TwelverShia.net Forum

Unscientific Shia Hadith?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Rauf Murtuzov

Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« on: May 22, 2020, 02:46:05 PM »
AsSalamu Aleikum. My thread is deleted, so I am making the new one. Let me clarify my intention beforehand. This thread is not about attacking Shias, but rather a research about Shia hadith.

“And God forbade eating rabbits as it has claws like cats and other beasts of prey. Therefore, the same decree about beasts of prey applies to eating rabbits. In addition to this, there is some filthiness in it and bleeding like that of menstruating women since it is a freak (perverted) animal[147]. “
Source: Uyoun Akhbar Al-Ridha, by Ibn Babawayh, vol. 2, page 92 (English translation)
http://islamicmobility.com/pdf/UYUN%20AKHBAR%20AL%20REZA%20VOL.2.pdf


But we know that rabbits don’t menstruate. How can you reconcile this contradiction?


In the deleted thread, one Shia made an ad-hominin argument about famous Sunni hadiths which were explained already by Sunnis. But this Shia hadith had never been discussed before.

Then another Shia come with the argument that we should compare hadiths with the Quran. But where does the Quran talks about this?

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2020, 03:52:10 AM »
AsSalamu Aleikum. My thread is deleted, so I am making the new one. Let me clarify my intention beforehand. This thread is not about attacking Shias, but rather a research about Shia hadith.

“And God forbade eating rabbits as it has claws like cats and other beasts of prey. Therefore, the same decree about beasts of prey applies to eating rabbits. In addition to this, there is some filthiness in it and bleeding like that of menstruating women since it is a freak (perverted) animal[147]. “
Source: Uyoun Akhbar Al-Ridha, by Ibn Babawayh, vol. 2, page 92 (English translation)
http://islamicmobility.com/pdf/UYUN%20AKHBAR%20AL%20REZA%20VOL.2.pdf


But we know that rabbits don’t menstruate. How can you reconcile this contradiction?


In the deleted thread, one Shia made an ad-hominin argument about famous Sunni hadiths which were explained already by Sunnis. But this Shia hadith had never been discussed before.

Then another Shia come with the argument that we should compare hadiths with the Quran. But where does the Quran talks about this?

Ahlulbayt calculated their words to be confirmed all by Quran.  If it can't be confirmed by Quran nor refuted, you remain neutral, till you know by Quran what it is.

You are allowed to do mistakes, and assume something is confirmed by Quran from ahadith, and you are allowed to be mistaken in thinking something contradicts ahadith, but this should be honest analysis mistakes.

Not from ignorance of passions, something doesn't make sense to you, and so you Quran doesn't confirm it by your ignorance of Quran nor attribute an interpretation to Quran as valid simple because a hadith says so.

Quran unravels itself when paired with the Sunnah.

Obviously, the Quran doesn't have the anatomy of every animal and we can't analyze all scientific facts in Quran, and if Quran has a code to unravel all that, we don't know how.

What I'm saying is,  The Sunnah as in what relates to the eternal light of God and the path to it, is all explained in Quran.  Salah it's details down to every ruku is explained.

More then the Sunnah, the intention behind the words are explained. But you won't know it through Quran alone, you need to come with the notion of the Sunnah and trying to see if you can confirm it in the Quran.

The Quran is a tool as well. The Ahlulbayt are stars of guidance in the sky of this world.

When you begin to reach out to the sky and look towards the inward kingdom, the stars become adorned and bring you to reflect over Quran and understanding, you don't think is possible now.

"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2020, 11:08:39 AM »
Ahlulbayt calculated their words to be confirmed all by Quran.  If it can't be confirmed by Quran nor refuted, you remain neutral, till you know by Quran what it is.

You are allowed to do mistakes, and assume something is confirmed by Quran from ahadith, and you are allowed to be mistaken in thinking something contradicts ahadith, but this should be honest analysis mistakes.

