Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

B-N

Advanced Member
  • Content Count

    810
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Muslim2010 in Muawiyah (la) died as a disbeliever [Sunni Proof]   
    Nasai also believed that there existed no sahih hadith in praise of muawiya.
  2. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Aabiss_Shakari in Muawiyah (la) died as a disbeliever [Sunni Proof]   
    The tradition cited regarding Muawiyah being a Haadi has not been even approved by Imam Tirmidhi himself as he decalred it ‘Hasan Ghareeb’. Allamah Muhammad Abdurehman bin Abdurahim al-Mubarakfuri in his commentary of this tradition cited the comments of Allamah Ibn Abdul Barr:
    ‘The hafiz ibn Abdulbar said: “His companionship is not true and his chain (isnad) is not Sahih.” 
     
    We also read in ‘Tanaqudat al-Albani’ volume 2 page 228 by Allamah Hassan Saqaaf:
    “The Marfu Hadith from Abdulrahman bin Abi Umaira (Oh Allah guide him and make let him guide) referring to Mu’awiya, this hadith cannot be Sahih in any way”
    Razi records in ‘Elal al-Hadith’ Volume 2 page 362:
    “Verily Abdulrahman bin Abi Umaria didn’t hear this hadith from the prophet (s)”
    Imam Dhahabi records in ‘Siar alam al-Nubala’ Volume 3 page 126:
    “The (chain) is disconnected”
     
    Not a single hadith in praise of Mu’awiya is Sahih

    The leading ‘Ulama of Ahl al-Sunnah have declared all hadith praising Mu’awiya as fabricated.
    Imam Jalaluddeen Suyuti in his book Al-Leale al-Masnooa, Volume 1 page 424 while Allamah Ibn al-Jawzi in al- Mawdu’at, Volume 2 page 24 have recorded:
    قال الحاكم سمعت أبا العباس محمد بن يعقوب بن يوسف يقول سمعت أبي يقول سمعت إسحق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي يقول لا يصح في فضل معاوية حديث
    Al-Hakim said: ‘I heard Aba al-Abbas Muhammad bin Yaqoob bin Yusuf saying: ‘I heard my father saying: ‘I heard Ishaq bin Ibrahim al-Handhali saying: ‘There is no Sahih tradition about Mu’awyia’s virtues”’.
    1. Al-Leale al-Masnooa, Volume 1 page 424
    2.  al-Mawdu’at Volume 2 page 24
    Muhammad bin Ali bin Shawkani in his boko Fawa’id al Mujmu’a fi Bay’an al-Hadith al-Maudu’a, page 147 states that:
    “Ibn Hibban commented that all ahadith in praise of Mu’awiya are fabricated”.
     Fawa’id al Mujmu’a, page 147
     
     
  3. Like
    B-N got a reaction from celestial in Muawiyah (la) died as a disbeliever [Sunni Proof]   
    The tradition cited regarding Muawiyah being a Haadi has not been even approved by Imam Tirmidhi himself as he decalred it ‘Hasan Ghareeb’. Allamah Muhammad Abdurehman bin Abdurahim al-Mubarakfuri in his commentary of this tradition cited the comments of Allamah Ibn Abdul Barr:
    ‘The hafiz ibn Abdulbar said: “His companionship is not true and his chain (isnad) is not Sahih.” 
     
    We also read in ‘Tanaqudat al-Albani’ volume 2 page 228 by Allamah Hassan Saqaaf:
    “The Marfu Hadith from Abdulrahman bin Abi Umaira (Oh Allah guide him and make let him guide) referring to Mu’awiya, this hadith cannot be Sahih in any way”
    Razi records in ‘Elal al-Hadith’ Volume 2 page 362:
    “Verily Abdulrahman bin Abi Umaria didn’t hear this hadith from the prophet (s)”
    Imam Dhahabi records in ‘Siar alam al-Nubala’ Volume 3 page 126:
    “The (chain) is disconnected”
     
    Not a single hadith in praise of Mu’awiya is Sahih

    The leading ‘Ulama of Ahl al-Sunnah have declared all hadith praising Mu’awiya as fabricated.
    Imam Jalaluddeen Suyuti in his book Al-Leale al-Masnooa, Volume 1 page 424 while Allamah Ibn al-Jawzi in al- Mawdu’at, Volume 2 page 24 have recorded:
    قال الحاكم سمعت أبا العباس محمد بن يعقوب بن يوسف يقول سمعت أبي يقول سمعت إسحق بن إبراهيم الحنظلي يقول لا يصح في فضل معاوية حديث
    Al-Hakim said: ‘I heard Aba al-Abbas Muhammad bin Yaqoob bin Yusuf saying: ‘I heard my father saying: ‘I heard Ishaq bin Ibrahim al-Handhali saying: ‘There is no Sahih tradition about Mu’awyia’s virtues”’.
    1. Al-Leale al-Masnooa, Volume 1 page 424
    2.  al-Mawdu’at Volume 2 page 24
    Muhammad bin Ali bin Shawkani in his boko Fawa’id al Mujmu’a fi Bay’an al-Hadith al-Maudu’a, page 147 states that:
    “Ibn Hibban commented that all ahadith in praise of Mu’awiya are fabricated”.
     Fawa’id al Mujmu’a, page 147
     
     
  4. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Ali al-Abdullah in Mukthar Al Thaqafi   
    Sheer deceit by usual Nasibi rhetoric. Though in a very very less number, but Shias (who 'believed' Ali to be most superior after prophet) were there right during the era of prophet and of course after his(s) death. We read in Tahdeeb al-Kamal, Volume 20 page 480:
     
    روي عن سلمان وأبي ذر والمقداد وخباب وجابر وأبي سعيد الخدري وزيد بن أرقم رضي الله عنهم أن علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه أول من أسلم وفضله هؤلاء على غيره
     Salman, Abu Zarr, Miqdad, Khubab, Jabir, Abi Saeed Khudri and Zaid bin Arqam (may Allah be pleased with them all) have narrated that Ali is the first Muslim and all these people used to give seperiority to Ali over others.
     
    We read in Tarikh Ibn Khaldun, Volume 2 page 17:
     أن جماعة من الصحابة كانوا يتشيعون لعلى ويرون استحقاقه على غيره
    A group amongst the Sahaba were the Shias of Ali and they used to give preference to Ali over others.
     
    Dr. Muhammad Hussain Dhahabi (d. 1977) the former teachter at he was teacher at Al-Azhar University who subsequently become the minister for ministry of Islamic affairs and endowments stated in his authority work Al-Tafsir wal Mufasaron, Volume 2 page 5:
     
    “Nay there were among the Sahaba who loved Ali and believed that Ali is better than the other Sahaba and he is more deserving to be the Caliph such as Ammar bin Yasir, al-Miqdad bin al-Aswad, Abu Dhar, Salman al-Faresi, Jaber bin Abdullah and many others”
     
    Abu Zuhra states in Al-Shafiye, page 93:
     
    It should be kept in mind that it is not just Shias who believe Ali being greatest of all the Sahaba rather in past era, Sahaba also held this view such as Ammar bin Yasir, Miqdaad bin Aswad, Abu Zarr Ghaffari, Salman Farsi, Jabir bin Abdullah, Ubai bin Kkaab, Huzaifa, Buraida, Abu Ayub, Sahal bin Haneef, Uthman bin Haneef, Abu Hathem, Khuzaima bin Thabit, Abu Tufayl, Aamir bin Wathila, Abbas bin Abdul Mutalib, and their son and others from Bani Hashim; in the begining Zubair also held this view, but changed his opinion later; even in Bani Umayya there were people who held this view like Khalid bin Saeed bin Aas and Umar bin abdul Aziz.
  5. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Sirius_Bright in Why Do People Say Taraweeh Is Haram?   
    Also worthy of note are the views of the son of this Bidah introducer. We read in Musnaf Abdul Razaq:
     
     
    عبد الرزاق عن الثوري عن منصور عن مجاهد قال جاء رجل إلى بن عمر قال أصلي خلف الإمام في رمضان قال أتقرأ القرآن قال نعم قال افتنصت كأنك حمار صل في بيتك‘Mujahid reported that one person came to Abdullah Ibn Umar and asked: ‘Shall I pray during Ramadhan behind an Imam?’ He (Abdullah Ibn Umar) asked: ‘Can you recite the Quran?’. He answered: ‘Yes’. Upon this (Abdullah Ibn Umar) said: ‘Then why do you want to stand quietly like a donkey, go and pray at your home’
     
     
     
    As usual pathetic logic and reply. As if two wrongs make one right. 
  6. Like
    B-N reacted to shiasoldier786 in Hamas & Israel Support Saudi Invasion Of Yemen   
    No more sympathy for these back-stabbing ungrateful palestinians. No matter how much we support them, they will always consider us the enemy.
  7. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Noor al Batul in The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved   
    LOL.. Till date i have not received answer of the following from you and the point is still unattended, i.e, since you are more than keen to prove that Shia text also says that prophets do not leave inheritance but you have miserably failed to prove, from Shia text, the concluding part of the Hadith fabricated/claimed by Abu Bakar, according to which 'whatever prophets leave is to be distributed as sadqa' !!! In fact Abu Bakar himself did not make implementation of this part of his lie thats why we see that not 'everything' prophet (s) left was distributed by him as sadqa such as apartments of prophets, prophet's ring, his garment etc. Thus, if anyone has been flopped badly, its the 'kazab al akber' whose adherents are till date making all false attempts to defend his act but in vain :)
     
    And yes, we have proof that Fatima Zahra (sa) demanded Fadak and in this regard Um e Ayman testified (tafsir al qummi), and yes we know that when usurper denied the claim on one pretext or the other than Fatima Zahra (sa) claimed it as inheritance but since king's was adamant thus she was denied this right as well. So you are rather advised not to play with the 'either gift or inheritance' card because you are making no favour to your client (Abu Bakar) like this and its only adding to his already tarnished character. 
     
