note: all the numerous hadiths cited both in text and video are from sunni sources only.




1.) Fadaa’il as-Sahaabah (“Virtues of the Companions”)-by Ahmad ibn Hanbal

Authenticated by Wasiyyu-Allah ibn Muhammad ‘Abbas –
Umm Al Qurra University (Mecca)
2nd Edition & 3rd Edition, New Edition
Dar ibn Al-Jawzi Publishers

Volume 2, pg. 965, Hadith# 1357:
‘Abdullah narrates that his father said, from someone (fulaan), who said that ‘Aisha or Umm Salama, that Wakee’ says: “I can’t remember which one of them ('Aisha or Umm Salama) said that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: ‘An angel which had never visited me before came into the house today. It (the Angel) told me: This son of yours, Hussein, will surely be killed. And if you wish (desire it) I can give you some of the soil of that land (Karbala) which he will die in. The Prophet said: He (the Angel) then brought me a soil that was red.'"


He also says: “He (Ahmad ibn Hanbal) has brought this hadith in his Musnad, and also Haythami in his Majma’ Al-Zawaa’id and has said: Imam Ahmad has reported this hadith and its narrators are authentic (saheeh).” And Tabarani has brought this hadith from ‘Aisha , and Imam Ahmad has mentioned it. And also in Majma’ Al-Zawaa’id it is mentioned: Ahmad has narrated this, and Abu Ya’laa Al-Mawsili and Al-Bazzaar, and its narrators are all trustworthy (thiqaat).”


2. Musnad of Abu Ya’laa Al-Mawsili
Authenticated by Hussein Saleem Asad
First Edition

Volume 1, pg. 298, Hadith# 363

Narrated by 'Abdullah ibn Nujayy who heard from his father that, he went along with 'Ali (ibn Abi Talib) and they faced Naynawaa, since they were going to the Battle of Siffeen (war against Mu'awiyyah). Then 'Ali called out: "Have patience, O' Abaa 'Abdillah (i.e. Hussain)! Have patience, O' Abaa 'Abdillah on the banks of the Euphrates (River)!" I said: "What do you mean, O' Abaa 'Abdillah?" He ('Ali) then said: "I went into the room with the Prophet (may peace be upon him) one day and his eyes were gushing with tears." I ('Ali) then said: "O Prophet! Has someone angered you? What makes your eyes gush with tears?" He (the Prophet) replied: "No. Jibreel has left me just now. He informed me that Hussein will be killed on the banks of the Euphrates (River)." Then He (Jibreel) said to him (the Prophet): "Shall I let you smell the soil (on which he will die)?" I said: "Yes!" Then he (Jibreel) extended his hand, took a handful of the soil and gave it to me (the Prophet). [/b]And then, I couldn't control my eyes from the gushing of tears.


[b]3.)Musnad of Abu Ya'laa Al-Mawsili.Volume 6, pg. 129-130, Hadith# 3402

Anas bin Malik says (according to the narration of 'Imaarah ibn Zaathaan):

"The Angel of Rain asked his Lord permission to make a visit to the Prophet (may peace be upon him). Permission was given to him (by Allah). And on this particular day the Prophet was with Umm Salama (the Mother of the Believers). The Prophet (may peace be upon him) told her: 'O, Umm Salama! Guard the door and do not let anyone come in.' He said: 'While she was at the door (about to guard it) Hussein ibn 'Ali burst into the room.' So the Prophet began to hug him and kiss him. The Angel then said: 'Do you love him?' The Prophet said: 'Yes!' The Angel replied: 'Your nation will surely kill him!' The Angel further said: 'If you wish, I will show you the place in which they will kill him.'

courtesy: International African Shia Federation:

http://africanshia.ning.com/profiles/blogs/karbala-amp-the-martyrdom-of

PLEASE CLICK ON THE BELOW [size=14pt]YOUTUBE VIDEO LINK [/size] FOR AN EXTENSIVE REASERCH (WITH EGLISH SUBTITLES) IN SUNNI HADITH COMPILATIONS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE LAND OF KARBALA AS RECORDED IN NUMEROUS SUNNI HADITHS:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gs9mENDS80

(the above video is in 6 parts.above is only part 1.the other parts are available on youtube).

The Story of Karbala

[b]During his Caliphate, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) shifted the Caliphate from Medinah to Kufa in Iraq. The Kuffans were staunch Partisans of Ali (Shia’t Ali). The Jew Abdullah Ibn Saba found the Kuffans to be very receptive to his claims that Ali was divinely appointed by Allah, and his followers became the Saba’ites. When the Shia’t Ali met the Shia’t Muawiyyah on the battlefield, Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه) convinced Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to hold a cease-fire and to use arbitration to decide who will be the Caliph. Ali (رضّى الله عنه) agreed to arbitration. This angered the Kuffan Saba’ites because they held the erroneous belief that Ali had been divinely appointed by Allah, so they believed that Ali (رضّى الله عنه) was going against the will of Allah by agreeing to arbitration. In their minds, there could be no negotiation on a matter that was decreed by Allah. Some of these Kuffan Saba’ites rebelled against Ali (رضّى الله عنه), turning on him and calling him an apostate. These people would be known as Kharajites, and they would eventually assasinate their leader Ali (رضّى الله عنه), the same leader they had once claimed so much love for.

Distrusting his Shia, Hasan (رضّى الله عنه) made peace with Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه) and gave him the Caliphate, so long as Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه) promised that Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) would be made Caliph after Muawiyyah’s death (رضّى الله عنه). Hussain’s Shia protested at this, and Hasan (رضّى الله عنه)’s reply is preserved in the most important of the Shia books of Hadith, Al-Kafi:

“By Allah, I handed over power to him for no reason other than the fact that I could not find any supporters. Had I found supporters I would have fought him day and night until Allah decides between us. But I know the people of Kufa. I have experience of them. The bad ones of them are no good to me. They have no loyalty, nor any integrity in word or deed. They are in disagreement. They claim that their hearts are with us, but their swords are drawn against us.” [Al-Kafi, vol. 8 p. 288]

When Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه) died, however, his son Yezid declared himself the new Caliph, in violation of the agreement settled with Hasan (رضّى الله عنه) which stated that Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) would be Caliph. This angered the Shias of Kufa. So it was that in Ramadan 60 A.H. that the Kuffans sent letter after letter from Kufa to Mecca where Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) was staying after his flight from Medinah. The Kuffans assured Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) of their loyalty and allegiance to him; they had not accepted Yezid as leader whom they resented. On certain days, there would be as many as 600 letters accompanied by messengers describing the overwhelming support of Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) in Kufa.

Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) decided to send his cousin Muslim Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) to investigate the situation in Kufa. Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) arrived in Dhul Qada where he stayed with Ibn Awsajah al-Asadi. The Kuffans met Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) and pledged the support of 12,000 Shia’t Ali of Kufa. They promised to fight with and to protect Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) with their lives and all they possessed. When the number who pledged support rose to 18,000 Kufans, Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) felt confident enough to dispatch a messenger to Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) informing him of the bayat (oath of allegiance) of the Kuffans, and urged him to proceed fr

Rumors of what was happening in Kufa soon reached Yezid in Damascus. He dispatched Ubaydullah ibn Ziyad with 17 men to find Muslim Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) and kill him. When Ubaydullah arrived in Kufa, Muslim Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) called the Kuffans to defend him. It was at this moment of need that the Shia of Kufa deserted Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه), fearful of Ubaydullah’s threats. Muslim Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) hid from Ubaydullah in the house of an old woman. The old woman’s son, a part of the Shia’t Ali, notified Ubaydullah of Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه)’s location, hopeful that this act would prevent Yezid from punishing Kufa. Based on this act of treachory, the Shia’t Ali left Muslim Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) to be captured by Ubaydullah.

