Sunday, 22 July 2012

REFUTE TO SHIA MAJOOSI - SAHABAS PLOTTED TO KILL THE PROPHET (S.A.W)

REFUTE TO SHIA MAJOOSI - SAHABAS PLOTTED TO KILL THE PROPHET (S.A.W)





Assalamualikum ! this refutation is going to be entertaining for Muslims and shameful for the shia aka hindu zorastrians...Please note that this is a purely refutation post so it is recommended that only students of knowledge proceed further, whereas laypeople are strictly warned not to proceed. However, those if your I.Q is above zero, you may proceed to witness the shia mockery!. 


As usual, we have shias accusing and fabricating lies to such an extent that it as usual not only works against them, but also shows how disgraceful and cursed they are ! cutting short, please find below the refutation 


Claim of the Rafidah (aka shia) : Abu bakr, Umar, Uthman (a.s) and other sahabas (a.s) plotted to kill the rasool (s.a.w) : 



Baiyhaqi in Dalail al-Nubuwwat and Suyuti in Dur al-Manthur write:


عن عروة قال رجع رسول الله صلى اله عليه وسلم قافلا من تبوك إلى المدينة حتى إذا كان ببعض   
الطريق مكر برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ناس من أصحابه فتآمروا أن يطرحوه من عقبة في
الطريق فلما بلغوا العقبة أرادوا أن يسلكوها معه فلما غشيهم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أخبر
خبرهم فقال من شاء منكم أن يأخذ بطن الوادي فإنه أوسع لكم وأخذ رسول اله صلى الله عليه وسلم
العقبة وأخذ الناس ببطن الوادي الا النفر الذين مكروا برسول اله صلى الله عليه وسلم لما سمعوا ذلك
استعدوا وتلثموا وقد هموا بأمر عظيم وأمر رسول الله صلى اله عليه وسلم حذيفة بن اليمان رضي الله
عنه وعمار بن ياسر رضي اله عنه فمشيا معه مشيا فامر عمارا أن يأخذ بزمام الناقة وأمر حذيفة
يسوقها فبينما هم يسيرون إذ سمعوا وكزة القوم من ورائهم قد غشوه فغضب رسول الله صلى اله
عليه وسلم وأمر حذيفة أن يردهم وأبصر حذيفة رضي الله عنه غضب رسول اله صلى اله عليه وسلم
فرجع ومعه محجن فاستقبل وجوه رواحلهم فضربها ضربا بالمحجن وأبصر القوم وهم متلثمون لا يشعروا
انما ذلك فعل المسافر فرعبهم الله حين أبصروا حذيفة رضي اله عنه وظنوا ان مكرهم قد ظهر عليه
فأسرعوا حتى خالطوا الناس وأقبل حذيفة رضي الله عنه حتى أدرك رسول اله صلى اله عليه وسلم
فلما أدركه قال اضرب الراحلة يا حذيفة وامش أنت يا عمار فأسرعوا حتى استووا بأعلاها فخرجوا من
العقبة ينتظرون الناس فقال النبي صلى اله عليه وسلم لحذيفة هل عرفت يا حذيفة من هؤلاء الرهط
أحدا قال حذيفة عرفت راحلة فلان وفلان وقال كانت ظلمة الليل وغشيتهم وهم متلثمون فقال النبي
صلى الله عليه وسلم هل علمتم ما كان شأنهم وما أرادوا قالوا لا والله يا رسول اله قال فإنهم مكروا
ليسيروا معي حتى إذا طلعت في العقبة طرحوني منها قالوا أفلا تأمر بهم يا رسول اله فنضرب أعناقهم
قال أكره أن يتحدث الناس ويقولوا ان محمدا وضع يده في أصحابه فسماهم لهما وقال اكتماهم.


Baiyhaqi in Dalail al-Nubuwwat narrates from ‘Arora who said: “When the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & HF) was returning to Medina with the believers, from Tabuk, a group of the companions agreed and decided to secretly throw the Prophet (PBUH & HF) off a cliff.


The Prophet (PBUH & HF) realised this betrayal and said: “Whoever wishes to take the route from the desert can do so, because that route is wider and the crowd will be able to pass by easily.” The Prophet (PBUH & HF), however, took the Aqabah route which was on a mountain. When those who intended to assassinate Him heard of this, they covered their faces and were prepared for something great. The Holy Prophet (PBUH & HF) then ordered Hudhayfa bin Imaan and Ammar bin Yasir to follow him. On the way, He asked Ammar to hold the reins of His camel, and ordered Hudhayfa to guide it. They then heard the footsteps of the tribe from behind and were soon surrounded by the hypocrites.


Hudhayfa recognised the Prophet’s (PBUH & HF) anger and tried to chase them away by hitting them with his staff. Although their faces were covered, he recognised the horses these men were on who then realised, through Allah’s intimidation, that their intentions had become apparent to the Prophet (PBUH & HF) and his aides. Terrified, they turned back and hastened into the crowd until they mixed in with the rest of the Muslims.


After this episode, Hudhayfa returned to the Prophet (PBUH & HF) who ordered them to move out of Aqabah and wait for the crowd. The Prophet (PBUH & HF) then asked: “O Hudhayfa! Did you recognise them?” He replied: “I recognised the horses but not those riding them.” The Prophet (PBUH & HF) then asked: “Do you know what their intentions were?” He replied: “I did not understand what they wanted from this.” The Prophet (PBUH & HF) said: “These people had decided to take advantage of the darkness of the night and wanted to throw me off a cliff.” They replied: “O Messenger of Allah! Order your men to behead them!” The Prophet (PBUH & HF) responded: “I do not want people to say that Mohammed accuses his own companions and kills them.”
Then the Prophet (PBUH & HF) mentioned the names of those men and ordered: “Assume you did not see this and conceal their identities.”


البيهقي، أبي بكر أحمد بن الحسين بن علي )متوفاي 754 ه(، دلائل النبوة، دلائل النبوة ج 5، ص 652 ، باب رجوع النبي من
تبوك وأمره بهدم مسجد الضرار ومكر المنافقين به في الطريق وعصمة الله تعالى إياه وإطلاعه عليه وما ظهر في ذلك من آثار
النبوة، طبق برنامه الجامع الكبير؛ السيوطي، جلال الدين عبد الرحمن بن أبي بكر )متوفاي 199 ه(، الدر المنثور، ج 7، ص 672 ، ناشر: دار الفكر  بيروت – - 9112


 Here comes the fun part, the rafidah continues to say : 


Identities of these individuals are unknown. However, some reliable scholars of the school of Ahl Sunnah like Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi have mentioned the names of these men. In his book called al-Muhali, he writes:


أَنَّ أَبَا بَكْرٍّ وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمَانَ وَطَلْحَةَ وَسَعْدَ بن أبي وَقَّاصٍّ رضي الله عنهم أَرَادُوا قَتْلَ النبي صلى الله عليه
وسلم وَإِلْقَاءَهُ من الْعَقَبَةِ في تَبُوكَ.


Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Talha, Sa’ad bin Abi Waqas decided to assassinate the Holy Prophet (PBUH & HF), and wanted to push him off a cliff on the way back from Tabuk.

إبن حزم الْندلسي الظاهري، ابومحمد علي بن أحمد بن سعيد )متوفاي 752 ه(، المحلي، ج 99 ، ص 667 ، تحقيق: لجنة
إحياء التراث العربي، ناشر: دار الْفاق الجديدة بيروت؛ –
و دار الفكر، توضيحات: طبعة مصححة ومقابلة على عدة مخطوطات ونسخ معتمدة كما قوبلت على النسخة التي حققها
الْستاذ الشيخ أحمد محمد شاكر.

Then the majoosi goes on ahead to show how thiqah (strong) Walid bin Abdullah the witness of this incident is in the books of sunnis and yada yada yada he goes on...

btw, This is the screenshot of that great personality and his claim: 












Link : http://i1171.photobucket.com/albums/r551/omarshah29/IBNHAZAMATTACKINGTHECOMPANIONS.jpg


And this is a part of the scan for the Quote of Ibn hazam : 























To read the whole Quote please visit : 

NOW STARTS THE FUN PART CALLED : REFUTATION 


Regarding the hadith of Al Bayhaqi : 

Without going into the takhreej and other details, it is crystal clear that the narration quoted by Bayhaqi (r.h) only informed regarding "certain companions" of the prophet (s.a.w) who plotted to kill him. Nowhere does he mention the name or pinpoint towards any of the sahabis let alone be the khulafa e rashideen. Moreover, there wasn't any need to even seek for the names as the prophet (s.a.w) ordered "Assume you did not see this and conceal their identities.” and hence we the sunnis or Muslims believe that a sahabi like Ammar and etc wouldn't disobey an order of rasool (s.a.w) of disclosing the names. 

Secondly, according to us (Sunnis) those people were from the hypocrites and not the sahabas, because the (short) definition of a sahaba means the one who saw the prophet (s.a.w), learned from him in the state of emaan and DIED in the state of emaan. Hence the one's who don't match this criteria aren't called sahabis in the context of islamic sharia and there is an Ijmah on this according to Muslims. 

Hence showing anything or trying to proof anything on the narration of bayhaqi is baseless or in other words is called shiism 

Regarding the narration quoted by Ibn Hazam :

Before i Proceed, a short definition of what a saheeh hadith means :

Hadeeth would be accepted as a saheeh hadeeth, if it complies with certain conditions. One such defination which suffices a short yet good explanation is the one given by ibn Salah (rahimuhullah) which said: “A sahih hadith is the one which has a continuous isnad, made up of reporters of trustworthy memory from similar authorities, and which is found to be free from any irregularities (i.e. in the text) or defects (i.e. in the isnad).” 

What you can see below is another lie of the shias who claim that we sunnis follow a text based on only the isnaad (chain of narrations). You may LOL 










Link : http://i1171.photobucket.com/albums/r551/omarshah29/shia-lies-again-41.jpg


As shown above under the "claim of the shias" the Dajjals quoted what Ibn Hazam narrated, yet they purposely left out mentioning the below wordings of Ibn hazam which was in the same paragraph from where they quoted. 

: وهذا هو الكذب الموضوع الذي يطعن الله تعالى واضعه فسقط التعلق به والحمد لله رب العالمين .


Ibn Hazam said : and this is a clear fabricated lie...and all praise is to Allah  


{the entire words of Ibn hazam areوأما حديث حذيفة فساقط لأنه من طريق الوليد بن جميع وهو هالك ولا نراه يعلم من وضع الحديث فإنه قد روى أخبارا فيها ان أبا بكر. وعمر. وعثمان. وطلحة. وسعد بن أبي وقاص رضي الله عنهم أرادوا قتل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وإلقاءه من العقبة في تبوك وهذا هو الكذب الموضوع الذي يطعن الله تعالى واضعه فسقط التعلق }به والحمد لله رب العالمين *

Isn't this a clear hypocrisy from their side? they purposely blatantly use quotes attesting lies to someone ! May Allah guide them or destroy them ! Aamen 

Furthermore, as explained above, in order for this narration quoted by ibn hazam to be accepted as a sahih or acceptable narration, we need to analyze the narration according to usool e hadith wherein both matan (content) and isnaad (chain of narrations) are a vital part of the tehkeeq. but regarding this narration our question is : where is the chain of this hadith?? Ibn Hazm only said that this hadith came from the way of Walid ibn Jamia. He didn’t record or narrate the complete chain in his book. Walid ibn Jamia, who is : Walid ibn Abdullah ibn Jamia al-Koofe az-Zuhre and it is known that he narrates from Ibrahim Nakhai, who was born in 50 year hijrah.

For the sake of argument lets assume that Walid died in second age of hijra. but the point to be noted is that Ibn Hazm himself died in 456 hijrah (see link) . There are hundred years between ibn Hazm and Walid ibn Jamia so how or from where did Ibn hazm get the chain for this narration? Hence this hadith has no sanad, not from Walid till someone who would be witness of that alleged attempt of assassination and neither from Walid till ibn Hazm.

Also, even lets say that this did have a chain linking from any one of the companions till Ibn hazim, still it would be rejected because we the people of proof , we don't depend only on the sanad and its authenticity, we also depend on the matan and other rules before declaring a hadith as acceptable. Knowing that we have numerous narrations describing the virtues of Abu bakr (a.s), Umar ibn Khattab (a.s) and Uthman (a.s), we can never believe a weak or cursed accusation like this as it contradicts the mutawattir ahadeeth regarding Islam and the merits of the companions. 

Moreover, we don't even need to look at this issue as we have more than enough proofs from the Quran, wherein Allah almighty, exalted be he from what they (majoosi) associate and lie upon him, that Allah has praised the companions at various verses, chose them to support and help the messenger (s.a.w), made them the most knowledgeable and the best of this ummah ever. 

Conclusion : 


  • This particular report by Ibn Hazm doesn’t exist in any other book. If it does then I'm sure it is found in one of Hollywood's story books from where they (shia) derive their religion. You may LOL

  • Ibn Hazm knew this type of narration, but in what exact form, we do not know. In any case, he declared this to be a lie and a fabrication and cursed the one who fabricated it. (He didn’t accuse Ibn Jami’ of fabricating it). 

  • It is also possible that Ibn Hazm was already so satisfied of the text being a lie that he didn’t even bother to do an in-depth study of the Isnad. Therefore it is possible that there existed a liar or unknown narrators below Ibn Al-Jami’. We cannot be certain unless we see the full Isnad of the narration. 
  • Regardless of Isnad, the text remain a lie. This is because when a text, even if narrated by good narrators, contradicts established facts through Tawatur (Ma’nawi or Lafzi) then it is rejected unless there remains a way of reconciliation between both. There are abundant reports praising Abu Bakr and Umar, many of them were said by our beloved Prophet (s.a.w) before he passed away to another world. 
May Allah guide the Ummah of Muhammad ! and May Allah strengthen the defenders of Sunnah.


Compiled by Mohammed Omar Shah





No comments:

Blogger Tricks And TipsComment here

To contact us, Please do so from the "Contact us" tab on the top of this page