TwelverShia.net Forum

Launching Nahjul-Balagha.net - the first Sunni website analysing the book

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 200
  • +3/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

With great pleasure we announce the official opening of http://Nahjul-Balagha.net , the first Sunni website dedicated to exposing, criticising and analysing the authenticity of the famous book Nahjul-Balagha, called by many Shia the "sister of the Quran". The website also contains other useful material such the authentic quotes of Ali bin abi Talib from Sunni sources etc.

Be sure to check out our Saheeh Nahjul-Balagha in a PDF format here:
http://nahjul-balagha.net/english-pdf/
« Last Edit: April 23, 2017, 08:30:10 PM by MuslimK »
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

Hani

A dude on twitter called "@313zahra786" replied to the Shaqshaqiyyah article with the following:

I begin In the name of God....

In this refutation i can easily refute the entire website targeting the legitmacy of Nahj Al Balagha, however due to the convenience of the readers i shall stick with Sermon Number 3 of Nahj Al Balagha.

The opponent states, "it is simply non-academic to rely on a book that was written in the year 400 AH when the vast majority of the work does not provide any early sources whatsoever"

Nahj ul balagha first of all was not 'written' it is a compilation of the sermons and letters of Imam Ali a.s. Secondly, the holy Quran gives accounts of Anbiyah a.s who lived centuries before its revelations by such rationale we should also accept the excuse of those that attack the Qurans accuracy by saying it is too young to be giving accounts of what happened 1000's of years before?

Or shall we accept the holy Quran at all by this logic at all because our sunni brothers say that it was preserved orally in the memory of sahabah for 30 plus years until uthman compiled it and burned differing copies?

The opponent further says that the sources Shaykh Abdul Zahra quoted were disconnected and he cited the references that he says the shaykh used.

Here is the extract from the website:

"Other Disconnected Reports for Shaqshaqiya

Like the above, the majority of sources that have quoted Shaqshaqiya do not provide chains for the reports. Below, we have provided a list of those disconnected sources that are taken from the original seventeen sources:

Al-Balkhi (317 AH) (See Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed’s commentary on Nahjul Balagha 1/69)
Ibn Qiba (4th century) (See Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed’s commentary on Nahjul Balagha 1/69)
Abu Ahmad Al-Askari (382 AH) (See Al-Saduq’s Ma’ani Al-Akhbar p. 343)
Ibn Abd Rabbih Al-Maliki (328 AH) (See Al-Majlisi’s Bihar Al-Anwar 8/160)
Al-Mufeed (412 AH) (Al-Irshad p.135)
Abdul-Jabbar Al-Mu’tazili (415 AH) (See Al-Amini’s Al-Ghadeer 7/83 and Al-Murtadha’s Al-Shafi p. 212)
Abu Sa’eed Al-Aabi (422 AH) (See Al-Ameen’s A’ayan Al-Shia 8/107)
Al-Tabrasi (548 AH) (Al-Ihtijaj 1/95)
Ibn Al-Kashshab (567 AH) (See Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed’s commentary on Nahjul Balagha 1/69)
Sibt Ibn Al-Jawzi (654 AH) (Tathkirat Al-Khawas p. 133)
Ibn Abi Al-Hadeed Al-Mu’tazili (Commentary on Nahjul Balagha 1/69)
Ibn Maytham Al-Bahrani (679 AH) (Commentary on Nahjul Balagha 1/252)
One might argue that the existence of variant sources provides the reliability of a report. However, there is no proof that these sources did not take from one source or simply quoted from one another"

As for his claim that there are no chains for the sermon that claim shall be refuted later insha'Allah. However it is very difficult for one to refute this excerpt above because he doesnt say how there is a 'disconnection'. Ibn Abd Rabbih was a supporter of Bani Ummayyah Ibn {`Abd Rabbih. In Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature (Vol. 1, pp. 302-303)}. who lived around 300 AH so one cant accuse the narrators of being biased or being a shia or anything of that nature.

one of the first people to dispute the legitimacy of Nahj ul balagha is Ibn Khallakan. This man rejected the content because of its stance against the Sunni Aqeedah despite 90% of it if not all of it being in compliance with the occurrences in history. It is clear that Ibn Khallakan was not in favor of the Ahlulbayt a.s as he praised Yazid (la)

"In the year 633, when i was in damascus, I memorized Yazids poetry collection because i was extremely fond of him. I was thus able to recognize his poetry from those falsely attributed to him" (Wafayatul Ayan Volume 1, Page 507). Imagine for someone to love an individual so much that he recognizes the salt from the sugar. And i say this cliche the other way around because there is nothing sweet about Yazid (la).

