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

Al-Qasim Bin Ismail - The Liar?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

9. The book of Sabah bin Sabih al-Hadha al-Fazari [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

قال حدثنا حميد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا عبيس بن هشام عن صباح بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ubays bin Hisham > Sabah bin Sabih al-Fazari

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ubays who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [sabah] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

10. The book of Abdallah bin al-Walid al-Nakhai [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حدثنا أحمد بن محمد بن رباح قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا عبيس بن هشام عنه بكتابه

Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Rabah > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ubays bin Hisham > Abdallah bin al-Walid al-Nakhai

[As we can see Ahmad who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ubays who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Abdallah] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

11. The book of Abdallah bin Ayyub al-Zuhri [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

قال حدثنا حميد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا عبيس عن عبد الله بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ubays bin Hisham > Abdallah bin Ayyb al-Zuhri

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ubays who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Abdallah] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

12. The book of Abd al-Rahmab bin A'yan al-Shaybani [from the Ashab of al-Baqir and al-Sadiq]

قال حدثنا حميد بن زياد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا علي بن النعمان عن عبد الرحمن بن أعين بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ali bin al-Nu'man > Abd al-Rahman bin A'yan al-Shaybani

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ali bin al-Nu'man who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Abd al-Rahman] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

13. The book of Abd al-Samad bin Bashir al-Abdiy [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

قال حدثنا حميد بن زياد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل، عن عبيس، عن عبد الصمد بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ubays bin Hisham > Abd al-Samad bin Bashir al-Abdiy

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ubays who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Abd al-Samad] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

14. The book of Muthanna bin Abd al-Salam [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

عن حميد، عن القاسم بن إسماعيل، عنه به

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Muthanna bin Abd al-Salam

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqa 8 is narrating from al-Qasim bin Ismail who is in Tabaqah 7 narrating from a Sahabi of al-Sadiq [Muthanna]]

NOTES:

There is no way al-Qasim bin Ismail who is in Tabaqah 7 can narrate from someone who is from the Ashab of al-Sadiq. There just has to be one intermediary between them. This being the case, this is the second instance of suspicion where al-Qasim bin Ismail claims to narrate a book of someone who he could not have met (at least it is doubtful).

15. The book of Umar Abu Hafs al-Rumaniy [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حدثنا حميد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل، عن عبيس، عن أبي حفص بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ubays > Abu Hafs al-Rumaniy

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ubays who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Abu Hafs] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

To be continued ...

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

16. The book of Abu Harun al-Sinji [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حميد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا عبيس بن هشام، عن أبي هارون السنجي

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ubays bin Hisham > Abu Harun al-Sanji

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ubays who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Abu Harun] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

17. The book of Nasih al-Baqqal [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

عن حميد بن زياد، عن القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا جعفر بن بشير، عن ناصح بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ja'far bin Bashir > Nasih al-Baqqal

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ja'far who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Nasih] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

18. The book of Malik bin Atiyyah al-Ahmasiy [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

قال حدثنا حميد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا عبيس بن هشام، عن مالك بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ubays bin Hisham > Malik bin Atiyyah al-Ahmasiy

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ubays who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [Malik] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

19. The book of Uyayna bin Maymun [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

عن حميد، عن القاسم بن إسماعيل، عن علي بن النعمان، عنه بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim > Ali bin al-Nu'man > Uyayna bin Ma'mun

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ali who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [uyayna] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

20. The book of Hashim bin Hayyan Abu Said al-Mukariy [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حدثنا علي بن حبشي بن قوني قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل

I say: There is dropping if Humayd in between Ali bin Habshiy and al-Qasim, for always Ali bin Habshiy narrates from Humayd who narrates from al-Qasim bin Ismail.

This being the case, the Isnad should look like Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail.

NOTES:

It seems very doubtful that al-Qasim bin Ismail narrated directly from Hashim, this is when we consider that Safwan bin Yahya [who is a teacher of this al-Qasim - and from Tabaqah number 6) is recorded as narrating from him.

To be continued ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

21. The book of Isa bin al-Sarriy Abu al-Yasa [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

قال حدثنا حميد بن زياد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثنا محمد بن سلمة بن أرتبيل عن عيسى بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Muhammad bin Salama > Isa bin al-Sarriy

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Muhammad bin Salama who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [isa] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

22. The book of A'mir bin Abdallah bin Juda'ah al-Azdiy [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حدثنا حميد بن زياد قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل قال حدثني إبراهيم بن مهزم عن عامر بن جداعة بكتابه

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ibrahim bin Muhazim > A'mir bin Juda'ah al-Azdiy

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Ibrahim bin Muhazim who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [A'mir] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

23. The book of Sabih Abu al-Sabah al-Sayrafi [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حدثنا علي بن محمد بن رباح من كتابه قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل أبو المنذر الأنباري قال حدثنا صفوان بن يحيى عن صبيح أبي الصباح بكتابه

Ali bin Muhammad bin Rabah > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Safwan bin Yahya > Sabih bin Abu al-Sabah

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim who is in Tabaqah 7 who is narrating from Safwan who is in Tabaqah 6 who is narrating the book of the companion of al-Sadiq [sabih] who is in Tabaqah number 5. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

..That is the end..

