Nasibi and Rafidi - does the label fit?

[Aqdas]

NASIBI AND RAFIDI
DOES THE LABEL FIT?

In the past few years, we have seen a drastic increase in the number of people or groups labelled as nasibi or rafidi who themselves profess to be Ahl al-Sunnah.

One telling difference I would like to point out is this:

Do those accused of being nasibi oppose the remembrance of Ahl al-Bayt? i.e. when persons such as Mawla Ali, Fatimah, Hasan, Husayn, Hamzah, Abbas et al are mentioned, praised, glorified and honoured - does the accused dislike this? Does he feel abhorrence in his heart at their mention?

Many of those accused of being nasibi actually don't dislike the remembrance of Ahl al-Bayt. Rather, they find solace in it and consider it a part of their faith.

In this case, the accusation would be slander.

Yes, if they indeed dislike the remembrance of Ahl al-Bayt, the label would fit.

---
Consider the same for the one accused of being rafidi and the remembrance of Amir Muawiyah. Does he oppose it? When Amir Muawiyah is mentioned, praised and glorified, does he feel abhorrence and dislike?

If so, the label does indeed fit.

---
The difference I have personally seen is that Sunnis who are accused of being nasibi do not dislike the praise of Ahl al-Bayt but many of those accused of being rafidi do actually squirm at the mention of Amir Muawiyah. They openly condemn gatherings for him such as urs and discourage the mention of his qualities (fadayil, manaqib).

---
Compare: do those accused of nasb mark the day of Mawla Ali? Yes.

Do those accused of rifd mark the day of Amir Muawiyah? No.

Do they oppose marking the day of Amir Muawiyah? Yes.

---
When the two terms, nasibi and rafidi, are properly defined and understood, one will invariably see that the nasibi label often does not fit but the shiah one tends to.

Nasibi may well be alive and well, but it needs to be defined properly first. I don't see nasb amongst Ahl al-Sunnah. I do see rifd.

رضي الله عنهم

 

[Noori]

I don't see nasb amongst Ahl al-Sunnah. I do see rifd.

as long as it has not reached to rifD or tafDil they are ahlussunah, otherwise they are ahlul bid'ah, they claim to be among us and deceive sunni awam.

 

[Waqar786]

There seems to be both of a lack of jazba to do sincere Islaah and a reluctance to accept any criticism. The focus seems to be on to malign and zaleel one another, and the labels seems to act as justifications.

 

[Tariq Owaisi]

The labels are being thrown around based on projections of a statement or philosophy. ie "he is saying this to introduce aspects of aqeeda of rifd/nasb, I am justified in calling him rafidi/nasibi"


There is no one here to call any sunni a nasibi, so I think the pertinent question is whether we have been too tolerant of others being called rafidi?

This self check is required because it directly effects how these issues are dealt with, with which language and the prevelance of insults in these debates.

 

[abu Hasan]

the guy i called rafidi called himself a sunni. but every one of his arguments are rafidi arguments and from rafidi books.
only the rafidis claim that every one of the twelve imams were poisoned or killed somehow or the other.

plus he clearly began making accusations against hazrat usman raDiyAllahu anhu and other sahabah.

 

[Unbeknown]

There is no one here to call any sunni a nasibi

perhaps you have been sleeping this whole while when hasnayn was calling everyone who didn't agree to his rifd as nasibi - since you have just woken up to I'd advise you to withhold your tongue.

think the pertinent question is whether we have been too tolerant of others being called rafidi?

speak for yourself - don't try to "we" us sunnis in your confused ramblings.

as a matter of fact - no one has been labelled a rafidi unduly on our forums. not once. geddit?

---
in fact - this shows that you were not actually asleep all this while but only feigning it.

So the pertinent question is why would you, who claim to be sunni, sympathize with a rafidi who was just banned for denigrating the sahaba and sunni ulama?

What is it that makes you act so rashly? What is that which would endear a rafidi to a self-professed sunni?

Why would you, a "sunni", care what tariq zaleel would consider someone or not?

And based on your recent activities in other threads, the more pertinent questions are:

Why does the mention of Alahazrat disturb you so much that you are barely able to hide your consternation? Why do you keep trying to suggest (in circuitous ways) that Alahazrat was mistaken in his fataawa on ilm-ul-ghayb?

Why is it, that I find you poking your head in every thread that deals with devbandis - and trying to snidely suggest that the devandis somehow do have a valid point?

I wonder why ...

 

[abu Hasan]

so I think the pertinent question is whether we have been too tolerant of others being called rafidi?

very simple check. list the instances where people are being called rafidi while they are not.

go ahead and post examples why a certain person called a rafidi should not have been called one. you can start with listing down examples, we will ask for reasons afterwards.

 

[Tariq Owaisi]

perhaps you have been sleeping this whole while when hasnayn was calling everyone who didn't agree to his rifd as nasibi - since you have just woken up to I'd advise you to withhold your tongue.



speak for yourself - don't try to "we" us sunnis in your confused ramblings.

as a matter of fact - no one has been labelled a rafidi unduly on our forums. not once. geddit?

