Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a - Islam for Muslims - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Islam for Muslims / Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a (1654 Views)
An Important Hadith For Husband-wife Relationship / A Prophecy About Fornication, Wine Drinking, Musical Instrument - Hadith / An Educative Debate Between Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal And The Shi'a (2) (3) (4)
| Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Demmzy15(m): 7:06pm On Oct 20, 2015 |
Hadith Manzila Indeed this narration is mutawattir, but we would have to pay attention to this statement, {“Are you not pleased to be to me what Harun was to Musa”}, this narration doesn’t have any addition like “AFTER ME”. Those additions are munkar since the authentic narrations are free of these additions. Before I continue, I'll like to make some points clear about the grading of Hadiths in Ahl Sunnah: 1. When is authenticated as some Shiites do “sahih Isnad(chian is authentic)” because as clearly established is not an approval for hadeeth being authentic. Imam Ibn Katheer said: ” الحكم بالصحة أو الحسن على الإسناد لا يلزم منه الحكم بذلك على المتن ، إذ قد يكون شاذاً أو معللاً ” The fact that the isnaad is deemed to be saheeh or hasan does not necessarily mean that the same applies to the text, because it may be shaadhdh (odd) or mu’allal (faulty). [Ikhtisaar ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth (p. 43).] As for the Shiites there is a perfect example to make them understand regarding this terminology. So here is the view of Sheik Albani regarding this narration. He accepts the chain as being hasan, but he rejects part of the hadith completely which didn’t go down the throat of Shiites. In Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Sahihah, vol. 4, p. 343, Number 1750, Shiekh Albani states: أما ما يذكره الشيعة في هذا الحديث و غيره أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال في علي رضي الله عنه : ” إنه خليفتي من بعدي ” . فلا يصح بوجه من الوجوه , بل هو من أباطيلهم الكثيرة التي دل الواقع التاريخي على كذبها لأنه لو فرض أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قاله , لوقع كما قال لأنه ( وحي يوحى ) و الله سبحانه لا يخلف وعده As for what the Shiites mention about this Hadith (i.e. Hadith al-Ghadir) and in others that the Prophet said about Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, that “He is my Khalifah after me”, it is not authentic in any way or by any means. Rather, it is part of their several lies which history has refuted. This is because if the Prophet, peace be upon him, had indeed said it, it would have occurred as predicted, because it is revelation revealed, and Allah never fails in His promises. 2. The view of mutakir(scholars from later generation) cannot precede the the views of Mutaqaddimin(early) scholars. For example views of sheikh albani cannot precede over views of Imam Bukhari regarding a narration/narrator if they are contradictory and if Imam Bukhari’s view is supported by other classical scholars.. 3. There is a famous principle in the science of Hadeeth and it is that the explained jarh(critism on narrator) takes precedence over ta’deel Firstly let us bring our attention to a “word” present in this narration, which Shiites deliberately left in their translation, because it would have destroyed whole of their argument. Here is the correct translation with the word that was deliberately missed by Shiites. Translation: "Are you not pleased to be to me what Harun was to Musa except that you are not a prophet? You are my khalifah MEANING over every believer after me. The narration the Shiites brought had the word (يعني) which translates as “MEANING”, which they deliberately left out from the translation because this word proves that the later part of the narration was the addition by the Shia narrator. The Sahih and famous narrations which all the Muslims know do not contain the added formula “after me“, this was most likely spread by Shia as rumours to strengthen their Madhab and some people might have heard it and mixed it up with what is known to be said from the Prophet(saw) This narration comes via Abu al Balaj from Amro bin Maymoun from Ibn Abbas… First narrator who inserted the phrase “after me” in narration. الكامل في ضعفاء الرجال ج7/ص229 2128 يحيى بن أبى سليم أبو بلج الفزاري ثنا علان ثنا بن أبى مريم سمعت يحيى بن معين يقول أبو بلج يحيى بن أبى سليم سمعت بن حماد يقول قال البخاري يحيى بن أبى سليم أبو بلج الفزاري سمع محمد بن حاطب وعمرو بن ميمون فيه نظر . وقول البخاري رحمه الله : فيه نظر The Book ” Al Kamil fi Dua’fa’a al Rijal ” 7/229, Bukhari says Abu Balaj al fazari is WEAK. وذكر عبد الغني بن سعيد المصري الحافظ أن أبا بلج أخطأ في اسم عمرو بن ميمون هذا ، وليس هو بعمرو بن ميمون المشهور، إنما هو ميمون أبو عبد الله مولى عبد الرحمن بن سمرة، وهو ضعيف. Abdul Ghani bin Sa’eed al masri al Hafiz mentioned that Abu Balaj made a mistake in the name of Amro bin Maymoun and this is not the famous Amro bin maymoun but it is Maymoun Abu abdullah the Mawla of AbdulRahman bin Samrah and he is WEAK. The proof for this is that Amr bin Maymoon never narrated the hadith of Ibn Abbas,(which is true if we search through his hadiths). This is also the opinion of Imam Ahmad. وقد قال البخاري عنه: فيه نظر. Imam Al Bukhari said: “Fih Nazar” and when bukhari says this it means he is very weak. ونقل ابن عبد البر وابن الجوزي: أن ابن معين ضعفه، وقال أحمد: روى حديثا منكرا. And Ibn Abdul Barr and Ibn al jawzi both transmitted That ibn Ma’een had weakened him, Ahmad said: He narrated MUNKAR hadith. أخطأ. Al Hafiz Ibn hajar said in “al taqreeb”: Saduq but makes mistakes. وقال السعدي: أبو بلج الواسطي غير ثقة. Al Sa’adee said: Abu Balaj al Wasiti is not trustworthy. وقال الذهبي في (المقتنى): لين. Al Thahabi said in “al Muqtana”: Lenient (meaning he may narrate false things and doesn’t care much about parts of the Hadith if there are additions or deletions to the text). Moreover, al-Thahabi considered this hadith to be munkar in Mizan Al-I’itidal under the biography of Abu Balj, and it is one of his late books. His comments on al-Mustadrak was written when he was a lot younger and he himself admitted that it needed some work. Check out Siyar A’alam Al-Nubala under the biography of Al-Hakim. بثقة. Al jawzjani said in “Ahwal al Rijal”: Untrustworthy قال ابن حبان في (المجروحين): كان ممن يخطئ ، لم يفحش خطؤه حتى استحق الترك ، ولا أتى منه ما لا ينفك البشر عنه فيسلك به مسلك العدول، فأرى أن لا يحتج بما انفرد من الرواية، وهو ممن أستخير الله فيه Ibn Habban said in “al Majrouheen” that he was amongst those who made mistakes in Hadith and the Narrations which only come through him (meaning he is the only one who narrates it) are rejected and not a Hujjah. It is well known that this Man narrates a LOT of Munkar hadiths, al thahabee mentioned an example of these Munkar Hadiths of his “Al Meezan”: قال الذهبي في (الميزان): ومن مناكيره عن عمرو بن ميمون عن ابن عباس أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أمر بسد الأبواب إلا باب علي رضي الله عنه، رواه أبو عوانة عنه، ويروى عن شعبة عنه. “And from his Manakeer(rejected/unacceptable) narrations from amro bin maymoun from ibn abbas that the Prophet PBUH ordered that all doors be shut except that of Ali, Abu Awanah narrated it from him and it is narrated from Shu’ubah from him.” 1 Like 1 Share |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Bamoha(m): 8:33am On Oct 21, 2015 |