So in Summary from Fihrist al-Najashi

1. Aban bin Umar al-Asadiy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays bin Hisham > Aban]

2. Ibrahim bin Nasr bin al-Qa'qa [Humayd > al-Qasim> Ja'far bin Bashir > Ibrahim]

3. al-Husayn bin Ahmad al-Minqari [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays > al-Husayn]

4. Ayyub bin Atiyyah [Humayd > al-Qasim > Safwan bin Yahya > Ayyub]

5. Hamza bin Humran [Humayd > al-Qasim > Safwan > Hamza]

6. Hassan bin Mihran al-Jammal [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ali bin al-Nu'man > Hassan]

7. Zakariyya bin Abdallah [Ali bin Muhammad bin Rabah > al-Qasim > Safwan > Amru bin Khalid > Zakariyya]

8. Zahr bin Abdallah al-Asadiy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Zahr]

9. Sabah bin Sabih al-Fazari [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays > Sabah]

10. Abdallah bin al-Walid al-Nakhai [Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Rabah > al-Qasim > Ubays > Abdallah]

12. Abd al-Rahman bin A'yan [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ali bin al-Nu'man > Abd al-Rahman]

11. Abdallah bin Ayyub al-Zuhri [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays > Abdallah]

13. Abd al-Samad bin Bashir al-Abdiy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays > Abd al-Samad]

14. Muthanna bin Abd al-Salam [Humayd > al-Qasim > Muthanna]

15. Umar Abu Hafs al-Rumaniy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays > Umar]

16. Abu Harun al-Sinji [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays > Abu Harun]

17. Nasih al-Baqqal [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ja'far bin Bashir > Nasih]

18. Malik bin Atiyyah al-Ahmasiy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ubays > Malik]

19. Uyayna bin Maymun [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ali bin al-Nu'man > Uyayna]

20. Hashim bin Hayyan al-Mukariy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Hashim]

21. Isa bin al-Sarriy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Muhammad bin Salama > Isa]

22. A'mir bin Abdallah al-Azdiy [Humayd > al-Qasim > Ibrahim bin Muzahim > A'mir]

23. Sabih Abu al-Sabah [Ali bin Muhammad bin Rabah > al-Qasim > Safwan > Sabih]

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites

al-Qasim bin Ismail is an integral Waqifi narrator for some Usuls of the Ashab [notebooks of Ahadith from the Imams], these he narrated to his formemost student - the famous Waqifi Shaykh of al-Kulayni - Humayd bin Ziyad, and secondarily to another Waqifi Ali bin Muhammad bin Rabah and his brother Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Rabah.

I first ran across him when I say this Riwayah in the Ghaybah of al-Tusi which paints him as a liar.

وروى أبو علي محمد بن همام، عن علي بن رباح، قال: سألت القاسم بن إسماعيل القرشي وكان ممطورا: أي شئ سمعت من محمد بن أبي حمزة؟ قال: ما سمعت منه إلا حديثا واحدا، قال ابن رباح: ثم أخرج بعد ذلك حديثا كثيرا، فرواه عن محمد ابن أبي حمزة، قال ابن رباح: وسألت القاسم هذا: كم سمعت من حنان؟ قال: أربعة أحاديث أو خمسة، قال: ثم أخرج بعد ذلك حديثا كثيرا فرواه عنه

And narrated Abu Ali Muhammad bin Hammam from Ali bin Rabah who said: I asked al-Qasim bin Ismail al-Qarashiy and he was a Mamtura - what did you hear from Muhammad bin Abi Hamza? he (al-Qasim) said: I did not hear from him except a single Hadith, and Ibn Rabah said: then after that he came out with many Ahadith which he narrated from Muhammad bin Abi Hamza, and Ibn Rabah said: and I asked this al-Qasim: how much did you hear from Hannan? he (al-Qasim) said: four Ahadith or five, he (Ibn Rabah) said: then he came out with many Ahadith narrated on his (Hanan's) authority.

In the above Riwayah, Ibn Rabah claims that al-Qasim bin Ismail would fabricate narrations on the authority of Muhammad bin Abi Hamza and Hannan - from whom he did not hear alot of narrations.

The only brief and terse entry about al-Qasim in our works is found in Rijal Tusi, who says about him

يكنى أبا محمد المنذر، روى عنه حميد بن زياد أصولا كثيرة

al-Qasim bin Ismail al-Qarashiy: his Kuniyyah is Abu Muhammad al-Mundhir, Humayd bin Ziyad narrated alot of Usul from him.

Willing to investigate further, I turned to the two Fihrists of al-Najashi and al-Tusi to see whether there are any peculiarities in the Usul transmission chains which he partakes in which can come to the fore to support this claim.

Interesting research, akhi. But...let me get this straight. Are we to believe that `Ali b. Rabah (a Waqifi mind you) is narrating a hadith whereby he calls al-Qasim b. Ismail a mamtura (lit. "wet dog" - a pejorative term often used in the polemics in reference to the Waqifa) while he himself is a Waqifi? He'd be insulting himself, wouldn't he? Who does that? I find that rather absurd. Am I the only one that catches that? :huh:

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Interesting research, akhi. But...let me get this straight. Are we to believe that `Ali b. Rabah (a Waqifi mind you) is narrating a hadith whereby he calls al-Qasim b. Ismail a mamtura (lit. "wet dog" - a pejorative term often used in the polemics in reference to the Waqifa) while he himself is a Waqifi? He'd be insulting himself, wouldn't he? Who does that? I find that rather absurd. Am I the only one that catches that? :huh:

(wasalam)

Good question Akhi, having said that, you are not the only one who 'catches' this, the very simple answer to this is that the وكان ممطورا is an addition by later narrators(or even copyists) to clarify the Madhab of al-Qasim bin Ismail, infact it could be al-Tusi himself who makes this addition, you see al-Tusi is bringing up this example under the following context, and I quote:

فأمّا ما روي من الطعن على رواة الواقفة فأكثر من أن يحصى، و هو موجود في كتب أصحابنا، و نحن نذكر طرفا منه

'And as to what has been narrated in criticism of the narrators of the Waqifa, than that is more numerous than to be counted, and it is preserved in the books of our companions, and we are going to mention a few of these .....'

