It is True!

[kakaballi]

Re: It is True!

^ Thanks.

[vroom]

Re: It is True!

@ZeeshanParvez

And to now show the absolute incompetence of that website, its incorrect translations, and the fact that it purposefully deceives its readers consider this! Even the quote when read in full shows that Imam Al-Ghazaali did not say it!!!

Here is the full quote from the Tafsir

قال الإمام: ((إنها بعد المفارقة قد تظهر لها آثار وأحوال في هذا العالم فقد يرى المرء شيخه بعد موته فيرشده لما يهمه، وقد نقل عن جالينوس أنه مرض مرضاً عجز عن علاجه الحكماء فوصف له في منامه علاجه فأفاق وفعله فأفاق))، وقد ذكره الغزالي ولذا قيل - وليس بحديث كما توهم - إذا تحيرتم في الأمور فاستعينوا من أصحاب القبور أي أصحاب النفوس الفاضلة المتوفين ولا شك في أنه يحصل لزائرهم مدد روحاني ببركتهم وكثيراً ما تنحل عقد الأمور بأنامل التوسل إلى الله تعالى بحرمتهم، وحمله بعضهم على الأحياء منهم الممتثلين أمر «موتوا قبل أن تموتوا»

Note the part in red which reads And the Imam said:

The part in blue is what the Imam said which reads: Indeed it, after separating, the traces and circumstances become apparent to it in this existence and man sees his sheikh after his death. Then he guides him to that which is important to him. And it has been reported from جالينوس that he became very sick and the wise were unable to treat him so it was shown to him in his dream his treatment, so he regained health and he did it and then regained health.

Then the part in purple reads: And Al-Ghazaali had said it!!!

And now look at the part in green which reads: And for this reason it has been said (wa lidhaa qeela)!!!

What Al-Ghazaali said preceded. The phrase Qeela, it has been said, as any person who is spent any time reading Tafsir, Books of Fiqh, etc., knows means some have said!!!

This was never the statement of the Imam but of some people which this website has incorrectly translated and attributed to the Imam!!! God forbid. Is this what they stoop to to prove their point!!!

Well some versions of the tafsir itself are not reliable, remember as soon as I heard the name Alusi in other thread I was alarmed. I think the quote was included for the oppositions consumption, since as a Sunni I do not doubt seeking help from our resting Masters is possible.

There is apparently a couple of manuscripts around for the tafsir as well. A hint of a salafi son, and salafis publishing it

This is from living Islam regarding it:

A sharp reader and unparalleled expert in rare books and manuscripts, Imam al-Kawthari long ago revealed that the printed version of Imam Mahmud ibn Abd Allah al-Husayni al-Alusi al-Baghdadi's (1217-1270) tafsir entitled Ruh al-Maani published by his “Salafi” son Numan al-Alusi in Bulaq (Egypt) in 1301 (then again twice by the Damascene "Salafi" Munir Abduh Agha at his Muniriyya Press in Egypt) contained alterations and accretions from foreign hands, responsibility for which al-Kawthari laid squarely at the feet of Numan: "He cannot be trusted over the publication of his father's commentary, and if someone were to compare it [the latter edition] with the [autograph] manuscript kept today at the Raghib Basha library in Istanbul, which is the manuscript gifted by the author to the Sultan Abd al-Majid Khan, one would certainly find in it what will make him certain of that."(1)

In his 1968 372-page book al-Alusi Mufassiran, Muhsin `Abd al-Hamid(2) petulantly denied the charge that there had been any tampering with the Tafsir as “a bizarre fiction,” claiming he had compared the manuscript kept at Baghdad’s general Awqaf library and found no discrepancies, and that he consulted with [the “Salafi”] Muhammad Bahjat [al-Baytar] and Munir al-Qadi who were of one mind with him.

