Friday 24 November 2017
“Muawiyyah” and Banu Umayyad the tree cursed in Quran
ID: 473 Publish Date: 05 December 2016 - 16:24 Count Views: 504
Speeches » VelayatTv
“Muawiyyah” and Banu Umayyad the tree cursed in Quran

velayat tv - October 16, 2016

 

In The Name Of God

Date : October 16, 2016

Presenter:

In the name of god, Hello to all dear viewers of “Velayat” global channel and our dear master Ayatollah “Qazvini”. I express my condolence on the occasion of month “Muharram”. Dears who are in Iran mourn in the first ten days of this month and in some cities people mourn by the end of Month of “Safar”. Thank goodness, we’d see that our dears’ mourning in different countries including America and England were held in utmost glory better than last years. In tonight’s program we’re at our dear master’s service, Ayatollah “Qazvini”.

Our topic of conversation is the role that “Muawiyyah” had in Imam “Husayn” [AS]’s martyrdom, in the last programs we discussed this matter and tonight we want finish this discussion.

If we have enough time, we’ll listen to our viewers’ questions at the end of the program.

Ayatollah “Qazvini”:

Greeting to you and all dear and respectable viewers worldwide and I wish them success.

Presenter:

Thank you dear master for your presence in this program, in the first decade of month of “Muharram”, you attended a live broadcast program and began a conversation that was so useful. This conversation could draw the attention of our viewers and coincidently, one of questions that we’d ask Sunni was that what role “Muawiyyah” had in martyring Imam “Hussein” [AS].

This conversation remained unfinished, and tonight we want to continue it in this program. Since several sessions have passed and perhaps some of our viewers couldn’t watch all the programs, I ask you to tell us a summary of what you said in those programs.

Ayatollah”Qazvini”:

I decided to say issues about the role of “Muawiyyah” in martyring Imam “Husayn” [AS] and making dissention amongst Muslim nations and converting the path of Islam to monarchy. Current problems in Islam world have root in the performance of “Muawiyyah”. Before answering your question, I should say that we respect Sunnis’ sanctities.

The sentence of grand Ayatollah “Sistani” has always been our slogan in “Velayat” global channel, he says:

«لا تقولوا اخواننا السنة، بل قولوا أنفسنا أهل السنة»

Don’t say Sunni brothers but say Sunni dears!

His saying is our motto, currently, making any dissension amongst Sunni and Shia will hurt both sides. No one will benefit this dissension other than Islam enemies! Wahhabis have made dissentions amongst Muslims that some of them are ignorant and unaware and were deceived by evils.

On the day of resurrection they will say: “God we followed our elders, double their punishment”.

God almighty will both double the punishment of Wahhabi scholars, Muftis and Wahhabism; because if “Wahhabism” doesn’t follow their scholars, their Muftis will stop giving “Takfiri” fatwas.

Second point is that we don’t know “Muawiyyah” Muslim at all. In the perspective of Commander of the faithful [AS] and companions of prophet [PBUH] and some of “Tabi’in” -those who met some of companions and died as believer but they didn’t meet prophet Muhammad [PBUH]- this guy didn’t convert to Islam at all.

Not only we don’t know him companion of prophet [PBUH] but also it’s been rejected that he’s Muslim. Commander of the faithful [AS] says explicitly in the 16th letter of “Nahj al-Balagha”: “Muawiyyah” and his companions pretended that they’ve become Muslim, they just hid their infidelty.

We have many narratives from Sunni scholars in this regard, as well as many narratives from prophet [PBUH] that “Muawiyyah” won’t die as Muslim, and he’ll fall in a hole in the Hell. It’s also been quoted with authentic document that prophet [PBUH] has cursed “Muawiyyah”.

If we bring up the matter of “Muawiyyah”, it’s because not only we don’t know him amongst Sunni’s sanctities and companion of prophet [PBUH], but it’s not been proved for us that he’s Muslim and we’re sure about this matter because it’s written in Shia and Sunni narratives.

So I want Sunnis not to take his side immediately, when we are talking about this matter. We feel that Mr.”Mulavi” has been impressed and says irrelevant things. He says: “anyone who insults” Muawiyyah”, we don’t know him Muslim!”

Despite of Iran supreme leader said several times: “if someone insults Sunnis’ sanctities, I’ll deal with him!”

Over the last 30 years, there were guys who insult Sunni’s sanctities and Islamic republic of Iran dealt with them.

“Takfiries” and those who swear Mr.”Mulawi” and call him infidel, broadcast his clips.

Even Imam “Komeini” says about Muawiyyah”: he had his former infidelity.

Some guys are more catholic than the pope, and amongst Shias there are some who are more prejudiced that Sunni, when Muawiyyah’s name is said, they say: this guy is amongst Sunni’s sanctities and we should call “Mr.”Muawiyyah”!!

“Muawiyyah” doesn’t have Islamic prior, he fought against Islam explicitly for about 18 years. We’ll say multiple reasons from Sunni books about Muawiyyah’s infidelity. Sunni scholars have said more than 15 reasons that imply his infidelity. this is our duty to say.

