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

Tattoos

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Ron_Burgundy said:

Tattoos are halal according to Syed Sistani.

Yes indeed they are (I would like one myself).

One thing that I have been told through discussions with two different preachers was the following: although tattoos are halal, getting the name of a masoom / prayer / text from the quran or the names of Allah may be problematic. The reason being is the following: those areas that are tattooed with the aforementioned must be pak 100% of the time. Since it is impossible to keep an area of the body pak 100% of the time, it would not be recommended to get a tattoo of religious nature. If what I have understood is not in line with the general views on this issue, please correct me.

To support my previous views, I just wanted to include the email I received from Hujjatul Islam Wal Muslimeen Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi in Toronto (representative of Sistani) "Knowing how tattoos are done (especially, if you decide to remove it, it become surgerical procedure), I would strongly advice you against it. Especially when you have the name of the Ma'sumeen on you -- you don't know in what state it could come into najasat.

w/s
SM Rizvi"
Edited by Meesum_Mtl
Added Third Paragraph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tattoos are halal, but getting tattoos of religious origin, such as Allah's name, or the name of the prophets, ayahs of the quran, names of the masoomeh, etc, are disliked and not encouraged at all. 

Why don't you get a tattoo of a symbol of Ali (as)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tattoos are haraam according to the narrations of ahlulbayt (as). This is the problem with blind taqleed - people are unconsciously following things without researching what the Thaqalayn have said about them.

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn abu Abd Allah from his father from Mohammed ibn Sinan from Abd Allah ibn Sinan who has said the following: ‘Abu Abd Allah (as) has said that the Messenger of Allah (saww) has cursed tattooing persons and those (women) who are tattooed, those who raise the price of a piece of goods for sale without the intention to buy and those who agree to such act’.

Al-Kafi, Vol. 3, H. 4024,

 

And from Qatada who said, ‘When Ibleesla went down, Adamas said: ‘O Lord! He (la) has been cursed. What is his knowledge?’ Allah replied: ‘The magic’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his reading?’ Allah replied: ‘The poetry’. Heas asked: ‘What is his writing?’ Allah replied: ‘The Tatoos’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his food?’ Allah replied: ‘Every corpse (dead) and on which the Name of Allah has not been mentioned’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his drink?’ Allah replied: ‘Every intoxicant’. He (as) asked: ‘Where is his dwelling place?’ Allah replied: ‘The bath’. He asked: ‘Where is his sitting (place)?’ Allahazwj replied: ‘The markets’. He asked: ‘What is his voice?’ Allah replied: ‘The flute’. He asked: ‘What are his traps?’ Allah replied: ‘The women’.

Bihar ul Anwaar – Volume 60 – Hadeeth 172

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Tattoos are haraam according to the narrations of ahlulbayt (as). This is the problem with blind taqleed - people are unconsciously following things without researching what the Thaqalayn have said about them.

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn abu Abd Allah from his father from Mohammed ibn Sinan from Abd Allah ibn Sinan who has said the following: ‘Abu Abd Allah (as) has said that the Messenger of Allah (saww) has cursed tattooing persons and those (women) who are tattooed, those who raise the price of a piece of goods for sale without the intention to buy and those who agree to such act’.

Al-Kafi, Vol. 3, H. 4024,

 

And from Qatada who said, ‘When Ibleesla went down, Adamas said: ‘O Lord! He (la) has been cursed. What is his knowledge?’ Allah replied: ‘The magic’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his reading?’ Allah replied: ‘The poetry’. Heas asked: ‘What is his writing?’ Allah replied: ‘The Tatoos’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his food?’ Allah replied: ‘Every corpse (dead) and on which the Name of Allah has not been mentioned’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his drink?’ Allah replied: ‘Every intoxicant’. He (as) asked: ‘Where is his dwelling place?’ Allah replied: ‘The bath’. He asked: ‘Where is his sitting (place)?’ Allahazwj replied: ‘The markets’. He asked: ‘What is his voice?’ Allah replied: ‘The flute’. He asked: ‘What are his traps?’ Allah replied: ‘The women’.

Bihar ul Anwaar – Volume 60 – Hadeeth 172

Brother, our respected maraje perform ijtihaad, which is basically deriving Islamic law using the holy quran and the ahadith. I'm pretty sure Ayatollah Sistani has seen these hadith before coming to any conclusion. In fact, he's not just seen these hadith but analysed them inside out. 

These maraje study these hadith, the narrators of the hadith, the way it's written, study the hadith in light of the quran, and so much more that I can't even list before making any firm decision. These maraje have studied Islam their whole lives, so if Syed Sistani says it's halal, it's best to follow what he says. 

By following the rulings of our maraje, in no way are we blindly doing anything. In fact, since we may be blind when it comes to these things, we are following those who have the sight and the insight.

Edited by AStruggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, AStruggler said:

Brother, our respected maraje perform ijtihaad, which is basically deriving Islamic law using the holy quran and the ahadith. I'm pretty sure Ayatollah Sistani has seen these hadith before coming to any conclusion. In fact, he's not just seen these hadith but analysed them inside out. 

These maraje study these hadith, the narrators of the hadith, the way it's written, study the hadith in light of the quran, and so much more that I can't even list before making any firm decision. If Syed Sistani says it's halal, then as laymen who may not even have the be ability to understand basic arabic, it's best to follow what he says. 

By following the rulings of our maraje, in no way are we blindly doing anything. In fact, since we may be blind when it comes to these things, we are following those who have the sight and the insight.

This is quite a myth. You've been made to believe that the Marjas analyse the Quran and all ahadith, then why is it that Agha Sistani has permitted it in contradiction to the ahadith? Though according to the ahlulbayt (as) they are pretty much haraam.

On what basis has agha sistani permitted it?

Will you still blindly follow Sistani on this? Or the Ahlulbayt (as).

If the fatwas are based on the ahadith then why don't they just simply narrate the hadith? (Which was the true Fuqaha have been commanded to do).

During the ghayba of Imam mahdi (as), we are commanded to seek out the narrators of hadith.

The Prophet (s) said to hold onto the Qur'an and the ahlulbayt (as) in which we will never go astray. He never mentioned a 3rd category. In the light of this, it becomes necessary to seek out all issues in the light of the thaqalayn.

Edited by Al-Hussayni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Al-Hussayni said:

This is quite a myth. You've been made to believe that the Marjas analyse the Quran and all ahadith, then why is it that Agha Sistani has permitted it in contradiction to the ahadith? Though according to the ahlulbayt (as) they are pretty much haraam.

Will you still blindly follow Sistani on this? Or the Ahlulbayt (as).

You're wrong.

Bro, do you think every single hadith is reliable, do you think the thousands of ahadith in the books are all 100% true and from the Imams (AS)?

What if after studying the biographies of maybe just ONE of the individuals in the chain of narrators of the hadith, it turns out that the narrator was a liar?

What if after studying the different ahadith, other ahadith contradict this one?

What if this hadith somehow contradicts the quran?

Are you still going to accept the hadith despite all of these possibilities?

There could be many other reasons....And our maraje study all of this...

"...The Imams of Ahlul-Bayt (peace be upon them all) have endorsed this system in theory as well as in prac­tise:

In Theory: In a famous hadith, 'Umar ibn Hanzalah asked Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (a.s.) about the legality of two Shi'ahs seeking a verdict from an illegitimate ruler (or a judge appointed by such a ruler) in a dispute over a debt or a legacy. The Imam's answer was that was absolutely forbidden to do so; and then he read the following verse:

" ... (Yet in a dispute) they desire to summon one another to the judgment of the taghut1 though they were commanded to reject and disbelieve in him.”(Surah an-Nisaa, 4:60)

Then 'Umar ibn Hanzalah asked, "What the two (Shi'ahs) should do then?" The Imam replied, "They must seek out one of your own who narrates our tradi­tions, who is versed in what is permissible and what is forbidden, who is well-acquainted with our laws and ordinances, and accept him as judge and arbiter, for I appoint him as judge over you. If the ruling which he based on our laws is rejected then this rejection will be tantamount to. ignoring the order of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and rejecting us and rejecting us IS the same as rejecting Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى, and this is the same as polytheism. 2"

https://www.al-islam.org/introduction-islamic-shariah-sayyid-muhammad-rizvi/taqlid-following-expert#f_aea1e76a_2

So yeah, I will follow Ayatollah Sistani because by doing so, I would be following the teachings of the Ahlul Bayth (AS).

Edited by AStruggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

السَّلآمُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ الله وبَرَكآتُه 

@Ya ALIIII

Brother/Sister

Since it seems that the matter of tattoo on the body is a matter of a pretty big dispute unfortunately I thought of advicing you this.

Instead of putting a tattoo on your upper skin (body) why do not you embed a tattoo of Moula Ali(asws) in your heart? 

I prefer that will be better comparatively and it will purify your heart as well.

This way you will entirely live everyday in his love and in his thoughts.

Putting a tattoo on body, you know people will look at you, wonder and probably ask you again and again, better to embed a tattoo in your heart and keep loving him(asws) in yourself silently all by yourself rejoicing every time his love all within yourself, Trust me you will be happy.

Imagine yourself right now believing this that you have a tattoo on your heart and to add to it with your finger on your chest write 'Ya Ali' and try to feel it. You will feel nice and satisfied.

A sincere advice from your brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Al-Hussayni said:

This is quite a myth. You've been made to believe that the Marjas analyse the Quran and all ahadith, then why is it that Agha Sistani has permitted it in contradiction to the ahadith? Though according to the ahlulbayt (as) they are pretty much haraam.

On what basis has agha sistani permitted it?

Will you still blindly follow Sistani on this? Or the Ahlulbayt (as).

If the fatwas are based on the ahadith then why don't they just simply narrate the hadith? (Which was the true Fuqaha have been commanded to do).

During the ghayba of Imam mahdi (as), we are commanded to seek out the narrators of hadith.

The Prophet (s) said to hold onto the Qur'an and the ahlulbayt (as) in which we will never go astray. He never mentioned a 3rd category. In the light of this, it becomes necessary to seek out all issues in the light of the thaqalayn.

السَّلآمُ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَةُ الله وبَرَكآتُه 

Brother @Al-Hussayni this Thread will go on many comments if this topic is brought up and we have people here from other school of thoughts too on shiachat (I hope you know what I mean by this).

Let us not get into the topic of Marjaees and the discrepancies.

Some people just don't understand so let them follow what they want to.

You cannot just change, Trust me when I say this. It is very hard.

We cannot.

Share this post


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

You're wrong.

Bro, do you think every single hadith is reliable, do you think the thousands of ahadith in the books are all 100% true and from the Imams (AS)?

What if after studying the biographies of maybe just ONE of the individuals in the chain of narrators of the hadith, it turns out that the narrator was a liar?

What if after studying the different ahadith, other ahadith contradict this one?

What if this hadith somehow contradicts the quran?

Are you still going to accept thej hadith despite all of these possibilities?

There could be many other reasons....And our maraje study all of this...