very educative post bro... but wetin do ur watsapp? Aminat508 |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Demmzy15(m): 9:27pm On Oct 21, 2015 |
Bamoha:Its working now, network is bad in school! |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Demmzy15(m): 10:16pm On Oct 21, 2015 |
Now the second narrator to use this munkar phrase “After me” was Ja’afar Ibn Sulaiman So who is Ibn Suleiman? في تهذيب التهذيب قال الدوري كان جعفر إذا ذكر معاوية شتمه وإذا ذكر عليا قعد يبكي وقال ابن حبان في كتاب الثقات حدثنا الحسن بن سفيان حدثنا إسحاق بن أبي كامل حدثنا جرير بن يزيد بن هارون بين يدي أبيه قال بعثني أبي إلى جعفر فقلت بلغنا أنك تسب أبا بكر وعمر قال أما السب فلا ولكن البغض ما شئت فإذا هو رافضي الحمار In Tahtheeb al tahtheeb al Douri said about Ibn Suleiman: If Muawiyah was mentioned in front of him he would insult him and swear and if Ali was mentioned then he would cry, Ibn Habban said in the book “al thiqat” Al hassan bin Sufian narrated from Ishaq bin Abi Kamil from jurayr bin Yazeed bin Haroon in front of his father he said: My father sent me to ja’afar and I said to him: We heard that you insult Abu bakr and Umar, Ibn Suleiman replied: As for Cursing then No but I Hate them more than you can think of. So he was a rafidhi. كونه شيعيا فهو بالاتفاق قال في التقريب جعفر بن سليمان الضبعي أبو سليمان البصري صدوق زاهد لكنه كان يتشيع As for him being a Shia it is by consensus for he said in “al Taqreeb”: Ja’afar bin Suleiman al Dab’ee Abu Suleiman al Basri He is Saduq, And has Zuhd but he was a Shia. this is also mentioned in al Meezan and others.. As for the innovators it is renowned principle in science of hadith that, If an Innovator narrates something to further his innovation then it is rejected even if the narrator is trustworthy. This hadith was only narrated through him in this form thus his addition to the Hadith is rejected. What is clear is that the addition of “After me” is only in the Hadith of Shia narrators and that is because this is how they understood the Hadith so they made the addition of the words “after me” in the narration. As the exact same hadith was also narrated by trustworthy narrators but this time we do not see the addition of “after me”: There are other authentic hadiths which expound on this hadith, such as: The Prophet said to Ali (may God be pleased with him):”Khalaftak antakun Khalifatih” – I have choosen you as my successor.Ali replied (may God be pleased with him): Will I succeed you O Prophet of God ?The Prophet replied: Aren’t you satisfied with being unto me what Aaron was unto Moses but with this exception that there would be no prophet after me. [Tabarani, authentic] Comment: Here prophet clearly removed the doubt of successorship after him. He said “ARE NOT U SATISFIED”! It is written in: ميزان الإعتدال في نقد الرجال ج: 2 ص: 136 1507 2530ت جعفر بن سليمان م Meezan al i’itidal fi Naqd al Rijal 2/136 regarding Ja’afar bin Suleiman: قال يحيى بن معين كان يحيى بن سعيد لا يكتب حديثه ويستضعفه Yahya bin Ma’een did not write his hadith and found him weak. وقال ابن سعد ثقة فيه ضعف وكان يتشيع Ibn Sa’ad said: He is trustworthy and there is weakness in him, he is a Shia. وقال أحمد بن المقدام كنا في مجلس يزيد بن زريع فقال من أتى جعفر بن سليمان وعبد الوارث فلا يقربني وكان عبد الوارث ينسب الى الاعتزال وجعفر ينسب الى الرفض Ahmad bin al miqdam said: we were in a Majlis of yazeed bin Zurai’i and he said: He who meets up with Ja’afar bin suleiman and Abd al Warith Then let him not come near me, Abdul Warith was considered as a Muatazilite and Ib Suleiman was considered a Rafidhi. وقال إذنه حدثنا محمد بن مروان القرشي حدثنا أحمد بن سنان حدثني سهل بن أبي خدوية قال قلت لجعفر بن سليمان بلغني أنك تشتم أبا بكر وعمر فقال أما الشتم فلا ولكن البغض ما شئت Ithnuh told us that Muhamad bin Marwan al Qurashi told him that Ahmad bin Sinan told him that Sahl bin Abu Khadweih said: I said to ja’afar bin Sinan: We heard that you insult Abu bakr and Umar and he said: as for Insulting then no but as for hatred then I hate them a lot. قال البخاري في الضعفاء له جعفر بن سليمان الحرشي ويعرف بالضبعي يخالف في بعض حديثه al bukhari in al Duafa’a said: Ja’afar bin Suleiman al hurashi and known as al Dab’ee he contradicts (What is correct) in some of his Hadiths.[ In short This narrator is trustworthy BUT he is from the Ghulat of the Shia so this Hadith cannot be taken from him with this addition. Some people misunderstand when we say that “after me” was added by the shia narrators, they argue that were those narrators liars to add that phrase? The answer to this ignoramus argument is that we don’t say that shia narrator was a liar. However, being an innovator, and specifically narrating additions in hadiths that nobody else narrated implies that he narrated hadiths ACCORDING TO THEIR MEANING(i.e AS HE BELIEVED). Narrating the hadith according to the meaning is halal according to most scholars. However, when an innovator narrates it according to his beliefs, the hadith will sometimes slightly change. Because when Ja’afar(shia narrator) saw wali kul mu’min, he assumed that it referred to khilafah, so when narrating the meaning of the hadith, he added the word ba’dee(after me). This is due to his innovation. This is why scholars like Ibn Hajar reject the hadith of innovators if the hadith supports their innovation. It isn’t because they are lying, but because their understanding of hadith is incorrect. |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Demmzy15(m): 10:33pm On Oct 21, 2015 |
