Nope he was not tht person Ghulam ahmed pervaiz was the active member of tahrikh e pakistan and the writter of all speeches of Quid e azam.He had created a tahrikh of Tolu e Islam which is teaching the theory of tafsir ul quran bil quran.he was infact a amazing righter most of the people call him the biggest scholar quran but in reality is not tht he is the writter of 1 of the famous book Shakar e risalaat which is indeed his remarkable asset.Shayaad sadiyoo main aisi kitab na likhi jaye.in ka bara naam hai Danish waq quran main yea door e jadeed ke chand baray mufkir e quran main se ek kahlaty hai
Let’s look at the difference Farahi School of thought (with which Ghamidi is normally associated) has with traditional ones.
1- Qur’an: When Muslim scholars started writing the Tafseer of Qur’an, especially from Al-Tabarri (atleast 3 centuries after the Prophet), there was a problem that how to couple hadith with each verse of Qur’an. This problem is still there when these people do exegesis of Qur’an, as there is a chance of error that they might not have coupled proper hadith with proper verse. And what if, the hadith itself has some problem? this means that Qur’anic verse may not be interpreted correctly. Farahi school of thought solved this problem by finding thematic coherence in Qur’an. This thematic coherence is given in Qur’an itself:
And We have bestowed upon you seven mathani (Mathani (مثاني) is the plural of mathna (مثنى) and it means something which occurs in pairs) which is this great Qur’an. (15:87)
Hence, Qur’an is in seven groups, with Surahs in pairs. Each group is in the order of revelation within itself. This was definintely a novel way of interpreting the Qur’an. But interestingly, it fits very well into the overall structure of the Qur’an. This approach also proved that you don’t need Shan-e-Nazool to know that which verse was revealed at which time, rather Qur’an itself tells clearly that when this verse was revealed. Each one group of Qur’an starts from Makki Surah and finishes at Madni Surah, and hence it is almost in the order of revelation. Hence, from this point of view, “Tadabbur-i-Qur’an” of Amin Ahsan Islahi is one of the major Tafseer written in Muslim history after l-Jami‘ al-Bayan of Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Kabir of Razi, and al-Kashshaff of Zamakhshari. The first of these is a compendium of the opinions of authorities of the past; the second mostly deals with theological issues and third with declensions and syntax.
2- Sunnah: After tenth century, Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari, both were considered synonymous to Sunnah. This concept was allien before 3rd century Hijrah. Sunnah was always believed to be religious practices which prophet Muhammad instituted himself as part of the religion. Ghamidi simply refined this process of finding Sunnah and gave a very robust procedure to find Sunnah in a very reliable way.
I don't know that why i feel that Ghamdee is more right than the people khanbabax likes to follow. I think that these imams were nothing but egoistic people who could not follow the other person and liked to make their own mosque of 1-1/2 bricks.
I am also a human being. When I direct you about something which relates to your religion, take it from me and when I express my own opinion [about something which is outside this sphere] then my status in this regard is nothing more than that of a human being … I had conjectured about something.1 Do not hold me accountable for such things which are based on opinion and conjecture. However, if I say something on behalf of God, take it because I will never forge a lie on God … You very well know about your worldly affairs. (Muslim, Nos: 2263, 2361, 3262)
[/quote]
how interesting on one side you reject ahadees
and on the other hand you bring proves from ahadees
[quote]
The Second Principle
The Sunnah entirely relates to practical affairs of life. Belief, ideology, history, occasions of revelation (sha’n al-nuzul) and other similar things do not fall in its sphere. In the Arabic language, Sunnah means “trodden path”. The way the Almighty dealt with peoples to whom messengers were sent by rewarding or punishing these people is called Sunnatullah by the Qur’an. Consequently, the word Sunnah cannot be applied to things such as faith, and nothing which relates to knowledge can be regarded as Sunnah. Its ambit is practical things and everything that does not fall in this ambit cannot be called Sunnah.
