Scrutiny of Shi`ah Narrators Part 3

`Abd al-Husayns Criticism of the Morality of the Sahabah
December 8, 2015
Scrutiny of Shi`ah Narrators Part 2
December 8, 2015

BACK Return to Table of contents

 

Burayd ibn Muawiyah al ‘Ijli

Al ‘Amili has said regarding him in al Wasaʼil:

 

وجه من وجوه أصحابنا ، ثقة فقيه، له محل عند الأئمة قاله العلامة ونحوه النجاشي وعده الكشي من أصحاب الاجماع كما مر، وروى له مدحا جليلا ، وفيه بعض الذم يأتي الوجه في مثله في زرارة  .

A facet of our companions, a reliable faqih. He has a unique position with the Imams, as stated by ‘Allamah (al Hilli), and al Najashi has made a similar statement. Al Kashshi has included him amongst the companions of ijma’ as stated previously. Great praise has been reported for him, and amongst the narrations is a little disparagement, the reason behind it being the same as for Zurarah.

 

They have exaggerated in the praise for this individual even though he has been cursed by the ‘infallibles’. Al Kashshi reports that Imam Jafar rahimahu Llah said:

 

عن مسمع كردين أبي سيار قال سمعت أبا عبد الله يقول لعن الله بريدا ولعن الله زرارة .

May the curse of Allah be upon Burayd and may the curse of Allah be upon Zurarah.[1]

 

Abu Basir Layth al Bakhtari al Muradi

Amongst their narrators is Abu Basir and he used to partake in intoxicants and was persistent in its consumption just as his predecessors.

 

فعن كليب بن معاوية قال: كان أبو بصير وأصحابه يشربون النبيذ يكسرونه بالماء فحدّثت بذلك أبا عبدالله(ع) فقال لي: وكيف صار الماء يحلّل المسكر ، مرهم لا يشربوا منه قليلا ولا كثيرا، قلت: إنهم يذكرون أن الرضا من آل محمد يحلّه لهم ، فقال: وكيف كان آل محمد يحلّون المسكر وهم لا يشربون قليلا ولا كثيرا فامسكوا عن شربه فاجتمعنا عند أبي عبدالله(ع) فقال له أبو بصير: إن جائنا بكذا وبكذا وكذا فقال(ع): صدق يا أبا محمد إن الماء لا يحلّل المسكر فلا تشربوا منه قليلا ولا كثيراً

Kulayb ibn Muawiyah reports: Abu Basir and his companions would drink nabidh, which they would dilute with water. I informed Imam Jafar about this and he said to me, “How can water become a purifier of intoxicants. Order them not to drink even a little from it.”

I said that they say, al Rida from the family of Muhammad (salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) has permitted it for them. Imam Jafar replied, “How have the family of Muhammad (salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) permitted it when they do not drink even a little of it. Abstain from its consumption!”

We then all (later) gathered before Imam Jafar and Abu Basir said to him, “He has come to us with such and such?”

Imam Jafar replied, “O Abu Muhammad! He has spoken the truth. Water does not purify intoxicants so do not consume of it, be a it a little or a lot.”[2]

 

The Shia are insistent upon ruling this individual as reliable, despite his condition being the same as Zurarah in being disparaged, as will be discussed. Al Ardabili says:

 

قال الغضائري : كان أبو عبدالله(ع) يتضجر به ويتبرم وأصحابه يختلفون في شأنه قال وعندي أن الطعن وقع على دينه لا على حديثه وهو عندي ثقة والذي اعتمد عليه قبول روايته وأنه من أصحابنا الامامية للحديث الصحيح الذي ذكرناه أولاً وقول ابن الغضائري لا يوجب الطعن

Al Ghadaʼiri has said, “Imam Jafar would express disgust with him and would be annoyed by him. His companions differed regarding him.” According to me, the disparagement was regarding his din, not his narrations, and according to me he is reliable and one upon whose narrations one can rely upon. He is amongst our companions of the Imamiyyah, who report sahih ahadith which we mentioned first. The statement of al Ghadaʼiri does not necessitate disparagement.”[3]

 

They continue to defend him despite the derision from the ‘infallible’ Imam such that they were forced to search for imaginary excuses for him, saying:

 

وقد ذكرنا شطراً مما صدر من ساحتهم في حقه وأمثاله في ترجمة بريد ابن معاوية العجلي..

We have discussed a little of that which emanated of their politics regarding him under the biography of Burayd ibn Muawiyah al ‘Ijli.[4]

 

Their Sheikh, Jafar al Subhani said:

 

وقع في إسناد كثير من الروايات تبلغ ألفين ومائتين وخمسة وسبعين موردا عنوان “ أبي بصير “ فاختلف في تعيين المراد منه كما اختلف في تحقيق عدد من يطلق عليه هذه الكنية ، فذهب بعضهم إلى إطلاقها على أثنين وبعض آخر على ثلاثة وجمع كثير على أربعة وربما يظهر من بعضهم أكثر من هذا العدد أيضاً

In many chains of narration, approximately 2275, the name “Abu Basir” appears; thus, there is difference of opinion regarding who is implied just as there is difference of opinion regarding the number of people who hold this title. The minority are of the opinion that there are two, while a few others are of the opinion that there are three, while a great many are of the opinion that they are four. While many a time it becomes apparent from some there are more than this as well.[5]

 

However, the most famous opinion, as mentioned above, is that it is shared by four individuals, as elucidated by Ibn Dawood, al Tiffarishi and al Mamaqani. Ibn Dawood says that the four are:

  1. Layth ibn al Bakhtari
  2. Yusuf ibn al Harith al Batri
  3. Yahya ibn Abi al Qasim
  4. ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad al Asadi[6]

 

These four are not all reliable narrators as indicated in Mujam Rijal al Hadith. Some of them have stated that the name “Abu Basir” is shared by both reliable and unreliable narrators. As a result of this the majority of these narrations can no longer be substantiated from.[7]

Al Najashi has said under the biography of Abu Basir al Bakhtari al Muradi:

Abu Muhammad, and it has been said that he is Abu Basir al Asghar.

 

Just as al Tusi did not consider him reliable and disregarded him…. al Tustari said, “Al Sheikh and al Najashi disregarded him.”[8]

As for Ibn al Ghada’iri, he said:

 

ليث بن البختري المرادي أبو بصير يكنى أبا محمد، كان أبو عبد الله يتضجر به، ويتبرم وأصحابه مختلفون في شأنه وعندي أن الطعن إنما وقع على دينه لا على حديثه وهو عندي ثقة

Layth ibn al Bakhtari al Muradi Abu Basir whose agnomen was Abu Muhammad: Abu ‘Abdullah (Jafar al Sadiq) would be infuriated and annoyed with him. His (Abu ‘Abdullah) companions have differed regarding him. According to me, the criticism against him was only about his din, not his hadith; and according to me he is reliable.[9]

 

Al Kashshi narrates from Hammad al Nab who says:

 

جلس أبو بصير على باب أبي عبد الله ليطلب الإذن ، فلم يؤذن له ، فقال لو كان معنا طبق لأذن قال ، فجاء كلب فشغر في وجه أبي بصير ، قال أف أف ما هذا ؟ قال جليسه : هذا كلب شغر في وجهك

Abu Basir sat at the door of Abu ‘Abdullah seeking permission. He was denied permission upon which he remarked, “If we had with us a dish, he would have definitely granted permission.”

Thereafter a dog appeared and defecated on the face of Abu Basir. He cried, “Oof! Oof! What is this?”

His companions replied: “It is a dog that defecated on your face.”[10]

 

Another narration, on the authority of Hammad al Nab, who says:

 

خرجت أنا وابن أبي يعفور وآخر إلى الحيرة أو إلى بعض المواضع فتذاكرنا الدنيا فقال أبو بصير المرادي : أما أن صاحبكم لو ظفر بها لاستأثر بها ، فأغفى فجاء كلب يريد أن يشغر عليه فذهبت لأطرده ، فقال لي ابن أبي يعفور دعه قال ، فجاء حتى شغر في أذنه

I, Ibn Abi Ya’fur, and another individual went to al Hayrah or to another place. We began discussing the world, so Abu Basir al Muradi said, “Listen well, if your companion (referring to the Imam) could be successful in acquiring it, he would have kept it to himself!”

