Aban ibn Abi Ayyash

Biography

At fifteen years of age, Aban met Sulaym ibn Qays who taught him about Shi'a Islam. Eventually, he was entrusted with the book of Sulaym ibn Qays.

After the Battle of Karbala, when he was starting to get old, he went to Shiraz. After that, he went to Basra where he met Hasan al-Basri and asked him about the authenticity of the book. Hasan answered "it’s all true". Aban then went to Mecca where he talked to Sahabas and Taba'een, and all agreed to the events as portrayed in the book. He was still unsure about some of the more explicit parts of the book, so he took it to the Shi'a Imam Ali ibn Hussain, whom happened to be in Mecca that year.

Two old Sahaba were accompanying Ali ibn Hussain: Abu Tufail and Umar ibn Abi-Salman. Ali ibn Hussain told one of the Sahabas to read it for him. For three days, they did nothing but read the book, and at the end Ali ibn Hussain declared the content authentic. Aban became a known and prominent Sahaba to Ali ibn Hussain, and then to the following two Shi'a Imams: Muhammad al-Baqir ibn Ali and Ja'far al-Sadiq ibn Muhammad Baqir.

gollark: It's easy to say that if you are just vaguely considering that, running it through the relatively unhurried processes of philosophizing™, that sort of thing. But probably less so if it's actually being turned over to emotion and such, because broadly speaking people reaaaallly don't want to die.
gollark: Am I better at resisting peer pressure than other people: well, I'd *like* to think so, but so would probably everyone else ever.
gollark: Anyway, I have, I think, reasonably strong "no genocide" ethics. But I don't know if, in a situation where everyone seemed implicitly/explicitly okay with helping with genocides, and where I feared that I would be punished if I either didn't help in some way or didn't appear supportive of helping, I would actually stick to this, since I don't think I've ever been in an environment with those sorts of pressures.
gollark: Maybe I should try arbitrarily increasing the confusion via recursion.
gollark: If people are randomly assigned (after initial mental development and such) to an environment where they're much more likely to do bad things, and one where they aren't, then it seems unreasonable to call people who are otherwise the same worse from being in the likely-to-do-bad-things environment.I suppose you could argue that how "good" you are is more about the change in probability between environments/the probability of a given real world environment being one which causes you to do bad things. But we can't check those with current technology.

See also
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.