TwelverShia.net Forum

Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2017, 06:09:09 AM »
Quote
If i may ask brother, what is your school of Aqeedah?

I don't have one school of aqeeda. I see pro and cons with all schools of Kalaami thought such as Mutazilla, Maturudi and the Athari (textual) school.

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2017, 11:56:09 PM »
I don't have one school of aqeeda. I see pro and cons with all schools of Kalaami thought such as Mutazilla, Maturudi and the Athari (textual) school.

Without seeming to come across as rude here brother, i think it is essential you adopt a doctrine of Aqeedah. It is the most fundamental aspect of your religion. As for seeing the pros and cons of every school of Aqeedah, one can not simply agree with them all in some matters and disagree in some matters. The schools are so distinct one would have to choose one because there are no middle ways between them

This website - TSN, adopts a Salafi-Manhaj. Salafi's are a minority in the Sunni world which as been dominated by the Ashari and the Maturidi. In an attempt to defend beliefs such as the fact Allah literally can be described by means of location and position, that he literally descends, that he literally has two hands, two eyes, fingers, two feet, a shin - but the they are not like the creations, they have disparaged the Ashari, the Maturidi, and the Shia, using the oft-repeated 'Jahmiyyah' insult and slander.

Even those who are Salafi would tell you that you must adopt a school of Aqeedah.

This is one of the differences i have seen between the Sunni and the Shia. Many intelligent and articulate individuals such as yourself who clearly know a lot about the religion mix and match Aqeedah and do not have any defined school of Aqeedah. Whereas if you ask a Shia, there is no difference between us on fundamental aspects of Aqeedah regarding the divine attributes, for example.

This does disappoint me, because i feel the Salafi's, as well as the Askari's and Maturidi's should be doing more because the next generation generally does not seem to place any real emphasis in identifying with a school of Aqeedah.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2017, 11:58:07 PM by whoaretheshia »
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #22 on: November 23, 2017, 12:11:45 AM »
There you go. He did have a deviant view.He did say God has a body, and the refutations which the 12er Shia did in his defense was to state that the body was no similar to  human body. Sadly, Hisham ibn Saleem was even more deviant. 

I had given you three links to read which would conclusively proof this was not the case. However, given you are mature and discuss these differences with good akhlaq, i will briefly summarise the main points. InshAllah, we will aim to get out a properly research, referenced and clear article on Hisham b.Hakam tomorrow.

One of the things that has dismayed me about TSN is that they never dig deep enough - and this is sometimes the fault of some Shia websites. The find a tradition here and there, and then jump to conclusions without recognising that the reality is far different.

If you study the life of Hisham b.Hakam, in his young age, he was a student of Jahmiyya b. Safwan. If you have ever heard the term 'Jahmiyya' before it originates from this man. The Mutazila were accused of adopting doctrines from this man. What is pertinent to note is that this was only when Hisham b.Hakam was young, and he was not a Jahmi' , but rather in his young age and naivity adopted some of the beliefs of Jahmiyya b. Safwan.

And we all know that the furthest people from anthropomorphism are the Mutazila, and the Jahmiyya. They are actually regarded as those who go into the other extreme. Jahmiyya b.Safwan is the first individual recorded to have coined the term 'Allah is a body unlike any bodies'. It is clear he did not believe Allah had a corporeal body, or that he could be divided, nor that he could be seen, or occupied space, position and any of these factors. If we are going to claim the statement 'Allah is a body unlike other bodies' is correctly attributed to Hisham b . Hakkam one must also take the view his understanding was that of he man he got it from - Jahmiyya b.Safwan, who he later left, and refuted.

The term 'Allah is a body, unlike other bodies' is not a reference to the fact Allah has a body. Rather it means Allah is an existent, unlike any other existent. The reasons why the Imams criticised Hisham b. Hakam in this regard was not because they believed he was an anthropomorphist. But rather he was using a term that could be interpreted the wrong way and cause confusion - even though Hisham b. Hakam knew full well what it meant. This higher level philosophical reasoning and analogy were limited with the use of vocabulary. The Imams criticised using that kind of terminology owing to the fact it is not proper no matter what the intention to attribute it to Allah [swt].

From his many books - which were possessed by our classical scholars like Shaykh Saduq, Shaykh Mufid and Shaykh Tusi, Hisham b. Hakkam refutes many of the anthropomorphisms, negates any corporeal body for Allah, as well as the ability for anyone to visualise him, nor that he occupies any space, or has a confine.

