Bahlool Dana and Abu Hanifa

Synopsis: This post briefly examines the famous Shia story of Bahlool's dialogue with Abu Hanifa. The scope of this post is only to examine this particular story, it does not examine the authenticity of the actual existence of this character (for the record, the earlier Shia rijal sources such as Najashi and Tusi do not mention him, perhaps his earliest mention is in Shaikh al Haeri's Munatahal Maqal; thereby making his existence dubious).

أعيان الشيعة - السيد محسن الأمين - ج ٣ - الصفحة ٦١٧

A'yan al Shia by Syed Muhsin al Amin, Vol 3 Page 617

 ثم إن صاحب المجالس ذكر نقلا عن تاريخ گزيده حكايات للبهلول مع الامام أبي حنيفة وانها كانت في عصر الرشيد مع أن بين وفاة البهلول ووفاة أبي حنيفة نحو أربعين سنة لأن أبا حنيفة توفي سنة 150 والبهلول سنة 190 وادراكه له وان كان ممكنا الا ان جعله ذلك في عصر الرشيد يبطل الخبر من أصله لأن أبا حنيفة لم يعاصر الرشيد بل المنصور، والبهلول ان كان عاصر الصادق ع فقد عاصر المنصور

Qadi Nurullah Shostri had quoted from the book 'Tarikh Guzaidah' interactions of Bahlool with Abu Hanifa during the reign of Caliph Haroon Rashid. However, there is a gap of approximately 40 years between the death of Abu Hanifa and Bahlool, as Abu Hanifa died in 150AH while Bahlool in 190AH. While there is a possibility that Bahlool may have witnessed Abu Hanifa, but the issue of it taking place during the reign of Haroon Rashid renders the whole episode impossible, as Abu Hanifa was not a contemporary of Haroon Rashid but of Caliph Mansoor; and if Bahlool was a contemporary of Imam al Sadiq (as) then he would have been in the era of Mansoor.

تنقيح المقال ـ الجزء الثالث عشر ::: 121 ـ 135

Tanqihul Maqal by Allamah Mamqani, Vol 13 Page 123

  وأقول : ينبغي أن يكون ذهاب أبي حنيفة إلى المنصور دون هارون ؛ لأنّ أبا حنيفة مات سنة مائة وخمسين ، ومات المنصور سنة مائة وثمان وخمسين ، ويومئذ لم يكن هارون خليفة ، وإنّما كان الخليفة المنصور

I say: It is more likely that Abu Hanifa went to complain to Mansoor* instead of Haroon Rashid, as Abu Hanifa died in 150AH while Mansoor died in 158AH (i.e. they were contemporaries) and Mansoor, not Haroon Rashid, was the caliph at that time.

*Author's note: This seems unlikely, as Abu Hanifa is reported to be on bad terms with Caliph Mansoor, who had Abu Hanifa imprisoned and lashed. Moreover, if such an event had occurred to a scholar as famous as Abu Hanifa, that too while he was teaching a class full of students and moreover the incident then got escalated to the caliph of the time; then the incident would surely have been widely reported by all historians.

Read More... Bahlool Dana and Abu Hanifa Read More!

Salat al Wahsha (Namaz e wahshat) and its analysis

موقع سماحة العلامة الشيخ محمد العبيدان القطيفي

Shaikh Muhammad al Obaidan al Qatifi's* website

*Shaikh al Obaidan is a Saudi scholar, who studied bahth al kharij (advanced hawza studies) under Ayatullah Wahid Khorassani and Ayatullah Jawad Tabrizi for fiqh and usool, Ayatullah Kamal al Haidery for philosophy and Ayatullah Muslim al Dawri for rijal.

وهي المعروفة بصلاة الهدية، أو صلاة الوحشة، وقد جرت عادة الكثير من الفقهاء ذكر هذه الصلاة ضمن الصلوات المستحبة، ولا بأس بالإشارة إليها بصورة موجزة.

'Salat laylah al dafan' (prayer of the burial night) is also commonly known as 'salat al hadiyah' (the prayer gift [for the deceased]) and 'salat al wahshah' (prayer for [easing] loneliness [of the deceased in his grave]). It is common among many of the scholars to mention this prayer, along with other mustahab (recommended) prayers. Here is a brief analysis of it.

لا يخفى أنه ليس لهذه الصلاة ذكر في شيء من كتب قدماء الأعلام، فلم يتعرض لها المفيد، ولا المرتضى، ولا الشيخ في شيء من كتبهم، حتى أن الشيخ(ره) لم يذكرها في كتابه المصباح والذي قد أعده لمثل هكذا أعمال من الصلوات المستحبة والزيارات والدعوات.

It is not a secret that this prayer has found no mention anywhere in the books of the classical scholars. Neither Shaikh Mufid (413 AH), Syed al Murtada (436 AH) or Shaikh Tusi (460 AH) mention it anywhere in their books. Shaikh Tusi did not even mention it in his book 'Misbahul Mutahajjid', which contains many similar mustahab prayers, ziarat and supplications.

كما أنها لم ترد في شيء من المصادر الحديثية الأصلية المعتمدة، فلم يذكرها الكليني(ره)، ولم ترد في شيء من كتب الصدوق(ره)، كما لم يتعرض لها الشيخ(ره) في تهذيبه.

It does not appear anywhere among the classical primary books of ahadith either. Neither did Shaikh Kulaini (329 AH) mention it, nor is it found anywhere in the books of Shaikh Saduq (310 AH). Shaikh Tusi did not mention it in his 'tahdhibul ahkam' either.

والظاهر أن أول ظهور لها كان في عصر السيد ابن طاووس، فقد ذكرها في كتابه فلاح السائل، حذيفة بن اليمان عن النبي(ص).

It seems it first appeared in the period of Syed ibn Tawus (664 AH), who mentioned it in his book 'Falah al Saeyl', quoting from Hudhaifa b. al Yaman who reported it from the Prophet (pbuh).*

ثم نقلها ممن بعده الكفعمي صاحب المصباح(ره)، فقد نقلها من كتاب الموجز لابن فهد الحلي، وهو قد نقلها عن النبي(ص). والرواية التي ذكرها في المصباح تغاير الرواية التي ذكرها السيد ابن طاووس، كما سيتضح عند نقل الروايتين.

After Ibn Tawus, it was mentioned by Shaikh al Kaf'ami (905 AH), author of 'Misbah'. He quoted it from Ibn Fahad al Hilli's book 'Al Mojiz', who in turn reported it from the Prophet (pbuh).* The narration that al Kaf'ami mentioned in 'al misbah' differs from the narration reported by Ibn Tawus, as would become clear shortly when the narrations are presented.

وقد أوجب خلو المصادر الفقهية والحديثية من الإشارة لهذه الصلاة، توقف بعض الأعلام في مشروعيتها، بل جزمه بكونها من الموضوعات، قال صاحب الحدائق(ره): لكن شرعية هذه الصلاة على هذا الوجه المخصوص من الكيفية والزمان وكمية العدد المشهور فيها، ونحو ذلك لما لم يثبت من طريق أهل البيت(ع)، فهو لا يخلو من احتمال البدعية، وعدم المشروعية، فإن العبادة وإن كانت من حيث كونها عبادة راجحة ومستحبة، لكن لو انضم إلى ذلك أمر آخر من التخصيص بكيفية مخصوصة أو زمان مخصوص أو نحو ذلك من المشخصات مع عدم ثبوت ذلك شرعاً فإنه يكون تشريعاً، ألا ترى أن الأخبار قد استفاضت بتحريم صلاة الضحى، مع كونها صلاة، والصلاة خير موضوع، إلا أنه لما انضم إلى ذلك تخصيص استحبابها بهذا الوقت المخصوص، والعدد المخصوص ونحو ذلك من الخصوصيات مع عدم ثبوت ذلك شرعاً حصلت الحرمة وصارت بدعة، والحكم كذلك في هذه الصلاة مع عدم ثبوت مشروعيتها على هذا الوجه المذكور عن أهل البيت(ع)، واحتمال كون تلك الأخبار من طرق العامة كما لا يخفى.

The lack of its presence in the books of fiqh and ahadith caused some of the scholars to not consider it permissible, and in fact feel certain that it is a fabrication. Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani wrote in 'Hadaiq al Nadirah' (Vol 10, Page 547): "This prayer being prescribed in a particular fashion, for particular times and containing an ordained number of units as is commonly known; as well as other particulars of it none of which are established to be from ahlulbayt (as), makes it a likely bid'ah (innovation in religion) and impermissible. While acts of worship, due to virtue of being acts of worship, are encouraged and recommended, but if specific conditions are added to them; such as a specific way or time of offering, or anything similar to that which is not established to be ordained in Islamic law, this is then considered to be creating Islamic law by oneself. Have you not seen, numerous ahadith deem 'salat al duha' to be haram, despite it being a prayer and prayer being a good act, but since conditions have been added to it with regards to it being mustahab at a specific time, consisting of a certain number of units as well as other similar conditions which are not established to be ordained in Islamic law, thus salat al duha is deemed haram and a bid'ah. Therefore the same ruling applies to salat al wahshah, due to it not being established that the ahlulbayt(as) ordered praying it in this particular manner (i.e. as it is prayed these days), and it is highly likely that these ahadith [in shia books which describe how to pray salat al wahshah] originate from non-shia sources."

*Translator's note: Apart from salatul wahshah not being mentioned in books prior to the 7th century AH period of Syed Ibn Tawus, Ibn Tawus and Kafa'mi report it in mursal fashion as well, which makes the narrations of salatul wahshah even weaker.

Read More... Salat al Wahsha (Namaz e wahshat) and its analysis Read More!

Crawling in shrines and kissing them, a bidah?

