What rubbish? How many mosques does he want us to show named after Ali bin abi talib, Imam Hasan, Imam Husayn, Jafar Al-Sadiq and others radi Allahu 3anhum. I think another 15-20 years and we'd be asking their fan clubs why they don't name their children Abu Bakr and Umar. I have a bad feeling about this lot. So what's his point?
Very good answer by Brother Abu Hasan! As for Brother Aqdas comments, Brother he has not explained his statement anywhere in the whole lecture. Here is the link to the whole lecture: Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usAd-bZmNhw&list=FLbc59d-epOxjQ5p3OvVlRKw&index=35&feature=plpp_video Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neWL1iL-VRs&feature=related As for Brother Kattarsunni's post yes this is his annual lecture their. He did this lecture the same place he did the last one at in Pakistan. I have watched the whole lecture and here are some of the things he discussed: He defended himself regarding his last statements, proving that kufar has come from inside of Sayiduna Adam AS. He proved his point regarding Hazrat Khawaja Ghareeb Nawaz RA turning Hindus into Muslims and breaking the record of prophets. He had ago at Banu Umayah for fighting against the beloved Prophet Sallalaho Alahi Wa Sallam (referring to Sayiduna Abu Sufyan RA). Then he carried on referring to Sayiduna Amir E Muawiyyah RA and Mola Ali RA. Then Sayiduna Imam Hussain RA and Yazeed. He then says this won't stop here, when Imam Mahdi RA comes a Sufyani (from the same family) will come forward against Imam Mahdi RA. He again says what he said was right that the Nasbis of this time are the Sunnis (didn't use the word Barevi this time). He says why don't Sunnis name their mosques on the name of Ahlulbayt? We have hundreds on the names of Sahaba and Awliyah but hardly any on the name of Ahlulbayt. Lastly he says Moudoodi and few other Wahabi Scholars are Sayyids. Most of all this is in part 1, he starts from 5 minutes onwards in the video. I could get all this in clips if anyone wants me to but don't see a point.
yeh, well, muft-i zahid husain should have explained the statement and not leave it for the awam to base an aqida on. you can hear them saying 'sub'HanAllah' when zahid husain says, 'he is even superior to some prophets'. this is not the whole speech so let's hope somewhere during it he did present the sharh as aH has done. you can't make such statements in front of awam and leave them without commentary.
a side issue: in al-mirqat, under the hadith "every person who can state his opinion will insist on his opinion to be correct" ali al-qari says: "that is without referring back to the kitab, sunnah or ijma'a. or analogy based upon the strongest evidence or forsaking the following of our imams, like the four imams..."
In Al-Burhan, Ali al-Muttaqi (the author of Kanz al-Ummal) cites Suyuti's Al-Arf for the opinion of Ibn Sirin in its entirety. (see Chapter 12: Miscellaneous Issues)
In Al-Qawl al-Mukhtaşar fī Álāmāti’l Mahdī al-Muntažar, Imam Ibn Ĥajar says: That which is reported that Ibn Sīrīn said: “Mahdī is superior to Abū Bakr and Úmar; It is nigh [1] that he shall supersede some prophets.” And an authenticated report from him, that he did not give precedence to Abū Bakr and Úmar over him. Even though, the second statement is more veritable than the first one, it is necessary to explain it favourably such that they agree with ĥadīth that are unambiguous. And an Ijmāá is [already] established that both of them [Abū Bakr and Úmar] are superior to him [Mahdī]; rather, superior to the rest among the four;[2] rather, among all companions, in contrast to the aberrant opinion of Ibn Ábd al-Barr who said that someone superior to the Companions can come after them. And this [statement of Ibn Sīrīn] should be reconciled by the report that says: “the reward of fifty amongst you” which can be used to explain both statements. This is because of the intense tribulation in Mahdi’s time, and the entire Christian world rallying against him and besieged by Dajjāl – so, his superiority and the reward that he shall receive is similar to that of his followers.