Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Marriages of imam Hasan (as)

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Salam. It's a well known fact that hadith were fabricated against Ahlul Bayt AS.  Imam Hasan - The Myth of his Divorces An explanation of the unjust accusations against the 2nd Imam (a), and

There is, unfortunately, a fundamental flaw in your argument. I'm no expert in rijal so I haven't the faintest clue as to how reliable the Hadith is and whether there's any way to oppose the credibili

This is the only strong narration in al-Kafi to this affect according to `Allamah al-Majlisi. al-Majlisi said in Mir'at al-`Uqool, Volume 21: الحديث الرابع : موثق. The hadith is muwathaq.

Posted Images

On 10/8/2016 at 7:34 AM, amirhosein_88 said:

Salamun alaykum.

The first 2 narrators, as you also have mentioned, are Waqifi and they are regarded as the leaders of this deviated group. Then how such narration is authentic?

Rijal by Najashi, pp. 40-41:

الحسن بن محمد بن سماعة
أبو محمد الكندي الصيرفي من شيوخ الواقفة كثير الحديث فقيه ثقة و كان‏ يعاند في الوقف و يتعصب

Rijal by Najashi, pp. 132:

حميد بن زياد بن حماد
بن حماد بن زياد هوار الدهقان أبو القاسم، كوفي سكن سورا، و انتقل إلى نينوى قرية على العلقمي إلى جنب الحائر على صاحبه السلام، كان ثقة واقفا، وجها فيهم.

alaykum salam my respected brother.

So, can we assume that in accordance to shia norms, hadith is not saheeh if it was narrated by any non-imami?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Abbas. said:

I will try to keep it short and avoid getting into lengthy debate. In the large shia compilation of hadith and narrations, we will find many odd and sometimes unacceptable content.

as salam alaykum. It is strange how people here not greeting each other. 

Thank you very much for your indeed valuable input. I just have notes, that you or any other member is more than welcome to address.

Quote

Fortunately, we do not consider any of our sources to be completely authentic and reliable as they are all works and collections of fallible people.

In itself this claim is very debatable my friend. Just example for your kind attention:

In the introduction of al-Kāfī, Kulayni explicitly said:

 

 

وقلت إنك تحب أن يكون عندك كتاب كاف يجمع فيه من جميع فنون علم الدين ما يكتفي به المتعلم ويرجع إليه المسترشد ويأخذ منه من يريد علم الدين والعمل به بالآثار الصحيحة عن الصادقين عليهم السلام والسنن القائمة التي عليها العمل وبها يؤدي فرض الله عز وجل وسنة نبيه صلى الله عليه وآله وقلت لو كان ذلك رجوت أن يكون ذلك سببا يتدارك الله تعالى بمعونته وتوفيقه إخواننا وأهل ملتنا ويقبل بهم إلى مراشدهم

 

 

“Verily, you solemnly wished that you possess a book which is sufficient, brings together the entire Islamic sciences of the knowledge of religion within it, wholly satisfies the needs of the student, acts as a reference for the seekers of guidance, and would be used by those who want to attain the knowledge of religion and practice upon it by deriving correct [şaĥīĥ] narrations of the truthful ones (as) and the upright and acted upon traditions from it—through which the compulsory duties of Allāh, the Powerful and Exalted, and the tradition of His Prophet (saws) can be fulfilled.

 

 

 

And you said: ‘If that happens, I can hope that (the book) would be a means through which Allāh will rectify our brothers and people of our religious community through his support and grace, and take them closer to their salvation.’”

 

 

 

·         al-Kāfī, of Abū Ja`far al-Kulaynī (d. 329), volume 1, page 8 [Tehran]

 

 

Following this, he said:

 

 

وقد يسر الله وله الحمد تأليف ما سألت وأرجو أن يكون بحيث توخيت

 

 

“Allāh, all praise to him, has facilitated the compilation of what you requested. I hope that (this book) will be in accordance with the wishes you had in mind.”

 

 

 

·         al-Kāfī, of Abū Ja`far al-Kulaynī (d. 329), volume 1, page 9 [Tehran]

This is an explicit confirmation from al-Kulaynī that the reason he compiled al-Kāfī was so he can provide Shī`īs with a book of authentic narrations that is sufficient for them—i.e. his book only contained correct reports according to him.

 

 

The contemporary Shī`ī scholar Āyat Allāh Muĥammad Mahdī al-Āşifī writes about al-Kulaynī while discussing al-Kāfī in his epistle Tarīkh Fiqh Ahl al-Bayt:

 

 

وقد جمع رحمه الله في موسوعته هذه ما صح لديه من أحاديث الأئمة الهداة عليهم السلام

 

 

“He—may Allāh have mercy on him—has collected what he found authentic from the narrations of the guiding Imāms (as) in this encyclopedia of his.”

 

 

 

·         Riyāđ al-Masā’il fī Bayān Aĥkām al-Shar` wa al-Dalā’il, of al-Sayyid `Alī al-Ţabāţabā’ī (d. 1231), volume 1, page 31 [Qum] – Tarīkh Fiqh Ahl al-Baytincluded in the introduction.

 

 

Furthermore, Āyat Allāh Abū Ţālib al-Tajlīl al-Tabrīzī, author of the famous booklet translated as Spurious Arguments about the Shia, confirms this declaration of al-Kulaynī in the introduction to his book known as Mu`jam al-Maĥāsin wa al-Masāwī.

 

 

He writes about al-Kulaynī and his al-Kāfī:

 

 

وقد صرح في مقدمته بصحة أحاديثه حيث قال وقلت تحب أن يكون عندك كتاب يأخذ منه من يريد علم الدين والعمل به بالآثار الصحيحة عن الصادقين عليهم السلام . . . . إلى أن قال وقد يسر الله وله الحمد تأليف ما سألت وأرجو أن يكون بحيث توخيت

 

 

“He has declared the authenticity of its narrations in his introduction, when he said: ‘Verily, you solemnly wished that you possess a book would be used by those who want to attain the knowledge of religion and practice upon it by deriving correct [şaĥīĥ] narrations of the truthful ones (as)…’ to: ‘Allāh, all praise to him, has facilitated the compilation of what you requested. I hope that (this book) will be in accordance with the wishes you had in mind.’”

 

 

 

·         Mu`jam al-Maĥāsin wa al-Masāmī, of Abū Ţālib al-Tabrīzī, page 17 [Qum]

Thank you very much for posting fatwa with explanation. I would just quote again report and verdict from shia alim:

Kulayni narrated in “Kafi” (5/56) via his own chain, and MAJLISI SAID IT’S MUWATHAQ.

حُمَيْدُ بْنُ زِيَادٍ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سَمَاعَةَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ زِيَادِ بْنِ عِيسَى عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) قَالَ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً قَالَ وَ هُوَ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ لَا تُزَوِّجُوا الْحَسَنَ فَإِنَّهُ رَجُلٌ مِطْلَاقٌ فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ هَمْدَانَ فَقَالَ بَلَى وَ اللَّهِ لَنُزَوِّجَنَّهُ وَ هُوَ ابْنُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) وَ ابْنُ أَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ( عليه السلام ) فَإِنْ شَاءَ أَمْسَكَ وَ إِنْ شَاءَ طَلَّقَ .

From Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) which said: Ali (alaihi salam) said, and he was on the minbar: do not give in marriage, your daughters to Hasan for he divorces very soon.’ a man from the hamdân clan said: ‘by Allâh, we shall give our daughters to him in marriage. those he likes, let him keep; and those he dislikes, divorce.

As I mentioned higher, Kulayni himself thought all in his book is sound, Majlisi said on this particular hadith - muwathaq. Don't blame me, blame them.

as salam alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh.

 

Edited by Abu_Rumaysah
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Straight Path said:

Salam

Islam allows a man to marry up to four women at any given time. As Imam Hasan already had three wives, who were with him up to the last day of his life, he could marry only one more woman at any time.

Bearing in mind this limitation, one can only regard the statement of Quwwat al-Qulub with amusement: “Often he (Imam Hasan) married 4 wives in one sitting and then divorced them in one sitting.” How could he marry 4 wives in one sitting when he already had 3 wives?

Now suppose that he married a fourth wife, and then divorced her. As long as that divorced wife was in 'idda (period of probation, normally 3 months) she was counted legally his wife, and Imam Hasan could not marry another wife before expiry of her 'idda.

Let us, now, suppose that he married a woman. As divorce cannot be given in a month in which co-habitation has taken place, the earliest that that wife could be divorced was in next month; her 'idda continued for 3 months. Thus, four months passed before Imam Hasan could be free to marry another wife. One wife in four months gives us a maximum of 3 wives in a year. Supposing that Imam Hasan had no other work except marrying and divorcing, as Mansur said, and if we count from 37 A.H. up to his martyrdom at the beginning of 51 A.H. to get a period of 14 years, this will give us a maximum number of 42 possible marriages.

And the minimum alleged by these scholars is 70 wives!

 

 

as salam alaykum wa rahmatullah. May Allah guide you and me to the truth path. And may truth be manifested upon your tongue.

Let us forget report from Qut-al-Qulub for a minute, and focus on one sound shia report only:

Kulayni narrated in “Kafi” (5/56) via his own chain, and MAJLISI SAID IT’S MUWATHAQ.

حُمَيْدُ بْنُ زِيَادٍ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سَمَاعَةَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ زِيَادِ بْنِ عِيسَى عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) قَالَ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً قَالَ وَ هُوَ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ لَا تُزَوِّجُوا الْحَسَنَ فَإِنَّهُ رَجُلٌ مِطْلَاقٌ فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ هَمْدَانَ فَقَالَ بَلَى وَ اللَّهِ لَنُزَوِّجَنَّهُ وَ هُوَ ابْنُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) وَ ابْنُ أَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ( عليه السلام ) فَإِنْ شَاءَ أَمْسَكَ وَ إِنْ شَاءَ طَلَّقَ .

From Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) which said: Ali (alaihi salam) said, and he was on the minbar: do not give in marriage, your daughters to Hasan for he divorces very soon.’ a man from the hamdân clan said: ‘by Allâh, we shall give our daughters to him in marriage. those he likes, let him keep; and those he dislikes, divorce.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Abbas. said:

There are hundreds of narrations with reliable content that directly contradict the narrations posted in this thread, not to mention Quran which declares Ahl-ul-bayt pure and spotless. 

Almost forgot this magnificent point from my respected brother.

Allah said in the Quran:

وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا {33}

[Shakir 33:33] And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying.

But He, Almighty also said:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُوا ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ مَرْضَىٰ أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ مِنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لَامَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُوا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُوا بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ مِنْهُ ۚ مَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ مِنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَٰكِنْ يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ {6}

[Shakir 5:6] O you who believe! when you rise up to prayer, wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe your heads and your feet to the ankles; and if you are under an obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves) and if you are sick or on a journey, or one of you come from the privy, or you have touched the women, and you cannot find water, betake yourselves to pure earth and wipe your faces and your hands therewith, Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you, so that you may be grateful.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Wow. You really are single-minded, aren't you? Since your whole argument is so shallow and one-dimensional, you presume to know our beliefs better than we do by claiming these books are 100% sahih, when no contemporary Shi'a scholar believes that. We have always maintained that none of our books are fully sahih and only represent the opinion of their author (which, like all humans, can be wrong) and given that you can authenticate chains using our rijal books, you already know that.

You pick the part of Kafi's foreword that you wanted but forgot to post the rest:

Quote

My brother in faith, may Allah grant you proper guidance, please note that there is no other way to sort out the confusion that comes from the variation of the narration of the scholars except by the help of the principles that the scholar (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) has set. "Compare a narration with the text of the Holy Quran. Whatever agrees with the Holy Quran is acceptable and what does not agree is rejected.

"Also he has said, "Leave alone what agrees with the views of the others because the right is in what is opposite to them."

Also there are his (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) words, "Follow what is unanimously agreed upon because there is no harm in what is unanimously agreed upon." (I wonder if the grandson of the Prophet being what is basically a predator is unanimously agreed upon.)

We are only able to apply such principles to a very few of such cases. We do not find any thing better and more precautionary than to refer to the scholar (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) and accept that which is within the limit of his (DivineSupremeCovenantBody) words, "Whichever you would follow in submission and obedience is excusable for you."

Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most Gracious, has made the compilation of the book that you had wished for possible. I hope it will prove to be up to your expectations. It may have shortcomings, but our intentions have not been insincere to provide good advice because to provide good advice to our people is obligatory. We also hoped to be considered as partners of all benefits of this book up to the end of time.

I think his words speak for his opinion of how sahih his book was better than you.

Edited by Khadim uz Zahra
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, E.L King said:

@Abu_Rumaysah What is your personal opinion on the matn?

as salam alaykum.

My personal opinion it is sound, it been narrated both by shias and sunnis. I am not talking about numbers of wifes. But he (alayhi salam) did married and divorced a lot of women.  This could be accepted from great companion, but could not be accepted from infallible who is superior to prophets. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
7 hours ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

 

as salam alaykum wa rahmatullah. May Allah guide you and me to the truth path. And may truth be manifested upon your tongue.

Let us forget report from Qut-al-Qulub for a minute, and focus on one sound shia report only:

Kulayni narrated in “Kafi” (5/56) via his own chain, and MAJLISI SAID IT’S MUWATHAQ.

حُمَيْدُ بْنُ زِيَادٍ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سَمَاعَةَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ زِيَادِ بْنِ عِيسَى عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) قَالَ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً قَالَ وَ هُوَ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ لَا تُزَوِّجُوا الْحَسَنَ فَإِنَّهُ رَجُلٌ مِطْلَاقٌ فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ هَمْدَانَ فَقَالَ بَلَى وَ اللَّهِ لَنُزَوِّجَنَّهُ وَ هُوَ ابْنُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) وَ ابْنُ أَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ( عليه السلام ) فَإِنْ شَاءَ أَمْسَكَ وَ إِنْ شَاءَ طَلَّقَ .

From Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) which said: Ali (alaihi salam) said, and he was on the minbar: do not give in marriage, your daughters to Hasan for he divorces very soon.’ a man from the hamdân clan said: ‘by Allâh, we shall give our daughters to him in marriage. those he likes, let him keep; and those he dislikes, divorce.

There are several huge problems with this hadith. Let's put aside the isnad for now, we may come back to that if necessary. The first problem is with this part. 

قَالَ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً قَالَ وَ هُوَ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ

You see, unfortunately for you I read and understand Arabic, as do many people on this site. If the Isnad ends at Aba Abdullah(a.s), i.e. Imam Husain(a.s), there is no way he would refer to Imam Ali(a.s), his father as Ali ? 

If your father's name is John, would you say 'John said' ? 

No, you would say 'My father said'. This is universal. And especially if your father is Amir Al Mumineen. 

If this 'hadith' is referring to another Aba Abdullah, then why is (alayhi salam) used, as this is only used for the Masoom ? 

If you can answer this, we can move on to the further problems with this 'hadith'. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 10/8/2016 at 10:02 AM, Abu_Rumaysah said:

Almost forgot this magnificent point from my respected brother.

Allah said in the Quran:

وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىٰ ۖ وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا {33}

[Shakir 33:33] And stay in your houses and do not display your finery like the displaying of the ignorance of yore; and keep up prayer, and pay the poor-rate, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! and to purify you a (thorough) purifying.

But He, Almighty also said:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ جُنُبًا فَاطَّهَّرُوا ۚ وَإِنْ كُنْتُمْ مَرْضَىٰ أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ أَوْ جَاءَ أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ مِنَ الْغَائِطِ أَوْ لَامَسْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَلَمْ تَجِدُوا مَاءً فَتَيَمَّمُوا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَامْسَحُوا بِوُجُوهِكُمْ وَأَيْدِيكُمْ مِنْهُ ۚ مَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيَجْعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ مِنْ حَرَجٍ وَلَٰكِنْ يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمْ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ {6}

[Shakir 5:6] O you who believe! when you rise up to prayer, wash your faces and your hands as far as the elbows, and wipe your heads and your feet to the ankles; and if you are under an obligation to perform a total ablution, then wash (yourselves) and if you are sick or on a journey, or one of you come from the privy, or you have touched the women, and you cannot find water, betake yourselves to pure earth and wipe your faces and your hands therewith, Allah does not desire to put on you any difficulty, but He wishes to purify you and that He may complete His favor on you, so that you may be grateful.

Can a fallible person like me have the same level of purification (with due apology, as that of Ahl albayt as as per verse 33:33)  just by  wudu , wiping the feet and head  and also taking a tayamum only? 

Would you like to explain it please?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
1 minute ago, Abu Hadi said:

There are several huge problems with this hadith. Let's put aside the isnad for now, we may come back to that if necessary. The first problem is with this part. 

قَالَ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً قَالَ وَ هُوَ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ

You see, unfortunately for you I read and understand Arabic, as do many people on this site. If the Isnad ends at Aba Abdullah(a.s), i.e. Imam Husain(a.s), there is no way he would refer to Imam Ali(a.s), his father as Ali ? 

If your father's name is John, would you say 'John said' ? 

No, you would say 'My father said'. This is universal. And especially if your father is Amir Al Mumineen. 

If this 'hadith' is referring to another Aba Abdullah, then why is (alayhi salam) used, as this is only used for the Masoom ? 

If you can answer this, we can move on to the further problems with this 'hadith'. 

Aba Abdillah was also the kunya of Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq (a).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
6 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

Even still, would Imam Sadiq(a.s) refer to Imam Ali(a.s), as Ali  ? 

Maybe, but I've never seen it. If you know of examples. 

There are loads of examples. People back then weren't like today, where unless you give 3 titles before someone's name, it's considered as disrespect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Khadim uz Zahra said:

Wow. You really are single-minded, aren't you?

I am not here to be abused, I am here for discussion. When Allah send the one who was definitely better than you, to someone definitely worse than me, He ordered him:

[Shakir 20:43] Go both to Firon, surely he has become inordinate;
[Shakir 20:44] Then speak to him a gentle word haply he may mind or fear.

Quote

Since your whole argument is so shallow and one-dimensional, you presume to know our beliefs better than we do by claiming these books are 100% sahih, when no contemporary Shi'a scholar believes that. We have always maintained that none of our books are fully sahih and only represent the opinion of their author (which, like all humans, can be wrong) and given that you can authenticate chains using our rijal books, you already know that.

Wrong allegation. 

I hope Abdulhusayn Musawi is enough contemporary for you my dear and respected friend. 

Abd al-Ĥusayn al-Mūsawī writes while representing the Shī`ī Ithnā’ `Asharī sect in his alleged dialogue with one of the Grand Imāms of al-Azhar, Salīm al-Bishrī (d. 1335):

 

نبغ من أصحاب الصادق جم غفير وعدد كثير كانوا أئمة هدى ومصابيح دجى وبحار علم ونجوم هداية والذين دونت أسماؤهم وأحوالهم في كتب التراجم منهم أربعة آلاف رجل من العراق والحجاز وفارس وسوريا وهم أولو مصنفات مشهورة لدى علماء الإمامية ومن جملتها الأصول الأربعة مئة وهي كما ذكرناه سابقا أربع مئة مصنف لأربع مئة مصنف كتبت من فتاوى الصادق عليه السلام على عهده فكان عليها مدار العلم والعمل من بعده حتى لخصها جماعة من أعلام الأمة وسفراء الأئمة في كتب خاصة تسهيلا للطالب وتقريبا على المتناول وأحسن ما جمع منها الكتب الأربعة التي هي مرجع الإمامية في أصولهم وفروعهم من الصدر الأول إلى هذا الزمان وهي الكافي والتهذيب والاستبصار ومن لا يحضره الفقيه وهي متواترة ومضامينها مقطوع بصحتها والكافي أقدمها وأعظمها وأحسنها وأتقنها

 

A great portion and large number from the companions of al-Şādiq (as) achieved ultimate wisdom. They became leaders [imāms] of right path, lanterns in darkness, oceans of knowledge, and stars of guidance. Among those, who have their names and conditions recorded in biographical texts, are four thousand men from Iraq, the Ĥijāz, Persia, and Syria. They are authors of famous works, which include the four hundred Uşūls of the Imāmīs.

 

These (Uşūls)—as we mentioned earlier—are four hundred compilations authored by four hundred authors, which were written during the time of al-Şādiq (as) and contained his verdicts. They were the axis of knowledge and practice after him, to such an extent that a group of eminent scholars of this nation and ambassadors of the Imāms rendered them into books as a facilitation and summarization for the seeker and deriver of knowledge.

 

The best of what was compiled from the (Uşūls) are the Four Books, which are sources for the Imāmīs in referring to their roots and branches of religion, from their earliest period to this era.  These are: al-Kāfī, al-Tahdhīb, al-Istibşār and Man lā Yaĥđuruh al-Faqīh. They are transmitted consecutively and their contents are undoubtedly authentic, and al-Kāfīis the oldest, the greatest, the best and the most accurate among them.

 

·         al-Murāja`āt, of `Abd al-Ĥusayn al-Mūsawī (d. 1377), page 419 [Beirut]

What about Muhammad Sadiq as-Sadr? Is he contemporary enough?

 Grand Āyat Allāh Muĥammad Şādiq al-Şadr even went to the extent of explicitly stating in his book entitled al-Shī`a:

 

أن الشيعة وإن كانت مجمعة على اعتبار الكتب الأربعة وقائلة بصحة كل ما فيها من روايات غير أنها لا تطلق عليها اسم الصحاح كما فعل ذلك إخوانهم أهل السنة

 

The Shī`a, even though they are unanimous upon the reliability of the Four Books and believe in the authenticity of all the narrations in them, do not name them Şiĥāĥ as their Ahl al-Sunna brothers did.

 

·         al-Shī`a, of Muĥammad Şādiq al-Şadr (d. 1419), page 127 [Tehran]

Another one. 

Grand Āyat Allāh al-Mīrzā Muĥammad Ĥusayn al-Nā’īnī (d. 1355). His belief in the correctness of the narrations in al-Kāfī reached such a degree that he declared checking their chains of transmission to be a waste of time.

 

His student, Grand Āyat Allāh al-Sayyid Abū al-Qāsim al-Khū’ī (d. 1412) writes:

 

وقد ذكر غير واحد من الاعلام أن روايات الكافي كلها صحيحة ولا مجال لرمي شئ منها بضعف سندها وسمعت شيخنا الأستاذ الشيخ محمد حسين النائيني قدس سره في مجلس بحثه يقول إن المناقشة في إسناد روايات الكافي حرفة العاجز

 

More than one of the eminent scholars have mentioned that all the narrations of al-Kāfī are şaĥīĥ, and there is no room for putting away anything from it due to its weak chain of transmission. I heard our master and teacher Shaykh Muĥammad Ĥusayn al-Nā’īnī—may Allāh sanctify his secret—say in one of his gatherings of discussion: ‘Verily, arguing about the chains of transmission of the narrations in al-Kāfī is the vocation of an incompetent!’

 

·         Mu`jam Rijāl al-Ĥadīth wa Tafşīl Ţabaqāt al-Ruwāt, of Abū al-Qāsim al-Khū’ī (d. 1412), volume 1, page 81 [Qum]

 

 

Quote

 

You pick the part of Kafi's foreword that you wanted but forgot to post the rest:

 

My respected brother, that is not me, but shia scholars did make conclusion that in accordance to Kulayni, all content of his book is saheeh.

Āyat Allāh Abū Ţālib al-Tajlīl al-Tabrīzī, author of the famous booklet translated as Spurious Arguments about the Shia, confirms this declaration of al-Kulaynī in the introduction to his book known as Mu`jam al-Maĥāsin wa al-Masāwī.

 

He writes about al-Kulaynī and his al-Kāfī:

 

وقد صرح في مقدمته بصحة أحاديثه حيث قال وقلت تحب أن يكون عندك كتاب يأخذ منه من يريد علم الدين والعمل به بالآثار الصحيحة عن الصادقين عليهم السلام . . . . إلى أن قال وقد يسر الله وله الحمد تأليف ما سألت وأرجو أن يكون بحيث توخيت

 

“He has declared the authenticity of its narrations in his introduction, when he said: ‘Verily, you solemnly wished that you possess a book would be used by those who want to attain the knowledge of religion and practice upon it by deriving correct [şaĥīĥ] narrations of the truthful ones (as)…’ to: ‘Allāh, all praise to him, has facilitated the compilation of what you requested. I hope that (this book) will be in accordance with the wishes you had in mind.’”

 

·         Mu`jam al-Maĥāsin wa al-Masāmī, of Abū Ţālib al-Tabrīzī, page 17 [Qum]

 

This declaration of al-Kulaynī was so influential in history that it even led a group of Ithnā’ `Asharī Shī`ī scholars to use it as an argument for their belief in the immaculacy of the contents of al-Kāfī. Among them is al-Ĥurr al-`Āmilī (d. 1104), a major Shī`ī scholar of that group and an expert in the field of narrations, who staunchly believed in the correctness of all the narrations in al-Kāfī.

 

He states about the declaration of al-Kulaynī cited above:

 

وهو صريح أيضا في الشهادة بصحة أحاديث كتابه لوجوه منها قوله بالآثار الصحيحة ومعلوم أنه لم يذكر فيه قاعدة يميز بها الصحيح عن غيره لو كان فيه غير صحيح ولا كان اصطلاح المتأخرين موجودا في زمانه قطعا كما يأتي فعلم أن كل ما فيه صحيح باصطلاح القدماء بمعنى الثابت عن المعصوم بالقرائن القطعية أو التواتر

 

“This is also an explicit declaration of authenticity of the narrations in his book due to various points.

 

One of these points is: His statement: ‘Authentic narrations.’ It is well-known that neither did he mention a rule that distinguishes the rigorously authentic [şaĥīĥ] narration from the other categories in (the book), even if there is a non-şaĥīĥ narration in it, nor were the terminologies of the later scholars absolutely present during his time, as it will be further explained.

 

Thus, it is known that all the narrations in it are correct [şaĥīĥ] by the terminology of the early scholars, with the meaning of being proven from the infallible on the basis of categorical indications or consecutiveness.”

 

·        Khātimat Tafşīl Wasā’il al-Shī`a ilá Taĥşīl Masā’il al-Sharī`a, of al-Ĥurr al-`Āmilī (d. 1104), volume 30, page 196 [Qum]

 

Note: What al-Ĥurr means by “the terminology of later scholars” are the terminologies introduced with the categorization of narrations, in terms of their authenticity, that was not invented until the end of the 7th Islamic century. Before this categorization, the early Ithnā’ `Asharī scholars viewed the narrations to be either şaĥīĥ or not şaĥīĥ. This will be further elaborated in this writing.

 

Opposing the view of this group of Ithnā’ `Asharī scholars, al-Sayyid Muĥammad al-Mujāhid al-Ţabāţabā’ī (d. 1242) replied to this argument in the following words:

 

إن إخبار الكليني بصحة ما دونه في الكافي كما يمكن أن يكون باعتبار علمه بها وقطعه بصدورها عن الأئمة عليهم السلام فيجوز الاعتماد عليها والحال هذه كسائر أخبار العدول كذلك يمكن أن يكون باعتبار اجتهاده وظهورها عنده ولو بالدليل الظني فلا يجوز إذن الاعتماد عليه فإن ظن المجتهد لا يكون حجة على مثله كما هو الظاهر من الأصحاب بل ومن العقلاء وحيث لا ترجيح للاحتمال الأول وجب التوقف به لأن الشك في الشرط يوجب الشك في المشروط فيلزم التوقف

 

“Indeed, the testimony of al-Kulaynī concerning the authenticity of (the narrations) he has recorded in al-Kāfī, just as it is possible that it is in consideration of his knowledge and certainty of their issuance from theImāms (as), in which case it is permissible to depend upon them and its status will be the same as of all the reports of just individuals, it is (also) possible that it is in consideration of his independent judgment [ijtihād] and their appearance to him on the basis of conjectural proof. In this case it is impermissible to depend upon them, for the conjecture of a scholar capable of independent judgment [mujtahid] is not proof for those of the same stature, as it is obvious from other scholars, in fact, even from those with intellect.

 

And when there is no preference for the first possibility, it is incumbent to desist from holding on it because doubt about the condition necessitates doubt about what the condition is applied upon. Therefore, desistance is incumbent.”

 

·        Mafātīĥ al-Uşūl, of al-Sayyid Muĥammad al-Ţabāţabā’ī (d. 1242), page 332 [Tehran]

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

Kulayni narrated in “Kafi” (5/56) via his own chain, and MAJLISI SAID IT’S MUWATHAQ.

حُمَيْدُ بْنُ زِيَادٍ عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سَمَاعَةَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ زِيَادِ بْنِ عِيسَى عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ( عليه السلام ) قَالَ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً قَالَ وَ هُوَ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ لَا تُزَوِّجُوا الْحَسَنَ فَإِنَّهُ رَجُلٌ مِطْلَاقٌ فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ هَمْدَانَ فَقَالَ بَلَى وَ اللَّهِ لَنُزَوِّجَنَّهُ وَ هُوَ ابْنُ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) وَ ابْنُ أَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ ( عليه السلام ) فَإِنْ شَاءَ أَمْسَكَ وَ إِنْ شَاءَ طَلَّقَ .

From Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) which said: Ali (alaihi salam) said, and he was on the minbar: do not give in marriage, your daughters to Hasan for he divorces very soon.’ a man from the hamdân clan said: ‘by Allâh, we shall give our daughters to him in marriage. those he likes, let him keep; and those he dislikes, divorce.

as salam alaykum my dear brothers and sisters, shias and sunnis,

I have already pointed out that above mentioned hadith was graded as muwathaq by shaykh Majlisi.

Just adding to this same grading from shaykh Yusuf al-Bahrani in his "Hadaiq an-Nadira" 25_148

Hadaiq an nadira 25_148 - Copy.jpg:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

There are several huge problems with this hadith. Let's put aside the isnad for now, we may come back to that if necessary. The first problem is with this part. 

قَالَ إِنَّ عَلِيّاً قَالَ وَ هُوَ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ

You see, unfortunately for you I read and understand Arabic, as do many people on this site. If the Isnad ends at Aba Abdullah(a.s), i.e. Imam Husain(a.s), there is no way he would refer to Imam Ali(a.s), his father as Ali ? 

If your father's name is John, would you say 'John said' ? 

No, you would say 'My father said'. This is universal. And especially if your father is Amir Al Mumineen. 

If this 'hadith' is referring to another Aba Abdullah, then why is (alayhi salam) used, as this is only used for the Masoom ? 

If you can answer this, we can move on to the further problems with this 'hadith'. 

As Salam Alaykum. 

Wow! Wow! What a great point indeed! 

Unfortunately for me, your understanding of Arabic language, doesn't makes this discussion more sensible. I don't think you should post such "meaningful" note and cry out: Eureka!

In the very first post of this thread I wrote:

From Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) which said: Ali (alaihi salam) said, and he was on the minbar: 

I am pretty sure that I could find lots of examples where Hasan or Husayn narrated report from him father by naming him by name. But I wouldn't even bother myself with such search. 

Abdullah ibn Sinan ibn Tarif, the one who narrated this report from Abu Abdullah (as), use to narrated from Abu Abdullah Jafar as-Sadiq and Abul Hasan Musa (and report from second imam is not established). See Rijal of Najashi p 214. 

So you got my point? Or I need further elaborate? If not, please check with knowledgeable shia brothers, I remember you boasted with their arrival to this thread.

as salam alaykum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

7 hours ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

It is funny that instead of discussing SOUND shia and sunni reports, you would willingly switch to discussing of my intentions. 

And I can see 3 of your peers applauding to your post.

 

Salam,

We all agree on the Book of Allah right?

So as muslims why don't we refer it back to the Book of Allah?

I think that's the most sound thing we can do to solve this matter and according to the Book of Allah Imam Hassan a.s. is purified.

And if that according to your definition of being purified would mean that one still can make mistakes or sin then still the status of being a member of the People of the Cloak together with Muhammad s.a.w.a.s.and therefore being purified distinguishes him a.s. from the Sahaba let alone the rest of the Ummah.

The thought behind your intention is that Imam Hassan a.s. and even Imam Ali and Imam Hussein a.s. were not diffirent from the rest while there are plenty and/or explicit proofs from Quran and ahaadith which show us otherwise.

 

Edited by Faruk
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

as salam alaykum my dear brothers and sisters, shias and sunnis,

I have already pointed out that above mentioned hadith was graded as muwathaq by shaykh Majlisi.

Just adding to this same grading from shaykh Yusuf al-Bahrani in his "Hadaiq an-Nadira" 25_148

Hadaiq an nadira 25_148 - Copy.jpg:

 

 

Just adding another bullet point to discussion.

As we all witnessed Kulayni narrated report that I have mentioned above in his book, that he considered sound, Majlisi and Yusuf al-Bahrani said hadith is muwathaq.

Now turn for another hadith, and another book.

Shaykh Ali Namazi in his book "Mustadrak safinatul Bihar" 6/60-61, said:

 في الصحيح في رجل جاء إلى أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) مستشيرا في أن الحسن والحسين (عليهما السلام) وعبد الله بن جعفر، خطبوا بنته فقال أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام): المستشار مؤتمن، أما الحسن، فإنه مطلاق للنساء ولكن زوجها الحسين (عليه السلام) فإنه خير لابنتك  

Translation:

In SAHIH regarding man who came to commander of faithful (alaihi salam) to consult him in regards to al-Hasan, al-Husayn (alayhum salam) and Abdullah ibn Jafar, for purposing them his daughter. Commander of faithful said: The one who is advised with is trusted. AS FOR AL-HASAN, then he divorces women soon. Marry her to al-Husayn (alaihi salam), he would be good towards your daughter".

One masoom points out to something not correct coming from other masoom. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@Abu_Rumaysah i asked

Prophet PBUH said "Hassan a.s and Hussain a. s are masters of youth of paradise and their father is afzal than then"

Ali a. s said "I am one of the slaves of Prophet PBUH"

Now two quick questions for you. 

1. Will the Prophets a. s enter Paradise? 

2. Were prophets a. s masoom? 

Hadaiq an nadira 25_148 - Copy.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 10/8/2016 at 12:12 PM, Faruk said:

Salam,

We all agree on the Book of Allah right?

So as muslims why don't we refer it back to the Book of Allah?

I think that's the most sound thing we can do to solve this matter and according to the Book of Allah Imam Hassan (عليه السلام). is purified.

