Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Shia vs Sahabah (Companions)’ Category

Extreme hatred of Shiism towards the Muslim Ummah.  It is narrated in their books that sparrows should be killed because they are Sunni and they love Abubakr (رضی الله عنه) and Umar (رضی الله عنه). Shiism is the sect of hatred and violence.

Book: Anwar Numania page 211

“It is narrated that sparrow loves fulan (Abubakr) and fulan (Umar) and it is a Sunni. It should be killed in any way possible and executed and then eaten”.

Scan Image:

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Praise be to Allah. This is a good article in refutation of shia claim that Umar (ra) hit Fatima (ra).
In this article on one example we would show again how shia scholars tricked their readers in the attempt to misguide them. …
From Shia sources:
Baqir Sharif al-Qurashi, shia writer in his book about Fatima, which was translated into english language said:
Ash-Shahristani mentioned from an-Nidham that Umar was shouting: ‘Set fire to her (Fatima) house with all those in it.’ There were no but Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn inside the house.’
Source: The Life of Fatima az-Zahra, chapter The attack on Imam Ali’s house
This claim in this or other form was repeated and recorded by other shia scholars and writers.
Let us see original book of Shahristani to see what important part was dropped of by them.
Scan from “Milal wa Nihal” 1/51, Darul Kutub al-Ilmiyah:
 وزاد في الفرية فقال: إن عمر ضرب بطن فاطمة يوم البيعة حتى ألقت الجنين من بطنها وكان يصيح: أحرقوا دارها بمن فيها وما كان في الدار غير علي وفاطمة والحسن والحسين.
Translation:
And he (Nadham) added to this FALSE CLAIM: Umar hit Fatima’s belly in the day of pledge in such way that embryo fell from her womb, and he was shouting: Set fire to her (Fatima) house with all those in it.’ There were no but Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn inside the house.
Discussion:
1) First as it clear, in accordance to Shahristani this claim of Nadham was nothing but lie and false claim. But shia author didn’t mention this at all. That is same as if we would quote hadith from Mojam ar-Rijal of al-Khui, regarding which he said it is lie and fabrication, without mentioning his opinion. This is nothing but trick and clear lie.
2) Who is Nadham? That was Ibrahim ibn Sayyar ibn Hani, an-Nadham. Motazili, with many false beliefs. Shahristani quoted them one by one, and I would list some of them:
a) Nadham said: Allah have no power over evil deeds and sins, they are not under his authority.
b) He rejected idea that Allah has His own Will (Irada).
c) He rejected idea that Ijma of nation is a proof in any question.
d) He clearly supported shia idea of Imamate of Ali, and attacked companions.

Read Full Post »

In 351Hijree Ma’aza ad-Daulah ie Ahmad bin Buwaiyyah ad-Dailaamee wrote the following statement on the Door of the Grand Mosque of Baghdaad, (we seek refuge in Allaah)

“May the curse of Allah be upon Mu’awiyyah bin Abu Sufyaan, the oppressive who denied Fatima the garden of Fidak, the one who denied Hasan being buried with his grandfather, the one who exiled Abu Dharr and the one who expelled al-Abbaas from the Shoora (council).”

Ma’aza ad-Daulah on the 18th of Dhul-Hijjah 351H announced it to be a day of Eed in Baghdaad and called it the day of ‘Eed Khum Ghadeer’ drums were beaten and there were a lot of festivities.

Controversy persists with regards to choosing this day, some say this day was chosen because on this day the Messenger of Allaah (Sallaalahu Alayhee Wasallam) at his last person near the pond of Khum Ghadeer appointed Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) as his successor however some Shee’ah Raafidhah chose this day as it was the date Uthmaan ibn Affaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) was martyred and hence Shee’ah Raafidhah formulated this date as a day of happiness and Eed.

Ma’aza ad-Daulah ie Ahmad bin Buwaiyyah ad-Dailaamee set this up in 351H and since then the Shee’ah Raafidhah have pushed and believe this Eed ie of Ghadeer Khum is more superior and more important than Eed ul-Adha.

