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  
Al-Maghribi

Challenge For Sunnis Who Are Sunni-Shia Unity Fans

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Here's a link to a detailed refutation by Sunni's in regards to Najd being in Iraq. They have basically proven that in the language of the Prophet (saaw) its got nothing to do with Iraq....more to do with Saudi lol

 

http://ahlussunnahwaljamah.blogspot.co.uk/2008/04/hadith-of-najd-part-1.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a link to a detailed refutation by Sunni's in regards to Najd being in Iraq. They have basically proven that in the language of the Prophet (saaw) its got nothing to do with Iraq....more to do with Saudi lol

 

http://ahlussunnahwaljamah.blogspot.co.uk/2008/04/hadith-of-najd-part-1.html

Do we have same kind of hadith also from our Imams (as)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we have same kind of hadith also from our Imams (as)?

 

I personally don't remember coming across anything mentioning 'Najd' in our own literature that i have come across, but its not been anything i have actively searched. I'm going through 2 books about Wahabism at the moment, one by Ayatollah Jafar Subhani and another shorter one by Ayatollah Nasir Makarim Shirazi. If i come across any hadith describing these terrorists, i will definitely share :)

 

But its definitely a fruitful question, i dont know if any of the other brothers/sisters have come across anything specific?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We realize we cannot cover all that which has been transmitted from them (imams) on this subject [the salutations at the shrines], nor on any other issue, except that which has been related to us by reliable [transmitters] from our companions

 

If we go by what your saying it makes no sense for him to include the first part وقد علمنا أنّا لا نحيط بجميع ما روي عنهم في هذا المعنى if he included narrators that were unknown, since than he would have been able to include more than what was transmitted by his thiqa narrators whom he said he narrated from.

 

Try to read the passage in a wholistic way.

وقد علمنا انا لانحيط بجميع ما روي عنهم في هذا المعنى ولا في غيره، لكن ما وقع لنا من جهة الثقات من اصحابنا رحمهم الله برحمته ولا اخرجت فيه حديثا روي عن الشذاذ من الرجال، يؤثر ذلك عنهم عن المذكورين غير المعروفين بالرواية المشهورين بالحديث والعلم

 

‘And we have known not to give credence (attention) to everything that is narrated on their authority [i.e. the Ahlulbayt] – in this topic [i.e. Ziyara] or in any other [topic apart from it], rather, what has come to us from the side of the Thiqat from our Ashab – may Allah have mercy upon them with his mercy – and I have not taken out in it (i.e. included in my book) a Hadith on the authority of the Shudhadh (odd ones) from the Rijal, which is traced back on their authority (i.e. the Ahlulbayt) from the aforementioned ones (i.e. other Shudhadh) (and) not those recognized for their Riwaya and well known for their Hadith and Ilm’.

When he says that they (i.e. the Qudama) do not give credence (attention) to everything that is narrated on their authority [i.e. the Ahlulbayt] in this topic or in any other apart from it – except – what was narrated from the side of the Thiqat from our Ashab, he is laying a general principle which was approved by the Qudama, only then does he come to state how this principle is going to be reflected practically in his work (how he is going to implement it).

In other words, first of all, he talks about what is to be given credence to according to the Qudama among all the Riwayat [i.e. what comes from the side of the Thiqat from our Ashab] and then immediately says ‘I have not taken out in it …’.

You cannot separate the two i.e. point to the general principle he attributes to the Qudama and then divorce it from how he implements it, this is because we will only understand what the general principle is, as the Qudama understood it, by observing how he (as a reflection of their mileu) aims to fulfill it.

The defect of your interpretation is that when he says جهة الثّقات which means from ‘the side of the Thiqat’, you wish to foist upon him (back-project) an understanding that he means all the Rijal of the Isnad of the Riwayat in his book will have to be Thiqat, this is your modern understanding, clouded as it is by evolved Mustalahat and Diraya.

You are not letting the text speak for itself to understand the world-view of the Qudama in this matter of including or excluding Riwayat.

If we continue reading with an open mind we come to understand that what he means is - He will not include in it (the book) a Hadith from the Shudhadh if it was further on narrated by other Shudhadh, since it is a darkness upon darkness, a Hadith that has not undergone the fitering or selection process of those recognized for their Riwaya and well known in Hadith and Ilm (i.e. the Nuqad who could undertake a filtering process due to their expertise).

But, if that Hadith has been narrated (selected) by the Thiqat who are recognized for their Riwaya and well known for their Hadith and Ilm then he will depend upon that (i.e. the choice of these Nuqad) and include the Hadith that was originally narrated by the Shadh individual. 

  

As for [which explains presence of the Mursalat and Marfuat in his Hadith],

I told you have a better chance of explaining this away by saying the books has been played with.

 

 

Unfortunately for you, their is no evidence that the book was ‘played with’. However much you wish for it. How can someone just raise allegations as flippantly as you have without having any proof to back it up, can a man say anything he wants? Is this not a very poor form of argumentation - just conjuring up something out of nowhere.

Based upon the natural understanding of the passage that I have argued for (based on the understanding of al-Sistani), the presence of the Mursalat and Marfuat is easily explained away by the fact that those who were recognized for their Riwaya and well known in Hadith and Ilm accepted these Riwayat and did not out-right reject them as they did others (because they essentially met a certain level of acceptability in their eyes).

And since Ibn Qulawayh depends upon these (Nuqad) to identify what at the very least enters the boundaries of permissible relay and what does not, he is allowed to include these Riwayat in his book.

  

Moving on you already admited this reading is valid

And this is more in line with the text unlike the hypothesis of Sistani.

 

This reading may also be valid linguistically, but not too quick, it has severe defects that categorically weaken it, and one can confidently say that it was not what Ibn Qulawayah meant [based upon the internal evidence of what he went on to include in the book].

This reading means that he will only include the Riwayat of the non-Shudhadh, at the same time, it defines those who are non-Shudhadh as those who are recognized in Riwaya and well known in Hadith and Ilm, something that is impossible for all the 388 narrators who feature in the book (this is what convinced al-Khoei among other reasons to restrict it to the Mashayikh).

