Dear brother aqdas sb, [though it irrelevant] the very passage from aalamgiri which declares rawafiz kafir for the denial of the khilafat of shaykhayn karimain and disparaging them and many other similar references were also quoted prior to his own opinion by hazrat alahazrat in his booklet on radd of rafizis: here: http://www.alahazratnetwork.org/modules/booksofalahazrat/item.php?page=11&itemid=128 والاحوط فيه قول المتكلمين انهم ضلال من كلاب النار لا كفار و به ناخذ his final verdict on those who deny khilafat of the two and curse them are not kafirs. " the correct opinion is that of the dialectical theologians that such people are misguided and will go to hell but are not kafirs. this is what i believe and agree with" so look, if the same passage of jurists can be set aside for takfir then why not for bida'? countless, muftis issued fatwas that tabarra of the two shaykhayn and denial of their khilafat is kufr yet hazrat alahazrat says No they are not kafir on the basis of tabarra and denial of khilafat yet what about those fuqaha who did consider them kafir for denial of khilafat and tabarra?
But [caveat] whether this is qati or not, is a different matter. Considering I'm in the dock I'd say the jury is out on this one. I have been keenly watching both sides since the debate started. What I would say is that in the last few months, well since Jilani Shah Saheb's book and after watching the three videos of Hasnain Raza Shah I would say the stronger view seems that it is not qati and there is not much basis to say that on--unless, there is a robust rebuttal to all the points raised, and questions asked.
Oh I've been put in the dock so I guess I have to answer before I'm banned. I'm not a scholar so there is not much point in asking for my view but thank you anyway for valuing my opinion. My view is: Hazrat Abu Bakr is Afzal among the sahaba. Happy? I've said it many times before so I'm not sure why AH, AQ and other zealots are on my back.
Brother Naqshbandijamati sahib, thank you for that professional translation and I hope that everyone has read it and now the mystery about Hazrat Shah abdul aziz's fatwa in english is over and I am sure your translation will now do the rounds on the internet forums whenever there is a discussion on tafzil. notice, the things shah abdul aziz sahib singles out in which the shaykhayn or Imam Ali are afzal. during the zahiri life time of the Prophet(s) and after.
translation of the fatwa from hazrat shaykh shah abdul aziz dihlavi: ** translator's note: these harsh words including the cursing [la'anat] and the word 'shaytan' for Marwan are those of Shah Abdul Aziz :ra: NOT any additions or translating error by me. hope people can discuss the main topic now.
Brother Sayyid Hasnain Shah, You are a Sayyid. Blood of Sayyida al BaTool az Zahraa :as: . Please protect your dignity. Don't let or give commoners a chance to attack and mock you, and insult you, and shame you. It does not befit a Sayyid. you exaggerated on serious differences. Dont you think they are only on these things: 1) tafDil of shaykhayn raDyAllahu 'anhuma 2) cursing of sayyiduna mu'awiya raDyAllahu 'anhu I am not a part of any subcontinental pir politics.
brother abdalqadir sahib, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. those here and heres, were just a reaction to what you said preceding those things. but anyway, hope all is fine now. I have said what i had to.
sorry for my rather angry response AQ i got nothing against you personall -- despite your exclusion of me from your last apology!-- but your style of address can be abrasive at times. i think gg's last post was very conciliatory so lets all -- i address myself first of all-- keep our discussion on a civil level. let's just discuss the issue and not make it personal. let me be first to say sorry for any offence caused intentionally or unintentionally. -- salam.
As usual, you put the cart ahead of the horses and can't see the forest for the trees. In case you haven't noticed gg's wound and heal tactics, his "sidi" and "dear brother" posts come after he's had a go at someone or posted something sneaky to make his point. It's a tactic used by wahabis and shias all the time. Wound and heal is the absolute worst kind of sarcasm. Have a look at his tone to me in some of his other posts: right in this thread; did I provoke him here?; great attitude here; sarcasm towards other posters here; I don't need to prove it to you, but I wouldn't have responded to him with "punk" had he at least maintained some consistency in his attitude. His "dear brother" to me was nothing but sarcasm and a cheap jab at me. It was coupled by the typical wahabi style blackmail by making implications of - "since you did not mention the Imam of Ahl al-bayt or should I say the Imams of ahl al-bayt". All these dear brother posts are the internet versions of crocodile tears. Any ideas why he has mentioned tahir riaz in his reply to me on this forum? I'm sorry if I don't get my kicks from playing wound and heal and being sneaky. What meakes you think I'll let them get away with their sneakiness in the first place? I can deal with wahabis and shias objectively too. But when someone mixes that along with sinister tactics at personal levels, they're asking for it. Even if they're Sunnis, being sinister is asking for it. It's not just the ideological disagreement. I am honest enough to admit it was a response at both a personal level as well as ideological. Hope that puts your heart at ease. I would have said something in relation to that but now since my personal bias has come in, I hope one of the other brothers comment if you're right or wrong in your comprehension of it. ------ Btw, if someone holds the position that a dead Muslim can be pronounced la3nat, then really, technically speaking, calling a living person as a "punk" is something much lesser. So why all the fuss? I suggest, if you or gg have anything else, please let's sort/fight it out on PM rather than derailing the thread. I had to defend myself and end this topic here because of the way things just went on this thread and some other threads. ----- sincere apologies to mods or anyone whose not nj or gg, but had to read this derailment.
sidi abdalqadir sahib, i neither hold a grudge against you nor hate you nor mock you. I will not be drawn to respond in kind. actually, I do not hate anyone. and I am sorry if i ever hurt anyone's feelings. though, we have srioues differences with, say, wadood, but i find his demographic and cultural knowledge from which we can all learn from, and from you i have learnt all different kinds psychological disorders and it helped me reflect upon myself and try not do those things. as for sidi AH, there are some differences but i learn from him too, his excellence in literary expression and anecdotes of about our pious predecessors. as for kattarsunni, i like the new KS, objective and sincere. i will not say anything about naqshbandijamati, the man struggling to awake us up from our dogmatic slumber. I sick of this name calling and all that goes along with it. if you have a problem then you must address the issue and not the man as tahir riaz has famously said.
AQ man you've got a serious attitude problem. You're lucky gg appears to be a shareef person and this is the internet. if you spoke like that to someone else in real life they might just smack you in the mouth! yes, you can disagree with gg (like many of us do on this issue) without being so damn aggressive. as for the fatwa of Shah Abdul Aziz it is actually quite clear... insha Allah I will post the translation later tonight...there is an interesting bit in there too about cursing Marwan...
Don't "dear brother abdalqadir sahib" me, punk! It's not going to help making your baseless point any easier! I deliberately did not mention the Imam of the Ahl Al-Bayt for a very simple reason - I don't trust your english translations of their words, and neither do I trust modern scholars' interpretations, interpolations, extrapolations, and commentaries of the words of the elders lest they rest on the commentaries of the mujtahids. You want to bring their words, bring forward 1 - the interpretations of their words by the mujtahid aimma relating to individual quotes, and 2 - let us all know the mujtahid aimma's stance on the topic overall. If you want to play this game the way you are doing, get in line! The wahabis and shias are already way ahead of you with their blackmails of "So you're ignoring a hadith" and "Abu Bakr said this" and "Ali said that" and so on. I might think of someone as a mubtadi3 but at least at a human level, I can appreciate one's sense of integrity and self respect, which sadly you haven't displayed yo-yo'ing between "mate" and "dear brother" and your temper tantrums at being probed on your 3aqidah, and the only reason you stated your position openly is because you were cornered by the moderator. I would have responded a bit more respectfully to you if you had still maintained your "mate" tone with me rather than this pathetic display of sarcasm. The only thing more nauseating than bid3ah itself is this phoney "dear brother" sweetness coupled with sarcastic implications, specially by punks on the internet. Thanks for the fatwa by Shah Abdul Aziz btw. It shows that you haven't understood what the muhaddith is talking about.
OK, dear brother abdalqadir sahib, since you did not mention the Imam of Ahl al-bayt or should I say the Imams of ahl al-bayt so I will not mention them either. I think, if we start then this will go on and on...so I will just give you what you want. I will kindly request my dear learned brother, Naqshbandijamati sahib to translate it. please translate the first question on page 412 (starts after the first full paragraph) and second question, which the immediately next one on page 413. link: http://www.archive.org/stream/Fatawa-e-aziziByShaykhShahAbdulAzizDehlvir.a#page/n206/mode/1up
This discussion has continued for 7 years on this site. Not again. http://www.sunniport.com/masabih/showthread.php?t=6556&page=2
this is a question to all brothers who know: forgive my ignorance of Shah Abdul Aziz's fatwa, but what exactly does it entail? as long as you love the Shaykhayn, .... what exactly are the "etc" that you are permitted?
seems like i'm banned if i tell you and banned if i don't tell you. frankly, i am not 100% sure though i am more inclined towards the opinion of Imam Zayd ibn Ali Ibn Hussayn Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a), for example, about tafzil and fatwa of shah abdul aziz dehlavi that as long as you love shaykhayn, etc.. which would be option 2. if it is otherwise, then i am open to being convinced with evidence.
