sunni organisational constitution

which part of this quote says that

 

my oh my, i'm flattered! what's there to return. i asked a question on the other thread, you answered it to the best of your deceptive abilities, and that was that.

i see you avoided the following questions:

any particular reason?

 

this is just wonderful. we keep getting such agenda-free posters one after other. no sooner does one leave (or is kicked out) than another joins. I wonder if it's the same small group of posters who keep returning with different aliases.

 

woh baat sarey fasaney mein jis ka zikr na tha
woh baat unko bahut nagawaar guzri hai

 

First of all, Do you always ask the questions and then do not return? For example see here: http://www.sunniport.com/masabih/showthread.php?t=11245

however, Yes, I consider the khawarij, rafizis and wahabis as muslims and part of the ummah hence part of the ijma of the ummah. The caveat is that those who do not deny the zaruriyat e din are muslims. For example, if a rafizi does tabarra and denies the khilafat of shaykhayn then he/she is still a muslim though an innovator, etc. or a khariji who does takfir of sahaba is still a muslim, etc.

as for their inclusion in the ijma, it is the opinion of imam ghazali, imam aamdi, etc. that if an innovator mujtahid is not included in the ijma then such an ijma is not valid.

 

i wonder why nawazuddin shah sahib did not pick up the issue #6 and #7 and argue against taqlid. who knows we may see the madh'hab of PAQS walthamstowi as the sixth madh'hab (as many people include ja'afari mad'hab as the fifth...)

---
or the even better for his argument are #17 and #18: mawlid and gyarahwin; and disagree that none among the salaf celebrated it and therefore claim that alahazrat has removed all ulama prior to the sixth-seventh century as out of ahl al-sunnah.

---
what shah sahib did not realise is that these points are checklists are for common people to ensure that a person is true sunni or not - IN OUR TIMES - and if those who disagree are non-sunnis. this is just a test to expose those who have a disease in the heart and who do taqiyyah and deceive common people.

khuub pardah hai ke chilman se lage baythe hain
saaf chupte bhi nahin saamne aatey bhi nahin

shah sahib did not realise that he failed the twenty-test.

----
now you tell me whether wiping upon mests is an article of faith? if not, why did imam a'azam include it in a book of aqidah claiming that sunnis do this - non-sunnis don't?

----
regardless, if you are interested, i can show the fallacies in your argument - wa billahi't tawfiq.

 

so according to you, rafidiz form a part of the ummah?

or perhaps you think their opinion merits an inclusion in the ijma3 of the ummah?

do you also consider khariji and wahabi opinions worthy of inclusion in the ijma3 of the ummah?

what about the qadianis (of either type)?

a simple yes/no is all i ask

do you identify yourself as a Sunni with odd 3qaid or some 3qaid at variance with Ala Hazrat - or as an ithna3shari shia?

do you consider people like khomeini or sistani as a) respect-worthy or b) disrespect-worthy?

 

Just to support the above and please do not construe this as some kind of insincere agenda, that is not my intention at all. these are some concerns I have so please address them.

Imam Muhammad ibn Hasan al-Shaybani (d. 189) a prominent student of Imam Azam and an architect of the hanafi madhab is reported in the Hanafi work, al-jawahir al-mudiyya:

محمد بن الحسن يقول لو لم يقاتل معاوية عليا ظالما له متعديا باغيا كنا لا نهتدي لقتال أهل البغي

"If muawiya had not fought with Ali whilst being a zalim/unjust and a rebel/baghi who transgressed then we would not have known the rulings for fighting with rebels."

http://www.madinahnet.com/books26/الجواهر-المضية-في-طبقات-الحنفية-صفحة516


Imam al-San`ani in his famous commentry subul al-salaam on Imam Ibn Hajr al-asqalani's book bulugh al-maram says:

والحديث دليل على أن الفئة الباغية معاوية ومن في حزبه والفئة المحقة علي رضي الله عنه ومن في صحبته وقد نقل الإجماع من أهل السنة بهذا القول جماعة من أئمتهم كالعامري وغيره

"This hadith of Ammar Yasir is proof that the rebel party is Muawiya and his group and the Ali was on the truth and those with him and there is IJMA of ahlesunnat upon this position, stated by al-amiri and others from ahlesunnat."

http://islamport.com/w/srh/Web/366/749.htm

there are so many more references from our ahlesunnat imams on this but this much is sufficient. What are we to do as sunnis? consider all who said what they said as out of ahlesunnat?

and for those who do not know the hadith about hazrat ammar yasir, the meaning of which is the ijma of ahlesunnat is stated above by imam sanani is the following from sahih bukhari sharif:

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 438:
Narrated 'Ikrima:
Ibn 'Abbas said to me and to his son 'Ali, "Go to Abu Sa'id and listen to what he narrates." So we went and found him in a garden looking after it. He picked up his Rida', wore it and sat down and started narrating till the topic of the construction of the mosque reached. He said, "We were carrying one adobe at a time while 'Ammar was carrying two. The Prophet saw him and said woe! a relbellious group will kill Ammar and started removing the dust from his body and said, "May Allah be Merciful to 'Ammar. He will be inviting them to Paradise and they will invite him to Hell-fire." 'Ammar said, "I seek refuge with Allah from affliction."