Furthermore, it does not explain the presence of the Mursalat and the Marfuat, since Ibn Qulawayh cannot possibly identify the Wasait (intermediaries) in these two types of Riwayat to declare them as recognized in Riwaya and well known in Hadith and Ilm [a condition that he 'supposedly' put upon himself acc. to this reading]

Based upon these two reasons, I maintain that this reading is not what was meant by Ibn Qulawayh, as the correct reading is always the one that accounts for everything under discussion in the simplest and most accurate way.

 

And this is very funny because before 1988 Al-Khoi held the opinion that all the individuals were thiqa. So i ask was Al Khoei weaker than you as a muhadith before 1988 (since you seem to hold it is impossible for all 388 to be thiqa) and was Al Khoei a very bad muhadith in this case before 1988?

 

It is not befitting for me to be mentioned in the same line as scholars since I am not one of them. I am not the one who has identified the correct reading.

Furthemore, it was his own students like al-Muhsini [who wrote to him from Pakistan about the defect of his view] and al-Dawuri [who debated him about this until he restricted his view to the Mashayikh] who brought about his change.

Unfortunately, al-Khoei decided to restrict it to the Mashayikh since he saw that this was what better reflected the passage [as he realized that it could not be talking about all 388 narrators], but this was still an incorrect opinion, as it was stuck on the old model, and therefore not defensible.

It is al-Sistani (another one of his students) who revived the understanding that I promulgate (as above), it is the most natural and answers all the questions, it is linguistically valid while also reflecting what is contained in the book [without resorting to your unevidenced childish ‘played with’ theory].

More importantly, it is not al-Sistani who understood this passage in such a way for the first time, from the time of al-Tusi, al-Najashi, Ibn Tawus, Allamah al-Hilli, Ibn Dawud, Shahid I, Shahid II, and their students, up to Shaykh Hurr al-Amili, no one understood from the passage the Tawthiq of all the Rijal in the book. How can we fight thousands of years of understanding?

  

I dont even like to attack your distorted rijal books, the contradiction that happend due to taqqiya is enough to show how useless a shia hadith is. As for using Khamenei, lets see how i even made a mountain. Did he say tahrif happend to your rijal books? Yes or No Did He say your books are heavy damaged.

 

You are just a veritable source of pre-conceived argument points against Shias aren’t you? Arguments that you have been fed and which you simply repeat. Now you have jumped to Taqiyya present in the Riwayat!

As for the quotation from al-Khamenei:

 

بناء على ما ذكره الكثير من خبراء هذا الفن ، ان نسخ كتاب الفهرست كأكثر الكتب الرجالية القديمة المعتبرة الاخرى مثل كتاب الكشي والنجاشي والبرقي والغضائري قد ابتليت جميعاً بالتحريف والتصحيف ،ولحقت بها الاضرار الفادحة ، ولم تصل منها لابناء هذا العصر نسخة صحيحة

“Based on saying of many experts in this field: copies of book al-Fihrist (author al-Abu Jafar at-Tose) as the other majority of old books on rijal, like al-Kashi, an-Najashi, an-Burqui, and al-Ghadairi, were all distorted, and (get changes in their) diacritical marks, and suffered heavy damage, and there is not one single correct copy that reached to the people of this era”.”Usul al-Arba fi Ilmul Rijal” p 50.

 

Firstly, there is Tadlis in his translation, the Sayyid said كأكثر الكتب الرجالية القديمة المعتبرة الاخرى - 'like most of the books of Rijal which are trusted/relied upon (i.e. Mu'tabara) like the book of al-Kashi ....' - note that the website you copied this from does not mention or translate the word - ‘Mu’tabara’.

Now, don’t you think that if he is calling them Mu’tabara and yet they have the Tashif and Tahrif that you are alluding to then he is contradicting himself big time.

The occurence of Tashif and Tahrif in these books is solely a result of copyist errors, scribal variants, and interpolation in the sense that in some rare portions - the footnotes of the copyists and commentators have entered into the main text of the works.

But this has occurred in varying degrees to all books, show me a book from that period from us or the Ahl al-Sunnah that does not have any variation in wordings based on different manuscripts.

As for the 'Nuskha as-Sahiha', then it is meant the original copies [which would be free from all defects], it is true that these handwritten copies from the original authors have not reached us [but they reached for example - Ibn Dawud and Allamah al-Hilli], just as they have not reached you for most of your works, but does it mean that the works were not transmitted down through acknowledged methods of Haml?!

More importantly, through Tahqiq the difference between different manuscripts are realized and the original wordings is preserved, thus most defects can be remedied as has been done in some of the published editions.

And this is what al-Khamenei was trying to contend in raising such points, engaging in a scholarly discussion within an academic environement about how to deal with some manuscriptal variations, little did he know that his words will be twisted by Salafi Da'is on the internet, who have not read the whole work.

So for example he goes on to say in the same book:

إذاً ففي أي موضع لا يتطابق النقل بين نسخ الفهرست الموجودة مع ما ينقله ابن داود عن الكتاب المذكور، يجب أن يقدم ما ينقله ابن داود على غيره بدون تأمل، وأن يعدّ نقله حجة كذلك؛ لأن من المحتمل قوياً والمعقول أنه قد تم تصحيح ومقابلة تلك النسخة مع مخطوطة الشيخ الطوسي

 

'Therefore, in any instance where their is a difference in quotation between what is in the present manuscripts of the Fihrist and what was quoted by Ibn Dawud from the mentioned book (i.e. Fihrist), it is neccesary to prefer what was quoted by Ibn Dawud over someone other than him without any hesitation, and his (Ibn Dawud's) version will be seen as the decisive one in such instances, because it is most probable that his (Ibn Dawud's) version had undergone a Tashih and a comparison with the manuscript that was in the handwriting of the Shaykh Tusi (which had reached him)'.

We have to ask ourselves - are the Tashifat and in some cases Tahrifat in any way changing the intended meaning? In most cases No. Are they present in all copies of the work? No, the true version is mostly preserved in the better preserved manuscripts or the older ones as demonstrated above.

But, you make it seem that al-Khamenei has no regard for these works, or does not recommend using them, while if you had read the whole book you would have realized that he considers them authoritative.

