Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Islamic INTRAfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Islamic INTRAfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: A Brief History of Islam Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 7 Next >>
Author Message
rami
Male  Islam
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Senior Member

Joined: 01 March 2000
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2550
Quote rami Replybullet Posted: 16 November 2005 at 11:09pm
Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem

assalamu alaikum

One of the book that I am using is "A brief history of Islam " by Dr. Hasanuddin Ahmed. Pg: 140 to 150, "Biographies of the Women Companions of the Holy Prophet" By Qazi Mohammad Saeed will use other books to in future.

can you please list all the books you intend to use and refrence the works apropriatly to there authors as you post them on this site.

Apart from simply wanting to know, there are copywrtie implications. A work should be properly refrenced espetialy if you are simply typing chunks and pieces from different works.


Edited by rami
Rasul Allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam) said: "Whoever knows himself, knows his Lord" and whoever knows his Lord has been given His gnosis and nearness.
IP IP Logged
Fatah-Momin
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 156
Quote Fatah-Momin Replybullet Posted: 17 November 2005 at 11:48pm

rami

 

I think that you did not read the last two post by me all the refrences are well documented. I have highlighted some for your benifit.



Edited by Fatah-Momin
IP IP Logged
rami
Male  Islam
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Senior Member

Joined: 01 March 2000
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2550
Quote rami Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 12:52am
Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem

no i skimmed through them they didnt stand out from the main body of the text, jazak allah khair.

are these all from translations of the works or original arabic?

some of the names you Quote i didnt think there were translations of there works yet.

In most places you only Quote names not the actual title of the work this is not a complete refrence.

Also are you Quoting from the main works of these scholars yourself or the works of others Authors Quoting them?

if so the titles of all the works is what i am asking for not the refrence from the book you are Quoting.


Edited by rami
Rasul Allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam) said: "Whoever knows himself, knows his Lord" and whoever knows his Lord has been given His gnosis and nearness.
IP IP Logged
Fatah-Momin
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 156
Quote Fatah-Momin Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 7:00am
Yes this is translation from Arabic to english directly from the work of scholar like At-Tabari and other, by a very close friend of mine. Most of this material is not available in english, thus the history is obscured.
IP IP Logged
Fatah-Momin
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 156
Quote Fatah-Momin Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 1:45pm
DISASTER SIFFIN

The war took place between the people of Syria and the people of Iraq.(170) One side called for homage to `Ali and unity on the Imam, and the others called for power over `Uthman's murderers. They said, "We will not offer allegiance to the one who gives refuge to the murderers." (171)

`Ali used to say, "I do not empower someone who seeks a right over a person to carry out whatever he wants from him without any judgment or judge." Mu`awiya said, "We will not offer allegiance to one who is suspected or his killer. He is one of those who is sought, so how can we let him rule or give him allegiance. He is a khalif who has overstepped and given himself (power)" In the details about that, they mentioned some words which resulted in the use of letters, (172) copying statements, composing poetry, and making examples outside of the path of the salaf. The successors confirmed these things and their successors rejected them. (173)

PROTECTION

As for the war between them, that definitely took place. It is also known that this was the cause. As for `Ali being the one who was right in it because the claimant for blood cannot properly give judgment and the claimant's suspicion of the qadi does not necessitate that he attack him. He must seek his right from the judge. If the judgment is clear, he has the judgment. If it is not, he is silent and patient. Allah has given judgment in many a right. If he does not have any deen, then he attacks him and he has an excuse in this world. (174)

If `Ali was suspected of the murder of `Uthman, then every Companion of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in Madina was suspected of it. There is little information that he killed him because a thousand men who came to kill `Uthman could not defeat 40,000 men..

Not a single man of the people of the Sunna suspected `Ali of the murder of `Uthman, not in our time nor in his time. That has already been discussed in this book. The only fact is that the murderers of `Uthman were with `Ali. `Ali had a position in relation to them, and he had his excuse between himself and Allah for that position. We all have the opinion of al-Qa'qa b. `Amr that the position of `Ali was due to constraint. However, some historians from the Shi`a added reports to `Ali which imparted other than what his heart contained of love, pleasure, friendship and support for `Uthman during his trial. They behaved badly to `Ali when they wanted to behave badly to `Uthman. As for Mu`awiya and his group, they did not mention `Ali at all in the attack on `Uthman except by virtue of the connection of `Uthman's murderers to him and his seeking their help. The murderers of `Uthman were those who behaved badly to Islam - to `Uthman and to `Ali as well. Allah will take their reckoning. If all the muslims had been like `Abdu'r-Rahman b. Khalid b. al-Walid in his resolution before the sedition got out of control and the reins had been taken from the hands of the men of intellect, then the business would not have gone to what it reached.
That would lead you to say that `Ali, Talha and az-Zubayr helped each other in the murder of `Uthman. What kept the Companions, both the Mahajirun and the Ansar and those who were counted among them and joined them from helping him?
There is the possibility that it was because they thought that these men sought a right and acted correctly. That would be a testimony against `Uthman, so the people of Syria had no statement. If they had refrained from it in order to mock the deen and they did not have any opinion about the situation nor any concern for Islam or the confusion which occurred in it, that would be apostasy and not rebellion because weakness in the hudud of the deen and surrendering the sacred things of the Shari'a to waste is kufr. If they refrained, it was because they did not think that they should go beyond `Uthman's limit and what he indicated. What wrong action to they have in that? What proof do Marwan, `Abdullah b. az-Zubayr, al-Hasan and al-Husayn, Ibn `Umar and these who helped him in his house have, since they came in and then left with weapons and arms while those who sought were outside watching? If they had had a force or could have sought refuge in a strong pillar, they would not have allowed anyone of them to see him or attack him. They were onlookers. If al-Hasan and al-Husayn, `Abdullah b. `Umar and `Abdullah b. az-Zubayr had stood in front of him, they would not have dared attack. If they had killed them, none of the attackers would have been left alive on the earth.

However, `Uthman surrendered himself. He was left to his opinion. It is a question of ijtihad as we already stated. What could `Ali say after the homage had been completed for him and if the relative of `Uthman had come and told him, "The Khalif was faced by a thousand persons who killed him. They are known"? What could he say except, "I am firm, take." On that day, he was firm unless they had proven that `Uthman deserved to be killed. (175)

By Allah, company of muslims, you know that what they said about `Uthman was nothing but injustice. The moment gave the seeker power, was useful to the seeker in that situation and made it easier for him to reach the one he sought. (176) That which refutes the lie in that, is, that when the command went to Mu`awiya, he did not kill any of `Uthman's murderers unless it was by a judgment - not counting those who were killed in a war (by interpretation) or those who intrigued against him as was said. (177) This lasted until the time of al-Hajjaj. Then they were killed by mere suspicion, not by reality. (178)

It is clear to you that they became liable for what they did.

It will cool your breasts to know that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, mentioned the sedition. He indicated and clarified them. He warned about the Khawarij and he said, "The group closest to the truth will kill them." (179) He had it clear that each group was connected to the truth. However, the party of `Ali was closer to it. (180)

Allah ta'ala said, "If two groups of the believers fight, make peace between them. Then if one of them is insolent against the other, then fight the insolent one until they come back to the command of Allah. If they come back, then make a peace between them with justice and be fair. Allah loves the just." (49:9) He did not bring them out of "belief" by insolence through any interpretation nor did He strip the name "brothers" from them since He said after it, "The believers are brothers, so make peace between your brothers." (49:10)

He, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said about `Ammar, "An attacking party will kill him." (181)

He said about al-Hasan, "This son of mine is a master. Perhaps Allah will use him to make peace between two great parties of muslims." He recommended to him that he remove himself and make peace. Similarly, it is related that the Prophet gave `Uthman permission in the dream to submit and break the fast with him that night. All of these are the things which happened because of the conflict. They are not the result of any method of fiqh nor are they considered to be part of the path of ijtihad in which the one who is right is rewarded ten times and the one who errs once. (182)

==================================================

170. In a place caled Siffin, close to ar-Ruqqa on the shore of the Euphrates at the end of the borders of Iraq. It is the beginning of Syrian territory. `Ali went there with his armies at the end of Dhu'l-Qa'da, 36 A.H.

171. When `Ali finished the Battle of the Camel and left Basra for Kufa, he entered it on Monday, 12th of Rajab. He sent Jarir b. `Abdullah al-Bajili to Mu`awiya in Damascus to call him to obey. Mu`awiya gathered the leaders of the companions, the generals of the armies, and the aides of the people of Syria and he consulted them about what `Ali demanded. They said, "We will not give him allegiance until he kills `Uthman's murderers or surrenders them to us." Jarir took that back to `Ali. `Ali appointed Abu Mas`ud `Uqba b. `Amr over Kufa and left it. The army was at an-Nakhayla, the beginning of the road to Syria from Iraq. Some people indicated that he should remain in Kufa and send someone else to Syria. He refused. Mu`awiya heard that `Ali had prepared and gone out himself to fight him. His men advised him to go out himself. The Syrians went towards the Euphrates in the direction of Siffin. `Ali advanced with his army to the place. `Ali's army had one hundred and twenty thousand and the army of Mu`awiya was seventy thousand. The Battle started in Dhu'l-Hijja, 36 A.H. and the fighting resumed later. Seventy thousand men were killed in this war. There were ninety battles in one hundred and ten days. This war was distinguished by noble courage in the fighting and noble dealings and contact during the truce and rest periods. Then the document of arbitration was written on the Ramadan at Duma al-Jandal in a place there called Adhruh.

172. i.e. Their ascription is a lie and it has no basis. Most of what you find in what the historians of the Shi`a relate comes from unknown transmitters or liars. The least of them in vehemence was Abu Makhnaf Lut b. Yahya. Adh-Dhahabi said, "Abu Makhnaf was a historian and a writer. He is not reliable. Abu Hatim and others left him." Ibn `Adi said about him. "A burning Shi`i who is one of their historians." Then others after him came who were worse for the History of Islam. They corrupted what the community knew of their past.

173. "Khalf" are the mischievous. In the revelation, "There succeeded after them a succession who inherited the Book, taking the goods of this lower world." "Khalaf" are the right-acting. There is the hadith, "This knowledge is carreid by ever successor of its just ones. They remove the twisting of the fanatics, the plagiarism of the liars and the interpretation of the ignorant."

174. `Uthman's murderers were in `Ali's army. That is true and no one disputes that. Al-Ashtar, who was one of the leaders of those who attacked `Uthman, was one of those who did the most to kindle the war between the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who were in the army of `Ali and in the army of Mu`awiya. When `Ali asked Mu`awiya, the Companions and the Tabi'un who were with him to give him allegiance, they appealed to him regarding `Uthman's murderers and demanded that he carry out the hadd of Allah on them. We already excused the Amir al-Mu'minin `Ali in this matter for when the murderers of `Uthman went with `Ali to Iraq, they were in the stronghold of their strength and the pride of their tribes. `Ali thought that if he killed them, that would open a door which he would not be able to close later. The lofty Companion al-Qa'qa' b. `Amr at-Tamimi pointed out this reality and he mentioned it to the Umm al-Mu'minin, `A'isha, and the two Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, Talha and az-Zubayr. They conceded his point and they excused `Ali. They agreed to come to an understanding with him which would lead them out of this civil strife. The murderers of `Uthman quickly started the war between the two groups. Those who sought to carry out the hadd of Allah on the murderers of `Uthman were excused because they were seeking a right, whether they were from the People of the Camel or the people of Syria. `Ali was unable to carry out the hadd of Allah due to the well- known constraint in which he found himself. However, when `Uthman's murderers started the war between the first two groups in Basra, it would have benefited Islam if the war of Siffin had not started between the other two groups. The grandson of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, al-Hasan b. `Ali, did not want his father to leave Madina for Iraq since he feared that a war would start with the people of Syria. If `Ali had not moved from Kufa to prepare for this fight, Mu`awiya would not have moved a single inhabitant to fight. Ibn Taymiyya said in `The Path of the Sunna' (2:219), "Mu`awiya was not one of those who chose to start the war."

