[Nafheense]

Salaam alaikum dear brothers and sisters.

i know qaisda burda originally has 160 lines . buton you tube its of 8-10 lines. can u guys refer to this video of 8-10 lines and let me know if its shirk.. remember im not talking about the 160 lines of complete poem im talking about this particular video .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-78o...eature=related

jazakallah khair

[ringtonesmannq]

Salaam alaikum dear brothers and sisters.

i know qaisda burda originally has 160 lines . buton you tube its of 8-10 lines. can u guys refer to this video of 8-10 lines and let me know if its shirk.. remember im not talking about the 160 lines of complete poem im talking about this particular video .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-78o...eature=related

jazakallah khair

W-Salam,

Turks have their own way of Arabic pronounciation

[Agedprepdoock]

Salamualikum Waramatullahi Wabarakatuh,

Brothers and sisters in Islam should realise that when it come to the Rasullahi, it is in the heart (or mind).

No statement can be excessive praise about him, because we cannot use words to adequate describe or talk about him, after experiencing him spiritually. Most sheiks that talk about the Rasul are either talking him the way they understand (that is - zahir or batini). it is all dependent on the side of him that Allah (SWA) make manifest to you.

May Allah (SWA) guide us aright.

[FliveGell]

Assalamu Alaikum,

After reading the past few pages of this thread, I saw many posts saying things like "its impossible to overly praise Rasool Allah"! Now, praising Rasool Allah is definitely not forbidden, but a problem arises when we praise him by lying about him and attributing things to him that he didnt posses...etc. For example, Rasool Allah did not have knowledge of the unseen, as this is stated in both the Quran and Sunnah. When someone wants to praise RasoolAllah, it is incorrect to say that he does have knowledge of the unseen! Ghulow is very dangerous! What did the Christians fall into when they claimed that I'sa (Alaihi assalam) was the Son of God? What dod the Shee'ah fall into when they claimed that Ali was better than any Prophet or Angel?

I am not going to deny the fact that Al-Busairi did a wonderful job in terms of the style of the poem, however, many of the messages conveyed in the poem are highly flawed. Here are some examples:

يا أكرم الخلق ما لي من ألوذ به * * * سواك عند حلول الحادث العمم
He is saying: Who else do I make istighaahah to besides you. (Salafis would deem this a serious problem)

فإن من جودك الدنيا وضرتها * * * ومن علومك علم اللوح والقلم[
This bayt contradicts two well known concepts:

1. Allah (SW) says in the Quran “وإن لنا للآخرة والأولى”. The universe was not created from RasulAllahs generosity..etc
2. Also, RasulAllah does not know the ghayb.

قال سبحانه عن نبيه محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم: وَلَوْ كُنْتُ أَعْلَمُ الْغَيْبَ لَاسْتَكْثَرْتُ مِنَ الْخَيْرِ وَمَا مَسَّنِيَ السُّوءُ

ما سامني الدهر ضيماً واستجرت به * * * إلا ونلت جواراً منه لم يُضَم
He is saying that nothing has hurt me, caused me pain..etc and I asked for his help, except he has cured me.

Allah says that Prophet Ibrahim said:
وإذا مرضتُ فهو يشفين
Allah also says:
والله تعالى يقول: ** وإن يمسسك الله بضر فلا كاشف له إلا هو

And Rasool Allah said:
إذا سألت فأسأل الله وإذا استعنت فاستعن بالله .

فإن لي منه ذمة بتسميتي محمداً * * * وهو أوفى الخلق بالذمم
He’s saying that he has a “a’hd” with RasoolAllah (basically to enter jannah) because he shares his name! Where did he get this from?

- لعل رحمة ربي حين يقسمها * * * تأتي على حسب العصيان في القسم
He states that Allahs mercy increases proportionally with ones bad deeds!

Allah says:

إن رحمت الله قريب من المحسنين .

ورحمتي وسعت كل شيء فسأكتبها للذين يتقون ويؤتون الزكاة والذين هم بآياتنا يؤمنون

وكيف تدعو إلى الدنيا ضرورة من * * * لولاه لم تخرج الدنيا من العدمHe states that the Dunya was created solely because of Rasul Allah. This is incorrect:allah says: وما خلقت الجن والإنس إلا ليعبدون


أقسمت بالقمر المنشق إن له * * * من قلبه نسبة مبرورة القسم He is swearing by the Prophet.
من حلف بغير الله فقد أشرك.

These are just a few of the problems that we have with the Burdah. Although it does contain some beautiful abyaat, alot of it is full of ghulow and false claims. Please dont write a million replies showing that Tawassul is valid..etc. I just wanted to show why the Salafis have issues with it!