[/quote]
this princple does'nt hold any reference only based on imagination
if you are true brings reference from Quran o hadees
this shows the knowledge of Ghamdi (sheetaan)
how poor he is in knowledge , still he want to be called as scholar
[quote]
The Third Principle
The third principle is that even things which belong to the practical sphere cannot be regarded Sunnah if they are initiated by the Qur’an. It is known that the Prophet Muhammad (sws) had amputated the hands of thieves, flogged criminals of adultery, stoned to death people for sexual misconduct, fought with people who deliberately denied the truth – however all these acts cannot be termed Sunnah. All these are directives initiated by the Qur’an, and the Prophet (sws) merely followed them. On the other hand, directives such as the prayer, fasting, zakah, hajj and animal sacrifice are also mentioned in the Qur’an which has also made some corrections in them; however, it becomes evident from the Qur’an itself that these directives were initiated by Muhammad (sws) himself once he had revived them as part of the religion of Abraham (sws) and given them religious sanction. Thus they must be regarded as Sunnah which the Qur’an has ratified.
[/quote]
astaghfirullah
what a buhtan on Hazoor PBUH by this sheetan (ghamdi )
bring prove if you are right, otherwise this is a full fleged buhtan
what a buhtan , that Hazoor PBUH done things without the approval of Allah Almight (astaghfirullah )
[quote]
Thus, if something is originally based on the Qur’an and the Prophet (sws) has merely explained it or followed it in exactly the same way he was directed to, then these **words or acts of the Prophet (sws) will not be called Sunnah; **they will be termed as the Prophet’s explanation and exemplary manner in which he acted upon them. Only those things will be regarded as Sunnah which are originally based on the words, practices or tacit approvals of the Prophet (sws), and they cannot be regarded as following a directive of the Qur’an or an explanation of a directive mentioned in it.
[/quote]
what a misleading explanation and trying to confuse people
[quote]
The Fourth Principle
A new Sunnah is not constituted by merely observing some Sunnah in an optional manner. We know that the Prophet (sws) while complying the directive: ????? ????????? ??????? ??????? ?????? ??????? ??????? (He that does a virtue of his own will, (2:158)) of the Almighty offered optional prayers besides the obligatory ones, he fasted optionally besides the obligatory fasts of Ramadan, offered animal sacrifice at instances in which it was not obligatory; however, none of these optional acts of worship constitute a new Sunnah. The way the Prophet (sws) showed diligence in worshipping over and above what was required of him can definitely be termed as a good example that he set for his followers; however, it cannot be regarded as independent Sunan (plural of Sunnah).
Similar is the case of doing some deed of religion is its most ultimate and perfect form. The wudu (ablution) and ghusl (bathing) of the Prophet (sws) are two very good examples that can be presented in this regard. The way the Prophet (sws) went about doing these does not constitute any independent or original deed that they may be regarded as another Sunnah. He has in fact tried to obey an original Sunnah in its most complete and perfect form. Hence they shall be regarded as the exemplary form in which he acted upon a Sunnah, and not regarded as independent Sunnah.
[/quote]
astagfirullah astagfirullah
claiming without reference
declaring every sunnah , not a sunnah without a reference
completely illogical point
Ghamdi here goes out of mind here completely
[quote]
The Fifth Principle
Things which merely state some aspect of human nature cannot be regarded as Sunnah. Beasts having canine teeth, wild birds having claws and tamed donkeys have been prohibited by the Prophet (sws); however, this prohibition is only a delineation of human nature, which is averse to eating such things. Hence this prohibition cannot be termed as Sunnah. T
[/quote]
astagfirrualah
see here one can clearly see how much he want to change islam
[quote]
he prohibition of certain food items mentioned in the Qur’an (6:146 and 2:173) is a mere delineation of human nature. Man inherently knows that lions, tigers, elephants, eagles, crows, vultures, kites, scorpions and human flesh itself are not meant to be eaten. He is also well aware of the fact that horses and mules are a means of transportation and have no role in satisfying one’s hunger. There are some other similar things also which have been mentioned in various narratives and should be understood thus, and not as independent Sunan.
