Fadak and khatā
- Thread starter Aqdas
- Start date
Maulana Kaukab Noorani Okarvi sahib's response:
To be honest, it was disappointing, not because of the stance he took or the describing of Sayyidah Nisaa al-3aalameen's fadilah (ma3az Allah), but because he didn't clarify the Ashari and Maturidi stance on the matter.
I'm gonna rant with some peace of mind once I sit on the PC and not on fone.
To be honest, it was disappointing, not because of the stance he took or the describing of Sayyidah Nisaa al-3aalameen's fadilah (ma3az Allah), but because he didn't clarify the Ashari and Maturidi stance on the matter.
I'm gonna rant with some peace of mind once I sit on the PC and not on fone.
abu Hasan
Administrator
why are they saying sayyidah e ka'inat?
does this not imply prophets in the ka'inat - so is sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha greater to them?
does this not imply malayikah - hazrat jibril alayhi's salam in ka'inat and hence sayyidah is greater to him
what about sayyidu'l ka'inat? sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam?
---
what is happening to everybody?
does this not imply prophets in the ka'inat - so is sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha greater to them?
does this not imply malayikah - hazrat jibril alayhi's salam in ka'inat and hence sayyidah is greater to him
what about sayyidu'l ka'inat? sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam?
---
what is happening to everybody?
abu Hasan
Administrator
disappointed. it is the responsibility of ulama to speak the haqq and guide people towards the correct mas'alah instead of ranting and venting their emotions.
when 'our buzurg' commits open anthropomorphism (umar icharwi) nobody dares to call out such blatant kufriyat and anti-sunni aqa'id. but the nisbat of khata to sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha is such a big issue that everyone is ready to refute this. if they are not aware of the umar icharwi and "biz-zaat maujud on this earth", tell them; and let us see whether they will come out and speak about tanzih of Allah ta'ala or not. or whether tanzih is not an important issue, but nisbat of khaTa to sayyidah raDiyAllahu anha is the bigger crime.
we will wait and see. hopefully they will rise to the occasion. in sha'Allah.
if this is what our scholars do, the day is not far when people will be either wahabi or rafiDi. astaghfirullah al-azeem.
i wouldn't be surprised if all of these ulama will begin their shola-bayani calling to burn sharh al-mawaqif and sharh al-maqasid.
====
sh. al-maqasid vol.5 p.60
in the above, ulama have debated whether attribution of minor sin to prophets is permissible; our preferred position is as below (neither saghirah nor kabirah). but those who did not were not ruled kafir or gustakh/insolent either.
=====
when this is the stand about prophets, why should the nisbat of khaTa be such an issue (regardless of the asif jalali sahib's unwise choice of words):
now i hope all these speakers will demand apology from imam al-a'azam or at the least leave his madh'hab and issue fatawa against him. or declare that sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha is greater than prophets.
laa Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
this is from fiqh al-akbar:
the same from an older copy:
=====
وإلى الله المشتكى
نسأل الله العافية
---
my opinion: it is incorrect to attribute sayyidah faTimah with khaTa; but this is not disrespect or insult. the speaker has erred in his description, but the way ulama are responding as if it is kufr is extremely irresponsible. in this atmosphere - al-iyadhu billah (may i never be in such a position) but if i were in the position of asif jalali sahib, i would openly do ruju and say that i do tawbah for hurting the sentiments of muslims, saadat kiram and apparent disrespect or what is perceived as disrespect of sayyidah zahra raDiyAllahu anha; and my intention was not to hurt them but just to explain the mas'alah that only anbiya are ma'Sum and the belief that ahl al-bayt are ma'Sum is that of rawafiD. i have made a mistake and i request everyone to forgive and forget.
however, nisbat of khaTa is not disrespect; and ahl al-bayt are not ma'Sum. by attributing khaTa to the ahl al-bayt, if it could be argued that it is disrespectful, it is still not apostasy.
