To day TIME is most precious. Nobody would like to go into so much details.
Whatever Salafee say is but half truth. They are a new sect called Wahabi: They blindly follow Muhammed bin Abdul Wahab.and his disciples
Wahabies can not make difference between Taqleed, Sunnat and Itteba' e Rasool pbuh.
Wahabees are engaging other sects in fussy things like Rafa'e'dain, Right arm over left arm and etc, this is just to conceal their own anti-Sharea activities and divert attention of people of other sects - so their own faults or crimes are not touched.
Please tell me where in Islam is it permissible to have 34 wives? - King Abdullah of Saudia has it. Where is it permissible in Islam to make High rise buildings? - See Mecca and tell me if there is any single story building around Haram shareef, & upon that tell me where Islam permits to make Towers to gain World fame while Palestinians are Starving. Afghans are killed like killing cockroaches, Indian Muslims are groaning under non-Muslim rulers.
Where is it permissible to let 50,000+ young women of Iraq migrated to Syria, No-body came to their help so they had to adopt profession of prostitutes, Does Islam permits the luxury of having car made of Platinum (white Gold and more expensive then gold) specially for Shaikh of Dubai costing US$ 2.5 million. Does Islam permit to have Luxurious cars as self property that is worth more then US$ 5 Billions owned by Sultan of Brunei.
Does Islam permit to go side by side - Masjid and sex luxuries as is promoted in U.A.E.
How many of them are followers (Taqleed) of other then ibn Abdul Wahab?
Is there anybody to ponder upon fitna-e-Dajjhal in which All Muslim Ummah is engulfed?
Please wake up. First Ask the King/s, Shaikhs, Sultan for their crime against Islam and against huminity at large then come back to drain your half knowledge to the other sects.
Taqleed of their own Shuyukh without understanding of Qur'an and Ahadith may lead a person to the Rightious Path if Shaikh is on right Path Like Mufti Taqi Usmani, Yousuf Ludhyanwi Rahmatullah alaihi, Dr. Israr Ahmed Rahmatullah alaihi, Shah Walliyullah Dehlvi Alaihi Rahma and if Shaikh is on wrong path he will lead his followers away from Sirat-ul-Mustaqeem Like many others including Dr. Tahirul Qadri:
The person who believes: That Rasulullah pbuh. is with Allah s.w.t where Allahs.w.t has Willed, He was the most learned man in matters of Islam and had Ilm-e-Ghaib only that much which Allah s.w.t in His Wisdom Showered - and it was Atta'ii - & When Allah Jallah Shanuhu Himself is Omni Present and Omni scient (Present every & Seeing everything) and Knows what is in each individual's mind - There is no need of anybody else
- Shaitan or his disciples from Jinns and/or Human beings are present everywhere because Allah. s.w.t Has Given a Word to Shaitan to allow him to misguide people till the day of Resurrection.
Asking any body besides Allah s.w.t for help or solving problem tantamount to Shirk.
People call Shaikh Abdul Qadir Jeelani Rahmatullah alaihi. They do not call only this
very honorable person, but others also. To prevent Muslim Ummah, Allah s.w.t Revealed Surah # 71 - Nuh. The Nation of Nuh a.s. used to call for help their five dead- previous: very honorable persons & they made their respective Deities. Nuh a.s. preached to them the
true and right way for 950 years but except few ( from 34 to 80 wa'Allahu Aalm)
The four A'imma: Abu Hanifa, Shafee, Malik, & Hummbl all were very learned Scholars,
and cleared/solved many problems thru Qur'an and Sunnah by their respective Fiqah/s.
If Islam could not be followed within 400 Hijra centuries, then How come now after 12 Hijra centuries one Imam stands up and rejects many rulings of old Imamas and introduces new rulings. Where as Hazoor pbuh has said: some what:"The best is my period (generation or centry, then next then next" He pbuh also said that near Qiyamat, (Original) knowledge of Deen will be vanished due to death of learned scholars & newly established scholars will give their own rulings that will deviate from Right Path & Biddah or cutting short of Deen will be rampage.
O' Allah s.w.t: Please save Muslim Ummah from Fitna-e-Dajhal and keep our Iman intact.
Aameen
--- On Tue, 5/29/12, Mujeeb Abdul Rahman <mujeebrk2@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Mujeeb Abdul Rahman <mujeebrk2@gmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: Some Objections on Ahl ul-Hadeeth and the answer to those Objections
To: "discuss_islam_the_religion@ yahoogroups.com" <discuss_islam_the_religion@yahoogroups.com>, "Tanzeem Hum Hindustani Group" <tanzeemhumhindustani@yahoogroups.com>, "hyderabadis -in-saudi" <hyderabadis-in-saudi@yahoogroups.com>, IslamHelpTalk@yahoogroups.com, islami@yahoogroups.com
Cc: ghousemd@yahoo.com, "Dr.Syed Sabir" <sabirsyed2k@yahoo.com>, "INAM MOHD" <m.inamulhassan@gmail.com>, "zakaria ejaz" <mzejaz02@gmail.com>, yahiya007@yahoo.com, yahiyabaig@rediffmail.com, zakariahmd@gmail.com, ahemdhussain@yahoo.com, "Shaikh Aleem" <aleembly@gmail.com>, "Basheer Bly" <yaseenjewellers@yahoo.co.in>, "Ilyas Mohammed" <ilyasmdgh@gmail.com>, ilyasmdgh@yahoo.com, "A Kabir BLY" <skmj_skmj@yahoo.co.in>
Date: Tuesday, May 29, 2012, 7:22 AM
Assalaum Alaikum As received FYI Please Response: Placing the hands on the chest in Salah Hanafi fiqh Channel Abu Nauman Abdur Raheem ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Abu Haneefah Omair <omair.shafiuddin@gmail.com> Date: 27 May 2012 12:32 Subject: Re: Some Objections on Ahl ul-Hadeeth and the answer to those Objections To: Mohtashim Shaikh < mohtashims@gmail.com> Cc: farrukhabidi@yahoo.com, mjb_ksa@yahoo.com, tabligi dr < drahmeds@hotmail.com>, Touseefuddin Syed < touseefuddin.syed@yahoo.com>, nuaman.bader@gmail.com, Abdullah Akbar < abdullahakbar@gmail.com>, Am < am.email.groups@gmail.com>, kareem_biyabani@yahoo.com, Humayun Rasheed < rana.humayun.rasheed@gmail.com>, "callseries ." < callseries@sify.com>, AbdurRahman Mohammed < ashfaqur82@gmail.com>, Proud to be a muslim proud to be a muhammadi < aman.peace.4u@gmail.com>, mustafa mohammed < mushlop@gmail.com>, Mujeeb Abdul Rahman < mujeebrk2@gmail.com>, Abdul Hameed < mhmulky@gmail.com> Assalaam-Alaikum, Brother Mohtashim,
What happened to your previous allegation of calling Tafsir Ibn Kathir as a Pseudo Salafi tafseer ? Apparently, you were caught red-handed on your Buhtaan (false accusation), at least admit that you were mistaken on the Tafsir of Surah Nisaa - Ayah 59 and do not repeat the same mistake again..
