Hafiz Aslam Bandyalwi at Derby Jamia Masjid

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Nawazuddin, Jun 8, 2015.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    It is my understanding that shah sahib was addressing the issue of tafdil and ijma, and that because there was no ijma in the times of sahaba on the issue and they differed about it hence agreement after disagreement in a previous age does not authorise the new age to establish an ijma. And al-Sarakhsi's quote on that has been provided below. However, being a wise man, you have avoided the crux of the argument about ijma on tafdil and ijma about Parents (alayhuma al-salaam). That is what you should have refuted :)... Anyway, ya shaykh, there are notable usuli imams who declared unequivocally that epistemologically it is not possible to ascertain an ijma other than that of the sahaba. for example, here is al-Razi's conclusion in his al-mahsul:
    والإنصاف أنه لا طريق لنا إلى معرفته إلا فى زمان الصحابة
    the correct position is that we have no way of knowing ijma upon an issue except in the times of the sahaba.
     
  2. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    red herring.

    ---
    shah sahib sr. said that imam sarkhasi said that any ijma post SaHabah was not an ijma'a at all. my posts were concerning that statement.
    shah sahib sr. mixed up types of ijma'a (just like junior is doing here) and ran back and forth arguing about takfir, tabdiy, etc. to eventually reject all kinds of ijma'a (citing sarkhasi) other than that of SaHabah. just in case my short post didn't convey the message: there are different types of ijma'a. not all types entail the one refusing it to be a kafir (hint, hint).

    wa billahi't tawfiq.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2015
  3. AbdalQadir

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

    quite a straw man!

    JUST adhering to the tafdil of Mawla Ali over Shaykhayn radi Allahu 3anhum ajma3een is one thing.

    propagating an assortment of rafidi beliefs and tendencies along with it is something else.

    quite a cunning lot these guys are.
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2015
    Abu Hamza likes this.
  4. AbdalQadir

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

    nawazuddin, are you objective-enquirer?
     
  5. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

  6. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    Ijma after disagreement in an earlier age:

    al-Lakhnawi states:
    اتفاق العصر الثاني بعد استقرار الخلاف في العصر الأول ممتنع عند الأشعري و الإمام احمد و الإمام حجة الإسلام الغزالي و إمام الحرمين
    Ijma of a generation after disagreement in a preceding generation is INAVLID according to Imam al-ashari, Imam Ahmed bin hambal, Imam Ghazali and Imam al-Haramayn.

    al-Sarakhsi:
    الاجماع بعد الاختلاف في الحادثة، إذا كانت مختلفا فيها في عصر ثم اتفق أهل عصر آخر بعدهم على أحد القولين، فقد قال بعض

    العلماء: هذا لا يكون إجماعا، وعندنا هو إجماع ولكنه بمنزلة خبر الواحد في كونه موجبا للعمل غير موجب للعلم. قال رضي الله عنه:

    وكان شيخنا (الامام الحلواني رحمه الله) يقول: هذا على قول محمد رحمه الله يكون إجماعا، فأما على قول أبي حنيفة وأبي يوسف

    رحمهما الله لا يكون إجماعا، فإن الرواية محفوظة عن محمد رحمه الله أن قضاء القاضي بجواز بيع أم الولد باطل، وقد كان هذا

    مختلفا فيه بين الصحابة ثم اتفق من بعدهم على أنه لا يجوز بيعها فكان هذا قضاء بخلاف الاجماع عند محمد، وعلى قول أبي حنيفة

    وأبي يوسف رحمهما الله ينفذ قضاء القاضي به لشبهة الاختلاف في الصدر الاول، ولا يثبت الاجماع مع وجود الاختلاف في الصدر

    الاول.

    Ijma upon a legal matter which had a difference of opinion in a preceding generation then the latter generation agrees upon one of the earlier opinions then according to some jurists it will not be considered ijma but according to us it is ijma. however, it willstill be considered like a single chain of report in its strength and will only be sufficient in a 'practical matter' (fiqh) and will not be sufficient for knowledge (aqeeda)issue. Our shaykh Imam al-halawani said that this is ONLY according to the opinion of imam mohammed considered ijma BUT according to IMAM abu hanifa and imam yusuf it is NOT considered Ijma! it is reported from imam mohammed that if a qazi passes judgement on legality of the sale of an umm walad then that judgement will be invalid. this verdict had a difference of opinion amongst sahaba but later generation agreed that it is invalid therefore this legal verdict would be against such an ijma according to imam mohammed but imam azam abu hanifa and imam qazi abu yusuf the judgement of qazi will be valid due to the difference in earlier generation because according to them IJMA IS NOT VALID WITH DIFFERENCE IN AN ERALIER GENERATION.

