Yazid muslim?? (split from Taif Incident)

[zer01]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by bao bihari: *

here we are discussing the wrong refrences given by answering ansar

[/QUOTE]

Bao! merey Bhai, you checked folowing references for the narrations I have given above:

Taufa Ithna Ashari page 6 Chapter 1
Hidayaath al Shi'a Volume 1 page 95 by Allamah Rasheed Ahmad angohi
Fitna Kharijee Volume 1 page 267 by Qadhi Madhar Husayn
Skahyk al Islam bu Muhammad Qaim Nanothi Voluime 1 page 258
Fatawa Azeezi Volume 1 page 21

right??

would you please tell me *which narration (i posted above) I have taken any of the above books you have rechecked *?? Would be a great favor if you post them again so I can also recheck them myself

[zer01]

s

[bao_bihari]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by zer01: *

Bao! merey Bhai, you checked folowing references for the narrations I have given above:

Taufa Ithna Ashari page 6 Chapter 1
Hidayaath al Shi'a Volume 1 page 95 by Allamah Rasheed Ahmad angohi
Fitna Kharijee Volume 1 page 267 by Qadhi Madhar Husayn
Skahyk al Islam bu Muhammad Qaim Nanothi Voluime 1 page 258
Fatawa Azeezi Volume 1 page 21

right??

would you please tell me *which narration (i posted above) I have taken any of the above books you have rechecked *?? Would be a great favor if you post them again so I can also recheck them myself
[/QUOTE]

Bhai.....u provided the name of these books for suporting ur assumption that sunni scholars considerd yazeed as kaffir......and there was nothing i these books implying that........

aa gae sumajh

[QUOTE]
It is proven from the sources of Ahl'ul Sunnah that Yazeed rejected the concept of revelation; rather he deemed all this a stage for power by Rasulullah (s). This proves that Yazeed was a kaafir, so what right do these Nasibi have to extol Yazeed, deem him to to the rightful Khalifah over the Muslims and Ameer'ul Momineen?
[/QUOTE]

[inuit]

Originally posted by SalmanNY:
Bao, chalo sara kooch tou nahi KOOCH tou sachaai ho gi na … i mean even if little bit and even then that is not acceptable at least in my dictionary. A person disgracing the mothers of our UMMAH and stopping the water on them.. Common… Sheer Haterness and nothing else
-Salman

Originally posted by bao bihari
i agree salman…but same happened to hadar usman un ka bhi pani bund kar diya gaya tha…how many of us call hadrat usman kay qateleen kaffir…

Sunni have disagrement over whether to do lanat on yazeed or not…
but they have never said with surity that he was kaffir…

Intuit…there is nothing wrong with the statement…(at http://www.kr-hcy.com)

Originally posted by bao bihari
but abu lahab never embraced islam…he never belived in one ness of ALLAH…he was mushrik…the case is not the same…

plz…keep in mind i am not advocating yazeed…just cant understand why he is called kaffir

What is the token of Sipah Sabah? Those people who deny Sahaba are kafir. what about those who Deny Imam Hussain? When we remind you the hardships of Imam Hussain(A) why you remind us the hardships of Sahaba. On which there is no comparison. The hardships of Imama Hussain and Ahle Bait were much more than others. the same kind if question I asked you under Pillars of Islam thread, but so far there is no reply.

Originally posted by armughal
but how does he become a kaafir???
did he reject Allah???
did he reject the Prophet???

Originally posted by armughal
ur only problem is that u feel that the murderer still lives 1400 years after his crime…

We think that the followers and lovers of murderer are alive. there Character is dead. But the Deed is alive. Yazid is dead but Yazidiyat is alive. to oppose it Hussain and Hussainiyat both are alive.

Originally posted by armughal
bani hashim were also initially kafir…

This is production of your brain or you got these teachings from Banu Umayyah

Originally posted by Fraudz
My summary answer to all your points is this. whatever politics took place does not change what my obligations to god, or to people are. My pillars of faith are the same, and all the political kabbadi that took place after the death of the prophet, and aftrer the quran was completed does not change religion.

I do nto care whether the texts come from the books of sunni or shia folks. Those books are not Quran.

The rest of the stuff, is not part and parcel of the faith, whether i say lanat on someone, or not, does not impact religion as it is.

Fraudia! would you consider it as politics when you deny Imam Mehdi and Prophet Jesus (2nd coming) 100s of years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. Would you like to join the party of dajal if he say to you that its Politics. Our Religion and Politics are not separate. Humara deen humari siyasat hay Those who say that religion and politics are separate; are English agents.

