Akhbari-Usuli Dispute

The teaching of Islam is based on the Holy Quran (God's words reveled to the Prophet) and the Sunnah (words and actions) of the Prophet Muhammad (may peace and the blessings be upon him and his family) found in hadiths/ahadith.

The Holy Quran (Islam’s holy book) is still in the same language (Arabic) as was originally reveled to Prophet Muhammad (saw) 1432 years ago. The text has never been changed except some minor variation in reading. The collection of hadiths varied and has gone through a number of stages/people (narrators).

Then, Gleave asked a series of thought-provoking questions, i.e.,

1. Should the words of companions or the scholars that came later be held in the same position/respect as the Holy Prophet?
2. Which interpretations (hadiths) are legitimate and which need to be rejected?

On the spread of Akhbari thought, the author stated
"The Akhbaris flourished between the Seventeenth and Nineteenth Centuries (CE) amongst Twelver Shii scholars of Iran, Iraq, Eastern Arabia and India. Some Akhbaris views on the above questions were innovative and had little or no precedent in either Twelver Shiaism or Muslim thought more generally. Many of their opinions, however, followed well-worn lines of argument".[1]

According to Gleave, Shia theological/legal works are influenced by hadiths of the Prophet (akhbar), Mu’tazili inspired doctrine (that are based heavily on rationality or reasoned speculation) or in between two views.

Reference
[1] Scripturalist Islam: The History and Doctrines of the Akhbārī Shiʿī School By Robert Gleave

Tracing the origin or the beginning of Akhbarism

Akhbaris were referred by a name, only in the time of Muhammad Amin al-Astarabadi and after him.

Gleave said “The Akhbaris themselves, of course, wished to trace their history back to the earliest Shii scholars in order to claim an historical pedigree.”

The problem is that the earliest scholars

1. were never referred to as Akhbaris
2. They never claimed they were Akhbaris
3. And neither did the later Akhbari scholars shared all the juristic methodology with earlier scholars

The Akhbari movement inspired by Mullah al-Astarabadi was either concerned with reforming or rejecting Allamah Hilli’s Usul al-Fiqh.

Gleave stated that the Akhbari movement is rarely mentioned in either Safavid or Qajar historical sources.

• Safavid court histories, are largely silent on the dispute between the Akhbaris, and their opponents, the Usulis (or mujtahids, who sought to maintain al- Allåma’s juristic system).
• Scholars (identified as Akhbaris) pleading their allegiance to the Akhbari School of jurisprudence is rare in these historical sources.

The founder of Akhbarism, al-Astrabadi rejected ijtihåd and the epistemological ilm/zann distinction implied by it. In its place, he proposed a legal methodology which attempted to ensure that legal rulings could be derived with certainty from the sources.

Al-Astrabadi (in his book al-Fawa'id al-Madaniyya) proposes

• Tradition/akhbar of the Imams are historically accurate
• Traditions are sufficient as guidance for a complete adherence to the law of God

Other possible sources of knowledge (for laws), i.e., reason, philosophy, experience, inspiration are rejected.

Opposition to the Shia Legal Theory

Gleave stated that the work by Allamah Hilli (d. 1325)

• Made mujtahid’s opinions more authoritative
• Inspired many new textbooks on legal theory (e.g Ma’alim al-Deen)
• Used to train Shii scholars
• Subjected to extensive commentaries

The earliest opposition to Allamah Hilli legal theory was not very significant. The most significant Akhbari’s resistant/response to Shia Usul al-Fiqh was done by Mullah Muhammad Amin al-Astarabadi (d.1627, Iranian theologian and founder/proponent of Shia Akhbarism).

A few doubts on the origin/beginning of Akhbarism was presented, i.e.,

• No standard usage of the term Akhbari or a set of doctrines attributed to Akhbarism before Mullah al-Astarabadi
• Classical Shia or even the Sunni literature do not mention a definable group called the Akhbariya

And then Gleave said
No scholars are ever named as being members of the early Akhbariyya until much later (and such references are clearly back projections), and no distinctive doctrines are explicitly assigned to the group. In short, I argue that the Akhbari are best seen as starting with Muhammad Amin al-Astarabadi.

Intro to the Akhbari book

Gleave stated that this book was the result of ten years of research, off and on. His other book is Inevitable doubt: two theories of Shīʻī jurisprudence. This book specifically focus on the ideas of Akhbarism.

The author hypothesize that the reason Shia were late in developing Usul al-Fiqh was because when an Imam was present, then there was no need for usul al-fiqh or book on jurisprudence.

The Zaydi allowed individual jurists to propose their own legal opinions using theoretical principle and not personal whims. Their writing began in the eleventh century. The earliest Zaydi’s work of Usul al-Fiqh is al-Mujzi fi usul al-Fiqh by Abu Talib Yahya b. al-Husayn al-Natiq bi’l-Haqq (d 1033).

The Ismaili Shia tradition (under the Fatimids and later) was not collected or written until the time of Qadi al-Numan, Da'a'im al-Islam. I've reviewed a paper about sources used for compiling his book (part 1, part 2 and part 3).

Then the author said "The Imami Shia developed an interest in legal theory following the disappearance of their Twelfth Imam in the year 874 AD. ... Within a hundred years of the Twelfth Imam’s greater occultation” (941) (after it became clear his promised return was not imminent), works of usul al-Fiqh were being composed by Imami (or Twelver) Shii scholars and the basis for a tradition of juristic scholarship was being laid."

The author then quoted some academic work that highlighted influence of Sunni (Shafii) legal theory in the earliest works of Shia Usul al-Fiqh.

Some interesting terminology/facts/info was presented in the introduction, i.e.,

1. Matters known with certainty
2. Matters that are disputed
3. The four famous (Shii) hadith books
4. Akhbar: Test for accuracy
5. Contradictory hadiths and ways to resolve them
6. Imams forbidding qiyas/analogical reasoning
7. Very little opposition to Shia Usul al-Fiqh developed by Allamah Hilli
8. He mistranslated khabar al-wahid. Real meaning.
Please continue reading part 3.

Hijri or Gregorian?

I am no longer going to use Hijri date on my blog (sorry mom!). They are just redundant. Everything will be defaulted to a Gregorian date. Please use the Gregorian Hijri Converter for alternate date format.

However, the Hijri format will be used if the underlying text is relevant to Hijri calendar system.

What is Taqleed and Ejtehad?

Islamic Laws according to Sayyed Sistani

Question: What does Taqlid mean in religious laws?

Answer: Taqlid in religious laws means acting according to the verdict of a Mujtahid. It is necessary for the Mujtahid who is followed, to be male, Shi'ah Ithna Ash'ari, adult, sane, of legitimate birth, living and just ('Adil). A person is said to be just when he performs all those acts which are obligatory upon him, and refrains from all those things which are forbidden to him. And the sign of being just is that one is apparently of a good character, so that if inquiries are made about him from the people of his locality, or from his neighbors, or from those persons with whom he lives, they would confirm his good conduct. And if one knows that the verdicts of the Mujtahids differ with regard to the problems which we face in every day life, it is necessary that the Mujtahid who is followed be A'lam (the most learned), who is more capable of understanding the divine laws than any of the contemporary Mujtahids.

Question: Who is a Mujtahid? What are the specific criteria a Mujtahid should have?

Answer: Mujtahid is a jurist competent enough to deduce precise inferences regarding the commandments from the holy Qur'an and the Sunnah of the holy Prophet by the process of Ijtihad. Ijtihad literally means striving and exerting. Technically as a term of jurisprudence it signifies the application by a jurist of all his faculties to the consideration of the authorities of law with a view to finding out what in all probability is the law. In other words Ijtihad means making deductions in matters of law, in the cases to which no express text is applicable.

Question: What are the ways through which I can identify the most learned of Mujtahids?

Answer: There are three ways of identifying a Mujtahid, and the A'alam:

1. When a person is certain that a particular person is a Mujtahid, or the most learned one. For this, he should be a learned person himself, and should possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or an A'alam;
2. When two persons, who are learned and just and possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or the A'alam, confirm that a person is a Mujtahid or an A'lam, provided that two other learned and just persons do not contradict them. In fact, being a Mujtahid or an A'lam can also be established by a statement of only one trusted and reliable person;
3. When a number of learned persons who possess the capacity to identify a Mujtahid or an A'lam, certify that a particular person is a Mujtahid or an A'lam, provided that one is satisfied by their statement.

What is backbitting?

Islamic-laws according to Sayyed Sistani:

Question: What is the proper definition of 'backbiting'? Please, give some references from the Quran and Hadith also.

Answer: Backbiting means “speaking ill of a believer in their absence with the purpose of disparaging or not, and no matter whether the alleged shortcoming was related to his body, lineage, behaviour, deeds, statements, religion, or life, and other defects which are [usually] concealed from the people. Similarly, it does not matter whether the description was done by words or by gesture.”

Almighty Allãh condemned backbiting in His noble Book and has described it such that mind and body feel abhorrence towards it. He said, “And some of you should not backbite the others: would anyone of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? No, you abhor it.” (Al-Quran 49:12)

The Prophet (s.a.w.) said, “Be careful of backbiting because backbiting is worse than adultery, in that a person who commits adultery can repent and ask forgiveness from God, and Allãh can forgive him whereas Allãh will not forgive the backbiter until the person who was at the receiving end forgives him.”

It is not appropriate for a believer to listen to backbiting against his believing brother. Indeed, it appears from the sayings of the Prophet and the Imams (may Allãh bless them all) that it is obligatory upon one who hears backbiting to support the person who is being disparaged; and that if he does not repel the backbiting [against his believing brother], Allãh will abandon him in this world as well as in the hereafter, and he shall be held accountable just like the one who did the backbiting.

Notes about philosophy/Islamic philosophy

The following opinions about philosophy was expressed by SC user Jibrael in topic; Ayatullah Khorasani Condemns philosophy. I’ve found his views refreshingly honest and insightful. Hence, I am making a note. It is being reproduced here with his permission.

(Note: I've restructured the order of posts for clarity. No editing was done on the content. Some editing was done to make the writing shorter. Please refer to the original topic for a more detailed information. Also, I have added my own titles on his write-up. You can choose to ignore them if you think they are annoying or irrelevant.)

Everything is relative to a person
The condemnation of philosophy is OK. The propagation of philosophy is OK. Learn and let learn. Just make sure that Qur'an and Tradition are kept in first place. Treat everything else as an interesting game. In other words, Truth with a capital T is Ahlulbayt. Everything else are relative, dependent on the perspective of the person, and strictly unimportant.

Different types of speculation
Philosophy, speculating rationally/intuitively about the world is condemned by some. But these same people do not condemn speculation based on experiments which leads to science and technology. So there is a contradiction in the anti-philosophy groups.

Many ways to understand the world
Those who support Philosophy sometimes believe Philosophy to the Mother of All Sciences. But it is really just one way of understanding the world. Irfan is another. Philosophy reasons, whereas Irfan understands. Which is higher in its truth? (Zareen: The answer will differ from one person to another)

Take a middle way. Take what is beneficial and leave what is not. And if we don't know, we can abandon it altogether. Just, when it comes to our solid beliefs, let's keep to the Ahlulbayt

Philosophy: Hate or Love?

1. To those who adore philosophy: Why is it so bad to criticize the philosophical method?
2. To those who hate philosophy: Why is it so bad to work with the philosophical method?
3. Yet why is it so good to work with the scientific method?

I think criticism can only make philosophy sharper, and philosopher's less lazy about thinking and more aware of their limits and strengths. However, I don't advocating destroying philosophy, just as I don't advocate destroying science - it has its fruits.

Science vs. Philosophy
I think philosophy is like science.

1. Do I believe that science has all the right answers? No.
2. Do I create dogmas out of scientific findings - which may be disproven in later centuries? No.
3. Do I still continue conducting scientific experiments? Yes. Because it helps as a tool of understanding and exploiting (in a good way) the world.

Whereas science is empirical - based on what we observe and measure - philosophy is rational - based on what we think, conceptualize and understand.

1. Do I believe philosophy has all the right answers? No.
2. Do I create dogmas out of philosophical findings - which may be disproven by a better mind? No.
3. Do I still continue philosophising about issues - what is existence? essence? free will? life? knowledge? justice? society? power? morality? etc.

Yes I do. Because it helps as a tool of making logical sense of the world, and creating a reasonable basis for human interaction, since we all value rationality.

Now, the Quran and Ahlulbayt:

1. Do I believe that they have all the right answers? Yes.
2. Do I take them as dogma? Yes.
3. Do I keep myself to them? Yes, insha'Allah.

So, in my perspective, philosophy is as useful and unimportant as science and technology.

Ayatullah Khurasani's views
On Ayatollah Khorasani's view - he seems to be saying a similar thing - that these are branches of Human Inquiry, but tainted with Human Fallibility... Truth is elsewhere; he implies he knows Asfaar from start to finish, and all of Rumi, but he views them as paltries next to the treasures of Ahlulbayt. Can anyone who believes in the Ahlulbayt deny that? Probably not.

Very difficult to define philosophy/philosophers?
A philosopher is someone who draws conclusions from thinking about things. End of story. However, originally, the main philosophies were heavily influenced by Greek philosophers. These philosophies were a mix of rational thought and speculation.

Learning philosophy: Past, current and the future
From my understanding:
Today, philosophers in the Hawzah have moved on - but only just a little. While they talk of Kant and Russell on the one hand, they are still steeped in traditional essence/existence dichotomies and the rule of how from one comes one, etc.

Thus, Islamic philosophers are still stuck in the limits drawn by the Greeks - though Avicenna made some improvement, Suhrawardi transcended the Greeks, backing his thoughts with Qur'anic verses, and Mirdamad and Mulla Sadra used concepts found in the Tradition of Ahlulbayt.

Today, philosophy is the legacy of such a large mixture of tendencies and prejudices, handed down over a series of heated debates from one school to another.

In my opinion, Ayatollah Vahid Khorasani is condemning this philosophy - rather than the philosophy otherwise known as rational reflection.

However, it is something to note that he himself studied these philosophers, and claims to be deeply acquainted with them. In my eyes, this means that he sought the ideas of great thinkers, absorbed what is beneficial, and kept to the Ahlulbayt as the spring of all Absolute Infallible Knowledge, casting everything else away as human dabblings of the mind.

How should we think and discuss philosophy?
I address this post to all those who have posted here. Please read, and let's construct a more reasonable dialogue between the different sides of the argument.

Aren't we having 2 discussions in this thread rather than 1?

1. A. Reasoning and reflection of any kind, rational, empirical, intuitive, etc. on the one hand -- called "Philosophy" in the West and sometimes in the Muslim World
2. B. Philosophy as a framework in which we reflect about the world - a framework based on concepts which have their origins in Greek, Islamic and Neoplatonic thought. -- this is the framework in which Islamic Philosophy has operated so far.

It is clear that A encompasses all thought, including B.

On the other hand, B is a particular method of inquiry, using concepts which have been established throughout history, which have their origins in Greek and Neoplatonic thought.

A may lead to B or may not. It may lead to a new type of Islamic Philosophy, which is derived through reflecting on the Tradition of Ahlulbayt.

If you look at the lecture-videos by Ayatollah Vahid Khorasani (also posted here recently on SC) you will see that the Sheykh uses reflection to delve into the tradtions. What he says is mystical and rational. Look at how he describes Ghadeer in one of the videos. So, reflection and deriving conclusions is not the problem. This should be established by now.

It is also not a problem when the mind derives concepts which have also been derived by Greeks. If the Greek mind derives the concept of First Cause (God), we shouldn't reject it just because it is Greek, otherwise we will be rejecting God!

