I dont know what makes you reapting about Matam… i think you have lots of confusions aboit it.
Anyway, yes they did Tabbarra [did disassociate themselves from the eemies of Ahlulbait[as]), did mourn for the Shuhda e Karbala.
(My previous post is pre requisite to this topic).
Ahlulbait[as] means the progeny of Holy Prophet[s].
Comon. Leanr the definition of Ahlulbait[as] first. What if i say " I had a friend who used to drink , I would have a hard time following such Sahaba".
Will this make sense ? I hope you got the point !
Being a Syed or Zaidi, Abidi isnt suffice. The main thing is to follow Quran and Ahlulbait[as]. And as for your friend who “loved to discuss performing cunnilingus on menstruating women” , then it was his fault you cannot blame others for it.
By the way Ayesha has made her personal and sexual life public in the Sahih Hadiths of your school and the sad thing is that rest of the narrators of such hadiths are male. Anyway, thats diff topic.
Not neccessary !
As i Said Holy Prophet [s] did instruct to follow Ahlulbait[as] after him. Do you regard Holy Prophet [s] in condradiction with Quran ? Prophet said: Verily, I am leaving behind two precious things (thaqalayn) among you: the Book of God and my kindred (`itrah), my household (Ahl alBayt), for indeed, the two will never separate until they come back to me by the Pond (of alKawthar on the Judgement’s Day).**
Musnad, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v3, pp 14,17,26,59, v4, pp 366,370-372, v5, pp 182,189,350,366,419.
Fadha’il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p585, Tradition #990
It seems that you are Quranist ? Is it so ? Let me cite another thing from Quran which may help you uderstand the thing i m trying to say.
Allah said in Quran: “Hold fast to the Rope of Allah, all of you together and do not separate” (Quran 3:103)"
The Rope of Allah which we should not separate from, are the Ahlul-Bayt. In
fact, some Sunni scholars narrated from Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (AS) saying: “We are the Rope of Allah about whom Allah has said: ‘Hold fast to the Rope of Allah, all of you together and do not diverge (3:103)’”
al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami , Ch. 11, section 1, p233
Tafsir al-Kabir, by al-Tha’labi, under commentary of verse 3:103
I hope the above words of mine answers your this question as well.
in various other hadith he (saw) also asked us to adhere to:-
– the Prophet’s (saw) sunnah (al Muwatta, Ahmed, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, al Hakim)
– the rightly guided khalifas after him (Ahmed, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah)
– “If you should not find me, then go to Abu Bakr” (al Bukhari)
– his companions (al Tirmidhi, al Hakim)
– the jama’ah (Abu Dawud, al Darimi)
– the large majority (Ibn Majah)
… so his “family” (which includes his wives despite the shi-ites venomous hatred of them!) is one of many guideposts… and where disagreements arise it is common sense that any and every guidepost is subservient to the Qur’an and the Prophet’s own words and actions… the family of the Prophet (saw) are as much bound by the Qur’an as everyone else is
the Rope of Allah is the Qur’an as the Prophet (saw) himself said in hadith in Sahih Muslim, Sunan al Tirmidhi, Sahih Ibn Hibban… e.g. “The Book of Allah, it is the Rope of Allah extended from heaven to earth.”
Hadith has been narrated by Abu Hurrairah who is not trut worhty for Shias but anyway there is no doubt that ALL Muslims are required to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH&HF). However, the question remains that which Sunnah is genuine and which one is invented later and was falsely attributed to the Prophet..Comparing both hadith , its the Ahllubait [as] who wil tell you about Sunnah of Holy Prophet[s].
Of course, any Muslim should follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), and
as such, we, the Followers of Ahlul-Bayt, submit to the genuine (practice) Sunnah of the Holy Prophet of Islam (PBUH&HF) and consider it to be the only path of salvation. But the above tradition gives evidence to the fact that any so-called Sunnah (practice) which contradicts Ahlul-Bayt is NOT a genuine Sunnah and has been innovated later on by some pay-rolled individuals in support the tyrants. That’s why the Prophet had emphasized so much on Ahlul-Bayt in loving them and following them since they carry his genuine Sunnah. And this is the basis of the Shia School of Thought (the School of Ahlul-Bayt).
al-Tirmidhi reported that the “Quran and Ahlul-Bayt” version of the tradition is traced to 30+ companions. Ibn Hajar al-Haythami reported that he knows of 20+ companions witnessed that also.
Again the tradition is considered weak as compared to the Ahlulbait [as] version.
It is obvious to be rejected since Holy Prophet [s] termed Ali [as] as the door of knowledge and all sahaba were agreed on the superior knowledge of Ali bin Abi Talib [as] where as Abu Bakar was not sure about himself.
**“Now then: O people, I have been put in charge of you, although I am not the best of you. Help me if I do well; rectify me if I do wrong”
**Tarikh Tabari, English translation Volume 9 p 201
Thats the reason he used to keep taking adivces from sahaba during his reign specialy from Ali [as].
Again the tradition is considered weak as compared to the Ahlulbait [as] version. And logically think which group of companions will follow ? The one who were with Ali [as] during the war of jamal or those who were with Ayesha ? So there so so may differences between the companions that such confused and contradictory path never be left by Holy Prophet [s].
That will always put you at wrong path cuz majority are not always right in fact Allah has denounced the majority in Quran . (Quran 6:116, 10:92 )etc
And this was the reason that your beloved companions chose to support and follow Yazeed[la] and abandoned Imam Hussain [as] just because majority was with Yazeed[la].
No . The Ahlulbait[as] whom Prophet [s] left to be followed were those individuals for whom verse of purification was revealed and who where under the cloak of Prophet [s].
No wonder that the Banu Umaiyah era’s hadith making factory had removed the nnames of Ahlulbait [as] from their due places but still truth canbe found in texts as i have already mentioned.
nonsense as usual… the tradition “upon you is my sunnah” is reported by Irbad ibn Sariya (Abu Dawud, al Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Musnad Ahmed, al Hakim); the hadith “whoever abandons my sunnah is not from me” is reported by Anas ibn Malik (al Bukhari, Muslim), by Abd Allah ibn Amr (Musnad Ahmed, Sahih Ibn Khuzaima), by Ibn Abbas (al Tahawi’s Muskhil al Athar) etc.
you display similar ignorance in your attempts to reject the other hadith
your hypocrisy in boasting that this or that hadith is witnessed by 30+ companions is laughable when we all know you consider most if not all of those narrators to be apostates or whatever other accursed accusation your hate-filled mind can dream up against them
“And they ill-treated them for no other reason than that they believed in Allah, Exalted in Power, worthy of all Praise!” (Qur’an 85:8)
It doesnt matter what i believe about companions, i have cited the refs bec your school deem them authentic.
And my mind is not filled with hatred rather it was the mind (s) of some people who had resenment against Ahlulbait [as] which made them to usurp their rights.
^ citing "refs" from our "school" is one thing... understanding them is another, something which you've failed to do throughout... don't be a "donkey carrying books" (Qur'an 62:5)
BOY-NICE You were dismissive of the above statement of Hz. Ali (ra) ***** for obvious reasons known to all, saying that ash-Shafi written by Sayyid al-Murtada is not a principle book.
Do you really know the pedigree of Sayyid al-Murtada among the Shia? Guess not.
There is always time to learn, check the following:
'Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn Musa, known as al-Sayyid al-Murtada, and 'Alam al-Huda, (355-436/965-1044), is one of the greatest scholars of Islam and Shi’ism. Most of the great scholars of the Imami Shi’ah, including al-Shaykh al-Tusi, have benefitted from his teaching. Among the works he wrote are: al-Amali, al-Dhari’ah ila usul al-Shari’ah, al-Nasiriyyat, al- Intisar, al-Shafi’i.
