:::: MENU ::::

ABC: Torture Tape implicates UAE Sheikh

I seriously don’t know how to react, on one hand we here in Pakistan are fighting a battle against the illiterate Talibans who continue on their rampage of brutality releasing video after video of flogging, beheadings and even suicide bombings, but it shocks me to watch the ‘educated’ stoop exactly to the same level, now the question is who do you stop? Educate the uneducated or uneducate the educated

Sheikh Issa bin Zayed al Nahyan, brother of the UAE’s crown prince, Sheikh Mohammed al Nahyan, has been caught on camera by ABC News where a UAE policeman assists the Sheikh in tying the victim’s arms and legs, later holding him down as the Sheikh pours salt on the man’s wounds, subsequently the Sheikh shoots at the victim and then later drives over him with his Mercedes SUV.

ABC News: In a statement to ABC News, the UAE Ministry of the Interior said it had reviewed the tape and acknowledged the involvement of Sheikh Issa bin Zayed al Nahyan, brother of the country’s crown prince.

The Question that must be asked in light of the Talibans on rampage in the north, and such videos appearing from the land of shattered dreams – Do we Educate the uneducated or uneducate the educated


78 Comments

  • Aamir Mughal |

    And more than 50 yrs has been past since the “rehlat” of Nabi e Karim(saww). [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ===================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    I wont deny the Incidents of Jamal, Siffin and Karbala but the way these Incidents are narrated, is nothing but slander and blasphemy against the Companions of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH].

    Numbers of dead and Injured in these incidents were shown around 200,000 ???? Just imagine when the total population of Arabia was far far less the 1 Million.

  • dr.jawwadkhan |

    good job amir mughal!

    any comments about hadith i quoted?

  • Aamir Mughal |

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    Comment on your quoted Hadith is as under:

    If Hazrat Muawiya [May Allah be pleased with him] is [Allah forbids] included in Rebellious Group then why Hazrat Hassan [May Allah be pleased with him] surrednered Khilafa to him and why Hazrat Muawiyah was given good news by Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] that Muawiyah will be in Paradise.

    Not a single authentic and verified Hadith can be quoted to say that Hazrat Ammar Ibn Yasir was martyred by Hazrat Muawiya [May Allah be pleased with him] no doubt Hazrat Ammar was martyred in the Incident of Siffin [Note: Incident not Battle]

    Martyrdom of Hazrat Ammar Ibn-e-Yasir [May Allah be pleased with him]

    Not Cut and Paste but simple reading and readjusting the Hadith [Tatbeeq]

    Narrated 'Ikrima:

    Ibn 'Abbas said to me and to his son 'Ali, "Go to Abu Sa'id and listen to what he narrates." So we went and found him in a garden looking after it. He picked up his Rida', wore it and sat down and started narrating till the topic of the construction of the mosque reached. He said, "We were carrying one adobe at a time while 'Ammar was carrying two. The Prophet saw him and said woe! a relbellious group will kill Ammar and started removing the dust from his body and said, "May Allah be Merciful to 'Ammar. He will be inviting them to Paradise and they will invite him to Hell-fire." 'Ammar said, "I seek refuge with Allah from affliction." [Saheeh Bukhari]

    "Abu Bakrah [May Allah be pleased with him] related that he heard the Messenger of Allah [Peace be upon him] say while Hasan Bin Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] was beside him on the pulpit, 'This son of mine is a leader, and through him, Allah will bring together two huge groups of Muslims.'" [Bukhari]

  • Aamir Mughal |

    good job amir mughal!any comments about hadith i quoted? [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    Comment on your quoted Hadith is as under:

    If Hazrat Muawiya [May Allah be pleased with him] is [Allah forbids] included in Rebellious Group the why Hazrat Muawiyah was given good news by Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] that Muawiyah will be in Paradise.

    What about this in Bukhari on Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah [May Allah be pleased with him].

    Narrated Anas bin Malik:

    Allah's Apostle used to visit Um Haran bint Milhan, who would offer him reals. Um-Haram was the wife of Ubada bin As-Samit. Allah's Apostle, once visited her and she provided him with food and started looking for lice in his head. Then Allah's Apostle slept, and afterwards woke up smiling. Um Haran asked, "What causes you to smile, O Allah's Apostle?" He said. "Some of my followers who (in a dream) were presented before me as fighters in Allah's Cause (on board a ship) amidst this sea cause me to smile; they were as kings on the thrones (or like kings on the thrones)." (Ishaq, a sub-narrator is not sure as to which expression the Prophet used.) Um-Haram said, "O Allah's Apostle! Invoke Allah that he makes me one of them. Allah's Apostle invoked Allah for her and slept again and woke up smiling. Once again Um Haram asked, "What makes you smile, O Allah's Apostle?" He replied, "Some of my followers were presented to me as fighters in Allah's Cause,"

    repeating the same dream. Um-Haram said, "O Allah's Apostle! Invoke Allah that He makes me one of them." He said, "You are amongst the first ones." It happened that she sailed on the sea during the Caliphate of Mu'awlya bin Abi Sufyan, and after she disembarked, she fell down from her riding animal and died. [Bukhari : Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihaad)]

