dhaeef hadith's used by gair muqallid's

[Ali al-Hanafi]

I don't slander the muhajireen and ansar and i don't curse any of them and i love most of them

so back to the topic

we love all of them.

[Nafs Zakiyah]

Mutazili

It is interesting how you argue for the authenticity of wiping, when many(if not most) of the major Ahlul Bayt Imams believed that wiping over khuffayn had been abrogated and was therefore not permissible, let alone over jawrabayn.

[Mutazili]

Mutazili

It is interesting how you argue for the authenticity of wiping, when many(if not most) of the major Ahlul Bayt Imams believed that wiping over khuffayn had been abrogated and was therefore not permissible, let alone over jawrabayn.

prove it !!! I don't like it when people make claims without proofs so please present proofs

[Ali al-Hanafi]

prove it !!! I don't like it when people make claims without proofs so please present proofs

The article in the first post mentions references and proofs for its claims so why you're asking for proof I have no idea. In fact, you're the one making claims without presenting any proofs.

[hiso]

Arey yaar.... This shi'ite is deviating the topic..
Brother Mutazili , if you are much interested, then become a sunni... i will happily accept you...

CAN ANY BODY CONCENTRATE ON THE MAIN TOPIC PLEASE...

[Nafs Zakiyah]

prove it !!! I don't like it when people make claims without proofs so please present proofs

You ask me for proofs, yet I see you on this forum making bold claims without substantiation.
If you were well read I would have thought that you knew the basic Fiqh of the Imams of Aal Muhammad.
Since you are a 12:er, tell me do the Imami scholars accepts the wiping of jawrabayn, if so on what basis?
12:ers never had many scholars from Aal Muhammad.

Imam al-Qasim bin Ibrahim al-Rassi and Imam Yahya bin al-Husayn, known as al-Hadi ila al-Haqq, are in agreement on this issue, it has been abrogated.
The Imams of Ahlul Bayt narrates from sayyidina Ali that he said, “Verily, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon
him and his progeny, wiped [over the leather socks] before the revelation of al-Mā’ida. The verse in al-Mā’ida [5:6] was not revealed yet.
However, he did not wipe afterwards.”

You don't follow an established tradition, you do not follow a specific Usul etc. You argue from your personal opinions and conclusions, and that is fine.
But then do not claim to represent anything other than yourself!
My post is really not about the validity of wiping over khuffayn or jawrabayn, but that you set yourself up as the champion of Ahlul Bayt, yet this thread goes to show that you don't follow their basic fiqh!

[Mutazili]

You ask me for proofs, yet I see you on this forum making bold claims without substantiation.
If you were well read I would have thought that you knew the basic Fiqh of the Imams of Aal Muhammad.
Since you are a 12:er, tell me do the Imami scholars accepts the wiping of jawrabayn, if so on what basis?
12:ers never had many scholars from Aal Muhammad.

Imam al-Qasim bin Ibrahim al-Rassi and Imam Yahya bin al-Husayn, known as al-Hadi ila al-Haqq, are in agreement on this issue, it has been abrogated.
The Imams of Ahlul Bayt narrates from sayyidina Ali that he said, “Verily, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon
him and his progeny, wiped [over the leather socks] before the revelation of al-Mā’ida. The verse in al-Mā’ida [5:6] was not revealed yet.
However, he did not wipe afterwards.”

You don't follow an established tradition, you do not follow a specific Usul etc. You argue from your personal opinions and conclusions, and that is fine.
But then do not claim to represent anything other than yourself!
My post is really not about the validity of wiping over khuffayn or jawrabayn, but that you set yourself up as the champion of Ahlul Bayt, yet this thread goes to show that you don't follow their basic fiqh!

so imams of zaidyyah are hujja upon us now or what ?? we don't follow these people at all so i ask again : please present hadith from true ahlbait(as) (the 14 infallibles ) about this !!

i am waiting

ws

[Abdussamad]

Actually they're Sahih, as the Shafi'i use it to prove their hands below chest (lowest part of chest). As for Jawrabay, they might use the reports of companions doing that, which i believe wasn't discussed in the article about the weakness of jawrabayn.

What is jawrabayn? Which hadeeth are you refering to? Could you mention it please? All I know is, that there are no authentic ahadeeth regarding where to place the hands. Some hanafi scholars consider the hadith regarding "under the navel" saheeh. The hanafis criticize the "on the chest" ahadeeth as far as I know.

[Zubair]

What is jawrabayn? Which hadeeth are you refering to? Could you mention it please? All I know is, that there are no authentic ahadeeth regarding where to place the hands. Some hanafi scholars consider the hadith regarding "under the navel" saheeh. The hanafis criticize the "on the chest" ahadeeth as far as I know.

Jawrabayn are regular socks (if i'm not mistaken), they're not leather scocks. As for the issue of the hands, the hadith used by Shawafi' is recorded in Sahih Ibn Khuzayma, while the Ahnaf use a Sahih if not hasan hadith (as 'Allama Qutlubugha states) mentioned in Musannaf alluded in his takhrijat of a particular book. The Ahnaf use proof from that hadith, as well as weak ahadith (all added amount to Hasan at the least), and the actions of the Salaf.

Two Ahnaf's (No Shafi's) discussion on the proofs used by Shafi's and Hanafis - http://www.4shared.com/file/83113389...53/______.html

Phenominal work on the subject, I'm not done reading though.

Ma' Salama

[rqsnnt]

Salamu alaykum
All ahadeeth of placing the hands on the chess are weak. Allah knows best.

Assalam Alaikum
Then placing the hands on chest for woman, is't ok? If yes then how?
Salam