175. The author admitted that the proof rested with the one who had the means because the crime was well known and the criminals were public in their outrage and made no attempt to conceal it. How could justice be carried out and who would undertake to see to it while the city of the Messenger was humbled under the force of the terror? Who would guarantee `Ali's life for him when he gave this judgment? Aren't those the very ones who discussed killing him when they formed their plot in Dhu Qar after `Ali's speech which he gave to the new men before they went to Basra (at-Tabari, 5:165) Wasn't al-Ashtar angry with the Amir al- Mu'minin `Ali after the Battle of the Camel because he had appointed his nephew, `Abdullah b. `Abbas, over Basra and did not appoint al-Ashtar. Then he left him in anger and `Ali caught up to him and corrected his evil (at-Tabari, 5:194). Didn't the Kharijites who came out against `Ali grow from this kernel? When `Ali was killed, wasn't he killed by a weapon similar to the one which killed `Uthman?

176. The moment gave the seeker power, even if there had been a force in Madina for which `Uthman wished. It is said that a force from the army of Syria had left Damascus, heading for Madina. When the news of the martyrdom of the Amir al-Mu'minin `Uthman reached them, they went back. Madina remaied in the power of the murderers of `Uthman until the homage was given to `Ali. If these murderers had yielded to the judgments of this homage which held no harm for them, there is no doubt that they would have turned into savage beasts if the judgments of Allah had been given against them and the hudud had been carried out for the atrocious crime which they had committed.

177. The force of Allah and His lofty justice fell on most of `Uthman's murderers. None of them were left during Mu`awiya's rule except for the fugitive who fearfully sought for a stone where he could hide. Their power vanished and their decreased. Mu`awiya had no need to pursue them.

178. The author alluded to the incident with `Umayr b. Dabi and Kumayl an-Nakh`i. That report was already given.

179. The name Khawarij has come about a group who went out against `Ali b. Abi Talib and his company because he had accepted arbitration. They said that the judgment of Allah was clear and that this arbitration was not necessary. Their slogan was "Only Allah had judgment." They were also called the al-Haruriyya, from a village in Kufa called Harura'. They went out to it. The Amir al-Mu'minin `Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, fought them in a famous battle called the Battle of an-Nahrawan. He defeated them and killed many of them. However, he was not able to eradicate them. Then they worked out a ruse which killed him at the hand of `Abdu'r-Rahman b. Muljam, may Allah give him what he deserves!
The Kharijites claimed that `Uthman was a kafir by his changes and alterations and that `Ali was a kafir when he accepted arbitration. They attacked the People of the Camel. All of that came from their ignorance and misguidance.
Part of their theory was that the khalifate was by the free choice of the muslims. In that, they opposed the Shi`a who said that the khalifate was confined to the House of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. That was also opposed to the people of the Sunna who said that the khalifate was in Quraysh when they were present and proved to be worthy. That is the truth.
The Kharijites, in spite of their misguidance and twisting, were not known to lie like the Rafidites who did not recognise sound hadith and who fabricated false hadith which they ascribed to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. They also interpreted the ayats of the Noble Qur'an according to their passions.
In the `Sahih' of Muslim (book 12, hadith 150, pt. 3. p. 113) from the hadith of Abu Sa`id al-Khudri, "An arrow will penetrate a group of the muslims. They will be killed by the group closest to the truth."

