Clips from Shaykh Abu Hasan's posts: TM said grammar - saying that it is 100% mistake and explained the reason. saying that tanwin is not upon a verb. he is clearly speaking about grammar - not orthography. for example, مالك in surah fatihah is written ملك without the alif - this is not a mistake, but when one talks of orthography, it is of this type. not why the verb doesn't have tanween. "tanween appears on a noun, not a verb" "the laam in the beginning and the nun in the end is tawkidi" are these issues of grammar or orthografie? the example is clearly not related to rasm al-khatt. it is a grammar issue and as i have pointed out on the forum.
Exactly. The Deobandis are so shameless that they would rather sacrifice the truth of the Quran and its perfection than be held accountable for the errors made by themselves or their group. They resort to cheap and dishonest tactics, citing obscure or out-of-context texts and or ahadith to deflect from the issue, which is even worse because they imply that such actions were common and acceptable among the Sahabah. However, they deliberately leave out the plausible explanations for these narrations, showing no concern for the doubts that may arise in the minds of the common people. It is the true Ahlusunnah (ie the Barelwis) who are left with no alternative, and in order to safeguard the honor of the Quran and the Sahabah, must respond by offering the proper context and upholding their integrity. In retrospect, this situation once again demonstrates who truly stands on the side of the haq.
Let me rephrase what I asked since it was a bit ambiguous: If the discussion is related to Rasm and not grammar, shouldn’t this type of tawkid be present in all places that require tawkid within a specific version of a Mus'haf and not just limited to a few places? Because then it would relate to the Mus'haf being used. Whereas if it is a grammar issue, then it would makes sense that in some places it exists with the Noon and in some places with the Alif tanween due to consideration of certain factors?
This verse Fascinatingly describes this situation & devs in general یَوْمَ یَعَضُّ الظَّالِمُ عَلٰى یَدَیْهِ یَقُوْلُ یٰلَیْتَنِی اتَّخَذْتُ مَعَ الرَّسُوْلِ سَبِیْلًا(27) وَیْلَتٰى لَیْتَنِیْ لَمْ اَتَّخِذْ فُلَانًا خَلِیْلًا(28) On that Day, the wrongdoer will bite his hands, saying, “Would that I had adopted the Path with the Messenger Alas, my ruin! Would that I had not taken such a man as a friend.
their brazenness is shocking. they will wager their iman just to win an argument. they will lie and distort just to prove their point. it is a deeper disease, which they don't realise. --- all tariq had to do was say: "i made a mistake. am sorry. i do tawbah. i repeat iman". instead, they proferred justifications and then his defenders are doing a haka. in all this, they are not even concerned about the honour of the qur'an and do not bother about underscoring the fact that there is no mistake in the qur'an. instead, they are justifying the statement: "qur'an has a mistake which is 100% grammar mistake". pathetic beings.
My takeaway from the discussion: Mawlana Abu Hasan is arguing that TM’s ignorant kufri statement is partly due to TM not being aware of the grammatical rule that dictates how the “Noon” can be converted to “Tanwin” in the case of a “Tawkid” that may have additional requirements (ie the necessity of the alif in case one wants to pause during recitation, in order for correct recitation at the pause). But due to ignorance, TM believes that this is a grammatical mistake in the Quran that was overlooked by the Prophet ﷺ during dictation (according to TM). Tulaib is trying to distract from the main issue by downplaying this statement of “grammatical error” by TM, even though explicitly stated by TM himself, by making the argument that this matter is not a matter of grammar to begin with. Rather this is an issue of Rasm (according to Tulaib). And that TM mistakenly used the term “grammatically” in place of Rasmi due to lack of understanding of English. Tulaib has no evidence to support this claim. This is clearly a matter related to grammar as acknowledged by TM himself; why else would he engage in explaining the concept of “Lam Tawkid” and “Noon Tawkid” when making his claim? There was no reference to Rasm at all by TM. Tulaibs claim that it’s a Rasmi discussion doesn’t add up. If it truly is a Rasmi discussion, then shouldn’t this version of Tawkid should be present in all other places of the Quran and not limited to just this one particular place? Because after all it’s just a matter of a difference in the script being used (as per Tulaib)? And even if it was truly Rasmi, I don’t see how this absolves TM, especially with regards to his disrespectful tone when discussing the Prophet ﷺ. It just appears that Tulaib is using the Rasm argument as a diversion tactic to distract from the actual kufr said; similar to the deobandi usage of Lafzi and Nafsi when cornered on Imkan AlKidhb. Then Tulaib further tries to distract from the matter by engaging in whataboutism insinuating that others have done similarly as TM; ie they also narrated that sahabah made mistakes thereby making a false comparison to TM’s kufri assertion which entails disrespect of the Prophet ﷺ.
