Monthly Archives: April 2014

Shia belief of “al-Bada'”


al-Salamu `Aleykum,

Today we have something fun to play with : )

You all know the narrations that contain the ancient Shia belief of “al-Bada'”, for example:

ما بدا لله في شيء كما بدا له في إسماعيل ابني

Imam al-Sadiq says: “It hasn’t appear to Allah in anything as it appeared to him in my son Isma`il.”

Meaning that it would appear to Allah that Isma`il was the next Imam, then after Isma`il died in his father’s life, Allah (astaghfirullah) made the Imam his brother Musa instead, in other words he changed his mind as if he apparently never knew that the first one was going to die.

To make a long story short, the Shia at the time fabricated these narrations as excuses to switch from following one Imam to the next, and so that they wouldn’t appear as liars in front of their followers.

Now the Twelver Shia scholar al-Saduq doesn’t  like this narration, so he refutes it in his book “Kamal ul-Deen wa Tamam ul-Ni`mah” pg.69:

ما ذلك الخبر؟ ومن رواه؟ ومن تلقّاه بالقبول؟ فلم يجدوا إلى ذلك سبيلاً ، وإنّما هذه حكاية ولّدها قوم قالوا بامامة إسماعيل ، ليس لها أصلٌ


[What is this narration? who narrated it? who accepted it? they couldn’t answer, this is only a story made up by some folks who believed in the Imamah of Isma`il, it is baseless.]

Then he makes Takfir on those who believe in it by saying:

وعندنا من زعم أنَّ الله عزَّ وجلَّ يبدو له اليوم في شيء لم يعلمه أمس فهو كافرٌ والبراءة منه واجبة

[We believe that whoever states that something can be revealed to Allah today that he didn’t know yesterday is a Kafir, and it is a duty to be free from him.]


Now we’ll reveal to him what he didn’t know, Bismillah:

رواه سعد بن عبد الله الأشعري قال: حدثني أبو هاشم داود بن القاسم الجعفري قال: كنت عند أبي الحسن عليه السلام وقت وفاة ابنه أبي جعفر – وقد كان أشار إليه ودل عليه – فإني لافكر في نفسي وأقول: هذه قضية أبي إبراهيم وقضية إسماعيل، فأقبل علي أبو الحسن عليه السلام فقال: نعم يا أبا هاشم بدا لله تعالى في أبي جعفر وصير مكانه أبا محمد، كما بدا لله في إسماعيل بعدما دل عليه أبو عبد الله عليه السلام ونصبه، وهو كما حدثت به نفسك وإن كره المبطلون، أبو محمد ابني الخلف من بعدي عنده ما تحتاجون إليه ومعه آلة الإمامة والحمد لله


Sa`d bin `Abdullah al-‘Ash`ari said: abu Hashim Dawoud bin al-Qassim al-Ja`fari said: I was with Imam abu al-Hassan (as) when his son abu Ja`far died -and he had pointed to him and appointed him- So I started thinking to myself: “This is similar to the case of Imam abu Ibrahim (as) and Isma`il.” so abu al-Hassan (as) came to me and said: “Yes O abu Hashim, it appeared to Allah in abu Ja`far and he replaced him with abu Muhammad, it also appeared to Allah in Isma`il after his father abu `Abdullah had pointed to him and appointed him, it is exactly as you thought to yourself even if the haters will hate. abu Muhammad my son is my successor after me, he has what you need and the Imamah praise be to Allah.”

source: Ghaybat al-Tusi, page 200.
grading: SAHIH.

In other words, al-Saduq is clueless because this is an authentic Shia narration with a chain of trustworthy Imami Shia, No Isma`ilis, No Zaydis.

Also it turns out this happened twice, not just with Isma`il and Musa, but it also happened with the children of `Ali al-Hadi, Muhammad and Hasan.

al-Bada’ x 2 

; )

By Hani (islamic-forum.net)
Salam `Aleykum,

8 Comments

Filed under Revealing Shia sect, Shiite's sahih hadith

Clear Mistranslation in the English version of Majlisi’s work – Hayat ul Quloob


بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

It is well known that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم had four real daughters from Khadijah رضي الله عنها . Quite many Shias nowadays deny this fact, but this was not the case with the ancient Shias. Rather there are clear and authentic narrations in Sunni and Shia books which prove that the Prophet (S) had four real daughters from Khadijah.

After mentioning those authentic narrations, Majlisi mentioned that a group of people from Shias and Sunnis state that they were not the real daughters, but then he says “But authentic narrations refute both of these statements.” ?Since this sentence was problematic, hence the English translator of Hayat ul Quloob omitted it. 