Explanations for authentic narration of Manzila Lets us give a brief account of the context in which these words were said by Prophet(Saw), so that people could understand them properly and in a correct manner, which will be free of Shiites interpretations: “After a major number of the Muslims leaving al-Madinah, the hypocrites who remained back and those who returned from the way, in the event of the defeat of the Muslim army, which `Abdullah Ibn Ubay expected, they planned to invade the Prophet’s home and loot it and send away the members of his family from al-Madinah. There was also danger from people who had not as yet embraced Islam and were defeated in the battles that they fought with them. Such people might see an opportunity to plunder the properties and assets of the Muslims. In these circumstances, it was the demand of farsightedness that a person should be left in al-Madinah who could face any eventuality with courage and control things from going awry. Therefore, the Prophet (a.s) decided to leave behind `Ali (a.s) whose fear was already embedded in the hearts of the Arabs because of his recent successes in the battles. The hypocrites of al-Madinah did not like this arrangement. When they were unable to find any excuse, they said: “The Prophet (a.s) considering him a burden, has left him behind!” `Ali (a.s) who was continuously winning in the battles with the infidels, was feeling for being dropped from the contingent going for the new Campaign. When he heard this taunt from the hypocrites, he could not control himself and put on the arms and started moving behind the army at some distance. After sometime, he caught up with them and went to the presence of the Prophet (a.s). He complained to the Prophet (a.s) that the hypocrites say that he was left behind because he would be a burden during the campaign. The Prophet (a.s) said that they were liars and I am leaving you behind in al-Madinah because the administration there should be either with me or with you. He also said that in his Ahl al-Bayt and in his Ummah, he was his successor. He added: “Are you not happy that you have the same relationship with me as Harūn (a.s) had with Mūsa (a.s). The only difference is that there will be no prophet after me.” [Shia author Mufti Jafar Husayn , “Sirat amir al-muminin” (p 293) ]” Another shia scholar Ibn Muttahar al-Hilli in his book on bio of Ali (p 136) wrote: “The Messenger of Allah who had taken march towards Tabuk seriously, to carry out God’s order, departed with a group of believers toward Tabuk, appointing `Ali as his successor to protect Medina and to act as guardians of families, saying to him: The security of this city will not be guarded by anyone except you and me. The Messenger of Allah knew that the Arabs residing around Mecca and those who had suffered life losses in the battles were looking for a chance to invade Mecca when the Holy Prophet was not in that city. It was due to this reason that he vigilantly endeavored to safeguard it. Now that the Holy Prophet was in the battle, he appointed `Ali to safeguard Medina which was feared to face chaos in the absence of the Messenger of Allah. Hearing this, the blind-hearted hypocrites and gossipmongers inside Medina were extremely worried and jealous of `Ali, for they knew that with the presence of `Ali no danger could threaten Medina and in this way their plot was foiled. Hence, they started the so-called cold war, spreading the rumor by saying: As the presence of `Ali in this battle is heavy for the prophet, he does not wish to take him with himself. Therefore, he leaves `Ali in Medina which means he does not honor `Ali, though they knew how much the Holy Prophet was interested in `Ali! This kind of rumors was heavy for `Ali. So he immediately left Medina for meeting the Messenger of Allah.” Thus we realize through the context of these reports that Ali(ra) was disappointed with the decision because it meant he would have to stay behind with women and children. The Prophet (pbuh) was consoling him by comparing him to Aaron when Moses left Aaron in charge. In the case of battle, all able-bodied Muslims are required to join the Prophet (pbuh) unless they have a legitimate excuse, otherwise they were usually considered hypocrites. The Prophet (pbuh) would have had told a good and trustworthy person to stay behind himself, because nobody would have wanted to stay behind, and even if they did, it would not have been a positive mark on their sincerity of faith. So the Prophet (pbuh), as not to make someone upset for staying behind, had to select someone to do a necessary but otherwise unglamorous duty – something which nobody would have liked to volunteer to do. In normal circumstances, we would want the most pious and brave soldiers to join the Prophet (pbuh), not to volunteer to stay behind. So the Prophet (pbuh) should hand-pick someone to stay behind otherwise an unworthy person might be left behind instead. Most importantly, the context was not near the Prophet’s (pbuh) end of life. Rather, the Prophet (pbuh) was appointing Ali (may God be pleased with him) to govern Medina while the Prophet (pbuh) was leaving to battle. That is why the scholars did not consider it an appointment of Caliphate due to being early and limited context as leaving Ali in charge of Medina in his absence Caliph is a word which denotes being the Caliph of the Muslims. But it’s also the right word to use if you are deputizing someone over an area. For example, the Prophet (pbuh) gave the same job to many other companions in many other battles. He deputized people other than Ali to look after Medina in his absence: فقد استخلف في غزوة بدر: عبد الله ابن أم مكتوم، واستعمل على المدينة في غزوة بني المصطلق: أبا ذر الغفاري وفي غزوة الحديبية: نُمَيْلَةَ بن عبد الله الليثي كما استعمله أيضاً في غزوة خيبر، وفي عمرة القضاء استعمل: عويف بن الأضبط الديلي، وفي فتح مكة: كلثوم بن حصين بن عتبة الغفاري، وفي حجة الوداع: أبا دجانة الساعدي (السيرة النبوية لابن هشام في سيرته2/650،804،806، 3/ 1113،1133،1154،1197، 4/1241،1457) In seerah Ibn Hisham, the Prophet (pbuh) appointed the following people as leaders of Medina in his absence during various battles Abdullah ibn Um Maktoom Abu Dharr al Ghafari Numaylah bin Abdulah Allaythi Uyaaf bin Al Adhbat al Deeli Kulthum bin Hussein bin Utbah al Ghafari Abu Dujannah al Sa’di ولهذا خرج عليّ إلى النبي وقال « خلّفتني على النساء والصبيان»؟ فقال له ذلك، وأراد أن يطيب قلبه وأبان له أن الاستخلاف لا يوجب نقصاً له،eالنبي لأن موسى استخلف هارون على قومه فكيف يعدّ ذلك نقصاً، فرضي علي بذلك (فقال: رضيت رضيت) كما جاء في رواية ابن المسيب عند أحمد (فتح الباري7/92) In fact, Ali (may God be pleased with him) was upset with being left behind from battle, as he said: Have you appointed me as the Caliph of the women and children? And the Prophet (pbuh) replied that Moses (pbuh) left Aaron (pbuh) in charge of the children of Israel while he went to speak to God. So Ali said “I am pleased, I am pleased” [Narrated by Ahmed bin Hanbal, in Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar al Asqalani] to be continued Insha'Allah.... |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Demmzy15(m): 11:10pm On Oct 21, 2015 |
