Is this true?

Re: Is this true?

**Know that if the entire creation were to gather together to do something to benefit you- you would never get any benefit except that Allah had written for you

**So when a person gets a benefit from seeking help at the burial site of a wali and has it granted ... And he believes that it happened because Allah (SWT ) had it written for him ... Surely this makes the above compatible?

Re: Is this true?

Read below we will discuss weak Hadith for Aqeedah and related issues later. The above shows you have not read ANY of the references I gave you. Now we shall go through them one by one! :D

Re: Is this true?

Ok bro I do not even think you read the references I gave you. So, before preceding further, lets go through one. Tell me what you understand from the following regarding this issue

**يجيء النفي في معنى النهي ] وقد يجيء النفي في معنى النهي ، ويختلف حاله بحسب المعاني : منها أن يكون نهيا وزجرا ، كقوله تعالى { ما كان لأهل المدينة ومن حولهم من الأعراب أن يتخلفوا } ومنها : أن يكون تعجيزا ، كقوله تعالى : { ما كان لكم أن تنبتوا شجرها } . ومنها أن يكون تنزيها ، كقوله تعالى : { ما كان لله أن يتخذ من ولد } ذكره ابن عطية في سورة مريم

اعلم أولا أن لفظ " ما كان " يدل على النفي ، فتارة يدل ذلك النفي من جهة المعنى على الزجر والردع
وتارة يدل على التنزيه
وتارة يدل على التعجيز

**Its time to move beyond the Madinah Books to advanced Arabic now.

Re: Is this true?

What I understand from the given is that some commentary is being given about negation assuming the meaning as though it were prohibition.

In other words it supports what I was saying the Laam Alif is translated with negation but the sentence as a whole may be taken as prohibitive. This is in the realm of ilm-ul-ma'aani rather than nahuw.

The famous hadith you gave about laa-darara ... From Imam Nawawis collection I believe is not laa of negation ... That is Laa of prohibition, but the difference cannot be seen since the verb is mabniy. Right? But the state of the verb is in majzuum, that is what shows it is prohibitive in translation.

Re: Is this true?

Good brother. May Allah bless you. Now consider this, you know the Hadith about Istigathaa. It is possible that the first site I took it from - the Arabic - inflected it wrong! You know that the Hadith were recorded without vowels. If you download the Volume 10 of Al-Haythmi, you will see it is not inflected.

Considering how all Arabs understand it to mean a Nafi for prohibition, perhaps the website site inflected it wrong.

Now getting to the point of Aqeedah. Aqeedah cannot be taken from weak Hadith! As a matter of fact according the school you and vroom follow, it cannot be taken from authentic hadith either if it is not mutawaatir or mashoor.

But first lets decided if this is an issue of Aqeedah. I mentioned this to vroom and he said this is not Aqeedah rather only an act Muslims perform. If you scroll back you will find his statement.

So, what do you say. Is this a matter of Aqeedah or not?

Re: Is this true?

So, how many angels can dance on the point of a very fine needle, without jostling one another?

Re: Is this true?

Tawassul is not a matter of Aqeedah, but istighaata, should have a bearing on 'aqeedah in the sense that we either seek help from Allah (SWT) or seek help from His servants knowing that it actually comes from Him. When we say O RasoolAllah (SAW) help us ... That clearly means O RasoolAllah (SAW) help us by seeking help from Allah (SWT) on our behalf.

It stems from whether you view RasoolAllah (SAW) as alive and respondent or not alive. I have come to view all true martyrs, Awliyah and prophets are alive and have differing levels of proximity to us. Loving the loved ones of Allah (SWT) earns Love of Allah (SWT) ...

We will never ask RasoolAllah (SAW) to forgive sins or worship him ... Or Attribute to his nature any form of Divinity from the elements of Tawheed. So we should not be accused of doing that either. For me this topic is unnecessary we can comfortably live with this difference and treat each other as brothers and move on ... I understand people from both sides would rather not do that.

Re: Is this true?

That is true. And despite what vroom thinks about me and my intentions, my original purpose with this thread was to truly understand if the accusations present in the book were true. Of course while he was explaining things he had a knack of being sarcastic and abusive in his responses - which I confirmed when I had a friend and several others read this thread - which put me on my guard.

It would probably come as a surprise to him that I have actually prayed behind the Imams of the Brailley. Had I truly believed they were Mushriks, like said in the translated material I presented earlier on in the thread, I would not have been ignorant enough to pray behind them. :)

Re: Is this true?

Perhaps a commentary on that rather obscure statement would be nice!

Re: Is this true?

He means we are going into hairsplitting details that goes into a purely academic over philosophical domain that does not benefit anyone.

Re: Is this true?

Ah smart man! May Allah bless him!!

Re: Is this true?

Tawassul (and istighatha) are practices. There is Aqeedah which allows for them. This is the rightly guided Muslim Beliefs

Some people have an aqeedah which does not allow for it, and this is the beliefs of Ahul Bidah

Re: Is this true?

Are you confusing arabs for najdis? The hadiths I have presented earlier are from Arabs, the sahaba, and our Hadith collectors

Meaning istighatha was never prohibited, and this is the view of orthodox mainstream Muslims

[quote]
Now getting to the point of Aqeedah. Aqeedah cannot be taken from weak Hadith! As a matter of fact according the school you and vroom follow, it cannot be taken from authentic hadith either if it is not mutawaatir or mashoor.

But first lets decided if this is an issue of Aqeedah. I mentioned this to vroom and he said this is not Aqeedah rather only an act Muslims perform. If you scroll back you will find his statement.

