[Tahir-Riaz]

Pir Naseer-ud-Deen Nasser Shah Shab discusses the doctrine of afzaliat while Irfan Shah Shahab is a part of the audience. Surprisingly the "Sher" remains rather numb during the lecture.






After watching the clip above one can be led to believe that Irfan Shah Sahab is targeting Per Naseer-ud-Deen Nasser in the lecture bellow......


....Surprisingly that's not the case. The target of the last clip is Syed Abdul Qadir Jilani another great scholar of our time. The objective of juxtaposing these 2 clips is to demonstrate what I call intellectual dishonesty:

Rules change according to the man commencing the opposing view.

Pick a nonissue, blow it out of proportions and use it as political tool against those you don't like. Religious politics at its best.

[Mudassar-Rana]

it really is a non issue - who the hell are we to debate on the status of some of the greatest men in the history of mankind. Its as if anything we say will have any bearing on their status? its very confusing as to why people actually follow this argument. Men like Ali a.s and abu bakr r.a are worthy only of our admiration and not for us to try and measure the esteem allah and his beloved s.a.w held them in. We are not fit to lace their boots. I bet these gentlemen are sat with rasool s.a.w  and wondering why the hell are we debating this issue when the ummah that these people built is being torn to shreds! If ALi r.a or Abu Bakr was alive now I dont think they would entertain any of this at the moment. They would be too busy with stopping the daily rape and pillage of this ummah.

[Qadri-Jilani]

Sultan are you having a joke?
It is in complete contradiction to what Sayyid Irfan Shah Sahib says. You cannot only look at the first 30 seconds of the clip brother (about min kul'il-wujuh), there is a lot more to it. Irfan Shah Sahib says the mas'ala of tafdil is qat'i and that's what Pir Sahib is refuting. Pir Sahib actually rebukes and criticises people who with certainty put a rank of afdaliyya saying that no one has a right to do this and it will only be decided on the day of qiyama (and this has been mentioned by our Sunni Ulama of aqa'id as one of the opinions), does Irfan Shah Sahib put a specific rank in terms of who is afdal (and does so in qat'i terms)? I think you know the answer. When he talks about the afdaliyya of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq he addresses people in the second person as "aap" (not necessarily talking about himself). 
He calls people brainless who simply repeat what some scholars of the past have said on afdaliyya saying that people should use their own brain and think for themselves who is afdal. He gives reasons why someone could argue that Sayyiduna 'Umar is greater than Abu Bakr Siddiq. Finally he states that saying Sayyiduna 'Ali is 4th greatest because he is the 4th caliph (as the qat'i camp argue) is ignorance because the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) came last out of the Prophets (peace be upon them) but he is actually the greatest among all Prophets and he came last, Sayyiduna Ali also came last out of the four and you can work the rest out yourself.
I think it's in this very speech later on where Pir Sahib says in expressive terms that it was the aqida of the three noble khulafa that Sayyiduna Ali was superior to them along with his two sons. There are other speeches also where he says that Sayyiduna 'Ali is greater than all other Sahaba.
Sorry sultan, but there is not much in it for you in this clip.

[Tahir-Riaz]

Quote

sultansalim (21.06.2010)

---

Pir Irfan's are on tafdil of Abu Bakr radiyAllah on one issue, and that is mentioned in the books as virtue and action. On this one thing is the dispute between Irfan Shah and others. Pir Nasir's video does not contradict Irfan Shah's view...

Brother Sultan Salim, didn't Hazrat Umar (ra) surpass all Sahaba in virtue and action by not hiding his faith? Hazrat Umars (ra) actions provided Islam a strength which it have before him. How do you explain this exception in light of the principal of (Qati) absolute supremacy of Hazrat Abu Bakr (ra) (in virtue and action)

Suhayb ibn Sinan ar-Rumi narrates: "When Umar ibn al-Khattab became Muslim, Islam came out into the open and the call to Islam was made In public. We sat around the Kabah in circles, and we Circumambulated the House and settled our scores with those who had persecuted us. We started to hit back."

[Tahir-Riaz]

Quote

Qadri Jilani (21.06.2010)

---

I think it's in this very speech later on where Pir Sahib says in expressive terms that it was the aqida of the three noble khulafa that Sayyiduna Ali was superior to them along with his two sons. There are other speeches also where he says that Sayyiduna 'Ali is greater than all other Sahaba.

QJ, that's another lecture and for everyone's convenience I am reposting the clip.

