Shia Muslims only: The validity of Hadithes

[mojtaba]

Well , I got this as well , not so important but worthy to give it a look :

I am so sorry for you. You are helping to the propaganda of the enemies of Islam.

Grand Ayatullat al-Marji` al-Mirza Hashim al-Aamili “ميرزا هاشم الآملي” who says in his book “al-Ma`alim al-Ma’thoura” 2/258-259:

أقول إن المشهور طهارة العامة ومنشأ الاختلاف إن الاعتقاد بالإمامة هل يكون مقوّم الإسلام أم لا فإنهم وإن كانوا كفرة وكالكلب الممطور في الباطن كما في الجواهر ولكنهم طاهرون بحسب الظاهر ولا يخفى إن البحث يكون فيمن لا يعتقد إمامة الأئمة عليهم السّلام المسمى بالسني

[I say: what is popular is the purity of the mainstream Muslims(`Amah) and the origin of the disagreement is if Imamah is a condition of Islam or not. Even though they are Kouffar and like wet dogs on the inside as was mentioned in “al-Jawahir” but they are pure on the outside. It is not hidden that the matter being discussed is concerning he who does not believe in the Imamah of the twelve (as) or what is called “Sunni”.]

What he means by “al-Jawahir” is the book written by their leader Muhammad Hassan al-Najafi who said on vol.6 pg.57:

فهو من أقوى الأدلة على طهارة هؤلاء الكفرة ، وإن كانوا في المعنى أنجس من الكلاب الممطورة

[It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, although in reality they are more impure than wet dogs.]

Why did they use the term “wet dogs” to refer to those who oppose them?

Their scholar Yusuf al-Bahrani explains in “al-Hada’iq al-Nadirah” 8/370:

يعني الكلاب التي أصابها المطر مبالغة في نجاستهم

[Meaning dogs who have been exposed to rain to exaggerate their impurity.]

According to our belief, our brother Sunnis are Muslim and pure.

I said you that, you can send your question regarding this case to the sites of our jurisprudents. They will certainly reply, "Sunnis are Muslim and pure."

Translations are not correct and are an evil translation.
فهو من أقوى الأدلة على طهارة هؤلاء الكفرة ، وإن كانوا في المعنى أنجس من الكلاب الممطورة
True translation, " It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, if they are fi al-Ma'ni(i.e., spiritualy) more impure than wet dogs. ".

This part "if they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs" does not have a bad meaning. Indeed, it means that if we suppose that they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs, this does not mean they are Physically impure.

The author has used this part for Emphasizing to their purity.

But why have the authors called Sunnis as Kafirs[disbelievers]?

Kufr(disbelieving) has two types,
1. disbelieving from the faith (ایمان)
2. disbelieving from Islam(اسلام)

The authors themselves have emphasized that in their sayings, Kufr means the first type, not the second one which results in the impurity. So, Sunnis are Muslim and pure.

Muhammad Hassan al-Najafi has said on “al-Jawahir” vol.6 pg.57

ولانحصار مقتضى النجاسة في كفرهم بذلك، وقد ثبت ضده، وهو صفة الاسلام بشهادة ما دل على حصوله بابراز الشهادتين من الأخبار، كخبر سفيان بن السمط المروي هو وما يأتي بعده أيضا في باب الكفر والايمان من الكافي، قال: (سأل رجل أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) عن الاسلام والايمان ما الفرق بينهما؟ فلم يجبه، ثم سأله فلم يجبه، ثم التقيا في الطريق وقد أزف من الرجل الرحيل، فقال له أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): كأنه قد أزف منك الرحيل، فقال: نعم، فقال: فالقني في البيت، فلقيه فسأله عن الاسلام والايمان ما الفرق بينهما؟ فقال: الاسلام هو الظاهر الذي عليه الناس شهادة أن لا إله إلا الله، وأن محمدا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وإقام الصلاة، وإيتاء الزكاة، وحج البيت، وصيام شهر رمضان، وقال: الايمان معرفة هذا الأمر، مع هذا فإن أقر بها ولم يعرف هذا الأمر كان مسلما وكان ضالا ".​

Their Kufr(type 2) to this[Imamah] proves their [physical] impurity, while in Hadiths [of Imams] has proven its opposite, and it is the attribute of Islam, testifying to two Shahadahs(ie, testifying to oneness of Allah and Messengership of Muhammad). Such these Hadiths [of Imams] is the Hadith which has narrated through Sofiyan ibn al-Samt al-Marwi[from Imam Sadiq], and it has been narrated in al-Kafi in the Chapter of "Al-Kufr wa al-Iman[disbelieving and faith]" that he said," A person asked from Imam Sadiq about Islam and Iman[faith] and the difference between them. Then Imam replied, ' Islam is what the people are now apparently in it, that is testifying that there is no god but allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and doing Salah, paying Zakah, going to Hajj, and doing the fasting in the month of Ramadhan.' and also said, ' Iman[faith] is the knowing of this matter[i.e., Imamah]. If a person testifies those things but does not have the knowledge to this matter[Imamah], so he is an astray[from Imamah] Muslim' ".


So, according to our belief, our brother Sunnis are Muslim and pure.

 

[mojtaba]

I showed you for what you insisted. I done my part. There are quite a few scholars names came up though...

Because his saying is a big lie, so he is not reliable.

Please do not continue, your posts are off-topic and are not true.

 

[Union]

I am so sorry for you. You are helping to the propaganda of the enemies of Islam.


According to our belief, our brother Sunnis are Muslim and pure.

I said you that, you can send your question regarding this case to the sites of our jurisprudents. They will certainly reply, "Sunnis are Muslim and pure."

Translations are not correct and are an evil translation.
فهو من أقوى الأدلة على طهارة هؤلاء الكفرة ، وإن كانوا في المعنى أنجس من الكلاب الممطورة
True translation, " It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, if they are fi al-Ma'ni(i.e., spiritualy) more impure than wet dogs. ".

This part "if they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs" does not have a bad meaning. Indeed, it means that if we suppose that they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs, this does not mean they are Physically impure.

The author has used this part for Emphasizing to their purity.

But why have the authors called Sunnis as Kafirs[disbelievers]?

Kufr(disbelieving) has two types,
1. disbelieving from the faith (ایمان)
2. disbelieving from Islam(اسلام)

The authors themselves have emphasized that in their sayings, Kufr means the first type, not the second one which results in the impurity. So, Sunnis are Muslim and pure.

Muhammad Hassan al-Najafi has said on “al-Jawahir” vol.6 pg.57

ولانحصار مقتضى النجاسة في كفرهم بذلك، وقد ثبت ضده، وهو صفة الاسلام بشهادة ما دل على حصوله بابراز الشهادتين من الأخبار، كخبر سفيان بن السمط المروي هو وما يأتي بعده أيضا في باب الكفر والايمان من الكافي، قال: (سأل رجل أبا عبد الله (عليه السلام) عن الاسلام والايمان ما الفرق بينهما؟ فلم يجبه، ثم سأله فلم يجبه، ثم التقيا في الطريق وقد أزف من الرجل الرحيل، فقال له أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): كأنه قد أزف منك الرحيل، فقال: نعم، فقال: فالقني في البيت، فلقيه فسأله عن الاسلام والايمان ما الفرق بينهما؟ فقال: الاسلام هو الظاهر الذي عليه الناس شهادة أن لا إله إلا الله، وأن محمدا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وإقام الصلاة، وإيتاء الزكاة، وحج البيت، وصيام شهر رمضان، وقال: الايمان معرفة هذا الأمر، مع هذا فإن أقر بها ولم يعرف هذا الأمر كان مسلما وكان ضالا ".​

Their Kufr(type 2) to this[Imamah] proves their [physical] impurity, while in Hadiths [of Ima, and it is testifying to two Shahadahs(ie, testifying to oneness of Allah and Messengership of Muhammad). Such these Hadiths [of Imams] is the Hadith which has narrated through Sofiyan ibn al-Samt al-Marwi[from Imam Sadiq], and it has been narrated in al-Kafi in the Chapter of "Al-Kufr wa al-Iman[disbelieving and faith]" that he said," A person asked from Imam Sadiq about Islam and Iman[faith] and the difference between them. Then Imam replied, ' Islam is what the people are now apparently in it, that is testifying that there is no god but allah, and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and doing Salah, paying Zakah, going to Hajj, and doing the fasting in the month of Ramadhan.' and also said, ' Iman[faith] is the knowing of this matter[i.e., Imamah]. If a person testifies those things but does not have the knowledge to this matter[Imamah], so he is an astray[from Imamah] Muslim' ".


So, according to our belief, our brother Sunnis are Muslim and pure.

You snapped partly while other part clearly affirms those Shia scholars' view about impurity of Sunni. Whatsoever as I said it is not important to discuss as I have showed you already that so many Shia scholars left Shia version of Islam to join Sunni. This fact already exposed the fallacy of Shia science of Hadith , as per your set criterions at least.
May ALLAH swt help you to accept Quran as the only source of Islam.