Unfortunately, owing to the fact he would debate and defeat many Mutazila , he made enemies and those who are even disparaged and considered untruthful in the Sunni world. To disparage ones opponents is very common. Look at the words of some of the four major Sunni Imams against one another. You can even find them criticising and calling narrators you deem Thiqah as liars, weak, not to be taken from. In Sunni rijal, you do not consider the Jarh / weakening of a narrator if it was his contemporary weakening him.

We will produce a far more cogent response in the form of a fully referenced article. However this should suffice for now regarding Hisham b. Hakam. These are links we will share with you again and we highly recommend you read them:


1. Hisham b.al-Hakkam a background: https://www.al-islam.org/introduction-emendation-shiite-creed-muhammad-rida-jafari/hisham-ibn-al-hakam-some-aspects-his

2. The Mutazila who Hisham b.al-Hakkam met and engaged in debate with: https://www.al-islam.org/introduction-emendation-shiite-creed-muhammad-rida-jafari/mutazilis-whom-hisham-met-and-their

3. Further refutation of allegations: https://www.al-islam.org/introduction-emendation-shiite-creed-muhammad-rida-jafari/hisham-ibn-al-hakam-and-his-refutation

4. Hisham b.Salim refuting attributing beliefs of anthropomorphism to him:https://www.al-islam.org/introduction-emendation-shiite-creed-muhammad-rida-jafari/incorrectness-attributing-views

DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #23 on: November 23, 2017, 12:43:16 AM »
Here is the paper which in regards to Shaykh Saduq and Shaykh Mufid.

Ibn Babuya places his section on human actions immediately after his section on
obligation. The significance of the placement of this section is, perhaps, that Ibn
Bïibuya wanted to make his opposition to determinism clear before declaring that
human actions are created, for what have taklif and capacity got to do with a
determinist's scheme? He states:
Our beHef conceming hurnan actions is that they are created (makhliïqa [sic: makhliïq]),
in the sense that Allah possesses foreknowledge (khalq taqdJry, and not in the sense that
Allah compels man to act in a particular manner by creating a certain disposition (khalq
takwJn). And the meaning of aIl this is that Allah has never ceased to be aware of the
potentialities (maqiidJry ofhuman beings.)


Still, Mufid is not satisfied and rebukes Ibn Babuya in his Correction as follows:
The sound tradition from the family of Mu4ammad is that man's acts are not created by
God. And what Abü Ja'far [aH;adüq] has said came by an invalid tradition whose chain
of authority is not approved. The true tradition says the opposite. And it is unknown in
the language of the Arabs for knowledge ofsomething to be creation ofit. Were it as
the opponents of truth maintained, then anyone who knows the Prophet would
necessarily have created him! And whoever knows heaven and earth is their creator!
And whoever knows anything that God has made and affirms it in his own mind-why
he must be its creator! That is absurdo Its error escapes none of the followers of the
Imams, much less the Imams themselves. As for taqdJr, linguistically it is creation. For
taqdJrtakes place only by an action. As for knowledge, it is not taqdJr, nor can it (Le.,
taqdJI) be mere thought. Far is God above creating monstrosities and evil deeds in any
case.



Here Shaykh Mufid is took Shaykh Saduq's words out of context. Then he tried to apply the Mutazilla concept of free will.


Another tradition

Ibn Babuya's fifth section, on compulsion Uabi) and delegation (tafwIe/), consists
of one, short lJadIth narrated by Imam aHiadiq:
There is neither (complete) compulsion (or constraint) (on human beings), nor
(complete) delegation (or freedom), but the matter is midway between the two
(extremes). He was asked to define what was meant by "an affair midway between the
two"? He said: For instance, you see a man intent upon a crime and you dissuade him,
but he does not desist, and you leave him; then he commits the crime. Now, it is not,
because he did not accept (your advice) and you left him, that you are the person who
commanded him to commit the crime.


First Mufid dismisses the proof-text because it is, "incompletely supported." Then he
explains that, "The mean between these two theses is that God empowered creatures for
their acts and gave them ability for their deeds, and He set bounds and limits for them,
and He forhade them to do evil by reprimanding and warning, by the Promise and the
Threat.,,246 The difference between them is that, for Ibn Biibuya, the proof-text is a
sufficient theodicy, whereas, for Mufid, it is necessary to assert man's free-will in order
to necessitate that God is irreproachable; substantially they agree.