"The revolution of Imam Hussain (as): Its specialities and focal points" by Ayatullah Khamenei (Original Arabic page posted at the bottom of the post)

'There is a strange bid'ah that people have lately invented, in the method of ziyarah. As you know, all the Imams (as) used to visit the pure grave of the Prophet (pbuh) and the pure graves of the ahlulbayt (as) in Medina, Iraq and Iran; but have you ever heard that any of the Imams (as) or the scholars used to crawl upon his torso from the entrance of the shrines to the grave spot during their ziyarah? So if this act was mustahab or good in itself, then surely the great scholars would have performed it, however, they did not perform such acts. In fact, it has been mentioned that Ayatullah Burujerdi, who was a very pious scholar and leading mujtahid, and a man of pioneering ideas; forbade even the kissing of the doorstep of the shrines of any of the Imams (as).'

"Al Thawrah al hussaiyniyah: Khasais wa murtakizat" (A collection of various lectures by Ayatullah Khamenei, collected and arranged by editors from the "Society of Islamic Cultural knowledge" from Beirut, Lebanon)

Read More... Crawling in shrines and kissing them, a bidah? Read More!

Dua Kumail, authentic?

 

الموقع الرسمي لسماحة الشيخ حيدر حب الله

Ayatullah Haider Hobollah's website

هل دعاء كميل ثابت وصحيح؟ 

 

Is Dua Kumail authentic?

 

السؤال: 1 ـ بحسب مباني العلماء وفي نظركم الشخصي ما مدى صحّة دعاء كميل؟

2 ـ هل دعاء كميل ثابت أم لا؟

Question: As per the standards of scholars, as well as in your own opinion, what is the basis of Dua Kumail's authenticity? Is it authentic or not? 

الجواب: دعاء كميل بن زياد النخعي من الأدعية الرائجة الجميلة الرائعة التي يدعو بها الملايين من المسلمين كلّ ليلة جمعة في مختلف أقطار الأرض، وفيه مضامين عالية، ولهذا الدعاء شروح كثيرة وترجمات متعدّدة، نصّ عليها الباحثون، ومنهم الطهراني في (الذريعة 8: 193، و 13: 258 ـ 259) وغيره، لكن أغلبيّتها الساحقة إن لم يكن جميعها ظهر خلال القرون الأربعة الأخيرة فقط، وقبل ذلك لا ذكر لهذا الدعاء على مستوى الشرح والترجمة والتعليق وغير ذلك.

 Answer: Dua Kumail b. Ziyad al Nakh'i is among one of the most popular, beautiful and wonderful supplications; which is recited every Thursday night by millions of Muslims across the globe. Its content is amazing and many scholars have written exegesis/commentaries on it and translated it into different languages, as stated by researchers such as Agha Buzurg Tehrani (author of the most comprehensive bibliographical encyclopedia of Shi'ite books "Al Dhariah") in his "Al Dhariah" (Vol 8 page 193 and Vol 13 page 258 - 259) and others. However, most of if not all of them, appeared only in the last 4 centuries. Before that, there was no sign or trace of this dua in the realm of exegesis/commentaries, translations, annotations etc of scholars.

أمّا على مستوى الإثبات التاريخي، فإنّ هذا الدعاء يرجع إلى مصدرين أساسيين ـ وسائر الكتب ترجع إليهما ـ وهما:

المصدر الأوّل: وهو الأقدم والأهم، عنيت مصباح المتهجّد للشيخ الطوسي (460هـ)، فقد قال الشيخ: (دعاءٌ آخر، وهو دعاء الخضر عليه السلام: روي أنّ كميل بن زياد النخعي رأى أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ساجداً يدعو بهذا الدعاء في ليلة النصف من شعبان: اللهم إني أسألك برحمتك التي وسعت كلّ شيء، وبقوّتك التي قهرت بها كلّ شيء..) (مصباح المتهجد: 844 ـ 850).

As for attempting to establish its authenticity historically, this Dua originates from 2 primary sources, and all other books (which contain Dua Kumail) quote it from those 2. And those 2 sources are:

Source 1: "Misbahul Mujtahid" by Shaikh Tusi (413 AH), this is the oldest and most important source. Shaikh Tusi reported in Misbah (Page 844 -850): "...Another dua is 'Dual al Khidher': It has been reported that Kumail b. Ziyad al Nakh'i saw Imam Ali prostrating and reciting the following dua on 15 Sha'ban: Ya Allah! I beseech you by your mercy which covers everything, and by your power by which you subjugate everything....."

وفي هذا المصدر ـ كما رأينا ـ لا يُعرف من أين حصل الشيخ الطوسي على هذا الدعاء، وتفصله عن عصر علي وكميل حوالي أربعة قرون، فلا سند ولا مصدر ولا تحديد لطريقة الحصول على هذا الدعاء، والطوسي لم يذكر أيّ طريق له إلى كميل بن زياد لا في كتاب المصباح ولا في مشيخة التهذيب والاستبصار ولا في الفهرست ولا في أيّ موضعٍ آخر من كتبه حتى نطبّق نظريّة التعويض السندي هنا لتصحيح الحديث. وربما يكون الشيخ الطوسي قد أخذ الدعاء من سند أو مصدر غير معتبر حتى عنده، لكنّه نقله في هذا الكتاب؛ لأنّ كتاب مصباح المتهجّد هو كتاب مندوبات وأعمال ومستحبات، وقد يبني الشيخ الطوسي ـ كما هي طريقة المشهور ـ على التسامح في أدلّة السنن، فنقل لنا الدعاء رغم عدم صحّة سنده أو مصدره عنده، وهذا أمرٌ ممكن في مثل هذه الموضوعات، لاسيما مع علّو مضمونه عنده، بل ربما صحّحه بمضمونه كما يصحّحه بعض العلماء اليوم بهذه الطريقة.

As we can see in this source, it is not known how Shaikh Tusi obtained this dua, while the time lapse between that of his era and that of Imam Ali and Kumail b. Ziyad al Nakh'i is of around 4 centuries. There is no sanad (chain of narrators), no original earlier source and no mention of the method by which this dua was obtained. Shaikh Tusi also did not mention any 'tareeq' (list of shuyukh/teachers via whom he could obtain narrations of earlier people) to Kumail, neither in his "Misbah" nor in Tahdhibain or in his Fihrist, neither in any other place in any of his books; which may allow for "ta'widh al sanad" (i.e. reconstruct the sanad, based on turuq mentioned elsewhere) to authenticate the hadith. Probably, Shaikh Tusi obtained this dua from a source or sanad that was unreliable, even according to him, but he still recorded it in his book because the book "Misbahul Mujtahid" is a book about supplications, recommended acts (mustahabaat) etc (i.e. not a fiqh book about halal and haram) and Shaikh Tusi adopted the popular practice of "Al Tasamuh fi adillatis sunan" (i.e. popular fiqh principle of applying leniency in hadith authentication in issues related supplications, mustahab acts etc; and not involving halal or haram) so he reported the dua despite lack of reliability of its sanad or source near him. This is completely plausible in such (recommended/mustahab) issues, especially with the content of the dua being highly eloquent according to him. Probably Shaikh Tusi considered the dua reliable based on its content, like how some scholars these days have authenticated it based on its content.

المصدر الثاني: كتاب إقبال الأعمال للسيد ابن طاووس (664هـ)، حيث قال: (ومن الدعوات في هذه الليلة ما رويناه بإسنادنا إلى جدّي أبي جعفر الطوسي رضي الله عنه قال: روي أنّ كميل بن زياد النخعي رأى أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام ساجداً يدعو بهذا الدعاء في ليلة النصف من شعبان. أقول: ووجدت في روايةٍ أخرى ما هذا لفظها: قال كميل بن زياد: كنت جالساً مع مولاي أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام في مسجد البصرة، ومعه جماعة من أصحابه، فقال بعضهم: ما معنى قول الله عزّ وجلّ: (فيها يفرق كلّ أمر حكيم)؟ قال عليه السلام: ليلة النصف من شعبان، والذي نفس عليّ بيده إنّه ما من عبدٍ إلا وجميع ما يجري عليه من خيرٍ وشرٍّ مقسومٌ له في ليلة النصف من شعبان إلى آخر السنة في مثل تلك الليلة المقبلة، وما من عبدٍ يحييها ويدعو بدعاء الخضر عليه السلام إلا أجيب له. فلمّا انصرف طرقته ليلاً، فقال عليه السلام: ما جاء بك يا كميل؟ قلت: يا أمير المؤمنين، دعاء الخضر، فقال: اجلس يا كميل، إذا حفظت هذا الدعاء فادعُ به كلّ ليلة جمعة أو في الشهر مرّة أو في السنة مرّة أو في عمرك مرّة تُكف وتُنصر وترزق ولن تعدم المغفرة، يا كميل، أوجب لك طول الصحبة لنا أن نجود لك بما سألت، ثم قال: اكتب: اللهم إني أسألك برحمتك التي وسعت كلّ شيء، وبقوّتك التي قهرت بها كلّ شيء، وخضع لها كلّ شيء، وذلّ لها كلّ شيء، وبجبروتك التي غلبت بها كلّ شيء، وبعزّتك التي لا يقوم لها شيء..) (ابن طاووس، إقبال الأعمال 3: 331 ـ 338).