 Banu Umayyad, the cursed tree, the most vindictive enemy of “Ahl al-Bayt”

Firstly, tree cursed has written in Quran, Sura AL-ISRA, verse 60:

وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لَكَ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ أَحَاطَ بِالنَّاسِ وَمَا جَعَلْنَا الرُّؤْيَا الَّتِي أَرَيْنَاكَ إِلَّا فِتْنَةً لِلنَّاسِ وَالشَّجَرَةَ الْمَلْعُونَةَ فِي الْقُرْآنِ وَنُخَوِّفُهُمْ فَمَا يَزِيدُهُمْ إِلَّا طُغْيَانًا كَبِيرًا

When we said to you: 'Indeed, your Lord encompasses all people. We did not make the vision which we showed to you, and the tree cursed in the Koran except to be a trial for people, and we frighten them, but it only increases them in great insolence”

If you pay attention to Holy Quran exegesis, you’ll see that how Sunni elders have translated this verse. We don’t talk about Shia scholars’ opinions, Mr.”Badr al-Din al-Ayni” says in the book:”Umdat al-Qari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari”:

Prophet [PBUH] saw that “Banu Umayyad” climbs his pulpit like apes, and god sent down 60th verse of Sura AL-ISRA. After that no one see prophet [PBUH] laughing till he died.

And Imam “Al-Qurtubi” quotes in his book “Tafsir Qurtubi” from “Sahl ibn Sa’d”:

«أن رسول الله کان یری بنی أمیة ینزون علی منبره نزو القردة»«فاغتم لذلک وما استجمع ضاحکا من یومئذ حتی مات»«قوله تعالی: (والشجرة الملعونة فی القرآن)»

Messenger of god saw that “Banu Umayyad” goes up the pulpit like apes, after that, no one saw him laughing till he died, and this verse was sent down “the tree cursed in the Koran.

“Qurtubi”, Tafsir Qurtubi, v 10, p 283

This is a very clear issue. Mr.”Alusi” quotes this matter from “Ibn abi Hatim”, “Ibn Marduyah”, “Al-Bayhaqi”, “Ibn Asakir”, “Sa’d bin Musayyib” as well as “Ayesha” about “Marwan”.

Then he says: It says the “Tree” because these guys are from “Banu Umayyad” and the reason that prophet has issued their cursing is that “Banu Umayyad” made shedding Shia Imams [AS]’s blood ‘Mubah” {it is an Islamic Arabic term denoting an action as neither forbidden nor recommended, and so religiously neutral. This is one of the degrees of approval (Ahkam) in Islamic jurisprudence. The term is often used as a synonym for halal}

They even confiscated people’s property by force, usurped ‘Ahl al-Bayt” [AS]’s dues and changed divine orders, he tels all these things and says:

Crimes that “Banu Umayyad” committed will never be forgotten!!

Cursing these guys is either written in Quran – as Shia has said – or is said publicly and then he says some reasons.

So this fact that this verse “the tree cursed in Quran” is about “Banu Umayyad” has been proved, and the reason of revealing this verse is that “Banu Umayyad” would climb prophet [PBUH]’s pulpit like apes.

And it’s written in the book “Tafsir Tabari” about 28th verse of Sura IBRAHIM, 

«ألم تر إلی الذین بدلوا نعمة الله کفرا وأحلوا قومهم دار البوار»

Have you not seen those who exchanged the favor of Allah with disbelief and landed their nation in a house of ruin?

It’s written about this verse, those who turned divine blessing into blasphemy, are two dissolute tribes, “Banu Mughirah” and “Banu Umayyad”. First one was destroyed in the battle of “Badr” and “Banu Umayyad” will remain for long time.

We didn’t say this narrative but it’s been quoted in “Tafsir Tabari”. “Ibn Taymiyyah” says explicitly:

«وَتَفْسِيرِ ابْنِ جَرِيرٍ الطَّبَرِيِّ وَ ابْنِ أَبِي حَاتِمٍ، تَفَاسِيرُهُمْ مُتَضَمِّنَةٌ لِلْمَنْقُولَاتِ الَّتِي يُعْتَمَدُ عَلَيْهَا فِي التَّفْسِيرِ»

The books “Tafsir Tabari” and “Tafsir ibn abi Hatim” contain narratives that we can rely on them interpreting Quran.

“Minhaj as-Sunna an-Nabawiyyah”, v 7, p 179

This matter is quite clear. And it’s written in the book “Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihayn” about Sura IBRAHIM, verse 28:

«فی قوله عز وجل (وأحلوا قومهم دار البوار) قال هم الأفجران من قریش بنو أمیة وبنو المغیرة فأما بنو المغیرة فقد قطع الله دابرهم یوم بدر وأما بنو أمیة فمتعوا إلی حین هذا حدیث صحیح الإسناد ولم یخرجاه»

“Hakim Nishapuri”, Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihayn, v 2, p 383 

What interesting is that Mr.”Al-Dhahabi” has said that this narrative is authentic. Narrative says: the meaning of this verse “Have you not seen those who exchanged the favor of Allah with disbelief and landed their nation in a house of ruin?” is “Banu Umayyad” that will live years after prophet [PBUH].

