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.

Imams continue misguiding the nation

The Imam according to the Shia intentionally misleads and misguides his followers as well as the mainstream Muslims (sunnah), in this topic we will quote the narrations quoted by the Shia scholar Yusuf al-Bahrani in the introduction of his book “al-Hadaeq al-Nadirah”, we read: Continue reading

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

Qawwam Ad-Din Al Qummi – alteration of hadith from Musnad

Book: Hadith as-Saqalain.

Author: Qawwam Ad-Din Al Qummi

At the pages 22-23 of this book, this shia author quoted hadith from Musnad of imam Ahmad as you can see in the footnote. He quoted it in this form:

One of the prophets women was asked one day about moral of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi), and she answered: His moral was Quran.

 

In Musnad of Ahmad you can see:

هشام بن عامر قال أتيت عائشة فقلت يا أم المؤمنين أخبرينى بخلق رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم-. قالت كان خلقه القرآن

Hisham ibn Amir: One day I came to Aisha and asked her: O mother of faithful, what was the moral of prophet – sallalahu alaihi wa sallam) – she said: His moral was Quran.

As majority of rafidha this Qawwam ad-Din couldn’t mention Aisha and mention her title, because that would be praise for her, if they would narrate from her and rely upon her in ahadeth, and they wouldn’t be able to attack her as mad dogs, if they would name her mother of faithful. That’s why this rafidi preferred to not even name her.

Shahrudi and elementary arithmetic

:Bismillah:

Nice discover from brother from forum alsrdaab.

Shia shaykh Ali an-Namazi ash-Shahrudi in “Mustadrakat ilmul rijal al-hadith” (1/15) said regarding abul Hasan al-Awwal al-Musa al-Kadhim:

ولد بالأبواء بين مكة والمدينة في سنة ١٢٨ – ١٢٩
Was born in al-Abwa between Mecca and Medina in 128 – 129 H.

In the same book volume 8, p 205, ash-Shahrudi was discussing narrator Yahya ibn Zayd ibn Ali ibn Hussayn.

He said regarding him (من أصحاب الصادق والكاظم ) (from companions of Saduq and al-Kadhim) and few sentences further at next page he said: (مقتله وشهادته في سنة ١٢٥) (his death and shahadah happen in 125)

Imam was born in 128 – 129, and his companion died in 125? Weird isn’t it?

Abu Jafar at-Toose and his Rijal

:Bismillah:

:Salam:

He mentioned Qutaiba ibn Muhammad between those who narrated from as-Sadiq at page 272, and then he mentioned him at page 436 between those who didn’t narrate from aimma.

Fudala ibn Ayub al-Azdi was mentioned amongst people which narrated from al-Kadhim at page 342, and amongst those who narrated from ar-Rida at page 363, and finally at page 436 he was mentioned as one who didn’t narrate from aimma.

Muawiyah ibn Hakim at page 378 was mentioned as the one who narrated from Jawad, at 392 as one who narrated from al-Hadi, and as one who didn’t narrate from aimma at page 449.

al-Qasim ibn Muhammad al-Jawhari as one who narrated from Sadiq at page 273, from al-Kadhim at 342, and the one who didn’t narrate from aimma at page 436.

al-Qasim ibn Urwa was mentioned as one who narrated from Jafar as-Sadiq at page 273, and as one who didn’t narrate from aimma at page 436.

Kulaib ibn Muawiyah was mentioned as ravi from al-Baqir at page 144, from Jafar at page 274, and as one who didn’t narrate from aimma at 436.

Muhammad ibn Isa ibn Ubayd ibn Yaqtin was mentioned as one who narrated from ar-Rida at page 376, narrated from al-Hadi at 391, from al-Askari at 401 and finally as one who didn’t narrate from aimma at 448.

Hafs ibn Ghiyas as one who narrated from al-Baqir at pae 133, from Jafar at 188, from al-Kadhim at 335 and as one who didn’t narrate from aimma at page 425.

Source of research.

How explain this?

al-Murtada: The Shia Fiqh is taken from weak and untrustworthy sources

Al-Murtada says:

