on his blog, efendi has tried to cheat people; and let us see how

but before, we go into analyzing his tricks; let us see certain basic things

whenever an article is written, it is with certain aim
and that is known by the name of that article; or by the conclusion of that article

so, let us see what was the name of our article



ibn abi darim & narration of attack of umar on bibi fatima: exposing truth of sunni scholars

it can be read here

and in conclusion, we said


ibn abi darim had no problem except that he spoke what was truth, and got victimized

the allegation of being rafidi does not hurt him
as such allegations are there on the narrators of bukhari, muslim, and other books of sihah

 

so, simply speaking, this article was meant to expose sunni scholars; and their bias towards ibn abi darim

like we see that when ibn hajar talked of him in lisan (1/610) or dhabi talked of him in meezan (1/283)
they mentioned this statement of his in their books
so that was there in back of their minds;; and for that, we gave example of dhabi’s book sair ul aalam
where he started off by claiming him to be imam, hafiz
and then turned against him

what efendi did was that he named the post like this


Alleged attack on Fatima – doubt refuted

 

and then he started off like this

إنّ عمر رفس فاطمة حتّى أسقطت بمحسن.

“umar kicked fatima asws, and that caused abortion of mohsin asws”

Shia quoted this report as a proof for their views that Umar attacked Fatima.

Here full article from shia site.

by giving this start; he is trying to divert the attention of his readers to what he can defend

so he says

 

InshAllah we would address all doubts here.

1) All reports should contain two things: a) Text. b) Chain of reporters.

This one doesn’t contain any chain. In books which were quoted by this rafidi, there is mention of only one narrator – Ibn Abi Daraam.

This in itself is enough to reject above mentioned report as non-established. In contrast to rafidis, which would quote evenOxforddictionary to proof their points, we as an ahlesunnah wal jamaa, wouldn’t accept story which would accuse noble companion without sound chain of reporters.

2) This report would be rejected even if it would contain sound report, because text of it is munkar and shazz to well known history facts.

if you read our article, we never said that this narration is coming with any chain or that all narrators of that chain are thiqa
all we are saying is that
he said this; and got victimized

so, why is he trying to cheat his readers?

if you actually read his statement, you will realize that he has actually exposed his bias as well; though he tried to cover it in words
but if you see when he writes

2) This report would be rejected even if it would contain sound report,

they are actually not interested in any chains whatsoever, they have to defend umar at any cost
their scholars would do this by terming them liars etc;

and this is our basic aim as well
to expose their bias

now,

the peak of his cheating was when he tried to make his readers realize that we just quoted praise for ibn abi darim from sair ul aalam;;; though anyone can see that it was not just praise, rather we did say that dhabi turned against him in the same book

let us see how efendi cheats his readers
he says

 


Rafidi quoted Siyar of Dhahabi, where he mentioned that ibn Abi Daraam was Imam and Hafidh. But as all other rafidis, this one closed his eyes on fact that in the very same place, Dhahabi said that ibn Abi Daraam wasn’t truthful in his narrations
.

 


IMAM, HAFIDH, NOT TRUTHFUL IN NARRATIONS

This reminds me of what we said before

IMAM, HAFIZ, FADIL, SINNER, MISGUIDED

have you ever seen this sentence before for anyone?

is it possible??

of course it is;; all you need to do is to learn this art from dhabi as to how one can protect honor of its caliphs;; and that too not in different books, rather same page

 

good efendi! you have learned this art

he continues; and says

 

5) As for doubt of rafidi that how it possible that imam would become rafidi liar, we have some good examples in our time. For sure shining star of modern rafd – al-Tijani wasn’t Imam or even scholar, he was layman soofe, but he became well known rafidi.

During the time of prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) was a companion, which believed in Islam, left his hometown and made hijra to Abisiniyah and there accept Christianity.

So there is no problem in accepting fact that someone could change his religion.

nice try efendi; but tell me

in this present era

do you call tijani as

imam, hafiz tijani?

nope, rather as you said


For sure shining star of modern rafd – al-Tijani wasn’t Imam or even scholar, he was layman soofe, but he became well known rafidi.

these are the words which you are using now
isnt it?

so, the question is

why was your scholar, dhabi; calling him

IMAM, HAFIZ???

you did not answer this thing …………………
rather you accepted this

Advertisements