abu ja'afar hanbali (jurjis?)

Discussion in 'Bibliophile's Corner' started by Unbeknown, Jun 24, 2021.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    juhala disguising their ignorance by throwing vague statements.
    the best way to tackle such gyaan is to call their bluff.

    so here are my questions:

    1. what exactly did imam ahmad say and where and how can you justify the above statement. REFERENCES please.

    2. did the imam say: "i do takfir of jahmiyyah, but i will not do takfir of individual jahmis"? if not, what statement implies the above 'conclusion' attributed to imam ahmad?

    3. what is your definition of 'individual takfir'?

    4. in your argument about qadianis what is the difference between "group takfir" and "individual takfir"? is lahori the name of an individual who might be your mate or some relative of yours?
    if you are going to defend that jurjis guy, i would call him a jahil also for being one who has no clue of how to approach controversial issues. if one does not know fully well, one should learn to keep quiet - instead of throwing ink in the water which will only muddy it.

    من جهل بأهل زمانه فهو جاهل

    if anyone does not know about qadiyanis - they should either make an effort to learn about it and if they are unable to (for whatever reason: time, inclination, other important things) keep away and declare that you do not know enough about the topic to take a stand.

    anyone who considers qadiyanis as muslims - of whichever stripe - in today's world is either a jaahil or a kafir himself (if he tries to do tawil of qadiyanis after learning about them).
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 20, 2021
    Umar99 likes this.
  2. AbdalQadir

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

    excellent point.

    it's just like the abcd hindus who are born and raised in the west, who do not know the details of their religion and books. they can't read one sentence in sanskrit in their books.

    essentially, the children are counted on the deen of their parents. when one grows into the age of accountability, he is accountable, regardless of the home he is born in. (we all need to thank Allah for all blessings, but this is a special blessing we need to be especially thankful for. we were born in Muslim homes and our jobs have been made that much easier. this is purely His Rahmah upon us for which we can never thank/praise Him as He deserves to be thanked/praised)

    we don't deem children of kuffar (who have grown up to adulthood) to be Muslims or even upon the fatrah, just by virtue of ignorance of their kufr beliefs.

    similarly, children of Muslims who are not as well versed in deeni knowledge will be deemed Muslims upon the deen of their Muslim parents, even if they haven't read Rad Al-Muhtar or Ihya from cover to cover, lest they deny a daruri precept (ma3adh Allah) when they're adults.

    this is not a very hard thing to grasp, but has been made into a grey area by the likes of mark hanson, faraz, keller, et al celebrity shuyukh.
  3. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    there have been scores of heretical groups in the past who resembled Muslims in a few beliefs/rituals - and that by no means made individual members among them immune from takfir.

    Qadiyanis have a set of core beliefs by dint of which they are deemed kaafir.

    Now if a qadiyani boy grew up in the West, for example, and he did not care to learn much about qadiyaniyyat, he doesn't automatically become a Muslim. All one can say is that he is ignorant of many core beliefs of qadiyanniyat. and that is all.
  4. UwaysRida

    UwaysRida New Member

    I am not denying the things their teacher, Mirza Ghulam, was upon. But we are talking about different groups that come out of this. And then also, not all of the people who claim to be Qadiyani necessarily will have his beliefs and neither do we know this. So for this reason the scholars resort to group takfir. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal made group takfir on Jahmiyyah but not individual takfir, and they had some dangerous kufri beliefs as you know very well. And so this falls in the same line. (So please no accusations against me or the people of 'ilm who say this, and neither do I support them in anyway!).
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    most of these books were downloaded from the qadiani site.
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    ruhani khazain in 23 vols
    maktubat in 10 vols
    malfuzat in 10 vols

    his son basheeruddin:

    english trans:

  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    anyone who believes mirza to be a muslim after learning about him and his writings is a kafir. one who doubts in this is also a kafir because he has doubt concerning daruri precepts.

    this shameless attempt to split hairs about individual and group takfir is laughable. this is like saying that hindus as a group are kafir, but please do not do individual takfir.

    such things are admissible in case of sects or groups which hold few aberrant opinions that do not contradict daruri precepts. here qadianis trample upon every islamic principle.

    i hate it when people post in such an arrogant and self-important manner. what exactly is your qualification that can satisfy your high standards of academic interest?

    1. how many books on qadiyani refutation have you read?
    2. how many books OF qadiyani dajjal have you read / or you can put it in number of pages.
    - apropos the above, how many books in urdu original and how many in english translations?​

    if you are not careful, you imperil your own iman.

    attached here is a short compilation from the dajjal's writings, i have compiled and translated regarding ONE issue. that of insulting sayyiduna yisa alayhis salam and his chaste mother.


    Attached Files:

    Umar99 and Unbeknown like this.
  8. UwaysRida

    UwaysRida New Member

    This thread is just insults and actually no proper explanation on why you hold this position. I would like to see something academical on this, because we know that there are also Qadiyanis who believe that Mirza Ghulam was a mujaddid and not Prophet, so individual takfir in this case is incorrect.

    Sure Azhar has made some statements, but Azhar is not always correct, there were times they declared Shi'a as people of the thuth and some of their shuyukh have been Mu'tazila.
    So I think this is an unfair criticism towards the Shaykh. Scholars from Shaam and other regions also hold the opinion that the takfir is on the group and not every person.
  9. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    jahil murid of a jahil shaykh.
    Umar99 likes this.
  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    jurjis is not only a jahil but is unfit to be a 'shaykh'.

    after insulting ghawth al-a'azam's son and greatest khalifah, by denying that he was given khilafah - he has not even retracted and made amends.

    he is perhaps deprived of the barakah of my master, the ghawth. that is why.

    نسأل الله العافية
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2021
    Umar99 likes this.
  11. Juwayni

    Juwayni Veteran

    Mawlana @abu Hasan

    Why do they need an 'ijmah' to say individual Qadiyanis are kāfir? Where do they draw the line? According to them, are individual Sikhs non-takfirable because someone somewhere may have written a book saying their Guru Nanak was a Muslim and attended the Hajj? How about the Druze. What about the so-called 'Hussaini Brahmins', about whom [naql i kufr, kufr na bashad] some say:

    "Wah Dutt Sultan, Hindu ka dharm, Musalman ka iman, Adha Hindu adha Musalman.’"​

    Does he hesitate to consider every individual follower of Musaylimah al-Kaddhāb a kāfir too? Or how about the so-called "Atheist Muslim"? Perhaps he hesitates on that one too. In fact, what does Jurjis even have to say about Maʿlūm min ad-Dīn bi-Ḍarūrah? Would someone saying they are Muslim while openly rejecting every other tenet of the faith still come within his nuance?
    Unbeknown and Umar99 like this.
  12. AbdalQadir

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

    @Umar99 please forward it to that mardood and tell him to renew his iman and nikah. if he still insists, he will be under the exact same ruling of qadianis themselves.

    Incidentally, that Azhari Risalah has quite a few references to Ali Miyan nadwi. So was he too a Barelvi, or does this mardood too believe like zaleel and his chamchas that we are funding Arab and North African shuyukh?
    Unbeknown and Umar99 like this.
  13. Juwayni

    Juwayni Veteran

    Fatwa from Azhar on Qadiyanis

    Attached Files:

    Umar99 likes this.
  14. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the jahil shaykh made so many historically inaccurate claims which were debunked.
    the same ignorance and confidence leads him to make such a statement.

    no cure for such a malady.

    so we can say that jurjis believe that RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is not the last prophet. al iyadhu billah.

    jurjis should do tajdid e iman.
    Unbeknown and Umar99 like this.
  15. AbdalQadir

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

    I didn't read this thread. Just saw @Umar99 post and the comment of the clown he cited.

    If this idiot is truthful, let him bring a written statement from the elders of wahabis and devbandis saying they don't consider all qadianis as kafirs, or a statement of Al-Azhar which has also declared takfir of all qadianis.
    Umar99 and Hamza_ like this.
  16. Umar99

    Umar99 Veteran

    Recently on Facebook, a student of Abu Jafar has been arguing that not every qadiyani is kafir, quoting his shaykh.

    It began with this:


    Then once some objected to this, he responded:

    A statement of Shaikh Abu Ja`far Al-Hanbali regarding the Qadiyaniyyah/Ahmadiyyah

    "The same scholars that made general takfir on the Ahmadiyyah are the same who made general takfir on the Salafiyyah. Yes, claiming another prophet after the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, is a major kufr; but so is likening Allah to His Creation, changing End Time Prophecy, saying that most of the Ummah are idol worshippers, Salvation is by faith and deeds, that one could have a part of tawhid and not another and still be a Muslim.

    This is why our grand scholars like Sulaiman ibn `Abdul Wahhab, `Alawi Al-Haddad, `Abdullah ibn Dawud al-Basri and others made general takfir on Salafiyyah; but using the same principles the scholars `Abdul Latif as-Subki, Mustafa ash-Shatti and others, Allah be pleased with all of them, made the same general takfir on Ahmadiyyah, without calling each and every Ahmadi an unbeliever.

    This is consistent with the practice of the two Shaikhs of Islam Abu Bakr as-Siddiq and `Umar ibn Al-Khattab, who when fighting the Hinderers from Zakah, did not kill them all as apostates (although there was Sajjah, Musailimah, Tulaihah al-Asadi and Al-Aswad al-`Ansi, all false prophets) or say each and every one of them was an apostate. In fact, some of them even took these people as war captives. This is not permissible when you consider each and every one of a group and apostate. Please see The Divine Lightning, pp. 135-140, where Imam Abu Sulaiman al-Khattabi, may Allah have mercy on him, goes into remarkable details regarding this matter and fleshes out a great deal of benefit.

    There is no Consensus of the Majority on them not being referred to as Ahmadiyyah, otherwise the rest of the scholars would have known it. Please research the statements of Imam Muhammad Abu Zahra and others that have fleshed out that not every Ahmadiyyah member is an unbeliever and there are actually two jama`ahs within them, a smaller group who believe that he is not a prophet and a larger group who believe he is, this is why not every cultist is an unbeliever."

    In short, we consider the cults to be kuffar in general but we do not make individual takfir on them, only if our scholars have made specific takfir on individuals.


    Then in response to criticism he decided to declare us to be aberrant, I wonder if he also learnt this from his shaykh.

  17. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    رضي الله عنهم
    Umar99 likes this.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    imam ibn qudamah (muwaffaquddin) was a great man, known for his knowledge, piety and worship. he himself says that he benefited from the shaykh - and indeed, he did - we ask Allah ta'ala to give us his barakah. and if the company of 50 days could do this to him, then, what is the reason a man like sayyidi abdu'l Razzaq cannot be an inheritor of the ghawth's knowledge in spite of living for nearly 33 years with the shaykh since birth?

    after all, he spent more years with the shaykh - sub'HanAllah, he was one of the shaykh's own sons and considered the worthiest of them all; he was mentored by his own father, as he made him sit in classes of hadith from a very young age. hafiz Diya'a al-maqdisi, ibn qudamah's nephew and a major hadith scholar says that 'he (shaykh abd al-Razzaq) was the the best scholar in all of baghdad for his knowledge and research abilities.' that he was very pious and abstemious (zuhd, wara') among other noble qualities.

    do you think it makes sense, that a 20-year old newcomer and stays for a little more than a month and gets khilafah, while his own son - qualified and able, 33 years of age and spent all his life under the shaykh's watchful eye is denied khilafah?

    sub'HanAllah! does it make sense?

    Last edited: Nov 10, 2018
    Umar99, Unbeknown, Noori and 2 others like this.
  19. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i will, in sha'Allah, post lots of references, but to keep the discussion focused here is the summary:

    i have checked many biographies, histories, but none of them mention that abu umar al-maqdisi studied under shaykh abdu'l qadir. much less that he spent many years (as implied in the talk "middle of his studies") or that he went back and forth.

    i couldn't find his name in tadifi's list, nor in siyar of dhahabi or dhayl tabaqat of ibn rajab or maqSad al-arshad of ibn mufliH, or rawDatayn of abu shamah. if i have missed something, please help me.

    oh yeah? which year was this exactly? because according to abu jafar's history, shaykh muwaffaq came back and forth to baghdad and one last time, rehearsed the books with the ghawth. which means this was over a period of years - and he says four years.

    so approximately, which year did muwaffaq join his brother abu umar in baghdad?

    hmm. this gives the impression that muwaffaquddin ibn qudamah studied with al-ghawth for approximately four years - give and a take a few months when he went back and forth to damascus.

    nice story, eh? except that it is all muddled up. here be the facts:

    - muwaffaquddin ibn qudamah and his cousin, abdu'l Ghani ibn abd al-waHid, reached baghdad in 561 AH.

    - both cousins were young men of twenty years of age. (both were born in year 541 AH).

    - according to various accounts, they spent a very short time of 40-50 days with the ghawth, who passed away soon after.

    - during this short period of < 50 days, shaykh muwaffaq read mukhtaSar al-khiraqi, [of which, mughni is a commentary] with shaykh abdu'l Qadir.

