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
HE WASN’T SHIA, BUT HE WAS NASIBI KHABITH!
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.
Noticed one interesting point in book “al-Murajiat” (Muasasat Wafa). And want to share with muslims. Indeed about such people like Abdulhussain it was said: He is more misguided than his domestic donkey.
This shia in his book in letter number 16 said:
25. Zayd ibn al-Habab Abul-Hasan al-Kufi al-Tamimi
Ibn Qutaybah has included his biography among those whose biographies he has included among Shi`a dignitaries in his work Al-Ma`arif. Al-Thahbi has mentioned him in his Al-Mizan describing him as “pious trustworthy truthful.” He indicates his being vouched as trustworthy by Ibn Ma`in and Ibn al-Madini. He has quoted Abu Hatim and Ahmed describing him as truthful adding that `Adi has said: “He is one of the reliable Kufi traditionists whose trustworthiness is never doubted.” Muslim has relied on his authority. Refer to the latter’s sahih containing his hadith as narrated by Mu`awiyah ibn Salih al-Dahhak ibn `Uthman Qurrah ibn Khalid Ibrahim ibn Nafi` Yahya ibn Ayyub Saif ibn Sulayman Hasan ibn Waqid `Ikrimah ibn `Ammar `Abdul-`Aziz ibn Abu Salma and `Aflah ibn Sa`id. His hadith is quoted by Ibn Abu Shaybah Muhammad ibn Hatim Hasan al-Hulwani Ahmed ibn al-Munthir Ibn Namir Ibn Karib Muhammad ibn Rafi` Zuhair ibn Harb and Muhammad ibn al-Faraj.
Now keeping all this in mind, let us check bio of other narrator that Abdulhussain give few pages after. He said:
71. Fadil ibn Marzuq al-Aghar al-Ruwasi al-Kufi Abu `Abdul-Rahman
Al-Thahbi mentions him in his Mizan and describes him as a well-known Shi`a quoting Sufyan ibn `Ayinah and Ibn Ma`in testifying to this fact. He quotes Ibn `Adi saying that he hopes there is nothing wrong with the hadith he narrates then he quotes al-Haytham ibn Jamil saying that the latter once mentioned Fadl ibn Marzuq once and described him as “one of the Imams of guidance.”
In his Sahih Muslim relies on the authority of Fadil’s ahadith which deals with prayers as transmitted by Shaqiq ibn `Uqbah and with zakat by `Adi ibn Thabit. His hadith dealing with zakat as recorded by Muslim is transmitted by Yahya ibn Adam and Abu Usamah. In the sunan his hadith is quoted by Waki` Yazid Abu Na`im `Ali ibn al-Ja`d and many peers. Zayd ibn al-Habab has in fact lied regarding what he attributed to him of hadith dealing with the appointment of `Ali (a.s.) as Amr by the Prophet (p.b.u.h.). He died may Allah have mercy on him in 158.
So as real hypocrite and liar, this Abdulhussain praises Zayd ibn al-Habab when it suitable to him, but when he sees something from him which contradicts his rafidi beliefs, he accuse him in lie.
What else can we do expect laugh at this ignorant liar al-Musawi?
Slave of Husayn, Sharafutdin of Rawafidh al-Musawi in his book “Nass wal-Ijtihad” (p 483) said:
وأخرجه مسلم في كتاب الإيمان من صحيحه : وتواتر قوله صلى الله عليه وآله : ” من كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه اللهم وال من والاه وعاد من عاداه ”
And it was narrated by Muslim in his book “al-Eman” from his Sahih: and it is tawatur saying of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi): Whom I am mawla Ali is his Mawla, O Allah befriend to those who would befriend him and enemy to those who would be enemy for him”.
One question. Where is this hadith in Muslim? May be its version of Muslim which was printed in the “Holy” city al-Qum? Because I couldn’t locate this hadith in mentioned place.
At the page 513 of the same book, this slave of the creation, said:
وأما عمرو بن العاص فروى فيه الحديث الذي أخرجه البخاري ومسلم في صحيحيهما مسندا متصلا بعمرو بن العاص . قال : سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله يقول : ” ان آل أبي طالب ليسوا لي بأولياء ، انما وليي الله وصالح المؤمنين ”
As for Amr ibn al-As, he narrated about this hadith which was transmitted by Bukhari and Muslim in their Sahihs with connected chain till Amr ibn al-As, which said: I heard prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa alihi) said: “The family of Abu Talib are not closer to me, indeed my wali is Allah and other believer”.
1) I couldn’t find hadith with mentioned text in Bukhari.
2) In Muslim it came in different form than this slave of Husayn mentioned.
215 حدثني أحمد بن حنبل حدثنا محمد بن جعفر حدثنا شعبة عن إسمعيل بن أبي خالد عن قيس عن عمرو بن العاص قال سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جهارا غير سر يقول ألا إن آل أبي يعني فلانا ليسوا لي بأولياء إنما وليي الله وصالح المؤمنين
‘Amr b. ‘As reported: I heard it from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) quite audibly and not secretly: Behold! the posterity of my fathers, that is, so and so, are not my friends. Verily Allah and the pious believers are my friends.
If it had been from other than Allah, they would have found many inconsistencies in it.
Shia known and famous pop-star Abdulhusayn al-Musawi al-Kadhab in his famous shia book “al-Murajiat” listed 100 names of narrators, which were allegedly shias, which were relied upon by Islamic scholars. We have answered to that letter in details. Among many people, Slave of Husayn mentioned imam Yahya ibn Saeed al-Qattan, as if he was shia. (See #95, in that letter).
However other shia author Adil Kamal Abdullah in the book “Dinu an-Nawaseeb” included imam Yahya ibn Saeed al-Qattan among nawaseeb!
So ya rafidah! Was imam al-Qattan faithful shia or nawaseeb?!!!
Author: Abdulhusayn Al-Musawi.
I personally have a nice and more precise point. When the Almighty applied the plural rather than the singular form as many do then those who hated `Ali as well as all those who were envious of and in competition with Banu Hashim would not be able to tolerate hearing it in the singular form for they would then be unable to hide the truth or water it down. Because of their desperation they might even do something quite harmful to Islam. It is quite possible that it was for this reason that the verse was revealed in the plural form though applied to the singular: in order to avoid the harm resulting from disgracing those folks.
In his famous letter with 100 names of shia narrators, Abdulhussain mentioned many names among them such aimma like Wakia and Sherik ibn Abdullah.
For people who are familiar with shia faith in sifaat, it’s clear that modern rafidah are upon the way of mutazila and jahmiya.
Let us see minhaj of these two imams in the questions of sifaat.
Imam Daraqutni narrated in his book “Kitabus Sifaat”:
#62, p 59 – …. from Ahmad ibn Dawaraqi: “I heard Wakiah (ibn al-Jarrah) said: “Leave these ahadeth (in sifaat) as they came, and don’t say: How is that? And (don’t say): And why is in this way?”
Compare these with modern shia understanding of sifaat! When after such questions they are changing meaning of sifaats as they wish!
#65, p 61 – …Abbad ibn al-Awwam said: “Sherik ibn Abdullah came to us, (and we addressed to him: O Abu Abdullah!) here we have a group of mutazila, they rejecting these ahadeth “Allah descend to the heaven” and “people of heaven would see their lord”. Upon that Sherik narrated us 10 ahadeth in these meaning, and said: “As for us, we took our religion from children of tabein, (and they) from companions of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam)! And from whom those (mutazila) took their religion?”.
Ajurri in his “Shariah” gave us another testimony that Sherik for sure was far from rafidah, may Allah disgrace their faces.
He reports (p 124, n 282, Darul Kutub al-Ilmiyah) that when murjia were mentioned in presense of Sherik, he said: “They are most wicked group. AND IT IS ENOUGH FOR YOU (AS AN EXAMPLE) WICKEDNESS OF RAFIDAH, but this (group) lies upon Allah”.
Hadeeth: “O `Ali! I am superior to you due to my being a Prophet while you are superior to all other people due to seven merits: You are the foremost among them to believe in Allah the most just in fulfilling Allah’s Promise the most obedient to the Commandments of Allah the most equitable the most fair in dealing with the public the most far-sighted in all issues and the one who enjoys the highest status in the sight of Allah.” (Murajiat, letter 48, hadith #40).
This narration is pure fabrication (“Silsila ad-daeefa” #4912; Shawkani “Fawaid al-majmua” #344)
It was narrated by ibn Asakir in “Tareeh madinatul dimashk” (42/58, shamela) and Abu Nuaym in “Hilliyatul awliya” (1/65-66) from Muaz. In the chain Bishr ibn Ibrahim al-Ansare, and he was liar. Uqayli said about him: “Narrated fabrications from al-Awzai”. Ibn Adi said: “In my view he is from those who fabricated stories”. Ibn Hibban said: “Fabricated ahadeth upon truthful” (“Mizanul itidal” 1/311/#1181).