«قال رسول الله: إِنَّ أَهْلَ بَيْتِي سَيَلْقَوْنَ مِنْ بَعْدِي مِنْ أُمَّتِي قَتْلًا وَتَشْرِيدًا، وَإِنَّ أَشَدَّ قَوْمِنَا لَنَا بُغْضًا بَنُو أُمَيَّةَ، وَبَنُو الْمُغِيرَةِ، وَبَنُو مَخْزُومٍ»

Prophet [PBUH] said: after me, my “Ahl al-Byat” will face massacre and homelessness by my nation. Our worst enemies amongst our nation are “Banu Umayyad” and “Banu Mugihrah” and “Bani Makhzum”.

«هذا حدیث صحیح الإسناد ولم یخرجاه»

This Hadith is valid but “Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj” and “Bukhari” haven’t quoted it.

“Hakim Nishapuri”, Al-Mustadrak alaa al-Sahihayn, v 4, p 534

So according to this narrative the most vindictive and worst enemies of prophet [PBUH]’s “Ahl al-Bayt” are “Banu Umayyad”.

God says about these guys in Quran:

أُولئِک الَّذِینَ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ وَ مَنْ یلْعَنِ اللَّهُ فَلَنْ تَجِدَ لَهُ نَصِیرا

Those are they whom Allah has cursed and whosoever Allah has cursed, you will not find any helper for him.

Sura AN-NISA / verse 52

According to this holy verse the fate of those who have been cursed by god is clear. We can understand from this verse “The tree cursed in Quran”, the fate of people who have been cursed by god.

Presenter:

Thank you very much dear master. Sometimes we hear that some have faked narrative about Muawiyyah’s virtues. Perhaps, this question comes to the mind of our viewers that if there is any authentic narrative about Muawiyyah’s virtue said by prophet [PBUH].

Ayatollah “Qazvini”:

There are many things to say in this regard. If we want to talk about it comprehensively it may take several sessions to say that if we have any narrative about Muawiyyah’s virtue or not and what kind of narrative quoted narratives are.

“Ibn Hajar Asqalani” uses the word virtue in the book “description of Sahih Bukhari” searched by Dr.”Birag” printed in “Saudi Arabia” , v 8 , about commander of the faithful Ali [AS], Hadrat “Fatimah” [AS] and “Ayesha”.

He says the virtue of “Ali bin Abi-Talib, the virtue of “Ayesha” and the virtues of Hadrat “Fatimah”, but about “Muawiyyah” he doesn’t use the word “virtue”; but he says “Manaqib”.

“Manaqib” was a phrase used for those who would make virtue for others or fantasize. For instance they would make virtue for “Rostam” and “Sohrab”. {Rostam is the most celebrated legendary hero in Shahnameh and Iranian mythology}.

What interesting is that “ibn Hajar” uses the word “ذکر" about “Bukhari” not even the word “منقبت", he says:

عبر البخاری فی هذه الترجمة بقوله ذکر ولم یقل فضیلة ولا منقبة لکون الفضیلة لاتؤخذ من حدیث الباب

Then he says:

«لان ظاهر شهادة بن عباس له بالفقه والصحبة دالة علی الفضل الکثیر»

We’ll talk about it and this narrative is quite fake, then he says:

«وقد صنف بن أبی عاصم جزءا فی مناقبه وکذلک أبو عمر غلام ثعلب وأبو بکر النقاش وأورد بن الجوزی فی الموضوعات بعض الأحادیث آلتی ذکروها ثم ساق عن إسحاق بن راهویه انه قال لم یصح فی فضائل معاویة شیء»

In this part of narrative “Ishaq ibn Rahwayh” has quoted that we don’t have even one narrative about Muawiyyah’s virtue.

«فهذه النکتة فی عدول البخاری عن التصریح بلفظ منقبة اعتمادا علی قول شیخه»

He says in continue:

«عبد الله بن أحمد بن حنبل سألت أبی ما تقول فی علی ومعاویة فاطرق»

“Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal” said: I asked my father: what is your opinion about “Ali” and “Muawiyyah”? He looked at the ground thought and said:

«اعلمان علیا کان کثیر الأعداء ففتش اعداؤه له عیبا فلم یجدوا»

I know that “Ali” had many enemies and they tried a lot to find fault in his life, but they couldn’t.

«فعمدوا إلی رجل قد حاربه»

That’s why they went to “Muawiyyah” to fight “Ali” and began making virtue for “Muawiyyah”.

This is the saying of the Imam of Sunni. He means virtues that enemies made for “Muawiyyah” were because of their grudge and enmity towards “Ali”.

«فاطروه کیادا منهم لعلی فأشار بهذا إلی ما اختلقوه لمعاویة من الفضائل مما لا أصل له»

“ibn Taymiyyah” says: they went to “Muawiyyah” and made things for him, that’s why all narratives that they say about his virtues are fake.

«وقد ورد فی فضائل معاویة أحادیث کثیرة»«لکن لیس فی‌ها ما یصح من طریق الإسناد»«وبذلک جزم إسحاق بن راهویه والنسائی وغیرهما والله اعلم»

We have many narratives about Muawiyyah’s virtues, but even one of them is not authentic, that’s why elders like “Nasa’i” and “Ishaq binRahwayh” said that we don’t have one authentic narrative about his virtue.

“Ibn Hajar Asqalani”, Fath al-Bari, v 7, p 104

“Badr al-Din al-Ayni” says in the book “Umadat al-Qari fi Sharh Sahih Bukhari”, v 16, p 249:

«من حیث إن فیه ذکر معاویة، ولا یدل هذا علی فضیلته»

If you say we have multiple narratives related to Muawiyyah’s virtue, I’ll say, yes we have but not of them are authentic.

He rejects all these narratives.“Suyuti” quotes from “Ishaq bin Ibrahim Hanzali” and says:

«لَا یصح فِی فضل مُعَاویة حَدِیث»

There isn’t even one authentic hadith about Muawiyyah’s virtue.

He means that all narratives related to Muwayyah’s virtues are fake not even “Zai’if” {a narrative that its narrators are not reliable or just} and fake narratives are different than “Zai’if” narratives. Putting one thousand fake Hadiths beside each other is like putting one thousand zero beside each other, this is the meaning of lie and fake Hadith! These guys should distinguish between lie and “Zai’if” Hadith.

I read an article from ”Hasan bin Farhan Maliki”, it was very good article in which he has collected some narratives from Sunni elders that when they face a narrative about the virtues of commander of the faithful [AS], Imam “Hasan” [AS] and Imam Husayn [AS], they try to reject it saying that it’s about Shia.

On the other hand, we see narratives in the book “Sahih Bukhari” quoted by hypocrites, Nawasib {enemies of Ahl al-Bayt} and those who swear and curse commander of the faithful [AS] and “Bukhar” has said they are reliable!

I don’t know what to name their act in calling “Umar in calling bin Sa’d”, the murderer of Imam “Husayn” [AS], reliable! One of Sunni scholars has said:

«کیف یکون قاتل الحسین ثقة»

How is that possible to call the murderer of Imam “Husayn” reliable.

I’ll look into this matter that these guys have said that “Nawasib” are reliable, they call them reliable but some of Sunni elders who are amongst Sunni Imams have said: that narrative is invalid because it’s about the virtues of commander of the faithful Ali [AS] and Hadrat Fatimah [AS].

For instance, they’ve praised “Mutawakkil Abbasid” who was one of the most felon “Abbasid” caliphs. May god almighty damn all of those who like and defend him!!

“IbnTaymiyyah” has praised him a lot. They claim that “Mutawakkil Abbasid” was the reviver of prophet [PBUH]’s Sunna and the remover of “Bida’h”!!! {innovation in religious affairs}

Are destroying the holy grave of Imam “Husayn” [AS] and houses around his grave and turning there into the farm land reviving Prophet [PBUH]’s Sunna.

Crimes quoted about “Mutawakkil Abbasid”, have not been said about other “Bani Abbasid” caliphs. He had a dancer who would swear commander of the faithful [AS] before him!! 

Her swears were so obscene that “Mu’tasam” protested to “Mutawakkil” and said: would it be fine if she said such things about “Abu-Bakr”?!

“Mutawakkil” defended her and said: this guy is our dear and dancer. It was in that meeting that “Mu’tasam” decided to kill “Mutawakkil” and made his death plot.

So this sentence “There isn’t even one authentic hadith about Muawiyyah’s virtue” doesn’t mean that narrative is invalid but it means that all narratives in this regard are all fake.

“Ibn Hajar Haythami” says:

«اعلم أن علیا کان کثیر الأعداء ففتش له أعداؤه شیئا فلم یجدوه فجاؤا إلی رجل قد حاربه وقاتله فأطروه کیدا منهم له»

“Haytami”, al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, v 2, p 374

And “Ibn Taymiyyah”- who is called the leader of hypocrites by “Salehi Shami”- says in the book “Minhaj as-Sunna an-Nabawiyyah”, v 4, p 400:

«وطائفة وضعوا لمعاویة فضائل ورووا أحادیث عن النبی فی ذلک کل‌ها کذب ولهم فی ذلک حجج طویلة لیس هذا موضع‌ها»

They made virtues for “Muawiyyah” and faked and quoted narratives from prophet [PBUH] in this regard that all of them are lie.

So dear viewers shall pay attention that when “Ibn Taymiyyah” says: “all these narratives are lie”, it means that all narratives related to Muawiyyah’s virtue even narratives written in “Sahih Muslim” from “Ibn Abbas” in this regard are lie either!

There is a narrative in the book “Sahih Bukhari” which says: “Abu Sufyan” went to prophet [PBUH] and said: O messenger of god! Now that I converted to Islam after 18 years fighting, I have several requests.

One of his requests was that prophet [PBUH] selects “Muawiyyah” as his revelation writer; it means the guy who fought against prophet 18 years becomes his revelation writer.

His second request was that prophet [PBUH] engages with his daughter “Umm Habibah”. Those who were there got surprised and said: her husband died in “Habesha” when Muslims had gone there - three or four years before taking Mecca- and he married her several years before taking Mecca.

“Abu Sufyan” would say: prophet let me be your father-in-law because I converted to Islam.

People would say: “Abu Sufyan” knew that it’s been years that prophet [PBUH] is married to his daughter but he wanted them to engage for the second time under the pretext of becoming Muslim. Dear viewers, see these guys’ foolish acts.

Has it ever happened that someone says to his son-in-low: engage my daughter again because of the good act that I did for you. People will laugh at such guy.

As well as about commander of the faithful [AS]’s allegiance some fool say such thing! It’s written in “Sahih Bukhari” explicitly – Hadiths No. 4241 and 4240- that as long as Hadrat “Fatimah” [AS] was alive, Hadrat “Ali” [AS] didn’t swear allegiance with caliphs.

Some say: “Ali bin abi-Talib” swore allegiance at the beginning of caliphs’ caliphate, but to tighten and emphasize on it, he swore another allegiance.” I don’t know to laugh at such guys’ thoughts or to cry for their bias!! 

How come that no one went to emphasize on the allegiance with “Abu-Bakr” and didn’t swear allegiance with him again after several months? It’s written in “Sahih Bukhari” and “Sahih Muslim”:            

«ولم یکنْ یبَایعُ تِلْک الْأَشْهُرَ»

In those months, commander of the faithful [AS] hadn’t sworn allegiance at all.

“Al-Bukhari Ju’fi”, Sahih Bukari- v 4, p 1549- Hadith No. 3998

These guys say: “Ali” [AS] had sworn allegiance and after several months he did so again!!” 

If commander of the faithful [AS] wanted to swear allegiance again, others such as: “Talhah”, “Zubayr”, “Abd al-Rahman” and “Sa’d bin abi Waqqas” should have done so; because these guys were elder companions of prophet [PBUH]!!

Why did the lot of second allegiance fall only upon “Ali” [AS]? Dear friends, some prejudices don’t let us to see and accept the truth. On the day of resurrection we’ll regret such days.

(رَبِّ ارْجِعُونِ لَعَلِّی أَعْمَلُ صالِحاً فِیما تَرَکتُ کلاَّ)

Until, when death comes to one of them he says: 'My Lord, let me go back, that I should do righteousness in that I forsook.

Sura AL-MUMENOON, verse 99-100

But that regret will not benefit us. We say: Shia and Sunni shall put the bias aside and let’s have scientific discussion. Neither we call each other infidel, nor we confirm each other and nor we insult each other. We shouldn’t get upset, but we should have scientific discussion. If our other side doesn’t understand or if I don’t accept the truth out of stubbornness, at least millions of Shias will see that “Qazvni” was stubborn and didn’t accept! Aren’t you going to make Shia to understand? So why don’t you come discussing?!

As well as, when thousands of Wahhabi or Sunni youth see that this guy is stubborn, it’s proved that because of this guy’s stubbornness, this discussion is the discussion of stubbornness not the discussion of shedding light on truth. While “Koran” says:

(فَبَشِّرْ عِبادِ الَّذِینَ یسْتَمِعُونَ الْقَوْلَ فَیتَّبِعُونَ أَحْسَنَهُ)

Therefore give good tidings to my worshipers, who listen to the Words and follow what is finest of it.

Sura AZ-ZUMAR, verses 17-18

According to these verses, we say let’s save our viewers of this perplexity.

Wahhabis sometimes say things that we really feel sorry. Some of these evils {Wahhabis} are more evil than devil. If we call them “more evil than pig and dog”, we may have insulted dog and pig!!

Mr.”Kalkarabi” {Wahhabi expert} who has apparently forgotten his parentage should know that there is limit to how much we can wait. 

Presenter asked: “Mr.”Heidari”, what was the result of this year’s mourning {in month of Muharram}?! He answered: “The result of this year’s mourning is that these guys did anti-Islam and anti-prophet [PBUH]’s Sunna acts across the world. This year’s mourning had some benefits for scholars and Marājiʿ{sources to emulate} and religion’s merchants!”

Dear viewers, I swear you by anything that you accept that you judge.

He says:” this year’s mourning had three profits for religion’s merchants; first result is that they benefited from this year’s mourning in terms of sensuality! on their pulpits, they would talk about their relationship with married women, Jewish and Christian women and unbeliever women!!!”

He just put Wahhabi women off the hook and didn’t say anything about them. Maybe one day his shamelessness gets more and he adds these women either! 

Then he says: “The second result of this year’s mourning was that people gave one-fifth of their property {Khoms} to scholars.” You judge his talks, don’t fools laugh at him?! It’s clear that this guy must be chained at madhouse rather talking on T.V.

He also says: “The third result of this year’s mourning is creating sedition amongst Islamic nation!” he says such thing while dear Sunni in “Kurdistan”,”Zahedan”, “Bandar Abbas” and other provinces mourned along with Shia on the days of “Tasu’a” and “Ashura”.

As well as in a suicide attack in “Chabahar” {city in Iran} Wahhabis exploded their own evil disciples, sons of “Yazid bin Muawiyyah”, in a mourning ceremony and martyred several Sunnis!

This disaster was the best sign of Sunni’s love towards Imam “Husayn” [AS]. Sunnis like imam “Husayn” [AS] and are interested in him.

A Sunni is not shameless like you to wear red shirt at the night before “Ashura” and next night he wears black shirt hypocritically.

A clip was broadcasted in which “brainless Aqil” had worn red clothing. It shows that you’re ridiculing. Why didn’t wear red shirt other nights. 

Did you wear red shirt at the murdering night of second and third caliphs? What happened that you put on red shirt at the night before “Ashura”?! Some protested to him for wearing such clothing and next night he wore dark color shirt. But Mr.”khedmati” had worn black shirt. 

When he was asked: why aren’t you wearing black shirt?! He said: “black clothing is the clothing of the people of the Hell, the clothing of “Pharaoh”. 

When they do hypocritical acts, perhaps, some dear Sunnis protest to them either.

Presenter:

So it was clarified and explained completely that if there is a narrative about Muawiya’s virtue, it’s quite fake and lie not even invalid.

Another question is that if there is any narrative quoted by companions of the prophet [PBUH] or Sunni early scholars in which “Muawiyyah” has been dispraised?

Ayatollah “Qazvini”:

A narrative has been quoted from “Hasan Basri” written in many of Sunni books. For instance it’s written in the book “Tabari History”, v 3, p 232 that “Ayesha” said to “Muawiyyah”:

«یا معاویة أما خشیت الله فی قتل حجر وأصحابه»

O “muawiyyah”! Weren’t you afraid of god killing “Hujr bin ‘Adi” and his companions?

«قال لست أنا قتلتهم إنما قتلهم من شهد علیهم»

I didn’t kill him but those who testified against him did so.

“The History of Tabari”, v 3, p 232

Even “Ayesha” criticized him. His response is similar to the response that he gave after killing “Ammar ibn Yasir”.

When “Ammar” was martyred, he said: prophet [PBUH] has said that the murderer of “Ammar” is put in the Hell, but I didn’t kill “Ammar” but “Ali” killed him, because if “Ali” had not taken him out of his home and put him before our sword {allusion to fighting them} he wouldn’t have been killed!!

Look how these guys do fallacy! He says responding “Ayesha”: I didn’t kill him, but those who testified against him killed him. When some guys testify against another guy and you issue death order, it means that you’re the real murderer.

“Hasan Basri” who is amongst Sunni prominent figures and big scholar, says: “Muawiyyah” had four qualities that only one of them was enough to perish him and send him to the Hell.

«انْتِزَاؤُهُ عَلَى هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةِ بِالسَّيْفِ حَتَّى أَخَذَ الْأَمْرَ مِنْ غَيْرِ مَشُورَةٍ، وَفِيهِمْ بَقَايَا الصَّحَابَةِ وَذَوُو الْفَضِيلَةِ» «وَاسْتِخْلَافُهُ بَعْدَهُ ابْنَهُ سِكِّيرًا خِمِّيرًا» «يَلْبَسُ الْحَرِيرَ وَيَضْرِبُ بِالطَّنَابِيرِ، وَادِّعَاؤُهُ زِيَادًا، وَقَدْ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ، - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ  «الْوَلَدُ لِلْفِرَاشِ وَلِلْعَاهِرِ الْحَجَرُ»» «يَلْبَسُ الْحَرِيرَ وَيَضْرِبُ بِالطَّنَابِيرِ، وَادِّعَاؤُهُ زِيَادًا، وَقَدْ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ، - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ -: «الْوَلَدُ لِلْفِرَاشِ وَلِلْعَاهِرِ الْحَجَرُ»»

He gave responsibility to insane such as: “Yazid” and other fools like: “Marwan” and guys who were rejected by prophet [PBUH], in Islamic nation without consulting with those who left from the companions {of prophet Muhammad} and knowledgeable guys lived in the society. He appointed his drunken son as the caliph. His third mistake was that he said that “Ziyad ibn Abih” is my brother. He said: my father committed adultery with this guy’s mother and he was born, so he’s my brother.

“Ibn Athir” - The complete History, v 3, p 82

So “Hasan Basri” says: “Muawiyyah” had four qualities that one of them is enough to perish someone and send him to the Hell.

“Ibn al-Jawzi” quotes such sentence from “Hasan al-Basri” in the book “Al-Muntazam”, v 5, p 243 and says: “Muawiyyah” had four qualities that one of them was enough for his perishing.

Maybe some get sad that we’re talking about “Muawiyyah” this way. “Hasan al-Basri” is Sunni scholar that we quoted his sentence from different Sunni books. Look at this narrative in the book “Siyar al-A’lam al-Nubala’”, v 9, p 570, in this book “Al-Dhahabi” quotes a narrative from “Abd ar-Razzaq as-Sana’ni” - the master of Bukhari- he says: 

«فذکر رجل معاویه فقال لا تقذر مجلسنا بذکر ولد أبی سفیان»

Someone said the name of “Muawiyyah” and he said: don’t make our ceremony dirty by saying his name.

“Al-Dhahabi” Siyar al-A’lam al-Nubala’, v 9, p 570

That guy who says: anyone who says bad things about “Muawiyyah” is not Muslim”, can he say that “Abd ar-Razzaq as-Sana’ni” is not Muslim?!

And it’s also written in this book quoted by “Yahya ibn Ma’in”- one of the founders of “Rejal” science- he says:

«لو ارتد عبد الرزاق عن الإسلام ما ترکنا حدیثه»

If even “Abd ar-Razzaq” becomes apostate, we’ll live up to his narratives.

“Al-Dhahabi”, Siyar al-A’lam Nubala’- v 9- p 573

When someone practices his {Abd ar-Razzag} narratives, so his “Fatwas” are in priority compare to his narratives! It may sometimes happen that he quotes narratives, but he doesn’t trust them and has opposite opinion. But when he gives “Fatwa”, he says his opinion and says: “don’t make our meeting dirty by saying the name of son of “Abu Sufyan Muawiyyah”, it’s beyond narrative. He says: if “Abd ar-Razzaq” becomes apostate we won’t leave him!!

As well as “Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi” quotes a sentence from “Akramah” in the book “Sharh ma’ani al-Athar”. Of course we don’t know “Akramah” reliable but you {Sunnis} accept him and know him amongst your “Mufassirs” {Mufassir. The writer of a commentary on the Quran}, pay attention to this narrative, he says: “Ibn Abbas” and I were with “Muawiyyah” talking, after midnight:

«فَقَامَ مُعَاوِیةُ فَرَکعَ رَکعَةً وَاحِدَةً»

“Muawiyyah” got up and said one Raka’t prayer as night prayer.

«فقال بن عَبَّاسٍ من أَینَ تُرَی أَخَذَهَا الْحِمَارُ»

Then “Ibn Abbas” said: where has this donkey gotten this fatwa from?!

“Abu Ja’far Tahawi”, Sharh Ma’ani al-Athar, v 1, p 289

The author of this book is “Hanafi” madh’hab {one of Sunni branches} and it’s been searched by one of figures and elders named “Muhammad Zuhri al-Najjar”.

Some may say that this book is not authentic. The book “Nukhab al-Afkar fi Tanqih Mabani al-Akhbar” is from “Badr al-Din al-Ayni”, the describer of “Sahih Bukhari”. He quotes this narrative:

«من أین تُرَی أخذها الحمارٌ؟!»

Where has this donkey learnt from to say night prayer in one Rakat”.

Then he says on the next page:

«أخرج ذلک من طریقین صحیحین علی شرط مسلم»

“Ahmad badr al-Din Ayni”, Nukhab al-Afkar fi Tanqih Mabani al-Akhbar”, v 5, p 80

If you want to get mad you should be upset with guys such as: “Ibn Abbas”, “Hasan basri”, “Ayesha” and others who would curse “Muawiyyah”.

In his prayer’s “Qunoot”, commander of the faithful would curse “Muawiyyah”. 

God willing, I’ll read {narratives} for Sunni about  the role of “Muawiyyah” in martyring Imam “Husyn” [AS] from their own books so that they themselves judge.

Presenter:

Thank you very much dear master. 

Viewers’ contacts

From now on, we’re listening to our viewers’ contact, Sunni or Shia, I ask them to ask question briefly. First viewer:

Viewer {Mr. Mu’min Taq- Shia}:

Greeting to you and Ayatollah “Qazvini”,

Presenter:

Hello

Viewer:

Ayatollah “Qazvini”, a friend of mine told me several days ago that you said that “Ibn Abi Hamza Bataeni” is reliable, while Shia scholars in “Rejal” science say that he’s not reliable. I want to know that why you said that he’s reliable?

 I also want to know that why “Sahl bin Ziyad” and “Muhammad bin Sanan” are reliable {as narrator}, another point is that Ayatollah Sayyed “Muhammad Sadiq Rouhani”, when he talks about a narrator in his book “Fiqh al-Sadiq”, he says:

This narrator is unknown, but “Ibnrahim bin Hashim” – father of Ibrahim Qomi”- has quoted narrative from this person and it makes him reliable.

I want to ask Ayatollah “Qazvini” that if “Ibrahim bin Hashim” quotes a narrative from a narrative whther it makes that narrator reliable or not?

Ayatollah “Qazvini”:

Let’s start from last question, our opinion is that if a narrative is quoted by these three persons, it’ll be reliable, Shaykh “Tusi” says that there is consensus in this regard.

«اجمعة الطایفة لأنهم لا یروون و لا یرسلون الا عن ثقة»

One of them is “Ibn Abi Amir”, another one is “Safwan bin Yahya” and last one is “Ahmad bin abi Nasr Bazanti”. These three guys are definitely reliable.

As for “Ali bin abi Hamzah Bataeni”, he’s been dispraised a lot and is amongst the founders of “Waqifiyyah” denomination {name of one of Shia denominations who would say that Imam “Kazim” [AS] is the last Imam, he’s not dead and has disappeared} there’s no doubt that he’s not reliable but narratives that “Safwan” and others have quoted from him are for the time that he’d gone to astray yet.

