Fadak and khatā

Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Aqdas, Jun 15, 2020.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    this is mu'taqad, p110:

    mutaqad, p110a.png

    the claim of ismat for non-prophets should not be considered a light thing; this leads to the heresy of batinis.

    ---

    mutaqad, p110b.png
     
  2. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    can they please point out the actual statement?

    • what is the shara'yi hukm on a person who says that saghirah sins are permissible for prophets. and thus, for ahl al-bayt? should such a person be considered a heretic? have any of our sunni ulama said that this position is clear heresy (bid'ah) or kufr?

      WARNING
      : do not rush to answer this one.

    • what is the shara'yi hukm on a person who does takfir of saHabah - such as hazrat mu'awiyah and mawla ali raDiyAllahu anhuma?

    • will such a person be ruled a kafir?
     
    Noori and Aqdas like this.
  3. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    amusing if it were not so serious.

    all those baying for jalali sahib's blood should know that they have become pawns of the rawafid and the rafidis/tafdilis are having a good laugh.

    for those short-sighted emotionally charged speeches without rhyme or reason i implore. please tarry and think. not of tomorrow but the day after.

    ---
    fast forward to the year 2050, so called followers of alahazrat, sunnis etc will post a claim that sayyidah fatimah raDiyAllahu anha was ma'Sum and superior than anbiya'a [al iyadhu billah].

    their proof? here is a hypothetical conversation:

    A: "when a maulvi, asif jalali attributed khata to sayyidah, the sunni ulama of the time - including mawlana irfan shah sahib who is not only a sayyid, but a vanquisher of tafdili/shias in the UK refuted him and ruled him kafir.

    B: "did he rule him [jalali] kafir?"

    A: "he might have even if there is no written fatwa available. but that is the implication from available speeches anyway. as you can see many other scholars demanded jalali's tawbah. so it should have been a matter of kufr. else why would they demand tawbah and ruju'?"

    B: "but is there a fatwa....?"

    A: "forget that. don't digress. our issue is about ismat of ahl al-bayt. mawlana irfan shah sahib categorically said there is no difference between ma'Sum and maHfooz. in other words, sayyidah faTimah was maHfooz [and other great awliya] as said by so many ulama including alahazrat. and according to shah sahib maHfooz means ma'Sum. it is only a semantic issue. sayyidah and her descendants are ma'Sum from khaTa"

    B: "but...but imam a'azam said 'khata' can be attributed to anbiya..in fiqh al-akbar"

    A: "irfan shah sahib refuted it saying that saying so without qualification is "kalimah e kufr".

    B: "in other words, the word khaTa can be used with qualification of "khaTa ijtihadi". in which case, i have read that maulvi jalali in his speech HAD said that it was khaTa ijtihadi. so it should not be a problem?"

    A: "no. the issue of sayyidah is different. the ahl al-bayt are ma'Sum from khaTa even. and thus higher than anbiya'a. otherwise why would irfan shah sahib and others ask for tawbah and rujuu of maulvi jalali?"

    ====
    C: "btw, i was listening to your conversation. my grandfather became a muslim and previously, he belonged to the now-extinct qadiani religion. he used to say that the qadianis would say that ilham and waHy are the same linguistically; and in this way mirza was a semantic prophet and not a true prophet. come to think of it. irfan shah sahib's speech can be proof for mirza, who doesn't appear so bad after all..."

    i hope irfan shah sahib can sleep well with that.​



    [disclaimer: this is a hypothetical scenario intended to show where this utterly illogical objection is leading to. Allah knows best.]

    نسأل الله العافية
     
    Noori likes this.
  4. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Jul 14, 2020
  5. sherkhan

    sherkhan Veteran

    Amidst the brouhaha over maasoomiyat, khata ijtihadi etc., one voice that has been overlooked (or may be I have missed the posts here) is that of Mufti Fazl Ahmad Chishti.