[/quote]
woow
it is clear that how he want to mislead muslim
[quote]
The Sixth Principle
Those guidelines of the Prophet (sws) cannot be regarded as Sunnah the nature of which is fully sufficient to show that the Prophet (sws) never wanted to constitute them as Sunnah.
[/quote]
astagfirullah
[quote]
One example of this are the utterances and supplications which are said in the qa‘dah. It is evident from various narratives that the Prophet (sws) taught the tashahhud and the darud to be recited in the qa‘dah; however, it is also very clear from these narratives that neither did the Prophet (sws) initiate these supplications nor did he deem them as an essential part of the prayer. He in fact wanted to give people the option to either read these supplications which he taught them or read some others to invoke the Almighty. Thus the only thing that is Sunnah in this regard is that one must sit in the qa‘dah position in the second and last rak‘at of a prayer; other than this, no other thing is Sunnah in this sphere.
[/quote]
another misleading
he is a pure sheetan
[quote]
The Seventh Principle
Just as the Qur’an is not validated through khabr-i wahid, the Sunnah is also not validated through it. The Sunnah is an independent source of religion. The Prophet Muhammad (sws) was liable to communicate it with great care and diligence in its original form and in a manner that would render it certain. It was not left to a person’s choice to communicate it further as is the case of a khabr-i wahid. Consequently, the source of Sunnah is the consensus of the ummah, just as the source of the Qur’an is the consensus of the ummah. Just as the Qur’an has been transmitted to the ummah by the consensus and verbal perpetuation of the Companions (rta) of the Prophet (sws), the Sunnah is transmitted to the ummah by the their consensus and their practical perpetuation. Less than this extent of validation, the Qur’an and Sunnah cannot be accepted; only the Hadith, which depict the exemplary personality of the Prophet (sws) or which contain his explication are transmitted through lesser means of validation.
These are the seven principles of determining the Sunnah. If what has been transmitted to the ummah by the Prophet (sws) other than the Qur’an is deliberated upon in the light of these principles, the Sunnah, like the Qur’an, can be determined with absolute certainty.
[/quote]
this is clear from these seven principles that
the main aim of this seeetan is
to mislead normal people who don't have knowledge
try to misquotes some ahadees and ayat and try to change the religion
most of these principle clear dipict how he has anger against Hazoor PBUH and don't want sunnah to be declared as sunnah only based on imagination and without any authentic reference and prove
totally illogial princples clearly showing the knowledge of sheetan ghamdi
wooow
you say imam egoistic
but we say that your musharaf and Ghamdi are egomanic like hitler etc
look at your words and tell me doesn't that fit to ghamdi
second it is clear from your words that how much do you have knowledge about imams
go and check
they had offer prayer behind each other
go and check it in different history books
that clears shows that your words are just words of anger against them without any authentic proof
It’d be alot better if you would try to give some traditionalist arguments rather than just saying Astaghfirullah. This is not a scholarly way to criticize someone. And I am thrilled by the way you criticize Ghamidi. You are not even ready to accept hadith just because it is quoted by Ghamidi. Thank you Usman for your great scholarly criticism!
do i have said i am scholar
i am just a student
and to prove Ghamidi is sheatan , no one need scholarly arguments even a laymen can prove him wrong
everything which Hazoor PBUH did, acted, said , forbid is a sunnah
so simple
read my words again
these people reject hadees and then bring prove for their authenticity from ahadees that ahadees and sunnah is wrong
how amazing believing and non believing at the same time
they are confuse people and don’t know how to humilate islam but actually they humiliate themself
Nobody is rejecting ahadith. This is your personal desire that people like Ghamidi would reject hadith, so that you can disagree with Ghamidi! I’d listen to a more scholarly criticism of Ghamidi rather than criticism that lacks depth into religion and its history.
