Nahjul Balagha is not a religious book, the guy who collected these Sermons never intended on writing a book of Fiqh or Aqeedah and this is mainly why he didn’t care about the authenticity of the Texts inside his book, The purpose of this book is to show Eloquent Arabic literature, this is why he named it the “Peak of eloquence” or “Nahjul balagha”, It is categorised by the scholars as a book of “Adab”… meaning a Book of Arab literature and No one with his right mind would use an Isnad-less book to build his religion. Shia Scholars were trying their best to dig up and find correct Sanads for such Khutbas unfortunately They never came up with anything convincing.
We ask the Shia for a Sahih Isnad to Ali bin abi talib RAA and they give us pathetic chains from God knows where, as if we’d accept a Shia isnad. The Shia scholars have been digging hard trying to find ANY source or anything which resembles these Khutbas of Nahjul Balagha in order to claim that the book is authentic, They tried to find and come up with any Isnad for the book so they can statisfy their followers and what they came up with was quite laughable and unacceptable to any man who has intelect, one of these scholars
who tried to defend this book is Abdul Zahra al Khatib, he writes in his book:
[ ان الشريف لم يجمع النهج لجعل منه مصدراً من مصادر الفقه ، او مدركاً من مدارك الاحكام ، بل كان جل قصده ان يخرج للناس جانباً من كلام امير المؤمنين الذي يتضمن من
عجائب البلاغة ، وغرائب الفصاحة ، وجواهر العربية ، وثواقب الكلم الدينية والدنيوية ما لا يوجد مجتمعاً في كلام ولا مجموع الاطراف في كتاب ، لذا تراه لم يذكر الاسانيد ، ولم
يتعرض للمصادر الا فيما ندر ]
[ مصادر نهج البلاغة واسانيده / عبد الزهراء الخطيب ص 27 ]
“Al Shareef did not collect Nahjul balagha to make it a book of Fiqh/Jurisprudence or a book to extract rulings from, But His aim was to reveal to the people a sample from the speech of Ameer al mumineen and to show the rare eloquence and the wonders of Arabic tongue and its jewels, This is why he never mentioned any Asanid or even sources unless very rarely” Source: [Masadir Nahjul balagha wa Asaniduhu/ Abdul Zahra al Khateeb page 27]
So it’s not even a religious book but a Book of Arab literature with absolutely no Isnads whatsoever Unlike the four ancient Main Shia books which are full of thousands of hadiths with and without Isnads, thus we cannot take anything from such book and build our religion or better yet build an entire Madhab based on such ridiculous book. As far as scientific Value, it has no scholarly or scientific value.
And this Guy who wrote an entire book to defend Nahjul Balagha’s Authenticity stated at the beginning of his book (and I want you to notice their Tactics):
فهل يطمع طامع بعد تلك الحوادث والكوارث في العثور على جميع مصادر نهج البلاغة بجميع مفرداته وفقراته ؟ كلا ثم كلا ]
[ مصادر نهج البلاغة واسانيده / عبد الزهراء الخطيب ص 24 ]
“So would anyone be greedy enough after all of these distaters and incidents to ask for ALL THE SOURCES of Nahjul Balagha with all of its vocabulary? NO and Then NO!”
[Masadir Nahjul Balagha wa Asaniduhu / Abdul Zahra page 24]
then he mentions in page 25
[ وما لحق مكتباتهم من التحريق ، حتى اضطر شيخ الطائفة اخيراً في سنة (450 هـ ) ان يهاجر الى النجف ]
“And the burning of the Shia libraries until the sheikh al Taefa(TUSI) had to finally move to Najaf in 450 hijri“.
Note: So basically he’s telling the reader that the Shiite books have been attacked over and over and the Shiites have been oppressed and the sources of their books have dissapeared over time so it’s not logical for us to ask for the Sources of the Sermons Word per Word. although everyone knows that Tusi’s Library was burned 50 years after Nahjul Balagha was written and Tusi’s library was not the only one with this book in it. So it doesn’t affect the sources of Nahjul Balagha.
Then the Nahjul Balagha defender who Already stated that the sources of these Sermons had been burned and disappeared Said in Page 26:
[ وعلى هذا فليس بضائر فيما نحن فيه اذا كان فيما ننقله عما جعلناه مصادر للنهج ما يختلف معه اختلافاً يسيراً بزيادة عبارة او نقصان اخرى او اختلاف كلمة او سقوط جزء ]
[ مصادر نهج البلاغة واسانيده / عبد الزهراء الخطيب ص 26 ]
“And It’s not harmful in this situation if we return to these sources of the Nahjul Balagha which we specified and if they have a little conflict with what’s in our book by addition of a phrase or deletion of a phrase or having different words or missing parts”
Note: So Now he’s saying That there are Sources to these Sermons and Those sources Conflict (but by a Small amount) with what’s written in Nahjul Balagha…
Mashallah how academic.🙂
He mentions in Page 25:
[ ذهاب معظم الاثار التي كانت في عهد الشريف الرضي بسبب الفتن والمحن كما المحنا لطرف منها انفاً ]
“The Disapearance of MOST of the sources during the Life of al shareef al Radhi because of Fitnah and hardships that we mentioned earlier”
Any Muslim with intellect knows that he’s paving the way to some of the weakest and most unreliable sources and the most unacceptable of Isnads ever.And God knows what his proof is when he says That The time of NahjuL Balagha was full of Fitnah.
From what we understand until now is that The Sources are different then what’s written inside the Nahj and some of them are missing phrases and adding phrases or missing Paragraphs or changing words and that we can’t get all the sources for these sermons and That even if we get sources the Isnad needs to be authentic and Sahih.
So until now the conclusion we draw is that we cannot attribute this book to imam Ali RAA by Jazm.