The sermons in Nahj ul balagha such as sermon number 3 have long existed before The compiler of Nahj ul balagha, throughout the era of the Ummayyads and the Abbassids and were preserved by Non Shias and Shias alike.

Now i shall state what scholars have said about this sermon and will also give its chain:

al-Qadi Ahmad ibn Muhammad, ash-Shihab al-Khafaji (d. 1069 A.H.) writes with regard to its authenticity:

It is stated in the utterances of Amir al-mu'minin `Ali (Allah may be pleased with him) that "It is strange during life time he (Abu Bakr) wanted to give up the Caliphate but he strengthened its foundation for the other one after his death." (Sharh durrat al-ghawwas, p.17)

Abu'l-Muzaffar Yusuf ibn `Abdillah and Sibt ibn al-Jawzi al-Hanafi (d. 654 A.H.) writes:

Our ash-Shaykh Abu'l-Qasim an-Nafis al-Anbari related this sermon to us through his chain of authorities that ends with Ibn `Abbas, who said that after allegiance had been paid to Amir al-mu'minin as Caliph he was sitting on the pulpit when a man from the audience enquired why he had remained quiet till then whereupon Amir al-mu'minin delivered this sermon extempore. (Tadhkarat khawass al-ummah, p.73)

ash-Shaykh `Ala ad-Dawlah as-Simnani writes:

Amir al-mu'minin Sayyid al-`Arifin `Ali (p.b.u.h.) has stated in one of his brilliant Sermons "this is the Shiqshiqah that burst forth." (al-`Urwah li ahl al-khalwah wa'l-jalwah, p3, manuscript in Nasiriah Library, Lucknow, India)

n fifteen places in an-Nihayah while explaining the words of this sermon Abu's-Sa`adat Mubarak ibn Muhammad, Ibn al-Athir al-Jazari (d. 606 A.H.) has acknowledged it to be Amir al-mu'minin's utterance

Muhammad Muhyi'd-Din `Abd al-Hamid, Professor in the Faculty of Arabic Language, al-Azhar University has written annotations on Nahj al-balaghah adding a foreword in the beginning wherein he recognises all such sermons which contain disparaging remarks to be the utterances of Amir al-mu'minin

Majdu'd-Din al-Firuz'abadi (d. 816/817 A.H.) has recorded under the word "Shiqshiqah" in his lexicon (al-Qamus, vol.3, p.251): Khutbah ash-Shiqshiqiyyah is by `Ali so named because when Ibn `Abbas asked him to resume it where he had left it, he said "O' Ibn `Abbas! it was the foam of a camel that burst forth then subsided.

as for the content and its verification as per history you can refer to this link: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1spludf


Abu Ahmad al-Hasan ibn `Abdillah ibn Sa`id al-`Askari (d.382 A.H.) who counts among great scholars of the Sunnis has written commentary and explanation of this sermon that has been recorded by Ibn Babawayh in `Ilal ash-shara'i` and Ma`ani al-akhbar.

as-Sayyid Ni`matullah al-Jaza'iri writes: The author of Kitab al-gharat Abu Is'haq, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ath-Thaqafi al-Kufi (d. 283 A.H.) has related this sermon through his own chain of authorities. The date of completion of writing this book is Tuesday the 13th Shawwal 255 A.H. and in the same year, Murtada al-Musawi was born. He was older in age than his brother as-Sayyid ar-Radi. (Anwar an-Nu`maniyyah, p.37)

Now the isnad:

as-Sayyid Radi ad-Din Abu'l-Qasim `Ali ibn Musa, Ibn Tawus al-Husayni al-Hulli (d. 664 A.H.) has related this sermon from Kitab al-gharat with the following chain of authorities:- This sermon was related to us by Muhammad ibn Yusuf who related it from al-Hasan ibn `Ali ibn `Abd al-Karim az-Za`farani and he from Muhammad ibn Zakariyyah al-Ghallabi and he from Ya`qub ibn Ja`far ibn Sulayman and he from his father and he from his grand-father and he from Ibn `Abbas. (Translation of at-Tara'if, p.202)

