Refuting the debated and analyzing the debater.

Sheikh Mumtaz-ul-Haqq was phoned for the second time publicly by a Shi'ah brother, this time discussing the topic of Adaalat-e-Sahaaba - Justice of the Companions. Sheikh Mumtaz as usual is worried, annoyed and left heartlessly bamboozled, when the Sh'iah asks him questions, and gives him references from important Sunni scriptures. Some of the main issues picked up in the debate was the discussion regarding the event of A'isha saying to Rasool-ul-Allah you smell of Maghafeer. This and the establishment of Surah Tahreem in the Quran too. 

The Shi'ah goes on to discuss the virtues of the Companions in the based foundation that not all the 100000 companions of the Prophet (saws) would go to Heaven, rather are promised Heaven. In this article, we will see and analyse further points which were discussed, and in all honesty clearly see some of the key features which weren't examined fully and not even touched by our Shi'ah brother - in all honesty! There was a point in between the discussion which the Sheikh raised with great authority, he presented Surah Al-Fath's verse number 1 and 2, regarding the fact that this serves as a proof, that Rasool-ul-Allah (saws) once was a sinner, through the understanding of the verse. 

Now obviously this isn't true at all, we true Shias believe that Prophet Muhammed (saws) was never a sinner, and was a Ma'soom (Innocent), and can never sin, but on this issue raised by the Sheikh, our brother Shia caller in all honesty did stutter. That is why once someone really clever said this;

Before letting the opponent talk, make sure there is nothing left for him to talk but to admit and admire. - Mao Tse Tsung

But anyway, we insh'allah, will now focus on this point raised by the Shi'ah caller of A'isha calling Prophet (saws) something untrue, rather, claiming something to him which isn't true at all. Before we go anywhere, we need to highlight this word Maghafeer, I hope everyone is aware of this word fully, otherwise notifying the Hadith is useless.

We read in Fath-ul-Baari Bi- Sharha Saheeh Bukhari - فتح لبآريي بشرح صحيح بخاري - Al-Barraak Edition, Tayba Institution, Volume 12:

"Maghafeer is the plural of Mughfoor, and the Mughfoor is a nasty smelling sweet gum...and it is collected from the bushes that are used to feed camels."

In another tradition, it's called Urfut, let's see in the same book what Urfut means;

"Urfut is the tree who's gum is known as Maghafeer." 

So we should now practically know what this thing Maghafeer is, for more info on this, refer to the excellent article by RevisitingTheSalaf team here at Section 1.

Moving on, what would you do to a person if he/she calls your mother something unimaginable and horrible? Strike back with the same words? Attack physically? Insult back and crossing the limits? Or, ignore? What do you think? What do you think happens when the master of this world is called something which he truly doesn't deserve? You expect thunderous reply! And angry gesture! A ruthless slap! A kind and a thoughtful procession of ignoring such lunacy! What?!"""£$
In all honesty, it isn't nice to say to a person anyway, that you stink or smell of some sort! Does A'isha require some manners to be taught here or what? This is such a huge accusation, that even the Bible rejects the unbelieving wives of Rasool-ul-Allah's claims! We will look at this later on. But or right now, we have an established fact that Maghafeer doesn't smell nice, at all! And just in case anyone hesitates to even claim this whole event of A'isha and Hafsah calling Prophet (saws) something bad, lets see what Tafseer Ibn Katheer has for us regarding the Tafseer of Surah Tahreem (Ch. 66).

You can read the full Tafseer of this Surah on that website, and see for yourself the reality of this event. It'clear and explicit. Before we go any further, I want to ask a question, in that screenshot, at the very bottom it says;

﴿إِن تَتُوبَآ إِلَى اللَّهِ فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا﴾

(If you both turn in repentance to Allah, your hearts are indeed so inclined;) in reference to `A'ishah and Hafsah.

Did A'isha and Hafsah then repent? If they did, where is its mentioning in any authentic Hadith or even in the Quran? 

This is something which should have been the victim or absolute concentration and questioning, this is not any issue, this is Rasool-ul-Allah and his respect which we are talking about. Anyway, as I mentioned, even the Bible, refutes A'isha' hideous claim, we read in the Old Testament Song of Solomon, Chapter 5, verse 16:

"Hikko Mamittakim we kullo Muhammadim Zehdoodeh wa Zehraee Bayna Jerusalem."

"His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem."  

This verse is reasonably accepted as a clear proof for the evidence of the mentioning of Prophet Muhammed (saws) in the Bible. Now, I'm not here to discuss this with the Non-Muslim phase right now, but this certainly will be in another post. But just have a look at what the verse says, His mouth is most sweet! Unbelievable is it not dear readers? I'll leave all the comments of your's to be the value of utter dignity for the claim of A'isha regarding Rasool-ul-Allah rejected by even the Bible! This should have at least been a victim of hint all in all in the discussion with the Sheikh... At least...

Turn to precisely 3:40

At this point, the Sheikh makes a lunatic event to actually say that the smell wasn't coming from Rasool-ul-Allah, but from something he had eaten. Now that we and the Sheikh know that the Oder of Maghafeer is not nice, he defends his mother through making a hideous claim and purely performing Qiyaas by saying the thing he (saws) had consumed (i.e. what the wives thought) was bad, not Rasool-ul-Allah. But again, as we saw in Tafseer Ibn Katheer, how can this;

smell unpleasant?

It's a basic question to be asked and answered, how on earth does Honey smell bad, honey is superb! Isn't it? Unless the Sheikh's mother gives a radical Fatwa of course... I'm pretty sure someth

ing fishy is going about... Again, this was an unbelievably foolish act by the Sheikh, and this must have been a down town thunder blast by our Shi'ah caller, that's a peach! These two points mentioned here absolutely murder the Sheikh's defense, yet he still continues to bark about the smell not being from the Prophet, but something he had eaten. Now what the Prophet had eaten has been examined through the Tafseer of Ibn Katheer, Honey, who in the world thinks honey has a bad smell, only Sheikh Mumtaz and his mother A'isha, otherwise he would've been the first to break his fast quietly with a jar of honey in the toilet! Anyway, he says that, and is rebutted by the Sh'iah caller through the reference of Saheeh Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 63, Hadeeth no. 193,  that in the start of the narration, A'isha says to Raool-ul-Allah what is this bad smell which I smell from you and later on in the same narration, it goes on to say pretty much the same thing; what is this bad smell which I detect on you. This is a fine objection raised by the Shi'ah caller, it's clear and explicit, that A'isha is stating to the Prophet (saws) of the bad smell, this refutes the Sheikh in 3 points;

• It was a bad smell.
• The smell isn't attributed to the thing which Rasool-ul-Allah had drank/eaten.
• Whatever he had drank/eaten which A'isha accused of making Rasool-ul-Allah smell, wasn't smelling at all, it was honey - and this point has been emphasized. 

Turn to precisely 5:25

At this point, yet again, in all honesty, the Sheikh picks up a good point, for once in his debates we are publicly witnessed to, but this point is invalidated to humility later on by some fantastic weaponry Ahadith - which our Shi'ah caller, yet again in all honesty, utterly fails to respond and stutter. The Sheikh presents Surah Al-Fath's verses 1-2 to show, well, hang on Mr, you are saying A'isha and Hafsah made some sins and mistakes, so did Rasool-ul-Allah (God forbid), as in the Quran, Allah states;

لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِن ذَنبِكَ وَمَا تَأَخَّرَ وَيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكَ وَيَهْدِيَكَ صِرَاطًا مُّسْتَقِيمًا {2 

048:002 Khan

:

That Allah may forgive you your sins of the past and the future, and complete His Favour on you, and guide you on the Straight Path;048:002 Maulana

:

That Allah may cover for thee thy (alleged) shortcomings in the past and those to come, and complete his favour to thee and guide thee on a right path,048:002 Pickthal

:

That Allah may forgive thee of thy sin that which is past and that which is to come, and may perfect His favour unto thee, and may guide thee on a right path,048:002 Rashad

:

Whereby GOD forgives your past sins, as well as future sins, and perfects His blessings upon you, and guides you in a straight path.048:002 Sarwar

:

so that God will redeem the sins (which the pagans think you have committed against them) in the past or (you will commit) in the future. He will complete His favors to you, guide you to the right path,048:002 Shakir

:

That Allah may forgive your community their past faults and those to follow and complete His favor to you and keep you on a right way,048:002 Sherali

:

That ALLAH may cover up for thee thy shortcomings, past and future, and that HE may complete HIS favour upon thee on a right path;048:002 Yusufali

:

That Allah may forgive thee thy faults of the past and those to follow; fulfil His favour to thee; and guide thee on the Straight Way;

The Sheikh at this point really highlights the word ذَنبِكَ and tries to bring the attention of the Shi'ah caller here. Though this is marginally out of the context of the debate, we can still shut anyone up, as we are the knowledgeable ones, and try to become even more knowledgeable! Anyhow, I would like you to play the video call further on, and see for yourselves that there was hardly any strong reply to this actually very good claim from a very stupid man, which obviously we will prove stupid after all... 

Regarding this we have several Ahadith in authentic Shi'ah books, with Isnaad (chain of transmission). Let's see;

و ذكر الحديث، إلى أن قال: «و قد قال النبي (صلى الله عليه و آله) لعلي (عليه السلام): يا علي، إن الله تبارك و تعالى حملني ذنوب شيعتك ثم غفرها لي، و ذلك قوله عز و جل: لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ ما تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِكَ وَ ما تَأَخَّرَ».

And mentioned the Hadeeth, until he^asws said: ‘And the Prophet^sawwsaid to Ali^asws : ‘O Ali^asws ! Allah^azwjBlessed and High Burdened me^saww with the sins of your^asws Shias, then Forgave them for me^saww, and these are the Words of the Mighty and Majestic [48:2] That Allah may Forgive you what has preceded from your sins and what is to follow’.[1]

علي بن إبراهيم: حدثنا محمد بن جعفر، قال: حدثنا محمد بن أحمد، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن علي بن النعمان، عن علي بن أيوب، عن عمر بن يزيد بياع السابري، قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله (عليه السلام): قول الله في كتابه: لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ ما تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِكَ وَ ما تَأَخَّرَ، قال: «ما كان له ذنب، و لا هم بذنب، و لكن الله حمله ذنوب شيعته ثم غفرها له».

Ali Bin Ibrahim, from Muhammad Bin Ja’far, from Muhammad Bin Ahmad, from Muhammad Bin Al-Husayn, from Ali Bin Al-No’man, from Ali Bin Ayoub, from Umar Bin Yazeed who said,

‘I said to Abu Abdullah^asws , ‘(What about) the Words of Allah^azwjin His^azwj Book [48:2] That Allah may Forgive you what has preceded from your sins and what is to follow. He^asws said: ‘There was no sin on him^saww, nor was he^sawwwith a sin, but Allah^azwj burdened him^saww with the sins of his^sawwShias, then Forgave them for his^saww sake’.[2]

قال شرف الدين النجفي: و يؤيده ما روي مرفوعا عن أبي الحسن الثالث (عليه السلام): أنه سئل عن قول الله عز و جل: لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ ما تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِكَ وَ ما تَأَخَّرَ، فقال (عليه السلام): و أي ذنب كان لرسول الله (صلى الله عليه و آله) متقدما أو متأخرا؟ و إنما حمله الله ذنوب شيعة علي (عليه السلام)، من مضى منهم و من بقي، ثم غفرها له».

Sharaf Al-Deen Al-Najafi said,

‘And it is supported by what has been reported from Abu Al-Hassan^asws the Third having said about the Words of Allah^azwj Mighty and Majestic [48:2] That Allah may Forgive you what has preceded from your sins and what is to follow, so he^asws said: ‘And which sin was committed by Rasool-Allah^saww, before or after?’But rather, Allah^azwj Burdened him^saww with the sins of the Shias of Ali^asws , from the past among them and the ones who remain, then Forgave them on his^sawwbehalf’.[3]

الطبرسي: روى المفضل بن عمر، عن الصادق (عليه السلام)، قال: سأله رجل، عن هذه الآية، فقال:«و الله ما كان له ذنب، و لكن الله سبحانه ضمن له أن يغفر ذنوب شيعة علي (عليه السلام) ما تقدم من ذنبهم و ما تأخر».

Al-Tabarsy – It has been reported by Al-MufazzAl-Bin Umar,

‘A man asked Al-Sadiq^asws about this Verse, so he^asws said: ‘By Allah^azwj,there was no sin for him^saww, but Allah^azwj the Glorious, Guaranteed him^sawwthat He^azwj would Forgive the sins of the Shias of Ali^asws , whatever had preceded from their sins and whatever is to follow’.[4]

---

[1] علل الشرائع: 173/ 1.

[2] تفسير القمّي 2: 314.

[3] تأويل الآيات 2: 593/ 4.

[4] مجمع البيان 9: 168.  

These serve as a brilliant proof, that Prophet (saws) did not sin, as well as that fact that he is Ma'soom. This is obviously by the Shi'ah perspective, but for those Nawasib, whom degrade Rasool-ul-Allah (saws), there is a place in hell for them... This was a point which our Shi'ah caller seriously struggled on - in all honesty, just saying and reminding the Sheikh of staying on the line and path of the topic isn't enough - you need to debate at any angle if you can. 

But even again, on this point, the Sheikh says that Allah will forgive Prophet's sins, but will Allah forgive the sins of his wives? Especially A'isha, for sure there is the mentioning of Rasool-ul-Allah's so called sins (Belief) forgiven, but will Allah forgive the sin which A'isha done? Come on man, you could have at least shed some light on that!! I would say to our brother Shi'ah caller;

"You're jumping the guns too much..."

The Sheikh even says the wrong chapter number, it's chapter 48 - Surah Al-Fath of Quran, not 49, 49 is Surah Hujraat.

Important concluding point:
I'm highly sorry if someone find my article a bit un-friendly, but hay, Guys! This was the reality which should have been the case in the discussed debate. And to this act of A'isha, there should have been the discussion of some of the actual acts of the Companions, what they did, before converting, what they did after converting to Islam (especially secretly under the watchful eye of Prophet Muhammed), what they did after Rasool-ul-Allah (saws) died, and what were their moral characteristics in regards to inspiration and ethics. For example, when you study the life of Umer ibn-Al-Kahattab, there were several cases, where he said some absolute rubbish, where he killed the daughter of the Prophet, where he and his friend Abu Bakr didn't do justice with Fatima Zahra (sa) in regards of Fadak... And much more... I believe this was an issue leading to many more, and probably the biggest one of this issues would have been the Fadak matter, where Fatima Zahra (sa) denied here property... 

We can all learn from what we did not know - Mao Tse Tsung       

David Wood - just another puppet in the 21st century.

Salaam dear viewers...

Recently on You-Tube I've been watching some videos of this man called David Wood. His speeches and debates are widely known around the world, and through one of his encounters, we are told that he has converted one Muslim during his lifetime too - as far as I'm sure. He's been like a virus spreading on the computers, and absolutely brainwashing people with his stupendous Muslim resources references.

He appears on the show Jesus or Muhammad? regularly with his guests and a host who knows nothing but to accept the phone calls of Sunnis! It's the God Damn truth guys! David Wood (below center) has his own blog called http://www.answeringmuslims.com/ and has his articles and views also published on http://www.answering-islam.org/ web too. 

Through out his speeches and shows, there is one thing which I really want to know, has this man ever had a debate with a Shia Scholar's perspective of looking Islam? And as far as I know, NO! Continuously throughout his debates, he refers to Bukhari and Muslim, and fools the Muslims (Sunni by the way) easily with strong references that Rasool-ul-Allah (God forbid) was a pedophile, child raper and so forth.

Therefore, dear viewers, there are 2 things which we can conclude here,
a) Sunni resources tell us straight on how rude they are to the Prophet of Allah (swt)
b) And I insha'allah have taken a step against them, and are preparing articles in reply to them.

Dear viewers, I will ensure you some strong proofs regarding my perspective of Islam, and will tell the world - how strong a religion Islam is! And by religion Islam, I mean Shia Islam of course. Just be patient dear viewers, just be patient...

Raees Mustafa  

Imam Hussain (as)'s blood was everywhere...

Brief signs of Imam Hussain (as) displayed by naturalisation.

Article By: Raees Mustafa

Introduction;

Assalamu Alaykum – Dear brothers, 10^th Muharram is a poisonous day for a disbeliever, and he wants to do anything he can, to make the day of mourning of a believer, be dreadful. Though really, I don't get it, when some Shias do perform this, they end up (God forbid) being attacked by Lunatics, by Infidels. What they don't understand is that they should start bombing or attacking per the history recently, to such natural objects, which are hard to even explain how they are doing this, and even harder, why should we do this or that to them.

Don't get confused, I'm like it, in other words, the worlds of Allah mourn for Imam Hussain (as), the natural sources cry and weep for Imam Hussain (as) and so does the Prophet (saws), try calling him (saws) an infidel huh? They wont, because this will automatically enable them to become one! Just to shorten it up, my 8^th article discusses nothing but questions to be asked and questions to be answered, I hope you find the article informative.

Who else cried for Hussain (as) other than Shias?

Al-Bidayah Wal-Nihayah, Vol. 2 – Book written by Al-Hafidh Imadul-Deen Abil Fidaa Ismaeel ibn Umer ibn Katheer Al-Qurashi Al-Damishqi (who dies approximately around 773 A.H). This particular book which I'm referring to you is investigated by Dr. Abdullah Abdul Muhsin At-Turki. A'lam Al-Kutub Institution for copying and publishing. As mentioned, in Vol. 2, p 573 of this particular publication, we read;

“Qaalal Imam Ahmed: Hadathanaa Abdur-Rahman wa Affaan, Hadathanaa Hammaad ibn-Salama, An Ammar ibn Abi Ammar, An Ibn Abbase Qaala: Ra'aytun-Nabee (s) Fil Manaam Bi Nasfin-Nahaar. Ash'asa Aghbar. Ma'ahoo Qaaroorah Fee-haa Damun, Faqulto: Be Abee Anta wa Ummee Yaa Rasool-ul-Allah, Maa Haadha? Qaala: Haadha Dam-ul-Hussaine wa Ashaabeyhee. Lam Azal Al-Taqitohoo Munzul Youm. Qaala Amaar: Fa Ahsaynaa Dhaalika-al-Youm, Fawajadnaahoo Qad Qotila Fee Dhaalika-al Youm.”