Edit: You have to scroll right down the page and check the footnote 13 of the link given below:
Just to impress upon you about I got some more details about him:
**Lineage of al Radi **
**Al-Rad’i’s parents’ lineage came directly from the Imams (as) of the Prophet’s Family. ** From his father’s side he descended from al-Imam Musa al-Kazim (as) ibn Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) ibn Muhammad al-Baqir (as) ibn 'Ali Zayn al-'Abidin (as) ibn al-Husayn (as) ibn 'Ali (as) in the following order: Abu Ahmad Husayn Tahir al-'Awhad Dhu al-Manaqib ibn Musa ibn Muhammad ibn Musa ibn Ibrahim al Mujab ibn Musa al-Kazim (as). All his forefathers were eminent in their own right. From his mothers side he descended from the famous al-Nasir al-Kabir also known as Nasir al-Haqq (225 or 230-304/840 or 844-916) who descended from the second son of al-'Imam 'Ali ibn al-Husayn (as) ibn Ali (as).
Ibn Abi al-Hadid, in Sharh Nahj al-balaghah, narrates a story which is indicative of the high position of this lady of great virtue. **The story goes that one night al-Shaykh al-Mufid dreamed that Fatimah (as), the Prophet’s daughter, came to his place in Karkh bringing her two young sons,al- Hasan (as) and al-Husayn (as), and asked that he take up the task of teaching them. Al-Mufid awoke amazed at the dream. The next morning Fatimah, mother of al-Sayyid al-Murtada and al-Sayyid al-Radi, came to his mosque surrounded by her servants, bringing her two small sons, asking that he teach them. ** Al-Sayyid al Radi in his elegy on her death paid rich tributes to her virtue, piety, religiosity, courage and other qualities of the heart and the mind. She died in the month of Dhu al-Hijjah 385/995.
Aqeedah of Ahlul Sunnah Wal Jama’a - by Imam Tahawi
We ask Allah to make us firm in our belief and seal our lives with it and to protect us from variant ideas, scattering opinions and evil schools of view such as those of the Mushabbihah, the Mu’tazilah, the Jahmiyyah the Jabriyah, the Qadriyah and others like them who go against the Sunnah and Jama’ah and have allied themselves with error.
The above has also confirmed by Shia site (regarding al-Sayyid al-Murtada):
In those days due to a climate of tolerance at least among scholars and students, the Shi’ah and Sunni students used to attend classes of teachers belonging to different sects. A number of al-Radi’s teachers were Sunni and Mu’tazili.
'Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn Musa, known as al-Sayyid al-Murtada, and 'Alam al-Huda narrates that Imam Ali (ra) said the following: "I am ashamed before Allah to overturn something that was prohibited by Abu Bakr and continued by ‘Umar.”, it should be enough for you. Truth is hard to swallow.
If by chance the narration of Imam Ali (ra) had been from Al-Kafi, the most prominent of Shia hadith books, you would have dismissed that too saying that 65% of Al-Kafi is unreliable and quoting the following from a Shia site.
*The number of traditions in al-Kafi is 15,181; according to another reckoning 15,176. If the traditions reported in different sections are counted, the number is over 1,000 more. Of the basic traditions, 5,072 are considered sound (sahih) by scholars, i.e. first category; 144 are regarded as good (hasan), second category; 178 are held to be trustworthy (muwaththaq), third category; 302 are adjudged to be strong (qawi), fourth category; and 9,484 are considered weak (da’if), fifth category. *
Nop. Since books are yours hense donkey is yours as well not ours. And by the way donkey has always been yours. No need to mention that Ayesha mounted on a mule and she stopped the corpse of the elder grandson of the Holy Prophet Imam Hassan [as] from moving ahead for burial near the Holy Prophet.
No one objected against Sayed Mutaza. Its not Sayed Murtuza rather its the text which is unacceptable.
The text cited bu al Murtada has not been verified by an Shi’a Hadeeth scholar, and to quote the comments of our Shah Abdul Aziz in Taufa Ithna Ashari, Chapter 9 page 266 Muthaeen Abu Bakr:
**In the eyes of Ahl as-Sunnah, only those hadith are reliable that appear in the authoritative texts of hadith scholars.
The tradition claims that Imam Ali (as) was ashamed before Allah to overturn something that was prohibited by Abu Bakr and continued by 'Umar.
This conflicts with the most authentic Ahadeeth in Sunni literature that presents an entirely different scenario. Sahih al Bukhari informs us that Abu Bakr prohibited Fadak by using the Hadeeth of “No heirs of Prophet” while Mawla Ali (as) was not convinced with it and deemed Abu Bakr to be a lair.
Not only during the life of Abu Bakr, but also after his death (i.e. in the time of Umar’s reign) Maula Ali (as) tried his utmost to get his share of Fadak back. Mawla Ali (as) and Abbas went to Umar and demanded the right of Fadak.
Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4349 and 4350 demonstrates that Hadhrat 'Ali (as) was in no way ashamed to overturn Abu Bakr’s decision, on the contrary he (as) deemed the Khalifa’s confiscation of Fadak as proof of him being a liar, sinful, treacherous and dishonest.
If Maula Ali (as) was really ashamed of overturning something that was prohibited by Abu Bakr, why would he make a claim before Abu Bakr in the first place?
And your point is ?
Hadid was a Mutazali and there is no clue of him being Shia
Well thats not my headache my point is that Hadid was not a shia.
BTW those that deem Abu Bakr to be the rightful Khalifa are split into two groups Ashari or the Mutazzalite and Ibn al Hadeed was of the Mutazzalite Sect. Ibn Taymeeya the beloved of the Nasibis infact counted the Mutazzalite as Sunni’s. He stated as follows in Minhaj as Sunnah Volume 1 page 89:
“The claim of the Shi’a Ulema that all groups of Ahl’ul Sunnah seek to prove the Khilafat of the first three Khalifas on Qiyas is false, since the Ahl’ul Sunnah are split into numerous sects such as the Mutazzalite, Fiqh Baghdhawiya, Dhareeya, and individuals such as Dawood, Ibn Hazm and others did not prove their Imamate’s by relying on Qiyas”
I was listening to this Shia’a scholar reciting an incident from Karbala regarding some pious personality, and how he supposedly kept fighting Mu’awwiyah 's army while he had 71 arrows stuck in his body…
BOY-NICE ** - Now do you mean to say that 'Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn Musa, [known as al-Sayyid al-Murtada, and 'Alam al-Huda, one of the greatest scholars of Islam and Shi’ism] really did not know much about Fadak to narrate the following fro Hz. Ali (ra): “I am ashamed before Allah to overturn something that was prohibited by Abu Bakr and continued by ‘Umar.”**
Surely, such a learned man would know all about Fadak and what affect his statement would have on 'Hz. Fatimah (ra)‘s right over Fadak’.
And you were trying to peddle him off as being a Sunni.
Its not about knowing or not . Its about authenticity of the text. There are so much text /views in both Shia Sunni sources which are not authentic. And as i said This conflicts with the most authentic Ahadeeth in Sunni literature that presents an entirely different scenario. Sahih al Bukhari informs us that Abu Bakr prohibited Fadak by using the Hadeeth of “No heirs of Prophet” while Mawla Ali (as) was not convinced with it and deemed Abu Bakr to be a lair**.**
Again this is not about the expertise of a person rather its the authenticity of the text cited by him. For example Imam Bukhari recorded this hadith in his “Sahih” bukhari.
**Narrated 'Aisha: ** “The Prophet used to lean on my lap and recite Qur’an while I was in menses”
Now applying your logic here, was the learnt Imam of Ahle Sunnah unware of Quranic injunctions abot staying aloof from a woman during her menses yet he recorded that Quran used to be recited during menses ?
Surah Baqarah verse 222
Nop , i will cite material from AA only when you will get back and bring more filth from Nawasib sites like Ansar and Chaar Yaari etc.
No surprise that u havent heard about Ahlulbait [as] because most of the mullahs doesnt tell this to their adherents because this cud spark a array of questions regarding Ahlulbait [as] like why most of the people abandoned them , what treatment most of the people did with them etc..
Anyway, as for source of this hadith, i think u were not following the thread. It is present in the first post of mine - in this page.
's army while he had 71 arrows stuck in his body…