In the beginning of 352H Ahmad bin Buwaiyyah ordered the people that on the 10th of Muharram we will mourn the death and martyrdom of Hussain (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and hence on this day all the shops will be closed and no transactions or business will take place. The people from the towns and villages will wear clothes indicating mourning and will openly lament and grief. The women will have to open their hair, blacken their faces, rip their clothes, walk and parade the streets whilst reciting tragic, sad, depressive, pitiful and lamentable poems and couplets whilst also hitting their faces and chest.

So the Shee’ah Raafidhah did this openly and jubilantly. After all it was the Shee’ah Raafidhah responsible for the deaths of Hussain (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and his family and hence they had more of a reason to lament as history testifies. Therefore lamenting at their own sin and mistake was not problematic for them and also on the basis that Ubaidullaah ibn Ziyaads army who was the Governor of Koofah was compromised of the same koofee Shee’ah Raafidhah who had invited Hussain (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) to come to koofah and promised their loyalty and their pledge of allegiance. In the same manner they got Muslim ibn Aqeel killed and proved treacherous and liars and hence this is the reason why they mourn, ie because they killed Hussain (RadhiAllaahu Anhu)

Ahlus Sunnah Wal-Jama’ah refrained from this and kept themselves away from the Shee’ah Raafidhah as the ministers and local officials were Shee’ah Raafidhah. In the following year 353H the same morning and lamenting was ordered and the Sunnis were instructed to do the same which consequently led to troubles and turmoil between the Sunni and Shee’ahs.

From there on the Shee’ah Raafidhah continued the annual practice of lamenting and mourning and this practice continues today in all the Muslims countries and has even spread to the west as we see often, in Europe, England and USA. In some Muslims countries the Soofee bareilwis mostly bareilwee soofee hanafees are so beguiled that they also join and participate in such mourning and lamenting and follow in the footsteps of the Shee’ah Raafidhah without realising what they are actually doing and so falling prey to the confusion and misguidance of the Shee’ah Raafidhah by their false love and extremism for Hussain (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and the Prophets Family (May Allaah be pleased with them all) (Refer to Taareekh Islaam 2/566 of Najeebabaadee)

Ma’aza ad-Daulah ie Ahmad bin Buwaiyyah ad-Dailaamee was a bigoted staunch Shee’ah Raafidhah and he and others were ministers in the Abbassid Khaliphate in Baghdaad. Initially he was quiet and observant and later he manifested his true bigotry and extremism in his shee’ism. Many of the Abbaasid ministers and officials were Shee’ah Raafidhah but they were hidden and never openly manifested their beliefs. Ahmad ibn Buwaiyyah intended to crush and weaken the Khaliphate and push the ideology of Raafidhah Shee’ism in Baghdaad which he started in 351H by writing on the doors of the Grand Mosque of Baghdaad,

“May the curse of Allah be upon Mu’awiyyah bin Abu Sufyaan, the oppressive who denied Fatima the garden of Fidak, the one who denied Hasan being buried with his grandfather, the one who exiled Abu Dharr and the one who expelled al-Abbaas from the Shoora (council).”

(Refer to Taareekh Ibn Atheer 8/179)

The Khaliph at the time attempted was unable to halt the spreading of this innovation. The Sunnis would erase the wording from the doors of the mosque but the next day Ahmad bin Buwaiyyah would we-write them. One of Ahmad bin Buwaiyyahs close advisers advised him to add the words, “Mu’awiyyah the oppressor of the Household of Muhammad.” So the cursing and abusing of Mu’awiyyah started and then became the norm.

Ma’aza ad-Daulah ie Ahmad bin Buwaiyyah ad-Dailaamee instigated this further and pushed this concepts vividly throughout Baghdaad and the surrounding areas including villages and other area. He pushed this third Eed and in this way it got incorporated as a permissible muslim festival and a day of joy and happiness.

