Is reputation reliable?

[glorfindel]

Book from God.

Where in the book of God?

[Soccer]

Where in the book of God?

This has been discussed to death here.

[glorfindel]

This has been discussed to death here.

Indulge me.  Give me just one place where your evidence is found in the book of God.

[Soccer]

Indulge me.  Give me just one place where your evidence is found in the book of God.

42:23.

[glorfindel]

42:23.

What does it say?

[Soccer]

What does it say?

The reward the disbelievers accused the Prophet of seeking from power, reputation, moral landscaping, control, fame, legacy in his bloodline, all that at the end of it that which they see as a reward really is but recognizing and loving the kinsfolk chosen by God for who they are and appreciating God's favor and this love is actually the path of goodness - and God will appreciate this goodness and they are the means of faith and goodness to approach God by which he will forgive and appreciate those who do so.

[glorfindel]

The reward the disbelievers accused the Prophet of seeking from power, reputation, moral landscaping, control, fame, legacy in his bloodline, all that at the end of it that which they see as a reward really is but recognizing and loving the kinsfolk chosen by God for who they are and appreciating God's favor and this love is actually the path of goodness - and God will appreciate this goodness and they are the means of faith and goodness to approach God by which he will forgive and appreciate those who do so.

Wow that's a lot of words...let's unpack what you said;

ذلك الذي يبشر اللَّه عباده الذين آمنوا وعملوا الصالحات قل لا أسألكم عليه أجرا إلا المودة في القربى ومن يقترف حسنة نزد له فيها حسنا إن اللَّه غفور شكور   

I checked the Arabic there was no mention about disbelievers? Where does it say Prophet (as)? Where does it say that the family it is talking about is the prophet's family (as)?

[Soccer]

You can play with Quran with a hard heart or you can fear God and believe in what it says, it's up to you brother.

[glorfindel]

You can play with Quran with a hard heart or you can fear God and believe in what it says, it's up to you brother.

Take some of your own advice - fear Allah and don't ascribe things to the words of Allah that aren't there.

[Soccer]

What is the clear unambiguous meaning of the verse by context, language, and other verses of Quran per you?

[glorfindel]

What is the clear unambiguous meaning of the verse by context, language, and other verses of Quran per you?

Per Me? Who care's what you or I think (I am not qualified, and you certainly are not) - this is what ibn Abbas said about القربى, which let's be honest is the only thing you are interested in;

"There was no clan among Quraysh to whom the Prophet did not have some ties of kinship.'' Ibn `Abbas said, "Except that you uphold the ties of kinship that exist between me and you.'' This was recorded by Al-Bukhari. It was also recorded by Imam Ahmad with a different chain of narration."


So it's not about obeying to infallible one's that would be born in the future from his Son-In-Law's family...

Regards,
Glorfindel.

[Soccer]

Per Me? Who care's what you or I think (I am not qualified, and you certainly are not) - this is what ibn Abbas said about القربى, which let's be honest is the only thing you are interested in;

"There was no clan among Quraysh to whom the Prophet did not have some ties of kinship.'' Ibn `Abbas said, "Except that you uphold the ties of kinship that exist between me and you.'' This was recorded by Al-Bukhari. It was also recorded by Imam Ahmad with a different chain of narration."


So it's not about obeying to infallible one's that would be born in the future from his Son-In-Law's family...

Regards,
Glorfindel.

So you put the Quran at the mercy of something we aren't certain of?

[glorfindel]

So you put the Quran at the mercy of something we aren't certain of?

Please explain.  I'm certain of the explanation of ibn Abbas.

[Soccer]

Please explain.  I'm certain of the explanation of ibn Abbas.

If you are certain, then show how you know this by Quran.

[Soccer]

Please explain.

The Quran describes itself not only as a clear book, but that a book that forever explains itself, clearly, with with clear proofs and signs, and the way language works is that contextualization of all words contextualize each other.

Show by context, other verses of Quran, or by the very words, that the clear meaning is that one you claim Ibn Abbas believed in.

[Khaled]

I can quote so many verses about this topic, but I will be brief, it's not. If I quote all the verses about this, the points I bring will have so many verses, but rather I will summarize what people who read Quran should recall and be familiar with.

السلام عليكم,

I'm not sure if this is a off shoot of another topic or what, so if I'm not getting your point please link me to the original post.

1)Believers were always seen low, vile, per their opponents and Quran says the people of hell will be amazed that there was a group of people they use to count as the most evil and vile, but not one of them in the hell.

Sounds like how the 12ers view the tens of thousands (maybe one hundred thousand) Sahaba, no?

2)People know for "righteousness" without proof from God in form of signs and scripture from him designating them specifically as that, for the most part, are the opposite and clothing themselves with garbs of purity and righteousness above others, when they are not even believers.

Isn't the Qur'an proof enough for the "righteousness" of the Sahaba, at least the Muhajiroon and Ansar?  The Qur'an describes them as being "المؤمنون حقا" and teaches a prayer which includes that we shouldn't have any hatred for them.

3) Clergy of all religions known as highly more pious, pure or righteous then others, there are so many verses, about how their reputation was based on falsehood from Iblis and the sorcery gives them the illusion of it in both their eyes and the eyes of the people.

I don't think I understand what you mean here?  Are you talking about people who put on turbans and collect khums?

4) The only people who are attributed purity by God and have authority to speak about guidance with firm authority, is those who God manifests their purity per scriptures and proves them, and who have proof of their authority from God without doubt.

You mean like "المؤمنون حقا"?

5) Who truly fears God is not known through reputation, claiming one fears God, outward show and marks, all this doesn't prove it.

It doesn't disprove it either.  In fact, a person could have a bad reputation with the people and still be God Fearing in the sight of Allah.

6) God always divided believers from disbelievers, with the word of light from him in both form of scripture and in humans who interpret the scripture and leads humans back to God and calls them back to God.

True.

7) The sorcery itself makes people belittle Prophets as liars, deceivers, greedy people out for their own reward, let alone, believers, and so in a world ruled by dark magic from Iblis,  one cannot rely on who is "known" for knowledge, piousness, or purity.  One has to seek proof from God.

Good thing Allah tells us who are pious and who isn't.

God emphasizes so much places, faith is hidden and needs to be tested,  and even when one is sure and certain, and don't doubt after, if they sin and unclean fire takes over their souls, they can turn on their backs... and so even if a person is a believer and you know he is, this is different then guarantee from reverting to disbelief and this is true vice versa, lost souls and rebellious souls still have a chance to repent and thank God and turn to the right path. The nature of most humans is they are volatile. IT's the chosen ones who God knows for sure if they slip, they will repent and turn back, and will remain on the straight path and not leave it no matter what slip they might slip by.

True.

Believers are volatile, and Suratal Auli-Imran shows even the original Badr fighters, were volatile and can turn on their backs after, let alone other believers.

Where does it say that?

9) Real trials come at moments we don't expect and make us and break us, like Iblis when ordered to prostrate to Adam. Worshipping God for eons before, he didn't expect himself to leave the path, disbelieve in God and rebel against the order of the heavens and the earth, but here is and here we are.

Which is precisely why we don't testify for anyone that they are going to Heaven or Hell unless they are promised either place in the Qur'an or Sunnah.

10) The Quran talks about disbelievers having followed their leaders and their great ones, their great ones were not great, only their eyes, this means, reputation in people's eyes is not reliable.

الحمدلله, Allah makes it clear in the Qur'an who to follow, or else we would basing our religion on what a guy in a turban who steals 5% of our wealth, and who cannot recite Surat al-Fatiha says.  Stay on the path of the Muhajiroon, Ansar, and those who follow them in guidance, and to never believe that anyone other than the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم can have an infallible understanding of our religion.

بارك الله فيك for the reminder.

[Khaled]

It's of value. Ilmel Rijaal and the whole basis of Sunnism and Shiism today, trusts reputation as reliable. I've shown by Quran, it is not.

I don't think you really understand how Ilm ar-Rijal works in the Sunni tradition.  While Adala is reputation, there is another element called Dabt, which can only be seen by analyzing everything that person reports and comparing it to other narrators reporting similar or contradictory repots.  Adala is only taken into consideration if the person is considered a liar, and he is the only person narrating such a narration (which, any one can see is a problem) or if it is a person from a particular sect and is solely narrating a report that promotes his theology.  Meaning, as long as the person is not known as a liar, his reports will be accepted if he is Dabt even if he is Rafidi, Nasibi, Qadari, etc, as long as he or she is not the only person narrating a report that promotes his deviance.

[Soccer]

As for Dabt, it's circular in reasoning with no way out and it doesn't lead to truth.

As for the Sahaba, read 3rd chapter of Quran, particularly the warnings at the end to not turn on their backs like those before did in the past, and also with flow with that is the verse of if Mohammad (s) dies or is killed.  The flow of the verses show it's possible even the original followers of Mohammad that fought the polytheists (who then would form the majority of the nation - ie. most of the Muslims were people who denied Mohammad as a sorcerer and liar and fought for most of his Nubuwa) to revert and turn on their backs.