 

[mojtaba]

You snapped partly while other part clearly affirms those Shia scholars' view about impurity of Sunni. Whatsoever as I said it is not important to discuss as I have showed you already that so many Shia scholars left Shia version of Islam to join Sunni. This fact already exposed the fallacy of Shia science of Hadith , as per your set criterions at least.
May ALLAH swt help you to accept Quran as the only source of Islam.

Excuse me, but are you blind?

“al-Jawahir” , vol.6 pg.57
It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar(I.e., disbelievers of Imamah, not disbeliever of Islam, as the authors mentioned)

 

[Union]

....

Do you think this a fair conclusion?

Quran is the final authority in Islam. As you already knew Qur'an didn't mention anything about it , hence it is not a tenet of Islam.

 

[Union]

Excuse me, but are you blind?

“al-Jawahir” , vol.6 pg.57
It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar(I.e., disbelievers of Imamah, not disbeliever of Islam, as the authors mentioned)

Thanks for the late edit but dishonest enough not to cite in full :

"It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, although in reality they are more impure than wet dogs ."

Leave it my friend , the more you kick and scream in quicksand the more you go down..

 

[mojtaba]

Thanks for the late edit but dishonest enough not to cite in full :

"It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, although in reality they are more impure than wet dogs ."

Leave it my friend , the more you kick and scream in quicksand the more you go down..

May Allah help you. You are wasting my time.

I said you that translation is not correct and is an evil one.

True translation, as I meantioned

It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, if they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs.

This means that if we suppose that they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs, this does not mean they are Physically impure.

The author has used this part for emphasizing to their purity.

So Sunnis are pure. Use your head and try to understand.

 

[Union]

May Allah help you. You are wasting my time.

I said you that translation is not correct and is an evil one.

True translation, as I meantioned

It is one of the strongest opinions for the purity of those Kouffar, if they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs.

This means that if we suppose that they are spiritualy more impure than wet dogs, this does not mean they are Physically impure.

The author has used this part for emphasizing to their purity.

So Sunnis are pure. Use your head and try to understand.

Your translation is absolutely making no sense taking the first part as the starting of the whole sentence to implicate a final meaning , while وإن as the synonyms of مَعَ أنّ / وَلَكِن/مع أن، دون أن is perfectly matching with the proper translation 'Although' .

Grand Ayatollah Al Hashim Al Amili understood it correct and referred to 'Al-Jawahir' by saying :

"I say: what is popular is the purity of the mainstream Muslims(`Amah) and the origin of the disagreement is if Imamah is a condition of Islam or not. Even though they are Kouffar and like wet dogs on the inside as was mentioned in “al-Jawahir” but they are pure on the outside."

This definitely conveys that Sunnis are spiritually/really impure than the wet dogs . Physical impurity is not a concern here from the very beginning I cited this reference and unfortunately you are stuck there .

 

[mojtaba]

Your translation is absolutely making no sense taking the first part as the starting of the whole sentence to implicate a final meaning , while وإن as the synonyms of مَعَ أنّ / وَلَكِن/مع أن، دون أن is perfectly matching with the proper translation 'Although' .

Grand Ayatollah Al Hashim Al Amili understood it correct and referred to 'Al-Jawahir' by saying :

"I say: what is popular is the purity of the mainstream Muslims(`Amah) and the origin of the disagreement is if Imamah is a condition of Islam or not. Even though they are Kouffar and like wet dogs on the inside as was mentioned in “al-Jawahir” but they are pure on the outside."

This definitely conveys that Sunnis are spiritually/really impure than the wet dogs . Physical impurity is not a concern here from the very beginning I cited this reference and unfortunately you are stuck there .

Grand Ayatollah Al Hashim Al Amili ,
I say: what is popular is the purity of the mainstream Muslims(`Amah) and the origin of the disagreement is if Imamah is a condition of Islam or not. Even though they are Kouffar and like wet dogs on the inside as was mentioned in “al-Jawahir” but they are pure on the outside[physically].

 

[Union]

Grand Ayatollah Al Hashim Al Amili ,
I say: what is popular is the purity of the mainstream Muslims(`Amah) and the origin of the disagreement is if Imamah is a condition of Islam or not. Even though they are Kouffar and like wet dogs on the inside as was mentioned in “al-Jawahir” but they are pure on the outside[physically].

That was what I was saying as well . These Shia Alims think Sunni are spiritually impure and they are Kaffir . Why then not admitting so ?

Again as I proposed , leave this issue behind , let us dicuss something else . Answer my following inquiry :

Using Ulm-Al Hadith , if one Shia scholar would grade a Hadith ' Sahih' , is it accepted by all other scholars as 'Sahih' ? Or the case for a Dhaif/Mawdu Hadith ?

