Sayyidah e Kayinat

Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Aqdas, Aug 28, 2020.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    @AbuSulayman: Let me put it in a different way. You've called Jalali Sahib a gustakh for ascribing khata e ijtihadi to Sayida Fatima. You've accused @abu Hasan of bughz of Ahl ul Bayt for objecting to a term not used for Sayida Fatima by the salaf. Now what do you say about that person who according to you violated the right of Sayida Fatima to such an extent that she renained angry with him until she passed away. Answer this question.
     
  2. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    @AbuSulayman. One simple question. According to you, Sayida Fatima was denied her Haq, who denied her haq and what is the reality of this person for doing this?
    Answer this question honestly? Don't go around it?
     
  3. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    for once i agree with you.

    i was thinking of the same thing myself this afternoon. pakistan's Sunnis are quite infested with pseudo-shiaism

    i was just thinking of this, i admit, very lousy slogan, this afternoon

    neem hakeem - khatra e jaan
    neem maulvi - khatra e iman
    neem rafizi - khatra e pakistan :)

    the issue is not being close to Ahlul Bayt ridwan Allahi 3alaihim. a person whose heart isn't close to the servitude of the Ahlul Bayt isn't a Muslim. the issue is iftara on the boundaries of the Ahlus Sunnah
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  4. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    when one has to break up a three-words phrase - three simple word each - to hammer it's meaning into someone's head - we know the level of intellect we are addressing.

    this is the state of not just the masses but so called "students" and "shaykhs" (c.f. nabeel) - Allah help us.

    No wonder our enemies are swallowing us whole ...

    seriously, this is embarrassing ...
     
  5. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    no. this is what i said could have helped him easily wrap up his rebuttal of the straw man he was attacking

    he is rebutting a straw man - an alleged and non-existent objection to the usage of Sayyidah Nisaa Al-3aalameen - and giving a talk on that.

    i said he could have rebutted in just one line that the honorific is limited only to women folk because of the word Nisaa (@AbuSulayman pay attention again). he didn't need to give a talk, even if just 6 minutes.

    the real objection of Abu Hasan was at Sayyidah e Kainat (see also post # 48)
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  6. ghulam-e-raza

    ghulam-e-raza Well-Known Member

  7. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    i meant get the Arabic word for it from texts like hadith, tafsir etc. and then translate into Urdu

    NOT the other way round - first coin a word you like in Urdu and then translate to Arabic.

    you're becoming an itch really.

    Sayyidah is female and means Lady Leader - who could be leading MEN, WOMEN, ANGELS, anyone

    Nisaa means women

    Sayyidatu Nisaa means - Lady Leader of (other) ladies

    that is why Sayyidah e Kainat DOES MEAN 'Lady Leader of all kainat, be it men, women, angels etc.' - and this is what Abu Hasan is trying to explain to people like you - Angels and prophets are NOT PRECLUDED from the meaning of Sayyidah e Kainat

    Sayyidah Nisaa Al-3aalameen MEANS 'Lady Leader of all ladies' and here prophets and angels ARE PRECLUDED from the meaning.

    Sayyidah (the Lady Leader) being a female is irrelevant

    What is relevant is what comes after it - Lady Leader OF --- all kainat (which includes prophets and angels) OR the women of the kainat (nisaa al-3aalameen, and this is the title given in hadith)
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  8. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    @Sunni-brothers

    I hope everyone now stops responding to this rafidi troll - the more you feed him the more will you whet his appetite.

    Imam Ibn daqeeq al 'eid refused to debate ibn taymiyyah saying: "He relishes speech, while I prefer silence".

    Allah knows best.

    Edit: I had mistakenly mentioned Imam ibn 'atayiAllah (qaddasa sirruhu) - he infact did debate ibn taymiyyah.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
  9. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    I haven't watched muzaffar sab's talk - but is this really the pith of his argument?

    So sayyidah e kaynaat means leader of women only and not men - because sayyidah is a feminine noun?

    Then what would ummul mu'mineen mean then - Mother of believing women only and not men?
     
  10. AbuSulayman

    AbuSulayman Banned

    @abu Hasan,

    abu layth might be a nasibi but as i said in one of my first posts, a just person listens to all sides of the story. doesn't mean i admire his nasibiyyah. he probably got that from some maliki scholars like qadi abu bakr ibn al arabi and other defenders of yazid who didn't want people to send la'anat on him so don't blame him for a position you also are defending on the other thread.
     
  11. AbuSulayman

    AbuSulayman Banned

    @abu Hasan,

    wrong. i am not hasnain shah! it doesn't matter who i am but i don't want you to think i am a sayyid like hasnain shah bukhari sahib when i am not him.

    ghulam Hussain!
    here is the real hasnain shah for you though.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
  12. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    @AbuSulayman

    we now know that it is hasanayn shah. i am disappointed that taqiyya mein abu-lies jayse nasibi ki admiration bhi kah diya aur sharm nahin aayi.

    la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
     
  13. AbuSulayman

    AbuSulayman Banned

    @Waqar786,
    you have to understand sunnis in pakistan or of pakistani origin, i'm talking about laypeople like myself, -- i dont know about india --are extremely close to the ahlul bayt and bibi paak (s.a) in particular so this is a sensitive issue. outsiders might well think we are shia if they see us crying in muharram (without the beating ourselves or other things that rafidis do), almost everyone is named ali or hussain --usually ghulam ali, ghulam hussain, kaneez fatima, abbas, zaynab, sakina etc. --these kind of names are in every sunni family. you will struggle to find the name muawiyah (let alone yazid maloon!) amongst sunnis. i would not name my own children with that name nor with the name marwan. . it doesn't mean we don't respect hazrat muawiyah as a sahabi though. we have 20% shias in pakistan. we sunnis live with them peacefully. intermarriage is common. almost all of the famous pirkhanas are led by syeds from aal muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم). people don't know intricate masail. we are simple folk. so if people hear some maulvi like dr.jalali use a phrase like 'bibi fatima did a khataa when she went to ask abu bakr for fadak' it screams gustakhi. for us we might not believe that she was masoom theoretically but in practice that's what people do believe. if you said the word 'khata' for any of the panjtan 5 people will crucify you. because khata for the common person there and in common understanding means 'ghalti'. they hear a scholar saying bibi paak made a mistake or was wrong. dr. jalali then doubled down on his error instead of apologising and saying i am sorry. ( as i've said he should not be in jail but he should definitely acknowledge his mistake and apologise but he won't because of the massive egos most scholars and religious folk in general have especially -sorry to say -barelvis').

    so when you have people on what are called sunni forums defending jalali and going against qibla shah sahib, debating the word sayyidah e kainaat, and even -- i was shocked! -- suggesting murderers of hussain (a.s.) might not be kafirs --it screams nasibi! if you are not a nasibi then i apologise and take it back. i am definitely not a rafidi so you should apologise to me too.

    the issue of fadak is this (as a simple pakistan person, not an alim sees it).
    1. did bibi paak salamullah alayha go to hazrat abu bakr to ask for her haq? yes or no.
    2. did she get her haq? yes or no.

    that's it. and if we analyse in historical terms of what actually happened without getting into the theology or rights and wrongs of it, 1. bibi paak asked for her haq. 2. she came back empty handed. you will say it's an emotional argument and come up with various rebuttals but don't you see you've already lost so many awaam? normal people don't care about intricate theological differences.

    ya hussain!

    as for hanif qureishi, i don't see anything wrong with what he said and i think he is one of our best young sunni scholars.

    i am sorry if you think i am displaying double standards. i try not to.
     
  14. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    ma sha'Allah. irfan shah sahib ko gaane aur galiyan nahin yaad aaye. chaleN apnon se na sahih ghayron ke muqabil hilm o burdbari aur ulama ka sheywa ikhtiyar karte hain. muhazzab 'debate' in kameene rawafiz se karte hain aur galiyaN sunni ulama ko dete hain.

    sub'HanAllah.