Allah ta'ala knows best.
wAllahu a'alam
when 'our buzurg' commits open anthropomorphism (umar icharwi) nobody dares to call out such blatant kufriyat and anti-sunni aqa'id. but the nisbat of khata to sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha is such a big issue that everyone is ready to refute this. if they are not aware of the umar icharwi and "biz-zaat maujud on this earth", tell them; and let us see whether they will come out and speak about tanzih of Allah ta'ala or not. or whether tanzih is not an important issue, but nisbat of khaTa to sayyidah raDiyAllahu anha is the bigger crime.
we will wait and see. hopefully they will rise to the occasion. in sha'Allah.
if this is what our scholars do, the day is not far when people will be either wahabi or rafiDi. astaghfirullah al-azeem.
i wouldn't be surprised if all of these ulama will begin their shola-bayani calling to burn sharh al-mawaqif and sharh al-maqasid.
====
sh. al-maqasid vol.5 p.60
in the above, ulama have debated whether attribution of minor sin to prophets is permissible; our preferred position is as below (neither saghirah nor kabirah). but those who did not were not ruled kafir or gustakh/insolent either.
=====
when this is the stand about prophets, why should the nisbat of khaTa be such an issue (regardless of the asif jalali sahib's unwise choice of words):
now i hope all these speakers will demand apology from imam al-a'azam or at the least leave his madh'hab and issue fatawa against him. or declare that sayyidah faTimah raDiyAllahu anha is greater than prophets.
laa Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
this is from fiqh al-akbar:
the same from an older copy:
=====
وإلى الله المشتكى
نسأل الله العافية
---
my opinion: it is incorrect to attribute sayyidah faTimah with khaTa; but this is not disrespect or insult. the speaker has erred in his description, but the way ulama are responding as if it is kufr is extremely irresponsible. in this atmosphere - al-iyadhu billah (may i never be in such a position) but if i were in the position of asif jalali sahib, i would openly do ruju and say that i do tawbah for hurting the sentiments of muslims, saadat kiram and apparent disrespect or what is perceived as disrespect of sayyidah zahra raDiyAllahu anha; and my intention was not to hurt them but just to explain the mas'alah that only anbiya are ma'Sum and the belief that ahl al-bayt are ma'Sum is that of rawafiD. i have made a mistake and i request everyone to forgive and forget.
however, nisbat of khaTa is not disrespect; and ahl al-bayt are not ma'Sum. by attributing khaTa to the ahl al-bayt, if it could be argued that it is disrespectful, it is still not apostasy.
Allah ta'ala knows best.
wAllahu a'alam
Last edited:
abu Hasan
Administrator
mawlana irfan shah sahib is right. we should respect ahl al-bayt especially the ahl e qabaa. raDiyAllahu anhum ajma'yin.
it is said that imam subki narrated the hadith where RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was angered by someone doing intercession for a lady who committed theft as she was from nobles; and he said that if so-and-so would commit theft Muhammad (sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam) will cut her hand. and our master mentioned the name of one of his family.
it is said imam subki did not name the blessed lady who was mentioned as an example.
this is adab. and why do people lose their focus?
this is a hadith from bukhari and muslim. but other than narration, we must not repeat such ahadith out of respect to our elders. we wouldn't say: 'if your shaykh committed theft would you not cut his hand?" while this is hypothetical and the shaykh being non-prophet, possible shar'an as well as he is not ma'Sum. but one would not use their example, would they?
may Allah ta'ala give us the tawfiq to be respectful.
wa billahi't tawfiq.
I have not watched the video with shah sahib and sayyidi noorani miya. i asked my cousin who is a follower of hadrat pir sayyid muzaffar shah sahib regarding why shah sahib was going on a program with tasleem sabri? he said shah sahib was not there to condemn allamah jalali sahib but rather to stop other people from making absurd comments on this issue and from insulting mawlana jalali.
I shared Kaukab Noorani sahib's response with someone (who is pro-Asif Jalali sahib) and was shown this shocking video in response:
https://www.4shared.com/s/fUsluBFAHea
Unbelievable! He called Wahshi bin Harb radi Allahu anhu a zalim!
