₦airaland Forum

SUMMARY

We have discussed here each and every place in the Qur’an where the word Imam and its plural A’immah were used in the Qur’an. It was demonstrated how Allah Ta‘ala used this word to refer variously to

• a book (thrice)
• the Champions of Kufr (twice)
• a road (once)
• the leaders of the Israelites
• the leaders of the Pious
• the Prophets or the Book

Any attempt by the Shia to identify their idiosyncratic notion of Imamah with the Imamah of the Qur’an is totally incongruous. The closest they could come to it would be to draw a similarity between their own Imamah and the leadership of the Israelites. However, such a similarity is immediately rejected when one considers that this leadership of the Israelites is clearly identified in the Qur’an with the Prophets of Bani Isra’il. The Qur’an provides no grounds whatsoever to identify this leadership of the Israelites with anyone but the Prophets. It is not uncommon to find the Shia quoting verses such as the 5th verse of Sura al Qasas to substantiate their belief of Imamah. If they only took the trouble of reading the verse in its proper context, without adding to it the excrescences of their own theology, they will see just how far fetched their identification of Qur’anic Imamah with Shia Imamah really is. In al Qasas:5 for example, the reference is clearly to Musa and his people. Just how, one wonders, is that verse extended to Ali ibn Abi Talib and eleven persons from his progeny?

The attempt to draw a comparison between the Qur’anic Leadership of the Pious and the Imamah of the Shia is similarly fraught with problems. It has been seen above how this form of leadership is a favour sought from Allah by His ideal servants. The Imamah of the Shia of the Shia, on the other hand, is like Nubuwwah, divinely granted, and cannot be aspired to by any person. The utter lack of harmony between this form of leadership and Shia Imamah is nowhere more clearly brought to light than in the authentically narrated saying of Imam Jafar as-Sadiq which points at the corruption of the text of the Qur’an at the hands of the Sahaba radiya Llahu ‘anhum as the reason for the disparity.

The only other Qur’anic meaning of the word Imam left to the Shia is the one which refers to the Day of Qiyamah, when nations will be called by their “Imams”. Is it possible that the word “Imam” here could be referring to the Shia concept of Imamah? Unfortunately for the Shia, once again that is not possible. It is not possible for two reasons:

Firstly, because a holistic reading of the immediately following verses, as well as of other verses of the Qur’an point unmistakably to the fact that the Imamah spoken of here refers either to the Prophets, by whose names nations are called not only in the Hereafter, but in the Qur’an and Sunnah too, or to their books of deeds by which they will be called to account.

Secondly, because identifying the verse with the Shia concept of Imamah leads to a very problematic distribution of nations for the various Imams.

In conclusion, in the usage of the word “Imam” in the Qur’an there is nothing whatsoever to support the belief of Imamah as conceived of by the Shia.


________________________________________
REFERENCES
1. Asl ash-Shia wa-Usuluha p. 58 (Mu’ssasat al A‘lami, Beirut)
2. al Kafi vol. 8 (Rawdat al Kafi) p. 167 (Dar al Adwa’, Beirut, 1992)
3. Risalat al I‘tiqad pp. 111-114, quoted by al Majlisi: Bihar al Anwar vol. 27 p. 62 (Dar al Kutub al Islamiyyah, Tehran, 1387)
4. al Masa’il, quoted in Bihar al Anwar vol. 8 p. 366
5. Talkhis ash-Shafi vol. 4 p. 131 (Dar al Kutub al Islamiyyah, Qum, 3rd ed. 1394)
6. al Alfayn p. 3 (al Maktaba al Haydariyyah, Najaf, 3rd ed. 1388)
7. al Jami‘ lish-Shara’i‘ p. 371 (Mu’assasat Sayed ash-Shuhada’ al ‘Ilmiyyah, Qum, 1405)
8. Tahrir al Wasila vol. 2 p. 72 (Mu’assasat Ismailiyan, Qum 1408)
9. Asl ash-Shia wa-Usuluha pp. 58-59
10. al Anwar al Lami‘ah Sharh az-Ziyarat al Jami‘ah p. 176 (Mu‘assasat al Bi‘thah, Mashhad, 1st ed. 1457)
11. Bihar al Anwar vol. 26 pp. 194-200
12. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 267-318
13. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 319-332
14. ibid. vol. 27 pp. 29-31
15. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 109-107
16. ibid. vol. 26 pp. 117-132
17. al Hukumat al Islamiyyah p. 52 (Ministry of Guidance, Iran. )
18. Tafsir (‘Ali ibn Ibrahim) al Qummi vol.1 p. 10 (ed. Sayed Tayyib al Musawi, 2nd edition, Kitabfarosh ‘Allameh, Qum 1968)
19. ibid., editor’s introduction.
20. Abu Talib at Tajlil at Tabrizi: Mujam ath Thiqat p. 224 (Mu’assasat an-Nashr al Islami, Qum 1404AH). In this book the author has compiled a list of all reliable hadith narrators of the Shia. One of his sources is the tafsir of al Qummi. In the third chapter of this book he gives a list of the narrators upon whom al Qummi has relied in narrating the material contained in his tafsir, quoting al Qummi’s statement in the introduction to his book, that “we will mention and inform about that which reached us, which our mentors and reliable narrators have narrated”. He then quotes the author of Wasa’il ash-Shia who states that “‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al Qummi has testified that his tafsir is narrated from the Imams by reliable narrators.” (Wasa’il vol. 3 p. 524)
21. Tafsir Ibn Kathir vol. 3 p. 52 (Maktaba Dar at Turath, Cairo n.d.)
22. In the first volume of al Kafi this ayah is used thrice in relation to the Imams.

On the Day of Judgement

There remains one place in the Qur’an where the word Imam is used. It is in Sura al Isra’ where Allah Ta‘ala says:

The day when we will call all people by their leaders.(al Isra’ : 71)

The Imam spoken of in this ayah is recognised by the mufassirin of the Ahlus Sunnah as either the book of deeds or the prophet to whose Ummah the person belonged. The first meaning is preferred by Ibn Kathir,21 who mentions in support of his preference the ayat where the word Imam was used in the sense of a book (see above). This meaning is further supported by the rest of the ayah:

So those who are given their book in their right hand will read their books.

The second meaning also finds ample support in the Qur’an. In another ayah Allah says:

How will it be when We bring forth from every Ummah a witness, and bring you (O Muhammad) as a witness over these? (an-Nisa’:41)

From the way in which the position of the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is compared to the position of the “witnesses” of the other Ummahs we can only conclude that the reference is to the Prophets. It therefore follows that those Ummahs will be called by the names of their Prophets. Calling the Ummahs of the past by the names of the Prophets who were sent to them is further a common thing in both the Qur’an and the Sunnah. The ‘Ad, for example, are commonly referred to as “the people of Hud”, just like Banu Isra’il are called “the people of Musa”. Identifying the Imam mentioned in the ayah under discussion with the Prophets is therefore warranted by both the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

As for the claim of the Shia that it refers to the Twelve Imams,22 this claim not only lacks Qur’anic support, it also curtails the general scope of the ayah. The lack of Qur’anic support is evident from the above discussion on the usage of the word Imam in the Qur’an. The restriction of the general scope of the ayah arises from the chronological disparity between the times when the Twelve Imams lived, and the periods during which previous Ummahs flourished. If we say that all Ummahs will be called by the names of the Twelve Imams, then what about the Ummahs that existed before them? By whose name will they be called? After all, the ayah says that all people will be called by their leaders.

[b]In addition, when for argument’s sake we do assume that the reference is to the the Twelve Imams, we are left with a somewhat incongruous situation. Sayyidina ‘Ali, the first of the Twelve Imams, died in the year 40. His son Sayyidina Hassan died nine years later, in 49. If Sayyidina ‘Ali is the Imam for the people of his time, Sayyidina Hassan is left with only those people who were born during his nine years. All the other people of his time who were alive during his father’s time will form part of his father’s group, and not his. The tenure of the 3rd Imam lasted for 22 years; the 4th for 34 years; the 5th for 19 years; the 6th for 34 years; the 7th for 35 years; the 8th for 20 years; the 9th for 17 years; the 10th for 34 years; and the 11th for only 6 years. Suddenly, with the 12th Imam, the Awaited Mahdi, we have a tenure of Imamah that has been running for over 1200 years. The group that will supposedly be called by the name of the 11th Imam, for example, will only include people that were born during his Imamah that ran from 254 up to 260, while the numbers of those who will be called by the name of the 12th Imam will be practically incalculable.[/b]

Compare this incongruous scenario with the much more orderly and Qur’anic system of having the various Ummahs called by the names of their Prophets on the Day of Qiyamah, and the absurdity of using the 71st ayah of Sura al Isra’ to substantiate the doctrine of Imamah as conceived of by the Shia will be fully exposed. There can be no question that the word Imam in this ayah does not refer to the Twelve Imams.

Leadership of the pious

There remain three places where the word imam is mentioned in the Qur’an. In one of these three places Allah speaks of the prayer of His exemplary worshippers:

(They are) those who say: Our Lord, grant us the coolness of (our) eyes in our wives and children, and make us leaders of the pious. (al Furqan : 74)

This verse speaks of normal people who do not belong to a special class like the Prophets, asking Allah to make them imams, in the sense of paragons of virtue, whose example others would strive to emulate. It is very obvious that it cannot refer to a group of “divinely appointed Imams”, for the reason that the Imams’ elevation to the rank of Imamah is not on account of their prayers. Since their appointment, like that of the Prophets, is supposedly divine in origin, it not attainable by any amount of exertion or devotion.

