TwelverShia.net Forum

Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => General Sunni-Shia => Topic started by: whoaretheshia on December 09, 2019, 01:23:43 AM

Title: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 09, 2019, 01:23:43 AM
Salam,

As you know, TSN, Sunni Defense, and Youpuncturedtheark have attempted to weaken a version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn whereby the Prophet (saw) clearly states that if people held onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, they would never go astray. However, they have not told you that the people weakening this tradition are lay brothers online, namely Hani, and Noor-Us-Sunnah, who are explicitly going against the grading given by your own reliable scholars. I have challenged both Hani and Noor-Us-Sunnah on this without any legitimate response given.

Whose grading will you adopt, Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and heavy weights in your sect, or online lay bloggers such as Noor-us-Sunnah, and Hani? Ask yourselves what is haq?

Quote
“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.”

We wish to present four chains of narrators we feel will be accepted by the vast majority of Sunnis, starting with the one that will be most widely accepted.

Chain one

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 Abi Asim]

Chain two

حدثنا إبراهيم بن مرزوق قال : حدثنا أبو عامر العقدي قال : حدثنا كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي ، عن أبيه ، عن علي ، أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم  – إني قد تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله سببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي. [Mushkil al-Athar al-Tahawi]

The only difference between the two chains is a narrator at the beginning who is indisputably Thiqah, and so the following will apply for both, although al-Albani/ al-Arnaut were grading the second chain:

1. Muhammad Nasir-ud-Dīn al-Albani included this in Silsila al-aHaadith as-Sahiha, referring to it as a strong Shawahid, whose narrators are trustworthy.

2.Shu’ayb al-Arnaut has graded the chain of narrators as ‘Hasan’ in Sharh Mushkil al-Athar.

3. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani has graded the chain as ‘Saheeh’ in al-Matalib al-Aliyah bi Zawaid al-Masanid al-Thamaniyyah.

4. Ahmad B. Abu Bakr b.Ismail Al Busri , Itihaf al-Khiyarah al-Maharah bi Zawaid al-Masanid al-‘Ashra declares the chain as ‘Saheeh’.

5. Moulana Muhammad Abasoomar of the well-respected Hadithanswers.com also grades the chain of narrators for this tradition as ‘Hasan’ and has written: “This is a narration from Kitabus Sunnah of Imam Ibn Abi ‘Asim (rahimahullah), hadith: 1563. The chain is sound (hasan).”

This is therefore Hujjah upon Sunnis.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 09, 2019, 01:28:50 AM
What common responses are given by Hani, TSN and Youpunctured?

Claim: "The scholars were only being lenient because it pertained to merits of the Ahlulbayt"

Response:

Some have argued that the scholars were just being lenient in grading the traditions, because it is one of ‘virtue’. This however, is shameless intellectual dishonesty. For instance, Shu’ayb al-Arnaut grades the first  chain for the second version brought in this work as ‘Hasan’ , however, the same Shu’ayb al-Arnaut also has graded weak chains of the second version, and has not graded them ‘Hasan’ out of lenience but has declared them weak.

As an example of him grading a chain for the second version as week we find: “Footnote (Arnaut) : Sahih li ghayri(authentic due to external evidence), the chain of this narration however is weak , because of Zayd Ibn Al-Hasan he is Qurashi and Al-Anmati. [1].  Conversely, for the reliable chain presented for version two however as cited before, he states: ” إسناده حسن ” [The chain is Hasan] [2]

Further more al-Albani clearly authenticates the narrators in the chain, and has outright considered them reliable. Many other Sunni scholars of Hadith have objectively considered the chain to be of a Hasan standard. They have graded other traditions whereby the chain was weak to be Dhai'f, and have weakened narrators.

So this false claim can be thrown out. This tradition is also far greater than just merits of the Ahlulbayt, there is a clear command here with significant theological ramifications, which is why TSN/Sunni Defense/Youpuncturedtheark are desperate to weaken it.

[1] [Source: Jamia Tirmidhi Sunan Al -Tirmidhi. Vol. 6, Pg. # 335]

[2]  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
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 09, 2019, 01:33:25 AM
Claim: Okay, the chain might be Hasan , but that does not mean the Matn is.

Response:


Many of these same scholars have clearly also authenticated the Matn, including al-Albani himself.

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…”  [1]

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.” [2]

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. ” [3]

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]

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 09, 2019, 01:39:59 AM
Claim: "The more reliable version in Saheeh Muslim should be taken above this"

Response:

Your scholars don't seem to find any contradiction between the version in Saheeh Muslim, and this version. It is already proven that Zayd , in his old age and admitting memory loss, missed out phrases even TSN/YPTA consider reliable, such as "They will never deviant until the pool of Kawthar/Pond". When all of the versions are collated, it is clear they contain a fuller account of statements omitted by others, or summarized by others.

An assessment of the tradition in Sahih Muslim, narrated by Zaid bin Aqram.

Assessment

The most important fact to consider is that this version narrated by Zaid bin Aqram only when he first complains about his advanced age and poor memory. No other companion has narrated it in this fashion. We acknowledge this is not sufficient to discount it – and we are not attempting to claim this is inauthentic. However, one should hardly consider it the most complete account, and given there are authentic narrations with additional expressions, Zaid bin Aqram clearly omitted parts. 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) , 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. This double standard undermines attemptsto objectively analyse this tradition. One may argue Zayd did not report other than what he felt he could remember accurately, but many with memory loss and old age may feel the same way but due to declining memory may mistakenly think they have remembered something accurately. Unless Zayd or the Sahaba were immune to the effects we find in every single generation of human beings, it is clear his memory may have effected him here.

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. If he could do it whilst not being at a very advanced age at the time, why couldn’t Zayd also at an advanced age and suffering from memory loss too omit authentic expressions?

Sunnis should not see the first version as a contradiction to the second, but both as reliable with the second containing an authentic expression the first has omitted, and the third an expression the first and second may have omitted.

[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. 

[8] Sunan Abu Dawud, Saheeh: https://sunnah.com/abudawud/21/41
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 09, 2019, 11:56:27 AM
I'm not at all interested in again answering the arguments which this Shia keeps bringing even after  these were refuted several times.

But my suggestion for people is to focus on three important points.

1. Until the verse of perfection/completion of religion was revealed by Allah(swt) on Arafah, Prophet(saws) mentioned only Quran as the source he left, holding which Muslims would never go astray.

2.  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.

3. Understanding of Sahabi(Zayd bin Arqam) disapproves the view that the purpose behind mention of Ahlelbayt in Hadith al-Thaqalayn was to seek guidance from them. Because according to him any relative of Prophet(S) upon whom acceptance of Sadaqa was forbidden is from Ahl al-bayt, so this even includes members who were sinners.

Details with evidences are in this link:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/hadeeth-al-thaqalayntwo-weighty-things-the-correct-understanding-and-a-spot-on-perspective-of-sunnis/
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: iceman on December 09, 2019, 09:50:03 PM
I'm not at all interested in again answering the arguments which this Shia keeps bringing even after  these were refuted several times.

But my suggestion for people is to focus on three important points.

1. Until the verse of perfection/completion of religion was revealed by Allah(swt) on Arafah, Prophet(saws) mentioned only Quran as the source he left, holding which Muslims would never go astray.

2.  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.

3. Understanding of Sahabi(Zayd bin Arqam) disapproves the view that the purpose behind mention of Ahlelbayt in Hadith al-Thaqalayn was to seek guidance from them. Because according to him any relative of Prophet(S) upon whom acceptance of Sadaqa was forbidden is from Ahl al-bayt, so this even includes members who were sinners.

Details with evidences are in this link:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/hadeeth-al-thaqalayntwo-weighty-things-the-correct-understanding-and-a-spot-on-perspective-of-sunnis/

"I'm not at all interested in again answering the arguments which this Shia keeps bringing even after  these were refuted several times"

The feeling is absolutely the same here. I'm tired of answering the same questions and addressing the same matters over and over again. Especially by Muslim 720 and mythbuster. But it needs to be done. The propaganda needs to be addressed and the propagandists need to be dealt with.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Mythbuster1 on December 11, 2019, 06:40:20 PM
"I'm not at all interested in again answering the arguments which this Shia keeps bringing even after  these were refuted several times"

The feeling is absolutely the same here. I'm tired of answering the same questions and addressing the same matters over and over again. Especially by Muslim 720 and mythbuster. But it needs to be done. The propaganda needs to be addressed and the propagandists need to be dealt with.

Lol you dimwit you couldn’t answer even if your life depended on it, you and your kind have been a joke for centuries it’s only right that your ancestors the jokers gave birth to jokers like yourself😂

The joke is.......divine imarmite😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

And you still can’t answer👍
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: iceman on December 12, 2019, 04:42:38 AM
Lol you dimwit you couldn’t answer even if your life depended on it, you and your kind have been a joke for centuries it’s only right that your ancestors the jokers gave birth to jokers like yourself😂

The joke is.......divine imarmite😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

And you still can’t answer👍

Here we are.

Qur'an (2:124).

"And [mention, O Muhammad], when Abraham was tried by his Lord with commands and he fulfilled them. [ Allah ] said, "Indeed, I will make you an IMAM for the people." [Abraham] said, "And of my descendants?" [ Allah ] said, "My covenant does not include the wrongdoers."

Qur'an (32:24).

"And we made of them IMAMS to guide by our command for they were patient, and they were certain of our clear signs”.

Below are the two verses which absolutely and completely destroy Saqifa.

"And your Lord creates and chooses whom He pleases; to choose is not theirs”
(28:68)

“And it behaves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Apostle have decided a matter” (33:36)

Please do rub yourself in it 😆
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Mythbuster1 on December 14, 2019, 04:46:46 PM
Here we are.

Qur'an (2:124).

"And [mention, O Muhammad], when Abraham was tried by his Lord with commands and he fulfilled them. [ Allah ] said, "Indeed, I will make you an IMAM for the people." [Abraham] said, "And of my descendants?" [ Allah ] said, "My covenant does not include the wrongdoers."

Qur'an (32:24).

"And we made of them IMAMS to guide by our command for they were patient, and they were certain of our clear signs”.

Below are the two verses which absolutely and completely destroy Saqifa.

"And your Lord creates and chooses whom He pleases; to choose is not theirs”
(28:68)

“And it behaves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Apostle have decided a matter” (33:36)

Please do rub yourself in it 😆

 Ibrahim as gets promotion AFTER prophethood.........ahlubaith ra get promotion at birth.

😯 THIS IS DIVINE SHIITE IMAMATE!😂

So if you can provide a verse to back that up then I can say you are NOT twisting words of the noble Quran........otherwise like I’ve said before you are just a lying Shiite........not a syed at all😉

The rest of the verses don’t touch on Saqifa until you start ADDING your own commentary on it which is LYING!!!

A confused syed who is most likely the idiot of his village 😂
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: iceman on December 15, 2019, 10:35:49 PM
Ibrahim as gets promotion AFTER prophethood.........ahlubaith ra get promotion at birth.

😯 THIS IS DIVINE SHIITE IMAMATE!😂

So if you can provide a verse to back that up then I can say you are NOT twisting words of the noble Quran........otherwise like I’ve said before you are just a lying Shiite........not a syed at all😉

The rest of the verses don’t touch on Saqifa until you start ADDING your own commentary on it which is LYING!!!

A confused syed who is most likely the idiot of his village 😂

You asked me to prove Imamah from the Qur'an and I've proved it again. 😆 It's not my problem that you can't digest it and keep coming with counter arguments, ifs and buts and irrelevant stuff. Next time don't bite off more than you can chew. And don't swallow more than you can digest. 😅 Deal with what you can stomach 😂
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 04:40:59 AM
Brother Noor-Us-Sunnah, the author of youpuncturedtheark, obviously makes a lot of effort in the analysis he does. My impression is - and Allah knows best - these are sincere efforts. His arguments are well thought out, he does his research, but unfortunately, there are errors. These errors i believe, come from what he has assumed apriori; the idea that the Prophet (saw) explicitly designated the Quran and Ahlulbayt as sources of guidance right before his death it at odds with what Sunnis do, what the caliphs did, what many of the companions did, and seems to strongly support the Shia narrative. He has therefore gone to great lengths to weaken the tradition and explain it away.

I will address his latest reply, but if you look on his article, he does a the following:

1.
He knows that he needs to explain why well-respected, authoritative and far more knowledgeable scholars of Hadith like al-Albani , al-Arnaut, ibn Hajar etc have authenticated the chain. He erroneously claims this was out of leniency and misuses the principle of being more lax when it comes to traditions pertaining to virtue. 

I clearly demonstrated instances when al-Arnaut, and al-Albani grade the same version of the same Hadith as 'weak' due to chain. They did not shy away from doing so, which throws that argument out of the water. There are also instances where, al-Albani for example, explicitly claims the narrators are reliable.  Indeed, Allah is a witness, but it is beyond doubt that al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many others have graded the chain to be at least 'Hasan' outright, and not out of leniency.

Will he correct this? I can only hope so, given i have given references and clearly pointed this out to him.

2. He then , in his article, makes the claim that irrespective of the grading, claiming a chain is 'Hasan' does not mean the scholars agree with the content of the Hadith. This is true, however, i provided evidence where several of the scholars who authenticated it, clearly also accepted the contents, such as Al-Albani himself. The point he raised therefore bears absolutely no relevance to our discussion.

Where does this leave us?

Well, it is up to Sunnis on here to decide for themselves. On one hand, you have scholars who have spent decades upon decades studying the science of Hadith, who have given their expert gratings over the matter of narrators. On the other hand, you have -perhaps- sincere online bloggers, trying to overrule the scholars.

What is the decent thing for youpuncturedtheark to do, even if he disagrees with scholars far greater than him? At least present the truth. Present the fact Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many others authenticated the chain, and not out of leniency, and many of these and others accepted the Matn, though some gave it their own interpretation. Then make it clear you disagree with these scholars, and why.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 04:57:11 AM
Three additional points of brother Noor-Us-Sunnah

1. Brother Noor-Us-Sunnah claims that on the day of Arafah, the Prophet (saw) told the people to hold onto the Quran as guidance, but didn't mention anything along with this. If we concede this, for sake of argument, it does not contradict the fact that there are other essential things to also hold onto. Does it mean we ought not to also follow his Sunnah? Does the Prophet (saw) telling the people that he is leaving behind the Quran as a source of guidance for us to hold onto mean he did not, or could not, at any other point of time also make clear that there were other key sources of guidance?

Does Noor-Us-Sunnah not accept the traditions where the Prophet (saw) commands the people to follow his Sunnah, and also the way of the rightly guided Caliphs?   Are not the Khawarij who proclaimed that the Quran and Allah were sufficient? 

A better argument to make here would be, why do we not have reliable evidence that the Prophet (saw) claimed he left behind the Quran and the Ahlulbayt at Arafah. Why do it at Ghadeer Khumm?  I will respond to this in due course, insha Allah.

However, would anyone have a good reason to proclaim something at Hajj? Indeed, we find the second Khalifah himself agreed with the wisdom of waiting to proclaim certain things which would be seen as controversial, distorted and twisted in front of the people of Medina, who would (he hoped) better implement it and understand its proper place:

"“I used to teach (the Qur’an to) some people of the Muhajirln (emigrants), among whom there was `Abdur Rahman bin `Auf. While I was in his house at Mina, and he was with `Umar bin Al-Khattab during `Umar’s last Hajj, `Abdur-Rahman came to me and said, “Would that you had seen the man who came today to the Chief of the Believers (`Umar), saying, ‘O Chief of the Believers! What do you think about so-and-so who says, ‘If `Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and such person, as by Allah, the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr was nothing but a prompt sudden action which got established afterwards.’ `Umar became angry and then said, ‘Allah willing, I will stand before the people tonight and warn them against those people who want to deprive the others of their rights (the question of rulership). `Abdur-Rahman said, “I said, ‘O Chief of the believers! Do not do that, for the season of Hajj gathers the riff-raff and the rubble, and it will be they who will gather around you when you stand to address the people. And I am afraid that you will get up and say something, and some people will spread your statement and may not say what you have actually said and may not understand its meaning, and may interpret it incorrectly, so you should wait till you reach Medina, as it is the place of emigration and the place of Prophet’s Traditions, and there you can come in touch with the learned and noble people, and tell them your ideas with confidence; and the learned people will understand your statement and put it in its proper place.’ On that, `Umar said, ‘By Allah! Allah willing, I will do this in the first speech I will deliver before the people in Medina.” [ Saheeh of Imam al-Bukhari]



Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 05:31:38 AM
The brother then regards the version to be ambiguous and faulty. There are two ways in which he can do this:

1. Regard a narrator as weak.

2. Regard the content as problematic or contradicting more reliable versions.

As has been demonstrated already, there are no weak narrators in the chain of transmission. Does he know something Al-Albani didn't? Or perhaps Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many of the other scholars of Hadith?  His attempts at claiming the scholars realized this but were lenient have been proven false.

He then tries to claim the text itself is faulty. The reality is, this is clutching at straws. What he argues is that because the singular is used in the version i have presented, this is the error of the narrator at hand, who perhaps confused things. However, the narrators were all fluent Arabic speakers. Given this would have been a grammatical issue, if it was not a way of speaking which was common and absolutely acceptable linguistically, the narrator would have recognized this.

So again, the brother claims:

"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]

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, it isn't just the version I've presented using this mode of expression. The same can be found in many other sources by many other narrators:

Musnad of Imam Ahmad:

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

Jami' of Imam Tirmidhi:

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

Mu'jam Sagheer of Imama 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



Did these narrators, who are actually considered weak and accused of fabricating the Hadith, who were fluent in Arabic given it was their native tongue, manage to fabricate a tradition but erroneously forget to make sure they amended very, very basic grammar?

Brother Noor-us-Sunnah is clutching at straws and this particular argument he is making is novel to him, and should be thrown out.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 05:39:33 AM
I would like to ask brother Noor-Us-Sunnah , that, say i concede Zayd b. Aqram did not consider them to be sources of guidance, what does that prove? If a companion did not recognize the status of the Ahlulbayt, that does nothing to diminish it. Who is greater, Abu Bakr, or Zayd b. Aqram, in the eyes of Sunnis? It is clearly the first Khalifah. He undoubtedly did not hold onto the Ahlulbayt as a clear source of guidance alongside the Quran. Does that disprove clear commands of the Prophet (saw)?

Zayd himself contradicts Sunni scholarship when he in the Hadith claims wives are not Ahlulbayt. Noor-us-Sunnah himself would accept that in his view, the command is to look after the Ahlulbayt, to care for them, and this includes the wives.

Furthermore, it is not proven what Zayd actually thought. He may have accepted that the Prophet said to hold onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, but believed the Ahlulbayt were to be considered as certain bloodlines of the Prophet. Nevertheless, many turned away from this, and like they do today, served to give the words of the Prophet their own interpretation.

We find the same for other companions of other Prophets of God in the noble Quran, who clearly hear the command, but convince each other about how best to implement it.

We should concern ourselves with the following:

Did the Prophet (saw) command us to follow the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, as sources of guidance after which we would never go astray?

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 11:26:13 AM
Brother Noor-Us-Sunnah, the author of youpuncturedtheark, obviously makes a lot of effort in the analysis he does. My impression is - and Allah knows best - these are sincere efforts. His arguments are well thought out, he does his research, but unfortunately, there are errors. These errors i believe, come from what he has assumed apriori; the idea that the Prophet (saw) explicitly designated the Quran and Ahlulbayt as sources of guidance right before his death it at odds with what Sunnis do, what the caliphs did, what many of the companions did, and seems to strongly support the Shia narrative. He has therefore gone to great lengths to weaken the tradition and explain it away.
The Shia narrative is that Ahl al-bayt were appointed as Leaders over the Ummah, which contradicts numerous reports showing Sunnah of Prophet(SAWS) and even the understanding of Sahaba including Ahl al-bayt such as Ali(RA).

And as for Ahl al-bayt being designated as being source of guidance and what the Shia narrative is, then this just doesn't goes against Quran, and ahadeeth, but it even goes against the understanding of Sahabi who narrated this report.


I will address his latest reply, but if you look on his article, he does a the following:

1.
He knows that he needs to explain why well-respected, authoritative and far more knowledgeable scholars of Hadith like al-Albani , al-Arnaut, ibn Hajar etc have authenticated the chain. He erroneously claims this was out of leniency and misuses the principle of being more lax when it comes to traditions pertaining to virtue. 

I clearly demonstrated instances when al-Arnaut, and al-Albani grade the same version of the same Hadith as 'weak' due to chain. They did not shy away from doing so, which throws that argument out of the water. There are also instances where, al-Albani for example, explicitly claims the narrators are reliable.  Indeed, Allah is a witness, but it is beyond doubt that al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many others have graded the chain to be at least 'Hasan' outright, and not out of leniency.


Does this change the fact the there were classical scholars who weakened the narrator? This even includes Ibn Hajar who did say that the narrator committed mistakes. So what's the problem in calling the version as faulty? Or atleast saying that a report coming from a narrator of this level cannot be used in forming an Aqeedah, which you are arguing for. These are basics, those same scholars whom you are quoting would laugh on this argument that, a report coming from a narrator of this level, who was known for making mistakes, would be used to form an Aqeedah and that too when it contradicts numerous reports of Prophet and Understanding of Sahaba.

If you are here to implying that the grading of al-Albani or Ibn Hajar implies that, the report is spotless and perfectly authentic, even when Ibn Hajar himself admittted that the narrator was known for making mistakes, then I can't help you come out of your delusion. But if you say that, even though the narrator was truthful but would commit mistakes, which makes his report atleast Hasan, which implies it's not at top level of authenticity then, it you shouldn't make a fuss when I say the text is faulty, because the narrator wasn't a top level narrator , whose narration is being called faulty, its a narrator who was known for his mistakes.


2. He then , in his article, makes the claim that irrespective of the grading, claiming a chain is 'Hasan' does not mean the scholars agree with the content of the Hadith. This is true, however, i provided evidence where several of the scholars who authenticated it, clearly also accepted the contents, such as Al-Albani himself. The point he raised therefore bears absolutely no relevance to our discussion.
I say, that's completely fine for me. Because al-Albani wasn't the only Muhaddith in the world, it's fine if you want to go with his grading, but other disagreed and there is a scope for difference of opinion in this, and this is how an academic approach is, but hypocrisy is when, you take his grading, but reject his interpretation, because if your connotations were applied al-Albani himself would point out to you that, this is false and that would effect the grading of hadeeth as Munkar.

So you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't use he grading of al-Albani but reject his explanation, because there are several instances wherein Albani authenticated weak reports because in his view those reports were supported by other Sahih reports. But but rejecting his interpretation you are jeopardizing his whole grading.


Well, it is up to Sunnis on here to decide for themselves. On one hand, you have scholars who have spent decades upon decades studying the science of Hadith, who have given their expert gratings over the matter of narrators. On the other hand, you have -perhaps- sincere online bloggers, trying to overrule the scholars.
The weakening of narrator wasn't by a online blogger as the Shia friend tries to portray but by these authoritative Scholars, which even includes Ibn Hajar.