And thereafter he goes on to narrate this narration from Ali bin Rabah questioning his Shaykh al-Qasim bin Ismail.

Thus making it clear that al-Qasim is one of these Waqifis seems necessary.

So I do not think that these were the words of Ali bin Rabah as he is narrating from al-Qasim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Now, beginning with the Fihrist of al-Tusi.

1. The book of Ibrahim bin Nasr [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حميد بن زياد عن القاسم بن إسماعيل عن جعفر بن بشير عن إبراهيم بن نصر

Humayd > al-Qasim bin Ismail > Ja'far bin Bashir > Ibrahim.

NOTES:

[it should be noted that this is the same Ibrahim bin Nasr al-Qa'qa (no. 2 above), and the upper chain of al-Tusi is identical to that of al-Najashi in obtaining Ibrahim's book. Verdict: Everything looks fine]

2. The book of Ibrahim bin Umar al-Yamani [from the Ashab of al-Baqir and al-Sadiq]

أخبرنا به عدة من أصحابنا عن أحمد بن محمد بن الحسن بن الوليد عن أبيه عن محمد بن الحسن الصفار عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى عن الحسين بن سعيد عن حماد بن عيسى عنه، و أخبرنا أحمد بن عبدون عن أبي طالب الأنباري عن حميد بن زياد عن ابن نهيك و القاسم بن إسماعيل القرشي جميعا عنه.

The Shaykh has two chains to this book, one that is a Qummi chain, and the other that is a Kufan-Baghdadi Waqifi chain.

CHAIN A: A number of our companions > Ahmad bin Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin al-Walid > his father (Ibn al-Walid) > Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Saffar > Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Isa > al-Husayn bin Said > Hammad bin Isa from him (i.e. Ibrahim).

CHAIN B: Ahmad bin Abdul-Wahid > Abu Talib al-Anbariy (Waqifi) > Humayd bin Ziyad (Waqifi) > Ibn Nahiyk (Waqifi) AND al-Qasim bin Ismail al-Qarashiy (Waqifi) from him (i.e. Ibrahim).

NOTES:

There is no way that al-Qasim bin Ismail can narrate from Ibrahim bin Umar al-Yamani, this is the same al-Qasim who requires the intermediary of people like Safwan, Ali bin al-Nu'man and Jafar bin Bashir [Ashab of al-Ridha] to narrate from al-Sadiq's companions, how can he narrate directly from Ibrahim bin Umar al-Yamani, there must be at least two intermediaries between them.

Compare with the Qummi chain which follows a regular pattern, with al-Saffar (Tabaqah 8) from al-Asha'ari (Tabaqah 7) from al-Husayn (Tabaqah 6) from Hammad (Tabaqah 5).

3. The book of Ismail bin Abd al-Khaliq [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq and al-Kadhim]

أخبرنا به ابن أبي جيد عن محمد بن الحسن بن الوليد عن محمد بن الحسن الصفار عن محمد بن الوليد عن إسماعيل، و أخبرنا أحمد بن عبدون عن أبي طالب الأنباري عن حميد بن زياد عن أبي محمد القاسم بن إسماعيل القرشي عن إسماعيل بن عبد الخالق

The Shaykh has two chains to this book, one that is a Qummi chain, and the other that it a Kufan-Baghdadi Waqifi chain.

CHAIN A: Ibn Abi Jayyid > Muhammad bin al-Hassan bin al-Walid > Muhammad bin al-Hassan al-Saffar > Muhammad bin al-Walid > Ismail.

CHAIN B: Ibn Abdun > Abu Talib al-Anbari (Waqifi) > Humayd bin Ziyad (Waqifi) > Abu Muhammad al-Qasim bin Ismail (Waqifi) > Ismail.

NOTES:

As we can see, in the Qummi chain, al-Saffar, who is in the same Tabaqah as al-Qasim has an intermediary to the book [i.e. Muhammad bin Walid], but al-Qasim does not.

4. The book of Asbat bin Salim [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]and al-Kadhim]

أخبرنا به ابن أبي جيد عن ابن الوليد عن الصفار عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى عن ابن أبي عمير عنه، و أخبرنا به أحمد بن عبدون عن ابن الأنباري عن حميد بن زياد عن القاسم بن إسماعيل القرشي عن أسباط.

CHAIN A: Ibn Abi Jayyid > Ibn al-Walid > al-Saffar > Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Isa > Ibn Abi Umayr > Asbat.

CHAIN B: Ahmad bin Abdun > al-Anbari (Waqifi) > Humayd (Waqifi) > al-Qasim bin Ismail (Waqifi) > Asbat.

NOTES:

Notice how in chain B there is no narrator from Tabaqah 6, we see that al-Qasim is narrating directly from Asbat.

5. The book of Burayh al-Abdiy [from the Ashab of al-Sadiq]

حميد بن زياد عن القاسم بن إسماعيل القرشي، و عبيد الله بن أحمد النهيكي جميعا عنه

Humayd > al-Qasim AND al-Nahiyki > Burayh.

[As we can see Humayd who is in Tabaqah 8 is narrating from al-Qasim AND al-Nahiykiy (another Waqifi) who are in Tabaqah 7 and both are narrating a book of the companion of al-Sadiq [burayh] who is in Tabaqah number 5]

NOTES:

How can al-Qasim narrate from al-Sadiq's companions directly!?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

So, how's the tariqa for Tusi to Muhammad b. Hammam? And how many narrations of al-Qasim do we actually have?

