Question:

Did Al-Majlisi II. classify the reports of Kitab Sulaim as authentic (Sahih)?

Answer:

Muhammad Baqir Al-Majlisi writes: “Obviously good (Hasan). Rather, it is authentic (Sahih), because the book of Sulaim is considered accepted (Maqbul) by the most early scholars. Al-Kulaini, As-Saduq and others besides them relied on it and they know more about the narrations than the one who came after them. The book was shown to Imam Al-Baqir (a.) and it is also available to us.” [Mir’at-ul-Uqul, Volume 3 Page 291]

قال شيخ الإسلام المجلسي رحمه الله: حسن على الظاهر بل صحيح إذ كتاب سليم مقبول عند القدماء إعتمد عليه الكليني والصدوق وغيرهما وهم أعرف بأحوال الرجال ممن تأخر عنهم والكتاب معروض على الباقر عليه السلام وهو عندنا موجود

Muhammad Baqir Al-Majlisi writes: “The book of Sulaim Ibn Qais is at the top of its fame. One group criticized it, but in truth it is one of the principles that are authentic (Mu’tabar).” [Bihar-ul-Anwar, Volume 1 page 38]

قال شيخ الإسلام المجلسي رحمه الله: وكتاب سليم بن قيس في غاية الإشتهار وقد طعن فيه جماعة والحق أنه من الأصول المعتبرة

Muhammad Baqir Al-Majlisi writes: “it is known (by some) to be weak. It is considered as authentic (Mu’tabar) by me. I have Kitab Sulaim with me and I see in it what leaves the strong assumption that it is authentic (Sahih).” [Mir’at-ul-Uqul, Volume 1 Page 210]

قال شيخ الإسلام المجلسي رحمه الله: ضعيف على المشهور معتبر عندي وكتاب سليم عندي موجود وأرى فيه ما يورث الظن القوي بصحته