Wahabhi View Of The Imams Of Ahlul Bayt (as)

[abbas110]

I do not know whether to laugh or cry after reading this.

Source: http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/101272/shia

Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) divided the Imams of the Ithna ‘Ashari Shi’ah into four categories:

1 – ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, al-Hasan and al-Husayn (may Allaah be pleased with them). They are noble Sahaabah and no one doubts their virtue and leadership, but many others shared with them the virtue of being companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and among the Sahaabah there are others who were more virtuous than them, based on saheeh evidence from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

2 – ‘Ali ibn al-Husayn, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Baaqir, Ja’far ibn Muhammad al-Saadiq and Moosa ibn Ja’far. They are among the trustworthy and reliable scholars. Manhaaj al-Sunnah (2/243, 244).

3 – ‘Ali ibn Moosa al-Rida, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Moosa al-Jawaad, ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-‘Askari, and al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al-‘Askari. Concerning them, Shaykh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyah) said: They did not show a great deal of knowledge such that the ummah might benefit from them, nor did they have any authority by means of which they could help the ummah. Rather they were like any other Haashimis, they occupy a respected position, and they have sufficient knowledge of what which is needed by them and expected of people like them; it is a type is knowledge that is widely available to ordinary Muslims. But the type of knowledge that is exclusive to the scholars was not present in their case. Therefore seeks of knowledge did not receive from them what they received from the other three. Had they had that which was useful to seekers of knowledge, they would have sought it from them, as seekers of knowledge are well aware of where to go for knowledge. Minhaaj al-Sunnah (6/387).

4 – Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-‘Askari al-Muntazar (the awaited one). He did not exist at all, as stated above.

[Saimaaa]

This is the correct Salafi position and i hold the same opinion as well. Imam Dhahabi has said something similar in his abridgment of Minhaj us sunnah.

[Kismet110]

^^^

The 'correct Salafi position' is the viewpoint of a deviant/heretic (description of Ibn Taymiyah according to some of his contemporaries including family) and means nothing to Shi'ah of Maula Ali (as), sufis or 'mainstream' sunnis.

ALI

[abbas110]

This is the correct Salafi position and i hold the same opinion as well. Imam Dhahabi has said something similar in his abridgment of Minhaj us sunnah.

to be honest people who gave this opinion -and those who remotely agree with it- have the position akin to waste amongst the humanity.

[Saved]

This is the correct Salafi position and i hold the same opinion as well. Imam Dhahabi has said something similar in his abridgment of Minhaj us sunnah.

Ibn Taymiyyah al-Nasibi said about the Ahl al-Bayt (as):

They did not show a great deal of knowledge such that the ummah might benefit from them, nor did they have any authority by means of which they could help the ummah.

It is strange that the spammer, saima bukhari, agrees with this Nasibi opinion, while the Holy Prophet (pbuh) said something entirely different. Shaykh Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani records in his Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Volume 3, page 543, Number 3788 (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Maktabah al-Ma’arif; first edition, 1420 H):

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÍÈíÈ Èä ÃÈí ËÇÈÊ ¡ Úä ÒíÏ Èä ÃÑÞã – ÑÖí Çááå ÚäåãÇ – ÞÇáÇ : ÞÇá ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã : Åäí ÊÇÑß Ýíßã ãÇ Åä ÊãÓßÊã Èå áä ÊÖáæÇ ÈÚÏí º ÃÍÏåãÇ ÚÙã ãä ÇáÂÎÑ : ßÊÇÈ Çááå ÍÈá ããÏæÏ ãä ÇáÓãÇÁ Åáì ÇáÃÑÖ æÚÊÑÊí Ãåá ÈíÊí ¡ æáä íÝÊÑÞÇ ÍÊì íÑÏÇ Úáí ÇáÍæÖ ¡ ÝÇäÙÑæÇ ßíÝ ÊÎáÝæäí ÝíåãÇ

Narrated Abu Sa’id (al-Khudri) and Zayd bin Arqam, may Allah be pleased with them both:

Allah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, said:

“I will always leave among you that which if you ADHERE TO you will never go astray after my death. One of them both is greater than the other: they are the Book of Allah, a rope stretching from the heaven to the earth, and my ‘itra, my Ahl al-Bayt. Both (the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt) shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Font. Therefore, watch carefully how you treat them both after my death.”

Commenting upon its authenticity, Shaykh al-Albani says:

ÕÍíÍ

Sahih

So, who do you follow? Ibn Taymiyyah al-Nasibi or the Prophet (pbuh)?

[Replicant]

I read tha Q&A thing a few months ago. Made me sick. May Allah (swt) curse those who believe that.

[Saimaaa]

I have given my position and i don't want to debate it until i see something substantial in the refutation of my stance.

Regarding the Hadith of the two weighty things , it can not be stretched below Imam Hassan even if it is Sahih. The chain mentioned above is defected alot and the Hadith is rejected on the basis of Jarah present on almost all of its narrators.

Ali ibn al-Munzir al-Koofiy - Mohammed ibn Fudhayl - Al-A`mash - `Atiyyah - Abu Sa`eed.