He says for example about the Fihrist Genre:

يعتبر هذا الكتب من أثمن كتب الشيعة القديمة في علم الرجال ومن المصادر المعتمدة لدى علماء هذا الفن

 

'These books are considered the most valuable books among the Shia and the most ancient in Ilm al-Rijal, and the depended upon books in this field'

In other words, their has not occurred fabrication and premeditated additions or deletions for biased motives (which have permeated the manuscripts), and that is why a part of this quotation is being used to allude to something more sinister that has not been demonstrated to have occurred.

 

I asked did the Shia 12ers have something called "Sahih" at the time of Al-Tusi? Let me ask it in a more easy and clear way. rules and criterias for ilm ul Hadith. So what i am asking did the science of authentication exist at the time of Al Tusi. Long before Al Hilli introduced when facing critism from Ibn Taymiyya? When Al-Hilli went to the books of Ahlu Sunnah of the likes of the books of Al-Hakim(rh) , Ibn Al Salaah(rh) and Al Ramhormozi?

 

I see you are one of those who have been sold the image of the superiority of Sunni ‘Dirayah’ without knowing much about it, I will inform you that we are not a cult of Isnad that concentrates solely on the chain, a methdology that has its inherent weaknesses which are inescapable.

Our Qudama were a Tadwin based community, taking from a small knit of known Ashab, the Usul works that were approved by the Aimma had Shuhra very early on, and the Qudama used Qarain to give credence to a narration including Amal of the Taifah, analysing the Matn and also the Ruwat.

Most of the principles for evaluating a Riwaya in order to deem it fit for acceptance or not are already elaborated on in early works of Usul al-Fiqh eg. al-Tusi’s Uddat al-Usul, he talks about the Hujiyya of Khabar al-Thiqa, what Wathaqa involves in terms of Adalah and Dhabt, what is to be done in cases of Ikhtilaf where Tarjih is made for the Awthaq, can we accept the Riwaya of the non-Imami, how a Dhaif Hadith can be strengthened by Shawahid to reach a level of acceptance etc.

All this is not based on what he came up with of himself, rather, he is documenting the practice of the A’lam who came before him and documenting it formally, it is another matter that you have not read this work before.

Also, what do you mean that books of Rijal are almost irrelevant, of course they are totally relevant, when you read the early books of Rijal - you will see that Jarh and Ta’dil was a common practice among the Ulama during that period, what else were they evaluating narrators for - if not to use it to evaluate narrations?! Why were they talking about whether someone had met a given Shaykh or not? [it is because they appreciated the concept of Ittisal], why were they talking about the Tafarrud of some narrator’s narrations [it is because they understood the concept of Mutabiat] etc.

They had already classified narrators and recognized that gradings could be based on the narrators who narrate the narrations. The only thing that you can be proud of is some invented fancy Mustalahat which we do not need as our Ahadith do not have some of the pecularities that yours have for us to need a word to describe such a phenomena.

Drawing a paralell, we know that the generation of the earliest critics like Shu’ba, al-Qattan, Ibn al-Mahdi and then Ibn Hanbal, Ibn Main, etc. are considered the most knowledgeable in this affair without any paralell, but apparently, according to you, because the developed Mustalahat were not defined and rules were not formally written down until later times [al-Baghdadi, al-Hakim, Ibn Salah] that they were not the foremost in this Ilm!?

While we know that all what the later ones did was to bemoan the sorry state of affairs in their age in regards this Ilm and try to ecapture the receding of this Ilm and to re-energize it.

As al-Tusi said in Uddat al-Usul:

‘Verily, we have found that the Taifah has discerned the Rijal who have narrated these Akhbar, so they have made Tawthiq of the Thiqat amongst them, and made Tadh’if of the Dhuafa amongst them, so they have distinguished between those upon whom we can depend upon in their Hadith and Riwayah, and those upon whom there can be no dependence, and they have praised the praiseworthy amongst them, and blamed the blameworthy amongst them, and they said about various Rijal, this one is accused in his Hadith, and that one is a liar, and so and so makes mistakes in narration, and Fulan is an opponent in Madhab and I'tiqad, and Fulan is Waqifi, and Fulan is Fathi, and the rest of the condescending attributes that they have recalled, and they authored for this purpose books, and they excluded some Rijal's (narrations) from the collection of what they themselves narrate, this reached to an extent that one of them - when he rejects the content of a Hadith - he looks at its Sanad, and weakens it due to the ones narrating it, this was their practise from the olden times up to the current'.

Edited by Islamic Salvation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they don't. And yes I am sure I watched the whole video. I will only respond to these two for now because of limited time. insha'Allah the others later.

Hajj is still wajib and Ziyarat is mustahab. Yes the reward is much greater but hajj is still wajib. After one performs hajj, there is a huge reward in ziyarat of Imam Hussain on Arafa day.

I believe that tahreef happened and I curse those that did it. Other Shias claim that tahreef didn't happen but it is 100% proven from our most authentic books as well as other evidence. I am not going to turn a blind eye to it and say it didn't happen.

We could probably have some interesting discussions. I am opposed to taqiyyah except when a human life is in danger or other hardships are faced. Since my life is not in danger and you aren't going to force some other hardship on my for being truthful, I will be 100% honest with you. I see no reason to sugar coat my religion to make it look more appealing.

As for hajj being wajib and ziyarat being mustahab, If you read the other narrations from the book you would see that it is wajib aswell since without ziyarat your religion is incomplete and the other narration said you would enter hell. Also remember the video was to a sunni audience. I love to discuss with you in the future in sha Allah

 

 

Here's a link to a detailed refutation by Sunni's in regards to Najd being in Iraq. They have basically proven that in the language of the Prophet (saaw) its got nothing to do with Iraq....more to do with Saudi lol

 

http://ahlussunnahwaljamah.blogspot.co.uk/2008/04/hadith-of-najd-part-1.html

The fact that the other version of the hadith uses the word Iraq instead of Najd is enough to prove it is Iraq.

