TwelverShia.net Forum

Hadith with Mawla

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Ibn Yahya

Hadith with Mawla
« on: July 15, 2015, 05:29:42 PM »
Jami' at-Tirmidhi 3940

Narrated Abu Ayyub Al-Ansari:
that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The Ansar, Muzainah, and Juhainah, Ashja', Ghifar, and whoever is from Banu 'Abdid-Dar are Mawali. They do not have a Mawla other than Allah, and Allah and His Messenger are their Mawla."

interesting Hadith. What are your thoughts?

Hadrami

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2015, 06:10:28 AM »
Jami' at-Tirmidhi 3940

Narrated Abu Ayyub Al-Ansari:
that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The Ansar, Muzainah, and Juhainah, Ashja', Ghifar, and whoever is from Banu 'Abdid-Dar are Mawali. They do not have a Mawla other than Allah, and Allah and His Messenger are their Mawla."

interesting Hadith. What are your thoughts?

I have a better one. Shia wont quote this one for sure :)

".....and He (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said to Zaid:"You are our brother and our mawla" (Sahih Bukhari Kitab Al Islah hadith no 2501)

Zaid RA was the first imam eh? :D

Eid Mubarak!!

Optimus Prime

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2015, 12:37:17 PM »
Jami' at-Tirmidhi 3940

Narrated Abu Ayyub Al-Ansari:
that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The Ansar, Muzainah, and Juhainah, Ashja', Ghifar, and whoever is from Banu 'Abdid-Dar are Mawali. They do not have a Mawla other than Allah, and Allah and His Messenger are their Mawla."

interesting Hadith. What are your thoughts?

I have a better one. Shia wont quote this one for sure :)

".....and He (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said to Zaid:"You are our brother and our mawla" (Sahih Bukhari Kitab Al Islah hadith no 2501)

Zaid RA was the first imam eh? :D

Eid Mubarak!!

Haha, good one.

Ibn Yahya

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2015, 03:05:21 PM »
Jami' at-Tirmidhi 3940

Narrated Abu Ayyub Al-Ansari:
that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The Ansar, Muzainah, and Juhainah, Ashja', Ghifar, and whoever is from Banu 'Abdid-Dar are Mawali. They do not have a Mawla other than Allah, and Allah and His Messenger are their Mawla."

interesting Hadith. What are your thoughts?

I have a better one. Shia wont quote this one for sure :)

".....and He (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said to Zaid:"You are our brother and our mawla" (Sahih Bukhari Kitab Al Islah hadith no 2501)

Zaid RA was the first imam eh? :D

Eid Mubarak!!

And you to

whoaretheshia

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2017, 07:22:48 AM »
One of the areas that most bothers me when engaging in apologetics and rebuttals online with regards to the debate surrounding the declaration of Muhammed [saw] at Ghadir Khum is the way some websites have interpreted 'Mawla'.

In a sense, they have tried to erroneously explain the root of the word Mawla means 'beloved' and this is the dominant expression of the word - to indicate and signify closeness and attachment.  The reality is, this is only one of the meanings, but the dominant meaning is actually 'worthier' in the general meaning , and 'one who takes charge of a matter' in the most common rendering of the word. When the Prophet [saw] states 'whomsoever Mawla i am' you can quite simply throw away the other meanings such as slave and the like which do not apply to him.  As for quoting traditions where others have been referred to as 'Mawla' this is extreme dishonesty, given the usage of the word depend on the context, and who it is being referred to. Context is key.

Here are the words and works of some well respected grammarians and scholars of the Arabic Language and Sunni Islam:


1. In the famous Lisan Al-Arab dictionary it states: he author of Lisan ul-Arab says: “Sibawayh says, “Wilaya stands for the guardianship of someone; taking charge of his “affairs and fulfilling his needs. The mawla (guardian) of a woman is he who undertakes the responsibility of contracting marriage on her behalf; she cannot get married without his agreement. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) says: (For women who got married without the permission of their guardians, their marriage is invalid.) Thus, the real meaning of this word (mawla) is to take charge of a matter and to carry it out. The various uses of the expression simply express this basic fact, such as saying the word ‘man’ for Zayd, Amr and Bakr. Allah is called Mawla because He is the ruler of the affairs of Man.