So What is the problem?

To interpret the unknown by Greek - or any fallible human - models and then think they are Certain Truths.

Models are useful - but they are not Truths. The signifier is not the signified.

On the other hand, the Tradition of Ahlulbayt is the Truth. However, even this Truth is still Truth revealed in the form of Human Language and Perspective, so that we can understand.

The Ultimate Absolute Truth is God Himself. This is the Glorious Truth which the Imams always referred to, but were never able to speak it, because...

"Talk about what is beneath the `Arsh (Throne), and do not talk about what is above the `Arsh" - Imam Sadiq(as).

There is a hierarchy in Truth:

1. The world as it appears
2. The logic of this world as it seems to us
3. The logic of this world as it is
4. The "Is" - the actual Being which all things are a manifestation of His Names

It is number 4 which is the Glorious Truth, which gives meaning and being to everything else. We never really comprehend Allah (swt), but we try to understand somethings through the logic of the world as it is, as described by the Ahlulbayt (as).

We also reflect on the world as it appears to us, and devise models, like scientific theories, which help us to benefit from the world. However, they are human mental constructions, not the external real world.

Everything perishes except His Face (Quran xxviii,88).

Need to be a little bit cautious
The pro-philosophy crowd who do know what philosophy is, are not being too straightforward: let's own up - that Peripatetic philosophy is a worldview based on Aristotlean and Neoplatonic concepts, that Illuminationist philosophy is inspired by Persian thought, and Transcendental philosophy is a reconciliation of the different philosophical approaches in a systematic framework, including the use of Qur'anic verses and Ahlulbayt traditions.

Of course, that doesn't mean that a Philosophy derived purely from Ahlulbayt has the same suspicious status as these other schools.

Reference
[1] http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234987730-does-ayatullah-khorasani-condemn-philosophy/

The History and Doctrines of the Akhbārī Shia School

Next week, Insha Allah, I will be reading the book Scripturalist Islam: The History and Doctrines of the Akhbārī Shiʿī School By Robert Gleave (Leiden: Brill, 2007), xxiii, 339 pp. EAN 978–9004157286.

The following is an abstract of the book (written by Madelung)

Twelver Shiʿi jurists since the eleventh/seventeenth century have been divided into two major camps known as the Akhbārīs and the Uṣūlīs. The Akhbārī legal school, which was founded by Muḥammad Amīn al-Astarābādī (d. 1036/1626–27), rose to a position of predominance in the twelfth/eighteenth century, but has since declined to insignificance.

The older Uṣūlī school, against which al-Astarābādī reacted, is commonly considered to have been founded by al-ʿAllāmā al-Ḥillī (d. 726/1325) with his unequivocal endorsement of the practice of ijtihād.

The nature and significance of the Akhbārī legal school has, on the basis of limited source evidence, repeatedly been discussed in Western scholarship in a summary way.

The author of the present book offers a much more comprehensive study based on a decade of broad and thorough research. In particular he investigates the thought and motivation of the founder al-Astarābādī fully and in detail. He then pursues the spread and development of the school through the centuries until the present.

In general Gleave stresses the scholarly sophistication of the Akhbārīs in their legal methodology despite their formal opposition to ijtihād, as against the view that they represented a populist literalist reaction against Uṣūlī elitist rationalism.

Shaykh Saduq Rebuttal

Note: In the last post, we saw a number of objections from Zaydis.

Doubts over which sons of Imam Sadiq (may peace be upon him) succeeded him disappeared when Imam Musa al-Kadhim (may peace be upon him) spoke and invited people to him. The other sons were not really Imam because they were either dead or banished/ irrelevant.

Shaykh Saduq said that these things could be misleading. And not all the Shias of that period knew the names of all the twelve Imams. However, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) did inform the Ummah that there will be twelve Imams after him, and that they are his successors. And the traditions of the twelve Imams contain their names.

The fact is that there were some Shias who were not aware of the tradition or the names of all the twelve Imams.

Now, as for the matter of Zurarah bin Uyun
Zurarah b. Uyun was said to have died before meeting Imam Musa al-Kadhim or his representative. When people persisted in asking him the identity of the 7th Imam, Zurarah gave allegiance to Imam as-Sadiq's successor but refrained from mentioning his name/identity.

By placing the Quran on his chest, he said: “O Lord, I testify for the Imamate of the one, whose Imamate is proved in this Quran.”

But we also know that Zurarah was not ignorant of the identity of the seventh Shia Imam, rather he sent his son, Ubaid, to Imam Musa bin Ja’far (as) to inquire if he (Zurarah) was permitted to reveal what he knew about his Imamate, or that he should keep it confidential through dissimulation/taqqiyya.

Tradition #1
Narrated to us Ahmad bin Ziyad bin Ja’far al-Hamadani from Ali bin Ibrahim bin Hashim, from Muhammad bin Isa bin Ubaid from Ibrahim bin Muhammad al-Hamadani that he said: I asked Imam Ali al-Redha (a.s.):

O son of Allah’s Messenger, tell me whether Zurarah was aware of the Imamate of your venerable father.

The Imam replied: Yes.

I further asked: Then why he sent, Ubaid, his son to inquire who Imam Sadiq, Ja’far bin Muhammad (as) had appointed as his successor?

Imam Ali al-Redha(as) said: Indeed, Zurarah was aware of the Imamate of my venerable father and also knew about the clear textual appointment (Nass) of my honorable grandfather about him. And when his son was late in returning, Zurarah was requested to mention his opinion about my father. Since he did not prefer to proceed in this matter without the leave of my father, he picked up the Quran and said: “O Lord, my Imam from among the sons of Imam Ja’far bin Muhammad is one, whose Imamate is proved in this Quran.”

Also the narration that Zaidiyyah had presented as argument does not say that Zurarah was unaware about the Imamate of Musa bin Ja’far. Rather it is proved therein that he sent his son, Ubaid to inquire about something.

Tradition #2 (This is a weak narration and should not be trusted)
My father narrated to us from Muhammad bin Yahya Attar from Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Yahya bin Imran Ashari from Ahmad bin Hilal from Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Zurarah from his father who said:

When Zurarah sent his son, Ubaid, to Medina to inquire about the report and it was after the demise of Abu Abdillah (Imam Ja’far Sadiq a.s.), his condition became serious he took the Quran and said: “My Imam is only the one, whose Imamate this Quran will prove.”

And this narration does not say that Zurarah was not having recognition of the Imam. Moreover, the narrator of this report is Ahmad bin Hilal and this person is not reliable in the view of our senior scholars.

Tradition #3
Narrated to us my teacher, Muhammad bin Hasan bin Ahmad bin Walid that he said: I heard Saad bin Abdullah say:

These people that it is not lawful to use a traditional report narrated solely by Ahmad bin Hilal.

Tradition #4
And it is narrated that Imam Musa bin Ja’far will seek Zurarah from his Lord.
Narrated to us Muhammad bin Hasan bin Ahmad bin Walid from Muhammad bin Hasan Saffar quoting from Muhammad bin Abi Sahban from Mansur bin al-Abbas from Marook bin Ubaid from Darast Ibne Abi Mansur Wasti from Abul Hasan Imam Musa bin Ja’far.

The narrator says that when Zurarah was mentioned in the presence of Imam (as), the Imam said:

By Allah, on Judgment Day I would seek Zurarah from my Lord, for myself, and He would give him to me. Woe be on you, indeed, Zurarah bin Uyun bore malice to our enemy for the sake of Allah and for His sake had regard for our friends.

Tradition #5
Narrated to us my father and Muhammad bin Hasan that: Narrated to us Ahmad bin Idrees and Muhammad bin Yahya Attar; both said narrating from Muhammad bin Ahmad from Yaqood bin Yazid from Ibne Abi Umair from Abul Abbas Fadl bin Abdul Malik from Abu Abdillah Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) that he said:

“Four persons are very dear to me, whether they are alive or dead: Buraid al-Ajali, Zurarah bin Uyun, Muhammad bin Muslim and Ahwal (Muhammad bin Noman Bajali, alias Momin Taq). These four are my favorite men.”