 
The hadeeth of ibn Umar Reported by Abu Nu'aym in al-Hilya (6/133) "O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, and bestow your blessings on our Mecca, and bestow your blessings on our Shaam, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa'inaa wa muddinaa)." A person said, " O Messenger of Allaah and in our Iraaq" and so he turned away from him and said, "there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the horn of Satan."(Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut declares it's isnaad to be saheeh as in his footnotes to 'Sharh as-Sunnah' (14/206-207 fn. 2) and he too endorses the words of al-Khattaabee quoted above.)
 
The hadeeth of ibn Umar Reported by Abu Nu'aym in al-Hilya (6/133), "O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, and bestow your blessings on our Mecca, and bestow your blessings on our Shaam, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa'inaa wa muddinaa)." A person said, " O Messenger of Allaah and in our Iraaq" and so he turned away from him and said, "there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the horn of Satan." 
 

Let us go trough the link and see what your sufis brothers have written.

 

 

 

It can be deduced from the above Hadith that Najd is neither blessed nor a good place but one of Fitna and Evil

And we know that Iraq is not a good nor a blessed place.

 

Narrated Ibn Abi Nu'm:A person asked `Abdullah bin `Umar whether a Muslim could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply). "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's Messenger (Peace be upon him) The Prophet(Peace be upon him) said, They (i.e. Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet basils in this world." Sahih Bukhari Vol. 5, Book 57, Hadith 96
 
 

 

 

The Arabic word used in the above Hadith is Qarnush Shaitaan, which normally means the horn of Shaitaan. But the 'Misbahul Lughaat', a dictionary printed in Deoband has the following meaning: "One who follows the advice of Shaitaan." (Misbahul Lughaat, pp/663). Thus we learn that a Najdi/Wahhabi group will emerge, as pointed out by Rasoolullah (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) and this group will follow the advice of Shaitaan (Shaitaan refuses to respect Prophets and Saints, remember his refusal to bow to Hazrat Adam (Alayhi Salaam) is mentioned in the Quran. It will create havoc in the Muslim world. We are now witnessing the emergence of the Wahhabis who, with the assistance of petrodollars, are sweeping the Muslim world and are bribing them into accepting Wahhabism as the official version of Islam.

Bashing without evidence.

 

 

 

Wahhabism is a disease but so many are misled into believing that it is curing the Ummah of Shirk, Kufr and Bidah. It is being portrayed as a revivalist movement. This is against the Ahadith. Looking at the geographical position of Najd, it lies to the East of Medina. The Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) pointed towards the East and said:

The sufis who are accused of Bidah are the ones who claim there is such a thing a good bidah. As for Najd here is a list of all the Najd's

 

Zubedi Said in Tajul-Urus in the Explanation of Jamus Vol.2 pg.511 and Alaama Hamumui in (Mawjam Al-Bildaan Vol.19 Pg.265.)

 

1-Najd Yamen.
2-Najd Iraq.
3-Najd Hijaaz.
4-Najd Khal.
5-Najd Al-Shari.
6-Najd Azaar.
7-Najd Al-Aqaab.
8-Najd Kabkab.
9-Najd Mari.
10-Najd Alwaz.
11-Najd-e-Aja.
12-Najd Barqq.

And Ibn Hajar al Asqalani in Fath ul Bari said "Al-Khattaabee said: 'The Najd in the direction of the east, and for the one who is in Madeenah then his Najd would be the desert of Iraaq and it's regions for this is to the east of the People of Madeenah.

 

 

 

It is reported in SAHIH BUKHARI from Hazrat Abu Said Khudri (Radiallhu Anhu) who narrates that:

Once we were in the presence and company of the Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam). He was distributing booties (Spoils of War) when a person named Zul-Khawaisara, who was from thetribe of Bani Tamim addressed the Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) "Oh Muhammad Be Just!" ". The Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied: "A Great pity that you have doubts, if I am unjust then who will be just, you are a loser and a failure." Zul-Khawaisara's attitude infuriated Hazrat Umar (Radiallhu Anhu) and he pleaded with the Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) to permit him to slay Zul-Khawaisara. The Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) remarked: "Leave him, as his slaying will serve no good purpose, as he is not the only individual but there are a host of others like him and if you compare their prayers and fasting to that of yours, you yourself will feel ashamed. These are the people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats, with all these apparent virtues they will leave the fold of Deen just like the arrow leaves the bow.

This is one person being adressed. As for him saying these are the people he speaking of his likes not his tribe. His tribe was praised by Rasul Allah.

 

Narrated by Abu Huraira: I have loved the people of the tribe of Bani Tamim ever since I heard, three things, Allah's Apostle said about them. I heard him saying, These people (of the tribe of Bani Tamim) would stand firm against Ad-Dajjal." When the Sadaqat (gifts of charity) from that tribe came, Allah's Apostle said, "These are them Sadaqat (i.e. charitable gifts) of our folk." 'Aisha had a slave-girl from that tribe, and the Prophet said to 'Aisha,"Manumit her as she is a descendant of Ishmael (the Prophet). Sahih Bukhari Volume 3 : Book 46 Hadith 719

 

 

 

The previous Hadith has also been narrated as follows: "A person with eyes protruding, with a long beard and head clean-shaven came to the Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) and declared: 'O Muhammad! (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) fear Allah. "' The Prophet(Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied: "If I disobey Allah, then who else will obey Him? I am obedient to Allah at all times and never disobedient. Allah has sent me as Amin(Honest for the entire world, but you don't accept me as an honest man?' A Sahabi (Companion) became infuriated and sought permission to remove him from the presence of the Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam). The Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) prevented the Sahabi from doing so After the person had left, the Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: "From his progeny will rise a Group who will recite the Holy Quran but it will not go below their throats. They will leave the Deen just as an arrow leaves the bowstring. They will kill the Muslims but spar the idolaters. If I ever confronted these people I would slaughter them just as the people of Aad had been destroyed" (Mishkat Shareef, pp/535) 

Same as above it is speaking about that one person.

 

 

 

"I heard the Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) as saying that as the Day of Qiyamah approaches there will appear a group of youths with a low mental capacity and understanding, apparently they will talk of good but their Imaan will not go beyond their throat and they will leave the true Deen like an arrow leaves the prey. Wherever you find them, you should make Jihaad with them. ( Bukhari)

 

Yup nothing to do with the topic at all. 

