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       

Refuting Sheikh Mumtaz-ul-Haqq!

A'isha is a controversial character in the history of Muslims. She is either good, or bad, or extremely bad. By some views, we only see destruction and hate, and from the other, knowledgeable arguments and great philosophical attributes of history presented. In this short clip, we sight an amazing reference from Imam Hambal's Musnad, quoting a narration of Prophet (saws), narrated by Abdullah Ibn Umer, that Prophet (saws) pointed at the house of A'isha, and called out Fitnah thrice. 

That is the narration from Abdullah Ibn Umer in Musnad of Ahmed Ibn Hambal, but as well as that, we see the very same narration of Prophet (saws) in Bukhari too! 

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.336
Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: "Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here," saying three times, "from where the side of the Satan's head comes out."

A debate with Sheikh Mumtaz on the killers of Imam Hussain (as).

Mumtaz ul Haq is a Deobandi religious scholar based in the UK. A prolific speaker who has spoken on a plethora of subjects, many of his speeches can be located on various forms of social media. He commands huge popularity among the Sunni masses, who look up at him with awe that has thus further propelled his status and ever increasing ego to another level. 

Having successfully acquired his mobile number the team devised a series of questions to ascertain the intelligence levels of the Sheikh via one of the contacts whom is a follower of the Ahlulbayt (a.s). Since he is a vocal proponent of the doctrine that all the companions are truthful and guaranteed Paradise, we felt it was time to test this Aqeedah and did so armed with books from his school of thought.

Having hopeless been shown as out of his depth during the telephone conversation. Sheikh is no doubt feeling humiliated and his followers crestfallen. We are offering the Sheikh an opportunity to redeem himself, and we challenge him to answer questions on the very narrations that he denied the existence of...

Answer The Following Questions: 


1) Do you accept that a companions by definition is that individual that died on belief?

2) Do you believe all the companions are stars of guidance, that shall be raised in a good successful state ?

3) Do you believe that those companions that didn't give bayya to Yazid and died in that state (whether that be naturally or during the battle of Karbala) died the death of apostates?

4) Do you believe that those companions that broke their pledge Yazid and were then slaughtered in Harra died as apostates who shall face the humiliation of being raised as rebels on the Day of Judgement?

5) Do your answers to questions 1-4 above concur with the two fatwas of ibn Umar?

6) If not, why not, do you know more about your religion than ibn Umar?

7) Will an apostate be raised in a humiliating or successful state on the day of judgement?

8) Does a person that dies the death of an apostate enter Jannah?

9) How do the two fatwas of ibn Umar concur with your belief that all the companions are in Paradise?

If ANYONE can satisfactorily answer the above questions we pledge to: REMOVE this video and shut down the channel and site seek repentance for the error of our ways publicly covert to Sunnism on the hands of Sheikh Mumtaz.

For all references quoted in this article refer to the following link:

http://www.revisitingthesalaf.org/2013/04/debate-who-killed-imam-hussain-as_29.html

-Above intro by RevisitingTheSalaf team. A debate by a Shi'a brother with Mumtaz-ul-Haq.

"Prostrating on Turbah is Bid'at!" Non-followers of the Prophet

(Below is an article by Raees Mustafa, it has already been published and read by many, it can be downloaded from raeesmustafa.blogspot.co.uk)

What did the Prophet (saws) prostrate upon?

Article By: Raees Mustafa

Introduction

There are several proofs from holy ahadith, and the actions of Sahaba, that the Prophet Muhammed (saws), did not prostrate upon the prayer mat, or, the Carpet, but in fact a piece of mud, soil, clay, called Turbah, which these days seems apparently that only the Shias follow that Sunnah. It's quiet remarkable, so see really, that so many traditions, and informations from books say that Prophet prostrated upon a Turbah, there are still, people from around the world, calling the Shias Kafir, and Bidati (a person who does Bid'ah). I hope this may be a clear answer, to those who reflect such belief, I have also created a video on this, which I would like you to also have a look.

Kind Regards

Raees Mustafa

References

References for Sunni books saying that Prophet Muhammed (saws) prostrated upon Clay:

Sunan Abu Dawood Urdu Edition mentioned in pages 376 and 381:

Prophet had the signs of mud on his forehead and on his nose, due to the prostration upon clay...

Therefore celebrate the praises of thy Lord, and be of those who prostrate themselves in adoration (Holy Qur'an 15:98)

The Shi'ah Muslims prefer to prostrate on a small block of earth, called a Turbah, which is usually made from clay from the land of Karbala in Iraq.

According to the Shi'ah Ja'fari fiqh - which is one of the five main schools of law in Islam - prostration must be performed on pure earth or what grows on it, provided that it is not eaten or worn. This includes dust, stone, sand and grass, provided that it is not a mineral. Prostration on paper is permitted, because it is made of a material which grows on earth, but not cloth or carpets.

The legal scholars of all the Sunni schools of law concur regarding the validity of prostration on earth and that which grows on it.