So it is not possible that Imam Ja’far Sadiq (as) should have made such a statement about Zurarah if he was ignorant of the Imamate of Musa bin Ja’far.

4th objection from Zaydis

I am continuing with Zaydis vs Imammi discourse.

Before looking into the exact objection (from Zaydis), let's recap a few of my last entries.

Why Ismail son of Imam Jaffar as-Sadiq is not his father's successor
Ismail's death reported in our traditions
Why Imam Musa al-Kadhim is the only true successor
The Murjiyyah sect
The haruriyya (Kharajite) sect

The Zaidiyyah in Shaykh Saduq's book made the following statement
If the tradition regarding the number of Imams to be twelve had been correct, people would not have doubted in the successor-ship of Imam Ja’far Sadiq (may peace be upon him).

A number of people believed in the Imamate of Abdullah (son of Imam as-Sadiq) and some adopted the belief in Imamate of Ismail (son of Imam as-Sadiq). When Abdullah was put to test, they found him lacking/did not posses the necessary qualities to be the Imam.

Then the people came out saying: “Now where do we go? To Murjiah or to Hururiya?”


When Musa Ibne Ja’far heard this, he said:
“Neither to Murjiah or Qadariya or Hururiya; come to me.”

The Zaydis tried to invalidate the tradition of twelve Imams by giving a few examples of people being misguided or unclear on the identity of the Imam who succeeded Imam as-Sadiq.

And on top of this, the Zaydis started spreading rumors about the Shia Jurist (Faqih) of this period, Zurarah bin Uyun. They falsely accused Zurarah of dying in the state of being unclear of the successor of the sixth Shia Imam (Jaffar as-Sadiq).

The rebuttal from Shaykh Saduq will be in the next blog post.

Haruriyya

Haruriyya
Haruriyya is one of the early sects (it predates all the Sunni school of thoughts/sects). The Haruriya sect is a branch of the Kharajite ("Rejectors") sect/movement. Kharajite rejects Imam ‘Alī's (may peace be upon him) right to the Caliphate.

Ibn Muljam (may Allah damn him to hell for eternity), the killer of Imam Ali, was a member of this sect.

Sahih International

Sahih International is yet another translation of the Holy Quran. I found it while browsing some websites (many websites are utilizing this translation).

Initially, I was under the impression that it was named Sahih because of heavy reliance on Sunni “Sahih” (authentic) books. Wrong!. It is just a branding or marketing ploy. Putting the word Sahih on the cover doesn’t make the translation more authentic.

I am told that the translation is pretty decent. Though, I found a few badly translated verses.

Murjiyyah

Murjiyyah
Murjiyyah is theological school that was opposed to the Kharijites. Murjite doctrine held that only God has the authority to judge who is a true Muslim and who is not, and that Muslims should consider all other Muslims as part of the community.

They declared that no Muslim would enter the hellfire, no matter what his sins. This contradicts the traditional Sunni belief which states that some Muslims will enter the fire of hell temporarily. Therefore the Murjites are classified as "Ahlul Bid'ah" or "People of Innovation" by traditional Sunni Muslims

Get a life!

Yay! We had our first hater. He left a note yesterday.

He sounds like a wahhabi

• Rafidi
• Muta
• Taqiyya
• Different Quran
• Kufar and Shirk

I think it’s safe to assume that he has left the pure teaching of ahlul bayt and went to the other side. I am creating a new category "Rant". Also filling this as nonsense.

Hey Crispin, do you mind telling me which cult you are into nowadays?

Four sects and the four sons of Imam as-Sadiq

Imam as-Sadiq had four sons, whose followers regarded each of them, as a natural successor to his father. All of them were proved to be false (illegitimate), eventually, except Imam Musa al-Kadhim (may peace be upon him).

Imam Musa al-Kadhim
Imam Musa al-Kadhim was the seventh of the Twelve Imams of Twelver Shi'a Islam. According to the Kitab al-Irshad of Sheikh al-Mufid:

Among the shaykhs of the followers of Abu Abd Allah Ja'far al-Sadiq, peace be on him, his special group (khassa), his inner circle and the trustworthy righteous legal scholars, may God have mercy on them, who report the clear designation of the Imamate by Abu Abd Allah Jafars peace be on him, for his son, Abu al-Hasan Musa, peace be on him, are: al-Mufaddal b. Umar al-Jufi, Mu'adh b. Kathir, Abd al-Rahman b. al-Hajjaj, al-Fayd b. al-Mukhtar, Yaqub al-Sarraj, Sulayman b. Khalid, Safwan al-Jammal... [That designation] is also reported by his two brothers, Ishaq and Ali, sons of Jafar, peace be on him.[12]

Abdullah al-Aftah ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq
Abdullah al-Aftah ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq (d.766 CE / 149 A.H.)[1] was the eldest surviving son of Ja'far al-Sadiq (after al-Sadiq’s death) and the full-brother of Isma'il ibn Jafar.[2] Following Ja'far al-Sadiq’s death, the majority of Ja'far’s followers accepted Abdullah al-Aftah as their new Imam. These followers were known as the Fathites and, according to the Mu'tazili heresiographer Abul-Qasim al-Balkhi al-Ka‘bi (d.319 A.H. / 931 CE), they were the biggest and most important section of the followers of Ja'far al-Sadiq.[5] To support his claims, Abdullah al-Aftah seems to have claimed a 2nd Nass from his father (following Ismā'īl's demise) and his adherents cited a supposed Hadith from Ja'far al-Sadiq to the effect that the Imamate must be transmitted through the eldest son of the Imam. However, when Abdullah al-Aftah died childless[6][7] about 70 days after the death of his father, the bulk of his supporters went over to his brother Musa al-Kadhim

Isma‘il ibn Ja‘far
Isma‘il ibn Ja‘far (Arabic: إسماعيل بن جعفر‎ c. 721 CE/103 AH - 755 CE/138AH) was the eldest son of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq and the full-brother of Abdullah al-Aftah. Following Ja'far's death, the Shia community split between the element that would become the Twelver Shia, and those who believed the imamate passed through to Ismail's son; the Ismaili branch of Shia Islam is accordingly named for Ismail.[1] According to both the Nizari and Mustaali Shia sects, he is the sixth Imam. Traditions about his death.

Muhammad ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq
Muhammad ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq (Al-Dibaj i.e. the handsome),[1] the younger full brother of Musa al-Kadhim,[2] appeared in Mecca in the year 200 A.H. / 815 C.E. claiming that he was the Awaited Mahdi. He believed in a Zaydl Shia type of Imamate[3] and declared himself as the Caliph of the Muslims and took the oath of allegiance from them and was called the Leader of the faithful. He was recognized as the Imam by a small group of followers. His followers became denominated as the Shumaytiyya (Sumaytiyya) after their leader Yahya ibn Abi’l-Shumayt (al-Sumayt).[4] However, his revolt against the Caliph Al-Ma'mun proved unsuccessful in the very same year it started (i.e. 815 C.E.).[5] He ended his revolt by abdicating and publicly confessing his error and was then banished from the Hejaz.[6]

Traditions about Fatima az-Zahra,

The Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him and his pure family)) said, "The most beloved of my family to me is Fatima."Al-Jami^ al-Sagheer, v. 1, #203, p. 37; Al-Sawaiq Al-Muhariqa, p. 191; Yanabi^ Al-Mawadda, v. 2, ch. 59, p. 479; Kenz Al-Omal, v. 13, p. 93.

The Prophet (s) said, "The four greatest women in the Universe are Mary, Asiya, Khadija, and Fatima."Al-Jami^ Al-Sagheer, v. 1, #4112, p. 469; Al-Isaba fi Tamayyuz Al-Sahaba, v. 4, p. 378; Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya, v. 2, p. 60; Dakha'ir Al-Uqubi, p. 44.

