Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Refuting "From Imāmiyya to Ithnā-ashariyya"

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

I do not have this book, Could you please bring the points raised by the author so that it can be discussed and counter arguments / answer to the objections can be mentioned, please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
On 9/22/2018 at 5:42 AM, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Does anyone know of any good works that refute the paper "From Imāmiyya to Ithnā-ashariyya" by Etan Kohlberg? 

You may also like to see the ؐhadiths about the names of 12 Imams. The following link provide this book about imams in Arabic:

http://alfeker.net/library.php?id=1069

wasalam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/24/2018 at 1:26 AM, skyweb1987 said:

I do not have this book, Could you please bring the points raised by the author so that it can be discussed and counter arguments / answer to the objections can be mentioned, please.

Basically argues that the doctrine of Ghaybah was developed later in history and that in our earliest books (Basâ'ir al-darajât and Kitab al-Mahasin) this doctrine is absent. Only do we find in the later books of Saduq this doctrine really taking shape.

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

1. The statement that the doctrine of immamah  was developed by later in history can be refuted by the verses of quran that mention Ibrahim AS as chosen imam. The similar imams  were also chosen by Allah swt for the guidance of the people. Similarly in the ummah of the prophet saaw there are 12 imams/ caliphs/ ameers..

The doctrine of imamah as we now has its foundation in the hadith thaqlyn that two weighty things ie Quran and Ahl lbayt of the prophet saaw for whom we should adhere to avoid going astray. This is neglected by a common  and biased researcher from west at first,.

The numerous hadith in sunni books mention about 12 leaders/ successor / ammers but the names are not quoted because of political reasons. The sunni have remained confused as no one confirms the identification of those 12 based on the hadith of the prophet saaw.

Shia books do mention these hadith and the names are quoted confidently  from the progeny of the prophet saaw, First one being imam Ali and the last 12th is Almahdi AS. which is justified  in the light of the verses of quran and other hadith of the prophet saaw..

wasalm

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

1. The statement that the doctrine of immamah  was developed by later in history can be refuted by the verses of quran that mention Ibrahim AS as chosen imam. The similar imams  were also chosen by Allah swt for the guidance of the people. Similarly in the ummah of the prophet saaw there are 12 imams/ caliphs/ ameers..

 The doctrine of imamah as we now has its basis on the hadith thaqlyn that two weighty things for whom we should adhere to avoid going astray. This is neglected by a common  and biased researcher from west at first,.

 The numerous hadith in sunni books mention about 12 leaders/ successor / ammers but the names are not quoted because of political reasons. The sunni have remained confused as no one uits the cirteiaa for the idntifcation of those 12 based on the hadith of the prophet saaw. Shia books do mention these hadith and the names are quoted from the progeny of the prophet saaw, First one being imam Ali and the last 12th is Almahdi AS. which is justified  in the light of the verses of quran and other hadith of the prophet saaw..

 wasalm

The verse of Ibrahim being an Imam does not establish any of the Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) being Imams. None of their names are mentioned in the verse.

Yes maybe we could use the 12 khulafa hadith in Sunni books, but again this doesn't mention the names of the Imams of Ahlulbayt, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
10 minutes ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

The verse of Ibrahim being an Imam does not establish any of the Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) being Imams. None of their names are mentioned in the verse.

Yes maybe we could use the 12 khulafa hadith in Sunni books, but again this doesn't mention the names of the Imams of Ahlulbayt, 

1. Ibrahim AS was a chosen imam as per quran and his progeny includes imams too verse 2:124 except the wrong doers.

2. Why the sunni books does not mention these 12  names even in the presence of these hadith? Is it not a weakness of major nature in those when they claim to follow the caliphs / ameers / iams as ulil amr? Were these sunni books not written before shia early books?

Shia are well confident and justified for their names from the progeny of the prophet saaw based on the hadith of the prophet saaw and sayings of imams.

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Basically argues that the doctrine of Ghaybah was developed later in history and that in our earliest books (Basâ'ir al-darajât and Kitab al-Mahasin) this doctrine is absent. Only do we find in the later books of Saduq this doctrine really taking shape.

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

Ridiculous argument.

