Hanafi Sunni
sunniport user
Aapki khair banaye do jahaan
Apni khatir jo banaya aap hain.
Mufti Akmal on Huzoor Tajush shariahs poetry
- Thread starter Hanafi Sunni
- Start date
Aapki khair banaye do jahaan
Apni khatir jo banaya aap hain.
Hanafi Sunni
sunniport user
Hanafi Sunni
sunniport user
Brother, can you link the video where Akmal says don't say A3lam... I can't locate easily on YouTube... Preferably make a new thread on that one
i'm no fan of Akmal Qadri, and he may well have a superiority complex that he's the Abu Mansoor Maturidi of this time, but with the greatest respect to Sayyed sahab, i think he jumped the gun a bit (on this specific talk) - in the video linked in OP, i just understood (please correct me if i'm wrong) that he said don't say complicated poems in front of common people even though there is no problem per se ("koi aisa masala nahin hai"), and mentioned the aqidah that Allah is free of needs. at least in the linked video he didn't say "lazim aata hai", and even gave examples of other poems of sajdah, "jaise mazarat pe sajdah karne ke sheyr hotey hain". i think his point was 'please consider the state of the awam when reciting this kind of poetry'
as for Muzaffar Shah sahab, partial justice is no justice - his scathing rebuke of Akmal Qadri will make sense only when he also tackles iran shah in the same way - ironically, in the linked video (post #3) he says he's fighting tafzilis and Akmal Qadri said the wrong masala mentioning "jumhoor". so what about all the damage iran shah has done? i think his grouse with Akmal is only for not subscribing to the "trendy" version of "Sunniyat" and "Fikre Raza" prevalent in the subcontinent, which understandably can ruffle many feathers for many reasons
again, please correct me if i misunderstood the videos on the topic of this couplet.
on the khata issue of Ashraf Jalali, Muzaffar Shah sahab scoffed at Muhaddithe Kabir saying "hum pakistan mein chane nahin bech rahe hain"... just sayin!
Qadiri Faqir
sunniport user
Maybe that’s why he is an ex-DI.
I think it’s not simply about “poetry” and it’s not like this is the first time the mufti sahb has made such blunders. These types of clips only plants seeds of doubt in the awaam.
This is just a prime example of what Mawlana Abu Hasan alluded to when Huzur Taj al Shariah Alaihir Rahmah passed away, “as elders pass away, i fear (many of my friends share this feeling) sunnis have become more vulnerable; many people calling themselves sunnis and were afraid to come out with their own agendas will become bolder.”
So mufti saheb doesn’t think the awaam will understand the line of poetry but they won’t have an issue understanding why taking selfies in Haram Sharif is perfectly fine?
The point many of the scholars who have spoken out are highlighting is the principle behind his comments which the awaam won’t understand and his hidden agenda given his past blunders.
from the posted clips, it doesn't look like his other such blunders. otherwise, there will be no Sunni left in pyara pakistan.
that was my point and i stand to be generously corrected.
what kind of doubts? was anything wrong with the aqidah point he mentioned? he categorically said nothing really wrong with the cited couplet, just that awam's sad states should be considered. so where exactly is the issue?
granted, he could have adopted a more tanatan-friendly and naatkhwan-industry-friendly approach and explained the poetic license in detail, and could have even mentioned about tawilat of certain aayaat and ahadith along with the aqidah point; but on this point it doesn't look like anything warranting a brouhaha on ishq and loyalty to maslak, etc.
brother, we're talking only on this masala, otherwise we'll get into how long is a piece of string. what does selfies in Haram Sharif or wishing christmas or having lunch on the same table as hindus in the office cafeteria have to do with this masala?
yes, please do point out the principle behind his comments. we all need a yardstick or a benchmark for sulh kulliyat.
please show it if you know it. and also show Muzaffar Shah sahab's hidden agenda behind his silence, (as well as support on khata issue), on iran shah.
again, i'm not a fan or admirer of Akmal Qadri.
also i'm genuinely curious to see the video Muzaffar Shah alludes to wherein Akmal Qadri allegedly says don't call Prophet 3alaihis salam a3lam!
abu Hasan
Administrator
mufti akmal's clip is utterly ridiculous - and like it or not - i agree with syed muzaffar shah sahib that kalam and reasoning is not akmal sb's forte.
---
it is not only laughable, but akmal doesn't even understand what he is talking about; and of course, given poor reasoning skills, he doesn't realise that he contradicts himself. while what he says may appear logical, he himself commits blunders which were obvious upon listening just once.
in sha'Allah, i will prove those claims. wa billahi't tawfiq.
