Who killed Ammar ibn Yasir{RA}?

[Abu Dajanaa]

:salam:

:jazak:

[abulayl]

:salam: i know only it was in battle of siffin, but dont remember anything about the person who martyred him.

[Hussayn]

He was killed by the transgressing tyrannical Army of Muawiyah ibn Abu Sufyan at the Battle of Siffin. He was very loyal alhamdullilah to Hadhrat Ali (as)

Sahih Bukhari : Volume 1, Book 8, Number 438: Narrated 'Ikrima:

Ibn 'Abbas said to me and to his son 'Ali "Go to Abu Sa'id and listen to what he narrates." So we went and found him in a garden looking after it. He picked up his Rida', wore it and sat down and started narrating till the topic of the construction of the mosque reached. He said, "We were carrying one adobe at a time while 'Ammar was carrying two. The Prophet saw him and started removing the dust from his body and said, "May Allah be Merciful to 'Ammar. He will be inviting them (i.e. his murderers) to Paradise and they will invite him to Hell-fire." 'Ammar said, "I seek refuge with Allah from affliction."

Sunan Thirmidhi : Hadith Number 3800: Abu Huraira narrated that the Messenger of Allah said : "Rejoice Ammar, the transgressing party shall kill you


Allah's messenger (PBUH) said to Ammar: "A group of rebels would kill you."

- Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, Tradition #6968


Umm Salama narrated that Allah's messenger (may peace be upon him) said: "A band of rebels would kill Ammar."

- Sahih Muslim, English version, v4, chapter MCCV, Tradition #6970


This narration is clearly indicative of the fact that in the conflict between Hadrat Ali and his opponents, Hadrat Ali was on the right as Ammar Ibn Yasir was killed in the Battle of Siffin fighting in the camp of Hadrat Ali. (Footnote of Sahih Muslim, English version, v4,
p1508).


"In the Battle of Sifin, when the head of Ammar Yasir (RA) was cut off and taken to Muawiyya, two people were arguing over it, each one claimed that he had killed Ammar."

- Musnad Ahmad (Pub. in Dar al-Maarif, Egypt 1952), Tradition #6538, #6929
- Tabaqat, by Ibn Sa'd, v3, p253

[The Fake Shaykh]

:salam:

:jazak:

a interesting read: Is the killer of Ammar ibn Yasir going to hell?

http://www.umm-ul-qura.org/info/user_pages/page.asp?art_id=152

[ILM seeker]

This question is a little bit off the topic, but wouldnt it be possible for a sunni muslim to get involved in the politics that happend after Rasulullah (saw) and still be a good muslim,

I dont mean disregarding the Rashidun, and the sahaba but just steering clear of situations like the above which cause doubts in peoples heads ?

ps: this is just a question, I personaly would rather find out the truth.

[True Life]

:salam:
This question is a little bit off the topic, but wouldnt it be possible for a sunni muslim to get involved in the politics that happend after Rasulullah (saw) and still be a good muslim,

I dont mean disregarding the Rashidun, and the sahaba but just steering clear of situations like the above which cause doubts in peoples heads ?

ps: this is just a question, I personaly would rather find out the truth.Do you understand Urdu? If so, then listen to the following clip (especially from 3:00 onwards).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI3iX5Z2INA

[ILM seeker]

:salam:Do you understand Urdu? If so, then listen to the following clip (especially from 3:00 onwards).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI3iX5Z2INA

I dont understand urdu Bro, Maybe you can explain ?

[True Life]

:salam:
I dont understand urdu Bro, Maybe you can explain ?Maulana Tariq Jamil from Pakistan explains to his students how some narrations, which are recorded in the books of history, i.e. al-Bidayah wan-Nihaya, Tabari, Ibn Khuldun etc., can (or usually do) create in the reader's mind Tashwif towards the Sahabah.

He tells further, that at the beginning of his own studies he would dwelve into and study Tarikh (history) with a great passion no matter of which era. At the end himselfl got confused, too. For weeks he had discussions with his teacher Maulana Jamshed (scholar in Raiwind) on this, until Maulana Jamshed said one sentence which removed all his doubts and confusions:

"The Sahabahs lives were Deen. And Deen is not judged by (or based on) history, but rather Qur'an and Sunnah."

He as well explains to his students, that even if Sahabah erred then the One, who is supposed to take them to account for it has in the Qur'an forgiven them already in a loving manner. So who are we, Maulana Maududi or Shi'a to point fingers at their errors?!

Please anyone correct me, if I made a mistake in paraphrasing it.

[Ahmad_shakeel]

:salam:
"The Sahabahs lives were Deen. And Deen is not judged by (or based on) history, but rather Qur'an and Sunnah."


:subh:


the point that distinguish people of truth from rafidi shias and maududis..it is their fav. hobby to point fingers at the sahaba and salaf...

[ILM seeker]

He as well explains to his students, that even if Sahabah erred then the One, who is supposed to take them to account for it has in the Qur'an forgiven them already in a loving manner.

:jazak:

So even if the sahaba were to commit crimes against the ummah or against islam (astaghfirulla) ... they would be forgiven ???