 والله من الشيطان العين الرجيم بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم والصلاة والسلام على أشف الأنبياء والمرسلين السيدنا ونبينا أبل القاس من محمد المصطفة وألأ أهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين المعصومين المظلومين وبالخصوص السيدنا عليا وزوجته فاطمة الزحراء عليها السلام أولاد ومائرين ألأ أهل بيته الطيبين أهل بيته الطيبين في هذه المقلقة المخطبية في هذه الشراء المطبخية ساعتنا أهل بيته الطيبين والصلاة والمصطفة والألأ ومائرين ساعتنا أهل بيته الطيبين و في الرأي the previous episode we had began by discussing a very important topic and the topic which I wish to continue discussing tonight namely what is the methodology what is the development process that any Muslim scholar has utilized in the past in order to discuss history let us have a very frank discussion tonight brothers and sisters in which we want our hearts to be open to as much academic objectivity as possible chill between the dead and the dead , and we wish to be as open as possible to what the methodology used by Muslims in order to discern history is indeed there are many out there who have numerous doubt pertaining to this particular event , the event of the martyrdom of Fatala and it is not surprising for indeed when you hear one story on the念It relates to another فأنا نتظر أن هذا would naturally generate a question within the audience as to whether or not these accounts are truthful يطلق أن هناك أقل من شخص who wish to know is it possible that the ummah turned its back upon its heels في مجرد من الناس في المشاركة بأنها تقلق بشكل صغير بشكل صغير من الناس who are taking the power to oppress Fatima Tezahra and to attack her house and is this something within the realm of possibility of course in the previous episode I had alluded to the fact that one of the major doubts that we often hear something which we would often hear from well-meaning well-educated people of good standing people of religious backgrounds is that they would say brother is this Rwaya Sahih brother is this Hadith Sahih and of course we talked about the fact that this falls into a category fallacy for indeed what we are looking at are not reports of jurisprudence that we would need to apply the fourfold division of Sahih to it we would not need to look at whether it is Sahih Muwathaq Hassan or Waif that is not to say that there are no Rwayats which meet these criteria according to our scholars according to our scholars there are several Rwayats alluding to Fatima Tezahra's martyrdom may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon her and her husband and her father and her husband and her children and indeed these reports according to those Olamah have reached the level of ehtabar and authenticity according to even that feqhi standard let me make that clear so my discussion tonight is not pertaining to whether or not we do not have such Rwayats I do not wish for us to enter into a false dilemma by thinking that is the topic of discussion tonight rather the topic of discussion tonight is what is the historical methodology utilized by the Muslim Olamah of course in previous episodes I had talked about the methodology utilized by our great Autad our great Olamah particularly some of the great giants of the history of 20th century sheism the likes of Kashif Al-Ghataa the likes of Mohsen Al-Amin and the likes of Sayyid Al-Khoi Sayyid Al-Muhaqaq Zaeem Haouzat Najaf when I mentioned their standards it became very clear that such individuals who do indeed believe in the standard of checking the objectivity and authenticity of Rwayat in the science of Almar Rajal do not consider this measurement to be the accurate measurement when it comes to objectively verifying history that is to say they believe that this standard must be diligently observed when it comes to verifying whether or not the Maula Allah Az-Zawajal has commanded a certain action has forbidden a certain action or has allowed certain actions to become mustahab or makru when it comes to particularly the Halal and Haram such Olamah have diligently utilized the standards of Jarhi wa Taadil the standards of Alma Al-Daraya and you can find this laid out in Sayyid Al-Khoi's Magnus Opus معجم الرجال الحديث but tonight we are looking at a separate topic namely what is the standard they utilize in history we saw that this is not the standard so allow us to ask a question is this merely something which is obstructed confined and relegated to the Shi'a ibn Asheri Imamiyah scholars or have a very scholars of Hadith who belong to the movements which calls itself the Ahl al-Hadith also engaged in the practice of discerning between two different types of reports namely historical and those Hadith which classify as teaching us things from such as and of course it is necessary to point out that we the Shi'a Imamiyah do not merely accept خبر الواحد صحيح in we believe that must come from those those things which are clear cut and there is no dispute in them so without further ado I would like to continue by looking at what some of these we find that Ibn Hajar Al-Asqilani the famous compiler and writer of the famous commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari someone who is considered by the vast majority of Ahl al-Sunnah to be Amir al-Mu'mineen in Hadith he states the following when looking at the biography of Saif ibn Amr al-Tamimi he states Saif the son of Amr from the tribe of Tameem the author of the book or the compiler of the book which refers to the apostasy in the beginning of Islam what is referred to as ويقال له الضب this is another alternative name which is attributed to him ويقال غير ذلك الكوفي it's also stated that he's from Kufa وعيف الحديث he is weak in Hadith namely his Hadith are not taken عمدة في التاريخ yet he is dependent upon pillar in history أفحش ابن هبان القول فيه من الثامنة ومات في من الرشيد namely ابن هبان has probably the harshest critiques against him and he died in the 8th generation and he is from the time of Haroun al-Rashid so ابن هجر الأسقلاني أمير المؤمنين in Hadith according to the vast majority of Ahl al-Sunnah he clearly distinguishes in all clarity that the conditions of accepting narrations namely Halal and Haram and points out that they differ when it comes to history otherwise it would make no point and it would not make sense to say that someone is عمدة في التاريخ and that they are weak in Hadith it would not make sense to take both of those statements if one were to accept his narrations in their entirety the second case we wish to look at is Shamsuddin al-Wahibi namely the famous student of Ibn Taymiyyah al-Harrani of course Shamsuddin al-Wahibi despite his tutelage of a renowned Ibn Taymiyyah is someone who is accepted by the vast majority of the Ahl al-Sunnah you will find even the most renowned of the Asha'ira who have leading us towards Tasawwuf and therefore revile and find problematic the school of Ibn Taymiyyah have taken the statements of Shamsuddin al-Wahibi and have depended upon him he is without doubt considered a pillar in the science of Rujal he states in the profile of Muhammad Ibn Ashaq صاحب السير والمغازي he states and in regards to that which has been decided in practice Verily Ibn Ashaq he is considered a Marja he is a depended upon source when it comes to issues of Marazi of course Marazi comes from the word Ghazwa which refers to the skirmishes of the Prophet but the word in general is utilized to even encompass most basic details of the Seerah as well so any detail pertaining to the Prophet's life والأيام النبوية and the issues of the days of the Prophet ما إنه يشذ بالأشياء and yet he would come forward with unique sayings in certain things وإنه ليس بهجف الحلال والحرام نعم ولا بالوحي بل يستشهد به نعم هو ليس بهجف حلال والحرام و لكن هذا ليس شيئ which is unique هو يتكلم بأن الناس بهجف وفهبي is very clear here بأن وروات have depended أبن Ashaq in Seerah والمغازي but they do not depend upon him و لكنهم لا يدفن أو يعتقد أنه يتكلم في حلال والحرام و هؤلاء هؤلاء هؤلاء سكولرين يتكلم بشكل كبير if not all of the Sunni world now of course when we say all of the Sunni world we do not mean unique exceptions to the rule we do not mean people we mean journalists and therefore do not accept those who were classical scholars have accepted nor do we mean Neomotazalites we mean those who have depended upon what we call the ألوم النقلية we transmitted sciences are those the only two cases we have no we come to أبن كثير at the Meshqi of تفسير أبن كثير of course he is also attributed to have been under the tutelage of أبن تيمير because this is not my field I'm not an expert in Sunniism and nor am I particularly concerned with whether or not this claim is true if it's not true then we may throw that claim to the side nonetheless the expertise of أبن كثير is not something which is disputed in the issue of تفسير and more importantly in the issue of history for his book is considered to be one of the most authentic sources it is one which is widely translated into the English language and one which is heavily depended upon in the average of Sunni now of course when I mention these things I want to make very clear that whether or not these Sunnis and these Sunni scholars the scholars of the أحل الصناول جماعة had made this their standard in history would be irrelevant to this discussion for indeed we showed her the doubt the unanswered objection of many of our brothers who wonder is this رواية صحيح is one which emanates from the lips of the Shia of themselves and therefore the discussion pertaining to what is the measurement of history is generally one which should have been confined to the scholars of the إمامية and we brought forward some of the claims of the most objective most thorough and most diligent Shia scholars of the 20th century and yet I wish to continue why in order to establish that this is not merely an inter-إمامي practice this is not merely of the سلوك of the ألماء but rather this is a principle amongst the أقلاء this is a principle amongst أسحاب الفن the particular science and art of historiography this particular principle is one which they all adopted ابن كثير الدمشقي he states when looking at محمد بن عمر الواقدي and what he has to say about him he states و الواقدي عنده زيادات حسنة و تاريخ مهرر غالبا فإنه من عمت هذا الشعن الكبار وهو الصدوق في نفسه مكثر كما بصطنا القول في عدالته وجرحه في كتابنا الموصوم بالتكميل في معرفة الثقات و الغعفة والمجاهيل والله والله الحمد والمنا of course he has to say here but وقدي has many زيادات which are good he has many extra things which are good and his history is on point and he is from the imams of this field and from the كبار and he is dependable in and of himself now of course الواقدي for those of you who are unaware is