Spirit Of Islam: Sunni way of following Ahle Bayt - Spirit Of Islam

Jump to content



Icon Important Announcement!

Like us on facebook!


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Sunni way of following Ahle Bayt

Posted 09 January 2010 - 11:44 PM (#1) User is offline   asad_akhtar 

  • Waxing Crescent
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 299
  • Joined: 16-October 07

As salam alaikum brothers and sisters,

I want to know how we sunnis are following the instruction  of huzoor paak salalahu alaihi wasalam when he instructed us to follow the ahle bayt. The shias keep saying they follow the ahle bayt by believing in the 12 imams and that sunnis do nothing. how do we reply to this?

NO MEANINGLESS REPLIES PLEASE

ASAD AKHTAR
0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:17 AM (#2) User is offline   qadrimuslim 

  • First Quarter
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 903
  • Joined: 29-December 03

Assalam u alaykum

This is a huge topic and I think I would type for days discussing it, so I will just have to put it in brief bullet points:

HOW AHLUS SUNNAH FOLLOW THE AHLUL BAYT:

- All of our pious Ulama, Scholars, Faqih and Mujtahideen took knowledge, guidance and ijazah from the Ahlul Bayt. This knowledge was then spread throughout the world through the Ulama.

- Our 4 Imams of Fiqh all gained their knowledge from the Ahlul Bayt.

- Almost all of our Silsila Tariqat is from the Ahlul Bayt i.e Qadriyyah and Chishtiyyah etc

- We follow ALL of the Imams as our teachers and spiritual guides - not just 12 like the 12er Shia choose to do.

- We accept all Sayyids as Ahlul Bayt (unlike the Shia)

- The majority of Sunni missionaries were from the Ahlul Bayt and spread SUNNIYAT throughout the world!

- We actually act upon the Sunnah of the Ahlul Bayt in the following way:

      1 - By respecting the Khulafa e Rashideen and protecting the azmat of the Sahaba (RA) - this is the way of Ahlul Bayt. See Mufakkir e Islam's speeches for strong evidence of this.

      2 - By having the SAME BELIEFS as the early Imams. Not diverting to new innovative beliefs and falsely attributing them to the Imams.

      3 - By not beating ourselves - The Imams taught us to be strong - not to beat yourself! You will not find even one of the early Ahlul Bayt beating themself!

Inshallah I hope that helps!

"The Sufi Must Submit to the Faqih" - Shaykh Ahmad Zurruq (RA)

Wa-la Ghalib Il-Allah "There is no Conqueror but Allah"
0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 09:24 AM (#3) User is offline   technocore 

  • First Quarter
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 696
  • Joined: 15-February 09

I would like to respectfully disagree with you brother, due to following reasons:

Prophet (sawaw) said He is leaving behind two things:

1. Quran & Ahlebyet
2. Quran & his Sunnah

Which inevitably means that besides Quran the only other source to extract religions (in all ascpects) are ahlebyet.

Now let us analyze where we do and donot act upon this command of our Master (sawaw):


SHARIYA:

Extraction of shariya from Quran is based on its interpretation. Ahlebyet have no contribution in this area in sunni school. The pious scholars of the first times did major contributions to this sector and we follow them. Apparently ahlebyet were either not well versed in Quranic interpretation or they did not teach it or their teaching was not taken by ahlesunnah. There cannot be a fourth scenario in light of history. If anyone can come up with, please englighten us all.


FIQH:

Only Imam Malik and Imam Abu Hanifa spent some time as students of Imam Jaffir Sadiq. That is also doubtful as the only indication that Imam Abu Hanifa actually learned from Jaffar Sadiq is his statment "If I had not spent those two years with the Jaffer Sadiq, Nauman would have perished". We believe (and only believe) he meant learning while others believe he meant he took asylum with Imam Jaffir Sadiq for 2 years to save his life and was a contemporary scholar of the same grade.

None of the Imams of ahlebyet, whom by the way, we consider to be Ghaus of their times, either followed the four sunni schools of fiqh or propogated them. They had their own fiqh based on their own interpertation of Quran and sunnah (and in light of hadeeth, the true sunnah of our Master (sawaw) ) which is unknown to us today. Fiqh jafriya i.e the shia 12er school emerged many centuries later and therefore is as ignorant about this aspect as us.

Apparently taking fiqh from ahlebyet sources either never started or to some extant if started, it ended with Imam Jafir Sadiq. All the later day ahlebyet awliya including great one's like Syed Abdul Qadir Jilani rely on four imam's for fiqh (unfortunately i donot understand why, weather it is their lack of thorough understanding of quran and hadeeth or something else).


