The 4 Sunan: Will The Mahdi Be Imprisoned?

[Qa'im]

This is the first article in a multi-part series called Fee Saqut al-Waqifa (في سقوط الواقفة), which will deal with the arguments that some on these forums have presented against Twelver Shiism. Our intentions are not to stir controversy or to create animosity. Our intention is to guide the good brothers that have written and read articles attacking the personalities of our later Imams, our scholars, and our narrators. We ask Allah to guide our dear friends to His way, the way of the Prophet (pbuh), and the school of the Ahl al-Bayt (as).

 

No personal attacks or name callings are necessary. That would lead us only to fitna, which Allah does not desire in the Umma. Rather, we would like to deal with the issues as they are, in the best and most professional manner. InshaAllah we will be posting more articles when they come. Unlike our neo-Waqifi brothers, we are opening this discussion to the public in an unlocked and non-hidden thread. This way, people can comment, ask questions, and debate if they so choose.

 

 

 

 

The 4 Sunan: Will the Mahdi be Imprisoned?

Written by: Dar'ul Islam and Qa'im ibn Mohamad

 

 

One of the narrations used as evidence for the position of waqf by the neo-Waqifa is the hadith of Sunan of Four Prophets. This narrative, which comes down to us in many different forms from different books, states that al-Qa’im (as) will have certain shared characteristics of certain prophets of the past. The detail in question is the sunna that al-Qa’im (as) will share with Prophet Yusuf (as). One variant of the narrative states that it will be السجن, which can be translated as prison or imprisonment depending on the vowelization of the word (sijn or sajn, respectively).

 

The narration is as follows:

 

أبي وابن الوليد معا، عن الحميري، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن سليمان بن داود، عن أبي بصير قال: سمعت أبا جعفر (ع) يقول: في صاحب هذا الأمر أربع سنين من أربعة أنبياء: سنة من موسى وسنة من عيسى وسنة من يوسف وسنة من محمد صلوات الله عليهم فأما من موسى فخائف يترقب وأما من يوسف فالسجن وأما من عيسى فيقال: إنه مات ولم يمت، وأما من محمد(ص) فالسيف.

 

My father and ibn al-Walid together from al-Himyari from Muhammad b. `Isa from Sulayman b. Dawud from Abi Baseer. He said: I heard Abu Ja`far عليه السلام say: In the Patron of this Affair are four traditions from four prophets: a tradition from Musa, a tradition from `Isa, a tradition from Yusuf, and a tradition from Muhammad – صلوات الله عليهم – and from Musa is the fearfulness and vigilance, and from Yusuf is the imprisonment, and from `Isa is that it will be said: “He died”, but he did not die, and from Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله is the sword.

 

The Shaykh puts forward an effort to reconcile this and the other narrations that are to come:

 

فما تضمن هذا الخبر. من الخصال كلها حاصلة في صاحبنا. فإن قيل صاحبكم لم يسجن في الحبس. قلنا: لم يسجن في الحبس وهو في معنى المسجون لانه بحيث لا يوصل إليه ولا يعرف شخصه على التعيين فكأنه مسجون.

 

 

“So all of the characteristics of what this report comprises occur in our sahib (i.e. the twelfth Imam). So if it said your sahib was not imprisoned in jail, we would say: he was not imprisoned in jail but he is in the nature of being imprisoned, whereat one does not reach him and recognize his person specifically, so it is as though he is imprisoned.”

 

This reconciliation is satisfactory if we are to assume the correctness of the narration in its attribution to the Infallibles.

 

These are the chains that all reference in some shape or form the sunna of Yusuf being prison/imprisonment:

 

الإمامة والتبصرة: وعنه، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن سليمان بن داود، عن أبي بصير

 

كمال الدين: أبي وابن الوليد معا ، عن الحميري ، عن محمد بن عيسى ، عن سليمان بن داود ، عن أبي بصير

 

الغيبة للنعماني: وحدثنا علي بن أحمد، عن عبيد الله بن موسى، عن عبد الله بن جبلة، عن الحسن بن أبي حمزة، عن أبي بصير

 

كمال الدين: حدثنا علي بن أحمد بن محمد رضي الله عنه قال: حدثنا محمد بن أبي عبد الله الكوفي قال: حدثنا موسى بن عمران النخعي، عن عمه الحسين بن يزيد النوفلي، عن الحسن بن علي بن أبي حمزة (عن أبيه) عن أبي بصير

 

These narrations all return to Abi Baseer, a major companion of al-Baqirayn (as) and part of the Ashab al-Ijma`. In most of them, you see that the source to him is `Ali b. Abi Hamza, the origin and da`i of waqf.

 

Many, if not most, of `Ali b. Abi Hamza’s narrations go through Abi Baseer and this is mainly due to the fact that Abu Baseer was blind and `Ali b. Abi Hamza served him – leading him around Kufa. He was also himself a companion of al-Sadiq (as) and al-Kazhim (as), serving as the latter’s wakeel (representative). `Ali b. Abi Hamza is accused to fabricating this doctrine regarding the Qa’imiyya of al-Kazhim (as) upon his death. Shaykh Tusi [ra] in al-Ghayba says the following:

 

وقال الشيخ في الكلام على الواقفة: " فروى الثقات ان أول من أظهر هذا الاعتقاد علي بن أبي حمزة البطائني، وزياد بن مروان القندي، وعثمان بن عيسى الرؤاسي، طمعوا في الدنيا ومالوا إلى حطامها واستمالوا قوما فبذلوا لهم شيئا مما اختانوه من الأموال

 

“…So the reliable ones narrate that the first from those to publicize this doctrine was Ali b. Abi Hamza, Ziyad b. Marwan al-Qindi, and Uthman b. Isa al-Ruwasi - they were consuming in the duniya and inclining themselves to its debris and trying to incline people [to it] so they gave away freely to them from what they deceived him from his wealth.

 

Ibn al-Ghada’iri in his book of Weak Narrators says this regarding him:

 

علي بن أبي حمزة، لعنه الله أصل الوقف، وأشد الخلق عداوة للولي من بعد أبي إبراهيم عليهما السلام

 

`Ali b. Abi Hamza – curse of Allah upon him – the origin of Waqf and the most sever of creation in opposition to the Wali after Abi Ibrahim [al-Kazhim] peace be upon them.

 

Saduq reports this narration in `Uyun Akhbar al-Rida where `Ali b. Abi Hamza himself is shown to know of the appointment of al-Rida (as) by al-Kazhim (as):

 

حَدَّثَنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ مُوسَى بْنِ المُتَوَكِّل‏ رَضِىَ اللهُ عَنْهُ قالَ: حَدَّثَنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى العَطَّارُ، عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عِيسَى، عَنِ الحَسَن بْنِ عَلِىٍّ الخَزَّارِ قالَ: خَرَجْنا إِلى مَكَّةَ وَمَعَنا عَلِىُّ بْنُ أَبي حَمْزَةَ وَمَعَهُ مالٌ وَمَتاعٌ، فَقُلْنا: ما هذا؟ قالَ: هذا لِلْعَبْدِ الصَّالِح‏ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ أَمَرَنِي أَنْ أَحْمِلَهُ إِلى عَلِيِّ ابْنِهِ‏ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ وَقَدْ أَوْصى‏ إِلَيْهِ..

 

Muhammad b. Musa b. al-Mutawakkal narrated to us. He said: Muhammad b. Yahya al-Attar narrated to us from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa from al-Hasan b. Ali al-Khazzaz. He said: We headed out towards Makka and with us was Ali b. Abi Hamza and with him wealth and goods. So we said: What is this? He said: This belongs to The Righteous Servant [al-Kazhim] peace be upon him; he commanded me to carry it to Ali, his son, as he had deputed him.

 

In any case, returning to our previous discussion on the reports about the characteristic of the prison, the narrations presented  appear to go back to two students of Abi Baseer – `Ali b. Abi Hamza and Sulayman b. Dawud al-Minqari.  However this is incorrect. The chain from Sulayman b. Dawud [al-Minqari] from Abi Baseer are instances of tadlees and irsal. Sulayman b. Dawud cannot have met and narrated directly from Abi Baseer, there is a gap in their tabaqat – Abu Baseer is from the 4^thtabaqa (d. 150 AH) and Sulayman b. Dawud is from the 6^thtabaqa (d. 234).  It even more clear when the chain as presented in Fii Nursat al-Waqifa where the intermediary between Sulayman and Abi Baseer is in fact Ali b. Abi Hamza:

 

في نصرة الواقفة: وروى سليمان بن داود، عن علي بن أبي حمزة، عن أبي بصير

 

 And this is furthered evident from viewing the other narrations of Sulayman b. Dawud going up to Abi Baseer, for example:

 

محمّد بن الحسن بإسناده عن الحسن بن محمّد بن سماعة، عن سليمان بن داود، عن علي بن أبي حمزة، عن أبي بصير.

 

Muhammad b. al-Hasan [al-Tusi] by his chain from al-Hasan b. Muhammad b. Sama`ah from Sulayman b. Dawud from Ali b. Abi Hamza from Abi Baseer…

 

All of these narrations and this characteristic from Prophet Yusuf being the prison/imprisonment is the tafarrud or solitary transmission of `Ali b. Abi Hamza. And all of the narrators that are taking this narration from him directly are not from any Qat`i narrators from our companions. The two narrators in question are al-Hasan b. `Ali b. Abi Hamza – `Ali’s son and one of the heads of Waqf – and Sulayman b. Dawud al-Minqari. Najashi says in regards to Sulayman b. Dawud the following:

 

ليس بالمتحقق بنا، غير أنه روى عن جماعة أصحابنا من أصحاب جعفر بن محمد

 

He is not verified to be from us, although he narrated from a group of our companions from the companions of Jafar b. Muhammad (as)

 

Najashi is clarifying that his madhhab is not Shi’ism or Imami, and this is further supported by the lack of any accusations of shi’ism, rafdh, etc. by the Sunnis in their biographical entries for Sulayman b. Dawud. The descriptions of him indicate him to be one of their own. Furthermore, he narrates repeatedly, in our own books, from Sufyan b. `Ayuna – a famous Sunni narrator.

 

So there is a lack of tawatur of this notion of the prison from the A’immah. Let us now examine the other traditions regarding the sunna of Yusuf al-Qa’im will possess.

 

408 - وروى محمد بن عبد الله الحميري، عن أبيه، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن سليمان بن داود المنقري، عن أبي بصير قال: سمعت أبا جعفر عليه السلام يقول: في صاحب هذا الامر [ أربع ] سنن من أربعة أنبياء: سنة من موسى عليه السلام، وسنة من عيسى عليه السلام، وسنة من يوسف عليه السلام. وسنة من محمد صلى الله عليه وآله، فأما سنة من موسى عليه السلام فخائف يترقب، وأما سنة من يوسف عليه السلام فالغيبة ، وأما سنة من عيسى عليه السلام فيقال: مات ولم يمت، وأما سنة من محمد صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم فالسيف .

 

And Muhammad b. `Abdullah al-Himyari narrated from his father from Muhammad b. `Isa from Sulayman b. Dawud al-Minqari from Abu Basir. He said: I heard Abu Ja`far عليه السلام saying: There are four traditions (sunan) from four prophets in the sahib hadha ‘l-amr: a tradition from Musa, a tradition from `Isa, a tradition from Yusuf, and a tradition from Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. As what [is from] Musa it is (he will) fear, being vigilant. As to what [is from] Yusuf it is the ghayba. As to what [is from] `Isa, so it will be said: He died, and he did not die. And as to what [is from] Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله it is the sword.

 

So our Neo-Waqifi opponents claims that this hadith, going back to `Ali b. Abi Hamza from Abu Baseer, is the deliberate alteration or tahreef of the narration’s content in order to alleviate it of Waqifi implications. However, Shaykh Tusi would not have been the one who did so in this as he also leaves the version in Fii Nursat al-Waqifi as it is and narrates this one - both in the same book. Also, Saduq narrates the prison version as it is. The difference here comes from the difference in chain where Tusi is narrating it from Muhammad b. Abdullah b. Jafar al-Himyari. What seems to have happened as either an error on his or his students’ part in transmitting this down or they narrated it by meaning, which is a common modality of transmission.

