See here for disclaimer.
Rūh Allah Tawh̯īdī Niyā2
The topics of hadith interpretation and authenticity are contentious. Of the greatest controversies, originating two centuries ago, is a never before seen version of Hadith-e Kisā (HK). Although the core of the Incident of the Cloak (IC) is present in Shi’ite and Sunnite texts, two opposing camps exist regarding HK. Exclusively, HK is utilized to emotionally arouse its hearkeners, and it is the sole version attributed to Zahra (a). This article explores the personality and motive of HK’s author, as well as the reaction of the Imamite clergy, researchers, and laity over time. HK’s authenticity is impertinent to this article.
The IC is found in numerous Imamite3 and Sunnite4 sources. Although the matns (contents) differ, what is certain is that the Panjtan (a) were under a cloak when the Messenger (p) proclaimed, “God desires to remove any uncleanliness from you, O people of the household, and purify you (thorough purifying);” whereupon the verse of tat̯hīr was revealed.5 Shi’ite grandees and writers, including the Imamite mutakalims during the minor occultation,9 have argued that the IC is evidence for the Ahlulbayt’s (a) infallibility and Imamship. Imams Ali6 and Hasan7 (a) pointed to the incident as evidence for their post-prophetic successorship, as well as Um Salama8 as proof of Haydar’s (a) superiority. On said basis, the Imamites reprobated the Sunnite exegetes of the verse, some of whom emphasized the wives whilst others the consanguineous kin.10 As a result, Shi’ites endeavored to collect all isnāds of the incident from Sunnite sources. From the Shia side, there is no disagreement as to the IC’s significance.
The lengthy, popularly beloved, and intercessory supplication to the Ahlebayt (a), HK, had humble beginnings. The sui generis version of the IC was born in the seventeenth century AD (11th century AH). As stated by some Shi’ites and narrations, remembrance of the Ahlulbayt’s virtues at gatherings is a cause of divine forgiveness and blessing.11 Notwithstanding, one cannot help but wonder – can a pseudo-hadith with no basis prior to the eleventh century AH, imputed to Bibi Zahra (a), be a valid, faithful form of intercession?
Turayhi and the Novel HK
An analysis of pre-seventeenth century sources shows that no single narration encapsulated all aspects of the IC. Then, in the seventeenth century, the now famous HK came into existence in the book al-Muntak̊ab fī Jam’ al-Marāt̊ī wa al-K̊ut̯ub by Sheikh Turayhi (d. 1676).12, 13 The author, a Najafi scholar, is best known for his lexicographical work on problematic and unusual Quranic and hadithic terminology, Majma’ al-Bah̯rayn.14
Multiple factors explain Muntakhab‘s fame. One is the Turayhi clan’s preeminence,15 composed of authorially prolific scholars. A second is Sh. Turayhi’s prolific authorship; many of his books exhibited an innovative and efficient methodology, catching the attention of his peers.16 A third factor was his saintly and charming character. Mirza Abdullah Efendi (d. 1718), a man who knew him personally, writes in his Riyād̯ al-‘Ulamā`, “Sh. Turayhi is of this era’s most God-conscious and devout personages.”17 Such his persona was that his funeral was considered of the most important days for the people of Najaf.18 As a result of Efendi and fellow admirers, the holograph was copied, spread friend-to-friend, and eventually city-to-city.19
The text is divided into two segments, each segment into ten sections, and each section into multiple chapters. Its structure demonstrates that the topics he oft-repeated in public gatherings were then collected and organized into a single tome. As maintained by Muntakhab’s introduction, this piece is a collection of elegies and homiles in praise of the Ahlebayt (a). In spite of being composed almost entirely of mursal hadiths, it caught the attention of the laity and clergy as its [emotional] content answered the late Safavid period’s ‘laic needs.’