Suyote in “Leal al-masnua” (1/296-297, shamela) quoted hadith with close wording. In the chain group of abbasi caliphs, and their status like narrators is unknown for me. Also in the chain Hassan ibn Ubeydullah al-Abzari (الابزارى). Ibn Jawzi in “al-Mawdoat” (1/344) said he was liar.
Ibn Asakir narrated it via way: Abu Saeed Amr ibn Uthman ibn Rashid as-Sawaq – Abdullah ibn Masood ash-Shame – Yasin ibn Muhammad ibn Ayman from Abu Hazim from ibn Abbas. Yasin ibn Muhammad is abandoned (“Mizanul itidal” 4/358/#9442).
Hadeeth: Ali! You possess seven qualities about which nobody can dispute with you: You are the first to truly believe in Allah the most just in fulfilling Allah’s Promise the most obedient to Allah’s Commandments the most compassionate to the public the most informed of all issues and the highest among them in status.” (Murajiat, letter 48, hadith 40).
This narration is pure fabrication (“Silsila ad-daeefa” #4913).
Abu Nuaym in “Hilliyah” (1/66) narrated it also from Abu Saeed al-Khudri . Ibn Arraq al-Kinani in “Tanziru sharia” (1/352/#32) said: “In it Usamah ibn Muhammad, one from the accused in inventing”. Yahya ibn Maeen said he’s liar. Daraqutni said he’s abandoned (“Mizanul itidal” 3/68/#5631).
Hadeeth: “”The nation will turn treacherous to you; you shall live adhering to my nation and will fight for my sunnah; whoever loves you loves me too and whoever hates you hates me too and this (`Ali’s beard) will be drenched with blood from this (`Ali’s head).” (Murajiat Letter 48, hadith #38).
Hakim narrated it in “Mustadrak” (#4686) without full chain, directly from Hayan Al-Asde from Ali. It’s impossible to check it. I found part of this hadith along with chain in “Kamil fi duafa” (5/194). It was narrated by Ali ibn Nazaar – Ziyad ibn Abu Ziyad al-Asde – Hayan – Ali: “You would live upon my nation, and will fight for my sunnah; whoever loves you loves me too and whoever hates you hates me too”. In the chain Ali ibn Nazaar. Ibn Maeen said that his ahadeth are nothing. Azdi said he’s extremely weak (“Mizanul itidal” 3/159/#5957).
Part of this hadith was narrated in separate form. There are 3 ways of transmission for words “The nation will turn treacherous to you”. And they are weak. (“Silsila ad-daeefa” 4905).
Way of transmission #1.
It was narrated by al-Hakim ibn Jubayr from Ibrahim an-Nakhai from Alqama from Ali. Ibn Jawzi in “Ilal al-mutahaniya” (1/244/#390) said: “Daraqutni said: “Hakim ibn Jubayr stated alone in narrating this from an-Nakhai. Ahmad said: Hakim is daeef al-hadith. As-Saade said he’s liar”.
Way of transmission #2.
It was also narrated by al-Hakim in “Mostadrak” (#4676), Hatib in “Tareeh” (11/216) and Harith in “Musnad” (as it quoted ibn Hajar in “Matalibul aliya”) via chain: Hashim from Ismail ibn Salim from Abu Idris al-Awde from Ali.
Analyses: 1) Hashim, that’s Hashim ibn Basheer, thiqat but known for tadlis (“Mizanul itidal” 4/306/#9250), and this hadith he transmitted in /muanan/ form, without making clear that he heard it himself.
2) Abu Idris al-Awde. Bukhari in “Kunya” (p 5/#26) said that this Abu Idris seen ibn Zubayr, and from him narrated Abu Maslamat. I couldn’t find sufficient information regarding this narrator. But then I checked bio of next narrator after him, Ismail ibn Salim, in “Tahzib al-kamal”. Between his shuyukh, imam Mizzi mentioned Yazid ibn Abdurrahman, Abu Idris al-Awde. Ibn Hajar in “Taqrib” (#7746) said he’s maqbool. In “Tahzib at-tahzib” (11/302) it’s written that ibn Hibban included him in “Thiqat”, and Ijli also authenticated him. However both of them known for lenience in taskhih of unknown narrators. That narrator is most likely unknown. Allah knows best.
Way of transmission #3.