Deobandi lies is a big reason why I left the Hanafi Madhab.. And before saying good-bye to Deobandis, I had spoken to several Deobandi Muftis and discussed with them the issue of Raful yadain, folding hands on chest etc. in great detail.. Once you catch their lies and ask them about it, they get mad at you, they try to become personal and try to insult you... But, I pity those blind-followers who are still getting fooled by deobandis..
Alhamdulillah, I was the first in my family to leave the Hanafi madhab.. And now, Alhamdulillah everyone from my family realized that Deobandis are trustworthy and they too have also accepted the Manhaj As-Salaf.. Verily, whomsoever Allah guides, none can misguide.. Thousands and Thousands of people are doing tawbah and returning to the Authentic teachings of Rasoolullah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam).. Also, there are dozens of Deobandi Aalims who left the Hanafi madhab to accept Manhaj As-Salaf..
Secondly, I had mentioned three main points on the narration you quoted from Mizan Al-I'itidal. You did not address the second issue about the SANAD of that narration.
If someone says that the prophet said so and so in the following hadees, you cannot object saying the prophet himself did not write the hadees. Even if muhaddiseen imam Imam Tirmidhi, Bukhari, Sanai r.e.h etc have attributed those words to the prophet s.a.w then all muslim believe it to be true and on the authority of the prophet s.a.w.
The objection is not that Imam Bukhari did not write it. You misunderstood the objection.. Its on the Chainless narration attributed to Imam Bukhari rahimahullah..
Same way Imam Mizzi, Imam Dhahabi, Ibn Hajr r.e.h etc have attributed this hadees to be daeef and / or that Imam Bukhari .r.e.h. also considered him to be daeef. Really ? The Muhaddiseen considered Mu'ammal bin Isma'eel to be Dhaweef ? Just read the Rebuttal from the Mashaikh..
1) Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani (rah.) = He mentioned the hadeeth of Mu'ammal from Ibn Khyzaymah in Fath ul-Baari and did not criticize it. [2/224 Under H. 740]
2) Imam Dhahabi (rah.) = "He is among the Siqaat" [Al-Abar fi Khabar min Ghabar: 1/274]
3) Imam Mizzi said: "Imam Bukhaari has narrated from him as Istish-haad" [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/527]
4) Yahya ibn Ma'een (rah.): "Thiqah" [Taareekh Ibn Ma'een by Ad-Dauri: 235 Pg 591, Al-Jarah wal Ta'deel by Ibn Abi Haatim: 8/374]
5) Imam Tirmidhi (rah.) : According to At-Tirmidhi Mu'ammal is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth and Hasan ul-Hadeeth. Declared his narration, Saheeh [415, 672, 1948], Declared his narration, Hasan [6146, (3266)]
6) Imam Ad-Daraqutni rah.: Authenticated him in his Sunan. [2/186, H. 2261]. Daraqutni wrote about the chain of Mu'ammal from Sufyaan that, it is Saheeh. Meaning he is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth according to him from Sufyaan.
7) Imam Al-Haakim rah. = Authenticated him in al-Mustadrak on the conditions of Shaikhayn, and Dhahabi followed him in that. [1/384 H. 1418]
8) Imam Abu Dawood rah. = Abu Ubayd al-Ajurri said, I asked Abu Dawood about Mu'ammal bin Ismaa'eel, thus he described his greatness and raised his status, except that he makes mistake in somethings. [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/527]
9) Imam Nasa'ee rah. = He narrated from him in his Sunan (4097, 4589)
10) Ibn Khuzaymah rah.: Authenticated him. [1/243 H. 479]. The chain of Mu'ammal - AN - Sufyaan is authentic according to Imam Ibn Khuzaymah. So, the question I have for you Omair is: Have all these muhaddis made mistake here ? Yes / No.
First, Read the above narrations from the muhaddiseen that refute your argument.
Secondly, You have some misunderstandings with regards to the subject of Uloom Al-Hadeeth. And, where is the reference to say these Muhaddiseen declared him Da'eef ?
Many such Chainless narrations are attributed to the Muhaddiseen are Mardood (rejected)..
And you are not quoting Shaikh Zubair Ali Zia completely.. Please read the complete rebuttal..
Discussing the Criticism on Mu'ammal bin Ismaa'eel [Taken from: Ithbaat at-Ta'deel fi Tawtheeq Mu'ammal bin Isma'eel]
The following are the criticisms narrated regarding Mu'ammal:
1. Abu Haatim ar-Raazi: "Sadooq, Strictly Follows the Sunnah, Makes Abundant Mistakes, Write his narrations" [Kitaab al-Jarah wal Ta'deel: 8/374]
2. Zikriyah bin Yahya As-Saaji: "He is sadooq, but makes many mistakes. He has errors that would take too long to be mentioned." [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* From the author of Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb (Hafidh Ibn Hajar) to Imam As-Saaji, the chain is not present. Therefore this narration is Mardood.
3. Muhammad bin Nasar al-Marwazi: "If Muammal alone relates a certain narration then it becomes obligatory to pause and research the hadeeth as he had a bad memory and erred excessively" [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* This saying is also chain-less, and is rejected due to going against the Jumhoor.
4. Ya'qoob bin Sufyaan al-Faarsi: "Muammal is a great sunni shaikh. I heard Sulaiman bin Harb praise him. Our shaikhs would advise us to take his hadeeth, only that his hadeeth are not like the hadeeth of his companions. At times it is obligatory upon the people of knowledge to distance themselves from his narrations as he narrates munkar ahadeeth from even his authentic teachers. This is worse for had he narrated these munkar ahadeeth from weak authorities we would have excused him." [Kitaab al-Ma'rifat wal Taareekh: 3/52]
* If this Jarah is from Sulemaan bin Harb then Ya'qoob al-Faarsi is among the Admirers (Mothaqeen) of Mu'ammal; and if this Jarah is from Ya'qoob then Sulemaan bin Harb is among the Admirers (mothaqeen) of Mu'ammal.
5. Abu Zur'ah: "There are a lot of Mistakes in his hadeeth" [Mizaan ul-I'tidaal: 4/228 T. 8949]
* This saying is also chain-less.
6. Ibn Sa'd: "He is Thiqah, makes many mistakes." [Al-Tabaqaat al-Kubra by Ibn Sa'd: 5/501]
7. Daraqutni: "Thiqah, makes many mistakes." [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
This saying is contradictory to the praise of Imam Daraqutni as he Authenticated him in his Sunan. [2/186, H. 2261]. Imam Daraqutni wrote about the chain of Mu'ammal from Sufyaan that, it is Saheeh. Meaning he is Saheeh ul-Hadeeth according to him from Sufyaan, and it is also not proven from The author of Tahdeeb to Daraqutni. Mu'ammal is not mentioned in the book of Imam Daraqutni "Kitaab ad-Du'afa wal Matrokeen".
8. Abd ul-Baaqi bin Qaani': "Saalih makes Mistakes" [Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* This saying is chain-less. Abdul Baaqi bin Qaani himself is criticized of being Mukhtalat. Some have praied him and some have criticized him. [See: Mizaan ul-I'tidaal: 2/532, 533]
9. Hafidh Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani: "He is truthful, weak in memory."[Taqreeb at-Tahdheeb]
10. Imam Bukhaari: "Munkir ul-Hadeeth" [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/526, Mizaan ul-I'tidaal: 4/228, Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* In all the three books, this saying is mentioned without any chain and without any reference. Whereas on the contrary to it, Imam Bukhaari has mentioned Mu'ammal in Al-Taareekh al-Kabeer (Vol 8 Pg 49 T. 2107) and did not criticize him. Mu'ammal is also not mentioned in Kitaab ad-Du'afa of Imam Bukhaari, and the narrations of Mu'ammal are present in Saheeh Bukhaari, See: H. 2700, 2083 with Fath ul-Bari. Imam Mizzi said: "Imam Bukhaari has narrated from him as Istish-haad" [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/527] Haafidh Muhammad Taahir al-Maqdasi has written regarding a narrator that: "In fact He (Bukhari) has taken narrations from him in many places as Istish-haad to indicate that he is Siqah" This proves that Mu'ammal is Siqah according to Imam Bukhari, not Munkir ul-Hadeeth.
11. Ahmed bin Hanbal: "Mu'ammal is mistaken." [Sawalaat al-Marwaazi: 53, Mawsoo'ah Aqwaal al-Imam Ahmed: 3/419]
It is an established saying that, even the Siqah narrators get mistaken (sometimes), therefore if such a narrator is Siqah according to the Jumhoor, then his proven Mistakes are to be left, and in his remaining narrations, he will be Hasan ul-Hadeeth. Moreover see: Qawaid fi Uloom ul-Hadeeth: Pg 275 and others.
12. The ciriticism of Ibn al-Turkamaani al-Hanafi is rejected due to "Qeela (Passive Form)". [See: Johar al-Naqi 2/30]
Has Imam Bukhari r.e.h narrated from him in his Sahih collection i.e. in Sahih Bukhari? The answer is No. Why did Imam Bukhari r.e.h avoid Mu'ammal from him Saheeh ? In conclusion, Imam Bukhari only mentioned Mu'ammal in Ta'aleeq, not in the main Ahadeeth of Sahih Bukhari. WAllahu A'alam. You are wrong again... Read Saheeh Bukhaari = (H. 2700, and according to a raajih qaul H. 7083 in Ta'leeq Form)... The narrations of Mu'ammal are present in Saheeh Bukhaari, See: H. 2700, 2083 with Fath ul-Bari.
The Deobandi Muftis need to realize that its not easy to fool all Muslims.. I know their tricks because I was a former Deobandi myself :)
Also, can you give me an idea, I am asing you for the second time, when do you plan to complete you refutation series of Rafayadain so that I can refute that too and show all brothers the true picture rather than the baised picture showcased by yourself and the contradictions in your article. It was time to quote all Saheeh and Hasan narrations on Raful yadain.. It will be a lenghty compilation.. I will do it inshallah in few days..
Quran, Sunnah and Understanding of Sahaabah... Good Desires, Innovations and Blind-Following Deobandis... Baad
Wa Maa Alainaa Illal Balaagh.. Assalaam-Alaikum, Defender of Sunnah, Abu Haneefah Omair.. On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Mohtashim Shaikh <mohtashims@gmail.com> wrote: Brother Omair, I need further clarifications from you. I would request rest of the brothers on the group to pay special attention to the reponses we get from Omair [who claims to be a Salafi] and my replies and judge yourself if these Alhe Hadees are true to Hadees and the subject or diving the ummah on false and biased claims. Your Quote below: *********************************************** The Quote that you ascribed to Imam Bukhari rahimahullah is mentioned as follows: Imam Bukhari says, 'Muammal is munkar al hadeeth (People who view Imam Bukhari as the ultimate authority in matters of Hadeeth should note his following statement: 'It is not permissible to narrate from anyone whom I have labelled munkar al hadeeth [Mizan al I'itidal. 1/119]
Firstly, Mizan Al I'itidal is not a book authored by Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, the book was actually written by Imam Ad-Dhahabi rahimahullah...
