The mention of Amīr e Shaam has disappeared

It could have possibly come in response to this narration. Because al-Ḥākim authenticated it by placing it in his mustadrak (although he had yet to revise it) they used this as an argument. But we know this narration to be weak so in response we cite the report of where Hadhrat Abū Bakr رضي الله عنه himself was named al-Șiddīq. The burden of proof is upon those who claim Hz ʿAlī رضي الله عنه to be aL-Șiddīq al-Akbar. Like i said before if this narration is authentic then we will interpret it to mean after the three khulafa.

This Wajahat Ḥussain Ḥanafī is a distorter and he even speaks against Hadhrat Āmir Muʿāwiyah. Best is to warn people against him

 

Understood all of this from his talk. But my question is, where is our naming coming from? I can find references to Hz Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه being alSiddiq, but not AL Siddiq al Akbar... so there is a bit of an issue here..

He used quite a few fallacious ways to play down all types of jarh, but I'm not skilled enough in usool to debunk them.

 

He is a known Tafḍilī and follower of Tahir ul.

The ḥadīth is reported by Ibn Majāh, bāb: faḍlu ʿAlī ibn abī Ṭālib رضي الله عنه H:120 It was authenticated by al-Ḥākim in his Mustadrak 3:311-312=3:120-121 (DKI) and al-Būṣirī graded its chain ṣaḥīḥ in his Misbah.

However Imām al-Dhahabī said; It does not fall on the condition of either of them (Bukhārī or Muslim) nor is authentic rather it is false.

This is due to the narrator ʿAbbād bin ʿAbdullāh.

ʿAlī bin al-Madīnī had said he is weak, and Imam Bukhari said: Fihi Nazar (which is usually used for someone he considers weak), Uqaili and ibn Adi included them in there Ḍuʿafā.

The issue of Hadhrat Abū Bakr being Afḍal is known by necessity in Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaʿh. The wording itself is weak as it relates that Hadhrat ʿAlī "said" he prayed seven years before the people.

So even if this narration is considered "authentic" in terms of its chain, then we reject it based upon its text or we can interpret it to mean after the first three Khulafa. Allāh Knows best

 

He is a knwn tafzili and follower of Tahir ul

 

I don't know how to post this elsewhere, if someone else can assist...
A gathering last night had this person as a guest speaker. The host made a claim that the hadith in which Maula Ali كرم الله وجهه claims to be al siddiq al akbar and al faruq al a'dham is SAHIH, and has been suppressed by sunnis. He claims that these titles were given by al Nabi صل الله عليه وسلم on ghadeer khum (again, he swears that the hadith is SAHIH)
The only non outright Shia analysis I can find on this is the guest speaker himself.
https://fb.watch/lEGsh4BVC-/?mibextid=ZbWKwL


What I'd like to know, is where did our (subcontinent sunni) naming of our masters Abu Bakr and Umar رضي الله عنه with these titles come from?

 

Hashmi and Noorani Ashrafi are due back in the UK in July.

The Kashmiri Sufis in Birmingham and Blackburn need to stop hosting this orange duo whilst in Bradford they need to oust Mahroof and his orange brigade out of the Sunni Masajid.

 

Mere zuban aur mere posts m Qibla hazrat allama sayyid muhammad madni miya ashrafi jilani zeeda sharafhu ke bare me kuch ghalat alfaz aur ghalat jumle nikal aye the jo public aur manzare aam m nikal aye they.
in tamam baton se me rujoo aur tauba e shari' karta hoon sidq e dill aur nadamat ke sath, tamam tauba k sharait aur taqazay rakhtey hue, aur me wada karta hoon k ainda ulama se mushawarat ke beghair koi jumla nahin bolunga.
wasalam


I have made very disrespectful posts recently regarding Hazrat 'Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Madani Miya Ashrafi al-Jilani zeeda sharfahu. Some ulama may disagree with him but that does not give me the right to lash out at him. I publicly repent, do ruju' and do tawba al-shari' with nadamat keeping all the conditions of tawbah an-nasuha in mind. I promise to not make such comments again unless I am under the guidance of a rightly guided Sunni Sahih al-Aqida scholar.