Posted Image

Original Persian Text and its correct English translation :

و جمعى از علماى خاصه و عامه را اعتقاد آن است كه رقيه و ام كلثوم دختران خديجه بودند از شوهر ديگر مع پيش از رسول خدا (صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم) داشته و حضرت ايشان را تربيت كرده بود و دختر حقيقى آن جناب نبودند؛ و بعضى گفتند كه: دختران هاله خواهر خديجه بوده‏اند. و بر نفى اين دو قول روايت معتبره دلالت مى‏كند

A group of Shia and Sunni scholars believe that Ruqayyah and Umm Kulthum were the daughters of Khadijah from another husband before the Prophet (S), and some say that they were the daughters of Haala, the sister of Khadijah. But authentic narrations refute both of these statements.

Hayat ul Quloob, Vol. 2, p. 560 

By Kalaam (islamic-forum.net)
Posted by 13S2010

Leave a comment

Filed under Exposing al-islam.org

Tijani finds Shia Mosques and Hussainiyas places of smoking rather than worship


Few excerpts from a book of Tijani

He says :

We can say that smoking is a common phenomenon among the Shia. When you come into their mosques for the first time, you are shocked by that.

I remember that when I traveled to Holy Najaf for the first time, I was shocked by this phenomenon. I found it odd and so I asked some of their (the Shia) ulema about it. They gave answers which have not convinced me until now. Some of them say that smoking is neither impermissible nor disapproved because there is no (legal) text concerning it either from the Prophet (S) or from the infallible Imams (a.s..) and that analogy is not permissible to them. Some others say that they do not smoke in the mosques, but only in Husayniyyas 2 which are not from mosques.

Regarding Shia Scholars, he shows his displeasure at not giving fatwa against smoking, and says:

Or, they may fear the reaction of smokers and so they do not give a fatwa for the sake of being disapproved. Someone from them has tried his best to convince me that smoking has many benefits and to disapprove this is really a dangerous thing having a dangerous effect! It encouraged a Muslim youth who knew this man, to keep on smoking.

At the same time we find that charitable societies and social organizations in the atheist countries sparing no effort against smoking and smokers, and preventing even its advertisement. They ask the manufacturers of cigarettes to write on the packets of cigarettes the word “SUICIDE” to encourage people to keep away from it. Yet we find in the Islamic religious societies widely embarking on it and encouraging others towards it. We even find women carrying packets of cigarettes with them to places of worship and religious meetings.

http://www.al-islam….port/html/30002

Yeah, this is ‘the school of ahlelbayt’, who can’t give fatwa against smoking for the fear of backlash, and others encourge it. Someone tried to show the benefits of smoking to Tijani. What could that be? It makes you think as if you are the hero? It protects from cancer? And the mominaat, they carry packets of cigarettes in places of worship even in Najaf? Yuck.

shesha_hosseinyat

by Kalaam (islamic-forum.net)
posted here by 13S2010

34 Comments

Filed under Revealing Shia sect

Ghayba of Shia Mahdi is not from Allah


Shia scholar: Occultation of Shia Twelfth Imam is not from Allah

Salam alaikum.

Interesting quote from Shia website Markaz al-Abhaz Aqaidiyah:

http://www.aqaed.com…2/m-i-m-04.html
قال المحقق الطوسي: (ليست غيبة المهدي من الله ولا منه، بل من المكلفين والناس، وهي من غلبة الخوف، وعدم تمكين الناس من إطاعة الامام، فاذا زال سبب الغيبة وقع الظهور)

Muhaqiq at-Toose said: Ghayba of Mahdi isn’t from Allah, and neither from him (self). But due to mukalifin (opponents) and people. And the [ghaybah] happened due to predominance of fear, and absence of patient people in the obedience to Imam, and once the reason of ghaybah disappears, appearance (of Imam) will take place.

Points for discussion:

1) Allah didn’t want ghaybah. Neither 12-th Imam wanted to hide.

2) He scared of people, and didn’t see obedience in his faithful rafidi followers. And he still scared. Only after he will feel safe and will see obedience in his followers, he will appear.

3) Tayib, let us suppose he was scared in the time of Abbasids. What scare him now? How is it possible for coward to lead Islamic nation?

4) He still don’t see much obedience in his shias. 

By Efendi (islamic-forum.net)
Original Link
Posted with some changes by 13S2010

6 Comments

Filed under Rebuttals, Revealing Shia sect

Shia grand Scholar wouldn’t do anything without cursing the Sahaba


Shia grand Scholar wouldn’t do anything without cursing the Sahaba – What a sick brain?

Just read on Shia Facebook page:

al-Muhaqiq al-Bahrani in his work Luluat al-Bahrain, Page 148:

And he – may Allah have mercy on him – [Muhaqiq al-Karaki] didn’t ride and he didn’t do anything […] and with his voice he curse the Shaykhain [Abu Bakr and Omar] and those who follow their steps (i.e Sunnis).

Note:
Muhaqiq al-Karaki (rah) was the Marji’ and the scholar of the Safavid Empire, he was Lebanese, his grave is in Iran.

Everything he used to do was with his curse on Omar and Abu Bakr.

