TwelverShia.net Forum

Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

whoaretheshia

Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« on: June 15, 2019, 03:16:44 PM »
In the name of Allah,

Salam

TSN and Youpuncturedtheark have tried many a time to weaken Hadith-at-Thaqalayn. TSN in the recent past performed a study on the tradition in so far as Sunni methodology was concerned. They initially reached to a conclusion of the following version being 'Hasan', which they then, applying their own methodology and against the far more weightier and authoritative verdicts of their own major scholars, attempted to backtrack. 

As for Hadith at-Thaqalayn, the following comes from an authentic chain of narrators: 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 أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم


“The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: “I have left behind over you (al-Thaqalayn) that which if you hold fast to it you will never go astray: the Book of Allah – one end of which is in the Hand of Allah and the other in your hands– and my Ahl al-Bayt.”[5] 

Chain: Sulayman b. ‘Ubayd Allah al-Ghilani – Abu ‘Amir – Kathir b. Zayd – Muhammad b. ‘Umar b. ‘Ali – his father – ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him:

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 أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال :إني تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله، سببه بيد الله، وسببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي. [Musnad Ibn Rahwayh, Sunan Ibn Asim, Aqeedah at-Tahawi]


This is what TSN claimed to want to try to do on their academic analysis

"We have only used the most reliable books of Rijal to judge each of the narrators and we decided to not be very harsh or too lenient in our judgment as it would greatly reduce the value and reliability of our research and our hard work would be lost and therefore the truth."

From: http://www.twelvershia.net/2013/10/26/hadith-of-thaqalayn/






This is what TSN (Hani) originally graded the chain as:





After making a thread and using this narration, Hani then perhaps recognised the contents were completely at odds with the narrative TSN wishes to purport, and in a further article, attempted to weaken the tradition. This is what he wrote:





Points to make:


1. Hani claims Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani's overall assessment of the narrator can not be taken because earlier critics, such has Ibn Qattan al-Fasi declare him to be Majhool. However, what Hani misses to point out is that Ibn Qattan al-Fasi himself declares Muhammed b. Umar b. Ali b. Abi Talib to be Hasan -ul-Hadith!

"Muhammad ibn ‘Umar ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (rahimahullah) was ‘qalilul Hadith‘ i.e He reported few Hadith only. Imams Nasai, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah (rahimahumullah) have accepted his Hadiths.

Imam Ibn Hibban (rahimahullah) has declared him reliable. Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al ‘Asqalani (rahimahullah) declares him ‘saduq‘ i.e. His Hadiths will be sound. ‘Allamah Ibnul Qattan (rahimahullah) was also of the view that his Hadiths are sound (hasan).

(Refer: Mizanul I’tidal, vol. 4 pg. 222, Tahdhibut Tahdhib, vol. 9 pg. 361. Taqribut Tahdhib, 6170)"


From: https://hadithanswers.com/the-hadith-narrator-muhammad-ibn-umar-ibn-ali-ibn-abi-talib/

Ibn Hajar was more than aware of the discussion surrounding who is Majhool and pertaining to this narrator. Yet, he used other indicators and his extensive knowledge and concurred with the earlier transmitter.

Furthermore, Dahabi himself cites the overall positive view given by Ibn Qattan al-Fasi.


What does al-Albani say about Muhammed b. Umar b. Ali b. Abi Talib in his book Silsila al-aHaadith as-Sahiha, and the chain of narrators?



First look at the fact he regards this tradition as a strong witness.

A translation from another brother: "And its narrators are (all) trustworthy except for Yazid b. Kathir, for I do not recognise him. And the main suspicion is that it is corrupted upon the printer or the scribe. God knows best. Then it occurred in the mind that perhaps it became flipped upon one of them and that the correct is Kathir b. Zayd. Then I became sure of that after I returned to the books of rijal and found his mention amongst the shaykhs of `Amir al-`Aqdi, and amongst the narrators from Muhammad b. `Umar b. `Ali."

Al-Albani has graded chains with Kathir b. Zayd as 'Hasan': https://sunnah.com/urn/1293060 and https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/21/40


Additionally, here are the verdicts of your other scholars:

(1) Shu’ayb Arnaut states regarding the above tradition: إسناده حسن [The chain is Hasan [good]]

 (2) Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani states: هذا إسناد صحيح [The chain is Saheeh]

(3) Ahmad B. Abu Bakr b.Ismail Al Busri states : رواه إسحاق بسند صحيح [The chain is Saheeh]

 (4) Ali b. Husam al-Din al-Muttaqi al-Hindi states: ابن راهويه وابن جرير وابن أبي عاصم والمحاملي في أماليه وصححه [Narrated by (Ishaq) Ibn Rahwayh, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi ‘Asim, and by al-Muhamali in his Amali, and he (al-Muhamali) declared it Saheeh]

They have not graded this as 'Saheeh' or 'Hasan' on account of it corroborating in Matn, but rather, they have grades the chain of narrators independently as 'Hasan'. Therefore it is upon you to take the verdict of brother Hani, or his own earlier more objective gradings and those of your major scholars in Hadith.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 03:20:45 PM by whoaretheshia »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #1 on: June 15, 2019, 03:27:45 PM »
Abu Khadeejah:https://www.abukhadeejah.com/part-5-the-hasan-hadeeth-its-definition-and-usage-with-the-scholars-of-hadeeth/

"Ruling of the Hadeeth Hasan:

Its ruling is the same as the hadeeth saheeh in evidence even if it is lesser than saheeh in strength [as far as the isnaad is concerned]. For this reason it is considered as a proof with the scholars, and they act upon it – likewise the vast majority of the hadeeth scholars consider it to be a proof, except a few in opposition from the harsh ones. And there were some who were too lenient and considered the hasan to be saheeh."

"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2019, 05:13:16 PM »
In the name of Allah,

Salam

TSN and Youpuncturedtheark have tried many a time to weaken Hadith-at-Thaqalayn.
Why did you mention Youpuncturedtheark's name, when you didn't want to address the analysis done for the hadeeth in question on it? It not only dealt with the chain, but even the text of the report.

Here is what "Youpuncturedtheark" stated:
Quote
Issue with Chain of Transmission:

Narrator Kathīr bin Zayd is a weak transmitter.

(a). Ibn Abi Hatim in Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta`dil:
سئل يحيى بن معين عن كثير بن زيد فقال ليس بذاك القوى…فقال ابو زرعة هو صدوق فيه لين
Yahya ibn Ma`in was asked about Kathir ibn Zayd and he said: “He is not strong according to the Muhaddithin”… Abu Zur’ah said: “Truthful but he has weakness.”[Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta`dil, vol 7, page 150-151, #841].

(b). Al-Dhahabi in al-Mizan:
قال ابو زرعة فيه لين…قال النسائى ضعيف
Abu Zur`ah said: “He has weakness”… Nasa’i said: “Da’if(weak)” [al-Meezan, vol 5, page 489]

(c). Ibn Hajar in al-Tahdhib:
صالح بن أبي خيثمة عن بن معين ليس بذاك وكان اولا قال ليس بشيئ…قال النسائى ضعيف…قال ابو جعفر الطبرى كثير بن زيد عندهم ممن لا يحتج بنقله
Ibn Abi Khaythamah has reported from Ibn Ma`in: “He is not reliable.” And he first said: “He is nothing”… Nasa’i said: “Da`if”… Abu Ja`far al-Tabari said: Kathir ibn Zayd is amongst those whose narrations cannot be substantiated from.” [Tahdhib al-Tahdhib vol 8, page 414, #745]

(d). Imaam Dhahabi said: “There is weakness in Katheer ibn Zayd“ [Mu’jam ash-Shuyookh ul-Kabeer by Dhahabi, vol 1, page 240]

(e). Ibn Jawzi mentioned him in Kitab al-Duafa wal Matrukin(weak and rejected narrators). [Kitab al-Duafa wal Matrukin by Ibn Jawzi vol 3, page 22 , #2786 ]

(f). Imaam Ali ibn al-Madeeni said: “Saalih, He is not Strong.“ [Sawalat Ibn Abi Shaybah by Ibn al-Madeeni: Pg 95]

(g). Ibn Ḥajar says: “He is a sadūq(truthful) who makes mistakes in his transmission. [Taqrib al-Tahdhib, vol 1, page 459]

In the above references, the scholars of hadith have explicitly mentioned that the narrator Kathir bin Zayd is weak in the field of hadith. And even though there were some other scholars who praised him, however as the famous principle of hadeeth science “Explained disparagement is given preference over commendation”[Kitab Marifat Anwa ilm Al-hadith by ibn al-Salaah, page 84].

Issue with the Matn(text) :

The text of this version is ambiguous, as we shall see. But before we proceed let us present the grading given by Some Scholars for this report, along with the clarification of these gradings:

Shu’ayb Arnaut states regarding the above tradition: إسناده حسن [Isnaad Hasan]

Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani states:  إسناد صحيح [Isnaad Saheeh].

What does the terms Isnaad Saheeh or Isnaad Hasan imply?

Al-Haafiz ibn al-Salaah said:
” قولهم : ( هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد أو حسن الإسناد ) دون قولهم :  هذا حديث صحيح أو حديث حسن  لأنه قد يقال : هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد ، ولا يصح لكونه شاذا أو معللا ”
When they say “This hadeeth has a Saheeh Isnaad(chain) or a Hasan Isnaad(chain)” instead of “this is a saheeh hadeeth or a hasan hadeeth”, that is because it may be said that this hadeeth has a saheeh isnaad but it is not saheeh per se because it is shaadhdh(odd) or mu’allal(faulty). [Muqaddimah fi ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth, page 23].

Imam Ibn Katheer says:
” الحكم بالصحة أو الحسن على الإسناد لا يلزم منه الحكم بذلك على المتن ، إذ قد يكون شاذاً أو معللاً ”
The fact that the Isnaad(chain) is deemed to be Saheeh or Hasan does not necessarily mean that the same applies to the text, because it may be shaadhdh(odd) or mu’allal(faulty). [Ikhtisaar ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth page 43].

In regards to the accuracy of the text of this hadeeth in question, then it has an ambiguous wording or in a way faulty wording. The readers must know that Prophet(saws) uttered only one version(in regards to formation/structure of sentence) out of the different versions, and the most authentic and clear version(in regards to the sentence formation/structure) is the version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn in Sahih Muslim. The ambiguity in the wording of the hadith in question occurred due to the reason that a sub-narrator(who was known for making mistakes in his transmission) narrated it in a summarized form, instead of narrating it in an accurate and proper form as found in Sahih Muslim.

Abu Bakr al-Khatib said:

قال الخطيب البغدادي: “السبيل إلى معرفة علة الحديث أن يجمع بين طرقه، وينظر في اختلاف رواته، ويعتبر بمكانهم في الحفظ، ومنزلتهم في الإتقان والضبط”
“The way to discover the defect of a hadith is to collect the lines of transmission, examine the differences of its transmitters and examine their position in regard to retention and their status in regard to exactitude and precision. [Uloom al-Hadeeth by Ibn Salaah, page 91- 92].

Abdullah bin Mubarak said:

ابْنَ الْمُبَارَكِ ، يَقُولُ : ” إِذَا أَرَدْتَ أَنْ يَصِحَّ لَكَ الْحَدِيثُ فَاضْرِبْ بَعْضَهُ بِبَعْضٍ

If you want to check authenticity of a hadith, then present it against other hadiths. [Al-Jami’ li Akhlaq al-Rawi wa aadaab al-Sama’a #1934]

Therefore, inorder to understand the text of this summarized and ambiguous version, we need to use the most authentic version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, which clarifies the ambuiguity in the summarized version. This is the proper method of doing justice with the report.

Ambiguous version states:

إِنِّي تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا : كِتَابَ اللَّهِ ، سَبَبُهُ بِيَدِ اللَّهِ ، وَسَبَبُهُ بِأَيْدِيكُمْ ، وَأَهْلَ بَيْتِي

I have left behind over you that which if you hold fast to IT you will never go astray: the Book of Allah – one end of IT is in the Hand of Allah and the other end of IT is in your hands– and my Ahl al-Bayt”.[Musnad Ishaq ibn Rahwayah]

Accurate version of Sahih Muslim{supported by twenty five(25) chains} states:

أَنَا تَارِكٌ فِيكُمْ ثَقَلَيْنِ أَوَّلُهُمَا كِتَابُ اللَّهِ فِيهِ الْهُدَى وَالنُّورُ فَخُذُوا بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَاسْتَمْسِكُوا بِهِ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ فَحَثَّ عَلَى كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَرَغَّبَ فِيهِ ثُمَّ قَالَ ‏”‏ وَأَهْلُ بَيْتِي أُذَكِّرُكُمُ اللَّهَ فِي أَهْلِ بَيْتِي

I am leaving among you two weighty things: the first one being the Book of Allah in IT there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to IT. He continued to encourage and urge regarding the Book of Allah. He then said: (secondly) and my AhlelBayt! I remind you of Allah with regard to the people of my household(Ahlelbayt). [Sahih Muslim #2408]

The Key word that needs to be focused in both versions is the pronoun {هِ/hi/hu= IT}, which is a singular pronoun. Even though as per Arabic grammar, the word (هِ/hi/IT) can occur for two or more things being addressed as in reference to (مَا/maa/Which), but without the change in verbs for the nouns being mentioned and it should be in a single sentence. However, in the accurate version of Sahih Muslim, we see that it has two verbs, Astamsiku bihi(adhere to it) and udhakkirukum(I remind you). These are two sentences, with two different verbs, and it doesn’t have (مَا/maa/which) in it. Moreover, in one of the report (مَا/maa/which) was used in reference to holding on Quran alone[Refer, Mustadrak al Hakim, vol 3, page 613, #6272], and there is no mention of Ahlelbayt in this report, which again proves the correctness of our explanation, that the command was to adhere/hold only one thing, that is Quran.

Therefore, the ambiguous version having the singular pronoun (هِ/hi/IT) must be understood in the light of the accurate and clear version(of Sahih Muslim), which clarifies that the command to “adhere to it” or “hold on it” was for single thing, that is Quran only. The sentence itself demonstrates that the mention of guidance, light, holding and adherence, is for Quran alone. As for mention of Ahlelbayt in the hadeeth, then they were mentioned to be reminded to people about their duties towards them. That’s why in one report there is no mention of Ahlelbayt but Quran alone, holding which people will not go astray.

Afaan  — Hassaan bin Ibrahim — Sa’eed bin Masrooq — Yazid bin Hayyan — Zayd bin Arqam said: Prophet(SAWS) said:  I am leaving amongst you the Book of Allah, and that is the rope of Allah. He who holds it fast would be on right guidance and he who abandons it would be on misguidance. [Musannaf fi al-Ahadeeth wa al-Athar, by Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol 6, page 133, #30078].

Our explanation is also supported and strenghtened by the authentic reports about Quran alone being source of guidance from (a). Ja’far bin Muhammad(Jafar as-Sadiq) from his father(Muhammad al Baqir) from Jabir bin Abdullah. [Sahih Muslim, vol 3, page 343 — 350, #2950(1218)] ; [Musannaf fi al-Ahadeeth wa al-Athar, by Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol 6, page 133, #30077] (b). Abdullah ibn Umar. [Musnad al-Bazzar, vol 12, page 298-300, #6135] ; (c). Abu Shurayh al-‘Adawi and (d). Jubair bin Mut’am. [Silsilah al-Sahiha, vol 2, page 230, #713] ; (e). Ubay ibn Ka’b. [Hilyat ul- Awliya, vol 1, page 253] ; (f). Also from the Sermon of Ali ibn Abi Talib reported in Shia book. [Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 1] ; (g). Last but not the least, the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam, which has been explained in detailed under Section (IX) of this article.

All these reports collectively support the fact that only Quran is to be adhered to gain guidance and not go astray and they collectively support our explanation for the ambiguous version. And this is a proper academic method to understand an ambiguous hadeeth, because an authentic hadeeth of Prophet(saws) which is clear and accurate explains the other ambiguous hadeeth having faulty text.

NOTE: Readers should notice that, we don’t find the mention of Prophet(saws) reminding of Ahlelbayt in this ambiguous/faulty version, so where did it disappear? It is quite clear that, the weak narrator who was known for making mistakes in his transmission, erroneously reported this version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn in an ambiguous/faulty form. We won’t find any faulty version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, which mentions adhering or holding both Quran and Ahlelbayt, also mentioning the reminder towards Ahlelbayt.

Most importantly, the Shia interpretation for the faulty version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, even contradicts Quran(4:59). Hence, the Shia interpretation is rejected.
[/size]
« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 05:14:29 PM by Noor-us-Sunnah »

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2019, 04:44:01 PM »
Salam,

Brother Noor-us-Sunnah, apologies for the late reply, i have had issues with health and real life concerns.

There are three primary areas i wish to address here:

1. The Sanad of this narration
2. The Matn
3. The issue of memory


Let me first start with responding to your weakening of the Hadith.

Issue with Chain of Transmission:

Quote
Narrator Kathīr bin Zayd is a weak transmitter.

(a). Ibn Abi Hatim in Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta`dil:
سئل يحيى بن معين عن كثير بن زيد فقال ليس بذاك القوى…فقال ابو زرعة هو صدوق فيه لين
Yahya ibn Ma`in was asked about Kathir ibn Zayd and he said: “He is not strong according to the Muhaddithin”… Abu Zur’ah said: “Truthful but he has weakness.”[Kitab al-Jarh wa al-Ta`dil, vol 7, page 150-151, #841].

(b). Al-Dhahabi in al-Mizan:
قال ابو زرعة فيه لين…قال النسائى ضعيف
Abu Zur`ah said: “He has weakness”… Nasa’i said: “Da’if(weak)” [al-Meezan, vol 5, page 489]

(c). Ibn Hajar in al-Tahdhib:
صالح بن أبي خيثمة عن بن معين ليس بذاك وكان اولا قال ليس بشيئ…قال النسائى ضعيف…قال ابو جعفر الطبرى كثير بن زيد عندهم ممن لا يحتج بنقله
Ibn Abi Khaythamah has reported from Ibn Ma`in: “He is not reliable.” And he first said: “He is nothing”… Nasa’i said: “Da`if”… Abu Ja`far al-Tabari said: Kathir ibn Zayd is amongst those whose narrations cannot be substantiated from.” [Tahdhib al-Tahdhib vol 8, page 414, #745]

(d). Imaam Dhahabi said: “There is weakness in Katheer ibn Zayd“ [Mu’jam ash-Shuyookh ul-Kabeer by Dhahabi, vol 1, page 240]

(e). Ibn Jawzi mentioned him in Kitab al-Duafa wal Matrukin(weak and rejected narrators). [Kitab al-Duafa wal Matrukin by Ibn Jawzi vol 3, page 22 , #2786 ]

(f). Imaam Ali ibn al-Madeeni said: “Saalih, He is not Strong.“ [Sawalat Ibn Abi Shaybah by Ibn al-Madeeni: Pg 95]

(g). Ibn Ḥajar says: “He is a sadūq(truthful) who makes mistakes in his transmission. [Taqrib al-Tahdhib, vol 1, page 459]

In the above references, the scholars of hadith have explicitly mentioned that the narrator Kathir bin Zayd is weak in the field of hadith. And even though there were some other scholars who praised him, however as the famous principle of hadeeth science “Explained disparagement is given preference over commendation”[Kitab Marifat Anwa ilm Al-hadith by ibn al-Salaah, page 84].

Just to explain to the dear readers, what brother Noor-us-Sunnah is doing here is quoting opinions from certain scholars of Jarh Wat Ta'dil, and then claiming that based on their opinions the narrator is weak given any disparagement by scholars of Jarh Wat Ta'dil overrides the praise and Tawtheeq given to Kathir b. Zayd by many other scholars.

However, this is not how the science of Hadith works in the Sunni world, and this is not how many major scholars from Ibn Hajar who has been quoted, Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut themselves apply this necessarily.

Early scholars of Jarh Wat T'adil would make their comments, and then later scholars such as Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani and others would look at the statements of every source about a particular narrator, and then summarize their scholarly verdict about that narrator. Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut themselves had their opinions on particular narrators.

There are many narrators regarded reliable who have had some disparagement from earlier scholars, but who scholars collating the overall opinion have regarded Thiqah or Saduq. It depends on the nature of the criticism, evidence given and what the later scholars have judged overall.

Despite quoting Ibn Hajar who himself quotes both praise and criticism, the important thing to recognize is that he still regarded Kathir b.Zayd as Saduq, who can make mistakes in transmission. This does not mean he is a weak narrator, given Ibn Hajar himself has graded chains of narrators with Kathir b. Zayd in them as 'Hasan' or 'Saheeh'.

Indeed, Al-Albani himself has graded a number of chains of narrations with Kathir b. Zayd in them as 'Hasan', Al-Arnaut has done so, and many major past to present scholars of Hadith have done likewise. I'm not sure anyone here is willing to claim scholars who knew better about praise and criticism would erroneously regard a transmitter like Kathir b. Zayd as Hasan-ul-Hadith.

This field an area is not for me to judge, nor can brother Noor-us-Sunnah as a fellow layman come in and contradict what major scholars in his own school of thought with far more weight, expertise and authority are saying.

It is worth reminding ourselves that:

1. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani graded the tradition as Saheeh by chain of narrators.
2. Shuayb al-Arnaut, a massive Sunni scholar of Hadith whose grading are one of the most famously used globally graded the tradition as 'Hasan' by chain.
3. Al-Albani himself regarded the chain of narrators to be reliable and regarded this tradition itself to be a strong Shawahid.
4. TSN themselves initially, when relying on these scholars and the 'most reliable books' as evidenced in the original post, also graded the tradition as 'Hasan'.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

muslim720

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2019, 05:08:44 PM »
Hadith at-Thaqalayn is authentic!  Arguing over versions that may be dubious or questionable is a waste of time.  So we agree that Ahlul Bayt (ra) must be followed.  What we need is to identify Ahlul Bayt (ra).

Every time this phrase occurs in the Qur'an, it is in regards to a wife (or wives) of a Prophet (asws).  It occurs in relation to Sarah (asws), the wife of Musa (asws) and the wives of the Holy Prophet (saw).  Furthermore, we have authentic narrations from the Holy Prophet (saw) in which he refers to, or greets, his wives (ra) as his Ahlul Bayt (or a derivative of the word).

I am willing to follow Ahlul Bayt (ra); in fact, there is no Sunni Islam without Ahlul Bayt (ra).  The real question is: are the Shias willing to accept the definition of Ahlul Bayt (ra) as per Qur'an and Sunnah OR are they happy with their exclusive, only-four defintion?
"Our coward ran from those in authority" - Iceman (admitting the truth regarding his 12th Imam)

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2019, 05:36:22 PM »
Quote
Shu’ayb Arnaut states regarding the above tradition: إسناده حسن [Isnaad Hasan]

Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani states:  إسناد صحيح [Isnaad Saheeh].

What does the terms Isnaad Saheeh or Isnaad Hasan imply?

Al-Haafiz ibn al-Salaah said:
” قولهم : ( هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد أو حسن الإسناد ) دون قولهم :  هذا حديث صحيح أو حديث حسن  لأنه قد يقال : هذا حديث صحيح الإسناد ، ولا يصح لكونه شاذا أو معللا ”
When they say “This hadeeth has a Saheeh Isnaad(chain) or a Hasan Isnaad(chain)” instead of “this is a saheeh hadeeth or a hasan hadeeth”, that is because it may be said that this hadeeth has a saheeh isnaad but it is not saheeh per se because it is shaadhdh(odd) or mu’allal(faulty). [Muqaddimah fi ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth, page 23].

Imam Ibn Katheer says:
” الحكم بالصحة أو الحسن على الإسناد لا يلزم منه الحكم بذلك على المتن ، إذ قد يكون شاذاً أو معللاً ”
The fact that the Isnaad(chain) is deemed to be Saheeh or Hasan does not necessarily mean that the same applies to the text, because it may be shaadhdh(odd) or mu’allal(faulty). [Ikhtisaar ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth page 43].


Brother Noor-us-Sunnah, who i am assuming based on previous posts and i believe his own words is an author on the website youpuncturedtheark, has made a valid point in that a tradition merely being regarded as 'Hasan' or 'Saheeh' by chain does not mean the authors necessarily regarded it being so in content.

So let us examine the words of Al-Albani, who regards the tradition as reliable by chain, what he himself reflected concerning the content:

"the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an, is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…”

End quote from Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).