2. Az-Zajjaj and al-Farra’ said, as mentioned in al-Fakhr ar-Razi’s book At-Tafsir, vol. 29 p. 227, Egyptian edition that “Mawla means worthier.” It was mentioned that Abul-Abbas al- Mubarrid had said that Mawla means worthier and most deserving..

3. Some senior scholars have discussed this subject in their books. Abu Ubayda says in his book Ghareebul-Qur’an: “Mawla means worthier.”

4. Abdul-Malik bin Marwan as his evidence: “Al-Anbari said in his book Tafsirul-Mushkil fil-Qur’an: “Mawla means the worthier.”

5. And Zamakshari, the famous sunni scholar, combines both meaning in the following: “Az-Zamakhshari said in his Tafsir, vol. 4 p. 66, Egyptian edition: “In fact, Mawla means your place, where it would be better for you to be. [a worthier place]“

6. Al-Halabi, in his book At-Taqrib, said: “Mawla, in fact, means worthier and the other expressions are derived from it. The master is a mawla because he is worthier to manage his slaves’ affairs and to bear with their faults. The slave is a mawla because he is worthier to obey his master. So too are the freed slave,the helper who is more worthy of helping whom he helps, the ally to be more worthy of supporting his allies, the neighbour to be more worthy of helping his neighbour and defending him, the son-in-law to be more worthy of his relatives, the imam to be more worthy of whom he leads and the cousin to be more worthy of helping his cousins.” Since the word (Mawla) means worthier, there is no excuse to turn it away from its real meaning and seek other ones.


Please have a look where we have discussed the meaning of 'Awla', 'Mawla' and why together, the statement of the Prophet [saw] is very specific and exact in meaning.

1. Awla:
2. Mawla:
3. A holistic assessment of the full statement:

“Alastu Awla bil-Mu’mineen min Anfusihim?”. Man Kuntum Mawla, Fahadha Aliyun Mawla”

When the Prophet [saw] asks the believers if he is not more worthy over them, then they are over their own-selves [ and Ibn Kathir renders this to mean obedience to his commands over theirs, and thus, the Prophet [saw] is one who holds absolute authority over us], he has set the context of his worthiness and authority over all the believers. And thus when he subsequently states 'Whomsoevers Mawla i am' i.e whoever he is more worthy over [which owing to the preceding sentence will render the meaning to mean master, the leader over all of the muslims] Ali too, is his Mawla"

Some people have commented that at times, you can make a statement to grab the attention of the audience, and then make another statement that is not connected. This is true. For instance, a man can say 'Am i not the Messenger of Allah? If i am his Messenger, then love our parents and treat them kindly". However, what is unique an undeniable is the direct connection between 'Awla' and 'Mawla'. He first establishes his absolute authority over the believers as being more worthy over them, and then follows it by connecting the meaning to Awla, and using the word Mawla, and thus whomsoever he is more worthy over , Ali is also more worthy over , and in this context the word Mawla is rendered as explained to mean master, or one with absolute authority and leadership.

The rebuttals i am seeing online which try to purport that Mawla in essence is derived from a meaning of being 'beloved' and 'close' present one false interpretation. In general it means worthier, and in the context the Prophet [saw] particularly when you take the preceding statement made, it can only be rendered as Master.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 07:42:30 PM by Hani »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2017, 07:33:02 AM »
Also, we highly recommend anyone who truly wants to engage in an academic and honest dialogue on this issue to read the rebuttal we have written here:
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 07:40:45 PM by Hani »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Hani

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2017, 09:36:50 AM »
Unlike other sites like RTS, Wilayat, Shiapen etc.. Me and Farid do not feel a need to refute the poorly written contents of this site. Thank You.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

whoaretheshia

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2017, 09:49:34 AM »
Unlike other sites like RTS, Wilayat, Shiapen etc.. Me and Farid do not feel a need to refute the poorly written contents of this site. Thank You.