A keyword in the title is al-Marāt̊i (lamentations). Thus, in addition to the book’s structure, it is understood that Turayhi intentionally pretermitted sources, its objective being to promulgate epics and sensational threnodies.20 For instance, his matn of Zayd b. Ali’s (d. 121 AH) martyrdom via Abu Hamza Thumali (dec. c. 150 AH) contradicts the original.21 Turayhi’s matn of archangel Gabriel informing the Messenger (p) apropos of Imam Hussain’s (a) future martyrdom deviates exceedingly from the original.22 The [blunders] are to such an extent that modern researchers have hypothesized that this book must have been penned during his formative years in preparation for mourning gatherings. It may have been that the holograph fell into the wrong hands, thenceforth copied and (mis)classified mu’tabar, to his dismay. 23 In postmodernity, countless pieces of evidence compel the scholar to label HK as non-credible.24 Hagiographical tall-tales of Imam Husayn’s (a) martyrdom were pervasive throughout the Safavid period [and continue unto this day].
Hadith-e Kisa in Premodernity
A socio-political analysis of the Imamite textual renaissance during the Safavid period reveals why Turayhi’s HK was welcomed. A pivotal factor in the development of Akhbarism in this period was the ever-increasing polarization between Shi’ites and Sunnites25 – stemming from the [political] tension betwixt the Sunni Ottomans and Shia Safavids.26 Example of this tension are the migration of Shi’ite scholars to Iran and the Ottoman ban of entry against Shi’ite clerics.
The Safavids saw their [political legitimacy] unto the Iranian populace as beholden to the notion of being the ‘guardians of Shi’ism.’ Therefore, for their two centuries of existence, they patronized the hawza, especially its scribes. Political support depended upon Shianess; ergo, clergy who ‘out-Shiaed’ their confreres received handsomer stipends; i.e. they ‘did what they had to do.’ The best way to appear more Shia was via the scribing of Shi’ite hadiths.27 Confessional polarization begets polemics. Thus, in this [sectarian] context, many Shi’ite clergymen tolerated [and abetted] the adducing of weak and chainless pseudo-hadiths. [Rash] isnadic laxity from religious authorities paved the way for [radical] textualism.28
HK is useable as evidence of Shi’ite rightfulness. Hence, it is imaginable that a tale, told by a famous bookman and preacher in that millieu, would have easily caught on. Noteworthy is that many so-called Usulites, in spite of being Usulite in fiqh, are quasi-Akhbarites in history.29 Accordingly, the arising and burgeoning of this matn cannot be imputed to Akhbarite authorship, but rather to the hermeneutics of ‘leniency in accepting the sunnah,’ and ‘a transmitter’s fame compensates for a weak chain,’ utilized by these so-called Usulites.30 An analysis of the period’s literature demonstrates that such unacademic hermeneutics bastardized historiography, such that texts are riddled with interpolated details and added appeals to emotionalism – all in order to meet “laic needs.”
Possibly the first disagreement with reference to the narration can be found within Allama Majlisi (d. 1699) and his students. In Bihar al-Anwar, a mass-compilation of Shi’ite reports regardless of authenticity, the novel HK is absent. Conversely, Majlisi’s student, Sheikh Abdullah Bahrani (d. 1723),31 in order to increase HK’s acceptance, included the report in his ‘Awālam al-‘Ulūm.32 Two points are noteworthy about Sh. Abdullah. First, he was a minor, unknown ecclesiastic. Within biographical dictionaries of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, including the biographical dictionary Lū‘lū‘ al-Bah̯rayn (Pearls of Bahrain [his patria]), his name is nonexistent. Consequently, his lack of recognition explains why his writings are only available in manuscriptal form in scattered bibliothecas. The second is his radical Akhbarism, outdoing his teacher (Majlisi) in this regard;33 such that he expurgated much of the rational knowledge of Bihar in his ‘Awālam34 and endeavored to present sources for some of the narrations.35
A probe into Muntakhab shows that it was composed unscholarly. Muhadith Nuri (d. 1902) states, “Some parts are deficient, and some parts are non-deficient.”36 Mirza Muhammad Arbāb (d. 1922) concurs, “Much negligence is present within Muntakhab and its peculiar reports are untrustworthy.”37
Nevertheless, some modern scholars promote the novel HK. For instance, Sāhib ‘Urwa (d. 1919), in response to concerns, proclaims, “Although mursal, it is one of multiple narrations apropos of the IC. Its chain, accordingly, poses no problem.”38 Other modern muhadiths, in the hope of further spreading such narrations, collect and/or pen commentaries – the most recent of which include al-Tuh̯fah al-Kasā‘īah by Sh. Muhammad Hussain Bāfaqī Yazdī (d. 1310 AH) and Kafš al-G̊at̯ā‘ ‘an H̯adīt̊ al-Kisā by Ali Āl ‘Abd al-G̊affār Kashmiri (d. 1345 AH).