The sixth section of Ibn Biibuya's creed is about God's intention (iriida) and will
(mashl'a). He says that the Imamite doctrine is based on a lJadlth narrated by Imam al-
~iidiq which states that, "Allah wills (shii'a) and intends (ariida); or He does not like
(Iam yuiJibba) and He does not approve (Iam yarqa). "248 He explains the lJadlth as
follows:
Now by sha'a(He wills) is meant that nothing takes place without His knowledge; and
arada is synonymous with it; and He does not like (lam yu1;libba) it to be said that He is
"the third of the three"; and He does not approve of disbelief on the part of His slaves.
Says Allah, the Mighty and Glorious; "Verily, thou (0 Mul;mmmad) guidest not whom
thou lovest, but Allah guideth whom He Will."249 ... Our opponents denounce us for this,
and say that according to our belief, AŒih intends (that man should commit) crimes and
that He desired the murder ofI:Iusayn b. 'Ali, on whom both be peace. This is not what
we believe. But we say that Allah desired that the sin of the sinners should be
contradistinguished from the obedience ofthose that obey, that He desired that sins,
viewed as actions, should not be ascribed to Him, but that knowledge ofthese sins may
be ascribed to Him even before the commission thereof. And we hold that Allah's wish
was that the murder of I:Iusayn should be a sin against Him and the opposite of
obedience. And we say that Allah intended that his (I:Iusayn's) murder should be
prohibited, and something which was not commanded. And we say that his murder was
something that was disliked and not approved; and we say that his murder was the cause
of Allah's displeasure and it was not the cause of His approval, and that Allah the
Mighty and Glorious did not desire to prevent his murder by means of (His) compulsion
or power, but merely by prohibition and word. And if He had prohibited it by (His)
compulsion and power, even as he [sic] prevented it by prohibition and word, surely he
would have escaped being murdered ... And we say that Allah always knew that I:Iusayn
would be killed ... We hold that what Allah wills; happens; and what he willeth not, will
not happen.

Mufid states that, "The truth of the matter is that God wills (yuiid) only good actions
and intends (yashiï) only beautiful deeds. He does not will the evil and does not intend
the monstrous. Far is God above what the deceivers say!,,251 He goes on to accuse Ibn
Babuya of determinism:
The determinists' avoidance of saying unreservedly that God wills to be disobeyed and
disbelieved, that His friends be killed and His loved ones vilified, by saying instead that
He wills what He knows to take place as He knows it and wills that disobedience be an
evil and forbidden, really me ans a persistence in what they c1aim to have fled and an
entanglement in what they c1aim to have disowned. For if the evil He knows happens as
He knows it, and God was willing that the evil He knew should be as He knew it, then
He wills the evil, and He has willed that it should be evil. So what sense is there in
fleeing from one thing to the same thing and in their escape from one idea to the same
idea?2
 



More differences on free will and determinism taken from this article:

http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca/webclient/StreamGate?folder_id=0&dvs=1511312296993~293


From what it looks like Shaykh Mufid used Mutazilla arguments against Shaykh Saduq. Shaykh Saduq view is the view that the 12er Shia support. Also, this view is supported by the Maturidi school in Ahle Sunnah.

In one paragraph dear brother, could you explicitly cite Shaykh Mufids opinion on free will, and then explicitly Shaykh-Saduqs and where they disagree? I do not think anything you have quoted, with respect, lends evidence to the claims you are making. Therefore i want to see if you understand their positions, inshAllah.
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #24 on: November 23, 2017, 01:49:01 AM »
kh Mufids opinion on free will, and then explicitly Shaykh-Saduqs and where they disagree? I do not think anything you have quoted, with respect, lends evidence to the claims you are making. Therefore i want to see if you understand their positions, inshAllah.

The issue is Shaykh Saduq in my understanding of Kalam has the correct view on the Jabr and Qadr. Shaykh Mufid purposely takes him out of context, and then makes Shaykh Saduq's view sound as if a Jabariyyah. Then he goes on to refute him on the basis of claims which Shaykh Saduq did not even claim.

The fact that he denies Shaykh Saduq input and it shows that he is a Qadriyyah\Mutazilla on the matter of Jabr and Qadr.

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #25 on: November 23, 2017, 02:05:09 AM »


And we all know that the furthest people from anthropomorphism are the Mutazila, and the Jahmiyya. They are actually regarded as those who go into the other extreme. Jahmiyya b.Safwan is the first individual recorded to have coined the term 'Allah is a body unlike any bodies'. It is clear he did not believe Allah had a corporeal body, or that he could be divided, nor that he could be seen, or occupied space, position and any of these factors. If we are going to claim the statement 'Allah is a body unlike other bodies' is correctly attributed to Hisham b . Hakkam one must also take the view his understanding was that of he man he got it from - Jahmiyya b.Safwan, who he later left, and refuted.
Where is the proof that he gave up this belief?

