Polygamy : The Genius of Sheikh Ahmed Deedat

true, but no scholar worth his salt ever said that hobnob with shiah. all ulama from imam a'azam's time to now have warned against the shiah - as either heretics or kafirs.

RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam forbade us from hobnobbing with heretics. but apparently tahir and other freethinkers seem to have more mercy and brotherly love for muslims than the Master himself. al-iyadhu billah.

---

the point is, when? was it prior to the sixties when real and fearless ulama lived or was it after? even if it does, do ibn abidin and zabidi, haskafi and nabulsi (all sayyids and prolific authors) carry more weight than the az'hari maulvis of our time?

is al-az'har a mufti? or is it an institution that houses muftis? then, does the quality of that institution remain untouched irrespective of the quality of the muftis it houses?

is the fatwa from al-az'har of today the same as fatwa issued from al-az'har of ayni and ibn Hajar's day?

because all that glitters is not gold. if you had read ONE book of imam ghazali, you could easily tell the difference. i still recommend you to read kimiya-e-sa'adat (of allama saeed ahmed naqshbandi translation). perhaps you were not looking for what is important. instead of ilm and taqwa, you were impressed with boasting and the pomp and show.

my teacher raHimahullah, was an excellent hafiz even at his age past 70 (he would recite one whole juzu' for review, prior to iftar in ramadan; as he had to recite it in tarawiH later - a student (and i among them) would have to listen to him during the half-hour review) and he had memorised the qur'an before he was twelve. he was a master of tajwid and knew some books of tajwid by heart; he was a teacher of arabic and farsi. he had a masters degree and he could speak fluent english - in fact he would correct our translations (we were required to translate arabic passages into urdu and english). he was scrupulous to the point that he refused service from even his own students (that is us);and if we insisted, he would relent sometimes but immediately tell us afterwards: 'you will do only what i ask you to do.' i have seen with my own eyes that he would pray nawafil for hours, long after everybody would have left after isha prayer.

yet, he was largely unknown in our city. when he went to meelad celebrations where ordinary maulvis acted as if they were the chief muftis, and crowds thronged to them, our mawlana remained unnoticed and he was satisfied with being out of the limelight. he was a the kind of a sufi, straight out of imam ghazali's books. he rarely - if at all - asked other people to come to prayer or wear the beard. but young men and old alike, kept beards - beard-trimmers wore long beards, and we went to the masjid by ourselves without goading or reprimand. he would always be either reading or praying; he would be forced to sit in committees and community gatherings, but he would sit in a corner silently unless somebody asked him a question. he would say something if it was related to sharayi hukm or remained silent otherwise. [it is a pity that we learned very little from him]

my point is, such men of Allah are everywhere. but people look in the wrong places. indeed, some people are bestowed with fame and recognition too - dhalika faDlullah, He gives whom He pleases - but many remain unnoticed.

yes, something like reasoning and comprehension. i am not being sarky, but i seriously think that you should take a GRE or a GMAT course at least for some engaging activity.

 

6. Oh, the Al Azhar fatwa remark by me was a deliberate provocation--but it shows that just like anyone else you guys too only pick and choose what you choose to follow from authorities. Yet Azhar is the highest Sunni authority generally speaking in the world...yet if I choose to ignore a fatwa by someone else I'm suddenly ignorant...
7. Someone might say you talk of rejecting proof by authority but are giving Iqbal as an
authority for not doing blind-following...no i am not...i am just quoting a bit of poetry from him which nicely expresses my thoughts...

 