Did the Prophet (s) and his Companions ever do this?

Praying on the earth was certainly the practice of the Prophet (s) and those around him.

q       Narrated Abu Sa'id al-Khudri: I saw Allah's Apostle prostrating in mud and water and saw the mark of mud on his forehead.

[Al-Bukhari, Sahih (English translation), vol. 1, book 12, no. 798; vol. 3, book 33, no. 244]

q       Narrated Anas bin Malik: We used to pray with the Prophet in scorching heat, and if someone of us could not put his face on the earth (because of the heat) then he would spread his clothes and prostrate over them.

[Al-Bukhari, Sahih (English translation), vol. 2, book 22, no. 299]

According to this hadith only in exceptional circumstances would the Prophet (s) and his Companions prostrate on cloth.

The Prophet (s) also used to have a Khumra on which he would put his forehead for prostration.

q       Narrated Maymuna: Allah's Apostle used to pray on a Khumra.

[Al-Bukhari, Sahih (English translation), vol. 1, book 8, no. 378]

q       According to al-Shawkani, a famous Sunni scholar, more than ten Companions of the Prophet (s) have narrated traditions mentioning his prostration on a Khumrah.  And he lists all the Sunni sources recording these traditions which include Sahih Muslim, Sahih al-Tirmidhi, Sunan AbuDawud, Sunan al-Nasa'i and many others.

[Al-Shawkani, Nayl al-Awtar , Chapter of Prostration on the Khumrah, vol. 2, p. 128]

So what is a khumrah?

q       a small mat sufficient just for the face and the hands while prostrating during prayers.

[Al-Bukhari, Sahih (English translation), vol. 1, book 8, no. 376 (as explained by the translator in paranthesis)]

Ibn al-'Athir, another famous Sunni scholar, in his Jami al-'Usul has written:

q       "Khumra is [like that] upon which the Shi'ah of our time perform their prostrations."

[Ibn al-'Athir, Jami' al-Usul, (Cairo, 1969), vol. 5, p. 467]

q       "Khumra is a small mat made from palm fibers or other material…. and it is like that which the Shi'ah use for prostration."

[Talkhis al-Sihah, p. 81]

But why the earth of Karbala?

The special characteristics of the soil of Karbala (Iraq) were known and it was an object of special attention during the time of the Prophet (s) as well as in later times:

q       Umm Salama says: I saw Husayn (a) sitting in the lap of his grandfather, the Prophet (s), who had a red block of soil in his hand. The Prophet (s) was kissing the dust and weeping. I asked him what that soil was. The Prophet (s) said: "Gabriel has informed me that my son, this Husayn, will be murdered in Iraq. He has brought this earth for me from that land. I am weeping for the suffering that will befall my Husayn." Then the Prophet (s) handed the dust to Umm Salama and said to her: "When you see this soil turn into blood, you will know that my Husayn has been slaughtered." Umm Salama kept the soil in a bottle and kept watch over it until she saw on the day of Ashura, 10^th of Muharram 61 A.H., that it turned to blood. Then she knew that Husayn bin Ali (a) had been martyred.

[al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, vol. 4, p. 398]

[al-Dhahabi, Siyar a`lam al-nubala', vol. 3, p. 194]

[Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah wa'l-nihayah, vol. 6, p. 230]

[al-Suyuti, Khasa'is al-kubra, vol. 2, p. 450; Jam` al-Jawami, vol. 1, p. 26]

[Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib , vol. 2, p. 346]

q       'Ali ibn Abi Talib, passed by Karbala after the battle of Siffin. He took a handful of its soil and exclaimed: 'Ah, ah, on this spot some men will be slain, and will enter Paradise without reckoning!'

[Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib , vol. 2, p. 348]

Why is it compulsory to prostrate on the clay from Karbala?

It is not !

But the Shi'ah prefer to prostrate on the earth of Karbala because of the importance given to it by the Prophet (s) and the Imams from his Family (Ahl al-Bayt). After the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (a), his son Imam Zayn al-'Abidin (a) picked some up, declared it to be sacred dust, and kept it in a bag. The Imams (a) used to perform prostrations on it and make a tasbihout of it, and recited Allah's praises on it.

[Ibn Shahrashub, al-Manaqib,  vol. 2, p. 251]

They also encouraged the Shi'ah to perform prostrations on them, with the understanding that it was not compulsory, but with a view to achieving greater recompense. The Imams (a) insisted that prostration before Allah must be on clean earth only and that it was preferable if it was performed on that earth of Karbala.

[al-Tusi, Misbah al-Mutahajjad,  p. 511]

[al-Saduq, Man la yahduruhu'l faqih,  vol. 1, p. 174]

The Shi'ah for a long time have kept this earth with them. Then, fearing that it might be desecrated, they kneaded it into small tablets or pieces, which are now called mohr or Turbah. During prayers we prostrate on it not as a compulsory act but in view of its special nature. Otherwise, when we have no pure soil with us, we prostrate on clean earth, or something that originates from it.