Thereafter, he went to take a nap. As he done so, a dog came by and was about to defecate on him. I stepped forward to dispel it, but Abu Ya’fur said, “Leave it!” The dog then proceeded on to defecate in his ear.[11]

 

How does ‘Abdul Hussain explain the statement of Abu Basir, “If we had with us a dish, he would have definitely granted permission”? O ‘Abdul Hussain, is this the great service rendered by Abu Basir to al Sadiq?

Al Kashshi narrates from Abu Ya’fur who says:

 

خرجت إلى السواد نطلب دراهم !!لنحج ونحن جماعة وفينا أبو بصير المرادي قال ، قلت له يا أبا بصير اتق الله وحج بمالك فإنك ذو مال كثير ! فقال اسكت فلو أن الدنيا وقعت لصاحبك لاشتمل عليها بكسائه

I went out to the suburb seeking some dinars by means of which I could perform Hajj. Amongst our group was Abu Basir.

I said to him, “O Abu Basir, fear Allah, for indeed you are a wealthy man!”

He replied, “Remain silent! If the entire world were to fall in the destiny of your companion (Imam Jafar), he would have wrapped it under his garment!”[12]

 

It is well-known that “your companion” in the above texts refer to none other than the infallible Imam, as explained by the commentator of al Kashshi and Hashim Ma’roof.[13]

As if it was not enough to attack the personality of al Sadiq without any grounds, he even desires to perform Hajj using the wealth of others, despite being a wealthy person. It was nothing but jealousy that had blinded his heart, to the extent that he alleged that al Sadiq had the same agenda and mentality as him, that if the entire world were to fall in his destiny, he would have wrapped it under his garment. The question arises: Is it possible that he repented from his unethical conduct? The reality is that he only increased his criticism, blasphemy and mockery of al Sadiq. Thus, we find him accusing the Imam of having insufficient knowledge and being ignorant of the laws of Shari’ah.

Al Kashshi narrates from Shu’ayb al ‘Aqraqufi who narrates that Abu Basir said:

 

سألت أبا عبد الله عن امرأة تزوجت ولها زوج فظهر عليها ؟ قال : ترجم المرأة ويضرب الرجل مائة سوط لأنه لم يسأل ، قال شعيب : فدخلت على أبي الحسن فقلت له امرأة تزوجت ولها زوج ؟ قال ترجم المرأة ولاشيء على الرجل ، فلقيت أبا بصير فقلت له إني سألت أبا الحسن عن المرأة التي تزوجت ولها زوج قال ترجم المرأة ولاشيء على الرجل، قال فمسح على صدره وقال ما أظن صاحبنا تناهى حلمه بعد!

I asked Abu ‘Abdullah (Imam Jafar) regarding a woman who marries even though she has a husband who done zihar[14] upon her and he answered, “The woman will be stoned and the man will be lashed one hundred times, since he did not enquire.”

Shu’ayb says, “Thereafter, I went to Abu al Hassan (Imam al Kazim) and asked him, “What is the law regarding a woman who marries despite having a husband?”

He replied, “The woman will be stoned and there will be no action against the man.”

Later, I met Abu Basir and told him, “I asked Abu al Hassan regarding a woman who marries despite having a husband and he replied, ‘The woman will be stoned and there will be no action against the man.’”

Abu Basir responded by wiping his hand on his chest and saying, “I do not think that the intelligence of our Companion (the illustrious Imam) has reached its climax!”[15]

 

The author of the footnotes of al Kashshi says under the commentary of this: “Tanaha means that which has reached its climax and culmination.”

The author of the footnotes of Majma’ al Rijal says, “We seek the protection of Allah from these two narrations.”

These two narrations have also been narrated by al Tusi in Tahdhibayn, i.e. al Tahdhib and al Istibsar.[16]

The author of Mujam al Rijal says, “Al Sheikh narrated this narration with a slight difference in the text.”

He also narrated the meaning of this text with his chain of narrators from Ahmed ibn Muhammad from Ibn Abi ‘Umair from Shu’ayb who said:

 

سألت أبا الحسن عن رجل تزوج امرأة لها زوج قال : يفرق بينهما ، قلت فعليه ضرب ؟ قال: لا ما له يضرب ! فخرجت من عنده وأبو بصير بحيال الميزاب فأخبرته بالمسألة والجواب ، فقال لي: أين أنا ؟ فقلت بحيال الميزاب ، قال فرفع يده : ورب هذا البيت أو رب هذه الكعبة لسمعت جعفرا يقول : أن علياً قضى في الرجل تزوج امرأة لها زوج فرجم المرأة وضرب الرجل الحد ، ثم قال: لو علمت إنك علمت لفضخت رأسك بالحجارة ، ثم قال ما أخوفني إلا يكون أوتي علمه

I asked Abu al Hassan (al Kazim) about a man who marries a married woman and he said, “They will be separated.”

I asked, “Will the man be whipped?”

He replied, “No, what crime did he commit that he should be whipped?”

I left his presence and Abu Basir was in front of the gutter (of the Ka’bah), so I informed him of the question and the answer that was offered.

He asked me, “Where am I?”

I replied, “In front of the Ka’bah.”

Thereafter he lifted his hand and said, “By the oath of the Rabb of this house (or he said the Rabb of this Ka’bah)! I heard Jafar saying, ‘Indeed ‘Ali passed the verdict regarding a man who marries a married woman, that he will be flogged according to the hadd (prescribed punishment) and the woman will be stoned to death. Thereafter he (‘Ali) said (to the man), ‘If I knew that you already had knowledge about it, I would have crushed your head with a stone.’”

Thereafter Abu Basir said, “The only thing that scares me is that he has been given the knowledge of his predecessor.”[17]

 

The most amazing fact is that they have found fault with their infallible Imam and defended Abu Basir! This was done by fabricating a few theories exonerating him of his offences. These include the following preposterous explanations: “The narration does not indicate that he condemned the Imam,” “At most, he was not completely cognisant of the knowledge of the Imam at that time, due to a doubt that occurred to him. That is, he imagined that the verdict of the Imam contradicted the verdict that reached him from the ancestors of the Imam. This does not affect his reliability, over and above the fact that it cannot be proven that he remained upon this view”, and “This narration was an act of Taqiyyah (dissimulation).”

Their claim that Abu Basir was not completely cognisant of the knowledge of the Imam is indeed astonishing! Did he not take an oath by the Rabb of this house or the Rabb of this Ka’bah that he heard Jafar saying, “Indeed ‘Ali passed the verdict regarding a man who marries a married woman, that he will be flogged according to the hadd and the woman will be stoned to death,” and thereafter he said, “If I knew that you already had knowledge about it, I would have crushed your head with a stone.” After which Abu Basir added, “The only thing that scares me is that that he has been given the knowledge of his predecessor.”

Further, the claim of Taqiyyah also does not make sense. This is so because Abu Basir was adamant that the Imam has insufficient knowledge and he is the one who attacked the Imam. He himself was not an Imam, due to which it could be falsely claimed that the Imam resorted to Taqiyyah. Therefore, this answer is absolutely preposterous.

This narration also reveals to us that Abu Basir belied Imam al Kazim or he falsely attributed something to al Sadiq; thus, he attacked both of his infallible Imams. Now, who will be called a liar, one of the two Imams or Abu Basir?

As for the statement of Abu Basir, “I think the knowledge of our Imam has not reached its culmination,” we will leave the responsibility of explaining it upon this compiler. It appears in Wasa’il al Shia from Shu’ayb al ‘Aqraqufi who said:

 

كنت عند أبي عبد الله ومعنا أبو بصير وأناس من أهل الجبل يسألونه عن ذبائح أهل الكتاب فقال لهم أبو عبد الله قد سمعتم ما قال الله تعالى في كتابه إشارة إلى قوله تعالى:{ وَلاَ تَأكُلُو مِمَّا لَمْ يُذْكَرِ اسْمُ اللّٰهِ عَلَيْهِ }  فقالوا له نحب أن تخبرنا فقال لهم لا تأكلوها فلما خرجنا قال أبو بصير : كلها في عنقي ما فيها فقد سمعته وسمعت أباه جميعاً يأمران بأكلها فرجعنا إليه فقال لي أبو بصير: سله فقلت له: جعلت فداك : ما تقول في ذبائح أهل الكتاب ؟ فقال : أليس شهدتنا بالغداة وسمعت ؟ قلت : بلى : فقال : لا تأكلها .

