Mawla Ali is khalifah bila fasl

Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Aqdas, Jul 30, 2021.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    and oh, btw. imam bukhari uses "dhikr" instead of 'manqabat' or 'fadayil' for some other companions as well including sayyiduna ibn abbas and usamah ibn zayd.

    so the rafidis and shiyis and the sunnis afflicted with shiyi poison are reading too much into it.

    shahnawazgm, Umar99 and Noori like this.
  2. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    it is a lengthy hadith in sahih muslim. #52

    muslim, 52.png

    in the last part:

    RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: "O umar, what made you do what you did?"

    he replied: "O RasulAllah, may my father and mother be sacrificed upon you. did you send abu hurayrah with your sandals [and to tell] whom he met, who bore witness that there is no God except Allah (laa ilaaha illa'ALlah) and has the firm conviction (i.e. firm yaqin) in his heart, then give him the glad tidings of paradise?"

    he [RasulAllah] said: "yes"

    he [umar] said: "do not do so. because i fear that people will fall back on it [rely upon it]. leave them to do deeds"

    RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: "leave them".

    as you can see, neither did hazrat umar object to RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam ('what is the use of enforcing the shariah?') nor did he reject it.

    instead he respectfully submitted to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam and requested to not let him go and announce the glad tidings, lest people become lazy and stop doing deeds.

    RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam did not 'modify' his statement. he simply accepted the suggestion of umar raDiyAllahu anhu.

    nor did the quranic verse come down. (with pir nasir gone, who will give us the information about this verse?)

    what is the value of the opinion of such a scholar who cannot get his basic adab right?
    shahnawazgm, Umar99 and Noori like this.
  3. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    unhon ne kaha ya RasulAllah, aap ne ye farmay hai? jis tarah ye nikal raha hai. aur logon ko batane ke liye. agar janab laa ilaaha illa'Allah kahne ke ba'ad zina badkari, sharab noshi, jo fahhashi, jo badkari, agar insaan uske liye aap Allah ki rahmat ki itni wus'at aap bayan kar rahe hain; to phir ye shari'at nafiz karne ki kya zaroorat hai.

    he said ya RasulAllah, did you say this? as this person has gone out to tell people? if one says laa ilaaha illa'Allah, and then [commits] adultery, drinks wine and indulges in obscenity - if you announce the vastness of the mercy of Allah for such a person, as you describe it, then what is the point of enforcing this shariah?

    dekhen. sa'ibur raay. ke faaruq e azam ka woh maqam hai ke idhar zaban se nikli udhar qabul huwi. idhar raa'y thi to udhar qur'an ki surat mein woh aayat aagayi.

    look. he was a person of informed opinion. faruq the great had such a rank that the words came out of his tongue and there (near Allah) it was accepted. here he expressed his opinion and there the quranic verse came down (affirming his statement).

    @2.33: faruq e azam ki baat par ALlah ne kaha ye theek kah rahe hain.

    on the words of faruq the great, Allah said: this one has said it right.

    @2.44: huzur ne kaha theek hai. farooq tu theek kah raha hai.

    and then the master said: alright. farooq, you are are right [Lit. you are saying it correctly]

    he also says: 'and then modified that statement: 'if he remained steadfast and died upon that'..

    this is uncalled for and grossly inaccurate description of the hadith. this makes it look as if our master SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was (al-iyadhu billah) not aware of the implications and then upon the intervention of `umar al-faruq, he did istidrak (i.e. modified the statement.)

    thoroughly ignorant take on the hadith - if he didn't understand it, he should have consulted commentaries. pir nasir is simply ignorant of the rank of RasulALlah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam and is incapable of explaining a well-known hadith.

    in his bid to demonstrate the greatness of umar faruq, he unwittingly diminishes and obliquely criticises RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam! according to this storyteller's version, faruq objected to RasulAllah's sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam in a rough manner, and our master had to 'correct' himself. al-iyadhu billah.

    and pray, which qur'anic verse that was revealed?

    la Hawla wa laa quwwata illa billah.
    Umar99, Noori and Aqdas like this.
  4. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    first let us go to the reference which i think pir nasir was most likely talking about.

    ibn hajar al-asqalani's note on why imam bukhari used: "dhikr mu'awiyah" and not fadayil or manaqib; whereas fadayil (merits) and manaqib (praise) is used for khulafa and other saHabah.

    fat'H al-bari, under the hadith #3764-66
    fathbari, v9p473, b3764.png

    note: bukhari titled this section as "mention" [of mu'awiyah] and did not say "excellence" [faDilah] or "praise" [manqabah].

    this is because the hadith mentioned in this section are not [explicitly] in the context of excellence [of mu'awiyah]. it is apparent that the witness of ibn abbas that he [muawiyah] was knowledgeable [faqih] and that he was a companion imply excellence. ibn abi aaSim has compiled a short work (juz) on the praise [of muawiyah]; so also abu umar ghulam tha'alab [muhammad ibn abd al-wahid al-baghdadi]; and abu bakr al-naqqash.

    ibn al jawzi reported some of the hadith they had mentioned [as praise of muawiyah] in his mawDu'at and then quoted is'Haq ibn rahuway that he said: "there is no SahiH narration in the excellence of mu'awiyah".

    this is the point upon which bukhari did not use the word 'manqabah'/praise based upon the statement of his shaykh (i.e. is'Haq ibn rahuwayh). however, he skillfully* selected those [hadith] that would refute the heads of the rawafid.

    the story of nasa'i in this issue is well-known; as if he too depended upon his shaykh, is'Haq ibn rahuwayh.

    similarly is the story about Hakim. and ibn al-jawzi has also reported this via abdullah ibn ahmad ibn Hanbal:

    "i asked my father (ahmad ibn Hanbal). what do you say about ali and muawiyah?
    he lowered his head and then he [raised it and] said: 'know that `ali had plenty of enemies. his enemies tried to find flaws in him but they could not do that. so they turned toward the person who fought `ali and began excessively praising him - this was done in their enmity to `ali."

    [ibn Hajar:] here [imam ahmad] is hinting about the difference of opinion [among scholars] about mu`awiyah and the reports of his excellence [faDayil] which have no basis.

    numerous hadith have been reported in the excellence of mu`awiyah but there is not among them which can be called authentic by way of isnad. this is whay is'Haq ibn rahuway, nasa'i and others emphasised upon.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.

    *literally: by a keen eye.


    in summary:

    1. the enemies of ali forged hadith in praise of mu'awiyah. (the ibn Hanbal anecdote)

    2. imam ibn Hanbal and imam is'Haq ibn rahuway rejected those forged narrations.

    3. bukhari and nasa'i followed their teacher ibn rahuway and abstained from terming these as "hadith in the excellence of mu'awiyah".

    4. this does not mean that there is absolutely no hadith that praises mu'awiyah - as is evident in this section of bukhari itself. when ibn abbas called him a faqih and a sahabi, it is praise.

    in umdatu'l qari, we read that the title is 'mention' instead of 'praise' because one of the hadith only mentions his action and is not explicitly his praise.

    so this was the context in which imam ahmad replied to his son. he was not against praising hazrat mu'awiyah or that he did not have any merit at all. hazrat muawiyah was a sahabi and a scholar is an excellence in itself!

    in fact, in his other book 'fadayil al-Sahabah' imam ahmad lists a few hadith under the title "fadayil muawiyah", even if those hadith are weak (that is the point anyway of his statement, and even weak hadith are admissible in matter of fadayil)

    as you have seen pir nasir's description that "mawla ali did not have friends" is an addition that distorts that quote, so he can make his point.
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2021
    Umar99, Waqar786, Noori and 2 others like this.
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    many errors in this small talk. like politicians, they use bits of truths here and there, and create a self-serving narrative.

    nice orator but playing loose and fast with with facts. and why the insinuation, if he had the reference, he should simply present it instead of teasing: 'come to me, i will show you'.

    charb zaban is the word. glib talker. he spins around words and an average person in the audience would not even know what hit him. he would think imam ahmad said such and such a thing, whereas it was pir nasir's own words, which he garnishes with words and names in a strategic manner that gives the impression that imam ahmad said so.