 

 

Posted here by 13S2010

40 Comments

Filed under Revealing Shia sect

Saqīfah incident actually disproves Shia concept of Imamate


بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

Saqīfa incident actually disproves Shia concept of Imamate/Wilayah of Ali

Shias believe the Prophet (S) declared Caliph Ali as the first Imam in Ghadeer. Shias say Abu Bakr and Umar plotted in Saqifa against Ali, and hence snatched the Caliphate from him. This is how they think about this incident, but an unbiased look at this incident shows that it was impossible. First of all, the people of Madinah, whom Allah called ‘Ansar’ which means ‘the Helpers’ had gathered at Saqifah. Their gathering in Saqifah was for the purpose of selecting a Caliph from amongst themselves. Hence, if anyone plotted against Ali, it was actually by these people whom Allah declared ‘Ansar’. Abu Bakr and Umar only came to Saqifah to stop them. If they had any intention to select a Caliph at Saqifah, which would have been the last thing in their mind when they heard the gathering of Ansar at Saqifah, they would have gone to Saqifah with a large number of Muhajireen i.e ‘The Immigrants’. They only intended to stop the Ansar from selecting a Caliph, because they didn’t have the right since the Prophet (S) had clearly declared that the Caliph would be from the ‘Quraish’. But aside from that, the gathering of Ansar at Saqifah shows that those people didn’t consider the event of Ghadeer to be the appointment of Ali as the first Caliph. And if Ghadeer event was the evidence of the appointment of Ali as the first Caliph, than the Ansar were the first people to go against Ali. 

When Abu Bakr and Umar reached Saqifah with Abu Ubaidah, and when they looked at the situation, they tried to stop Ansar from selecting a Caliph from amongst them. They talked to them, and persuaded many people from Ansar. How would anyone from Ansar agree with them, if they didn’t think Abu Bakr and Umar were telling the truth? How can Abu Bakr, Umar and Abu Ubaidah force anyone from Ansar to accept their stance when they were only three people in a large gathering of Ansar? And as the Shias preach day and night, Abu Bakr and Umar didn’t even have the superficial powers which would have forced the Ansar to agree with them! The only thing with which they convinced the Ansar was Quran and Sunnah. But still, there were few Ansari who wanted to choose a Caliph from amongst them. If they had succeeded, and if Abu Bakr and Umar hadn’t stopped them, it would have been Ansar who would have made the first error of choosing a wrong person as Caliph as both Sunnis and Shias agree that the Caliph is from the Quraish. But Abu Bakr and Umar stopped them from committing this error, and not by force, but with discussion and wisdom.

When some of the Ansari still wanted to choose a person from amongst them as Caliph, Umar knew that they can only be stopped from selecting a man from their own as Caliph, by selecting an eligible person from Quraish as the Caliph. And he was Abu Bakr, so Umar told him to move his hand forth, and he rendered allegiance to Abu Bakr. The Ansar who were convinced as a result of the discussion that the Caliph has to be from the Quraish started rendering allegiance to him, so much so that all of them rendered allegiance to him. And Umar saved the Muslims from the division on that day with his wisdom.

Hence this event is not actually a crime of Abu Bakr and Umar, but it is the event which shows how they protected the Muslims from division on the very first day after the death of the Prophet (S). If Ansar had succeeded in choosing a caliph from amongst them, the unity of Muslims would have been at stake. Because the Muhajireen wouldn’t render allegiance to an Ansari Caliph, since neither the Ansar could force the Muhajireen nor they could convince the Muhajireen to accept an Ansari as a Caliph in the light of Quran and Sunnah. The Muslims would have been fighting with one another, rather than against the rebels and the kuffar. And Ali would still not have got the position of the Caliph, because just like Ansar didn’t think the event of Ghadeer as the appointment of Ali as Caliph, so was the case with the Muhajireen, because the Muhajireen considered Abu Bakr to be the eligible person for Caliphate.

Conclusion:
Ali wasn’t considered as ‘the divinely appointed first Caliph’ by Ansar as well as Muhajireen. And he wouldn’t have become even the fourth caliph of the Muslims if Abu Bakr and Umar hadn’t intervened at Saqifah, because that would have lead to the division of Muslims and it would have been the biggest catastrophe, since the centre of Islam would have become the battleground between the two factions of Muslims, and before they could have settled their dispute, the rebels and the Kuffar would have overpowered them. We need to be thankful for the role of Abu Bakr and Umar in Saqifah, rather than condemning them.

Wa lillahil hamd ! 