Quote
The term 'Allah is a body, unlike other bodies' is not a reference to the fact Allah has a body. Rather it means Allah is an existent, unlike any other existent. The reasons why the Imams criticised Hisham b. Hakam in this regard was not because they believed he was an anthropomorphist. But rather he was using a term that could be interpreted the wrong way and cause confusion - even though Hisham b. Hakam knew full well what it meant. This higher level philosophical reasoning and analogy were limited with the use of vocabulary. The Imams criticised using that kind of terminology owing to the fact it is not proper no matter what the intention to attribute it to Allah [swt].

Yes Sharif Murtaza has explained the belief of Hisham ibn Hakam.

Quote
From his many books - which were possessed by our classical scholars like Shaykh Saduq, Shaykh Mufid and Shaykh Tusi, Hisham b. Hakkam refutes many of the anthropomorphisms, negates any corporeal body for Allah, as well as the ability for anyone to visualise him, nor that he occupies any space, or has a confine.
In Shaykh Saduq's Kitab al Tawheed he actually shows the Imams condemning Hisham ibn Hakam. Even his belief on how Jism can be interpreted was condemned by the Imams. It went as far as Imam Musa al Kazim (as) cursing him for it.

Quote
Unfortunately, owing to the fact he would debate and defeat many Mutazila , he made enemies and those who are even disparaged and considered untruthful in the Sunni world.
Lol! Very funny. He would defeat the Mutazilla? This has got to be a joke. Firstly the Sunni world were bigger enemies of the Mutazilla in Kalam as compared to a Mutazilla verses Shia.  Secondly, if Mutazilla were so defeated than how come Shaykh Mufid had to go to them and study under them. In fact, I have an article where Shaykh Saduq tampered with hadith because he too feared the Mutazilla popularity and in the end censored the view of the Imams themselves. Also, recall how Shaykh Saduq couldn't even conclude if the Quran is created or uncreated. On top of that there are traditions from the 12er Shia books which state the Quran is uncreated too.





whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #26 on: November 23, 2017, 02:50:27 PM »
The issue is Shaykh Saduq in my understanding of Kalam has the correct view on the Jabr and Qadr. Shaykh Mufid purposely takes him out of context, and then makes Shaykh Saduq's view sound as if a Jabariyyah. Then he goes on to refute him on the basis of claims which Shaykh Saduq did not even claim.
The fact that he denies Shaykh Saduq input and it shows that he is a Qadriyyah\Mutazilla on the matter of Jabr and Qadr.

Could you summarise for me, briefly, exactly what Shaykh Saduq said about this in your own words, and exactly what Shaykh Mufid said, and the official view of our madhab on it? I feel there are nuances which if misunderstood can lead us to make unwarranted conclusions.
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #27 on: November 23, 2017, 02:55:09 PM »
I never said most. I said more knowledgeable than Qaim. Back in his 12er Shia days Qaim used to follow him.

Q'aim is more knowledgable than him. While it may have been closer several years ago, Q'aim has definitely overtaken him. Furthermore, he did not come close to giants like Islamic Salvation, Nader Zaveri, or the Rijal master , Cake. 

Quote
However, once he left the 12er Shia sect Qaim began to slander him with nasty remarks.

Not really. Disagreeing with someone is not slander. Q'aim is also pretty moderate and reserved about comments made against others.


Quote
Read it again brother. The reference says he learned under a Mutazilla. This is different sitting in Mutazilla circles.

In those days, there was much more fluidity generally speaking. Shaykh-as-Saduq, or Shaykh-al-Mufid, or Shaykh-Tusi learning from other scholars where what they learned only confirmed what was established  by our Aimmah, and so it was merely another path to strengthen our beliefs is not the same as taking from them. I also think in those days, the line was blurred between 'sitting in a circle' and 'learning'.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 02:59:58 PM by whoaretheshia »
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #28 on: November 23, 2017, 03:07:19 PM »
Lol! Very funny. He would defeat the Mutazilla? This has got to be a joke. Firstly the Sunni world were bigger enemies of the Mutazilla in Kalam as compared to a Mutazilla verses Shia.  Secondly, if Mutazilla were so defeated than how come Shaykh Mufid had to go to them and study under them. In fact, I have an article where Shaykh Saduq tampered with hadith because he too feared the Mutazilla popularity and in the end censored the view of the Imams themselves. Also, recall how Shaykh Saduq couldn't even conclude if the Quran is created or uncreated. On top of that there are traditions from the 12er Shia books which state the Quran is uncreated too.

We are going to write you an an entire article on Hisham b.Hakkam, but we feel what we have written is conclusive enough - particularly what we have linked you. However i must express my surprise that you do not know of the debates that occurred between Hisham, and the Mutazila. I thought this would have been common knowledge.  An enormous part of the life of Hisham comprises precisely of his debates with with Mutazila [and the non-shia Muslims, and the non-Muslims].

Muhammad ibn al-Hudhayl al-‘Abdi, their client, Abu 'l-Hudhayl al-‘Allaf al-Basri (135/753–235/850). Ash-Shahristani said:Debates between [Hisham] and Abu 'l-Hudhayl took place on theology, some of them concerned anthropomorphism, and some the attachment of God's knowledge.

Reference al-Milal wa 'n-nihal, vol.1, pp.30, 184.

Are you aware of who these men were with who Hisham b. Hakkam debated? They were the leader of the Mutazilla: http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/christian-muslim-relations-i/abu-l-hudhayl-muhammad-ibn-al-hudhayl-ibn-ubayd-allah-ibn-makhul-al-abdi-l-allaf-COM_23638

Al-Mas‘udi recounts one of the discussions, and says at the end of it: "Abu 'l-Hudhayl fell silent, and did not come forth with an answer."

Reference: 90 Muruju 'dh-dhahab, vol.7, pp.232-3.


Are you aware when greek philosophy started to infiltrate the Ummah, and itself was a threat to the Barkamids  , they relied on Hisham to dispute them? 

"The biographers of Hisham relate that Yahya al-Barmaki loved Hisham, sheltered him as his own, and that his care for him knew no bounds, because 'Yahya ibn Khalid al-Barmaki had enjoined Hisham to attack the philosophers . . .'

Reference: al-Kishshi, p.258; Majma‘u 'r-rijal, vol.6, p.218; al-Bihar, vol.48, p.189.


We highly recommend you to read this to obtain many documented encounters and rifts he had with the Mutazila: https://www.al-islam.org/introduction-emendation-shiite-creed-muhammad-rida-jafari/mutazilis-whom-hisham-met-and-their


Other points are to be inshAllah addressed in an article.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 03:09:55 PM by whoaretheshia »
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

fgss

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #29 on: November 23, 2017, 03:31:04 PM »
@whoaretheshia

Quote
Q'aim is more knowledgable than him. While it may have been closer several years ago, Q'aim has definitely overtaken him. Furthermore, he did not come close to giants like Islamic Salvation, Nader Zaveri, or the Rijal master , Cake.

This is from the same Nader Zaveri.

Quote
Our scholars most likely took it from the Mu'tazilah, as many of our classical scholar's teachers were Mu'tazilah. Their Usool al-Deen are:

Tawheed
`Adl
al-Wa`d wa al-Wa`eed (Promise and Threat)
al-Manzilah bayn al-Manzilatayn (Rank between two ranks)
Amr bi'l Ma'roof wa Nahi `anil Munkar

Notice the first two.


Quote
From my research, this Usool al-Deen of ours was not fully defined until the time of Shareef al-Murtada (355-436 AH), while the Usool al-Deen of the Mu'tazilah were defined way before the 5th century. We took many things from the Mu'tazilah, heavy reliance on mutawaatir and rejection of akhbaar aHaad was another Pro-mu'tazilah concept that al-Murtada also adopted.

There is no denying the many of our classical scholar's teachers were Mu'tazilah. We also had scholars who switched from being Mu`tazilah to an Imaami (i.e. Muhammad bin `Abd al-Rahmaan bin Qibah al-Raazi).

585 محمد بن قبة الرازي

، يكنى أبا جعفر، من متكلمي الإمامية و حذاقهم و كان أولا معتزليا ثم انتقل إلى القول بالإمامة

Muhammad bin Qibah al-Raazi:

kunya Abaa Ja`far, he is from the kalaam scholars of the Imaamiyyah, clever, he was first a Mu`tazilah, then he transferred to the belief of Imaamah

Source:

al-Toosi, al-Fihrist, pg. 132, person # 585

Source: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/234994293-why-is-adl-justice-part-of-usool-ad-deen/


May I know your username on SC?