The second source: The book "Iqbalul A'mal" by Syed Ibn Tawus (664 AH), he reported ('Iqbalul aamal' Vol 3 page 331- 338): "Among the supplications for this night are what we have reported by our sanad to our grandfather Shaikh Tusi, who said: 'It has been reported that Kumail b. Ziyad al Nakh'i saw Imam Ali prostrating and reciting the following dua on 15 Sha'ban'. I say: I found in another narration the following wordings: 'Kumail b. Ziyad al Nakhii said: I was sitting with my master Imam Ali in the mosque of Basra, and with him was a group of his companions. Some of them asked him, what is the meaning of the verse "On that night is made distinct every precise matter" (44:4)? Imam replied: The night of 15 Sha'ban, I swear by the one who created me, there is none but every good and bad that is to happen to him that year until the next 15 Sha'ban night is ordained on the night of 15 Sha'ban. And there is none who supplicates via the dua of Khidher but that his supplication is granted. So when people left for the night (I did not leave), so Imam asked: What is wrong Kumail? I replied: Please teach me Dua al Khider. Imam said: Sit down Kumail, if you memorise this dua and supplicate by it every Thursday night, or once in a month, or once a year, or even once in your whole lifetime; it will suffice you and help you and bless you and you will not be without maghfirah. Kumail, due to your long companionship with us, we are obliged to give you what you seek. Imam then continued: Write: Ya Allah! I beseech you by your mercy which covers everything, by your power which subjugates everything, which conquers and humbles everything, by your ruler-ship which conquers everything, by your honour which nothing can withstand........."

ومن الواضح هنا أنّ ابن طاووس ينقل الحديث الذي رأيناه عند الطوسي في المصباح، فليس هناك من جديد، لكنّه يعود ويذكر لنا أنّه رأى روايةً أخرى في هذا الصدد يذكرها لنا ويسوق بعدها الدعاء، دون أن يبيّن لنا أين رأى تلك الرواية الأخرى، فلا يذكر المصدر ولا السند ولا أيّ معلومات حول الموضوع، رغم أنّه تفصله ستة قرون عن عصر الإمام علي وكميل بن زياد.

 It is obvious here the Ibn Tawus is quoting the hadith which we saw reported from Shaikh Tusi in Misbah in the beginning, so there is nothing new there. But Ibn Tawus does mention that he also saw another narration in this regard and mentions it (as seen above) and then proceeds to the dua, but without mentioning where he saw this narration and neither does he mention any source or sanad or any other relevant information on this; despite that the time gap between him and the era of Imam Ali and Kumail is that of 6 centuries.

والجدير بالذكر أنّ المصدرين يذكران أنّ الدعاء هو دعاء الخضر، ولكن لا يُعرف ماذا يراد بهذه الكلمة، فهل التقى الخضر بعلي بن أبي طالب فأخبره به أم كان يدعو به الخضر سابقاً وأعلم الله عليّاً أو محمّداً بذلك فروياه لهذه الأمّة رغم وجود آية قرآنية في هذا الدعاء (أفمن كان مؤمناً كمن كان فاسقاً لا يستوون)؟ ولا أريد أن أدخل في تحليلٍ يتصل بذكر اسم الخضر وما يحمله هذا الاسم من دلالات عميقة في الثقافة الدينية والصوفيّة، بل سأترك هذا الأمر، وأنصح بمراجعة الكتاب الذي ألّفه الباحث الأستاذ عماد الهلالي حول شخصيّة الخضر في التراث الديني (العبد العالم الخضر عليه السلام، دراسة شاملة وموسّعة عن حياة الخضر عليه السلام وتاريخه من خلال القرآن والسنّة والحديث، طبع دار الكاتب العربي، عام 2010م). 

An important point worthy of attention is, that both the sources mention the dua as the dua of Khidher. But it is not clear as to what is meant by that. Did Khidher meet Imam Ali who then taught it to him, or did Khider use to supplicate with it from before and taught it to Ali (as) or Muhammad (pbuh) and they narrated it for this ummah (although this is strange as) even though the dua contains Quranic verse 32:18 (although the Qur'an had not been revealed then.....)? I do not wish to engage in the discussion regarding the various meanings that the name Khider could convey as per cultural and Sufi thoughts, I will skip that discussion, and suggest referring to Professor Imad al Hilali's book about Khider "Al Abd al Alim al Khider".

كما لا أريد أن أدخل أكثر في الرواية التي يقدّمها لنا السيد ابن طاووس في أنّ الآية الكريمة (فيها يفرق كلّ أمر حكيم) قصدت النصف من شعبان، وأنّ هذا المفهوم يعارض التناسب بين الآيات القرآنية بحيث تكون ليلة القدر في شهر رمضان وليس شعبان (وهو موضوع فيه جدل لا نخوض فيه الساعة)، على أنّ هذه الرواية تعارض بعض الروايات التي ذكرت أنّ المراد بهذه الليلة في الآية الكريمة هو ليلة القدر من رمضان لا شعبان، وهذه مشكلة يجب حلّها كي نأخذ بنقل السيد ابن طاووس هنا. أضف إلى ذلك أنّ الإمام عليّاً عليه السلام يعطي هذا الدعاء لكميل لمكان صحبته وعلاقته بهم عليهم السلام، ولا أعرف هل الأدعية يعطيها الأئمّة لمن حولهم أم يعلّمونها لعموم المسلمين في الأرض حيث يجب تبليغ دين الله للأمّة؟! وهل في هذا الدعاء ما يدعو للتقيّة؟! فكأنّ هذا الدعاء خاصّ وله بُعد غير عام حتى يذكره الإمام عليه السلام لكميل بحكم العلاقة القريبة! هذا تساؤل أتركه للتفكير. 

Similarly, I do not wish to enter into a discussion about the issue in Ibn Tawus's narration, where it says that the verse "On that night is made distinct every precise matter" (44:4) refers to the night of 15th Sha'ban and that this contradicts the Qur'anic verses which say that 'laylatul Qadr' occurs in Ramadan instead of Sha'ban (this is something on which there is disagreement and we shall not discuss it at the moment). Furthermore, this narration conflicts with othernarrations which state that the night mentioned in verse 44:4 is the Laylatul Qadr of Ramadan instead of Sha'ban. It is important to solve this issue, if we are to take this narration of Ibn Tawus. To add to that, Imam Ali gave this dua to Kumail due to his companionship with him, what I do not understand is that are the Imams supposed to teach duas to only those who are very close to them instead of teaching it to all Muslims because after all the tabligh (propagation) of religion to the whole ummah is wajib on them. And is there anything in this dua which would call for taqiyya (due to which Imam taught this dua only to Kumail)? The narration makes it seem as if there is something secretive in this dua such that the Imam taught it only to Kumail due to his close companionship. I will leave this issue as a food for thought.

وهناك أيضاً تساؤل آخر أدعه للتفكير ـ وقد يجاب عنه ـ وهو أنّ رواية ابن طاووس تفيد أنّ كميل بن زياد كتب الدعاء حيث قاله له الإمام عليّ، وهذا يعني أنّ لديه كتاباً وهو دعاء كميل، ومع ذلك لم نجد ذكره إطلاقاً في كتب الفهارس والمصنّفات ولم يذكره الطوسي ولا النجاشي ولا ابن النديم ولا غيرهم في عداد مصنّفي الشيعة رغم ذكرهم بعض من كَتَبَ في القرن الأوّل الهجري، وهذا لعلّه يؤكّد أنّهم لم يروا هذه الرواية التي ينقلها ابن طاووس أو لم يعتدّوا بها في إثبات كون ابن زياد صاحب مصنّف أو أصل.

هذا، 

And there is another question which bears pondering upon, which I shall answer shortly, which is that Ibn Tawus's narration mentions that Kumail wrote down the dua upon Imam Ali's order; which means he authored a booklet i.e. Dua Kumail, but despite that we do not find any mention of it in the Bibliographical books. (The authors of such books such as) Shaikh Tusi, Shaikh Najashi, Ibn al Nadim nor others mentioned it among Shia books despite mentioning some of the Shia books authored in the 1st century AH. This to an extent confirms that they either had not seen this narration or had not considered it authoritative enough to consider Kumail as the author of an "Asl" or "Musannaf".

وليس هناك مصدر يؤكّد لنا خصوصيّة ليلة الجمعة في هذا الدعاء، سوى هذه الرواية (رواية ابن طاووس) غير المسندة، والتي تعاني من بعض المشاكل؛ لهذا رأينا من يشير إلى اعتماد رواية المصباح للطوسي لا رواية الإقبال لابن طاووس، ورواية المصباح تركّز على هذا الدعاء بوصفه دعاءً يدعى به في ليلة النصف من شعبان لا في كلّ ليلة جمعة.

And there also no source which establishes for us a special status for Thursday night with regards to Dua Kumail, except for the sanad-less narration of Ibn Tawus which suffers from the issues mentioned above. Therefore, in our view, the narration in Misbah of Tusi is relatively more reliable with respect to Ibn Tawus's narration, and the narration in Misbah focuses on labeling this dua as one which is supplicated on the night of 15 Sha'ban instead of every Thursday night.

