Here we go again! Consulted your mufti I take it?
A Mufti can not stand in front of your knowledge and wisdom bro, I have to consult Grand grand Muftis to answer your ground breaking and earth shattering revelations. But they all miserably failed. Alas!
Still no disclosure of your association/affiliation to a sect. Why are you so scared to disclose? Scared that I may rattle you some more?
I associate myself to Islam and all my affiliations are towards Allah and His Prophet A.S. Why should I be scared? Your accusations and utterances are not new. People have attributed worst towards Ahl us Sunnah like Khwarij, Rawafiz, Muatazila and Najdis. You are not the only one and you have every right to believe whatever you want.
Most importantly, except Prophets, no one is infallible in Islam. We as Muslims can hold different opinions from anyone, except Prophets. As far as rattling goes, Quran and Sunnah of Prophet are enough for modest Muslims like me, they provide us the strength to stand up against Ahl ul Biidah and to defend our fellow Muslims. Surely, Allah is the best of Helpers.
I dont associate myself to any sect or any group. As far as my beliefs are concerned, I follow the Manhaj and way of Ahl us Sunnah in Asool, as understood by majority of Salf, Muhadiseen and Mujtahideen.
I told you a while back to stop trying to fit me in any sect, it won't be fruitful at all. You want me to comment on Shia who say 'Ya Ali Madad' instead of 'Ya Allah Madad' as per إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِينُ
No different than those so called sunni muslims going to mazars and asking dead peers, ghouses etc for madad. But each try to justify in a sly way portraying that it is harmless - yeah, committing shirk by asking the dead for madad is harmless!
I have no regards for Najdis - if you mean Salafis/Wahabis. As I said before, I do not associate myself to any of these sects. Most Takfeeri groups are this and Ahle Hadith - based on their books and what's coming out of their ulemas!
Who will you attempt to associate me to now?
I repeat, I do not consider any of the sects to be non-muslims (except one shia sect who calls Hazrat Ali (AS) god, and Qadyanis).
As per Hadith, all kalma goh ummatis who believe in khatm-e-nabuwat will ultimately be pulled out of Jahanam and entered into Jannah. My only plea is to reject all sects as not doing so could result in a trip to Jahanam - but people are risk takers in matters of Deen and that's their/your choice.
i dont want to and I also dont feel any need to associate you to any sect. I agree we should reject all forms of sectarianism. However, this doesnt mean we should declare everyone Biddati from Salaf to Khalaf, except us.
You dont associate yourself with Takferis but you still quote their writings which are full of sectarianism. I genuinely feel that you should tone down your rhetoric against Muslims, be humble my friend. What will you say to God in the afterlife, if God asked you about your accusations and if they were not proved to be true? How can you be 100 percent sure about all your accusations from Ulema to Sahaba? After all, your reliance is on fallible sources, which can be wrong. Dont you feel that your gross generalizations are unwarranted? You dont need to accept this on open forum, just reevaluate your thinking and ideology. Be compassionate and loving towards your fellow Muslims, who you believe are ultimately destined for heaven.
They are. Maalik, Shafai, Hanbal were influenced by mysticism and even regarded as saints by sufis of those days! It's recorded history.
So, how can we trust narrations of these three men and their followers? After all, they were influenced by mysticism.
The differences were theological. Ulema of previous Aima schools went against the next in line Aima when he opened his school - despite being student of the previous Aima. You are welcome to keep denying however.
Can you state any theological difference which existed between these Imams?
You did it again. I had underlined in the act for your understanding but as usual, you intentionally missed it completely! This is what manipulators do and you sir are coming across as one.
I am always ready to take back my words as long as you stop accusing every other Muslim. Thank God you have accepted that every person who was a follower of 4 schools at that time was not a Biddati.
Oh so now you reject Hadith (that I quoted earlier)? As I said to read Surah Bakarah. What jewish ulema were doing is exactly what our so called ulema are and have been doing.
Does Hadith declare all Ulema Biddatis? Secondly, where in Quran it is mentioned that our Ulema are treading the path of Jewish scholars? Dont try to present your ideas as Quran, its just your interpretation of Quran, which can be discarded.