Later that day–the Day of Arafah, the 9th of Dhul Hijjah–Muslim ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه) was taken up to the highest ramparts of the fort. His last words before being executed were:

“O Allah, You be the Judge between us and our people; they deceived us and deserted us.”

The Shia of Kufa witnessed his execution, and not a single one of them went to the aid of Hussain’s cousin. It is important to remember that only 17 men were with Ubaydullah, whereas there were 18,000 Shia of Kufa who had pledged Bayat to Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) in front of Muslim Ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه). How could it be that 18,000 men could not stop 17 men from slaughtering the very man they had just pledged support to? Such was the treachory of the Shia of Kufa.

Meanwhile, Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) had dispatched a mesenger by the name of Qais ibn Mushir to inform the Kuffans of Hussain (رضّى الله عنه)’s arrival. The messenger was captured by Ubaydullah, who ordered him to mount the walls of the fort and publically curse Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) and his father. Instead, Qais ibn Mushir praised Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and Hussain (رضّى الله عنه), telling the Shia of Kufa that Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) was on his way, and he exhorted them to defend him. Upon that, Qais ibn Mushir was executed. Yet another representative of Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) had been killed by 18 men who met no ressistance from the 18,000 Shia of Kufa. A ratio of 1,000 Kufans to each of Yezid’s men.


Yezid thereupon dispatched 4,000 soldiers to intercept Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). These 4,000 soldiers were actually on their way to fight the Daylamites, but Yezid re-routed them to Karbala. These 4,000 soldiers passed through Kufa. The Kuffans witnessed the departure of this force from Kufa with their own eyes, full well knowing they were headed to Karbala to intercept Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). This would be the Kuffans’ last chance to honor the oaths of allegiance to Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) which they had taken upon the hands of his cousin Muslim ibn Aqil (رضّى الله عنه). This was the final opportunity to rush to the side of the grandson of the Prophet and protect the Ahlel Bayt. It was after all the invitations and assurances of support from the Shia of Kufa that encouraged Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) to abandon the safety of Mecca for Kufa. But once again faithfulness, courage and commitment was found lacking in the Shia of Kufa. Only a handful emerged to join Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) at Karbala. Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) would comment:

“Our Shia have deserted us.”

The Shia of Kufa outnumbered Yezid’s men 18,000 to 4,000. Actually, the number was greater than 18,000; 18,000 was simply the number of men who had pledged Bayat (oath of allegiance) to protect Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). Had they wanted to, the Shia of Kufa could have defeated Yezid’s men and protected Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). But instead, they did nothing but watch from afar with cowardice. The Shia of today will eulogize this day and talk about how 71 men fought against 4,000 of Yezid’s troops. Where did the other 18,000 go? [/b]

this thread by me was started to quote the sayings of the holy Prophet (sa) regarding the city of Karbala after disgusting comments by vedaxcool against this holy city in another thread:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-661419.96.html


you have come to see hopefully the significance of Karbala in islam and come to realize that Karbala is neither "intoxicating" nor a "burukutu" since even the Prophet (sa) honored it with his words and attention.

This attitude against Karbala,and Ashura and anything that has to do with Imam Hussain (as) is a pure wahhabi and nasibi approach to conceal facts about the tragedy of Karbala and the atrocities of the Ummayads and their predecessors against the Ahlul-Bayt (as).they think by concealing historical facts and islamic beliefs,they can fight off the Shia.this is to the extent hate and ignorance can take over some people.they forget about and conceal religion just because they hate the word "Shia".

as for the nonsense you posted above,let me tell you that a Shia like myself is not bothered by your display of ignorance mixed with blind hatred especially for things you do not know or understand.as far as I am concern,and as long as you do not show any sign of tawba (repentance) for the words you used against Karbala,the Ahlul-Bayt and the Prophet (sa) himself,I do not consider you anything but a plain and pure kaf’ir with a display of hypocrisy by using islam as a disguise to claim that you’re muslim.

the word "shia" or "partisans of Ali " (as) means those who love the Ahlul-Bayt (as) and support the leadership role (wilayah) which Allah (swt) designated for the progeny of the Prophet (sa) i.e. the 12 Imams (as).so the minute anyone goes against the Household,he is no longer "shia" and is not even muslim.saying that the shia killed a member of the Ahlul-Bayt (as) is like saying that muslims fought against the Prophet (sa), when those who professed islam with their mouth and not with their hearts as recorded in surat-al-fath were infact hypocrites.likewise anyone who claims to be shia cannot go against the Household except if they are just as hypocrites as those who claimed to be muslims and thereafter stood against the Prophet (sa) in Medina.going by your logic,then we should condemn all muslims as enemies of the Prophet Muhammad (sa) and the killers of his uncle Hamza (as) during the battle of Uhud.

Zayd Ibn Ali,grandson of Imam Hussain (as),is another matyr of Islam from the Household who we also honor and mourn and remember annually.it is up to the nasibi wahhabis to decide if they really want to be muslims or hypocrites.you have to decide where you stand and where your hearts belong to.is your heart with the Ahlul-Bayt (as) or with banu ummayya? Is your heart with Imam Hussain (as) or with Yazeed (la) the tyrant?the choice is up to you all,those who claim to be “sunni” and also those who are openly nasibis and wahhabis.

Also,“vedaxcool” forgets to mention that the cowardly kuffans were either bribed or threatened by Yazeed’s governor umar ibn saad against supporting Imam Hussain (as).he also forgets to mention that a handful from the kuffans stood by Imam Hussain (as) while the majority betrayed him either out of kufr and hypocrisy,bribery or the threat they received from Yazeed’s men.

And ofcourse vedaxcool,has forgotten to mention that sunnis still say “may Allah be pleased with him”,after mentioning the name of the traitor and butcher of the muslims and killer of the Ahlul-Bayt (as),Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan,when mention of his name is made.he forgets to also state that the Shia up to this day say “may Allah curse him”,when the name of Muawiyah and his son Yazeed are mentioned.so let people be the judge and tell us who really love the enemies of the Ahlul-Bayt (as):is it the shia or the sunni (and their wahhabi/nasibi offsprings)?


and let us remember that it was Muawiyah who first used the name and word "ahlus-sunnah wal-ja'maa" or simply what we know as "sunni" when he refered to the people who were not shia,allies of the Ahlul-Bayt (as).

A TIMELINE OF EVENTS AFTER THE DEMISE OF THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD (sa) THAT LED TO THE MATYRDOM/BEHEADING OF IMAM HUSSAIN (as)

1.) Death of the Prophet Muhammad (sa)

2.) Body of the Prophet (sa) yet unburied and the Banu Hashem (clan of the Prophet) were busy making burial arrangements when a gang decided to hold a meeting at [B]SAQIFA BANU SAEDA[/b] to put in place a caliph, or successor to the Prophet (sa).

3.) The gang led by Abu Bakr and Umar bargained and even threatened themselves with swords as they finally agreed to make Abu Bakr caliph.

4.) They use “shura” or “consultative consensus” or even “democracy” as the means to justify abu bakr’s selection in the SAQIFA BANU SAEDA, when a majority of muslims and members of the Prophet’s clan were caught unawares.

5.) The selection of abu bakr as caliph went against several declarations by the Prophet Muhammad (sa) in line with divine order to make Imam Ali(as),the father of Imam Hussain (as),as the first imam and successor to the Prophet (sa).Google and read the following hadiths:

a.) Hadith of the two weighty things
b.) Hadith of Position
c.) Hadith of twelve successors
d.) Hadith of the pond of khumm
e.) Hadith of the Imam of the time
f.) Hadith of warning


6.) Companions of the Prophet (sa) and close associates of Imam Ali (as) referred to by the Prophet Muhammad (sa) himself as “the shia of Ali” gathered around him in his house and refused to pay allegiance to abu bakr. the closest prominent four companions were: Ammar Ibn Yasser, Salman al-Farisi, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari and Miqdad Ibn Aswad.

7.) Confiscation of the land of fadak by abu bakr which was gifted to Lady Fatima by the Prophet (sa) under abu bakr’s false testimony that prophets do not leave behind inheritance.

8.) Lady Fatima (as) and the family of the Prophet (sa) protested. Lady Fatima (as) made a moving speech in the Masjid an-Nabawi in Medina during which abu bakr was exposed for what he was. See here for the speech:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-573841.0.html

9.) Umar and his gang of hoodlums assaulted the house of Lady Fatima, daughter of the Prophet (sa),to force those inside to come out and pay allegiance to abu bakr. this assault led to the untimely death of Lady Fatima,mother of Imam Hussain (as),and the lost of her unborn child, Muhsin (as).

10.) Lady Fatima (as) passed away six months after the death of her father, the Prophet Muhammad (sa).

11.) Abu bakr died. while on the deathbed he appointed umar directly and imposed him on Muslims as his successor and second caliph. All the talk about shura,and democracy went to the drain.

12.) Umar was struck to death and died. Before his death,he ordered a committee six men including Imam Ali (as) to select his successor among themselves with the use of threat.failure to do so would see the six men all killed. usthman was selected and became caliph.Imam Ali refused to become caliph because he was given the condition that he must abide by the “sunnah” (tradition) of the Prophet (sa) and the shaykhain (two sheikhs) i.e. abu bakr and umar.Imam Ali (as) refused and reasoned that if he only followed the sunnah of the Prophet (sa) which the “two sheikhs” claimed to have followed, there was no need to follow the “sunnah of the sheikhain”. the so much talk/argument for abu bakr’s caliphate based on shura and democracy went to the drain again.

13.) Usthman was assassinated and he did not appoint or leave a successor. the people rushed to Imam Ali (as) for him to take the reign of the caliphate and “rescue” the muslim ummah (nation) to which he accepted.

14.) Aisha, daughter of abu bakr, rebelled against the imam of her time and successor to the Prophet,Imam Ali (as) and challenged his caliphate. she led an armed uprising which saw the killing of thousands of muslims known as the BATTLE OF JAMAL.[/b]she did this despite being warned by the Prophet (sa) before his death against the war. She was defeated and put under house arrest by a band of Muslim women loyal to Imam Ali (as).

15.) Muwaiya son of Abu Sufyan, from the clan of Banu Ummaya also led two wars against Imam Ali (as) during Imam Ali’s caliphate known as the [b]BATTLE OF SIFFEEN and the BATTLE OF NAHRWAN.note that Abu Sufyan was the arch-foe of the Prophet (sa) and enemy number one of Islam before he was defeated decisively by the Prophet (sa) and abu sufyan only accepted Islam out of humiliation. Both aisha and muawiya and even sunnis to this day repeat the lie that muawiya and aisha’s wars against Imam Ali (as) were fought because Imam Ali (as) did not do much to punish the killers of usthman. this can be described as ridiculous:they can declare war against the leader of the time and use force but they themselves did not bring the killers of usthman to justice or punish them!the logic is clear:they used the killing of usthman to vent their hatred on Imam Ali (as) rather than help him to bring the killers to justice.

16.) Imam Ali (as) was assassinated by a kharijite with order from muawiya. the kharijites were once part of Imam Ali’s (as) army and political supporters who were also referred to as “shiat Ali”. they should by no means be considered as being “shia” because no shia can be shia or can remain “shia” if he rebels against any of the 12 Imams or disbelieves in them. also, a “shia” is both religiously and politically affiliated to the 12 Imams (as) from the progeny of the Prophet (sa).

17.) Imam Hassan, son of Imam Ali (as),gained the caliphate but gave it up with a truce at muawiya’s aggression to prevent more bloodshed of Muslims and further divisions and rebellions. One condition was for the caliphate to be returned to Imam Hussain (as) upon the death of Muawiya.

18.) Imam Hassan (as),grandson of the Prophet (sa) is poisoned by his treacherous wife by the order of muawiya, son of abu sufya, the arch-enemy of the Prophet (sa).muawiya promised her worldly reward and to marry her to his sinful and un-islamic son, Yazeed (la).

19.) Imam Hussain (as) buried his elder brother, Imam Hassan (as) under the rain of bow and arrows and the refusal of Aisha for Imam Hassan (as) to be buried close to the Prophet Muhammad (sa).

20.) Muawiya assumed the reign of caliphate

21.) Muawiya nominated his son,Yazeed as successor and caliph-to-be in violation of the truce with Imam Hasaan in which he promised to hand over power to Imam Hussain (as).

22.) Muawiya dies and Yazeed took over the caliphate.

23.) Yazeed demands pledge of allegiance from Imam Hussain (as) to legitimize his rule.

24.) Imam Hussain (as) refuses to pay allegiance to the un-islamic and un-godly Yazeed.

25.) Yazeed ordered for the assassination of Imam Hussain (as) even if found glued to the walls of the Ka’ba!

26.) Imam Hussain (as) sent his cousin, Muslim Ibn Aqeel to kufa for support. the kuffans voiced support for Imam Hussain (as) in their thousands.

27.) Imam Hussain (as) left Medina and headed for Mecca. upon knowledge that Yazeed is bent on assassinating him, and Imam Hussain’s will to preserve the sanctity of the Ka’ba and expose the treachery of Yazeed, Imam Hussain (as) left for Iraq with his children, wives, sisters, nephews, daughters and the closest and staunchest of all his Shia (loyalists).

28.) Imam Hussain (as) kept marching towards Iraq even after being warned of betrayal and not to advance.Imam Hussain’s choice away from Mecca and Medina and the location of Iraq brings into perspective his fight against the tyranny of yazeed.if he were to remain in Makkah or Medina and get assassinated,it could have being just “one more assassination”.his choice to take with him all his relatives young and old and his companions among his Shia most of whom were assassinated ensured his triumph after death against injustice and the battle of karbala was immortalized.

29.) Imam Hussain (as) and his relatives and followers were besieged in Karbala. The people of kufa betrayed him and failed their promise to help him. Those who betray any of the 12 Imams (as) from the progeny of the Prophet (sa) can by no means be considered “shia” and can by no means remain shia of the Ahlul-Bayt (as).the meanings of “shia” are “supporter,partisan,loyalist,lover,friend,follower”.if one betrays the Imams and the Ahlul-Bayt (as),he therefore cannot claim to be a “shia” of them.

30.) Yazeed’s governor in kufa threatened and bribed the people of kufa into submission and betrayal of Imam Hussain (as).

31.) Only the staunchest followers (shia) of Imam Hussain (as) and his relatives stayed with him.all were matyred in Karbala on the 10th of Muharram which is annually commemorated up to this day by the followers of Ahlul-Bayt (the shia) as a day of mourning and sadness. This day is also known as the day of Ashura.it was the day the Prophet’s Ahlul-Bayt (as) and their shia were killed in Karbala with order of Yazeed,son of muawiya (la).

32.) News of Imam Hussain’s (as) martyrdom spread and the people were awakened and moved to stand against Yazeed and oppose his tyranny. Eventually blood triumphed over the sword and justice over tyranny and force as the battle of Karbala and the stance and words of Imam Hussain (as) and his reasons for opposing Yazeed (la) are immortalized and viewed as the epitome of sacrifice and selflessness to oppose tyranny and injustice.

further on to the above compiled by myself,you can read more on the events that led to the tragedy of Karbala and the events of Karbala:

[size=18pt]KARBALA

CHAIN OF EVENTS[/size]

http://www.al-islam.org/short/karbala.htm

Once again the chap named lagoshia has shown why i repeat that he is under the influnece of Karbala Burukutu!

Read below the hadiths (which authenticity I am yet to verify,but for the sake of argument I will accept them)

1.) Fadaa’il as-Sahaabah (“Virtues of the Companions”)-by Ahmad ibn Hanbal

Authenticated by Wasiyyu-Allah ibn Muhammad ‘Abbas –
Umm Al Qurra University (Mecca)
2nd Edition & 3rd Edition, New Edition
Dar ibn Al-Jawzi Publishers

Volume 2, pg. 965, Hadith# 1357:
‘Abdullah narrates that his father said, from someone (fulaan), who said that ‘Aisha or Umm Salama, that Wakee’ says: “I can’t remember which one of them ('Aisha or Umm Salama) said that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: ‘An angel which had never visited me before came into the house today. It (the Angel) told me: This son of yours, Hussein, will surely be killed. And if you wish (desire it) I can give you some of the soil of that land (Karbala) which he will die in. The Prophet said: He (the Angel) then brought me a soil that was red.'"


Where does he names the city if Karbala being Holy? Do you read with your eyes closed? why are you so desperate to cling of shiasm (division)? A place is not holy because the Prophet's grand son dies there, please we need to use our head even in religious matters, Nowhere did he say Karbala is holy, not did he make a pronouncement on that when a member of his Family dies that spot becomes Holy? the strange fact is that shia simply treat the rest of the prophet's family with contempt as if they do not matter in any way, yet they keep shouting Ahlul bayt, but yet they simply reserve the right to choose who this Ahlul Bayt are, you need to see how some dogs amongst them who go as low to insult the prophet's wife, I showed the karbala individual links proving that his ayatollha engage in such filthy behavior, yet he immediately pretended not to see the truth, indeed when ALLAH does not show his  light to anyody, none can show him the light.

Al-Islam.org says: Do not name your daughter with the name “Aisha”
http://al-islam.org/organizations/aalimnetwork/msg00711.html

2. Musnad of Abu Ya’laa Al-Mawsili
Authenticated by Hussein Saleem Asad
First Edition

Volume 1, pg. 298, Hadith# 363

Narrated by 'Abdullah ibn Nujayy who heard from his father that, he went along with 'Ali (ibn Abi Talib) and they faced Naynawaa, since they were going to the Battle of Siffeen (war against Mu'awiyyah). Then 'Ali called out: "Have patience, O' Abaa 'Abdillah (i.e. Hussain)! Have patience, O' Abaa 'Abdillah on the banks of the Euphrates (River)!" I said: "What do you mean, O' Abaa 'Abdillah?" He ('Ali) then said: "I went into the room with the Prophet (may peace be upon him) one day and his eyes were gushing with tears." I ('Ali) then said: "O Prophet! Has someone angered you? What makes your eyes gush with tears?" He (the Prophet) replied: "No. Jibreel has left me just now. He informed me that Hussein will be killed on the banks of the Euphrates (River)." Then He (Jibreel) said to him (the Prophet): "Shall I let you smell the soil (on which he will die)?" I said: "Yes!" Then he (Jibreel) extended his hand, took a handful of the soil and gave it to me (the Prophet). And then, I couldn't control my eyes from the gushing of tears.

When you can point where he said Holy city of Karbala we will take you seriously.



3.)Musnad of Abu Ya'laa Al-Mawsili.Volume 6, pg. 129-130, Hadith# 3402

Anas bin Malik says (according to the narration of 'Imaarah ibn Zaathaan):

"The Angel of Rain asked his Lord permission to make a visit to the Prophet (may peace be upon him). Permission was given to him (by Allah). And on this particular day the Prophet was with Umm Salama (the Mother of the Believers). The Prophet (may peace be upon him) told her: 'O, Umm Salama! Guard the door and do not let anyone come in.' He said: 'While she was at the door (about to guard it) Hussein ibn 'Ali burst into the room.' So the Prophet began to hug him and kiss him. The Angel then said: 'Do you love him?' The Prophet said: 'Yes!' The Angel replied: 'Your nation will surely kill him!' The Angel further said: 'If you wish, I will show you the place in which they will kill him.'

Likewise nowhere does he show where it says Karbala is a holy place, what bothered the Prophet pbuh is simply the fact that his grandson will killed, we should ask lagoshia to show us where the holy and karbala meet.



When I say Karbala intoxicants, if you had little understanding of english you would use that brain of yours which you have left to zazzaky, to understand that it means, you longer think properly because of the Karbala, it is common to hear the use of intoxicants with things that do not intoxicates, it is simply a figure of speech.

Hussien said:
“I know it full well that the Prophethood and the Caliphate cannot co-exist together in our family.”

(Tareekh al-Islam, Vol.2, p.26)

[b]Saudi grand Wahhabi/Salafist mufti defends Yazeed and condemns Imam Hussain (as)

Shia grand Ayatollah in the holy city of Karbala refutes the literally and figuratively one-eye saudi mufti.[/b]PLEASE WATCH HERE (with english subtitles):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98bK3V7JNfY

"Husain is from me and I am from Husain." -Prophet Muhammad (sa)

Sunni references:
(1) Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v4, p172
(2) Fadha'il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Hanbal, v2, p772, Tradition #1361
(3) al-Mustadrak, by al-Hakim, v3, p 177
(4) Amali, by Abu Nu'aym al-Isbahani, p 64
(5) al-Kuna wal Asmaa, by al-Dulabi, v1, p88
(6) al-Tabarani, v3, p21
(7) Adab by al-Bukhari, also al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah, as quoted in:
( al-Sawa'iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar Haythami, Ch. 11, section 3, p291
(9) Mishkat al-Masabih, by Khatib al-Tabrizi, English Version, Tdadition #6160

Summarize points from the sunni hadiths in the OP on the holiness of Karbala:

1.) Allah (swt) knew the land where Imam Hussain (as) would be matyred and He gave it special attention.
2.) Allah (swt) sent angels to visit Karbala
3.) those angels touched the soil of Karbala which makes it blessed.
4.) the soil was taken to the Prophet (sa) himself and he smelled it.
5.) the blood of the Prophet (sa) was spilled in Karbala which adds more blessing to that land.Imam Hussain (as) is the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad (sa) for those who forget and Allah (swt) blessed Karbala to be the spot Imam Hussain (as) was matyred.
6.) Imam Hussain (as) was blessed with imamate and divine authority over mankind and thus he undertook the task of confronting yazeed and his tyranny and injustice which threatened islam.Imam Hussain (as) preserved islam with his holy blood which was spilled in Karbala.
7.) countless hadiths exist on the holiness of Karbala from the Ahlul-Bayt and the 12 Imams (as).and they also inform us of the blessings we get by visiting the tomb of Imam Hussain (as) in Karbala.

further on.the Prophet (sa) said:"Hussain is from me and I am from Hussain.
sunni reference:Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.

[b]How does some read something and still end at the opposite conclusion? Karbala was not mentioned by name, niether was it refered to as being holy, how can someone decide to be so blind? Well the evidence speaks for itself, the word karbala was not mentioned and I repeat only individuals that prefer paganism to guidance, will believe that because the Grand son of the Prophet dies in Place, the place becomes Holy. Such precedence has never occured in the History of mankind, they are well over 1000's places Prophets ALLAH sent to the world had died, yet in Islam we only have two places we call Holy. But because an individual is suffering from Karbala intoxicants, he has refused to admit the fact that is clear for all to see, The death of Hussain in Karbala does not make Karbala holy. Islam is far above the level of Paganism to allow muslims to be worshipping individuals and attributing falsehood to them,



The man who killed Sayyiduna Hussain (i.e. gave the death-blow) was a man by the name of Shimr bin Thil-Jawshan and he was a Shia, as recorded in both Sunni and Shia books. Shimr was part of the Shia, and then he betrayed Sayyiduna Hussain and joined Yazid’s men, giving Sayyiduna Hussain the death-blow.

To provide a solid proof of this fact (i.e. that Shimr was a Shia), we refer to the esteemed and classical Shia scholar, Al-Qummi. Al-Qummi, author of the famous book “Mafaatihul-Jinaan”, writes in his book: “I say, Shimr was in the forces of Ameer al-Mu’mineen on the Day of Siffin.” (Al-Qummi, “Safinatun-Najaat”, vol.4, p. 492, Chapter Sheen Followed by Meem[/b]

What Ali Thought of his Shia:

Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 34

During the fight against the people of Syria [Muawiyyah], Ali said to his Shia:

“Woe to you. I am tired of rebuking you. Do you accept this worldly life in place of the next life? Or disgrace in place of dignity? When I invite you to fight your enemy your eyes revolve as though you are in the clutches of death, and in the senselessness of last moments. My pleadings are not understood by you and you remain stunned. It is as though your hearts are affected with madness so that you do not understand. You have lost my confidence for good. Neither are you a support for me to lean upon, nor a means to honour and victory. Your example is that of the camels whose protector has disappeared, so that if they are collected from one side they disperse away from the other side.”
source: http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/34.htm


[b]In the same sermon, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) also condemns the Shia for being trouble-makers and fitnah-mongerers, saying:

    “By Allah, how bad are you for igniting flames of war.”

Hasan did not trust these Shia either as they were very disloyal. In his book al-Ihtijâj, the prominent Shia author Abu Mansur at-Tabarsi has preserved the following remark of Hasan:

    “By Allah, I think Muawiyyah would be better for me than these people who claim that they are my Shia.” [Abû Mansûr at-Tabarsî, al-Ihtijâj vol. 2 p. 290-291 , Mu’assasat al-A‘lamî, Beirut 1989]

Distrusting his Shia, Hasan (رضّى الله عنه) made peace with Muawiyyah (رضّى الله عنه) and gave him the Caliphate. His Shia protested at this, and Hasan’s reply (رضّى الله عنه) is preserved in the most important of the Shia books of Hadith, Al-Kafi:

    “By Allah, I handed over power to him for no reason other than the fact that I could not find any supporters. Had I found supporters I would have fought him day and night until Allah decides between us. But I know the people of Kufa. I have experience of them. The bad ones of them are no good to me. They have no loyalty, nor any integrity in word or deed. They are in disagreement. They claim that their hearts are with us, but their swords are drawn against us.”

    (Al-Kafi, vol. 8, p.288)[/b]

For all the ignorant claims that those who betrayed the Imams (as) were 'shia',i am left to wonder and ask: WHERE WERE THE 'RIGHTEOUS' SUNNIS?!.

The definition of 'shia of Ali' is anyone who believes in the divine wilayah or imamate of the Imams (as) and stands against the usurpation of the caliphate by the caliphs recognized by sunnis as 'the rightly guided caliphs',starting with abu bakr,the thief of the land of Fadak,which belonged to Lady Fatima (as).a 'shia of Ali' is someone who loves the Imams (as) and obey them.

Simply because you had muslims who betrayed the Prophet Muhammad (sa), and some of his followers in the early days of islam turned apostates and renagades,does not mean islam is wrong or all muslims are such.infact,those who betrayed the Prophet (sa) are considered by all muslims as hypocrites and not muslim at all.[b]the actions of the hypocrites,does not give for example hindus or christians the right to point an accusing finger agains muslims,as it doesnt give sunnis the right against shia.[/b]in the same way,why must anyone negate the concept of imamate or shia-islam and blackmail the shia as a whole,who practice true islam,for what hypocrites who at some point claimed to be shia betrayed the Imams (as) as other hypocrites who claimed to be muslims and followers of the Prophet Muhammad (as) likewise betrayed him? Its either we accept all as hypocrites,or we also hold all muslims accountable for the betrayal the Prophet (sa) faced like in the battle of uhud for instance and also condemn islam,as some ill-intended and insincere people want to do against shia.

vedaxcool:



[size=18pt]The man who killed Sayyiduna Hussain (i.e. gave the death-blow) was a man by the name of Shimr bin Thil-Jawshan and he was a Shia, as recorded in both Sunni and Shia books. Shimr was part of the Shia, and then he betrayed Sayyiduna Hussain and joined Yazid’s men, giving Sayyiduna Hussain the death-blow.

To provide a solid proof of this fact (i.e. that Shimr was a Shia), we refer to the esteemed and classical Shia scholar, Al-Qummi. Al-Qummi, author of the famous book “Mafaatihul-Jinaan”, writes in his book: “I say, Shimr was in the forces of Ameer al-Mu’mineen on the Day of Siffin.” (Al-Qummi, “Safinatun-Najaat”, vol.4, p. 492, Chapter Sheen Followed by Meem[/size]

Just as a shias killed Ali R.A they also did same to Hussain. we read further

Then, Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) would be betrayed by the Shia of Kufa, who would feed him to Yezid’s men who slaughtered Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) at Karbala. Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) would say before being martyred,

“Our Shia have deserted us.”

And the Shia betrayal of the Ahlul Bayt did not stop with Ali, Hasan, and Hussain; indeed, they did not even spare Hussain’s grandson, Zayd ibn Ali ibn Hussain (رضّى الله عنه). The Shia would betray him on the battlefield, defecting against him. Before being martyred, Zayd (رضّى الله عنه) said:
“I am afraid they have done unto me as they did to Hussain.

Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 4

Ali says about his Shia:

“I always apprehended from you consequences of treachery and I had seen you through in the garb of the decietful.”

It seems this decietfulness they passsed unto other shias.

ahjul Balagha, Sermon 36

Ali says to his Shia:

“You are a group whose heads are devoid of wit and intelligence. May you have no father! Allah’s woe be to you!”


Yet this same shia who Ali cursed are the ones who passed the knowledge to generations of shia


Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 39

Ali says about his Shia:

“I am faced with men who do not obey when I order and do not respond when I call them. May you have no father! Woe to you! What are you waiting for to rise for the cause of Allah? Does not faith join you together, or sense of shame rouse you? I stand among you shouting and I am calling you for help, but you do not listen to my word, and do not obey my orders, till circumstances show out their bad consequences. No blood can be avenged through you and no purpose can be achieved with you. I called you for help of your brethren but made noises like the camel having pain in stomach, and became loose like the camel of thin back.”


In this next sermon, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) warns the Shia not to become heretics outside the folds of orthodox Islam. And he warns them of their fate if they do this.

Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 57

Ali said to his Shia:

“Storm may overtake you while there may be none to prick you (for reforms). Shall I be witness to my becoming heretic after acceptance of Faith and fighting in the company of the Prophet?! So you should return to your evil places, and get back on the traces of your heels. Beware! Certainly you will meet, after me, overwhelming disgrace and sharp sword and tradition that will be adopted by the oppressors as a norm towards you.”

Ali (رضّى الله عنه) said that he feared the oppression of his Shia and their lies against him. And he called the supporters of Abdullah Ibn Saba to be cowards, and he called the Shia to be the worst of supporters.

Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 96

Ali said to the Shia of Kufa:

“People are afraid of the oppression of their rulers while I fear the oppression of my subjects. I called you for war but you did not come. I warned you but you did not listen. I called you secretly as well as openly, but you did not respond. I gave you sincere counsel, but you did not accept it. Are you present like the absent, and slaves like masters? I recite before you points of wisdom but you turn away from them, and I advise you with far reaching advice but you disperse away from it. I rouse you for jihad against the people of revolt but before I come to the end of my speech, I see you disperse like the sons of Saba. You return to your places and deceive one another by your counsel. I straighten you in the morning but you are back to me in the evening as curved as the back of a bow. The sraightener has become weary while those to be straightened have become incorrigible.

“O those whose bodies are present but wits are absent, and whose wishes are scattered. Their rulers are on trial. Your leader obeys Allah but you disobeyed him while the leader of the people of Syria [Muawiyyah’s men] disobeys Allah but they obey him. By Allah, I wish Muawiyya exchanges with me like Dinars with Dirhams, so that he takes from me ten of you and gives me one from them.

“O people of Kufa, I have experienced in you three things and two others: you are deaf in spite of having ears, dumb in spite of speaking, and blind in spite of having eyes. You are neither true supporters in combat nor dependable brothers in distress. Your hands may be soiled with earth. O’ examples of those camels whose herdsman has disappeared, if they are collected together from one side they disperse from the other. By Allah, I see you in my imagination that if war becomes intense and action is in full swing you would run away from the son of Abi Talib like the woman who becomes naked in the front.”
source: http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/96.htm

Ali (رضّى الله عنه) condemns the Shia for their ideas going astray and for them being heretics. And notice how he says that he wants the Shia to be replaced with the real Muslims.

Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 115

Ali says to his Shia:

“Your ideas went astray and your affairs were dispersed. I do long that Allah may cause separation between me and you and give me those who have a better right to be with me than you.”


Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 124

Ali says to his Shia:

“You are not trustworthy to rely upon, nor are you holders of honor to be adhered to. You are very bad in kindling the fire of fighting. Woe to you! I had to bear a lot of worries from you. Some day I call you and some day I speak to you in confidence, you are neither true free men at the time of call, nor trustworthy brothers at the time of speaking in confidence.”

[b]
And perhaps the best of all to summarize with, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) says that the people have sinned by splitting up into Shias (sects), and that they have left Islam and instead gone back to the pagan Beduin ways. He tells the Shia that they will dishonor Islam by breaking the pledge of brotherhood with the Muslim Ummah and insulting the pioneers of Islam.

Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 191

Ali says to his Shia:

“You should know that you have again reverted to the position of the [pagan] Bedouin Arabs after immigration to Islam, and have become different Shias after having been once united. You do not possess anything of Islam except its name, and know nothing of belief save its show. You would throw down Islam on its face in order to defame its honor and break its pledge for brotherhood which Allah gave you as a sacred trust on His earth and a source of peace among the people. Be sure that if you incline towards anything other than Islam. the unbelievers will fight you. Then there will be neither Gabriel nor Michael, neither Muhajirun nor Ansar to help you, but only the clashing of swords, till Allah settles the matter for you…You have broken the shackles of Islam, have transgressed its limits, and have destroyed its commands!”
source: http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul/191.htm[/b]

change while you have the chance to

A Probe Into the History of Ashura- by  Dr. Ibrahim Ayati :

http://www.al-islam.org/ashura/

Did The Shi'a of Kufa kill Imam Hussain (as)?: 


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2KHwdxhesk&playnext=1&list=PLA40E23E17DE63018

(above is part 1 of 4.other parts (2-4) available on youtube)



The Prophet Muhammad (s) guaranteed Paradise for the Shi'a of 'Ali (as):

http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/shia_of_ali_appraisal/en/chap3.php


"The Creed of the Shia Explained":

http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/creed_of_shia_explained/en/chap1.php

“You and your shias are the best of creation.”

It should be known that it is not authentic.

It was narrated in Tafseer at-Tabari in regards to Verse 98:7 of the Quran:

“Those who have faith and do righteous deads, they are the best of creatures.” (98:7)

29208

From Ibn Humayd, Eesa ibn Farqad, from Abu Jarud, from Muhammad ibn Ali: “They are the best of creatures”, the Prophet said to Ali: “That is you and your shias.”

The narration is Mursal. The chain ends at Muhammad ibn Ali who did not see the Prophet, and as such, he could not witness the so-called event.

Additionally, the chain is extremely weak and goes through Rawaafidh (Shia extremists). The chain goes through Abu Jarud (Ziyad ibn Manzoor) and he was criticized by the scholars of Hadith.

Ibn Hajar said about him: “Rafidhi (Shia extremist) who was declared to be a liar by Yahya ibn Ma’een” (Taqreeb Al Tahzheeb 1/221), and he described him as a “liar and not trustworthy” (Al Jarh wal Ta’deel 3/454).

Dhahabi reported about Abu Jarud in Mizan (#2965):

Ibn Mueen said: “He is a liar.” Nasai and others said he is Matrook.

Abu Hatim Muhammad ibn Hibban al-Busti in his book “Marjoohin” (p.306) wrote about him:


“(He) narrated baseless stories about the honor of Ahlel Bayt.”


We all know the level to which Shia will go to make their path acceptable, even to the extent of criticizing Angel Jibrel for going to the Holy Prophet Muhammad pbuh instead of Ali r.a.

The Shia propagandists feel the heat when the Sunnis remind them that it was the Shia of Kufa who betrayed Hussain, and that it was this betrayal that led him to his death. To counter this, Answering-Ansar wrote an article defending Shi’ism by claiming that the Kuffans were not really Shia. The basic premise of Answering-Ansar’s article is that while the Kuffans were called “Shia”, they were not the Shia’t Ali but rather the Shia’t Umar, Shia’t Uthman, or the Shia’t Muawiyyah. Anything other than the Shia’t Ali.

However, this is a ridicolous interpretation of history, and no historian would claim that Kuffans were anyone other than the Shia’t Ali. But let us provide you with a historical source that the Shia considers authoratative. I kindly refer the reader to “The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam” by SHM Jafri. Establishing this book’s authenticity in the eyes of the Shia is not difficult since it is available on Al-Islam.org, the most reliable Shia website on the internet. The book may be found here: http://al-islam.org/index.php?sid=729406346&t=sub_pages_74&cat=74

The book “The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam” by SHM Jafri is so authoratative that it is endorsed by the Iranian government. The book is published in Qum with the blessing of the highest scholars (Maraje’) in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Please go to this Shia website http://www.karbala-najaf.org/shiaism/shiaism.html and scroll down to the bottom to confirm this.

The truth of the matter is that it is the Shia who are the Nasibis, because they hate the Prophet’s wives. The Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah loves the entire Ahlel Bayt, including the Prophet’s wives, all his children, Ali (رضّى الله عنه) and his family, etc., whereas the Shia only love one segment of the Ahlel Bayt and despise other parts of it.

The Origins and Early Development of Shi`a Islam

S.H.M.Jafri

Chapter 5

Kufa: Stage of Shi`i Activities

From the time `Ali moved to Kufa in 36/656, or even earlier, the city became the main centre of Shi`i movements, aspirations, hopes, and sometimes concerted efforts. It was in and around Kufa that so many of the stormy events which make up the early history of Shi’i Islam took place:

events such as the mobilization of forces by `Ali for the battles of Al-Jamal and Siffin the election and abdication of Hasan, the uprising of Hujr b. `Adi al-Kindi, the massacre of Husayn and his companions, the movement of the Tawwabun, and the revolt of Mukhtar.

Yet Kufa also proved to be a source of setbacks, disappointments, frustrations, and even treachery and failure in the Shi`i desire to see the house of `Ali in command of the affairs of the Muslim community.

This chapter, therefore, endeavours to examine in brief the nature and composition of the city of Kufa and the characteristic tendencies of its people.
[b]
The Origins and Early Development of Shi`a Islam

S.H.M.Jafri

Chapter 5

Kufa: Stage of Shi`i Activities

The city of Kufa was founded in the year 17/638, about three years after `Umar b. al-Khattab assumed the caliphate at Medina…

…It is against this background that the third and most critical phase of Kufan history began. The first phase had seen the city’s foundation in 17/638 and extended until the death of ‘Umar in 24/644; the second ended with the death of’`Uthman in 35/655; this ushered in the third phase, which was dominated by the rise of `Ali to the caliphate in the same year…

The Kufan contingent was the first to pay homage to `Ali under the leadership of Malik al-Ashtar…’Ali was thus left with no choice but to leave Medina for Iraq and count on the support of the Kufans, who had shown their inclinations towards him…

When ‘Ali came to Kufa, there was another influx of newcomers to the city, those who came with ‘Ali himself, and he treated them with equality irrespective of their early domicile…

He arrived in the neighbourhood of Kufa with about 1,000 men who accompanied him from Medina, and was readily joined by about 12,000 Kufans….

They formed the main part of his army at the battle of Al-Jamal. The Meccan-Basran alliance was defeated, and ‘Ali was able to bring Basra well under his control and appointed ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abb~s as his governor.

‘Ali then entered Kufa, not to make it his capital, but only to mobilize further support and organize the Kufans for another much more serious encounter with Mu’awiya…

In order to consolidate his power in Kufa, ‘All had to establish a purely Islamic socio-political system…Leaders such as Al-Ashtar, Hujr, and `Adi, together with their following,
especially from the newcomers of their tribes, formed the backbone of `Ali’s supporters and were the nucleus of the Shi`i of Kufa.

…From the time `Ali moved to Kufa in 36/656, or even earlier, the city became the main centre of Shi`i movements, aspirations, hopes, and sometimes concerted efforts.
source:
http://www.al-shia.com/html/eng/books/history/origins-development-shia-islam/


it is quiet funny how the shia preacher in  youtube denies that the Kufans were not shia, when will shias learn to stop making self serving argument? Such behavior is absurd indeed and shows utter deceit, something commonly associated with shiasm.   [/b]

TAFSIR DURREL MANTHUR OF PROMINENT SUNNI SCHOLAR JALALUDDIN AL-SUYUTHI:

It is in praise of the Shi'a of Ali that Allah (swt) sent down the following revelation:

"Those who believe and do righteous deeds are the best of the creatures. Their reward from their Lord shall be everlasting gardens, below which flow rivers, they will abide there forever. Well pleased is God with them and they are well pleased with Him"
Quran 98:7

Muhammad bin Ali narrates in Tafsir ibne Jarir, Volume 33 page 146 (Cairo edition) that the Prophet (saww) said:

"The best of creations are you Ali and your Shi'as".

Tafseer Durre Manthur

Jalaladin Suyuti, (849 - 911 AH) is one of the highest ranking Sunni scholars of all times. In his commentary of this verse, he records through 3 Isnaad (chains) of narrators that the Prophet (saww) told his companions that the verse referred to Ali and his Shia. Hadhrath Ali narrates in Tafsir Durre Mansur, Volume 6 page 379 (Cairo edition) "Have you not heard this verse:

"Their reward from their Lord shall be everlasting gardens, below which flow rivers, they will abide there forever"? This verse refers to you and your Shi'a, I promise you that I will meet you at the Fountain of Kawthur".

The 3 Sahaba who narrated this Hadeeth are (1) Ali (as) himself (2) Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari (ra) (3) Abdullah ibne Abbas (ra). They are acknowledged by the majority school as truthful narrators of Hadeeth. Had this been in a Shi'a book, our opponents would have deemed it a forgery, but it's presence in their own books has perplexed the minds of many of their scholars. There are no Hadeeth in which the Prophet (saaws) guaranteed paradise for a specific Sahabi and his followers, with the sole exception of Ali (as) and his Shi'a. Other Sunni scholars have also recorded this Hadeeth from Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari in their commentaries of the above verse.

Hadhrath Abdullah Ibn Abbas narrates:

"that when this verse descended the Prophet (s) Ali you and your Shi'a will be joyful on the Day of Judgement"
ibid. Jalaladin Suyuti

Ahmad ibn Hajr al Makki quotes from Imam Dar Qatany in his al Sawaiq al Muhriqah page 159 (Cairo edition):

"O Abul Hasan you and your Shi'a will attain paradise".

We appeal for justice as we have cited 18 Sunni works that records that Maula 'Ali (as) and his Shi'a will enter Paradise. If Nasibi raise any objection to these traditions we would then ask: 'what forced your great Ulema to coin a tradition confirming Paradise for 'Ali (as) and his Shi'a, and why did your Ulema support and interpret this Hadeeth in favour of the Ahl'ul Sunnah'? Why did you Ulema try to say that the real Shia are Ahl'ul Sunnah?

http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/shia_of_ali_appraisal/en/chap3.php

excerpt below from "The Origins and Early Development of Shi'a Islam" by S.H.M Jafri on the different groups of people who lived in Kufa and claimed to be "Shi'a of Ali" for different motives and reasons (some were sincere while others were hypocrites as mentioned earlier in one of my posts,post #14):

Ali thus left behind the people of Kufa divided into two groups of conflicting interest which could now be more easily defined and categorised than when he arrived at Kufa five years earlier. There was, firstly, a group of his faithful followers, both from the early and the late comers, who were not only committed to his person, but also believed that the leadership of the Muslims must remain in the house of the Prophet. In this, indeed, there appear to have been some considerations of a socio-economic nature, but these were only concomitant with the idea of justice and religious values which, they thought, could be realized only through a divinely inspired leader. Among them there were people, however small in number, to whom religious and spiritual considerations were the only driving force: economic factors, even though these seem to have been the cause of certain incidents, had nothing to do with their adherence to Ali. For others, economic factors were just as important as religion; they felt that an appropriate combination of the two could be realized only through Ali. Whatever the degree of emphasis on one aspect or the other, the conviction of both sections of Ali's firm supporters was the same: the leadership of the Muslim community must come from the family of the Prophet.

Secondly, there was a group consisting of clan and tribal leaders, along with those whose interests were dependent on these leaders. They were basically interested in preserving and maintaining their political positions and economic monopolies, which would be seriously threatened should Ali succeed in firmly establishing his rule in Kufa. They were, therefore, indifferent to Ali and were inclined towards Mu'awiya, in whom they saw security for their privileged positions and vested interests. But at the same time, they were Mu'awiya and thereby lose their hesitant to openly submit to bargaining position. It was for this reason that outwardly they remained in the rank and file of Ali's army while putting pressure on Mu'awiya for the guaranteeing of their privileges. [b]They thus pretended to be the supporters of the Shi'i cause. These were the people who composed the political supporters of Ali, [/b]as discussed in Chapter 4.

To these two groups of opposite interest we must add a third, consisting of the vast masses of Kufa, mostly the Yemenis and the non-Arab mawali, who theoretically were inclined to the Shi'i ideal of leadership but were hopelessly devoid of resolve in the face of any danger which might befall them. Emotionally, whenever they saw any hope of success of someone from the Ahl al-Bayt, they swarmed around him; practically, they deserted him as soon as they saw the hope of success dwindling away. They lacked the necessary courage or the firmness of character to withstand a moment of trial.

The events described in the following two chapters will explain the behaviour and attitude of these three groups. Here it remains to note that after the death of Ali and the abdication of his son Hasan, when Mu'awiya took control of Kufa, the strong tribal. and clan leaders were made to serve as the intermediaries in the power structure of the province. The central authority in Damascus was concerned with exercising power both over and through them. The old style tribalism was reinforced and governmental power was grounded on a tribal organization in which tribal leaders supported and in turn were supported by the government. [b]At the time of Ali's death, the tribal leaders were on one side of the scale, the committed Shi'at Ali on the other, while the great masses were wavering between the two. [/b]The following years were to prove decisive in resolving this basic contradiction of interests.


http://www.followislam.net/books/origins/index.htm

vedaxcool:

“You and your shias are the best of creation.”

It should be known that it is not authentic.

It was narrated in Tafseer at-Tabari in regards to Verse 98:7 of the Quran:

“Those who have faith and do righteous deads, they are the best of creatures.” (98:7)

29208

From Ibn Humayd, Eesa ibn Farqad, from Abu Jarud, from Muhammad ibn Ali: “They are the best of creatures”, the Prophet said to Ali: “That is you and your shias.”

[size=18pt]The narration is Mursal. The chain ends at Muhammad ibn Ali who did not see the Prophet, and as such, he could not witness the so-called event.[/size]

[size=18pt]Additionally, the chain is extremely weak and goes through Rawaafidh (Shia extremists). The chain goes through Abu Jarud (Ziyad ibn Manzoor) and he was criticized by the scholars of Hadith.[/size]
[size=18pt]
Ibn Hajar said about him: “Rafidhi (Shia extremist) who was declared to be a liar by Yahya ibn Ma’een” (Taqreeb Al Tahzheeb 1/221), and he described him as a “liar and not trustworthy” (Al Jarh wal Ta’deel 3/454).[/size]

Dhahabi reported about Abu Jarud in Mizan (#2965):

[size=18pt]Ibn Mueen said: “He is a liar.” Nasai and others said he is Matrook[/size].

[size=18pt]Abu Hatim Muhammad ibn Hibban al-Busti in his book “Marjoohin” (p.306) wrote about him:


“(He) narrated baseless stories about the honor of Ahlel Bayt.”
[/size]

[size=18pt]

We all know the level to which Shia will go to make their path acceptable, even to the extent of criticizing Angel Jibrel for going to the Holy Prophet Muhammad pbuh instead of Ali r.a. [/size]

Note how deceptive a shia is, he deliberately bolded the part that supported his sectarian agender but if you read what he wrote, your will understand in what context,


Secondly, there was a group consisting of clan and tribal leaders, along with those whose interests were dependent on these leaders. They were basically interested in preserving and maintaining their political positions and economic monopolies, which would be seriously threatened should Ali succeed in firmly establishing his rule in Kufa. They were, therefore, indifferent to Ali and were inclined towards Mu'awiya, in whom they saw security for their privileged positions and vested interests. But at the same time, they were Mu'awiya and thereby lose their hesitant to openly submit to bargaining position. It was for this reason that outwardly they remained in the rank and file of Ali's army while putting pressure on Mu'awiya for the guaranteeing of their privileges. They thus pretended to be the supporters of the Shi'i cause. These were the people who composed the political supporters of Ali, as discussed in Chapter 4.

it is very clear, that the leaders did not support Ali r.aspiration, but this same book indicated below that the people "mases" generally surpported tha shia movement

[size=28pt]To these two groups of opposite interest we must add a third, consisting of the vast masses of Kufa, mostly the Yemenis and the non-Arab mawali, who theoretically were inclined to the Shi'i ideal of leadership but were hopelessly devoid of resolve in the face of any danger which might befall them. Emotionally, whenever they saw any hope of success of someone from the Ahl al-Bayt, they swarmed around him; practically, they deserted him as soon as they saw the hope of success dwindling away. They lacked the necessary courage or the firmness of character to withstand a moment of trial.[/size]

The events described in the following two chapters will explain the behaviour and attitude of these three groups. Here it remains to note that after the death of Ali and the abdication of his son Hasan, when Mu'awiya took control of Kufa, the strong tribal. and clan leaders were made to serve as the intermediaries in the power structure of the province. The central authority in Damascus was concerned with exercising power both over and through them. The old style tribalism was reinforced and governmental power was grounded on a tribal organization in which tribal leaders supported and in turn were supported by the government. At the time of Ali's death, the tribal leaders were on one side of the scale, the committed Shi'at Ali on the other, while the great masses were wavering between the two. The following years were to prove decisive in resolving this basic contradiction of interests.

Note the Italicized portions of the quote appears immediately after our ever evasive shia brethren, lagos shia quotations from S. M book, to show his desperation he decided to ignore the portions that indicted his polytheistic belief, that is the masses of Kufa were on the side of shiasm. Again here is a shia historian writing about the ever fickleness of the shia masses, today they are on your side tomorrow they docked for their life, who were the mawlis? they were Persians and some other tribes, note Persian generally follow the path of shiasm, due to the fact that they believed their leaders were godlike before the advent of Islam, again this Mawlis appear to be in the majority in Kufa, Nb I am quoting some paragraph before the above quotation, again the above quotation occurs as the last 2 paragraphs:

'
It is important to note here that the Persians in Kufa were not granted equal status by their Arab co-citizens in the social system of the city. They were called mawali (sing. mawla), or clients, a term to indicate inferior social standing. Since the mawali played an important role in Kufan religio-political history, especially in Shi'i movements, it would be helpful to know a little more about them. Though the term mawali was originally meant for freed slaves, after the Muslim conquest it was extended to a variety of non-Arab peoples. In Kufa, the mawali can be divided into five groups:


;
;
;
The total number of all classes of mawali, however, increased to the extent that within only a few decades they almost outnumbered their Arab counterparts. In the battle of Jamajim, the mawali forces which came to fight for Ibn al-Ash'ath are reported to have been 100,000.