وبناءً عليه فهذا الدعاء لم يثبت بطريقة علميّة صحيحة، فلا يُعلم مصدره ولا سنده، والكتب التي نقلته لنا قليلة جدّاً (كتابان)، ومن ثمّ يصعب تطبيق قاعدة تعاضد الأسانيد أو المصادر فيه، فإسناده إلى النبي وأهل بيته صعب للغاية، إلا على طريقة من يثبت النصوص والأدعية من خلال طبيعة البيان والمضمون الذي يشبه سائر كلمات الإمام علي أو الأئمّة أو من خلال نورانيّة المضمون العالي الذي يحمله، فمن يحصل له وثوق واطمئنان بصدور هذا الدعاء عن الإمام علي عليه السلام من خلال هذه المعطيات ـ كما يظهر من غير واحد من العلماء مثل الشيخ عبدالهادي الفضلي ـ فهو حجّةٌ له وعليه، وإلا فلا اعتبار بهذا الدعاء من حيث تصويب الإسناد للنبي أو أهل بيته عليهم السلام جميعاً،

Based on all this, this dua cannot be considered authentic as per proper academic standard as the (original) source and sanad for it are unknown, and the books which mention it are very few; basically only 2. Therefore, it is not possible to reconstruct its sanad or find an alternative earlier source for it, which makes attribution of this dua to the Prophet (pbuh) or his progeny very difficult. Except for by the method of those who authenticate narrations and supplications by comparing and checking the similarity of the tone and content with other ahadith of Imam Ali and the Imams (as), or by the eloquence of the content, so one who obtains confidence and satisfaction of this dua being narrated by Imam Ali (as) through these methods; as is the case with multiple scholars such as (Late) Ayatullah Dr. Abdul Hadi al Fadli (1), then it is hujjah for him and upon him only. Otherwise,  there is no reliability of this dua in terms of its attribution to the prophet (pbuh) or the ahlulbayt (as).

 وإنّني أنصح نفسي قبل أن نحكم على الدعاء ـ أيّ دعاء ـ ونسبته من خلال طريقة بيانه ورفعة مضمونه أن تكون لدينا ثقافة واسعة في الأدعية والمناجاة التي تركها لنا سائر العلماء المسلمين، بل وغير المسلمين أيضاً، لنجد أنّ بعضها مما تقشعر له الجلود وتلين له القلوب وتهتزّ له الضمائر وتدمع له العين ويخشع معه القلب، فالثقافة الموسوعيّة والمقارنة هنا ضروريّة قبل التسرّع بإصدار أحكام قد تشوبها العاطفة وما اعتدنا عليه في صغرنا أو تربّينا عليه عفويّاً وتشكّلت لدينا فيه قناعات انطباعية وليست علميّة.

And  I remind myself before grading the dua, in fact any dua, and its attribution to the infallibles (as) by the method of judging its content and its eloquence; that we also have a large collection of supplications from rest of the Muslim scholars (from other sects), in fact even from non-Muslims (such as Psalms of the Hebrew Bible, Hindu Vedas scriptures etc etc ). We find that some of those are so touching that they send chills in the body's skin, melt the hearts, shake the consciences, swell up the eyes with tears and frighten the hearts. Therefore, taking this into consideration is necessary before we jump to conclusions based on emotions and what we have grown up with or been brought up on sanctifying, and issuing judgement based on preconceived notions instead of academic investigation.

وأمّا القول بأنّ اهتمام العلماء به شاهد صحّته فقد بيّنا أنّ الاهتمام هذا لم نجده واضحاً سوى منذ أربعة قرون تقريباً فقط، أمّا قبل ذلك فقد ندر أن تجد شرحاً أو تعليقاً أو ذكراً له فليراجع. نعم، يجب أن أشير إلى أنّ بعض جمل هذا الدعاء وأكثر ذلك في مطلعه، ورد في بعض الروايات الأخرى، ومنها رواية نقلها بعض علماء أهل السنّة في مصنفاتهم الحديثية كابن أبي شيبة في المصنّف، ولكنّ هذا لا يثبت نقل الدعاء الطويل، بل يُثبت بضعة أسطر قليلة منه لو تمّت تلك الروايات أيضاً، 

As for the claim that the special treatment given to this dua by scholars proves its authenticity, then we have already explained that such treatment is not clearly found except since around the last 4 centuries only. As for any earlier than that, then it is rare to find any exegesis/commentary, annotations or mention of it which could be referred to. Yes, it is worth mentioning that some sentences of this dua, mostly from its beginning, have been reported in other narrations. Among them is a narration that has been mentioned by some sunni scholars in their hadith collections, for example by Ibn Abi Shayba in his Musannaf. But this does not prove the whole long dua being reported (in the other narrations), only a very small portion of it, if the authenticity of those other narrations could be established that is.(2)

ومن الغريب ما وجدته عند بعضهم من أنّه يريد تصحيح هذا الدعاء برواية ابن أبي شيبة التي هي ضعيفة السند من جهة وتنقل لنا بضعة أسطر فقط من جهة ثانية، وهو يعلم أنّ الوضع في الحديث كثيراً ما يكون بالإدراج، فيؤتى بحديث معتبر ويضاف فيه أو ينقص منه ويضاف مكان الإنقاص، فانتبه جيداً، فهذا لا يصحّح حديثاً، نعم لو تمّ نقل أغلب مقاطع هذا الدعاء في مطاوي روايات أخَر عن علي عليه السلام لاقتربنا من هذا التصحيح جدّاً، وهو أمرٌ غير متوفّر هنا مع الأسف الشديد..

And I find it strange that some try to authenticate dua Kumail by Ibn Abi Shayba's narration, which is da'eef (weak) in the first place and secondly only contains a very small portion of dua Kumail. It is also well known that fabrication in ahadith is often done by insertion, that is, taking an authentic hadith and adding to it or removing a portion from the hadith and replacing it with something else hence making it look authentic (by doing fabrication within an authentic hadith) although this does not make the hadith authentic. Yes, if most parts of dua Kumail had been reported in other narrations from Imam Ali, then the dua could be authenticated through those narrations. But with great regret, this is not the case in this scenario.

(1) Translator's note:  Ayt Abdul Hadi al Fadli had said:

وقال عبد الهادي الفضلي في " دروس في أصول فقه الإمامية " ( ص 258 ) : أمثالُ دعاءِ كميلِ فإن سندَهَ غيرُ ناهضٍ بإثبات صحةِ صدورهِ عن المعصومِ ، لكن الفقيه من خلالِ مقارنته أسلوب هذا الدعاء بما يعرفُهُ من خصائص مميزة لأساليب أدعية أهل البيت يحصل له القطع بأنه صادرٌ عنهم ( عليهم السلام )

'Lessons in the principles of Imami jurisprudence' (Page 258): "The sanad of dua Kumail does not prove its attribution to the infallible (as), but the faqih (Islamic Jurist) can attain absolute certainty that this dua is narrated by the infallible (as) by comparing the tone and style of this dua to the distinguishable style of the duas of ahlulbayt (as)."

Ayt Muhammad Hussain aale Kashif al Ghita had stated similar principle for authenticating duas:

 محمدُ حسين كاشف الغطاء فقد قال في " الفردوس الأعلى " ( ص 51 ) : وبالجملة فما أجود ما قال بعض علمائنا الاعلام : ( إننا كثيرا ما نصحح الأسانيد بالمتون

 "Al Firdaws al A'la" (Page 51): "Overall, the best method is what has been stated by some of our scholars that often we authenticate the sanads by their content (instead of the other way round..)"

(2) Translator's note: Even if those aami narrations are accepted as authentic by the 'aamma, that would still not prove the authenticity of dua Kumail, as aami Ilmur Rijal and hadith gradings are not authoritative for Shias. Shia ahadith can only be authenticated via aami narrations, if the aami narrations are accompanied by strong qarain and/or aathaar from classical Imami literature and scholars. Regardless, since those narrations only contain small portion of Dua Kumail, this is a non-issue. 

 

Read More... Dua Kumail, authentic? Read More!

Arba'een, a bid'ah?

Audio recording* of Ayatullah Fadlullah: Transcribed by Ayatullah Muhammad Ali al Hashmi al Mashhadi in his book 'Al Hawzah al Ilmiyah Tudain al Inhiraf', Page 70 (Original Arabic page posted at bottom of post)

*Link to the audio file as well as transcription of the lecture is also available here: Ayatullah Mutada Ja'far al Amuli's site

"It is not necessary that all views present throughout history in the Jewish ideology, be evil. (No) This is not necessary. There have been things which originated from religion. But then as for arba'een, so it does not have any basis in Islam. As per Islamic law, neither do we have a week of mourning nor forty days, we have been ordained only three days of mourning and whoever carries on mourning afterwards is only freshening the sorrow. Three days, then the door of remembering the dead is closed, period. Just remember him with duas (supplications) and sadqah (charity), as for holding of a gathering on the first arba'een and then us repeating that year after year as seen in past years, so this does not have any Islamic basis whatsoever. I am not saying that it is haram, no it is not so, but it is not from the followings of Islam. It may or may not have Jewish origins, Allah knows best. Perhaps some Muslims believe that this occasion is suitable for the gathering of people; especially as it entails preaching, righteous guidance and meeting of people for positive causes.

Now as for ziyarah al arba'een, so it has not been mentioned in our ahadith (1). We do have a hadith saying that the signs of a momin (believer) are: wearing ring in the right hand, commencing with bismillah, praying fifty one rakahs and doing ziyarah al arba'een (doing visitation of forty). Some people have interpreted 'ziyarah al arba'een' as doing ziyarah of Imam al Hussain on the day of arba'een. But that is incorrect, it actually means visiting forty believers (2). However, Imam Hussain (as) is a shaheed (martyr) in our view, there are recommended ziyarahs for him such as ziyarah on day of arafah, in (mid of) sha'ban etc, but as for ziyarah al arba'een, so there is no istihbab (merit) in it."

(1) Translator's note: The mutaqaddamin such as Shaikh Kulaini or Shaikh Ja'far b. Qawluweh al Qmmi (author of Kamil al Ziaraat) never mentioned any hadith about ziyarah al arba'een. The latter only mentioned ziyarahs on days of ashura, arafa, mid sha'ban etc. The earliest hadith about the recommendation of ziyarah al arbaeen comes from Ibn al Qawluweh's student, Shaikh Mufid (in 'Al Mazaar') in mursal form (without chain), followed in turn by his student Shaikh Tusi who narrated 3 ahadith about it in his works (Tahdhib and Misbah). So overall, the 3 ahadith about arba'een, come from the latter Baghdadi scholars in mursal fashion. While ziyarah of Imam Hussain is highly recommended, on any day(including arba'een), but there is no specific hadith from earlier sources at all about doing it on arba'een (unlike how we have ahadith for doing it on ashura, arafa etc).

(2) Translator's note: However, as for interpreting the term 'ziyarah al arbaeen' found in the latter sources as the visitation of forty believers, it does not seem to have any precedent or support. The earlier giant scholars, from Shaikh Mufid to Shaikh Hurr al Amili, understood it to mean ziyarah of Imam al Hussain (as) on 20th Safar. They created chapters in their books called 'Desirability of doing ziyarah of Imam Hussain on arbaeen' and reported this hadith (the giant scholars who interpreted this hadith as ziyarah of Imam Hussain on arba'een, are simply too many to be listed). Neither does this interpretation have linguistic support. Contemporary scholars, from Ayatullah Murtada Ja'far al Amuli to Shaikh Al Dur al amuli, have linguistically refuted this isolated interpretation. Below, is also an excerpt from 'Al-Islam.org' (the most mainstream shia website in this age, run under the supervision of Ayatullah Sistani's office), refuting this interpretation:

"To twist the meaning of ziyarat al-arba’een by saying that it means visiting the grave-sites of forty believers is simply indicative of twisted minds, an attempt at distortion, one which good taste resents. Moreover, it is without any foundation. Had the goal been to visit forty believers, the Imam (ﻉ) would have used the term "ziyarat arba’een [mu’mineen]." The original wording indicates that ziyarat al-arba’een is one of the conditions enumerated in the hadith cited above saying that it is one of the marks of one’s iman and an indication of his loyalty to the Twelve Imams (ﻉ)." (Source: Karbala and Beyond, by Shaikh Yasin T. al Jibouri)

Nonetheless, regardless of the interpretation, this hadith does not form a hujjah (proof) as it is coming from the latter sources.

Conclusion: The desirability of 'ziyarah al arbaeen' specifically is not established, as no hadith has been reported for it from our earlier sources.

*A common misconception: A common belief, regarding origin of arbaeen, is that the ahlulbayt returned from Syria (after being held prisoners by Yazid ma'loon ibn mal'oon) to Karbala (on way to Medina) on the 20th of Safar, where they met Jaber b. Abdullah al Ansari who had also come for ziyarah. This incident is not historically correct. Below is an excerpt from 'al-islam.org':

"Only Sayyid bin Tawus has written in Luhuf, contrary to the historical and geographical evidence, that on return from Damascus the Ahlul Bayt proceeded to Iraq when they reached the parting of the ways to Iraq and the Hijaz (a place which is not identified even by the geographers) and on the 40th day of the Ashura they reached Karbala. Sayyid bin Tawus was, no doubt, a great person. Allama Hilli has acknowledged that he performed unusual feats and there is no denying the fact that he enjoyed high status.
However, it is not possible to attach any value to this statement of his from the historical viewpoint and it is not known whether he himself believed in this narration which is not based on any authority. In any case this matter needs investigation and research.
As a matter of principle it is opposed to common sense that everything should be accepted without any investigation, study and comment. Even if Sayyid bin Tawus had been our contemporary we would not have approached that great scholar in this particular matter, and his remark in a book, which according to the researchers was written in his youth, would not have carried any historical value for us. It is a vulgar and foolish way of thinking that whatever is said by anyone or is written in any book should be accepted as correct and free from errors.
The path of research and criticism is always open to the intelligent persons and research scholars of history .According to the Muslims of the world in general there is only one person whose remarks cannot be erroneous in the least and he is the Holy Prophet. According to the Shi'ah school, however, this distinction is enjoyed by the Holy Prophet as well as by Lady Fatima Zahra and the twelve Imams whose infallibility is proved by reason as well as by narrations." (Source: A probe into the history of Ashura, by Dr. Ibrahim Ayati)

'Al Hawzah al Ilmiyah Tudain al Inhiraf' by Ayatullah Muhammad Ali al Hashmi al Mashhadi, page 70

Read More... Arba'een, a bid'ah? Read More!

Reason behind Imam Hasan's numerous marriages and divorces

 Explanation for the previous post: Marriages and divorces of Imam Hasan (as)

الحدائق الناضرة - المحقق البحراني - ج ٢٥ - الصفحة ١٤٨

Hadaiq al Nadra by Shaikh Yusuf al Bahrani, Volume 25 Page 148

بقي هنا إشكال وهو أنه قد تكاثرت الأخبار بأن الحسن (عليه السلام) كان رجلا مطلاقا للنساء حتى عطب به أبوه علي (عليه السلام) على ظهر المنبر.
ومن الأخبار في ذلك ما رواه في الكافي عن عبد الله بن سنان في الموثق عن أبي عبد الله (عليه السلام) " قال: إن عليا (عليه السلام) قال وهو على المنبر: لا تزوجوا الحسن، فإنه رجل مطلاق، فقام إليه رجل من همدان فقال: بلى والله أزوجه، وهو ابن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وابن أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فإن شاء أمسك وإن شاء طلق ".
وعن يحيى بن أبي العلاء عن أبي عبد الله (عليه السلام) " قال: إن الحسن بن علي (عليهما السلام) طلق خمسين امرأة فقام علي (عليه السلام) بالكوفة فقال: يا معاشر أهل الكوفة لا تنكحوا الحسن (عليه السلام) فإنه رجل مطلاق، فقام إليه رجل فقال: بلى والله أنكحنه إنه ابن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وابن فاطمة (عليه السلام) فإن أعجبته أمسك، وإن كره طلق ".
وروى البرقي في كتاب المحاسن عن ابن محبوب عن عبد الله بن سنان عن أبي عبد الله " قال: أتى رجل أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) فقال له: جئتك مستشيرا إن الحسن والحسين وعبد الله بن جعفر خطبوا إلي فقال أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام): المستشار مؤتمن، أما الحسن فإنه مطلاق للنساء، ولكن زوجها الحسين فإنه خير لابنتك ".
وربما حمل بعضهم هذه الأخبار على ما تقدم في سابقها من سوء خلق في أولئك النساء أو نحوه مما يوجب أولوية الطلاق، ولا يخفى بعده، لأنه لو كان كذلك لكان عذرا شرعيا، فكيف ينهى أمير المؤمنين (عليه السلام) عن تزويجه والحال كذلك.
وبالجملة فالمقام محل إشكال، ولا يحضرني الآن الجواب عنه، وحبس القلم عن ذلك أولى بالأدب

The problem that remains is that ahadith have been reported in extremely vast numbers that Imam al Hasan (as) was a man who used to frequently divorce women, to the point that even his own father Imam Ali (as) blasted him for this publicly from the top of the pulpit. The ahadith that have been reported on this matter include:

Muwathaq (authentic) hadith in Kafi, from Abdullah b. Sinan, reporting from Abi Abdillah (as) who said: " Indeed Ali (as) said, while he was on the pulpit: "Do not arrange marriage with al Hasan, for indeed he is a man who constantly divorces." So a man from Hamdan stood up then said: "Rather, by Allah (swt) we will definitely arrange marriage with him, he is the son/progeny of the Prophet (pbuh) and the son of commander of the faithful, so if he wishes he may keep and if he wishes he may divorce."

And from Yahya b. al 'Ala reporting from Abi Abdillah (as) who said:  "Indeed al Hasan b. Ali (as) divorced fifty women, so Imam Ali (as) ascended the pulpit and said: O people of Kufa! Do not arrange marriage with al Hasan, for indeed he is a man who constantly divorces." So a man from Hamdan stood up then said: "Rather, by Allah (swt) we will definitely arrange marriage with him, he is the son/progeny of the Prophet (pbuh) and the son of Fatima, so if he wishes he may keep and if he wishes he may divorce."

And al Barqi narrated in his book, al Mahasin, from ibn Mahboob, from Abdullah b. Sinan from abi Abdullah (as) who said: A man came to Ali (as), so he said to him (as): "I have come to seek advise whether I should propose to Hasan, Hussain or Abdullah b. Ja'far?" So Ali (as) said: "(Speaking as) The trusted adviser, as for Hasan, so indeed he divorces women a lot, instead arrange marriage with Hussain for indeed he is good for your daughter."

And sometimes some scholars have interpreted these ahadith to be with regards to ill mannered women or those with other bad characteristics which would necessitate divorce, however, the weakness of this excuse is not inevident. After all, if the situation was like that then it would be a perfectly valid reason for divorce, so why would Imam Ali (as) have to forbid people from arranging marriage with Imam Hasan (as) in that case?

All  in all, this is a  problematic issue, and I simply do not have an answer for it at the moment, and halting the pen from righting further on this topic is best in terms of respect for Imam Hasan (as).

Read More... Reason behind Imam Hasan's numerous marriages and divorces Read More!

How to cure black magic

التبيان - الشيخ الطوسي - ج ١ - الصفحة ٣٧٤

Al Tibyan by Shaikh Tusi, Volume 1 Page 374

وقيل في معنى السحر أربعة أقوال:
أحدها - انه خدع ومخاريق، وتمويهات لا حقيقة لها يخيل إلى المسحور أن لها حقيقة.
والثاني - انه اخذ بالعين على وجه الحيلة.
والثالث - انه قلب الحيوان من صورة إلى صورة، وانشاء الأجسام على وجه الاختراع فيمكن الساحر ان يقلب الانسان حمارا وينشئ أجساما.
والرابع - انه ضرب من خدمة الجن كالذي يمسك له التجدل فيصرع، وأقرب الأقوال الأول، لان كل شئ خرج عن العادة الخارقة، فإنه لا يجوز أن يتأتى من الساحر. ومن جوز للساحر شيئا من هذا، فقد كفر لأنه لا يمكنه مع ذلك العلم بصحة المعجزات الدالة على النبوات، لأنه أجاز مثله من جهة الحيلة والسحر

قال ابن الأثير في النهاية (2/26) (المخاريق جمع مخراق وهو في الأصل ثوب يلف ويضرب به الصبيان بعضهم بعضا

There are (mainly) four views about magic:

1. It is simply deception and childish trickery. It is completely fake and there is no reality to it. It is just that the one being tricked gets deluded into thinking that it is real.

2. It is an optical illusion.

3. It is the transformation of a creature from one form to another, therefore creating a body (seemingly) out of nowhere. So it is possible for the magician to transform a human into a donkey and create a (new) body (i.e. of the donkey, into which the human has been transformed).

4. It is the infliction of a strike with the help of the jinn, such as when the person being possessed is cued, he goes into a fit.

The correct view out of these is the first one (i.e. that magic is just fake trickery and nothing else), because anything that is against the natural order, is beyond the power of a magician. Whoever believes that a magician can perform out of the ordinary acts (such as make someone sick or poor, cause obstacles in a woman getting married or conceiving a child etc) has committed absolute kufr, because with such an assumption it is then not even possible to ascertain the authenticity of the miracles of the prophets as then those miracles could be dismissed as being magic tricks.

السرائر - ابن إدريس الحلي - ج ٣ - الصفحة ٥٣٣

Al Sarair by Ibn Idris al Hilli, Volume 3 Page 533

ولا حقيقة للسحر، وإنما هو تخيل وشعبذة، وعند بعض المخالفين أن له حقيقة

And there is no reality at all of magic, it is just an illusion and trickery, but some mukhalifeen (non shias) believe (foolishly) that it is real.

قواعد الأحكام - العلامة الحلي - ج ٢ - الصفحة ٩

Qawaid al Ahkam by Allama Hilli, Volume 2 Page 9

وتعلم السحر وتعليمه، وهو: كلام يتكلم به أو يكتبه أو رقية، أو يعمل شيئا يؤثر في بدن المسحور أو قلبه أو عقله من غير مباشرة، والأقرب أنه لا حقيقة له وإنما هو تخييل وعلى كل تقدير لو استحله قتل

Teaching or learning magic: Magic can be a spell which is vocalised, written, blown onto knots, or doing something which (supposedly) effects the body, heart or mind of the victim indirectly (i.e. without any direct physical contact). But the correct view is that there is no reality to magic and it is just an illusion. But in any case, if someone considers it (doing idiotic acts like blowing onto knots or reciting a so called spell) halal then he is worthy of death penalty in Islam.

مفتاح الكرامة - السيد محمد جواد العاملي - ج ١٢ - الصفحة ٢٣١

Miftah al Karamah by Syed Jawwad al Amuli, Volume 12 Page 231

[في بيان حقيقة السحر] قوله: (والأقرب أنه لا حقيقة له وإنما هو تخييل) كما هو خيرة الأكثر كما في " الدروس (1) والمسالك (2) " ومذهب كثير كما في " الروضة (3) " وقد يظهر من صاحب " الخرائج والجرائح (4) " أنه إجماعي بين المسلمين.
قلت: لعله كذلك، إذ هو صريح الرازي (5) والبيضاوي (6) والآمدي (7) (والواحدي - خ ل) ومولانا الطبرسي (8) والشيخ (9) وفخر الإسلام (10). وهو ظاهر كلام ابن الأثير (11) وابن فارس (12) والجوهري (13) والفيومي (14)وقال في " الدروس (1) ": قيل أكثره تخاييل وبعضه حقيقي، فظاهره التردد كصريح الكركي (2) والقطيفي وإن كان الكركي قد ذهب إلى أن له تأثيرا من جهة الوهم لا من جهة الحقيقة

Explanation about the reality of magic: Allama Hilli stated about magic that "the correct view is that there is no reality to magic and it is just an illusion", as is the opinion of the majority of Shia scholars. This is evident from Shahid al Awwal's book "Al Durus" and Shahid al Thani's "Masalik al Afham". It is the view of the great majority (of shia scholars) as seen in Shahid al Thani's "Sharh Lum'a", and Shaikh Rawandi stated in "Al Kharaij wal Jaraih" that it is the ijma (consensus) of the Muslims that there is no reality at all of magic.

I (i.e.Syed Jawad al Amuli) say: Perhaps it (the claim of ijma) is correct because Raazi, Bedawi, Al Amdi, Wahidi (all sunni scholars) as well as Shaikh Tabrisi, Shaikh Tusi and Fakhrul Muhaqiqqin dimissed the reality of magic. This is also what is apparent from the words of Ibn al Athir, Ibn Faris, Al Johari and Al Fuyoomi...........And Muhaqqiq Karaki leaned towards the view that magic can have an effect due to imagination (i.e. people deluding themselves into believing in magic and losing peace of mind, which then may indirectly effect them negatively) not because there is an actual reality to it.

مصباح الفقاهة - السيد الخوئي - ج 1 - ص 445

Mibahul Fuqaha by Ayatullah Khoei, Volume 1 Page 445

يقطع بأن السحر ليست له حقيقة واقعية

It is proven without a shadow of doubt that there is no actual reality of magic (it is just childish tricks) 

Read More... How to cure black magic Read More!

Sending la'nah, obligatory?

 الفوائد الطوسية للحر العاملي، م‍ح‍م‍د ب‍ن‌ ح‍س‍ن، صفحه ٥١٥

 Fawaid al Tusiya by Shaikh Hurr al Amili, page 515

و ‌أما‌ الروايات‌ الشريفة فهي‌ أكثر ‌من‌ ‌أن‌ تحصي‌ و ‌من‌ أرادها فليرجع‌ ‌إلي‌ كتب‌ الحديث‌ المشتملة ‌علي‌ الأحكام‌ الشرعية ‌بل‌ و أحاديث‌ الأصول‌ و غيرها ‌فإن‌ أكثر الواجبات‌ ‌إن‌ ‌لم‌ يكن‌ كلها: ‌قد‌ ورد لعن‌ تاركها، و أكثر المحرمات‌ ‌إن‌ ‌لم‌ يكن‌ كلها ‌قد‌ ورد لعن‌ فاعلها و أكثر الاعتقادات‌ الصحيحة ‌قد‌ ورد كفر منكرها و لعنه‌ و أكثر الاعتقادات‌ الفاسدة ‌قد‌ ورد كفر صاحبها و لعنه‌، و ‌أما‌ لعن‌ المتقدمين‌ ‌علي‌ أمير المؤمنين‌ ‌عليه‌ السّلام‌ و المحاربين‌ ‌له‌ فالذي‌ ورد ‌فيه‌ أكثر ‌من‌ ‌إن‌ يحصي‌ و اجتماع‌ أسباب‌ اللعن‌ فيهم‌ ‌أو‌ أكثرها أوضح‌ ‌من‌ ‌أن‌ يخفي‌، ‌قد‌ وردت‌ ‌به‌ روايات‌ علماء السنة فضلا ‌عن‌ روايات‌ الشيعة و ‌كذا‌ لعن‌ ‌کل‌ ‌من‌ خالف‌ ‌في‌ الإمامة و ‌كذا‌ لعن‌ بني‌ أمية و ‌كذا‌ لعن‌ الصوفية عموما و خصوصا و ‌قد‌ ‌روي‌ ‌الشيخ‌ الثقة الجليل‌ عمر ‌بن‌ ‌عبد‌ العزيز الكشي‌ ‌في‌ كتاب‌ الرجال‌ ‌عن‌ ‌محمّد‌ ‌بن‌ قولويه‌ و الحسين‌ ‌بن‌ ‌الحسن‌ ‌بن‌ بندار القمي‌ جميعا ‌عن‌ سعد ‌بن‌ ‌عبد‌ اللّه‌ ‌عن‌ إبراهيم‌ ‌بن‌ مهزيار و ‌محمّد‌ ‌بن‌ عيسي‌ ‌عن‌ ‌علي‌ ‌بن‌ مهزيار ‌عن‌ ابي‌ ‌جعفر‌ يعني‌ ‌الثاني‌ ‌عليه‌ السّلام‌ ‌في‌ حديث‌ ‌قال‌ ‌قال‌ رسول‌ اللّه‌ ‌صلي‌ اللّه‌ ‌عليه‌ و آله‌ ‌من‌ تأثم‌ ‌أن‌ يلعن‌ ‌من‌ لعنه‌ اللّه‌ فعليه‌ لعنة اللّه‌ و ناهيك‌ بهذا الحديث‌ الشريف‌ الصحيح‌ السند الصريح‌ الدلالة و ‌ما اشتمل‌ ‌عليه‌ ‌من‌ التأكيد و المبالغة ‌مع‌ ضم‌ الآيات‌ القرآنية السابقة حجة ‌علي‌ ‌من‌ توقف‌ ‌في‌ ‌ذلک‌، و ‌قد‌ ‌روي‌ ‌في‌ عدة أحاديث‌ معتمدة ‌أن‌ ولاية النبي‌ و الأئمة (ع‌) ‌لا‌ تقبل‌ ‌إلا‌ بالبراءة ‌من‌ أعدائهم‌ و ‌أنّه‌ تجب‌ عداوة الكافر و الفاسق‌ و تحرم‌ محبتهما و موالاتهما

As for ahadith (about la'an), so they are too many to be counted, so one who wishes to pursue them should refer to the books of ahadith dealing with the Islamic laws. In fact, he should consult the books of ahadith on aqaid (ideology/beliefs) and others, for indeed in most, if not all, obligatory issues a la'an has been issued for the one who abandons them; and in most, if not all, haram acts, a la'nah has been issued for the one who undertakes them. And for most correct beliefs, takfeer and la'nah has been issued for the one who rejects them; and for most corrupt beliefs, takfeer and la'nah has been issued for the one who professes by them.