considered to be a questionable reporter when it comes to that which is and and so when it comes to looking at these particular aspects we see that particularly given that they are looking at the حلال and the haram given that these are biographical dictionaries pertaining to the what of hadith there would be no need to categorically point out that these individuals are not reliable in history if there was not a distinguishment a Tabayan between history and hadith of course these quotes should have sufficed but it is also necessary to just continue in order that one would see these are not shahd or isolated positions but rather these are positions which belong to the very pillars to looking at history and distinguishing between historians in addition to مهدثون we find it is reported from Ahmed bin Hanbal in the famous النقاط على مقدمة ابن صلاح of ابن هجر الأسقال سؤل أحمد بن Hanbal وهو على باب النظر هاشم بن قاسم فقيل له يا أبا عبدالله it was asked of Ahmed bin Hanbal and so it was asked أو أبا عبدالله which is of course the conya of Ahmed bin Hanbal ما تقول في موسى بن أبيده و محمد ابن إسحاق what do you say about موسى بن أبيده and محمد ابن إسحاق فقال أما موسى بن أبيده فلم يكن به بأس in regards to موسى بن أبيده فلم يكن به بأس ولكن حدث بأحديث مناكير عن أبدالله بن دينار however he would report deniable reports well there is a debate as to what مناكير means in the language of Ahmed بن Hanbal but since we are not interested in the Sony Science of Hadith today and this is an issue that can be discussed amongst your own scholars we will leave that and we will just focus on مناكير meaning deniable rejected حدث بأحديث مناكير عن أبدالله بن دينار وما محمد ابن إسحاق فالرجل تكتب عنه هذه الأحاديث يعني المغازي ونهوها فأما إذا جاء الحلال والهرام أردنا قوماً حكبة وقبدا أصاب يديه الأربع when it comes to his reports of Sirad Maghazi we accept it but when it comes to Halal and Haram we reject it and he talks about a gesture that the محديثون used to do with their hands when it comes to other reporters and earlier scholars we find that ويهي ابن معين and of course his position in جرحي وتعديل is not something which is unknown to be أهل الصناول الجماعة سألته عن البقائي أعني زيادة فقال لا بأس به في المغازي أما في غيره فلا so يهي ابن معين زياد البقائي and he responds when it comes to مغازي namely history, the zero of a prophet then take what he has to say but when it comes to anything else then no as for other particular reports which are interesting in this field we find that these are particularly classical scholars who are accepted as being pillars in their field some would argue that of course when it comes to contemporary scholars they differ slightly but we shall see that the case is that these classical pillars and the contemporary experts in their field remain fairly consistent in what they have to say we find for example continuing with the classical scholars ابن عبدالبر and he is of course the author of numerous famous works one of them being particularly in تراجم of صحابة he states he is describing a book and he states that the book is famous amongst the people of knowledge it's so famous that it is above being required to ask for أسانيد لأنه أشبه التواطر في مجي التلقي للناس له بالقبول والمعرفة namely that we don't need to ask for the Islam because this book is very famous and the people have accepted it and it is more not when we look at this particular principle we see that it is shared not only by these individuals but more importantly that even the most skeptical and the most diligent of scholars people accepted as pillars in the field such as and in areas such as have also utilized such principles in their works but of course I do not wish to dedicate our entire time to those individuals because I believe that when it comes to establishing the classical scholars we have cited enough people rather I wish to go to the work of a contemporary scholar nonetheless considered an expert in this field and when we understand who this individual is we'll just see how widespread this particular methodology is الدكتور أقرام ضياء العمري or عمري I'm not quite sure on the pronunciation to be fair this is an individual who has taught at one of the major Salafi universities in Saudi Arabia and when it comes to this field of history he is not unknown to the علماء of the Salafi he states the following in his book دراسات تاريخية he states that namely when it comes to depending upon only صحيح reports in regards to accepting reports of history that do not pertain to عقيدة nor شرعية namely areas of عقائد or فق then this is something that then this is something in which we allow a lot and a lot of leniency in لأن روايات تاريخية التي دونها أسلافنا المؤرخون لم تعمل مؤاملة الأحديث because the reports of history upon which our predecessors namely the Salafi historians the Salafi collectors of the news used to depend upon they did not deal with these reports with the مؤاملة of حديث بل تم تصاهل فيها وإذا رفظنا من هاجهم فإن الحلقات الفارغة في تاريخنا ستمثل حوة صحيقة بيننا وبينما فينا مما يولد الهير والضياء والتمزق والإنقطاب نعم إذا كنا ندفع على سولي تحديث حديثي وإذا كنا ندفع في المنطقة سنجد أن حصولنا سيكون مفتوح وإذا كنا ندفع بشكل كبير وإذا كنا ندفع كنا ندفع في طبيعه في وقت 27 لذا when we find this لذا when we find أن هذا المشكل يدفع أنه حقوق لن يفتح لذلك لن ندفع هل هذه الأشياء مقبطة في حديث إذا كنا يرد لتحطي that particular standard فلنعرف that they might be claiming to utilize a new methodology it might be a methodology which they find befitting for themselves and that's absolutely fine but yet it would not be the methodology of either the great historians of the She'a more of the great historians who belong to the Ahl-Sunnah and the Jama'ah so we must know and we must be aware that every field has its specialist and the specialists of the field of Islamic history have ruled and declared that the need to have a particular criteria which only allows for Sahih reports is one which is problematic none the less before we proceed to move on to the next episode for indeed I'm sure that my time has been cut particularly short even though I have forgot to observe the time for now I would like to quote from a particular report of Ahmed Bin Hambal in order that we might understand why these reports have not reached us today of course I dislike that we enter into polemics at this time of the year in which we discuss something so sensitive and in which we discuss something which is much greater than a bunch of online keyboard warriors debating something much greater than our petty need to fuel the ego and feel that we have won some kind of argument an argument that at the end of the day your ego will not fill you on the day of judgement and your ego will not avail you on the day of judgement rather let us observe this quote in order that this might serve as a key which allows us to understand why some of these reports would be quite isolated and the preponderance of evidence would of course be one which is dare I say censored and dare I say limited in its outreach I begin by quoting Abdullah Bin Ahmed Bin Hambal reported to us he said I asked my father about a man that vilifies anyone from the companions of the Prophet ﷺ so he said I do not believe he is upon Islam what is interesting about this particular report is that and of course this report is found in Kitaba Sunnah of the famous it shows to us that Ahmed Bin Hambal would doubt upon the Islam of anyone who vilifies the companions now of course the term vilifying the companions is a very loose term there are some who do not speak of the companions in a particularly rude way but merely narrate what has reached them in their reports and merely question why this has happened and of course if we were to go even further but we would see that the definition of companion does not encompass one who is excluded by leaving a religion nor does it encompass the hypocrites according to the Abdullah of Islam so if a person is genuinely convinced but a personality who is disagreed upon let's say for the sake of argument the disagreement would be upon Abu Talib who our friends from the Ahl Sunnah and the Jama'a do not consider to be a Muslim are we now to attack them for vilifying Abu Talib by stating that we believe he died upon disbelief or is it that the books that have reached them have portrayed to them this particular issue furthermore يوسف بن موسى ربورت to us that Abu Abdullah namely Ahmed bin Hambal was asked and Ali bin Samad reported to us he asked Ahmed bin Hambal about Arafa the neighbor we had he would greet me with salam do I return it he said no now what's interesting here is this issue that you could be classed as Arafa before except in certain reports which we've seen in history there are certain reporters who do to narrating things have been known as Arafa ون خبيث and more importantly we find in again ليسان الميزان the following موسى بن هارون and it is said شاي which could be a mistake for Sheer consumed by the fire the majority of his hadith that I heard from him exceeded proper limits i.e. they are manakir he narrates vile narrations defying the companions in another place he said he was trustworthy and he would tell about the defects of the wives and companions of the prophets of course what I'm trying to highlight here is there could very well be a precedent of when things have reached the hadith compilers due to a set of dogma they would reject such reports because they have a preconceived notion that such things are impossible for the wives and the companions but in doing so they sometimes recognize individuals who they admit or by their standards reliable but then are baffled as to why they narrate such rejectable reports and if those are a few that were known to be reliable what about all those individuals in history who were once known to be reliable but all of a sudden became dismissed as unreliable purely due to the presence of the nations in their books and in their narrations rubbers and sisters in Islam it is necessary that we try to show as much objectivity to this discussion we do not wish to be like those who resort to insults resort to fueling the flames of sectarian hatred of sectarian violence and so I would like to ask for all of you who are commemorating the martyrdom of Fatima be civilized in your behavior do not be of those who incite others aimlessly do not be of those who in order to prove a cheap point if you are one of those who cannot back up what you have to say with reliable information if you are not one of those who could have an academic discussion pertaining to this do not be of those who try to incite the other rather look into this issue with all objectivity and see what conclusions you come to yourself