|
Post by abunoor on Jan 21, 2017 18:03:28 GMT
You wrote: "Some people have a misunderstanding that this is an insignificant or peripheral issue related to ‘aqīdah. In fact, it is a fundamental issue, in which holding the incorrect view may even amount to kufr as recorded from at least one of the earlier imāms of ‘aqīdah. The Barelwī opinion was espoused by some unknown figures from the early period and some people of knowledge from the later period like al-Sāwī al-Mālikī. However, it is a rejected view on account of its clear opposition to texts of the Sharī‘ah and the explicit statements of the ‘ulamā’...Hence, the Barelwīs who claim to be Sunnī Māturīdī Hanafīs must reassess their claim against the statements quoted above. If their claim is true, will they accept that the view of their imām, Ahmad Ridā Khān al-Barelwī, is incorrect? Or will they turn a blind eye to the documented and established position of the Māturīdī school in favour of this unacceptable view of Ahmad Ridā Khan."
Al-Sayyid al-Barzanji wrote in "Al-Ishā'ah li-Ashrāt al-Sā`ah" regarding the "hour":
وأنها لا تجيء إِلَّا بغتة كما قال تعالى، وقد استأثر بعلمها، ولم يعلمها أحداً من خلقه، أو علّمها النبي صلى عليه وسلم ونهاه عن الإخبار بها؛ تهويلا لشأنها، وتعظيماً لأمرها. - 2005 ed., Dār al-Minhāj, Page 27
I did not find Shaykh Muhammad Zakariyya Kandihlawi criticizing this in his ta`līqāt of this work. If the matter was possibly kufr, I would've expected him to mention some type of tanbīh. Any possible reason for why he remained silent?
|
|
|
Post by loveprophet on Jan 21, 2017 20:57:44 GMT
I repeat again, that the official and correct belief of the majority of the Berelvi scholars is the one said by Imam Ahmed Rida Khan "Imam Ahmed Rida Khan also said: “Whoever totally denies the Bashariyah (humanity) of the Prophet sallAllahu 'alaihi wasallam is a Kafir. Allah says: Say: Glory to my Lord! Am I aught but a man – a messenger?” (Fatawa Ridawiyyah, v.6, p.67)" Kanzul Iman of Imam Ahmed Rida is found here www.alahazrat.net/alquran/Quran/041/041_001_011.html"Proclaim (O dear Prophet Mohammed - peace and blessings be upon him), “Physically I am a human like you - I receive the divine revelation that your God is only One God, therefore be upright towards Him and seek forgiveness from Him”; and woe is to the polytheists. -" See how different it is to Zameel's false accusation that he denied the humanity of the Prophet. Zameel, will you retract your lie? Wasalam
|
|
|
Post by loveprophet on Jan 21, 2017 21:48:02 GMT
Per this Deobandi fatwa: islamqa.org/hanafi/darulifta-deoband/26174"Hazrat Hakimul Ummah, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi has mentioned a Hadith in his book نشر الطیب فی ذکر النبی الحبیب صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم with reference of Ahkam bin Al-Qattan that Hazrat Ali bin Al-Hussain (Zainul Abdeen) narrated from his father Hazrat Hussain (رضی اللہ عنہ) and he narrated from his father (Hazrat Ali رضی اللہ عنہ) that the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم) said: ?I was a noor (light) in front of my Lord some forty thousand years before the birth of Hazrat Adam (علیہ السلام)?. There are some more traditions which prove that the noor of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم) was created in the earliest time, some traditions say that his noor was created before the Tablet, the Pen, earth, sky and even before all creatures" Shaykh Ashraf's book Nashr al-Tayyib, on the section of the Noor of the Prophet, also narrates the hadith of Jabir from Abdul Razzaq. Attached is the scans. He clearly affirms him being made from Noor. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Zameel on Jan 21, 2017 21:51:42 GMT
See how different it is to Zameel's false accusation that he denied the humanity of the Prophet. Zameel, will you retract your lie? It is not a lie. The passage from Kanz al-Īmān translates the last verse of Sūrah al-Kahf as: “Say: In external human appearance ( ẓāhir ṣurat basharī), I am like you”; which does suggest that in his reality, he is not a human being like other human beings, but is only like other human beings in his external appearance (just like the angel Jibrā’īl when he appeared to Maryam raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā). Moreover, I did not claim he "denied the humanity of the Prophet", but that he alluded to the Barelwi view described in the opening post.
