Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Al-Maghribi

Challenge For Sunnis Who Are Sunni-Shia Unity Fans

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

We never learn do we!

Muslims should just look around the world today, look at the Muslim blood spilt over exactly this type of sectarian incitement.

What is it to feel you share the bond of the Ummah?

When you put the TV on and daily you hear of Muslims being killed in Islamic countries and it reduces you to utter helplessness.

I reiterate once again any Sunni or Shia who distorts the Holy Quran let Allah swt be the judge of that, we should not pass judgement on anyone.

The greatest challenge for Muslims today is the order of Allah swt for ALL Muslims to unite.

How many Muslims have raised to that challenge?

Edited by Sherezade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me, my heart tells me ive done a good jobe when they call us rafithis, shias, jafar followers. Thankyou really :)

 

Who calls you Jaffar followers?

 

 

Mods please remove the link, propoganda, false, lies. Lets not give the clown views.

What is false and where are the lies in the video :) ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is false and where are the lies in the video :) ?

We have no book that is A to Z authentic and which is A to Z full of koffor. 

I believe you don't understand the punishment of lying: ... invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie. (3:61)

Now, post the scan images of the book he quotes along with our Rijal experts claiming it to be A to Z authentic. 

If you cannot (and you wont be able to) post then surely you are of liars (even if you consider Shias non-muslims you claiming to be muslim can never lie to anyone) and Allah's curse is on you.

The challenge is on you and don't be of those who run away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A man said to Imam al-Baqir (as), "Verily so-and-so has called us a name". He said: "And what is that name?" He said: "He has called us the Rafida". So Abu Ja`far (as) said with his hand to his chest: "I am from the Rafida and it is from me." He said it thrice. (Kitab al-Mahasin of al-Barqi)

 

Thanks brother Qaim for sharing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have no book that is A to Z authentic and which is A to Z full of koffor. 

I believe you don't understand the punishment of lying:

I belive you did not watch the video. And i belive you dont know anything about your religion. Kamil al Ziyarat is accepted as authentic by your scholars. And all the 388 transmitters are truthworthy. You should spend more time studying your books and less time accusing others of lying.

 

210ev5g.png

 

 

Here is a translation incease you dont speak arabic. 

 

We realize we cannot cover all that which has been transmitted from them  on this subject, nor on any other issue, except that which has been related to us by reliable [transmitters] from our companions – may Allah forgive them by His Rahmat. I have not cited a tradition in it [the book] which has been transmitted by reporters who are rarely mentioned (shudhdhadh).

 

 

Now, post the scan images of the book he quotes

 

Sure.

kmlzyratqowlwih_000cvr.jpg

2yx0umw.png

2d0gfhi.png

Full Book in Arabic: http://ia600803.us.archive.org/14/items/736278932/kamil-zyarat.pdf

Full Book in English:http://www.ziaraat.org/books/KamiluzZiaraat.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

First of all, having all Rijal Thiqat in a chain does not equate to Sihha of the Hadith, this is your first and very basic mistake.

Please show me where i said having all rijal thiqat makes a hadith sahih? A person can be thiqa but old of age having a bad memory. But before you can bring an example from the book of a person being in a state or a different state weaking a hadith i dont see the point of having a 101 Hadith course with you.  ItYou see awaiting_for_the.12th asked me for the rijal not for the tashih. If you had watched the video instead of jumping to try and me it look like i made a mistake you would have seen i mentioned Abdul-Hamid Al-Muhajir.

 

 

 

Secondly, the belief that all the Rijal in Kamil al-Ziyarat are Thiqah is a very minority opinion that originated in near-modern times (from the times of Hurr al-Amili onwards) falling within the broad movement to re-read the statements in the Awail/Muqadimat of the books of the Qudama to widen the circle of Mu'tabar narrations in terms of chains, there is no trace of it as a Qaidah in Dirayah before this time.

 

Ibn Qulaywayh in the introduction said :

 لكن ما وقع لنا من جهة الثّقات من أصحابنا

 

And that he did not narrate from  الشُّذاذ.

 

 

very minority opinion

 

There is no such thing as an agreement in the Shia religion. To the level that for every sahih hadith you base your religion on there is an equal sahih hadith that contradicts it. 

 

 

 

 

Thirdly, even someone like al-Khoei who is credited for reviving and popularizing such an opinion.

 

 

 

 The same al-Khoei who said every narrator in tafsir al Qummi is sahih?hhhh Second it is well known about his change of opinion that happend in 1988 however Al-Khoei seem to have presented a view that the book have been played with something we can have a field day with if we are going to talk about shia books (Khamenei has done us a great favour here). However that does not change what is written in the introduction of the book.
 

 

 

So in the end, your statement that Kamil al-Ziyarat is Sahih from 'a to z' is a cooked up statement ascribed to our scholars, and based upon this - I advice you not waste our time by making videos whose original premises are false ones.

