Sayyiduna Ameer Muawiyah رضي الله ﺗﻌﺎﻟﯽٰ عنه

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by AMQadiri, May 2, 2018.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Paradise Seeker

    Paradise Seeker Active Member

    Muzammal Shah is a filthy animal that should never be allowed in a sunni masjid.... all his life his crew and him have been attacking sunnis and making out as if there has been a big cover up and conspiracy against the Alhe Bayt by sunni ulamah of the past.......

    this is exactly what the shia say....
     
    AbdalQadir likes this.
  2. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    To be fair, his statement "Prove the marriage (Nikah) of Yazeed’s mother" is wrong and not proven and he should retract it.

    as for other stuff, such as it was not an ijtihadi mistake, etc. are in line with the aqeedah of ahlesunnat. yazid ibn muwaiya's mother was a christian and whilst she was pregnant she was divorced and then yazid was born...
     
  3. Tauba, how upsetting. He is a Sahabi and we need to make sure no one is allowed to insult any one of Them ( may Allah be pleased with Them).
     
  4. YaMustafa

    YaMustafa Well-Known Member

    https://www.facebook.com/MuhammadMasoodQadiri/videos/1098954926815188/

    This is the clip of Muzammil shah jamati insulting Hazrat Ameer Muawiya RadiyAllaho anho.
    Maulana syed irfani ashrafi jeelani told muzammil shah to repent, but still muzammil carried on.

    Muzammil shah says:
    “Prove the marriage (Nikah) of Yazeed’s mother! Prove her declaration of faith! (Kalimah Shahdah). She has neither Nikah nor Declaration of faith! He was nurtured in a Christian household! And when we refer to Hazrat Ameer Muawiya’s mistake as being an “Ijtihadi mistake”… our scholars who state that it is an Ijtihadi mistake…What do you know what an Ijtihadi mistake is? They say that when a Mujtahid makes a mistake, he is still rewarded for his mistake. A mujtahid is: (the public reply) “rewarded for his mistake!”. They say that his refusal to swear an oath of allegiance to Hazrat Ali is an Ijtihadi mistake. I say that we can accept that the refusal to swear allegiance to Hazrat Ali is an “Ijtihadi mistake”. However to appoint Yazid as Khalifa is not just an ordinary mistake, rather it is a grave mistake! (use of Hyperbole for exaggeration). To appoint him during his lifetime…”

    (After this Syed Ifani Miah interrupts and objects and the attendees started protesting and stood up).

    Urdu below

    یزید کی ماں کا نکاح ثابت کرو؟ یزید کی ماں کا کلمہ ثابت کرو؟ نہ اس کا نکاح ہے نہ اس کا کلمہ ہے۔ وہ عیسائیوں کے گھر میں پلا تھا۔ اور حضرت امیر معاویہ کی جو ہم کہتے ہیں نا کہ اجتہادی غلطی ہے۔ ہمارے علماء کہتے ہیں کہ آپ کی اجتھادی غلطی ہے۔ تہانوں کی پتہ اے کہ اجتھادی غلطی کی ہوندی اے؟ آندے نیں مجتھد جو ہوتا ہے ناں وہ غلطی کرے پھر بھی اسے ثواب ملتا ہے۔ مجتھد کو غلطی پر بھی (لوگ جوابًا کہتے ہیں کہ) ثواب ملتا ہے۔ وہ کہتے ہیں کہ حضرت علی کی جو بیعت انھوں نے نہیں کی یہ اجتھادی غلطی ہے۔ میں آناں من لیا کہ حضرت علی کی بیعت نہ کرنا اجتھادی غلطی ہے۔ مان لیتے ہیں لیکن۔ یزید کو خلیفہ مقرر کرنا یہ غلطی نہیں غلطان ہے۔ اپنی زندگی میں مقرر کرنا اسے۔ ( اس کہ بعد سید عرفانی میاں نے ٹوک دیا اور لوگ بھی بول پڑے اور اٹھ کھڑے ہوئے!
     
  5. Muhammad Ali

    Muhammad Ali Veteran

    the actual video is on facebook uploaded by Allama Masood Qadri Sahib. Pir Abdul Qadir has infected all his followers with Shiaism.

    Must watch recent clip of Sayyid Irfan Shah al-Mashadi Kazmi:
     
  6. Wadood

    Wadood Veteran

    There must be some incentive. Otherwise, why would someone spend petrol, and money on other resources, including time, to sit with the deviants.

    There must be some appeal, something to gain. Its not out of friendship for sure.
     
  7. shahnawazgm

    shahnawazgm Veteran

    Why do we still have these gatherings with deviants? It seems like in the UK most are obsessed with sharing a platform with deviants! Why are sunnis still sitting along with the rawafid of walthamstow and his group?

    If you buy a box of mangos and find one rotten then the first thing you do is remove the rotten one to save the rest of the good ones from rotting. How difficult can this be to put into practice?
     
    Noori and Bazdawi like this.
  8. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    mashaAllah
     
  9. Harris786

    Harris786 Veteran

  10. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    The link is broken or page is removed.

    I am re-posting my message here, from another thread:-


    Muzammil Jamaati (previous Imam at Victoria Park mosque) - a protege of PAQs has uttered absolute insolence against the noble Sahabi Hazrat Syeduna Ameer Muawiyyah, by claiming that his son Yazeed was not born from matrimony.

    He has further made fun of Muftis and also accused the noble Sahabi Hazrat Syeduna Ameer Muawiyyah, of being VERY WRONG (in his stance with Syeduna Ali) (Allah be pleased with both the companions).

    only Syed Mohammed Irfaani Jeelani was brave enough to challenge him, refute him and then walk out of the gathering.

    PAQs and his party kept on listening without uttering a word or objecting. It seems this occurred just this week, in Bolton, UK.

    You can listen to Syed Mohammed Irfaani Jeelani's clip HERE.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2016
    YaMustafa and Harris786 like this.
  11. YaMustafa

    YaMustafa Well-Known Member

    Link doesn't work Harris
     
  12. Harris786

    Harris786 Veteran

  13. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    home-made or bought from the rafizi bargain store?
     
  14. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    Busy Now. Will return, insha'Allah, at some point in the next few days, hopefully, with some kulfi for you :)
     
  15. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    nah. see, a little nudge can make you speak a lot.

    why is it then you lose no opportunity to post material that is used to criticise ameer mu'awiyah raDiyallahu anhu?

    indeed?

    both points have been discussed and i have no other opinion than that of great ulama - the 'hotchpotch' ijmaa according to you. perhaps imam Hasan raDiyallahu anhu did not know of hadith of ammar raDiyallahu anhu, or he did not have as much ghayrah for mawla ali raDiyallahu anhu as you do... never mind.

    my ears are closed to criticism of hazrat mu'awiyah. if such criticism is by his equals or superiors (other SaHabah, that is) we just keep quiet - ibn abbas or mawla ali raDiyallahu `anhum had the right to say what they said, and knew what they were talking about. it does not behoove anyone who came afterward to follow them in their criticism. a man's father can scold his uncle (younger brother) which would be just; but if one claims to follow his father and scolds his uncle, he will be considered impudent. even his father will not permit it.

    the reason we must keep quiet is because of RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam asked us to keep quiet. "fear Allah concerning my companions". don't listen to senile old men who say that this warning does not cover hazrat mu'awiyah. khayr, you are not a baby; just stubborn aneed.

    ---
    you didn't understand it. read it again.

    then tell me, why did he openly go against hazrat mu'awiyah in the arafat talbiyah, where the material witness sayid ibn jubayr reports that people were not saying talbiyah fearing mu'awiyah? upon which sayyiduna ibn abbas, said that they were doing it out of bughz of mawla ali. that hadith (which you dug up just as a criticism of ameer mu'awiyah) spawns a few possibilities:

    a) hazrat mu'awiyah held the opinion that talbiyah should be stopped before wuquf; and ibn abbas openly opposed him. why didn't he do taqiyyah there? assuming he was afraid according to you, being arafat and a public assembly is far more cause of fear than in a private majlis talking to a single person as in the case of witr.

    b) hazrat mu'awiyah did not hold the opinion that talbiyah should be stopped; so ibn abbas saying talbiyah was not opposed to him. it would then mean that he was only against the people who didn't say talbiyah and not mu'awiyah per se. so your citing that hadith in criticism of mu'awiyah will not avail you.

    so what is the problem with it? is being a SaHabi and faqih mutually exclusive? which muhaddith considered it self-contradictory like you do?

    yes, of course. but if you haven't noticed, these two athars are distinctly different, and as far as 'donkey' is mentioned - one has it, and another doesn't - black and white. in such cases, if you had suppressed the one with the harsh word and stated the other, it would have been a good action and i would approve of such a citation. instead, you suppressed the other one, trying to present imam taHawi as inimical to mu'awiyah. when imam taHawi has specifically said:

    aq-thwy.jpg

    before you give us the hidayah reference, here read what imam ayni had to say in his nukhab al-afkar, his commentary on ma'ani al-aathar. [5/82]


    nukhab 5-82.jpg
     
  16. “Woe to ‘Ammaar; he will be killed by the transgressing group; he will be calling them to Paradise and they will be calling him to Hell,”

    Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

    If it is said: “He was killed at Siffeen, when he was with ‘Ali, and those who killed him were with Mu‘aawiyah, with whom were some of the Sahaabah, so how can it be said that they were calling to Hell?”

