Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Prophetic Narrations [Ahle Sunnah VS Ahle Tashayu]

Rate this topic


Fahad Sani

Recommended Posts

:bismillah:

:salam:

Allah says in Quran:

{Certainly did Allah confer [great] favor upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.} [3:164]

{Just as We have sent among you a messenger from yourselves reciting to you Our verses and purifying you and teaching you the Book and wisdom and teaching you that which you did not know.} [2:151]

{And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.} [47:2]

 

Therefore a Muslim must follow everything the Prophet (saw) says, everything he does, and everything he accepts and allows from the actions of those believers surrounding him.

The Prophet whom Allah chose is the source of all knowledge, so from where should someone take his orders, his instructions and explanations? From the books of Ahlul-Sunnah? Or the books of the Ahle Tashayyu?

 

1- SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: Orders, sayings and instructions taken from the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

-Bukhari has 7,593 narrations in his book with repetitions, plus 1,341 Mu`allaqat.

-It is rare to find a non-prophetic narration in al-Bukhari, the vast majority of its narrations are prophetic sayings or orders or actions or description of his (saw) physical look or his interpretation of Qur’anic verses or decisions in military or economic matters or descriptions of his society and the location in which he lived (saw). A quick browse in the book by anyone easily shows that it is hard to find non-prophetic narrations in it.

-After its chains of transmission have been analysed and scrutinized, the scholars of Ahlul-Sunnah have a consensus that the narrations in this book are all reliable and authentic except for maybe five or seven reports in which there is disagreement.

 

2- KAFI AL-KULAYNI: Orders, sayings and instructions taken from the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

A quick browse through al-Kafi unveils that there is barely any mention of the Prophet (saw) in the book. The vast majority of its contents appear to be opinions and sayings of 5th and 6th Shia Imam.

Everyone know that Allah ordered us in the Qur’an to follow the guidance and commands of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), there was no mention of any guidance that needs to be taken from other than Prophet.

Prophetic narrations are those who explicitly state: The Prophet (saw) said this, or the Prophet (saw) did that etc.

Moreover, Renowned Shia scholar of Hadith, Ayatullah al-`Allamah `Abdullah al-Mamaqani al-Najafi says in his book of Hadith sciences “Miqbas-ul-Hidaya” vol.1 pg.198:

إن ثاني الشهيدين بعد نقله عن الأكثر عدم العمل بالحسن و الموثق لاشتراطهم في قبول الخبر: الإيمان, و العدالة, كما قطع به جماعة قال: و العجيب أن الشيخ (الطوسي) اشترط ذلك أيضا في كتبه الأصولية, و وقع له في الحديث و كتب الفروع الغرائب, فتارة يعمل بالخبر الضعيف مطلقا حتى أنه يخصص به أخبار كثيرة صحيحة حيث تعارضه باطلاقها, و تارة يصرح برد الحديث لضعفه, و أخرى يرد الصحيح معللا بأنه خبر واحد لا يوجب علما و لا عملا

In summary he says that al-Shaheed al-Thani (Zayn-ul-Deen bin `Ali al-`Amili) narrated the opinion of the vast majority of the Shia scholars that one cannot use or work with the Hasan or Muwathaq narrations since the Shia placed two conditions to accept a narration:

1-Iman (Faith of the narrator).
2-`Adalah (Reliability of his narrations).

In short, what the author is saying is that the Hasan Hadith has gathered the condition of Iman but lost that of `Adalah, while the Muwathaq has gathered the condition of `Adalah but lost that of Iman, and I add that the Hasan is superior to the Muwathaq in Shia Hadith since they care more about the religion of the man than his reliability as narrator.

 

Summary of Prophetic narrations in Kafi:

Total number of narrations in al-Kafi is taken from al-Shaheed al-Awwal as written in al-Ijtihad wal-Taqleed by al-Khu’i and is 16,199 narrations.

As per authentication of al-Majlisi in “Mir’at al-`Uqoul” following are results.

-TOTAL SAHIH: 285. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 1.75%
-TOTAL HASAN: 358. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 2.21%
-TOTAL MUWATHAQ: 128. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 0.79%
-TOTAL WEAK: 1,624. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 10%
-TOTAL UNGRADED: 13. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 0.08%

> TOTAL NUMBER OF PROPHETIC NARRATIONS: 2,408 out of 16,199 / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 14.86% with repetition.

 

FURTHERMORE:

-All “Sahih” narrations listed above are not connected to the messenger (saw), the chain usually stops at Ja`far al-Sadiq who was born 70 years after the death of the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

-Only about one or two narrations in this entire book are actually connected to Prophet Muhammad (saw) such as the one from Jabir bin `Abdullah in volume 5, page 325, chapter “Worst of women.”

-Almost every narration listed as “Hasan” above, comes through the path of one narrator and he is Ibrahim bin Hashim al-Qummi, whose reliability was not documented but is assumed to be “honest”.

 

FINAL WORDS:

The unbiased researcher who follows Allah’s instructions will naturally lean towards the book with the biggest number of authentic and connected prophetic narrations as the Qur’an has planted in our hearts the love of Muhammad (saw) and our eagerness to learn more about his noble life will drive us towards the best religious source.

 

Original Source with more details.

 

THOUGHTS?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

A quick browse through al-Kafi unveils that there is barely any mention of the Prophet (saw) in the book. The vast majority of its contents appear to be opinions and sayings of 5th and 6th Shia Imam.

Everyone know that Allah ordered us in the Qur’an to follow the guidance and commands of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), there was no mention of any guidance that needs to be taken from other than Prophet.

The Prophet said: "I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allaah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allaah and adhere to it. The second are the members of my household (Ahlulbayt) I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family."

This hadith has been transmitted not only in Sahih Muslim, but many other sunni sources aswell. The Prophet told us to follow his Ahlulbayt who are infallible. We are simply following the Prophet's orders by following hadiths from our holy Imams.

2 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

The unbiased researcher who follows Allah’s instructions will naturally lean towards the book with the biggest number of authentic and connected prophetic narrations as the Qur’an has planted in our hearts the love of Muhammad (saw) and our eagerness to learn more about his noble life will drive us towards the best religious source.

Sahih Bukhari contains about 7500 narrations and of those about 4000 of them are from Abu Huraira, a person who is known to be a notorious liar. How can a book be almost 100% authentic when more than half of it is narrated by a liar? Let me provide you with evidence below.

There are clear grounds to show that Abu Huraira was an unreliable man. Your own ulama have confirmed this fact. One of the reasons for his being cursed is that, according to the words of the Prophet, he was an associate of the cursed son of Abu Sufyan. On some occasions in Siffin he offered prayers led by the Commander of the Faithful, ‘Ali. At other times he sat at the dining table of Mu'awiya to eat his fancy food. As reported by Zamakhshari in ‘Rabiu'l-Abrar’ and Ibn Abi'l-Hadid in the commentary on ‘Nahju'l-Balagha’, when Abu Huraira was asked the reason for his double-dealing policy, he said, "Mu'awiya's food is very rich and savory, and prayers behind ‘Ali are preferable."

The same Abu Huraira himself narrates (as recorded by your own eminent ulama’, like Hakim Nishapuri in ‘Mustadrak’, Volume II, page 124, Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal Tibrani, and others) that the Prophet said, "‘Ali is with the Qur'an and the Qur'an is with ‘Ali. These two shall not be separated until they reach me at the Fountain of Kauthar. ‘Ali is from me, and I am from ‘Ali. He who profanes ‘Ali, profanes me. He who profanes me, profanes Allah." Mu'awiya, in his address of the Jum'a prayers, cursed ‘Ali, Hasan, and Husain. He ordered that in all congregations those revered people should be cursed. So if a man is so intimately associated with such damned people and is pleased with their actions, is he not to be condemned? 

Ibn Abi'l-Hadid Mu'tazali, in his commentary on the ‘Nahju'l-Balagha’, Volume I, page 358, and in Volume IV, reports from his Sheikh and teacher, Imam Abu Ja'far Asqalani, that Mu'awiya Ibn Abu Sufyan organized a group of companions of the Holy Prophet and the children of the companions for the purpose of fabricating hadith. Among those who concocted filthy hadith against ‘Ali were Abu Huraira, Amir Ibn As, and Mughira Ibn Shaba. Giving details of these stories, Ibn Abi'l-Hadid narrates that Abu Huraira once entered the Kufa mosque and saw a huge gathering of people who had come to welcome Mu'awiya. He shouted to the crowd: "O people of Iraq. Do you think that I would tell a lie in opposing Allah and His Prophet and buy Hellfire for myself? Hear from me what I have heard from the Prophet. 'Every Prophet has a Haram (sacred dwelling place) and my Haram is Medina. One who is responsible for innovation in Medina is cursed by Allah, by His angels, and by all humanity.' I swear by Allah that ‘Ali was responsible for an innovation." (That is, ‘Ali incited dissension among the people and so, according to the Prophet, should be cursed). When Mu'awiya learned of this (that Abu Huraira did such a thing for him and did it in ‘Ali's capital, Kufa), he sent for him, gave him a reward, and made him the governor of Medina. the Holy Prophet said, "One who abuses ‘Ali, abuses me; one who abuses me, abuses Allah." It is clear that Abu Huraira was one of those who not only abused ‘Ali Ibn Abu Talib, but who fabricated hadith to incite others to abuse him.

It has been reported by your own historians, including Tabari, Ibn Athir, Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, Allama Samhudi, Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Khallikan, and others that Mu'awiya Ibn Abu Sufyan sent the cruel Busr Ibn Artat with 4,000 Syrian soldiers to Yemen via Medina to crush the people of Yemen and the Shi’as of ‘Ali. The assailants murdered thousands of Muslims in Medina, Mecca, Ta'if, Tabala' (a city of Tihama), Najran, Safa, and its suburbs. They did not spare the young or old of the Bani Hashim or the Shi’as of ‘Ali. They even murdered the two small sons of the Holy Prophet's cousin, Ubaidullah Ibn Abbas, the governor of Yemen, who had been appointed by ‘Ali. It is said that more than 30,000 Muslims were killed on the order of this tyrant. The Bani Umayya and their followers committed these insane atrocities. Your beloved Abu Huraira witnessed this slaughter and was not only silent but actively supported it. Innocent people, like Jabir ibn Abdullah Ansari, and Abu Ayyub Ansari sought refuge. Even the house of Abu Ayyub Ansari, who was one of the Prophet's chief companions, was set on fire. When this army turned towards Mecca, Abu Huraira remained in Medina.

The ulama’ of both the sects (like Allama Samhudi in ‘Ta'rikhu'l-Medina’, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal in ‘Musnad’, Sibt Ibn Jauzi in ‘Tadhkira’, page 163) have quoted from the Holy Prophet (S), who said repeatedly: "He who threatens the people of Medina with oppression will be threatened by Allah and will be cursed by Allah, by His angels, and by humanity. Allah will not accept anything from him. May he be cursed who threatens the people of Medina. If anyone harms the people of Medina, Allah will melt him like lead in fire." So why did Abu Huraira join the army which devastated Medina? Why did he fabricate hadith in opposition to the rightful successor to the Prophet? And why did he incite people to revile the man about whom the Prophet had said: "To abuse him is to abuse me"

Ibn Athir and Ibn Abi'l-Hadid in his ‘Sharhe-Nahju'l-Balagha’, Volume III, page 104 (printed in Egypt), and several others have reported that after Caliph ‘Umar appointed Abu Huraira governor of Bahrain in 21 A.H., the people informed the Caliph that Abu Huraira had amassed great wealth and had purchased many horses. ‘Umar therefore deposed him in 23 A.H. As soon as Abu Huraira entered the court, the Caliph said: "O enemy of Allah and enemy of His Book! Have you stolen Allah's property?" He replied, "I never committed theft, but the people have given me gifts." 

Ibn Sa'ad in Tabaqat, Volume IV, page 90, Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Isaba, and Ibn Abd al-Rabbih in Iqdu'l-Farid, Volume I, write that the Umar ibn Al-Khatab said: "'When I made you the governor of Bahrain, you had not even shoes on your feet, but now I have heard that you have purchased horses for 1,600 dinars. How did you acquire this wealth?' He replied, 'These were men's gifts which profit has multiplied much.' The Caliph's face grew red with anger, and he lashed him so violently that his back bled. Then he ordered the 10,000 dinars which Abu Huraira had collected in Bahrain be taken from him, and deposited in the account of the Baitu'-Mal."

This was not the first time that ‘Umar beat Abu Huraira. Muslim writes in his ‘Sahih’, Volume I, page 34, that during the time of the Prophet, ‘Umar Ibn Khattab beat Abu Huraira so severely that the latter fell down on the ground. Ibn Abi'l-Hadid writes in his commentary on ‘Nahju'l-Balagha’, Volume I, page 360: "Abu Ja'far Asqalani has said: 'According to our great men, Abu Huraira was a wicked fellow. The hadith narrated by him were not acceptable. ‘Umar beat him with a lash and told him that he had changed hadith and had attributed false sayings to the Holy Prophet.'"

Ibn Asakir in his ‘Ta'rikh Kabir’, and Muttaqi in his ‘Kanzu'l-Umma’ report that Caliph ‘Umar lashed him, rebuked him, and forbade him to narrate hadith from the Holy Prophet. ‘Umar said: "Because you narrate hadith in large numbers from the Holy Prophet, you are fit only for attributing lies to him. (That is, one expects a wicked man like you to utter only lies about the Holy Prophet.) So you must stop narrating hadith from the Prophet; otherwise, I will send you to the land of Dus." (A clan in Yemen, to which Abu Huraira belonged.)

Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, in his commentary on ‘Nahju'l-Balagha’, Volume I, page 360 (printed in Egypt) reports from his teacher, Imam Abu Ja'far Asqalani, that ‘Ali said, "Beware of the greatest liar among the people, Abu Huraira Dusi."

Ibn Qutayba, in ‘Ta'wil al-Mukhtalifu'l-Hadith’, and Hakim in ‘Mustadrak’, Volume III, and Dhahabi in ‘Talkhisu'l-Mustadrak’, and Muslim in his ‘Sahih’, Volume II, reporting about the characteristics of Abu Huraira, all say that A’ysha repeatedly contradicted him and said, "Abu Huraira is a great liar who fabricates hadith and attributes them to the Holy Prophet."

In short, it is not we alone who have rejected Abu Huraira. According to Umar, ‘Ali, A’ysha, and other companions and followers of the Prophet said that he was completely unreliable. Accordingly, the Sheikhs of the ‘Mu'tazilite’s and their Imams, and the ‘Hanafi’ ulama’ generally reject the hadith narrated by Abu Huraira. Moreover, in his commentary on Muslim's ‘Sahih’, Volume IV, Nadwi emphasizes this point: "Imam Abu Hanifa said, 'The companions of the Prophet were generally pious and just. I accept every hadith with evidence narrated by them, but I do not accept the hadith whose source is Abu Huraira, Anas Ibn Malik, or Samra Ibn Jundab."

We reject the same Abu Huraira, whom Umar lashed and called a thief and a liar. He was rejected by A’ysha, Abu Hanifa, and by many companions and followers of the Holy Prophet. We reject the same Abu Huraira who was rejected and called a liar by ‘Ali, and by the Holy Imams and descendants of the Prophet. We reject Abu Huraira who was a belly-worshiper, who, despite knowing the superiority of ‘Ali, ignored him. He preferred his patron, the damned Mu'awiya, sat at his table to relish dainty dishes, and concocted hadith in opposition to ‘Ali. You and I are obliged to see to it that when a hadith from the Holy Prophet is under consideration, we should first refer it to the Holy Qur'an. If the hadith agrees with the Qur'an, we should accept it, otherwise not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Bukhari has so many ridiculous hadiths, I do not know how you guys can believe them. Let me show you some hadiths from Bukhari that are absolutely absurd.

‘Sahih Bukhari’ (Vol. I, in the Chapter “Fazla's-Sujud Min Kitabu'l-Adhan”) page 100; Vol. IV, p.92 of ‘Sahih Muslim’, "Babu's-Sira Min Kitabu'r-Riqaq", and ‘Sahih Muslim’ (Vol. I, in the Chapter "Isbatu'l-Ruyatu'l-Mu'minin Rabbahum Fi'l-Akhira," page 86) Abu Huraira says: "The clamor and violent rage of Hell will intensify, it will not calm down until Allah puts His leg in it. Then Hell will say, 'Stop, stop! It is enough for me; it is enough for me.'" Abu Huraira also narrates that a group of people asked the Holy Prophet, "Shall we see our Creator on the Day of Judgement?" He replied, "Of course. At mid-day when the sky is free of clouds, does the Sun hurt you, if you look at it?" They said: "No!" Again he said: "During the nights when you see the full moon when the sky is clear, does it hurt you?" They said: "No!" He continued: "So when you see Allah Almighty on the Day of Judgement, you will not be hurt, just as you are not hurt by seeing these (the sun and the moon). "

"Vision comprehends Him not, and He comprehends (all) vision." (6:103)

Again, when the Prophet Moses was compelled by the Israelites to go to his place of prayer, and beseech Allah to "show Himself to him," the Holy Qur'an records the event as follows: "He (Moses) said: 'My Lord! Show me (Thyself), so that I may look upon Thee.' He said: 'You cannot (bear to) see me...'" (7:143)

This ‘hadith’ has been recorded by the great Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Yaqub Kulaini in his Usul Kafi, Volume on Tawhid, as well as Sheikh Saduq in his Book on Tawhid, Chapter "Ibtal Aqida Ruyatullah." Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq is quoted as saying a Jewish scholar asked the Commander of the Faithful, ‘Ali, whether he had seen Allah at the time of prayers. The Imam replied: "He cannot be seen by these physical eyes. It is the heart which sees Him through the light of the realities of conviction." 

Bukhari, in the Chapter "Kitab al-Ghusl," and Muslim in Part II of his ‘Sahih’ (in the Chapter on Virtues of the Prophet Moses) Abu Huraira said:  "Among the Bani Isra'il it was customary to bathe together without clothes, so that they glanced at the genitals of one another. They did not consider it objectionable. Only the Prophet Moses went into the water alone, so that no one could see his private parts. The Bani Isra'il used to say that the Prophet Moses had defective genitals, so he avoided bathing with them. One day the Prophet Moses went to the river to bathe. He took off his clothes, put them over a stone, and went into the water. The stone fled with his clothes. Moses ran after the stone, naked, shouting: 'My clothes! O stone, my clothes.' The Bani Israel saw the naked Moses and said: 'By Allah! Moses has no defect in his genitals. The stone then stopped and Moses retrieved his clothes. Then, Moses beat the stone so severely that six or seven times the stone shrieked in pain."

Do you actually believe such a thing is possible for the Holy Prophet Moses, or that a stone, an inanimate object, could take away his clothes? Surely it would be impossible for a Prophet to run naked before the people. 

I will relate another ‘hadith’ recorded in the ‘Sahih’, which is even more ridiculous. Bukhari quotes Abu Huraira in his ‘Sahih’ (Volume I, page 158 and Volume II, page 163) and again in the Chapter "Death of the Prophet Moses", and Muslim also quotes the same authority (Abu Huraira) in his ‘Sahih’, Volume II, page 309 in the Chapter "On The Merits of Moses" as saying: "The Angel of Death came to the Prophet Moses and asked him to accept the invitation of his Creator. Upon hearing this, Moses gave him such a slap in his face that he lost one of his eyes. So, he went back to Allah and complained that he had sent him to a man who did not want to die and who had knocked out one of his eyes. Allah cured his eye and ordered him to go again to Moses and to tell him that if he wanted longer life, he should lay his hand on the back of a bull. He would live for as many years as the number of hairs that would be covered by his hand."
 

The two books, ‘Sahih’ Muslim and ‘Sahih’ Bukhari, contain hadith narrated by liars. If you study ‘Sahih’ Muslim and ‘Sahih’ Bukhari in the light of the books of ‘Rijal’, you will find that they have recorded many hadith reported from men who were great liars, e.g., Abu Huraira, the notorious liar, Ikrima Kharji, Sulayman Ibn Amr, and others of the same category. Bukhari was not so cautious in recording hadith as you think. He did not record the Hadith al-Thaqalain, which others have done, but he had no hesitation in recording ludicrous and insulting stories about the Prophet Moses slapping the face of the Angel of Death, the Prophet Moses' running away naked after a stone, and Allah's visibility.

Consider another ridiculous, and insulting story recorded by Bukhari in his ‘Sahih’, Volume II, Chapter ""Al-Lahr Bi'l-Harb," page 120, and by Muslim in his ‘Sahih’ Volume I, quoting Abu Huraira as saying: on the Eid (a holiday) some Sudanese nomads gathered in the Mosque of the Prophet. They entertained spectators with their sport and performances. The Prophet asked A’ysha if she would like to witness the performances. She said she would. The Prophet let her mount on his back in such a way that she had her head over his shoulders and her face on the head of the Prophet. In order to amuse A’ysha, the Holy Prophet was asking the entertainers to stage a better dance. At last A’ysha became tired, and the Holy Prophet let her get down on the ground!

Judge for yourself whether such a story is not insulting. If Bukhari was so cautious about recording facts, was it fair on his part to record such foolish stories in his ‘Sahih’. But even now you characterize these books as the most authentic ones after the Holy Qur'an. Of course Bukhari took special care to omit the matter of the Imamate and the Vicegerency of ‘Ali, as well as the matter of the Ahlul Bayt. Probably he feared such information might some day be used as a weapon against the opponents of the Ahlul Bayt. For instance, there are many verses of the Holy Qur'an, revelations which have a direct bearing on the hadith (‘Hadith al-Wilaya’ on the Day of Ghadir; ‘Hadith al-Inzar al-Yaumu'd-Dar’; ‘Hadithu'l-Muwakhat’; ‘Hadith al-Safina’; ‘Hadith al-Babu'l-Hitta’, etc.) which concern the respect for, and vicegerency of, the descendants of the Holy Prophet. These have been avoided scrupulously by Bukhari. And on the other hand, those so-called "ahadith" which humiliate the prophets, particularly our Prophet, and his chaste descendants, are recorded in his book without the least consideration that they have been reported by liars. Your own ‘ulama’ admit that in order to fill his belly from the dainty dishes provided by Mu'awiya, he fabricated reports. Because of his fabrications, Umar had him lashed. It is surprising that sensible people believe in such ridiculous stories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

:bismillah:

:salam:

Allah says in Quran:

{Certainly did Allah confer [great] favor upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.} [3:164]

{Just as We have sent among you a messenger from yourselves reciting to you Our verses and purifying you and teaching you the Book and wisdom and teaching you that which you did not know.} [2:151]

{And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.} [47:2]

 

Therefore a Muslim must follow everything the Prophet (saw) says, everything he does, and everything he accepts and allows from the actions of those believers surrounding him.

The Prophet whom Allah chose is the source of all knowledge, so from where should someone take his orders, his instructions and explanations? From the books of Ahlul-Sunnah? Or the books of the Ahle Tashayyu?

 

1- SAHIH AL-BUKHARI: Orders, sayings and instructions taken from the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

-Bukhari has 7,593 narrations in his book with repetitions, plus 1,341 Mu`allaqat.

-It is rare to find a non-prophetic narration in al-Bukhari, the vast majority of its narrations are prophetic sayings or orders or actions or description of his (saw) physical look or his interpretation of Qur’anic verses or decisions in military or economic matters or descriptions of his society and the location in which he lived (saw). A quick browse in the book by anyone easily shows that it is hard to find non-prophetic narrations in it.

-After its chains of transmission have been analysed and scrutinized, the scholars of Ahlul-Sunnah have a consensus that the narrations in this book are all reliable and authentic except for maybe five or seven reports in which there is disagreement.

 

2- KAFI AL-KULAYNI: Orders, sayings and instructions taken from the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

A quick browse through al-Kafi unveils that there is barely any mention of the Prophet (saw) in the book. The vast majority of its contents appear to be opinions and sayings of 5th and 6th Shia Imam.

Everyone know that Allah ordered us in the Qur’an to follow the guidance and commands of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), there was no mention of any guidance that needs to be taken from other than Prophet.

Prophetic narrations are those who explicitly state: The Prophet (saw) said this, or the Prophet (saw) did that etc.

Moreover, Renowned Shia scholar of Hadith, Ayatullah al-`Allamah `Abdullah al-Mamaqani al-Najafi says in his book of Hadith sciences “Miqbas-ul-Hidaya” vol.1 pg.198:

إن ثاني الشهيدين بعد نقله عن الأكثر عدم العمل بالحسن و الموثق لاشتراطهم في قبول الخبر: الإيمان, و العدالة, كما قطع به جماعة قال: و العجيب أن الشيخ (الطوسي) اشترط ذلك أيضا في كتبه الأصولية, و وقع له في الحديث و كتب الفروع الغرائب, فتارة يعمل بالخبر الضعيف مطلقا حتى أنه يخصص به أخبار كثيرة صحيحة حيث تعارضه باطلاقها, و تارة يصرح برد الحديث لضعفه, و أخرى يرد الصحيح معللا بأنه خبر واحد لا يوجب علما و لا عملا

In summary he says that al-Shaheed al-Thani (Zayn-ul-Deen bin `Ali al-`Amili) narrated the opinion of the vast majority of the Shia scholars that one cannot use or work with the Hasan or Muwathaq narrations since the Shia placed two conditions to accept a narration:

1-Iman (Faith of the narrator).
2-`Adalah (Reliability of his narrations).

In short, what the author is saying is that the Hasan Hadith has gathered the condition of Iman but lost that of `Adalah, while the Muwathaq has gathered the condition of `Adalah but lost that of Iman, and I add that the Hasan is superior to the Muwathaq in Shia Hadith since they care more about the religion of the man than his reliability as narrator.

 

Summary of Prophetic narrations in Kafi:

Total number of narrations in al-Kafi is taken from al-Shaheed al-Awwal as written in al-Ijtihad wal-Taqleed by al-Khu’i and is 16,199 narrations.

As per authentication of al-Majlisi in “Mir’at al-`Uqoul” following are results.

-TOTAL SAHIH: 285. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 1.75%
-TOTAL HASAN: 358. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 2.21%
-TOTAL MUWATHAQ: 128. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 0.79%
-TOTAL WEAK: 1,624. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 10%
-TOTAL UNGRADED: 13. / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 0.08%

> TOTAL NUMBER OF PROPHETIC NARRATIONS: 2,408 out of 16,199 / Percentage out of total in al-Kafi = 14.86% with repetition.

 

FURTHERMORE:

-All “Sahih” narrations listed above are not connected to the messenger (saw), the chain usually stops at Ja`far al-Sadiq who was born 70 years after the death of the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

-Only about one or two narrations in this entire book are actually connected to Prophet Muhammad (saw) such as the one from Jabir bin `Abdullah in volume 5, page 325, chapter “Worst of women.”

-Almost every narration listed as “Hasan” above, comes through the path of one narrator and he is Ibrahim bin Hashim al-Qummi, whose reliability was not documented but is assumed to be “honest”.

 

FINAL WORDS:

The unbiased researcher who follows Allah’s instructions will naturally lean towards the book with the biggest number of authentic and connected prophetic narrations as the Qur’an has planted in our hearts the love of Muhammad (saw) and our eagerness to learn more about his noble life will drive us towards the best religious source.

 

Original Source with more details.

2 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

{Certainly did Allah confer [great] favor upon the believers when He sent among them a Messenger from themselves, reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.} [3:164]

{Just as We have sent among you a messenger from yourselves reciting to you Our verses and purifying you and teaching you the Book and wisdom and teaching you that which you did not know.} [2:151]

{And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad – and it is the truth from their Lord – He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.} [47:2]

1THOUGHTS?

1. Sahih Bukhari has Hadith which says that Prophet was illiterate while Quran says he PBUHHP was a teacher. It shows that not everything in Sahih Bukhari is from Prophet but it also contain many fabrications. Secondly, there are many hadiths which speak about the persons such as Umar, Abu Bakar, Uthman and Bibi Ayesha whose narratives are included in Sahih Bukhari. So, it is not purely Prophet's tradition book.

2 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

2- KAFI AL-KULAYNI: Orders, sayings and instructions taken from the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

A quick browse through al-Kafi unveils that there is barely any mention of the Prophet (saw) in the book. The vast majority of its contents appear to be opinions and sayings of 5th and 6th Shia Imam.

Everyone know that Allah ordered us in the Qur’an to follow the guidance and commands of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), there was no mention of any guidance that needs to be taken from other than Prophet.

Prophetic narrations are those who explicitly state: The Prophet (saw) said this, or the Prophet (saw) did that etc.

Moreover, Renowned Shia scholar of Hadith, Ayatullah al-`Allamah `Abdullah al-Mamaqani al-Najafi says in his book of Hadith sciences “Miqbas-ul-Hidaya” vol.1 pg.198:

 

2 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

2- KAFI AL-KULAYNI: Orders, sayings and instructions taken from the source of knowledge Muhammad (saw).

A quick browse through al-Kafi unveils that there is barely any mention of the Prophet (saw) in the book. The vast majority of its contents appear to be opinions and sayings of 5th and 6th Shia Imam.

Everyone know that Allah ordered us in the Qur’an to follow the guidance and commands of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), there was no mention of any guidance that needs to be taken from other than Prophet.

Prophetic narrations are those who explicitly state: The Prophet (saw) said this, or the Prophet (saw) did that etc.

Moreover, Renowned Shia scholar of Hadith, Ayatullah al-`Allamah `Abdullah al-Mamaqani al-Najafi says in his book of Hadith sciences “Miqbas-ul-Hidaya” vol.1 pg.198:

2. A great portion of Al-Kafi contains traditions of Prophet narrated by infallible Imams such as "Imam Sadiq a.s heard from Imam Baqar and Imam Baqir narrated from Imam Ali Zain-ul-Abidden who heard from his father Imam Hussain who heard Imam Ali saying that Prophet PBUHHP said" It is one of Wahabbi conspiracy theory to allege Al-Kafi that it contains very less Prophetic traditions. To add further, Prophet PBUHHP said: "Hold fast unto Quran and Ahle bait for they will meet me at the river of Kawther". Every traditions which is mentioned in these books as from Imam Jafar al Sadiq and Imam Baqir is actually from Prophet PBUHHP. I read from Imam Baqar a.s saying to one of his Ashab that "Whenever you hear that I said something or my Father said something, you must know it that we took it from Prophet as saying that".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hassan Y said:

The Prophet said: "I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being the Book of Allaah in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allaah and adhere to it. The second are the members of my household (Ahlulbayt) I remind you (of your duties) to the members of my family."

This hadith has been transmitted not only in Sahih Muslim, but many other sunni sources aswell. The Prophet told us to follow his Ahlulbayt who are infallible. We are simply following the Prophet's orders by following hadiths from our holy Imams.

Firstly, this hadith do not say to follow ahlebait. But to take care of them, love and respect them. Love of Ahlebait is part of Iman.

Secondly, if you read the entire narration you will find that here at ghadir ahlebait include family of Ali, Abbas, Jafar and Aqil. At ghadir ahlebait include all these four families. Its not only limited to 12 or 13 or 14 Imams.

1 hour ago, Hassan Y said:

Sahih Bukhari contains about 7500 narrations and of those about 4000 of them are from Abu Huraira, a person who is known to be a notorious liar. How can a book be almost 100% authentic when more than half of it is narrated by a liar? Let me provide you with evidence below.

Which ahlul sunnah rijal experts had considered abu huraira as liar and declared hm weak. Provide their names.

Consider all reports and then reach a conclusion about someone.

Even the prophets of Allah have been accused of lying, and that did nothing to hurt their credibility in the eyes of Allah swt.

He said in His Holy book that they called Nuh (alaih al-salam) a liar:

قَالَ الْمَلَأُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ قَوْمِهِ إِنَّا لَنَرَاكَ فِي سَفَاهَةٍ وَإِنَّا لَنَظُنُّكَ مِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ

{Said the eminent ones who disbelieved among his people, “Indeed, we see you in foolishness, and indeed, we think you are of the liars.”} (Al-A’araf: 66)

Shu’aib (alaih al-salam) was also accused of lying:

وَمَا أَنْتَ إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُنَا وَإِنْ نَظُنُّكَ لَمِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ

{You are but a man like ourselves, and indeed, we think you are among the liars.} (Al-Shu’ara’a: 186)

Even the people of Quraish held accused Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam) of lying:

وَعَجِبُوا أَنْ جَاءَهُمْ مُنْذِرٌ مِنْهُمْ وَقَالَ الْكَافِرُونَ هَذَا سَاحِرٌ كَذَّابٌ

{And they wonder that there has come to them a warner from among themselves. And the disbelievers say, “This is a magician and a liar.} (Saad: 38)

 

For more knowledge REFER THIS

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

Firstly, this hadith do not say to follow ahlebait. But to take care of them, love and respect them. Love of Ahlebait is part of Iman.

 

 

Well how did that one go? I guess they really took care of them didn't they? 

Edited by YAli
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fahad Sani said:

Firstly, this hadith do not say to follow ahlebait. But to take care of them, love and respect them. Love of Ahlebait is part of Iman.

Secondly, if you read the entire narration you will find that here at ghadir ahlebait include family of Ali, Abbas, Jafar and Aqil. At ghadir ahlebait include all these four families. Its not only limited to 12 or 13 or 14 Imams

What does taking care of them means ? If one says take care of your parents what does it means ? To listen to them and to be obedient to them whatever they say follow them and do not hurt them. 

These all things were done by those people who according to your saying were obliged to "Take care of them". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

What does taking care of them means ? If one says take care of your parents what does it means ? To listen to them and to be obedient to them whatever they say follow them and do not hurt them. 

These all things were done by those people who according to your saying were obliged to "Take care of them". 

It's quite clear that some people took the term 'take care' in the italian mafia gangster sense. They really 'took care of them' at Karbala didn't they. 

Muawiya also really loved Ali a.s. so much that he wanted to take care of him as well right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hassan Y said:

Bukhari has so many ridiculous hadiths, I do not know how you guys can believe them. Let me show you some hadiths from Bukhari that are absolutely absurd.

‘Sahih Bukhari’ (Vol. I, in the Chapter “Fazla's-Sujud Min Kitabu'l-Adhan”) page 100; Vol. IV, p.92 of ‘Sahih Muslim’, "Babu's-Sira Min Kitabu'r-Riqaq", and ‘Sahih Muslim’ (Vol. I, in the Chapter "Isbatu'l-Ruyatu'l-Mu'minin Rabbahum Fi'l-Akhira," page 86) Abu Huraira says: "The clamor and violent rage of Hell will intensify, it will not calm down until Allah puts His leg in it. Then Hell will say, 'Stop, stop! It is enough for me; it is enough for me.'" Abu Huraira also narrates that a group of people asked the Holy Prophet, "Shall we see our Creator on the Day of Judgement?" He replied, "Of course. At mid-day when the sky is free of clouds, does the Sun hurt you, if you look at it?" They said: "No!" Again he said: "During the nights when you see the full moon when the sky is clear, does it hurt you?" They said: "No!" He continued: "So when you see Allah Almighty on the Day of Judgement, you will not be hurt, just as you are not hurt by seeing these (the sun and the moon). "

"Vision comprehends Him not, and He comprehends (all) vision." (6:103)

Again, when the Prophet Moses was compelled by the Israelites to go to his place of prayer, and beseech Allah to "show Himself to him," the Holy Qur'an records the event as follows: "He (Moses) said: 'My Lord! Show me (Thyself), so that I may look upon Thee.' He said: 'You cannot (bear to) see me...'" (7:143)

This ‘hadith’ has been recorded by the great Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Yaqub Kulaini in his Usul Kafi, Volume on Tawhid, as well as Sheikh Saduq in his Book on Tawhid, Chapter "Ibtal Aqida Ruyatullah." Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq is quoted as saying a Jewish scholar asked the Commander of the Faithful, ‘Ali, whether he had seen Allah at the time of prayers. The Imam replied: "He cannot be seen by these physical eyes. It is the heart which sees Him through the light of the realities of conviction." 

Bukhari, in the Chapter "Kitab al-Ghusl," and Muslim in Part II of his ‘Sahih’ (in the Chapter on Virtues of the Prophet Moses) Abu Huraira said:  "Among the Bani Isra'il it was customary to bathe together without clothes, so that they glanced at the genitals of one another. They did not consider it objectionable. Only the Prophet Moses went into the water alone, so that no one could see his private parts. The Bani Isra'il used to say that the Prophet Moses had defective genitals, so he avoided bathing with them. One day the Prophet Moses went to the river to bathe. He took off his clothes, put them over a stone, and went into the water. The stone fled with his clothes. Moses ran after the stone, naked, shouting: 'My clothes! O stone, my clothes.' The Bani Israel saw the naked Moses and said: 'By Allah! Moses has no defect in his genitals. The stone then stopped and Moses retrieved his clothes. Then, Moses beat the stone so severely that six or seven times the stone shrieked in pain."

Do you actually believe such a thing is possible for the Holy Prophet Moses, or that a stone, an inanimate object, could take away his clothes? Surely it would be impossible for a Prophet to run naked before the people. 

I will relate another ‘hadith’ recorded in the ‘Sahih’, which is even more ridiculous. Bukhari quotes Abu Huraira in his ‘Sahih’ (Volume I, page 158 and Volume II, page 163) and again in the Chapter "Death of the Prophet Moses", and Muslim also quotes the same authority (Abu Huraira) in his ‘Sahih’, Volume II, page 309 in the Chapter "On The Merits of Moses" as saying: "The Angel of Death came to the Prophet Moses and asked him to accept the invitation of his Creator. Upon hearing this, Moses gave him such a slap in his face that he lost one of his eyes. So, he went back to Allah and complained that he had sent him to a man who did not want to die and who had knocked out one of his eyes. Allah cured his eye and ordered him to go again to Moses and to tell him that if he wanted longer life, he should lay his hand on the back of a bull. He would live for as many years as the number of hairs that would be covered by his hand."
 

The two books, ‘Sahih’ Muslim and ‘Sahih’ Bukhari, contain hadith narrated by liars. If you study ‘Sahih’ Muslim and ‘Sahih’ Bukhari in the light of the books of ‘Rijal’, you will find that they have recorded many hadith reported from men who were great liars, e.g., Abu Huraira, the notorious liar, Ikrima Kharji, Sulayman Ibn Amr, and others of the same category. Bukhari was not so cautious in recording hadith as you think. He did not record the Hadith al-Thaqalain, which others have done, but he had no hesitation in recording ludicrous and insulting stories about the Prophet Moses slapping the face of the Angel of Death, the Prophet Moses' running away naked after a stone, and Allah's visibility.

Consider another ridiculous, and insulting story recorded by Bukhari in his ‘Sahih’, Volume II, Chapter ""Al-Lahr Bi'l-Harb," page 120, and by Muslim in his ‘Sahih’ Volume I, quoting Abu Huraira as saying: on the Eid (a holiday) some Sudanese nomads gathered in the Mosque of the Prophet. They entertained spectators with their sport and performances. The Prophet asked A’ysha if she would like to witness the performances. She said she would. The Prophet let her mount on his back in such a way that she had her head over his shoulders and her face on the head of the Prophet. In order to amuse A’ysha, the Holy Prophet was asking the entertainers to stage a better dance. At last A’ysha became tired, and the Holy Prophet let her get down on the ground!

Judge for yourself whether such a story is not insulting. If Bukhari was so cautious about recording facts, was it fair on his part to record such foolish stories in his ‘Sahih’. But even now you characterize these books as the most authentic ones after the Holy Qur'an. Of course Bukhari took special care to omit the matter of the Imamate and the Vicegerency of ‘Ali, as well as the matter of the Ahlul Bayt. Probably he feared such information might some day be used as a weapon against the opponents of the Ahlul Bayt. For instance, there are many verses of the Holy Qur'an, revelations which have a direct bearing on the hadith (‘Hadith al-Wilaya’ on the Day of Ghadir; ‘Hadith al-Inzar al-Yaumu'd-Dar’; ‘Hadithu'l-Muwakhat’; ‘Hadith al-Safina’; ‘Hadith al-Babu'l-Hitta’, etc.) which concern the respect for, and vicegerency of, the descendants of the Holy Prophet. These have been avoided scrupulously by Bukhari. And on the other hand, those so-called "ahadith" which humiliate the prophets, particularly our Prophet, and his chaste descendants, are recorded in his book without the least consideration that they have been reported by liars. Your own ‘ulama’ admit that in order to fill his belly from the dainty dishes provided by Mu'awiya, he fabricated reports. Because of his fabrications, Umar had him lashed. It is surprising that sensible people believe in such ridiculous stories.

There is nothing ridiculous or insulting there. Consider the book in totality and compare this to Kafi. Statistics are there in OP.

Narrations which say we can see our Lord will happen in hereafter, not in this world. While story of moses a.s and other events are talking in reference to world. What exactly will happen in hereafter we dont know. Allah swt did not give us all knowledge. 

Even if you reject such reports which seems ridiculous to you. Still then there remain a vast number of prophetic narrations in bukhari as cpmpared to Kafi. Which is more than double in siza than bukhari. 

If bukhari was hypocrite by not including man made narrations on divine imamate then same bukhari also did not included reports in praise of muawiya and ummayds. Rather he included reports which exposes the rule of muawiya and co.

And if abu huraira is a liar according to twelver shias then all narrations from him in praise of ahlebait and all narrations from him which are against the ummayds will become unreliable.

Moreover, there is not a single report from prophet saww himself where he cursed or called abu huraira liar. While in shia rijal books we have plenty of reports from more than one Imams of ahlebait where top shia narrators like abu basir, zurarah etc are being cursed by ahlebait. Not once but on many occasions. But yet they are trustworthy. 