Uqayli in “Duafa al-kabir” (4/8/#1561) narrated it via chain: Kamil Abul Ala from Hubayb ibn Abu Thabit from Thalaba ibn Yazeed al-Hamani from Ali.
Kamil Abul Ala was weak. Ibn Maeen said he’s thiqat, Nasai said: Not strong. Ibn Hibban said: “He was from those people who corrupted chains, and raised mursal reports, and didn’t understand than themselves” (“Mizanul itidal” 3/400/#6929).
Hubayb ibn Abu Thabit was upright narrator, but known for tadlis, and he narrated this hadith in /muanan/ form.
Thalaba ibn Yazeed was under question, and he’s not for people who should be rely on (Bukhari “Tareeh al-kabir” 2/174/#2103). He was extreme shia, Nasai said he’s thiqat (“Mizanul itidal” 1/371/#1391).
Bazzar in his “Mosnad” (#869, shamela) narrated it via chain: Ali ibn Qadam – Sherik – Ajlah – Hubayb ibn Abu Tabit – Thalaba ibn Yazeed.
Ali ibn Qadam was extreme shia and weak. Yahya said he’s weak. Ibn Sad said: “Munkar al-hadith” (“Mizanul itidal” 3/150/#5909) .
Sherik ibn Abdullah upright narrator, with extremely bad memory.
Ajlah ibn Abdullah was shia, saduq ishAllah. Abu Hatim said he’s not strong. Nasai said he’s weak (“Mizanul itidal” 1/78/#274).
Abu Nuaym in “Dalail” narrated it via two chains, but both them ending with link: Hubayb ibn Abu Thabit from Thalaba.
Hadeeth: “”The foremost in testifying (to the Prophets’ truth) are three: Habib al-Najjar the believer implied in Surat Yasin who said: `O my people! Follow the Messengers (of God);’ Izekiel [whose name means “Strength of God” – tr.] the believer from the family of Pharaoh who said: `Do you intend to kill a man just for saying that his Lord is Allah? ‘ and `Ali ibn Abu Talib who is superior to all of them.” (Murajiat Letter 48, hadith #36).
This hadith is invented. (“Silsila ad-daeefa” 355; “Minhaj as-sunna” 5/26).
It was narrated by al-Qatyi in additions to “Fadhail as-sahaba” (#1072), by Abu Nuaym in “Maarefatus sahaba”, ibn Asakir in “Tareeh madinatul dimashk” (42/313). In the chain Amr ibn Jamia al-Basre. I couldn’t find man with such nisba, most likely talk is about Abu Uthman Amr ibn Jamia al-Koofe. He was accused in lie by Ibn Maeen and ibn Adi. Bukhari said: “Munkar al-hadith”. Daraqutni said: “Abandoned” (“Mizanul itidal” 3/251/#6345).
Hadeeth: The foremost (among believers) are three: Joshua son of Nun [of the tribe of Ephraim – tr.] who was the foremost to believe in Moses the believer implied in Surat Yasin [Chapter 36 of the Holy Qur’an] who was the foremost to believe in Jesus and `Ali ibn Abu Talib who was the foremost in believing in Muhammad (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam). (Murajiat Letter 48, hadith #36).
This narration is extremely weak. (“Silsila ad-daeefa” 358). It was narrated by Tabarani from ibn Abbas, al-Heythami said in “Majmau zawaid” (#14598): “In it (it’s mean chain) Hussaid ibn Hasan al-Ashqar, he was authenticated by ibn Hibban, and weakened by majority. Other narrators people, whose ahadeth are hasan or saheeh”. Badrutdin al-Ayni in “Umdatul Qari” (16/27) said: “In the chain Hussain ibn Hasan al-Ashqar, and he’s weak”. Ibn Kathir in his commentary (6/574, shamela) said: “And this hadith is munkar, it’s not known from any way other than from Hussain al-Ashqar, and he’s shia, abandoned, and Allah knows best”. Suyote in “Durr al-mansur” (7/52) quoted this hadith from Tabarani and ibn Mardaweyh, and noticed its weakness. It was also weakened by hafidh Zaynutdin al-Iraqi.
From myself I have to notice that in the chain of Tabarani (al-Kabir, vol 11, #11152, shamela), next to al-Ashqar, we can see Hussain ibn Abu Sarra al-Asqalani. He was accused in lie by his own brother, and Abu Aruba al-Harrani. Abu Dawud said he’s weak (“Mizanul itidal” 1/536/#2003).