I had posted a week or more ago that from 44 AH to 91 AH ali r.a was openly cursed from the minbar of bani umayyas masajidahum and i said this in the light of narrations in the books of tareekh which i read. However after consulting some expert scholars on this issue , Praise be to allah, i recant from that status and position ONLY because those narrations arent authentically established as i happened to learn from some ahl al-hadeeth `ulema who are known for their strictness in usool al-hadeeth. And also from the work of Mufti taqi uthmani hafidhahullah against mawlana maududi may allah have mercy on him and forgive him, who is famous for criticising and bad mouthing the sahaaba such as muawiyah and his allies. However, it is absolutely true that the sahaaba did criticise and refute each other but we should not get into that topic. As for non sahaaba abusing or cursing `ali r.a and his family then this is well known even from authentic narrations , and does not necessarily have to be from the minbar and could be on other instances as well ,some of which ill mention below. It was narrated that Sad bin Waqqas said: Muawiyah came on one of his pilgrimages and Sad entered pon him. They mentioned Ali, and Muawiyah criticized him. Sad became angry and said: Are you saying this of a man of whom I heard the Messenger of Allah say: If I am a persons close friend, Ali is also his close friend. And I heard him say: You are to me like Harun was to Musa, except that there will no Prophet after me. And I heard him say: I will give the banner today to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger. [Ref: Sunan Ibn Maajah, Vol. 1, Book 1, Hadith 121] Sahl b. Sad reported that a person from the offspring of Marwan was appointed as the governor of Medina. He called Sahl b. Sad and ordered him to abuse All Sahl refused to do that. [Ref: Saheeh Muslim (2409)] In another narration in saheeh Muslim Book 65, Hadith 4876 , marwan who was appointed the governer by muawiyah r.a in madeenah, also asked sahl r.a to criticise ali r.a but he refused Narrated Abu Hazim: A man came to Sahl bin Sa`d and said, This is so-and-so, meaning the Governor of Medina, He is calling `Ali bad names near the pulpit. Sahl asked, What is he saying? He (i.e. the man) replied, He calls him (i.e. `Ali) Abu Turab. Sahl laughed and said, By Allah, none but the Prophet (ﷺ) called him by this name and no name was dearer to `Ali than this [Ref: Sahih al-Bukhari 3703.] Also, it has come via a saheeh sanad in tabaqat ibn sa`d that ammar bin yasir r.a also criticised uthman r.a and his supporters. agaAnd the famous narration quoted by shi`as showing how muawiyah r.a abused ali r.a from the minbar is actually against them as it shows that it was ali and bani hashim radhiallahu anhum ajmaeen who started this first but praise be to allah it is very weak. Now the words used mostly in the Kutub as-sittah are sabb except rarely it says لَعَنَ اللَّهُ أَبَا التُّرَابِ like in saheeh Muslim . But even then, all the authentic narrations attributed to the companions show that the words used by them are Sabb or a more harsher words (shetam) but we do not translate this as curse or abuse in the sense of the abuse we know today or how the shi`as abuse our mothers. We take it to mean criticism as per the language + the manners and status of the sahaaba. This is like how it has come authentically in Bukhaari/Muslim from what i remember that the senior most hashmi member sayed abbas radhiallahu `anhu called `ali (r.a) a kaddhab (liar) deceitful and treacherous over the fadak property issue [Saheeh Muslim 1757 c ] . Also the prophet (s.a.w) once called a sahaabi abu sanaabi saying he lied [Bukhaari 3770] and we all know that liar is no less of an abuse in the eyes of the honourable people or those with any conscience left today so much so that the khawarij have their narrators in our books but liars despite their piety or charity or sunnah adherence were abandoned . So we have to take these criticism and their kinds in the proper context and not like how the shi`as or people of ghulu take it. So these usage of words of criticism was normal among the arabs but this does not mean the sahaaba used fahaasha language or abuses against each other. This would need solid proof and no authentic narration in any books establish this. As for the other governors of bani umayya then yes it has come in the narrations shown above and elsewhere wherein they did criticise or even possibly abuse the ahlul bayt but there are also narrations on the other side showing banu hashim abusing too. But this is after the time of the sahaaba so i dont really care about it. But as i said above, the claim of abusing openly from the minbar is not proven authentically. --------------------------------- Another relevant accusation hurled against muawiyah r.a based on the weak narrations that came in Musannaf ibn abi shaybah, bidaya wan nihaaya, `Abdur razzaq in his musannaf and others who copied it from them later on. youtube/watch?v=fcNoirICmLY In the above video, shaykh uthman khamees says that Hajr bin Udai rahimahullah was killed by Mu`awiyah r.a not because he refused to curse ali (as the fabricators narrated it) but due to other reasons as shaykh Uthman khamees hafidhahullah explains refuting the famous syrian anti shi`a scholar whose had big contributions against the shi`as, namely adnan Ibrahim
Posted on: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 14:11:21 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015