I was in the presence of Abu ‘Abdullah with a few others. Amongst us was Abu Basir. The people of the mountain were asking him regarding the slaughtered animals of the people of the Book (Jews and Christians).

Abu ‘Abdullah replied, “You have definitely heard that which Allah says in his Book.” Referring to the verse, And do not eat from that on which Allah’s name was not taken…”[18]

They responded, “We would like you to inform us.”

So, he said to them, “Do not eat it.”

When we left from there, Abu Basir said, “I take responsibility for all of it. There is no sin in consuming it. Indeed, I have heard both him and his father commanding that it should be consumed and, thus, we consumed it.”

Thereafter Abu Basir said to me, “Ask him!”

Hence, I said to him, “May I be sacrificed for you, what is your opinion regarding the slaughtered animals of the people of the Book?”

He replied, “Were you not present this morning? Did you not hear?”

I said, “Indeed I was present,” thereupon he said, “Do not partake of it.”[19]

 

This narration has been reported by al Tusi in his al Tahdhib. The last portion is as follows:

 

فقال أبو بصير :كلها ثم قال لي: سله ثانية فقال لي مثل مقالته الأولى وعاد لي أبو بصير فقال لي قوله الأول : في عنقي كلها ثم قال لي : سله فقلت : لا اسأله بعد مرتين

Abu Basir then said, “Partake of it.”

Thereafter he said to me, “Ask him a second time.”

He replied in the same manner that he replied the first time.

Abu Basir came back to me and repeated his previous statement, i.e. “I take responsibility, eat it.”

Then he said to me, “Ask him (once more).”

I replied: “I cannot ask him more than twice.”

 

I say, Abu Basir is insisting upon the incumbency of the Imam retracting his verdict. Despite his insistence and his repeated questioning of al Sadiq and the reply of al Sadiq that it is not permissible in each instance, whereas there was no third person with them in his company, they (the Shia) still—unsuccessfully though—try their best to defend him and prove that he was definitely correct. This demands that they concede that their Imam was mistaken, even though they believe that he was totally infallible. They use all their abilities to defend this narrator who has been criticised, to the extent that one of them even said, “The narration of Abu Basir should be understood to be an act of Taqiyyah.”

I say, that means, Abu Basir was al Sadiq (the truthful one) and Imam al Sadiq was al Kadhib (the liar) according to them.

Furthermore, Abu Basir would visit the infallible Imams whilst he was in an impure state. Al Sayed Ahmed writes in al Tahrir:

 

ومن ذلك أنه دخل عليه وهو جنب فنهاه عن ذلك

And from that is, he would enter his presence whilst being impure, so he prohibited him from that.

 

Abu Bukayr narrates:

I met Abu Basir al Muradi so I asked him, “Where are you of to?”

He replied, “I am on my way to your master.”

I said to him that I will go along with him. So, we continued until we entered upon him, whereupon he gave Abu Basir a stern look and rebuked him saying, “Is this how you enter the homes of the Prophets; whilst you are impure?”

Abu Basir replied, “I seek the protection of Allah from his anger and your anger. I seek forgiveness from Allah, I will not repeat this.”[20]

 

Al Dahlawi has definitely spoken the truth when he said that some of the narrators of the Shia were expelled by Jafar al Sadiq from his gathering, yet the Shia rely upon them as explained.

 

Hisham ibn al Hakam

According to the Shia, he is the individual who was responsible for stitching together the concepts of Imamah, Wasiyyah, and Ismah (infallibility of the Imams). He formed the rules and principles regarding it. Al ‘Amili states in his Wasa’il al Shia:

 

 ممن فتق الكلام في الإمامة وهذّب المذهب بالنظر

He is amongst those who stitched together the discussion on Imamah, and he systemised the mazhab (Shi’ism) by means of logical proofs.[21]

 

The Shia have defended this anthropomorphist to the extent that ‘Abdul Hussain stated in his al Muraja’at:

 

ورماه بالتجسيم وغيره من الطامات مريدو إطفاء نور الله من مشكاته حسداً لأهل البيت وعدواناً ونحن أعرف الناس بمذهبه وفي أيدينا أحواله وأقواله وله في نصرة مذهبنا من المصنفات ما أشرنا إليه فلا يجوز أن يخفى علينا من أقواله وهو من سلفنا وفرطنا ما ظهر لغيرنا مع بعدهم عنه في المذهب والمشرب

He has been accused of anthropomorphism and other outrageous crimes by those who wish to extinguish the light of Allah from its lantern, due to jealousy and enmity for the Ahlul Bayt. We are the most acquainted ones with his stance and we have in our possession his biography and his sayings. He has authored in defence of our religion that which we have already indicated to. Hence. it is impossible that any of his sayings remain hidden from us, especially since he is from our predecessors and amongst those who will receive us. This is more so when it is known to others, since they are far from our religion and viewpoint.[22]

 

He also states:

 

None of our predecessors were tainted by any of the crimes attributed to them by the opposition. We cannot find any trace of that which was attributed to Zurarah ibn A’yan, Muhammad ibn Muslim, Mu’min al Taq and their likes, notwithstanding how we had exhausted our resources and energies in trying to find them. It is nothing but injustice, enmity, slander and accusations… Is it possible that this type of crimes be attributed to man of excessive virtue the like of Hisham! Never, instead the opposition have preferred false speech and rumours as a result of their oppression and jealousy of the Ahlul Bayt and those who subscribe to their views.[23]

 

I say, in refutation of these people, especially this author who asserts that he exhausted resources and energies in trying to find them. You described al Kafi in your al Muraja’at (pg. 390) in the following manner:

 

وأحسن ما جمع منها – أي من الأصول الأربعمائة – الكتب الأربعة التي هي مرجع الإمامية في أصولهم وفروعهم من الصدر الأول إلى هذا الزمان وهي : الكافي والتهذيب والاستبصار ومن لا يحضره الفقيه وهي متواترة ومضامينها مقطوع بصحتها والكافي أقدمها وأعظمها وأحسنها وأتقنها …

And the best of compilations that are based on them (the four hundred sources) are the four books, which have remained the references of the Imamiyyah in all their primary as well as subsidiary matters from the first century up until the present era. They are al Kafi, al Tahdhib, al Istibsar and Man La Yahduruhu al Faqih. These books are mutawatir and their contents are undisputedly accurate. Al Kafi is the earliest of them, the greatest, best and the most well-preserved.

 

Therefore, we will quote those ahadith of al Kafi, regarding which he claims ‘the contents are undisputedly accurate’. This will serve as proof against him and his cohorts who claim that they exhausted their resources. Just as it will serve as proof against those who claim that the scholars are unanimous regarding the reliability and high rank of this anthropomorphist in the sight of the Imams, but the Ahlus Sunnah have criticised him and he was condemned in certain reports for being an anthropomorphist.

Al Kulayni, who they have dubbed Thiqat al Islam, states in his al Kafi with his chain from ‘Ali ibn Abi Hamzah who said:

 

قلت لأبي عبد الله سمعت هشام بن الحكم يروي عنكم أن الله جسم ، صمدي نوري ، معرفته ضرورة يمن بها على من يشاء من خلقه فقال: سبحان من لا يعلم أحد كيف هو إلا هو ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير لا يحسد ولا يحس ولا يجس ولا تدركه الأبصار ولا الحواس ولا يحيط به شيء ولا جسم ولا صورة ولا تخطيط ولا تحديد

I said to Abu ‘Abdullah, “I heard Hisham ibn Hakam narrating from you people that Allah is a body who is independent and full of light. His recognition is necessary. He favours any of his creation that He wills.”

