Jhangvi

LOCKED Q & A Session: Farid vs Wasil (Walid)

66 posts in this topic

[quote] You said in yours post that if we take all Hadeeths narrated by Abu Hurara(r.a) still it wont effect Ahlel Sunnah.(Please correct me If I am wrong)[/quote]

Yes akhi, this is something I personally believe. As demonstrated in the debate, most of the hadiths of Abu Huraira are narrated by other companions, and I am yet to see any "game changing" hadiths, or anything too major, that would hurt Sunni [i]aqeedah[/i] if we rejected the narrations of Abu Huraira. As we saw in the debate, the narrations that Abu Huraira seem to have narrated by himself are usually narrations about prophets of old, or about personal stories that occurred to him. Even if we rejected all of this, how would it harm Sunnism?!

[quote]
but Shiaism will sink in case Ibrahim bin Hashim is proved liar etc ?

Imam Jawad(r.a) imamate depends on the narration narrated by Ibahim bin Hashim....Is that the reason or they are many others too?[/quote]

To determine the weight of Ibrahim bin Hashim, one would literally need to go through all the narrations about any given subject. I haven't really put this to the test yet, but it is sufficient to know that Al-Imam Al-Hadi (not Al-Jawad) has no authentic narrations about his [i]imamate[/i] from any other path, other than that of Ibrahim bin Hashim (if we consider him as trustworthy). This is a very huge point. This point alone, as I've discussed, could change Twelverism completely, since Shias tend to argue that Allah wouldn't leave us without the Imam (who was to be Ali) after the Prophet (pbuh), but this applies to the other Imams as well.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Farid' timestamp='1323399506' post='105986']
[quote] You said in yours post that if we take all Hadeeths narrated by Abu Hurara(r.a) still it wont effect Ahlel Sunnah.(Please correct me If I am wrong)[/quote]

Yes akhi, this is something I personally believe. As demonstrated in the debate, most of the hadiths of Abu Huraira are narrated by other companions, and I am yet to see any "game changing" hadiths, or anything too major, that would hurt Sunni [i]aqeedah[/i] if we rejected the narrations of Abu Huraira. As we saw in the debate, the narrations that Abu Huraira seem to have narrated by himself are usually narrations about prophets of old, or about personal stories that occurred to him. Even if we rejected all of this, how would it harm Sunnism?!

[quote]
but Shiaism will sink in case Ibrahim bin Hashim is proved liar etc ?

Imam Jawad(r.a) imamate depends on the narration narrated by Ibahim bin Hashim....Is that the reason or they are many others too?[/quote]

To determine the weight of Ibrahim bin Hashim, one would literally need to go through all the narrations about any given subject. I haven't really put this to the test yet, but it is sufficient to know that Al-Imam Al-Hadi (not Al-Jawad) has no authentic narrations about his [i]imamate[/i] from any other path, other than that of Ibrahim bin Hashim (if we consider him as trustworthy). This is a very huge point. This point alone, as I've discussed, could change Twelverism completely, since Shias tend to argue that Allah wouldn't leave us without the Imam (who was to be Ali) after the Prophet (pbuh), but this applies to the other Imams as well.
[/quote]
[img]http://islamic-forum.net/public/style_emoticons/default/24-JazakAllah.png[/img] brother Farid

I repeated yours comments about Abu Hurarah(r.a) just to emphasized the point which you cleared in second part about Imam Hadi(r.a) imamate narrated only by Ibrahim bin Hashim.Its a million dollar question,let me put this question on Walid.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Question for Walid.

The Imamate "Nass" of Imam Hadi(r.a) that he would be next Imam is narrated only by Ibrahim bin Hisham?
According to early scholars Abrahim bin Hisham wasn't Thiqa,this is what you have agreed in debates(Please correct me if I am wrong).

In that case don't you think it will sink the whole Imamate theory of 12rs Shias?

Waiting for yours answer thanks.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@ Farid:

In the last posts of the debate you said, that you are going to post a report of Ibrahim ibn hisham that most of the shias will reject him. Which was that report?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ It was the last one, where we find that the prophets didn't leave an inheritance.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, what your view on the ridiculous and illogical interpretation given by the OP for that report...
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To [b]Farid:[/b]

Whats the criteria in Shiaism, regarding the [i]tawtheeq[/i] of a narrator? I mean, during the debate, we seen that apart from famous [i]Rijaali[/i] scholars of Shias like [i]Tusi, Najashi[/i] or [i]Ghadairi[/i], we came across some others like [i]Ibn Al-Walid[/i] or [i]Khoei[/i] etc. Can you give a crisp breakdown encompassing all of them?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what are your summarized and conclusive views regarding tawheeq of ibrahim ibn hisham by shia classical shia scholars and the defences that were made by OP. Also do you think that the report where shia scholar rejected the report where Ibrahim ibn hisham was present is a clear evidence that Ibrahim wasn't considered trustworthy by classical scholars.

OR ATLEAST HE WAS SEEN AS SOMEONE WHO OFTEN PRESENTS SOME WEIRD REPORTS WHICH contradict other reports, thus they could be rejected.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@ SoS:

[quote] Ok, what your view on the ridiculous and illogical interpretation given by the OP for that report...[/quote]

Well, I obviously disagree with Walid's interpretation, and I commented briefly on his thoughts. I'd rather not turn this into a Fadak debate, so I will be brief once again and say that this is something that most Shias will reject, because they attribute this narration to Abu Bakr and they believe that he fabricated it.

@ Jhangvi:

[quote]
Whats the criteria in Shiaism, regarding the [i]tawtheeq[/i] of a narrator? I mean, during the debate, we seen that apart from famous [i]Rijaali[/i] scholars of Shias like [i]Tusi, Najashi[/i] or [i]Ghadairi[/i], we came across some others like [i]Ibn Al-Walid[/i] or [i]Khoei[/i] etc. Can you give a crisp breakdown encompassing all of them? [/quote]

Well, apart from the clear cut statements of [i]tawtheeq[/i] that we are used to in Sunnism. Shias have several other ways of strengthening narrators. However, there is a difference of opinion regarding all these ways. Here is a short list of what comes to mind:

1) If the narrator is a [i]shaikh[/i] of Al-Najashi then he is a [i]thiqa[/i]. This is because Al-Najashi states that he left one of his [i]shaikhs[/i] because that man was weakened. However, it can be argued that Al-Najashi's [i]shaikhs [/i]can include unknown narrators that were so unknown that nobody weakened them, and thus, Al-Najashi narrated from them.

2) The existence of the narrator in Tafseer Al-Qummi makes him a [i]thiqa[/i]. This is because the author of the [i]tafseer[/i] says that he gets his reports in this book from [i]thiqaat[/i] only. However, one can respond to this by saying that the [i]tafseer[/i] is incorrectly attributed to Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Qummi.

3) Being a [i]shaikh[/i] of Ibn Abi Umair, Ibn Abi Nasr and Safwan bin Yahya. This is because they supposedly never narrated from weak narrators. Of course, this is highly debated and has been rejected by several scholars because there are instances when they have narrated from weak narrators.

4) Being a narrator in Al-Kamil fil Ziyarat because the author said that he got his narrations from [i]thiqaat[/i]. However, some scholars believed that this is only for the [i]shaikhs[/i] of the author, while others believed that this is for all the narrators in the book.

5) Being a [i]shaikh [/i]of one of the 18 narrators that are considered to be [i]ashab al-ijma'a[/i]. This is because Al-Kashshi said that whatever these 18 men narrate, then it is acceptable. However, some scholars rejected that this implies that the [i]shaikhs [/i]of those 18 are trustworthy.

So, in short, there are quite a few alternative ways of strengthening a narrator in Shiasm. However, it is equally as important that everyone of these ways has been looked upon with doubt by other scholars. You will not find a Shia [i]rijal[/i] book by a contemporary that doesn't quote opinions for and against the views above, since the trustworthiness of hundreds of narrators relies on these late rules.

@ SoS:

[quote]And what are your summarized and conclusive views regarding tawheeq of ibrahim ibn hisham by shia classical shia scholars and the defences that were made by OP. Also do you think that the report where shia scholar rejected the report where Ibrahim ibn hisham was present is a clear evidence that Ibrahim wasn't considered trustworthy by classical scholars.

OR ATLEAST HE WAS SEEN AS SOMEONE WHO OFTEN PRESENTS SOME WEIRD REPORTS WHICH contradict other reports, thus they could be rejected.[/quote]

I'm assuming you are referring to the statement of Al-Saduq in which he says that he rejects a specific narration, because it was only narrated by Ibrahim bin Hashim, then he narrates something else that he agrees with. If that is so, then I believe that this is the only idea of the weight of the hadiths of Ibrahim bin Hashim. So, in general, it seems to me, with the absence of any other statement in praise of him, that the early Shias were on the fence, they were unsure about his reliability. It doesn't necessarily mean that they considered him to be a liar, but rather, that they couldn't call him a [i]thiqa. [/i]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Farid' timestamp='1323367349' post='105892']
@msameer: I only felt kind of uncomfortable when Walid asked me about a hadith in Saheeh Muslim that I believe is weak. I felt uncomfortable not because of my doubts regarding the weakness of thehadith, but rather because it is a very popular view that the Saheehain are 100% authentic. Ironically, that hadith itself is weakened by Bukhari.[/quote]
OIC so brother it means there are some Hadith in Sahi Muslim / Bukhari which are Dai'ef ?

:JazakAllah:
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ This is my personal view, yes. The scholars that held this view also only held it for a very few hadiths in any case.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='syed5' timestamp='1323369898' post='105912']
My question to both Wasil and Farid;If i remember correctly; The intent of the debate which was initiated by Farid, to bring down the hadith literature of Shia/Sunni by bringing down the most significant narrator.Since all the understanding of religion is based on hadith, by bringing down the most significant narrator the assumption is generally true that it will strike the weakness of the whole structure of belief and ideology of that particular sect.

To start with this premises, even if one assume away the shia hadith literature as compare to sunni's[b], even then the shia core beliefs, i.e. Wilayat Ali and Infallibility of Ahlekisa still cannot be harmed. Since the evidence of it one also find from the core hadiths in sunni literature.[/b] The intersecting hadith literature is a composition of both sunni and shiites.

In simple terms, even if we eliminate large part of Shiite hadith literature, the core belief of shiahs will remain intact since they are also evidently manisfested in sunni hadith literature. On the contrary it is not true vice versa for sunni core beliefs of Khilafata Rashida and about later ummavi period, since then Farid has to show evidence of sunni beliefs from shiite hadith literature. And thats why the defence of Abu Hurraira was more important to Sunnis than anything else.

And that is why Wasil demand was interesting to Farid to talk about Core belief system rather than the mere implication of this topic. If farid or anyone is interested, then i suggest Wasil can be requested to carry on another debate on more useful topic, which is the real bone of contention among Muslims of various sects.
[/quote]

^The bold part is what young Rafidis are fed with since childhood like as if "infallibility, DIVINE IMAMAH, Ilm Al Ghayb" are present in our books. Please brother Farid can you respond to this well known Shia myth as requested (perhaps you could mention how many Hadith are in line with Sunni beliefs in SHIA books, I think the PRAISE of Jafar al Sadiq for a BIG BULK of Sahaba is one).
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
^ I never responded because it didn't seem like much of a question, but more like an argument.

In short, I don't believe that Shiasm could function based on Sunni hadith literature, and my reasons are simple. Sunnis have included narrations in their books that can only be interpreted as proof for [i]wilayah [/i]and infallibility if we come forth with Shia preconceptions. I say this because the sheer amount of Sunni narrations that contradict these concepts make it impossible for anybody to hold these views. Assuming that there were no outside interferences from Shia hadiths or from those preconceptions.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='al-andalusi' timestamp='1323383010' post='105974']
Salaamun alaykum


[quote] I think i tried hard to help my fellow shias understand true tashayu but i failed , yes i failed (i am not talking about the debate here but about my attempts to reform the minds of the young shias online )and this is why i just want to retire[/quote]

Dear brother Walid

I can guarante you that this statement of yours is 100 % not true. You have helped me alot, actually so much that you can not imagine, and through your refutation of the Ghulaat (may Allah guide and if not punnish them) many mani Shi'as are beginning to wake up here where i live, and are starting not to believe in all this ghulu like attributing ilm ul Ghaib to imams as etc so for that i am very thankfull wal-hamdulillah.

Now to the question This is Also for you brother walid

In the debate you said that you had sent a question to Sayed al-Sistani about Nawadir al-Hikmah. Did you get a response and if yes do you mind posting it ?
[/quote]

alhamdulilleh that you benefited masha'allah akhi may allah bless you .

and no i don't remember having received an answer from sistani .
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='al-andalusi' timestamp='1323384901' post='105978']
And i forgot to say to both Shaikh Walid and Shaikh Farid, thank you for a great debate full of wisdom i learned alot from it al-hamdulillah, may god grant you both more knowledge and may Allah guide us all InshaaAllah.
[/quote]

jazakallah khiaran akhi
0

Share this post


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