|
|
|
Post by loveprophet on Jan 21, 2017 22:03:19 GMT
So what about Qadi Iyad and the majority of hadith scholars who used weak narrations to affirm the Prophet's miracles and attributes? For example Qadi Iyad denied the shadow of the Prophet in his Shifa. Similarly the Hafiz of hadith, shaykh Abd Allah Siraj al-Din and Imam Suyuti (the big hadith master and mujtahid) also did, so did many others? Qadi Iyad was a very reputable hadith scholar. I'm surprised by the condition you mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by loveprophet on Jan 21, 2017 22:08:02 GMT
Your lie is that he is denying that the Prophet has humanity inwardly, which is not what he denied. Surely the Prophet is not inwardly like the mushrikin because they inwardly deny Islam but he doesn't. His noor is the first of creation but not them etc. In fact, to say that the Prophet is inwardly like them, would be kufr. Furthermore, the Prophet's heart was opened and the black spot removed. He is also sinless and received revelation. Hence he was not inwardly like him Also your understanding of Imam Ahmed's words to mean "which does suggest that in his reality, he is not a human being like other human beings, but is only like other human beings in his external appearance (just like the angel Jibrā’īl when he appeared to Maryam raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā). " is just false and a lie for which you offered not a shred of evidence, yet you didn't retract. I ask you for one clear proof from the words of Imam Ahmed Rida that he denied that the Prophet had any human aspect inwardly.
|
|
|
Post by loveprophet on Jan 21, 2017 22:35:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Zameel on Jan 21, 2017 22:43:32 GMT
There are some more traditions which prove that the noor of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم) was created in the earliest time, some traditions say that his noor was created before the Tablet, the Pen, earth, sky and even before all creatures" Shaykh Ashraf's book Nashr al-Tayyib, on the section of the Noor of the Prophet, also narrates the hadith of Jabir from Abdul Razzaq. Attached is the scans. He clearly affirms him being made from Noor. Māwlānā Thānawī believed this to be a reference to the soul of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam). ( Nūr wa Bashar, p. 52, 82) This is how others before him, like Mullā ‘Alī al-Qārī and al-Khafājī, also understood the ḥadīth. (ibid. p. 51) Regarding his physical composition and his bodily reality, however, Mawlānā Thānawī does not deny he is a human being. He says in the very same work, Nashr al-Ṭīb: “In terms of being a human being, in terms of physical composition and make-up, he is the same as the ummah.” (Quoted in ibid., p. 82-3) This is quite unlike the Barelwī belief described earlier: that in terms of his physical make-up and reality, he is not a human being but a light, that – just like the angel Jibrā’īl – merely appeared in human form. In fact, Māwlānā Thānawī described the latter belief as a belief of kufr! This is apart from the fact the ḥadīth is probably a baseless and spurious narration. Mawlānā Thānawī was quoting it from earlier authors who mentioned it as a ḥadīth (ibid. p. 52), and not from any original ḥadīth source.
