Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Refutation' started by AR Ahmed, Jun 21, 2022.
Maybe the scholar in question about Sh Abdalqadir was mistaken in his assessment then....
which portion? can you please point out the segment?
what do you mean not in arabic? the phrase used in arabic is mentioned in qur'an and hadith according ot the shaykh.
this is incorrect.
he clearly says that we cannot say anything against a sahabi (especially in the context of sayyidna muawiyah raDi'Allahu anhu).
people from the subcontinent are accustomed to titles and honorifics to the point that if someone does not say: 'hazrat' or follow up with a 'rahimahullah' or 'raDi'Allahu anhu' we deem it to be disrespectful. so it is mostly a cultural thing.
when alahazrat mentions sahabah or even ulama, he usually mentions lofty titles and laudatory remarks, which is considered as elegant style. but in english, such epithets/remarks appear grandiloquent and are sparingly used.
this is also true to an extent in arabic. even imams such as nawawi and subki say: muawiyah ibn sufiyan without the prefix "sayyiduna" or the prayer suffix. check ibn hajar al-haytami's sawayiq al-muhriqah and tat'hir al-janan. surely, one cannot accuse him of being shiyi or tafdili?
this is the way arabs speak. so we shouldn't measure them according to the cultural/linguistic mores of the subcontinent.
now for the statements made by the shaykh in the clip below about the asharah and the rest being superior to hazrat mu'awiyah, he is reciting from jawharah and there is no objection for what he says. it is true that hazrat mu'awiyah is among the later sahabah and there is no comparison with mawla ali or even the rest of the asharah.
@9.40 he tries to answer a question about his appointment of yazid. he takes a deep breath (as if he is reluctant to talk about it) and he says:
who was first to appoint a successor? there is no doubt he (i.e. hazrat muawiyah) was the first.
and who will question him for that? that is Allah. it is for Allah to ask him (yuHasibuhu Allah)
and it is not for us to call him to account. brother... compared to him, we should know our place (na'rifu maqamana) and our limits.
[he is..] a companion of the Prophet SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.
who am i to speak about the companions [of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam].
i am nothing (la shayy) compared to the Companions of Sayyiduna Muhammad sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam
i should know my worth, my brother. [i shouldn't even speak of] tabi'yin who...
and i? i let my tongue loose about the Companions of the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam?
such a tongue will be [should be] cut off that speaks [ill] of the companions of our master, the Messenger of Allah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.
or the blessed family (aal bayti) of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. or the awliya [friends] of Allah, the righteous folk.
it is not fair to accuse him of being a tafdili. his position is that of ahl al-sunnah.
Allah knows best.
i asked a scholar about these videos
he said a lot of the stuff (baghawah in the shari' istilahi sense vs equaling zulm in the lughawi sense) is in our books but that he (abdalqadir) is trying to defend tafdhilis
similarly the statement about the 'amal of sayyidina amir mu'awiya radhiallahu anh and not being in his group has the ta'wil of referring to sayyidina Ali karamallahu wajhul karim being on the haq and sayyidina amir mu'awiya radhiallahu anh being on khata ijtihadi
that being saidd, this scholar told me that abdalqadir is defending tafdhiliyyah and should not have said it in the way he did. he also said the ibarat of bahar e shari'at is for the use of baghi/baghiya/fi'atul baghiya in urdu not arabic
i agree with this 'alim's assessment. I follow fatawa ridawiyya sharif and bahare shariat and maktubat sharif in saying khata ijtihadi nothing more
see 4:14 where he says he is not from the hizb of hazrat amir muawiya رضى الله عنه and is not pleased with the action of hazrat ameer muawiya رضى الله عنه
Note Shaykh al-Buti rahimahullah used this word also but did taraddi and clariified baghi and baghawah in fiqh al-islami entails ijtihad:
Note our position:
Our mashaykh have made it clear it is not permissible to use this term baghi because of change of 'urf (see Bahare Shari'at) and because this issue was an issue of ijtihadi khata : عرفِ شرع میں بغاوت مطلقاً مقابلۂ امامِ برحق کو کہتے ہیں ، عناداً ہو، خواہ اجتہاداً ، ان حضرات (حضرت امیر معاویہ، حضرت طلحہ و حضرت زبیر ) پر بوجہ رجوع اس کا اطلاق نہیں ہو سکتا، گروہِ امیرِ معاویہ رضی ﷲ تعالیٰ عنہ پر حسبِ اصطلاحِ شرع اِطلاق فئہ باغیہ آیا ہے، مگر اب کہ باغی بمعنی مُفسِد ومُعانِد وسرکش ہو گیا اور دُشنام سمجھا جاتا ہے، اب کسی صحابی پر اس کا اِطلاق جائز نہیں (بہار شریعت،حصہ 1، امامت کا بیان)
See also maktubat imam rabbani hisssa chaharam daftar awal
Imam Ahmad Rida in Fatawa Ridawiyya Sharif writes: ہم اہلسنت ان میں حق،جانب جناب مولٰی علی(مانتے)اور ان سب کو مورد لغزش)بر غلط و خطا اور حضرت اسد اللہّی کو بدرجہا ان سے اکمل واعلٰی جانتے ہیں مگر بایں ہمہ بلحاظ احادیث مذکورہ(کہ ان حضرات کے مناقب و فضائل میں مروی ہیں)زبان طعن وشنیع ان دوسروں کے حق میں نہیں کھولتے اور انہیں ان کے مراتب پر جوان کے لیے شرع میں ثابت ہوئے رکھتے ہیں،کسی کو کسی پر اپنی ہوائے نفس سے فضیلت نہیں دیتے۔اور ان کے مشاجرات میں دخل اندازی کو حرام جانتے ہیں، الخ
"و معاوية كان باغي "
رضي الله عنه
he also uses the terms baghi and zaalim for Sayyiduna Amir Mu'awiyyah raDiyAllahu a'nh
He also sayss in one of the two videos that he is not from the group of Sayyiduna Amir Mu'awiyah raDiyAllahu a'nh and it is not necessary to do taraddi of him.
It was difficult to follow his accent in some places but what I understood is that he is defending Sayyiduna Amir Mu'awiyyah raDiyAllahu a'nh. I have watched some of his other videos, he refutes wahabiyyah very well, and appears to be a sunn alim. he also has praised sayyidi ala hazrat alaihi rahmah was riDwan.
he admitted that sayyiduna Amir Mua'wiyyah was a sahabi, and said the sandals of a sahabi are on my head (an expression of respect in arabic). near the end, he also said that disrespecting a sahabi, even if he is an a'rabi (a villager), is a great sin because a sahabi is afDal from all of us because of the blessed companionship of Rasulullah aliahi afDalus salatu wat tasleem.
the only issue I felt was that he did not use raDiyAllahu anh with sayyiduna Amir Mu'awiyyah's (raDiyAllahu anh) name, but he didn't appear to be a deviant who disrespect sayyiduna Amir Mu'awiyyah raDiyAllahu a'nh.
Is this person really a shaykh? see how much lack of adab he has when mentioning sayyidina amir mu'awiya radhiyallahu anhu.