I’ve already explained this thing many times that even Imam Malik rejected many many hadith on the basis of practice of Medina. Do you think Imam Malik was a Munkar-e-hadith? Same is true about different Fuqha-e-Din who differ among each other just because of different version of the hadith they have. In your insistence on Ghamidi’s dual policy about hadith, why you only accuse Ghamidi, why not your best Fuqha-e-Din who also reject one hadith and accept the other? The simply reason is that you must have some good reason to do so. And if you don’t consider yourself a scholar, then please leave this discussion to scholars. The concept that Sunnah can only be found from hadith was first introduced by Imam Shafi’i. And after tenth century, people started believing what you are saying (i.e. everything in Bukhari and Muslim is Sunnah).
If you are saying that every thing prophet Muhammad (sws) did was Sunnah, then it is against the given hadith and Qur’anic verse which says clearly that God sent religion and humans were asked to take guidance in religion from these personalities. Your argument is self dissolving and blind following of tradition without finding out that it is against Qur’an or Sunnah. You are imposing your opinions over hadith literature and believe that you know more than prophet Muhammad, as he said in hadith himself. Following Qur’anic verse only asks us to oblidge our prophets only the sphere which is covered by the religion:
He has enjoined on you the same religion which He enjoined on Noah, and which We have now revealed to you, which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, with the assertion: “Adhere to this religion [in your lives] and do not create any divisions in it.” (42:13)
Enjoyning is on the religion and not on customs, as customs change with time, but religion is forever. Also, I am an engineer, and I don’t take any guidance in Engineering from religion, rather all the Engineering and Mathematics is not even discussed by the religion. And if I’d believe that everything which prophet did was Sunnah, then Engineering techniques, by which they were making houses in which prophet sometimes also took part (as in the construction of Mosque of Medina), that technique of construction is also Sunnah. I just don’t know from where you are coming from?
Regarding Ghamidi himself is confused, you should have brought a good example for that, as many people think otherwise. Your example of hadith is so weak because every hadith will be seen separately, and this has been the way of our top Muslim scholars.
Think twice before you write something. I hope that if some person who is aware of traditionalist arguments and arguments of Ghamidi, he/she can give us a better criticism of Ghamidi rather than criticism that comes out of bigotry.
Do not loose heart landaleav, you cannot satisfy all the people. However i really appreciate your comments on the post as it increased my knowledge.
Usman, well my comments against Imams were no doubt based on anger on the amount of hair splitting they did to prove each other wrong and in effect made the deen too complex. If they offered prayers behind each other, it does not mean they believed each other. Now explain me one simple fact. According to Abu Hanifa, consecutive three talaqs means talaaq is valid but it is not like this to other Imams. Now what happens if a person does three consecutive talaaqs and then repents and goes back to his wife. Now he is committing adultery according to one imam and not according to other. Now both cannot be right at the same time. Tell me that whether Allah has separate rules for different Imams. If i proclaim to be a Hanbalee this act is valid but if i am a hanafie this is haraam. This is sheer non sense. Only one of them can be right as Allah's laws are one and not different for different groups.
Also i believe that Ghamadee is not a Hadith rejector as you love to state. He says that we should not base our deen on them outrightly. I may not agree to him in this regard, however what you are thinking about Hadith rejectors is something of your imagination. Have you ever read pervaiz. I think he is more demonized by our ulemas than he deserves.
Regarding principles to understand hadith, Ghamidi Sahib writes:
Ahadith (plural of Hadith) are narratives which record the words, deeds and tacit approvals of the Prophet Muhammad (sws). They are mostly akhbar-i ahad (isolate reports). It is absolutely evident that they do not add to the contents of religion stated in the Qur’an and Sunnah. In technical terms, they do not add any article of faith or any deed to religion. In other words, it is outside the scope of Ahadith to give an independent directive not covered by the Qur’an and Sunnah. However, this is also a reality that the Hadith literature is the largest and most important source which records the biography, history and the exemplary life of the Prophet Muhammad (sws) as well as his invaluable explanations of various issues of religion. Thus** it occupies such great importance that no student of religion can ignore it**. It is because of this importance of Hadith that it is essential to know the principles which help us in understanding them.
Before elaborating on these principles, we will first have a look at the principles on the basis of which a Hadith is accepted or rejected.
1-The Chain of Narration of Hadith
It is the chain of narration of a narrative which makes it a Hadith that can be attributed to the Prophet (sws). In addition to any hidden flaws in the chain of narration of a Hadith, the trustworthiness of the narrators, their memory and the contemporaneousness of the narrators are the three standards which should be kept in consideration in the light of the material which the scholars of Hadith have painstakingly made available. This is the standard which scholars of Hadith have put forth for the examination of the chain of narration of a Hadith, and is so sound that no addition can be made to it nor anything taken away from it.
Since attributing something suspect to the Prophet (sws) can be of severe consequences in this world and in that to come, it is necessary to apply this standard without any lenience and with absolute impartiality to every narrative attributed to him. Only those narratives should be considered acceptable which fully conform to this standard.1 Thus no narrative attributed to the Prophet (sws) even if found in primary works as the al-Jami al-Sahih of Imam Bukhari, al-Jami al-Sahih of Imam Muslim and the Mu’atta of Imam Malik can be accepted without application of this standard.
2-Text of a Hadith
After investigating the chain of narration of a Hadith, the second thing which requires investigation is the text of a Hadith. Although scholars of Hadith have left no stone unturned in investigating the characters and biographies of the narrators and have spent a greater part of their lives in this research, yet like every human endeavour, the natural flaws which still exist in the narration of a Hadith2 requires that the following two things must always remain in consideration while investigating the text of a Hadith:
i. Nothing in it should be against the Qur’an and Sunnah
ii. Nothing in it should be against established facts derived from knowledge and reason
It has already been explained that in religion the Qur’an is the mizan (the scale of truth) and the furqan (the distinguisher between truth and falsehood). It is like a guardian of every religious concept and it has been revealed as a barometer to judge between what is right and what is wrong. Thus no further explanation is required of the fact that if anything is against the Qur’an, then it must stand rejected.
Similar is the case of the Sunnah. Whatever religion has been received through it is as certain and authentic as the Qur’an, as has already been explained earlier. There is no difference between the level of authenticity of the two. Just as the Qur’an is validated thought the consensus of the ummah, the Sunnah is also determined from its consensus. Since this fact is an absolute reality about the Sunnah, thus if a Hadith is against the Sunnah and if there is no way out to resolve a conflict between the two, the Hadith in consideration must necessarily be rejected.
Established facts derived from knowledge and reason also have the same status in this regard. The Qur’an is absolutely clear that its message is based on these established facts. Its arguments on such basic issues as tawhid and the Hereafter are primarily based on these facts. It is the requirements and demands of these facts which the Qur’an highlights through its teachings. Every student of the Qur’an is aware that it presents these facts as deciding factors for the message it puts forth. It presented them as the final word both before the Idolaters of Arabia and the People of the Book. Those who oppose these are regarded by it as people who follow their base desires. Thus intuitive realities, historical truths, results of experience and observation – all are discussed in the Qur’an in this very capacity. Hence how can a Hadith which is against these facts regarded by the Qur’an as ones which distinguish between the truth and untruth be accepted? It is obvious that it shall stand rejected. All leading scholars of Hadith also hold this view. Khatib writes:
ولا يقبل خبر الواحد في منافاة حكم العقل وحكم القرآن الثابت المحكم والسنة المعلومة والفعل الجاري مجرى السنة كل دليل مقطوع به
A khabr-i wahid cannot be accepted which is against sense and intellect, is against an established and explicit directive of the Qur’an, is against a known Sunnah or is against a practice which is observed like the Sunnah or its conflict with some conclusive argument becomes absolutely evident.3
Let us now take a look at the** principles of understanding the Hadith**:
1-*Literary Appreciation of the Arabic Language
*
Just as the Qur’an has been revealed in highly literary Arabic, the language of the Hadith too is highly literary Arabic. There is no doubt that a great number of Ahadith have not been transmitted in their original words, yet whatever much has been preserved of the language of the Prophet (sws) and his Companions (rta) is still enough for a keen student of the Qur’an to distinguish it from other material. Like the Qur’an, the language of the Hadith too has a certain standard which does not accept any adulteration of material substandard to it. Thus it is necessary that by a continuous study of its language, students of Hadith are able to acquire enough skill of the language so as to reject narratives like الشّيْخُ وَ الشَّيْخَةُ4 on the very basis of the language used in it. Similarly, they should have no problems in understanding the rather difficult style used in الْبِكْزُ باِلبِكزِ5. This skill is also required to solve difficulties posed by the syntax and morphology of the Arabic language. A person should have a deep study of what the authorities of these subjects have written. No one is able to solve the difficulties of Hadith unless he is cognizant of the delicacies of the Arabic language and its various styles and constructions.
