pir sayyid irfan shah mashadi kazmi sahib & muhammad hussain najafi dhaku?

since i have never actually lived in an islamic country for any period of time that counts--except summer holidays--does anyone here know how much interaction there was between sunni and shia (ulema or otherwise) in places like india and pakistan where both groups have lived together for generations. was there any interaction/communication amongst ulema of both groups or did they just ignore each other?

perhaps brothers who have lived in those places can enlighten us.

 

In Pakistan, shiaism has been given a booster shot by that aamer liaqat character, who has surprisingly managed to pull the wool over an unbelievable amount of Sunnis' eyes.

 

The door to the Shi'a in South Africa was opened by Dr Tahir and his group. I witnessed first hand how those so called Ulama who joined Tahir had joint events with these Shia. I witnessed these same people exchange robes with the Shia and call them Hujjatul Islam, etc, etc.

 

naqshbandijamati bahi,

The heiracrhy system of Shia's might be good, but what use is it when they are teaching BUGHZ e Sahaba... what use of having big titles when it will only throuhg out dirt?

Alhumdullilah we SUnnis dont need to innovate such a thing, our system is good as it is.

We Sunnis just need to get rid of pro-wahabis and pro-shia's or so called BROTHERS from our Mosques... as anyone with little soft spot for wahabi or shia is a danger to Sunnis.

regarding dhaku v Syed Irfan hussaiN shah Saab... they both have an old rift i heard, I think Irfan HUssain shah Saab also challenged him for a debate and also done a speech on dhaku in Peterbourhg few years back... Syed Irfan hussain Shah would rinse this dhaku in a debate... just like Irfan hussain Shah Saab faces all these shia;s on TV and leaves them in shame when he explains with login, Quran and hadeeth.

The Shia are now concentrating on training there students to become professioanl debators and usually these debators are sent to villeages in PAkistan where the debator makes a challeneg to a Molvi of a Sunni mosque who has no knoweldge about shia;s just knows them to be Kaffir and accept dbeates and the Shia wins lol... this has happened with ABBAD Hydari.... until Asif Jalili saab challeneged him for a open debate and till today he hasnt replied.

The Shia;s are very cunning and are like lizard they change colour so quick... years back Shia had stronf belief that Quran is corrupt, as years go along there stance keeps changing... Shia's hatred for Hazrta Ayesha rda can be found in there books openly, but now they are changing there stance and trying to fit in with Sunni population so they can change Sunnis to Shia, just like Wahabi try to change Sunnis to Wahabis...

We Ahle Sunna have so many enemies, Shia's are after Sunnis, Wahabis are after Sunni's, Qadyanis are after Sunnis, and any other sect are targetting Sunnis....... becaus we are the Majoirty and Sawad e Azam... just like the Prophet Mohammed swas mentioned....

MAY ALLAH unite us Ameen

 

The above post is right. In their jahil 3aqaid, "Syed-ness" has nothing to do with genealogy but rather whoever adheres to their anti-sahaba bigoted manhaj.

My friend's shia co-worker one day was bragging to him about how he helped a girl convert 'from hindu to syed' and married her.

 

their syed system allows non syed's to become syed , there was an ex-sufi called tijani who is from tunisia he was not a syed and when he became a shia he became a syed . they say we do not care about genealogy.

Tijani Footage :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0ePXc-pucs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HATOmsa0nXg

in the video you can see tijani as a ''syed'' :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m44Uy8d96fM

 

as for their built-in hatred of the companions it always comes out. that i know from personal experience in discussions with them no matter how much they try to hide it or deny it. i had a student who was a really lovely person, a favourite of mine, and we often discussed sunni-shia differences. i showed him some farsi kalam of imam ahmad raza khan :ra: and he couldn't at first believe a sunni could write such praise of the ahlul bayt. he said he would show it to his friends and teachers in iran. then when he came across a poem by ala hazrat in farsi in praise of sayyida aisha :ra: his face changed and he exclaimed, "does he mean aisha the daughter of abu bakr?!"

i said, "yes. that's the difference between us and you. we love both the companions and the ahlul bayt..."

he was silent then.

 

i mean i have heard some preposterous things about them from SOME sunni ulama
e.g. during the night of the 9th of muharram which they call shaam e ghareebaaN they turn the lights off and have an orgy and anyone concieved during that night is called a sayyid!

and

when a pious shia person dies they stick a pole inside him and then use that pole in cooking their rice as a ladle (!)

--i'm sorry but i don't believe such nonsense.

 

:s1: to brother miraj ahmad (please PM me will you?) and sidi suleyman,

i have not sat with or studied with, or much about, shia ulama other than a few biographies of khomeini (the one by baqer moin is v good and detailed) and second-hand accounts of their beliefs from sunni ulama/books and a long book about dr shariati but i have had a few shia friends and students and discussions with them on their beliefs. i definitely don't have the detailed experience which miraj ahmed has had as per his previous post.

when i mentioned logic and mantiq it was in the sense that when arguing with them they often gave preference to aql (logic) over transmitted sources (naql); that was something which struck me (and could mislead someone less bone-headed in their sunniness than me! i'm often accused of being an extremist Barelvi!!) and, to be honest, i do admire some things about them e.g. i think the fact that they have a much more structured hierarchy for their scholarship is a good thing in this era (i.e. a simple maulvi at the bottom -then alim--mujtahid--ayatollah-hojjatelislam-marja-e-taqleed-ayatollah-al-ozma (i might have got the order wrong!)); something i think sunnis should innovate.

did irfan shah sahib challenge najafi to a debate or something?
nothing wrong with learning farsi -- it's a sweet language! i'm surprised people still learn it in india as in pakistan its virtually dead (i guess there must be a few graduates in farsi in the universities but apart from them and older generation ulama...)

 

Sidi Suleiman,

I think we are saying the same thing. It's been a very long time since I looked at Khu'i's tafsir and I do not recall if he mentions the order being changed. He very well may make that claim.

"he attacks sistani thoroughly, LOL! when the recording was leaked, he issued a statement saying that the bani umayya spread the audio -- so much for all the logic and mantiq he studied!"

My experience with Shi'a ulama has been that every argument eventually ends like this. In Hyderabad I listened to two camps of ulama exchange insults and accusations over each others fatawa on matam. The pro-matam group claimed the anti-matam group were Sunni, Ummayad, Muatazili(!) agents sent by Iran(yes, Umayyads from Iran) to corrupt the faith of the Shi'a of India. The anti-matam group claimed the pro-matam group were Sunni plants sent by a secret cabal of Indian, American and local Sunni leaders to tarnish the image of the Shi'a in the eyes of the media. The former also claimed that Khomeini was not a Muslim at all, but a Sikh trained from his childhood by the Indian government to infiltrate a Muslim country. Their proof? The shape of his turban and the similarity between the Sikh khanda and the symbol on the Irani flag. That would make him an Indian, Sunni, Umayyad, Muatazili, Irani Sikh agent. It didn't seem to matter to them that he was born 45 years before Indian independence. A third group, also pro-matam, but anti-the-other-pro-matam group, accused both groups of being agents of Iran and America. I even heard such things from a young imam who was a graduate both of Qum and Oxford, which would indicate that the poor quality of their scholarship has more to do with their inability to control their emotions than it does with their actual learning. I agree that they have not made any significant intellectual contributions and what few they are known for are derivative. There are intelligent men amongst them but whatever mantiq they have studied is stifled by the diseases that have consumed their hearts.

I should also add that I am consistently impressed with you willingness to stand up against the Rawafidh and those who defend them. We live in strange times and it has become increasingly rare to find young Muslims who are as committed to the Haqq as you are.

 

the Rawafidh believe that Imam mahdi is hiding in a cellar and some believe in a well .

they also believe that there was 40 Juz in the Quran and a donkey ate 10 hence 30 Juz .

 

sayyidi Miraj Ahmad, some say there were additions, some say only subtractions, and the rest say that the order was changed. even some new-age neo-zaydiyyah converts from ahl as-sunnah (represented by people like hasan b. farhan al-maliki et al) bring this up, sadly.

 

so what knowledge do they have? what are they known for?

i assure you, the average youth does not know what mantiq means, let alone is attracted to the rafidah based on their familliarity with it.

this is an honest question: what are the rafidah twelvers known for in terms of knowledge?

as for i'tizal and the twelvers, they are weak in 'aqidah with regards to ilayhiyyaat and even nubuwwat -- where mu'tazili influence can be felt most -- hence they're not even known for that! if you want mu'tazili thought, go to the zaydiyyah in yemen -- i have no qualms about acknowledging that they have inherited the mu'tazili school of 'aqidah in a sound manner, unlike the twelvers.

i was not exagerating, and if you like, i shall proceed to defend what i wrote. better yet, here is Mr. Kamal al-Haydari, one of the most popular rafidi figures and who -- admitedly -- has studied in quite some depth, mocking the maraji' of qum and najaf, demonstrating their ignorance of the qur'an and sunnah. bear in mind, he has studied with them [and he is no better]:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUxkPY2hPCI&feature=player_embedded

he attacks sistani thoroughly, LOL! when the recording was leaked, he issued a statement saying that the bani umayya spread the audio -- so much for all the logic and mantiq he studied!

 

Not all of the Rawafidh believe that the Qur'an has been tampered with. Khu'i wrote about this extensively in his tafsir where he denies that it would even be possible. Of, course many of them still do and I have encountered scholars who say that anyone who does not believe in tahrif is a kafir. Khu'i's argument is not much to take comfort in. He defends the authenticity of the Qur'an by insulting the Shaykhayn, whom he claims, naudhubillah, were incapable of taking on a task as noble as compiling the Qur'an. He gives credit to Sayyiduna Ali, whom he says compiled the first mushaf under the guidance of Rasulallah, salallahu alayhi wa salam. And, like their Mu'atazili forebears, they all believe that the Qur'an is created.

I don't know much about the Shia in Pakistan, but in India many of the awam still learn Farsi. It is, however, considered to be more of a sign of cultural refinement than of piety. I did my undergraduate research on a particularly venomous community in Hyderabad and I met families there that still speak it at home. At least that was the case ten years ago.

Surprisingly, the families that took Khamenai as their marja were less likely to have studied it. Overall, they seemed lacking in any formal religious education and were attracted to the politics of Iran's ulama more than their religious scholarship. They were also anti-matam, but, since Khomeini's time the official fatwa from Qum is that it is haram. It is a little surprising that a Najafi would be opposed to it, since most of the senior ulama there and the alumni in Lebanon approve of it within certain limits (it must not interfere with the performance of the prayer, for instance. Of course, it inevitably does.) Then again, Khomeini studied at Najaf himself.

I'm not sure if Farsi is even taught in Najaf. The curriculum is, however, just as rigorous as that offered at any prominent Sunni institution. As strange as it may seem, they even study al-Kafi with the same intensity and solemn regard that our ulama offer when approaching Sahih al-Bukhari. That is in part die to the fact that they still bicker amongst themselves about its authenticity.

I'm not sure if their knowledge of anything is what attracts young people to them. My experience with the Shi'a, ulama and awam alike, is that emotion trumps logic and boiling blood deafens their ears to any other proof. I spent a considerable amount of time (too much) with Shi'a ulama before coming to Islam and even the most calm and soft spoken of them would inevitably loose his grip and slip into invective against a host of perceived "shaytans." Khu'is defense of the authenticity of the Qur'an is a perfect example. He lucidly presents all of the evidence he has proving the impossibility of tahrif but, in the end, he cannot resist the opportunity to insult the Shaykhayn, rahdi Allahu ta'la anhum. His false claim that they did not participate in the compilation of the mushaf does nothing to support his argument. It does however appeal to the base emotions that are the very foundation of Shi'ism.

Finally, I would assume that this Rafizi takes issue with the work of Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib for the same reason that all of the Shi'a who know him do. At a time when people, even ulama, claim to be Sunni but stand in solidarity with those insult the Sahaba he continues to expose the Rawafidh and the Tafzilis for who they really are.

 

sidi suleiman i dislike the rawafid as much as any sunni on this forum but we have to be fair and judicious. to dismiss their learning so brazenly doesn't do us any favours amongst the 'neutrals' who might be on here. yes, we can certainly say that because of their blasphemous aqaid their knowledge wont benefit them in the hereafter (those whose heresy tips over into kufr) but to say they have no knowledge save mantiq and farsi is just plain silly.

re their use of mantiq: (which they got from the mutazilites especially in aqidah) it is this very thing which makes them so attractive to many youth who don't know better.

anyway, my post's primary concern was to ask what this fellow ayatollah najafi has to do with allama pir sayyid irfan shah sahib?

 

We don't really care about their Matam (it has already been banned previously in Iran) -- we care about their 'aqidah which no marja can change.

As for fluency in Farsi, they're probably taught that in their hawzaat. What else is there to teach? The qur'an was re-arranged and tampered, over a third of the ahadith in their most authentic book, al-kafi, according to them are fabrications, they're seriously lacking in the field of hadith methodology, so what is there to teach besides Persian and mantiq?

was-salam

 

Salam az man!

Who is this person? I know he is a Shia, and apparently only one of two South Asian marja-e-taqleeds, but what is his issue with Pir Sayyid Irfan Shah sahib?

There are some videos of him on youtube where he addresses Shah Sahib by name. What is the story behind that?

I googled a bit about him and listened to his speech a little and he is definitely learned and I was impressed how fluently he spoke Farsi (there is a visit of his to Iran). I wish more Sunni scholars had such conversational Arabic/Farsi/Turkish/English etc. so they could communicate with others.

From the little I listened to he seems to be trying to rid Rafidis of a lot of their habits such as doing matam with knifes, chains etc. saying it is unislamic...