His ignorant. His disregard for facts says it all. Shaykh abu Hasan belted him nicely. Apart from "why you always angry hazrat" and "got you out of sunniport" he doesn't have any other responses to shaykhs threads. These self-proclaimed "thought leaders", who lack genuine expertise that use blogging platforms like Medium to disseminate oversimplified or misinformed opinions, mistakenly envision themselves as visionary thinkers of our time. What a joke this moron made of himself. Mr Harvard Graduate
Devbandis have stooped so low that they are now claiming the Quran has grammatical errors. Shaykh Abu Hasan is refuting them on Twitter so a kind request to all Muslims who have love for the Quran to like and share these threads. It only takes a minute: https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1838250500208181482?t=mhUuxc46tVndyKutoAvSFA&s=19 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1838281587701522722?t=Pk7kG_ONDaFVceB2TN2K5Q&s=19 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1838286247430627362?t=5ZzlKsZz92tjxJ2aOTzL4A&s=19 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1838288095596146897?t=zgDHB4189xOSzCPg6zghUQ&s=19 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1838290580759032018?t=YV8RZ4Cgzshr1zQOLeckWg&s=19 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1838247048425914870?t=bNnPTP2SahgmY0reoyVJIQ&s=19 https://x.com/ridawipress/status/1838282105685422313?t=r0WQcur90K5-16LqrX7gNQ&s=19
Tariq Masud Devbandi’s statement. Only relevant portions mentioned below. Nothing is snipped to take it out of context. Ellipsis to indicate non-contiguousness. ========================================================== baaz dafa'a katib say grammar ki ghalati huwi likhnay mein hamaray nabi nay uski correction nahin ki aap ko nahin pata chala kay ye grammar ke lihaz say ghalat likha huwa hai woh ab tak usi tarah likha huwa hai .... [recites the verse] la-naSfa'an bi'n naaSiyah to yahan kya hai la-naSfa'an .... .... jitney bhi ulama yahan baythay huway hain inko pata hai, kay la-naSfa'an yeh laam takid hai aur aakhir mein nuun ta'kid hai yeh alif kay saath likhna grammar ke lihaz say ghalat kyunkay tanwin ‘noun’ pay aati hai sentence pay aur fiyl pay kabhi bhi nahin aati samajh mein aa rahi hai baat keh nahin aa rahi hai? .... .... lekin yahan par kya hai kay nabi sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam nay padha na la-naSfa'an Jibril aaye yeh aayat le kay aap ney isko pronounce kia apni zaban say la-naSfa'an to kaatib nay kyunkay an mein aawaaz nuun ki aa rahi hai. to kaatib ney us waqt likh diya - nuun kay bajaay alif daal diya jo tanween ki alaamat hai yeh grammar keh lihaaz sey kya hai? 100% mistake. aap kabhi bhi arabi mein sentence pay tanween nahin dalogay IMG:
https://x.com/ZaadFather/status/1837862621904585052 Mawlana Abu Hasan, can you respond to this thread?
