Fadak and khatā

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

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    @abu Hasan have Allamah Saeed Asad and Syed Irfan Shah made up this position or have they misquoted Ibn al-Jawzi and al-Hakim? A case of teaching Jalali Sahib the dark arts or 'foul' that they accuse him of with regards to Khata e Ijtihadi? Their way of saying we can play that game too (Not saying that I think Jalali did play games but that's the view of the opposition). Just another example of a lack of sincerity in tackling the issue.
  2. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    ya Allah! do these people not know that the hadith of fadak being requested by sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha is found in sahih bukhari?

    did ibn al-jawzi not know that this hadith existed in bukhari?

    did imam abu abdallah al-Hakim not know that it was in bukhari?

    hadith #3092/3093

    bukhari, 3092-3.png
    AbdalQadir and Noori like this.
  3. AbdalQadir

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

    yes, that's what i gathered from the interview (see my post # 92). i saw the interview only once.

    if this is not what irfan shah said explicitly or implicitly in the interview, someone correct me please.

    great response by Jalali's student.

    irfan shah's hubris and takabbur on his supposedly high levels of knowledge and status is nauseating and disgusting. he thinks he's the Khaatam Al-Muhaqqiqeen Ibn Abidin of this age or what? i'm starting to get the feel that irfan shah considers himself as mahfooz from all sorts of khata's

    the Jalali student is right, irfan shah ki pol khul gayi, regarding his ilmi status and activities in the uk. and irfan shah has shown himself to be a thug by such bullying tactics and threats of cussing from morning to evening, with all those "Islamic" cheerleaders sitting around him.

    utterly disgusting.

    feel bad for muzaffar shah in a way. considering the abrasive desi culture of in laws, he will be/is forced to be embarrassed for irfan shah's idiotic gambits. (like how trump's cabinet find it so hard to defend his idiocies)

    these kind of mistakes can be let to slide from the likes of common people like us. but when shameless people say the exact same word "khata" for Ummahaatul Mumineen and senior Sahaba and then throw a hissy fit only because their shia buddies feel threatened (not in defense of Sayyidah, people loyal to Sayyidah can't stay away from humility), then yes, it is necessary to pick on 'nabras' (irfan) and 'musannif ibn abi shaybah' (hanif qureshi)... actually even balab and sapray. someone should call the home office before irfan shah heads to the uk, and ask them to seize his british passport and deport him if he can't pass a GCSE in english!
  4. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    I would guess so because Saeed Asad sahib also said something similar in Sayyid Mash'hadi's presence recently.
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    so what does this mean?

    is irfan shah saying that sayyidah fatimah never asked for fadak, nor her request was declined?

    is this what the claim is?
    Aqdas likes this.
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    while shah sahib is wrong, the other mawlana (jalali sahib's student) chiding him for silly reasons is a tit-for-tat; because shah sahib tried to belittle him even though jalali sahib himself and other punjabi ulama routinely mispronounce names. i take a lenient view of this. so nabras instead of nibras is a talking point because of shah sahib's bravado, which would be ignored otherwise.

    fair enough.


    shah sahib's citation is terrible.

    kitab al-thiqat: there are more than one, but the most famous is that of ibn Hibban. and yes, ibn al-jawzi did not write kitab al-thiqat. [that i know of].

    the quote abu'l aynaa that he said: "i and jahiz used to forge hadith like that of fadak..." is attributed to abu abdullah hakim who mentioned in al-mad'khal. ibn al-jawzi cited it in his "mawDu'at".

    see vol.1/p.41

    mawduat ibn jawzi v1p41.png
    one can object how can we accept a liar's claim that he lied in that specific issue. apparently, abu'l aynaa acknowledged this after he repented from his previous ways of lying.
    Noori likes this.
  7. Brother Barry