 

 

 

From the above hadith it is clear that these killers of Muslim will be from the Region of Najd , from the tribe of Bani Tamim

Nope it is not clear at all. From seeing different version of the narration one gets to know Najd is Iraq. Also Rasul Allah praised Banu Tamim and it is from Dhul Khawaisara that the group will raise not from the entire tribe. We also get to know that these people shave their beard.

 

Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 93, Number 651: Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:The Prophet said, "There will emerge from the East some people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not exceed their throats and who will go out of (renounce) the religion (Islam) as an arrow passes through the game, and they will never come back to it unless the arrow, comes back to the middle of the bow (by itself) (i.e., impossible). The people asked, "What will their signs be?" He said, "Their sign will be the habit of shaving (of their beards). (Fateh Al-Bari, Page 322, Vol. 17th)
 

When we scroll down he said some non sense about Abdul Wahab making a new sect and so on so on. Nothing in the article that showed it is not iraq.

 

So i went to part 2

 

 

 

Many a times we meet ignorant wahabis in life who say that NAJD is Iraq. This statement ensures that the person has been reading Wahabi FABRICATED materials and has been brain washed by the wahabi speakers.

I guess Sahih Bukhari, Musnad Ahmed and Ibn hajar Al Asqalani must be fabricated wahabi materials  :lol: 

 

 

 

The etymological sense of the Arabic word najd, which means ‘high ground’. Again, a brief consultation of an atlas resolves this matter decisively. With the exception of present-day northern Iraq, which was not considered part of Iraq by any Muslim until the present century (it was called ‘al-Jazira’), Iraq is notably flat and low-lying, much of it even today being marshland, while the remainder, up to and well to the north of Baghdad, is flat, low desert or agricultural land. Najd, by contrast, is mostly plateau, culminating in peaks such as Jabal Tayyi’ (1300 metres), in the Jabal Shammar range.

This is simply refuted by what we posted earlier about najd being iraq from Medina q. Just as we read in fath al bari above. And the borders between Arabia and Iraq was refered to as Najd.

 

Ibn Hajr said: "al-Khattaabee said: 'the najd in the direction of the east, and for the one who is in Madeenah then his Najd would be the desert of Iraaq and it's regions [baadiya al-Iraaq wa Nawaaheehaa] for this is to the east of the People of Madeenah. The basic meaning of Najd is that which is raised/elevated from the earth in contravention to al-Gawr for that is what is lower than it. Tihaamah [the coastal plain along the south-western and southern shores of the Arabian Peninsula] is entirely al-Gawr and Mecca is in Tihaamah.'" 

"by this [saying of al-Khattaabee] the weakness of the saying of ad-Daawodee is understood that 'Najd is in the direction of Iraaq' [min Naahiya al-Iraaq] for he suggests that Najd is a specific place. This is not the case, rather everything that is elevated with respect to what adjoins it is called Najd and the lower area called Gawr." [Fath al-Baaree 13/58-59] 

 

As Ali ibn Al Athir said: Najd is the highland region. This name is given to area beyond the Hijâz towards Iraq 

 

The third proof was refuted when we cited the scholars.

 

His forth proof is refuted by the saying of Ibn Umar showing that they considered east to be Iraq.

 

Saheeh Muslim [4/1505 no.6943] Saalim bin Abdullaah bin Umar said: O people of Iraaq, how strange is it that you ask about the minor sins but commit the major sins? [The killing of al-Husayn] I heard my father, Abdullaah bin Umar narrating that he heard the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, saying while pointing his hand to the east: "Indeed the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the horns of Satan and you would strike the necks of one anothe

 

Also another proof Iraq is East.

 

Behold he (Dajjal) is in the Syrian sea (Mediterranean) or the Yemen sea (Arabian sea). Nay, on the contrary, he As In the east, he is in the east, he is in the east, and he pointed with his hand towards the east. I (Fatima bint Qais) said: I preserved It In my mind (this narration from Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him).(Sahih Muslim Book 41, Hadith 7028)
 
and 
 

He(Dajjal) would appear on the way between Syria and Iraq and would spread mischief right and left. (Sahih Muslim Book 41, Number 7015

 

Looking at the world map one can see Saudia Arabia is no where between Syria and Iraq.

 

The error many of these sufis do is that they use modern day maps.

 

 

 

Book 007, Number 2666: Sahih Muslim

Abu Zubair heard Jabir b. 'Abdullah (Allah be pleased with them) as saying as he was asked about (the place for entering upon the) state of Ihram: I heard (and I think he carried it directly to the Apostle of Allah) him saying: For the people of Medina Dhu'l-Hulaifa is the place for entering upon the state of Ihram, and for (the people coming through the other way, i. e. Syria) it is Juhfa;for the people of Iraq it is Dbat al-'Irq; for the people uf Najd it is Qarn (al-Manazil) and for the people of Yemen it is Yalamlam.

 

From using the above hadith we can prove Iraq is Najd since in another version of hadith we read.

 

“The Messenger of Allah () addressed us and said: ‘The Talbiyah of the people of Al-Madinah begins at Dhul-Hulaifah. The Talbiyah of the people of Sham begins at Juhfah. The Talbiyah of the people of Yemen begins at Yalamlam. The Talbiyah of the people of Najd begins at Qarn. "وَمُهَلُّ أَهْلِ الْمَشْرِقِ مِنْ ذَاتِ عِرْقٍ"The Talbiyah of the people of the east begins at Dhat ‘Irq.’ Then he turned to face the (eastern) horizon and said: ‘O Allah, make their hearts steadfast.’[sunan Ibn Maja Vol. 1, Book 25, Hadith 2915]
 

So we see that Iraq is East from the above 2 ahadith. 

 

As for the ahlu najd as we said earlier it depends on what context it is used

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said i have to read the text in its whole but yet you admit the reading i give it is linguisticly correct. Also it make sense with the text because Ibn Qulawayh said.

 

وقد علمنا انا لانحيط بجميع ما روي عنهم في هذا المعنى ولا في غيره، لكن ما وقع لنا من جهة الثقات من اصحابنا

 

He says that he could not have collected ( بجميع) from the imams on this mawdu about ziyarat expect from what he got from his thiqa ashab.