Isnaado-hoo Qawiyun! “And Imam Ahmed said: Abdurahman and Affan told us, Hammad ibn Salama reported from Ammar ibn Abi Ammar, who reported from Ibn Abbas, who said: I saw the Prophet (saws) in my dream during mid-day. He was dusty and dishevelled and he was holding a bottle of blood. I said: Let my mother and father be sacrificed for you 'O Messenger of Allah, what is this? He (Prophet) said: This is the blood of Hussain and his companions. This is the blood of Hussain and his companions. I have been collecting it since today. Ammar said: We memorised that day and then we found that he (Hussain) was killed on the same date.” The chain of narration is strong!

The Prophet (saws) is seen in the middle of a day, in the land of Hejaz, carrying a bottle of blood. What is the chance you'll everyone, see a report, so fascinating as this one, containing the witnessing of the Messenger of Allah (saws) in someone's dream? And there would be a lot of accusations upon that Hadeeth being fabricated too, as per some Scholars. But I guess, whom on earth is here an Alim bigger than Ibn Katheer in this modern time, to argue Ibn Katheer on his recording of this report in Al-Nihaya? Just have a look at what Prophet (saws) said, this is the blood of Hussein and his companions! So Rasool-ul-Allah is giving special importance to not only Imam Hussain (as)'s bloodshed, but also his noble companions too! To those who think companions are the ones to only have lived during the lifetime of Prophet (saws) are wrong! These are what you call Companions mate!

But hang on, let's ask a question, what is Prophet (saws) doing in the middle of the day collecting blood, moreover, this isn't making any sense at all to me, how does Prophet (saws) know Hussain (as)'s death info? Well, let's begin by answering the last question first, Prophet (saws) knows everything, he is the master of the world, and is the greatest human being ever, he knows what happened and what didn't happen! Secondly, moving on, Prophet (saws) through the submission of the hadeeth, is on the day of Hussain (as)'s death date, this is 10^th Muharram, and after the dream was seen, calculations were done regarding Prophet (saws) coming into the dream, and they figured out that Imam Hussain (as) died.

This goes to show the magnificence of the day of Ashoora, and the fact that how Prophet (saws) also commemorates and mourns over the death of his beloved grandson Imam Hussain (as).

We read in the Musnad of Imam Al-Humble, Vol. 4, investigated by Sho'aib Al-Arna'oot and Adil Murshid. Vol. 4, p 59 – the thing which I'm going to report to you is repeated on page 336 as well. We read;

An Ibn Abbase Qaala: Ra'aytun-Nabee (s) Fil Manaam Bi Nasfin-Nahaar. Ash'asa Aghbar. Ma'ahoo Qaaroorah Fee-haa Damun Yal-Taqitohoo Aou Yatatabahoo fee haa Shay'an. Qala: Qulto Ya Rasool-ul-Allah Maa Haadha? Haadha Damun Hussaine wa Ashabeyhee Lam Azal Al-Taqitohoo Munzul Youm. Qaala Amaar: Fa Ahsaynaa Dhaalika-al-Youm, Fawajadnaahoo Qad Qotila Fee Dhaalika-al Youm.”

Isnaadohoo Qawiyun Alaa Sharte Muslim. From Ibn Abbas: I saw the Prophet (saws) in my dream during the mid-day and he was dishevelled and dusty. He was holding a bottle which contained the blood, or he was collecting something. I said: O Messenger of Allah, what is this? He replied: The blood of Hussain and his companions, and I have been collecting it since day-time. Ammar said: We memorized this day, and we found out that he (Imam Hussain) was killed on that day. The Chain of narration is strong according to the conditions of Muslim.

Quiet amazing isn't it, it's worth mentioning what Sho'aib Al-Arna'oot said regarding its chain of narration further;

At-Tabarani narrated this in Hadeeth No. 2822 and 12837, Al-Hakim Al-Nisapouri narrated it in Mustadrak Vol. 4, p 397-398 from Hammad ibn Salama with this chain. Al-Hakim further authenticated it according to the conditions also set by Muslim, and Al-Dhahabi agreed with them too.

The Prophet (saws) on the day of Ashoora is collecting the blood of Imam Hussain (as), if you see this somewhat from an understanding angle, it's shocking that Hussain (as) is already dead, yet Rasool-ul-Allah is doing something mentally and physically impossible. We should remember, that this is within the dream, and within the dream Prophet of the earth comes down from Heaven, what is supposed, to collect the blood of Hussain, to mourn over Hussain, what did you do last Ashoora? Or for the year before, or even before? Whatever you did, I hope you followed the Sunnah, by collecting or shedding at least some tears compared to the act of Prophet (saws).

Now let's refer to another book, Majma Az-Zawa'id wa Manba'Al-Fawa'id, written by Al-Haythami al-Misri (807 A.H). Narration No. 15159, it states: The narration is;

Wa An-iz-Zuhri Qaala: Qaala Abdul Malik: Ayo Waahidin Anta in A'lamtanee, Aya Alaamatin Kaanat youma qatlal Hussain. Faqaala Qulto: Lam Turfa' Hasaatun Bey Bayt-il-Maqdis. Illa wojida Dahtahaa damun Abeet.

Arwaa'a hut-Tabarani wa Rijaalohoo Thiqaat. From Az-Zuhri wo said: Adul Malik said: What a person (great person) you are if you told me what sign there was on the day Hussain was killed. I said: There was not a single stone that was lifted at Bayt-ul-Muqqadas unless they found blood flowing underneath it. At-Tabarani narrated this and mentioned the narrators to be trustworthy.

This is a cosmological debate which needs understanding, look at the relation between the blood of Hussain (as) and the bleeding of the stones in Bayt-ul-Muqqadas. This tells us a spiritual motion of God in play, this tells us the magnificence of Hussain (as) rather, that even when Hussain (as) was many a mile away, the stones wept and knowing he was butchered in the land of Karbala by Yazidi Shias! Let's go onto the narration No. 15160;

Wa Aniz-Zuhri, Qaala: Maa rofi'a Bi-Shaamey Hajarun Youma Qatl-e-Al-Hussain ibn Ali, Illa Andam.

Wa-Arwaahu-Tabarani Rijaalohoo Rijal As-Saheeh From Az-Zuhri who said: No stone was lifted on the day Hussain Ibn Ali was killed, except, they found blood underneath it. Narrated by At-Tabarani and the narrators are the narrators of Saheeh (i.e. Saheeh Bukhari and Muslim).

So from another narration from Az-Zuhri, we find that not only stones at Bayt-al-Muqadas were bleeding tears for Hussain (as), no! There were all stones, to which there was a naturally established fact by God, to weep blood over Hussain (as)! If stones can do, why can't your hearts, the quran addresses to people whom have stone hearts, to follow Allah and his way, following Allah means completing, doing and fulfilling every aspect of his command, if stones can weep, why can't those even with the stone hearts?

As mentioned before, this is cosmological view, and a disturbing phase for those, whom don't like to hear the truth. It is I'm afraid, how the world is sometimes run...

And let's site yet another narration shall we, Hadeeth No. 15161, we read;

Qaala: Lamma Qotilal Hussain Ibn Ali, In-kasafat-As-Shams Kasfatan Hattaa Badat-al-Kawaakibo Nasfan-Nahaar. Hattaa Zanannaa Anna haa hiya.

When Hussain ibn Ali was killed, the sun eclipsed, and other planets appeared in the mid-day. Until we thought that was it! (Day of Judgement).

What is this? You may ask, and rightly so, when truth was in the so called hibernation under the pits of ignorance. At least that is what when you come over conclusions like these, that the murder of Hussain was bad, incredibly bad, veraciously bad! And Hussain (as) himself was unbelievably good! Incredibly good, spectacularly awesome! The planets appeared dear viewers, the planets! They came to mourn, the whole system is changing, since when did you see all the planets come at the same time, and mourn over Hussain (as)!

Really, we can go on and on, commenting on this with great logic, but really, it's up to you now to decide, which option is the best, sit down on the 10^th Muharram, and see out of your window Shias mourning, and start to curse them, or go out there by yourself, and mourn like what planets and stones did, at least they know something...

Meanwhile, as usual;

O Allah, forgive us all, for our bad sins.

How the Prophet cursed Banu Ummayah and their people!

___________________

How the Prophet cursed Banu Ummayah and their people!

Article By: Raees Mustafa

Introduction:

Assalamu Alaykum

Dear readers, this, by the graciousness of Allah, is my 6^th successful article published, through sincere hard work, and research, not for the cause of mentioning upon grabbing attention, or showing off, of course not, I don't believe in that, and neither do believe in what the sons and the daughters of followers of Banu Ummayah did, done and are doing, for their Islam. It's a pleasure to be at the service of our 12^th Imam, and guide people, or show the path of Mukhlasin.

In this article, we go through the undiscovered, and the sank, disappeared Sunnah of the Prophet, which was cursing Banu Ummayah, Marwaan Ibn Hakam (especially) and their generation. The so called Sunnis, try to perform the Sunnah of the Prophet, right? But don't always match up to the reality, and neither do they every want to.