For 10th Muharram ie Ashoora he forbade all business and the closure of all shops. He ordered the people to wear a specific type of hat and to lament and mourn and for the women to do things we have mentioned previously. He ordered processions through the streets with the people in the processions lamenting and mourning and this is what is continuous to this day. (refer to Taareekh Ibn Atheer 8/184, Taareekh Islaam 4/12-13 of Ma’een ud deen Ahmad)

Over the years these processions increased in their extravagance and extremism, the men started beating themselves with knives and other sharp metal instruments causing bleeding and pain and similarly the women would do the same trying to resemble the women at karbala by opening their hair and dishevelling them, beating their chests and ripping their clothes. They started to wear black clothes as sign of mourning. Without realising this was and is a direct insult and rebuking of the beloved pious household of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallaalahu Alayhee Wasallam), who would never to anything contrary to the teachings of Islaam and the Sunnah.

The Raafidhah Shee’ah allege all of these false things to our Ahlul Bayt, can you imagine Zainab (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) behaving in this way ripping her clothes and beating her chest, crying and lamenting in public. No, you will not find this, rather you will find they were extremely dignified and honourable, patient and in profuse remembrance of Allaah the All mighty as this is what is synonymous with their honour and position, from being from Ahlul Bayt. Yet again this is a sly hidden, deceptive conspiracy of the Raafidhah Shee’ah to secretly discredit the companions and the Ahlul Bayt.

In some instances the Raafidhah Shee’ah don’t change their clothes in these days nor wash believing and wanting to replicate the situation at karbala. They concoct false fabricated stories to make the affair more extravagant and increase the pity on the situation and all of this just to shift their blame from themselves because the Raafidhah Shee’ah know, it was themselves who actually martyred and unlawfully killed Hussain (RadhiAllaahu Anhu). 

Read Full Post »

The shee’ah declare the all the companions to be disbelievers including the household members of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalaahu Alayhee Wasallam) except 3 companions. Infact the Shee’ah Raafidhah twist this and say all the companions apostated after the demise of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalaahu Alayhee Wasallam). Furthermore Shee’ah Raafidhah believe it is permissible and they encourage the cursing and abusing of the companions and this has continued from the very beginning.

 

In this day and age when Ahlus Sunnah Wal-Jama’ah have expounded and virtue and love of the companions overwhelmingly the Shee’ah Raafidhah have had no choice to manifest their deceptive behaviour and once again change their stance and approach. Now they say they were not disbelievers but inferior in virtue to Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and hence he had superiority over all companions and should have been the First Caliph.

 

Irrespective of what the Shee’ah Raafidhah say in this day and age it does not hold any value nor will their statements substantiate their beliefs due to them concealing their faith and lying, namely taqiyyah and kithman. Therefore in order to ascertain the beliefs of the Shee’ah Raafidhah it is important to consult and refer to their classical and unilateral works.

 

Kulainee reports from Ja’afar who said, “After the demise of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalaahu Alayhee Wasallam) everyone apostated except 3 people and he said they were Miqdaad bin al-Aswad, Abu Dharr al-Ghiffaree and Salmaan al-Faarisee.” (Furoo al-Kaafee 69/137-138 of Kulainee)

 

Majlisee reports, “A servant of Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) said to him, “I have served you well for a long time, please tell me about Abu Bakr (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and Umar (RadhiAllaahu Anhu)? So he replied, “Both of them were Kaafirs (disbelievers) and whoever loves them is also a Kaafir (disbeliever).” (Bahaar al-Anwaar pg.522 of Majlisee)

 

Concerning the verse which mentions “Wa Yanha Anil Fahshaa Wal Munkar Wal-Baghya…” al-Qummee said in his explanation of the Quraan, “Fahshaa refers to Abu Bakr (RadhiAllaahu Anhu), Munkar refers to Umar (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and baghya refers to Uthmaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhu).” (Tafseer al-Qummee pg.218)

