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
Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Additions makes Tashahud void, then what is fatwa on Imam Jaffer e Sadiq (عليه السلام)?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Capture1.thumb.PNG.d98350177fc6c6d2c4a8f13488785bfb.PNG1.thumb.PNG.2eb9ff4f4a8adc9150e88e2e1542ea07.PNG

 

Taqi Majlisi in his book Rawzat ul Muttaqeen Narrates Tashahud and calls chain authentic from Abu Baseer from Imam e Sadiq (عليه السلام)
In which Imam added highlighted testimony in tashahud.

My question:

1. Is Namaz of Imam e Sadiq (عليه السلام) batil? According to Bashir Najafi etc...

2. Why did he add to tashahud? 

3. Can you people attribute all the titles to Imam e Sadiq (عليه السلام) which you people have given to us who recite third testimony?

Hopefully i will get satisfactory answers this time. :D :party:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

Why don't you take it up with a marja' and post their answers? But no, that would mean you are genuinely concerned.

Why should i go to Marja when something is clear to me from hadith.

I have heard many ulima of yours saying: "Tashahud utna he hai" i:e is limited to 2 testimonies.

So that means they oppose Quran and Sunnah don't they? And following such a person is haram isn't it?

Even their taqleed becomes invalid doesn't it?

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Share this post


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

It should be quite easy to understand that what comes from an Imam is a sunnah and what is made up by the people is an innovation.

And supporters of that innovation shouldn't be respected and their taqleed should be invalid based on 4 conditions given by Iman Hassan Askari (عليه السلام).

Imam (عليه السلام) gave third and fourth testimonies in tashahud written above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol this has to be your 6th thread related to this topic. The thing with hadith literature is that you can find anything you are looking for in there.

Have you put this hadith into some framework to judge its reliability? Or are you just accepting it simply because it’s what you are looking for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, 786:) said:

Lol this has to be your 6th thread related to this topic. The thing with hadith literature is that you can find anything you are looking for in there.

Have you put this hadith into some framework to judge its reliability? Or are you just accepting it simply because it’s what you are looking for?

Should i show videos of your own researchers calling this hadith Sahih?
Also Taqi Majlisi has called this hadith Mosaq.

And it has been narrated by Abu Baseer from Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام)

And Imam gave two additional testimonies in tashahud thus making total testimonies 4.

Please answer why did imam (عليه السلام) do that?

Why did he practice obligatory precaution lol,

Plus according to you people, adding/subtracting anyhting from tashahud makes namaz void, what is fatwa for Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام)?

33 minutes ago, 786:) said:

Lol this has to be your 6th thread related to this topic.

Definitely i will always expose batil fatwas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Quran and Itrah

Are you part of a group of Shia brothers/sisters in the Indo-Pak subcontinent that don't perform Taqlid of a Marja?

I don't like assuming things based on rumours, and so i want to ask you directly to clarify insha Allah. 

So what i've heard is there is a group of Shias who don't perform Taqlid , believe 'Ali yun Waliyullah Wajib' , and also have yearly pilgrimages to different parts of the subcontinent to honour Zuljenah, and touch Zuljenah (or the depiction/replacement that symbolises it), and seek blessings from it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Quran and Itrah
56 minutes ago, 786:) said:

Lol this has to be your 6th thread related to this topic. The thing with hadith literature is that you can find anything you are looking for in there.

Have you put this hadith into some framework to judge its reliability? Or are you just accepting it simply because it’s what you are looking for?

I had heard of rumours about Akhabari groups in the subcontinent not performing Taqlid, but i thought because there's all sorts of things coming out of the indo-pak subcontinent, i felt someone was just exaggerating and making fun of Indo-Pak Shias who people allege are extreme. 

I don't like believing rumours, but is this true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 786:) said:

Lol this has to be your 6th thread related to this topic. The thing with hadith literature is that you can find anything you are looking for in there.

Have you put this hadith into some framework to judge its reliability? Or are you just accepting it simply because it’s what you are looking for?

It has been quoted from Tehzeeb Al Ahkam. see for yourself.  And its one of The Four Books Kutab e Arba

image.thumb.png.164026a0fac7ddb4dd94aa43af785670.pngimage.thumb.png.2fd93bf150a90b0ca5f65b02a7e7ffc4.png 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't simply cherry pick a line out of a single book and make or invalidate a whole belief out it. 

