[/QUOTE]
Which Sunnah..... as discribed in the following Hadith:
Sahih al-Bukhari as narrated by Ibn 'Abbas:
When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was 'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said: "Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray." 'Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us." The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, "Come near so that Allah's Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray," while the others said what 'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them, "Go away and leave me."Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah's Apostle from writing a statement for them.
Sahih al Bukhari Arabic-English Volume 9 hadith number 468 and Volume 7 hadith 573
Don't dispute in the presence of the Prophet (s)
Surah Anfal verse 46 "And obey Allah and His Messenger and do not quarrel…."
Because of you the other thread was closed by Admin. The Discussion was at very excellent stage. When you saw that you are unable to answer the post, you used abusive language. This is really a very bad behavior. A clear hypocrisy. All the readers of this website are witness. This is happening since beginning.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by inuit: *
Which Sunnah..... as discribed in the following Hadith:
Sahih al-Bukhari as narrated by Ibn 'Abbas:
When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was 'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said: "Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray." 'Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us." The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, "Come near so that Allah's Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray," while the others said what 'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them, "Go away and leave me."Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah's Apostle from writing a statement for them.
Sahih al Bukhari Arabic-English Volume 9 hadith number 468 and Volume 7 hadith 573
Don't dispute in the presence of the Prophet (s)
Surah Anfal verse 46 "And obey Allah and His Messenger and do not quarrel…."
Because of you the other thread was closed by Admin. The Discussion was at very excellent stage. When you saw that you are unable to answer the post, you used abusive language. This is really a very bad behavior. A clear hypocrisy. All the readers of this website are witness. This is happening since beginning.
[/QUOTE]
You know i guess The ADMIN is doing a conspiracy against SHIAS.
Inuit curse them. Write a whole book on that. And than again curse them.
Beginning of WHAT. Yeah, blame the CALIPHS(RA). Earn more
Sawab.
If you are not agree with the above Hadith (Sahih al Bukhari Arabic-English Volume 9 hadith number 468 and Volume 7 hadith 573) and dont believe in Sahi Bukhari then please stay away from this post and let the other learn.
The usul of al-Kafi are divided into eight kutub or chapters and most of the kutub are divided into abwab or sections. The eight kutub are.
The Chapter of Reason and Ignorance
The Chapter of the Excellence of Knowledge
Kitab al-tawhid, “The Chapter of Unity”
Kitab al-hujja, “The Chapter of the Proof”.
The Chapter of Faith and Unbelief
Kitab al-du’a’, “The Chapter of Prayer”
Kitab al-fadl al-Qur’an, “The Chapter of
the Excellence of the Qur’an”
Kitab al-'ishra, “The Chapter of Companionship”
The furu’ of al-kafi are concerned with the elaboration of the details of Islamic law. Islamic law, as is well known, concerns the whole man and his conduct towards God is as much a matter of Islamic law as his conduct towards his fellow men. The furu’ contain many more traditions than the usul and there are 26 kutub.
If you want to learn more about Al-Kafi, you can seach through internet OR visit the following sites.
I would invite you to visit this page to learn more about the above Hadith and ‘calamity of Thursday’.
We learn from the traditions that towards the end of his noble life, the Prophet’s (s) condition was deteriorating. The majority opinion holds that the Prophet (s) left no will before his death, and made no attempt to do so. However, according to the Qur’an it is absolutely obligatory on all Muslims to leave a will. Allah (swt) says in his Glorious Book:
“It is prescribed for you when death approaches one of you, if he leaves behind any goods that he makes a bequest for Parents and (the nearest kinsmen) in goodness, this is a duty upon the pious” (The Qur’an 2:180)).
i think there is no need to mention sahih bukhari ...the topic is about asul e kafi.........why dont we stick to whether u believe that asul e kafi contains fabricated ahadith or not.......if yes why dont u remove them...i no then ALLAh khair karay
Little Human Sorry for the delay, I had to get the reference from arab friend of mine as most of the books are in Arabic.
Here’s the reference:
Narrated by Nafe’ slave of Ibn Umar: “We prayed on Aisha and Umm Salama and the Imaam was Abu Hurayrah the day we prayed on Aisha and Abdullah ibn Umar was also present”
Inuit I only responded to your post because you seem to keep plugging this ‘story of yours’ in any thread irrespective of topic at hand. The topic of this of this thread is about Asool Kafi and Jila-ul-Ayoun.
You said:
I think you are covering the truth by using Taqiyyah. As a Shia you should know better that it is the core of Shia Belief that:
**“The Imams possess all the knowledge granted to angels, prophets and messengers” (Al-Kulaini, Al-kaafi, p.255.) **
“The Imams have knowledge of whatever occurred in the past and whatever will happen in the future, and nothing is concealed from them” (Al-Kulaini, Al-kaafi, p. 260.)
So how come Iman Mahdi (ra) equipped with such knowledge finds it difficult to locate a grave ‘some where in Madinah!
For your information, Hazrat Ayeisha’s grave is well known; those who have visited Jannatul Baqi will have been shown the grave of Hazrat Ayiesha (ra) along with other notables. Her grave is in the section where other Mothers of the Believers are buried.
The references that you have given for your ‘story’, which you have cut & pasted from Shia Encyclopedia, are from very obscure books. Any body can bring many references from dubious books to prove to prove literally anything, even that Martians reside in the west side of Salt Lake City!
Here’s some info about Al-Kafi which I have taken from a Shia site:
Al-Kafi was authored Abu Ja’far Muhammad b. Ya’qub b. Ishaq al-Kulaini al-Razi a renowned Shia Scholar, who died in 328 A.H. or 329 A.H. (939 or 940 A.D.). Not much is known about him except that he was born in Iran in a village called, Kulain or Kulin.
He first worked as a religious scholar and faqih (student of fiqh or religious law) among the Imami-Shi’i scholars of al-Raiy in Iran. Then he moved to Baghdad and became head of the religious and legal scholars of the Imamis during the time when al-Muqtadir was Caliph. Al-Kulaini’s life’s work took place during the time of the sufara’ of the Mahdi (the agents who acted on behalf of the Hidden Imam during the lesser occultation, al ghaiba al-sughra).
Al-Kulaini is accredited with several works during this period. Among these are, as well as al-Kafi, a Kitab al-rijal, (a book in which men are assessed as authorities for traditions), al-Radd 'ala ‘l-Qaramata (“Refutation of the Carmatians”, Rasa’ il al-a’immata “Letters of the Imams” and an anthology of poetry about the Imams. Only al-Kafi appears to have survived.
Al-Kafi is a collection of the traditions taught by the Prophet and the Imams and handed down to the Muslim Community by the disciples of the Imams. The name al-Kafi means “that which is sufficient” that is, the book was intended to be a comprehensive collection of Imami-Shi’i traditions. This is explained by al-Kulaini in his introduction to the work:
**“…You wanted to have a book which would be sufficient (for your religious needs) (kafin), which would include all kinds of knowledge ('ilm) of religion, which would be adequate for the student, and to which the teacher might refer. Thus it could be used by anyone who wanted knowledge of religion and of legal practice ('amal) according to sound traditions (athar) from the truthful ones (the Imams) …” **
It is claimed that it took al-Kulaini twenty years to complete al-Kafi. It is indeed a very full and comprehensive work, divided into three sections, al-usul, al-furu and al-rawda.
The usul give traditions concerning the principles of religion and principles on which religious law is based. The furu’ concern the traditions which elaborate the details of religious law, while the rawda is a collection of traditions outlining various points of religious interest and including some of the letters and speeches of the Imams.
**The number of traditions in al-Kafi is 15,181; according to another reckoning 15,176. If the traditions reported in different sections are counted, the number is over 1,000 more. Of the basic traditions, 5,072 are considered sound (sahih) by scholars, i.e. first category; 144 are regarded as good (hasan), second category; 178 are held to be trustworthy (muwaththaq), third category; 302 are adjudged to be strong (qawi), fourth category; and 9,484 are considered weak (da’if), fifth category. The fact that a tradition is considered weak does not mean that it is not true. What it means is that the scholars of tradition have found some weakness in the tradition, usually one of the persons in the isnad, which suggests the possibility that the tradition might not go back to the Imam as claimed. **
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by inuit: *
Which Sunnah..... as discribed in the following Hadith:
Sahih al-Bukhari as narrated by Ibn 'Abbas:
When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was 'Umar Ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said: "Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray." 'Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us." The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, "Come near so that Allah's Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray," while the others said what 'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them, "Go away and leave me."Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah's Apostle from writing a statement for them.