 

أخبرنا أحمد بن محمد بن سعيد ابن عقدة قال حدثنا محمد بن المفضل بن قيس بن رمانة الأشعري و سعدان بن إسحاق بن سعيد و أحمد بن الحسين بن عبد الملك و محمد بن الحسن القطواني قالوا جميعا حدثنا الحسن بن محبوب الزراد عن هشام بن سالم عن يزيد الكناسي قال سمعت أبا جعفر محمد بن علي الباقر ع يقول إن صاحب هذا الأمر فيه شبه من يوسف ابن أمة سوداء يصلح الله عز و جل له أمره في ليلة واحدة

 

Ahmad b. Muhmmad b. Sa`eed b. `Uqda said: Muhammad b. al-Fadl b. Qays b. Ramaanih al-Ash`ari and Sa`dan b. Is`haq b. Sa`eed and Ahmad b. al-Husayn b. `Abd al-Malik and Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Qatwaani who said: al-Hasan b. Mahbub az-Zarad from Hisham b. Salim from Yazid al-Kunasi who said:

I heard Abu Ja`far Muhammad b. `Ali al-Baqir عليه السلام say: Verily, in the Patron of this Affair is a resemblance of Yusuf. He is the son of a black bondswoman,  and Allah عز و جل will reform his affair in one night.  (Nu`mani’s Ghayba)

 

This narration itself does not define the similarity between Prophet Yusuf and al-Qa’im. Rather, it just states that there is a shared characteristic. So, this similarity and comparison to Prophet Yusuf was mashhur and heard by different companions.

 

علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن ابن أبي نجران، عن فضالة بن أيوب، عن سدير الصيرفي قال: سمعت أبا عبدالله (عليه السلام) يقول: إن في صاحب هذا الامر شبها من يوسف (عليه السلام)، قال قلت له: كأنك تذكره حياته أو غيبته؟ قال: فقال لي: وما تنكر من ذلك، هذه الامة أشباه الخنازير، إن إخوة يوسف (عليه السلام) كانوا أسباطا أولاد الانبياء تاجروا يوسف، وبايعوه وخاطبوه، وهم إخوته، وهو أخوهم، فلم يعرفوه حتى قال: أنا يوسف وهذا أخي، فما تنكر هذه الامة المعلونة أن يفعل الله عزوجل بحجته في وقت من الاوقات كما فعل بيوسف، إن يوسف (عليه السلام) كان إليه ملك مصر وكان بينه وبين والده مسيرة ثمانية عشر يوما، فلو أراد ان يعلمه لقدر على ذلك، لقد سار يعقوب (عليه السلام) وولده عند البشارة تسعة أيام من بدوهم إلى مصر، فما تنكر هذه الامة أن يفعل الله عزوجل بحجته كما فعل بيوسف، أن يمشي في أسواقهم ويطأ بسطهم حتى يأذن الله في ذلك له كما أذن ليوسف، قالوا: " أئنك لانت يوسف؟ قال: أنا يوسف ".

`Ali b. Ibrahim from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from ibn Abi Najran from Fadala b. Ayyub from Sadeer al-Sayrafi who said:

I heard `Abu Abdillah عليه السلام say: Verily, there is in the Patron of this Affair a resemblance to Yusuf عليه السلام. He said: I said to him: Are you referring to his life or his occultation? He said: So he said to me: Do not be surprised by this [nation]; this Umma has the resemblance of pigs. The brothers of Yusuf عليه السلام were from the tribes of the descendants of the prophets, and yet they made business with Yusuf – they sold him; and had [later] spoken to him. They were his brothers and he was their brother, and yet they did not recognize him until he said: I am Yusuf and this is my brother. So, do not be surprised by this cursed Umma when Allah عزوجل stipulates His Proof (hujja) in a time from the timings, as they would do the same as that which was done to Yusuf. Surely Yusuf عليه السلام had ruled Egypt when there was between him and his father the walking [distance] of eighty days. If he wanted to inform him, he could have done it. Verily, when Ya`qub عليه السلام heard the news, he marched with his son for nine days, from their starting location to Egypt. So, do not be surprised by this Umma, as Allah عزوجل will do with His Proof (hujja) as He did with Yusuf, and he will be walking in their market and treading between them until Allah permits him, just as He allowed Yusuf – they said: You surely are Yusuf? He said: I am Yusuf. (al-Kafi)

 

This narration explains, in detail, the similarity al-Qa’im has with Yusuf and there is no mention of prison. The overall theme here is his absence and ghayba – his occulting from his followers and close associates who will be unable to recognize him. So it is not strange that the other version coming from Abi Baseer mention things more along these lines rather than the prison.

 

وروى أبو بصير، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: في القائم شبه من يوسف قلت: وما هو ؟ قال: الحيرة والغيبة

 

And Abu Baseer narrated from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام. He said: In the Qa’im there is a likeness to Yusuf.  I said: And what is it?  He said: The confusion and the occultation. (Tusi’s Ghayba)

 

Again we see the comparison being the ghayba rather than a prison and the confusion being the inability of his followers and nears one to recognize him.

 

الهمداني، عن علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن سليمان بن داود، عن أبي بصير، وحدثنا ابن عصام، عن الكليني، عن القاسم بن العلا، عن إسماعيل بن علي، عن علي بن إسماعيل، عن عاصم بن حميد، عن محمد بن مسلم قال: دخلت على أبي جعفر (ع) وأنا اريد أن أسأله عن القائم من آل محمد(ص) فقال لي مبتدئا: يا محمد بن مسلم إن في القائم من آل محمد(ص) شبها من خمسة من الرسل: يونس بن متى، ويوسف بن يعقوب، وموسى، وعيسى، ومحمد صلوات الله عليهم، فأما شبهه من يونس فرجوعه من غيبته وهو شاب بعد كبر السن وأما شبهه من يوسف بن يعقوب فالغيبة من خاصته وعامته، واختفاؤه من إخوته وإشكال أمره على أبيه يعقوب )ع) مع قرب المسافة بينه وبين أبيه وأهله وشيعته.