If the Imam (a) read that then there must have been a reason for why and in what circumstance he read it. There's a lot of study that goes into this buddy which clearly you don't know about. 

Islam isn't a kilona (toy) for you to play around with and make into whatever you wish. 

When we look at all the hadith of the Imams (a) and the teachings of the Quran, we get the tashahud we commonly read today.

Let me ask you a question, do you believe that all the top shia scholars of today and of the past 1000 years of shiasm or so, were all wrong and gave batil fatwas?

If so then may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) help you.

Edited by AStruggler

Share this post


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

You can't simply cherry pick a line out of a single book and make or invalidate a whole belief out it. 

If the Imam (a) read that then there must have been a reason for why and in what circumstance he read it. There's a lot of study that goes into this buddy which clearly you don't know about. 

Islam isn't a kilona (toy) for you to play around with and make into whatever you wish. 

When we look at all the hadith of the Imams (a) and the teachings of the Quran, we get the tashahud we commonly read today.

Let me ask you a question, do you believe that all the top shia scholars of today and of the past 1000 years of shiasm or so, were all wrong and gave batil fatwas?

If so then may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) help you.

I respect your view brother.

But look, I have mentioned one of the great scholors of Imamia Ithan Ashari Like Taqi Majlisi who called this hadith reliable.
Also this hadith has been quoted by Sheikh Tusi in Tehzeeb al Ahkam which is one of Kutab e Arba.

You for sure can't label above testimonies as taqqiyah and also this isn't only one narration and in one book or authenticated by one scholor.

Scan of tehzeeb i showed has Mosaq written on back of hadith number.
Taqi Majlisi called it authentic.

Now see Another book from Kutab e Arba is Manla yahzarahu AL Faqih by Sheikh Sadooq and here is tashahud quoted from Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) that has more than 8 Testimonies in it:

 

image.thumb.png.c71d09bdad3dcb9f1bc46daf0bb3df33.png image.thumb.png.c13f628474ec103f46ce92f30a7f9bf0.png

So all the old scholors have narrated this and all of this in Kutab e Arba so you cannot include old scholors in your list since no one believed that Tashahud was fixed.
So scholors of past didnt give any batil fatwas neither had the view which is held by many scholors today.

Either Sheikh Tusi, SHeikh Sadooq, Taqi Majlisi or perhaps Imam Jaffer e Sadiq or Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) has toyed with deen or either your scholors are toying with deen and giving batil fatwas

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

And supporters of that innovation shouldn't be respected and their taqleed should be invalid based on 4 conditions given by Iman Hassan Askari (عليه السلام).

Imam (عليه السلام) gave third and fourth testimonies in tashahud written above.

I don't see the issue here. If one recites their prayers as the aimmah did then they are following a sunnah.

However, the common point between all of the narrations (the two you quoted as well as the ones that cover tashahhud in prayers as commonly recited by us) is that none of them have the so-called 'third testimony'.

Thus the difference between sunnah (comes from a ma'soom) and bid'ah (invented by the people). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

So scholors of past didnt give any batil fatwas neither had the view which is held by many scholors today.

Either Sheikh Tusi, SHeikh Sadooq, Taqi Majlisi or perhaps Imam Jaffer e Sadiq or Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) has toyed with deen or either your scholors are toying with deen and giving batil fatwas

No they are all consistent on the fact that the third testimony is not a part of the tashahhud during prayers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

or perhaps Imam Jaffer e Sadiq or Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) has toyed with deen or either your scholors are toying with deen and giving batil fatwas

Firstly don't use such sarcasm. Sounds disrespectful.

Unfortunately I do not understand Arabic so I cannot say much. And I don't believe you understand it properly either. 

Perhaps brother @OrthodoxTruth can respond to your questions better. 

However, what you're quoting above, are these hadith of the Imams explicity telling us that ______ is the tashahud to be recited in namaz? 

And are you sure everything you're underlining is part of the tashahud being conveyed in the ahadith. 

Also, don't be so black and white, yes making additions/ommisions may invalidate the prayers but that's making additions/ommisions to what's the right thing. How do you know these other lines that the Imams (a) are reciting are considered wrong as per the fatwas of the contemporary mujtahideen? Maybe they accept it too but just write the mainstream tashahud in their risalahs. For example, if you read their risalahs, you'll find that there's even a shorter way to recite the tashahud and salaam. Also, you'll find there are extra supplicatory lines or dhikr you can say before and after the tashahud. Maybe these extra lines in the hadith are not read with intention of the tashahud and are simply just extra mustahab dhikr. Maybe you're just badly misunderstanding and mixing things up. At the end of the day, I know that I'm not qualified to do ijtihaad so I shall choose to follow someone who is. 

Edited by AStruggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

No they are all consistent on the fact that the third testimony is not a part of the tashahhud during prayers. 

They call it batil to recite anything more than 2nd Testimony like Bashir najafi etc thus they gave fatwas against teachings of Masomeen (عليه السلام)

Also they said nothing should be added to tashahud which is also a batil fatwa since masomeen (عليه السلام) added to it

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

I don't see the issue here. If one recites their prayers as the aimmah did then they are following a sunnah.

 

Accepting on narration and rejecting other? And basing a fatwa only on opinion is Qias which is haram.
The method adopted by them is "Pick And Choose" method. Accept one and reject the other.

 

29 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

However, the common point between all of the narrations (the two you quoted as well as the ones that cover tashahhud in prayers as commonly recited by us) is that none of them have the so-called 'third testimony'.

 

I am an illiterate in arabic biut seriously? What comes after 2nd testimony? 3rd testimony? they (عليه السلام) have added upto 8 9 testimonies in Tashahud.
Logic is, testify that Jannah is haq, jahanum is haq, qayamat is haq but if you testify to wilayat e Ali, your salah is batil. Hats off to you and your ulima.

 

31 minutes ago, Mahdavist said:

Thus the difference between sunnah (comes from a ma'soom) and bid'ah (invented by the people). 

Yep. Masoom added to it and said recite what seems best.
While innovators fixed it and said only recite what we say.
Agreed.

Share this post


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

And are you sure everything you're underlining is part of the tashahud being conveyed in the ahadith. 

 

Yes. I have seen it from Translation as well.

Plus word "I Testify" can be seen before sentences begin.

But follow those who do not oppose teachings of Ahlebait (عليه السلام), this is problem with people, no matter how strong evidence is from the books, they would even reject sahih sanad hadith and follow a fallible human being. That isn't cool at all

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Accepting on narration and rejecting other? And basing a fatwa only on opinion is Qias which is haram.
The method adopted by them is "Pick And Choose" method. Accept one and reject the other.

 

I am an illiterate in arabic biut seriously? What comes after 2nd testimony? 3rd testimony? they (عليه السلام) have added upto 8 9 testimonies in Tashahud.
Logic is, testify that Jannah is haq, jahanum is haq, qayamat is haq but if you testify to wilayat e Ali, your salah is batil. Hats off to you and your ulima.

 

Yep. Masoom added to it and said recite what seems best.
While innovators fixed it and said only recite what we say.
Agreed.

The point is simple, I don't know why you're struggling with it so much. 

Whatever we recite is from the ma'soomeen. Anyone who adds something that the ma'soomeen didn't has innovated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mahdavist said:

Whatever we recite is from the ma'soomeen. Anyone who adds something that the ma'soomeen didn't has innovated

Exactly like scholors who fixed tashahud, or said do not recite anything more than two testimonies, or who called anyhting more than two testimonies indeed has innovated deen with their personal opinions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Exactly like scholors who fixed tashahud, or said do not recite anything more than two testimonies, or who called anyhting more than two testimonies indeed has innovated deen with their personal opinions. 

Brother, be honest with yourself. None of these narrations have the line 'ashadu anna aliyyan waliullah' therefore adding it to the tashahhud is an innovated practice.

The position of the ulema is clear and obvious: do not add anything to the prayer that the aimmah have not performed or permitted. 

As you know we have supplications that we have received for sujood. One can of course recite these since we have evidence from the aimmah to do so. Adding your own lines is an innovation.

Similarly, reciting what the aimmah recited in tashahhud is obviously permitted. Adding your own lines is not. 

What the scholars have said is so obvious that I am surprised one even needs a fatwa for it. We cannot add things on our own to the prayers. If you are reciting what the aimmah recited then it is a sunnah. Anything else is bid'ah.

 

Share this post


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

Brother, be honest with yourself. None of these narrations have the line 'ashadu anna aliyyan waliullah' therefore adding it to the tashahhud is an innovated practice.