 

[mojtaba]

Answer my following inquiry :
Using Ulm-Al Hadith , if one Shia scholar would grade a Hadith ' Sahih' , is it accepted by all other scholars as 'Sahih' ?

Yes.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Quran is the final authority in Islam. As you already knew Qur'an didn't mention anything about it , hence it is not a tenet of Islam.

Has Allah said in Quran, that He is bounded to everything He said in Quran explicitly?
What if some of the Mutishabihat verses are actually, regarding Qaim? .....The Shia Imams interpreted some of them as such.

Let's think about coming of Muhammad, and how He was promised to Christians. In Quran it is written:

"And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One (Ahmad). Yet when he hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say: This is mere magic." 61:6

According to this verse, Jesus 'said'. It does not say, Jesus had written this in Injil or Allah had written this in Injil. So, according to Quran, would it be acceptable if a Christian says, Muhammad is not explicitly mentioned in Injil, and He is not a Tenent of Christianity?

 

[Union]

Yes.

I hope you understood my question properly . Nonetheless , read the following Hadith first :



مُحَمَّدٌ عَنْ أَحْمَدَ عَنِ ابْنِ مَحْبُوبٍ عَنْجَمِيلِ بْنِ صَالِحٍ عَنْ أَبَانِ بْنِ تَغْلِبَ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ (عليه السَّلام) قَالَ سَأَلْتُهُ عَنِ الْأَرْضِ عَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ هِيَ قَالَ هِيَعَلَى حُوتٍ قُلْتُ فَالْحُوتُ عَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ هُوَ قَالَ عَلَى الْمَاءِقُلْتُ فَالْمَاءُ عَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ هُوَ قَالَ عَلَى صَخْرَةٍ قُلْتُ فَعَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ الصَّخْرَةُ قَالَ عَلَى قَرْنِ ثَوْرٍ أَمْلَسَ قُلْتُ فَعَلَىأَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ الثَّوْرُ قَالَ عَلَى الثَّرَى قُلْتُ فَعَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍالثَّرَى فَقَالَ هَيْهَاتَ عِنْدَ ذَلِكَ ضَلَّ عِلْمُ الْعُلَمَاءِ .

Muhammad reportedfrom Ahmad, from ibn Mahbub, from Jamil ibn Salih, from Aban ibn Taghlib, from Abu ‘Abd Allah (upon whom be peace), who said, I asked him about the earth: Upon which does it stand forth? To which he replied: It stands forth upon a whale. I asked: Upon which does the whale stand forth? To which he replied: Upon water. I asked: Upon which does water stand forth? To which he replied: Upon a rock. I asked: Upon which does the rock stand forth? To which he replied: Upon a bull’s smooth horn. I asked: Upon which does the bull stand forth? To which he replied: Upon the ground. I asked: Upon which does the ground stand forth? To which he replied: What an idea? Therewith is lost the knowledge of the men of knowledge.

Source : Al-Kafi vol.8,.89

Now please grade this Hadith according to the following Marjai :

01- Al-Mufid
02- Al-Majlisi

Thanks

 

[Union]

Has Allah said in Quran, that He is bounded to everything He said in Quran explicitly?

Not so sure what you are asking .

What if some of the Mutishabihat verses are actually, regarding Qaim? .....The Shia Imams interpreted some of them as such.

These verses are not the tenet of Islam on the contrary to Muhakama verses , hence somehow if it may happen , it is not obligatory to believe and follow .

Let's think about coming of Muhammad, and how He was promised to Christians. In Quran it is written:

"And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One (Ahmad). Yet when he hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say: This is mere magic." 61:6

According to this verse, Jesus 'said'. It does not say, Jesus had written this in Injil or Allah had written this in Injil. So, according to Quran, would it be acceptable if a Christian says, Muhammad is not explicitly mentioned in Injil, and He is not a Tenent of Christianity?

Has Allah said in Quran, that He is bounded to everything He said in Quran explicitly?
What if some of the Mutishabihat verses are actually, regarding Qaim? .....The Shia Imams interpreted some of them as such.

Let's think about coming of Muhammad, and how He was promised to Christians. In Quran it is written:

"And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One (Ahmad). Yet when he hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say: This is mere magic." 61:6

According to this verse, Jesus 'said'. It does not say, Jesus had written this in Injil or Allah had written this in Injil. So, according to Quran, would it be acceptable if a Christian says, Muhammad is not explicitly mentioned in Injil, and He is not a Tenent of Christianity?

But it was :


157 Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

157 Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.

