Break your fast at sunset - why delay?

[In Gods Name]

In the name of Allah,

In the Shia school of thought, there are many maraji' who permit breaking the fast without having to wait another 10-20 minutes. We have many ahadith in favour of this and we have ahadith whereby the Imams curse the Ghulat who were the ones he says in some ahadith who invented this idea off waiting.

There is a debate here, and it is worth watching this video and coming to your own conclusion:

 

[sunnism]

There are contradictory shi'i reports on this topic. The shia method of choosing the hadith is, leave what agrees to the sunnis and take what opposes them. 

[Abu_Zahra]

There are indeed two positions, Sheikh Haidar explains them briefly in his article on this subject:

https://hobbollah.com/p/49109/what-is-the-justification-for-delaying-the-maghrib-prayer-till-the-disappearance-of-the-eastern-redness

 

[The Green Knight]

The Quran has fixed the time of iftar at night (Layl), not the disappearance of the sun. According to hadith, night starts a little later than that.^

[In Gods Name]

2 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

The Quran has fixed the time of iftar at night (Layl), not the disappearance of the sun. According to hadith, night starts a little later than that.^

Salam my dear brother,

Actually it is a little bit more complex than this.

Layl in the Quran actually means as soon as the disk of the sun dissapears.

In our Ahadith, it is said we have much stronger/more numerous hadith stating we should break the fast when the disk of the sun dissapears.

Most of the Ummah do this too, and many Sunnis wait 3-4 minutes just to be sure, but not 15+ minutes.

<>
In our ahadith the Imams are known to curse abul Khatab, the liar, who they accuse of inserting fake ahadith into our books and also calling the people of Kufa to delaying their Iftaar until a certain star appears in the sky.

<>

Many classical and modern day Shia scholars affirm that one should break their fast at sunset not 15, 20, 25 minutes later.

Edited February 21, 2024 by In Gods Name

[In Gods Name]

Scholars who stated Maghrib time is at sunset/disappearance of disk:

• Ibn Abi Aqeel al-‘Amani (d. 3th Century AH)
• Ibn al-Junayd (d. 3th Century AH)
• Shaykh al-Tusi (d. 460 AH)
• Shaykh al-Saduq (d. 381 AH)
• Sayed al-Murtadha (d. 436 AH)
• Al-Qadhi Ibn al-Baraj al-Tarabulsi (d. 481 AH)
• Salar al-Daylami (d. 463 AH)
• Muhaqiq al-Hilli (d. 676 AH)
• Al-Fadhil al-Saymari
• Allamah Majlisi
• Al-Faydh al-Kashani
• Al-Waheed Al-Behbahani
• Al-Muhaqiq al-Naraqi
• Shaykh al-Ridha al-Hamdani
• Shaykh Muhammad Hassan al-Najafi
• Sayed Muhammad al-Rouhani
• Sayed Muhammad Sa’eed al-Hakeem
• Sayed Muhammad Hussain Fadhlullah
• Shaykh Muhammad Taqi Bahjat

Edited February 21, 2024 by In Gods Name

[kadhim]

It seems kind of obvious when you think it through for a minute. The view invoking taqiyyah to reconcile the two groups of texts is really an odd and unnatural read. Especially where the more rational reconciliation aligns with the predominant early perspective.

I don’t understand how most of the ulema came to shift to an objectively worse explanation and “maghrib == sunset” became a minority position. It’s an odd historical development.  

Edited February 21, 2024 by kadhim

[In Gods Name]

4 minutes ago, kadhim said:

It seems kind of obvious when you think it through for a minute. The view invoking taqiyyah to reconcile the two groups of texts is really an odd and unnatural read. Especially where the more rational reconciliation aligns with the predominant early perspective.

I don’t understand how most of the ulema came to shift to an objectively worse explanation and “maghrib == sunset” became a minority position. It’s an odd historical development.  

I agree.

The Sunnis have significant and ample evidence from the Prophet saw, and the companions that Maghrib truly is sunset.

We have ample, plentiful strong narrations that Maghrib is again, truly sunset.

Many of the heavy weights of our classical scholars, such as Shaykh Tusi - the leader of the sect according to sayed Khui and many- as well as Shaykh as Saduq, said Maghrib is sunset.

We even have narrations that Abdul Khattab - a companion of the Imams, but cursed by the Imams, would forge and lie that Maghrib is when you see a certain star in the sky. He was a Ghulat that used to , with his cronies, take the books of the companions of the Imams under noble pretences, add chains and ahadith in them of all sorts of Khurafat, and then disseminate those edited books around to the people. The Imams cursed him for doing this. 

<>

Modern day popular Shia Islam in my view, is so far removed to the ones the Prophet and his family taught. It's almost another religion in my eyes.

The likeliest explanation is that this was another Kufan lie by the Ghulat.

Edited February 21, 2024 by In Gods Name

[sunnism]

Reported to us my father, saying: Narrated to us Sa’d bin Abdullah, from Abu Ja’far Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Isa & Musa bin Ja’far bin Abi Ja’far al-Baghdadi, from Abu talib Abdullah bin As-salt al-Qummi, from al-Hasan bin Ali bin Faddaal from Dawood bin Abi Yazeed from al-Sadiq Ja’far bin Muhammad(عليه السلام) saying: When the sun sets, the time of Maghrib has entered. [al-Amaali by al-Sadooq, page 68, Ch #18, H #11].