"...The Imams of Ahlul-Bayt (peace be upon them all) have endorsed this system in theory as well as in prac­tise:

In Theory: In a famous hadith, 'Umar ibn Hanzalah asked Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq (a.s.) about the legality of two Shi'ahs seeking a verdict from an illegitimate ruler (or a judge appointed by such a ruler) in a dispute over a debt or a legacy. The Imam's answer was that was absolutely forbidden to do so; and then he read the following verse:

" ... (Yet in a dispute) they desire to summon one another to the judgment of the taghut1 though they were commanded to reject and disbelieve in him.”(Surah an-Nisaa, 4:60)

Then 'Umar ibn Hanzalah asked, "What the two (Shi'ahs) should do then?" The Imam replied, "They must seek out one of your own who narrates our tradi­tions, who is versed in what is permissible and what is forbidden, who is well-acquainted with our laws and ordinances, and accept him as judge and arbiter, for I appoint him as judge over you. If the ruling which he based on our laws is rejected then this rejection will be tantamount to. ignoring the order of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and rejecting us and rejecting us IS the same as rejecting Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى, and this is the same as polytheism. 2"

https://www.al-islam.org/introduction-islamic-shariah-sayyid-muhammad-rizvi/taqlid-following-expert#f_aea1e76a_2

So yeah, I will follow Ayatollah Sistani because by doing so, I would be following the teachings of the Ahlul Bayth (AS).

Brother,

We should accept the ahadith unless we find other narrations which contradict (god forbid) it. Then we can look into these narrations a bit more deeply. The imams have warned us against dismissing their narrations so quickly. The narrations above on tattoos can be found in our primary sources (such as al-kafi) and secondary sources.

The process of Ilm e rijaal is not a shia concept and it is an innovation in the Shia school borrowed from the sunnis.

I would rather be on the safe side and accept these ahadith rather than reject them. Please read the following narrations of accepting/rejecting narrations:

RasoolAllah (saws), said that the sign of Iman is reflected from good deeds and light (of knowledge) is gained from Quran-e-Mohkum, Thus a hadith which is in agreement with the Book of Allah swt, accept it otherwise leave it'
 
This matter is further explained by Imam Jafar-e-Sadiq (as) when a person asked 
what shall we do when we hear conflicting Ahadith from those who are your trustworthy (followers)? Imam (as) said if a hadith is in agreement with the book of Allah and sayings of Rasulallah, then accept it otherwise leave it alone.


Imam further explained: When a narrator asked from Imam Jafar-e-Sadiqas which hadith should be followed when two ahadith (e.g., Imam Zain-ul-Abadeen a.s. and Imam Mohammed Baqir a.s.) are presented. Imam (as) replied "act on the latter one until you get another hadith from the living masoom Imamas then act on it." Imam Jafar-e-Sadiq (as) then said "I have asked you to act on the tradition of later Imam only to protect you from troubles (of rulers). But when there is no fear of harm then act upon any one of them."

In another hadith from Imam-e-Zamanas it is narrated that act on a hadith from masoom Imam with the understanding that it is Masoom's tradition but not giving one priority over the other hadith.
 
Mola Ali (as) has said, if you do not understand some of our Ahadith leave them for the generations who will come after you (act on those which are relevant to you).

So based on these narrations, the ahadith are hujjah (proof) upon us and not fatwas

Tell me, which narrations did agha sistani come across which permitted tattoos?

You are just assuming they've studied all of this because a blind muqallid is not even allowed to demand proper evidence. He has to accept blindly. This is my biggest problem with the system frankly.

I guess you are willing to reject any ahadith that contradict Sistanis viewpoint because you believe he's 100% correct?

Read the hadith you quoted carefully. It clearly says to seek out a narrator of our hadith:

"They must seek out one of your own who narrates our tradi­tions."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Tattoos are haraam according to the narrations of ahlulbayt (as). This is the problem with blind taqleed - people are unconsciously following things without researching what the Thaqalayn have said about them.

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn abu Abd Allah from his father from Mohammed ibn Sinan from Abd Allah ibn Sinan who has said the following: ‘Abu Abd Allah (as) has said that the Messenger of Allah (saww) has cursed tattooing persons and those (women) who are tattooed, those who raise the price of a piece of goods for sale without the intention to buy and those who agree to such act’.

Al-Kafi, Vol. 3, H. 4024,

 

And from Qatada who said, ‘When Ibleesla went down, Adamas said: ‘O Lord! He (la) has been cursed. What is his knowledge?’ Allah replied: ‘The magic’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his reading?’ Allah replied: ‘The poetry’. Heas asked: ‘What is his writing?’ Allah replied: ‘The Tatoos’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his food?’ Allah replied: ‘Every corpse (dead) and on which the Name of Allah has not been mentioned’. He (as) asked: ‘What is his drink?’ Allah replied: ‘Every intoxicant’. He (as) asked: ‘Where is his dwelling place?’ Allah replied: ‘The bath’. He asked: ‘Where is his sitting (place)?’ Allahazwj replied: ‘The markets’. He asked: ‘What is his voice?’ Allah replied: ‘The flute’. He asked: ‘What are his traps?’ Allah replied: ‘The women’.

Bihar ul Anwaar – Volume 60 – Hadeeth 172

Sayyed Al-Sistani, and most fuqaha today, follow the mainstream ilm al rijal method. The above hadiths seem to be weak. That could be a reason why they don't rule tattoos haram. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus, let's say for the sake of argument that we are acting upon wrong narrations or those narrations which are wrongly referenced. Imam ali (as) has clarified this:

Amir-ul-mu'mineen [as] said upon presenting our Hadith, you must mention the name of the person from whom you have originally heard it. Thus, if the Hadith is true then you will get the reward (for narrating it) but if it is false, then he will be held responsible for attributing a lie to us."

The point here is that our intentions should be on following the divine commands of the ahlulbayt (as). We are bound to act upon a single hadith which is hujjah (proof) for us, but later on if we come across some conflicting narrations, then we may look further into this.

Of course, it is our firm belief as shias that the Aimmah (as) never contradicted themselves or with the teachings of the Prophet (saws).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

Sayyed Al-Sistani, and most fuqaha today, follow the mainstream ilm al rijal method. The above hadiths seem to be weak. That could be a reason why they don't rule tattoos haram. 

Astaghfirullah. Rejecting even one hadith just like that (especially using a man-made method) is equivalent to rejecting the orders of ahlulbayt (as). We may only suspect a narration if it is in conflict with the book of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and other narrations. Another side note: If we apply Ilm-e-rijaal on Shia collections of hadith, then we will come to find that most of them are weak according to this false method!

وعنه عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علي بن الحكم، عن حسان أبي علي عن أبي عبد هللا )عليه السالم( - في حديث - قال: حسبكم أن تقولوا ما نقول، وتصمتوا عما نصمت، إنكم قد رأيتم أن هللا عز وجل لم يجعل ألحد في خالفنا خيرا And it is reported from Ahmad Bin Muhammad, from Ali Bin Al Hakam, from Hisaan Abu Ali from Abu Abd Allah (as) in a Hadith that: ‘It is sufficient for you that you should say that which we say, and observe silence in that in which we keep silent, as you have seen that Allahazwj has not kept any good in any of our adversaries.

 

[44164 ] أحمد بن أبي عبدهللا البرقي في ) المحاسن ( عن أبيه ، عن النضر بن سويد ، عن يحيى بن عمران الحلبي ، عن عبدهللا بن مسكان ، عن أبي بصير ، قال : قلت ألبي عبدهللا ) عليه السالم ( : أرأيت الراد على هذا االمر كالراد عليكم ؟ فقال : يا با محمد من رد عليك هذا االمر فهو كالراد على رسول هللا ) صلى هللا عليه وآله ( . H 33463 – Ahmad Bin Abu Abd Allah Al Barqy in Al Mahasin from his father, from Al Nazar Bin Suweyd, from Yahya Bin Amran Al Halby, from Abdullah Bin Muskan, from Abu Baseer who said: ‘I said to Abu Abd Allah [asws], ‘Do you see the rejection of this order as if rejecting you?’ He [asws] said: ‘O Abu Muhammad! One who rejects this order (Hadith) to you has rejected the Messenger of Allah [saww]’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Astaghfirullah. Rejecting even one hadith just like that (especially using a man-made method) is equivalent to rejecting the orders of ahlulbayt (as). We may only suspect a narration if it is in conflict with the book of Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى and other narrations. Another side note: If we apply Ilm-e-rijaal on Shia collections of hadith, then we will come to find that most of them are weak according to this false method!

وعنه عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علي بن الحكم، عن حسان أبي علي عن أبي عبد هللا )عليه السالم( - في حديث - قال: حسبكم أن تقولوا ما نقول، وتصمتوا عما نصمت، إنكم قد رأيتم أن هللا عز وجل لم يجعل ألحد في خالفنا خيرا And it is reported from Ahmad Bin Muhammad, from Ali Bin Al Hakam, from Hisaan Abu Ali from Abu Abd Allah (as) in a Hadith that: ‘It is sufficient for you that you should say that which we say, and observe silence in that in which we keep silent, as you have seen that Allahazwj has not kept any good in any of our adversaries.

 

[44164 ] أحمد بن أبي عبدهللا البرقي في ) المحاسن ( عن أبيه ، عن النضر بن سويد ، عن يحيى بن عمران الحلبي ، عن عبدهللا بن مسكان ، عن أبي بصير ، قال : قلت ألبي عبدهللا ) عليه السالم ( : أرأيت الراد على هذا االمر كالراد عليكم ؟ فقال : يا با محمد من رد عليك هذا االمر فهو كالراد على رسول هللا ) صلى هللا عليه وآله ( . H 33463 – Ahmad Bin Abu Abd Allah Al Barqy in Al Mahasin from his father, from Al Nazar Bin Suweyd, from Yahya Bin Amran Al Halby, from Abdullah Bin Muskan, from Abu Baseer who said: ‘I said to Abu Abd Allah [asws], ‘Do you see the rejection of this order as if rejecting you?’ He [asws] said: ‘O Abu Muhammad! One who rejects this order (Hadith) to you has rejected the Messenger of Allah [saww]’

Rejection =/= unproven.

In any case, the Holy Qur'an says if a fasiq comes with a report then investigate. This doesn't mean rejection, but it doesn't mean it is proven either.

One can say "I don't reject this hadith but it isn't proven to me that the Imam (as) has said it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

Rejection =/= unproven.

In any case, the Holy Qur'an says if a fasiq comes with a report then investigate. This doesn't mean rejection, but it doesn't mean it is proven either.

One can say "I don't reject this hadith but it isn't proven to me that the Imam (as) has said it."

But there are clear references for the narrations and we must act upon them. We cannot just reject them, which is tantamount to rejecting the orders of the Aimmah (as). If the hadith, with sanad and reference is quoted then we must take it on face value and accept it. Even for sake of argument if it's a wrong narration or wrong reference, then we will not be punished for that because we will have fulfilled our duty on acting with accordance with the divine command.