180. The people of the Muhammadan Sunna owe it to Allah to believe that `Ali and Mu`awiya and the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who were with them, were all people of the truth. They were sincere in that. Their disagreement was based on ijtihad just as mujtahids can disagree in any subject open to dispute. They are rewarded for being right and being wrong because of their sincerity in their ijtihad. The reward of the one who is right is many times greater than the reward of the one who is wrong. Apart from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, no human being is protected from error. some of them err in some things and are right in others. It is like that with other people. Whoever renounced the truth by provoking the first sedition against `Uthman is not considered to be one of the two parties who had the truth, even if he fought with them and attached himself to them because those who stained their hands, intentions and hearts with the unjust attack on the Amir al-Mu'minin `Uthman, whoever they were, deserved to have the Islamic hadd carried out on them. In the situation here, no one was able to do that, and their presence inflamed the fighting between the right-acting muslims. Whenever these men sensed the muslims' resolve for peace and brotherhood, as they did in the Battle of the Camel, they decided to persist in criminality as long as as they could. When we say that both parties were among the people of the truth, we mean the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who were with the two parties and those Tabi`un who went with them, and who were based on the sunna of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. We think that `Ali, who was promised the Garden, had a higher station with Allah than Mu`awiya, the uncle of the believers and the Companion of the Messenger of the Lord of the Worlds. Both of them were people of excellence. When the parties of the people of evil infiltrated them, the one who did an atom's weight of good will see it and the one who did an atom's weight of evil will see it. Ibn Kathir said in `The Beginning and the End' (7:277) that `Abdu'r-Rahman b. Ziyad b. An`am ash-Sha`bani, the Qadi of North Africa (d. in 156), who was a man of right action and one of those who commanded the correct, said when he mentioned the people of Siffin, "There were Arabs who knew each other in the Jahiliyya. They met in Islam with zeal and the sunna of Islam. They counselled each other to be steadfast and they were ashamed to flee. They brought out their dead and buried them." Ash-Sha`bi said, "They are the people of the Garden. They met each other and none of them fled from the other.

181. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said that when they were building the mosque and people were moving one brick at a time while `Ammar was moving two bricks at a time. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, spoke these words about him, according to what Abu Sa`id al-Khudri related by `Ikrima, the client of Ibn `Abbas and `Ali b. `Abdullah b. `Abbas. It is in `The Book of Jihad and Biography' from the `Sahih' of al-Bukhari (book 56, chap. 17, pt. 3, p. 207). Mu`awiya knew that he himself would not attack in the war of Siffin because he did not bring it or start it. He only came to it after `Ali had left Kufa and camped his army in an-Nukhayla in order to go to Syria as was already stated. That is when `Ammar was killed. Mu`awiya said, "The one who brought him out killed him." The wrong action for all the muslims who were killed at the hands of the muslims since the time of `Uthman's murder, rests on `Uthman's murderers because they opened the door of sedition and because they stirred up anger in the breasts of the muslims against each other. As they were the murderers of `Uthman, so they killed all those who were killed afterwards. Those men included `Ammar and those who were better than `Ammar - like Talha and az-Zubayr, until the sedition came to the point where they murdered `Ali himself. They were part of his army and were in the group on which he was based. The hadith is one of the signs of prophecy. The two groups fighting in Siffin were all Companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and were the pillars of the `Umma of Islam. The wrong action for all that took place in the sedition rests upon the attacking group, for whose sake every person killed, in the Battle of the Camel and the Battle of Siffin and what branched out from that, was killed.

182. Ibn Taymiyya said in `the Path of the Sunna' (2:219-220), "Mu`awiya was not one of those who chose to start the war. He was one of the people who most desired that there should be no fighting. Others were more eager to fight than him." People have different statements about the battle of Siffin. Some of them say that both of them were correct mujtahids as is stated by many of the people of kalam, fiqh,and hadith among those who say that every mujtahid is correct. They said that they were both mujtahids. This is the statement of many of the people of Ash`arites, the Karamiyya, the fuqaha' and others. It is the statment of many of the people of Abu Hanifa, ash-Shafi`i, Ahmad and others. The Karamiyya said that each was a correct Imam and that it is permitted that there be two Imams when there is a need for that. Some of them say that one of them was correct and does not specify who that was. This is the statement of one group. Some of them say that `Ali alone was correct and Mu`awiya was a mujtahid who erred as is stated by some groups of the people of kalam and the fuqaha' of the people of the four schools. These three statements are related by Abu `Abdullah Hamid, one of the people of Imam Ahmad and other people. They include those who say it would have been better for both groups not to fight. Fighting was a fight of civil war. It was neither obligatory nor recommended. Not fighting would have been better for both groups, even though `Ali was more entitled to the truth. This is the statement of Ahmad and most of the people of hadith and most of the Imams of the fuqaha.' It is the statement of the great Companions and those who followed them. That is the statement of `Imran b. Husayn, may Allah be pleased with them. He forbade the sale of weapons for the fight. He said, "It is selling arms in civil strife." That is the statement of Zayd, Usama b. Zayd, Muhamamd b. Maslama, Ibn `Umar, Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas and most of the rest of the first predecessors among the Muhajirun and the Ansar, may Allah be pleased with them. This is why it is the school of the people of the Sunna not to discuss the quarrels between the Companions. Their virtues are confirmed and their love and friendship are obligatory.
IP IP Logged
rami
Male  Islam
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Senior Member

Joined: 01 March 2000
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2550
Quote rami Replybullet Posted: 19 November 2005 at 5:25am
Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem

Yes this is translation from Arabic to english directly from the work of scholar like At-Tabari and other, by a very close friend of mine. Most of this material is not available in english, thus the history is obscured.

Are you saying your friend is of the same status as tabari?

Is the work published in arabic or is it a personel work. Can you please provide the name of the author and the work.
Rasul Allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam) said: "Whoever knows himself, knows his Lord" and whoever knows his Lord has been given His gnosis and nearness.
IP IP Logged
Fatah-Momin
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 156
Quote Fatah-Momin Replybullet Posted: 19 November 2005 at 10:24am

The work originaly published in Arabic it was translated and indexed by my friend in english on my request, refrences are already within the posts. 

 

Are you saying your friend is of the same status as tabari?

^ where did this come from?



Edited by Fatah-Momin
IP IP Logged
Fatah-Momin
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 May 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 156
Quote Fatah-Momin Replybullet Posted: 19 November 2005 at 10:08pm
Regarding the accusations that Sayydina Fatima died angry with Sayyidina Abu Bakr. We say: It is false and untrue, and only a man devoid of sense would believe such a thing. When looking at a narration, one must look at all of them as a whole. Even if we suppose that Sayyidina Fatima was angry at Sayyidina Abu bakr we must note that Fatima was not omniscient, and her understanding was as limited as that of any other human: just as Musa lost patience with Khidr, because he did not understand the latters actions, so Fatima lost patience with Abu Bakr, since she misunderstood the latters actions. Allah be pleased with them both.

And note that Musa - peace be upon him- is Infallible.

When Fatima fell sick Abu Bakr Siddiq came and asked permission to see her. Ali said: "Fatima, here is Abu Bakr asking permission to see you." She said: "Would you like me to give him permission?" [1] He said yes, whereupon she gave him permission. He entered to see her, seeking her good pleasure, and said: "By Allah! I did not leave my house, property, family, and tribe except to please Allah, and to please His Prophet, and to please you, the People of the House (ahl al bayt)! He continued to seek her good pleasure until she was pleased." [2]

[1] Al-Dhahabi said in the Siyar (Al Arna'ut ed. 2:121): "She applied the Sunna by not giving permission to anyone to enter her husbands house except by his command."

[2] Bayhaqi in al Sunan al Kubra (6:300-301) and Dala'il al-Nubuwwa (7:273-281) who said: "It is narrated with a fair (hasan) chain." Muhibb al Din al-Tabari cited it in al Riyad Al Nadira (2:96-97 #534) and Dhahabi in the Siyar (Ibid). Ibn Kathir states it as Sahih in his Al Bidayah and Ibn Hajar in his Fath Al Bari.
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 7 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com