Mukhtaṣar A`lām al-Ḥanafiyyah min Ahl-ul-Bayt” Scholars of Ahlul-Sunnah from Ahlul-Bayt (Part 1)
Yüklə 1,23 Mb.
|
6) Ibn Hajar al-Haythami said: وبعد اتفاقهم على فسقه اختلفوا في جواز لعنه بخصوص اسمه، فأجازه قوم منهم ابن الجوزي ونقله عن أحمد وغيره “And after (they) agreed in his (Yazeed) fisq, they differed in permissibility of cursing him by name. And group allowed that, from them ibn Jawzi, and was reported from Ahmad and others”. Source: “Sawaiq al muhriqa” p 309-310. And he said: روى ابن الجوزي عن القاضي أبي يعلى الفراء أنه روى في كتابه المعتمد في الأصول بإسناده إلى صالح بن أحمد بن حنبل قال قلت لأبي إن قوما ينسبوننا إلى تولي يزيد فقال يا بني وهل يتولى يزيد أحد يؤمن بالله ولم لا يلعن من لعنه الله في كتابه فقلت وأين لعن الله يزيد في كتابه فقال في قوله تعالى فهل عسيتم إن توليتم أن تفسدوا في الأرض وتقطعوا أرحامكم أولئك الذين لعنهم الله فأصمهم وأعمى أبصارهم فهل يكون فساد أعظم من القتل وفي رواية فقال يا بني ما أقول في رجل لعنه الله في كتابه فذكره “Ibn Jawzi narrated from qadi Abu Yala al-Fara that he reported in his book “Mutamad fi usul” with chain till Salih ibn Ahmad ibn Abdullah which said: I said to my father: “Group of people attribute love of Yazeed to us”. He said: “O My son, does anyone who believes in Allah would love (tawale) Yazeed, and why not to curse the one whom Allah cursed in his book”. I asked: “And where Allah cursed Yazeed in His book?”. He replied: In saying of Taala: ” (47:22) But if you held command, you were sure to make mischief in the land and cut off the ties of kinship! (47:23)Those it is whom Allah has cursed so He has made them deaf and blinded their eyes”. And is there mischief great that murder?”. And in (other) report he said: “O my son, what to say about man who was cursed by Allah in his book?”. Source: “Sawaiq al muhriqa” p 310. Interesting quote that was missed by Ibn Jawzi, Qadi after citing this opinion from imam Ahmad said: قال القاضي : وهذه الرواية إن صحت فهي صريحة في معنى لعن يزيد “And this riwayat, IF IT’S SAHIH then it’s clear in meaning regarding curse of Yazeed”. So obviously Qadi himself was doubting this riwayat, or at least he wasn’t sure regarding it. And in the answer of shaykh Munajid, you would see other narration from imam Ahmad, which is seems much much more authentic. And you have already seen it in the quote from ibn Muflih. 7) Qazzali said in “Ihya” (3/125, darul marifat Beirut): فإن قيل هل يجوز لعن يزيد لأنه قاتل الحسين أو آمر به قلنا هذا لم يثبت أصلا فلا يجوز أن يقال إنه قتله أو أمر به “And if it would be said: Is it permitted to curse Yazeed because he killed Hussain or ordered to? We would say: It’s not established, and it’s not permitted to say that he killed him or ordered to kill him”.