It is interesting to note that this verse proved to be so unpalatable to certain of the early Shia that they declared it to have been corrupted.
The following narration appears in the tafsir of ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim al Qummi, the teacher of Abu Jafar al Kulayni:

It was read to Abu ‘Abdillah (i.e. Imam Jafar as-Sadiq):

And make us leaders of the pious.

He said: “It would be an enormous thing for them to ask Allah to make them Imams of the pious.” [The Shia concept of an Imam is intended, of course, since the Imams are appointed, and no one can become an Imam by praying for it.]

Someone then enquired:
“How was it then revealed, O son of Rasulullah?”

He replied: ‘It was revealed:
…and make for us leaders from amongst the pious.[/b]18

[b]This narration, documented in a tafsir of great repute amongst the early tafsirs of the Shia, (a tafsir, in fact, that is described by its twentieth century editor as being “in reality the commentary of the Imams al Baqir and as-Sadiq,”19 and each one of whose narrators is regarded as reliable and credible by Shia hadith experts,20 which vouches for its authenticity by Shia standards) obviates the need for further discussion around the meaning of the word Imam as it appears in this ayah.

Usage of the word Imam in the Qur‘an

In what follows we will investigate how the word Imam and its plural A’immah have been used in the Qur’an. From the way Allah has used the word in the Qur’an it will then be seen whether the Shia concept of Imamah that has been explained above, finds any sort of Qur’anic support.

A book

The word imam recurs 7 times in the Qur’an, while its plural form, a’immah, appears 5 times. In 3 of these cases it refers explicitly to a book:

And before it was the Book of Musa, a guide and a mercy. (Hud : 17)

And before it was the Book of Musa, a guide and a mercy. (al Ahqaf : 12)

Verily, we will restore the dead to life, and we write that which they sent forth, and that which they left
behind; and of everything we have taken account in a Clear Book. (Yasin : 12)

The champions of kufr

In another 2 cases it refers to the champions of kufr:

Fight the leaders of kufr. (at Tawbah : 12)

And We made them leaders who call towards the Fire. (al Qasas : 41)

A road

One reference is to a clearly discernible road:

And verily, the two (cities) lie next to a clear road. (al Hijr : 79)

Leadership of the Israelites

In the remaining six places where the word is used, it is used in terms of its literal meaning, i.e. leadership. In Sura al ambiya it is stated:

We said: O fire, be cool and (a means of ) safety unto Ibrahim. And they planned against him; but We made them the greater losers. And We delivered him and Lut to the land which We blessed for the nations. And We gave him Ishaq, and Ya‘qub as an additional gift; and all of them We made righteous men. And We made them leaders who guide by Our command; and We revealed to them the doing of good, the establishment of prayer and the giving of alms. And they were men who served Us. (al ambiya : 69-73)


In this extract, which had to be extended somewhat in order that the reader may see the full context in which the word a’immah is used, one clearly sees its association with the function of the Prophets as the leaders of men, who guide them towards Allah. This unequivocal identification of a’immah as Prophets leads us to conclude that the reference in Sura as-Sajdah too, is to the Prophets, and not to any other category of men:

Indeed, We gave Musa the Book, so be not in doubt about meeting him; and We made it a (source of) guidance for the Children of Isra’il. And We made from amongst them leaders who guided by Our command, when they persevered. And they had full certainty in Our signs. (as-Sajdah : 23-24)


Even if the scope of a’immah in this verse were to be extended to include people other than the Prophets, there is nothing to justify its identification with the elaborate doctrine of Imamah as conceived of by the Shia.

In a third verse Allah speaks of His plans for the oppressed Israelites in Egypt:

And We wished to be gracious to those who were oppressed in the land, and to make them leaders, and to make them heirs. (al Qasas : 5)


In order to see who the word a’immah refers to in this verse one only has to look at the persons in whom this divine wish came to fulfilment. It was primarily in Nabi Musa and the other prophet-kings of Bani Isra’il like Nabi Dawood and Nabi Sulaiman ‘alayhimus salam that the leadership referred to in this verse, came to be vested. If at times they were ruled by men other than the Prophets, [b]the status of those leaders was never seen to be superior to the rank of the Prophets.[/b]Verses like the above three, apart from dealing specifically with the Prophets of Bani Isra’il, are not in the least indicative of the existence of a rank like that of Imamah as conceived of by the Shia.

Imamah and Prophethood in the Qur’an

In this article we investigate the Qur’anic foundations of the Shi‘ite concept of Imamah. By analysis of the usage of the word imam and its plural form a’immah in the Qur’an we will investigate whether the Qur’an provides any basis for the doctrine of Imamah as formulated in Shi‘ite theology. In limiting our investigation to the Qur’an, it is not our contention that the Sunnah is inconsequential in issues of doctrine. Instead, it is out of the conviction that a doctrinal issue like Imamah, which Shi‘ite theology places above Nubuwwah, must find textual support from the Qur’an. After all, the “secondary” issue of Nubuwwah finds more than ample support in the pages of the Qur’an. No one, after reading the clear and unambiguous Qur’anic texts wherein Allah makes mention of His Messengers and Prophets, their status,


And each (of them) we favoured above all the worlds. (al An‘am : 86)

their stories,

And has there come to you the story of Musa? (Taha : 9)
And recite to them the story of Ibrahim. (ash-Shu‘ara : 69)
We relate unto you you the most beatiful of stories. (Yusuf : 4)

the explicit mention of their names,

Such was the argument we gave Ibrahim against his people. We raise in degree whomsoever We will, and your Lord is Wise, All-Knowing. We gave him Ishaq and Ya‘qub; each of them We guided. And before that, We guided Nuh, and among his (Ibrahim’s) progeny (We guided) Dawood, and Sulaiman, and Ayub, and Yusuf, and Musa, and Harun; thus do We reward those who good. And (We guided) Zakariyya, and Yahya, and ‘Isa, and Ilyas; all of them of the Righteous. And Ismail, and Alyasa‘, and Yunus, and Lut; each of them We favoured above all the worlds. (al An‘am : 83-86)

and the importance of belief in them as an integral part of faith in Islam,

And whoever denies Allah, His Messengers, His Books and the Last Day has clearly gone astray. (an-Nisa’ : 136)

can reasonably doubt that the Qur’an supports, or rather enjoins, belief in Nubuwwah. The question now is: Does the same hold true for Imamah? If Imamah is superior to Nubuwwah, as the theology of the Ithna ‘Ashari (Twelvers)Shia teaches, it would be only reasonable to expect that the Qur’an would deal in equally explicit terms with Imamah; and if not, that at least a clear, unambiguous picture what Imamah is and who the Imams are, would be drawn by the Qur’an.

The nature of the office of the Imams

On this point it would be sufficient to say that the Shia bestow upon their Imams all the perfections and accomplishments of the Prophets, and even more. It would be impossible to document here all the narrations that deal with the status of the Imams, but it might be just as informative to quote the chapters under which they have been documented in a source that is described as a “veritable encyclopaedia of the knowledge of the Imams”: Bihar al Anwar of ‘Allamah Muhammad Baqir al Majlisi (died 1111AH), widely reputed to be the greatest and most influential Shia scholar of the Safawid era. During his lifetime he occupied the office of Sheikh al Islam in Isfahan, capital of the Safawids, and even to this day his works are indispensable to the Shia clergy as well as their lay public. We quote here the name of the chapter, as well as the number of narrations he documents in each chapter:

[b]1. The Imams possess more knowledge than the Prophets (13 narrations)11
2. The Imams are superior to the Prophets and the entire creation. The Covenant of the Imams was taken from them (the Prophets), the Mala’ikah and the entire creation. The (major prophets called) ulul-‘Azm (Nuh, Ibrahim, Musa and ‘Isa ) attained the status of ulul-‘Azm on account of loving the Imams. (88 narrations)12
3. The duas of the Prophets were answered because they invoked the wasila of the Imams. (16 narrations)13
4. The Imams can bring the dead back to life. They can cure blindness and leprosy. They possess all the miracles of the Prophets (4 narrations)14
5. Nothing of the knowledge of Heaven, Earth, Jannat and Jahannam is hidden from them. The Kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth was shown to them. They know all that happened and that will happen up to the Day of Resurrection. (22 narrations)15
6. The Imams know the truth of a person’s faith or hypocrisy. They possess a book that contains the names of the inmates of Jannat, the names of their supporters and their enemies. (40 narrations)16 [/b]

The titles of these chapters create quite a vivid impression of the narrated material upon which the Shia base their faith. The office of Imamah can thus be seen to incorporate more than just the political leadership of the Ummah. The Imams are more than just heads of state with a divine right to rule. They are the repositories of every branch of knowledge and perfection possessed by the Prophets. The existence of the world depends upon their presence. They are the intermediaries upon whose intercession acceptance of the prayers of even the Prophets depends. Their office is one that combines political, religious, scientific, cosmological and metaphysical supremacy over the entire creation. From this one can understand the reason for al Khomeini’s statement in the book al Hukumat al Islamiyyah, upon which rests the entire philosophy of his revolution:

It is of the undeniable tenets of our faith that our Imams possess a status with Allah that neither Angel nor Messenger can aspire to.[/b]17

[b]After this introduction to the concept of Imamah, the nature of the appointment of the Imams, and the nature of their office, we pose the question: Is belief in such a concept justified and upheld by the Qur’an? Surely a belief of such momentousness, an article of faith with such far reaching consequences, that supercedes even belief in the Prophets, must be rooted in the Qur’an, the book which was revealed by Allah
as an explanation of all things, a guide, a mercy, and glad tidings to the Muslims. (an-Nahl:89)

It is with the purpose of answering this question that this article is written.