The first, second, and fourth narrator in this chain (i.e. Ali ibn al-Munzir al-Koofiy, Mohammed ibn Fudhayl, and Atiyyah) are all known to be Shia. Based on this alone, the narration can be disregarded. Besides this, Mohammed ibn Fudhayl is also criticized by Ibn al-Mubarak as not being approved of by his contemporaries. (Dhu`afaa al-`Uqayliy). Moreover, Mohammed ibn Sa`d has said that ‘his narratives are not considered by many to be evidence of a true saying of the Prophet’ (Siyar A`laam al-Nubalaa).

The fourth narrator in this chain is Atiyyah. Ibn Taymiyya states regarding him in his Taqrib: “He was a Shia and a concealer.” Imam Dhahabi states regarding him in his Mizan Al I’tidal: “he was Dhaeef (i.e. unreliable).” Yahya ibn Mu`een considers him to be Dhaeef - i.e. unreliable (Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa). Ahmad ibn Hanbal says that he incorrectly ascribes narratives that he hears from al-Kalabiy to Abu Sa`eed (Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa). The same thing is reported by Ibn Hibbaan (Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb). Ahmad ibn Hanbal says that Sufiyaan al-Thauriy considered him unreliable (Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa). Ibn Hajar says that he commits a lot of mistakes (Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb). Al-Nasaaiy and ibn Hibbaan consider him to be unreliable (Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb). Abu Dawood says: ‘He cannot be trusted’ (Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb).

I am sure that you have attributed a lie to Albani as how can he deem authentic a Hadith with such a faulty chain? He might have authenticated its other versions through other chains. Provide a reference to where albani has authenticated this hadith with this chain

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÍÈíÈ Èä ÃÈí ËÇÈÊ ¡ Úä ÒíÏ Èä ÃÑÞã

[Saved]

I have given my position and i don't want to debate it until i see something substantial in the refutation of my stance.

Regarding the Hadith of the two weighty things , it can not be stretched below Imam Hassan even if it is Sahih. The chain mentioned above is defected alot and the Hadith is rejected on the basis of Jarah present on almost all of its narrators.

Ali ibn al-Munzir al-Koofiy - Mohammed ibn Fudhayl - Al-A`mash - `Atiyyah - Abu Sa`eed.

The first, second, and fourth narrator in this chain (i.e. Ali ibn al-Munzir al-Koofiy, Mohammed ibn Fudhayl, and Atiyyah) are all known to be Shia. Based on this alone, the narration can be disregarded. Besides this, Mohammed ibn Fudhayl is also criticized by Ibn al-Mubarak as not being approved of by his contemporaries. (Dhu`afaa al-`Uqayliy). Moreover, Mohammed ibn Sa`d has said that ‘his narratives are not considered by many to be evidence of a true saying of the Prophet’ (Siyar A`laam al-Nubalaa).

The fourth narrator in this chain is Atiyyah. Ibn Taymiyya states regarding him in his Taqrib: “He was a Shia and a concealer.” Imam Dhahabi states regarding him in his Mizan Al I’tidal: “he was Dhaeef (i.e. unreliable).” Yahya ibn Mu`een considers him to be Dhaeef - i.e. unreliable (Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa). Ahmad ibn Hanbal says that he incorrectly ascribes narratives that he hears from al-Kalabiy to Abu Sa`eed (Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa). The same thing is reported by Ibn Hibbaan (Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb). Ahmad ibn Hanbal says that Sufiyaan al-Thauriy considered him unreliable (Al-Kaamil fi al-Dhu`afaa). Ibn Hajar says that he commits a lot of mistakes (Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb). Al-Nasaaiy and ibn Hibbaan consider him to be unreliable (Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb). Abu Dawood says: ‘He cannot be trusted’ (Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb).

There are two terrible LIES in the above post:

1. Hadith al-Thaqalayn EXCLUDES Imam al-Husayn (as) and all his pure descendants.

2. Hadith al-Thaqalayn is weak

Well, Shaykh al-Albani, himself a hardcore Nasibi, has graded the hadith to be authentic. I am not going to take the word of an ignoramus like you over him. The above facts perfectly supports the fact that you are a hardcore Nasibi!

Now, concerning your first claim, let us re-read the hadith:

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÍÈíÈ Èä ÃÈí ËÇÈÊ ¡ Úä ÒíÏ Èä ÃÑÞã – ÑÖí Çááå ÚäåãÇ – ÞÇáÇ : ÞÇá ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã : Åäí ÊÇÑß Ýíßã ãÇ Åä ÊãÓßÊã Èå áä ÊÖáæÇ ÈÚÏí º ÃÍÏåãÇ ÚÙã ãä ÇáÂÎÑ : ßÊÇÈ Çááå ÍÈá ããÏæÏ ãä ÇáÓãÇÁ Åáì ÇáÃÑÖ æÚÊÑÊí Ãåá ÈíÊí ¡ æáä íÝÊÑÞÇ ÍÊì íÑÏÇ Úáí ÇáÍæÖ ¡ ÝÇäÙÑæÇ ßíÝ ÊÎáÝæäí ÝíåãÇ

Narrated Abu Sa’id (al-Khudri) and Zayd bin Arqam, may Allah be pleased with them both:

Allah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, said:

“I will always leave among you that which if you ADHERE TO you will never go astray after my death. One of them both is greater than the other: they are the Book of Allah, a rope stretching from the heaven to the earth, and my ‘itra, my Ahl al-Bayt. Both (the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt) shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Font. Therefore, watch carefully how you treat them both after my death.”