That said, this doesn't mean most of them turned on their back, it just means it was a possibility.  My view is the followers of Mohammad (s) and Ali (a) - the majority of Muhajareen and Ansar remained loyal, and while they were a bit apathetic when Abu Bakr did what he did, Fatima (S) speech rallied them to convey the Sunnah about Ahlulbayt (a) and Ali (a) and also use the Quran to prove the rights of Ahlulbayt (a), and if it was not for their efforts,  the people would not have came to Ali (a) after Uthman was killed.

I think some of the original companions did turn on their backs, I believe others were of Gog and Magog and never truly believed, and remained loyal to the Devils they worshipped, and always faked belief and people lied about them even during Prophet's time about what the Prophet said regarding them.

That said, what I'm talking about, is not about companions.  It's about generations after, and whether we can know "scholars" are actually righteous by the reputation they have about it.

I'm saying - it's not only the case you can't, but the Quran shows the best people had the worst reputation in the eyes of majority of humans who were heedless and disbelievers.

The believers are not known and then their path, and rather the way is to be known, the chosen ones and his scriptures, then you come to know the believers of them perhaps, perhaps not if the falsehood has take root too much, it maybe you can't recognize believers anymore as this happened time and time again when the leaders of guidance didn't have enough support.

The issue is how to deal with guidance from God when reputation is unreliable. Ilmel Rijaal assumes it is reliable but per Quran is not a reliable means.

It could've been somewhat reliable if there was no divisions and people united on the rope of God, but that didn't occur. 

[Khaled]

As for Dabt, it's circular in reasoning with no way out and it doesn't lead to truth.

السلام عليكم,

How so?  Isn't the fact that the same narrators consistently narrating the same thing as other people from various teachers proof enough that he is Dabit and can be relied upon to narrate honestly and accurately?

As for the Sahaba, read 3rd chapter of Quran, particularly the warnings at the end to not turn on their backs like those before did in the past, and also with flow with that is the verse of if Mohammad (s) dies or is killed.  The flow of the verses show it's possible even the original followers of Mohammad that fought the polytheists (who then would form the majority of the nation - ie. most of the Muslims were people who denied Mohammad as a sorcerer and liar and fought for most of his Nubuwa) to revert and turn on their backs.

Never said it was impossible, neither عقلًا nor شرعًا.  I just said that Allah سبحانه وتعالى instructed us to follow their path and to pray to not have hatred in our hearts for them, at the very least the Muhajiroon and Ansar from among them.

That said, this doesn't mean most of them turned on their back, it just means it was a possibility.

Looks like we agree.

My view is the followers of Mohammad (s) and Ali (a) - the majority of Muhajareen and Ansar remained loyal, and while they were a bit apathetic when Abu Bakr did what he did, Fatima (S) speech rallied them to convey the Sunnah about Ahlulbayt (a) and Ali (a) and also use the Quran to prove the rights of Ahlulbayt (a), and if it was not for their efforts,  the people would not have came to Ali (a) after Uthman was killed.

A few questions if you don't mind:
1) How did the majority stay loyal (i.e. hold the belief that you hold, which is contrary to mainstream Sunnism AND 12erism) while still pledging allegiance to Abu Bakr and fighting in his armies?  I am having a hard time reconciling between your belief regarding the Imamate, and between the Sahaba remaining apathetic to it being usurped by Abu Bakr and Omar.
2) I'm confused, if the majority were loyal, then why would they then need to be reminded to come to Ali رضي الله عنه وعليه السلام after Uthman's rule?  This point just seems all over the place.
3) How did you come to the conclusion that the details regarding what happened with Fatima عليها السلام ورضي الله عنها actually took place?  Since I know you don't care about connected chains of reliable narrators and those details certainly didn't come to us by way of an Tawatur, let alone reliable chains.

I think some of the original companions did turn on their backs, I believe others were of Gog and Magog and never truly believed, and remained loyal to the Devils they worshipped, and always faked belief and people lied about them even during Prophet's time about what the Prophet said regarding them.

Is this belief based on any facts or just how you are able to reconcile their behavior in light of your belief system?  I think you really need to reflect about this point.

That said, what I'm talking about, is not about companions.  It's about generations after, and whether we can know "scholars" are actually righteous by the reputation they have about it.

The reason this discussion started was because of how your description seems to sound like how the 12ers view the Sahaba.  I have come now to know that you somehow are able to reconcile the majority of them being loyal to the Message (i.e. your belief system) while simultaneously being apathetic to Abu Bakr's rule.