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    hahahahhahahahah.

    you sound like a typical mehmood ahmed abbasi.who claimed that yazid is as respectable as hazrat hussain(ra)

    the question is who was the rebellious group?

    who killed hazrat Ammar yasir(ra)?

    we can not have a discussion on the basis of denial.Also this is matter of jaleel ul qadr sahaba e kiram(ra).i feel highly uncomfortable to continue the discussion.

    please tell me you are not one of those who believe that yazid is a sahabi….here is some refrences:

    Ibn Taymiyyah, a Sunni scholar stated the following concerning the nature of Yazid's position:

    “Yazid had the sword and hence he had the power to deal with anyone that opposed him. He had the power to reward his subjects with the contents of the treasury, and could also withhold their rights. He had the power to punish criminals; it is in this context that we can understand that he was the khalifah and king. Issues such as Yazid's piety or lack of it, or his honesty or lack of it, is another matter. In all of his actions Yazid was not just, there is no dispute amongst the people of Islam on this matter.”

    (Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah )

    Ibn Kathir a famously renowned Sunni Islamic scholar, himself reports on the character of Yazid:

    “Traditions inform us that Yazid loved worldly vices; would drink; listen to music; kept the company of boys with no facial hair; played drums; kept dogs; made frogs, bears and monkeys fight. Every morning he used be intoxicated, and he used to bind monkeys with the saddle of a horse and make the horse run.”

    ( al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah vol.8 pg.1169)

    Ibn Sa'd, writes in his book, “Tabaqat Al-Kubra” regarding the nature of Yazid:

    “Abdullah bin Hanzala the Sahaba stated, 'By Allah we opposed Yazid at the point when we feared that stones would reign down on us from the skies. He was a Fasiq who copulated with his mother, sister and daughters, who drank alcohol and did not offer Salaat.”

    ( Tabaqat Al-Kubra vol.5 pg.66)

    After Yazid's death, when Muawiyah II (Yazid's son) was made to be the caliph, he stated the following in his inaugural address with regards to his father and his grandfather (Muawiyah I), as recorded by Ibn Hajr al-Haythami another scholar of the Ahl us-Sunnah:

    ““When Yazid's son came to power he gave the speech:

    'Khilafat is from Allah. My grand father Muawiyah I Allah Huma laan Khatal Latal Amir Al Momineen fought for khilafat against an individual who was more entitled to it, that being Ali. He (Mu'awiya I) performed actions that you are all aware of, and he is suffering in his grave for that. Then my father Yazid became the khalifah even though he was not deserving of khilafat. He fought the grandson of Rasulullah ( Husayn ) and is suffering in the grave on account of his sins.'

    Mu'awiya bin Yazid (Muawiyah II) then proceeded to cry, 'It is a terrible thing that we are fully aware of Yazid's bad deeds: he slaughtered the family of the Prophet, he deemed alcohol Halal, and set fire to the Ka'ba.”

    (Sawaiq al Muhriqa pg.134)

  • Aamir Mughal |

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    My comment are inserted after your queries.

    hahahahhahahahah. you sound like a typical mehmood ahmed abbasi.who claimed that yazid is as respectable as hazrat hussain(ra) [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ==========================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    Did I quote Bukhari or Mehmood Ahmed Abbasi in my messages above.

    the question is who was the rebellious group? who killed hazrat Ammar yasir(ra)? [DJK]

    AM: Nobdoy knows for sure because as per the narrations in Isteeab "an arrow struck Hazrat Ammar" nobody knows who fired that arrow.

    we can not have a discussion on the basis of denial.Also this is matter of jaleel ul qadr sahaba e kiram(ra).i feel highly uncomfortable to continue the discussion. [DJK]

    AM: If you are feeling uncomfortable then dont raise questions for which Allah will not ask you on the judgement day. If you are feeling uncomfortable then instead of asking 20 questions on Companions and their 'alleged' differences you should only follow the Quranic Verse below:

    Those are a people who have passed away; theirs is that which they earned and yours that which ye earn. And ye will not be asked of what they used to do. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 – Verse 141]

    please tell me you are not one of those who believe that yazid is a sahabi….here is some refrences: [DJK]

    AM: You dont have to quote Minhaus Sunnah by Ibn Taimiya to know that whether Yazid was Companion or not. Yazid was not Companion but Companion of the Companion of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] means Tabaiee. Since you have quoted Taiymiya on Yazid so let me quote his Pupil i.e. Shamsuddin Dhabi in Sair al Alam Nubala [History of Great people 30 Volumes in Arabic] wherein there are narrations that Abdullah Ibn Zubair, Hussein Ibn Ali, and Hazrat Abu Ayub Ansari [May Allah be pleased with all of them] and many other Companions of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] founght under the command of Yazid on Constantinople front.

    Ibn Kathir a famously renowned Sunni Islamic scholar, himself reports on the character of Yazid: [DJK]

    AM: Dear Jawwad Sahab, you are quoting wikipedia's link on Yazid without bothering to check the original book. First you should buy Al Bidaya Wal Nihaya and read chpater on Yazid then we will talk.

    Ibn Sa’d, writes in his book, “Tabaqat Al-Kubra” regarding the nature of Yazid: [DJK]

    AM: Again you are quoting it from yahoo answers instead of original book get Tabaqat Ibn Saad, read it and then come to discuss this issue and if Ibn Saad's narrations are so authentic on Yazid then Ibn Saad also declares that Mohammad Bin Abu Bakar s/o Abu Bakar Siddiq [adopted by Hazrat Ali] was amongst the assassin and killer of Hazrat Uthman. I say this narration is a Tabbarra upon Hazrat Ali and if you believe Ibn Saad Narrations then May Allah help you.

    After Yazid’s death, when Muawiyah II (Yazid’s son) was made to be the caliph, he stated the following in his inaugural address with regards to his father and his grandfather (Muawiyah I), as recorded by Ibn Hajr al-Haythami another scholar of the Ahl us-Sunnah: and

    (Sawaiq al Muhriqa pg.134) [DJK]

    AM: Dear Jawwad Sahab, instead of quoting from wikipedia please quoted from original books get these two books and read those narrations and then we will talk.

  • Aamir Mughal |

    Ibn Taymiyyah, a Sunni scholar stated the following concerning the nature of Yazid’s position:

    “Yazid had the sword and hence he had the power to deal with anyone that opposed him. He had the power to reward his subjects with the contents of the treasury, and could also withhold their rights. He had the power to punish criminals; it is in this context that we can understand that he was the khalifah and king. Issues such as Yazid’s piety or lack of it, or his honesty or lack of it, is another matter. In all of his actions Yazid was not just, there is no dispute amongst the people of Islam on this matter.” (Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah ) [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    i feel highly uncomfortable to continue the discussion. [DJK]

    ========================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    Since you quoted Ibn Taymiyyah and you are also feeling uncomfortable to continue the discussion. Therefore let me quote Ibn Taymiyyah's Aqeedah Wastiya on Controversial Affairs of Siffin, Jamal, and Karbala [original is in Arabic and also available in Urdu as well you can buy and read]

    PART 1

    Ibn Taymiyyah's Aqeedah Wastiya on Controversial Affairs of Siffin, Jamal, and Karbala [original is in Arabic and also available in Urdu as well you can buy and read]

    "QUOTE"

    Ahl Al-Bait, 'Ummahat Al-Mu'minin and As-Sahabah (The Prophet's Family, The Prophet's Wives and the Companions of the Prophet) As-Sahabah (The Prophets Companions)

    Among the fundamentals of the people of the Sunnah and the community is purity of heart and tongue toward the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) just as Allah has described them:

    "Those who came after them ( the Sahabah ) say: 'Our Lord forgive us. Forgive our brethren who preceded us in faith. Purify our hearts of any rancor toward the believers. Our Lord, You are Gentle, Compassionate." (al-Hashr 59/10)

    Obey the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him):

    "Do not revile my companions. By (Allah) in Whose Hand my soul is!, if any one of you spends gold (piled up) like (mount) 'Uhud it will not equal a pint of any one of them, nor its half." (al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu-Dawud, at-Tirmidhi Ibn Majah, Ibn Hanbal)

    (The people of the Sunnah ) accept what the Qur'an, the Sunnah , and the consensus brought them of the Sahabah's virtues and high ranks; So they prefer those who spent (their wealth) and fought before the victory -which is the treaty of al-Hudaybiyah [1] – over those who spent and fought after it.

    They prefer the Muhajirun (Immigrants) over the Ansar (Helpers). They believe that Allah said to the people of Badr – they were over three hundred-: "Do whatever you wish, I have already forgiven you." ( Abu Dawud )

    And "they believe that no one who pledged allegiance to the Prophet (peace be upon him) under the tree 36 will enter Hell" ( Muslim ), as the Prophet (peace be upon him) had declared; but that Allah was pleased with them and they with Him – and they were more than one thousand and four hundred. They assign to Paradise whoever the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) assigned there such as the ten, and Thabit Ibn Qays Ibn Shammas , and others of amongst the Sahabah .

    They accept what has been reported continuously from the Prince of the Believers, ' Ali Ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him), and from others, that the best men of this ' Ummah after its Prophet are: Abu Bakr ; then ' Umar ; third, ' Uthman , and fourth, ' Ali Ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with them all). All Traditions have indicated, and all Sahabah (may Allah be pleased with them all) have agreed upon giving priority to ' Uthman out of regard for his allegiance ( al-Bai'ah ), although some of the people of the Sunnah are disputing over whether ' Uthman or ' Ali (may Allah be pleased with both of them) has the priority, after they (the people of the Sunnah ) had agreed upon giving priority to Abu Bakr and ' Umar . Some people gave the priority to ' Uthman and kept silent and considered ' Ali to be the fourth. However, some people preferred ' Ali . And some remained neutral. But the people of the Sunnah settled on preferring ' Uthman , even though this matter – the matter of ' Uthman and ' Ali – is not of the fundamentals. The majority of the people of the Sunnah do not consider disagreeing in this matter as being misled. Rather, it is in the matter of the "Question of the Caliphate" where they consider the disagreeing person to be misled. Ahl as-Sunnah believe that the Caliph after the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) is Abu Bakr ; then ' Umar ; then ' Uthman , then ' Ali , and that whoever contests the Caliphate of any one of these Imams is indeed more lost than an ass.

    Ahl as-Sunnah should not deal with what happened between the Sahabah of the disagreement, and they must say: Part of the Traditions which are narrated about their faults are untrue, and some of them added to or omitted from, or distorted; The part of them which is true, they are excused from, because either they expressed their personal opinion and were right, or they expressed their personal opinion and were wrong.

    Ahl as-Sunnah do not think that each of the Sahabah is infallible of committing grave sins or light sins, but that they are liable to commit general offenses. Nevertheless, to them belongs priority in accepting Islam and in doing good deeds which qualify them for forgiveness of what they may have committed, to the extent that their offenses are forgiven. The same offenses will not be forgiven of those who come after them because they ( as-Sahabah ) have a credit of good deeds which erase the bad deeds, a credit the generations after them do not have. It has been confirmed by the saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him):

    "That they are the best of all generations," (al-Bukhari and Muslim) and: "That the pint of charity any one of them might have given is better than a pile of gold the size of Mount 'Uhud if it is given by anyone who comes after them." (al-Bukhari and Muslim)

    "UNQUOTE"

  • Aamir Mughal |

    Ibn Taymiyyah, a Sunni scholar stated the following concerning the nature of Yazid’s position:

    “Yazid had the sword and hence he had the power to deal with anyone that opposed him. He had the power to reward his subjects with the contents of the treasury, and could also withhold their rights. He had the power to punish criminals; it is in this context that we can understand that he was the khalifah and king. Issues such as Yazid’s piety or lack of it, or his honesty or lack of it, is another matter. In all of his actions Yazid was not just, there is no dispute amongst the people of Islam on this matter.” (Minhaj as-Sunnah an-Nabawiyyah ) [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    i feel highly uncomfortable to continue the discussion. [DJK]

    ========================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    PART 2

    Ibn Taymiyyah's Aqeedah Wastiya on Controversial Affairs of Siffin, Jamal, and Karbala [original is in Arabic and also available in Urdu as well you can buy and read]

    "QUOTE"

    Moreover, if anyone of them ( as-Sahabah ) committed any act of offense, without doubt he repented from it, or he did good deeds which wiped that offense from him, or he has been forgiven for the virtue of accepting Islam from its start or by intercession of Muhammad (peace be upon him) since they are deserving most his intercession, or a calamity inflicted upon him in this world which covered for that offense. But if this is the case in actual offenses, what about matters in which they were mujtahids (formulating independent decision in legal or theological matters)? If they were correct in their ijtihad they will receive double reward and if they missed they will receive one reward and the missing is forgiven for them.

    Furthermore, the objectionable amount of their deeds is negligible in comparison to their virtues, their merit is in belief in Allah and His Messenger, the jihad in His Path, the Hijrah (emigration) from Makkah to al-Madinah , the support for the Prophet and the faith, the valuable knowledge and the good deeds. Whoever studies the life of the Sahabah objectively, with insight and with what Allah bestowed upon them of virtues, will no doubt discover that they are the best of all people after the Prophet (peace be upon him), that there never was and never will be their like and that indeed they are the choicest of the generations of the ' Ummah which is in itself the best of all nations and the most honorable in the eyes of Allah ,The Exalted.

    Ahl Al-Bait (The Prophets Family)

    Ahl as-Sunnah should love the Prophet's family, give them support, and honor the Prophet's will in regard to them, as he said at Ghadir al-Khum : "I ask you by Allah to take care of my family I ask you by Allah to take care of my family." ( Muslim )

    [The Prophet] (peace be upon him) said to his uncle al-Abbas when he complained to him that some men of Quraysh resent Banu Hashim (the Prophet's clan):

    "By (Allah) in Whose Hands my soul is! They will never be believers until they love you for the sake of my relationship to you." (Reported by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and others)

    The Prophet (peace be upon him) said:

    "Indeed, Allah chose the sons of isma'il, and from them He chose Kinanah, and from Kinanah He chose Quraish, and from Quraish he chose Banu Hashim, and from Banu Hashim He chose me." (Reported by Muslim and Ibn Hanbal)

    'Ummahat Al-Mu'minin (The Prophets Wives)

    [ Ahl as-Sunnah ] should give support to the wives of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), the Mothers of the Believers, and they should believe that they will be his wives in the Hereafter, especially Khadijah (may Allah be pleased with her) the mother of most of his children, and the first person to believe in him and give him support, and he respected her very highly. And [ A'ishah ], as-Siddiqah , the daughter of [ Abu Bakr ] as-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with her and her father), of whom the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:

    "A'ishah's superiority over women is like the superiority of ath-Tharid (a dish of sopped bread, meat and broth) over the rest of the food." (Reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim)

    [ Ahl as-Sunnah ] should forsake the Rawafid doctrine [Extremist Shias] , those who hate the Prophet's Companions and revile them.

    They should forsake the Nawasib doctrine (those who harm the Prophet's Family verbally or actually).

    Reference:

    1 – In the year 628 C.E ., the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) led a band of believers to perform ' umrah (smaller pilgrimage) to Makkah , but the non-believers of Makkah prevented him and his followers from entering Makkah by blocking their way with a large army at a place called al-Hudaibiyah located nine miles out of Makkah . As a result, a war almost broke out between the two parties, but negotiations took place instead. The Prophet (peace be upon him) sent ' Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) to Makkah to represent him at the negotiations, but he did not return for three days and rumors reached the Prophet and his followers that ' Uthman was killed by the Makkans . Although unprepared for battle, the Prophet could not leave the Makkans unpunished for their treacherous act. So, he assembled his followers and, standing under a large tree, they pledged allegiance to him to fight the Makkans . Therefore, Allah praised them in the Qur'an :

    "Lo! Those who swear allegiance unto you ( Muhammad ), swear allegiance only unto Allah. The Hand of Allah is above their hands…" (al-Fat-h 48/10) In the same chapter, verse 18, Allah expressed His pleasure with the believers who pledged allegiance to the Prophet (peace be upon him) under the tree in Hudaibiyah , He said : "Allah was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance unto you beneath the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, and He sent down peace of reassurance on them, and has rewarded them with a near victory."

    2 – Rawafid or Rafidah is one of the names given to the Shi'ah . Al-Ash'ari explains this denomination as those who rejected the caliphate of Aba Bakr and ' Umar.

    3 – Nawasib is a group of people who do not like 'Ali or his family; they are the counterpart of the Rawafid .

    "UNQUOTE"

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    OMG! that was a huge.load after load and you start to feel suffocating.me and many others requested you to please do not paste that huge amount of stuff.

    i wish if we could have a discussion like normal person.

    NO ONE CAN READ THE AMOUNT OF MATERICAL YOU PASTED THERE IT IS ANNOYING….POINT BY POINT PLEASE…..

    "Not a single authentic and verified Hadith can be quoted to say that Hazrat Ammar Ibn Yasir was martyred by Hazrat Muawiya [May Allah be pleased with him] no doubt Hazrat Ammar was martyred in the Incident of Siffin [Note: Incident not Battle]"

    Here i found some thing in aehkam ul quran by abu bakr jassas. and please forgive my english translation:

    Abu bakr jassas writes in “aehkam ulquran” :

    “Ali bin abi talib(ra) used his sword in a war against rebellions and along with him were eminent sahaba and those who fought the ghazwa e badr.every one knows their position within the sahaba . they were on right side . except the rebellions no one oppose them. Furthermore Nabi e Kareem(saww) told hazrat ammar(ra) that a group of rebellions will kill you. This hadith was persistently narrated and recognized as correct . even when abdullah bin umaro bin ala’s pointed out about this hadith ,hazrat amir muawiyah(ra) couldn’t deny this hadith but interpretated that “ammar was killed by those who bring him in front of our spears”

    (aehkam ul quran lil jassas / volume 3 –page 492)

    POINT BY POINT…..PLEASE

  • Aamir Mughal |

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    If you have Abu Bakar Jassas's Ahkamul Quran then read the next narrations and then we will talk.

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    “Not a single authentic and verified Hadith can be quoted to say that Hazrat Ammar Ibn Yasir was martyred by Hazrat Muawiya [May Allah be pleased with him] no doubt Hazrat Ammar was martyred in the Incident of Siffin [Note: Incident not Battle]

    (Amir Mughal)

    ______________________________________________________

    Hafiz ibn e hajr writes in “alasaba”:

    “ murder of hazrat ammar (ra) revealed that hazrat Ali(ra) was right later on aehl e sunnat concurred on it although they were confused before”

    (al asaba -vol 2 / p:506)

  • Aamir Mughal |

    Jassas just discussed the narration through History of Tabari's narration {Muawiyah's comment above is from Tabari's History] and not given any narration to support. It was his opinion and Jassas's opinion can be thrown on wall.

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    You are more than welcome to discuss anything but first you should at least buy the original books I have mentioned in several threads of this forum.

  • Aamir Mughal |

    Hafiz ibn e hajr writes in “alasaba”: “ murder of hazrat ammar (ra) revealed that hazrat Ali(ra) was right later on aehl e sunnat concurred on it although they were confused before” (al asaba -vol 2 / p:506)

    ======================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab

    I agree but why did Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] surrendered Khilafa [Bukhari] since your above comment from a book says that Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him – and there is no doubt that he was on right path] was on right path?

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    You seems very fond of giving the references from “bidaya wa nihaya”.

    Ok I give you something from bidaya wa nihaya:

    "Because of the murder of hazrat ammar (ra) revealed the secret of the prophecy of rasoolullah (saww) that a rebellion group will kill hazrat ammar(ra) and because of that it become evident that hazrat ali(ra) was right and hazrat muawiya(ra) was the rebellion"

    (al bidaya –vol 7 / page : 270)

    The reason of retreat of hazrat zubair (ra) in war of the camels that he remembered the hadith about hazrat ammar’s(ra) murder and in the war he saw hazrat ammar bin yasir (ra) was with the forces of hazrat ali(ra)

    (al bidaya –vol 7/p 241)

  • Aamir Mughal |

    You seems very fond of giving the references from “bidaya wa nihaya”. Ok I give you something from bidaya wa nihaya:[Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ======================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    I have already written above that Islamic History was compiled like this:

    How Islamic History was compiled:

    Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari: “I am writing this book as I hear from the narrators. If anything sounds absurd, I should not be blamed or held accountable. The responsibility of all errors or blunders rests squarely on the shoulders of those who have narrated these stories to me.” Tabari’s Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) popularly called “Mother of All Histories” is the first ever “History of Islam” written by ‘Imam’ Tabari (839-923 CE) at the junction of the third and fourth century AH. He died in 310 AH. [Preface of Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) by Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari.]

    Ahmed Bin Hanbal says:Three kinds of books are absolutely unfounded, Maghazi, Malahem and Tafseer.” (The exalted Prophet’s Battles, Dreams and Prophecies, and Expositions of the Qur’an). [Ahmed Bin Hanbal as quoted by ibn Rajab al-Hanbali in Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila (Appendage to the Encyclopedia of Hanbali Scholars)]

    Hafiz Ibn Kathir says: Had Ibn Jareer Tabari not recorded the strange reports, I would never have done so. [Tafseer Ibn Katheer (Commentary on Quran) and Al Bidaya Wal Nihaya (History – From Start to End)]

    Ibn Khaldun says: The Muslim historians have made a mockery of history by filling it with fabrications and senseless lies. (Muqaddama Ibn Khaldun)

    Shah Abdul Aziz Dehelvi says: Six pages of Ibn Khaldoon’s History have been deliberately removed since the earliest times. These pages had questioned the most critical juncture of Islamic history i.e. the Emirate of Yazeed and the fiction of Karbala. [Even the modern editions admit in the side-notes that those pages have been mysteriously missing from the ancient original book. [Tohfa Ithna Ashri by Shah Abdul Aziz Dehelvi]

    Shah Waliullah Dehelvi says: Imam Jalaluddin Sayyuti’s Tarikh-ul-Khulafa is the prime example of how our Historians, Muhaddithin and Mufassirin, each has played like Haatib-il-Lail (One who collects firewood at night not knowing which piece is good and which one is bad). [Izalatul Khifa A'N Khilaafatil Khulafaa by Shah Waliullah]

    Example is as under:

    “QUOTE”

    Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasar [Birth:85 AH 704 CE Death: 150-153 AH (767)]

    The earliest is Ibn Ishaq’s Sira, his biography of the Prophet. It is also the longest and the most widely quoted. Later historians draw, and in most cases depend on him. [Uyun al-athar, I, 7, Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (d. 734A.H.)

    A contemporary of Ibn Ishaq, Imam Malik [d 179 AH], the jurist, denounces Ibn Ishaq outright as “a liar” and “an impostor” just for transmitting such stories. [`Uyun al-athar, I and ibid, I, 16].

    It must be remembered that historians and authors of the Prophet’s biography did not apply the strict rules of the “traditionists”. They did not always provide a chain of authorities, each of whom had to be verified as trustworthy and as certain or likely to have transmitted his report directly from his informant, and so on. The attitude towards biographical details and towards the early events of Islam was far less meticulous than their attitude to the Prophet’s traditions, or indeed to any material relevant to jurisprudence. The attitude of scholars and historians to Ibn lshaq’s version of the stories has been either one of complacency, sometimes mingled with uncertainty, or at least in two important cases, one of condemnatlon and outright rejection.

    The complacent attitude is one of accepting the biography of the Prophet and the stories of the campaigns at they were received by later generations without the meticulous care or the application of the critical criteria which collectors of traditions or jurists employed. It was not necessary to check the veracity of authorities when transmitting or recording parts of the story of the Prophet’s life.[Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (op. cit., I, 121)]

    It was not essential to provide a continuous chain of authorities or even to give authorities at all. That is obvious in Ibn Ishaq’s Sira. On the other hand reliable authority and a continuous line of transmission were essential when law was the issue. That is why Malik the jurist had no regard for Ibn Ishaq. [Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila – Liar and Liar amongst Liars]

    His contemporary, the early traditionist and jurist Malik, called him unequivocally “a liar” and “an impostor”[Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila – Liar and Liar amongst Liars] “who transmits his stories from the Jews”.[`Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7 by Ibn Sayyid al-Nas].

    In a later age Ibn Hajar Asqalani further explained the point of Malik’s condemnation of Ibn Ishaq. Malik, he said,[Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, IX, 45. See also `Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7] condemned Ibn Ishaq because he made a point of seeking out descendants of the Jews of Medina in order to obtain from them accounts of the Prophet’s campaigns as handed down by their forefathers. [ibid.]

  • Aamir Mughal |

    You seems very fond of giving the references from “bidaya wa nihaya”. Ok I give you something from bidaya wa nihaya

    (al bidaya –vol 7 / page : 270) (al bidaya –vol 7/p 241) [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    Bidaya Wal Nihaya also carry narrations that clearly shows that Mohammad Bin Abu Bakar [May Allah have mercy on his soul] had killed Hazrat Uthman [May Allah be pleased with him]. Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] had adopted Mohammad Bin Abu Bakar and if we would believe these Histrorical Narrations [Lies] then it woould be an Insult on Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]. Therefore only those narrations of History will be acceptable as far as three blessed generations are concerned which are supported by Quranic and Hadith [and that too authentic and verified] text.

    Even after all this discussion above is not sufficient for you then you are free to have any kind of opinion you want to have.

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    “It must be remembered that historians and authors of the Prophet’s biography did not apply the strict rules of the “traditionists”. They did not always provide a chain of authorities, each of whom had to be verified as trustworthy and as certain or likely to have transmitted his report directly from his informant, and so on. The attitude towards biographical details and towards the early events of Islam was far less meticulous than their attitude to the Prophet’s traditions, or indeed to any material relevant to jurisprudence. The attitude of scholars and historians to Ibn lshaq’s version of the stories has been either one of complacency, sometimes mingled with uncertainty, or at least in two important cases, one of condemnatlon and outright rejection”

    You want to apply the criteria for “aehkam e sharaiya” on the history.

    That’s new!!!

  • Aamir Mughal |

    You want to apply the criteria for “aehkam e sharaiya” on the history. That’s new!!![Dr Jawwad Khan]

    =========================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    That is not new, that is very old and now 1500 years old.

    O ye who believe! If an evil-liver bring you tidings, verify it, lest ye smite some folk in ignorance and afterward repent what ye did {Private Apartments XLIX (Soora Al-Hujrat) Verse 6).

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    I hope you dont have a faith on the following narrations of Tabari

    For example there are 4 to 5 narrations in Tabari:

    The History of al Tabari (I have read every narrations of Tabari regarding this and their narrators and their authenticity are highly doubtful) are and That Rascal Sufi Ali Hajveri (in his alleged book Kashf al-Mahjub, The Revelation of the Veiled) aka Data Ganj Bukhsh [through the source of notorious Tabari who in his Tarikh al-Tabari (History of the Prophets and Kings) and Tafsir al-Tabari – Commentary on Quran cocncocted the lie of Love Story between Mohammad and Zainab bint Juhash (Perish the thought)]of Lahore in his book Kashf al Mahjoob ("Unveiling the Veiled") has repeated the concocted tale of love story of Mohammad and Zainab [Perish the thought] that is being propagated by all an sundry.

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    Bidaya Wal Nihaya also carry narrations that clearly shows that…..if we would believe these Histrorical Narrations [Lies] then it woould be an Insult on Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him].Therefore only those narrations of History will be acceptable as far as three blessed generations are concerned which are supported by Quranic and Hadith [and that too authentic and verified] text"

    (Amir Mughal)

    ____________________________________________________

    hahahahhahahhahahah. you are such a impossible man

    we were not talking about the history.

    we were talking about the hadith in the light of history.

    and i was just quoting the refrences of historians you quote all the time.

  • Aamir Mughal |

    “It must be remembered that historians and authors of the Prophet’s biography did not apply the strict rules of the “traditionists”. They did not always provide a chain of authorities, each of whom had to be verified as trustworthy and as certain or likely to have transmitted his report directly from his informant, and so on. [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ===============

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    If you believe in Tabari's Narrations and Tabari is quoted by every Historian of Islam.

    There is a Chapter on Hazrat Hassan Bin Ali [May Allah be pleased with him]

    90 marriages of Hazrat Hassan have been narrated by Tabari and this an outright lie on Hazrat Hasan because in this chapter Tabari has narrated that Hazrat Hasan most of the time used to be busy in "Intercourse and Divorce" [Perish The Thought – Maa'az Allah]

    Glorious Hazrat Hasan [May Allah be pleased with him] was declared Syed [Chief] by Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] [Reference – Bukhari] and Tabari is narrating on Hazrat Hasan as if he is discussing a Mughal Prince.

    If we believe Tabari's narrations then we will reach to the conclusion that Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]'s very own grandson didn't even know as to how detested [not haram but disliked] the Divorce is before Allah. [May Allah forgive for even repeating this]

    Tabari's name should be changed into Tabbaarrai [those who hurl verbal abuses]

    There are chapters after chapters in Tabari compiled in the name of History which comprised upon lies and slander upon the Ahl Al Bayt. They have been shown as Greedy for Money and Power.

    I hope you wont believe everything compiled in Tabari.

  • Aamir Mughal |

    hahahahhahahhahahah. you are such a impossible man

    we were not talking about the history. we were talking about the hadith in the light of history. and i was just quoting the refrences of historians you quote all the time. [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ========================

    Dear Dr Sahab,

    Do not before distortion that I quoted History to counter those who were relying on History to quote Karbala

    If you are even aware of a principle of Fiqh [Read Imam Nuwi's Sharah Muslim] the fact that any Hadith whose apparent meaning is raising finger on any Companion then it is obligatory for every Muslim that Hadith will be explained [Yaani Jirah wa Tadeel ki Jai gi] so to clear any doubt on any Companion.

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    "If you are even aware of a principle of Fiqh [Read Imam Nuwi's Sharah Muslim] the fact that any Hadith whose apparent meaning is raising finger on any Companion then it is obligatory for every Muslim that Hadith will be explained [Yaani Jirah wa Tadeel ki Jai gi] so to clear any doubt on any Companion"

    hahahahahahahahahahha.why you are making me laugh today.

    hadith ki jirah o taadil ki jaey gee? aur woh bhee sahi hadith ki jisay tawatir ka darja hasil hey?

    aur kon karey ga?????woh jin ki bat ko aap log utha kar deewar par mrnay ka azam rakhtey hen.

    wahabi aisa to naheen kehtay.

    hahahhahhaha

  • Aamir Mughal |

    hahahahahahahahahahha.why you are making me laugh today.

    hadith ki jirah o taadil ki jaey gee? aur woh bhee sahi hadith ki jisay tawatir ka darja hasil hey? aur kon karey ga?????woh jin ki bat ko aap log utha kar deewar par mrnay ka azam rakhtey hen. wahabi aisa to naheen kehtay. hahahhahhaha

    ==================

    Dear Jawwad Sahab,

    Read the books on Hadith and Usool al Fiqh wal Hadith [Durrul Beyh by Shawkani and Sharh Muslim by Imam Nuwi and Fath Al Bari by Hajar Asqlani] and then you can laugh as much as you want. Yes explaination/analogies will be made of Sahih Hadith. Read beofre discussing these issues.

  • Aamir Mughal |

    hahahahahahahahahahha.why you are making me laugh today.

    hadith ki jirah o taadil ki jaey gee? aur woh bhee sahi hadith ki jisay tawatir ka darja hasil hey? aur kon karey ga?????woh jin ki bat ko aap log utha kar deewar par mrnay ka azam rakhtey hen. wahabi aisa to naheen kehtay. hahahhahhaha [Dr Jawwad Khan]

    ===================

    Dear Sir,

    There is another way for you since you have questioned the conduct of Sahaba , and that you should have firm belief on what Khomeini/Mawdudi have said about Sahaba in their books and it will remove all doubts from your mind.

  • dr.jawwad khan |

    "There is another way for you since you have questioned the conduct of Sahaba , and that you should have firm belief on what Khomeini/Mawdudi have said about Sahaba in their books and it will remove all doubts from your mind"

    i can't help it. it is matter of hadith and history.

    why don't you just get rid of your prejudices?intead of giving me the lessons on usool al fiqah and hadith.

    i know only one thing that fear of Allah.swt/taqwa and iman comes first and every other things comes later.

    if your faith is not derived from these elements then it is better to throw this faith on a wall.

    —-END OF THE DISCUSSION—-

  • omar khatai |

    well i am surprised by those who claim that ibn umar, ibn abbas etc didnt support hussain against yazid. it is a partial view of history. ibn abbas[ra] even after paying allegiance to yazid depised him in his letters after karbala[ibn aseer, ibn kaseer albidayah].as far as ibn umar is concerned he wished if he had supported ali [ra] against muawia[ra].

  • Living here |

    They are the worst ever. Illetrate, lazy and spolit bunch of idiots.