Shia Muslims only: The validity of Hadithes

[Union]

Your posts are not scientific. Rather, they are emotional.

We do not believe that Bukhari was liar. Rather, we believe that all of the Hadiths of his book are not Sahih.

There are some Sunni scholars that like Shia scholars do not believe in reliability of Abu Hurayra.e.g., Ibrahim Nazzam, Abu Ja'far Askafi, Muhammad Abu Rabboh.

I do not know what is the point, different opinions in a scientific field is a common thing.

For example, in biology(my field), some scientists believe that so and so enzime has three domains. But others believe that it has two domains. This does not mean that molecular biology is not a strong science.

Ulm-Il-Hadith is just a man made thing which has no canonized scientific basis at all . Mr. X is a reliable Rabi with Shia Rijal but dishonest in Sunni Rijal because only he is...... . Some matn in Sunni Hadith is 100% Sahih while as it contradicts Shia doctrine hence a fabrication . Almighty GOD let it go to be in serious mess as much as Shia and Sunni wanted it to be because HE , the Exalted doesn't care about it . But Almighty GOD has secured the Qur'an from them just because it is HIS commandments and message to the people who really want to know Islam .

AlhamduliALLAH , who follows the Qur'an , as if he is eating a fresh apple and he who follows the Hadith as if he is eating a rotten apple . Thanks .

 

[mojtaba]

I said in my last post,
We do not believe that Bukhari was liar. Rather, we believe that all of the Hadiths of his book are not Sahih.

I have changed my sentence. That was not true.

Correct sentence, "We do not believe that Bukhari was liar. Rather, we believe that, this is not true that all of the Hadiths of his book are Sahih. Indeed, we believe that there are both authentic and non-authentic Hadiths in Bukhari book."

 

[spirit_of_dawn]

AlhamduliALLAH , who follows the Qur'an , as if he is eating a fresh apple and he who follows the Hadith as if he is eating a rotten apple . Thanks .

"A witty saying proves nothing"
neither does a parable...

Historically speaking, according to your flawed reasoning, the Quran was not spoken by Prophet Muhammad. You think it was prove it. In fact the entirety of history cannot be relied upon.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Do Shias accept, Sunni Hadithes as well?
Do they apply the same criteria to determine if a Hadith is weak, strong, mutiwatir...etc?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Is it possible, a strong Hadith be incorrect, and a weak Hadith be true?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Is it possible, a Shia strong Hadith be incorrect, and a weak Sunni Hadith be true, or vice versa, a Sunni Strong hadith be false, and Shia strong Hadith be true?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Is the following statement fair in your view:

The reason that People must believe that Quran is from Allah, is, because in the Book, Allah has testified that the Book is from Him, and No one else can bring Surrahs Like it, no matter how much they studied Quran, and Arabic, or the whole people on earth combined, cannot bring a Surrah Like it. And Allah has said in the Book, if Prophet Muhammad was to say, anything from Himself, Allah would kill Him (or something like this)

Is this a Fair statement?

 

[Union]

I said in my last post,
We do not believe that Bukhari was liar. Rather, we believe that all of the Hadiths of his book are not Sahih.

I have changed my sentence. That was not true.

Correct sentence, "We do not believe that Bukhari was liar. Rather, we believe that, this is not true that all of the Hadiths of his book are Sahih. Indeed, we believe that there are both authentic and non-authentic Hadiths in Bukhari book."

What is your criterion of Judging Bukhari's Hadith to be authentic and/or non-authentic ? According to 1.5 Billion Sunni Muslim Bukhari had adopted the most sincere effort to collect his Sahih . If Ulm-al-Hadith is based on such a universal scientific method then why you question Bukharis Hadith ? Does it not prove that a Hadith hero like Bukhari also played tricks in Hadith to satisfy his masters ? What then stop the Shia Hadith scholars not doing the same ? It is just an ego-game that must need to suit Shia belief otherwise not Sahih ...

 

[Union]

"A witty saying proves nothing"
neither does a parable...

Historically speaking, according to your flawed reasoning, the Quran was not spoken by Prophet Muhammad. You think it was prove it. In fact the entirety of history cannot be relied upon.

What really that means ? Please clarify . Thanks .

 

[Union]

Is the following statement fair in your view:

The reason that People must believe that Quran is from Allah, is, because in the Book, Allah has testified that the Book is from Him, and No one else can bring Surrahs Like it, no matter how much they studied Quran, and Arabic, or the whole people on earth combined, cannot bring a Surrah Like it. And Allah has said in the Book, if Prophet Muhammad was to say, anything from Himself, Allah would kill Him (or something like this)

Is this a Fair statement?