But there is no explicit mention of Prophet Muhammad in Torah and the Gospel.
For example 'Spirit of Truth' which is mentioned in Gospel, can be seen as a future Prophet. The Christians don't see that as Prophet Muhammad.

 

[Union]

But there is no explicit mention of Prophet Muhammad in Torah and the Gospel.
For example 'Spirit of Truth' which is mentioned in Gospel, can be seen as a future Prophet. The Christians don't see that as Prophet Muhammad.

Song of Solomon 5.16 :
חכו ממתקים וכלו מחמדים זה דודי וזה רעי בנות ירושלם
ChKV MMThQYM VKLV MChMD(YM) ZH DVDY VZH Ur'yY BNVTh YUrVShLM.
His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely ( In original Hebrew : Muhammad). This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.

Also this Article : Prophet "AHMAD" is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls
http://www.answering-christianity.com/predict.htm

 

[Shiranui117]

***MOD POST***

Thread moved to Same Faith Debates.​

 

[mojtaba]

I hope you understood my question properly . Nonetheless , read the following Hadith first :

مُحَمَّدٌ عَنْ أَحْمَدَ عَنِ ابْنِ مَحْبُوبٍ عَنْجَمِيلِ بْنِ صَالِحٍ عَنْ أَبَانِ بْنِ تَغْلِبَ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ (عليه السَّلام) قَالَ سَأَلْتُهُ عَنِ الْأَرْضِ عَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ هِيَ قَالَ هِيَعَلَى حُوتٍ قُلْتُ فَالْحُوتُ عَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ هُوَ قَالَ عَلَى الْمَاءِقُلْتُ فَالْمَاءُ عَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ هُوَ قَالَ عَلَى صَخْرَةٍ قُلْتُ فَعَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ الصَّخْرَةُ قَالَ عَلَى قَرْنِ ثَوْرٍ أَمْلَسَ قُلْتُ فَعَلَىأَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍ الثَّوْرُ قَالَ عَلَى الثَّرَى قُلْتُ فَعَلَى أَيِّ شَيْ‏ءٍالثَّرَى فَقَالَ هَيْهَاتَ عِنْدَ ذَلِكَ ضَلَّ عِلْمُ الْعُلَمَاءِ .

Muhammad reportedfrom Ahmad, from ibn Mahbub, from Jamil ibn Salih, from Aban ibn Taghlib, from Abu ‘Abd Allah (upon whom be peace), who said, I asked him about the earth: Upon which does it stand forth? To which he replied: It stands forth upon a whale. I asked: Upon which does the whale stand forth? To which he replied: Upon water. I asked: Upon which does water stand forth? To which he replied: Upon a rock. I asked: Upon which does the rock stand forth? To which he replied: Upon a bull’s smooth horn. I asked: Upon which does the bull stand forth? To which he replied: Upon the ground. I asked: Upon which does the ground stand forth? To which he replied: What an idea? Therewith is lost the knowledge of the men of knowledge.

Source : Al-Kafi vol.8,.89

Now please grade this Hadith according to the following Marjai :

01- Al-Mufid
02- Al-Majlisi

Thanks

Both of them has said that the Hadith is Sahih.

But the Hadith has a spritual and mystic meaning, as some past scholars have mentioned( for instance, Feyz Kashani, al-Wafi book, vol 26, pg. 472). There are some verses in Quran that are like this Hadith and have spritual meaning, for instance see 11:7.

For example, in the Hadith, Earth means the material world, like the verse of Quran, 7:176.

Also, the word 'Hut حوت' means fish, not whale, like the verse of Quran, 18:63. That fish is indeed an immaterial being which this world is relied on it and is indeed the Soul of this world, a theory that the scientists call it the Super Organism of Universe.(see, http://www.asincerelife.com/the-universe-as-superorganism/).

But according to a Hadith, as Quran also proves, all planets in the space and the earth are bound to each other by nonvisible pillars(i.e., gravity).

Hussein ibn Khalid asks Imam Reza(8th Shia Imam) about the interpretation of this verse of Quran:
وَالسَّمَاء ذَاتِ الْحُبُکِ
By the heaven with its passages,(51:7)

Imam(pbuh) answered: "This sky has some ways towards the earth." And then Imam entered his fingers within each other.

Hussein ibn Khalid said:
I told him, how there are some ways but Allah says the skies don’t have any pillars.

Imam answered, “But Allah says there are no visible pillars(Quran, 13:2)”.

“Yes “ I said.

“So, there are some pillars but you can’t see” Imam continued.
(Source, Tafsir al-Ayyashi, vol. 2, pg. 203)