Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Critique of Husam al-Haramayn: How a fatwa split the Ummah

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
    Interesting video on the Barelvis and Hazir Nazir:

    I always admire the strength these molvis have in wasting time in debating issues not concerning the ummat ---- I think, it's these controversies which keeps them relevant ( otherwise the guy on the right, whoever he is, looks to me like a third grade Molvi in some street mosque of Pakistan).

    okay you have posted relating to hazir o nazir, I ask you, do you think it's the brelwis who introduced hazir nazir thing in sub continent? (No google search)
    "Europe died in Bosnia and was buried in Syria. Bodies of innocent children washing ashore are the
    western civilization's tombstones"


    Rajab Tayyab Erdogan

    Comment


    • Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
      The thing is these Deobandis were coming from the angle that Asrar Rashid was purposefully deceiving the people (Taqiyyah) regarding the beliefs of the Barelvis and their scholars. The entire video was them quoting their scholars and elaborating on the statements found in Barelvi sources.
      This is an explanation from a Barelwi source:

      Traditional Scholarship & Modern Misunderstandings
      Understanding The Ahle al-Sunnah - By Shaykh Abu Ammar

      9) Haadhir Naadhir

      We, the Ahl as-Sunna wa'l-Jama'a, believe that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is hadir and nazir which, simply put, means that he views our actions and in this way we are presented to him.He (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is nazir, since he views our actions, both good and bad.

      Definition of Hadir/Nazir
      Mufti Ahmad Yaar Khan and Allama Ghulam Rasool Sa'idi write:

      "Hadir/ nazir does not mean that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is present. Rather, it means that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) views the actions of his Ummah whilst he is in his grave. He can go from his grave to other places where he likes spiritually. He prays for us"

      [Sa'idi, G, R., Tawzeeh al-Bayan Sharh Sahih Muslim, chapter on 'Mi'raj', vol 1; Khan, Ahmad, Y., Ja al-Haq, chapter on 'al-Hadir-u-wan-nazir']


      Extract from http://www.islamicinformationcentre....alsunna3.htm#9
      Visit the link for the full article

      And the above meaning is not just affirmed by Barelwis. I've already quoted Imam Ibn al-Hajj (d. 737 AH) where he explicitly states that our beloved Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - witnesses his Umma and knows their state. This is also supported by Ayat and Ahadith.

      Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
      I don't necessarily disagree with this. There was even an instance towards the latter part of the video where they criticized Asrar Rashid for nodding his head to a Nasheed which included an Istigatha of Abdul Qadr al-Jilanee(rah). However, I would be curious to hear how the Deobandis respond to this allegation. I'm sure they don't view themselves as deviating from Maturidi/Ahl al-Sunnah on this issue.
      What really is problematic about these types of discussions is is that those who are on the Najdi side or inclined towards them don't even realize what their words imply.

      An example: When they speak about "being in every place" and when they act as if that is what their opponent is saying, then what this actually implies is that "being in every place" is a divine attribute, while it's from the known beliefs of the Ahl al-Sunna that Allah ta'ala is beyond place and time (i.e. God is beyond His creation!) and that believing God to be in every place or in some place is disbelief.

      Another example: When they speak regarding the ability of the creation and its limits, then they sometimes make statements clearly implying that living beings for example have real influence unlike those from the creation who have passed away, while it's again a known Sunni belief that NO ONE - no matter whether living or passed away - has real influence (Ta`thir) on the creation except Allah ta'ala and that Allah ta'ala is the One creating our actions.

      Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
      I'm sure they don't view themselves as deviating from Maturidi/Ahl al-Sunnah on this issue.
      Well, I really would like to know how they can justify praising a Najdi inclined book like Taqwiyatul Iman?
      I mean there is not a single classical Sunni 'Aqida work - whether Ash'ari, Maturidi or Athari - that has the content of that book. The only likeness we find are the books of the Najdis, who are not classical anyways.

      Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
      inshaAllah Asrar Rashid makes a response video and clarifies his position. These brothers were supposed to debate sometime last year.
      I don't think they will debate. The speaker has already proven that he can't discuss based on Islamic principles of discussion and in an academic way and wants simply to impress the laymen.
      Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 29-03-20, 11:24 AM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
        Well, I really would like to know how they can justify praising a Najdi inclined book like Taqwiyatul Iman?
        I mean there is not a single classical Sunni 'Aqida work - whether Ash'ari, Maturidi or Athari - that has the content of that book. The only likeness we find are the books of the Najdis, who are not classical anyways.
        Add to that: Why being hellbent on defending problematic statements instead of simply correcting those statements and using non-problematic wordings in one’s statements in order to establish one’s point?