[fabrizioitwloch]

Most of the objections raised against Qasidah Burdah are regurgitations of what some Salafi scholars have written against it. Contemparary Salafi scholars have just repeated the objections parrot-fashion without even attempting to find a possible realistic interpretation of the verses in question, look at the context of the verses or check the reliable commentaries of Al-Burdah.

Abu Dujanah said:

يا أكرم الخلق ما لي من ألوذ به * * * سواك عند حلول الحادث العمم

He is saying: Who else do I make istighaahah to besides you. (Salafis would deem this a serious problem)

Abu Dujanah, it's important to literally translate first as opposed to decide for the readers what Busairi (RA) is trying to say.

Translation: O Most Noble among the creation, who can I seek refuge in besides you, when the great calamity occurs?

What's the great calamity? The Day of Qiyamah; the word "amami" means all-encompassing and general, which is obviously the Day of Qiyamah, because even the Prophets (alayhimus salaat was salaam) will be worried about themselves and only the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) will respond to the request of mankind to ask Allah to begin the Reckoning.

This is what Baajoori and Ibn Hajar al-Haythami have both said in commentary of this verse.

Secondly, the word "aloodhu" does not mean istighaatha and it is incorrect to deduce this meaning from the word.

Sayyiduna Ali (radhiallahu anhu) said: “When the ferocity of combat would reach its limit and the eyes would turn red, we would seek refuge next to the Messenger of Allah. He would be the closest of us to the enemy.”

The word Ali used here is "naloodhu" being the plural first person form of the same word Busairi is attacked for. So was Sayyiduna Ali (radhiallahu anhu) also doing istighaatha bir rasool in the battlefield, or is that meaning exclusive for Busairi?

If Ali (radhiallahu anhu) can "seek refuge" with Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on the battlefield, why is Busairi a criminal for expressing that he shall seek refuge with him on the Day of Qiyamah? Moreover, Busairi is not fabricating or imagining any ideas on his own part; he has just visualised the horrific situation of Qiyamah which has been narrated in authentic narrations.

This is just one example of Salafi shortcomings in understanding and being rash in passing judgment, a situation further escalated when Salafis commit the "unforgivable crime of taqlid" of their scholars and accept the criticism of Busairi without researching it themselves.

[FliveGell]

Salam,

Why have you only focus on one bayt? Why dont you explain this : ومن علومك علم اللوح والقلم

Is that not ghulow?

[ringtonesmannq]

Salam,

Why have you only focus on one bayt? Why dont you explain this : ومن علومك علم اللوح والقلم

Is that not ghulow?

Btw I don't know the Qaseeda but How does that mean that he knew EVERY SINGLE THING from Luh and Qalam?

[fabrizioitwloch]

Salam,

Why have you only focus on one bayt? Why dont you explain this : ومن علومك علم اللوح والقلم

Is that not ghulow?

The reason I've only focused on one bayt is because:

(a) I simply didn't have time to explain all the questionable bayts

(b) My purpose was not to exhaustively cover all the bayts. I'm just pointing out the fallacious nature of the objections to Qasidah Burdah and that it's not always what it seems at face value.

And coming back to the point, if I'm wrong in only focusing on one bayt, the least you can do is accept that the Salafi objections to the bayt I discussed may not be as strong as they first seem.

Otherwise, if I go on to explaining the bayt which you've quoted, I don't want you conveniently skipping to next bayt saying, "Why are you only focusing on TWO bayts?"

[FliveGell]

Btw I don't know the Qaseeda but How does that mean that he knew EVERY SINGLE THING from Luh and Qalam?

Firstly, the word "Min" here is used for Tab'ieed, meaning this knowledge of the unseen is only a fraction of his total knowledge. Also, it is a general statement which means, according to him, RasoolAllah has total knowledge of these things. For it to mean partial knowledge, the author would have mentioned it.

Secondly, is what is recorded on Al-Lawh al-Mahfooth not considered to be from the Ghayb? RasoolAllah doesnt posess knowledge of the ghayb (partial or complete). This is mentioned in the Quran and in the authentic sunnah.

Here's example : وَلَوْ كُنْتُ أَعْلَمُ الْغَيْبَ لَاسْتَكْثَرْتُ مِنَ الْخَيْرِ وَمَا مَسَّنِيَ السُّوءُ

[fabrizioitwloch]

The Pen has only written what is to happen until the Day of Judgment as mentioned in the authentic narrations, whereas the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was also given knowledge of the affairs of the Akhirah, something beyond the scope of what's written in the Preserved Tablet. That's the answer to "min"

Secondly, it does not necessarily mean that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had all-encompassing knowledge of the ghayb. And even if we accept that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was given some knowledge of what is written in the Preserved Tablet, does that mean we have equated his knowledge with Allah's?

No, it obviously doesn't. Otherwise, we'd have to reject the hadiths which mention that the angel is ordered to write down the taqdeer of a child in the womb, because it's attributing knowledge of the future to an angel; is this not shirk then to say that the angel knows the fate of the child?

[ringtonesmannq]

Firstly, the word "Min" here is used for Tab'ieed, meaning this knowledge of the unseen is only a fraction of his total knowledge. Also, it is a general statement which means, according to him, RasoolAllah has total knowledge of these things. For it to mean partial knowledge, the author would have mentioned it.

Secondly, is what is recorded on Al-Lawh al-Mahfooth not considered to be from the Ghayb? RasoolAllah doesnt posess knowledge of the ghayb (partial or complete). This is mentioned in the Quran and in the authentic sunnah.

Here's example : وَلَوْ كُنْتُ أَعْلَمُ الْغَيْبَ لَاسْتَكْثَرْتُ مِنَ الْخَيْرِ وَمَا مَسَّنِيَ السُّوءُ

No this is your mind playing games with you e.g. in English language "If I say I know what you are thinking" that doesn't mean that I know every single thing which you think all the time or even every single thing at that moment (of me saying it) its just a phrase!"

It is the unanimous Aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamaah that NO ONE including Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) can share the divine knowledge except what Allah (SWT) permits. This is SO OBVIOUS that it doesn't need explaining in a poem.

ONLY A SALAFi with a twisted mind will believe that a Muslim can utter a poem to claim that a person including Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) will know total knowledge of the Luhw and the Qalam.

This is poetry and it "implies" that Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) shared or knew of this knowledge much more then any other human being (which is utterly true). This isn't over-exaggertaion ITS A FACT!

But since this is Poetry and requires abstinence from literal interpretation and thinking, Salafees can't grasp it.

We all believe that part of the knowledge of Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) was what Allah (SWT) choose to reveal to him (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam).

You still havn't answered the question. I know very well what "Min" means but where did you get the idea that this means total knowledge of Luh and Qalam?

[FliveGell]

The Pen has only written what is to happen until the Day of Judgment as mentioned in the authentic narrations, whereas the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was also given knowledge of the affairs of the Akhirah, something beyond the scope of what's written in the Preserved Tablet. That's the answer to "min"

The lafth was A'aam (general), meaning that he has complete knowledge of the Lawh and qalam. None of the Salaf used this term when referring to the Fadaa'il of RasoolAllah, why did Al-Busairi hundreds of years later?

Secondly, it does not necessarily mean that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had all-encompassing knowledge of the ghayb. And even if we accept that the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was given some knowledge of what is written in the Preserved Tablet, does that mean we have equated his knowledge with Allah's?

No, it obviously doesn't. Otherwise, we'd have to reject the hadiths which mention that the angel is ordered to write down the taqdeer of a child in the womb, because it's attributing knowledge of the future to an angel; is this not shirk then to say that the angel knows the fate of the child? Quantifying the amount of knowledge of the unseen that Rasoolallah had is irrelevant. The fact is, RasoolAllah has NO knowledge of the unseen. This was stated in the Quran and sunnah! Unless you can provide me evidence that states that rasoolAllah has some knowledge of the unseen, you have no argument.

[fameintatenly]

Assalam o alaykum,

This was posted earlier in of one of the thread regarding the same topic:

Imam Kawthari said in his Maqalat:

“Part of your generosity is this life and its companion (the Hereafter), and some of your knowledge is the knowledge of the Tablet and the Pen.”

"Concerning those who criticize al-Busiri for saying that the Prophet knows the science of the Tablet and the Pen: neither does all that is hidden, nor does all knowledge reside exclusively in the Tablet. Therefore the denial of the knowledge of the Unseen does not necessitate that of the knowledge of what is in the Preserved Tablet. The denial mentioned in Allahs saying: fa la yuzhiru `ala ghaybihi ahadan "He discloses unto none His Secret" (72:26) presupposes exemption of all that is excluded from "His Secret," signifying the negation of universal disclosure, not the universal application of such negation. Therefore the meaning is the negation of the knowledge of all the Unseen; not the negation of the knowledge of some of the Unseen. This was demonstrated by Sa`d Al Taftazani in Sharh al maqasid." Allamah al-Busiri's statement [may Allah have mercy on him] doesn't mean that he proves knowledge of the five things or total ilm-e-ghayb for the Prophet [Allah bless him and give him peace] as this is biddah at minimum. Also it should be kept in mind that there is exaggeration in poetry.

[FliveGell]

No this is your mind playing games with you e.g. in English language "If I say I know what you are thinking" that doesn't mean that I know every single thing which you think all the time or even every single thing at that moment (of me saying it) its just a phrase!"

Unfortunately, the English language is not a hujjah in Islamic sciences. Please do not use it in the discussion

It is the unanimous Aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamaah that NO ONE including Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) can share the divine knowledge except what Allah (SWT) permits. This is SO OBVIOUS that it doesn't need explaining in a poem.

ONLY A SALAFi with a twisted mind will believe that a Muslim can utter a poem to claim that a person including Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) will know total knowledge of the Luhw and the Qalam.

This is poetry and it "implies" that Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) shared or knew of this knowledge much more then any other human being (which is utterly true). This isn't over-exaggertaion ITS A FACT!

But since this is Poetry and requires abstinence from literal interpretation and thinking, Salafees can't grasp it.

We all believe that part of the knowledge of Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) was what Allah (SWT) choose to reveal to him (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam). Im going to ignore this Salafi/Ahl Al-Sunnah nonesense that you seem to bring up in every thread. Its completely irrelevant to the subject at hand.

You still havn't answered the question. I know very well what "Min" means but where did you get the idea that this means total knowledge of Luh and Qalam? This is not my idea. In the Arabic language, if a generalization is used (Ilm al-Allawh Walqalam), you dont assume that there are exceptions. Its hilarious to see how you people make far fetched explanations up just to justify a line of poetry! He says, among your knowledge is the knowledge of THE LAWH AND QALAm (meaning all of it).

[ringtonesmannq]

Unfortunately, the English language is not a hujjah in Islamic sciences. Please do not use it in the discussion



Im going to ignore this Salafi/Ahl Al-Sunnah nonesense that you seem to bring up in every thread. Its completely irrelevant to the subject at hand.



This is not my idea. In the Arabic language, if a generalization is used (Ilm al-Allawh Walqalam), you dont assume that there are exceptions. Its hilarious to see how you people make far fetched explanations up just to justify a line of poetry! He says, among your knowledge is the knowledge of THE LAWH AND QALAm (meaning all of it).

Brother,

The example in English serves the same purpose as in Arabic e.g. tells you how not to go down the path of literal interpretation and take linguistics into consideration which you (salafees) can't grasp for some reason.

You have STILL TO ANSWER as to who did you assume that the couplet in question means to say that the Prophet (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) knows everyting from Luh and Qalam or has independent access to it. Please give me a grammatical breakdown as to why you are assuming that?

Don't assume things and don't put your own thoughts into people's minds unless you have some evidence to back it up!

Again this is NOT Arabic langauge generalisation, this is your twisted idea and assuming the worst of Muslims (another typical Salafi trait) which is against the Sunnah as we are supposed to assume the best in a Muslim (and not the worst), give excuses and protect the dignity of a Muslim as I am sure that somewhere you must have come across this Hadeeth.

P.S: The bits in RED BOLD speaks volumes about how you actually think about other Muslims.

[FliveGell]

Brother,

The example in English serves the same purpose as in Arabic e.g. tells you how not to go down the path of literal interpretation and take linguistics into consideration which you (salafees) can't grasp for some reason.

You have STILL TO ANSWER as to who did you assume that the couplet in question means to say that the Prophet (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) knows everyting from Luh and Qalam or has independent access to it. Please give me a grammatical breakdown as to why you are assuming that?

Don't assume things and don't put your own thoughts into people's minds unless you have some evidence to back it up!

Again this is NOT Arabic langauge generalisation, this is your twisted idea and assuming the worst of Muslims (another typical Salafi trait) which is against the Sunnah as we are supposed to assume the best in a Muslim (and not the worst), give excuses and protect the dignity of a Muslim as I am sure that somewhere you must have come across this Hadeeth.

P.S: The bits in RED BOLD speaks volumes about how you actually think about other Muslims.

First of all, this is not my "twisted reasoning", but the understanding of great scholars such as Sheikh Ibn Othiameen, who was a master in the field of Arabic grammar. Since you still cannot understand the Qaa'idah that ive attempted to explain to you, lets try some examples. Maybe that will clarify things.

If I were to say: H'afitha Muhammadu Al-Qur'aan.

Would this mean that Muhammad had memorized the entire Quran, or only a part of it? When a general statement is made, it is taken just that way. You have to prove to me that it is not general, not the other way around.