(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]


What is the decent thing for youpuncturedtheark to do, even if he disagrees with scholars far greater than him? At least present the truth. Present the fact Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many others authenticated the chain, and not out of leniency, and many of these and others accepted the Matn, though some gave it their own interpretation. Then make it clear you disagree with these scholars, and why.
The purpose of article is to refute Shia narrative, and I have done that successfully Alhamdulillah!
And I have presented one of the major reason being the understanding of a Sahabi which destroys the Shia narrative or rather misinterpretation of the report. And it's a rational fact that the understanding of an eye witness Sahabi is superior to those who came centuries after, let alone some innovators(Shia).
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 11:44:22 AM
Three additional points of brother Noor-Us-Sunnah

1. Brother Noor-Us-Sunnah claims that on the day of Arafah, the Prophet (saw) told the people to hold onto the Quran as guidance, but didn't mention anything along with this. If we concede this, for sake of argument, it does not contradict the fact that there are other essential things to also hold onto. Does it mean we ought not to also follow his Sunnah? Does the Prophet (saw) telling the people that he is leaving behind the Quran as a source of guidance for us to hold onto mean he did not, or could not, at any other point of time also make clear that there were other key sources of guidance?
Taking Sunnah as source of guidance proven from Quran again, So if you believe Quran is source of guidance, you need to take Sunnah as guidance as well. So following Sunnah is going back to Quranic guidance again. And don't forget religion was perfected on Arafah.

Don't you find it odd that, the mention of Ahl al-bayt appears AFTER religion was perfected?

Does Noor-Us-Sunnah not accept the traditions where the Prophet (saw) commands the people to follow his Sunnah, and also the way of the rightly guided Caliphs?   
I do accept them, because again they are backed from Quran, because following Sunnah and those in authority is proven from Quran again. Hence this is going back to Quranic guidance again.

A better argument to make here would be, why do we not have reliable evidence that the Prophet (saw) claimed he left behind the Quran and the Ahlulbayt at Arafah. Why do it at Ghadeer Khumm?  I will respond to this in due course, insha Allah.
I'll give you a much better one, why didn't Allah delay the announcement of perfection of religion till Ghadeer, like the Shia fabricators understanding the importance of this verse, fabricated reports that this verse was revealed at Ghadeer. So since you can't help your case with those fabricated reports, trying finding any authentic one, otherwise, you'll fail those poor desperate Shia fabricators and the argument as well.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 11:49:14 AM
The brother then regards the version to be ambiguous and faulty. There are two ways in which he can do this:

1. Regard a narrator as weak.

2. Regard the content as problematic or contradicting more reliable versions.

As has been demonstrated already, there are no weak narrators in the chain of transmission. Does he know something Al-Albani didn't? Or perhaps Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many of the other scholars of Hadith?  His attempts at claiming the scholars realized this but were lenient have been proven false.

He then tries to claim the text itself is faulty. The reality is, this is clutching at straws. What he argues is that because the singular is used in the version i have presented, this is the error of the narrator at hand, who perhaps confused things. However, the narrators were all fluent Arabic speakers. Given this would have been a grammatical issue, if it was not a way of speaking which was common and absolutely acceptable linguistically, the narrator would have recognized this.

So again, the brother claims:

"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]

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, it isn't just the version I've presented using this mode of expression. The same can be found in many other sources by many other narrators:

Musnad of Imam Ahmad:

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

Jami' of Imam Tirmidhi:

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

Mu'jam Sagheer of Imama 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



Did these narrators, who are actually considered weak and accused of fabricating the Hadith, who were fluent in Arabic given it was their native tongue, manage to fabricate a tradition but erroneously forget to make sure they amended very, very basic grammar?

Brother Noor-us-Sunnah is clutching at straws and this particular argument he is making is novel to him, and should be thrown out.

Answered several times, refer the previous discussions in the other threads,  i guess you left the older threads where we discussed this and i answered you, for the same reason.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 12:15:28 PM
I would like to ask brother Noor-Us-Sunnah , that, say i concede Zayd b. Aqram did not consider them to be sources of guidance, what does that prove? If a companion did not recognize the status of the Ahlulbayt, that does nothing to diminish it. Who is greater, Abu Bakr, or Zayd b. Aqram, in the eyes of Sunnis? It is clearly the first Khalifah. He undoubtedly did not hold onto the Ahlulbayt as a clear source of guidance alongside the Quran. Does that disprove clear commands of the Prophet (saw)?

Zayd himself contradicts Sunni scholarship when he in the Hadith claims wives are not Ahlulbayt. Noor-us-Sunnah himself would accept that in his view, the command is to look after the Ahlulbayt, to care for them, and this includes the wives.

Furthermore, it is not proven what Zayd actually thought. He may have accepted that the Prophet said to hold onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, but believed the Ahlulbayt were to be considered as certain bloodlines of the Prophet. Nevertheless, many turned away from this, and like they do today, served to give the words of the Prophet their own interpretation.

We find the same for other companions of other Prophets of God in the noble Quran, who clearly hear the command, but convince each other about how best to implement it.

We should concern ourselves with the following:

Did the Prophet (saw) command us to follow the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, as sources of guidance after which we would never go astray?

What appears from the initial part of this post is that, Zaid(R) is someone who for NO reason, didn't recognize the status of Ahl al-bayt(as per Shia narrative) and turned away from the instruction of Prophet(S), but He himself narrated those same instructions, making a case against him. That's possible in your perception because of the brain washing done to you and for the Shia narrative you were brought up with. But, not in the view of a rational Muslim, the simplest way is that Zaid(R) just like rest of Sahaba who were superior to him didn't understand that from that report that it meant Ahl al-bayt were designated as source of Guidance by Prophet(S). And what they understood from it, they tried to stick to it. Like Abu bakr(R) who honored Ahl al-bayt and strove to keep good relation with them, same goes with Zaid bin Arqam, who honored Ahl al-bayt and kept narrating their virtues till the last stage of his life.

This even includes Jabir bin Abdullah(R) to whom (a supposed divinely appointed source of guidance) approach to know about the final Hajj of Prophet(S), he narrated to him that event, while he even LED that source of guidance in prayer as well. This might seem not a big issue to you, but the for the narrative you are advocating, it is a big issue.

And, I already answered Zayd's(R) view that wives of Prophet(S) aren't included in Ahl al-bayt of Hadeeth Thaqalayn. And you haven't answered it, so I care to save time by not answer that which was already answered by me, and for which you didn't make any counter response.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 02:02:22 PM
Quote
Does this change the fact the there were classical scholars who weakened the narrator? This even includes Ibn Hajar who did say that the narrator committed mistakes. So what's the problem in calling the version as faulty? Or atleast saying that a report coming from a narrator of this level cannot be used in forming an Aqeedah, which you are arguing for. These are basics, those same scholars whom you are quoting would laugh on this argument that, a report coming from a narrator of this level, who was known for making mistakes, would be used to form an Aqeedah and that too when it contradicts numerous reports of Prophet and Understanding of Sahaba.

If you are here to implying that the grading of al-Albani or Ibn Hajar implies that, the report is spotless and perfectly authentic, even when Ibn Hajar himself admittted that the narrator was known for making mistakes, then I can't help you come out of your delusion. But if you say that, even though the narrator was truthful but would commit mistakes, which makes his report atleast Hasan, which implies it's not at top level of authenticity then, it you shouldn't make a fuss when I say the text is faulty, because the narrator wasn't a top level narrator , whose narration is being called faulty, its a narrator who was known for his mistakes.


Now, brother Noor-us-Sunnah is trying to explain that some classical scholars of Hadith may have considered him weak, or put a question mark on him. However, he knows full well that there is a delicate science to this. We find that for a large number of narrators, there tend to be a divergent number of views regarding them among the classical scholars. Some of those are known to be unfairly strict. There are rules concerning how to take the totality of comments made by these scholars.

This is precisely why Ibn Hajar, despite giving the positive and negative views of Kathir b. Zayd himself authenticates the chain with Kathir b. Zayd by Sanad.

This too, is precisely why Al-Albani does so too, as well as Al-Arnaut, who are arguably two of the most well respected Sunni scholars of Hadith in modern times. They are not ignorant about the fact a narrator has divergent views, because this exists for a large swathe of narrators. However, given they have studied thousands, upon thousands of narrators, they recognize how to collate all of the various views and give what they consider the most reliable overall view.

Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many others therefore regarded Kathir b. Zayd to transmit hadith to at least a Hasan level. This takes into account the divergent views, which stops it being at a Saheeh level, but is not strong enough to condemn it to being a Dhai'f (weak) level. This seems to be the overwhelming view of the great scholars of Hadith, particularly those who had access to the views of many of the others.

The only plausible claim that one can make here is that there is a more authentic version that this particular version contradicts. However, there is no evidence of this whatsoever.

Just because we find the Prophet claiming at one stage, that the Quran is a source of guidance we ought to hold onto if we do not wish to go astray, does not mean at other points he could not inform us of other critical sources of guidance. We know he had informed us to follow his Sunnah, to follow the rightly guided successors,  to follow his Ahlulbayt.


In terms of what one can use for Aqeedah, Hadith al-Thaqalayn is Muttawatir, particularly between the Sunnis and Shias. However, even if one were to claim it falls below Muttawatir, then the idea of only requiring Muttawatir for Aqeedah is not something adopted by Salafis:

IslamQA: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/130918/can-ahaad-hadeeths-be-accepted-with-regard-to-aqeedah

"3.If we say that matters of ‘aqeedah cannot be proven on the basis of ahaad reports, then it is possible to say that practical rulings cannot be proven on the basis of ahaad reports, because practical rulings are accompanied by the belief that Allah enjoined this and forbade that. If this opinion is accepted, then many of the rulings of sharee‘ah would be rendered invalid. If this idea is rejected then the idea that ‘aqeedah cannot be proven on the basis of ahaad reports should also be rejected, because there is no difference between the two, as we have explained.

To sum up: If an ahaad report is supported by corroborating evidence which indicates that this is true, then it becomes part of knowledge and rulings of practice and belief may be established. There is nothing to indicate that there should be any differentiation between the two. Any person who suggests that any of the imams differentiated between them has to prove that with a sound chain of narration from that imam, then he has to explain his evidence."


Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 02:13:19 PM
Quote
I say, that's completely fine for me. Because al-Albani wasn't the only Muhaddith in the world, it's fine if you want to go with his grading, but other disagreed and there is a scope for difference of opinion in this, and this is how an academic approach is, but hypocrisy is when, you take his grading, but reject his interpretation, because if your connotations were applied al-Albani himself would point out to you that, this is false and that would effect the grading of hadeeth as Munkar.

So you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't use he grading of al-Albani but reject his explanation, because there are several instances wherein Albani authenticated weak reports because in his view those reports were supported by other Sahih reports. But but rejecting his interpretation you are jeopardizing his whole grading.

I can absolutely take his grading but not fully agree with his interpretation, because they are two entirely different matters.

When he is grading the tradition, he is doing so on Sunni standards, and i regard him to be an authority on this matter and to have a much better understanding of narrators than Hani, yourself, or any online blogger. Therefore his grading, as well as that of Ibn Hajar, Al-Arnaut, and other authorities in this field allows me to have the most objective, authoritative and respected verdict on the chain of transmission of a particular hadith, which should be good enough for the vast majority of Sunnis.

His interpretation of the Hadith isn't based on his own judgement, as well as his desire to try to fit the Hadith with an already well crystallized Sunni/Salafi ideology.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 02:25:54 PM

Now, brother Noor-us-Sunnah is trying to explain that some classical scholars of Hadith may have considered him weak, or put a question mark on him.
Now..?? This point is from ages in the article, if you didn't have the tawfeeq to read it in the article then blame yourself.

And "May have..."??? I never tried to explain, they MAY HAVE considered him weak. Its clearly mentioned that they did weaken him.  You have started cheap shots, by putting words in my mouth.

However, he knows full well that there is a delicate science to this. We find that for a large number of narrators, there tend to be a divergent number of views regarding them among the classical scholars. Some of those are known to be unfairly strict. There are rules concerning how to take the totality of comments made by these scholars.
This was mentioned to remind you that what you are trying to implying is based on your ignorance. You think, online bloggers are weakening narrators out of nowhere. So I thought its important to make you face the ground reality.

This is precisely why Ibn Hajar, despite giving the positive and negative views of Kathir b. Zayd himself authenticates the chain with Kathir b. Zayd by Sanad.
This precisely why, I'm not rejecting the hadeeth as a whole by just calling the text as faulty. And such things aren't surprising from narrators who were known for making mistakes. Even if the sanad is hasan, a narrator of such level is open to make mistake.



Just because we find the Prophet claiming at one stage, that the Quran is a source of guidance we ought to hold onto if we do not wish to go astray, does not mean at other points he could not inform us of other critical sources of guidance. We know he had informed us to follow his Sunnah, to follow the rightly guided successors,  to follow his Ahlulbayt.


In terms of what one can use for Aqeedah, Hadith al-Thaqalayn is Muttawatir, particularly between the Sunnis and Shias. However, even if one were to claim it falls below Muttawatir, then the idea of only requiring Muttawatir for Aqeedah is not something adopted by Salafis:

IslamQA: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/130918/can-ahaad-hadeeths-be-accepted-with-regard-to-aqeedah

"3.If we say that matters of ‘aqeedah cannot be proven on the basis of ahaad reports, then it is possible to say that practical rulings cannot be proven on the basis of ahaad reports, because practical rulings are accompanied by the belief that Allah enjoined this and forbade that. If this opinion is accepted, then many of the rulings of sharee‘ah would be rendered invalid. If this idea is rejected then the idea that ‘aqeedah cannot be proven on the basis of ahaad reports should also be rejected, because there is no difference between the two, as we have explained.

To sum up: If an ahaad report is supported by corroborating evidence which indicates that this is true, then it becomes part of knowledge and rulings of practice and belief may be established. There is nothing to indicate that there should be any differentiation between the two. Any person who suggests that any of the imams differentiated between them has to prove that with a sound chain of narration from that imam, then he has to explain his evidence."
You are missing the point that this version of Thaqalayn, not hadeeth Hadeeth Thaqalayn itself, (if Shia narrative is applied) goes against other Mutawattir reports in Sunni books. Which discards the Shia narrative and upholds the Sunni explanation that Ahl al-bayt weren't designated as leaders or source of guidance but they were mentioned to be taken care of.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 02:29:04 PM
Quote
Answered several times, refer the previous discussions in the other threads,  i guess you left the older threads where we discussed this and i answered you, for the same reason.

Brother Noor-us-Sunnah has tried to propose an argument which i have not heard from anyone else. He claims that due to the grammar of the Hadith i have presented, it indicates it is likely Kathir b.Zayd transmitted a very ambiguous form of the Hadith.

Let us remind ourselves of his main point:

Quote
"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]

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."


To those who may be confused, brother Noor-Us-Sunnah claims he ought not to have used the singular, which makes it ambigous whether or not he mistakenly narrated a Hadith which had referred only to the Quran in singular, and then just lumped Ahlulbayt at the end in confusion.

However, this argument is of no use whatsoever and should be thrown out. All of the narrators in that chain of transmission were fluent in Arabic. Kathir b. Zayd was a native Arab and knew full well what was normal rhetoric, speech and grammar. In the Hadith , he is clearly relaying that the Prophet said he is leaving behind that which if we hold onto , we should never go astray, the Quran and the Ahlulbayt.

I'm sure Noor-us-Sunnah would himself admit that a fluent Arab transmitting a Hadith which at least in his mind includes the Ahlulbayt in addition to the Quran as what is being referred to for what we ought to hold on to, would have known that the singular to refer to both was improper. However, this is not the case, because it is apparent that his usage of this sort of language is proper and acceptable.

That is why i presented many other chains of fluent Arab narrators, though some of them may have been weak, also transmitting the Hadith in this manner:

Musnad of Imam Ahmad:

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

Jami' of Imam Tirmidhi:

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

Mu'jam Sagheer of Imama 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

In response, the brother claimed:

Quote
(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.

The problem with his reasoning is that these narrators all allegedly tried to verbatim quote a Hadith where only the Quran was being left, used the very same grammar as the Prophet to refer to the singular, but then lumped the Ahlulbayt at the end. Nobody should take this line of reasoning seriously, with all due respect.

If you read the traditions, they clearly stipulate the Prophet leaving behind two weighty things, and then use the singular in reference to both the Quran and the Ahlulbayt. No scholar has ever raised the objection about the grammar, because in the varying chains of narrators, it is clear that the usage of the singular is absolutely acceptable and not ambiguous.

These narrators, who were fluent Arabs, knew full well the Hadith they were narrating was about the Prophet leaving behind two weighty things, and when they used the singular, they did not attempt to amend it to duality or plurality because the usage of the singular is perfectly acceptable.







Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 02:30:09 PM
I can absolutely take his grading but not fully agree with his interpretation, because they are two entirely different matters.

When he is grading the tradition, he is doing so on Sunni standards, and i regard him to be an authority on this matter and to have a much better understanding of narrators than Hani, yourself, or any online blogger. Therefore his grading, as well as that of Ibn Hajar, Al-Arnaut, and other authorities in this field allows me to have the most objective, authoritative and respected verdict on the chain of transmission of a particular hadith, which should be good enough for the vast majority of Sunnis.

His interpretation of the Hadith isn't based on his own judgement, as well as his desire to try to fit the Hadith with an already well crystallized Sunni/Salafi ideology.
If you want to follow his grading then apply your own deviant narrative to it, then it's your wish, it's just like Quran, you have your own interpretation. But you can't ask your opponents to reject the views of Classical Scholars, some who out rightly weakened him and some who said he would make mistakes, and adopt the views of al-Albani and then ask Sunnis to reject the explanation of al-Albani and accept the deviant Shia narrative which goes against Mutawattir Sunni reports and even understanding of Sahabi.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 02:48:46 PM
Quote
Now..?? This point is from ages in the article, if you didn't have the tawfeeq to read it in the article then blame yourself.

And "May have..."??? I never tried to explain, they MAY HAVE considered him weak. Its clearly mentioned that they did weaken him.  You have started cheap shots, by putting words in my mouth.

 This was mentioned to remind you that what you are trying to implying is based on your ignorance. You think, online bloggers are weakening narrators out of nowhere. So I thought its important to make you face the ground reality.

You need to be honest with your readers brother Noor-us-Sunnah.

For those who are finding it difficult to follow, let me simplify this.

In the sciences of hadith, there are different levels of criticism. What Noor-us-Sunnah has done is looked at the first wave, of classical Hadith scholars, who often gave their verdicts or views on a narrator. We know that for a very large number of narrators, they often disagreed about them.

Scholars who came after, like Ibn Hajar, and later than this, like Al-Arnaut, and Al-Albani looked at what the totality of classical scholars had said, before they gave their overall verdict on a narrator. They were experts at knowing which classical scholars of Hadith were too strict, too lenient, and what external indicators and proofs could be used to give varying degrees of confidence in a narrator.

What Noor-us-Sunnah is doing is cherry picking verdicts of some classical scholars, ignoring the verdict of others, and then overruling scholars who have already collated all of the different views and are experts, such as Al-Albani, and then gone with them, which is not acceptable.

One can not say that a classical scholar gave one verdict, and Al-Albani has given another, and that they go with the classical scholar, because the criticism of the narrator is occurring at two entirely different levels.

The classical scholar gives an opinion. Al-Albani is an expert at looking at what all of the classical scholars have said, and then giving an overall verdict on the most likely degree of confidence we can have on the narrator.

This is why he deems the narrator to be at a 'Hasan' level, a view shared by many experts who have done the same, such as Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar etc. Online bloggers like Hani and Noor Us Sunnah have sought to go straight to cherry picking views of some classical scholars, and can hardly overrule the verdicts of those scholars who are deemed the foremost in the field of collating what all the classical scholars have said.

If you are a Sunni, you are obliged to follow the most knowledgeable or knowledgeable group on a particular field or area. The overwhelming majority of Sunni scholars accept that Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar are among the best qualified to give overall verdicts on narrators. It would be unwise to allow online bloggers, no matter how good their intentions, to try to overrule this.





Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 02:52:20 PM
Brother Noor-us-Sunnah has tried to propose an argument which i have not heard from anyone else. He claims that due to the grammar of the Hadith i have presented, it indicates it is likely Kathir b.Zayd transmitted a very ambiguous form of the Hadith.
I based my explanation on the authentic version, because a version which was narrated by a narrator was known for making mistakes or those who were weak narrators by agreement is being explained and corrected using the correct version. This is what the point was.


To those who may be confused, brother Noor-Us-Sunnah claims he ought not to have used the singular, which makes it ambigous whether or not he mistakenly narrated a Hadith which had referred only to the Quran in singular, and then just lumped Ahlulbayt at the end in confusion.

However, this argument is of no use whatsoever and should be thrown out. All of the narrators in that chain of transmission were fluent in Arabic. Kathir b. Zayd was a native Arab and knew full well what was normal rhetoric, speech and grammar. In the Hadith , he is clearly relaying that the Prophet said he is leaving behind that which if we hold onto , we should never go astray, the Quran and the Ahlulbayt.

It's not about them being native Arabs, its about them being weak narrators or atleast those who were known for making mistakes. And instead of rejecting this narration as a whole, it can be accepted  in the light of interpreting it as per authentic version.

As done below:
Quote
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 undertand an ambiguous hadeeth, because an authentic hadeeth of Prophet(saws) which is clear and accurate explains the other ambiguous hadeeth having faulty text.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 02:59:58 PM
You need to be honest with your readers brother Noor-us-Sunnah.

For those who are finding it difficult to follow, let me simplify this.

In the sciences of hadith, there are different levels of criticism. What Noor-us-Sunnah has done is looked at the first wave, of classical Hadith scholars, who often gave their verdicts or views on a narrator. We know that for a very large number of narrators, they often disagreed about them.
I was fair and honest. But That's hard to expect from a Shia.

This is what i said in the article after presenting the views that shows his weakness.

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].


Scholars who came after, like Ibn Hajar, and later than this, like Al-Arnaut, and Al-Albani looked at what the totality of classical scholars had said, before they gave their overall verdict on a narrator. They were experts at knowing which classical scholars of Hadith were too strict, too lenient, and what external indicators and proofs could be used to give varying degrees of confidence in a narrator.
Ibn Hajar even mentioned that the narrator makes mistakes, why are you running away from it. ANd are you claiming that a narrator who is Hasan, yet makes mistakes, who report can be classed as Hasan, can't make an error in the text? If not then then that's your ignorance. You need to educate yourself.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 03:15:41 PM
Quote
I was fair and honest. But That's hard to expect from a Shia.

This is what i said in the article after presenting the views that shows his weakness.

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].

Brother, i don't think your lack of accuracy is due to you wanting to be willfully dishonest. You're a human being, you obviously have been putting in a lot of time into the work you've done. I just feel you've misunderstood a few things.

You bring up the principle whereby disparagement is given preference over commendation, and that is generally true, but you are applying it inaccurately.

Do you think the great scholar of Hadith, Ibn Hajar, who himself would compile disparagement and praise of narrators in books you yourself have relied on heavily in your articles, didn't know that? You are fully aware that after he collated the varying views, he gave an overall verdict.

Similarly, Al-Albani was aware of this basic principle. However, he too was obviously aware that it isn't as simple as that. It is a general rule, but there are many nuances and varying criteria by which one should use to get to a better outcome. That is why he too, took the totality of what was said and used his expert opinion to give an overall view.

Al-Arnaut, and many others too, adopted this.

So to cherry pick classical scholars who considered him weak, and then claim this overrides what other scholars had said is not acceptable.

You know very well that if Ibn Hibban alone praised a narrator, even if nobody else disparaged that narrator, Al-Albani himself made clear he would often authenticate unknown narrators who may have been weak.

You are also aware that there are classical scholars who were known to be very strict, and whose disparagement was overruled if others praised the narrator.

