[rahat]

Ok, I don't really understand how you can be so stubborn as to refuse reality. Firstly, I cannot verify that the stuff you have scanned is true in any way - because, lets face the facts: Morons like yourself have openly lied and fabricated things so as to subvert people against the truth. Every day I hear about some magical fatwa from Imam Khomeini's "Volume 3" of the book he wrote "Tahrirolvasyleh". Whenever its proven by fact and reality that only 2 volumes were ever written/published - you can't handle it and burst into emotional histrionics.

But for the sake of argument, I'll entertain you:

Shias do not blindly accept hadith simply because they are written down. There is stuff, that is written, in our own books, that is 100% rejected.

Our books are not considered 100% authentic. Some stuff is authentic. Some stuff is not. But what we do is write every single thing down for the purposes of historical analysis.

If someone narrates such a "hadith", we see that that person is not trustworthy and reject other hadith from him.

What is so controversial about that?

Why are you so insistant on perpetuating your stupidity?

It doesn't bother me at all that Shia records of history contain every single detail so that we can scrutinize them. I'm quite glad that we have things that we can say "No this isnt true" and other stuff we can say "Ok, this is true". Its not like we have 6 books we call "Sahih" and are forced to accept them because someone decided to throw away all other hadith 1000 years ago. We have everything anyone ever said.

It bothers me that the only goal in your life is sectarian propaganda and hatred.

I mean have you seen a psychiatrist? Did you seriously go through all the effort to scan stuff into the internet, post it on a website, but not even bother to learn 1% of how the shia system works?

Please, tell me the truth:

Are you Brittney Spears?

-
rahat

[sixpakistan]

Originally Posted by rahat

Shias do not blindly accept hadith simply because they are written down. There is stuff, that is written, in our own books, that is 100% rejected.

What criteria are used to determine what is rejected and what is not?

[AbuAlAbbas]

Ok, I don't really understand how you can be so stubborn as to refuse reality. Firstly, I cannot verify that the stuff you have scanned is true in any way - because, lets face the facts: Morons like yourself have openly lied and fabricated things so as to subvert people against the truth. Every day I hear about some magical fatwa from Imam Khomeini's "Volume 3" of the book he wrote "Tahrirolvasyleh". Whenever its proven by fact and reality that only 2 volumes were ever written/published - you can't handle it and burst into emotional histrionics.

Prove one thing that I "fabricated"

Shias do not blindly accept hadith simply because they are written down. There is stuff, that is written, in our own books, that is 100% rejected.

this is funny because the shias have no science of hadith, the firsth hadith classification criteria for the shias came only 600 years ago, and your scholars back then have said that the only reason they have made a science of hadith now is to keep off the 3ama (ahlul sunnah), so their is no truth in your hadith classification since 800 yrs of fairytelling has built your manhaj, your major scholars like al-kashani, and al-tusi even say that there is no way in knowing if a hadith is true or not in shiism.

If someone narrates such a "hadith", we see that that person is not trustworthy and reject other hadith from him.

yeah right. Al-khoei classified the hadith that says the quran is 17,000 ayats as daeef, yet he classified everyone in the chain of narrarations as thuqat i.e hadith acceptable from them, how is that possible, taqqiyah maybe?

Shia hadith science is a JOKE. Here is a shia "alama" "al shaykh" muhammad al-musawi (he is considered a alama, and a shayk, remember that) can be seen here YouTube - Azadari alert (Janabe qasim marriage) . In a debate (i'll post the link below) the science of hadith for the shias was exposed, and on top of that this "shaykh" and "alama" could not classify the criterias for a sahih hadeeth for the shias, al musawi could not do it, he didnt know, AND THIS IS A SCHOLAR? the shaykh from ahlul sunnah knew the criteria for a sahih hadeeth for the shias but a shia scholar didnt know it, and after being embarassed he started calling people 'wahabis' similar to some here.

Then he starts running away from the subject, but he was asked to state one hadith that was sahih that he had memorized, and he couldnt state one, NOT ONE, THIS IS YOUR SCHOLARS? then how ignorant are the laymen? Heres the video Video Musawi 11 - نداء, الى, الغا�لين, عن, الشيعة - Dailymotion Share Your Videos

And the book scans were not done by me.

[rahat]

Originally Posted by sixpakistan

What criteria are used to determine what is rejected and what is not?

Salaam,

Here's a partial list, I don't have the full one because I am not actually a hawzah student:

1. Agreement with the Quran

If any hadith is found to be in disagreement with the Quran, that hadith is automatically rejected. There can be no exceptions to this rule. This is our primary rule, and the rest of the list I am not aware of the ranking order. [This is how laymen like myself and other Shias are able to sometimes rountinely dismiss hadith posted on this board as false without being scholars].

2. Chain of narration

(Similar to Sunni narration analysis)

3. Agreement with other hadith

If two hadith disagree with eachother, an attempt is made to reconcile them (i.e. if one is applicable only in siutation A). If they cannot be reconciled, both are rejected.

4. Historical analysis

Each narrator is looked at in context of their birth date and known locations. If a hadith is narrated before a person was born or after he/she died - then obviously the hadith must be rejected.

Also locations and so forth are examined too.

5. Character analysis

Each link in the chain of narrators is examined for trustworthiness in light of their reputation, and the other hadith they have narrated.

6. If a hadith can be authentically traced to any of our 12 Imams, this is considered the "Golden Chain".

This means that we do not view our Imams as anything "peculiar" or "special" but that they are/were the most knowledgeable of hadith of their grandfather. They would not speak about Islam whatsoever unless they had authentically heard it from their father, and his father, and his father, all the way up to Imam Ali and Bibi Fatima who directly heard it from the Prophet himself.

7 and etc: We have ilm e hadith and ilm e rijaal that are also key factors, but I'm not knowledgeable about the intricacies.

-
rahat

ps everything that that dude abuabbas is saying is lies. I'm not even sure where to begin, I mean every single word he spoke was a falsity.

[Kadhim]

Originally Posted by rahat

Are you Brittney Spears?

-
rahat

LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!!!!!!

LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!!!

WAHHHHHH!!!!!!


LOL.
[/quote]

[sixpakistan]

Originally Posted by rahat

Salaam,

Here's a partial list, I don't have the full one because I am not actually a hawzah student:

1. Agreement with the Quran

If any hadith is found to be in disagreement with the Quran, that hadith is automatically rejected. There can be no exceptions to this rule. This is our primary rule, and the rest of the list I am not aware of the ranking order. [This is how laymen like myself and other Shias are able to sometimes rountinely dismiss hadith posted on this board as false without being scholars].

2. Chain of narration

(Similar to Sunni narration analysis)

3. Agreement with other hadith

If two hadith disagree with eachother, an attempt is made to reconcile them (i.e. if one is applicable only in siutation A). If they cannot be reconciled, both are rejected.

4. Historical analysis

Each narrator is looked at in context of their birth date and known locations. If a hadith is narrated before a person was born or after he/she died - then obviously the hadith must be rejected.

Also locations and so forth are examined too.

5. Character analysis

Each link in the chain of narrators is examined for trustworthiness in light of their reputation, and the other hadith they have narrated.

6. If a hadith can be authentically traced to any of our 12 Imams, this is considered the "Golden Chain".

This means that we do not view our Imams as anything "peculiar" or "special" but that they are/were the most knowledgeable of hadith of their grandfather. They would not speak about Islam whatsoever unless they had authentically heard it from their father, and his father, and his father, all the way up to Imam Ali and Bibi Fatima who directly heard it from the Prophet himself.

7 and etc: We have ilm e hadith and ilm e rijaal that are also key factors, but I'm not knowledgeable about the intricacies.

-
rahat

ps everything that that dude abuabbas is saying is lies. I'm not even sure where to begin, I mean every single word he spoke was a falsity.

Thanks for the clarification. If there are hadith that are considered false, why are they still in accepted and authorized books? I know Sunnis have daeef hadith too, but you won't see any in the most widely accepted collections such as Sahih Bukhari.

Do Shia have a collection of hadith they consider "sahih" or anything like the hadith qudsi?

[AbuAlAbbas]

Originally Posted by rahat

ps everything that that dude abuabbas is saying is lies. I'm not even sure where to begin, I mean every single word he spoke was a falsity.

prove me wrong everything I stated was truth backed from evidence from your books, and what you stated is all lies. It is clear that you dont want the haqq, blindly follow the religion of your forefathers like the people of quraish.

It is clear that you guys run away from things once you have been exposed. You make comments, your comments are then rejected with proof, and you call them lies like anyone is going to believe you. You rejecting what I posted and calling them lies is exactly the same as calling one plus one equals two a lie.

I dont post anymore to show you (khadim and rahat) how your religion is a complete fairytale, that is zoroastarianism under the cloth of islam, but i post that way other people see the truth and learn because all you guys do is lie to people about what you think your religion should be and not what your religion actually is.

With that said I think the people have seen the haqq and the batil, once the haqq was shown, the type of haqq that there is no denying they started calling me britney spears, really the only reply they can make because they cant deny the truth.

[rahat]

Originally Posted by sixpakistan

Thanks for the clarification. If there are hadith that are considered false, why are they still in accepted and authorized books? I know Sunnis have daeef hadith too, but you won't see any in the most widely accepted collections such as Sahih Bukhari.

Do Shia have a collection of hadith they consider "sahih" or anything like the hadith qudsi?

Salaam,

This is a very good question. Here is the answer

Our books of hadith are not for the laymen, but for scholars. Our books of hadith are intended to be complete compilations of anything, of any "rank" (sahih, hasan, daeef, etc), that has ever been stated by anyone.

This ties into our system of taqleed. Our Mujtahids are required to be familiar with all true and false hadith, so as to be able to differentiate between the two.

On another level, if a particular narrator has several obviously false narrations, but only one or two trustworthy ones, this shows that this narrator cannot be trusted.

So in this way our books of hadith are simply intended to be "complete compilations" without any grading.

The concept of a sahih book of hadith is something we actively seek to avoid for a couple of reasons:

1. There can be no such thing as a truly sahih book except the Quran. Any other book is subject to man made errors or mistakes, even if the author is 100% virtuous and has the best of intentions.

2. To classify a particular hadith as a particular rank requires (i believe) the rank of ijtehad. As such, a particular grading is only applicable to the individual mujtahid who delivered that ranking.

2a. In the Shia system, taqleed is only permissible of a living mujtahid. If a particular mujtahid passes away, his fatwas and hadith rankings are thus negated. As such, the creation of hundreds of personalized books of sahih hadith would be cumbersome and not serve a practical purpose.

3. One cannot extract fiqh from one or two hadith, just as one cannot extract Islam from one or two ayats of the Quran. They must be taken as a whole, and to create a hadith book would be extremely misleading to our masses, as it would be of no functional use to them, and might be a source of confusion. Since, in the Shia system, there are somewhere around a million hadith - you can easily see issues that might arise.

4. We extract our fiqh from the published rulings of our highest mujtahids. Many of these mujtahids also have webpages for this fiqh. Sometimes they will quote hadith, and they are authentic, but the true value is that any individual is allowed to consult the office of the Mujtahid and ask for a full explanation of why a particular ruling is a particular way, and it will be explained to him or her using our full system of authentification (although this can't exactly be done online for obvious reasons).

5. In our hawzah system, a mujtahid rises in rank because of his published thesis style analysis of hadith. The more intricate and correct an analysis, as judged by the academic society of the hawzah, the higher the rank of the mujtahid. These thesis papers are available at the various hawzahs, and comprise our modern research into hadith.

6. Certain hadith are popularly known to be sahih, such as various hadith e qudsi, hadith e kitha, hadith e thaqlayn, and so forth.

-
rahat

[IbnAbdullah]

Originally Posted by Kadhim

I am disappointed that by this point you would even entertain the notion that it is mainstream belief. He is, or was an isolated individual. Seems from my limited research that he stirred quite a bit of controversy within our community because of some of his poetry. Seems he specialized in mystical poetry in Persian of a very figurative nature, and from time to time approached, and sometimes crossed the lines of even the norms of Persian mystical poetry.

Who knows who's truthful, you or the one you claim is isolated from shias. Maybe he is overwhelmed by the love of Imams and forgot to do taqiyya.

Anyways, let's talk about the 'real issue': Is there any official statement by ayatullas that Aga Khanis etc are Kafirs or this is like the 'wonders of secrets' that transfer from heart to heart, so that the Nasibis can't find out..

[IbnAbdullah]

Originally Posted by rahat

Salaam,

Here's a partial list, I don't have the full one because I am not actually a hawzah student:

1. Agreement with the Quran

woa! have you converted to sunnism? because you talking about agreement with Quran, so where is the name of Imam Ali as the first Imam or Khalifa in Quran? Or it is in the 'tafsir' of Quran, because tafsir is the real Quran?

[AliFazel]

I believe

Those who bear witness that, there is no God but Allah and Muhammad (SAW) is the messenger of Allah, are Muslims --- There are 73 factions of Islam and only one is on the right path and close to Allah.

You cannot say that they (the other 72) are non-Muslim for as long as they sincerely believe in the above statement of faith.

Correct me if I am wrong.

IbnAbdullah why are you so desperate to rubber stamp that Shias do not believe in Quran? And Why do you have this sterio type belief about Shia and Taqyah.
Please ---- The least you could do is Stick to reality - I believe you are here to debate/discuss and not to insinuate

[ChotooMotoo]

Originally Posted by AliFazel

IbnAbdullah why are you so desperate to rubber stamp that Shias do not believe in Quran? And Why do you have this sterio type belief about Shia and Taqyah.
Please ---- The least you could do is Stick to reality - I believe you are here to debate/discuss and not to insinuate

So he can rubber stamp all shias as kaafir, and not feel bad when terrorists kill them durring ashura (or any other time).