Three points come to mind:

They're not our earliest books, most of the personal collections of the companions of the imams (the usool) predate them, they were gathered into larger collections such as Al-Kafi, so there was no need to copy and transmit them seperately thereafter, although some (AFAIK) have reached us in their original individual form.

Al-kulayni and his collection Al-Kafi came before Saduq and his books, and you'll see plenty of narrations from the later imams in there, so clearly he and his mashayikh believed in these imams to preserve and transmit these narrations.

Both books were written by twelvers. Basa'ir al-darajat was written by Muhammed bin Al-Hassan Al-Saffar who was a companion of Imam Al-Askari (as). How can one suggest twelver theology was later "developed" by saying there's a lack of evidence in a book written by a person who was a companion and believer of the 11th imam, clearly the author of the book believed in it already. As for Kitab Al-Mahasin, it was written by Ahmad Al-Barqi who was born 12 years before Imam Al-Hadi (as) and five years after Imam Al-Jawad (as), and was a companion of both, and he believed in the imamat of both.

So if one wants to suggest twelver shiism "developed" later you're going to have to do better than evidence that claim by pointing out books written by companions of and believers in the 9th, 10th, and 11th imams, while making false assumptions about them being our earliest works.

Edit:

Just realised the objection is about the ghaybah specifically, Qai'm's points are sufficient. It can be added however that there are several narrations about the ghaybah in Al-Kafi reported from the earlier imams (1), given that Al-Kafi is compiled from the usool which predate the two books mentioned, the claim is clearly false.

http://www.alseraj.net/maktaba/kotob/hadith/kafi1/html/ara/books/al-kafi-1/144.html

Edited by IbnMariam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

although I cannot claim to have even have the most superficial knowledge of the ghaybah period ,in general I have been disappointed by the paucity of ahadith in 12er imami hadith collections narrated from the first 3 imams and their companions , and the relative abundance of ahadith in sunni works narrated from close companions of first imam ( aka jabir, abu saeed, ibn abbas, bara b azib, zayd b arqam, abu dharr, and in later generations of tabi'in)

It almost seems from a neutral vantage point that two different Ali versions exist a Imami shia one and a sunni one and each has become a mouth piece of dogmas of their respective sects 

Can someone share any ideas on this ?

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • Veteran Member
On 9/28/2018 at 10:24 AM, Panzerwaffe said:

although I cannot claim to have even have the most superficial knowledge of the ghaybah period ,in general I have been disappointed by the paucity of ahadith in 12er imami hadith collections narrated from the first 3 Imams and their companions , and the relative abundance of ahadith in Sunni works narrated from close companions of first Imam ( aka jabir, Abu saeed, ibn Abbas, bara b azib, zayd b arqam, Abu dharr, and in later generations of tabi'in)

It almost seems from a neutral vantage point that two different Ali versions exist a Imami Shia one and a Sunni one and each has become a mouth piece of dogmas of their respective sects 

Can someone share any ideas on this ?

1. Hadith narrated by Imams area taken being they are the pious members of the Ahl albayat ie progeny of the Prophet Muhammad saww. there are hadith in our collections that the hadith of Imams are the hadith of the Prophet saww narrated by subsequent Imams. So we are quite satisfied with it in the light of hadith thaqlayn. 

2.  The abundance of hadith form close companions of Imams may have been there in Sunni wordks but there is a deficiency which is obvious in these work. eg the hadith does mention of 12 ameers/ caliphs or successors of the Prophet Muhamamd saaw but we could not find names of those 12 in Sahiheen books. On the other hand they are required to follow these caliphs as per interpretation of ulil amr, whose names are missing from their works. Also Sunni scholars are confused about these 12 names of the caliphs. But Shia have the clear define names of those 12 caliphs / Imams whom they follow.

3. The hadith are to be verified finally with the Qur'an if they are meeting the principles of Qur'an These  are acceptable otherwise rejected. if any Sunni hadith collection mentions about the permission of breast feeding in adult . then it is rejected as it is permissible only in age of infancy. (about 2 and half year as per Qur'an ).

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
16 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Point 1..

so independent reports from first 3 Imams through their companions are rare compared to later Imams despite the political situation being much more favorable to ahlylbayt in times of first 3 Imams ?

