Offshoots from khata thread

there's your answer.

Allah is my Lord and I am hopeful of His pardon in this life and the next. By the sadaqah of hasnayn kareemayn (raDyiAllahu 'anhum).

don't take the ism al Jalalah to satisfy your nafsanic prejudices. a taqiyya baaz lecturing on taqwa is too ironical for my tastes.

a very curious layman you make...

 

@Waqar786,

it is simple. the reason only those 5 are included is because of this hadith in muslim:

Sahih Muslim 2424
In-book reference : Book 44, Hadith 91
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 31, Hadith 5955
(deprecated numbering scheme)

 

I tell you something else, those who claim to be broad minded, they will always target the hard core Sunnis as being narrow minded. Where has your broad mindedness gone there, it's only for those who hold hetradox beliefs.
Aqida is not a joke, it is a matter of faith and faith requires certitude.

Look at how @AbuSulayman broadminded view has ended up him agreeing with the Shia view that Sayida Fatima was right and added that she was angry with Sayiduna Abu Bakr. That indicates that Sayiduna Abu Bakr denied Sayida her right and not only that upset Sayida too. Do you not understand how dangerous that belief is?

 

This is the issue when it suits people, sunniyat can be very broad and when it does not, it becomes incredibly narrow as seen in the Jalali Sahib issue.

This definition of Masoom/Mahfuz does not make sense to me. Even if we accept what Shah Sahib says but how can you give one definition of mahfuz for the Sayiduna Ali, Sayida Fatima, Imam Hasan and Hussain and then deny it for the wives of the Holy prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) or the Shayhayn. This is you making things up because even Shah Sahib does not believe this. All Shah Sahib said was the distinction between Masoom and Mahfuz was qati and Zanni. What he did not say was that only the aforementioned personalities fall in that category of mahfuz. For someone who claims that he takes what makes sense for him, you don't even take it properly.
This is why I said go and study with a Sunni scholar.

You claim to follow the jumhur position and then post a shayr of pir Naseer that contradicts this, and say that Pir sahib summed it up beautifully.

This is how Pir Abdul Qadir Shah has been operating. He puts forward beliefs that are linked to the Shias but claims that he himself follows the Jumhur position. His line summed it up perfectly: 'My tahqeeqat is different from my aqida'. Causes the confusion and when challenged about it, clarifies that this not my belief.

@Tariq Owaisi: the brother may be pouring his heart out but he certainly is not here to seek clarification. He has already made his mind up and brothers do not have time to waste.

 

He definitely would if you were scholar, he might let you off tho

 

The guy is speaking his heart out, and from what I have read is a Sunni. Let's not narrow sunniyat down too much. Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah has a broad spectrum of acceptable positions.

 

@Unbeknown,

how can you so brazenly say i am a tafzeeli when i believe in the jumhoor that hazrat abu bakr is afzal?! fear Allah!

@abu hassan

i don't take khata to mean sin but to mean mistake. so i believe that it is intrinsically impossible for the Prophet alahisalam to make a mistake (صلى الله عليه وسلم) but it is contingently impossible for the rest of the ahle kissa to make a mistake either. that's what differentiates them from all the other sahaba and why jalali sahib was wrong. that's how i understood pir syed irfan shah's explanation about how mahfuz is the same as masoom for bibi paak except it is zanni whereas for the Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family) it is qati. in simple words you could say the prophet is intrinsically infallible (masoom) whereas the hasnain, bibi paak and mawla ali are contingently infallible (mahfuz).

 

the jalali-irfan shah binary is merely a facade - with which you fool no one. grow up and stop playing with toys.

whoever you are - you are at least a tafzeeli - and (going by your own confessions) could be any number of other lis - or jis or dis or bis - but whether you care or not, and regardless of your home-brewed definitions, you are not a sunni.

Allah knows best.

 

@AQ,
I respect Tariq Jameel sahib (though I don't follow his aqeedah in all matters where Barelvis and Deobandis differ) because he has good manners, is soft spoken and doesn't talk about things that are controversial but about akhlaq and self improvement etc. His approach is one i wish all ulema adopted. The only 2 'Barelvis' that are similar are Saqib Raza Mustafai sahib whom i really like too for the same reasons and also Ajmal Raza Qadri sahib. Mufti Abu Layth I disagree with on many issues but what i like about him is he is open minded to listen to everyone, doesn't have a holier than thou attitude, doesn't shout, and understands the modern zeitgeist and he is, unlike most Indo-Pak traditional scholars, approachable and seems like a normal bloke you could hang out with. For some reason most traditionalist desis act as if they have a problem smiling or joking and take themselves too seriously. I think its called Napoloen syndrome? Yassir Qadhi despite his Salafi background is very academic in his approach to problems that Western Muslims face and, because he has gone through both traditional and western academic institutes, understands and tries to explain issues in a way that makes sense. His manner also is academic and respectful he doesn't shout or make takfir or people at the drop of a hat or call people 'dalla!' or 'zaleelo!' etc. etc. Even though I disagree with them all on certain aspects I find the positive far outweigh the negative. These latter two use logic instead of endless appeals to authority. I hope that answers your question.

I respect Shah Sahib for being a Sayyid and a buzurg. I doubt he'd disown someone just for listening to Tariq Jameel! If he did, I'd lose some respect for him for being narrow minded.

 

pir naseer was criticised for the same reasons pir irfan sahib is being criticised - becoming a tool of the shiah.

as for pir mihr ali shah sahib raHimahullah, i do not remember anyone 'attacking' him - and in fact, if YOU respect him, you would be criticising irfan shah.

but rafidis and tafzili peerzadahs, you are satisfied with only tokenism.

---
people are busy and not everyone is 24/7 on the forum. in fact, in your post you did not even mention the Prophet alayhis salatu wa's salam. and when you did, it was in passing along with sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha and did not even say the salawat.

just imagine how many accusations people can level against you? think before you speak...

true, but khaTa is NOT sin. and since it is deemed possible [contingent] for them to do a sin (though they did not), obviously, they are not at the level of prophets.

and if using the word 'khaTa' with prophets is not a problem, obviously using it for the ahl bayt should not be a problem.

you have done well by proving this point. jazakAllahu khayra.

 

al-Hamdulillah, in the past days, we have did fatihah of imam husayn and others in karbala a few times; taught our kids the meaning of husayn and his unforgettable sacrifice - the idea of justice and to stand up for truth, even if it means to let go of everything we have.

if you think doing matam like rawafid and getting all theatrical is the only way to commemorate imam husayn, you have been deprived of the barakah of imam husayn raDiyAllahu anhu - may we, our parents and our children be sacrificed upon him.

remembering imam Husayn means to stand for the truth and for the protection of the shariah of his glorious grandfather SallAllahu `alayhi wa aalihi wa sallam. remembering imam Husayn means to not bother about criticism in our efforts to protect/serve the shariah of Mustafa SallAllahu `alayhi wa sallam.

those who fought against Husayn tried to force him to accept their unreasonable demands, and Husayn showed us that after Haqq is apparent, never bow down to baTil regardless of how they try to blackmail you - (ironically, using HIS name in our time!). when we think of Husayn, we only see adherence to the shariah and fighting for it.

----

miyan tum hi shuru kar dete? kahe ko khamosh baythe the? creating a new account was unnecessary. besides it is obvious that you have been around (hence your comment: "...now").

instead of starting a thread on imam Husayn and his noble deeds, you are only bickering about those who do not subscribe to shi'ah leaning beliefs! speaks volumes of your faux-love for imam Husayn.

 

But even Shah sahib will disown you for being a Tariq Jameel fan.

Out of curiosity, what opinions, on this or any matter you take from Tariq Jameel, Abu layth, and Yasir Qadhi?

 

anyone can ask me about my aqidah on any specific issue and i will answer and not hide my aqidah. i've got nothing to hide inchallah.

 

brother unbeknown
i am disappointed by your comments. i didn't say i have no boundaries in belief. i said i evaluate different opinions within sunni islam obviously to see which makes most logical sense to me. on this issue just because i disagree with jalali sahib and agree with shah sahib doesnt make me non-sunni!

shaykh nabeel is correct!

 

brothers please don't waste your time replying to abuS. he has personal definitions of everything and he has no hard boundaries - you cannot put sense into such people nor can you win an argument against them (psst... they have their own definition for "win").

he's clearly stated that he browses for "edutainment" - so he's just loitering here (probably doesn't have anything better to do with his time - so he thought why not troll these longfaces for fun).

I doubt he's a sunni even - people who wish to stay sunnis don't get the previlige to believe what they like.

 

I am referring to this beautiful couplet of hazrat pir naseer sahib's

دے کے بستر کر دیا تھا فیصلہ ھجرت کی شب

عقل کا اندھا ابھی ترتیب کے چکر میں ھے

 

My advice @AbuSulayman would be to study traditional Ashari/Matarudi creed with a qualified teacher and take it from there. You can't just rely on what makes sense to you because you will end up having doubts and accepting hetradox opinions. Our deen requires understanding and understanding comes from studying the religon with qualified Sunni scholars.

 

people always claim pir naseer did ruju from beliefs without any evidence. his son jaami sahib has the same beliefs. so i don't believe in this alleged ruju'. i would like to meet asrar rashid sahib. why shouldn't i accept pir naseer's view? you accept the views of whichever scholars you admire -- but you're right i don't blindly follow them; only if they make sense.

personally i find it shocking that some consider hazrat abu talib as a non muslim though i accept it is an accepted opinion in sunnis. but some sunnis even consider yazid a muslim!! as bamsi would say, 'toba toba!'

 

Let me clarify a couple of things @AbuSulayman:
The issue is not whether Hazrat Abu Talib's iman is a sunni belief or not because yes sunni scholars have supported this view. The issue is when you doubt the faith of those who are not of the opinion that Hazrat Abu Talib accepted Islam. This is a shia belief.

Re. Ameer Muawiyya, you've tried to sugar coat it. Hanif Qureshi has previously linked the name Muawiyya to dogs. Then there has been open abuse of Ameer Muawwiya by some scholars who have a likeminded mentality to Hanif Qureshi. This is the biggest deception of these people that they claim that such beliefs are Sunni beliefs.

Pir Naseer that you have said that you trust the most had some positions that shortly before they passed away, they did ruju on. I would check with other Sunni scholars before just blindly accepting their view.

Shaykh Asrar if you speak to him privately is a lot more laid back than what you see in your videos. However, in this issue he has refuted Shah sahib.

It's clear that from the scholars you have listed, that you will take from whoever and whatever, which will inevitably result you in not understanding what is the actual sunni position on any matter. Aqida is not something you pick and choose to learn from