SUNNAH:

To extract Sunnah of our Prophet (sawaw), we kept ahlebyet aside and relied mainly on hadeeth and methodologies of Imams of hadeeth: a science based on memorization of teachings transmitted through word of mouth generation after generation, with no protection declared from Allah (swt) or Prophet (sawaw). Though a few (very few) hadeeth were taken from Ahlebyet and this is the entire contribution to sunnah against our Prophet (sawaw) teaching which dictates ahlebet to be the only source of Sunnah (above points).


AHSAAN:

Or in other words Tasawuf. In this field Imams of ahlebyet are the teachers but only upto Imam Ali Raza. Imam Muhammad Taqi, Ali Naqi or Hasan Askari apparently have no contributions to this area either. Later Awliya from ahlebyet became pinnacles in this science.


Even if we argue that 11 Imams shia follow were not the only ahlebyet, we have to prove in black & white evidance of the percentage of teachings extracted from other ahlebyet sources excluding or including the 11 imams in all above field.

This is where ahlesunnah comes to a full stop in logical/reasonable discussion and start bashing the questioner on his/her ignorance and bad aqeeda.

NOTE:  This does not in anyway mean shia 12ers are right. We ahlesunnah still do accept a few ethical and moral teachings from Imams of ahlebyet whereas the 12ers have even abandoned those. Their fiqh to orignate from ahlebyet is only a surface level reality where as it orignated many centuries later. They claim if came from riwayat from ahlebyet but it goes completely contrary to the few basic teachings from these Imams which have survived today. Therefore, either it started correct but got mixed up with wrong contents or being from ahlebyet imams was a myth from the begining.

- The most favorable friend to me is that who shows me my flaws -
0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 09:47 AM (#4) User is offline   Zarb-e-Ali 

  • Waxing Gibbous
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1155
  • Joined: 21-December 08

I agree with brother technocore, sunni saying of ' we follow Ahle Bait ' is more like a myth and emotional statement rather then any fact. Almost all of the teachings come from non-Ahle bait sources, the most harsh argument put against sunnis by Shias is similar, when the raise the question "You sunnis follow Ahle Bait, but 99% of the hadiths in books are from non-Ahle Bait sources" .


Now, there is certainly no answer to that and none of our Scholars have actually answer'ed to it in detail. But i personally think that there was a hard opposition against Ahle Bait starting right from the rule of Ummayads, also interesting to note that ALL of the 12 Imams were martyred, and their teachings were either destroyed or not allow'ed to spread openly.

We say we are follower's of Ahle Bait but we dont even know the names of 12 Imams.






0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 10:10 AM (#5) User is offline   technocore 

  • First Quarter
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 696
  • Joined: 15-February 09

Quote

Zarb e Ali (10.01.2010)
I agree with brother technocore, sunni saying of ' we follow Ahle Bait ' is more like a myth and emotional statement rather then any fact. Almost all of the teachings come from non-Ahle bait sources, the most harsh argument put against sunnis by Shias is similar, when the raise the question "You sunnis follow Ahle Bait, but 99% of the hadiths in books are from non-Ahle Bait sources" .


Now, there is certainly no answer to that and none of our Scholars have actually answer'ed to it in detail. But i personally think that there was a hard opposition against Ahle Bait starting right from the rule of Ummayads, also interesting to note that ALL of the 12 Imams were martyred, and their teachings were either destroyed or not allow'ed to spread openly.

We say we are follower's of Ahle Bait but we dont even know the names of 12 Imams.

Salam O Alikum Brother,

There was a strong opposition towards our 4 Imams of fiqh as well and they were martyed too. This did not stop them becoming the center of ahlesunnah's teachings and Imams of fiqh. Neither did strong opposition stop ahlebyet's teachings to disappear from tasawuf. Why are their teachings only ignored in the practicale aspects of religion like fiqh/sunnah/shariya.

- The most favorable friend to me is that who shows me my flaws -
0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:14 PM (#6) User is offline   Mystic 

  • Waxing Gibbous
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 2971
  • Joined: 06-August 04

The Sunnis have given up the political stance of the ahlul bayt. Today we only follow the spiritual stance of ahlul bayt which includes some of their teachings and the ijtihed of the awliya. As for the politcial stance the mutazilla were the last non-shias to follow them. Today the only group that follows them till this day are the Zaydia. As for the 12rs they only follow the partial teachings of the ahlul bayt. A lot of their madhab is an input from their scholars.

0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:27 PM (#7) User is offline   Mystic 

  • Waxing Gibbous
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 2971
  • Joined: 06-August 04

Quote



None of the Imams of ahlebyet, whom by the way, we consider to be Ghaus of their times, either followed the four sunni schools of fiqh or propogated them. They had their own fiqh based on their own interpertation of Quran and sunnah (and in light of hadeeth, the true sunnah of our Master (sawaw) ) which is unknown to us today. Fiqh jafriya i.e the shia 12er school emerged many centuries later and therefore is as ignorant about this aspect as us.