This is the opinion held by four of the most eminent classical scholars of the Shia, and if seen from the angle of consistency, it is a commendable position indeed. Yet, if one has to ask the Shia of today (especially recent converts to Shi‘ism) whether they believe Sunnis are Muslims are not, they will respond with surprise, and might even appear grieved at such a question. As far as recent converts to Shi‘ism are concerned, this is to be expected, since it is in the interest of any propaganda scheme that certain facts be kept secret from neophytes. However those who are more knowledgeable about the technicalities of Shi‘ism will know that in the eyes of the Shia a distinction is made between a Muslim and a Mu’min. All those who profess Islam outwardly are Muslims: Sunnis, Zaidis, Mu‘tazilis, and all other sects. A Mu’min, however, is only he who believes in the Twelve Imams. By this clever ruse the fuqaha of the Shia kill several birds with one stone. By accepting all other sects as Muslims they protect themselves against the ridiculousness of casting out of the fold of Islam over 90% of its adherents, and the same men who carried the banner of Islam to all corners of the world. At the same time they avoid the antagonism of Sunnis and others, which facilitates proselytisation for them. On the other hand, by the subtle measure of distinguishing Muslim from Mu’min they effectively excommunicate their opponents. Muslims are those to whom the laws of Islam apply in this world. It is therefore permissible to intermarry with them, to pray behind them, to eat what they slaughter, etc., while Mu’mins are those to whom salvation in the hereafter belongs exclusively, and that depends upon belief in the Twelve Imams. This distinction between Muslim and Mu’min can be found throughout classical Shia literature. The seventh century faqih, Yahya ibn Sa‘id al Hilli (died 690AH), for example writes in his manual on fiqh, al Jami‘ lish-Shara’i‘:

[b]It is correct for a Muslim to make an endowment (waqf) upon Muslims. Muslims are those who utter the two shahadahs, and their children. But if a person makes something waqf upon the Mu’minin, it will be exclusively for the Imamiyyah who believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams.[/b]7

Eight centuries later, exactly the same view is propounded by Ayatollah Khomeini. In his own manual of fiqh, Tahrir al Wasila, he states:

[b]If a person makes a waqf upon the Muslims it will be for all those who confess the two shahadahs … If an Imami makes a waqf upon the Mu’minin it will be restricted to the Ithna ‘Ashariyyah (Twelvers).[/b]8

Some amongst the contemporary spokesmen for Shi‘ism, like Kashif al Ghita, have realised that even this ruse is not sufficiently subtle. He thus devised another terminology. He speaks of being a Mu’min in the special sense, and of being a Mu‘min in the general sense. Whoever believes in Imamah is regarded as a Mu’min in the special sense, while those who do not believe in it are regarded as being Mu’min in the general sense, as a result of which all the temporal laws of Islam are applicable to him. The result of this difference, he says, will become apparent on the Day of Judgement, in the degrees of Divine proximity and honour that will be bestowed upon the believers in Imamah.9

To us this reveals much more than what the author intended. It reveals to us that when the Shia say they regard Sunnis as Muslims, it is in strict reference to worldly matters. In eschatological matters, matters of the hereafter, Sunnis who do not believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams are just like Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus or any other rejectors of the Nubuwwah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The only reason for saying that Sunnis are Muslims is expedience and convenience. Without professing such an opinion the Shia would have had to retreat into seclusion and bear ostracism from the rest of the Muslim world. This reason is given by Sayed ‘Abdullah Shubbar (died 1232AH) in his commentary of az-Ziyarat al Jami‘ah, the comprehensive dua read at the graves of the Imams. At the point where the ziyarat reads:

Whoever denies you is a kafir,

he comments upon it, saying:

[b]There are many narrations that indicate that the opponents are kafir. To document all of them would require a separate book. Reconciling such narrations with that which is known about the Imams, viz. that they used to live, eat and socialise with them, leads to the conclusion that they (the opponents) are kafir, and that they will dwell in Hell forever, but that in this world the laws of Islam are applied to them as a gesture of mercy and beneficence to the True Denomination (the Shia), since it is impossible to avoid them.[/b]10

The nature of the appointment of the Twelve Imams

As far as the nature of their appointment is concerned, it is a matter of consensus amongst the Shia that the right of their twelve Imams to lead the Ummah was bestowed by Allah Ta‘ala Himself. No distinction is made between the appointment of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as the Messenger of Allah and the appointment of the twelve Imams as his successors. Underscoring this vital aspect of Imamah, ‘Allamah Muhammad Hussain Kashif al Ghita, who was the most prominent Shia ‘alim of Najaf in Iraq during the seventies, writes in his book Asl ash-Shia wa-Usuluha:

Imamah is a divine station, just like Nubuwwah. Just as Allah chooses whomsoever He wants to for Nubuwwah and Risalah … similarly, for Imamah too, He selects whomsoever He wishes.[/b]1

It is interesting to note that the book from which this statement is drawn was written for the express purpose of correcting contemporary misconceptions about the Shia. Since Imamah is then for all practical purposes on exactly the same plane as Nubuwwah and Risalah, consistency would dictate that the rejection of Imamah be censured with the same severity as the rejection of Nubuwwah and Risalah. [b]If rejection of the Nubuwwah of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam cast the likes of Abu Jahl and Abu Lahab outside the fold of Islam, then it is only logical to expect that rejection of the Imamah of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu should cast the likes of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and the rest of the Sahaba radiya Llahu ‘anhum out of the fold of Islam. For one who views the problem from this perspective it thus comes as no surprise to find the Shia narrating from their Imams that “all the people became murtad after the death of Rasulullah, except three,”[/b]2 since it is consistent with the principle that equates Imamah with Nubuwwah in the sense that each of them is a position appointed by Allah.

[b]What is surprising is the opinion the Shia of today express about the Ahlus Sunnah in general. One would expect them to say about the Ahlus Sunnah as they have said about the Sahaba: that they are unbelievers, out of the fold of Islam. After all, there are many non-Muslims who believe in the oneness of Allah, but do not believe in the prophethood of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and for that reason we all regard them as unbelievers. If Imamah is then a “divine station, like Nubuwwah,” Sunnis who do not believe in the Imamah of the Twelve Imams must also be unbelievers. There have been many ‘ulama of the Shia in the past who have displayed consistency in this regard and declared all those who deny the Imamah of the Twelve Imams—like the Ahlus Sunnah—unbelievers. For example, Ibn Babawayh al Qummi (died 381AH), the author of one of the four canonical hadith collections of the Shia, Man La Yahduruhu al Faqih, states in the treatise in which he expounds the creed of the Shia:

[b]It is our belief about one who rejects the Imamah of Amir al Mu’minin (Sayyidina ‘Ali) and the Imams after him that he is the same as one who rejects the Nubuwwah of the Prophets.

It is our belief concerning a person who accepts (the Imamah of) Amir al Mu’minin but rejects any one of the Imams after him, that he is similar to one who believes in all the Prophets but rejects the Nubuwwah of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “The Imams after me are twelve. The first is Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib and the last is the Qa’im (the Mahdi).Obedience to them is obedience to me, and disobedience to them isdisobedience to me. Thus, whoever rejects one of them has rejected me.”

Whoever wrongfully claims the Imamah is an accursed oppressor. Whoever places the Imamah in anyone besides its rightful repositories is an accursed oppressor. The Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said: “Whoever shall deny ‘Ali his Imamah after me has denied my Nubuwwah, and whoever denies me my Nubuwwah has denied Allah His divinity.” Imam Jafar as-Sadiq said: “Whoever doubts the kufr of our enemies is himself a kafir.”[/b]3

His student Sheikh Mufid (died 413AH) writes:

[b]There is consensus amongst the Imamiyyah (the Ithna ‘Ashari (Twelvers)or Jafari Shia) that whoever denies the Imamah of anyone of the Imams, and denies the duty of obedience to them that Allah has decreed, that such a person is a kafir, misguided, and that he deserves everlasting torment in Hell.[/b]4

The prolific Abu Jafar at Tusi, called Sheikh at Ta’ifah, (died 460AH), who is the author of two of the four canonical hadith collections, has the following to say:

[b]Rejection of Imamah is kufr, just as rejection of Nubuwwah is kufr.[/b]5

The mujaddid of Shi‘ism in the eighth century after the Hijrah, Ibn Mutahhar al Hilli (died 726AH) expresses similar sentiments in the following terms:

[b]Imamah is a universal grace (lutf ‘amm) while Nubuwwah is a special grace (lutf khass), because it is possible that a specific period in time can be void of a living Nabi, while the same is not true for the Imam. To reject the universal grace is worse than to reject the special grace.[/b]6

The Doctrine of Imamah

Before going any further it would be well-advised, for the benefit of those who may not be fully aware of what the Imamah of the Shia means, to expand somewhat upon the detail of the issue. Once the reader has a proper focus of what Imamah means to the Shia, and what its position in the belief structure of the Shia is, we will continue with our discussion of that doctrine in the light of the Qur’an.

