khayru'l quruni qarni

Aqdas

Aqdas

Ridawi.org
Staff member
mufti ayyub ashrafi delivered a talk yesterday at victoria park masjid, manchester, on the fadayil of sayyidina umar and sayyidina uthman radiyAllahu ta'ala anhuma.

he said, some scholars have written that the hadith khayru'l quruni qarni indicated towards the 4 khulafa.

the last letter of siddiq is Q
the last letter of umar is R
the last letter of uthman is N
the last letter of ali is I

QRNI are the 4 letters of qarni.
 
yes, another interesting one, perhaps, is that the number of letters in ayat e tatheer are 47 and the number of letters of the names of twelve imams plus seyyeda fatima zahra(s) are also 47.

though i'm not entirely sure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gg - what is your 3aqidah on tafzil?

1) Shaykhayn are afzal to Imam Ali, radiwan Allahi 3alaihim

2) Imam Ali is afzal to Shaykhayn.

3) I do not possess the knowledge to decide.

Just choose ONE of the 3 and get it over with with your pot stirring. Why hide you 3aqidah and only make "implications"? Your 3aqidah defines who you are. You should state it proudly.
 
what is your obsession with me anyway?

why dont you convince me about what you believe? we are not at your local madrassa reading yassarnalquran, mate!
I think, it is best that I do not engage with you. if you have anything to refute something i say then my dear brother sahib, you are most welcome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think, it is best that I do not engage with you.
Click to expand...

reminder

---
unless gg declares his persuasion, his posts will be deleted. all mods take note. so also with abu fadl.

once again: unless abdal qadir's post is answered neither gg nor abu fadl will be allowed here to post.

real men do not fear to take a stand.

---
i have no qualms banning them, because they are useless time-wasters, but naive brothers wanted them back.
 
seems like i'm banned if i tell you and banned if i don't tell you.

frankly, i am not 100% sure though i am more inclined towards the opinion of Imam Zayd ibn Ali Ibn Hussayn Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a), for example, about tafzil and fatwa of shah abdul aziz dehlavi that as long as you love shaykhayn, etc.. which would be option 2. if it is otherwise, then i am open to being convinced with evidence.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
this is a question to all brothers who know:

fatwa of shah abdul aziz dehlavi that as long as you love shaykhayn, etc.. which would be option 2
Click to expand...

forgive my ignorance of Shah Abdul Aziz's fatwa, but what exactly does it entail?

as long as you love the Shaykhayn, .... what exactly are the "etc" that you are permitted?
 
forgive my ignorance of Shah Abdul Aziz's fatwa, but what exactly does it
entail?

as long as you love the Shaykhayn, .... what exactly are the
"etc" that you are permitted?
Click to expand...



OK, dear brother abdalqadir sahib, since you did not mention the Imam of Ahl al-bayt or should I say the Imams of ahl al-bayt so I will not mention them either. I think, if we start then this will go on and on...so I will just give you what you want. I will kindly request my dear learned brother, Naqshbandijamati sahib to translate it. please translate the first question on page 412 (starts after the first full paragraph) and second question, which the immediately next one on page 413.

link: http://www.archive.org/stream/Fatawa-e-aziziByShaykhShahAbdulAzizDehlvir.a#page/n206/mode/1up
 
Don't "dear brother abdalqadir sahib" me, punk! It's not going to help making your baseless point any easier!

I deliberately did not mention the Imam of the Ahl Al-Bayt for a very simple reason -

I don't trust your english translations of their words, and neither do I trust modern scholars' interpretations, interpolations, extrapolations, and commentaries of the words of the elders lest they rest on the commentaries of the mujtahids. You want to bring their words, bring forward

1 - the interpretations of their words by the mujtahid aimma relating to individual quotes, and

2 - let us all know the mujtahid aimma's stance on the topic overall.

If you want to play this game the way you are doing, get in line! The wahabis and shias are already way ahead of you with their blackmails of "So you're ignoring a hadith" and "Abu Bakr said this" and "Ali said that" and so on.

I might think of someone as a mubtadi3 but at least at a human level, I can appreciate one's sense of integrity and self respect, which sadly you haven't displayed yo-yo'ing between "mate" and "dear brother" and your temper tantrums at being probed on your 3aqidah, and the only reason you stated your position openly is because you were cornered by the moderator.

I would have responded a bit more respectfully to you if you had still maintained your "mate" tone with me rather than this pathetic display of sarcasm. The only thing more nauseating than bid3ah itself is this phoney "dear brother" sweetness coupled with sarcastic implications, specially by punks on the internet.

Thanks for the fatwa by Shah Abdul Aziz btw. It shows that you haven't understood what the muhaddith is talking about.
 
AbdalQadir said:
Don't "dear brother abdalqadir sahib" me, punk! It's not going to help making your baseless point any easier!
.
.
.