    for example: he praises imam ahmad (many inaccuracies there) and describes the scene in a highly dramatised fashion and then attributes a statement to him:

    17.12: ali qalilu'l aHibba'a thaa aur kathiru'l a'ada tha. ali ke dost thode the dushman ziyada the.

    ali had few friends and many enemies.

    at 17.38: is ki wajah main bayan...main ne kya samjhi: is liye ke dost hote hain unke khilaen. jin ka dastarkhwan waseey ho. jo..jin ke paas aana jaana wasa'il aur dunyawi mafaadat ziyadah hon. log un ke paas toot kar jaate hain. ke khana khaa lenge. payt bhar lenge. koyi kaam huwa to kisi se karaa lenge. asar rusukh wala aadmi hai. mahal mahadiyon wala hai. unke dost ziyadah hote hain. ali ke paas kyun jaate bhai?

    the reason for this... i will tell you... the reason as i have understood: such a person has many friends who feeds them. a person whose table spread is generously covered. people have more relations with them and they have worldly means and benefits. people throng at the door of such people. we will get something to eat and fill our bellies (i.e. worldly benefit). if there is some work, we will ask them to get it done as he is a person with influence and connections. he has palaces and buildings. such a person has many friends.

    why would they go to ali?

    the insinuation is that hazrat mu'awiyah had more wealth, power and influence and hence they concocted hadith praising hazrat mu'awiyah.

    indeed, a number of hadith were forged praising hazrat mu'awiyah and scholars of hadith rejected those ahadith. my objection to the above snippet is that pir nasir is not only inaccurate in presenting the quote of imam ahmad, he distorts the context of the quote. this leads to the false implication of rafidis (and tafzilis) that there are absolutely NO hadith that praise hazrat mu'awiyah. this is the technique used by people who cannot shoot straight. pir abdul qadir and his erstwhile pal, zahid shah etc are all well-trained in this sleight of hand.

    before i explain imam ahmad's quote, and pir nasir's error, i would like to invite people to do introspection - doesn't this attribute fit sunni-turned-tafzilis of our time? the anti-minhaji-anti-tahirulpadri brigade of past decades, who became his admirers and sing his praises?

    nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.

  6. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Whoever has left the world and has left behind heresy, we can say:

    If he died on that, he was a deviant. Allah Knows best if he did tawbah. His deviance will be refuted nonetheless and whoever today acquiesced with it is a deviant.
    Umar99 and Noori like this.
  7. shahnawazgm

    shahnawazgm Well-Known Member

    Let's call a spade a spade, it is very important to safeguard the aqueeda of people. We go by the apparent beliefs of the individual, and Pir Naseer had open tafzili beliefs. If we start labelling a tafzili as a Sunni just because he has now passed away it will mislead a lot of people as they will start accepting the individual's heretic sayings!
    Noori likes this.
  8. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    Pir Naseer have passed away so no need to speculate what their aqida was albeit they came out with some random things in their life time. Even Pir Naseer would agree that the aqida of Pir Mehr Ali Shah is the correct one and Alhamdulillah Syed Pir Mehr Ali Shah at every juncture defended the pristine Sunni creed. What their grandchildren believe cannot supersede that because they are no where near the level in terms of the scholarship of their grandfather and some will probably admit they are not even scholars. As this is a matter of creed, we should only really give credence what scholars have said about it.
  9. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    pir nasir = a tafzili + wahabi

    seeing these tafzilis, sometimes I have this waswasah weather their elders were also covert shia; otherwise, how come their children deviated from their path.

    but it is just a waswasah, their elders' books are full of sunni aqidah, it is only their descendants who got involved in money, they monetized their elders' fame and respect, they did not focus on studying sunni aqidah and were hijacked by shia financers little by little.
  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    Mawla Ali is khalifah bila fasl after Hazrat Uthman Dhu'n Nurayn

    Pir Nasir didn't know.
    Umar99, Noori and Aqdas like this.
  11. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

Share This Page