[objective-enquirer]

hazrat pir syed nasir al-din sahib® clearly says that if being first was the key in afzaliyyat the hazrat Adam(a) would have been most afzal!

 

anyway, i would like to say a few things about the last clip; which is absolutely devoid of any principles/usul.

the main argument being shouted is that this matter of tafzil is definite/qati according to Imam Ali(a). and the basis of the argument is that imam Ali is 'reported' to have said that whoever considers me afzal to shaykahin then i will implement hudud punishment of 80 lashes on that person.

before that let me explain that the references of bukhari etc do not count here because when hazrat mohammed bin hanafiyya asked his father Imam Ali the He(a) replied that shaykhain are afzal and i am just like any muslim.

now, is Imam ali just an ordinary muslim? no. He said those things out of humility and humblenss just like when hazrat abu bakr became caliph and he said to hundreds of sahaba that i am not better then you...none of them disagreed so does that mean there is ijma of sahaba that he was not better then anyone? no. he was saying that out of humility just imam ali was saying it out of humility. one event explains the other.

however, coming back to the so called report of 80 lashes.

molana irfan shah sahib thinks that it is in sunan of darqutni...that is his first mistake because it is not in sunan but rather in illal of darqutni, which is about defective reports. this much should be sufficient for any student of usul al-hadith. furthermore, this report has hakim bin hajal as its first reporter and it is unanimous in asma ar-rijaal that the man never met Imam Ali so what is his source?

secondly, its sanad has more than three reporters afterwords that are majhul/unknown. since when are we to defininately decide upon a report whose reporters we do not know? it is also in ibn asakir and the reporters there are also unknown. for example, abu saeed al-janzwadi-unknown, abu al-hussain al-harawi-unknown, abu sahal al-qattan-unknown, abdullah aroh al-madaini-unknown....these were just the first four and they are all unknown/majhul reporters.

even the salafis, the hardcore believers of tafzil of shaykhain, themselves say that this report is daeef/weak. see footnote on minhaj al-sunna.

so the chain of its reporters is not just weak but the weakest of chains. it amazes me that a molana would sit on mimbar and shout his head off that it is qati because Ali said but it turns out that it the worst kind of weak report...food for thought.

some people have just followed blindly some person's research on it in the last few centuries and have failed to actually check it for themselves. for example, he says that its in sunan of darqutni, which clearly suggests that he never checked himself!

more importantly and crucially is the lack of understanding about the issue of hudud and he himself actually refutes himself towards the end of the clip.

Imam Ali is supposed to have said that I will punish them with 'hadd' of 80 lashed.

this in itself is the refutation of the report. Imam Ali would never say such a jahil thing. why?

because hudud are for 'actions' and not for aqaid. In Islam there are no hudud for matters of aqeeda at all but all hudud are for actions such as theft, adultery, drinking etc.

secondly, hudud are prescribed by Allah and His Prophet(s). there is no where in the book of God nor in sunnah where there is a mention of hudud for tafzil.  

the matter of hudud is in actions/aamaal alone. there are four types of hudud:

1. theft

2. adultery

3. falsely accusing of adultery

4. drinking alcohol

these are the only four hududs in shariah. there is no mention in Quran or sunnah or even in any fiqh books of the hudud for tafzil.

this false report actually disrespects Imam Ali and his Knowledge.

in aqeeda there are no hudud but rather people are may be considered kafir or innvators etc.

this much is sufficient and if anyone thinks this wrong then bring your evidence from Quran for such a hadd of tafzil because only Allah legislates hudud and and no one else has the right to make a hadd other then what is in Quran.

May Allah protect us.

[objective-enquirer]

evidence that he never read it himself but rather blindfollowing of mistakes of others by saying that it is in sunan darqutni:

check after 4 minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TSJ8QgiPLs&feature=related

[blogger]

Quote

Qanbar (21.06.2010)

---

Brother Sultan Salim, didn't Hazrat Umar (ra) surpass all Sahaba in virtue and action by not hiding his faith? Hazrat Umars (ra) actions provided Islam a strength which it have before him. How do you explain this exception in light of the principal of (Qati) absolute supremacy of Hazrat Abu Bakr (ra) (in virtue and action)

Suhayb ibn Sinan ar-Rumi narrates: "When Umar ibn al-Khattab became Muslim, Islam came out into the open and the call to Islam was made In public. We sat around the Kabah in circles, and we Circumambulated the House and settled our scores with those who had persecuted us. We started to hit back."

We're going round in circles here, how do you measure one's actions? it's not a science and it's open to an individual's interpretatiton, Like Pir Syed Naseeruddin Shah Saheb said 'Is there a meter which measures an individual's virtues?'

Also, you've addressed Syed Irfan Shah Saheb solely regarding this but you have to acknowledge that there are many other contemporary Ahle Sunnah scholars who share the same view as Syed Irfan Shah Saheb (significant in number).

[Zarb-e-Ali]

Hey blogger, why use selective pick and choose? You choose to reply Qanbar because there you could brag about some scholars but you cant put an answer to what OE has said. Stay away from this discussion with your kiddish intellect, and stop worshipping modern day scholars, everything which comes outa their mouths aint wahi or hadith or even truth. Stop destroying this Ummah.

Irfan Shah Jee might have disagreements, its his right. After all, he has to use the knowledge he gathered somewhere. But shouting false and fabricated narrations to prove his point is the worst kind of dishonesty and is called lying while sitting on mimbar e rasool (

[hafiz-qadri]

Quote

blogger (21.06.2010)

---

Quote

Qanbar (21.06.2010)

---

Brother Sultan Salim, didn't Hazrat Umar (ra) surpass all Sahaba in virtue and action by not hiding his faith? Hazrat Umars (ra) actions provided Islam a strength which it have before him. How do you explain this exception in light of the principal of (Qati) absolute supremacy of Hazrat Abu Bakr (ra) (in virtue and action)

Suhayb ibn Sinan ar-Rumi narrates: "When Umar ibn al-Khattab became Muslim, Islam came out into the open and the call to Islam was made In public. We sat around the Kabah in circles, and we Circumambulated the House and settled our scores with those who had persecuted us. We started to hit back."

We're going round in circles here, how do you measure one's actions? it's not a science and it's open to an individual's interpretatiton, Like Pir Syed Naseeruddin Shah Saheb said 'Is there a meter which measures an individual's virtues?'

Also, you've addressed Syed Irfan Shah Saheb solely regarding this but you have to acknowledge that there are many other contemporary Ahle Sunnah scholars who share the same view as Syed Irfan Shah Saheb (significant in number).

Aslaamualikum

(Significant in number) Quantity has no Value in the face of Quality.Imam Hussain (as) did not have (Significant Numbers) Yazeed Lanati did,so who was on the True/Right Path.

If it's Ijema e Qati why Doesn't Syed Irfan Shah Sahib issue a Kufr Ka Fatwa.End of Argument!!!!!!!

[Mudassar-Rana]

Unfortunately when people cling onto titles like sunni and shia it brings intellectual dishonesty. We attempt to prove cases for no other reason that to prove our side is right. Yet Ali a.s is every muslims not just shia - what difference would it make if I said Ali a.s is the best or should have been first caliph - none whatsoever. We love ali a.s as much as we love abu bakr siddique - men like these are not born everyday so we can sit 1400 years down the road and debate on intricacies and events that we never witnessed. We forget the mutual respect that they had for each other - infact abu bakr r.a said to look at ali a.s is ibaadat! I long for the day that people would rather stay in their houses than attend futile events like this where everybody is a loser. Proving the greatness of Abu bakr r.a. should not be linked to proving how much sunni you are! the prestige of these men is something that will never be replicated as rasool s.a.w said he got the best of creation for his companions. lets leave it at that.

[blogger]

Quote

Zarb e Ali (21.06.2010)

---

Hey blogger, why use selective pick and choose? You choose to reply Qanbar because there you could brag about some scholars but you cant put an answer to what OE has said. Stay away from this discussion with your kiddish intellect, and stop worshipping modern day scholars, everything which comes outa their mouths aint wahi or hadith or even truth. Stop destroying this Ummah.

Irfan Shah Jee might have disagreements, its his right. After all, he has to use the knowledge he gathered somewhere. But shouting false and fabricated narrations to prove his point is the worst kind of dishonesty and is called lying while sitting on mimbar e rasool (

Here we go again, personal attacks ... all I was doing was pointing out a mere fact. ZA you can carry on making assumptions but I'll state clearly that I'm not a supporter of Syed Irfan Shah Saheb I respect the majority opinion of the Ahle Sunnah scholars be they Arab/Indian/Pakistani etc. Please refrain from focussing on a single individual there are many others.

