Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Translations' started by Aqdas, Oct 11, 2016.
Can anyone translate the alqab?
I may be wrong , as far as I remember , there is a chapter in sahih of Imam Bukhari where he has named : virtues of Fatima ( alayhis salam).
Also, if I remember correctly, Qadi Baydawi (Rh) has mentioned that since it has become a tardemark of shi'is to use that word only for selected people, and they don't use it for other companions of the prophet ( sal allahu alayhi wa sallam), so the reason of avoiding that usage is because of that.
I remember reading a book on this topic by Mufti Faiz ahmed awaisi rh.
Mufti shams ul hudaa sahib can be contacted on this number between 5 and 7pm everyday
That's the number for Darul iftaah Ahle-sunnat.
Its normally very busy because mufti sahib gets a lot of questions so if you ring then please be patient.
Mufti Shams ul Hudaa Sahib was in Nottingham Wednesday night, He also mentioned that we are not allowed to say alaihis salam after the name of a non-Prophet or a Non-angel.
He also gave the same examples as Allama Irfan Sahib.
There is also a heading in Noorul Irfan stating It is Haram (or might be not permitted) to say alaihis salam after non-Prophets etc.
He stated and in Durood e Ibraheemi we send blessings onto Ahlay bait indirectly only after mentioning the Prophet sallalahu alaihi wassalam first
i think these are 12 alqab that imam baraylawi uses in his khutbas etc:
imamayn al-humamayn al-sa'eedayn al-shaheedayn
nayyirayn al-tayyibayn al-tahirayn
and for sayyida fatima he says:
salamullahi 'ala abeeha wa 'alayha wa ba'liha wa banayha
"Allama Syed Zahid is a khalifah of Mufti-e-Azam Hind Mustafa Rida Khan"
I have never heard or read this before???
i saw this following answer by Sayyidi Mufti Akmal:
Mulla Ali Qari (rahimullah) wrote the same thing as below:
"Sayyedina Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Al-Qadiri Rahimullah says even if a Sayyid becomes gumrah or ‘loses the right Islamic path’ on condition he does not reach disbelief (kufr) then also it is ‘obligatory to respect him’ (waajibut tazeem). This respect (tazeem) is due to his ‘relationship’ (nisba) with the Beloved Prophet Aaqa Sayyedina Muhammad Mustafa Ahmed-e-Mujtaba sallal lahu ta'ala alaihi wa aalihi wa sallam."
A'llamah Mufti Fayd Ahmad al Owaisi al Qadiri hafizahullahu Ta'ala has written a whole book on this issue:
Kiraahatu a'lahis salatu was salaam a'la ghair il Anbiyaa wal Malaikah a'laihimus salaam
Ghair Anbiyaa Aur Malaikah Ke Liye A'laihi Salam
Please read the whole book before commenting
A'llamah Mufti Fayd Ahmad al Owaisi al Qadiri hafizahullah is also a khalifah of Mufti Aa'zam Imam Mustafa Rida al Qadiri radi Allahu Ta'ala a'nhu.
A'llamah Sayyid Zahid Husain Shah ar Ridwi hafizahullah is not the student of Sadr us Sharia'h A'llamah Amjad A'li radi Allahu Ta'ala a'nhu.
Remember Fiqhi Ikhtilaaf Jaiz Hai
Sayyedina Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Al-Qadiri Rahimullah says even if a Sayyid becomes gumrah or ‘loses the right Islamic path’ on condition he does not reach disbelief (kufr) then also it is ‘obligatory to respect him’ (waajibut tazeem). This respect (tazeem) is due to his ‘relationship’ (nisba) with the Beloved Prophet Aaqa Sayyedina Muhammad Mustafa Ahmed-e-Mujtaba sallal lahu ta'ala alaihi wa aalihi wa sallam.
Allah and his Beloved Habib sallal lahu ta'ala alaihi wa aalihi wa sallam. knows the best.
Please remember this Nacheez in your supplication's.
Shaykh G Haddad also uses 'alaihi'salam for the Ahl-e-Bait, one would not call him a shia on this basis:
Even after that time, `Ali (as) never ceased to call `A'isha (as) "the Beloved of the Prophet" .
Naqshbandi, excuse me. Where did Irfan Shah Sahib quote the rulling of Ala Hazrat? By reading one verse from many others does not mean it is a ruling! What Allama Irfan Shah said was certainly not the ruling of Ala Hazrat. Ala Hazrat is above such basic errors.
I don think you listened to the clip and spoke too early. Allama Syed Zahid explains the view of Ala Hazrat through Ghazali-e-Zaman Allama Syed Kazmi Shah. Allama Kazmi Shah also quotes Ala Hazrat to say that it is allowed. I have not heard one authentic sunni scholar say it is impermissible, that is why I was surprised. By the way it is a very balanced answer.
Listen again if you have not already.
With all due respect to the noble lineage of Allama Sayyid Zahid Husayn Shah sahib, a knowledgable buzurg, I prefer the ruling of Ala Hazrat :ra: himself as narrated by Allama Sayyid Irfan Shah.
and Allah knows best.
You said he is syed himself so how could he negate the status, this is why I said I am not sure of the reasons (an element of surprise). I think it is more to do with social aspects, i.e. from his own neighbourhood in Pakistan. Allah knows best.
Anyhow here is an audio clip from another site by 'Allama Syed Zahid Husayn Ridwi Barkati on the validity of 'alay hi'salam for the ahl al-bayt. Allama Syed Zahid is a khalifah of Mufti-e-Azam Hind Mustafa Rida Khan, a student of Muhaddith al-Azam Pakistan and also from the students of Sadr ash-Shari'a 'Allama Amjad 'Ali Azami.
This answers the question very clearly.
ibn hajar al haytami quotes taqiyuddin al-maqrizi in his as-sawayiqu'l muHriqah, pg.253-244:
'in my opinion, there are many such true incidents [referring to one quoted in the previous pages] concerning the progeny of Hasan and Husayn. beware. be heedful, don't disparage them no matter what their state is - because a son is a son, no matter what: whether righteous or a sinner. [wa in kaanu ala ayyi halatin; li anna'l walad walad `ala kulli Haal - Salah aw fajar]'
that is we may differ, refute, disagree upon what the sayyids not following the position of ahlu's sunnah do, but we must not disparage them - because it is not them, it is the relation we respect.
alas! you choose to prefer her opinion than to hide the sin of a muslim. and a sayyid.
i think he is right in bringing some balance. most non-sayyids will simply keep quiet and usually it is the sayyids who reprimand and reproach other sayyids. a friend of mine who studied in a madrasah would tell me how the teachers never reproached his sayyid classmates; they would send them to other sayyid teachers who would punish/reprimand the errant kids.
so if a sayyid reproaches other sayyids, he is doing a duty others are not willing to do - heedful of RasulAllah's nisbah. sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam.
Allah ta'ala knows best.
Bismillāhi’r Raĥmāni’r Raĥīm
It is written in Khulāsah [al-Fatāwā] reported from in Al-Ajnās “that Abū Ĥanīfah raĥimahullāh said: “It is not permissible to send salawāt  upon anyone [exclusively] except Prophets and Angels. Anyone who does so [send salawat exclusively] except as an appendix , is an extremist Shiite, those whom we call Rawāfiđ.”
What we understand from the above is that the ruling of ‘salam’ is not the same as ‘salawat.’ This is probably because ‘salam’ is a salutation [taĥiyyah] of the people of Islām and there is no difference if one says: as-salāmu álayh or álayhi’s salam; the only difference is: to say Álī álayhi’s salām is the practice [hallmark] of the ahl al-bidáh and it is not desirable.
Sharĥ Fiqh al-Akbar, Álī al-Qārī, pg.248
1.To use the word şalāt [or the verb şalli] as in Álī álayhi’s şalātu wa’s salam.
2. álā wajhi’t tabýiyyah: that is one can say Álī álā nabiyyina wa álayhi’s şalātu wa’s salam. Which means: ‘Álī - salawat and salam upon our Prophet and upon him.’ because that is how it is in the Ĥadīth: ‘allahumma şallī álā sayyidinā Muĥammad wa ála āli sayyidinā Muĥammad…’
3. That is to say: Álī álayhi’s salām.
4. This is Ĥanafī verdict – it is not mustaĥsin or desirable which means it is permissible, but not desirable because it resembles the action of heretics. That is why we sunnīs say Karramallāhu Wajhah to be different than the Shiáh.
However, Imām Bukhārī wrote the title of the ĥadīth fro 3711 to 3716: ‘And in the Praise of Faţima álayha’s salām the daughter of the Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam. ’ in his Al-Jāmiý as-Şaĥiĥ also known as Sahih Bukhari.
Allāh táālā knows best.
It is incorrect and a false accusation to suggest, as Bro Abu Fadl, seems to that Sayyid Irfan Shah 'is too extreme in his negation of the status of the Ahlul Bayt'. Of the points mentioned by Sidi Aqdas, none of them are against Ahlus Sunnah teachings.
I'm sure there are works--many of them--where you can find the same positions as Sayyid Irfan Shah sahib. He is from the Ahlul Bayt himself remember so why would he negate his own position?!
Sunni Islam is the path of moderation in all aspects of the Deen. We are neither Rafidis nor Nasibis.
The position of respecting those sayyids who deserve respect rather than just for their ancestry seems to fit well with the Koranic position too. For example, we see many sayyids, like the former King Hussain of Jordan, who was famous for visiting infamous nightclubs in London in the 1960s. I'm currently reading a book by one of the models who used to work in one of these clubs and she mentions him a a 'regular'. Yet he was from the Ahlul Bayt. We can say we respect his bloodline but that is about it.
Bro, don't be too hasty to judge. especially scholars.
as i said...if you want his exact position clarified...ask him yourself. this is the best way.
Irfan Shah Sahibs positions do not seem like traditional sunni opinions on the ahl al-bayt, he seems too extreme in his negation of the status or praise of ahl al-bayt. I am not sure of the reasons but it is often heard in his speeches.
'alayhi as-salam has even be used by the Muhadithun of the six sahih books (which obviously includes Bukhari ash-Sharif). I have heard a speech on this and will try to locate it. Also note that 'alayhi as-salam is used for angles.
As for his saying that ahl al-bayt only hold a special place if they act accordingly, this is also not accurate. There are many works where one can find the contrary, Shaykh Sayyid Yusuf Nabhani just to name one. If you look on the internet Shaykh Sayyid Yaqoubi has as well as our own abu hasan on this forum.
my dear asif
shah sahib was saying that the sunni position is the middle path.
we dont say the ahle bayt have no merit neither do we say they are pure from fault even if we commit sins.
shia say they are masoom and whatever they do, even if they sin, they are still our imams
wahabis say they have no special place.
but ahlus sunnah say they hold special position BUT only if they act accordingly.
that was the gist of it. he did quote quran to prove it. it is my fault that i didnt take a pen and paper. it was just another in a long line of excellent speeches.