    Mufti Fazl Ahmad Chishti sahab has roundly rebutted the tafdhilis here with sound research and citations. He cites from every book on his desk, rather than just using these as props! He amply demonstrates the ahl us-Sunnah doctrine on this matter.

    masalah khata (original):


    masalah khata (sequel):


    latest refutation of PAQ or his coterie:
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2020
  6. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Well-Known Member

  7. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    yes, he's using the kind of sophistry he has himself refuted in the past and utilizing the ways of the ahlul bid3ah. superimposing linguistic meanings on specific 3aqidah mustalahat, fiqhi meanings on tasawwuf mustalahat, majaz on literal, literal on majaz, mutlaq on muqayyad, etc. and so on.

    in simple words, he's taking the awam for fools, just like politicians. if he doesn't speak up against hanif qureshi or the full on barking rafidi dogs, like you mentioned, he's gonna lose his grandstanding very soon

    taking things personally is not the way of Hasanayn Kareemayn radi Allahu 3anhumaa.

    glad you mentioned that. in Irfan Shah sahib's video in post # 69 (the Juma speech in Data Darbar), he unwittingly mentions abul a3la mawdudi (purportedly a "Sayyid"). Alhamdulillah for that - because that will go against his smart implications in the video in post # 77 where he somehow hints all Sayyids are "mahfooz" or "masoom"

    let him note well that Sunnis have stood up for haqq even against people like mawdudi, or ali miyan of nadwa, or ahmad khan of aligarh.

    we sincerely hope he doesn't join the ranks of mawdudi whom he has himself spoken against. he's on very slippery slope!

    let's hope the words of Muhaddithe Kabeer sit well with him, as he says he's an ardent follower of Ala Hazrat.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2020
  8. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    What is more upsetting now is that attempts are being made to manipulate established sunni principles to indict Jalali Sahib after it became clear a fatwa of gustakhi would not stand up in light of agreed upon sunni principles.
    It is clear Shah sahib has taken things personally and subsequent speeches have been all over the place in terms of reasoning and some very suspect statements. We pray that Shah Sahib adopts his previous fearless defence of the haq, and brings an end to this sorry state of affairs. His current wishy washy speeches are not befitting of his status as 'Hujjat ul Islam' and more worryingly seems to support those who have infiltrated rifz into the rank of sunnis and they are now starting to speak like them too in terms of the reasoning used.
    If Shah Sahib is sincere in this issue, he should demand their qaid Syed Munawwar Jammati also announce a boycott of Mufti Hanif Qureshi and a ruju too for the way he spoke about Syeda Ayesha. If Shah Sahib wants to teach Jalali Sahib a lesson about adab for mothers, he should also teach Mufti Hanif Qureshi too about how one should speak about the mothers of the believers.
    Sincerity equals a fearless defence of the truth and consistency. This is what we have come to expect of Shah Sahib and we pray that despite whatever agenda and pressure they might be under, they will rise to uphold the truth again. That does not mean support Jalali Sahib, it means support whatever are the true sunni principles, and not muddy the waters further
     
  9. ramiz.noorie

    ramiz.noorie Active Member

    Very sad to see these people put criminal cases against Dr Asif Ashraf Jalali

    More disappointment from Pir Irfan Shah Moosavi, I don't why he flipped. There are no excuses what-so-ever, and it is very unfair, that some brothers are not giving enough excuses to Dr Jalali.

    A syed is not masum (infallible). We respect syed as long as he is on Haqq.
    https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/676821-case-against-dr-ashraf-asif-jalali-registered-pa-told

    https://nation.com.pk/24-Jun-2020/d...alls-for-action-against-dr-ashraf-asif-jalali

    https://tribune.com.pk/story/2249786/1-na-slams-clerics-allegedly-disrespectful-remarks

    https://www.change.org/p/imran-khan...ldGl0aW9uADYOXQEAAAAAXuocuVckjpY3MWYxMjdjNg==
     
  10. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Well-Known Member

  11. ghulam-e-raza

    ghulam-e-raza Well-Known Member

    Kya Dr Asif Jalali Saheb ko Ruju Karna hai? Masla-e-Bagh-e-Fadak by Huzur Muhaddith-e-Kabeer

     
  12. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Well-Known Member

    Furthermore those associated with sayyid `irfan shah mas`hadi have now tried to say that bila qayd using the term khata ijtihadi for anbiya alayhim al-salam refers to in umur e deeni. they then impute this towards jalali sahib
     
  13. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    What about the 2:30 to 3:00 minute part where he says that Prophet 3alaihis Salam in his worldly life he can forgive his own gustakh but he can't forgive the gustakh of Sayyidah Nisaa Al-3aalameen radi Allahu 3anha?
     
