[LeslieMoran]

Assalamu alaykum


My only asset is Alhamdulilah Qala Allah Wa Qala Rasoolullah. Doctor sahib. The Sufees also say "Our asset is Alhamdulilah Qala Allah Wa Qala Rasoolullah", you may not agree on that, but it is Allah SWT who is judging.

[Beatris]

Why did Ibn Taymiyah praise some Sufis? Why were so many scholars of the past - the same ones who would say Qaala Allah and Qaala Rasoolullah - ahl-e-tasawwuf?

Because some Sufis were within the bounds of the shari'ah and some who attributed themselves to Sufism were shameless zanadiqah, and there were some who were in-between this and fell somewhat into innovations and problematic things while remaining essentially correct-minded. Ibn Taymiyyah has a famous fatwa on the three groups of sufis which you can probably find with a quick google that quite amply sums up his considerations on them.

Of course, his word is not final- it is a hardly contested fact that Imam Ahmad ordered the boycott of early ascetics which Ibn Taymiyyah admired, such as al-Harith al-Muhasibi- I believe you can read an article to that effect on asharis.wordpress, wherever you can find the biography of his. The article accuses the early muhaddithin of 'intolerance-' ha!

As for your second question, is it ahl-e-tasawwuf the way you define it, the way Ibn Taymiyyah defined it, or the way Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi defined it? For the former, I haven't the slightest what your borders are, for the second, because everyone has faults and also good points and we should pick on the good points while not overlooking the faults- if they are there, and if it is the third, then nobody who defined tasawwuf the way the heretic Raza Khan did would be a great scholar of anything- aside perhaps from a how-to guide on bid'ah and heresy.

[eljugadordepoquer]

Subho Shaam Akabir nay Tasbeeh Ki
Jaahil nay unko Wahabi se tashbeeh ki,
Ishq ki meh se Wahhabi hai mehroom,
Aur Hubb e Dunya se hai dunya-e-arab baysukun,
Aao Deoband ki Mehkhano se pee-lo Jaam,
Taake Dr Ati kay Qalb ko Ayain kuch toh Araam.
Sunnat Kay Mutabiq Yeh Tasawuf Hain Hamara
Allah Allah-Ban Ja Allah Ka Pyaara
Tajdeed ka fann hain Nazuk Salika
Ifraat o Tafreet se paak humara tariqa.
Internet bhi hain salik kay liyain Ik museebat
Subho Shaam hai is mein gheebat hi gheebat

[anfuckinggs]

Subho Shaam Akabir nay Tasbeeh Ki
Moring and evening, the elders indulged in declaration of God's purity
Jaahil nay unko Wahabi se tashbeeh ki,
Ignorant accused them of being Wahhabi
Ishq ki meh se Wahhabi hai mehroom,
Wahhabis are deprived of the rain of love
Aur Hubb e Dunya se hai dunya-e-arab baysukun,
The Arab world is in turmoil due to love of this world
Aao Deoband ki Mehkhano se pee-lo Jaam,
Come and drink your glass from the taverns of Deoband
Taake Dr Ati kay Qalb ko Ayain kuch toh Araam.
Give solace to Dr Ati's heart
Sunnat Kay Mutabiq Yeh Tasawuf Hain Hamara
This mysticism of ours is according to sunnah
Allah Allah-Ban Ja Allah Ka Pyaara
Recite Allah Allah and be dear to Allah
Tajdeed ka fann hain Nazuk Salika
Dear seeker this renewing of Islam is a delicate job
Ifraat o Tafreet se paak humara tariqa.
Our Method is free of reduction or addition
Internet bhi hain salik kay liyain Ik museebat
Even internet is a trouble for the seeker
Subho Shaam hai is mein gheebat hi gheebat
From morning to evening it has backbiting

.

[larentont]

To the Shaa'ir and the Mutarjim,

[Beatris]

Subho Shaam Akabir nay Tasbeeh Ki
Jaahil nay unko Wahabi se tashbeeh ki,
Ishq ki meh se Wahhabi hai mehroom,
Aur Hubb e Dunya se hai dunya-e-arab baysukun,
Aao Deoband ki Mehkhano se pee-lo Jaam,
Taake Dr Ati kay Qalb ko Ayain kuch toh Araam.
Sunnat Kay Mutabiq Yeh Tasawuf Hain Hamara
Allah Allah-Ban Ja Allah Ka Pyaara
Tajdeed ka fann hain Nazuk Salika
Ifraat o Tafreet se paak humara tariqa.
Internet bhi hain salik kay liyain Ik museebat
Subho Shaam hai is mein gheebat hi gheebat

Tariqas: invented by persians hundreds of years after hijrah.

Free of newly invented things?

[Cemeuncex]

Dawud
I never ask question about tassawuf to a laymen (non scholarly devoid of knowledge or usul of tassawuf) or anyone who is relaxed about shariah. By the way did you get to find out about 'Firasat' and more so about Imam Ibn Taiymiah (RAH). I can bet my bottom dollar if the salafist find out ( minus his name), they would be calling him all sorts.

Dawud join us in the thread 'Why do you believe Islam is the true Religion ? ' We can use your expeirience there.


Allahualam

I never saw the quotes from ibn taimiyyah, however inshAllah I am very keen to study classical texts form scholars of the past and also teh salaf, so any qotes from ibn taimiyyah with references will be of interest to me inshAllah so please do feel to provide any quotations of ibn taimiyyah along with the place where I can find it. I would love to study his majmo al fatawa one day inshAllah, I agree with you that I will probabily get a few shocks when i read it.

Ill have a look for the thread inshAllah but got a lesson in 10mins so will have ton contribute later inshALlah. Im sure my contribution wont be any better than anyone else here though. wallahu a;lam

[Cemeuncex]

Brother dr ati, I understand tha you dont like the deobandis, but please bro, we have so much more on our plate. Look at these deviant barelwis:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...nference/page2


Its so important right now that we prioritise. Let us take care of those who are bordering on kufr and shirk rather than fighting with those who share our ideology with a few differences. Deobanid and salafis are close together bro. please akh, work on unity and work togetehr to fight the serious deviations of the likes of tahir al qadri. Please consider what im saying bro. priorities are very important inshAllah

[antipenq]

Brother dr ati, I understand tha you dont like the deobandis, but please bro, we have so much more on our plate. Look at these deviant barelwis:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...nference/page2


Its so important right now that we prioritise. Let us take care of those who are bordering on kufr and shirk rather than fighting with those who share our ideology with a few differences. Deobanid and salafis are close together bro. please akh, work on unity and work togetehr to fight the serious deviations of the likes of tahir al qadri. Please consider what im saying bro. priorities are very important inshAllah

Would the "Khudawandan e Sunniforum" be kind enough to pass my email to Akhi Dawud or his to me?

[antipenq]

Assalamu alaykum




Doctor sahib. The Sufees also say "Our asset is Alhamdulilah Qala Allah Wa Qala Rasoolullah", you may not agree on that, but it is Allah SWT who is judging.

Walaikum as sallam wr wb brother.
Thats a good point and to avoid this conflict of interpretation we have a solution. The solution is that to avoid the subjective intellect play its negative role in the interpretation of Quran and Hadith , lets freeze the conceptualization of Quran and Hadith into the understanding of Salaf. That would eradicate the dilemma of interpretation of the scriptures for personal desires or the fulfillment of preconceived notions.

[antipenq]

Why did Ibn Taymiyah praise some Sufis? Why were so many scholars of the past - the same ones who would say Qaala Allah and Qaala Rasoolullah - ahl-e-tasawwuf?

Walaikum as sallam wr wb

The brother has provided a good answer already.Where do you place Shaykh Ul Islam Rahimahullah's Takfir of Ibn Arabi (Shaykh Al Akbar of Sufis as nominated by the Deobandi Akabir) ? We agree on one thing brother that we can not assert a personality only in the light of what some people claim about him. Like we see in the case of Shias views regarding Ali Ibn Talib RadhiAllahuanhu.
We also know that exaggerated lies have historically been attributed to some people. The scholars who have been praised by Shaykh Ul Islam rahimahullah were the Mashaikh of Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaa't. They were never involved in the stuff which was attributed to them by some deviants later on. The only way to nullify what i am saying will be to provide us the books which are proved with Sahih chains to be written by them or Aqwaal of them with a Sahih chain but i am have checked it carefully , it can not be done. Why to go so far , lets pick Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jillani Al Hanbali rahimahullah. Lets judge the amount of lies attributed to him and the rational proof for it.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...adir-Al-Jilani

[delnisfernan]

Dawud
On a different topic - not this anti this and anti that thread!!
I don't think you can actually classical books unless you are fully trained in the subject. The subject I am elluding to is when 'Ibn Taimiyah warned people of Mongole hord, and what was said and why he said'. This needs explaining by a scholar who knows the science. I first didn't get it but at the hand of a capeble specialist it becomes apparent. You will miss the point if you simply read it without realising the notion of firasat and other qualities. Same was narrated by Ibn kathir about his teacher'. These are just some example. These quality still manifest!! Subhanllah. It is simply people are blind to it. Gold and dimond is hidden!! A book is being written on these. Just wait for a few years. In the mean time do not chew on things without first digesting what you are being taught.
Allahualam

[PekHyvac]

Walaikum as sallam wr wb

The brother has provided a good answer already.Where do you place Shaykh Ul Islam Rahimahullah's Takfir of Ibn Arabi (Shaykh Al Akbar of Sufis as nominated by the Deobandi Akabir) ? We agree on one thing brother that we can not assert a personality only in the light of what some people claim about him. Like we see in the case of Shias views regarding Ali Ibn Talib RadhiAllahuanhu.
We also know that exaggerated lies have historically been attributed to some people. The scholars who have been praised by Shaykh Ul Islam rahimahullah were the Mashaikh of Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaa't. They were never involved in the stuff which was attributed to them by some deviants later on. The only way to nullify what i am saying will be to provide us the books which are proved with Sahih chains to be written by them or Aqwaal of them with a Sahih chain but i am have checked it carefully , it can not be done. Why to go so far , lets pick Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jillani Al Hanbali rahimahullah. Lets judge the amount of lies attributed to him and the rational proof for it.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...adir-Al-Jilani

What does the takfir of Ibn Taymiyah prove? There is takfir by Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi of Deobandis but many Deobandis do not respond in kind to Barelwis. And why bring up the bullet points of Barelwis and disprove them when Deobandis accept that there are lies attributed to him? And yet, they still see him as a Sufi shaykh, initiator of the Qadri order. There are lies attributed to glorious ulama of the past, that is true, but how do they negate that they were mutasawwifoon?

[antipenq]

What does the takfir of Ibn Taymiyah prove? There is takfir by Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi of Deobandis but many Deobandis do not respond in kind to Barelwis. And why bring up the bullet points of Barelwis and disprove them when Deobandis accept that there are lies attributed to him? And yet, they still see him as a Sufi shaykh, initiator of the Qadri order. There are lies attributed to glorious ulama of the past, that is true, but how do they negate that they were mutasawwifoon?

An appeal to authority was made earlier in this thread (not every appeal to authority is a logical fallacy) so i mentioned the Takfeer of Ibn Al-Arani by Shaykh Ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah ( Imam Dhahabi , Ibn Kathir , Ibn Qayyum , Ibn Rajjab and many more prominent scholars have done the Takfeer of Ibn Al Arabi so that substantiates the Takfeer done by Ibn Taymiyyah). We both understand the difference between Shaykh Ul Islam rahimahullah and Ahmed Raza khan Barelvi so i don't think that was a good analogy. We both agree that those personalities were upright scholars of Ahli Sunnah Wal Jammat however you are adding the word "mutasawwifoon" to their names and character so you are making a positive claim and hence the burden of proof is on you brother. Why do you think that they were Sufis (A definition of Sufi here would be appreciated as well)? Or what was that something which was found additionally in these scholars which was not found in the non sufi scholars?