 

By Kalaam (Islamic-Forum.net)
Posted by 13S2010

Leave a comment

Filed under Articles, History

Mushrik Poet from Quraysh lists the Sahaba who gave them hard time in the battle of Badr


In his Sirah, Ibn Ishaq listed a poem of one of the Mushrikeen from Quraysh, Dhirar Ibn Al-Khattab,  which was said after the battle of Badr. He said:

شعر ضرار بن الخطاب في يوم بدر

وقال ضرار بن الخطاب بن مرادس ، أخو بني محارب بن فهر في يوم بدر ‏‏:‏‏ 

عجبت لفخر الأوس والـحَـين دائر** عليهم غدا والـدهـر فـيه بـصـائر 
وفخر بني النجار إن كان معـشـر ** أصيبوا ببدر كُـلِّـهـم ثـمَّ صـابـر 
فإن تك قتلى غودرت من رجالـنـا ** فإنا رجـال بـعـدهـم سـنـغـادر 
وتَردي بنا الجرد العناجيج وسطكـم ** بني الأوس حتى يشفي النـفـس ثـائر 
ووسط بني النجار سوف نكـرُّهـا ** لها بالـقـنـا والـدارعـين زوافـر 
فنترك صرعى تعصب الطير حولهم ** وليس لـهـم إلا الأمـانـي نـاصـر 
وتبكيهم من أهـل يثـرب نـسـوة **لهن بها لـيل عـن الـنـوم سـاهـر 
وذلـك أنـا لا تـزال سـيوفـنـا **بهـن دم مـمـن يحـاربـن مــائر 
فإن تظفروا في يوم بدر فـإنـمـا** بأحمد أمسى جدكـم وهـو ظـاهـر 
وبالنـفـر الأخـيار هـم أولـياؤه ** يحامون في اللأواء والموت حـاضـر 
يعد أبو بـكـر وحـمـزة فـيهـم **ويدعى عليٌ وسط مـن أنـت ذاكـر 
ويدعي أبو حفص وعثمان منـهـم ** وسعد إذا ما كان في الحرب حاضـر 
أولئك لا من نتَّجـت فـي ديارهـا ** بنو الأوس والنجار حـين تـفـاخـر 
ولكن أبوهم من لؤي بـن غـالـب ** إذا عُدت الأنساب كـعـب وعـامـر 
هم الطاعنون الخيل في كل معـرك ** غداة الهـياج الأطـيبـون الأكـاثـر

In this poem, Dhirar Ibn Al-Khattab wonders why the tribe of Aws from the Ansar as well as Beni Al-Najar take pride in the victory of Badr. He says that Quraysh will take revenge and kill them and leave them as food for the vulctures and leave their women to weap over them. 

He says that the only reason the Ansar were victorious in Badr is because their army contained some people from Quraysh. He says:

If you have gained victory in Badr then it is because ** of Ahmad (i.e the Prophet -SAW) that your luck became apparent

And also because of a group of nobles who are his friends ** who defend him when death is present

Abu Bakr is considered amongst them as well as Hamza ** and Ali is called amongst the middle of them

Abu Hafs (i.e Umar -RA-) and Uthman are considered amongst them ** and Saad when he is present at war

They are the ones and not those produced in the lands of ** Bani Al-Aws and Al-Najar when one takes pride

Rather their father is Luai Ibn Ghalib ** if one would consider lineages of Kaab and Amir (i.e sons of Luai and ancestors of most Qurayshis)

They are the ones who stab the horses in every war **  at the day of battle they are the nobles they are the great

So who knows better about the performance of the Sahabas in battles, their adversaries in the battle, or their adversaries who beat their chests like women and weep and cry every year in Muharram?! 

By al-a3sha
Original Link 
Posted by 13S2010

Leave a comment

Filed under Articles, History

Ali: Ask me before you lose me p2


بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

اسلام علیکم

by Brother Efendi

May Allah protect our brother Qasurah from alsrdaab.com. He gave a very interesting question regarding famous saying of Ali which is used by shias.

Ali (ra) said: Ask me before you lose me.  Rarely you would find shia book on Ali, which wouldn’t mention this saying.

We would try to look at this saying in the prism of famous shia belief that each Imam use to inherit knowledge from previous one.

In the life time of Ali there were two other Imams: Hasan and Husayn.

Question:

Why Ali was persisting that people should ask him questions before they would loose him, if after him were two other Imams which inherited knowledge from him and could answer to questions of people? 

Leave a comment

Filed under Articles, Clarification about sunni hadiths, Question bank for shiite's

Ali: Ask me before you lose me – سلوني قبل أن تفقدوني p1


بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

Ali (ra) said :

سلوني قبل أن تفقدوني

Ask me before you lose me.

He said it , and the previous caliphs didn’t say it, and the reason was that during the previous caliphs, there were many learned people around them, they were all the students of the Prophet (saww), so such people around them were also knowledgeable. But Ali (ra) was in kufa, where there were the worst miscreants of the earth present as is very clear from the sermons of Nahjul balagha. There were very few students of the Prophet (saww) around them, so Ali (ra) said that ask me before you lose me, since with his death, their city would be left with even fewer students of the Prophet (saww).