 

 Ali bin Ibrahim from his father from Hamad bin Isa from Hariz from Zurara: Abu Ja’far(عليه السلام) said : The time for Maghrib is when the sun’s disk disappears so if you see it after a time and you had already prayed then repeat your prayer and continue your fast and stop eating if you had taken anything of food. [al-Kafi, vol 3, page 279] ; [Miraat al-Uqool, vol 15, page 39 : Hasan].

 

 A group of our companions from Ahmad bin Muhammad from Husayn bin Said from Nadhr bin Suwayd from Abdillah bin Sinan from Abu Abdillah(عليه السلام) : I heard Him(عليه السلام) say: The time for Maghrib is when the sun disappears and so disappears its disk(from the horizon). [al-Kafi, vol 3, page 280] ; [Miraat al-Uqool, vol 15, page 40 : Sahih].

 

 Abu Abdullah(عليه السلام) was asked about delaying Maghrib(prayer) until the appearance of stars? He(عليه السلام) said: (this is the belief of the) Khataabiyyah, Verily Jibra’eel revealed onto the Messenger of Allah(SAWS) (i.e. the start time of Maghrib is) when the disk (of the sun) has disappeared. [Tahdheeb al-Ahkaam, vol. 2, ch.13, page 258, hadeeth # 64 ; al-Majlisi declared it as Muwaththaq(Reliable) – Milaadh Al-Akhyaar, vol. 4, page 319].

 

 Reported to us, Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin Ahmad bin al-Waleed, from Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Saffaar from al-Abbas bin Ma’roof from Ali bin Mehziyar from al-Hasan bin Sa’eed from Ali bin al-Nu’man from Dawood bin Farqad saying: I heard my father asking Abu Abdullah al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) about the time Maghrib begins. He said: when its rim disappears. He asked: What is its rim? he said: its disk. (My father) Said: How do we know the disk disappeared? he said: if you looked and did not see it. [al-Amaali by al-Sadooq, page 68, Ch #18, H #10].

 

 al-Jarud said: Abu Abdullah(عليه السلام) said, “I now pray it (Maghrib) when sun’s disc has fallen.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 277, #1032].

 

 Abu Ja’far(عليه السلام) said, “Maghrib is when the (Sun’s)disc disappears.”[Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, vol 1, page 218, #655].

 

 al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) said, “If the sun disappears, then it is time to break the fast and prayer becomes obligatory.”[Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, vol 1, page 221, #663].

 

 Jabir(Al-Ju’fi) narrated from Abu Ja’far(عليه السلام) that he said, “The Prophet(SAWS) said: If the disc disappears, he who fasts, eats, and the time of prayer has begun.”[Wasail al-Shia, vol 4, page 179, #4846].

 

Isma’eel bin al-Fadhl al-Hashimi narrated from Ja’far al-Sadiq(عليه السلام), who said, “The Prophet(SAWS) prayed Maghrib when the sun sets, when the edge disappears.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 275, #1025].

 

 Abu Baseer said that Ja’far al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) said, “The time of Maghrib is when the sun disappears.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 275, #1026].

 

Amr bin Abi Nasr said that he heard Ja’far al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) say about Maghrib, “When the disc disappears, it is time for prayer, and (time to) eat.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 29, #77].

 

 Reported to us my father and Muhammad bin al-Hasan and Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Yahya al-Attaar (they all) Said: Narrated to us Sa’d bin Abdullah from Muhammad bin al-Hussain bin Abu al-Khattab from Musa bin al-Attar from al-Mas’oudi from Abdullah bin al-Zubair from Aban bin Taghlib and al-Rabie bin Sulaiman and Aban bin Arqam and others. (They all) said: When we were at Valley Al-Ajfar on our way back from Makkah, we saw a man praying while the sun’s ray is up. This caused us unease feeling. However, He kept praying and we kept praying against him, saying this youth is from al-Madinah. When we approached nearer, behold he was Abu Abdullah Ja’far bin Muhammad(عليه السلام). We dismounted and prayed with him, missing one Rak’ah, and when we’ve done, we came to him saying: May we be your ransom, do you pray at this hour? He(عليه السلام) said: When the sun sets, the time of Maghrib has entered. [al-Amaali by al-Sadooq, page 69, Ch #18, H #16].

[The Green Knight]

When the non-Shia say adhaan for maghrib there is a copious amount of daylight and it can be called anything but night. If it is night then they should also say the Isha prayer right after maghrib. As for our hadiths, our way is to say the maghrib prayer first then have our meal, it takes only 10 minutes. 10 minutes is not so big a deal.

For the choice of marajaa like Fadhlallah they are all respectable but few in number. He has a few different takes on things. Not mainstream. For instance he ok'ed suicide bombings in Beirut back when Hezbullah was in its infancy there. Or his fatwa that everything in the oceans is halal. Or his different opinion on the event of the door.

In the end it boils down to the individual's thinking. Quran says night so night it is. 10 minutes, at most, some days even less. When you look at all the daylight you have to vote your conscience. When you hear corrections being offered from sects coming into existence after hundreds of years or even a millennium, sects that contributed nothing positive to mankind, have lots of flaws then you have plenty of solid evidence it becomes pretty much pointless. I have to think, Will they want to cut my head for this issue and then appropriate my possessions? Nah I know those who do that will always have plenty of excuses so why worry.