Unless one can provide other conflicting narrations in this regard, then it is obligatory to act upon these ahadith above.

The Imams (as) have also explained that verse of the Qur'an, which makes it clear we must investigate irrespective if a person is righteous or immoral.

 Abu Abdillah (as) said:

"O Muhammad, whatever comes to you in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that agrees with the Quran, then take hold of it. And whatever comes to in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that contradicts the Quran, then do not take hold of it."

It's strange how people will easily reject a narration (because it goes against what they believe) but will blindly accept a fatwa without any evidences for it.

 


According to the following hadith we are not allowed to just reject a narration attributed to an Imam (as):

حدثنا محمد بن الحسين عن محمد بن اسماعيل عن حمزة بن بزيع عن على السنانى عن ابى الحسن ع انه كتب إليه في رسالة ولا تقل لما بلغك عنا أو نسب الينا هذا باطل وان كنت تعرفه خلافه فانك لا تدري لم قلنا وعلى أي وجه وصفة.

Muhammad b. al-Husayn narrated to us from Muhammad b. Isma`il from Hamza b. Bazi from Ali the as-Sinani from Abu ‘l-Hasan (as)  that he wrote to him in an epistle,
 
"And do not say for what reaches you from us and is attributed to us “this is false” even if you have known its opposite, for verily you do not know why we said (it) and upon which aspect and attribute."
 
[Source: Basair Al-Darajat Pg. 538]

 

According to the following hadith, one who chooses not to refer to the aimmah (as) will be counted as a mushrik:

وباالسناد عن يونس، عن داود بن فرقد، عن حسان الجمال، عن عميرة، عن أبي عبد هللا )عليه السالم( قال: امر الناس بمعرفتنا والرد إلينا والتسليم لنا ثم قال: وإن صاموا وصلوا وشهدوا أن ال إله إال هللا، وجعلوا في أنفسهم أن ال يردوا إلينا، كانوا بذلك مشركين It is narrated from Yunus from Dawood Bin Farqad from Hisan Al amaal from Ameer from Abu Abdullah [asws] that: ‘The affairs of the people are on recognising us and referring to us and accepting us.’ Then he said: ‘And if they were to observe fast and pray and bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and if they have it in their hearts that they will not refer to us, then they will be among the ‘Mushrikeen’ (polytheists).

Edited by Al-Hussayni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Al-Hussayni said:

But there are clear references for the narrations and we must act upon them. We cannot just reject them, which is tantamount to rejecting the orders of the Aimmah (as). If the hadith, with sanad and reference is quoted then we must take it on face value and accept it. Even for sake of argument if it's a wrong narration or wrong reference, then we will not be punished for that because we will have fulfilled our duty on acting with accordance with the divine command.

Unless one can provide other conflicting narrations in this regard, then it is obligatory to act upon these ahadith above.

The Imams (as) have also explained that verse of the Qur'an, which makes it clear we must investigate irrespective if a person is righteous or immoral.

 Abu Abdillah (as) said:

"O Muhammad, whatever comes to you in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that agrees with the Quran, then take hold of it. And whatever comes to in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that contradicts the Quran, then do not take hold of it."

It's strange how people will easily reject a narration (because it goes against what they believe) but will blindly accept a fatwa without any evidences for it.

 


According to the following hadith we are not allowed to just reject a narration attributed to an Imam (as):

حدثنا محمد بن الحسين عن محمد بن اسماعيل عن حمزة بن بزيع عن على السنانى عن ابى الحسن ع انه كتب إليه في رسالة ولا تقل لما بلغك عنا أو نسب الينا هذا باطل وان كنت تعرفه خلافه فانك لا تدري لم قلنا وعلى أي وجه وصفة.

Muhammad b. al-Husayn narrated to us from Muhammad b. Isma`il from Hamza b. Bazi from Ali the as-Sinani from Abu ‘l-Hasan (as)  that he wrote to him in an epistle,
 
"And do not say for what reaches you from us and is attributed to us “this is false” even if you have known its opposite, for verily you do not know why we said (it) and upon which aspect and attribute."
 
[Source: Basair Al-Darajat Pg. 538]

 

According to the following hadith, one who chooses not to refer to the aimmah (as) will be counted as a mushrik:

وباالسناد عن يونس، عن داود بن فرقد، عن حسان الجمال، عن عميرة، عن أبي عبد هللا )عليه السالم( قال: امر الناس بمعرفتنا والرد إلينا والتسليم لنا ثم قال: وإن صاموا وصلوا وشهدوا أن ال إله إال هللا، وجعلوا في أنفسهم أن ال يردوا إلينا، كانوا بذلك مشركين It is narrated from Yunus from Dawood Bin Farqad from Hisan Al amaal from Ameer from Abu Abdullah [asws] that: ‘The affairs of the people are on recognising us and referring to us and accepting us.’ Then he said: ‘And if they were to observe fast and pray and bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and if they have it in their hearts that they will not refer to us, then they will be among the ‘Mushrikeen’ (polytheists).

Once again bro, rejection is not the same as not proven. The fuqaha don't reject usually, they say "weak". "Weak" doesn't mean "rejected", just means unproven.

And there is no problem with following the hadith, the problem is to claim something is halal or haram due to something which we aren't certain comes from the Imams (as).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

Once again bro, rejection is not the same as not proven. The fuqaha don't reject usually, they say "weak". "Weak" doesn't mean "rejected", just means unproven.

And there is no problem with following the hadith, the problem is to claim something is halal or haram due to something which we aren't certain comes from the Imams (as).

Brother, it's technically the same thing. One can still say 'not proven' even though the hadiths are pretty clear on the issue, which is the same as rejecting or dismissing them. however as quoted above, the imams (as) have warned us not to dismiss their narrations so quickly. 

When the marjas  'weaken' narrations, it is usually due to ilm al rijaal, which is not a valid criteria for determining the correctness of a hadith.

As stated before, if one were to apply ilm-e-rijaal to Shia collections of hadith, then most of them would be 'weak' according to this standard.

In regards to the subject (on tattoos), the narrations are pretty clear on this issue; they are haraam, unless one can prove otherwise, the hadiths are proof upon us so one should and is better off sticking to the hadith rather than disputing them. Mind you, the hadiths that forbid tattoos in shia sources, even in primary ones like in Al-Kafi, can also be found in sunni sources.

In the hadith, there is guidance and a hujjah (proof) upon us. Even if we misunderstand the meaning of the hadith, because we followed that which was hujjah, we have a legitimate excuse and are off the hook, whereas the same cannot be said for weakening a hadith based upon man made criteria.

Edited by Al-Hussayni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another hadith against Ilm al-rijaal:

Abu Abdullah (asws) said: Do not belie the Hadeeth, whether it comes to you by (way of) the Murjiites, or the Qadiriyya, or the Harouriya, if it is referred to us (asws), for you do not know perhaps therein is something from the Truth, otherwise you would end up belying Allah (azwj) on top of His (azwj) Throne. [Source: Al Mahaasin V1 Bk 5 H 175]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Brother, it's technically the same thing. One can still say 'not proven' even though the hadiths are pretty clear on the issue, which is the same as rejecting or dismissing them. however as quoted above, the imams (as) have warned us not to dismiss their narrations so quickly. 

When the marjas  'weaken' narrations, it is usually due to ilm al rijaal, which is not a valid criteria for determining the correctness of a hadith.

As stated before, if one were to apply ilm-e-rijaal to Shia collections of hadith, then most of them would be 'weak' according to this standard.

In regards to the subject (on tattoos), the narrations are pretty clear on this issue; they are haraam, unless one can prove otherwise, the hadiths are proof upon us so one should and is better off sticking to the hadith rather than disputing them. Mind you, the hadiths that forbid tattoos in shia sources, even in primary ones like in Al-Kafi, can also be found in sunni sources.

In the hadith, there is guidance and a hujjah (proof) upon us. Even if we misunderstand the meaning of the hadith, because we followed that which was hujjah, we have a legitimate excuse and are off the hook, whereas the same cannot be said for weakening a hadith based upon man made criteria.

Incorrect, because the Holy Qur'an says if a fasiq comes with a report than investigate. What the fuqaha do is this exactly, they don't reject the hadith because they fear attributing a lie to the Imam (as), unless there is proof it is mawdhoo (fabricated), but at the same time nor do they accept it in the realm of Fiqh and declare halal or haram by it unless there is sufficient evidence that this is the word of the Imam (as).

That is not the same as rejecting at all, that is tawaqquf in actual fact. 

Yes, most hadiths would be weak if we applied ilm al-rijal. 

You have not come up with a hadith that rejects ilm al-rijal, all you have told us is not to reject hadith, but I said to you that weak does not mean rejected. 

10 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

The Imams (as) have also explained that verse of the Qur'an, which makes it clear we must investigate irrespective if a person is righteous or immoral.

 Abu Abdillah (as) said:

"O Muhammad, whatever comes to you in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that agrees with the Quran, then take hold of it. And whatever comes to in a narration from a righteous person or an immoral person that contradicts the Quran, then do not take hold of it."

Again, a misunderstanding of the hadiths. This hadith is saying that we don't take hadith which contradict the Holy Qur'an, even if they come from a righteous person. That is a known principle.

But where is the proof that we are obligated to follow the hadith of the immoral person in a matter which is not mentioned in the Holy Qur'an? (i.e tattoos).

All we are commanded to do is to not belie him, where is the proof that we must act by it? In fact that would go in the face of the Verse which says "investigate". You are saying "believe him".

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Incorrect, because the Holy Qur'an says if a fasiq comes with a report than investigate. What the fuqaha do is this exactly, they don't reject the hadith because they fear attributing a lie to the Imam (as), unless there is proof it is mawdhoo (fabricated), but at the same time nor do they accept it in the realm of Fiqh and declare halal or haram by it unless there is sufficient evidence that this is the word of the Imam (as).

That is not the same as rejecting at all, that is tawaqquf in actual fact. 

Yes, most hadiths would be weak if we applied ilm al-rijal. 

You have not come up with a hadith that rejects ilm al-rijal, all you have told us is not to reject hadith, but I said to you that weak does not mean rejected. 

Again, a misunderstanding of the hadiths. This hadith is saying that we don't take hadith which contradict the Holy Qur'an, even if they come from a righteous person. That is a known principle.

But where is the proof that we are obligated to follow the hadith of the immoral person in a matter which is not mentioned in the Holy Qur'an? (i.e tattoos).

All we are commanded to do is to not belie him, where is the proof that we must act by it? In fact that would go in the face of the Verse which says "investigate". You are saying "believe him".

Yes I agree, the Qur'an does say that. Let's quote the verse again to make it clear:

O you who have faith! If a fasiq (evil-doer, profligate person) should bring you some news, verify it, lest you should visit [harm] on some people out of ignorance, and then become regretful for what you have done. [Surah Hujurat, 49:6]

Reading this ayah carefully, it is actually opposed to the concept of ilm al rijaal. This verse asks to investigate the report even when the narrator known to be an evil-person, because there is a chance that it could come from the Imams (as). It is NOT asking us to evaluate the profile of the reporter. In other words, to not to reject a report even if it's from an evil person.

