Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
hamza1892

Cursing The Sahaba...

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Why do shia curse the sahaba's of the Holy prophet Mohammad?? Sometimes i hear this when i listen to lectures by high shia scholars. So if you any can answer this question that would help :)

thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mushu

Why do shia curse the sahaba's of the Holy prophet Mohammad?? Sometimes i hear this when i listen to lectures by high shia scholars. So if you any can answer this question that would help :)

thank you

They're not 'high' Shia scholars. I don't know where you got that idea from. Our 'high' Shia scholars don't do this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6FxPi2tr8o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cursing is Haraam, Lanat is Halal. where you make a due for the mercy to be removed from this person

Then we do not curse every sahaba, people like Ammar ibn Yassir, Abu Dhar, Bilal, Salman, Miqdad, we love

But there were companions who were cruel with the Ahlul Bayt so we do not love them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The word sahaba/companion doesn't and never has actually inferred the person being referred to is good in character, this is a shocking myth propounded by Sunnis for Allah only knows what purpose.

In Holy Quran and narrations in both Bukhari and Muslim (2 most popular Sunni books of narration) companion has been used to describe polytheists, hypocrites & apostates.

I'm not saying all sahaba were any of the above, many were pious and worthy of our love and admiration, just that it's a complete lie to say ALL sahaba were good and beyond reproach, hence the lana'at on those who went against Allah, His Prophet or his Ahlebait.

ALI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Arabic language, the word for cursing is seb; Muslims, as a whole, should avoid cursing. La'nat, on the other hand, is permissible. The Prophet performed la'nat and so did his community. To perform la'nat simply means to ask God to withhold his mercy from certain individuals for their actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're not 'high' Shia scholars. I don't know where you got that idea from. Our 'high' Shia scholars don't do this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6FxPi2tr8o

Purely for the sake of academic integrity- allow me to present a response to the claims of Dr. Ahmed al-Wa'eli which contain evidence to suggest that he was not representing the madhhab himself in his claim presented in this video:

The above videos are in Arabic; please note- I do not know enough about 'Abd al-Haleem al-Ghizzi to discuss his credibility or lack of- therefore I am not endorsing him, I am merely presenting his refutation of Dr. Wa'eli.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mushu

Purely for the sake of academic integrity- allow me to present a response to the claims of Dr. Ahmed al-Wa'eli which contain evidence to suggest that he was not representing the madhhab himself in his claim presented in this video:

The above videos are in Arabic; please note- I do not know enough about 'Abd al-Haleem al-Ghizzi to discuss his credibility or lack of- therefore I am not endorsing him, I am merely presenting his refutation of Dr. Wa'eli.

Thank you brother, I just watched the first one, and will watch the others later, and then get back to you inshAllah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mushu

The point is not why Shia curse the Sahaba. The point is can there be any Shia-Sunni unity and cooperation as long as they continue to do so ?

There is a benefit in making a private Dua requesting Allah (SWT) to remove his mercy from the enemies of Islam. Whether you want to name them all one by one, that's up to the individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cursing certain sahaba is *wajib* not mustahab, may Allah damn them to hell for all eternity.

the truth is most sunni are too jahil to understand that even the prophet (pbuh) in the sunni book bukhari, that certain of his companions will be in hell.

they dont even know their own faith but they know that ours is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allah swt has demanded the love of the Ahlul Bayt. Prophet has demanded that we cling on to them along with Quran for guidance and that if anyone upsets them then Prophet and Allah Himself are angered.

We wish to respect the personalities who sat in the company of the Prophet saww and fought along with him in his mission and also recognize their services for the mission of Islam. But our trouble is that we see certain personalities, after the departure of the Prophet from this world, oppressing the Ahlul Bayt and waging war on them and killing and imprisoning them. Thus either we follow the popular opinion within the Muslims which is to turn a blind eye towards the history and pretend that nothing ever happened OR we let Allah and his Prophet and our consciousness decide who to respect and who not to respect and condemn and stay away from. We can not respect the people who inflicted pain and suffering on the Ahlul Bayt.

Edited by abbas110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sunnis love sahaba more than the prophet (pbuh) - since they refuse to curse the sahaba because of their "status", even if those "sahaba" openly fought against everything rasool e paak (pbuh) spent his lifetime struggling for.

where there is aql, there is no sunni. where there is a sunni, there is no aql. (Sounds better in punjabi)

In the Arabic language, the word for cursing is seb; Muslims, as a whole, should avoid cursing. La'nat, on the other hand, is permissible. The Prophet performed la'nat and so did his community. To perform la'nat simply means to ask God to withhold his mercy from certain individuals for their actions.

we have hadith (strong ones) of our imams cursing (not doing lanat) on certain groups of individuals. it is barney-fication of shiaism that made people believe that cursing is not allowed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sahaba ran away from battles, frequently. Imam Ali was known for his bravery in fight, where the 3 caliphs were known for their 400 meter sprint. The prophet even commented on Uthman's running away in Uhud - some sources say he ran for 3 days.

How brave they are! If all muslims were like them, we'd all be Jewish, Christians, or atheists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How brave they are! If all muslims were like them, we'd all be Jewish, Christians, or atheists.

those who fled and abandonned rasool Allah (pbuh) in badr are cursed in the quran itself.

the first 3 all fled.

therefore Allah himself curses them.

its not rocket science.

[3.153] When you ran off precipitately and did not wait for any one, and the Apostle was calling you from your rear, so He gave you another sorrow instead of (your) sorrow, so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor (at) what befell you; and Allah is aware of what you do.

[3.154] Then after sorrow He sent down security upon you, a calm coming upon a party of you, and (there was) another party whom their own souls had rendered anxious; they entertained about Allah thoughts of ignorance quite unjustly, saying: We have no hand in the affair. Say: Surely the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah. They conceal within their souls what they would not reveal to you. They say: Had we any hand in the affair, we would not have been slain here. Say: Had you remained in your houses, those for whom slaughter was ordained would certainly have gone forth to the places where they would be slain, and that Allah might test what was in your breasts and that He might purge what was in your hearts; and Allah knows what is in the breasts.

[3.155] (As for) those of you who turned back on the day when the two armies met, only the Shaitan sought to cause them to make a slip on account of some deeds they had done, and certainly Allah has pardoned them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing.

[3.156] O you who believe! be not like those who disbelieve and say of their brethren when they travel in the earth or engage in fighting: Had they been with us, they would not have died and they would not have been slain; so Allah makes this to be an intense regret in their hearts; and Allah gives life and causes death and Allah sees what you do.

"ashaaba e karam" my ass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sick of this sahaba topic. Million times our people explained them but still they cant stop bothering us. Now i am 100% sure sunnis do not follow prophet s.a.w but sahaba i.e they are least bothered about Bukhari;s disrespectful narrations regarding holy prophet s.a.w but they care sooooo much about some one sending lanah on their so called sahaba.

Sahaba stop it baba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cursing certain sahaba is *wajib* not mustahab, may Allah damn them to hell for all eternity.

the truth is most sunni are too jahil to understand that even the prophet (pbuh) in the sunni book bukhari, that certain of his companions will be in hell.

they dont even know their own faith but they know that ours is wrong.

This is narration is said by the Prophet SAWS, but he did not name specific people. Therefore it is only known by Allah SWT and His Prophet SAWS. What gives anybody the right to speak for the Prohpet SAWS?

If this point is specific to Sunnis knowing their faith, then why is the narration of the 10 promised to jannah ignored when you try to make this point?

sunnis love sahaba more than the prophet (pbuh) - since they refuse to curse the sahaba because of their "status", even if those "sahaba" openly fought against everything rasool e paak (pbuh) spent his lifetime struggling for.

where there is aql, there is no sunni. where there is a sunni, there is no aql. (Sounds better in punjabi)

we have hadith (strong ones) of our imams cursing (not doing lanat) on certain groups of individuals. it is barney-fication of shiaism that made people believe that cursing is not allowed

We have to follow Quran [59:10]... that doesn't mean we love the Sahabah [family and non-family] "more" than the Prophet SAWS.

those who fled and abandonned rasool Allah (pbuh) in badr are cursed in the quran itself.

the first 3 all fled.

therefore Allah himself curses them.

its not rocket science.

[3.153] When you ran off precipitately and did not wait for any one, and the Apostle was calling you from your rear, so He gave you another sorrow instead of (your) sorrow, so that you might not grieve at what had escaped you, nor (at) what befell you; and Allah is aware of what you do.

[3.154] Then after sorrow He sent down security upon you, a calm coming upon a party of you, and (there was) another party whom their own souls had rendered anxious; they entertained about Allah thoughts of ignorance quite unjustly, saying: We have no hand in the affair. Say: Surely the affair is wholly (in the hands) of Allah. They conceal within their souls what they would not reveal to you. They say: Had we any hand in the affair, we would not have been slain here. Say: Had you remained in your houses, those for whom slaughter was ordained would certainly have gone forth to the places where they would be slain, and that Allah might test what was in your breasts and that He might purge what was in your hearts; and Allah knows what is in the breasts.

[3.155] (As for) those of you who turned back on the day when the two armies met, only the Shaitan sought to cause them to make a slip on account of some deeds they had done, and certainly Allah has pardoned them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing.

[3.156] O you who believe! be not like those who disbelieve and say of their brethren when they travel in the earth or engage in fighting: Had they been with us, they would not have died and they would not have been slain; so Allah makes this to be an intense regret in their hearts; and Allah gives life and causes death and Allah sees what you do.

"ashaaba e karam" my ass

Not that I agreed with what you said above, but what is your opinion (from tafseer or something) about verses:

9:117 - 9:119?

Edited by Merdan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is narration is said by the Prophet SAWS, but he did not name specific people. Therefore it is only known by Allah SWT and His Prophet SAWS. What gives anybody the right to speak for the Prohpet SAWS?

If this point is specific to Sunnis knowing their faith, then why is the narration of the 10 promised to jannah ignored when you try to make this point?

10 are promised Jannah.

The First angered the daughter of the Prophet [saww]

The Second created innovations within Islam

The Third was revolted against by the Ummah

The Fourth is who we believe is the 1st Imam

The Fifth and the Sixth fought against the Fourth

See the contradictions within your one hadith of 10 being promised paradise.

We have to follow Quran [59:10]... that doesn't mean we love the Sahabah [family and non-family] "more" than the Prophet SAWS.

The Qur'an doesn't tell you to love all the sahabah. The Qur'an doesn't even praise all the sahabah. Bring me one ayat which praises Abu Bakr, Umar, or Uthman DIRECTLY.

Not that I agreed with what you said above, but what is your opinion (from tafseer or something) about verses:

9:117 - 9:119?

The verses don't prove that the sahabah were good people. It says Allah (swt) forgave them, this doesn't mean they remained forgiven till they died. Was the verse revealed after their death or before it? If you say before it then surely they can still sin and anger Allah (swt) before they die, if you say after it then you are a liar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 are promised Jannah. I will explain these point by point. But first, The Prophet SAWS knowing that there would be deviants among his people then would not have said this narration.

The First angered the daughter of the Prophet [sawws] Very tragic.. in our books, Abu Bekr RA explains his intentions to which Ali RA agrees. Even in your literature, Fatemeh RA is supposedly angry at Ali RA for not doing enough to get back the fadak. So, Ali RA explains

The Second created innovations within Islam Your Opinion, and a whole other topic which I am sure there are millions of in this and other forums

The Third was revolted against by the Ummah Ali RA was mutinied against multiple times and so was Hassan RA. Remember Ali RA sent his sons to protect him. I've explained these rebels to you in another post and the oddness and conspiracy of it.

The Fourth is who we believe is the 1st Imam

The Fifth and the Sixth fought against the Four Explained by Ali RA and pardoned in which he says, I will meet you in paradise. (in our sources)

See the contradictions within your one hadith of 10 being promised paradise.

The Qur'an doesn't tell you to love all the sahabah. The Qur'an doesn't even praise all the sahabah. Bring me one ayat which praises Abu Bakr, Umar, or Uthman DIRECTLY.

That's not my point. He was talking about cursing sahabah. And I was telling him, this is why we cannot.