[In Gods Name]

2 hours ago, The Green Knight said:

When the non-Shia say adhaan for maghrib there is a copious amount of daylight and it can be called anything but night. If it is night then they should also say the Isha prayer right after maghrib. As for our hadiths, our way is to say the maghrib prayer first then have our meal, it takes only 10 minutes. 10 minutes is not so big a deal.

 

Actually, it isn't only Sayed Fadallah who has advocate it, but Shaykh Bahat, Al-Hakeem, Najafi,

even Alama Majlisi of Bihar al Anwar

and our greatest classical scholars, shaykh saduq and Mufid

<>

Even Imam Jaffer as Sadiq.

In terms of waiting another 10-20 minutes, this isn't necessary according to many of our classical scholars and modern day scholars, and authentic teachings of the Imam of Ahlulbayt.

Many Shias past and present who break their fast when the disk of the sun sets, and Sunnis, generally tend to observe 3-4 minutes any way precaution, but they do not delay it 10,15,20 and even 25 minutes.

[sunnism]

1 hour ago, In Gods Name said:

Actually, it isn't only Sayed Fadallah who has advocate it, but Shaykh Bahat, Al-Hakeem, Najafi,

even Alama Majlisi of Bihar al Anwar

and our greatest classical scholars, shaykh saduq and Mufid

<>

Even Imam Jaffer as Sadiq.

In terms of waiting another 10-20 minutes, this isn't necessary according to many of our classical scholars and modern day scholars, and authentic teachings of the Imam of Ahlulbayt.

Many Shias past and present who break their fast when the disk of the sun sets, and Sunnis, generally tend to observe 3-4 minutes any way precaution, but they do not delay it 10,15,20 and even 25 minutes.

And the funny part is, shiites will do lectures arguing that the sunni point of view is wrong. 

Edited February 21, 2024 by sunnism

[In Gods Name]

5 minutes ago, sunnism said:

And the funny part is, shiites will do lectures arguing that the sunni point of view is wrong. 

Not all, but some.

Remember there are two views in our camp. In my view, the majority of Shias and Sunnis historically broke it at sunset. It's only more recently i feel for Shias it's swung the other way.

 

[Abu_Zahra]

For those who have read Sheikh Haidar's article, one interesting aspect here is the perspective on the different indicators and why this may result in different times.

The disappearance of the disk under the horizon is an indicator,  but in earlier times could have been insufficient for instance in a mountainous area where the apparent sunset would not be the actual sunset (sun setting behind a mountain =/= sun setting beneath the horizon). The second indicator of the disappearance of redness in the sky above would be more suitable here. 

Of course in today's day and age one could argue that the calculated sunset times are consistent with the actual sunset and account for geographical factors such as mountains. 

The point is that the different positions here aren't necessarily rooted in something sinister or malicious, rather it may just be a case of having different indicators and which indicator one relies on or gives preference to, or yet again how one reconciles both of them (perhaps by taking the safer option). 

[In Gods Name]

On 2/20/2024 at 9:32 PM, sunnism said:

There are contradictory shi'i reports on this topic. The shia method of choosing the hadith is, leave what agrees to the sunnis and take what opposes them. 

The stronger and more numerous ahadith  as well as the major classical view of our scholars agrees with sunnis.

[Abu_Zahra]

3 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

The stronger and more numerous ahadith  as well as the major classical view of our scholars agrees with sunnis.

I wouldn't say this is true. There are numerous narrations supporting both positions, and there are important classical and contemporary scholars for either position.  

[In Gods Name]

2 minutes ago, Abu_Zahra said:

I wouldn't say this is true. There are numerous narrations supporting both positions, and there are important classical and contemporary scholars for either position.  

Salam brother,

Thank you for the reply, just to clarify, i understand there exists narrations on both sides - maybe even authentic-, but from what i've heard, there are stronger narrations/more numerous ones on the side of Saduq, Tusi, Majlisi, etc and more contemporary scholars like Fadallah.

Happy to retract this is it can be proven i am mistaken but this is what i've heard from a number of research based sources.

Saduq and Tusi represent the pillars of our classical Fiqh, with Tusi himself dealing with a number of contradictory narrations and going out of his way to reconcile them. They are the authors of three of our four cannocial books of Fiqh and hadith.

Edited February 22, 2024 by In Gods Name

[kadhim]

On 2/21/2024 at 4:10 PM, Abu_Zahra said:

For those who have read Sheikh Haidar's article, one interesting aspect here is the perspective on the different indicators and why this may result in different times.

The disappearance of the disk under the horizon is an indicator,  but in earlier times could have been insufficient for instance in a mountainous area where the apparent sunset would not be the actual sunset (sun setting behind a mountain =/= sun setting beneath the horizon). The second indicator of the disappearance of redness in the sky above would be more suitable here. 

Of course in today's day and age one could argue that the calculated sunset times are consistent with the actual sunset and account for geographical factors such as mountains. 

The point is that the different positions here aren't necessarily rooted in something sinister or malicious, rather it may just be a case of having different indicators and which indicator one relies on or gives preference to, or yet again how one reconciles both of them (perhaps by taking the safer option). 

I can appreciate your effort to go out of the way to diplomatic. But .. it’s rather obvious the relation between the two indicators. It’s the natural conclusion. The criterion is the sunset and the sky redness is a backup indicator for the same thing. As you pointed out, the earliest generation of scholars seems to have found it similarly obvious. So then what motivated that historical shift away from that? 

