Majlisi and his mendacious claim


In his book “Biharul anwar” (9/29), Muhammad al-Majlisi said:

قد أجمعت الشيعة على إسلامه وإنه قد آمن بالنبي صلى الله عليه وآله في أول الأمر ولم يعبد صنما قد بل كان من أوصياء إبراهيم عليه السلام واشتهر إسلامه من مذهب الشيعة حتى أن المخالفين كلهم نسبوا ذلك إليهم و تواترت الأخبار من طرق الخاصة والعامة في ذلك ، وصنف كثير من علمائنا ومحدثينا كتابا مفردا في ذلك كما لا يخفى على من تتبع كتب الرجال.

And shias agreed upon his (Abu Talib’s) Islam, and he testified messenger of Allah (sallalahu alaihi wa ali) in the very first time, and he didn’t worship to Idols, contrary to that he was from heirs of Ibrahim (alaihi salam), and his Islam is well known in school of shias (till such level) that even all opponents ascribed that (belief) to them. And narrations from the way of khass (shias) and amma` (sunnis) are mutawatir in that. And many our scholars and muhadithin wrote a books dedicated to that (his Islam), as it’s not concealed from those who study books on rijal.

In this short quote from one of the top shia scholars, we can see examples of obvious lies.

1) He said that Abu Talib never worship to idols.

Shia author Jafar al-Husayn in his “Biography of imam Ali ibn Abu Talib” said:

Abū-Talib’s real name was the same as that of his ancestor, `Abd-Manaf.

(see chapter “Abu Talib ibn Abdal-Mutalib” p 64)

Other shia sheikh Jamaladdin ibn Yusuf, better known like allama al-Hilli, in his book “Kashf al yaqin”  said:

Imam `Ali’s dignified father was Abu-Talib, `Abd-Manaf ibn `Abd al-Muttalib Known as Shaybat al-Hamd, literally meaning a model of thanksgiving or the thanksgiving old man.

(see chapter “Ali’s genealogy”  p 194)

So real name of Abu Talib was Abd-Manaf. And that’s mean slave of Manaf. Let me now enlighten readers what does it mean Manaf, and what was Manaf?

Manaf (Arabic: مناف‎) was a pre-Islamic deity in Mecca when the residents were still polytheists.

So i have several questions to shias.

1) You claim that Abu Talib and his father And al-Muttalib were upon monotheism. Why someone who was firmly believer in one and only God-Allah, named his son “Slave of (idol) Manaf”?

2) Why Abu Talib if he was firm believer in one and only Allah, and was far away from idolatry, didn’t change his name from slave of idol manaf to something more suitable for real moslem?

I heard someone from shias saying that: How could he change his name, if he would, he couldn’t protect prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) from Meccan mushriks. For the sake of argument, i could accept this answer.

But, by such answer shias could explain why he didn’t change his name during the time of prophecy. But what about time, before prophecy?

Shia author Mufti Jafar Husain in the same book, same chapter said:

He (Abu Talib) was thirty-five years older than the Prophet (a.s).

So 35 years. And we could add to them 40 years, because prophecy came to Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) when he was 40. So in sum Abu Talib lived 75 years before prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) got prophecy, and Abu Talib started to defend him against Meccan mushriks. Why he didn’t change his pagan name during this 75 years?

The answer could be only and only one. He didn’t change it, because he himself was on the religion of those Meccan mushriks.

2) Majlisi said that narrations regarding emaan of Abu Talib are mutawatir from both shia and sunni books. We personally don’t care about shia books, but his claim regarding our sources, is another example of lie.