Nazim Haqqani

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Umar99, Jan 27, 2018.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Umar99

    Umar99 Veteran

    He stated in his book Islam The Freedom To Serve, page 67.

    "To follow Sufi ways, must I be a Muslim? Do you think that Christians are not Muslims? Perhaps they are. To be a Muslim means to be an obedient servant of your Lord. ‘Muslim’ is only an Arabic word for this. Why are you afraid of this word? Worship your Lord. Worship is part of a special relationship between you and your Lord."

    Screen Shot 2020-03-12 at 6.15.01 pm.png
     
  2. Umar99

    Umar99 Veteran

    Well since he has said it, it must be accepted, it cannot be rejected, especially not by his Murīds as we see from the horse's mouth:

    "One is not entitled to refute or object to any of the matters of his sheikh even if he contradicts the pure rules of the Religion."
     
  3. shahnawazgm

    shahnawazgm Active Member

    Of course! And if you happen to be Tony Blair or George Bush then you don't even have to love a Muslim but you get promoted to a Wali Allah! So further going by the same logic anybody who loves Tony or George goes to jannah.
     
    Umar99 likes this.
  4. Umar99

    Umar99 Veteran

    So a Muslim who is in a Ĥarām relationship with a Christian woman and commits Zinā with her is actually saving her from Hellfire? After all, if she loves him then she has no need of saying the Shahādah and accepting Islām.
     
  5. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    What about him loving the Christians and respecting the pope?
     
  6. Ibn Furak

    Ibn Furak New Member



    Nazim claims that a christian will not enter Hellfire if he loves a muslim. This is kufr.
     
  7. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider Shajar-e-Sharjeel Shajar-e-Uthman



    I don’t see anything wrong with making a haram relationship as is; a halal one. For verily marriage is Better than the opposite, be it among Muslims or otherwise.


    Again, I’d like to reinstate that I don’t agree or adhere to many of the “munkarat” or “rukhsas” done by the late shaykh during his tour to USA/EU or elsewhere around the globe.

    Most the issue are regarding fiqh, which were in most cases contrary to the jamhur.

    My whole point was that despite the issues one may have with the methodology of Shaykh Nazim. I feel that his son Shaykh Mehmet is trying his best to rectify and realign the mureeds back on track.
     
  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i can see an answer lurking there somewhere in those lines...
     
  9. Alf

    Alf Active Member


    I hope I wasn't coming off as confrontational or angry. I don't think my affiliation matters as far as this discussion goes, and regardless of what you thought, I was trying to understand it from the sunni perspective.

    Regarding the sheikh or his tariqa in question, I have my own views on certain things they say or promote which I do not accept, such as their proximity with a certain deviant sect, referring to their own sheikh as sultan ul awliya, and more, but then not all information coming from the followers or disciples are actually reliable or authentic, so it is possible some of the wrong things about them is nothing more than a misrepresentation made by ignorant followers.
     
  10. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    again: did I even hint at that?

    brother, I don't know whose mureed you are - but don't let your affiliation make you emotional.

    I already answered that in my previous post. the touchstone is the Shariah.

    we don't decide - it is the legislation from Allah, the Supreme, that decides. each saying is to be considered according to its own merit.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2018
  11. Alf

    Alf Active Member

    I did, as an example of writings that ulema have a problem with: it was in that context.


    You're right, not all utterances qualify as spiritual exclamation, however, the question still remains as to when a person is considered important enough, when it does. This, by the way, is a genuine query from my end, one that I have had for quite some time.



    You did mention above, that ulema always tried to find the smallest of reasons to do taawil, to find an excuse for utterances made by majzoobs and even those in control of their senses, so that way everybody will have the benefit of taawil and excuses, then why not for the sheikh discussed here? Or is it being claimed that while we can somehow make taawil of all the strange utterances of the buzurgs of the past, but the ones happening in recent times can not be given that benefit? if yes, why so? Is there any objective basis for that distinction?
     
  12. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    brother, I only responded to your post, for you claimed having read it in Fusus alHikam; so that's why I asked you to bring a solid proof that it exists in the writings of the Hazrat ibn Arabi whom even Ala Hazrat calls "Shaykh e Akbar".

    if you did not believe in it, why did you mention it?

    did I even hint at that?

    ulema have always tried to find the smallest of reasons, to do taawil, to find an excuse for utterances made by majzoobs, those in the state of spiritual ecstasy and even those in control of their senses. for instance, if a statement has a hundred (100) meanings of Kufr, but just a single (1) meaning of Imaan, they will excuse it, until the speaker clarifies what he meant.

    but they will not declare every madman's utterance as a "spiritual exclamation".

    nobody has the license to say whatever and then say 'you excused so & so'. things will go wildly haywire. as it is, we already have thousands of idiots masquerading as spiritual guides.

    we don't decide - it is the legislation from Allah, the Supreme, that decides. each saying is to be considered according to its own merit.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2018
    Umar99 and Ghulam Ali like this.
  13. Alf

    Alf Active Member


    I think you're missing the point. I am neither saying pharaoh is going to heaven nor vouching for the writings attributed to Sheikh Ibn Arabi( rahimahullah)as authentically reported: the issue is broader than that. Are you saying, that no buzurg in the past has ever said or done something which the orthodox ulema had or continue to have problems accepting? People can do tawil or simply consider such writings or reports forged, then, why don't we do the same for others?
     
  14. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    please post a scan from the original book by Shaykh ibn Arabi. not from the translation available on the net from a book attributed to him.

    If someone believes that the exclamation of Pharoah at the time of death, was accepted by Allah, then this is incorrect; accepting faith upon facing imminent death is rejected.


    A QUOTE FROM THE TRANSLATION
    We say, and the matter belongs to Allah, that the fixed idea which the common people have regarding the wretchedness of Pharaoh is not based on anything in the divine text.
    UNQUOTE


    The following are some of the proofs from the texts:-

    Allah Almighty says, in Surah Momin [40:45-48]

    Therefore Allah saved him from the evils of their scheming, and an evil punishment enveloped the people of Firaun. The fire - upon which they are presented morning and evening; and when the Last Day is established - “Put the people of Firaun into the most severe punishment.” And when they will quarrel amongst themselves in the fire, those who were weak will say to those who sought greatness, “We were your followers, so will you reduce from us some of the punishment of the fire?” Those who were proud will say, “We are all in the fire - indeed Allah has already passed the judgement among the bondmen.”

    And the Holy Prophet once said regarding abu Jahl; he is the Pharoah of my Ummah.
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2018
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  15. Alf

    Alf Active Member

    Regarding pharaoh going to heaven, I have read it in fusus al hikam.
     
  16. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    I had seen this video a year ago but did not want to post it - since it is so ugly. But since this sweeping statement has been made I can't help posting it.

    Marrying off two non-practicing Christians - and people raising takbeer. My stock of ta'weels has run dry - please provide one if you can.



    And while you are at it, let us know the count of munkaraat that went on there.
     
  17. Bazdawi

    Bazdawi Active Member

    references?
     
  18. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider Shajar-e-Sharjeel Shajar-e-Uthman

    Does that include pharaoh going to heaven ? And the Worship of Cow not being fully shirk?
     
  19. Umar99

    Umar99 Veteran

    Does this include George Bush and Tony Blair? Or what about Prince Charles, Wazīr of Imām Mahdī? Perhaps Adnān Oktar is included too?
     
  20. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider Shajar-e-Sharjeel Shajar-e-Uthman

    Look ,indeed there are other issues, but mostly it’s done by the uneducated of the community (wether or not it’s from his direct family or among mureeds)

    And in terms of teaching /aqeedah. we have done tawil of much odd and strange statements or Our Awliya of the past.
     
    Alf likes this.

Share This Page