Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Refutation' started by shahnawazgm, Apr 1, 2018.
To make it easier for Nawazuddin to understand "the effacer of Nawazuddin (aka Hasnain)"
13 Rajab marks the birth of Hadhrat Sayyeduna Ali (Radi Allaho anhu)
A'ala Hazrat says:
The origin of pure lineage, path to the divine
Endless salutations upon the door to sainthood
The first to expel the Rafidis and Kharijis
Endless salutations upon the fourth pillar of this nation
The lion, carrier of the sword; destroyer of Khaybar
Endless salutations upon the manifestation of divine power
The effacer of Rafd*, Tafdil*, Nasb* and Khuruj*
Endless salutations upon the promoter of the religion and Sunnah
* Rafidis - enemies of the sahabah
** Tafdilis - deniers of the superiority of Abu Bakr and Umar radiyAllahu anhuma
* Nasibis - enemies of Ahlu'l Bayt and Mawla Ali
** Kharijis - enemies of Ahlu'l Bayt and Mawla Ali
adā-e-ḳhās se 'nawaaz' huā hai jahal-sarā
salā-e-ām hai yārān-e-nukta-dāñ ke liye
what exquisite taste. plumbs the depth of the soul ...
shia could mean several things
1) shia of hz. Ali
2) shia of hz Ali vs hz Muawiya
3) shia of hz Ali vs hz Abu Bakr hz Omar hz Osman
so what does shia interchangeable with tafdeel mean in your context.
if you mean hz Ali is afdal then he should be afdal also when it comes to khilafa otherwise how is he afzal ?
so many holes in your argument.
Read poetry of Ala Hadhrat, Azeem ul Barakat, Imam e Ishq o Mohabbat.
It will also erase some misconceptions!
nawaz! do not satisfy your ilmi zawq by reading poetry on the back of rickshaw and wagons, read some good classical books
bijli huN nazar koh o bayaban pey hai meri
mere liye shayaaN khas o khaashaak nahiN hai
parwanah gird e sham'a ke shab do ghaDi rahaa
phir dekhi us ki khaak paDi do ghaDi ke ba'ad
the do ghaDi se shaykh-ji shaykhi baghartey
saari woh shaykhi un ki jhaDi do ghaDi ke ba'ad
پنکھے کی رُکی نبض چلانے کے لیے آ
کمرے کا بجھا بلب جلانے کے لیے آ
رنجش ہی سہی دل ہی دکھانے کے لیے آ
آ پھر سے مجھے چھوڑ کے جانے کے لیے آ
I'm busy too but still here, in-shaa-Allah will share my humble opinion after your're done.
مگس کو باغ میں جانے نہ دینا
کہ ناحق خون پروانے کا ہوگا
ok. i was busy last week. i wanted to do the translation of #3 before going to #4, hence i just mentioned the source (for those who might be impatient); and for those who require a translation, in sha'Allah, will do it soon.
meanwhile, farsi edition of tafsir azizi:
PDF (45MB): https://archive.org/download/FatawaAziziPersian/Fatawa Azizi Persian.pdf
Out of the three possibilities, when you consider the innumerable times he has done it and the fact that those very same passages nawaz quotes refute his own claims, I think it's highly unlikely it could be 1 or 2. It was intended but I should have clarified it is my opinion that more than likely this is the case with nawaz.
It is clear you did not say or mean it like that. However this highlights another one of his problems: whilst yours is the correct way of not jumping to conclusions and considering all possibilities I think nawaz is the other extreme, perhaps because he is desperate as he has no substance in his arguments.
Allah Ta'ala knows best.
@Nawazuddin pls take note this is the way of our predecessors, to not quote out of context, And to consider all possibilities and not jump to conclusions, in case that is what your are un/intentionally doing.
Either way if its 1 or 2 or 3 i think you need to stick to the day job mate.
@Ghulam Ali: you might not have intended it, but you have quoted me out of context. in the post below, you quote me as saying:
but the actual quote is:
i mentioned a possibility and i did not accuse him of doing it. your citation makes me do it, when i did not.
Old habits die hard
Its not easy when you're flagging dead horses
Utterly shameful, this guy has been called out so many times for so long yet he carrys on: 'If you are shameless then do as you please'.
Looks like his 'book' is going to get ripped bad, he may as well put in the shredder
Its a good thing that he is allowed to post, by answering him you are in sha Allah earning the pleasure of Allah Ta'ala and RasulAllah SallAllahu Alayhi wa sallam whilst educating us. JazakAllah khayr
so here is question no.3:
"it is an established precept of ahl al-sunnah that there is an ijmaa' (consensus) of the superiority of shaykhayn (h. abu bakr and h. umar raDiyAllahu anhuma); now, is this superiority of shaykhayn upon mawla ali karramAllahu wajh'hah is in every aspect or not?"
the answer to this question by shah abdu'l aziz dihlawi:
and here is the farsi original:
suppose one did not have the luxury of checking different editions. even then, the quoted passage itself should make one pause to think:
"just like ahl al-sunnah say, that the shaykhayn raDiyAllahu anhuma have superiority over mawla ali in those aspects (umuur) which have been mentioned above".
clearly, this passage in itself does not tell the full story.
in this case, it was quite easy. i have multiple editions of fatawa abdul aziz dihlawi in urdu translation - and also the original farsi. and it is only a few hundred pages with a topic index, it was a breeze.
nawaz quotes with the highlights:
and he says:
the impression a reader gets is that shah abdul aziz dihlawi supported the tafzil which nawaz and his ilk promote and are dying to prove it right.
important notes concerning this citation:
1. this is a translation of shah abdul-aziz sahib's original fatwa in farsi.
2. this is not an isolated question. this is from a set of ten questions, to which shah abdul aziz sahib has replied.
3. this translation of shah sahib (in this post, this will refer to shah abdul aziz dihlawi raHimahullah) exists for more nearly a hundred years. i have a copy (PDF) of translation published in 1342/1923. this translation was named "surur e azizi" published by mujtabayi press, delhi in 1923.
4. now this translation is according to shah sahib's original, persian "fatawa aziz". please keep reading to understand what i mean by 'original'.
5. the translation posted by nawaz is from a 'new' edition. this new edition has rearranged fatawa according to the opinion of the editor of the 'new edition'. i have complained about this kind of interference and messing with an author's work by later people who seem to think they know better than the author. it has happened with alahazrat's books as well, and i continue to protest.
if one thinks that the book can be reorganised, or presented in a different format, one should clearly indicate that it is NOT the original work of the author. call it a mukhtasar, or ma'khuz or ifadat or something - but don't sell it or call it the same name.
this new edition DOES mention that it is 'rearranged, reordered according to topics' and in the preface, the plan of the rearrangement is described.
i do not know about other places, but in this particular question/answer, the editor failed miserably to provide the context and has provided false hope and ammunition to heretics for their own agenda.
6. as mentioned earlier, in the original fatawa, this portion is extracted from a set of ten questions: (fatawa azizi, old edition, 1923, vol.1 p.327 onward)
7. the question, in question (sic) is the fourth in the list; and shah sahib's answer to the fourth is BUILT UPON the third answer. and this is immensely important. if you don't pay attention, you will miss it.
8. though, this little research puts things in perspective, it should be noted that it is still a translation that has been quoted. the right approach would be to check the farsi original. which we did: see majmu'ah fatawa aziz (sic), mujtabayi press, 1311 AH. (persian, p.190):
like always, this fatwa also refutes nawaz's other predilections comprehensively. in sha'Allah, in the next posts.