However, the principle of Ilm al rijaal dictates we reject the narration if there are unjust people in the chain. A clever tactic used by the perpetrators who initiated the false concepts Taqleed and Ijtihad in the Shia school. They wanted to deter people away from ahadith and get a stronghold on the shia community, so the ilm al rijaal was a good invention by them!

The marjas are not equivalent to fuqaha by the way. Fuqaha are people who narrate ahadith, marajas do not do this - they issue their own fatwas based on no evidence.

You said 'they don't reject the hadith because they fear attributing a lie to the Imam (as), unless there is proof it is mawdhoo (fabricated), but at the same time nor do they accept it in the realm of Fiqh and declare halal or haram by it unless there is sufficient evidence that this is the word of the Imam (as)."
My comment: But many of them have declared it halaal without any evidences! Whilst there are sufficient evidences to suggest that tattoos are haraam, yet why have they still declared it halal?

Why don't they accept it? Especially when the hadiths are so clear and are in conformity with the principles of hadith outlined by the ma'sumeen [as]. You tell me yourself, if you found the fatwa of a marja to be in direct contradiction to the hadith, would you follow the fatwa or the hadith? The only way that they could declare tattoos halal is if there are other conflicting narrations which say it's halal, but there aren't any!  So why should I be in doubt?

Even for the sake of argument, let's say the narrations cannot be verified by other supporting narrations, then it doesn't mean one can reject it based on man-mad principles like ilm al rijaal.

Quote

You have not come up with a hadith that rejects ilm al-rijal, all you have told us is not to reject hadith, but I said to you that weak does not mean rejected. 

The point of the hadith and many similar ahadith state not to reject a hadith simply because they are narrated by people with devious beliefs, which is in direct contrast to the principles of Ilm al rijaal.

Well, according to you weak does not mean rejected, but many would reject them simply because of this.

I quote to you yet another hadith warning against rejecting hadith simply because of who narrated it:

I heard Abu Jafar [as] say: By Allah, that companion of mine is beloved to me, who narrates and ponders over our Hadith, and the evil one is the one who hears the Hadith which has been associated with us (asws) and has been reported form us (asws), so his mind does not accept it and his heart is constricted by what is contained in it, and he fights against it and denies it to make it his religion, and he does not know that it could be the hadith which is coming from us (asws) and to us (asws) is it’s link, so by that he has exited out of our wilayah (guardianship) [Source: Basair ul Darajat Chapter 22]

 

Again, a misunderstanding of the hadiths. This hadith is saying that we don't take hadith which contradict the Holy Qur'an, even if they come from a righteous person. That is a known principle

Yes, which means we still have to investigate it irrespective of whether it comes from a righteous or immoral person and hence we are not obligated to look into who is fasiq or not because we still have to look into the narrations either way.

 

But where is the proof that we are obligated to follow the hadith of the immoral person in a matter which is not mentioned in the Holy Qur'an? (i.e tattoos).

Who decides if a person is fasiq or not? You are telling me you will reject a narration simply because the matter isn't clearly mentioned in the Holy Qur'an according to your understanding? That can be applied to quite a few things!

Below is a clear ahadith where we should only Act/say in Accordance with hadith, even if the matter isn't clearly mentioned in the Qur'an!

] 44461 ] سعيد بن هبة هللا الراوندي في ) رسالته ( التي ألفها في أحوال أحاديث أصنحابنا وإثبنات صنحتها ، عن محمد ، وعلي ابني علي بن عبد الصمد ، عن أبيهما ، عن أبي البركات علي بنن الحسنين ، عنن أبني جعفنر ابن بابويه ، عن أبيه ، عن سعد بن عبدهللا ، عن أيوب بن نوح ، عن محمد ابنن أبني عمينر ، عنن عبند النرحمن بن أبي عبدهللا ، قال : قال الصادق ) عليه السالم ( : إذا ورد عليكم حديثان مختلفان فاعرضوهما على كتاب هللا ، فما وافنق كتناب هللا فخنذوه ، ومنا خنالف كتناب هللا فنردوه ، فنان لنم تجندوهما فني كتناب هللا فاعرضنوهما علنى أخبار العامة ، فما وافق أخبارهم فذروه ، وما خالف أخبارهم فخذوه . H 33362 – Saeed Bin Habtullah Al Rawandy in his letter which he has written the conditions of the Hadith of our companions and established their strength, from Muhammad, and Ali Bin Abdul Samad, from their fathers, from Abu Al-Barkat Ali Bin Al Husayn, from Abu Ja’far Ibn Babuwayh, from his father, from Sa’d Bin Abdullah, from Ayoub Bin Nuh, from Muhammad Ibn Abu Umeyr, from Abdul Rahman Bin Abu Abd Allah who says: Al-Sadiq [asws] said: ‘If two differing Ahadith get referred to you then present both of them to the Book of Allah [azwj]. If they are in agreement with the Book of Allah [azwj], take them, and if they are against the Book of Allah [azwj] leave them. If you do not find about them in the Book of Allah [azwj], present them both to the Ahadith of the generality of the Muslims, whatever is in agreement with what they transmit leave it, and whatever goes against their narrations, take it’.

As you can see, even if the subject of the narrations aren't mentioned directly in the Qur'an, we must still refer them to other narrations on this matter. 

As far as I'm aware, I've only ever come across narrations (in quite a few sources) which condemn tattoos and not those which deem it permissible, therefore there remains no doubt about the matter.

Anyways so far on this subject I've come to the following conclusion:

1. The hadiths found in many sources of Shia hadith (both primary and secondary) clearly condemn the practice of tattoos
2. There are no conflicting narrations on this subject
3. We must adhere to the hadiths of the ma'sumeen [as] for rejecting them is tantamount to rejecting Allah's orders
4. We must look into all reports (irrespective if narrated by a righteous person and a fasiq) according to the Qur'an 49:6 and hadith of Imam sadiq (as) & compare them all with the Qur'an and other ahadith

 

 

Edited by Al-Hussayni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Al-Hussayni said:

 

Yes I agree, the Qur'an does say that. It doesn't say to reject/accept a narration on the basis if the narrator is fasiq or upright though. We must Investigate into it, even if it's been narrated by a fasiq, because there is a chance that it could come from the Imams (as). However, the principle of Ilm al rijaal dictates we reject the narration if there are unjust people in the chain.

The marjas are not equivalent to fuqaha by the way. Fuqaha are people who narrate ahadith, marajas do not do this - they issue their own fatwas based on no evidence.

You said 'they don't reject the hadith because they fear attributing a lie to the Imam (as), unless there is proof it is mawdhoo (fabricated), but at the same time nor do they accept it in the realm of Fiqh and declare halal or haram by it unless there is sufficient evidence that this is the word of the Imam (as)."
My comment: But many of them have declared it halaal without any evidences! Whilst there are sufficient evidences to suggest that tattoos are haraam, yet why have they still declared it halal?

Why don't they accept it? Especially when the hadiths are so clear and are in conformity with the principles of hadith outlined by the ma'sumeen [as]. You tell me yourself, if you found the fatwa of a marja to be in direct contradiction to the hadith, would you follow the fatwa or the hadith? The only way that they could declare tattoos halal is if there are other conflicting narrations which say it's halal, but there aren't any!  So why should I be in doubt?

Even for the sake of argument, let's say the narrations cannot be verified by other supporting narrations, then it doesn't mean one can reject it based on man-mad principles like ilm al rijaal.

 

 

No, and no one rejects it. I haven't seen anyone say that weak hadiths are rejected. They say it is weak, therefore unverifiable, therefore we don't have itminaan that this is the word of the Imam (as), therefore we cannot say something is halal or haram by it. Ilm al-rijal doesn't dictate we reject it, the same maraje use weak hadiths many times in their reasonings. Weak =/= rejected, I have made this clear.

Faqih just means jurists. Marja is a faqih who is a mujtahid who people turn to. Sayyed Al-Sistani has decided not to show his methods in his risala, but other maraje have. Sayyed Al-Khoei and Sayyed Al-Rouhani have added their research in some of their Fiqh books, citing hadiths. Sistani hasn't.

They have declared it halal because everything is halal (mubah) until proven otherwise. They will say those hadiths aren't strong enough to prove it being haram.

If a fatwa says halal and a hadith, even a weak one, says haram, I turn to precaution and avoid it, but I don't rule it haram either, because I am not a mujtahid. That is me personally. This is in fact why I don't want a tattoo, precisely because of the hadiths you cited. But that doesn't mean I can declare it haram. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sumerian said:

No, and no one rejects it. I haven't seen anyone say that weak hadiths are rejected. They say it is weak, therefore unverifiable, therefore we don't have itminaan that this is the word of the Imam (as), therefore we cannot say something is halal or haram by it. Ilm al-rijal doesn't dictate we reject it, the same maraje use weak hadiths many times in their reasonings. Weak =/= rejected, I have made this clear.

Faqih just means jurists. Marja is a faqih who is a mujtahid who people turn to. Sayyed Al-Sistani has decided not to show his methods in his risala, but other maraje have. Sayyed Al-Khoei and Sayyed Al-Rouhani have added their research in some of their Fiqh books, citing hadiths. Sistani hasn't.

They have declared it halal because everything is halal (mubah) until proven otherwise. They will say those hadiths aren't strong enough to prove it being haram.

If a fatwa says halal and a hadith, even a weak one, says haram, I turn to precaution and avoid it, but I don't rule it haram either, because I am not a mujtahid. That is me personally. This is in fact why I don't want a tattoo, precisely because of the hadiths you cited. But that doesn't mean I can declare it haram. 

I understand you've made it clear from your understanding, but declaring it weak technically does mean rejecting it. If they weren't rejecting it, then they would quote the narrations to suggest tattoos are haraam or highly discouraged at the very least. 

Well the only reason why they say it isn't the words of the Imams (as) is due to applying the man made criteria.

Yes faqih means jurist, who issues only a verse of the Qur'an or hadith, not their own fatawa. One who issues a fatwa in the absence of hadith, related to any islamic issue cannot be a true faqih, since they attempt to extract the meanings of Islamic rulings while employing the man-made system of Ijtihad, which consists of the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Ijmah and 'Aql, whereas a true faqih only uses what the Prophet (saws) left behind, i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah.

What methods exactly? So now Agha sistanis methods are different from the others? How do we know which ones are correct? Especially so when there are contradictions between the marjas themselves. There is no proof to suggest that their fatwas are in line with the ahadith of ahlulbayt (as).

 Firstly, bllind taqleed of a non-ma'soom is haraam and tantamount to shirk. The main issue is that they are issuing fatwas with the absence of Qu'ran and hadith (i.e. without true knowledge). Infact a true order from Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى can only be a verse of the Qur'an or a hadith.