 

That's dis honesty. Imams freely added many testimonies in Tashahud and told believers to recite what seems best. Thus calling it an innovation has no basis. Imam (عليه السلام) told people to recite what seems best, he didn't restrict recitation of tashahud to 2 testimonies only. And i have no idea, how can learned ones like you still call it innovation while you know open declaration of faith "ali un wali ullah" would've made shias perish. Its established from authentic hadiths that imams practiced taqqiyah and in that era, it was impossible to bear witness to third testimony in Tashahud.

Tell me one thing honestly, tashahud is fine with Testimony of Qayamah? its fine with testimony of Jannah but void and innovation with Testimony of Wilayah? Does that make sense?

1 hour ago, Mahdavist said:

The position of the ulema is clear and obvious: do not add anything to the prayer that the aimmah have not performed or permitted. 

 

There are narrations like that from Fiqh e Raza but since that book isn't considered authentic, so its useless to use such a source.

As for permission, here have it from kutab e Arba: (A reliable tradition)

image.thumb.png.400091a7d283a6cb47241e3cc00dcbce.pngimage.thumb.png.58c63288b6846718a4069462db59dbc3.png 

Imam was asked a question, can i take names of Aima in "Salat". Imam permitted him to do so. And the manner in which hadith has been narrated, it clearly tells that its Mustahab to do so, and Sahabi of Imam (عليه السلام) asked him before doing this, thus this cannot mean salawat or darood since its wajib after tashahud. And there is no way that a companion like Halbi never knew of it.

So Permission of Imam (عليه السلام) to take names of all imams is there for Namaz. After this, you cannot say testifying to wilayah in tashahud is innovation. Since it has basis from Kutab e Arba and Hadiths of Aima (عليه السلام).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, OrthodoxTruth said:

I ceased debating neo-Akhbaris because I find it a waste of time.

They are not neo-akhbari. They are a latest subsect from rural punjab mainly led by foreign funded khateebs and zakirs. They also say Ali Allah and Ali jalla jalaalahu and their own formulation of third testimony in tashahud and cussing mujtahids and doing their own ijtihad. They are one of the thirteen subsects of Shia foretold. After 1450 years they have found their "correct" iteration of religion. May Allah guide us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 ((عليه السلام).) 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 taghut 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

In another hadith, Abi Khadijah relates that Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq ((عليه السلام).) sent him to his companions with the following message: "If a dispute or a difference occurs among you about a property, then take care not to seek judgment from those illegitimate [judges]; in­stead, you must seek a person who knows what is permissible and what is forbidden by us, for I appoint him as a judge over you. And take care that you do seek judgement against one another with an unjust ruler.”3

The least that these two narrations prove is that the Shi'ahs are not allowed to refer to unauthorized judges for solution to their problems, instead they are advised to seek the guidance of those who are well-versed in the teachings of the Ahlul-Bayt. In these ahadith, the prac­tise of seeking the advice of experts in shari'ah laws is taken for granted.4

In Practise: There are several documented cases of Shi'ahs who asked the Imams of their time to appoint someone to adjudicate between them in religious prob­lems. Such questions were raised by those who lived far from Medina or those who could not gain access to their Imam in Medina itself.

1. 'Ali ibn al-Musayyab asked Imam 'Ali ar-Riza ((عليه السلام).): "I live far away and cannot always come to you, so from whom should I take the guidance for my relig­ion?" The Imam replied, "From Zakariyyah bin Adam al-Qummi ..."

2. 'Abdu ‘l- ‘Aziz and Hasan bin 'Ali bin Yaqtin asked Imam 'Ali ar-Riza ((عليه السلام).), "I cannot always reach to you to ask about our problems about religious teach­ings. Is Yunfis bin' Abdu 'r-Rahman trustworthy enough for seeking religious guidance?" The Imam replied in affirmative.

3. 'Abdullah bin Abi Ya'fur asked Imam Ja'far as­-Sadiq ((عليه السلام).), "I do not meet you all the times nor is it possible for me to come [to you], and at times one of our friends would come to ask a question from me for which I would have no answer." The Imam said, "What does prevent you from [seeking guidance from] Muhammad bin Muslim ath-Thaqafi, for he has heard [many ahadith] from my father and was respectable in his views."

