Does Imam Ali have knowledge of all things except creation?

[Cool]

1 hour ago, Muslim2010 said:

like to add the following link that mentions authentic hadith from Alkafi about the knowledge of Imams from ahl albyat (عليه السلام):

Thank you brother for bringing this thread here. I think this thread alone should be "kafi" for knowing the status of Imams as far as knowledge is concern. 

Whatever I have said here in this thread, is also mentioned there with references:

 

 

[Abu_Zahra]

7 hours ago, Cool said:

First of all, I haven't "rejected" any hadith till yet. I only said "I can reject". 

Reject what you like, I was simply pointing out that your suggestion that these narrations contradict the Quran was incorrect.

[In Gods Name]

 

Shaykh Saduq, Shaykh Mufid, and Shaykh Tusi all confirm the Imams do not have to have knowledge beyond the Shariah, and that knowledge of the future was but an inheritance of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). The Imams in many narrations claim they did not know when they would have their next meal, and often did not know who the munafiqoon were among their Shia.

This is found in the Quran, the Prophet himself (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was not informed initially of who the Munafiqoon were.

The Imams curse those who attribute to them knowledge of everything apart from the day of judgement. There were strong attempts from the Ghulat to claim the Imams knew the number of drops of water in the sea, the falling of every leaf, the number of stars in the Sky, and the Imams condemned this and claimed only Allah has this knowledge of totality. The imams were shocked and terrified of this.

 

<<>>

There is no doubt, the Imams of ale Muhammed were the most knowledgeable in Shariah, and most knowledgeable in restricted knowledge of the unseen due to inheritance from the messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). However, they were only human, and there was a lot they did not know and did not even need to know for their role

 

 

[In Gods Name]

Over time, the Ghulat, who were causing havock in Kufa during the time of the Imams, tried to promote the following beliefs:

-> The Imams were made before the universe and by permission of God created all that exists : This is a corrupt Ghali belief. 

-> We exist because of the Imams: No. We exist to worship and know Allah, the Imams have the same test as us.

-> The Imams can listen to dua, grant Risq, and control the atoms of the universe in real time: No. They do not delegate Risq, they can't hear your Dua, and only Allah is the one who governs the universe, listens to prayers, and answers them

->The Imams know all there is to know apart from knowledge of the day of judgement: False. The Imams did not know who the Munafiqoon were among their Shia. They sometimes were unaware of where food tomorrow would come. They did not need to know how to code Python, Java, or mechanical engineering. They did not read the minds of all of their followers. They had restricted knowledge of future events due to inheritance from the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and the consensus of our early scholars was that they did not have to have knowledge beyond the Shariah.

I want you all to play close attention. Some people here try to define Ghuluw as claiming divinity for the Imams. Whereas the imams condemned people who claimed Tafweed (Allah is the only God, but he gave the Imams the power to now control all affairs, delegate risq etc), and they also condemned and defined as Ghuluw those people who made claims about them which they did not make for themselves.

When you tell some of these brothers and sisters, Ghuluw is to attribute to the ahlulbayt that which they did not attribute to themselves , they are vehemently against this. So you have to ask yourself, why? Why are people extremely sensitive about the efforts not to attribute to the ahlulbayt that which the ahlulbayt never even claimed for themselves?

[In Gods Name]

I urge you all to , if your faith is not weak, read the book by Moderrasi - Shia Islam Crisis and Consolidation. You will see just how terrifying and powerful the Ghulat were, and how they evolved. They knew they could not get away with calling the Imams God, and so they evolved into the Mufawwidah - delegators, who claimed the Imams were not divine, but attributed to them that which only belongs to Allah, and also claimed for the Imams that which the Imams did not claim for themselves. 

[In Gods Name]

33 minutes ago, Abu_Zahra said:

Reject what you like, I was simply pointing out that your suggestion that these narrations contradict the Quran was incorrect.

I respect brother cool, but what he tends to do is bring verses which are quite open to interpretation, and then forces a very specific meaning to them completely out of context and with the utmost respect, not really supported by narrations and the views of our classical scholars.

When you bring a narration like this:

I wonder if our brother would consider this to go against the Quran despite it being Saheeh and actually being inline with the Quran?

[Abu_Zahra]

1 hour ago, In Gods Name said:

I respect brother cool, but what he tends to do is bring verses which are quite open to interpretation, and then forces a very specific meaning to them completely out of context and with the utmost respect, not really supported by narrations and the views of our classical scholars

This is known as tafseer bil ra'y

[Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi]

2 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

Over time, the Ghulat, who were causing havock in Kufa during the time of the Imams, tried to promote the following beliefs:

-> The Imams were made before the universe and by permission of God created all that exists : This is a corrupt Ghali belief. 

-> We exist because of the Imams: No. We exist to worship and know Allah, the Imams have the same test as us.

-> The Imams can listen to dua, grant Risq, and control the atoms of the universe in real time: No. They do not delegate Risq, they can't hear your Dua, and only Allah is the one who governs the universe, listens to prayers, and answers them

->The Imams know all there is to know apart from knowledge of the day of judgement: False. The Imams did not know who the Munafiqoon were among their Shia. They sometimes were unaware of where food tomorrow would come. They did not need to know how to code Python, Java, or mechanical engineering. They did not read the minds of all of their followers. They had restricted knowledge of future events due to inheritance from the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and the consensus of our early scholars was that they did not have to have knowledge beyond the Shariah.

I want you all to play close attention. Some people here try to define Ghuluw as claiming divinity for the Imams. Whereas the imams condemned people who claimed Tafweed (Allah is the only God, but he gave the Imams the power to now control all affairs, delegate risq etc), and they also condemned and defined as Ghuluw those people who made claims about them which they did not make for themselves.

When you tell some of these brothers and sisters, Ghuluw is to attribute to the ahlulbayt that which they did not attribute to themselves , they are vehemently against this. So you have to ask yourself, why? Why are people extremely sensitive about the efforts not to attribute to the ahlulbayt that which the ahlulbayt never even claimed for themselves?