Sahih al Bukhari Arabic-English Volume 9 hadith number 468 and Volume 7 hadith 573
Don't dispute in the presence of the Prophet (s)
Surah Anfal verse 46 "And obey Allah and His Messenger and do not quarrel…."
Because of you the other thread was closed by Admin. The Discussion was at very excellent stage. When you saw that you are unable to answer the post, you used abusive language. This is really a very bad behavior. A clear hypocrisy. All the readers of this website are witness. This is happening since beginning.
[/QUOTE]
*Inuit * You are at it again! You are not not sticking to the topic at hand but trying to divert it for what ever reason you have. You should open new thread if you have something different to say.
Let's hear your views about the Shia books in question.
I have found something that will interest you over the Net. I too, could paste links to many Sunni Sites, as you have done with your Shia sites, but won't as it's against the rules of Gupshup.
Analysis of the Traditions in Sahih Bukharee: The narrations of al-Bukharee are authentic concerning this matter. We shall quote the narrations first and then analyze them.
Ibn Abbas reported: When Allah's Apostle was on the death bed and in the house there were some people amongst whom was Omar ibn al-Khattab, the Prophet said, “Come, let me write for you a statement after which you will never go astray." Omar said, "The Prophet is seriously ill and you have the Quran; so the book of Allah is enough for us." The people in the house differed and quarreled. Some said, “Go near so that the Prophet may write for you a statement after which you will never go astray." While others said what Umar said. When they caused a hue and cry before the Prophet, Allah's Apostle said, "Go Away!"
Narrated Ubaidulla: Ibn Abbas used to say, " It is very unfortunate that Allah's Apostle was prevented from writing that statement for them because of their disagreement and noise."[Sahih Bukharee 7:573]
Ibn Abbas reported: When the ailment of the Prophet became worse, he said, " Bring for me (writing) paper and I will write for you a statement after which you will never go astray." But Omar said, "The Prophet is seriously ill and we have got Allah's book with us and that is sufficient for us" But the companions of the Prophet differed about this and there was a hue and cry. On that the Prophet said to them, “Go away and leave me alone. It is not right that you should quarrel in front of me." Ibn Abbas came out saying, "It was most unfortunate that Allah's Apostle was preventing writing that statement because of their disagreement and noise" [Sahih Bukharee 1:114]
Narrated Sa'id ibnu Jubair that he heard Ibn Abbas saying, “Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is?" After that Ibn Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn Abbas, “What is about Thursday?" He said,” When the condition (health) of the prophet deteriorated, he said, “Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray." The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of a prophet. They said, “What has happened to him? Do you think he is delirious?" Ask him (to understand his state), The Prophet replied, "Leave me as I am in a better state than what you are asking me to do."
Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying, "turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates and give them gifts as I used to do." the sub narrator( Sulaiman ibn Abi Muslim according to Sufian at Thawri) added , " the third thing was something beneficial which either Ibn Abbas did mention or he mentioned but I forgot. Sahih Bukharee 4: 393]
It is obvious from these narrations that the Prophet was seriously ill; in fact he was approaching his death. Around him were some of his companions. It is understood from the last narration that amongst the ones present, there were some who asked the prophet to write them something after which they would never go astray. This is evident from what the Prophet said, ".....than what you are asking me to do," meaning, "....than the statement you are asking me to write." Omar when he heard what some of the individuals were asking for stated that Prophet was very ill and should not be disturbed and instead the Quran should be referred as it is sufficient for guidance. It should be noted that by then the revelation was completed and all the religious injunctions were laid down. The Quran is the source of all guidance whereas the Ahadeeth or the Sunnah is an explanation and elaboration of the Quranic guidelines. The Sahaba (including Umar) had memorized the sayings of the Prophet and had adopted it practically in their every day lives. Every Sahaba tried to copy the Prophet as best as possible.
So the companions were already experts in the Prophetic traditions. In order to follow the Sunnah more properly they had to refer to the Quran for more Guidance and this is what Umar meant. It is not necessary to conclude from his saying that Umar viewed that only the Quran should be sole guide (as it is evident from his biography that he used to adopt the manners and instructions of the Prophet to his fullest ability) Furthermore it is possible that Umar and those who supported his position were a bit far and did not hear what the Prophet said because he was sick and might have spoken those words in a soft & low voice. It is well known that Umar was very obedient to the Prophet.