Abu Ja`far Muhammad ibn `Ali, Ibn Babawayh (d. 381 A.H.) writes: Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Is'haq at-Talaqani told us that `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Yahya al-Jaludi (d. 332 A.H.) told him that Abu `Abdillah Ahmad ibn `Ammar ibn Khalid told him that Yahya ibn `Abd al-Hamid al- Himmani (d. 228 A.H.) told him that `Isa ibn Rashid related this sermon from `Ali ibn Hudhayfah and he from `Ikrimah and he from Ibn `Abbas. (`Ilal ash-shara'i`,vol.1, chap. 122, p.144; Ma`ani al-akhbar, chap.22, pp.360-361)
9) Then Ibn Babawayh records the following chain of authorities :- Muhammad ibn `Ali Majilawayh related this sermon to us and he took it from his uncle Muhammad ibn Abi'l-Qasim and he from Ahmad ibn Abi `Abdillah (Muhammad ibn Khalid) al-Barqi and he from his father and he from (Muhammad) Ibn Abi `Umayr and he from Aban ibn `Uthman and he from Aban ibn Taghlib and he from `Ikrimah and he from Ibn `Abbas. (`Ilal ash-shara'i`, vol.1, chap.122, p.l46; Ma`ani al-akhbar, chap.22, p.361)

In connection with this very authenticity al-`Allamah al-Majlisi writes: Al-Qadi `Abd al-Jabbar ibn Ahmad al-Asad'abadi (d. 415A.H.) who was a strict Mu`tazilite explains some expressions of this sermon in his book al-Mughni and tries to prove that it does not strike against any preceding caliph but does not deny it to be Amir al-mu'minin's composition. (ibid., p.161)

You can see even opponents of the sermons message dont deny it to be the words of Ameer ul Mu'mineen a.s

al-`Allamah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi has related the following chain of authority about this Sermon from ash-Shaykh Qutbu'd-Din ar-Rawandi's compilation Minhaj al-bara`ah fi Sharh Nahjul Balaghah: Ash-Shaykh Abu Nasr al-Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim informed me from al-Hajib Abu'l-Wafa' Muhammad ibn Badi`, al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn Badi` and al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd ar-Rahman and they from al-Hafiz Abu Bakr (Ahmad ibn Musa) ibn Marduwayh al-Isbahani (d. 416 A.H.) and he from al-Hafiz Abu'l-Qasim Sulayman ibn Ahmad at-Tabarani (d. 360 A.H.) and he from Ahmad ibn `Ali al-Abbar and he from Is'haq ibn Sa`id Abu Salamah ad-Dimashqi and he from Khulayd ibn Da`laj and he from `Ata' ibn Abi Rabah and he from Ibn `Abbas. (Bihar al-anwar, 1st ed. vol.8, pp.160-161)

Ibn Abi'l-Hadid al-Mu`tazili writes that his master Abu'l-Khayr Musaddiq ibn Shabib al-Wasiti (d. 605 A.H.) stated that he heard this sermon from ash-Shaykh Abu Muhammad `Abdullah ibn Ahmad al-Baghdadi (d. 567 A.H.) known as Ibn al-Khashshab and when he reached where Ibn `Abbas expressed sorrow for this sermon having remained incomplete Ibn al-Khashshab said to him that if he had heard the expression of sorrow from Ibn `Abbas he would have certainly asked him if there had remained with his cousin any further unsatisfied desire because excepting the Prophet he had already spared neither the predecessors nor followers and had uttered all that he wished to utter. Why should therefore be any sorrow that he could not say what he wished?

Musaddiq says that Ibn al-Khashshab was a man of jolly heart and decent taste. I inquired from him whether he also regarded the sermon to be a fabrication when he replied "By Allah, I believe it to be Amir al-mu'minin's word as I believe you to be Musaddiq ibn Shabib." I said that some people regard it to be as-Sayyid ar-Radi's production when he replied: "How can ar-Radi have such guts or such style of writing. I have seen as-Sayyid ar-Radi's writings and know his style of composition. Nowhere does his writing match with this one and I have already seen it in books written two hundred years before the birth of as-Sayyid ar-Radi, and I have seen it in familiar writings about which I know by which scholars or men of letters they were compiled. At that time not only ar-Radi but even his father Abu Ahmad an-Naqib has not been born."

Thereafter Ibn Abi'l-Hadid writes that he saw this sermon in the compilations of his master Abu'l-Qasim (`Abdullah ibn Ahmad) al-Balkhi (d. 317 A.H.). He was the Imam of the Mu'tazilites in the reign of al-Muqtadir Billah while al-Muqtadir's period was far earlier than the birth of as-Sayyid ar-Radi.

He further writes that he saw this sermon in Abu Ja`far (Muhammad ibn `Abd ar-Rahman), Ibn Qibah's book al-Insaf. He was the pupil of Abu'l-Qasim al-Balkhi and a theologian of Imamiyyah (Shi`ite) sect. (Sharh of Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.1, pp.205-206)

One may say that this is a Mu'tazzalli. The response to this is simple, this sermon is an ideological issue not a fiqh issue so that excuse has no basis.

The opponent states, "Ikrimah, the mawla of Ibn Abbas was weakened by Al-Kashshi."
Many Ulema have expressed an admiration for Ikrimah and have regarded him as acceptable.

Imām Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan al-Shaybānī (132 – 189 H)

‘Wakī‘ reported to us from Sufyān al-Thawrī from Simāk ibn Ḥarb from ‘Ikrimah that a Bedouin gave testimony to the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) of having seen the crescent moon. He said: ‘Do you bear testimony that there is no deity but Allāh and I am the Messenger of Allāh?’ He said: ‘Yes.’ So he instructed the people to fast. This is of that which proves to you that the testimony of one individual in religious affairs is valid.’ (al-Aṣl, Dār Ibn Ḥazm, 2:248)

The ‘Ikrimah here is ‘Ikrimah the freed-slave of Ibn ‘Abbās, as clarified in other places of al-Aṣl itself. Hence, Imām Muḥammad quotes a narration from ‘Ikrima and presents it as proof. And it is well-known that when a mujtahid presents a ḥadīth as proof, this is tantamount to him grading it ṣaḥīḥ. (For evidences of this principle from the speech of Ibn al-Humām, Ibn Ḥajar, Ibn al-Jawzī and others, see Qawā‘id fī ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth, Maktab al-Maṭbū‘āt al-Islāmiyyah, p. 57 – 59)

Imām Ṭaḥāwī (239 – 321 H)

Al-Ṭaḥāwī quotes a narration with an authentic chain to ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbās (without presenting any supporting chains), and then says: ‘Hence, this is Ibn ‘Abbās conveying that…’ (Sharḥ Ma‘ānī al-Āthār, 1:116-7), his positive assertion (jazm) of it showing that he believes it is authentic.

Imām Abū Bakr al-Jaṣṣāṣ (305 – 370 H)
quotes the same narration as Imām Muḥammad mentioned earlier, clearly presenting it as proof:


‘The proof of accepting Khabar al-Wāḥid in this is what Simāk ibn Ḥarb narrated from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbās (may Allāh be pleased with him): A Bedouin came to the Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) and said: “I saw the crescent of Ramaḍān.” He said: “Do you bear testimony that there is no deity but Allāh.” He said: “Yes.” He said: “Do you bear testimony that Muḥammad is the messenger of Allāh?” He said: “Yes.” He said: “Bilāl, announce to the people to fast tomorrow.” This report proves two things…’ (Sharḥ Mukhtaṣar al-Ṭaḥāwī, 2:453)

Imām al-Qudūrī (362 – 428 H)

Imām al-Qudūrī states in his work al-Tajrīd:


قال أبو أويس: وحدثني ثور بن يزيد مولى بني الديل بن بكر بن كنانة، عن عكرمة عن ابن عباس مثله، وهذا طريق صحيح، لكن أبا أويس ضعيف

‘Abū Uways said: Thawr ibn Yazīd…narrated to me from ‘Ikrimah from Ibn ‘Abbās the like of it. This [i.e. the chain that Abū Uways mentioned] is a ṣaḥīḥ route, although Abū Uways [himself] is weak.’ (Tajrīd, 3:1371)

And as most of our opponents i assume this individual is also a supporter of ibn Hajar.