 

Majlisee further said, “There are numerous and plenty of ahadeeth which allude to the kufr (disbelief) of Abu Bakr (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and Umar (RadhiAllaahu Anhu), they also allude to the innovations they formulated. They also allude to acquiring reward for cursing and abusing them and for also disassociating and shunning them. These ahadeeth number so many that they can be compiled into one or many volumes.” (Bahaar al-Anwaar pg.330)

 

Majlisee says after citing a report that “Abu Bakr (RadhiAllaahu Anhu), Umar (RadhiAllaahu Anhu), Uthmaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and Mu’awiyyah (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) will be in the depths of the hell fire.” (Bahaar al-Anwaar pg.334)

 

The Shee’ah Raafidhah author says, “Oh Allaah have mercy and shower your blessings upon Muhammad (Sallalaahu Alayhee Wasallam) and his Family and curse both (ie Abu Bakr and Umar (RadhiAllaahu Anhuma) the tyrannical idolaters and curse both of his daughters (ie Aishah and Hafsah (RadhiAllaahu Anhuma) except the Quraish.” (Ahqaaq al-Haqq 1/337)

 

Majlisee said in another work, “In the religion of Imaamiyyah (ie the Shee’ah Raafidhah who reject the Caliphate of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhuma) and adopt The Imamate of Alee and the Imaams) the aspects which are considered to be necessary to believe in are Mut’a (temporary marriage) being halaal (ie lawful) and rejecting and shunning 3 people (ie Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhuma) similarly the same applies to Mu’awiyyah (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and Yazeed ibn Mu’awiyyah (Rahimahullah) and from every individual who fought against the leader of the believers (ie Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu).” (Risaalah al-Ei’tiqaad pg.58 of Majlisee)

 

The Shee’ah Raafidhah on the day of Ashoora bring a dog which they call umar and they vehemently hit the dog with sticks and stones, until it dies. Then they bring a little goat which they name aishah and they pull its hair right out from the roots and hit it with their shoes and slippers until it also dies. (ASTAGFIRULLAHUl-A’DHEEM) (Tabdeed adh-Dhulaam Wa Tanbiyyah an-Niyaam pg.32)

 

Similarly they celebrate a day of festivities and feasts on the day Umar (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) was martyred and they give an honorary title to the cowardly assassin Abu Lulu al-Majoosee, as Baba Shuja ud deen (The Bold and Brave Saint of the Deen) (al-Kunaa Wa al-Qaab 2/55 of Abbaas al-Ajamee)

 

The simple question we have if the Shee’ah Raafidhah believe Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhuma) apostated, they were hypocrites and innovators (may the curse of Allaah be upon the liars) then why did Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) and his the household name their children Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhuma)?

 

This clearly shows the Shee’ah Raafidhah are liars and they lie and the normal shee’ah masses get engulfed and subjugated with such beliefs without realising the true reality of such issues.

 

Be brave and leave these foolish concepts and know that one day you will die and face Allaah, do not think about what your family and friends will think if you abandon such beliefs and the shee’ah religion rather think what will happen on the day of judgement when Abu Bakr as-Siddeeque, Umar bin al-Khattaab, Uthmaan ibn Affaan and Alee bin Abee Taalib and all of the companions (May Allaah be pleased with all of them) are standing with the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalaahu Alayhee Wasallam) and your asked why were you cursing and abusing my companions?

 

We further ask the Shee’ah Raafidhah since when have they starting naming their children with names that belong to non muslims (according to their incorrect beliefs) its hypocritical and disillusional?

 

It is like the Shee’ah Raafidhah saying we will name our boys as salman rushdie, barack obama, george bush or tony blair or name our women as hirsi ali or amina wudud it does not make sense.

 

So claiming love for the household of the Messenger of Allaah (Sallalaahu Alayhee Wasallam) and at the same time cursing their children and offspring is indeed a great crime and a hidden agenda of the Shee’ah Raafidhah in belittling the companions and the Prophets household. This is clear proof against the Shee’ah Raafidhah who curse Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan (RadhiAllaahu Anhuma) whereas the household of the Prophet (Sallalaahu Alayhee Wasallam) named their children with the same names, this warrants an answer from the Shee’ah Raafidhah

 

The following children of Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) ibn Abee Taalib were martyred (May Allaah be pleased with them all):

Hussain, Ja’afar, Abbaas, Abu Bakr!!!, Muhammad, Uthmaan!!!

 

The following children of Hussain ibn Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) were martyred:

Alee Akbar (some reports his name was Umar), Abdullaah

 

The Following children of Hasan ibn Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) were martyred:

Abdullaah, Qaasim, Abu Bakr!!!

 

The Following children of Aqeel (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) ibn Abe Taalib were martyred:

Ja’afar, Abdullaah, Abdur Rahmaan, Muslim, Abdullaah ibn Muslim

 

The Following children of Abdullaah ibn Ja’afar (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) ibn Abe Taalib were martyred

A’un, Muhammad Ridhwaan (May Allaah be pleased with all of them)     

(refer to Taareekh Khaleefah pg.224 of Ibn Khayaat)

 

Dear readers note why did the household of Alee (RadhiAllaahu Anhu) name their children Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan, it is a point worth noting. This also shows clear enmity and animosity!

Read Full Post »

Alee (Radhiallaahu Anhu) said,

“A nation (a group of people) who love me will enter the Hell fire due to their (blind extreme) love of me, similarly a nation having animosity towards me will enter the Hell fire due to their animosity.”

(Kitaab Fadhaa’il as-Sahaabah 2/565 no.952 Shaikh Zubair Alee said, Its chain is authentic, Kitaab as-Sunnah no.983 of Ibn Abee Aasim, Shaikh Zubair Alee authenticated it.)

Alee (Radhiallaahu Anhu) also said,

“Two men (types of ie groups) will be destroyed concerning me, one who is extreme in exaggeration (in love of me) and the other who is extreme in his animosity towards me.”

(Fadhaa’il as-Sahaabah 2/571 no.964 Shaikh Zubair Alee said, Its chain is authentic)

 

Courtesy of  ahlulhadeeth.wordpress.com

 

Read Full Post »

This is a topic for those who have a very good idea about how the Shia function, and they usually function in two groups both having the same goal but the second group is much more dangerous, meaning the likes of Khomeini who has the most evil of beliefs and intentions in his heart but outwardly talks about “Unity” and “Love” between Twelver Shia and Muslims. Sometimes however this “beautiful mask” that hides the vile truth of the shia is exposed by none other than the Shia scholars themselves, and as you know Shiism in its true form can never spread among the Muslims or the non-Muslims and this is one of the main reasons for hiding it.

A Shia has to deceive in order to get under people’s skin, in order to earn their trust and loyalty, then he starts spewing his poison.

The Almighty says in his glorious book: { [Allah praises] those who convey the messages of Allah and fear Him and do not fear anyone but Allah. And sufficient is Allah as Accountant. } [al-Ahzab : 39]

The Shia Imams usually act like they never read the above verse, this is why we find narrations of lies and Taqqiyah constantly attributed to them and by God they are Innocent from this accusation, but this religion has chosen to take the path of lies.