It isn't as simple as you are trying to portray here. Yes, that is a general rule, but it is far more complicated than that.



Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 18, 2019, 03:17:48 PM
Quote
Ibn Hajar even mentioned that the narrator makes mistakes, why are you running away from it. ANd are you claiming that a narrator who is Hasan, yet makes mistakes, who report can be classed as Hasan, can't make an error in the text? If not then then that's your ignorance. You need to educate yourself.

Ibn Hajar, Al-Albani, and Al-Arnaut knew full well that he, like many other Hasan narrators, may make some mistakes and not be on the level of a Saheeh narrator. However they still deemed the chain as "Hasan".

While he could make an error in the text, your claim that the chain is weak goes against the verdicts of far more authoritative scholars of Hadith.

Your arguments about faulty or ambiguous text too, have been addressed.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 03:19:21 PM
Brother, i don't think your lack of accuracy is due to you wanting to be willfully dishonest. You're a human being, you obviously have been putting in a lot of time into the work you've done. I just feel you've misunderstood a few things.

You bring up the principle whereby disparagement is given preference over commendation, but that is generally true, but you are applying it inaccurately.

Do you think the great scholar of Hadith, Ibn Hajar, who himself would compile disparagement and praise of narrators in books you yourself have relied on heavily in your articles, didn't know that? You are fully aware that after he collated the varying views, he gave an overall verdict.

Similarly, Al-Albani was aware of this basic principle. However, he too was obviously aware that it isn't as simple as that. It is a general rule, but there are many nuances and varying criteria by which one should use to get to a better outcome. That is why he too, took the totality of what was said and used his expert opinion to give an overall view.

Al-Arnaut, and many others too, adopted this.

So to cherry pick classical scholars who considered him weak, and then claim this overrides what other scholars had said is not acceptable.

You know very well that if Ibn Hibban alone praised a narrator, even if nobody else disparaged that narrator, Al-Albani himself made clear he would often authenticate unknown narrators who may have been weak.

You are also aware that there are classical scholars who were known to be very strict, and whose disparagement was overruled if others praised the narrator.

It isn't as simple as you are trying to portray here. Yes, that is a general rule, but it is far more complicated than that.

Answer this :

Ibn Hajar even mentioned that the narrator makes mistakes. Are you claiming that a narrator who is Hasan, yet makes mistakes, whose report can be classed as Hasan, can't make an error in the text?
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 03:26:47 PM
While he could make an error in the text, your claim that the chain is weak goes against the verdicts of far more authoritative scholars of Hadith.
Stop being dishonest. Where did i say chain is weak? I said narrator was weakened. So please stop this deceit.


Your arguments about faulty or ambiguous text too, have been addressed.
And I refuted them.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 03:46:40 PM
Let me summarize what the problem in this discussion is:

You want Sunnis to accept the views of those Scholars who graded the chain of the controversial report as Hasan or Sahih, and reject those classical scholars who had weakened the narrator in the chain.

Now, For those Scholars who accepted the Hadeeth and gave their explanation to it, you want Sunnis to reject their explanation and go for the Shia narrative.

But you don't get that the Shia narrative contradicts many Mutawattir Sunni traditions, which would make the report narrated by controversial narrator as Munkar, So you want Sunnis to reject the Mutwattir narrations as well, or other Ahaad authentic traditions.

But at this position you won't find any Sunni supporting you, at this point you'll play the emotional card of Sunnis rejecting Ahl al-bayt. The root cause of which is a report with faulty and misinterpreted text. That's why I'm making you understand where the problem lies, you think only controversial grading is the issue, but that's not the the only issue there are many, and You won't disagree that eventually you will end up blaming Sunni Scholars even the ones whom you are try to stick for the grading when you'll find yourself cornered.

I wrote this is post to expose the double standards Shias hold, and how they keep picking and rejecting Scholars as that suit their desires and would eventually accuse all Sunni Scholars, just because their agenda can't pass the test of standard principles of accepting and using a hadeeth to form an idea or belief.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 18, 2019, 06:45:42 PM
I would like to ask brother Noor-Us-Sunnah , that, say i concede Zayd b. Aqram did not consider them to be sources of guidance, what does that prove? If a companion did not recognize the status of the Ahlulbayt, that does nothing to diminish it. Who is greater, Abu Bakr, or Zayd b. Aqram, in the eyes of Sunnis? It is clearly the first Khalifah. He undoubtedly did not hold onto the Ahlulbayt as a clear source of guidance alongside the Quran. Does that disprove clear commands of the Prophet (saw)?

Zayd himself contradicts Sunni scholarship when he in the Hadith claims wives are not Ahlulbayt. Noor-us-Sunnah himself would accept that in his view, the command is to look after the Ahlulbayt, to care for them, and this includes the wives.

Furthermore, it is not proven what Zayd actually thought. He may have accepted that the Prophet said to hold onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, but believed the Ahlulbayt were to be considered as certain bloodlines of the Prophet. Nevertheless, many turned away from this, and like they do today, served to give the words of the Prophet their own interpretation.

We find the same for other companions of other Prophets of God in the noble Quran, who clearly hear the command, but convince each other about how best to implement it.

We should concern ourselves with the following:

Did the Prophet (saw) command us to follow the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, as sources of guidance after which we would never go astray?





What appears from the initial part of this post is that, Zaid(R) is someone who for NO reason, didn't recognize the status of Ahl al-bayt(as per Shia narrative) and turned away from the instruction of Prophet(S), but He himself narrated those same instructions, making a case against him. That's possible in your perception because of the brain washing done to you and for the Shia narrative you were brought up with. But, not in the view of a rational Muslim, the simplest way is that Zaid(R) just like rest of Sahaba who were superior to him didn't understand that from that report that it meant Ahl al-bayt were designated as source of Guidance by Prophet(S). And what they understood from it, they tried to stick to it. Like Abu bakr(R) who honored Ahl al-bayt and strove to keep good relation with them, same goes with Zaid bin Arqam, who honored Ahl al-bayt and kept narrating their virtues till the last stage of his life.

This even includes Jabir bin Abdullah(R) to whom (a supposed divinely appointed source of guidance) approach to know about the final Hajj of Prophet(S), he narrated to him that event, while he even LED that source of guidance in prayer as well. This might seem not a big issue to you, but the for the narrative you are advocating, it is a big issue.

And, I already answered Zayd's(R) view that wives of Prophet(S) aren't included in Ahl al-bayt of Hadeeth Thaqalayn. And you haven't answered it, so I care to save time by not answer that which was already answered by me, and for which you didn't make any counter response.

Indeed the understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam for Hadeeth Thaqalayn, is a thorn in the throat of Shias, This Shia guy was forced to disown the Sahabi who Shias considered to be respectable. This is what happens when you are reluctant in accepting the truth.

[ Invalid Attachment ]
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 19, 2019, 12:40:48 AM
Quote
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.

Brother Noor-us-Sunnah is arguing, once again, something i consider to be completely unacceptable, and i am not normally one to claim things like this. Essentially, there is a tradition whereby the Prophet (saw) claims that he is leaving behind the Quran, which if we hold onto we will not go astray. The words used in that tradition are in the singular, because they refer to the noble Quran.

What Noor-us-Sunnah is now doing is something i have not seen a single scholar in any of their analysis of this tradition ever put a question mark on. He claims that because in the version i presented, the singular is used, when referring to the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, this may have been an error on part of the narrator, who may have conflated the two traditions , or lumped 'Ahlulbayt' at the end after perhaps hearing the tradition of the noble Quran.

This is an unacceptable claim to make for the following reasons:

1. Kathir b. Zayd was a fluent , native Arab. In the tradition he is transmitting, it is clear that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are the two things being referred to as after which, we would never go astray. He knows about Arabic grammar and correct modes of expression and speech, and the singular is clearly a well accepted manner of expression.

2. We also find in many other chains, of fluent, native Arabs, for the same version of other narrators, the narration clearly implying the Quran and Ahlulbayt as the two weighty things, but the singular being used. It would be absurd to accuse not only Kathir b. Zayd, but other native Arabs who knew full well that the tradition pertained to two things, to not amend very basic grammar!

If they had confused the Hadith and added 'Ahlulbayt' when it ought to have only been the Quran, they , being native Arabs would have immediately recognized the singular is what they were using. However, they never were concerned about this at all, because the singular is a perfectly acceptable usage of grammar and speech.

There is no ambiguity whatsoever. How much clearer can the Messenger of Allah get, brothers and sisters?

1. First he places the Quran and the Ahlulbayt side by side by referring to them as 'Thaqalayn', which many great Sunni scholars admit denotes their authority, importance and need to abide by their commands, as we do for the Quran.

2. Then he  states, if we held onto the two we would never go astray, making it abundantly clear that the two are the foremost source of guidance for our salvation.

3. He then finishes this with emphasizing again that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt will never deviate from each other until they meet the Prophet at the highest level of Jannah in the pool of Kawthar, which emphasizes that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt go hand in hand, they are inseparable, they are two sides of the same coin.

4. He then , at Ghadir Khumm as part of the same sermon, asks Muslims if he has greater authority over them then they do over their own selves. He grabs the hand of Ali and proclaims that whomsoever he is the Mawla of, Ali too, is their Mawla.


To this i say, Ya Rasullulah, we hear and we obey.

"...And whatever the Messenger has given you - take; and what he has forbidden you - refrain from. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty" - Noble Quran
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 19, 2019, 01:13:34 AM
Brother Noor-us-Sunnah is arguing, once again, something i consider to be completely unacceptable, and i am not normally one to claim things like this. Essentially, there is a tradition whereby the Prophet (saw) claims that he is leaving behind the Quran, which if we hold onto we will not go astray. The words used in that tradition are in the singular, because they refer to the noble Quran.

What Noor-us-Sunnah is now doing is something i have not seen a single scholar in any of their analysis of this tradition ever put a question mark on. He claims that because in the version i presented, the singular is used, when referring to the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, this may have been an error on part of the narrator, who may have conflated the two traditions , or lumped 'Ahlulbayt' at the end after perhaps hearing the tradition of the noble Quran.

This is an unacceptable claim to make for the following reasons:

1. Kathir b. Zayd was a fluent , native Arab. In the tradition he is transmitting, it is clear that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are the two things being referred to as after which, we would never go astray. He knows about Arabic grammar and correct modes of expression and speech, and the singular is clearly a well accepted manner of expression.

2. We also find in many other chains, of fluent, native Arabs, for the same version of other narrators, the narration clearly implying the Quran and Ahlulbayt as the two weighty things, but the singular being used. It would be absurd to accuse not only Kathir b. Zayd, but other native Arabs who knew full well that the tradition pertained to two things, to not amend very basic grammar!

If they had confused the Hadith and added 'Ahlulbayt' when it ought to have only been the Quran, they , being native Arabs would have immediately recognized the singular is what they were using. However, they never were concerned about this at all, because the singular is a perfectly acceptable usage of grammar and speech.

There is no ambiguity whatsoever. How much clearer can the Messenger of Allah get, brothers and sisters?

1. First he places the Quran and the Ahlulbayt side by side by referring to them as 'Thaqalayn', which many great Sunni scholars admit denotes their authority, importance and need to abide by their commands, as we do for the Quran.

2. Then he  states, if we held onto the two we would never go astray, making it abundantly clear that the two are the foremost source of guidance for our salvation.

3. He then finishes this with emphasizing again that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt will never deviate from each other until they meet the Prophet at the highest level of Jannah in the pool of Kawthar, which emphasizes that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt go hand in hand, they are inseparable, they are two sides of the same coin.

4. He then , at Ghadir Khumm as part of the same sermon, asks Muslims if he has greater authority over them then they do over their own selves. He grabs the hand of Ali and proclaims that whomsoever he is the Mawla of, Ali too, is their Mawla.


To this i say, Ya Rasullulah, we hear and we obey.

"...And whatever the Messenger has given you - take; and what he has forbidden you - refrain from. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty" - Noble Quran

Let me put the explanation in a simple way:

THIS AUTHENTIC VERSION - Which mentions Quran as the only source holding which people will not go astray.

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]

THIS ACTUAL VERSION WAS NARRATED IN THE BELOW FAULTY FORM.

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 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].

Now my attempt was to explain the faulty version in the light of the Actual version. And how did the Actual version turn into the above one? Well That is because of the narrator who had weakness in narrating.

As simple as that.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 19, 2019, 02:21:18 AM

1. First he places the Quran and the Ahlulbayt side by side by referring to them as 'Thaqalayn', which many great Sunni scholars admit denotes their authority, importance and need to abide by their commands, as we do for the Quran.
Which the Sahabi - who was an eye witness - understood as taking care of Ahl al-bayt, that too all those Ahl al-bayt for whom acceptance of charity was forbidden, which included members who would commit Sins too. Due to which who have disowned this Sahabi, who is considered respectable as per Shias. It's a huge loss for you.

And not to forget great Sunni Scholars again who understood this in the similar way.

2. Then he  states, if we held onto the two we would never go astray, making it abundantly clear that the two are the foremost source of guidance for our salvation.
Quran alone was mentioned as source of guidance holding which people wouldn't go astray. And how could holding people among whom were sinners(esp from Bani abbas, Bani Jafar, etc) lead to salvation in your view?

3. He then finishes this with emphasizing again that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt will never deviate from each other until they meet the Prophet at the highest level of Jannah in the pool of Kawthar, which emphasizes that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt go hand in hand, they are inseparable, they are two sides of the same coin.
This contradicts Quran 4:59, because immunity was mentioned only for Allah and Prophet(S) , not for anyone else.

And this isn't practical as well, because If Ahl al-bayt were with Quran, then how come they never taught the correct Quranic Qira’at? Instead they said it is permissible to recite any of the Qira’at while (supposedly) believing that the different Qira’at are the mistakes, for eg: Qira’at Hafs is a mistake, yet it’s permissible to recite it, and the different Qira’at lead to different rulings. Imams from Ahl al-bayt who were supposed to be protectors of Quran, ask people to recite Quran in false forms, which are based on Human mistakes. This is enough to show that the Shia interpretation of the wording that “Quran and Ahl al-bayt will never seperate with each other” is wrong and incorrect.

4. He then , at Ghadir Khumm as part of the same sermon, asks Muslims if he has greater authority over them then they do over their own selves. He grabs the hand of Ali and proclaims that whomsoever he is the Mawla of, Ali too, is their Mawla.
This occurred due to criticism of people over Ali(ra) for taking Khums in Yemen, even though Ahl al-bayt were prohibited to accept charity and were assigned a share in Khums. And that's why Prophet(SAWS) reminded people to take care of Ahl al-bayt, that's why the eye-witness Sahabi who understood this statement of Prophet(S), said that Ahl al-bayt are all those upon whom acceptance of charity was forbidden, they are same people for whom a portion of Khums was assigned. A clear relation between taking care of Ahl al-bayt being mentioned at Ghadeer and Ali(RA) being praised. While on other hand it is clearly proven that Quran was the only source mentioned at Arafah holding which Muslims wouldn't go astray(where religion was perfected) and the same was said by the Sahabi who narrated the correct version of Hadeeth Thaqalayn from Ghadeer.


To this i say, Ya Rasullulah, we hear and we obey.

"...And whatever the Messenger has given you - take; and what he has forbidden you - refrain from. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty" - Noble Quran
And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.(2:13)
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 19, 2019, 02:58:45 PM
Quote
Let me put the explanation in a simple way:

THIS AUTHENTIC VERSION - Which mentions Quran as the only source holding which people will not go astray.

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]

THIS ACTUAL VERSION WAS NARRATED IN THE BELOW FAULTY FORM.

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 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].

Now my attempt was to explain the faulty version in the light of the Actual version. And how did the Actual version turn into the above one? Well That is because of the narrator who had weakness in narrating.

As simple as that.

I have addressed this, but will do so again collating everything I've said together clearly. I just want to point out again that the use of the singular {هِ/hi/hu= IT} has no relevance to our discussion. Why? If the narrator was , allegedly confused enough to believe the Ahlulbayt were included in what was left, after which we would never go astray, being a native Arab, as well as adding the Ahlulbayt in the Hadith, he would also have amended the grammar, being a native Arab fluent in his language. However, neither he, nor many, many others who narrate similar variants of this version have, but rather have used the singular {هِ/hi/hu= IT}, which demonstrates it is perfectly acceptable in the Arabic language.

There are three key points i wish to make here:

Point one:

The tradition of Zayd b. Aqram occurred when he was very old and had forgotten much of what he remembered. Even if he sincerely only tried to narrate what he felt he could remember, he still omitted authentic expressions.

Indeed, every single version in Saheeh Muslim occurs when Zayd is very old and proclaims: "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 (saw), so accept what I narrate to you, do not compel me to narrate what I fail to narrate”.

In Ibn Majah with an authentic sanad we find him saying: "We said to Zaid bin Arqam: ‘Tell us a Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (saw).’ He said: ‘We have grown old and have forgotten, and (narrating) Ahadith from the Messenger of Allah (saw) is difficult (not a simple matter).’

Those who suffer from memory loss may sincerely believe they are narrating what they remember, but are more likely to confuse and mix things up while thinking what they are saying is accurate. For sake of argument, let us not assume this necessarily, but accept he omitted authentic expressions, some of which even you agree with.

You agree, for example, and there is no difference between us, that another authentic expression is:

"They will never deviate until they meet me at the Hawdh (Pool of Kawthar at the highest level of Jannah"

There is no dispute, and we are united in that this is an authentic expression, which Zayd has omitted here, perhaps due to forgetfulness.

Point two

The difference between the version of Zayd when he is old, and other versions are as follows:

In the Musnad of Ibn Rahwayh (teacher of Imam al-Bukhari) , as well as in the Mushkil al-Athar al-Tahawi, in a Hadith on the authority of Ali b. Abi Talib, that the Messenger of Allah (saw) had said:

 “I have left behind over you (al-Thaqalayn), that which if you hold fast to it you will never go astray...the Quran...and my Ahlulbayt"

In Saheeh Muslim we find:

"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...and my AhlulBayt...I remind you in the name of Allah of my Ahlulbayt ( three times)".


There is an authentic expression which is not in the Saheeh of Muslim, which does not contradict with it at all:

"If you hold fast to it you will never go astray"


Indeed, there is no contradiction between the two versions. They go in harmony, one placing in an authentic expression omitted by the other. Given the tradition has two Hasan chains, and many other Hasan chains due to the Shawahid, coming from many different chains of transmitters, it would be absurd to think they all united on the same error.

The only way you can dismiss the Hadith is if the tradition contradicts with the version of Saheeh Muslim. You can not use Dhann and speculation. I have to again emphasize, unless there is a contradiction, you can not throw away a Hasan hadith , with many, many chains and witnesses based on your own speculation of what could have happened.

So let us combine the traditions:

 “I have left behind over you al-Thaqalayn, which if you hold fast to it you will never go astray, the Quran, , in which there is right guidance and light, so hold fast to the Book of Allah and adhere to it, and my Ahlulbayt. I remind you in the name of Allah of my Ahlulbayt ( three times).They will never deviate until they meet me at the Hawdh (Pool of Kawthar at the highest level of Jannah.

Indeed, each of the three versions help to combine to give us a fuller picture and they go in harmony.

1. The Prophet (saw) begins by saying he is leaving behind the Thaqalayn, placing the Quran and Ahlulbayt side by side.

2. He proclaims that if we hold onto them, we will never go astray.

3. He emphasizes in the Quran there is guidance and light, so to hold onto it.

4. He then emphasizes his Ahlulbayt, which are of the two weighty things we hold onto to never go astray.

5. He beautifully emphasizes that the two go hand in hand by stating that they will never deviate from one another until they return to the Prophet (saw) at the highest level of Jannah.


How much clearer can the Messenger of Allah (saw) get? He uses many expressions to not only make it crystal clear, but to emphasize the Quran and the Ahlulbayt being side by side as sources of guidance. If this was a simple matter of asking the people to look after his family, why place the Quran side by side, why claim if we hold onto both we would never go astray, why emphasize the two will never deviate from each other until they reach the highest level of Jannah? This is hardly a call to give Khums to the Ahlulbayt, and many Sunni scholars have recognized it is a far greater command onto humanity.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 19, 2019, 06:48:32 PM
I have addressed this, but will do so again collating everything I've said together clearly. I just want to point out again that the use of the singular {هِ/hi/hu= IT} has no relevance to our discussion. Why? If the narrator was , allegedly confused enough to believe the Ahlulbayt were included in what was left, after which we would never go astray, being a native Arab, as well as adding the Ahlulbayt in the Hadith, he would also have amended the grammar, being a native Arab fluent in his language. However, neither he, nor many, many others who narrate similar variants of this version have, but rather have used the singular {هِ/hi/hu= IT}, which demonstrates it is perfectly acceptable in the Arabic language.
I have clarified your misunderstanding multiple times, and each time you are left answer-less you get absent for a span of time then returning by creating a new thread, bringing same arguments which were refuted repeatedly by me.

You think that if it was grammatically incorrect then the narrator would have changed the grammar, but as per your habbit which had lead you remain on misguidance, i.e. self-assuming the opponent's argument, you have misunderstood my claim. My claim is that the report in question having singular form, is open for interpretation, it's not incorrect grammatically, but rather it's open for interpretation, and the interpretation I gave was in the light of authentic version narrated by Zaid bin Arqam, which mentions Quran alone as source of guidance. If someone claims to reject this interpretation then that implies the interpretation he is giving is going against the stronger and correct version, hence could be rejected as well. So you argument is based on your misunderstanding, and hence costed wastage of time.


There are three key points i wish to make here:

Point one:

The tradition of Zayd b. Aqram occurred when he was very old and had forgotten much of what he remembered. Even if he sincerely only tried to narrate what he felt he could remember, he still omitted authentic expressions.
His narration has more authority over the narration in question narrated by a narrator known for making mistakes. Moreover, even if it is said that Zaid(R) missed an expression, that doesn't effect the content of the hadeeth nor the fact that the understanding of the hadeeth which held for this hadeeth renders my interpretation to  be correct and Shia narrative to be false. His understanding actually settles this dispute, that's the reason you chose to disown him in your earlier post.


Indeed, every single version in Saheeh Muslim occurs when Zayd is very old and proclaims: "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 (saw), so accept what I narrate to you, do not compel me to narrate what I fail to narrate”. 
Old age doesn't effect the content of the report, and the expression you claim him missed that doesn't effect the content of it either. And it is more valid and authoritative than the one narrated by a narrator who was criticized for making mistakes.

Moreover, This version in not just restricted to Sahih Muslim, it's in several other books, from other Sahaba as well, which again make your argument to be void.

From Hudhayfah bin Usayd al-Ghafar. [Mu’jam al-Tabrani al-Kabeer, vol 3, page 65, #2683]

From the WIFE of Zayd ibn Arqam. [al-Manaqib Ameer Al-Momineen Ali ibn Abi Talib, page 44 – 45 – 46, #23].

From Jabir(R). [Sharh Usool I’tiqaad Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, vol 1, page 81, #95].


Point two

The difference between the version of Zayd when he is old, and other versions are as follows:

In the Musnad of Ibn Rahwayh (teacher of Imam al-Bukhari) , as well as in the Mushkil al-Athar al-Tahawi, in a Hadith on the authority of Ali b. Abi Talib, that the Messenger of Allah (saw) had said:

 “I have left behind over you (al-Thaqalayn), that which if you hold fast to it you will never go astray...the Quran...and my Ahlulbayt"

In Saheeh Muslim we find:

"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...and my AhlulBayt...I remind you in the name of Allah of my Ahlulbayt ( three times)".
The major difference here is that the narration of Ali(R) was narrated via a narrator who was known for making mistakes in his transmission, never forget or try to cover this fact. And the narration of Zaid(R) from Sahih Muslim is more authoritative and reliable than the one from Kathir bin Zayd who was criticized for making mistakes.

There is an authentic expression which is not in the Saheeh of Muslim, which does not contradict with it at all:

"If you hold fast to it you will never go astray"
Sahih Muslim actually explicitly clarifies that what was to be held inorder not go astray.  Here is that version from Sahih Muslim, which clarifies it. That is Quran.

https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-muslim-vol-6-page-269-62272408.jpg

Similar clarification is in another books as well and again it is for Quran alone:

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

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

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

https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mustadrak-al-hakim-vol-3-page-613-6272.jpg

https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mujam-al-tabrani-al-kabeer-vol-3-page-64-2681.jpg

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

Indeed, there is no contradiction between the two versions. They go in harmony, one placing in an authentic expression omitted by the other.
The authentic version only mentions Quran as a source holding which people will not go astray. So if the faulty version interpreted in manner then it's in harmony otherwise there is a clear contradiction.

Given the tradition has two Hasan chains, and many other Hasan chains due to the Shawahid, coming from many different chains of transmitters, it would be absurd to think they all united on the same error.
Two Hasan chains? You mean both chains having same common narrator known for making mistakes? That's two chains? Well in that case the authentic version is has atleast 25 chains, which mentions Quran alone holding which people will not go astray. In addition to that there are other chains from other Sahaba like Hudhaifa, wife of Zaid bin Arqam, Jabir which support the version that Quran alone is to be held so as to not go astray. Ofcourse all of these can't gather upon an error of mentioning holding Quran alone.

And this doesn't end here: There are other evidences as well supporting the fact that  Quran alone is the 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]


How much clearer can the Messenger of Allah (saw) get? He uses many expressions to not only make it crystal clear, but to emphasize the Quran and the Ahlulbayt being side by side as sources of guidance. If this was a simple matter of asking the people to look after his family, why place the Quran side by side, why claim if we hold onto both we would never go astray, why emphasize the two will never deviate from each other until they reach the highest level of Jannah? This is hardly a call to give Khums to the Ahlulbayt, and many Sunni scholars have recognized it is a far greater command onto humanity.
Indeed Prophet(SAWS) was very clear, that why the eye-witness Sahabi who loved Ahl al-bayt (Zaid bin Arqam) clearly understood that Ahl al-bayt are to be taken care of, and they are all those upon whom acceptance of charity was forbidden which even included sinners. It's the deviant groups that emerged later who try to portray that this true lover of Ahl al-bayt - Sahabi - wasn't faithful. These people who emerged centuries later want to argue that Prophet(S) wasn't clear to his own companions who were witnessing his sermon, yet clear to them who came centuries later. As for mentioning Ahl al-bayt alongside Quran, then that is because giving Khums to Ahl al-bayt is proven from Quran. And Prophet(SAWS) had already mentioned Quran alone as source of guidance holding which people won't go astray, on Arafah where religion was perfected. As we find in Sahih Muslim this time from Jabir bin Abdullah, another lover of Ahl al-bayt. https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-muslim-vol-3-page-350-29501218.jpg

So there was no scope of any confusion for his companions at all.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 20, 2019, 08:12:38 PM
Quote
I have clarified your misunderstanding multiple times, and each time you are left answer-less you get absent for a span of time then returning by creating a new thread, bringing same arguments which were refuted repeatedly by me.

You think that if it was grammatically incorrect then the narrator would have changed the grammar, but as per your habbit which had lead you remain on misguidance, i.e. self-assuming the opponent's argument, you have misunderstood my claim. My claim is that the report in question having singular form, is open for interpretation, it's not incorrect grammatically, but rather it's open for interpretation, and the interpretation I gave was in the light of authentic version narrated by Zaid bin Arqam, which mentions Quran alone as source of guidance. If someone claims to reject this interpretation then that implies the interpretation he is giving is going against the stronger and correct version, hence could be rejected as well. So you argument is based on your misunderstanding, and hence costed wastage of time.

My emphasis on it being  grammatically correct, and an absolutely perfectly acceptable mode of expression is in response to your claim the dual ought to have been used. There is absolutely no ambiguity in the text itself, because it begins by stating:

إِنِّي تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا

Therefore, whatever is to follow, is included in this initial expression. The first was the noble Quran, and the Ahlulbayt are also added as a component of what was in the initial expression by usage of:

" وَأَهْلَ بَيْتِي "

There is therefore no ambiguity whatsoever in this tradition.

Now, you could make a claim that this tradition, which makes clearer that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are to be adhered to for guidance, after which we would never go astray contradicts reports which only mention holding onto the Quran. Such a claim would be incorrect, and i will explain how, but what you can not do is claim the text itself is ambiguous.

You have dedicated a large body of work on your website, youpuncturedtheark, to try to prove the following, which have been refuted:

1. You explicitly claimed those traditions which command us to adhere to both the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are weak, and have weak narrators. I have proven this to be a totally false claim, and some of your greatest Muhadditheen , from al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar, and many others have authenticated the Sanad. Your article therefore contradicts the comments made by your own major scholars who have far greater authority on the subject matter than you do, or i do, when it comes to Sunni hadith.  Will you not amend your article?

2. You then claimed that those scholars who have claimed it is reliable by chain have only done so out of leniency. I have proven this to also be totally false, as Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut authenticated the chain by their usual standards, and this has been proven.

3. You then claimed those who authenticated the chain, did not necessarily authenticate the content. Once again, i demonstrated how your greatest scholars also accepted the Matn , and did not question it.

When i have pressed you to now clearly relay to myself and the dear readers what your verdict on the chains i have presented are, you have avoided answering. This is highly unusual if you have built an entire argument on weakening every chain barring the version in Saheeh Muslim.

You must now realize the only argument you can push forward is that while the version commanding us to adhere to them both contains within it reliable chains, as well as witnesses in other chains of narrators, with unambiguous text, in your opinion, it contradicts a more authentic report in Saheeh Muslim.

If you agree to this, we can focus solely on dissecting the Matn.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 20, 2019, 08:36:44 PM
My emphasis on it being  grammatically correct, and an absolutely perfectly acceptable mode of expression is in response to your claim the dual ought to have been used. There is absolutely no ambiguity in the text itself, because it begins by stating:

إِنِّي تَرَكْتُ فِيكُمْ مَا إِنْ أَخَذْتُمْ بِهِ لَنْ تَضِلُّوا

Therefore, whatever is to follow, is included in this initial expression. The first was the noble Quran, and the Ahlulbayt are also added as a component of what was in the initial expression by usage of:

" وَأَهْلَ بَيْتِي "

There is therefore no ambiguity whatsoever in this tradition.
I have already proven that the text is open for interpretation. Two things were left no doubt, but only one was that which was to be adhered holding which people would not go astray. This is explicit from the accurate version of Sahih Muslim, which I already quoted in my previous post.  And I have followed the academic way of interpreting a report, that is to use an explicit report to interpret it.  Let me quote it again for benefit of readers, so that they can see for themselves, how clear and explicit it is, that Quran alone was mentioned to be adhered in accurate version.

https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-muslim-vol-6-page-269-62272408.jpg

Now, you could make a claim that this tradition, which makes clearer that the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are to be adhered to for guidance, after which we would never go astray contradicts reports which only mention holding onto the Quran. Such a claim would be incorrect, and i will explain how, but what you can not do is claim the text itself is ambiguous.
Please display some honesty in attributing claims to me. My claim is that this version is open for interpretation, and rather it's your Shia narrative which is contradicting the authentic version and many other reports as well, which I have explained in my previous response.


1. You explicitly claimed those traditions which command us to adhere to both the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are weak, and have weak narrators. I have proven this to be a totally false claim, and some of your greatest Muhadditheen , from al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar, and many others have authenticated the Sanad. Your article therefore contradicts the comments made by your own major scholars who have far greater authority on the subject matter than you do, or i do, when it comes to Sunni hadith.  Will you not amend your article?
Alhamdulillah I have proven my case by making you admit that the narrator in question was making mistakes. When this is done, you need to show some honesty and admit that a narrator in question is known for making mistakes, which  leads us to a clear reason why the narration from him is implicit and not same as from the stronger narrators.

3. You then claimed those who authenticated the chain, did not necessarily authenticate the content. Once again, i demonstrated how your greatest scholars also accepted the Matn , and did not question it.
When accepted it because the way it's content was interpreted by them was fine for them. But they way you interpret it is different and contradicts many Mutwattir traditions. And I have demonstrated to you that there are several scholars who explained Hadeeth thaqalayn as, that Quran was to be adhered and Ahl al-bayt to be taken care of.

And i have a clear upper hand in this case because, my interpretation is supported by a Sahabi who was an eye witness to this event. Due to which you were forced to disown him.


You must now realize the only argument you can push forward is that while the version commanding us to adhere to them both contains within it reliable chains, as well as witnesses in other chains of narrators, with unambiguous text, in your opinion, it contradicts a more authentic report in Saheeh Muslim.

If you agree to this, we can focus solely on dissecting the Matn.
I have made my case quite clear, in my previous response, That's why you never dare to respond it quoting me. That's a sign for readers to see your weakness. You know that you can't play these run arounds if you try to refute my point by quoting me, like I do when refuting you. Btw Don't miss stating that the narrator in the version you are using was known for making mistakes. That would be really helpful for the readers.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 20, 2019, 08:43:52 PM
Zayd b. Arqam wasn't just old, he was very advanced in age, and was losing his memory, something he not only attested to in Saheeh Muslim, but he also complained about the difficulty of narrating about the Prophet (saw) in an authentic Hadith in Ibn Majah. Zayd himself appeared to forget a supposedly basic fact, in that the wives of the Prophet (saw) were forbidden Sadaqah. You would expect a senior companion to know a very simple matter of Fiqh like that, especially given it is he you rely on for the "deepest" understanding of the tradition. However, you yourself admit he was wrong and mistaken in not believing Sadaqah was forbidden for the wives.

According to Sunni Hadith sciences, had this been a non-Sahabi, this would have affected the quality of this report, but given it is a companion, an exception is made. Despite being a very unscientific double standard, let us assume what Zayd reported itself was more or less accurate generally, though he missed - as we both agree - authentic expressions.

Your claim is that Kathir b.Zayd, who al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many of your greatest Muhadditheen regard to be Hasan-ul-Hadith, made an error in including the Ahlulbayt along with the Quran in terms of what was to be adhered onto, lest we never go astray. Now, you might have had a point if he was alone in narrating this, but as we see, he is not alone in narrating this.

We find that Al-Albani, and Al-Arnaut consider the following chain which does not contain Kathir b. Zayd to be 'Hasan' due to Shawahid:

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

al-Albani: وهو إسناد حسن في الشواهد  al-Arnaut: سنده حسن بالشواهد.


Despite Attiyah being a weak narrator, he was regarded as Saduq, and truthful, and not accused of lying. His weakness was not in lying, or forging, but Ibn Hajar declares it may have been in his memory. However, both Al-Albani and Al-Arnaut have noted that there is a Hasan chain from Kathir b. Zayd, which reduces the probability that this was a mistake both made. This means that if one considered it possible for Attiyah to make a mistake due to his memory, the fact the same tradition is transmitted by someone more reliable than he is, who was also faulted - though had a much better memory, the problem of considering the chain weak due to memory is now alleviated.

Furthermore, we also have another chain of narrators, going through another individual Zaib b. al-Hassan al- Anmati who was considered weak, but not accused of lying. Tirmidhi considered him to be truthful , Ibn Hibban considered him Thiqah, but Abu Hatim, who was very strict and whose rulings were not taken if anyone other than Ibn Hibban gave Tawtheeq or praise declared him Munkar. The overall verdict however, is that he is a weak narrator. The weakness is not in him being a forger, or a liar, but may be due to weakness in hadith , memory and the likes.

Given that Zayd b. Al-Hassan narrates an almost identical report, but perhaps mistakenly declares this occurring at Arafah, and not Ghadir Khumm, it provides another witness:

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

While the chain is weak on its own, Zayd b. al-Hassan , like Attiyah, are merely weak narrators, but not themselves accused of lying, forging or fabricating, and together, the paths strengthen each other and make it unlikely all of these narrators somehow happened to coincidentally make the same mistake.

Furthermore, there is yet another path that does not include liars or forgers in the Ansab al-Ashraf of Baladhuri:

عبدالملك بن محمد بن عبد الله القرشي -> يحيى بن حماد -> أبو عوانة -> العماش -> حبيب بن أبي ثابت -> `أمير بن وائل أبو طفيل -> زيد بن ارقم … قال انى تارك فيكم الثقلين ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله وعترتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا على الحوض…

The only weakness in this chain is Habib b. Abi Thabit, who was a Mudallis of the third category. Some scholars would accept this report, but they are in the minority. However, we do find evidence that the great scholar, Imam Tahawi, was satisfied that Habib b. Abi Thabit, whose lifetime largely overlapped Abu Tufayl, met him, given he declares a similar chain to be Saheeh:


كما حدثنا أحمد بنُ شُعيب قال: حدثنا أبو عوانة، عن سليمان – يعني الأعمش – قال: حدثنا حبيب بن أبي ثابت، عن أبي الطفيل، عن زيد بن أرقم قال:
لما رجع رسول الله (ص) عن حجة الوداع ونزل بغدير خم أمر بدوحات فقممن ثم قال :« كأني دعيت فأجبت إني قد تركت فيكم الثقلين أحدهما أكبر من الآخر كتاب الله عزّ وجل وعترتي أهل بيتي فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهما فإنهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا علي الحوض »، ثم قال : «إن الله عزّ وجل مولاي وأنا ولي كل مؤمن ومؤمنة» ثم أخذ بيد علي رضي الله عنه فقال : «من كنت وليه فهذا وليه ، اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه» ، فقلت لزيد : سمعته من رسول الله (ص) ؟ فقال : ما كان في الدوحات أحد إلاّ رآه بعينه وسمعه بأذنه ) ثم قال الطحاوي :

( فهذا الحديث صحيح الإسناد لا طعن لأحد في أحد من رواته







Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 20, 2019, 09:08:48 PM
The version whereby the Prophet saw commands people to hold onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, after which, they would never go astray comes from:

1. At least 20 chains of narrators.
2. At least five different companions of the Prophet (saw)
3. Two outright Hasan chains, and other supporting chains which are Hasan due to Shawahid. 
4. Five chains of narrators without any overlap whatsoever, including from different companions.

Your claim, that Kathir b. Zayd heard hadith al-Thaqalayn and mistakenly added the Ahlulbayt as that which people were to hold onto, to never go astray after, would be given more weight if he was alone in narrating it. There are many other chains of narrators, of individuals who are not accused of lying or forging, but considered truthful with weakness being in other areas, who have reported the very same thing, making it unlikely they all happened to mistakenly narrate something in accurate, especially given Kathir b. Zayd is Hasan-ul-Hadith.

The only plausible alternative for you to try to argue is that this was not an innocent mistake, but a forgery and wider conspiracy, which would not be difficult to throw out.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 20, 2019, 09:23:49 PM
Quote
I have already proven that the text is open for interpretation. Two things were left no doubt, but only one was that which was to be adhered holding which people would not go astray. This is explicit from the accurate version of Sahih Muslim, which I already quoted in my previous post.  And I have followed the academic way of interpreting a report, that is to use an explicit report to interpret it.  Let me quote it again for benefit of readers, so that they can see for themselves, how clear and explicit it is, that Quran alone was mentioned to be adhered in accurate version.

 Please display some honesty in attributing claims to me. My claim is that this version is open for interpretation, and rather it's your Shia narrative which is contradicting the authentic version and many other reports as well, which I have explained in my previous response.

I would argue the opposite. The version in Saheeh Muslim is open for interpretation, and the version i presented is crystal clear:

“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.”

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.

This is absolutely clear. If we hold onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, we will never go astray. There is no ambiguity here. Your claim that the singular verb makes this ambiguous is a claim that should be thrown out. That verb is perfectly acceptable to be used, it has been used in many other reports, and no scholar has ever claimed it renders this version ambiguous. There has been no doubt that in this version, it is clear the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are two things to be held onto, so that we would never go astray.

The claim that this contradicts a more authentic report in Saheeh Muslim is an entirely different matter however. What you can not be doing is claiming this report itself is ambiguous, when it is clear.

The version in Saheeh Muslim however, i will accept, could be open to interpretation.  Many of your own scholars have themselves stated the Prophet (saw) placing the Quran along with the Ahlulbayt,  as two weighty things in his place, demonstrates the need to uphold and abide by both. Even though the Prophet (saw) mentions that the Quran is guidance, and we should hold fast onto it, this does not mean he denies the same should be done for his Ahlulbayt. However, it leaves ambiguity because a good case can be made in interpreting this way, and it is not just the Shia who do so, but your own scholars:

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]


Just by using the word 'Thaqalayn', placing the Quran side by side, and then claiming that they will never deviate from one another until the pool of Kawthar, it gives the impression that the two are to be held onto for guidance, the two will not dispute one another (some argue the consensus of the Ahlulbayt such as Ibn Taymiyyah).


However, when the Prophet (saw) mentions this:

"“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.”

It should remove any ambiguity for those who previously doubted.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 20, 2019, 09:34:33 PM
Brother Noor-us-Sunnah, who obviously has put in a lot of effort, i have no doubt to judge, for the sake of Allah in his mind with this website "youpuncturedtheark" has for years made the following claims:

1. The versions of Thaqalayn which command us to adhere explicitly to the Quran and Ahlulbayt are all weak, and have weak narrators. I have proven this to be false , given al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar , and some of the greatest Sunni Muhadditheen have authenticated the chain.

2. In updating his article following debates over the years, he included a section trying to explain away why some authenticated the chain, claiming they were being lenient. This again, was proven to be false.

3. A more recent argument he then brought up was pertaining to the text of the version authenticated as 'Hasan' by Al-Albani and Al-Arnaut. He claimed that the use of singular verbs made it open to interpretation. However, there is not a single scholar who has read this version and made the same remark. The Hadith in the second version clearly commands adhering to the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, this is what the narrators would have understood, this is what the compilers would have understood, and this is what the Ijma of Sunni scholars took it to be. This is an attempt - perhaps not deliberately but out of some sort of inner desire- to muddy and weaken the basis for accepting this version further, but it is an argument which should be thrown out.


Given his claim that the text, as well as the chain of narrators and interpretation of some of the greatest Sunni scholars such as Al-Albani , Ibn Hajar, Imam Nawawi, Al-Arnaut, Azamakshari, Ibn Athir go against the claims made in his article, which was the idea that the tradition of Thaqalayn was just about taking care of the family and the wives, he has now evolved his argument and focused more heavily on two key areas.

They are:

1. Trying to claim that even if this version is declared Hasan, has Shawahid that are declared Hasan, and is transmitted in many other chains, it still contradicts a more authentic report in Saheeh Muslim.

2. Zayd b. al-Arqam didn't interpret it like al-Albani, Ibn Athir, Imam Nawawi, and his views should be taken above these scholars.

In my next few posts, i will prove how there is no contradiction with the version in Saheeh Muslim, which was also the view Al-Albani, and many of the great Muhadditheen themselves had. I will also demonstrate how his claim of Zayd b. al-Arqam interpreting it in any way whatsoever is not proven, but ambiguous in its own right. I have not disowned Zayd, i merely claimed that let us first prove the chain and text of the version i presented, which take priority no matter how many companions had another interpretation. Let us do that first, rather than working our way backwards.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 21, 2019, 01:18:43 AM

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

al-Albani: وهو إسناد حسن في الشواهد  al-Arnaut: سنده حسن بالشواهد.


Interestingly, Attiyah, who was considered truthful but who made many mistakes due to a poor memory, is regarded as having a chain with him elevated to the level of Hasan. This is probably due to the fact Al-Albani and Al-Arnaut considered other chains of narrations, with the very same text (which were cited before, namely the two Hasan chains, and others), making it less likely he would have made the exact same mistake with nearly identical words given narrators more reliable than him have narrated the very same thing.

Furthermore, despite  Imaam Ijlee, Imaam Ibn Sa'd, and Imaam Timidhi declaring him Thiqah, he is overall considered to be weak. However, despite that, we find that his traditions can still be used as proof and support, which is exactly what strengthens the chain with Kathir b. Zayd.

Imaam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: "He is Da'eef ul-Hadeeth, write his narrations (for Mutaabi'aat and Shawaahid)." [Al-Jarh wal Ta'deel: 6/383]

 Imaam Yahya ibn Ma'een said: "He is Da'eef, however, write his narrations (for mutaabi'aat)" [Al-Kaamil by Ibn Adee: 5/369, Chain Hasan]

 Imaam Ibn Adee said: "He is Da'eef but in spite of this, write his narration (for mutaabi'aat)" [Al-Kaamil fi Du'afa ar-Rijaal: 5/370]


Therefore the chain indeed is Hasan due to Shawahid. The weakness of Attiyah is not sufficient to render it too weak to be elevated and doubts about his memory are addressed somewhat by the fact this hadith is narrated verbatim by many others, including by reliable narrators.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 21, 2019, 02:46:00 AM
Zayd b. Arqam wasn't just old, he was very advanced in age, and was losing his memory, something he not only attested to in Saheeh Muslim, but he also complained about the difficulty of narrating about the Prophet (saw) in an authentic Hadith in Ibn Majah. Zayd himself appeared to forget a supposedly basic fact, in that the wives of the Prophet (saw) were forbidden Sadaqah. You would expect a senior companion to know a very simple matter of Fiqh like that, especially given it is he you rely on for the "deepest" understanding of the tradition. However, you yourself admit he was wrong and mistaken in not believing Sadaqah was forbidden for the wives.

According to Sunni Hadith sciences, had this been a non-Sahabi, this would have affected the quality of this report, but given it is a companion, an exception is made. Despite being a very unscientific double standard, let us assume what Zayd reported itself was more or less accurate generally, though he missed - as we both agree - authentic expressions.
Just to expose the dishonesty of this Shia guy to the readers, I would be again reminding that how you keep repeating the arguments that were refuted several times by me. And you know that your arguments are too weak, that's why you are scared to even quote the point I make while trying to make your feeble responses. While I quote you each time, then refute you, so the readers get a better opportunity to understand what's going on. So please don't insult the intellect of readers with such tricks.

I refuted this point several times and this is the response:

Indeed, Zayd bin Arqam(RA) said he had become old and forgotten many things, this shows the  extreme carefulness and cautiousness of Zayd(RA) in narrating hadeeth of Prophet(SAWS). He wanted to narrate only that hadeeth, which he still remembered properly, about which he was confident and sure. Which makes the hadeeth more stronger.

Let us quote what Zayd(RA) said:

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.

As for the argument of Ikhtilat; then this is an invalid argument in this case. Ikhtilat is when a narrator confuses events and mixes texts and wordings. If a narrator has not done this then he is not deemed a Mukhtalit regardless of whether he forgot some events or not, as long as he doesn’t mix and confuse events he’s good. And none of the Scholar ever claimed that Zayd bin Arqam(RA) was Mukhtalit. Therefore, the argument brought up by Shias, is invalid and it was due to their ignorance and misunderstanding of Hadeeth Sciences.