It is rather the practical implication of the matter as an external examination not just because Qur'an mentioned so . For example , does Qur'an possess any flaws ? An investigation may lead to the conclusion in this regard and not because just that Qur'an claimed to be flawless.

 

[spirit_of_dawn]

What really that means ? Please clarify . Thanks .

Hi Union,

The meaning is obvious. If you can't comprehend what I am saying, then I cannot help you any further.

BTW, OP had stated in the title of the thread: "Shia Muslims Only", and your current posts are an apparent hijacking of the thread.

Best Wishes

 

[spirit_of_dawn]

Do Shias accept, Sunni Hadithes as well?
Do they apply the same criteria to determine if a Hadith is weak, strong, mutiwatir...etc?

Usually not. Ask the Sunnis on their own sub.

Is it possible, a strong Hadith be incorrect, and a weak Hadith be true?

Yes.

Is it possible, a Shia strong Hadith be incorrect, and a weak Sunni Hadith be true, or vice versa, a Sunni Strong hadith be false, and Shia strong Hadith be true?

Yes.

Is the following statement fair in your view:

The reason that People must believe that Quran is from Allah, is, because in the Book, Allah has testified that the Book is from Him, and No one else can bring Surrahs Like it, no matter how much they studied Quran, and Arabic, or the whole people on earth combined, cannot bring a Surrah Like it. And Allah has said in the Book, if Prophet Muhammad was to say, anything from Himself, Allah would kill Him (or something like this)

Is this a Fair statement?

No.

Your habit of continuously repeating the same questions is annoying.

Have a nice day

 

[mojtaba]

What is your criterion of Judging Bukhari's Hadith to be authentic and/or non-authentic ? According to 1.5 Billion Sunni Muslim Bukhari had adopted the most sincere effort to collect his Sahih . If Ulm-al-Hadith is based on such a universal scientific method then why you question Bukharis Hadith ? Does it not prove that a Hadith hero like Bukhari also played tricks in Hadith to satisfy his masters ? What then stop the Shia Hadith scholars not doing the same ? It is just an ego-game that must need to suit Shia belief otherwise not Sahih ...

As previously mentioned, you can not find a Shia scholar who has converted to Sunni faith. Rathet, there are very Sunni scholars who have converted to Shia faith.

So, there are universal scientific methods for Ilm al-Hadith(science of tradition) by which we discuss with Sunnis and then satisfy them.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

It is rather the practical implication of the matter as an external examination not just because Qur'an mentioned so . For example , does Qur'an possess any flaws ? An investigation may lead to the conclusion in this regard and not because just that Qur'an claimed to be flawless.

Thank you union.

What I am really interested, is how the Auther of Quran, in His Own Words, specifes why the Quran is True and How a person can conclude that Quran is from Allah, according to the Clear verses of Quran.

 

[Union]

As previously mentioned, you can not find a Shia scholar who has converted to Sunni faith. Rathet, there are very Sunni scholars who have converted to Shia faith.

So, there are universal scientific methods for Ilm al-Hadith(science of tradition) by which we discuss with Sunnis and then satisfy them.

I don't know why you emphasis such a silly criterion to establish the sensitivity of Shia Hadith , but as you insist there you go. There were quite a number of Shia Scholars who converted to Sunni .

Shia Scholars Converts To Sunnis
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235028000-shia-scholars-converts-to-sunnis/

This is Shia cleric Hussein Al-Moayyad who left Shiism for Islam and Sunnah
http://gift2shias.com/2013/11/15/shia-cleric-shaykh-al-moayyad-who-left-shiism-for-islam-and-sunnah/

What is your point now ?

 

[Union]

Thank you union.

What I am really interested, is how the Auther of Quran, in His Own Words, specifes why the Quran is True and How a person can conclude that Quran is from Allah, according to the Clear verses of Quran.

Then your previous point/post was right/fair for this justification . Thanks .

 

[mojtaba]

I don't know why you emphasis such a silly criterion to establish the sensitivity of Shia Hadith , but as you insist there you go. There were quite a number of Shia Scholars who converted to Sunni .

Shia Scholars Converts To Sunnis
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235028000-shia-scholars-converts-to-sunnis/

This is Shia cleric Hussein Al-Moayyad who left Shiism for Islam and Sunnah
http://gift2shias.com/2013/11/15/shia-cleric-shaykh-al-moayyad-who-left-shiism-for-islam-and-sunnah/

What is your point now ?

It has been written in the book of Sheykh al-Moayyad,
"This is because the Sunni people are considered najis[impure] in the sight of the Shi'ahs, to the extent that even if they cleanse a thousand times, the najis will not vanish."