    Brother Barry Veteran

    Seems like shah saabs now standing in the very shoes of the matrook raawi he's mentioned.
  8. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    @abu Hasan does this mean they made up that narration or just got the author wrong?
  9. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    hazrat se meri mu'addabana darkhwast hai ke parachute le kar jaeN, ke kharash na aaye. kyun ke aap ke interview ka agar jaiza liya jaye ga to minar e pakistan khud bula raha hoga...
  10. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    Brothers could I draw your attention to this video. It seems to put different clips together but a couple of points are raised:
    1. Syed Irfan Shah seems to be boasting about his (or possibly the people of Punjab) dictionary of swears
    2. According to Jalali sahib's student, Shah Sahib has incorrectly attributed a text (Kitab ul Siqaat) to Imam Jawzi. After Shah sahib lays down the challenge about the veracity of his interview. He also mentioned the name of Abu'l Ayna as one of the narrators that supports the claim that Sayida Fatima did not request the garden of fadak. Does this narrator exist.
    @abu Hasan, could you verify the veracity of these claims

    AbdalQadir likes this.
  11. AbdalQadir

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

    It's those implications that people like Noori and I are concerned with.

    While yes, it can be said he has aberrations despite being Sunni, he has muddied the waters on a key aqidah for a bunch of people with his theory of 'istilahi masoom is lughwi mahfooz which is also istilahi mahfooz'. This will certainly open the doors for jahil awam to step into shiaism.

    And screaming Ala Hazrat's name or chanting slogans of 'maslake Ala Hazrat' or reciting Ala Hazrat's naats or salam won't be able to protect that awam that doesn't dive into Ala Hazrat's discourses. Ala Hazrat's name, naats and salam have already been hijacked by tafdilis and minhajis, much like claims to the title of 'Ahlus Sunnah' is generously made by wahabis or how devbandis claim to be the representatives of Desi Hanafis to nondesis.

    Wallahul musta3an.
  12. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Mingling with ahl al-bidah, if that's what he's done, is forbidden; but doesn't take him out of ahl al-Sunnah.

    We've said this for others before too. They aren't to be followed if they hobnob with deviants but don't become deviants themselves just for hobnobbing.

    Which deviants has Sayyid Mash'hadi mingled with?
  13. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    he is not a reliable sunni scholar who can be followed. his actions do not behoove a sunni aalim.
    however, so long as he does not contradict sunni principles, he will remain a sunni.

    unless of course, al-iyadhu billah, he comes out openly in support of tafzilis or minhaji aqidah.

    nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 7, 2020
    Aqdas likes this.
  14. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    how come sidi when he is hobnobbing with tafzili and minhaji people, it is not just this aberration in mas'alah khata, but his mingling with ahl al bida'h as well.
  15. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator


    just saying that while this aberration has had serious implications for ahlus sunnah in pakistan/UK, irfan shah sahib has not contradicted any major point of aqidah and hence we still consider him a sunni who has some aberrations.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
    sherkhan, Ghulam Ali and Aqdas like this.
  16. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    Just to clarify, I don't want brothers to think I am in favour of Shah Sahib. I vehemently oppose their:
    1. Role in getting Dr Jalali sahib arrested (As one of senior Qaid's of Markazi Jammat e Ahle Sunnat, which appealed for the arrest of Jalali Sahib).
    2. Using the pretext of a hadith (most will argue that it was out of context too) to dish out filthy swears at Jalali sahib and his parents
    3. Instigating a fatwa of kufr on Jalali Sahib (We know the writer of the fatwa did not act of his own accord) that most Mashaykh present did not sign.

    Certainly, their credibility as an uncompromising defender of the Sunni creed is now severely been brought into question. Where previously, the swearing was tolerated, it certainly won't be now.

    By no means it is a point of no return for Shah sahib in terms of their aqida but the nature of their association with people like Syed Munawwar Jammati is going to be decisive. I have not given up on them and who knows they might even set the likes of Syed Munawwar Jammati straight.
  17. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    It's not because he was/is 'Hujjat ul Islam' but because according to Shah Sahib Pir Naseer had repented from his non-sunni beliefs before he passed away. I don't see how that hurt the 'cause' and because Pir Naseer passed away soon after this meeting with Shah Sahib, the ulema thought it best to move on.

    If the current custodians of Golra Sharif have the same non-Sunni beliefs and claim that they are just following Pir Naseer, then they need to openly refute Syed Irfan Shah's stance, and vice versa.