And if that according to your definition of being purified would mean that one still can make mistakes or sin then still the status of being a member of the People of the Cloak together with Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).(عليه السلام).and therefore being purified distinguishes him (عليه السلام). from the Sahaba let alone the rest of the Ummah.

The thought behind your intention is that Imam Hassan (عليه السلام). and even Imam Ali and Imam Hussein (عليه السلام). were not diffirent from the rest while there are plenty and/or explicit proofs from Quran and ahaadith which show us otherwise.

i have asked OP the similar question that how a fallible like me can get the purification same as that of Prophet and Ahl e kisaa, just by doing wudu, wiping the head and feet and making Tayamum?

But he is unable to respond on it.

Wasalam 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Quote

i have asked OP the similar question that how a fallible like me can get the purification same as that of Prophet and Ahl e kisaa, just by doing wudu, wiping the head and feet and making Tayamum?

But he is unable to respond on it.

Wasalam 

 

Salam,

Another significant distinction of the Ahl Al-Bayt (عليه السلام). is that it is forbidden to give them zakat or sadaqa because according to Muslim:

“The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘Zakaah should not be given to the family of Muhammad because it is from the dirt of the people.’” (Narrated by Muslim, al-Zakaah, 1784).

Why?

Because they were purified.

The next thing that ofcourse will be used as a counter-argument is the question who the family of Muhammad (عليه السلام). actually are

One time the Wives are incorporated while the other time the Wives are excluded and replaced by the descendants of Jafar, Abbas and Aqeel:

Ahl al-Bayt (the members of the Prophet’s household) are the tribe of ‘Abd al-Muttalib (the descendents of ‘Ali, the descendents of ‘Abbaas, the descendents of Ja’far, the descendents of ‘Aqeel, the descendents of al-Haarith and the sons of ‘Abd al-Muttalib), and their freed slaves. See al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah, 1/100; al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 6/258). 

Fact is that it is out of discussion that the core of the family is Bibi Fatima, Imam Ali, Imam Hasan, Imam Husain peace be upon them all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
5 hours ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

As Salam Alaykum. 

Wow! Wow! What a great point indeed! 

Unfortunately for me, your understanding of Arabic language, doesn't makes this discussion more sensible. I don't think you should post such "meaningful" note and cry out: Eureka!

In the very first post of this thread I wrote:

From Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam) which said: Ali (alaihi salam) said, and he was on the minbar: 

I am pretty sure that I could find lots of examples where Hasan or Husayn narrated report from him father by naming him by name. But I wouldn't even bother myself with such search. 

Abdullah ibn Sinan ibn Tarif, the one who narrated this report from Abu Abdullah (as), use to narrated from Abu Abdullah Jafar as-Sadiq and Abul Hasan Musa (and report from second imam is not established). See Rijal of Najashi p 214. 

So you got my point? Or I need further elaborate? If not, please check with knowledgeable shia brothers, I remember you boasted with their arrival to this thread.

as salam alaykum.

We'll leave that point for now. Two brothers here who are knowledgeable in Rijal and whose opinions I trust have told you that this hadith is daef' graded as weak. In other words not fit to even reference much less spin a whole theory that you spun based on it. 

If you conclude that Imam Ali(a.s) told people 'don't marry my son' based on your evidence, then you are not doing anything except slandering Imam Hassan(a.s). Congratulations for your 'work'. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
3 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

We'll leave that point for now. Two brothers here who are knowledgeable in Rijal and whose opinions I trust have told you that this hadith is daef' graded as weak. In other words not fit to even reference much less spin a whole theory that you spun based on it. 

If you conclude that Imam Ali(a.s) told people 'don't marry my son' based on your evidence, then you are not doing anything except slandering Imam Hassan(a.s). Congratulations for your 'work'. 

And I am a mod so, if you continue this slander based on your weak evidence, you will be banned. So be careful. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2016 at 1:53 PM, Abu Hadi said:

We'll leave that point for now. Two brothers here who are knowledgeable in Rijal and whose opinions I trust have told you that this hadith is daef' graded as weak. In other words not fit to even reference much less spin a whole theory that you spun based on it. 

If you conclude that Imam Ali((عليه السلام)) told people 'don't marry my son' based on your evidence, then you are not doing anything except slandering Imam Hassan((عليه السلام)). Congratulations for your 'work'. 

I based my point not simply on report. But on reports, one of them  been trusted (authenticated) by Kulayni, because he narrated this in his book (see my posts above that he considered contains of his book as reliable), very same report was graded as muwathaq by two distinguish shia scholars: Majlisi and Yusuf Bahrani. And on second report, which been graded as saheeh by Ali Namazi Shahrudi (see my post above).

Here your scholars authenticated reports in this or other way, and you are trying to make it weak. 

Who is more knowledgeable in ahadeth your forum brothers, or Majlisi, Bahrani and Namazi?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

And I am a mod so, if you continue this slander based on your weak evidence, you will be banned. So be careful. 

What about justice? I didn't slandered anyone here. If you accept that reports as a slanderer, first remove them from your books, and raise the voice of justice against your scholars that authenticated them. 

I can not understand why for such intelligent man is much easier to ban me, rather than show justice?

Anyway, I don't want to be banned here. Especially for nothing. I rest my case here.

Apologize for all brothers and sister, whose questions in this thread I didn't manage to answer yet. I am leaving this thread due to threat to be banned. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
16 hours ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

1) I can't understand how man can love prophet (saws) and at the same time attack almost all his students, accusing them in kufr, nifaq, fisq and all other evils.

Each person to his own. They will be judged them based on their own actions. The Prophet is Allah's best creation and people who disobey him and stray away from his message are at fault, not him. By your logic will you blame the Prophet if this kufr, nifaq and fisq turns out to be more than just an accusation? You'll have dug yourself in a hole. 
‎(ولا تزر وزارة وزر اخرى) 
(And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another...) 35:18

So called students learnt nothing and the proof is in your own books. These aren't accusations they are facts which have been proven multiple times on this site.