Apparently taking fiqh from ahlebyet sources either never started or to some extant if started, it ended with Imam Jafir Sadiq. All the later day ahlebyet awliya including great one's like Syed Abdul Qadir Jilani rely on four imam's for fiqh (unfortunately i donot understand why, weather it is their lack of thorough understanding of quran and hadeeth or something else).

If he was a true Jafari or Zaydi he wouldn't be able to become a sunni imam of tasawuuf. Therefore, he had to adopt the 4 schools of thought.



0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 06:52 PM (#8) User is offline   technocore 

  • First Quarter
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 696
  • Joined: 15-February 09

[quote]Mystic (10.01.2010)
[quote]

If he was a true Jafari or Zaydi he wouldn't be able to become a sunni imam of tasawuuf. Therefore, he had to adopt the 4 schools of thought.

[/quote]

Can the same apply to the remaining Imams of Ahlebyet especially from Imam Musa Kadim upto Imam Hasan Askari. They did not follow the four Imams but are accepted as sunni awliya of taswuuf. Brother Mystic, lets not stray from the topic. I have mentioned multiple areas of religion. Please enlighten us where we take our contribution from ahlebyet that is if we claim to be their followers. Please provide realistic evidance of contributions if possible.

- The most favorable friend to me is that who shows me my flaws -
0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 07:19 PM (#9) User is offline   Mystic 

  • Waxing Gibbous
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 2971
  • Joined: 06-August 04

In there times there was no real Sunni or shia split.
Take this clip and see what the shia scholar has to say.


Later on in the 4th century Syeds were forced to join other madhabs. They had no choice.
As for contributions the Mutazillah sect worked on the political stance of ahlul bayt and sufi worked on the spiritual aspect. We as sunnis have given up the political aspect.

0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 10:20 PM (#10) User is offline   A-New-Hope 

  • First Quarter
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 904
  • Joined: 25-December 05

technocore wrote (under 'fiqh') :

Quote

All the later day ahlebyet awliya including great one's like Syed Abdul Qadir Jilani rely on four imam's for fiqh (unfortunately i donot understand why, weather it is their lack of thorough understanding of quran and hadeeth or something else).

Salam

I am assuming this is referring to Ghaus Paak ®. If Ghaus Paak ® lacked thorough understanding of Quran and Hadeeth then Tassawuf and Waliyat stand on shaky ground. :w00t:

Salam

"A Friend of Allah should have affection like the sun, generosity like a river and hospitality like the earth." (Hazrat Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer Sharif, India).
0

Posted 10 January 2010 - 11:07 PM (#11) User is offline   Mystic 

  • Waxing Gibbous
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 2971
  • Joined: 06-August 04

Ghous Al Azam's (ra) Tafseer of the Quran is preserved in Turkey. There are some sufi shaykhs who are working on a translation. Also, some of Imam Jafar's (as) tafseer can be found in this book.

Posted Image
0

Posted 11 January 2010 - 07:11 PM (#12) User is offline   technocore 

  • First Quarter
  • PipPipPip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 696
  • Joined: 15-February 09

Salam O Alikum Brother Mystic,

Thank you for the information. 
I am not challenging ahlesunnah brother but rather trying to find justification for the grounds on which we call our selves followers of ahlebyet. Firstly a few bits from ahlebyet here and there like what you mentioned the tafseer has some parts from Imam Jaffer Sadiq cannot be taken a "following" someone. Which area in our version of Islam is dominated by ahlebyet especially the blessed Imams of ahlebyet whom even the awliya keep in high esteem - "shariya", "Quranic Interpretation", "Fiqh", "Tasawuf", "Sunnah/Hadeeth" ?

Can we establish the percentage of teachings in each of above areas which comes ahlebyet ?

We apparently don't follow them, shias dont follow them, wahabi's don't follow them .... then who does ? - why did the prophet (sawaw) said I am leaving behind Quran and ahlebyet ? when his hadeeth and quran are the primary sources of all laws. what was the purposes of specifically mention ahlebyet ?

As for the other brother, I respect Syed Abdul Qadir (ra) immensly ... but it does not make sense ... all earlier day Awliya from ahlebyet followed Muhammad (sawaw) directly with out any of the four Imams to interpret teachings of the Prophet (sawaw). Ghous Pak (ra) and all the later day awliya are muqalid them selves.

I follow Imam Nauman (ra) - abu hanifa - because I donot possess enough knowldge myself to extract judgments from Quran and hadeeth myself. If someone does then he would not need to follow interpretations of the four imams. so question is why was sultan of awliya a muqalid ?