---
--
however, his application to the line of taju'sh shariah was unnecessary and as we say in urdu "baal ki khaal khinchna" [trying to skin a strand of hair]. and here he betrays the latent deviant streak in his ideology. it might be because of his confusion - or lack of rigour - or a complex about aqayid o nazaraiyat of sunni ulama [beliefs and views].
complex could be superior - "i know better than all these maulvis" or inferior - 'sunni ulama are not well-read in kalam'
---
---
if people do mistakes - then they should be corrected. the sajdah type of lines, if read should be clarified. at least, it is my practice, that in a gathering, whenever we speak of istighatha or istimdad - i emphasise that only Allah ta'ala is the haqiqi Giver. no one can give without the leave of Allah. no one can help without the permission of Allah. and ONLY that happens which Allah Wills.
in a hadith, [not verbatim]: a man's children make him lose his courage.
so long as he has made his own aqidah clear - his silence on an individual due to his 'nazuk' [delicate] relations should not be construed as support of the individual. perhaps he doesn't approve of him in private -wAllahu a'alam - but due to compulsions that we can all understand, he may hesitate to air it in public.
so let us not use that against him to 'counter' his rightful criticism of akmal.
---
nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
---
it is not only laughable, but akmal doesn't even understand what he is talking about; and of course, given poor reasoning skills, he doesn't realise that he contradicts himself. while what he says may appear logical, he himself commits blunders which were obvious upon listening just once.
in sha'Allah, i will prove those claims. wa billahi't tawfiq.
---
i disagree. and we will see it in a bit.
--
in principle, what he says is right. scholars should abstain from saying esoteric things and keep it simple. that much i agree with akmal sb.
however, his application to the line of taju'sh shariah was unnecessary and as we say in urdu "baal ki khaal khinchna" [trying to skin a strand of hair]. and here he betrays the latent deviant streak in his ideology. it might be because of his confusion - or lack of rigour - or a complex about aqayid o nazaraiyat of sunni ulama [beliefs and views].
complex could be superior - "i know better than all these maulvis" or inferior - 'sunni ulama are not well-read in kalam'
---
hazrat needs to learn about false premises and fallacies.
---
one doesn't suggest cutting off the head to get rid of a headache.
if people do mistakes - then they should be corrected. the sajdah type of lines, if read should be clarified. at least, it is my practice, that in a gathering, whenever we speak of istighatha or istimdad - i emphasise that only Allah ta'ala is the haqiqi Giver. no one can give without the leave of Allah. no one can help without the permission of Allah. and ONLY that happens which Allah Wills.
not necessarily. we are all humans - and we are not living in hazrat umar farooq's time. raDi'Allahu anhu. we have our shortcomings, our weaknesses. it is known that muzaffar shah sahib's daughter is married to iran shah's son - so he has some limits on directly attacking him or refuting him. we should not hold it against him.
in a hadith, [not verbatim]: a man's children make him lose his courage.
so long as he has made his own aqidah clear - his silence on an individual due to his 'nazuk' [delicate] relations should not be construed as support of the individual. perhaps he doesn't approve of him in private -wAllahu a'alam - but due to compulsions that we can all understand, he may hesitate to air it in public.
so let us not use that against him to 'counter' his rightful criticism of akmal.
---
exactly my point.
brother, while i agree with you on many issues - sometimes, we are diametrically opposite. this video may seem harmless, but apart from issues in the video itself, he has a history of incorrect fatawa and opinions. which adds up to this. howsoever you want to look at it as an isolated incident, the history of errors will force itself into the context. i still cannot get over the bad taste after his riling against bahar e shariat.
nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
abu Hasan
Administrator
you missed his point.
he said:
1. the line says "a, b, c" - but not a problem. it is a line of poetry. we can do ta'wil.
in other words: it is obviously wrong and shouldn't be said. but a ta'wil can be made to avoid any hukm.
2. such lines should not be said in public.
meaning: these are against aqidah
3. he then attacks what he considers as 'false aqidah'
Allah re saadgi! nahin itni unheN khabar
mayyit pe aa ke poochte hain: in ko kya hua?
and what is this 'false' aqidah? the belief that the universe was created for the love of the beloved Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.
---
and then akmal sb goes on to explicate what he thinks is the implication, making a show of how little he knows from the qur'an and hadith.
nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
Qadiri Faqir
sunniport user
abu Hasan
Administrator
firstly, about the line of tajush shariah
there is nothing wrong with the lines per se - nor is it 'complex' 'confusing' or things that ought not to be said in front of the awaam.
we will come to the needless 'baal ki khaal' part of akmal sahib's interpretation later, in sha'Allah.
---
aap ki khaaTir bana'e do jahan
apni khaaTir jo banaya aap hain
Allah ta'ala created the two worlds [dunya and Hereafter] for your sake
and He created you for Himself [chosen you as the highest in the creation, the most beloved]
tajush shariah himself explained it as "chosen for Himself" "made him His beloved" similar to the verse of surah ta-ha:
I created you for Myself.