Consider all these facts and then decide who is liar and unreliable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, YAli said:

It's quite clear that some people took the term 'take care' in the italian mafia gangster sense. They really 'took care of them' at Karbala didn't they. 

Muawiya also really loved Ali a.s. so much that he wanted to take care of him as well right. 

Right. Some people did not followed what prophet saww said regarding his ahlebait. But many followed. 

Exactly, it was first muwiya who created problems for ahlebait. And later his son. Followed by other ummayad and abbasid caliphs. While during the time of first three caliphs ahlebait was treated with deep respect and care.

In short, love of ahlebait is sign of momin and haterd is sign of munafiq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, YAli said:

It's quite clear that some people took the term 'take care' in the italian mafia gangster sense. They really 'took care of them' at Karbala didn't they. 

Muawiya also really loved Ali a.s. so much that he wanted to take care of him as well right. 

Yeah nauzbillah. Now angels of hell be taking care of them in graves. I really feel sympathy for those who knew their mistakes and following the path of ignorance lolz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

Right. Some people did not followed what prophet saww said regarding his ahlebait. But many followed. 

Exactly, it was first muwiya who created problems for ahlebait. And later his son. Followed by other ummayad and abbasid caliphs. While during the time of first three caliphs ahlebait was treated with deep respect and care.

In short, love of ahlebait is sign of momin and haterd is sign of munafiq.

Masha-Allah deep respect.

Umar burnt house of Fatima Zahra a.s.

Abu baker snatched fadak from her and also gave governorship to Muawiya's brother 

Uthman banished Abu Dhar Ghafari and was one who maltreated many Ashab 

Bibi Ayesha fought against Imam Ali and shot arrows at the funeral of Imam Hasan and offered Sajdah i Shukar on the matrydom of Imam Ali a.s.

Abu Hurairah invented fabrications under the government of Muawiya.

Don't say they took their care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are far more shia hadith books than al kafi, bright spark. 

for example Bihar al Anwar has 110 volumes, books 15 to 53 deal almost exclusively with the lives of the Holy Prophet (S) and 14 infallibles. Im not even going to bother breaking down how many hadith that equates to or talk about other shia hadith books like Man La Yaduruhu al Faqih or others.

funny how you didnt mention this in OP, must be a coincidence that you only mentioned al kafi. 

OPs argument is "I only know about al kafi therefore shia have no narrations from the holy Prophet (s)"

 

Edited by DigitalUmmah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sindbad05 said:

Masha-Allah deep respect.

Umar burnt house of Fatima Zahra a.s.

Abu baker snatched fadak from her and also gave governorship to Muawiya's brother 

Uthman banished Abu Dhar Ghafari and was one who maltreated many Ashab 

Bibi Ayesha fought against Imam Ali and shot arrows at the funeral of Imam Hasan and offered Sajdah i Shukar on the matrydom of Imam Ali a.s.

Abu Hurairah invented fabrications under the government of Muawiya.

Don't say they took their care.

Muawiyah and other ummayad caliphs used to insult and torture ahlebait throughout their caliphate. Their rule is full of crimes against ahlebait. But caliphate of first three caliphs is free from any such thing. The only thing shia present from caliphate of first three is attack on sayeda and issue of fadak . While remaining time period of their caliphate is free from any crime or insult against ahlebait. How is that possible. If they really were enemies of ahlebait as shia potray their character in their books and majalis etc then their caliphate should have been full of crimes agaisnt ahlebait just like of muawiya and yazid. This clearly shows that it was merely a myth scripted by some liars of that time in order to make abu bakr and umar villians and enemies of ahlebait. 

Read the document in op for references and detailed narrations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fahad Sani said:

Muawiyah and other ummayad caliphs used to insult and torture ahlebait throughout their caliphate. Their rule is full of crimes against ahlebait. But caliphate of first three caliphs is free from any such thing. The only thing shia present from caliphate of first three is attack on sayeda and issue of fadak . While remaining time period of their caliphate is free from any crime or insult against ahlebait. How is that possible. If they really were enemies of ahlebait as shia potray their character in their books and majalis etc then their caliphate should have been full of crimes agaisnt ahlebait just like of muawiya and yazid. This clearly shows that it was merely a myth scripted by some liars of that time in order to make abu bakr and umar villians and enemies of ahlebait. 

Read the document in op for references and detailed narrations.

It was a myth that is why it is in your book as well. Secondly, your caliphs were in need of Imam Ali a.s, they understood that without Imam Ali a.s, they cannot interpret and explain religious things. It was due to this that when many Jews and Christians came to debate to your caliphs they always turned to Imam Ali a.s. Read in your books, whenever Umar did mistakes in Jurisprudential stuff, they sought help of Imam Ali a.s and he used to say: "If Ali were not born, Umar would have died". And also read about Umar that he talks of his mistakes and says that if Allah had not wished, there would have been a great fitna due to Saqifa and Allah's wished implied towards Imam Ali a.s. It was Allah's will that Allah reminded them anger of Momineen if they hurt Imam Ali a.s further and you would have found civil war against your caliphs. What was the reason that Muwaviya hatched conspiracies to kill Imam Ali a.s, Imam Hassan and Bibi Ayesha, it is known that he was aware of the influence of the people and he used khawajities and Jehda bint Ashas who was in the Nikah of Imam Hassa a.s. 

This truth is verified from your books too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Fahad Sani said:

Muawiyah and other ummayad caliphs used to insult and torture ahlebait throughout their caliphate. Their rule is full of crimes against ahlebait. But caliphate of first three caliphs is free from any such thing. The only thing shia present from caliphate of first three is attack on sayeda and issue of fadak . While remaining time period of their caliphate is free from any crime or insult against ahlebait. How is that possible. If they really were enemies of ahlebait as shia potray their character in their books and majalis etc then their caliphate should have been full of crimes agaisnt ahlebait just like of muawiya and yazid. This clearly shows that it was merely a myth scripted by some liars of that time in order to make abu bakr and umar villians and enemies of ahlebait. 

Read the document in op for references and detailed narrations.

Members, please do not listen to this revisionist rubbish. 

the very first crime Against the Ahlulbayt (as) was saqeefa. 

Crimes of ammi jaan aisha against the Ahlulbayt (as)

The Crime of the Pen and Paper

The Crime of Saqeefa

The Crime of blaming uthmans killing on shia of Ali

The Crime of usurpation of Khums away from the Ahlulbayt (as), 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DigitalUmmah said:

there are far more shia hadith books than al kafi, bright spark. 

for example Bihar al Anwar has 110 volumes, books 15 to 53 deal almost exclusively with the lives of the Holy Prophet (S) and 14 infallibles. Im not even going to bother breaking down how many hadith that equates to or talk about other shia hadith books like Man La Yaduruhu al Faqih or others.

funny how you didnt mention this in OP, must be a coincidence that you only mentioned al kafi. 

OPs argument is "I only know about al kafi therefore shia have no narrations from the holy Prophet (s)"

 

OP gives a comparison between only one book from each side. You can compare others books as well. Same is the case with all shia books.

Kafi is the primary shia hadith book. On both usul and furu. While other main shia hadith books like faqih, tehzib and istibsar are mostly based on furu. And bihar ul anwar is not a primary book. Its like all shia books or narrations compiled into one. It also include many chainless narrations as well. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

OP gives a comparison between only one book from each side. You can compare others books as well. Same is the case with all shia books.

Kafi is the primary shia hadith book. On both usul and furu. While other main shia hadith books like faqih, tehzib and istibsar are mostly based on furu. And bihar ul anwar is not a primary book. Its like all shia books or narrations compiled into one. It also include many chainless narrations as well. 

 

what a stupid argument. 

we have multiple hadith across many top ranking hadith compilations (can you even name the 4 main ones btw?). your argument is taking one, putting it next to bukhari, and then saying that because the one shia one you chose has less prophetic hadith than bukhari, this means that shia have less prophetic hadith than sunni books. 

wow, much refutation. many victory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sindbad05 said:

It was a myth that is why it is in your book as well. Secondly, your caliphs were in need of Imam Ali a.s, they understood that without Imam Ali a.s, they cannot interpret and explain religious things. It was due to this that when many Jews and Christians came to debate to your caliphs they always turned to Imam Ali a.s. Read our books, whenever Umar did mistakes in Jurisprudential stuff, they sought help of Imam Ali a.s and he used to say: "If Ali were not born, Umar would have died". And also read about Umar that he talks of his mistakes and says that if Allah had not wished, there would have been a great fitna due to Saqifa and Allah's wished implied towards Imam Ali a.s. It was Allah's will that Allah reminded them anger of Momineen if they hurt Imam Ali a.s further and you would have found civil war against your caliphs. What was the reason that Muwaviya hatched conspiracies to kill Imam Ali a.s, Imam Hassan and Bibi Ayesha, it is known that he was aware of the influence of the people and he used khawajities and Jehda bint Ashas who was in the Nikah of Imam Hassa a.s. 