So, what do you say. Is this a matter of Aqeedah or not?
[/quote]

It is only a practice and not a matter of aqeedah among people who are of one aqeedah. Where as some forms and reasons for prohibition would mean a difference of aqeedah

This thread was an attempt to get back at me for what you saw as me labelling you as hypocrite or disbeliever. You stated this. Also you took offence at me pointing out that subjects such as istighatha and our Grave culture are beliefs of mainstream Muslims. Also you must have agreed with the protestant christian in what he said regarding the Muslims and specifically Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Imam e Ahle Sunnat

You called Imam Subki Rehmatullah Alaih as a ''granddaddy'' - which is indicative of what type of emotional state you are in with regards to the beliefs of mainstream Muslims.
Also indicative is your failure to accept Istighatha as an Islamic practice

This thread was not initiated by a genuine seeker of knowledge or clarification.

[quote]
It would probably come as a surprise to him that I have actually prayed behind the Imams of the Brailley. Had I truly believed they were Mushriks, like said in the translated material I presented earlier on in the thread, I would not have been ignorant enough to pray behind them. :)
[/quote]

My attitude is not effected by your praying behind Barelvis, it is effected by what you write. What you wrote aimed or desired to put the fatwa of kufr and Shirk upon mainstream islam and its adherents such as imam Ahmad Raza Khan and Imam Subki, and others

Re: Is this true?

Tawassul can not be outright prohibited and anyone who does is an innovator, hypocrite or disbeliever

Zeeshanparvez was happy for a quote of Imam Abu Hanifa Rehmatullah Alaih quote to be used against Tawassul outright

1) I encourage zeeshan to take back this sentiment

2) Also ISTIGHATHA is an Islamic practice, and I encourage zeeshan to accept this

3) the resting places of Saints being desired places, places of aid is the view of mainstream Islam, unless your making takfir on the ummat at some point prior to that. i encourage zeeshan to accept this

4) None of the above issues are particularly linked to Imam e Ahle Sunnat Ahmad Raza Khan. He was a scholar who represents orthodox mainstream islam [ahle sunnat wal jamaah] and a part of the reason His name is portrayed as if He personally devised all these things is due to laymen najdis, and like minded people, not being able to comprehend that mainstream Islam disagrees with them. They single out individuals such as Imam Ahmad Raza Khan, and this gives the impression that they themselves represent mainstream Islam. This is a form of taqiyyah [deception]. I encourage zeeshan to accept this

Re: Is this true?

Oh man you getting all emotional again!!!

It’s ok. Well know how UNAUTHENTIC your sources were. So, I don’t think I need to waste any more time on you. :wink:

Next time hope you will find a website which knows how to translate and a video which does not have a coconut in it saying things which are basically lies!!! :smiley:

And please a lesson in Husn Zann which I know is difficult for your sect… :slight_smile:

And no I don’t take back anything I said!!! :biggthumb:

Re: Is this true?

Just a reminder of the coconut in the video you gave us! :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

Re: Is this true?

tawheedis vs Sunni Barelvi

aloo tawheed vs Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal

this is what these people when they speak based on principle say about our imams

Here they speak about Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, one of the four imams of Sunni Jurisprudence

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb2-FvnKAO0

Re: Is this true?

I still believe him, and i am not taking back what i added till either i learn to translate myself, or i get someone else to check what i need checking. I will look into this hadith, or not hadith, that you guys are using here and elsewhere on the internet at some point. It needs a full and comprehensive investigation, although the fact that you were saying it is not hadith to be used according to your principles suggests the wheels will fall off with this line of then using it, as is evidenced from even a shar of it and its use all over the internet including here

However it is a side issue, some accepted proofs for istighatha have already been shown to you.

You can not hide behind insults such as 'granddaddy' and 'coconut'. Or at least they should show you where you stand in terms of ahklaaq. I am not angry, you are.

You not wasting your time with me means one of three things 1) You are aware, or suspect that these issues are proven from Quran and Sunnah in the favour of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah 2) You are not willing to acknowledge their validity 3) hiding nifaaq for another day, meaning to continue regardless having internally acknowledged the validity of issues such as istighatha.

The list I made earlier REQUIRES you to accept the statements i put forward for you to accept. And if this is not done then know that I know your secret, and all the believers know your secret :)

Re: Is this true?

Wa alaikum Salam

Your generalisations about me are incorrect, although i do have shortcomings which i am choosing not to deal with, something like 'you sure do like to ask questions' is blatantly incorrect. I rarely ask questions from non sunnis, even the question I asked earlier was not a question - it was an answer, and other things

I do realize this was asked a while ago, but a couple of weeks should not matter in our pursuit of knowledge, right?

The Questions posed here are thus:
"...Can you please provide some textual reference from the earliest of traditional scholars of Islam who went to graves to seek aid/help? Texts from the earliest generations would be best. Surely, a believer would not embark on a practice and do it as a part of the deen without having substance to establish the practice?.."

"...I realize you have often said your way is the way of traditional Islam, but traditional Islam should extend way back to the times of Rasool Allah (s.a.w.) and Sahaba (r.a.), should it not? Did they visit graves with the intention of seeking aid/help from any of the dead?.."

Forgive me again, for taking some more time before I actually answer the questions, if I do.

Please state your attention is still is on this subject, and if any of the evidences I provided earlier were beneficial to correcting your view

Re: Is this true?

An ignorant man like you preaching istigathaa!! Go for it dude…:biggthumb: