Part 4 مسئلہ ۴۱: قبر کو بوسہ دینا بعض علما نے جائز کہا ہے، مگر صحیح یہ ہے کہ منع ہے۔ (4) (اشعۃ اللمعات) اور قبر کا طوافِ تعظیمی منع ہے اور اگر برکت لینے کے لیے گرد مزار پھرا تو حرج نہیں ، مگر عوام منع کیے جائیں بلکہ عوام کے سامنے کیا بھی نہ جائے کہ کچھ کا کچھ سمجھیں گے۔
I saw this post today on Twitter. The reference is from GF Haddad’s, ‘Albani and His Friends.’ Page 220. https://archive.org/details/albani-...ion-2009-final/page/189/mode/1up?view=theater does anyone have the reference to this, if true? JazakAllah Khair
shadee masry takes a principled stand on deobandi writings pic.twitter.com/KRaZ0XDpcB— Deobandis posting their Ls online (@DeobandiLs) February 3, 2023 I wish he also washes his hands off jonathan brown and his heretical positions.
This is not just about inability or ignorance - this is studied indifference to truth - and hence, quite plausibily a deliberate attempt to misguide. If a person can make so bold a claim as: no theologian ever said xyz - then it means he has either studied the matter deeply before coming to such an absolute conclusion or he is here to lie confidently to hoodwink the gullible. I see no third possiblity. Especially since he didn't provide even an informal retraction. Allah Knows best.
The response doesn't answer the following questions: When it is said that Prophet ﷺ is described as Mukhtar-e-Kul, does he ﷺ have choice (ikhtiyar) and power (qudrah) (ie. Allah bringing out the effect/ tathir due to his ﷺ kasb) to: Forgive sins Creation of ajsaam Make ANYTHING halal or haram He asks whether kasb cannot be attributed to certain Mujizat as they're from khasais of Allah To sum it up, his question is about the limits of Ikhtiyar (pertaining to the issue of Mukhtar-e-Kul), if any. This issue, I believe, is the crux of Deo-Barelwi difference on Istighatha. When people quote the book Zalzala that even Deobandi elders engaged in exercising tasarruf and has knowledge of unseen based on the stories in their books, the deobandi response (as per the books written in refutation of Zalzala and others) is that Deobandis do not disbelieve in Karamat or Mujizat. They simply affirm them as action (Fe'l) of Allah and hence help is not sought from the creation. The crux of the issue is whether Prophets and Awliya have kasb when they heal the sick, grant someone Jannah etc. (ie. when Allah creates the effect whilst the helper had the kasb) or are these mujizat/karamat from the khasais of Allah with no possibility of kasb being attributed to the creation, as said in the quoted twitter thread.
Wow, I was not aware of all this. Thanks for sharing this important thread. Having said that he has some excellent translations of Hanbali works refuting the Najdis. But clearly we should not speak on every topic unless we are well versed in it.
oh well if jurjis hanbali has reservations, it would probably be a pathetic piece. we have our own reservations about abu ja'afar hanbali: https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/abu-jaafar-hanbali-jurjis.11772/page-2#post-73000 ==== wonder how it looks.
Interestingly, Sheikh Abu Jafar al-Hanbali was one of the editing staff for the Ibn al-Jawzi translation and he says he warned them not to go ahead with it: "There are significant errors made regarding the theology of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH) and Imam Ibn Al-Jawzi, by both the translator and the publisher along with some of the issues of Imam Muhammad Zahid Al-Kawthari. I know this as I was on the editing staff and I first warned them not to do this translation as they had neither studied comparative creed nor had they understood the issues surrounding the fact that this was an “in house” discussion between Imam Ibn Al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) and some other scholars within the madhhab. After presenting my statements to the translation committee regarding my lack of confidence in their skill as well as mistakes made in theology by the translator, I was informed that they were still going ahead with the project and not going to consult authorities on the topic such as Imams As-Saffarini (d. 1188 AH) and others." https://jurjis.wordpress.com/2015/01/31/ibn-al-jawzi-translation-and-dishonesty/
I know of him because I used to follow and admire the Zaytuna college people. He has translated one of Imam Ghazalis aqidah works (al-Iljam al-Awwam an ilm al-kalam) into English. Also he translated a work by Imam ibn al-Jawzi (Daf' Shubah al-Tashbih). Obviously translating is one thing and being an expert in kalam is another, however this shows he is not totally ignorant. I wonder therefore why he was so off the mark on the issue of kidhb. It is down to hanging around too much with deobandis and being influenced by them? Did he read and accept Sheikh Nuh's article blindly? I wonder what these people are reading to make them believe such a thing.
This doesn't make any sense: 1. If Allah conveys the lie told by his creation, such as the lies of Pharaoh in the Quran, what Allah has said is truth because he has told us exactly what Pharaoh said. Conveying what someone else said is not a lie, it's literally the truth. Literally. 2. If conveying what someone else has said means the power to lie, then is conveying what someone else has said actual lying? It doesn't make any sense. Is he saying that if Allah conveys a lie that someone else has said, this would be a lie in itself in which case he's promoting a belief in the occurrence of a lie as opposed to the possibility. If he is not saying that Allah conveying the lie of someone else is a lie, then it doesn't prove the power to lie. I seek refuge in Allah. What he said is incoherent. Only a buffoon would believe this.
That's what it seems like and he's just exposing his jahl that he hasn't as much as opened a book of Kalam. He's gonna cry bad Adab if we call him as the donkey that he is.
True, but is he saying the definition for Muhal Aqlan (which is that the mind cannot conceive of it's existence) changes when we speak about lying? If so where did he get this from? Or is his given definition actually what he considers the definition of Muhal Aqlan to be? If so, then one could say "Muhal Aqlan means He has no logical reason to create another god, not that He cannot do it." Wal iyazu billah! This is madness
these guys throw a hissy fit when we call them blasphemous mutazila, but time and again they just show their reality as blasphemous mutazila. these juhhal simply can't grasp a simple thing that Allah's Kalam is one and qadeem with no beginning or end, it's not emergent like our Kalam
Dr. Abdullah Ali made a very strange comment which I cannot find now because he deleted the tweet, but it was something along the lines of "Logically impossible (muhal aqlan) means that He has no logical reason to lie, not that He cannot do it". I genuinely have never heard this as a definition of muhal aqlan. I am a beginner in kalam books so can anyone else clarify if there is any truth in this?
Those who believe in Imkan al-kidhb really took a bad beating on twitter recently. Maulana Abu Hasan, SunniCircassian, Dr Shadee and a few others went in and they really had no answer.
Note that BenHamid's initial contention was (paraphrased from memory ): No theologian has ever said lying is beyond Divine Power After he was quickly exposed for making such an utterly ignorant comment - did he have the decency to admit he was wrong? No sir, because that is against the rules of adab taught at zaytouna.
For the brothers who are not aware - a back and forth was going on between mawlana @abu Hasan and abdullah bin hamid ali (of lampost), on the issue of imkaan kadhib - which started after BinhamidAli supported a clueless random poster dispensing jahalat about the topic and shady masry objected. Mawlana took it up from there and started posting excerpts from Imam Sanusi, Imam Asha'ri et al. Instead of admitting his error BinhamdiAli went on the defensive, making comments that were not only illogical but also showed his utter unfamiliarity with even the basics of the science of kalaam. Things kept getting worse for him until he killed what little credibility he had by saying: "Allah can convey someone's lies. Hence He has the power to lie. Very Coherent". al 'iyadu bi Allah. ==== Either he realised the stupidity of this statement or someone else did him a favor and the rest is the usual story of adab and nuance that zaytuna is well known for: SPECIAL NOTE: I deleted tweets from a debate about a delicate matter of Kalam, not because I have changed my view. I did it because Twitter isn’t the right place for such discussions. The platform is too prone to misunderstanding and full of uncharitable readers. Peace.— Dr. Abdullah Ali (@BinhamidAli) January 22, 2023