It is a pity that some people maliciously insist that the Shi'ah worship stones or that they worship Husayn (a). The truth is that we worship Allah alone by prostrating on the Turbah, not to it.  And we never worship Imam Husayn, Imam Ali, or the Prophet Muhammad (s). We worship only Allah, and it is in accordance with Allah's order that we perform prostration only on pure ear

th.

Conclusion

This is the reason why Shi'ah Muslims carry small tablets, usually made from the earth of Karbala, which enables them to do prostration on this highly recommended object and to follow the sunnah of the Prophet (s).

Some more references

Sunan Abu Dawood, Urdu Edition page 376 and 381 it states:

Prophet had the signs of mud on his forehead and nose, after prostration upon it.

Kenzul-Ammal, Volume 7, Tradition No. 19804, it states:

Narrated from Umme Attiyah, the Salah of one whom doesn't prostrate upon Earth, mud or something not eaten and not worn, and also not have his nose placed upon it, is not accepted by Allah.

Kenzul-Ammal, Volume 7, Tradition No. 19775, it states:

Ibn Attiyah narrates, Verily God doesn't accept the Salah of those whom don't prostrate upon Earth, or something not worn or eaten, and also have his nose prostrated upon that earth, or soil.

Allama Wahid-uz-Zamaan, in his commentary of Sahih Al-Bukhari, states about this tradition:

All Jurists, unanimously agree, that the Prophet (saws) used to prostrate upon a Sajday Gah, turbah, and also ordered his companions to do so too.

Umar Ibn Abdil Aziz said:

He used to prostrate on mud, which was supposed to be brought for him, and Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates from Urwa, that he (Prophet Muhammed (saws)), considered prostrating upon nothing but a Turbah.

Tayseer-al Bari Sharh Sahih-Al Bukhari, Volume 1, page 275, published by Taaj company Limited.

Sunan Tirmidhi, Volume 1, page 156, translated by Badee Uz-zaman, publsihed in lahore, states:

Hazrat Abbas narrates that the Holy Prophet Muhammed (saws) used to prostrate on a Sajday Gah, a trubah, and not on a prayer mat.

Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra, By Ibn Sa'ad , Volume 1, page 352,

Kenzul-Ammal, Volume 7, page 49, Tradition No. 17896, state:

When the Prophet would prostrate, he would lift his Amamah, turban, from the forhead, and then prostrate upon earth.

Same line: Prophet Muhammed (saws) asked one of his companions to remove the truban, from forehead, as the forehead should actually touch the Turbah.

Sunan Al-Kubrah by Al-Bayhaqi, Volume 2, page 151, Tradition No. 2659,

Al-Isabah by Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani Vol. 3 page 465 (Hadith No. 4368),

Osdol-Ghaba by Ibn Al-Atheer, Volume 3 page 9

The Prophet of Allah (swt), saw a man praying next to him, and sighted his truban was blocking his forehead from touching the turbah, Prophet Muhammed (saws), then removed his turban, to such extent, where his forehead, was actually touching the trubah.

Ibn Taymiyyah issued this verdict, in his book Muju Al-Fatawa, and it's narrated in that book, that it was asked from him, about the prostration on a prayer mat, in the mosque, and the prayer performing, that on a carpet, is it an act of innovation or not?

He replied: Praise be to the lord of the world, as for the salat on the prayer mat, this is not from the Sunnah, of the Salaf of the Mohajireen or Ansaar, and nor from the Sunnah of the Taymeen after them. On whom is the blessing of the favor of Allah, the holy Prophet Muhammed (saws), him and his companions prayed upon soil in the mosque! Not even one of them ever took a prayer mat, or carpet to pray on for their salah. This is narrated from Abdurahman Ibn Mahdi , when the carpets and the prayer mats first came to Medinah, then Malik ordained of confiscating them, and then it was said to him that it was Abdurahman ibn Mahdi, and he said: Truly know that, verily the carpet, and the prayer mat, in our mosque is a biddah, and this is the saheeh, narration, from Abu Saeed Al-Khudri, of a tradition, Aetakaafal-Nabi, narrated also in Mujmu Al-Fatawa, Volume 22, page 163.

Video link:

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

Hanafi sect exposed, part 1 - Raees Mustafa

Exposing the Hanafi sect, Sunni religion include different sub sects, all of them have a different Imam, Imam Abu Hanifa, is the most famous Imam out of the 4, as he has the most followers, exposing him through other Imams of other sub sects Sunni Imams...

Raees Mustafa in this video, publicly exposes these lies, with research and knowledge, and shows, why we Shias, don't convert as to not only the deviating beliefs, but also due to the disgusting conflicts and stupidity which lies in the religion's sub sect.

I hope this video would be helpful, and knock doors on the Eiman... Insh'allah, other parts will also come, and continue upon exposing this sect. As promised, a detailed post regarding the mentioning in the video, of the books, will be presented and referred with authority...