Wasil

LOCKED Munazara: Farid vs Wasil (Walid)

412 posts in this topic

[quote][b]
You are showing ignorance here when you thought companions in the words of najashi etc means just people whom najashi and tusi met because the word "ashabbuna" (our companions) mean "the shia twelvers " and here his expression means ijmaa that ibrahim ibn hashim was the first to spread hadith of koofis (people of kufa) in Qom. If he said a number of our people or some of them then this is not indication of ijmaa.[/quote]

Ignorance?

If "ashabuna" implies a consensus, then Al-Najashi shouldn't go against it.

In the biography of Mohammed bin Bahr Al-Ruhani (p. 384):

قال بعض أصحابنا: إنه كان في مذهبه ارتفاع، وحديثه قريب من السلامة. ولا أدري من أين قيل ذلك.

Some of our "companions" said: He was "high" in his [i]mathhab[/i] (he had [i]ghuluu[/i]). And his hadith is close to being clean, and I don't know what caused them to say this.
[/b]
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[b]Salam farid

well the issue is that you are trying to impose your opinion and analysis upon us! you have to realize that we have an opinion and it's not fair or scientific for you to discredit almost all our scholars opinions about trustworthiness of ibrahim ibnhashim and our readings into his wathaqa (trustworthiness )based on OUR OWN methodology. I am not saying you cannot disagree! not at all but to make yourself the sole judge upon our manhaj and your opinion greater than that of our scholars desperation akhi!

There's no way you can weakened the master of hadith ibrahim ibn hashim (ra) based on your adopted sunni methods that you yourself contradicted earlier!!

we told you that whatever the corner you look at ibrahim ibn hashim from then he is thiqat or at least acceptable :

1-tawtheeq ibn alwaleed even though it's not through nass (text where he said : he is thiqat )

2-claim of ijmaaa by sheikh tusi and mentioning ijma without limitation to particular layer of scholars means the ijma(consensus ) is both from mutaqaddimeen(early scholars and muta'akhireen ( late scholars )

3-he is from mashayikh al-ijazah and some some accept this (this is new point but i didn't use it because i disagree with it )

4-he is relied upon extensively by thiqat (trustworthy narrators )

5- his hadith is used in fatawi (islamic rules) of shyukh altaifah(the leaders of the shia sect) (this is also new point that some scholars believed in but i don't )

6-he is muwathqa by muta'akhireen (late scholars ) and we shia accept their opinions even without tawtheeq al-mutaqaddimeen (early scholars ) apart from al-khoei and his students and few others.

7-lastly the factthat he spread thousands of koofi( from kufa) hadiths amongst the Qommis (people of Qom ) knowing their strictness and their sensitivity.

this last point you wanted me to answer so ok i will through the view of sayed al-istrabadai (ra)who said answering the akhbari scholar al-bahrani :

بقاؤه مدّة مديدة عندهم ، و توطّنه في بلدهم ، و نشر حديث الكوفيّين فيهم ، و قبولهم إيّاها عنه ، و علمهم بها على ما هو ظاهر ـ و ستعرف أيضاً ـ و عدم صدور قدح من أحد منهم بوجه من الوجوه فيه في تلك المدّة المديدة ، مع ما يظهر من حالهم من قدحهم الرجال خصوصاً بالنسبة إلى الأجلّة ، و سيّما (2) ما ارتكبوا بالنسبة إليهم من إخراج البلد و غير ذلك من الأذيّة ، و خصوصاً باعتبار رواية المراسيل و عن المجاهيل و غيرهما ممّا لم يثبت عندهم عدالة رواتها ، فبملاحظة ما ذكر و أنّ أحاديث الكوفيّين ما كانوا يعرفونها قبل نشره حتّى لا يحتاجوا إلى ملاحظة حال من يؤخذ عنه و أنه لو لم يعرف حاله لم يضرّ ، سيّما و أنْ يكونوا يعرفونها واحداً واحداً و بالكيفيات متناً و سنداً ؛ فبملاحظة جميع ما ذكر يترجّح في النظر عدالته عندهم ، بل في الواقع أيضاً و سيّما بعد ملاحظة باقي ما ذكر.
فإنْ أردت من الدلالات القطعيّة منها ففساد ما ذكرت ظاهر ، سيّما و بعد ملاحظة ما ذكرنا في الفائدة الاُولى.
و إنْ إردت الأعمّ فانكارها مكابرة إلا أنْ يدّعي اعتبار الأقوى ، ففيه ما مرّ ف الفائدة مضافاً إلى أنه أقوى من كثير من التوثيقات

he said : his long stay with them ( Qommis : people of Qom) ...and spreading of hadith of koofis (people of kufa) among them and their acceptance of his narrations by them with their knowldge of these hadiths apparently and the lack of criticism by anyone of them even during that long stay , all this with what is known about them in criticizing the narrators even the great ones as they did to them by kicking them out of their land and other harm ....added to this that [u]this is greater than many forms of tawtheeq ( deeming a narrator trsutworthy )[/u](rough translation of the important and relevant words ).

and many scholars think the same as allmah al-istrabadi (ra)

in brief you have no case against him using our methods . your only case is maybe what you deem as wrong in his hadith or what seems like a lie or his manhaj in narrating narrations and this can be discussed later inshallah.

