Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Can someone give example of a battle where the muslims first sent a message of Islam to a non-muslim land. The non-muslims rejected the message and the muslims then asked the non-muslims to pay jizyah and live under the laws of Allah. The non-muslims refused and thererby the muslims fought to establish the laws of Allah.
Muslims defending their Islamic state against an agressor is definitely Jihad however what if the pretext of that is that muslims may be protecting guilty muslims and have been attacked for not dealing justice to them?
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Examples will soon be given to you inshaAllah.
[quote]
Muslims defending their Islamic state against an agressor is definitely Jihad however what if the pretext of that is that muslims may be protecting guilty muslims and have been attacked for not dealing justice to them?
[/quote]
Who will decide that they are guilty?
A Kafir monster like George Bush?
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
I believe that was not an answer to what I asked.
Later inshaAllah, I would have to dig out Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. By the way, why you don't go yourself into chapters of Military Expeditions **and **Jihad in these most authentic sources of hadith and history?
I mean why to waste my time on you (lol)?
Why don't you do it yourself, we are already Muslims, we know what we believe, if you want to learn about Islam then do it yourself, after all we don't care what you think of us or our religion. I mean yeah, that's true.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Well, they are not authentic sources, especially Tarikh of Tabari, whose author (Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir ibn Rustam Tabari) himself is a shia and there are shias' narrations in al Bidayah wan Nihayah as well, though this is compared to Tabari's history more authenitc as its sanad is from Ibn Kathir.
But as I said, Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are the most authentic.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
You stated that Ibn Kathir quoted Ibn Jarir Tabari and yet he didnt know that Tabari was a Shia while only you are aware of this secret?
It seems that your ignorance knows no bounds The author of "Tarikh Tabari" basically known as "Tarikh al Ummam wal Maluk" is not ibn Jarir ibn Rustam **(Shia) rather its **Abu Jaffar Muhammad bin Jareer bin Yazeed bin Katheer bin Ghalib Tabari (Sunni Imam), who is considered as an authority by the ulema of ahle sunnah . The Hanafi scholar Mufti Ghulam Rasool of "Daar ul Uloom Qadriyah Jilaniyah London" replied to this confusion in detail when he was also given the same ignorant question.Mufti Ghulam Rasool when quoted Ibn Jareer Tabari in his work he confronted with a question about the authenticity of Ibn Jareer to which he replied in this manner:
Question1: You have quoted the statements of Ibn Jarir Tabari but he was a Shia so how can be his statements and references be reliable ?
Answer: There are two Tabaris One is from Ahle Sunnah who is known as Abu Jaffar Muhammad bin Jareer bin Yazeed bin Katheer bin Ghalib Tabari whose statements and reference have been quoted by us and he is Ahle Sunnah. He was born in 224 H. He was an outstanding Scholar. Khatib Baghdadi (d 423 H) wrote that Jareer Tabari was unique in knowledge and merits. No one was equal to him in his period. He was Hafid of Quran, Muffassir, master in Quranic injunctions, aware of abrogating (verses) and abrogations, scholar in historical incidents and an esteemed Muhaddith. Ibn Jareer initially adhered to Shafi school and then claimed of doing Ijtihad and let the foundation of his Naqahi school but that school did not sustain for longer period, in fact it finished during his life. **
**Ibn Khazimah (d 361 H) wrote that there has been no scholar like Ibn Jareer. Muhith bin Khaliwi ( d 370 H) has also prasied Ibn Jareer excessively.
*Ibn Taimiyah also wrote: “Muhammad bin Jareer was a prestigious Muffassir” [Fatawa Ibn Taimiyah, Vol 2 page 192]. *
*Allamah Daudi (d 945 H) wrote: “ Ibn Jareer was an esteemed scholar of abrogated (verse) and abgrogating (verses), difficult and abstruse matters, Qisas o Akhbar and other studies.” [Tabaqat al Muffassareen, page 23]. *
Yaqut al Hamawi (d 226 H) also wrote that Ibn Jareer was an esteemed scholar and a exalted commentator of Quran.
*Hafid Ibn Kathir (d 775 H) wrote: “Ibn Jareer was among Greats of the scholars. Rulings are derived from his statements and people do refer to his merits. He was Hafid of the book of Allah and was aware of all types of recitation and meanings. He was jurist about instructions and was scholar in abrogated and abrogating. He was aware of the statements of Sahaba, Tabaeen and people who came after them.” Al Badayah wal Nihayah, Volume 11 page 145]. *
*Ibn Khalkan (d 681 H) wrote that Ibn Jarir was among the Imams of Mujtahdeen. *
*Hafid Ibn Hajar Asqalani wrote: “Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari is a very respected commentator [Muffassir]. Ahmed bin Ali Sulemani has said inappropriate words for him that he used to make hadith for Rafdis . This is an allegation against Ibn Jarir and a curse of the Liar, because Ibn Jarir is from amongst the Great Imams of Islam” Lisan al Mizan, Volume 5 page 100]. *
Hafid Dahabi ( d 748 H) wrote: “Muhammad bin Jareer Tabari was a respected Imam, Muffassir, Thiqa and truthful. He was from amongst the Noble and great scholars (Akabireen) of Islam. There was another person namely Muhammad bin Jarir bin Rustam who was a Shia”. [Mizan al Eitadal, Vol 3 page 35].
