Shaking My Head

Empiree:
Shaking My Head

at what? if you don't mind

AlBaqir:


Hey yah! You must have been having sleepless nights. You can see how you are jumping like mountain goat from one topic to another, derailing your own thread. You even start cursing! That really show your immaturity and desperations. Honestly you need deliverance.

You Wish!!!


So, three of your deviations have been confirmed;

# Saying the Quran we have with us is not error-free
# Cursing the Sahabah
#Raising Ali above the mesengers

The strange thing is that you have denied the first two in the past.

As for those narrations you quoted, them they are not strange to me at all, the strange thing is that I never believed anyone would be so deviant to derive such misguided understanding from them!

And thanks for the info, I can't believe I got all these info first hand from an insider.

Newnas:


at what? if you don't mind

Bcus You Dont Make Sense. Sorry To Speak. You And Albaqir Fit The Same Page. I have learned to grow up past this.

AlBaqir:
^Sino, you can clearly see my approach to the issue you put forth.

* First, I posted an argument from a website which basically deals with ilm rijal thereby the author tried to weaken the hadith.

* Second, I submitted my personal opinion. The sanad of the hadith might be controversial but personally I see nothing wrong with the matn of the hadith. And I clearly present my justifications for it.

* Third, the only thing I feel like replying in the epistle you copied is this:
This shows that some of your early and even late scholars do believe in the thareef of the Qur'an, which is kufr! Thus, this topic presented by Newnas has legitimacy, and many of you may deny it now, but was believed by big scholars of shi'ism of old as well as their followers. This is actually a big issue, and really puts a big question mark on the foundations on which shi'sm stands...

@bold, So, has Umar ibn al-Khattab, Aishah, Ibn Abbas et al became kafirun for there are account in your documents (which have been exposed greatly on this thread) that they actually believed in tahrif? There is no twisting to these ahadith.

That is very disappointing of you. The obvious truth is both Schools (Sunni and Shi'a) have tawattur reports in their documentations that point out clearly, that there is Tahrif of the holy Quran. Nobody can ever denied this. That is the naked truth. So, personally I might not be able to fault any scholar who argue through this mutawattir ahadith. As I have posted earlier under the title: Is there Tahrif in the Quran, majority of our scholars clearly, after admitting there are ahadith in both schools that point out tahrif, states that such ahadith should be discarded outrightly even despite the ruling of Tawattur reports. But this is not the case in Sunnism. Sunnism still want to preserve the so-called 100% authenticity of Sahih Bukhari and Muslim. Albaqir doesn't discuss this kind of topic unless I am forced to do so.

*Why did you post the article in the first place if you truly believed in the matn of the narration and a big scholar such as Majilisi had already authenticated it?!

*Please define tahreef and what are your scholars position on those who believed in tahreef? If you can't find any information in shi'ism in regards to this, please feel free to bring what the scholars in sunni said about tahreef, and please for Allah's sake, show how those you have mentioned believed in tahreef of the Qur'an.

I see your attempt to copy and paste an article so as to weaken the narration from al-Kafi fell flat on its face. Since you strongly believe in the matn of the narration in question from your infallible Imam, I also want to know if you believe the Qur'an with us is incomplete?! or how do you explain 17,000 verses, which is double the amount we have?! Mind you, I would appreciate a scholars opinion far above yours, what you put up there as an explanation does not account for over 10,000 verses which are obviously missing in the Qur'an with us. Also, it seems in shi'ism, everyone is a scholar?... Since we do not even know your level of Islamic education, why should your opinion matter?!

I hope you do not mind my many questions, I just want to be sure of what you believe, and the source of your beliefs and I know you love epistles and I love to learn.

Many thanks in advance...

sino:


*Why did you post the article in the first place if you truly believed in the matn of the narration and a big scholar such as Majilisi had already authenticated it?!

*Please define tahreef and what are your scholars position on those who believed in tahreef? If you can't find any information in shi'ism in regards to this, please feel free to bring what the scholars in sunni said about tahreef, and please for Allah's sake, show how those you have mentioned believed in tahreef of the Qur'an.

