devbandis traducing alahazrat for ibriz quote

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Sunnisoldier786, Oct 21, 2020.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Sunnisoldier786

    Sunnisoldier786 New Member

    For shaykhs to have spiritual knowledge of the actions of their mureeds isn't like observing them physically. This kind of analogy and understanding is incorrect because physical and spiritual matters are different.
  2. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    Dearest Dearest brother, there could have been respectful words used to portray the advice. The story as presented with its choice of wording in adding allusion to being in the 'room' or even at a distance of intrusion of privacy is worthy of condemnation as it clashes with established Islamic prospective on haya. Closer to Fisq then Awliya, with this wording.

    Point made
  3. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Umar99 likes this.
  4. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    Awliya plural - That's uncomfortably very broad but if a Wali sees through the clues given to him a personal problem of a mureed then no, not a problem.
  5. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Brilliant. So there isn't a problem if awliya are informed either.
    Umar99 likes this.
  6. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    Yes they do write crime of zina
    They should normally be said to be physically present, there is difference of opinion regarding during toilet, sex, ghusl etc but they are informed of zina and other acts good and bad yes
    Yes I accept hadir and Nazir and say he SallAllaahu alaihi wa sallam knows the deeds of his Ummah without ruling out exceptions. For polemic purposes Hadir wa Nazir is a mystical and non enforceable term, however its basis is sound and thus defendable
  7. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    I agree with you in parts, and disagree in other parts but if you interpret the story yourself different from the reading, different to what others are saying even, take the bite out of it so to speak what have you defended the story of some other story? It's some other story and you run the risk of accepting anything and everything, including those things which are harmful of which this is one of them.
    JazakAllahu khair for the prayer but please also make one for yourself as to the tawils you are making, the truth of this matter and the attack on the ummah that this possess.
  8. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    @Tariq Owaisi

    If a person commits zina, do the angels write it?

    Are they physically present? Or are they informed of it?

    You say you're not devbandi. Do you believe RasulAllah ﷺ is hadir wa nazir and knows the actions of his ummah? What is your understanding of hadir wa nazir?
    Umar99 likes this.
  9. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    Takabbur and Ta'assub are barriers to Taweeq, and Tafakkur is not born in the a'amaa - a dead heart doesn't sprout green shoots of wisdom - that barren organ oozes only foulness and filth.

    Holding out a candle for the blind.

    nas'al Allah al-aafiyah
  10. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    Alahazrat writes:

    And not just knowledge, rather, whatever is happening in the world and will do so till judgement day, RasulAllah ﷺ sees it like he sees the palm of his hand. There isn't a particle in the heavens and the earth that is hidden from his vision. In fact, this is just a small tributary from his oceans of knowledge.

    He knows his entire nation better than a man recognises the one who sits next to him. And not just knows them, but he sees their every action and each movement. If a thought passes in their heart, he is aware of it.


    This was posted by sidi Aqdas in this thread - in June 2019.

    Are the answers provided in that and this thread, and many threads in-between, not enough to clear the issue for any sane Muslim not touched in his mind? Yes they are.

    If you notice - the very next post is by this same devbandi vermin Tareekh Chuhaisi.
    1.5 years on, and the guy is still swimming in that same cesspool.

    Draw your own conclusions.
  11. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    Yes my inference was different from the reading , but no where did I insinuate that if one thinks it’s the same room he’s culpable, in-fact my argument was aimed to vindicate both interpretations (same room or outside the house) because in either case the Modesty of the looker (and or knower) cannot be questioned just as one doesn’t question the modesty of the Angle.

    I only focused on a 4th “room,” because it could possibly solve the issue for people like you , who seem to be having.

    Moreover , The actions of the Ummah are presented to the Prophet ﷺ (general : the public and private , the good and the bad ) he gives thanks to Allah for their good actions and intercedes for the bad actions, now private matters are here too, but just like how the matters are presented in an ghaybani sense that is made appropriate for the Prophet ﷺ to know about, is the same way the Angles are made aware, and is the same way that The Shaykh is made aware. Without compromising Modesty and Shame.

    I hope this bring some clarity, at the end of the day, this is a sufi concept (Huzur-e-Shaykh) you can take it or leave it.