brothers! whoa!
let me clarify some things:
1. i am NOT defending TuQ at all. I also don't think he is Sunni.
(It is calling him 'kafir' where I disagree with some brothers and choose instead to hold my tongue - sukoot).
2. I have nothing against Hazrat Akhtar Raza Khan sahib -- my point was a more general one of principal: just because someone who is well-known or the scion of a noble family should say something that itself isn't enough to make it true. (In logic this is called the proof by authority fallacy and is one of the most common fallacies...especially by religious folk...)
3. Re Ahmad Deedat -- if it can be shown without doubt that he held beliefs against the accepted Sunni Ashari/Maturidi aqeedah then I will, of course,
say he isn't Sunni but I won't accept that just because Hazrat XYZ says so anymore. That's a subtle difference. (With many of our maulvis here, it is enough for someone to disagree with Sayyidi Ala Hazrat on one issue of fiqh for that person to be declared ghair-Sunni.)
4. As for personal attacks on my ignorance I don't really care...
As Iqbal said,
"Taqlid ki ravish se tau hai khud-kushi bihtar" (and yet he was a follower of Hanafi fiqh...)
5. Re: Rafidis -- by definition Rafidis are non-Sunni but non-Sunni doesn't equal non-Muslim therefore on that basis we can say they are our errant Muslim brothers. (Anyone who reads the kalimah and doesn't openly disbelieve any of the necessities of the religion is a Muslim no matter how heretical or sinful...) Come on brothers,since when did we become like Wahabis and begin declaring everyone with slight differences of opinion out of Islam? Yes, I believe the common, average, Wahabi and Deobandi is also my Muslim brother who has erred.

Let's have some compassion here and not narrow the definition of Muslim so much that no one is left!

At an even more general level every human is my brother and sister...Islam is all about love...

Peace!

 

this is a cheap accusation. mawlana akhtar raza khan is a scholar and pious man. of course, one can disagree with his fatawa in furu'u but as far as his position concerning the sunni path - which is sometimes referred as maslak-e-alahazrat is unerringly sunni. indeed, in his extreme cautiousness of following shari`ah, his fatawa may be very strict and restrictive; one can disagree with his fiqh opinions, but to scorn him just because he happens to be the grandson of a great man indicates hidden jealousy.

show us a single instance where the mawlana has a strange and aberrant position contradicting the majority of ahlu's sunnah in aqidah? or made a statement that can be classified as contradicting ahlu's-sunnah?

in fact, i don't think - AFAIK - that the mawlana has ever used this nisbat of his to further himself or wax proud saying: 'i am the grandson of alahazrat. you dare dispute me?' those who attack him on this basis are only jealous of who he is; it is ironical that tahir - braggadocio personified - should say this; when he never loses an opportunity to talk about his 'achievements' and most of the time he tries to qualifies them with his (perceived or real) nisbat to some great man or another.

stop this brain-dead repetition of false accusations just because some celebrity fraud says it.

the reason tahir says is because of his pyschological inadequacy; his megalomania demands a number of things; and he can make claims for anything except for ancestry. he is neither a sayyid nor from the family of any reputed scholar. this inferiority-complex causes him to attack people on the false premise that they are considered great because of their ancestries. tahir's mind is all muddled up - inferiority-complex, paranoia, megalomania, npd, hallucinations, etc.

there are a fiqh issues (like video etc.) where many ulama disagree with mawlana akhtar's fatawa, but his courage to say the right thing without worrying about other people's approval is admirable.

btw, i am not a murid of mawlana akhtar raza khan.

----

that is based on an assumption and generalisation. this is a common fallacy propounded by everyone who differs to legitimise their aberration.

of course, many murids without knowledge (even some who have studied in madrasah) try to prove that anyone disagreeing with their shaykh is not sunni. but as far as i know, not every shaykh ejects anyone from sunniyat without a reason - and for the mere act of disputing them. again, people blame the shaykh for their murids wrongdoings; but still in cases like tahir, who commit mistakes in public, people are willing to even sacrifice their faith to have a good opinion of him.

but, you have a point. all sunnis should remember that ahlu's sunnah is defined by the set of beliefs agreed upon by major scholars in the previous centuries. as long as a person does not directly or indirectly contradict these issues, he remains a sunni. on the other hand, chest-beating and mere claims of sunniyat: "if i am not sunni, no mother has given birth to any sunni" is not only cheap, it is also egotism, arrogance and foolishness.

for example, major scholars in the four madh'habs and classic books of aqidah which have been taught for centuries - and accepted by ulama for centuries. this is what defines sunniyat; not what you or i or a contemporary shaykh says.

once again you play the freethinker. if you have disavowed that view simply because you would like to have husn-zann of the person, it is ok. but if specific points are shown where he has contradicted sunni aqidah, will you still be disavowed? obviously, those who call him non-sunni should specify where he held anti-sunni beliefs.

wa billahi't tawfiq.

 

Well, if Azhar gave the fatwa then it must be true?!

 

I too wish that you could get that time back so that you could have spent it on studying basic fiqh.

