Turbah Novel (Click Here)
Shias have a misconception that it is obligatory to do sujood on a piece of clay or on something natural which is not used for eating or wearing, like a tissue paper etc.
In this document we present the research on this topic in the form of a dialogue.
Reformist 
2 replies on “Turba (Is it obligatory)?”
Salam brother.
Will all due respect – this is quit a poorly researched article. There are many mistakes and inconsistencies.
Firstly, the hadiths that back up your position, how reliable do you find them? you did not mention the reliability?
Secondly, your analysis of the chains were quite poorly done. For hadith #1, you completely missed the alternative chain mentioned in Wasa’il al-Shi`a, found in Tahdheeb al-Ahkam. Needless to say, it is reliable chain, authenticated by almost all our big rijali scholars – be it classical (like al-Majlisi) or comtemporary (like al-Kho’i). You say you derive your inspiration from these scholars – yet you have gone against their own authentications.
You took the chain found in bihar (which does not take from the four main books, generally) and only took the chain from `ilal, while wasa’il mentioned another chain. Why did you not analyse this chain?
Thirdly, your grading of certain people also shows inconsistencies. you tend to take the manhaj of what suits you. For example, why not be consistent and take the opinion of al-kho’i, al-toosi, and al-najashi when it came to Ya’qoob bin Yazeed? According to all three, he was reliable and truthful?
I hope to hear from you soon.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Walaikum Assalam brother. Thank you for your comment and criticism, we always welcome that.
Regarding your first question about the reliability of narrations that support our claim.
1. We dont need narrations to back our claim, thats the default position. It is the shia ulema who claim that turba is required, so the burden of proof is on them. If their claim is not proven from the narrations then the matter returns to its default position.
2. If you read carefully, we did comment on the reliability of those narrations. We have said that the narrations are not authentic by our strict standards, but can be used as an argument because they are reliable by the lousy qummi standards.
As for your second claim that we missed the alternate sanad in wasail and tahzeeb. Please mention the sanad which is authentic according to you, we will consider it inshallah.
FYI we do not derive inspiration from these scholars, we respect them, appreciate their efforts, but disagree with them where ever we see the need to do so.
Regarding your comment that we are inconsistent in our grading and we should take the grading of khoei toosi and najashi? Why brother? Why should we be obliged to take their gradings if we disagree with them? If we were doing their blind taqleed then there was no point in writing this document, obviously their gradings will lead to their fatwa, which is well known. I am surprised you asked this question.
Taking the Tadheef of one scholar when others do Tawtheeq of him is not picking and choosing, it is called:
تقديم التجريح على التوثيق لاعتماد الأول على العلم الموجب للاطمئنان وكون الثاني مبنيا على جهل الرجالي بما يطعن في وثاقة الراوي
Its not picking and choosing, its a principle in ilm al rijal. Yoh can also see Majlisi’s comment that this narrator has narrated khurafaat. Why should we take our religion from someone who narrates khurafaat?
LikeLiked by 2 people