"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2019, 06:51:28 PM »
Brother Noor-Us-Sunnah, in his article on Youpuncturedtheark, raises a more technical issue pertaining to the grammar of the tradition.

Quote
The Key word that needs to be focused in both versions is the pronoun {هِ/hi/hu= IT}, which is a singular pronoun. Even though as per Arabic grammar, the word (هِ/hi/IT) can occur for two or more things being addressed as in reference to (مَا/maa/Which), but without the change in verbs for the nouns being mentioned and it should be in a single sentence. However, in the accurate version of Sahih Muslim, we see that it has two verbs, Astamsiku bihi(adhere to it) and udhakkirukum(I remind you). These are two sentences, with two different verbs, and it doesn’t have (مَا/maa/which) in it. Moreover, in one of the report (مَا/maa/which) was used in reference to holding on Quran alone[Refer, Mustadrak al Hakim, vol 3, page 613, #6272], and there is no mention of Ahlelbayt in this report, which again proves the correctness of our explanation, that the command was to adhere/hold only one thing, that is Quran.

Therefore, the ambiguous version having the singular pronoun (هِ/hi/IT) must be understood in the light of the accurate and clear version(of Sahih Muslim), which clarifies that the command to “adhere to it” or “hold on it” was for single thing, that is Quran only. The sentence itself demonstrates that the mention of guidance, light, holding and adherence, is for Quran alone. As for mention of Ahlelbayt in the hadeeth, then they were mentioned to be reminded to people about their duties towards them. That’s why in one report there is no mention of Ahlelbayt but Quran alone, holding which people will not go astray.

To explain to readers who may be confused or unfamiliar, let me quote the Arabic:

أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال :إني تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله، سببه بيد الله، وسببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي.

The brother rightly says the word (هِ/hi) highlighted in red is singular, but has also pointed out later in his article that in Arabic, if you have used the word  ما , the singular  (هِ/hi) can still be used in reference to plurality.

His explanation is that Kathir b.Zayd, due to the fact he makes some mistakes, took the version in Saheeh Muslim where the words were used in singular to refer to the Quran alone, and perhaps accidentally added in 'Ahlulbayt' after.

This argument is one i have yet to see any scholar make, and is rather pure conjecture on behalf of brother Noor-us-Sunnah and can be roundly dismissed for two main reasons.

1. There are dozens of chains of narrators who used the word  ما , followed by the singular (هِ/hi), many of whom are completely independent of one another in wholly unique chains demonstrating that, just like in many other languages. more succinct and shorter expressions which are grammatically acceptable can be used to shorten sentences and improve eloquence, or may be conventionally accepted or even dominant ways of speaking:

From the Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:

1 حدثنا عبد الله حدثنى احمد بن حنبل حدثنا الاسود بن عامرثنا شريك عن الركين عن القاسم بن حسان عن زيد بن ثابت قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم انى قد تركت فيكم ما ان اخذتم به لن تضلوا بعدى الثقلين احدهما اكبر من الاخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء الى الارض و عترتى اهل بيتى وانهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا على الحوض   

2 حدثنا عبد الله حدثنى ابى عن ابن نمير ثنا عبدالملك بن ابى سليمان عن عطية العوفى عن ابى سعيد الخدرى قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم انى قد تركت فيكم ما ان اخذتم به لن تضلوا بعدى الثقلين احدهما اكبر من الاخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء الى الارض و عترتى اهل بيتى وانهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا على الحوض 


From the Jami’ of Imam Tirmidhi:


حدثنل نصر بن عبدالرحمان الكوفى قال حثنا زيد بن الحسن عن جعفر بن محمد عن ابيه عن جابر بن عبدالله قال رءيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فى حجته يوم عرفة وهو على ناقته القصواء يخطب  1 فسمعته يقول يا ايها الناس انى تركت فيكم ما ان اخذتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله و عترتى اهل بيتى

حدثنا على بن المنذر الكوفى حدثنا محمد بن الفضيل حدثنا الاعمش عن عطية عن ابى سعيد والاعمش عن حبيب بن ابى ثابت عن زيد بن ارقم قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم انى تارك فيكم ما  2 تمسكتم به لن تضلوا بعدى احدهما اعظم من الاخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء الى الارض وعترتى اههل بيتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علىّ الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفونى فيهما هذا حديث غريب



From the Musnad of Abd ibn Humayd

حدثنى يحيى بن عبدالحميد قال حدثنا شريك عن الركين عن القاسم بن حسان عن زيد بن ثابت قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم انى تارك فيكم ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله و عترتى اهل بيتى وانهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا على الحوض

 

From the M’ujam Saghir of Imam Tabarani:

حدثنا حسن بن مسلم بن الطبيب الصنعانى ثنا عبدالحميد بن صبيح ثنا يونس بن ارقم هارون بن سعد عن عطية عن ابى سعيد الخدرى عن النبى صلى الله عليه و سلم قال انى تارك فيكم الثقلين ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله وعترتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا على الحوض-لم يروه عن هارون بن سعد الا يونس




2. The second main reason to discard the ambiguity argument:

It is well known that the tradition is the one of the 'two weighty things' or 'Thaqalayn'. The tradition almost always starts with affirming plurality, whereby the Prophet says he is leaving behind two weighty things. The contention here is if he added or started with 'which if you hold onto, you will never go astray'. This line can not be found in Saheeh Muslim, but it can be found in many other versions. Therefore there can be no question Kathir b. Zayd was not confusing the first part of the tradition of Saheeh Muslim.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #7 on: June 26, 2019, 07:35:12 PM »
The next part of brother Noor-us-Sunnah's argument, and perhaps leading to his conclusion, surrounds the following points:

1. That Zayd b. Aqram has reported the most reliable and complete account.
2. That the additional versions contradict his more authentic account.
3. The issue of memory

Here is what he has written:

Quote
Our explanation is also supported and strenghtened by the authentic reports about Quran alone being source of guidance from (a). Ja’far bin Muhammad(Jafar as-Sadiq) from his father(Muhammad al Baqir) from Jabir bin Abdullah. [Sahih Muslim, vol 3, page 343 — 350, #2950(1218)] ; [Musannaf fi al-Ahadeeth wa al-Athar, by Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol 6, page 133, #30077] (b). Abdullah ibn Umar. [Musnad al-Bazzar, vol 12, page 298-300, #6135] ; (c). Abu Shurayh al-‘Adawi and (d). Jubair bin Mut’am. [Silsilah al-Sahiha, vol 2, page 230, #713] ; (e). Ubay ibn Ka’b. [Hilyat ul- Awliya, vol 1, page 253] ; (f). Also from the Sermon of Ali ibn Abi Talib reported in Shia book. [Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 1] ; (g). Last but not the least, the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam, which has been explained in detailed under Section (IX) of this article.

All these reports collectively support the fact that only Quran is to be adhered to gain guidance and not go astray and they collectively support our explanation for the ambiguous version. And this is a proper academic method to understand an ambiguous hadeeth, because an authentic hadeeth of Prophet(saws) which is clear and accurate explains the other ambiguous hadeeth having faulty text.

NOTE: Readers should notice that, we don’t find the mention of Prophet(saws) reminding of Ahlelbayt in this ambiguous/faulty version, so where did it disappear? It is quite clear that, the weak narrator who was known for making mistakes in his transmission, erroneously reported this version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn in an ambiguous/faulty form. We won’t find any faulty version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, which mentions adhering or holding both Quran and Ahlelbayt, also mentioning the reminder towards Ahlelbayt.

Most importantly, the Shia interpretation for the faulty version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, even contradicts Quran(4:59). Hence, the Shia interpretation is rejected.


1. Zayd b.Aqram and the version in Saheeh Muslim

On the authority of Yazid bin Haiyan on the authority of Zaid bin Aqram: “I went along with Husain bin Sabrah and ‘Amr bin Muslim to Zaid bin Arqam (May Allah be pleased with them) and, as we sat by his side, Husain said to him, “Zaid, you acquired great merits, you saw Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), listened to him talking, fought by his side in (different) battles, and offered Salat (prayer) behind him. Zaid, you have indeed earned great merits. Could you narrate to us what you heard from Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)?” Zaid said, “By Allah! I have grown old and have almost spent up my age and I have forgotten some of the things which I remembered in connection with Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), so accept what I narrate to you, do not compel me to narrate what I fail to narrate”. He then said, “One day Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) stood up to deliver a Khutbah at a watering place known as Khumm between Makkah and Al-Madinah. He praised Allah, extolled Him, and exhorted (us) and said, ‘Amma Ba’du. O people, I am a human being. I am about to receive a messenger (the angel of death) from my Rubb and I will respond to Allah’s Call, but I am leaving with you two weighty things: the first is the Book of Allah, in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it.’ He exhorted (us to hold fast) to the Book of Allah and then said, ‘The second is the members of my household, , I remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. remind you in the name of Allah about my Ahlul-Bayt. [1].

وعن يزيد بن حيان قال‏:‏ انطلقت أنا وحصين بن سبرة، وعمرو بن مسلم إلى زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهم، فلما جلسنا إليه قال له حصين‏:‏ لقد لقيت يا زيد خيرًا كثيرًا، رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وسمعت حديثه، وغزوت معه، وصليت خلفه‏:‏ لقد لقيت يا زيد خيرًا كثيرًا، حدثنا يا زيد ما سمعت من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال‏:‏ يا ابن أخى والله لقد كبرت سني، وقدم عهدي، ونسيت بعض الذي كنت أعي من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فماحدثتكم ، فاقبلوا، وما لا فلا تكلفونيه ثم قال‏:‏ قام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يومًا فينا خطيبًا بماء يدعى خماء بين مكة والمدينة، فحمد الله، وأثنى عليه، ووعظ، وذكر، ثم قال‏:‏ ‏”‏أما بعد، ألا أيها الناس، فإنما أنا بشر يوشك أن يأتي رسول ربي فأجيب، وأنا تارك فيكم ثقلين‏.‏ أولهما كتاب الله، فيه الهدى والنور، فخذوا بكتاب الله، واستمسكوا به‏.‏ فحث على كتاب الله، ورغب فيه ثم قال‏:‏ ‏”‏وأهل بيتي أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي، أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي‏

 
Assessment

There are some important facts that ought to be mentioned before any deeper analysis of this particular tradition. As mentioned previously, the first, and perhaps the most important, is that this version is only narrated by Zaid bin Aqram when he first complains about his advanced age and poor memory. No other companion has narrated it in this fashion, and out of all the versions, this has the fewest chains both in pure number and unique routes. We acknowledge this is not sufficient to discount it – and we are not attempting to claim this is inauthentic. To emphasise the extent of his memory loss, and advanced age, let us bring forth a tradition in Sunan Ibn Majah:

“Abdur-Rahman bin Abi Laila said: We said to Zaid bin Arqam: ‘Tell us a Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ).’ He said: ‘We have grown old and have forgotten, and (narrating) Ahadith from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) is difficult (not a simple matter).’”[5]

Interestingly for anyone other than the companions (who are given a free pass which undermines the entire objectivity of this debate) , the following (and rather logical) approach is used:

Our dear viewers may want to read what the position is on someone whose memory is said to have changed:

Ibn Kathir in ‘al-Bath al-Hathith’ said while speaking about people whose memory became weak due to different reasons (fear; illness; problem): “Whoever heard from such (narrators) before their change, his narrations are accepted, and if someone heard after, or there is a doubt (if he heard after or before) his reports are not accepted“.[6]  and  Hafidh al-Iraqi in ‘Hafidh al-Alai ‘al-Mukhtalatin’  said: “Ruling regarding those who changed in their memory (ikhtilat), his reports in such state are not accepted“. [7]

It is rather interesting that the companions are given a free pass, and not enlisted into the ‘Mukhtilat’ whereas non-companions may be. Nevertheless, all we argue is that Zaid was old, had complained but a notable decline in his memory, and this therefore makes it highly plausible to suggest he may have forgotten to include authentic expressions.

Some may argue Zayd only truthfully reported what he remembered in this case. Let us assume that was the case, if someone is so old they complain about having forgotten many things, even if they may sincerely claim to report only what they can accurately remember , is it not possibly due to their memory, they have been mistaken in doing so? In the medical world, it is extremely common for people to sincerely be convinced about a particular chain of events, only to have been mistaken.

Some examples of Ibn Umar setting a precedent in omitting an authentic expression or perhaps making an error:

Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as saying: The dead is punished because of his family’s weeping for him. When this was mentioned to ‘Aishah, she said: Ibn ‘Umar forgot and made a mistake. The Prophet (ﷺ) passed by grave and he said: The man in the grave is being punished while his family is weeping for him. She then recited: “No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another.” The narrator Abu Mu’awiyyah said: (The Prophet passed) by the grave of a Jew. [8]

Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar:  Allah’s Apostle said, “If someone keeps a dog neither for guarding livestock, nor for hunting, his good deeds will decrease (in reward) by two Qirats a day.’[9]
Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who kept a dog except one meant for watching the herd, or for hunting or for watching the fields. he lost two qirat of reward every day. Zuhri said: “The words of Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) were conveyed to Ibn Umar who said: May Allah have mercy upon Abu Huraira; he owned a field.” [10]

As we can see in the example above, Ibn Umar ommits what is an authentic expression to Sunnis, which is correctly preseved by Abu Huraira.

Evidence that Zayd committed authentic and important expressions:

Even according to TSN, versions of Hadith at-Thaqalayn which include the word 'They will never deviate from one another until they meet me at the pool of Kawthar' are widely reported and many of which are reliable. However, Zayd forgets to mention this very important expression, which itself is clear evidence even in his account, he has omitted event to Noor-us-Sunnah, an important phrase.



As we can see, in another version attributed to Zayd when he did not complain of memory problems (which is not the one found in Saheeh Muslim and sources quoting that same version), there is the additional phrase of 'and they will never deviate from one another until the lake (of kawthar).

TSN have graded multiple chains of this version as 'Hasan' in their study.



Summary

Considering the evidence presented above, it is not unreasonable to suggest that it is possible that Zaid bin Aqram could have omitted an authentic expression, due to his poor memory, which has been preserved in the many more unique and in cases reliable chains for the second version of the tradition. Sunnis should not see the first version as a contradiction to the second, but both are reliable with the second containing an authentic expression the first has omitted, and the third an expression the first and second may have omitted. 

References

[1] Saheeh Muslim Book 1, Hadith 346 (Sunnah.com) (and other sources)

[2] [Abu Bakr b. Abi ‘Asim, Ahmad b. ‘Amr b. al-Dhahhak b. Mukhlid al-Shaybani, Kitab al-Sunnah (al-Maktab al-Islami; 1st edition, 1400 H) [annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani], vol. 2, pp. 644-645, # 1558 

[3] Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Matalib al-Aliyah bi Zawaid al-Masanid al-Thamaniyyah (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah; 1414 H) [annotator: Prof. Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-A’zami], vol., 4, p. 65, # 3972 (The books are the Musnad of Ibn Rahwayh , the teacher of Bukhari, and also Ibn Abi Asim, there are also a number of other sources which will be presented later on).

[3.1] Abu Ja’far Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Salamah b. ‘Abd al-Malik b. Salmah al-Azdi al-Hajari al-Misri al-Tahawi, Sharh Mushkil al-Athar (Muasassat al-Risalah; 1st edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaut], vol. 5, p. 13, # 1760

[3.2] Ahmad b. ‘Ali b. Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Matalib al-Aliyah bi Zawaid al-Masanid al-Thamaniyyah (Beirut: Dar al-Ma’rifah; 1414 H) [annotator: Prof. Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-A’zami], vol., 4, p. 65, # 3972

[3.3] Ahmad b. Abi Bakr b. Isma’il al-Busiri, Itihaf al-Khiyarah al-Maharah bi Zawaid al-Masanid al-‘Ashra (Riyadh: Dar al-Watan; 1st edition, 1420 H), vol. 7, p. 210, # 6683

[3.4] ‘Ali b. Husam al-Din al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, Kanz al-‘Ummal fi Sunan al-Aqwal wa Af’al (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risalah; 1989 H), vol. 13, p. 121, # 36441

[4] Al-Mo’jam Al-Kabir [4980 & 4981],   Musnad Al-Bazzar: Musnad Zaid bin Arqam  [224]

[5] Sunan ibn Majah, Book 1, Hadith 26 / ENG: Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 25 (Darrusalam).

[6] Ibn Kathir in ‘al-Bath al-Hathith’  (page 668, Maktabatul Maarif)

[7] Hafidh al-Iraqi in Hafidh al-Alai ‘al-Mukhtalatin’ p 7. 
« Last Edit: June 26, 2019, 07:44:20 PM by whoaretheshia »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #8 on: June 26, 2019, 07:46:17 PM »
An additional point i would like to add about Kathir b.Zayd:

There are two narrators that individuals and non-scholars often claim are weak, the first is Kathir bin Zayd, who  has been given Tawthiq by Ibn ‘Ammar al-Musili and Ibn Hibban in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, viii, 300 and is classed as ‘Saduq (truthful) and makes mistakes’ (but reliable and accepted in Hadith) by Ibn Hajar.  It is pertinent here to note that someone being Saduq who makes mistakes does not degrade him to the level of a Dhai’f narrator. The science of Hadith is more nuanced than that. Rather, the weakness must be investigated for the severity, and context, and so and in this case, given the number of scholars who have graded this chain to as at least Hasan, he is not deemed to be a weak narrator by many scholars and most importantly, those who came later and collated the views of the previous ones (like Ibn Hajar).

If we take the example of Sharik, who is weaker than Kathir bin Zayd, and rather than just making mistakes, is said to have made many of them, even then we find  scholars may regard him to be Hasan narrator. Al-Dhahabi says regarding him:” I (al-Dhahabi) say: Sharik was hasan al-hadith (i.e. his ahadith are hasan).” This is despite Ibn Hajar writing in his Taqrib Al-Tahdhib : ““Sharik b. ‘Abd Allah al-Nakha’i al-Kufi al-Qadi, (resided) first at Wasit and then Kufah, Abu ‘Abd Allah: Saduq (very truthful), made a lot of mistakes”. References have not been provided given the name is sufficient to look into the dictionary of the famous and well known books of Rijal. Indeed if one performs research on Kathir bin Zayd, they will find that Ibn Khuzaymah has narrated many narrations with him, At-Tabari declared a chain containing him to be ‘Saheeh’, Ahmad ibn Hanbal has declared ‘ i do not see anything wrong with him’, Ibn Hiban has declares him Thiqah, as well as Yahya bin Ma’in and there are many more examples such as this.

The well respected Sunni Hadith website, ‘Hadithanswers.com’ notes:  “…Nevertheless, in the case in question (saduqun yukhti-u, or saduqun yahimu or saduqun lahu awham), such a narrator’s Hadiths can be sound(hasan), depending on the nature of the Hadith’s content and its topic of discussion.  Ref: [11]  Shaykh ‘Awwamah’s footnotes on Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Hadith: 723, 6028 and 6934





Unfortunately, lay people who produce articles and give their own subjective gradings based on a very simplistic understanding of the science of Rijal and narrator criticism and Hadith,  fail to apply a holistic approach. We do not deny some scholars might judge a narrator weak, while another may not, and methodology differs. However, there is no such principle that means a Saduq narrator that sometimes makes a mistake is automatically considered weak, but rather he may be considered Hasan.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #9 on: June 27, 2019, 01:08:51 AM »
Here is my feedback for brother WhoaretheShia's posts.

Upon Reading his replies, I felt that the brother was hasty in trying to answer back. And due to that he missed addressing several points, which could have neutralized the main points in his response. I'll try to highlight those in these feedback.

(i). In Post#4 brother "WhoaretheShia" , tried to argue that Kathir bin Zayd is not weak, keeping aside the fruitless discussion of showing why the criticism on Kathir bin Zayd is explained and preferred, I believe its better to discuss something which we both agree. I believe the Shia brother doesn't disagree with the fact that, Kathir bin Zayd, was declared as someone who made mistakes in his reports. So this must be kept it mind. Because the issue here is with the text of the report. Two of the five conditions for a hadeeth to be deemed reliable are that,  there shouldn't be any fault in the text and another is that it shouldn't go against the report narrated by stronger narrators. And in my previous response, I explained that how it doesn't fulfill these two conditions for the Sahih hadeeth.

(ii). Then in Post #6, The Shia brother, quoted a part from Shaykh Albani's explanation, while if you read his complete explanation, you won't agree to most of his points. So you can't pick and choose and reject what you dislike.  And not to forget, that Shaykh al-Albani authenticated the hadeeth in Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah, based on the Shahid of the hadeeth of Zaid bin Arqam in Sahih Muslim(4/356).

(iii). In post #7, He misunderstood my stance, He said:
Quote
His explanation is that Kathir b.Zayd, due to the fact he makes some mistakes, took the version in Saheeh Muslim where the words were used in singular to refer to the Quran alone, and perhaps accidentally added in 'Ahlulbayt' after.
I didn't mean to say that, Kathir bin Zayd accidentally added Ahlulbayt, but rather Kathir bin Zayd narrated it in a summarized and ambiguous form and not in an accurate form, which was narrated by Zayd bin Arqam in Sahih Muslim. And the ambiguous form is open for interpretation, and I explained it based on other authentic reports.

(iv). In Same post, He presented some other chains in support of the ambiguous version of Kathir bin Zayd, without pointing out the fact that all the chains he presented have weak narrators in them, which supports my stance and weakens his, because the version he is trying to back is coming only from unreliable narrators. While the explicit version in Sahih Muslim from Zaid bin Arqam is supported by other authentic reports, about Quran alone being source of guidance from (a). Ja’far bin Muhammad(Jafar as-Sadiq) from his father(Muhammad al Baqir) from Jabir bin Abdullah. [Sahih Muslim, vol 3, page 343 — 350, #2950(1218)] ; [Musannaf fi al-Ahadeeth wa al-Athar, by Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol 6, page 133, #30077] (b). Abu Shurayh al-‘Adawi and (c). Jubair bin Mut’am. [Silsilah al-Sahiha, vol 2, page 230, #713] ; (d). Also from the Sermon of Ali ibn Abi Talib reported in Shia book. [Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 1] ; (e). Last but not the least, the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam.

So any rational person who is seeking truth, would prefer to base his view over authentic and explicit reports. Instead of ambiguous report. Or atleast would prefer to interpret the ambiguous report in the light of other authentic reports, which mention Quran alone as source of guidance.

(v). In Post#8, the Shia brother has again misunderstood me, he thinks that I believe Zaid bin Arqam(in Muslim) narrated the COMPLETE event of Hadeeth Thaqalayn, but that's not true. I never claimed so, rather I have repeatedly said, that Zaid bin Arqam(in Muslim) narrated the most ACCURATE version of Thaqalayn in regards to sentence formation, which doesn't necessarily mean complete version. Here is what I said in the article:

"{the most authentic and clear version(in regards to the sentence formation/structure) is the version of Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn in Sahih Muslim"}.

I even explained this point in the same article as follows:
{in the accurate version of Sahih Muslim, we see that it has two verbs, Astamsiku bihi(adhere to it) and udhakkirukum(I remind you). These are two sentences, with two different verbs, and it doesn’t have (مَا/maa/which) in it. Moreover, in one of the report (مَا/maa/which) was used in reference to holding on Quran alone[Refer, Mustadrak al Hakim, vol 3, page 613, #6272], and there is no mention of Ahlelbayt in this report, which again proves the correctness of our explanation, that the command was to adhere/hold only one thing, that is Quran.}.

(vi). In same Post, the Shia brother goes on to cast doubts on the memory of Zaid bin Arqam, that he omitted certain details of Hadeeth Thaqalayn, while these arguments were already answered in the article on Youpuncturedtheark, I don't know why he overlooked the response.

As for Zaid bin Arqam omitting some details of Hadeeth Thaqalayn, then that doesn't change the meaning of Hadeeth. Our stance is that Zaid narrated the hadeeth accurately in regards to sentence formation, contrary to the ambiguous version which was narrated via weak narrators or the one who used to make mistakes.

As for casting doubts on the memory of Zaid bin Arqam because he didn't mention some details of the event, then the Shia brother from this standard should also, doubt the memory of all those narrators who missed mentioning "أذكركم الله في أهل بيتي" in the hadeeth, due to which the hadeeth became ambiguous.