    The bottom line is, the fact that your early generation of scholars did not rule out the possibility of prophets leaving behind material possessions as inheritance has actually left your generation of Abu Bakar's advocates in a rather awkward situation, but still, keep trying. And yes, even if any window was left open for you, it was subsequently shut by your subsequent caliphs who handed over the fadak to the Ahlulbayt (as) deeming it their right.  
  8. Like
    B-N got a reaction from TheIslamHistory in Fatima Was Pleased With Abu Bakr (Shia Hadith|   
    Did you deliberately left the part wherein both Ali and Abbas had used the same wordings for Abu Bakar? In case it was not deliberate, then let me quote that relevant portion:
  9. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Ali Hadi. in Fatima Was Pleased With Abu Bakr (Shia Hadith|   
    Did you deliberately left the part wherein both Ali and Abbas had used the same wordings for Abu Bakar? In case it was not deliberate, then let me quote that relevant portion:
  10. Like
    B-N got a reaction from BrockLesnar in Fatima Was Pleased With Abu Bakr (Shia Hadith|   
    Did you deliberately left the part wherein both Ali and Abbas had used the same wordings for Abu Bakar? In case it was not deliberate, then let me quote that relevant portion:
  11. Like
    B-N reacted to mesbah in Should We Call Upon Ali?   
    I proved you were a liar. what does it have to do with adab? you deny the fact that umar taught people to directly address the Prophet  (pbuh)? umar did it during his rule, and that was after the demise of the Prophet  (pbuh)
    all four sunni schools regard the following statement a part of their prayer:
    التَّحِيَّاتُ لِلَّهِ، وَالصَّلَوَاتُ وَالطَّيِّبَاتُ، السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْكَ أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ وَرَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ، السَّلاَمُ عَلَيْنَا وَعَلَى عِبَادِ اللَّهِ الصَّالِحِينَ، أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ ، وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ
    your scholars believe the narration you are in love with so much, has some additions by the narrators as their Ijtihad that contradict the teaching of umar:
    وأمّا ما وَرَدَ في " صحيح البخاري " عن عبد الله بن مسعود أنهم كانوا يقولون بعد وفاة الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم: " السَّلامُ على النَّبيِّ ورحمة الله وبركاته " فهذا مِن اجتهاداتِه – رضي الله عنه - التي خالَفه فيها مَنْ هو أعلمُ منه ؛ عُمرُ بن الخطَّاب ، فإنه خَطَبَ النَّاسَ على مِنبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وقال في التشهُّد ِ: " السَّلامُ عليك أيُّها النبيُّ ورحمة الله " كما رواه مالك في " الموطأ " بسَنَدٍ من أصحِّ الأسانيد ، وقاله عُمرُ بمحضر الصَّحابة وأقرُّوه على ذلك . 
    لصحيح أن يقول المصلي في التشهد السلام عليك أيها النبي ورحمة الله وبركاته ؛ لأن هذا هو الثابت في الأحاديث ، وأما ما روي عن ابن مسعود رضي الله عنه في ذلك- إن صح عنه - فهو اجتهاد من فاعله لا يعارض به الأحاديث الثابتة ، ولو كان الحكم يختلف بعد وفاته عنه في حياته لبينه لهم صلى الله عليه وسلم . 
    " فتاوى اللجنة الدائمة للبحوث العلمية والإفتاء " ( 7 / 11 - 13 ) . 
    go and study.
    as I said umar had "major kufr" issue according to your own reasoning

    as for Shia sources, a narration that says angels take the Salam of the shias to the Imam, it is from Kamil al-Ziyarat:
     
    1- حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ الْقُرَشِيُّ الرَّزَّازُ الْكُوفِيُّ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي خَالِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ بْنِ أَبِي الْخَطَّابِ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي مُوسَى بْنُ سَعْدَانَ الْحَنَّاطُ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ الْقَاسِمِ الْحَضْرَمِيِّ عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ بْنِ شُعَيْبٍ الْمِيثَمِيِّ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع يَقُولُ‏ إِنَّ الْحُسَيْنَ بْنَ عَلِيٍّ ع لَمَّا وُلِدَ أَمَرَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ جَبْرَئِيلَ ع أَنْ يَهْبِطَ فِي أَلْفٍ مِنَ الْمَلَائِكَةِ فَيُهَنِّئَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ص مِنَ اللَّهِ وَ مِنْ جَبْرَئِيلَ ع قَالَ وَ كَانَ مَهْبِطُ جَبْرَئِيلَ ع عَلَى جَزِيرَةٍ فِي الْبَحْرِ فِيهَا مَلَكٌ يُقَالُ لَهُ فُطْرُسُ‏ كَانَ مِنَ الْحَمَلَةِ فَبُعِثَ فِي شَيْ‏ءٍ فَأَبْطَأَ فِيهِ فَكُسِرَ جَنَاحُهُ وَ أُلْقِيَ فِي تِلْكَ الْجَزِيرَةِ يَعْبُدُ اللَّهَ فِيهَا سِتَّمِائَةِ عَامٍ حَتَّى وُلِدَ الْحُسَيْنُ ع فَقَالَ الْمَلَكُ لِجَبْرَئِيلَ ع أَيْنَ تُرِيدُ- قَالَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَعَالَى أَنْعَمَ عَلَى مُحَمَّدٍ ص بِنِعْمَةٍ فَبُعِثْتُ أُهَنِّئُهُ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَ مِنِّي فَقَالَ يَا جَبْرَئِيلُ احْمِلْنِي مَعَكَ لَعَلَّ مُحَمَّداً ص يَدْعُو اللَّهَ لِي قَالَ فَحَمَلَهُ فَلَمَّا دَخَلَ جَبْرَئِيلُ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ ص وَ هَنَّأَهُ مِنَ اللَّهِ وَ هَنَّأَهُ مِنْهُ وَ أَخْبَرَهُ بِحَالِ فُطْرُسَ‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ص يَا جَبْرَئِيلُ أَدْخِلْهُ فَلَمَّا أَدْخَلَهُ أَخْبَرَ فُطْرُسُ‏ النَّبِيَّ ص بِحَالِهِ فَدَعَا لَهُ النَّبِيُّ ص وَ قَالَ لَهُ تَمَسَّحْ بِهَذَا الْمَوْلُودِ وَ عُدْ إِلَى مَكَانِكَ قَالَ فَتَمَسَّحَ فُطْرُسُ‏ بِالْحُسَيْنِ ع وَ ارْتَفَعَ وَ قَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ص أَمَا إِنَّ أُمَّتَكَ سَتَقْتُلُهُ- وَ لَهُ عَلَيَّ مُكَافَاةُ أَنْ لَا يَزُورَهُ زَائِرٌ إِلَّا بَلَّغْتُهُ عَنْهُ وَ لَا يُسَلِّمَ عَلَيْهِ مُسَلِّمٌ إِلَّا بَلَّغْتُهُ سَلَامَهُ وَ لَا يُصَلِّيَ عَلَيْهِ مُصَلٍّ إِلَّا بَلَّغْتُهُ عَلَيْهِ صَلَاتَهُ قَالَ ثُمَّ
    ارْتَفَعَ.

    Amir al-Mumineen is a Prophet-Given title, exclusively for Ali b. Abi Talib al-Farooq al-'Azam
    no wonder, some people stole it and now you see terrorists like abu bakr baghdaadi call themselves by it. 
     
    nope, the first is a direct address.
     
    ... you should stop repeating Takfiri allegations and paving the way for killing innocent shias.
    get your hand out of innocent blood.
  12. Like
    B-N reacted to .equilibrium. in Abd Allah Ibn Saba: Myth Exploded (New Book!)   
    He did scare the goat off, as the valient man he was, if you would but read.
    Bring the murders to justice and apply the quranical penalty, And that by which recognized authority? The one just recently usurped by Abu Bakr and his street thugs, right? 
    Now then your off again ranting, applying your myopic, one-laned Sunni crippled mindset. Could his coorporation with the 3 satans have been for the greater good of islam? 
    I´ll tell you straight away, Im not interested in debate for the sake of debate. 
     
    Have a nice, calm and peaceful life. 

    Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Is it a goat?
     

     
    No. It's just Umar.
  13. Like
    B-N reacted to .equilibrium. in Abd Allah Ibn Saba: Myth Exploded (New Book!)   
    Just to understand what you're really asserting here. Do you intend to say that by proving through Shi'i sources the mere historical existence of a person by the name of Ibn Saba, who got punished by the imam for ascribing divine attributes to him, you equally justify the fairytale of the superhuman covert agent that infiltrated the sahabas in Medina, toppled the uthmani caliphate, instigated the rebellion against Ameer al momineen (a.s.) while duping the top ranks of the Medinite intelligentsia in doing so, and conclude that shias should be convinced of The Ibn Saba story?
     
    And you and your bunch claim that shias believe in demigods, lol.
     
     
     
    And we know that Allah (s.w.t.) didn't include any mountain goats in that verse, jumping mountain goats rarely enrage people.
  14. Like
    B-N got a reaction from yam_110 in Fadak - Issues In Abridged Form   
    (salam)
     
    I have often observed that debate on Fadak gets expand on pages thats why I thought to shrink the whole debate into a abridged form in a rather informal way:
     
    Events as they happened
     
    1.      Fadak was received as Fay property and it became exclusive property of prophet. (Nawawi)
     
    2.      Prophet (s) gifted it to Fatima Zahra (as). (Tafsir al Qummi)
     
    3.      After prophet’s death, Fatima Zahra (as) demanded Fadak to which Abu Bakr demanded witnesses, Fatima produced witnesses but her witnesses were turned down. (Ibn Hajjar in Sawaiq al Muhriqa, Mir Sharif in Sharah Mawaqif, Razi in Tafsir Kabir, Allamah Halabi in Sirat al Halabiyah. Also Tafsir al Qummi).
     
    4.      Then Fatima Zahra (as) demanded Fadak in shape of her right in inheritance left by her father. (Bukhari, Musnad Ahmed, Muslim)
     
    5.      To which initially Abu Bakar stated that “he” had decided that although progeny of prophet are his heirs but property left by prophet should be distributed among people.
     
    6.      Then a sudden change in stance, Abu Bakar coined a hadith and attributed to prophet the concept of which Hadith is that prophets have a rather different system of inheritance and whoever is born from loin of a prophet brings misfortune for himself/herself and he/she is punished in a way that he/she is deprived of his/her ‘right’ to inherit his/her father which ‘right’ is otherwise enjoyed by each and every individual of the world. He/She is debarred to inherit even a single cheap material possession from his/her father which activity otherwise is considered as an sign of a Muslim being a legitimate child of his/her parents. “ Whatever” and once again – “WHATEVER” prophets leave is to be distributed as charity among poor.  (Bukhari, Musnad Ahmed, Muslim etc)
     
    7.      Fatima Zahra (as) cited verse of Quran to prove that prophets did leave inheritance and heirs but since intentions of some people had overcome by Satan therefore those verses were also not accepted.
     
    8.      Fatima Zahra (as) got (a.) “angry” with Abu Bakar and (b.) did not talk to him again © died with the same stance. (Bukhari, Musnad Ahmed, Muslim, Tirmidhi etc)
     
    9.      Widower Ali bin Abi Talib (as) then  (again) raise the issue and agitates his share from the property left by his wife which she ought to have inherited from her father on the other side Abbas, the uncle of prophet claims his share from inheritance left by prophet. But Abu Bakar remained adamant hence Ali deemed him as (a.) treacherous (b.) dishonest © Lair (d) Sinful. (Bukhari, Muslim etc).
     
    [This shows Ali did not believe Abu Bakar to be ‘Sideeq’ and not to mention that lair is cursed in Quran so Ali also deemed Abu Bakar to be an accursed one]
     
     
    10.  Abu Bakar died but not before ‘nominating’ net ruler. Umar became incharge. Ali bin Abi Talib (as) and Abbas again present their ‘same case of inheritance’ to him. Ali again deemed Umar as (a.) treacherous (b.) dishonest © Lair (d) Sinful. (Muslim etc).
     
    Not to mention that lair is cursed in Quran so Ali deemed Umar to be an accursed one]
     
     
    11.  In pursuance of claim of inheritance advanced by Ali and Abbas, Umar handed over the property to both but then some dispute emerged.
     
    12.  Fadak remained a football between rulers and the rightful owners. Umar bin Abdul Aziz overruled the decision of pioneer caliphs and handed over it to its rightful owners.
     
    Contradiction of coined Hadith to Quran / Hadith / History
     
    1.      According to the Hadith which was fabricated at the drop of hat by the ruler of the time viz prophets do not leave inheritance, but we see that inheritance of prophets have been mentioned in Quran.
     
    2.      “Majority of Sunni ulema” have been of the opinion that prophet Suleman inherited horses from his father.
     
     
    3.      Commentators also believed that prophet Zakria was seeking (in quranic verse) someone to inherit his material possessions.
     
     
    4.      Some of the early Hanafi scholars were also of the view that prophets can leave material possessions as inheritance. Thus the picture is not like what present day Sunnis try to paint before Shias according to which there has always been Ijma among scholars that prophets cannot leave inheritance.
     
     
    5.      Most of all, Sunnis cannot prove that Abu Bakar and Co. ever had interpreted these verses in the way that they are doing in this age.
     
    6.      They cant bring single authentic prove that any of the material possessions of any past prophet was not inherited by his legal heirs but were distributed as Sadqa among poor.
     
    Bias shown – underhand deals – Acting in contradiction to coined Hadith
     
    According to the alleged Hadith, “whatever” prophets leave behind it to be distributed among poor but this rule was not applied in cases of:
     
    1.      Apartments of wives of prophets. They were not taken over and distributed among the poor and wives of prophet were still allowed to live in them.
     
    2.      Sword of Prophet or its sale proceed was not distributed and it was with Imam Zain ul Abdeen. (Bukhari).
     
    3.      Prophet’s ring was kept by Abu Bakar and then Umar and Uthman. (Bukhari)
     
    4.      Prophet’s garment was kept by Ayesha. (Muslim)
     
    5.      Fatima Zahra’s home was broke open by Abu Bakar and Co. to see if there was anything left by prophet do that it can be distributed as Sadqa (Ibn Tamiyah) but no such act was done with anybody else.
     
     
    6.      At least there was no dispute about Ahlulbayt’s right to receive Khums but Abu Bakar even stopped Khums to Banu Hashim (Tafsir Ruh al Ma’ani etc)
     
    7.      At times, Abu Bakar didn’t ask for witnesses and granted the relief claimed by Sahabi on the basis of his sole testimony. (Bukhari) but he asked for witnesses from  Fatima Zahra’s although her rank was much higher, than those sahaba, being part of  “Ahlulbayt” and Abu Bakar was bound to accept her version in light of “Hadith al Thaqlayn”.
     
    Use of Aql
    1.      Prophet of Islam did not inform the method of inheritance of prophets to his own daughter but informed about it to an outsider.
    2.      Ali bin Abi Talib (as) who according to Sunnis was the most knowledgeable Sahabi and the only one who advanced the challenge of Saluni (to know the Quranic revelations and interpretations) himself didn’t know anything about such an important system of inheritance exclusive to prophets.
    3.      Wives of prophets were also didn’t aware of any such thing hence they also advanced their claim of inheritance.
    4.      Another stake holder, uncle of prophet was also kept in dark by the prophet on such an important aspect.
     
     
    Defenses advanced by desperate advocates of rulers
     
     
    One: Nawasib claim that as per Shia hadiths, ulema are the heirs of prophets and prophets leave knowledge in their inheritance.
     
    1.      These Hadiths do not debar the “biological progeny” of prophets from inheriting their fathers/prophets and we have authentic Hadith which says that Fatima Zahra inherited prophet's estate (al kafi) which is suffice to water down any attempt to equate shia hadith with that of coined by Abu Bakar.
    2.      Unlike Hadith advanced by Abu Bakar, Shia hadiths do not say that ‘whatever’ prophets leave is to be distributed among poor.
     
    Two: Imam Ali didn’t regain Fadak during his reign
    1.      Okay, and it proves what? It seems nothing but as an attempt to find ‘weakness’ in the arguments of your opponents when you yourself cannot advance any strong defense of your ancestors.
    2.      Does it prove that Fatima Zahra and Ali have not been opposing the view formed by Abu Bakar in respect of prophet’s inheritance?
    3.      Does it in anyway, altogether and all of a sudden, nullify the stance of Ali about Abu Bakar and Umar being treacherous, sinful, lair and dishonest?
    4.      Does it anyway prove that Fatima Zahra did not die angry of Abu Bakar?
    5.      If Ali could not get back Fadak from the clutches of his opponents then there were a series of reasons and wisdom behind it some of which we find mentioned in hadith works.
  15. Like
    B-N reacted to shabib_jaisi in EXCAVATING THE GRAVE OF IMAM HUR   
    (bismillah)
    (salam)

    Once abbasiyad caliphate tried to excavate the body of imam hussain(a.s.) many years after the tragedy......coz it is said that the shahids do not die nd their body do not wear nd tear out in the grave........when the shias resisted they settled down to excavate the grave of hur(a.s.) ............during the battle of karbala when hur (a.s.) was injured and blood was gushing out of his forehead imam hussain(a.s.) tied the hand made handkerchief of janab fatima on his forehead the blood stooped and he was buried with handkerchief..............so when his grave was excavated his body was found in the same state with that handkerchief on his forehead.........abbasiyad people knew that the handkerchief was of janabe fatima so they become greedy and thought it would be a treasure to keep janab-e-fatimas handkerchief......so even after much protest of shias the handkerchief was untied and removed....the effect was that the blood again started gushing out of the wound.......the authorities had to tie the handkerchief back on his forehead.............thus proving that not only does their body remains preserves but also their blood and thus they are alive even being dead in world's view

    ur brother in faith
  16. Like
    B-N got a reaction from yam_110 in The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved   
    LOL.. Till date i have not received answer of the following from you and the point is still unattended, i.e, since you are more than keen to prove that Shia text also says that prophets do not leave inheritance but you have miserably failed to prove, from Shia text, the concluding part of the Hadith fabricated/claimed by Abu Bakar, according to which 'whatever prophets leave is to be distributed as sadqa' !!! In fact Abu Bakar himself did not make implementation of this part of his lie thats why we see that not 'everything' prophet (s) left was distributed by him as sadqa such as apartments of prophets, prophet's ring, his garment etc. Thus, if anyone has been flopped badly, its the 'kazab al akber' whose adherents are till date making all false attempts to defend his act but in vain :)
     
    And yes, we have proof that Fatima Zahra (sa) demanded Fadak and in this regard Um e Ayman testified (tafsir al qummi), and yes we know that when usurper denied the claim on one pretext or the other than Fatima Zahra (sa) claimed it as inheritance but since king's was adamant thus she was denied this right as well. So you are rather advised not to play with the 'either gift or inheritance' card because you are making no favour to your client (Abu Bakar) like this and its only adding to his already tarnished character. 
     