Again, the narrations are clear in declaring tattoos are haraam so why would they still declare it halal!? Saying that the hadiths aren't 'strong' enough according to man-made principles and then issuing a fatwa in complete opposite to what the narrations state is tantamount to rejecting the ahadith themselves, I see no difference here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Al-Hussayni said:

I understand you've made it clear from your understanding, but declaring it weak technically does mean rejecting it. If they weren't rejecting it, then they would quote the narrations to suggest tattoos are haraam or highly discouraged at the very least.

No they wouldn't, because that would mean they accept it. The reason why they have ilm al-rijal in the first place is because they don't want to apply something to the Shari'ah that isn't there. To say something is "haram" is attributing something to Islam, and if it is incorrect then it is like attributing a lie to Allah! That is why they have ilm al-rijal, so that they only rule by the hadiths which they are satisfied to a degree that it has come from the masoom. If for example, in a hadith chain, everyone in the chain is a liar, fasiq, zindeeq, deviant, and the hadith says "x" is haram, would it be logical to accept it and attribute something to Islam due to it?! Even though it has come from dubious sources?

They basically say this: we rule by the reliable hadiths, and the non-reliable hadiths that we are not certain of, we don't rule by them unless there is evidence to support them, but we don't say they are false. Because if we rule by them and they are wrong, then we may have attributed a falsehood to Islam and misguided the people. But we don't say they are false lest they may be correct and also attributed a lie to Islam. It is simple really. 

1 hour ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Well the only reason why they say it isn't the words of the Imams (as) is due to applying the man made criteria.

They don't say it isn't the word of the Imam (as), they say we aren't satisfied enough to attribute it to the Shari'ah.

1 hour ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Yes faqih means jurist, who issues only a verse of the Qur'an or hadith, not their own fatawa. One who issues a fatwa in the absence of hadith, related to any islamic issue cannot be a true faqih, since they attempt to extract the meanings of Islamic rulings while employing the man-made system of Ijtihad, which consists of the Qur'an, the Sunnah, Ijmah and 'Aql, whereas a true faqih only uses what the Prophet (saws) left behind, i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah.

The reason why they apply these "man made systems" is to ascertain what hadiths we should rule by and which ones we don't. These "systems" are based on aqli principles and usooli principles. "Aql" is actually very important in the hadiths of Ahlulbayt. Not sure why you seem to disregard it. It goes as far as to declare it a hujjah in Al-Kafi.

1 hour ago, Al-Hussayni said:

 Firstly, bllind taqleed of a non-ma'soom is haraam and tantamount to shirk. The main issue is that they are issuing fatwas with the absence of Qu'ran and hadith (i.e. without true knowledge). Infact a true order from Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى can only be a verse of the Qur'an or a hadith.

They are issuing fatwas according to the reliable hadiths according to their methods and standards. To follow one of them, you must know he is the a'lam. But I don't want to discuss taqleed, that is another topic.

1 hour ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Again, the narrations are clear in declaring tattoos are haraam so why would they still declare it halal!? Saying that the hadiths aren't 'strong' enough according to man-made principles and then issuing a fatwa in complete opposite to what the narrations state is tantamount to rejecting the ahadith themselves, I see no difference here!

They didn't issue a fatwa declaring it halal in opposition to the hadith. Everything is halal until PROVEN otherwise. They say these hadiths aren't strong enough to prove otherwise.

Share this post


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

No they wouldn't, because that would mean they accept it. The reason why they have ilm al-rijal in the first place is because they don't want to apply something to the Shari'ah that isn't there. To say something is "haram" is attributing something to Islam, and if it is incorrect then it is like attributing a lie to Allah! That is why they have ilm al-rijal, so that they only rule by the hadiths which they are satisfied to a degree that it has come from the masoom. If for example, in a hadith chain, everyone in the chain is a liar, fasiq, zindeeq, deviant, and the hadith says "x" is haram, would it be logical to accept it and attribute something to Islam due to it?! Even though it has come from dubious sources?

They basically say this: we rule by the reliable hadiths, and the non-reliable hadiths that we are not certain of, we don't rule by them unless there is evidence to support them, but we don't say they are false. Because if we rule by them and they are wrong, then we may have attributed a falsehood to Islam and misguided the people. But we don't say they are false lest they may be correct and also attributed a lie to Islam. It is simple really. 

And I've already mentioned that based on the teachings of ahlulbayt (as), we can't 'weaken' (as you put it) or reject hadith on the basis of Ilm al rijaal. We can only reject hadith if it goes against Qur'an or against other well established hadith. We cannot apply man made methods on the ahadith.

Well it would be better to accept these narrations and make the rule of haraam based upon it because that what they say. As I've mentioned before, even if they turn out to be wrong, then there would be no consequence for it as the ahadeeth are hujjah (proof) upon us and we would have done our duty in terms of adhering to the ahadeeth, in contrast to adhering to a baseless fatwa.

Otherwise, 1000s of Shias who are getting tattoos done (even though the ahadeeth have condemned them) will all be held accountable and even more, the greater sin would be upon those marjas who declared such things as halal! The rule in Islam, is that it is better to refrain from something that is doubtful at the very least, so the marajas should have atleast made the rule to refrain from doing such things rather than just outright declaring them halal upon no basis whatsoever.

 

3 hours ago, Sumerian said:

They don't say it isn't the word of the Imam (as), they say we aren't satisfied enough to attribute it to the Shari'ah.

Indirectly that's exactly what they are doing, rejecting them. Not acting upon ahadith which are clear and using their own man made tools to say they aren't satisfied with them.

 

3 hours ago, Sumerian said:

The reason why they apply these "man made systems" is to ascertain what hadiths we should rule by and which ones we don't. These "systems" are based on aqli principles and usooli principles. "Aql" is actually very important in the hadiths of Ahlulbayt. Not sure why you seem to disregard it. It goes as far as to declare it a hujjah in Al-Kafi.

These man made systems are not based upon any sort of evidence or ahadeeth. Simply saying they are aql principles or usooli principles suggests they are making their own stuff up as it suits them. Aql and intellect is very important generally speaking, but not when determining matters of Islamic shariat! 

A true faqih (one who narrates ahadith) will not use tools other than what the Holy Prophet (saws) left behind

 

3 hours ago, Sumerian said:

They are issuing fatwas according to the reliable hadiths according to their methods and standards. To follow one of them, you must know he is the a'lam. But I don't want to discuss taqleed, that is another topic

Well firstly, we don't even know what their fatwas are based on as many maraja' have contradicting opinions on many issues. Secondly, they are not narrating hadith as has been commanded by Imam mahdi (as). Thirdly, they have devised their own methods which is totally wrong.

In regards to following the A'lam (most learned) - I've pondered alot over this concept which I have concluded makes no sense. If someone is to believe that one marja is more knowledgeble than another marja, they must have enough knowledge themselves to justly deduce that. For example, if someone had to pick between Sistani or Shirazi or Khamenei, as a layman how could someone know who knows more about tashayu'!!??

 

4 hours ago, Sumerian said:

They didn't issue a fatwa declaring it halal in opposition to the hadith. Everything is halal until PROVEN otherwise. They say these hadiths aren't strong enough to prove otherwise.

This is such flawed reasoning. Of course, Sistani isn't going to come out and blatantly state that 'This is halal in opposition to the hadiths'. He's done that already indirectly; not just the ruling on tattoos but also other rulings! With absolutely no ahadith supporting his fatwas. Other marjas may have differed with him too on these matters.

When I emailed the office of sistani in london in regards to some questions years back (when i used to do blind taqleed), I asked for evidence and i was given nothing! Only then to realise that the risalahs actually state we are not supposed to demand evidences from them. 

Not strong according to their man-made methods, yeah sure, but I do not agree with that and I will come out and quote the ahadiths which state it is haraam, unless one can give evidence to suggest otherwise. Therefore, tattoos are haraam and at best, it is a confusing matter, and the guidelines of the Imams (as) is to hold back in such matters:

Abu Abd Allah (asws) said: ‘Holding back in confusing matters is better than falling into destruction. For every truth there is a reality, and on all correctness there is a light. Whatsoever is in agreement with the Book of Allah azwj, take it, and whatsoever is against the Book of Allah azwj, leave it’.
[Source: H33368 Wasail us Shia]

In many matters it maybe futile to determine ultimate verdict whether it is haram or halal, rather if we come to know that Imam disliked an act (even if they didn't say it is forbidden) then it is enough for us to refrain from it out of love and obedience to them.

This is what Agha sistani should have advised people!

The Shias also need to understand that for many matters we need to wait for re-appearance of the Imam so we can ask him for clarification. Until then we simply pause. If these so called "marjas" have ready answers and fatwas for every question placed before them, then why are their followers praying for re-appearance of the Imam?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

And I've already mentioned that based on the teachings of ahlulbayt (as), we can't 'weaken' (as you put it) or reject hadith on the basis of Ilm al rijaal. We can only reject hadith if it goes against Qur'an or against other well established hadith. We cannot apply man made methods on the ahadith.

Well it would be better to accept these narrations and make the rule of haraam based upon it because that what they say. As I've mentioned before, even if they turn out to be wrong, then there would be no consequence for it as the ahadeeth are hujjah (proof) upon us and we would have done our duty in terms of adhering to the ahadeeth, in contrast to adhering to a baseless fatwa.

Where is any proof that you can't weaken a hadith? Bring one hadith which states that. Once again you conflate rejection with weakening. 

And how is it you claim that we are supposed to accept a hadith from a fasiq source when the Qur'an itself tells us NOT to? The Qur'an says investigate, not accept. You are saying we should accept. That is in contradiction to the Verse:

 

O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful. [49:6]

You are saying: don't investigate, just accept.

You can't reconcile your position with the Qur'an at all. 

7 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

These man made systems are not based upon any sort of evidence or ahadeeth. Simply saying they are aql principles or usooli principles suggests they are making their own stuff up as it suits them. Aql and intellect is very important generally speaking, but not when determining matters of Islamic shariat! 

A true faqih (one who narrates ahadith) will not use tools other than what the Holy Prophet (saws) left behind

Sounds like an akhbari vs usooli discussion which I am not interested in. I am here to explain how ilm al-rijal is not in contradiction to the hadiths you mentioned before, and in fact your position is in contradiction to the Qur'an.

7 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

In regards to following the A'lam (most learned) - I've pondered alot over this concept which I have concluded makes no sense. If someone is to believe that one marja is more knowledgeble than another marja, they must have enough knowledge themselves to justly deduce that. For example, if someone had to pick between Sistani or Shirazi or Khamenei, as a layman how could someone know who knows more about tashayu'!!??

Who said you personally pick who is the most a'lam? It is actually picked for you. You go and ask people who are of khibra (expertise) in these matters, and they tell you who is the most knowledgable in these affairs. You don't pick someone by yourself, or what suits you best, or who you believe is the most a'lam with no external proof.