[3] This is a relative concept where it is possible that someone who is less superior [mafđūl] has specific aspects [4] of superiority that is not found in the more superior [fāđil]; it is therefore that Tāwūs yearned for [living in] Mahdi’s age, because in that age, good deeds are multiplied, and sins are forgiven. As for receiving more reward and exaltedness near Allāh absolutely, then the mentioned ones [5] are superior to him.[6] It is as if, Ibn Sīrīn meant by his saying: “Mahdi would have superiority upon a [7] Prophet” that Imām Mahdī will lead Sayyidunā Ýīsā in prayer. And an Imām has [an aspect of] superiority upon those whom he leads. In truth, this aspect of superiority is not on account of Mahdi himself, but rather because of our Prophet şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam. Because this indicates that Sayyidunā Ýīsā álayhi’s salām, by following Mahdi, follows the Sharīáh of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam and subservient to him. ------------------------- footnotes (by AH): 1. Unlike the previous two texts, which said: “qad”, in one of the printed version of Al-Qawl al-Mukhtaşar, it says: “kāda” which means: ‘he is close to being superior to certain Prophets.’ However, in a manuscript, it still says “qad” as mentioned by Suyūţī. There are some other errors in the printed version, which I have corrected comparing it with a Diaber MS. Allāh táālā knows best. 2. That is the four: Abū Bakr, Úmar, Úthmān and Ĥaydar rađiyAllāhu ánhum. So the first two are superior to the other two. 3. As mentioned in the hadith earlier: reward of fifty companions for the same deed. 4.The text says: “one specific or many specific aspects” which is have summarized for brevity. 5. Abū Bakr and Umar 6. Mahdī 7. báad al-anbiyā’a: many times, this expressions is used to denote one person
In Al-Árf al-Wardī, Imām Jalāluddīn al-Suyūţī says: Also reported [1] through the route of Đamrah from Muĥammad ibn Sīrīn, that he mentioned of tribulations that shall occur, and he said: “When such a time comes, sit in your homes until you hear that the person has arrived who is better than Abū Bakr and Úmar.” He was asked: “Will someone else come who is better than Abū Bakr and Úmar?” [He said]: “Rather he will be superior to some prophets.” I say [Al-Suyūţī]: In it is what there is! [2] Ibn Abi Shaybah said in his Al-Muşannaf in the chapter on Mahdī: Abū Usāmah narrated to us from áwf from Muĥammad – that is Ibn Sīrīn – who said: “There shall be in this nation a Khalifah upon whom Abū Bakr and Úmar will not be preceded” I say [Al-Suyūţī]: This is narrated by a chain of trustworthy narrators. This statement is milder than the previous one. And the reconciliation according to me for both statements is the extrapolation [3] of the ĥadīth: “Rather, the reward of fifty amongst you” because of the intense tribulations in the age of Mahdi and the opposition of Romans and beseiged by Dajjāl. This does not indicate superiority of more reward and exaltedness near Allāh táālā. Because, there are many şaĥīĥ ĥadīth and Ijmāá that Abū Bakr and Úmar are superior to the entire creation after prophets and messengers. -------------------------- footnotes: 1. here Al-Suyūţī makes a mark “Kāf” to indicate the additional reports he has collected, as mentioned in the beginning of the risalah. 2. fī hādhā mā fīhi: That is, it is obvious that the report has such blatant contradiction with established áqīdah; and is thus discreditable – and does not even merit an examination. Dismissed summarily. 3. ta’wīl
AH akhi, the footnotes come from you or are from the original text by Imam Barzanji? Just for my own curiosity. EDIT - just read all of them and i think they're from you.
shah sahib is right when he says he is a naqil. nowhere did he claim that he is an honest, upright naqil. you guys are all getting upset for nothing. shah sahib never claimed that he speaks the full truth. given below is the passage from al-isha'ah of al-barzanji: ---- Another Warning Note: It has been reported of Ibn Sīrīn [that he said]: That Mahdi is superior to Abū Bakr and Úmar rađiyAllāhu ánhūmā. He was asked: “Better than Abū Bakr and Úmar?” He replied: “He would be superior to some Prophets.” It is also reported by him that he would not consider Abū Bakr and Úmar superior to Mahdi. rađiyAllāhu ánhūm. Al-Suyūţī said in Al-Árf al-Wardī, that the second statement is reported by trustworthy narrators [isnādu’n şaĥīĥ] and is easier to reconcile[1] than the first statement. According to me both statements can be reconciled by the ĥadīth that says: “rather a reward fifty times that you receive”.[2] I [Al-Barzanjī] say: Upon research, [it is known that] the reasons for superiority are many. It is not permissible for us to say that someone is absolutely superior unless RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam has informed us of it. Sometimes a specific point of superiority is found in those who are lesser and not found in those who are higher. It has been mentioned earlier that in Al-Futūĥāt, the Shaykh [3] says, that Imām Mahdi will be infallible in his rulings as he shall fully [4] follow in the footsteps of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam such that he shall not err [in rulings] at all; obviously, there is no doubt that this kind of Divine Protection [5] is not accorded to the Two Shaykhs.[6] And all the nine other merits mentioned have not been found in any one Imām prior to him. From such a viewpoint, it is permissible to say that Mahdi is superior to Shaykhayn, even though they two have the superiority of being in the company of RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam and witnessing the revelation, and being earliest Muslims etc., Allāh táālā knows best. Shaykh Álī al-Qārī in his Al-Mashrab al-Wardī fī Madh’hab al-Mahdī says: Among things that prove his superiority is the saying of Nabiy şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam who named him: “The Khalifah of Allāh” and Abū Bakr rađiyAllāhu ánhū is not termed except: “The Khalifa of RasūlAllāh”. ------------------- footnotes: 1. akhaff meaning milder. meaning, the first statement is inflammatory (as we shall see in Suyuti's comment, inShaAllah) 2. In a very famous ĥadīth found in Tirmidhi, Ibn Mājah, Abū Dāwūd, Sunan al-Kubrā of Al-Bayhaqi, and Mishkāt: Narrated from Abū Thálabah rađiyAllāhu ánhū concerning the verse: “Be steadfast yourselves; those who go astray will not harm you as long as you are upon guidance yourselves” [5:105] Thálabah said: “By Allāh, I asked RasūlAllāh şallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam about this verse and he said: “Rather, command others to do good, enjoin the righteous and forbid evil. Until you see that people pursue their greed, [people] follow their desires, and this world is given precedence [upon hereafter] and every person who can state his opinion, thinks that his opinion is the finest; and when you see things that you cannot escape – then, be steadfast yourself and take care of your own affairs, and leave the doings of the commonfolk. Verily, there are days of forbearance ahead of you; whosoever remains patient [and steadfast upon religion] in such times is like grasping a smoldering coal. Those who do good deeds among them shall receive the reward of fifty people who would do a similar deed.” The companions asked: “Ya RasūlAllāh! Fifty amongst them?” He replied: “Fifty amongst you.” 3. Shaykh al-Akbar, Muĥiyuddīn Ibn Árabī 4. muqtaf: completely, leaving out nothing. from Tāj al-Árūs: in a ĥadīth of Nasāyī, “when he eats, he completely finishes it” 5. máşūmun fī ĥukmih 6. Abu Bakr and Umar rađiyAllāhu ánhūmā
Is this something annual? At the beginning of the year he had the statement regarding Sayyiduna Adam alayhisalam, now for December there is this statement. Alamah Zaid Shah Sahib should be contacted for a clarification on both these statements.
this 'man' is still a scholar and a mufti for those who follow him, and a sayyid. we should respectfully disagree like the muftis did on tv when refuting him for wrong aqida on Sayyiduna Adam 'alaihissalam. When sayyid írfan shah refutes, he does not personally attack, but is objective, and refutes the other person solely for the sake of Shariat and Sunni Aqida. why do brothers on sunniport attack those we disagree with, personally? This 'man' could simply be confused and mistaken. it is our job, as Sunnis, to remove that. it cannot come with character assassination. shaykh sayyid 'irfan shah waits for every moment for the other non-sunni to convert and accept the truth. lets say Mufti zahid does that. will we on sunniport suddenly jump on welcoming him with flowery language? it would seem odd. may be he becomes a real sunni mufti then
elsewhere, people are discussing kharjis and their hatred for ahlu'l bayt. yes, they are certainly wrong but what do you expect from wahabis and deobandis? i.e. it's not surprising. however, as we all know, the enemy within is the most dangerous. if an open rafidi said this, every sunni would dismiss it as kufr immediately. but, because this man has spent decades in sunni ranks, many awam will be fooled. firstly, this man is not a mufti. secondly, it is extremely dangerous what he is saying. he says 'i am just a naqil', i.e. don't blame me, i am just telling you what he said. note he doesn't then go on to explain the correct aqida, hence, he wants the awam to accept this report. to say such things to the awam is totally irresponsible. as we all know, it is kufr to give superiority to a non-prophet over any prophet and imam mahdi is not a prophet. hence, to believe he is afzal to some prophets is kufr. these people are proof that iman is not through ilm alone, it is the tawfiq of Allah.
