کتابُ هدایة الأبرار الی طریق الأئمة الأَطهَارِ للمحقق الکرکی، صفحة ١٢٣
Hidayatul Abrar Ila Tareeq al Aima al
Athaar by Muhaqqiq Karki, Page 123
وأول
مًن ألف في (الدرایة) من أصحابنا الشهید الثانی
إختصر (درایة ابن الصلاح الشافعی في رسالته) ثم شرحها ، وحیث لم یطلع علی «عدة
الشیخ» ولا علی «أصول المحقق» لیعرف الفرق بین طریق القدماء والمتأخرین ، کما
عرفه- ولده الشیخ حسن
And the first one to author a book on Dirayah (analysis of ahadith) among our companions was Shahid al Thani. He summarized Dirayah of Ibn Salah al Shafi'i in his journal, then did its exegesis. That is because he was neither familiar with Iddatul Usul by Shaikh Tusi or Ma'arijul Usul by Muhaqqiq Hilli, so as to be able to discern the difference between the methodology of the classical scholars and the latter scholars, as acknowledged by his son, Shaikh Hasan.
وسائل الشيعة (آل البيت) للحر العاملي (1104 هـ) الجزء٣٠ صفحة٢٥٩
Wasail al shia by Saikh Hurr al Amili (ra), Volume 30, Page 259
الثاني عشر: أن طريقة المتقدمين مباينة لطريقة العامة، والاصطلاح الجديد موافق لاعتقاد العامة واصطلاحهم، بل هو مأخوذ من كتبهم كما هو ظاهر بالتتبع، وكما يفهم من كلام الشيخ حسن وغيره. وقد أمرنا الأئمة عليهم السلام باجتناب طريقة العامة. وقد تقدم بعض ما يدل على ذلك في القضاء في أحاديث ترجيح الحديثين المختلفين وغيرها
The twelfth point is that the method of the classical scholars was contrary to the aama (non shia majority muslim/sunnis)'s method, while the modern terminology of hadith science is in accordance to the belief of the 'aama and their terminologies, rather it is actually derived from their books as appears through investigation, and as is understood from works of Shaikh Hasan (son of Shahid al Thani) and others. While the Imams(as) have commanded us to avoid the 'aama's method. And there has preceded some material that evidences upon that in the section on judgment of ahadith, involving gauging various ahadith and others.
الحدائق الناضرة - المحقق البحراني - ج ١ - الصفحة ١٤
Hadaiq al Nadhirah by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani (ra), Volume 1, Page 14
المقدمة الثانية قد صرح جملة من أصحابنا المتأخرين بأن الأصل في تنويع
الحديث إلى الأنواع الأربعة المشهورة هو العلامة أو شيخه جمال الدين بن
طاوس نور الله تعالى مرقديهما. وأما المتقدمون فالصحيح عندهم هو ما اعتضد
بما يوجب الاعتماد عليه من القرائن والأمارات التي ذكرها الشيخ (قدس سره)
في كتاب العدة. وعلى هذا جرى جملة من أصحابنا المحدثين وطائفة من متأخري
متأخري المجتهدين كشيخنا المجلسي رحمه الله وجمع ممن تأخر عنه
The second preface: It has been stated by a number of our companions, the contemporary scholars, that the origins of classifying (grading) the ahadith into the four well known categories (i.e. sahih, hasan, muwathaq and da'eef) is from Allama Hilli or Syed ibn Tawoos. And as for the classical scholars, so the sahih hadith according to them is which appeals to confidence due to the evidence and signs/indicators mentioned by Shaikh Tusi in his book Iddatul Usool. A number of our companions, the muhaditheen (hadith scholars), and a group among the latter mujtahids like Shaikh Majlisi and a collection of those who came after him, they conformed to this method.
الفوائد المدنية والشواهد المكية - محمد أمين الإسترآبادي ، السيد نور الدين العاملي - الصفحة ١٧٢-١٧٣
Fawaid al Madaniyah by Allama Amin Astarabadi (ra), Page 172-173
وبالجملة، أول من قسم أحاديث أصول أصحابنا - التي كانت مرجعهم في عقائدهم
وأعمالهم في زمن الأئمة (عليهم السلام) وكانوا مجمعين على صحة نقلها كلها عنهم (عليهم السلام) - إلى الأقسام الأربعة المشهورة بين المتأخرين العلامة
الحلي أو رجل آخر قريب منه، ثم من جاء بعده وافقه كالشهيد الأول والفاضل
الشيخ علي والشهيد الثاني وولده صاحب كتابي المعالم والمنتقى والفاضل
المتبحر المعاصر بهاء الدين محمد العاملي. والسبب في إحداث ذلك غفلة من
أحدثه عن كلام قدمائنا، والسبب في غفلته ألفة ذهنه بما في كتب العامة،
والسبب في الألفة أنه لما كانت أرباب الدول من أهل الضلالة وكانت المدرسون
في المدارس مظهري طرق الضلال انحصرت طرق الإفادة والاستفادة في كتب العامة،
فإذا أراد أحد تحصيل الفضيلة لم يكن له بد من قراءة كتب العامة على
مدرسيها
And to sum up, the first to classify (grade)he original/principle ahadith of our companions, which were their source of religious beliefs and acts in the era of the Imams (as) and they consented upon their authenticity in being wholly quoted from the Imams (as), into the four categories well known among the latter scholars was Allama Hilli or someone else close to him. Then there are those who followed him afterwards like Shaheed Awwal, Shaikh Ali, Shaheed Thani and his son who has authored the books "al Mu'alim" and "Muntaqul Jiman"; and Shaikh Bahai. And the reason for this change is the ignorance from the works of our classical scholars. And the reason for this ignorance is the intimacy of the mind with what is in the books of the 'aama. And the reason for this intimacy is that when the heads of states are from the people of deviance and the teachers in the schools (religious seminaries) show the deviant's path, confine the way of recourse and refer to books of the 'aama, so when one intends to gain education he is compelled to read the books of the 'aama in the educational institutes.
Related Posts : Ahadith and their application
salam alaykum brother Bhooka_bhairiya. bro please help me. these hadiths is sahih? day of Gadir: http://www.shiastudies.com/arabic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=810
ReplyDelete@Velayet: Wa'laikum assalam,
ReplyDeleteYes, these ahadith are sahih, in fact I would even say that they're mutawatir (inshallah I'll make post later showing that the ahadith in our classical books are mutawatir). But I'm speaking according to manhaj of our classical scholars.
If we go by the modern usooli hadith grading system, then some of them maybe weak. But even usooli scholars like Allama Amini (author of al Ghadir) consider the ahadith about ghadir to be mutawatir so the weakness in sanad wouldn't matter.
salaam brother,
ReplyDeleteI was just wondering, akhbaris consider all the ahadith in our classical books to be authentic? So how is it that their beliefs were so grounded and free of ghuluw, but with these modern day pseudo-akhbaris from indo-pak,who also believe that every hadith is authentic, have so much deviance in their interpretation of islam? (though it seems the ghullats are in general the dominating force today, so it could be a bit unfair to single out the beliefs of the indo-pak community
Wa'laikum assalam brother,
ReplyDeleteMashallah you've asked a very good question, being a former usooli it's something I myself didn't understand earlier. Although probably a whole book could be written about this but I'll try to be brief (unfortunately I may still end up writing long because it's such a deep question). Anyway, some of the reasons are:
1) I'd like to qualify your statement about akhbaris considering all the ahadith in our classical books to be authentic. They only consider all the ahadith from the properly established classical ahadith books (such as kutub al arba and others) to be authentic. For example, Shaikh Hurr al Amili (author of our famous Wasail al shia and a staunch akhbari) rejects Tafsir al Askari while MANY usooli scholars such as Ayatullah Mirza Hussain Noori, Agha Buzurg Tehrani, Ayatullah Burujerdi etc accept it (in fact, al Khoei foundation has published its English translation). Similarly, Shaik Hurr al Amili rejects Misbah al sharia (lantern of the path, this English translation has been published by mainstream/usooli publishers) which has strong indications of it being the work of a sufi, deceptively attributed to the Imam (as) later. While usooli scholars such as ibn Tawus, Shahid Thani etc accepted it. I could go on and on with such examples.
So as you can see, while their methodology is different from the modern usooli methodology, they do follow the strict methodology of the classical hadith scholars (who followed the ways taught by the Imams) and reject MANY ahadith which do not satisfy their criteria. You can read the methodology of classical scholars here: http://realtashayyu.blogspot.com/2011/09/manhaj-of-our-classical-scholars.html
2) While akhbaris follow soundly established classical shia hadith books, most of the ghulu beliefs actually come from relatively later books, often from not shia but actually sufi sources. For example, khutbatul bayan(http://hubeali.com/khutbat/khutaba_tul_Bian_English.pdf), a favorite among such people, mainly originates from Hafidh Rajab al Bursi (a sufi)'s book Mashariq Anwarul Yaqeen (other ghali khutbas such as khutba tuntunjia etc are also from this book). Again, Shaikh Hurr Amili denounces the author as a ghali in his book Amul al Amil and doesn't narrate from him, while Allama Amini (a famous usooli scholar) authenticates him in his famous book al Ghadir. So basically its the usooli scholars who are more involved in promoting ghulu. It's not a secret that many of the famous maraji' our sufis/pro sufism/irfan and most (except Ayatullah Dhakkoo and perhaps a few others) of them believe in "wilayah al takwiniya" (a term which isn't even found in our ahadith books). You can read a popular marja's opinion here (skip to wilayah al takwiniya section): http://imamshirazi.com/ahlulbayt.html
3) Akhbaris follow ahadith while the people you mentioned follow non ahadith sources in reality. Our books are full of ahadith about denunciation of ghulu. Our ahadith provide a proper definition of ghulu and denounce it. You can read just a small sample here to get an idea (note, there are MANY more such ahadith): http://realtashayyu.blogspot.com/2011/05/tafwidh-and-ghulu.html
So basically if one is following the ahadith in our famous ahadith books, it's hard to fall into ghulu. That's why the early qummi hadith scholars were so anti ghulu and would exile anyone on the slightest suspicion of ghulu. As said earlier, ghulu suff often comes in through other sources.
As for the indo pak pseudo akhbaris, in fact not just them but even the usooli laymen (since taqleed is not allowed in aqeeda) are forced to take their beliefs from zakirs/lecturers because the usooli clerics have failed to translate our ahadith books.
4) The pseudo akhbaris (as well as usoolis) do NOT just accept all ahadith. Since they do not have a sound criteria like the proper akhbaris, they just accept and reject as they wish. For example, "Nad e Ali" is not even mentioned in any of the classical hadith books yet they accept it. Also, "Aliun waliullah" in adhan, no hadith mentions it but the maraji' consider it mustahab. On the other hand, we have authentic ahadith saying that Imam Hasan (as) did LOTS of marriages and divorces (http://realtashayyu.blogspot.com/2011/11/marriages-and-divorces-of-imam-hasan-as.html) but yet these people would reject them saying they're "against the Qur'an, against intellect etc" (Usooli scholar Saeed Akhtar Rizvi, father of Syyed Muhammad Rizvi, had written an article "refuting" it). Again, one can go on and on with such examples.
ReplyDelete5) Lastly, even if some ghulu hadith is found in the established classical hadith book(s), while the akhbaris would not outright reject it, they do not consider all ahadith to be actable. They'll try to reconcile it, or if that does not work then just do tawaqquf (leave it as it is) since as per ahadith itself we're supposed to leave the shadh (rare/odd) ahadith and take the well known ones.
Anyway, one can go on and on but I think these are the main reasons.