So it has been proved that there were two people by the name of Ibn Jareer Tabari. One was a Rafidi whose name was Muhammad bin Jareer bin Rustam while the second one is from Ahle Sunnah wal Jamat. He was an esteemed scholar and Muffassir and belong to the fourth group of Mufassareen. His Tafseer Ibn Jarir is very exalted and popular. Allamah Suyuti (d 911 H) states that there is no Tafseer like Ibn Jarir. He has written various books among them are Tarikh al Ummam wal Maluk, Kitab al Qirat, Kitab al Tanzeel, …”
Hasab aur Nasab, by Mufti Ghulam Rasul ; Volume 3 page 72-74 (publishedin London)
Please always do research work before claiming anythign because unconfirmed claims will effect the naive minds as well besides being humiliated.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Ibn Jarir al Tabari was not a Shia. He was a sunni, and wrote two great works. The first one was on History, called History of the Prophets and Kings, famously known as Tarikh al Tabari, and the second one was his commentary on Quran, which is one of the most famous Tafsirs around, and many scholars have used it as their reference including Ibn Kathir.
But its true Tarikh al Tabari and Bidayah wal Nihayah the two greatest works on History of Islam, have many shiite narrations...and that's something thats true for all works on history. The thing is they get these shiite narrations with the perfect isnad and according to the methodology used for narrating hadith everything seems so spotless hence they are forced to add these narrations to their work.
Ibn Kathir had stated that despite of being so cautios as to not include anything that was unverified and false, he still couldn't get rid of shiite narrations from his work.
and, Bidayah wal Nihayah's sanad is from ibn Kathir? Ibn Kathir was born in 1301, he was a later day scholar, and he himself used Tabari as his reference lol.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Well, this is a joke, the fact is that shias' 'Ulama have often used tadlees for the purpose of taqiyyah (to fool sunnis) and Tabari is an example of such work.
Just know that there are two Tabaris according to shias or sunnis
Both belong to the same time period.
Both have the same name as Muhammad.
Both have the same the same kunniyat or first son by name.
Both have the same name for their fathers which was Jarir.
Both belong to the same place as Tabaristan.
Now to make them look different what shias did was to change his grand father's Persian **name from **Rustam to Yazid. They chose Yazid so that sunnis would think that Tabari can't be a shia as his grandfather was called Yazid and shias hated this name.
Ibn Hiban has regarded this Tabari of Tarikh as a shia.
Even Ibn Hajr and Ad Dhahabi have accepted tashaiyo' of Tabari though they have tried to lower his degree of shi'ism.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Your claim is ridiculous as even Tabari has confessed in the introduction of his Tarikh that most of it or much of it hasn't been transmitted through a sanad. Most of the Tarikh of Tabari is contradicting and comes from shias. In fact Tarikh of Tabari is a collection of half shia and half sunnis' narrations in order to keep both sects happy, and that is why both shias and sunnis use it to make their points.
In any case it serves the purpose of shi'ism.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Rather than to debate in the thread I was reading Hadith, of Sahih Bukhari What does fighting in the Cause of Allaah mean.
Then probaby i will read Military Expedition Al Ghazi. I personally feel USResident is looking out for opinions from Quran and Hadith.
Got a couple of Good points up there in the Hadith.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Debator has the nerve to call others ridiculous, while he goes out slandering the Imams of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaah and calling them shias, just cause their books contain a few shiite narrations.
He's the kinda person who has a hard time understanding what others are trying to say, and is only interested in getting the mumbo-jumbo-half-cent-worth-crap-in-his head-that-he's-learned across.
Same goes for ajmal farooqi and all these other kids, that have started to frequent the religion board. Slandering others, calling others jews, shias .. you name it.
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
OH yeah ! Quote the complete statement not partial. According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani, the one who deems Imam Ibn Jarir Tabari as Shia is doing nothing but making a lie against him*.*
The bottom line is that according to all prominent ulema of ahle sunnah mentioned above such as Dahabi, Ibn Hajar Adqalani, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Khalkan, Daudii , Ibn Tamiyah etc, Ibn Jareer Tabari (the author of Tarikh Tabari) was not a Shia rather they considered him as their "Imam" and the one who think that he is more knowledgeable than these prominent ulema and all of them were wrong about a certain person that would make the Tons of Rijal works put frward by these very ulema as null and void!
Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
Fadhl bin Wakeen (Abu Na'eem) was one of the ustaads (teachers) of Imam Bukhari though he was a shia. Surprised?
I didn't use the word Rafidhi for Tabari but I said he was a shia which is a term generally used for those who raise the status of Hadhrat 'Ali radhiyAllahu 'anhu and his family over all the rest of Sahabah. But it doesn't mean they don't have any malice towards Sahabah, sometimes they express it and other times they don't.
The quotes you have provided with above don't claim that he was a sunni and not a shia.
Another example of such shias is Hakim who is the author of Mustadrak al Hakim. Though some 'ulama have called him Rafidhi. WAllahu A'lam