Now shall we start with abu hurairah or you prefer an other subject before them ?![/b]
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for the view of one or two scholars from late scholars who think ibrahim ibn hashim is not muwathaq then this view is baseless because these are very small minority among the shia and their status is nothing compared to that of people like shaheed thani and ibn tawoos and others. but even those like the scholar you mentioned who is the writer of madarik i hope ( correct me if i am wrong)accepts ibrahim ibn hashim as thiqa when it suits him and weak when it doesn't !! :JazakAllah:

here's what you posted

[quote]
Firstly, as I’ve implied, no one was clear about this until the seventh century, and more importantly, I did find a statement by Al-Sayid Mohamemd Al-Amili in which he says:



ويمكن المناقشة في الرواية من حيث السند بإبراهيم بن هاشم حيث لم ينص علماؤنا على توثيقه[/quote]
here's what allamah al-ardabili said answering him :

فمن حيث طعنه في ابراهيم بن هاشم بعدم التوثيق وكذا طعنه في سليمان بن خالد ورده الرواية بذلك، فانه قد قبل رواية ابراهيم في غير موضع من شرحه وعدها من قسم الحسن مصرحا بانها لا تقصر عن الصحيح، بل نظمها في الصحيح ايضا في مواضع وان طعن فيها ايضا في مواضع اخر مثل هذا الموضع، كل ذلك يدور مدار احتياجه لها تارة وعدمه اخرى، وهذا من جملة المواضع التي اضطرب فيها كلامه، ومن ذلك ما ذكره في كتاب الصوم في مسألة رؤية الهلال قبل الزوال حيث قال: " والمسألة قوية الاشكال لان الروايتين المتضمنتين لاعتبار ذلك معتبرتا الاسناد، والاولى منهما لا تقصر عن مرتبة الصحيح لان دخولها في مرتبة الحسن بابراهيم بن هاشم

as for his criticism of ibrahim ibn hashim by lack of tawtheeq and also sulaiman ibn khalid and his rejection of this narration because of this then he acceptednarration of ibrahim(ibn hashim he means ) many times in his explanation (sharh) and considered them from the class of Hasan(good sanad ) saying that it's not lowerthan sahih !!!!!!!!!!! so there's inconsistencies in his words ......and he said( about a narration) : and the issue here is strong because the two narrations ...are relibale "sanadan"(chain is reliable ) and the first narration is no less than sahih even with it's classification as hasan (good sanad ) by IBRAHIM IBN HASHIM!

you see farid even the scholar you used is not really good for your case .

ws Edited by Walid
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Farid' timestamp='1314038748' post='97572']
[quote][b]
You are showing ignorance here when you thought companions in the words of najashi etc means just people whom najashi and tusi met because the word "ashabbuna" (our companions) mean "the shia twelvers " and here his expression means ijmaa that ibrahim ibn hashim was the first to spread hadith of koofis (people of kufa) in Qom. If he said a number of our people or some of them then this is not indication of ijmaa.[/quote]

Ignorance?

If "ashabuna" implies a consensus, then Al-Najashi shouldn't go against it.

In the biography of Mohammed bin Bahr Al-Ruhani (p. 384):

قال بعض أصحابنا: إنه كان في مذهبه ارتفاع، وحديثه قريب من السلامة. ولا أدري من أين قيل ذلك.

[color="#FF0000"]Some[/color] of our "companions" said: He was "high" in his [i]mathhab[/i] (he had [i]ghuluu[/i]). And his hadith is close to being clean, and I don't know what caused them to say this.
[/b]
[/quote]


just read this and i say : nice try by the way ! here's what i said akhi farid :
[quote]
because the word "ashabbuna" (our companions) mean "the shia twelvers " and here his expression means ijmaa that ibrahim ibn hashim was the first to spread hadith of koofis (people of kufa) in Qom.[color="#FF0000"] If he said a number of our people or some of them then this is not indication of ijmaa[/color][/quote]

nice try but Nah !it's confirming what i'm saying not what you are assuming.
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote] [b]
[b]we told you that whatever the corner you look at ibrahim ibn hashim from then he is thiqat or at least acceptable :[/b]

[b]1-tawtheeq ibn alwaleed even though it's not through nass (text where he said : he is thiqat )[/b]

[b]2-claim of ijmaaa by sheikh tusi and mentioning ijma without limitation to particular layer of scholars means the ijma(consensus ) is both from mutaqaddimeen(early scholars and muta'akhireen ( late scholars ) [/b]

[b]3-he is from mashayikh al-ijazah and some some accept this (this is new point but i didn't use it because i disagree with it )[/b]

[b]4-he is relied upon extensively by thiqat (trustworthy narrators )[/b]

[b]5- his hadith is used in fatawi (islamic rules) of shyukh altaifah(the leaders of the shia sect) (this is also new point that some scholars believed in but i don't )[/b]

[b]6-he is muwathqa by muta'akhireen (late scholars ) and we shia accept their opinions even without tawtheeq al-mutaqaddimeen (early scholars ) apart from al-khoei and his students and few others.[/b]

[b]7-lastly the factthat he spread thousands of koofi( from kufa) hadiths amongst the Qommis (people of Qom ) knowing their strictness and their sensitivity.[/quote][/b][/b]

[b] [/b]

[b]My responses to these:[/b]

[b] [/b]

[b]1- There is a disagreement upon this, and you yourself had to create a new [i]manhaj [/i]in order to accept this view.[/b]

[b]2- First of all, you meant Ibn Tawoos, and not Al-Tusi... and secondly, his claim is contradicted by Al-Hilli who has rejected that there is any specific statement. Therefore, we are left with the conclusion that Ibn Tawoos is talking about the [i]muta’akhireen[/i].[/b]