Plus he's entertaining tasleem Sabri (I've been told he's a staunch minhaji) and that rafidi/pro-rafidi naatkhwan shahbaz qamar fareedi (I believe it was him who recited a Urdu/punjabi naat under a shower of money, something to the tune of 'we don't adhere to radi Allahu anhu, we say 3laihis salam' implying hazrat Ali radi Allahu anhu or Abu Talib)
I know for a fact that in the not so distant past, Kaukab Noorani sahib used to call Tahir as padri and that he's been anti Tahir since the 80s when not many people even knew him. Don't know if that's still the case.
Last edited:
I think most, if not all us agree that Dr Ashraf Jalali should have or should apologise for his statement and take it back. As Mufti Zia ul Qadri points out that yes he can provide many evidences on this issue but in reality how is this going to benefit the unity of sunnis. His statement just gives further ammunition to the detractors. This is what has really wound me up about sunni scholars in the recent past, they all become proud of their 'tahqeeq' and become obstinate. Their followers or the sheeple then go crazy and make things a whole lot worse and who loses out, yes the sunnis. Our pious predecessors have already spoken on these issues, there is absolutely no need to go beyond that because there was wisdom in just simply explaining the viewpoint and leaving it. I got no time for so called scholars, who give emotional speeches and try to do takfir of Jalali sahib because it is the same scholars who either have insulted the sahaba in the past or never spoke up against it. The likes of Dr Kokab Noorani Sahib, Mufti Zia ul Qadri and the Ashrafi Mufti were measured and what they advised was correct. A lot of issues that are brought up have already been dealt with; so I see no point in new 'tahqeeq' and I certainly see no benefit in becoming obstinate on it as it will just cause these scholars to make the same mistakes the deos did all those years ago. What is badly missing for sunnis is leadership and everyone feels the need to fill that vacum by giving their view, and further widening the disunity. I hope you will see in my points that I have not limited the discussion to Jalali Sahib because this issue is just a microcosm of what the current state of Muslims in general and Sunnis specifically is Everyone wants to talk, few want to listen and fewer are showing sincerity and objectivity. At a time where we most need to be united , we are doing our best to cause disunity. We forget to be grateful for the immense blessing of being from the ummah of the Holy prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and even more being blessed to have been brought up in a Sunni household. As Alahazrat said: Ummati theri kismat per lakou salaam. Let's be grateful and sincere, especially towards our fellow Muslims. May Allah most High make us a sincere ummati of the Holy prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and give us death on kamil Iman. Ameen.
I'm sorry to say I lost all respect for "mawlana" kokab noorani okarvi the moment this debacle started
If okarvi sahib really had an issue, he would go out of his way to first privately contact mawlana jalali first and not issue a tahreer asking for a ruju.
Furthermore, kokab noorani okarvi's statement on hadrat wahshi (radhiyAllahu anhu) is odious to say the least and highlights a double standard held by okarvi sahib
If okarvi sahib really had an issue, he would go out of his way to first privately contact mawlana jalali first and not issue a tahreer asking for a ruju.
Furthermore, kokab noorani okarvi's statement on hadrat wahshi (radhiyAllahu anhu) is odious to say the least and highlights a double standard held by okarvi sahib
@AR Ahmed: Brother I only watched the clip of Dr Kokab Noorani where he mentions that he was the first person to advise Dr Jalali sahib. Don't know if that was done privately or like you said in the form of tahrir.
I also had not watched that video where he called a sahabi a 'zaalim'. That comment was very similar to Mufti Hanif Qureshi's one about Hazrat Abu Sufyaan. Both not factually incorrect but once they have become a sahabi, this sort of language about them is unacceptable and disrespectful. It just further highlights how our scholars are not exercising caution in their speeches and are not doing the utmost best to preserve the unity of the Jammat and the way of pious predecessors. I hope Dr Noorani Sahib will do ruju for this comment like he has asked of Dr Jalali Sahib, especially when in that video he says anyone that insults a sahabi, he has nothing to do with them.