” والذي يختص هذا الموضع مما لم نبينه هناك: أنه لا خلاف بين كل من ذهب إلى وجوب العمل بخبر الواحد في الشريعة، أنه لا بد من كون مخبره عدلا، والعدالة عندنا يقتضي أن يكون معتقدا ” للحق في الأصول والفروع، وغير ذاهب إلى مذهب قد دلت الأدلة على بطلانه، وأن يكون غير متظاهر بشئ من المعاصي والقبائح. وهذه الجملة تقتضي تعذر العمل بشئ من الأخبار التي رواها الواقفية على موسى بن جعفر عليهما السلام الذاهبة إلى أنه المهدي عليه السلام، وتكذيب كل من بعده من الأئمة عليهم السلام، وهذا كفر بغير شبهة ورده، كالطاطري وابن سماعة وفلان وفلان، ومن لا يحصى كثرة. فإن معظم الفقه وجمهوره بل جميعه لا يخلو مستنده ممن يذهب مذهب الواقفة، إما أن يكون أصلا في الخبر أو فرعا “، راويا ” عن غيره ومرويا ” عنه. وإلى غلاة، وخطابية، ومخمسة، وأصحاب حلول، كفلان وفلان ومن لا يحصى أيضا ” كثرة، وإلى قمي مشبه مجبر، وأن القميين كلهم من غير استثناء لأحد منهم إلا أبا جعفر بن بابويه – رحمة الله عليه- بالأمس كانوا مشبهة مجبرة، وكتبهم وتصانيفهم تشهد بذلك وتنطق به. فليت شعري أي رواية تخلص وتسلم من أن يكون في أصلها وفرعها واقف أو غال، أو قمي مشبه مجبر، والاختبار بيننا وبينهم التفتيش” .( رسائل الشريف المرتضى 3/310 .

There is no difference amongst those who decided to accept and work with the Khabar al-Wahid (1) in matters of Shari’ah that it must come through a ‘Adl, in our madhab ‘Adl means that the narrator must have a correct belief in Usool and Furu’u, that he must not be from a corrupt madhab according to the proofs, that he must not commit disobedience and evil deeds apparently. This means that we must not work with any of the narrations by the Waqifah of Musa bin Ja’afar (as) who believe that he was a Mahdi and all those after him are liars, this is clear kufr, such as al TaTari and ibn Sama’ah and such people which we cannot count as to their large numbers. The majority of our Fiqh or all of it is related to narrations from the Waqifah, whether they narrated the Hadith from someone or someone narrated it from them. Also others such as the Ghulat (2), the Mukhammisah (3), the people of Hulul (4) and they are too many to count “Or from a Qummi who is a Mushabbih or a Mujabbir (5), and all qummies with no exceptions except for Ibn Babaweih are Moushabihah and Moujabirah, their books all bear wtiness to this clearly. So what narration is safe from having in its chain a Waqifi or a Ghali or a Qummi who is a Mushabbih and a Mujabbir.”

Source: Rasael al-Shareef al-Murtada 3/310.

شيخ الطائفة :” إن كثيراً من مصنفي أصحابنا وأصحاب الاصول ينتحلون المذاهب الفاسدة وان كانت كتبهم معتمدة ” الفهرست ص 2

While sheikh al-Taefa al-Tusi says: “Many of the authors from our companions and those who wrote the Usool have adopted corrupt Madhabs although their books are accepted.”

Source: al-Fihrist pg 2.

Basically if the Shia want to apply the proper science based on the ‘Adalah, then a big part of their Madhab would collapse as they rely on the narrations by people of corrupt madhabs whom they themselves deem as Kouffar.

Footnotes

————————————————————-

1: What is narrated through one narrator.
2: Extremist Shia who commit Ghulu and the Shia definition of Ghulu changes with the passing of time, this sect attributes divine features to ‘Ali, although many Twelvers in our days do this so ponder.
3: Shia sect that believed that Allah came in the form of Muhammad, ‘Ali, Fatima, Hassan, Hussein.
4: Those who believe Allah can appear in a specified physical form.
5: Shia sects such as al-Bayaniyah and al-Sabaiyyah and others, they liken the creator to the creation.

Sayyed Abu al-Hassan curses al-Kulayni because most of al-Kafi is weak

al-Kafi by al-Kulayni is the biggest and most important Shia book of Hadith, it is of the same importance of Sahih al-Bukhari when it comes to the average Muslim. However, the difference between the two books is that al-Bukhari collected the most authentic reports while al-Kulayni filled his Kafi with the weakest narrations making it really hard for the reader to come across any Sahih Hadith in the book.

Continue reading

Is tafsir al-Qummi authentic?

We can see shias from the past till our times relying on commentary of Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi. Each book in Islamic nation has its own chain of transmitters. Including this commentary of Ali ibn Ibrahim.

Let us check page 27 of on-line version of this tafsir, to see who is the very first person who is in the chain of narration.

http://www.al-shia.org/html/ara/books/lib-quran/tafsir-qommi-j1/01.html

As you can see first person in the chain of transmitters is – Abul Fadl al-Abbas ibn Muhammad ibn al-Qasim ibn Hamzah ibn Mosa ibn Jafar.

This person wasn’t mention by shia scholars of rijal, as said ash-Shahrudi in “Mustadrakat ilmul rijal al-hadith” (4/357/#746)