I haven't even looked it up, but I assume it is this:

Tusi > Jama`ah > Tal`ukbari > Muhammad b. Hammam b. Suhayl

As for number of narrations, Mawsu`ah says the name "Qasim b. Ismail" appears only 4 times in Wasa'il. The Qudama did a good job of filtering out liars and fabrications, al-hamdulillah, for the most part anyway

في أمان الله

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

al-Qasim bin Ismail narrates thrice in al-Kafi, all three narrations are on the topic of al-Ghayba and the Qiyam.

Apart from that, there seems to be a total neglect of him from al-Tusi, even though al-Tusi had received a lot of works through him.

الحسين بن محمد، عن جعفر بن محمد، عن القاسم بن إسماعيل الانباري، عن يحيى بن المثنى، عن عبدالله بن بكير، عن عبيد بن زرارة، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: للقائم غيبتان، يشهد في إحداهما المواسم، يرى الناس ولا يرونه

الحسين بن محمد، عن جعفر بن محمد، عن القاسم بن إسماعيل الانباري، عن الحسن بن علي، عن إبراهيم بن مهزم، عن أبيه، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: ذكرنا عنده ملوك آل فلان فقال: إنما هلك الناس من استعجالهم لهذا الامر، إن الله لا يعجل لعجلة العباد إن لهذا الامر غاية ينتهي إليها، فلو قد بلغوها لم يستقدموا ساعة ولم يستأخروا

NOTE: This second Hadith shows one Wasita between him an Ibrahim bin Muhazim, while he claims to have narrated the book of A'mir bin Abdallah bin Juda'ah al-Azdiy (no. 22 above) directly from Ibrahim.

محمد بن يحيى والحسن بن محمد، عن جعفر بن محمد، عن القاسم بن إسماعيل الانباري، عن الحسن بن علي عن أبي المغرا عن ابن أبي يعفور قال سمعت أبا عبدالله عليه السلام يقول: ويل لطغاة العرب، من أمر قد اقترب، قلت: جعلت فداك كم مع القائم من العرب؟ قال: نفر يسير، قلت: والله إن من يصف هذا الامر منهم لكثير، قال: لا بد للناس من أن يمحصوا ويميزوا ويغربلوا ويستخرج في الغربال خلق كثير

It should be seen that in all three narrations his real position in the Tabaqat is gleamed.

On as sidenote, it is interesting how close knit the Waqifa Rijal were, their paths of transmission overlap quite a bit, and their concentration is on getting the Usul and books of certain figures, who must be in some way associated with them.

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question Akhi, having said that, you are not the only one who 'catches' this, the very simple answer to this is that the وكان ممطورا is an addition by later narrators(or even copyists) to clarify the Madhab of al-Qasim bin Ismail, infact it could be al-Tusi himself who makes this addition, you see al-Tusi is bringing up this example under the following context, and I quote:

فأمّا ما روي من الطعن على رواة الواقفة فأكثر من أن يحصى، و هو موجود في كتب أصحابنا، و نحن نذكر طرفا منه

'And as to what has been narrated in criticism of the narrators of the Waqifa, than that is more numerous than to be counted, and it is preserved in the books of our companions, and we are going to mention a few of these .....'

And thereafter he goes on to narrate this narration from Ali bin Rabah questioning his Shaykh al-Qasim bin Ismail.

Thus making it clear that al-Qasim is one of these Waqifis seems necessary.

So I do not think that these were the words of Ali bin Rabah as he is narrating from al-Qasim.

I suppose that's definitely possible, but it still seems fishy. I wouldn't be surprised to know the origins of such a narration as would be expected in the highly polemical culture many scholars found themselves in, but that's quite speculative on my part. My question would be, though, why not filter out all of the narrations from these Waqifis, if they were so prone to lying. Why would we even want them in our books or have any interest in what they have to narrate (they'd probably be making it up, wouldn't they?). Although, at the same time, I don't see why we would have to discredit all of these usul books on the basis of one hadith (which I am doubtful of) and even though a few books appear without complete chains, several others do. And like you said, they're are at least a few possiblities as to why the chains appear incomplete.

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

/\ Those are all from al-Qasim b. Isma`il al-Anbari, who is separate from the Qasim b. Isma`il al-Qarashi you are discussing: http://www.hadith.ne...-e2052-p36.html

So, that tariqa? (Dar's guess aside)

Actually, I argue that it is the same person.

Firstly, al-Qasim bin Ismail al-Anbariy has only these three narrations in al-Kafi.

Secondly, he is unknown outside of these three narrations, that is, al-Najashi or al-Tusi do not mention him separately.

But the main reason that settles the matter is as follows:

When the Shaykh is narrating his path to Sabih Abu al-Sabah, he says the following:

صبيح أبو الصباح مولى بسام بن عبد الله الصيرفي

له كتاب يرويه عنه جماعة، منهم صفوان بن يحيى. أخبرنا أحمد بن عبد الواحد قال حدثنا عبيد الله بن أحمد الأنباري قال حدثنا علي بن محمد بن رباح من كتابه قال حدثنا القاسم بن إسماعيل أبو المنذر الأنباري قال حدثنا صفوان بن يحيى عن صبيح أبي الصباح بكتابه.

Sabih Abu al-Sabah - client of Bassam bin Abdallah al-Sayrafi.

He has a book, narrate from him a number of people, among them is Safwan bin Yahya.

Narrated to us Ahmad bin Abdul Wahid narrated to us Ubaydallah bin Ahmad al-Anbari (Waqifi) who said narrated to us Ali bin Muhammad bin Rabah (Waqifi) who said narrated to us al-Qasim bin Ismail Abu al-Mundhir al-Anbariy (Waqifi) who said narrated to us Safwan bin Yahya from Sabih bin Abu al-Sabah - with his book.

And when we go back to the Tarjama of al-Qasim bin Ismail, al-Tusi says

يكنى أبا محمد المنذر، روى عنه حميد بن زياد أصولا كثيرة

His Kuniyyah is Abu Muhammad al-Mundhir, narrated from him Humayd bin Ziyad a lot of Usuls.

This together with the fact that he occurs in the same Tabaqah just brings it home.

I suppose that's definitely possible, but it still seems fishy. I wouldn't be surprised to know the origins of such a narration as would be expected in the highly polemical culture many scholars found themselves in, but that's quite speculative on my part. My question would be, though, why not filter out all of the narrations from these Waqifis, if they were so prone to lying. Why would we even want them in our books or have any interest in what they have to narrate (they'd probably be making it up, wouldn't they?). Although, at the same time, I don't see why we would have to discredit all of these usul books on the basis of one hadith (which I am doubtful of) and even though a few books appear without complete chains, several others do. And like you said, they're are at least a few possiblities as to why the chains appear incomplete.

(wasalam)

The filtering has already occured, for example you see almost NO trace of this al-Qasim bin Ismail in the four books, the three Muhammads clearly preferred alternative Qummi chains.

As to your second point, it is true that there can be other explanations in some cases, for example, what I have come across is that al-Tusi is not as careful or exacting [purposely or not] in recording these Turuq, to an extent that he many a time misses narrators in al-Qasim bin Ismail's Isnads, which makes it seem as though the Isnads are incomplete, but comparing with other sources revealing the truth. This will follow and become clear when I complete this.

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I have a few questions. What is the point of all of this? So your trying to prove that a narrator is lying, thus nullifies his narrated hadiths? We dont believe that a weak hadith is always false and a sahih hadith is always true, we are not sunnis. How are you 100% sure, if this guy turns out to be a liar, that those hadith are false?

Wa Salaam

Link to post
Share on other sites

The filtering has already occured, for example you see almost NO trace of this al-Qasim bin Ismail in the four books, the three Muhammads clearly preferred alternative Qummi chains.

So, what's the verdict? Are we to reject all of these usul books like that? Or just those that appear to be fabricated?

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I have a few questions. What is the point of all of this? So your trying to prove that a narrator is lying, thus nullifies his narrated hadiths? We dont believe that a weak hadith is always false and a sahih hadith is always true, we are not sunnis. How are you 100% sure, if this guy turns out to be a liar, that those hadith are false?

Wa Salaam

Actually, if you had taken the time to read the thread you would have understood that this guy does not even figure in our Hadith books - so your question is mute.

Secondly, my main aim was to collect all the chains from the two Fihrists so as to see a trend [due to paucity of other sources], and use them to understand whether there can be any evidence for this allegation that are preserved in them [whether such a thing can even be proved today and after all this time or not - was my point of entry and inquiry].

What I have come across is that scholars (even such as al-Khoei in his Mu'jam) have been too lax in calling out the clear Irsal in some of these paths, one can argue that since these books are not available to us - such an effort would fruitless; but for hobbyists, such things are purely acedemic excercises that do sometimes produce appreciable results, while at the same time helping to confirm the integrity of the transmissions in the Madhab [when you see that all this harmonic detail in the Tabaqat and relation between student and teacher within the Isnads cannot possibly be fabricated].

But this was a side issue which I stumbled across while doing the main research.

My main research has been based on seeing the Usul transmissions of the Waqifa in the two Fihrists, in such an endeavour, I have dealt with analysing chains involving their key figures like al-Tartariy, Ibn Sam'ah, al-Nahiky, al-Kaysabah, Humayd, Abu Talib al-Anbariy, Muhammad bin Abdallah bin Ghalib, Ibn Rabah etc. seeking to obtain a pattern.

The aim of that was to see what books they were involved in transmitting, whom of the Ashab of the Sadiqayn and al-Kadhim they had associations with, and what of their transmission were available to al-Najashi and al-Tusi.

A product of this study is that it has led me to conclude certain things about the geoghraphical origination of the movement, furthermore, I can satisfactorily surmise the Waqifi leanings of some previously unlabelled Rijal, while at the same time I am interested in what of their narrations are still to be found in our four books [so as to understand better the filtering done by the early compilers, and their selection bias].

Also, a byproduct of this has been the finding that al-Tusi was not as careful or exacting [purposely or not] in recording these Turuq, and the many generalizations he makes in them [and what one can make of that].

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting for that tariqa.

You do realize 1) this is entirely speculative since you don't actually have birth and death dates from these people to be able to say definitively X could not narrate from Y, not to mention lacking the vast majority of his actual narrations (from what I understand, there's one hadith from him in `Ilal ash-Shara`i, hardly much to build a case on), you're entirely dependent on what Najashi or Tusi have reported of the chains to these books and 2) some of your ominous red listings are actually self defeating, since you are listing other independent chains to the same book. Did al-Qasim report them the same way as the other chain?

Seems like you're going through a lot of work to discuss a narrator whose narrations we don't even have...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Actually, if you had taken the time to read the thread you would have understood that this guy does not even figure in our Hadith books - so your question is mute.

Secondly, my main aim was to collect all the chains so as to see a trend [due to paucity of other sources], and use them to understand whether there can be any evidence for this allegation that can be preserved in the two Fihrists [whether such a thing can even be proved today and after all this time was my point of entry and inquiry].

What I have come across is that scholars (even like al-Khoei in his Mu'jam) have been too lax in calling out the clear Irsal in some of these paths, one can argue that since these books are not available to us such an effort would fruitless, but for hobbyists, such things are purely acedemic excercises that do sometimes produce some results, while at the same time help to confirm the integrity of the transmissions in the Madhab [when you see that all this harmonic detail in the Tabaqat and relation between student and teacher cannot be fabricated].