 

Okay Bro, lets take the issue number Five as stated in the umur:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/127010992/umur-e-ishrin-be-es-umoor-urdu

It says that those who fought Hazrat Ali ibn Talib did so because of khata e ijtihadi which means that even they fought with Ali ibn Abi Talib and were also wrong yet received reward from Allah(swt) because it was done on the basis of ijtihad.

Now by signing it as sunniyyat, a person considering them as rebels and unjust would be taken out of ahlesunnat.

This is not what the Imams have stated though there may be other opinions similar to umur ishrin but the point is that if one does not agree with it and holds an opinion certified by other sunni Imams then that person and indeed that imam would be considered out of ahlesunnat. This is the point here.

Now that the point of contention is clear, let me give you the names of imams and my own position. First, let us trace the development of the idea of ijtihadi mistake thesis before actually citing evidence of the imams on the issue.

Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari (d. 332) in his famous work maqalat al-islamiyyin provides us with the origins of the ijtihadi mistake thesis. He states:

وقال قائلون‏:‏ سبيل علي وطلحة والزبير وعائشة في حربهم سبيل الاجتهاد وأنهم جميعاً كانوا مصيبين وكذلك قول هؤلاء في قتال معاوية وعلي وهذا قول حسين الكرابيسي‏


"the qa'ilun said: Ali, Talha, zubayr and ayesha in their fight were mujtahids and all were right and similarly they have said about the fight between Muawiya and Ali and this is the position of husayn al-Karabisi"

So here, as you would say, that qailun are not clear who they really were-sunni, khawarij, mutazilah- but we know who al-karabisi was, he was a student of imam shafi and a jurist and has also had something in him about hazrat Ali as khatib al-baghdadi, etc. have reported. However, the point here is that the FIRST person in the history of Islam, according Imam al-ashari, to consider the war between Hazrat Ali ibn Abi Talib and Hazrat Muawiya ibn Abi sufyan as an ijtihadi mistake was al-Karabisi (d. 248). So what was the general belief of ahl al-sunnah prior to that? if he was the first person then what did the muslims believe for over 200 years before him? This position is considered as Sunni position only and if you do not sign umur ishrin then you are out of ahl al-sunnah yet we find that before al-karabisi (d. 248) this was NOT the position of ahl al-sunnah.

so what was it? here I will only provide a single reference from the classical times by imam abd al-qahir al-jurjani. Imam al-manawi states in fayd al-qadeer:


وقال الإمام عبد القاهر الجرجاني في كتاب الإمامة: أجمع فقهاء الحجاز والعراق من فريقي الحديث والرأي ، منهم مالك والشافعي وأبو حنيفة والأوزاعي والجمهور الأعظم من المتكلمين والمسلمين ، أن علياً مصيب في قتاله لأهل صفين كما هو مصيب في أهل الجمل ، وأن الذين قاتلوه بغاة ظالمون له ، لكن لا يكفَّرون ببغيهم

"Imam Abdul Qahir al-jurjani states in his book al-imamah that jurisconsults of Hijaz and Iraq from ahl al-hadith and Rayy have unanimously agreed, among them were Malik, Shafi`, Abu Hanifah, al-awzai and the great majority of theologians and muslims that Ali was in the right in Siffin as he was right in jamal and those who fought him were unjust rebels but they were not kafirs on account of their rebellion."

we know that al-karabisi (d. 248) was the first person to consider the ijtihadi mistake between Ali and Muawiya. But before that in the first two hundred years of Islamic scholarship, we have Imam Abu Hanifah (d. 150), Imam Awzai (d. 157), Imam Malik (d. 179) and Imam Shafi`(d. 204) plus great majority of mutakallims and muslims, who said that those who fought Hazrat Ali were bughaat zalimun/ unjust rebels.