Recently, in an internet communication on February 26, 2006 the Riyadh genealogist and historian of scholarship Dr. Muhammad ibn `Abd Allah Aal Rashid mentioned all of the above and commented:

“This claim [by Muhsin Abd al-Hamid] avails us nothing, since al- Kawthari very precisely referred to the autograph manuscript and its location. In the Hajj of the year that just passed (1426) I met the researcher and teacher Ah.mad ibn Abd al-Karim al-Ani who informed me that the Imam al-Azam Faculty in the city of Baghdad had tasked thirty Master’s candidate students to prepare a critical edition of al-Alusi’s commentary, Ruh al-Maani, Ustadh al-Ani being one of those students… and they were basing themselves on the manuscript indicated by Shaykh al-Kawthari. He told me that the printed version was indeed filled with alterations, tamperings, gaps and suppressions in many places, which confirms the words of Shaykh al-Kawthari that the printed version which is in circulation contains tamperings and suppressions.”(3)

[end of quote]

So it may be that it was included to say this is from your own. That is a possibility since other quotes are available on this subject
Also two manuscripts could be a problem. A reading comprehension issue?
it may be famous regarding Imam Ghazali since some salafis only leave him, from their opinion, a repentance to cling to - this is the kind of reason which would fit why they do that!

Anyway I’ll give you this chance to trounce me, but the issues here are too many to say with certainty that the website actually purposely lied

@psyah what do you think?

[ZeeshanParvez]

Re: It is True!

@vroom

Well some versions of the tafsir itself are not reliable, remember as soon as I heard the name Alusi in other thread I was alarmed. I think the quote was included for the oppositions consumption, since as a Sunni I do not doubt seeking help from our resting Masters is possible.

There is apparently a couple of manuscripts around for the tafsir as well. A hint of a salafi son, and salafis publishing it

This is from living Islam regarding it:

A sharp reader and unparalleled expert in rare books and manuscripts, Imam al-Kawthari long ago revealed that the printed version of Imam Mahmud ibn Abd Allah al-Husayni al-Alusi al-Baghdadi's (1217-1270) tafsir entitled Ruh al-Maani published by his “Salafi” son Numan al-Alusi in Bulaq (Egypt) in 1301 (then again twice by the Damascene "Salafi" Munir Abduh Agha at his Muniriyya Press in Egypt) contained alterations and accretions from foreign hands, responsibility for which al-Kawthari laid squarely at the feet of Numan: "He cannot be trusted over the publication of his father's commentary, and if someone were to compare it [the latter edition] with the [autograph] manuscript kept today at the Raghib Basha library in Istanbul, which is the manuscript gifted by the author to the Sultan Abd al-Majid Khan, one would certainly find in it what will make him certain of that."(1)

In his 1968 372-page book al-Alusi Mufassiran, Muhsin `Abd al-Hamid(2) petulantly denied the charge that there had been any tampering with the Tafsir as “a bizarre fiction,” claiming he had compared the manuscript kept at Baghdad’s general Awqaf library and found no discrepancies, and that he consulted with [the “Salafi”] Muhammad Bahjat [al-Baytar] and Munir al-Qadi who were of one mind with him.

Recently, in an internet communication on February 26, 2006 the Riyadh genealogist and historian of scholarship Dr. Muhammad ibn `Abd Allah Aal Rashid mentioned all of the above and commented:

“This claim [by Muhsin Abd al-Hamid] avails us nothing, since al- Kawthari very precisely referred to the autograph manuscript and its location. In the Hajj of the year that just passed (1426) I met the researcher and teacher Ah.mad ibn Abd al-Karim al-Ani who informed me that the Imam al-Azam Faculty in the city of Baghdad had tasked thirty Master’s candidate students to prepare a critical edition of al-Alusi’s commentary, Ruh al-Maani, Ustadh al-Ani being one of those students… and they were basing themselves on the manuscript indicated by Shaykh al-Kawthari. He told me that the printed version was indeed filled with alterations, tamperings, gaps and suppressions in many places, which confirms the words of Shaykh al-Kawthari that the printed version which is in circulation contains tamperings and suppressions.”(3)

[end of quote]

So it may be that it was included to say this is from your own. That is a possibility since other quotes are available on this subject
Also two manuscripts could be a problem. A reading comprehension issue?
it may be famous regarding Imam Ghazali since some salafis only leave him, from their opinion, a repentance to cling to - this is the kind of reason which would fit why they do that!

Anyway I’ll give you this chance to trounce me, but the issues here are too many to say with certainty that the website actually purposely lied

@psyah what do you think?

The quote the website presented itself had the same words with an omission of that which was before as indicated by the phrase Wa Qad Dhakarahu Al-Ghazaali