Moreover, it isn’t just that Zayd(ra) narrated the hadeeth only, rather he shared his view and explained it as well, about who are Ahlelbayt mentioned in hadith al-Thaqalayn. And this view of Zayd, supports the hadeeth he narrated and it refutes the claims that the hadeeth is about adhering both Quran and Ahlelbayt.

As for him missing the expression of "they will not seperate until they reach me at the pond", then this was the response I gave, which you purposely dodge.

[ Invalid Attachment ] 

[ Invalid Attachment ]
So don't be in delusion that the readers would be gullible enough to not notice how keep dodging the responses I give you, and yet bring the same arguments again and again.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 21, 2019, 04:23:43 AM

Your claim is that Kathir b.Zayd, who al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and many of your greatest Muhadditheen regard to be Hasan-ul-Hadith, made an error in including the Ahlulbayt along with the Quran in terms of what was to be adhered onto, lest we never go astray. Now, you might have had a point if he was alone in narrating this, but as we see, he is not alone in narrating this.
Kathir bin Zayd, is the guy who you admitted that was known was making mistakes and could have an made an error in the text. In case you forgot then read it yourself.[ Invalid Attachment ]
Your self-made assumption as-usual and attributing it to me is wrong and rather a deceitful attempt of yours which as become your habbit, which readers should take a notice.

My argument is that, the narrator(known for making mistakes) here missed some important words  which would have clarified that the mention of Ahl al-bayt was a reminder to people that Prophet(s) left his family too, which people needed to take care. While this is clear in the accurate version from Sahih Muslim and other books. So this is the issue not the one you made up. Or say he flipped the structure of the content making it confusing or appear in one way to people like you as if both are to be adhered to not go astray. Which I'll explain clearly while explaining Zayd bin Hasan's example and why he narrated contradictory reports. So don't miss it or dodge it while trying to answer me, as usual.


We find that Al-Albani, and Al-Arnaut consider the following chain which does not contain Kathir b. Zayd to be 'Hasan' due to Shawahid:

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

al-Albani: وهو إسناد حسن في الشواهد  al-Arnaut: سنده حسن بالشواهد.
Meaning it is not Hasan on it's own, but rather due to supporting chain, in other words it's weak on its own.

And the content of this report is Munkar, and it's not identical to the ambiguous one from Kathir bin Zayd. Here the structure of the content is messed up and is contradicting the Accurate version.


Despite Attiyah being a weak narrator, he was regarded as Saduq, and truthful, and not accused of lying. His weakness was not in lying, or forging, but Ibn Hajar declares it may have been in his memory.
A narrator with weak memory could screw up the content structure of the report, as it happened in this case. And since you are using the view of Ibn Hajar on Atiyya then you need to know that he was declared a Mudallis as well by Ibn Hajar, so you can't have your cake and eat it too. if you bring in the issue of tadlees, a whole can of worms is gonna open, and it's not that simple. And to reject that Attiya was a Mudallis, one needs to back the claim from authoritative and classical Scholar, not a recent deviant nobody like As for Mahmood Saeed Mamdoh, who is a biased innovator, who has been criticized by Scholars for his ignorance of Hadeeth science, bias and his unacademic approach. Hence his view holds no weight in the sight of Ahlesunnah.

Here is an example from his book Rafa’ al-Minarah https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/saeed-mamduh.jpg by  where he is misquoting Imam Ibn al-Qayyim. He attributing the madhhab that prophets are alive in their graves to Ibn al-Qayyim by quoting from Nuniyah. In reality Ibn al-Qayyim was quoting the view of his opponents before refuting them. He left the intial of the poem which also indicates that he was presenting opponent’s arguments. Here is the initial:

فإن احتججتم بالشهيد بأنه … حيّ كما قد جاء في القرآن
والرسل أكمل حالة منه بلا … شك وهذا ظاهر التبيان
فلذاك كانوا بالحياة أحق من … شهدائنا بالعقل والبرهان

Ibn al-Qayyim starts the refutation like this:

فيقال أصل دليلكم في ذاك … حجتنا عليكم وهي ذات بيان
إن الشهيد حياته منصوصة … لا بالقياس القائم الأركان
هذا مع النهي المؤكد أننا … ندعوه ميتا ذاك في القرآن
ونساؤه حل لنا من بعده … والمال مقسوم على السهمان
هذا وأن الأرض تأكل لحمه … وسباعها مع أمة الديدان
لكنه مع ذلك حيّ فارح … مستبشر بكرامة الرحمن
فالرسل أولى بالحياة لديه مع … موت الجسوم وهذه الأبدان
وهي الطرية في التراب وأكلها … فهو الحرام عليه بالبرهان
ولبعض أتباع الرسول يكون ذا … أيضا وقد وجدوه رأي عيان

Hence the views of such dishonest, biased and in-academic person  holds no weight in the sight of Ahlesunnah.


Furthermore, we also have another chain of narrators, going through another individual Zaib b. al-Hassan al- Anmati who was considered weak, but not accused of lying. Tirmidhi considered him to be truthful , Ibn Hibban considered him Thiqah, but Abu Hatim, who was very strict and whose rulings were not taken if anyone other than Ibn Hibban gave Tawtheeq or praise declared him Munkar. The overall verdict however, is that he is a weak narrator. The weakness is not in him being a forger, or a liar, but may be due to weakness in hadith , memory and the likes.
Ibn Hibban's Tawtheeq is not taken into consideration, this is what Al-Albani himself said, and several others as well.

As for Zayd bin Hassan then,  Imam Abu Ḥātim said: “Munkar Al Ḥadīth”[Tahdhib al-Tahdhib vol 3, page 406 #740] ; Imam al-Dhahabi  declared Zayd ibn al-Hasan al-Anmati as Weak. [Al-Kashif by al-Dhahabi vol 1, page 416 #1731] ; Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani declared Zayd ibn al-Hasan al-Anmati as Weak. [Taqreeb al Tahdheeb, page 352, #2139 by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani]. If Abu Hatim was wrong, then Imam al-Dhahabi or Ibn Hajar would have rejected the view of Abu Hatim and declared him truthful, while this wasn't the case.


Given that Zayd b. Al-Hassan narrates an almost identical report, but perhaps mistakenly declares this occurring at Arafah, and not Ghadir Khumm, it provides another witness:

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

While the chain is weak on its own, Zayd b. al-Hassan , like Attiyah, are merely weak narrators, but not themselves accused of lying, forging or fabricating, and together, the paths strengthen each other and make it unlikely all of these narrators somehow happened to coincidentally make the same mistake.
Attiyyah was a mudallis too, so don't use this silly argument that he wasn't accused of lying, etc. If you didn't get what I said, then ask me I'll try to educate you, what Tadlees means.

But Zayd bin Hassan whom you admitted that He was a weak narrator, has interesting reports as well, which contradicts his own report. Nullifying your whole theory.

And why does he have contradictory reports? It is because of the structure of content he used while narrating, which isn't surprising to occur from a weak narrator.

Now pay attention:

(Muhammad bin al-Fadl al-Saqti — Sa`eed bin Sulayman) & (Muhammad bin `Abdullah al-Hadrami & Zakariya bin Yahya al-Saji) — Both from — Nasr bin `Abdul-Rahman al-Washa’ — Zayd bin al-Hasan al-Anmati — Ma`rouf bin Khurboudh — Abi al-Tufayl — Hudhayfah bin Usayd al-Ghafar. [Mu’jam al-Tabrani al-Kabeer, vol 3, page 65, #2683]
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mujam-al-tabrani-al-kabeer-vol-3-page-65-2683.jpg

(Muhammad bin `Abdullah al-Hadrami &  Zakariya bin Yahya al-Saji —  Nasr bin `Abdul-Rahman al-Washa’) & (Ahmad bin al-Qasim bin Musawir al-Jawhari — Sa’eed bin Sulayman al-Wasiti)  — Both from — Zayd bin al-Hasan al-Anmati — Ma`rouf bin Khurboudh — Abi al-Tufayl — Hudhayfah bin Usayd al-Ghafar. [Mu’jam al-Tabrani al-Kabeer, vol 3, page 200 – 201, #3052]
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mujam-al-tabrani-al-kabeer-vol-3-page-201-3052.jpg

Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Hamdan — al-Hasan bin Suffiyan — Nasr bin `Abdul-Rahman al-Washa`— Zayd bin al-Hasan al-Anmati — Ma`rouf bin Khurboudh — abu al-Tufayl — Hudhayfah bin Usayd. [Hilyat al-Awliya, vol 1, page 355].
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/hilyat-al-awliya-vol-1-page-355.jpg

See these three chains from Zayd bin al-Hasan, the content structure of text is such that, "He first mentions Quran, then clarifies that it is holding it will not make people go astray, then mentions Ahl al-bayt, So here is clarity that Quran is to be held and holding it people will not go astray. And this version is support by the authentic version of Zaid bin Arqam in Sahih Muslim.

While when He narrated the version in Tirmidhi which you quoted, He flipped the structure. Instead of Saying Quran first and then saying holding it people will not go astray. He flipped the structure and started off by saying, Prophet(S) left that which abiding by people will not go astray, Quran and Ahl al-bayt. This made people fall in confusion and misunderstanding, as in one way it looks like abiding both Quran and Ahl al-bayt to not go astray. But when you reflect back to the other version from this same guy, where he didn't flip the structure, and which is supported by the accurate version you get the clarity that, Quran was mentioned, then he said, adhering it people will not go astray, then he mentions Ahl al-bayt. Which proved that Quran alone was to be adhered to not go astray.

So I hope this demonstration helps the readers see, how weak narrators or narrators who were known for making mistakes, flipped the structure of the content. Had they mentioned Quran first and then said that holding it people won't go astray and then said Ahl al-bayt, that would have not made people fall into the confusion. That's why it is important to the stick to the version narrated by trustworthy narrators , instead of relying on weak narrators or those who were known for making mistakes.


Furthermore, there is yet another path that does not include liars or forgers in the Ansab al-Ashraf of Baladhuri:

عبدالملك بن محمد بن عبد الله القرشي -> يحيى بن حماد -> أبو عوانة -> العماش -> حبيب بن أبي ثابت -> `أمير بن وائل أبو طفيل -> زيد بن ارقم … قال انى تارك فيكم الثقلين ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله وعترتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا على الحوض…

The only weakness in this chain is Habib b. Abi Thabit, who was a Mudallis of the third category. Some scholars would accept this report, but they are in the minority. However, we do find evidence that the great scholar, Imam Tahawi, was satisfied that Habib b. Abi Thabit, whose lifetime largely overlapped Abu Tufayl, met him, given he declares a similar chain to be Saheeh:

Since you admit that Habib bin Abi Thabit is a Mudallis, that itself is sufficient to discard the report. But still this is a good example.

Muhammad ibn `Ali al-Shaybani — Ahmad ibn Hazim al-Ghifara — Abu Nu`aym —Kamil Abu al-`Ala’ — Habib ibn Abi Thabit — Yahya ibn Ja`dah —  Zayd ibn Arqam. [Mustadrak al Hakim, vol 3, page 613, #6272].
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/mustadrak-al-hakim-vol-3-page-613-6272.jpg

Here you see, Habib bin Abi Thabit narrating the report, while mentioning Quran alone a source holding which people will not go astray.  Hence you need to refer the explanation I gave using the example of Zayd bin hasan and flipping of content structure, to understand why were narrators reporting  in a way which was contradictory.

Moreover, the report is from Baladhuri, who doesn't have tawtheeq from Scholars, which implies he was majhool. And you may say here is report from Tirmidhi, but there Habib is directly narrating from Zaid(R) being a mudallis and never hearing from Zaid(R).
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 21, 2019, 04:46:07 AM
The version whereby the Prophet saw commands people to hold onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, after which, they would never go astray comes from:

1. At least 20 chains of narrators.
2. At least five different companions of the Prophet (saw)
3. Two outright Hasan chains, and other supporting chains which are Hasan due to Shawahid. 
4. Five chains of narrators without any overlap whatsoever, including from different companions.

Your claim, that Kathir b. Zayd heard hadith al-Thaqalayn and mistakenly added the Ahlulbayt as that which people were to hold onto, to never go astray after, would be given more weight if he was alone in narrating it. There are many other chains of narrators, of individuals who are not accused of lying or forging, but considered truthful with weakness being in other areas, who have reported the very same thing, making it unlikely they all happened to mistakenly narrate something in accurate, especially given Kathir b. Zayd is Hasan-ul-Hadith.

The only plausible alternative for you to try to argue is that this was not an innocent mistake, but a forgery and wider conspiracy, which would not be difficult to throw out.

Most of this has been dealt in my previous post. What needs to be addressed is that, all the chains have weakness, and in most cases they contradict the reports by same narrators whom you are using, as i demonstrated. And not to forget the wording of all those which you are referring due to your ignorance isn't same. While the accurate version is via 30 chains,  and  they were narrated by 4 different Sahaba.

so the collection of weaker chains for Munkar or faulty text against the accurate version holds no ground.

Hafiz al-Zayla’i said:

قال الحافظ الزيلعي في نصب الراية 1/360

وكم من حديث كثرت رواته و تعددت طرقه وهو حديث ضعيف كحديث…. بل قد لا يزيد كثرة الطرق الا ضعفا

There are many of traditions reported by numerous narrators and many chains, yet they are still weak….Many a time, Abundant chains only increase the narration in weakness. [Nasb-ul-Rayah vol 1, page 360 ]

Even Shia Scholars rejected some of their ahadeeth having many chains due their weakness. For example:

The Shia researcher of the book “al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah” Sa’ib Abdul-Hameed, he praises the author, the esteemed Shia Scholar Shaykh al-Mufeed for his scientific professional method in the book by saying:

“In this book we can clearly see the correct methodology (of al-Mufeed) in his research and in how he extracts proofs. He holds on to the authentic established narration and leaves all else, even if what opposes it was related by the great ones such as al-Saduq and ibn al-Junayd. He shows complete disregard to the multitude of narrations whose chains are unreliable, instead he relies on the single authentic chain leaving behind a large pile of weak and fabricated reports. He is the expert diver who selects the pure pearls leaving behind the rubble that floats in the oceans.”[al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah, by Shaykh al-Mufeed, Tahqeeq by Sa’ib Abdul Hameed, page 12].
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 21, 2019, 04:55:37 AM
I would argue the opposite. The version in Saheeh Muslim is open for interpretation, and the version i presented is crystal clear:

“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.”

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.

This is absolutely clear. If we hold onto the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, we will never go astray. There is no ambiguity here. Your claim that the singular verb makes this ambiguous is a claim that should be thrown out. That verb is perfectly acceptable to be used, it has been used in many other reports, and no scholar has ever claimed it renders this version ambiguous. There has been no doubt that in this version, it is clear the Quran and the Ahlulbayt are two things to be held onto, so that we would never go astray.

The claim that this contradicts a more authentic report in Saheeh Muslim is an entirely different matter however. What you can not be doing is claiming this report itself is ambiguous, when it is clear.

The version in Saheeh Muslim however, i will accept, could be open to interpretation.  Many of your own scholars have themselves stated the Prophet (saw) placing the Quran along with the Ahlulbayt,  as two weighty things in his place, demonstrates the need to uphold and abide by both. Even though the Prophet (saw) mentions that the Quran is guidance, and we should hold fast onto it, this does not mean he denies the same should be done for his Ahlulbayt. However, it leaves ambiguity because a good case can be made in interpreting this way, and it is not just the Shia who do so, but your own scholars:

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]


Just by using the word 'Thaqalayn', placing the Quran side by side, and then claiming that they will never deviate from one another until the pool of Kawthar, it gives the impression that the two are to be held onto for guidance, the two will not dispute one another (some argue the consensus of the Ahlulbayt such as Ibn Taymiyyah).


However, when the Prophet (saw) mentions this:

"“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.”

It should remove any ambiguity for those who previously doubted.

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).


Understanding of Sahabi disapproves the view that the purpose behind mention of Ahlelbayt in Hadith al-Thaqalayn was to seek guidance from them.

Narrated Zayd bin Arqam: Prophet(saws) said: I am leaving among you two weighty things: the one being 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 are the members of my household! I remind you of Allah with regard to the people of my household. He (Husain) said to Zayd: Who are the members of his household? Aren’t his wives the members of his family? Thereupon he said: His wives are the members of his family (but here) the members of his family are those for whom acceptance of Zakat is forbidden. And he said: Who are they? Thereupon he said: ‘Ali and the offspring of ‘Ali, ‘Aqil and the offspring of ‘Aqil and the offspring of Ja’far and the offspring of ‘Abbas. Husain said: These are those for whom the acceptance of charity(sadaqa) is forbidden. Zayd said: Yes. (Sahih Muslim, #2408).

Notice, that when the noble Sahabi(companion) of Prophet(saws) was asked about who Ahlelbayt are, he replied that members of household(Ahlelbayt) in regards to Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn are those relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom the acceptance of charity(sadaqa) is forbidden. They are ‘Ali and the offspring of ‘Ali, ‘Aqil and the offspring of ‘Aqil and the offspring of Ja’far and the offspring of ‘Abbas.

Zayd bin Arqam(ra) did not say, Ahlelbayt are those who are chosen by Allah or those who were purified or those who were infallible. Rather Zayd(ra) GENERALIZED that Ahlelbayt in regards to Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn are those relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of charity(sadaqa) is forbidden. The question which the readers should ponder over is that; Were all these members from Ahlelbayt on whom acceptance of Sadaqa was made forbidden, eligible or deserving to be adhered or held, to save ourselves from going astray? Undoubtedly, No! People of knowledge know that, not all the relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of Sadaqa was made forbidden, were righteous. There were people among them who were unrighteous too and they were fallible, prone to commit sins and mistakes. And even Zayd bin Arqam(ra) knew this fact very well, yet he defined Ahlelbayt mentioned in hadeeth al-Thaqalayn in a generalized manner, that those are the relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of Saqada(charity) is forbidden; that is ‘Ali and the offspring of ‘Ali, ‘Aqil and the offspring of ‘Aqil and the offspring of Ja’far and the offspring of ‘Abbas. Which implies that as per understanding of Zayd bin Arqam(ra) the purpose behind the mention of Ahlelbayt in Hadith al-Thaqalayn wasn’t to adhere or hold or seek guidance from Ahlelbayt.

The reason we are saying this is because of the generalized definition given by Zayd(ra). He described Ahlelbayt, as those relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of Sadaqa was forbidden, this was the only condition he mentioned to define Ahlelbayt in regards to hadeeth al-Thaqalayn. This is the reason, even though Zayd(ra) accepted wives of Prophet(saws) were Ahlelbayt, yet he said that in regards to hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, Ahlelbayt were those relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of Sadaqa was forbidden. If Zayd bin Arqam(ra) believed that righteousness or purification, was a criteria to define Ahlelbayt in hadeeeth al-Thaqalayn, then he would have even included wives of Prophet(saws) in it, since all the wives of Prophet(saws) were righteous[If The Rafidah disagree then we give them the example of Umm Salamah(ra) and Zaynab bint Jahash(ra), atleast they must have been included], but Zayd(ra) didn’t include them and made a generalized definition that, it is those relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of Sadaqa(charity) is forbidden, even though this definition included some members who were unrighteous or (atleast) members who were fallible and prone to sins and mistakes. Therefore, Zayd bin Arqam(ra) making a generalized definition which even included unrighteous members, is an apparent proof that, he didn’t believe that in regards to hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, the purpose behind the mention of Ahlelbayt was to adhere them or seek their guidance to avoid going astray.

Rather, the generalized definition made by Zayd bin Arqam(ra) for Ahlelbayt and him stating the only condition for it as, “acceptance of Sadaqa being forbidden”, is a clear proof that, Zayd(ra) understood the purpose behind the mention of Ahlelbayt in hadeeth al-Thaqalayn was to take care of them and to be responsible towards them, not to adhere them or to seek their guidance, and this is the right and correct understanding of hadeeth al-Thaqalayn. This is the reason that in authentic version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn, the mention of Quran has the necessary details i.e. “in it is illumination and guidance. It should be held onto.” Exhortation was sounded to accept it and practice upon it. On the other hand, mention of the AhlelBayt is not accompanied by any such statements that are indicative of them holding a fundamental position in Islamic law, such that it is incumbent to obey them unquestioningly. Rather, what we do see is the encouragement to take care of them and be responsible towards them.

Readers might question that, how does the generalized definition of Ahlelbayt made by noble companion Zayd(ra) in regards to hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, prove that the purpose behind the mention of Ahlelbayt in hadeeth al-Thaqalayn was to take care of them and be responsible towards them?.

The answer is that, hadeeth al-Thaqalayn was mentioned on the location of Ghadeer Khumm, this was in relation to what occurred during Hajj when, the Muslim army from Yemen returned to Makkah, they made multiple complains against their commander -Ali(ra) – who was a member of Ahlelbayt, and one of the complaint was that Ali(ra) had taken a slave girl from Khums, therefore Prophet(saws) rebuked those who complained against Ali(ra) and said that Ali(ra) even deserved more than that from Khums. Therefore, on the way back to Madina after Hajj, and after religion was completed/perfected and after Farewell Sermon was given at Makkah; Prophet(saws) stopped at a resting place called Ghadeer Khumm, and there he addressed people encouraging them to befriend and love Ali(ra) who was a member of Ahlelbayt, and in the same speech He(saws) even mentioned hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, which mentions about being responsible towards Ahlelbayt.

The reason, Prophet(saws) did so, is most likely because he realized that people criticized a member of his household(Ahlelbayt), who took his right from Khums, therefore Prophet(saws) felt the need to remind the people about the importance of taking care of his Ahlelbayt and to be responsible towards them, after him. Because his relatives due to relation with him, were prohibited from accepting Sadaqa(charity), and if some Muslims criticize or object against them, for taking their right, like their share from Khums, which was a right given to them by Allah in Quran, then that would create a big problem for his Ahlelbayt, since they weren’t even eligible to accept Sadaqa(charity); This would even be against the Quran. This is the reason, Prophet(saws) mentioned Hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, where the purpose of mentioning Ahlelbayt, was to remind the people about taking care of Ahlelbayt and to be responsible towards them.

This is the reason, noble Sahabi(companion) Zayd bin Arqam(ra) believed that, Ahlelbayt in regards to hadeeth al-Thaqalayn were those relatives of Prophet(saws) on whom acceptance of Sadaqa was forbidden, since these same people were eligible to receive a portion from Khums.

We read in Shia book regarding the ruling on Khums:

مسألة: المشهور أن المراد باليتامى والمساكين وابن السبيل في آية الخمس من قرابة النبي – صلى الله عليه وآله – من بني هاشمخاصة، ذهب إليه الشيخان، وابن أبي عقيل، وأبو الصلاح، وباقي فقهائنا

It is popular among our scholars that what is meant by the orphans, the poor ones, and the wayfarer, in the verse of khums (8:41), among the kindred of the Prophet(saws), are those exclusively from the Bani Hashim. Among those who advocated this view are Shaikh Mufid, Shaikh Tusi, ibn abi Aqil, Abu Salah, and other scholars.(Mukhtalif al Shia by Shia Allama Hilli, Volume 3 Page 330).