I have utmost respect for Muhaddiths - they had an agreed methodology of recording and verifying Hadith and did not deviate despite the beliefs of teachers they had! Problem with early muhaddiths was that they had far less ahadith collection than Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim (+ 4 others) who devoted their lives as muhaddiths. This low volume of hadith records by earlier muhaddiths resulted in major differences that developed into schools/groups/sects.
Main differences in these sunni sects is that they take extreme stances in acceptance, rejection and interpretation of hadith.
And then we have Tafseer by ulema of these sects, and what majority of them do in tafseer is just criminal.
All Sunni Muslims respect Muhadiseen and their contribution towards Hadith. Sunnis also believe in their truthfulness and they had highest standards of morality and character. We accept their narrations because we consider them truthful.
Imam Malik, Shafi and Hanbal were part of Muhadiseen. They are Imam of all Muhadiseen and are considered as the highest authority in ilm e Hadith. When you accuse these Aima you are in fact rejecting their narrations. These narrations are a major part of all transmitted Hadiths.
Besides rejecting their narrations, you are also accusing their followers of deliberate deceitfulness because everyone of them consider these Aima e Salasa as truthful. You will not find a single person in all Ilm e Hadith accusing them of any wrongful act. Asma ur Rijjal is filled with statements of their admiration and applause. How can we consider Bukhari and Muslim truthful when we know that they are telling lies about these Aima? Every single Muhadith is directly or indirectly associated with these Aima and if we accept your assertion then my friend no one remains truthful in entire ilm e hadith.
No one has ever accused these Aima of the acts which you are attributing to them. As far as beliefs go, their students had the same beliefs and they have transmitted these beliefs to us. We know about these Aima because their students which were Muhaditheen told us about them. If Muhadiseen were hiding wrongdoings of these Aima then how can we accept their other narrations? Subtract Aima e Arba and their followers from ilm e Hadith and you will be left with nothing.
Early Muhadiseen were nearer to the source and they are the only source of Ilm ur Rijjal. We accept and reject narrations based on their verdict. They told us about character of all narrators. If they were liars, then no one can be trusted.
I have stated that before. I do not believe in any groups/sects who call themselves other than &/or anything in addition to 'Muslim'!
You havent answered my question. Let me repeat. Do you think that every Sahabi who was involved in fighting was spreading Tafarkah? (Naoz o Billah)
I dont know why you are picking up one liners and closing your eyes to every other argument. Quite amusing, I must say.
Imam Bukhari wrote Juz Raful Yadain - have you read it? Read it all when you have time. And come back to me if you don't find anything relevant. In there is recording of a manazra where Abu Hanifa mocked the act of Raful Yadain during and after rukuh. Page 70 .. but I am not here to spoon feed you!
What? Is Imam Abu Hanifa's name mentioned in Sahih bukhari? Its getting quite funny now, bro. Please have some mercy on us. I didnt found anything related to Imam Abu Hanifa in Sahih Bukhari. i dont know which lala land you are living in.
Imam Bukhari also wrote in that book that leaving Raful Yadain (before and after rukuh) is a bidat!!
Where? Writing some words in red dont make them authentic unless backed by original sources. Secondly, as I have pointed earlier, you should not quote those men who were disciples of sectarian dead Babas.
Now you are going to accuse him as you accused me - of being Shia, Khwariji or Salafi? I dare you or muftis of your sects to label Imam Bukhari for what he wrote and Hadith recorded in Juz Raful Yadain.
How can I accuse Imam Bukhari when I believe in truthfulness of him and his teachers? Allhamdulilah, me and Ahl us Sunnah believe in truthfulness of Muhadiseen and Mujtahideen, unlike you who are accusing them of spreading Tafarkah.
It was Qazi Abu Yusuf (student of Abu Hanifa) who renounced Raful Yadain after he became the top Qazi. There is a not a single Hadith that confirms that Raful Yadain was suspended or anything like that.
Are we discussing Rafa ul Yadain? What Qazi Abu yousaf and his so called rejection of Raful Yadain has anything to do with the question posed by me? The question was simple. How can you trust Hadith which was transmitted by a disciple of Aima e Arba?
I think you are completely ignorant about methods of discourse and argumentation. The question which I have posed was a counter argument to your accusations against Aima e Arba. On one hand you are accusing them of spreading tafarkah and on the other hand you are believing in narrations of their disciples. How can we trust disciples of Aima e Arba when we know that they are lying about character of their teachers? Similarly, your accusation of Tafarkah against aima arba dictates that we should discard all narrations of them and their followers because they can not be trusted as they were trying to promote their own sects. In essence, you are contradicting your own arguments.