So in the end the author of the book Kamil al Ziyarat said every narrator in his book is thiqa and there are scholars today who hold this view. And other scholars who say the book have been played with. There are also scholars like Khamenei who say the books of rijal of the shia have been played with making the whole sahih daif shia game useless.

 

So in the end i did not make any false premises. It is as false as if i said the Shia belive the Quran has been protected from corruption something Nakshavani does all the time. And we can prove this is also only an opinion is the Shia religion. So the shia are the last one´s who should speak about false premises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Please show me where i said having all rijal thiqat makes a hadith sahih? A person can be thiqa but old of age having a bad memory. But before you can bring an example from the book of a person being in a state or a different state weaking a hadith i dont see the point of having a 101 Hadith course with you.  ItYou see awaiting_for_the.12th asked me for the rijal not for the tashih. If you had watched the video instead of jumping to try and me it look like i made a mistake you would have seen i mentioned Abdul-Hamid Al-Muhajir.

 

You claimed that:

 

 

Kamil al Ziyarat is accepted as authentic by your scholars. And all the 388 transmitters are truthworthy

 

This is a lie. You cannot generalize like this, the overwhelming majority of scholars do not consider all the Rijal of Kamil al-Ziyarat as Thiqah.

 

Once this is realized your whole argument is worthless.

 

 

Ibn Qulaywayh in the introduction said :

 لكن ما وقع لنا من جهة الثّقات من أصحابنا

And that he did not narrate from  الشُّذاذ.

 

This book contains Mursal Riwayat and even Marfu ones, there are cases of clear Dhuafa narrating in it, where does this stand in with your supposed reading of Ibn Qulawayh? Does it not show a contradiction with your understanding?

 

Maybe you should read some basic Dirayah books from Shia Ulama, read for example the work of Muhsini on this topic where he interprets this statement in the more natural way, why do you think Mirza Nuri and al-Khoei restricted it to the Mashayikh?

 

 

There is no such thing as an agreement in the Shia religion. To the level that for every sahih hadith you base your religion on there is an equal sahih hadith that contradicts it.

 

Strange, weren't you only a few posts ago claiming that they were all agreed in accepting every narration in Kamil al-Ziyarat, now you admit that there is Ikhtilaf? Nice turn around.

 

The Ikhtilaf among our Ulama can in no way be more than that between your different Madhahib.

 

As for your other generalization that every Sahih Hadith has a Sahih contradiction - take such foolishness elsewhere, you cannot prove such a thing even if you wanted to.

 

 

The same al-Khoei who said every narrator in tafsir al Qummi is sahih?hhhh Second it is well known about his change of opinion that happend in 1988 however Al-Khoei seem to have presented a view that the book have been played with something we can have a field day with if we are going to talk about shia books (Khamenei has done us a great favour here). However that does not change what is written in the introduction of the book.

 

al-Khoei did not say every narrator in Tafsir Qummi is 'Sahih', Sahih what? Sahih al-Basar maybe?

 

If you knew that he changed his opinion then why did you not say in the video that not every Hadith in Kamil al-Ziyarat is accepted according to all, why did you make it seem as though it is universally accepted as a Sahih book [as in all content is Mu'tabar].

 

What is this about - al-Khoei presented a view about the book being 'played with'

 

You are reading too much into what is in most cases Nuskha differences (from that Khamenei quote) - calling it 'playing with', such differences have occurred in all books from that age [for Sunnis and Shias] without any difference. They are cases of copyists Tashif OR some foot-notes that entered into the main text [which can be remedied by Tahqiq], as a whole, the books are stable in content, and that is why we depend on them.

 

 

So in the end the author of the book Kamil al Ziyarat said every narrator in his book is thiqa and there are scholars today who hold this view. And other scholars who say the book have been played with. There are also scholars like Khamenei who say the books of rijal of the shia have been played with making the whole sahih daif shia game useless.

 

Do not conflate topics, if you want to discuss what Ibn Qulawayh meant in his Muqadimma - make a topic, just don't make it seem that all our scholars believe that all the narrators of Kamil al-Ziyarat are Thiqat OR all of Kamil al-Ziyarat is Sahih - when that is clearly not the case.

 

As for 'playing with', this is an unsubstantiated view, show examples of 'purposeful' and 'villainous' corruption if you can.

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a lie. You cannot generalize like this, the overwhelming majority of scholars do not consider all the Rijal of Kamil al-Ziyarat as Thiqah.

 

Once this is realized your whole argument is worthless.

Ibn al Qulawayh Al Qummi said every narrator is thiqa in his book not only that Abdul-Hamid Al-Muhajir aswell promoted that everything is this book is sahih. Aswell as scholars of the past who held this view. I said a valid opinion held in your religion that some might disagree with. So what the problem? Where did i say its indisputable accept as sahih by ever single shia scholars? There is not one thing that is accept as indisputable in the shia religion. However you have to agree modern aswell as scholars and Ibn Al Qualawayh himself accepted the narrators in the book as thiqa.

