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

12ver Shiaism | A Minor Sect?


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
10 hours ago, Nightclaw said:

I always tell Shi'a [and anyone in general] that they should refrain from saying "Wahabi" because it, in turn, makes fun of one of the names of Allah - Al-Wahhab (The Bestower). I know that you are an agonistic, though I request you refrain from making fun of Allah. 

To answer your question, I never like to label myself. But, as of the world and time we live in now, I have no other option. I am a Salafi/Athari, whichever one you know of.

Right.  There is no need to be ashamed of the name Wahhab.
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

"Sunnism" ultimately isn't one sect either. It is composite of several schools of `aqida (Athari, Ash`ari and Maturidi being the main ones), several schools of fiqh (Hanafi, Shafi`i, Maliki, Hanbali),

Sahih International: And if you obey most of those upon the earth, they will mislead you from the way of Allah. They follow not except assumption, and they are not but falsifying. Surah 6 Verse 1

@Zainuu though i have to agree, shia Islam is not a political movement. Iran is just another nation using religion to garner support from its religious population, and its leaders showcase themselves

Posted Images

  • Advanced Member
9 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

Right.  There is no need to be ashamed of the name Wahhab.

I am not. The point here is that it is being used negatively and as tarnation. Most people hate Muhammad ibn Abdulwahhab because of what they think he did and without truly understanding nor knowing. It is a wonder... people want to defame great men of Islam while they are in their graves. It almost reminds me of how a certain group of people used to insult 'Umar, 'Uthman and Abu Bakr only after they were dead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/16/2020 at 9:02 PM, Nightclaw said:

I always tell Shi'a [and anyone in general] that they should refrain from saying "Wahabi" because it, in turn, makes fun of one of the names of Allah - Al-Wahhab (The Bestower). I know that you are an agonistic, though I request you refrain from making fun of Allah. 

To answer your question, I never like to label myself. But, as of the world and time we live in now, I have no other option. I am a Salafi/Athari, whichever one you know of.

No one mocks the word 'al-Wahhab' actually. I don't know who coined the term 'wahabi' but it is a known popular sect. Atleast we talk about it in that way and we mock the actions rather than the name. 

Just like many terror groups who keep holy names of their respective groups but their actions are condemned and mocked and not their name. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Zainuu said:

No one mocks the word 'al-Wahhab' actually. I don't know who coined the term 'wahabi' but it is a known popular sect. Atleast we talk about it in that way and we mock the actions rather than the name. 

Just like many terror groups who keep holy names of their respective groups but their actions are condemned and mocked and not their name. 

Using the word "Wahhabi" is a derogatory term that was coined by the British. It is not a "sect". Even if it is, refrain from using "Wahhabi" because it makes fun of the name of Allah. Say Sunni. If you want to continue doing it despite the warning, then just know that I warned you. When you enter your grave, you will be asked about it lest you refrain from using the term.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/16/2020 at 9:18 PM, Nightclaw said:

It almost reminds me of how a certain group of people used to insult 'Umar, 'Uthman and Abu Bakr only after they were dead.

Saying this, you reminded me how people did it during their lives as well. We are not afraid.

”Kill Us! Our Ummah will only be more awakened!”

-Sayed al Khomaeni (رحمة الله عليه)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Saying this, you reminded me how people did it during their lives as well. We are not afraid.

If all you do is insult and mock me on one hand and say I am your "respect brother" on the other, I doubt I can trust your words. You are too wishy-washy. You tend to bark a lot and I can see arrogance overflowing from you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
37 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

Using the word "Wahhabi" is a derogatory term that was coined by the British. It is not a "sect". Even if it is, refrain from using "Wahhabi" because it makes fun of the name of Allah. Say Sunni. If you want to continue doing it despite the warning, then just know that I warned you. When you enter your grave, you will be asked about it lest you refrain from using the term.

Can you provide me with a ref?

I assure you that I won't use it if it is used as a mock. Although, I have never mocked this name at all or if I did so, may Allah forgive me for my ignorance.

what I have read and heard is that Wahabi is a sect. If calling a sect or sub-sect by it's name is mocking and condemning or accepting their actions (not name) is mocking, then I don't agree with you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Zainuu said:

Can you provide me with a ref?