Also awaiting your answer here: http://forum.twelvershia.net/imamah-ghaybah/question-for-shias-did-imam-ali-decare-his-imamah/msg19973/#new
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 03:32:27 PM by fgss »
إِنَّ أَصْدَقَ الْحَدِيثِ كِتَابُ اللَّهِ وَأَحْسَنَ الْهَدْىِ هَدْىُ مُحَمَّدٍ وَشَرَّ الأُمُورِ مُحْدَثَاتُهَا وَكُلَّ مُحْدَثَةٍ بِدْعَةٌ وَكُلَّ بِدْعَةٍ ضَلاَلَةٌ وَكُلَّ ضَلاَلَةٍ فِي النَّارِ

May Allah guide us to the true teachings of Quran and Sunnah of His beloved Prophet (s.a.w.w). Ameen

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #30 on: November 24, 2017, 01:40:34 AM »


Could you summarise for me, briefly, exactly what Shaykh Saduq said about this in your own words, and exactly what Shaykh Mufid said, and the official view of our madhab on it? I feel there are nuances which if misunderstood can lead us to make unwarranted conclusions.

Lets go over the first comparison I posted.

 Shaykh Saduq says that humans actions have free will and in terms of Allah's will, Allah (swt) has knowledge of what man will do before he does it.

Shaykh Mufid replies by saying ' The sound tradition from the family of Mu4ammad is that man's acts are not created by
God."
The reality is Shaykh  Saduq never said that Allah creates the actions. He says Allah has knowledge of Man's actions before they commit it.

So Shaykh Mufid in his 'Tashih' accused his teacher something he never even said.

This is what the a 'Tashih' from Shaykh Mufid books on free will and determism.

As for the 12er Shia view, today they are what is presented by Shaykh Saduq on Jabr and Qadr.
In the Ahle Sunnah the Maturidi school shares the same view, but not the Mutazilla who believe in total free will or the Ashariyah and the Ahle hadith which believe in total determinism. 

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #31 on: November 24, 2017, 01:53:41 AM »


Quote

In those days, there was much more fluidity generally speaking. Shaykh-as-Saduq, or Shaykh-al-Mufid, or Shaykh-Tusi learning from other scholars where what they learned only confirmed what was established  by our Aimmah, and so it was merely another path to strengthen our beliefs is not the same as taking from them. I also think in those days, the line was blurred between 'sitting in a circle' and 'learning'.

It wasn't like that brother. First Shaykh Mufid learned and then went into the sitting state. As I stated about Shaykh Mufid present a Mutazilla view in his disagreement with Shaykh Saduq in his book titled 'Tashih al-Itiqadat,'


As for confirmation, Shaykh Saduq lived in the era of the Mutazilla and actually tampered with hadith of the Aimmah (as). He felt that the traditions did not stand a chance against the Mutazilla so he began to censor the hadith attributed to the Imams and changed the traditions.


Edited by Farid at the request of Rationalist.

« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 09:32:50 PM by Farid »

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #32 on: November 24, 2017, 02:14:41 AM »


We are going to write you an an entire article on Hisham b.Hakkam, but we feel what we have written is conclusive enough - particularly what we have linked you. However i must express my surprise that you do not know of the debates that occurred between Hisham, and the Mutazila. I thought this would have been common knowledge.  An enormous part of the life of Hisham comprises precisely of his debates with with Mutazila [and the non-shia Muslims, and the non-Muslims].
The problem is the transcript of the debates do not exist on the issue of kalam. Instead we the 12er Shia side telling us he won without bringing any proof.




Quote
Al-Mas‘udi recounts one of the discussions, and says at the end of it: "Abu 'l-Hudhayl fell silent, and did not come forth with an answer."

Reference: 90 Muruju 'dh-dhahab, vol.7, pp.232-3.

This makes no sense. The reason is the Mutazilla were not anthropomorphism. So how did Hisham ibn Hakam silence Abu Hudhayl? Also, today the 12er Shia are in agreement with the Mutazilla on the area of Tawheed.


Quote
Are you aware when greek philosophy started to infiltrate the Ummah, and itself was a threat to the Barkamids  , they relied on Hisham to dispute them? 

Again do the transcripts exist? This so called referrences makes him a champion without any proof. As far as I know Hisham had a heart condition in which he used to tremble in fear. The authenticity of the 12er Shia stories need to be questioned. Even if you look at how Shaykh Mufid got the title Mufid, there are 3 different versions of the story itself.
When I read Hisham ibn Hakam's biography, there is one report which states he met Imam Jafar and in his first meeting he asked 500 questions in just one sitting. Again I can't agree with your references as they lack detail and proof.

 


MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 227
  • +8/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #33 on: November 24, 2017, 03:01:39 AM »
Not only Hisham bin Hakam but early Imamis were all Mujasima.

