Validating tafdili aqidah in Kichocha
- Thread starter Aqdas
- Start date
HajiNaushah
sunniport user
Will Madani Mian speak up?
He has to.
HajiNaushah
sunniport user
Khalifa Ayub Ashrafi, Khalifa Arshad Misbahi should refute this at NMJM as both are Ashrafi.
abu Hasan
Administrator
there is nothing to refute.
the belief that mawla ali raDi'Allahu anhu was afDal than abu bakr is a bid'ah, but certainly not rifD (rafiziyyat).
we have posted previously on this board, a fatwa of alahazrat that tafDili belief (ONLY that mawla ali is afDal) is a slight bid'ah.
however, tafDilis in our time have progressed beyond this - they have insinuated against sahabah, tried to paint rosy borders on rafidi aqayid and even step into them at times. some have openly criticised and slandered the sahabah.
so they do not remain tafDili - and thus by alahazrat's fatwa, one of light bid'ah anymore. they fall under closet rawafid and fussaq for slandering the sahabah.
Allah ta'ala knows best.
strange demand this. similar to islamophobes who demand all muslims to condemn every act of terrorism or alleged terrorism that is done by muslims or alleged to be muslims anywhere in the world.
HajiNaushah
sunniport user
Would be ok to pray behind or take bayah with a tafzili (light version one)?
He's promoting bidah in front of Hashmi who is the pir of millions of Sunnis.
Alahazrat wrote that ulama deemed tafdilis to be rafidis.¹ It might be a slight bidah but a bidah nonetheless and has to be refuted before it takes hold amongst Ashrafis.
¹ ولہذا ائمہ دین نے تفضیلیہ کو روافض سے شمار کیا کمابیناہ فی کتابنا المبارك مطلع القمرین فی ابانۃ سبقۃ العمرین۱۳۹۷ھ
Last edited:
abu Hasan
Administrator
it is makruh tahrimi to pray behind a tafzili.
and invalid to do ba'yah with a tafzili - if the pir becomes a tafzili, his ba'yah is severed. the person must find a sahihu'l aqidah sunni and do a new ba'yah.
Allah knows best.
I watched the latter half of the event - one speaker unknown to me, followed by this Sayyid Sayf al-Din, then Mawlana Sadr al-Wara Misbahi, then Hashimi Miyan.
I initially thought this Sayyid Sayf al-Din may have inadvertently mixed up afdaliyyah with fadilah: we believe in afdaliyyah of Sayyiduna Siddiq but whoever talks about the fadilah of Sayyiduna Murtada is not a rafidi (paraphrased).
But, the absence of any clarification from him in the last few days makes me think he did mean those who deem Sayyiduna Murtada afdal are not from the rawafid.
Pardon my ignorance, but it seems Mawlana Abu Hasan agrees with this stance.
On the other hand, didn’t Alahazrat deem the tafdiliyyah as outside the folds of Ahl al-Sunnah and the stepping stone to rifd?
I initially thought this Sayyid Sayf al-Din may have inadvertently mixed up afdaliyyah with fadilah: we believe in afdaliyyah of Sayyiduna Siddiq but whoever talks about the fadilah of Sayyiduna Murtada is not a rafidi (paraphrased).
But, the absence of any clarification from him in the last few days makes me think he did mean those who deem Sayyiduna Murtada afdal are not from the rawafid.
Pardon my ignorance, but it seems Mawlana Abu Hasan agrees with this stance.
On the other hand, didn’t Alahazrat deem the tafdiliyyah as outside the folds of Ahl al-Sunnah and the stepping stone to rifd?
abu Hasan
Administrator
that is also correct. in the one minute clip, the speaker admits the aqidah of the afzaliyyat of sayyiduna abu bakr, but shies away from naming tafzilis as bidyis.
i do not know if there was more said before or after this 1 minutes but within this clip, his statement that "considering the afzaliyyat of mawla ali is not rafiziyyat" can be justified by those supporting him. while it is deplorable (again assuming that there was nothing said before or after the one minute) that he tries to accommodate tafzilis in his "big heart"
i took his speech in a broad manner and gave him the benefit of doubt. if he indeed "promoted" tafzili aqidah and did not consider it bid'ah, then he should be reprimanded.