Wassalam
as salaamu alaykum,
ReplyDeleteok I understand, so the ghulluw isn't so much from established books of classical scholars as much as deviant sufi books. My arabic is still at a very early stage, but insha Allah I will be able to pick it up quickly, and get a better idea of what’s out there. But there are still a few of shaykh al-sadooq's books in english, I also have usool al-kafi and I haven't come across anything strange, the chapter in al-kafi about the imams knowing when they will die is a bit strange, but I guess we know for sure that Imam Ali (a) and Husayn (a) knew the manner they would be killed in, but as for the others, I'm not convinced. However all in all, as far as books in english (by classical scholars) there are still enough that people shouldn't have these deviant beliefs.Even if all the books were available in english, I don't think it would change much, people are very set in their ways.
"And when it is said to them, Follow what Allah has revealed, they say: Nay! we follow what we found our fathers upon. What! and though their fathers had no sense at all, nor did they follow the right way."
It's plane to see that the ghullats are the majority today, I actually saw that shiazi site on the weekend, it makes me sick, I don't understand why many people with more normal beliefs hate the IRI scholars so much and don't seem to mind the shirazi 'scholars' they are much more dangerous, at least with the IRI scholars, there is a chance there are trying to prepare for the return of Imam Mahdi (a), and even though I'm sure they hold many deviant beliefs such as willayat al takwiniyah, at least they don't put it on their websites, khamenei's site don't even answer usool questions. But with these Shirazi people all islam is is bid'ah, bid'ah and more bid'ah, aside from the fact that they are strict on music, there isn't much good to say about them. I was reading an old thread on shiachat and that apparently redha shirazi believed in tafwid, I'm not sure how true that is, but his followers were defending the position. To top it off, they control many of the shia tv stations, the english ahl ul bayt channel propagate quite a bit of deviance, but not excessive, but I'm told that with the arabic shirazi channels, the gloves come off and and they claim things like 'the knowledge of the imams is one inch less than the knowldge of Allah'!
As for willayat al takwiniyah, I think all of the maraja hold this belief, aside from shaykh MH Najafi and sayed Fadlallah, and they are two of the most hated figure in shia islam, the ghullats hate them more than the wahhabis, but in general they are not well thought of (I bet it is only down to 3rd shahada in adhan issue)
I had read your article about ghulluw before, but even then, is that the only thing that is considered ghulluw? Fine, it takes W.T. out of the picture, but most people believe that the Imams are all hearing and all seeing, know every word, event action that will ever take place, know the intentions of everyone who supplicates ot them(can read minds), that sayeda Fatima (a) is present at every Husayni Majlis - at the same time, and all other kind of anti-Qur'anic views, this is also ghulluw isn't it? But these are current mainstream views
what a sad state out religion is in
wassalaam, Ali
Wa'laikum assalam,
ReplyDeleteYou've definitely raised some good points, especially about the particular chapter in Kafi.
Insha'Allah I'll answer a bit later. I'll also try and make a post about the beliefs of the classical scholars and the difference from current clerics.
@Anonymous: Salam,
ReplyDeleteRegarding that chapter in kafi (about the Imams knowing when they'll die), I'd recommend that you read one of my previous posts (if you haven't already) which I wrote specifically on this topic: http://realtashayyu.blogspot.com/2011/04/qari-mashkia-displaying-pure-sunni.html
BUT....while in that post I've shown the weakness of those ahadith in terms of the modern usooli gradings for the sake of argument, but I personally consider it pure escapism to dismiss those ahadith in our premier primary book based off the gradings of latter scholars. The proper way would be to investigate the issue further within our classical texts. So as that post shows, our classical books themselves completely refute this notion of the Imams(as) knowing ghaib (in fact, there are ahadith in kafi itself which refute this notion) and in ahadith it IS considered a ghali belief.