 

 

 

on this topic where he interprets this statement in the more natural way, why do you think Mirza Nuri and al-Khoei restricted it to the Mashayikh?

What your scholars are doing is that they are playing with words in the introduction making it the clear statement say  things it never said. 

 

 

 

You want to go into the ikhtilaf between the Batris and the shirazis who are declaring each other kaffirs and british agents? Or the ikhtilaf between the usulis and the akbaris? And then we can see if that can be compared with the differences between the 4 madhabs?

 

 

As for your other generalization that every Sahih Hadith has a Sahih contradiction - take such foolishness elsewhere, you cannot prove such a thing even if you wanted to.

I guess Al Tusi was foolish than?

 

 

 

“There is no information that we agree on which doesn’t have another that contradicts it, and no narration is safe from another which denies it …(until he said)… and this is why many of the shia left the Madhab.” [source: Tahtheeb al Ahkam 1/8 by sheikh of the sect al Tusi.]
 

 

 
 
 

 

What is this about - al-Khoei presented a view about the book being 'played with'

 

 
This is what Al Khoei said.
 

 

 

“After examining the traditions of the book and investigating its isnads, it appears that it [the book] contains many traditions - maybe more than a half [of the traditions in the book] - which do not accord with his [ibn Qawlawayh’s] description in his introduction [that the work contains reliable transmitters only]. Moreover, the book contains many traditions whose isnads are not complete or which do not culminate in a ma‘sum (the infallible one). Persons who are not from our companions also occur in theisnads. Some figures who are not cited in our biographical works at all are also mentioned, others who are known to be weak like Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Mihran are also cited. Therefore, there is no alternative but to alter [our stated position] and to maintain that only his [ibn Qawlawayh’s] mashayikh (teachers) from whom he reports directly (bila wasita), are reliable.” source

 

 
Now my questions is where did Ibn Qulaywayh say that only his teachers are thiqa?
 
 
 
 
Edited by Al-Maghribi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part 2

 

We will go further into this about the taqwiy of the rijal and if i misrepresented your religion once you show me where where Ibn Qulaywayh said that only his teachers are thiqa and that he did not mean every narrator (about 388).

 

As for

You are reading too much into what is in most cases Nuskha differences (from that Khamenei quote) - calling it 'playing with', such differences have occurred in all books from that age [for Sunnis and Shias] without any difference.

 

 

Lets see what Khamenei said

 

khamnai-not-rejal-1.jpg?w=207&h=300

khamnai-not-rejal-2.jpg?w=207&h=300

khamnai-not-rejal-3.jpg?w=207&h=300

khamnai-not-rejal-3.jpg?w=207&h=300

بناء على ما ذكره الكثير من خبراء هذا الفن ، ان نسخ كتاب الفهرست كأكثر الكتب الرجالية القديمة المعتبرة الاخرى مثل كتاب الكشي والنجاشي والبرقي والغضائري قد ابتليت جميعاً بالتحريف والتصحيف ،ولحقت بها الاضرار الفادحة ، ولم تصل منها لابناء هذا العصر نسخة صحيحة
 

“Based on saying of many experts in this field: copies of  book  al-Fihrist (author al-Abu Jafar at-Tose) as the other majority of old books on rijal, like al-Kashi, an-Najashi, an-Burqui, and al-Ghadairi, were all distorted, and (get changes in their) diacritical marks, and suffered  heavy damage, and there is not one single correct copy that reached to the people of this era”.”Usul al-Arba fi Ilmul Rijal” p 50.

So not only are you ahadith useless because of taqiyya as you scholar Yusuf al Bahrain admits
 

“The majority of contradictions in our narrations after observation and research or even all of the contradictions originate from Taqqiyah.” Source: al-Hadaeq al Nadirah by Yusuf al Bahrani 1/8.

 

Only a small amount of the rulings of the religion were known for sure, because their narrations were mixed with the narrations of Taqqiyah(dissimulation), as was admitted by Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad bin Ya’aqoub al-Kulayni may Allah fill his grave with light in his collection al-Kafi. “al-Hadaeq al-Nadirah” vol.1 pg.5

 

But also many of your greatest rijal books are muharaf and heavily damaged.

 

 

Do not conflate topics, if you want to discuss what Ibn Qulawayh meant in his Muqadimma - make a topic, just don't make it seem that all our scholars believe that all the narrators of Kamil al-Ziyarat are Thiqat OR all of Kamil al-Ziyarat is Sahih - when that is clearly not the case.

 
I am not conflating topics. When you see shia apologetics going around giving dawah saying "we have the same Quran as the sunnis and our mushafs are printed in Saudia arabiya" Do you ever see them saying the Quran being free from distortion is only an opinion in the  the school of "ahlul bayt" but our greatest scholars like al Majlisi and Nimatullah Al Jazairi and also Kulayni believed in tahreef hmm? Do you ever see them promoting faslul kitab by Nuri al Tabrassi ? Seeing as i never said all of your scholars hold the opinion i am doing nothing different than what these Shia Apologetics are doing in the Us, Uk and the other places they are active at.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i see you are playing with the words.

 

Now let us read the text together. Without the playing of the words by Sistani.

 

وقد علمنا انا لانحيط بجميع ما روي عنهم في هذا المعنى

 

 

We realize we cannot cover all that which has been transmitted from them (imams) on this subject(grave worship)

 

Here Ibn Qulawayh admits that he realized he cannot collect/cover all the narrations from the Imams on the topic of grave worship and its so called rewards.

 

 لكن ما وقع لنا من جهة الثّقات من أصحابنا

 

Except that which has been related to us by reliable(thiqa) transmitters from our companions 

 

He didnt say shuyukh he simply said thiqat. Meaning every narrator and he further goes on to say.

 

ولا أخرجت فيه حديثاً روي عن الشُّذاذ من الرِّجال

 

I have not cited a tradition in it [the book] which has been transmitted by reporters who are rarely mentioned (shudhdhadh).

 

So even  الشُّذاذ (odd) are not found in this book. Only Thiqa.

 

 

 

My question is this, if this was what Ibn Qulawayh meant in doing, why was no attention paid to it from the times of al-Najashi, and al-Tusi, and Ibn Tawus, and Allamah Hilli, and Ibn Dawud, and Shahid I and Shahid II and their students.

 
And i can ask the same things back. Where did your Qudama say he only meant his shuyukh?

 

 

 

 

 while I have shown the natural reading of the passage.

Nope what you did is play with the words. And give different interpretation of how your scholars play with the words. Second you can admit the books has been played with and you would have a stronger case than you have now by playing with the words. As for the introduction it is there for whoever to see.

 

 

 

Firstly, you had said that any 'Sahih' Hadith has another 'Sahih' Hadith contradicting it

Did Shia have something called "sahih" at the time of Tusi?

 

Seeing as you could not comment on what al tusi said we will move on.

 

 

It simply means that he came to realize that the supposed condition that Ibn Qulawayh put upon himself (as he understood it) is not reflected by the content of the work, something that made him reconsider how he interpreted what was mean by Ibn Qulawayh in the Muqadimma of the book.

 

 

Al Khoei might have given it the same interpretation you have in a different place, i know some of his student have said this. As for that quote he made it clear his book. It is fair to suggest he meant there are interpolations in the book in that particular quote.

 

 

 

No-where,   

And thats why you and those who limit it to their shuyukh have no dalil for their claim.

 

Also i never made the claim "all"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Al-Maghribi

 

Even if you were angelic and your convincings immaculate (lets suppose) do you fathom in to what you're inviting us, "Lover of Muawiya"? And what you ask of us to abandon in doing so?

 

Now even if you put the sun in my right hand and the moon in the left, I will not abandon what I have come to love.


So why don't you wait. We're waiting too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Al-Maghribi

 

Even if you were angelic and your convincings immaculate (lets suppose) do you fathom in to what you're inviting us, "Lover of Muawiya"? And what you ask of us to abandon in doing so?

 

Now even if you put the sun in my right hand and the moon in the left, I will not abandon what I have come to love.

So why don't you wait. We're waiting too.

What to abandon? First of to abandon the grave worship and to stop associating others with Allah. Also to stop attacking the honor(wife) of prophet Muhammad(saw) and his sahaba. That would be a good start

 

As for Amir Ul Muminin Muawiyya(as) this is what the prophet said.

 

Prophet said to Muawiyah (r.a): “Allah, make him (Muawiya ) guided, a guider, and guide people through him”.Graded Sahih. Refrence Sunan Tirmidhi English: V1B46H3842 Arabic: B49H4213

 

So yes we love Amir Muawiyya but ofcourse our love for Imam Amir Ul muminin Ali(as) is much greater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ولا أخرجت فيه حديثاً روي عن الشُّذاذ من الرِّجال

 

I have not cited a tradition in it [the book] which has been transmitted by reporters who are rarely mentioned (shudhdhadh).

So even الشُّذاذ (odd) are not found in this book. Only Thiqa.

 

 

Firstly, do you understand the meaning of Hasr [delimitation], obviously everyone wants to get Ahadith from the Thiqat as a priority, but does it mean that he explicitly states that he will do this only from the Thiqat, you do understand that their is a grey area of the Majhulin about whom the Qudama were silent and whose Riwayat they unanimously included, this practice of theirs was so common until they were accused of believing in Asalah al-Adalah by modern scholars.

 

Simply put, the Statement of Ibn Qulawayh does not have Hasr.

 

In other words, not taking from the Shudhadh does not necessitate that he will not narrate from the Majahil [which explains presence of the Mursalat and Marfuat in his Hadith], you have not answered the question of the existence of these two types of narrations present in al-Kamil, rather you just jump around topics [or allude to imaginary interpolations].

 

Furthermore, why don't you continue translating this passage? Seeing a problem for your chosen interpretation in the other half?

 

No problem I will help you.

