TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Hadith-Rijal => Topic started by: Zlatan Ibrahimovic on July 28, 2017, 04:25:02 PM
-
In Sunni rijal, what is the status of a man who hates or insults or curses Abu Bakr and Umar? Is he automatically relegated to weakness, or can he be considered trustworthy in spite of his positions regarding the Shaykhayn?
-
I used to hold the view that they would weaken all of those that hated them. However, I later became aware of the opinion that there are some cases of reliable narrators who hated them, like Ja'afar bin Sulaiman and Abbad bin Ya'qoub.
Though, I am not aware of them cursing and insulting Abu Bakr and Omar.
-
@Farid, and someone who doesn't just hate them, but also curses them or insults them. What is the stance over him? The same?
-
@Farid, and someone who doesn't just hate them, but also curses them or insults them. What is the stance over him? The same?
This would again be categorized in two ways. One is cursing or insulting them because of their deen, their Islam. Or for personal differences. If it's for personal differences, then that won't affect their credibility. But if its due to their Islam and their deen, then yes it would.
-
@Farid, and someone who doesn't just hate them, but also curses them or insults them. What is the stance over him? The same?
Cursing and insulting in itself is a sin, let alone cursing and insulting dead Muslims.
If one continuously cursed a dead Muslim, wouldn't you consider that to be a sign of fisq?
-
The irony is the Rafidi narrators are both praised and cursed in the 12er shia book of rijal. So how can Sunni rijal accept them?
-
@Farid, and someone who doesn't just hate them, but also curses them or insults them. What is the stance over him? The same?
Cursing and insulting in itself is a sin, let alone cursing and insulting dead Muslims.
If one continuously cursed a dead Muslim, wouldn't you consider that to be a sign of fisq?
Yes cursing and insulting a dead Muslim is a sin and can be a sign of fisq. But what I am getting from you is that somebody could have insulted and cursed the Shaykhayn, but still would be considered reliable?
-
I'm not so sure about that one. It seems to me that those that insult the dead, and especially thr shaikhain, are not reliable since that action puts holes in their adalah.
-
I'm not so sure about that one. It seems to me that those that insult the dead, and especially thr shaikhain, are not reliable since that action puts holes in their adalah.
So fasiqs cannot be reliable? Aren't there thiqa narrators who used to be drunkards for example?
-
Good question.
Would you call someone who drank once a fasiq but is an upright Muslim otherwise a fasiq? Or would a raging alcoholic be a fasiq in your eyes?
...and yes, I am aware that this matter can be grey.
-
Good question.
Would you call someone who drank once a fasiq but is an upright Muslim otherwise a fasiq? Or would a raging alcoholic be a fasiq in your eyes?
...and yes, I am aware that this matter can be grey.
For number one: I'm not sure about the term 'fasiq' but he is certainly not a adil unless he repents, even if it was just a drop.
-
That is one way of lookin at it.
I don't know how that would be applied though. I don't think those that commit sins like drinking alcohol were asked: "Did you make tawba?"
For example, you saw a friend drink alcohol when he was a teen. Then, ten years later, you saw him as an Imam in the masjid. I don't think anyone would feel the need to ask if he made tawba, but rather, they would just assume that he has changed.
-
That is one way of lookin at it.
I don't know how that would be applied though. I don't think those that commit sins like drinking alcohol were asked: "Did you make tawba?"
For example, you saw a friend drink alcohol when he was a teen. Then, ten years later, you saw him as an Imam in the masjid. I don't think anyone would feel the need to ask if he made tawba, but rather, they would just assume that he has changed.
So are we sure those nasibis who use to curse Imam Ali (as) and who are thiqa, died repenting from their fisq? (kufr according to me).
-
So are we sure those nasibis who use to curse Imam Ali (as) and who are thiqa, died repenting from their fisq? (kufr according to me).
Cursing Ali is fisq without a doubt. You seem to be under the impression that there are tons of thiqaat that cursed Ali. This is untrue. The most that anyone can do is find an isolated case or two, but that doesn't disprove the general rule, which is that cursing Ali is fisq.
Also, keep in mind that in such cases, those that accuse a narrator of cursing Ali are not the ones that are calling him adl. In other words, the tawtheeq would be coming from someone who is probably unaware of the narrator's cursing.
-
So are we sure those nasibis who use to curse Imam Ali (as) and who are thiqa, died repenting from their fisq? (kufr according to me).
Cursing Ali is fisq without a doubt. You seem to be under the impression that there are tons of thiqaat that cursed Ali. This is untrue. The most that anyone can do is find an isolated case or two, but that doesn't disprove the general rule, which is that cursing Ali is fisq.
Also, keep in mind that in such cases, those that accuse a narrator of cursing Ali are not the ones that are calling him adl. In other words, the tawtheeq would be coming from someone who is probably unaware of the narrator's cursing.
Why is Umar ibn Sa'ad thiqa and is a narrator in Muslim even though he killed the grandson of the Prophet (saww)?
-
The Imam of Al Jarh wal Ta'deel Yahya bin Ma'een was asked: Is he Thiqa?
He answered, "How can the killer of Al Hussain be a thiqa?!"
Reference: Tareekh Ibn Abi Khaythama
-
Note: Some folks are unjustly referred to as "Nasibi" and vice versa some are unjustly referred to as "Shia". I can give examples.
-
The Imam of Al Jarh wal Ta'deel Yahya bin Ma'een was asked: Is he Thiqa?
He answered, "How can the killer of Al Hussain be a thiqa?!"
Reference: Tareekh Ibn Abi Khaythama
Okay, so even if Ibn Ma'een took him as weak, how come other rijalists took him as thiqa?
-
I'm not aware of tawtheeq from a classical scholar apart from Al-Ijli, who is often criticized by Sunnis for his lenience. In any case, I don't believe he was referring to the character of Omar bin Sa'ad, but rather, his narrations. The wathaqa of a narrator is also determined by a comprehensive study of their narrations.
In other words, Al-Ijli found corresponding reports to all of Omar bin Sa'ad's narrations, which isn't really that large of a feat, since Omar bin Sa'ad barely narrated anything, or Al-Ijli found nothing dubious in his narrations in general.