Salam all,
I have been reading a lot of posts here and have noticed that people, and not just here, make a lot of assumptions, generalizations and make claims without backing them up with references or evidences, especially in the sunni/shia forum, and hence end up with a lot of baseless beliefs. i think we would all agree that a historical narration, as opposed to a hadith, is not a source of religion, or is not hujjah, unless it has an authentic chain. the reason for that is that if the shi'a bring 10 historical accounts of the evils of "sahaba" or supporting any of their views, the sunnis can bring 100 historical accounts to back their view of islam. and hence i believe making claims or forming beliefs based on historical accounts with no sanad/chain, is not only incorrect, but would lead to useless arguments. if you disagree, then you disagree with the whole science of hadith, as we simply do not take a saying of the prophet pbuh without a chain or without authenticating the chain. some people say, well there MUST be a reason the accounts are there in history, like, there HAS to be SOME truth to them. to those people, i say: the same can be said about sunni historical accounts. there MUST be SOME truth to their accounts as well. but at the end of the day, both of us will be doing nothing more than assuming and wishful thinking.
So, to summarize, if you are saying something about your religion, make sure that you would be willing to risk your akhirah for it and can back it up with evidence/reference, cause you never know what you might be held accountable for. and let this be a sort of notice for any of my future posts as well, that i will neither entertain nor respond to any claims/responses based on assumption/prejudice/emotion. someone wise once said, there is no place for emotions in the field of knowledge.
salam.