Not from ignorance of passions, something doesn't make sense to you, and so you Quran doesn't confirm it by your ignorance of Quran nor attribute an interpretation to Quran as valid simple because a hadith says so.

Quran unravels itself when paired with the Sunnah.

Obviously, the Quran doesn't have the anatomy of every animal and we can't analyze all scientific facts in Quran, and if Quran has a code to unravel all that, we don't know how.

What I'm saying is,  The Sunnah as in what relates to the eternal light of God and the path to it, is all explained in Quran.  Salah it's details down to every ruku is explained.

More then the Sunnah, the intention behind the words are explained. But you won't know it through Quran alone, you need to come with the notion of the Sunnah and trying to see if you can confirm it in the Quran.

The Quran is a tool as well. The Ahlulbayt are stars of guidance in the sky of this world.

When you begin to reach out to the sky and look towards the inward kingdom, the stars become adorned and bring you to reflect over Quran and understanding, you don't think is possible now.

Are your response a representative of Twelver Shia perspective? Can you show me where do you get these principles from?

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2020, 07:31:36 PM »
Are your response a representative of Twelver Shia perspective? Can you show me where do you get these principles from?

I can show hadiths confirming this from Ahlulbayt. But it would be circular reasoning to build on that. In fact, even building on Quran by Quran is circular reasoning.

For example, some people believe in Prophethood of Mohammad because Quran says so. This is circular reasoning and not legit.

So by what you are asking, are you asking for confirmation of what I said in:

1. hadiths.
2. Quran.
3. Or how I know this to be the proper methodology.

I don't represent Quran or Islam or Ahlulbayt, I'm speaking all I know in terms of what I perceive to be guidance to the best of my ability.

Our ahadith, there almost in it facts wise but that would you find it a contradiction somewhere in the hadiths to it. And the way we try to reconcile hadiths is not necessarily best, as we are going against the norms of language when we do this. Sometimes not, but sometimes we are.

For example, tatoos are forbidden hadith wise and not only forbidden but one of the worst type of harams one can do as one is cursed for it. I'm not saying tatoos are actually forbidden or Quran forbids it here, what I'm trying to reveal is the flaw of our fiqh system with reconciling hadiths.

But because we reconciled hadiths that speak about x being cursed, yet x is halal, so then we concluded, being cursed can mean makruh,  the clear ahadith forbidding tatoos strongly is abandoned.

But there is not a single hadith saying tatoos are halal but only ahadith saying results to get the curse of God.

And in fact, we have authentic hadiths that say khums is on spoils of war only. Now people are playing games with the word maghanim to justify the khums system we have now.

Sure we have other hadiths, and all of them are mutually exclusive,  they all can't be true, but the mental gymnastics we go through them all true, is insincere.

This is not how the religion is suppose to be adhered to. Liar says x about Ahlulbayt, truthful says y, and you get z by reconciling their opposite views.

Ilmel Rijaal has failed us Shiites for sure. We have authentic hadiths (numerous) the tell us to kill people who insult Prophet or Ahlulbayt without recourse to a judge or even the Imam, if we have no fear of doing the action.

That's crazy talk, vigilantism gone to extreme, and behaviour one can justify murder through it and get away with (accuse the person who he killed as insulting Ahlulbayt). In this case, Quran appeals to reason - many times - to do away with customs of the Arabs when they were polytheistic.  But in fact, there is a verse that limits killing a person to two things only:

1. Murder
2. Fasad fel Arth (oppression, causing havoc in the earth)

While rape may be included in 2, for sure, other type of zina can't be included in 2 nor apostacy nor insulting the Prophet or family of the Nabi.

If we begin to be lax in how we define 2, all sorts of murder can be justified. A person drinks alcohol, well fasad, kill him.

A person sells non-halal, well fasad, kill him.

etc...

It's crazy, fasad here takes the meaning of literally destroying the peace and security in the land. Rape can fall under this category, but not other things, we have to be sincere.