Muhadith Qummi (d. 1941), a great researcher and author of the most popular dua book Mafatih al-Jinan (MJ), expressed an opposing view. Of his concerns was the adulterating effects of superstition and distortion upon threnodies, duas, and ziyarat-texts (ziyaratnamas). Concerning the concocted HK in Muntakhab, he asservates, “A group of misfortunate preachers fear not fabrication, citing the pseudo-hadith: ‘He who weeps for me shall enter paradise.’ This old lie continues to plague modern publications. For, even when an honest, truth-seeking muhadith professes his shunning of mistruths, he relies upon [respected] literature and lectures, and/or a lax hermeneutic which allows him to quote weak hadiths under the pretext of ‘substantiating the sunnah.'”39
Owing to his truth-seeking hermeneutical tendency, Qummi, correspondingly, excluded it from his MJ. He asseverated, “HK is nonexistent in every respectable Shi’ite book, a singularity of Muntakhab.”40 Notable is that Qummi was a student of Muhadith Mirza Hussain Nuri, the Akhbari coryphaeus, and a follower of his school of thought. Nuri’s methodology can be sensed in his Lū‘lū‘ wa Marjān wherein he asserts his opposition to mythical hadiths and elegies anent Ashura. Qummi’s proclivity accords. In the introduction of his Nafs al-Mahmūm, he states his disapprobation of the fictional retelling of Karbala, misascribed to Abu Mikhnaf.
Ponderable is HK’s considerable renown among pulpit preachers [and thence the laity] by the post-Safavid period. Mullā Zulf’alī Kurūnī (d. 1290 AHS), the renowned Bakhtiyari poet, avowed its status as a part of Shi’ite belief and ritual practice. He composed a grand style poem in the Bakhtiyari dialect of Luri about HK.41 Calligraphers, [now aware of its existence], also reverenced it; such that a court secretary of Nasir al-Din Shah (d. 1896) calligraphed a lavish piece titled Hadīt̊-e Kisā‘-e Manz̯ūm.42
Scholarly Detractors of HK in the Past Two Decades (Group 1)
The controversy surrounding HK evaded significant intra-Imami debate until Ayatullah Reyshahri published his tendentious Ahl al-Bayt fī al-Kitāb wa al-Sunnah in 1375 AHS (c. 1997) wherein he challenged HK’s matn and isnad.43 Translated into Persian in 1379 AHS (c. 2001), it incited much contention in the early 2000s among the laity and clergy. Ayatullah Reyhahri, at the beginning of 1383 AHS (c. 2005), was invited to an interview with the monthly journal Kihān-e Farhangī concerning the topic of prevalent, yet chainless, pseudo-hadiths. In it, he contends that HK is problematic both matn-wise and isnad-wise. Its record extends to a mere two centuries and, although sidelined by Sh. Qummi, it was posthumously interpolated into his magnum opus, MJ. 44 He adds, “Allama Majlisi, a leading Akhbarite, omitted it from his masterpiece, Bihar al-Anwar. Some Shi’ites accepted it as a polemical argument against the Sunnites. This, unwittingly, is problematic as the event, according to both Shia and Sunni sources, transpired in the house of Um Salama, whereas the novel HK alleges Bibi Zahra’s (a) cottage.“45
Media outlets, thereafter, informed the caretakers of the ‘Abd al-‘Az̯īm Hassani (a) mausoleum, whereof Ayt. Reyshahri is a trustee, concerning the Mafatih and Kisā cause celebre, [‘stoking the fire’ for a ‘juicier story’]. This, unsurprisingly, exacerbated the backlash. Eventually, he was forced to invite the press and have them engage with the dean of the College of Hadith Sciences, i.e. himself. Herein, he refutes canards and HK’s defenders – including Muhadith Qummi’s own son Haj Sh. ‘Alī Muh̯adit̊ Zāda who declared Ayt. Reyshahri’s communiqué, that HK was interpolated into MJ, as “disinformation.”46