I see your attempt to copy and paste an article so as to weaken the narration from al-Kafi fell flat on its face. Since you strongly believe in the matn of the narration in question from your infallible Imam, I also want to know if you believe the Qur'an with us is incomplete?! or how do you explain 17,000 verses, which is double the amount we have?! Mind you, I would appreciate a scholars opinion far above yours, what you put up there as an explanation does not account for over 10,000 verses which are obviously missing in the Qur'an with us. Also, it seems in shi'ism, everyone is a scholar?... Since we do not even know your level of Islamic education, why should your opinion matter?!

I hope you do not mind my many questions, I just want to be sure of what you believe, and the source of your beliefs and I know you love epistles and I love to learn.

Many thanks in advance...

Pls don't engage the guy again.

He has already confirmed his misguidance.

Empiree:
Bcus You Dont Make Sense. Sorry To Speak. You And Albaqir Fit The Same Page. I have learned to grow up past this.

If your definition of growing up is to keep shut and turn deaf ears to the people of misguidance, then I had rather remain an embryo!

sino:


*Why did you post the article in the first place if you truly believed in the matn of the narration and a big scholar such as Majilisi had already authenticated it?!

If you want to be fair on me, I will remind you that immediately you posted the hadith, I replied that I see nothing wrong with it and I brought a case of abrogation of some verses. However, a hadith might be weak by its sanad but sahih by its matn provided it has corroboration. In this case, the hadith is authenticated by Allamah majlisi only by its sanad. What about its matn? It has no corroboration and by the first standard of Shi'i ilm hadith which says any hadith must be test by the Quran before being authenticated (I have given you two ahadith on this already), I believe the hadith should be discarded.

Why did I posted the submission on that link? It is a good job of ilm hadith whereby what Allamah majlisi seem to be right is exposed to be wrong. That's an independent research. There are lots of ahadith in both schools tagged sahih but independent research exposed them otherwise.

Finally, you will need to go back and read my submissions immediately after posting the link. That's my own personal view with evidences.

sino:


*Please define tahreef and what are your scholars position on those who believed in tahreef? If you can't find any information in shi'ism in regards to this, please feel free to bring what the scholars in sunni said about tahreef, and please for Allah's sake, show how those you have mentioned believed in tahreef of the Qur'an.

Tahrif

Ayatullah Abul Qassim al-Khoei writes:

First, the meaning is to transfer an object from its place to another.

Allah says:

"And some amongst the Jews pervert the words (of the Torah) from their (original) places..." [Al-Nisā: 46 ]

Muslims are agreed upon the fact that such an interference has occurred in the Qur’an, because whenever someone interprets the Qur’an without understanding its true meaning and transforms its real meaning to something irrelevant, he tampers with it.

Many have introduced innovations and unfounded beliefs into Islam by basing their arguments on interpretation of the Qur’an according to their own whims and opinions. There are several traditions which forbid this type of interpretations, and condemn its perpetrators. In al-Kafi, a tradition by Imam Muhammad al‑Baqir (‘a) says that he wrote to Sa'ad al‑Khayr: "One of the examples of their repudiation of the Book has been that they stood by its letters and distorted its injunctions; they narrate it, but do not have deference to its teachings. The ignorant are impressed by their narrations and recitations, while the learned are grieved to see their disregard for its protection..."

Secondly, the meaning of Tahrif is an omission or an addition of a letter or a change in grammatical inflections, without effecting any change in the content of the Qur’an. This change may sometimes not be discernible from the rest of the Qur’an. This type of change has definitely occurred in the Qur’an. We have already pointed out earlier that the so called various readings of the Qur’an were not based on tawattur, which means that the Qur’an was really based on only one authentic system of reading, and the rest were either additions or omissions.