وأما شبهه من موسى فدوام خوفه وطول غيبته وخفاء ولادته وتعب شيعته من بعده بما لقوا من الاذى والهوان إلى أن أذن الله(عز و جل) في ظهوره ونصره وأيده على عدوه وأما شبهه من عيسى فاختلاف من اختلف فيه حتى قالت طائفة منهم ما ولد وقالت طائفة مات وقالت طائفة قتل وصلب. وأما شبهه من جده المصطفى (ص) فخروجه بالسيف وقتله أعداء الله وأعداء رسوله (ص) والجبارين والطواغيت وأنه ينصر بالسيف والرعب وأنه لاترد له رأية وأن من علامات خروجه خروج السفياني من الشام وخروج اليماني وصيحة من السماء في شهر رمضان ومناد ينادي باسمه واسم أبيه.

 

al-Hamadani from `Ali b. Ibrahim from Muhammad b. `Isa from Sulayman b. Dawud from Abu Baseer.

And ibn `Asam narrated from al-Kulayni from al-Qasim b. al-`Alaa’ from Isma`il b. `Ali from `Ali b. Isma`il from `Asim b. Humayd from Muhammad b. Muslim. He said:

I entered upon Abu Ja`far عليه السلام while I had the intention of asking him about the Qa’im from the Family of Muhammad صلوات اللّه عليهم. So he began [the conversation first] by telling me: O Muhammad b. Muslim, verily in the Qa’im from the Family of Muhammad صلوات اللّه عليهم are similarities to five messengers: Yunus b. Matta, Yusuf b. Ya`qub, Musa, `Isa, and Muhammad صلوات اللّه عليهم. As for his similarity to Yunus, it is his return from occultation as a youth after being of old age. As for his similarity to Yusuf b. Ya`qub, it is occultation from his special and common [associates] (i.e. occultation from his people), his disappearance from his brothers, and his father Ya`qub’s عليه السلام confusion regarding his affair despite the close proximity between him and his father, his family, and his followers (i.e. his Shi`a).

As for his similarity to Musa, it is the continuity of his fear, the length of his occultation, the secrecy of his birth, and the weariness of his followers (i.e. his Shi`a) from the pains and disregard they saw after him until Allah عز و جل allowed him to appear. He then supported him, and He reinforced him over his enemies. As for his similarity to `Isa, it is the schisms of the disputers about him until one sect from them said, “he was not born”, another sect said, “he is dead”, and another sect said, “he was killed and crucified”. As for his similarity to our grandfather al-Mustafa صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, it is his appearance with the sword, the killing of the enemies of Allah, the enemies of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم, the arrogant, and the tyrants; and that he will succeed through the sword and fear; no standard of his will return in defeat. From the signs of his appearance is the appearance of the Sufyani in Sham, the appearance of the Yamani, the cry from the sky in the month of Ramadan, and a Caller will call his and his father’s names. (Kamal ad-Deen)

 

So this narration comes down with 2 chains and compares al-Qa’im to five prophets. The first chain goes back to Sulayman b. Dawud from Abi Baseer – where `Ali b. Abi Hamza is the removed intermediary. However this is not to be seen as some sort of Twelever fabrication, rather there is the second chain to support it. This is a different hadith than what has been narrated earlier from Abi Baseer. And it is most apparent that Aba Baseer is narrating from Muhammad b. Muslim here (as the narration is exclusively regarding him). Again, this hadith, narrated by a major Imami Companion, compares al-Qa’im to Yusuf in regards to his occulting and separation from followers and close associates, as in the previous narrations, with no mention of prison.

 

حدثنا المظفر بن جعفر بن المظفر العلوي رضي الله عنه قال: حدثنا جعفر بن محمد بن مسعود، عن أبيه محمد بن مسعود العياشي قال: حدثنا علي بن محمد بن - شجاع، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن يونس، عن علي بن أبي حمزة، عن أبي بصير قال: قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام: إن في صاحب هذا الامر سنن من الأنبياء عليهم السلام، سنة من موسى بن عمران، وسنة من عيسى، وسنة من يوسف، وسنة من محمد صلوات الله عليهم: فأما سنة من موسى بن عمران فخائف يترقب، وأما سنة من عيسى فيقال فيه ما قيل في عيسى، وأما سنة من يوسف فالستر يجعل الله بينه وبين الخلق حجابا، يرونه ولا يعرفونه، وأما سنة من محمد صلى الله عليه وآله فيهتدي بهداه ويسير بسيرته.

 

al-Muzhaffar b. Ja`far b. al-Muzhaffar al-`Alawi may Allah be pleased with him narrated to us. He said: Ja`far b. Muhammad b. Mas`ud narrated to us from his father Muhammad b. Mas`ud al-`Ayyashi. He said: `Ali b. Muhammad b. Shuja` narrated to us from Muhammad b. `Isa from Yunus from `Ali b. Abi Hamza from Abu Basir. He said: Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام said: There are traditions (sunan) from the prophets in the sahib hadha ‘l-amr: a tradition from Musa b. `Imran, a tradition from `Isa, a tradition from Yusuf, and a tradition from Muhammad صلوات الله عليهم. As to the tradition from Musa b. `Imran it is (he will) fear, being vigilant. As to the tradition from `Isa it will be said regarding him what is said regarding `Isa. As to the tradition from Yusuf it is the cover, Allah will cause there to be a veil between him and the people (lit. the creation), they will see him but not recognize him. And as to the tradition of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله he will guide by his guidance and take the course of his conduct.