I'm saying - it's not only the case you can't, but the Quran shows the best people had the worst reputation in the eyes of majority of humans who were heedless and disbelievers.

We don't need the Qur'an to tell us that.  The problem with your opinion regarding the Sahaba, is that their reputation is extracted FROM THE QUR'AN.  Therefore, how can the Qur'an, on one hand praise the Sahaba, say they are the true believers, ask the Muslims to follow their way and pray to never have any hatred in their hearts for them, while simultaneously telling us in an indirect way that these guys are going to turn their back on the Message?

The believers are not known and then their path, and rather the way is to be known, the chosen ones and his scriptures, then you come to know the believers of them perhaps, perhaps not if the falsehood has take root too much, it maybe you can't recognize believers anymore as this happened time and time again when the leaders of guidance didn't have enough support.

With all due respect, I could not make out this sentence no matter how many times I tried rereading it.  All I can gather is you are telling me I cannot recognize the believers because "perhaps ... the falsehood has take root too much."  I recognize Imam Ali, al-Hassan, al-Hussain, Fatima, Zayn al-Abideen, al-Baqir, and Ja'far as-Saadiq عليهم السلام ورضي الله عنهم ورحمهم الله as true believers, so I'm not sure how that works, considering this is the view of basically all Muslims إلا من شذ منهم.

The issue is how to deal with guidance from God when reputation is unreliable. Ilmel Rijaal assumes it is reliable but per Quran is not a reliable means.

Not true, Ilm ar-Rijal does not assume that at all.  It actually assumes the opposite, that is why every report must be checked and corroborated, or else we can't simply accept it.  The reputation that the narrators earn come after checking their reports, not before.

It could've been somewhat reliable if there was no divisions and people united on the rope of God, but that didn't occur.

The problem with your whole premise is that it is theoretical.  You need to somehow show practical examples of people who are: A) considered reliable in Ilm ar-Rijal B) making mistakes c) that were not noticed by the scholars of hadeeth.  Without that, you are just throwing the baby out with the water in your wholesale condemnation of Ilm al-Hadeeth, the same Ilm you conveniently ignore when choosing whatever narration you think fits with your narrative.  I'm not sure how a hadeeth that is relayed by a person who had a good reputation in front of the Muslims, who was considered Dabt through his constant narrating narrations that are corroborated by other sources, directly from his teacher is considered "unreliable", but the Sermon of Fadak, which has problems with the chain is somehow acceptable.  Why did you accept one and not the other?  Because one fits your preconceived narrative and the other one didn't.

[Soccer]

Salam

Mujareen and Ansar (original ones) are a very small minority of Muslims near the end of the Prophet's (s) life. They aren't majority.  Fatima (s) speech rallied them, woke them up, and I believe for the most part they performed their duty.

The majority of people - who Ali (a) didn't want to fight with his small band of followers (original companions very few compared to how many Muslims are now there who fought or denied Mohammad (s) most of his Propethood) - were frankly ignorant of the Quran and Sunnah.   

Majority of muhajareen and ansar were ready to fight if Ali (a) gave the orders, but he spared them their blood, and majority of the "Muslims" were people who fought Ali (a) and the first band of believers and who didn't understand Quran or Sunnah nor took the religion seriously.

Moving on from Sahaba - discussion.

The circular reasoning is that all kinds of hadiths existed.  What we have left from what is written is also a very small amount compared to the original amount of hadiths and their diversity.

Your last sentence: " Because one fits your preconceived narrative and the other one didn't." is ironic, because this what your system does. 

It fits righteousness according to a belief system, but how do you know the belief system is right, well due to righteous men chain of reports, and how do you know they are righteous, well by what they report confirming a type of belief system.

You don't take seriously the many (very many) chains naming the 12 Imams seriously. Think about the reason why... so the amount of hadiths and chains doesn't prove 12 Imams to you.

It has more - to do with - what you just said "Because one fits your preconceived narrative and the other one didn't."

And we see this clearly the case. For example,  a person narrates, Fatima (a) house was lit on fire, he is automatically flagged unreliable just for narrating that.

Someone narrates Imam Baqir (a) did a miracle - automatically flagged unreliable and liar.


The system is so chaotically bias, to lead one way, and so yes, it leads that way. It's circular defined to collect "authetnic" hadiths from all sorts of narrators narrating what is already believed in.

It's not there didn't exist numerous hadiths contradicting that or even more hadiths than ones "collaborating" each other.