We have narratives written in “Sahih Bukhari” and “Sahih Muslim” and Shia books that there are people who do so many good deeds but eventually they go out of Islam and put piety and just aside.

Guys like “Abi Hamza Bataeni” had resistance era, justice and piety era and impiety era! We say about these guys: narratives that they’ve quoted are all related to their piety era. 

When “Abi Hamza Bataeni“ was rejected by Imam “Reza” [AS] and Imam “Reza” dispraised him, guys like “Safwan” wouldn’t quote narrative from him any longer.

Third point is about “Abdullah bin Sanan”, we don’t doubt that he’s reliable we prefer his narrative compared to “Muhammad bin Sanan”.

There are narratives in which “Muhammad bin Sanan”, “Safwan bin Yahya” and “Zurarah” have been dipraised, while there are narratives from Shia imams [AS] about these guys in which they were praised!

Sometimes Imam “Sadiq” [AS] would say to “Abdullah bin Zurarah”: May god damn “Zurarah”, my ancestors and I hate him. 

And in another place Imam “Sadiq” [AS] said to “Abdullah bin Zurarah”: remember me to your father!

In my opinion, to show to government officials that there’s not relationship between us and “Zurarah” so that they don’t bother or execute him in charge of supporting us, Imam “Sadiq” [AS] dispraised him to protect him.

This is our opinion about “Zurarah”, “Safwan” and “Muhamamd bin Sanan” and some of narrators who were dispraised.

Presenter:

Mr.”Mu’min Taq” we don’t have much time, there are some other guys that we should hear their questions. Thank you, goodbye.

Ayatollah “Qazvini”:

You can ask your questions in the next session or through cyberspace, I’ll answer them. He’s very active in cyberspace, I thank to him and all dears who effort. However sometime we protest to them when they pass the limits. From here I recommend all of those who are active in cyberspace in this regard to learn Shia Imams [AS]’s literature. 

We grew up by commander of the faithful [AS]’s doctrine who says about “Muawiyyah” while he doesn’t know him Muslim:

«إِنِّی أَکرَهُ لَکمْ أَنْ تَکونُوا سَبَّابِین»

I don’t want you swearing “Muawiyyah”.

Nahj al-Balagha, p 323, Hadith No. 206

Avoid of any type of insulting towards Sunnis’ sanctities, even if they swear:

وَعِبَادُ الرَّحْمَنِ الَّذِينَ يَمْشُونَ عَلَى الْأَرْضِ هَوْنًا وَإِذَا خَاطَبَهُمُ الْجَاهِلُونَ قَالُوا سَلَامًا

The worshipers of the Merciful are those who walk humbly on the earth, and when the ignorant address them say: 'Peace,

Sura AL-FURQAN, verse 63

I apologize, there some “Saudi Arabia” hired dogs in cyberspace such as: ”Mikael” who is infidel and hypocrite and some other guys who insult Shias’ sanctities.

I ask those who accept my sayings not to respond such guys, but about Wahhabism, decry them as much as you can. “Ibn Taymiyayh” has been turned into an idol, break it as much as you can. 


As for “Muhammad bin Abdullah”, “Bin Baz” and evil “Abdullah Al ash-Sheikh” who gave “fatwa” that all Iranians are infidel, publish anything that you know about them.  But don’t insult companions of prophet Muhammad [PBUH].

I ask all dears to be more patient. One moment tolerance may have good result, as “Quran” says: “and when the ignorant address them say: 'Peace,”.

I’ve said several times that I had a meeting with one of Sunni elders in “Khorasan” –city in Iran- he told me anything that he liked. He said:” you lie and ascribe lie to “Bukhari”, he was younger than me and there were some other guys there too, I called my brother and told him to bring the book “Sahih Bukhari”, he brought the book, I opened it and said to that person: you yourself read it and then he found out that the same narrative that I quoted is written there. He blushed and got ashamed, I changed the topic. Not only I didn’t respond his disrespecting but I changed the topic, he himself found out and it led to our good relationship and I n a meeting at my home that grand Ayatollah “Shubairi Zanjani” and Ayatollah “Sobhani” were there too, he announced officially that he’s become Shia.

He said: Ayatollah Husseini Qazvini’s good behavior made me to think of becoming Shia. In a meeting I insulted “Ayatollah Qazvini” as much as could, but he was patient. I found out that I grew up in a doctrine that as soon as I heard a narrative, I began disrespecting him but he grew up in a doctrine that not only he didn’t respond me but he behaved me kindly. 

Presenter:

I apologize to those who were supposed to ask their questions, but out time is over. 

Ayatollah Qazvini:

Since we don’t have much time in our program we can’t answer more than two or three questions. Some of questions like tonight’s questions are specific. Dears can discuss such questions on our website and cyberspace till we answer them.

Presenter:

Thank you very much. Goodbye.

 



Share
* Name:
* Email:
* Comment :
* Security code:
  

Latest Articles
Most Comments
Most viewed
Index | Contact us | Archive | Search | Link | List Comments | About us | RSS | Mobile | urdu | فارسی | العربیة |