The third meaning of Tahrif is an omission or an addition of a word or two, at the same time leaving the essence of the Qur’an untouched. It is the type of interpolation which surely occurred in the first century of Islam, and in the days of the companions of the Prophet (‘s). The fact that Uthman burnt up all other copies of the Qur’an, and ordered his emissaries to do away with all the copies other than the codex prepared by himself, is an ample proof that there existed some difference between his copy and the others, else he would not have asked for their destruction.

In fact, some of the scholars have recorded those differences, like Abdullah b. Abi Dawud as‑Sajistani who wrote a book titled: Kitabul Masahif. It could be inferred that some interpolation had occurred, either on the part of Uthman or on the part of the scribes who prepared their copies. But we will soon establish that the copy of Uthman was actually the one already known to the Muslims. It was the one which was handed over from the Prophet (‘s) and widely used. The Tahrif by way of addition or omission had occurred in those copies which ceased to exist after the era of Uthman. As for the existing Qur’an, it is totally free from any omission or addition....

The fourth meaning of Tahrif is addition or suppression of an ayah or a Surah, at the same time preserving the revealed Qur’an intact, and accepting the fact that the Prophet (‘s) recited it as a part of the Qur’an. And this has definitely occurred in the Qur’an. The "basmalah" for example, is an ayah for which Muslims unanimously hold that the Prophet (‘s) recited it before every Surah except the Surah of al‑Tawbah. Yet, among the Ulama’ of Ahlus Sunnah, it is a subject of dispute. Some of them suggest that it is not a part of the Qur’an, and the Malikites have gone to the extent as to consider it Makruh to recite it before the Surah of Fatihah in the daily prayers, except when one intends to thereby digress from another Surah. And then there is a group among them who say that it is a part of the Qur’an. The Shi’as are unanimous that basmalah is a part of every Surah except al‑Tawbah, and this has been accepted by some Sunni scholars as well. When we start our commentary the Surah al‑Fatihah, we will enlarge upon this subject. So we see that Tahrif in the form of exclusion or suppression has certainly taken place.

The fifth meaning of Tahrif is that an addition of such a nature has taken place which rendered certain parts unauthentic. This indeed is totally inapplicable to the Holy Qur’an. Such a change has not occurred in the Qur’an, and this must be believed in as cardinal part of the faith.

The sixth meaning is Tahrif by omission. This would imply that the Qur’an we have today is incomplete and that people are deprived of some parts of Qur’an. It is over this implication that the dispute arose, with certain people rejecting it altogether, and certain group conceding it."

Source: The collection and the preservation of the Quran, p. 5
http://www.al-islam.org/the-collection-and-preservation-of-the-quran-extract-ayatullah-adul-qasim-al-khui

# On this very thread, I have posted earlier various Shi'i Ulama submission on Tahrif. Kindly flip back. There are more if you want.

sino:


I see your attempt to copy and paste an article so as to weaken the narration from al-Kafi fell flat on its face. Since you strongly believe in the matn of the narration in question from your infallible Imam, I also want to know if you believe the Qur'an with us is incomplete?! or how do you explain 17,000 verses, which is double the amount we have?!

@underlined, that's a wrong accusation. Why then did I submit a contrary personal opinion to what I posted?

@bold, I never used the word "strongly". That's an exaggeration

# Quran we have today is complete with no distortion. That's my firm believe, take it or leave it. If you can read the book I posted its link by Ayatullah al-Khoei (may Allah raise his station), you will see Shi'i arguments on the compilation and preservation of the holy Quran.

sino:


Mind you, I would appreciate a scholars opinion far above yours, what you put up there as an explanation does not account for over 10,000 verses which are obviously missing in the Qur'an with us. Also, it seems in shi'ism, everyone is a scholar?... Since we do not even know your level of Islamic education, why should your opinion matter?!

I hope you do not mind my many questions, I just want to be sure of what you believe, and the source of your beliefs and I know you love epistles and I love to learn.

Many thanks in advance...

@underlined, even if it is 5,000, its something. Only an insincere person can deny those facts except we altogether rubbish the authenticity of those ahadith.

In sha Allah, this would be my last comment on this thread.

Salam alaykum. Fi amanillah

Double post.