Comparision of Ali(ra) with Haroon(as): SOME FACTS FROM HISTORY Allah (تبارك و تعالى) tells us in the story of Musa (عليه السّلام) in Qur’an 7:142: وَقَالَ مُوسَى لِأَخِيهِ هَارُونَ اخْلُفْنِي فِي قَوْمِي وَأَصْلِحْ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ سَبِيلَ الْمُفْسِدِينَ And Musa said to his brother, “Be my Khalifah among my people, act in the Right Way and do not follow the way of the mischief-makers. We know that even Haroon(as) was not made Khaliph in permanent manner rather his appointment was temporary, that is until Musa(as) returns. But the permanent Khaliph of Musa(as) was Yusha bin noon, who became caliph after death of Musa(as) it was not Haroon(as) since he was made as caliph for a particular moment, that is why Prophet(Saw) compared Ali(ra) with Haroon. Another Example from History: Here Another incident from history which further strengthens our explanation. When the people of Syria asked Umar for help against the people of Palestine, he appointed Ali as the ruler (in his absense). لما استمد أهل الشأم عمر على أهل فلسطين استخلف عليا When Umar went to Palestine , he appointed Ali as his Caliph Sources: Tabari Vol. 4 p. 159 Siyyar Alam al nubla, Vol. 2, p. 85 Kanzul Ammal Vol. 7 , p. 69 This is the incident in which Umar(ra) appointed Ali(ra) as his Caliph, in a temporary manner similar like Musa(as) made to Haroon(as) and as Prophet(Saw) made to Ali(ra), but after the death of Umar(ra) neither Ali(ra) nor others claimed that since Ali(ra) was made a caliph in temporary manner for particular moment then he should be the Caliph after him, Nothing as such happened in fact Umar(ra) himself gave a list of members who were eligible to be made as Caliphs after him. Ali(ra) himself rejects the Shiite interpretations for this narration: Sahi Bukhari 5.728: Narrated `Abdullah bin `Abbas: `Ali bin Abu Talib came out of the house of Allah’s Apostle during his fatal illness. The people asked, “O Abu Hasan (i.e. `Ali)! How is the health of Allah’s Apostle this morning?” `Ali replied, “He has recovered with the Grace of Allah.” `Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib held him by the hand and said to him, “In three days you, by Allah, will be ruled (by somebody else ), And by Allah, I feel that Allah’s Apostle will die from this ailment of his, for I know how the faces of the offspring of `Abdul Muttalib look at the time of their death. So let us go to Allah’s Apostle and ask him who will take over the Caliphate. If it is given to us we will know as to it, and if it is given to somebody else, we will inform him so that he may tell the new ruler to take care of us.” `Ali said, “By Allah, if we asked Allah’s Apostle for it (i.e. the Caliphate) and he denied it us, the people will never give it to us after that. And by Allah, I will not ask Allah’s Apostle for it.” Comment: so this narration proves that even hz ali(ra) didn’t knew until the last hours of prophet(Saw) that who will be the caliph. Which proves that he never understood hadeeth al manzila to be a declaration of his Caliphate. Points to ponder: 1. Why wasn’t Ali(ra) initially happy if he was appointed as a Caliph or as the shias say divinely appointed Caliph? Well it just proves that nothing was related to divine appointment by Allah nor was it related to Permanent Caliphate. 2. It was not said as an address to Ummah or muslims, but it was an address just to Ali(ra). Because prophet(Saw) said “YOU” are to “ME” as haroon to musa, He didn’t say” o believers, Ali is to me as harun to musa”. Or he would have said: “Ali to YOU(muslims) is like Haroon to Bani Israel”, but he didn’t say anything as such. This clearly shows that this wasn’t any kind of declaration before muslims, but it was rather a consolation to Ali(ra) ONLY. [Ironically shias claim that Ali(ra) was made caliph in Ghadeer, but we find that he was made caliph(according to shias) on this occasion. Silly contradiction.] 3. Shiites also fail to take into consideration that Hadhrat Ali was made the caretaker of the Ummah not only in the absence of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه و سلم, but also in the absence of Hadhrat Abu Bakr and Hadhrat Umar رضي الله عنهم. This shows that the narration in question has no relevance to the Shiite claim of the caliphate rightfully belonging to Hadhrat Ali رضي الله عنه over Siddiqe-Akbar. 4. If the appointment of one as leader over the people by the Messenger of Allah was sufficient enough proof for the position of Caliphate, then why do Shiites ignore that Hadhrat Abu Bakr Siddiq رضي الله عنه was nominated as Ameer-ul-Hajj by the Messenger of Allah ? And even when Hadhrat Ali رضي الله عنه was sent as a minister to make the formal announcement in Makkah and was asked by Siddiqe-Akbar “امبرٌ ام مأمور ” (Are you sent as Amir or Ma’mur/follower) to which Hadhrat Hadhrat Ali رضي الله عنه replied “بل مأمور” (Indeed, as a follower). What answer do Shiites have to the fact that at the time of Hijrah, the Messenger of Allah appointed Hadhrat Ali رضي الله عنه to stay in his place to return the possessions of the people of Makkah, but it was Hadhrat Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه who Allah decreed to accompany the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم. Why has no Shiite ever been able to explain why did the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه و سلم appointed Hadhrat Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه as the Imam to lead the prayers on his musalla and not Hadhrat Ali? 5.Harun عليه السلام died during the lifetime of Musa عليه السلام so he was never a successor after Musa(as). The Hadith al-Manzilah does not at all help the Shia cause, but rather it is a strong proof against the Shia claims. Had the Prophet wished to imply that Ali was his successor, then he would have likened Ali to Yusha bin nun rather than Prophet Haroon(as). |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Demmzy15(m): 11:16pm On Oct 21, 2015 |
Cc AlBaqir, LagosShia |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 12:14am On Oct 22, 2015 |
Thanks for bringing this issue on a new thread although the issue had been clarified in many thread before. Anyway this another treat. You obviously raised three objections while you admit that the Hadith Manzila is Mutawattir, and they are as follows: 1. That the Hadith does not have "AFTER ME" in it. That it is an additional statement. 2. WHO INSERTED THE PHRASE "AFTER ME?" The accusing finger is on Abu Balj, who is said to be "very weak and made mistakes". 3. One of the reason why the "AFTER ME" is rejected is this theory of Sheik al-Albani: As for what the Shiites mention about this Hadith (i.e. Hadith al-Ghadir) and in others that the Prophet said about Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, that “He is my Khalifah after me”, it is not authentic in any way or by any means. Rather, it is part of their several lies which history has refuted. This is because if the Prophet, peace be upon him, had indeed said it, it would have occurred as predicted, because it is revelation revealed, and Allah never fails in His promises. |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 12:19am On Oct 22, 2015 |
Since you (or whoever wrote that) agreed the hadith is Mutawattir, you failed to recognize and quote ALL the sighah (versions) of this hadith. Anyway, b]THE THREE VERSIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS[/b] First version 1. قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم لعلي: انت مني بمنزلة هارون من موسي الا انك لست نبيا وانت خليفتي في كل مومن من بعدي Imam Ibn Abi 'Asim (d. 287H) records: Muhammad b. al-Muthanna - Yahya b. Hammad - Abu 'Awanah - Yahya b. Sulaym Abu Balj - 'Amr b. Maymun - Ibn Abbas: The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said to 'Ali: "You are to me of the status of Harun to Musa, with the exception that you are not a prophet. And you are my Khalifah over every believer after me." Dr. Al-Jawabirah says: Its chain is hasan. Its narrators are narrators of the two shayks, except Abu Balj, and his name is Yahya b. Sulaym b. Balj. Al-Hafiz said: "Saduq (very truthful), maybe he made mistakes." There are witnesses for it (i.e the hadith) Ref: {Kitab al-Sunnah (Dar al-sami'ili al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi) [annotator: Dr. Basim b. Faysal al-Jawabirah], vol. 1, p. 799-800, #1222} B. قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم لعلي: انت مني بمنزلة هارون من موسي الا انك لست نبيا (انه لا ينبغي ان اذهب الا) وانت خليفتي في كل مومن من بعدي 'Allamah al-Albani (d. 1420H) in his annotated version of Ibn Asim's kitab al-Sunnah added some daunting wording in bracket: Muhammad b. al-Muthanna - Yahya b. Hammad - Abu 'Awanah - Yahya b. Sulaym Abu Balj - 'Amr b. Maymun - Ibn Abbas: The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said to 'Ali: "You are to me of the status of Harun to Musa, with the exception that you are not a prophet. [Verily, it is not right that I depart except] with you as my Khalifah over every believer after me." Allamah al-Albani comments: Its chain is hasan. Its narrators are narrators of the two shayks, except Abu Balj, and his name is Yahya b. Sulaym b. Balj. Al-Hafiz said: "Saduq (very truthful), maybe he made mistakes." {Kitab al-Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st edition, 1400H) [annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani], vol. 2, p. 565, #1188} Second version Imam Ahmad documents: ...وخرج بالناس في غزوة تبوك قال فقال له علي اخرج معك قال فقال له نبي الله لا فبكي علي فقال له اما ترضي ان تكون مني بمنزلة هارون من موسي الا انك لست بنبي انه لا ينبغي ان اذهب الا وانت خليفتي 2. Imam Ahmad (d. 241H) in his Musnad also documents: Abd Allah - my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) - Yahya b. Hammad - Abu 'Awanah - Abu Balj - 'Amr b. Maymun...Ibn Abbas said: ...He (the Messenger of Allah) went out for the battle of Tabuk. So, 'Ali said to him, "Let me go out with you." Therefore, the Prophet of Allah, peace be upon him, said, "Do not weep, 'Ali. Are you not pleased that you are to me of the status of Harun to Musa, with the exception that you are not a Prophet? Verily, it is not right that I depart except with you as my Khalifah." Sheik al-Arnaut strangely says on the hadith: "Its chain is da'if (weak) with this context. Abu Balj, the fairest that has been said about him is that his hadith is accepted only when he is corroborated." {Musnad, [annotator: Shu'ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 1, p. 330, #3062} However, he grossly contradicted himself elsewhere in the same book (Musnad) he annotated: 'Abd Allah - my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) - 'Affan - Abu 'Awanah - Abu Balj - Muhammad b. Hatib...Its chain is Hasan due to Abu Balj {Musnad, vol. 4, p. 259, #18305} Al-Arnaut also states: 'Abd Allah - my father (Ahmad b. Hanbal) - Hasan - Zuhayr - Abu Balj - 'Amr b. Maymun - Abu Hurayrah ...This chain is hasan. {Musnad, vol. 2, p. 355, #8645} So obviously by Sheik Ar'naut's standards, the hadith is Hasan due to Abu Balj. Only God knows whether he deliberately pronounce the hadith Manzila as "weak" or he made mistake. Anyway, he shot himself on the leg. PUTTING THINGS IN THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE! 'Allamah Ahmad Shakir (d. 1377H) made proper clarification and just correction. He writes on the same hadith in Musnad of Imam Ahmad which he annotated: "Its chain is Sahih. Abu Balj: his name is Yahya b. Sulaym. He is also called Yahya b. Abi al-Aswad al-Fazari, and he is Thiqah (trustworthy). Ibn Ma'in, Ibn Sa'd, al-Nasai, al-Daraqutni and others declared him Thiqah. It is said in al-Tahdhib that al-Bukhari said: "There is a problem in him"! I do not know: where has he said that? This is because in his (al-Bukhari's) biography of him (Abu Balj) in al-Kabir 4/2/279-280, he does not mention any criticism against him, and he (al-Bukhari) does not write his biography in al-Saghir, and neither he nor al-Nasai has mentioned him in (his respective) al-Du'afa. Moreover, Shu'bah has narrated from him, and he does not narrate except from Thiqah (trustworthy) narrators." Ref: {Musnad (cairo: Dar al-Hadith; 1st edition, 1416H) [annotator: Ahmad Muhammad Shakir], vol. 1, p. 331, #3062} B. Imam al-Hakim also documents the same version as Imam Ahmad: Ibn Abbas said: ...They are attacking a man who has ten EXCLUSIVE merits...the messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, went out for the battle of Tabuk, and the people went out with him. So, Ali said to him, "Let me go out with you." Therefore the Prophet, peace be upon him, said, "Do not weep, 'Ali. Are you not pleased that you are to me of the status of Harun to Musa, with the exception that there is no prophet after me? Verily, it is not right that I depart except with you as my khalifah." Al-Hakim says: This hadith has a Sahih chain. Al-Dhahabi backs him: Sahih Ref: {al-Mustadrak 'ala al-Sahihain, vol. 3, p. 143, #4652 (Beirut: Far al-kutub al-Illmiyah;1st edition, 1411H)}. Third Version 3. Imam al-Nasai (d. 303H) documents the third sighah through the same Hasan chain as the first: وخرج بالناس في غزوة تبوك فقال علي اخرج معك فقال لا فبكي فقال اما ترضي ان تكون مني بمنزلة هارون من موسي الا انك لست بنبي شم قال انت خليفتي يعني في كل مومن من بعدي "...He (the Messenger of Allah) went out with the people for the Battle of Tabuk. So, 'Ali said to him, "Let me go out with you." Therefore, he (the Prophet_ said, "Do not weep, 'Ali. Are you not pleased that you are to me of the status of Harun to Musa, with the exception that you are not a Prophet? You are my Khalifah, that is, over every believer after me." Ref: {Al-Nasai, 'Sunan al-Kubra (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah; 1st edition, 1411H) [annotator: Dr. 'Abd al-Ghaffar Sulayman al-Banduri and Sayyid Kasrawi Hasan], vol. 5, p. 112, #8409} The word "yahni, that is" apparently is only found in this version of al-Nasai. |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 12:21am On Oct 22, 2015 |
Albani's weird and only objection Here's al-Albaani's theory: As for what the Shiites mention about this Hadith (i.e. Hadith al-Ghadir) and in others that the Prophet said about Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, that “He is my Khalifah after me”, it is not authentic in any way or by any means. Rather, it is part of their several lies which history has refuted. This is because if the Prophet, peace be upon him, had indeed said it, it would have occurred as predicted, because it is revelation revealed, and Allah never fails in His promises. Al-Albani accused the Shia that it is one of their several lies. How fair is our dear Sheik? Reply 1. Has the Sheik forgotten that he has personally authenticated the chain of the hadith? It is very disappointing to see the al-Albani's calibre being economical with sincerity after realizing that this Hadith can never be twisted; he unfortunately plays this lowly "Ibn Taymiyyah" card. 2. The ONLY excuse al-Albani tabled for attacking the hadith is that it contradicts historical reality. Rather than Ali, Abu Bakr became the Khalifah. Therefore Ali could not have been the designated successor?! This reasoning further exposes another aspect of Allamah al-Albani: his shocking ignorance of the meaning of the word Khalifah! Does he even read the Quran at all? * Musa and Harun were both messengers chosen by Allah {Quran 20: 47} * By the order of Allah, every messenger was a ruler of his people {Quran 4:64} * So, what happens when the people refuse to obey a messenger? Does he lose his status? By the reasoning of Allamah al-Albani, if Allah had truly appointed someone a messenger, then the people would certainly have obeyed him. If they did not obey him, then it must have been that he was not a genuine messenger! * Harun, apart from being a messenger, was also Musa's Khalifah over the latter's entire Ummah: Musa said to his brother, Harun: "Be my Khalidah over my people." {Quran 7:142} But what happened once Musa went away temporarily from his Ummah, with his brother as his khalifah over them? A rebel leader rose against Harun, and stole power. The people of Musa thereby disobeyed Harun and followed the rebel leader, named al-Samiri. Read: Quran 20:85, 7:150 In line with the logic of Allamah al-Albani, since Allah announced Harun as a messenger, and Musa too called him his Khalifah, then the Israelites must have obeyed him. Otherwise, the Promise of Allah would have failed! Moreover, because they disobeyed Harun and obeyed al-Samiri - in the thinking line of Allamah al-Albani - the former was therefore no longer a messenger or a Khalifah! Rather, al-Samiri became the true messenger and Khalifah by staging a successful rebellion! How can a muslim scholar reason like that? |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 1:09am On Oct 22, 2015 |
Demmzy15: First, it is unfortunate that you haven't quote the Sanad of the hadith of discussion where Jafar Ibn Sulayman appears. Kindly quote the Sanad and the hadith in full with proper references. Jafar ibn Sulayman was adjudged to be trustworthy but his hadith is rejected for being a Shi'i. How fair is this? 1. Al-Mua'lami (d.1386) writes: The Imams in the hadith sciences have declared as trustworthy a lot of heretics, and have taken their ahadith as hujjah, and have recorded them in their Sahih books. And whoever researches their narrations finds that a lot of them apparently agree with their heresies. The scholars give alternative interpretation for those ahadith without attacking them (the hadith) on account of the heresy if their narrations, nor do they attack the narrators for narrating them. Ref: Al-Tankil bi ma fi Ta-anib al-Kawthari min al-Abatil [annotator:Nasir deen al-Albani] (al-Maktab al-Islami, 2nd edition, 1406H), vol.1, p.237 NB: Imam Bukhari alone recorded in his Sahih hundreds of ahadith from Shi'a narrators. Be my guest to contest this. Likewise Imam Muslim and others in their Sahih. 2. Al-Albani writes: "If someone says: 'The narrator of this corroborative hadith was a Shi'i, and also in the chain of the main hadith, there is another Shi'i, and he is Jafar ibn Sulayman . Does this not justify attack on the hadith and constitute a fault in it? So, I answer: "Not at all, because the requirements in the transmission of hadith are ONLY truthfulness and sound memory. As for the madhhab (of the narrator), that is between him and his Lord, and He is sufficient for him" Ref: Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Sahihah wa Shayhun min fiqhihah (1st edition, 1415H), vol. 5, p.262, #2223 3. A third Salafi hadith Scientist, al-Turayfi writes: "The default position concerning the report of a heretic, if he was accurate and trustworthy, is to accept it, regardless of whether he narrated concerning what agrees with his bid'ah or not, as long as he had not apostatize through his heresy. In such case, it will be rejected due to kufr. This was the practice of the Imams who were hadith scientists, for they used to narrate from the heretic if he was trustworthy and accurate, and used to declare his report to be Sahih" Ref: Al-Tahjil fi takhrij ma'lam yukhraj min al-Ahadith wa al-Athar fi Irwa al-Ghali (Riyadh:Dar al-Asimah; 1st edition,1420H), vol. 16, p.65, #3920. So absolutely what the writer should concentrate on is whether the hadith is authentic or not. Obviously it is not scholastic to reject hadith based on narrators' madhhab. After Imam Bukhari and Muslim themselves recorded hundreds of ahadith from "heretics" and none of their hadith was rejected based on this. |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 12:45pm On Oct 22, 2015 |
^While it is not academic to reject an hadith based on someone madhhab, the science of Sunni hadith only approve hadith based on the trustworthiness and accuracy of the narrator. Therefore, the hadith of Jafar ibn Sulayman who is trustworthy but accused of Shiism is valid. Implications If an hadith is condemned based on the narrator's Shi'ism, then why is several ahadith in Sahih of al-Bukhari and Muslim hasn't been faulted since both of them narrated from Shi'i narrators?! Secondly, there are lots of sahabah of the prophet that were known Shi'a. Are Sunni ready to gun them down all for being Shi'i? Shi'a and Rafida Among the Sahabah Imam Ibn Qutaybah stated: ﺃﺳﻤﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻐﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺍﻟﺮﺍﻓﻀﺔ ﺃﺑﻮ ﺍﻟﻄﻔﻴﻞ ﺻﺎﺣﺐ ﺭﺍﻳﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﺎﺭ، ﻭﻛﺎﻥ ﺁﺧﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺭﺃﻯ ﺭﺳﻮﻝ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﺻﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻭﺳﻠﻢ ﻣﻮﺗﺎً . ﻭﺃﺑﻮ ﻋﺒﺪ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﺍﻟﺠﺪﻟﻲ ﻭﺯﺭﺍﺭﺓ ﺑﻦ ﺃﻋﻴﻦ ﻭﺟﺎﺑﺮ ﺍﻟﺠﻌﻔﻲ TRANSLATION: Names of the EXTREMISTS among the RAFIDIS: Abu al-Tufayl, the flagbearer for Mukhtar, and he was the last of those who saw the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, to die; and Abu 'Abdullah al-Jadali; and Zurarah b. A'yan; and Jabir al-Ju'fi. Source: Kitab al-Ma'arif. Link to the book from a Salafi website: http://islamport.com/w/adb/Web/541/138.htm 2. Another RAFIDI Sahabi was Sulayman b. Surad, رضي الله عنه. Imam al-Dhahabi wrote about him in his Siyar: ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺑﻦ ﺻﺮﺩ ( ﻉ ) ﺍﻷﻣﻴﺮ ﺃﺑﻮ ﻣﻄﺮﻑ ﺍﻟﺨﺰﺍﻋﻲ ﺍﻟﻜﻮﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺼﺤﺎﺑﻲ That confirms that he was indeed a Sahabi. Then, al-Dhahabi says further about him: ﻗﻠﺖ : ﻛﺎﻥ ﺩﻳﻨﺎ ﻋﺎﺑﺪﺍ ، ﺧﺮﺝ ﻓﻲ ﺟﻴﺶ ﺗﺎﺑﻮﺍ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻠﻪ ﻣﻦ ﺧﺬﻻﻧﻬﻢ ﺍﻟﺤﺴﻴﻦ ﺍﻟﺸﻬﻴﺪ ، ﻭﺳﺎﺭﻭﺍ ﻟﻠﻄﻠﺐ ﺑﺪﻣﻪ ، ﻭﺳﻤﻮﺍ ﺟﻴﺶ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺍﺑﻴﻦ TRANSLATION: "I say: he was a devout worshipper. He rose as part of an army, which was seeking the forgiveness of Allah FOR THEIR BETRAYAL OF HUSAYN THE MARTYR. So, they went in revenge for his blood. And they named the army al-Tawwabin." Source: Siyar A'lam al-Nubala. Link: https://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?ID=357&bk_no=60&flag=1 3. Definition of Shi'a and Rafida Imam al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani made this definition of what Shi'ism and Rafida is: “Shi'sm is the love of 'Ali and placing of him over the sahabah (except Abubakr and Umar only). Whoever places him above AbuBakr and Umar, such is an extremist in his Shi'ism, and he is called a Rafidi. If he does not, then he is only a Shi'i. If he added to that (i.e preference of Ali over the AbuBakr and Umar), abuse, cursing or open hatred (of AbuBakr and Umar), he is then an extremist in Rafd. If he believes in Raj'ah into this world, then he is severe in (Rafidi) extremism.” Ref: {Hadi al-Sari Muqaddimah Fath al-Bari (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi; 1st Edition, 1408H), p. 460} Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748H) also concur with this definition. He writes: "Bid'ah has two types: The minor bid'ah: Like extreme Shi'ism, or moderate Shi'ism, for this was widespread among the Tabi'in and their followers, despite their devotion, piety and truthfulness. If the ahadith of these people were rejected, part of teachings of the Prophet would be lost, and that would be a clear evil. Then the major bid'ah: Like complete Rafd and extremism in it." Ref: {Mizan al-I‟tidal fi Naqd al-Rijal (Beirut: Dar al-Ma‟rifah, 1st edition, 1382H), vol. 1, p.5-6, #2} #Toyib Olawuyi writes: If, according to Sunni scholars, loving and placing 'Ali over the Sahaba (esp. Abu Bakr and Umar) is term Shi'ism and constitute Bid'ah, then some notable Sahaba were not free from this bid'ah. An ace Sunni Imam, Ibn 'Abd al-Barr (d. 463H) writes: “Salman, Abu Dharr, al-Miqdad, Khabab, Jabir (b. Abdullah al-Ansari), Abu Sa'id al-Khudri and Zayd b. Arqam narrated that 'Ali b. Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, was the first to accept Islam, AND THEY CONSIDERED HIM THE MOST SUPERIOR (AMONG THE SAHABAH)” Ref: {al-Isti‟ab fi Ma‟rifat al-Ashab (Beirut: Dar al-Jil; 1st edition, 1412H), vol. 3, p. 1090, #1855} In fact, a Sahabi by the name, Abu al-Tufayl ['Amir b. Wathilah b. 'Abd Allah b. Amr al-Laythi al-Kanani al-Hijazi] is described by al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani and Imam Ibn 'Abd al-Barr thus: “Abu Umar said: He accepted the Merit of Abu Bakr and 'Umar BUT HE CONSIDERED 'ALI TO BE THE MOST SUPERIOR” Ref: {al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-„Illmiyyah, 1st edition, 1415H), vol. 7, p.193, #10166 And Imam al-Dhahabi also concur: "The name of Abu Tufayl was 'Amir b. Wathilah b. 'Abd Allah b. 'Amr al-Laythi al-Kanani al-Hijazi, THE SHI'I. HE WAS FROM THE SHI'AH OF 'ALI." Ref: {Siyar A'lam al-Nubala (Beirut, 9th edition, 1413H), vol. 3, p. 468, #97} |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 2:07pm On Oct 22, 2015 |
Conclusion # While the writer had failed to prove academically the claim that "After me" (in the hadith) was an interpolation, rather the writer insinuate Abu Bajl to be the interpolator DUE to the fact that "some scholar" weakens him; it is yet to be seen if any scholar ever accused Abu Bajl of fabrication or adding to text what is not there! Alas! Abu Bajl has been proven to be trustworthy. Imam Bukhari ONLY mentioned him in his al-Kabir, and ONLY the best and most reliable narrator al-Bukhari wrote their bio on al-Kabir. # Another funny card played by this unknown writer is an hadith (yet to be seen with its sanad and ref) having a Shi'i named Ja'far ibn Sulayman. This hadith is rejected on the basis that Jafar ibn Sulayman is a Shi'a. This has been proven to be unacademic because the only requirement in authenticating hadith is trustworthiness and sound memory (accuracy). Comparism of Ali with Harun Did you ever considers the statement of Nabi Muhammad (peace be upon him and his household) in the hadith? The statement: "You are to me of the status of Harun to Musa, with the exception that you are not a prophet," "Are you not pleased that you are to me of the status of Harun to Musa, with the exception that there is no prophet after me?" Does this statement limited to a particular occasion of Tabuk? # Prophet's word is very clear when he said those words "You are to me of the STATUS OF HARUN to Musa except prophethood". The implication of this is that ALI HAS ALL THE STATUS of Harun except Prophethood. What are the Status of Nabi Harun? Kindly read various passages of Quran where Allah highlights them. THE LEAST IS THAT HARUN WAS THE BEST OF MUSA'S NATION. # These statement of Rasul left aside the personal identity of Nabi Harun like his age, death, marital life etc. Interestingly Harun died before Musa whereas Ali did not die before the holy Prophet. Harun was older than Musa whereas Ali was much younger than the Prophet etc. The comparison is on STATUS ALONE # And you are my Khalifah over every believer AFTER ME." This statement is authentically documented as part of the hadith and various modern scholars authenticated it just like their old counterpart. This statement bury all ambiguity. The fact that Harun was natural successor to Musa but died before Musa made the holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny) clarified and added to the status of Ali which Harun could not achieved (Khilafah after Musa). # Does "min bahdi (after me)" meant Prophet's journey out of Madina? The fact that 'Ali had already been made as Prophet's deputy in Madina by the Prophet himself while the Prophet journey to Tabuk, and some people started mocking him or he felt distressed (as reported differently); only then does the Prophet gave those new statements with emphasis on "min bahdi (after me)". There's absolutely nothing proven by the writer to undermined the hadith and bring it down. The hadith is authentic as it is widely reported. All other points the writer mentioned that I did not touch doesn't worth to be touched. In sha Allah other respond will come as your responds builds up. Wa Salam alaykum. 1 Like |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 8:09pm On Oct 22, 2015 |
