TwelverShia.net Forum

Sahih or not? Thanks

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Sahih or not? Thanks
« on: April 28, 2017, 07:23:24 PM »
I will be posting Sunni chains and I would like to see if they are authentic/unauthentic:

حدثنا سليمان بن عبيد الله الغيلاني، حدثنا أبو عامر، حدثنا كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي، عن أبيه، عن علي رضي الله عنه

___


إبراهيم بن مرزوق قال : حدثنا أبو عامر العقدي قال : حدثنا كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي ، عن أبيه ، عن علي ،


___


إسحاق: أنا أبو عامر العقدي، عن كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي، عن أبيه، عن علي
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #1 on: April 28, 2017, 08:00:24 PM »
This one:

حدثنا أبو حفص عمر بن أحمد الجمحي بمكة ثنا علي بن عبد العزيز ثنا عمرو بن عون ثنا هشيم عن إسماعيل بن سالم عن أبي إدريس الأودي عن علي رضي الله عنه
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Hani

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #2 on: April 28, 2017, 09:09:26 PM »
First three are one chain:

Kathir bin Zayd is truthful but makes mistakes, which weakens a report. Muhammad bin `Umar bin `Ali bin abi Talib is Majhul, I used to accept him as truthful just due to his lineage but that's obviously not academic, depends on how lenient you want to be.

This is weak, at best Hasan if you're very lenient and requires Mutaba`ah.


Second chain:

It has two issues, Hushaym is a big Mudallis and he did not declare hearing. abu Idris has only been authenticated by Ibn Hibban and `Ijli who are very lenient thus scholars dismiss their authentication so he'd be reduced to a Mastur/Majhul.

This is kinda weak unless it has a Mutaba`ah.

« Last Edit: April 28, 2017, 09:29:34 PM by Hani »
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

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #3 on: April 28, 2017, 09:38:07 PM »
First three are one chain:

Kathir bin Zayd is truthful but makes mistakes, which weakens a report. Muhammad bin `Umar bin `Ali bin abi Talib is Majhul, I used to accept him as truthful just due to his lineage but that's obviously not academic, depends on how lenient you want to be.

This is weak, at best Hasan if you're very lenient and requires Mutaba`ah.


Second chain:

It has two issues, Hushaym is a big Mudallis and he did not declare hearing. abu Idris has only been authenticated by Ibn Hibban and `Ijli who are very lenient so scholars dismiss their authentication so he'd be reduced to a Mastur/Majhul.

This is kinda weak unless it has a Mutaba`ah.

As for Muhammad ibn Umar, wasn't he declared saduq by Al-Hafidh?

As for the one about Ibn Idris, didn't Al-Hafidh declare him maqbul? And Dhahabi authenticated the hadith, wouldn't that mean he considered him saduq or thiqah?

Also, what if this one bro?

ثنا أبو علي الحافظ ، ثنا الهيثم بن خلف، ثنا محمد بن عمر بن هياج، ثنا يحيى بن عبد الرحمن، ثنا يونس بن أبي يعفور، عن أبيه، عنه ، به
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2017, 09:48:07 PM »
Also these two bro if you don't mind:

حدثنا يحيى قال :حدثنا جرير عن الحسن بن عبيد الله عن أبي الضحى عن زيد بن أرقم

___

حدثنا علي بن المنذر كوفي حدثنا محمد بن فضيل قال حدثنا الأعمش عن عطية عن أبي سعيد و الأعمش عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهما

___

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا بن نمير ثنا عبد الملك بن أبي سليمان عن عطية العوفي عن أبي سعيد الخدري
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Hani

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2017, 12:48:00 AM »

As for Muhammad ibn Umar, wasn't he declared saduq by Al-Hafidh?

As for the one about Ibn Idris, didn't Al-Hafidh declare him maqbul? And Dhahabi authenticated the hadith, wouldn't that mean he considered him saduq or thiqah?


Ibn Hajar and Dhahabi are late, they're basing their opinions off of early biographers. As far as the early scholars, Ibn Hibban probably authenticated Muhammad so Ibn Hajar went and said "Saduq", he often does that. In truth, his condition is unknown because Ibn Hibban's grading are unreliable and he authenticates unknown people.

Ibn Idris is the same deal, authenticated by Ibn Hibban, Ibn Hajar picks that up and labels him "Maqbul" which btw means Maqbul only as a follow-up(Mutaba`ah) not on his own. We're still stuck with a Majhul.

ثنا أبو علي الحافظ ، ثنا الهيثم بن خلف، ثنا محمد بن عمر بن هياج، ثنا يحيى بن عبد الرحمن، ثنا يونس بن أبي يعفور، عن أبيه، عنه ، به

As for the chain, Yahya bin `Abdul-Rahman bin Malik bin al-Harith is truthful(Saduq) and may make mistakes. Yunus bin abi Yu`fur is differed upon, a strict Shia, some weakened him and some said reliable, he seems to lean towards weakness and makes a lot of mistakes in his Hadith. There's an un-named narrator, "عنه" not sure who's supposed to be here.

حدثنا يحيى قال :حدثنا جرير عن الحسن بن عبيد الله عن أبي الضحى عن زيد بن أرقم

This chain is strong but experts questioned abu al-Duha's hearing from Zayd.

حدثنا علي بن المنذر كوفي حدثنا محمد بن فضيل قال حدثنا الأعمش عن عطية عن أبي سعيد و الأعمش عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهما

This is two chains, first is very weak due to `Atiyyah from aba Sa`id. Second, they're are all reliable but I don't recall Habib hearing from Zayd, possible there's an intermediary that's dropped, try to find who's the middle man by searching for the same narration in other books.

حدثنا عبد الله حدثني أبي ثنا بن نمير ثنا عبد الملك بن أبي سليمان عن عطية العوفي عن أبي سعيد الخدري

Very weak because of `Atiyyah from abi Sa`id.
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

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2017, 02:41:43 AM »
Al-Salamu Alaykum bro.

عنه is Hayyan Al-Assadi.

In anyway the chain has a Shi'i in it, many Sunni rijalists will probably reject this narration and say it supports the Shi'i madhab.

As for Abu Al-Duha and Zayd ibn Arqam, what do you think of this link?

http://www.room-alghadeer.net/vb/showthread.php?t=38282
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2017, 02:55:05 AM »
Also bro what do you think of this? Apparently there are foreign words in some Hadith Al-Thqalayns which Sunni brothers quote:

https://www.al-islam.org/hadith-al-thaqalayn-deposed-will-last-prophet-humanity-toyib-olawuyi/4-hadith-al-thaqalayn-prophet
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Hani

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #8 on: April 29, 2017, 03:30:04 AM »
Al-Salamu Alaykum bro.

عنه is Hayyan Al-Assadi.

In anyway the chain has a Shi'i in it, many Sunni rijalists will probably reject this narration and say it supports the Shi'i madhab.

As for Abu Al-Duha and Zayd ibn Arqam, what do you think of this link?

http://www.room-alghadeer.net/vb/showthread.php?t=38282

It seems in the thread you linked that they're responding to somebody who weakened al-Thaqalayn.

Thaqalayn is authentic and that is known to all, weakening it is obviously politically motivated.

The thread revolves around Zayd bin Arqam's Hadith, as I stated previously that abu Duha most-likely heard from Zayd so I had no issue accepting his narration. Although this narration also contains al-Hasan bin `Ubaydullah who is trustworthy but there's some shakiness (Idtirab) in his reports.

This however does not matter, because 2 other people narrated Thaqalayn from Zayd and their chains are spotless. Yazid bin Hayyan and `Ali bin Rabi`ah.

As for Hayyan al-Asadi he's Majhul.

As for aba Idris, I checked al-Dulabi's book which is one of the oldest sources listing that chain, it actually lists his full name as:
عَنْ أَبِي إِدْرِيسَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ أَبِي حَدِيدٍ الأَوْدِيِّ

I've no clue who this is, most likely another Majhul.

Second link is from al-islam's site, an article by Toyib and it is a deceptive one as is this man's habit. He's saying there's an interpolation by Yazid, who said that? Those are the words of Zayd bin Arqam who witnessed it and understood it. Toyib is trying to muddy the waters in order to give the text the meaning Shia believe in, which is that the Prophet (saw) told us to hold onto Ahlul-Bayt for guidance. This is of course clearly false from the text itself and the rest of Zayd's narration illustrates this further.
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

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2017, 03:37:02 AM »
Al-Salamu Alaykum bro.

عنه is Hayyan Al-Assadi.

In anyway the chain has a Shi'i in it, many Sunni rijalists will probably reject this narration and say it supports the Shi'i madhab.

As for Abu Al-Duha and Zayd ibn Arqam, what do you think of this link?

http://www.room-alghadeer.net/vb/showthread.php?t=38282

It seems in the thread you linked that they're responding to somebody who weakened al-Thaqalayn.