Praise be to Allaah. His name was Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan ibn Harb ibn Umayaah al-Umawi al-Dimashqi. Al-Dhahabi said: he was the commander of that army during the campaign against Constantinople, among which were people such as Abu Ayyoob al-Ansaari. Yazeed was appointed by his father as his heir, so he took power after his father died in Rajab 60 AH at the age of thirty-three, but his reign lasted for less than four years. Yazeed is one of those whom we neither curse nor love. There are others like him among the khaleefahs of the two states (Umawi/Umayyad and ‘Abbaasi/Abbasid) and the governors of various regions, indeed there were some among them who were worse than him. But the issue in the case of Yazeed is that he was came to power forty-nine years after the death of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him); it was still close to the time of the Prophet and some of the Sahaabah were still alive such as Ibn ‘Umar who was more entitled to the position than him or his father or his grandfather. His reign began with the killing of the martyr al-Husayn and it ended with the battle of al-Harrah, so the people hated him and he was not blessed with a long life. There were many revolts against him after al-Husayn, such as the people of Madeenah who revolted for the sake of Allaah, and Ibn al-Zubayr. (Siyar A’laam al-Nubalaa’, part 4, p. 38) Shaykh al-Islam described people’s attitudes towards Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah, and said: The people differed concerning Yazeed ibn Mu’aawiyah ibn Abi Sufyaan, splitting into three groups, two extreme and one moderate . One of the two extremes said that he was a kaafir and a munaafiq, that he strove to kill the grandson of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to spite the Messenger of Allaah and to take revenge on him, and to avenge his grandfather ‘Utbah, his grandfather’s brother Shaybah and his maternal uncle al-Waleed ibn ‘Utbah and others who were killed by the companions of the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), by ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and others on the day of Badr and in other battles – and things of that nature. To have such a view is easy for the Raafidis who regard Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmaan as kaafirs, so it is much easier for them to regard Yazeed as a kaafir. The second extreme group think that he was a righteous man and a just leader, that he was one of the Sahaabah who were born during the time of the Prophet and were carried and blessed by him. Some of them give him a higher status than Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, and some of them regard him as a prophet. Both views are obviously false to one who has the least common sense and who has any knowledge of the lives and times of the earliest Muslims. This view is not attributable to any of the scholars who are known for following the Sunnah or to any intelligent person who has reason and experience. The third view is that he was one of the kings of the Muslims, who did good deeds and bad deeds. He was not born until the caliphate of ‘Uthmaan. He was not a kaafir but it was because of him that the killing of al-Husayn happened, and he did what he did to the people of al-Harrah. He was not a Sahaabi, nor was he one of the righteous friends of Allaah. This is the view of most of the people of reason and knowledge and of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah. Then they divided into three groups, one which cursed him, one which loved him and one which neither cursed him nor loved him. This is what was reported from Imaam Ahmad, and this is the view of the fair-minded among his companions and others among the Muslims. Saalih ibn Ahmad said: I said to my father, some people say that they love Yazeed. He said, O my son, does anyone love Yazeed who believes in Allaah and the Last Day? I said, O my father, why do you not curse him? He said, O my son, when did you ever see your father curse anybody? Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi said, when he was asked about Yazeed: according to what I have heard he is neither to be cursed nor to be loved. He said, I also heard that our grandfather Abu ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Taymiyah was asked about Yazeed and he said: we do not deny his good qualities or exaggerate about them. This is the fairest opinion. (Majmoo’ Fataawa Shaykh al-Islam, part 4, p. 481-484) Islam Q&A Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid 9) Shia writer Baqir Sharif al-Qarashi in his book “The life of Imam Husain” at page 840 (internet version) wrote: Regret of the Oppressor, Yazid After the Muslims began to condemn that tyrant with regard to the killing of the beloved grandson of the Messenger of Allah (s) he became regretful and tried to transfer the blame of that crime to Ibn Marjana and he always said: “What would have happened to me if I had borne the pain and lodged him (His Eminence, Husain) with me in my house and fulfilled his demands and made him the ruler even though this would have brought me condemnation and my power would have weakened; due to having respected the honor of the Messenger of Allah (s) and fulfillment of his rights. May Allah curse Ibn Marjana; because by killing him (Husain) he has made me hateful to Muslims, and sowed their hearts with malice to me. Such that both the righteous and sinful ones have started disliking me for the seriousness of the killing of Husain. What do I have to do with Ibn Marjana? May Allah curse him and be furious upon him!” Author: Baqir Sharif al-Qarashi Translator: Sayyid Athar Husain S.H. Rizvi Publisher: Ansariyan Publications First Edition 2007-1386-1428 Quds Press 10) Shaykh of shias Abbas Qummi in his book “Nafasul mahmoom” (p393, internet version) wrote: It is related in Kamil (of Ibne Aseer), that when the head of Imam Husain (a.s) reached Yazeed, he was pleased with Ibne Ziyad. His confidence in him increased and he bestowed numerous gifts upon him and was pleased with his work. Within a short time, he was informed that people hated, cursed and vilified him, thus he (falsely) regretted the murder of Imam Husain (a.s), and said, ”What would have mattered if I had taken his injury upon myself and would have brought Husain to my home, and could have handed him over whatever he intended, although it would result in a split in my kingship. I could have honoured the sanctity of the Prophet of Allah (s.a.w.s) and could have observed his right and considered his family. May Allah curse the son of Marjanah! When Husain had requested him that he would place his hand in my hand and go away to another place and live until Allah gives him death. But he did not yield to him and killed him, and by doing so he made me detestable in the eyes of the Muslims. And he ignited my enmity into their hearts, while now the virtuous, as well as the evil ones, bear enmity towards me due to the gruesome massacre of Husain. What relation did I have with the son of Marjanah! May Allah curse him and keep enmity with him”. Author: Haj Shaikh Abbas Qummi
I would leave alone comments from “Kamil ziyarat” that Yazid was pleased. Because justice of shias something mythical. Just pay attention directly to direct speech of Yazeed. Conclusion: In the end I’d like to share again with readers with my view. Just reminding, I am not a scholar, and neither talibul-ilm. So that’s only my view. Yazeed can’t be loved, he deserve to be hated. Someone can say that his drinking wine, and others examples of fisq and lacks of morality isn’t proven. But for sure the least thing that can be said about him, that he is responsible for butchery in Madina, and with the connivance of him, was killed sayidina Hussain (radi Allahu anh). These two things are facts. And Allah knows best, wa sallalahu ala sayidina Muhammad, wa ala alihi wa ashabihi ajmayin. Abu Abdullah Jafar as-Sadiq on companions July 13, 2010 at 8:17 pm | Posted in History, Invented myths and legends | Leave a comment
i
Rate This 
Salam alaikum. Sheikh Saduq in his “Khisal” narrated: كان أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله اثنى عشر ألف رجل
THERE WERE TWELVE THOUSAND COMPANIONS OF THE PROPHET 28-5 Ahmad ibn Zyad ibn Ja’far al-Hamedany – may God be pleased with him – narrated that Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Hashim quoted his father, on the authority of Muhammad ibn Abi Umayr, on the authority of Hisham ibn Salim that Aba Abdullah as-Sadiq (alaihi salam) said, “There were twelve-thousand companions for God’s Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ali). Eight-thousand of them were from Medina, two-thousand of them were from Mecca and another two-thousand of them were the free atheist who had become Muslims. There were no Qadarites, Marajites, Kharajites, Mo’tazelites, nor any who act according to their own opinions. They cried day and night and said, ‘O God! Please take away our souls before we eat barley bread”. Interesting point to mention, where all those 100 000 companions which as shias say present at gadir-hum gone? Ayatullah Abu Alfathel Alburqai July 13, 2010 at 7:13 pm | Posted in History | 4 Comments
i
4 Votes
Salam alaikum. 
His full name is: Abulfadhal the son of Al-Hasan the son of Hijjat Al-Islam Al-Sayyid Ahmed the son of Ridha Al-Deen the son of Al-Sayyid Yahya the son of Mirza Meeran the son of Yahya the son of Meer Muhsin the son of Meer Ridha Al-Deen the son of Al-Sayyid Muhamed the son of Meer Fakhr Al-Deen the son of Meer Hussain the son of Badshah the son of Meer Abu Al-Qasim the son of Meerah the son of Abu Al-Fadhal the son of Bindaar the son of Isa the son of Abi Jaffar Muhamed the son of Abu Al-Qasim the son of Ali the son of Ali Muhamed the son of Ahmed the son of Muhamed the lame the son of Al-Sayyid Ahmed the son of Mousa Al-Mubarqi’e the son of Al-Imam Muhamed Al-Taqi the son of Al-Imam Ali bin Mousa Al-Ridha the son of Al-Imam Mousa bin Jaffar Al-Khadhim the son of Al-Imam Jaffar bin Muhamed Al-Saddiq the son of Al-Imam Muhamed bin Ali Al-Baqir the son of Al-Imam Ali bin Al-Hussain Zaynul A’abideen the son of Al-Imam Al-Hussain bin Ali bin Abi Talib the son of Al-Imam Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased at them all. He was nicknamed Al-Burqu’ei in relation to his grandfather Al-Sayyid Mousa Al-Mubarqa’a. His Quest for Knowledge: Ayatullah Al-Uthma Abu Al-Fadhl Al-Barqa’ei sought knowledge from the following scholars: - Al-Sheikh Abdul Kareem Al-Ha’eiri Al-Yazdi, - Ayatullah Hujjat Koh Kamrah, - Ayatullah Al-Sayyid Abul Hassan Al-Esfihani, - Al-Haaj Al-Sheikh Muhamed Ali Al-Qummi, - Mirza Muhamed Al-Samera’ei, - Al-Haaj Al-Shiekh Abdul Nabi Al-A’araki, - Al-Qassim Al-Kabeer Al-Qummi, - Ayatullah Shah A’abadi, and many other scholars The Phenomenon of Ayatullah Al-Barqa’ei: In matter of fact, Al-Barqa’ei, may Allah have mercy on his soul, was part of a phenomenon that we need to understand and try to spread and adopt. This phenomenon that we are talking about is the guidance of some Shia scholars to Islam and their realization of the falsehood of their previous sect. Al-Barqa’ei mentioned in his book “The Destruction of the Idol” or “Kasr Al-Sanam” that he was influenced by Mustafa Tabteba’ei. Tabteba’ei had graduated from the Shia schools in Qumm, the holy Shia city, reached the degree of Ijtihad – the right to deduce fatwas from Sharia – , and then left Shiasim. Other prominent Shias who left Shiasim include but not limited to the following: - Dr. Ali Muthfarian who was a surgeon and left Shiasim to become the prayer Imam for Ahl Al-Sunnah mosque in Shiraz, - Mousa Al-Mosavi who resolved on correcting the path of Shiasim and in the process wrote many books including: Shiasim and Correction (Al-Shia wa Al-Tasheeh), O’ Shia of the World, Wake up (Ya Shiat Al-A’alam, Estayqathou), The Miserable Revolution (Al-Thawrah Al-Ba’eisah), and many other books. - Ahmed Kasravi: a prominent Shia judge and writer, who left Shiasim to be later assassinated by extremist Shias, and wrote a book named Shiasim and Shia (Al-Tashayu’a wa Al-Shia), and - Ahmed Al-Katib, a Shia who rejected the hypothesis of the birth of the Awaited One Muhamed bin Al-Hasan Al-Haskari aka Lord of All Ages and invalidated all of the historical Shia stories regarding this matter, story after story. His Suffering, May Allah Have Mercy on His Soul: After ordering him to fear Allah, to establish regular prayer, enjoin what is just, and forbid what is wrong, Luqman said to his son, “and bear with patient constancy whatever betide thee,” because every reformer who calls for reforms suffers from pain and is always surrounded by rumors. At the time of the Shah, and through the instigation of Ayatullah Shari’timdari, the leader of Shias at that time, Al-Burqa’ei was imprisoned, tortured, and then exiled. Ayatullah Shari’timdari managed to gather six thousand signatures, and that resulted in expelling Al-Burqa’ei from the mosque that he was its leader. The mosque is located in Tehran. Since the Shah’s government was secular in nature, he showed indifference towards what Al-Barqa’ei was doing i.e. refuting the beliefs of Shiasim. However, the increased instigation and hatred from Shia scholars lead to cast some suffering on Al-Barqa’ei. However, the true suffering and the greatest agony started after the Iranian Revolution. The Shia scholars tormented him, and encouraged the ignorant people to attack him. As a result, his house was attacked many times. And when the regime noticed that he is not refraining from telling the truth with great courage and that he is continuing in his activities, though in a small scale, then the regime instructed one of its followers to assassin him as they tried to do the same thing with Haydar Ali Qalamdaran, may Allah have mercy on his soul, who left Shiasim long time ago. The person who tried to assassin Haydar Ali was one of the scholars of Qumm who visited Haydar Ali in the beginning days of the revolution to kill him with a knife. However, Haydar Ali managed to flee away, and lived for many years afterwards. However, the Shia regime was much annoyed by the works and books of Al-Barqa’ei, which he used to type on the typing machine and distribute it to people. As we said earlier, the regime had sent one of its followers to assassin Al-Barqa’ei by gun at his house. And while Al-Barqa’ei was praying, some bullets had been fired on him, and a bullet managed to enter his left cheek to leave from the right cheek. Al-Barqa’ei, may Allah have mercy on his soul, at that time aged 80 years and was transported to the hospital for treatment. However, the doctors were ordered by the regime not to treat him. After that, a doctor advised Al-Barqa’ei to leave the hospital and seek treatment at his house. And all of that did not break the iron will of Al-Barqa’ei, and he continued in his doings until the regime imprisoned him. Prison was no stranger to Al-Barqa’ei; however, this time it was the notorious prison Evin, which is considered to be the most infamous political prisons in Iran. He stayed a year in that prison, then he was exiled to Yazd, a very far away city from Tehran, his dwelling city. However, after 5 days of his exile, he was again lead to prison to be exiled again to the same city later on. Then he passed away, and no one knows for sure whether he was murdered or not, may Allah have mercy on his soul. Al-Barqa’ei passed away in the year 1993 and advised his friends and family not to be buried in a Shia cemetery or to write any poems on his grave, even though he wrote some wonderful poems for such an occasion before his guidance, but he preferred not to have them in the end. His Works: Al-Barqa’ei wrote many books, some of them as follows: - An Index to the Beliefs of Shiekhism and its Contradiction to Islam (Fahras Aqa’eid Al-Sheikhiyah wa Mukhalafatha lil Islam) - A Study in the Supplication of Al-Nadab (Dirasat Du’oa Al-Nadab) - Supplication of Al-Nadab and its Contradictory Nature to Quran (Du’oa Al-Nadab wa Mukhalaft Ebaratuh lil Quran) - The Many Superstitions in Visiting the Grave (Al-Khurafat Al-Katheerah fi Ziyarat Al-Quboor) - The Prohibition of Temporary Marriage in Islam (Yahreem Al-Mut’ah in Al-Islam) - The Destruction of the Idol – A Study in the Hadeeths of Al-Kafi (Kasr Al-Sanam) - A Scientific Study in the Hadeeths of Al-Mahdi (Dirasah Eilmiyah li Ahadeeth Al-Mahdi) - The Contradiction of ‘The Keys to Heavens’ to the Verses of the Quran (Mukhalafat Mafateeh Al-Jinan li Ayat Al-Quran) And he also translated into Persian the book “Al-Muntaqa” by Al-Thahabi, which is a summary of “Minhaj Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiya” by Ibn Taymiyah. Dr. Ali Muzafaryan and Redha Zanganah: Their Biography is in Farsi. I wonder if any qualified person can translate it to us. Group of Shia scholars converted after the long munazara: Reported by Syed Abdullah Ib Al-Hussain Al-Suwaidi Al-Abbasi to occur after a Munazara in Najaf in the year (1156) in the presence of Nadir Shah. Muhib Al-Deen Al-Khadimi: Author of ” Siyaha Fee Alam Al-Tashaiu” (A Journey in the world of Shiasm). Nawab Mohsin-ul-Mulk: Popular name for the history of Struggling in Pakistan, an Ex-SHIA scholar, who converted to SUNNI More:
-Alama: Ismail Al-Ishaq Al-Khoeini - Hyder Ali Qalamdaran - Dr. Musa Al-Musawi - Hussain Al-Musawi - Muhammad Iskandar Al-Yasiri If any brothers has more names to share with us please do not hesitate Shah ‘Abd al-Aziz Dahlawi on ibn Sabah July 4, 2010 at 8:49 pm | Posted in History | Leave a comment
i
Rate This
Written by brother Saad: Assalam o alaykum, Imam Shah ‘Abd al-Aziz Dahlawi (may Allah have mercy on him) has discussed the schemes of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba in great detail in his magnum opus, Tuhfa Ithna ‘Ashariyyah. Son of Imam Sayyid Alusi has translated and abridged it into Arabic. He writes that ‘Abdullah ibn Saba was a Jew from Yemen and he divided his activates into three different levels depending on the people he was dealing with; hence three different groups emerged through his efforts.
Now this is what present day Zaydis hold to. So it is perfectly fine to say that ‘Abdullah ibn Saba was also the founder of Zaydi Shias. These are also known as Tafdilis. 2. Once he was successful in this, he chose a certain number of his followers, those close to him, and started to brainwash them that Sayyiduna ‘Ali was the first Caliph appointed by the Holy Prophet. He told them that it was the Companions (Sahabah) who after the demise of Holy Prophet went against his instructions and usurped the right of Sayyinduna ‘Ali. He was the first one to misinterpret the incident that happened over Fadak and used that as a proof to spread hatred of the Companions. He also made sure to tell his followers that never to ascribe these teachings to him if asked; disassociate from him in public because his purpose is to inform the truth and not fame or power. Present day Itha ‘Ashariyyah (Twelvers) belong to this second group. They are also known asSabbiyah or Tabarriyah. 3. After this ploy was also successful, he went a step further and selected a certain number of his very close associates and told that that I am about to tell a very sensitive secret. He made them promise that this information will be kept secret. He started off by telling karamat of Sayyiduna ‘Ali and through this he convinced them of Uluhiyyat of Sayyiduna ‘Ali; that Sayyiduna ‘Ali is in fact God but has come in the form of a human. I believe present day Alawis fall under this category. These are known as Ghullat. Shah ‘Abd al-Aziz concludes that ‘Abdullah ibn Saba is indeed the founder of above mentioned three groups of Shias. Every single Shia group will fall under one of the above three categories. As far as the Shia Awla, those were actually Ahl al-Sunnah. They were known as Shia Awla because they sided with Sayyiduna ‘Ali during the differences that arose among various Companions due to the schemes of ‘Abdullah ibn Saba. They had all the beliefs of Ahl al-Sunnah like affirming the superiority of Shaykhayn (may Allah be pleased with them) over Sayyiduna Ali. So it obvious that when it is said, ‘Abdullah ibn Saba is the founder of Shiaism’, Shia Awla are not being referred to. In our time, Shia Awla are referred to as Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jamah and this title is not used anymore for any given group. Abdullah ibn Saba July 4, 2010 at 8:36 pm | Posted in History | 2 Comments
i
3 Votes
Written by brother Saad: Assalam o alaykum, Existence of Abdullah ibn Saba is both accepted by Sunnis, Shias and the Westener historians. Today some Shias try their best to even deny his existence, let alone the role he played in the foundation of Shiaism. He is to Shiaism, what Saint Paul is to Christianity. Yüklə 1,23 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|