1. The question has already been replied in detail at sr no. 1,,2 & 3 above. The weaknesses in Sunni collections are identified and agreed.

2. How you are able to conclude such statement?

Would you please like to please mention how many hadith have been taken in Sunni Sahih book of Bukhari from Ahl albayt AS  of the Prophet Mugammad saww?

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I'm well aware of imami explanations on this issue but still makes less sense since well known companions of Ali and Hasan has narrated so many hadith in non Shia works.Didnt first 3 Imams spent most of the first 25 yrs after Prophet teaching their companions ? Surprisingly so few of them narrate in imami works then ? Or do they ? I'll be happy to be proven wrong I would love nothing else to find dozens of narrations from them 

Regarding Sunni works you know very well the anti rafidi and pro uthmani..bias of most Sunni muhdaith

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Also if imami had a clear hadith from Prophet mentioning the names of 12 Imams why was there a dispute amongst the followers as to which Imam to follow after deaths of 4 to 5th Imams onwards ?

Was this hadith brought up as a counter argument during those times?

Like hadith of ammar,  hawab , and khawarij was used by partisans of Ali to refute the claims of his enemies ? And these hadith were well known during this time as documented in most Sunni and Shia historical works proving Ali and his partisans were on the right side 

 

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Regarding point 1 do we have a specific book or document written by later Imams saying they heard hadith from earlier Imams? If not then these hadith of later Imam depend on the same isnad principle that Sunni hadith use I.e use of fallible narraters 

 

@skyweb1987 you counter argument is just that Sunni hadith is flawed , not perfect , not methodical and biased against progeny of Ali

I agree with you on all these points esp first two but I'm asking very specific questions just pertaining to imami Shia hadith 

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Unregistered
On 9/25/2018 at 8:17 AM, Follower of Ahlul Bayt said:

Basically argues that the doctrine of Ghaybah was developed later in history and that in our earliest books (Basâ'ir al-darajât and Kitab al-Mahasin) this doctrine is absent. Only do we find in the later books of Saduq this doctrine really taking shape.

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

You have two different issues here. Concept of Imamat and second is the doctrine of Ghaybah. 

Issue with these type of pointed and restrictive questions are that they are asked with the end in mind. 

Not every one  has the data available that people who study this type of discipline have. So, what do the Laypeople/average people do when they come across questions like this. 

Break it down to the most Basic Concept.

وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً ۖ قَالُوا أَتَجْعَلُ فِيهَا مَنْ يُفْسِدُ فِيهَا وَيَسْفِكُ الدِّمَاءَ وَنَحْنُ نُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِكَ وَنُقَدِّسُ لَكَ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ {30}

[Pickthal 2:30] And when thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to place a viceroy in the Earth, they said: Wilt thou place therein one who will do harm therein and will shed blood, while we, we hymn Thy praise and sanctify Thee? He said: Surely I know that which ye know not.

Allah(عزّ وجلّ) did not set a time limit. Meaning there will always a Representative of Allah(عزّ وجلّ) on this Earth. 

تَنَزَّلُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ فِيهَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِمْ مِنْ كُلِّ أَمْرٍ {4}

[Pickthal 97:4] The angels and the Spirit descend therein, by the permission of their Lord, with all decrees.

Unless, this has stopped- who is this person? 

*****

Look up a companion by the name of Owais Qarni/ Uwais al-Qarani. Concept of been present on this Earth but not having direct access was already establish for the people of insight. 

The fact that something in not in the Original books- is also a fallacy that many use- They do conveniently forget/or get selective here- That it is not that Shia had the government and all the printing presses were running at full capacity and that Shia Government was recording events and details in books to be read my the masses and preserved in history- . So, if something is not in the Earliest books, it means it is a new concept. Usually,  Non Shia get n to this trap, as they are used to this type of thinking. Everything is recorded for them, so if its not there is a innovation. 

With in 50 years Tragedy of Karbala, fact that Imam had to go into occultation means that conditions were still not in the favor- So, and intelligent mind after making these assessments will understand that history of the Oppressed is recorded in different manner. Our Theology was passed down in Dua's. Ziyarats and printed material in stages ( some of it was lost and burned)  - 

Its common sense to understand any underground movement will preserve many things - in verbal form - passed down to next generation this way. To print everything in open and ready for the masses to ready is not really intelligent - you are just providing reason to  the Government . When the time is right, less restriction form the Government but still public has been brainwashed for centuries  and it also depends on that condition so you slowly start publishing for the masses even at this stage some "very sensitive issues" still may not make it for various reason ....

Just an Layman input, may not be complete 

Edited by S.M.H.A.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
21 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Also if imami had a clear hadith from Prophet mentioning the names of 12 Imams why was there a dispute amongst the followers as to which Imam to follow after deaths of 4 to 5th Imams onwards ?

Was this hadith brought up as a counter argument during those times?

The answer comes from the verses of Qur'an and hadith as mentioned below:

وَلَقَدْ أَخَذَ اللَّهُ مِيثَاقَ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ وَبَعَثْنَا مِنْهُمُ اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ نَقِيبًا ۖ وَقَالَ اللَّهُ إِنِّي مَعَكُمْ ۖ لَئِنْ أَقَمْتُمُ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَيْتُمُ الزَّكَاةَ وَآمَنتُم بِرُسُلِي وَعَزَّرْتُمُوهُمْ وَأَقْرَضْتُمُ اللَّهَ قَرْضًا حَسَنًا لَّأُكَفِّرَنَّ عَنكُمْ سَيِّئَاتِكُمْ وَلَأُدْخِلَنَّكُمْ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ ۚ فَمَن كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ مِنكُمْ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ سَوَاءَ السَّبِيلِ

And certainly Allah made a covenant with the children of Israel, and We raised up among them twelve chieftains; and Allah said: Surely I am with you; if you keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and believe in My messengers and assist them and offer to Allah a goodly gift, I will most certainly cover your evil deeds, and I will most certainly cause you to enter into gardens beneath which rivers flow, but whoever disbelieves from among you after that, he indeed shall lose the right way. (5:12)

فَبِمَا نَقْضِهِم مِّيثَاقَهُمْ لَعَنَّاهُمْ وَجَعَلْنَا قُلُوبَهُمْ قَاسِيَةً ۖ يُحَرِّفُونَ الْكَلِمَ عَن مَّوَاضِعِهِ ۙ وَنَسُوا حَظًّا مِّمَّا ذُكِّرُوا بِهِ ۚ وَلَا تَزَالُ تَطَّلِعُ عَلَىٰ خَائِنَةٍ مِّنْهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّنْهُمْ ۖ فَاعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَاصْفَحْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُحْسِنِينَ

But on account of their breaking their covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard; they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others). (5:13)

The above verses describe the scenario for the Jews and these are part of the Qur'an as reminder for us in similar manner.

إِنَّا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ كَمَا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ نُوحٍ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ مِن بَعْدِهِ ۚ وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالْأَسْبَاطِ وَعِيسَىٰ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُونُسَ وَهَارُونَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ ۚ وَآتَيْنَا دَاوُودَ زَبُورًا

Surely We have revealed to you as We revealed to Nuh, and the Prophets after him, and We revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and Isa and Ayub and Yunus and Haroun and Sulaiman and We gave to Dawood (4:163)

The above verses imply that the revelations sent to other Prophets have been sent to our Prophet Muhammad saaww thus the presence of twelve leaders as representative of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is well proven, The evidence also comes from this verses that the number of names used in this verses are exactly 12.

The detail discussion about the twelver Shia as follower of the religion  of Ibrahim AS which is mentioned in Qur'an can be seen at the given links:

Also the hadith of the Prophet Muhmaad saww mentions that our nation will follow the ways of Jews and Christians. There will be 73 sects in our nation / ummah I do believe the sayings and words of the Prophet saww about this division.

The following ink may be seen further discussion about this hadith:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

That's all fine and dandy but you are just stressing importance of number 12 that's not the question.

If they were known by name why were there intra Shia schisms during their times ?

Ok let's assume Shias who followed other Imams were deviants

Then Did the right group of let's say as Sadiq's Shias  say we follow 12 Imams  vs zayd 's Shias who denied 12 is not right number or Ismail 's Shias who said 12 Imams are not right ?

Also was there anyone during time of earlier Imams who said we will follow 12 Imams only ? Surely if it was a prediction hadith from Prophet and it must have been known in every generation, so regardless of their names the number 12 should have as much importance in time of Ali as in time of Imam Askari ?

Lastly how many of Ali partisans have narrated this hadith of 12 Imams ?

 

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
34 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

That's all fine and dandy but you are just stressing importance of number 12 that's not the question.

If they were known by name why were there intra Shia schisms during their times ?

Ok let's assume Shias who followed other Imams were deviants

Then Did the right group of let's say as Sadiq's Shias  say we follow 12 Imams  vs zayd 's Shias who denied 12 is not right number or Ismail 's Shias who said 12 Imams are not right ?

Also was there anyone during time of earlier Imams who said we will follow 12 Imams only ? Surely if it was a prediction hadith from Prophet and it must have been known in every generation, so regardless of their names the number 12 should have as much importance in time of Ali as in time of Imam Askari ?

Lastly how many of Ali partisans have narrated this hadith of 12 Imams ?

 

Your last two points will get the convenient “hadiths were burned” opt-out.

I have always wondered how there could have been deviance in the house of the Imams'. Surely, if the imamate of 12 was conveyed by name from the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), this would have been common knowledge in the house of the Imams (عليه السلام). Hence, no dispute within the house of who is the next Imam. But this obviously was not the case as disputes did arise.

Edited by 786:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Also was there anyone during time of earlier Imams who said we will follow 12 Imams only ? Surely if it was a prediction hadith from Prophet and it must have been known in every generation, so regardless of their names the number 12 should have as much importance in time of Ali as in time of Imam Askari ?

Lastly how many of Ali partisans have narrated this hadith of 12 Imams ?

The same has already been explained and replied at sr no. 1 last posts. the link is given below:

As you have agreed about the deficiency in the Sunni hadith system just mentioning the numbers of 12 caliphs only without the names then it is an evidence that Bukhari had possibly kept out those 12 names from his collection for political reasons. 

Then what do you intend to bring like 3 caliphs thought who rejected the Qur'an presented by Imam  Ali AS according to the revelation order, you are just trying to present Sunni  myths when there are clear evidences from verses of Qur'an and hadith of the Prophet saww about 12 Imams from the progeny of the Prophet saww as presented in my last post and making you a speechless .

Then the question comes here why the three early caliphs put a prohibition for writing the hadith in their rule? @786:)

Why the Sunni thought just stick at 4 caliphs when their collections do have number 12 for them? 

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
37 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

Then the same question comes here why the three early caliphs put a prohibition for writing the hadith in their rule? @786:)

So caliphate rule was the only time the first three Imams could have transmitted hadith? Imam Ali had 5 years after the caliphate reign to transmit something. The latter two Imams had even longer time. I think we need to stop coming up with excuses--whether its #HadithBan or #HadithBurn. Just face it, we have nothing from the early Imams. Most of our hadiths that back our sectarian narratives come from the later Imams--who were isolated from their "followers" so their "followers" transmitted hadith on their behalf.

 

Edited by 786:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
19 minutes ago, 786:) said:

So their rule was the only time the first three Imams could have transmitted hadith? Imam Ali had 5 years after their reign to transmit something. The latter two Imams had even longer time. 

1. Imam Ali faced the following:

Saqeefa where early caliphs snathed the right of claiphate form bani hahsim and Ali

Land of Fadak captured by rulers

battles like jamal, sifeen, kahwarij etc  Martyrdom by backup  support of uamamyad

How you consider it was a favorable time for them to transfer the hadith in writing. there weer his followers although few in numbers and he was in direct contact with them.

2. Imam Hsaan faced hard time from Muawiya, who validated peace treaty, and his backup support resulted in martyrdom of Imam AS

The funeral of Imam was not made possible near the grave of the Prophet saaw by attacking on his funerals all is part of history/ How do you consider that it was a favorable time?

3. Imam Hussain faced Muwaiya and yazeed and he was martyrdom at Kerbela  with his family and companions. How do you conclude that he was in favorable time for writing  down the hadith?

Later Imams like Imam Sadiq As got a better time for communicating the hadith and teaching of the Prophet Muhamamd saaw because of growing  enmity and war  between ummayad and ababsid for ruler ship. Moreover Imam have to be followed unconditionally after the Prophet saww no one has right to ask any thing about it

How do justify the actions of first three caliphs for prohibition of writing the hadith of the Prophet saww?

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

1. Imam Ali faced the following:

Saqeefa where early caliphs snathed the right of claiphate form bani hahsim and Ali

Land of Fadak captured by rulers

battles like jamal, sifeen, kahwarij etc 

How you consider it was a favorable time for them to transfer the hadith in writing. there weer his followers although few in numbers and he was in direct contact with them.

2. Imam Hsaan faced hard time from Muawiya, who validated pee treaty, and his backup support resulted in martyrdom of Imam AS

The funeral of Imam was not made posible near the grave of the Prophet saaw by attacking on his funerals all is part of history/ How do you consider that it was a favorable time?

3. Imam Hussain faced Muwaiya and yazeed and he was martyrdom at Kerbela  with his family and companions. How do you conclude that he was in favorable time for writing  down the hadith?

Later Imams like Imam Sadiq As got a better time for communicating the hadith and teaching of the Prophet Muhamamd saaw becasue of growing  enmity and war  between ummayad and ababsid for ruler ship.

How do justify the actions of first three caliphs for prohibition of writing the hadith of the Prophet saww?

So these political disruptions were more important than correcting the beliefs of the ummah? Interesting proposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
4 minutes ago, 786:) said:

So these political disruptions were more important than correcting the beliefs of the ummah? Interesting proposition.

I await the reply of my question I have explained my view in clear words please.

9 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

How do justify the actions of first three caliphs for prohibition of writing the hadith of the Prophet saww?

What service for Islam they have carried out by hiding the truth through prohibition of hadith? What  were their motives except keeping the truth hidden about the rights of the pure progeny of the Prophet saww and 12 Imams?

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I do not justify it. However, I do not find it to be an excuse at the same time. I believe it is the responsibility of the Imams to correct the beliefs of the ummah they are leading. I just find it odd we do not have a single narration of them proclaiming they are the Imam e Zamana or 12 Imams. Nahjul Balagha dives into smaller scale matters, but does not shed light on 12 Imams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
37 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

What service for Islam they have carried out by hiding the truth through prohibition of hadith? What  were their motives except keeping the truth hidden about the rights of the pure progeny of the Prophet saww and 12 Imams?

3

The view that there was some sort of official government political ban on writing down hadith and transmitting them is not very accurate. The most we can show is that only Umar (not even any other caliph) prevented a handful number of people here and there from narrating or writing down hadith on some occasions, but there is no evidence to suggest that hadith writing or transmitting was banned as a political rule for 90+ years until Umar b. Abdul Aziz allowed it. In fact, there is ample evidence to show that companions and subsequent generations already had many smaller codices of hadith written down. For more extensive research see Dr.. Mustafa Azmi's book Studies in Early Hadith Literature. There are Shi'a scholars who have also argued against this, but their works are in Arabic.

Edited by Ibn al-Hussain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, skyweb1987 said:

1. Imam Ali faced the following:

Saqeefa where early caliphs snathed the right of claiphate form bani hahsim and Ali

Land of Fadak captured by rulers

battles like jamal, sifeen, kahwarij etc  Martyrdom by backup  support of uamamyad

How you consider it was a favorable time for them to transfer the hadith in writing. there weer his followers although few in numbers and he was in direct contact with them.

2. Imam Hsaan faced hard time from Muawiya, who validated peace treaty, and his backup support resulted in martyrdom of Imam AS

The funeral of Imam was not made possible near the grave of the Prophet saaw by attacking on his funerals all is part of history/ How do you consider that it was a favorable time?

3. Imam Hussain faced Muwaiya and yazeed and he was martyrdom at Kerbela  with his family and companions. How do you conclude that he was in favorable time for writing  down the hadith?

Later Imams like Imam Sadiq As got a better time for communicating the hadith and teaching of the Prophet Muhamamd saaw because of growing  enmity and war  between ummayad and ababsid for ruler ship. Moreover Imam have to be followed unconditionally after the Prophet saww no one has right to ask any thing about it

How do justify the actions of first three caliphs for prohibition of writing the hadith of the Prophet saww?