Worthy of mention is the following. There was a covenant between Sh. Qummi and the late Sayyid Ahmed Kitābcī, [the publisher] and then manager of the library and Islāmiya bookstore, that MJ would be calligraphed by T̯āhir K̊ūšnawīs and published by 1360 AH (c. 1941), which coincided with Sh. Qummi’s unfortunate passing. Except for a two-page foreword by the publisher, no other addition occurred. Sayyid Ahmed Kitabchi stipulates that sirs Sh. Muhammad Ali K̊iyābānī Tabrizi, Sh. Muhammad Ali Adīb Tehrani, and Muhammad S̯ādiq Wā’iz̯ Zāda were responsible for ensuring that Muhadith Qummi’s holograph match the calligraphed facsimile. [Alas], following Kitabchi’s demise, his son, Sayyid Ismail, gained control of the family business. Ismail dictated interpolations be made in the beginning and end of MJ with Tahir Khushnawis’s pen in 1379 (c. 1960) and 1381 (c. 1962) (of course, the calligrapher specifies that the insertions were at the behest of Sayyid Ismail). Additions in this recension, which Kitabchi’s manuscriptal version lacked, include an afterword, the phrase “Islamiya Offset Printing,” and, pertinent to this investigation, HK.
The famous Allama Sayid Murtada Askari (d. 2007) in the 1980s, before the aforesaid controversy [with Ayt. Reyshahri] occurred, rebutted HK on the last page of his H̯adīt̊ al-Kisā. The defects he mentioned include: 1) Its only isnad, attributed to Sh. Abdullah Bahrani, assuming veracity, states “As reported by Sayyid Hashim Bahrani, which I beheld.” Despite this, who can guarantee that Sayyid Hashim Bahrani actually penned this chain? 2) Sayyid Hashim Bahrani never mentioned this isnad in his oeuvre. In fact, he wrote statements which contradict the existence of HK. 3) Many of history’s greatest Shia muhadiths are presented in the isnad, et al. Kulayni, Tusi, Mufid, Tabrasi, and Ibn Shahrashub. Yet, HK is found in none of their oeuvres.47 Then, in Qum in early 1383 Solar Hijri (c. 2004), he avowed his view of HK’s weakness, immediately becoming the ‘talk of town.’ His students, seeking clarification from the abounding rumors, sent him a letter, “Recently, we have heard you utter statements which contradict everything for which you stand. Half a century you spent championing the wilāyah and Ahlulbayt. Now, you seemingly betrayed it all. We are perturbed about you.”48
Askari ripostes in a response letter. After mentioning the IC’s tawātur-ness and its eminence, he highlights HK’s chainlessness and directs his students to his al-Kisā fī Madrasa al-K̊ulafā wa Madrasa Ahl al-Bayt.49 Subsequently, the matter was not raised.
Ayt. Nematollah Salehi Najafabadi alluded to his disapproval of HK in the 1950s and 60s.50 In his publication of H̯adīt̊ hāy K̊iyālī (Fanciful Hadiths) he averred his case dealing with its highly problematic isnad and matn. He wrote, “HK is ineloquent. It contains a matn that is weak, unpleasant, obscene, and repugnant. Concocted it was by a dull-witted Ghulat with the intention of popularizing it among the Shi’ite masses.” “It was fabricated in an era in which geocentrism was popular, evident as the pseudo-hadith claims that the heavens orbit the Earth. Yet, the report’s forger alleged that the false Ptolemaic system was affirmed by God.”51
The reason for Ayt. Reyshahri’s more vicious backlash, [as compared to the others],52 was due to the press’s hearing of his order to disseminate an emendated version of MJ without HK. Since, in addition to his espousal of veracity, as the president of the largest institute of Shi’ite hadith studies, he enjoys such correcting authority. Thereafter, doubt among the pious laity soared as, thitherto, they had commenced every majlis with the recitation of HK from MJ, as instructed by countless marjas and renowned ecclesiastics.