So how to resolve the issue? The issue of analysing differing/contradicting ahadith is lengthy, but in short, some of the common ways are to try and reconcile those ahadith since we've been taught in ahadith that the ahadith dealing with specifics qualify the general ones. Another method is to follow the one which has shawahid from Qur'an (this does NOT include twisting Qur'anic verses, as many usooli scholars do to fit their WT belief) and the established/mutawatir sunnah. Another sure fire way, as taught in ahadith itself, is to follow the ahadith that are well known among the shia narrators, and leave the rare/odd one (so for this reason it's important to look at the views and practices of the shuyukh al taifa i.e. our classical muhaditheen). So the ahadith about Imams knowing when they'll die can be reconciled with the ones refuting that they knew ghaib in the sense that they did in fact NOT know ghaib at all but were only aware specifically about when they'll die. This is also backed by the fact that Shaikh Kulaini (ra) named the chapter "The Imams know when they'll die..." (i.e. he would take the ahadith as they are, without putting a spin on them), he didn't name it something like "The Imams are the holders ilm al ghaib". As you yourself said, we have Prophetic ahadith prophesying the deaths of Ali(as) and Hussain(as). We also have a sermon of Imam Ali in Nahjul Balagha where he prophesies future events, and when asked if he knew ghaib, he replied that he did not but those particular things were told to him by the Prophet. Both sunni and shia ahadith are full of the Prophet describing the end times, and no one considers this knowledge of ghaib (and thus ghulu) because it's a knowledge of certain events only. As for the rest of the Imams, it is possible at least that they came to know about their deaths some time before it was due so that they could make their wasiyya and nass for the next Imam. This is backed by the fact that we know through ahadith that Imams are not born with full knowledge, but rather, their knowledge increases with time and they're accompanied with ruh al qudus at times which then guides them. Also note, that we have hadith in Mukhtasar al Basair by Shaikh Sulaiman, saying that Allah (swt) made the Imams forget about their time and circumstance of death when the moment came, thus they drank the poison unknowingly. So this also establishes that Imams can do sahw (forget). Anyhow, it's clear that our classical scholars including Shaikh Kulaini did not believe that the Imams know ghaib. This is especially evident considering that our highest authority in rijal, Shaikh Najashi (ra), who was the student of Shaikh ibn al Ghadairi who was known for being VERY VERY anti ghulu and would declare people ghali on the slightest of suspicion, despite that Shaikh Najashi describes Shaikh Kulaini and his Kafi in admirable words.
So anyway, yes, ghulu is not limited to what I wrote in my article(i.e. tafwid/WT), that was just a small sample. Believing that Imams know ghaib is also certainly considered ghulu and we already know what's the status of ghulat as per ahadith. Also remember that kafi has a chapter on "Pillars of religion", and believing that Imams know when they'll die is not one of them. So if someone decides to make no judgement on the issue (which means not rejecting those ahadith either) then that's perfectly fine as well.
ReplyDeleteSo all in all, it's pretty much impossible to fall in ghulu if one follows are authoritative classical texts. One's more likely to fall in ghulu following the current "scholars"/maraji', who as you pointed out, all except M H Najafi and Fadlullah (I myself wouldn't put him in the "good list" though because he completely strays from the manhaj of classical scholars) believe in WT, ghaib etc.
One more thing brother, I'd advise you not to be so judgmental about the ignorant people (yes, they're just plain ignorant, not necessarily deviants) by saying that even if our classical books are translated in English it wouldn't change much.
ReplyDeleteI know from personal experience, how I'd read and be brainwashed by books of mutahhari, khomeini etc that are available in English on al-islam.org which preach WT and other ghali beliefs. At that time I didn't know Arabic and since the books were written by such giant figures, I thought every word in it must be true. I first changed when I read M H Najafi's Usool al sharia (Urdu book) in which he shattered the ghali beliefs of current maraji' in light of ahadith from classical books (which are yet to be translated).
Yes, this was some time back and some classical books may have been translated now, but still the majority are still not available in English, Urdu etc. Always remember, our ahadith say that Allah (swt) ordered the scholars to teach first and then obliged the common people to learn.
Therefore, one can't blame the laymen when our clerics have failed to translate our classical texts. Making translations available is the only solution. But unfortunately most usoolis are still stuck with the mentality that if the ahadith books are translated then "people will start being thier own mujtahids"......
Sad times really.
A number of our companions, the muhaditheen (hadith scholars), and a group among the latter mujtahids like Shaikh Majlisi and a collection of those who came after him, they conformed to this method
ReplyDeleteI don't understand. What method ? (the ahadith into the four well known categories, or the classical method?)