 

ولا اخرجت فيه حديثا روي عن الشذاذ من الرجال، يؤثر ذلك عنهم عن المذكورين غير المعروفين بالرواية المشهورين بالحديث والعلم

 

'And I have not taken out in it (my book) a Hadith that is narrated on the authority of the Shudhadh (odd ones) from the Rijal - which has been narrated on their authority (i.e. the Ahlulbayt) from the aforementioned ones (i.e. Shudhadh) and not those recognized in their Riwaya and famous in Hadith and Ilm'

 

According to al-Sistani, the most natural interpretation of this passage, is that he will not take out a Hadith in his book from the Shudhadh which has been narrated by the like (other Shudhadh).

 

Rather, he may take out a Hadith in his book from the Shudhadh if it went on to be narrated by those recognized in their Riwaya and famous in Hadith and Ilm.

 

Why you may ask?

 

Because those who were recognized in their Riwaya and famous for Hadith and Ilm could make choices of which Hadith of the Shudhadh to narrate and include in their books, because they know of the other means for strengthening i.e. via Mutabiat and Shawahid, declaring the Asl to be Thabit, Tasahhul in matters of Mustahabat etc. Refer to the example of what al-Saduq did for the Riwayat of Muhammad bin Musa al-Hamadani.

 

As al-Sistani says:

 

ولكن الصحيح ان العبارة المذكورة في المقدمة لا تدل على هذا المعنى بل مفادها انه لم يورد في كتابه روايات الضعفاء والمجروحين ، لذا لم يكن قد اخرجها الرجال الثقات المشهورون بالحديث والعلم ، المعبر عنهم بنقاد الاحاديث كمحمد بن الحسن بن الوليد وسعد بن عبدالله واضرابهما وأما لو كان قد اخرجها بعض هؤلاء سواءا كانوا من مشايخه أو مشايخ مشايخه فهو يعتمدها ويوردها في كتابه ، فكأنّه قدس سره يكتفي في الاعتماد على روايات الشذاذ من الرجال على حد تعبيره - بايرادها من قبل بعض هؤلاء الاعاظم من نقاد الاحاديث وهذا المعنى مضافا الى كونه ظاهرعبارته المشار اليها - كما يتبين عند التأمل - مقرون ببعض الشواهد الخارجية المذكورة في محلها

 

'But the correct opinion is that the aforementioned passage in the Muqadimma (by Ibn Qulawayh) does not point to this meaning [that all the Rijal in it are Thiqat], rather, what it means is that he will not include in his book the Riwayat of the Dhuafa and Majruhin since these Riwayat did not go on to be narrated by the Rijal who are Thiqat and famous (known in the matters of) Hadith and Ilm, whom we can call the Nuqad al-Hadith (critical scholars) like Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin al-Walid or Sa'd bin Abdallah and the like, but if some of these men (i.e. Nuqad) would have narrated them (the Riwayat of the Shudhadh) whether they (i.e. the Nuqad) be his teachers or the teachers of his teachers - then he (Ibn Qulawayh) will depend upon them (the Riwayat of the Shudhadh) and include them in his book, so it is as though - he - may his soul be sanctified - has sufficed himself in depending upon the Riwayat from the Shudhadh among the Rijal if they were included by some of these great ones from the Nuqad al-Hadith. And this interpretation, apart from being evident from the passage, as is clear when one concentrates on reading it, is also supported by some external evidences which are mentioned in their appropriate places'

 

فليس مراده وثاقة جميع من وقع في أسانيد رواياته فإن منهم من لا شائبة في ضعفه وليس د مراده وثاقة عامة مشايخه فإن منهم من لا تنطبق عليهم الصفة التي وصفهم بها قدس سره وهي كونهم مشهورين بالحديث والعلم

 

'So his intention was not to give Wathaqa to all who have occurred in the chains of his Riwayat, for among them, there are those about whom there is no doubt as to their weakness, and his intention was also not to give Wathaqa to the generality of his Shuyukh for among them their are those upon whom the attribute he described - that is - being famous in the Hadith and Ilm - cannot be applied'

 

 

 

And i can ask the same things back. Where did your Qudama say he only meant his shuyukh?

 

 

Now I see that I am wasting my time, and that you cannot follow the thread of my arguments, alas, their may be some who may obtain Fawaid from this so I shall soldier on.

 

Where did I say that the Qudama restricted it to his Mashayikh?!

 

Listen carefully, the Qudama did not understand from this passage Tawthiq for anyone AT ALL, as al-Sistani maintains.

 

 

 

Second you can admit the books has been played with and you would have a stronger case than you have now by playing with the words. As for the introduction it is there for whoever to see.

 

 

Get it out of your head that the book was played with, you have zero evidence for that, so you better not continue unsubstantiated claims.

 

I know that beginner Salafis from around the world like to quote Khamenei, it is very typical, nothing new I assure you, but obviously the whole relevant portions of Khamenei's words are untranslated - because if they were, everything would seems clear, in essence you are highlighting a portion and thus making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

There is no word play, it is the Dhahir of the Ibarah - can you read? I will make it simpler for you

 

And I (Ibn Qulawayh) have not taken out in it (my book) a Hadith that is narrated on the authority of the Shudhadh (odd ones) from the Rijal - which has been narrated on the authority (i.e. of the Ahlulbayt) from the same aforementioned ones (i.e. other Shudhadh) and NOT those recognized in their Riwaya and famous in Hadith and Ilm (i.e. which means that, when the opposite happens, and it was narrated by those who are recognized in their Riwaya and famous in Hadith and Ilm he would depend on that and include those specific Riwayat of the Shudhadh)'

 

Read slowly as al-Sistani suggests and you will grasp.

 

Do not read up to the first part and base everything on it, continue on and you will realize what he means, he will not take out hadith of the Shudhadh if it is narrated by their like (i.e. other Shudhadh), BUT if those who are recognized in their superiority in the matter of Riwayah, and those who are well known for their knowledge of Hadith (i.e. Nuqad) choose to take out (include) from said Shadh Rajul he will make Ittiba if them and allow himself to take it out also.

 

 

 

Did Shia have something called "sahih" at the time of Tusi?

 

 

A new low from you.

 

Why did Tusi write books on Rijal if he did not want to authenticate chains - for his pleasure?

 

Why did he put a whole Bab for the Hujiyya Khabar al-Thiqah in his Uddat al-Usul?

 

 

As for that quote he made it clear his book. It is fair to suggest he meant there are interpolations in the book in that particular quote.

 

 

Be honest, in that quote, their is nothing that points to him suggesting that there were interpolations in the book and that is why the 'supposed' rule that Ibn Qulawayh placed on himself is not reflected in the work.

 

If that were the case, why did Khoei restrict it to the Mashayikh, cannot the interpolations have continued there?

 

This is just clutching at straws now.

 

 

 

And thats why you and those who limit it to their shuyukh have no dalil for their claim.

 

 

As I have said, and if you had the ability to read what I wrote you would not have written this, I myself do not restrict it to the Mashayikh, and their is no Dalil for that in my eyes, why are you using this against me when I am on the opposite side.

 

Read carefully before answering!

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I belive you did not watch the video. And i belive you dont know anything about your religion. Kamil al Ziyarat is accepted as authentic by your scholars. And all the 388 transmitters are truthworthy. You should spend more time studying your books and less time accusing others of lying.

 

Some words of wisdom from Mr Maghribi Wahhabi that maybe he should apply on himself lol

 

Brother Islamic Salvation has been very patient with you, but i doubt you have any sort of sense of honour or shame, and hence you will most likely continue replying and making a fool of yourself and of Wahhabi academia lol I just dont understand why you have to be dishonest in your approach, even after its been explained repeatedly to you? Is Wahhabism that weak?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

Some words of wisdom from Mr Maghribi Wahhabi that maybe he should apply on himself lol

 

continue replying and making a fool of yourself and of Wahhabi academia lol I just dont understand why you have to be dishonest in your approach, even after its been explained repeatedly to you? Is Wahhabism that weak?

 

 

 

 

:lol:

 

It is very funny that you should call anyone a fool after having that signature. Because if you had any knowledge about islamic history or about ahadith you would have known that the Najd refered to in the hadith is Iraq and not the Najd of arabiya and you would also have known about the ahadith where the word Iraq is used instead of Najd. 

 

 

ابْنِ عُمَرَ، قَالَ: رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: يُشِيرُ بِيَدِهِ يَؤُمُّ الْعِرَاقَ: " هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، - ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنُ الشَّيْطَانِ مسند أحمد ط الرسالة (10/ 391 رقم/6302/ 6129 

 

And Also

 

Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim b. 'Abdullah b. 'Umar as saying: O people of Iraq, how strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father 'Abdullah b. 'Umar, narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily, the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the horns of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another.Sahih Muslim Book 041, Hadith Number 6943.
 
Narrated by Yusair bin 'Amr:I asked Sahl bin Hunaif, "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said, "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq. "There will appear in it (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats,and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body.' Sahih Bukhari Volume 9 : Book 84 : Hadith 68 :
 

If you had any knowledge of history you would have know there have been around 13 locations refered to as Najd and Iraq was refered to as Najd. 

 

Ibn Hajr al Asqalani in Fath Al Bari quoted al-Khattabi

The najd is in the direction of the east, and for the one who is in Madeenah then his Najd would be the desert of Iraaq and it's regions for this is to the east of the People of Madeenah. The basic meaning of Najd is that which is raised/elevated from the earth in contravention to al-Gawr for that is what is lower than it. Tihaamah [the coastal plain along the south-western and southern shores of the Arabian Peninsula] is entirely al-Gawr and Mecca is in Tihaamah.'[...] by this [saying of al-Khattaabee] the weakness of the saying of ad-Daawodee is understood that 'Najd is in the direction of Iraaq' [min Naahiya al-Iraaq] for he suggests that Najd is a specific place. This is not the case, rather everything that is elevated with respect to what adjoins it is called Najd and the lower area called Gawr."Fath al-Baaree 13/58-59.