He replied, “Free from inconsistencies is He who none know His reality except Himself. There is none like Him and he is the All Hearing, All Seeing. He does not harbour jealousy, have feelings or spy on others. Neither eyes nor any of the other senses are able to perceive Him. None can encompass Him. He has no body, form, lines or limits.”[24]

 

The authors of discourses and books on different sects have indicated towards the views held by this anthropomorphist. Al Baghdadi states in al Firaq:

 

Hisham ibn al Hakam asserts that His Deity is a body which has an end and a boundary. He has a length, breadth, and height. His length and breadth are equal.[25]

 

Al Baghdadi and al Ash’ari state that Abu al Hudhayl mentioned in one of his books that Hisham ibn al Hakam said to him that his Rabb is a body who goes, comes, sits, and stands; so he asked him, “So who is greater, this mountain or your Rabb?” He answered, “This mountain is obedient to him”, i.e. He is greater.[26]

Al Shahrastani and al Ash’ari state:

 

Ibn al Rawandi narrates from Hisham that his deity resembles the creation to a certain degree. If this was not the case, the creation would not have directed one towards him.[27]

 

The statement of Hisham that he allegedly narrates from Abu ‘Abdullah al Sadiq that Allah is an independent luminous body has been pointed out by al Ash’ari, al Isfara’ini, and al Baghdadi in their works. They report:

 

He believes that He is a radiant illumination who has a definite size and a fixed place, like a pure bullion. He shines from all sides like a round pearl.[28]

 

Al Kulayni in his al Kafi and Ibn Babuwayh al Qummi who has been titled al Saduq (the truthful one) by them, narrate from Muhammad ibn Hakim who says:

 

I described to Abu Ibrahim the statement of Hisham al Jawaliqi and narrated to him the statement of Hisham ibn al Hakam, “Indeed He is a body.”

He replied, “Nothing resembles Allah! Is there any blasphemy greater than the statement of the one who describes the Creator of all objects to be a body, form, creation, or confine Him to a space or attribute limbs to Him? Allah is far above all of that!”[29]

 

Al Kulayni who was given the title Thiqat al Islam (the most reliable person in Islam) by the Shia, and al Qummi who was given the title al Saduq, both narrate from al Hassan Musa ibn Jafar:

 

أن هشام بن الحكم زعم أن الله جسم ليس كمثله شيء ، عالم ، سميع بصير ، قادر ، متكلم ناطق والكلام والقدرة والعلم يجرى مجرى واحد ليس شيء منها مخلوقا

Hisham ibn al Hakam claims that Allah is a body. There is none like Him. He is the possessor of knowledge, All Hearing, All Seeing, All Powerful, One who speaks and makes utterances. Speech, power and knowledge are in the same category, none of them are creations.

 

He replied:

 

قاتله الله، أما علم أن الجسم محدود والكلام غير المتكلم معاذ الله و أبرأ إلى الله من هذا القول لا جسم ولا صورة ولا تحديد وكل سواه مخلوق إنما تكون الأشياء بإرادته ومشيئته من غير كلام ولا تردد في نفس ولا نطق بلسان

May Allah destroy him, does he not know that bodies have parameters and speech is separate from the one who speaks, I seek Allah’s protection! I free myself from such statements in the court of Allah! There is no body, form or limits. Everything besides Him is creation. Everything is brought into existence by His will and desire, without Him having to say it out. He does not reconsider anything or speak with a tongue.[30]

 

The authors of books on sects have indicated to this base statement. Al Shahrastani states:

 

The belief of Hisham is that: “Allah was always well-informed regarding Himself and he learns of other occurrences after they come into existence. However, this knowledge is not considered as something new, nor is it considered eternal. This is because it is an attribute and attributes cannot be described… His view regarding power and life are not the same as his view on knowledge, except that he does not believe that they are non-eternal. He also says that He desires objects, and His wish is a movement which is neither part of Him nor separate from Him.”

 

Al Baghdadi says:

 

It has been reported that Hisham has deviated as far as the attributes of Allah are concerned, after deviating from monotheism. He claims regarding the power, sight, hearing, life and will of Allah that they are neither eternal nor brought into existence as they are the attributes of Allah, which cannot be described. He further claims, “If He is aware of that which His bondsmen are going to do even before they do it, then it is neither possible for them to be making decisions, nor should they be accountable for their actions.”[31]

 

Al Kulayni and al Qummi have narrated with their own chains from Muhammad ibn Hakim that he said:

 

وصفت لأبي الحسن قول هشام الجواليقي وما يقول في الشاب الموفق ، وصفت له قول هشام بن الحكم فقال : أن الله عز و جل لا يشبهه شيء

I explained the belief of Hisham al Jawaliqi to Abu al Hassan, as well as that which he says about an inspired youth, and the belief of Hisham ibn al Hakam and he replied, “Nothing resembles Allah, the most Exalted and Glorified.”[32]

 

Al Kulayni and al Qummi narrate from Muhammad ibn al Faraj that he said:

 

كتب إلى أبي الحسن أسأله عما قال هشام بن الحكم في الجسم وهشام بن سالم في الصورة ، فكتب: دع عنك حيرة الحيران واستعذ بالله من الشيطان ، ليس القول ما قال الهشامان

I wrote to Abu al Hassan to ask him about the view of Hisham ibn al Hakam regarding the body, and the view of Hisham ibn Salim about the form. He responded. “Disregard the confusion of the befuddled and seek the protection of Allah. The truth has nothing to do with the statements of the two Hishams.”[33]

 

Al Saduq has narrated with his chain from al Saqr ibn Abi Dalaf, who said:

 

سألت أبا الحسن علي بن محمد بن علي بن موسى الرضا (ع) عن التوحيد وقلت له : إني أقول بقول هشام ابن الحكم ، فغضب ثم قال : مالكم ولقول هشام ، إنه ليس منّا من زعم أن الله (ع) جسم ونحن منه برآء في الدنيا والآخرة ، يا ابن أبي دلف إن الجسم محدث ، والله محدثه ومجسمه

I asked Abu al Hassan ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Musa al Rida ‘alayh al Salam about Tawhid and said to him, “I agree with the view of Hisham ibn al Hakam.”

He became infuriated and then said, “What is the matter with you people and the view of Hisham? Whoever claims that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala is a body is not from us, we dissociate ourselves from them in this world as well as the hereafter! O Ibn Abi Dalaf, a body is brought into existence. Allah is the one who brings it into existence and creates it.”[34]

 

Now look at the boldness in his claim: “Is it possible that these types of crimes be attributed to man of excessive virtue, the likes of Hisham? Never, instead the opposition have preferred false speech and rumours as a result of their oppression and jealousy of the Ahlul Bayt and those who subscribe to their views.” It should also be remembered that most of the narrators of the Shia subscribed to the belief of anthropomorphism. A few examples are; Hisham ibn al Hakam, Hisham ibn Salim, Yunus ibn ‘Abdur Rahman, Shaitan al Taq (who they refer to as Mu’min al Taq) and others. One of the Shia asked al Mufid regarding this matter, to which he replied:

 

إني لا أزال أسمع المعتزلة يدّعون على أسلافنا أنهم كانوا كلهم مشبهة ، وأرى جماعة من أصحاب الحديث من الإمامية يطابقونهم على هذه الحكاية ، ويقولون أن نفي التشبيه إنما أخذناه من المعتزلة

I have always heard the Mu’tazilah (another deviant sect) claiming that all our predecessors were anthropomorphist.[35] I have also seen a group of hadith scholars from the Imamiyyah who agreed with that claim. They assert that we took the belief of anti-anthropomorphism from the Mu’tazilah.[36]

 

That is why you find them repeatedly asking the ‘infallible’ Imams about the correct Tawhid. There is an abundance of narrations under this chapter in the book al Tawhid of al Qummi, which one may refer to.[37]

These are the narrations of al Kafi, regarding which they claim, “The contents thereof are undisputedly authentic”. Al ‘Amili goes on to state in his Wasa’il al Shia under the fourth note:

A list of authentic books from which the narrations of this book (Wasa’il al Shia) have been quoted. Their authors have testified to its authenticity. Other scholars have also testified regarding its authenticity. Another book is al Kafi.[38]

 

Al Isfara’ini states in al Tabsir[39]:

 

The Hashimiyyah have openly stated such anthropomorphic beliefs that are kufr according to all Muslims. They are the ones who introduced this concept, which they adopted from the Jews, who attributed a son to Allah by saying, “‘Uzayr is the son of Allah”. They confine Allah to a place, limits, an end point, and that he moves. Allah is way above all of that.”

 

Some of them have tried their utmost to vindicate this anthropomorphist using every available avenue, the easiest one being, claiming that these narrations, which are ‘undisputedly authentic’ according to them, are in fact fabrications. In this manner, all those ahadith which expose this anthropomorphist are discarded. The greatest paradox is that the one who presents this laughable explanation is the author of a book on the science of narrators, i.e. Mujam al Rijal of al Khu’i.