    The bottom line is, the fact that your early generation of scholars did not rule out the possibility of prophets leaving behind material possessions as inheritance has actually left your generation of Abu Bakar's advocates in a rather awkward situation, but still, keep trying. And yes, even if any window was left open for you, it was subsequently shut by your subsequent caliphs who handed over the fadak to the Ahlulbayt (as) deeming it their right.  
  17. Like
    B-N reacted to MohammadAli1993 in Debate On Chapter 2 (Al-Baqarah) Verses 30-39: The   
    Here is a clear Hadees which proves that the AhlulBait (as) dint prostrate to Prophet Adam (as) when Allah (swt) ordered the angels to prostrate to Adam (as).
     حدّثنا عبد الله بن محمد بن عبد الوهاب عن أبي الحسن محمد بن أحمد القواريري، عن أبي الحسين محمد بن عمّار، عن إسماعيل بن توبة، عن زياد بن عبد الله البكائي، عن سليمان بن الأعمش، عن أبي سعيد الخدري، قال: كنّا جلوساً مع رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله إذ أقبل إليه رجل فقال
    يا رسول الله، أخبرني عن قول الله عزّ وجلّ لابليس: (أَسْتَكْبَرْتَ أمْ كُنْتَ مِنَ الْعَالِينَ) فمَن هم يا رسول الله الّذين هم أعلى من الملائكة؟ قال رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله: أنا وعليّ وفاطمة والحسن والحسين، كنّا في سرادق العرش نسبّح الله وتسبّح الملائكة بتسبيحنا قبل أن يخلق الله عزّ وجلّ آدم بألفي عام. فلمّا خلق الله عزّ وجلّ آدم، أمر الملائكة أن يسجدوا له، ولم يأمرنا بالسجود فسجدت الملائكة كلّهم إلاّ إبليس فانّه أبى ولم يسجد. فقال الله تبارك وتعالى: (أَسْتَكْبَرْتَ أمْ كُنْتَ مِنَ الْعَالِينَ) عنى من هؤلاء الخمسة المكتوبة أسماؤهم في سرادق العرش


    Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Abdul-Wahab narrated to us from Abu al-Hasan Mohammed bin Ahmed al-Qawariri from Abu al-Hussein Mohammed bin Ammar from Ismaeel bin Tawba from Ziyad bin Abdullah al-Bukaai from Sulaiman bin al-Amish that Abu Saeed al-Khidri related:

    We were sitting with the Prophet (s) when a man came and asked him:

    "O Allah's Messenger, Allah says: 'Eblis, what prevented you from prostrating before what I have created with My own hands? Was it because of your pride or are you one of those who are exalted?' (38:75) Who are those exalted ones whose ranks are higher than the angels'?"
     The Prophet (s) answered: Those are Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan, al-Hussein, and I. We were in the pavilion of the Divine Throne praising Allah. The angels were imitating us. That was two thousand years before the creation of Adam. When He created Adam, Allah, Powerful and Exalted is He, ordered the angels to prostrate themselves before him. Allah did not include us in this order. All of the angels therefore prostrated except Eblis who rejected to prostrate. Referring to the five individuals whose names are recorded on the pavilion of the Divine Throne, Allah said to Eblis, 'Was it because of your pride or are you one of those who are exalted?

    [source: Fazail ush Shia, Sheikh Sadooq, Hadees.7] 
    http://www.najaf.org/english/book/23/01.html#7 
  18. Like
    B-N reacted to yam_110 in The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved   
    I will try to be very brief in my reply as you have repeated a lot of stuff which has been refuted already.
     
     
    1. If Abu Bakr had mentioned exceptions in the narration he coined you would have had scope to discuss about the transfer of the kingdom. Since he said Prophets do not leave inheritance this question of yours is irrelevant and what remains relevant is that Prophet Dawood's (as) kingdom was NOT distributed as alms.
     
    2. As I have stated above, you can blame Abu Bakr for that as he generalized that all Prophets do not leave anything. Since Talut was not a prophet we do not have to worry about it. 
     
    3. You can call it whatever you like but your deception isn't going to help you this time as Quran clearly outlines the laws of inheritance for children. Just because you deny Quranic verses it doesn't mean that everyone should do it. I have already proved from Quran the reason for zakat being prohibited for a few members of the Prophet (pbuh) and yet you incorreclty hang on to a generic statement about the family of the Prophet (pbuh) not receiving it. Desperation at it's best.
     
    4. Excuse me? Authentic??? A narration going against the Quran, finds itself only in your books, heard only by ONE person who was not impacted  by this and none of the family members were aware of it. It tells a sane mind that it cannot be authentic coz if it was then it would (nauzubillah) be an insult to the Prophet (pbuh). 
     
    As I have said before, any narration which goes against the Quran is to be rejected.
     
    Don't lie again. Shia books do not state what you are saying. You are taking narrations out of context and partially from our books. If you want to know the real meaning then open the books and see if you can interpret them the way you are alleging. You only mentioned the list but when asked for a proof you have evaded it twice. All you have mentioned is a narration which was coined to insult the Prophet's (pbuh) family.,
     
    I am repeating it hopefully for the last time. Any narration which contradicts the Quran is to be binned. Just because you think narrations can modify Quranic verses doesn't mean anything.
     
     
    5. It doesn't matter whose website it is. The fact you are following it is sufficient to expose your dishonesty. 
     
     
    Allah says in Quran "Fay is bestowed upon the Prophet"
     
    Umar says "Those lands were meant for the Prophet"
     
     
    Yet, you state contrary to the above.
     
     
    To interpret the Quran whose words do we trust? Your's or your caliphs?
     
    Quran & Narrations have both proven you wrong on numerous occasions and yet you have the audacity to accuse others????
     
     
     1. I do not care what you call it as you have proven that you are only good at accusing others. You will see the reason for these questions very soon in my future posts InshaAllah.  2. Embarrassingly for you the narration you claim to be weak is authentic. Read the details on the link I gave you. You ignore my reply and continue making incorrect claims. Even if we leave aside the authentic narration, the fact that Abu Bakr didnt't interpret the Quranic verses like you are doing now is enough to prove you wrong. Not just Abu Bakr, people who lived during the era of the revelation of the Quran didn't interpret the verses that way. Even the tabaeen didn't interpret the verses in a way you are doing now as we have seen earlier. Doesn't it tell you something? We have seen you incorrectly quoting Quranic verses to prove your point yet Abu Bakr did not think of it? The truth is if he thought the verses would help him he would have boasted about it to prove his stance. Yet he only confined himself to a narration which he coined. However, we see you going a step further and thinking that you are more knowledgeable that Abu Bakr himself and interpreting the Quranic verses to your liking. This is a clear case of deceit & dishonesty which even Abu Bakr didn't try. So it is quite clear that your interpretation is something which has been fabricated centuries after the revelation of the Quran to defend the mistakes of the person who himself didn't interpret the verses that way.  3. Firstly that narration is from your books and secondly, I have refuted it already. Go back and read my posts instead of repeating the same stuff over and over again & wasting my time. As I have said before, if that narration is true then you must also agree that they thought of Abu Bakr to be liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.  4. Which narration?      
    All through this post you have been repeating stuff and adding no value to this discussion.
     
    I am not going to repeat myself just because you are not reading my posts. But I will only highlight two things.
     
    i) The narration is talking about the successor to the Prophet (pbuh) and not the inheritor to his material wealth invalidates your attempt.
    ii) As per Quran, sons and daughters would inherit the material wealth of the parents and this narration is not about material wealth. So to divert this topic to something which goes against Quran and say that Imam Ali (as) inherited the Prophet (pbuh) or Bibi Fatima (s) ; is a clear proof of you taking this narration out of context again.
     
     
    To add to the above, as I have mentioned in my previous reply:
     
    (i) Tell me which prophet did not have knowledge?
    (ii) The fact that Prophet Sulaiman  (as) inherited his father's kingdom is a proof that knowledge was not the only thing he could have inherited. 
     
    It would help you if you read my posts before repeating stuff over and over again as it would at least save you some embarrassment.
     
     
    For argument's sake if I brush aside logic and accept your desperate position then it actually results in more problems for you than for me. 
     
    If you agree that Imam Ali (as) had inherited the knowledge of the Prophet then as he sided with the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) on her stance on Fadak & said that "Verily, under the sky we had only Fadak as our personal property but we were deprived of it, it tempted them, they took it by force and we had to bear the wrench patiently and cheerfully, the best judge is the Lord Almighty." means that the person who had inherited the knowledge of the Prophet thought of Abu Bakr as an usurper.
     
     
    Choice is now yours to make. 
     
    (wasalam)
  19. Like
    B-N got a reaction from yam_110 in The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved   
    Jazakallah khair bro. Another point is that in their feeble attempt to prove that prophets do not leave material possessions in inheritance  Sunnis/Nawasib shoot themselves in the feet by relying upon the above hadith because the hadith confirms that
    (a.) it was Ali (as) who was the heir of prophet  (b.)
      Ali in fact inherited prophet,
     
    and hence the humanly appointment caliph (Abu Bakar) looses his eligibility leaving Sunnies no where !!  
  20. Like
    B-N reacted to Sumerian in Why Be A Shia?   
    Edit
    - Consensus against Tatbeer? Nonsense. Don't believe Tatbir.org on everything, they didn't put the true opinion of Sayyed al-Khu'i (r.a), and Sayyed Alee' al-Seestani (h.a). Also, what about the maraja' who view it halaal' today? Sayyed Saadiq al-Sheerazi (h.a), Sayyed Saadiq al-Rouhanee' (h.a) and others. Not to mention that many of the older scholars such as Shaykh al-Naa'eeni (h.a) believed in its permissiblity.
    Secondly, "A'isha" (r.a)!? Why would you say "May Allaah (s.w.t) Be pleased with her?! Are you Shee'ah? How can you respect someone the Imaams didn't?
  21. Like
    B-N reacted to yam_110 in The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved   
    Apologies if I sound rude, but I need to know something. Do you ever try thinking logically using the brain which Allah has blessed you with? 
     
     
    I am amazed at how you continuously ignore the context in which the verses are being mentioned or the narrations being spoken of. All because you want to prove that Abu Bakr heard something from the Prophet (pbuh). 
     
    The full narration being alluded to is as follows:
     
     
    “Zayd bin Abi Awfa said: ‘I went to Allah’s messenger in his mosque, then he (Zaid) mentioned the story of brotherhood amongst the companions of Allah’s messenger. Then Ali said to the Prophet (s): ‘I lost my patience and felt sorrow when I saw you doing that to your companions but not to me, if I have incurred your displeasure I wish to apologise’.Allah’s messenger said: ‘I swear by He who sent me with the truth, I only left you for myself, your status to me is like the status of Harun to Musa except there is no Prophet after me, you are my brother and my inheritor’. (Ali) said: ‘O Allah’s messenger, what shall I inherit from you?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘You shall inherit from me what the prophets used to inherit’. (Ali) said: ‘What did the Prophets inherit?’ (The Prophet) said: ‘The book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, you are with me in my palace in paradise along with my daughter Fatima, you are my brother and my friend’. Then Allah’s messenger recited the verse { (they shall be) as brethren, on raised couches, face to face.} 015.047” 
     
    As we see above, the above narration has nothing to do with material inheritance. Just pause a moment and think about these things logically.
     