7 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Not strong according to their man-made methods, yeah sure, but I do not agree with that and I will come out and quote the ahadiths which state it is haraam, unless one can give evidence to suggest otherwise. Therefore, tattoos are haraam and at best, it is a confusing matter, and the guidelines of the Imams (as) is to hold back in such matters:

Abu Abd Allah (asws) said: ‘Holding back in confusing matters is better than falling into destruction. For every truth there is a reality, and on all correctness there is a light. Whatsoever is in agreement with the Book of Allah azwj, take it, and whatsoever is against the Book of Allah azwj, leave it’.
[Source: H33368 Wasail us Shia]

In many matters it maybe futile to determine ultimate verdict whether it is haram or halal, rather if we come to know that Imam disliked an act (even if they didn't say it is forbidden) then it is enough for us to refrain from it out of love and obedience to them.

This is what Agha sistani should have advised people!

The Shias also need to understand that for many matters we need to wait for re-appearance of the Imam so we can ask him for clarification. Until then we simply pause. If these so called "marjas" have ready answers and fatwas for every question placed before them, then why are their followers praying for re-appearance of the Imam?

 

Your choice, you can refrain from it personally, like me, but you are not a mujtahid to issue a fatwa.

In many matters the marjas actually refrain from giving solid answers declaring haram or halal.

The re-appearance of the Imam (as) will end any conflict in the Shari'ah in terms of interpretation, possibly add new ahkam because many ahkam may have not reached us, and outside of that, he will conquer the planet and establish the rule of Allah upon the world, getting rid of the tyrants and those with illegitimate rule, taking revenge on the killers of his grandfather, among other things. That's why we "blind followers" pray for his re-appearance.

Share this post


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

Where is any proof that you can't weaken a hadith? Bring one hadith which states that. Once again you conflate rejection with weakening. 

The real question should be, what is the proof that you can use man made methods such as Ilm al-rijaal on ahadeeth? Again, you may say that rejection and weakening are two different things, but many people and scholars will reject ahadeeth purely based on this rijaal system.

Also, you made an explanation of the above point earlier that how ilm al rijaal is not used to reject hadeeth, but rather to establish the likelihood of a report coming from an Imam (as) through the particular chain

A simple reply to this is: Our religion is based on yaqeen (certainty) and not doubt. Ilm al-rijaal creates doubt in hadeeth and doubt ultimately destroys religion, which is why it was created in the first place, to deter people from reading ahadeeth and accepting the fatwas of the marjas blindly.

 

2 hours ago, Sumerian said:

And how is it you claim that we are supposed to accept a hadith from a fasiq source when the Qur'an itself tells us NOT to? The Qur'an says investigate, not accept. You are saying we should accept. That is in contradiction to the Verse:

I didn't say to blindly accept it, I am saying that it is better to accept it and then look further into it (Using the qur'an & supporting narrations), rather than shunning them outright  because that's what the Imams (as) have said. On the contrary, there aren't any narrations that tell encourage us to place doubt in their hadeeth Let me quote the narrations again:

Abu Abdullah (asws) said: Do not belie the Hadeeth, whether it comes to you by (way of) the Murjiites, or the Qadiriyya, or the Harouriya, if it is referred to us (asws), for you do not know perhaps therein is something from the Truth, otherwise you would end up belying Allah (azwj) on top of His (azwj) Throne. [Source: Al Mahaasin V1 Bk 5 H 175]

Al Safar narrated from Muhammad son of Al Hussein from Muhammad son of Ismael from Hamza son of Bazee from Ali AlSinany from Abi Al Hassan (as) that he (as) wrote to him in a letter “Do not say to what has been mentioned by us Baatil(false/void) even if you know that it is the opposite, you do not know why we have said it and on what face and description.” [Source: Basaer AlDarajat Muhammad son of AlHassan AlSafar p.558/AlKafi v.8 p.25/Bihar Al Anwar v.2 p.209]

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

Then we go to the Qur'anic verse which you mentioned:

O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful. [49:6]

I've already mentioned earlier, that I agree that we must investigate into the report, but that is irrespective of whether the narrator is fasiq or not (according to other ahadith of the Imams which i mentioned before). IMPORTANT POINT: THE VERSE DOESN'T SAY TO INVESTIGATE INTO THE PROFILE OF THE NARRATORS. In addition, there is no tafsir of the above verse from the masumeen [as] linking it to the promotion of ilm al-rijaal.

 

2 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Who said you personally pick who is the most a'lam? It is actually picked for you. You go and ask people who are of khibra (expertise) in these matters, and they tell you who is the most knowledgable in these affairs. You don't pick someone by yourself, or what suits you best, or who you believe is the most a'lam with no external proof.

And how are we supposed to know who the people of khibra are? People who do follow a marja usually pick for themselves based on their personal preferences. If it was so clear to these 'experts' then they would all come to the same conclusion. But today, there are a variety of different marjas and each one essentially claiming to be the most knowledgeable one.

Also did the Imams (as) ever mention that we must follow the most knowledgeable marja?


It is impossible for people to identify a person who is all together pious, trustworthy and the most learned. Even Prophet musa (as), when charged with identifying pious men, ended up selecting hypocrites! How then can ordinary Shias or so-called 'experts' identify a perfect mujtahid?

2 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Your choice, you can refrain from it personally, like me, but you are not a mujtahid to issue a fatwa.

No one has the right to issue fatwa, not even a mujtahid or a faqih. Only Qur'an or hadith must be presented.

Abu Ja’far (as) said (in a reply to arriving at a best judgement-fatwa): If you get it right you will get no reward for it, but if you get it wrong you will have ascribed a lie to Allah (azwj). — Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, Wasail ul Shia H. 33185

I said to Abu Jafar (as): “Matters get referred to us whose existence we do not find in the Book and the Sunnah, and we speak on them by opinion’. Imam (as) said: “If you get it right you will get no reward for it, and if you make a mistake you will have forged a lie against Allah (azwj). [Reference: Wasail ul Shia, H. 33185]

In other words, people who issue fatwas will either get no reward or get punished for issuing a wrong one :)

You don't even know the sources of the fatwa for crying out loud! and the mujtahid himself is never sure of his judgement. Don't they themselves write: 'Wallahu alim bil thawaab'?

 

2 hours ago, Sumerian said:

In many matters the marjas actually refrain from giving solid answers declaring haram or halal.

The marja shouldn't say anything of his own opinion, but should only narrate from the Qur'an or hadeeth. Anyone who issues his own fatwas (personal opinions) is following his low desires. He has violated the limits set by Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى who is the only original source of Shariah.

 

One thing i have noticed throughout this entire discussion so far: You brought zero evidences from the Qur'an (apart from the one verse we are discussing) and ahadeeth for your various claims. On the contrast I have brought many ahadeeth in support of my stance.

Everything you've stated is bases on mere speculation so far: e.g. That a faqih is equivalent to a mujtahid, that fatwas are in accordance with ahadeeth, justifying the use of ilm al rijaal without proof, claiming only mujtahids can issue fatwas (when in reality no one can)

Edited by Al-Hussayni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

The real question should be, what is the proof that you can use man made methods such as Ilm al-rijaal on ahadeeth? Again, you may say that rejection and weakening are two different things, but many people and scholars will reject ahadeeth purely based on this rijaal system.

Also, you made an explanation of the above point earlier that how ilm al rijaal is not used to reject hadeeth, but rather to establish the likelihood of a report coming from an Imam (as) through the particular chain

A simple reply to this is: Our religion is based on yaqeen (certainty) and not doubt. Ilm al-rijaal creates doubt in hadeeth and doubt ultimately destroys religion, which is why it was created in the first place, to deter people from reading ahadeeth and accepting the fatwas of the marjas blindly.

 

I didn't say to blindly accept it, I am saying that it is better to accept it and then look further into it (Using the qur'an & supporting narrations), rather than shunning them outright  because that's what the Imams (as) have said. On the contrary, there aren't any narrations that tell encourage us to place doubt in their hadeeth Let me quote the narrations again:

Abu Abdullah (asws) said: Do not belie the Hadeeth, whether it comes to you by (way of) the Murjiites, or the Qadiriyya, or the Harouriya, if it is referred to us (asws), for you do not know perhaps therein is something from the Truth, otherwise you would end up belying Allah (azwj) on top of His (azwj) Throne. [Source: Al Mahaasin V1 Bk 5 H 175]

Al Safar narrated from Muhammad son of Al Hussein from Muhammad son of Ismael from Hamza son of Bazee from Ali AlSinany from Abi Al Hassan (as) that he (as) wrote to him in a letter “Do not say to what has been mentioned by us Baatil(false/void) even if you know that it is the opposite, you do not know why we have said it and on what face and description.” [Source: Basaer AlDarajat Muhammad son of AlHassan AlSafar p.558/AlKafi v.8 p.25/Bihar Al Anwar v.2 p.209]

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

Then we go to the Qur'anic verse which you mentioned:

O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate, lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful. [49:6]

I've already mentioned earlier, that I agree that we must investigate into the report, but that is irrespective of whether the narrator is fasiq or not (according to other ahadith of the Imams which i mentioned before). IMPORTANT POINT: THE VERSE DOESN'T SAY TO INVESTIGATE INTO THE PROFILE OF THE NARRATORS. In addition, there is no tafsir of the above verse from the masumeen [as] linking it to the promotion of ilm al-rijaal.

You say "many scholars will reject", I challenge you to bring one quote from any scholar that says "weak hadith are rejected". I promise you that you will find no one.

Your theory on doubt also doesn't make sense, because, as we are commanded to, investigate. We are not doubting that hadiths are hujjah, astaghfirullah, we are seperating the liars from the truthful ones.

You now say "I'm not saying to blindly accept, I'm saying it is better to accept it and look further" - which is strange really. The Holy Qur'an never said "accept then investigate" it said "investigate". The first step is investigation, not acceptance. Not sure how you claim to that conclusion.

Then you bring more hadiths that have to do with rejecting and belying hadiths, which has nothing to do with this because no one rejects or belies them anyway. 

So then if you say we must investigate, why is your first reaction to accept it? Once again, the first step is to INVESTIGATE, not accept or reject.

Ilm al-rijal is a science that is mostly based on aqli principles, not a specifc hadith to outline it. If you want to reject the role of aql in tashree' then fine, that is an Akhbari and Usooli debate. But what we are arguing is whether to accept hadiths from dubious sources ot not, and whether the Holy Qur'an supports this notion. Clearly, the Qur'an tells us to investigate.

3 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

And how are we supposed to know who the people of khibra are? People who do follow a marja usually pick for themselves based on their personal preferences. If it was so clear to these 'experts' then they would all come to the same conclusion. But today, there are a variety of different marjas and each one essentially claiming to be the most knowledgeable one.

Also did the Imams (as) ever mention that we must follow the most knowledgeable marja?


It is impossible for people to identify a person who is all together pious, trustworthy and the most learned. Even Prophet musa (as), when charged with identifying pious men, ended up selecting hypocrites! How then can ordinary Shias or so-called 'experts' identify a perfect mujtahid?

No one has the right to issue fatwa, not even a mujtahid or a faqih. Only Qur'an or hadith must be presented.