The order of Khilafat isn't the basis of afzaliyat (praiseworthiness) as some have assumed there is no relation, It just so happens that the order of the Khulafa-e-Rashideen is also the order of afzaliyat that the overwhelming majority of Ahle Sunnah Wal Jamaat prescribes to to this day and have done so throughout history.

Let me state very clearly, Pir Syed Abdul Qadir Shah Saheb holds the same view as Pir Syed Irfan Shah Saheb in that Hazrat Abu Bakr Radiallahu Anhu is the most praiseworthy after the Prophets Alaihis Salam followed by Hazrat Umar Radiallahu Anhu. Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Tahir-Riaz]

[quote]blogger (22.06.2010)

---

[quote][b]Let me state very clearly, Pir Syed Abdul Qadir Shah Saheb holds the same view as Pir Syed Irfan Shah Saheb in that Hazrat Abu Bakr Radiallahu Anhu is the most praiseworthy after the Prophets Alaihis Salam followed by Hazrat Umar Radiallahu Anhu then Hazrat Usman Radiallahu Anhu followed by Hazrat Ali Radiallahu Anhu[/quote]

That is absolutely true and even Irfan Shah Sahab knows this. However, it makes me wonder why he chooses to insinuate that Pir Syed Abdul Qadir Jilani is a Marasi. Not very scholarly I must say.

We should all pause for a second ask our selves the following question: Is this religion or politics?

The argument of 80 lashes has been shattered to 80 pieces. Since the matter is speculative people have the freedom to fancy whom they wish.

Cheers

[Qadri-Jilani]

Simple question to Irfan Shah Sahib: Please can you show us the narration from Daraqutni?


The entire basis for Shah Sahib's argument to say the issue is qat'i rests on this, not only in this speech but in almost every speech of his on this matter he use this as his main and principle argument.


I'm sorry to say but the language used in this speech is once again deplorable, that's not being political but just telling folks that it is damn right out of order.

[Imran.]

Quote

sultansalim (22.06.2010)

---

I would like to know what type of ijma' does the following of the four schools fall under? Does it fall under ijma' qat'i or dhanni?

Also tell me if there is an ijma on following of the schools of aqeeda(ashari/maturidi),if so what type,if not,why not.

Especially as this issue is to do with Aqeeda,not fiqh(practical amal).


Does non taqleed of a school of aqeeda take on out of sunnyat,if not why not?

Quote

When is Allama Shah Abdul Qadir's work on this subject out?

When you stop swearing at him from pulpits and behind alias's and computer screens alike.

[Desert-Sheikh]

[quote]Qanbar (22.06.2010)

---

[quote]That is absolutely true and even Irfan Shah Sahab knows this. However, it makes me wonder why he chooses to insinuate that Pir Syed Abdul Qadir Jilani is a Marasi. Not very scholarly I must say.

[/quote]

He is a Sunni scholar but I’m ashamed to hear the language he speaks.

[syedmohsin86]

Awesome speech by Pir sahab, very happy to hear this from an Alim of Ahl-e-Sunnat, whatever He said is 100% true, we should use our Khopari rather accepting what others have said on this issue.

Their Shan and Real Muqaam will be disclose at day of judgment By Allah. And Prophet (S) will handover 'Liwaa'ul Hamd  to  Maula-e-Kainat Hazrat Ali K.A.W.



Note: I am not shia, im Sunni, follower of Imam-e-Azam Imam Abu Hanifah R.A and from Silsila-e-Qadriyah.

[MDeen]

Was Pir Naseer-ud-Deen Nasser Shah Shab not a mureed of Syed Irfan Shah Saab?

[Tahir-Riaz]

Quote

M.Deen (23.06.2010)

---

Was Pir Naseer-ud-Deen Nasser Shah Shab not a mureed of Syed Irfan Shah Saab?

Yes Indeed and then you woke up!

Quote

syed.mohsin86 (22.06.2010)

---

Note: I am not shia, im Sunni, follower of Imam-e-Azam Imam Abu Hanifah R.A and from Silsila-e-Qadriyah.

The above declaration manifests the psychological terrorism Sunnis have been subject to. People should be able to make such comments without the fear of being labeled as deviants by the Takfiri Mullahs.

 

[syedmohsin86]

I dont fear for getting label of Shia, infact got this label many times and i feel proud to get this label,:) as all most all Great Scholars got this label in the love of Ahl-e-Bait.

 Dr Tahir ul Qadri said "jis sunni per shia honay ka ilzam nahi laga samjh lay kay wo Ahl-e-Bait ki muhabat mai kamzor hai"