Imam Beyhaki said in Itiqad wal Hadiy ila sabili Rashad (p 494):
The thing that was narrated regarding Ali didn’t pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr 6 months, is not from words of Aisha. That is words of az-Zuhri, which some narrators inserted to hadith of Fatima from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with them). Muamar ibn Rashid memorized it, and narrated it in clear form, and he marked words of az-Zuhri separate from hadith itself.
Scan page: Continue reading
Book: Kitab an-Nawadir p 123
Author: Diyautdin Abu Rida Fadlullah ibn Ali al-Husayni ar-Rawandi.
قال عليه السلام: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله: أثبتكم على الصراط، أشدكم حبا لأهل بيتي ولأصحابي
Alaihi salam said: Messenger of Allah, sallalahu alaihi wa ali said: Most steady from you on the siraat those who more love my ahlalbayt and my companions.
Thanks to brother كاوا محمد
Know – may Allah have mercy upon you – that the propaganda of the Rafidah has confused and poisoned many minds. Two historical events that resulted into a war between some of the companions of the Prophet (صل الله عليه و على آله و سلم) are being used day and night in the Rafidite propaganda machineray, namely the battle of Battle of Jamal and Siffeen. Their Da’wa in this regards (as usual actually) is very emotional and thus they target the general masses of the Muslims (who in this age have not much clue about Islam in general, let alone historical events) by ranting day and night about these two events. Their aim is well known, it is to put hatred in the heart of the Muslims, hatred for the Sahaba and love only for Ali Ibn Abi Talib (رضوان الله عليه) it’s literally a black and white world i.e. whoever was with Ali is good/muslim whoever was not with Ali is a bad/Kafir and then this very sect has seriously the audacity to call others (like the ‘WAhhabis’) as ‘Takfiris’! Ironically it is the Ijma’ of the Imamite sect that all the non-Imamite sects, even Shia sects such as Zaydis are Nasibis and Kuffar and their destination (if dying upon any blief other than the Imamite one) is the hellfire. Then they add some Hadith (loving Ali is a sign of Iman etc. of course they don’t mention similar Hadith for Sahaba they hate …) and pave the way way for their Takfir of the Sahaba, it is a simple minded, Shia Takfeeri Mathematics. Of course they will never mention that Ali himself never did Takfir on those who fought him, not even the evil Khawarij who were not Sahaba in the first place. Ali was well aware that it is a big Fitnah and hence all historians report that in the battle of Jamal and Siffeen (Muslims VS Muslims) he never showed any joy and happiness and even cursed the ones who killed some of his opponents (!), like the killer of Zubayr (رضوان الله عليه), but at Naharavan, where he killed the real Khawarij he showed joy and happiness.
The One Who Broke The Ribs Of the Majoos – Abu Sulaiman, KHALED BIN WALEED (رضي الله عنه)
Do you know the REAL reason why the Rafidah (Majoos, spawn of the Sassanid-Majoos and Sabaite-Yahood) hate on Khaled bin Al-Waleed? Sure, they hate most Sahabas anyway, especially those Sahaba who participated in the opening (Fath) of Persia and freed the Persians of the oppression of the Sassanids and brought Islam to Persia. Their (Rafidah’s) number one on the list (to pick on) is Al-Farooq Omar and this is as we know because he BROKE the RIBS of Yazgerd, the Kisra (King) of the Sassanids. As for Khaled, the unsheathed sword of Allah, well, did you know that Khaled did not just aided the the Prophet (عليه الصلاة و السلام) in many CRUCIAL battles but also took part in the battles under the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and Omar against the Sassanid Persian MAJOOS? Yes, you got it, this is the REAL reason why they hate him, all the other doubts raised against him have been answered a long time (including in this article) and are just cheap excuses to cover the deep Sassanid-Majoosi grudge that has infested their sect more and more throughout history. Anyway, here a short reminder of the achievements of Khaled, something to ponder upon:
– The Battle of Mu’tah (not the sexual battle the Rafidah are involved in i.e. Mut’ah/fornication (متعة) but Mu’tah (with a Hamzah = معركة مؤتة).
This battle took place near the village of Mu’tah, east of the Jordan River (some Sahaba graves are stil in Jordan), between the Messenger and his companions and the forces of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire who STARTED the war by killing
What Ali and his TRUE followers would have done … with those who CLAIM to be upon his path …
That’s what the Shia claim, the very Shia who included accursed and hideous innovations into their Adhan (see HERE>>>), these Rafidah have the audacity to accuse the Ahl Al-Sunnah of Bid’ah! The people who are drown in Bid’ah and heresies dare to use to word Bid’ah! What an oxymoron indeed. They argue that it was (as their usual claim) Omar Al-Farooq (رضي الله عنه) who removed it from the Adhan because ‘he disliked it’. They also sometimes argue based on a few narrations from some of the Salaf who used to say the phrase (‘Hayya ‘alaa khayr ..’) in the Adhan. So what’s the truth? Did Omar removed it? Did anyone removed it? Are the deeds of the Salaf (if we asume that some really used to say that phrase), even from the Sahaba evidence enough (if in contradiction to what the Prophet صل الله عليه و على آله و سلم taught)?! Let’s find that out, Insha’Allah.