[b]3- There is a disagreement regarding this and if you aren’t convinced by it yourself, then you shouldn’t bring it up as evidence. Surely, relying on evidence that you don’t find acceptable implies that there is doubt about Ibrahim bin Hashim.[/b][b] [/b]

[b]4- There are cases in which weak and unknown narrators are relied upon.[/b]

[b]
[/b][b]5- See #3.[/b] [b]

6- As you said, there is a difference of opinion in this issue. [/b]

[b]7- He spread his hadith to nine people, max. I don’t see how this classifies as [i]tawtheeq[/i].[/b]



[size="3"]Furthermore, not all Qummis were sensitive and strict. Ironically, the bunch that narrated the hadiths of Ibrahim bin Hashim are the same that narrated the hadiths of Sahl bin Ziyad, Ahmad bin Hilal, and Al-Sayyari, who are all completely rejected by Shia hadithists. So, yes, these narrators, which apparently make up the population of Qom, did narrate the hadiths of liars and weak narrators. [/size]



[size="3"]Anyhow, I appreciate your attempt to make the list of reasons for the reliability of Ibrahim bin Hashim a long one. However, each of these fail, especially if one follows the school of Al-Khoei when it comes to [i]rijali [/i]sciences.[/size]



I think that I am done arguing theory right now. I’d try to take a more practical approach to the reliability of Ibrahim bin Hashim Al-Qummi.



First of all, I would like to make it clear that Ibrahim bin Hashim is one of the most fascinating and mysterious narrators in Shiasm. This is because he has been around for so long, and has narrated thousands of hadiths from specifics narrators, and yet, he has narrated so few from the Imams themselves.



As I searched through some books of Shia hadith, I only found a couple of narrations in which he is directly narrating and not quoting another source and my results were pretty interesting. I did realize that the amount of narrations in total do not in any way exceed ten. Most of which are actually weak narrations. However the few authentic ones do cause one to raise an eyebrow.



The first is from Usool Al-Kafi (1/317):



[size="4"]أستأذن على أبي جعفر عليه السلام قوم من أهل النواحي من الشيعة، فأذن لهم فدخلوا فسألوه في مجلس واحد عن [/size]ثلاثين ألف[color="black"] مسألة فأجاب عليه السلام وله عشر سنين.[/color][b] [/b]





Rough translation: Ali bin Ibrahim from his father: A group of Shias requested to enter upon Abu Jafa’ar (as). So he let them in, and they asked him in one sitting about thirty thousand issues, and he replied to them, and he was ten years old.



This is unacceptable. For one cannot ask thirty thousand questions in one sitting. It would take over a week, without sleep, to ask thirty thousand questions, let alone answer them.



Be aware that Al-Majlisi, in Al-Bihar (6/104), attempted to explain this hadith, and wounded up giving seven different explanations as to how this many have happened, some of which were even magical reasons. Of course, the simplest reason is most often the correct one. In this case, it is that Ibrahim bin Hashim isn’t reliable.



I will post some more examples as we continue, inshallah.



Walid, you may bring your reasons as to why we should accept this hadith from Ibrahim bin Hashim. You may also go for Abu Huraira if you’d like. Edited by Farid
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Farid' timestamp='1314176768' post='97587']
[quote] [b]
[b]we told you that whatever the corner you look at ibrahim ibn hashim from then he is thiqat or at least acceptable :[/b]

[b]1-tawtheeq ibn alwaleed even though it's not through nass (text where he said : he is thiqat )[/b]

[b]2-claim of ijmaaa by sheikh tusi and mentioning ijma without limitation to particular layer of scholars means the ijma(consensus ) is both from mutaqaddimeen(early scholars and muta'akhireen ( late scholars ) [/b]

[b]3-he is from mashayikh al-ijazah and some some accept this (this is new point but i didn't use it because i disagree with it )[/b]

[b]4-he is relied upon extensively by thiqat (trustworthy narrators )[/b]

[b]5- his hadith is used in fatawi (islamic rules) of shyukh altaifah(the leaders of the shia sect) (this is also new point that some scholars believed in but i don't )[/b]

[b]6-he is muwathqa by muta'akhireen (late scholars ) and we shia accept their opinions even without tawtheeq al-mutaqaddimeen (early scholars ) apart from al-khoei and his students and few others.[/b]

[b]7-lastly the factthat he spread thousands of koofi( from kufa) hadiths amongst the Qommis (people of Qom ) knowing their strictness and their sensitivity.[/quote][/b][/b]

[b] [/b]

[b]My responses to these:[/b]

[b] [/b]

[b]1- There is a disagreement upon this, and you yourself had to create a new [i]manhaj [/i]in order to accept this view.[/b]

[b]2- First of all, you meant Ibn Tawoos, and not Al-Tusi... and secondly, his claim is contradicted by Al-Hilli who has rejected that there is any specific statement. Therefore, we are left with the conclusion that Ibn Tawoos is talking about the [i]muta’akhireen[/i].[/b]

[b]3- There is a disagreement regarding this and if you aren’t convinced by it yourself, then you shouldn’t bring it up as evidence. Surely, relying on evidence that you don’t find acceptable implies that there is doubt about Ibrahim bin Hashim.[/b][b] [/b]

[b]4- There are cases in which weak and unknown narrators are relied upon.[/b]

[b]
[/b][b]5- See #3.[/b] [b]

6- As you said, there is a difference of opinion in this issue. [/b]

[b]7- He spread his hadith to nine people, max. I don’t see how this classifies as [i]tawtheeq[/i].[/b]



[size="3"]Furthermore, not all Qummis were sensitive and strict. Ironically, the bunch that narrated the hadiths of Ibrahim bin Hashim are the same that narrated the hadiths of Sahl bin Ziyad, Ahmad bin Hilal, and Al-Sayyari, who are all completely rejected by Shia hadithists. So, yes, these narrators, which apparently make up the population of Qom, did narrate the hadiths of liars and weak narrators. [/size]



[size="3"]Anyhow, I appreciate your attempt to make the list of reasons for the reliability of Ibrahim bin Hashim a long one. However, each of these fail, especially if one follows the school of Al-Khoei when it comes to [i]rijali [/i]sciences.[/size]



I think that I am done arguing theory right now. I’d try to take a more practical approach to the reliability of Ibrahim bin Hashim Al-Qummi.



First of all, I would like to make it clear that Ibrahim bin Hashim is one of the most fascinating and mysterious narrators in Shiasm. This is because he has been around for so long, and has narrated thousands of hadiths from specifics narrators, and yet, he has narrated so few from the Imams themselves.



As I searched through some books of Shia hadith, I only found a couple of narrations in which he is directly narrating and not quoting another source and my results were pretty interesting. I did realize that the amount of narrations in total do not in any way exceed ten. Most of which are actually weak narrations. However the few authentic ones do cause one to raise an eyebrow.



The first is from Usool Al-Kafi (1/317):



[size="4"]أستأذن على أبي جعفر عليه السلام قوم من أهل النواحي من الشيعة، فأذن لهم فدخلوا فسألوه في مجلس واحد عن [/size]ثلاثين ألف[color="black"] مسألة فأجاب عليه السلام وله عشر سنين.[/color][b] [/b]





Rough translation: Ali bin Ibrahim from his father: A group of Shias requested to enter upon Abu Jafa’ar (as). So he let them in, and they asked him in one sitting about thirty thousand issues, and he replied to them, and he was ten years old.



This is unacceptable. For one cannot ask thirty thousand questions in one sitting. It would take over a week, without sleep, to ask thirty thousand questions, let alone answer them.



Be aware that Al-Majlisi, in Al-Bihar (6/104), attempted to explain this hadith, and wounded up giving seven different explanations as to how this many have happened, some of which were even magical reasons. Of course, the simplest reason is most often the correct one. In this case, it is that Ibrahim bin Hashim isn’t reliable.



I will post some more examples as we continue, inshallah.



Walid, you may bring your reasons as to why we should accept this hadith from Ibrahim bin Hashim. You may also go for Abu Huraira if you’d like.
[/quote]

Where did i tell you to accept this hadith?? secondly if we accept then we can speculate that by "majlis" he means one majliss over many days (with breaks between them ) or that he said 30 thousand in way of exaggeration like when i say : i told you a million times so and so ...

but I don't believe that Ibrahim ibn hashim (ra) was a regular companion of the imam and i doubt that he even met him (as) because i don't know of anyone saying this and [u]if[/u] he was there he would have narrated at least hundreds of hadiths from jawad(as) (the imam mentioned in the hadith where it was reported he answered 30000 questions) . So I say it's not proven that he was from ashab al-jawad (as) and even his meeting with ridha(as)[u] is doubted by najashi.[/u]

secondly please stop mentioning the view of allamah if you are misunderstanding it : he didn't say nobody strengthened him but he said: nobody stated his justness with a text and here's what sayedal-istrabadi explained this:

و لا تعديله بالنتصيص.
اشارة إلى أنّ التعديل ظاهر من الأصحاب إلا أنّهم لم ينصّوا عليه.

he said : this is indication(from allamah ) that tad'eel ( deeming someone thiqat or just) is clear from ashab ( companions : shia scholars ) but they didn't state this with literal nass ( meaning they didn't say he is : thiqat or just but they did tawtheeq of him)

back to the hadith ofthe 30000 question: there must be some problem with this hadith sanadan or matnan even if it appears sahih sanadan but i say it's "Munkar".

now you have as sunnis ahmed ibn hanbal(rah) claiming he memorized one million hadiths !!!!!!!!!!

here's what dhahabi(one of the big gun of sunni rijel and ilm hadith etc ) said :

قال عبد الله بن أحمد : قال لي أبو زرعة : أبوك يحفظ ألف ألف حديث ، فقيل له : وما يدريك ؟ قال : ذاكرته فأخذت عليه الأبواب . فهذه حكاية صحيحة في سعة علم أبي عبد الله ، وكانوا يعدون في ذلك المكرر ، والأثر ، وفتوى التابعي ، وما فُسِّر ، ونحو ذلك وإلا فالمتون المرفوعة القوية لا تبلغ عشر معشار ذلك .

translation: abdullah ibn ahmed(ibn hanbal..the sunni imam the son of the sunni imam ) said abu zar'a ( an other sunni imam ) said to me : [u]your father ( ahmed ibn hanbal)memorizes one million hadith ( alf alf =one million) [/u]so he was asked : and how do you know , so he answered : i sat reviewing with him so i took all chapters from him

the dhahabi commented: [u]this narration is authentic (sahiha )[/u] about vastness of knowldge of abu abdilleh ( ahmedibn hanbal )and they used to count among this (hadiths ) the repeated and athar( hadith not from the prophet but from sahabah etc ) and fatwa of tabi'i and what was explained because if the marfu'a narrations (proper hadiths ) cannot reach the tenth of the tenth of this number .

http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/showalam.php?ids=12251

Any correction in translation welcome.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]
back to the hadith ofthe 30000 question: there must be some problem with this hadith sanadan or matnan even if it appears sahih sanadan but i say it's "Munkar".[/quote]



Indeed. I agree that it is [i]munkar[/i], but apparently for different reasons than yours.



Here is another hadith that proves that he was with Al-Jawad:



[b][size=4]عن علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه قال: كنت عند أبي جعفر الثاني عليه السلام إذ دخل عليه صالح بن محمد بن سهل وكان يتولى له الوقف بقم، فقال يا سيدي اجعلني من عشرة آلاف في حل، فإني أنفقتها، فقال له: أنت في حل، فلما خرج صالح، قال أبو جعفر عليه السلام: أحدهم يثب على أموال حق آل محمد وأيتامهم ومساكينهم وفقرائهم وأبناء سبيلهم فيأخذه ثم يجيء في حل، أتراه ظن أني أقول: لا أفعل، والله ليسألنهم الله يوم القيامة عن ذلك سؤلًا حثيثً[/size][/b][b][size=4][/size][/b]

[b][size=4] [/size][/b]

Rough translation: From Ali bin Ibrahim from his father: I was with Abu Ja’afar the second (as) when Salih bin Mohammed bin Sahl came in, and he used to be in charge of endowments in Qom. So he said, “Sir, I have spent ten thousand, make it halal for me.” He said, “It is halal.” So when Salih left, Abu Ja’afar said: “He unjustly uses the money of the Aal of Mohammed and their orphans and their poor and then asks for it to be halal? Do you think that he thought that I would say ‘I will not’? By Allah he will be asked on the day of judgement about this money!”





Notice, the hypocrisy that is attributed to Al-Jawad by Ibrahim bin Hashim. Firstly, we need to keep in mind that this man was appointed by Al-Jawad himself. It is a man that he himself trusted. However, we find Ibrahim bin Hashim accusing him of stealing the money of Ahlul Bayt. Furthermore, we find Al-Jawad forgiving him in his face, then promising that he will face a harsh judgement for stealing. Isn’t the Imam supposed to advise those that do wrong? Or at least condemn them? Keep in mind that there is no room for [i]taqiyyah[/i] since Al-Jawad was in charge of this person since he was appointed by him.



Please try to focus on the issue at hand without diverting the topic to Imam Ahmad. Al-Thahabi’s explanation is sufficient. Imam Ahmad didn’t learn a million hadiths in a single [i]majlis[/i]. Notice that Al-Thahabi said that this includes [i]athaar [/i]and repeated narrations through different chains.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Farid' timestamp='1314239267' post='97659']
[quote]
back to the hadith ofthe 30000 question: there must be some problem with this hadith sanadan or matnan even if it appears sahih sanadan but i say it's "Munkar".[/quote]



Indeed. I agree that it is [i]munkar[/i], but apparently for different reasons than yours.



Here is another hadith that proves that he was with Al-Jawad:



[b][size=4]عن علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه قال: كنت عند أبي جعفر الثاني عليه السلام إذ دخل عليه صالح بن محمد بن سهل وكان يتولى له الوقف بقم، فقال يا سيدي اجعلني من عشرة آلاف في حل، فإني أنفقتها، فقال له: أنت في حل، فلما خرج صالح، قال أبو جعفر عليه السلام: أحدهم يثب على أموال حق آل محمد وأيتامهم ومساكينهم وفقرائهم وأبناء سبيلهم فيأخذه ثم يجيء في حل، أتراه ظن أني أقول: لا أفعل، والله ليسألنهم الله يوم القيامة عن ذلك سؤلًا حثيثً[/size][/b][b][size=4][/size][/b]

[b][size=4] [/size][/b]

Rough translation: From Ali bin Ibrahim from his father: I was with Abu Ja’afar the second (as) when Salih bin Mohammed bin Sahl came in, and he used to be in charge of endowments in Qom. So he said, “Sir, I have spent ten thousand, make it halal for me.” He said, “It is halal.” So when Salih left, Abu Ja’afar said: “He unjustly uses the money of the Aal of Mohammed and their orphans and their poor and then asks for it to be halal? Do you think that he thought that I would say ‘I will not’? By Allah he will be asked on the day of judgement about this money!”





Notice, the hypocrisy that is attributed to Al-Jawad by Ibrahim bin Hashim. Firstly, we need to keep in mind that this man was appointed by Al-Jawad himself. It is a man that he himself trusted. However, we find Ibrahim bin Hashim accusing him of stealing the money of Ahlul Bayt. Furthermore, we find Al-Jawad forgiving him in his face, then promising that he will face a harsh judgement for stealing. Isn’t the Imam supposed to advise those that do wrong? Or at least condemn them? Keep in mind that there is no room for [i]taqiyyah[/i] since Al-Jawad was in charge of this person since he was appointed by him.