    However, I don't see how Syed Irfan's stance hurts the cause because he did not give credence to Pir Sahib's non-Sunni beliefs but rather announced that Pir Sahib had repented. This then made it futile for the Tafdhlis to quote Pir sahib.

    Overall, we should think favourably of those who passed away because they are not here to clarify their positions.
  18. Harris786

    Harris786 Veteran

    Last edited: Aug 7, 2020
  19. AbdalQadir

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

    just to clarify, talking about the entitled peerzada types.

    i believe in respecting and honoring Sayyids as long as they adhere to Sunni 3aqaid and honor the Shari3ah.
  20. AbdalQadir

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

    that would have been the case if he didn't himself undo that very good work of the past.

    if he just resorted to galis on a personal matter or another matter, we could've consoled ourselves 'at least he stands up to the wahabis, rafidis and the tafdilis' but he has attacked those very aqaid he defended in the past. he has really done rujoo3 from Sunniyat by attacking the 3aqidah of ma3soomiyat

    i was thinking of the same thing, but then actually giving an interview of 2 hrs with that tasleem sabri, and then giving a 9 minutes long gali of a speech says otherwise. it simply can't be given away to senility or a mere slip

    had he just made a case of adab and kept silent, he might have gotten away with it, but he went on to elaborate extrapolations and so on.

    he made a spectacle of the Ahlus Sunnah. it looked as disgusting as a family fight spilling on to the street

    this is the real issue with the Sunnis of the subcontinent.

    they give lofty 7 lines long titles to people who don't even deserve to be called mawlana, and kiss just anyone's hands and feet

    the other thing is that for all our egalitarianism, and anti-hereditary attitudes, we think that just because someone's father or grandfather was a shaykh or wali, that means any and everyone down the line will be the same.

    as the saying goes, 'Allah peer banaye, peerzada na banaye'

    it's just that these peerzadas (Sayyids or not) have a very high sense of entitlement. this problem exists in EVERY SINGLE khanwada of scholars/peers, even Ala Hazrat's - heritage above knowledge of deen.

    some Sayyids think of themselves as equal to THE Ahlul Bayt of those times or at least the next best person after Ghawthe A3azam. i can see how someone would have felt their own statuses threatened- if the word khata was attributed to Sayyidah Fatimah radi Allahu 3anha, then what about present day Sayyids. people will question them too. (eventhough Irfan Shah himself blasted Mawdudi). sorry but this is something i feel needs to be said.

    i'm not Sayyid myself, but closely related to a few.

    i know one such peerzada in my extended family. his father was a well known wali. but he's no where close. just cashing in on 'we're x-th generation of Ghawthe A3azam's sons' and parading as a Shah saheb. his etiquettes are similar to Irfan Shah saheb's. just can't stand even the most minor of disagreements.


    that mardood hanif qureshi said in one video, 'when he was defending the sahaba none of you guys got a heartburn. but when he defends his grandmother, you're all up in arms.'

    someone should tell that mardood, when Irfan Shah defended the sahaba, he did use the word 'khata' for them (as did hanif beghayrat himself when he was supposedly praising Hazrat Ali). classic case of 'ulta chor kotwal ko daante'. was a very clever sentence to impute that we somehow have a Sahaba vs Ahlul Bayt mindset! he also exposed his latent rafidiyat with that sentence.

    also in that gali conference, he tries to induce crocodile tears, 'i ask all you Sayyids, did Jalali's words not hurt your feelings?' and you should have seen munawwar jamati and some chamchas make a sade emoji face


    Sunnis will NEVER get out of this rut, unless and until we stop

    1. giving insanely lofty titles to peers/mawlanas or even plain idiots donning mawlana uniforms
    2. considering naatkhwani as a source of 3aqidah and knowledge and promote jahil naatkhwan mafia
    3. giving precedence to personalities above principles
    4. giving preference to shola bayan taqreers full of naarebazi over actual seeking of knowledge

    it's all a waste of time discussing these matters till then.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2020

Share This Page