Shaykh ul Islam Maulana Ishaq shatters the myth about Yazid’s innocence which is being perpetuated by Neo-Nasibi activisits today.Maulana follows the path of pious salaf without any deviation unlike the Nasibis and Rafidhis.
He Clarifies that Revolution which Sayyidna Hussain wanted to bring about was to restore a religious govt. along the lines of the pious caliphs earlier, and he was supported by the majority of muslims but unfortunately due to a combination of reasons the uprising didnt succeced.Also this uprsising inspired many other revolts by the religious people against the corrupt Ummayyads including that of Ansar in Medina, of Kufans under Tawwabun and later under Ibn As’ath.This true nature of the event of Karbala is being forgotten today by both Rafidis and Nawasib who have hijacked the memory of Karabala for their own ulterior motives
This true nature of the event of Karbala is being forgotten today by both Rafidis and Nawasib who have hijacked the memory of Karabala for their own ulterior motives
I dont know how on earth one can accuse Rafidhis for 'hijacking' the memory when it pertains to the tragedy befallen on those whom Rafidhis deem as their leaders, so if someone has really hijacked the memery of Karbala or for that matter the teachings of Ahlulbayt then its non-Rafidhis. Anyhow, that may biget a new debate here but I am happy that a non-Rafidhi scholar has played his role against Nasibism.
^ since they use the tragedy of karbala to advance their own revisionsit version of events.Which puts criminals like muawiyah and yazid in the same category as Sayyidna Umar & Sayyidna Abu Bakr.This serves the interest of Nawasib as well since they can then defend muawiyah/yazid under the false pretence of "deefah-e-Sahaba" and automatically label anyone who criticzes ummayyads as "rafidi".While this world view is in perfect harmony with rafidi scholars who have a strong dislike for the vast majority of Sahaba, for obvious reasons and anyone who does not believe in their doctrine ( i.e divine designation of Sayyidna Ali) is a heretic.
i don't really come to this site or section much now. i think das reich you were mostly on the right track but i have no clue why you have started to defend these khalifas.
yazeed and muwaiya were in the league of their own. but that doesnt mean these khalifas didnt commit atrocities against the holy Ahlul bait. learned sunni scholers also believe that but they don't want to say anything since they were "sahabis". anyways we don't need to curse them but fact remains that they had hurt Prophet's family after Prophet left
We shias follow the true teachings of Prophet as Prophet said to follow Quran and Ahlul Bait (sahih muslim).
anyways you carry on with your beliefs and good luck to you
I didn't watch the videos, but up until this Muharram and before reading the numerous threads these past few days, I didn't even think anyone had any doubt about Yazid's guilt.
I didn't watch the videos, but up until this Muharram and before reading the numerous threads these past few days, I didn't even think anyone had any doubt about Yazid's guilt.
Muawiya made Muslims regularly curse ImamAli a.s. Regularly. Propaganda machine was in full effect that when these Muslims found out that Imam Ali a.s. was martyred in mosque they were surprised that what was Ali a.s. doing in the mosque
Now propaganda machine is trying to make yazeed not such a bad person infact popular Sunni scholar zakir naik says it was the battle between two prince. Shame on these people
i don't really come to this site or section much now. i think das reich you were mostly on the right track but i have no clue why you have started to defend these khalifas.
yazeed and muwaiya were in the league of their own. but that doesnt mean these khalifas didnt commit atrocities against the holy Ahlul bait. learned sunni scholers also believe that but they don't want to say anything since they were "sahabis". anyways we don't need to curse them but fact remains that they had hurt Prophet's family after Prophet left
We shias follow the true teachings of Prophet as Prophet said to follow Quran and Ahlul Bait (sahih muslim).
anyways you carry on with your beliefs and good luck to you
hey SHeraz bro.........great to c u after such a long time!
yes there are some former important supporters of Ali took part in killing of Hussain b Ali
like Shibath b Ribea who was a former supporter of Aisha and later supported khawarij and even abdullah b zubair
Amr b Hajjaj
Hajjar b Abjar
Ubaidullah b Ziyad whose father Ziyad was once a supporter of Ali but later became a supporter and governer of Kufa under muawiyah and also in flagrent violation of Sunnah Muawiayh made him his ******* half-brother
Muhammad b Asath b Qays
Shimar b Ziljawsan
Umar b Sa’d
but these individuals are a small percentage of the party of Ali which had a huge following in iraq, persia, hijaz and yemen.There can be no collective accusation against them of treachery since it can be easily disproven by facts.Unless one wants to accuse akabir Sahaba & Tabaeen of henious crimes.
but the abovementioned individuals are these people ideologically “shias” ? thats quite absurd since at that time there is no evidence of existence of a imami shia sect.Even certain followers of Mukhtar Thaqavi who had certain heretical beleifs but no clear concept of imamate.The imami 12ers are a much later invention.
^Das tum bhee bass........lanat on shimar, umar ibn saad, Ibn Ziyad, Abdullah bin Zubayr......and pity on u for calling referring to them as Shiyaan e Ali AS..........Das, u have hit a new low.....
LoL, who said that Shias were not invovled in the killings? Of course there was a segment of Shias clearly invovled in the killings and that segment subsequently changed its name and today its know nas Ahle Sunnah wal Jamat.
ds, if you actually look at the authenticated facts, shianeali cannot be seperated from the SHAHADAT of husein radiallahu anhu. indeed shimr is said to be actual killer
some of the most moving of husein RA’s speeches were directly aimed at these kufis who called husein RA and lined up against him. zain bin husein rah said ‘these people are crying for us, then who killed us’, ibn umar says similar
as for yazeed, who was not a sahabi, this is an authoratative view on him
as for ideoloogical shias- being a shia is not permissable in islam and Allah SWT has warned us of consequences
LoL, who said that Shias were not invovled in the killings? Of course there was a segment of Shias clearly invovled in the killings and that segment subsequently changed its name and today its know nas Ahle Sunnah wal Jamat.
So you are still in dreams.
is this why you beat yourselves?
you need to accept shias were the actual killers of husein ra the grandson of the prophet SAW
the prophet SAW was not doing matam, or the other practices of shias. i'd call this bidah but the quran says something else
As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did. 6:159 y.ali
