Examining Extremism And Ghulu' In Islam

[Ethics]

MashAllah, Hossein Al Qazwini, in this month of Ramadan is talking about many interesting topics. This is one of them. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE at least check out the other lecture topics he talked about in this holy month:

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235023615-hossein-al-qazwini-month-of-ramadan-2014-lectures/

 

(wasalam)

 

Edited July 8, 2014 by PureEthics

[robbenmessi1010]

Very interesting lecture. However, the part about the prophet(as) not forgetting is quite strange. We have hadiths from our imams(as) that the prophet did indeed have forgetfulness in prayer.

- حدثنا تميم بن عبد الله بن تميم القرشي قال : حدثني أبي عن أحمد بن علي الانصاري عن أبي الصلت الهروي قال : قلت للرضا عليه السلام يا بن رسول الله إن في سواد الكوفة قوما يزعمون أن النبي ( ص ) لم يقع عليه السهو في صلاته ، فقال : كذبوا لعنهم الله أن الذي لا يسهو هو الله الذي لا إله إلا هو

 

- عن الحارث بن المغيرة قال : قلت لابي عبد الله عليه السلام : إنا صلينا المغرب فسها الامام فسلم في الركعتين فأعدنا الصلاة ، فقال : لم أعدتم ؟ أليس قد انصرف رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله في الركعتين فأتم بركعتين ، ألا أتممتم

 

عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال : إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله سها فسلم في ركعتين ، ثم ذكر حديث ذي الشمالين ، فقال : ثم قام فأضاف إليها ركعتين  )

 

عن زيد بن علي ، عن آبائه ، عن علي عليهم السلام قال : صلى بنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله الظهر خمس ركعات ، ثم انفتل ، فقال له بعض القوم : يارسول الله هل زيد في الصلاة شئ ؟ فقال : وما ذاك ؟ قال : صليت بنا خمس ركعات ، قال : فاستقبل القبلة وكبر وهو جالس ، ثم سجد سجدتين ليس فيهما قراءة ولا ركوع ثم سلم ، وكان يقول : هما المرغمتان

 

عن أبي جميلة ، عن زيد الشحام قال : قال : إن نبي الله صلى بالناس ركعتين ، ثم نسي حتى انصرف ، فقال له ذو الشمالين : يارسول الله أحدث في الصلوة شئ ؟ فقال : أيها الناس أصدق ذو الشمالين ؟ فقالوا : نعم لم تصل إلا ركعتين ، فقام فأتم ما بقي من صلاته ) .

 

عن ابن سنان ، عن أبى سعيد القماط قال : سمعت رجلا يسأل أبا عبد الله عليه السلام عن رجل وجد غمزا في بطنه أو أذى - وساقه إلى أن قال عليه السلام : - كل ذلك واسع ، إنما هو بمنزلة رجل سها فانصرف في ركعة أو ركعتين أو ثلاث من المكتوبة فإنما عليه أن يبني على صلاته ، ثم ذكر سهو النبي صلى الله عليه وآله

 

- كا : محمد بن يحيى ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن عثمان بن عيسى ، عن سماعة بن مهران قال : سألته عن رجل نسي أن يصلي الصبح حتى طلعت الشمس ، قال : يصليها حين يذكرها ، فإن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله رقد عن صلاة الفجر حتى طلعت الشمس ، ثم صلاها

 

قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام : من حفظ سهوه فأتمه فليس عليه سجدتا السهو ، فإن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله صلى بالناس الظهر ركعتين ثم سها فسلم ، فقال له ذو الشمالين : يا رسول الله أنزل في الصلاة شئ ؟ فقال : وما ذلك ؟ فقال : إنما صليت ركعتين ، فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله : أتقولون مثل قوله ؟ قالوا : نعم ، فقام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله فأتم بهم الصلاة وسجد بهم سجدتي السهو ، قال : قلت : أرأيت من صلى ركعتين وظن أنهما أربعا فسلم وانصرف ثم ذكر بعد ما ذهب أنه إنما صلى ركعتين ، قال : يستقبل الصلاة من أولها ، قال : قلت : فما بال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله لم يستقبل الصلاة وإنما أتم بهم ما بقي من صلاته ؟ فقال : إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله لم يبرح من مجلسه ، فإن كان لم يبرح من مجلسه فليتم ما نقص من صلاته إذا كان قد حفظ الركعتين الاولتين .

 

...And more. From: http://alsrdaab.com/vb/showthread.php?t=17568

 

I am not sure how they could disagree with Sheikh Sadooq on this, it's quite clearly there in our books also. 

[Ethics]

Very interesting lecture. However, the part about the prophet(as) not forgetting is quite strange. We have hadiths from our imams(as) that the prophet did indeed have forgetfulness in prayer.

 

Im not even going to even rationally argue you with in terms of examining these notion in hadiths as a whole, or blinding following hadith. But I will say one thing, What kind of a chosen leader/prophet of God forgets how to pray? which is something that I even myself have never forgotten about. Let alone Muhammad A.S who is vociferously mentioned as the most obedient and perfect servant of God, the best creation. For those of you who accept these rubbish hadith and such a irrational notion, must also accept the fact that I am better than the prophet, for I myself, have NEVER forgotten how to pray or when to pray, and im not even chosen or protected by God. You must also accept that rationally the prophet is subject to error, wholly, as life is religion. Thus invalidates the notion of this religion being perfect, not only this, but the whole system of God falls into doubt. For someone who does not believe in ijtihad and taqlid, how can you accept a view of one of our scholars? It goes in contradiction to your beliefs. If you listened carefully, not only do current scholars respectfully disagree with Sheik Suduq and his teacher, but future scholars after him did as well.

 

http://www.al-islam.org/articles/taharah-ismah-masumeen-dr-hatem-abu-shahba

 

I forgot to mention one thing, and that these hadiths clearly go against the quran.