|
|
|
Post by Zameel on Jan 22, 2017 15:25:21 GMT
The following is a relevant passage from ‘Allāmah Khalīl Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī’s al-Barāhīn al-Qāṭi‘ah, a work written in the lifetime of his shaykh and teacher, Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī, who read and endorsed the work. When the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) forbade ṣawm al-wiṣāl (continuous fasting without ifṭār) and some companions said in response that he (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) himself performs it, he replied: “Which of you is like me? I spend the night while my Rabb feeds me and gives me drink.” ( Bukhārī) And in another version, he said: “I am not like any of you...” ( Muslim) ‘Abd al-Samī‘ al-Rāmpūri used this narration to criticise those who regard the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) as a “brother” (based on a particular ḥadīth in which he describes himself as such). In response, Mawlānā Khalīl Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī writes in al-Barāhīn al-Qāṭi‘ah: I say:
In the ḥadīth, “Which of you is like me?” the intent is likeness in proximity to Allāh Almighty, which is clearly indicated by the words he said after this: “My Rabb feeds me and gives me drink.” The same is the case with the verse: “You [O wives of the Prophet] are not like any of the women” (Qur’an 33:32), in which is intended negation of likeness in terms of the honour of being the wives [of the Prophet] or the consequences of being the wives [of the Prophet].
Not even the least Muslim will claim likeness with the Pride of the World (upon him blessings) in proximity to Allāh and his lofty perfections. However, likeness in the very property of being human (nafs bashariyyat) because of being from the sons of Ādam was stated by Allāh Himself: “Say: I am but a man like you.” Thereafter, the qualification “revelation comes to me” (Qur’an 18:110) again establishes the position of proximity to Allāh after affirming likeness in being human.
Thus if anybody says that he is a brother, in the sense of Ādam being a common parent, there is no contradiction with the texts, but it is perfectly in line with the texts [of the Qur’ān and ḥadīth]. The Pride of the World (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) also said: “I hoped to see my brothers.” (Muslim)*
Thus affirming his brotherhood – in the sense of being from the sons of Ādam – is completely in line with the Qur’ān and ḥadīth, and attacking this is an attack on Qur’ān and ḥadīth, and disagreeing with this is opposition to the clear texts [of Qur’ān and ḥadīth]. Thus, the one who says he is a brother means it in the sense that he is from the children of Ādam, not because he believes in likeness in terms of proximity to Allāh! Thus, an attack on this stems from an opposition to the texts. To take out his (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) person from being human – which is the noblest and most exalted of creation – and placing him in another species is pure disrespect and degradation of his lofty station.
...
There is no doubt that brotherhood in the very property of being a human being, and equality in terms of being from the children of Ādam, has been established in the text of the Qur’ān; while, in the perfections of proximity, nobody has called him a brother or believes him to be equal [with others]. (al-Barāhīn al-Qāṭi‘ah, p. 7) *When the ṣaḥābah asked “Are we not your brothers?” he (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) replied “You are my companions. My brothers are those who haven’t yet come.” Al-Nawawī in his commentary quotes Imam al-Bājī who said: “This is not a negation of their brotherhood, but he mentioned their additional station of companionship. Hence, these are brothers from the ṣaḥābah while those that haven’t yet come are brothers that are not ṣaḥābah, as Allah said: ‘The believers are only brothers.’” ( Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Mu’assasa Qurṭuba, 3:175-6)
|
|
|
Post by Zameel on Jan 31, 2017 14:13:25 GMT
Mawlānā Ashraf ‘Alī al-Thānawī issued a fatwā of disbelief on one who believes that the Prophet (peace be upon him) is a human being only in his outward form, but not in reality ( Imdād al-Fatāwā, 5:234). ... For instance, the book Ikhtilāf e Ummat aur Ṣirāt e Mustaqīm by Mawlānā Yūsuf Ludhyānwī, a widely accepted work taught in some madāris, categorically states: “Just as in terms of his species, he (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) was from humanity; in terms of the quality of giving guidance, he is a light for the whole of humanity.” ( Ikhtilāf e Ummat aur Sirāt e Mustaqīm, p. 39) ... Mawlānā Thānawī says in the very same work, Nashr al-Ṭīb: “In terms of being a human being, in terms of physical composition and make-up, he is the same as the ummah.” (Quoted in Nūr wa Bashar, p. 82-3) ... When the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) forbade ṣawm al-wiṣāl (continuous fasting without ifṭār) and some companions said in response that he (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) himself performs it, he replied: “Which of you is like me? I spend the night while my Rabb feeds me and gives me drink.” ( Bukhārī) And in another version, he said: “I am not like any of you...” ( Muslim) ‘Abd al-Samī‘ al-Rāmpūri used this narration to criticise those who regard the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) as a “brother” (based on a particular ḥadīth in which he describes himself as such). In response, Mawlānā Khalīl Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī writes in al-Barāhīn al-Qāṭi‘ah: I say:
In the ḥadīth, “Which of you is like me?” the intent is likeness in proximity to Allāh Almighty, which is clearly indicated by the words he said after this: “My Rabb feeds me and gives me drink.” The same is the case with the verse: “You [O wives of the Prophet] are not like any of the women” (Qur’an 33:32), in which is intended negation of likeness in terms of the honour of being the wives [of the Prophet] or the consequences of being the wives [of the Prophet].