2-Interpretation in the Light of the Qur’an
The Hadith should be interpreted in the light of the Qur’an. The status occupied by the Qur’an has already been alluded to earlier. It is the most definite and authentic record of whatever Muhammad (sws) did in his status of a prophet and a messenger. Consequently, most topics covered in the Hadith are related to the Qur’an the way a branch is related to a stem or the way an explanation is related to the text it explains. Without a recourse to the original text, it is obvious that its corollaries and explanations cannot be understood. If all the mistakes in interpreting the Hadith are minutely analyzed, this situation becomes abundantly clear. The incidents of stoning to death in the times of the Prophet (sws), the assassination of Ka‘b Ibn Ashraf, punishment meted out in the graves, narratives of intercession and directives as أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ النَّاسَ and (I have been directed to wage war against these people)6 مَنْ بَدَّلَ دِينَهُ فَاقْتُلُوهُ (Execute the person who changes his faith)7 have become issues which have caused a lot of confusion and have been subjected to misinterpretation because they have not been understood by relating them to their basis in the Qur’an.
In short, if this principal is kept in consideration, a lot of perplexities are resolved in understanding the Hadith.
3-Understanding the Occasion of the Hadith
A Hadith must be understood with reference to the instance and occasion of the topic it records. What was the occasion on which it was said? What was the background in which it was said? Who were the addressees? If one does not address these questions in interpreting a Hadith, on many occasions one fails to get to the right interpretation. The Hadith الأَئِمَّةُ مِنْ قُرِيْش (The rulers will be from the Quraysh)8 is a famous narrative. By the apparent words of this Hadith, scholars of our ummah have been led to believe that a Muslim ruler must always be from among the tribe of the Quraysh. If this is accepted then at least with reference to the political system there remains no difference between Islam and Brahmanism. The basic reason in misinterpreting this Hadith is the fact that this statement of the Prophet (sws) related to the political situation which was to arise right after him; instead of understanding this aspect, the directive stated in it was regarded to be an independent directive of religion applicable for all times. There are numerous such Ahadith in religion and they cover very important topics. It is essential that they be understood by keeping in consideration this principle.
4-Study of all the Variant Texts
All the variant texts of a Hadith must be studied in order to form an opinion about it. Many a time a person may form an opinion about a Hadith by not studying its variants; however, once he deliberates on all the variants his overall interpretation changes. One glaring example of this are the Ahadith which mention the prohibition of pictures and portraits. If some of the narratives are studied only, one can easily conclude that this prohibition is absolute and every picture and portrait is prohibited in Islam. However, if all the variants are collected and analyzed, it becomes evident that the prohibition is regarding only those pictures which have been made for worshipping. Many similar examples can be cited from the corpus of the Hadith. Thus it is essential that if one is not satisfied from the apparent words of a Hadith, one must gather and collate all its variants to form an opinion.
5-*Reason and Revelation *
It must be appreciated that reason and revelation never contradict. Earlier on, while explaining the principles of acceptance or rejection of a Hadith, it has been explained that religion is based on universally established facts derived from knowledge and reason, and if a Hadith appears to be contradicting these established facts, then it must be deliberated upon repeatedly. However, summarily rejecting a Hadith, if it appears to be against these facts is not the correct academic approach. Similarly, ignoring these facts and accepting an insubstantial interpretation of the Hadith should also not be the case. Experience shows that when a narrative is analyzed in the correct perspective, then many a time no contradiction remains with these facts and what is stated in the Hadith becomes very clear. This of course can only be achieved when it is fully accepted that there can be no contradiction between reason and revelation. The works of scholars who have kept this principle in consideration speak volumes of how aptly they have been able to interpret a Hadith. Thus one must always take into account this all important principle in interpreting the Hadith.