*********************************************** I say: I never said that Mizan Al I'itidal is a book authored by Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, but yes I believe Imam Bukhari r.e.h did not consider him Sahih, because many great muhaddis have said that Imam Bukhari had considered him weak in memory. This is similar to the below situation: You cannot object to saying tha Sahih Bukhari is not a book authored by the prophet s.a.w, the book is actually written by Imam Bukhari r.e.h hence the you cannot attribute whatever is written in Sahih Bukhari to the prophet. If someone says that the prophet said so and so in the following hadees, you cannot object saying the prophet himself did not write the hadees. Even if muhaddiseen imam Imam Tirmidhi, Bukhari, Sanai r.e.h etc have attributed those words to the prophet s.a.w then all muslim believe it to be true and on the authority of the prophet s.a.w. Same way Imam Mizzi, Imam Dhahabi, Ibn Hajr r.e.h etc have attributed this hadees to be daeef and / or that Imam Bukhari .r.e.h. also considered him to be daeef. So, the question I have for you Omair is: Have all these muhaddis made mistake here ? Yes / No. Anyways let's move on.... Your Quote: **********************
Thirdly, Imam Bukhari narrated from Mu'ammal as Ishtishhaad in his Saheeh. Imam Bukhari has narrated from him in Ta'leeq form. Therefore, he is Saheeh Ul-Hadeeth according to him. And he has also mentioned Muammal ibn Isma'eel in Al-Tareekh Al-Kabeer (Vol 8, Pg 49) and did not criticize him. It is not conceivable to assume that such an Imam contradicted himself in his books..
This is the problem of blind-following Deobandi articles.. The deobandis narrate a bunch of lies and this narration attributed to Imam Bukhari is no surprise to be quoted from the fabricated machines of Deoband..
***************************************************************
I say: Has Imam Bukhari r.e.h narrated from him in his Sahih collection i.e. in Sahih Bukhari? The answer is No. Why did Imam Bukhari r.e.h avoid Mu'ammal from him Saheeh ? This could be true because just after Mu'ammal bin Isma'eel, in at-Tarikh al-Kabeer, Imam Bukhari listed Mu'ammal bin Sa'eed and declared him Munkar al-Hadith. It may be that some scholar mistakenly took it for Mu'ammal bin Isma'eel.
However, on the other hand it also seems difficult because more than one scholars had attributed this to Bukhari, some have attributed the statement "Munkar al-Hadith" while some have attributed mere weakening without specifying any term. This includes the likes of Imam al-Mizzi, al-Dhahabi, al-Haythami, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani and al-Buqa'i. It is necessary, before reaching to a conclusion, that different manuscript of Tarikh Kabeer and other books on Rijal by al-Bukhari should be analyzed carefully. WAllahu A'alam. With regards to the claim of Shaykh Zai that Imam Bukhari has included his narrations in his "Saheeh" in support and hence he was Thiqah, this is again a false analogy.
Imam Bukhari intentionally avoiding Mu'ammal and not taking him as hujjah, indicates that there was some reason for which he avoided him. Similarly Imam Muslim completely avoided him. Hafiz Abu Umar Ibn As-Salah said in his famous Muqaddimah on 'ilmul hadeeth (pg.84), "Know that the narrations of those who is not Hujjah (as a narrator) and rather he is among weak narrators, is sometimes cited in case of Mutabi'ah and Shawahid. And in the book of Bukhari and Muslim there are several weak narrators cited as Mutabi'ah and Shawahid." Inclusion of some weak narrators in Ta'aaleeq of Saheeh is a fact which cannot be denied. The following are narrators in Ta'aleeq of Saheeh:
1. Ibrahim bin Isma'eel bin Mujamma': Imam Bukhari said, "he was the person with a lot of doubts (Kathir al-Wahm)".
2. Huraith bin Abi Matar: Bukhari said, "feehi nazr".
3. Ubaidulla bin Sa'eed bin Muslim al-Ju'fi, Abu Muslim: Bukhari said,"feehi nazar".
4. Umar Abu Salamah bin Abdur-Rahman: Bukhari said,"Sadooq, except that he was opposed (by scholars) in some of narrations".
5. Imran bin Dawar: Bukhari, "truthful, he used to fall in doubts (yahim)".
6. Mu'awiyah bin Abdul Kareem: Ibn Abi Hatim said, "Bukhari listed him amongst weak narrators".
7. Yahya al-Kindi: Bukhari said, "He was not known and no one back (support) him (lam Yutaba' alaih)".
One can refer to entries of these narrators in Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb by Ibn Hajar. Sh Zubair quoted from Muhammad bin Tahir al-Maqdisi that he said regarding a narrator, "In fact He (Bukhari) has taken narrations from him in many places as Istish-haad to indicate that he is Thiqah", and then he (Sh Zai) himself concluded, "This proves that Mu'ammal is Thiqah according to Imam Bukhari, not Munkir ul-Hadeeth". I say: The statement of al-Maqdisi is regarding some narrators of Sahihayn who were well famous scholars but still Shaykhain avoided them, except in Mutabi'ah or Shawahid. This doesn't mean for every single narrators mentioned by Shaykhain in support or for back up. Even if we accept that al-Maqdisi meant it for every single narrator, then also there is no reason to blindly follow him and leave the facts described above. Therefore, I could not understand the basis for the statement of Shaykh Zubair Ali Zai that Mu'ammal was Thiqah according to Imam Bukhari. In conclusion, Imam Bukhari only mentioned Mu'ammal in Ta'aleeq, not in the main Ahadeeth of Sahih Bukhari. WAllahu A'alam. Read the complete refuation of Zubair Ali Zai in the below link regaring Mu'ammal Hoping to hear from you soon "Omair". Also, can you give me an idea, I am asing you for the second time, when do you plan to complete you refutation series of Rafayadain so that I can refute that too and show all brothers the true picture rather than the baised picture showcased by yourself and the contradictions in your article. I would request all brothers who are not "psuedo-salafis" to spread this message. On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Abu Haneefah Omair <omair.shafiuddin@gmail.com> wrote: @Mohtashim Shaikh: You also said, <<@Omair: Forget about the 2nd and 3rd quotes and atleast tell me about Imam Bukhari r.e.h's 1st quote. Did Imam Bukhari r.e.h also make a mistake here ? I thought psuedo-salafis had spared him. Have you ?>>
The Quote that you ascribed to Imam Bukhari rahimahullah is mentioned as follows:
Imam Bukhari says, 'Muammal is munkar al hadeeth (People who view Imam Bukhari as the ultimate authority in matters of Hadeeth should note his following statement: 'It is not permissible to narrate from anyone whom I have labelled munkar al hadeeth [Mizan al I'itidal. 1/119]
Firstly, Mizan Al I'itidal is not a book authored by Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, the book was actually written by Imam Ad-Dhahabi rahimahullah...
Secondly, the Chain of Narration (SANAD) is not mentioned in that book..
Thirdly, Imam Bukhari narrated from Mu'ammal as Ishtishhaad in his Saheeh. Imam Bukhari has narrated from him in Ta'leeq form. Therefore, he is Saheeh Ul-Hadeeth according to him. And he has also mentioned Muammal ibn Isma'eel in Al-Tareekh Al-Kabeer (Vol 8, Pg 49) and did not criticize him. It is not conceivable to assume that such an Imam contradicted himself in his books..
This is the problem of blind-following Deobandi articles.. The deobandis narrate a bunch of lies and this narration attributed to Imam Bukhari is no surprise to be quoted from the fabricated machines of Deoband..
Wa Maa Alainaa Illal Balaagh, Defender of Sunnah, Abu Haneefah Omair (an Ex-Hanafi Deobandi)..
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Abu Haneefah Omair <omair.shafiuddin@gmail.com> wrote: @Mohtashim: You said, << I have found the tafseer in Urdu and will be sharing with the email group soon. They will inshallah see how the tafseer you shared was incomplete and misleading.>>
Previously, you accused the Tafseer of 4:59 that I had quoted to be wrong and also called it as pseudo-salafi tafseer. What happened to your previous accusation ? Did your allegation go down the drain ? Did you realize that you were lying and inserting your selfish desires into the Quran ??
Coming to the Urdu Tafseer point, as I pointed out earlier, the two most reliable works are Tafsir Ibn Kathir and Tafsir At-Tabari.. Please quote to me from any one of these books..
Here is Tafsir At-Tabari for the Quranic Text - "Faruddoo hu ilallaahi war rasooli".. Even Tabari does not use the word Mujtahid for this Ayah.. Shame on you for inserting your words and opinions into the Quran..
| {59} يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا | الْقَوْل فِي تَأْوِيل قَوْله تَعَالَى : { فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر }يَعْنِي بِذَلِكَ جَلَّ ثَنَاؤُهُ : فَإِنْ اِخْتَلَفْتُمْ أَيّهَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ فِي شَيْء مِنْ أَمْر دِينكُمْ أَنْتُمْ فِيمَا بَيْنكُمْ أَوْ أَنْتُمْ وَوُلَاة أَمْركُمْ فَاشْتَجَرْتُمْ فِيهِ , { فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه } يَعْنِي بِذَلِكَ : فَارْتَادُوا مَعْرِفَة حُكْم الَّذِي اِشْتَجَرْتُمْ أَنْتُمْ بَيْنكُمْ أَوْ أَنْتُمْ وَأُولُو أَمْركُمْ مِنْ عِنْد اللَّه , يَعْنِي بِذَلِكَ : مِنْ كِتَاب اللَّه , فَاتَّبِعُوا مَا وَجَدْتُمْ . وَأَمَّا قَوْله : { وَالرَّسُول } فَإِنَّهُ يَقُول : فَإِنْ لَمْ تَجِدُوا إِلَى عِلْم ذَلِكَ فِي كِتَاب اللَّه سَبِيلًا , فَارْتَادُوا مَعْرِفَة ذَلِكَ أَيْضًا مِنْ عِنْد الرَّسُول إِنْ كَانَ حَيًّا , وَإِنْ كَانَ مَيِّتًا فَمِنْ سُنَّته : { إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر } يَقُول : اِفْعَلُوا ذَلِكَ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُصَدِّقُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر . يَعْنِي : بِالْمَعَادِ الَّذِي فِيهِ الثَّوَاب وَالْعِقَاب , فَإِنَّكُمْ إِنْ فَعَلْتُمْ مَا أُمِرْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْ ذَلِكَ فَلَكُمْ مِنْ اللَّه الْجَزِيل مِنْ الثَّوَاب , وَإِنْ لَمْ تَفْعَلُوا ذَلِكَ فَلَكُمْ الْأَلِيم مِنْ الْعِقَاب . وَبِنَحْوِ الَّذِي قُلْنَا فِي ذَلِكَ قَالَ جَمَاعَة مِنْ أَهْل التَّأْوِيل . ذِكْر مَنْ قَالَ ذَلِكَ : 7806 - حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو كُرَيْب , قَالَ : ثنا اِبْن إِدْرِيس , قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا لَيْث عَنْ مُجَاهِد , فِي قَوْله : { فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول } قَالَ : فَإِنْ تَنَازَعَ الْعُلَمَاء رَدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول . قَالَ : يَقُول : فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه وَسُنَّة رَسُوله . ثُمَّ قَرَأَ مُجَاهِد هَذِهِ الْآيَة : { وَلَوْ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى الرَّسُول وَإِلَى أُولِي الْأَمْر مِنْهُمْ لَعَلِمَهُ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَنْبِطُونَهُ مِنْهُمْ } 4 83 7807 - حَدَّثَنِي الْمُثَنَّى , قَالَ : ثنا سُوَيْد , قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا اِبْن الْمُبَارَك , عَنْ سُفْيَان , عَنْ لَيْث , عَنْ مُجَاهِد فِي قَوْله : { فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول } قَالَ : كِتَاب اللَّه وَسُنَّة نَبِيّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ . * - حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَن بْن يَحْيَى , قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْد الرَّزَّاق , قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا الثَّوْرِيّ , عَنْ لَيْث , عَنْ مُجَاهِد فِي قَوْله : { فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول } قَالَ : إِلَى اللَّه : إِلَى كِتَابه , وَإِلَى الرَّسُول : إِلَى سُنَّة نَبِيّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ . 7808 - حَدَّثَنَا اِبْن حُمَيْد , قَالَ : ثنا حَكَّام , عَنْ عَنْبَسَة , عَنْ لَيْث , قَالَ : سَأَلَ مَسْلَمَة مَيْمُون بْن مِهْرَان عَنْ قَوْله : { فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول } قَالَ : " اللَّه " : كِتَابه و " رَسُوله " : سُنَّته . فَكَأَنَّمَا أَلْقَمَهُ حَجَرًا . 7809 - حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَد بْن حَازِم , قَالَ : ثنا أَبُو نُعَيْم , قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا جَعْفَر بْن مَرْوَان , عَنْ مَيْمُون بْن مِهْرَان : { فَإِذَا تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول } قَالَ : الرَّدّ إِلَى اللَّه : الرَّدّ إِلَى كِتَابه , وَالرَّدّ إِلَى رَسُوله إِنْ كَانَ حَيًّا , فَإِنْ قَبَضَهُ اللَّه إِلَيْهِ فَالرَّدّ إِلَى السُّنَّة . 