    al-Razi in al-Mahsul:
    إذا اتفق أهل العصر الثانى على أحد قولى أهل العصر الأول كان ذلك إجماعاً لا تجوز مخالفته خلافاً لكثير من المتكلمين و كثير من فقهاء

    الشافعية و الحنفية

    when people of a latter age agree upon one of the two opinions existing in a earlier age then it will be considered ijma and disagreement would not be permissible, and this statement is against the opinion of most mutakallimeen(aqeeda scholars) and most shafi jurists and most hanafi jurists.
     
  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    Abu Hamza likes this.
  8. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    @abu Hasan - could you perhaps share dabbusi's 'taqwim al-adillah' please

    Jazak'Allahu Khayr
     
  9. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    he emphasizes that even imam abu hanifah by his statement: "if you bring the statement of a tabiyi, we will contest it" does not mean that he rejects any ijma'a other than the ijma'a of SaHabah.

    usul sarkhasi 1.jpg
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2015
    Abu Hamza and Harris786 like this.
  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    particularly, if he is interested in edification of his own self, shah sahib should begin reading on types of ijma'a; he can try dabbusi's taqwim al-adillah.

    as for the false accusation that shams al-ayimmah sarkhasi in his usul rejected the ijma'a post SaHabah, he probably got too excited and forgot to read the whole paragraph; [hint: shams al-ayimmah actually rejects that view:]
    usul sarkhasi 2.jpg

    Allah ta'ala knows best.


    ---
    unless of course, it is elsewhere and i have missed it. anyone is welcome to post a correction. wa billahi't tawfiq.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2015
    Abu Hamza, Harris786 and Aqdas like this.
  11. Brother Barry

    Brother Barry Well-Known Member

    Mawlana Fazl of darby! since when did he become a Mufti ?

    He is one guy I don't think I'll ever forget or respect due to his actions on the first & last meeting we had.

    A few years ago I accompanied Hafiz Tahir Qadiri the Naat reciter to Darby, the brothers of the Darby Sunni Movement held a Mawlid gathering at the Masjid that Mawlana Fazl is Imam at. At the end of the gathering a brother brought the Muey Mubarak of Rasoolullah (peace & blessings be upon him), Mawlana Fazl flipped out & demanded a Sanad of the Muey Mubarak or else he wouldn't allow it to be viewed by the people, I can't remember exactly but I think he came out with something like if its real then test if it burns or not. He also accused the brother who brought it of misguiding people etc, he told the brother to take it out, the brother out of respect for the Masjid & Muay Mubarak didn't give him a exchange of words and he chose to leave.

    It was horrible how this individual behaved, Hafiz Tahir & myself later on were invited to do Zayarat at the house of the brother, he just said that Mawlana Fazl wasn't destined to do Zayarat, then it was explained to us that his strings are pulled by PAQ etc.. it kinda all made sense then why he was so hostile towards the Sunni Movement brothers.

    Even if his not a Tafzili any longer, in my eyes his still guilty of disgusting behaviour in a Masjid by raising his voice & screaming and disrespecting the Muay Mubarak. Even if the brother wasn't able to provide a Sanad there & then on the spot it still doesn't negate the fact that it could be the Muay Mubarak, no proof either way means it should be respected out of precaution at the very least as if it is authentic and one shows disrespect then that will mean destruction in both worlds.
     
  12. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    shah sahib either did not study about ijma'a properly or he forgot everything about it. i strongly recommend that he read usul properly. he is mixing up things and i think it is too late to expect him to learn about things. here is a snip from an usul book, though;

    mhs.jpg
     
    Harris786 likes this.
  13. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    Some of the points Syed Zahid Hussain makes:

    1) The issue of superiority is that of the majority (jamhur) not consensus (Ijma) - He later goes onto refute those who suggest it is Ijma and suggests that they don't even comprehend the concept.

    2) One who believes otherwise, (i.e that Sayyiduna Ali is superior) is still within the confines of Ahlu Sunnah on condition that there is nothing else that he can be taken to task for.