As for the evidence in the accuracy of what Zaid narrated, we read:

حَدِّثْنَا يَا زَيْدُ مَا سَمِعْتَ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم – قَالَ – يَا ابْنَ أَخِي وَاللَّهِ لَقَدْ كَبِرَتْ سِنِّي وَقَدُمَ عَهْدِي وَنَسِيتُ بَعْضَ الَّذِي كُنْتُ أَعِي مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَمَا حَدَّثْتُكُمْ فَاقْبَلُوا وَمَا لاَ فَلاَ تُكَلِّفُونِيهِ ‏
Hussain(narrator) said:  Zayd! narrate to us what you heard from Allah’s Messenger(SAWS). He(Zayd) 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(SAWS), so accept whatever I narrate to you, and which I do not narrate do not compel me to do that.[Sahih Muslim #2408]

Point to note is that, even though Zayd(RA) was extremely careful and cautious about narrating the hadeeth from Prophet(SAWS), yet for the hadeeth which he remembered and narrated about Thaqalayn, HE TOLD THE QUESTIONER TO ACCEPT IT. What else can we ask for,  to believe in accuracy of the report he narrated. Out of caution, he narrated that event which he witnessed, in which he was sure and confident, which makes the hadeeth most accurate version.

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #10 on: June 27, 2019, 02:19:44 AM »
Thank you for the reply brother Noor-us-Sunnah. I will switch from addressing you directly and also in third person when i want to try to get others up to speed and not confused with our discussion, and i hope you do not mind.

Quote
(i). In Post#4 brother "WhoaretheShia" , tried to argue that Kathir bin Zayd is not weak, keeping aside the fruitless discussion of showing why the criticism on Kathir bin Zayd is explained and preferred, I believe its better to discuss something which we both agree. I believe the Shia brother doesn't disagree with the fact that, Kathir bin Zayd, was declared as someone who made mistakes in his reports. So this must be kept it mind. Because the issue here is with the text of the report. Two of the five conditions for a hadeeth to be deemed reliable are that,  there shouldn't be any fault in the text and another is that it shouldn't go against the report narrated by stronger narrators. And in my previous response, I explained that how it doesn't fulfill these two conditions for the Sahih hadeeth.

You had initially presented some of the statements of scholars of Jarh wa Ta'dil against Kathir b. Zayd, and used this as evidence he is to be regarded as a weak narrator based on the principle of disparagement taking precedence over praise. I explained to you that this isn't so clear cut , and scholars perform an in-depth analysis, particularly later ones like Ibn Hajar, Dahabi, and more modern ones like al-Albani, al-Arnaut. They know better about the principles of declaring a narrator acceptable or not, and they have examined the statements about him, evidences, potential biases, and taken it holistically and most of your major scholars have declared him Hasan-ul-Hadith.

If you want to argue that the narration is weak based on him contradicting a more authentic report, this must be declared explicitly as your only reason. I have to also comment here that i can only go by the works of your major scholars, and any reasonable Sunni/Salafi brother or sister here would be probably better advised to do likewise.

Quote
(ii). Then in Post #6, The Shia brother, quoted a part from Shaykh Albani's explanation, while if you read his complete explanation, you won't agree to most of his points. So you can't pick and choose and reject what you dislike.  And not to forget, that Shaykh al-Albani authenticated the hadeeth in Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah, based on the Shahid of the hadeeth of Zaid bin Arqam in Sahih Muslim(4/356).

There are a number of versions of Hadith at-Thaqalayn he authenticated, and it is pertinent here to note he authenticated the following chain:

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 أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال :إني تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله، سببه بيد الله، وسببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي. [Musnad Ibn Rahwayh, Sunan Ibn Asim, Aqeedah at-Tahawi]




First look at the fact he regards this tradition as a strong witness.

A translation from another brother: "And its narrators are (all) trustworthy except for Yazid b. Kathir, for I do not recognise him. And the main suspicion is that it is corrupted upon the printer or the scribe. God knows best. Then it occurred in the mind that perhaps it became flipped upon one of them and that the correct is Kathir b. Zayd. Then I became sure of that after I returned to the books of rijal and found his mention amongst the shaykhs of `Amir al-`Aqdi, and amongst the narrators from Muhammad b. `Umar b. `Ali."

Al-Albani has graded chains with Kathir b. Zayd as 'Hasan': https://sunnah.com/urn/1293060 and https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/21/40

So al-Albani has regarded the chain to be independently 'Hasan', and has followed another major scholar of Hadith, al-Arnaut, as well as Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.

Given that al-Albani has taken a view of authenticating the tradition by Sanad, you initially made a claim that this does not mean he considered the text reliable. However, given he considers the text reliable as well as the chain, it is obvious his interpretation of it will have to be one influenced by his world view as a Sunni/Salafi scholar. He is hardly going to take the clear meaning of the tradition and interpret it as it should be done, and as the Shia do and i hardly have to accept his total view. Despite this, i again have to stress Al-Albani's following comments make it clear he regards the Matn to be reliable, as well as the Sanad:

"the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an, is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…”

End quote from Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).

This interpretation is at complete odds with the narrative of TSN and Youpuncturedtheark. I don't blame you for trying to weaken the chain of narrators and content of the Hadith, because it is apparent that the clear meaning is completely in favour of the Quran and Ahlulbayt being the two most superior sources of guidance to the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw), and adds enormous weight to the declaration of Ali b. Abi Talib at Ghadir-Khumm, which incidentally is part of the same sermon.


Quote
In Same post, He presented some other chains in support of the ambiguous version of Kathir bin Zayd, without pointing out the fact that all the chains he presented have weak narrators in them, which supports my stance and weakens his, because the version he is trying to back is coming only from unreliable narrators. While the explicit version in Sahih Muslim from Zaid bin Arqam is supported by other authentic reports, about Quran alone being source of guidance from (a). Ja’far bin Muhammad(Jafar as-Sadiq) from his father(Muhammad al Baqir) from Jabir bin Abdullah. [Sahih Muslim, vol 3, page 343 — 350, #2950(1218)] ; [Musannaf fi al-Ahadeeth wa al-Athar, by Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol 6, page 133, #30077] (b). Abu Shurayh al-‘Adawi and (c). Jubair bin Mut’am. [Silsilah al-Sahiha, vol 2, page 230, #713] ; (d). Also from the Sermon of Ali ibn Abi Talib reported in Shia book. [Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 1] ; (e). Last but not the least, the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam.

The purpose of presenting the other chains despite knowing they are not authentic to you was not for the chains themselves, but the Arabic. You had claimed the usage of the Arabic in the report was very ambigious and the explanation for it was that Kathir b. Zayd made a mistake. However, you admitted this was still a perfectly acceptable usage of the Arabic, and i presented several other chains of narrators with the very same usage independent of Kathir b.Zayd, which is evidence many others widely used this style of speech , perhaps for brevity or eloquence.

After further analyzing brother Noor-us-Sunnah's argument, it appears it entirely hinges on his conjecture of the Arabic words and their usage, which he tries to then present as contradicting the other reports. However, an analysis of the version in Saheeh Muslim and the version presented here demonstrates there is no contradiction at all.

1. In the version of Saheeh Muslim, the Prophet says he is leaving behind two weighty things, the Quran, to which he then says is light and guidance and that we must hold fast onto it and adhere to it.

2. In the version presented on this thread, the Prophet states he is leaving behind two weighty things, which if we hold onto, we will never go astray, the Quran, and his Ahlulbayt.

It is clear that the version in Sahih Muslim doesn't contradict the one in the Musnad of ibn Rahwayh/Aqeedah at-Tahawi. Rather, Zayd b. Aqram merely omits 'if you hold onto them you will never go astray' as well as 'and they will never deviate from one another until the lake-fount'. Instead, he goes onto describing that the Prophet said the Quran was light and guidance and to adhere to it, and he repeated three times reminding them and Allah as a witness about his Ahlulbayt. 

Here are the sermons combined: "I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray. The first is the Book of Allah, in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it. 'The second is the members of my household, I remind you in the name of Allah about by Ahlulbayt, I remind you in the name of Allah about by Ahlulbayt,I remind you in the name of Allah about by Ahlulbayt, and they will never deviate from one another until they meet me at the lake-fount (of Kawthar in Janat-ul-Firdaus)."

There are absolutely no contradictions by any stretch of the imagination between the versions. It is clear therefore that Zayd b.Aqram narrates an incomplete version. One can not claim he narrates a more accurate version because his version does not contradict with any of the others, nor do the others contain words which implies confusion in text. It is patently clear the other versions contain distinct lines Zayd omits, and Zayd elaborates on what the others have not done so.

The other reports do not elaborate on what the Prophet said about the Quran, or about mentioning the Ahlulbayt three times because they merely summarize what the Prophet said, in that we should hold onto two weighty things which if we do so we will never go astray, which are the Quran and his Ahlulbayt, which will never deviate until they meet him at the pool of Kauthar.

Once more, Zayd reported he was very old, forgot a number of traditions, and was distressed about his memory loss. He may have sincerely only reported what he thought he remembered accurately, but many who lose memory may sincerely be mistaken. Indeed, the Sahaba are given a free pass and anyone else would have been weakened by Sunni scholars of Hadith on account of this, which undermines the entire objectivity of the debate. Having said that, assuming he reported accurately what he remembered, it is clear he omitted two phrases which we find in other authentic reports, and this may have been due to his memory.




« Last Edit: June 27, 2019, 02:28:45 AM by whoaretheshia »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #11 on: June 27, 2019, 10:13:27 AM »
If you want to argue that the narration is weak based on him contradicting a more authentic report, this must be declared explicitly as your only reason.
We both agree that this narrator used to make mistakes. And a report or the interpretation of a report which goes against an explicit report that was narrator by stronger reports would be rejected.

There are a number of versions of Hadith at-Thaqalayn he authenticated, and it is pertinent here to note he authenticated the following chain:

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 أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال :إني تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله، سببه بيد الله، وسببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي. [Musnad Ibn Rahwayh, Sunan Ibn Asim, Aqeedah at-Tahawi]


The discussion there was about Albani's explanation of the hadeeth, which is about the text, as for the chain, then we agree that the narrator in there was saduq but used to make mistakes. And since you are bringing up the grading of chain from Albani, then here is what Farid had to say.

Quote
2) He often grades the hadith with little attention to wording or false additions.

https://twitter.com/Farid_0v/status/1117046020683202561

First look at the fact he regards this tradition as a strong witness.
Scholars some times, do not pay attention to the wording of the hadeeth which they use as Shahid. Here is the example of Zubair Ali Za'ee who initially authenticated a report based on Shahid, then eventually retracted his opinion stating the text is not same.
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/al-hadeeth-vol-100-page-20-by-zubair-ali-zaee.jpg

Secondly, Albani's style of grading was a bit different, he would even use weak reports as acceptable Shahid, to strengthen a report. Here is one example:
Here you see Albani himself weakened a report: https://sunnah.com/abudawud/6/7
But here you see ALbani's using this report as Shahid: https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/salat-al-taraweeh-page-9.jpg

Moreover, you cannot make Qiyas over the grading of Albani, because Albani if he wanted could have stated the hadeeth as Hasan, instead of Isnad Hasan, when he knew that both are taken differently. And as I said, his explanation is because the text is ambiguous and he didn't find it an issue hence, interpreted it, which you don't agree with in totality. But the reason I'm pointing out its ambiguity as an issue because the interpretation given by Shias, is going against other authentic reports and even Quran.


The purpose of presenting the other chains despite knowing they are not authentic to you was not for the chains themselves, but the Arabic. You had claimed the usage of the Arabic in the report was very ambigious and the explanation for it was that Kathir b. Zayd made a mistake. However, you admitted this was still a perfectly acceptable usage of the Arabic, and i presented several other chains of narrators with the very same usage independent of Kathir b.Zayd, which is evidence many others widely used this style of speech , perhaps for brevity or eloquence.
You again missed the mark. You are using the text as witness, which was reported EXCLUSIVELY from Weak and unreliable narrators. While this goes against Authentic reports narrated from various other narrators which shows that Quran alone was to be adhered.

Moreover, Here we have another report which, has (maa/which) in it and it again exclusively refers to holding Quran, there is no mention of Ahlulbayt here, and this nullifies your case of using reports from weak narrators, because those reports too become ambiguous due to presence of external evidence, where we find in authentic reports that Quran alone is to be held as source of guidance.
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mustadrak-al-hakim-vol-3-page-613-6272.jpg


After further analyzing brother Noor-us-Sunnah's argument, it appears it entirely hinges on his conjecture of the Arabic words and their usage, which he tries to then present as contradicting the other reports. However, an analysis of the version in Saheeh Muslim and the version presented here demonstrates there is no contradiction at all.
Other reports, aren't just from Zaid bin Arqam, but from multiple Sahaba, and in all of these we find Quran alone being source that needs to be adhered. I mentioned those in previous post, but you conveniently skipped.

other authentic reports, about Quran alone being source of guidance from (a). Ja’far bin Muhammad(Jafar as-Sadiq) from his father(Muhammad al Baqir) from Jabir bin Abdullah. [Sahih Muslim, vol 3, page 343 — 350, #2950(1218)] ; [Musannaf fi al-Ahadeeth wa al-Athar, by Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol 6, page 133, #30077] (b). Abu Shurayh al-‘Adawi and (c). Jubair bin Mut’am. [Silsilah al-Sahiha, vol 2, page 230, #713] ; (d). Also from the Sermon of Ali ibn Abi Talib reported in Shia book. [Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 1] ; (e). Last but not the least, the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam.


1. In the version of Saheeh Muslim, the Prophet says he is leaving behind two weighty things, the Quran, to which he then says is light and guidance and that we must hold fast onto it and adhere to it.

2. In the version presented on this thread, the Prophet states he is leaving behind two weighty things, which if we hold onto, we will never go astray, the Quran, and his Ahlulbayt.

It is clear that the version in Sahih Muslim doesn't contradict the one in the Musnad of ibn Rahwayh/Aqeedah at-Tahawi. Rather, Zayd b. Aqram merely omits 'if you hold onto them you will never go astray' as well as 'and they will never deviate from one another until the lake-fount'. Instead, he goes onto describing that the Prophet said the Quran was light and guidance and to adhere to it, and he repeated three times reminding them and Allah as a witness about his Ahlulbayt.
Due to not reading the article on Youpuncturedtheark properly, the Shia brother is making his claims based on conjecture. While, the reports from Zaid bin Arqam, does mention about not going astray, and even that too, Quran alone was mentioned.

Here are some examples:
 Example 1: https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-muslim-vol-6-page-269-62282408.jpg

Example 2: https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sunan-al-kubra-by-al-nasai-vol-7-page-320-8119.jpg

Example 3: https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-ibn-khuzaymah-vol-4-page-63-2357.jpg

Example 4: https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sharh-usool-itiqaad-ahlus-sunnah-wal-jamaaah-vol-1-page-79-88.jpg

Example 5: Its from weak narrators, yet it mentions Quran alone to be held not to be misguided. https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mujam-al-tabrani-al-kabeer-vol-3-page-64-2681.jpg

Example 6: similar to above https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mujam-al-tabrani-al-kabeer-vol-3-page-65-2683.jpg

So the explanation you made based on conjecture collapses when we see the reliable reports singling out Quran as the source holding it people will not be misguided. And as said before this is even supported by another authentic report,

وقد تركتُ فيكم ما لن تضلوا بعده إن اعتصمتُم به . كتابَ اللهِ .

[I have left among you the Book of Allah, and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray.(Sahih Muslim)
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-muslim-vol-3-page-350-29501218.jpg


The other reports do not elaborate on what the Prophet said about the Quran, or about mentioning the Ahlulbayt three times because they merely summarize what the Prophet said
Exactly, and this summarized version came us through narrators who were either weak or the one who used to make mistakes. And this summarized version is weak, and IT'S MISinterpretation by Shias goes against Quran version of Thaqalayn and other reliable reports, but it's correct interpretation doesn't.

Once more, Zayd reported he was very old, forgot a number of traditions, and was distressed about his memory loss. He may have sincerely only reported what he thought he remembered accurately, but many who lose memory may sincerely be mistaken. Indeed, the Sahaba are given a free pass and anyone else would have been weakened by Sunni scholars of Hadith on account of this, which undermines the entire objectivity of the debate. Having said that, assuming he reported accurately what he remembered, it is clear he omitted two phrases which we find in other authentic reports, and this may have been due to his memory.
Firstly, you are basing your views on assumptions. While on other hand Zaid was confident in what he narrated(accuracy) AND as WITNESS we have reports from other Sahaba as well, which i just quoted, proving that Quran alone is to be adhered.

Secondly, You are assuming that Zaid become old he could have omitted some parts, but be honest and tell us doesn't the understanding of Zaid bin Arqam(RA) go against your interpretation? Because Zaid in his explanation said that Ahlalbayt are those upon whom Sadaqa acceptance is forbidden, it's a general rule, which encompasses fallible members too. If Zaid understood the hadeeth like Shias are misinterpreting then, Zaid would have never believe that it encompasses fallibles.

Moreover, you used a weak report from Jabir bin Adbullah as a witness, but do you know that as per authentic report when Imam Baqir went to Jabir to ask about a hadeeth, he led him in prayer in his home, while Prophet(SAWS) said, that the one who is more knowledgeable should lead the prayer. Seems even Jabir didn't believe in divine Imamate of Imam al-Baqir, and all these proves showing the incorrectness of Shia misinterpretation.

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #12 on: June 27, 2019, 08:45:28 PM »
Quote
We both agree that this narrator used to make mistakes. And a report or the interpretation of a report which goes against an explicit report that was narrator by stronger reports would be rejected.

I think it is important to clarify for the dear readers that when major scholars such as Ibn Hajar, al-Albani, al-Arnaut, make a verdict about a narrator or a particular chain of narrators, they take into account all of the evidences prior and form a holistic judgement.

You initially tried to claim Kathir b. Zayd was a weak narrator on account of some disparagement made about him, to which i replied that major scholars who formed an overall view of the narrators such as the aforementioned knew better than you and i and if they almost unanimously regard a narrator as Hasan-ul-Hadith, on an online forum like this neither of us have a right to go against their expert view and declare a narrator weak, by Sunni standards.

It is also worth mentioning here that Kathir b. Zayd narrates traditions to a standard most of your major scholars will deem Hasan, and it is proof just like the Saheeh. He is Saduq who makes mistakes, but this means he is a truthful narrator who occasionally makes the mistakes, and not one regarded as making many mistakes. The only way one would discount a report from him is if we found a stronger report contradicting his. You have tried to claim this is the case, and i have already demonstrated why there is absolutely no contradiction between the various versions, and they can actually be taken together.

Quote
Scholars some times, do not pay attention to the wording of the hadeeth which they use as Shahid. Here is the example of Zubair Ali Za'ee who initially authenticated a report based on Shahid, then eventually retracted his opinion stating the text is not same.
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/al-hadeeth-vol-100-page-20-by-zubair-ali-zaee.jpg

Secondly, Albani's style of grading was a bit different, he would even use weak reports as acceptable Shahid, to strengthen a report. Here is one example:
Here you see Albani himself weakened a report: https://sunnah.com/abudawud/6/7
But here you see ALbani's using this report as Shahid: https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/salat-al-taraweeh-page-9.jpg

Moreover, you cannot make Qiyas over the grading of Albani, because Albani if he wanted could have stated the hadeeth as Hasan, instead of Isnad Hasan, when he knew that both are taken differently. And as I said, his explanation is because the text is ambiguous and he didn't find it an issue hence, interpreted it, which you don't agree with in totality. But the reason I'm pointing out its ambiguity as an issue because the interpretation given by Shias, is going against other authentic reports and even Quran.

I find that in our discussions, you raise some valid points but they have no connection or relevance to the particular evidence i am presenting.

The late al-Albani had a principle of strengthening a collection of many weak chains on account of them acting as witnesses for one another, and i have yet to present him doing that for the many multiple weak chains.  However, there were other cases where he outright graded a chain as Hasan.



The late al-Albani regards the tradition for the version presented on this thread itself as a strong witness, and not that he has used many weak reports in addition to this report and collectively elevates them. He has declared this particular chain and report as strong on its own, and if you read further, he declares the individuals in the chain as trustworthy, and beyond that, even mentions that Yazid b. Kathir is actually Kathir b. Zayd, a narrator he has in many of his other grading regarded as Hasan-ul-Hadith. It isn't just him, but al-Arnaut and Ibn Hajar who have absolutely no problems with the chain.

So Farid mentioning he often grades with little attention to the wording is of no relevance here. What Farid is talking about here is when he grades a narration with a weak chain and variant wording as 'Saheeh' based on a narration with a strong chain about the same topic an issue. The issue here is that he has outright graded the chain as 'Hasan'. If one now claims he regarded the chain as reliable but not the variant wording, he clearly explains why he takes the wording as well as the chain of narrators.

He never at one point claims the text is ambiguous, this is an argument with due respect, you are pushing which i feel has no foundation or relevance, nor has it caught the attention of scholars commentating. He also would not be making bold claims like this about ambiguous text:

"the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an, is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…

End quote from Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).



To summarize:

1. Kathir b. Zayd is regarded as at least Hasan-ul-Hadith by al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, and accusing him of being a weak narrator has no weight for most Sunnis.

2. Al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar asl-Asqalani graded the chain of narrators at least to a Hasan level.

3. As for the Matn, al-Albani and many others accepted it, and never claimed it is ambiguous, nor did he at any point claim it contradicts any other version, and it is patently clear as proven in previous posts there are no contradictions.

In my next post, given it has now been proven that most Sunnis would regard the Matn and Sanad as acceptable as per their major scholars of Hadith, why Youpuncturedtheark/brother Noor-us-Sunnah is incorrect when he claims it contradicts more reliable reports. The only way to weaken a hadith that is Hasan is by showing a stronger report that contradicts it, which is what the brother is now trying to do.

I would just like to add here that i appreciate why the brother is doing this, and why many, many articles online have tried to do so. When the Prophet (saw) says something like:“I have left behind over you (al-Thaqalayn) that which if you hold fast to it you will never go astray: the Book of Allah – one end of which is in the Hand of Allah and the other in your hands– and my Ahl al-Bayt", the meaning is pretty clear and it is completely in favor of the Shia narrative. That is why many attempts have been made to weaken it, because it would make no sense for the Prophet to claim something like this given the Sunni narrative.

"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #13 on: June 27, 2019, 09:14:09 PM »
To summarize:

1. Kathir b. Zayd is regarded as at least Hasan-ul-Hadith by al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, and accusing him of being a weak narrator has no weight for most Sunnis.
You are repeating the arguments that have already been answered. Katheer bin Zayd used to make mistakes. That’s my point. If you disagree then say it. Otherwise no need ti repeat answered arguments. 


3. As for the Matn, al-Albani and many others accepted it, and never claimed it is ambiguous, nor did he at any point claim it contradicts any other version, and it is patently clear as proven in previous posts there are no contradictions.
if it wasn’t ambiguous then there was no need to give its interpretations which he did. Even I wouldn’t have a problem with the text, when I know of it’s proper interpretation, but the issue is when people misinterpret it, that is when they need to reminded that there is a stronger and proper version which refutes the MISinterpretation that is being done.

And as for Albani you  can’t have your cake and eat it too. you can’t accept the grading of Albani and reject the his explanation because May in that case Albani too would have dealt with you the same way I’m dealing.

And not to forget one of the most strongest evidence is the understanding of the Sahabi who narrated it, and I’m basing my view on just any scholar , but rather on the understanding of the Sahabi who narrated this report.

Youpuncturedtheark/brother Noor-us-Sunnah is incorrect when he claims it contradicts more reliable reports. The only way to weaken a hadith that is Hasan is by showing a stronger report that contradicts it, which is what the brother is now trying to do.
Again I repeat what I stated previously. What is contradicting the authentic reports is the Shia MISinterpretation for the ambiguous report. So what got refuted was your MISinterpretation, otherwise , even I explained this hadeeth in a proper way.

And I have proven my case in the light of several authentic reports from Multiple Sahaba which state that ONLY Quran was to be adhered to not go astray. And in addition to that the understanding the of the Sahaba who narrated it, which voids the Shia MISinterpretation, as we can see you are conveniently trying to dodge the point of the understanding of the Sahaba.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #14 on: June 27, 2019, 10:24:19 PM »
Also I would like to add that there are some high ranking and prominent Sunni Scholars who explained this hadeeth to mean love and taking care of Ahlelbayt. The Shia brother is portraying as if what I’m presenting is an isolated view.  Here are some Scholarly explanations for hadeeth thaqalayn.