The other thing this saying of Ali (ra) show is that he didn’t hide knowledge as the Shias claim. Nor did he limit the knowledge to his son only, rather he asked the general masses to ask him, he didn’t limit his knowledge to his son.

Thirdly, this shows that with the death of Ali (ra), even Hassan (ra) wouldn’t be having the same amount of knowledge so it refutes the Shia claim that all the imams are equal in knowledge, (and some of their narrations mention the increase in the knowledge of the Imams with every passing moment) if that was the case, Ali (ra) wouldn’t have said it.

By Brother Kalaam
Original Link.
Posted by 13S2010

1 Comment

Filed under Articles, Clarification about sunni hadiths, Rebuttals

Is Hadith al-Kisa (Cloak) authentic in Shia books?


بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

Written by Farid
Original Article link
Posted here with some changes by 13S2010

Note: The letters in red are from the Shia.

Salam everyone, it has been a while since I have made a topic. I’ve been pretty busy lately, but I couldn’t help myself from posting about this topic.

One of the more intellectual brothers on SC, Ibn Al-Ja’abi, is attempting to respond to a challenge I made a while ago. It must have been ages ago, since I don’t really recall making this challenge, but it really sounds like something I would say, so I have no intention of disputing it. =p

Here is some background to the issue:

Shia Ibn Al-Ja’abi says:

And thirdly, the Nawasib have mocked us for not being able to find such oft-discussed incidents in our own books, such as Hadith Al-Thaqalayn, Hadith Al-Ghadeer, Hadith of the 12 Imams, This one, and others. Other narrations have been found in multitude by hard working brothers Al-Hamdu Lillah and exposed so the brainless Nawasib and Mukhalifeen can be shut up, Insha’Allah I will try a humble effort at finding narrations on or relating to Hadith Al-Kisa in Shi’a books, and when possible include the grading,

Indeed, there is little doubt that Shias really do believe Sunni narrations that are in their favor. This methodology is flawed. Nobody sees Sunnis taking in Shia narrations that are pro-Sunni as truth, unless if the narration has been established in our books first. Subjectively cherry-picking narrations has gotten so bad that as Shias have truly based aspects of their aqeedah on Sunni narrations (that have been misinterpreted).

Perhaps the most significant narration is the hadith of Samura of the their being twelve caliphs. We see this narration quoted by early twelvers hundreds of times in their ancient texts in order to establish their view that the Imams are twelve. This view, however, was not held by all Shias, since there were many that believed in five, seven, nine, or eleven Imams. They did not see the Sunni hadith is evidence and that view, from a Shi’ee perspective, is an objective one.

Thus, the challenge was made:

The popular (and deceptively charming) Sunni internet Rijalist, namely Farid (may Allah make his Progeny into Rawafidh) had challenged the Shi’as on the Nasibi internet forum of KFC (aka Haq Char Yar Islamic Forum) to prove “tashayyu is self sufficient, or is it not able to function without the existence of Sunnism” – to directly quote him, in that we need to prove from authentic Shi’a narrations khilafah of Imam Ali, and then the next challenge was to find a number of narrations often quoted from Sunni texts in Shi’a texts (I named a few of them above, but to repeat, Hadith Al-Ghadir, Hadith Thaqalayn, Hadith of 12 Imams, Hadith Al-Kisa (i.e. the hadith I will be attempting to prove is in our texts), and others).

I did find it amusing that Ibn Al-Ja’abi seems to have lost hope for me and is making dua’a for my progeny. Inshallah he will find it in his heart to extend that dua’a towards me as well.

Farid (may Allah make his Progeny into Rawafidh) also said not to use narrations connected to Imams, but only that which is connected to the Prophet (saww), due to the ‘isma (infallibility) of the Imams not being established.

We say: This was a devious trick used by him to make this challenge impossible, however, the infallibility of the Imams is established through a reliable narration connected back to the Prophet (saww) through a continuous chain, which we will quote here:

حدثنا علي بن عبد الله الوراق الرازي قال: حدثنا سعد بن – عبد الله قال: حدثنا الهيثم بن أبي مسروق النهدي، عن الحسين بن علوان، عن عمر ابن خالد، عن سعد بن طريف، عن الأصبغ بن نباته، عن عبد الله بن عباس قال: سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله يقول: أنا وعلي والحسن والحسين وتسعة من ولد الحسين مطهرون معصومون

Ali ibn Abdullah Al-Warraq Al-Razi narrated to us, he said: Sa’d ibn Abdullah narrated to us, he said: Al-Haytham ibn Abi Masrooq Al-Hindi narrated to us, he said: from Al-Hussain ibn Ulwan, from Umar ibn Khalid, from Sa’d ibn Turayf, from Al-Asbagh ibn Nubata, from Abdullah ibn Abbas, he said: I heard the Messenger of Allah say: “I, and Ali, and Al-Hasan, and Al-Hussain, and the Nine from the progeny of Al-Hussain, are pure and infallible.”

Kamal Al-Deen wa Tamam Al-Ni’ma volume 1 page 266 hadith 28

Shaykh Hadi Al-Najafi: The Narration’s Chain is Established (Mawsu’ah Ahadith Ahlul-Bayt volume 7 page 183)

The narration cannot be used to establish the infallibility of the Imams, for Ibn Al-Ja’abi would been to established the reliability of Ali bin Abdullah Al-Warraq, Sa’ad bin Turaif, Al-Asbagh bin Nabata, and Ibn Abbas. Each of these men have been criticized by Shia scholars as either weak or anonymous.

To be honest, one doesn’t even need to study the chain in order to arrive at the conclusion that this is a fabrication upon the tongue of Ibn Abbas, since Sunnis are the only real sustainers of his knowledge. His narrations in our books can be found in the thousands and include the most mild to the most controversial opinions. To suggest that this one reached a fourth century Qummi scholar and wasn’t documented by Sunni narrators is not reasonable.

Ibn Al-Ja’abi then went on to quote other narrations from the Imams in order to establish these merits from Shia books. First we start with Ayat Al-Tatheer/hadith Al-Kisa:

Translation (of the chain and the red highlighted portion): Ali ibn Ibrahim, from Muhammad ibn Isa, from Yunus, and Ali ibn Muhammad, from Sahl ibn Ziyad Abi Sa’id, from Muhammad ibn Isa, from Yunus, from Ibn Muskan, from Abi Basir, he said I asked Aba Abdillah Posted Image…..”Rather Allah (azza wa jall) narrated it to him in his true book to his Prophet (saww): ‘Allah intends only to remove impurity from you, Oh People of the House, and purify you with a purification’ (33:33), so it (Ahlul-Bayt) was Ali, and Al-Hasan, and Al-Hussain, and Fatima Posted Image, and The Messenger of Allah (saww) entered them into a cloak in the house of Umm Salamah, and then said: ‘Allahuma, verily to every Prophet there was a family and a weight (thaql), they are the People of my Household, and my gravity.’ So Umm Salamah said: ‘Am I not from your family?’ So he said: ‘Verily to you is goodness, but these are my family and my weights.'”

Kitab Al-Kafi volume 1 page 149 hadith 1 

Allama Majlisi: Authentic by its chain (Mir’at Al-Uqul volume 3 page 213)
Shaykh Marja Jawad Tabrizi: Sahih (Risalah Mukhtasarah Fi Al-Nusus Al-Sahiha Ala Imama Al-A’ima Al-Ithna Ashar page 12)

The narration comes from the path of Mohammad bin Eisa bin Yunus who has been weakened by several early Shia scholars and thus the narration is weak.

Muhammad ibn Yahya, from Muhammad ibn Al-Hussain, from Muhammad ibn Isma’il, from Mansur ibn Yunus, from Zayd ibn Al-Jahm Al-Hilali, from Abi Abdillah Posted Image, he said: “…..The evidence was established by the saying of the Prophet (saww) and by the Book which is read by the people, so he never stopped reciting the virtues of the People of His House in the words and shows them in the Qur’an, ‘Verily Allah only wishes to remove impurity from you, Oh People of the House, and purify you through a purification’……”

Al-Kafi volume 1 page 152 hadith 3

Zaid bin Al-Jahm is anonymous.

Muhammad ibn Yahya, from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa, from Ali ibn Al-Hakam, from Isma’il ibn Abdul-Khaliq, he said: I heard Aba Abdillah Posted Image saying to Abi ja’far Al-Ahwal, and I heard: “Have you been to Basra?” So he said: “Yes.” He said: “What did you see regarding the hastening of the people to this matter, and entering into it?” He said: “By Allah, verily they are few, they then did it, but even that was few.” So He said: “It is upon you [to approach] the youth, for verily they hurry to every good.” He then said: “What did the people of Basra say regarding this verse: ‘Say I ask no reward from you, except for the love of my Relations.’ (42:23)?” I said: “May I be made your ransome, verily they say this is for the relations of the Messenger of Allah (saww) (i.e. all of them)” So He said: “They lie, verily this was revealed for us especially, for the People of the House, for Ali, and Fatima, and Al-Hasan, and Al-Hussain, [who are] the Companions of the Cloak.”

Al-Kafi volume 8 page 1971 hadith 66

Allama Majlisi: Sahih (Mir’at Al-Uqul volume 25 page 221)
Shaykh Hadi Al-Najafi: The Narration’s Chain is Authentic (Mawsu’ah Ahadith Ahlul-Bayt volume 7 page 289)

The chain is weak and the opinion of these scholars simply shows how incompetent they are in their hadith gradings. Ali bin Al-Hakam is a very late narrator and he did not narrator from the second century Imams. Isma’eel, on the other hand, died during the times of Ja’afar Al-Sadiq. The chain is easily disconnected but it is no surprise that Shia scholars did not notice this.