[Cemeuncex]

(Read this article and link it to the ill defined word "sufi")

http://www.burg.com/2010/03/define-y...nderstandings/


How often does an argument ensue and hurt feelings result from an exchange of well-intentioned, or even neutral (i.e., information-type) words when, with a little bit of thought, clarification and definition, such misunderstandings, unhappiness and even resentment could easily be avoided?

Example: Pat tells you the party tonight begins at 7:30, “dressy-casual” and it won’t be that crowded. Good thing, especially that last part, because you don’t like crowds.

You arrive at 7:30 on the dot. Pat hasn’t arrived yet, most of the people there are dressed much more formally than you are, and there are a lot more people than you expected. When Pat finally arrives at 7:45, you voice your displeasure.

“Pat, you’re 15 minutes late and I don’t know anyone here, which makes me very uncomfortable. I feel way underdressed. I thought you said ‘dressy-casual.’ And, I would definitely call this a crowd.”

Genuinely surprised and confused, Pat responds, “What are you talking about? I meant ‘around’ 7:30. What’s the big deal? And dressy-casual means more dressy than casual – just not formal. ‘Everyone’ knows that. And you think this is a crowd?”

An exaggerated example, to be sure, but still somewhat typical, right? Both of you are correct and, then again, incorrect…that is, depending upon your viewpoints and belief systems regarding the terms, “7:30″, “dressy-casual” and “crowd.”

Both of you have different meanings for each of those three terms. You know what you mean. And, you naturally assume Pat’s concept/definition of those terms are the same as yours. The same holds true for Pat. In other words, you both believe you are “speaking the same language” but you’re not. And, neither of you knows you are not. You “don’t know that you don’t know.”

Now imagine you need to converse with someone who speaks an entirely different language (not metaphorically such as “Mars and Venus” or “personality profiles” but, again, literally another language). How difficult it would be to get your point across! Universally recognized smiles aside, after that, you’ve still got to be able to communicate the words that will result in the appropriate understanding.

The one advantage here over the previous conversation is that AT LEAST YOU BOTH KNOW you’re not speaking the same language. You “know that you don’t know.”

When you think about it, the first conversation we looked at is actually more dangerous and fraught with more potential confusion. Why? Because we all walk around believing that we’re communicating when, in actuality, we often are not.

The solution, and the way to avoid misunderstanding, is to make sure you “define your terms.” And, make sure the other person does so as well.

Why? Two reasons: first, because when we define our terms, we have clarity – we know what we are saying. Secondly, the other person knows what we are saying. When we insist (politely, of course) that they do the same, we have extra clarity and understanding. And, so do they.

Example: “Pat, just for my own clarification, when you say it won’t be that crowded, about how many people are expected to attend?” or, “I’m just thinking, in case our concepts of dressy-casual are different, what do you see as being appropriate attire?”

(By the way, the phrases “for my own clarification” and “I’m just thinking” are known as “softeners” – polite lead-ins to your question which soften any type of perceived coarseness.)

So, make sure of two things: One, that you define your terms (what do you yourself mean by “7:30, crowded, and dressy-casual”?) and two, know exactly what “Pat” means by “7:30, crowded, and dressy-casual”. When you remember to do this, misunderstandings, which can result in negative feelings, will be much less likely to occur.

[CaseyFronczek]

The reason for me posting the article was to show the deobandi brothers that the barelwis are their real enemies SubhanAllah! You are admitting an intention to cause division?

[Cemeuncex]

SubhanAllah! You are admitting an intention to cause division?

I am definitely hoping to cause division between barelwis and deobandis/salafis and I am also hoping salafis and deobandis can unite inshAllah.

Why would I want any sort of unity with people like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvVEb...eature=related

[Cemeuncex]

I am definitely hoping to cause division between barelwis and deobandis/salafis and I am also hoping salafis and deobandis can unite inshAllah.

Why would I want any sort of unity with people like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvVEb...eature=related

the weird thing is, they actually recorded it and put it on teh internet, like they think this is something good

[Cemeuncex]

barelwis are like the muslim version of these guys:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtVGx...eature=related

[TEFSADDERFISA]

Oh Look its Br Dawud with another barelwi bashing thread...yawn...