 

By the Star when it sets, (Qur’an 53:1)

Your companion (i.e., Prophet) does not err/wander, nor is he deceived (Qur’an 53:2)

Nor does he speak out of his desire; (Qur’an 53:3)

It is no less than a revelation that is revealed. (Qur’an 53:4)

The Mighty in Power has taught him. (Qur’an 53:5)

 

So if you believe those hadiths to be true, you must accept Allah has erred in His own system, for Allah has taught him, and Muhammad A.S acts only towards the will of Allah. So by Muhammad A.S forgetting how to pray, you are saying Allah did not teach him the importance of prayer. For one never forgets that which is divinely inspired. Have you ever forgotten you are a Muslim? Have you forgotten  who your mother or father is? Of course not, it would be senseless. So how can one claim, Muhammad A.S forgets that which he has been endowed with by the Grace of Allah? The deen which is more important than your mother and father.

 

I ask you humbly, you have responded with an off topic post and given your own thoughts, so if you want to speak of a matter outside the purpose of this thread, create your own thread. Please, do not post off topic responses to other peoples threads, as you always due to spread your own agenda.

 

(wasalam)

Edited July 8, 2014 by PureEthics

[khamaila]

By the Star when it sets, (Qur’an 53:1)

Your companion (i.e., Prophet) does not err/wander, nor is he deceived (Qur’an 53:2)

Nor does he speak out of his desire; (Qur’an 53:3)

It is no less than a revelation that is revealed. (Qur’an 53:4)

The Mighty in Power has taught him. (Qur’an 53:5)

 

Above verses clarifies all doubts and filter all faults. Prophet Mohammed s.a.w.w. is undoubtedly flawless.   

[Ali Musaaa :)]

^... Firstly, his post was not off topic as you described it. He took issue with one part of the lecture.

Im not even going to even rational argue you with in terms of examining these notion in hadiths as a whole. But I will say one thing, What kind of a chosen leader/prophet of God forgets how to pray? which is something that I even myself have never forgotten about. Let alone Muhammad A.S who is vociferously mentioned as the most obedient and perfect servant of God, the best creation. For those of you who accept these rubbish hadith and such a irrational notion, must also accept the fact that I am better than the prophet, for I myself, have NEVER forgotten how to pray or when to pray, and im not even chosen or protected by God.

Secondly, I'd be very careful if I were you. Need I not remind you are fasting? You really shouldn't be out right rejecting Ahadith just because they don't confirm to how you want to imagine the religion ought to be.

This isn't a matter you're going to solve. Scholars have disagreed on this issue for a longtime now. Your 'rational' approach is incoherent, brother. It's time to subject your intellect to the texts themselves and not let your flawed human 'intellect' decide what you want to be part of your religion. You are indirectly creating your own criteria and standard. Anything that doesn't conform with that must be 'wrong', 'illogical' etc.

Question: why do we need infallible leaders? The answer you are about to give is contracted by the Ghayba itself. If you want to dismiss things because they are 'illogical' to you, then you might as well reject the Ghayba as well.

Your human mind is flawed. God isn't. Let's not dismiss things because we merely don't understand it at first.

Question 2: If God is the One who caused the Prophet to forget in order for us to learn how to rectify our mistake, then what is the issue?

Edited July 8, 2014 by Ali Musaaa :)

[Abu'l Khattab]

Im not even going to even rationally argue you with in terms of examining these notion in hadiths as a whole, or blinding following hadith. But I will say one thing, What kind of a chosen leader/prophet of God forgets how to pray? which is something that I even myself have never forgotten about. Let alone Muhammad A.S who is vociferously mentioned as the most obedient and perfect servant of God, the best creation. For those of you who accept these rubbish hadith and such a irrational notion, must also accept the fact that I am better than the prophet, for I myself, have NEVER forgotten how to pray or when to pray, and im not even chosen or protected by God. You must also accept that rationally the prophet is subject to error, wholly, as life is religion. Thus invalidates the notion of this religion being perfect, not only this, but the whole system of God falls into doubt. For someone who does not believe in ijtihad and taqlid, how can you accept a view of one of our scholars? It goes in contradiction to your beliefs. If you listened carefully, not only do current scholars respectfully disagree with Sheik Suduq and his teacher, but future scholars after him did as well.

The Mighty in Power has taught him. (Qur’an 53:5)

 

So if you believe those hadiths to be true, you must accept Allah has erred in His own system, for Allah has taught him, and Muhammad A.S acts only towards the will of Allah. So by Muhammad A.S forgetting how to pray, you are saying Allah did not teach him the importance of prayer. For one never forgets that which is divinely inspired. Have you ever forgotten you are a Muslim? Have you forgotten  who your mother or father is? Of course not, it would be senseless. So how can one claim, Muhammad A.S forgets that which he has been endowed with by the Grace of Allah? The deen which is more important than your mother and father.

 

I ask you humbly, you have responded with an off topic post and given your own thoughts, so if you want to speak of a matter outside the purpose of this thread, create your own thread. Please, do not post off topic responses to other peoples threads, as you always due to spread your own agenda.

 

(wasalam)

1. It's not talking about forgetting how/when to pray. It's forgetfulness during the prayer, which happens to all of us once in a while.

2. Many of these narrations are authentic, but the scholars who disagree with them say they were narrated in Taqiyyah, they didn't call it "rubbish".

3. You can't attack someone for simply copy-pasting narrations. 

4. Calm down. 

Edited July 8, 2014 by Al-Afasy

[Ethics]

^... Firstly, his post was not off topic as you described it. He took issue with one part of the lecture.

Secondly, I'd be very careful if I were you. Need I not remind you are fasting? You really shouldn't be out right rejecting Ahadith just because they don't confirm to how you want to imagine the religion ought to be.

This isn't a matter you're going to solve. Scholars have disagreed on this issue for a longtime now. Your 'rational' approach is incoherent, brother. It's time to subject your intellect to the texts themselves and not let your flawed human 'intellect' decide what you want to be part of your religion. You are indirectly creating your own criteria and standard. Anything that doesn't conform with that must be 'wrong', 'illogical' etc.

Question: why do we need infallible leaders?

Question 2: If God is the One who caused the Prophet to forget in order for us to learn how to rectify our mistake, then what is the issue?