---
the sheyr is identical to that in burdah:
akmal sahib may probably forbid reciting burdah in gathering or explaining this verse.
---
other ulama have also spoken on this sheyr, so i will end it here. and if there is any other objection, someone can mention here.
there is nothing wrong with the lines per se - nor is it 'complex' 'confusing' or things that ought not to be said in front of the awaam.
we will come to the needless 'baal ki khaal' part of akmal sahib's interpretation later, in sha'Allah.
---
aap ki khaaTir bana'e do jahan
apni khaaTir jo banaya aap hain
Allah ta'ala created the two worlds [dunya and Hereafter] for your sake
and He created you for Himself [chosen you as the highest in the creation, the most beloved]
tajush shariah himself explained it as "chosen for Himself" "made him His beloved" similar to the verse of surah ta-ha:
I created you for Myself.
---
the sheyr is identical to that in burdah:
akmal sahib may probably forbid reciting burdah in gathering or explaining this verse.
---
other ulama have also spoken on this sheyr, so i will end it here. and if there is any other objection, someone can mention here.
abu Hasan
Administrator
i was just transcribing akmal miyan's hilarious speech - if we apply his standards, he has to do tawbah for a few things. syed muzaffar sahib said he is kachha [raw] - but this clip will show how kachha.
hazrat to buniyadi aqa'id dar barah e zaat o sifat e ilahi se be bahra aur mabahis e ilm e kalam se na waqif nazar aatey hain.
as i complete the transcription, i fear that akmal doesn't have hsi basic aqidah about Allah ta'ala and half a dozen islamic concepts right.
in sha'Allah read the analysis in a separate thread:
https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/analysis-of-mufti-akmals-speech-on-apni-khatir.15535/
hazrat to buniyadi aqa'id dar barah e zaat o sifat e ilahi se be bahra aur mabahis e ilm e kalam se na waqif nazar aatey hain.
as i complete the transcription, i fear that akmal doesn't have hsi basic aqidah about Allah ta'ala and half a dozen islamic concepts right.
in sha'Allah read the analysis in a separate thread:
https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/analysis-of-mufti-akmals-speech-on-apni-khatir.15535/
Last edited:
Just a suggestion- if you wanted, you could request a volunteer to transcribe on your behalf therefore leaving you free to give the analysis rather than spending time doing both.
My urdu isn't on the right level for this video but I could probably do so for an English video in the future if the occasion arises, insha Allah
My urdu isn't on the right level for this video but I could probably do so for an English video in the future if the occasion arises, insha Allah
abu Hasan
Administrator
thanks. i have done that in the past and then the topic went on the backburner. i felt guilty of giving work to brothers who transcribed - and then postponed the analysis. so until i fulfill my promise of commenting on those transcriptions, it is embarrassing to ask.
a request for brothers to point out those posts (one i recall is NAK's speech) and some others. just leave a bookmark here, so i can follow up when i get time. in sha'Allah.
brother jazak Allah khayr... no harm done and we don't need to agree on every issue
anyone can comb the forums and see my opinion on 'mufti' Akmal, just go into my 2012 posts and see some bad road rage style outbursts against him that i'd rather not link to right now (he didn't give a proper answer on a tahir issue, even in principle). i'm not a fan of his.
don't get me wrong. i don't consider him one of the greatest mutakallimeen this side of the Mississippi,
and if i understand properly, he positions himself as an all rounder muballigh not necessarily a master mutakallim (maybe arrogantly a muballigh superman, only Allah knows), his grouse being with the awam being hollow and lost with some selected nafila rituals shunning faraiz, naatkhwani, naarebazi, and sycophantic aggrandization of some peers, period. and lack of knowledge on basic aqidah and basic fiqh, with many many ulama doing little to nothing to rectify the situation, in fact only aggravating it; i can generously accept that he's the wrong person for this job (which you're analyzing in the other thread), but i'm starting to get a hunch that a lot of the antagonism towards him, by many people is for this very reason and his popularity.
one respected mufti sahab from Amjadiya in karachi told me if they apply their standards of each other to some of the non-desis they and their students respect, they'd be hard pressed to call some of them (non-desis) Muslim, let alone Sunni, for a lot of reasons. so what makes them turn their guns on each other so furiously?
tl;dr - after observing a lot of ulama over the years on various different topics, my only main contention is that so far, proverbially speaking, while Akmal might not have the table manners taught by Ala Hazrat (but which contemporary scholar has?), he hasn't yet given any real evidence of spitting in the plate he's eating from. i'm not too sure if it's fair or even worthwhile to accuse him alone of fikri minhajiyat or a deliberate attempt to sabotage the maslak from the inside, seeing the actions/stances of many ulama on many issues.