I assure you that I won't use it if it is used as a mock. Although, I have never mocked this name at all or if I did so, may Allah forgive me for my ignorance.

what I have read and heard is that Wahabi is a sect. If calling a sect or sub-sect by it's name is mocking and condemning or accepting their actions (not name) is mocking, then I don't agree with you. 

The British and anyone opposing him started to refer to him as "Wahhabi", romanizing it. It is not written down anywhere, but the term was used worldwide, whom it originated from the west.

You should not use it at all. Use Sunni. Is this sect not part of Sunni Islam? What stops you from using Sunni? Sure, you could argue that you want to specify. However, we already know what you talk about when you say Sunni. Do not use the term "Wahhabi" or Al-Wahhab will bestow something upon you for playing games with His name.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
54 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

If all you do is insult and mock me on one hand and say I am your "respect brother" on the other, I doubt I can trust your words. You are too wishy-washy. You tend to bark a lot and I can see arrogance overflowing from you.

I haven’t insulted you. If I have may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forgive me. I don’t need you to trust my words, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows what our hearts have let out and concealed. If you say I bark, then keep it with you. I don’t need to send insults like this to you. A Lion doesn’t turn his head when a small dog barks. 

If you are upset because I stated a fact that people weren’t afraid to insult the “3” Caliphs during their lives, and they aren’t scared to do it now. Many Sahaba were killed and torture because of it. And because of these crimes and hidden truths, many Shia, including myself, have made Sunnis become Shia.

Edited by Ansur Shiat Ali
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
43 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

I haven’t insulted you. If I have may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forgive me. I don’t need you to trust my words, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows what our hearts have let out and concealed. If you say I bark, then keep it with you. I don’t need to send insults like this to you. A Lion doesn’t turn his head when a small dog barks. 

If you are upset because I stated a fact that people weren’t afraid to insult the “3” Caliphs during their lives, and they aren’t scared to do it now. Many Sahaba were killed and torture because of it. And because of these crimes and hidden truths, many Shia, including myself, have made Sunnis become Shia.

No, on other occasions, you have thrown ad hominem attacks at me - which is insulting passive aggressively, but then call me your respected brother. Something is not adding up.

Secondly, give me one piece of evidence where someone insulted Abu Bakr, 'Umar, or 'Uthman publicly. This only happened during the time of 'Ali ibn Abu Talib during the Khawarij era.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Nightclaw said:

The British and anyone opposing him started to refer to him as "Wahhabi", romanizing it. It is not written down anywhere, but the term was used worldwide, whom it originated from the west.

You should not use it at all. Use Sunni. Is this sect not part of Sunni Islam? What stops you from using Sunni? Sure, you could argue that you want to specify. However, we already know what you talk about when you say Sunni. Do not use the term "Wahhabi" or Al-Wahhab will bestow something upon you for playing games with His name.

Britishers were the ones who empowered this sub-sect amongst the Sunnis. It is all well documented and present on internet. And using the term to address the sect itself is not an insult to the name. Moreover, name of the sect is 'Wahhabi' which itself means followers of 'Wahhab'.  If Britishers mocked me by this name, I would thank Allah that my enemy is calling me a 'follower of Allah'. 

Regardless, I don't use it to mock anyone and neither I have seen anything like that anywhere. 

And Allah knows better what's in the hearts and everyone is answerable to Allah, the all knowing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
46 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

If you are upset because I stated a fact that people weren’t afraid to insult the “3” Caliphs during their lives, and they aren’t scared to do it now. Many Sahaba were killed and torture because of it. And because of these crimes and hidden truths, many Shia, including myself, have made Sunnis become Shia.

I rarely get upset nor angry as it is a pastime for me, and certainly not over the internet. I know you and this other bloke have mentioned this Cherub fellow, but I have learned to control myself. I feel as if it is your goal to make me look bad and get angry, which will not happen. You are another random person on the internet who will enter his grave sooner or later. How stupid would it be to let someone make me angry in my house... who is not even in my house?

During the reign of these caliphs, nobody insulted them. This only happened and started from the people of Kufa. 