Thats a very good aqeedah for shias who are weak in faith.

33 minutes ago, Abu_Zahra said:

This is known as tafseer bil ra'y

please show or highlight where he has done tafseer bil ra'y? He has literally quoted Quran and if verses say everything is in Imam e Mubeen, then hadiths you people are bringing up are certainly against the verse.

I quoted a bunch of ahadith and belief of Sheikh Kyulani on knowledge of Imams (عليه السلام), i'll quote it in this thread again. Belief in Imams having all the knowledge we have has been belief of shias and only shias with weak faith have rejected this. I don't care if Sheikh Sadooq or Mufeed or Tusi or Kashi etc happen to fall in that category. These people also had great bias when it came to rejecting hadiths of shia scholars who they thought where ghulat without any evidence.

[Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi]

2 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

I respect brother cool, but what he tends to do is bring verses which are quite open to interpretation, and then forces a very specific meaning to them completely out of context and with the utmost respect, not really supported by narrations and the views of our classical scholars.

When you bring a narration like this:

I wonder if our brother would consider this to go against the Quran despite it being Saheeh and actually being inline with the Quran?

Following Hadith has probably been narrated due to Taqqiyah

[Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi]

there's a chapter in Al-Kafi:

باب أن الأئمة عليهم السلام يعلمون علم ما كان وما يكون وأنه لا يخفى عليهم الشئ صلوات الله عليهم

The Imams ((عليه السلام)) do have the knowledge of what was and will be, and that nothing is unknown to them

If believing in it is Ghuluw, then declare Sheikh Kyulani as Ghali LOL. Here are a few hadiths from that chapter:

أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْحُسَيْنِ عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ إِسْحَاقَ الاحْمَرِ عَنْ عَبْدِ الله بْنِ حَمَّادٍ عَنْ سَيْفٍ التَّمَّارِ قَالَ كُنَّا مَعَ أَبِي عَبْدِ الله ((عليه السلام)) جَمَاعَةً مِنَ الشِّيعَةِ فِي الْحِجْرِ فَقَالَ عَلَيْنَا عَيْنٌ فَالْتَفَتْنَا يَمْنَةً وَيَسْرَةً فَلَمْ نَرَ أَحَداً فَقُلْنَا لَيْسَ عَلَيْنَا عَيْنٌ فَقَالَ وَرَبِّ الْكَعْبَةِ وَرَبِّ الْبَنِيَّةِ ثَلاثَ مَرَّاتٍ لَوْ كُنْتُ بَيْنَ مُوسَى وَالْخَضِرِ لاخْبَرْتُهُمَا أَنِّي أَعْلَمُ مِنْهُمَا وَلانْبَأْتُهُمَا بِمَا لَيْسَ فِي أَيْدِيهِمَا لانَّ مُوسَى وَالْخَضِرَ (عَلَيْهما السَّلام) أُعْطِيَا عِلْمَ مَا كَانَ وَلَمْ يُعْطَيَا عِلْمَ مَا يَكُونُ وَمَا هُوَ كَائِنٌ حَتَّى تَقُومَ السَّاعَةُ وَقَدْ وَرِثْنَاهُ مِنْ رَسُولِ الله ﷺ وِرَاثَةً

Imam ((عليه السلام)) said the following. “An eye is watching over us.” We then looked right and left and did not see anyone. We said, “No eye is watching over us.” The Imam ((عليه السلام)) said, “I swear by the Lord of the Ka‘ba. I swear by the Lord of the House.” He said so three times. “Had I been with Moses and al-Khidr I would have told them that I had more than they did and would have informed them of what they had no knowledge. This is because Moses and al-Khidr were given the knowledge of what was in the past and they were given the knowledge what will be in future or what will exist up to the Day of Judgment while we have inherited all of them from the Messenger of Allah as heirs.”,

(Knowledge of past, and knowledge of future is everything includes programming in javascript typescript who was/will be a kaafir, who was/will be momin etc)

عِدَّةٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ عَنْ يُونُسَ بْنِ يَعْقُوبَ عَنِ الْحَارِثِ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ وَعِدَّةٍ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا مِنْهُمْ عَبْدُ الاعْلَى وَأَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ وَعَبْدُ الله بْنُ بِشْرٍ الْخَثْعَمِيُّ سَمِعُوا أَبَا عَبْدِ الله ((عليه السلام)) يَقُولُ إِنِّي لاعْلَمُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الارْضِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا فِي النَّارِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا كَانَ وَمَا يَكُونُ قَالَ ثُمَّ مَكَثَ هُنَيْئَةً فَرَأَى أَنَّ ذَلِكَ كَبُرَ عَلَى مَنْ سَمِعَهُ مِنْهُ فَقَالَ عَلِمْتُ ذَلِكَ مِنْ كِتَابِ الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ إِنَّ الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ يَقُولُ فِيهِ تِبْيَانُ كُلِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ.

they heard abu ‘Abdallah ((عليه السلام)) say the following. “I certainly know what is the heavens and what is in the earth. I know what is in paradise and what is the fire. I know what was there and what will be there.” The narrator has said that the Imam ((عليه السلام)) paused for a while and found that what he had just said was much heavy for the audience then he ((عليه السلام)) said, “I learned all of it from the book of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High. Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, has said, “In it there is the clarification of all things.”

(notice فَقَالَ عَلِمْتُ ذَلِكَ مِنْ كِتَابِ الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ إِنَّ الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ يَقُولُ فِيهِ تِبْيَانُ كُلِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ. here. this is literally the same as what brother cool was saying before and quoted verses for)

عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ سَهْلٍ عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ أَبِي نَصْرٍ عَنْ عَبْدِ الْكَرِيمِ عَنْ جَمَاعَةَ بْنِ سَعْدٍ الْخَثْعَمِيِّ أَنَّهُ قَالَ كَانَ الْمُفَضَّلُ عِنْدَ أَبِي عَبْدِ الله ((عليه السلام)) فَقَالَ لَهُ الْمُفَضَّلُ جُعِلْتُ فِدَاكَ يَفْرِضُ الله طَاعَةَ عَبْدٍ عَلَى الْعِبَادِ وَيَحْجُبُ عَنْهُ خَبَرَ السَّمَاءِ قَالَ لا الله أَكْرَمُ وَأَرْحَمُ وَأَرْأَفُ بِعِبَادِهِ مِنْ أَنْ يَفْرِضَ طَاعَةَ عَبْدٍ عَلَى الْعِبَادِ ثُمَّ يَحْجُبَ عَنْهُ خَبَرَ السَّمَاءِ صَبَاحاً وَمَسَاءً

Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Sahl from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Aabu Nasr from ‘Abd al-Karim from Jama‘a ibn Sa‘d al-Khath‘ami who has said that al-Mufaddal was in the presence of abu ‘Abdallah ((عليه السلام)). Al-Mufaddal asked the Imam ((عليه السلام)) the following. “May Allah, take my soul in service for your cause, does Allah command (his) servants to obey a servant and hide the news of the heavens from him?” The Imam ((عليه السلام)) said, Allah is by far much honorable, kind and caring towards His servants than to command them to obey a servant (of His) and then hide form him the news of the heavens mornings and evenings.”

مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنِ ابْنِ مَحْبُوبٍ عَنِ ابْنِ رِئَابٍ عَنْ ضُرَيْسٍ الْكُنَاسِيِّ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا جَعْفَرٍ ((عليه السلام)) يَقُولُ وَعِنْدَهُ أُنَاسٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِهِ عَجِبْتُ مِنْ قَوْمٍ يَتَوَلَّوْنَا وَيَجْعَلُونَا أَئِمَّةً وَيَصِفُونَ أَنَّ طَاعَتَنَا مُفْتَرَضَةٌ عَلَيْهِمْ كَطَاعَةِ رَسُولِ الله ﷺ ثُمَّ يَكْسِرُونَ حُجَّتَهُمْ وَيَخْصِمُونَ أَنْفُسَهُمْ بِضَعْفِ قُلُوبِهِمْ فَيَنْقُصُونَا حَقَّنَا وَيَعِيبُونَ ذَلِكَ عَلَى مَنْ أَعْطَاهُ الله بُرْهَانَ حَقِّ مَعْرِفَتِنَا وَالتَّسْلِيمَ لامْرِنَا أَ تَرَوْنَ أَنَّ الله تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى افْتَرَضَ طَاعَةَ أَوْلِيَائِهِ عَلَى عِبَادِهِ ثُمَّ يُخْفِي عَنْهُمْ أَخْبَارَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالارْضِ وَيَقْطَعُ عَنْهُمْ مَوَادَّ الْعِلْمِ فِيمَا يَرِدُ عَلَيْهِمْ مِمَّا فِيهِ قِوَامُ دِينِهِمْ فَقَالَ لَهُ حُمْرَانُ جُعِلْتُ فِدَاكَ أَ رَأَيْتَ مَا كَانَ مِنْ أَمْرِ قِيَامِ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ وَالْحَسَنِ وَالْحُسَيْنِ ((عليه السلام)) وَخُرُوجِهِمْ وَقِيَامِهِمْ بِدِينِ الله عَزَّ ذِكْرُهُ وَمَا أُصِيبُوا مِنْ قَتْلِ الطَّوَاغِيتِ إِيَّاهُمْ وَالظَّفَرِ بِهِمْ حَتَّى قُتِلُوا وَغُلِبُوا فَقَالَ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ((عليه السلام)) يَا حُمْرَانُ إِنَّ الله تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى قَدْ كَانَ قَدَّرَ ذَلِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَقَضَاهُ وَأَمْضَاهُ وَحَتَمَهُ عَلَى سَبِيلِ الاخْتِيَارِ ثُمَّ أَجْرَاهُ فَبِتَقَدُّمِ عِلْمٍ إِلَيْهِمْ مِنْ رَسُولِ الله ﷺ قَامَ عَلِيٌّ وَالْحَسَنُ وَالْحُسَيْنُ ((عليه السلام)) وَبِعِلْمٍ صَمَتَ مَنْ صَمَتَ مِنَّا وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ يَا حُمْرَانُ حَيْثُ نَزَلَ بِهِمْ مَا نَزَلَ مِنْ أَمْرِ الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَإِظْهَارِ الطَّوَاغِيتِ عَلَيْهِمْ سَأَلُوا الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ أَنْ يَدْفَعَ عَنْهُمْ ذَلِكَ وَأَلَحُّوا عَلَيْهِ فِي طَلَبِ إِزَالَةِ مُلْكِ الطَّوَاغِيتِ وَذَهَابِ مُلْكِهِمْ إِذاً لاجَابَهُمْ وَدَفَعَ ذَلِكَ عَنْهُمْ ثُمَّ كَانَ انْقِضَاءُ مُدَّةِ الطَّوَاغِيتِ وَذَهَابُ مُلْكِهِمْ أَسْرَعَ مِنْ سِلْكٍ مَنْظُومٍ انْقَطَعَ فَتَبَدَّدَ وَمَا كَانَ ذَلِكَ الَّذِي أَصَابَهُمْ يَا حُمْرَانُ لِذَنْبٍ اقْتَرَفُوهُ وَلا لِعُقُوبَةِ مَعْصِيَةٍ خَالَفُوا الله فِيهَا وَلَكِنْ لِمَنَازِلَ وَكَرَامَةٍ مِنَ الله أَرَادَ أَنْ يَبْلُغُوهَا فَلا تَذْهَبَنَّ بِكَ الْمَذَاهِبُ فِيهِمْ.