Problem with all your sects lot is that you have become munkar-e-Hadith by rejection and twisting of validated Hadith because it doesn't fit or goes against what your babay/buzurg/peers told you!
Again! Calm down, read again and try to understand the argument. We Ahl us Sunnah believe in truthfulness of "Dead Babas/Buzurgs". That is the reason of our acceptance of Hadith. However, you are accusing Aima e Arba of spreading Tafarkah. Therefore, you should not believe in narrations which were transmitted by Aima e Arba and their disciples primarily because they were trying to protect their own sects. How can we be sure that these dead babas were not concocting false narrations and attributing them towards Prophet for their own gains?
Secondly, dead babas/buzurgs have told us about narrations of Prophet. Why are you not discarding statement of dead babas while demanding us to do so. You have not only accused our babas but you are accusing almost all dead babas of Ilm e Hadith.
This is shaksiyat parasti!
Are you not committing the same sin when accepting sayings of Dead Babas? How can you not be Shakhsiyat Parast while everyone is?
This includes Ahle-Hadith as well now ... their ulema start running a mile when sahih hadith is presented to them. Gave you example of how Hanafi ulema twisted the hadith on divorce in jest to justify divorce by force. Maybe you will want more evidence and when presented you will run back to Aima again.
We are not discussing rejection of Hadith by Wahabis and Hanfis. Instead, we are discussing the role of Aima e Arba in spreading the Tafarkah. Stick to the topic and release your anger somewhere else.
It is Imam Maalik's firm stance against the forced divorce fatwa of Hanafi ulema (who use 'reason', a lot of it warped) that lead to Banu Abbas lot torturing him and breaking his shoulders. So it is relevant! It is also relevant to 4 musallahs as well!
So now suddenly Imam Malik has become acceptable to you? Weren't you the one accusing him of spreading Tafarkah?
You asked for evidence of forced marriage fatwas for the kings. Now you run from Mawsili. Who was he a student of?
Where I asked evidence of forced marriage fatwas for the kings? Why should I run from Mawsli, he is just another Muslim.
Who gave fatwa that those who do not perform Sunnat Muakkadah are sinners? This type of ridiculous fatwa was one of the many reasons for 4 musallahs. Raful Yadain being another. Then you say they didn't differ on serious matters. Can't agree on basics of Salah from Hadith and you claim there were no major differences
Sahaba also differed on some acts of Salah. Should we start accusing them of spreading Tafarkah?
Fitnah entered Islam at Hazrat Umar's (RA) shahadat. Within 50 years of Prophet's (PBUH) passing, his whole family was murdered by who exactly? It was muslims killing muslims, Sahaba & Tabis v Sahaba & Tabis! Now will you deny this?
Fitna of sects came after the fitna of malukiat.
Why do you have a problem with the truth!?
I dont have any problem with truth. I have problem with your false accusations and gross generalizations.
So muhaddiths being once students of an Aima validates what the Aimas and their followers did?
Muhadiseen Validated their truthfulness, integrity and their command on Ulom e Denia. If we accept that they were spreading tafarkah, then we can not trust their narrations. You have not accused Aima of errors in judgement, instead you have accused them of spreading tafarkah. A person who can spread tafarkah can also concoct narrations to further his agenda. In the same vein, those who accepted integrity of Aima can also not be trusted because they have deceitfully lied about their teachers.
As above, outsiders were not making Sahabas kill each other. That is the bitter truth.
so, what is your verdict about Sahaba?
I am studying history WITHOUT any sect biases. You are invited to gutter your biases and study history from Hadith.
The same Hadith, which according to you was transmitted by sectarian dead babas and their disciples. Apart from that, your bias against Sahaba and Aima e Arba is quite apparent.
For the sake of discussion to continue, as you are stuck on Aimas, let's assume that they didn't do anything majorly wrong (can't declare them sin free) and their intentions were not to form groups that go at each other but their students, ulema and followers have really messed things up.
I dont make assumptions based on ignorance and hatred towards fellow Muslims. Are you accepting that they were not the perpetrators of Tafarkah?
Secondly, if you want to discuss more on this topic, I suggest we should move to some other thread in members sections to avoid derailing the ongoing discussion between other members.