You asked me what I think, well, I say what the imams of ahlesunnat said. I don't mind the ijtihadi mistake but what the above imams have said would take them out of ahlesunnat if they don't sign the umur ishrin.

just to state another reference from a prominent aqidah text of ahlesunnat tuaght in darse nizami by another al-Jurjani known as sharah al-mawaqif:

والذى عليه الجمهور من الامة وهو ان المخطئ قتلة عثمان و محاربو علي فانهما امامان فيحرم القتل و المخالفة قطعا الا ان بعضهم كلقاضي ابي بكر ذهب الى ان هذه التخطية لاتبلغ حد التفسيق و منهم من ذهب الى التفسيق كلشيعة وكثيرمن اصحابنا

"Upon which the majority of the Ummah are is that those who killed Usman and fought with Ali were in error because they were both rightful imams and it is certainly haram to kill and oppose them. Some like qazi abu bakr considered their error as not reaching fisq but those who considered this as fisq are the shiah and MOST of our scholars."

Most of our scholars here means sunni ulama because Imam al-Jurjani is a sunni imam and whats more the same most of our ashab is also stated by imam al-aamdi in his abkar al-afkaar.

The point is that the you do not have to agree with what is stated by these great imams of ahlesunnat but please do not do what the wahabis do. For example, we say Ya Rasul Allah and if the wahabis do not say it then we do not mind but the problem is that they call us mushriks for saying so. This is the problem. Here we have opinions of OUR prominent ulama referenced-to name but a few-and if anyone holds to what is said above then do not take them out of the fold of ahlesunnat.

 

The Ijma` stated by alahazrat on the kufr of hazrat abu talib(r) is definitely not Ijma of the ummah. He mentions that rawafiz are the ones affirming his imaan. so what kind of ijma is it? He states ijma as mutlaq and excludes the rafizis from it. From what I know of his writing and the kind of ijmas advanced in them, I think, according to him, it is ijma of ahlesunnat. So if one believes in the imaan of hazrat Abu Talib(r) then He is in fact going against the ijma of ahlesunnat.
Now, you tell me, is that right? if not then atleast state what kind of ijma is meant with evidence, of course. Something tells me that you may evade the question again because it leads to certain consequences that may be hard to swallow.

 

why argue about ijmaa which you do not understand?

 

shah sab, this won't do.

I am sorry that I cannot conform to something that is not proportional to the evidence.

which of the 20 issues mentioned in umur ishrin do you find "difference of opinion"?

please mention the point number, the imams that differed and your own position. remember that sincere people are not afraid to state their own stand. sunnis do not do taqiyyah.

 

The kind that alahazrat mentions as above. Perhaps, you will be kind enough and explain it to us.

 

such as ijtihadi ghalti thesis.

 

which kind of ijma'a?

 

such as?

 

Qasim bhai, please explicate for me, if you don't mind, alahazrat's saying that there is IJMA that Abu Talib is a non-muslim and that it is the rafizis who consider him momin, etc. what I need to understand is that to declare one a muslim or non-muslim is a matter of aqidah and it is very serious. In principle, if Ijma is a binding force then to go against it results in what?

bro AH, zaruriyat e din are those the denial of which takes one out of the fold of Islam because they are qati al-subut and qati al-dalalat.

as for umur ishrin, i find that in some of them there is clear difference of opinion stated in our books of aqeedah and otherwise by other greats Imams.

I never intended a debate or an argument; my humble opinion, even if it may be erroneous but I am stating it with sincerity and without any malice. I am sorry that I cannot conform to something that is not proportional to the evidence.

 

then you should go back to whoever taught you and learn the basics of aqidah. and our brothers should stop arguing on such topics with a person who does not even know zaruriyat e din.

next you will ask us what farz and wajib means.

 

Nawaz Sahib are you for real you show us where A'ala Hadrat radi Allahu Ta'ala 'anhu has said that a person who believes that he is a mumin is khaarij from the Ahl us Sunnah.
My advice to you is stop this nonsense it is taking you no where.

 

I do not understand what you mean by 'core aqidah issue'?

alahazrat says: that ulama ka ja baja kufr e Abi Talib par ijma naqal farmana aur Islam e Abi Talib qawl maz`um e rawafiz batana...

furthermore: kufr abi talib....aysa roshan sabut se sabit ke jis se kisi Sunni ko majal dam zadan nahin...

as for comparison between Abu Lahab and Abu Talib(r) then obviously kufr of abu lahab is explicitly by name is stated in the Qur`an hence not to consider him kafir takes one out of the fold of Islam and not just ahlesunnat.



alahazrat is saying that there is ijma on kufr of abu talib and no sunni can affirm his iman. what does that mean? those who affirm hazrat abu talib's iman are denying IJMA and that it is a rafizi belief and not a sunni one!