Page 1 of 1

How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:11 pm
by RuralMan08
1. Imam Dhahabi (SHOCKED :shock: )


2. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal ( SHOCKED :shock: )


3. Imam al Bukhari (retained many hadith from Abdurrazaq al Sana'ani)


So what do all these scholars have in common?


They all either learnt directly from (Ahmad ibn Hanbal) OR retained hadith from (Al Bukhari) OR generally loved (all Sunni scholars) Imam Abdurrazaq al Sana'ani. Abdurrazaq al Sana'ani was a scholar whom hated the Raafidha passionately as they were misguided even though he himself ascribed to a form of Zaydiyah which is closest to the Shafi'i school of thought.



Examples:

As Imam Dhahabi states in his Siyar, "Abd Al-Razzaq bin Himam, Ibn Nafi', the great hadith master, the scholar of Yemen, Abu Bakr Al-Humayri, their mawla Al-San'ani, the trustworthy, the Shi'ite." (Kitaab Siyar)

An example of a Shi`i narrator retained by Bukhari is the great muhaddith `Abd al-Razzaq al-San`ani (d. 211), the author of the Musannaf, from whom Bukhari took a quantity of hadiths.


Biography of Imam Abdurrazzaq al Sana'ani

One such great personality to have lived and taught in San’a was the great Hadith expert (hafidh), Imam Abd al-Razzaq ibn al-Humam al-Himyari al-San’ani (Allah have mercy on him). The Imam belonged to Himyar, a major Yemeni tribe, and was known as al-San’ani, as he lived in San’a, the capital of Yemen. Imam Abd al-Razzaq was born in 126 AH and studied under a large number of scholars including many of the leading figures of his time. His teachers include: Imam Malik, Ibn Jurayj, Ma’mar, Imam al-Awza’i, Sufyan al-Thawri and Sufyan ibn Uyayna (Allah have mercy on them all). His pursuit of knowledge also saw him travel to Makka, Madina, Syria and Iraq, where he studied under many scholars of his time. His students include figures like Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma’in, Ishaq ibn Rahuya, Ali ibn al-Madeeni and many others (Allah have mercy on them all). Imam Ahmad was one of his main students and travelled to San’a to take the knowledge of Hadith from him. Imam Ahmad has a famous statement which states: “Travelling to San’a is a must even if the journey is very long” (la budda min San’a wa in tala as-safar). Hence, Imam Ahmad sacrificed his time and (along with Imam Yahya ibn Ma’in) travelled to San’a and remained in the company of Imam Abd al-Razzaq for a considerable length of time. Imam Ahmad was asked whether he met anyone who was better in Hadith scholarship than Imam Abd al-Razzaq to which he replied in the negative.



Imam Abd al-Razzaq’s knowledge of Hadith was extensive. He wrote several books, the most important of which is his “al- Musannaf” - a collection of Ahadith in several volumes. His other works include a commentary of the Qur’an and a book on the Prophet’s life. However, only al-Musannaf survives, and has been published more than once. The great Hadith scholar of the Indian subcontinent Shaykh Habib al-Rahman al-A’zami was the first person to have worked on and publish al-Musannaf. A new and fuller edition was later published by Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi in Beirut in 2002. Imam Abd al-Razzaq passed away to the mercy of Allah in the month of Shawwal 211 AH, when he was well over 80 years of age. May Allah have mercy on his soul and grant him Paradise, Ameen. (See: Mu’jam al-Buldan, 3/428 & al-Musannaf, 1/1 Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi edition)

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:28 pm
by Samatr
Attention whore waaxid, your not shia sheeko kale noo soo bandhig.
Go outside get some fresh air kid.

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:30 pm
by Leila25
What is this obsession with Shia's? I thought we were 100% Sunnis.

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:30 pm
by RuralMan08
Samatr wrote:Attention whore waaxid, your not shia sheeko kale noo soo bandhig.
Go outside get some fresh air kid.
Read properly please it mentions some very important things. I think Grandpakhalif needs to read this.

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:45 pm
by Enlightened~Sista
Ruralman, give it a rest walaal.

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:46 pm
by Berke
Ruralman, if you don't mind me asking how old were you when you arrived in the west?

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:48 pm
by RuralMan08
Berke wrote:Ruralman, if you don't mind me asking how old were you when you arrived in the west?
I was born in Carabaha, Ajmaan, UAE and came to the States when I was 2.

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:51 pm
by Berke
RuralMan08 wrote:
Berke wrote:Ruralman, if you don't mind me asking how old were you when you arrived in the west?
I was born in Carabaha, Ajmaan, UAE and came to the States when I was 2.
That explains. Thanks for the answer.