He was imam of tasawuf is not the answer by the way ... because ahsaan is a stage when one has already mastered quran, shariya & sunnah. One follows another only when he lacks the knowldge or capability of the task himself.

 Please donot take it as rude brothers, I am not even worthy to call Ghous Pak (ra) my Imam. But to get answers to such questions is necessary to remove doubt.

 

- The most favorable friend to me is that who shows me my flaws -
0

Posted 11 January 2010 - 08:16 PM (#13) User is offline   Mystic 

  • Waxing Gibbous
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 2971
  • Joined: 06-August 04

Brother just answer one question. If Ghous Al Azam was a Jafari or Zaydi in fiqh would Sunnis today follow him ? No! Therefore, he had to adopt one of 4 school in order to lead the sunnis into tasawuuf. Ghous Al Azam (ra) wasn't given imamate to the level that the 12 imams were given imamate. His imamate is mainly in tasawuuf as Abu Hanifah's imamate is in fiqh. After the era of 12 imams firstly the door of ijtihad was closed. Secondly, the Syeds were forced to join another school. They no longer were able to have their own independent beliefs. Try to understand this. In another words their school came to an end.


Quote

Bro "shariya", "Quranic Interpretation", "Fiqh", "Tasawuf", "Sunnah/Hadeeth" ?

The Zaydi sect follows the Ahlul Bayt in these areas. Except they no longer have much works in tasawuuf. If you do a comparison between them and us there isn't much difference. As for reference to the ahlul Bayt I believe we have more sources on the first 3 imams then any other sect. After that there is limitation to information.

In another words you are correct. We don't follow the ahlul Bayt today.

0

Posted 28 January 2011 - 09:18 PM (#14) User is offline   tswf 

  • New Moon
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 48
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Ok, this is a bad bad situation....

First of all br Mystic, please provide a proof, reference or citation from a reputable source where it says the Syeds were FORCED to follow the four madhabs?

Also, I dont think you guys realise but many many schools existed outside of the 4 Madhabs, even Imam Sufyan Thawri (r.a.) had a Madhab which dissipated.  The four schools werent static everywhere, many were popular because they were either patronised (Ottomans) or because the Imam in question was resident in those areas (Shafi'is of Egypt anyone?)

Imam Malik lived and BREATHED Madina al Munawarra and his science of Hadith was very blessed, and he ofcourse took Hadiths from Ahle Bayth! In fact TUQ proved that this myth that Sunni books hold hardly any Ahle Bayth Hadiths is false propoganda! He counted no less then over five and half thousand from our main Sunni kitabs, no less...

As far as sources, no group had more false Hadiths narrated from them than the Ahle Bayth (see Shias who narrated immense awful Hadiths falsifying them from their Imams to justify their Aqaid....such as Imam Jafar Sadiq a.s.'s disapproval of Imam Zayd - which is ofcourse false as he loved him DEARLY!)

As for Ghauwth ul Azam (a.s.) being a 4 Madhab'er, brother he was raised on the study of Hanbali Fiqh! Who forced Him?! (a.s.) He gave rulings as per people's Fiqhi inclination, but I have read nowhere that he didn't do the same for our Shia brethren. In fact of late, they seem to be busy trying to disprove the Monarch's Syed lineage :blink:

Ghawth ul Azam (a.s.) was in no way simply an Imam of Tasawuf, if that was the case, why was he given the title of Mohyudin? All should be aware of the miracle of the old decrepid man, he helped up who became a healthy man as he helped him up. When asked about this strange occurence, the young man remarked, "I am the deen of your Grandfather (saaw) and was poorly and diseased. Allah swt has revived me through your help"... Sufism is not a spiritual parallel, it is the ultimate proof of Islam and proof is even Mujtahid Mujjadid giants such as Imam Shafi'i said "my knowledge falls short of the knowledge by the Sufis". So please, let's not infer seperates here...

The ultimate source of all schools goes back to our Aka (saaw) whether he taught his family (a.s.) or the Sahaba Ikraam who he said were like the stars. The Ahle Bayth taught many of the Imam's and in fact many don't realise that although Imam Shafi'i didnt study Imam Jafar Sadiq formerly, he was taught by Syeda Nafisa al Hasani (a.s.) too.

As Sunnis, we follow ALL Ahle Bayth, our Mujtahid's followed them in person, we follow their noble character instead of the innovated institutionalised rituals of the Shia, and if anything, our Hadith science is much more robust in its scrutiny of Hadiths than Ahle Tashayu who has MUCH more deplorable examples of falsehood...

