1 | Page A DISCUSSION ON HUJR BIN ADI FROM PURE SUNNI APPROACH.

DEFENDING SAHABAH AN APOLOGY TO SAHABAH BIS MIL LA HIR RAH MAANIR RAHIM The Problem of HUJR Bin ADI Siyanda Mariah R.D is A COMPANION OF HOLY PROPHET AND HE DOES DESERVE ALL THE REPECT OF A SAHABI. There are several objections of Shiites in general and Ethan Ash rites in particular against Saiyadna Muaviah R.D One of them is of the punishment of H-jr bin Aid INTRODUCTION. HUJR on of Adi was a Tabai and not a Sahabi. The tradition that he was a sahabi is not authentic according to Sunni laws of traditions. According to Bin SAD few learned person include him in SAHABAH but IBN AL KSIR HAS CITED Abu Ahmad R.H that Majority of Muhaddthun DO NOTconsider the claim that he was sahabi AS Correct. [ See TABQAT VOL 6 AND ALBADAYAH WAN NAHAYAH vol 8]. It is very strange to see that Ithna Ashri try to prove that he was a Sahabi on weak reports and unreliable sayings and reject the Statements of Majority of Sunnis from the works of Sunnis. Even they themselves never consider the reports and opinions of their own minorities. They themselves reject a number of traditions of Usul Al Kofi. How can they do that to Sunnites, when such a thing is not even according to there own standard. One can not present a Qaul Saying of AKHBARI ITHNA ASHRI to convince an Usuli Ithna Ashri or a saying of An Usuly Ithna Ashri Against An AKBARI ITHNA ASHRI. USULITES OF SUB CONTINENT DIFFER ON CERTAIN ISSUES WITH USULITES OF PERSIA OR IRAN , the Neo Khumini Iran. Even Ante Khumini Ithna Ashri Scholors differ from Neo Khumini Scholors on certain Issus. So the opinion of majority can not be forsook against The minority not only in Ithna Ashriaism but also in Sunnism. Page6

Ithna Ashri or The Twervers Laws of tradition does not recognize the truth

2 | Page A DISCUSSION ON HUJR BIN ADI FROM PURE SUNNI APPROACH. of Sunni traditions. SECT OF HUJR. Although Hujr was against SAIYADNA MUAVIAH BUT he did not held ITHNA ASHRITE VIEWS. He was only a supportor of Caliph Ali ER.D who in his extremism joined a group of terrorists and began to challenge the writ of the state. Hujr was a pious man in the sense he used to worship GOD and obeyed his laws in general. Crime of Hour. The Tabai Hour was unfortunately a supporter of Insurrect ore and rebellions of the Islamic Caliphate. He joined the Punishment. Hour was punished by the chief executive i.e. the Caliph and was sentenced to death for his Anti Caliphate activities. This was the demand of justice and he was punished as a terrorist. And an insurrection a rebellion and an activist... PIOUSNESS AND THE CRIME. In Islam no one can be declared as Kafir just because he or she has done a transgression. Also Sunnis of the world consider Hour as a pious person who had unfortunately fallen as a pray in the hands of insurrections.. WAS HUJR NOT GUILTY THIS is beyond any shadow of doubt that Hujr was guilty of crime of Insurrection and was deserved full punishment. His personal piousness can not be a proof of the fact the alleged claim that he was not guilty How ever his crime was considered as an error of IJTIHAD. Dispute over the punishment of HUJR BIN ADI. Anti Caliphate activists and did several unforgivable offences.

Sunnis are divided into two groups. One those opine that He would have been IMPRESSIONED for life instead of being killed for the crime of insurrection. They do opine that he may be IMMPRISONED for the rest of his life instead of being killed. Another group of Sunnis believed that he was rightly punished and deserved to be killed. The first group of Sunnis did believe that SAIYADNA Mariah did commit Page6

3 | Page A DISCUSSION ON HUJR BIN ADI FROM PURE SUNNI APPROACH. an error in his judgment just as a judge or juries commit an error in making decision and judgment. Group thinks that his decision and judgment was correct and insurrection was a crime... Both of this group opines that Hour did commit the error of insurrection in spite of his piousness. The proof of the first group is a tradition ascribed to Mother of Faithful in which she enquired SAIYADNA Mariah that what had happen to His Hilm in the case of Hujr and why did him not sentenced Hujr to be iIMPRESSIONED for life. Point to be noted that there is a difference between ADL AND HILM. She did not say what had happened to his adl. This is a proof hat it was nor a zulm or injustice. Yet it was the demand of Hilm and not of Adl to forgive Harsher did not suggested a full mercy but suggested anan alternative punishment. She did suggested that HUJR would have been forgiven from the deserving punishment of death .A number of other Sunnis suggest that killing Hujr was a strong punishment for a crime which deserved a life land punishment. A strong punishment for slightly weaker crime. Other opine that It was a correct decision and an accurate judgment yet as according to JUST AND ADL.How ever He may have been forgiven since the Caliph had the right to forgive and the caliph was well known for his hilm . So a person who was well known for his hilm is not likely to deviate from his hilm even if it was not injustice or zulm. Response of Muaviah was that he lacked a good advisor at that time who may have asked for change of punishment. APPEAL for Mercy vs. Punishment of death. In the word of Justice there is a punishment for insurrection and rebellion. Some time very pies men insurrect on the basis of their thoughts. But this is no excuse to change the punishment. Even today the act of rebellion is considered as a crime by any government. Hujr had become a threat to the state of caliphate and deserved the full punishment of death .But he was a pious man and he might be forgiven not as an act of justice but as an act of mercy. The caliph had the proper right to change the punishment of death to the punishment of imprisonment for life. But he did not. The tradition is an enquiry why did the Caliph not forgive on his own instead of sentencing HUJR to death. An enquiry to know the reasons. Page6 How ever it must be noted that the tradition is extremely doubtful and can not be accepted with certainty.

