Battle of Yarmouk and al-Qadisiyyah 636 AD

[PakSword]

Which means he was one of god swords like muhammad said

Good.. so you believe he was "too" given this title by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)?

 

[I.R.A]

And the persians like al tabari and al masoodi are considered the most trustable Sunni historians

Exactly they (the named) are the ones responsible for spreading false propaganda and working for their own motives. They form the basis of all those false traditions and narratives and hear say. And you rightly pointed out their blind follower ship. And its not Al Tabri only all of the imams who happen to have gathered ahadeeth on their own were Persians.

 

[Trango Towers]

I didn't know that Ibn ishaak or Ibn kather or al dhahabbi or ibn al atheer were persians

And the persians like al tabari and al masoodi are considered the most trustable Sunni historians

There you go again.....Sunni historian.

Your sectarian shit stinks

 

[SALMAN F]

Good.. so you believe he was "too" given this title by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)?

No

There you go again.....Sunni historian.

Your sectarian shit stinks

Just pointed out that the people who he calls liers are considered the most trusted historians by the majority of muslims

Exactly they (the named) are the ones responsible for spreading false propaganda and working for their own motives. They form the basis of all those false traditions and narratives and hear say. And you rightly pointed out their blind follower ship. And its not Al Tabri only all of the imams who happen to have gathered ahadeeth on their own were Persians.

Well than that's mean I was right when I said 99% of the Islamic history is a bunch of made up lies

 

[PakSword]

No

But said this in your previous comment.

Any way.. good for you.. More than 70 percent Muslims do believe he was awarded this title.. and I am happy with that..

 

[I.R.A]

Well than that's mean I was right when I said 99% of the Islamic history is a bunch of made up lies

Yes I agree and that includes Karbala and all the fairy tales associated with it, it also includes all that distortion and bad image publicity for Ameer Yazeed.

 

[SALMAN F]

But said this in your previous comment.

Any way.. good for you.. More than 70 percent Muslims do believe he was awarded this title.. and I am happy with that..

And again muhammad didn't give him that title only for him he said he is just one of gods many swords I doubt if you understand that

Yes I agree and that includes Karbala and all the fairy tales associated with it, it also includes all that distortion and bad image publicity for Ameer Yazeed.

Nobody needs to give yazeed a bad image since everyone know that he killed Muhammad's grandson

 

[PakSword]

And again muhammad didn't give him that title only for him he said he is just one of gods many swords I doubt if you understand that

I understand that fully.. So you are saying he wasn't the only person to obtain the title from Muhammad Peace be Upon Him.. Fair enough, even if he was one of many.. I hope you understand my point..

Well than that's mean I was right when I said 99% of the Islamic history is a bunch of made up lies

And the rest 1% includes?

You know you are now making a mockery of yourself..

 

[SALMAN F]

I understand that fully.. So you are saying he wasn't the only person to obtain the title from Muhammad Peace be Upon Him.. Fair enough, even if he was one of many.. I hope you understand my point..



And the rest 1% includes?

You know you are now making a mockery of yourself..

The Islamic history and the hadeeths were written centuries after the prophet era specially during the Abbasid era nobody knows which history or hadeeth is true

 

[PakSword]

The Islamic history and the hadeeths were written centuries after the prophet era specially during the Abbasid era nobody knows which history or hadeeth is true

Same goes with all the sects.. but there are methods to get to the truth.. and I believe hadith system is bang on target.. and I don't care what you believe in..

 

[Goenitz]

what I know, both Byzantien and Sassinids had no interest in Arabia so they never invaded....they had their proxies to counter arab invaders and dacoits... after birth of islam when muslim got weaker during first caliph times, those proxies helped the false prophets and other rebels... so thats the reason muslims invaded Sassinids.... plus muslims had no soft corner for Sassinids as they had declined friendship with the Prophet SAW in past..

 

[I.R.A]

Nobody needs to give yazeed a bad image since everyone know that he killed Muhammad's grandson

Everyone knows it the way ...... how Tabri wanted them to know it ......... again I can safely say that everyone knows it the way how a Persian wanted them to know it. Ameer Yazeed didn't kill Imam Hussain, he couldn't have. Tabri's work in this regard ends up quoting people who never existed, and then all those millions vs few is some fairy tale they introduced to stir emotions of people. Karbala if it ever happened ...... was only half an hour conflict, it happened all of a sudden without Imam Hussain and Ameer Yazeed wanting it to happen.

 

[Goenitz]

I believe the newly covert muslims in Sassinid region casued too much trouble... they (abdullah sabai) sabotaged, manipulated and killed Hazrat Usman. Then they (abu lolo deroz) killed Hazrat Umer during prayers.
They started battle of Camels... and killed Hazrat Talha when he was going Hijaz. and also Hazrat Zubair ibn Awam was assassinated... Later, Ibn e mulgim killed Hazrat Ali.
Then they (Koofians) called Prophets SAW grandson to support them... but Ibn e zayad and his general Shimar were convinced to fight Hazrat Hussain RA. Those people who called him, betrayed him and after victory burnt his family camps to burn down the proof (letters they sent)

also in 930 theses newly converts (Qarmatians) attacked and stole Hijr e Aswad... they were also mixed of islam and zooristanian

 

[I.R.A]

but Ibn e zayad and his general Shimar were convinced to fight Hazrat Hussain RA.

Personally I am more convinced that Imam Hussain was governor of Iraq when he was assassinated (like many other Muslim leaders and personalities), however for the sake of argument .......

Why didn't state act against Imam Hussain and his followers when they were leaving Makkah? And why did Imam Hussain leave without attending Hajj ........ you can work the dates and travel means of those times, routes and calculate when Imam Hussain should have left Makkah to reach Karbala on tenth of Muharam.

And another pertinent question here is many great Companions of Messenger (Peace be upon him) were alive at that time, including companions who fought in Badar and many other fights ..... why none of those companions assisted Imam Hussain?

And (if I start believing the history as it is) it wasn't the people you quote who started and wished the conflict, it were the brothers of Muslim Bin Aqeel who wanted to avenge the death of their brother from state. And it was their impatience that led to the short conflict and resultant bloodshed (max half an hour)

 

[Pindi Boy]