So, the fitnah of the people through them both on that day...

So, the fitnah of the people through them both on that day will be more severe than the fitnah of the calf and al-Samiri.[^8] About one of the narrators, al-Jawahiri comments: أحمد بن مابنداذ … مجهول Ahmad b. Mabindadh...: Majhul .[^9] In ‘Uyun , this narrator’s name is given as: أحمد بن بندار Ahmad b. Bundar However, even this one is dha’if too, as stated by al-Jawahiri: أبو جعفر أحمد بن بندار: مجهول Abu Ja’far Ahmad b. Bundar: Majhul .[^10] Then, Prof.

‘Ali Akbar al-Ghiffari explains the other defects in the sanad : أحمد بن هلال العبرتائي متهم في دينه غال. ورواية ابن أبي عمير عن المفضل بدون الواسطة بعيد Ahmad b. Hilal al-‘Abirtai, he is accused in his religion, a ghali (exaggerator) . And the narration of Ibn Abi ‘Umayr from al-Fadhl without an intermediary is improbable.[^11] Shaykh al-Tusi (d. 460 H) also says: أحمد بن هلال العبرتائي … ولد سنة ثمانين ومائة، ومات سنة سبع وستين ومائتين، وكان غاليا متهما في دينه Ahmad b. Hilal al-‘Abirtai ...

he was born in 180 H, and he died in 267 H. He was a ghali **, accused in his religion**.[^12] Al-Saduq himself also tells us about Ahmad b.

Hilal and people like him: اعتقادنا في الغلاة والمفوضة أنهم كفار بالله تعالى، وأنهم أشر من اليهود والنصارى والمجوس والقدرية والحرورية ومن جميع أهل البدع والأهواء المضلة Our belief concerning the ghulat (exaggerators) and the mufawwidhah is that they are DISBELIEVERS ( kuffar ) in Allah the Most High , and they are worse than the Jews, the Christians, the Majus, the Qadariyyah, the Haruriyyah and all the heretics and deviants.[^13] Of course, we do not take our religion from kuffar !

Their disbelief itself is sufficient to kill off their ahadith completely and absolutely. The ghulat commit outward kufr by awarding some attributes of Allah to the Prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wa alihi , and the Imams, ‘alaihim al-salam , after him. Al-Tusi further says about him: أحمد بن هلال وهو ضعيف فاسد المذهب Ahmad b. Hilal: he is dha’if , and a heretic.[^14] Ayatullah Sadiq al-Ruhani concurs: والاشكال فيه بأن في طريقه أحمد بن هلال وهو ضعيف Its problem is that in its chain is Ahmad b.

Hilal, and he is dha’if .[^15] The bottomline here then is, this chain is dha’if as well; in fact it is outrightly mawdhu’ due to the presence of the ghali in it. So, the report is NOT a valid proof. Shaykh Ahmad al-Tabarsi (d.