The view of some Sunni scholars regarding Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn:

(i). Imam Muhammad bin al-Hussain al-Ajuri(d. 360 A.H) after mentioning Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, said:

قَالَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ: فَيَدُلُ عَلَى أَنَّ خُطْبَةَ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي حَجَّةِ الْوَدَاعِ بِمِنًى , وَأَمَرَ أُمَّتَهُ بِالتَّمَسُّكِ بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَبِسُنَّتِهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ , وَفِي رِجُوعِهِ مِنْ هَذِهِ الْحِجَّةِ بِغَدِيرِ خَمٍّ فَأَمَرَ أُمَّتَهَ بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَالتَّمَسُّكِ بِهِ وَبِمَحَبَّةِ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ , وَبِمُوَالَاةِ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِي طَالِبٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ , وَتَعْرِيفِ النَّاسِ شَرَفَ عَلِيٍّ وَفَضْلِهِ عِنْدَهُ , يَدُلُّ الْعُقَلَاءَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ عَلَى أَنَّهُ وَاجِبٌ عَلَى كُلِّ مُسْلِمٍ أَنْ يَتَمَسَّكَ بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ , وَبِسُنَّةِ رَسُولِهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ , وَسُنَّةِ الْخُلَفَاءِ الرَّاشِدِينَ الْمَهْدِيِّنَ , وَبِمَحَبَّتِهِمْ وَبِمَحَبَّةِ أَهْلِ بَيْتِهِ الطَّيِّبِينَ , وَالتَّعَلُّقِ بِمَا كَانُوا عَلَيْهِ مِنَ الْأَخْلَاقِ الشَّرِيفَةِ , وَالِاقْتِدَاءِ بِهِمْ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ , فَمَنْ كَانَ هَكَذَا , فَهُوَ عَلَى طَرِيقٍ مُسْتَقِيمٍ

This is the evidence that the Prophet(SAWS) gave his farewell sermon in Minaa and commanded the Ummah to hold fast to The Qur’an and Sunnah. And while returning back from Hajj, at Ghadeer khumm, he ordered the people to hold fast to the Book of Allah and to preserve love and compassion with Ahlel Bayt, and to hold Ali bin Abi Talib(RA) in high regard. He enlightened people about the virtues and honorable status of Ali(RA), and guided the wise and intelligent Muslims to strongly adhere to The Book and the Sunnah and the way of the rightly guided caliphs, and to show their love for them and reverence for Ahlel bayt, moreover, to imitate and follow their outstanding traits, such a person will be upon the straight path. [al-Shariah by Ajuri, vol 3, page 351 – 352, #1765]; another edition [al-Shariah by Ajuri, vol 5, page 2221 – 2222, #1706].

(ii). Imam al-Qurtubi in regards to hadeeth al-Thaqalayn said: “This advice and urging in the strongest terms implies that it is obligatory to respect his family and love them. This highlights the obligation of the Muslims towards them and leaves no excuse for anyone not to do it.” [Faydh al Qadeer by al-Manawi, vol 3, page 14 ; Ali ibn Abi talib, page 122-123 by Ali Muhammad Sallabi].

(iii). Shaykh Ali Muhammad as-Sallabi stated in his book:

What is proven in Saheeh Muslim is that the command was to adhere to the Book of Allah, and the instruction was to show respect and kindness to Ahlelbayt, as we have seen in the hadith of Zayd ibn Arqam in Muslim. The Prophet(saws) enjoined adherence to the Book of Allah, then he said: “And the people of my household. I remind you of Allah with regard to the people of my household, I remind you of Allah with regard to the people of my household, I remind you of Allah with regard to the people of my household”. What he(saws) enjoined was adherence to the Quran. With regard to Ahlelbayt, the Prophet(saws) enjoined taking care of them and giving them their rights, which had been granted to them by Allah(swt).(See: Haqbat min al-Tareekh, page 203). [Source: Ali ibn Abi Talib, Ali Muhammad as-sallabi, vol 2, page 412 – 413 (eng), (Arabic)].

(iv). Dr. Ali Ahmad al-Saloos, who discussed the speech at Ghadeer and the advice to adhere to the Quran and Sunnah. He studied the reports about adhering to the Quran and Sunnah and the reports about adhering to the Quran and the family of the Prophet(saws) and examined them critically, then he said: “From the above, we can see that the hadith of the two weighty matters is one of the hadiths which are sound in both chain of narration and text. However, of the eight reports which enjoin adhering to the family of the Prophet(saws) alongside the noble Quran, not one of them is free of some weakness in the chain of narration”.  (See: Ma’a Al-Shia al-Ithna Asharia fi al-Usool wa al-Furoo, vol 1, page 129). [Source: Ali ibn Abi Talib, by Ali Muhammad as-sallabi, vol 2, page 411 (eng), (Arabic)].

(v). Al-Sindi said in the explanation of, ‘My Ahlelbayt:’ It was as if the Prophet(saws) made them equal in importance to his position. Just as in his(saws) life, it was him and the Qu’ran after his death. It was his family and the Qu’raan. But it means that we must abide by their love and position, not abiding to their orders and actions. (Source: Jamia Tirmidhi Sunan Al -Tirmidhi. Vol. 6, Pg. # 335).

(vi). Shaykh al-Islam Ahmed ibn Taymiyyah stated:

However, as for the term ‘al’Itrah’, we find in Saheeh of Muslim narrated Zayd ibn Arqam that he said; The Messenger of Allah(saws) spoke to us at a ghadeer Khumm located between Mekka and al Medina and He said; “I am leaving among you the two weighty things one of them is greater than the other, the Book of Allah(swt)” and incited us to adhere to it and He said; ”My progeny whom they are my Household, by Allah I remind you of my household, by Allah I remind you of my household, by Allah I remind you of my household” and in here lies the order to follow the Qur’aan and that He recommended the nation to take care of His Household and as for His saying; ”If you adhere to it than you would never astray after, the Book of Allah (swt) and my Itra (Family)”, it was narrated by al Tirmidhi and Ahmad ibn Hanbal said it is weak. (Source: Bayan Talbis al-Jahmiyyah. Vol. 8. Pg. # 230 – 231).

Note: Not to forget the understanding of Sahabi which supports the view I presented.

TOAA

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #15 on: June 28, 2019, 05:48:11 AM »
Zayd ibn Arqam,Zayd ibn Thabit and other narrators of hadith Al-thaqalayn had their own students,their own narrations and their own fiqh views independent of any Ahl-Bayt member.None of them viewed Ali or his sons as the sole sources of Islamic teaching.

In short,Shia understanding of the hadith goes againts the understanding of the primary eye-witnesses.

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #16 on: July 05, 2019, 06:20:39 PM »
In the name of Allah,

Salam,

Time permitting i will address all of the posts i have not done so already, however i'd like to share this for mutual reflection:

Al-Albani, one of the great modern day Sunni-Salafi scholars of Hadith [Who authenticated the second version]: “What is specifically meant by the members of the household is the righteous scholars among them, who adhere to the Qur’an and Sunnah.  Imam Abu Ja‘far at-Tahhaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The “family” are the members of his household (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) who adhere to his religion and follow in his footsteps. Conclusion: the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an, is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…”  [22]

Imam Nawawi:”The scholars said: The two have been called Thaqalayn to show their ealtedness and the greatness of their importance. It has also been said that the word is used to show the heaviness of the (responsibility to) act by their instructions.” [23]

Al-Zamakhshari states: Jinn and man have been called the Two Weighty Things (i.e. Thaqalaan, as in Qur’an 55:31) because both of them dwell on the earth, and are actually the two most important beings on it. The Qur’an and the itrah have been likened to them because the good health and survival of the religion is dependent upon them, just as the survival of the earth is dependent upon the existence of jinn and man on it. ” [24]

Ibn Athir:” The two (i.e. Qur’an and Ahl al-Bayt) have been called Thaqalayn (i.e. the Two Weighty Things)because holding firmly onto them and acting by their instructions is a heavy (responsibility), and it is said that everything that is weighty is precious. The two have been called Thaqalayn in recognition of their authority and importance.”  [25]

Shaykh Hasan al-Saqqaf: Holding firmly onto the Ahl al-Bayt (as in hadith Thaqalayn) means loving them,defending their rights, copying their manners, following their guidance and conduct, acting by their narrations (of the Sunnah), basing one’s religion upon their opinions, statements and jurisprudence and to prefer them above all others.” [26]

Mullah Ali al-Qari :“Holding firmly onto the Ahl al-Bayt (as in Hadith Thaqalayn) means loving them, defening their rights, acting by their  narrations (of the Sunnah) and basing one’s religion upon their words.”  [27]

Shaykh al-Munawi states: “The Holy Prophet (pbuh) made the Holy Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt his successors and instructed his Ummah to be kind to them both, to place their rights above their own and to hold onto them both in the religion.”[28]

Al-Sindi: “It was as if the Prophet (saw) made them equal in importance to his position. Just as in his (pbuh) life, it was him and the Qu’raan after his death. It was his family and the Qu’raan. But it means that we must abide by their love and position, not abiding to their orders and actions. [29]

Note: Bizarrely, al-Sindi admits that the noble Quran and the Ahlulbayt are on equal position and in place of the Prophet (saw) after his death, and then manages to claim that this does not mean obedience. It is clear that if they are equal in importance to his position after his death, this denotes we obey them and adhere to their commands.

On the statement ‘and they will never deviate from one another until they reach the lake-fount”

Ibn Taymiyyah: “The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said concerning his family: “They and the Book will never be separated until they both come to him at the Cistern.” And he is the most truthful one, so this indicates that the consensus of the (Prophet’s) family constitutes proof. This is the view of a number of our companions, and it was mentioned by al-Qaadi in al-Mu‘tamad.” [30]

Interestingly, Al-Albani when discussing a version which has ‘Sunnah’ in place of Ahlulbayt, makes a very interesting admission:

“Rather, it is obligatory to consider the Book and the Sunnah as a single source, with no difference between them both, as indicated in the statement of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him: “I have been given the Qur’an and its likeness with it”, that is the Sunnah, and his statement:“Both shall never separate until they meet me at the Lake-Fount.”  [31]



[22] Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).

[23] Sharh Sahih al-Muslim, Vol. 15, p. 180

[24] Al-Faiq fi Gharib al-Hadith, Vol. 1, p. 150

[25] Al-Nihayah fi Gharib al-Hadith, Vol. 1, p. 216

[26]  Sahih Sharh al-Aqidat al-Tahawiyah, p. 653

[27]  Mirqat al-Mafatih, Vol. 9, p. 3974

[28] Fayd al-Qadeer, Vol. 3, p. 20

[29] Footnotes by Shuayb’al-Arnaut quoting al-Sindi in  Jamia Tirmidhi Sunan Al -Tirmidhi. Vol. 6, Pg. # 335.

[30] Source: Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (7/395)

[31] Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman Ahmad b. Shu’ayb al-Nasai, al-Mujtaba min al-Sunan (Halab: Maktab al-Matbu’at al-Islamiyyah; 2nd edition, 1406 H) [annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani], vol. 5, p. 153, # 2736]]
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 06:21:56 PM by whoaretheshia »
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

Noor-us-Sunnah

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #17 on: July 06, 2019, 12:16:34 AM »
In the name of Allah,

Salam,

Time permitting i will address all of the posts i have not done so already, however i'd like to share this for mutual reflection:

Al-Albani, one of the great modern day Sunni-Salafi scholars of Hadith [Who authenticated the second version]: “What is specifically meant by the members of the household is the righteous scholars among them, who adhere to the Qur’an and Sunnah.  Imam Abu Ja‘far at-Tahhaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The “family” are the members of his household (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) who adhere to his religion and follow in his footsteps. Conclusion: the mention, in this hadith, of the members of his household, alongside the Qur’an, is like the mention of the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs alongside the Sunnah (way) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadith: “I urge you to adhere to my way (Sunnah) and the way of the Rightly Guided Caliphs…”  [22]

Imam Nawawi:”The scholars said: The two have been called Thaqalayn to show their ealtedness and the greatness of their importance. It has also been said that the word is used to show the heaviness of the (responsibility to) act by their instructions.” [23]

Al-Zamakhshari states: Jinn and man have been called the Two Weighty Things (i.e. Thaqalaan, as in Qur’an 55:31) because both of them dwell on the earth, and are actually the two most important beings on it. The Qur’an and the itrah have been likened to them because the good health and survival of the religion is dependent upon them, just as the survival of the earth is dependent upon the existence of jinn and man on it. ” [24]

Ibn Athir:” The two (i.e. Qur’an and Ahl al-Bayt) have been called Thaqalayn (i.e. the Two Weighty Things)because holding firmly onto them and acting by their instructions is a heavy (responsibility), and it is said that everything that is weighty is precious. The two have been called Thaqalayn in recognition of their authority and importance.”  [25]

Shaykh Hasan al-Saqqaf: Holding firmly onto the Ahl al-Bayt (as in hadith Thaqalayn) means loving them,defending their rights, copying their manners, following their guidance and conduct, acting by their narrations (of the Sunnah), basing one’s religion upon their opinions, statements and jurisprudence and to prefer them above all others.” [26]

Mullah Ali al-Qari :“Holding firmly onto the Ahl al-Bayt (as in Hadith Thaqalayn) means loving them, defening their rights, acting by their  narrations (of the Sunnah) and basing one’s religion upon their words.”  [27]

Shaykh al-Munawi states: “The Holy Prophet (pbuh) made the Holy Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt his successors and instructed his Ummah to be kind to them both, to place their rights above their own and to hold onto them both in the religion.”[28]

Al-Sindi: “It was as if the Prophet (saw) made them equal in importance to his position. Just as in his (pbuh) life, it was him and the Qu’raan after his death. It was his family and the Qu’raan. But it means that we must abide by their love and position, not abiding to their orders and actions. [29]

Note: Bizarrely, al-Sindi admits that the noble Quran and the Ahlulbayt are on equal position and in place of the Prophet (saw) after his death, and then manages to claim that this does not mean obedience. It is clear that if they are equal in importance to his position after his death, this denotes we obey them and adhere to their commands.

On the statement ‘and they will never deviate from one another until they reach the lake-fount”

Ibn Taymiyyah: “The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said concerning his family: “They and the Book will never be separated until they both come to him at the Cistern.” And he is the most truthful one, so this indicates that the consensus of the (Prophet’s) family constitutes proof. This is the view of a number of our companions, and it was mentioned by al-Qaadi in al-Mu‘tamad.” [30]

Interestingly, Al-Albani when discussing a version which has ‘Sunnah’ in place of Ahlulbayt, makes a very interesting admission:

“Rather, it is obligatory to consider the Book and the Sunnah as a single source, with no difference between them both, as indicated in the statement of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him: “I have been given the Qur’an and its likeness with it”, that is the Sunnah, and his statement:“Both shall never separate until they meet me at the Lake-Fount.”  [31]



[22] Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).

[23] Sharh Sahih al-Muslim, Vol. 15, p. 180

[24] Al-Faiq fi Gharib al-Hadith, Vol. 1, p. 150

[25] Al-Nihayah fi Gharib al-Hadith, Vol. 1, p. 216

[26]  Sahih Sharh al-Aqidat al-Tahawiyah, p. 653

[27]  Mirqat al-Mafatih, Vol. 9, p. 3974

[28] Fayd al-Qadeer, Vol. 3, p. 20

[29] Footnotes by Shuayb’al-Arnaut quoting al-Sindi in  Jamia Tirmidhi Sunan Al -Tirmidhi. Vol. 6, Pg. # 335.

[30] Source: Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (7/395)

[31] Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman Ahmad b. Shu’ayb al-Nasai, al-Mujtaba min al-Sunan (Halab: Maktab al-Matbu’at al-Islamiyyah; 2nd edition, 1406 H) [annotator: Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani], vol. 5, p. 153, # 2736]]

You are copy pasting stuff without realizing that Youpuncturedtheark has an advance refutation for them. Here is what you missed this time.


Sahabi’s understanding of Hadeeth in comparison to the understanding of people(Scholars) who came after.

The Sahabi(companion) of Prophet – Abdullah ibn Mas’ood(ra) said:

وقد ذكر سنيد قال حدثنا معتمر عن سلام بن مسكين عن قتادة قال قال ابن مسعود: من كان منكم متأسيا فليتأس بأصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فإنهم كانوا أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا، وأعمقها علما، وأقلها تكلفا، وأقومها هديا، وأحسنها حالا، آختارهم الله لصحبة نبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم وإقامة دينه، فاعرفوا لهم فضلهم، واتبعوهم في آثارهم، فإنهم كانوا على الهدى المستقيم.

“Whoever wants to follow an example, let him follow the example of those who have passed away, the Companions of Muhammad (S). They were the best of this ummah, the purest in heart, the DEEPEST in knowledge, the least in sophistication. They were people whom Allah chose to be the Companions of His Prophet (S) and to convey His religion, so imitate their ways and behaviour, for they were following the Straight Path.” [Tafseer Al-Qurtabi and Sharh as-Sunnah of Al-Baghawi]

Similarly, Al-Hasan Al-Basri said:

1143 – وحدثنا ابن عبد الحميد قال : حدثنا يعقوب بن إبراهيم الدورقي قال : حدثنا حكام بن سلم الرازي ، عن عمرو بن أبي قيس ، عن عبد ربه قال : كنا عند الحسن في مجلس ، فذكر كلاما ، وذكر أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال : « أولئك أصحاب محمد كانوا أبر هذه الأمة قلوبا ، وأعمقها علما ، وأقلها تكلفا ، قوم اختارهم الله عز وجل لصحبة نبيه ، وإقامة دينه ، فتشبهوا بأخلاقهم وطرائقهم ، فإنهم كانوا ورب الكعبة على الهدي المستقيم »

Those are the companions of Mohammad, best in the heart, DEEPEST in knowledge, without going out of their way. They were chosen by Allah to accompany his prophet, to stabilize the religion, so follow their manners and ways, for by Allah they were on the straight path.( Al-Sharee’a by Al-Ajurri #1143)

In the first report, Abdullah ibn Masood is telling the Tabaeen –- who are the second greatest generation –- to follow those who have passed away, that is the companions(sahaba) of Muhammad(saws). Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) was saying this in the time of second best generation(Tabaeen). And he gives some reasons for following the Sahaba, one of which is, “they were DEEPEST in knowledge” – notice here the choice of words, Abdullah Ibn Masood(ra) as well as Hasan Al-Basri(rah) didn’t say, Sahaba had the MOST knowledge, but they said Sahaba had the “DEEPEST knowledge”; because there were people who came after Sahaba, who might know things which Sahaba may not have known, for example Imam Al-Bukhari knew more ahadeeth than many Sahaba, because he knew of ahadeeth which different Sahaba had, he knew ahadeeth which Umar(ra) had, which Ali(ra) had, which Ibn Abbas(ra) had, which Abu Huraira(ra) had, which Ayesha(ra) had, etc, He was an encyclopaedia of Hadeeth. So Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) and Hasan Al-Basri didn’t say they had the most knowledge, but they said Sahaba had the DEEPEST knowledge.

Therefore, even though some of the scholars who came later knew the things which some of the Sahaba didn’t know, however none of the people who came after Sahaba have the depth of knowledge that the Sahaba had, because even though a Sahabi may know only two hundred hadeeth or three hundred hadeeth, but he was there when those ahadeeth were spoken by Prophet Muhammad(saws), He knew the circumstances, He knew why Prophet(saws) said it, He was there, he experienced it first hand, therefore everyone who came after Sahaba is just scratching the surface of knowledge, whereas Sahaba lived that hadeeth, an opportunity that none of the people who came after has, so sahaba had an edge over everyone who came later. This is the reason Abdullah Ibn Masood(ra) and Hasan al-Basri advised people to follow the understanding of Sahaba in comparison to those who came after.

In the previous section we have proven, by the help of Allah, that as per the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam(ra), the purpose behind mention of Ahlelbayt in hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, WAS NOT that, they are to be adhered and taken as a source of guidance, inorder to be protected from going astray, since he made a generalized definition and believed that Ahlelbayt in hadeeth al-Thaqalayn are all those relatives of Prophet(saws) upon whom acceptance of Sadaqa is forbidden, which even included people from Bani Hashim who could be unrighteous.

We are aware that there are some Sunni scholars who on the basis of some weak reports with faulty text, reported in a twisted form by unreliable narrators; explained the Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn to mean adhering to Ahlelbayt and following their guidance. Even though we believe that Ahlelbayt should be adhered and followed in a conditional way, just like Sahaba, but we disagree with the view of those scholars who say that, the meaning of hadeeth al-Thaqalayn is adhering Ahlelbayt and following their guidance, because the understanding of these scholars is based on weak and unreliable reports with faulty and twisted text, and it goes against the understanding of noble Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam(ra). Therefore, these scholars erred in their understanding. As as per the rule their explanations are discarded because their basis itself is weak. For example, Shaykh Zubair Ali Za’ee, when discussing the reliability of a random hadeeth said that: “Since the hadeeth is proven as weak, the explanation of Shaykh al-Sindhi has no value”. [al-Hadeeth, vol 100, page 20, by Shaykh Zubair Ali Za’ee].

As we quoted the words of Abdullah ibn Masood(ra) and Hasan Al-Basri(rah), Sahaba had the deepest knowledge, their understanding was deep, they understood the hadeeth way better than those who came later. Therefore the understanding of Sahabi will be given preference over the understanding of scholars who came later. So in the case of hadeeth al-Thaqalayn too, the understanding of Zayd bin Arqam(ra) would be followed, because he was there when those words were spoken by Prophet Muhammad(saws), He knew the circumstance, He knew why Prophet(saws) said it, He was there, he experienced it first hand, therefore scholars who came centuries later are just scratching the surface of knowledge and they can be wrong, whereas Zayd bin Arqam(ra) fully understood the hadeeth al-Thaqalayn and He didn’t believe that Ahlelbayt are a source of guidance adhering whom, Muslims would not go astray, as we explained in the previous section.

Hence, the understanding of later scholars is a no match in comparision to the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam(ra). The understanding of Sahabi is highly preferred over the understandings of all those scholars who misunderstood hadeeth al-Thaqalayn.

muslim720

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #18 on: July 08, 2019, 05:50:42 PM »
Ibn Taymiyyah: “The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said concerning his family: “They and the Book will never be separated until they both come to him at the Cistern.” And he is the most truthful one, so this indicates that the consensus of the (Prophet’s) family constitutes proof. This is the view of a number of our companions, and it was mentioned by al-Qaadi in al-Mu‘tamad.” [30]

[30] Source: Minhaaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah (7/395)

Wait a minute!  I could have sworn Shias - including those at Speakers Corner - were adamant that Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) was a "Nasibi" and they would quote "Minhaaj as-Sunnah" to prove his "nasb".  Now, we have you quoting the same Ibn Taymiyyah (rah) and the same book issuing a statement in favor of Ahlul Bayt (ra)! 

In the words of Ahmed Deedat (rah), what games are you people playing?
"Our coward ran from those in authority" - Iceman (admitting the truth regarding his 12th Imam)

whoaretheshia

Re: Deception of TSN surrounding Hadith at-Thaqalayn
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2019, 01:12:15 AM »
I have one plea to make to brother Noor-us-Sunnah, the main? author of youpuncturedtheark. If you have a particular point of you, at least present the truth about what your scholars say honestly. The version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn whereby the Prophet (saw) states: "If you hold onto them, you will never go astray" has been authenticated by al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar, and many others, in addition to it's actual Matn by many including al-Albani and al-Arnaut.

Your appeal to the Sahabi Zayd concerning the understanding of this tradition does not hold water. In Saheeh Muslim, and we know for certain he narrated it during very old age when he complained of memory problems, he is adamant that the Ahlulbayt do not include the wives. If your scholars themselves claim that it is common knowledge the Ahlulbayt include the wives, you can not have your cake and eat it, so to speak dear brother.

You either accept Zayd made an error, or that he was confused in his understanding. The very fact he seemed to confuse an allegedly basic piece of knowledge that the Ahlulbayt included the wives, as per the Sunni position means you can't read too much into his testimony.There were also many who knew full well the position of the Ahlulbayt but were swept along with the chaos that happened, and did not fully recognize heir rights.
"I leave behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray...the Quran and my Ahlulbayt" - Musnad Ibn Rawayh (al-Albani classes Isnaad *independently* as Hasan, and Matn as authentic, as does Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and others.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1091 Views
Last post March 20, 2016, 03:19:27 PM
by Abu Muhammad
21 Replies
1683 Views
Last post April 24, 2017, 06:28:58 AM
by Zlatan Ibrahimovic
79 Replies
5075 Views
Last post December 20, 2017, 08:23:38 PM
by Optimus Prime
70 Replies
1937 Views
Last post June 20, 2020, 05:37:54 PM
by Soccer