TwelverShia.net Forum

Is reputation reliable?

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Khaled

Re: Is reputation reliable?
« Reply #40 on: September 11, 2020, 08:36:51 PM »
Salam

وعليكم السلام

Quote
Mujareen and Ansar (original ones) are a very small minority of Muslims near the end of the Prophet's (s) life. They aren't majority.

Do you have a list of them?  Would people like Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman, Talha, az-Zubayr, Abu Ubaydah, Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqaas, Abd Al-Rahman bin Awf, Sa'd ibn Ubadah be on that list?

Quote
Fatima (s) speech rallied them, woke them up, and I believe for the most part they performed their duty.

What is the evidence that Fatima عليه السلام ورضي الله عنها gave that speech?
Who was rallied from the original Muhajiroon and Ansar?
What was the duty that they performed?

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

So these Muslims, who are frankly ignorant of the Qur'an and Sunnah, were good enough to fight with and support the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم but they were not good enough to do so with Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه?  That's a very strange explanation.

In addition, I limited the discussion to the Muhajiroon and Ansar, so we don't need to include the Tulaqaa', who are all ignorant of the Qur'an and Sunnah according to you.  As of right now, the discussion centers around the Muhajiroon and Ansar, what was their duty, and how you are able to verify that any of this happened.

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

All of this is problematic for several reasons:
1) What is the evidence for any of it?
2) Why would Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه do things differently from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم?  Why would the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم include these people in his followers, but Imam Ali عليه السلام ورضي الله عنه exclude them?
3) Your takfeer of the majority of the Muslims during the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم's time based solely on your interpretation of he events that happened 1400 years ago, based on a system of preserving history (Ilm al-Hadeeth) that you don't believe in.

Quote
Moving on from Sahaba - discussion.

It seems we have yet to scratch the surface of that discussion.

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

I don't see how that is circular reasoning, nor do I see any evidence that "all kinds of hadiths existed" but no longer exist.  A lot of hadeeth books were lost, but that was during the times of the Mongols, long after Sunnism was codified.  Obviously, modern day 12erism was codified more in the 1700-1800s and reinterpreted in the past 40 years, but that's an entirely different discussion. 

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

You will need to provide an example of this.  My examples of you doing it is believing in the Fadak Sermon without providing any reasons why.  Why do you believe this actually happened?  Did you do an analysis of its historicity, or is it just simply that it fits your belief so you accept it?

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

No it doesn't, since a person could be Adl and Dabit even if he is considered non-Sunni.  Here are some quick examples:

عباد ابن يعقوب الرواجني بتخفيف الواو وبالجيم المكسورة والنون الخفيفة أبو سعيد الكوفي صدوق رافضي حديثه في البخاري مقرون بالغ ابن حبان فقال يستحق الترك من العاشرة مات سنة خمسين خ ت ق

لمازة بكسر اللام وتخفيف الميم وبالزاي ابن زباد بفتح الزاي وتثقيل الموحدة وآخره راء الأزدي الجهضمي أبو لبيد البصري صدوق ناصبي من الثالثة د ت ق

أحمد ابن عبدة ابن موسى الضبي أبو عبد الله البصري ثقة رمي بالنصب من العاشرة مات سنة خمس وأربعين م 4

إبراهيم ابن يعقوب ابن إسحاق الجوزجاني بضم الجيم الأولى وزاي وجيم نزيل دمشق ثقة حافظ رمي بالنصب من الحادية عشرة مات سنة تسع وخمسين د ت س

إسماعيل ابن موسى الفزاري أبو محمد أو أبو إسحاق الكوفي نسيب السدي أو ابن بنته أو ابن أخته صدوق يخطىء رمي بالرفض من العاشرة مات سنة خمس وأربعين عخ د ت ق

أيوب ابن عائذ بتحتانية ومعجمة ابن مدلج الطائي البحتري بضم الموحدة وسكون المهملة وضم المثناة الكوفي ثقة رمي بالإرجاء من السادسة خ م ت س

دينار ابن عمر الأسدي أبو عمر البزار آخره راء الكوفي الأعمى صالح الحديث رمي بالرفض من السادسة بخ ق

عبد الله ابن عبد القدوس التميمي السعدي الكوفي صدوق رمي بالرفض وكان أيضا يخطىء من التاسعة خت ت

غالب ابن الهذيل الأودي [أبو الهذيل] الكوفي صدوق رمي بالرفض من الخامسة س

هارون ابن سعد العجلي أو الجعفي الكوفي الأعور صدوق رمي بالرفض ويقال رجع عنه من السابعة م
[/size]

That should be a small enough list to show you that what you have been taught about Ilm ar-Rijal isn't accurate.