Thanks for the fatwa by Shah Abdul Aziz btw. It shows that you haven't understood what the muhaddith is talking about.
Click to expand...

AQ man you've got a serious attitude problem. You're lucky gg appears to be a shareef person and this is the internet. if you spoke like that to someone else in real life they might just smack you in the mouth!

yes, you can disagree with gg (like many of us do on this issue) without being so damn aggressive.

as for the fatwa of Shah Abdul Aziz it is actually quite clear...

insha Allah I will post the translation later tonight...there is an interesting
bit in there too about cursing Marwan...
 
sidi abdalqadir sahib, i neither hold a grudge against you nor hate you nor mock you. I will not be drawn to respond in kind. actually, I do not hate anyone. and I am sorry if i ever hurt anyone's feelings. though, we have srioues differences with, say, wadood, but i find his demographic and cultural knowledge from which we can all learn from, and from you i have learnt all different kinds psychological disorders and it helped me reflect upon myself and try not do those things. as for sidi AH, there are some differences but i learn from him too, his excellence in literary expression and anecdotes of about our pious predecessors.
as for kattarsunni, i like the new KS, objective and sincere.
i will not say anything about naqshbandijamati, the man struggling to awake us up from our dogmatic slumber.

I sick of this name calling and all that goes along with it. if you have a problem then you must address the issue and not the man as tahir riaz has famously said.
 
AQ man you've got a serious attitude problem.
Click to expand...

As usual, you put the cart ahead of the horses and can't see the forest for the trees. In case you haven't noticed gg's wound and heal tactics, his "sidi" and "dear brother" posts come after he's had a go at someone or posted something sneaky to make his point. It's a tactic used by wahabis and shias all the time. Wound and heal is the absolute worst kind of sarcasm.

Have a look at his tone to me in some of his other posts: right in this thread; did I provoke him here?; great attitude here; sarcasm towards other posters here;

I don't need to prove it to you, but I wouldn't have responded to him with "punk" had he at least maintained some consistency in his attitude.

His "dear brother" to me was nothing but sarcasm and a cheap jab at me.

It was coupled by the typical wahabi style blackmail by making implications of - "since you did not mention the Imam of Ahl al-bayt or should I say the Imams of ahl al-bayt".

All these dear brother posts are the internet versions of crocodile tears.

Any ideas why he has mentioned tahir riaz in his reply to me on this forum?

I'm sorry if I don't get my kicks from playing wound and heal and being sneaky.

if you spoke like that to someone else in real life they might just smack you in the mouth!
Click to expand...

What meakes you think I'll let them get away with their sneakiness in the first place?

yes, you can disagree with gg (like many of us do on this issue) without being so damn aggressive.
Click to expand...

I can deal with wahabis and shias objectively too. But when someone mixes that along with sinister tactics at personal levels, they're asking for it. Even if they're Sunnis, being sinister is asking for it. It's not just the ideological disagreement. I am honest enough to admit it was a response at both a personal level as well as ideological. Hope that puts your heart at ease.

as for the fatwa of Shah Abdul Aziz it is actually quite clear...
Click to expand...

I would have said something in relation to that but now since my personal bias has come in, I hope one of the other brothers comment if you're right or wrong in your comprehension of it.

------

Btw, if someone holds the position that a dead Muslim can be pronounced la3nat, then really, technically speaking, calling a living person as a "punk" is something much lesser. So why all the fuss? ;)

I suggest, if you or gg have anything else, please let's sort/fight it out on PM rather than derailing the thread. I had to defend myself and end this topic here because of the way things just went on this thread and some other threads.

-----

sincere apologies to mods or anyone whose not nj or gg, but had to read this derailment.
 
sorry for my rather angry response AQ i got nothing against you personall -- despite your exclusion of me from your last apology!-- but your style of address can be abrasive at times. i think gg's last post was very conciliatory so lets all -- i address myself first of all-- keep our discussion on a civil level.
let's just discuss the issue and not make it personal. let me be first to say sorry for any offence caused intentionally or unintentionally.

--
salam. :)
 
Last edited:
brother abdalqadir sahib, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. those here and heres, were just a reaction to what you said preceding those things. but anyway, hope all is fine now. I have said what i had to.
 
Brother Sayyid Hasnain Shah, You are a Sayyid. Blood of Sayyida al BaTool az Zahraa :as: . Please protect your dignity. Don't let or give commoners a chance to attack and mock you, and insult you, and shame you. It does not befit a Sayyid.

you exaggerated on serious differences. Dont you think they are only on these things:

1) tafDil of shaykhayn raDyAllahu 'anhuma
2) cursing of sayyiduna mu'awiya raDyAllahu 'anhu

I am not a part of any subcontinental pir politics.
 
translation of the fatwa from hazrat shaykh shah abdul aziz dihlavi:
Q: It is affirmed by the Sunnis that there is consensus (ijma') on the superiority [tafzil] of the Two Shaykhs [Abu Bakr & Umar]; however
is the superiority of the Two Shaykhs over Hazrat Ali (may his countenance be enobled) established in every way?