 

This narration does indeed return to `Ali b. Abi Hamza from Abi Baseer. It can be said, similar to the case of Shaykh Tusi narrating from al-Himyari’s son, that this narration was an error or narration by meaning. However, it also quite possible that this narration was taken from `Ali b. Abi Hamza prior to the creation of the Waqifa  as the narrator taking from him is Yunus b. Abd al-Rahman – a major companion of al-Kazhim and al-Rida. The likelihood of a staunch companion of al-Rida and opponent of the Waqifa going to their head and narrating from him is unlikely.

 

So this comparison with Prophet Yusuf and al-Qa’im is exclusively from the riwayah of `Ali b. Abi Hamza al-Bata’ini – the creator of the Waqifa and its most outspoken proponent. So how is it that we can trust the solitary report of the person accused of fabricating the Waqifa sect? In addition, we find that those how narrate this tradition from him are either Waqifi themselves or not from the Imamiyya at all. Both have motivation or reason to indicate that they would narrate from `Ali b. Abi Hamza after al-Kazhim (as)’s death, after he had publicized this belief about al-Kazhim (as)’s qa’imiyya and occultation. Whereas the tradition narrated from him by the Imami companions – who would never narrate from him after his deviation – narrate it absent of prison and we find that is more in line with the other comparison to Yusuf regarding the ghayba. This narrative of the prison is uniquely `Ali b. Abi Hamza and an anomaly in comparison to the other narration about al-Qa’im and Prophet Yusuf.

 

The perspective taken by our opponent is that the Twelvers have altered and fabricated in order to support their madhhab. However, this case is better applied to the Waqifa themselves in light of the uniqueness of the prison comparison to `Ali b. Abi Hamza while the widespread narrations that come from many directions from many chains uphold the comparison of the ghayba and separation from followers and near ones.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Qa'im

[Ibn-Ahmed Aliyy Herz]

Ahsant

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)
(bismillah)

 

Excellent Article! It is obvious that Sulaymaan b. Dawud al-Minqari was not a 12'er, and could not have heard directly from Abu Baseer. Just look at some main narrators he narrated from (all major Sunni narrators) and their dates of death. Not to mention Sulaymaan b. Dawud narrates from `Abd Allaah b. Wadaah, a companion of the 7th Imaam only, who was also a close companion of Abu Baseer, commonly called Saahib Abi Baseer.

 

al-Fudayl b. `Ayyaad (d. 187 AH)

Hafs b. Ghiyaath (d. 194 AH)

Sufyaan b. `Uyaynah (d. 198 AH)

`Abd al-Rahman b. Mahdi (d. 198 AH)

`Abd al-Razzaq b. Hammaam (d. 211) - Compiler of Musannaf `Abd al-Razzaq

 

Here is a little bit about Sulaymaan b. Dawud, it is obvious he was a major Sunni scholar. Click here: http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/showalam.php?ids=14555

 

(salam)

[IbnSohan]

Good article. Baraka Allahu feek Akhi.

 

I noticed that these mutashabih ahadith are sometimes a group of hadiths that were combined into one, sometimes there is deletion and sometimes there is insertion of words as well. Some of these hadiths are saheeh but were used in the wrong context with subtle alternations. This can be noted in the hadiths of many deviant sects.

 

I also have been told that many of these deviant hadith narrators were not close companions to Imams, I am not sure how correct is this statement though.

Another thing I noticed about the narrators is that some of them may not had been deviants but some deviant believes were attributed to them to give these beliefs credibility.

 

It is a whole messy confusing issue when you have to deal with the history of dead people that can hardly be verified, these narrators lived in times of turbulence, sects formations, aqidah innovations and times of hadith compilation.

 

Nonetheless , great article.

[muhibb-ali]

Great article.. This article and others that would come up in future should be uploaded on a website or a blog ..

[rotten_coconut]

Great article bro Qa'im & Dar'ul_Islam. I thank you for creating this and hope that you continue the series so the people will get a more balanced view from both the Twelver and Waqifi point of view regarding the issues.

I agree with your approach to see analyze the ahadith from their narrators since I believe that we should not accept ahadith on aqidah narrated by someone from other sects since they would have the vested interest to falsify the narrations. So unless the ahadith were corroborated with the ones with the same meaning narrated by Twelver narrators, I think the ahadith should be considered as solitary reports and rejected.

Therefore, I wonder why Shaykh Tusi felt the need to explain such ahadith when he could reject them altogether as you have done here.

[Islamic Salvation]

Good article.

 

A thorough search within the four books for the Sulayman bin Dawud, Ali bin Abi Hamza and Abu Basir 'triangle' reveals that in such cases Sulayman bin Dawud invariably narrates from Ali bin Abi Hamza (who may or may not narrate from Abu Basir).

 

Note that there were just four hits, all found in al-Tahdhib, it may also be pertinent to point out that al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Sama'ah who narrates from Sulayman in all these instances presented below is also a rigid Waqifi (like Ali bin Abi Hamza).

 

الحسن بن محمد بن سماعة عن سليمان بن داود عن علي بن أبي حمزة قال: ذكر عند أبي عبدالله عليه السلام زوال الشمس قال فقال أبوعبدالله عليه السلام: تاخذون عودا طوله ثلاثة أشبار وان زاد فهو ابين فيقام فما دام ترى الظل ينقص فلم تزل، فإذا زاد الظل بعد النقصان فقد زالت

1. [With the Shaykh's chain to] al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Sama'ah from Sulayman bin Dawud from Ali bin Abi Hamza who said: the Zawal of the sun was mentioned in the presence of Abi Abdillah عليه السلام, he (Ali) said: so Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said: you take a stick which is three hand-spans long, and if it can be more than that in length - the better, it is then placed standing vertically (on the ground), as long as you can see that the shadow is continuing to lessen (recess) then the Zawal has not entered, but if the shadow lengthens (on the other side) after its prior disappearance then the sun has overturned (i.e. Zawal has entered and the Dhuhr can be prayed).