Undeterred, Ayt. Reyshahri persevered. Such that the public relations office of the Hazrat Abd al-Azim (a) shrine was forced to mail letters to the most ill-famed detractors, wherein they affirmed their certitude in the IC, but that its version expurgated from the rectified MJ, the notorious HK, is baseless.53 Whereto many ayatullahs and seminarians countered.
Ayt. Nasir Makarim Shirazi concurs at to HK’s weakness. In his Mafātīh-e Nawīn (Novel Mafatih), HK is absent. He asserts, ‘Although the IC is mutawātir, HK is a peculiarity of Muntakhab, recorded by a single student of Majlisi. The chain he rendered is problematic. Howbeit, its recitation out of devotion unto the Ahlulbayt (a) is unproblematic. The isnad of HK, present only as marginalia in ‘Awālam‘s holograph located in the Yazd library, differs from its popular isnad. Many of the transmitters are unverified and separated by seventy years.”54
Returning to Ayt. Reyshahri, the retaliation he received forced him to pen another defense in 1384/7/7 (2004), well-nigh a facsimile of the original [indicating that the controversial piece was unread], titled Pažūhišī dar H̯adīt̊-e Kisā‘ (An Investigation into HK). In the introduction, he expresses his sorrow provoked by the recent rumors, then quotes a condemnatory passage from Muhadith Qummi against those who wish to add to his magnum opus, “May the curse of Almighty Allah, His holy Prophet (p), and the pure Imams (a) be upon whomsoever inserts or extracts aught from my tome.”55 Reyshahri then [symbolically] addresses the [late] Muhadith Qummi in a scathing tone, reminiscent of Group 2A, “O great muhadith, revive yourself, wake up and smell the coffee. Astonished you shall be to witness that, that which you declared unreliable has been interpolated into your chef-d’œuvre and mislabeled sahih! Now, whensoever I avouch that MJ ought to be Mafatih al-Jinan, from all sides they [the denigrating clerics] decry, ‘Wherefore?!'”56
Then, Reyshahri responds to attacks and gossip, such as those inculpating him for “gainsaying a fundamental of the sect.” In another section, he problematizes HK’s [pseudo]-isnad, jotted as a sidenote in ‘Awālam.57 Notwithstanding his [evidence-based] striving could not end the onslaught and, in mid-1386 (c. 2007), he participated in two interviews – H̯ikmat nāma-e Payāmbar v. 5 and Hamšahrī Jum’a – in order to defend himself and wiggle out of scandal.58 The incident is mentioned in 1390 solar hijri (c. 2011) in the encyclopedia Dānešnāma-e Qur‘ān wa H̯adīt̊ under the section Ahl-e Bayt.