The Prophet (s) said, "The head of the women of Paradise is Fatima." Kenz Al-Omal, v. 13, p. 94; Sahih Al-Bukhari, Kitab Al-Fadha'il, Chapter on the Virtues of Fatima; Al-Bidaya wa Al-Nihaya, v. 2, p. 61.

The Prophet (s) said, "The verse of purification was revealed concerning five people: myself, Ali, Hassan, Hussein, and Fatima." Is^af Al-Raghibeen, p. 116; Sahih Muslim, Kitab Fadha'il Al-Sahaba.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 61: Narrated Al-Miswar bin Makhrama: Allah's Apostle said, "Fatima is a part of me, and he who makes her angry, makes me angry."

The Prophet (s) said, "Fatima is part of me, and whoever pleases her, pleases me." Al-Sawaiq Al-Muhariqa, p. 180 & 132; Mustadrak Al-Hakim; Maarifat Ma Yajib Li Aal Al-Bait Al-Nabawi Min Al-Haqq Alaa Men Adahum, p. 73; Yanabi^ Al-Mawadda, v. 2, ch. 59, p. 468.

The Prophet (s) said, "The first one to enter Paradise will be Fatima." Yanabi^ Al-Mawadda, v. 2, p. 322, ch. 56.

The Prophet (s) said, “Fatima is the head of the women of my nation.” Seir Alam Al-Nubala’, v. 2, p. 127; Sahih Muslim, Kitab Fadha’il Al-Sahaba, Chapter on the Virtues of Fatima; Majma^ Al-Zawa’id, v. 2, p. 201; Is^af Al-Raghibeen, p. 187.

More traditions about the death of Ismail son of Imam as-Sadiq

Tradition #2
Narrated to us Muhammad bin Hasan bin Ahmad bin Walid, who said: narrated to us Muhammad bin Hasan Saffar narrating from Ayyub bin Nuh and Yaqoob bin Yazid from Ibne Abi Umair from Muhammad bin Shuaib from Abi Kahmas that he said:

I was present at the time of Ismail’s death, while Abu Abdillah Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) was sitting near him. When he died, Imam (a.s.) tied up his jaws and covered his face with a piece of cloth. Then he ordered that he should be given the funeral bath and shrouded. After this was accomplished he called for his shroud cloth and wrote on its periphery: Ismail testifies that there is no god except Allah.

Tradition #3
Narrated to us my father who said: Narrated to us Abdullah bin Ja’far Himyari quoting from Ibrahim bin Mahziyar from his brother, Ali bin Mahziyar from Muhammad bin Abi Hamza from Marrah the slave of Muhammad bin Khalid that he said:

“When Ismail passed away, Abu Abdillah (Imam Ja’far Sadiq) came upto the grave and squatted on side of it and did not descend into the grave. Then he said: It was the same that the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) had done when his son, Ibrahim had died.”

Tradition #4
Narrated to us Muhammad bin Hasan who says: narrated to us Husain bin Hasan bin Aban quoting from Husain bin Saeed from Qasim bin Muhammad from Husain bin Umar from a man of Bani Hashim that he said:

“When Ismail passed away, Abu Abdillah Imam Sadiq (a.s.) came with us and began to walk barefooted and with a cloak ahead of the bier.”

Tradition #5
Narrated to us my father who said: Narrated to us Saad bin Abdullah from Ibrahim bin Mahziyar from his brother Ali bin Mahziyar from Hammad bin Isa from Jurair from Ismail bin Jabir and Arqat, the cousin of Abu Abdillah (Imam Ja’far Sadiq) that:

Abu Abdillah Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) was with Ismail at the time of his death. When Arqat saw his restlessness he said: O Aba Abdillah, indeed, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) has passed away from the world. He (the narrator) says: The Imam stopped being restless and then said: “You said the right thing and I thank you this day.”

Tradition #6
Narrated to us Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Yahya Attar: Narrated to us Saad bin Abdullah quoting from Ibrahim bin Hashim and Muhammad bin Husain bin Abi Khattab from Anr bin Uthman Thaqafi from Abi Kahmas that he said:

“I was present at the time of the death of Ismail bin Abu Abdillah (Imam Ja’far Sadiq a.s.). At that time I saw that Abu Abdillah (Imam Ja’far Sadiq a.s.) prostrated and remained in that position for a long time. After that he raised his head and continued to stare at his face for some time.

The narrator says that after that again he prostrated and remained in that position for a longer time. Then he raised his head, and at time Ismail had died. The Imam closed the eyelids, tied up fast both the jaws and covered the face with a piece of cloth. After that he stood up and I saw such an expression on his face that only Allah knew what it was.

The narrator says: Then the Imam arose and went to his quarters, remained there for sometime and then returned to us with the hair oiled and having applied antimony (Surma) to his eyes. He had also changed his clothes and did not have the expression he had at the time of entering his quarters. Then he began to issue instructions about the funeral procedures. Finally he called for the shroud cloth and when it was brought to him, he wrote on its edge: Ismail testifies that there is no god except Allah.

Tradition #7
Narrated to us my father from Saad bin Abdullah quoting from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Isa from Muhammad bin Ismail bin Bazi from Abul Hasan Zareef bin Naseh from Hasan Ibne Zaid that he said:

When a daughter of Abu Abdillah (a.s.) died, he mourned for her a whole year. After that another son died and he mourned him also for a whole year. Then Ismail died; and the Imam was extremely aggrieved for sometime but stopped mourning after that.

The narrator says: Abu Abdillah (a.s.) was asked: “May Allah bless you, does your family mourn and lament in this way?” He replied: “When Hamza passed away the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) said: Hamza must be mourned because there is no one to weep on him.”

Tradition #8
Narrated to us Muhammad bin Hasan from Hasan bin Matteel Waqqaq (flour seller) who said: Narrated to us Yaqoob bin Yazid from Hasan bin Ali bin Fuzzal from Muhammad bin Abdullah Kufi that he said:

“When Ismail bin Abu Abdillah (Imam Ja’far Sadiq a.s.) died, Abu Abdillah was extremely disturbed and aggrieved.” The narrator says: “After having closed his eyelids he called for a shirt that was washed clean or absolutely new. He wore it and emerged from his room to issue directions regarding the funeral procedure.”

The narrator says: “Some of the Imam’s companions asked him: ‘May we get sacrificed on you, when we saw your restlessness and grief we thought that we would not be able to speak to you for a long time as you would be in mourning.’ He replied: ‘We Ahle Bayt (a.s.) are such that we express sorrow and restlessness till the time the tragedy befalls, when it does, we observe patience.’”

Tradition #9
Narrated to us Ali bin Ahmad bin Muhammad Waqqaq: Narrated to us Muhammad bin Abdullah Kufi that he said: Narrated to us Muhammad bin Ismail Barmaki from Husain bin Haitham from Abbad bin Yaqoob Asadi from Anba bin Bajjad Abid that he said:

“When Ismail bin Ja’far bin Muhammad died and we finished his funeral ceremonies, Imam Sadiq Ja’far bin Muhammad (a.s.) sat down and we sat in his company. After a while the Imam raised his head and said: O people, indeed this world is an abode of separation. It is an unsuitable place and not suitable, separation from a close one is such a tragedy that cannot be forgotten and it is such a sorrow that cannot be dispelled and people are superior to each other in the matter of observing a nice way of mourning and right contemplation. Thus one who does not have to mourn for his brother will have to taste death. After that Imam (a.s.) recited the couplet of Abu Kharash Dauzali that he had composed while mourning for the death of his brother:

Answering objections from Zaydiyyah sect – part three

We are then presented with a follow-up question from the Zaydi sect

What are the arguments to reject the Imammah of Ismail son of Imam Jaffar as-Sadiq (may peace be upon him)? And what evidence and proof do we have against the Ismaili (Ismaliyya) sect that follows this belief?