Sunni books are specified in this piece of text, which examine, how and exactly when the Prophet of Islam, Muhammed (saws) cursed this clan. And upon for what reasons, are they hated by Shia's! I hope you enjoy the article. There are questions to be asked, and questions to be... answered!

بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ

Kind Regards

Raees Mustafa

Banu Ummayah hated the names of AhlulBayt Imams and especially “Ali”

Siyaral A'lam al-Nubala written by Imam Dhahabi, states in Vol. 5, p 101, of the book published fro Al-Risala institution. Biography number is 35 – Ulay bin Rabah;

Imam Dhabai states: He is a trustworthy Imam. Abu Musa al-Lakhmi al-Misri heard narrations from Amr ibn Al-Aas and he heard from Uqba ibn Amir and he from Abi Qatada al-Ansari, and he from Abdullah ibn Umer and he from group of companions.

Then he goes on to state on page 102:

...And he is from the greatest Scholars of Tabi'een. Abu Abdurahman Al-Murqi said whenever the Banu Ummayah would hear that a new born baby was named Ali, they would kill him!

Right, Banu Ummayah would kill the person for not being a follower of Ali, but for just having the name Ali! What hate, is this what Banu Ummayah are respected for? This is what Imam Dhahabi has mentioned in his book, Siyar A'lam, a highly well known publication. We further read on the same page of the book:

So when this reached (the news of murder of anyone who's name was even Ali), Rabah (father of Ulay) changed his name from Ali to “Ulay”.

Do you see the name connectivity between “Ali” and “Ulay”? There is some mess up in the name as it shows.

Siyar A'laam Al-Nubala, Vol. 10, p 400 – Biography of Allama Al-Hafidh Al-Sadiq Abul-Hassan Al-Madaa'ini. The book states about him:

He came to Baghdad and put a classification and he was very good in biographies, battle stories and lineages of Arab tales. He was honest in what he said with a high (saheeh – authentic) chain of narration.

Now let's turn to page 402:

Al-Madaa'ini narrated that he entered upon Ma'moon and mentioned to him the narrations about Ali. So he (Ma'moon) cursed Banu Ummayah. Al-Muthana ibn Abdillah Al-Ansari said: I was in Shaam (Syria) and I never heard the names Ali nor Hassan. But rather all I heard was Mu'awiah and Yazeed and Al-Waleed.

Banu Ummayah wanted to erase even the name of Ali, forget the followers, the names of Ali, Hassan and Hussain (likewise of the AhlulBayt). Is this what Banu Ummayah and their clan is so well known and respected for? They wanted to remove this name from the Islamic history, society and never let this name be alive! What was Imam Ali (as)'s (in particular) fault, with his sons and family? Just because they followed Prophet Muhammed (saws). That's all, though we encounter something else too;

Same book: Siyar A'lam Al-Nubala Vol. 10, p 402 (same page, but further historical info below) – Al-Madaa'ini further narrates;

Then I went past a man standing at his door, who ordered his son (Hassan) to fetch him water. I said: You named him Hassan?

So he said: My children are called Hassan and Hussain and Ja'far, because the people of Shaam (Syria) name their children after the Caliphs of Allah.

And then the man cursed his son.

So I said: I thought you were the best from among the people of Shaam (Syria), but I realised there will be nobody who is worse than you Hell fire!

So Ma'mun said: Never mind, that is why Allah curses their alive and dead people. He meant the Nawasib!

MY GOD!

They used to name their sons Hassan, Hussain and Ja'far etc... so they could curse them! And guess what, that same Sunni Alim in his well known Sunni book says the narration from Madaa'ini, mentioning “Caliphs of Allah”! We over here have come across another huge point everyone, Hassan, Hussain, Ali and further Masoomeen of Shia sect, are the Caliphs of Allah! And the one who goes against the Caliphs of Allah is not a Muslim!

What truth! Is this what Islam teaches us? No, but Kufr, the ultimate enemy of Islam, these people are of the lineage of Pagans dear readers, Mu'awiah, and Banu Ummayah, they still had a stitch of idol worshipping within them, and never ever really submitted their will to Allah and his Prophet's religion truly! Never ever! And that's what the big bearded illiterates wont teach you!

If the Banu Ummayah was so bad, and against the Prophet and Allah, how comes the Prophet never said anything bad about them? Well, let's see what the Prophet had said about such a clan of Ummayah!

The Prophet cursing Banu Ummayah!

Al-Matalib Al-Aaliya Biz'a'waa'id al-Masaaneed al-Thamaaniya - an incredibly well known book written by Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani. Vol. 18, p 257 of the book states:

And just have a look at this title of the chapter everyone, it's not me saying what I want to, but it's:

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

it's

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

it's

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

Yes, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani dear readers, one of the head clans of Banu Ummayah! Not me quoting this on my Eiman's behalf, but Ibn Hajar himself. Let's see, what he has just named the title of the chapter in Vol. 18, p 257:

Chapter of Rasullulah cursing al-Hakam ibn Abil-Aas and his sons and Banu Ummayah!

Amazing! The title tells us everything about what the chapter is based upon! I'm repeating again, this isn't me saying this, but Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani!

Who is Prophet Muhammed (saws) cursing? It's

• Banu Ummayah
• Marwaan Ibn Hakam
• And the progeny of Banu Ummayah!

Prophet Muhamed (sas) is cursing, why can't we? It's a question to be asked and a question to be answered!

We read a few pages further in the same book, same volume at Hadith No. 4455;

It's related from Abi Yahya, who said: I was with al-Hassan and al-Hussain, and Marwaan cursed Al-Hussain!

Dear readers, I'm saying this over and over, it's not me saying this, but Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani, the chief head of Banu Ummayah! What did he say, he writes in his book a narration from Abi Yahya, whom narrates that Marwaan cursed Al-Hussain! Those who say Marwaan was good and a fine companion, is found cursing Al-Imam Al-Hussain (as), for whom the Prophet (saws) has been mentioned saying through some reporters;

Al-Naysaboorie quoted abu-Hazim and abu-Hurayra as saying: “ I saw the Messenger carrying al-Husayn son of ‘Alee and saying, “ O Allah, I love him, so love him”.References:

Al-Hakim described this Hadith’s ascription as credible but both of them did not publicize it, Mostadrak al-Saheehayn Ch.3 p.185. The same hadith was narrated mentioning al-Hasan instead; both are found, Mostadrak al-Saheehayn Ch.3 p.195.

Amazing, whom Allah and the Prophet love, someone else is cursing him! Are you telling me through the analyses of your faith, that Marwaan, and Banu Ummayah's untold stories are better and have more value that Allah and the Prophet's laid foundational Deen (religion)? If you are, I'm sorry to label you as an infidel! Marwaan, whom Sunnis portray as a great Caliph, and a companion of the Prophet, is cursing someone whom upon we read:

Al-Hakim ascribed this Hadith to abu-Horayra: “ The Prophet came out to us with al-Hasan and al-Husayn on his shoulders, kissing them alternatively until he came to the point where we were standing; a man then said, “ O Messenger of God, do you love them? He replied, “ Yes, whosoever loves them has loved me and whosoever hates them has hated me”.References:

Mostadrak al-Saheehayn Ch.3 p.182/Al-Bidaya Wa al-Nihaya Ch.8 p.35, 205.

So Marwaan therefore hates Prophet Muhammed (saws), as he hates Imam Hussain (as)! And this isn't me saying dear readers, it's

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

We further read dear readers: (same Hadith Number)

Marwaan said: Let the AhlulBayt be cursed! So Al-Hussain got angry and said: Are you cursing the AhlulBayt? For By Allah, Prophet of Allah cursed you while you were in your father's loins!

Imam Hussain (as) dear readers is saying that Prophet Muhammed (saws) cursed whom? Marwaan whilst he was in his father's loins! So Prophet Muhammed (saws) knew what kind of a person this man was, and what he will be! These are questions to be asked, and questions to be answered dear viewers!

The investigator of this book is Abdul-Qadir Abd-il-Aziz jawandal, who says:

This Hadeeth is Saheeh, as per the narrators within this chain of narration, are all trustworthy and authentic! And this has been mentioned by

• Al Haythami
• Busairi
• And is written by Abu Yo'la
• Ibn Katheer

etc...

Dear viewers, what else would you want? These are questions to be asked, and questions to be answered!... (I just love saying that).

“Swear to God that Prophet cursed Banu Ummayah” - Yes, somone did swear to God;

We read in Tareekh-ul-Islam wa Wafiat Al-Mashaheer wal-A'laam by Imam Dhahabi. Book edited by Br Bashar Awaad Ma'roof Al-Gharb Al-Islami Institution. The one which I'm referring to you is from the 3^rd Edition published in 2003. In Vol. 2, page 200 of this book, we read:

Al-Shay'bi said: I heard Ibn Zubair say: I swear by Lord of this house (Ka'ba), that verily Al-Hakam ibn Abil-Aas and his sons are cursed by the tongue of Prophet Muhammed (saws)!

Pay close attention to the footnote of this hadeeth, Dhahabi says it is Saheeh, all the narrators in this chain are authentic! Dear readers, that was a brief covering of the greatest era, as primarily due to the fact that Prophet Muhammed (saws) lived in it, and that Prophet of Allah, cursed Marwaan Ibn Hakam from his own tongue, and also Banu Ummayah and their sons! He cursed the most evil clan in Hejaz, if not, the world! He cursed what deserved to be. Another question arriving is that Banu Ummayah included Mu'awiah, and in the previous articles I published (which you can get the link from below), have examined his character, and clearly have stated (the books of Ahl-e-Sunnah), what kind of a person he was, and Prophet (saws) even went on to order his killing if he is seen upon my pulpit!

There are thousands of ore evidences for Mu'awiah and Banu Ummayah's character examination providing the family of Kufr. In fact, we even have some ahadith, which claim Mu'awiah being announced as the enemy of Islam, by Prophet Muhammed (saws) himself. And I don't see why conversion to a different faith seems a good idea after all.

As mentioned, my intention isn't to harm any view of any faith with rude, stupid and a foolish way, but in fact guide and bring people to the path of Mukhlasin and provide even more info of the religion, so pagans aren't existing tampering it.

2 sentenced Conclusion:

O Allah, forgive us all for our bad sins...

__________________________________Can you “actually” Handle the truth?

Link to Mu'awiah's hate for Ali: http://www.scribd.com/doc/138842239/Mu-Awiah-s-Hate-for-Ali

Link to Mu'awiah and some more devastating facts you didn't know: http://www.scribd.com/doc/139718487/Mu-awiah-and-some-more-devastating-facts

Karbala before Imam Hussain (as)'s touch.

Karbala and Hussain before meeting tragedy.

Article By: Raees Mustafa

Introduction

Assalmu Alaykum

Dear readers, this is my 7^th successful article published thanks to the almighty grace of Allah (swt). It's all because of him we win everything, and it's because of him, we see the finishing line through our defeats. Though one defeat and win which has bamboozled us this concept of Karbala, which we Muslims have adopted. Some regard Karbala as absolute blasphemy, whereas some mention it to be suitable cause for the health and the life of Islam. Existence and love is only a trailer through the sacrifice of Imam Hussain (as).

And that sacrifice is analysed here in this article, we here discuss and examine the history, upon what before Karbala had gone through. As in what did the Prophet (saws) talk about it? Was there any knowledge to him upon Allah's submission of such a futur upon his love Hussain (as)?

This article is quite lengthy, and even went to a thought of turning it into a book. But merely, regarding today, not much is understood except hate with just a glance. Therefore I hope, through this article, we'll see lost Sunnah of the Prophet (saws). And the glamorous Shine of Hussain (as), through the revelation of special Angels!

I hope you find the article informing, and educating. Any comment or question is welcomed, I'm up for a debate, you can contact me through 2 blogs, but I'd rather really prefer you from contacting me via http://exposingthesalaf.blogspot.co.uk/. Or if you have any enquiry or debate to instruct quickly! You can email me direct here at;

raees.mustafa@gmail.com

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful (1) 

Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, (2) The Beneficent, the Merciful. (3) Owner of the Day of Judgment, (4) Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help. (5) Show us the straight path, (6) The path of those whom Thou hast favoured. Not (the path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray. (7)

Keywords to note and know;

Saheeh – meaning Authentic. - It can either be used to define a personality's character or the status of Ahadith.

Hassan – meaning Good. - Again, this can either be referred to a personality's reliability, character, or Ahadith.

Thiqah – meaning Reliable. - Yet again, a person can be reliable upon the fact that he is saying the truth with its application upon Ahadith too.

Mutawatir – meaning Strong. - Mutawatir is at the highest level of grading upon any Hadith's status or any personality's reliability and character.

Qawiyun – meaning Strong. - It doesn't differ much from Mutawatir, except for the fact that this word is normally associated outside the usage examining a narrator or Ahadith.

Da'eef – meaning Weak. Coming from above, a narrator can be weak, and so can be a narration. Therefore its reliability is very low.

Kafir – meaning an Infidel. Kuffar is the plurality of Infidels. And Kufr means Infidelity.

Shirkh – meaning an act of such disobedience, where almighty God's power, will, command and everything to do with him and him only, is applied of some kind or some way upon other than Allah.

Ibn/bin – means Son. So if it is written (for example) Ibn/bin Muhammed – it means the Son of Muhammed. And if it is after a name like Muhammed Ibn/bin Abdullah – it means Muhammed the son of Abdullah

Ahadith – meaning Narrations. Hadith – meaning a Narration.

Mustahab – meaning Recommended.

Sunnah – meaning adhering of Prophet Muhammed (saws)'s holy acts, commands and following them.

Karbala – Land upon which Imam Hussain (as) was killed.

Jibreel – Angel Gabriel.

Trubah – Piece of soil, or mud.

Ulama – meaning Scholars. Alim – meaning a Scholar.

Ummah – meaning a Nation.

Bid'ah – meaning Innovation. Just to note, the exact translation of Innovators in Arabic would be Bid'ati.

Allama – meaning a person knowledgeable in practically all fields of knowledge.

References as usual...

Ibn Taymiyyah in his book, Minhaj-As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyah, verified by Muhammed Rashad Salim, second edition of this book. Vol. 3, p 70 states:

It is well known that Umer Ibn Saa'ad was the leader of the military detachment, that killed Imam Hussain. Even though he was wrong, and his preference of this world over the religion, his sin was not as bad as Mukhtar ibn Abi Ubayd who (later) rose to get revenge for Hussain.

Have a look at this man saying: It is well known that Umer Ibn Saa'ad was the leader of the military detachment – What military detachment, was Imam Hussain (as) killed by an army of 1000s or just a few 100s? Ibn Taymiyyah is trying to hide the auspiciousness of the crime, by degrading the issue of discussing the amount of people going to kill Imam Hussain (as).

And then he goes on to state: Even though he was wrong, and his preference of this world over the religion, his sin was not as bad as Mukhtar ibn Abi Ubayd who (later) rose to get revenge for Hussain. This is absolute lunacy from this man. Talk of common sense, even that is lacking, for someone who takes the revenge, of a righteous person being killed, how does he become bad, and even worse than the killer of the person killed at the first place – Imam Hussain (as)?

Use your common sense, if Imam Hussain (as) is killed, then that means his killer is bad, isn't it? Then if someone avenges the killers, isn't he supposed to be good, as in reality, he has fought the ones whom Imam Hussain (as) was fighting? Of course he is! Over here we read that Imam Hussain (as)'s killer is Umer Ibn Saa'ad, and he is addressed with this title by Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah himself!

Book: Fadha'il-As-Sahaba, written by Ahmed Ibn Hambal, this particular version is verified by Wasi ul-Allah ibn Muhammed Abbas – who is a teacher at the Ummul Qura University in Mecca tul-Makramah. This version of the book which I'm referring to you is of the 3^rd Edition, from Dar Al-Ibn Jawzi – who published this particular book in 1426 A.H. Vol. 2, p 965, in Hadith No. 1357, we read;

Abdullah narrated from his fathers, (list of narrators is long) from A'isha and Umme Salama who said that: (Wakee said: I can't remember which one narrated this, whether it's A'isha or Umme Salama, but it's either one of them) – Prophet (saws) said: An angel that has never visited me before, came into this house today. It told me: This son of yours Hussain, will be killed. If you wish, I can give you some soil of that Earth which he will die upon. He (angel) then brought me some soil, which was red.

Dear readers, is there any excuse to refuse to discuss such a dramatically spiritual moment in life of Prophet Muhammed (saws)? Even what if the Prophet himself requests for the soil, upon his Hussain's martyrdom. How can this be true when the so called Sunni doesn't also derive upon that wanting of the soil, or at least, wishing to go and get that soil of Karbala? Prophet Muhammed (saws) is asking for the soil, on which his son Hussain (as per the narration in the book and the event), would be martyred. And when that soil was brought, it was red! Is there any reason why it was red than the fact that only bloodshed was a happening there? This is rhetorician at its very peak!

Dear readers, this is the news, which an angel brought, not a Muslim living on the planet! If an angel comes to give such a great news, how comes we don't greet and mourn for Imam Hussain (as), as per the asking, and emotions shown in this narration of Prophet Muhammed (saws)?

And just have a look at what the footnote says: Saheeh – Authentic!

It's not Hassan (Good), neither is it Thiqah - Reliable, but true and authentic! Is there any reason why we should still argue?

The verifier of this book says: he (Ahmed Ibn Hambal) has brought this Hadith in his Musnad, and also Haythami in Majma Az-Zawa'id – and has said: Ahmed has narrated this Hadith, and its narrators are true and Saheeh.

The verifier further writes on the same page of the book:

At-Tabarani has brought this Hadith from A'isha, and Ahmed has mentioned it. And in Majma Az-Zawa'id it is mentioned: Ahmed has narrated this, Abu Ya'laa and Bazzar state that all the narrators are Thiqah!

Musnad Abu Ya'laa Mowsili, By Imam Hafiz Ibn Tameemi, Ahadith verified by Hussain Saleem Asad. The type of book which I'm referring to you is from the first Edition, which was published in 1430 A.H. In Vol. 1, p 298, Hadith 363 - it's written:

Abdullah Ibn Nujjay, who heard from his father that he went with Ali, and faced Naynawwah, since they were going to the battle of Siffeen (against Mu'awiah). Then Ali called out: Have patience Oh Abu Abdullah! Have patience Abu Abdullah on the Banks of Euphrates. I asked Ali: What and who do you mean by “Abu Abdullah”? He (Ali) then said: I went into the room with the Prophet (saws) one day, and saw his eyes were gushing with tears. I then asked the Prophet (saws): Oh Prophet! Did someone anger you? What makes your eyes gush with tears? He (Prophet ~saws~) said: No, Jibreel (Angel Gabriel) just left me now, and informed me that Hussain will be killed on the Banks of Euphrates river. Gibreel then asked: Shall I let you smell the soil upon which he will die? I said yes! So he (Jibreel) then extended his hand, took a handful of the soil and gave it to me. And then I couldn't control my eyes from further gushing of tears.

The verifier of the Hadith says it is Hassan. The chain of narrators are good - Hassan! He (verifier) further comments: Haythami has mentioned this in Majma Az-Zawa'id. As well as Ahmed in his Musnad with Abu Ya'laa, Bazzar and Tabarani. And the narrators of this Hadith are Thiqah.

Amazing, Prophet Muhammed (saws) was informed long ago the killing of Hussain! And inquired to have some of the soil of the land upon which Hussain would die, to be smelt and loved! If Imam Hussain (as) was on the evil side, I ask the big bearded Alim like the one you see to explain why Prophet was crying upon a person, whom actually was mislead? According to Sheikh Abdul Azeez Al-Sheikh, we come to know that he has famously, and publicly mentioned, that Yazid, was in his rights to kill Imam Hussain (as), and Hussain (as) was mislead – these are the sincere words of the Sheikh of Saudi Arab. I ask him and his follower upon the fact that if Imam Hussain (as) was on the wrong path, and was mislead, what is the need for Prophet (saws) to gush tears for? Is it for Yazid or Hussain? If it was for Yazid, then I can vouch my life upon the statement that I will quit my religion! Because the book states, the history states, that Prophet (saws)'s grandson Hussain was martyred upon Karbala, not Yazid, Hussain (as) was oppressed, not Yazid!

Sunni say they follow the Sunnah, henceforth call themselves “Sunnis” - people whom follow the Sunnah. I'm sorry, am I mistaken to hear that you don't complete and follow the Sunnah of the Prophet upon crying and shedding tears for Hussain? Do you even know of this Sunnah or not? Do you even follow the Prophet correctly, because as far as I know, Sunnis follow the Sunnah, but this Sunnah has been left out in the hate of Hussain (accordingly to some people), and has been dismissed by lunatics when not having enough knowledge upon this and for some people (like the one you see below), it's just the case of complete infidelity (Kufr), whom claim that it's totally fine to call out the slogans in the Summer of 2009 in Pakistan (if I'm not mistaken upon the date);

Ali Mu'awiah Bhai Bhai, Shahadat Ya Hussain Murdabaad

Translation: Ali and Mu'awiah brothers, Martyrdom of Hussain useless, cursed and bad!

Molana Fazlur-Rahman, Secretary General of JUI.

It makes us cry dear readers, that why the Ummah of Prophet (saws) had betrayed Hussain and left him butchered in Karbala, these people and their ancestors did play a role in that, and are also doing it now! Fie upon such people, and Fie upon the killers of Hussain!

The Verifier further explains: Naynawaah was a village of Prophet Yunus (as) in Mosul – Iraq.

___________________________________________________

Abu Abdullah is the Kuniyat of Imam Hussain (as). Meaning, the father of Abdullah.

Another referred book dear viewers is the same of source, Musnad of Abu Ya'laa, edition along with the publications and the verifier, are the very same, from which you can read above. In Vol. 6, p 129, Hadith No. 3402.

Narrated from Anas Ibn Malik: The Angel of rain asked his Lord's permission to visit the Prophet (saws).

Before, we go anywhere, let's see what Anas has to say of a man in the chain of this narrators;

Of Course – just to let you know the chain of narrators include Imarah Ibn Zathaan -

Anyway, continuing with the above Hadith:

Allah gave permission to the Angel, to visit Prophet (saws). And this day, he was with Umme Salama, the mother of the believers, the Prophet said: Guard the door, don't let anyone come in. He said: While She (Umme Salama) was at the door, Hussain Ibn Ali burst into the room, so the Prophet (saws) began to hug him and kiss him. The Angel then said: Do you love him? He (Prophet ~saws~) said: Yes. The Angle then further proclaimed: Your nation will kill him! He (Angel) said: If you wish, I will show you the place in which they will kill him. He (Prophet ~saws~) said: Yes! Of course! So he (Angel) took a handful of soil from the place in which he would be killed and showed it to the Prophet (saws). And when the soil was shown to the Prophet by the Angel, it was Sahla (Red soil).

Look at Ibn Taymiyyah address this issue fairly lightly with the words: Military detachment will kill him, instead, we see an Angel of rain say to the Prophet that his nation would kill him. Is the nation of the Prophet a small detachment of some kind or what?

Look at him manipulate the wordings, look at him destroy the minds of innocents all over the world, as well as of course, brain washing even his own men with invalidity!

The verifier further commentates: In Musnad of Ahmed ibn Hambal, it says “he struck his hand out and brought red sand.”

Nonetheless, we still continue with the Hadith from above: Umme Salama took it, and collected it all over her clothes.

I don't know why dear readers, if Umme Salama, can cry and preserve such depth of humility for just the soil upon the killing of Hussain, why can't we develop that habit and structure of organising ourselves to be in the favour of Imam Hussain (as)? This is utter lunacy, and sheer determination, to uproot Islam. Though it is impossible, we do have failing attempts, which do rather look a bit frightening, and these Ahadith show, why some people don't like the truth!

Those ignorants, whom say, that this is absolute Bid'ah, innovation, to keep soil of whatsoever kind upon you, I want to ask them just one simple question, then that certainly means, Prophet's wife, Umme Salama (Ummul Mo'mineen), is doing Shirkh or even Bid'ah! I ask, if this was innovation, why didn't Prophet (saws) stop here from performing this? Not only that, but why did Prophet (saws) himself wish to acquire some soil, and preserve it and weep upon it? Then call Prophet (saws) an innovator!

These I'm afraid are allegations, and attempts to ruin the Sunnah of the Prophet (saws) to degrade the value of Islam, and most importantly Imam Hussain (as), but this will never ever happen, as long as Mahdi is our saviour, and as long as Allah is our Lord!

Thabit says: We would say that this soil, which Umme Salama preserved and Prophet (saws) wanted to smell, was of Karbala.

The Verifier says: The chain of narrators are Good - Hassan (for the second footnote). Ahmed has narrated this, so has Abu Na'eem in “Dalail al-Nubuwwah”. Ahmed has narrated it with 2 chains. Whereas Haythami has mentioned it in Majma Az-Zawa'id, concluding: Ahmed has narrated and Abu Ya'laa. Further people mentioning are: Bazzar, and Tabarani, with chains including Imarah Ibn Zathaan, and a group of Scholars, have deemed him to be Thiqah - trustworthy.

Because the verifier mentions Imarah bin Zathaan as weak, there are still other great Scholars, whom complete go against that:

Abu Ya'laa says all the narrators are Saheeh! Not just one man, but in fact all!

To confirm its authenticity, let's see what Musnad of Ahmed Ibn Hambal holds for us, the writer of this particular book which I'm referring to you is from Imam Hambal (of course), who died in year 241 A.H. This particular referred book has been authenticated and verified by 4 different Scholars. As mentioned, my book references may be different to the ones you may find in libraries or at home, because I'm taking this piece of info from the 2^nd Edition, published particularly in the year 1429 A.H. Vol. 44, p 143, Hadith No. 26524 states:

The Prophet (saws) said to one of them –

Meaning A'isha or Umme Salama

An angel entered the house, whom I have never seen before. It told me that your son Hussain will be killed, and if you wish, I will show you the soil in which he will be killed. Then he brought out red soil.

Verifiers and commentators of this book have recorded this Hadith to be Hassan – Good, per its chain.

Amazing, this Hadith turns out to be Hassan, despite the fact that there is one person, in the chain, for whom there is a bit of confusion, whether being fine to be accepted or not, whether trustworthy or not, all other men to have narrated this Hadith are actually labelled as Saheeh – Authentic by Allama Al-Bani, who further comments:

Although there is some weakness in this chain, the majority are Saheeh – Authentic!

Verifiers and commentators of this book further state:

This hadith is in Ahmed's Musnad, as well as the book; Fadha'il-As-Sahaba (Virtues of Companions), with more people too. Tabarani and Haythami have narrated this, and have its authenticated its narrators. And so has Ibn Tahmam in his book Manshikha and Tabarani.

Why do they mention the name Tabarani twice? Because dear readers, Tabarani has recorded this with ultimate authenticity, and has narrated it with a long chain of narrations, concluding them all authentic!

Book Tareekh-ul-Islam, written by Imam Dhahabi. Verifier of this book is Umer Abdul Salaam Tadmuri. The Edition number I'm afraid doesn't exist, so the one which I'm referring to you is probably from the first one, but anyway, p 123 of this book states the exact same narration of Umme Salama which we encountered before, and gives an expression too. But the book states what I really want you to read:

Abdul-Razzaq has also narrated this, and its chain of narrators are Saheeh! Ahmed has narrated this, and a similar Hadith has been narrated by so and so that an Angel entered the house etc...

This is Imam Dhahabi saying this dear readers, not me, not me at all, he confirms the fact that all the people narrating this Hadith are Saheeh – Authentic!

Hugely well known book, Siyar A'lam Al-Nubala, a book which I present very often for references, written by Imam Dhahabi – in Vol. 3, p 290 states with a chain or Saheeh narrators! And another very important source is the book Sahih il-Jamay'As-Sagheer, written by Muhammed Nasiruddeen Albani, verified by Zuhair Shaweesh. Vol. 1, published from the Islamic Library, p 73 Hadith No. 61, it states:

Jibreel came to me and informed me that my nation (Ummah) will kill my son i.e. Hussain. And brought me some red soil from amongst the place of Hussain's martyrdom!

Angel Gabriel only comes down for important issues, and doesn't waste time, but here, it is seen that he comes down to reveal this news to the Prophet (saws), and offers him the soil upon which he (Hussain) would die. And guess what, the Angel already told the Prophet of the killers of Hussain, it would be his Ummah – the Prophet's own nation!

And we read in the footnote of the Hadith regarding its validity as Saheeh!

Albani has authenticated this Hadith, upon the fact that it's been recorded in another one of his book called The series of Saheeh Ahadith, Hadith No. 821. So he has authenticated in both of his books, is there still some doubt on why it's not Mustahab to weep over Hussain, visit Hussain's shrine, have love for him as much as Prophet (saws) did? And most importantly, he was on the righteous path?

These are questions to be asked, and questions to be answered...

But please pardon me, as I have this auspicious behaviour of seriously exposing the Salaf, let's just see what is stated in this book of Albani (Series of Saheeh Hadith)... In total this book from Albani contains 501 to 1000 Ahadith, as this is Vol. 2, and Hadith 821 (as mentioned):

Jibreel came to me and informed me that my Ummah will kill my son Hussain. I said this Hussain? He (Angel Jibreel) replied: Yes! Then he brought me some of his soil, which was red.

Haakim and Bayhaqi have narrated it from Umm-il-Fadhl bint-al-Harith. She went to the Prophet (saws) and said: Oh Prophet of God! I saw an unclear dream tonight! He (Prophet) asked: What was it? Bint Al-Harith replied: It was very intense! He (Prophet ~saws~) asked: What was it? In return, Bint Al-Harith answered: I saw as if a part of your body was cut from you and put upon my chest! He (Prophet) said: You have seen something good! Fatima (Insha'allah) will bear a baby boy, and he will be upon your chest. So Fatima (sa) gave the birth to Hussain, and he was on my chest, as the Prophet (saws) said. Therefore, one day, I went to Prophet (saws), and put Hussain on his chest, then he turned his face to the side, and started pouring tears. I said to the Prophet (saws) of God: May my parents be sacrificed for you, what is wrong?

Let's have a look at what the book's verification has in for us; This Hadith is Saheeh by the conditions of Shaikhain – Imam Muslim and Bukhari.

But, Al-Dhahabi narrated this as weak – Da'eef. But Allama Albani refutes who? He refutes Al-Dhahabi!

Let's see what Albani says on the same page: There are many proofs which testify to its authenticity. Some of which Ahmed has narrated them,

Then Albani writes: The narration “An Angel which never came to this world entered” proves its authenticity!   

Al-Dhahabi doubted this Hadith, and recorded it as official Da'eef, though apparently, we see Imam Muslim and Bukhari favouring the authenticity of the Hadith, as explored by Allama Albani, and we see Ahmed narrating this with also not to mention Imam Hakim Al-Nisapouri. In his book, Mustadrak Al-Hakim, he has narrated this Hadith clearly too!

Allama Albani in the very same book: Series of Saheeh Ahadith, has recorded something special to be noted. In Vol. 3, Hadith No.s 1001 to 1500. In Hadith No. 1171 dear readers, we concentrate on the footnote of the Hadith. But let's read the Hadith first shall we;

Jibreel (Gabriel) just left me now, and he informed me that Hussain would be killed on the Banks of Euphrates.

Remember the statement of Imam Ali (as) in the beginning, where he was just calling out “have patience O Abi Abdullah, have patience” and then someone asked what do you mean by Abu Abdullah, and he replied so and so... (see the Hadith above for more info). This very same piece of text which we are sighting from Allama Albani's book is regarding that, or at least, we can take it as to that referred source. We read regarding another Hadith's verification in the book:

He narrates that very same Hadith, Ahmed, narrated in his musnad, from Abdullah: I went to the Prophet (saws) and his eyes were gushing with tears etc...

However dear readers, he (Albani) says the narrations weak! Da'eef...

To verify and be content upon his opinion regarding the value of the Hadith being degraded, is the presentation of one of the narrators Najjiye - the father of Abdullah, nobody knows who he is, Al-Dhahabi has mentioned, and nobody trusts him except Ibn Habban.

Right dear readers, just as I thought, and knew for just about a fact that some of you may have been confused. Let's see what Allama Albani had to say, but this time, in steps and small chunks of info;

1. Regarding the Hadith of Imam Ali (as), when he went to Siffeen's battle, and cried out “have patience Abi Abdullah” (2 times). Allama Albani says it is weak, as one of the narrators of the Hadith includes this man named Najjiye.
2. Therefore, through that analyses, Albani regards the Hadith as officially weak, and not trustworthy.
3. Though he does present later on the view of Ibn Habban, another Scholar, whom in fact doesn't believe he (Najjiye) is weak.

Now our role and play is to analyse, who is right, it's probably the person in the back seat of the Kuffar saying that this Hadith is Da'eef, as entirely upon the declaration of the findings of this man named Najjiye by Allama Albani, but hang on guys, does having just a single Da'eef narrator in a Hadith, make the whole Hadith fake, when you see people before him narrating the very same thing, but whom have been regarded as ultimately Saheeh – Authentic? And we will insha'allah look upon whether Allama Albani done the justice to this issue or not? Though we read something further on from the pen of Albani;

...his son (Najiyye's son) is more famous than him, and who ever authenticates his Hadith, has made an error!

So dear readers, we can assure ourselves – entirely from the view of Albani's declaration, that this Hadith, regarding the Angel coming to inform the Prophet of Hussain's killing, is absolute rubbish, right? But I wouldn't eccentrically agree with those whom don't read and research, as we go onto read something staggering, from the very same pen of Allama Albani, whom from the style of this writing, expresses his view, and turns the table upside down, pointing the needle of the Hadith to the authenticity side! We read;

I (Albani) say: Haythami writes this that Ahmed has narrated it as well as Abu Ya'laa, Badhar, and A-Tabarani. And the narrators have been regarded Trustworthy!

Then we ask Mr Albani, if all the narrators are trustworthy, what is the reason behind you declaring it Da'eef?

And guess what, we read a totally different mindset now from Allama Albani;

Najjiye isn't the only one who has narrated this! Therefore I say it clearly, that there are multiple proofs to strengthen the this Hadith, and the Hadith (in fact), is strong!

Wow! A sudden change in the mind of Albani, he has now commented on behalf of other great supreme Alims of Sunni sect, whom have recorded this Hadith to be strong! Not even Saheeh, but Strong! Allama Albani continuing;

I (Albani) say in one sentence: This Hadith with its meaning, and interpretation, is Saheeh – authentic, by the collection of all its different chains! Even if some of the single narrators have weakness, but all others are trustworthy, this ideology and system, can be fairly applied to abstain from defying the Hadith to be false!

Book, Sahih Ibn Habban, Vol. 5, p 142, this particular book has been verified and authenticated by Sho'aib Arna'oot. We read in Hadith No. 6742;

It's narrated from Anas Ibn Malik: The Angel of rain asked, permission from Allah to visit the holy Prophet (saws). He was allowed to, and it was the day of Umme Salama, he told her not to let anyone enter, when suddenly Hussain opened the door and burst into the room and jumped on the Prophet (saws)'s back. And then Prophet (saws) began to hug and kiss him. The Angel on behalf of witnessing this asked: Do you love him? He (saws) said: Yes! On behalf of this, the Angel then replied: Your nation will kill him! If you wish, I can show you the place upon which he will be killed. He (saws) said: Yes! Then he (The Angel) brought a handful from the place of his martyrdom and showed it to Prophet (saws), and it was red soil. So Umm-e-Salama took it and kept it in her clothes.

Amazing dear readers, is there any reason except for the tragedy of Hussain, which could've made the soil red? If there was, believe me, I think you're on the wrong path... I've mentioned this before, and will mention it again, it's dear readers an Angel coming to inform Prophet (saws) of his son Hussain (as)'s death. If this military detachment did kill him (as), then I ask was the Prophet's Ummah really known truly by that term “military detachment”? What blasphemy! Did the Prophet's nation consult of just a few 100 people, and not thousands? As per the narration from Mustadrak Al-Hakim, we read Prophet (saws) addressing at least 110,000 people. Weren't they included in the Ummah of Prophet (saws)?

These are such people, whom were raised with evil sculptured minds, and designed to eradicate Islam from the very beginning of Prophet (saws)'s life. They were never a part of Islam. And those who say that Shias killed Imam Hussain (as), it were the Shias of Uthmaan, Mu'awiah and other cruel members of the nation of Prophet (saws).

Imam Hussain (as)'s murder wasn't an ordinary one, it was of such stature, that Prophet (saws) gushed tears and tears for, whom had wished to have some soil of that land upon which Hussain would be killed, in his dear possession, so to his decree, patience would be a virtue at all...

She (Umme Salama), preserved the soil, took the soil with her, in fact, displayed in within her cloths. I ask, if this is Bid'ah (innovation), why didn't Prophet (saws) stop her from performing it? It's simple, if you think, that we Shias, whilst preserving the precious soil of Karbala, are innovators, then call Prophet (saws)'s witness and companion an innovator too! But, as according to you, Prophet (saws) also becomes an innovator (Heavens forbid), as

a) He didn't stop here performing it – didn't warn her.

b) And in fact wished for some soil to be preserved by himself as well (see the narrations above).

But any knowledgeable person wouldn't agree with me at all, as entirely, the Quran states:

وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَىٰ-إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ

Sahih International

Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination.

Muhsin Khan

Nor does he speak of (his own) desire.

Pickthall

Nor doth he speak of (his own) desire.

Yusuf Ali

Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire.

Shakir

Nor does he speak out of desire.

Dr. Ghali

And in no way does he pronounce (any word) out of prejudice

إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَىٰ

Sahih International

It is not but a revelation revealed,

Muhsin Khan

It is only an Inspiration that is inspired.

Pickthall

It is naught save an inspiration that is inspired,

Yusuf Ali

It is no less than inspiration sent down to him:

Shakir

It is naught but revelation that is revealed,

Dr. Ghali

Decidedly it is nothing except a revelation revealed.

Prophet Muhammed (saws) says nothing but what Allah wishes, and reveals, so here, it's indeed, a through message of some kind, by the Glorious Lord, to Prophet (saws) regarding the ultimate love for Hussain (as) through through the inclined incident, of the Angel, and weeping and much more...

We read in Majma Az-Zawaa'id wa Manba'a Al-Fawa'id, written by Al-Haythami al-Misri. This particular referred book which I'm reading from is verified by Muhammed Abdul Qadir. In Vol. 9, he mentions a collection of different narrations, which really, will be long and disturbing to mention, especially when they don't have much to do with our topic clearly. Though I will point out to one very useful narration;

Umme Salama took it, and put it into a bundle, and kept it in her clothing. Thabit says: We were told it was from Karbala.

Truly magnificent, she placed it in a Bundle, as well as in her clothing, is there a problem why we (Shia's) can't do that? After all, we are just following the Sunnah of the Prophet (saws)... We further read;

This has been narrated by Ahmed, Abu Ya'laa, Bazzar and At-Tabarani with chains containing “Imarah” - for whom some Scholars have put an opinion of authenticity with him. This is the same Imarah ibn Zathaan we talked about, whom has some weakness in him. And the rest of the narrators are though Saheeh – Authentic!

And there for you my dear readers, were dozens of narrations, mentioned through the books of great Sunni Scholars, some narrations which haven't even been read by the Sunni sect them self. Though there has been the accountability of the fact that Ahl-e-Sunnah don't complete this one Sunnah, this lost Sunnah... Is it out of love for Hussain, or just the reality hidden away by Scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah? Perhaps it's just the case of lack of knowledge and understanding. As I say, we Shias may not know how to read or memorize the Quran, but we certainly know how to understand, and understand it better than you!

Dear readers, I can present many verses from the Quran, supporting mien and Prophet (saws)'s same view, regarding the love and the attitude of love for Imam Hussain (as)'s killing, as well as the fact that of his tragedy, in Karbala. Imam Hussain (as)'s given respect by Sunnis, but really, not as much as how the Prophet (saws) did, and therefore, the Sunnah isn't even preserved! I ask yet again, if you do love Imam Hussain (as), and do have the fulfilment in life of being a real Sunni, I ask, why didn't you go to Karbala? Who stopped you from taking the soil with you? Who stopped you from preserving it? The Prophet or the misguided big bearded Mullahs of today?

Nonetheless, it isn't about whom stopped you and whom didn't, it's really about why did you stop yourself from being blind of truth? That's the main question, because when we go onto the grave, we will be alone, and petrified, no point will be taken on behalf of the fact that “I saw/heard from him saying this and that, therefore without researching into it, or asking others of it, to assure whether it's correct or not, I just done it”. I'm afraid that kind of blasphemy will not be taken seriously, and torture will only be the result of it.

Because really, discussing Quranic verses now will be incredibly long, I myself do believe that this is one, if not, one of the longest and my best articles, probably articles coming next will have a database of Quranic verses – explaining beautifully the Shi'ah Aqeeda of many things! For now, as Imam Ali (as) said: When you are happy or sad, or in any mood, remember your Grave...

But before I go away, let's end with the name Ibn Taymiyah too, has a sunnah in his name, which turns out to be true, curse the killers of Imam Hussain (as)!

وأما من قتل الحسين أو أعان على ذلك أو رضي به فلعنة الله عليه والملائكة والناس أجمعين, لا يقبل الله منه صرفا ولا عدلا
 

“Whoever killed Hussain, or contributed or was pleased with it, may Allah’s, Angel’s and people’s curse be upon him, may Allah don’t accept his worship and acts.”

Majmoa al-Fatawa, Volume 4 page 487

Astonishing is it not? Ibn Taymiyyah then really, curses Umer Ibn Sa'ad, the Kafir who killed Imam Hussain (as), through his own feat! Yazid definitely killed Imam Hussain (as), and was involved with him in killing Imam Hussain (as) was Umer Ibn Sa'ad! Wow! Why don't these Sunnis follow the Sunnah of Ibn Taymiyyah regarding the curse upon the killers of Imam Hussain (as)?

We read something regarding the curse an even greater aspect in the Sunni Islam. Below is the statement of a Sunni converted Alim, called Allama Abdul Kareem Mushtaq, whom was murdered by Saudi – American funded terrorist organisations, namely Taliban and Sipah Sahaba. The following is an excerpt from 100 questions asked by Allama to Nawasibs, regarding their faith. We read;

You have six Kalimas, the sixth of which is called ‘Radde Kufr’ wherein you do tabarra. Like in:

Fatabarra’tu Minal Kufri wash Shirki wal Kidhb.
I disassociate myself from Kufr and Shirk.

Do you regard the doing of tabarra as permissible?

As mentioned by Allama, if Tabarra is a part of a statement which is durable for anyone to become a Muslim, then why isn't that part of a Kalima not practised or given attention upon by Sunnis? We have here in front of us a situation, where really, Tabarra is permissible, and in fact allowed upon the person whom performs Shirkh and Kufr right? Then why on earth, doesn't the killer of Hussain look to you a Kafir?

Is this some kind of a joke you're playing with the nation or what? At one point you accept Tabarra to be a pillar of religion, and the other point, you degrade it! This tells me nothing but of the fact that your religion is absolutely fake and disgusting!

You haven't fulfilled 3 precious Sunnah of Prophet (saws) – which have been analysed briefly in this article;

1. Crying and weeping and gushing tears for Imam Hussain (as).
2. Preserving and honouring the soil of Karbala.
3. Not cursing the enemies of Prophet's son Hussain (as) – through the reference of the Kalimah, and Ibn  Taymiyyah's scripture.

Let's just note the fact that in Ahadith examination, dear readers, we come across a rule established by great Scholars of previous times, that any 5 people, whom are Saheeh, highly trustworthy, and really can never lie, and have never lied as far as history is concerned upon their biography. They together make the Hadith Mutawatir and Qawiyun – meaning incredibly strong!

Now in the above article, we have listed hugely well known men and women, whom have narrated incredible narrations of Prophet (saws) meeting an Angel, and all that regarding Hussain (as)'s killing, here are some of those people;

• A'isha – wife of the Prophet (saws); considered absolutely Saheeh by 72 sects in Islam.
• Umme Salama – wife of the Prophet (saws); considered absolutely Saheeh by all sects of Islam!
• Imam Ali (as) – the cousin of Prophet (saws), his son in law, as well as a student and the greatest companion of Prophet (saws); considered absolutely Saheeh by every Muslim in the world!
• Imam Hussain (as) – the spoken son of Prophet (saws), his grand son as well, Prophet absolutely loved him, if you still have some doubt over this fact, then believe me, the torture of hell would satisfy you; considered absolutely Saheeh by most of the Islamic sects.
• Umm-il-Fadhl bint-al-Harith or Anas bin Malik - Umm-il-Fadhl bint-al-Harith, a respected narrator during the time of Prophet (saws); considered healthily Saheeh by great Islamic Hadith Scholars. As far as Anas bin Malik is concerned, he is highly accepted and thoroughly well known, though wasn't in Prophet (saws)'s time, he is one of the top 10 Sunni narrators regarding the Ahadith he mentioned in his books of Prophet (saws); considered an honest and a trustworthy person by 71 Islamic sects.

Let's learn something here dear readers, that even if a chain includes a weak person, we can still take the Ahadith, upon the fact that if other narrators are highly good, and making sure they have narrated it before the doubted person. In this case, we have the above 5 people narrating this way before – so who are we to doubt this incident, which upon the Ummah is silent?

Till then.... Just say this;

________________________________________________________________________________

Oh Allah!Forgive us all.

For our Bad Sins...

Wassalaam... Keep me and most importantly your Eiman's safety in your Duas...