Despite all these tribulations we have clear hadith that are clearly pro Ali in even the most biased Sunni books , despite the ban on hadith writing it does not mean all proali hadith of that time was lost , infact Sunnis agree most merits in hadith of any caliph are those of Ali 

Battles of Ali were PERFECT time to recount such ahadith when war cries and motivational speeches were common place 

And so was the letters he sent to his governors , he even chewed his governor for building a expensive house , be mindful of minorities and chastised them fleeing the battle but no reminder of the allegedly most important religious obligation the ONE thing that sets them apart from rest of ummah yet in nahjul balagah even there is no mention of 12 rulers 

Edited by Panzerwaffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

Salam and Bismillahi taala.

O Messenger! proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And Allah will defend thee from men (who mean mischief). For Allah guideth not those who reject Faith (5:67).

 

The above verse clearly showed how difficult for the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to introduce his successor publically as Ulil Amr.  The Prophet was hesitated until the above verse forced him to say it or otherwise he is not a Prophet.  The Prophet knew very well the state of minds of most of his companions after 20+years he were with them in many ups and downs.

Why was the Prophet so hesistated to proclaim Ali as his successor (as Ulil Amr) and in coded message...he just mentioned 2 weighty things ?  If anyone hold to it, they will not go astray. The surrounding companions of the Prophet were having so much personal interest or Arab jahilliyah mentality.  They were more cultural than Islamic.  They were not ready to receive Ali as Ulil Amr or Ahlul Bayt as Ulil Amr.

The sahabah went to saqifa and elected among themselves. That was clear proof why the Prophet hesitated.  They selected the Ulil Amr among themselves.

The Prophet was worried about future of Islam, so did Ali, Hassan, Hussain, Ali ibnul Hussain and the rest of Ahlubayt.  They were all worried about future and message of Islam.  Therefore, they did not introduce themselves as Ulil Amr and let the society to decide. However, the companions at that time were more acceptable toward Imamate roles of Ahlul Bayt in religious knowledge matters but not as Ulil Amr.  Even during Umaiyah and Abbasiyah, none of the rulers would give Ahlul Bayt to play the roles as Ulil Amr.  Only as advisor to religious matters.

For the Prophet, the message of Islam has to be protected at any cost.  Ulil Amr roles can take back seat because ummah were not ready.  The Prophet just asked Ahlul Bayt to be patience and not to go for Ulil Amr status.  Leave it Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

If the Prophet was to insist on Ulil Amr position of Ahlul Bayt and then he would have mentioned all 12 of them by names...they would have killed all of them (ulil amr) as soon as possible and the message of true Islam would be gone by now.

That how Imamate concept developed and officiated at later stage of Islam (not during early Imams). The roles of Imamate (confined to religious matter) started earlier during Imam Ali era.   It was more accepted to general Muslims as time went by.  And Imamate school of thought was officiated publically.

Now the imamate is accepted.  But the moment we turn Imamate into Ulil Amr, the Sunnis will jump up because they love their sahabahs as Ulil Amr.

To reflect on current situation... The Islamic Rep of Iran will be supported by Arabs and Western world if Iran remain as religious state like the Vatican.  But Iran is moving toward the roles of Ulil Amr of the people of the Middle East.  The first country to declare opposition to Iran is Saudi Arabia and all of Arab Kings.  The US and Saudis will not tolerate Islamic Iran as Ulil Amr.

Imam Mahdi will return and will change the status of Imamate to Ulil Amr.  At that moment the concept Imamate will be obsolete again, there will be only one concept...and that is Ulil Amr.  Imamate is just small part of Ulil Amr.

Allah, the Mighty and Sublime says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ

“O you who believe! obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those in authority from among you.” (Qur’an, Surah Nisa 4:59)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
17 hours ago, Ibn al-Hussain said:

The view that there was some sort of official government political ban on writing down hadith and transmitting them is not very accurate. The most we can show is that only Umar (not even any other caliph) prevented a handful number of people here and there from narrating or writing down hadith on some occasions, but there is no evidence to suggest that hadith writing or transmitting was banned as a political rule for 90+ years until Umar b. Abdul Aziz allowed it. In fact, there is ample evidence to show that companions and subsequent generations already had many smaller codices of hadith written down. For more extensive research see Dr..... Mustafa Azmi's book Studies in Early Hadith Literature. There are Shi'a scholars who have also argued against this, but their works are in Arabic.