As for these "Sunnis becoming Shi'a" jargon, that is hard for me to believe. If you did, they were probably laymen who you knew a tad bit more than. You cannot even speak Arabic and I can be rest assured you have not memorized more than 20 - excluding the last 5 and al-Fatiha - chapters of the Qur'an. You cannot speak nor properly understand Arabic. You do not know Arabic grammar. You do not know the Qur'anic language. You have no faith or creed without our narrations. You cannot prove your beliefs from your side, rather you just use our side - an appeal to self-interest (not uncommon among Shi'a).

You are more focused on Sunnis becoming Shi'a that non-Muslims becoming Muslim. You are bragging about this as if it means something to me. I do not care. You can fool the laymen, but you cannot fool people who know what they speak of. I have asked you countless times to prove things via the Arabic language and you fail to do so. I am well aware you speak some Arabic - but do you understand it? A lot of people who speak English do not understand definitions and meanings of words, but they use it because they feel it is right instead of knowing.

I advise you to honestly learn the language in its fullest before making any assertions. That just shows insincerity and outright arrogance, because you do not understand from your ignorance, but you think you do and refuse to be corrected. This is not the quality nor characteristic of a Muslim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Zainuu said:

Britishers were the ones who empowered this sub-sect amongst the Sunnis. It is all well documented and present on internet. And using the term to address the sect itself is not an insult to the name. Moreover, name of the sect is 'Wahhabi' which itself means followers of 'Wahhab'.  If Britishers mocked me by this name, I would thank Allah that my enemy is calling me a 'follower of Allah'. 

Regardless, I don't use it to mock anyone and neither I have seen anything like that anywhere. 

And Allah knows better what's in the hearts and everyone is answerable to Allah, the all knowing.

Any Shi'a I ask about the history of Abdulwahhab, they become shellshocked - which shows they have been spoon-fed information. Right now, you will probably Google it. If we were talking or in real life, you would certainly not be able to answer. Problem #1 is getting all of your information from the internet. 

Second, it is used to address this "sect" in a deragatory fashion. Again, you can continue to use it. I have done my part in warning you. I do not care anymore. Use it until the sun goes down. That only adds weight in your grave, not mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Nightclaw said:

Secondly, give me one piece of evidence where someone insulted Abu Bakr, 'Umar, or 'Uthman publicly.

So if I prove this, you will admit that you just lied, you said that this only happened with the khawarij?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

So if I prove this, you will admit that you just lied, you said that this only happened with the khawarij?

If I am not mistaken, it happened also during the time of 'Uthman. However, these people were Khawarij. They never liked 'Umar nor 'Uthman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
33 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

If I am not mistaken, it happened also during the time of 'Uthman. However, these people were Khawarij. They never liked 'Umar nor 'Uthman.

What about outside the Khawarij? If I prove this then you will admit that you have lied?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

What about outside the Khawarij? If I prove this then you will admit that you have lied?

You are giving me an ultimatum that is a false dichotomy. If you can prove it, that does not mean I am lying. It means there was something I did not know. Lying means that I am intentionally concealing the truth, which I am not. How can I conceal something I was unaware of?

Regardless, prove it. Prove during the reign of the first three caliphs that there was such statements against them [excluding the partial reign of 'Uthman].

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
10 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

You are giving me an ultimatum that is a false dichotomy. If you can prove it, that does not mean I am lying. It means there was something I did not know. Lying means that I am intentionally concealing the truth, which I am not. How can I conceal something I was unaware of?

Regardless, prove it. Prove during the reign of the first three caliphs that there was such statements against them [excluding the partial reign of 'Uthman].

sahiah00_0000.jp2&id=waq47652&scale=6.425531914893617&rotate=01-LI

"Narrated Abu Ghadiah,

I heard Ammar Ibn Yasir (رضي الله عنه) INSULTING UTHMAN in Medina..."

"Sahih Hadith, the Rijal are Thiqh, (and they are) The Rijal of Muslim."

Silsilat al Ahadith Al Sahiha, Al Albani, Vol.5, P.19

Now, You are either calling Ammar Ibn Yasir (رضي الله عنه) from the Khawarij, or you didn't know, which I can understand.

Now just to point out, the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said that Ammar doesn't pick between 2 choices unless he picks the Rightly Guided one.

msnda41_0000.jp2&id=waqmsnda&scale=4&rotate=02-LI

"...Aisha said...'I heard the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) say, 'Ammar (رضي الله عنه) doesn't pick between 2 choices unless he picks the Rightly Guided one.'' "

"Sahih under the conditions of Muslim."

So not only did Ammar (رضي الله عنه) insult Uthman, but he was Rightly Guided to do so.

Edited by Ansur Shiat Ali
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
15 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

sahiah00_0000.jp2&id=waq47652&scale=6.425531914893617&rotate=01-LI

"Narrated Abu Ghadiah,

I heard Ammar Ibn Yasir (رضي الله عنه) INSULTING UTHMAN in Medina..."

"Sahih Hadith, the Rijal are Thiqh, (and they are) The Rijal of Muslim."

Silsilat al Ahadith Al Sahiha, Al Albani, Vol.5, P.19

Now, You are either calling Ammar Ibn Yasir (رضي الله عنه) from the Khawarij, or you didn't know, which I can understand.

Now just to point out, the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said that Ammar doesn't pick between 2 choices unless he picks the Rightly Guided one.

msnda41_0000.jp2&id=waqmsnda&scale=4&rotate=02-LI

"...Aisha said...'I heard the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) say, 'Ammar (رضي الله عنه) doesn't pick between 2 choices unless he picks the Rightly Guided one.'' "

"Sahih under the conditions of Muslim."

So not only did Ammar (رضي الله عنه) insult Uthman, but he was Rightly Guided to do so.

I specifically mentioned outside of the partial reign of 'Uthman, but no problem. 

Secondly, Al-Albani made a mistake here. He is not infallible. This hadith is weak due to it having a disconnection. 

Also, not every single thing Al-Albani does is what we follow. He has made authenticate hadiths weak [due to lack of particular knowledge/mistake, but they were later corrected]. He made mistakes, for he is not infallible and only a man. He said things that are not true, such as women are prohibited from wearing gold. However, he is a great and exemplary scholar of Islam, may Allah have mercy on him.

So this hadith is not accepted by us due to it being weak and unreliable. So again...

Provide me evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/16/2020 at 12:48 AM, eThErEaL said:

Just wondering,

What is the reason we don't place 12ver Shiaism as one of the minor sects on this Forum.  It is still a minor sect within Islam given that it doesn't even come close to 20% of the Sunni population.    I am genuinely interested in knowing how Shias cope with this fact (THIS REALITY) and how they end up taking their sect  as a serious contender in the arena of Islamic World.?  

 

- This is a Shia website lol. 

- As to how we take our sect as a serious contender.... well when you're confident in what you believe in,  and are validated by historical facts then there is nothing to not take serious. I have always said this but there are some debatable aspects of Shi'sm ( i.e. intercession). However, one thing I will never be convinced on is that all 'sahabas' were good, just, and that I should respect them regardless of their actions. I don't have the heart to do such a betrayal to the Prophet and his family. 

- In many countries we are a minority, but a very significant minority i.e. 20% or 30% of the Muslim population. Its about quality not quantity. And on a more personal level, being an underdog doesn't feel so bad :).  

Being the largest in numbers is not what religion is about. If that was the case then every Muslim should be a Christian since they're the majority.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Where is the disconnection?

It will take some time to explain and I am already doing something else on another thread, so I refer you where Al-Dhahabi explains it - in his Sayir [volume 2, page 544]. The words in the hadith mentioned are not mentioned in early hadith sources that are more authentic, so therefore it is not only disconnected, but weak entirely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Hadith of Prophet Muhammad ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)): "A party practicing the religion of Allah will always remain on this earth even if they are only 10 in numbers". For such a "minor sect" no wonder we attract rather enormous attention from pure evil, i.e., Iran and Hizbullah versus the entire west and its minions. Or people of mainstream religions using underhanded desperate tactics to defame us and misguide people about us, even making phony websites with Shia names.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
47 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

The words in the hadith mentioned are not mentioned in early hadith sources that are more authentic, so therefore it is not only disconnected, but weak entirely.

Again, Proof?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

 

2 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Again, Proof?

 

50 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

I refer you where Al-Dhahabi explains it - in his Sayir [volume 2, page 544]

There is your proof. I would do it myself, but I am doing something else - unless you would rather wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

 

 

There is your proof. I would do it myself, but I am doing something else - unless you would rather wait.

