بسم الله الرحمن الرحیمWritten 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:
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 , 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 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.”
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:
This is the day of the Shura, after the death of Umar ibn Al-Khattab.
The Shia quoted another narration:
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.