A: The superiority of the Two Shaykhs over Hazrat Ali is not in every way infact the research scholars have written that even amongst the Two Shaykhs it is impossible [mihaal] for there to be superiority in every way of one of them over the other. This is because in terms of the physical jihad, legal judgements, large number of hadith narrations, in his being a Hashimite and uprighteousness [hanafiyyat], and especially for the honour of being the spouse of Lady Fatima, Hazrat
Ali is superior. In all these matters the superiority of Hazrat Ali over Hazrat Abu Bakr is absolute [qati']. Likewise, the superiority
of Hazrat Ali over Hazrat Umar is also absolute in these matters: he accepted Islam before Hazrat Umar, and he performed the canonical prayer [namaz] before him. The meaning of this saying that the Two Shaykhs are superior to Hazrat Ali is this that
they are only superior in these matters, i.e. political leadership of the Ummah, protection of the Faith, closing the gates of tribulation,
giving currency to the commandments of the Shariah and implementing Islam in different dominions and establishing the Hudood and Ta'zirat Laws.

These are those matters in which,in carrying them out like the Prophet, the Two Shaykhs have superiority over Hazrat Ali. These same reasons are to be found in the
greater caliphate and because of this there was consensus amongst the Companions that in the matter of the greater caliphate the Two Shaykhs had priority over Hazrat Ali.

In fact in al-Sawariq al Muhriqa and other reliable books of hadith it is written that the Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam)
said,

"Oh Ali I asked Allah Ta'ala to give priority to you but he refused to give priority to anyone else but Abu Bakr" (from, "Ten Question" by Shah Bukhara))


Q: Is it permissible [jaiz] to make a Tafzili a prayer imam and if Sunnis offer their prayers behind him what is the ruling in that case?

A: There are two types of Tafzilis: One type is of those people who give Ali superiority over the Two Shaykhs but they are extremely passionate in the love and respect of the Two Shaykhs too and are extremely firm in praising the Two Shaykhs and in obeying their words and actions and following their path.

This is just like the Sunnis say that the Two Shaykhs have superiority over Hazrat Ali in these matters--as discussed above--but they are passionate in the love and obedience
of Hazrat Ali and are firm in following his words and action.This type of Tafzili is included in the Ahlus Sunnah w'al Jama'ah although they have erred in the matter of tafzil
and this error of theirs is like the difference between the Asharis and the Maturidis. The imamate of this type of Tafzili is permissible and some scholars and Sufis
of the Ahlus Sunnah were also of this persuasion. For example, the muhaddith Abd al Razzaq and Salman Farsi and Hassan ibn Thabit and some other Companions were
also of this view.

The other type of Tafzilis are those people who say that the love of Hazrat Ali and his offspring is enough for us and so is following the words and actions of
these people alone sufficient for us.They also say that we do not speak ill of the Two Shaykhs nor the other Companions but nor do we have anything to do with
them, neither hate, nor love, nor obeying them, nor disobeying them. Nor we do follow their words or actions nor do we ignore them i.e. we give no importance
to their matters. These type of Tafzilis are without doubt innovators [bid'ati] and the ruling for the imamate of one of them is the same as that of
the ruling for the imamate of an innovator. No reliable person from the Ahlus Sunnah has been such a Tafzili.


Q: What is affirmed from the Ahlus Sunnah about speaking ill of Hazrat Muawiya and Marwan?

A:The love of the Ahlul Bayt is from amongst the obligations [faraid] of the Religion and not just a necessary Sunnah [lawazim Sunnat] and
it is from the love of the Ahlul Bayt to speak ill of Marwan -- may he be cursed [la'anatullah alayh] -- and one should be disgusted from the heart
with him. In particular, he acted treacherously with Imam Hussain and the Ahlul Bayt and had extreme hatred for them. For this reason one should
remain disgusted by this devil [shaytan].**

But Hazrat Muawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan is a Companion and there are some hadith about him [Aan-Janaab] too. There is a difference of opinion
in the Ahlus Sunnah concerning him. The scholars of Transoxiana, the Koranic Exegetes [mufassireen], the jurists [fuqaha] say that Hazrat
Muawiyah's actions against Hazrat Ali, which took place in war and battle, were an error in his ijtihad... [translator: I leave the rest out due to time]

----
(fatawa azizi (Urdu translation), pp. 412-13, MH Saeed Publishers, Karachi 1408 AH)
Click to expand...


** translator's note: these harsh words including the cursing [la'anat] and the
word 'shaytan' for Marwan are those of Shah Abdul Aziz :ra: NOT any additions or
translating error by me.


hope people can discuss the main topic now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top