For your point. you mean individually, or as overall sahabah like what this post is referring to?

The verses don't prove that the sahabah were good people. It says Allah (swt) forgave them, this doesn't mean they remained forgiven till they died. Was the verse revealed after their death or before it? If you say before it then surely they can still sin and anger Allah (swt) before they die, if you say after it then you are a liar

Not my point again. He's talking about Allah sWT cursing people for abandoning the Prophet SAWS, specifically, not anything else. This part of the surah is talking about 3 other Sahabah that did not to battle at all and stayed behind for whatever reason, and I want to know what he says about that. or what the tafseer is. i'm sure you're not interested in ours.

I will be gone for the late afternoon, so probably won't respond until late afternoon. Please don't think i'm avoiding you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 are promised Jannah. I will explain these point by point. But first, The Prophet SAWS knowing that there would be deviants among his people then would not have said this narration.

I will reply point by point.

The First angered the daughter of the Prophet [sawws] Very tragic.. in our books, Abu Bekr RA explains his intentions to which Ali RA agrees. Even in your literature, Fatemeh RA is supposedly angry at Ali RA for not doing enough to get back the fadak. So, Ali RA explains

Imam Ali [as] didn't agree with abu bakr.

Fatima [sa] was not angry at abu bakr.

Bring your proof if you are truthful. From Shi`a books that is.

The Second created innovations within Islam Your Opinion, and a whole other topic which I am sure there are millions of in this and other forums

"... As for the appointment of the six people by 'Umar, it was a nomination to them by him upon the request of the Muslims. Then 'Abdul Rahman ibn 'Auf consulted the Muslims about whom they wanted from the six people. The majority wanted 'Ali if he adhered to the practices of Abu Bakr and 'Umar, otherwise they wanted 'Uthman. When 'Ali rejected to adhere to the practices (/Sunnah/Bidah) of Abu Bakr and 'Umar,'Abdul Rahman ibn 'Auf gave the pledge to 'Uthman and the people gave their pledge ��"

Sunni References:

  • al Bidayah wa al Nihaya Volume 7 page 146
  • Sharh Fiqh Akbar page 66 "Fadail Naas badh ai Rasulullah"
  • Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 213
  • Tareekh Abu Fida Volume 1 page 166 Dhikr Maqaathil Umar
  • Tareekh Khamees Volume 2 page 255
  • Tareekh Tabari Volume 5 page 2793 Dhikr Sunnat Chapter 23
  • Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 35 Dhikr Shura

The Third was revolted against by the Ummah Ali RA was mutinied against multiple times and so was Hassan RA. Remember Ali RA sent his sons to protect him. I've explained these rebels to you in another post and the oddness and conspiracy of it.

Imam Ali [as] was a noble man and he did not want Uthman to be killed and this is why he sent his sons [as] to protect them. Doesn't make Uthman a good person.

The Fifth and the Sixth fought against the Four Explained by Ali RA and pardoned in which he says, I will meet you in paradise. (in our sources)

Bring me proof from Shi`a sources.

That's not my point. He was talking about cursing sahabah. And I was telling him, this is why we cannot.

For your point. you mean individually, or as overall sahabah like what this post is referring to?

Individually where is abu bakr, umar or uthman praised?

Not my point again. He's talking about Allah sWT cursing people for abandoning the Prophet SAWS, specifically, not anything else. This part of the surah is talking about 3 other Sahabah that did not to battle at all and stayed behind for whatever reason, and I want to know what he says about that. or what the tafseer is. i'm sure you're not interested in ours.

I will be gone for the late afternoon, so probably won't respond until late afternoon. Please don't think i'm avoiding you.

I will let the person you directed this question to answer it because I am not knowledgeable enough to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will reply point by point.

Imam Ali [as] didn't agree with abu bakr.

Fatima [sa] was not angry at abu bakr.

Bring your proof if you are truthful. From Shi`a books that is.

There's one thing to make anyone angry and leaving it at that. But it's another thing to make some angry and then explain yourself.

Don't you believe that the hadith in Bokhari about this is true? Towards the end of the narration Abu Bekr RA explains his intentions and apologizes and Ali RA agrees.