Thaqalayn is authentic and that is known to all, weakening it is obviously politically motivated.

The thread revolves around Zayd bin Arqam's Hadith, as I stated previously that abu Duha most-likely heard from Zayd so I had no issue accepting his narration. Although this narration also contains al-Hasan bin `Ubaydullah who is trustworthy but there's some shakiness (Idtirab) in his reports.

This however does not matter, because 2 other people narrated Thaqalayn from Zayd and their chains are spotless. Yazid bin Hayyan and `Ali bin Rabi`ah.

As for Hayyan al-Asadi he's Majhul.

As for aba Idris, I checked al-Dulabi's book which is one of the oldest sources listing that chain, it actually lists his full name as:
عَنْ أَبِي إِدْرِيسَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ أَبِي حَدِيدٍ الأَوْدِيِّ

I've no clue who this is, most likely another Majhul.

Second link is from al-islam's site, an article by Toyib and it is a deceptive one as is this man's habit. He's saying there's an interpolation by Yazid, who said that? Those are the words of Zayd bin Arqam who witnessed it and understood it. Toyib is trying to muddy the waters in order to give the text the meaning Shia believe in, which is that the Prophet (saw) told us to hold onto Ahlul-Bayt for guidance. This is of course clearly false from the text itself and the rest of Zayd's narration illustrates this further.

1) that version of hadith al-thaqalayn which the website quoted and I did before tells us to hold onto both the Holy Qur'an and Ahlulbayt (as).

2) if there is no interplotation then why are there versions of the hadith, like the one narrated by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, which does not have that wording? Or is the brother who wrote that article wrong about that point too?
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2017, 04:29:44 AM »

1) that version of hadith al-thaqalayn which the website quoted and I did before tells us to hold onto both the Holy Qur'an and Ahlulbayt (as).
No it doesn't . Its talking only about holding the Quran as the source of Guidance. You can read the detailed explanation and many other queries in this article:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/hadeeth-al-thaqalayntwo-weighty-things-the-correct-understanding-and-a-spot-on-perspective-of-sunnis/

Quote
2) if there is no interplotation then why are there versions of the hadith, like the one narrated by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, which does not have that wording? Or is the brother who wrote that article wrong about that point too?
The guy who wrote that article is notorious for his deceit and deception, as mentioned by Hani. And it seems you misread what Hani said. He didn't deny that the hadeeth has interpolation, but unlike what the deceitful writer mentioned that the interpolation was from a sub narrator Yazid bin Hayyan, Hani said the correct thing that those were the words of the main narrator Zaid bin Arqam, who witnessed that sermon. Those aren't the words of Yazid bin Hayyan.

These words of Zaid bin Arqam:
.‏ فَحَثَّ عَلَى كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَرَغَّبَ فِيهِ
 he urged and motivated (us) regarding the Book of Allah.

implies that Prophet(Saws) mentioned some sentences wherein Prophet(saw) encouraged and urged people to follow and hold Quran(alone).

Now you might ask that, then why didn't Zaid(ra) mentioned those exact sentences or words. Well the reason for this was given by Zaid himself in the starting of the hadeeth.

Zaid said: I have grown old and have almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2017, 04:33:23 AM by Noor-us-Sunnah »

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #11 on: April 29, 2017, 04:40:00 AM »

1) that version of hadith al-thaqalayn which the website quoted and I did before tells us to hold onto both the Holy Qur'an and Ahlulbayt (as).
No it doesn't . Its talking only about holding the Quran as the source of Guidance. You can read the detailed explanation and many other queries in this article:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/hadeeth-al-thaqalayntwo-weighty-things-the-correct-understanding-and-a-spot-on-perspective-of-sunnis/

Quote
2) if there is no interplotation then why are there versions of the hadith, like the one narrated by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, which does not have that wording? Or is the brother who wrote that article wrong about that point too?
The guy who wrote that article is notorious for his deceit and deception, as mentioned by Hani. And it seems you misread what Hani said. He didn't deny that the hadeeth has interpolation, but unlike what the deceitful writer mentioned that the interpolation was from a sub narrator Yazid bin Hayyan, Hani said the correct thing that those were the words of the main narrator Zaid bin Arqam, who witnessed that sermon. Those aren't the words of Yazid bin Hayyan.