[ringtonesmannq]

First of all, this is not my "twisted reasoning", but the understanding of great scholars such as Sheikh Ibn Othiameen, who was a master in the field of Arabic grammar. Since you still cannot understand the Qaa'idah that ive attempted to explain to you, lets try some examples. Maybe that will clarify things.

If I were to say: H'afitha Muhammadu Al-Qur'aan.

Would this mean that Muhammad had memorized the entire Quran, or only a part of it? When a general statement is made, it is taken just that way. You have to prove to me that it is not general, not the other way around.

Your explaination is rubbish!

It is the understanding of MANY MANY great scholars such as Shaykh Abul-Hasan Ali Nadwi (RA), Justice (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (Ex-Secretary General) Rabita Al-Islami and hundreds others around the world that Qasida Burda contains NO SHIRK!

If your Bias and bigoted nose cannot see beyond Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) [whom I respect highly by the way) and you are ignoring other scholars then NOTHING can satisfy your desires and Hawa.

When it comes to Arabic language Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) is no one compared to Shaykh Abul-Hasan Ali Nadwi (RA).

I have mentioned only two (2) scholars if you look at history then there are many many scholars who read, admired and encouraged reading of Qaseeda Burda and saw NO SHIRK in it.

As I said before, Salafi bias, bigotry, hatred and literal interpretation knows no bounds or limits and its matchless in its narrow band of Taqleed. Everytime you mention one scholar against we can give you many who are Pro-Qaseeda Burda.

So! Stick to the facts! Your mind is made up and you are trying to retro-fit your interpretation in people's heads.

You don't want to read it, don't (as I said I don't know it either) but don't twist and apply accusations of Shirk on thousands (if not millions) of Muslims (laymen and scholars alike) who read it without objection.

P.S: Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) was a great scholar and you have the right to do his Taqleed, just keep it to yourself.

[zooworms]

When it comes to Arabic language Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) is no one compared to Shaykh Abul-Hasan Ali Nadwi (RA).

"True", my 2 cents only

[ringtonesmannq]

"True", my 2 cents only

Brother,

Salafees see Shirk in someone asking for dua "To grow a Beard"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVtlSHW3DwA

So as I said in the beginning of this thread they are obsessed with finding "Shirk" in every single thing they encounter (including Tashahudd which has the Kalima in it!) and then BENT on TWISTING Qur'aan and Sunnah to justify, dupe and deceive the Ummah into thinking that majority of the Muslims are Mushriks.

Its a Jehovah’s witness like crusade and obsession

[FliveGell]

Mouad, go back to my original post on this thread, and read what I said! In the beginning of the thread, people were asking why Salafis believe that Al-Burdah contained Shirki ideas. I was simply answering their question. If you disagree with me, please be respectful in your responses. All of your writings are full of insults, and not real argument. Its getting to the point where any discussion with you becomes pointless.

Your explaination is rubbish!

Jazakallahu Khairan. It would be good if you pointed out why that is so.!

It is the understanding of MANY MANY great scholars such as Shaykh Abul-Hasan Ali Nadwi (RA), Justice (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (Ex-Secretary General) Rabita Al-Islami and hundreds others around the world that Qasida Burda contains NO SHIRK! Thise schoalrs are all Sufies. I was explaining the Salafi prespective. If there was Ijmaa' among the scholars that Al-Burdah was a shirki poem, this discussion would be over!

If your Bias and bigoted nose cannot see beyond Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) [whom I respect highly by the way) and you are ignoring other scholars then NOTHING can satisfy your desires and Hawa. Thank you for theinsults. Where are your arguments? Proofs? etc..
When it comes to Arabic language Shaykh Uthaymeen (RA) is no one compared to Shaykh Abul-Hasan Ali Nadwi (RA). Please do not belittle the status of Shiekh Ibn Othaimeen. Someone like you, who hasnt even read Al-Aajuroomiyyah, does not have the right to say what you said. Ibn Othaimeen was known for his knowledge in the field of Arabic language. Unless you can bring some sayings of specialists in the field that support what you said, your comparison carries no weight.


I have mentioned only two (2) scholars if you look at history then there are many many scholars who read, admired and encouraged reading of Qaseeda Burda and saw NO SHIRK in it. Again, two soofy scholars.


As I said before, Salafi bias, bigotry, hatred and literal interpretation knows no bounds or limits and its matchless in its narrow band of Taqleed. Everytime you mention one scholar against we can give you many who are Pro-Qaseeda Burda.

So! Stick to the facts! Your mind is made up and you are trying to retro-fit your interpretation in people's heads. Jazakallahu Khairan, again with the insults! You havent provided one argument .. in all of your posts.