HADITH AL-WILAYAH Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah states about the hadith al-Wilayah: "And similarly his statement 'he (Ali) is the wali of every believer after me", it is a lie upon the Messenger of Allah {Minhaj al-Sunnah, vol.7, p.391 (1st edition, 1406H).} The implication of Shayk ibn Taymiyyah word is that the hadith is Mawdu (fabrication). However the hadith is a declaration of the Prophet that announced Ali as the wali of every believer after him. 1. Imam Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi (d. 204H) records: "Abu Dawud - Jafar b. Sulayman al-Dab'i - Yazid al-Rishk - Mutarrif b. Abd Allah b. Al-Shikhir - Imran b. Hasin who said: The messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, appointed Ali as part of an army expedition. They (his co-soldiers) saw something in him that they hated, and small band of four people (among them) therefore agreed and vowed to inform the Prophet, peace be upon him, about what Ali did. It was our custom back then that whenever we returned from any journey, we would not go to our families until after visiting the Messenger of Allah...So, the small band of four people came (to the Prophet immediately they returned), and one of them stood up and said, "O Messenger of Allah! Have you not seen that Ali did so and so? So, he (the prophet) turned away from him. Then, the second stood up and said the same thing. So, he (the prophet) turned away from him (too). Then, the third stood up and said the same thing. So, he (the prophet) turned away from him (as well). Then, the fourth stood up and said the same thing. Therefore, the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said, "What is it with them and Ali? Verily! Ali is from me and I am from him, and he is the WALI of every believer after me." Ref: {Al-Tayalisi, Musnad (Beirut: Dar al-Ma'arifah), p.111, #829} Allamah al-Albani says about this riwayah: "Al-Tayalisi recorded it in his Musnad (829)...from the route of Jafar b. Sulayman al-Dab'i, fromYazid al-Rishk, from Mutarrif, from Imran b. Hasin, may Allah be pleased with him...And al-Tirmidhi said: "A hadith that is Hasan gharib (i.e with a Hasan [good] chain), we do not know it except through the hadith of Jafar b. Sulayman." I (al-Albani) say: and he (Jafar b. Sulayman) is thiqah (trustworthy), from the narrators of (Sahih) Muslim, and so are the rest of its (i.e the hadith) narrators . This is why al-Hakim said, "Sahih upon the standard of (Imam)Muslim. And al-Dhahabi concured with him." Ref: {Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Sahihah wa Shayhun min Fiqhihah wa Fawaidihah (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Ma'arif; 1st edition, 1415H), vol.5, p.261, #2223} All the narrators are thiqah (trustworthy), and are relied upon in Sahih Muslim. [@Demmzy15, remember Jafar b. Sulayman, who is accused of being Shia and therefore our half-baked writer declared his hadith munkar?! The same man is relied upon by Imam Muslim in his Sahih]. Imam Tirmidhi (d. 279H) declared the chain to be Hasan, while Imam Hakim (d. 403H) and al-Dhahabi (d.748H) grade it as Sahih. 2. Al-Tayalisi records further with another chain: "Yunus - Abu Dawud - Abu 'Awanah - Abu Bajl - AMR b. Maymun - Ibn Abbas: The messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said to Ali: "You are the wali of every believer after me." Ref:{Musnad (Beirut: Dar al-Ma'arifah), p. 360,#2752} Allamah al-Albani says about it: "As for his statement 'And he is the wali of every believer after me", it has been narrated in the hadith of Ibn Abbas, for al-Tayalisi (2752) said: Abu 'Awanah - Abu Bajl - AMR b. Maymun, from him (i.e Ibn Abbas), "that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said to Ali: You are the wali of every believer after me." Ahmad (1/330-331) recorded it, and from his route al-Hakim (3/132-133), he (al-Hakim) said, a Sahih chain" and al-Dhahabi concured with him, and it is indeed as both have stated" Ref: {Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Sahihah wa Shayhun min Fiqhihah wa Fawaidihah (Riyadh: Maktabah al-Ma'arif; 1st edition, 1415H), vol.5, p.263, #2223} 3. Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal (d.241H) too documented the hadith: {Musnad (Cairo: Muasassat Qurtubah) [annotator: Shu'ayb al-Ar'naut], vol. 4, p.437,#19942} 4. Imam Tirmidhi (d.279H) also documents the hadith: {al-Jami al-Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi (Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi) [annotator: Muhammad Nasir din al-Albani], vol.5, p.632, #3712 Al-Tirmidhi says about it: "This hadith is Hasan gharib (i.e has a Hasan chain) Allamah al-Albani has a simple verdict: SAHIH. 5. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (d.852H) also states: "Al-Tirmidhi records in a narrative with strong (qawi) chain from 'Imran b. Hasin: "That messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: "What do you want with Ali? Verily! 'Ali is from me and I am from Ali, and he is the wali of every believer after me." Ref: {al-Isabah fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah (Beirut: Dar al-kutub al-Illmiyah;1st edition, 1415H), vol. 4, p.468} 6. Imam Ibn Asim (d. 287H) also documents: 'Abbas b. Al-Walid al-Narsi and Abu Kamil - Jafar b. Sulayman - Yazid b. al-Rishk - Mutarrif - Imran b. Hasin, who said: The messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: "Ali is from me, and I am from him, and he is the wali of every believer after me." Albani comments: ITS CHAIN IS SAHIH, its narrators are thiqah (trustworthy), upon the standard of (Imam) Muslim. Ref: Kitab al-Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st edition, 1400H) [annotator: Muhammad Nasir din al-Albani], vol.2, p.564, #1187} 7. Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 354H) has documented the same version (as 6.) in his Sahih Ibn Hibban bi Tartib Ibn Balban (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 2nd edition, 1414H), [annotator: Muhammad Nasir din al-Albani and Shu'ayb al-Arnaut], vol.15, p.373-374, #6929} Shayk al-Ar'naut, the annotator says about the riwayat: Its chain is strong. 8. Imam Jarir al-Tabari (d. 310H) and Allamah al-Hindi (d.975H) also documented this hadith. This is the hadith that troubled Sheik Ibn Taymiyyah in which he proffer no single reason before declaring it "a lie". Are all the above-mentioned Imams of Ahlu Sunnah lies?!. This is what makes Allamah al-Albani reiterated in his closing remark on Hadith al-Wilayah thus: "Of the truly unbelievable is Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah's denial of this hadith, and his calling it a lie in Minhaj al-Sunnah (4/104)" {silsilah al-Ahadith al-sahihah vol. 5, p.264, #2223} @Demmzy15, and others what is the meaning of " 'Ali is the Wali of every believer after me" in this hadith?! Salam. 1 Like |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by AlBaqir(m): 4:41pm On Oct 31, 2015 |
Please where is Demmzy15? Been a while. I miss our discussion already. |
| Re: Hadith Manzila And The Shi'a by Demmzy15(m): 5:37pm On Oct 31, 2015 |
AlBaqir:I've been busy with school work, I'll reply in due time Insha'Allah! |
(1) (Reply)
Where Can One Meet Muslims And Perform Acts Of Ibadah? / What Day Is Ashura&tashura / Why Did The Prophet (saw) Fast On Monday's And Thursday's
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 179 |