Not even the least Muslim will claim likeness with the Pride of the World (upon him blessings) in proximity to Allāh and his lofty perfections. However, likeness in the very property of being human (nafs bashariyyat) because of being from the sons of Ādam was stated by Allāh Himself: “Say: I am but a man like you.” Thereafter, the qualification “revelation comes to me” (Qur’an 18:110) again establishes the position of proximity to Allāh after affirming likeness in being human.
Thus if anybody says that he is a brother, in the sense of Ādam being a common parent, there is no contradiction with the texts, but it is perfectly in line with the texts [of the Qur’ān and ḥadīth]. The Pride of the World (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) also said: “I hoped to see my brothers.” (Muslim)
Thus affirming his brotherhood – in the sense of being from the sons of Ādam – is completely in line with the Qur’ān and ḥadīth, and attacking this is an attack on Qur’ān and ḥadīth, and disagreeing with this is opposition to the clear texts [of Qur’ān and ḥadīth]. Thus, the one who says he is a brother means it in the sense that he is from the children of Ādam, not because he believes in likeness in terms of proximity to Allāh! Thus, an attack on this stems from an opposition to the texts. To take out his (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) person from being human – which is the noblest and most exalted of creation – and placing him in another species is pure disrespect and degradation of his lofty station...There is no doubt that brotherhood in the very property of being a human being, and equality in terms of being from the children of Ādam, has been established in the text of the Qur’ān; while, in the perfections of proximity, nobody has called him a brother or believes him to be equal [with others]. (al-Barāhīn al-Qāṭi‘ah, p. 7) In a fatwā dated 25 Shawwāl 1391 (1971 CE), Muftī Rashīd Aḥmad Ludhyānwī (1341 – 1422 H/1922 – 2002 CE) (raḥimahullāh) [1] said in response to the question: “How is it to regard Allāh’s Messenger (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) as nūr? – clarify and be rewarded”: Nūr means light. Thus, Allāh (Exalted is He) called the moon light: ‘It is He Who made the sun radiant and the moon a light.’ (Qur’ān, 10:5) Since light is itself manifest and makes other things illumined and manifest, this is why the concomitant meaning of light is: to be manifest and make manifest. Based on this connection, the revered noble prophets (upon them blessing and peace) are also called ‘light’ since they are themselves on guidance and also make the paths reaching to Allāh manifest to others and guide to the Straight Path. In fact, according to this meaning, every religious authority is a light. This is also the intent of the supplication in ḥadīth, ‘O Allāh, make me a light’. There is a common practice of keeping the names Nūr al-Dīn, Nūr al-Islām, Nūrullāh etc. Its meaning is also this: that is, the one who guides to religion and Islām.