    1) Is the above narration about material wealth?
    2) Is Imam Ali (as) , the son or daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) to ask about material inheritance?
    3) Wasn't the daughter of the Prophet (pbuh) alive to discuss about material inheritance?
    4) Imam Ali (as) always stated that Fadak belonged to Bibi Fatima (s). If we assume that the above narration was about material inheritance, then are you telling us that he knew he wouldn't receive a share and yet he asked for something prohibited for him (Nauzubillah) ?
    5) If at all we see anything from this narration, it only proves that Imam Ali (as) was the most knowledgeable after the Holy Prophet (pbuh) as he had inherited his knowledge and he would  be his successor after he departs.
     
    Can you deny any of the above points?
     
     
     
     
     
    Now that we have answers to two questions. Can you answer the third one please?
     
     
    Q. Do you have a verse from Quran which exempts the Prophets from inheritance?
    A. NO. There is no verse which excludes the Prophets from the general inheritance laws.
     
    Q. Do you have any narration which proves that Abu Bakr interpreted the verses like you are doing now?
    A. NO narration is present about Abu Bakr interpreting the Quranic verses like it is being done recently.
     
     
    Do you have a narration to prove that Prophet (pbuh) informed his family members that they would not receive anything after his death?
     
     
     
    After you answer all the questions, you will see the reason for these questions InshaAllah.
     
     
    (wasalam)
  22. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Haidar :) in The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved   
    Are you okay? Why would he "claim" Fadak "alongside" Fatima Zahra (sa) when only she was entitled to it? He advanced his claim when his claim became matures i.e. he was seeking his share from Fatima Zahra's share from her father's property. Have a look at it again:
     
     
    “...Then I took charge of this property for two years during which I managed it as Allah’s Apostle and Abu Bakr did. Then you both (‘Ali and ‘Abbas) came to talk to me, bearing the same claim and presenting the same case. (O ‘Abbas!) You came to me asking for your share from the property of your nephew, and this man (Ali) came to me, asking for the share of his wife from the property of her father.” Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 80, Number 720
  23. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Haidar :) in The Ahlul Bayt - The Family Of The Beloved   
    What about this?
     
     
    “...Then I took charge of this property for two years during which I managed it as Allah’s Apostle and Abu Bakr did. Then you both (‘Ali and ‘Abbas) came to talk to me, bearing the same claim and presenting the same case. (O ‘Abbas!) You came to me asking for your share from the property of your nephew, and this man (Ali) came to me, asking for the share of his wife from the property of her father.” Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 80, Number 720
  24. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Haidar :) in The Oppression Of Sayeda Faatima (S.a.) Part Vii-I   
    Ok finally the najis blood of your nasibi ancestors flowing into your veins have finally been revealed. By the way, your acceptance of Ali being a rebel (for whatever category of word you may put him) has proved you an out and out nasibi because as per hadith we are asked not to find faults in Ali bin Abi Talib (as) and that too, a fault/crime which according to your school is tantamount to committing zina in a mosque 
    .
     
    Nayl al-Awtar, Volume 7 page 198: واعلم أن قتال البغاة جائز إجماعا كما حكي ذلك في البحر ولا يبعد أن يكون واجبا لقوله تعالى { فقاتلوا التي تبغي } وقد حكي في البحر أيضا عن العترة جميعا أن جهادهم أفضل من جهاد الكفار إلى ديارهم إذ فعلهم في دار الإسلام كفعل الفاحشة في المسجد “You have to know that the there is Ijma regarding the lawfulness of fighting the rebel as it is written in al-Bahr (book), and likely it is obligatory for His almighty statement ‘{ then fight ye (all) against the one that transgresses}’, and it is also written in al-Bahr (book) that all of the progeny said fighting them is superior to fighting the disbelievers in their homeland because their act of rebellion on Muslims’ homeland is like performing adultery inside a mosque.” Just want to ask for the sake of knowledge as to how other "rebel" Sahaba (in your words) were treated by Abu Bakar and Co. for their not giving bayah to him? Sahabi Saad bin Ubada never paid bayah to Abu Bakar nor to Umar. 
  25. Like
    B-N got a reaction from Rasul in The Oppression Of Sayeda Faatima (S.a.) Part Vii-I   
    Ok finally the najis blood of your nasibi ancestors flowing into your veins have finally been revealed. By the way, your acceptance of Ali being a rebel (for whatever category of word you may put him) has proved you an out and out nasibi because as per hadith we are asked not to find faults in Ali bin Abi Talib (as) and that too, a fault/crime which according to your school is tantamount to committing zina in a mosque 
    .
     
    Nayl al-Awtar, Volume 7 page 198: واعلم أن قتال البغاة جائز إجماعا كما حكي ذلك في البحر ولا يبعد أن يكون واجبا لقوله تعالى { فقاتلوا التي تبغي } وقد حكي في البحر أيضا عن العترة جميعا أن جهادهم أفضل من جهاد الكفار إلى ديارهم إذ فعلهم في دار الإسلام كفعل الفاحشة في المسجد “You have to know that the there is Ijma regarding the lawfulness of fighting the rebel as it is written in al-Bahr (book), and likely it is obligatory for His almighty statement ‘{ then fight ye (all) against the one that transgresses}’, and it is also written in al-Bahr (book) that all of the progeny said fighting them is superior to fighting the disbelievers in their homeland because their act of rebellion on Muslims’ homeland is like performing adultery inside a mosque.” Just want to ask for the sake of knowledge as to how other "rebel" Sahaba (in your words) were treated by Abu Bakar and Co. for their not giving bayah to him? Sahabi Saad bin Ubada never paid bayah to Abu Bakar nor to Umar. 
×
×
  • Create New...