Shah Waliullah Dehlvi (Mujjadid and Wali of his age) stated he once saw our Aka (saaw) in a dream in which he asked him which Madhab was the one which lead to him best. Our blessed Maula (saw) replied, "All of them lead to me". The Imam's of Ahle Bayth taught and prepared the world for Islamic knowledge and are recorded as such.

Finally, can we stop referring to the Imams as 12, as there is no recorded proof of the 12th Imam being born let alone occultation, and beyond 12r's no other group believes in this. At the very very very very least, you cant question that we follow the 12 Imams, or know of the 12 Imams because the 12th Imam (may Allah hasten his birth) was never even seen, let alone taught anything that we today decline...

I'd say more, but you get my point!
Had tapeh to Awliya, Be-had tapeh to Pir,

Had be-had jo tape, usi ka naam Faqeer...- Syed Pir Mehr Ali Shah
0

Posted 07 March 2013 - 06:28 PM (#15) User is offline   Nureddin 

  • New Moon
  • Pip
  • View blog
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 20-June 06
  • LocationLima - Peru

Bismillahi Rahmani Rahim

As salam alaikum

Prophet (saaws) said both:

- I leave you Qur'an and my Sunnah, and
- I leave you Qur'an and my Ahlul Bayt.

But he did not stop there. He said also many other things granting authority in knowledge to Sayyidina Abu Bakr as Siddiq and Umar al Faruq, may Allah be pleased with them. The afdaliyya of Sayyidina Abu Bakr is well known even if in earlier times there was a minority position stating otherwise, yet the consensus was reached among the ulama of later times. And even if you don't share the idea of his afdaliyya, he is among the best of the best of sahabas with no doubt and was granted knowledge to be a guide to Ummah, as wel as the second Caliph.

So the conclusion pointed by someone here that Ahlul Bayt had to be the main source for knowledge (hadith, fiqhm, usul fiqh) is erroneus, yet indeed they had to be a main reference among other references.

Among the 4 imams of fiqh two of them learned with Imam Jafar as Sadiq. When awliya have taight this, even if there could have been small ground for the historical scope of such learning, many awliya have clearly stated this fact and it makes then clear, for whoever accepts them, that it was so and not, as an opinion mentioned by someone, that Imam Abu Hanifa received merely refuge in the house of the imam.

Were there political persecutions and risks for common ulema that could partially explain that they did not mention the early imams on their fields? For common ulama, yes. The higher ones, at least two of the imams, went to them to learn.

But while that political aspect may be an important factor in this scenario, a second yet more subtle factor is equally or even more important: the imams themselves, having received such privilege in knowledge, knew also what the majority of ulama were teaching and how the hadith, fiqh and usul fiqh was growing and having seen that what was already in the ground was good and correct they decided not to add more than what was commonly available as this last itself good (taking from other main sources of knowledge).

It is the same as what has been narrated from a great wali in ba'lawi history about whom it was said that he reached the degree of Mujtahid Mutlaq yet he himself saw that his judgments were equal or pretty much like the shafi madhhab and so decided not to open his own door as his people had already something correct [BTW, I am hanafi : )]

Besides it, the hadith about I leave you my Ahlyl Bayt point to them as reference, yes, as a new Buh's Ark, yes, but emphasis is also given to treating them well by future generations. So why this last mention of them? Precisely in porder to warn people to respect them, love the, and not to kill them. A karamat as we know what happened to so many of them starting with Sayyidina Hussein (as), as well as the next of imams.

Finally, precedence in rank and principality in reference does not entail necessariously supremacy in each specific field of knowledge under the tools and methods of that same knowledge.

May be I should explain it: it is well known, as explained by sidi Abdulaziz ad Dabbagh, that the Qutb al Aqtab in each time, the wali muhammadi per excellence in each generation, has complete and full knowdlege of shariah, of Islam. Not only that, he receives knowledge of previous shariahs, etc, etc. To the point that as sidi Abdalaziz ad Dabbagh expressed that if all the ulama of the world die, this unique person with his knowledge would be enough to recover the whole knowledge. However, his absolute masterhip on knowledge does not entail that he may reach to it through the external ways, learning, 'cross-examination' at the hands of his teachers, as it happens in the methodology of external sciences.

Sidi Abdulaziz himself was ummi and he could not have been considered, pursuant to the methodologies and criterion of external knowledges, as such, yet he was by way of Haqq.

So:

- There are other auhtorized sources of knowledge,
- Ahlul Bayt had to be first of all well treated, loved and no injustice should touch them,
- Relative precedence is given to them in general, with high position in knowdlege yet this does not entail to accomplish with the eternal criteria of each field, and their internalk authority is opened only to people with high himma and ikhlas at their own time,
- Imams of the 4 Imams went to them and they consented that what the Ummah had was enough,
- Plus political circumstances avoiding fitna and further cruelties

So we should not think that we, the general Ummah, 'lost' something that makes, hasha astaghfirullah, our way incomplete. Nor we should think that we, the general Ummah, have additional obligations in relation to them that we cannot fulfill.