Abu Ja’far (as) said (in a reply to arriving at a best judgement-fatwa): If you get it right you will get no reward for it, but if you get it wrong you will have ascribed a lie to Allah (azwj). — Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, Wasail ul Shia H. 33185

I said to Abu Jafar (as): “Matters get referred to us whose existence we do not find in the Book and the Sunnah, and we speak on them by opinion’. Imam (as) said: “If you get it right you will get no reward for it, and if you make a mistake you will have forged a lie against Allah (azwj). [Reference: Wasail ul Shia, H. 33185]

In other words, people who issue fatwas will either get no reward or get punished for issuing a wrong one :)

You don't even know the sources of the fatwa for crying out loud! and the mujtahid himself is never sure of his judgement. Don't they themselves write: 'Wallahu alim bil thawaab'?

 

The marja shouldn't say anything of his own opinion, but should only narrate from the Qur'an or hadeeth. Anyone who issues his own fatwas (personal opinions) is following his low desires. He has violated the limits set by Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى who is the only original source of Shariah.

 

One thing i have noticed throughout this entire discussion so far: You brought zero evidences from the Qur'an (apart from the one verse we are discussing) and ahadeeth for your various claims. On the contrast I have brought many ahadeeth in support of my stance.

Everything you've stated is bases on mere speculation so far: e.g. That a faqih is equivalent to a mujtahid, that fatwas are in accordance with ahadeeth, justifying the use of ilm al rijaal without proof, claiming only mujtahids can issue fatwas (when in reality no one can)

The ahlul khibra are mujtahids or those who are just under ijtihad, you can easily find out who is a mujtahid. This is why we have a Hawza. The experts differ amongst themselves on who is the most knowledgable because their standards and methods are all different. 

Following the most knowledgable is something that is again, based on aqli principles. Of course, if you are akhbari, you will reject this, and I am not here to discuss akhbarism vs usoolism. The main topic is accepting hadiths from dubious sources or not in light of the Qur'an and hadiths.

3 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

One thing i have noticed throughout this entire discussion so far: You brought zero evidences from the Qur'an (apart from the one verse we are discussing) and ahadeeth for your various claims. On the contrast I have brought many ahadeeth in support of my stance.

Everything you've stated is bases on mere speculation so far: e.g. That a faqih is equivalent to a mujtahid, that fatwas are in accordance with ahadeeth, justifying the use of ilm al rijaal without proof, claiming only mujtahids can issue fatwas (when in reality no one can)

In fact, you have brought no Verses or hadiths to support your stance. What you assume is supporting your stance is your misplaced belief that "weak" means "rejection", since all the hadiths you brought are related to rejection. Did you know there are terms in ilm al-rijal for a "rejection" hadith? 

"Munkar", or "matruk" (left), or "mawdhoo" (fabricated). "Dha'eef" (weak) is not amongst these terms. This is why the same fuqaha you claim are rejecting these hadiths, have no issue with narrating weak hadiths. Your assumptions don't hold, and your assertion which is we should accept hadiths and then look further has no backing at all from the Qur'an, which tells us to investigate.

Focus on the topic only: acceptance if hadiths from fasiqs, correct or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2018 at 8:05 AM, Al-Hussayni said:

This is such flawed reasoning. Of course, Sistani isn't going to come out and blatantly state that 'This is halal in opposition to the hadiths'. He's done that already indirectly; not just the ruling on tattoos but also other rulings! With absolutely no ahadith supporting his fatwas. Other marjas may have differed with him too on these matters.

Bro, please do not speak of our maraje with any close to disrespectful way!

I really don't want to get into any serious academic debate or argument, but this is what I have to say:

All these books and sources you keep referencing is with us thanks to this beautiful system of scholarship which has been continuing and continuing for centuries. So brother please stop acting so bold equipping yourself with that which came from the very same group/side you are opposing. Like c'mon dude, really ask yourself, have you spent most of your life studying the Islamic sciences? Where are you getting this confidence from that you are reaching and accepting such big conclusions regarding the religion? Be truthful to yourself, can you really say are you more knowledgeable then Syed Sistani or Syed Khamenei? Be honest, for Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى is watching.

Satan comes to us in all sorts of ways, be careful bro, be careful. We must be careful of not giving your ears to those who are creating fitna and injecting the ummah with corruption. I don't understand why you have such unpleasant feeling to our great maraje, who thanks to their work, we are where we are today. 

I do not understand why you are so boldly fighting for these views that you're fighting for. Based on what you believe, let's say if I astaghfirullah, god forbid, show up tomorrow and present a hadith to you that I fabricated last night and say it's from an Imam, you would without any questions, blindly just accept it and use it to derive Islamic law because it supposedly came from an Imam (AS)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

You say "many scholars will reject", I challenge you to bring one quote from any scholar that says "weak hadith are rejected". I promise you that you will find no one.

Typical rant trying to justify your so called marja's fatwa. Can you give us one proof to suggest that Sistani's fatwa on tattoo is in line with the ahadeeth? What proof has he acted upon to suggest it's halal? 

As the only ahadeeth on the matter of tattoos are the ones I mentioned above which clearly state it is haraam. Did Sistani say anywhere those ahadeeth are weak to him? For the sake of argument, I will assume that Sistani has said those ahadeeth on tattoos are weak to him and therefore cannot come to a judgement on them, but then he has given a fatwa saying it is halaal, essentially REJECTING those ahadeeth! 

To suggest that the probability of a hadeeth coming from Imam (as) is not strong and rejecting it is pretty much near the same thing. It's just a mischevious tactic used by usoolis to justify their marjas fatwas.

 

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

Your theory on doubt also doesn't make sense, because, as we are commanded to, investigate. We are not doubting that hadiths are hujjah, astaghfirullah, we are seperating the liars from the truthful ones

It makes absolute sense to the one who thinks with reason and open-mindedness - Yes the verse mentions to investigate the report, not the reporters! Other ahadeeth state to look into reports irrespective of whom they are narrated from. This is why Ilm al-rijaal is in direct opposition to this ayah because it commands to look at ahadeeth based on who narrated them, not the actual report themselves!

 

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

You now say "I'm not saying to blindly accept, I'm saying it is better to accept it and look further" - which is strange really. The Holy Qur'an never said "accept then investigate" it said "investigate". The first step is investigation, not acceptance. Not sure how you claim to that conclusion.

Based upon the ahadeeth of the Imams (as) narrated above, we must not reject a hadeeth straight away without looking into it. Tell me, what is the opposite of rejection? ANY Hadeeth of the ahlulbayt (as) we must take it and then look into it. I'm not saying to ACT upon it straight away.

Of course, acting on the hadeeth is then another step forward.

But getting to the main point, we have clear narrations on the prohibiton of tattoos and the narrations are very harsh on this matter. Ilm al-rijaal which is a man made fallacy CANNOT BE used to judge ahadeeth!

 

Another example on this is that Mr Khoei weakens all narrations in regards to the prohibition of the fast of ashura and he strengthens those narrations which commend the fast of ashura - This is also based on Ilm al rijaal. He then mentions that the strongest opinion is to fast on this day. This is such a big deviation because the narrations which prohibit the fast all come from our main primary sources - reading them would be enough to convince someone definitely not to fast. The narrations which commend the fast all come from secondary sources (many of them found in sunni books, which suggests they are fabrications or were uttered under taqiyyah). 

Do you understand now why applying ilm al-rijaal is so problematic now? Because it is making those things haraam as halal/mustahab! Simply based on ilm al-rijaal, khoei has essentially ignored all those narrations which prohibit the fast (which are more authentic & if you read them, they would tell you why we should not fast this day) he's just saying to act on these commendable ones purely based on rijaal - not forgetting that we are supposed to act in opposition to the 'amma based on the principles of hadeeth from the Imams (as)

 

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

Then you bring more hadiths that have to do with rejecting and belying hadiths, which has nothing to do with this because no one rejects or belies them anyway. 

Absolute nonsense because that's exactly what these marjas are doing, i.e. Rejecting/weakening the hadeeths simply based on a man-made principle! If they weren't rejecting them, then they would not be issuing fatwas in direct opposition to them (Which I've stated so many times now)! Of course, they aren't going to come out straight and say we are rejecting these hadeeths, but in principle & from their fatwas, that's exactly what they are doing.

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

So then if you say we must investigate, why is your first reaction to accept it? Once again, the first step is to INVESTIGATE, not accept or reject.

My first reaction is that there is a possibility that they could be coming from the Imams (as), so I don't reject them. What is the opposition of rejection!??? Acting on the hadeeths are different like i said!

But the fact of the matter is, in regards to tattoos, if we bring all the narrations altogether you will find that it is not only 1 hadeeth, but many ahadeeth which are stating the same thing. There are no ahadeeth which state it is halal.

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

Ilm al-rijal is a science that is mostly based on aqli principles, not a specifc hadith to outline it. If you want to reject the role of aql in tashree' then fine, that is an Akhbari and Usooli debate. But what we are arguing is whether to accept hadiths from dubious sources ot not, and whether the Holy Qur'an supports this notion. Clearly, the Qur'an tells us to investigate.

Exactly, thank you for proving my point, there are NO AHADEETH whatsoever stating that we must apply ilm al-rijaal to our narrations! Therefore it is a big deviation.

What we are arguing is all essentially linked to Ilm al-rijaal, i.e. grading and filtering hadeeth by evaluating the biographies  of the narrators instead of by examining the content (Text)- this is what Ilm al-rijaal is and the Qur'an quite clearly rejects this idea. It says to investigate the report not the reporters!!

 

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

The ahlul khibra are mujtahids or those who are just under ijtihad, you can easily find out who is a mujtahid. This is why we have a Hawza. The experts differ amongst themselves on who is the most knowledgable because their standards and methods are all different. 

MashaAllah thanks for pointing that out - differences amongst experts/mujtahids, differences amongst their standards and methods, which all leads to people following different marjas and then you get each group essentially forming their own tariqah, creating even more divisions & opinions. I'm pretty sure this is what Imam al-mahdi (as) wanted for us.

 

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

Following the most knowledgable is something that is again, based on aqli principles. Of course, if you are akhbari, you will reject this, and I am not here to discuss akhbarism vs usoolism. The main topic is accepting hadiths from dubious sources or not in light of the Qur'an and hadiths.

Yes and I've already pointed out how the concept of following the most knowledgeable is so flawed.

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

In fact, you have brought no Verses or hadiths to support your stance. What you assume is supporting your stance is your misplaced belief that "weak" means "rejection", since all the hadiths you brought are related to rejection. Did you know there are terms in ilm al-rijal for a "rejection" hadith? 

Again it's a pretty sly tactic from those who initiated ilm al-rijaal - saying how 'weak' doesn't mean 'rejection' when alot of times it actually is, otherwise they wouldn't be acting in opposition to the ahadeeth. It gives them a leeway to accept and reject narrations according to their own desires.

There's no proof for Ilm al-rijaal in the first place anyway! So it should not be applied in the first place.