This truth is verified from your books too. 

Thats what I am saying. There was only love and respect between them. They were like best friends. As friends used to say yaar agr aj tu nhi hota mai to mar jata. 

Actual civil wars happened after the shahada of uthman r.a. and actual insult on ahlebait started during the rule of muawiyah. Before that there are only myths and man made stories. And conjectures. Like it was Allah's will. Imam Ali was under taqqiyah. He wanted unity. He remained silent for the sake of islam.

Job of a historian is to collect all data. Thats why we have many contradictry versions for the same event in history books. But not each and everythig there is authentic. You are saying its also there in ahlul sunnah books. Having sth written in book do not make the report authentic. Same rules also applys on shia books. For e.g just because sermon 3 is there in nahjul balagha, do not make it authentic. It need to be verified. And I am 500% sure that its chain will be weak. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fahad Sani said:

Thats what I am saying. There was only love and respect between them. They were like best friends. As friends used to say yaar agr aj tu nhi hota mai to mar jata. 

Actual civil wars happened after the shahada of uthman r.a. and actual insult on ahlebait started during the rule of muawiyah. Before that there are only myths and man made stories. And conjectures. Like it was Allah's will. Imam Ali was under taqqiyah. He wanted unity. He remained silent for the sake of islam.

Job of a historian is to collect all data. Thats why we have many contradictry versions for the same event in history books. But not each and everythig there is authentic. You are saying its also there in ahlul sunnah books. Having sth written in book do not make the report authentic. Same rules also applys on shia books. For e.g just because sermon 3 is there in nahjul balagha, do not make it authentic. It need to be verified. And I am 500% sure that its chain will be weak. 

There was no love between them. For Imam Ali a.s, the responsibility of Propagation of Deen and Hidayah of people mattered and for Umar and Abu Bakar only world has value. If Imam Ali a.s would not have been stopped by Prophet to be patient, He a.s would not have allowed to rule for even a nano second. But this world is a trial for every human, Allah allowed every person equal chance in their lives and you know that who lived a successful life and who violated the traditions of Prophet by usurping Caliphate and Fadak and installing Abu Sufan's family in Power. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

what a stupid argument. 

we have multiple hadith across many top ranking hadith compilations (can you even name the 4 main ones btw?). your argument is taking one, putting it next to bukhari, and then saying that because the one shia one you chose has less prophetic hadith than bukhari, this means that shia have less prophetic hadith than sunni books. 

wow, much refutation. many victory. 

See my previous post. Names of kutub arba are there. Collectively all four books have about 44,000 narrations. More than natrations in sihha sitta combined. Can you provide the summary of kutub e arba that how many from them are sahih and weak. And how many are directly from prophet saww without any gap in chain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

See my previous post. Names of kutub arba are there. Collectively all four books have about 44,000 narrations. More than natrations in sihha sitta combined. Can you provide the summary of kutub e arba that how many from them are sahih and weak. And how many are directly from prophet saww without any gap in chain.

4 is a fairly arbitrary number. there are actually 14 "main" shia books compiling the hadith of the Prophet (S) and Masumeen, as opposed to the 4 "sahih" (lol) sunni books. 

so straight away we have more "main" books of hadith (therefore prophetic hadith) than the sunni. 

secondly, we do not have, nor have ever been as stupid to think that anything other than the Quran is "sahih". our compilations are a mix of good hadith, bad hadith, crazy hadith. its the job of our scholars to sift through them and determine which hadith are right. 

the sunni argument is "well, we have 4 sahih hadith books, so shia must also have sahih hadith books. lets take one of ours against one of theirs and compare which has more prophetic hadith". 

its an absolutely absurd argument, written by someone who doesnt even know how shia hadith science works, promoted by a guy who doesnt know anything but cut and paste. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It is narrated that Imam al-Sadiq (a.s.) said:

"Never is there anything but that is mentioned either in the Book of Allah or in the Prophetic tradition."

Sama'ah asked Imam Musa bin Ja'far: "I said to him: 'Is everything found in the Book of Allah and the tradition of His Prophet (s.a.w.); or do you comment on them?' He (a.s.) replied: 'Yes, all things are found in the Book of Allah and the sunnah of His Prophet '".

 

Narrated Imam Ali bin Musa al-Ridha (a.s.) said:

"Do not accept any saying (relating them to us) which disagrees with the Qur'an; surely our sayings should agree with the Qur'an and the Prophetic traditions; we speak either quoting them from Allah or His Messenger."

So in order to verify sayings of ahlebait we need prophetic narrations. How many are there in shia primary books i.e kutub arba. And how many of them are authentically transmitted from prophet saww. Without any major defect in chain.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It is narrated that Imam al-Sadiq (a.s.) said:

"Never is there anything but that is mentioned either in the Book of Allah or in the Prophetic tradition."

Sama'ah asked Imam Musa bin Ja'far: "I said to him: 'Is everything found in the Book of Allah and the tradition of His Prophet (s.a.w.); or do you comment on them?' He (a.s.) replied: 'Yes, all things are found in the Book of Allah and the sunnah of His Prophet '".

 

Narrated Imam Ali bin Musa al-Ridha (a.s.) said:

"Do not accept any saying (relating them to us) which disagrees with the Qur'an; surely our sayings should agree with the Qur'an and the Prophetic traditions; we speak either quoting them from Allah or His Messenger."

So in order to verify sayings of ahlebait we need prophetic narrations. How many are there in shia primary books i.e kutub arba. And how many of them are authentically transmitted from prophet saww. Without any major defect in chain.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

So in order to verify sayings of ahlebait we need prophetic narrations. How many are there in shia primary books i.e kutub arba. And how many of them are authentically transmitted from prophet saww. Without any major defect in chain.

Shia scholars have dedicated their entire lives for over 1000 years on this exact question. we have secondary and tertiary books which summarise their findings and research. 

in response, sunni say "bukhari said so therefore its true". 

you tell me which is a better path. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Research of few notable shia scholars on kafi.

 

Allama Baqir Bahdoodi

Saheeh: 27%

Daeef: 73%

Allama Baqir Majlisi

Saheeh: 2760 – 17%

Daeef: 5400 – 34%

Hassan: 2140 – 13%

Marfoo’: 370 – 2%

Mursal: 1050 – 7%

Majhool: 3000 – 19%

Muwathiqa: 1280 – 8%

According to shia scholar Zayn al-Din al-`Amili, known as al-Shahid al-Thani (911-966/1505-1559), al-Kafi's traditions, consists of 5072 sahih (authentic), 144 hasan (good authenticity), 1118 muwaththaq (trustworthy to an extent), 302 qawi (strong authenticity) and 9485 traditions which are categorized as daif (weak).

https://www.al-islam.org/al-tawhid/general-al-tawhid/selections-usul-al-kafi-muhammad-ibn-yaqub-al-kulayni/preface

This is the case with Kafi which is only 8 or 9 volume book. Then what about bihar which has 110 volumes. How much bihar would be authentic.

Why dont shia scholars today publish only sahih narrations from Kafi as a separate book and weak as other. So that it become more easier for all to know how many narrations are from whom and on what topics. 

Compare the authenticity of Kafi as comapred to Bukhari. Also in terms of which book contain more authentic prophetic narrations. And then decide which of the two books is more reliable to follow the sunnah of prophet saww. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

Why dont shia scholars today publish only sahih narrations from Kafi as a separate book and weak as other. So that it become more easier for all to know how many narrations are from whom and on what topics. 

there's literally entire libraries filled with these types of books. you not knowing about them doesn't mean that they do not exist. 

5 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

Compare the authenticity of Kafi as comapred to Bukhari. Also in terms of which book contain more authentic prophetic narrations. And then decide which of the two books is more reliable to follow the sunnah of prophet saww.

hadith in bukhari are sahih because bukhari said they are sahih? 

how about we dont compare them, lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sindbad05 said:

There was no love between them. For Imam Ali a.s, the responsibility of Propagation of Deen and Hidayah of people mattered and for Umar and Abu Bakar only world has value. If Imam Ali a.s would not have been stopped by Prophet to be patient, He a.s would not have allowed to rule for even a nano second. But this world is a trial for every human, Allah allowed every person equal chance in their lives and you know that who lived a successful life and who violated the traditions of Prophet by usurping Caliphate and Fadak and installing Abu Sufan's family in Power. 

