Banu Umayya History In Urdu Pdf Download 37
Pamula Harrison
narrated abu al-abbas muhammed ibn yaqoob from muhammed ibn ali ibn maymoon alriqqi from muhammed ibn yussef al-firyabi from sufyan from abu ishaq from amru dhi mor from ali radhiallahu amh he said about Allah's verse: " and they made their people dwell in destruction "
he said : this is about the most evil two tribes of quraish : banu umayyah and banu mugheerah , as for bani mugheerah then Allah has destroyed them in badr and as for bani umayyah then Allah will make them enjoy for a while
narrated musaab ibn abdilleh he said ibn abi hazim told us from al-alaa from his father from abi hurairah that rasool Allah saw in his dream bani al-hakam mounting his pulpit and descending so he woke up exasperated and said: why did i see bani al-hakam mounting my pulpit like monkeys . he said( abu hurairah) rasool Allah was never seen smiling after that untill he died
Uthman ibn Sayed said: I asked Yahya about Ala and his son, what is their status? He said: They are not bad. I asked: Who is more beloved to you Sayed al-Muqre or he (Ala)? He said: Sayed more correct, and Ala is weak. (Mizan #5735)
Ibn Abbas reported: I was playing with children that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) happened to pass by (us). I hid myself behind the door. He (the Holy Prophet) came and he patted upon my shoulders and said: Go and call Mu'awiya. I returned and said: He is busy in taking food. He again asked me to go and call Mu'swiya to him. I went (and came back) and said that he was busy in taking food, whereupon he said: May Allah not fill his belly!.
Say (O Beloved Prophet): If your fathers, and your sons, and your brothers, and your wives, and your kinsfolk, and the wealth you have acquired, and merchandise for which you fear that there will be no sale, and dwellings you desire, are dearer to you than Allah and His (Prophetic) Messenger and fighting in His Way: then wait till Allah brings His Command to pass, and Allah does not guide the disobedient people. (9:24)
if SUPPOSE for sake of argument that hadees is authentic , then from that do you conclude that EVERY INDIVIDUAL FROM THAT TRIBE IS CURSED AND THERE CAN BE NO GOOD PERSONALITY FROM THAT TRIBE? is that you conclude from that?
And there is also Idtirab (conflict) in the sanad as this same hadith also recorded by Tabari in his Tafsir where Qasim b. Fadl narrates from 'Isa bin Mazin instead of Yusuf bin Mazin. Hence there is Idtirab as said by Ibn Katheer and supported by Mubarakpuri.
Its Munakr based on the fact that Surah Kawthar was not revealed regarding the incident mention in narration, neither surah qadar revealed for that. Any book of Tafsir might be useful to know the fact.
Dhahabi only said he do not see any problem in the narrators. What i was talking about is the matan of the hadith. The Matan is munkar as Surah Kawthar revealed regarding Aas bin Wail Sahmi who said some disliked words for prophet (pbuh) when Prophet's son died. And Surah Qadar revealed regarding "lailatul qadr". And the hadith you qouted says that both were revealed when Prophet (pbuh) saw Banu Umaya were giving Khutba on his minbar. We cannot hope this type of unscholarly reply from Imam Hasan (ra) . Certainly, if there were any Nasibi here on shiachat, he would have qouted this narration to show that how ignorant Hasan b. Ali was, just like Rafida qoute some hadith to show how ignorant Umar b. Khattab was. (wal 'iyadh billah)
And from when Dhahabi became hujjah for you so that its enough for you? Al-Mizzi and Ibn Katheer declared it munkar, and does makes more sense as Dhahabi also do not declared the hadith to be Sahih rather he just commented on Narrators, without commenting on matan.
As for the third hadith then it doesn't prove your racist view. Prophet (pbuh) was angry on Umavis caliphs attitude on his minbar, meaning those who were not eligible for it reached the minbar of Prophet (pbuh) . And we know a large number of Umavis caliph were not eligible for it, there were other who had more right for caliphate than them. In short the hadith is about those Banu Umayya who were behaving like monkeys on Prophet's minbar. This doesn't include Uthman, Umar b. Abdul Azeez, Mu'awiya. (the minbar indicates leadership).
first of all rasool Allah Allah saw bani umayyah in a dream (ro'ya) not while awake so it's wahi from Allah , have you got any objection to this ?? if yes then that's your problem not ours because we believe rasool Allah spoke many times about future events that he didnt see during his life time that's why he's a prophet !!!
now tashih dhahabi carries a lot of weight , i dont care if it's his early work or later work , yes he did comment on his silence about some hadiths but he never contradicted himself anout any tashih of any hadith.
and this dance about sanad and matn is ridiculous because when hakim saw a hadith that is munkar he said it, this hadith he accepted matnan and sanadan otherwise he would have said otherwise , when he said sahih what does this mean ??? what's a hadith sahih? it means sanad muttasil with all narrators thiqat , we as shia have given you hadith sahih with narrators all of them accepted as thiqat according to u. but of course out of hatred of ali(as) you start talking about matn and i dont know what
You don't care only because it suits your desires. Scholars always differentiate between early and later work of a scholar. And if you would read the article you'll find all of your answers. _detail_section.cfm?q_id=839&main_cat_id=11
we the imami know that ibn katheer and dhahabi and others are nawasib so we dont agree with what agrees with their madhab and manhaj but we deem them extremely reliable when it comes to data where they contradict their madhab , for example we have hadiths from ikrimah maula ibn abbas and we accept his hadith as extremely sahih when he contradict his madhab , also we accept hadiths of ayesha and malik ibn anas and even abu hurairah as extremely sahih given the condition i just stated.
as for this hadith it's sahih but it doesnt suit your nasibi madhab so it's munkar according to you even ifd sanad is sahih and this is unscientific and only shows nasb and deep hatred for ahlbeit(as) especially maula almuwahhideen (as)
The hadith is about those umavis who were behaving like monkeys on the minbar of Rasulullah (pbuh) . "Most" of them did not ever stand on pulpit, and then is the second condition that Prophet saw them mounting like monkeys. That was the reason why Prophet (pbuh) became angry, not just because they were Banu Umayya. And "majority" of Banu Umayyah leaders were not that great. But you can't apply it to all.
i have nothing more to say , i explained to you that we the shia have sunni narrators in our books and even nasibi narrators and we deem their hadith to be extremely sahih when they narrate against their madhab , for example khutbah shaqshaqyyah , no shia doubts its autheticity even though it has chains that go back to ikrimah.
i dont know whether the hadith are true accurate weak or strong. History proves that that elements of that tree is cursed and poisoned. People may rationalise their support for Yazid and Moaviyah because they feel they are obliged to but the majority would not name their children that. Some misguided twisted individuals do. But thankfully the names of the Ahlul Bait are like Al Kauther in the muslim world and the names of the 'cursed tree' are still extremely rare. By this I mean right across the muslim world not just Shia.
b1e95dc632