It is reported that once Umar was besides the Prophet when he said to him, "Oh Allah's Apostle, I love you above every thing else except for myself." The Prophet answered, "The Emaan will not be completed unless you love me more than your own self." Upon that Umar replied, "Oh Messenger of God, I love you now more than myself." The Prophet then said, "Now your Emaan is complete." Also we read in the chapters of history that Umar and Abu Bakr used to compete with one another in obeying the Prophet and keeping him pleased. On the expedition of Tabuk upon the order of the Prophet to fund for the military campaign, Umar straight forwardly went to his home and brought half of his wealth , laid it before the Prophet and asked him to used it in any way he wished. He took a special care that her daughter Hafsa wont do something that would displease the Prophet. He felt greatly disturbed when he saw people that would disobey or behave inappropriately in front of the Prophet. He would ask the Prophet to allow him cut the neck off that certain individual(s). How can such a person whom the Prophet promised Paradise (Sahih Bukharee: book virtues of companions: virtues of Umar), would commit the sin of disobeying the Prophet knowingly? The people disagreed and argued amongst one another in front of the Prophet.
It should be noted that no one is infallible. The Sahaba made mistakes as they were human beings. But we find that the Prophet corrected them by saying, "It is not right that you should quarrel in front of me." About the saying of some people, "What has happened to him? Do you think he is delirious?" actually indicates that the speakers here disapproved of the opinions of other people who suggested that the Prophet should not be asked to write as he is seriously ill. It can also be out of compassion to the Prophet that the speakers got worried about him and asked their opponents whether they knew something about his health about which the speakers were uninformed. So they went and asked the Prophet about his health. The reply of the Prophet was, " Leave me as I am in a better state than what you are asking me to do," Which means that I am busy preparing myself to meet my Lord which is better (= I am in a better state) than the worldly affairs you are asking me to do (= what you are asking me to do - writing the statement).
By examining the scenario above, one reaches the conclusion that the Prophet did not place a will, but he was to give an advice upon a request. However after all what happened up to here, then the Prophet placed a will that had those three instructions: turn out the pagans from Arabia, respect all foreign delegates and another instruction that was forgotten by the sub narrator Sulaiman Bin Abi Muslim and not by the one who narrated directly from Ibn Abbas.
If the advise that the Prophet wanted to write down was his will then there is no place for Ibn Abbas to state: "It is very unfortunate that Allah's Apostle was prevented from writing that statement for them because of their disagreement and noise," Because the Prophet already presented his will( the 3 instructions). The Sahaba loved the Prophet very much. When he passed away a world of sorrow befell the companions. Ali (ra) got unconscious due to sadness. Umar out of deep sorrow stood up and said that whoever says that the Prophet is dead I will chop his neck off. Uthman made unprecedented lamentation. It is said that Bilal had forsaken the Adhaan after the death of the prophet because it reminded him of the good days of the Prophet Hood and this made him to miss the Apostle of Allah very much. He called the Adhaan only on two occasions. One of them being in Jerusalem. When the companions heard his Adhaan again they wept with sorrow as the memory of their companionship with the Prophet passed their minds.
For this reason Ibn Abbas wept as he was narrating something about the last moments of the Prophet. The Shiites insist that the third instruction which the narrator forgot was actually the will that Ali should be made the successor of the Prophet. This assumption faces lots of problems & difficulties. The Prophet made indirect indications that Abu Bakr should be made a successor after him. For this reason during his last days while in illness, he appointed Abu Bakr to lead the prayer. Bukharee narrates from Jubair bin Mutim that he reported: A woman came to the Prophet who ordered her to return to him again. She said, "What if I came and did not find you?" as if she wanted to say, "If I found you dead?" The Prophet said, "If you should not find me, go to Abu Bakr."[Sahih Bukharee 5: 11], Bukharee in his Sahih also reports that the Prophet promised Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman paradise [5 :44] and further it states that the Prophet said Abu Bakr is a Siddiq and Umar and Uthman are (or will be) martyrs.[5:49].
Enough is to say that Ali (ra) gave Bai'ah to Abu Bakr (ra) and later to Umar (ra) thus accepting and declaring his support for their caliphate.
Asool Kaafi, Haq-ul-Yaqeen, Jila-ul-Ayoun, Hayat-ul-Quloob etc. from which all the Muslims are even not aware of. When we see these books and go through them, got to know the various sayings (false) of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w) and the sayings of Imam. .
In response to INtuit:
Hadith
“I believe in ALLAH, in His Angels, His Scriptures, His Prophets, the Day of Judgment, and in the fact that every thing good or bad (in the world) is pre-destined by ALLAH the Exalted, and in the resurrection after death.”
Belief of a Shia on Hadith of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w) is:
The Shia’s reject all Prophetic Traditions which were not related by members of Ahl-e-Bayt or their descendants. The only exception to this rule is their acceptance of a few Hadiths (Ahadith) narrated by those who sided with Ali (r.a) in his political wars. They do not attend to the authenticity and soundness of the chain of narrators, nor do they approach the study of the Prophetic Traditions with a scientific, critical attitude. Their narrations often appear in a form like that of the following example: “It has been reported regarding Muhammad Bin Ismail by way of some of our friends through a man who transmitted it from him (Ali) that he said…” Their books are filled with hundreds of thousands of traditions whose authenticity cannot be confirmed". They have built their religion specifically upon these spurious texts while outright rejecting over three quarters of the authentic Prophetic Traditions. They don’t accept the Hadith books of Saha-e-Satta of all Muslims. The reason behind this is that our Hadith books reflects the true Islam and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w) which were the utmost and the desirable facts for the Muslim Ummah all times. Due to their believes on the Oneness of ALLAH, Imamat, Prophethood, Sahabah (r.a), Noble mothers of Ummah and Quran etc. as discussed previous, is an open Kufr in front of all Muslim Ummah. The true Islam started from the 1400 years back, they are not accepting this as far as their believes are concerned. The main thing to be noticed is that for all the Muslim Ummah, renowned Sahabah (r.a) and the narrators of Hadith books of Ahl-e-Sunnat, are being the Ma’loon for them as far as they say that only 3-4 Sahabah (r.a) followed the Islam truly (naozuBILLAH). As Hadith books of Ahl-e-Sunnat is being full of the narrations by all the Sahabah (r.a) especially Hazrat Abu Huraira (r.a), Hazrat Ibn-e-Umar (r.a), Hazrat AbduLLAH bin Masood (r.a) and many others. Hazrat Abu Huraira in the name of Ahl-e-Sunnat are “Haafiz-ul-Hadith” because he learned about 5,374 Ahadith from the words of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w). The major part of the Hadith work comprises of the Hadiths narrated by Him (r.a). But when we see the Hadith books of Shia’s, no where any Hadith is being narrated by any Sahabah and Hazrat Abu Huraira (r.a) except the that 3-4 Sahabah (r.a) who are being mentioned as the pure Momins after the death of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w).
Undoubtedly it is a sign of great misfortune and misguidance if a person’s faith is based on slandering the companions of the best of mankind (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or arguing about the disputes that arose among them, instead of occupying himself with doing that which will benefit him in both his worldly and spiritual affairs.
No one should have any reason to slander or hate or bear grudges against the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Their virtues are many, for they are the ones who supported Islam and spread the faith; they are the ones who transmitted the Qur’aan, Sunnah and rulings. Allaah chose them to be the companions of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), so no one slanders them or hates them except a hypocrite whose does not love Islam or believe in it.
It was narrated that al-Bara’ (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: I heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “The Ansaar: no one loves them but a believer and no one hates them but a hypocrite. Whoever loves them, Allaah will love him, and whoever hates them, Allaah will hate him.”
Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3672; Muslim, 75.
If a man who hates the Ansaar cannot be a believer and that makes him a hypocrite, then how about one who hates the Ansaar and Muhaajireen and those who followed them in truth, and slanders them, curses them and denounces them and those who love them as kaafirs – as the Raafidis do? Undoubtedly they deserve more to be regarded as kaafirs and hypocrites, and of not being believers.
Al-Tahhaawi said, discussing the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah:
We love the companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and we do not neglect to love any one of them, nor do we disavow any one of them. We hate those who hate them and who criticize them, and we only mention them in good terms. Loving them is part of religious commitment, faith and ihsaan, and hating them is kufr, hypocrisy and wrongdoing.
Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said:
The way of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah is to love the family (ahl al-bayt) of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
The Naasibis love the Sahaabah but hate the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), hence they were called Naasibis because they set themselves up (nasb) as enemies of the family of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
The Raafidis are the opposite: they love the Prophet’s family (ahl al-bayt) – or so they claim, but they hate the Sahaabah, whom they curse, denounce as kaafirs and criticize.
Whoever hates the Sahaabah hates Islam, because they are the bearers of Islam and the followers of the Chosen Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). So whoever hates them hates Islam, and this indicates that there is no faith in the hearts of such people and that they do not love Islam.
This is an important basic principle which the Muslims should understand, namely loving and respecting the Sahaabah, because that is part of faith. Hating them or hating one of them is kufr and hypocrisy, because loving them is part of loving the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and hating them is part of hating the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
Sharh al-‘Aqeedah al-Waasitiyyah.
Some of the scholars explained in detail what is meant by hating the Sahaabah. They said: If a person hates some of them for some worldly reason, then that is not kufr and hypocrisy, but if it is for a religious reason, because they were the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), then undoubtedly this is hypocrisy.
This is a good explanation which does not contradict what we have mentioned above, rather it explains it further and reinforces it.
Abu Zar’ah al-Raazi said: If you see a man criticizing one of the companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), then know that he is a heretic.
Imam Ahmad said: If you see a man mentioning one of the companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in a bad way, then call his Islam into question.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:
If a person slanders them in a way that does not impugn their good character or religious commitment, such as describing one of them as being stingy or cowardly or lacking in knowledge or not being an ascetic and so on, then he deserves to be rebuked and disciplined, but we do not rule him to be a kaafir because of that. This is how the words of those who were not regarded as kaafirs by the scholars are to be understood.
If a person curses them and slanders them in general terms, this is an area of scholarly dispute, depending on whether this cursing is motivated by mere feelings or religious doctrines. If a person goes beyond that and claims that they apostatized after the death of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), apart from a small group of no more than ten or so individuals, or that most of them rebelled and did evil, then there is no doubt that such a person is a kaafir, because he has denied what is stated in more than one place in the Qur’aan, that Allaah was pleased with them and praised them. Indeed whoever doubts that such a person is a kaafir is himself a kaafir, because this implies that those who transmitted the Qur’aan and Sunnah were kaafirs or evildoers and that the best of this ummah which is described in the verse “You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:110 – interpretation of the meaning] – the first generation – were mostly kaafirs and hypocrites. It implies that this ummah is the worst of nations, and that the first generations of this ummah are the most evil. No doubt this is blatant kufr, the evidence for which is quite clear.
Hence you will find that most of those who proclaim such views will sooner or later be shown to be heretics. Heretics usually conceal their views, but Allaah has punished some of them to make an example of them, and there are many reports that they were turned into pigs in life and in death. The scholars have compiled such reports, such as al-Haafiz al-Saalih Abu ‘Abd-Allaah Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Waahid al-Maqdisi, in his book al-Nahi ‘an Sabb al-Ashaab in which he narrated the punishments that befell such heretics.
In conclusion, there are some groups of those who slander the Sahaabah concerning who them is no doubt that they are kaafirs, others who cannot be judged to be kaafirs, and others concerning whom there is some doubt regarding that.
Al-Saarim al-Maslool ‘ala Shaatim al-Rasool, p. 590-591.
Taqiy al-Deen al-Subki said:
… This refers to one who slanders some of the Sahaabah. But if a person slanders all of the Sahaabah, then he is undoubtedly a kaafir. The same applies if he slanders one of the Sahaabah just because he is a Sahaabi, because this is demeaning the virtue of the Sahaabah and indirectly slandering the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). So undoubtedly the person who does this is a kaafir. Based on this, the words of al-Tahhaawi, “and hating them is kufr” should be understood as meaning that hating all of the Sahaabah is undoubtedly kufr, but if a person slanders a Sahaabi not because he is a Sahaabi but for some personal reason, and that Sahaabi was, for example, one of those who became Muslim before the Conquest of Makkah and of whose virtue we are certain – such as the Raafidis who slander the two Shaykhs [Abu Bakr and ‘Umar] – then al-Qaadi Husayn stated that the one who slanders the two Shaykhs is a kaafir.