 

عنه عن سليمان بن داود عن علي بن أبي حمزة عن أبي بصير قال: ذكر أبوعبدالله عليه السلام أول الوقت وفضله فقلت: كيف أصنع بالثماني ركعات؟ قال: خفف ما استطعت

2. [With the Shaykh's chain] from him (i.e. al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Sama'ah) from Sulayman bin Dawud from Ali bin Abi Hamza from Abi Basir who said: Abu Abdillah عليه السلام recalled the importance of praying in the earliest time, and the merit of doing so, so I (Abu Basir) said: (if that is the case) how do I pray the eight Rakaat? (i.e. of Nawafil before Dhuhr), He said: shorten it (the time used in praying the Nafila) as much as you can.

 

عنه عن سليمان بن داود عن علي بن أبى حمزة عن أبى بصير عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: وقت المغرب حين تغيب الشمس

3. [With the Shaykh's chain] from him (i.e. al-Hasan bin Muhammad bin Sama'ah) from Sulayman bin Dawud from Ali bin Abi Hamza from Abi Basir from Abi Abdillah عليه السلام who said: the beginning time of Maghrib is when the sun has disappeared.

 

محمد بن يعقوب عن حميد بن زياد عن ابن سماعة عن سليمان بن داود عن علي بن ابى حمزة عن بى الحسن عليه السلام قال: قلت ان رجلا من مواليك مات وترك ولدا صغارا وترك شيئا وعليه دين وليس يعلم به الغرماء فان قضى لغرمائه بقي ولده ليس لهم شئ فقال: انفقه على ولده

4. [With the Shaykh's chain to] Muhammad bin Ya'qub from Humayd bin Ziyad from Ibn Sama'ah from Sulayman bin Dawud from Ali bin Abi Hamza from Abi al-Hassan عليه السلام, he (Ali) said: I said to Him: a man from your Mawali has died, and he has left behind small children, and he has also left something (i.e. a monetary amount as inheritance), upon him is debt - though the creditors do not know about it (i.e. that he has died), but if the creditors are repayed nothing will remain for the small children! so He said: spend it upon the children.

(NOTE: al-Saduq also narrates this same Hadith in al-Faqih with the same chain, al-Kulayni's chain of the Hadith is erroneous, as a sidenote, al-Tusi rejects the content of this Hadith as it contradicts with more established narrations that call for repayment of the debt, in fact the ruling here seems to be in total contradition with the clear Qur'anic Ayah about the matter)

CONCLUSION:

In light of the above, we can rest assured that the conclusion drawn in this article written by the esteemed brothers is collaborated elsewhere.

Any narration in which Sulayman bin Dawud seems to narrate from Abu Basir directly is suspect, and definitely a case of the dropping of the intermediary (Ali bin Abi Hamza) from the chain.

This is what has happened in both the chains of al-Saduq I (in al-Tabsira) and al-Saduq II (in Ikmal) where they have Sulayman narrating directly from Abu Basir, most likely, it is either these two authors or later copyists who have dropped the name of Ali bin Abi Hamza as the intermediary.

This being the case, how can the neo-Waqifi apologists expect to argue with us using this 'four Sunan tradition' when we have seen that its wording is solely reported by the man who is the origin of the Waqifa, whom 12er tradition sees as a liar who fabricated the Madhhab for worldly gains.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Islamic Salvation

[Abu Tufayl]

(bismillah)

Therefore, I wonder why Shaykh Tusi felt the need to explain such ahadith when he could reject them altogether as you have done here.

 

Akhi...we have answered this question for already in the other topic and elsewhere. Why do you keep asking it?

 

في أمان الله

[.InshAllah.]

Jazakumullah

[Qa'im]

A summary of points:

 

• One of the main proofs being used in support of al-Kadhim's Qa'imiyya is that this hadith states that the Qa'im would be imprisoned. The 12th Imam was not imprisoned, while al-Kadhim was.
   
• Tusi says that this "imprisonment" was metaphorical and not literal, but there is another way to deal with this tradition.
   
• The chain goes to Sulayman b. Dawud - a trustworthy Sunni narrator - and then to the primary narrator, Abu Baseer. The hadith is reported in several books.
   
• Sulayman b. Dawud could not have narrated from Abu Baseer, and according to the same narration in Fii Nusrat al-Waqifa, `Ali ibn Abi Hamza was the transmitter in between the two.
   
• `Ali ibn Abi Hamza was the founder of the Waqifi sect. He was considered to be a liar according to the shaykhs of rijal. We believe one of the motives for his creation of the Waqifiyya was that he was holding much of the property of al-Kadhim, and in order to keep it, he said al-Kadhim was still alive.
   
• Many of `Ali b. Abi Hamza's hadiths are found in our books, because the Imamis tried to preserve what he had narrated prior to his misguidance and that which was backed up by the tradition.
   
• Since Sulayman b. Dawud was not a Shi`i, he probably would not have taken the same effort to narrate only the most confirmed material from `Abi b. Abi Hamza.
   
• The argument of the neo-Waqifis was that the Twelvers tried to change and hide the tradition of the imprisonment of the Mahdi. They present a version in Tusi's Ghayba where the word imprisonment was removed. But the two narrations have a chain difference, and Tusi includes both in his Ghayba (he left the one in Fii Nusrat as it is), so one cannot say that Tusi made this deliberate change if he preserved the Waqifi version in the same book.
   
• There were many hadiths that go back to Abu Baseer and other top Shi`a comparing Yusuf to the Qa'im. None of these comparisons include a word about the "imprisonment". In other words, Abu Baseer did make an overt comparison between Yusuf and the Qa'im, but in all other versions of his narration, this comparison was NOT the imprisonment.
   
• The imprisonment being the parallel between the prophet Yusuf and the Mahdi was only narrated - to my knowledge - through `Ali b. Abi Hamza, his son, and other dubious sources.
   
• Therefore, the best supported explanation is that this change in the report came from `Ali b. Abi Hamza. Not only is this idea unsupported outside of his narrating, but we find motive to believe that altered the tradition to support his cause.