7810 - حَدَّثَنَا بِشْر بْن مُعَاذ , قَالَ : ثنا يَزِيد , قَالَ : حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيد , عَنْ قَتَادَة , قَوْله : { فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول } يَقُول : رُدُّوهُ إِلَى كِتَاب اللَّه وَسُنَّة رَسُوله { إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاَللَّهِ وَالْيَوْم الْآخِر } 7811 - حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّد بْن الْحُسَيْن , قَالَ : ثنا أَحْمَد بْن مُفَضَّل , قَالَ : ثنا أَسْبَاط , عَنْ السُّدِّيّ : { فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْء فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّه وَالرَّسُول } إِنْ كَانَ الرَّسُول حَيًّا , و { إِلَى اللَّه }قَالَ : إِلَى كِتَابه . | |
On the topic of putting hands on the Chest, its a very minor issue.. I don't consider it worthy to be discussed.. However, the passage that you copy-pasted is already addressed in this video about the weak narrator Muammal Ibn Isma'eel..
The main point is that SADR (Chest) also refers to the area above the Navel.. Just click on this link: Response: Placing the hands on the chest in Salah Hanafi fiqh Channel Brother Mohtashim, your first allegation is proven to be a LIE. You called the earlier translation of the Quran as a typical Ghair Muqallid or a pseudo-salafi wrong translation..
Shame on you Mohtashim, you are simply lying and lying continuously against the Salafi brothers.. This is the madhab of Deoband which is Full of Lies.. And the Lies of Deoband is a big reason why I left the Hanafi madhab..
Assalaam-Alaikum, Defender of Sunnah, Abu Haneefah Omair.. On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Mohtashim Shaikh <mohtashims@gmail.com> wrote: @Omair: I have found the tafseer in Urdu and will be sharing with the email group soon. They will inshallah see how the tafseer you shared was incomplete and misleading. Anyways your Quote: Pseudo-Salafis tying hands on chest rather than above navel or below navel is a bidah (innovation) that none of the imams r.e.h followed. I say: 1. Sayyiduna Wail bin Hujr (ra) says, 'I prayed with the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) and he placed his right hand over his left on his chest.(Ibn Khuzaimah, 479) This hadeeth has been reported by Muammal bin Ismaeel from Sufyan al Thawri from Aasim bin Kulaib from Wail bin Hujr (ra) -However it is only Muammal who reports these additional words from Sufyan al Thawri. Sufyan's other student, Abdullah bin al Waleed who also narrates this hadeeth from him does not include these words in his narration as recorded in Imam Ahmad's Musnad. (Ahmad 18392) Imam Bukhari says, 'Muammal is munkar al hadeeth (People who view Imam Bukhari as the ultimate authority in matters of Hadeeth should note his following statement: 'It is not permissible to narrate from anyone whom I have labelled munkar al hadeeth [Mizan al I'itidal. 1/119] Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah r.e.h. | ويكره أن يجعلهما على الصدر ، وذلك لما روي عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه نهى عن التكفير وهو وضع اليد على الصدر
'It is makrooh (disliked) to place the hands on the chest in view of the narration that the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) forbade At-takfeer, which is to place the hands on the chest.' [Ibn Qayyim in Bada'i al Fawa'id, Volume No. 2, Page No. 69, Published by Maktaba al Mishqat]
Mr Naeem even according to Sahih Muslim and ruling of Shafi'i school, the hands are to be tied "BELOW THE CHEST NOT ON CHEST"
| Shams ul Haq Azeem Abadi r.e.h the leading authority of Salafis said:
إن الوضع يكون تحت السرة وهو أبو حنيفة وسفيان الثوري وإسحاق بن راهويه وأبو إسحاق المروزي من أصحاب الشافعي وقد عرفت أن الحديث ضعيف لا يصلح للاستدلال . وذهب الشافعية . قال النووي وبه قال الجمهور إلى أن الوضع يكون تحت صدره فوق سرته . وعن أحمد روايتان كالمذهبين , ورواية ثالثة أنه يخير بينهما ولا ترجيح وبالتخيير قال ... وعن مالك روايتان إحداهما يضع تحت صدره والثانية يرسلهما ولا يضع إحداهما على الأخرى
Translation: According to Imam Abu Hanifa, Sufyan al Thawri, Ishaq bin Rahwaih, Abu Ishaq, al Marwazi, the hands should be folded below the navel, according to Imam Shafi (the hadith regarding tying hands below navel) is Weak and cannot be taken as proof, In the Shafi'I school as Imam Nawawi (Rahimuhullah) said: The vast majority of scholars are of the opinion that Hands should be tied "BELOW THE CHEST" but above navel, There are 2 statements narrated from Imam Ahmed bin hanbal and according to another third he does not give preference to any of the two (i.e. one has choice to place them below the navel of above the navel under chest), from Imam Malik there are also 2 sayings narrated one of which is that hands should be tied "BELOW THE CHEST" and the second is that Hands should be left free [Al- Azeem Abadi in Awn al Ma'bud, Volume No.1, Page No. 275]
|
|
|
| @Omair: Forget about the 2nd and 3rd quotes and atleast tell me about Imam Bukhari r.e.h's 1st quote. Did Imam Bukhari r.e.h also make a mistake here ? I thought psuedo-salafis had spared him. Have you ? Let's have an acedemic discussion [no emotonal or response out of anxiety here] on the forum to see if psuedo-salafis have erred in their claims or is it the scholars of Ahle Sunnah wal Jamaat.
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Abu Haneefah Omair <omair.shafiuddin@gmail.com> wrote: @Mohtashim Shaikh:
ibn Katheer r.e.h himself did Taqleed of Imam Shafa'ee r.e.h so why would he translate this aaayat against tafseer ?
You are lying, Ibn Kathir was a Mujtahid Scholar himself, he didn't do Taqleed or Blind-Following of others. Please do not Abuse the scholars by calling them as Muqallids or Blind-Followers.
That's a typical Ghair Mukallid exclamation. If you open the link there are multiple aayats including Suarah Nisa aayat 59 [See with open eyes] along with the one pasted above.
This a typical, arrogant and stupid Muqallid exclamation. We are not talking about Multiple Ayat's.. We are only concerned with Ayah 59.. [See with open eyes] in both links..
The link contains all Quranic aayat that pertains to ulema (people of authority) and not layman.
You are opening the wrong link.. This link has the Tafseer of Ayah 58, not 59.. Are you still Blind-Folded ? Read the bottom line, you will find the translation of Ayah 59 and the next page contains the actual tafseer which we are concerned about..
Brother Omair don't you see that many people read these emails. Please do justice and tell me on what basis did you say that these are my own words ? Brother Mohtashim, Please do justice and tell me on what basis did you insert your own opinions into the Quran ? You haven't quoted anything from Tafsir Ibn Kathir on Ayah 59 and you are inserting the word Mujtahid into the Quran.. Fear Allaah!!!
Omair; We are Mukallids Alhumdullillah and we never Quote from our brains and our Naive understaing for we are not as foolish and careless to do so. Mohtashim, Muqallids are blind-followers who keep following someone whose words are not a Hujjah or proof in the Shariah.. This is something that is Shameful indeed.. It shows who are the foolish people..
And when it is said unto them: Believe as these people [Sahabah [R.A]] believe; they say: Shall we believe as these foolish believes? Alert! they are the foolish but they know not. (Surah Baqarah, Ayah11)
Let me paste you what I had typed and you can check my previous email if you still disbelieve. ***************************************** {Then if you quarrel on anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day.}
(11 :59)
According to the above explanation, it is a continuous sentence in which the mujtahideen are addressed. Abu Bakr Jassas (ra)wrote in support of ulama as 'those in aurhority'.
That Allah's words, if you quarrel follow
immediately His statement about ulul amr (those in authority) is evidence that ulul amr are the jurists, because Allah has commanded all men to obey them. ***************************************** You are not quoting to Tafsir Ibn Kathir of Ayah 59. This is a typical Deobandi scholars interpretation.. And who believes in the deobandis, they have fabricated machines to spread lies upon lies..
Thus is it "Abu Bakr Jassas (ra)" and not me who justifies Taqleed here.
Abu Bakr Jassas was a Hanafi jurist and we have the right to reject his words because they are not a Hujjah in the Shariah..
The unanimous agreement of Sunni Muslims and their Ulema is on Tafsir Ibn Kathir to be an authority to be relied upon.. Not the Tafseer of Abu Bakr Jassas..
I hope you do not throw him out of fold of islam just as psuedo salafis have blamed Umar r.z, Uthman r.z and Ali r.z of bidah like 20 Rakat taraweeh, Two Azaan for Jumah Prayers and Tying hands below navel.
The ignorant Pseudo-Hanafis of the 21st century have failed to realize that Umar radhiallahu anhu commanded Ubay ibn Ka'ab radh. to lead the people in Salaah with 11 Raka'ah (Witr included). Read Muwatta Imam Maalik:
Umar (radi-Allaahu 'anhu) ordered Ubayy ibn Ka'ab and Tameem ad-Daaree to lead the people in 11 rak'ahs. [This hadeeth is mention in Muwatta Imam Malik, Sunan Al Kubra of Bayhaqi and also in many other books. The chain of this hadeeth is Absolutely authentic and all its narrators are Thiqqah]
There are more than dozens of opinions that pseudo salafis have derieved against the 4 imams and there are many books showcasing them. I have seen those books and found that due to Muta'assub (fanatical sectarianism), Deobandis are spreading lies against the Manhaj As-Salaf..
Pseudo-Salafis tying hands on chest rather than above navel or below navel is a bidah (innovation) that none of the imams r.e.h followed.
I have shown you one example out of the many .. but sad you were unaware of this till date ? You have shown nothing but lies against the Salafis and its sad that you are unaware of the lies..
If you fear Allah more than others show me where does the Tafseer of ibn Katheer says that this aayat is for layman and not for the ulema (peopleof authority) ? If you fear Allah, first take your words back and agree that Tafsir Ibn Kathir did not use the word Mujtahid or the Judges in Authority for the tafsir of this Ayah.. And the Ayah itself says who is being addressed here.. "In kun tum to'minoona billaahi wal yaumil aakhir".. This means, "If you really believe in Allah and the Last Day".. So Allaah subhanahu wa ta'ala is addressing the Believers in this ayah and your tiny brain thinks the ayah refers to the Mujtahids.. Shame on you..
Take a breath and read this
Don't give me sectarian deobandi links... I don't trust the Deobandis, because I was an Ex-Hanafi myself and I used to follow the Deobandi Ulema.. But Alhamdulillah, the moment I realized that they were lying and deceiving us, I left the fold of the Deobandi (by name Hanafi) madhab..