 

That is like saying a pharmacy has a policy not to sell a marijuana unless one has a special permission to obtain it.

 

And we see 388 smoking marijuana which we know they obtained from that pharmacy.

 

So from the policy we can get to the conclusion that all 388 had a special permission.

 

Likewis it would make no sense for Ibn Qulawayh to include non thiqa narrators when he said that he cannot collect narrations from imams expect for what he got from the rijal who were thiqa.

 

And this is a view that is held by some of your scholars modern and of the past.

 

So i am innocent and i represented a fair view amoungst the shi3a.

 

And in no way did i put you in the same level as Al Khoei, I pointed out that it seemed like you were ridiculing this view and you went as far as saying it is impossible yet Al Khoei held this view untill 1988. Meaning that Al Khoei held a view that is impossible(according to your words) which makes Al Khoei look like a weak muhadith.

 

I spoke of the taqiyya contradictions before we even spoke about the rijal books.

 

As for Ali Khamenei. 

 

1. I posted the original arabic and seeing as you know arabic there is no need for me to edit the translation.

2. He does not seem to contradict himself. He praises the books and than later says they are corrupted. J

3. Please find me a Sunni scholar who said that our books are corrupted and heavily damaged.

4. We can compare manuscripts from our books and your books and we can see if this is something normal that is also found in the sunni books.

 

And also al Tusi admits the contradictions and why people left shiism as we posted earlier. Also since you did not have the rules untill many centuries later i did not misrepresent anyhing.

 

 

 

I belive that was about eve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So yes we love Amir Muawiyya but ofcourse our love for Imam Amir Ul muminin Ali(as) is much greater.

 

Illogic. Irrationality. You love them both even though they were bitter enemies of each other and thousands of your sahaba died in their feud? Seriously? You're being hypocrite here. If you loved Ali more and were logical too then your title would instead read "Lover of Ali". Most probably you haven't read history at all. Muawiya celebrated the deaths of Ali's supporters. If Ali was indeed rightly guided as your kinds claim, then Muawiya was a wajibul qatl rebel and kafir by virtue of that alone.

 

As for the honor of the Prophet you're talking about, can you prove that the Prophet made nikkah with Ayesha? You can't and that is because it never happened. Ayesha was gifted as a slave girl to him. She was only 18 years old when the Prophet passed away. And she is your second top contributor of hadith. While the top most being a Jew who allegedly recited shahada 18 months before the Prophet passed away. And this is because you never read history of your madhhab which was a state sponsored madhhab made by the Abbasid king Al-Mansur with the help of Abu Yusuf, a gay man and a student of Abu Hanifa who was made chief justice / qadhi al-qadha by Mansur. While Abu Hanifa was sent to prison to rot and pass away in there. Yet you would insist you follow Abu Hanifa.

 

That is what you're inviting others to? You should head to a kindergarten or a insane asylum instead.

 

The Quran itself dishonors Ayesha violently. Read surah Tehreem. Its all in her "honor" and exposes her vile and seditious nature. There are heaps of ahadith about her villainy. Yet uttering them makes us blasphemers? SubhanAllah.

 

As for grave worship, the first grave worshipers were Abu Bakr and Umar who insisted that they be BURIED beside the holy grave of the Prophet. Why don't you go dig them up and punish them first for such shirk?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is like saying a pharmacy has a policy not to sell a marijuana unless one has a special permission to obtain it.

And we see 388 smoking marijuana which we know they obtained from that pharmacy.

So from the policy we can get to the conclusion that all 388 had a special permission.

Likewis it would make no sense for Ibn Qulawayh to include non thiqa narrators when he said that he cannot collect narrations from imams expect for what he got from the rijal who were thiqa.

And this is a view that is held by some of your scholars modern and of the past.

Non sense...

Muhaddith Nuri view is that the thiqat that Ibn Qulawayih was speaking about are those who directly transmitted the Hadith to him. This view I believe is the accepted view today about Ibn qulawih sentence. Out of 388 narrators in total, 32 of them were counted as non thiqah.

Regarding your tadlis about Najd , Najd is what raise from the land, it is a hill not a marsh, while Iraq means what lowered from land that it reaches the level of sea or lower. The part of Iraq that could be described as east to Madinah is southern Iraq which is not hills at all. I would like to stress on their word " najdina" which is OUR Najd , not the Najd of other nations and lands but the Najd of arabia . To cut it short , here is a more clear Hadith

* كما هو في (الجامع الصحيح المختصر): [حدثنا مسدد حدثنا يحيى عن إسماعيل قال: حدثني قيس عن عقبة بن عمرو أبي مسعود قال: أشار رسول الله، صلى الله عليه وسلم، بيده نحو اليمن فقال: (الإيمان يمان ها هنا؛ ألا إن القسوة وغلظ القلوب في الفدادين عند أصول أذناب الإبل، حيث يطلع قرنا الشيطان في ربيعة ومضر)].

Prophet said in sahih Hadith that eman is Yemeni but the hardness in hearts is with the shepards , owners of camels where the horn of satan appear , LAND OF RABIAH and MUDHAR

If you will start to argue about the distribution of tribes in the time of the prophet then please read the Hadith about the delegation of bani abdil qayis tribe from eastern part of arabia , when they came to prophet they complained about the difficulty of traveling to prophet due to the danger of the road , particularly the danger of the Kufar of Mudar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Illogic. Irrationality. You love them both even though they were bitter enemies of each other and thousands of your sahaba died in their feud? Seriously? You're being hypocrite here. If you loved Ali more and were logical too then your title would instead read "Lover of Ali". Most probably you haven't read history at all. Muawiya celebrated the deaths of Ali's supporters. If Ali was indeed rightly guided as your kinds claim, then Muawiya was a wajibul qatl rebel and kafir by virtue of that alone.

 

As for the honor of the Prophet you're talking about, can you prove that the Prophet made nikkah with Ayesha? You can't and that is because it never happened. Ayesha was gifted as a slave girl to him. She was only 18 years old when the Prophet passed away. And she is your second top contributor of hadith. While the top most being a Jew who allegedly recited shahada 18 months before the Prophet passed away. And this is because you never read history of your madhhab which was a state sponsored madhhab made by the Abbasid king Al-Mansur with the help of Abu Yusuf, a gay man and a student of Abu Hanifa who was made chief justice / qadhi al-qadha by Mansur. While Abu Hanifa was sent to prison to rot and pass away in there. Yet you would insist you follow Abu Hanifa.