Firstly we reject the Imamah of Ismail based on the tradition of the twelve Imams.

Secondly, we reject Ismail based on traditions that prove Ismail’s died during the lifetime of his father.

Among the reports that prove his death during the lifetime of his father is one that was related to me by my father, who says: Narrated to us Saad bin Abdullah from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Isa from Hasan bin Saeed from Fuzala bin Ayyub and Hasan bin Ali Fuzzal from Yunus bin Yaqoob from Saeed bin Abdullah Al-Araaj who said:

Abu Abdillah Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) said: When Ismail died I ordered that the cloth should be removed from his face. Then I kissed his forehead, chin and upper breast. After that I ordered him to be covered with cloth again. Then I said: Uncover his face. And again I kissed his forehead, chin and upper breast. Then I again ordered him to be covered. Then I ordered and he was given the funeral bath. I came to his corpse when he had been shrouded and said: Uncover his face. And again I kissed his forehead, chin and upper part of breast.

Another point derived from this narration is that the Imam (a.s.) said: ‘I ordered that the funeral bath be given to him’ and he did not say: ‘I gave him the funeral bath myself’. And this tradition also mentions that which disproves the Imamate of Ismail. None other than Imam can give a funeral bath to an Imam, in his presence.

Online Quran Project

I found a nice website for studying the Quran, the Online Quran Project. Here, I am listing a number of features available on the website

1. The whole interface is fully customizable
2. Support for other languages
3. Very good Navigation (Pane of left side) with search and browsing capabilities
4. Drop down menu to access chapters and verses.
5. Translation of the text and the ability to customize the Arabic text
6. You are also able to change the translation of the Quran. The way to do this is sort of hidden. You need to scroll all the way down until you see the language (e.g. English).
7. The following translations are available: Abdullah Yusuf Ali, maududi, Ali Quli Qarai (in my view this is the best so far) and others.
8. On the right side is the Quran (In Arabic) and it’s translation.
9. The most wonderful feature is the ability to view the footnotes by clicking the footnote link (number) positioned at each verse.
10. You can also increase the font for both the Quran (Arabic script) and also the English translation

Answering the Zaydiyyah sect

This is the second part of answering the objection from the Zaydiyyah (Zaydi) sect. Part 1 is here. Note: I summarized key points from my reading and added some context.

The Zaydi sect (Zaydiyyah) has rejected Imam Musa al-Kadhim (The Seventh Shia Imam) by claiming that he (Musa al-Kadhim) in not the legitimate successor. The Zaydis believe Imam Jaffar as-Sadiq (may peace be upon him) issued a Nass (verbal acknowledgment of the candidacy) in favor of Ismail when he (Ismail) was still alive.

Ismail is believed to have passed away in the lifetime of his father (Imam Jaffar as-Sadiq). The following blog entry contains some specific of his death.

Shaykh Saduq clarified that the accusation from Zaydis are false and have no merit whatsoever. Even the tradition (below) that was presented by them to support the claim had been taken out of context

"The Almighty Allah did not effect change (Bada) in anything like He did regarding my son, Ismail".
The misinformation has been spread far and wide by irresponsible party. Please click here to see the explanation of the tradition (Bada in connection to the death of Ismail son of Imam as-Sadiq)

Shaykh Saduq asked his audience to evaluate Zaydi’s accusation critically.

What is the basis of making the above statement?
Did the Imam (as-Sadiq) really issued a nass to support the Imamah of his son Ismail?
Who witnessed the proclamation?
Who reported the incident? When did the event take place?
Can the report be trusted?

The book stated that Zaydis were not able to answer these questions convincingly.

We believe that those who believe in the Imamate of Ismail concocted the story. Ismail was not ma’sum (infallible). And only someone who is ma’sum (infallible) can become the true and absolute leader for mankind.

Why am I doing this and who are my readership?

I’ll answer the second question first.

I don’t really know who reads my blog. The blogger.com provide some basic statistics on my visitors (list of countries), what posts visitors like the most and traffic direction. My readers are from all over the word (North America, South America, Europe, Middle East, South Asia, Japan, China, South East Asia, Australia).

Most of the traffic is from www.ShiaChat.com, www.google.com or some strange looking urls (no idea what it means). Most common search term on google.com is “Ghulat sects”. I did a search on google and found my blog on the second page, right after mother (www.ShiaChat). Note to self: Write more articles about Ghulat Sects.

I think the reason I am doing this is because everyone (except me, until now) have a personal website or blog. And I don’t want to be left out. Is the reason not good enough?

I’ll be embarrassed if someone said, this site looks like a personal diary (you know who you are!). I would prefer people to think the blog as a log book. Log book about “Research Into Other Sects”.

This is a private blog. I don’t get paid to blog. Neither am I doing this for a job or an assignment for one of the classes I am currently taking.

Why “Research Into Other Sects”?

I have been meaning to do this for long time. Didn’t know how to do it until I found out that you could sign-up for free blogs. It cost me $0.0 to host this website. The only thing I am putting here is my time and effort.

I also have to thank my contributors. Some of the best thing on my blog is not written by me.

I do welcome suggestions and feedback. Please leave comments, anonymously, if you wish. I have no way to track back to you.

I stumbled across Zaydis vs Imami discourse

I was doing non-Sects related reading yesterday and came across an interesting Zaydis vs Imami discourse in a book written by Shaykh Saduq (Scholar Extraordinaire).

The title of the book is Kamal al-din wa tamam al-ni'mah (the perfection of the religion and the end of the blessings).

These discourses were written to refute Zaydis concepts and understanding of Imams of Ahlul Bayt, especially the 12th Imam al-Hujjah (may Allah swt hasten his appearance). There are a total of eight or nine articles and I will try to summarize all of them if possible, Insha Allah.

Some Zaidiyyah say: the Imamiyah sect sometime ago has fabricated Traditions that specify the number of Imams to be twelve.

Here I am summarizing the answer given by the Shaykh
Shaykh Saduq mentioned that there are traditions from Imami and also from non-Imami sources reporting the number of the Imams as twelve.

Details

Among the traditions of Abdullah bin Masud that is narrated to us from Ahmad bin al-Hasan al-Qattan known as Abi Ali bin Abde Rabb ar-Razi and he is a noted tradition scholar he says:

Narrated to me Abu Yazid Muhammad bin Yahya bin Khalaf bin Yazid al-Maruzi in the city of Rayy in 302 A.H. in the months of Rabi I from Ishaq bin Ibrahim Hanzali who was there in 238 A.H. and was known as Ishaq bin Rahuya from Yahya bin Yahya from Hisham from Mujalid from Shobi from Masrooq that he said:

One day we were in the company of Abdullah bin Masud to get our copies of Quran checked by him so that they were free of errors.

A young man asked: Has your Prophet told you about the number of his successors?
He replied: You are very young and it is something that no one has asked me before. Now I will tell you about it. Yes, our Prophet informed us that indeed there would twelve successors after him and it would be equal to the number of the chiefs of Bani Israel.

We have mentioned some chains of narrators of this tradition in this book of ours and some others are mentioned in our another book, An-Nass Alaal Aaimmatul Ithna Ashar (a.s.) bil Imamiyah. In this way, from our opponents some have narrated the traditions of reappearance to the level of usefulness.

Among these is the report of Jabir bin Samura that Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Ishaq ad-Dinawar, a tradition scholar, has narrated.

He says: Narrated to me Abu Bakr bin Abi Dawood from Ishaq bin Ibrahim bin Shazan from Walid bin Hisham from Muhammad bin Zukwan from his father from his father from Ibne Sirreen from Jabir bin Samura as-Sawai that he said:

We were in the company of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) when he said: There are twelve leaders for this Ummah.

Samura said: A clamor arose so I couldn’t hear what else the Prophet said. So I asked my father who was nearer to the Prophet, what he had said.
My father said: He said: All of them shall be from Quraish, such that their like is not seen.

I have also mentioned the various chains of reporters of this tradition. Some versions say:

There will be twelve Amirs (chiefs) and some say: There will be twelve successors. Thus it proves that traditions in Imamiyah books regarding the twelve Imams are authentic.

Islamic Mythology

There is a wikipedia page that treats a number of events (facts) from the Islamic teaching as myths. The title of the page is Islamic Mythology. I have never seen such an area of research or study.

The writeup states

Islamic mythology is the body of traditional narratives associated with Islam from a mythographical perspective. Many Muslims believe that these narratives are historical and sacred and contain profound truths. These traditional narratives include, but are not limited to, the stories contained in the Qur'an.

The introductory section is badly written.
If "myth", defined by folklorists, are stories both sacred and "believed as true", then the most clear-cut examples of Islamic mythology come from Islamic scripture.

The definition is very simple and seems to imply that everything sacred and the truth must be a myth. This is incorrect. We, Muslims, also believe in the existence of the Holy Prophet (and his family), sacred and truth, and not a myth.

And then you come across this

"Note also that the term "myth" may not encompass all stories in Islamic scripture, depending on how strictly one defines the word "myth". One's use of the word "myth" is largely a matter of one's academic discipline."

This is a completely made up area!

Philosophy Book Recommendations

Recently, a video was posted on YouTube of a respected Ayatullah from the Holy City of Qum saying the following

Do you want arguments; do you want evidence for irfan and philosophy from the beginning till_ the end? - Come to me! Philosophy and Irfan are nonsense. All of knowledge is in the Koran and the traditions.

Later on, we did found out what he meant exactly.

Anyway, I spent too much time debating yesterday that I didn’t get my daily reading done. And I don’t think I will be able to get anything done (for my blog) today. I am super-busy with my offline life.

Since we are on the topic of philopshy...
A really good philosophy book is Will Durant's: The Story of Philosophy.

I was at Amazon.com earlier to see if they are still selling an old philosophy book that I have on my desk. It is still available in the market and they even have a newer edition of it.

Book reviews (this is taken straight from Amazon.com)

• I especially enjoyed the organization of the book. Each chapter covers a major topic
• He divides the topics of philosophy into ten major problems in order "to bring together what each philosopher has written on each of these problems as briefly and concisely as possible
• If you are in search of a handy reference work that gives fundamental summaries of the main theories of western philosophy, this book functions adequately.
• Most of the major philosophers, or at least the major philosophical movements in history, are consulted for their theories on fundamental questions.
• The book can be somewhat useful for those who want to familiarize themselves very briefly with the most prominent schools of thought - the Epicurean, Stoic, the Idealist philosophy, etc.

-ve reviews

• The style and language of the book are also a bit dry and not very engaging. This book provides all-too-often overly simplistic, thumbnail, topical sketches of philosophical teaching.
• The rendering of Christian thinking/doctrine is grossly--and I emphasize grossly--misrepresented (e.g. Christians, through grace, strive to regain their "lost divinity"--rubbish!; Abelard being posed as the progenator of "situtation ethics"--rubbish!; Augustine being quoted as saying that God "put" evil in the world--rubbish!;..)

I have also found an interesting book about Muslim Philosophers/Philosophy. It is online here.

Martyrdom of Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr and his sister Bint al-Huda

Today is the 31st anniversary of the martyrdom of Ayatollah Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr and his sister Bint al-Huda.

They were killed in the most brutal manner by the Butcher of Baghdad, Saddam (may Allah damned him to hell for eternity).

Please see the following discussion of his life, his martyrdom and his legacy.

YouTube videos of his biography.

Do you please your family or your wife?

I read a really good advice given by Sayyed Sistani. This is taken from his website.

Question: A man is put in a situation that he either pleases his family or pleases his wife: should he divorce his wife in order to please his family or should he do the opposite?

Answer: He should adopt the situation that is best for his religion as well as his world, that he should be inclined towards justice and equitability, and refrain from injustice and violation of the rights [of others].

Ibn Taymiyyah's Teaching (Tajsim, Ejtehad, Philosophy)

Ibn Taymiyyah was a firm believer of Tajsim (anthropomorphism). In one of his sermon, he (Ibn Taymiyyah) said

“God descended from his throne”. And while he was reading these words, he emphasized the meaning by descending a few steps, from the pulpit and continued by saying, “just as I am descending here (ka-nuzuli hadha)”

al-Dahabi and Ibn Hajjar al-Asqalani
Ibn Taymiyyah did not follow any of the Sunni school of taught in fiqh. He practiced Ejtehad and derives his own rulings. He also accepted qiyas as a method to derive Islamic laws.

Al-Sayuti quoted Ibn Taymiyyah
“These philosophers, as far as their teachings and living is concerned, are among the lowest people. The disbelieving Jews and Christians are to be preferred to them; the entire philosophy of these philosophers is not even on the level with Jews and Christians after accomplished falsification of their religious writings, much less does it attain the level before this forgery”

Al-Maqrizzi Khitat
Because of this and other teachings, Ibn Taymiyyah was frequently imprisoned and had to suffer much persecution from the officially recognized theologians. Yet, he had a considerable number of admirers among the Hanbalites and other Muslims both during his life and after his death.

On account of his opposition to al-Asharites philosophy of religion, and his independence of the orthodox legal schools, the one party condemned him as a heretic who left the consensus (kharij an ijma al-ummah), while others considered him worthy of the highest honors and called him the greatest Muslim of his time.

The following book was used as a reference
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2011/03/read-book-about-zahiri-islamic-law.html

Ibn Taymiyyah, forefather of the Wahhabiya movement, founder of the Salafi sect

Ibn Taymiyyah was a pseudo-Hanbalite. He lived in the Turkish region between 12-13 century AD.

Ignaz Goldziher in his book (the Zahiri) has revealed a lot of insightful information about this man.

Ibn Battuta, Voyages, I, p. 215
“He was an important man and could speak about the most varied fields, but he had a bee in his bonnet”

Many of Ibn Taymiyyah teachings were strange and at odds with the official Sunni school of thoughts (madhab).

• He disapproved of appealing for help from the Prophet (source Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani)
• He prohibited visiting the Prophet’s grave (source al-Qastallani)
• He is represented as having made harsh and disrespectful remarks about the first caliphs, and in his lectures he generally assaulted important and unimportant, old and modern scholars
• He accused Umar al-Khattab of errors (source Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani)
• He said Ali ibn Abi Talib made wrong decisions in seventeen questions(source Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani)
• He abused al-Ghazali and the other Asharites and insulted Ibn 'Arabi and other mystics(source Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani)

When you compare Ibn Taymiyyah teaching about God (below) to his teaching about Muslim personalities(above), the above seems pretty mild.

Ibn Taymiyyah taught tajsim (Anthropomorphism) by interpreting the metaphorical verses of the Holy Quran literally. (More will be in the next post)

According to Ibn Hajjar al-Asqalani
Ibn Taymiyyah did not renounce his deviancy/heresies despite being put before an inquisition and forced to signed a document that rejects his heresies.

How did the Muslim community got divided into sects?

I am going to continue reading the book and writing daily review. In addition, I am also going to write a rebuttal (in bold font) when I feel the author has missed out crucial facts/discussions.
Part II of the book deals with the manner in which the Muslim community has been divided into 73 sects.
Al-Baghdadi started the chapter briefly mentioning that the first ever division was over the mortality of the Holy Prophet (may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his pure family). Some didn't believe that the Holy Prophet died/he could die. And he mentioned Abu Bakr giving an authoritative declaration that put this issue to rest.

• Here, the author did not mention name of people who doubted the death of the Holy Prophet. At least we know (according to some traditions) that one of the doubters was Umar al-Khattab (the second caliph).
• Some Sunnis have told me that this reaction (to doubt the death of your closest companions/friends/a member of your family) is normal. If so, then al-Baghdadi is making a really big issue out of it.

The next cause of the division (according to the author) was on where the Holy Prophet should be buried (burial site). The author stated that they came to an agreement by burying him at a place where he died.