These words of Zaid bin Arqam:
.‏ فَحَثَّ عَلَى كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَرَغَّبَ فِيهِ
 he urged and motivated (us) regarding the Book of Allah.

implies that Prophet(Saws) mentioned some sentences wherein Prophet(saw) encouraged and urged people to follow and hold Quran(alone).

Now you might ask that, then why didn't Zaid(ra) mentioned those exact sentences or words. Well the reason for this was given by Zaid himself in the starting of the hadeeth.

Zaid said: I have grown old and have almost spent my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that.

As for the first one, you're wrong my friend!

حدثنا يحيى قال :حدثنا جرير عن الحسن بن عبيد الله عن أبي الضحى عن زيد بن أرقم قال: النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم :إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله عز وجل وعترتي أهل بيتي وإنهما لن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض

This sounds a lot like the version the Shi'a narrate.
محور المقاومة والممانعة

Hani

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #12 on: April 29, 2017, 04:40:32 AM »
The good thing about Yazid's narration is that it's detailed, which helps us understand what the meaning is as opposed to a vague brief report. The Shia prefer the vague report, as they can give it all sorts of interpretations. Ahlul-Sunnah want the detailed report because they wish to understand what is intended from those words.

Here I quote Zayd's Hadith from Musnad ibn abi Shaybah who died in 235 AH (almost 30 years before Muslim) and it's the same text either-way:

[He (saw) praised God and offered wisdom then said: "To begin, O people I await my Lord's messenger to respond and I am leaving among you two heavy burdens, one of which is God's Book, in it is guidance and light; so hold onto God's book and adhere to it." He (saw) encouraged us to stick to God's Book then said: "And my household; By God I remind you of my household."]


Let us look at the green part, it is quite clear that he never asked anybody to hold on to anything other than God's Book here right? In fact, he (saw) goes out of his way to describe how it guides us towards light.


Now if we read the red part, it's clear these are not Yazid's words or anybody other than Zayd himself, he was narrating what happened and describing the situation. This part further emphasizes that they were being encouraged to hold onto God's book for guidance.


The last blue part, does not state that we must hold onto the household nor that there's any guidance involved, it is a reminder for us to take care of them.


At the end of the narration, notice how Zayd lists the members of the household. Clearly he's not talking about chosen individuals or infallible leaders, he's talking about the paternal relatives (`Abbas's family, Harith's family, `Ali's family, Ja`far's family).


Now why is the Shia on that site going out of his way to authenticate specifically the narration of abu al-Duha? He does it for two reasons:


A- abu al-Duha's report contains "They shall not separate until they reach me at the pond."


Regarding this, we Ahlul-Sunnah have no issue. Although this is a vague statement, yet we can give it a suitable interpretation which is that the Prophet (saw) told us to be responsible for the Qur'an and his household. Being responsible for the Qur'an means learning its guidance, preserving and teaching it. Being responsible for his household means giving them their due rights and protecting them. When a Muslim reaches the pond having done his duties, he is safe. However, a Nasibi such as Hajjaj who taught Qur'an but hurt the household will have a problem at the pond.


B- one of abu al-Duha's reports can be twisted to imply that Ahlul-Bayt offer guidance.


The one familiar with abu al-Duha's reports knows that it does not state anything with regards to acquiring guidance neither from Qur'an or from Ahlul-Bayt.

It simply says this:

أَبِي الضُّحَى، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ: إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمُ الثَّقَلَيْنِ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلَ بَيْتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ

[I am leaving among you two heavy responsibilities, God's Book and my progeny; my household. They shall not separate until they reach me at the pond.]

YET, one report attributed to him has a slight variation:

عَنْ أَبِي الضُّحَى، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ، قَالَ: قَالَ: النَّبِيُّ: إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ تَمَسَّكْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا كِتَابُ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلُ بَيْتِي، وَأَنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَى الْحَوْضِ

[I am leaving behind a thing that if you hold onto it, you shall not go astray God's Book; and my household. They shall not separate until they reach me at the pond.]

Now we respond to this by saying: We interpret this in the context of Zayd's other more authentic narration, in that the above text is limiting guidance ONLY to the Qur'an. This is why it says "If you hold onto IT you shall not stray God's Book" This part is only referring to the Qur'an thus the singular "It" when referring to the object of guidance. The Prophet (saw) then adds that he is also leaving behind his household. Of course we know this because it's a brief summarized narration, the more detailed reports state how the Prophet (saw) described the Qur'an as a rope from the sky and a light of guidance before moving on to reminding us of his family.