---
in fact - this shows that you were not actually asleep all this while but only feigning it.

So the pertinent question is why would you, who claim to be sunni, sympathize with a rafidi who was just banned for denigrating the sahaba and sunni ulama?

What is it that makes you act so rashly? What is that which would endear a rafidi to a self-professed sunni?

Why would you, a "sunni", care what tariq zaleel would consider someone or not?

And based on your recent activities in other threads, the more pertinent questions are:

Why does the mention of Alahazrat disturb you so much that you are barely able to hide your consternation? Why do you keep trying to suggest (in circuitous ways) that Alahazrat was mistaken in his fataawa on ilm-ul-ghayb?

Why is it, that I find you poking your head in every thread that deals with devbandis - and trying to snidely suggest that the devandis somehow do have a valid point?

I wonder why ...

This is too much personal questions for me to try to answer. The questions themselves are very much based on false assumptions. I have barely posted in deobandi threads. I posted in two that I can remember recently and never did I say they have a valid point. Abu Hasan took them to task on one issue and the other I agreed with brother Bilal(?) the Sunni rep. The deos actually agree with you where we (me and you) differ!

My post was not even about hasnayn or AbuS or the forum or any members - my post was about general Sunni situation. Same as what Waqar wrote in fact.

 

[Tariq Owaisi]

very simple check. list the instances where people are being called rafidi while they are not.

go ahead and post examples why a certain person called a rafidi should not have been called one. you can start with listing down examples, we will ask for reasons afterwards.

My post was same as Waqars, I did get the impression that you thought it was about you in your reply. It was not aimed at any forum posts at all.

I agree with Aqdas that "we have seen a drastic increase in the number of people or groups labelled as nasibi or rafidi who themselves profess to be Ahl al-sunnah."

I don't want to carry the arguments of any camp in particular, certainly not the ones calling the other a nasibi.

My concerns over this subject are quiet recent, gained from Dr Jallalis video accusing Tahir ul Qadri of rifd. Tahir ul Qadri may be a lot of negative things but rifd? I kinda disagreed with that (not saying this is a big issue for me but it was interesting)

 

[Aqdas]

The deos actually agree with you where we (me and you) differ!

Please expound. Usman Dev refuses ilm al-ghayb for RasulAllah ﷺ. So how are we agreed?

 

[Tariq Owaisi]

Please expound. Usman Dev refuses ilm al-ghayb for RasulAllah ﷺ. So how are we agreed?

On ilm al-ghayb I disagree with them too so we don't differ

I don't see nasb amongst Ahl al-Sunnah. I do see rifd.

Bringing this subject back on course what rifd do you see among those who ascribe to Ahl Al Sunnah?

 

[Aqdas]

You said devs agree with us. About what?

 

[Tariq Owaisi]

You said devs agree with us. About what?

I was talking specifically to Unbeknown who accused me. I have not really seen you discuss any matters hence I don't really know anything about you. I have offered further discussion to Unbeknown hence no need to derail the thread. Thank you

 

[Aqdas]

Bringing this subject back on course what rifd do you see among those who ascribe to Ahl Al Sunnah?

Did you not see AbuS?

Similar to Usman devbandi, innit? A wahabi claiming to be Sunni.

 

[Tariq Owaisi]

Did you not see AbuS?

Similar to Usman devbandi, innit? A wahabi claiming to be Sunni.

AbuS was trying to reconcile 12er Shia view of history with Ahlus Sunnah. I think the 12er view is pure heretical and AbuS seems to have himself stuck in among all that. He is an individual layman and I know individuals can be put into these dilemmas. May Allaah free him and bring us all to righteousness.

I am not really here to argue no one that ascribes to Ahl al Sunnah should be labeled rafidi. Perhaps they should in some instances.
For example AbuS labeled Dr Jallali a nasibi but he himself criticised Abu Bakr (RadiAllahu Anhu). If he knows Allah is with Abu Bakr from the verse of the cave, his aspersions upon Abu Bakr which I don't want to repeat were open to be labelled anything including rafidi once he had said that. Also one of his statements seemed like it it was borrowed from the catholics - on that I think we shouldn't call him Catholic - I think he was looking for jumlay to say, misguided by those around him away from Tawheed!.. But not irreversibly so, in Sha Allah

Deoband are not Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, they are generally constricted to the views of their akabirs and the influence of najd. They can be more accurately whilst maintaining political correctness be called Ahlus Sunnah Deoband.

 

[Aqdas]

Deoband are not Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah, they are generally constricted to the views of their akabirs and the influence of najd. They can be more accurately whilst maintaining political correctness be called Ahlus Sunnah Deoband.

Not Sunni but can be called Ahl al-Sunnah. Well done.

 

[Unbeknown]

whilst maintaining political correctness

no we don't set any store by political correctness - no precedent in Islam (no major scholar *ever* allowed political correctness to color their language - except maybe under duress).

Besides, devbandis aren't some oppressed class or something nor do they wish to hide their deviations - they howl at the top of their voices (that jaahil uthman and his ajhal friend abdul hawa for instance)

be called Ahlus Sunnah Deoband

it's like the Muslim Atheists trope