 

That is what you're inviting others to? You should head to a kindergarten or a insane asylum instead.

 

The Quran itself dishonors Ayesha violently. Read surah Tehreem. Its all in her "honor" and exposes her vile and seditious nature. There are heaps of ahadith about her villainy. Yet uttering them makes us blasphemers? SubhanAllah.

 

As for grave worship, the first grave worshipers were Abu Bakr and Umar who insisted that they be BURIED beside the holy grave of the Prophet. Why don't you go dig them up and punish them first for such shirk?

In sha Allah when you get some manner and get less emotional we can talk and refute your non-sense from your books and ours

 

 

That is like saying a pharmacy has a policy not to sell a marijuana unless one has a special permission to obtain it.

And we see 388 smoking marijuana which we know they obtained from that pharmacy.

So from the policy we can get to the conclusion that all 388 had a special permission.

Likewis it would make no sense for Ibn Qulawayh to include non thiqa narrators when he said that he cannot collect narrations from imams expect for what he got from the rijal who were thiqa.

And this is a view that is held by some of your scholars modern and of the past.

Non sense...

Muhaddith Nuri view is that the thiqat that Ibn Qulawayih was speaking about are those who directly transmitted the Hadith to him. This view I believe is the accepted view today about Ibn qulawih sentence. Out of 388 narrators in total, 32 of them were counted as non thiqah.

Regarding your tadlis about Najd , Najd is what raise from the land, it is a hill not a marsh, while Iraq means what lowered from land that it reaches the level of sea or lower. The part of Iraq that could be described as east to Madinah is southern Iraq which is not hills at all. I would like to stress on their word " najdina" which is OUR Najd , not the Najd of other nations and lands but the Najd of arabia . To cut it short , here is a more clear Hadith

* كما هو في (الجامع الصحيح المختصر): [حدثنا مسدد حدثنا يحيى عن إسماعيل قال: حدثني قيس عن عقبة بن عمرو أبي مسعود قال: أشار رسول الله، صلى الله عليه وسلم، بيده نحو اليمن فقال: (الإيمان يمان ها هنا؛ ألا إن القسوة وغلظ القلوب في الفدادين عند أصول أذناب الإبل، حيث يطلع قرنا الشيطان في ربيعة ومضر)].

Prophet said in sahih Hadith that eman is Yemeni but the hardness in hearts is with the shepards , owners of camels where the horn of satan appear , LAND OF RABIAH and MUDHAR

If you will start to argue about the distribution of tribes in the time of the prophet then please read the Hadith about the delegation of bani abdil qayis tribe from eastern part of arabia , when they came to prophet they complained about the difficulty of traveling to prophet due to the danger of the road , particularly the danger of the Kufar of Mudar.

We have already proved that Najd in that hadith was Iraq. And we proved people of the east were called people of the Iraq. And we proved Najd is Iraq from the varitions where in the other ahadith iraq was used instead of najd. Also from the apperence of dajjal. Was Najd of today a part of Iraq back than hh? Why dont you attempt to answer what we posted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maghribi at that time iraq was not under Islamic rule, iraq comed under Islamic rule during the caliphate of Abu Bakar R.ta whose commander was Khaled bin waleed R.ta, so what Prophet S.a.w mentioned najd is the exact najd which is known as riyad presently, why they changed so old and famous name najd to riyad Allah knows best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In sha Allah when you get some manner and get less emotional we can talk and refute your non-sense from your books and ours

We have already proved that Najd in that hadith was Iraq. And we proved people of the east were called people of the Iraq. And we proved Najd is Iraq from the varitions where in the other ahadith iraq was used instead of najd. Also from the apperence of dajjal. Was Najd of today a part of Iraq back than hh? Why dont you attempt to answer what we posted

Are you referring to yourself as "we"? Lol

The hadiths where Najd is substituted by Iraq seems weak, the narrators are weak or unknown or that was their only Hadith . In other instances, the jest that our east is referring to Iraq came from narrators not from our prophet mouth. How about you address the Hadith in my last post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The hadiths where Najd is substituted by Iraq seems weak, the narrators are weak or unknown or that was their only Hadith . In other instances, the jest that our east is referring to Iraq came from narrators not from our prophet mouth. How about you address the Hadith in my last post? 

 
 

hahahahahaha. First there is not only one hadith that mentions Iraq. Second the hadith is musnad ahmed is sahih. It is very funny beause you dont like a hadith you guess its weak. hahahahahaha  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

 

حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ نُمَيْرٍ، حَدَّثَنَا حَنْظَلَةُ، عَنْ سَالِمِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، قَالَ: رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: يُشِيرُ بِيَدِهِ يَؤُمُّ الْعِرَاقَ: " هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، - ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنُ الشَّيْطَانِ " [مسند أحمد ط الرسالة (10/ 391 رقم/6302/ 6129 ) واسناد صحیح علی شرط الشیخین
 

This is enough evidence to prove Najd is Iraq.

 

So we finished your neo sufi made arguments on this.

 

And we brought more evidence above that Iraq is refered to as east and from the understanding of the Sahaba.

 

More ahadith that mention Iraq instead of Najd.