And when it is said unto them: Believe as these people [Sahabah [R.A]] believe; they say: Shall we believe as these foolish believe? Alert! they are the foolish but they know not. (Surah Baqarah, Ayah11)
Wa Maa Alainaa Illal Balaagh..
Defender of Sunnah, Abu Haneefah Omair..
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Mohtashim Shaikh <mohtashims@gmail.com> wrote: @ Omair: ibn Katheer r.e.h himself did Taqleed of Imam Shafa'ee r.e.h so why would he translate this aaayat against tafseer ? Check wiki and look at the mazhab of ibn Katheer r.e.h. I have tried to showcase a very clear difference of the translation that you or the psueodo salafis have made out of that tafseer of Surah Nisah. Your Quote: No, there is no difference.. Why are you not reading properly ?? You should be ashamed of yourself... Go to quran4u.com and then go to qtafsir.com and read Surah Nisaa Ayah 59.. Both have the same tafseer exactly with the same statements recorded..
The tafseer of ibn Katheer does not even say that (two laymen having dispute must refer to Quran and the sciences of Hadees). If you believe that the tafseer of ibn Katheer says so, Please share the arabic text of ibn Katheer and the literal translation where he says that laymen having dispute should look up the Quran and Hadees. Thus its your translation and not ibn Katheer r.e.h.
Your Quote: Ya akhi, both quran4u.com and qtafsir.com have exactly the same wordings... Its the same tafseer.. The problem with you is that you are opening another page and comparing it with another page and another ayah.. Just see what you are doing.. You are mixing up the ayaat assuming things.. Astaghfirullah!!! Yaa Allaah!!! That is not Ayah 59.. It was the tafseer of the earlier ayat's of Surah Nisaa.. So you are mixing up the ayat's without knowledge.. On top of that, you are making buhtaan (false accusations).. That's a typical Ghair Mukallid exclamation. If you open the link there are multiple aayats including Suarah Nisa aayat 59 [See with open eyes] along with the one pasted above. The link contains all Quranic aayat that pertains to ulema (people of authority) and not layman.
@Omair: The Tafseer does not say that they ayah was revealed about those in authority.. These are your own cooked up words.
Brother Omair don't you see that many people read these emails. Please do justice and tell me on what basis did you say that these are my own words ? Omair; We are Mukallids Alhumdullillah and we never Quote from our brains and our Naive understaing for we are not as foolish and careless to do so. Let me paste you what I had typed and you can check my previous email if you still disbelieve. ***************************************** {Then if you quarrel on anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you believe in Allah and the last day.}
(11 :59)
According to the above explanation, it is a continuous sentence in which the mujtahideen are addressed. Abu Bakr Jassas (ra)wrote in support of ulama as 'those in aurhority'.
That Allah's words, if you quarrel follow
immediately His statement about ulul amr (those in authority) is evidence that ulul amr are the jurists, because Allah has commanded all men to obey them. ***************************************** So, is these my words or do you usually read things superficially ??? Thus is it "Abu Bakr Jassas (ra)" and not me who justifies Taqleed here. I hope you do not throw him out of fold of islam just as psuedo salafis have blamed Umar r.z, Uthman r.z and Ali r.z of bidah like 20 Rakat taraweeh, Two Azaan for Jumah Prayers and Tying hands below navel.
@Omair: Give at least one example of such an issue.. Because, as the wise saying goes, "If claims are not backed with proof, they are used only by the fools as evidence." There are more than dozens of opinions that pseudo salafis have derieved against the 4 imams and there are many books showcasing them. Strange, that you do not even know a single issue that pseudo-salafis invented against the conventional muslim ummah stance in recent times. Pseudo-Salafis tying hands on chest rather than above navel or below navel is a bidah (innovation) that none of the imams r.e.h followed. I have shown you one example out of the many .. but sad you were unaware of this till date ? Your Quote: From which tafseer did you reach to this conclusion ?? Tafsir Ibn Kathir of both links that you quoted do not use the word Mujtahid.. You are making it up and inserting your own words into the Quran.. Astaghfirullah.. This is Tahreef (distortion).. Fear Allaah!!! If you fear Allah more than others show me where does the Tafseer of ibn Katheer says that this aayat is for layman and not for the ulema (peopleof authority) ? Take a breath and read this On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Abu Haneefah Omair <omair.shafiuddin@gmail.com> wrote: Assalaam-Alaikum,
@Mohtashim Shaikh: Sorry, I had missed your email earlier...
You said, There is obvious difference in both the Tafseer, I don't understand why are you not able to make out ?
No, there is no difference.. Why are you not reading properly ?? You should be ashamed of yourself... Go to quran4u.com and then go to qtafsir.com and read Surah Nisaa Ayah 59.. Both have the same tafseer exactly with the same statements recorded..
Ya akhi, both quran4u.com and qtafsir.com have exactly the same wordings... Its the same tafseer.. The problem with you is that you are opening another page and comparing it with another page and another ayah.. Just see what you are doing.. You are mixing up the ayaat assuming things.. Astaghfirullah!!!
Yaa Allaah!!! That is not Ayah 59.. It was the tafseer of the earlier ayat's of Surah Nisaa.. So you are mixing up the ayat's without knowledge.. On top of that, you are making buhtaan (false accusations)..
The Tafseer does not say that they ayah was revealed about those in authority.. These are your own cooked up words..
Give at least one example of such an issue.. Because, as the wise saying goes, "If claims are not backed with proof, they are used only by the fools as evidence."
From which tafseer did you reach to this conclusion ?? Tafsir Ibn Kathir of both links that you quoted do not use the word Mujtahid.. You are making it up and inserting your own words into the Quran.. Astaghfirullah.. This is Tahreef (distortion).. Fear Allaah!!!
Wa Maa Alainaa Illal Balaagh,
Defender of Sunnah,
--
R e g a r d s,
<Mohtashim>
<Subject Matter Expert>
mob: +91 9323657130
--
R e g a r d s,
<Mohtashim>
<Subject Matter Expert>
mob: +91 9323657130
--
R e g a r d s,
<Mohtashim>
<Subject Matter Expert>
mob: +91 9323657130
|
No comments:
Post a Comment