  14. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Sayyid Mash'hadi says ma'sum and mahfuz are the same except qatyi and zanni.

     
  15. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Well-Known Member

    Someone has said to me that the statement that Shah sahib gave regarding nisbat of khata was found in Takmil al Iman. Furthermore this individual insists that A`lahazrat rahimahullah writes in Al-Mustanad al Mu`tamad (he incorrectly cites al-Mut`aqad) that this view of khata e ijtihadi is not accepted.

    Could abu hasan please comment on this?
     
  16. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

  17. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    most people i know who know of Irfan Shah sahib and i too am baffled (and disappointed) by his recent behavior, the most notable of which is siding with the rafidi and minhaji sympathizer munawwar jamati

    as Irfan Shah sahib is a Sayyid, let us consider these things (my own thoughts, feel free to throw me under the bus)

    - have a good look at him. he looks weak and old and visibly different from his former self. could this behavior be due to age or health (umar ka taqaza)? we pray to Allah to give him good health and long life

    - could he or members of his family have been threatened? khanqahs are run like any other mafia now and i know this happens

    - he has handsomely refuted paqs of walthamstow in the past, something that i have been told was the actual reason he moved to the uk

    now coming to his speech on friday

    - it was a lot of laffazi and faulty reasoning or false analogies and false premises

    - incidentally, what he has said at Data Darbar on friday, also applies on his former self. can someone explain to me the difference between ghalti and khata? or is Sayyid Mashhadi sahib doing ruju from HIS former positions and propagating his new position? can he please explain his current 3aqidah in simple layman terms regarding 3ismah for prophets and non-prophets?



    see this video too:



    - since he has more or less done takfeer (i'll ignore the part where called someone 'kuttay da puttar' in the Data Darbar mosque in the same speech he asks people to respect its sanctity), i am compelled to state this

    - is it not the way of Imams Hasan and Husayin radi Allahu anhuma to side with haqq at all costs?
    - is it befitting Sayyids to take things personally? whose trait is that?

    i have been told he went to see Jalali sahib (or sent someone over) and apparently Jalali didn't do as he was told. so this wasn't taken so well by Sayyid Irfan sahib.

    Jalali even disagreed with his own teacher Shaykh Abdul Sattar Saeedi sahib and didn't heed his suggestion to do a rujoo3 as he suggested, rather he retracted from the word khata 'in his own way' as is evident from the videos on this thread posted by brother Aqdas, because Jalali felt that doing rujoo3 in the manner some other scholars (including his own teacher) suggested would be giving in to the bullying of the rafidi and tafdili inclined khanqahs and mafia.

    Abdul Sattar Saeedi sahib and other people of some madaris just adopted sukoot and went their way because they know that on maslaha/mafsada or fiqh matters students/juniors can disagree with their teachers/seniors (as is Islamic scholarly tradition), while some mainly peer sahiban, khateebs, khanqah in-charge's and celebrity shuyukh did what they did for various different reasons (loyalty to their rafidi/minhaji/tafdili inclined friends and associates, tickets, visas, thick envelopes, ego trips, compound ignorance, etc.)

    Allah help us
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2020
    Noori and Aqdas like this.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    janab irfan shah sahib has probably forgotten about the ikhtilaf among ahl al-sunnah concerning ismat of anbiya.