The innumerable awliya, noth sayyids and non sayyids, as well as all the Aqtab, that are found only in Ahlus Sunnah wal Yammah, for centuries and centuries is pretty much more than enogh proof of the complete path that we have.

Notwithstanding it, knowledge that Rasul (saaws) received is of three levels:

- One that remains only between him and Allah (azza wa jal).
- One that he disclosed to special and selected among his sahabas (and we have a hadith for this, and it is well known among al turuq, as consensus of people of tasawwuf)
- One that was subject to the general public, and it is what has reached us in a complete way.

Are there more things that we can learn from Ahlusl Bayt? And more meaning to followng them? Yes, but not at the general level, but at the second one mentioned above. And not only from the Imams, also from the tachings of the Khulapha e Rashidin themselves (as it is known that Sayyidina Abu Bakr as Siddiq, on the external knowledge, narrated only few ahadith).

It is in this reealm that the Aqtab, the Poles, of the Ummah follow and learn and give their full support, in a way that is proper for this second level of relationship, to the Imams of Ahlul Bayt.

And it is in this second level that they come to know, and then they let us known, that those Imams are indeed 12, and it does not mean that we do not take from fields of knowledge of other sayyids. We do! From Shaykh Abdalqadir al Jilani, etc., etc., up to our time, sayyids 'Imams' for us. But it is only to indicate that those 12 are a special category that deserves a special treatment and authority among all of Ahlul Bayt, in this second level of relationship.

The 12th not born hundreds of years ago as shias claimed, but he is for Ahir Zaman, yet his spiritual role, his ruhaniyat, was there already before.

And these are teachings that we take from awliya and ulama that belong to the purest Ahlus Sunnah way, those who themselves are under the shadow of Sayyidina SAbu Bakr as Siddiq (ra). So no suspicion of 'shiaism' could be attributed to them. They are among those who clearly reject the shia myths and acclaim the authority (both political and spiritual authority= of the 4 khulapha and acknowledge the afdaliyya of Sayyidina Abu Bakr as Siddiq (ra). I refer here to two giants of naqshbandi tariqa, the siddiqui tariqa, among Ahlus Sunnah wal Yamaah.

And I end by quoting them:

By Imam Ahmad Faruqi as Sirhindi (qs), from: Mukasfifat-i `Ayniyya

"The road of Hazrat Abubakr the champion of truth has already been discussed. Hazrat [Umar] Faruq had a different road as well. In the same way, Hazrat Uthman had a separate road as well.
The ways to reach Allah for the wayfarers are these four.
The way of Hazrat Ali is the best known.
Most of the sufi silsilas have reached their destination along this way. In the same way, the way of Hazrat Abubakr is a different silsila and it is specific to the silsila of the khwajegan.
However, the great sufi shaykhs have traversed via silsilas other than these [two] silsilas and have reached their intended destinations (maqsud). As these paths were secret, it was difficult to traverse on them. As a poet had composed,

Naqshbandis are a wondrous caravan of masters
Who carry through a secret path to the sanctuary of the caravan
The path of Hazrat Amir [Ali] was manifest and so that path became wellknown.

And the paths of Hazrat [Umar] Faruq and Hazrat [Uthman] the possessor of two lights were hidden, and so it was hard to travel on their paths. As a result, sufi shaykhs chose the wellknown path [that was the path of Hazrat Ali]. Another point is that Hazrat Ali came last [among the four well instructed caliphs]. And that is why his tariqa attained more name and fame.

Ignorant people consider the tariqa of Hazrat Ali complete and the tariqas of the other three caliphs incomplete. Alas! Their arrogance! Since their wayfaring has been on the path of Hazrat Ali, they have rejected and denied all the tariqas except his. It is a bad deed!

I have seen many great shaykhs who have done their wayfaring on the path of Hazrat Umar Faruq (rad).Even Hazrat the great succour (ghawsu ‘lthaqlain) [Abdulqadir Jilani] (rah) arrived on (wasil) [the station of] the unseen person (ghaybI dhat) on this path. He did not travel on the path of Hazrat Amir [Ali] more than annihilation and abidingness (fana’, baqa’), which is [only] the first step on the path of friendship. Hazrat Shaykh Abu Sayid Kharraj also wayfared on the path of Hazrat [Umar] Faruq.