(Translated from Ghamidi’s Mizan by Shehzad Saleem)
The soundness of character of the Companions of the Prophet (sws), however is an exception and does not need the conformation of any standard. The Almighty Himself has borne witness to it in His Book. See The Qur’an, 3:110.
According to Abu Hanifa, consecutive three talaqs means talaaq is valid but it is not like this to other Imams. Now what happens if a person does three consecutive talaaqs and then repents and goes back to his wife.
[/QUOTE]
According to all 4 Imams, 3 talaaqs in 1 majlis is considered as 3 talaaqs. There is no difference about this, and there is Ijma on this.
:)tht shows tht ur all imams dont know quran interstling they didnt follow the quran and wants tht there followers also not to be on right path.this is called blind following and challenging qurani ayaat.QURAN has hve enough details about talaq why we need man made books about this topic.QUran per imaan bhi hai app ka?
yes, Prophet s.a.w. Sahabas, and early Muslims didnt understand the Quran but people like Javed Ghamdi came 1400 years later and told us the real meaning of the Quran. IN fact you are blind following people like Ghamdi.
HAsbana Kitab ul Allah .Quran enough for them thts why they didnt write a single book.Interstling u call himself muslim u dont hve iman on quran.There were razi Allah tallah Anha aur Riwayaat k books main daikhoo tu imamoo nay kitna insaaf kia hai.In riwayatoo nay tu Anbiya ko bhi nhi choora lakin tumhe woh nazar kion ayee ga kion k is se tumharay paighamber (imamaoo)k books aur in ke paighambariyaat se inkaar hoo jata hai.QUran k agay aisay 50000 saal k ijma bhi hoon gaye tu quran per iman lanay walaoo k liye in k kuch Ahmiyaat na hoo gaye.ALlah nay kaha tha k imaan laoo Allah per Allah k kitaboo per Rasooloo per Aur Ikhraat per.Agar wohi shakaas jo Laillah ila lalah per kar imaan lata hai aur phir woh in tamaam chizoo ko samjhnay k koish karta hai.jis per woh imaan laya tha.Aur quran k rooh se woh is ko bharppoor tariqay se samjhta hai tu app is ko muslim manay se hi inkaar kar daitay hoo Allah nay Hazoor k atat ka kaha tha jaab taak woh zinda thai.is k baat Allah k kitab humhary liye kafi thi.Lakin Ahle Ajam nay quran ko challenge kia aur app nay is challenge ko aain islam samjh kar qabool kar lia.Abb imaan k ek aur shart laga de k Ghair Allah k books per bhi imaan lana hoo ga aur koi shakaas agar quran ko hi samjh raha hai aur is ka aqeeeda app k books aur imam(jo ke app ke paighamber hai)in k kisi baat se inkaar karta hai app is ko kafir qaraar day daitay hai main app se poochta hoo app ke pass koi sanad hai kisi k imaan ko kufar kahnay k agar app main himmat hai i m challenging u app talaq per ek thread banaoo wahaan discuss karty hai main yea sabit kar doon gaye k app k sab imam quran k munkir thai aur apna culture aur tradation in hoonay riwayaat k zariye muslim ko soob dia 250 years baad k baad yea threak shoro hoye aur is waqt taak ek sahabi bhi hayaat nahi thai.
khanbabax! I think that all the other three imams differ over issue of consecutive talaqs with imam abu hanifa. They do not agree to consecutive talaaqs as three. Am i mistaken?
They perfectly did but we are the real losers who feel no need to rectify our mistake.