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

"Munkar", or "matruk" (left), or "mawdhoo" (fabricated). "Dha'eef" (weak) is not amongst these terms. This is why the same fuqaha you claim are rejecting these hadiths, have no issue with narrating weak hadiths. Your assumptions don't hold, and your assertion which is we should accept hadiths and then look further has no backing at all from the Qur'an, which tells us to investigate.

Mujtahids are not equivalent to fuqaha. Fuqaha are people who narrate ahadeeth, but the mujtahids do not do this. Agha Sistani has not narrated any ahadeeth in regards to the permissibility of tattoos. Infact, I emailed a question to his office in London yesterday:

 

Assalamu 'alaykum, 

I would like to know whether Tatoos are halal, haraam or makrooh in Islam? Please provide me with references from the Qur'an or Ahadith of the ahlulbayt (as)

 

The response:

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

 

It is permissible to have a tattoo if:

a. The tattoo allows the water of wudhu and ghusl to reach the skin while performing wudhu or ghusl.

b. Having a tattoo does not involve forbidden touch or look.

c. The tattoo does not encourage corruption or corrupted ideas or beliefs.

d. The tattoo does not have the names of Allah his almighty or Quran script.

e. for woman, if that is considered as a beauty item then it must be concealed from non-mehram man

 

Wassalamu Alaykum

Once again, I was not given proof for any of the above! Which proves that the fatwas that the maraja' are issuing are not based on the Qur'an or ahadeeth at all. Even if their fatwas maybe in compliance to the ahadeeth, they haven't narrated any verses of the Qur'an or ahadeeth in regards to their rulings.

 

On 11/9/2018 at 2:38 AM, Sumerian said:

Focus on the topic only: acceptance if hadiths from fasiqs, correct or not?

Correct if in compliance with the Holy Qur'an and other ahadeeth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AStruggler said:

Bro, please do not speak of our maraje with any close to disrespectful way!

I really don't want to get into any serious academic debate or argument, but this is what I have to say:

All these books and sources you keep referencing is with us thanks to this beautiful system of scholarship which has been continuing and continuing for centuries. So brother please stop acting so bold equipping yourself with that which came from the very same group/side you are opposing. Like c'mon dude, really ask yourself, have you spent most of your life studying the Islamic sciences? Where are you getting this confidence from that you are reaching and accepting such big conclusions regarding the religion? Be truthful to yourself, can you really say are you more knowledgeable then Syed Sistani or Syed Khamenei? Be honest, for Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى is watching.

Satan comes to us in all sorts of ways, be careful bro, be careful. We must be careful of not giving your ears to those who are creating fitna and injecting the ummah with corruption. I don't understand why you have such unpleasant feeling to our great maraje, who thanks to their work, we are where we are today. 

I do not understand why you are so boldly fighting for these views that you're fighting for. Based on what you believe, let's say if I astaghfirullah, god forbid, show up tomorrow and present a hadith to you that I fabricated last night and say it's from an Imam, you would without any questions, blindly just accept it and use it to derive Islamic law because it supposedly came from an Imam (AS)?

I'm not against scholarship just for the record and all our books that have been preserved have bene thanks to so much effort and hardwork by our classical scholars like Shaykh al-Kulayni, Sheikh Hurr al-Aameli, Sheikh Sadooq, Mulla baqir Majlisi etc. The present day maraja would not even dare to compare themselves with these individuals.

What I am against is the present day system of marja'iyyat and taqleed, which is a recent innovation and which the classical scholars spoke greatly against. Blind taqleed (without proof) is haraam and equivalent to shirk according to many of our narrations. The problem with such taqleed can be summarised in the hadeeth below from Imam sadiq (as):

 ِم ْن ُدو ْرباباً َ ْحبا َر ُه ْم َو ُر ْهباَن ُهْم أ َ وا أ ِن َّهللا و قال ع إياكم و التقليد فإنه من قلد في دينه هلك إن هللا تعالى يقول ات ِ فال و هللا َّ َخذُ ما صلوا لهم و ال صاموا و لكنهم أحلوا لهم حراما و حرموا عليهم حالال فقلدوهم في ذلك فعبدوهم و هم ال يشعرون The Holy Imam Ja’far Al Sadiq [as] said: ‘Beware of taqleed! Whosoever adorns this in religion is destroyed! Surely Allah 'azza wa jal has Said: ‘They took their Rabbis and Monks as their Lords besides Allah (9:31). No, by Allah! They did no pray nor fast but they made permissible which was forbidden to them and made the forbidden permissible. They did their taqleed (emulated them) in this and obeyed them, and they did not realise.

The above narration makes it clear, that such scholars will make the halal into haraam and haraam into halaal, which is exactly what is happening today.

What 'Islamic sciences' exactly? Most of which are not even required when Wanting to study the Qur'an and ahadeeth. This notion that the marajas spend 'their whole lives researching and studying' is a big fallacy. I used to think this as well by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Typical rant trying to justify your so called marja's fatwa. Can you give us one proof to suggest that Sistani's fatwa on tattoo is in line with the ahadeeth? What proof has he acted upon to suggest it's halal? 

As the only ahadeeth on the matter of tattoos are the ones I mentioned above which clearly state it is haraam. Did Sistani say anywhere those ahadeeth are weak to him? For the sake of argument, I will assume that Sistani has said those ahadeeth on tattoos are weak to him and therefore cannot come to a judgement on them, but then he has given a fatwa saying it is halaal, essentially REJECTING those ahadeeth! 

Sadly brother, you still don't get it. To say something is part of the Shari'ah when it isn't, is similar to lying upon Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى, so the hujjiyah of the hadith has to be proven in order to use the hadith as proof that something is part of the Shari'ah. We have to be SURE it is part of the Shari'ah before we say it is part of the Shari'ah. Therefore, the rijalists would say we don't know that the Imam (as) said this hadith or not, so we cannot rule by it. And when there is no proof on whether something is haram, mustahab, makruh etc... then it is immediately ruled as mubah. Simple as that really. 

18 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

TTo suggest that the probability of a hadeeth coming from Imam (as) is not strong and rejecting it is pretty much near the same thing. It's just a mischevious tactic used by usoolis to justify their marjas fatwas.

How is it the same, when the same marjas use weak hadith to justify some of their rulings all the time? Look at Nahj ul-Balagha for example, most of the book is weak by chain, but the same marjas praise the book and have no issue with the speeches and recommend the believers to contemplate the words and narrate them. Same with many hadiths which relate to tarikh, aqeeda, ziyaraat, duas, adaab, akhlaq, etc.. where they have no issue with them even if they are weak on chain. The mainstream approach in Hawza right now seems to use rijal mainly for Fiqh. So how can you claim they reject weak hadiths when they have no issue with the things I mentioned?

18 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

It makes absolute sense to the one who thinks with reason and open-mindedness - Yes the verse mentions to investigate the report, not the reporters! Other ahadeeth state to look into reports irrespective of whom they are narrated from. This is why Ilm al-rijaal is in direct opposition to this ayah because it commands to look at ahadeeth based on who narrated them, not the actual report themselves!

Where in the Verse does it say investigate the report and not the reporters? Do not attribute something to the Holy Qur'an without proof. The Qur'an says "fatabayanu" (investigate). There is no literal method given on how or where or when to investigate, it just says if a fasiq comes with a report then investigate. 

19 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Based upon the ahadeeth of the Imams (as) narrated above, we must not reject a hadeeth straight away without looking into it. Tell me, what is the opposite of rejection? ANY Hadeeth of the ahlulbayt (as) we must take it and then look into it. I'm not saying to ACT upon it straight away.

Of course, acting on the hadeeth is then another step forward.

But getting to the main point, we have clear narrations on the prohibiton of tattoos and the narrations are very harsh on this matter. Ilm al-rijaal which is a man made fallacy CANNOT BE used to judge ahadeeth!

What does take it and then look into it even mean? And how does that make sense with not "acting on it" straight away? And how does that make sense with investigating first, then accepting? You still haven't showed me how we should accept first in light of the Qur'an which just says investigate.

20 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

Another example on this is that Mr Khoei weakens all narrations in regards to the prohibition of the fast of ashura and he strengthens those narrations which commend the fast of ashura - This is also based on Ilm al rijaal. He then mentions that the strongest opinion is to fast on this day. This is such a big deviation because the narrations which prohibit the fast all come from our main primary sources - reading them would be enough to convince someone definitely not to fast. The narrations which commend the fast all come from secondary sources (many of them found in sunni books, which suggests they are fabrications or were uttered under taqiyyah). 

Do you understand now why applying ilm al-rijaal is so problematic now? Because it is making those things haraam as halal/mustahab! Simply based on ilm al-rijaal, khoei has essentially ignored all those narrations which prohibit the fast (which are more authentic & if you read them, they would tell you why we should not fast this day) he's just saying to act on these commendable ones purely based on rijaal - not forgetting that we are supposed to act in opposition to the 'amma based on the principles of hadeeth from the Imams (as)

And in here you have made a magnificent error by claiming many things which are in fact, falsehoodd attributed to Al-Khoei (rah). First of all, tens of scholars, including classical and post-classical scholars, have claimed fasting on Ashura is mustahab. And they're not "rijalists". In fact, among the post-classical scholars are some Akhbari scholars who ruled it mustahab.

Who said that these narrations are only found in secondary sources? What are you talking about? One of the authentic narrations he relies on is this one;

صيام يوم عاشوراء كفّارة سنة

This is from Tahdhib Al-Ahkam by Al-Tusi (rah), this is from the four books and is a primary source. 

And he did not ignore them. He even discussed them and said some of them are only attacking the fast for the intention of happiness and what not which is what some mukhalifeen and nawasib and their leaders had done. So your assertion here is incorrect.

20 hours ago, Al-Hussayni said:

MashaAllah thanks for pointing that out - differences amongst experts/mujtahids, differences amongst their standards and methods, which all leads to people following different marjas and then you get each group essentially forming their own tariqah, creating even more divisions & opinions. I'm pretty sure this is what Imam al-mahdi (as) wanted for us.

Umm. First of all differences in Fiqh opinions between the scholars of the Shi'as and our companions occurred even before the ghayba, and then after the ghayba amongst the classical scholars and remain today. As long as the belief in our usool and aqaid is the same and without deviation, then there is no issue. There is no tariqah because the core beliefs is the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/6/2018 at 5:00 AM, Al-Hussayni said:

This is the problem with blind taqleed

 

 

One difference among people is that some want a very simple answer and some want a detailed explanation.

Regarding many issues: how many people boasting that they read a ruling of a particular scholar--which they repeat like parrots, without any reasoning--are able to get an explanation that allows a thoughtful person to think through the issues?

And what kind of standard is it to be pleased that a particular action is "only" questionable instead of being conclusively forbidden?

In this instance--getting tattoos--the action is characteristic of all kinds of deviant people and it is not at all characteristic of people of purity.

It probably makes sense for the fake "shiah" to emphasize their phony identity by getting a "religious" themed tattoo instead of doing actions that are actually difficult to accomplish, like focusing on the needs of the poor and oppressed.

Edited by Husayn_Forever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...