I get that we’re supposed to give people the benefit of the doubt. The charitable way to explain this shift is genuine doubt and an overabundance of precaution. Okay. 

But. Can we not admit at least that it looks a lot like part of the community trying to invent a sectarian identity marker on an issue where previously there wasn’t any disagreement? (In religious communities, it’s pretty common for groups to draw lines like this to define their own group cohesion through sharply traced boundaries between themselves and the others)

Which, if so, was not great behaviour, was it?

[Abu_Zahra]

2 hours ago, kadhim said:

As you pointed out, the earliest generation of scholars seems to have found it similarly obvious. So then what motivated that historical shift away from that? 

I didn't and wouldn't say that the early generation had a consensus on this. The same article I quoted shows scholars on both sides, and there is a reasonable distribution of early and contemporary scholars for either position. 

2 hours ago, kadhim said:

But. Can we not admit at least that it looks a lot like part of the community trying to invent a sectarian identity marker on an issue where previously there wasn’t any disagreement?

In this case I don't think so, but I do agree that in other issues this appears to be the case. The reason I am less skeptical about this difference is because:

1. The differences date to earlier eras and are not merely 10th century Safavid era positions, or ghulat positions that were crystallized in the Safavid era

2. There are multiple narrations supporting both positions 

Take an issue like the third testimony in the adhan for instance. This doesn't pass either of the above litmus tests. 

What we certainly can learn from this discussion is that the 'Shia' and 'Sunni' maghrib time concept is a myth and that in reality there are at least 2 opinions among the Shia and in fact also smaller variations among Sunnis. 

 

[In Gods Name]

On 2/21/2024 at 2:41 PM, sunnism said:

Reported to us my father, saying: Narrated to us Sa’d bin Abdullah, from Abu Ja’far Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Isa & Musa bin Ja’far bin Abi Ja’far al-Baghdadi, from Abu talib Abdullah bin As-salt al-Qummi, from al-Hasan bin Ali bin Faddaal from Dawood bin Abi Yazeed from al-Sadiq Ja’far bin Muhammad(عليه السلام) saying: When the sun sets, the time of Maghrib has entered. [al-Amaali by al-Sadooq, page 68, Ch #18, H #11].

 

 Ali bin Ibrahim from his father from Hamad bin Isa from Hariz from Zurara: Abu Ja’far(عليه السلام) said : The time for Maghrib is when the sun’s disk disappears so if you see it after a time and you had already prayed then repeat your prayer and continue your fast and stop eating if you had taken anything of food. [al-Kafi, vol 3, page 279] ; [Miraat al-Uqool, vol 15, page 39 : Hasan].

 

 A group of our companions from Ahmad bin Muhammad from Husayn bin Said from Nadhr bin Suwayd from Abdillah bin Sinan from Abu Abdillah(عليه السلام) : I heard Him(عليه السلام) say: The time for Maghrib is when the sun disappears and so disappears its disk(from the horizon). [al-Kafi, vol 3, page 280] ; [Miraat al-Uqool, vol 15, page 40 : Sahih].

 

 Abu Abdullah(عليه السلام) was asked about delaying Maghrib(prayer) until the appearance of stars? He(عليه السلام) said: (this is the belief of the) Khataabiyyah, Verily Jibra’eel revealed onto the Messenger of Allah(SAWS) (i.e. the start time of Maghrib is) when the disk (of the sun) has disappeared. [Tahdheeb al-Ahkaam, vol. 2, ch.13, page 258, hadeeth # 64 ; al-Majlisi declared it as Muwaththaq(Reliable) – Milaadh Al-Akhyaar, vol. 4, page 319].

 

 Reported to us, Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin Ahmad bin al-Waleed, from Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Saffaar from al-Abbas bin Ma’roof from Ali bin Mehziyar from al-Hasan bin Sa’eed from Ali bin al-Nu’man from Dawood bin Farqad saying: I heard my father asking Abu Abdullah al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) about the time Maghrib begins. He said: when its rim disappears. He asked: What is its rim? he said: its disk. (My father) Said: How do we know the disk disappeared? he said: if you looked and did not see it. [al-Amaali by al-Sadooq, page 68, Ch #18, H #10].

 

 al-Jarud said: Abu Abdullah(عليه السلام) said, “I now pray it (Maghrib) when sun’s disc has fallen.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 277, #1032].

 

 Abu Ja’far(عليه السلام) said, “Maghrib is when the (Sun’s)disc disappears.”[Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, vol 1, page 218, #655].

 

 al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) said, “If the sun disappears, then it is time to break the fast and prayer becomes obligatory.”[Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, vol 1, page 221, #663].

 

 Jabir(Al-Ju’fi) narrated from Abu Ja’far(عليه السلام) that he said, “The Prophet(SAWS) said: If the disc disappears, he who fasts, eats, and the time of prayer has begun.”[Wasail al-Shia, vol 4, page 179, #4846].

 

Isma’eel bin al-Fadhl al-Hashimi narrated from Ja’far al-Sadiq(عليه السلام), who said, “The Prophet(SAWS) prayed Maghrib when the sun sets, when the edge disappears.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 275, #1025].

 

 Abu Baseer said that Ja’far al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) said, “The time of Maghrib is when the sun disappears.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 275, #1026].