More on this later.

"... As for the appointment of the six people by 'Umar, it was a nomination to them by him upon the request of the Muslims. Then 'Abdul Rahman ibn 'Auf consulted the Muslims about whom they wanted from the six people. The majority wanted 'Ali if he adhered to the practices of Abu Bakr and 'Umar, otherwise they wanted 'Uthman. When 'Ali rejected to adhere to the practices (/Sunnah/Bidah) of Abu Bakr and 'Umar,'Abdul Rahman ibn 'Auf gave the pledge to 'Uthman and the people gave their pledge ��"

Sunni References:

  • al Bidayah wa al Nihaya Volume 7 page 146
  • Sharh Fiqh Akbar page 66 "Fadail Naas badh ai Rasulullah"
  • Iqd al Fareed Volume 2 page 213
  • Tareekh Abu Fida Volume 1 page 166 Dhikr Maqaathil Umar
  • Tareekh Khamees Volume 2 page 255
  • Tareekh Tabari Volume 5 page 2793 Dhikr Sunnat Chapter 23
  • Tareekh Kamil Volume 3 page 35 Dhikr Shur

The words added into the parentheses are yours. I find it interesting though that Ali RA did accept this (i.e. pledge). It puts a perspective on what he said. The rest of Ali's progeny with Hassan RA and throughout did no such thing. And certainly the last Imam will not do such a thing.

That being said, Ali RA had every right to do his own ijtehad as he was his own mujtahid. However, it's not what you make it seem to be, like taraweeh in the time of Ali RA.

Imam Ali [as] was a noble man and he did not want Uthman to be killed and this is why he sent his sons [as] to protect them. Doesn't make Uthman a good person.

Your point was that Osman RA was a bad person because he was revolted against. My point is that Osman RA being revolted against does not make him a bad person.

Bring me proof from Shi`a sources.

about this. i'm not concerned with this. my initial response was based on the insinuation that sunnis don't know their faith from their own books. i'm not trying to prove to you something from your own books.

Individually where is abu bakr, umar or uthman praised?

on which we would both agree on? probably none, because we have different hadith about verses and when they were revealed and who they were about. unless you would like to hear me out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's one thing to make anyone angry and leaving it at that. But it's another thing to make some angry and then explain yourself.

Don't you believe that the hadith in Bokhari about this is true? Towards the end of the narration Abu Bekr RA explains his intentions and apologizes and Ali RA agrees.

No I don't since I don't accept sunni ahadith

The words added into the parentheses are yours. I find it interesting though that Ali RA did accept this (i.e. pledge). It puts a perspective on what he said. The rest of Ali's progeny with Hassan RA and throughout did no such thing. And certainly the last Imam will not do such a thing.

You are saying by accepting a pledge it means that he agrees with him. I am saying it doesnt.

That being said, Ali RA had every right to do his own ijtehad as he was his own mujtahid. However, it's not what you make it seem to be, like taraweeh in the time of Ali RA.

What do you mean like taraweeh in the time of Imam Ali [as]?

[EDIT 25 April 2012] - Taraweeh in Congregation is a bid'ah created by umar.

[Reason for Edit] - I found out Taraweeh is only a bid'ah in congregation (if I'm mistaken someone please correct me)

Your point was that Osman RA was a bad person because he was revolted against. My point is that Osman RA being revolted against does not make him a bad person.

There are many other things which show he is a bad person, such as putting his family members into power even though they were bad people/not suitable for the role.

about this. i'm not concerned with this. my initial response was based on the insinuation that sunnis don't know their faith from their own books. i'm not trying to prove to you something from your own books.

Ok I did not know that, sorry.

on which we would both agree on? probably none, because we have different hadith about verses and when they were revealed and who they were about. unless you would like to hear me out.

That is true that we may not agree on it, but none the less if you don't mind I wish to see which ayahs you believe have been revealed praising individually either Abu Bakr, Umar, or Uthman. Remember no general verses where it mentions many people in one category.

Edited by Shia_Debater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I don't since I don't accept sunni ahadith

Well I guess we're at an impasse.

You are saying by accepting a pledge it means that he agrees with him. I am saying it doesnt.

All I'm saying is that him pledging puts a light on what he said or how he meant it, in addition no other member of his progeny made such pledge.

What do you mean like taraweeh in the time of Imam Ali [as]?

Taraweeh is a bid'ah created by umar.

I'm going to stay specific with Ali RA.

Another impasse.

I'll say that in Timirzi, we see Ali RA ordering 20 rakats of salaat during ramadhan.

You'll say that Ali RA tried telling the people in Kufa it was bidah, but they did not listen.

So, what now?

All I'll say is that, it's odd that Ali RA establishes his rule in Kufa, where he has the most support, perhaps more than Medineh... and even before accepting the caliphate, promises to tread only on the right path... only to abandon an aspect of the right path out of fear that people might abandon him. I mean he knew that doing arbitration would anger some of his people and they might leave too.

This is what I mean.

There are many other things which show he is a bad person, such as putting his family members into power even though they were bad people/not suitable for the role.

What happens if he did not know the true intentions of some people? I mean one of the letters in Nahjul Balagha talk about a family member of Ali's RA who stole the treasury.

That is true that we may not agree on it, but none the less if you don't mind I wish to see which ayahs you believe have been revealed praising individually either Abu Bakr, Umar, or Uthman. Remember no general verses where it mentions many people in one category.

Well, when you say general verse, I'm supposing you mean that of which Allah SWT refers to a plural subject, right?

Edited by Merdan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I guess we're at an impasse.

I guess we are.

All I'm saying is that him pledging puts a light on what he said or how he meant it, in addition no other member of his progeny made such pledge.

Ok, I understand what you are saying, but it still doesn't prove anything.

I'm going to stay specific with Ali RA.

Another impasse.

I'll say that in Timirzi, we see Ali RA ordering 20 rakats of salaat during ramadhan.

You'll say that Ali RA tried telling the people in Kufa it was bidah, but they did not listen.

So, what now?

All I'll say is that, it's odd that Ali RA establishes his rule in Kufa, where he has the most support, perhaps more than Medineh... and even before accepting the caliphate, promises to tread only on the right path... only to abandon an aspect of the right path out of fear that people might abandon him. I mean he knew that doing arbitration would anger some of his people and they might leave too.

This is what I mean.

I don't know any ahadith from our books which state this so like you said again we are at an impasse.

What happens if he did not know the true intentions of some people? I mean one of the letters in Nahjul Balagha talk about a family member of Ali's RA who stole the treasury.

I do not want to be ignorant and say Uthman this and Uthman that whilst I don't have proof for him being bad, so I will have to look more into it to see why he is condemned, however one reason I do know, which again will lead us to an impasse is that he carried on with what Abu Bakr and Umar started.

Well, when you say general verse, I'm supposing you mean that of which Allah SWT refers to a plural subject, right?

Yes that is the type of verse I don't want. I want a verse that is specifically about abu bakr, umar or uthman and I want the verse to be a verse praising/condoning something they did not condemning them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Book 38, Number 4350:

Narrated AbuBakr:

AbuBarzah said: I was with AbuBakr. He became angry at a man and uttered hot words. I said: Do you permit me, Caliph of the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), that I cut off his neck? These words of mine removed his anger; he stood and went in. He then sent for me and said: What did you say just now? I said: (I had said:) Permit me that I cut off his neck. He said: Would you do it if I ordered you? I said: Yes. He said: No, I swear by Allah, this is not allowed for any man after Muhammad (peace_be_upon_him).

 

-      http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/hadith/abudawud/038-sat.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/01/2012 at 5:30 AM, Maula Dha Mallang said:

sunnis love sahaba more than the prophet (pbuh) - since they refuse to curse the sahaba because of their "status", even if those "sahaba" openly fought against everything rasool e paak (pbuh) spent his lifetime struggling for.

where there is aql, there is no sunni. where there is a sunni, there is no aql. (Sounds better in punjabi)

we have hadith (strong ones) of our imams cursing (not doing lanat) on certain groups of individuals. it is barney-fication of shiaism that made people believe that cursing is not allowed

Salam

Could you mention some of those hadiths? Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...