The problem is our scholars are too playful with words in Quran and try to enforce every hadith on to it.

At the same time, sometimes hadiths give insight to Quran.

So we have to take care.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2020, 07:35:04 PM by Soccer »
"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2020, 07:49:50 PM »
I can show hadiths confirming this from Ahlulbayt. But it would be circular reasoning to build on that. In fact, even building on Quran by Quran is circular reasoning.
So we have to take care.

I read all what you said and trying to understand your position. Are you reformist Shia?

For example, we Sunnis have Abu Layth, who have total different beliefs from the vast majority of Sunnis, when it came to Hadiths.

What I meant by representative, is that you are not saying something which is considered wrong by 99% of the Twelvers. It is not something which is reformist thinking which is against for example against Sistani and Khomeini and other revered scholars of the Twelvers.

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2020, 07:53:23 PM »
It's definitely not adhered to by Marjaas. It definitely is not followed by Shiites. It definitely is not even known my methodology.

But it is well supported (exact methodology) by many hadiths but most importantly Quran verifies those ahadith.

May God forgive them, I am trying to write books about this at the same trying to finish my degree.

I don't think Shiites when I present my case clearly and apply it all, will reject it.  They are just too chaotic at the moment and our system of Fiqh has failed us.



"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2020, 07:57:37 PM »
It's definitely not adhered to by Marjaas. It definitely is not followed by Shiites. It definitely is not even known my methodology.

But it is well supported (exact methodology) by many hadiths but most importantly Quran verifies those ahadith.

May God forgive them, I am trying to write books about this at the same trying to finish my degree.

I don't think Shiites when I present my case clearly and apply it all, will reject it.  They are just too chaotic at the moment and our system of Fiqh has failed us.

Can you ask a knowledgeable Twelver Shia who has the representative view about this Hadiths?
Also, will you talk about this Hadith in your book?

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2020, 08:06:34 PM »
Here is 1 hadith and this part of a book I'm writting, I will share more:

When a problem is put before anyone of them he passes judgement on it from his imagination. When exactly the same problem is placed before another of them he passes an opposite verdict. Then these judges go to the chief who had appointed them and he confirms all the verdicts, although their Allah is One (and the same), their Prophet is one (and the same), their Book (the Qur’an) is one (and the same)!
Is it that Allah ordered them to differ and they obeyed Him? Or He prohibited them from it but they disobeyed Him? Or (is it that) Allah sent an incomplete Faith and sought their help to complete it? Or they are His partners in the affairs, so that it is their share of duty to pronounce and He has to agree? Or is it that Allah the Glorified sent a perfect faith but the Prophet fell short of conveying it and handing it over (to the people)? The fact is that Allah the Glorified says:
We have not neglected anything in the Book (Qur’an) . . . (6:38),
and in it is a ‘clarification of everything’ And He says that one part of the Qur’an verifies another part and that there is no divergence in it as He says:
And if it had been from any other than Allah, they would surely have found in it much discrepancy. (4:82)
Indeed, the outside of the Qur’an is wonderful, and its inside is deep (in meaning). Its wonders will never disappear, its amazements will never pass away and its darkness (plural form) cannot be cleared except through itself.

My comments:


This sermon shows the differences arose and the 1st Successor comments on them.  First condemnation is passing a judgement not on knowledge but imagination.  The Quran also forbids attributing God what we do not know.  Another person placed with another, they come with an opposite verdict. This means they can not all be correct. Then the chief that appointed them confirms all their verdicts. This is exactly how Taqlid is done today.  They differ but its accepted that we can follow any of them. Obviously, the chief appointing them did not want to say both judgments are true, rather, he is saying which ever one you follow it does not matter, for they are “attempting” to follow God and his Messenger.

Then the first Successors begins with some rhetorical questions.  God did not order them to differ rather we see in Quran, unity upon Quran and Sunnah is the advice, and not to differ.  The notion that God wants us to differ and accepts the differences, is a notion we hold today. But the Quran has in fact commanded the opposite and said without understanding (Fiqh) our hearts will be divided even if people may think we are united.

