In this post, I would review as to what have scholars said about this Ziarat’s authenticity. I would not be doing analysis of Rijal/narrators, rather quote what Scholars have said. Please keep in mind that I have used […] for my footnotes. Use of (…) is for those whose work I am using.

My work would concentrate on two things mainly

1- What has been said about Sanad

2- What has been said about authenticity

 

 

SANAD OF ZIARAT UL JAMIA

As regards to Sanad/chain of this ziarat, We find Syed Ali Husseini al Sadr saying in his book, Fi Rihab al Ziyarat ul Jamia [1]

روى الشيخ الصدوق أبو جعفر محمّد بن علي بن موسى بن بابويه القمّي (1) في العيون (2) قال : 
    حدّثنا علي بن أحمد بن محمّد بن عمران الدقّاق (رضي الله عنه) (3) ومحمّد بن أحمد السناني (4) ، وعلي بن عبدالله الورّاق (5)، والحسين بن إبراهيم بن أحمد بن هشام المكتّب (6) قال 

Sheikh Sudooq Abu Jafar Mohammad bin Ali bin Musa Bin Babwiya al Qummi (1) said in his book al Ayoon (2). He said that narrated to me Ali bin Ahmad bin Mohammad bin Imran al Daqqaq (3) and Mohammad bin Ahmad al Sanani (4) and Ali bin Abdullah al Waraq (5) and Hussein bin Ibrahim bin Ahmad bin Hashamd al Maktab (6). He said …………. [2]

 

And in the footnotes, Syed al Sadr says

 

(1) هو الشيخ العظيم من مشايخ الشيعة الثقات ، والركن القويم من أركان الشريعة الأجلاّء ، من الذين لا شكّ في وثاقتهم ولا حاجة إلى بيان عدالتهم .

 He is Great Scholar, Teacher of Shia Trustworthy………There is no doubt in his Trustworthiness and no need to express him being Just

 

(2) عيون أخبار الرضا (عليه السلام) : ج2 ص277 .

 Ayoon Akhbar ur Raza, Vol 2, page 277 [3]

 

(3) هو من مشايخ الصدوق الذين ترضّى عليهم وترحّم لهم وهو قرين المدح ، بل عديل التوثيق ، فإنّهم أثبات أجلاّء ، والحديث من جهتهم صحيح معتمد عليه كما حكي من المحقّق الداماد (قدس سره) .
بل يستفاد توثيق مشايخه عموماً من كلامه في أوّل كتاب المقنع : ص2 .

(إذ كان ما اُبيّنه فيه من الكتب الاُصولية موجوداً مبيّناً عن المشايخ العلماء والفقهاء الثقات (رحمهم الله)) .

He is amongst Teachers of Sudooq, and there is Tardhi [4] and Tarheem [5] for him, and this shows Praise, rather it is proof of Trustworthiness, since it is proven that they are great. And narration in this regards is Sahih and can be trusted as has been said by Mohaqiq Damaad. Rather We get Trustworthiness of his Teachers in general from his saying in start of his book, Al Muqna’a, page 2…..

 

(4) من مشايخ الصدوق الذين أكثر الحديث عنهم وترحّم عليهم ، فهو مورد الإطمئنان والوثوق .

 He is amongst Teachers of Sudooq and He has taken many narrations from him, and did Tarheen. So this gives satisfaction to us in this regard and Trustworthiness

 

(5) من مشيخة الصدوق وممّن روى عنهم مترحّماً عليهم ، فيطمئنّ بوثاقته .

 

He is amongst teacher of Sudooq and He has done his Tarheem, so we are satisfied for his trustworthiness

 

(6) هو الحسين بن إبراهيم المؤدّب المكتّب .. روى عنه الصدوق مترضّياً عليه ، وأقلّ ما يستفاد منه حسن حاله كما حكي عن التعليقة .

 He is Hussein bin Ibrahim. Sudooq narrated from him and did his Tardhi. And this benefits us that He was Hasan/good in status as we find in Taleeq [6]

 

Then on the next page, Syed al Sadr says

 

حدّثنا محمّد بن عبدالله الكوفيّ (1) . 

    وأبو الحسين الأسدي (2) ، قالوا : 
    حدّثنا محمّد بن إسماعيل المكّي البرمكي (3) قال : 
    حدّثنا موسى بن عبدالله النخعي (4) قال : قلت : لعلي بن محمّد بن علي

 

Narrated to us Mohammad bin Abdullah al Kufi (1) and Abu Hussein al Asadi (2); and they said

Narrated to us Mohammad bin Ismail al Makki al Barmaki (3), and he said

narrated to us Musa bin Abdullah al Nakhai (4), who said that I asked Imam Ali bin Mohammad (aswS)

 

And in the footnotes, he says

 

(1) هو محمّد بن عبدالله بن نجيح الكوفي المعروف بالشيخ ، ذكره العلاّمة في القسم الأوّل من رجاله المعدّ للمعتمدين في الخلاصة : ص156 الرقم 108 ، وفي محكي الوجيزة والبلغة أنّه ممدوح ، وفي محكي منتهى المقال أنّه من مصنّفي الإمامية ، ويكفيه حسناً .

He is Mohammad bin Abdullah Najeeh al Kufi who is famous by Sheikh. He was mentioned by Allama (Hilli) in first category in his Rijal, who are trustworthy ones in Al Khulasa, page 157, number 108. And what we get in Al Wajeeza and Al Balagha, that he is praised. And what we get from Montahi ul Miqaal, he is an author in Imamia, and that is sufficient for Him being Hasan

 
(2) هو محمّد بن جعفر الأسدي الكوفي المحقّق وثاقته ، وقد قال فيه النجاشي في رجاله : ص264 أنّه ثقة صحيح الحديث .

 

He is Mohammad bin Jafar al Asadi al Kufi. Najashi said in his Rijal, page 264 that He is Trustworthy and Sahih in Hadeeth

 

(3) وثّقه النجاشي في رجاله : ص241 وقال : كان ثقة مستقيماً له كتب منها كتاب التوحيد ، وحكى توثيقه أيضاً عن الوجيزة ، والبلغة ومشتركات الكاظمي والطريحي .

Najashi said that He is Thiqa in his Rijal, page 241. And said that He is Trustworthy and steadfast, and he has a book Kitab-u-Tauheed. And we get hsi trustworthiness from Al Wajeeza and alBalgha and Mushtarikaat al Kadhmi and Al Tareehi

 

(4) ورد فيما بأيدينا من نسخة العيون موسى بن عمران النخعي ، والظاهر أنّه تصحيف ، والصحيح موسى بن عبدالله النخعي كما أثبتناه بقرينة ذكره هكذا في الفقيه من نفس الصدوق (رحمه الله) ، ونقله عنه في التهذيب : ج6 ص95 .
على أنّ موسى بن عمران النخعي لم يذكر له حديث عن الإمام الهادي (عليه السلام) ، وهو أيضاً ثقة ورد في اسناد تفسير القمّي : ج1 ص388 ، إلاّ أنّه ليس هو الراوي لهذه الزيارة الشريفة .
وموسى بن عبدالله النخعي ورد أيضاً في اسناد مشايخ علي بن إبراهيم في الكافي : ج1 ص27 ح31 .
وفي روايته الزيارة الجامعة دلالة على كونه إماميّاً ، صحيح الاعتقاد ، بل في تلقين مولانا الإمام الهادي (عليه السلام) هذه الزيارة المتضمّنة لبيان مراتب الأئمّة ، شهادة على كون الرجل من الحسان ومقبول الرواية ، كما أفاده المحقّق المامقاني في تنقيح المقال : ج3 ص257 .
وعلى الجملة فهو مقبول ، بل هو موثّق بالتوثيق العام من علي بن إبراهيم الذي وثّق عموماً سلسلة رواته بقوله في مقدّمة تفسير القمّي : ج1 ص4 « ونحن ذاكرون ومخبرون بما ينتهي إلينا ورواه مشايخنا وثقاتنا عن الذين فرض الله طاعتهم وأوجب ولايتهم .. » .
وبذلك تعرف أنّ جميع رجال سلسلة السند معتبرون بالإستقصاء . مع ما عرفت من العلاّمة المجلسي في أوّل هذا الكتاب من أنّ هذه الزيارة أصحّ الزيارات سنداً .

And what we are getting from the copy of al Ayoon is that he is Musa bin Imran al Nakhai. And this is a mistake. And the correct is that it is Musa bin Abdullah al Nakhai as is proven from al Faqeeh [7] and from that was copied by Tusi in Tehzeeb, 6/95 that Musa bin Imran al Nakhai was not mentioned in narrating from Imam Hadi (asws). He is also Thiqa as he has been in Chains of Tafsir Qummi, 1/388, though he is not the narrator in this Ziyarat.

And Musa bin Abdullah al Nakhai, He is also there in Chains of Ali bin Ibrahim in al Kafi, 1/27 narration 31

And the narration of Ziyarat Jamis is proof that He is Imami, and with correct belief. Rather advice of Imam Hadi to him in this Ziarat which explains status of Aimmah, is a proof that he is Hasan and his narrations are accepted as we benefit from Mohaqiq Mamqani in his Tanqeeh ul Miqaal, 3/257

And in any case, he is accepted, rather trustworthy due to general trustworthiness show by Ali bin Ibrahim in his chains…………

And with that knowledge of all narrators of this chain being reliable; alongwith what we know from Allama Majlisi who said in start of this book that this Ziarat is Most Sahih of all as per Sanad

 

 

Syed Ali Milani wrote for the last narrator that Musa al Nakhai, one book says that He is Musa bin Imran al Nakhai and other says he is Musa bin Abdullah al Nakhai. He explains the reason as

 

ويحتمل أنْ يكون «موسى» في نسخة «الفقيه» منسوباً إلى جدّه «عبدالله» فتكون النسختان صحيحتين، والرجل واحد.

وللنسبة إلى الجدّ في الكتب الروائيّة نظائر كثيرة،

And there is chance that Musa in copy of al Faqeeh is attributed to the Grandfather “Abdullah”, and so both copies are correct, and he is One

And the examples of attribution to grand father are many in books of Narration. 

 

Syed Ali Milani said in regards to his trustworthiness that He is narrator of many books for whom authors said that they would be taking narrations from Thiqa, like He gives examples of

1- Tafsir Qummi

2- Kamil uz Ziyarat

3- Al Mazaar of Sheikh Mashadi

4- Sheikh Amad ud Deen Tibri’s Basharat ul Mustafa

5- Him being present in Faqeeh of Sudooq, and trust of Sudooq on his book.

6- Opinion of Sheikh Mamqani for him, who said

 الحسان مقبول الرواية لهم

He is good and his narrations are accepted ………………… [8]

 

 

AUTHENTICITY

 

Famous scholar, Ali Akbar Ghafari said in his footnotes in Man la Yahdaral Faqih 

 فالسند حسن كالصحيح

Sanad of this narration is Hasan, rather like Sahih …… [9]

Sheikh Jamil Hamood Aamili said regarding this Ziaraat

الزيارة الجامعة الكبيرة والشريفة صحيحة السند

Ziarat Jamia is Sahih in Sanad [10]

Syed Sadiq Rohani said about this

سند زيارة عاشوراء والجامعة معتبر لا  إشكال فيه

Chain of Ziarat Ashura and al Jamia is Reliable and there is no problem with that [11]

Allama Taqi Majlisi says

 الزيارات‌ لأمير المؤمنين‌ ‌عليه‌ ‌السلام‌ و لباقي‌ الأئمة عليهم‌ ‌السلام‌ كثيرة أحسنها الزيارة الجامعة ‌

Ziaraat of Amir ul Momineen and other Aimmah are many, and the best of them is al Ziarat ul Jamia [12]

Sheikh Sudooq himself said

وقد أخرجت في كتاب الزيارات، وفي كتاب مقتل الحسين عليه السلام أنواعا من الزيارات واخترت هذه لهذا الكتاب لأنها أصح الزيارات عندي من طريق الرواية

And I have mentioned in this book of Ziaraat, and in book of Maqtal ul Hussein (asws) different Ziaraat, ad I took in this book “The most Sahih Ziarat in my view in regards to chain of Narration [13]

Allama Majlisi termed it { أصح الزيارات سندا} The most Sahih in Ziaraat in Chain [14]

Sheikh Mohammad Fadil al Masoodi said

ثم لو تلونا وقرأنا زيارة الجامعة الكبيرة  الواردة بسند صحيح عن الإمام الهادي (عليه السلام)

If you recite Ziarat ul Jamil al Kabeer which comes with Sahih chain from Imam Hadi (asws)  [15]

Syed Sistani was asked about authenticity of this narration, and He replied

الجواب : بسمه تعالى 
في مثل هذه الزيارات لا ينظر الى صحة السند ، وانما العبرة بالوثوق لصدورها والاطمينان بها ، وزيارة الجامعة كما قال المجلسي ( قدس سره ) من أصح الزيارات سنداً ومتناً ومضامينها خير شاهد على صدورها من المعصوم (ع) الذي هو معدن العلم ومهبط الوحي ، فإنّ فقرات هذه الزيارة لا تكون صادرة الا عن مقام الوحي والالهام الرباني ولا يشك فيها ضال او منحرف أو مكابر .

There is no Ziaraat like this one in authenticity of chain, and it comes with authenticity and satisfaction. And Ziarat ul Jamia, as Majlisi said, is amongst most Sahih Ziarat, in regards to chain and subject, and its subject is good, and a proof that it has came from Infallible…………….there is no doubt except for one who is Misguided or deviant or arrogant  [16]

Apart from these scholars, there are many other scholars who have accepted authenticity of this Ziaraat, and Brother Hasan ul Alawi has mentioned them in Arabic language. Those who are interested, may visit this link where he has posted them all.

The Ziaraat can be recited on this link

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

=========================

 

REFERENCES:-

 

1- Here is the online link to this book.

2- Fi Rihab Ziyarat ul Jamia, page 16

3- Ayoon Akhbar ur Raza has been published by different publishers. The online version shows that the reference is 1/305

4- Tardhi means saying رضی اللہ عنہ; or similar words

5- Tarheem means saying رحم اللہ عنہ; or similar words

6- This fact regarding trustworthiness of Teacher of Sudooq has been accepted by many scholars. Syed Ali Milani said regarding this

قال الشيخ المامقاني:
وقد قالوا: إنّ ذكر الثقات مشايخهم مقروناً بِالرَّضْيَلَة والرَّحْمَلَة قرين للمدح، بل هو عديل للتوثيق. قال المحقق الداماد رحمه الله: إنّ لمشايخنا الكبار كالصّدوق رضي الله عنه مشيخةً يلتزمون إرداف تسميتهم بِالرَّضْيَلَة أو الرَّحْمَلَة لهم، فاُولئك أثبات أجلاّء، والحديث من جهتهم صحيح معتمد عليه، نصّ بالتوثيق أو لم ينصّ(1).
وعلى هذا الأساس نقول: بأنّ المشايخ الذين روى عنهم الصّدوق الزيارة الجامعة كلّهم من الإماميّة، وينبغي الاعتماد عليهم، لترضّيه وترحّمه عليهم مع كثرة روايته عنهم في مواضع كثيرة من كتبه

Sheikh Mamqani said:

We say: when he speaks of trustworthy of his teachers, he used Tardhi or Tarheem, and this shows Praise rather it shows Trustworthiness. Mohaqiq Damad said that Teachers of greats like that of Sudooq where he uses Tardhi or tarheem for them, that proves their greatness, and Hadeeth in that regards is Sahih and can be trusted, whether there is any other proof for his tautheeq or not. (تنقيح المقال في علم الرجال 1 / 267.)

And on this basis, I say that the Teachers of Sudooq from whom He narrated Ziarat Jamia, all of them are from Imamia. And we trust them for they have Tardhi and Tarheem in many narration…..

Here is the online link for what I have quoted of Syed Ali Milani.

He further said that since there is no Jarah on any of the 4 Teachers of Sudooq, there fore that also proves their Trustworthiness. His words are

ولكنّ إكثار الصّدوق مترحّماً مترضيّاً، وروايته عنهم في كتابه الذي التزم بالفتيا بما روى فيه، مع عدم وجود أيّ جرح من أحد فيهم، يوجب الوثوق بهم والاعتماد عليهم.

Here is the online link for that.

Also, Syed Milani said that since the narration has come to us via 4 people, this also adds to the authenticity; and all of them have been termed Reliable by Sheikh Mamqani. See this link for details regarding all of the 4.

7- Man la Yahdaral Faqih, 2/609

8- Here is the link for what I have quoted from Syed Ali Milani

9- Man la Yahdaral Faqih, with research of Ali Ghafari, 2/609

10- Here is the link from his official website

11- Here is the link to his Official website and fatwa

12- Rauda tul Motaqeen, 5/424

13- Man la Yahdaral Faqih, 2/598

14- Bihar ul Anwaar, 99/144

15- Al Israar ul Fatamiyya, page 17

16- Here is view of his fatwa

Advertisements