4 | Page A DISCUSSION ON HUJR BIN ADI FROM PURE SUNNI APPROACH. It may be a fabrication if not with certainty then with high probability. The other group of Sunnis point out at this fact and consider that this is a fabricated tradition with doubt ful origin. That is HUJR was correctly punished and there was no need to shew unnecessary mercy inspite of all of his personal piousness. Sunni never mix the two things. Problem of insurrection is one thing and the problem of insurrection is an other thing. How ever they think that Hujr may be forgiven by Allah for his act of insurrection against the state and the Caliph. Some also opine that it would have been far better if he would have been forgiven and this is a matter of an error in the judgment. It is also not a transgression. HISTORY OF HUJR AND HIS HIS CHALLEGE TO WRIT OF THE GOVERNMENT. During the Governorship of Saiyadna SHAB bin MUGHIRA R.D A COMPANIOPN OF RASUL P.B.U.H the Governor used to criticize the killers of Caliph SAIYADNA Uthman R.D and the policy of Caliph SAIDYADNA Ali R.D in regard to the killers of SAIYADNNA Othman R.D.He used to advocate Saiyadna Muaviah R.D on the issue. HUJR Began to criticize Saiyadna Muaviah R.D and to Dfend the killers Of Usman R.D instead. The Governor began to advice him and did not take any practical sTEP to stop him from his act since. Was included in freedom of expression. The critic of Siyanda Mariah criticized for eight long years and practiced his right of criticism in the SERMONS OF FRYDAYS When the new GOVERNOR ZIAD [who was once a supporter of SAIYADNA ALI R.D] was appointed after the death of former MERCIFUL Governor the new governor in his first sermon condemned the killers of SAIYADNA USMA R.D .Hour once again made a sharp response to the new Governor. By the time the new Governor was appointed Hujr had joined the insurrections and rebellions that were about three thousand in number or more and were armed with traditional weapons of their time. . Perhaps the INSURRECTORS had thought to begin practical violence and insurrection against the Government and to challenge the writ of government. The ASSITENT ./ acting governor AMAR BIN HARIS WAS DELEVERING A SERMON ON ONE FRYDAY Hujr began to stone him .The acting reported this act of violence to the Governor who send the report to the CALIPH SAIYADNA MUAVIAH red as a duty The Caliph SAIYADNA MUAVIAH R.D asked the Governor to send Hujr to the Capital of the Caliphatic State. For challenging the WRIT OF THE STATE. When the enforcing authorities tried to arrest Hujr a serious conflict occured between the insurrectors and the low enforcing authorities.Ziad took witnesses Page6

5 | Page A DISCUSSION ON HUJR BIN ADI FROM PURE SUNNI APPROACH. from those who were eye witness of the entire event and send every thing to the Caliph Saiyadna MUAVIAH R.D. There were seventy witnesses against Hujr and his rebellions. Caliph Mariah R.D was in doubt whether to punish Hour or to forgive him for his activities of terrorism possible violence in future against the Caliphatic State in the name of Caliph Ali R.D. but HE LATTER DECIEDED THAT Hour was left untouched for eight or more years and he is becoming more and more extremist day by day, he must be punished. Hujr was sentenced to death for his activities. ANALYSIS. HUJR USED THE FREEDOM OF EXPREESION IN A VERY NEGATIVE WAY AND DELEBERATELY USED FOR CIVIL VIOLENCE ,DISORDER AND TERRORIST ACTIVIES. Against a Government which has been neglecting Him for eight years or more.The government had provided full freedom of expression to critics of the Government. A freedom which is example for generations after generations of mankind. But to consider freedom of expression as some thing to make civil violence is a great mistake . SUNNIS ARE NOT NASIBITES. A NUMBER IF IRANIANS ARE TRYING TO DECLAIR ALL THE SUNNIS AS NASIBITES. THE ALLEGE THAT ONE WHO BELIEVE SAYYADNA MUAVAIAH AS A RESPECTABLE SAHABI IS A NASIBITE. BUT THIS ALLIGATION IS FALSE. SINCE ALL THE SUNNIS IN THE WORLD BELIEVE THAT SAIYADNA MUAVAIAH R.D IS A RESPECTABLE SAHABI BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF DOUBT AND IT IS SUFFICIENT FOR A PERSON TO BE EXCLUDED FROM AHLUSSUNNAH IF HE OR SHE DENOUNCE THE SAHAQBIHOOD OF SAIYADNA MUAVIAH R.D. HOW EVER MAJORITY OF SUNNIS DISLIKE HIS SON YAZID. BUT THERE IS A SHARP DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO . MINOERITY OF SUNNIS DO NOT CONSIDER YAZID AS THE KILLER OF SAIYADNA HUSAIN R.D. EVEN THEY DO NOT SAY THAT SAIYADNA HUSAIN WAS KILLED RIGHTLY BY YAZID. THEY ONLY OPINE THAT YAZID WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE DEATH OF SAIYADNA HUSAIN R.D AND WAS NOT GUILTY OF HIS MARTYRDOM. BUT MAJORITY OF SUNNITES HOW EVER BELIEVE THAT IF YAZID WAS NOT DIRECTLY INVOLVED HE STILL MAY BE ACCUSED IN THE KILLING OF SAIYADNA HUSAIN R.D, HENCE HE WAS A FASIQ JUST LIKE THE KILLERS OF SAIYADNA USMAN R.D WERE FASIQ. THIS OPENION IS SOUND AND IS QUITE MODERATE. BUT THE KILLERS OF USMAN WERE NOT PIOUS AND HUJR DID A GFREAT MISTAKE WHEN HE JOINED THE PEOPLE WHO SUPPORTED THE KILLERS OF SAYADNA USMAN R.D. THOSE WHO RENAME SUNNITES AS NASIBITES JUST BECAUSE THE RESPECT SAIYADNA MUAVIAH R.D AS A SAHABI ARE TRHEMSELVES RACVAFID. Page6

6 | Page A DISCUSSION ON HUJR BIN ADI FROM PURE SUNNI APPROACH. ONE MAY POINT OUT THAT ITHNA ASHRITES ARE SO SENSATIVEN THAT THEY ARE READY TO EXCL;UDE AND EXCOMMUNICATE ANY ONE FROM THE FOLDS OF ITHBNA ASRISM IF SOME ONE DISPUTES ONLY ON THE NON EXITENCE OF THEIR ALLEGED IMAM IS XSUPPOSED ISOLATION WHOM THE DECLAIR AS MAHDI. IF A PERSON CAN BE EXCLUDED FROM THE FOLDS OF ITHNA ASHRISM JUST ON THE DISPUTE ON A CONTROVERSAL PERSON OF DISPUTED EXISTENCE THEY ARE IN NO POSITION TO ADVOCATE FOR A PERSON WHO DOES NOT RECOGNISE SAIYADNA MUAVIAQHR.D AS A RESPECTABLE SAHABI . SUCH A PERSON IF AGREES WITH SUNNITES ON THOUSAND OF ARTICLES OF FAITH IS EXCLUDED FROM SUNNISM JUST BECAUSE OF DENOUNCING THE SAHABIHOOD OF SAIYADNA MUAVIAH R.D IT IS HOPED THAT MANY CONFUSIONS ITHNA ASHRITE FALLACIES MUST HAVE BEEN SOVED BY NOW. INSHALLAH. ALI AND MUAVIAH RADI YALLA HU ANHUMA BOTH ARE BROTHERS IN ISLAM AND THEIR DISPUTE WAS PURLY BASED ONI JTIHAD. WHAT IF. A] SOME ONE TRY TO CHALLANGE THE WRIT OF GOVERNMENT IN UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND TODAY AS HUJR DID IN THE PAST. HUJR AND HIS FOLLOWERS MAY BE CONSIDERED IN THE PAST AS WHAT I.R.A [IRISH REPUBLICAN ARMY IS TODAY. B] WHAT IF SOME ONE OPENLY DECLAIR KHUMINI AS CRUEL, UNJUST, AND .AND KILLER IN IRAN WILL HE NOT BE PUNISHED? IT IS CLEAR HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE KILLED DURING THE REGIME OF KHUMIINY. C] What if some one throws stone on the Iranian President. What if some one makes a group of people to resist ANY ACT OF Iranian law ENFORCING AUTHORITY. The first example is for the Europeans particularly those living in United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. IRANIAN often confuses Christians Muslims, Jews and followers of other religions to make them selves sympathetic to ITHNA ASHRITES. On the other hand These Iranians must ask them selves what they are doing in Iran and what their Government is doing against Sunnis before condemning The Characters of past. EPLOG

Page6

7 | Page A DISCUSSION ON HUJR BIN ADI FROM PURE SUNNI APPROACH. May ALLAH FORGIVE Hujr Bin Adi FOR HIS ERROR since arter all he was a Tabai and he was not punished for denouncing the Caliphate of SAIYADNA ABU BAKR AND, SAIYADNA UMAR RADI YALLAHU ANHUMA. APOLOGY SOME MISTAKES IN THE SPELLINGS MAY HAVE NOT BE REMOVED. SORRY FOR INCONVINENCE DEFENCEOFSAHABAH@EOROPEMAIL.COM

Page6