The rope of God is meant to be a source of unity, but when it becomes a source of conflict and division, its obviously not guiding. So that poses the next question.
Or is it that God sent an incomplete faith? Certainly, God has sent a guidance and way to unite on guidance, so if we are not following that guidance, its due to rebellion and insincerity on our part.

The Leader shows then a more sinister intention in all this.  He asks, that if they are in fact partners with God in the affair, and this goes to a verse in the 42nd chapter of Quran.  The leader and guide showing that people who follow such leaders in fact, are associating with God heedlessly.
The Leader continues and then advices on the role of the Sunnah, he says or is it God sent a perfect religion, but the Prophet did not convey it and fell short of manifesting it?

He then refutes all these rhetorical questions and shows in fact, the Quran has an amazing quality of guiding humans through all their differences and it’s implied with the last reference to the Prophet, that the Sunnah compliments it and provides insight to it.

The Captain and Navigator of the ship of Salvation explains, that different parts of Quran explain different parts.

The last line is the most significant phrase for the purposes of the paradox. Its darkness which is in plural form, mean all the type of darkness which is a hint to the verse 3:7 and what is meant by ambiguity from it is to be cleared through itself.
And the Quran clarifies itself, but through the help of Ahlulbayt (as).  The Sunnah of the Messenger was complimenting the Quran as it was dynamically built.

And here while we should provide hadiths to clarify Quran, we must prove at the end Quranic signs and insights by Quran insights, since hadiths can always be denied.

But as anyone can talk a bunch of nonsense about Quran any right interpretation must be supported by hadiths as well. When hadiths are shown there is weight to the words and explanation, and it becomes easier to see it in Quran.


"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2020, 08:23:39 PM »
Here is 1 hadith and this part of a book I'm writting, I will share more:
But as anyone can talk a bunch of nonsense about Quran any right interpretation must be supported by hadiths as well. When hadiths are shown there is weight to the words and explanation, and it becomes easier to see it in Quran.
My intention to make this post was to research this Hadith. Do you know if chains of this Hadith are strong or weak?

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2020, 08:25:47 PM »
My intention to make this post was to research this Hadith. Do you know if chains of this Hadith are strong or weak?

I haven't researched the chains.

"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #10 on: May 24, 2020, 08:29:10 PM »
Alternative Sources for Sermon 18
(1) Ibn Talhah, Matalib, I, 141;
(2) al-Tabarsi, al-'Ihtijaj, I, 139;
(3) al-Qadi al-Nu’man, Da’a'im, I, 93;
(4) Narrated by Ibn Udhaynah from al-'Imam al-Sadiq (A) in al-Nuri, Mustadrak al-Wasa'il, III, 174; see also al-Saffar, Basa'ir al-darajat.

(You can look into it if you wish)
"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2020, 08:31:32 PM »
Alternative Sources for Sermon 18
(1) Ibn Talhah, Matalib, I, 141;
(2) al-Tabarsi, al-'Ihtijaj, I, 139;
(3) al-Qadi al-Nu’man, Da’a'im, I, 93;
(4) Narrated by Ibn Udhaynah from al-'Imam al-Sadiq (A) in al-Nuri, Mustadrak al-Wasa'il, III, 174; see also al-Saffar, Basa'ir al-darajat.

(You can look into it if you wish)
I have seen many from Shiachat claiming female rabbits mensturate.

also popular site confirming this: https://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/fa4057

is it maybe because it has good chains?
« Last Edit: May 24, 2020, 08:37:01 PM by Rauf Murtuzov »

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2020, 08:33:23 PM »
I have seen many from Shiachat claiming female rabbits mensturate.

also popular site confirming this: https://www.islamquest.net/en/archive/question/fa4057

is it maybe because it has good chains?