Please try to focus on the issue at hand without diverting the topic to Imam Ahmad. Al-Thahabi’s explanation is sufficient. Imam Ahmad didn’t learn a million hadiths in a single [i]majlis[/i]. Notice that Al-Thahabi said that this includes [i]athaar [/i]and repeated narrations through different chains.
[/quote]
[b]
This hadith is incorrect because ibrahim ibn hashim cannot have been from ashaab al-jawad (as) as nobody said this from mutaqaddimeen (early scholars ) but late scholars even though as i said might be able to know what the early ones didn't know but there's no proof for this but this narration from al-kafi and this narration is NOT from Ibrahim ibn hashim but Ibrahim ibn sahl ibn Hashim and he is majhool so sheikh al-kulaini assumed that this was the father of ali ibn ibrahim and the proof is that sheikh tusi narrated it from "ibrahim ibn sahl "" and not "ibrahim ibn hashim" and here's the narration from istibsaar:

وروى[color="#FF0000"] إبراهيم بن سهل[/color] بن هاشم قال: كنت عند أبي جعفر الثاني عليه السلام
إذ دخل عليه صالح بن محمد بن سهل وكان يتولى له الوقف بقم فقال: يا سيدي اجعلني من
عشرة ألاف درهم في حل فإني أنفقتها فقال: له أنت في حل فلما خرج صالح قال:
أبو جعفر عليه السلام أحدهم يثب على أموال آل محمد وأيتامهم ومساكينهم وفقرائهم
وأبناء سبيلهم فيأخذها ثم يجئ فيقول اجعلني في حل، أتراه ظن أني أقول
لا أفعل، والله ليسألنهم الله يوم القيامة عن ذلك سؤالا حثيثا.

http://www.shiaonlinelibrary.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A8/1158_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%8A%D8%AE-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B7%D9%88%D8%B3%D9%8A-%D8%AC-%D9%A2/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%81%D8%AD%D8%A9_60#top

this alone added to the lack of proof of Ibrahim ibn hashim being from ashab al-jawad casts big doubt about this hadith especially that this hadith goes against sahih narrations where "khums" was put on hold for shia since the time of imams before imam al-jawad (as).

yes the hadith is recorded elsewhere as going through ibrahim ibn hashim but this is an apparent mistake.

Also ibrahim ibn hashim was "addicted"(i am saying it in an affectionate way ) to narrations so there's no way he would narrate couple of hadiths from jawad(as) if he met him and he is the one narrating thousands of hadiths from fallible people.

now you could start using views of scholars from muta'akhireen about how ibrahim ibn hashim was from ashab al-jawad(as) !!! and you could say : who are you compared to these scholars !!! well that's fine but for me it's up to people to judge for themselves :

1- no one from early scholars said that ibrahim ibn hashim was from ashab al-jawad(as)

2-none of the muta'akhireen used any objective evidence apart from hadith that didn't convince mutaqaddimeen that he was from ashab al-jawad.

3- the personality of ibrahim wouldn't allow him to neglect hadith of imams (as) if he met him and he is the one who narrates relentlessly from fallible people.

Now this is great :

[quote]
[color="#FF0000"]Notice, the hypocrisy that is attributed to Al-Jawad by Ibrahim bin Hashim[/color]. Firstly, we need to keep in mind that this man was appointed by Al-Jawad himself. It is a man that he himself trusted. However, we find Ibrahim bin Hashim accusing him of stealing the money of Ahlul Bayt. Furthermore, we find Al-Jawad forgiving him in his face, then promising that he will face a harsh judgement for stealing. Isn’t the Imam supposed to advise those that do wrong? Or at least condemn them? Keep in mind that there is no room for taqiyyah since Al-Jawad was in charge of this person since he was appointed by him.[/quote]

you seem to have forgotten hadith of ayesha about the prophet In sahih al-bukhari :

http://hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&BookID=24&PID=5808

5707 حدثنا صدقة بن الفضل أخبرنا ابن عيينة سمعت ابن المنكدر سمع عروة بن الزبير أن عائشة رضي الله عنها أخبرته قالت استأذن رجل على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال ائذنوا له بئس أخو العشيرة أو ابن العشيرة فلما دخل ألان له الكلام قلت يا رسول الله قلت الذي قلت ثم ألنت له الكلام قال أي عائشة إن شر الناس من تركه الناس أو ودعه الناس اتقاء فحشه

rough Translation :ayesha said a man asked for permission to enter upon rasool allah (saww) so he (saww) said: allow him to enter WHAT A HORRIBLE PERSON (or awful person from such tribe ) so when the man came in the prophet spoke Kindly to him !!!!! so ayesha asked : you said what you said then you spoke kindly to him so he(saww) answered that the worst kind of people is whoever was left by people out of fear of his bad morals !!!

so here the prophet (saww) is backbiting a man then he "smiled in his face "( just an expression)

now back to ahmed ibn hanbal who memorized one million "hadiths " . we are talking about hadiths not anything else otherwise why didn't abu zar'a clarify this. and explanation of dhahabi was speculative and not based on views of his mashayikh till an eye witness or from mutaqaddimeen or from objective evidence. even if we suppose that what he says is correct then are you expecting us to believe that someone can memorize one million hadiths !!! Isn't it too much to expect from us ? I don't know so i let people judge !

next time i will start about abu hurairah inshallah[/b]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]
[b]
This hadith is incorrect because ibrahim ibn hashim cannot have been from ashaab al-jawad (as) as nobody said this from mutaqaddimeen (early scholars ) but late scholars even though as i said might be able to know what the early ones didn't know but there's no proof for this but this narration from al-kafi and this narration is NOT from Ibrahim ibn hashim but Ibrahim ibn sahl ibn Hashim and he is majhool so sheikh al-kulaini assumed that this was the father of ali ibn ibrahim and the proof is that sheikh tusi narrated it from "ibrahim ibn sahl "" and not "ibrahim ibn hashim" and here's the narration from istibsaar:

وروى إبراهيم بن سهل بن هاشم قال: كنت عند أبي جعفر الثاني عليه السلام
إذ دخل عليه صالح بن محمد بن سهل وكان يتولى له الوقف بقم فقال: يا سيدي اجعلني من
عشرة ألاف درهم في حل فإني أنفقتها فقال: له أنت في حل فلما خرج صالح قال:
أبو جعفر عليه السلام أحدهم يثب على أموال آل محمد وأيتامهم ومساكينهم وفقرائهم
وأبناء سبيلهم فيأخذها ثم يجئ فيقول اجعلني في حل، أتراه ظن أني أقول
لا أفعل، والله ليسألنهم الله يوم القيامة عن ذلك سؤالا حثيثا.