    ----
    sunayi jati haiN dar pardah galiyaN hum ko
    kahun jo maiN to kaheN aap se kalam nahiN
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
    Unbeknown likes this.
  15. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

  16. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    The Jalali Sahib issue would have been resolved a couple of months ago if Shah Sahib did not get involved, and helped to get Jalali sahib arrested.

    On the first of Muharram, Sh Nabeel did his clarification where he just defended Shah Sahib stance and tried to claim sunni scholars who refute Shah Sahib's stance are either ignorant and Nasabis.

    A separate conference was then held to refute these claims because guess what they are now being defended in the UK. This is the conference that was labelled a Nasabi conference by Sh Nabeel.

    The double standards are clearly there but some just choose to wilfully ignore them and just continue spew their nonsense
     
  17. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    You got links bro?
     
  18. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    Also no point in mentioning Allamah Saeed Asad because he is said that Although he disagrees with the term 'khata' being used for Sayida Fatima, he still regards Jalali sahib to be part of Ahl-us Sunnah.

    Sayyid Muzaffar Hussain Shah has not been seen with Syed Irfan Shah and co since just before the conference where Shah Sahib verbally abused Jalali Sahib and his parents.

    Do you know what the saddening thing is that Asif Alvi referred to Sayiduna Abu Bakr as a kafir, and you should see how calmly Shah Sahib refuted him.
     
  19. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    You only read what you want to read and then make conclusions from it
    @AbuSulayman.
    Firstly, @abu Hasan did not raise this objection in Muharram, it was before that. It was picked up on a few days ago and we have responded.

    I am glad you mentioned Jalali Sahib. If you actually look to the start of the thread, we said that Jalali Sahib should apologise for what he said because of how the term 'khata' can be misinterpreted by the awaam. What the brothers have refuted is that what Jalali sahib said was not a gustakhi and no shari hukm can be placed on this. Disagreement with the wording is what most scholars expressed, but Shah sahib and co took it to another level.

    Like @Aqdas said, if you disagree with @abu Hasan's position, then that's not an issue. If you go back to the original thread, you can see people like myself made favourable ta'wil for the term. However, what we are refuting is this labelling.

    When I told you about the issues with Hanif Qureshi, you were a lot more diplomatic. Check out your response.

    However, you are quick to label us a Nasabi and haters of Ahl ul Bayt. This is my issue, why the double standards.

    With regards to your heart, you again misinterpreted what I said.
     
  20. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    muzaffar shah sahib reads the aayat:

    s2v47.png
    surah baqarah, 2:47, 2:145]

    i don't want to really refute muzaffar shah sahib. if using that title is very important for him and the litmus test of his love of sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha, then let him. but accusing bughz of sayyidah fatimah, for those who only point out proper is unjust at the least. but then, most speechmakers are not full-time scholars. so there is no point in whining about it.

    one of the meaning of the word `aalam is 'the age'. thus it refers to 'people of the age'. now if you mean "sayyidatu'l aalamin" which age are you referring to? of course, you can carve exceptions in your mind even if it may not be linguistically consistent. it is a free country that you live in - free for those who curse SaHabah and people (relatives of muzaffar shah) who openly utter profanities abusing ulama without a whimper or a squeak from these 'lions'.

    ---
    it is obvious that the usage above affords scope for contextual interpretation. this is why the other verse on the superiority of sayyidah mariyam is interpreted [surah aal imran, s3:v47]:

    s3v42.png


    ----
    this is the madness that you are descending into by blindly imitating rawafiD. ulama of the past differed about who was superior - whether sayyidah faTimah, sayyidah ayishah or sayyidah mariyam without being accused of being naSibis and harbouring bughz of sayyidah fatimah raDiyAllahu anhaa.

    when this is the level of 'scholars' and their discourse in our time, laymen and juhala like abu sulayman can be forgiven for their rants.

    la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2020
    Umar99 and Unbeknown like this.

Share This Page