Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
First you said,
And then you said,
Now you tell me 
if it has been rejected, isn’t it being ignored. Afterall they were the most respected, most reliable scholars.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
Ok its over. Nothing else needs to be said now. Both ravage and CT are admitting that it is ok to cuss sahabas. Especially those sahabas like Abubaker (pbuh) who was guaranteed by Prophet :saw: to enter in Janaah.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
ravage - I also gave refrences from shia books, very reliable ones. It's just that you beleive what you want to.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
alrite fair enough, the sentence is ambiguous. lemme rephrase A lot of kafi is crap and that crap (substitute “that crap” instead of it) has been rejected by later ulema. That which is not rejected because of contradiction with the Quran is a valuable resource for fiqh and explaining the quran.
happy?
and we reacted by saying that those books are wrong. now when we give our references, you can either say that the event didnt happen, and the book was wrong or you can try to argue it out. you guys tend to do the latter since you bind yourselves into saying the book is accurate/sahih.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
Kaleem bhai - Well said, and I agree with you that ALLAH shall be the judge
overthecross - Yes, bro you are right. The mods may lock this thread now if they want. The point has been made. It is okay to cuss the sahaba who have been given a gauranteed ticket into heaven. Even if there was not any real evidence provided, we have learnt that Sunnis especially the Sahaba are all conisdered munafiqs by our shia brothers.
Thank You all.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
ravage - Yes that's better, now if only you could teach that to the jaahils who consider us and the Sahabas munafiqs, yet believing such crap themselves. :)
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
awww... there there.. sheraz you've hurt him i think.
please refrain from speaking on my behalf. i as a shia consider many sunnis to be much better muslims than me.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
kaleem..he has given reference from many sunni books..not just one…also undertheass brought the incident where Umar slammed the door on Bibi Fatima (a.s.)…thats also in many sunni books…after reading all this stuff in ur books i really dont have much respect for some of the sahabas..to me teh family comes first
anyways they can believe in whatever they want..i dont care..but go read the thread in PAKISTAN section by ur sunni brothers…innocent people died again in pakistan and they make these insensitive comments
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=3153528
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
Sheraz-CT, You are still crying about that? Truth hurts son, suck it up.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
what things specifically? you and sheraz seem to be talking about two different things. for the record, i do not find myself in disagreement with any reference sheraz is giving.
and your comments in the shia blast thread are apalling.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
I have read Peshawer Nights....Its like reading Mein Kempf....
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
And Prophet did threw all the Munfiqeen out of Masjid-e-Nabawai and did put in place those munafiqeen who had built the Masjid-e-Zarrar, after he had been told in a wahi by Allah…Now why he did not do the same with Umer, AbuBakar and Uthman??? After all they by their sheer position in the society would have to be the biggest munafiqeen (naoozo billah)…Was it error in judgment on the part of the Prophet and God (naoozo billah)???
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
a typically blinkered shi-ite presentation… Ibn Hajar outright rejects Abu Bakr’s attendance not least because it conflicts with the report (which Ibn Hajar also gives) from Abu Nu’aym’s al Hilya al Awliyya that, “Abu Bakr forbade intoxicating beverage upon himself, and drank it neither in the jahiliyya period, nor in Islam.” And as Ibn Hajar also points out, the “Abu Bakr” referred to (in Sheraz’s copy-and-paste report) was in fact Abu Bakr ibn Shughub: “… some think it refers to Abu Bakr al Siddiq but that is not the case.” (wrote Ibn Hajr)… He also states that even if for the sake of argument Abu Bakr’s (and Umar’s) attendance was confirmed they simply visited Abu Talha’s residence without partaking of any drink.
in any case, the report refers to an incident before the absolute prohibition of al khamr… when someone came to them that very same day announcing that it had been made haram Abu Talha right away told Anas to dispose of it all (Sahih al Bukhari 7:488)…
see earlier explanation…
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
yaar gupguppy hum shia'o ko kyon badnaam kertay ho
read the 10 names again in my copy paste please..does it mention Abu Bakr al-Siddiq
this hadith was about "sahabas"
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
If we assume for the moment the Shia version that Hz. Umar bin Al-khattab (ra) really committed that heinous crime, then it goes against Hz. Ali (ra).
Want to know why? How could Hz. Ali (ra) stay quiet while his wife is beaten up, his house is assaulted, and his unborn son is killed? Is this the portrait of Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra) that the Shia are trying to paint?
The least man in faith, chivalry, and manhood will not allow his wife to be beaten up, causing her to lose the unborn child.
Do you think that mighty Hz. Ali bin Abi Talib (ra), who dispatched to hell the best the Kuffar could muster against the Muslims would not react to defend the honour of his wife who is the daughter of the Prophet (peace be upon him)?
It has been mentioned in a few narrations that Hz.Ali (ra) and Hz. Zubair (ra) gathered at the house of Hz.Fatima (ra) and Hz. Umar (ra) went there and threatened them because it was brought to his attention that apparently after the burial of The Prophet (saw) and before the general Bay’at in the Masjid, Hz. Ali (ra) and Hz. Zubair (ra) and a few Muhajireen Sahabah (raa) gathered at the house of Hz. Fatima (ra) and thought that because the general Bay’at had not yet been taken, they should appoint Hz. Ali (ra) as the Khalifah. They discussed this matter amongst themselves and Hz. Zubair (ra) also announced that he will back Hz. Ali (ra) with his sword.
On the other hand many of the Muhajireen and Ansaar had already taken Bay’at on the hands of Hz. Abu Bakr (ra) at Saqeefa Bani Saaidah, now if another Khalifah had to be appointed, there was a great fear of revolt and the Ansaar would again have demanded that an Ameer be appointed from amongst them. Therefore, in order to suppress this revolt Hz. Umar (ra) went to Hz. Fatima (ra)’s house.
It has been stated in Kanzul Ummal that Umar (R.A) told Fatima (R.A.) that: “O the daughter of The Prophet (saw) nobody from amongst the people is more beloved to me than your father and nobody is more beloved to me than you after your father. I have received the bad news that these people are gathering in your house and conspiring against the Khilaafat of Abubakar. If they do not stop conspiring then by Allah! I will burn their homes.”
On saying this Umar (R.A) left and when Ali (R.A.) and Zubair (R.A.) arrived at the house of Fatima (R.A.), Fatima (R.A.) said to them: “Do you know that Umar came to see me and he has taken an oath that if you conspire against the Khilaafat of Abubakar he will burn your homes? By Allah! Umar will most definitely fulfil his oath. Therefore leave my house with the intention of dropping your opinions and thoughts and do not return with the same object.”
Ali (R.A.) and Zubair (R.A.) left the house and did not gather there again until they took Bay’at on the hands of Abubakar (R.A.). (Kanzul Ummal, Vol. 5, Page 651)
The claim that Hazrat Fatima (ra) had a miscarriage is a mere fabrication. It has been mentioned in an authentic book of history, (Albidayah wan Nihaayah) that during the lifetime of The Prophet (saw), Hz. Fatima (ra) gave birth to a third son by the name of Muhassin and that this child passed away in his infancy. This is why the majority of the historians mentioned only two sons of Fatima (ra).
The reason why Umar (R.A) reacted staunchly with those who opposed the Khilaafat after Abu Bakr (ra) was appointed as the Khalifah was because The Prophet (saw) has said: “If anybody else claims Khilaafat after a Khalifah has been chosen from amongst the Muslims, then he should be killed no matter who he may be.” (Sahih Muslim)
**Even Al-Sayyed Hussain FadlAllah, the grand Shia scholar in Lebanon, had denied the incident of the assault on Hz. Fatimah (ra) after doing a lot research from Shia books. **
It has been recorded in Shia and Sunni books that Hz. Ali (ra) married his youngest daughter,Hz. Umm Kulthum (ra) from Hz. Fatimah (ra) with Hz. Umar ibn Al Khattab (ra). - (Please don’t open a new thread about this as it has alread been discussed thoroughly on on this board.)
Do you think Hz. Ali would have done that if what the Shia allege to be true?
I request brothers to discuss these sensitive issues very calmly and respectfully.
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
your argument will remain forever weak when you insist on mindless copy and pastes from books and reports you haven’t even seen, let alone read…
… for your benefit, let me repeat (with emphasis):-
Ibn Hajar outright rejects Abu Bakr’s attendance not least because it conflicts with the report (which Ibn Hajar also gives) from Abu Nu’aym’s al Hilya al Awliyya that, “Abu Bakr forbade intoxicating beverage upon himself, and drank it neither in the jahiliyya period, nor in Islam.” And as Ibn Hajar also points out, the “Abu Bakr” referred to (in Sheraz’s copy-and-paste report) was in fact Abu Bakr ibn Shughub: “… some think it refers to Abu Bakr al Siddiq but that is not the case.” (wrote Ibn Hajr)… He also states that even if for the sake of argument Abu Bakr’s (and Umar’s) attendance was confirmed they simply visited Abu Talha’s residence without partaking of any drink.
in any case, the report refers to an incident before the absolute prohibition of al khamr… when someone came to them that very same day announcing that it had been made haram Abu Talha right away told Anas to dispose of it all (Sahih al Bukhari 7:488)…
i hope that makes it easier for you to understand…
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
Sahabahs of Musa(AS) became infidel by denying the diving right (Wilayat) of Hazrat Haroon(AS) - Samari the closest Sahabi became infidel by denying the divine right of (Wilayat) of Hazrat Haroon(AS).
waiting for the following kind of replies:
where is this
we dont believe it
you are wrong
no match
he was not sahabi
no comparison
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
Very nice to know, but can you please explain what it has to do with the topic?
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
its got everything to do with the topic..tera kasoor bhi nahi hai..jaahil to thehra…easily baat samajh kidher aye gi
Re: A thread about Shias: as requested by Sheraz-CT
Just think about it