    Also I’d recommend you read Imam Ghazali’s epistle on brotherhood, if you take that book, this incident, and the hadith you think pose a problem, I hope you that you’ll come to reconcile the situation with some Tafakkur and Tawfiq إن شاء الله ﷻ .
  12. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    As you can appreciate the wording here doesn't seem as graphic
    Watching your sins float away - no I can't see a problem with it
    The Ibriz quote has clear differences with this but perhaps what should have been said is the same
  13. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    There is a plethora of different explanations/mixes that can be made from this incident. If you want to fix a set interpretation for example of AH then you can do that.

    AH criticised intrusion of privacy. We need to ask him or you tell me about the details of what he meant (like in presence did he mean just physical presence or also spiritual presence which could also be described as sitting on the bed.

    All the criticism of this incident is based on the understanding that it was spiritual presence.

    AH openly criticised intrusion of privacy in physical presence which in his view does not apply here so it was criticism of nothing but the spiritual presence is the same thing.

    So saying Pir is with you physically as you have sex, has a spiritual equivalent which is spiritual presence. Both are intrusions of privacy in their misguiding nature

    And in the plethora of possible interpretations is also one which could say it was not spiritual presence either. With this interpretation we should be able to agree that the narration itself is misguiding (behaya)

    Now you are saying I'm worse then your bitterest enemy?
    I'm not even deobandi
  14. AbdalQadir

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

    What about the karamah of Imame Aazam when he was doing wudu alongside a youth, and he saw the used water of the young man's wudu flowing and he was shocked and saw zina flowing away in that water?

    This well known narration is found in devbandi books too. Also in our books. The original is in a book of Imame Aazam's seerah or a book of tabaqat. Don't have the reference now, but in fact the first time I heard before reading it, was from a devbandi.

    Background: There are Sahih ahadith that wudu for Salah washes away a believer's sins.

    @Tariq Owaisi what do you make of this?
  15. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Ok, now show me where aH said it's intrusion of privacy?

    I used to think zaleel is the most shameless devbandi online but...
  16. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    tareekh (like his master tareekh zaleel) is a devbanda vermin ... he is following the well-trodden dev-bhakt way of "refusing to see the sun - in broad daylight" (vermin live in rat holes, so that might be a reason for day-blindness).

    brothers can post whole pages worth of explainations - but he will continue to say "where? I can't see it"

    when he gets cornered, he will:
    1. Say, "I knew it all along"
    2. Cook up a new principle
    3. Make a claim based off that - as if it's some shara'i fact
    4. and shurg off

    he is a troll - good ol style
  17. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    You have only quoted a portion of the reply of AH missed out where he criticises the intrusion of privacy (we know it alludes to a big blunder) - a criticism which is applicable to those who infer that he was on the fourth bed and therefore narration itself.
  18. Tariq Owaisi

    Tariq Owaisi Active Member

    I am aware that the text makes no mention of "same roam" and that is an inference drawn by readers/translators but you specifically mentioned different roams - which was interesting. Just out of interest was that inference made by yourself? I've not heard it before in the recent years this issue has come to prominence.
    My point is mute though if you now say it makes little difference if it was the same roam. Since you had mentioned different roams specifically it insinuated that those who inferred it as same roam were culpable - which hints towards hadith mentioning the permissibility of beating of the one who looks inside your home from the outside! A different roam can be made tawil of as a different house, which was, in a way, an interesting escape from a permissible beating of the wali

    Everyone is saying read their earlier post but I plan to refer to dars on haya as I suspect the modern outlook is moderated beyond bounds hence I can't accept the I have no problem with it so its A1 ok. The issue must be weighed by genuine Islamic inspired view on haya.

    The angels tawil I knew about but Afzal actions of an insaan are different. It would be a daleel if a person accused shirk but this is linked to inappropriate behaviour (intrusion of privacy as AH said) not shirk. Hope you understand
  19. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Also, how come Asharr Fiyli Thanwi recommended Ibriz as a manual of Tasawwuf and Ashiq Ilahi Meeruti translated it all?

    Can Tariq and Usman tell us the ruling on Thanwi?
  20. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    So now someone having ilm al-ghayb is be-hayayi.

    This Tariq is likely a devbandi and has a major problem with Alahazrat just like Usman Bradfordi.

    That clown didn't know the basics of munazarah and Tariq here can't comprehend basic English. This is word for word what aH wrote days ago:

    the narrator however does not say that the shaykh was physically present - by mentioning the fourth bed, he only indicated that he was informed of things.

    now for example, you and i have gained this knowledge of what the narrator did. we gained this knowledge without the details by reading from a book. and the shaykh was probably informed in some other mode which we do not know. wAllahu a'alam.

    Now, I ask every non-devbandi, what in this universe is objectionable?

Share This Page