The reason for the scholarly dispute on this issue is if a person slanders a specific person it may be for some personal reason, or he may hate someone for a worldly reason etc. This does not imply that he is a kaafir. But undoubtedly if he hates one of the two Shaykhs because he was a companion of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), then this is kufr, and indeed hating any of the Sahaabah who was lower in status than two Shaykhs just because he was a companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is also definitely kufr.
The link brother Bao Bihari gave you is of an anti Shia site. Could it not be possible that they have manipulated the text to prove them selves right? If I were you I would go to the shia source or our shia friends and ask them about their book. Hope you will think about that.
The link brother Bao Bihari gave you is of an anti Shia site. Could it not be possible that they have manipulated the text to prove them selves right? If I were you I would go to the shia source or our shia friends and ask them about their book. Hope you will think about that.
[/QUOTE]
I have read similar thing in another anti-shia site so that's the reason why I open this thread and Yup I have already asked some shias about this (as far as I have heard from them they say the things written there indeed has been changed)
I have over estimated the guppies knowledge here :o I thought I would be able to find all the info i needed regarding those books (note: Seems like no one is bothering about the second book that I asked about "Jila-ul-Ayoun ") :D khair thanks for your concern.
Jalal ul Oyun is a hadith book by Allama Jalaluddin Suyuti.
Ahle Tasannu have many hadith books, but six of them are give more importance. They are called Sahah Satta.
1. Sahih Bukhari
2. Sahih Muslim
3. Sunan Tirmizi
4. Sunan Nisa'i
5. Sunan Ibn Maja
6. Masnad Imam Ahmed bin Hambal (? I think.)
Ahle Tashayyu also have many hadith books, Jalaul Ayun being one of them. But the more authentic books are four.
1. al Kafi - by Shaykh Kulayni
2. Man laa Yahdhuruhul Faqih - by Shaykh Sadooq
3. al Istibsaar - by Syed Tusi
4. al Tahzeeb - by Syed Tusi
Although many Ahle Sunnat claim Sahah Satta, especially Sahih Bukhari, to be almost 100% error-free; shia scholars never made such a claim.
Shia scholars merely say that the chances of finding strong ahadeeth are more in these four books than others.
The proof of authenticity of a hadith is not that in which book it is quoted (it does, however, supports the claim). Rather the authenticity of a given hadith is determined by range of standards set by muhadditheen. These standards are acceptable to both Shias and Sunnis.
Some of these standards are:
1. Continuity of the chain (Isnad) of transmitters. The chain of transmitters had to be unbroken in order for a hadith to be acceptable.
2. The integrity of the transmitters. The integrity of transmitters was established in terms of their outward observance of Islam.
3. Soundness of memory of the transmitters. It had to be verified through the biographical sciences of Hadith that each transmitter had a sound memory.
4. Conformity of the hadith with other hadith. It was important that the hadith conform with similar hadiths on the same topic.
etc.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by 1010: *
Jalal ul Oyun is a hadith book by Allama Jalaluddin Suyuti.
Ahle Tashayyu also have many hadith books, Jalaul Ayun being one of them.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with 1010, he wrote excellent.
However, if I am not forgetting Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti was a Sunni scholar. He wrote Tareekh ul Kholafa which is considered an authentic historical book among Ahle Sunnah. It is translated in many languages including Urdu.
Maybe i am making a mistaking because of Spellings
Jalal ul Oyun
Jalaul Ayun
i thought mAshkaat is also included in shah e satta(7 correct books)
shaih bukhari and other shahis r mere compilation of selected sahihs ahadiths…so as hadiths in it were selected from already shaoih ahadiths and after further scrutiny included in the book it is rightly calleed sahihs…sunni scholars dont base all thier dicsisions on these shahis alone…there r many other hadith books containing many shaih ahadith…however if alll shaihs have a same hadith that hadith is siad to be muttafiq alih…agreed upon…
** A QUESTION **
Kindly can some one explain to me why unlike sunni ravis(narrrators) shia narrator mostly and specially their imams were practising sunnis in thier daily lives even they r narrators of some ahadiths …
secondly is it that shia hadith usually end up with the imam who narrated ?.. with out the proper chain to the :saw:
I've read through the posts, in particular the first post posing the question and I still can't figure out what question is being asked. Please elaborate on the meaning of the question and its intention.