 

If you can disprove my rationality, or bring up evidence rationally to support your claim, do so. As least try and rebuttal the article linked above. Dont just pin sinfulness or hell on me. I am certain and I willfully reject such notion. I am no hadithist and I do not accept blindly whatever I find in our books. I check to see, what our current ulema have said, and I find a position myself. I believe the majority of our scholars reject such a notion.

 

1. If any representative of God were not infallible, then God's system falls into a contradiction, which implies this religion is imperfect. For, how can God command us to refrain from sin if His own representatives couldnt. This religion becomes a joke. If prophets are not protected from all weaknesses, then this religion simply falls into doubt because it is implied that there is a possibility of God's system being erred. A perfect religion, cannot be subjected to doubt, hence it becomes imperfect. Not only that, but you are implying the representatives of God were not perfect, which again implies that the system of God is imperfect, for they are part of His system. Do you understand that this type of ideology is the exact reason why sunnis believe the prophet to have "hallucinated"? and other senseless attributes they give to degrade the prophet and bring doubt upon this perfect religion.

 

2. See, this question is flawed in itself. It is like saying can God create a square that is a triangle. God will not demeanor a prophet or imam to teach us a lesson. This again defies the system of God. God doesn not make His chosen representatives go against his own religon. Why not ask God to have made prophets commit adultery so that we learn from that as well? This thinking is fallacious. God does not make prophets commit error or sins to teach us, else why were they chosen? Why did God choose prayer? Why not a bigger and worse sin? If it were the case to "teach" us. Is there any examples of God making prophets or imams commit errors or sins besides this example to "teach us". I find it funny really. Its like saying, a doctor killed his patient to teach us what not to do. This defies all logic, my brother.

 

(wasalam)

1. It's not talking about forgetting how/when to pray. It's forgetfulness during the prayer, which happens to all of us once in a while.

2. Many of these narrations are authentic, but the scholars who disagree with them say they were narrated in Taqiyyah, they didn't call it "rubbish".

3. You can't attack someone for simply copy-pasting narrations. 

4. Calm down. 

 

1. Can you rationally prove it happens to all of us? If not, then this claim is null.

 

2. Just because a hadith is authentic doesnt imply it is true. I think it is fair for me to call it rubish. For if there was many hadiths on prophets or imams committing adultery, would you not call it rubbish? I call anything that I believe nullifies the notion of this perfect religion rubbish. If you can prove to me otherwise, I will change my stance.

 

3. This thread wasnt here to discuss hadiths. It was simply to share a video.

 

4. Iam pretty calm dear brother. It is a sham you cannot see me through your computer.

 

(wasalam)

Edited July 8, 2014 by PureEthics

[Saintly_Jinn23]

While we should give Sheikh Sadooq the respect due to an early scholar of our religion, we should not take his opinions as necessarily law if reason, logic and tradition tell us he was mistaken. In the early years after the minor occultation, questions like whether The Prophet (pbuh) could "forget" were hot issues of debate and some Imami scholars disagreed with others on the extent of infallibility as well as the supernatural powers of the Ahlul Bayt.

 

Funny enough, i think Sheikh Sadooq even called those who believed the Imams and The Prophet never forgot "ghulat." In fact, Qom and Baghdad/Kufa differed from one another in that Qom Imamis at the time were becoming more rationalistic, emphasizing the more down-to-earth human characteristics of the Imams, while the Iraqi Shia were more occult and mystically oriented and tended to emphasize the more superhuman qualities and cosmic nature of the Ahlul Bayt and wilayat al-Taqwinnah

Edited July 8, 2014 by Saintly_Jinn23

[robbenmessi1010]

I apologize. But I am not trying to spread an "Agenda". I'm just informing you that many hadiths narrated from our imams(as) say that the prophet indeed did forget in prayer, and they also cursed those who deny that. Your words "What kind of a chosen leader/prophet of God forgets how to pray?" don't really mean much, given our imams(as) said the opposite. 

 

Verse 53:2, does not mean what you are claiming. Tafseer from opinion really needs to stop from the Muslims today. Unfortunately, most people quote verses without going to the ones who are supposed to explain the verses to us. 

 

Part of a long hadith in Amali al-Saduq:

 

فقال المنافقون عبد الله بن أبي وأصحابه: لقد ضل محمد في محبة ابن عمه وغوى، وما ينطق في شأنه إلا بالهوى! فأنزل الله تبارك وتعالى (والنجم إذا هوى) يقول الله عز وجل: وخالق النجم إذا هوى (ما ضل صاحبكم) يعني في محبة علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام

....So the hypocrites – Abdullah Bin Ubay and his companions – said, ‘Muhammad has strayed in his love for his cousin and has erred, and he does not speak in his praise except with the (personal) desire’. So Allah, Blessed and High Revealed [53:1] I swear by the star when it goes down The Mighty and Majestic and the Creator of the star is Saying, when He Breaks it [53:2] Your companion does not err, Meaning, (he has not erred) regarding the love for Ali Bin Abi Talib(as)....

Sheikh Saduq(ra) obviously had a valid position on this. 

[Ethics]

I apologize. But I am not trying to spread an "Agenda". I'm just informing you that many hadiths narrated from our imams(as) say that the prophet indeed did forget in prayer, and they also cursed those who deny that. Your words "What kind of a chosen leader/prophet of God forgets how to pray?" don't really mean much, given our imams(as) said the opposite. 

 

Verse 53:2, does not mean what you are claiming. Tafseer from opinion really needs to stop from the Muslims today. Unfortunately, most people quote verses without going to the ones who are supposed to explain the verses to us. 

 

Part of a long hadith in Amali al-Saduq:

 

فقال المنافقون عبد الله بن أبي وأصحابه: لقد ضل محمد في محبة ابن عمه وغوى، وما ينطق في شأنه إلا بالهوى! فأنزل الله تبارك وتعالى (والنجم إذا هوى) يقول الله عز وجل: وخالق النجم إذا هوى (ما ضل صاحبكم) يعني في محبة علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام

....So the hypocrites – Abdullah Bin Ubay and his companions – said, ‘Muhammad has strayed in his love for his cousin and has erred, and he does not speak in his praise except with the (personal) desire’. So Allah, Blessed and High Revealed [53:1] I swear by the star when it goes down The Mighty and Majestic and the Creator of the star is Saying, when He Breaks it [53:2] Your companion does not err, Meaning, (he has not erred) regarding the love for Ali Bin Abi Talib (as)....