Some Shia scholars as you will see in the following example are too shy to disclose the “message of Allah” and would rather keep it hidden, this is because the “message of Allah” according to their religion is to curse and slander against Abu Bakr (ra) and ‘Umar (ra) and all of their lovers. Shia scholar and Muhaddith Yusuf al-Bahrani was commenting on what the other Shia scholar and Muhaddith Ni’imatullah al-Jazaeri wrote in his book concerning the great Shia Safavid (Safawi) scholar ‘Ali bin al-Hussein al-Karaki, (and it is quoted in Lulu al-Bahrain (p 148):

قال مولانا السيد نعمة الله الجزائري في صدر كتابه شرح غوالي الئالي … وكان رحمه الله لا يركب ولا يمضي إلا والباب يمشي في ركابه مجاهراً بلعن الشيخين ومن على طريقتهما

“Mawlana al-Sayyed Ni’imatullah al-Jazaeri wrote at the beginning of his book Sharh Ghawali al-Laalee … And He (al-Karaki) may Allah have mercy on him never used to ride his horse or walk the streets unless he had his servant walking in front of him cursing the two sheikhs (Abu Bakr & ‘Umar) and cursing those who follow their way

So here we see what the situation was when the Shia were in a position of power and when they had a strong state, al-Karaki used to have people walking with him for the sole purpose of cursing the companions, this is how deep the hatred runs. So al-Bahrani criticizes al-Jazaeri for uncovering the truth of their great scholar because it caused harm to many of the Shia living in Islamic countries, He said:

أقول: إن ما نقله عن الشيخ المزبور من ترك التقية والمجاهرة بسب الشيخين خلاف ما استفاضت به الأخبار عن الأئمة الأخيار الأبرار عليهم السلام ، وهي غفلة من شيخنا المشار إليه إن ثبت النقل المذكور ، وقد نقل السيد المذكور أن علماء الشيعة في مكة المشرفة كتبوا إلى علماء أصفهان من أهل المحاريب والمنابر : أنكم تسبون أئمتهم في أصفهان ونحن في الحرمين نُعذَّب بذلك اللعن والسب ، انتهى ، وهو كذلك

“I say: What he related to us from the sheikh about leaving Taqqiyah and publicly cursing the two sheikhs as opposed to what is found in the countless narrations from the pious Imams (as), this is a mistake from our sheikh if it is proven to be true, and the Sayyed also mentioned that the Shia scholars in Mecca wrote to the Shia scholars of Isfahan saying: { You curse and insult their Imams in Isfahan and we in Mecca and Madinah have to face their wrath. } And this is true.”

Source: Lulu al-Bahrain page 147by Yusuf al-Bahrani.

Since most of the Shia narrations that curse the first three caliphs never do this by stating their name, they instead refer to them as “The first and the second” or “Fulan and Fulan” where the word “Fulan” “فلان” in Arabic is like saying “so-and-so”, for Taqqiyah purposes usually their names aren’t mentioned publicly BUT anyone who is familiar with the Shia religion even the Shia laymen know exactly who is being talked about , I shall provide a sample of this:

The Iranian grand Shia scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi who lived in the Persian Safavid state would discard Taqqiyah and state the obvious as to who “the first and the second” are.

al-Qummi wrote in his Tafseer 2/106: from al-Hassan bin ‘Ali from Salih bin Sa’ad: I heard abu ‘Abdullah (as) explain the saying of Allah:

Surat al-Nur verse 40: {Or (they are) like Darknesses} means Fulan and Fulan, {within an unfathomable sea which is covered by waves} meaning Na’athal, {upon which are waves} meaning Talha and Zubair, {over which are clouds – darknesses, some of them upon others} Mu’awiyah and Yazid and the Fitnah of bani Umayyah, {When one puts out his hand} in the Darkness of their Fitnah, { he can hardly see it. And he to whom Allah has not granted light – for him there is no light.} meaning an Imam from the children of Fatima (as), he doesn’t have the light of an Imam which will guide him on the day of judgement.

al-Majlisi commented on the above narration by his predecessor in Bihar al-Anwar 32/306: What is meant by “Fulan and Fulan” are Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and “Na’athal” is ‘Uthman , his enemies used to call him Na’athal likening him to a sheikh with long beard in Egypt who used to be an idiot, it also means a male Hyena .”