 

Amr bin Abi Nasr said that he heard Ja’far al-Sadiq(عليه السلام) say about Maghrib, “When the disc disappears, it is time for prayer, and (time to) eat.”[Tahdhib Al-Ahkam, vol 2, page 29, #77].

 

 Reported to us my father and Muhammad bin al-Hasan and Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Yahya al-Attaar (they all) Said: Narrated to us Sa’d bin Abdullah from Muhammad bin al-Hussain bin Abu al-Khattab from Musa bin al-Attar from al-Mas’oudi from Abdullah bin al-Zubair from Aban bin Taghlib and al-Rabie bin Sulaiman and Aban bin Arqam and others. (They all) said: When we were at Valley Al-Ajfar on our way back from Makkah, we saw a man praying while the sun’s ray is up. This caused us unease feeling. However, He kept praying and we kept praying against him, saying this youth is from al-Madinah. When we approached nearer, behold he was Abu Abdullah Ja’far bin Muhammad(عليه السلام). We dismounted and prayed with him, missing one Rak’ah, and when we’ve done, we came to him saying: May we be your ransom, do you pray at this hour? He(عليه السلام) said: When the sun sets, the time of Maghrib has entered. [al-Amaali by al-Sadooq, page 69, Ch #18, H #16].

 

[kadhim]

On 2/23/2024 at 3:19 AM, Abu_Zahra said:

I didn't and wouldn't say that the early generation had a consensus on this. The same article I quoted shows scholars on both sides, and there is a reasonable distribution of early and contemporary scholars for either position.

Well. The lists for each position presented in the article appear to be largely in chronological order. One of the lists starts about 400 years before the other one. (4th c. AH vs 8th c. AH). Am I missing something here? 

I’m the last person to deny people the right to reinterpret things, but it really seems like this second view popped up out of nowhere in the 8th century. Do you know of any in the earliest generations who held the other view?

On 2/23/2024 at 3:19 AM, Abu_Zahra said:

and are not merely 10th century Safavid era positions, or ghulat positions that were crystallized in the Safavid era

That’s true. It doesn’t show that typical sort of profile of “nouveau-Shia” views. In fact, it looks like the big Safavid-era scholars like Majlisi, Behbahani, etc took the older maghrib = sunset position.

On 2/23/2024 at 3:19 AM, Abu_Zahra said:

There are multiple narrations supporting both positions

I understand and acknowledge that you’re saying this in the context of contrasting with truly out of nowhere nouveau-Shia views like 3rd testimony and that sort of business and not in the contest of weighing the relative merits of each position on this issue. 

Still, I find this to be a bit of red herring. Seeing that both views represent attempts to reconcile two superficially clashing sets of narrations, and so by definition have texts supporting each. But even on that measure, I find the “reconciliation” offered by the “disappearing redness as the defining criterion” view to be problematic in that it “reconciles” the two sets of texts by essentially discarding roughly half of them (or is it even the majority of them?) under the banner of “statements uttered under taqiyyah.”

It’s odd. And as opposed to other notable “reconciliation through invoking the taqiyyah card” like the case of eating scaleless fish, where the evidence points in two actually opposite directions and the “more permissive” view is in the minority, there seems to be no good reason to read the texts this way in this case. 

Agree to disagree, I guess, but to me it stinks of sectarian motivations. (At least in the 8th century context. In the modern context, I imagine it’s more the passive inertia of “I (mostly) teach what my teacher taught” syndrome)

[In Gods Name]

1 minute ago, kadhim said:

Agree to disagree, I guess, but to me it stinks of sectarian motivations. (At least in the 8th century context. In the modern context, I imagine it’s more the passive inertia of “I (mostly) teach what my teacher taught” syndrome)

It gets more interesting.

The Imams have according to our classical sources cursed Abul Khattab, the one who was part of the Ghulati Khattabiyah sect, and have cursed him in a number of narrations for two reasons:

- Being part of the group that took the books of the companions of the Imams and attributed lies to the trustworthy companions by adding ghuluw and all sorts of khurafat in them

-Claiming we should delay maghrib until we see a certain star in the sky i.e. it gets very dark

<>

Scholars like Tusi knew of the major contradictions in our books which i honestly am starting to doubt was actually Taqqiyah. To claim that the Imams deliberately lied and gave contradictory laws , even on issues which honestly don't seem that serious, brings about major issues.

What's more likely to me is, the Kufans who went from Medina to Kufa began to lie on the Ahlulbayt. They began to forge all sorts of lies, and this is exactly what you'd expect if you have trustworthy companions transmitting the truth , and liars and ghulat and wolves in sheeps clothing who slipped throught he net of our rijal authentication making things up. You'd expect all sorts of statements coming from the Imams.

And if the liars are grabbed and told, how come you narrate the opposite to what others do? The answer? Taqqiyah! The Imams told me something in secret they won't tell you and if you go to them they'll deny it.

I am doing research into this and making my mind up, but this entire mess is exactly what would happen if groups of liars all made things up and attributed it to the Imams. You would get major contradictions. This is actually not just a single issue, it was so bad, it led to many leaving the school of ahlulbayt.

This is why Tusi authored some of his works like Taddib al Ahkam and Al istibsaar.