The articles directly address claims you make at their very core. While i commend the work done by the team at Shiapen, and RTS, unfortunately, i have not yet seen an attempt to refute what your latest refutations and rebuttals centre on.

I think you should be clear as to:

1. What is poorly written?

2. What arguments are incorrect?

If it is as you say, it would be simple for you to demonstrate this clearly, rather than evade addressing them. The whoaretheshia team have spent a lot of time in writing these, and have examined your claims in quite some depth.

Perhaps it is easier for you to address websites which quote weak traditions , so your job is merely finding J'arh of narrators and showing they have relied on spurious material. Or picking easy targets in certain interpretations of events that might well not be the most accurate and hence fairly straightforward to cast doubt upon.

Just as an example, you published a '12 reasons to leave Shiaism' - which was replete with errors, referenced things which anyone who possessed knowledge would not have done, and showed a total grasp and misunderstanding.

If you find it easier to refute articles on Shiapen , to RTS, which at times clearly quote traditions which anyone who had picked up a book on hadith will know are not Hujjah on Sunni's - such as trying to pass off a Hasan-Ghareeb tradition in Tirmidhi as 'evidence', be my guest.

To me, it just looks like you are evading a proper and legitimate challenge. I would be gladly proven wrong, even if you could create a thread and list the very basic errors.  It is strange to open up a discussion forum, and then shy away from a debate.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 07:43:01 PM by Hani »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2017, 10:02:38 AM »
Unlike other sites like RTS, Wilayat, Shiapen etc.. Me and Farid do not feel a need to refute the poorly written contents of this site. Thank You.

For instance, RTS and Shiapen rely on traditions on Thaqalayn which you can quite easily say are weak, and are not truly 'Hasan' due to the fact when Imam Tirmidhi grades a tradition as 'Hasan Gharib' it is actually weak. RTS for instance, puts forward he tradition of Jabir bin Abdullah [ra] narrating he saw the Prophet [saw] declare the hadith of Thaqalayn in Arafah. To evidence this is 'authentic' they quote Tirmidhi saying it is 'Hasan Gharib' and 'Arnaut saying it is 'Saheeh due to external evidence' 

What we have done is left out all of the very easy pickings for you, which don't require intellect to dismiss, and challenged you based on legitimate evidence and sound argumentation. We have not relied merely on Ibn Hiban and Ijili, because we know they often gave Tawhiq to disparaged narrators and were more lax. Those traditions we have relied on we have done so based on pretty major and well respected scholars, such as al-Hafiz ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Dhabi, among others. We don't fall into traps like this.

I just have a feeling that you have chosen to try to rebut weak arguments and maintain your rebuttal to those weak arguments. As soon as something comes which can not allow you to merely dismiss it based on chain, but creates legitimate doubt in your minds, you choose not to address it.

I have seen you address posts of people spreading extremely weak arguments, who have no knowledge of Ilm al-Rijal, and whose arguments even as a Shia i consider weak. I have seen you address people who have very little intellectual rigour in their position. However, when there comes to you an updated rebuttal, by a team, who have not fallen into similar traps of previous debaters or refutation websites, you wish to ignore it.

« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 10:03:50 AM by whoaretheshia »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2017, 10:09:49 AM »
Unlike other sites like RTS, Wilayat, Shiapen etc.. Me and Farid do not feel a need to refute the poorly written contents of this site. Thank You.

Another example - the article published on your website on 12 reasons to leave Shiasm, was replete with errors. You made out that every nine of of ten prophetic narrations are declared weak due to anonymity of narrator - which was false. You claimed we do no posses prophetic tradition or have very few, whereas in Wasail there are roughly 7000 prophetic traditions.

Your article boasted about Shia's not having any classic Tafseers, which ignores one of the most highly acclaimed classical Tafseers - Tibyan by Shaykh Tusi, who is a classical scholar, and born just 78 years after a man you regard as the author of the greatest tafsir - Tabari. If you can call Tafsir Tabari the greatest, and deem it classical, why can we not refer to Tusi's Tibyan as classical, as he was born just 78 years after Tabari , is the author of two of our four canonical woks and by all means one of our greatest classical scholars? Just because Tafsir Qummi is highly disputed, does not mean we do not possess classical tafsir.