Originally posted by Fraudz
Now the people who were enjoying the baybassi of ahle-rasool, I am nto sure why one would throw it in my face as if that was me or those are people I like.

If you favor them, you would be consider with them. zulam kay khalaf aawaz na uthanay wala, zalam kay saath hota hay

Originally posted by Fraudz
so did the fundamentals of the religion change? No..right. The religion was completed, as told by Allah to the prophet. Any of the political issues afterwards do not change the religion.

The religion was completed in the prophets life as far as I am concerned, so anything that happened afterwards is a political issue.

By calling it a political issue you are defending Yazid. was fight between Habeel and Kabeel a political issue.

Originally posted by Fraudz
so you oppose it, but does it fundamentally alter your religion? does the impact of this politicalluy impacted action make you change how you pray, what you believe in etc? No..right?

Do you think, simply praying and having belief is relgion. is this your islam for the community life.

Originally posted by Fraudz
Indeed, however they are much less important than the prophet and the religion was completed on the prophet so anything added aftwerwards is extra and has notrhing to do with faith, When Allah completed the religion, no human has the authority to add, change or subtract from it.
So whether or not I consider them as wa Wali does not change the faith the Allah completed upon the prophet.

Allah completed the faith with wali Prophet(PBUH) said:Mun kinto Mawla fa haza Aliun Mawla. Imams/Khulfa are after Prophet(PBUH). like Imam Mehdi and Prophet Jesus (2nd coming). you cant deny them saying * the religion was completed on the prophet so anything added aftwerwards is extra and has notrhing to do with faith,*. you will be considered a disbeliever if you deny them. Same value is of the Imams who came before.

Originally posted by Fraudz
well I dont think that Hazrat Ali’s name is mentioned here It says Allaj, and the prophet, I dont see any other names there.

Do you see the name of Imam Mehdi(A) in Quran. How can you say that if it is not in Quran; dont believe.

Originally posted by Fraudz
Would beleving in that change anything. As far as I am concerend. It does not change the fact that I need to pray, fast, etc. So the question is, what is the problem between shias and sunnis, Not belonging to any camp, I can just look with astonishment as each group keeps fighting on and on.

It does not make me read nohay, it does not make me do matam. does it?

How can you make yourself free from all this? If you say that you believe only in Quran. you are following Omer which is not true. You have no belief.

[bao_bihari]

INTUIT.....

yaar i am really impressed with ur work..........you only match an old gs user insaniyat in this.....

itna reasearch kia hay bhai ......man aya tum ko....

inshalalh am going now....kal answer doon ga

[bao_bihari]

HEre you go ..intuit....

[QUOTE]

1-What is the token of Sipah Sabah? Those people who deny Sahaba are kafir.
2-what about those who Deny Imam Hussain?
3-When we remind you the hardships of Imam Hussain(A) why you remind us the hardships of Sahaba. On which there is no comparison.The hardships of Imama Hussain and Ahle Bait were much more than others.
4-the same kind if question I asked you under Pillars of Islam thread, but so far there is no reply.
[/QUOTE]

INtuit bhai ..you seem to be more touchy these days......i wonder why ?

khair ..i have ameneded your question by making points....answer dainay main asani rahay ge and will not go oftopic ..

1-Why so obsessd with sipah.....the only reason i can see of mentioning sipah is just to divert the discussion...have you see me mentioning *tehreek e nifaz e fiqah e jafria * ragardless of how provokive is the name fo the gruop...
It is not just denyl of sahbah that make one kaffir ..it goes beyond that...you can always rely on ur favorite site ww.kr-hcy.com on learning about sipah belives......
2-Those who deny ahle bayat and nauzobillah call them munafiq are as kaffir as those who deny sahbah and call sahbah nauzobillah munafiq.
3-There is a comparison bhai.......
and we just remind you so that one could not exaggerate stuff on the cost of others.......
why forget the shadah of hadrat sumiya...hadrat hamza....hadrat usman ......and many others sahbahs.....
4-OK ..i''ll answer that...actually i see no end to the discussion ...so i just stopped....

when one goes as down as making allegations on others rather then arguing with facts then it normaly is useless to argue then....

wasalam

BAo Biahri

[inuit]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by bao bihari: *
2-Those who deny ahle bayat and nauzobillah call them munafiq are as kaffir as those who deny sahbah and call sahbah nauzobillah munafiq.

[/QUOTE]
Was not Yazid one of those?