 

And if you had any knowledge about Muhammad ibn abd al Wahab you would have known he was from the tribe of banu tamim a tribe praised by Prophet Muhammad.

 

"I have loved the people of the tribe of Banu Tamim, ever since I heard three things the Messenger of Allaah , sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said about them. I heard him saying, 'these people (of the tribe of Banu Tamim) would stand firm against the Dajjaal.' When the Saddaqat from that tribe came, the Messenger of Allaah , sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said, "these are the Saddaqat (charitable gifts) of our folk." Aa'ishah had a slave girl from that tribe, and the Prophet , sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said to Aa'ishah, 'manumit her as she is a descendant of Ismaa'eel, alayhis salaam."Ibn Hajr Fath hadith 2543 also see Sahih Muslim book 31 Hadith number 6133 and 6134.
 

 

Now lets move on to Islamic Salvation. Before we start i do apologize that i ascribed Al Khoei view to you.

Simply put, the Statement of Ibn Qulawayh does not have Hasr.

I find this part to be very fun how you make the statement 

وقد علمنا أنّا لا نحيط بجميع ما روي عنهم في هذا المعنى ولا في غيره ، لكن ما وقع لنا من جهة الثّقات من أصحابنا ـ رحمهم الله [برحمته] ـ ولا أخرجت فيه حديثاً روي عن الشُّذاذ من الرِّجال
 

There is no لكن this nor لكن that.

 

Which further answers your next point.

 

 

 

n other words, not taking from the Shudhadh does not necessitate that he will not narrate from the Majahil [which explains presence of the Mursalat and Marfuat in his Hadith],

 

 

We realize we cannot cover all that which has been transmitted from them (imams) on this subject [the salutations at the shrines], nor on any other issue, except that which has been related to us by reliable [transmitters] from our companions

 

If we go by what your saying it makes no sense for him to include the first part وقد علمنا أنّا لا نحيط بجميع ما روي عنهم في هذا المعنى if he included narrators that were unknown, since than he would have been able to include more than what was transmitted by his thiqa narrators whom he said he narrated from.

 

As for  [which explains presence of the Mursalat and Marfuat in his Hadith],

 

I told you have a better chance of explaining this away by saying the books has been played with. 

 

Moving on you already admited this reading is valid

 

 

 

Not bringing something from the Shudhadh Mutlaqan (totally), and they are defined as those not recognized in their Riwaya and not famous in Hadith and Ilm.

And this is more in line with the text unlike the hypothesis of Sistani.

 

You said

 

 

Based upon the first interpretation, can it be claimed that all those he goes on to include are not Shudhadh and therefore Ma'ruf bi al-Riwayah and Mashhur Fi al-Hadith wa al-Ilm (recognized in their Riwaya and famous in Hadith and Ilm)?!, this cannot be the correct reading, as he cannot be attributing such greatness to all these individuals, it is impossible for these attributes to be combined in 20 of these - let alone 388

 

And this is very funny because before 1988 Al-Khoi held the opinion that all the individuals were thiqa. So i ask was Al Khoei weaker than you as a muhadith before 1988 (since you seem to hold it is impossible for all 388 to be thiqa) and was Al Khoei a very bad muhadith in this case before 1988?

 

 

I know that beginner Salafis from around the world like to quote Khamenei, it is very typical, nothing new I assure you, but obviously the whole relevant portions of Khamenei's words are untranslated - because if they were, everything would seems clear, in essence you are highlighting a portion and thus making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

I dont even like to attack  your distorted rijal books, the contradiction that happend due to taqqiya is enough to show how useless a shia hadith is. As for using Khamenei, lets see how i even made a mountain. Did he say tahrif happend to your rijal books? Yes or No  Did He say your books are heavy damaged.

 

 

A new low from you.

 

Why did Tusi write books on Rijal if he did not want to authenticate chains - for his pleasure?

 

Why did he put a whole Bab for the Hujiyya Khabar al-Thiqah in his Uddat al-Usul?

You avoided the question. The books of Rijal are almost irrelevant (note i said almost) to what i asked.  I asked did the Shia 12ers have something called "Sahih" at the time of Al-Tusi? Let me ask it in a more easy and clear way. rules and criterias for ilm ul Hadith. So what i am asking did the science of authentication  exist at the time of Al Tusi. Long before Al Hilli introduced when facing critism from Ibn Taymiyya? When Al-Hilli went to the books of Ahlu Sunnah of the likes of the books of Al-Hakim(rh) , Ibn Al Salaah(rh) and Al Ramhormozi?  

 

 

Be honest, in that quote, their is nothing that points to him suggesting that there were interpolations in the book and that is why the 'supposed' rule that Ibn Qulawayh placed on himself is not reflected in the work.

Al Khoei said the intro does not agree with what is inside the book. This is open for many interpretations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some words of wisdom from Mr Maghribi Wahhabi that maybe he should apply on himself lol

 

Brother Islamic Salvation has been very patient with you, but i doubt you have any sort of sense of honour or shame, and hence you will most likely continue replying and making a fool of yourself and of Wahhabi academia lol I just dont understand why you have to be dishonest in your approach, even after its been explained repeatedly to you? Is Wahhabism that weak?

You missed something,

 

Al MAghribi is a Maliki, with hanbali aqeedah, and what not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with the book? I listened to the whole video and none of the narrations particular bothered me.

 

So these 2 did not bother you?

 

-Missing Hajj and spending Arafah day at the grave of Imam Hussain is equal to the reward of participating in 1000 battles with a divine messenger and performing 1000 accepted hajj and umrahs. pg 158 

 

-Those Shia who visit the grave of Hussein should ask Allah to send curse on those who distorted holy book. pg 185.

 
Are you sure you watched the entire video?
 
 
I should included these aswell.
 
Allah goes to his Ziyarat every Friday evening, with the angels, prophets, successors. pg 113
 
One who performs the Ziyarat of the grave of Imam Husain by the banks of Euphrates is like one who has visited Allah on His Throne. Pg 142 
 
Imam Sadiq (a.s.) was asked about one  who omits the Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) for no reason. 
Imam (a.s.) said, “He will be from the folks of Hell.” pg 178 
 
One who repeatedly performs the Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) is recognized by us as our lover and he will be 
among the folks of Paradise, whereas the faith of one who does not perform the Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) is 
incomplete pg 178
 
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So these 2 did not bother you?

No, they don't. And yes I am sure I watched the whole video. I will only respond to these two for now because of limited time. insha'Allah the others later.

-Missing Hajj and spending Arafah day at the grave of Imam Hussain is equal to the reward of participating in 1000 battles with a divine messenger and performing 1000 accepted hajj and umrahs. pg 158

Hajj is still wajib and Ziyarat is mustahab. Yes the reward is much greater but hajj is still wajib. After one performs hajj, there is a huge reward in ziyarat of Imam Hussain on Arafa day.

-Those Shia who visit the grave of Hussein should ask Allah to send curse on those who distorted holy book. pg 185.

I believe that tahreef happened and I curse those that did it. Other Shias claim that tahreef didn't happen but it is 100% proven from our most authentic books as well as other evidence. I am not going to turn a blind eye to it and say it didn't happen.

We could probably have some interesting discussions. I am opposed to taqiyyah except when a human life is in danger or other hardships are faced. Since my life is not in danger and you aren't going to force some other hardship on my for being truthful, I will be 100% honest with you. I see no reason to sugar coat my religion to make it look more appealing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So these 2 did not bother you?

 

-Missing Hajj and spending Arafah day at the grave of Imam Hussain is equal to the reward of participating in 1000 battles with a divine messenger and performing 1000 accepted hajj and umrahs. pg 158 

 

-Those Shia who visit the grave of Hussein should ask Allah to send curse on those who distorted holy book. pg 185.

 
Are you sure you watched the entire video?
 
 
I should included these aswell.
 
Allah goes to his Ziyarat every Friday evening, with the angels, prophets, successors. pg 113
 
One who performs the Ziyarat of the grave of Imam Husain by the banks of Euphrates is like one who has visited Allah on His Throne. Pg 142 
 
Imam Sadiq (a.s.) was asked about one  who omits the Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) for no reason. 
Imam (a.s.) said, “He will be from the folks of Hell.” pg 178 
 
One who repeatedly performs the Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) is recognized by us as our lover and he will be 
among the folks of Paradise, whereas the faith of one who does not perform the Ziyarat of Imam Husain (a.s.) is 
incomplete pg 178
 
 
 
 

 

Its a well known belief of tashayyu' that there has been tahreef in the tawil (interpretation) of the Quran, which is definitely what is being referred to in the Ziyarat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a well known belief of tashayyu' that there has been tahreef in the tawil (interpretation) of the Quran, which is definitely what is being referred to in the Ziyarat.

 

Ahsant. This dude is purposely throwing assumptions around and CLEAR distoration of the interpretation of our hadiths. I dont believe in distortion of the Quran, except the fact that there has been 100% distortion of the interpretation of it from our ahlul sahaba school..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what's the stance of maghribi on the Hadith of Aysha on Quran being incomplete and that a goat ate the scroll with verses of rajm

Also what dose he have to say about his god who sits on throne in sky who is in shape of young beardless man?

But I am not expecting a proper answer from a troll who has no shame

Qarn ashytan is Najd of arabia , the men who asked rasul Allah were from hijaz , they asked rasul Allah about " our Najd" not the Iraq Najd and rasul Allah pointed to east of madinah , Iraq is northern east, east to madinah is Najd of arabia.

Play all you want on the rijal game, it is evident that you lack the slightest understanding of religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...