4. Shu'ayb al-'Aqraqufi asked Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq ((عليه السلام).), "Sometimes we need to ask about certain things, so whom should we ask?" The Imam replied, "Take guidance from [Abu Basir] al-Asadi.”5

These few examples prove beyond doubt that the practise of seeking the guidance of those who are well­ versed in religion has been practically endorsed by the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt ((عليه السلام).).

Let me end this section with the statement of Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi ((عليه السلام).) in answer to a letter sent by Ishaq bin Ya'qub. The Present Imam ((عليه السلام).) says, "As for the newly occurring circumstances, you should turn (for guidance) to the narrators of our hadith, for they are my proof over you and I am Allah's proof."6

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

Share this post


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

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 ((عليه السلام).) 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 taghut 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

In another hadith, Abi Khadijah relates that Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq ((عليه السلام).) sent him to his companions with the following message: "If a dispute or a difference occurs among you about a property, then take care not to seek judgment from those illegitimate [judges]; in­stead, you must seek a person who knows what is permissible and what is forbidden by us, for I appoint him as a judge over you. And take care that you do seek judgement against one another with an unjust ruler.”3

The least that these two narrations prove is that the Shi'ahs are not allowed to refer to unauthorized judges for solution to their problems, instead they are advised to seek the guidance of those who are well-versed in the teachings of the Ahlul-Bayt. In these ahadith, the prac­tise of seeking the advice of experts in shari'ah laws is taken for granted.4

In Practise: There are several documented cases of Shi'ahs who asked the Imams of their time to appoint someone to adjudicate between them in religious prob­lems. Such questions were raised by those who lived far from Medina or those who could not gain access to their Imam in Medina itself.

1. 'Ali ibn al-Musayyab asked Imam 'Ali ar-Riza ((عليه السلام).): "I live far away and cannot always come to you, so from whom should I take the guidance for my relig­ion?" The Imam replied, "From Zakariyyah bin Adam al-Qummi ..."

2. 'Abdu ‘l- ‘Aziz and Hasan bin 'Ali bin Yaqtin asked Imam 'Ali ar-Riza ((عليه السلام).), "I cannot always reach to you to ask about our problems about religious teach­ings. Is Yunfis bin' Abdu 'r-Rahman trustworthy enough for seeking religious guidance?" The Imam replied in affirmative.

3. 'Abdullah bin Abi Ya'fur asked Imam Ja'far as­-Sadiq ((عليه السلام).), "I do not meet you all the times nor is it possible for me to come [to you], and at times one of our friends would come to ask a question from me for which I would have no answer." The Imam said, "What does prevent you from [seeking guidance from] Muhammad bin Muslim ath-Thaqafi, for he has heard [many ahadith] from my father and was respectable in his views."

4. Shu'ayb al-'Aqraqufi asked Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq ((عليه السلام).), "Sometimes we need to ask about certain things, so whom should we ask?" The Imam replied, "Take guidance from [Abu Basir] al-Asadi.”5

These few examples prove beyond doubt that the practise of seeking the guidance of those who are well­ versed in religion has been practically endorsed by the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt ((عليه السلام).).

Let me end this section with the statement of Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi ((عليه السلام).) in answer to a letter sent by Ishaq bin Ya'qub. The Present Imam ((عليه السلام).) says, "As for the newly occurring circumstances, you should turn (for guidance) to the narrators of our hadith, for they are my proof over you and I am Allah's proof."6

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

Again these arguments for taqleed?

AbuBaseer and others were narrators of hadith and they mever used to give fatwas based on their opinions like you Mujtahids do today.

And the last hadith mentions Ruju not taqleed. You can refer to as many scholors for hadith and not his own opinion that has no basis from Quran and sunnah. While in taqleed you are bound to follow one scholor. None of these hadiths promote and allow taqleed. There is only one hadith in Tafseer Al Askari (عليه السلام) which can be used as an evidence to allow taqleed.

And Alhumdulillah i have given hadiths throught our discussion while you people came up with nothing other than fatwas of your mujtahids that contradict Quran and sunnah and is based on pure rae.

If you are truthful, bring a hadith that proves Tashahud is fixed and we shouldn't add to it. Else it would mean you just intend to decieve people by quoting above hadiths that are irrelevant.

Edited by Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

The least that these two narrations prove is that the Shi'ahs are not allowed to refer to unauthorized judges for solution to their problems, instead they are advised to seek the guidance of those who are well-versed in the teachings of the Ahlul-Bayt. In these ahadith, the prac­tise of seeking the advice of experts in shari'ah laws is taken for granted.4

Please show, which of your current marjas have been appointed over us by Imam. Since its the condition of legitimacy.

And when their fatwas contradict Quran and sunnah, isn't it enough to prove that they are liars.

Also these two hadiths talk about people, who were from opposing party of Ahlebait (عليه السلام) and with regards to them, imam said this that refer to our people for judgments.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

STAY RELEVENT TO THE TOPIC.

I have to say you're smart.

Lets refer to scholors who narrated Hadiths in Kutab e Arba.

Sheikh Sadooq in his Amali says:

و یجزی فی التشهد الشهادتان فمازاد فتعبد

Two testimonies are sufficient for Tashahud and any more than that is worship.

How about this?

All the hadiths that i quoted and fatwa of sheikh sadooq inline with hadiths this is a Faqih. A muhaddis. A real alim who doesn't intend to contradict hadiths and transfer real ruling of Aima (عليه السلام) to shias unlike you mullahs who completely ignore all this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

They are not neo-akhbari. They are a latest subsect from rural punjab mainly led by foreign funded khateebs and zakirs. They also say Ali Allah and Ali jalla jalaalahu and their own formulation of third testimony in tashahud and cussing mujtahids and doing their own ijtihad. They are one of the thirteen subsects of Shia foretold. After 1450 years they have found their "correct" iteration of religion. May Allah guide us all.

Sheikh Tusi, Sheikh Sadooq, Imam Jaffer (عليه السلام) , Imam Baqir (عليه السلام), Sheikh Kulayni, Sadiq Shirazi, Muhammad Shirazi, Muhammad Ali Garami, Muhammad Ali Tabatabai etc are punjabi zakirs?

If I say Ali Allah, curse be upon me,

Else curse be upon liars.

Still saying we added it in tashahud even after reading all hadiths i quoted above? 

Ijtehad is based on opinion while i have quoted hadiths word by word.

But no! Following scholors even if they contradict hadiths is what Imams (عليه السلام) have taught us right? To leave hadiths and blindly follow fallible people. May Allah guide you people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Still saying we added it in tashahud even after reading all hadiths i quoted above? 

Ijtehad is based on opinion while i have quoted hadiths word by word.

Those are very weak statements. People have indicated problems with your "ijtihad", if we can call it that. Perhaps we should call your kind Ahl al Hadith Shias? In fact, cherry picking Ahl al hadith because there are also clear cut hadiths of two testimonies as well but you go with the other while violating the hadiths and quranic command of "do not divide yourselves". And for what? Over a mischief because all Shia recite the third testimony but your kind have all of sudden started insisting that it is wajib in tashahud. While wilayat is an usool.

35 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

If I say Ali Allah, curse be upon me,

Else curse be upon liars.

I think you haven't met your fellow people then. You are going in their direction because you are ignorant and insist on ignorance. Lost from the flock you are food for the predators. May Allah guide us.

Edited by The Green Knight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Capture1.thumb.PNG.d98350177fc6c6d2c4a8f13488785bfb.PNG1.thumb.PNG.2eb9ff4f4a8adc9150e88e2e1542ea07.PNG

 

Taqi Majlisi in his book Rawzat ul Muttaqeen Narrates Tashahud and calls chain authentic from Abu Baseer from Imam e Sadiq (عليه السلام)
In which Imam added highlighted testimony in tashahud.

My question:

1. Is Namaz of Imam e Sadiq (عليه السلام) batil? According to Bashir Najafi etc...

2. Why did he add to tashahud? 

3. Can you people attribute all the titles to Imam e Sadiq (عليه السلام) which you people have given to us who recite third testimony?

Hopefully i will get satisfactory answers this time. :D :party:

What is interesting in this narration is that it contains even the testimony of Qiyamah & Ba'that but not the testimony of wilayah of Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

So what do you think brother, Imam forgot to mention the testimony of wilayah here? 

59 minutes ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Sheikh Sadooq in his Amali says:

و یجزی فی التشهد الشهادتان فمازاد فتعبد

Two testimonies are sufficient for Tashahud and any more than that is worship.

More than that is worship, 2 are only sufficient but not worship? 

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.


×
×
  • Create New...