There is no conflict between nūr and being human (bashariyyah). Otherwise, it would have not been valid for a human being to keep the name Nūr al-Dīn. Likewise, it wouldn’t have been acceptable for a human being to make the supplication, ‘O Allāh, make me a light,’ since its meaning would amount to: ‘O Allāh, take me out of being a human being and being man!’ Guidance is also called nūr and misguidance ‘darkness’ in the Noble Qur’ān: ‘Is he who was dead, then We gave him life, and made for him a light by which he walks among the people, like he who is in total darkness, and cannot get out of it?’ (Qur’ān, 6:122) This light of guidance will on the Day of Resurrection become a [real] light illuminating [the path]: ‘Their light radiating ahead of them, and to their right’ (Qur’ān, 57:12) Allāh (Exalted is He) Himself says of His own Being: ‘Allāh is the light of the heavens and the earth.’ (Qur’ān, 24:35) The revered exegetes have here too identified nūr as being in the meaning of guidance. That is, Allāh (Exalted is He) is the One that gives guidance to all creatures in the earth and sky. In this slave’s mind, a clearer and more comprehensive meaning is that just as effulgence is taken from light, in much the same way the earth and sky, and whatever is within them, all of their existences and attributes are purely the effulgence of the Generous Master.
The reality is nūr in the meaning of guidance is the true perfection, and is far greater than physical light. Thus, despite the sun, moon and stars being physical lights, they are subservient to man: ‘And He committed the sun and the moon to your service, both continuously pursuing their courses.’ (Qur’ān, 14:33) Since man is the noblest of creatures, this is why Allāh (Exalted is He) chose man as the light of guidance. He states: ‘We offered the Trust to the heavens, and the earth, and the mountains; but they refused to bear it, and were apprehensive of it; but the human being accepted it’ (Qur’ān, 33:72)
Those who deny the humanity of the Noble Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) – may my father and mother be ransomed for him –, having removed [him from being] from the species of the most noble of creatures and the esteemed position of being a human being, into which creation do they wish to include him?! If their intent is that just like angels he too is from the free spirits (mujarradāt), then these claimants to love, like an ignorant friend, are belittling the greatest benefactor (Allāh bless him and grant him peace). Allāh (Exalted is He) made the angels bow down in prostration to Ḥaḍrat Ādam (upon him peace). The Noble Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) is superior to even Ḥaḍrat Ādam (upon him peace). That there is a conflict between being a human being and a messenger [of Allāh] was the belief of the disbelievers. They would claim that a messenger can only be an angel. Allāh (Exalted is He) refuted this mistaken belief of theirs in several places of the Noble Qur’ān.
The upshot is that the Noble Prophet (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) is a light [of guidance] as well as a human being. To deny [the reality of] his being a human being is disbelief on account of denying the Qur’ānic texts and on account of it entailing belittlement of him. (Aḥsan al-Fatāwā, 1:56-7) [1] Muftī Rashīd Aḥmad Ludhyānwī spent time in the company of Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmad Madanī and Mawlānā Ashraf ‘Alī Thānawī, and eventually received khilāfah from Mawlānā Thānawī’s famous successor, Mawlānā ‘Abd al-Ghanī Phūlpūrī. He graduated from Dārul ‘Ulūm Deoband aged 20, having studied under Mawlānā I‘zāz ‘Alī, Mawlānā Muhammad Ibrāhīm Balyāwī, Muftī Muhammad Shafī‘, Mawlānā Muhammad Idrīs Kandhlewī amongst others. He was appointed by Muftī Muhammad Shafī‘ as shaykh al-ḥadīth at Dār al-‘Ulūm Karāchī, a position which he served between the years 1376 H and 1383 H. In 1381 H, he is credited with founding a separate faculty at the Dār al-‘Ulūm Karāchī for students who wished to specialise in fiqh and issuing fatwā, now famous as the Iftā’ program. After leaving Dār al-‘Ulūm, he founded his own institution, Dār al-Iftā’ wa l-Irshād, which he served till his death in the year 1422 H. He was a man of immense piety and learning.
|
|