Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Sunni Jaag, Mar 6, 2021.
I heard this and I don't he meant it like that... just phrased poorly. He does not go on to elaborate either.
It's not just muddying the waters. Listen at 3:16. He utters kufr "Ek doosre se shan mein bade hain ye"! He talks about Ahle Bayt and Quran. Giving the Ahle Bayt precedence over the Quran is kufr. The ulema have already caught him out on this.
This has been at the heart of Shah Sahib's speeches in recent times... these indirect comments, which do enough to muddy the waters without fully crossing over the pond.
Ashraf Asif Jalali sahib refutes Iran Shah's latest heresy.
Jalali camp have also now spoken about Pir Maroof. Let's see how this one plays
Statement by Jamia Islamia Rizvia and Scholars on the Fatwa on Iran Shah and in relation to his supporting lackeys at JTI.
The scholars of Ahl-us-Sunnah decided in an important meeting today on 16th October 2021 in Jamia Islamia Rizvia Bradford that the fatwā from Bareilly Sharīf applies upon Irfān Shāh Mashhadī. Therefore in accordance with the fatwā it is necessary upon him to repent and also repent from the three additional matters which occurred from him after the fatwā. Those people who made Irfān Shāh Mashhadī do a speech and lead the Mawlid-un-Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم gathering and procession, knowing that the fatwā has been given upon him, must also repent in accordance with the fatwā. Furthermore the scholars of Ahl-us-Sunnah gave a message to Sunnīs to avoid the events and gatherings of Irfān Shāh Mashhadī because this is harām in Sharī'ah according to the fatwā. It is necessary upon every Sunnī to adhere to the fatwā because the truth is now apparent and no one has an excuse. This fatwā is supported by leading noble scholars and honourable shuyūkh including Dhangrī Sharīf, Nerian Sharīf and Shādpur Sharīf. More details and a list of supporting scholars to follow إن شاء الله.
علمائے اہل سنت نے آج ١٦ اکتوبر ٢٠٢١ جامعہ اسلامیہ رضویہ بریڈفورڈ میں ایک اہم اجلاس میں فیصلہ کیا کہ بریلی شریف سے آنے والا فتوی عرفان شاہ مشہدی پر چسپاں ہو گیا ۔ لہذا فتوی کے مطابق اس پر لازم ہے کہ وہ توبہ کرے اور مزید تین اور امور جو فتوی آنے کے بعد اس سے صادر ہوئے ہیں ان سے بھی توبہ کرے ۔ جن لوگوں نے بریڈفورڈ میں میلاد النبی صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے جلسے و جلوس میں یہ جانتے ہوئے کہ بریلی شریف سے فتوی لگ چکا ہے عرفان شاہ مشہدی سے تقریر اور قیادت کروائ وہ بھی فتوی کے مطابق توبہ کریں ۔ نیز علمائے اہل سنت نے سنیوں کو پیغام دیا ہے کہ عرفان شاہ مشہدی کے محافل و مجالس سے پرہیز کریں کیونکہ شرعا یہ فعل حرام ہے فتوی کے مطابق ۔ ہر سنی پر لازم ہے کہ وہ فتوی کی اطاعت کرے چونکہ اب حق واضح ہو چکا ہے اور کسی کے لئے عذر نہیں رہا ۔ اس فتوی کو یوکے کے جید علمائے کرام اور مشائخ عظام ڈھانگری شریف ، نیریاں شریف اور شادپور شریف سمیت نے تائید فرمائ ۔ مزید تفصیلات اور تائید کرنے والوں کے اسمائے گرامی آنے والے ہیں ان شاء الله ۔
please remember that these people have no principles - if it suits them, they will not shy away from signing-off bhopali or mawdudi as ameer-ul-mu'mineen.
I think they have given ample proof of their willingness to do so - just provide an incentive and watch them.
If Zaid said him being a sayyid allows him to set the parameters of what Ahlus Sunnah and this is because he is immune from error,
Then what does he say of Bhopali, Maududi, and Khomeini?
Do their alleged claims of being sayyids act as a proof for their creed?
If not why?
What does he have to say about this so-called "Sayyid"
and this one
and this one
And now Chaman Zamaan apparently saying that the Bareilly fatwa isn't about Irfan Shah but rather the Jalali camp have lied and attributed it to Irfan Shah. Jalali camp response below.
as if his ancestry is proven by nass! (for the dolts who may twist my words: as if HIS being sayyid is proven by nass qat'yi)
we do not say the ugly things that he says or even imply impute sin - hasha lillah. but it is quite possible that a sayyid sahib hundreds of years ago adopted, a boy who also mistakenly came to be known as sayyid. the issue of record-keeping and proper documentation is only 50 years ago. and it doesn't always have to be an implication of illegitimate children - but can even be mistaken attribution. so what is the guarantee that you are certainly a sayyid?
i know of a few people who are not really sayyids, but have the name sayyid and in a few generations their grandchildren will be sayyids.
we do not get into ta'an of ansab (denying people their claimed ancestry) and the truth is known only to Allah.
this fitna of foul-mouthed talk was started by irfan shah and the sin of everyone who copies him falls on his head. there is no guarantee of salvation merely upon being born as a sayyid. this is a rafidi aqidah and reeks of brahminical "divine-right-by-birth".
a sayyid is respected and will attain salvation ONLY if he remains steadfast on faith and dies on faith - the knowledge of which is only with Allah. this is why great men among sayyids were afraid. it is said that when imam zayd ibn musa kazim rose against ma'mun and was his brother imam ali riDa admonished him:
perhaps you are deluded (gharraka) (by the report of)* his (SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam) saying: "fatimah protected her chastity, so Allah prevented her and her children from fire" - that is only for the children she gave birth to.