But this was a side issue, my main research has been based on seeing the Usul transmissions of the Waqifa, in such an endeavour I have dealt with analysing chains involving their key figures like al-Tartariy, Ibn Sam'ah, al-Nahiky, al-Kaysabah, Humayd, Abu Talib al-Anbariy, Muhammad bin Abdallah bin Ghalib, Ibn Rabah etc. from the two Fihrists and obtain a pattern.

The aim of that was to see what books they were involved in transmitting, whom of the Ashab of the Sadiqayn and al-Kadhim they had associations with, and what of their transmission were available to al-Najashi and al-Tusi.

A product of such an endeavour has led me to conclude certain things about geoghraphical origination of the movement, furthermore, I can satisfactorily surmise the Waqifi leanings of some previously unlabelled Rijal, while at the same time I am interested in what of their narrations are still to be found in our four books [so as to understand better the filtering done by the early compilers].

Also, a byproduct of this has been the finding that al-Tusi was not as careful or exacting [purposely or not] in recording these Turuq, and the many generalizations he makes in them [and what one can make of that].

To be honest, I tried understanding your posts, but I dont have any understandings on these type of topics. So yes, I might have been confused at what you were trying to say. Thanks for this informational post.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

/\ Those are all from al-Qasim b. Isma`il al-Anbari, who is separate from the Qasim b. Isma`il al-Qarashi you are discussing: http://www.hadith.ne...-e2052-p36.html

So, that tariqa? (Dar's guess aside)

أخبرنا بها عدة من أصحابنا، عن أبي المفضل، عنه

Several of our companions reported it to us from Abi al-Mufaddhal from him

Now, I know you knew this Mac and you just wanted us to look i up ourselves. In any case, there's no problem with this tareeq. Even if Abul Mufaddal is weakened. I shall explain, inshaa'Allah.

Najashi says:

وكان في أوّل أمره ثبتاً ثمّ خلط، ورأيت جلّ أصحابنا يغمزونه ويضعّفونه. له كتب كثيرة ... رأيت هذا الشيخ وسمعت منه كثيراً ثمّ توقفت عن الرواية عنه إلاّ بواسطة بيني وبينه

"And he was in his beginning affair solid then he deviated and I saw our respected companions accusing him and weakening him, he has many books, I saw this shaykh and heard from him with plethora then I ceased narrating from him except with an intermediary between him and me."

Tus says:

كثير الرواية، حسن الحفظ، غير أنّه ضعّفه جماعة من أصحابنا، له كتاب

"Many narrations, good memory even though a group from our companions weakened him"

There's no problem in Abul Fadhl's tareeq as long as there is an intermediary between Najashi/Tusi [they are in the same tabaqa] and Abil Mufaddal. And in every case, it's always with a wasita, as they were getting what he narrated prior to his deviance.

ALSO

Muhammad b. Hammam's tarjima:

قائلا: " محمد بن همام البغدادي، يكنى أبا علي، وهمام يكنى أبا بكر، جليل القدر، ثقة، روى عن التلعكبري، وسمع منه أولا سنة (323)، وله منه إجازة، مات سنة (332)

...al-Tal`ukbari narrated from him and heard from him in the beginning of the year 323 and from him he got ijaza

al-Tal`ukbari's tarjima:

روى جميع الأصول والمصنفات، مات سنة خمس وثمانين وثلاثمائة، أخبرنا عنه جماعة من أصحابنا

He narrated ALL the usool and Musannifaat...A group of our companions reported it to us from him.

So, the tareeq I guessed above (Jama`ah > Tal`ukbari > Muhammad b. Hammam) is there and exists just not listed out in the tarjima, as they got all of what Tal`ukbari reported and he reported Muhammad b. Hammam's stuff.

في أمان الله

الله أعلم

Edited by Dar'ul_Islam
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

(bismillah)

Yes, of course I knew that (Khoe'i mentions it right there that in his entry that the Shaykh's tariqa to him is da`if)

Khui's mabani on rijal is something else entirely and it is often termed the extremely "usooli" method. And Khui's rijali opinions are not the standard. Btw, Khui also says the stuff on 12 Imams are sahih.

I find it amazing though how selective your (pl.) critical faculties are though in dealing with such things.

Lol

في أمان الله

Edited by Dar'ul_Islam
Link to post
Share on other sites

A product of this study is that it has led me to conclude certain things about the geoghraphical origination of the movement, furthermore, I can satisfactorily surmise the Waqifi leanings of some previously unlabelled Rijal, while at the same time I am interested in what of their narrations are still to be found in our four books [so as to understand better the filtering done by the early compilers, and their selection bias].

Do you mind sharing your finding in regards to the origins of this movement?

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

So, what's the verdict? Are we to reject all of these usul books like that? Or just those that appear to be fabricated?

(wasalam)

Akhi, there can be no verdict in regards to that, we do not have the vast majority of Usul works, they have already been selected-from by the three Muhammads who had access to them when they were preparing their works, they now survive in the four books after undergoing selective process of their authors [note though that one can reconstruct portions of these for particular companions].

Still waiting for that tariqa.

There is a general Tariqa of al-Tusi to Ibn Hammam as is known.

But that is not my point, nor is that particular Riwayah my point, I am not depending on that narration, though it made me think and begin this.

I just saw this 'allegation' about this supposed practise of al-Qasim, and since I understand that he is a main transmitter of Usul to Humayd -

I wished to investigate via the two Fihrists how his paths look like.

You do realize 1) this is entirely speculative since you don't actually have birth and death dates from these people to be able to say definitively X could not narrate from Y

Checking Irsal in the Madhhab is done by this Tabaqaic method, A teacher of Humayd CANNOT narrate from the Ashab of al-Baqir and al-Sadiq without Wasait. This is agreed upon, and makes sense. I mean this is the Humayd who died in 310 A.H.

One can argue that he lived a very long life, as the Mu'amarun, but there is no record of this interesting feature.

But more importantly, this same al-Qasim has to go through entirely logical Tabaqah 6 narrators, such as Safwan, Ubays, Ali bin al-Nu'man, and Ja'far bin Bashir etc. when he is narrating, how is it that this is not happening in the cases I outlined by the dreaded red?

not to mention lacking the vast majority of his actual narrations (from what I understand, there's one hadith from him in `Ilal ash-Shara`i, hardly much to build a case on), you're entirely dependent on what Najashi or Tusi have reported of the chains to these books

Last I checked, the Turuq of al-Tusi (at least) to the Ashab is very critical in judging I'tibar of narrations, and they are taken at face value, that being the case, there is no reason why I cannot use these Turuq to paint a picture, unless you argue otherwise.

and 2) some of your ominous red listings are actually self defeating, since you are listing other independent chains to the same book. Did al-Qasim report them the same way as the other chain?

That is a good question that has to be asked for cases where there are simultaneous chains that come down to al-Tusi and al-Najashi.

But I note that there are more than enough cases when a Tusi or Najashi has only one chain which is going via al-Qasim bin Ismail.

Secondly, it is quite possible that in these cases they had no differences in content with the variant of the book that came down through the other chains, but the potential point about him being a Mudallis and hiding his intermediaries still remains, and puts into question his uncorraborated transmissions, add to this that Tusi did not choose to use him at all, which casts his transmissions in doubt.

Thirdly, all this applies for those who believe that these Turuq actually bring the books down to Tusi and Najashi, there is a minority view [who have their own arguments which are credible] that they are reporting on existence of books and their titles, and ascribing them to their authors through these Turuq rather than actually receiving the books, in such a case, the point about al-Qasim claiming to having narrated these books from X when it is at the least suspicious that he could have - again paints a negative picture.

Seems like you're going through a lot of work to discuss a narrator whose narrations we don't even have...

I would like to clarify here that al-Qasim individually is not the point or the aim [he has no narrations himself as you point out - due to the filtering I should remind you, thus a product of this is we can know the extent of things left out (that is an added perk)]. I should inform you that the same has been done for other much more common narrators of Hadith, and findings if any may be shared.

Nor is it for the Waqifa narrators in particular, it just happens that they are a smaller unit core within the body that has been swallowed by 12er transmissions - which makes my job easy while also serving the need of trying to understand where they came from [as in what they were about], the point is that by studying these chains from the Fihrists for any narrator, one can build a picture [if done correc], and I advocate attempts in such to try and build a pattern.

I understand that you must feel special everytime the term Waqifa is to be used in contemporary discourses :shifty:.

The utility of such an exercise is obviously still open to debate.

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

As an elaborative example.

6. The book of Talha bin Zayd.

al-Najashi says about him:

طلحة بن زيد أبو الخزرج النهدي الشامي ويقال الخزري، عامي، روى عن جعفر بن محمد (عليه السلام)، ذكره أصحاب الرجال، له كتاب يرويه جماعة يختلف برواياتهم، أخبرنا الحسين بن عبيد الله، قال: حدثنا أحمد ابن جعفر، قال: حدثنا حميد بن زياد، قال: حدثنا محمد بن عبد الله بن غالب، قال: حدثنا علي بن الحسن، قال: حدثنا محمد بن كليب، قال: حدثنا سيف بن عميرة، عن منصور بن يونس، عن طلحة بن زيد، بكتابه "

Talha bin Zayd Abu al-Kharaj, al-Nahdiy, al-Shamiy, and it is said al-Khazariy, he narrated from Ja'far bin Muhammad [as], mentioned him the people of Rijal [scholars], he has a book, a number of people narrate it, and it varies [in its content] accoring to their transmissions.

Narrated to us al-Husayn bin Ubaydallah who said narrated to us Ahmad bin Ja'far who said narrated to us Humayd bin Ziyad who said narrated to us Muhammad bin Abdallah bin Ghalib who said narrated to us Ali bin al-Hasan who said narrated to us Muhammad bin Kulayb who said narrated to us Sayf bin Umayra from Mansur bin Yunus from Talha in his book.

Note that there are about five Waqifis in this chain, why were they so interested in Talha's book?, that is a question we should ask, also has bits of it been preserved?, that is another question.

As for al-Tusi he says

له كتاب، و هو عامي المذهب إلا أن كتابه معتمد أخبرنا به ابن أبي جيد عن ابن الوليد عن الصفار عن محمد بن الحسين عن محمد بن سنان عنه، و أخبرنا جماعة عن أبي المفضل عن حميد عن أبي محمد القاسم بن إسماعيل القرشي عن طلحة بن زيد

He has a book, Sunni in Madhhab, but his book is reliable, narrated to us Ibn Abi Jayyid from Ibn al-Walid from al-Saffar from Muhammad bin al-Husayn from Muhammad bin Sinan from him, and narrated to us a number from Abi Mufadhal from Humayd from Abi Muhammad al-Qasim bin Ismail al-Qarashiy from Talha bin Zayd.

Know we are supposed to believe that a teacher of Humayd (the Humayd who dies in 310 A.H.) met and narrated Talha's book, I dont think so, at least in the Qummi chain we have Ibn Sinan who is in Tabaqah 6 that narrates easily from the Ashab of al-Sadiq, as Ibn Sinan has done.

To make it more clear what is afoot, al-Qasim is at the same level and is a contemporary of Ali bin al-Hasan al-Tatariy in the first chain, al-Tatariy uses 3 Wasait to get to the chain, and our man al-Qasim narrates it directly?!

As al-Najashi says, the book differs with its transmissions, I dont think al-Qasim fabricates it, but he claims to narrate directly from Talha [hiding his intermediaries], but what changes could he have also made, is another question.