Brother to be honest, not a lot of our scholars command our respect anymore because too many just want to air their views and tahqeeq, and when they make a mistake, they don't seem very sincere in doing ruju. We don't see consistency with them either, they take a harsher stance in some issues than others. It does not help their followers become apologists for them. It is sorry state of affairs. Principles over personalities or we risk going the same way the deos did. Troubling times, May Allah most High keep our Iman strong and that we die on Islam and on the path of our pious predecessors. Ameen.
I also had not watched that video where he called a sahabi a 'zaalim'. That comment was very similar to Mufti Hanif Qureshi's one about Hazrat Abu Sufyaan. Both not factually incorrect but once they have become a sahabi, this sort of language about them is unacceptable and disrespectful. It just further highlights how our scholars are not exercising caution in their speeches and are not doing the utmost best to preserve the unity of the Jammat and the way of pious predecessors. I hope Dr Noorani Sahib will do ruju for this comment like he has asked of Dr Jalali Sahib, especially when in that video he says anyone that insults a sahabi, he has nothing to do with them.
Brother to be honest, not a lot of our scholars command our respect anymore because too many just want to air their views and tahqeeq, and when they make a mistake, they don't seem very sincere in doing ruju. We don't see consistency with them either, they take a harsher stance in some issues than others. It does not help their followers become apologists for them. It is sorry state of affairs. Principles over personalities or we risk going the same way the deos did. Troubling times, May Allah most High keep our Iman strong and that we die on Islam and on the path of our pious predecessors. Ameen.
So far, this is the best and most balanced response I have seen on this issue. It avoids either extreme of shouting kufr or justifying Mufti Ashraf's words wholly.
Sunnis should send this out to all and uncloud people's thinking.
@Aqdas to be fair Mufti Ashraf ul Qadri has adopted this approach on many occasions of controversy. I remember something similar with the Ameer Muawiyya and Maulana Ilyas Qadri issue. May Allah most High protect those scholars who speak the truth and look to maintain the dignity of the scholar in question and the unity between sunnis. Ameen.We need more scholars like Mufti Ashraf ul Qadri.
Has he spoken on this issue too?
Sorry got mixed up between the two Mufti Ashraf's.
@Aqdas to be fair Mufti Ashraf ul Qadri has adopted this approach on many occasions of controversy. I remember something similar with the Ameer Muawiyya and Maulana Ilyas Qadri issue. May Allah most High protect those scholars who speak the truth and look to maintain the dignity of the scholar in question and the unity between sunnis. Ameen.We need more scholars like Mufti Ashraf ul Qadri.
Juwayni
sunniport user
Why does it seem like public condemnation, refutation, and dissociation is first resort when something apparently controversial arises? In other areas of life people in the same occupation (not to say there's a comparison between say a doctor or lawyer and an Aalim) have bodies that oversee conduct, proceed with an investigation, if there is merit in trying it, call the person to provide their statement, see evidence, and hear witnesses. If and only if the process is fulfilled in its entirety does such a body make a finding of guilt and even then it may not outright remove the individual from the occupation and may instead caution, suspend, or fine the individual.
This whole incident highlights the need for easily accessible knowledge on usul al-takfīr and the specifics of what exactly is sabb (insult/ghustakh) and what is the red line between implicit and explicit sabb. Some may counter with the argument that this may lead to individuals doing reckless takfir, but that's already happening whether or not such knowledge is circulated to the wider public. If anything, this should provide a basis for being cautious in recklessly labelling things kufr and recklessly doing takfir or tabd'i.
This whole incident highlights the need for easily accessible knowledge on usul al-takfīr and the specifics of what exactly is sabb (insult/ghustakh) and what is the red line between implicit and explicit sabb. Some may counter with the argument that this may lead to individuals doing reckless takfir, but that's already happening whether or not such knowledge is circulated to the wider public. If anything, this should provide a basis for being cautious in recklessly labelling things kufr and recklessly doing takfir or tabd'i.