The Backlash of HK’s Clerical Supporters (Group 2A)
Bear in mind that the counteractions of HK’s proponents spotlighted herein represent a drop in the bucket. A proponent of HK’s veracity is Ayt. Mirza Jawad Tabrizi (d. 2006), considering it “a factual pillar, near and dear to the hearts of the faithful, clergy, and Imams’ Companions. An exemplar of seeking the means of recourse unto Him” (Qur’an 5:35) [i.e. intercession].59 Upon hearing the omission of HK from future editions of MJ, he swore, “The auspicious HK, – celebrated among the clergy and laity, a pillar of the faithful, – is that which is in MJ. Isnadic defects are unproblematic, for it was reliably transmitted orally. Therefore, chains are superfluous.”60
Ayt. Sayyid Ali Husayni Milani rebuked Group 1. His rationale for HK’s acceptability are the following: First, ‘Muhadith Qummi’s disapproval is irrelevant. He was likely ignorant of the chain in ‘Awālam. Second, man cannot prove a nonexistent matter via a nonexistent matter.’61
Sh. Muhammad Ali al-‘Alī, a professor in the Hawza of Ahsa, Saudi Arabia, berated a group for questioning HK. He accused them of trying to shatter the faith of the Shi’ites and blamed such activities for fomenting Shiaphobia.62 Ayt. Sayyid Sadiq Rohani, through an investigation of the isnadic sidenote in ‘Awalam, strengthened the suspicious transmitter, Qāsim b. Yah̯yā, rendering it sahih according to him.63
The greatest member of Group 2A is the preeminent mystic Ayt. Muhammad Taqi Behjat (d. 2009). By asserting the noble distinctiveness of the gentleman who penned the report, the miraculousness of HK’s matn was confirmed. The media broadcasted this tout de suite over radio and television. This emotional declaration rekindled the faith of many a skeptic.64
Ayt. Sayyid Ali Muwwah̯id Abt̯ah̯ī authored H̯adīt̊-e Kisā‘ wa Āt̊ār-e Šuguft-e ān (HK’s Superlative Sources). After presenting much evidence, he concludes that HK’s matn is present in G̊arar al-Ak̊bār wa Darar al-At̊ār fi Munāqib Abī al-A‘ima al-At̯hār by Hasan b. Abī al-Hasan Ali b. Muhamad Daylami (d. c. 780 AH).65 Moreover, he introduces an original isnad which includes himself – an ijazah in hadith via his mentor Ayt. Sayyid Sadiq Shirazi.66 However, although the IC is present in Gharar, HK is not, the narration in Gharar being much shorter, e.g. no transmission via Jabir, nor any mention of Qur’anic revelation in Bibi Fatima Zahra’s (a) abode – thus invalidating the comparison. Additionally, the chain is mursal. Notable is that the aforementioned original isnad, found in his ijazah in hadith via Ayt. Sadiq Shirazi, is unique – unrecorded in any other book.
Hussain Ustad Wali, the renowned hadith expert, researcher, and translator, has asserted ‘Awālam’s acceptability. He considers the additions to the text as supplementary rather than contradictory. Nonetheless, he emphasizes, ‘HK is not a literatim authentic supplication. Instead, it was imparted in order to foster [the IC’s] perusal among Shi’ites.’67
The Laic View (Group 2B)
In comparison to Group 2A, the laity is much more impassioned vis-a-vis HK. Anchormen, bloggers, and keyboard warriors have toiled and moiled pillorying Group 1. Some news agencies opposing Group 1 include al-Muflih̯ūn, Walīja al-Ši’a, Thaqalayn, and Quds Online. Websites abound the internet ennobling HK, highlighting its esoteric benefits and recommending its recitation as a remedy against deviation, e.g. “Those who weaken HK sadden Imam Zaman (a). HK ought to be recited every Saturday night. Whereby God shall rectify that which ails thy heart.”68
[More sophisticated] examples in this genre include a dissertation by a Kharazmi University student titled H̯adīt̊-e Kisā‘ Nazd-e Ši’a69 and a book titled Pažūhišī dar H̯adīt̊-e Kisā‘. These persons allege safeguarding the Shi’ite heritage (hadith corpus) by doing so. The author of said publication inquired the offices of many marjas and high-ranking clergymen on the subject of HK, many of whom answered on handwritten letters. Of course, all scholars listed in the text, according to him, approbate it.70 Notwithstanding, upon further inspection, many of the holographic letters either make no mention of HK, or respond vaguely to the query.
A piece of evidence presented in the book, attempting to withdraw HK from its shādh status, is from manuscript 8964, page 14, located in the library of Ayatullah Mar’ašī Najafī. However, multiple ayatullahs have demonstrated that the manuscript was misdated, being scribed within the Qajar reign.