This shows that the chain of the Ahl al-Bayt (as) mentioned in that hadith extends till the Day of Resurrection. Only a horrible Nasibi would exclude Imam al-Husayn (as) and his progeny from that hadith!

On your second point that the hadith is not authentic, I have two answers. Shaykh al-Albani has declared it authentic, which is a slap in your face. But, in case Shaykh al-Albani was mistaken, another scholar has authenticated that same chain. The contemporary Sunni Hadithist, al-‘Allamah Hasan bin ‘Ali al-Saqqaf in his Sahih Sifat al-Salat al-Nabiy, page 29 (Imam an-Nawawi Centre, Jordan), has documented the same hadith with the same chain. As regards its authenticity, he states:

æåæ ÕÍíÍ

And it is sahih

Besides, there are several other authentic chains for the hadith. Shaykh al-Albani records in his Sahih al-Jami’ al-Saghir, Volume 1, p. 482 (Al-Maktab al-Islami) that Zayd bin Thabit (ÑÖí Çááå Úäå) said:

ÞÇá ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã: Åäí ÊÇÑß Ýíßã ÎáíÝÊíä: ßÊÇÈ Çááå ÍÈá ããÏæÏ ãÇ Èíä ÇáÓãÇÁ æÇáÃÑÖ Ãæ ãÇ Èíä ÇáÓãÇÁ Åáì ÇáÃÑÖ æÚÊÑÊí Ãåá ÈíÊí æÃäåãÇ áä íÝÊÑÞÇ ÍÊì íÑÏÇ Úáíø ÇáÍæÖ

Allaah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, said: I will always leave among you TWO SUCCESSORS: the Book of Allah, which is a rope stretching between the heavens and the earth, and my ‘itra, my Ahl al-Bayt. The two of them will never separate till they meet me at the Lake-Font.”

Commenting upon its authenticity, Shaykh al-Albani says:

ÕÍíÍ

Sahih

Al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir records in his al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, Volume 5, p. 228 (Muasassat al-Tarikh al-‘Arabi) that the Prophet (Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáã) said at Ghadir Khumm:

ßÃäí ÞÏ ÏÚíÊ ÝÃÌÈÊ Åäí ÞÏ ÊÑßÊ Ýíßã ÇáËÞáíä ÃÍÏåãÇ ÃßÈÑ ãä ÇáÂÎÑ ßÊÇÈ Çááå æÚÊÑÊí Ãåá ÈíÊí ÝÇäÙÑæÇ ßíÝ ÊÎáÝæäí ÝíåãÇ ÝÅäåãÇ áä íÊÝÑÞÇ ÍÊì íÑÏÇ Úáíø ÇáÍæÖ¡ Ëã ÞÇá: Åä Çááå ãæáÇí æÃäÇ æáí ßá ãÄãä Ëã ÃÎÐ ÈíÏ Úáí ÝÞÇá: ãä ßäÊ æáíøå ÝåÐÇ æáíøå¡ Çááåã æÇá ãä æÇáÇå æÚÇÏ ãä ÚÇÏÇå

It seems I have been called (to the presence of Allah) and I have accepted the invitation. I have left behind among you the Two Weighty Things. One of them is greater than the other: the Book of Allaah and my ‘itra, my Ahl al-Bayt. Watch carefully how you treat them both after my death because both will never separate until they meet me at the Lake-Font. Allah is my Master, and I am the master of all believers. (Then he held the hand of ‘Ali and said) Whomsoever I am his master, this (‘Ali) too is his master. O Allah, love those who love him and hate those who hate him.

Commenting upon its authenticity, al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir says:

ÞÇá ÔíÎäÇ ÃÈæÚÈÏ Çááå ÇáÐåÈí æåÐÇ ÍÏíË ÕÍíÍ

Our Shaykh, Abu ‘Abdullah al-Dhahabi said: This Hadith is sahih.

Al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir again in his Tafseer, Volume 4, page 122 (Beirut, Lebanon: Daar al-Fikr, 1401 H) states:

æÞÏ ËÈÊ Ýí ÇáÕÍíÍ Ãä ÑÓæá Çááå ÞÇá Ýí ÎØÈÊå ÈÛÏíÑ Îã Åäí ÊÇÑß Ýíßã ÇáËÞáíä ¡ ßÊÇÈ Çááå æÚÊÑÊí æÃäåãÇ áä íÝÊÑÞÇ ÍÊì íÑÏÇ Úáíø ÇáÍæÖ

It has been firmly established in the Sahih (Hadith) that Allah’s Apostle said in his sermon at Ghadir Khumm: “I will always leave among you the Two Weighty Things: the Book of Allah and my ‘itra. Both shall never separate until they meet me at the Lake-Font.”