* the report through weak narrators; and a weak report cannot invalidate numerous sahih hadith and the qur'an itself! even if this were sahih, it still means that 'those sayyids who remained steadfast and died upon faith'.
imam husayn is among those who is given the glad tidings of going to jannah. why did he go to karbala? he could have just joined with yazid and had a good time for himself and for his family - after all he didn't have to do anything as he was anyway guaranteed jannah!
and here are a people who claim to be sayyids and act as if religion is their personal property and they can say and do whatever their fancies their nufus! la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah. this claim of 'salvation by birth in a sayyid family' contradicts the essence of islam and the concept of Divine Justice. which is clearly repudiated in the verse "he (son of Nuh alayhi's salam) is not from your family..."
this de-recognition was not because the son was not physically related to the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam; but because he went out of the command of Allah. it is islam that binds us together - totally unrelated strangers with absolute no similarily in looks or tastes or language or culture are BROTHERS when they are in islam; and a twin brother who reneges from islam becomes a stranger.
these shi'a influenced maulvis are blackmailing sunnis by waving their ancestry at us, whereas they cease to be sayyids when they go out of ahl al-sunnah.
ibn hajar al-haytami in al-sawa'iq al-muHriqah says after mentioning the respect due to ahl al-bayt also warns of boasting about ancestry without being on the right path and mentions the same anecdote:
this is an issue i wanted to clarify - and hopefully, i will put together a short article in sha'Allah - but here are quick takes:
in the Sahih hadith when RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: "I cannot avail you fatimah bint muhammad sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam..." it is not actually said to her (as she is the queen of the women of paradise), but probably to those who would come after her among her descendants and demanding salvation for merely being a sayyid (even though it is not in one's own power to be born a sayyid or a pathan).
in another hadith talking about fitna: "...from below the two feet of a man from my family (ahl bayti), who claims to belong to me, but in reality is not; rather, those who are beloved to me (awliyaa'yi) are the pious"
here too RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam negates mere familial descent as the basis of salvation. note that here too it is not denied that the person is a descendant; rather, he is mentioned as a descendant gone rogue. and to clarify RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa aalihi wa sallam says: "those beloved to me are the pious".
so merely boasting as sayyids and committing harams by abusing others (and insinuating adultery by accusing their forefathers as illegitimate children) does not behoove a sayyid. this is not the language of sayyids and it is quite probable that they are not sayyids at all! (i clarify again: i do not accuse of illegitimacy, but only erroneous attribution).
slandering people and humiliating them just because they are not sayyids is haram. even if a person with 'sayyid' surname does it. besides, profanity is the hallmark of a munafiq.
so just carrying a name 'sayyid' won't avail you unless you are in the ahl al-sunnah; as for sins and excesses, may Allah forgive us all, it is hoped that just as we ourselves hope to be forgiven, so also a sinner among sayyids will also be forgiven and due to his relationship has a stronger hope (ummeed e wathiq). nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
Allah ta'ala knows best.
Pir Syed Muzammil Hussain Shah speaking about Mufti Aslam Bandyalvi and Mawlana Sabir Ali Sabir a few days ago:
The irony the legacy and heritage of Syed Irfan Shah's father is being seen in the person of Dr Jalali. No matter how many times they stop that appendage, when the name 'Jalali' comes up, it's not Syed Irfan Shah that comes to mind.
The irony the legacy and heritage of Syed Irfan Shah's father is being seen in the persim
It's all emotional blackmail and whilst they constantly remind us of their lineage, they need to remind themselves of their heritage. Syed Irfan Shah's father were an amazing scholar and Syed Munawaar's grandfather require no introduction... they can't even evidence how they are following in their footsteps. Being a syed is an undoubted 'Sharaf' but the responsibility of preserving that legacy and heritage becomes even more important.
Munawwar Jamaati not at all concerned with any fatwa against them, most likely a response to the Bareilly fatwa. Till date not a single academic response by their group and still the audacity to call themselves ahle sunnat!
Just listen to his logic, " maante to hum doosron ko bhi hai, magar hum Ali ke bete hain to hamein apna baap hi aur acha lagega". Trying to sugar-coat his hidden rifd?
of the more or less 90 videos posted uptil now (20 pages) 40 have been removed.
looks like the DMCA department is doing brisk business. an unintended beneficiary of the grand battles of our age!
what shallow times these, people's reputations are built and destroyed online.
for 20 minutes of fame - how many years in hell?
nas'al Allahu 'aafiyah
I am not familiar with how things stand on the ground - but generally speaking, these are great times for students of the darker shades of human behavior, lots of opportunities for empirical studies from which to draw your conclusions and compare notes with past researchers - or even the great encyclopedists of human nature such as Imam Ghazzali.
Aren't there any social anthropologists at the University of Birmingham interested in these turf wars?