Ibn Ḥajar quotes the following narration:

Muḥammad ibn Fuḍayl said, reporting from ‘Uthmān ibn Ḥakīm: I was sitting with Abū Umāmah ibn Sahl ibn Ḥanīf (d. 100), when ‘Ikrimah came. He said: ‘Abū Umāmah, I remind you by Allāh, did you hear Ibn ‘Abbās say:



“Whatever ‘Ikrimah narrates to you from me, assent to him, for he does not lie about me.”’

Abū Umāmah said: ‘Yes.’

Ibn Ḥajar comments: ‘This is a ṣaḥīḥ chain.’ (Hady al-Sārī, p. 1142) [Primary sources for this narration are Tārīkh al-Dūrī and Ḍu‘afā’ of al-‘Uqaylī]

[Abū Umāmah ibn Sahl (d. 100) was either a young ṣaḥābī or a senior Tābi‘ī born in the lifetime of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam). He was a great imām whose narrations are found in the six famous collections of ḥadīths.]

Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī

Ibn Abī Khaythama (d. 279) narrates with an authentic chain that Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī (68 – 131 H) was asked about ‘Ikrimah and he said:


‘Had he not been trustworthy according to me, I would not have written from him.’ (Tārīkh Ibn Abī Khaythamah, 2382; Tahdhīb al-Kamāl, 20:275)


Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī was one of the great imāms of the salaf from the Tābi‘īn, someone who interacted with ‘Ikrimah directly, and studied under him

Ibn Sa‘d narrates with an authentic chain to Ḥabīb ibn Abī Thābit (d. 119), a reliable narrator from the students of several ṣaḥābah:

‘‘Ikrimah passed by ‘Aṭā’ (ibn Abī Rabāḥ) and Sa‘īd (ibn Jubayr), and narrated to them. When he got up (and left), I said to the two of them: “Do you disapprove of anything that he narrates?” They both said: “No.”’ (Ṭabaqāt Ibn Sa‘d, Maktabah al-Khānjī, 7:284)

This is an authentic testimony from two of the greatest of Ibn ‘Abbās’s students that ‘Ikrimah’s narrations have no issues


Al-Bukhārī narrates:

Sufyān ibn ‘Uyaynah reported from ‘Amr ibn Dīnār from Abu l-Sha‘tā’ Jābir ibn Zayd (d. 93), all three of them accepted imāms of the salaf, that the latter handed a parchment to ‘Amr ibn Dīnār containing some questions, saying: ‘Go ask ‘Ikrimah.’ ‘Amr ibn Dīnār appeared somewhat hesitant, so Jābir ibn Zayd snatched the parchment from his hand and said:


هذا عكرمة مولى ابن عباس، هذا أعلم الناس

‘This is ‘Ikrimah, the freed-slave of Ibn ‘Abbās. This is the most knowledgeable of people.’ (al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr, 7:49)

Ibn Ḥajar also said: ‘His being an innovator is not (historically) proven.’ (Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb)

As for the other narrators he has mentioned insha'Allah when i am not restricted by other obligations i shall address them too, however i must add just because they are "Anonymous' doesnt mean the sermon is to be rejected as there are still ample evidences of its legitimacy as i have presented above.
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

Hani

My reply to him here,

Here is my response to one of the worst "refutations" I've seen in my life. I'll tackle the "arguments" one by one.

Note: I feel sorry for even calling these "arguments" since the writer is a dimwit with zero knowledge.

He writes:

(( In this refutation i can easily refute the entire website targeting the legitmacy of Nahj Al Balagha, however due to the convenience of the readers i shall stick with Sermon Number 3 of Nahj Al Balagha.))

Oh, Masha'Allah, of course you can, for you it is "Kun Fa Yakun", I'm sure you can refute everything with a blind-fold.

((Nahj ul balagha first of all was not 'written' it is a compilation of the sermons and letters of Imam Ali a.s))

Very funny, Nahj-ul-Balaghah is not written :)

It must have come from space then? Nobody wrote it? You mean compilation Mr.Genius!? So what? All books of Hadith are compilations yet they're written. Even if Radi heard it from `Ali's mouth directly with a time machine and wrote it down it still counts as "written".

((Secondly, the holy Quran gives accounts of Anbiyah a.s who lived centuries before its revelations by such rationale we should also accept the excuse of those that attack the Qurans accuracy by saying it is too young to be giving accounts of what happened 1000's of years before?))

Qur'an was delivered to us by a prophet, I didn't know that Radi was also a prophet who knew the news of past nations and future events? Or are we equating al-Radi with Muhammad (saw) now? What are al-Radi's miracles then?

(( Or shall we accept the holy Quran at all by this logic at all because our sunni brothers say that it was preserved orally in the memory of sahabah for 30 plus years until uthman compiled it and burned differing copies?))

Qur'an was mass transmitted from followers who took it from the top Companions who learned it from the Prophet (saw), we have legitimate chains for all of its contents as opposed to al-Nahj. Heck in al-Nahj there are some sermons and sayings that have absolutely no sources at all, neither Sunnies or Shia could find where al-Radi got them from.

((As for his claim that there are no chains for the sermon that claim shall be refuted later insha'Allah.))

Nobody said there are no chains you foolish hyena! The article presents two types of sources, those without chains and those with chains.

The argument is to prove that the sermon is not authentic based on Twelver Shia standards, not that it has or doesn't have chains.

((However it is very difficult for one to refute this excerpt above because he doesnt say how there is a 'disconnection'.))

Because the disconnected sources are two types:

A- Those that are lost and so we cannot find the source itself.

B- Those who are still available but when you go back to them they won't list a chain.

Both the above are useless, feel free to revise them and let us know if we missed a chain in that long list.

((Ibn Abd Rabbih was a supporter of Bani Ummayyah Ibn {`Abd Rabbih. In Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature (Vol. 1, pp. 302-303)}. who lived around 300 AH so one cant accuse the narrators of being biased or being a shia or anything of that nature.))

Two objections,

A- He is still unknown according to Shia standards, therefore Shaqshaqiyyah remains un-authentic.

B- He never provided a chain, so it's VERY possible he took it from a liar, can you guarantee us here didn't?

((This man rejected the content because of its stance against the Sunni Aqeedah despite 90% of it if not all of it being in compliance with the occurrences in history))

Actually the sermon goes against modern science, it talks about the wind churning about the oceans which leads to the emergence of the sun, the stars and the moon. Try presenting your holy sermon to any scientist or man of knowledge and he'll have a laugh at you.

((The sermons in Nahj ul balagha such as sermon number 3 have long existed before The compiler of Nahj ul balagha, throughout the era of the Ummayyads and the Abbassids and were preserved by Non Shias and Shias alike.))

Nobody said Radi invented it, we're just saying it's not authentic according to Shia (& Sunni) standards of Hadith, thus unreliable.

((Now i shall state what scholars have said about this sermon and will also give its chain))

The idiot goes on to list the same stuff listed in our article which has no chains, such as Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi and the others.

((as-Sayyid Radi ad-Din Abu'l-Qasim `Ali ibn Musa, Ibn Tawus al-Husayni al-Hulli (d. 664 A.H.) has related this sermon from Kitab al-gharat with the following chain of authorities:- This sermon was related to us by Muhammad ibn Yusuf who related it from al-Hasan ibn `Ali ibn `Abd al-Karim az-Za`farani and he from Muhammad ibn Zakariyyah al-Ghallabi and he from Ya`qub ibn Ja`far ibn Sulayman and he from his father and he from his grand-father and he from Ibn `Abbas.))

Al-Za`farani is Majhool, Ghallabi is Majhool, abu Ya`qub there's no bio for him or his father. SO Shaqshaqiyyah is weak, not authentic.