Shaykh al-Albani again in his in his Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi, Volume 3, page 542, Number 3787 (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Maktabah al-Ma’arif; first edition, 1420 H) records:

ÍÏËäÇ äÕÑ Èä ÚÈÏ ÇáÑÍãä ÇáßæÝí ÍÏËäÇ ÒíÏ Èä ÇáÍÓä – ÇáÃäãÇØí –Úä ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ ¡ Úä ÃÈíå ¡ Úä ÌÇÈÑ Èä ÚÈÏ Çááå ÞÇá : ÑÃíÊ ÑÓæá Çááå Ýí ÍÌÊå íæã ÚÑÝÉ æåæ Úáì äÇÞÊå ÇáÞÕæÇÁ íÎØÈ ¡ ÝÓãÚÊå íÞæá : íÇ ÃíåÇ ÇáäÇÓ Åäí ÞÏ ÊÑßÊ Ýíßã ãÇ Åä ÃÎÐÊã Èå áä ÊÖáæÇ ßÊÇÈ Çááå æÚÊÑÊí Ãåá ÈíÊí

Narrated Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah al-Ansari, may Allah be pleased with him:

"I saw the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, during his hajj pilgrimage on the day of `Arafah. He was seated on his camel, al-Qaswa, and was delivering a sermon. I heard him say: 'O mankind, verily, I have left among you that WHICH IF YOU HOLD FAST TO you shall never go astray: the Book of Allah and my ‘itra, my Ahl al-Bayt."

Commenting upon its authenticity, Shaykh al-Albani says:

ÕÍíÍ

Sahih

Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in his al-Matalib al-‘Aliyah bi Zawa-id al-Masanid al-Thamaniyyah, Volume 4, page 65, Number 3972 (Saudi Arabia: Daar al-Ghaith, first edition, 1419 H, edited by Dr. Sa’d bin Nasir bin ‘Abd al-’Aziz al-Shatri) records as well:

Åä ÇáäÈí ÍÖÑÇáÔÌÑÉ ÈÎã ¡ Ëã ÎÑÌ ÂÎÐÇð ÈíÏ Úáí ÝÞÇá: ÃáÓÊã ÊÔåÏæä Ãä Çááå ÑÈßã ¿ ÞÇáæÇ : Èáì ¡ ÞÇá Ýãä ßÇä Çááå æÑÓæáå ãæáÇå ÝÅä åÐÇ ãæáÇå ¡ æÞÏ ÊÑßÊ Ýíßã ãÇ Åä ÃÎÐÊã Èå áä ÊÖáæÇ ßÊÇÈ Çááå ÓÈÈå ÈíÏå æÓÈÈå ÈÃíÏíßã æÃåá ÈíÊí

The Prophet was in the presence of a tree at (Ghadir) Khumm. Then he came out (to the people), holding ‘Ali’s hand, and saying: “Do you not testify that Allah is your Rabb?” The people said, “We do.” Then the Prophet said, “Whomsoever Allah and His Messenger are his Master, this (‘Ali) too is his master. And I have left among you THAT WHICH IF YOU HOLD FAST TO you will never go astray: the Book of Allah, one end of which is in His Hand and the other end in yours, and my Ahl al-Bayt.

Commenting upon its authenticity, al-Hafiz al-Asqalani says:

æåÐÇ ÅÓäÇÏ ÕÍíÍ

And this chain is sahih

Shaykh Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad bin Muhammad bin ‘Ali ibn Hajar al-Haytami, the supreme Shafi’i jurist and Hadithist during his time, states in his as-Sawa‘iq al-Muhriqah, Volume 2, page 428 (Lebanon: Muasassat al-Risaalah, first edition, 1417 H, edited by ‘Abdur-Rahman bin ‘Abdullah al-Turki and Kamil Muhammad al-Khurat):

æÝí ÑæÇíÉ ÕÍíÍÉ : Åäí ÊÇÑß Ýíßã ÃãÑíä áä ÊÖáæÇ Åä ÇÊÈÚÊãæåãÇ ¡ æåãÇ ßÊÇÈ Çááå æÃåá ÈíÊí ÚÊÑÊí

And in the Sahih report (the Prophet is reported to have said): I am forever leaving among you Two Commands. YOU WILL NEVER GO ASTRAY IF YOU FOLLOW THEM BOTH. Both are the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt.

O Allah! Curse all the Nasibis, and destroy them completely in both this world and the next.

[Saimaaa]

1. It was a typing error. Imam Hussayn is included in the list.

2. Provide a reference to where albani has classified this hadith Sahih with this chain

حدثنا علي بن المنذر كوفي ، حدثنا محمد بن فضيل ، حدثنا الأعمش عن عطية عن أبي سعيد ، والأعمش

You have attributed a lie to Albani. Don't waste more time on copy past now as you have been exposed. I stay with my position.

Edited July 10, 2011 by saima.bukhari

[Replicant]

^I can't believe how much hate you have for Ahlulbayt (as).

You are more concerned about attributing lies to Albaani than Ahlulbayt (as). Really upsetting.

Edited July 10, 2011 by Replicant

[Saved]

1. It was a typing error. Imam Hussayn is included in the list.

I have already refuted that Nasibi submission. You are supposed to seek Allah's forgiveness for doing injustice to the Imams (as) of the Ahl al-Bayt till the Day of Resurrection, especially Imam al-Mahdi (as).

2. Provide a reference to where albani has classified this hadith Sahih with this chain

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ

Check this http://islamport.com...b/2997/6051.htm [Edited - Inappropriate language]

[Saimaaa]

What has that page got to do with the lie you made up against Albani? That is a link to Al bidaya. Do the following or you will be a proven liar. .

Provide a reference to where albani has classified this hadith Sahih with this chain

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ

I

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÍÈíÈ Èä ÃÈí ËÇÈÊ ¡ Úä ÒíÏ Èä ÃÑÞã – ÑÖí Çááå ÚäåãÇ – ÞÇáÇ : ÞÇá ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã : Åäí ÊÇÑß Ýíßã ãÇ Åä ÊãÓßÊã Èå áä ÊÖáæÇ ÈÚÏí º ÃÍÏåãÇ ÚÙã ãä ÇáÂÎÑ : ßÊÇÈ Çááå ÍÈá ããÏæÏ ãä ÇáÓãÇÁ Åáì ÇáÃÑÖ æÚÊÑÊí Ãåá ÈíÊí ¡ æáä íÝÊÑÞÇ ÍÊì íÑÏÇ Úáí ÇáÍæÖ ¡ ÝÇäÙÑæÇ ßíÝ ÊÎáÝæäí ÝíåãÇ

Narrated Abu Sa’id (al-Khudri) and Zayd bin Arqam, may Allah be pleased with them both:

Allah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, said:

“I will always leave among you that which if you ADHERE TO you will never go astray after my death. One of them both is greater than the other: they are the Book of Allah, a rope stretching from the heaven to the earth, and my ‘itra, my Ahl al-Bayt. Both (the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt) shall never separate from each other until they meet me at the Lake-Font. Therefore, watch carefully how you treat them both after my death.”

Commenting upon its authenticity, Shaykh al-Albani says:

ÕÍíÍ

Sahih

Just provide a reference for it and don't copy paste irrelevant things.

[Saved]

What has that page got to do with the lie you made up against Albani? That is a link to Al bidaya. Do the following or you will be a proven liar. .

Provide a reference to where albani has classified this hadith Sahih with this chain

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ

Just provide a reference for it and don't copy paste irrelevant things.

Are you blind? That link is not for al-Bidayah!

Okay, let us invite other brothers to judge:

Please everyone who can read Arabic, is that link I provided above a link to al-Bidaya or to Albani's authentication of the chain as saima bukhari demanded?

Thanks everyone.

He is playing the blind now, now that he is completely cornered.

[Kismet110]

^^^

Br Saved, I think it's obvious this person is an authentic Nasibi ( graded: SAHIH) and a liar to boot (claimed only a few weeks ago to be a recent ex-Shi'ah but already an expert in Wahabbi viewpoint).

Name suggests female but tone of writing doesn't support that.

As I already mentioned in another thread these Najdi literalist followers of the deviant Ibn Taymiyah will take liars, drunks & murderers as reliable in chains of transmission but a sincere lover of Ahlulbayt (as) renders it unreliable & weak.

A thousand lana'ats on these enemies of Allah, His Prophet & the Holy Imams.

ALI

[Awaiting_for_the12th]

this person said that he was ex-shia, but his knowledge about them was below even the most ignorant shia's. And now, he/she is accepting and rejecting hadiths based on Ilm Rijal. Saima you sure you were not wahabi the day you were born and just made up the whole story about being ex shia? Secondly, as a scholar said there are Wahabi Shias, Zionist shias, kuffi shias etc. Claiming to be shia doesnt mean that you are a follower of Ahlul Bayt, unless your actions show that. None of what you have said tells that you actually were a shia, and i believe you have been lying and i also believe that you are actually getting anti-shia information from someone else and are just posting here.

[guest 34193]

What has that page got to do with the lie you made up against Albani? That is a link to Al bidaya. Do the following or you will be a proven liar. .

Provide a reference to where albani has classified this hadith Sahih with this chain

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ

Just provide a reference for it and don't copy paste irrelevant things.

:lol:

You've just proven you don't know Arabic and are likely just being fed some garbage by an online Nasibi who's using you as their latest pet to come and do "jihad" against us Rafidis.

[Jay]

this person said that he was ex-shia, but his knowledge about them was below even the most ignorant shia's. And now, he/she is accepting and rejecting hadiths based on Ilm Rijal. Saima you sure you were not wahabi the day you were born and just made up the whole story about being ex shia? Secondly, as a scholar said there are Wahabi Shias, Zionist shias, kuffi shias etc. Claiming to be shia doesnt mean that you are a follower of Ahlul Bayt, unless your actions show that. None of what you have said tells that you actually were a shia, and i believe you have been lying and i also believe that you are actually getting anti-shia information from someone else and are just posting here.

No one deviates from their religion in ignorance unless they are retarded, tricked, or seek a more material life. If someone wants to find the truth, they research and learn. This person is obviously ignorant of Shi'a Islam. His supposed conversion was obviously a lie, bent to cause fitna, since Wahhabis know nothing else (Using Islam as a cover to preach their deviated cult). I wish the mods would make a rule on these fake conversion stories, or at least ban this member.

[JimJam]

Imam Hasan Askari (as) spent most of his time under house arrest. I find it extremely callous for someone to say that he had nothing of worth to give to anyone and that he should be ignored.

The Imams of Sunnis stuck to the Imam Baqir (as) and Imam Jafar (as) to get knowledge of hadith, then they used analogy to create their own systems of fiqh, and then when they got their legal system set up they ignored the rest of the Imams saying they had not anything useful?

[Saved]

Alhamdulillah, saima bukhari al-nasibi has been exposed as a terrible liar!

