Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Harris786, May 12, 2017.
If a Muslim today sees Hadrat Khidr (alayhis salam) in wakefulness, will he be considered a tabi'?
This guy is just trying to wind you all up for the sake of it.
Basir has it got boring in Bradford? Go campaign for siti naz shah if you need a new hobby
sharh al kabir of shaykh sayid foudeh, p.1268-1273:
al iSabah of ibn Hajar, v1 p4-5
in usd al-ghabah of ibn al-athir, vol.1 p.119-120
in awn al murid, p116-117:
amidi in al-iHkam v2 / p112-115:
where is amidi, and what about ibn hajar and khiDr?
all i asked you was in which book and which subki. i was only trying to get you to cite it properly.there is no need to get upset.
incidentally, al-ibhaj fi sharh al-minhaj is a composition of both father and son.
mawlana taqiyuddin subki wrote a sharh until section3-article3 of minhaj; and his son qadi al-qudat tajuddin subki continued from there onward.
another interesting tidbit about this is that most manuscripts, where tajuddin al-subki starts where his father left off says referring to his father: "may Allah ta'ala give benefit to muslims by giving him a long life and aid him and extend it by His Divine Aid, and make his benefit everlasting. aameen.." further he says: 'my father, may Allah ta'ala give him a long life'. indicating that he completed the commentary in the lifetime of his father.
tajuddin subki himself has said that he completed the commentary in 752 AH; and his father taqiyuddin subki passed away in 756 AH.
so what is the cambridge version of allamah and imam and muhaddith among other alqab?
it is mulla ali al-qari, not the anglicised word mullah, which is anyway corrupted form of mulla even if it is accepted in english lexicon.
so khawarizmi should be algorithm and makkah should be mecca when writing in english.
imam nawawi said that it was a weak narration coming from sayid ibn al-musayyib.
he even doubts whether it can be attributed to sayid ibn al-musayyib; if it is indeed so, then the route of narration is weak as explained by suyuti.
in its commentary, suyuti in tadrib al-rawi says: 2/123
shaykh ibrahim laqani in hidayatu'l murid on the definition of 'SaHabi':
as aqib sahib has clarified, passing away is not equal to dead.
because, we believe that RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is alive; and we also believe that it is possible to see him SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam in a wakeful state. so do those who see him in a wakeful state become Sahabah?
this is what it means (see awn al-murid below) when we say "during his life in this world".
hey! you are back again without any improvement. did you provide translation of your quote in that thread?
the mouse has gone to the hole but the monkey is out.
..a little knowledge is a dangerous thing..
the way you talk shows that you are a slippery fish (chikni machhli); a guy who takes off to another tangent, and the debate to another topic.
"have passed" is NOT equal to "dead" for the anbiyaa. you don't seem to understand even basic English. where did abu Hasan even hint that the anbiyaa are not alive after having tasted death?
or is it that you believe that the Prophets have not even tasted death?
Are we back again to street talk bhai, you did this with Mullah Ali Qari ; oh yes, it is Mullah with H in english just like Caliph;
As for Subki, you seem to never had any systematic education but good at random cut and paste without even understanding what you are posting as you demonstrated in previous thread on language of jannah and yet you have the audacity to make ad hominen attacks on me, quite nefarious bhaiyyah.
Abu Hasan, you have a very similar logic and reasoning or I should say way like waHHabis.
astagfirullah, precisely wahhabi and devbandi line of reasoning.
al-anbiyâ'u aHyâ'un fi qubûrihim yuSallûn =The Prophets are alive in their graves, praying to their Lord
and this proven from Quran
@basirqadri786: if you want to jump in the middle of a conversation, at least be relevant. don't go to a marriage expecting to be felicitated for singing dirges.
perhaps if you learned to read, you could understand better.
actually, you have no reasoning skills.
i was comparing the opinion of ibn abbas raDiyAllahu anhu in a SPECIFIC issue which is accepted by jumhur vs. the opinion of sayid ibn al-musayyib (a tabiyi, albeit among the seniormost) which is not accepted by jumhur including all the names of scholars you named. how is this 'wahabi' reasoning?
in which case, any name you mention should go under your critique of "wahabi reasoning".
btw, wahabi, not wahhabi.
yeah. that is the only insult you could grab hold of.
i don't see any problem with bajuri's definition. you just jumped in throwing random quotes without a head or a tail or clarifying what exactly irks you from shaykh bajuri's quote. of course, you belittled him by saying:
even though shaykh bajuri was only citing a valid difference of opinion concerning khaDir alayhi's salam. perhaps you don't know about imam bajuri just as you didn't know about iraqi.
within a few posts, you turned around accusing us of not being tolerant of varying opinions. are you coming or going? make up your mind.
you don't even have the basic skill of proper citation, yet you accuse us of cut and paste. now where did you cut and paste this from? i may be wrong, but i have a strong feeling that you did not type that out from a book and just copied it from a website.
regardless, just for reference, it would be nice if you mentioned where subki said this and which subki.
someone asked a question, and a concise answer was given. if you have any objections on that, first make your stand clear and then mention YOUR opinion/choice and cite references to back your opinion. instead of that, just copying randomly and acting as if you were saying something profound which was hitherto in the dark is pretty juvenile.
and though you try to show off your arabic pasting skills, why don't you translate that for the benefit of others? or is it that you cannot find translations online that can be cut and pasted?
i would have dismissed you as another idiot, but you are unnecessarily creating confusion. if you have any objections to the definition of the SaHabi that i posted, (vide bajuri) please make it known instead of trying to project it as inaccurate. and if it is indeed so, show us where it is incorrect. and please don't try to intimidate me with citations.
for example, your post about khaDir alayhi's salam attributing a position to ibn Hajar, is dishonest at the least.
before we continue, i asked you for a clarification. are you saying that the above is ibn Hajar's opinion?
the brother asked:
but you ignored the fact that all the prophets have passed away except hazrat yisa and hazrat ilyas; and hazrat khaDir according to those who consider him a prophet. alayhimu's salam. even if prophets met, they did so after their passing away from this world. which would not satisfy the definition of the SaHabi. hence the mention of three who are deemed alive.
what you posted ARE random quotes - and clearly shows an cluttered and unorganised mind. you can call me whatever you want, am too old to fall for silly baits laid out by juveniles.
my frank opinion about you: you are a muddled mind and a waste of time who is playing an unnecessary game of one-upmanship.
Bhai, don't take this as negative, but this is wahhabi way of reasoning, they do this all the time, Does Abu Hanifah know better or Sahaba, wahhabis do this always in the matters of aqidah and fiqh.
Nawazuddin Hasanain Bukhari has issues with Tafdeel and he telling others about lack of definitive ijma, hey buddy, there is a difference between Sunni scholarship and wahhabi scholarship.
Wahhabi always force their opinion on others, and they have this disease of انا where as sunnis we have Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, Maliki, and Ashari, Maturidi, Athari.
Wahhabi claims random quotes from these scholars creates confusion, and sunni replies: Confusion is only for those who have disease in their heart. If check Albani, he said exactly the same thing, confusion, differences in opinion, ........
unfortunately, wahhabism way of thinking has corrupted many sunni minds.
من صحب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أو رآه من المسلمين فهو من أصحابه
Sahiba could be said here as company / acquaintance
والصحابى هو كل من رأى النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم مسلماً، وقيل : من طالت مجالسته، والصحيح الأول، وذلك لشرف الصحبة، وعظم رؤية النبى - صلى الله عليه وسلم -، وذلك أن رؤية الصالحين لها أثر عظيم، فكيف رؤية سيد الصالحين؟! فإذا رآه مسلم ولو لحظة، انطبع قلبه على الاستقامة، لأنه بإسلامه متهيئ للقبول، فإذا قابل ذلك النور العظيم، أشرق عليه وظهر أثره فى قلبه وعلى جوارحه
Don't try to force your opinion on others, that's a wahhabi trademark in guise of confusion or random quotes.
does ibn abbas raDiyAllahu anhu know more than us?
hadith of bukhari #3764 below:
do we take sayid ibn musayyib's definition, or ibn abbas?