[Those who think that only Hazrat Ali’s tariqa is the complete tariqa], it seems that they have not heard the hadith, If there were a prophet after me, he would be Umar (law kana nabiun ba`di lakana Umrun). If it [Umar’s tariqa] did not have the capability to make others perfect and to benefit others (takmil, ifadat), then how would he relate to the station of prophethood [when the prophets are charged with rectifying and benefitting the people]? Take heed! Don’t be an ignoramus!

(…)

You may know that the masters who have reached (wasilan) the person of God and has been given the title “solitary (afrad)” are few. Indeed, the prominent companions and the twelve imams of the prophet’s family have realized this felicity. And among the prominent friends, the pole who is the great succour (qutbI ghauth ‘lthaqlayn), the pole of the Lord (qutbI rabbani) Muhyi aldin Shaykh Abdulqadir Jilani (qs) was distinguished by this felicity. He had a distinguished standing on this station such that there have been only few friends with this distinction".

Also read the following words of Imam Ahmad Faruqi as Sirhindi (qs):

“And there is another way close to the spiritual sovereignty and this is the way of the Saints and the general friends of Allah, and this way is marked by its characteristic passion and it carries the guarantee of mediation and the leader and chieftain of the Saints of this way is ‘Alī al-Murtada. And this grand office is reserved for him. On this way, the feet of the Holy Prophet are on ‘Alī’s head and Fatima and Hasan and Husayn are included with him.

I believe that he enjoyed this position even before his physical birth, as he did after it, and whosoever has received the divine blessing and guidance, has received it through him, because he is closest to the last point on this way and the centre of this spot belongs to him.

And when his period ended, the grand office passed on to Hasan and Husayn and then on to each one of the Twelve Imāms, individually and elaborately.

And whosoever received guidance in their life and after their death, received it through these Saints. And the refuge and place of shelter of the Saints of high ranks are these Saints, (because they are the centre of all spiritual activity) and the sides tend to converge on the centre” (Maktubat, Volume 9:173#123).

Or these words too:

“O Brother! Indeed Imam ‘Ali is the holder of the keys of the Sainthood, Wilayah, of the Prophet Muhammad [s] and the training regime for the status of Aqtab, Awtad and Abdaal, who are from amongst the reserved Awliya, is done under the shelter of his Sainthood. The rank of Qutb al-Aqtab, who is the greatest Qutb and the guide and mentor of others, lays under his (‘Ali’s) feet. His orders are issued under the supervision and support of ‘Ali and he performs his duties under the supervision and support of ‘Ali and fulfills his tasks. Sayyida Fatima and both of her sons, the Imams (Hasan and Husayn) share this rank with ‘Ali.” (Maktubat Imam Rabbani, Volume 1:438#251)”

The great alim and naqsbandi shaykh Shah Wali Allah (qs) also wrote:

“This Faqir has come to know that from all the other relations, the Twelve Imams [ra] have the relation of central pole leadership (Qutb). And the way of Tassawuf (Sufism) had taken birth during their lifetime. But all the orders of Aqaed and Shariah are limited to the ahadeeth of the Prophet (saww). And they have the order (Amr) of inner (Batin) leadership (Qutbiyat), which is free from the problems of Shariah. And in regards to the very leadership (Qutbiyat), each of them had an indication and ‘Nas’ for the next one to come, and the affairs of imamate which they said, actually referred to this kind of central pole leadership (Qutbiyat).” [Maqalaat al Waziyah fi Naseehat al-Wasiyah, page 7 (Lucknow)].

As mentioned, the special authority of Imams of Ahlul Bayt is primarily here, and it is not exclusive of other -considered even afdal-.

Imam Rabbani again:

(Maktubat)

"The reality of Hazrat [AbuBakr] the champion of truth is the divine name that is his lord (rabb). That is his origin of enti¯cation (mabda'-i ta`ayyun). And that is directly (bi-tawassut) the shadow of the Muhammadan reality (zill-i haqiqat-i muhammadi) with nothing else in-between them.

[The reality of Hazrat Abu Bakr is the direct shadow. And as such, it is the direct] follower and heir of [the Muhammadan reality with nothing else in-between them. As a result,] whatever that is there in that [Muhammadan] reality, all of it is in that [direct] shadow [which is the reality of Hazrat AbuBakr].

It is for this reason that [Abu Bakr] is the most perfect (akmal) and most excellent (afdal ) heir (warith) in this [Muhammadan] community. The Prophet (salam) said, Whatever Allah had poured into my breast, I poured that all into the breast of Abu Bakr. Ma sabba `Llahu shay'an ¯ sadri illa wa qad sayabtuhu ¯ sadri Abi Bakr-in".

