Mufakkir responds to Syed Irfan

prove it!

 

Must Watch for everyone, Molvi Muzammil Shah who Pir Abdul Qadir Sahib praised at start of his book Zubdah. What is his view on Afzaliyat?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7oUqswSGSw

 

No where does it say those qaailun are Ahl alSunna. They could have easily been Qadariyya, Mutazila and Ahl alSunna.

Also elsewhere Imam Abu Hasan Ashari states there is ijma' of Ahl alSunna.

 

No need to act innocent. Mufakkir accuses Imam Ashari of 'smuggling'

 

you did not even understand the point ya Ah!

Hazrat Mufakir al-Islam is saying that it is in maqalat al-islamiyyin and not that it is the position of al-ashari himself. secondly, so what He said ijma' instead of ittifaq but al-nawawi, for example, says ittifaaq in his sharh muslim and ijma in his tehdhib. yet alahazrat in matla quotes both but even for the first one where it says ittafaqa ahlasunnah....alahzarat preceding it says kutub e usool mein ba tasrih ijma naql kiya...first example is with the 'ittifaq' wording of nawawi and second one is nawawi's quotation of abu mansur and so on.

alahazrat in sharah sahih muslim understood ijma' from the words ittifaq of nawawi. though i agree that by ittifaq he meant ijma!

all your clips and undetstandings are out of context and doctored clippings sultan bahu trust yet they dont realise that fiaz al-hasan sb was next to tahir al-qadiri during the whole thing of hare rama hare krishna. why didnt he walk out? anyone can come and see that people are against it so i will make an excuse when i see the reaction. what happened when he was singing hare rama hare krishna...didnt say anything then? where is the clip?

mufakir al-Islam does not say that it was al-ashri's own opinion but that he has written it in maqalat. you guys are twisting and chopping so it seems as if it he meant al-ashari.

as for the three opinion of ahl al-sunna about yazid(L) in maqalat:

فزعمت الروافض أنه جائز أن يظهر الإمام الكفر والرضى به والفسق على طريق التقية وجوزوا ذلك على الرسول عليه السلام وقال قائلون: لا يجوز ذلك على الرسول عليه السلام ولا يجوز واختلفوا في إمامة يزيد: فقال قائلون: كان إماماً بإجماع المسلمين على إمامته وبيعتهم له غير أن الحسين أنكر عليه أشياء مثلها ينكر وقال قائلون بإمامته وتخطئة الحسين في إنكاره عليه وقال قائلون: لم يكن إماماً على وجه من الوجوه.


the rawafiz considered that in taqiyya it is allowed for the imams to manifest kufr and fisq and they also allowed it permissable for the Prophet(s).
the sayers said: that is not for allowed for the Prophet(s) and it (taqiyya) is not permissable. they (those who disallowed taqiyya) differed in the imamat of yazid: sayers said: He was an imam by IJMA' of muslims and al-Husayn refused and sayers said: he was an imam and al-husayn was wrong in denying hsi rule and sayers said: he was not an imam for a reason amongst other reasons.


the above were the three sunni opinions and one group claimed ijma on yazid's imamat.


this all what mufakir al-Islam said and quoted from maqalaat. and not that it was the opinion of al-ashari but said that even people believed 'ijma' on the isssue as al-ashari(r) has written.

it is the filter of hatred that blinds you because your beloved tafzil-cat is out of the bottle hence all kinds schemes.

 

sub'hanAllah, pir abdu'l qadir is a liar and was refuted and a criminal who attacks imam e ahl e sunnat, sayyiduna abu'l hasan al-ash'ari.

he is an outright jahil who states and makes claims without any basis.

---
the pathetic, deplorable clip below was refuted here and his lies exposed. also here and here.

---
inShaAllah, we will have to compile a book on the inaccuracies and PAQ lies, but his blind followers will continue to hail him as a 'scholar'. i have said this before, and i repeat: a classic case of dunning-kruger effect.

 

Oh! and I forgot to show the clip. here it is at 44 seconds onwards that it is in sunan darqutni. which means that he never read it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF1K4dn_G5A&feature=player_embedded#!


so ghulam? did he read it? or was it sunni-sunai?

 

well, the level of research of maulana irfan shah sb about which he is claiming so much that for two years live on TV he kept saying it was in sunan daraqutni...then we informed him that hazrat do first hand research your self sometimes and do not rely on sunni-sunai. it was after two years of sunan-daraqutni sunan-dadaqutni, without actually reading it himself. Because it is not in sunan-daraqutni. hence phantom reading claim cannot be compensated by dB record.

 

Mufakkir's claims

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtube_gdata_player&v=p7jzcDR1it8

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtube_gdata_player&v=hR4588WAMkg