As for la'nah on Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, as well as those who waged war against Imam Ali (such as Ayesha, Talha, Zubair, Muawiyah, Khawarij etc), so la'nah has been issued on them in so many ahadith that they are too many to be counted, and the manifestation of the reasons of la'nah in them, or most of them (i.e. the 3 caliphs and those who waged war against Imam Ali), is just too obvious to be a secret. This has been reported in narrations from Sunni scholars also (for example sunni reports do mention the misdeeds of the 3 caliphs, however they are either discarded by them, interpreted away, or sometimes even considered praiseworthy deeds instead by the sunnis), as well as in shia ahadith such as (they also even include) la'nah on everyone who rejects/opposes the imamah, all the bani umayyah, and the sufis in general as well as in particular. The trustworthy and honorable Shaikh, Umar b. Abdel Aziz al Kashi (ra) reported in the book of rijal (Rijal Kashi) from Muhammad b. Qulawey and al Hussain b. al Hasan b. Bandar al qumi, both from Sa'd b. Abdullah from Ibrahim b. Mahzyar and Muhamad b. 'Isa, from Ali b. Mahzyar, from Imam al Jawad (as), who said: The Prophet (pbuh) said: "Whoever considers it a sin (hesitates) to send la'nah on the one on whom is Allah's la'nah, then upon him himself is Allah's la'nah." This noble hadith is absolutely great, it is sahih in terms of sanad and completely explicit. It is absolutely commanding and along with the Qur'anic ayat (verses) presented earlier (about la'nah), is a hujjah upon one who ponders on that. And it has been reported in so many authentic ahadith that wilayah of the Prophet (pbuh) and the Imams (as) is not accepted, except with tabarrah from their enemies; and it is obligatory to be hostile to the kuffar and the sinners, and it is haram to like them and and befriend them.

خطبة الجمعة لسماحة العلامة المحقق السيد هاشم الهاشمي        27 جمادى الأولى 1425 هـ الموافق 16 / 7 / 2004م

Friday prayer semon by Ayatullah Syed Hashim al Hashmi, on 27 Jamadi al Thani 1425 AH (16 July 2004)

روى الكشي بسند صحيح عن محمد بن قولويه والحسين بن الحسن بن بندار القمي، قالا: حدثنا سعد بن عبد الله، قال: حدثني إبراهيم بن مهزيار ومحمد بن عيسى بن عبيد، عن علي بن مهزيار، قال: سمعت أبا جعفر الثاني ( أي الجواد) عليه السلام يقول وقد ذكر عنده أبا الخطاب: «لعن الله أبا الخطاب، ولعن أصحابه، ولعن الشاكين في لعنه، ولعن من قد وقف في ذلك وشك فيه».
ثم قال:« هذا أبو الغمر وجعفر بن واقد وهاشم بن أبي هاشم استأكلوا بنا الناس، فصاروا دعاة يدعون الناس إلى ما دعا إليه أبو الخطاب لعنه الله ولعنهم معه، ولعن من قبل ذلك منهم، يا علي لا تتحرجن من لعنهم، لعنهم الله، فإن الله قد لعنهم».
ثم قال (ع): «قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله: من تأثم أن يلعن من لعنه الله فقد لعنه الله». (اختيار معرفة الرجال ص528 ح1012، عنه معجم رجال الحديث ج4 ص134، وأقر الخوئي صحة السند في المعجم ج14 ص256

Shaikh Kashi (ra) reported in a sahih (authentic) hadith (in Rijal Kashi) from Muhammad b. Qulawey and al Hussain b. al Hasan b. Bandar al qumi, who said: Told us Sa'd b. Abdullah: Told me Ibrahim b. Mahzyar and Muhamad b. 'Isa b. Ubaid, from Ali b. Mahzyar, who said: 

"I heard Imam Jawad (as) say, while the mention of Aba al Khattab (a ghali) was made in his presence: "May the la'nah (damnation) of Allah (swt) be on Aba al Khattab, and la'nah on his companions, la'nah on those who are upset by the la'nah made on him, and la'nah on the one who restrains from that (i.e. doing la'nah) and has doubt about it." Imam (as) then said: "Abu al Ghumr, Ja'far b. Farqad and Hashim b. abi Hashim, they drive the people away from us, for they have become preachers who call the people towards what Abul Khattab used to call for, la'nah of Allah (swt) be on him and those who were with him, and la'nah on one who accepts that (i.e. the deviant call) from them. O Ali! Do not be embarrassed of sending la'nah on them, may (more of) Allah's la'nah be on them, for indeed Allah's la'nah is on them."

Imam Jawad (as) then said: The Prophet (pbuh) said: "Whoever considers it a sin to send la'nah on the one on whom is Allah's la'nah, then upon him himself is Allah's la'nah.*"

(Source: Ikhtiyar Ma'arifatur Rijal by Shaikh Tusi, Page 528 Hadith 1012. Ayatullah Khoei quoted this hadith in his Mu'jam Rijal al Hadith Volume 4 Page 134, and he graded the sanad of this hadith sahih in Volume 14, Page 256)

*Translator's note: It has been shown in a previous post that the Imams (as) invoked la'nah on shaikhain. Click here.

Read More... Sending la'nah, obligatory? Read More!

Karbala: Imam Hussain and his companions were completely without water?

Below is an excerpt from one of the oldest and most authentic Shia Imami text on the event of Karbala and the martyrdom of the chief of martyrs (Syed al Shuhada) Imam Hussain (as), from the transcript of the lecture delivered by Shaikh Sadooq (ra) on 9th Muharram, 368 AH.

الأمالي - الشيخ الصدوق - الصفحة ٢٢٠

Al Amali by Shaikh Sadooq (ra), Page 220

ثم إن الحسين (عليه السلام) أمر بحفيرة فحفرت حول عسكره شبه الخندق، وأمرفحشيت حطبا، وأرسل عليا ابنه (عليه السلام) في ثلاثين فارسا وعشرين راجلا ليستقوا الماء، وهم على وجل شديد، وأنشأ الحسين (عليه السلام) يقول:
يا دهر أف لك من خليل * * كم لك في الاشراق والأصيل من طالب وصاحب قتيل * * والدهر لا يقنع بالبديل وإنما الامر إلى الجليل * * وكل حي سالك سبيلي ثم قال لأصحابه: قوموا فاشربوا من الماء يكن آخر زادكم، وتوضؤوا واغتسلوا، واغسلوا ثيابكم لتكون أكفانكم. ثم صلى بهم الفجر وعبأهم تعبئة الحرب، وأمر بحفيرته التي حول عسكره فأضرمت بالنار، ليقاتل القوم من وجه واحد

Imam Ali b. al Hussain (as) said (narrating the events of the night before Ashura): "....................Then indeed Imam Hussain (as) ordered  digging up of the ground, so the like of a ditch was dug up around their camps. He ordered for the ditch to be filled up with wood, and dispatched his son Ali (i.e. Ali Akbar, not Imam Zainul Abideen) with thirty horsemen and twenty foot soldiers to obtain water while they were in a state of extreme fear (due to their immense love for Imam Hussain, they were fearful of the slightest of harm being inflicted upon the noble Imam, Imam Hussain [as]). Meanwhile, Imam Hussain recited the following poetic verses: 

O Time (of this worldly and materialistic life)! Woe unto you of a friend! 

How many of your seekers (who strove all their lives for material things) and companions have been killed in the mornings and evenings 

But the time does not settle for an exchange (and people still die), and the authority is only for Allah! 

And every living person will walk my path (such would be the impact of my martyrdom!) 

Then Imam said to his companions: "Rise and drink from the water (brought by Ali Akbar and his companions) as it would be your last provision, and perform wudu and ghusl, and wash your clothes for they are your shrouds." Then Imam Hussain prayed Fajr with them, mobilized them in war formation and issued order about the ditch which had been dug around their camps, so it was set on fire so that the enemy may only be able to fight from one direction (instead of being able to attack them from all around their camps)."

Grading

Shaikh Abdullah al Bahrani (Al Awalim, page 159): Sahih
Shaikh Hurr al Amili (Khatima Wasail, Page 154): Sahih

Translator's note: As can be seen, temporarily the Imam and his companions were able to obtain enough water to not just drink and satiate themselves, but also to do wudu, ghusl and wash their clothes. While it is wrong to exaggerate about the events of karbala (such as saying that Imam Hussain and his companions were completely without water for many days on end in Karbala, as it is not humanly possible to survive in a hot desert without water for more than a few days at the very best), on the other hand it is also completely wrong to display a knee jerk reaction, and undermine the extreme hardships and miseries endured by the Imam and his companions in Karbala.

As for the issue of water (or the lack of it), while it is fully established that Imam Hussain's companions had managed to temporarily obtain water (this view has also been supported by modern scholars such as Ayatullah Muhammad Hussain Dhakkoo al Najafi and Ayatullah Ali Naqi Naqvi Naqqan), however, it is also established that the obtained water was still not enough for them (after all, unlike camels, humans do not have humps in which they can store water) and later on they again felt pangs of thirst, and tried to request the enemy force for water. However, their request was completely discarded, and they were told that they would not be allowed water just as Uthman and his family had been denied water during the siege on his house (even though Imam Hussain was in no way responsible for what befell Uthman, rather, it was his own crimes which led to his doom). Perhaps, it is for this reason that there are many ahadith recommending us to remember Imam Hussain and his companions and to send la'nah on his murderers when we drink water.

All in all, as far as the miseries of Karbala are concerned which befell Imam Hussain and his companions, it is impossible to encompass them in a post. Just to give a brief idea about Imam Hussain's sufferings, this hadith maybe helpful:

 الامالي للصدوق ص 228ح240 / 1 :
حدثنا الشيخ الجليل أبو جعفر محمد بن علي بن الحسين بن موسى ابن بابويه القمي ( رضي الله عنه ) ، قال : حدثنا أبي ( رحمه الله ) ، قال : حدثنا سعد بن عبد الله ، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى ، عن أبي عبد الله محمد بن خالد البرقي ، عن داود بن أبي يزيد ، عن أبي الجارود وابن بكير وبريد بن معاوية العجلي ، عن أبي جعفر الباقر ( عليه السلام ) ، قال : أصيب الحسين بن علي ( عليهما السلام ) ووجد به ثلاثمائة وبضعة وعشرون طعنة برمح أو ضمرة بسيف أو رمية بسهم ، فروي أنها كانت كلها في مقدمه لأنه ( عليه السلام ) كان لا يولي.   
[[الرواية صحيحة الاسناد]].

Al Amali by Shaikh Sadooq (ra), Page 228 hadith number 1

Told us Shaikh Sadooq, who said: Told us my father (ra), who said: Told us Sa'd b. Abdullah, from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa, from Abi Abdillah Muhammad b. Khalid al Barqi, from Dawud b. Abi Yazid, from Abi al Jarud and Ibn Bukair and Buraid b. Muawiya al Ajli, from Abi Ja'far al Baqir (as), who said: "When Imam Hussain (as) was wounded in Karbala, more than three hundred and twenty wounds were found on him, resulting from javelin/lance shot, or sword strikes or arrow shots. It has been reported that all the wounds were on the front of his body because he did not turn around/show his back (i.e. to run away from the enemy)." 

Grading: Sahih

Read More... Karbala: Imam Hussain and his companions were completely without water? Read More!

Interpretation of dreams

الكافي - الشيخ الكليني - ج ٨ - الصفحة ٣٣٥

Kafi by Shaikh Kulaini (ra), Volume 8 Page 335

الرؤيا على ما تعبر

The dream results in what it is interpreted to be

محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى، عن معمر بن خلاد قال: سمعت أبا الحسن (عليه السلام) يقول: ربما رأيت الرؤيا فأعبرها والرؤيا على ما تعبر (5

(5) أي تقع مطابقة لما عبرت به. (آت

Muhammad b. Yahya, from Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Isa, from Mu'mar b. Khallad, who said: I heard aba al Hasan (as) say: "Sometimes I see a dream, then interpret it. The dream results in what it is interpreted to be."

Grading

Baqir Majlisi (Miratul uqul, Volume 26 Page 490): Sahih (authentic)

Ayatullah Hadi al Najafi (Mausuah, Volume 4 Page 99): Mu'atbar (Relaible)

عنه، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن ابن فضال، عن الحسن بن جهم قال: سمعت أبا الحسن (عليه السلام) يقول: الرؤيا على ما تعبر، فقلت له: إن بعض أصحابنا روى أن رؤيا الملك كانت أضغاث أحلام، فقال أبو الحسن (عليه السلام): إن امرأة رأت على عهد الرسول (صلى الله عليه وآله) أن جذع بيتها قد انكسر فأتت رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) فقصت عليه الرؤيا فقال لها النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله):
يقدم زوجك ويأتي وهو صالح، وقد كان زوجها غائبا فقدم كما قال النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله) ثم غاب عنها زوجها غيبة أخرى فرأت في المنام كان جذع بيتها قد انكسر فأتت النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله) فقصت عليه الرؤيا فقال لها: يقدم زوجك ويأتي صالحا فقدم على ما قال، ثم غاب زوجها ثالثة فرأت في منامها أن جذع بيتها قد انكسر فلقيت رجلا أعسر فقصت عليه الرؤيا فقال لها الرجل السوء: يموت زوجك، قال فبلغ [ذلك] النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله) فقال: ألا كان عبر لها خيرا

قوله:" كانت أضغاث أحلام"

 (1) أي لم تكن لها حقيقة، و إنما وقعت كذلك لتعبير يوسف عليه السلام، و إنما أورد الراوي تلك الرواية تأييدا لما ذكره عليه السلام

قوله عليه السلام:" رجلا أعسر"

و المراد هنا الشؤم أو من يعمل باليسار فإنه أيضا مشوم و يظهر من روايات المخالفين إن هذا الأعسر كان أبا بكر و لعله عليه السلام لم يصرح باسمه تقية.

قال في النهاية: فيه امرأة أتت النبي صلى الله عليه و آله فقالت رأيت كان جائز بيتي انكسر فقال: يرد الله غائبك فرجع زوجها ثم غاب فرأت مثل ذلك فأتت النبي صلى الله عليه و آله فلم تجده و وجدت أبا بكر فأخبرته، فقال: يموت زوجك، فذكرت ذلك لرسول الله صلى الله عليه و آله فقال هل قصصتها على أحد؟ قالت: نعم، قال: هو كما قيل لك الجائز: الخشبة التي توضع عليها أطراف العوارض في سقف البيت

From him, from Ahmad b. Muhammad, from ibn Fudal, from al Hasan b. Jahm, who said: I heard aba al Hasan (as) say: "The dream results in what it is interpreted to be." So I said to him: " (Exactly!) In fact some of our companions also report that the dream of the king (in Surah al Yusuf) was a "confused" dream (that is, it did not have a reality of its own, but simply resulted in what it was interpreted to be by prophet Yusuf)." Imam (as) said: "Indeed, during the Prophet (pbuh)'s period, a woman whose husband was traveling, saw a dream that the pillar of her home had collapsed. So she approached the Prophet (pbuh) and told him her dream. So the Prophet (pbuh) told her that your husband would return safely, and her husband did return as foretold by the Prophet (pbuh). Then her husband went on a travel again, and the woman had the same dream (pillar of her home collapsing). She told the Prophet(pbuh) and he gave her the same interpretation as previously. Her husband returned safely as foretold by the Prophet (pbuh). Her husband then traveled again the third time, and she had the same dream. Unfortunately she met a jinxed/evil man and told him the dream. The evil man said: "Your husband will die." When the news reached the Prophet (pbuh), he lamented: "Couldn't he have done a good interpretation for her?".

Grading

Baqir Majlisi (Miratul Uqul, Volume 26 Page 490): Muwaththaq (Relaible)

Ayatullah Hadi al Najafi (Mausuah, Volume 4 Page 100): Muwaththaq (Relaible)

[Translator's note: In some narrations of the mukhalifeen, it has been reported that the evil man who gave the woman the bad interpretation was Abu Bakr. Baqir Majlisi has opined that the Imam (as) may not have named him due to taqiyyah.

However, as explained in a previous post, it is not allowed to accept those ahadith of the mukhalifeen which badmouth the enemies of ahlulbait (as) by name when the content is exclusive to the narrations of the mukhalifeen (i.e. when the same ahadith are not found in our shia imami sources). But, this does not in anyway mean that the shia ahadith which criticise/curse those enemies of the ahlulbait (as) which are held in high regard by the mukhalifeen, are to be rejected. The shia imami ahadith with such content are accepted. Only the ahadith of the mukhalifeen badmouthing the enemies of ahlulbait by name, which are not found in our shia sources, are to be rejected.

Therefore, in this case, as our shia sources do not name that evil man, hence it can not be accepted that the man was Abu Bakr. And even if the Imam (as), or the narrator, skipped the name due to taqiyyah, we also must follow suit as taqiyyah is wajib during ghaybah.]

عدة من أصحابنا، عن سهل بن زياد، وعلي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، [جميعا]، عن ابن محبوب، عن عبد الله بن غالب، عن جابر بن يزيد، عن أبي جعفر (عليه السلام) أن رسول الله كان يقول: إن رؤيا المؤمن ترف بين السماء والأرض على رأس صاحبها حتى يعبرها لنفسه أو يعبرها له مثله فإذا عبرت لزمت الأرض فلا تقصوا رؤياكم إلا على من يعقل

A number of our companions, from Sahl b. Ziad, and Ali b. Ibrahim, from his father, both from ibn Mahboob, from Abdullah b. Ghalib, from Jabir b. Yazid, from abi Ja'far (as) that the Prophet (pbuh) would say: "Indeed the dream of the momin drifts between the sky and the Earth, upon the head of its dreamer, until he interprets it himself or one of his like interprets it for him. So when it has been interpreted, it descends to the Earth (i.e. comes into effect), so do not recount your dream to anyone but one who is intelligent."

Grading

Baqir Majlisi (Miratul Uqul, Volume 26 Page 492): Hasan (good), no less than sahih (authentic)

محمد بن يحيى، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن محمد بن خالد، عن القاسم بن عروة، عن أبي بصير، عن أبي عبد الله (عليه السلام) قال: قال رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله): الرؤيا لا تقص إلا على مؤمن خلا من الحسد والبغي

قوله صلى الله عليه و آله:" خلا من الحسد و البغي"

 (4) أي ليعبرها بخير

Muhammad b. Yahya, from Ahmad b. Muhammad, from Muhammad b. Khalid, from al Qasim b. Urwah, from abi Baseer, from abi Abdillah who said: The Prophet (pbuh) said: "Do not recount your dream to anyone but a momin who does not hold jealousy or malice (so that he may interpret it in a good way)."

Grading

Ayatullah Hadi al Najafi (Mausuah, Volume 4 Page 100): No problem with regards to sanad

Read More... Interpretation of dreams Read More!