Ibn Tawoos al-Helli the theif

al-Salamu `Aleykum,

It appears that the Shia scholar ibn Tawoos al-Helli (died 664.AH) who was described by Sheikh al-Islam ibn Tayymiyah (rah) as: “From the narrators of lies”, stole the book “I`lam al-Wara” written by the Shia scholar al-Tabrasi (died 548.AH), then he changed the title to “Rabi` al-Shia”. Continue reading

Bahrani on commentary from Saduq

Yusuf al-Bahrani in Hadaiq an-Nadera said about shia shaykh Saduq:

While he was discussing report he said:

والظاهر أن هذا التفسير من كلام الصدوق ، الذي يدخله غالبا في الأخبار

Translation:

And apparently this commentary from the words of Saduq, WHICH HE OFTEN INSERTS IN THE REPORTS.

Saduq was one of the main figures in shia religion, and he is one of their greatest hadith scholars. So as you see Yusuf Bahrani testifies that this great shia muhadith OFTEN inserted in the reports his own comments.

Originally posted: http://www.dd-sunnah.net/forum/showthread.php?t=147327

Yasir al-Habis answers to Abdulhusayn al-Musawi

Shaykh of rafida Abdulhusayn al-Musawi filled his book “al-Murajiat” with all kinds of outrageous lies and distortions. In his famous letter, which we have discussed in the details, he ascribed a lot of known people to the shia sect. Amongst them was Sherik an-Nakhai

Let us quote polular shia dog Yasir al-Habib answer to the claim of Abdulhusayn that Sherik was shia.

At his official site, al-Habib said:

لم يكن شيعيا بل كان ناصبيا خبيثا

Translation:

HE WASN’T SHIA, BUT HE WAS NASIBI KHABITH!

Yasir al-Habis answers to Abdulhusayn al-Musawi

Shaykh of rafida Abdulhusayn al-Musawi filled his book “al-Murajiat” with all kinds of outrageous lies and distortions. In his famous letter, which we have discussed in the details, he ascribed a lot of known people to the shia sect. Amongst them was Hakim Naysaburi (rahimahullah).

Let us quote polular shia dog Yasir al-Habib answer to the claim of Abdulhusayn that Hakim was shia.

At his official site, al-Habib said:

إن الحاكم – وهو أبو عبد الله محمد بن عبد الله بن محمد الحافظ النيسابوري – من أعلام مذهبهم وكبار حفّاظهم ومحدّثيهم، ولا علاقة له بالتشيع لا من قريب ولا من بعيد!

Hakim – he is Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Hafidh an-Naysaburi – from their scholars of their (sunnis) mazhab, from their greatest huffaz and their hadith masters, THERE IS NO TIES BETWEEN HIM AND TASHAYU NOT FROM THE CLOSE NOR FROM THE FAR AWAY.

Book of Fatima

Shaykh Saduq narrated in his “Ilal ush Sharae” (p 205):

COVER PAGE

Translation:

From Fudayl ibn Sakarat: I entered to Abu Abdullah (alaihi salam), and Imam asked: O Fudayl? Do you know where I was looking before? I said: No. He said: I was looking to the book of Fatima (alaihi salam), and there is no Sultan which would rule, except he mentioned (there) by his name and name of his father. And there is nothing there for children of Hasan.

Comment:

Just imagine what kind of book that should be to contain names of all rulers which would rule in this world!

Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Al-Hasan bin Al-Waleed

For those that aren’t aware, many if not most of Al-Tusi’s chains to books and narrations include a narrator called Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Al-Hasan bin Al-Waleed. This narrator, is unknown, but to how often he is quoted, Shia fiqh and books in general would be rendered useless without proper tawtheeq given for him.

Due to this, several late scholar attempted to make tawtheeq for him by giving reasons like that he was considered trustworthy by late scholars, or that Al-Tusi and Al-Mufeed relied on him heavily, which makes him reliable.

Ironically, shia shaykh Al-Mohseni says the following in response to their claims:

“I say: Those that have found our book will know that these reasons that are given do not equate trustworthiness. However, the heart does not allow us to reject his narrations. So, we must accept his narrations out of caution.”

(Buhooth fi Ilm Al-Rijal, p. 339)

How can this be a form of caution?! Shouldn’t one be cautious and REJECT this man instead due to the lack of tawtheeq?

al-Khoei considered him majhool though.

لاشتماله على أحمد بن محمد بن الحسن بن الوليد وهو ممن لم يوثق في الرجال 

إلاّ أنّ طرق الشيخ كلّها ضعيفة،فإنّ الطريق الاوّل فيه: أحمد بن محمد بن الحسن ولم يرد فيه توثيق

Muhammad al-Qatifi on authenticy of “Uyun al-Akbar ar-Rida”

This is another post from series of revealing the truth behind shia slogan “we don’t have completely saheeh books”.

Shia shaykh Muhammad al-Ubaydan al-Qatifi said:

أقول:-قد رواها الصدوق في كتاب عيون أخبار الرضا (ع) ويـبدو أنه لم يذكر في هذا الكتاب إلا خصوص ما يراه صحيحاً ويستفاد ذلك من خلال التعبير بكلمة عيون.

http://www.alobaidan.org/index.php?act=artc&id=525

I say: Saduq narrated it in book “Uyun Akhbar ar-Rida” (a), it seems he didn’t  mentioned in this book nothing but especially what he seen authentic, it could be understand from his using the word  (Uyun)

Ibn Qawlaveyh and authentication of his work “Kamil az-ziyarat”

We have already cited some examples from this shia book regarding visitation of shrines at our blog.

In the introduction to his book (p4), author ibn Qawlaveyh al-Qummi said:

وقد علمنا أنّا لا نحيط بجميع ما روي عنهم في هذا المعنى ولا في غيره ، لكن ما وقع لنا من جهة الثّقات من أصحابنا ـ رحمهم الله [برحمته] ـ ولا أخرجت فيه حديثاً روي عن الشُّذاذ من الرِّجال

We realize we cannot cover all that which has been transmitted from them (imams) on this subject [the salutations at the shrines], nor on any other issue, except that which has been related to us by reliable [transmitters] from our companions – may Allah forgive them by His Rahmat. I have not cited a tradition in it [the book] which has been transmitted by reporters who are rarely mentioned (shudhdhadh).

Thus, all of the 388 transmitters who appear in Ibn Qawlawayh’s work are authenticated by this inference.

Saduq questioned again!

Praise to Allah in our previous posts we show to our dear readers complete unreliability of know shia scholar ibn Babaweyh al-Qummi shaykh Saduq in the light of the words of shia shaykhs (1, 2).

Now we would like to present to you another proof, how this Saduq altered report, by adding to it words, when he need it.  Continue reading

Nematullat Jazairi and alteration of hadith from Abu Dawud

I don’t think that there is a great need into introduction of shia muhadith Nematullat al-Jazairi.  Browse our site and you would find a lot of examples of his perverted faith.

However here we have another proof for his “honesty”.

Continue reading

Clear distortion of text from ayatollat Jafar as-Subhani

SubhanAllah! SubhanAllah! SubhanAllah!

Every time when I think that I have seen all kind of tricks and distortions and lies from rafidah, I am finding new example which makes me fall into a stupor!

Imam at-Tirmizi in his “Sunnan” narrated report from ibn Umar which was cited by ayatollat Jafar as-Subhani in his book “Mutatul Haj ala Dawil Kitab wa Sunnah”.  Here scan pics:

Continue reading

The Tahreef (corruption) of the books of Aqa Burzugh el-Tehrani

Bismillah,

“Ma’a Mawsou’at Rijal al-Shia” is a book written by al-‘Allamah al-Sayyed ‘Abdullah Sharaf al-Deen al-Musawi which discusses the encyclopaedias of Shia Rijal, here the author talks about the books of the famous Shia scholar Aqa Burzugh el-Tehrani, mainly “al-Thari’ah fi Tasaneef al-Shia” and “Tabaqat A’alam al-Shia” both books were written by al-Tehrani to gather all the works of the Shia scholars throughout the ages and the Tabaqat of the famous Shias in history.

Continue reading

هل كان الحاكم شيعياً ؟؟

الحمد لله وحده..

فهذا بحث حسن ربما غفل عنه الناس،وقد أودعه الشيخ عبد الرحمن بن حسن قائد حاشية تحقيقه النفيس جداً للمنتخب من كتاب المنثورات لابن طاهر المقدسي = فأحببتُ إفراده هنا؛لينتبه له أناس،وينتفع به آخرون..

Continue reading