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites

As an elaborative example.

6. The book of Talha bin Zayd.

al-Najashi says about him:

طلحة بن زيد أبو الخزرج النهدي الشامي ويقال الخزري، عامي، روى عن جعفر بن محمد (عليه السلام)، ذكره أصحاب الرجال، له كتاب يرويه جماعة يختلف برواياتهم، أخبرنا الحسين بن عبيد الله، قال: حدثنا أحمد ابن جعفر، قال: حدثنا حميد بن زياد، قال: حدثنا محمد بن عبد الله بن غالب، قال: حدثنا علي بن الحسن، قال: حدثنا محمد بن كليب، قال: حدثنا سيف بن عميرة، عن منصور بن يونس، عن طلحة بن زيد، بكتابه "

Talha bin Zayd Abu al-Kharaj, al-Nahdiy, al-Shamiy, and it is said al-Khazariy, he narrated from Ja'far bin Muhammad [as], mentioned him the people of Rijal [scholars], he has a book, a number of people narrate it, and it varies [in its content] accoring to their transmissions.

Narrated to us al-Husayn bin Ubaydallah who said narrated to us Ahmad bin Ja'far who said narrated to us Humayd bin Ziyad who said narrated to us Muhammad bin Abdallah bin Ghalib who said narrated to us Ali bin al-Hasan who said narrated to us Muhammad bin Kulayb who said narrated to us Sayf bin Umayra from Mansur bin Yunus from Talha in his book.

Note that there are about four Waqifis in this chain, why were they so interested in Talha's book?, that is a question we should ask, also has bits of it been preserved?, that is another question.

That question can be applied to almost every sect, though. I think we need to be a bit more fair in applying our methodologies indiscriminately. People are interested in something when it conforms to their particular religious persuasion but that doesn't necessarily mean that they were fabricating stuff. Otherwise, Sunnis just might say that our scholars fabricated ahadith about the Imams [as], as they seem to have had much interest in narrating them. So, it works both ways. I'm just not sure a narrator should be discredited so easily, seeing as we'd have a lot more issues if we applied this methodology elsewhere.

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

That question can be applied to almost every sect, though. I think we need to be a bit more fair in applying our methodologies indiscriminately. People are interested in something when it conforms to their particular religious persuasion but that doesn't necessarily mean that they were fabricating stuff. Otherwise, Sunnis just might say that our scholars fabricated ahadith about the Imams [as], as they seem to have had much interest in narrating them. So, it works both ways. I'm just not sure a narrator should be discredited so easily, seeing as we'd have a lot more issues if we applied this methodology elsewhere.

(wasalam)

I agree Akhi, I am not questioning any narrator based on that, in fact most of the Waqifis - and those who are nominally held as such - in that chain have Tawthiq from our scholars, what I am pointing to is that the Waqifi chains had interest in particular books which they felt necessary to transmit, I am just intrigued by the reason for that, and also want to know how much of this is preserved in our works.

Edited by Islamic Salvation
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Akhi, I am not questioning any narrator based on that, in fact most of the Waqifis in that chain have Tawthiq from our shcolars, what I am pointing to is that the Waqifi chains had interest in particular books which they felt necessary to transmit, I am just intrigued by the reason for that, and also want to know how much of this is preserved in our works.

Fair enough. I'd be interested in seeing what you discover. Although, I guess I would also like to ask how you would reconcile the narrations coming down from such narrators (whom you have asserted are given tawtheeq by our early scholars) which either hint at or explicitly state a pro-Waqifi position.

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

So, what's the verdict? Are we to reject all of these usul books like that? Or just those that appear to be fabricated?

(wasalam)

(bismillah)

(salam)

it is like I would not reject what akhi MacIssac tells me for he is an honest, truthful and a striving person.

His analysis could be off the mark but his quotes are not.

See the differences and in dealing with narrators.

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

it is like I would not reject what akhi MacIssac tells me for he is an honest, truthful and a striving person.

His analysis could be off the mark but his quotes are not.

See the differences and in dealing with narrators.

(wasalam)

I don't quite see what you're getting at.

(wasalam)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

That question can be applied to almost every sect, though. I think we need to be a bit more fair in applying our methodologies indiscriminately. People are interested in something when it conforms to their particular religious persuasion but that doesn't necessarily mean that they were fabricating stuff. Otherwise, Sunnis just might say that our scholars fabricated ahadith about the Imams [as], as they seem to have had much interest in narrating them. So, it works both ways. I'm just not sure a narrator should be discredited so easily, seeing as we'd have a lot more issues if we applied this methodology elsewhere.

(wasalam)

Salamalaikum, I think you have misunderstood what IS is doing here. The Usools which were narrated by some individuals who were doubtful to the likes of Kulayni, Sadooq etc were not narrated. So the claim by some later scholars that they just gathered whatever they found is incorrect. Although the primary intention of IS was to see a particular Mr. X narrating from someone who is atleast 100-150 years before him and subsequent interest of many other narrators from his own time interested in Mr. X and his broken chain; but this led to few other discoveries as to the subtle nature of the books compiled by classical ulema which gives you Itminaa'n that they have sieved through ahadees to present us what we have today. And it is not limited to that as they very surely applied a principle where if a not trustworthy person narrates something and it contradicts with other ahadees on the same issue then they should see if a thiqah has narrated something in regards to it and if nothing from a thiqah is found they can retain the hadees from a non trustworthy person and practice it with intention of Itaat. Since they only narrated 3-4 ahadees from Mr. X it is to be understood that they could not find something on this issue from a thiqah. Sunnis don't have such subtle rules and they don't even have connected chains from Rasool Allah saw so the doubt you have is not applied to the case being discussed

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...