Answering on doubt: Busr ibn Artat.


Bismillah, salam alaikum.

First I – Slave of Allah, would like to present allegation from Slave of Creation.

1) Who was this Busr? Busr ibn Artat, and it was said ibn Abi Artat. His name was Umayr ibn Uwaymir ibn Imran.

Was he companion? Ibn Hajar in “Tahzib at-Tahzib” (1/220) in his bio, said that his companionship was discussed. People differed in this. And he mentioned that only two ahadeth were narrated from Busr.

al-Waqidi said: Prophet (salallahu alaihi wa sallam) died and Busr was little (child), he didn’t hear from prophet (salallahu alaihi wa salam) anything. (Ibid)

Ibn Adi said: His companionship questionable, I don’t know from him except these two ahadeth.

Now it is time, to expose another half-quote  from this dajal slave of Creation.

As you can see in screen shot he quoted ibn Maeen saying that Busr was bad man, but he omitted first part of words of this Imam.

Ibn Hajar quoted him saying:

People of Madina rejected (idea) that Busr heard from prophet (salallahu alaihi wa sallam), and people of Syria reported from him from prophet (salallahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam).

And then he quoted him saying that Busr was bad man. So it is possible that imam Yahya ibn Maeen hold opinion that Busr wasn’t companion, like people of Madina.

However, let us assume that  Yahya as Daraqutni also thought that Busr was companion. So what?

In the end of his “great research” this Slave of Creation – Rafidi, said:

which for sure means, just becoming sahabi is not enough

We have such question to all rawafidh, including this ignorant, where did you see any scholars of AhleSunnah saying that being companion is enough?

May be you seen them saying that being companion mean being masoom?

Conclusion:

1) Being companion in the understanding of Muslims doesn’t mean being sinless.

2) Companionship of Busr was questioned by many known Islamic scholars.

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 828 other followers

%d bloggers like this: