Phantom taubah whose only witness is the edit mod (aqdas) tafzili liar Iran Shah. A person who just recently tried to undermine the credibility of the Sahabah, why will we believe in the credibility of this witness? Simple rule, if someone preached deviant beliefs in public then the taubah should also be in public so that the awaam are aware. Else the awaam has a right to consider the person a deviant. If the man was unable to do a public taubah for whatever reason (maybe he was on his deathbed) then that is with Allah, but the public will take his apparent actions that were clear to all before he died. Same goes for the death of any non Muslim where we will consider his apparent state of disbelief before his death.
What's Naseeruddin's reference for what he claims? Folks from his village might be awed by his oratory, but for a lot of us this Naseeruddin is a dodgy tafdili with a phantom tauba to his credit. We follow the ijma3 of the ummah, not the ijma3 of countryside punjab!
Noted. Looking at his other posts, he’s posting other Tafdhili stuff and mixing it with Sunni stuff. He links to videos in Urdu, which I don’t speak, unfortunately. Here he’s attempting to say that Sayyida Fatima Alayhasalam is superior after the Prophets Alayhim assalam, and uses a clip of Pir Naseeruddin Naseer Rahimahullah talking about Imam Malik. (Part of a thread): Based in this and many similar hadiths of Syeda Fatima being a direct piece of the flesh of greatest of ALL Allah swt's creation, Imam Malik رضي الله عنه believed She was the most superior/afzal of all people after Prophets عليه السلام pic.twitter.com/VMeFi3CehR— Oblak (@qalandarum) March 2, 2021 What’s funny is Tafdhilis can’t seem to make their minds up: For them, is Sayyidina Ali Alayhisalam superior or Sayyida Fatima Alayhasalam? Probably better to ignore this person, but it is worrying that Sunnis might be misled or confused.
First tell the claimant to bring references and proofs for what he said. Why should these neo-rafidi pendus enjoy the privilege of lighting fires and we should be the ones fighting them? Anyone can claim anything. Let me make a grand claim - the only reason trump was unceremoniously evicted from the white house is because he had secretly started to subscribe to the neo-rafidi creed of Irfan Shah, and has taken Irfan Shah as his murshid! Unless there's a reference given, please spare yourself and others from such useless misinformation overload.
Can somebody please explain this thread and if its claims are true: Imam Zayd bin Ali عليه السلام, openly believed in the superiority of Maula Ali عليه السلام. This was always a known fact.However, what nasibis try to hide, is not only did Imam Abu Hanifa رضي الله عنه give Bayah to Imam Zayd, but also funded his rebellion with 30k dirhams!— Oblak (@qalandarum) March 1, 2021 Not only funded, but when pressured by the Ummayads to give a fatwa against his Murshid Imam Zayd's revolt, Abu Hanifa refused, exclaiming, "I am of the party(Shi'at) of Zayd!"But do tell me how you neo barelwi nasibis "hATe TaFFy'S" when our own Imam gave Bayah & funded one!— Oblak (@qalandarum) March 1, 2021 It was this same Imam Zayd who taught Imam Abu Hanifa, was revered by Imam Jafar Sadiq & Baqir عليه السلام who said "none was born to resemble Ali than you!"Rasul'Allahﷺ wept while prophesying His martyrdomHis Aqaid was no different to Hzt Salman Al Farsi رضي الله عنه— Oblak (@qalandarum) March 1, 2021 I've seen filthy attacks on the Aqaid of the Sahaba such as Hzt Abdullah b Masūd, Ibn Abbas, Ammar b Yasir, Salman Farsiرضي الله عنه by those claiming defence of Sahaba; neo-barelwisFear Allah, you just abused the Aqaid of the closest of the close companions of Rasul'Allahﷺ!— Oblak (@qalandarum) March 1, 2021 In truth, you nasibis do not love Sahaba رضي الله عنه, but you resent & hate Ahle Baytعليه السلام's stature, and abuse even the Aqida of the Sahaba who loved them tooEven the killers of Imam Hussainعليه السلام read Salah & fasted like you doubted lineage nasibis; sit back down— Oblak (@qalandarum) March 1, 2021
Salam. I would like to ask the ulama on this thread questions regarding this article. 1. What is the ta'reef (or ta'reefaat) of ijma? 2. Is there ijma upon the ta'reef of ijma?