Sheikh Saduq(ra) obviously had a valid position on this. 

 

It does mean enough, that you cannot rationally go against it. Now I have a few claims to make, since you brought a tafsir. Can you prove, this is the only meaning of this verse? Is there a hadith that proves that the verse is not to be taken literal? If you cannot, then Im sorry to say, but your argument is weak. For you have only brought one meaning forward, not to mention it doesnt contradict the meaning I have brought forward. I would kindly ask of you to bring the status of each narrator and their authentication from the point of view of all our scholars (current and past) (not just one), otherwise, your hadiths have no authority in my eyes. For as I mentioned above, there is a system to hadiths, and I do not blindly accept them. It is soley your opinion that the Shiek had a "valid" position, without any proof given. As you always say, does our imams agree with sheik Saduq?

 

(wasalam)

Edited July 8, 2014 by PureEthics

[Ali Musaaa :)]

My point was to illustrated that you can't use your reason alone to distinguish what is true or false.

1. You believe in the need for an Imam to be present to guide people, yet at the same time you believe the Imam is in Occultation (which directly contradicts the purpose of the Imam in the first place). I don't see an issue with this because I submit to the A'immah (as) and their Lord. The texts speak of the need and purpose of the Imam yet these same texts also discuss the event of an occultation.

I don't even want to touch your second paragraph after you compared prayer, with all the intricate details of Fiqh relating to it, to engaging in the act of Zina. The Prayer is an act we are commanded to carry out, Zina is something we are told not to engage in. You only need to be told once not to do something, bit different than the command to carry out a specific task. Your comparison is really absurd.

This is just a thread. There is no need to speak with such emotion and attack people. The Prophet (s) reportedly said: Difference of opinion is a mercy for my nation.

[Ibn al-Hussain]

(salam)

Just for the record, the topic of sahw un-nabi was thoroughly discussed just about a year ago (with PureEthics also involved in it). All the posts on it can be read here: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235014721-shaykh-saduq-on-imams-mistakes/

 

The thread discusses the narrations, different opinions, approaches at looking at the issue and some posters even use rationality to prove the event etc. So might be a waste of time to get into that discussion on this thread again.

 

Wassalam

Edited July 8, 2014 by Ibn al-Hussain

[Ethics]

My point was to illustrated that you can't use your reason alone to distinguish what is true or false.

1. You believe in the need for an Imam to be present to guide people, yet at the same time you believe the Imam is in Occultation (which directly contradicts the purpose of the Imam in the first place). I don't see an issue with this because I submit to the A'immah (as) and their Lord. The texts speak of the need and purpose of the Imam yet these same texts also discuss the event of an occultation.

I don't even want to touch your second paragraph after you compared prayer, with all the intricate details of Fiqh relating to it, to engaging in the act of Zina. The Prayer is an act we are commanded to carry out, Zina is something we are told not to engage in. You only need to be told once not to do something, bit different than the command to carry out a specific task. Your comparison is really absurd.

This is just a thread. There is no need to speak with such emotion and attack people. The Prophet (s) reportedly said: Difference of opinion is a mercy for my nation.

 

I never said you can use reason alone, and this is clearly not the sole reason why our scholars held the opposite view of Sheik Saduq, but I believe it is a binding proof against such a notion.

 

1. Im confused, whats the purpose of what you have written? You didnt even say how it contradicts the purpose of an Imam, and I am in the view that it does not. First and foremost, God's system is perfect it has no contradictions, so, God wouldnt command an imam to go into Occulation if it goes against the very purpose of an imam. I think this point alone proves your point to be false. Anyway, the imam is still present while being in occulation. If you think I said I am against hadiths altogether, you are mistaken. I said, my beliefs are not solely dependent on hadiths.

 

2. My second point was not comparing prayer to other fiq matters, but addressing your argument that the prophet forgot or even worse Allah made him forget in order to "teach" us. Simply put, if the matter is teaching us, then why did God not use a universal or better example from that which we can learn from, as staying away from sins is more important then "forgetting during your prayer". If it was the case, why do we not see such an example in the holy quran, and that is the binding book for being morally upright. Please explain again if you did so, on how my example is absurd. If this hadith was the only and one example of teaching us, then why chance it once. We humans need to learn again and again, to understand and comprehend fully. God brought 124000 prophets to teach us. Having one hadith on forgetting while we pray, is based on mere chance. God should have taught us more through making His representatives error and sin so that we can learn, while they can fall in rank and become imperfect. o_O Like they do in Christianity. These types of notions remind me of the Chrisitians and how they signify their prophets and God's representatives.

 

I dont get how im attacking or being emotional. Im simply trying to prove my position and disprove yours, as you quoted Muhammad A.S "Difference of opinion is a mercy" :)

(salam)

Just for the record, the topic of sahw un-nabi was thoroughly discussed just about a year ago (with PureEthics also involved in it). All the posts on it can be read here: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235014721-shaykh-saduq-on-imams-mistakes/

 

The thread discusses the narrations, different opinions, approaches at looking at the issue and some posters even use rationality to prove the event etc. So might be a waste of time to get into that discussion on this thread again.

 

Wassalam

 

Thank you for pointing that I posted in that thread, although I have to say, my posts there, lack strength and certainty, as I believe my stance on this matter have grown stronger since the thread.

 

(wasalam)

Edited July 8, 2014 by PureEthics

[robbenmessi1010]

It is soley your opinion that the Shiek had a "valid" position, without any proof given. As you always say, does our imams agree with sheik Saduq?

LoLL I gave 10 hadiths, and the link I shared has even more narrations(maybe 20 or so) which tell us that the prophet did forget in prayer. How is that "solely my opinion"? "Without any proof given"...again, much proof was given. Maybe you missed my first post. 

Edited July 8, 2014 by robbenmessi1010

[Al-Jafarii]

The later Shia and the early Shia have differed in a bit in their conception of infallibility and what it means, infallibility is that Allah protects them from sin and protects and guides them in teaching the sharia in the absolute sense, this may include ilham(inspiration) for new information or just guidance in answering a question like the way Allah will guide a teach to teach his son. 

 

The early Shia would see it this way, the Imams (as) learned from their fathers the religion and the general principles of fiqh, via these general principles they were guided by Allah to answer every single fiqh question, and by the general and specific principles in belief they would answer questions pertaining to belief, all of this with an absolute guidance from Allah so that they would not err. They can forget, they do not control the atoms of the universe, they weep, they use the bathroom, they aren't made of "light". They were indeed sinless in that, they were such great human beings that they had the choice to sin but they did not, when you are to such a degree as this, Allah guides in the absolute sense. The Ilham they receive is the way we receive it as well, as they say in the Arab world "the heart of the believer is his proof/indicator", however their "indicators" were much more powerful and on an entire level.

 

Stop getting yourselves worked up and causing doubts in your religion from something so small and easily explained.

 

Also as Ali Musa said, our intellect is to serve hadith and to defend it, not to reject, when we use our intellect to reject things it is because we extracted principles for example, of the impossibility of anthropomorphism from the Islamic texts and using this we deny hadith that promote Allah having these ugly attributes intellectually.

[Ibn al-Hussain]

(salam)

 

By the way, it would be great if someone could put some effort into translating Resalah fi Sahw al-Nabi by the author of Qamus al-Rijal from Arabic into English (it is a scanned copy of the actual manuscript so it is hard for me read it). It can be found online here: http://www.noorlib.ir/View/fa/Book/BookView/Image/14867 (you have to register then access volume 12. It is located at the end of the book - or just search for  سهو).

 

A summary of his arguments from the Resalah can be read here though: http://www.ijtehadat.com/subjects/alnaja2%20(21).html

 

 

وقد أيَّد العلامة المحقِّق الحاج الشيخ محمد تقي الشوشتري (دام عزه) عقيدة الشيخ الصدوق في ثبوت سهو النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم ودافع عن هذا القول وردَّ على الشيخ المفيد وفنَّد بشكل وافٍ ومُدلَّلٍ ما ذكره في ردِّه على الصدوق، كل ذلك في رسالة سمَّاها: «رسالة في سهو النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم»، ذكرها صاحب «الذريعة» (ج12/ص267) بعنوان «رسالة في سهو النبي والانتصار للشيخ الصدوق». وقد طُبعت هذه الرسالة في آخر كتاب «قاموس الرجال» للعلامة الشوشتري مصورة عن نسخة كتبها بخط يده. وسنذكر في مقالتنا هذه أهم ما جاء في تلك الرسالة مع التعليق عليها. ومن الجدير بالذكر أننا بعد تحليلنا لتلك الرسالة سنذكر بعض الشواهد المؤيدة الأخرى من القرآن الكريم في هذا المجال. إن شاء الله تعالى.

 

خلاصة «رسالة في سهو النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم» للعلامة الشوشتري:

قال العلامة الشوشتري:

[[كتب الشيخ المفيد رسالةً في نقض كلام الصدوق في عقيدته بسهو النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم فقال: «قد تكلف [الصدوق] ما ليس من شأنه، فأبدى بذلك عن نقصه في العلم وعجزه، ولو كان ممن وفق لرشده لما تعرض لما لا يحسنه، ولا هو من صناعته». . . . . .

 

 

Edited July 8, 2014 by Ibn al-Hussain

[IbnSohan]

I think ShiaChatters should not restrict their view of the "shia" world to SC. Currently, Sahu Alnabi is not the issue that should be tackled, there are tons of deviant sects emerging, some are being created for political gains, many of which have resemblance with Baha'ism and Babism.

 

I believe that in this blessed month, instead of arguing over the opinions expressed previously on SC, it is more beneficial if we try to expand our view of Shia world and the current struggles.

 

The Yamani, Ahmad Alahasan and others are somewhat going on the same path as Bahaism.

 

http://bahaismiran.com/en/books.php?article_id=20

[Jahangiram]

This was in our mosque yesterday, I was at the speech :D

[eThErEaL]

MashAllah, Hossein Al Qazwini, in this month of Ramadan is talking about many interesting topics. This is one of them. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE at least check out the other lecture topics he talked about in this holy month:

 

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235023615-hossein-al-qazwini-month-of-ramadan-2014-lectures/

 

(wasalam)

 

 

(bismillah)

(salam)

 

I believe he is framing things incorrectly.  

 

There are extremists (fundamentalists) in all religions. True.  But the extremists of Islam (or any other religion/ which is what people normally understand by fundamentalists) are those that try to politicize Islam (they want Islam to have a political force in the world).  You find such extremists among Shias, Sunnis, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews.  

 

The context of Ghulat extremism and the context of Wahhabi extremism are not at all related (they are not extremists in the same sense).  

 

Fundamentalism (which is a politicized religious extremism) as such is juxtaposed with Secularism.

But the Ghulat extremism is juxtaposed with the Nasibi mentality (this is purely a theological conflict and has nothing to do with politics).       

Edited July 8, 2014 by eThErEaL

[Agora]

I think PureEthics has missed the point of taqleed. Whether or not you accept taqleed is completely irrelavent to this discussion. Taqleed is for fiqh. Taqleed in matters of Aqa'id is haraam and all of your scholars preach that. Look at the beginning of any resalah. :)

[Al-Jafarii]

(bismillah)

(salam)

 

I believe he is framing things incorrectly.  

 

There are extremists (fundamentalists) in all religions. True.  But the extremists of Islam (or any other religion/ which is what people normally understand by fundamentalists) are those that try to politicize Islam (they want Islam to have a political force in the world).  You find such extremists among Shias, Sunnis, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews.  

 

The context of Ghulat extremism and the context of Wahhabi extremism are not at all related (they are not extremists in the same sense).  

 

Fundamentalism (which is a politicized religious extremism) as such is juxtaposed with Secularism.

But the Ghulat extremism is juxtaposed with the Nasibi mentality (this is purely a theological conflict and has nothing to do with politics).       

 

Islam is political in that state and religion are not separated,the state must and for the benefit of it's people follow the guide lines put forward but the Qur'an and Sunnah. As to which government best serves this purpose in the ghayba, this is another discussion.

[Ethics]

The later Shia and the early Shia have differed in a bit in their conception of infallibility and what it means, infallibility is that Allah protects them from sin and protects and guides them in teaching the sharia in the absolute sense, this may include ilham(inspiration) for new information or just guidance in answering a question like the way Allah will guide a teach to teach his son. 

 

The early Shia would see it this way, the Imams (as) learned from their fathers the religion and the general principles of fiqh, via these general principles they were guided by Allah to answer every single fiqh question, and by the general and specific principles in belief they would answer questions pertaining to belief, all of this with an absolute guidance from Allah so that they would not err. They can forget, they do not control the atoms of the universe, they weep, they use the bathroom, they aren't made of "light". They were indeed sinless in that, they were such great human beings that they had the choice to sin but they did not, when you are to such a degree as this, Allah guides in the absolute sense. The Ilham they receive is the way we receive it as well, as they say in the Arab world "the heart of the believer is his proof/indicator", however their "indicators" were much more powerful and on an entire level.

 

Stop getting yourselves worked up and causing doubts in your religion from something so small and easily explained.

 

Also as Ali Musa said, our intellect is to serve hadith and to defend it, not to reject, when we use our intellect to reject things it is because we extracted principles for example, of the impossibility of anthropomorphism from the Islamic texts and using this we deny hadith that promote Allah having these ugly attributes intellectually.

 

I appreciate the fact that you created a new account just to post this, but again, what you believe in is not the position our ulema of today and past held. In fact, these notions were held by the only minority scholars (Shiek Saduq and his teacher) and the truth is in itself. Sheik Saduq believed that not being able to forget is a Ghulu attribute. Think about it, that reasoning is flawed in itself. We respectfully disagree with this way of thinking and our rationality proves otherwise. Your definition of infallibility is only one view that you uphold, it is not the only. Its funny because you use terms like absolute, but your words contradict the notion of absoluteness in that sense. "Allah teaches him the religion in the absolute sense", yet according to some of you, to teach us a lesson, Allah contradicts this notion of absoluteness and makes the prophet err. You use phrases like the "early shia" as if they are divinely guided and infallible. Im sorry to let you down, but rationally, just because you were a classical scholar or early shia doesnt imply correctness or truth. Allah in the holy quran for example says He taught Adam A.S the names. So you implying, that their compatibility to learn the deen just like us is a bit under looked. You see, saying Allah guided them, is saying they were robots with no free will. While the true case, is because of their position as perfectly God conscience beings willfully, not ever sinning and submitting fully to Allah, guidance in itself, was in motion. For when you obey Allah, that is guidance. Because of this, Allah endowed them with His divine knowledge, and made them leaders for mankind. Yes, the imams were endowed with the knowledge of the previous imams, all linking back to Muhammad A.S who received his knowledge from Allah. As the scholar mentioned in this video, the imams had full knowledge of the book. You see I disagree with this notion that Allah guided them in only religious matters. For is not religion life? It is not a way of life? To limit God's guidance to only religious matters, is contradicting the purpose of religion itself. Therefore, this cannot be. When you say, "They can forget, they do not control the atoms of the universe, they weep, they use the bathroom, they aren't made of "light", that is just your opinion, and many of our scholars today disagree with you. What does weeping have to do with any of this. Crying is not a weakness. Controlling the atoms of the universe is possible by the permission of Allah, and I doubt Jesus A.S when bringing the dead back to life, by the permission of Allah, did not need to control the atoms of the universe to do so, or even beyond just "atoms". Using the bathroom, is najis, Allah says in the holy quran, He purified them from ALL "IMPURITIES". Even today, we have humans who do not or cannot use the bathroom, so saying it is something beyond humanness is untrue. Lets not forget Allah has power over all things. Made of light? Its possible, according to the light particle theory. Again, I dont see how any of these concepts makes one beyond "humanness". If anything, them not sinning goes against the very essence of being human, yet many of who are against these very notions accept it willfully.

 

Im sorry im not like you or others, I dont just accept what ever I read. Allah gave us this intellect for the very reason to use it. Who says I have doubts? In fact, I am very certain because of this intellect. This way of thinking is very flawed on your part and sunnis are a perfect example for your style of thinking. They think just like you and it is the very same reason they believe God has human body parts, or that the prophet hallucinated and such. Why? Cause its in their books, and the hadiths must serve intellect right?, whether it goes against it or not. I find it hilarious that when I uphold such a view, everyone of you comes to start attack me and call it a blasphemy! Yet, when others hold topics that are against the very essence of Shia Islam, none of you come to refute such topics. Its also funny, because my view is not the minority, where yours is. So if anything, go refute our scholars before you all condemn me.

 

 

 

(wasalam)

[Abu'l Khattab]

Talk about having a temper, in this month especially...

[Agora]

Hadeeth al-Thaqalyn. Without even getting into `ilm ar-Rijaal, could somebody please tell me which of the following is authentic and which one is made up nonsense?

1.) "I am leaving behind two weighty things and if you follow them, you will not go astray: The Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt."

2.) "I am leaving behind two weighty things and if you follow them, you will not go astray: The Book of Allah and PureEthic's opinions."

The way you follow the Ahl al-Bayt (as) is to read their aHadeeth. The way you follow PureEthic's opinion is to read his illogical posts.

One of those narrations is mutawattir and the other one I just made up. Which will you follow? ;)

Edited July 8, 2014 by Agora

[robbenmessi1010]

 

The Yamani, Ahmad Alahasan and others are somewhat going on the same path as Bahaism.

 

http://bahaismiran.com/en/books.php?article_id=20

We should all work on exposing Ahmed al-Hassan. 

[IbnSohan]

We should all work on exposing Ahmed al-Hassan. 

Just out of curiosity :

Is his cult gaining a popularity in your area? In my area his cult is a joke, nonetheless, we witnessed a growing in numbers of his followers which is weird.

 

It is just weird to see neo ghulat cults emerging in this day and age, I am not talking about SC ghulu definition but Ghulu as per any Muslim definition. Those who consider Imam Ali prophet or those who believe that Imam Mahdi spirit resides in their corps etc.

[eThErEaL]

Islam is political in that state and religion are not separated,the state must and for the benefit of it's people follow the guide lines put forward but the Qur'an and Sunnah. As to which government best serves this purpose in the ghayba, this is another discussion.

An "Islamic State" is actually an impossibility (a contradiction in terms). It is in fact a modernist mentality and not at all traditional. I would love to discuss more about this with you but for now I will point you to this lecture given by Wael Al Hallaq:

http://youtu.be/WFAqQiIVsF8

Edited July 8, 2014 by eThErEaL

[robbenmessi1010]

Is his cult gaining a popularity in your area? In my area his cult is a joke, nonetheless, we witnessed a growing in numbers of his followers which is weird.

There are 2 people I know who starting to believe in Ahmed.  I wouldn't say it's gaining much popularity, but more people are aware of this cult's existence. It really is weird that people are falling for his deception.He doesn't even fit the criteria for an imam. In fact, we don't even know if he is alive :!!!:

Edited July 8, 2014 by robbenmessi1010

[eThErEaL]

If you can disprove my rationality, or bring up evidence rationally to support your claim, do so. As least try and rebuttal the article linked above. Dont just pin sinfulness or hell on me. I am certain and I willfully reject such notion. I am no hadithist and I do not accept blindly whatever I find in our books. I check to see, what our current ulema have said, and I find a position myself. I believe the majority of our scholars reject such a notion.

Your reasoning is not justified.

1. If any representative of God were not infallible, then God's system falls into a contradiction, which implies this religion is imperfect. For, how can God command us to refrain from sin if His own representatives couldnt. This religion becomes a joke. If prophets are not protected from all weaknesses, then this religion simply falls into doubt because it is implied that there is a possibility of God's system being erred. A perfect religion, cannot be subjected to doubt, hence it becomes imperfect. Not only that, but you are implying the representatives of God were not perfect, which again implies that the system of God is imperfect, for they are part of His system. Do you understand that this type of ideology is the exact reason why sunnis believe the prophet to have "hallucinated"? and other senseless attributes they give to degrade the prophet and bring doubt upon this perfect religion.

All representatives of God are infallible. But there are different ideas of infallibility. Prophets and Imams certainly do not sin. And they certainly do not make mistakes which compromise the integrity of the religion and their ability to teach. If you would like to believe in something more than this, such that the prophets and imams were infallible in a "superhuman" kind of way (a kind of infallibility that God does not expect from mere mortals)then that is something else entirely (this does not warrant you to reject Sudook's Hadith). Edited July 8, 2014 by eThErEaL

[Ethics]

Your reasoning is not justified.

All representatives of God are infallible. But there are different ideas of infallibility. Prophets and Imams certainly do not sin. And they certainly do not make mistakes which compromise the integrity of the religion and their ability to teach. If you would like to believe in something more than this, such that the prophets and imams were infallible in a "superhuman" kind of way (a kind of infallibility that God does not expect from mere mortals)then that is something else entirely (this does not warrant you to reject Sudook's Hadith).

 

What do you mean my reasoning is not justified? I have enough faith in my religion to know our scholars whom I uphold this view from, have a justification. None the less, it is as if you are implying for one to prove God through reasoning, is not a justification. Which is far from the case. Not everything is found in our books, and many of our sources have been lost. But this doesnt mean, my reasoning is wrong, unless you prove to me, through rationality, this type of reasoning is wrong. I think reading this link will help you understand how and why I uphold such a view:

 

http://www.al-islam.org/articles/taharah-ismah-masumeen-dr-hatem-abu-shahba

 

See, I dont get it. What do you mean "something more". What is more or less? What is infallibility in a superhuman way? Is being superhuman that which we do not have any evidence for as of yet? Is being superhuman having the intellect to build flying machines, when in the past, it would be called superhuman? I believe, anytime someone brings this notion of super human vs human within the realm of Islam, has automatically shot itself in the foot. For if you subject any form of perfection as super human or something beyond "mortals", you must also subject the ability of infallibility and miracles of Islam to the same objection. For you to say, God does not expect this kind of infallibility is merely an opinion of yourself and not of God's. For God's system must be perfect, and that which is part of the system of God must be perfect as well. It is a contradiction in itself, God doesnt expect perfection from His representatives, yet, He tells us to obey Him and not commit sin. The problem is, we are flawed, and we do not expect the best from Allah's system. When it comes to ourselves, everything must be beyond perfect, but when it comes to the beings who upheld and brought this religion for us, lets make them just enough, but lets leave room for doubt. If your life depended on this one surgeon to save your life, would you not want the surgeon who has 0% chance of error? You think Allah swt, will leave room for error and doubt in His deen, His system? That is absurd. See, you all keep saying how when it comes to the religion they dont make mistakes, yet you believe God will break that very rule, to teach us? That is absurd. If anything God should teach us, through them, on how not to go to hell (meaning God should make them commit sins), not just on a simply matter of praying, if it was truly to "teach" us. Again, religion is life, so to say they dont make mistakes in matters of religion only, is contradiction. Either, religion is not a way of life, or they dont make any mistakes period. Oh and saying they are weak creatures who makes mistakes, forgets and so forth, but God intervenes when it comes to the religion, I would call that "super human"....

Edited July 9, 2014 by PureEthics

[eThErEaL]

What do you mean my reasoning is not justified? I have enough faith in my religion to know our scholars whom I uphold this view from, have a justification. None the less, it is as if you are implying for one to prove God through reasoning, is not a justification. Which is far from the case. Not everything is found in our books, and many of our sources have been lost. But this doesnt mean, my reasoning is wrong, unless you prove to me, through rationality, this type of reasoning is wrong. I think reading this link will help you understand how and why I uphold such a view:

i never said reason as such is wrong.  I am saying your argument doesn't work.