• Interesting to note that the author did not mention names of prominent companions that were mostly missing from the Prophet's funeral (ceremony and the ritual). Some of them were bickering over who should be the next caliph. Please search for 'Saqifa of Banu Saida'.

The next division in the Muslim community was over Fadak. Fadak was an agricultural land owned by the Holy Prophet and given to his (Prophet) daughter, Fatima, while he (Prophet) was still alive. The giving of Fadak was a commandment from al-Mighty.

The following verse was reveled to the Holy Prophet (may peace and the blessings of Allah be upon him and his pure family)

وَآتِ ذَا الْقُرْبَىٰ حَقَّهُ وَالْمِسْكِينَ وَابْنَ السَّبِيلِ وَلَا تُبَذِّرْ تَبْذِيرًا {26}
[Shakir 17:26] And give to the near of kin his due and (to) the needy and the wayfarer, and do not squander wastefully.
[Pickthal 17:26] Give the kinsman his due, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and squander not (thy wealth) in wantonness.

• The author made an erroneous conclusion here. He said that the issue was settled when Abu Bakr presented a hadith to deny Prophet’s daughter the land that was already given to her while the Prophet was still alive.
• Yesterday, we went through a list of heresies (according to al-Baghdadi). Generally, heresies are controversial beliefs and we are urged to stay away from them. Two of the heresies mentioned by al-Baghdadi were i) Believing that the Islamic laws can/will be abrogated at the end of time and ii) allowing what is forbidden and disallowing what is lawful.
• Didn’t Abu Bakr just abrogate the law of inheritance in favor of something that he claimed he heard from the Holy Prophet?
• Shouldn’t he look for the answers in the Holy Quran (words of Allah swt) before exercising his personal Ejtehad?
• The Fadak issue was never resolved. The Prophet’s daughter refused to speak to either of the two men until to the day she died. She died very young. She also did not allow the two shaykhs (Abu Bakr and Umar) to attend her funeral.

I am ending my entry with a link to a sermon by Fatima az-Zahra about Fadak

Definition of Muslim (Islamic) Ummah

In the next few pages, all variants of the well-known tradition/hadith (of the 73 sects) and its chain of narrators/transmitters were discussed.

What is the Islamic Ummah?

According to Al-Shahrastani

The Muslim/Islamic Ummah refers to everyone who affirms the prophetic character of Muhammad, and the truth of all that he preached, no matter what he asserted after this declaration.

Others claimed that Muslim Ummah comprises all who acknowledge the necessity of turning in the direction of the Kaba in prayers.

According to the Karramiyah, the Mujassimah (corporealists) of Khurasan:

Muslim Ummah comprises all those who enunciate the two parts of the creed (There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah) no matter whether he is sincere or insincere, hiding unbelief and heresy under this assertion.

This definition can be a bit problematic because they are non-Muslim communities that accept the truthfulness of the Holy Prophet (may peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his pure family) but at the same time reject the Islamic faith.

An example was given of the Sharikaniyah sect. According to them

Muhammad was a prophet of Allah to the Arabs, and to the rest of mankind, with the exception of the Jews. The Quran is true and the Adhan [the announcement of prayer], the Ikamah, the performance of 10 the five prayers, the fast of Ramadan, and the pilgrimage of the Kaba, all these are truths, but they are prescribed for the Muslims, not for the Jews.

The author (al-Baghdadi) mentioned a number of attributes that makes one a Muslim

• Belief in the creation of the world
• Existence of God and his attributes
• Reject anthropomorphic nature of God
• Accept the Holy Prophet Muhammad as a messenger of God
• Accept the Holy Quran as the source of Islamic laws
• Turn towards the Kaba for prayers
• Do not hold any heresies

The author mentioned heresies as controversial beliefs, i.e.,

• The divinity of the Imams
• Reincarnation of God
• Transmigration of souls
• Allowing incestuous relationship (a father marrying his daughter or granddaughter)
• Believing that the Islamic laws can/will be abrogated at the end of time
• Allowing what is forbidden and disallowing what is lawful

The author also believes that the heresy of Mu'tazilites, Khawarij, Rafidah (Imamiyyah or Zaydi) will not take you out from the Islamic faith.

Breakdown of the Muslim Sects

The book is not going to be fun to read! Ms. Kate C. Seelye, the translator, has already put me off from reading.  She described al-Baghdadi in a very negative tone in her introduction.

Our author (al-Baghdadi) starts out by saying that all but the one sect, the orthodox [this is referring to the Sunni sects who are not really orthodox], are condemned to hell fire, and goes on to enumerate all those condemned sects, discussing and opposing their views, and periodically breaking forth in an exclamation of gratitude that " we are not as they " ;

I hope that the author of this book (al-Baghdadi) is not overtly biased.

Before the start of chapter 1, you are presented with the following breakdown of Muslim Sects. Note: anything with asterisks * are not discussed in detail.

Rafidiyah (20 sects)
 

A. Zaidiyah (3)
1. Jarudiyah
2. Sulaimaniyah or Jaririyah
3. Butriyah 

B. Kaisanlyah (2)
1. Followers of ibn-al-Hanafiyah
2. Muhammadiyah
 

C. Imamiyah (15)
1. Kamiliyah
2. Bakiriyah
3. The Ghulat
4. Mubarrakiyah
5. Kat'iyah or Twelvers
6. Hishamiyah
7. Zarariyah
8. Yunusiyah
9. Shaitaniyah
10. Muhammadiyah *
1 1 Nawawiyah *
12. Shumaitiyah *
13. Mu'ammariyah *
14. Isma'iliyah
15. Musawiyah

Al-Khawarij (20 sects)

1. The first Muhakkamah
2. Azarikah
3. Najadah
4. Sifriyah

5. Ajaridah * (mentions ten in heading, treats eight)
a. Khazimiyah
- Ma'lumiyah
- Majhuliyah
b. Shu'aibiyah
c. The People of Obedience
d. Saltiyah
e. Akhnasiyah
f. Shaibaniyah
g. Ma'badiyah
 

6. Rashidiyah

7. Mukarramiyah
a. Hamziyah *
b. Shamrakiyah *
c. Ibrahimiyah *
d. Wakifiyah*
e. Ibadiyah
- Hafsiyah
- Harithiyah

Mu'tazilites or Kadariyah (20 sects)

1. Wasiliyah
2. Amriyah
3. Hudhailiyah
4. Nazzamiyah
5. Aswariyah
6. Mu'ammariyah
7. Iskafiyah
8. Ja'fariyah
9. Bishriyah

10. Murdariyah

11. Hishamiyah
12. Thamamryah
13. Jahiziyah
14. Hayitiyah
15. Himariyah
16. Khaiyatiyah
17. Followers of Salih Kubbah *
18. Musaisiyah *
19. Shahhamiyah
20. Ka'biyah
21. Jubba'iyah

22. Bahshamiyah

Murji'ah (5 sects)

1. Yunusiyah
2. Ghassaniyah
3. Thaubaniyah
4. Tumaniyah
5. Marisiyah

Najjariyah (2 sects)

1. Barghuthiyah
2. Za'faraniyah
- Mustadrikah 

Jahmiyah
 

Bakriyah
Darariyah

Karramiyah (3 sects)

1. Hakakiyah
2. Tara'ikiyah

3. Ishakiyah

LIST OF SECTS OUTSIDE OF THE PALE OF ISLAM (according to al-Baghdadi)

 
Sababiyah
Ghulat
- Mughiriyah
- Bayaniyah
Harbiyah
Mansuriyah
Janahiyah
Ghurabiyah
Mufauwadah
Dhimmiyah
Shari'iyah
Numairiyah
Haluliyah

Ashab al-Ibahah
Ashab al-Tanasukh
Hayitiyah (of the Kadariyah)
Himariyah
Yazidiyah ( of the Khawarij)
Maimuniyah
Batiniyah