Our second response is a Hadithi one, we say: This report is incorrect, the narrator confused a part from abu Sa`id's narration with Zayd's narration.

The narration reported by the Kufans from abu Sa`id is the one that states in some versions "That if you hold onto it, you shall not go astray" However, abu al-Duha's report from Zayd does not.

To illustrate this, let us collect all of Zayd's reports from abu al-Duha starting with the suspect narration:


حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا جَرِيرٌ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ أَبِي الضُّحَى، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ، قَالَ: قَالَ: النَّبِيُّ : " إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ تَمَسَّكْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا: كِتَابُ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلُ بَيْتِي، وَأَنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَى الْحَوْضِ

وَحَدَّثَنَا يُوسُفُ بْنُ مُوسَى، قَالَ: نا جَرِيرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْحَمِيدِ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ النَّخَعِيِّ، عَنْ مُسْلِمِ بْنِ صُبَيْحٍ، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، قَالَ: إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمُ الثَّقَلَيْنِ: كِتَابَ اللَّهِ، وَأَهْلَ بَيْتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ

حَدَّثَنَا مُعَاذُ أَبُو الْمُثَنَّى، ثنا عَلِيُّ بْنُ الْمَدِينِيُّ، ثنا جَرِيرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْحَمِيدِ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ أَبِي الضُّحَى، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ : " إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمُ الثَّقَلَيْنِ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلَ بَيْتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ "، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو حُصَيْنٍ الْقَاضِي، ثنا الْحِمَّانِيُّ، ثنا جَرِيرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْحَمِيدِ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ أَبِي الضُّحَى، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ مِثْلَهُ

حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ، ثنا عَمْرُو بْنُ عَوْنٍ الْوَاسِطِيُّ، ثنا خَالِدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ أَبِي الضُّحَى، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ : " إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمُ الثَّقَلَيْنِ كِتَابَ اللَّهِ وَعِتْرَتِي أَهْلَ بَيْتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرٍ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ بْنِ مُصْلِحٍ الْفَقِيهُ بِالرِّي، ثنا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَيُّوبَ، ثنا يَحْيَى بْنُ الْمُغِيرَةِ السَّعْدِيُّ، ثنا جَرِيرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْحَمِيدِ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ النَّخَعِيِّ، عَنْ مُسْلِمِ بْنِ صُبَيْحٍ، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَآلِهِ وَسَلَّمَ: " إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمُ الثَّقَلَيْنِ: كِتَابَ اللَّهِ، وَأَهْلَ بَيْتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَنْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَيَّ الْحَوْضَ

قَرَأْتُ عَلَى مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ، ثنا أَبُو حُجْرٍ عَمْرُو بْنُ رَافِعٍ، ثنا جَرِيرٌ، عَنِ الْحَسَنِ، عَنْ مُسْلِمٍ، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ : إِنِّي تَارِكٌ فِيكُمُ الثَّقَلَيْنِ: كِتَابُ اللَّهِ، وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي، وَإِنَّهُمَا لَمْ يَتَفَرَّقَا حَتَّى يَرِدَا عَلَى الْحَوْضِ

Notice how all versions above say "I am leaving behind me al-Thaqalayn" except one version that says "I am leaving behind me what if you hold onto it you will not stray."


A- Jarir bin `Abdul-Hamid and Khalid bin `Abdullah both narrate the report from al-Hasan bin `Ubaydullah.


B- Khalid mentions nothing about guidance in his report. Jarir mentions the guidance version.


C- Jarir doesn't mention guidance in five versions but only mentions it in one version.


Conclusion: It's not possible that five people made a mistake while narrating from Jarir and only this one narrator "Yahya" got it right.


This is a sufficient response, if you wish to go further, try investigating WHO this Yahya is in the first place.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2017, 04:47:17 AM by Hani »
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

Zlatan Ibrahimovic

Re: Sahih or not? Thanks
« Reply #13 on: April 29, 2017, 07:04:03 AM »
This is a sufficient response, thank you.
محور المقاومة والممانعة

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
477 Views
Last post February 29, 2016, 10:02:18 PM
by Hani
1 Replies
346 Views
Last post March 07, 2016, 06:36:40 PM
by al-kulayni
9 Replies
1133 Views
Last post August 17, 2016, 10:47:12 PM
by Farid
21 Replies
357 Views
Last post April 24, 2017, 06:28:58 AM
by Zlatan Ibrahimovic