Ibn Al-Ja’abi then brought two more narrations about Kisa/Tatheer, but both narrations were weak. This is pretty obvious since he refrained from attempting to prove the authenticity of these chains. Furthermore, as usual, both narrations have anonymous narrators:

Narrations from Al-Khisal by Shaykh Al-Saduq:
 
First Narration:
 
أبي رضي الله عنه قال: حدثنا عبد الله بن الحسن المؤدب، عن أحمد ابن علي الاصبهاني، عن إبراهيم بن محمد الثقفي قال: أخبرنا مخول بن إبراهيم قال: حدثنا عبد الجبار بن العباس الهمداني، عن عمار بن معاوية الدهني، عن عمرة بنت أفعي قالت: سمعت ام سلمة رضي الله عنها تقول: نزلت هذه الآية في بيتي ” إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا ” قالت: وفي البيت سبعة رسول الله وجبرئيل وميكائيل وعلي وفاطمة والحسن والحسين صلوات الله عليهم، قالت: وأنا على الباب فقلت: يارسول الله ألست من أهل البيت؟ قال: إنك من أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه وآله. وما قال: إنك من أهل البيت
 
My Father (ra) he said: Abdullah ibn Al-Hasan Al-Mu’addab narrated to us, from Ahmad ibn Ali Al-Asbahani, from Ibrahim ibn Muhammad Al-Thaqafi, he said: Makhul ibn Ibrahim informed us, he said: Abdul-Jabbar ibn Al-Abbas Al-Hamadani narrated to us, from Ammar ibn Mu’awiyya Al-Dahni, from Amrah bint Af’i, she said: I heard Umm Salamah (ra) say: “This verse was revealed in my house: ‘Allah intends only to remove impurity from you, Oh People of the House, and purify you through a purification. (33:33)'” She said: “And in the house were seven, The Messenger of Allah, and Jibra’il, and Mika’il, and Ali, and Fatima, and Al-Hasan, and Al-Hussain (sa).” She said: “And I was at the door. So I said: ‘Oh Messenger of Allah, am I not from the People of Your House?’ He said: ‘Verily you are from the Women of the Prophet (saww).’ And he never said ‘You are from the People of my House.'”
 
Kitab Al-Khisal volume 2 page 439-40
 
Notes:
 
An interesting point in this narration is that it’s mentioned that 7 were present when this verse was revealed, whereas usually it’s only 5 or 6 (in the addition of Jibra’il), even Shaykh Saduq (ra) notes this when he says regarding this Hadith:
 
قال مصنف هذا الكتاب رضي الله عنه: هذا حديث غريب لا أعرفه إلا بهذا الطريق والمعروف أن أهل البيت الذين نزلت فيهم آية التطهير خمسة وسادسهم جبرئيل عليه السلام
 
The Compiler of this book (ra) said: “This narration is estranged, I do not know it except by this transmittion, and it is known that the People of the House for whom this verse of purification was revealed regarding were five, and the sixth from them was Jibra’il (as)
 
Second Narration:
 
This next narration is extremely long so I will post and translate the chain and the part which is necessary.
 
حدثنا أبي، ومحمد بن الحسن بن أحمد بن الوليد رضي الله عنهما قالا: حدثنا سعد بن عبد الله قال: حدثنا محمد بن الحسين بن أبي الخطاب، عن الحكم بن – مسكين الثقفي، عن أبي الجارود وهشام أبي ساسان، وأبي طارق السراج، عن عامر بن واثلة قال: كنت في البيت يوم الشورى فسمعت عليا عليه السلام وهو يقول:…..نشدتكم بالله هل فيكم أحد أنزل الله فيه آية التطهير على رسوله صلى الله عليه وآله ” إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا ” فأخذ رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله كساء خيبريا فضمني فيه وفاطمة عليها السلام والحسن والحسين ثم قال: ” يا رب هؤلاء أهل بيتي فأذهب عنهم الرجس وطهرهم تطهيرا “؟ قالوا: اللهم لا
 
My Father, and Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn Al-Waleed (ra) narrated to us, they said: Sa’d ibn Abdullah narrated to us, he said: Muhammad ibn Al-Hussain ibn Abi Al-Khattab narrated to us: From Al-Hakam ibn Maskeen Al-Thaqafi, from Abi Al-Jaarood and Hisham ibn Abi Sasan, from Abi Tariq Al-Siraj, from Amir ibn Wathila, he said: I was in the house on the day of the Shura, and I heard Ali (as) and he was saying: “…..I implore you by Allah, is there one among you, for who Allah revealed the verse of purification upon the Messenger of Allah (saww): ‘Allah intends only to remove impurity from you, Oh People of the House, and purify you through a purification. (33:33)’ So the Messenger of Allah (saww) took the cloak of khaybar, and pushed me into it, and Fatima (as) and Al-Hasan and Al-Hussain, then he said: ‘Oh Lord, these are the People of my House, so remove from them uncleanliness, and purify them through a purification.’?” They said: “Allahuma, no.”
 