16 hours ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

2) I can't understand how someone can claim to respect hz Ali, and at the same time to believe he didn't protected his spouse against attacks.

You ask the same questions over and over. This has been spoken about several times on here. Forums are useful it's just a search away

16 hours ago, Abu_Rumaysah said:

3) I can't understand how someone can make a blind eye to fact, that very same people who called our master Husayn, and claimed that they are ready to pledge allegiance to him, betrayed him and killed him.

No one turns a blind eye. They were traitors and we curse anyone who contributed to the killing of Imam Hussain a.s and again, (And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another...) 35:18. You are blaming a generation that came 1400 after for something we had no control over. We stand with the 72 companions who were at Karbala, with Al-Mukthar, Maythem Al-Tamar, Hanaa Bin Irwa. At the very least we acknowledge it and we mourn with the Prophet on the tragedy of Karbala. It's you who turn a blind eye to the fact Yazid was the head of the snake (may Allah curse him and his father).
The fact that Sunnis are ignorant and hypocritical when it comes to the battle of Karbala still stands. If you're not willing to mourn at least let others mourn and remember the Prophets grandsons sacrifice in peace.

 

Edited by Alzaynebia313
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

To the OP, Many times your sources for your 'theory' have been proved weak and inauthentic, not accepted by a single main stream scholar who is considered 'alim' and 'adl', and not accepted by the vast majority of muslims. You quote them with no context, mistranslate, and C&P from anti-shia websites in an attempt to spin your slanderous accusations against one of the Masters of the Youth of Paradise(a.s). I am reopening this thread at the request of some members of the mod team. I will not be participating further in it, as I believe the sole objective of the OP is to slander our Imam(a.s) and I do not want to be part of that. 

Edited by Abu Hadi
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2016 at 10:24 PM, Abu Hadi said:

And I am a mod so, if you continue this slander based on your weak evidence, you will be banned. So be careful. 

Assalam alayk ya @Abu Hadi

Finally I found it. Missed this post at the first time days ago.

Wanted to thank you by words personally my dear brother.

That's the result of your haj and your sawab by Allah swt, a strong iman by words and tongue. May Allah grant us such bravery.

I would gladly, proudly, and willingly give half of my Muharram and Safar Sawab to you brother, Enshallah by the will of Allah swt as a gift for your post as a brave and true MOD sample post.

May Allah swt keep you safe for islam, your family and us Enshallah.

May your name remains in the history by more acts and deeds like this, Enshallah

Wassalam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 10/7/2016 at 10:09 PM, Abu_Rumaysah said:

Muhadith Tabarsi in Mustadrak al-Wasail 15/250 reported:

عن أبي طالب في قوت القلوب أنه – يعني الحسن ( عليه السلام ) – تزوج مائتين وخمسين امرأة ، وقد قيل : ثلاثمائة ، وكان علي ( عليه السلام ) يضجر من ذلك ، فكان يقول في خطبته : ” ان الحسن مطلاق فلا تنكحوه

From abi Talib in Quwat al Quloob that he, that is Imam Hasan (as) married two hundred and fifteen women, and it is also said (that he married) three hundred, and Ali (as) was anxious of  that, so he would say in his sermon: “Indeed Hasan divorces a lot so do not arrange Nikah with him.”

 We all know how report regarding cloak been used by my shia friends to proof that Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husayn were masoom. When prophet (SAWS) gathered them under the cloak, Hasan was a child, and this warn from hz Ali regarding marriage from him, as it is obvious happen long time after hadith of cloak.  

Question is, if marriage with lots of women, and divorcing them, and getting warn from your own father, that people don't suppose to marry their daughters with you, is a sign for masoom Imam? Please I don't want to see answers like: You are nasibi, Muawiyah wasn't good man, Aisha did such and such and etc. My question is really simple, and requires really simple answer. 

are people of saheeh.

That’s mean he send 100 000 dirhams in one marriage! And he married a lot! 

Wa alai kum salaam.

First, don't feel bad and persecuted about being suspended. I have been suspended 3-4 times from about 12 hours - 7 days. The Mods are pretty fair in this regard.

Now let's get to discussing this issue.

Your primary question is how could a masoom marry so many times? And if he did, then is he a masoom.

Sunnis and Shias are in agreement that Imam Ali was known for fairness and being the best judge. "Umar would have perished had it not been for Ali, etc, etc,"

So is it fair of Imam Ali to tell the Muslims not to do something when he could just as well tell Imam Hasan to not marry so many women? Do you have any evidence that Imam Ali instructed Imam Hasan to not marry so much and that Imam Hasan disobeyed in this regard?

Moreover, did any of the people being addressed tell Imam Ali to go talk to his son rather than talking to them?

From the narrations, it seems like the Muslims aka sahaba were very eager to get their daughters to marry Imam Hasan and Imam Ali was trying to dissuade them coming up with the excuse of divorce. Based on the volume being discussed (215 - 300), were these people oblivious to what was going on that they needed to be told about it?

Could it be the sahaba were desperate to establish kinship with the Master of the Youths of Paradise?

Moreover, the dowry (mahr) being mention is quite substantial so perhaps they were interested in the money they could get by marrying their daughter to Imam Hasan.

You really should be questioning the behavior of the people and not Imam Hasan in this case. He seems to have done nothing but comply to the wishes of the people.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 8 October 2016 at 7:54 PM, Abu Hadi said:

And I am a mod so, if you continue this slander based on your weak evidence, you will be banned. So be careful. 

Lol seriously snap out of it and answer the man.........is this the best you can do?  "BAN 'EM!!"

lol I have seen this on here aplenty when no answer can be given

if you cannot answer a simple problem then you have no firm ground to stand on........BAN KULAYNI first!!!

bro rumaysah brilliant thread, the only answer is........BANNED

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...