Look at his charges against me again:

I am sure that you have attributed a lie to Albani as how can he deem authentic a Hadith with such a faulty chain? He might have authenticated its other versions through other chains. Provide a reference to where albani has authenticated this hadith with this chain

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÍÈíÈ Èä ÃÈí ËÇÈÊ ¡ Úä ÒíÏ Èä ÃÑÞã

Was he really "sure" or was he only struggling to hoax as usual?

You have attributed a lie to Albani. Don't waste more time on copy past now as you have been exposed. I stay with my position.

Now, he is affirming certainty!

What has that page got to do with the lie you made up against Albani? That is a link to Al bidaya. Do the following or you will be a proven liar. .

Provide a reference to where albani has classified this hadith Sahih with this chain

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáãäÐÑ ßæÝí ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ãÍãÏ Èä ÝÖíá ¡ ÍÏËäÇ ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÚØíÉ Úä ÃÈí ÓÚíÏ ¡ æÇáÃÚãÔ

After expressing his certainty that Al-Albani never authenticated that hadith with that chain, and after accusing me of lying upon his Shaykh, now he has run into hiding!

But, what is worse?! He called a truth I told about Shaykh al-Albani "a lie". However, when Ibn Taymiyyah al-Nasibi LIED upon the Ahl al-Bayt (as), as exposed by the Holy Prophet (pbuh) in Hadith al-Thaqalayn, this saima bukhari al-nasibi the spammmer nonetheless believed him!

He is ready to believe Ibn Taymiyyah's lie upon the Ahl al-Bayt (as) and disbelieve the truth about Shaykh al-Albani simply because it exposes Ibn Taymiyyah's lie!

Õáøì Çááå Úáì ÚáøÉ ÇáæÌæÏ ÇáäÈíø ÇáÃÚÙã ãÍãøÏ æÚáì Ãåá ÈíÊå ÇáØøÇåÑíä æáÚäÉ Çááå ÊÚÇáì ÌÇÍÏí ÅãÇãÊåã æãÈÛÖíåã æãäßÑí ÝÖÇÆáåã æãÎÇáÝíåã Åáì ÞíÇã íæã ÇáÏøíä

[Ya Baqiyatullah (aj)]

And why is this shocking?

Haqq will be Haqq and batil will be batil.

[twoblade]

I have already refuted that Nasibi submission. You are supposed to seek Allah's forgiveness for doing injustice to the Imams (as) of the Ahl al-Bayt till the Day of Resurrection, especially Imam al-Mahdi (as).

The narration only shows that hadith Thaqalayn may be authentic - not that it includes those who you guys insist are also part of Ahlel Bayt (after al-Husayn) - which omits the men that were omitted in the fatwa.

Check this http://islamport.com/w/mtn/Web/2997/6051.htm That should shut you up till the day you join Yazeed ibn Mu'awiyah in Hellfire.

Not really - what he included in his Saheeh al-Tirmidhi is everything he determined authentic, including saheeh li-ghayrihi. That says nothing about the sanad. It's pretty obvious what that person meant when they asked where al-Albani authenticated it with *that* chain. I've never seen anything with "itrati" that's authentic on it's own, only elevated li-ghayrihi (which implies the wording of the stronger narration is kept anyways...)

Imam Hasan Askari (as) spent most of his time under house arrest. I find it extremely callous for someone to say that he had nothing of worth to give to anyone and that he should be ignored.

He didn't say to ignore them, he's simply commenting based on the paucity of material which reached him through them. And I doubt a rigorous authentication even from Shi'ite perspective of the material from them would leave anything that doesn't pale in the comparison of material transmitted from Baqir and Jafar.

Edited July 11, 2011 by twoblade

[Saimaaa]

Not really - what he included in his Saheeh al-Tirmidhi is everything he determined authentic, including saheeh li-ghayrihi. That says nothing about the sanad. It's pretty obvious what that person meant when they asked where al-Albani authenticated it with *that* chain. I've never seen anything with "itrati" that's authentic on it's own, only elevated li-ghayrihi (which implies the wording of the stronger narration is kept anyways...)

Exactly. All what he knows is copy pasting. Now he will be googling "li ghayrihi"

[Yahya2004]

:lol:

You've just proven you don't know Arabic and are likely just being fed some garbage by an online Nasibi who's using you as their latest pet to come and do "jihad" against us Rafidis.

:lol:

loooooool, this is the problem with Salafis who can't concede not knowing arabic.

Someone needs a promotion as Saved's discussion is above their paygrade.

[ImamAliLover]

(bismillah)

(salam)

Exactly. All what he knows is copy pasting. Now he will be googling "li ghayrihi"

If you had knowledge, you would know that it's very simple to look up this hadith that al-Albani strengthened. Just Google the name of the book and you can download it in .pdf format, word etc. Or better yet, Google al-Albani's al-Silsilah al-Sahihah (hadiths with authentic chains) and see what he says about this very hadith.

And if you are ignorant, then you shouldn't be participating in these discussions.

Not really - what he included in his Saheeh al-Tirmidhi is everything he determined authentic, including saheeh li-ghayrihi. That says nothing about the sanad. It's pretty obvious what that person meant when they asked where al-Albani authenticated it with *that* chain. I've never seen anything with "itrati" that's authentic on it's own, only elevated li-ghayrihi (which implies the wording of the stronger narration is kept anyways...)

From al-Albani's al-Silsilah al-Saheehah #1750:

ãä ßäÊ ãæáÇå ÝÚáí ãæáÇå Çááåã æÇá ãä æÇáÇå æÚÇÏ ãä ÚÇÏÇå ] . ÕÍíÍ ÇäÙÑ ØÑÞå æÔæÇåÏå Ýí ÇáßÊÇÈ Ýåí ßËíÑÉ . æÃæáåÇ Úä ÃÈí ÇáØÝíá Úäå ÞÇá áãÇ ÏÝÚ ÇáäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã ãä ÍÌÉ ÇáæÏÇÚ æäÒá ÛÏíÑ Îã ÃãÑ ÈÏæÍÇÊ ÝÞããä Ëã ÞÇá ßÃäí ÏÚíÊ ÝÃÌÈÊ æÅäí ÊÇÑß Ýíßã ÇáËÞáíä ÃÍÏåãÇ ÃßÈÑ ãä ÇáÂÎÑ ßÊÇÈ Çááå æÚÊÑÊí Ãåá ÈíÊí ÝÇäÙÑæÇ ßíÝ ÊÎáÝæäí ÝíåãÇ ÝÅäåãÇ áä íÊÝÑÞÇ ÍÊì íÑÏÇ Úáí ÇáÍæÖ Ëã ÞÇá Åä Çááå ãæáÇí æÃäÇ æáí ßá ãÄãä . Ëã Åäå ÃÎÐ ÈíÏ Úáí ÑÖí Çááå Úäå ÝÞÇá ãä ßäÊ æáíå ÝåÐÇ æáíå Çááåã æÇá ãä æÇáÇå æÚÇÏ ãä ÚÇÏÇå . ÕÍíÍ . æÃãÇ ãÇ íÐßÑå ÇáÔíÚÉ Ýí åÐÇ ÇáÍÏíË æÛíÑå Ãä ÇáäÈí Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã ÞÇá Ýí Úáí ÑÖí Çáå Úäå Åäå ÎáíÝÊí ãä ÈÚÏí . ÝáÇ íÕÍ ÈæÌå ãä ÇáæÌæå . Èá åæ ãä ÃÈÇØíáåã ÇáßËíÑÉ . ÊÇÈÚ ÇáãæÖæÚ Ýí ÇáßÊÇÈ .

Hadiths al-Albani says are Sahih here:

1) Whoever I am his Mawla, Ali is his Mawla

2) The Prophet's (pbuh) dua to be a wali of whoever takes Ali (as) as a wali and be an enemy of who takes him (as) as an enemy

3) The Thaqalayn being Kitab Allah and 'itratee Ahlal Bayt

Interpret it how you want, but there's no denying these hadiths existing and being authentic.

[twoblade]

Interpret it how you want, but there's no denying these hadiths existing and being authentic.

If something is elevated by something that's authentic with different wording - it's pretty implicit that you keep the wording of the one that's authentic on it's own where they differ...

[Kismet110]

Welcome back saima.bukhari, very recent ex-Shi'ah (with virtually no knoweldge of her/his Shi'aism) turned wahabbi turned overnight ilm e rijal expert!

Let's ponder some views of the deviant/heretic forefather of terrorist Najdi sect:

وعلي يقاتل ليطاع ويتصرف في النفوس والأموال فكيف يجعل هذا قتالا على الدين

“Ali fought to secure obedience and rule the people and money, so how can that be deemed as fighting for sake of religion?”

Minhaj al-Sunnah Volume 8 Page 230

وعلي رضي الله عنه كان قصده أن يتزوج عليها فله في أذاها غرض

“Ali intended to marry so as to hurt her (Fatima) on purpose.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah Volume 4 Page 137

وقد أنزل الله تعالى في على يا أيها الذين آمنوا لا تقربوا الصلاة وأنتم سكارى حتى تعلموا ما تقولون لما صلى فقرا وخلطوا

“Allah had revealed for Ali {O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter,} when he prayed and recited and then got mixed up.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah Volume 7 Page 172

The above are blatant in their hatred of Maula Ali (as) but sadly there's plenty more. If this is Ibn Taymiyah view of Maula Ali (as) (one of the great sahaba, a part of "Khulafa e Rashideen") then what chance the other Imams (as)?

Can you show me a single utterance in similar vein to the above about Abu Bakr or Umar in Minhaj?

His Nasibi attitude sickens me. Your defence of him renders you in a similar position.

ALI

Edited July 11, 2011 by Kismet110

[Replicant]

Ibn Taymiyyah also believed that Lady Fatima (as) had characteristics of a hypocrite.

May Allah (swt) curse him and guide those who follow him. If they remain stubborn, may Allah (swt) raise them with Ibn Taymiyyah.

[Kismet110]

^^^

He did but I didn't have the heart to write it. This gem though I must repeat:

ÝÞÏ ËÈÊ æÊÍÞÞ æÙåÑ ÙåæÑ ÇáÔãÓ Ýí ÑÇÈÚÉ ÇáäåÇÑ Ãä ÚáãÇÁ ÇáãÐÇåÈ ÇáÇÑÈÚÉ ÞÏ ÇÊÝÞæÇ Úáì ÑÏ ÈÏÚÉ ÇÈä ÊíãíÉ æãäåã ãä ØÚäæÇ ÈÕÍÉ äÞáå ßãÇ ØÚäæÇ ÈßãÇá ÚÞáå

“Its proven (as clear) as the midday sun in the sky that the ulema of the four schools agreed on rejecting the heresies of Ibn Taimiyah, and some of them criticized his honesty in narrating. They also criticized the stability of his brain”

Shawahed al Haq Shakyh Yusuf al Nabhani Page 191

Nasibi AND mentally deranged.

ALI

[twoblade]

Welcome back saima.bukhari, very recent ex-Shi'ah (with virtually no knoweldge of her/his Shi'aism) turned wahabbi turned overnight ilm e rijal expert!

Let's ponder some views of the deviant/heretic forefather of terrorist Najdi sect:

æÚáí íÞÇÊá áíØÇÚ æíÊÕÑÝ Ýí ÇáäÝæÓ æÇáÃãæÇá ÝßíÝ íÌÚá åÐÇ ÞÊÇáÇ Úáì ÇáÏíä

“Ali fought to secure obedience and rule the people and money, so how can that be deemed as fighting for sake of religion?”

Minhaj al-Sunnah Volume 8 Page 230

æÚáí ÑÖí Çááå Úäå ßÇä ÞÕÏå Ãä íÊÒæÌ ÚáíåÇ Ýáå Ýí ÃÐÇåÇ ÛÑÖ

“Ali intended to marry so as to hurt her (Fatima) on purpose.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah Volume 4 Page 137

æÞÏ ÃäÒá Çááå ÊÚÇáì Ýí Úáì íÇ ÃíåÇ ÇáÐíä ÂãäæÇ áÇ ÊÞÑÈæÇ ÇáÕáÇÉ æÃäÊã ÓßÇÑì ÍÊì ÊÚáãæÇ ãÇ ÊÞæáæä áãÇ Õáì ÝÞÑÇ æÎáØæÇ

“Allah had revealed for Ali {O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter,} when he prayed and recited and then got mixed up.”

Minhaj al-Sunnah Volume 7 Page 172

The above are blatant in their hatred of Maula Ali (as) but sadly there's plenty more. If this is Ibn Taymiyah view of Maula Ali (as) (one of the great sahaba, a part of "Khulafa e Rashideen") then what chance the other Imams (as)?

Can you show me a single utterance in similar vein to the above about Abu Bakr or Umar in Minhaj?

His Nasibi attitude sickens me. Your defence of him renders you in a similar position.

ALI

:) You guys are just something else. Did you open and read any of those pages you're quoting from all the way through? Last one is before drinking was banned - don't see a problem. Of course this is blatant detraction from the thread, but let's let you have it :)

[Kismet110]

:) You guys are just something else. Did you open and read any of those pages you're quoting from all the way through? Last one is before drinking was banned - don't see a problem. Of course this is blatant detraction from the thread, but let's let you have it :)

Same as the lanati Israr Ahmad you don't see a problem with this? Majority of ahle sunnah alims and spokespersons reprimanded him when he said the same, only the haters of Ahlulbayt (as) remained silent.

And no, I haven't read all of Minhaj but if you like I can post views of prominent sunni scholars who have?

Please feel free to post anything from there where he was similarly harsh or bitter towards Abu Bakr or Umar.

ALI

[twoblade]

And no, I haven't read all of Minhaj but if you like I can post views of prominent sunni scholars who have?

Did I say all of it? Instead of running circles, just plainly say you didn't even read the paragraphs that are misquoted/taken out of context above (aside from 1 non-problematic one)...

Edited July 11, 2011 by twoblade

[a believer]

:lol:

loooooool, this is the problem with Salafis who can't concede not knowing arabic.

Someone needs a promotion as Saved's discussion is above their paygrade.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA

[Saimaaa]

I left shiasm because of the ignorant attitude of the Shias. This thread is a good example. You people are only good at copy paste and dont you see what the topic is? I am not a complete salafi yet as i am still investigating the issues in my own way . However , the way you people have made up lies against me makes me further sure that you people must have made up lies against the Sahaba etc as well. The member attributed a lie to Albani because he does not even know the basics of the gradation of Hadiths and is only good at copy paste. From now onwards i will only reply to some substantial post. Bye

Edited July 11, 2011 by saima.bukhari

[Kismet110]

^^^

Dearest saima.bukhari. If I were you I would stop whilst you're still only "Half A Salaf" because being a complete ond will not help you in the matter of Nasibi behavior.

For the record virtually everything Shi'ah state about tiny minority of bad 'sahaba' is present in Sunni books.

ALI

Edited July 11, 2011 by Kismet110

[Abd az Zahra]

I left shiasm because of the ignorant attitude of the Shias. This thread is a good example. You people are only good at copy paste and dont you see what the topic is? I am not a complete salafi yet as i am still investigating the issues in my own way . However , the way you people have made up lies against me makes me further sure that you people must have made up lies against the Sahaba etc as well. The member attributed a lie to Albani because he does not even know the basics of the gradation of Hadiths and is only good at copy paste. From now onwards i will only reply to some substantial post. Bye

Is that really how you determine the truth?

If so, then your tactics of claiming to be an ex-shia as propaganda become even more useless.

"The truth is not known through the actions of men. Rather, know the truth, and you will know its people" Imam Ali (a.s.)