The Rafidah say:
The brothers at TwelverShia.net have already done a wonderful job in refuting a NUMBER of deceitful (and always unnecessarily lengthy) articles of the Rafidi blog RTS (RevisitingtheSalaf). One of the latest refutations was in regards of one of the cheapest Rafidi ‘arguments’ (also used by the likes of Yasser Al-Khabeeth etc.) namely:
Now pretty much everything has been answered there. Our aim in this article is to shed some more light on a particular accusation of that Rafidi blog against (as usual) Omar bin Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) and indirectly against Othman Ibn Affan. They cite a narraton from Hudhayfah Ibn Al-Yaman (may Allah be pleased with him) concerning Al-Farooq Omar. Let us first introduce you to the great Sahabi Hudhayfah Ibn Al-Yaman:
The Rafidha Shia propagandist are the most biased people towards Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, so there is no wonder that they use anything, literally anything against Al-Faruq, including attacking his lineage (a trait of Jahiliyyah, attacking ones lineage …). Here the answer to their cheap and filthy lie they eagerly recycle (copy from other websites). They took this lie from the masters of lies, the Mullah Pasha, the palace scholar of the Safavids, the polytheist heretic and Khatim Al-Muhadditheen (!) of the Rafidha, the Majoosi (SEE HERE), Mullah Baqir Al-Majlisi:
Look very carefully at the sanad and see the lie of Al-Majlissi
وجدت في كتاب عقد الدرر لبعض الأصحاب بإسناده عن علي بن إبراهيم عن أبيه عن الحسن بن محبوب عن ابن الزيات عن الصادق
انه قال : كانت صهاك جاريه لعبد المطلب وكانت ذات عجز وكانت ترعى الإبل وكانت حبشيه وكانت تميل إلى النكاح فنظر إليها نفيل جد عمر فهواها وعشقها في مرعى الإبل فوقع عليها فحملت منه بالخطاب فلما أدرك البلوغ نظر إلى أمه صهاك فأعجبه عجزها فوثب عليها فحملت منه بحنتمه فلما ولدتها خافت من أهلها فجعلتها في صوف وألقتها بين اشحام مكة فوجدها هشام بن المغيره بن الوليد فحملها إلى منزله ورباها وسماها بالحنتمه و كانت شيمة العرب انه من ربى يتيما يتخذه ولدا فلما بلغت حنتمه نظر إليها الخطاب فمال إليها وخطبها من هشام فتزوجها فأولد منها عمر فكان الخطاب أباه وجده وخاله وكانت حنتمه أمه وأخته وعمته , وينسب إلى الصادق ( ع ) في هذا المعنى
من جده خاله ووالده وأمه أخته وعمته اجدر أن يبغض الولي وان ينكر يوم الغدير بيعته
The final coffin in all those Fadak related debates, the following should be enough for every Muslim, no need for hours of debates, just take the stance of the Ahl Al-Bayt:
Ali loved Othman, just as the Sunnis (whom the Rafidah used to call Umayyads, and today Wahhabis) do:
Shia historian al-Masoode wrote in his book “Muruj az-zahab” (2/270) : Continue reading
Yes, a good number of rock-solid Sahih narrations (whom Rafidah in their picking and chosing game will never mention) state so. So next time a Rafidi shows you such and such Hadith (like the Hadith in Bukhari where Omar says Ali called him a liar etc.) that says Ali had an argument with Omar, or Ali called Omar this or that etc. then you know how to respond:
The Sahaba (Ahl Al-Bayt included) were human beings and human beings have arguments, heck, the Qur’an says that TWO BELIEVING groups can be involved in a war and fight with one another, this is because NONE of them (neither the Ahl Al-Bayt nor the Sahaba) were ‘infallibles’, they were not Prophets to be infallible in any shape or form, hence they committed sins, but their good deeds were by far greater than their sins, hence Allah had forgiven them and promised them Jannah, hence Ali Ibn Abi Talib forgave his brothers and had (ultimately) nothing but good to say about his brothers the Sahaba, especially the likes of Omar Ibn Al-Khattab.
Everyone by now knows that the religion of hatred and cursing (Shiasm) tries its UTMOST to potray the Sahaba and Ahl Al-Bayt as die-hard enemies. They try to use every narration to