Essentially, Imamah is about leadership of the Ummah after the demise of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The Shia believe that just as Allah chose Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as His Messenger to mankind, he chose and appointed a line of twelve men to succeed him as the leaders of the Ummah in all matters, spiritual as well as temporal. The first of these leaders, or Imams as they are called, was ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He was succeeded by his eldest son Hassan, and he by his brother Hussain. After Hussain the Imamah continued in his progeny until the year 260AH, when the twelfth Imam, a child of five, disappeared upon the death of his father. He is believed to be the Awaited Mahdi who will return from occultation to establish justice upon the earth. To these twelve men from amongst the family of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam alone belongs the right to assume leadership of the Ummah. There are two aspects to Imamah that need to be looked at with attention. The first is the nature of the appointment of the Imams, and the second is the nature of their office.

Assalam Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuhu

I happened to stumble on this article I'll be sharing subsequently while doing some light research on some shi'a authentic narrations. If you have studied the shi'a's methodology especially in proselytizing their doctrines, they hardly quote from their books. This as always been quite interessting to me, for if they do believe the truth in their books, they ought to bring it forth with confidence and pride, but you would hardly see them do this, especially on this section, they would always quote sunni books, hiding under the pretext that they are only quoting our books to show that their claims are true. Since what is indisputable between the Sunni and Shi'a (well amongst the newer generation), is the Qur'an, then it is only reasonable to look at the fundamental of shiism through the criterion, the Qur'an. Please read carefully and understand the points raised, you may as well comment after.

The Qur’an and Imamah

by

Abu Muhammad al Afriqi


There is no gainsaying that of all differences that exist between the Ahlus Sunnah and the Shia, the issue of Imamah is by far the most serious. It is in fact quite within the limits of reason and logic to say that the question of Imamah is the root of all Sunni-Shia differences; all other differences will upon closer scrutiny be found to result from the difference that exists on that central point.

Therefore, no person or organisation who is serious about bringing Shias and Sunnis closer to one another can afford to ignore the doctrine of Imamah. All endeavours aimed at removing the barriers that separate the Ahlus Sunnah from the Shia must start from this point. Starting from anywhere else would be similar to treating the symptoms, and not the cause, of a disease. For a while the symptoms might disappear, only to be reactivated at a later stage by the dormant cause. Likewise, attempting to solve Sunni-Shia differences from any perspective other than that of its root, Imamah, might for the immediate moment create the impression of removing obstacles to Muslim unity. In reality those very same obstacles will return as soon as the euphoria at the creation of that unity subsides.

As Muslims we are obliged to refer the differences that exist amongst us to Allah and His Rasul. In this series of articles we refer the doctrine of Imamah to the Qur’an, with the purpose of ascertaining whether this doctrine as conceived of and believed in by the Ithna ‘Ashari (Twelvers) (or Jafari) Shia is justified by Divine Revelation or not.

Ma Sha Allah habiby! Ma sha Allah! I pray these terrorists would realize their mistakes and sincerely repent. Ameen

Bro, this is nice, now you are awakening my thirst to write... where is my pen sef

^^^ Brilliant piece bro! Loved it. And "Telling you it is beef that is inside sardine" hilarious

We need to continue learning, there are so many people calling to misguidance these days. May Allah (SWT) continue to guide us on His straight path ameen.

lanrexlan:
Alhamudulilah dear brother, acada is going well.On holidays to enjoy quality foods

Alhamdulilah! There nothing like the overwhelming feeling felt while eating home cooked meals from Mummy after several months of (sometimes disastrous) cooking experiments in the University's laboratories (hostels)... . Enjoy your holidays bro

lanrexlan:
No vex, it is Nollywood biko. Get used to them. Almost every nollywood movie always has alien, na to spice things up. Just dey thank God them never watch DSTV at Ifa's place

It is normal when it is being a long time you have their movies, sorry bringing back the memories

Nollywood no dey try at all, I try my best to avoid them and not that their advanced counterpart are any better in terms of extraterrestrial beings and stuff, they are just good at packaging. I once watched a movie/documentary about a lady possessed, I think the title is the "5th kind" or something, I can't really recollect, but it was spooky all through, it was quite disturbing ...

LMAO @ DSTV at Ifa's place, well what do you know, Ifa might need Information on world politics from CNN

lanrexlan:
Don't worry, let me save you the stress and the 'pains' of watching.

The story first dealt with two types of Akudayas namely; Akudaya Olooro which means the wealthy incarnate and this is the most common story of Akudayas. A person will die and such a person would be seen in another town wealthier than before. The movie focuses on the second category of Akudayas known as [size=16pt]Akudaya Onidubule.[/size]
This is how the movie goes.

It was staged in a Muslim family of two boys and one girl. The boys are named Abdulbasit, the elder brother and Khalid the younger brother, and the girl is named Fati. One day, Khalid had a dream that he died, was buried and then questioned in the grave. His father also had this dream, same with the family Alfa. The Alfa visited them and he concluded that they must avert the ‘untimely death of Khalid;.
He said they would organized a prayer and kill a ram after the prayer session has been concluded .

The prayer session was held at Khalid’s home and afterwards the ram was to be killed at the Alfa’s place. After they were through with the prayer, the alfa went home in order to kill the ram and complete the ‘aversion of khalid’s untimely death’.

As the alfa was about to slaughter the ram, another tragedy struck! The daughter of Alfa had an accident when sent on an errand and the ram wasn’t slaughtered. Fast-forward few days, Abdulbasit the elder brother of khalid died in an accident and the Alfa concluded that his death was due to the inability of not slaughtering the ram.

To cut the long story short, Abdulbasit was roaming through the earth because ‘his time was not up and he took the death of his brother’. Afterwards, he met an angel and the angel sent him back to the world telling him there is no place for him in heaven , “his time is not up and he has to complete his remaining years on earth.”

He was sent back to the world in another town in flesh and bones and he became [size=15pt]“Akudaya Onidubule”[/size] which literally means “The resting Incarnate”. The thing about these “Akudaya Onidubule” is that they are giving the name of the day they died in their new town (Monday, Tuesday et al). Another thing they can meet with their families and live with them as opposed the “Akudaya Olooro” that disappear on citing their family or known person.

The end is that Abdulbasit died the second time and was buried in two graves.
Thanks for 'watching'.

WHAT I AM DRIVING AT?

I wouldn’t have took interest in the movie if I haven’t watched the series “Aditu Olorun Funfun” which literally means “The Mysteries of Pure God”. In this series by Mayowa Orishatola (Now late), he interviewed a man who claimed to an Akudaya and the man’s story tallies exactly with the movie “Ayeloja”. The interviewed Akudaya claimed he saw “iti ogede (Banana tree’s trunk)” being used to replace his corpse in the grave.

So can this be real? Or the man was just hallucinating?
Cc; Hkana

Many thanks for bringing out the gist of the video bro

Hmmmm, very interesting movie I must say . If we are to look at this from strictly Islamic perspective, which I know you know, the above is hogwash, it sure was a case of hallucination or just pure fiction, nkan ti a npe ni aro ko. Nonetheless, the akudaya onidubule is quite new to me, I am more familiar with the other type which brings me to the opinion that this might be the possibility of seeing a doppelganger of a dead person and then referring to them as akudaya when in fact they are just real people living real lives with striking resemblance with a dead person.

Most stories I have heard are always not straight forward, and now I am not talking of movies here, I am talking of real people's narrations. It is either they see this akudaya in a crowded place, bus stops and the likes, in which they are not able to confront the akudaya one on one, it is always a case of sighting at a glance. It may also have to do with how our brain/mind work, sometimes, we see what we want to see, and we believe what we see as true whereas it is false.

lanrexlan:
Abeg carry out the research oo

Lemme quickly read the tafseer of the Ayah quoted.

It's good you going for the tafsir, I may read too, but I am quite comfortable with the fact that Allah (SWT) Says "...that you know not" Bro, I don't know, Allah (SWT) is the all Knowing.

@lanrexlan, I am sorry, I do not have the patience to watch the videos till the end, I watched like 15 mins. of the first video and that's all I could stomach. Honestly, I can't stand some of the hyperbolic assertions, unnecessarily irritating expressions and outright fallacies, I couldn't take it anymore when it got to aliens...And then the songs

Please do not mind the above outburst, I just dey vex small ni

Now I couldn't get to the akudaya part, and I am not willing to further torture myself to fast-forward to any part, but I would elaborate on my initial post as stated earlier.

So we were in class one day, and our Ustadh came in and asked the question "who knows about akudaya?"

We were all dumbfounded, like what in the world is this man talking about, and He likes taunting some of us who go to ahlu sunnah halqa...So he said we do not know anything, and that the Qur'an also talked about akudaya...Even then I knew that can't be right, so he quoted the below verse:

"We have decreed death to you all, and We are not unable, To transfigure you and create you in (forms) that you know not." (Qur'an 56:60-61).

He thereafter asked us to go make further research. Well I didn't carry out any further research, Perhaps I was too busy trying to learn more important things that do have direct impact on my life...

lanrexlan:
After watching that movie, I remembered that the late anchor of the radio program titled Aditu once interviewed someone who claimed to an akudaya in his collection of weird incidents which he titled Aditu Olorun Funfun. You can watch it here

https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tvL_BJfG6E&fulldescription=1&hl=en&gl=NG&client=mv-google

https://youtube.com/watch?v=errag_JZBG4&itct=CA8QpDAYACITCMS1g-bjzM4CFVaaHAodrekFwzIGcmVsbWZ1SKG3_JLB__Lt2gE%3D&hl=en&gl=NG&client=mv-google



The so called Akudaya man and this Akudaya onidubule somehow looks alike.

Just watch and pass your comments


Cc:Albaqir
Kazlaw2000
Sino
Hkana

I haven't watched the videos, but merely seeing akudaya made me remember when one of my Ustadh wanted to smuggle akudaya into the Qur'an , I'll elaborate later in sha Allah...

Hope acada is going fine bro?

First I must state that my being Muslim is as a result of Allah’s Mercies. As a Muslim, I must first acknowledge this profound blessing on me, for if Allah (SWT) had willed differently, I could have been anything except being a Muslim.

Be that as it may, I do have personal reasons for sticking with Islam. I haven’t studied all other religions in the world, but studying the Qur’an has helped me to understand what I need do to attain salvation. Not only that, if we look at the Abrahamic faith, Judaism and Christianity to be precise, they claim to be followers of Moses and Jesus respectively, fortunately, Islam talks about these religions, as well as the personalities they revere, this alone helps me understand that indeed, the religious personalities of these aforementioned religions were from the one true God who had also sent the last messenger to guide mankind to attain proper relationship with Him through the Qur’an and his teachings of the Qur’an.

Other forms of religion that I had come across, especially traditionally, acknowledges the existence of GOD, but they have constituted partnership with this one true God, this is counterintuitive, for even in our worldly dispositions, we detest sharing authority, so how can associating partnership with the Creator be what the Creator intends especially in terms of worship?! Not only that, these other religions happen to be as a result of a man, and therefore such religions are usually named after such men and in most cases such men are worshiped, instead of the Creator. Islam is distinct, and it is all encompassing. It deals with both worldly and spiritual affairs of man, Islam teaches how to recognize God as the one true God with no partners, He is self-sufficient, He begets not nor was He begotten, and there is none like unto Him (Q114:1-4).

I haven’t found a belief system that is superior to that which Islam prescribes.

2.6.1 Evidence that rajm is hadd (prescribed punishment) and not ta’zir (discretionary punishment)

Contrary to the claim of opponents of rajm we have ample evidence that rajm is indeed a hadd- punishment prescribed by the Almighty Allah. The Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- practiced it in the capacity of the Lawgiver and not just the ruler. Consider the following points;

1- In the verse 43 of surah al-Ma’idah rajm (stoning to death) is referred to “command of Allah” which shows it is a hadd prescribed by Allah.

2- According to the narration of Al-Bara’ bin ‘Azib-may Allah be pleased with him- after the stoning of the Jewish couple the Messenger of Allah –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: “O Allah!, I am the first of those who revive Your command, which they had killed off.”[26] It is clearly a command of Allah.

3- In the report from ‘Ubadah bin Samit- may Allah be pleased with him- the Messenger of Allah –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- mentioned stoning of the adulterers saying, “Allah has ordained a way for them.”[27]
Again the commandment for the punishment was attributed to Allah- simple straight forward evidence that it is indeed a prescribed punishment (haddI).

4- According to the narration of Khalid al-Juhani- may Allah be pleased with him- when a case of unmarried boy cohabiting with the a married woman was brought to the Messenger of Allah- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- he said, “By Him in Whose Hand is my life. I will decide between you according to the Book of Allah,” and ruled that the woman- if she confesses- must be stoned to death.[28]

Here again the Holy Prophet- peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- attributed the command to the Book of Allah.

5- After mentioning the incident of the stoning of the Jewish adulterers, Ibn Abbas –may Allah be pleased with him- said: “That was the punishment ordained for them by Allah because the Prophet had known their adultery.”[29]

6- Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Messenger- peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: In retaliation for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."[30]

This narration clearly mentions hudud i.e. prescribed punishments only and not ta’zirat i.e. discretionary punishments.

Source: clicke Here

I must first state that Muslims should be very careful with the materials they read online, some are designed to create doubts and cause fitnah within the ranks of the Muslims. One of the lessons a student of knowledge learns is to be wary of the wicked scholars, you can hardly know they have a dodgy aqeedah, they appear real and sincere, but from their teachings and writings, their real identity are revealed.

I would post excerpts from a research with regards to the OP, please visit the site to read the full article.

Denying Rajm and Arguments Against it

The Islamic Research Foundation International, INC. and other foundations that encourage critical thinking, opposing points of view and ijtihad, have been propagating articles under scholars and intellectuals that challenge and deny certain aspects of the Islamic principles laid more than 1400 years ago. Under the guise of critical thinking and logic such people believe that they can put forth a rational argument against Rajm. We want to emphasize the word rational as it will be very important in our article in the light of the presented proofs and arguments

2.1 Rajm Cannot be Found in the Quran?

Rajm not being in the Quran is one of the most[b] illogical and unreasonable[/b] argument that such people can put forth. They say that Rajm is not found in the Quran while the punishment of one hundred lashes is found in the Quran. They also use the following logical (read illogical) statement:

“Once again, it is the Qur'an that provides an outline of the Islamic Law. Other sources of Islam must be examined within the Quranic parameters”

Firstly, it is not really true that Qur’an has nothing about stoning though it is true that Qur’an does not explicitly mention it. A reference to Rajm is however found in Surah al-Ma’idah, verse 43 wherein Allah says;

وَكَيْفَ يُحَكِّمُونَكَ وَعِنْدَهُمُ التَّوْرَاةُ فِيهَا حُكْمُ اللَّهِ ثُمَّ يَتَوَلَّوْنَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ذَلِكَ وَمَا أُولَئِكَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ

“How do they ask you to judge while the Torah is with them, having the ruling of Allah? Still, they turn away, after all that. They are no believers.” (Qur’an 5:43)

The verse was revealed when a couple from amongst the Jews committed adultery. They came to the Holy Prophet –peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- asking him to judge on the matter. Actually their holy book, Torah, asked for stoning of such offenders, they came to the Blessed Prophet hoping that he would give a lesser punishment.

Consider the following narration:

Abu Hurairah said: A man and a woman of the Jews committed fornication. Some of them said to the others: Let us go to this Prophet, for he has been sent with an easy law. If he gives a judgment lighter than stoning, we shall accept it, and argue about it with Allah, saying: It is a judgment of one of your prophets. So they came to the Prophet (may peace be upon him) who was sitting in the mosque among his companions. They said: Abul Qasim, what do you think about a man and a woman who committed fornication? He did not speak to them a word till he went to their school. [b]He stood at the gate and said: I adjure you by Allah Who revealed the Torah to Moses, what (punishment) do you find in the Torah for a person who commits fornication, if he is married? They said: He shall be blackened with charcoal, taken round a donkey among the people, and flogged. A young man among them kept silent. When the Prophet (may peace be upon him) emphatically adjured him, he said: By Allah, since you have adjured us (we inform you that) we find stoning in the Torah (as the punishment for fornication). The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: So when did you lessen the severity of Allah's command? He said: A relative of one of our kings had committed fornication, but his stoning was suspended. Then a man of a family of common people committed fornication. He was to have been stoned, but his people intervened and said: Our man shall not be stoned until you bring your man and stone him. So they made a compromise on this punishment between them. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: So I decide in accordance with what the Torah says. He then commanded regarding them and they were stoned to death.[/b][1]

Another narration tells us that at the end of the whole episode with the Jews the Messenger of Allah said:

“The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) then said: O Allah, I am the first to give life to Thy command which they have killed.”And the narration says on the eve verses 41 to 47 of Surah al-Ma’ida were revealed.[2]

It is thus clear that “ruling of Allah” (hukm-ullah) in Surah Al-Ma’idah ayah 43 refers to rajm. For the said reasoning, the well known Tafsir al-Jalalayn, co-authored by Al-Mahalli and Al-Suyuti, puts it as;

“But how is it that they make you their judge when they have the Torah, wherein is God’s judgment”, of stoning: the interrogative here is for [provoking] amazement, in other words, they were not seeking thereby [by making you their judge] to discover the truth but a lighter punishment for them; “and then they turn away,” [and then] they reject your ruling of stoning, which accords with what is in their Scripture, “after that”, request [to you] for arbitration? “Such are not believers.”[3]

It is for this reason that Ibn Abbas- may Allah be pleased with him- said: "He who disbelieves in stoning (the adulterer to death) will have inadvertently disbelieved in the Qur'an, for Allah said, ‘O People of the Scripture! Now has come to you Our Messenger explaining to you much of that which you used to hide from the Scripture’ (Qur’an 5:15), and stoning was among the things that they used to hide.''[4]

Therefore it is clear that according to the blessed companions institution of stoning was proven from Qur’an itself. However they did seem to have known that it is not explicit and some people not having proper understanding may actually end up questioning it for this reason.

lexiconkabir:
^^ believe me he will find something to say, shaytan will give him wahy.

I know he would, but I think it is the Imam in occulation that gives him wahy, I find it quite interesting how these people disbelieve in what their earlier scholars had upheld as being true and authentic, one wonders, were the Imams during those period off duty? And what is even the function of the Imams when they couldn't help them, the earlier generations get their acts right...And the one said to be in hiding?! How does he guide the shi'a from his hiding place?

Allahu must'an

AlBaqir:
What destroyed your shallow and usual copy-paste is the very ayat Sherif you quote. Its a straight forward ayah with no hanky panky esp the underlined phrase. Where are authentic evidences linking the Prophet that support the views of your scholars on abrogation?

# The case here is about ayat rajm which can never and will never be found in the holy Quran. According to the ayat Sherif you quoted, which ayah was revealed to replace it? You must give an authentic narration to support it please.

# Apart from the fact that you can never provide a single narration to the Prophet that support the theories of your scholars, give us another "another erased recitation ayah but intact ruling" in the "Quran"?!

Only the second Caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab talked about Ayat Rajm (and probably Umm al-mu'mininah Aisha who claimed the verses had been eaten by a goat during the burial of the Nabi) out of 114,000 Sahabah of which less than 20% were recorded in the books of your ahadith. And the second Caliph clearly stated that the ayah exist in the Quran at least up till his time. Yet you want to shamelessly cover that under the carpet and push the silly argument of tahrif to the Shia despite given you tens of evidences to prove multitude of tahrif ahadith in your books. You've never disappointed me a day.

Na wa o, you that cannot prove Imamah from the Qur'an, you cannot defend your books filled with fabrications, you can't even post any authentic narration from there that supports your view, you do not follow your scholars or even agree with them, you do not base your opinion on any known tafsir be it sunni or shi'ah, you would just come start claiming A Y and Z. Do you think you should be taken seriously?! By the way, this is from one of your scholars, oya deny it as usual:

4- Also, refer to our article on the verse about suckling and its abrogation: Response to: Challenge to the Sons of Aisha.

It is also important to add that abrogations are not exclusive to Ahl Al-Sunnah. [b]By returning to Al-Idda and we have found a clear statement from Al-Tusi regarding the permissibility of this form of abrogation. In Chapter 7, he calls Section 4:

[/b]في ذكر جواز نسخ الحكم دون التّلاوة ، ونسخ التّلاوة دون الحكم

[b]“The permissibility of the abrogation of laws without recitation and the abrogation of recitations without laws.” [/b]We suggest that readers read the full chapter in order to see Al-Tusi’s reasons for accepting these forms of abrogation.

Source: The same as previous

Empiree:
Will be back here In sha Allah @sino. I'm very uncomfortable using my mobile. The whole arguments of yours devoid of simple


"Qola Allah Qola Rosullu"



The ONLY weight you have is you bombarded me with 'ijma' of SCHOLARS which is understandable.


As for your last paragraph, please desist from that bcus I'm not shy from implementation of hudud of Rab. I think you are being emotional by saying that. I don't want emotions involved.

@albaqir, thanks for your brief contributions. However, I think you should stand on neutral ground rather than your common tune "your scholar".


Remember you used to believe in hadd of Rajm until I brought your attention to it last year?. So please try to sound neutral so that sino doesn't feel he's dealing with sectarian arguments. Thanks

I do not know what gave you the impression that I was emotional with my last post, anyway, I await your full response. Note I am not debating with you, I only posted a brief introduction on the concept of abrogation in the Qur'an as opposed to the believe by the shi'ah that the Qur'an is incomplete. I am not interested in convincing you, I post facts, do you have facts?! are your views backed by renown scholarly views?! These are what I am interested in, you may not have problems with the hudud in the Qur'an, but you are having doubts with an authentic hadith containing hadd, doubts starts small and then spread, it is just a matter of time (well that is if you allow it grow)...I hope you have not forgotten the Qur'an were Allah (SWT) states the Prophet (SAW) does not speak of his own desire?!

Empiree:
I can say we are really on the same page base on your reply. I don't have problems with them.


But this issue of Rajm, you will really have to write a CONVINCING EPISTLE to get me to believe this again. Yes, I grew up believing in it. I only changed my view in 2010 after some studies. I understand overwhelming scholars of Islam from the time gone by held this view so I can be wrong but i am yet to see anyone to convince me.

Again, I think you wrong about Shia here. They believe in hadd of Rajm as well. I remember demmzy15 opened a thread about it last year and AlBaqir criticized me but he later went off for a month and came back agreeing with me.

He was however sectarian by blaming it on Umar (ra)

I just had similar 2days debate with a brother on YouTube late last week. Rajm issue becomes problematic bcus its so called abrogation and chain doesn't reach the prophet (saw)
It stopped with Umar (ra). That's where I raised eyebrows.

Bcus I disagree, some think I'm pleasing non- Muslims but that's not the case unfortunately. It's just studies.

Forget about criticism of Qur'an. That's never gonna end. Even Qur'aniyun we have here doesn't criticize Qur'an, he only has mind of his own.

Empiree, I do no write to convince, I state facts and appropriate explanations from scholars. It suffices me that the issue of rajm is an issue of abrogation and abrogation are of different types, and the type as explained by scholars, is an abrogation of the verse without the abrogation of the rulings. And I was talking about shi’ah and believe of their scholars that the Qur’an is incomplete is quite different from the understanding of abrogated verses.
Here is a brief explanation on abrogation of verses in the Qur’an:

Abrogation of Verses

Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says in the Holy Qur’an:
ما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها نأت بخير منها أو مثلها
Whichever verse We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. (2:106)

The scholars have observed three kinds of abrogation. The first is the abrogation of the ruling alone. The second is the abrogation of the ruling and the recitation. The third is the abrogation of recitation alone.

The existence in the abrogation of recitation is a commonly accepted view according to many Islamic scholars, even ones from outside the Sunni school. Jalal Al-Deen Al-Suyuti in his Al-Itqaan quotes several examples of this form. Such narrations usually include a companion saying, “We used to read such and such during the life of the Prophet.” When returning to the Qur’an, we do not find these verses within it. Scholars refer to such as an abrogation of verses.

Even though the abrogation of recitation has been something that has always been accepted by Muslim scholars, we do find that there are some that have doubted the existence of it. Their main argument is that they do not see the wisdom of such a thing and that abrogation of recitation creates nothing but confusion.

However, such an argument holds no weight, since it is not required for the creation to understand the wisdom of the actions of Allah as a requirement to accepting those actions.

According to Sulaiman Al-Lahim, in his introduction to Al-Nahhas’ Al-Nasikh wal Mansookh (1/118), one of the wisdoms of the existence of the abrogation of recitation is that it makes the Qur’an easier to memorize. He quoted the following verse:
الآن خفف الله عنكم وعلم أن فيكم ضعفا
For the present Allah has made light your burden, and He knows that there is weakness in you. (8:66)

By returning to the context of the verse, we find that Allah is decreasing what He expects from the Muslims at war. This is indeed a mercy upon them, for they were expected to stand up to armies that are up to ten times in number, but then the number was decreased to twice in number.

Similarly, the abrogation of those verses is a form of mercy as well, since Allah’s words can never run out, and having the Qur’an in its final state makes it easier to memorize than what it could have been if no abrogation of recitation existed.

Al-Suyuti in Al-Itqan (p.470) quotes Ibn Al-Jawzi for another benefit of the existence of the abrogation of recitation, which is that it personifies the obedience of the Ummah in following the teachings of Allah, even without absolute certainty, and this is similar to how Ibrahim (alaihi alsalam) accepted that he had to kill his son, even though it was just a dream as certain as he would have been if he received such an order through an angel. This type of acceptance of the rulings of Allah (i.e. via abrogation verses, and Ibrahim’s acceptance of his dream) demonstrates a high level of faith and deserves a higher reward. This is why some teachings were revealed as Qur’an while others came in the form of Sunnah, Allah wishes to test this nation through the Sunnah and see how they deal with its texts, how they study it, preserve it and deal with the differences of opinions among themselves in an Islamic manner.

You can read more and the examples given here: http://twelvershia.net/2015/11/25/defense-sunni-view-quran/

Please note again, this belief of the ahlu sunnah is far from what the scholars of shi’ah believe, I had already posted a link for your perusal.

Again your arguments and debates must stem from genuine facts, and supported by scholarly opinions, if you think just that stoning the adulterer is barbaric, hence your argument, then we may also look at cutting of the hands for a thief, and even whipping a fornicator 100 lashes can also be viewed as barbaric, not to mention the continuous pressure from some quarters to abolish death sentence. The last paragraph of the above post is very instructive. The Question to ask yourself are: Are the narrations on rajm authentic according to Islamic scholars?! If yes, why do you reject them?! If no, then who weakened them, and on what basis were the reasons for the weakness of the narrations?!

tbaba1234:
Infact, someone liked the first comment, that was how I knew. Na wa oh!!!

Kim Kardashian ke!!!

Changed the password now

Good you've changed your password, you should be very vigilant bro.

Empiree:
I perfectly understood this. This is why it is also wrong to simply conclude as Newnas did that Sahih Bukhari is 100% and even trying to stick to that. This brings question the difference btw that and Shi'a's creed on their "infallible 12 Imam". I know there is procedure and standard on Islamic Knowledge






Exactly my point. Everyone seems to be partisan these days. You can spot that here on NL. I have said repeatedly here that some muslims would not accept opinion of other scholars who are not known to have studied in Saudi universities. I have also said repeatedly here that knowledge of Islam is NOT restricted to the Kingdom of Arabia. They only famous by virtues of Makkah and Medinah. Yes, i appreciate their struggles for Islam but it is very wrong to shun other scholars outside of Arabia. This was the Khutba two days ago. The locals do not appreciate their scholars at all. They dont want to fund research projects with their scholars. But when a scholar or simply alim is invited from Saudi or it environs, they feel good like "here comes knowledge". This is trending attitude online and offline now.

We all have the tendencies to be partisan, that is where sincerity is very important. But you can't blame the people, Allah (SWT) has blessed the two cities, and definitely, such blessings would be upon the inhabitants and the products of these two holy cities be he a scholar or not. These two holy cities are beloved to the Prophet (SAW), as Muslims, you love what the Prophet (SAW) loves, and you cannot help but love those who uphold the teachings of Islam from these two holy cities, it is the way it is bro, you cannot change this.

Empiree:
Far as me, I don't just post criticism of any hadith. Matter of of, i believe i defend ahadith here than those who claim hadith is 100% accurate. I usually dont see them defend any except to say "he is Shia, misguided shaytan". "He is sufi deviant innovator". Bla bla bla. I don't learn anything like that. My point is, it is not enough to say scholars don't have problem with certain hadith. They have gone and we must continue where they stopped. Challenges and new challenges will evolve and we MUST confront them. Confronting these challenges require researching old scholars (not doubt). Edit their works and input our research rather than just copying and pasting and recycling everything over. Sick of that!

I do understand your point here, but I am more interested in the qualifications of those who intend to research and edit works of scholars of the past. It shouldn't be just anybody, we need those who have dedicated their life for such endeavor, not a person who has chosen another career path. I must say here that, especially for the shi'a, and some suffi, it is a waste of time and effort responding to them, but I also hold the opinion that responding to such criticism by these people is not to convince them, rather it is to defend the truth and protect the innocent readers.

Empiree:
When i said i reseach too, say for instance non-muslims quote controversial ahadith, if i dont understand them, i simply run a quick research bcus i know there is possibility it was already refuted. I sometimes edit their works and insert mine. In that case it is not appropriate for me to post the link since i edited their works. Sometimes, i simply search wide scholarly opinion and conclude. There is no way those scholars could be perfect. That's why i believe a hadith Allah will rectify religion every 100 years


إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَبْعَثُ لِهَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ عَلَى رَأْسِ كُلِّ مِائَةِ سَنَةٍ مَنْ يُجَدِّدُ لَهَا دِينَهَا

“Verily Allah sends to this Ummah at the head of every one hundred years someone who will renew the Deen for her”.

Related by Abu Daawood (4291) and was verified as Saheeh by As-Sakhaawiy in ‘Al-Maqqsid Al-Hasanah’ (149) and Al-Albaaniy in ‘As-Silsilah As-Saheehah’ (599).

Of course I do not criticize this form of research, it is what I also do sometimes, but to base your research solely on your own understanding of the text, interpreting narrations based on your desires and opinions, then that is ignorance at its peak, there is nothing scholarly about that.

Empiree:
I understand what you saying generally. This is why i do not agree with Sheik Ilory all the time as well in some of his criticisms. There is NO WAY we could erase unflinching efforts of these men who have gone by bcus without them, we are nothing. Criticisms of any hadith should be done by scholars nothing every Tom, Dick and Harry. It is also wrong to say everything they did was perfect.

I agree bro, you know I have defended Sheikh Habib on this same Nairaland, but from what I read, his criticism on some narrations were shallow. He can make mistake so also any other human being.

Empiree:
I know. I have raised this issue with Baqir about Sheik Habib and he understands. I am not gonna just criticize hadith without recourse. Pay attention @underlined, i think this is part of mistake of the past Ulama if you take the issue of Rajm as a case study. Some scholars have argued that it is like stabbing Qur'an in the back by saying verse of Rajm USED tobe in the Qur'an. And these scholars are not even based in the West bcus some would say they trying to please kufar is the reason they say that. That issue need review. By saying verse of Rajm USED to be in the Qur'an is tantamount to what Sunn criticized Shia of that "Qur'an in incomplete". Correct me if I am wrong.

The case of rajm is a case of abrogation, it is never a case of the Qur'an being incomplete as some of the shi'ah scholars believe. The ruling is clear in among the ahlu sunnah, anyone who believes the Qur'an with us is incomplete is a kafir, no excuses are given.

Empiree:
I said before that Sheik Ilori and his supporters vs 'salafis' who criticized him should have national televised debates and sort these issues out. Otherwise, if we keep quiet on these issues, in the name of Sahih hadith is perfect, or because we don't want to criticize Hadith collections, we will continue to have these munafiqs who embraced islam for this reason, studied arabic and islamic sirat and then deliberately apostatize to create confusion. This is the case of nincompoop who called himself "converted2islam". He is now using those ahadith and silly narrations to confuse people.

There shouldn't even be a need for a debate, just clarify issues and no need of attacking his personality. To my knowledge, scholars didn't keep quiet, although some attacked Sheikh Habib personally, but some also clarified issues. Even on facebook, there were rebuttals and refutations flying around.

Empiree:
Let me repeat this. It is unwise for many brothers here to simply marginalize Albaqir etc solely bcus he is Shia. I have notice that. Do you brothers think he doesn't make any point?. I swear he does. I just don't want to involve sometimes. His approach to argument is scholarly - little it may be compared to others who simply cancel him out in one sentence based on faction. I don't learn like that. This Is why i don't support any sects. Allah does not recognise these sects at all. I can only be dogmatic on obligatory Rituals and UNIVERSALLY accepted SUNNAH. Anything else is debateable with wisdom.

It is each and everyone's prerogative to do and respond as they wish, and truly, everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. AlBaqir and his cohorts are just trying their best to spread their sect, and their major MO is to find ways to discredit and undermine the Sunnis, so if he comes with his epistles (which are also copy and paste by the way), indeed he may have some few points, but at the end of the day, what he calls to which is shi'ism is no way outstanding, their books of hadith are filled with lies and fairy tales not to mention some strange beliefs that are alien to Islam. But you wouldn't know these facts, because they keep on bombarding you with narrations from the Sunni claiming it supports their beliefs...so if anyone ignores their arguments, you should know they have had enough of their deceits...

Empiree:
As always, Rasulullah says to follow his Sunnah and Sunnah of his Rashidun. He didnt say to follow Bukhari. Sunnah is spread in all Kitab Sittah and also committed to memory. I dont have problems with Bukhari collections. I only have problems when some say it is 100% and are not ready for different opinion. They say if you want to debate islam, ONLY Quran and Sahih Bukhari and perhaps, Muslim are the only welcomed sources. Anything else is Daif and fabricated. This is trending ideology now.

Bukhari is just a collection of hadith, it is a secondary source of Islamic teachings, let the scholars do the grading and the explanation of the sunnah therein, although I have not come across those who hold that opinion of only sahih Bukhari and Muslim.

Empiree:
Finally, believe it or not, there is nothing they can do with Qur'an. Even a Quraniyoon we have here is not drunk to the point of criticizing Qur'an. So dont fear that at all. I guarantee you they cant criticize Qur'an even the worst deviant people have not done that. It would have been obvious by now if that was to be the case.

Brother, indeed Allah (SWT) had promised to safeguard the Qur'an from corruption, but not criticism, even from the time of the Prophet (SAW), the Qur'an was criticized, and people disbelieved in it. Some shi'ah believed it to be incomplete and that the companions tampered with it, some believe the complete Qur'an is with the last Imam who is somewhere in a cave for over 1200 years and still counting.. see : https://www.nairaland.com/3071287/discussing-reality-crisis-between-shia

Bro, I was confused for a while, just change your password immediately as dominique suggested.

The Shi'ah love quoting narrations from the Sunni to back their flawed understanding. Ask them to prove the principle of Imamah with the Qur'an, they become terrified

It is one thing to quote narrations upon narrations as well as their authenticities, but it is another to interpret them to suit your opinions and prejudice...Hadith Thaqalyn, the two weighty things...I just learnt that the infallible Imams narrated hadith from mere fallible men, companions of the Prophet (SAW), including Abu Hurairah! OMG! This is a Sunni fabrication i guess, how can the infallible narrate from fallible, I guess they got revelations like the prophet innit?! You guys may try to explain how the Imams got their knowledge o, and please bring authentic proofs.

Another question, where are the ahlu-l-bayt today?! We do have the Qur'an with us and we surely have the authentic hadiths of the Prophet (SAW) which is quite higher than any of the Imams, unless the Imams got new revelations unknown to the Prophet (SAW)...Now before you come up with the saying of the Imams documented in your books, remember how your books are filled with fabrications, which brings another question, why?! How did the Imams guide you shi'ah when we cannot even trust the books that contain their words?! Please feel free to bring evidences, and they must be authentic chain and content

^^^ See Empiree, it is not about elevating Sahih Bukhari to the Qur'an, but rather it is the wrong approach in criticism especially with regards to Islamic scholarship. Islamic knowledge has rules and regulations as all other forms of knowledge, you wouldn't accept the criticism of a book written by a Professor of Medicine by a secondary school science student, that is not proper, on what basis would the student stand such criticism?!

You also do not make baseless accusations in which you cannot back up with facts, that is not acceptable anywhere. The Prophet (SAW) had given us proper guidance on issues we have doubts on, leave it, you need not start spreading information that at the long run may become harmful to the religion. Leave the academic research to those who have been trained to do so. For example, How can one who says he believes in individual research on Islamic issue, and he only base is research on English translations, would such research be comprehensive?! Or he who neglects other narrations, and scholars of repute from the old to the new, what sort of research is that when you fail to comprehend works of previous scholars on the same issue...

If you want to critic a narration, here are the questions you should answer: Are you an hadith scholar?! If not, then who are the scholars you are referencing who had also critic the said narration? Do you have facts?! On what basis was the criticism on? Have you read the explanations of the said narration?! Have you read other narrations with similar information?! Is your criticism sincere and are you really open-minded?!

If care is not taken, and we just let everyone just jump on a narration and start criticizing without recourse to the proper methodology, it wouldn't be long when some Qur'anic verses would be criticized, under the pretext of "individual research" not to mention that some so called Muslims believe that the Qur'an had been tampered with, and their scholars affirm this and they believe the original Qur'an is in the hands of a strange person in occultation.