Your article then goes onto boast bout having a monopoly of the earliest Seerah literature, whereas the truth is, Ibn Ishaq, what was contained in Ibn Hisham, Waqidi, Baladhuri, and arguably most of the contents of Tabari would be rejected. This is given most of the major earliest historians are declared either Majhool [like Baladhuri] or abandoned and called liars and possible shiites, like Ibn Ishaq and Waqidi.

I could go on, but it is all listed on the article. I sincerely feel and am starting to suspect that you may only be going after the easy pickings.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2017, 10:12:54 AM »
If you don't want to address rebuttals which comprehensively address the recent articles you have made, then approve my threads on Ghadeer Khum and let me debate with your members, inshAllah.  Though i feel with the time and effort you and Farid have devoted to users like Link, it is strange you do not take serious academic refutations with any level of priority.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Optimus Prime

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2017, 02:15:24 PM »
Unlike other sites like RTS, Wilayat, Shiapen etc.. Me and Farid do not feel a need to refute the poorly written contents of this site. Thank You.

Agreed. Much of the content on the site is riddle with the same quality trash, that is ripe on other Shia sites.

Optimus Prime

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #12 on: November 21, 2017, 02:28:44 PM »
Unlike other sites like RTS, Wilayat, Shiapen etc.. Me and Farid do not feel a need to refute the poorly written contents of this site. Thank You.

Another example - the article published on your website on 12 reasons to leave Shiasm, was replete with errors. You made out that every nine of of ten prophetic narrations are declared weak due to anonymity of narrator - which was false. You claimed we do no posses prophetic tradition or have very few, whereas in Wasail there are roughly 7000 prophetic traditions.

Your article boasted about Shia's not having any classic Tafseers, which ignores one of the most highly acclaimed classical Tafseers - Tibyan by Shaykh Tusi, who is a classical scholar, and born just 78 years after a man you regard as the author of the greatest tafsir - Tabari. If you can call Tafsir Tabari the greatest, and deem it classical, why can we not refer to Tusi's Tibyan as classical, as he was born just 78 years after Tabari , is the author of two of our four canonical woks and by all means one of our greatest classical scholars? Just because Tafsir Qummi is highly disputed, does not mean we do not possess classical tafsir.

Your article then goes onto boast bout having a monopoly of the earliest Seerah literature, whereas the truth is, Ibn Ishaq, what was contained in Ibn Hisham, Waqidi, Baladhuri, and arguably most of the contents of Tabari would be rejected. This is given most of the major earliest historians are declared either Majhool [like Baladhuri] or abandoned and called liars and possible shiites, like Ibn Ishaq and Waqidi.

I could go on, but it is all listed on the article. I sincerely feel and am starting to suspect that you may only be going after the easy pickings.


This is not entirely accurate. If you do your research thoroughly, it's really Prophetic traditions that are rejected from these dudes. However, when it comes to narrating pockets of history, or providing biological information, these facts, and narrations by and large are accepted.

There are many people who also praised ibn Ishaq: https://islamqa.info/en/148009

whoaretheshia

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #13 on: November 21, 2017, 02:37:44 PM »
Agreed. Much of the content on the site is riddle with the same quality trash, that is ripe on other Shia sites.

You are welcome to try to refute it dear brother.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Optimus Prime

Re: Hadith with Mawla
« Reply #14 on: November 21, 2017, 04:37:50 PM »
Agreed. Much of the content on the site is riddle with the same quality trash, that is ripe on other Shia sites.

You are welcome to try to refute it dear brother.

Too much time wasting. I'd rather visit a zoo.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 04:39:04 PM by Optimus Prime »

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
27 Replies
9079 Views
Last post November 23, 2017, 03:14:21 AM
by iceman
6 Replies
4918 Views
Last post July 16, 2016, 03:02:46 PM
by MuslimK
14 Replies
5456 Views
Last post April 07, 2015, 04:08:09 PM
by Hani
6 Replies
1048 Views
Last post November 21, 2017, 03:06:16 PM
by Farid