((Abu Ja`far Muhammad ibn `Ali, Ibn Babawayh (d. 381 A.H.) writes: Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Is'haq at-Talaqani told us that `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Yahya al-Jaludi (d. 332 A.H.) told him that Abu `Abdillah Ahmad ibn `Ammar ibn Khalid told him that Yahya ibn `Abd al-Hamid al- Himmani (d. 228 A.H.) told him that `Isa ibn Rashid related this sermon from `Ali ibn Hudhayfah and he from `Ikrimah and he from Ibn `Abbas.
9) Then Ibn Babawayh records the following chain of authorities :- Muhammad ibn `Ali Majilawayh related this sermon to us and he took it from his uncle Muhammad ibn Abi'l-Qasim and he from Ahmad ibn Abi `Abdillah (Muhammad ibn Khalid) al-Barqi and he from his father and he from (Muhammad) Ibn Abi `Umayr and he from Aban ibn `Uthman and he from Aban ibn Taghlib and he from `Ikrimah and he from Ibn `Abbas.))

The first chain that is provided by Al-Saduq contains several problems. The chain includes narrators that are anonymous in status like Mohammad bin Ibrahim Al-Talqani and Yayha bin Abdul-Hameed, both were declared anonymous by Al-Jawahiri in Al-Mufeed min Mu’jam Rijal Al-Hadith p. 483,  664. The chain also includes other anonymous narrators like Ali bin Khuzaima and Ahmad bin Ammar bin Khalid. Furthermore, Ikrimah, the mawla of Ibn Abbas was weakened by Al-Kashshi.

The second chain that is provided by Al-Saduq also contains problematic narrators like Mohammad bin Ali Majeelouyah who is anonymous according to Al-Jawahiri p. 559. It contains Mohammad bin Khalid Al-Barqi who was weakened by Al-Najashi. It also includes Ikrimah, like the previous chain.

((al-`Allamah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi has related the following chain of authority about this Sermon from ash-Shaykh Qutbu'd-Din ar-Rawandi's compilation Minhaj al-bara`ah fi Sharh Nahjul Balaghah: Ash-Shaykh Abu Nasr al-Hasan ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim informed me from al-Hajib Abu'l-Wafa' Muhammad ibn Badi`, al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn Badi` and al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd ar-Rahman and they from al-Hafiz Abu Bakr (Ahmad ibn Musa) ibn Marduwayh al-Isbahani (d. 416 A.H.) and he from al-Hafiz Abu'l-Qasim Sulayman ibn Ahmad at-Tabarani (d. 360 A.H.) and he from Ahmad ibn `Ali al-Abbar and he from Is'haq ibn Sa`id Abu Salamah ad-Dimashqi and he from Khulayd ibn Da`laj and he from `Ata' ibn Abi Rabah and he from Ibn `Abbas.))

The chain provided by Qutb Al-Deen is perhaps the worst of all, for almost all the narrators in it are anonymous in status, including Ibn Mardawaih, Al-Tabarani, Ishaq bin Sa’eed, and Khulaid bin Da’alaj.

((Many Ulema have expressed an admiration for Ikrimah and have regarded him as acceptable.))

Those are Sunni scholars, as for Shia scholars/Imams, they hate his guts and consider him an evil liar. Thus Shaqshaqiyyah is still weak and un-authentic according to your Hadith sciences.

((As for the other narrators he has mentioned insha'Allah when i am not restricted by other obligations i shall address them too, however i must add just because they are "Anonymous' doesnt mean the sermon is to be rejected as there are still ample evidences of its legitimacy as i have presented above.))

You're clearly not restricted to anything since the above is not even your work or research. You simply copied and pasted it, the same article can be found in Arabic elsewhere.

As for narrators being anonymous, it is MORE than enough reason to reject ANY narration, your scholars often reject narrations due to to the anonymity of narrators in their Fiqhi books and `Aqidah books. As for your "ample evidences", they're not ample, they're not even evidence. You simply said, "Some other guy mentioned it elsewhere, so it's true" Nope! Narrations of praise for Abu Bakr and `Umar are narrated in tons more sources yet you do not accept them, narrations of Tahrif literally fill your Hadith books yet you never accept and try to weaken them, so don't play this hypocrisy game with us for the love of God.


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

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 200
  • +3/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
LOL it was really fun reading this.     

May Allah bless you brother.

در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1074 Views
Last post July 09, 2015, 11:19:42 AM
by Bolani Muslim
15 Replies
1638 Views
Last post May 04, 2016, 12:17:56 PM
by scusemyenglish
1 Replies
614 Views
Last post January 09, 2016, 02:47:07 AM
by Rationalist
3 Replies
157 Views
Last post June 30, 2017, 06:28:03 AM
by fgss