        An example from the very pdf that is posted in the OP:

        The Fourth Objection: Saying The Thought Of The Noble Messenger In Salah Is Worse Than Thinking Of Cattle And Donkeys

        Recounting the alleged blasphemies of Mawlana Isma ̳il Dehlavi, Mawlana Ahmad Raza writes under Blasphemy no. 28:

        This is the worst of his blasphemies, as found in Sirat-e-Mustaqim, p. 29: [Mawlana Isma ̳il Dehlavi has written]
        ...
        [Mawlana Ahmad Raza Khan continues] O Muslims! O Muslims! Hark! Ponder on these filthy devil-inspired words that to draw one‘s attention towards the noble Messenger ﷺ during Salah [ritual prayer] is like drawing another layer upon layers of darkness, more evil than the thought of a debauched prostitute and that of committing adultery with her and much more evil than to engage in thoughts about one‘s cattle and donkeys.
        ...

        Response



        But before answering the objection, we will present the translation of the relevant section from Sirat-e-Mustaqim. It reads:

        The Second Advice: In the Detailed Analysis of Things that Disrupt Worship and Their Remedies. It Contains Three Statements.
        ...
        However, as per the Divine Words,...they are but multiple layers of darkness, one above another...‖, it is better to think about sexual intercourse with one‘s wife rather than imagining oneself commiting adultery with someone; to expend one‘s determination/focus one‘s mind (Sarf-e-himmat) upon one‘s spiritual guide or anyone similar, even if it maybe the noble Messenger ﷺ, is much worse than focusing one‘s concentration upon one‘s cattle and donkeys, because the former concentration will inspire awe and veneration in the depth of one‘s heart as opposed to the thought of cattle and donkeys, which will neither yield such an inspiration nor such feelings of awe, but rather its opposite. And this awe and veneration of anyone other than the Divine, if observed and aspired to during ritual prayer, will drag one towards polytheism (shirk).

        ...







        Having read and reflected upon the above passage, one should also bear the following points in mind.
        ...
        (Note: Highlight with colour was added by me.)

        Thereafter in the pdf a long defense is brought up.

        But I have one question: Was it really that difficult NOT to make the above statement (from Sirat-e-Mustaqim) in this manner - which is obviously problematic to say at least! - and simply explain one’s point in a non-problematic way?
        Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 29-03-20, 12:48 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by imran1976 View Post

          I always admire the strength these molvis have in wasting time in debating issues not concerning the ummat ---- I think, it's these controversies which keeps them relevant ( otherwise the guy on the right, whoever he is, looks to me like a third grade Molvi in some street mosque of Pakistan).
          According to these brothers it was the Barelvis (Asrar Rashid) who was provoking them and forced a response. They explained that in the video I posted and also in the prelude:



          okay you have posted relating to hazir o nazir, I ask you, do you think it's the brelwis who introduced hazir nazir thing in sub continent? (No google search)
          I'm not from the subcontinent. However, in the first video the brothers were alleging that it originated with the Twelver Safavid scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi. Watch the first 10 minutes of that video.
          Last edited by AmantuBillahi; 29-03-20, 02:45 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Abu 'Abdullaah View Post





            Please address these questions.
            Well AFAIK some sahabah RA drank from Rasulullah' s SAWS cup, and there was even some blessed hair of his in it.

            And one of them got his staff and never separated from it. In fact, he was even burried with it. No, that doesn't make him a grave worshipper.

            No, I ain't sufi FTM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mavikick View Post

              Well AFAIK some sahabah RA drank from Rasulullah' s SAWS cup, and there was even some blessed hair of his in it.

              And one of them got his staff and never separated from it. In fact, he was even burried with it. No, that doesn't make him a grave worshipper.

              No, I ain't sufi FTM.
              OK, but that has nothing to do with my post.

              Comment


              • I'd expect someone to mention ibn Al Khattab RA about touching the Black Stone. And his opinion regarding it. Bottom line, many new age Salafi take many things literally while on the other hands, those who are not, don't. And this is the difference between two of you. In the past, some even wanted to destroy or flatten down the grave of Rasulullah SAWS because of these differences.

                Comment


                • The LION has spoken.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by LookingForDaisy View Post
                    Assalamu alaikum,

                    I want to raise awareness of a serious issue that still affects our Ummah today and must urgently be rectified.

                    Ahmed Raza Khan issued a fatwa in the 20th century which slandered our Muslim brothers and sisters by labelling anyone who didn't agree with him as a "kafir", may Allah protect us all. This has resulted in a division in the Ummah, the effects of which can still be felt today.

                    An important piece of work was written by Imam Sarfraz Khan Safdar, and in 2018 this was translated into English: "A Critique of Husam Al-Haramayn: How a fatwa split the Ummah". I’ve included a link to the PDF copy of the book for reading, which refutes the unfair (and potentially invalid) fatwa issued by Khan in his work "Husam Al-Haramayn". I urge you all to read and share this important piece of work and educate our people. We need to do what we can to undo the hate and prejudice advocated by Khan, and re-unite the Ummah - sooner rather than later.

                    JazakAllah hu Khair.

                    Link to book: https://barelwism.files.wordpress.co...han-safdar.pdf
                    He's a known Deviant, most Muslims should be aware of his antics by now.

                    Him and his fatwa belong in the bin with the trash.
                    http://www.ilovepalestine.com/campai...imesinGaza.gif

                    "It does not befit the lion to answer the dogs."

                    Comment


                    • The long awaited part 2:

                      Was Ahmad Ridha Khan influenced by Shia beliefs? | Molvi Usman

                      Comment


                      • barelwi and shia have clear similarities and links infact many deviated sufis have issues with salafi or wahabi whatever terminology they use but have positive views of shia a example is the deviant timothy abdal hakim murad winter and his Cambridge eco mosque

                        5. Is this a Shia or Sunni mosque?

                        The mosque is non-denominational and welcomes Muslims of all backgrounds, Sunni, Shi’i, or other. For instance, the 16 pillars found in the main-prayer hall symbolize the 12 imams of Shia tradition and the 4 schools of thought of the Sunni practice. Sermons and lectures are inclusive and given in classical Arabic and English only. The mosque does not belong to any orientation or movement.

                        https://cambridgecentralmosque.org/faq/

                        Comment


                        • Prophet's(saws) Knowledge Equal with Allah | Mawlana Usman & Abdul Haleem

                          Comment


                          • Believing that the knowledge of the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - is equal to that of Allah ta'ala is obviously not what the Barelwis believe and this is clear from their authoritative works like al-Dawla al-Makkiyya.
                            It's really not a good thing to accuse each other of things, which are not true. And it doesn't get somehow true by using deceptive tactics against each other.

                            Originally posted by AmantuBillahi View Post
                            The long awaited part 2:

                            Was Ahmad Ridha Khan influenced by Shia beliefs? | Molvi Usman

                            On the sunniport forum there is a thread in response to the above video:

                            Originally posted by abu Hasan
                            the two idiots are back?
                            if i remember i had demonstrated how stupid both the morons were in their 'objections'.

                            when did they crawl out of the woodwork?
                            Originally posted by abu Hasan
                            ain't got no 2 hours to waste, but i was curious and scrubbed a little.

                            at 25:52 that clown on the right lays bare his stupidity. and the other clown "aa. yes yes."

                            like trump and modi patting each other's back for being the bestest leaders.

                            do i have to really demonstrate the jahl of this nincompoop who shows shiyi's claim to prove that sunnis are like rawafid?

                            -----
                            the aqidah of ma kana wa ma yakun for RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is from the hadith. but we will come to that later - we first need to see what these gents have to say.

                            so, just because the shiyi claim that aimmah are ma'Sum, claiming ismat for anbiya is following the rawafiD?

                            if the moron on the right cannot understand this, let him ask, i will try to explain it in a more simpler manner.

                            ------
                            the paragraph that he shows from sharh al-maqaSid, v5, p252. what exactly does it prove?
                            apart from the fact that the man is an idiot.

                            pardon my using the word idiot so many times - it is really that frustrating. like reciting poetry in front of an ox. but i will try. some may think that i am foolish for reciting poetry in front of an ox, but bear with me.

                            bayl ko jo aalim samajh rahe hain, unko samjhana maqsud hai.

                            ---
                            at 25:25

                            the part that he is reading about in sharh al-maqaSid is about the conditions the rafiDis placed on who can be an imam.


                            http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...p252-png.5946/



                            concerning conditions:

                            as for the condition for mu'jizah, and knowledge of the unseen, and languages, and the crafts and skills and the nature [or composition] of foods and medicine and the wonders of the land and sea and the heaven and the earth; this is from the innovations/heresies of...

                            the extreme rawafid made it a condition that for one to be an imam, they should display mu'jizah; that he should know the unseen and all the languages; and have knowledge of all the crafts and skills and know about the natures and compositions of all the foods and medicines and the wonders of the land and sea and the heaven and the earth.

                            these are fantasies [or heresy, innovation] that lead to negating the imam and rejecting the shariah and its rulings.



                            ======
                            what does this prove? it only proves that the condition imposed by rawafid for imamah (that is khilafah) is bizzare. and this belief ABOUT imams leads to rejecting the shariah (because these are attributes in prophets).

                            but what does our moron learn from it? that the 'idea of ilm al-ghayb came from rawafiD'.

                            tell me one thing: is it wrong to believe that prophets were given mujizahs? or is it also a belief taken from extreme rawafid that prophets are given mujizahs?

                            according to this moron, the qur'an has also taken from extremist rawafiD aqidah [al-iyadhu billah], because the qur'an says that Prophet Adam alayhi's salam was given the knowledge of the names:


                            http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...2v31-png.5947/


                            so is this belief also from extremist rawafid? the rafidi book that he displays?

                            ---
                            according to your logic, whoever believes that prophets are given mu'jizah takes from extremist rawafid beliefs according to taftazani. in other words, devbandis do not believe in mujizat of prophets.

                            if not, go ahead and make another video to explain the ibarat in full. we are waiting.
                            Originally posted by abu Hasan
                            i suggest these guys sue the madrasah or the teachers they learned from. because they didn't learn basic reading skills. as the qur'an teaches us, merely placing books on a donkey does not make it a scholar - buying volumes and placing them on the tea table is no guarantee that they are capable of reading it.

                            in all probability the guy has not seen the rest of the book. i am speaking of sharh al-maqaSid. go ahead and disprove me. if he has, then let him explain this passage AND tell me why taftazani is influenced from extremist rafizis.

                            for those who have not seen the book, this is an argument/discussion about wali and the capabilities of a waliy.

                            the same volume 5, p73.


                            http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...5p73-png.5948/
                            what is the meaning of this objection? regardless of the answer, does the objection imply that prophets are given ilm al-ghayb?


                            and few pages later, imam taftazani says in explaining this issue: ibid, p76-77:


                            http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...5p76-png.5952/


                            http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...5p77-png.5951/


                            ====
                            i invite the two clowns [the other guy crowing "a-haa" is priceless watch after time: 25:25] to disprove me by explaining this passage.

                            1. does this explanation affirm ilm ghayb for awliya - explicitly or implicitly?

                            2. does this explanation affirm ilm ghayb for anbiya - explicitly or implicitly?

                            if it does, then is taftazani taking from the extremist rafiDis according to your claim? if not, why not?

                            ====
                            according to your extremely stupid claim what is the meaning of this aayah?


                            http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...26-7-png.5953/


                            influenced from extremist rafidi beliefs i presume? [al iyadhu billah]

                            ===

                            if he cannot explain it, or ignores it - either his deception is caught and he is embarrassed to dig his grave further - or he is incapable of reading/explaining the book that he so grandly waves at the viewers.
                            Originally posted by abu Hasan
                            the madhouse is surely looking for their two occupants who have escaped.

                            at 37:27 the two clowns talk about some dream and the imbecile on the right wants proof of the dream! i don't know what he is talking about, but ridiculing a dream and implying that it is false because there is no witness is very rich.

                            if you are not a hypocrite you will publicly make a video that will challenge us to show a single such dream narrated by any of your akabirEEN.

                            go ahead, challenge me - ask me whether i can show you any examples of dreams coming from nanotvi, or thanavi or gangohi or ambhetvi or tandwi or qari tayyib.

                            please, challenge me. tell the world that the devbandis never make claims of dreams and whenever they do, they have proof of two witnesses who also saw those dreams.

                            if you do not challenge me OR if you do not want to see what i show you, you have acknowledge that you are a filthy hypocrite.
                            Originally posted by abu Hasan
                            aah! at 39:11 he brings up jaa al-Haqq.

                            so this is the issue about that mirqat quote. nice.

                            i wish more devbandis put their name to it than these two clowns. it will be fun, i promise.
                            Originally posted by abu Hasan
                            so in the same mirqat vol.10 p.327 under hadith #5660
                            he says that: "Allah ta'ala informed him of the secrets of the universe and unseen, which no one else was given.."


                            http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...p327-png.6047/



                            Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 08-08-20, 09:03 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Then:

                              Originally posted by abu Hasan
                              about the mirqat quote which the two clowns raving about.

                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?threa...mafatih.14543/

                              ----

                              this is from the hadith #5422; the full hadith is much longer, here is the relevant portion.

                              here, our master SallAllahu alayhi wa aalihi wa sallam is informing us of the tribulations of final days.


                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...p58a-png.6048/


                              RasulAllah SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: "indeed, i know their names, and the names of their fathers, and the colours of their horses. they are the best of riders - or (he said) among the best of riders - on the face of the earth on that day."


                              ----
                              commenting on this hadith, ali al-qari says:


                              {RasulAllah SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: "indeed, i know their names} that is the ten riders.

                              {and the names of their fathers, and the colours of their horses} along with the fact that it is among miracles [mu'jizat] it also proves that his knowledge exalted is He/ta'ala [SIC] encompasses the knowledge of the universe [ka'inat] in its entirety and all the details related to it, and others.

                              NOTE: we contend that instead of ta'ala it should be `alayhi's salam; "his knowledge" refers to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam and not Allah ta'ala.

                              HOWEVER, the correct statement would be:


                              {and the names of their fathers, and the colours of their horses} along with the fact that it is among miracles [mu'jizat], it also proves that his knowledge alayhi's salam encompasses the knowledge of the universe [ka'inat] in its entirety and all the details related to it, and other things.


                              ---


                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...p58b-png.6049/

                              ====
                              this is translated by the deobandis as thus: urdu translation of mirqat, v10 p102:


                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...p102-png.6050/
                              trans of the urdu above: "in addition to this being among the miracles of our master alayhis salam, this also proves that the Knowledge of Allah taala encompasses all the minutiae and in their completeness"

                              ===

                              first of all, one can clearly see that neither is the hadith, nor is the commentary speaking about Allah ta'ala. 'proving' the knowledge of Allah here, is obviously out of place.

                              the hadith says: "indeed, *i* KNOW the names of the riders, their fathers, and the colours of their horses."

                              NOT: "indeed, Allah knows the names of the riders, their fathers, and the colours of their horses."

                              so it should naturally follow in the commentary that in addition to this being a mu'jizah, it proves the extent of his [the Prophet's ﷺ] knowledge.

                              =====


                              fihi: IN IT - in what? in this piece of information that RasulAllah ﷺ gave us, that he "KNOWS the colours of the horses"

                              ma'a kawnihi - TOGETHER IN IT'S BEING: 'together' or 'along with' WHAT?

                              mina'l mu'jizati - AMONG MIRACLES: the two clowns may think that belief in mu'jizat of prophets is derived from extreme rafidis (vide their sit-on-couch-comedy) but at least the deobandi translator got it right that the 'mujizah' refers to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. so this hadith proves that it is among his miracles. right?

                              dalalatun - PROOF. proof of what? notice that the TOGETHER ties "mujizat" with "proof of knowledge". one can claim isti'ynaaf, but the context clearly refutes them.

                              `ala anna ilmahu muHitun - that his knowledge encompasses. WHOSE? this hadith is about prophecies and nowhere is the knowledge of Allah ta'ala being discussed.

                              li'l kulliyati wa'l juz'yiyyati - in its entirety including the minutiae. notice that kulliyyat and juziyyat refer to whosoever the knowledge belongs to. you cannot say juz'yiyyat refers to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam and kulliyyat refers to Allah ta'ala?

                              now go back and check the hadith/commentary. what does juz'yiyyat refer to? unless one is extremely stupid like the two deobandi clowns, they will have to invariably agree that it refers to "the colours of the horses" that is the level of detail our master KNEW. of course devbandi juhala will happily say that it refers to Allah's knowledge.

                              mina'l ka'inat wa ghayriha - of this universe and others.

                              =====​

                              even for the sake of argument, if you accept that the "knowledge of kulliyyat and juziyyat" refers to Allah's knowledge in this sentence, you will STILL have to accept that it was GIVEN to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. because - you got to be lobotomised to not see that it is RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam who says: "Verily I KNOW..."

                              there is no dispute that Allah ta'ala knows everything. our contention is that the knowledge of universe - ma kana wa ma yakun - was also given to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

                              does this equate the knowledge of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam with that of Allah? no. because only the jahil deobandi restricts Allah's knowledge to ONLY the ma-kana-wa-ma-yakun. whereas, we say that this is like a billionth part of a drop in comparison to billions of oceans.


                              ---
                              as i have mentioned in another thread, a copyist made a mistake which was carried over by others; and deobandis cling to it as if it has a sahih sanad until ali al-qari. it appears that either there was a corrected copy available in the 20th century [if you are able to locate this 5 volume edition, check vol.5 p.123]. and even if not, those who can see a mistake corrected it.

                              =====
                              apart from this technical correction, the author himself in mirqat and other works attests to this aqidah.

                              only the wilfully blind can stand in front of a mountain and deny its existence.

                              and for those who have not seen the mountain of evidence, in sha'Allah i will present it now.
                              Originally posted by abu Hasan
                              in the same mirqat, under hadith #725, narrated by abd al-Rahman ibn `ayish: [chapter on mosques and places where one can pray]


                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...n725-png.6052/


                              RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said:

                              i beheld my Lord-Creator - Glory and Majesty be to HIm - in the most beautiful manner [without any modality] and He [i.e. Allah ta'ala] said: "what do the angels in the Highest Assembly [mala' al-a'ala] discuss/debate?"

                              i replied: "You know best"

                              so Allah ta'ala placed His Grace* between my shoulders and i perceived its coolness in my bosom and my heart.** then, i LEARNED about all that was in the heavens and the earth. and He said: "and thus We show ibrahim, the colossal kingdom of the heavens and the earth, so that his knowledge becomes absolutely certain"


                              ---------

                              in its explanation, al-qari says: mirqat, v2 p400:


                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...p400-png.6051/



                              {i LEARNED or i came to KNOW} because of receiving that immense grace

                              {all that is in the heavens and the earth} meaning: that which Allah ta'ala taught him about angels, and trees and everything else. this describes the extent of the knowledge that Allah ta'ala opened for him.

                              ibn Hajar said: "that is - the entire universe in which are the heavens; rather, all that is above the heavens, as we learn in the story of his Night Ascent; and the earth - meaning all that is in the seven earths and below them....


                              ===
                              *the word kaff meaning 'palm' is used. but the ahl al-sunnah do not attribute limbs to the Creator; but it is indicative of His Grace [faDl] as al-qari explains and is translated accordingly.

                              * the dual is used - meaning bosom and heart [mirqat].
                              Originally posted by abu Hasan
                              those dumb deobandis who hang themselves on a typo need to expand their knowledge.

                              the same ali al-qari, in his sharh al-shifa says: vol.1 p.721


                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...721a-png.6053/


                              which is clearly echoing his ibarat in al-mirqat.

                              ---

                              {among his dazzling miracles} - that is manifest signs

                              {that Allah ta'ala has gathered for him among the sciences (or knowledge given to him) } that is the parts [or specific details]

                              {and many kinds of knowledge} that is as a whole; and perceptions - hypothetical and certain; or innermost secrets and manifest lights...

                              {specially given to him} that is, these kinds of knowledge were granted exclusively to him...
                              Originally posted by abu Hasan
                              henceforth, we must call them typo-clowns. these two are young idiots, so you can ignore them. but it is a sad reflection on their honchos who claim to spend decades teaching quran and hadith and yet spiritedly defend their wahabi beliefs.

                              it is not their eyes that are blind; it is their hearts that are devoid of guidance.


                              http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...2v46-png.6054/


                              Comment


                              • Thereafter:

                                Originally posted by abu Hasan
                                in the burdah is the line:

                                fa inna min judika'd dunya wa Darrataha
                                wa min ulumika `ilm al-lawHi wa'l qalami

                                and indeed, it is your favour - this world and the Hereafter
                                and among [the many kinds] of your knowledge is the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen.


                                http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...n154-png.6056/

                                ===
                                allamah ali al-qari says in his commentary, al-zubdah sh. al-burdah.


                                http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...bdah-png.6057/

                                zubdah:


                                http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...p281-png.6058/




                                Originally posted by abu Hasan
                                one should be wary of some modern editions. a case in point is the sharh of bajuri that is circulating on the internet.


                                http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...-cvr-png.6059/



                                the commentary of the same line is like this.


                                http://sunniport.com/index.php?attac...-p91-png.6060/


                                =====
                                i was taken aback because, i have previously read bajuri's sharh in an older format and this appears like it is snipped from here and there.

                                upon examination, it is indeed 'summarised' by the editor. this is not the FULL version. whether deliberately or because of lazy editing, the author's own standpoint is misrepresented in this version.

                                flag it up.

                                The real statement from the book from an older print:

                                Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 08-08-20, 09:30 PM.

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X