 

He states:

 

و إني لأظن الروايات الدالة على أن هشاما يقول بالجسمية كلها موضوعة وقد نشأت هذه النسبة عن الحسد كما دل على ذلك رواية الكشي المتقدمة بإسناده عن سليمان بن جعفر الجعفري قال:سألت أبا الحسن الرضا(ع) عن هشام بن الحكم قال : فقال رحمه الله كان عبدا أوذي من قبل أصحابه حسداً منهم له

I am of the opinion that all those narrations in which it is mentioned that Hisham was an anthropomorphist are fabrications. This attribution (of anthropomorphism to him) was a result of jealousy, as indicated by the narration of al Kashshi that already passed with its chain from Sulaiman ibn Jafar al Jafari who said, “I asked Abu al Hassan al Rida about Hisham ibn al Hakam and he replied, ‘May Allah have mercy on him, he was put though difficulty by his companions, as they were jealous of him.’”[40]

 

Subhan Allah! If one of your most authentic books, regarding which you claim that all the contents are undisputedly authentic, contains fabrications, then what is the status of the rest of the books that you rely upon? Nevertheless, their most outstanding scholars have admitted that this irreligious individual was an anthropomorphist.

Sheikh al Mufid states in his book, al Hikayat, answering the query of a Shia:

 

وإنما خالف هشام وأصحابه ،جماعة أبي عبد الله بقوله في الجسم ، فزعم أن الله تعالى “ جسم لا كالأجسام

Hisham and his companions only opposed the group of Abu ‘Abdullah with regards to the body. He claims that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala is a body, unlike other bodies.[41]

 

Al Kashshi narrates from Abu Rashid who narrates from Abu Jafar al Thani who says:

 

I said, “May I be sacrificed for you, our companions have differed, do you deem it correct if I perform salah behind Hisham ibn al Hakam?”

He replied, “O Abu ‘Ali, seek Ibn Abi al Hadid.”

I asked, “Should I take his verdict?”

He replied in the affirmative. Thereafter I met Ibn Abi al Hadid and asked him, “Are we allowed to perform salah following one of the companions of Hisham?”

He replied: “No!”

 

Al Kashshi also narrates from ‘Abdur Rahman ibn al Hajjaj:

 

وروى الكشي عن عبد الرحمن بن الحجاج قال أبو الحسن أئت هشام بن الحكم فقل له : يقول لك أبو الحسن أيسرك أن تشرك في دم امرىء مسلم فإذا قال لا فقل له ما بالك شركت في دمي

Abu al Hassan said, “Go to Hisham and say to him, ‘Abu al Hassan asks if it would bring pleasure to you to assist in killing a Muslim brother?’ If he replies in the negative then say to him, ‘What is the matter with you, why have you assisted in taking my life?’”

 

Al Kashshi further narrates from ‘Abdur Rahman ibn al Hajjaj:

 

I heard him delivering Abu al Hassan’s message to Hisham ibn al Hakam. He said, “What is the matter with Hisham that he speaks even though I have maintained silence. He has instructed me to command you not to speak! I am his messenger unto to you.’

Abu Yahya said, “Hisham refrained from speaking for one month, after which he began speaking. Thereupon ‘Abdur Rahman approached him and said, ‘O Abu Muhammad, are you speaking even though you have been prohibited from doing so?’”

He retorted, “People like me cannot be prohibited from speech!”

The next year, ‘Abdur Rahman ibn al Hajjaj came to him and said, “O Hisham, would it bring pleasure to you to assist in killing a Muslim brother?”

He replied, “No.” “Then how is it that you have assisted in killing me? If you remain silent, it will compensate for your past; otherwise, it will be as if you are slaughtering me.”

He did not desist from speech until that which is known about him had transpired.[42]

 

Al Kashshi narrates from Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn Hakim al Khath’ami who reports:

 

اجتمع هشام بن سالم ، وهشام بن الحكم ، وجميل بن دراج ، وعبد الرحمن بن الحجاج ، ومحمد بن حمران ، وسعيد بن غزوان ، ونحو من خمسة عشر رجلاً من أصحابنا ، فسألوا هشام بن الحكم أن يناظر هشام بن سالم فيما اختلفوا فيه من التوحيد وصفة الله ، وعن غير ذلك لينظروا أيهم أقوى حجة ، فرضي هشام بن سالم أن يتكلم عند محمد بن أبي عمير ، ورضي هشام بن الحكم أن يتكلم عند محمد بن هشام فتكلما  وساق ما جرى بينهما وقال : قال عبد الرحمن بن الحجاج لهشام بن الحكم : كفرت والله وبالله العظيم وألحدت فيه ، ويحك ما قدرت أن تشبه بكلام ربك إلا العود تضرب به ، قال جعفر بن محمد بن حكيم : فكتب إلى أبي الحسن موسى يحكى لهم مخاطبتهم وكلامهم ويسأله أن يعلمه ما القول الذي ينبغي أن يدين الله به من صفة الجبار ، فأجابه في عرض كتابه : فهمت رحمك الله واعلم رحمك الله أن الله أجل وأعلى وأعظم من أن يبلغ كنه صفته ، فصفوه بما وصف به نفسه ، وكفوا عما سوى ذلك

Approximately fifteen of our scholars gathered including, Hisham ibn Salim, Hisham ibn al Hakam, Jamil ibn Daraj, ‘Abdur Rahman ibn al Hajjaj, Muhammad ibn Humran, and Sa’id ibn Ghazwan. They asked Hisham ibn al Hakam to debate Hisham ibn Salim regarding those subjects in which they differed, like Tawhid, the attributes of Allah, and other subjects, so that they could see who had stronger proofs. Hisham ibn Salim agreed to speak in the presence of Muhammad ibn Abi ‘Umair and Hisham ibn al Hakam agreed to speak in the presence of Muhammad ibn Hisham. They began the debate and he narrated that which took place between them.

He says: ‘Abdur Rahman ibn al Hajjaj said to Hisham ibn al Hakam, “By the oath of Allah, you have disbelieved in Allah—the Almighty—and apostatised regarding Him. Woe unto you, have you found nothing better than a stick with which you hit to compare the speech of you Rabb?”

Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn Hakim said, “Thereafter, he wrote to Abu al Hassan Musa al Kazim, narrating to him their debate and views, requesting him to enlighten him on the view that he should adopt regarding the attributes of al Jabbar (the Omnipotent) in order for his belief in Allah to be correct.”

He replied with a letter in which the following was also mentioned, “You have understood, may Allah have mercy upon you! Know well, May Allah have mercy upon you, that Allah is extremely Sublime, Lofty and Mighty. Hence, it is impossible to entirely understand the attributes of Allah! Therefore, describe Him with that which he described Himself, and shun all other descriptions.”

This heretic was tutored by the infamous infidel Abu Shakir, whose irreligiousness has already been highlighted. This is also indicated to by those who authored works on the subject of sects. Al Kashshi narrates on the authority of Abu Muhammad al Hijal that once Imam al Rida mentioned al ‘Abbasi saying:

He is one of the cronies of Abu al Harith (Yunus ibn ‘Abdur Rahman), who was a student of Hisham, and Hisham was a student of Abu Shakir. Abu Shakir was an infidel.[43]

 

Al Barqi has disparaged him in his Rijal:

 

أن هشام من غلمان أبي شاكر الزنديق وهو جسمي رديء وسيأتي في الضعفاء

Hisham is from the companions of Abu Shakir the infidel. He was a lowly anthropomorphist. His details will appear under the section of unreliable narrators.[44]

 

Al Baghdadi quotes the statement of Hisham ibn al Hakam regarding his deity in al Firaq:

 

“Seven hand spans by one hand span.” He assumed that He is the same as humans, may Allah disgrace him.