Aishah is reported to have said, “My father had collected 500 Hadith of the Prophet (S). One morning he came to me and said, ‘Bring the Ahadith that are with you.’ I brought them to him. He burnt them all and said, “I am afraid, should I die leaving these with you.” It is reported on the authority of al-Zuhri that ‘Umar wanted to write the Prophet’s Sunan. He thought about it for a month, seeking guidance from God in this regard. One morning he made a decision and declared, “I recalled the peoples who lived before you. They wrote certain things and were attracted to such writings so much so that they abandoned the Book of God.”46

Yahya Ibn Ju’dah also reports that ‘Umar had intended to write the Ahadith and sunan. But having changed his mind he sent notices to all the cities declaring, “Whoever has with him any Hadith should destroy it.” It has been reported from ‘Urwah Ibn al-Zubayr that, “‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab wanted to write the sunan of the Prophet (S). He consulted the Companions of the Prophet (S). All of them were of the opinion that they should be documented in written form. But ‘Umar reflected upon the matter until one morning he made a decision and said, “I wanted to write down the sunan but then I recalled a people who lived before you who wrote books and abandoned the book of God. By God, I will not cover the Book of God with anything48.

This Riwayah shows that the Companions or at least those of them who were consulted, approved the writing down of Ahadith. But the Caliph, after a month’s reflection, prohibited the writing of Ahadith on the basis that he himself states49. The argument is not based on the Sunnah of the Prophet (S).

https://www.al-Islam.org/al-tawhid/general-al-tawhid/tadwin-al-hadith-part-2-rasul-jafariyan/tadwin-al-hadith-part-2#actual-reason-behind-prohibition-writing-of ahadith

https://www.al-Islam.org/prohibition-recording-hadith-Sayyid-Ali-al-shahristani

Thus confirming that prohibition of writing the hadith is a fact in the history of Islam.

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
20 hours ago, 786:) said:

I do not justify it. However, I do not find it to be an excuse at the same time. I believe it is the responsibility of the Imams to correct the beliefs of the ummah they are leading. I just find it odd we do not have a single narration of them proclaiming they are the Imam e Zamana or 12 Imams. Nahjul Balagha dives into smaller scale matters, but does not shed light on 12 Imams.

 

19 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

And so was the letters he sent to his governors , he even chewed his governor for building a expensive house , be mindful of minorities and chastised them fleeing the battle but no reminder of the allegedly most important religious obligation the ONE thing that sets them apart from rest of ummah yet in nahjul balagah even there is no mention of 12 rulers 

Nehjul balagha for the sayings of Imam Ali AS collected by Sharif Razi (359 h - 406 h) consists of a random collection of about 241  sermons,79 letters and 480 sayings of Imam Ali AS. It includes a variety of different topics (as collected by Sharif Razi in 400 h). It provides a guidance on matters with specific background of events happened in history of Islam.  The sources of nehjul balagah also  include Sunni sources that consider Imam Ali only as 4th caliph (not the first shii Imam).   it is considered a masterpiece of literature in Shia Islam. it does not gather all of Ali's sermons. The level of nehjul balaagh is considered after the 4 important books of Shia.
Syed Sharif Razi collected the contents of Nehjul Balaagha after the death of Yaqub Kulaini (in 328 h ie 72 years after his death who collected and complied the hadith mentioned in Al-kafi the first out of 4 important book of Shiite). Al-kafi predominantly provides the hadith  collected and arranged in more systematic manner which also includes a chapter in Vol 1 about the Prophets & 12 Imams with their virtues and their names have been clearly mentioned in it.
Keeping in view above how can one expect that the collected text included on nehjul Balagha should cover all the matters regarding shiite creed like 12 Imams in it when basic book of shiite school of thought ie Al-Kafi  already mentioned their names?

It is quite unreasonable and unrealistic approach. Although there are glimpses about the virtues of Ahl albayt and rejection of caliphate of three early caliphs as a part of its sermons.

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

×
×
  • Create New...