Hitherto, change is yet to occurr within the popular mindset. HK continues to be oft-chanted at gatherings, and the blessings of its recitation are oft-shared.71
This intra-Shi’ite disagreement was, unsurprisingly, exploited by anti-Shi’ite pseudo-Islamic cults. For example, a Wahhabist named Abubakr Hussain indited a monograph titled Ja’l-e Riwāyat dar ‘As̯r-e H̯ād̯ir dar Maktab-e Šī’a ba Gawāhī-e K̊odšān (Modern Hadith Fabrication within the Shia School as Attested by Themselves). Naturally, refutations were composed.
1. History professor at the University of Tehran.
2. Seminarian at the Hawza of Qum. Graduate student at the University of Tehran (primary author)
3. برای نمونه، ر : تفسیر قمی،ج2،ص193؛ تفسیر فرات کوفی،ص111؛ الکافی،ج2،ص8؛ األمالی،طوسی، ص368؛ نهج الحق وکفش الصدق،ص228 و 229
4. برای نمونه، ر : مسند احمد بن حنبل،باب بدایذ مسند عبدالله بن العباس و باب حدیث واثله بن السقع؛ ترمذی،سنن، باب »من سوره،الحزاب«؛ روح المعانی فی تفسیر القرآن العظیم،ج11،ص195؛ شواهد التنزیل لقواعد التفضیل،ج2،ص17؛ منهاج السنه،ج5،ص13
5. 33 ،احزاب
6 .الخصال، ج2،ص335 و 561؛ کمال الدین و تمام النعمه، ج1 ،ص278.
7 .األمالی، طوسی،ص559.
8 .شواهد التنزیل، ج2 ،ص72.
9 .برای نمونه، ر : األمهالی، صدوق، 559؛ خصال، 561؛ کمال الدین و تمام النعمه، 278 .همچنین برای مشاهده اسامی متکلمان و کتب آنها، ر : تفسیر نمونه،ج17،ص297 و 298
10 .برای نمونه: ،جامع البیان، ج22 ،ص7 ؛ فتح القدیر، ج4 ،ص280.
11 .برای مشاهده احادیث متعدد در این باره، ر : ارشاد القلوب، ج2 ،ص2-23.
12 .ریاض العلماء وفات وی را 1085 و ماضی النجف وفات او را دو سال عقب تر ذکر نموده است )ریاض العلماء، ج4 ،ص411؛ ماضی النجف ، ج2 ،ص457
13. المنتخب، ص255-257
14 .برای اطلاع بیشتر درباره شخصیت و ،جایگاه وی، در :مجمع البحرین، مقدمه محقق ، ص1-18.
15 .آل طریح از تبار علم، فضل،ادب و تقوا،در نجف ، و از قدیمیترین ومشهورترین و ریشه دارترین خانواده ها درمجد وشرافت. زمانیکه رجال علم واصلم را بشمرند،خاندانی معروفتر از آنان در نجف نیست)پژوهشی درباره کتاب عوالم، ص6.)
16اشکوری، مصحِّ 16 .ح کتاب مجمع البحرین، با اشاره به این دو ویژگی،با شمردن اسامی کتب وی،او را فقیهی بزرگ ومسلط به علوم عقلی و نقلی و مباحث رجال، تراجم و احوال راویان دانسته است)مجمع البحهرین، مقدمه محقق ، ص8.)
17 .ریاض العلماء و حیاض الفضلاء،ج4،ص413.
18 .ماضی النجف و حاضرها، ج2 ،ص457.
19 .همان، ص414.
70. Wahid Khorasani, Sistani, Safi Gulpaygani, Bashir Najafi, Ishaq Fayad, Sayyid Taqi Tabatabai Qummi, Mirza Jawad Tabrizi, Sayyid Muhammad Hussain Shahrawadi, Madani Tabrizi, Shams al-Din Wa’izi, ‘Ala al-Din Gharifi, Sayyid Muhammad Sa’id Hakim, Alawi Gurgani, Musawi Ardabili, Muhammad Taqi Behjat, ‘Aza al-Din Zanjani, Yathrabi, Muhammad Sanad Bahrani, Sh. Hadi Najafi, Mustajabi, Mir Damadi, Sayyid Ali Hussaini Sadr, Bihishti Isfahani, Malak Hussaini and Haqiqat