vague objections

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Noori, Apr 19, 2017.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    what else they need as a proof that deobandi molvies are munafiq. everybody knows what is taqi usmani's position on mawlid, yet he is a close friend of an arab shaykh who supports mawlid
  2. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the donkey doesn't know what he is talking about.
    fornication was Haram always. only a filthy devbandi mind can come up with such filthy objections.

    anyway, until they write a refutation of alahazrat's zubdah, sajdah e tazimi is Haram not kufr.

    just in passing, even though the second troll has already turned to stone:

    troll #2 said:
    hello, wake up. let not your ignorance get the better of you. find something like this if you can:

  3. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    Do you know the implications of your filthy statement.
  4. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    or this is their upbringing, don't forget ismail dehlavi's sirat al mustaqim, and his statement of waswasah of zina, and tahir gayavi explaining and equating imkan al khadib with qudrah on zina etc.
    Unbeknown likes this.
  5. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    Question: according to you: "in other words, fornication was permissible in previous shariat and haram in our shariat".

    Answer by "slave of shaitaan": yes

    explanation by "slave of shaitaan": marriage = fornication

    what happened? fell off your bed in childhood? the injury seems lasting...

    standard devbandits - equating the pure desire for ta'zeem to desire to fornicate. It's in their blood. their elders were sexual perverts so what else can we expect from them?
    Ghulam Ali and Noori like this.
  6. Sword of Sunnah

    Sword of Sunnah New Member

    Yes, I thought you knew this, have you ever read the marriage of the first children of Adam alayhis salam, that was permissible for him, but not in our shariah. there are several examples, what was approved in earlier shariah, not necessary approved in ours. I thought you knew this, but your claims are ridiculous with no precedents. You bring something new, as an innovation new.
  7. Sword of Sunnah

    Sword of Sunnah New Member

    You can read our Hanafi Muhadith, Badr al-Din al-Ayni (link removed by noori, post the relevant quotes, we don't support deobandi websites)

    also here (link removed by noori) and here بن نجيم ، البحر الرائق

    Contemporary scholar Saif al-Asri over here ; He is from Yemen but unfortunately a close friend of Deobandi Taqi Uthmani
  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the ignorance and foolishness - jahl - of people is incredible. WHY should i quote explicit statement of hadith scholars? which usul is this that you need an 'explicit' statement for everything?

    did your beloved deobandis cite from any of the hadith scholars, or imams sarakhsi or ayni or mahbubi or qurtubi explicitly say that "the DESIRE to prostrate is disapproved ALSO". we are supposed to look for proofs that are non-existent, and their criticism is valid unless disproved!

    hanafis, and our dars nizami was criticised for being heavily leaning on reasoning/logic related subjects. now you see why. people are incapable of basic differentiation in hukm - yet they run away with their foolish analogies.

    i did not say it.

    or according to you: "in other words you are saying that the sahabi committed fornication or adultery [al-iyadhu billah] and was not administered hadd."

    or according to you: "in other words, if someone does a haram, he should be given the hadd of fornication".

    or according to you: "in other words, desiring to fast on the prohibited days is like desiring to fornicate."

    look up false equivalence, if you need to understand your stupid analogy.

    if you have still not understood by now, let me give you your own whataboutery:

    according to you: "in other words, fornication was permissible in previous shariat and haram in our shariat".

    if you guys are so knowledgeable why don't you refute alahazrat's risalah. zubdatu's zakiyyah, and prove that it is not Haram but actually kufr to do sajdah tazimi. even nadwi was impressed with alahazrat's reasoning...
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2017
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  9. Sword of Sunnah

    Sword of Sunnah New Member

    Abu Hasan, can you quote explicit statements of Hadith Scholars that the desire to prostrate was not disapproved but only action. In other words, you are saying intention or desire to commit haram like fornication or adultery is permitted but the action is not permitted. Seems like this is conflicting with سد الذرائع blocking means to evil.

    Abdullah ibn Abi Awfa narrated: When Mu‘adh (may Allah be pleased with him) arrived from Sham, he prostrated to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace). Thereupon, he said: “What is this, O Mu‘adh?!” He said: “I went to Sham, and I found them prostrating to their high priests and their patriarchs, so I wished in my soul to do this for you.” Thereupon, Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: “Don’t do [this], for were I to instruct [anyone] to prostrate to another besides Allah, I would instruct the woman to prostrate to her husband.” Ahmad and Ibn Majah narrated it.

    Deobandis have dozen of articles on this subject and they quote: "Shams al-A’immah al-Sarakhsi said: “Prostration to other than Allah by way of reverence is disbelief (kufr).” Al-‘Ayni said in al-Binayah: “In this age, they do not prostrate to the sultan but out of reverence and awe, so there is no doubt concerning their disbelief.” Al-Mahbubi said in Sharh al-Jami‘ al-Saghir: “As for prostration to other than Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), it is disbelief in the absence of coercion. That which the ignorant Sufis do before their shaykh, it is absolutely forbidden and the worst of innovations, so they must be prohibited from [doing] this.”

    Al-Qurtubi has also interesting comment on this subject over here

    It would be best, if we have our own article, explaining the issue of intention or desire to prostrate.
    Sajdah as an action only without any worship involved
    Sajdah as reverence and respect
    Layman likes this.
  10. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    here is the first vote, though you didn't ask, the guy needs a kick.
  11. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    usual vagueness. now tell me how many texts have your read. don't be evasive.

    the vagaries of vagueness. who has handed our 'base' texts and 'love' of them to 'which 'sects'?

    absolute stupid nonsense.

    if a man with a diseased eye cannot see light, it is not the sun which is at fault. plus the man wants to rub cayenne powder in his diseased eye, because he heard that cayenne is a slick and expensive item; and wants you to sign an indemnification absolving him of all responsibility.

    i quoted the hadith.
    but you prefer your nafs' interpretation.

    as usual your nafs and stupid one at that.

    ok, then. time out. this is the last warning. i have had enough of your trolling. either you behave like a grown up (if you are). regardless, i will kick you out of here if i see any more of your trolling.
    Ghulam Ali, Unbeknown and Noori like this.
  12. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    no one can help you with the methodology you have adopted. even the wahabi has SOME method, yours is pure conjecture and wishful thinking.

    for example, take a random wahabi/salafi. he cites a hadith and sources he trusts.

    you however:

    1. make up your mind that something is wrong.

    2. assume that there might be someone who has some proof for your adopted position.

    3a. "ask for opinions" of others without specifying what exactly your question or confusion is about

    OR alternatively,

    3b. criticitise the position with demeanour of a person having solid proofs.

    4b. when asked for proof of your statement, you plead ignorance and laymansense.

    5. and randomly throw a statement as an afterthought to 4b.

    6. when confronted or refuted, you resort to emotional blackmail etc.

    this is troll behaviour. when you outwardly claim and pretend to be a real confused seeker, but in reality are just having some fun by pressing the buttons that trigger a response. what else explains feigned ignorance of a subject, but posting of objections related to those topic in a suggestive manner? many of my well meaning friends advise me that i am wasting my time answering trolls. this post is just a dissection of the behaviour, for future reference. : )

    if you are really a sincere seeker, and are incapable of examining proofs:

    1. you should ask, not make a statement. that is what the qur'an says - EXPLICITLY.

    2. you should accept the ruling of ulama, not commenting or objecting on the proofs.

    3. you should GIVE your proofs and the derivation-cycle, not assume that someone, somewhere MIGHT have a proof.

    4. not get involved in small issues and make a fuss about it.

    5. be specific and clear about your question. true story: a man went to a perfume store and said: 'you know, my friend wears a very nice perfume. it is dashing, very pleasing. i like it very much. do you have it?'

    6. do not try to teach proofs or usul to masters. by 'masters' i am referring scholars such as alahazrat or others.

    if you feel that confident of criticising positions and rulings of these ulama, why don't you attempt a proper refutation by academically analysing their positions and demonstrating - what you think - is a mistake?

    good for you. but i won't lose sleep if you threaten me otherwise. your life is your own. we can advise you to take a safer, better route - but you are free to choose perilious routes. just don't blackmail us, even in undertones; it won't work.

    i HATE generalisations. you 'feeling' is zilch, unless it is backed with proofs. tomorrow, if you 'feel' that we spend too much time talking about the Habib sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, instead of doing nafl namaaz - i can only pity the constriction in your heart.

    if the 'ingrained and widespread' issues have no sharayi objection (as stated by ulama/muftis), your 'feelings' have no value. if an issue is genuinely objectionable, and certainly 'widespread' then you can state it along with the correct position. many of our brothers do that on our forum. for example, we have discussed on this forum about poor organisation in our masajid, or the culture of naat-gatherings etc.

    "i don't like to go to school, but i hate being a dropout. life would be easier."

    what does that mean? if you are incapable of reading the qur'an, hadith, books of kalam etc and understand the arguments, objections, counter-arguments - you are a layman. you have no other option but to follow ulama who are accepted as authorities.

    for a jahil or a man incapable of reading and understanding proofs in the original arabic, the above statement is rather rich. the above statement has some hidden sub-text. let me fix it for you:

    "i follow aswj (so long as my nafs agrees with it) just not blindly (because i blindly follow only my nafs)."

    jo baat munasib hai woh haasil nahin kartey
    jo apni girah mein hai, usey kho bhi rahey haiN
    be-ilm to ye* log haiN, ghaflat bhi hai taari
    afsos ke andhe bhi haiN aur so bhi rahey haiN

    *with apologies to akbar.

    yes, but you do not have the ability to identify what is correct.

    every person - even the most abject illiterate, or the utterly ignorant, or the exceeding arrogant person has a right to medicine. he needs to get the right medicine for his disease. BUT, he should not tell the doctor how to treat him or ask the doctor to prove it to him that the medicine is right for his malady, or explain the process of selection of that medicine. or ask the doctor to justify or refute some opinion he found on jstor.

    if he values his life, ask around, find a reputable doctor and blindly follow his advice. don't mess with his prescription.

    hanging sentence and abrupt endings are annoying.

    if all you need is medicine, you have go to a doctor. if you wish to become a doctor of medicine, you need to go to a medical college.

    your next step: identify what you want to be.

    a) 'blind follower' who will accept advice of reputed ulama because you are unable to, or cannot afford to spare time, energy, patience, practice to read, think, reflect, understand.​
    b) wish to be a scholar who needs to understand proofs for rulings, or attempt to become a mujtahid.​

    A is easier. but comes with a rider. don't try to act like B. understand that you have chosen A.

    B is not easy. and if you want to be a B, it is not internet forums and half-asleep questions that will make you B.

    as imam shafiyi said:

    akhī lan tanāla’l ílma illā bi sittatin
    sa unbīka án tafşīlihā bi bayāni
    dhakāyun wa ĥirşun wa’jtihādun wa bulghatun
    wa şuĥbatu ustādhin wa ţūlu zamāni

    six they are, without which, knowledge cannot be gained
    hearken this o brother of mine, clearly ’tis explained
    intellect, a greed to learn; and zeal, when means obtained
    and then a master’s company, a lengthy time remained

    Ghulam Ali, Unbeknown and Noori like this.
  13. Layman

    Layman Banned

    Aqeedah comes from base texts. You have handed our base texts and the love of them to other sects in order so you can just do wah wah at fanciful interpretations. That's how I see it

    OK, do you have basis for your ''desire to prostrate'' and "prostration by the heart"?

    I have said ''desire to prostrate'' appears wrong (t&c's apply)
    It's from the disapproved matters
  14. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    if it appears to be an error to you, then you are not firm on the path of ahleSunnah - your inclination is towards ahle-Hadath. you must repent and restrain your "desires" of fanciful interpretation. I assure you, that such "desires" of fanciful self interpretations are definitely forbidden. it would be better if you followed the ASWJ blindly, rather than go astray.

    we have already told you that "desire to prostrate" / "prostration by the heart" are different from "prostration by the head"; only the last one is forbidden, the first 2 are not.
  15. Layman

    Layman Banned

    Abu Hasan I'm not going down the solo route nor to even leave ASWJ. However I do feel we have issues which are now ingrained and widespread. I hate going against barelvi norms, life would be easier.

    I follow ASWJ just not blindly. This is the correct way, isn't it? It's supposed to be the way. Even as laymen, who can engage in Islamic discussion but can not even translate arabic we need to hold correct views. You brothers can help, ASWJ should also

    If after discussion you don't approve my next step can not be a firm one in adopting a position.
  16. Layman

    Layman Banned

    The way you have explained this has also been my normal understanding of the hadith. We interpret it in a sympathetic way but .... it appears atm to be an error
  17. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    nearly two hundred years ago, a layman who thought he knew better than great muhaddithin tried to interpret the hadith of prostrating* in his own manner, and tried to add his own spin to it from his own limited understanding.

    the result was the utterly burnable book tafwiyatu'l iman. and the huge fitna he left behind.

    laymen should not attempt to 'explain' qur'an and hadith by their own understanding or their assumptions that someone might have vindicated their fanciful extrapolations.

    *prostration to the Habib SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.
    Noori and Ghulam Ali like this.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    yes, but it is not that you will understand.

    ush'shaq e rauzah sajdeh meiN suu-e-Haram jhukey
    Allah jaan'ta hai ke niyyat kidhar ki hai

    sajdah karta jo mujhe is ki ijazat hoti
    kya karun izn mujhe us ka khuda ne na diya
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2017
    Ghulam Ali and Noori like this.
  19. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    you are not only exceedingly ignorant but also stupid. i say this indignantly, because you don't understand the implication of your flights of fancy.

    RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam was asked by the SaHabi (the desire to prostrate) - and he was forbidden; go find me a narration which says that RasulAllah SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam ordered the SaHabi to do tawbah for asking such a question. the desire was not disapproved but only the action was forbidden.

    your statement implies that you know better. al-iyadhu billah.
    Noori and Ghulam Ali like this.
  20. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    This is a standard cut and paste, would appreciate if basirqadri can enlighten us with his expert analysis of this narration, and whether this (weak?) hadith can qualify to remove weak doubts of I-THINK like weak hearts?

    وَأخرج ابْن أبي الدُّنْيَا فِي مكايد الشَّيْطَان عَن ابْن عمر قَالَ: لَقِي إِبْلِيس مُوسَى فَقَالَ: يَا مُوسَى أَنْت الَّذِي اصطفاك الله بِرِسَالَاتِهِ وكلمك تكليما إِذْ تبت وَأَنا أُرِيد أَن أَتُوب فاشفع لي إِلَى رَبِّي أَن يَتُوب عليّ قَالَ مُوسَى: نعم
    فَدَعَا مُوسَى ربه فَقيل يَا مُوسَى قد قضيت حَاجَتك فلقي مُوسَى إِبْلِيس قَالَ: قد أمرت أَن تسْجد لقبر آدم ويتاب عَلَيْك
    فاستكبر وَغَضب وَقَالَ: لم أَسجد حَيَاء أَسجد بِهِ مَيتا
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 16, 2017

Share This Page