Pir Hasnain Shah lectures on Tafzil

I have to agree with KattarSunni's post. Shah Sahib has made his own POV clear in the video and presented his arguments and, in my opinion, in a very rational and intelligent manner* and now it is upto those who disagree with his arguments to refute them point by point either in writing or by video or in any other medium.

* caveat emptor: the one thing I didn't like about the video was the singing 'Ya pound salam alayka!" I understand why he was emotional and the point he was trying to make but I think he could have done better without that. To his credit he did apologise in the video.

 

i would question the man's wisdom - going to a kanjus person's house to ask, when he can always go to villas of generous rich men.

why ask such questions and expect answers from students and beginners? why can't shah sahib just go to scholars and get their input? and if he disagrees with them, he could compile all these as a book.

----

i wish* i could give you both roses and daffodils. rather, i was wondering about the tea: do you wish it to be strong or light? with milk or dark?

...with a little sugar, or bitter?




*because, unfortunately, i am a pauper. not just a kanjus person who has, but is not willing to give.

 

And neither should the counter using a pen name like some have been doing. Maybe when Mulla Sahib gets back from Makkah or wherever he is he can be notified to refute the points?

 

Sayyid Sahib is right. He has been man enough to place his views on video. There is no point in trying to divert the points made. Now those who disagree should counter his arguments either by writing or through a similar medium.

 

a man goes to a kanjus person's house and asks for a cup of tea. the host replies, would you like it in a cup or a glass? he said in a cup...should the cup be small or big? small would do. should it be black or white? white is fine. should this white cup have flowers pictures or people pictures?...flowers pictures are fine...should it have roses or daffodils on it?.....

 

Shah Jee why do you not put your research into writing?

 

Chishti raza bhai, I think muslim 1st Sunni 2nd has a valid point. since you have a problem then why not refute each point presented by the speaker. simple. for example, point one then point two then point three...in the order they are questioned etc.

 

Your inference from what I wrote is staggering brother. You have done this time and time again (also ignoring what is being said).

 

Put others to one side why doesn't Shah Saheb issue a formal debate challenge in writing. it's all well and good shouting from your own house.

Pir Abdul Qadir Shah Saheb is following in the footsteps of Ala Hazrat where dialogue was always encouraged before any such debate.

 

Herein lies the problem you guys love to degrade an individual choosing to ignore the argument. There are scholars that are verbally scolding others just because they are simply posing questions (with utmost respect and regarding Ala Hazrat as Mujaddid) to some of Ala Hazrat's research.

I'm sure Ala Hazrat if alive would have encouraged this and provided a detailed response, this kind of scholarship dialogue is what strengthens our religion but we're finding scholars trading insults.

 

New Clip of Pir Abdul Qadir on Afzaliyat E Siddique e Akbar RA

Watch this new clip of Pir Abdul Qadir on the Afzaliyat E Siddique e Akbar issue here (its in english):

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

He says that saying that whoever believes Sayiduna Ali Afzal then Sayiduna Abuabakar Siddique is out of Ahlus Sunnah, this belief was invented by the later scholar of India. He says its not a belief of muslims. No one from the middle east or other Arab countires had this view!

 

Brother Chisti Raza its not his fault. Hasnain has mentioned this in his talk. So has Pir Abdul Qadir and Hasnains father Molvi Zahid. They often say this regarding Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib but Shah Sahib have replied regarding this here:

Why does Sayyid Irfan Shah dye his Beard Black?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjO-GGv4UJQ

As for Shah Sahib replying back. Shah Sahib is not in the UK and neither has he watched these lectures. Second thing is Shah Sahib won't reply to a kid who cannot even recite Iman E Mufusal properly. If they wanted a reply then Pir Abdul Qadir should have refuted Alahazrat's book or Molvi Zahid. We know this is their research as admitted by Pir Abdul Qadir here, he names these homemade scholars saying I have prepared them on these topics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s78mRcoKMNk

If Pir Abdul Qadir thinks it doesn't suit him to debate or argue with small kids why does Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib have to? Secondly why did he debate Moulana Abid Jalali who is probably a year or two older then Allama Saqib Iqbal Shami?

If Pir Abdul Qadir refuted Alahazrat's book himself or Molvi Zahid then I am sure Shah Sahib would of replied back quickly.

Anyway when has Pir Abdul Qadir or Molvi Zahid ever replied back? Brother Abu Hasan has refuted Pir Abdul Qadir on his attack on Imam Bukhari RA, Imam Ghazzali RA, Imam Abu al-Hasan al Ash'ari and the list go's on. Molvi Zahid was refuted regarding the 80 lashes narration when has he replied back? When has Pir Abdul Qadir wrote a reply to Umda tu Tahqeeq? When these guys reply back Shah Sahib will start replying.

Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib on those who try to refute Alahazrat RA today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j63_DAOHaQ

Lastly Moulana Hafiz Aqeel Jalali Sahib have touched on Hasnain's third lecture regarding Alahazrat RA book:

Alahazrat & Matla al-Qamarayn - Afzaliyat E Siddique E Akbar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzTBWVq8CrE

Also why doesn't Pir Abdul Qadir challenge Shah Sahib for a debate if he wants answers? Pir Abdul Qadir doesn't even name Shah Sahib in his lectures. He has named Ghazi E Millat Sayyid Hashmi Mian. Pir Abdul Qadir Sahib's mureed and Khalifah Nisar Baig challenged Pir Auladdin Siddiqui Sahib for a debate online. Why don't one of his Molvis from the UK challenge him?

Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib have already hinted regarding a debate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6USYuvVS1vY

 

You are very confused brother. You need to educate yourself on how to separate an issue of Aqa'id and an issue of Fiqh. Ala Hazrat has clearly ruled on the deviancy of the Tafzilis. I sincerely advise you (given the root level of your knowledge) not to involve yourself in these matters.

 

First of all I'm not aware of any fatwa stating that Rizvi must abide and agree with everything Ala Hazrat said. I mean there are many scholars lovers of Ala Hazrat who dye their beards black but Ala Hazrat commands that Namaz should not be prayed behind such people.

Hazrat Abdul Aleem Siddiqui Rehmatullah Alaih a Khalifah of Ala Hazrat allowed photographs and we know what Ala Hazrat's views were regarding photography.

I don't understand ... why are you attacking the individual? if there's something wrong in what he has said then please clarify and provide a counter argument on the subject, otherwise at least agree that he has made valid points.

Show some sincerity brother and ask Shah Saheb to provide a repsonse to the questions posed in these lectures.

 

I haven't heard Shah Sahibs refutation yet. But it would be good to see pen to paper. As then all citations can be checked and verified when pen is put to paper. One would be shocked at the number of misquotes in "Zubda", as well as snippets decontextualised. Also this group is very confused about ijma and what it entails.

 

For everyone's information I have asked Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib about the HaqChaarYaar Conference in Newcastle today. Shah Sahib have said such a thing was never said and he believes what Alahazrat said that Tafzilis are Bidatis and not Kafirs. Anyone can contact Shah Sahib to confirm this. They are leaving for Pakistan today.

 

Sidi Abu hasan, you are missing the point. it is about 'ijma' of sahaba' and whether ijma' of sahaba for a matter of aqeeda can be proven from khabr al-wahid. that is the point. when a khabr al-wahid states x is ijma' of sahaba then ulama of usul said that it cannot be part of aqeeda by virtue of it being being khabr al-wahid.

 

come to think of it: the ummah has been in grave error for so long.

aqidah TaHawiyyah is taught for so long and by so many schools. even the wahabis teach/read the TaHawiyyah.

imam TaHawi says: 'this is the aqidah as professed by Abu Hanifah and his students, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad...'

imam TaHawi passed away in 321 AH. and the dates of passing of the Imams Abu Hanifah, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad are 150 AH, 182 AH and 189 AH respectively. thus there is a gap of 171, 139, 132 years respectively in the chain! and even if you find it, it will be a "khabar al-wahid" and you cannot establish aqidah by a "khabar al-wahid".

so anyone using TaHawiyah as evidence is now faced with this problematic evidence! alas, even those fussy salafis have missed this point.

---

 

around 50:00, the young chap questions imam al-bayhaqi and his isnad and questions the 280 or something years of missing chains. and this fellow knows more about shafiyi's position than al-bayhaqi.

----
such ignorance can strut confidently only in our times.

----
if he is really serious, he must commit this in writing - let him write a refutation, even if it is only a few pages (translating these passages) and deriving conclusions (as in his speech). who knows, shah sahib's book may remain unanswered and thus a ground-breaking work that heralds the arrival of the next mujaddid - one who refutes the previous mujaddid.

if he cannot write in urdu, he must write it in english. he must explain the ijma'a described by the usuliyyun for common benefit. he cites fat'h al-bari, al-isti'aab and kashf al-asrar among other works; if he can please put all these in writing - his eloquent refutation of alahazrat, and the blunders in alahazrat's evidence compiled as a book, it could be an eye-opener for many of us on how 'the greatest can violate standards of rational evaluation'.

----
laa Hawla wa laa quwwata illa billah.

 

Earlier a Brother wrote that Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib should be contacted to correct a report etc. Shah Sahib does not need to be contacted. If Molvi Abdul Qadirs mureeds can turn up to shah Sahibs events so can Molvi Abdul Qadir. Why don't these guys just challenge Shah Sahib by name and then we can all see what will happen.