We read in Shia book regarding the ruling on Zakat(obligatory charity) :

وتحرم الزكاة الواجبة علي بني هاشم جميعا من ولد أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام، وجعفر، وعقيل، والعباس رضي اللهعنهم

(Acceptance of) Zakat is haram for all the Bani Hashim, from the progeny of Imam Ali(as), Ja’far bin abi Talib, Aqil bin abi Talib, and Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib, may Allah (swt) be pleased with them. (Al Muqniah by Shaikh Mufid, Page 243)

As can be seen, the ruling of a share in Khums as well as forbiddance to accept charity is for the same group in general, that is, all the Bani Hashim, not just specific to the children of Fatima(ra) and Ali(ra). It is applicable on all the Muslims among them, whether they are righteous or not. This is same way, Zayd bin Arqam(ra) generalized Ahlelbayt while defining them as per Hadith al-Thaqalayn.

Infact, Imam Hassan bin Hassan bin Ali bin Abi Talib(rah) stated:

أحبونا لله فإن أطعنا الله فأحبونا ، وإن عصينا الله فأبغضونا فلو كان الله نافعا احدا بقرابته من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بغير طاعة لنفع أباه وأمه

Love us(ahl al-bayt) for the sake of Allah if we obey Allah. If we disobey Allah then hate us! Had Allah made familial links to the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam a means of benefit without obedience then the most eligible for that would have been his father and mother. [Nasb Quraysh, 2/49.]

The explanation and understanding of Sahabi Zayd bin Arqam(ra) is further strengthened by a reliable version of hadeeth al-Thaqalayn, which has the expression “Kitab Allah wa `Itrati Ahlu-Bayti“, we know that Ahlel-Bayt refers to the household, let’s discover what the “Itrah” means in Arabic.

In the traditional Arabic dictionary Lisan ul-Arab 4/536 by Ibn Manthur, we read:

والمشهور المعروف أَن عتْرتَه أَهلُ بيته وهم الذين حُرّمَت عليهم الزكاة والصدقة المفروضة وهم ذوو القربى الذين لهم خُمُسُ الخُمُسِ المذكور في سورة الأَنفال

“And what is famously recognized is that his ‘Itrah’ are the People of his Household, and they are those upon whom Zakaah and the mandatory Sadaqah is prohibited; and they are the relatives (Thuw al-Qurbaa) who are due a fifth of the spoils of war(Khums), mentioned in Surat al-Anfal in Quran.”]

Therefore, it is established that, as per the understanding of noble companion Zayd(ra), the purpose behind the mention of Ahlelbayt in hadeeth al-Thaqalayn was to remind people about taking care of Ahlelbayt and to be responsible towards them. It wasn’t to adhere them or to seek their guidance, and this is the right and correct understanding of hadeeth al-Thaqalayn.


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.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 21, 2019, 06:51:10 AM
Quote
Just to expose the dishonesty of this Shia guy to the readers, I would be again reminding that how you keep repeating the arguments that were refuted several times by me. And you know that your arguments are too weak, that's why you are scared to even quote the point I make while trying to make your feeble responses. While I quote you each time, then refute you, so the readers get a better opportunity to understand what's going on. So please don't insult the intellect of readers with such tricks.

I refuted this point several times and this is the response:

Indeed, Zayd bin Arqam(RA) said he had become old and forgotten many things, this shows the  extreme carefulness and cautiousness of Zayd(RA) in narrating hadeeth of Prophet(SAWS). He wanted to narrate only that hadeeth, which he still remembered properly, about which he was confident and sure. Which makes the hadeeth more stronger.

Let us quote what Zayd(RA) said:

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.

As for the argument of Ikhtilat; then this is an invalid argument in this case. Ikhtilat is when a narrator confuses events and mixes texts and wordings. If a narrator has not done this then he is not deemed a Mukhtalit regardless of whether he forgot some events or not, as long as he doesn’t mix and confuse events he’s good. And none of the Scholar ever claimed that Zayd bin Arqam(RA) was Mukhtalit. Therefore, the argument brought up by Shias, is invalid and it was due to their ignorance and misunderstanding of Hadeeth Sciences.

I am addressing your arguments and your points, my browser does not always let me quote people on here, so i have to copy and paste their words. I would advise you to tone down your rhetoric, if you wish to have an academic discussion here. I gain absolutely nothing from hiding , or not addressing your points, i am here to seek truth, and not just impose my opinion. If someone presents me a compelling view other than my own, i would be happy to accept it.

Now, one thing i made very clear in all of my discussions surrounding the version in Saheeh Muslim is that i do not consider it to be inaccurate. I do not think Zayd b. al-Arqam was talking and reporting falsities, or things he was not convince he himself had heard - to the best of his knowledge or ability.

I also know full well, despite my reverence and respect for Zayd b. al-Arqam (Radiyallahu anhu), Sunni Muslims would not enlist him as Mukhtalit. I am fully aware of that, which is why i have not tried to weaken the report itself.

However, what i have argued is that Zayd narrated the version we find in Saheeh Muslim when he was very old, was undergoing memory loss and in other authentic narrations (such as the one i cited earlier from Ibn Majah with an authentic sanad), complained that he had forgotten a lot of what he had heard from the Prophet (saw) and narrating had become difficult. Therefore it should come as no surprise that, while Zayd b. al-Arqam tried to faithfully narrate what he could remember from Hadith al-Thaqalayn, he missed authentic expressions and phrases which are contained in other reports. Simply because we do not find it in the version when he was already very old and undergoing memory loss does not mean the Prophet (saw) did not say it!

Rather, what we need to do first is to compile all of the reliable chained reports together, to get a fuller picture of what was said, providing there are no contradictions.

By the way, Ikhtilat is not restricted merely to when a narrator muddles up and confuses narrations, but also applies to those narrators who, due to their old age, lose their memory and forget much of what they had known previously. Many individuals who undergo memory loss may sincerely feel they remembered something, but can often forget parts of it, while retaining the parts they remember. Some may mix things up.

We find in Hadithanswers.com: "1. As a rule, if as a result of a narrator growing old, he loses his memory, the credibility of his narrations will undoubtedly be affected. Such narrators are labelled as ‘mukhtalit’."

https://hadithanswers.com/narrations-in-old-age/

Hadithanswers does say that this does not apply to the Sahaba, because the assumption is that they would only report what they knew to be accurate. I personally raise a question mark over this double standard, because the Sahaba were human beings. They were not immune from mistakenly narrating things, erring, slipping, being careless. Those like Zayd, who may have sincerely felt they were only narrating what they felt they could accurately remember may not have necessarily accurately transmitted a report. Today, particularity studying the science surrounding this, many who undergo memory loss may sincerely feel they remember an event, but the reality is, they do not accurately transmit it.

However, i know that approaching the Sahaba and using the same common sense barometer on them as you would with any large body of Muslims does not work with Sunni scholars, so i conceded that let us assume whatever Zayd (ra) transmitted was accurate. However, i was firm in that due to his poor memory and old age, this opens a plausible possibility that there are authentic expressions he himself may have forgotten, which we can find in other widely reported narrations, some of which contain reliable chains of narrators.

Expressions such as:

1. "I leave behind, that which if you hold onto, you will never go astray"

and

2. "They will never deviate from one another until they meet me at the pool of Kawthar".


Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 21, 2019, 06:58:09 AM
Just so our dear readers who may be lost can get up to speed:

Zayd b. Aqram (radiyallahu anhu) narrated the version we find in Saheeh al-Muslim when he was very old and had a fair degree of memory loss. He is cognizant of his memory loss, to the extent he warns the person he is narrating to that they should not ask him more than he is able to remember of a particular event.

While a narrator having a fair degree of memory loss would place question marks over whether they remember even what they sincerely feel they can properly, the Sahaba are made an exception here as the assumption is they would only narrate accurately. Many exceptions are given for them in Hadith, which are not afforded to others. However, let us assume that sincerity aside, Zayd was able to transmit accurately.

The reason why we have the three main versions of Hadith al-Thaqalayn, which do not contradict each other, but rather contain expressions the others do not, is simply that Zayd b. al-Arqam narrated in his old age and when he had a good degree of memory loss, and thus did not relay other authentic expressions we find relayed to us by other reliable narrators of hadith.

Those expressions are:

1. I leave behind that which if you hold onto, you will never go astray

and

2. They will never deviate from each other until they meet me at the pool of Kawthar

These expressions have not only been authenticated by al-Albani, al-Arnaut and many other major scholars of hadith, neither of them have considered these expressions to contradict the report of Zayd in Saheeh Muslim, but rather the scholars have taken the statements together and believe they can all be reconciled.

It is brother Noor-us-Sunnah here, who, perhaps out of his own misunderstanding, is seeking to manufacture some sort of contradiction between them, which insha Allah i will address in more detail in the following posts, where i respond to the rest of his points.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 21, 2019, 07:02:44 AM
Quote
Hafiz al-Zayla’i said:

قال الحافظ الزيلعي في نصب الراية 1/360

وكم من حديث كثرت رواته و تعددت طرقه وهو حديث ضعيف كحديث…. بل قد لا يزيد كثرة الطرق الا ضعفا

There are many of traditions reported by numerous narrators and many chains, yet they are still weak….Many a time, Abundant chains only increase the narration in weakness. [Nasb-ul-Rayah vol 1, page 360 ]

Even Shia Scholars rejected some of their ahadeeth having many chains due their weakness. For example:

The Shia researcher of the book “al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah” Sa’ib Abdul-Hameed, he praises the author, the esteemed Shia Scholar Shaykh al-Mufeed for his scientific professional method in the book by saying:

“In this book we can clearly see the correct methodology (of al-Mufeed) in his research and in how he extracts proofs. He holds on to the authentic established narration and leaves all else, even if what opposes it was related by the great ones such as al-Saduq and ibn al-Junayd. He shows complete disregard to the multitude of narrations whose chains are unreliable, instead he relies on the single authentic chain leaving behind a large pile of weak and fabricated reports. He is the expert diver who selects the pure pearls leaving behind the rubble that floats in the oceans.”[al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah, by Shaykh al-Mufeed, Tahqeeq by Sa’ib Abdul Hameed, page 12].


Do you realize why i gave you a number of chains, with narrators not accused of lying, but rather, in several of cases, some of your greatest scholars such as al-Albani and al-Arnaut authenticating some of those chains outright as 'Hasan', and elevating weak chains to the level of 'Hasan' due to the witnesses and other paths? It was precisely to demonstrate that the version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn as per Sunni science of hadith where the Prophet (saw) states "I leave behind that which if you hold onto, you will never go astray..." includes a good number of chains of narrators who report this very statement, are no accused of lying, and in two of the chains, are Hasan-ul-Hadith anyway.

The quotes you are bringing to me would only have applied if i presented for the second version only chains of narrators of those accused of lying, fabricating or forging.

Why else do you think i brought the chains of narrators?
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 21, 2019, 01:05:16 PM
I am addressing your arguments and your points, my browser does not always let me quote people on here, so i have to copy and paste their words.
Well you already made a quote in your post, and you always make it general. So if you want to quote it on point to point basis, use this [ Invalid Attachment ] memorize it, So that next time you don't make this silly excuse.



Therefore it should come as no surprise that, while Zayd b. al-Arqam tried to faithfully narrate what he could remember from Hadith al-Thaqalayn, he missed authentic expressions and phrases which are contained in other reports. Simply because we do not find it in the version when he was already very old and undergoing memory loss does not mean the Prophet (saw) did not say it!
And I already answered this, and to expose you before the readers, I even gave the screen shot showing I responded you over this argument. This the second time I'm posting the screen shot showing that I already answered this argument of yours, which you keep-repeating.
[ Invalid Attachment ]
Rather, what we need to do first is to compile all of the reliable chained reports together, to get a fuller picture of what was said, providing there are no contradictions.
If you intention to mean adding another expression, such as "they would not seperate until they reach me at the pond", then this doesn't effect or change the content of the Zaid's(R) report or it's meaning. However if you mean making your own imaginary content, then that would contradict the content of Zaid's(R) report and also many other authentic reports which support this version of Zaid(R) that Quran alone is the source of guidance holding which people won't go astray.


I personally raise a question mark over this double standard, because the Sahaba were human beings. They were not immune from mistakenly narrating things, erring, slipping, being careless. Those like Zayd, who may have sincerely felt they were only narrating what they felt they could accurately remember may not have necessarily accurately transmitted a report. Today, particularity studying the science surrounding this, many who undergo memory loss may sincerely feel they remember an event, but the reality is, they do not accurately transmit it.
And you are a nobody.

And as explained Zayd's(R) understanding of the report too proves that he wasn't mistaken in narrating it. Moreover Zayd's version is supported by others as well.

These are the supportive reports to Zayd's accurate version:

(Muhammad bin al-Fadl al-Saqti — Sa`eed bin Sulayman) & (Muhammad bin `Abdullah al-Hadrami & Zakariya bin Yahya al-Saji) — Both from — Nasr bin `Abdul-Rahman al-Washa’ — Zayd bin al-Hasan al-Anmati — Ma`rouf bin Khurboudh — Abi al-Tufayl — Hudhayfah bin Usayd al-Ghafar. [Mu’jam al-Tabrani al-Kabeer, vol 3, page 65, #2683]

 Abu Ya’la Ali ibn Abi Abd Allah ibn al-Allaf al-Bazzar — Abd al-Salam ibn `Abd al-Malik ibn Habib al-Bazzar — `Abd Allah Muhammad ibn `Uthman — Muhammad ibn Bakr ibn `Abd al-Razzaq — Abu Hatim Mughirah ibn Muhammad ibn al-Muhallabi — Muslim ibn Ibrahim — Nuh ibn Qays al-Judhami — al-Walid bin Salih — the WIFE of Zayd ibn Arqam. [al-Manaqib Ameer Al-Momineen Ali ibn Abi Talib, page 44 – 45 – 46, #23].

Abdul-Rahman bin `Umar bin Ahmad — al-Husayn bin Isma`eel — abu Hisham al-Rifa`ee — Hafs — Mujalid — al-Sha`bi — Jabir. [Sharh Usool I’tiqaad Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, vol 1, page 81, #95].

The accurate version from Zayd(R) is also supported and strenghtened by the 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). 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]


However, i was firm in that due to his poor memory and old age, this opens a plausible possibility that there are authentic expressions he himself may have forgotten, which we can find in other widely reported narrations, some of which contain reliable chains of narrators.

Expressions such as:

1. "I leave behind, that which if you hold onto, you will never go astray"

and

2. "They will never deviate from one another until they meet me at the pool of Kawthar".
The issue here is the structure of wording, which Zayd(R) accurately transmitted, while when it was narrated by narrators who were either weak or known for making mistakes, they flipped the structure of the wording, even though some of these narrators themselves narrated the hadeeth in proper structure of wording, which you seem to be reluctant in acknowledging.

Look at this:

Faulty Structure of wording: 
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]

Re-structure of wording in the light of accurate version: I have left behind over you the Book of Allah - one end of it is in the Hand of Allah and the other end of it is in your- hold fast to it you will never go astray and my Ahl al-bayt.

I didn't add anything in this re-structure, just flipped the wording which now matches the accurate version. 
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 21, 2019, 01:17:17 PM

Do you realize why i gave you a number of chains, with narrators not accused of lying, but rather, in several of cases, some of your greatest scholars such as al-Albani and al-Arnaut authenticating some of those chains outright as 'Hasan', and elevating weak chains to the level of 'Hasan' due to the witnesses and other paths? It was precisely to demonstrate that the version of Hadith al-Thaqalayn as per Sunni science of hadith where the Prophet (saw) states "I leave behind that which if you hold onto, you will never go astray..." includes a good number of chains of narrators who report this very statement, are no accused of lying, and in two of the chains, are Hasan-ul-Hadith anyway.

The quotes you are bringing to me would only have applied if i presented for the second version only chains of narrators of those accused of lying, fabricating or forging.

Why else do you think i brought the chains of narrators?

Not at all, this applies to weak narrator in general, esp when their wording contradicts the Sahih and accurate version. Which I demonstrated in post #45, using the perfect example of Zayd bin Hasan, which you purposely left out.

Know that when it comes to forming an Aqeedah, the Sahih and accurate version will be preferred over the faulty version when it contradicts the Sahih version, no matter how many chains weak chains it has. Hence the quotes from the Scholars are still valid and applicable in this case.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 22, 2019, 12:22:15 AM
Quote
Most of this has been dealt in my previous post. What needs to be addressed is that, all the chains have weakness, and in most cases they contradict the reports by same narrators whom you are using, as i demonstrated. And not to forget the wording of all those which you are referring due to your ignorance isn't same.

Chains having weakness does not mean the chains are all weak. I have demonstrated to you that two of the chains are 'Hasan', a grading given to them by some of your greatest Muhadditheen. You have still refused to tell me your position on the grading of the chain of narrators, despite going against your greatest Muhadditheen and declaring the narrator weak, the chain weak, and the chain graded 'Hasan' due to leniency, all of which have been proven false brother.

You are now resorting to trying to explain why the reports contradict, which is what i will address in my next post. Suffice to say many of your major scholars, from al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Imam Nawawi, Ibn Athir, Zamakshari, agreed with you on this.

I have also demonstrated to you that among the chains which would be weak on their own, al-Albani and al-Arnaut have elevated some of those chains from 'Dhaif' to 'Hasan' on account of the fact the weakness in those chains can be elevated due to Shawahid. If the chain in question contained liars or forgers, you can not elevated a weak chain to a reliable one due to Shawahid.

Furthermore, most of the chains are nearly identical in wording, with some minor variants which does not change the meaning, or even contains the other authentic expression "and they will never deviate until they meet me at the pool of Kawthar", some even give the complete report at Ghadir Khumm, with the declaration of Ali being the Mawla.

Musnad ibn Ibn Rahwayh (teacher of Imam Bukhari) as well as from Ibn Asim

.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.


al-Albani: إسناده حسن al-Arnaut: إسناده حسن

Mushkil al-Athar al-Tahawi:

حدثنا إبراهيم بن مرزوق قال : حدثنا أبو عامر العقدي قال : حدثنا كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي ، عن أبيه ، عن علي ، أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم  – إني قد تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله سببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي.

al-Albani: إسناده حسن al-Arnaut: إسناده حسن


Now, as for the reports which are weak, i will present to you those weak reports which are not weak on account of having a liar or a forger, but truthful individuals. The chains may on their own be regarded weak, but they constitute proof and support and strengthen each other. Had these chains exclusively been of those which contain liars or forgers, this would be unacceptable. However, given they are not, the following will apply:

وقد احتج جمهور المحدثين بالحديث الضعيف إذا كثرت طرقه وألحقوه بالصحيح تارة وبالحسن أخرى
“The majority of hadith scholars rely on the weak hadith if it carries multiple chains and they attributed it as Sahih or Hasan”

Allamah Muhammad bin Yusuf al-Salehi al-Shami (d. 942 H) records in “Subul al-Huda wa al-Rashad” Volume 1 page 254:

الأحاديث يشد بعضها بعضا، لأن الحديث الضعيف إذا كثرت طرقه أفاد ذلك قوة، كما تقرر في علم الحديث.
“The traditions support one other, because weak traditions with multiple chains constitute strength, as is known from Ilm hadith (science of hadith).”


From the Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:

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

al-Albani: وهو إسناد حسن في الشواهد  al-Arnaut: سنده حسن بالشواهد.

Importantly, it clearly states in an almost identical manner: "إني تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الل...ه و عترتى اهل

The additional expressions here are:

1. One of them is greater than the other - i'll address this in the next post.
2. A rope from the heavens to the earth (which is very similar to the report which states ، سببه بيد الله[وسببه بأيديكم، we find in the narrations graded Hasan outright.
3. "They will never deviate from one another until the pool of Kawthar" - This is a well established authentic expression.


Furthermore, the reason why al-Albani and al-Arnaut elevate this chain, which would be weak on its own, to the level of 'Hasan' is due to the fact Attiyah is not among the class of narrators accused of lying , forging or fabricating. Therefore despite this being weak in chain, it can be strengthened by virtue of other supporting chains of narrators. This particular chain of narrators can also act as a support for the narration of Kathir b. Zayd, and can be used as a Shahid, although it would not elevate that report to a Saheeh, given it is lower in rank.

Imaam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: "He is Da'eef ul-Hadeeth, write his narrations (for Mutaabi'aat and Shawaahid)." [Al-Jarh wal Ta'deel: 6/383]

There is another chain from Attiyah in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad with an identical Matn, it too would be 'Hasan' due to the Shawahid:

3 حدثنى ابى حدثنا اسود بن عامراخبرنا ابو اسرائيل يعنى اسماعيل بن اسحاق الملائى عن عطية عن ابى سعيد قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم انى تارك فيكم الثقلين احدهما اكبر من الاخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء الى الارض و عترتى اهل بيتى وانهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا على الحوض



Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 22, 2019, 12:35:02 AM
EDIT: "Suffice to say many of your major scholars, from al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Imam Nawawi, Ibn Athir, Zamakshari, agreed with you on this."

I had meant to write, "did not"

When i get time, i will add in the remainder of the chains where the narrator is merely weak, and not accused of lying or forging insha Allah.

I will then address the rest of your points.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 23, 2019, 01:24:25 PM
Chains having weakness does not mean the chains are all weak. I have demonstrated to you that two of the chains are 'Hasan', a grading given to them by some of your greatest Muhadditheen.
I will not allow you to deceive people when you say two chains, you  need to be honest enough to say that both chains of same narrator who had weakness in him as he was known for making mistakes. And I have already demonstrated how he made mistake.

You have still refused to tell me your position on the grading of the chain of narrators, despite going against your greatest Muhadditheen and declaring the narrator weak, the chain weak, and the chain graded 'Hasan' due to leniency, all of which have been proven false brother.
None of these damage control techniques of yours refute the point that, the narrator in question was known for making mistakes and I have demonstrated that how he narrated the text in an ambiguous form. You first misunderstood that it had something to do with grammatical error, but they I had to clear your misunderstanding. Then when I explained you the problem and even demonstrated it, you have nothing to refute it.


I have also demonstrated to you that among the chains which would be weak on their own, al-Albani and al-Arnaut have elevated some of those chains from 'Dhaif' to 'Hasan' on account of the fact the weakness in those chains can be elevated due to Shawahid. If the chain in question contained liars or forgers, you can not elevated a weak chain to a reliable one due to Shawahid.
You are truly an ignorant. When the problem is in the text as explained, then how would shawahid even help in this case? Infact I propose you to use the Shawahid of Sahih version in interpreting it. Like I have done.

Which I'll go it again for you:

Look at this:

Faulty Structure of wording: 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]

Re-structure of wording in the light of accurate version: I have left behind over you the Book of Allah - one end of it is in the Hand of Allah and the other end of it is in your- if you hold fast to it you will never go astray and my Ahl al-bayt.

I didn't add anything in this re-structure, just flipped the wording which now matches the accurate version. 

So don't assume that narrators are being accused of lying or fabricating. But rather they are being accused of transmitting the structure of the text in an ambiguous/faulty form, due to the weakness we all acknowledge. And that is why we restructure the text and interpret it in the light of accurate version and also the sahih hadeeth from Jabir bin Abdullah(RA) regarding Arafah.

https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-muslim-vol-3-page-350-29501218.jpg

I would like to add that it's not only  the Sahabi Zaid bin Arqam(RA) whose understanding of Hadeeth Thaqalayn rejects the Shia narrative that both Quran and Ahl al-bayt are to be held inorder to not go astray. But rather, Umar(RA) too believed the same, because when Prophet(S) asked the people few days before his death,  when he was seriously ill, that  "I will write for you a statement after which you will not go astray", Umar(R) noticing the condition of Prophet(S) said to the people that, "We have got Book of Allah, that is sufficient for us".
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/sahih-al-bukhari-vol-1-page-121-114-1.jpg

So Umar(R) too held the same understanding as did Zaid bin Arqam(R) held, He(R) didn't say Book of Allah and Ahl al-bayt are sufficient for us, because he was well aware that understanding of Hadeeth Thaqalayn, and also the Sermon of Prophet on Arafah, which Jabir narrated that Prophet(SAWS) said: “You shall not go astray if you hold onto what I have left among you: The Book of Allah.” [Saheeh Muslim #1218].