 

Ibn Qutaybah says in Mukhtalaf al Hadith:

 

We move on to Hisham ibn al Hakam. He was an extremist Rafidi who believed that Allah had boundaries, limits; He was confined to a few hand spans and other beliefs which are too blasphemous to narrate.[45]

 

Ibn Hajar mentions him in Lisan al Mizan:

 

He was from the famous and senior Rawafid. He was an anthropomorphist who claimed that the diameter of his deity is seven hand spans long and one hand span wide.[46]

 

All the above quotations reveal to us that this individual was filled with anthropomorphism up until the fleshy part of his ears. Sheikh, al Mufid even admitted this, as stated previously. His precise words were:

 

وإنما خالف هشام وأصحابه ، جماعة أبي عبد الله(ع) بقوله في الجسم ، فزعم أن الله تعالى “ جسم لا كالأجسام “ ، وقد روي أنه رجع عن هذا القول بعد ذلك وقد اختلفت الحكايات عنه ولم يصح منها إلا ما ذكرت، وأما الرد على هشام، والقول بنفي التشبيه ، فهو أكثر من أن يحصى من الرواية عن آل محمد . أخبرني أبو القاسم جعفر بن محمد بن قولويه عن محمد بن يعقوب ….عن محمد بن زياد قال : سمعت يونس يونس بن ظبيان يقول : دخلت على أبي عبد الله فقلت  له : أن هشام بن الحكم يقول في الله قولا عظيماً ، إلا أني أختصر منه أحرفا : يزعم : أن الله سبحانه “ جسم لا كالأجسام “ لأن  الأشياء شيئان : جسم وفعل الجسم ، فلا يجوز أن يكون الصانع بمعنى الفعل ، ويجب أن يكون بمعنى الفاعل، فقال أبو عبد الله: يا ويحة ! أما علم أن الجسم محدود ، متناه ، محتمل للزيادة والنقصان ، وما احتمل ذلك كان مخلوقا ؟ فلو كان الله جسماً لم يكن بين الخالق والمخلوق فرق. فهذا قول أبي عبد الله، وحجته على هشام فيما اعتل به هشام من المقال

Hisham and his companions only opposed the group of Abu ‘Abdullah with regards to the body. He claims that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala is a body, unlike other bodies. It is reported that he later retracted from this view; however, the narrations regarding this are contradictory and only that which I have mentioned is established and authentic. As far as refuting Hisham and establishing the view of anti-anthropomorphism, the number of narrations from the household of Muhammad regarding this is uncountable. Abu al Qasim Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn Quluwiyah narrated to me from Muhammad ibn Yaqub from Muhammad ibn Ziyad who said:

I heard Yunus ibn Zabyan saying, “I went to Abu ‘Abdullah and said to him, ‘Indeed Hisham ibn al Hakam utters outrageous statements regarding Allah. Briefly, he says that Allah is a body unlike other bodies as objects are of two types; bodies and the actions of bodies. It is not possible that the creator can be an action; hence, He is the one who does the actions.’

Abu ‘Abdullah replied, ‘Woe unto him! Does he not know that a body is confined and has an end-point? Does he not know that a body can be elongated and compressed? Does he not know that only created objects can accept the above changes? If Allah is a body, there will remain no difference between the Creator and the creation!’”

This is the statement of Abu ‘Abdullah and his proof against Hisham’s deviated views.[47]

 

The name Hisham ibn al Hakam, as attested to by the author of Mujam al Rijal, appears in the asanid of many narrations. The exact number reaches 160 places.

 

Hisham ibn Salim al Jawaliqi

Al ‘Amili states in Khatimat al Wasa’il:

 

ثقة ثقة ، قاله النجاشي والعلامة ، وروى الكشي له مدحا

Reliable and authentic. This was said by al Najashi and al ‘Allamah. Al Kashshi has narrated praise of him.[48]

 

They praise the man, despite him being criticised by them and being a man of corrupt beliefs!

Al Baghdadi states in al Firaq and al Isfara’ini in al Tabsir:

 

The Hishamiyyah are from amongst them. They are further divided into two groups; the group of Hisham ibn al Hakam al Rafidi and the group of Hisham ibn Salim al Jawaliqi. Both groups believe in anthropomorphism. Hisham ibn al Hakam claims that his deity is effulgence that glitters like a piece of pure bullion or a white pearl. Al Jawaliqi on the other hand claims that his deity has a form, flesh, blood, a hand, a leg, a nose, ears, eyes and a heart. Any intelligent person will immediately realise that the one who subscribes to these beliefs has nothing to do with Islam.[49]

 

It will not be inappropriate for us to prove our argument by quoting al Kafi, which ‘Abdul Hussain has described in his Muraja’at in the following manner, “The contents of which are undisputedly accurate. Al Kafi is the earliest, greatest, best and most precise from all of them.” Therefore, we will quote the ahadith of al Kafi, the contents of which (according to him) are undisputedly accurate.” Thus, it will be a proof against him and his cohorts who claim that they have exhausted their resources!

Al Kulayni narrates in al Kafi and al Qummi (who they have titled al Saduq) each with his own isnad from Muhammad ibn Hakim who said:

 

وصفت لأبي الحسن قول هشام الجواليقي وما يقول في الشاب الموفق ، وصفت له قول هشام بن الحكم فقال : أن الله عز و جل لا يشبهه شيء

I explained the view of Hisham al Jawaliqi to Abu al Hassan and that which he says regarding an inspired youth. I explained to him the view of Hisham ibn al Hakam. He replied, “Nothing resembles Allah, the Exalted and Glorified.”[50]

 

He also narrates on the authority of Muhammad ibn al Faraj, and al Qummi has narrated it from him with a complete isnad:

 

I wrote a query to Abu al Hassan regarding the view of a body that was held by Hisham ibn al Hakam and the view of a form that was upheld by Hisham ibn Salim. He responded, “Disregard the confusion of the befuddled and seek the protection of Allah. The truth has nothing to do with the statements of the two Hishams.”[51]

 

Al Kashshi narrates from ‘Abdul Malik ibn Hisham who says:

 

قلت لأبي الحسن الرضا أسألك جعلني الله فداك ؟ قال سل يا جبلى عماذا تسألني فقلت جعلت فداك زعم هشام بن سالم أن الله صورة وأن آدم خلق على مثال الرب ويصف هذا ويصف هذا و أوميت إلى جانبي وشعر رأسي ، وزعم يونس مولى آل يقطين وهشام بن الحكم : أن الله شيء لا كالأشياء بائنة منه وهو بائن من الأشياء وزعما أن إثبات الشيء أن يقال جسم فهو جسم لا كالأجسام شيء لا كالأشياء ثابت موجود غير مفقود ولا معدوم خارج من الحدين حد الإبطال وحد التشبيه فبأي القولين أقول قال ، فقال: أراد هذا الإثبات وهذا شبه ربه تعالى بمخلوق ، تعالى الله الذي ليس له شبيه ولا عدل ولا مثل ولا نظير ولا هو في صفة المخلوقين ، لا يقل بمثل ما قال هشام بن سالم وقل بما قال مولى آل يقطين وصاحبه قال قلت فنعطي الزكاة من خالف هشاما في التوحيد فقال برأسه لا

I said to Abu al Hassan al Rida, “May Allah allow me to be sacrificed for you, may I ask you something?”

He replied, “O Jabali ask regarding that which you wish to ask me.”

I said, “May I be sacrificed for you, Hisham ibn Salim claims that Allah is a form and that Adam has been created as a replica of the Rabb. He describes this and this, and indicated towards my side and the hair of my head. Yunus Mawla Al Yaqtin and Hisham ibn al Hakam claim that Allah is an entity unlike other entities. He is distinct from them and they are distinct from Him. They claim that an entity can only be established by saying that it is a body. Therefore, He is a body unlike other bodies and an entity unlike other entities. He is established and present. He is not lost or non-existent. He is beyond the two limits, the limit of nullification and the limit of comparison, so which of the two views should I adopt?”

He replied, “The one wished to establish and the other wished to compare his Rabb to the creation. Allah is above everything, He is beyond having someone who resembles Him, someone who is equal to Him, somebody who is like Him, someone who is similar to him and He does not have any of the attributes of the creation. Do not accept that which Hisham ibn Salim claims, instead, accept the view of Mawla Al Yaqtin and his companion.”

I asked, “Should we give Zakat to those who oppose Hisham in Tawhid?”

He indicated with his head in the negative.[52]

 

Shaitan al Taq

Al ‘Amili states in Khatimat al Wasa’il:

 

محمد بن علي بن النعمان الأحول مؤمن الطاق ثقة، كثير العلم، حسن الخاطر، قاله العلامة، ووثقه الشيخ ، وأثنى عليه النجاشي

Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn al No’man al Ahwal Mu’min al Taq: He is reliable and possessed a lot of knowledge and beautiful ideas. This was said by al ‘Allamah. Sheikh also considered him reliable and al Najashi praised him.[53]

 

They have praised him excessively despite the fact that he is condemned according to them and he is from the anthropomorphists. He is responsible for systemising and laying the principles and logical rules that the Imamiyyah claim to have.[54]

We reproduce the text of al Kafi which serves as a proof against him as claimed by the author in his al Muraja’at, al Kulayni in his al Kafi from Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al Khazzaz and Muhammad ibn al Hussain, both say:

 

دخلنا على أبي الحسن الرضا فحكينا له أن محمد رأى ربه في صورة الشاب الموفق في سن أبناء ثلاثين سنة وقلنا : أن هشام بن سالم وصاحب الطاق والميثمي يقولون : إنه أجوف إلى السرة والبقية صمد ، فخر ساجدا لله ثم قال : سبحانك ما عرفوك و لا وحدوك فمن أجل ذلك وصفوك ، سبحانك لو عرفوك لوصفوك بما وصفت به نفسك ، سبحانك كيف طاوعتهم أنفسهم أن يشبهوك بغيرك اللهم لا أصفك إلا بما وصفت به نفسك ولا أشبهك بخلقك أنت أهل لكل خير ، فلا تجعلني من القوم الظالمين !! ، ثم التفت إلينا فقال : ما توهمتم من شيء فتوهموا الله غيره ثم قال : نحن آل  محمد النمط الأوسط الذي لا يدركنا الغالي ولا يسبقنا التالي ، يا محمد أن رسول الله حين نظر إلى عظمة ربه كان في هيئة الشاب الموفق وسن أبناء ثلاثين سنة يا محمد عظم ربي عز و جل أن يكون في صفة المخلوقين

We entered the gathering of Abu al Hassan al Rida. We narrated to him that Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saw his Rabb in the form of a young inspired lad who was approximately thirty years of age.

We said to him, Hisham ibn Salim, Sahib al Taq, and al Mithami say, “He is hollow until His navel and the rest is solid.”

He fell prostrate and then said, “You are free from all inconsistencies! They have neither recognised You nor believed in Tawhid regarding You. That is why they have described You. You are free from all inconsistencies! If they had recognised You, they would have only described You with that which You have described Yourself. You are free from all inconsistencies! How did they delude themselves to describe You in a way that makes You resemble others? O Allah! I do not describe You except in the manner that You have described Yourself and I do not liken You to Your creation. You are worthy of all goodness, so do not place me amongst the wrong-doing nation!”

Thereafter he turned towards us and said, “If your imagination creates a picture of Allah for you, then immediately understand that that is not Allah.”

Later, he said, “We, the descendants of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam are upon the middle path. An extremist will not reach us and a follower will not surpass us. O Muhammad! When the Messenger of Allah was an inspired youth, thirty years of age when he saw the grandeur of his Rabb. O Muhammad, My Rabb’s grandeur does not permit that He should adopt the attributes of the creation.”[55]

 

The authors of books on sects have indicated towards this sect that affiliates itself with this Shaitan. Al Isfara’ini, al Baghdadi, and others have stated:

 

These are the followers of Muhammad ibn No’man, the Rafidi who was given the title Shaitan al Taq. He was from the era of Jafar al Sadiq. He lived on after him and then declared his son, Musa, the Imam and this ended with the death of Musa. Thus, he formed the group of Imamiyyah who believed that Imamah came to an end. He used to say that Allah is unaware of evil before it happens, just as Hisham ibn Salim used to say. He agreed with Hisham ibn Salim al Jawaliqi in many of his innovations. Amongst them were the belief that the actions of humans are bodies and that it is possible for actions to be bodies.[56]

 

Their magnum opus on the subject of disparagement and commendation, Rijal al Kashshi, narrates the following under the title, “Condemnation that was narrated regarding him (Shaitan al Taq)”:

 

عن المفضل بن عمر قال ، قال لي أبو عبدالله ائت الأحول فمره لا يتكلم ! فأتيته في منزله فاشرف علىّ فقلت له يقول لك أبو عبدالله لا تكلم قال أخاف إلا أصبر

Al Mufaddal ibn ‘Umar narrates:

Abu ‘Abdullah said to me, “Go to the squint-eyed and command him not to speak!”

I went to his house whereupon he glanced at me. I told him that Abu ‘Abdullah commands that you should refrain from speaking.

He retorted, “I fear that I do not have the patience to do so.”[57]

 

Al Kashshi also narrates from Fudayl ibn ‘Uthman who says:

 

دخلت على أبي عبد الله في جماعة من أصحابنا فلما أجلسني قال ما فعل صاحب الطاق ؟ قلت صالح قال أما أنه بلغني إنه جدل وإنه يتكلم في تيم قذر ؟ قلت أجل هو جدل قال أما أنه لو شاء طريف من مخاصميه أن يخصمه فعل ؟ قلت كيف ذاك ؟ فقال يقول أخبرني عن كلامك هذا من كلام أمامك ؟ فإن قال نعم : كذب علينا وإن قال لا : قال له كيف تتكلم بكلام لم يتكلم به إمامك ثم قال أنهم يتكلمون بكلام إن أنا أقررت به ورضيت به أقمت على الضلالة وأن برئت منهم شق عليّ نحن قليل وعدوّنا كثير قلت جعلت فداك فابلغه عنك ذلك ؟ قال أما أنهم قد دخلوا في أمر ما يمنعهم عن الرجوع عنه إلا الحمية قال فأبلغت أبا جعفر الأحول ذاك فقال صدق بأبي وأمي ما يمنعني من الرجوع عنه إلا الحمية

I visited Abu ‘Abdullah along with a group of our companions. After seating me down, he asked, “What is Sahib al Taq doing?”

I replied that he is in a good condition.

He then said, “It has reached me that he had an argument and he utters shameful statements?”

I replied, “Yes he has argued.”

He said, “If some of his opponents wish to defeat him, they can do so.”

I asked, “How is that possible?”

He answered, “Ask him, ‘Inform me regarding this view of yours, is it from the Imams? If he replies in the affirmative then he has forged a lie against us and if he replies negatively then say to him, ‘How can you speak regarding that which your Imam has not spoken about?’”

Thereafter he said, “They have spoken regarding such things that if I agree to it and be happy with it then I will be upon misguidance and if I dissociate myself from it then matters will become difficult as we are less in number and our enemy are many in number.”

I asked him, “May I be sacrificed for you, should I relate to him what you said?”

He answered, “Indeed they have involved themselves in such a matter that they are not being prevented from retracting from it by anything besides pride!”

I then informed Abu Jafar, the squint-eyed, about that to which he replied, “By the oath of my mother and father, nothing prevents me from retracting except pride.’’[58]

 

Along with all of this, Hisham ibn al Hakam authored a book in refutation of this Shaitan, which was named, al Radd ‘ala Shaitan al Taq. The Sheikh of their group, al Tusi has stated this in his al Fihrist and al Najashi in his Rijal.[59] If these were really the brave men who had the good fortune of serving al Baqir and al Sadiq, then we might as well say goodbye to such an Islam!

 

 

NEXT⇒ `Abdul Hussains Criticism of the Morality of the Sahabah


[1] Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 148, # 237.

[2]Furu’ al Kafi, 6/411-412.

[3]Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 159, # 265.

[4]Rijal al Najashi, 2/163.

[5]  Jafar al Sabhani: Kulliyat fi ‘Ilm al Rijal.

[6]Rijal Ibn Dawood, pg. 214.

[7]Mujam Rijal al Hadith, 21/47.

[8] Kulliyat fi ‘Ilm al Rijal, pg. 467; Qamus al Rijal, 11/119.

[9]Mujam Rijal al Hadith, pg. 142, Biography of Layth ibn al Bukhtari.

[10]Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 172; Tanqih al Maqal, 2/45 (1998); Mujam al Rijal, 14/148; Majma’ al Rijal li l-Qahbaʾi, 5/85.

[11]  Ibid.

[12] Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 169, # 285.

[13]Dirasat fi l-Athar wa l-Akhbar, pg. 233.

[14]Zihar: when the husband compares his wife to his mother implying that he has taken her to be forbidden for him.

[15] Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 171-172, # 292.

[16]Al Istibsar, 3/190, # 687, chapter of a man who marries a woman and only finds out that she was married after sleeping with her; al Tahdhib, 7/487, # 1957, chapter of the additional laws of nikah.

[17]Al Tahdhib, 10/25, # 76, chapter on the punishment of adultery.

[18]  Surah al An’am: 121.

[19] Wasa’il al Shia, 16/287.