Newnas:


If your definition of growing up is to keep shut and turn deaf ears to the people of misguidance, then I had rather remain an embryo!

Alright...good luck. See if you can fix it.

Empiree:
Alright...good luck. See if you can fix it.

You thought is good, but it's not easy to keep quiet. I'll think about your advice... in shaa Allah

Newnas:


Pls don't engage the guy again.

He has already confirmed his misguidance.

Jazakumullahu khayran brother, I usually would not respond to AlBaqir's allegations and suspicions, but for the fact that the truth must be told, and that I have done something, even if it is just copy and paste to dispel these false allegations and pure lies which I have found to be quite prevalent in shi'ism...it doesn't matter if AlBaqir accepts or not, I am used to him already, and due to my busy schedules, I see this as an opportunity for me to always read more about the deen...

AlBaqir:


If you want to be fair on me, I will remind you that immediately you posted the hadith, I replied that I see nothing wrong with it and I brought a case of abrogation of some verses. However, a hadith might be weak by its sanad but sahih by its matn provided it has corroboration. In this case, the hadith is authenticated by Allamah majlisi only by its sanad. What about its matn? It has no corroboration and by the first standard of Shi'i ilm hadith which says any hadith must be test by the Quran before being authenticated (I have given you two ahadith on this already), I believe the hadith should be discarded.

Why did I posted the submission on that link? It is a good job of ilm hadith whereby what Allamah majlisi seem to be right is exposed to be wrong. That's an independent research. There are lots of ahadith in both schools tagged sahih but independent research exposed them otherwise.

Finally, you will need to go back and read my submissions immediately after posting the link. That's my own personal view with evidences.

Bros I have been fair to you all this while, I asked you to explain a narration found in your book according to your scholars, instead of you to give me explanations from your scholars, you decided to go the route of weakening the narration, as it has been your way with all the narrations being quoted from your books that clearly go against your shi'ism or exposes some of you people's innovations in the deen. It is your way, and was refuted...But I see you didn't touch the refutation, and still hold on to the article as being correct (remind me again what it means to be open-minded?). Another issue is your point that Al-Majilisi authenticated the narration based on sanad alone, with your statement, "by the first standard of Shi'i ilm hadith which says any hadith must be test by the Quran before being authenticated" how come Al-Majilisi was basing his authentication only on the sanad? You may explain if this "testing of matn" was not applicable during the time of Al-Majilisi and perhaps you do have a clear proof that Al-Majilisi was only looking at the sanad to authenticate narrations in Al-Kafi. I would love to read it. (You know I have been asking you to explain how you guys go about deriving the classifications of narrations in your books, this might be an opportunity for you o, start a thread bro).

As a form of reminder...

Here are Al-Majlisi’s comments after he has graded this hadeeth in his Mir’aat Al-`Uqool:

"The khabar (hadeeth) is SaHeeH and it is obvious that this khabar (hadeeth) and other SaHeeH ones like it are clear about the Qur'aan being shortened and changed, and in my opinion, this is mutaawatir in meaning, and discarding these narrations would lead us to rejecting all akhbaar (narrations) in general."

Source: Al-Majlisi, Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 12, pg. 525

AlBaqir:

Tahrif

Ayatullah Abul Qassim al-Khoei writes:

First, the meaning is to transfer an object from its place to another.

Allah says:

"And some amongst the Jews pervert the words (of the Torah) from their (original) places..." [Al-Nisā: 46 ]

Muslims are agreed upon the fact that such an interference has occurred in the Qur’an, because whenever someone interprets the Qur’an without understanding its true meaning and transforms its real meaning to something irrelevant, he tampers with it.

Many have introduced innovations and unfounded beliefs into Islam by basing their arguments on interpretation of the Qur’an according to their own whims and opinions. There are several traditions which forbid this type of interpretations, and condemn its perpetrators. In al-Kafi, a tradition by Imam Muhammad al‑Baqir (‘a) says that he wrote to Sa'ad al‑Khayr: "One of the examples of their repudiation of the Book has been that they stood by its letters and distorted its injunctions; they narrate it, but do not have deference to its teachings. The ignorant are impressed by their narrations and recitations, while the learned are grieved to see their disregard for its protection..."

Secondly, the meaning of Tahrif is an omission or an addition of a letter or a change in grammatical inflections, without effecting any change in the content of the Qur’an. This change may sometimes not be discernible from the rest of the Qur’an. This type of change has definitely occurred in the Qur’an. We have already pointed out earlier that the so called various readings of the Qur’an were not based on tawattur, which means that the Qur’an was really based on only one authentic system of reading, and the rest were either additions or omissions.

The third meaning of Tahrif is an omission or an addition of a word or two, at the same time leaving the essence of the Qur’an untouched. It is the type of interpolation which surely occurred in the first century of Islam, and in the days of the companions of the Prophet (‘s). The fact that Uthman burnt up all other copies of the Qur’an, and ordered his emissaries to do away with all the copies other than the codex prepared by himself, is an ample proof that there existed some difference between his copy and the others, else he would not have asked for their destruction.

In fact, some of the scholars have recorded those differences, like Abdullah b. Abi Dawud as‑Sajistani who wrote a book titled: Kitabul Masahif. It could be inferred that some interpolation had occurred, either on the part of Uthman or on the part of the scribes who prepared their copies. But we will soon establish that the copy of Uthman was actually the one already known to the Muslims. It was the one which was handed over from the Prophet (‘s) and widely used. The Tahrif by way of addition or omission had occurred in those copies which ceased to exist after the era of Uthman. As for the existing Qur’an, it is totally free from any omission or addition....

The fourth meaning of Tahrif is addition or suppression of an ayah or a Surah, at the same time preserving the revealed Qur’an intact, and accepting the fact that the Prophet (‘s) recited it as a part of the Qur’an. And this has definitely occurred in the Qur’an. The "basmalah" for example, is an ayah for which Muslims unanimously hold that the Prophet (‘s) recited it before every Surah except the Surah of al‑Tawbah. Yet, among the Ulama’ of Ahlus Sunnah, it is a subject of dispute. Some of them suggest that it is not a part of the Qur’an, and the Malikites have gone to the extent as to consider it Makruh to recite it before the Surah of Fatihah in the daily prayers, except when one intends to thereby digress from another Surah. And then there is a group among them who say that it is a part of the Qur’an. The Shi’as are unanimous that basmalah is a part of every Surah except al‑Tawbah, and this has been accepted by some Sunni scholars as well. When we start our commentary the Surah al‑Fatihah, we will enlarge upon this subject. So we see that Tahrif in the form of exclusion or suppression has certainly taken place.

The fifth meaning of Tahrif is that an addition of such a nature has taken place which rendered certain parts unauthentic. This indeed is totally inapplicable to the Holy Qur’an. Such a change has not occurred in the Qur’an, and this must be believed in as cardinal part of the faith.

The sixth meaning is Tahrif by omission. This would imply that the Qur’an we have today is incomplete and that people are deprived of some parts of Qur’an. It is over this implication that the dispute arose, with certain people rejecting it altogether, and certain group conceding it."

Source: The collection and the preservation of the Quran, p. 5
http://www.al-islam.org/the-collection-and-preservation-of-the-quran-extract-ayatullah-adul-qasim-al-khui

Thank you for the definitions, but you missed something, with respect to the definitions given, especially the sixth, what is the verdict from your scholars in regards to one who believes in the tahreef (i.e distortion/corruption/omission) of the Qur'an and due to this tahreef, the Qur'an is incomplete?!

AlBaqir:

# On this very thread, I have posted earlier various Shi'i Ulama submission on Tahrif. Kindly flip back. There are more if you want.

And I had also posted that many of your early scholars (and later ones) and their followers believed in the tahreef (i.e distortion/corruption/omission) of the Qur'an , do you want me to post more?! So where does that leave us? Aren't these people your teachings came from?!

AlBaqir:

@underlined, that's a wrong accusation. Why then did I submit a contrary personal opinion to what I posted?

@bold, I never used the word "strongly". That's an exaggeration

# Quran we have today is complete with no distortion. That's my firm believe, take it or leave it. If you can read the book I posted its link by Ayatullah al-Khoei (may Allah raise his station), you will see Shi'i arguments on the compilation and preservation of the holy Quran.

Don't mind me, the exaggeration was for special effect and it is not a wrong accusation, this is not the first time i'll ask for explanation of a narration only for you to whip up the weak narration card...like I said earlier, it has been your way.

Anyway, Alhamdulilah you believe the Qur'an is complete. My issue is with some of your big scholars who believed otherwise, it is on record that they believed the Qur'an with us is incomplete, and the complete one is with the Imams, Al-Majilisi also holds this opinion, so what do you have to say AlBaqir?

AlBaqir:

@underlined, even if it is 5,000, its something. Only an insincere person can deny those facts except we altogether rubbish the authenticity of those ahadith.

In sha Allah, this would be my last comment on this thread.

Salam alaykum. Fi amanillah

Its quite unfortunate this is your last comment on this thread, and I see you had helped me post a link to explain the Sunni view in regards tahreef...It is not a difficult issue as you are making it, anyone who believes in tahreef (distortion/corruption/omission) of the Qur'an is a Kafir! Simple! You may find it easy to reject a narration that states that verses of the Qur'an are 17,000, but some of your scholars believed this to be true, they explained their views, and these are not just your regular guy on the streets, they were leaders and teachers of the shi'a sect.

NB: The cases of abrogation are quite different from the believe that the Qur'an with us is incomplete due to omission/distortion/corruption by fallibles (i.e Companions (Rodiyallahu 'anhum ajma'in)...

Wa alaykum Salam.

Salam Aleikom AlBaqir, was Aliyy(ra) name mentioned in the Quran?

BeansAndBread:
Salam Aleikom AlBaqir, was Aliyy(ra) name mentioned in the Quran?

Sheik al-Kulayni In a lengthy tradition states:

“I asked Aboo ‘Abd Allaah (as) about the words of Allaah(as) ‘Believers, obey Allah, His Messenger, and your leaders (who possess Divine Authority). . . .’ (4:59) “The Imam said, ‘This was sent from the heavens about `Alee ibn Abee Taalib, Al-Hassan and Al-Hussayn (as).’ I then said, ‘People say, “Why did He not specify Ali and his family by their names in the Book of Allaah (as)?’ “The Imam said, ‘Say to them, “The command for prayer came to the Messenger of Allah but He has not specified (the number of the Rak‘ats) for them as being three or four. It, in fact, was the Messenger of Allah who explained to them this matter. The command for Zakat (a form of income tax) came to the Messenger of Allah and there was no specific taxable number such as one Dirham on every forty Dirham. It was the Messenger of Allah who explained it for them. The command for Hajj came to the Messenger of Allah. It did not say walk seven times around the Ka‘ba. It was the Messenger of Allah who explained it for them…”

Source: Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafi, vol. 1, pg. 286 – 288, hadeeth # 1

Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (Authentic) in his Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 3, pg. 213


One thing to mention about this hadeeth is that it goes through 6 different routes, this add more emphasis to how SaHeeH (authentic) this narration truly is.

# In this hadeeth it shows that Allaah (SwT) has said not specifically named the names of the Imaams (as) merely because it is not the job of the Qur’aan to do so. Our 6th Imaam (as) has given examples such how to pray salaah, pay zakaah, do Tawaaf seven times around the ka`bah. It was the job of the Prophet (s) to fill in the details of these acts, just like it is the job of the Prophet (S) to fill in the details regarding the Imaams (s).

# Any aHaadeeth (which quotes ayah of the Quran) that is taken out of Shee`ah books that shows the actual naming of the Imaams (as) is either da`eef (weak) right away by isnaad, or that it is contradicting a highly SaHeeH hadeeth that goes through 6 different routes in the chain.