Shia leader called Hisham bin al-Hakam al-Koufi said Allah is a body of equal height, width and depth. He said that his god can move at times and remain idle at others, he also claimed his god has friction with the throne and that it fits him perfectly. [Al-Tanbih wal-Radd `ala Ahl al-Ahwa’ 36, Sharh al-Nahj 1/294, al-Ghuniyah lil-Jaylani 1/93, Al-Burhan fi `Aqa’id ahl al-Adyan 72, al-Farq bayn al-Firaq 71, Maqalat al-Islamiyin 1/106, al-Tabsir 120, al-Milal 1/184, Minhaj al-Sunnah 1/71]

Even Mutazilite scholar confirms the beliefs of Hisham bin Hakam and early heads of Rafidah:

Abu al-Husayn Al-Khayyat, Mu`tazili scholar from the 3rd century also stated in his book “Al-Intisar”:

[As for the opinion of the Rafidah in general, it is that Allah almighty has a volume, an image, a limit, He moves and stops, closer and further and He gets heavier and lighter. His knowledge is created, He had no knowledge before He knew and most of them attribute al-Bada’ to Him, which is that Allah says He will do something then a matter appears to Him so He refrains. This is the Tawheed of the entirety of the Rafidah, except a few among them who accompanied the Mu`tazilah and adopted proper Tawheed so the rest of the Rafidah exiled and disowned them. As for the majority of Rafidah and their scholars, such as Hisham bin Salim, Shaytan-ul-Taq, `Ali bin Maytham, Hisham bin al-Hakam, `Ali bin Mansur and al-Sakkak then they all believe in what we previously mentioned.]

Al-Murtada even says all Qummis had this belief with the exception of Saduq. al-Murtada says in “Rasa’il al-Murtada”:

إنّ أعظم الفقه وجمهوره، بل جميعه، لا يخلو سنده ممّن يذهب مذهب الواقفة وإلى غلاة وخطّابية وإلى قمّيٍّ مشبّه مجبّر، وإنّ القمّيين كلّهم أجمعين، من غير استثناء لاَحـد منهـم ـ إلاّ أبا جعفر بن بابويه رحمه الله ـ بالاَمس كانوا مشبّهة مجبّرة، وكتبهم وتصانيفهم تشهد بذلك

[The greatest amount of (Shia) Fiqh, rather all of it, reaches us through chains containing a Waqifi, a Ghaali (extremist), a Khattabi or a Qummi who believes in Jabr and Tashbeeh. The Qummies, all of them -with the exception of Ibn Babuwayh – until just yesterday were all Mushabbihah and Mujabbirah, their books and works are a testimony to this.]

Read more:
Tashbeeh & Tajseem in Shia texts
http://www.twelvershia.net/2016/02/27/tashbeeh/
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

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #34 on: November 24, 2017, 12:27:43 PM »
.

Dear brother,

If you are continuing to spread this slander and have not read my clear refutations against this, which for anyone who is intellectually honest would be robust evidence, that is fine. We can play a game of copying and pasting. It is a shame because when non-muslims copy and paste propaganda which either uses unreliable sources or twists things, we get angry. However, we are happy to do it to each other and ignore posts made.

I made a post about Hisham b.Hakkam, used sources and references and linked to websites. Instead of copying and pasting things i have refuted beyond doubt, why do you not quote my posts and engage in a direct debate with me?
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #35 on: November 24, 2017, 12:31:14 PM »

This makes no sense. The reason is the Mutazilla were not anthropomorphism. So how did Hisham ibn Hakam silence Abu Hudhayl? Also, today the 12er Shia are in agreement with the Mutazilla on the area of Tawheed.


Brother, even if it makes no sense to you, the reality is these are historical facts, well documented by though several sources, including ones of the Sunnis. It is beyond any doubt. I have provided you respected Sunni historians, sources, and links to even more sources to conclusively prove this. We also have differences with the Mutazila on Tawheed, by the way. Anyone who studies our Aqeedah will know that we conform to rational sense without going too far.

Our website has been taken down, but it is basically my username. We will post a fuller article soon , but what i have said already and the links i have referred you to should be more than sufficient.
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 227
  • +8/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #36 on: November 24, 2017, 02:35:52 PM »
.

Dear brother,

If you are continuing to spread this slander and have not read my clear refutations against this, which for anyone who is intellectually honest would be robust evidence, that is fine. We can play a game of copying and pasting. It is a shame because when non-muslims copy and paste propaganda which either uses unreliable sources or twists things, we get angry. However, we are happy to do it to each other and ignore posts made.