During prophet(pbuh) time three talaqs(at a time) were considered one talaq a person doing such an ignorant act considered fasiq (sinner) and the act it self an insult to quran. If you read Sura Baqra and Sura Talaq it is clearly mentioned that there is a "stipulated time period " i.e iddat after first talaq. First talaq is incomplete without iddat. You can read it yourself.
It was Hazrat Umar (ra)'s khilafat when he declared three talaqs in one sitting as legal three talaqs, which was clear voilation of Quran and Sunnah. And we todays muslim feel pride in following a mistake of a sahabi rather than following clear and unambiguous guidelines of Quran and sunnah.
In Jalaalain Shareef, a widely accepted commentary of the Noble Qur'an, the explanation of the above verse is given as follows:
'The issuing of divorce after which it is correct to revoke - two (divorce)' 'If the husband divorces (his wife) after two divorces then she is not Halaal for him after the third divorce'.(Jalaalain p.34)
Explaining the above verse, Abu Bakr Jassas Razi (Rahmatullaahi Alaihi), an expert in Jurist, states in Ahkaamul Qur'an:
If both Talaaqs are given together, both will be effective and this is clearly indicated in the Qur'an. (Vol. 1 page 387)
Hadhrat Ali (Radhiallaahu Anhu) reports that when Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) heard one person giving his wife three divorces, Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) became angry and said:
'You are making a mockery of the verses of Allah and the Deen of Allah. Whosoever gives his wife a terminating divorce, we will make three binding on him. His wife will not be Halaal for him until she does not marry another husband.' (Darul Qutni Vol.4 p.20)
3. 'It is reported from Mahmood Ibn Labid that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) was informed of a person who had given his wife three divorces at once. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) stood up in the state of anger and said, 'Are you playing with the Aayats of Allah and His Kitaab whilst I am among you.' A person stood up and said, 'Oh Rasulullah! Should I not kill him?' (Mishkaat Vol2 p.284)
4. *Once Imaam Hassan (Radhiyallaahu nhu) told his wife:
*'Go away, for you are divorced thrice'
When he was grieved at the separation of his wife, he said:
'If I had not heard my grandfather (Rasulullah) (or if my father did not tell me that he heard my grandfather) saying, 'Whosoever gives his wife three Talaaqs in the state of Tuhr (cleanliness) or three Talaaqs together, she is not Halaal for him until she does not marry another man, until then he cannot take her back.' (Darul Qutni Vol. 2 p.438)
This incident reiterates the fact that three Talaaqs in one sitting is three and not one. If anyone who was worthy of any exception to the Law, it would be the illustrious grandson of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam), Hadhrat Hassan bin Ali (Radhiyallaahu Anhu). However, this was not the case. The rule of three Talaaqs in one sitting was binding on him too.
Hadhrat Ayesha Radhiyallaahu Anha narrates that a man gave his wife three divorces. The wife remarried and (incidentally) her (second) husband divorced her. It was then asked to Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam), 'Is she Halaal for the first husband?' He (Rasulullah) replied, 'No,not until he tastes her sweetness (consummates the marriage) like how the first husband tasted her sweetness.' (*Bukhari * Vol. 2 p. 791)
6. Mujahid reports, 'I was in the company of Ibn Abbas (Radhiyallaahu Anhuma) when a man came and informed him that he had given his wife three Talaaqs. Ibn Abbas (Radhiyallaahu Anhuma) remained silent and we thought that he would send her back to him. Then he said, 'You walk and ride on stupidity, then you say: "OhIbn Abbas! Oh Ibn Abbas!" Allah says, "Talaaq (after which revoking is permissible) is twice....." You have disobeyed your Rabb and your wife is separated from you.' (Abu Daud)
7.Imaam Maalik (Rahmatullaahi Alaihi) in his Muwatta'a quotes the Fatwa of Ibn Abbas (Radhiyallaahu Anhuma) as follows:
*
* 'It has reached me (Maalik) that one person said to Ibn Abbaas, "I divorced my wife a hundred times, what will you rule on me?" Ibn Abbas said, "She is divorced from you with the first three Divorces and for the ninety-seven, you have taken the Aayats of Allah as a mockery."