 

 

 For if you subject any form of perfection as super human or something beyond "mortals", you must also subject the ability of infallibility and miracles of Islam to the same objection. For you to say, God does not expect this kind of infallibility is merely an opinion of yourself and not of God's. For God's system must be perfect, and that which is part of the system of God must be perfect as well. It is a contradiction in itself, God doesnt expect perfection from His representatives, yet, He tells us to obey Him and not commit sin. The problem is, we are flawed, and we do not expect the best from Allah's system. When it comes to ourselves, everything must be beyond perfect, but when it comes to the beings who upheld and brought this religion for us, lets make them just enough, but lets leave room for doubt. If your life depended on this one surgeon to save your life, would you not want the surgeon who has 0% chance of error? You think Allah swt, will leave room for error and doubt in His deen, His system? That is absurd. See, you all keep saying how when it comes to the religion they dont make mistakes, yet you believe God will break that very rule, to teach us? That is absurd. If anything God should teach us, through them, on how not to go to hell (meaning God should make them commit sins), not just on a simply matter of praying, if it was truly to "teach" us. Again, religion is life, so to say they dont make mistakes in matters of religion only, is contradiction. Either, religion is not a way of life, or they dont make any mistakes period. Oh and saying they are weak creatures who makes mistakes, forgets and so forth, but God intervenes when it comes to the religion, I would call that "super human"....

 

 

Only God is Perfect.  And those who are "infallible" perfectly recognize their utter imperfection in the face of the One who is Absolutely Perfect.  This very recognition is perfect only because it is God's.  The knower of God knows God through God and not through himself (Al-Arif Bi-Llah).

 

To imagine that human perfection is something other than that is a kind of Shirk.  

 

The entire system of God is imperfect inasmuch as it is not God.  This imperfect system is perfect only to the degree that it bears witness to the One who is Perfect (so the perfection of anything doesn't belong to creation but belongs to God and is found in non other than God).  Only God and His eternal Names are perfect (the names of God being the manifestations of God).  And it is true that the Prophets and Imams are those very Names of God, but not on the level of corporeality and contingency but in their inward reality which is all one and which they all share in identity.  Again, I repeat, they are capable of making error in ways that do not compromise the integrity of the religion and their ability to teach.     

 

This is just basic tawhid.  

 

There is non perfect but God.

Edited July 9, 2014 by eThErEaL

[Ethics]

i never said reason as such is wrong.  I am saying your argument doesn't work.

 

 

 

Only God is Perfect.  And those who are "infallible" perfectly recognize their utter imperfection in the face of the One who is Absolutely Perfect.  This very recognition is perfect only because it is God's.  The knower of God knows God through God and not through himself (Al-Arif Bi-Llah).

 

To imagine that human perfection is something other than that is a kind of Shirk.  

 

The entire system of God is imperfect inasmuch as it is not God.  This imperfect system is perfect only to the degree that it bears witness to the One who is Perfect (so the perfection of anything doesn't belong to creation but belongs to God and is found in non other than God).  Only God and His eternal Names are perfect (the names of God being the manifestations of God).  And it is true that the Prophets and Imams are those very Names of God, but not on the level of corporeality and contingency but in their inward reality which is all one and which they all share in identity.  Again, I repeat, they are capable of making error in ways that do not compromise the integrity of the religion and their ability to teach.     

 

This is just basic tawhid.  

 

There is non perfect but God.

 

God is absolute, and He is above perfection. God's absoluteness and His representatives perfection are two very different concepts. His representatives are perfect human beings. This is no contradiction. If something is perfect in itself as long as it is not independently perfect (meaning for example, no matter how perfect they are they still depend on God), it is not going above God, nor is it shirk. For, when I get a perfect score on my exam due to having perfect test taking skills, does that mean I share God's perfection as a whole? Of course not, that is far from the case. It is incomparable. No level of perfection (especially Human perfection) can ever even touch an iota of the "absoluteness" of God. Therefore, your false assumption lies in the thought that God and His representatives share the same level of perfection. You say it is shirk, how so? I find it mind boggling that you believe God to be "perfect" but that system which comes from Him to be imperfect, that is illogical on so many levels. At the same time you claim His names to be perfect o_O You have just contradicted the purpose of religion. Then again, you are one who believes in pluralism, or that Islam is not the only true religion, so your mindset is expected. Thesephrases you keep implying have no meaning what so ever (referring to '"This imperfect system is perfect only to the degree that it bears witness to the One who is Perfect.")

Edited July 9, 2014 by PureEthics

[robbenmessi1010]

Subhanallah how you are using logic and philosophical thinking of God and his representatives to neglect over 15 hadiths, which one of our top scholars in history agreed with. Neglecting the forgetfulness of the prophet, according to him, was the first part of ghuluw. 

[Ethics]

Subhanallah how you are using logic and philosophical thinking of God and his representatives to neglect over 15 hadiths, which one of our top scholars in history agreed with. Neglecting the forgetfulness of the prophet, according to him, was the first part of ghuluw. 

 

Lets not get over our head. As I mentioned before, for someone who does not follow our scholars, telling me our "top" scholars agreed with a matter, has no meaning. Second, I forgot to ask you, can you list me all the sources of those hadith, and where were their initial sources? Saying there were 15 hadiths has no meaning.

 

A few points:

 

1. they all could be copied from the same sources, which would not make it "over 15"
2. as I mentioned before, I do not blindly accept hadiths, and I look at a matter as a whole, and I need evidence to first authenticate such hadiths
3. "our top scholars" did not agree with such thinking, it was only Saduq and his teacher, if iam not mistaken, and our current scholars as well as our scholars that came after saduq respectfully disagree with him
4. a view is held that it was done in taqiyya, meaning those hadith have no significance
5. it rationally goes against the quran and reason
6. saduq's opinion of ghulu is rationally flawed

 

I find it really sad that there is a very very small minority of Shias who are not only anti-taqlid and blindly accepting hadith, but still cannot figure out infallibility, or think the main stream shias commit bid'ha and shirk.... but of course it is only on Shia Chat ^_^

Edited July 9, 2014 by PureEthics

[eThErEaL]

God is absolute, and He is above perfection. 

God is beyond perfection = He is absolutely perfect. Just pick up any book on theology and metaphysics.  "Beyond X" means "absolute in X". 

 

God is absolutely beautiful = God is beyond beauty.

Edited July 9, 2014 by eThErEaL