[20]Al Kashshi, pg. 171; al Tanqih, 2/45; Mujam al Rijal, 14/148; Majma’ al Rijal, 5/83.

[21]Wasa’il al Shia, 20/360; Jami’ al Ruwat, 2/313. Therefore, Hisham ibn al Hakam is the first person to systemize and develop the doctrine of the Shia, according to them. He shares this claim with Shaitan al Taq. Al Kashshi narrates in his Rijal that which indicates that the news of Hisham ibn al Hakam’s development of the doctrine of Imamah reached Harun al Rashid, when Yahya al Barmaki said to him, “O Amir al Mu’minin, I have investigated the matter of Hisham. He claims that Allah has placed an Imam on his land besides you, whose obedience is compulsory.” Harun exclaimed in surprise, “Allah is above all inconsistencies!” Yahya said, “Yes, and he claims that if Allah commands him to emerge then he will do so.” It is apparent, as proven by this text that Harun was taken aback by this news. Therefore, it is Hisham ibn al Hakam, Shaitan al Taq, and their followers, as will be explained, who revived the idea of Ibn Saba’ regarding Amir al Mu’minin ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and then spread it amongst the rest of the followers of the Ahlul Bayt. They exploited some of the occurrences which were not in favour of the Ahlul Bayt, like the martyrdom of ‘Ali and al Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, to stir up the emotions of the masses. Thus, this doctrine found some ground and thereafter the scholars of the Shia held onto it and penned it down in their books under the section of beliefs. Al Kashshi narrates from Yunus who says, “I was with Hisham ibn al Hakam at his masjid in the evening when Salim came to him. Salim told him that Yahya ibn Khalid said that he (Hisham) had made the din of the Rafidah incomprehensible, as they are of the belief that the din cannot exist without a living Imam and they do not know whether their current Imam is dead or alive.” Upon this Hisham said, “It is only necessary for us to believe that the Imam is alive and present, but he is hidden from us, until the news of his death reaches us. As long as the news of his death does not reach us, we will remain firm on the belief that he is alive.” Refer to Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 258, # 477, pg. 266-267, # 480.

[22]Al Muraja’at, Letter: 110, pg. 390.

[23]Al Muraja’at, pg. 391-392.

[24]Usul al Kafi, 1/104, chapter of prohibition of a body or form, # 1; Ibn Babuwayh al Qummi: al Tawhid, pg. 98.

[25]  Al Baghdadi: Al Farq bayn al Firaq, pg. 65.

[26]Maqalat al Islamiyyin, 1/107.

[27]  Al Shahrastani: Al Milal wa al Nihal, 1/184; Maqalat al Islamiyyin, 1/107.

[28]Maqalat al Islamiyyin, 1/106; Al Farq bayn al Firaq, pg. 65; al Tabsir fi al Din, pg. 37.

[29]Usul al Kafi, 1/105, # 4; al Tawhid, pg. 99, # 6.

[30]Usul al Kafi, 1/106, # 7; al Tawhid, pg. 100, # 8.

[31]  Ibid.

[32]Al Kafi, 1/106, # 8, pg. 98, # 1.

[33] Al Kafi, 1/105, # 5; Al Tawhid, pg. 98, # 2.

[34]Al Tawhid, chapter proving that Allah is not body or a form.

[35]  It is stated under the biography of Harun ibn Muslim ibn Sa’dan al Katib, one of their narrators, in the book Hawi al Aqwal, 3/232, # 1186: “His agnomen is Abu al Qasim, he is a reliable narrator and a great person. He had certain beliefs conforming to anthropomorphism and Jabr (the belief that humans have no choice with regards to their actions). He met Abu Muhammad and Abu al Hassan ‘alayh al Salam.” Al Fihrist states, “He narrates from the companions of al Sadiq ‘alayh al Salam.” Another narrator is Muhammad ibn Jafar ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Awn al Asadi. Al Najashi mentions him in his Rijal, 2/284, # 1021: “He is a reliable narrator, and his ahadith are sahih, except that he believed in Jabr and anthropomorphism.”

[36]  Al Mufid: Kitab al Hikayat, pg. 77.

[37]  Refer to these narrations in al Tawhid. They are eight in number. pg. 100-103.

[38]Wasa’il al Shia, 20/36.

[39]Al Tabsir fi al Din, pg. 38.

[40]Mujam Rijal al Hadith, pg. 294.

[41]Al Hikayat, pg. 78-81.

[42]Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 278-279, # 498.

[43] Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 278, # 497.

[44]Tanqih al Maqal, 1/295

[45]  Ibn Qutaybah: Mukhtalaf al Hadith, pg. 35.

[46]Lisan al Mizan, 6/194.

[47]Al Hikayat, pg. 78-81.

[48] Khatimat al Wasa’il, 20/362.

[49]Al Farq bayn al Firaq, pg. 64-65; al Tabsir fi al Din, pg. 38.

[50] Al Kafi, 1/106, chapter on the prohibition of the body and form.

[51] Al Kafi, 1/105, chapter on the prohibition of the body and form from the book of Tawhid.

[52] Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 284-285, # 503.

[53] Khatimat al Wasa’il, 20/337.

[54]  It has been mentioned that this narrator, Shaitan al Taq (who the Shia have named Mu’min al Taq), is the person responsible for spreading the view that Imamah is confined to specific individuals from the Ahlul Bayt. When Zaid ibn ‘Ali learnt of this, he sent someone to find out the reality of the matter. Al Kashshi (pg. 186) narrates that Mu’min al Taq said:

كنت عند  أبي عبد الله فدخل  زيد بن علي فقال له زيد : “ بلغني إنك تزعم أن في آل محمد إماما مفترض الطاعة ؟ قال شيطان الطاق : نعم وكان أبوك علي بن الحسين أحدهم فقال : وكيف وقد كان يؤتى بلقمة وهي حارة فيبردها بيده ثم يلقمنيها افترى أنه كان يشفق علي من حر اللقمة , ولا يشفق عليّ من حر النار ؟ قال -شيطان الطاق – قلت له : كره أن يخبرك فتكفر فلا يكون له فيك الشفاعة لا والله فيك المشية..

 وفي رواية للكليني  وتنقيح المقال  قال زيد  بن علي لأبي جعفر :يا أبا جعفر كنت اجلس مع أبي على الخوان فيلقمني البضعة السمينة ويبرد لي اللقمة الحارة …- إلى أن قال – إذ أخبرك بالدين ولم يخبرني به ؟ فأجابه شيطان الطاق: جعلت فداك من شفقته عليك من حر النار لم يخبرك خاف عليك أن لا تقبله فتدخل النار وأخبرني أنا فأن قبلت نجوت وأن لم أقبل لم يبال أن أدخل النار..

I was in the company of Abu ‘Abdullah when Zaid ibn ‘Ali came to me and said, “It has reached me that you believe that there is an Imam from the lineage of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam whose obedience is compulsory?”

Shaitan al Taq replied, “Yes indeed, and your father, ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, was one of them.”

Zaid said: “How is this possible? A morsel of food would be brought to him whilst it was hot. He would cool it with his hand before feeding it to me. Do you think that he took pity on me regarding a morsel of hot food, but neglected me as far as the heat of the fire of Jahannam is concerned?”

Shaitan al Taq says, “I said to him that he feared that you might reject it if he did tell you. The result of that will be that you will be deprived of his intercession. By the oath of Allah, he would not have a choice regarding you.”

The narration of al Kulayni and Tanqih al Maqal state that Zaid ibn ‘Ali said to Abu Jafar, “O Abu Jafar, I would sit with my father, ‘Ali, at the tablecloth. He would feed me the fleshy pieces and he would cool down the hot morsels… do you think he taught you the din and left me out?”

Shaitan al Taq replied, “May I be sacrificed for you, the only reason why he did inform you was his compassion for you, and that he did not want you to burn in hell. He did not inform you because if he did and you rejected it, you would have entered hell. The reason why he informed me is because if I accept it, I will be saved and if I reject it, it does not bother him that I will go to hell.”

[55]Usul al Kafi, Kitab al Tawhid, 1/100, chapter of the prohibition of describing with that which He did not describe himself.

[56]Al Farq bayn al Firaq, pg. 70; al Tabsir fi al Din, pg. 37.

[57]Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 191.

[58]Rijal al Kashshi, pg. 191.

[59]Al Fihrist, pg. 355; Rijal, pg. 305; refer to al Dhari’ah, 10/203.

Back to top