heard abu Ja‘far ((عليه السلام)) the following to an audience of his companions. “What an strange case is the case with a group of followers! They acknowledge us as the Divine authority over themselves, accept us as their Imam and say that obedience to us is obligatory just as is the case with the Messenger of Allah. They then destroy the veracity of their belief as such and dispute against their own selves due to weakness of their hearts. They then diminish our right and blame those whom Allah has granted evidence to know us as it should be and the (abulity) to submit themselves to our Divine authority. Do you not consider that how would Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, make it obligatory to obey those who possess Divine authority over his servants and then hide from them (people who possess Divine authority) `the new of the heaves and the earth? How would He cut them off of the sources of knowledge that might come to them to maintain their religion?” Humran then said to the Imam ((عليه السلام)), “May Allah, take my soul in service for your cause, how would you explain the case of the uprising of Ali ibn abu Talib, al-Hassan and al-Husayn ((عليه السلام))? They came out and rose up for the cause of Allah, Whose mention is so Majestic. How much they suffered and how mercilessly were they murdered at the hands of the rebels? They were defeated, murdered and over powered.” Abu Ja‘far ((عليه السلام)) then said, “O Humran, Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, had determined it on them. He had decreed, approved and made it unavoidable though the voluntary manner. He then allowed to take place. It, thus, happened with a pre-existing knowledge that had come to them from the Messenger of Allah. Ali al-Hassan and al-Husayn ((عليه السلام)) rose up for the cause of Allah with full knowledge of the consequences and remained silent from us those who remained silent. Had they, O Humran, when facing what Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, made them to face and suffer defeat at the hands of the rebels, asked Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, to remove their suffering and would implore Him to destroy the government and kingdom of the rebels He would have answered their prayers and would grant them relief. In such case the destruction of the governments of the rebels and the ending of their time would take place quicker than the dispersal under a great pressure, of beads threaded together. The suffering, O Humran, that befell them, because of the sins that they might have committed or the punishment for their opposition to Allah. It was because of the high marvelous position that Allah had prepared and wanted them to reaCh Do not let people’s opinions take you away from the right path.”

(Majlisi said Sahih)

مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْفُضَيْلِ عَنْ أَبِي حَمْزَةَ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا جَعْفَرٍ ((عليه السلام)) يَقُولُ لا وَالله لا يَكُونُ عَالِمٌ جَاهِلاً أَبَداً عَالِماً بِشَيْ‏ءٍ جَاهِلاً بِشَيْ‏ءٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ الله أَجَلُّ وَأَعَزُّ وَأَكْرَمُ مِنْ أَنْ يَفْرِضَ طَاعَةَ عَبْدٍ يَحْجُبُ عَنْهُ عِلْمَ سَمَائِهِ وَأَرْضِهِ ثُمَّ قَالَ لا يَحْجُبُ ذَلِكَ عَنْهُ.

Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz from Muhammad ibn al-Fudayl from abu Hamzah who has that he heard abu Ja‘far ((عليه السلام)) say the following. “No, I swear by Allah, the scholar (who possesses Divine authority) is never ignorant or knowledgeable in something and ignorant of other things. The Imam ((عليه السلام)) then said, “Allah, the Most Holy, Most High and Most Gracious, is far exalted and above imposing the obedience of a servant (of His) on the others and then hide the knowledge of things in the heavens and on earth from him and then say, “Do not hide that from him.”

That all hadiths except for one from the chapter.

Also focus on the title of chapter, أن الأئمة عليهم السلام يعلمون علم ما كان وما يكون وأنه لا يخفى عليهم الشئ . it says alot about the beliefs of Shia like Sheikh Kulayni. They believed imams know what has happened and what will happen and nothing is hidden from Aima (عليه السلام). Call him a Ghali.

[Abu Nur]

11 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

Rather, the claim among some Shias today is, that the Imams know all there is to know, except the day of judgement.

I never made this claim. I believe they know the knowledge of the prophets + portion of Ilm Al ghayb that was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (saws) + knowledge that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) reveals to them trough their position + knowledge that they seek from God (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). As the quantity of it, we don't know. They could have more of what we could assume. Only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows.

Edited October 16, 2023 by Abu Nur

[In Gods Name]

2 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Following Hadith has probably been narrated due to Taqqiyah

You're claiming the Hadith where the Imam denies knowing the drops of rain in the sky, leaves falling on the trees, stars in the sky as Taqqiyah lol ?

You are regarding clear cut saheeh narrations, in large quantity where they rebut every ghuluw belief, as well as the Ijma of Saduq, Mufid, and Tusi as invalid?

Habibi, be careful. I am not trying to scare you here but some beliefs can land you in hell, eternal hell.

[In Gods Name]

1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

I never made this claim. I believe they know the knowledge of the prophets + portion of Ilm Al ghayb that was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (saws) + knowledge that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) reveals to them trough their position + knowledge that they seek from God (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). As the quantity of it, we don't know. They could have more of what we could assume. Only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows.

The Ijma of Saduq, Tusi, and Mufid is that they did not know the munafiqoon around them, not even the Prophet did, and that they did not need to know beyond the Shariah, and perhaps a limited future info of future events etc that was an inheritance from the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).

The knowledge they were given, was not just infinite knowledge or take whatever you like. It was conditional on if Allah willed and permitted it. Sometimes the Imam was worried sick about when his next meal would come from (according to Rijal al Kashi) and he was worried and not know. Sometimes he would be shocked a certain companion he taught was a Munafiq because he otherwise didn't know.

Even Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was not automatically given knowledge of the Munafiqoon around him, etc

So whatever knowledge they have, or knowledge they might want to know, is dependent on whether Allah deems it appropriate to give to them. They are also being tested , as slaves of Allah.

 

 

[In Gods Name]

1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

I never made this claim. I believe they know the knowledge of the prophets + portion of Ilm Al ghayb that was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (saws) + knowledge that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) reveals to them trough their position + knowledge that they seek from God (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). As the quantity of it, we don't know. They could have more of what we could assume. Only Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows.

Think about it. The Munafiqoon brought havock for the Shias, causing massive contradictions in hadith. Saduq, Mufid and Tusi say that the Imams actually remained unaware of these hypocrites. Why didn't Allah automatically tell them? Why didn't they automatically just ask to gain this critical knowledge?

It's all the will of Allah. They only know what Allah permits them to know.

 

[In Gods Name]

1 hour ago, Abu Nur said:

 

Be careful with brother @Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi

He is a decent person, but he has openly declares his belief that the Quran is distorted, and has Tahreef, missing verses and critical missing words in verses which would change the entire meaning.

He is an Akhbari brother , denies Ilm ul Rijal and blanket authenticates mass hadith, accepting traditions from infamous Ghalis.

I would avoid listening to him about anything Aqeedah related.

[In Gods Name]

2 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

there's a chapter in Al-Kafi:

باب أن الأئمة عليهم السلام يعلمون علم ما كان وما يكون وأنه لا يخفى عليهم الشئ صلوات الله عليهم

The Imams ((عليه السلام)) do have the knowledge of what was and will be, and that nothing is unknown to them

If believing in it is Ghuluw, then declare Sheikh Kyulani as Ghali LOL. Here are a few hadiths from that chapter:

أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ

وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى

عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْحُسَيْنِ

عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ إِسْحَاقَ

الاحْمَرِ عَنْ عَبْدِ الله بْنِ حَمَّادٍ

عَنْ سَيْفٍ التَّمَّارِ

 

قَالَ كُنَّا مَعَ أَبِي عَبْدِ الله ((عليه السلام)) جَمَاعَةً مِنَ الشِّيعَةِ فِي الْحِجْرِ فَقَالَ عَلَيْنَا عَيْنٌ فَالْتَفَتْنَا يَمْنَةً وَيَسْرَةً فَلَمْ نَرَ أَحَداً فَقُلْنَا لَيْسَ عَلَيْنَا عَيْنٌ فَقَالَ وَرَبِّ الْكَعْبَةِ وَرَبِّ الْبَنِيَّةِ ثَلاثَ مَرَّاتٍ لَوْ كُنْتُ بَيْنَ مُوسَى وَالْخَضِرِ لاخْبَرْتُهُمَا أَنِّي أَعْلَمُ مِنْهُمَا وَلانْبَأْتُهُمَا بِمَا لَيْسَ فِي أَيْدِيهِمَا لانَّ مُوسَى وَالْخَضِرَ (عَلَيْهما السَّلام) أُعْطِيَا عِلْمَ مَا كَانَ وَلَمْ يُعْطَيَا عِلْمَ مَا يَكُونُ وَمَا هُوَ كَائِنٌ حَتَّى تَقُومَ السَّاعَةُ وَقَدْ وَرِثْنَاهُ مِنْ رَسُولِ الله ﷺ وِرَاثَةً

Imam ((عليه السلام)) said the following. “An eye is watching over us.” We then looked right and left and did not see anyone. We said, “No eye is watching over us.” The Imam ((عليه السلام)) said, “I swear by the Lord of the Ka‘ba. I swear by the Lord of the House.” He said so three times. “Had I been with Moses and al-Khidr I would have told them that I had more than they did and would have informed them of what they had no knowledge. This is because Moses and al-Khidr were given the knowledge of what was in the past and they were given the knowledge what will be in future or what will exist up to the Day of Judgment while we have inherited all of them from the Messenger of Allah as heirs.”,

 

Majlisi says: ضعيف (Dhai'f -WEAK)

This is a weak hadith, and Shaykh Bahbudi himself did not include it in his authentication.

Ghada'iri (regarded as the most reliable in Ilm ul Rijal by Ayatullah Al Udhma, Sayed Ali Hussaini Sistani Hafidhahullah) states: https://thaqalayn.net/chapter/17/2/9

9 - إبراهيم بن إسحاق، الأحمري، يكنى أبا إسحاق، النهاوندي. في حديثه ضعف، وفي مذهبه ارتفاع. ويروي الصحيح والسقيم، وأمره مختلط.

9 – Ibrāhīm b. Isḥāq, al-Aḥmarī, known by the kunya Abū Isḥāq. al-Nahāwandī. In his ḥadīths there is weakness, and in his madhhab there is irtifāʿ.

This Hadith therefore can not be used in Aqeedah. Let alone when we have presented Saheeh narrations from al-Kashi etc, and the clear words of the Qudama of Tashayyu. - giants such as Saduq, Mufid, and Tusi.

You follow the Ghulat and the Dahuhafa , you risk your Akhirah.

 

 

[In Gods Name]

2 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

 

عِدَّةٌ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ سِنَانٍ عَنْ يُونُسَ بْنِ يَعْقُوبَ عَنِ الْحَارِثِ بْنِ الْمُغِيرَةِ وَعِدَّةٍ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا مِنْهُمْ عَبْدُ الاعْلَى وَأَبُو عُبَيْدَةَ وَعَبْدُ الله بْنُ بِشْرٍ الْخَثْعَمِيُّ سَمِعُوا أَبَا عَبْدِ الله ((عليه السلام)) يَقُولُ إِنِّي لاعْلَمُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الارْضِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا فِي الْجَنَّةِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا فِي النَّارِ وَأَعْلَمُ مَا كَانَ وَمَا يَكُونُ قَالَ ثُمَّ مَكَثَ هُنَيْئَةً فَرَأَى أَنَّ ذَلِكَ كَبُرَ عَلَى مَنْ سَمِعَهُ مِنْهُ فَقَالَ عَلِمْتُ ذَلِكَ مِنْ كِتَابِ الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ إِنَّ الله عَزَّ وَجَلَّ يَقُولُ فِيهِ تِبْيَانُ كُلِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ.

they heard abu ‘Abdallah ((عليه السلام)) say the following. “I certainly know what is the heavens and what is in the earth. I know what is in paradise and what is the fire. I know what was there and what will be there.” The narrator has said that the Imam ((عليه السلام)) paused for a while and found that what he had just said was much heavy for the audience then he ((عليه السلام)) said, “I learned all of it from the book of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High. Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, has said, “In it there is the clarification of all things.”