    The answer to that is that they thought that they were calling to Paradise, and their action was based on ijtihaad, so there is no blame on them for following what they thought was best. What is meant by calling people to Paradise is calling them to that which leads to it, which is obeying the ruler. This was the stance of ‘Ammaar, who was calling them to obey ‘Ali, who was the ruler whom it was obligatory to obey at that time, whereas they (Mu‘aawiyah and his followers) were calling people to something other than that, but they are excused for the wrong conclusion they reached, which was based on misinterpretation of the texts.

    End quote from Fath al-Baari (1/542).

    Can you prove that HAZRAT AMEER MUAWIYAH is excluded from this Verse:

    And the first to embrace Islam of the Muhajiroon (the Emigrants from Makkah) and the Ansar (the citizens of Al-Madeenah who helped the Muhajiroon) and also those who followed them exactly (in Faith). Allah is well-pleased with them as they are well pleased with Him.

    Allah knows Best
     
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  17. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    قد يجوز أن يكون قول بن عباس أصاب معاوية على التقية له أي أصاب في شيء آخر لأنه كان في زمنه

    Imam al-Tahawi in his concluding remarks about athar of Ibn Abbas says: the comment of ibn abbas that muawiya is correct about one witr is based on fear and what he meant by 'correct' was in some other matter because he lived in his times.
    so the point is that al-Tahawi thinks that Ibn Abbas said it out of fear. and we know from our own Hanafi works such as hidaya that hz muawiya was indeed oppressive.

    Furthermore, the two athars of ibn abbas in bukhari that you present about witr-incident are from an identical source, namely, Ibn mulaika yet in one version he says that leave him he is a sahabi and in the other he says he is a faqih. similarly, in al-Tahawi, we also have two versions of the witr incident like the one in bukhari but here in one version it says where has the donkey taken that from and in the other version he says that he is correct.

    However, al-Tahawi points out the athar that goes against the hanafi position and the position of Ibn Abbas from Rasul Allah صلى الله عليه و سلم that he said it was correct out of fear because he couldn't openly oppose him during his reign.

    Before, you go loco, let me tell you that whilst considering as a sahabi, I also consider hz muawiya a rebel and our Imams of ahl al-sunna have declared that and have also stated that he was an unjust rebel and since you are a fond of hotchpotch ijma quotations, they have also written that there is ijma of ahl al-sunna that Muwaiya was a baghi and that Hadith of Ammar Yasir makes it clear and now I invite you to study that hadith and the facts surrounding it. A good start would be Bukhari.
     
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    what does it mean? why are you scared of saying it openly nawaz? instead of cut-n-paste and pretending that you have answered me, tell us what your objection or stand is - or if you mean to criticise my post, point out how i am mistaken.

    أي أصاب في شيء آخر لأنه كان في زمنه

    that is my answer.

    ---
    you are going back to the old method of cut-paste passing off as if you have answered. and i will revert to my response of deleting your posts if you don't post a translation and commentary - of what you actually mean by citing a text.

    i reiterate: if you simply cut-paste arabic passages without comments, in attempt to poison the pond, i will delete it. so the next time you do it, remember to:

    a) translate the relevant portions

    b) make your comment - the objective of posting that snippet; whether you agree, disagree, use it as evidence for your position etc.

    c) reference from books - i am sorry, i don't trust online sources and i always go back to books to verify. even books could be inaccurate, but they are still far better than online resources. besides, nawaz, what is the use of such a magnificent library that you sit in to make videos?​

    don't be afraid to mention your own opinion and don't act like a peon who transfers papers from one desk to another without any knowledge of what is in those papers.

    or if you only speak/write arabic, you should participate on the aslein and ahlalhadith forums instead of an english forum.

    wa billahi't tawfiq.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2016
    Harris786 and Ghulam Ali like this.
  19. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Hanafi-Maturidi

    Ibrahim ibn maysara said: it has reached me that umar ibn abd al-azīz [rahimahullah] did not lash anyone during his reign as khalifa except a man who insulted muawiyyah [radi'Allahu anh] in his presence, so he whipped him three times.

    al-istiyaab fi' asma il-ashaab - ibn abd il-barr al-qurtubi, pg. 248
     
    Ghulam Ali and Harris786 like this.
  20. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    قول بن عباس أصاب معاوية على التقية له أي أصاب في شيء آخر لأنه كان في زمنه
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2016

Share This Page