Al-Khisal volume 2 page 612
 
Notes:

This is the day of the Shura, after the death of Umar ibn Al-Khattab.

Update:

The Shia quoted another narration:

I apologize for updating this so long as I’m preoccupied with other things as well, however Insha’Allah I plan on updating my research more this week. I also wanted to add in a narration I skipped over when I was doing Al-Khisal:
 حدثنا أحمد بن الحسن القطان، ومحمد بن أحمد السناني، وعلي بن – موسى الدقاق، والحسين بن إبراهيم بن أحمد بن هشام المكتب ، وعلي بن عبد الله الوراق رضي الله عنهم قالوا: حدثنا أبو العباس أحمد بن يحيى بن زكريا القطان قال: حدثنا بكر بن عبد الله بن حبيب قال: حدثنا تميم بن بهلول: قال: حدثنا سليمان بن حكيم، عن ثور بن يزيد، عن مكحول قال: قال أمير المؤمنين علي بن – أبي طالب عليه السلام:……وأما السبعون فإن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله نام ونومني وزوجتي فاطمة وابني الحسن والحسين وألقى علينا عباءة قطوانية فأنزل الله تبارك وتعالى فينا ” إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا ” وقال جبرئيل عليه السلام: أنا منكم يا محمد، فكان سادسنا جبرئيل عليه السلام
Ahmad ibn Al-Hasan Al-Qattan narrated to us, and Muhammad ibn Ahmad Al-Sinani, and Ahmad Al-Sinani, and Ali ibn Musa Al-Daqqaq, and Al-Hussain ibn Ibrahim ibn Ahmad ibn Hisham Al-Mukattab, and Ali ibn Abdullah Al-Warraq (may Allah be pleased with them), they said: Abu Al-Abbas Ahmad ibn Yahya ibn Zakariyya Al-Qattan narrated to us, he said: Bakr ibn Abdullah ibn Habeeb narrated to us, he said: Tamim ibn Bahlool narrated to us, he said: Sulayman ibn Hakeem narrated to us, from Thawr ibn Yazid, from Makhool, he said: Amir Al-Mu’minin Ali ibn Abi Talib (as) said: “…..And as for the seventieth, verily The Messenger of Allah (saww) lay down, and he made me lay down, and my wife Fatima, and ym sons Al-Hasan and Al-Hussain, and threw upon us a Qatwani cloak, and Allah (tabarak wa ta’ali) revealed regarding us: ‘Allah intends only to remove impurity from you, Oh People of the House, and purify you through a purification. (33:33)’. And Jibra’il (as) said: ‘I am from you, Oh Muhammad.’ So Jibra’il (as) was the sixth of us.”
Al-Khisal volume 2 page 637
Notes: The word “Naama” means “he slept”, and the word “Nawwamani” means “he made me sleep”, but I found it more appropriate to translate them as “He lay down”, and “He made me lay down” in this context.

The narration is weak due to majhool narrators like Tameem bin Bahlool. I am also pretty sure that Thawr bin Yazeed and Makhool are not thiqaat since they are not Shia narrators in the first place.

Also, Ibn Al-Ja’abi suggested that my weakening of the narrations that he provided are based on my standards. This is false. Every rule that I use to weaken a hadith is based on one that is championed by Shia hadith scholars like Al-Khoei, Al-Subhani, and Al-Mohseni.

Ibn Al-Ja’abi then said:

Insha’Allah when I update my thread next, I will also post my reply to Farid, however, as I’ve said before I don’t engage in tit for tat polemics and won’t make my research thread into a debate one. In addition, before I continue anything else, I’ll ask Farid to read the title of my thread because he seems to misunderstand its purpose, it reads “A Collection Of Hadith Al-Kisa In Shia Books”, not “A Collection Of Mu’tabar Versions Of Hadith Al-Kisa In Shia Books”. I hope it’s understood that when I don’t post the grading of a narration, I’m not claiming that it is Mu’tabar or I haven’t attempted to try to see if it is.

 And just a point to you, clearly Shi’as had access to these narrations in our own books, the question now is do reliable ones exist with us, and the answer is yes.

 Also, a joke is only funny so many times

It seems like Ibn Al-Ja’abi has shifted to a much more lenient approach to collecting the narrations, since his original intention was to collect the authentic narrations on the subject. This is obvious since the very reason he created the thread was to respond to my challenge that these narrations do not exist through authentic chains. I never argued that these didn’t exist at all (through weak chains) in Shia books.

Leave a comment

Filed under Articles, Debates: Ahle-sunnah VS shia, Hadith science, Rebuttals, Revealing Shia sect, Shiite's sahih hadith