Majlisi says: ضعيف (Dhai'f -WEAK)

This is a weak hadith, and Shaykh Bahbudi himself did not include it in his authentication.

[Ibn Tayyar]

13 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

Salam brother.

I will also cite @Abu Nur

I hope you're doing well.

I didn't make any Tadlees whatsoever over what Shaykh Mufeed said.

Rather, the claim among some Shias today is, that the Imams know all there is to know, except the day of judgement. They know every loyal shia, they know all of what their Shias do, they know pretty much eveything.

I never denied the Imams have some knowledge of certain events that can come to pass, which is an inheritance from the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). I never denied Allah can bless them with restricted knowledge of the future. 

For example, some of the Imams , such as Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) inherited knowledge from the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) as to where he would die. But he did not necessarily know who would strike whom, which companions would die first, what they would say, etc in explicit detail. it's possible, but not necessary and he may well not have had that detailed knowledge, but the basics of what would happen in restricted context , yes perhaps.

Shaykh Mufeed was asked - how come the Imam did not vet some of his followers, given some of them were Munafiqoon and would spread erroneous things? Some modern day Shias would say, the Imams knew every hypocrite, they knew all of what the hypocrites spoke of, they could read the minds of every person on earth at the time, present or absent.

However, Shaykh Mufeed, Shaykh Tusi, and Shaykh Saduq almost build an Ijma here between them - the Imams did not know who the hypocrites were in totality, they often relied on what was reported to them and they often made judgement calls based on that. 

In terms of the Imams being given any knowledge they liked - this is dependent on if Allah willed for them to have that knowledge. They only had restricted information inherited from the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). If Allah willed for them and accepted for them further knowledge , then this was dependent on if Allah had wanted them to know it.

Musa (عليه السلام) was not given knowledge , but Khidr was , a test for Musa (عليه السلام). 

<<>>

There is this notion among modern Shias --> Imams knew everything apart from the day of judgement. They know the thoughts, prayers, feelings of everyone at all times. They know every science. They know what each star is doing in every galaxy in the entire universe.  This is clear cut ghuluw, and the Imams have cursed people who say about them, what they did not say about themselves.

Apart from restricted knowledge which is an inheritance from the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), as Shaykh Tusi perfectly put it, it is not necessary for the Imam to have knowledge outside of the Shariah.

You should translate these passages fully to avoid confusion.

I will also add that the source of the knowledge of the Imams (عليه السلام) can be multiple.

There is the knowledge in which they inherited from the Prophet (saww) and other books in their possession such as Mushaf of Fatima (عليه السلام), the Jabr, and so on. 

There is also a knowledge that may be revealed to them from the Angels, whom they can listen to.

There is also knowledge of Divine Inspiration (ilham). The Imam (عليه السلام) may ask Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) for certain knowledge and He will give it to him.

In addition to all this, they are also aided by the Holy Spirit.

Edited October 16, 2023 by Ibn Tayyar

[In Gods Name]

2 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

Also focus on the title of chapter, أن الأئمة عليهم السلام يعلمون علم ما كان وما يكون وأنه لا يخفى عليهم الشئ . it says alot about the beliefs of Shia like Sheikh Kulayni. They believed imams know what has happened and what will happen and nothing is hidden from Aima (عليه السلام). Call him a Ghali.

Kulayni believed the Quran was distorted and has Tahreef. In fact, you also admit you have this belief. You are also an Akhbari and blanket authenticate al-Kafi almost entirely.

<>

Kulayni did a good job gathering things and putting them into one book, but he is far from a good source of Aqeedah. Just look at his claims.

RED is Kulayni's false addition to the Quran (words Allah never himself used, Nauzubillah). This should scare any fellow Shia into not randomly accepting any old hadith they read, especially pertaining to aqeedah.  I will only present a few examples, but there are many.

<>

Distortion claim one:

Al-Kafi 1/422:

[(with his chain) from abu Basir, from abi `Abdillah (عليه السلام) regarding Allah’s saying:

“A questioner asked about a punishment bound to happen – To the disbelievers in `Ali’s love; of it there is no preventer.” He (عليه السلام) said: “By Allah, this is how Jibril (عليه السلام) revealed it to Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم).”]

Whereas the verse in our Qur’an today only says:

{A questioner asked about a punishment bound to happen – To the disbelievers; of it there is no preventer.} [70:1-2]

In fact, al-Kulayni has a chapter in his first volume called: “That nobody collected the entire Qur’an except the Imams (as)”

Kulayni clearly believed the Quran today has missing verses. 

Distortion claim two

Al-Kafi 8/184:

[`Ali bin Ibrahim from his father from Ibn Abi `Umayr from Umar bin Udhaynah from Burayd bin Muawiyah, he said: Abu Ja`far (عليه السلام) recited,

“O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you fear disagreement in this matter, refer it to Allah and the Messenger and those in authority among you,”

He then said, “How can he order to obedience but not in disagreement? He said this to those that were ordered, those that were told to: Obey Allah and obey His Messenger.”]

The Qur’an we have today says:

{O’ you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree on something, refer it to Allah and the Messenger} [4:59]

 

Distortion claim three

Al-Kafi 8/184:

[`Ali bin Ibrahim from his father from `Ali bin Asbat from `Ali bin abi Hamzah from abu Baseer from abu `Abdillah (as):

“And if We had decreed upon them, “Kill yourselves and submit to the Imam in (full, willing) submission or Leave your homes,” they would not have done it, except for a few of them. And if the opponents did what they were instructed to do, it would have been better for them and a firmer position [for them in faith].” and in this verse: “and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged in the matter of the leadership, and submit to Allah their obedience in [full, willing] submission.”]

Correct verses are as follows:

{And if We had decreed upon them, “Kill yourselves” or “Leave your homes,” they would not have done it, except for a few of them. But if they had done what they were instructed, it would have been better for them and a firmer position [for them in faith].} [4:66]

 

<>

These are just some of the many major perversions of the Quran condoned by Kulayni and included in his work. 

<>

I will end this by citing the views of Shaykh Saduq, and Shaykh Mufid:

 

 

 

 

[In Gods Name]

I am going to go through al-Kafi, Kitab al-Hujjah, and actually expose inshaAllah the following:

=> Kulayni's promotion of Tahrif and distortion of the quran

=> Kulayni relying on infamous Kahaabeen , liars, Ghulaat, Exagerrators, and accursed individuals for many of his narrations on Aqeedah - as per our greatest scholars, including some modern ones such as Khui'

I will make a thread, and go through as many narrations as i can insha Allah.

 

<>

Save yourself, and your families from Ghuluw, Shirk, and attributing to the Prophet and the Aimmah that which they never attributed to themselves. 

They won't love you more. They won't think you're sophisticated and have this extra third eye and 'marifah' to understand these hidden meanings. The ghali's of the past used the same excuse to hoodwink and trick people. Rather the Imams cursed them severely and prayed for the wrath of Allah to descended on them in the most severe of ways.

It is frightening.

 

[ShiaMan14]

16 minutes ago, In Gods Name said:

I am going to go through al-Kafi, Kitab al-Hujjah, and actually expose inshaAllah the following:

=> Kulayni's promotion of Tahrif and distortion of the quran

=> Kulayni relying on infamous Kahaabeen , liars, Ghulaat, Exagerrators, and accursed individuals for many of his narrations on Aqeedah - as per our greatest scholars, including some modern ones such as Khui'

I will make a thread, and go through as many narrations as i can insha Allah.

 

<>

Save yourself, and your families from Ghuluw, Shirk, and attributing to the Prophet and the Aimmah that which they never attributed to themselves. 

They won't love you more. They won't think you're sophisticated and have this extra third eye and 'marifah' to understand these hidden meanings. The ghali's of the past used the same excuse to hoodwink and trick people. Rather the Imams cursed them severely and prayed for the wrath of Allah to descended on them in the most severe of ways.

It is frightening.

 

Kulyani is on record that the Quran is authentic but what about the threefold caused by Hz Aisha and Caliph Umar wanting to change the Quran but was scared of Muslims to do it. Let's not forget the tahreef by Caliph Uthman too.

I mean really start at the source...

[In Gods Name]

4 minutes ago, ShiaMan14 said:

Kulyani is on record that the Quran is authentic but what about the threefold caused by Hz Aisha and Caliph Umar wanting to change the Quran but was scared of Muslims to do it. Let's not forget the tahreef by Caliph Uthman too.

I mean really start at the source...

Brother, even academic scholars will admit that Kulayni believed the Quran had Tahreef and was distorted. 

Our early classical scholars were split on the issue, with men like Saduq, Tusi, and maybe Mufid attesting there was no Tahrif, and men like Kulayni clearly believing in it.

I know at first this is difficult to digest, i am a Shia too, but it's a fact.

Luckily Kulayni was a good compiler, but we don't have to take Aqeedah from him. We can throw away the rubble and take the pearls from what he collected. 

<>

As for Aisha and Umar wanting to change the Quran, i'm Shia, i don't care, i don't see evidence for that, and even if i did, i still wouldn't care, it doesn't affect me and it isn't in my own books in reliable form.

[In Gods Name]

7 minutes ago, ShiaMan14 said:

Kulyani is on record that the Quran is authentic but what about the threefold caused by Hz Aisha and Caliph Umar wanting to change the Quran but was scared of Muslims to do it. Let's not forget the tahreef by Caliph Uthman too.

I mean really start at the source...

Alama Majlisi, one of the biggest Safawid scholars, author if Bihar al-Anwar,  writes in his large book “Mir’at-ul-`Uqul” 3/31:

[Our Companions differed regarding this (i.e Tahrif), al-Saduq ibn Babuwayh and a group held the opinion that the Qur’an is unchanged from how it was revealed and that nothing is missing. Whereas, al-Kulayni, Shaykh al-Mufid and a group of scholars, may Allah sanctify their souls, they believed that the complete Qur’an is with the Imams (عليه السلام) and that what we have in our Book today is only a part of it.]

[In Gods Name]

1 minute ago, In Gods Name said:

Alama Majlisi, one of the biggest Safawid scholars, author if Bihar al-Anwar,  writes in his large book “Mir’at-ul-`Uqul” 3/31:

[Our Companions differed regarding this (i.e Tahrif), al-Saduq ibn Babuwayh and a group held the opinion that the Qur’an is unchanged from how it was revealed and that nothing is missing. Whereas, al-Kulayni, Shaykh al-Mufid and a group of scholars, may Allah sanctify their souls, they believed that the complete Qur’an is with the Imams (عليه السلام) and that what we have in our Book today is only a part of it.]

@Ashvazdanghe Do you deny Majlisi has said this in his Mirat al Uqul ?

[In Gods Name]

Honestly , i struggle to find a reason why believing the Quran is distorted is not clear cut Kufr. 

 

[Abu Nur]

1 hour ago, In Gods Name said:

Think about it. The Munafiqoon brought havock for the Shias, causing massive contradictions in hadith. Saduq, Mufid and Tusi say that the Imams actually remained unaware of these hypocrites. Why didn't Allah automatically tell them? Why didn't they automatically just ask to gain this critical knowledge?

It's all the will of Allah. They only know what Allah permits them to know.

 

There is nothing ghuluw in my statement. 

[Cool]

5 hours ago, Abu_Zahra said:

This is known as tafseer bil ra'y

This statement itself is your last resort. Hiding behind bushes will not help you, you cannot get rid of Quran and the clear meanings its verses brought. Still running away from الشهداء، who are these shuhada? Who are these appointed witnesses? How do they witness?

A famous rule among the scholars of tafseer is this:

القرآن يفسر بعضه بعضا

I am just presenting before you the verses and the most important points before you guys. Putting fingers in your ears and closing your eyes will not help you either as the verses are living verses, these are the living signs, attracting our intellects to find the hikmah, the ta'veel. 

As long as you keep avoiding these verses, you will not be able to get to the first step of irfaan nor you will be able to see the blessed status of the Imams. 

[Cool]

7 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

respect brother cool, but what he tends to do is bring verses which are quite open to interpretation, and then forces a very specific meaning to them completely out of context and with the utmost respect, not really supported by narrations and the views of our classical scholars.

Well thanks for showing this respect. 

Look brother, I have simply brought few verses before you. Mentioned to you the word "الشهداء" and take you to sadiqeen through the verses of Quran. What I said and concluded was that these الشهداء are Imams of Ahlul Bayt. 

If you disagree with this conclusion, bring any narration where Imams said they are not the witnesses. If you are unable to do that, then accept the narrations I have presented before you mentioning them as witnesses.

Only then we will have a fruitful discussion on "knowledge of Imams". 

[Cool]

5 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

please show or highlight where he has done tafseer bil ra'y? He has literally quoted Quran

يريدون ليطفئوا نور الله بأفواههم

They only know how to run away from the difficult places where Quran literally calls their intellects:

وَكَذَٰلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا

2:143) And thus We have made you a medium (just) nation that you may be the bearers of witness to the people and (that) the Messenger may be a bearer of witness to you

Look how they are running away from the word شُهَدَاءَ in the above verse!

 

[Abu_Zahra]

58 minutes ago, Cool said:

This statement itself is your last resort. Hiding behind bushes will not help you, you cannot get rid of Quran and the clear meanings its verses brought. Still running away from الشهداء، who are these shuhada? Who are these appointed witnesses? How do they witness?

A famous rule among the scholars of tafseer is this:

القرآن يفسر بعضه بعضا

I am just presenting before you the verses and the most important points before you guys. Putting fingers in your ears and closing your eyes will not help you either as the verses are living verses, these are the living signs, attracting our intellects to find the hikmah, the ta'veel. 

As long as you keep avoiding these verses, you will not be able to get to the first step of irfaan nor you will be able to see the blessed status of the Imams. 

Alhamdulillah there's nothing to run away from. The point is quite simple. You are free to reject the narrations of the aimmah (عليه السلام) where they claim that ghuluw is to attribute to them what they do not attribute to themselves. However, to claim that you rejected it because it contradicts the Quran is inaccurate. 

[Cool]

8 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

not really supported by narrations and the views of our classical scholars.

I can even quote the words of every classical scholar. Everyone of them believe and accept Imams as witnesses. 

For instance, there is a whole chapter in his (Sheikh Sadooq's) book "Al-Hidayah":

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/4_الهداية-الشيخ-الصدوق/الصفحة_268

باب معرفة الأئمة الذين هم حجج الله على خلقه بعد نبيه صلوات الله عليه وعليهم بأسمائهم يجب أن يعتقد أن حجج الله عز وجل على خلقه بعد نبيه محمد صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم الأئمة الاثني عشر: أولهم أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب، ثم الحسن، ثم الحسين، ثم علي بن الحسين، ثم محمد بن علي، ثم جعفر بن محمد، ثم موسى بن جعفر، ثم الرضا علي بن موسى، ثم محمد بن علي، ثم علي بن محمد، ثم الحسن بن علي (2)، ثم الحجة القائم صاحب الزمان خليفة الله في أرضه صلوات الله عليهم أجمعين (3). ويجب أن يعتقد (1) أنهم أولوا الأمر الذين أمر الله بطاعتهم (2)، وأنهم الشهداء على الناس (1)، وأنهم أبواب الله والسبيل إليه
والأدلاء عليه (1)، وأنهم عيبة علمه (2)، وتراجمة وحيه

The words in bold, "it is wajib to believe that they are the ulil amr for them God commanded the obedience. They are the witnesses over people, they are the doors of Allah and way to Him.......

The phrase وأنهم عيبة علمه is what you must ponder. This will take you to ziyarat e jami'a.

Edited October 17, 2023 by Cool

[Cool]

2 minutes ago, Abu_Zahra said:

You are free to reject the narrations of the aimmah (عليه السلام) where they claim that ghuluw is to attribute to them what they do not attribute to themselves.

Actually it is you who reject the ahadith. This is majhool, da'eef, mowdu etc. lol.

We don't reject any hadith unless it collides with the verses of Quran. Which is the clear principle. 

What they claimed for themselves has been provided here too. It is again you who are trying to play desperately ghuluw card lol. 

Why don't you enlighten us how you understand them as witness over people? How & what they would be witnessing? 

[Abu_Zahra]

6 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

please show or highlight where he has done tafseer bil ra'y? He has literally quoted Quran and if verses say everything is in Imam e Mubeen, then hadiths you people are bringing up are certainly against the verse.

I haven't brought any narration, I simply observed a claim that the definition of ghuluw as narrated by the aimmah (عليه السلام),  i.e that it entails attributing to them what they haven't attributed to themselves, contradicts the Qur'an. However, the verses that were provided as proof do not say this at all. It's as simple as that 

[Cool]

3 minutes ago, Cool said:

Why don't you enlighten us how you understand them as witness over people? How & what they would be witnessing? 

The questions of these sort will take us to discover the knowledge of Imams عليهم السلام. 

 

[Abu_Zahra]

1 minute ago, Cool said:

Actually it is you who reject the ahadith. This is majhool, da'eef, mowdu etc. lol.

We don't reject any hadith unless it collides with the verses of Quran. Which is the clear principle. 

What they claimed for themselves has been provided here too. It is again you who are trying to play desperately ghuluw card lol. 

Why don't you enlighten us how you understand them as witness over people? How & what they would be witnessing? 

Not sure where you have read any of this in my post ('you reject hadith' , 'you run away' , 'you play the ghuluw card') but it's probably best to ignore it. 

The point is quite simple: do you reject the hadith from the aimmah (عليه السلام) stating that ghuluw is to attribute to them what they don't attribute to themselves?

And if so, do you reject it because it contradicts the Qur'an?