A big lie. A bigest one. We believe that Sunnis are Muslim and they are pure. I am surry for him.

You can send this question that, Are sunnis Najis or Pak[pure]? to the websites of all Shia Marj'hs[Faqihs]. They will send you that they are pure.
Leader.ir
sistani.com
makarem.ir
etc.

So is he reliable?

 

[Union]

It has been written in the book of Sheykh al-Moayyad,
"This is because the Sunni people are considered najis[impure] in the sight of the Shi'ahs, to the extent that even if they cleanse a thousand times, the najis will not vanish."

A big lie. A bigest one. We believe that Sunnis are Muslim and they are pure. I am surry for him.

You can send this question that, Are sunnis Najis or Pak[pure]? to the websites of all Shia Marj'hs[Faqihs]. They will send you that they are pure.
Leader.ir
sistani.com
makarem.ir
etc.

So is he reliable?

I showed you for what you insisted. I done my part. There are quite a few scholars names came up though...

 

[Union]

It has been written in the book of Sheykh al-Moayyad,
"This is because the Sunni people are considered najis[impure] in the sight of the Shi'ahs, to the extent that even if they cleanse a thousand times, the najis will not vanish."

A big lie. A bigest one. We believe that Sunnis are Muslim and they are pure. I am surry for him.

You can send this question that, Are sunnis Najis or Pak[pure]? to the websites of all Shia Marj'hs[Faqihs]. They will send you that they are pure.
Leader.ir
sistani.com
makarem.ir
etc.

So is he reliable?

Well , I got this as well , not so important but worthy to give it a look :

Grand Ayatullat al-Marji` al-Mirza Hashim al-Aamili “ميرزا هاشم الآملي” who says in his book “al-Ma`alim al-Ma’thoura” 2/258-259:

أقول إن المشهور طهارة العامة ومنشأ الاختلاف إن الاعتقاد بالإمامة هل يكون مقوّم الإسلام أم لا فإنهم وإن كانوا كفرة وكالكلب الممطور في الباطن كما في الجواهر ولكنهم طاهرون بحسب الظاهر ولا يخفى إن البحث يكون فيمن لا يعتقد إمامة الأئمة عليهم السّلام المسمى بالسني

[I say: what is popular is the purity of the mainstream Muslims(`Amah) and the origin of the disagreement is if Imamah is a condition of Islam or not. Even though they are Kouffar and like wet dogs on the inside as was mentioned in “al-Jawahir” but they are pure on the outside. It is not hidden that the matter being discussed is concerning he who does not believe in the Imamah of the twelve (as) or what is called “Sunni”.]

What he means by “al-Jawahir” is the book written by their leader Muhammad Hassan al-Najafi who said on vol.6 pg.57:

فهو من أقوى الأدلة على طهارة هؤلاء الكفرة ، وإن كانوا في المعنى أنجس من الكلاب الممطورة

[It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, although in reality they are more impure than wet dogs.]

Why did they use the term “wet dogs” to refer to those who oppose them?

Their scholar Yusuf al-Bahrani explains in “al-Hada’iq al-Nadirah” 8/370:

يعني الكلاب التي أصابها المطر مبالغة في نجاستهم

[Meaning dogs who have been exposed to rain to exaggerate their impurity.]

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Did GOD gave that authority to Qaim ? Please refer to the verse of the Qur'an . Thanks .

The Quran has no explicit verses mentioning the Qaim or Mahdi. I believe there is an explicit verse regarding return of Christ though, but just as other verses, that is subject to interpretation. Different people may have different interpretations. No arguments about that....

However, to the best of my knowledge, there are significantly more than 2000 Hadithes with regards to Qaim and Mahdi in both Shia and Sunni Hadithes.

From all these Hadithes, I think it is extremely unlikely or virtually impossible that the Prophet and Shia Imams never spoke of this Promised One.
I think the accuracy of some or many of these Hadithes, could be in doubt, but there is no proof that they are false. ( I personally feel and believe more than 95% of these Hadithes are legitimate.)

I think a fair conclusion is that, if Prophet Muhammad is certainly Prophet of God, and is infallible with regards to His mission, for those who believe in Muhammad, it may be said: since there are just so many Hadithes speaking of this Person, there should be no doubt of appearance of this Person. However to rely only on Hadithes to recognize Qaim, cannot be justified, since the accuracy of these Hadithes cannot be proved. Moreover, these Hadithes themselves are subject to interpretation, and only an infallible Person, appointed by God, can claim, His interpretation is true.

Do you think this a fair conclusion?