    He then goes on to deconstruct the position of Ijma on the superiority of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr over the rest of the Sahaba (Radi'Allahu Anhum), he states:

    1) Ala'Hazrat held the position that the superiority of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr over the rest of the companions is that of Ijma, thus one who shys away from this position is an innovator and no longer part of Ahlu Sunnah.

    2) Mullah Ali al-Qari states the same position in Sharh Fiqh ul-Akbar but then goes onto suggest that the meaning of Ijma is in fact Jamhur.

    As for the very concept itself he states:

    Ala'Hazrat states with regards to the imaan of Abu Talib that there is Ijma on his kufr - According to your understanding of Ijma, one who moves away from this position is an and no longer a sunni, therefore Khwaja Qamruddin Sialvi and Ata Muhammad Bandyalwi fit in this category since both of them held the position that Abu Talib was a Muslim (note: Imam Zayni Dahlan was also of this postion and Ala'Hazrat's sanad in hadith goes through him).

    In al-Mu'taqid, Mullah Ali al-Qari states with regards to the imaan of the parents of the Prophet (صلي اللهُ عليه و اله و سلم) that "there is Ijma of the Sahaba, Tab'in, Atba ul Ta'bin, all the mujtahideen including the 4 Imams" that they were disbelievers (Astagfirullah - We seek refuge in Allah)....

    ...Ala'Hazrat himself shys away from this position, so according to your own understanding of Ijma, what does that make Ala'Hazrat??

    Finally, he states that Ijma has no value after the Sahaba, he quotes Imam Sarkasi in 'Usul ul-Sarkasi' that "there in no such concept of Ijma after the Sahaba..."

    He finishes off by saying that the matter has nothing to do with the deen and one does not get expelled from the confines of Ahlu Sunnah for holding a position contrary to that which is pre-dominantly followed (how does Imam Abu Hanifa's statement fit in here: "Tafdil ul Shaykhayn......)
     
    Nawazuddin likes this.
  14. Ghulam

    Ghulam Veteran



    Hujjat ul Islam is having a go at Ijma and Hafiz Aslam Bandyalvi from 1.32. He say's 'Ijma shijma kee kohi value nahi'

    He talk's about Afzaliat and the tartib is the opinion of the Jamhur and no Ijma. 'aur kharabi' probably on about his old mate from e17/gujarkhan who has a few malfunctions



    Hafiz Sahib has challenged both Mufakkir and Hujjat to a debate at the end of above video
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2015
  15. Ghulam

    Ghulam Veteran

    listen from 46 minutes - aH you need to come into the ring as you have been challenged a few weeks ago

    also in the speech a few years ago at 1.05.00 onwards the named Ulama are yet to refute Pir Saqib Shami's speech

     
  16. Ghulam

    Ghulam Veteran

    Looks like they were given up when Hafiz Aslam started speaking

     
  17. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    will you be throwing any chairs? just asking.
     
  18. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    constitution, constitution, constitution!
     
  19. Ghulam

    Ghulam Veteran

    Aqdas Misbahi Qibla the Markazi Jammat has not issued a statement as yet in regards to their stance on Tafzil or the other beliefs of PAQS or the E17 camp.

    On facebook there is a grave accusation by one of the learned scholars who spoke at the Derby event that PAQS is of the opinion that Muʿāwiyah (RadiAllahu anhu) was a rebel.

    It will clear much confusion amongst the people if a clear statement is issued in regards to the above.

    It is confusing when the likes of Mufakkir e Bihari, Janasheen Huzur Shaykh ul Alam and Hazrat Baba e Brittania need to establish if they differ with PAQS on Aqida before presenting and accepting awards. Unity needs to be on the creed of ahl as-Sunnah.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Oct 1, 2014
  20. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    that's good news. I believe people like mawlana fazl ahmad qadri and mawlana nisar beyg were only proponents of tafzil isn't bid'ah because paqs is more learned and perhaps it was intellectual bullying. but now that they have distanced themselves, they can begin promoting the sunni aqida that tafzil ul shaykhayn is from zaruriyat e ahle sunnat.

    has zahid Husain shah also come back to 'tafzil ul shaykhayn is from zaruriyat'?

    ---
    note to all: don't comment about tafzil. we've battered tafzil to death. I'm just stating an observation and not here to debate the issue. just want to know about the ulama who have distanced themselves.
     

Share This Page