Lol, A lie attributed to Dhahabi, he narrates the same Hadith, hell, Its Muttawatir,

 عن أبي الغادية ، قال : سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان يشتمه ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين ، جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار ، فطعنته في ركبته ، فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل : قتل عمار ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار.

Siyar A'alam al Nubala, Dhahabi, Vol.1, P.425

عن أبي غادية الجهني ، قال : سمعت عمار بن ياسر يقع في عثمان يشتمه بالمدينة ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين جعل يحمل على الناس ، فحملت عليه وطعنته في ركبته فوقع ، فقتلته ،  تمام الحديث ، فقيل : قتل عمار ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : قاتل عمار وسالبه في النار.

Tarikh al Islam, Dhahabi, V.2, P.321

عن أبي غادية ، قال : سمعت عمار بن ياسر يقع في عثمان يشتمه بالمدينة ، قال : فتوعدته بالقتل ، قلت لئن أمكنني الله منك لأفعلن فلما كان يوم صفين جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار فرأيت فرجة بين الرئتين وبين الساقين ، قال : فحملت عليه فطعنته في ركبته ، قال : فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل قتلت عمار بن ياسر ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو بن العاص : هو ذا أنت تقاتله ، فقال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Al Tabaqat al Kubra, Ibn Sa'd, V.3, P.197

وفي رواية عفان سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان بالمدينة فتوعدته بالقتل ، فقلت : لئن أمكنني الله منك لأفعلن فلما كان يوم صفين جعل يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار فطعنته في ركبته فوقع فقتلته ، فأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : قاتل عمار وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو : فكيف تقاتله ، فقال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Al Isaba Fe Tame'ez al Sahaba, Ibn Hajar, V.7, P.259

عن أبي غادية ، قال : سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان ويشتمه بالمدينة ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار ، فحملت عليه فطعنته في ركبته ، فوقع فقتلته ، فأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : قاتله وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو : ها أنت تقاتله : قال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Ansab al Ashraf, Baludhuri, V.2, P.314-315

عن أبي الغادية ، قال : سمعت عمار بن ياسر يقع في عثمان يشتمه بالمدينة ، قال : فتوعدته بالقتل ، قلت : لئن أمكنني الله منك لأفعلن فلما كان يوم صفين جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار فرأيت فرجة بين الرئتين وبين الساقين ، قال : فحملت عليه فطعنته في ركبته ، قال : فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل : قتل عمار بن ياسر ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو بن العاص هو إذا أنت قاتله ، فقال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Tarikh Dimashq, Ibn Asakir, V.43, P.473

So forget about trying to say its disconnected, or Even weakening it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Lol, A lie attributed to Dhahabi, he narrates the same Hadith, hell, Its Muttawatir,

 عن أبي الغادية ، قال : سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان يشتمه ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين ، جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار ، فطعنته في ركبته ، فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل : قتل عمار ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار.

Siyar A'alam al Nubala, Dhahabi, Vol.1, P.425

عن أبي غادية الجهني ، قال : سمعت عمار بن ياسر يقع في عثمان يشتمه بالمدينة ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين جعل يحمل على الناس ، فحملت عليه وطعنته في ركبته فوقع ، فقتلته ،  تمام الحديث ، فقيل : قتل عمار ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : قاتل عمار وسالبه في النار.

Tarikh al Islam, Dhahabi, V.2, P.321

عن أبي غادية ، قال : سمعت عمار بن ياسر يقع في عثمان يشتمه بالمدينة ، قال : فتوعدته بالقتل ، قلت لئن أمكنني الله منك لأفعلن فلما كان يوم صفين جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار فرأيت فرجة بين الرئتين وبين الساقين ، قال : فحملت عليه فطعنته في ركبته ، قال : فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل قتلت عمار بن ياسر ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو بن العاص : هو ذا أنت تقاتله ، فقال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Al Tabaqat al Kubra, Ibn Sa'd, V.3, P.197

وفي رواية عفان سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان بالمدينة فتوعدته بالقتل ، فقلت : لئن أمكنني الله منك لأفعلن فلما كان يوم صفين جعل يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار فطعنته في ركبته فوقع فقتلته ، فأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : قاتل عمار وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو : فكيف تقاتله ، فقال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Al Isaba Fe Tame'ez al Sahaba, Ibn Hajar, V.7, P.259

عن أبي غادية ، قال : سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان ويشتمه بالمدينة ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار ، فحملت عليه فطعنته في ركبته ، فوقع فقتلته ، فأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : قاتله وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو : ها أنت تقاتله : قال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Ansab al Ashraf, Baludhuri, V.2, P.314-315

عن أبي الغادية ، قال : سمعت عمار بن ياسر يقع في عثمان يشتمه بالمدينة ، قال : فتوعدته بالقتل ، قلت : لئن أمكنني الله منك لأفعلن فلما كان يوم صفين جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار فرأيت فرجة بين الرئتين وبين الساقين ، قال : فحملت عليه فطعنته في ركبته ، قال : فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل : قتل عمار بن ياسر ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار ، فقيل لعمرو بن العاص هو إذا أنت قاتله ، فقال : إنما قال : قاتله وسالبه.

Tarikh Dimashq, Ibn Asakir, V.43, P.473

So forget about trying to say its disconnected, or Even weakening it.

How is it a lie when he wrote it in his book? You clearly have the book, so go to the page I just told you and you will see the explanation.

Second, this hadith is not mutawatir. It was cited in different books, not by different narrators. If one hadith is stated many times, this does not make it authentic nor mutawatir. Mutawatir can be in the text itself or narrators - this is not the case. It has only one narration and one variant - making it weak. Every single witness to this hadith is classified as weak. Another reason is that it opposes a more authentic hadith about the people who gave allegiance under the tree - which makes it even more weak. 

The explanation is waiting for you, go look for the book.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Nightclaw said:

How is it a lie when he wrote it in his book? You clearly have the book, so go to the page I just told you and you will see the explanation.

Second, this hadith is not mutawatir. It was cited in different books, not by different narrators. If one hadith is stated many times, this does not make it authentic nor mutawatir. Mutawatir can be in the text itself or narrators - this is not the case. It has only one narration and one variant - making it weak. Every single witness to this hadith is classified as weak. Another reason is that it opposes a more authentic hadith about the people who gave allegiance under the tree - which makes it even more weak. 

The explanation is waiting for you, go look for the book.

Alhamdulillah I have access to many of our books, but I am not finding anything on this, Inshallah I will look into it.

The Hadith comes through different chains, but all are from Abu Ghadiyah.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Alhamdulillah I have access to many of our books, but I am not finding anything on this, Inshallah I will look into it.

The Hadith comes through different chains, but all are from Abu Ghadiyah.

Thank you for proving my point. Then it is not mutawattir, is it? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
31 minutes ago, Nightclaw said:

I refer you where Al-Dhahabi explains it - in his Sayir [volume 2, page 544]

If you mean In Siyar A'alam al Nubala, this is what is actually written in it,

عن أبي الغادية ، قال : سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان يشتمه ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين ، جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار ، فطعنته في ركبته ، فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل : قتل عمار ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Nightclaw said:

Thank you for proving my point. Then it is not mutawattir, is it?

it is Abu Ghadiah is the one who tells the story, the whole chain, on the other hand, isn't the same for each one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

If you mean In Siyar A'alam al Nubala, this is what is actually written in it,

عن أبي الغادية ، قال : سمعت عمارا يقع في عثمان يشتمه ، فتوعدته بالقتل ، فلما كان يوم صفين ، جعل عمار يحمل على الناس ، فقيل : هذا عمار ، فطعنته في ركبته ، فوقع فقتلته ، فقيل : قتل عمار ، وأخبر عمرو بن العاص ، فقال : سمعت رسول الله (ص) ، يقول : إن قاتله وسالبه في النار.

Is this volume 2, page 554?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

it is Abu Ghadiah is the one who tells the story, the whole chain, on the other hand, isn't the same for each one.

He is the only person narrating it while no one else does. This is not the definition of mutawatir. It has to be a multitude of people narrating it - not just one. Again, there are also a disconuinity in the narration.

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.


×
×
  • Create New...