Only world. Ok

Then tell me how much wealth and property abu bakr and umar collected during their rule and what benefits they had given tp their children.

So you are saying that prophet saww told Ali a.s that be patient untill muhajirun and ansaar make you caliph. Then you are allowed to raise sword. Till then dont even raise your voice. Remain under taqqiyah. and play safely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
8 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

Firstly, this hadith do not say to follow ahlebait. But to take care of them, love and respect them. Love of Ahlebait is part of Iman.

Hadith al-Thaqalayn implies the religious leadership of the Ahlul Bayt. Since the Prophet has placed the Ahlul Bayt by the side of the Quran, it means that the Ahlul Bayt have to be followed, like the Quran, as the living guides of the Ummah in matters of doctrine, ritual and law.

Shah ‘Abd al-Aziz cites the statements of numerous leading Sunni authorities in affirmation of this. The words 'thaqalayn' and the command to hold on to them (al-i’tisam, al-akhdh or al-ittiba’ in accordance with the different wordings) unambiguously imply that in the same way as it is obligatory to follow the Quran, so also it is equally obligatory to follow the Ahlul Bayt in the matters of Islamic teachings.

The inseparability of the Quran and the Ahlul Bayt, as well as the repeated emphasis on holding on to the two and the specific emphasis on adherence to the Ahlul Bayt and the observance of their rights clearly establish the obligation to follow the Ahlul Bayt as the religious leaders, authorities and guides of the Ummah.

The Messenger of Allah said: "Acknowledgment of Aale-Muhammad (the family of Muhammad) means salvation from the fire, and love for them is a passport for crossing the bridge of the Siraat, and obedience to them is a protection from divine wrath."

Sunni references: Kitab al-Shafa, by Qadhi ‘Ayadh, published in 1328 AH, v2, p40 - Yanabi al-Mawaddah, al-Qundoozi al-Hanafi, section 65, p370

 

Abdullah Ibn Hantab related: The Messenger of Allah addressed us at Juhfa saying: "Do I not have authority over you more than yourselves?”They all said, "Yes of course.”Then he said: "I shall hold you answerable for two things, namely, the Book of Allah and my descendants."

Sunni reference: Ihyaa al-Mayyit, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti -  Arba’in al-’Arbain, by Allamah al-Nabahani

 

8 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

Secondly, if you read the entire narration you will find that here at ghadir ahlebait include family of Ali, Abbas, Jafar and Aqil. At ghadir ahlebait include all these four families. Its not only limited to 12 or 13 or 14 Imams.

The Ahlulbayt are only his 12 decedents, it has been proven here in this post:

 

8 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

Which ahlul sunnah rijal experts had considered abu huraira as liar and declared hm weak. Provide their names.

Consider all reports and then reach a conclusion about someone.

Even the prophets of Allah have been accused of lying, and that did nothing to hurt their credibility in the eyes of Allah swt.

He said in His Holy book that they called Nuh (alaih al-salam) a liar:

قَالَ الْمَلَأُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ قَوْمِهِ إِنَّا لَنَرَاكَ فِي سَفَاهَةٍ وَإِنَّا لَنَظُنُّكَ مِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ

{Said the eminent ones who disbelieved among his people, “Indeed, we see you in foolishness, and indeed, we think you are of the liars.”} (Al-A’araf: 66)

Shu’aib (alaih al-salam) was also accused of lying:

وَمَا أَنْتَ إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُنَا وَإِنْ نَظُنُّكَ لَمِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ

{You are but a man like ourselves, and indeed, we think you are among the liars.} (Al-Shu’ara’a: 186)

Even the people of Quraish held accused Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam) of lying:

وَعَجِبُوا أَنْ جَاءَهُمْ مُنْذِرٌ مِنْهُمْ وَقَالَ الْكَافِرُونَ هَذَا سَاحِرٌ كَذَّابٌ

{And they wonder that there has come to them a warner from among themselves. And the disbelievers say, “This is a magician and a liar.} (Saad: 38)

 

For more knowledge REFER THIS

It's your OWN ULAMA that are saying this, not just the shias. What I have provided were authentic hadiths to prove who Abu Huraira really is. If you think they are fabricated, it's on you to prove it. 

Abu Huraira wasn't just accused of lying, he was accused of many other things like siding with Muawiya, killing the people of Medina, cursing Ali...from so many different sunni sources. YOU have to prove to me that your own ulama and scholars have fabricated these hadiths.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fahad Sani said:

Only world. Ok

Then tell me how much wealth and property abu bakr and umar collected during their rule and what benefits they had given tp their children.

So you are saying that prophet saww told Ali a.s that be patient untill muhajirun and ansaar make you caliph. Then you are allowed to raise sword. Till then dont even raise your voice. Remain under taqqiyah. and play safely. 

Whatever they did, it went down along them into graves. No doubt they were corrupt people, if they were honest, they would not have stood for Caliphate knowing their merit. Everything was in their hands, and when they died nothing helped them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

Only world. Ok

Then tell me how much wealth and property abu bakr and umar collected during their rule and what benefits they had given tp their children.

So you are saying that prophet saww told Ali a.s that be patient untill muhajirun and ansaar make you caliph. Then you are allowed to raise sword. Till then dont even raise your voice. Remain under taqqiyah. and play safely. 

When Muhajirring and Ansar went to Imam Ali a.s, they blackmailed him that if you do not have caliphate now then on the day of Judgement, we will say to God that you denied to help us. Do you think that Imam Ali a.s was interested in the Caliphate that destroyed whole Muslim Ummah and gave power to Muawaiya ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Fahad Sani said:

Only world. Ok

Then tell me how much wealth and property abu bakr and umar collected during their rule and what benefits they had given tp their children.

So you are saying that prophet saww told Ali a.s that be patient untill muhajirun and ansaar make you caliph. Then you are allowed to raise sword. Till then dont even raise your voice. Remain under taqqiyah. and play safely. 

In the view of Arabs being old itself on it's own was a value. The tribal values of Arab nation. While in the view of Islam ........

Those who captured and occupied Fadak and refused and rejected Ali and Fatima can not be honest.

Edited by maes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

There is nothing ridiculous or insulting there. Consider the book in totality and compare this to Kafi. Statistics are there in OP.

Narrations which say we can see our Lord will happen in hereafter, not in this world. While story of moses a.s and other events are talking in reference to world. What exactly will happen in hereafter we dont know. Allah swt did not give us all knowledge. 

LOL

Everyone, @fahad sani just admitted that we will see ALLAH in the hereafter astaghfurullah. Not only that, but he thinks PROPHET MOSES ran naked infront of the people because a ROCK stole his clothes. Look at the hypocrisy of @Fahad Sani.

 

5 hours ago, Fahad Sani said:

Even if you reject such reports which seems ridiculous to you. Still then there remain a vast number of prophetic narrations in bukhari as cpmpared to Kafi. Which is more than double in siza than bukhari. 

If bukhari was hypocrite by not including man made narrations on divine imamate then same bukhari also did not included reports in praise of muawiya and ummayds. Rather he included reports which exposes the rule of muawiya and co.

And if abu huraira is a liar according to twelver shias then all narrations from him in praise of ahlebait and all narrations from him which are against the ummayds will become unreliable.

Moreover, there is not a single report from prophet saww himself where he cursed or called abu huraira liar. While in shia rijal books we have plenty of reports from more than one Imams of ahlebait where top shia narrators like abu basir, zurarah etc are being cursed by ahlebait. Not once but on many occasions. But yet they are trustworthy. 

Consider all these facts and then decide who is liar and unreliable.

 Why would we trust a book from an author who added over 4000 narrations of a liar in his book? That's not a book you'd want to trust. Abu Huraira was a liar NOT JUST ACCORDING TO SHIAS BUT SUNNIS SCHOLARS ASWELL. Why didn't Bukhari put any narrations from the ahlulbayt? It's because he hated them, and the Ummayads controlled him.

What I provided you is authentic hadiths of who Abu Huraira is, if you think they are fabricated than PROVE IT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

@Fahad Sani I honestly thought you were smarter than this. After proving to you that Abu Huraira is a liar and a book like Sahih Bukhari (more like 'Sahih Abu Huraira') is not a book to be trusted, you are still denying it. I showed you the absurd hadiths in Sahih Bukhari, like how Abu Huraira says we will see Allah in the day of judgment (which violates the quran) and you have the audacity to try to defend it. Shame.

Link to comment
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...