So now you have Sahabi Umar(R) too that Quran alone was sufficient for people to not go astray, following Sunnah comes under following Quran as explained. You as a staunch Shia are free to make conspiracy theories against Umar(R) and rest of Sahaba, but you can't deny the fact that as per Umar's(R) understanding only Quran was to be held, so as to not go astray, and this was the view of Zaid bin Arqam(R) too.

And as per the principle of Ahlus-sunnah(R) the understanding of a Sahabi takes precedence, that too the Sahabi who is considered the second best after Prophets(AS) as per Ijma of Ahlus-sunnah. Hence a Sunni is bound to follow the understanding of Sahaba, and even if a later scholar goes against the understanding of Sahaba, the understanding of that scholar will be rejected and the understanding of Sahabi would be upheld.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 24, 2019, 11:12:04 PM
An analysis of further weak chains (some being possibly 'Hasan' or 'Hasan due to Shawahid'')

Once more, if weak chains contain narrators who were not accused of lying or forging, nor regarded Munkar or abandoned in Hadith on account of their weakness, the various chains strengthen one another. Noor-us-Sunnah has , on his website ''Youpuncturedtheark' quoted scholars claiming that at times, numeral weak chains only make the tradition weaker. What he did not mention however, is the applies when forgery or deception is suspected.

As it has already been established, Hasan chains exist for the version of Thaqalayn whereby the Prophet (saw) states he is leaving behind two weighty things, which if he hold onto, we will never go astray, the Quran and his Ahlulbayt. Furthermore, additional Hasan chains due to Shawahid have been cited.


[Mustadrak al-Hakim]

[/color]
Abū Bakr ibn Isḥāq and Daʿlaj ibn Aḥmad al-Sajzī — Muḥammad ibn Ayyūb — al-Azraq ibn ʿAlī — Ḥassān ibn Ibrāhīm al-Kirmānī — Muḥammad ibn Salamah ibn Kuhayl – (his father) Salamah ibn Kuhayl — Abū al-Ṭufayl ibn Wāthilah — that Zayd ibn Arqam said:

Rasūlullāh  disembarked between Makkah and Madīnah at a place which had five trees with large branches. The people then trimmed the leaves. Thereafter Rasūlullāh he rested until evening. He then woke and performed ṣalāh and thereafter stood to address the people. He praised Allah abundantly, reminded the people (about the hereafter) and he advised them. Thereafter he said that which Allah willed that he should say. Then he said, “O people, I am leaving amongst you two such matters that you will never be misguided as long as you follow them, they are the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt, my ʿitrah.” After a while he asked three times, “Do you know that I have more right over the Mu’minīn than their own selves?” The people replied, “Yes.” Rasūlullāh he then said, “Whoever takes me as his mawlā then ʿAlī is his mawlā.”

حدثنا ابو بكر بن اسحاق ودعلج بن احمد السجزى قالا انبانا محمد بن ايوب ثنا الازرق بن على ثنا حسان بن ابراهيم الكرمانى ثنا محمد بن سلمة بن كهيل عن ابيه عن ابى الطفيل بن واثلة انه سمع زيد بن ارقم رضى الله عنه يقول نزل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم بين مكة والمدينة عند شجرات خمس دوحات عظام فكنس الناس ما تحت الشجرات ثم راح رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم عشيه فصللى ثم قام خطيبا فحمد الله و اثنى عليه وذكر ووعظ فقال ما شاء الله ان يقول ثم قال ايها الناس انى تارك فيكم امرين لن تضلوا ان اتبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله و اهل بيتى عترتى ثم قال اتعلمون انى اولى بالمؤمنين من انفسهم ثلاث مرات قالوا نعم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم من كنت مولاه فعلى مولاه

The weakness in this chain is Muhammed b. Salamah b. Kuhayl. He is not regarded to be a forger, nor a fabricator, nor is he munkar in Hadith. However, he is regarded weak in Hadith. He has narrated this from his father, Salamah b. Kuhayl who was Thiqah, who in turn narrates from Abu Tufayl, from Zayd b. Aqram.

The Matn of this text is generally corroborated by the tradition of Ali b. Abi Talib, in Musnad ibn Rawayh, Sunan  Abi Asim, Mushkil al-Athar of Imam al-Tahawi, by outright Hasan chains. In fact, this Matn is corroborated in many other chains of narrators, but the phrase: " انى تارك فيكم امرين لن تضلوا ان اتبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله و اهل بيتى عترتى" The main differences that the word: امرين is used instead of Thaqalayn.

What is rather interesting is that there are many chains going through Abu Tufayl to  Zayd b. al-Aqram with a very similar Matn, such as in the [Ja'mi of Imam al-Tirmidhi]:

“Indeed I am leaving amongst you that which if you hold onto, you will never go astray. One of them is greater than the other, the Book of Allah — a rope that has been extended from the sky to the earth and my ʿitrah who are my Ahl al-Bayt. They will never separate until they meet me at the Pond (al-Kawthar), therefore be careful how you succeed me with regards to them.”

This tradition would be considered at least Hasan, the only problem being a disconnection between Habib b. Abi Habit, and Zayd b. Arqam.

حدثنا علي بن المنذر كوفي حدثنا محمد بن فضيل قال حدثنا الأعمش عن عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهما قالا : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم به لن تضلوا بعدي أحدهما أعظم من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهم

However, we find Habib b. Abi Thabit narrating a very similar Matn from Abu Tufayl, from Zayd b. al-Arqam in [Ansab al-Ashraf of Baladhuri]:

عبدالملك بن محمد بن عبد الله القرشي -> يحيى بن حماد -> أبو عوانة -> العماش -> حبيب بن أبي ثابت -> `أمير بن وائل أبو طفيل -> زيد بن ارقم … قال انى تارك فيكم الثقلين ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله وعترتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا على الحوض…

“Indeed I am leaving amongst you that which if you hold onto, you will never go astray, the book of All and my Itra, and they will never separate until they meet me pond (of al-Kawhar)".

This is an example of another chain which would be Hasan or Saheeh, but there is a question whether Habib heard from Abu Tufayl. Given Abu Tufayl is between Habib and Zayd - as we have found in many other chains , it is likely he obtained it from him, which would explain the disconnection in Tirmidhi. However, Imam al-Tahawi in his Mushkil al-Athar declares a chain of Habib b. Abi Habit to Abu Tufayl, to Zayd as Saheeh, which is proof Imam al-Tahawi believed on the balance, Habib likely did obtain the tradition from Abu Tufayl:

كما حدثنا أحمد بنُ شُعيب قال: حدثنا أبو عوانة، عن سليمان – يعني الأعمش – قال: حدثنا حبيب بن أبي ثابت، عن أبي الطفيل، عن زيد بن أرقم قال:

Imam  al-Tahawi declares this chain as 'Saheeh': ( فهذا الحديث صحيح الإسناد لا طعن لأحد في أحد من رواته

Some believe that Baladhuri is Majhul, who is the historian who merely compiled reports. However, we find reports going against the Shia Madhab in his works, including reports which are in praise of Mu'awiyah. This particular report has a Matn which has already been corroborated by reliable chains, and a key component of the chain is also identical in other major works as has been demonstrated. There is a strong level of corroboration.


There are several other additional chains which will be added. I will then address the claim made by brother Noor-us-Sunnah, that this tradition contradicts the version in Saheeh Muslim, and demonstrate to him words of scholars who have not ever themselves claimed such a thing, and see no contradiction.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 25, 2019, 12:36:06 AM
When the problem is in the text as explained, then how would shawahid even help in this case? Infact I propose you to use the Shawahid of Sahih version in interpreting it. Like I have done.

Which I'll go it again for you:

Look at this:

Faulty Structure of wording:
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]

Re-structure of wording in the light of accurate version:
I have left behind over you the Book of Allah - one end of it is in the Hand of Allah and the other end of it is in your- if you hold fast to it you will never go astray and my Ahl al-bayt.

I didn't add anything in this re-structure, just flipped the wording which now matches the accurate version.

Accurate structure of wording:
I'm leaving among you two weighty things, the first of which is the book of Allah in which is the guidance and light. Whoever holds fast to it and adheres to it, will be following true guidance and whoever deviates from it will go astray. And my Ahl al-bayt, I remind of my Ahl al-bayt.
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-ibn-khuzaymah-vol-4-page-63-2357.jpg


So don't assume that narrators are being accused of lying or fabricating. But rather they are being accused of transmitting the structure of the text in an ambiguous/faulty form, due to the weakness we all acknowledge. And that is why we restructure the text and interpret it in the light of accurate version and also the sahih hadeeth from Jabir bin Abdullah(RA) regarding Arafah.

Narrated Jabir bin Abdullah(RA) that Prophet(S) said:  I have left among you the Book of Allah, and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray.
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/sahih-muslim-vol-3-page-350-29501218.jpg

I would like to add that it's not only the Sahabi Zaid bin Arqam(RA) whose understanding of Hadeeth Thaqalayn rejects the Shia narrative that both Quran and Ahl al-bayt are to be held inorder to not go astray.But rather, Umar(RA) too believed the same, because when Prophet(S) asked the people few days before his death,  when he was seriously ill, that  "I will write for you a statement after which you will not go astray", Umar(R) said to the people, noticing the condition of Prophet(S) that, "We have got Book of Allah, that is sufficient for us".
https://youpuncturedtheark.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/sahih-al-bukhari-vol-1-page-121-114-1.jpg

So Umar(R) too held the same understanding as did Zaid bin Arqam(R) held, He(R) didn't say Book of Allah and Ahl al-bayt are sufficient for us, because he was well aware that understanding of Hadeeth Thaqalayn, and also the Sermon of Prophet on Arafah, which Jabir narrated that Prophet(SAWS) said: “You shall not go astray if you hold onto what I have left among you: The Book of Allah.” [Saheeh Muslim #1218].

So now you have Sahabi Umar(R) too that Quran alone was sufficient for people to not go astray, following Sunnah comes under following Quran as explained. You as a staunch Shia are free to make conspiracy theories against Umar(R) and rest of Sahaba, but you can't deny the fact that as per Umar's(R) understanding only Quran was to be held, so as to not go astray, and this was the view of Zaid bin Arqam(R) too.

And as per the principle of Ahlus-sunnah(R) the understanding of a Sahabi takes precedence, that too the Sahabi who is considered the second best after the Prophets(AS) as per Ijma of Ahlus-sunnah. Hence a Sunni is bound to follow the understanding of Sahaba, and even if a later scholar goes against the understanding of Sahaba, the understanding of that scholar will be rejected and the understanding of Sahabi would be upheld.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on December 26, 2019, 05:59:36 AM
PART ONE: A summarised compilation of the chains which contain the phrase: "I am leaving behind (two weighty things) which if you hold onto, you will never go astray, the Quran and my Itra/Ahlulbayt"

Purpose: To demonstrate that the large bulk of chains do not have liars, forgers, or those abandoned in Hadith, and range from Hasan (reliable, the scholars use as proof like the Saheeh), to chains with minor weaknesses, which the scholars have elevated to 'Hasan due to Shawahid' on account of the sheer strength of the various different chains. Therefore the various paths should not weaken, but rather strengthen this narration.

Musnad ibn Ibn Rahwayh (teacher of Imam Bukhari) as well as from Ibn Asim

.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.

Al-Albani and al-Arnaut, in addition to Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani have graded this chain as at least 'Hasan'. This means that while a narrator may have made some mistakes, these were very few in number and did not effect the general quality of their reports, and they were to be relied on.

Mushkil al-Athar al-Tahawi:

حدثنا إبراهيم بن مرزوق قال : حدثنا أبو عامر العقدي قال : حدثنا كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي ، عن أبيه ، عن علي ، أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم  – إني قد تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله سببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي.

Al-Albani regarded this to be a strong Shawahid, and this is also at a 'Hasan' level as per al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and the general majority of Muhadditheen. The narrators are almost identical as above, barring the initial Saduq narrator.


From the Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:

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

Al-Albani and Al-Arnaut have elevated this chain to 'Hasan with the Shawahid' due to the fact the various different chains strengthen each other. Attiyah is also regarded truthful, but weak in Hadith, but his chains can be graded 'Hasan' if other paths strengthen it. They can also be used as supporting proof: Imaam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: "He is Da'eef ul-Hadeeth, write his narrations (for Mutaabi'aat and Shawaahid)." [Al-Jarh wal Ta'deel: 6/383]. I would also like to note here that for the non-Salafis, these two articles also presents a good argument as to why Attiyah ought not to be considered weak: 1. https://alsunna.org/proofs-on-tawassul-refuting-the-claims-of-ibn-taymiah-a-wahhabis.html#gsc.tab=0 and 2. http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/2005/11/hadith-6-response-to-salafis.html
 
Therefore, the following chain will also be 'Hasan due to Shawahid' given Attiyah would be the only weakness:

Sunan al-Tirmidhi:

حدثنا محمد بن الفضيل حدثنا الاعمش عن عطية عن ابى سعي 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  حدثنا على بن المنذر الكوفى د  بيتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علىّ الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفونى فيهما


[Mustadrak al-Hakim]

حدثنا ابو بكر بن اسحاق ودعلج بن احمد السجزى قالا انبانا محمد بن ايوب ثنا الازرق بن على ثنا حسان بن ابراهيم الكرمانى ثنا محمد بن سلمة بن كهيل عن ابيه عن ابى الطفيل بن واثلة انه سمع زيد بن ارقم رضى الله عنه يقول نزل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم بين مكة والمدينة عند شجرات خمس دوحات عظام فكنس الناس ما تحت الشجرات ثم راح رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم عشيه فصللى ثم قام خطيبا فحمد الله و اثنى عليه وذكر ووعظ فقال ما شاء الله ان يقول ثم قال ايها الناس انى تارك فيكم امرين لن تضلوا ان اتبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله و اهل بيتى عترتى ثم قال اتعلمون انى اولى بالمؤمنين من انفسهم ثلاث مرات قالوا نعم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم من كنت مولاه فعلى مولاه

The only weakness here is Muhammed b. Salamah b. Kuhayl, who is narrating from his father, Salamah b.Kuhayl who is regarded Thiqah, who in turn narrates from Abu Tufayl, who narrates from Zayd b. Arqam. Muhammed b. Salamah is regarded weak, but not abandoned, nor a liar.  His Matn is supported by the reliable 'Hasan' chains above. Furthermore, there are several chains going through Abu Tufayl, to Zayd b. Arqam which strengthen this.


[Ja'mi of Imam al-Tirmidhi]:

حدثنا علي بن المنذر كوفي حدثنا محمد بن فضيل قال حدثنا الأعمش عن عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهما قالا : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم به لن تضلوا بعدي أحدهما أعظم من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهم

The only weakness here is that Habib b. Abi Habit did not receive this directly from Zayd b. Arqam. However, we find Habib b. Thabit narrating the same hadith from Abu Tufayl, who in turn narrates from Zayd b. Arqam in Ansab al-Ashraf of Baladhuri.


[Ansab al-Ashraf of Baladhuri]:

عبدالملك بن محمد بن عبد الله القرشي -> يحيى بن حماد -> أبو عوانة -> العماش -> حبيب بن أبي ثابت -> `أمير بن وائل أبو طفيل -> زيد بن ارقم … قال انى تارك فيكم الثقلين ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله وعترتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا على الحوض…

Imam al-Tahawi, in Mushkil al-Athar grades a chain of Habib b. Abi Habit from Abu Tufayl to be 'Saheeh' which is proof he believed Habib did hear from Abu Tufayl:

كما حدثنا أحمد بنُ شُعيب قال: حدثنا أبو عوانة، عن سليمان – يعني الأعمش – قال: حدثنا حبيب بن أبي ثابت، عن أبي الطفيل، عن زيد بن أرقم قال:
فهذا الحديث صحيح الإسناد لا طعن لأحد في أحد من رواته


[Mustadrak al-Hakim]

قال محمد بن علي الشيباني - أحمد بن عظيم الغفارة - أبو نعيم - كامل أبو العال - -  حبيب بن أبي ثابت - يحيى بن جعبة - ياعيا بن جعبة عن زيد بن أرقم

This is yet another chain going from Habib b. Abi Thabit, this time to Yahya b. Jadah to Zayd b. Arqam. There are no weak narrators here, and the only question would be the connection between Habib and Yahya. The narration is clearly at Ghadir Khum, and starts with: "I am leaving among you that which you will never go astray..." just like the previous narrations cited. However, the narrator mentions "The Quran", and the Ahlulbayt is nowhere to be seen anywhere in this narration. We know for certain that in every narration whereby the Prophet first declares "I leave among you that which if you hold onto you will never go astray" he says "The Quran...and my Ahlulbayt". Given the Ahlulbayt were explicitly mentioned at Ghadir in Hadith al-Thaqalayn, and given the narration started in this manner, it could only have been referring to the "Thaqalayn" and the complete omission of mentioning the Ahlulbayt is perhaps the deliberate omission of one of the narrators, or their mistake.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on December 26, 2019, 09:59:36 AM
PART ONE: A summarised compilation of the chains which contain the phrase: "I am leaving behind (two weighty things) which if you hold onto, you will never go astray, the Quran and my Itra/Ahlulbayt"

Purpose: To demonstrate that the large bulk of chains do not have liars, forgers, or those abandoned in Hadith, and range from Hasan (reliable, the scholars use as proof like the Saheeh), to chains with minor weaknesses, which the scholars have elevated to 'Hasan due to Shawahid' on account of the sheer strength of the various different chains. Therefore the various paths should not weaken, but rather strengthen this narration.

Musnad ibn Ibn Rahwayh (teacher of Imam Bukhari) as well as from Ibn Asim

.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.

Al-Albani and al-Arnaut, in addition to Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani have graded this chain as at least 'Hasan'. This means that while a narrator may have made some mistakes, these were very few in number and did not effect the general quality of their reports, and they were to be relied on.

Mushkil al-Athar al-Tahawi:

حدثنا إبراهيم بن مرزوق قال : حدثنا أبو عامر العقدي قال : حدثنا كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي ، عن أبيه ، عن علي ، أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم  – إني قد تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله سببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي.

Al-Albani regarded this to be a strong Shawahid, and this is also at a 'Hasan' level as per al-Albani, al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar and the general majority of Muhadditheen. The narrators are almost identical as above, barring the initial Saduq narrator.


From the Musnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal:

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

Al-Albani and Al-Arnaut have elevated this chain to 'Hasan with the Shawahid' due to the fact the various different chains strengthen each other. Attiyah is also regarded truthful, but weak in Hadith, but his chains can be graded 'Hasan' if other paths strengthen it. They can also be used as supporting proof: Imaam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi said: "He is Da'eef ul-Hadeeth, write his narrations (for Mutaabi'aat and Shawaahid)." [Al-Jarh wal Ta'deel: 6/383]. I would also like to note here that for the non-Salafis, these two articles also presents a good argument as to why Attiyah ought not to be considered weak: 1. https://alsunna.org/proofs-on-tawassul-refuting-the-claims-of-ibn-taymiah-a-wahhabis.html#gsc.tab=0 and 2. http://hadithproofsfortawassul.blogspot.com/2005/11/hadith-6-response-to-salafis.html
 
Therefore, the following chain will also be 'Hasan due to Shawahid' given Attiyah would be the only weakness:

Sunan al-Tirmidhi:

حدثنا محمد بن الفضيل حدثنا الاعمش عن عطية عن ابى سعي 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  حدثنا على بن المنذر الكوفى د  بيتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علىّ الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفونى فيهما


[Mustadrak al-Hakim]

حدثنا ابو بكر بن اسحاق ودعلج بن احمد السجزى قالا انبانا محمد بن ايوب ثنا الازرق بن على ثنا حسان بن ابراهيم الكرمانى ثنا محمد بن سلمة بن كهيل عن ابيه عن ابى الطفيل بن واثلة انه سمع زيد بن ارقم رضى الله عنه يقول نزل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم بين مكة والمدينة عند شجرات خمس دوحات عظام فكنس الناس ما تحت الشجرات ثم راح رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم عشيه فصللى ثم قام خطيبا فحمد الله و اثنى عليه وذكر ووعظ فقال ما شاء الله ان يقول ثم قال ايها الناس انى تارك فيكم امرين لن تضلوا ان اتبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله و اهل بيتى عترتى ثم قال اتعلمون انى اولى بالمؤمنين من انفسهم ثلاث مرات قالوا نعم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم من كنت مولاه فعلى مولاه

The only weakness here is Muhammed b. Salamah b. Kuhayl, who is narrating from his father, Salamah b.Kuhayl who is regarded Thiqah, who in turn narrates from Abu Tufayl, who narrates from Zayd b. Arqam. Muhammed b. Salamah is regarded weak, but not abandoned, nor a liar.  His Matn is supported by the reliable 'Hasan' chains above. Furthermore, there are several chains going through Abu Tufayl, to Zayd b. Arqam which strengthen this.


[Ja'mi of Imam al-Tirmidhi]:

حدثنا علي بن المنذر كوفي حدثنا محمد بن فضيل قال حدثنا الأعمش عن عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهما قالا : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم به لن تضلوا بعدي أحدهما أعظم من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهم

The only weakness here is that Habib b. Abi Habit did not receive this directly from Zayd b. Arqam. However, we find Habib b. Thabit narrating the same hadith from Abu Tufayl, who in turn narrates from Zayd b. Arqam in Ansab al-Ashraf of Baladhuri.


[Ansab al-Ashraf of Baladhuri]:

عبدالملك بن محمد بن عبد الله القرشي -> يحيى بن حماد -> أبو عوانة -> العماش -> حبيب بن أبي ثابت -> `أمير بن وائل أبو طفيل -> زيد بن ارقم … قال انى تارك فيكم الثقلين ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله وعترتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا على الحوض…

Imam al-Tahawi, in Mushkil al-Athar grades a chain of Habib b. Abi Habit from Abu Tufayl to be 'Saheeh' which is proof he believed Habib did hear from Abu Tufayl:

كما حدثنا أحمد بنُ شُعيب قال: حدثنا أبو عوانة، عن سليمان – يعني الأعمش – قال: حدثنا حبيب بن أبي ثابت، عن أبي الطفيل، عن زيد بن أرقم قال:
فهذا الحديث صحيح الإسناد لا طعن لأحد في أحد من رواته


[Mustadrak al-Hakim]

قال محمد بن علي الشيباني - أحمد بن عظيم الغفارة - أبو نعيم - كامل أبو العال - -  حبيب بن أبي ثابت - يحيى بن جعبة - ياعيا بن جعبة عن زيد بن أرقم

This is yet another chain going from Habib b. Abi Thabit, this time to Yahya b. Jadah to Zayd b. Arqam. There are no weak narrators here, and the only question would be the connection between Habib and Yahya. The narration is clearly at Ghadir Khum, and starts with: "I am leaving among you that which you will never go astray..." just like the previous narrations cited. However, the narrator mentions "The Quran", and the Ahlulbayt is nowhere to be seen anywhere in this narration. We know for certain that in every narration whereby the Prophet first declares "I leave among you that which if you hold onto you will never go astray" he says "The Quran...and my Ahlulbayt".
As we see all the chains of weakness, as already discussed in this thread. And they go against, the accurate structure of the wording, as explained in my previous post which you are deliberately avoiding to answer.

I feel this quote from the Shia researcher of the book “al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah” Sa’ib Abdul-Hameed, where he praises the author, the esteemed Shia Scholar Shaykh al-Mufeed for his scientific professional method in the book, is sufficient:

“In this book we can clearly see the correct methodology (of al-Mufeed) in his research and in how he extracts proofs. He holds on to the authentic established narration and leaves all else, even if what opposes it was related by the great ones such as al-Saduq and ibn al-Junayd. He shows complete disregard to the multitude of narrations whose chains are unreliable, instead he relies on the single authentic chain leaving behind a large pile of weak and fabricated reports. He is the expert diver who selects the pure pearls leaving behind the rubble that floats in the oceans.”[al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah, by Shaykh al-Mufeed, Tahqeeq by Sa’ib Abdul Hameed, page 12].


Given the Ahlulbayt were explicitly mentioned at Ghadir in Hadith al-Thaqalayn, and given the narration started in this manner, it could only have been referring to the "Thaqalayn" and the complete omission of mentioning the Ahlulbayt is perhaps the deliberate omission of one of the narrators, or their mistake.
This is quite ridiculous, it is possible for narrator making mistake in omitting Ahl al-bayt, but it is not possible for narrator who had weakness to narrate the structure of the wording in a faulty manner. Even though I have proven why my claim is correct in my last post, which you are deliberately avoiding. The understanding of Sahaba the witness to that event clearly proves my view to be correct.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Ebn Hussein on December 28, 2019, 06:34:29 AM
Truth is, the Rafidah can never ever prove that:

Ahlul-Bayt = 12 Imams of the Twelver sect

So even IF we go by the most favourite al-Thaqalayn version of the Rafidah, Sunnism wouldn't be disproved nor would Imamism be proven to be truth.

As for Sunnism: Ahlul-Bayt is a general term and encompasses many individuals that the Rafidah exclude from the Ahlul-Bayt. Ibn Abbas is one of them, a main narrator and main mufassir of Sunnis.

As for Rafidism: The Qur'an between their hands has been compiled (according to them) by renegades and apostates, it's corrupted and at best muhtarim (respected) as their scholars say until the rise of their hidden one.

Conclusion: they have no Qur'an (of the Ahlul-Bayt, don't even start the 'Hafs is a Shi'ite argument, it will backfire...trust me) nor Ahlul-Bayt, the alleged guide is on idle for 1200 years, represented by fallible Iranian 'Ayatollahs' who can recite a Fatihah with semi-correct Tajwid.

Case closed.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Soccer on May 28, 2020, 03:29:19 PM
So even IF we go by the most favourite al-Thaqalayn version of the Rafidah, Sunnism wouldn't be disproved nor would Imamism be proven to be truth.


Yet you guys were desperately trying to hide how authentic it is lol.

I just wanted to add, singular usage, in Quran, often the Prophet and Quran is referred to as a single light. The Prophet is also called the proof and the reminder, showing unity between him and Quran or rather where the true Quran resides was his heart and soul.

The same is true of his family, and Quran also talks about the rope of God as a rope from God and rope from humans.

So there is nothing wrong with emphasizing on them being one, that he left in fact, one thing but at the same time stating their two. And this emphasized also with "and they will not separate till they return to the pond" which also has many authentic chains.

Anyways this was an epic thread.

Hopefully people can use reason properly and analyze the discussion properly.


Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on June 19, 2020, 03:08:40 PM
As we see all the chains of weakness, as already discussed in this thread. And they go against, the accurate structure of the wording, as explained in my previous post which you are deliberately avoiding to answer.

Al-Albani, Ibn Hajar, and many of the scholars of the the Ahlus-Sunnah did not consider the tradition in Saheeh Muslim (either Zayd b. Arqam (Radiyllahu anhu) in his very old aged and post-memory loss) or the hadith of Jabir b.Abdillah (radiyallahu anhu) to be in contradiction with the reliable hasan chains contained in Mushkil al-Athar, of Imam at-Tahawi, or Musnad ibn Rawayh, the teacher of Imam al-Bukhari.

Rather, i will quote the view of Al-Albani who summarises as follows:

"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…”
Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah (4/260).

According to, Moulana Suhail Motala approved by Moulana Haroon Abasoomar of the Hanafi school, on hadithanswers.com:

"The Muhaddithun don’t regard issues like these as a contradiction, rather it is an addition, showing us the importance of Quran, Sunnah and the Ahlu Bayt"
https://hadithanswers.com/hadith-i-am-leaving-behind-two-things/


Quote
I feel this quote from the Shia researcher of the book “al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah” Sa’ib Abdul-Hameed, where he praises the author, the esteemed Shia Scholar Shaykh al-Mufeed for his scientific professional method in the book, is sufficient:

“In this book we can clearly see the correct methodology (of al-Mufeed) in his research and in how he extracts proofs. He holds on to the authentic established narration and leaves all else, even if what opposes it was related by the great ones such as al-Saduq and ibn al-Junayd. He shows complete disregard to the multitude of narrations whose chains are unreliable, instead he relies on the single authentic chain leaving behind a large pile of weak and fabricated reports. He is the expert diver who selects the pure pearls leaving behind the rubble that floats in the oceans.”[al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah, by Shaykh al-Mufeed, Tahqeeq by Sa’ib Abdul Hameed, page 12].

Al-Mufid had a stricter criteria over what narrations one could derive Yaqeen from. He was also critical of those before him who chose to include a mixture of reports into their collections.

However, on this topic, nobody denies that if the chains of narrators promote Shadh content, or contain within them narrators who are disparaged as fabricators, liars, or those with extreme open Rafdh (Fasiqs?), chains of narrations coming exclusively from this group, even if they number a large ammount would not give strength to the narration in our case on account of the Shawahid or Mu'tabaat. 

In his Muqaddimah Ibn al-Salah states:

"Not every weakness in the Hadith is eliminated by the hadith coming from different lines of transmission. Rather the situation varies:

… there are also types of weakness which are not eliminated by something similar to that, on account of severity of the weakness and the failure of this Jaber (consoler) to console it and mend it.  An example of this is the weakness which arises from the transmitter being accused of lying, or the fact that the hadith is Shadh (irregular).

…Rather the situation varies: one weakness which the passage of the hadith through different lines of transmission eliminates the weakness which arises from some deficiency in the retention of its transmitter, when he is otherwise veracious and pious. When we saw the hadith he related also came from another line of transmission, we realize that it is one of the hadith that he had retained properly, and that his accuracy in it was not impaired …”

Now in our case, we actually have the following:

1. One tradition which is Hasan li-Dhati, in and of itself. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Al-Albani, Shu'ayb al-Arnaut, Ahmad B. Abu Bakr b.Ismail Al Busri and the majority of your scholars have deemed the narrators in this chain to be 'Hasan', and therefore the Isnaad at the very least to be 'Hasan'. This is the tradition of Kathir b.Zayd, in two chains through him, Mushkil al-Athar of Imam at-Tahawi, and Musnad ibn Rawayh, the teacher of Imam Bukhari.

2. Many additional chains, from various other companions, from Zayd b. Arqam, Abu Tufayl, Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, in addition to Ali b. Abi Talib, whose narrators are not disparaged as liars, Rawafidh, nor fabricators, but are considered weak mainly on account of retention, or Tadlees. Several of these chains Muhadditheen such as Al-Albani and Al-Arnaut have regarded as 'Hasan bil Shawahid'. This means the various paths for the tradition elevate the chain from Dhai'f to 'Hasan'. I have made a compilation in the previous page.

3. Furthermore, Al-Albani as well as many of your Muhaditheen themselves have used reports where there is or may be a disconnection between narrators in strengthening the chains.

There are several narrations from Thiqah narrators,where the only question is that of Tadlees. For instance, Habib b. Abi Thabit --> AbuTufayl -->Zayd b.Arqam.  Imam at-Tahawi regards the Sanad from this point as Saheeh, proof he believes Habib heard from Abu Tufayl. Nevertheless, if you believe this is still a disconnected report due to the question here, Al-Albani and others have still used reports where they may be a disconnection and weak itself, as proof and Shawahid.

Al-Albani strenghtening weaker chains/reports

Niqab: http://maktabasalafiya.blogspot.com/2011/06/shaykh-alabanis-position-of-niqab-of.html


Sheikh Al-Albani explains reasons behind this Hadith’s authenticity in great detail:

“. . . (The narration’s chain is) Bashir from Qatadah from Khalid ibn Duraik from Aishah. Ibn Adiy added that he (Khalid) once attributed it to Umm Salamah instead of Aishah. Abu Dawud said after citing it, ‘This Hadith is Mursal. Khalid ibn Duraik did not meet Aishah.’ Also, Sa’eed ibn Bashir is weak according to Hafidh ibn Hajar in At-Taqrib. However, this Hadith has been reported via other ways that strengthen it:

(1.) A Mursal report recorded by Abu Dawud (no. 437) from Qatadah with an authentic chain that includes neither ibn Duraik nor ibn Bashir: ‘Indeed, once a young girl reaches menses, it is not right for her to expose except her face and hands to the wrists.'

(2.) At-Tabarani (in Al-Kabir 24/143/378 and Al-Awsat 2/230/8959) and Al-Bayhaqi recorded via ibn Lahi’ah from Iyadh from Abdullah from Ibrahim bin Rufa’ah Al-Ansari from his father from (he believed) Asma bint Umays that Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) entered Aishah’s house while she had with her sister Asma bint Abi Bakr, who was wearing wide-sleeved clothes (see the report in question for the remainder of this Hadith’s text) . . . There is no doubt that a report by ibn Lahi’ah does not go below the level of Hasan when it has supportive narrations, as is the case here . . .”

(Jilbab Ul-Mar’at Il-Muslimah pp. 58-59)"

And here is another example, on the prophecy of Kerbala:
"
قلت وبالجملة فالحديث صحيح بمجموع هذه الطرق، وإن كانت مفرداتها لا تخلو من ضعف، ولكنه ضعف يسير، لا سيما وبعضها قد حسنه الهيثمي، والله أعلم

“Altogether, the Hadith is authentic by collectively considering all the chains of narration. This is true even though each single chain is not free from defects, but it’s minor defects. This is not to mention that some of those chains were graded as Hassan [less authentic than Sahih, yet authentic] by al-Haythamee.  And Allah knows best.”


Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on June 19, 2020, 03:20:20 PM
Truth is, the Rafidah can never ever prove that:

Ahlul-Bayt = 12 Imams of the Twelver sect

So even IF we go by the most favourite al-Thaqalayn version of the Rafidah, Sunnism wouldn't be disproved nor would Imamism be proven to be truth.

As for Sunnism: Ahlul-Bayt is a general term and encompasses many individuals that the Rafidah exclude from the Ahlul-Bayt. Ibn Abbas is one of them, a main narrator and main mufassir of Sunnis.

As for Rafidism: The Qur'an between their hands has been compiled (according to them) by renegades and apostates, it's corrupted and at best muhtarim (respected) as their scholars say until the rise of their hidden one.

Conclusion: they have no Qur'an (of the Ahlul-Bayt, don't even start the 'Hafs is a Shi'ite argument, it will backfire...trust me) nor Ahlul-Bayt, the alleged guide is on idle for 1200 years, represented by fallible Iranian 'Ayatollahs' who can recite a Fatihah with semi-correct Tajwid.

Case closed.


Aside from the  caricature and inaccuracies of this post, let us deal with the substantive points you have made. The fundamental thing first is to demonstrate that, given the partisan bias Shias have, and Sunnis have, if we want to reach haq, we must abide by the Quran, and that which is genuinely Mutawattir between both sects. In this way, we deal with that which there are substantive proofs for, what is unanimously accepted.

TSN, SunniDefense, and a large swathe of the online groups over the last decade or two, have vehemently tried to deny that the Prophet ever commanded us to follow the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, lest we go astray. Efforts have been made to consistently weaken this, because, as Hani himself admitted, if one were to take this as authentic, it strongly supports the Shia narrative.

If you believe the Prophet commanded us to obey the Quran and the Ahlulbayt for our guidance, as one of the last major declarations, along side declaring Ali the Mawla of whomsoever he and Allah are the Mawla of, the entire discussion changes.

That is why you now find brothers like Farid throwing up poorly considered challenges like 'Prove the twelve according to Sunni books'.

Habibi, you can't prove all of Islam using the Bible, but you can show Christians clear flashes of Tawheed in their own Bible which they have ignored and interpreted away despite the clear meaning.  What we Shia are trying to do is prove what is Tawattur between us both, which is the only fair thing anyone who wants to discern truth can do. What do we know with a high degree of confidence the Prophet said, which was declared so publicly, it is deemed authentic and widely transmitted among both Sunni and Shia collections?


Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on June 19, 2020, 03:27:42 PM
Yet you guys were desperately trying to hide how authentic it is lol.

I just wanted to add, singular usage, in Quran, often the Prophet and Quran is referred to as a single light. The Prophet is also called the proof and the reminder, showing unity between him and Quran or rather where the true Quran resides was his heart and soul.

The same is true of his family, and Quran also talks about the rope of God as a rope from God and rope from humans.

So there is nothing wrong with emphasizing on them being one, that he left in fact, one thing but at the same time stating their two. And this emphasized also with "and they will not separate till they return to the pond" which also has many authentic chains.

Anyways this was an epic thread.

Hopefully people can use reason properly and analyze the discussion properly.

Were? The attempts to deem it not authentic are still going on. Perhaps by virtue of their Fitrah, or otherwise, they recognize the ramifications of accepting it as authentic. Imagine the Imam of Masjid ul-Haram during Jumm'ah proclaiming:

"The Prophet (saw) declared at Ghadir, i am leaving behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray.The Quran and my Ahlulbayt, and they will never deviate from one another until they meet me again at the Pool of Kawthar (highest level of Jannah.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) then held the hand of Ali and proclaimed: " Whomsoever Allah and his Messenger are Mawla, Ali is his Mawla"


Most of the crowd there don't know this Hadith exists, let alone that it is widely transmitted between both Shias and Sunnis, and deemed authentic by both sets of Ulema barring the ones with bias in their hearts, or who are ignorant.

Accepting that Rasulullah (saw) declared to tens of thousands, right before proclaiming Ali as the Mawla of whomsoever he was the Mawla of, that we should hold onto the Quran and Ahlulbayt if we never want to go astray completely changes the entire narrative.

That is why you find they are willing to even discard the verdicts of Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani etc and instead adopt the views of Farid, Hani, Noor-us-Sunnah, who are all very talented and in themselves learned individuals, but are nothing in authority to the aforementioned, as far as Sunnis should be concerned.

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on June 19, 2020, 03:47:27 PM
I don't want to spam chains / it will take too long to read, so refer to this article a brother has made to compile chains etc: https://shiaresponses.wordpress.com/hadith-al-thaqalayn-articles/
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Mythbuster1 on June 19, 2020, 04:04:05 PM
The problem with this theory is,it was said miles away from the centre,where it would have been ideal to state such and clearly so.

Instead mawla was only mentioned AFTER the last hajj and that too miles away after everybody left for their homes, that too a word with many many meanings. That shows how desperate you shiites are at trying to prove something that just isn’t there.

I mean trying to clutch at something that’s clearly explained by Sunni with context and trying to make a rule out of it is honestly bordering on desperation.

Nothing in Quran Nothing in sunnah but you have vague reports that you substantiate to be true is a desperate attempt by shiites and that too by turning a blind eye to the context of the situation.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: whoaretheshia on June 19, 2020, 04:09:15 PM
Update on the various Isnaad for Hadith al-Thaqalayn whereby the Prophet at Ghadir Khumm first declared:

"I leave behind for you that which if you hold onto,you will never go astray"

Hasan li-Dhati (outright Hasan):

1.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.

2. حدثنا إبراهيم بن مرزوق قال : حدثنا أبو عامر العقدي قال : حدثنا كثير بن زيد، عن محمد بن عمر بن علي ، عن أبيه ، عن علي ، أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم  – إني قد تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا :كتاب الله سببه بأيديكم، وأهل بيتي.

Hasan Li-Ghayri

 3.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

 4.حدثنا محمد بن الفضيل حدثنا الاعمش عن عطية عن ابى سعي 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  حدثنا على بن المنذر الكوفى د  بيتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علىّ الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفونى فيهما

 5. حدثنا ابو بكر بن اسحاق ودعلج بن احمد السجزى قالا انبانا محمد بن ايوب ثنا الازرق بن على ثنا حسان بن ابراهيم الكرمانى ثنا محمد بن سلمة بن كهيل عن ابيه عن ابى الطفيل بن واثلة انه سمع زيد بن ارقم رضى الله عنه يقول نزل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم بين مكة والمدينة عند شجرات خمس دوحات عظام فكنس الناس ما تحت الشجرات ثم راح رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم عشيه فصللى ثم قام خطيبا فحمد الله و اثنى عليه وذكر ووعظ فقال ما شاء الله ان يقول ثم قال ايها الناس انى تارك فيكم امرين لن تضلوا ان اتبعتموهما وهما كتاب الله و اهل بيتى عترتى ثم قال اتعلمون انى اولى بالمؤمنين من انفسهم ثلاث مرات قالوا نعم فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم من كنت مولاه فعلى مولاه

 6. حدثنا علي بن المنذر كوفي حدثنا محمد بن فضيل قال حدثنا الأعمش عن عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن زيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهما قالا : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم إني تارك فيكم ما إن تمسكتم به لن تضلوا بعدي أحدهما أعظم من الآخر كتاب الله حبل ممدود من السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا علي الحوض فانظروا كيف تخلفوني فيهم

 7. عبدالملك بن محمد بن عبد الله القرشي -> يحيى بن حماد -> أبو عوانة -> العماش -> حبيب بن أبي ثابت -> `أمير بن وائل أبو طفيل -> زيد بن ارقم … قال انى تارك فيكم الثقلين ما ان تمسكتم به لن تضلوا كتاب الله وعترتى ولن يتفرقا حتى يردا على الحوض…

8. قال محمد بن علي الشيباني - أحمد بن عظيم الغفارة - أبو نعيم - كامل أبو العال - -  حبيب بن أبي ثابت - يحيى بن جعبة - ياعيا بن جعبة عن زيد بن أرقم


There are additional chains i will include later but suffice to note for the above:

1. Nobody accused of being a liar
2. Nobody accused of being one who forges
3. Nobody reliably accused of being a Rafidah
4. Majority of narrators regarded as Saduq, truthful, with weaknesses being in retention for the Dhai'f narrators i.e. weak in Hadith, something multiple chains can remedy according to Sunni scholars, or slight or possible disconnections.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Noor-us-Sunnah on June 19, 2020, 11:29:03 PM
See how Rafidah with their half-baked knowledge which is Jahl make foolish arguments.

(i). Report #1 & #2 have common narrator with weakness in him(Kathir bin Zayd) hence its one report.

(ii). Report #3 , #4 have common narrator who was weak and a Mudallis (Atiyya awfi).

(iii). Report #5 Narrator Muhammad bin Salama bin Kuhail had Munkar reports and he was a Shia.

(iv). Report #6  #7, #8 have common narrator Habib bin Abi Thabit, who was Mudallis.

As for the chain of narrators then, except one chain all the rest(3 : ii, iii, iv) are extremely problematic.  The presence of Mudallis in a chain and him not clarifying hearing, puts the possibility of liars, forgers and Rafidah, its a possibility though. And one narrator had Munkar reports. This answers point 1,2,3. Point 4 is a myth and thoroughly explained and shattered in this article:
https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/hadeeth-al-thaqalayntwo-weighty-things-the-correct-understanding-and-a-spot-on-perspective-of-sunnis/

Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: MuslimK on June 20, 2020, 02:47:02 PM
Were? The attempts to deem it not authentic are still going on. Perhaps by virtue of their Fitrah, or otherwise, they recognize the ramifications of accepting it as authentic. Imagine the Imam of Masjid ul-Haram during Jumm'ah proclaiming:

"The Prophet (saw) declared at Ghadir, i am leaving behind for you two weighty things, which if you hold onto, you will never go astray.The Quran and my Ahlulbayt, and they will never deviate from one another until they meet me again at the Pool of Kawthar (highest level of Jannah.

The Messenger of Allah (saw) then held the hand of Ali and proclaimed: " Whomsoever Allah and his Messenger are Mawla, Ali is his Mawla"


Most of the crowd there don't know this Hadith exists, let alone that it is widely transmitted between both Shias and Sunnis, and deemed authentic by both sets of Ulema barring the ones with bias in their hearts, or who are ignorant.

Accepting that Rasulullah (saw) declared to tens of thousands, right before proclaiming Ali as the Mawla of whomsoever he was the Mawla of, that we should hold onto the Quran and Ahlulbayt if we never want to go astray completely changes the entire narrative.

That is why you find they are willing to even discard the verdicts of Al-Albani, Al-Arnaut, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani etc and instead adopt the views of Farid, Hani, Noor-us-Sunnah, who are all very talented and in themselves learned individuals, but are nothing in authority to the aforementioned, as far as Sunnis should be concerned.



You are mistaken. Although you have been answered many times on this forum on this topic but even if these are considered authentic it doesn't prove anything against Ahl-Sunnah nor does it prove your sect to be correct. This is something you should keep in mind.



Aside from the  caricature and inaccuracies of this post, let us deal with the substantive points you have made. The fundamental thing first is to demonstrate that, given the partisan bias Shias have, and Sunnis have, if we want to reach haq, we must abide by the Quran, and that which is genuinely Mutawattir between both sects. In this way, we deal with that which there are substantive proofs for, what is unanimously accepted.

TSN, SunniDefense, and a large swathe of the online groups over the last decade or two, have vehemently tried to deny that the Prophet ever commanded us to follow the Quran and the Ahlulbayt, lest we go astray. Efforts have been made to consistently weaken this, because, as Hani himself admitted, if one were to take this as authentic, it strongly supports the Shia narrative.

If you believe the Prophet commanded us to obey the Quran and the Ahlulbayt for our guidance, as one of the last major declarations, along side declaring Ali the Mawla of whomsoever he and Allah are the Mawla of, the entire discussion changes.

That is why you now find brothers like Farid throwing up poorly considered challenges like 'Prove the twelve according to Sunni books'.

Habibi, you can't prove all of Islam using the Bible, but you can show Christians clear flashes of Tawheed in their own Bible which they have ignored and interpreted away despite the clear meaning.  What we Shia are trying to do is prove what is Tawattur between us both, which is the only fair thing anyone who wants to discern truth can do. What do we know with a high degree of confidence the Prophet said, which was declared so publicly, it is deemed authentic and widely transmitted among both Sunni and Shia collections?



Farid has a point - what makes your sect separate from the vast majority of Muslims is mainly your belief in the Imamah of 12 Imams. If You can't prove the foundation of your sect from the Quran or the Sunnah then that says a lot. You can't even prove it from books of other Shia sects, and even struggle in your own twelver sources.
Title: Re: The Prophet left two weighty things: stop the deception TSN/Sunni Defense/YPTA
Post by: Soccer on June 20, 2020, 05:37:54 PM
If You can't prove the foundation of your sect from the Quran or the Sunnah then that says a lot.

You are right about both points, but it's off-topic. This topic is about hadithal thaqalayn.