    ---
    shah sahib should now issue a fatwa on imam al-a'azam who did not say this with qayd:


    fiqh al-akbar new.png
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2020
    Noori likes this.
  19. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    I think @abu Hasan was spot on when he said that the objections should be written or a fatwa issued with evidences is given. Watching Syed Irfan Shah's speech, if I have not misunderstood it, he is effectively calling Jalali sahib a gustakh and therefore accusing him of kufr. If this is true, then these sort of speeches won't do the trick, if they are sincere, they should issue the fatwa with evidences why it is kufr and gustakhi.
    There are a few issues in this speech, which if critically analysed could cause confusion because don't be wishy washy and say that if the Awliya are mahfuz then the rank of Ahl ul Bayt and in particular Sayida Fatima is higher. Shah Sahib needs to clarify what does he mean by this because the layperson like myself will think that this means Sayida Fatima is ma'sum.

    In reality we are seeing a conflation of different points to create a narrative that does not match up with the actual context of the issue.

    I am still of the opinion that Jalali Sahib should have apologised based on that clip because of the way the words were said. This would have calmed the words.

    However, the other side are now really muddying the waters with what they are accusing Jalali sahib of and what this potentially necessitates.

    This is why Sidi Abu Hasan is right, emotional responses should be ignored because they can create confusion. Shah Sahib's speech is a perfect illustration of this.

    Based on Shah Sahib's speech, the likes of Mufti Hanif Qureshi should be dealt with just as severely because of how he spoke about Sayida Ayesha.

    I mention this because a lot of those who are using the sort of daleel that Shah Sahib have used, were silent when the Sahaba were openly insulted or in the example of Mufti Hanif Qureshi, his tone of voice was a lot more disrespectful when talking about the Sayida Ayesha. The parameters of adab need to be consistent across the board.

    This lack of consistency and objectivity does not suggest sincerity, it implies hidden agendas are at play. To be fair Shah Sahib has dealt with Mufti Hanif Qureshi and the Tafdhlis previously . However, on this issue for some reason it seems like there more to it than what meets the eye.
     
  20. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Well-Known Member

    Ye peigham hazrat e nabeera e huzoor hafiz ul hadith mohtaram ul maqam hazrat allama sayyid muhammad irfan shah sahib mashhadi moosavi kazmi maddazillahul ali, nazim e ala markazi jamaat e ahle sunnat pakistan k ki gaye jumla k mutaliq hai. ye jumla sadir hua hai k bila qayd anbiya e kiram k liye khata e ijtihadi ka itlaq karna kalima e kufr hai. ap ne mazeed farmaya k Hazraat e anbiya alayhim asalam umoor e shari’ m khata se pak hai jis k kisi ko inkar nahi.



    matn e fiqhul akbar me ye bat maujood hai k al Anbiyaa alayhim al salatu wa salam munazahun an saghair wal kabair wal kufr wal qabaih wa qad kaanat minhum zalaat wal khatayaat. neez hazrat sadrul afazli mawlana sayyid nai`m uddin muradabadi alayhirahmat wa ridwan ne hazrat adam alayhi salam k taraf nisbat e khata e ijtihadi kiya. (Dekhiye khazain ul irfan)



    Hazrat Mufti ahmad yar khan naeemi alayhirrahma farmate hain


    ‎’نبیاء کرام ارادۃ گناہ کبیرہ کرنے سے ہمیشہ معصوم ہیں کہ جان بوجھ کر نہ تو نبوت سے پہلے گناہ کبیرہ کرسکتے ہیں اور نہ اس کے بعد ہاں نسیانا خطا ءً صادر ہوسکتے ہیں ‘‘۔(جاء الحق ۔ص:434)



    Allama parharvi alaihirrahmat is tarhan farmate hain k “wa ama sudoor al kabirah bad al Nabuwwa sahwan wa kadha ala sabil al KHATA fajawazahu al aktharun wa fi sharh al mawaqif wa maqasid al mukhtar khilafahu wa haki qadi iyadh (al maliki) ijma`a ala ismati an kabair bila qayd amdatan wa sahwan (Nibras)



    Is tarhan hazrat ghazali e zaman alayhirrahmah farmate hain:


    البتہ علی سبیل السہو والنسیان، میں قاضی ابوبکر نے اختلاف کیا ہے مگر ائمہ اعلام اس میں بھی عقلاً عدم جواز ہی کے قائل ہیں۔ رہے باقی ذنوب یعنی کذب فی التبلیغ کے علاوہ تو وہ کفر ہوں گے۔ یا غیر کفر۔ عصمت عن الکفر پر اجماع امت ہے۔ عام اس سے کہ قبل النبوۃ یا بعد النبوۃ۔ اس اجماع کے خلاف خوارج کے ایک خاص گروہ ازارقہ کا قول پایا جاتا ہے جو اہل حق کے نزدیک باطل و مردود ہے۔



    Mazeed lafz e khata ka itlaq hasanatul abrar saiyyatul muqarribin k teht durust hai jaysa k fatawa ridawiyya sharif m maujood hai:


    حسنات الابرار سیّئات المقربین[4]۔نیکوں کے جو نیك کام ہیں مقربوں کے حق میں گناہ ہیں۔وہاں ترك اولٰی کو بھی گناہ سے تعبیر کیا جاتا ہے حالانکہ ترك اولی ہر گز گناہ نہیں۔

    (fatawa ridawiya sharif 29:418)


    Agar ye kufr hai - to wazahat hone chahiye ke kon sa kufr hai - luzoom ya iltizam? sarih ya ghair e sareeh? mutayyan ya mutabayyan? Mazeed allama jalali sahib k bat k taweel agar ho to takfir se roka jayega. Allama jalali ne saf farmaya k khata e ijthadi se murad bais e ajr o sawab hona hai na k gunah.



    Allama Ali al qari farmate hain:


    وَقَدْ قَالَ عُلَمَاؤُنَا إِذَا وُجِدَ تِسْعَةٌ وَّتِسْعُوْنَ وَجْهًا تُشِيْرُ إِلَى تَكْفِيْرِ مُسْلِمٍ وَوَجْهٌ وَاحِدٌ إِلَى بَقَائِهِ عَلَى إِسْلَامِهِ فَيَنْبَغِيْ لِلْمُفْتِيْ وَالْقَاضِيْ أَنْ يَعْمَلَا بِذَلِكَ الْوَجْهِ وَهُوَ مُسْتَفَادٌ مِّنْ قَوْلِهِ عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاةُ وَالسَّلَامُ ادْرَؤُوْا الْحُدُوْدَ عِنْ الْمُسْلِمِيْنَ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ فَإِنْ وَجَدْتُمْ لِلْمُسْلِمِ مَخْرَجًا فَخَلُّوْا سَبِيْلَهُ فَإِنَّ الْإِمَامَ لَأَن يُّخْطِئَ فِي الْعَفْوِ خَيْرٌ لَهُ مِنْ أَن ْيُخْطِئَ فِي الْعُقُوْبَةِ رَوَاهُ التِّرْمِذِيُّ وَغَيْرُهُ وَالْحَاكِمُ وَصَحَّحَهُ



    (sharah shifaa 2:499)


    Allama Ibn Nujaym alayhirrahma wa ridwan is tarhan farmate hain k zaeef qaul agar maujood ho to takfir se roka jayega:


    وَالَّذِيْ تَحَرَّرَ أَنَّهُ لَا يُفْتَى بِتَكْفِيْرِ مُسْلِمٍ أَمْكَنَ حَمْلُ كَلَامِهِ عَلَى مَحْمَلٍ حَسَنٍ أَوْ كَانَ فِيْ كُفْرِهِ اخْتِلَافٌ وَلَوْ رِوَايٌة ٌضَعِيْفَةٌ فَعَلَى هَذَا فَأَكْثَرُ أَلْفَاظِ التَّكْفِيْرِ الْمَذْكُوْرَةِ لَا يُفْتَى بِالتَّكْفِيْرِ بِهَا وَلَقَدْ أَلْزَمْتُ نَفْسِيْ أَنْ لَا أُفْتِيَ بِشَيْءٍ مِّنْهَا


    (baHr ul raiq)


    Lihaza takfir durust nahi na hi ye kehna k khata e ijtihadi ka mutlaqan itlaq karna kufr hai.


    wasalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah
     

Share This Page