    - in these 50 days, the shaykh made them wear the khirqah - or made them murid/khalifah in the Tariqah of Qadiriyyah.

    - after the passing of the shaykh, imam muwaffaquddin stayed in baghdad for four years; then he returned to damascus;

    - thereafter, in the year 567 AH, he returned to baghdad and stayed there for one more year; [and returned to damascus];

    - then went on Hajj in the year 574 AH and went back to baghdad in the company of Hajis from baghdad and stayed there for an year and then he came back to damascus, where he began writing his mughni. [see dhayl tabaqat of ibn rajab, 3/282-283]. it is quite possible that he was writing it prior to this, but certainly NOT during his first visit to baghdad, when he was merely 20 and still a student.
    tbqt ibnrajb, v3p283.png

    notice that the above is narrated by Hafiz Diya'a al-maqdisi who is the nephew of muwaffaquddin ibn qudamah, via his mother (i.e. imam muwaffaq's sister).

    and his other nephew, shamsuddin abdur RaHman, the son of abu umar said: "my paternal uncle muwaffaquddin would say: 'i and hafiz abdul ghani wore the khirqah at the hands of shaykh al-islam abdul Qadir at the same time; we studied with him fiqh and we heard from him (hadith), and we benefited from his company; we [could stay with him] and attained only 50 nights from his blessed life.

    qalayid, p6.png

    in ibar of dhahabi, v3, p36 he notes:

    ibar, v3p36b.png

    shaykh muwaffaq said: 'we stayed with him in his madrasah for 39 days, he passed away thereafter. we prayed his funeral prayer."
    could be. but it is not recorded that he started writing in baghdad. it can be extrapolated that he probably 'prepared' by studying under the various shaykhs. so it is a speculative statement.

    this is actually said by the presenter. i understand he is some sort of author too as he mentioned his book. but abu jafar agrees with him and extends that statement.

    once again, this is a glaring error. i reiterate, that we too mix up things and get names and dates wrong at times, or even facts turned around about not-so-famous people. but for someone to make a specific claim about such a well-known personality and author as ibn al-jawzi, and THEN confidently dismiss all those who come via shaykh abd al-Razzaq al-jilani as 'liars' and impostors is rather ironic.

    i examined more than a dozen biographies of ibn al-jawzi, and i couldn't see the name of shaykh abdu'l qadir among his teachers. and ibn al-jawzi himself in his al-muntazam [18/174] mentioned the passing of shaykh abdu'l qadir without noting that he was his teacher:

    muntazam, v18p174.png

    thereafter, i checked his mashaykhah - the listing of his mashayikh where he listed 86 of shaykhs (see attachment) and i couldn't see the name of ghawth e aazam. i checked 3 times to make sure, but i couldn't see the name. nor has any of the biographies of shaykh abdul Qadir said that ibn al-jawzi narrates from him.

    so the story of ibn al-jawzi being a student is apocryphal.

    actually, the fact that ibn qudamah spent less than fifty days is mentioned in various biographies.

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Nov 10, 2018
  20. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the impression you get from abu ja'afar's narration is:

    - abu umar al-maqdisi went back and forth to baghdad to learn under shaykh abdu'l qadir

    - he was a student of shaykh abdu'l qadir al-jilani and one of his 'designated' khulafa

    - shaykh muwaffaquddin ibn qudamah, who is abu umar's brother came to baghdad in the middle of abu umar's studies in baghdad under sayyidi abdu'l qadir.

    - shaykh muwafaq ibn qudamah came back and forth to baghdad and spent a long time learning with the shaykh.

    - now, for one last time, (because he says 'ultimately') he and his classmates rehearse their lessons with the shaykh over a period of 40-45 days before the passing of the shaykh.

    - al-mughni is his first major text.

    - shaykh muwaffaq started preparing al-mughni during his stay in baghdad.

    - one of those classmates of muwaffaquddin ibn qudamah and abu umar ibn qudamah is ibn al-jawzi.

    - ibn al-jawzi took hadith from shaykh abdul qadir al-jilani

    - they are all designated khulafa of the shaykh. this is important because of his claim further and denying that right to sayyidi abdu'l Razzaq al-jilani.

    how many of these statements are true? in sha'Allah, we will soon see.

    sigh. it is this man who is handing out certificates of khilafah to the likes of sayyidi abdul Razzaq al-jilani and denying qaadiriyat to all those who reach the quTub via him!

    Last edited: Nov 10, 2018

Share This Page