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 5:23 pm
by AhlulbaytSoldier
Rural/djib, take a break from shia missionary.
:up:

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:26 am
by Salahuddiin
No big problems with shiicas if it would only mean that they think that Ali and aalul beit deserved to be leaders and they wouldn't have problems with Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha, Zubair, Talha and rest of the sahaba. And they wouldn't have belief in imams with supernatural powers etc. This is how many of old day shiicas used to be.

Unfortunately nowadays shiica go to these and other extremes, except very few of them that don't even reach to 1% of them.

RuralMan, bro you don't really make sense to me. You claim to be a zaidi and that rawafid (name given to them by Zaid bin Ali) go to extremes even to the point of kufr. Same time you praise their leaders (check your avatar) and shiicas in general even though rawafid, ismacilis, alawis etc make up basically all the world's shiica population and zaidis compared to them are nothing numerically. It's like me praising and defending whole nation of USA because one muslim who lives there.

This is what I asked you some other topic:
RuralMan

What I mean that if you view scholars of twelvers (or basically their caqiida) to be kuffar/kufr and Ismailis even more so, while knowing that those two sects form the great majority of world's shiicas (and after that come even more shirk filled-sects like Alawis etc), then why do you so staunchly defend a general group that consists of about 99,5% kuffar and caqiida of kufr and 0,5% of righteous people in your eyes (Zaidis)? And same time you praise those leaders of twelvers?

Yes, there are sects inside shiicas, but as you know the Zaidis (less than 1% of shiicas) are the only sect with somewhat moderate views. After them come the twelvers (about 90% of the world's shiicas) and rest of the sects get even more crazier and extreme.

I just think that there are great contradictions in your claims and that makes it seem that you don't know what you believe in bro.

I'd like to ask you few questions to make things clear:

-What do you think about Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha and sahabas in general?

-Define imam (leader). Do you believe that they are just normal people who are supposed to be rulers, or do you see them as infallible with divine powers and knowledge?

-Has Mahdi been alive hiding in a cave all the time?

Re: How many of your scholars refer back to Shi'a scholars?

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 9:25 pm
by AlZaidi
Salahuddiin wrote:No big problems with shiicas if it would only mean that they think that Ali and aalul beit deserved to be leaders and they wouldn't have problems with Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha, Zubair, Talha and rest of the sahaba. And they wouldn't have belief in imams with supernatural powers etc. This is how many of old day shiicas used to be.

Unfortunately nowadays shiica go to these and other extremes, except very few of them that don't even reach to 1% of them.

RuralMan, bro you don't really make sense to me. You claim to be a zaidi and that rawafid (name given to them by Zaid bin Ali) go to extremes even to the point of kufr. Same time you praise their leaders (check your avatar) and shiicas in general even though rawafid, ismacilis, alawis etc make up basically all the world's shiica population and zaidis compared to them are nothing numerically. It's like me praising and defending whole nation of USA because one muslim who lives there.

This is what I asked you some other topic:
RuralMan

What I mean that if you view scholars of twelvers (or basically their caqiida) to be kuffar/kufr and Ismailis even more so, while knowing that those two sects form the great majority of world's shiicas (and after that come even more shirk filled-sects like Alawis etc), then why do you so staunchly defend a general group that consists of about 99,5% kuffar and caqiida of kufr and 0,5% of righteous people in your eyes (Zaidis)? And same time you praise those leaders of twelvers?

Yes, there are sects inside shiicas, but as you know the Zaidis (less than 1% of shiicas) are the only sect with somewhat moderate views. After them come the twelvers (about 90% of the world's shiicas) and rest of the sects get even more crazier and extreme.

I just think that there are great contradictions in your claims and that makes it seem that you don't know what you believe in bro.

I'd like to ask you few questions to make things clear:

-What do you think about Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha and sahabas in general?

-Define imam (leader). Do you believe that they are just normal people who are supposed to be rulers, or do you see them as infallible with divine powers and knowledge?

-Has Mahdi been alive hiding in a cave all the time?
@ Salahuddiin
The Shia of the old days are found only in the Zaidi today. As for RuralMan, his point is that the rawafidh of today like Iran and Hezbullah are doing more in the name of Islam and for Muslims than the Sunni countries. For example, Their policies against the US and Israel. The rawafidh are saving the children of Palestine and Lebanon whilst the most powerful Sunni countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia are supporting the US and Israeli killing of innocent Muslim men women and children. When Israel attacked Lebanon in 2006, the rafidhi Hezbullah defeated them, something Sunni Egypt and Wahhabi Saudi Arabia never did, and what was the response from Saudi Arabia? Don't support Hezbullah because the are Rafidhi. Due to this bizarre situation where Sunnis are supporting Kufar who kill Sunni babies in Gaza and the only people who defend the Sunni babies are rawafidh. That explains RuralMan's posts.