 

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

 

There are two other narrations that are used to support the imprisonment theory. The chain to one of them is here:

 

وحدثنا علي بن أحمد، عن عبيد الله بن موسى، عن عبد الله بن جبلة، عن الحسن بن أبي حمزة، عن أبي بصير

 

This also goes back to Abu Baseer, but through Hasan, the son of `Ali b. Abi Hamza. His son was declared to be an even bigger liar than the father, and his narrations are not trusted. It is likely, in my opinion, that this was also transmitted by his father because of tabaqa. The matn of this hadith is identical to the one `Ali b. Abi Hamza narrates. Therefore, this hadith cannot be used to support `Ali b. Abi Hamza's narration.

 

Another imprisonment hadith:

 

وحدثني حنان، عن أبي عبد الرحمن المسعودي قال: حدثنا المنهال بن عمرو، عن أبي عبد الله النعمان، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: صاحب الامر يسجن حينا ويموت [ حينا ] ويهرب حينا

 

This hadith is found only in Fii Nusrat al-Waqifa, the Waqifi book preserved in Tusi's Ghayba. Not only is the source dubious, but the chain is dubious.

 

1. Abi `Abd al-Rahman al-Mas`udi is a majhool and minor narrator.

2. al-Minhal b. `Amro (or `Umar, in the rijal books) is a majhool and minor narrator.

3. Abu `Abdullah an-Nu`man: ? Not in the rijal books at all, unless someone else can find him.

 

So the evidences for the parallel to Yusuf being the ghayba and confusion far outweigh the evidences for the parallel being imprisonment. The former is supported by many hadiths going back to Abu Baseer, Muhamamd b. Muslim, Sadeer al-Sayrafi, Yazid al-Kunasi, and others. The latter goes back only to the solitary report of the founder of Waqifism.

[Kazmi_202]

Fantastic work brothers, Jazakallah!

 

I remember reading in one of the other threads Brother Abdul Qaim asking for something like this, and MaashaAllah, its great to see such scholarly discussions :)

 

Keep up the good work.

[rotten_coconut]

Bro Dar'ul Islam,

I haven't made it clear. What I meant is that's what I'd have asked once I finished reading the materials since it is not elaborated in the article. In fact, that's one of the argument used by the Waqifi: the non-rejection of Shaykh Tusi ("If this narration was not accepted, why Tusi tried to explain it instead of rejecting it?"). Perhaps, if I may make a suggestion, you can elaborate on that in the article.

Furthermore, please correct me if I'm wrong, what we have discussed was the general overview of why Shaykh Tusi tried to reconciliate contradicting ahadith and the ahadith from other sects (instead of rejecting it altogether). We have yet to discuss the non-rejection of Tusi for ahadith that most probably made after the creation of Waqifi sect that support the Waqifi sect such as this one. Again, I could be wrong on this and please correct me if I do.

Edited July 5, 2013 by rotten_coconut

[*Sayyeda*]

(salam)

Great article, may you be rewarded for your efforts. I look forward to reading the next articles in the series soon InshAllah.

[Qa'im]

(salam)

Great article, may you be rewarded for your efforts. I look forward to reading the next articles in the series soon InshAllah.

 

Thank you. Article two has been posted here: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/235015198-perpetual-guidance-fee-saqut-part-deux/

[AlAbd AlThaleel]

Ma'joureen inshaAllah

[Hannibal]

Wow this is excellent work, I can tell you put countless hours on this. I will read the next part.

[Hannibal]

There is an awful silence here ...

[WilayaBlood]

Aslamalaykum,

 

JazaakAllah brothers, excellent work.

 

May Allah swt bless all those who defend the Quran and Ahlul Bayt a.s

[Qa'im]

Bro Dar'ul Islam,

I haven't made it clear. What I meant is that's what I'd have asked once I finished reading the materials since it is not elaborated in the article. In fact, that's one of the argument used by the Waqifi: the non-rejection of Shaykh Tusi ("If this narration was not accepted, why Tusi tried to explain it instead of rejecting it?"). Perhaps, if I may make a suggestion, you can elaborate on that in the article.

Furthermore, please correct me if I'm wrong, what we have discussed was the general overview of why Shaykh Tusi tried to reconciliate contradicting ahadith and the ahadith from other sects (instead of rejecting it altogether). We have yet to discuss the non-rejection of Tusi for ahadith that most probably made after the creation of Waqifi sect that support the Waqifi sect such as this one. Again, I could be wrong on this and please correct me if I do.

 

Tusi was trying to provide explanations beyond "this hadith is weak". If you look at this book - Tusi's Ghayba - he makes an effort to collect the hadiths and works of Waqifis, Fat`his, ghulat, and others. The book is a comprehensive work on the topic of ghayba, and he preserved anything that had a historical relevance. Tusi's way of dealing with this hadith is one that gives an understanding to the narration in case it were true. We don't believe `Ali b. Abi Hamza was always lying, otherwise many of his traditions would not have been accepted in books like al-Kafi. But, an investigation of the tradition shows that his comparison is the only one - out of many examples - that discusses the imprisonment of the Mahdi. The explanation that `Ali b. Abi Hamza inserted this detail is better than the explanation that all of the other Yusuf-comparisons are fabricated, because the latter relies upon much better evidence.

[rotten_coconut]

Bro Qa'im,

Thank you for the explanation. Sorry, since I haven't read the Kitab al-Ghaybah directly, was there any indication from Shaykh Tusi himself that a possible falsified hadith such as this one should be rejected (or considered weak) and the explanation given was only to point out that even if the hadith was realiable, there was other possible explanation? I think it there was such indication, it would better answer the Waqifi argument that I mentioned before.

Additionally, just to prevent from possible counter argument for your article, was there any 'ulama discussed this and using the same approach? While I (and I think the majority ShiaChat members) will agree on your approach, perhaps you will encounter someone who raises the argument that if your approach is correct, why no one has done it before.

Edited July 6, 2013 by rotten_coconut

[Abu'l Khattab]

Wow this is excellent work, I can tell you put countless hours on this. I will read the next part.

 

When are you doing a sequel of your Hajj vs. Ziyarah thread? I'd like to go deeper into the discussion with you. 

[hasanhh]

(salam)

Good job!

 

About the 4 prophets: The Imam's life-story base is that of Yusef(as) and then the other 3 added in. "Imprisonment" is not the same as Yusef's(as) but an isolation.

 

The Jews also have a reference to the Imam in their "deutero-Isaiah" where "the arm of"Allah(swt) is revealed to him, and to explain that he is not a political or other kind of threat to the Jews, as what he will say to them is limited.

Historically, The evilgelicals have claimed that this writing is about Isa(as) and many Sunni scholars have claimed this is about Muhammed(saws), neither of whom are correct because the description does not fit either one of them.

[Abu Tufayl]

(bismillah)

Bro Qa'im,

Thank you for the explanation. Sorry, since I haven't read the Kitab al-Ghaybah directly, was there any indication from Shaykh Tusi himself that a possible falsified hadith such as this one should be rejected (or considered weak) and the explanation given was only to point out that even if the hadith was realiable, there was other possible explanation? I think it there was such indication, it would better answer the Waqifi argument that I mentioned before.
Additionally, just to prevent from possible counter argument for your article, was there any 'ulama discussed this and using the same approach? While I (and I think the majority ShiaChat members) will agree on your approach, perhaps you will encounter someone who raises the argument that if your approach is correct, why no one has done it before.

In addition to what has already been said:

 

Shaykh Tusi [ra] is trying to be academic here, not a rijali. His approach in that book was apparently wider than just rijal and something more comprehensive. 

 

In any case, the reason this probably hasn't been said before or applied are perhaps a few reason:

1 - They did not catch Sulayman b. Dawud from Abu Baseer directly to be tadlees

2 - They do not apply rijal to hadith outside of the Ahkam

3 - The early scholars were not so "rijali"

4 - Accepting more of the akhbar is better (and safer) than denying akhbar

 

Also, by Tusi's time, the Waqifa were more or less dead. He didn't have to put effort the same way to destroy a sect like his predecessors رضي الله عنهم and neither did anyone after al-Tusi (ra) have to do so up until....1 month ago (?) cause the Waqifa was dead. Actually, they are still dead, the religion of Ali b. Abi Hamza & Humayd b. Ziyad is long gone and now what we have is the religion of Macisaac and his follower [notice the singular here and the absence of plural].

 

في أمان الله

Edited August 24, 2014 by Abu Tufayl

[Ali Musaaa :)]

^... I think there's three of them. I could be wrong.

[Abdul Qaim]

^... I think there's three of them. I could be wrong.

 

See, the population has just grown by 50% in a matter of hours. At this rate there will be thousands of Waqifah by years end.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Abdul Qaim

[Ethics]

See, the population has just grown by 50% in a matter of hours. At this rate there will be hundreds of Waqifa by years end.

 

subhanallah, where are the sign up sheets im in! Ya Reza A.S!

Edited July 8, 2013 by PureEthics

[Qa'im]

There's no need to take jabs. We must deal with this issue with good akhlaq. At the same time, there are many good reasons why this sect died out in a short time span and no attempts were made to really revive it. InshaAllah we'll go over all of that in these articles.

[Abdul Qaim]

subhanallah, where are the sign up sheets im in! Ya Reza A.S!

 

I think you may be ineligible for initiation  :P

[Ethics]

I think you may be ineligible for initiation  :P

 

:( Im making my own sect.. WaImami, where you can believe in the qiam of imam mahdi and imam musa a.s , the more qiams the better right? So therefore my religion is the best. Also im a scholar, I can hold one man friday prayers, I dont need any books, there has always been followers of this religion but they have been hiding in taqiyya, so now we are out and free. If anyone wants to join , call 1-800-Qiam, wa salaam

 

I forgot to add, first 100 gets free afghan food on me!

 

Ya Imam Musa! Ya Imam Mahdi!

Edited July 8, 2013 by PureEthics

[Inquisitor]

:( Im making my own sect.. WaImami, where you can believe in the qiam of imam mahdi and imam musa a.s , the more qiams the better right? So therefore my religion is the best. Also im a scholar, I can hold one man friday prayers, I dont need any books, there has always been followers of this religion but they have been hiding in taqiyya, so now we are out and free. If anyone wants to join , call 1-800-Qiam, wa salaam

 

I forgot to add, first 100 gets free afghan food on me!

 

Ya Imam Musa! Ya Imam Mahdi!

 

I am sorry I don't find it funny at all brother. You may want to scoff and mock them as much as you like, but there are other brothers here who are refuting it academically.

 

If brother Mac decides to go toe to toe with you in a public discussion, I won't be wrong to say, he'd swallow you whole.

 

Let's just sit aside and read what the knowledgeable brothers here have to share. I've learnt a heck lot and loving it from both sides - Waqifa and Shi'i. Much better than ridiculing others when we've got not much to share in a constructive way.

[Ethics]

I am sorry I don't find it funny at all brother. You may want to scoff and mock them as much as you like, but there are other brothers here who are refuting it academically.

 

If brother Mac decides to go toe to toe with you in a public discussion, I won't be wrong to say, he'd swallow you whole.

 

Let's just sit aside and read what the knowledgeable brothers here have to share. I've learnt a heck lot and loving it from both sides - Waqifa and Shi'i. Much better than ridiculing others when we've got not much to share in a constructive way.

Im sorry you didnt find it funny too brother. Plus, I wouldnt want to be swallowed by anyone, ewww. Also, no one can refute my religion because i accept all books from waqifi and imami, so how can you all prove me wrong ;) ? Rijali tactics wont work, I have proof my religion has been guided at all times... what else is there to argue?

[Abdul Qaim]

Im sorry you didnt find it funny too brother. Plus, I wouldnt want to be swallowed by anyone, ewww. Also, no one can refute my religion because i accept all books from waqifi and imami, so how can you all prove me wrong ;) ? Rijali tactics wont work, I have proof my religion has been guided at all times... what else is there to argue?

 

It's good to know your imaan is firm, but don't take the joke too far. Even Mac has a sense of humour about it all (as is evidenced by his change of avatar a few days ago), but remember your akhlaaq :) ...

[Ethics]

I'm done joking... Sorry for those who didn't like it. Wa Salaam