I don't know.
"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

MuslimK

  • *****
  • Total likes: 255
  • +18/-0
  • یا مقلب القلوب ثبت قلبی علی دینک
    • Refuting Shia allegations everywhere
  • Religion: Sunni
Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2020, 11:15:05 PM »
Are your response a representative of Twelver Shia perspective? Can you show me where do you get these principles from?

He has his own principles
در خلافت میل نیست ای بی‌خبر
میل کی آید ز بوبکر و عمر
میل اگر بودی در آن دو مقتدا
هر دو کردندی پسر را پیشوا

عطار نِیشابوری

www.Nahjul-Balagha.net | www.TwelverShia.net | www.ghadirkhumm.com

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #14 on: May 25, 2020, 01:35:56 AM »
He has his own principles

True, and I'm discovering more.
"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2020, 04:09:14 PM »
True, and I'm discovering more.

Do you know what is belief of most Twelvers about this Hadith?

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #16 on: May 28, 2020, 04:16:06 PM »
Do you know what is belief of most Twelvers about this Hadith?

Yeah, like every dumb sect, they believe their scholars are different and exception to the rule haha.



"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #17 on: May 28, 2020, 07:04:51 PM »
Yeah, like every dumb sect, they believe their scholars are different and exception to the rule haha.
This was from thread that was many years ago. There was a Shia who began to question the Hadith, but this is just forgotten now.
https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/20360-rabbits-are-haram-because/
« Last Edit: May 28, 2020, 07:08:08 PM by Rauf Murtuzov »

Soccer

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #18 on: May 28, 2020, 07:25:55 PM »
This was from thread that was many years ago. There was a Shia who began to question the Hadith, but this is just forgotten now.
https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/20360-rabbits-are-haram-because/

It's like the Khums. We have hadiths that interpret in the way it's obviously keeping in line with context and other verses of Quran, and we have ones that are fabricated. We follow the fabricated for whatever reason now.

وعنه ، عن محمد بن أبي عمير ، عن عمر بن اذينة ، عن زرارة ، قال : سألت ( أبا عبد الله ) ( عليه السلام ) عن الجريث ؟ فقال : وما الجريث ؟ فنعته له ، فقال : ( قل لا أجد فيما أوحي إليّ محرما على طاعم يطعمه ) إلى آخر الاية ، ثم قال : لم يحرم الله شيئا من الحيوان في القرآن ، الا الخنزير بعينه ، ويكره كل شيء من البحر ليس له قشر مثل الورق ، وليس بحرام ، إنما هو مكروه
Sahih from Zurara. He said: I asked Abu `Abdillahs عليه السلام about the eel (al-jarith). So he said: And what is al-jarith? So I described it for him. So he said: “Say: 'I do not find, in what is revealed to me, aught forbidden to him who eats thereof” until the end of the ayat. Then he said: Allah has not forbidden anything from the animals in the Quran except for the pig in itself. And everything of the sea that does not have scales leaves is disliked, and it is not haram, it is only makruh.

I think Imam Jaffar (a) here proves the case doesn't he not?

The Quran is clear, and so some food maybe makruh, but what is haram is clear in itself from Quran.

You have to give Quran a chance, and Imam (a) here proved it by Quran, the right stance.




« Last Edit: May 28, 2020, 07:27:20 PM by Soccer »
"Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Rauf Murtuzov

Re: Unscientific Shia Hadith?
« Reply #19 on: May 28, 2020, 09:05:04 PM »
True, and I'm discovering more.
How open are you to Sunni Islam? Will you accept it if you get evidences for it?

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
3389 Views
Last post November 25, 2014, 04:35:32 PM
by MuslimK
15 Replies
4659 Views
Last post July 30, 2016, 03:07:03 PM
by Abu Muhammad
2 Replies
1101 Views
Last post March 22, 2015, 11:00:37 AM
by sameer
13 Replies
1349 Views
Last post June 24, 2017, 08:24:46 AM
by Hadrami