And Shah Wali Allah also wrote (from Qurrat-ul-’aynayn fî-tafdîl-ish-shaikhayn):

“Shaikh Muhyiddîn Arabî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ makes a list of the things that will bring a person closer to Allâhu ta’âlâ. He states that the grade of Siddîqiyyat, the highest one, belongs to Hadrat Abû Bakr, the grade of Muhaddithiyyat, (the second highest,) belongs to Hadrat ’Umar, and the grade of Uhuwwat belongs to Hadrat Alî.

According to this faqîr, (i.e. in Shah Wali Allah’s understanding,) the Shaikhayn ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’ are like the light-radiating layer around the sun. Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is like the moon which receives and reflects the lights radiated. Whereas the Shaikhayn ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’ radiate the lights of the path of Nubuwwat, Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ radiates the lights of the path of Wilâyat. It is for this reason that our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated, “If I were to choose a halîl [friend] for myself, I would choose Abû Bakr,” and “If a prophet were to come after me, ’Umar would certainly be a prophet,” and “Alî is from me. And I am from him.”

This faqîr, [i.e. Hadrat Shâh Waliyyullah Dahlawî,] asked Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ spiritual entity during a (spiritual meditation termed) murâqaba:

What is the reason for the Shaikhayn’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ superiority over Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ despite his superiority in the honour of genealogy and in the sobriety of his judgments as well as his leadership of the orders of Tasawwuf?

He blessed my soul with the following answer:

“Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ has two blessed faces: One which is zâhir [visible, outward]; another one which is bâtin [invisible, inward]. His face which is zâhir administers justice among people, provides brotherhood, and shows the right path. In the performance of this duty, the Shaikhayn ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ are like his hands and feet. Through his other face, which is bâtin, he gives fayz to hearts. The Shaikhayn cooperate with him in this duty as well!” ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’”.

We have a complete way, and there is a knower above every knower and the those at the top of awliya have even higher ways to reach direct, continuos aand fresh support, training and knowledge from Ahlul Bayt and the Shaykhain are a mater to far to even understand.
The Holy Prophet (sws) is saying to us,' The way you believe, that's how you will live. The way you live, that's how you will die. The way you die, that's how you will be buried. The way you will be buried, that's how you will get up to the Judgment Day'. Watch yourself, look at yourself, say to yourself, `Am I happy with this situation that I'm living in right now? Is it enough for me to get up for the Judgment Day like this?' (Words of Sahib us-Sayf Sheykh Abdul Kerim Effendi Hazleteri el Hakkani el Kibrisi).
0

Posted 14 March 2013 - 01:19 AM (#16) User is offline   Anonymous02 

  • New Moon
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: 06-November 07

View Postasad_akhtar, on 09 January 2010 - 11:44 PM, said:

As salam alaikum brothers and sisters,</P><P>I want to know how we sunnis are following the instruction  of huzoor paak salalahu alaihi wasalam when he instructed us to follow the ahle bayt. The shias keep saying they follow the ahle bayt by believing in the 12 imams and that sunnis do nothing. how do we reply to this?</P><P>NO MEANINGLESS REPLIES PLEASE


Waleikum As Salaam

I don't know if this is Meaningful or Meaningless. However, this is how i relate to The Beloved Ahle Bait Athaar (RadhiAllahu anhum)

If not anything, The Sunni way of Following Ahle-bait (RadhiAllahum Ajma'een) lies in our relentless pursuit of their Qualities like Mercy and Forgiveness.

Few of many Distinctions of Moula-e-Kainat (RadhiAllahuanhu) are His unparalleled Mercy and Forgiveness.

How can a beleiver for an instance think, that Madh'Allah! these were due to some Weakness or lack of courage. No! He is the Commander of the Faithful and He is Sher-e-Khuda (Alaihisalam). A heart such as his would not even have a trace of blemish of any kind. These qualities were reflections of Sohbat of Rehmatallil A'alameen (Rehmah for all the Worlds) and Marifa of Rehman-o-Raheem Rabbal a'lameen (The Lord, Creator and Sustainer of All the worlds). His heart and Actions alike shone with these qualities.

No one becomes A Wali till he/she accepts the wilayat and Maqam of Hazrat Ali (KaramAllahu Wajhul Kareem) and nobody has a right to proclaim that he/she Loves/Follows Hazrat Ali (RadhiAllahuanhu) with out His/Her heart and Action Reflecting on These qualities.

Umm Salamah (RadhiAllahu anha) Narrates "When The Holy Prophet(Alaihi-salat-o-salam) became angry no one had the courage to talk to him, Except Ali" (At-Tabaraani)

Ma'salam
Alhamd-o-lilah!

"My Master, descend peace and blessings continuously and eternally on Your Beloved, the Best of All Creation"
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options
  Or sign in with these services