Discussion on "Shia Narrators in Sunnah"

[Muhammad Tazin]

As Salamu alaikum,
I have read the article "Abdul-Husayn’s 100 Shia Narrators in Sunni Books." , but I did not got chance to listen to the audio lecture- Murajaat.

recently,a local Shia person sent me an article claiming that a sahaba and many many important narrators of hadith were Extreme Shia,even Rafidhi who used to curse sahaba,shaykhayn & takfir on Uthaman(r.a.) etc.
scholars of hadith labelled them Shia,Gaalii(extremist) but also reliable and important! 
I feel that, they took some and translated from the book of Muhammad jafar al tabsi - {رجال الشيعة في أسانيد السنّة}, where 138 narrators are listed with comments on them by the Sunni hadith scholars.

The Shia article contains 1 Sahaba (Amr bin Tufayl) : they claimed , it was established that he was shia, and he was the flag bearer of the army of Mukhtar. I tackled the commentary provided by them(of Ibn Qutayba,Ibn Hazm) by the answers of Brother Farid in Islamic-Forum(http://islamic-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=17000  ) . and about flag-bearing, I  replied that "It was just political, to fight the oppressor governors of Yazeed. As Sulayman ibn Surad lead the Jaish al-Tawwabin, but he himself wasn't in need of that Tauba, because he did not write Husayn(r.a.) to some to Kufa then cheated; it was just to fight Yazeeds rule ". 
{ Need more logic and references }


and 7 other narrator -

1.Aban bin Tghlb [Abu Sa'd]
2.Isma'il bin 'Abdur Rahman al-Saddi
3.ahmad bin mufadhal
4.Isma'il bin Aban al-Waraq
5.Isma'il bin Zakaria
6.Isma'il bin Khalifa al-'Absi al-Mala'I
7.Ibrahim bin yazid al kufi

Shia claiming that, these people were extreme Shia that is established from the rijal of Sunnah.Some of them used to Curse Sahaba, make Takfir on them.  In Spite of that, they were declared reliable!
 
I have checked some in Muslimscholars.info . But my Arabic is bad, so feeling difficulty.
The most problem is the Shia article used Mizan al I'tidal for labeling thsese THIQA narrators extreme Rafidi, and Muslimscholars.info rarely includes comments from that book.
Saw some other websites, some saying that Allama Suddi was mistakenly labeled Shia etc. but not clear enough!

I earnestly request my expert brothers to help me by Discussing .

[Farid]

Wa alaykum alsalam wa rahmatullah,

Inshallah are your answers can be found in the audio.

[Muhammad Tazin]

Inshallah are your answers can be found in the audio.

About Amr bin Tufayl(r.a.) and the 7 narrators mentioned?

I am going to knock you if there's further need. Please keep an eye on this thread. I am badly in need of refute that articles sent to me by those Shia, claiming "Teacher of Bukhari was Shia... Extreme Rafidhi people narrrated in sahih Muslim" etc.!

[Farid]

The response provided in the audio is a general response to every person referred to as a Shia in a Sunni hadith book. Inshallah your questions will be answered in the audio.

[Muhammad Tazin]

It was great analysis. Now I got that , they exactly copied from this Al MUrazaAt book.
The problem is, Shia(with whom I'm dealing), might have known the policy of Sunni Hadith Science (accepting from those who do not Takfir on Sahaba or Curse) , So they specifically tried to send names of those who were told
"takfir/curse on sahaba" in the Sunni Rijal.
Yes, most of the cases they were politically labeled as "Shia", just fighting with Ali(r.a.) against Muwaiya(r.a) or trying to take revenge against Yazeed.
 7 people I listed above, critical analysis to be done, with:
 > Ismail bin Abdur Rahman(Al Suddi)- the Mufassir, Shia says he used to curse Shaykhayn. But some people says that it was a mistake,he actuallay did not curse etc.
>Ismail ibn Aban(the teacher of Bukhari), to prove that he was just political.
> Aban bin Taghilb(shia says he was strong in SHIA BELIEF)
> Ismail bin Zakariyya , Shia claims that he believed "Ali called Musa in Mount Tur" *funny fact I've got that he narrates from Abu Huraira(r.a.)
>Ibrahim bin yazid al Nakhyi was labeled Shia politically OR anything found about his belief ?

A strange thing is that- To label the narrators as EXTREMIST,RAFIDI, they gave references from Mizan al I'tidal only- in most cases! And I have heard that Al-Dhahabi labeled narrators depending on "قال غيره" , several cases.


I completely rely on your study of Shia Rijal books. So it's absolute that those 74 people are Majhool Haal in the Shia hadis Literature?   NO chance of getting details from any Shia rijal book?

[Furkan]

Ask them to prove if those narrators believe/narate anything about 12 imams

[Farid]

The narrators that are majhool are majhool according to Al Jawahiri in Mujam Rial Al Hadith. Brother, this is the case with most Shia narrators. Most hadiths are weak because of insufficient info about narrators.

Furkan is right. It is almost impossible to link these people to the twelve imams.

[Furkan]

There were tons of other sects within shiism so the chance for each of these narrators to be an twelver usuli imami shia is very low (if we would assume shiism aqida did exist back then)

[Muhammad Tazin]

 I am in need to prove that these   person( in my list) are not extreme rafidi, in their beilef.

I have done some work..

I've pointed,
* Al-Najashi said nothing about Yahya bin Saeed al Qattan, whether he's Sunni or not. as I have seen in Rijal al-NAjashi,  yahya bin said al qattan(id 1196) http://www.al-shia.org/html/ara/books/?mod=rejal&start=50&end=100
In rijal of Ahlus Sunnah, nobody said him Shia.

* Shia emphasize on Ibn Qutayba's comments about narrators, to prove that they were Rafidhi,Cursed Sahaba etc. .SO, there's something about Ibn Qutayba . His position in the field of Jarh al-ta'deel is to be examined.

* Ismail bin Abdur Rahman(Al Suddi)- the Mufassir, Shia says he used to curse Shaykhayn.
He is Saduq,Delusion . In Miazn al-I'tidal: abdullah ibn habib in abi Thabit heard he's shia( سمعت الشعبي).
Husain bin Waqid heard him in his majlis to criticizing Shaykhayn(r.a.) that establishes him as a Rafidi? {Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb Ibn Hajr } . I think it should be examined that whether there was any misunderstanding or not?
Fun Fact: In Sahih Muslim,Tirmidhi & Abu Daud, he narrates hadith of Aiysha(R.a.) and Abu HUrayra(r.a.) !!
Article of Brother Farid says, he is Unknown(8- Isma’eel Al-Suddi – Unknown ?)  But I have seen in Rijal Tusi that, it mentions his name, as a companion of ali bin husayn(r). 


* Aban bin Taghlib: In Mizan al I'tidal & Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb says, He got Tashayyu, Bidaat; but he did not believed Tahrif etc. and truthful etc. Got to prove it was mainly Political.
Fun Fact: he narrates hadith of Aiysha(R.a.) in Bukhari & Abu HUrayra(r.a.) in Abu Daud.

* Ismail ibn Aban(the teacher of Bukhari): Lisan al mizan- (Ibn Mueen) says, he got just little bit of Tashayyu as his city/area( تشيع قليل كدأب أهل بلده), so maybe it's possible that, it was just a trend?  Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb, Mizan al I'tidal says, Bukhari labeled him truthful. Some other said Shia( وقال غيره : كان يتشيع).
Fun Fact: He narrated hadith of Aisha(r.a.) in Bukhari & Abu Hurayra(r.a.) in Tirmidhi

* Ismail bin Zakariyya : Sadooq/Delusion. Shia claims that he believed "Ali called Musa in Mount Tur!!" don't from where they got this, maybe Al-Murazaat or Ibn Qutayba(??) . got to examine this.
Fun fact: same, He too got hobby of Narrating Hadith of Aisha(r.a.),Abu Hurayra(r.a.) - found in Bukhari,Muslim!

* Ahmad bin al-Mufaddhal is told Saduq by Abi Hatim even he's Shia, Ibn Hajr called him Shia, al-azdy said he's Munkar(قال الأزدي: منكر الحديث) source: Mizan al-T'tidal id-625. he narrated in Abu Daud & NAsai, which were sahih.
possible to know whether it was just Political?

* Ibrahim bin yazid al Nakhyi : I found no sign of being SHia. The Shia people claims he was labeled SHia-Aqida holder in Al-MA'arif by IBN QUTAYBA

* Isma'il bin Khalifa al-'Absi al-Mala'I  : Mizan al-I'tidal says , he did Takfir on Uthman(r.a.)!!!  SHia claims- Abu Jura' labeled him Saduq! And this person narrated in Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah.

I expect your help to solve this case brothers !

[Farid]

As you have said yourself, there is a question mark on the opinions of Ibn Qutaibah. Indeed, he was not known to have been a scholar of rijal in the first place.

Something important that must be realized is that making tafseeq on Aisha, Talha, and Al Zubair, is not specific to Shias. This is something that the Mu'tazila did.

You do not need to prove that these people were political Shias. Let the Twelvers prove that these men were Twelvers. How is this possible when they all died before the disappearance of the last Imam?

See brother Furkan's post above.

Also, if a man is mentioned in Rijal Al Tusi it doesn't mean anything. You will find all the many major Sunni scholars in that book. If Al Tusi doesn't call him reliable then he is majhool.

[Furkan]

Yes brother, don't be fooled by those shias by letting you do the research. If they want to claim those narators then let them prove it!

Turn the tables around

[Muhammad Tazin]

In real, I have no knowledge about Ibn Qutayba, doubted about him, based on your comments in Islamic-Forum!

Shouldn't I judge narrators, depending on whether he narrated hadith of Abu Hurayra(r.a.), Aisha(r.a.) etc. - that they are Rafidi or not? as Rafidi people hates them strongly. 

SO, if a person is just listed in Shia rijal, that doesn't mean he is known to Shia rijal, until he is labeled Thiqa/Saduq etc. ?
But, Al-NAjashi just narrated a hadith from Yahya bin Saeed al-Qattan, but did not mention of his being Sunni- that's a matter of Concern?
Also I am very worried about - Al suddi,someone who used to criticize sahaba, is present in the chain of Sahih Hadith; Isma'il bin Khalifa who made takfir on Uthman(r.a.) is narrator of Sihah Sittah & Ismail bin Zakariya-the man believed "Ali called MUsa in Jabale Tur" 

Furkan is right, while I'm troubling in searching, Shia will just move to another Topic, doing Copy-Paste lies!!

[IbnYusuf]

I found a discussion on 100 shia narrators in Bukhari online

response to Muraj'at: Letter 16 A Hundred Shi’a Authorities Relied upon by Sunnis

http://mahajjah.com/letter-15-and-16/

[MuslimK]

^ Good link

Also, check this:
http://www.twelvershia.net/2015/05/17/abdul-husayns-100-shia-narrators-in-sunni-books/

[Ijtaba]

^ Good link

Also, check this:
http://www.twelvershia.net/2015/05/17/abdul-husayns-100-shia-narrators-in-sunni-books/

In the link given by the brother, it states:

Conclusion: From this list of eleven, only 7 can be considered as reliable ideological Madhabi Shia narrators based on al-Musawi’s claims. However, it isn’t established that all seven men are ideological Madhabi Shia, they might as well be political Shia or Tafdili Shia, so the burden of proof lies on the opponent’s shoulders to prove that these seven are Twelver or Imami Shia.

I want to know at what point of time was the origin of Twelver or Imami Shia according to Ahlul Sunnah?

While answering my question please do let me know:

- Whether ibn Saba was a Twelver Shia or political Shia or Tafdili Shia

- Were the Followers of ibn Saba who caused division in Islam Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- People behind the assassination of Uthman... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- People responsible for the Fitna which caused Battle of Camel... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- Supporters who betrayed Imam Hassan (a.s) and greeted him (a.s) by saying Mudhillul Momineen (one who brought disgrace to the believers)... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- Supporters who betrayed Imam Hussain (a.s) by inviting him to Iraq and not supporting him (a.s) as well as some of them joining Yazid's army... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- Killers of Imam Hussain (a.s)...  were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

[Hani]

In the link given by the brother, it states:

I want to know at what point of time was the origin of Twelver or Imami Shia according to Ahlul Sunnah?

While answering my question please do let me know:

- Whether ibn Saba was a Twelver Shia or political Shia or Tafdili Shia

- Were the Followers of ibn Saba who caused division in Islam Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- People behind the assassination of Uthman... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- People responsible for the Fitna which caused Battle of Camel... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- Supporters who betrayed Imam Hassan (a.s) and greeted him (a.s) by saying Mudhillul Momineen (one who brought disgrace to the believers)... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- Supporters who betrayed Imam Hussain (a.s) by inviting him to Iraq and not supporting him (a.s) as well as some of them joining Yazid's army... were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

- Killers of Imam Hussain (a.s)...  were they Twelver Shias or political Shias or Tafdili Shias

I'll replace "Twelver" with Saba'i or ideological because there was no such thing as Twelvers at the time nor is it recorded in any history book that Twelvers existed in those early times. Imami Shia in all their sects never existed during this time, the earliest being Kaysanites who appeared a while after Husayn passed away.

- Ibn Saba' was an ideological religious Shia who believed `Ali was divinely chosen.
- Anyone who followed Ibn Saba's religious preaching must have either believed `Ali was divinely chosen or a God. As for those who followed his political propaganda, they didn't even need to be Shia, just people who opposed `Uthman's policies.
- Assassins of `Uthman were not Shia for the most part, there might have been some partisans of `Ali among them but the bulk were just tribes opposed to `Uthman. (There's a slight possibility that Ibn Saba' began preaching Imamah at the time, if so I wouldn't be surprised if a few rebels held those beliefs)
- Those who caused the battle of the camel were individuals mainly from `Ali's camp, integrated into the opposing army as well. They were fearful their heads would fly if the two armies (who were negotiating) united against them.
- Betrayers of Hasan were a mixture of all Shia groups available at the time. (No Imamites existed then)
- Betrayers of Husayn were also a mixture as above.
- Killer of Husayn was Sinan bin Anas al-Nakh`i, I do not know his background but he is from the Arabs of Kufah who were mostly Shia (political Shia for the most part). When Umayyads came into power he served his new masters and switched loyalties. He would enter on al-Hajjaj, highly doubtful that he had any Saba'i beliefs.