[url="http://www.shiaonlinelibrary.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A8/1158_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%8A%D8%AE-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B7%D9%88%D8%B3%D9%8A-%D8%AC-%D9%A2/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%81%D8%AD%D8%A9_60#top"]http://www.shiaonlin...AD%D8%A9_60#top[/url]

this alone added to the lack of proof of Ibrahim ibn hashim being from ashab al-jawad casts big doubt about this hadith especially that this hadith goes against sahih narrations where "khums" was put on hold for shia since the time of imams before imam al-jawad (as).

yes the hadith is recorded elsewhere as going through ibrahim ibn hashim but this is an apparent mistake.[/quote]


[/b]Indeed, in Al-Bihar, Al-Wasa'el, Mustadrak Al-Wasa'el, Al-Kafi, and Al-Ghaiba we all find the chains including Ali bin Ibrahim narrating from his father. Furthermore, we find the chain in Tahtheebul Ahkaam specifically referring to him as Ibrahim bin Hashim, without the inclusion of "Sahl".


Unless we are talking about a different Ali bin Ibrahim, or that he had another father, I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you. Al-Khoei has arrived at the same conclusion as I have as well of course.

[quote][b]now you could start using views of scholars from muta'akhireen about how ibrahim ibn hashim was from ashab al-jawad(as) !!! and you could say : who are you compared to these scholars !!! well that's fine but for me it's up to people to judge for themselves :

1- no one from early scholars said that ibrahim ibn hashim was from ashab al-jawad(as)

2-none of the muta'akhireen used any objective evidence apart from hadith that didn't convince mutaqaddimeen that he was from ashab al-jawad.

3- the personality of ibrahim wouldn't allow him to neglect hadith of imams (as) if he met him and he is the one who narrates relentlessly from fallible people.[/quote]

[/b]I think that you need to make a decision about whether or not to use the statements of the [i]muta'khireen.[/i] It just looks like you are flip-flopping your stance to me. Plus, there is no reason as to why Ibrahim bin Hashim couldn't have narrated from the Imams. He was there. He was a student of hadith. He had the ability to narrate a few thousand hadiths from Ibn Abi Umair, there is no reason to assume he couldn't have been at the [i]majlis [/i]of Al-Jawad a few times at least. My theory is that it is harder to get caught if you attribute lies to different people instead of narrating directly.


[quote][b]

you seem to have forgotten hadith of ayesha about the prophet In sahih al-bukhari :

[url="http://hadith.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=192&BookID=24&PID=5808"]http://hadith.al-isl...kID=24&PID=5808[/url]

5707 حدثنا صدقة بن الفضل أخبرنا ابن عيينة سمعت ابن المنكدر سمع عروة بن الزبير أن عائشة رضي الله عنها أخبرته قالت استأذن رجل على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال ائذنوا له بئس أخو العشيرة أو ابن العشيرة فلما دخل ألان له الكلام قلت يا رسول الله قلت الذي قلت ثم ألنت له الكلام قال أي عائشة إن شر الناس من تركه الناس أو ودعه الناس اتقاء فحشه

rough Translation :ayesha said a man asked for permission to enter upon rasool allah (saww) so he (saww) said: allow him to enter WHAT A HORRIBLE PERSON (or awful person from such tribe ) so when the man came in the prophet spoke Kindly to him !!!!! so ayesha asked : you said what you said then you spoke kindly to him so he(saww) answered that the worst kind of people is whoever was left by people out of fear of his bad morals !!!

so here the prophet (saww) is backbiting a man then he "smiled in his face "( just an expression) [/quote]

[/b]Seriously Walid? You are comparing the [i]mudaraat[/i] of the Prophet (pbuh), which is [i]itlaaq al-wajh [/i](smiling) in this hadith, to the lying attributed to Al-Jawad? There is no comparison between the two.


[quote][b]we are talking about hadiths not anything else otherwise why didn't abu zar'a clarify this.[/quote]

[/b]
This is actually apparent in the words of the [i]mutaqadimeen[/i] and doesn't need any explanation. The amount of hadiths that they used to write from different [i]wujooh[/i] implies a society that was based upon writing thousands upon thousands of hadiths, and that is just for the regular students. The scholars were top notch and would narrate their hadiths from a choice of hundreds of thousands. This is a side topic so I suggest you examine it at your own time.


[b] [/b]
4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salam alaykom

I don't know what rule did you base your view upon whne you said it's easier for ibrahim ibn hashim to lie upon other people rather than masoomin (as)? any scientific proof? or is this just from "kees" (purse or wallet) of farid? :smile:

your other arguments are already answered in my previous post so here it it , no need for repetition:

http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=14843&view=findpost&p=97688

as for ahmed ibn hanbal and his one million memorized hadith then it's relevant because you are amazed at 30 thousand answer (even though i know this is not your main argument but still it's in the topic)

we know thatrasool allah(saww) when he saw so many lies attributedto him he said : whoever lied upon me deliberately then let him book his chair in hell (rough translation)

it's time to start with abu hurairah now so i start with a small dose :

in sahih muslim chapter of jumu'a-chapter of "fadhl" yawm al-jumu'a hadith number 854:

854 وحدثنا قتيبة بن سعيد حدثنا المغيرة يعني الحزامي عن أبي الزناد عن الأعرج عن أبي هريرة أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال خير يوم طلعت عليه الشمس يوم الجمعة فيه خلق آدم وفيه أدخل الجنة وفيه أخرج منها ولا تقوم الساعة إلا في يوم الجمعة

abu hurairah said : [u]the prophet (saww) SAID [/u]: the best day in which the sun has risen is the Friday, in it Adam was created ...etc

but in sahih abi khuzaimah abu hurarah said :

محمد بن يحيى ، حدثنا قال : نا محمد بن يوسف ، ثنا الأوزاعي ، عن يحيى ، عن أبي سلمة ، عن أبي هريرة : خير يوم طلعت فيه الشمس يوم الجمعة ، فيه خلق آدم ، وفيه أسكن الجنة ، وفيه أخرج منها ، وفيه تقوم الساعة ، قال : قلت له : أشيء سمعته من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ؟ قال : بل شيء حدثناه كعب

mohamed ibn yahya narrated mohamed ibn ussof narrated al-awza'i from yahya from abi salamah from abu hurairah he said : the best day in which the sun has risen is the Friday ... so i asked him( abu salamah asking abu hurairah) : [u]did you hear this from rasool allah ?? he ( abu hurairah) said : [color="#FF0000"]it's rather something Kaab(Kaab al-ahbar ) told me[/color] !!!

here's the hadith from sahih ibn khuzaimah :

محمد بن يحيى ، حدثنا قال : نا محمد بن يوسف ، ثنا الأوزاعي ، عن يحيى ، عن أبي سلمة ، عن أبي هريرة : خير يوم طلعت فيه الشمس يوم الجمعة ، فيه خلق آدم ، وفيه أسكن الجنة ، وفيه أخرج منها ، وفيه تقوم الساعة ، قال : قلت له : أشيء سمعته من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ؟ قال : بل شيء حدثناه كعب

so did abu hurairah hear this from the prophet or from Kaab and if it's from kaab how could he attribute it to rasool allah (saww) ???

but more confusion is coming from the book of malik : muwatta malik :

243 وحدثني عن مالك عن يزيد بن عبد الله بن الهاد عن محمد بن إبراهيم بن الحارث التيمي عن أبي سلمة بن عبد الرحمن بن عوف عن أبي هريرة أنه قال خرجت إلى الطور فلقيت كعب الأحبار فجلست معه فحدثني عن التوراة وحدثته عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فكان فيما حدثته أن قلت قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم خير يوم طلعت عليه الشمس يوم الجمعة فيه خلق آدم

narrated malik from yazeed ibn abdilleh ibn alhaad from mohamed ibn ibrahim ibn alharith altaimi from abi salamah ibn abdirrahman ibn awf that abu hurairah said : i went out... so i met Kaab Al-Ahbar so i sat with him and he told me about tawraat (Torah) and i told him about rasool allah , and amongst what i told him i said :[u] the prophet (saww) said[/u]: the best day in which the son has risen is the The Friday ...the hadith

awaiting your comments farid
[/u]
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
more to come brother farid about abu hurairah. i know you said : it's an honor to defend him and i respect that so i will make you so honored until you say "enough" .

ps: I am not accusing abu hurairah of Evil lies but i am not doubting his trustworthiness according to sunnis as this would be "muzayada" upon sunnis but i will show his inconsistencies and tadlees and how carried away he can get.

ws
-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farid farid farid

as i said don't worry by the time we finish you will be guaranteed paradise for defending abu hurairah !!!

are you sure this hadith is sahih? :


[quote]
قال حدثنا حسين بن علي الجعفي عن[color="#FF0000"] عبد الرحمن بن يزيد بن جابر عن أبي الأشعث الصنعاني [/color]عن أوس بن أوس قال

قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من أفضل أيامكم يوم الجمعة فيه خلق آدم وفيه قبض وفيه النفخة وفيه الصعقة فأكثروا علي من الصلاة فيه فإن صلاتكم معروضة علي فقالوا يا رسول الله وكيف تعرض عليك صلاتنا وقد أرمت يعني وقد بليت قال إن الله عز وجل حرم على الأرض أن تأكل أجساد الأنبياء صلوات الله عليهم[/quote]


I 'll help you a bit : abdurrahman ibn yazid ibn jabir died in 154 h at the age of around 80 years of age.

abul ash'ath al-san'ani died during mu'awiya's rule !!!!!!!!!!!!!

also I'm afraid your accusation of yahya ibn abi katheer will backfire on you.

please address this and we will continue inshallah
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[b]You see farid : maybe you are used to other people among shia who only understand hadith of shia but i am an expert in sunni hadith also so don't expect anything you post in this field to go unnoticed.

I will show you later the irrelevance of some of the points you raised and there's more akhi. inshallah this will be very beneficial for all here.

Ps: there's no secret about my opposition to salafi madhab and i don't hide this and even though i think this madhab even though it has its origins found with many of the early sunni scholars and some of their salaf i am extremely opposed to it and its sympathizers especially among shia but i am opposed to these more than others and i consider these so-called shia who sympathize with salafis to be traitors and i advise them to stop trying to undermine the school of ahlbait (as) because nothing is worse than hypocrisy (i think people reading this understand what i mean)
yes i do respect farid because even though he is a salafi then he is more honest than many people i met from this sect but i have extreme hatred for pro-salafis among shias in particular.[/b]
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.