Wasalam

 

in a manuscript dated 979AH:

 

@4:58 sayyid sahib says:

"in gulistan sheikh saadi wrote: pisar e nuh baa-badan ba-nishist; khandan e nubuwwatash gum shud. hazrat nuh's son sat with evil people, and the progeny (khandan) of prophethood was eliminated".​

====
a few ilmi issues on this error of sayyid sb.
first of all the translation of the sheyr is incorrect.

pisar e nuH baa-badan ba-nishist
khandan e nubuwwatash gum shud

the son of hazrat nuH sat in the company of evil folk
and he was removed from the family of the prophet​

so sayyid sb's translation "the family of the prophet went extinct" is grossly wrong.

and for ANOTHER reason. actually, everyone else after the great flood perished and only the progeny of hazrat nuH survived. in fact, hazrat nuH alayhi's salam is known as the "second aadam" because, only HIS lineage continued after the flood.

it is an absurd claim even if you could justify the gross mistranslation somehow. FACT: the prophet nuH alayhis salam's line continued.

so shaykh sa'adi raHimahullah did not say what sayyid sb attributes to him; and thus he cannot exonerate himself by misquoting shaykh sa'adi.

----
there is a lesson here for the sayyids who step out of line. sitting with evil people may cause you to be ejected, 'eliminated' from the house of the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. that is the lesson of shaykh saadi.

----
another matter of academic interest is that most versions in farsi (including that published by orientalists) mention hazrat lut instead of hazrat nuH alayhima al-salam.

from an old copy of gulistan:



another published in iran:



the wife of hazrat luT alayhi's salam took the company of evil folk
and she was eliminated from the family of a prophet

-----
orientalist translations have said: 'His race of prophets became extinct'.

this doesn't make sense. because in either case (whether hazrat nuH's son or hazrat luT's spouse) it is the fault of the relative and by saying HIS race became extinct - al iyadhu billah - blames the august personages.

obviously, if the son or the spouse sat with wicked people - it is THEY who should get the punishment and that is being cut off from the family of the prophet.

the version about hazrat luT alayhi's salam's wife is more accurate; and a wife losing the way has nothing to do with the lineage of the Prophet himself. as for the version of hazrat nuH's (alayhi's salam) son - it would be correct ONLY if he did not have any other children and we know that it is not right.

come to think of it; eventually abu talib is also from the descendants of hazrat nuH alayhis salam...


====
wAllahu a'alam.

 

Stop the emotional blackmail

 

Nonsense.

 

You guys have become real joke now

Beware if he did taubah and you are still accusing
Beware of slandering people specially Syeds.

Mistakes and error happen to anyone.

In my POV only someone with bad intention would take a clip of god knows how many years it has been and create fitnah with it.

Specially when the concerned person has made so many speeches after that video on the importance and greatness of Sayyiduna Ameer Muawiyah radhiallahu an

 

Also, the ta'wil Noorani miyan used from Khwaja Sadi Shirazi قدس الله سره was unacceptable and is qiyas ma' al-fariq

 

Janab mawlana Sayyid noorani miya ashraf ashrafi ul jilani kichochavi, naib sajjada nashin Huzur Sayyiduna Muhaddith e Azam Hind رحمة الله عليه, Kichocha Shareef, ka diye gaye wazahat par mukhtasar aur muadibana tabsirah
1. Ye kehna durust nahi hai ke ameer e sham se qawal ka murad yazeed tha aur isko bahana banakar aik wazih aur sareeh ghalat cheez ke liye taweel banana durust nahi
2. Janab mawlana sayyid noorani miyan ashrafi sahib, ap ne farmaya k ap ne qawwal ko kaha k is misra ko change karein, is m daleel aur gawahi chahiye ke ap ye mehez farmarahe hain ya apne waqi' unko ye farmaya tha
3. molvi sibtain haider ne doosre video me to is misray ka misdaq hazrat Sayyiduna Amir Mu'awiya رضى الله عنه ko tehraya hai (ma'azAllah). to agar ye niyyat bhi nahi hai ap ka, magar agar shubha hai ke is me tauheen hai to kya ap par wajib nahi ke is qawali se parhez karein?

Wasalam

 

This response is inadequate and does not address the fact that if there would be "misconceptions" or even a shubha of disrespect, then it is not just the awam's responsibility to do 'husn al-dhann' but the 'alim's responsibility to stay far away.

Whether he is Ridawi or Ashrafi or whatever.

 

I am going to recant (do ruju) from something i said
As much as I now disagree with the way things are going in Khanwada e Ashrafiyya with Madani Miya meeting Kazim Pasha in 2020 (although I had husn e zann at one point that he didn't know much of Kazim Pasha's current views) and giving khilafat to Intekhab Qadeeri and then doing ruju' and other masa'il where even as a Talib (which i no longer am), i had concerns....

I am not sure if Madani Miya or Hashmi Miya have any direct involvement or awareness of this situation with Noorani Miya & his brothers Subhani and Samdani


Therefore, its unfair for me to say "where is Madani Miya" in this specific instance.

 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?st...pU5ZjHMcHl&id=219922974700393&mibextid=Nif5oz

Fatwa on these matters by the Saadaat