 

Ibn Umar reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “O Allah, bless us in our Syria. O Allah, bless us in our Yemen.” He repeated it and on the third or fourth time, they said, “O Messenger of Allah, and in our Iraq.” The Prophet said, “Verily, from there will appear upheavals and tribulations and from there will rise the horn of Satan."
عَنِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ , أَنّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ , قَالَ : " اللَّهُمَّ بَارِكْ لَنَا فِي شَامِنَا , اللَّهُمَّ بَارِكْ فِي يَمَنِنَا " , فَقَالَهَا مِرَارًا , فَلَمَّا كَانَ فِي الثَّالِثَةِ أَوِ الرَّابِعَةِ , قَالُوا : يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ وَفِي عِرَاقِنَا , قَالَ : " إِنَّ بِهَا الزَّلازِلَ , وَالْفِتَنَ , وَبِهَا يَطْلُعُ قَرْنُ الشَّيْطَانِ " .
►Al-Mujjam Awasaat Tibraani, Hadith-4230
►Musnad-e-Bazzar,Abu-Bakr Bazzar Pg.292
►Musnad Abdullah-bin-Umar Trososa pg.273
►Silsilah Sahiha of Shaikh Al-Bani, Hadith number: 2246
►Hilya-Awliya of Abu-Nu'aym pg.1/144
►Haythami - Source: Zawaa'id - Page or number:3/308
►Mundhiri in At-Tarqeeb wa-Tarhib - Page or number: 2/214
►Tareekh Baghdad of Khatib al-Baghdadi 1:321 
►Tareekh Damishiq of Ibn-Asakir pg.571

 

The hadeeth of ibn Umar Reported by Abu Nu'aym in al-Hilya (6/133)
"O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, and bestow your blessings on our Mecca, and bestow your blessings on our Shaam, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa'inaa wa muddinaa)." A person said, " O Messenger of Allaah and in our Iraaq" and so he turned away from him and said, "there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the horn of Satan."
(Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut declares it's isnaad to be saheeh as in his footnotes to 'Sharh as-Sunnah' (14/206-207 fn. 2)

 

What is there to respond to in your post. After what i posted above we have put the final nail in the coffin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Verily Allah the Almighty made Hajj obligatory upon those who are financially able with some conditions but He made Ziyarat of Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.), especially Ziyarat Imam Hussain (a.s.), obligatory upon all believers, rich and poor, then He made the Ziyarat of Imam Hussain (a.s.) equal to a thousand accepted Hajj and a thousand accepted Umrah in term of reward.

 

Indeed suffice it to say that if one goes to Hajj every year of his life (God knows if it will be accepted!) but do not go to Ziyarat of Imam Hassan al-Mujtaba (a.s.), Imam al-Sajjad (a.s.), Imam al-Baqir (a.s.), and Imam al-Sadiq (a.s.) in "Jannat al-Baqi" he has abandoned one of its obligations towards Allah and His Messenger and his Hajj is incomplete.

 

Running around a stone-house without knowing and obeying the Proofs of Allah is of no benefit, pre-Islamic Mushrikin of Arabia also revered the Ka'bah and did Tawaf around it.

 

Ziyarat of any infallible Imam is like Ziyarat of Messenger of Allah (s) and Ziyarat of Messenger of Allah (s) is like Ziyarat of Almighty Allah in His 'Arsh. Ibn Qulwiyah Qummi (May Allah elevate his position in paradise) complied the ahadith of Ziyarat in his book called "Kamil al-Ziyarat".

 

Signs of a believer is not performing Hajj, is not fasting, is not praying, is not giving zakat, etc. these comes after, in the grave and in the day of judgment first you will be asked about Usool e Din not Furu e Din, Imamat is of Usool e Din. One who do not believe in Imamat and Wilayat of Amir al-Momenin (a.s.) and A'imah al-Ma'sumeen (a.s.) will fail in the first stages and his hajj, prayers, fasting, etc. will not be accepted.

 

Signs of a believer is loving the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.), cursing their enemies and obeying them for they are the Proofs of Allah and Awisya of Rasulallah (s).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ابْنِ عُمَرَ، قَالَ: رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: يُشِيرُ بِيَدِهِ يَؤُمُّ الْعِرَاقَ: " هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، - ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنُ الشَّيْطَانِ " مسند أحمد ط الرسالة (10/ 391 رقم/6302/ 6129

It is a pathetic attempt by your ancient and recent narrators, the Iraq in this Hadith is not the prophet words but the narrator's.

Khattabee explanation and others are flawed by looking at other sahih hadiths were prophet said clearly that Najd is Qarn ashytan , I do assume that prophet new the geography well for he made a miqat for people of Najd.

As for the miqat of people of Iraq, there is a controversy about Irq being set by prophet or by Umer. Some Sunni scholars say that Omer set it for people of Iraq after the Islamic conquests. The narrations says that a delegation from Iraq came to Umer and said " prophet set a miqat for people of Najd, but our way to Madinah is not their way.." Clearly people of Iraq knew that they are not people of Najd. The other side who said that prophet was the one who set the miqat of people of Iraq brought forward some sahih Hadith that prophet distinguished between Iraq and Najd .

Your narrators are trying pathetically to twist meaning of the prophet hadith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ابْنِ عُمَرَ، قَالَ: رَأَيْتُ رَسُولَ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: يُشِيرُ بِيَدِهِ يَؤُمُّ الْعِرَاقَ: " هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، هَا، إِنَّ الْفِتْنَةَ هَاهُنَا، - ثَلَاثَ مَرَّاتٍ مِنْ حَيْثُ يَطْلُعُ قَرْنُ الشَّيْطَانِ " مسند أحمد ط الرسالة (10/ 391 رقم/6302/ 6129

It is a pathetic attempt by your ancient and recent narrators, the Iraq in this Hadith is not the prophet words but the narrator's.

Khattabee explanation and others are flawed by looking at other sahih hadiths were prophet said clearly that Najd is Qarn ashytan , I do assume that prophet new the geography well for he made a miqat for people of Najd.

As for the miqat of people of Iraq, there is a controversy about Irq being set by prophet or by Umer. Some Sunni scholars say that Omer set it for people of Iraq after the Islamic conquests. The narrations says that a delegation from Iraq came to Umer and said " prophet set a miqat for people of Najd, but our way to Madinah is not their way.." Clearly people of Iraq knew that they are not people of Najd. The other side who said that prophet was the one who set the miqat of people of Iraq brought forward some sahih Hadith that prophet distinguished between Iraq and Najd .

Your narrators are trying pathetically to twist meaning of the prophet hadith

 

Yup simply emotional statements bashing narrators without evidence. Najd depend on the context you are speaking. And we have given 2 additional proof backing Iraq being in the east and being were Qarn al Shaytan is. Once you are ready to construct an argument that uses evidence i be happy to talk to you :)

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...