Syed Zulfiqar sahab's rebuttal (2nd video) and explanation was balanced and fair compared to Muzaffar Shah sahab's for the reason mentioned above
but indeed if he (or anyone) did sell out on Sunni aqidah, then yes, it's better for such a person to go back to whatever they were doing as proper Sunnis
Allah knows best.
While I understand some of the concerns expressed, I feel it is critical to challenge the prevalent impressions and investigate the complexities of the situation.
In the spirit of being the devil's advocate, I'd like to expand on the following points:
In the spirit of being the devil's advocate, I'd like to expand on the following points:
- Some individuals within the Barelvi community may latch onto certain issues or statements rather than directly addressing. Individuals from varied backgrounds may occasionally become fixated on specific subjects or statements. This could be due to a number of factors, including an emotional commitment to certain ideas or practises. While it would be preferable for individuals to address problems openly and engage in respectful discourse, the truth is that people can be reactive and focus on specific areas rather than the big picture.
- Differences of opinion are a natural part of scholarly discourse and are not limited to Arab scholars. Even when it comes to the beliefs of Ala Hazrat Ahmad Raza Khan رحمه الل, there is leeway for academics to hold differing opinions within the larger Ahle Sunnah wa Jamaat society. Different scholars, regardless of their background, may hold validly opposing views based on their comprehension and interpretation of evidence. It is critical to handle these differences with respect and engage in intellectual dialogue.
- Mufti Akmal statement regarding the book "Bahar-e-Shariat" should not be taken as a dismissal or rejection of its value. Instead, it could be seen as a cautionary reminder against solely relying on any single book for comprehensive knowledge and scholarship. The fact that the Mufti Akmal himself references and recommends the book in his programs and acknowledges its importance in answering fiqh questions indicates that he recognizes its value within the broader scope of Islamic scholarship. This suggests that his intention is not to discredit or undermine the book, but rather to emphasize the importance of a holistic approach to learning and acquiring knowledge.
- Mufti akmal statements were made during a Q&A session, keeping husn-e-dhan where he may not have been aware of the specific origins of the poetry or its author, Tajusharia Akhtar Raza Khan رحمه الل . It is important to consider the context in which the scholar made his remarks and the limitations of his knowledge in that particular moment.
- Mufti Akmal's advise to be cautious when reciting some poetry may be a question of personal preference or interpretation. While his method may differ from others, it does not necessarily violate the Ahle Sunnah wa Jamaat doctrine.
abu Hasan
Administrator
you can do all that, but it is unfair to apply different approaches according to convenience. such as generalisations when required and specific items where it suits one's viewpoint.
instead of painting with a broad brush - let us talk about those "SOME" individuals and "CERTAIN" issues - instead of saying: everyone is dumb and stupid and doesn't know anything and deviant.
a good example of how to be evasive, but at the same time cast aspersions. check how many 'unknowns' in that sentence.
which, which, which and which? and how many are "some" "certain" and "occassionally" (how often)...
nice observation. but so long as it is not directed towards someone, it is doesn't apply to anyone.
---
again vague. in principle, yes. but which specific issue of alahazrat in belief, there is leeway fro academics?
iman of abu talib? ok.
that abu bakr al-siddiq's afzaliyyat is jumhur? umm..yes? no?
have you seen his face when he dismisses it? all the time making mistakes in fiqh and aqidah, which could be avoided if he had read BeS properly in the first place.
it may sound incendiary, but in my opinion, a number of celebrity and TV-sheikhs seem to have a delusion that they have become very big scholars - even though their ignorance shows in their speeches.
pardon me for saying this but it is an exceedingly idiotic defence of akmal's position. what 'cautionary reminder'? if anyone says: read this one book and nothing else - perhaps then his comments would make some sense.
however, it appears that people who say such things do not seem to have broader knowledge about books and reviews. in history, many books have been accorded glowing praise - but none of those who praised were speaking in absolute terms.
the book of malik is the most accurate under the sky after the quran - shafiyi
the book of bukhari and muslim are the most correct after the quran - a multitude of scholars
if all the books of religion were lost and ihya [of ghazali] survived, it would make up for it
if any book could be called "like the qur'an" - hikam of atayillah would be it
if any book could be called "like the qur'an" - mulHah of Harir would be it
one could compile numerous statements about such books - and none of these statements mean, that the rest should be thrown in the euphrates.
===
so whats stopping him from saying it? and praising it? if he did that perhaps, he would make fewer mistakes - due to barakah of our elders. unless that is not required by some people.
maybe you have not seen his comments or scoffing on BeS. or perhaps you don't understand the meaning of 'undermine'.
that is immaterial. and his comment on the lines are also sidenote as you will see how many howlers he does in trying to explain/dismiss it.
once i complete my commentary on his clip, i will open the thread for you to point out my mistakes where i missed the context.
...or perhaps it is too soon to judge and exonerate.