---
@HASSAN has posted the statement from kichaucha and is apt. nothing more needs to be said concerning this issue (i.e. by ulama of kichaucha).
---
see a separate thread for various fatawa on tafzilis, tafDilis, tafziliyyah, tafDiliyyah. in sha'Allah.
https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/fatawa-ridawiyyah-on-praying-behind-tafdili-tafzili.16423/
abu Hasan
Administrator
@abu Hasan
Does believing Sayyiduna Ali to be the most superior may Allah be pleased with him, take one out of the fold of the Ahlus Sunnah?
A lot of the Arab Ulema says it doesn't. They say its a bidah like you have but they say that person is still a sunni.
Does believing Sayyiduna Ali to be the most superior may Allah be pleased with him, take one out of the fold of the Ahlus Sunnah?
A lot of the Arab Ulema says it doesn't. They say its a bidah like you have but they say that person is still a sunni.
In this fatwa you posted, he groups the tafdiliyyah with the rawafid - “...jeysey rāfziyoñ meyñ tafzīlī”
abu Hasan
Administrator
certainly. that person is a mubtadiy. such as the zaydiyah in yemen.
---
who are these arab ulama? contemporaries are very lax and one cannot rely on their opinion.
list out any of the well-known ulama, at least from a hundred years ago.
perhaps ulama like ibn abidin and ibrahim halabi and ibn nujaym and ibn humam were not arab enough.
---
you must ask them whether it is bid'ah in aqidah or bid'ah in action.
if it is bid'ah in aqidah, then how can that person be a sunni?
Last edited:
This is the same stance as Said Mamduh and Habib Umar, as far as I know...
(and PAQS?)
Last edited:
If ala hazrat said that tafdili belief is a stepping stone to rifd, surely that indicates it is not rifd itself in the same manner that something being a stepping stone to kufr is not in itself kufr. Otherwise it would be labelled as such. So whilst they're outside the sunni fold, it doesn't mean they're inside the fold of the rawafidh Shia, right?
Especially the type of tafdili under discussion, meaning the sole bidah is their belief in tafdeel. If such a person exists amongst the common folk let's say... And he follows a madhab and his remaining beliefs are sound, then lumping him in with khomeini and others seems manifestly wrong. He would be a person of bidah but not such that we can lump him in with a group that rejects necessary beliefs in the religion.
Of course, most of the tafdeeli types we see are usually not like that and carry actual twelver beliefs or tendencies in which case they're not mere tafdeelis.
If tafdeelis are rawafidh, then what we're saying is that the belief in the superiority of sayyiduna Abu Bakr or rejection of it suffices as a differentia between sunni islam and rafidhism. Which would mean the words tafdeeli and raafidhi are carrying the same meaning?
Is the term 'rifdh' more encompassing than just the twelver Shia? I assumed it applied only to them, hence the confusion
Especially the type of tafdili under discussion, meaning the sole bidah is their belief in tafdeel. If such a person exists amongst the common folk let's say... And he follows a madhab and his remaining beliefs are sound, then lumping him in with khomeini and others seems manifestly wrong. He would be a person of bidah but not such that we can lump him in with a group that rejects necessary beliefs in the religion.
Of course, most of the tafdeeli types we see are usually not like that and carry actual twelver beliefs or tendencies in which case they're not mere tafdeelis.
If tafdeelis are rawafidh, then what we're saying is that the belief in the superiority of sayyiduna Abu Bakr or rejection of it suffices as a differentia between sunni islam and rafidhism. Which would mean the words tafdeeli and raafidhi are carrying the same meaning?
Is the term 'rifdh' more encompassing than just the twelver Shia? I assumed it applied only to them, hence the confusion
abu Hasan
Administrator
unless people are deluded that these two people are far greater in ilm and taqwa and insight anything else compared to ulama and awliya
ibn humam in fath al qadir:
bahr al rayiq:
Follow up question from a student of the Islamic sciences (against not myself) - he asks - if someone believes in everything that is essential to be from the Ahlus Sunnah but he differs in this one belief, he believes Sayyiduna Ali is the most superior and he doesn't reject the Khilafa of any of the companions, does his opposition to just 1 belief take him outside the fold out of the Ahlus Sunnah?