 

Who says that we do because of who his blessed ancestor is?! I guess you would have shut up had it come from your Shaykh? I don't know how long you would last with your current one though!

Even though you used to say such things in the past, I still remained silent - looking at your love for the blessed ancestor instead! Well, not anymore. I have been following your juvenile and ignorant posts for a while ... Do you really think that we are as ignorant as you?

 

when we talk about shias, we are talking about the ones who know all their beliefs and accept them. Ahmed deedat was clearly talking about the rawafid as he says the shias take a clay piece and do sujood on it, and he calls these shias his brothers? No scholar has done blanket kufr on shias but they have said all shias are misguided and why would you consider a misguided heretic as your brother? beyond me!

al-Azhar may have given this fatwa but then again, they've given PHD's for research agaisnt ala hazrat and against imam e azam abu hanifa. are you going to accept this aswell?

it's a shame, you could have used all that time to learn some simple fiqh and you wouldn't be as confused as you are right now.

I have heard that imam ghazalli said "only the ulema are living"

i guess some of the public are more "dead" than others.

 

Oh, and before some people on here start accusing me of not being a Sunni anymore--'don't waste my time with it!' (i.e. the opinions of most people on internet forums mean jack to me! There are a very small number of brothers whose opinions I value even if I may disagree and they know who they are.)

Peace.

 

I am not a defender of TuQ nor the Shiis but speaking on a general level the Shias are Muslims (no scholar has ever done blanket takfir on all Shias) and so it is not, imho, kufr to say, 'Shia are our Muslim brothers'. We can say they are heretical Muslims but they are still Muslims. Yes, some of them no doubt believe things that take them out of Islam but that is some and not all. It is the blanket hatred of all who are 'other than us ('us' here usually means our very own circle of ulema and pirs!) that I have no time for.

Didn't Al-Azhar give a fatwa that the Ja'afari madhhab is a valid fifth madhhab?

--
Now, none of the above means I like TuQ or endorse the obvious crap that sometimes comes out of his mouth but he is just another mullah/'pir' who is taking a lot of dumb sheeple (as my brother AQ would say) for a ride; he is more successful at it than others.

Sorry, but I've had it up to here with most of these so-called famous mullahs and pirs etc. Since I was 16 or so I've spent countless hours following them...
too many of them just use Islam to make themselves a nice earner using emotional blackmail and the common person's love for Islam as their hustle.
I wish I could get all that time back. I could have spent it on something useful like another degree or learnt another skill etc. etc.

--
The above also doesn't mean I no longer believe that genuine, God-fearing scholars and real pirs exist--I'm sure they do but most of them are hidden and only known to Allah and His Habib صلى الله عليه وسلم -- it isn't any of the famous ones (or a very tiny proportion of them at most!) Otherwise, every Tom, Dick and Abdul claims their pir sahib or hazrat to be just one or two steps below the Qutb!

As Bob said, 'You can fool some people some of de time, but you can't fool all the people all of de time.'

 

he even went to the extent of saying "I say why cant you accept the Shia brothers as a fifth madhab."

 

here is one of his speeches transcribed and he talks about shia-sunni unity and he even refers to the shias as his "brothers"

 

well, he does give reasons why so how is it brain dead following? and when did i said i follow him because of his ancestor? I respect him because of his ancestor but i follow him because of his knowledge, just like how you follow your scientists and what not.

well since you've started using your brain, you've started to doubt things such as the kufr statements of TuQ so i don't really think using your brain has benefited you much.

 

so does that mean it must be true? stop this brain-dead following of people just because of who their ancestor was! i am sure he is a sincere scholar but this is the bane of today's subcontinental scholars in general...no one is a Sunni apart from those who agree with their views 100%!!

disclaimer: a long time ago when I never used to use my own brain I also believed that Ahmad Deedat wasn't a Sunni...but I disavow myself from that view...

 

I have heard huzur taajush shariah say he is not a sunni.

 

well, in this speech he says that you are allowed to celebrate Christmas.

 

Ahmed Deedat (late) is of course sunni.

 

brother Hasan Raza, ahmed deedat is not a sunni.

 

Assalaamu 'Alaykum

I was listening to a few debates and lectures of Sheikh Ahmed Deedat Marhoom, and this one was absolutely amazing. See the way he rips apart Swaggart and the other 'reverends'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teJrNacEMfU