AlBaqir:
First, thanks for bringing those ahadith. In sha Allah they will help a lot in setting my records straight once again on Nairaland though you always pretend not to know it.

Second, the hadith is plentiful in al-Kaafi. Unfortunately ONLY ONE has a sahih chain unlike others with Da'if chains. This narrow the hadith to a "solitary hadith".

Third, the hadith as recorded in Hayatul Qulub of Allamah al-Majlisi does not have any chain so I wonder where "sahih chain" is found in the website you copy pasted from. Obviously you never had opportunity to check yourself. That's desperation and a ploy to mislead.
Hayatul Qulub is a very fine book about the life of the Prophet. However most of the ahadith in it are not graded. That's why Mir'atul Uqul of Allamah Majlisi (same author) is the best in grading ahadith in al-Kaafi. More so, the matn of that hadith (about Nabi Sulaiman) is worse than that of our Nabi.

NOW TO THE SOLITARY HADITH
Even though the hadith has a sahih chain, its matn (content) is da'if. As such, the hadith is da'if. One of the ahadith says that the Prophet used to have sex with his wives every day and every night. That's clearly falsehood.

There are mutawatir ahadith about the worship of the Prophet, in the day and in the night especially. In sha Allah, soon I will post some of those ahadith.

Secondly, the only hadith with a sahih chain in the list (the one from al-Kafi) uses the word غسي others which have Da'if chains use the word يطوف . Both may mean "sex" or "visit" depending on the context it is used. However it means sex in the ahadith.

The fact that Imam 'Ali, Sayyidah Fatimah, Imam al-Hasan and Imam al-Husayn also ate what the Prophet ate (according to that hadith), and did not become sex machines, also reveals another inconsistency in the text of the hadith.

It is a solitary report. The other reports have da'if chains. It contradicts the Qur'an and mutawatir Shi'a hadiths. In the Shi'a manhaj, any hadith that contradicts the Qur'an, or contradicts any mutawatir hadith, is a fabrication (no matter its sanad).

Note: This is also my stand to your Sahih Bukhari's ahadith, and I clearly stated this on another thread: In line with Sunni Rijali rules, all the ahadith in Sahih al-Bukhari are authentic ONLY in their chain but not in matn. Many have worse matn.





Allamah al-Albani following the footstep of al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani criticized some ahadith in sahih al-Bukhari (based on their bogus matn). Some Ahlu Sunnah scholars asked for his (Albani's) head. The fact that Allamah Majlisi graded the hadith Sahih doesn't mean both its Sanad and Matn are automatically Sahih. There are some ahadith with weak chain but authentic content, and vice versa. Both schools have lots in common in this sense.



Note: Allamah Majlisi (rahimahullah alayhi) was not infallible sheik, his prestigious works are not either. Other scholars in the field of hadith sciences like Ayatullah Abul Qassim al-Khoei (just like Allamah Albani) have re-graded some previously graded ahadith by previous scholars with explanations where necessary. [b]I brought this in order to clear your fantasy @underline.

Lastly, though I am far from being a scholar but I believe so much in individual research.

Wa Salam alaykum sir

Mr AlBaqir, indeed the narrations I presented above are fabricated (from the chain to the content), so also many more found in one of you people’s most reliable work called Al-Kafi…I had advised you previously to engage in proper research on your sect’s books to enable you help the ignorant among your sect, including yourself…Anyways, my question is, since you are deficient yourself with regards to knowledge, please quote your scholars who had addressed these narrations before, stating that they are weak or fabricated based on the matn, or none of your scholars talked about these narrations? And after that, please who are the culprits, since you easily accuse a sahabah, Abu Hurairah (RA) for fabricating narrations found in sahih Bukhari, so who is/are responsible for the fabrications of this kind of PLENTIFUL narrations in Al-Kafi?! And by the way, this methodology of yours is quite new I believe, because your earlier scholars believed that the narrations in Al-Kafi are all sahih and should be relied upon regardless of the chain and whoever and whatever it contains. Were these scholars misguided? How could they not have known this very important methodology in which you are presently using to fault the narrations in which they believed were authentic from the mouths of the infallible Imams?! What form of Islam were these scholars and the people of that time practicing prior to this epiphany of some sort among you guys of recent? I need evidences from an authority not your opinions…

Mind you, we have an excellent science of hadith, a procedure in authenticating narrations which had always been consistent since its introduction during the time of the companions of the Prophet themselves. The narration in sahih Bukhari in question is authentic, and proper explanation has been brought forth already no need going back and forth on it.

usermane:
He demand you to employ the science of Hadith in proving Sahih Bukhari is not 100% authentic. So get your butt up, given that the science of Hadith is the criterion for determining the authenticity of an Hadith by traditional Muslim scholars, it doesn't seem he or anyone is placing you in a hostile position with Bukhari.

OMG! I can't believe it, I do agree with you usermane...Wow! this is something!

AlBaqir:
You might be right but the clear reason of their foul languages is because it is part of their manhaj. Hardly will you come across a Wahabi scholar without abusing or call other than him, names. Sheik ibn Taymiyyah was known for this and he was Wahabi grandmaster. Allamah al-Hilli, a Shia scholar of Ibn Taymiyyah's contemporary was known as Ibn Mutahar (son of the pure). Ibn Taymiyyah never ceased calling him Ibn khabees (son of impure). Sheik Muhammad al-Ghazali among other Ahlu Sunnah past Shuyukh met same fate with Ibn Taymiyyah's tongue. Sheik Ali Jabata, his heir Abu Ibeji (Ibadan), Agbarigidoma et al are champions in using foul languages. Commercial salafis like Eleha, Alaro et al were able to control their tongues to a reasonable extent.

These people never obey Allah when He warned against bad mouthing, calling names, foul languages etc. They continue to follow their grandmaster.

I can't stop laughing, So instead of you to follow the path of your "son of the pure" you decided to follow the "Wahabi grandmaster"?! What does this say about you ehn?! On one hand you say these people never obey Allah (SWT) when He (Jalla Jalalluhu) warned against bad mouthing, calling names, foul languages etc. but you also started doing the same, not to mention previous episodes of you bad mouthing (and all derogatory remarks for) the Companions (RAA) and wives of the Prophet (SAW)...Please make up your mind, are you really following Allah (SWT) and His Prophet (SAW) or you follow your own desires, whims and in recent times, science

It is very important that people be very careful believing and accepting any form of criticism/opinion/information from a Shi’ah, hypocrisy seems to be their second nature…Perhaps AlBaqir may explain these below SAHIH narrations from the infallible Imams, and please quote your scholars or other narrations that supports your opinion…

Muhammad ibn Yahya has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from Ali ibn al-Hakam from Hisham ibn Salim who has said the following: “Abu ‘Abd Allah(as) said:.. At dawn Jibril descended with a dish of mashed meat and wheat from paradise and said, ‘O Muhammad, this is made for you by al-Hur al-‘In. You can eat it with Ali and his children; it is not proper that people other than you eat it.’ The Messenger of Allah, Ali, Fatimah, al-Hassan and al-Husayn ate it (the food that Jibril had brought from paradise) and[b] it gave the Messenger of Allah the ability in matters of going to bed with his wives which was equal to that of forty men, thus he (the Messenger of Allah) could go to bed with all of his wives in one night if he so wanted.’”[/b]( Al-Kafi: H 10221, Ch. 190, h 41 ; Majlisi said: Sahih in Miraat ul Uqool 20/422)

We read in Al-Kafi

A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad from ibn Khalid from his father or others from Sa‘d ibn s; from al-Hassan ibn Jahm who has said the following: “I once saw Abu al-Hassan(as) had used dye. I said, ‘I pray to Allah to keep my soul in service for your cause, I can see you have used dyes.’ He (the Imam) said, ‘Yes, readiness is of the matters that increases chastity of women and women neglect chastity because of their husband’s neglect of readiness.’ He (the Imam) then said, ‘Will you be happy to see her without readiness?’ I replied, ‘No, it does not make me happy.’ He (the Imam) said, ‘In the same way it will not make her happy to see you without readiness.’ He (the Imam) then said, ‘It is of the moral behavior of the prophets to maintain cleanliness, use perfumes, shave the hairs and going to bed with one’s wife very often.’ He (the Imam) then said, ‘Sulayman ibn Dawud(as) had one thousand women in one palace of whom three hundred were publicly known and seven hundred of them were secretly married. The Messenger of Allah(saw), had the ability equal to forty men of going to bed with his wives, he(the Messenger of Allah) had nine wives and moved among them every night and day.’”[Al Kafi: H 10230, Ch. 190, h 50]


We read in a tradition with a SAHIH chain from Imam Baqir(as) in Shia book Hayat-ul-Qaloob:

Imam Baqir(as) said: Prophet Sulayman(as) had a fort, having 1000 rooms made by Jinns for him, and in every room one of his wife used to live. From these 300 were his wives and 700 were concubines. Allah gave him the sexual strength of 40 men. He used to daily visit all of his women and used fulfill their desires.(Majlisi declared chain as Sahih, Hayat-ul-Qaloob vol 1, p. 644) .

Source: twelvershia forum

I await your denials AlBaqir, tell us how the above narrations are fabricated, and how a scholar of hadith like Majilisi couldn't decipher these kinds of fabrications (was he that ignorant and you so knowledgeable?), I hope he wasn't influenced by the Ahl Sunnah or worse, the Salafis/Wahabis!