I made a post about Hisham b.Hakkam, used sources and references and linked to websites. Instead of copying and pasting things i have refuted beyond doubt, why do you not quote my posts and engage in a direct debate with me?

How am I slandering? I am just quoting the beliefs of Hisham and even the testimony of Mutazilite scholar about him.
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

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #37 on: November 24, 2017, 04:01:01 PM »

This makes no sense. The reason is the Mutazilla were not anthropomorphism. So how did Hisham ibn Hakam silence Abu Hudhayl? Also, today the 12er Shia are in agreement with the Mutazilla on the area of Tawheed.


Brother, even if it makes no sense to you, the reality is these are historical facts, well documented by though several sources, including ones of the Sunnis. It is beyond any doubt. I have provided you respected Sunni historians, sources, and links to even more sources to conclusively prove this. We also have differences with the Mutazila on Tawheed, by the way. Anyone who studies our Aqeedah will know that we conform to rational sense without going too far.

Our website has been taken down, but it is basically my username. We will post a fuller article soon , but what i have said already and the links i have referred you to should be more than sufficient.

No the link you provided me is not sufficient. Show me the transcript of this debate. It doesn't exist. That's the problem.

whoaretheshia

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #38 on: November 27, 2017, 08:10:27 PM »

No the link you provided me is not sufficient. Show me the transcript of this debate. It doesn't exist. That's the problem.

Akhi, the links i gave to you proved conclusively:

1. Hisham b. Hakam according to many non-Shia sources is said to have been a student of Jahmiyyah b. Safwan. This is the man credited for influencing the Mutazila and those who are accused of denying the attributes of Allah, the Almighty. They are the last group to the Mujasima. Jahmiyya b. Safwan according to a number of reports is the first to say 'Allah is a body unlike bodies'. This means he is an existent, unlike other things in existence.

2. Hisham b. Hakam was known to debate many, including the Mutazila. This has been recorded by Masudi, and ibn Hajar even documents debates between them. The evidence he debated against the Mutazila are numerous , and the article listed certain individuals he defeated who became his enemies and were jealous of him. Even in Sunni hadith, you find some of the Four major imams weakening the others, or you find them weakening great Sunni scholars. In Rijal, statements like that are discarded because contemporaries weakening each other may do it out of personal feud. Furthermore the source of rumours against Hisham distorting his view came from the Mutazila and an individual not even regarded as reliable among the Sunni or the Shia.

3. Hisham b. Hakam has been recorded unanimously to deny Allah can be seen, and denying he has any form of corporeality. He has no position, nor place. He authored books against such beliefs.

4. The fault of Hisham b. Hakam was not Tasjeem. It was using improper language. In trying to say Allah is a body unlike other bodies he meant an existent like other existences. The Imams criticised him (and there is only one reliable hadith, and they do not curse him in the reliable ones). They did so because he used language that could be misleading, even if it is clear he never intended Tasjeem.

5. However, TSN and Antimajos and other Salafi websites decided to take a tradition, without context, and run with it.


I have made it very clear about Hisham b. Hakam and would like to move onto Hisham b. Salim.
DISCLAIMER: I AM AWAY UNTIL THE START OF THE NEW YEAR, PM ME IF I OWE YOU A REPLY, MAY ALLAH HAVE MERCY ON ALL OF US, FI AMANILLAH
" O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice.. even if it be against yourselves... So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be jus

Rationalist

Re: Shia usul al-din are an imitation of Mu'tazilah.
« Reply #39 on: November 28, 2017, 01:50:25 AM »
Akhi, the links i gave to you proved conclusively:


No they are blanket statements without proof. The transcript of the debate does not exist, so there is no proof exception Rafidi nationalism to make Hisham a winner in the imaginations of the 12er Shia.

Quote
. This has been recorded by Masudi, and ibn Hajar even documents debates between them.
Why would you reference ibn Hajar? To shoot yourself in the foot? Ibn Hajar said Hisham was defeated.
Again to be fair on the subject, I need to see the transcript. I never denied that Hisham ibn Hakam debated. I believe he did. Then from these debates he began to have heart problems, and a results began to tremble in fear. This does not seem like a winner to me as the Rafidi nationalist want us to believe.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1296 Views
Last post May 07, 2015, 10:06:20 AM
by Hadrami
4 Replies
1108 Views
Last post March 10, 2016, 02:26:52 AM
by Rationalist
1 Replies
162 Views
Last post May 22, 2017, 09:42:30 AM
by Optimus Prime
24 Replies
663 Views
Last post November 10, 2017, 10:00:09 PM
by Abu Muhammad