابويه، عن ابيه، عن سعد والحميري واحمد بن ادريس وعلي بن موسى، عن احمد بن محمد، عن موسى بن القاسم البجلي، عنه.

And Abu Ja`far Muhammad b. Ali b. al-Husayn b. Babuwayh [al-Saduq] narrated it from his father from Sa`d & al-Himyari & Ahmad b. Idris & Ali b. Musa from Ahmad b. Muhammad from Musa b. al-Qasim al-Bijli from him.

This tareeq is saheeh. So we see that al-Himyari [ra] has a parallel chain running along with whatever he narrates through Abduallah b. al-Hasan, he also has from this tareeq which is saheeh.

Why would he list this tareeq instead of the Saheeh one? Well, putting aside that rijal/dirayah was not always their goal, the point of Qurb al-Isnad (as evidence from his title, “Nearness of the Chain”) is to have the shortest chains possible. So the chain with the majhool grandson is shorter because then al-Himyari [ra] has one intermediary between him and the Masaa’il rather than 2.

Therefore, everything al-Himyari [ra] narrates from the Masaa’il in Qurb al-Isnad, upon accepting this argument, is saheeh.

والله أعلم

All mistakes are my own and all guidance and correct information is from Allah [swt].

في امان الله

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This masaa’il is also no reliable in its sanad as it is found in Bihar.

How did you conclude that? (I usually see that version being referred to by scholars as the sahih one)

Side note: There's another version of the Masa'il apart from these that is found outside of our books. Parts of it survives in the surviving extract of Qadi Nu`man's al-Idah where he quote from it amongst his other sources. Interestingly though, the format is different, in that instead of `Ali b. Ja`far asking his brother the questions, it's Musa b. Ja`far (a) himself asking his father (a) them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly though, the format is different, in that instead of `Ali b. Ja`far asking his brother the questions, it's Musa b. Ja`far (a) himself asking his father (a) them.

Well, it makes sense, since the Isma'ilis did not accept the imaamah of Musa (as), al-Nu'man wouldn't be quoting ahadeeth wherein the answers are given by an imam whom they do not accept. Changing the sanad so that Musa (as) is asking his father, Ja'far (as) would make it acceptable to the Isma'ilis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it makes sense, since the Isma'ilis did not accept the imaamah of Musa (as), al-Nu'man wouldn't be quoting ahadeeth wherein the answers are given by an imam whom they do not accept. Changing the sanad so that Musa (as) is asking his father, Ja'far (as) would make it acceptable to the Isma'ilis.

It's certainly possible, but the objection that could be raised against that is that in the same book Qadi Nu`man quotes from Zaydi sources as well without any change of attribution, particularly quoting from al-Qasim b. Ibrahim directly (i.e. questions ar-Rassi would be asked and the answer he'd give) like as though his answers were also in some manner authoritative, even though they obviously didn't consider him an Imam as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's certainly possible, but the objection that could be raised against that is that in the same book Qadi Nu`man quotes from Zaydi sources as well without any change of attribution, particularly quoting from al-Qasim b. Ibrahim directly (i.e. questions ar-Rassi would be asked and the answer he'd give) like as though his answers were also in some manner authoritative, even though they obviously didn't consider him an Imam as such.

That's true, but for some reason I'm not entirely sure of, Qadi al-Nu'man seemed to have no problem quoting directly from Zaydi sources. Al-Da'aaim is replete with Zaydi riwayaat, but Imaami ahadeeth all seem to be quoted by Imams no later than Ja'far (as) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

How did you conclude that? (I usually see that version being referred to by scholars as the sahih one)

Side note: There's another version of the Masa'il apart from these that is found outside of our books. Parts of it survives in the surviving extract of Qadi Nu`man's al-Idah where he quote from it amongst his other sources. Interestingly though, the format is different, in that instead of `Ali b. Ja`far asking his brother the questions, it's Musa b. Ja`far (a) himself asking his father (a) them.

I think some scholars have relied on the narrations of the Masaa'il in Bihar, yes. I know Muhsini thought so, too, then found it to be wijada. He wrote to Sayyid Khui [ra] about why he accepts it and he wrote back saying "Maybe al-Majalisi had other chains." And Muhsini said, "Maybe is not good enough."

الله أعلم

في امان الله

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

 

What is the reason that Imam al-Sadiq ع said radhi Allahu 'anhu after his father ع 's name in some of the narrations in the first chapter?

 

3 - وعنه، عن مسعدة بن صدقة قال: وحدثني جعفر بن محمد قال:
" قال أبي رضي الله عنه: ما من عبد مؤمن يذنب ذنبا إلا أجله الله فيه سبع ساعات، فإن هو تاب منه واستغفر لم يكتب عليه، وإن لم يتب كتبت عليه سيئة واحدة "

 

4 - وعنه، عن مسعدة بن صدقة قال: وحدثني جعفر، عن أبيه قال:
" أتى أبي رضي الله عنه الحسن البصري فقال له: يا أبا جعفر بلغني عنك أنك قلت: ما من عبد يذنب ذنبا إلا أجله الله سبع ساعات، فإن هو تاب منه واستغفر لم يكتب عليه. فقال له أبي: ليس هكذا قلت، ولكني قلت: ما من عبد مؤمن يذنب ذنبا. وكذلك كان قولي

 

5 - وعنه، عن مسعدة بن صدقة قال: وحدثني جعفر قال:
" قال أبي رضي الله عنه: ما من مؤمن قال هذه الكلمات سبعين مرة إلا وأنا ضامن له في دنياه وفي آخرته. فأما في دنياه فتتلقاه الملائكة ببشارة عند الموت، وأما في آخرته فإن له بكل كلمة منها بيتا في الجنة. يقول:
(يا أسمع السامعين) (4) ويا أبصر الناظرين، ويا أسرع الحاسبين، ويا أرحم الراحمين، ويا أحكم الحاكمين

 

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A8/1119_%D9%82%D8%B1%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%B1%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%85%D9%8A/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%81%D8%AD%D8%A9_38#top

 

etc

 

In the foot notes other references are given for the narrations:

 

3 - (٢) روى الكليني في الكافي ٢: ٣١٧ / ٣ نحوه، ونقله المجلسي في البحار ٧١: ٢٤٦ / ٣

 

4 - (٣) رواه الكليني في الكافي ٢: ٣١٨ / 9، والأهوازي في الزهد: 69 / 185، ونقله المجلسي في البحار 71:
247 / 4

 

5 - (5) رواه الراوندي في دعواته: 215 / 580 باختلاف يسير، ونقله المجلسي في البحار 95: 350 / 1

 

When these narrations appear in other books, are they in the same form? (r.a. rather than a.s. - I assume not, has anyone commented on this?)

 

Thanks

 

(salam)

Edited by Ali_Hussain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Most of these are normally added by the narrators of the Hadith.

In this particular case - one possible explanation for this is that the primary narrator Mas'ada b. Sadaqa is described as being an A'mmi (proto-Sunni) by al-Tusi, and al-Kashshi says he is a Batri (proto-Sunni with Shi'i leanings/inclination).

So he could be making the Taradhi as is their norm.

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...