In fact, even al-Kulayni in his introduction reports just how much confusion there was. And Kulayni ended up authoring a book with some of the most ridiculous claims about the Quran, from it being distorted, to some of the worst Khurafat you can find in a hadith book about the Quran. I view that hadith work as a war on the Quran truly, because his teacher al-Qummi and his student Nuamani, who authored tafseer al Qummi and Kitab al-Ghayba respectively, believed verses were missing allegedly from the Quran.

[In Gods Name]

9 minutes ago, kadhim said:

That’s true. It doesn’t show that typical sort of profile of “nouveau-Shia” views. In fact, it looks like the big Safavid-era scholars like Majlisi, Behbahani, etc took the older maghrib = sunset position.

Akhbaris like Majlisi often went in favour of what the more supported narrative in the traditional sources suggested.

Even though he also was part of the ghuluw and degeneration of Shia Islam, to support a Savafid state become even more sectarian to help differentiate the Shias and stop the Ottomans absorbing us.

He is another one of those deniers in the preservation of the Quran, claiming it has missing words and verses. 

You would think the four deputies of Imam al-Mahdi as would try to address this issue of Tahref in the Quran, and the wide differences in Fiqh among the community...but they between the four of them left no work of Fiqh, no book of Tafseer, no Hadith work. A lot of their letters seemed to answer questions yes, but also be occupied with collecting and distributing Khums and reprimanding imposters who were also doing the same.

Edited February 24, 2024 by In Gods Name

[In Gods Name]

 

[Abu_Zahra]

22 hours ago, kadhim said:

Well. The lists for each position presented in the article appear to be largely in chronological order. One of the lists starts about 400 years before the other one. (4th c. AH vs 8th c. AH). Am I missing something here? 

True, as per the list this seems to be the case.  I suppose I was looking at it as pre and post Safavid. 

22 hours ago, kadhim said:

I’m the last person to deny people the right to reinterpret things, but it really seems like this second view popped up out of nowhere in the 8th century. Do you know of any in the earliest generations who held the other view?

No I'm not aware of such scholars, if I do find anything I will update the thread inshaAllah. 

22 hours ago, kadhim said:

I understand and acknowledge that you’re saying this in the context of contrasting with truly out of nowhere nouveau-Shia views like 3rd testimony and that sort of business and not in the contest of weighing the relative merits of each position on this issue. 

Indeed. One can certainly question the opinion, but it seems to be a more legitimate difference of opinion than some of the other positions that we are referring to.

22 hours ago, kadhim said:

I find the “reconciliation” offered by the “disappearing redness as the defining criterion” view to be problematic in that it “reconciles” the two sets of texts by essentially discarding roughly half of them (or is it even the majority of them?) under the banner of “statements uttered under taqiyyah.”

I am also not convinced by the quick and easy approach to labeling anything and everything as taqiyyah. In fact it has very dangerous repercussions. Somewhere there is a nice critique of this by Sheikh Haidar, I will see if I can dig the article out. 

However, I think the more interesting explanation is the one Sheikh Haidar gives regarding geographical factors that sometimes prevent one for using the disappearance of the sun under the horizon as an indicator. 

23 hours ago, kadhim said:

Agree to disagree, I guess, but to me it stinks of sectarian motivations. (At least in the 8th century context. In the modern context, I imagine it’s more the passive inertia of “I (mostly) teach what my teacher taught” syndrome)

In terms of the modern era I think there is also the notion that the safer position is the one that prescribes a later maghrib time simply because it would satisfy all cases and conditions. In fact it appears that Sayyid al Khoie took the first view (earlier maghrib) but referred to the second out of precaution. I can also see why in a community of mixed opinions and taqleed, the later time would be the one that 'covers' all members. 

It will be interesting to see how contemporary and future scholars deal with this. To 'revive' an earlier Maghrib time, so to speak, would require the endorsement of the most prominent scholars of any one era. In terms of 2023, Sayyid Sistani and Sayyid Khamenei would both need to have this opinion for it to become the norm in most mosques or Islamic centers. 

[In Gods Name]

8 minutes ago, Abu_Zahra said:

However, I think the more interesting explanation is the one Sheikh Haidar gives regarding geographical factors that sometimes prevent one for using the disappearance of the sun under the horizon as an indicator. 

This appears to be the exception, rather than the rule. Would the Imams give the exception as the rule, and should out Fatawah be focused on the exceptions?

The general rule appears to be when the sun disappears under the horizon. Many Sunnis do add a few minutes (not the 15-20+ some Shias do), and if anything impedes observation this should be added as a secondary fatwah but the main ruling should be the former, not the latter - it would not make any sense otherwise.

It really doesn't appear to be a case of difference of opinion due to mountains therefore, but actually, contradictory traditions and purporting perhaps the Imams gave the first view out of Taqqiyah, which has led to a lot of 'as per precaution' Fatawah given by scholars who even accept the stronger opinion is that Maghrib is when the sun disappears under the horizon. 

They had mountains in the time of Saduq and Tusi, and Majlisi (especially in Persia!) yet they appeared not to favour the current dominant view among Shias.

<>

A lot of major past Ulema have at times, admitted to being frightened about giving Fatawah that does not match the current orthodoxy. I will get references and statements, but such a thing is possible, such that one major Ulema noted even the Ulema do Taqqiyah out of fear of the other scholars and the awam. 

Sayed Ali Khamanei mentioned this regarding self-mutilation and Tatbir - earlier scholars were afraid to speak out.

<>

When the majority if not all of the Ahlus-Sunnah wal jamaah with many authentic chains to the Prophet saw, on top of the heavy weights of Shia classical Fiqh i.e. Saduq, Tusi, and a number of contemporary scholars as well as common sense side on Maghrib being when the disk of the sun disappears on the horizon, and when you have the sheer number of contradictions our ahadith books have, including explicit Ghulati claims of waiting until stars appear before opening the fast, honestly, i strongly side with the view of most Muslims, past to present across both sects.

Edited February 25, 2024 by In Gods Name

[kadhim]

On 2/24/2024 at 4:26 PM, In Gods Name said:

It gets more interesting.

The Imams have according to our classical sources cursed Abul Khattab, the one who was part of the Ghulati Khattabiyah sect, and have cursed him in a number of narrations for two reasons:

- Being part of the group that took the books of the companions of the Imams and attributed lies to the trustworthy companions by adding ghuluw and all sorts of khurafat in them

-Claiming we should delay maghrib until we see a certain star in the sky i.e. it gets very dark

<>

Scholars like Tusi knew of the major contradictions in our books which i honestly am starting to doubt was actually Taqqiyah. To claim that the Imams deliberately lied and gave contradictory laws , even on issues which honestly don't seem that serious, brings about major issues.

What's more likely to me is, the Kufans who went from Medina to Kufa began to lie on the Ahlulbayt. They began to forge all sorts of lies, and this is exactly what you'd expect if you have trustworthy companions transmitting the truth , and liars and ghulat and wolves in sheeps clothing who slipped throught he net of our rijal authentication making things up. You'd expect all sorts of statements coming from the Imams.

And if the liars are grabbed and told, how come you narrate the opposite to what others do? The answer? Taqqiyah! The Imams told me something in secret they won't tell you and if you go to them they'll deny it.

I am doing research into this and making my mind up, but this entire mess is exactly what would happen if groups of liars all made things up and attributed it to the Imams. You would get major contradictions. This is actually not just a single issue, it was so bad, it led to many leaving the school of ahlulbayt.

This is why Tusi authored some of his works like Taddib al Ahkam and Al istibsaar.

In fact, even al-Kulayni in his introduction reports just how much confusion there was. And Kulayni ended up authoring a book with some of the most ridiculous claims about the Quran, from it being distorted, to some of the worst Khurafat you can find in a hadith book about the Quran. I view that hadith work as a war on the Quran truly, because his teacher al-Qummi and his student Nuamani, who authored tafseer al Qummi and Kitab al-Ghayba respectively, believed verses were missing allegedly from the Quran.

Hmm. What to say?

Based on what I have seen diving into the hadith literature in relation to a few different issues, I don’t have a lot of confidence in it in general as a source, especially if we’re talking about making rules from it. Not the way most in the community do, anyway. I think there is good stuff, authentic stuff in there. But it’s like going through raw ore to bring out and refine gold inside. There seems to be a lot of made up material in there. 

I’m wary though personally to really dive in and pull too much on some of these threads of who these early scholarly people were and whether we should trust them. I remember this dude from here from back in the day. Used to be a mod. Abu Zahra will know who I’m talking about. He was an American convert dude. Very into hadith studies. He learned the language well, even had a site with his own translations of books. Super orthodox hawza Shia. 

Anyway, he got pulling on some of these threads and I guess somewhere along the way, gradually and then all at once, lost confidence in the Imami story after Imam al-Kadhim(a). Tried to revive a dead fork of Imami Shiism. He ended up following some weird trajectories after that. I lost touch. 

So there’s that wariness, combined with some lack of pressing interest in the question. I’m sure there are lots of interesting questions to ask about this sort of material. But it’s not on my current priority to look closer into. Not yet anyway. I’m more interested in fiqh right now, and the ideas I’m exploring about Islamic law, it doesn’t matter as much which hadith exactly are real and fake; by default, I don’t think any of it should be taken as a copy-paste for exactly how to handle the same situation today. It’s all only suggestive / illustrative / an example of a principle, whether it’s the actual teaching of an imam or just some later party’s point of view slipped in labeled with a nice looking chain. 

But thanks for sharing your perspective. It’s interesting to read. Misfits have to exchange ideas, even when they strongly disagree on some peripheral issues. ;)

Edited February 28, 2024 by kadhim

[Diaz]

Salam I follow what sayyid sistani says. Nothing will happens if we break our fast after 10-15 minutes. 

[In Gods Name]

5 minutes ago, Diaz said:

Salam I follow what sayyid sistani says. Nothing will happens if we break our fast after 10-15 minutes. 

Wasalaam,

Except the Imams cursed the one who delays breaking their fast as per some narrations, with authentic narrations - maybe more authentic ones in number, clearly stating to break the fast at sunset.

We have additional evidence that the Ghulaat promoted delaying the breaking of the fast.

Waiting 5 mins or so is done by most Muslims, but what you find today is people delaying it by 20-25 mins

Either way, the foremost early classical scholars in Fiqh and a number of contemporary ones agree to break the fast is at sunset. Incidentally these scholars were best versed in ahadith on this topic.

Many who claim to wait say to do so out of precaution, either obligatory or recommended.

I follow Imam Jaffer as Sadiq as on this issue. I do not follow the Ghulaat, especially Abul Khattab the fabricator and liar.

Edited March 28, 2024 by In Gods Name

[Diaz]

11 minutes ago, In Gods Name said:

Wasalaam,

Except the Imams cursed the one who delays breaking their fast as per some narrations, with authentic narrations - maybe more authentic ones in number, clearly stating to break the fast at sunset.

We have additional evidence that the Ghulaat promoted delaying the breaking of the fast.

Waiting 5 mins or so is done by most Muslims, but what you find today is people delaying it by 20-25 mins

Either way, the foremost early classical scholars in Fiqh and a number of contemporary ones agree to break the fast is at sunset. Incidentally these scholars were best versed in ahadith on this topic.

Many who claim to wait say to do so out of precaution, either obligatory or recommended.

I follow Imam Jaffer as Sadiq as on this issue. I do not follow the Ghulaat, especially Abul Khattab the fabricator and liar.

No one break their fast after 20-25 minutes, I have never saw doing that. Sunnis break their fast and that 12-15 min we do. And there is no way I will listen to someone who did not do his islamic studies or is not known by many people preaching about what to do and don't (talking in general). We have ulema who are doing their studies since centuries, if you think they are wrong then it's up to you brother but I won't be taking any risks.

[In Gods Name]

12 minutes ago, Diaz said:

No one break their fast after 20-25 minutes, I have never saw doing that. Sunnis break their fast and that 12-15 min we do. And there is no way I will listen to someone who did not do his islamic studies or is not known by many people preaching about what to do and don't (talking in general). We have ulema who are doing their studies since centuries, if you think they are wrong then it's up to you brother but I won't be taking any risks.

Those Ulema brother who have been doing studies for centuries include some of the biggest Ulema in the Shia world who themselves have written the cannocial and most authoritative books of Fiqh which Ulema today use.

Shaykh Saduq and Man la Yadhuru al-Faqih

Shaykh Tusi, who is known by Shias including Sayed Khui as the leader of the sect, authoring two of our four major books, Al Istibsar and Tadhib al Ahkam.

Alama Majlisi, compiler of Bihar al Anwaar

and many modern day ulema too

All affirm breaking fast at Maghrib and not waiting 15-25 minutes. In fact, when you add the widespread bad practice of combining literally every Salah, it ends up being almost an hour after sunset if you include praying Maghrib and Isha, before people actually break their fast.

[Diaz]

7 minutes ago, In Gods Name said:

Those Ulema brother who have been doing studies for centuries include some of the biggest Ulema in the Shia world who themselves have written the cannocial and most authoritative books of Fiqh which Ulema today use.

Shaykh Saduq and Man la Yadhuru al-Faqih

Shaykh Tusi, who is known by Shias including Sayed Khui as the leader of the sect, authoring two of our four major books, Al Istibsar and Tadhib al Ahkam.

Alama Majlisi, compiler of Bihar al Anwaar

and many modern day ulema too

All affirm breaking fast at Maghrib and not waiting 15-25 minutes. In fact, when you add the widespread bad practice of combining literally every Salah, it ends up being almost an hour after sunset if you include praying Maghrib and Isha, before people actually break their fast.

So basically our marja are lying to us?

[In Gods Name]

15 minutes ago, Diaz said:

No one break their fast after 20-25 minutes, I have never saw doing that. Sunnis break their fast and that 12-15 min we do. And there is no way I will listen to someone who did not do his islamic studies or is not known by many people preaching about what to do and don't (talking in general). We have ulema who are doing their studies since centuries, if you think they are wrong then it's up to you brother but I won't be taking any risks.

Scholars who stated Maghrib time is at sunset/disappearance of disk:

• Ibn Abi Aqeel al-‘Amani (d. 3th Century AH)
• Ibn al-Junayd (d. 3th Century AH)
• Shaykh al-Tusi (d. 460 AH)
• Shaykh al-Saduq (d. 381 AH)
• Sayed al-Murtadha (d. 436 AH)
• Al-Qadhi Ibn al-Baraj al-Tarabulsi (d. 481 AH)
• Salar al-Daylami (d. 463 AH)
• Muhaqiq al-Hilli (d. 676 AH)
• Al-Fadhil al-Saymari
• Allamah Majlisi
• Al-Faydh al-Kashani
• Al-Waheed Al-Behbahani
• Al-Muhaqiq al-Naraqi
• Shaykh al-Ridha al-Hamdani
• Shaykh Muhammad Hassan al-Najafi
• Sayed Muhammad al-Rouhani
• Sayed Muhammad Sa’eed al-Hakeem
• Sayed Muhammad Hussain Fadhlullah
• Shaykh Muhammad Taqi Bahjat

[123xo]

You waited the whole day to break your fast can't you wait an extra 15mins just to be sure??! Some of the purposes of this whole month is learning patience, self control etc.

[In Gods Name]

10 minutes ago, 123xo said:

You waited the whole day to break your fast can't you wait an extra 15mins just to be sure??! Some of the purposes of this whole month is learning patience, self control etc.

This is what the Imams of Ahlulbayt taught us - to break our fast at sunset, and it is a position held by our foremost classical scholars, and many contemporary ones. It is also the position held by the vast majority of Sunnis. Therefore, between the sects, it is the position with the strongest evidence and is the majority view - between the sects historically across time.

Every Bi'ddah no matter how well intended in the religion is misguidance.

Edited March 28, 2024 by In Gods Name