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

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

There are a host of reasons why I don't take those chains seriously, and it is not because I'm not 12er.  Even 12ers don't take those chains seriously and reject them, because they are not reliable.  Had they been authentically reported from the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم we wouldn't have Shi'as differing ever time an Imam died.  Even the closest to the Imams, according to the 12er narrative, didn't know the successor.  Rejecting these reports has nothing to do with Ilm al-Hadeeth or preconceived narratives, its based on them being obvious later fabrication.

However, if you would like, we can go through the chains and see just how reliable they are together.
 
Quote
And we see this clearly the case. For example,  a person narrates, Fatima (a) house was lit on fire, he is automatically flagged unreliable just for narrating that.

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

This is just an empty claim until we actually see proof.  هاتوا برهانكم إن كنتم صادقين

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

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

As we have seen time and time again from you:
1) You claim something is circular without actually showing why that is.
2) You make claims about how Adalah is defined in hadeeth science despite it not coinciding with reality.
3) You completely ignore anything about Dabt, and turn a system that verifies its reports through corroboration into simply "all sorts of narrators narrating what is already believed in."
4) You make the claim that Ahl al-Hadeeth accepted hadeeths based on what they already believed in, rather than believing what they believe the authentic reports show, despite the fact they rejected ALL ahadeeth praising Mu'awiyah, accepted more reports praising Imam Ali رضي الله عنه than anyone else, accepted all kinds of reports that praise Ahl al-Bayt, all kinds of reports that disparage the Sahaba, and rejecting reports that say the Qur'an is Ghayr Makhlooq, and every report disparaging deviant sects except for the Khawarij.

Just face it, your narrative doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
كلُّ سُلامى من الناس عليه صدقة كلَّ يوم تطلع فيه الشمس، تَعدلُ بين اثنين صدقة، وتعين الرَّجل في دابَّته فتحمله عليها أو ترفع له عليها متاعَه صدقة، والكلمةُ الطيِّبة صدقة، وبكلِّ خطوة تَمشيها إلى الصلاة صدقة، وتُميط الأذى عن الطريق صدقة

Soccer

Re: Is reputation reliable?
« Reply #41 on: September 11, 2020, 10:42:51 PM »
The discussion should move on and be centered around "can every issue pertaining to guidance be verified in Quran?" and "what is the role of the hadiths and Sunnah with respect to Quran if ilmel rijaal is unreliable?".

I feel getting into a whole discussion about a system that has not a single verse to support it from Quran nor a hadith, is fruitless, and as if Quran doesn't tell us in detail how to approach studying Quran and Sunnah but rather this is a false lie scholars of both sects attribute to God. We been doing it for centuries (some people at least) this ilmel rijaal none-sense and it won't lead to guidance.

These two questions will answer your constant questioning and also prove all sects of Islam apparent today to be in error and their methodology to be false and not lead to truth.

« Last Edit: September 11, 2020, 10:46:23 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

Khaled

Re: Is reputation reliable?
« Reply #42 on: September 12, 2020, 01:40:52 AM »
The discussion should move on and be centered around

I think its unfortunate that you chose to ignore everything I wrote.  I think this seems to imply that you don't have an answer to the questions I posed.  Since this is the course you have decided to take, I would still love to know how and why you chose to accept the Sermon of Fadak as authentic.  I would also love to go through the chains of the ahadeeth  regarding the names of the Imams to see if the reason I reject them is preconceived, or is just simply the logical conclusion that any non-sectarian would reach after investigating the reports.

Quote
"can every issue pertaining to guidance be verified in Quran?"

The general consensus seems to be that everything is found in the Qur'an, its just the details maybe ascertained through Ahadeeth, Qiyaas, Ijmaa' and other means like the Amal of Ahl al-Madeena etc.  Some scholars, like al-Ghazali and ar-Razi, stated that we must also learn logic or else our understanding of all these things will be futile.

Quote
and "what is the role of the hadiths and Sunnah with respect to Quran if ilmel rijaal is unreliable?".

Of course I don't believe Ilm ar-Rijal is unreliable, but if it was proven to be, then it would have no value.

Quote
I feel getting into a whole discussion about a system that has not a single verse to support it from Quran nor a hadith, is fruitless,

You do raise a good point, why should we get into a discussion about infallible Imams if such a concept is absent from the Qur'an.

Quote
and as if Quran doesn't tell us in detail how to approach studying Quran and Sunnah but rather this is a false lie scholars of both sects attribute to God.

I don't know of any Muslim scholar, Sunni or Shi'a, who claims that the "Quran doesn't tell us in detail how to approach studying Quran and Sunnah."  That is a "false lie" that is purported by you, unfortunately.

Quote
We been doing it for centuries (some people at least) this ilmel rijaal none-sense and it won't lead to guidance.

Instead of empty slogans, a better approach would be, to tell us how we can verify the Sunnah if Ilm ar-Rijaal is "none-sense (sp)."  I showed that your understanding of Ilm ar-Rijal was lacking at best, so therefore you need to bring a better argument than "it is circular" and it is "none-sense" in order to convince anybody.  Especially considering you didn't address the examples of non-Sunnis having tawtheeq, nor did you address the concept of Dabt.  You have a lot on your plate, but seeing how this discussion has gone so far, my guess is you'll just completely ignore everything I said, and accuse everyone of lying and being under the spell of sorcery.

Quote
These two questions will answer your constant questioning and also prove all sects of Islam apparent today to be in error and their methodology to be false and not lead to truth.

So what you are saying is that ALL Muslims, except for you, are "in error" and that "their methodology" is "false and" will "not lead to truth"?  بارك الله فيك, but please clarify
كلُّ سُلامى من الناس عليه صدقة كلَّ يوم تطلع فيه الشمس، تَعدلُ بين اثنين صدقة، وتعين الرَّجل في دابَّته فتحمله عليها أو ترفع له عليها متاعَه صدقة، والكلمةُ الطيِّبة صدقة، وبكلِّ خطوة تَمشيها إلى الصلاة صدقة، وتُميط الأذى عن الطريق صدقة

Soccer

Re: Is reputation reliable?
« Reply #43 on: September 12, 2020, 01:49:13 AM »
You are not letting me answer your questions and you are denying what you know is true and denying what is well known.   The Quran shows as far convincing people, Pharaoh won, and people accused Moses as being a sorcerer, even though inwardly they knew he was right.

You don't want to learn, you want to argue. Even Moses lost like that. 

I told you answering these two questions (in detail), would answer your queries. But you can stick to your sect and your people.

I don't care about Shiites or their religion, that is why I abandoned their clergy and false ways.   I choose God over conjecture of people who will not avail me anything.

Muslims choose to be blind despite a book providing insights. They are a cursed people worthy of God's wrath. Stick to them in whatever way you like.
"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: Is reputation reliable?
« Reply #44 on: September 12, 2020, 02:00:06 AM »
just completely ignore everything I said, and accuse everyone of lying and being under the spell of sorcery.

What is ironic, is that this how Quran approaches it.  It was never the case that God did not clarify what people must do to remain guided and divisions from the rope of God only occur AFTER KNOWLEDGE when people envy each other and rebel against one another out of hate of God's light and out of clinging to the cursed tree and thereby hating the blessed tree.

The knowledge and simple clear way - is always belittled - due to sorcery. Not only is Quran clear about Ahlulbayt, it has repeated them through out it's pages but it is exactly the sorcery that not only keeps people from perceiving them but so many other clear insights and proofs repeated through out the Quran including the promise of God trying humanity with one more test - through a sent one from him - that if people reject his message, will be destroyed and all cities are under this threat, before the day of judgment.

"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: Is reputation reliable?
« Reply #45 on: September 12, 2020, 02:07:09 AM »
The Quran talks about itself as a book of signs, proofs, and insights - but that there is a curse sorcery with respect to it. It encourages us to reflect and seek the family of the reminder for proofs including seeking miracles from them (and both contexts of the two verses in this respect including asking for clear proofs in form of miracles).

We are in drought - where there is no live miracles in the open, the truth becoming no longer uppermost, God's word belittled, and evils looking beautiful while virtues looking ugly.

The Quran shows that nothing ever prevents God from sending with signs in form of miracles except the first ones denied them.

Miracles are a great part of Quran, and the tone is obvious they were meant to stay. If they are gone for the latter ones , the former ones didn't accept the miracles for certain.

Again, we can discuss religion to death and many people have done that.

You don't want to discuss dark magic with respect to Quran, yet Quran talks about that, but has not mentioned a word confirming any of the methodology of your complicated ilmel rijaal conjecture system but rather has shown the opposite - that it's unreliable.

« Last Edit: September 12, 2020, 02:10:05 AM 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

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
3155 Views
Last post January 18, 2015, 04:23:42 PM
by Hani
22 Replies
1982 Views
Last post April 28, 2017, 05:41:50 AM
by Hani
36 Replies
832 Views
Last post December 23, 2019, 01:28:30 PM
by Noor-us-Sunnah
0 Replies
81 Views
Last post July 16, 2020, 01:04:13 AM
by Noor-us-Sunnah