al-Kulayni narrated in al-Kafi 8/334: Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Qummi from his uncle ‘Abdullah bin al-Salt from Yunus bin ‘Abdul-Rahman from ‘Abdullah bin SInan from Hussein al-Jammal from abu ‘Abdulah (as) regardin the saying of Allah: Surat Fussilat verse 29: {Our Lord, show us those who misled us of the jinn and men [so] we may put them under our feet that they will be among the lowest} He (as) said: It is They, then He (as) said: and Fulan was a devil.

al-Majlisi said in his Bihar al-Anwar 30/270: What is meant by ”Fulan” is ‘Umar . . meaning the Jinn mentioned in the verse is ‘Umar, he used it as reference for him because he was a devil, either because he came from the devil as he was the son of an act of adultery, or because he was a trickster and a deceiver like the devil, and it is possible that “Fulan” here means Abu Bakr.

Many of the Shia scholars did not like their beliefs to be exposed in this way, Grand Ayatulla Muhammad Asif al-Muhsini criticized al-Majlisi for this, because according to him declaring their names would only harm the cause of the Shia and would make the Muslims hate them, al-Muhsini said in Mashara’at Bihar al-Anwar 1/167:

لم يمسك المؤلف رحمه الله قلمه عن السب ، والتفسيق ، والتكفير ، والطعن في جملة من أجزاء بحاره بالنسبة إلى قادة المخالفين ، والله يعلم أنها كم أضرَّت بالطائفة نفساً وعرضاً ومالاً ، على أنه هو الذي نقل الروايات الدالة على وجوب التقية وحرمة إفشاء الأسرار ، وأصرَّ على التصريح بمرجع ضمائر التثنية في الروايات مع أن عوام المؤمنين يعرفونه فضلاً عن خواصهم فأي فائدة في هذا التفسير سوى إشعال نار الغضب والغيض والانتقام ؟ ولا أظنه قادراً على بيان جواب معقول على سلوكه هذا

“The author (al-Majlisi) did not restrain his pen from cursing and insulting and making Takfeer and Tafseeq in his book of Bihar on the leaders of those who differ with us (sunnies), and Allah knows how much this harmed the sect in many ways, it was he who reported the narrations that state that we must hold on to Taqqiyah and that it is forbidden to reveal the secrets, but he insisted on declaring what those pronouns were referring to in the narrations, although the laymen from the believers (shia) know their meaning and so do the scholars, so what benefit can we draw from such explanations other than igniting the flames of anger and revenge? I don’t believe he has a legitimate excuse for what he did.”

– End –

Read Full Post »

Allaahs’ praise of the Companions (ra) is widely mentioned in the Noble Qur’an. And their virtue and excellence is part of the creed of any Muslims. Surely we love what Allaah (swt) loves and we give precedence to whom Allaah (swt) gave precedence. 

Allaah Azza wa Jaal said in the Noble Qur’an:

“The forerunners those who came first among the Migrators and the Helpers and those who followed them with the best. Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him and Allah has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow therein forever and that is the great success.”

[Suratu At-Tawbah 9:100]

And the Prophet (sallahAllaahu alayhi wasallam) said :

The best of my nation is my generation then those who follow them and then those who follow them.”  [Saheeh Bukhari]

Now, lets look at what the Rawaafidha Majoos belief of the Noble Companions:

The destructed one Ayatush-shaytaan Khomenie in his book al-Wasiyyah Siyasiya – page 27 says:

‘ I completely presume that the Iranian youth -in their millions of numbers- in this current time; they are better than the people of al-Hijaaz [Makkah & Madina and sorrounding areas] during the time of the Prophet (sallahAllaahu alayhi wasallam) !!!

And they are better than the people of Koofah in Iraaq during the time of the prince of believers [Alee] , and Husayn [may Allaah be pleased with both of them] … ’

End of his words !

So who do you believe; Allaah and then the Prophet (sallahAllaahu alayhi wasallam) who said the Companions (ra) are the best of people or this human devil who says such repungent words ?!

Attached image scan of Ayatush-shaytaan Khomenie’s book:

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: