what are the main deobandi beliefs regarding the prophet muhammad s.a.w?

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

what are the main deobandi beliefs regarding the prophet muhammad s.a.w?

jazakallah

[Badrud_Duja]

Is the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wasalaam) Hazir Nazir?

It is incorrect to believe that the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wasalaam) has the ability to be present everywhere. Rather, Allah (Subhanah WaTa’ala) is the only One who has the ability to witness all things at one time. To believe the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) is Hazir Nazir is completely disrespectful to Allah (Subhanah WaTa’ala) and the Prophet (SaAllahu Alahi Wassalaam).

For example, some have the belief that the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) actually attends gatherings where Durood is recited upon him Rather, the correct belief is that the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) is informed of our actions and Salaams are conveyed to him through angels, not that he actually comes to the gatherings. It is mentioned in Hadith by the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam)

حدثنا محمد بن يوسف ثنا سفيان عن عبد الله بن السائب عن زاذان عن عبد الله بن مسعود قال قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم : ان لله ملائكة سياحين في الأرض يبلغوني عن أمتي السلام (سنن الدارمي 2/409؛ عربي)

The Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) said: “Verily, Allah has angels that travel the Earth and convey my Ummah’s salutations to me” (al-Darami)



عن ابن مسعود أيضا عن النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم قال: (حياتي خير لكم تحدثون ويحدث لكم ووفاتي خير لكم تعرض علي أعمالكم فما رأيت من خير حمدت الله وما رأيت من شر استغفرت الله لكم) رواه البزار بإسناد جوده الحافظ العراقي وصححه الحافظ الهيثمي والجلال السيوطي والشهاب القسطلاني (الأحاديث المنتقاة، ص 91؛ جوامع الكلم)

The Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) said: "My life is good for you [since] you commit acts and its verdicts are given to you [through me]. And my death is [also] good for you [since] your deeds are presented to me. I praise Allāh for the good I see and I ask Him for your forgiveness for the evil I see" (al-Ahādīth al-Muntaqāh)

These two Ahadith clearly show that our Salaams and actions are presented to the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) through angels, not that he actually comes to the gatherings. Therefore, it will be incorrect to believe that the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) is Hazir Nazir.



Is the Prophet (SaAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) Alim ul-Ghayb?


The Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) was given knowledge of many things of the unseen, yet his knowledge was still limited. The ability to have complete knowledge of everything is the characteristic of Allah (Subhanah WaTa’ala) alone and no one else. This is proven through many Ayaat of the Quran a few of them are as follows:



قُل لاَّ يَعْلَمُ مَن فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ الْغَيْبَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ (النمل: 65)

Say: “None in the Heavens and the earth knows the Ghayb (Unseen) except Allah” (Quran 27: 65)



قُل لاَّ أَقُولُ لَكُمْ عِندِي خَزَآئِنُ اللَّهِ وَلا أَعْلَمُ الْغَيْبَ(الانعام: 50)

Say (O Muhammad SalAllahu Alahi Wassalam): I do not tell that with me are the treasures of Allah, nor (that) I know the Unseen (Quran 6: 50)



قُل لاَّ أَمْلِكُ لِنَفْسِي نَفْعًا وَلاَ ضَرًّا إِلاَّ مَا شَاء اللَّهُ وَلَوْ كُنتُ أَعْلَمُ الْغَيْبَ لاَسْتَكْثَرْتُ مِنَ الْخَيْرِ وَمَا مَسَّنِيَ السُّوءُ(الاعراف:188)

Say (O Muhammad SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam): “I possess no power over benefit or hurt to myself except as Allah wills. If I had the knowledge of the Ghayb (Unseen), I should have secured for myself an abundance of wealth, and no evil should have touched me. (Quran 7: 188)



وَعِندَهُ مَفَاتِحُ الْغَيْبِ لاَ يَعْلَمُهَا إِلاَّ هُوَ(الانعام: 59)

And with Him (Allah) are the keys of the Ghayb (all that is hidden), none knows them but He (Allah). (Quran 6: 59)



Clearly, these aayaat prove that no one other than Allah (Subhana WaTa’ala) has the knowledge of the Ghayb. Furthermore, in one incident, Aishah (Radhi Allahu Anhaa) was falsely accused of indecency and, thus, the Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) was worried for a long period of time. Until Allah (Subhanah WaTa’ala) sent down the Wahy to inform him of the truth. If he was knowledgeable of the Ghayb, then he would have known the reality of the situation. Many other instances, besides this one, have clearly shown that the beloved Prophet (SalAllahu Alahi Wassalaam) did not have knowledge of the Ghayb.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

brother

you sound a very knowledgable person, moulana you probably know that when a mother is preganant angels come and turn the child from one side to the other, allah dosent do this himself angels do this, does this astagfirullah mean that allah is not haazir and naazir no it dosent the same principle applies with the prophet muhammad s.a.w the fact that angels listen to the durood is proof of how beloved the prophet muhammad s.a.w is to allah and all other makhlooqat, that is why angels are commanded by allah to convey the durood to the prophet themselves.

brother regarding ilm e ghaib , the difference between the ilm e ghaib of the prophet muhammad s.a.w and allah is that
the prophet ilm e ghaib is given by allah whereas allah ilm is not given by no one
the prophet muhammad s.a.w ilm e ghaib can be further developed whereas allah subhanahuwataala ilm e ghaib is complete

brother you mentioned a hadith regarding aishah radiallah hu anha, the fact is that prophet muhammad s.a.w new the truth but there was hikmah behind this as they is hikmah behind everything that the prophet muhammad s.a.w does,
moulana every deobandi alim i speak to brings up the aishah r.a incident but i think to myself what about the hundreds of other hadith that prove that the prophet s.a.w does have ilm e ghaib such as when the prophet s.a.w told hazrat umar r.a and hazrat ali r.a about hazrat awais qarni r.a, he mentioned all the signs and the way he r.a looked when he hadnt even met him, the fcat that he told hazrat umar r.a and hazrat ali proves that he had knowledge of the unseen as he never told hazrat abu bkar or hazrat uthman because he knew that they would never meet him, there are many more evidences , you know better as you are a alim

jazakallah khair

[Badrud_Duja]

I'm not a maulana, I've just got the answers to your questions from the askimam website run by Mufti Ibrahim Desai of South Africa.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

ok brother have you got any answers to my last post

jazakallah

[Badrud_Duja]

If Rasulullah (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) is present everywhere and he sees and knows everything, then on the day of judgement why will it be said to him “You do not know what they had done after you.”? (See: Bukhari, hadith 4259)

[abuhajira]

brother

you sound a very knowledgable person, moulana you probably know that when a mother is preganant angels come and turn the child from one side to the other, allah dosent do this himself angels do this, does this astagfirullah mean that allah is not haazir and naazir no it dosent the same principle applies with the prophet muhammad s.a.w the fact that angels listen to the durood is proof of how beloved the prophet muhammad s.a.w is to allah and all other makhlooqat, that is why angels are commanded by allah to convey the durood to the prophet themselves.


:salam:

The contention in the above issue is that with regards to Durood we have ahadeeth which prove it. While in relation to Istimdad there is no substantiation. In most cases the istidlaal is very stretchy.


brother regarding ilm e ghaib , the difference between the ilm e ghaib of the prophet muhammad s.a.w and allah is that
the prophet ilm e ghaib is given by allah whereas allah ilm is not given by no one


Ilmul Ghaib is a specific quality of Allah. This quality is something Allah has made himself distinct with Himself in the Quran. If it is not, then we would require Sareeh ahadeeth which will establish otherwise.


the prophet muhammad s.a.w ilm e ghaib can be further developed whereas allah subhanahuwataala ilm e ghaib is complete

"Ilmul Ghaib" term is specifically encompassing of all knowledge of everything. That is the general connotation of Ilm in this term. Hence its attribution to someone establishes its completeness for that mausoof. The whole dispute in the two camps if whether this knowledge of Rasulullah :saw: is complete or incomplete. If it is incomplete then having incomplete knowledge is no special quality. Everyone one has partial knowledge. In this case even the deobandies believe that Rasulullah :saw: has the greatest of knowledge in the makhluq.


brother you mentioned a hadith regarding aishah radiallah hu anha, the fact is that prophet muhammad s.a.w new the truth but there was hikmah behind this as they is hikmah behind everything that the prophet muhammad s.a.w does,


Isnt this hikma argument taken from the shias who say that Sayiduna Ali r.a knew all along that the selection of Sayiduna Abu Bakr r.a, Sayiduna Umar r.a, and Sayiduna Uthman r.a was incorrect but due to hikmah he never disclosed. The same is said by those ghaali shias who say Sayiduna Ali r.a practiced this hikma in hiding the mistake of Gibraeel a.s of taking Nabuwah to Rasulullah :saw: instead of Sayiduna Ali r.a.

In anycase, it does not befit a Nabi to make kitmaan (conceal) the truth in this manner. To even suggest this as a response there has to be some substantiation from Sareeh evidences.


moulana every deobandi alim i speak to brings up the aishah r.a incident but i think to myself what about the hundreds of other hadith that prove that the prophet s.a.w does have ilm e ghaib such as when the prophet s.a.w told hazrat umar r.a and hazrat ali r.a about hazrat awais qarni r.a, he mentioned all the signs and the way he r.a looked when he hadnt even met him, the fcat that he told hazrat umar r.a and hazrat ali proves that he had knowledge of the unseen as he never told hazrat abu bkar or hazrat uthman because he knew that they would never meet him, there are many more evidences , you know better as you are a alim

jazakallah khair

This is also lack of understanding of the mas'ala. No deobandi has denied that Rasulullah :saw: doesnt have knowledge from the ghaib. After all he is a nabi. A nabi is someone who give information from the ghaib which is revealed onto him. So obviously he had been given some knowledge of the ghaib. The issue is whether he was given complete knowledge or not. If you say that he was given complete knowledge, then to disprove that stance all we need is to present ONE incident which shows sarahatan that he did not know of something. affirmation of one such incidents disproved of Ilmul kull.

Secondly such snippets from the ghaib as you mentioned in the example is disgracing Rasulullah :saw: status since even Umar r.a exclaimed on the pulpet to the army about the enemy behind the mountain. If such kashf could be given to Sahabi, then badaraja oola Nabi is entitled to them. Having said that no one here denies that Allah gives knowledge from ghaib to Rasulullah :saw:.

Under the same chapter we also have the ayah which mentions that non has the keys to the ghuyub:



{وَعِنْدَهُ مَفَاتِحُ الْغَيْبِ لَا يَعْلَمُهَا إِلَّا هُوَ وَيَعْلَمُ مَا فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ وَمَا تَسْقُطُ مِنْ وَرَقَةٍ إِلَّا يَعْلَمُهَا وَلَا حَبَّةٍ فِي ظُلُمَاتِ الْأَرْضِ وَلَا رَطْبٍ وَلَا يَابِسٍ إِلَّا فِي كِتَابٍ مُبِينٍ} [الأنعام: 59]

This is the same Mafateeh Ghaib which Rasulullah :saw: mentions


4627 - حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ العَزِيزِ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، حَدَّثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ سَالِمِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ: " {مَفَاتِحُ الغَيْبِ} [الأنعام: 59] خَمْسٌ: (إِنَّ اللَّهَ عِنْدَهُ عِلْمُ السَّاعَةِ وَيُنْزِلُ الغَيْثَ وَيَعْلَمُ مَا فِي الأَرْحَامِ وَمَا تَدْرِي نَفْسٌ مَاذَا تَكْسِبُ غَدًا وَمَا تَدْرِي نَفْسٌ بِأَيِّ أَرْضٍ تَمُوتُ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ) "
[صحيح البخاري 6/ 56]

and then Hazrat Ayesha r.a mentions in Sahih Muslim


وَمَنْ زَعَمَ أَنَّهُ يُخْبِرُ بِمَا يَكُونُ فِي غَدٍ، فَقَدْ أَعْظَمَ عَلَى اللهِ الْفِرْيَةَ، وَاللهُ يَقُولُ: {قُلْ لَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ الْغَيْبَ إِلَّا اللهُ} [النمل: 65]
[صحيح مسلم 1/ 159]



:ws:

[yousaf21]

Brother, You were talking about 'moulana'

Abuhajira is one .

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

brother do you beleive that the prophet s.a.w did have ilm e ghaib but not the same level as allah if yes than there is no argument, secondly if the prophet s.a.w is not hazir and nazzir then in surah ahzaab it says 'we have sent you as a witness and a bringer of good tidings and a warner' a witness is only a witness if he is haazir and naazir, in relation to what you said can you pls explain breifly and simply.

thirdly are you saying that any chracteristic that the sahaba have and the prophet s.a.w has is disrespect to both

ps reply in simple terms i am a begineer

jazakallah moulana

[abuhajira]

brother do you beleive that the prophet s.a.w did have ilm e ghaib but not the same level as allah if yes than there is no argument, secondly if the prophet s.a.w is not hazir and nazzir then in surah ahzaab it says 'we have sent you as a witness and a bringer of good tidings and a warner' a witness is only a witness if he is haazir and naazir, in relation to what you said can you pls explain breifly and simply.

thirdly are you saying that any chracteristic that the sahaba have and the prophet s.a.w has is disrespect to both

ps reply in simple terms i am a begineer

jazakallah moulana

:salam:

inshALlah I hope another brother will go ahead since its getting late tonight and tomorrow is a long day for me. I will mention this much for now insha'Allah.

a. With regards to Ilmul Ghaib, please read arguments on both sides. What you have mentioned above does not approve to qualify for the title of "Alimul Ghaib". The ayaat of quran are clear on who is proper aalimul ghaib so why do we need to call nabi :saw: alimul ghaib?
b. Surah Ahzaab does call Nabi :saw: Shaahid. But if that is the argument, then we will have to say that Hazrat Musa A.S is ALSO Haazir wa Naazir since Allah brough him in the like statement in Surah Muzammil when Allah called Rasulullah to be Shaahid. Merely using the term does not mean that now we start attributing such qualities.


{إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَا إِلَيْكُمْ رَسُولًا شَاهِدًا عَلَيْكُمْ كَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا إِلَى فِرْعَوْنَ رَسُولًا} [المزمل: 15]

Verily, We have sent to you (O men) a Messenger (Muhammad SAW) to be a witness over you, as We did send a Messenger [Musa (Moses)] to Fir'aun (Pharaoh)

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

brother we are talking about prophet muhammad s.a.w and if yopu beleive that he s.a.w is haazir and naazir aswell as prophet musa alayisalam than that is upto you, can u please tell me what it does say in surah ahzaab if it does not say shahidanwamubashirawwanadhira.

brother you have said that it says in the quran that the ilm e ghaib is only for allah. pls read the ayah's below and comment

Proof from the Qur’an that the Prophet Muhammad [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] has been given the knowledge of Ghayb

Allah says in the Qur’an,

“These are the tidings of Unseen that We reveal to you in secret”.

Surah-Ale-Imran, verse 44.

“Nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen. But He chooses of His Apostles (For the purpose)”

Surah-Ale-Imran, verse 179.

“The Knower of Unseen reveals not His secret to anyone. Except to His chosen Messengers”.

Surah-Al-Jinn, verse 26.

“…Allah has sent down to you the Book and Wisdom and has taught to you what you did not know, and great is the grace of Allah upon you.”

Surah Al-Nisa, Verse 113.

Imam Tabari writes under this verse:

Allah TA’ALA has told the Prophet (May Allah bless him and grant him peace), you must thank Allah TA’ALA Who has informed you of what has already happened and what will happen in the future and this is a great grace of Allah upon you.

(Tafsir Tabari under verse 113 of Surah Al-Nisa).

The above Qur’anic verses prove that Allah TA’ALA has given Muhammad (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) the knowledge of the Ghayb.


pls comment on this tommorrow and take care brother

jazakallah

asalamualikum

[abuhajira]

brother we are talking about prophet muhammad s.a.w and if yopu beleive that he s.a.w is haazir and naazir aswell as prophet musa alayisalam than that is upto you, can u please tell me what it does say in surah ahzaab if it does not say shahidanwamubashirawwanadhira.

brother you have said that it says in the quran that the ilm e ghaib is only for allah. pls read the ayah's below and comment

Proof from the Qur’an that the Prophet Muhammad [May Allah bless him and grant him peace] has been given the knowledge of Ghayb

Allah says in the Qur’an,

“These are the tidings of Unseen that We reveal to you in secret”.

Surah-Ale-Imran, verse 44.

“Nor will He disclose to you the secrets of the Unseen. But He chooses of His Apostles (For the purpose)”

Surah-Ale-Imran, verse 179.

“The Knower of Unseen reveals not His secret to anyone. Except to His chosen Messengers”.

Surah-Al-Jinn, verse 26.

“…Allah has sent down to you the Book and Wisdom and has taught to you what you did not know, and great is the grace of Allah upon you.”

Surah Al-Nisa, Verse 113.

Imam Tabari writes under this verse:

Allah TA’ALA has told the Prophet (May Allah bless him and grant him peace), you must thank Allah TA’ALA Who has informed you of what has already happened and what will happen in the future and this is a great grace of Allah upon you.

(Tafsir Tabari under verse 113 of Surah Al-Nisa).

The above Qur’anic verses prove that Allah TA’ALA has given Muhammad (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) the knowledge of the Ghayb.


pls comment on this tommorrow and take care brother

jazakallah

asalamualikum

:salam:

please read my response to you in the other thread.

also do search it up. The issue was recently (a month or so ago) discussed for perhaps 15th time on SF

:ws:

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

brother you seem to be brushing me off, i am openminded i want to know the truth regardless if it is deobandi etc you are a scholar you shouldnt be tired of discussing anything even if it means discussing evrysingle day so pls tell me what you think about the ayahs pls

jazakallah

[abuhajira]

brother you seem to be brushing me off, i am openminded i want to know the truth regardless if it is deobandi etc you are a scholar you shouldnt be tired of discussing anything even if it means discussing evrysingle day so pls tell me what you think about the ayahs pls

jazakallah

:salam:

InshAllah I will engage you.. but in my freetime. At this moment I can only give you these advices. There is no fruit is a fruitless argument. Hence we advise towards fruitfull issues.

:ws:

[irfan@tabligh]

these quotes that you have used brother are only that which allah has revealed tot he prophet, they dont prove that hes ilm e ghaib. The ayats that the brothers have given you are clealrey saying that ilm e ghaib is only with allah, only some knowledge of the unseen has allah given the prohet muhamad s.a.w, if prophet did have the knowlegde of the unseen, then why did he not predict the death of his uncle or that of umar etc etc

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

why do deobandis try to find ways that makes the status of the prohet s.a.w lower than it is. you disagree that the prophet is haazir and naazir, you say has ilm e ghayb than anyone can have etc. why??

and what is your belief on noor or bashr?

jazakallah

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

these quotes that you have used brother are only that which allah has revealed tot he prophet, they dont prove that hes ilm e ghaib. The ayats that the brothers have given you are clealrey saying that ilm e ghaib is only with allah, only some knowledge of the unseen has allah given the prohet muhamad s.a.w, if prophet did have the knowlegde of the unseen, then why did he not predict the death of his uncle or that of umar etc etc

brother these ayahs clearly state that allah has given ilm e ghaib to muhammad s.a.w. the brailvis agree that this is not like the ilm e ghaib like allah it is different as it is can be further developed and it is given from allah,

brother do you agree that prophet muhammad s.a.w has ilm e ghaib but not the same level as allah.

[irfan@tabligh]

The deobandis dont decrease the status of the prophet but keep it the same as it was in his time, its jsut a shame ahmed raza khan had deviant beliefs and views and the prophet is bashr Say O Prophet of ALLAH ! : I am but a man like yourselves, (but) the inspiration has come to me, that your God is One God : whoever expects to meet his Lord,let him work righteousness, and, in the worship of his Lord, admit no one as partner [Surah Al-Kahf verse:110]

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

brother this ayah you have quoted i would like to elaborate: the reason why allah told the prophet s.a.w to say this was because the prophets who came before were mistakenly taken as god as when one person done the hifz of the towrah they claimed he was god, when isa alayhislam cured people from blindness some people made him god some made him son of god, because of this allah told the prophet s.a.w to say this so people do not mistake him as a god or son of god.

brother bashara also means skin in arabic so if we take this meansing we see that the profit s.a.w skin is like bashr but in truth inside he s.a.w is noor. that is why the prophet s.a.w could fast for long periods and when asked how he said allah feeds me , the ulama have said that he did not used to get fed he used to see allah and do ziyarah of allah and in this status his thirst and hunger would go

this is the true meaning of this ayah it is a shame that ashraf ali thanvi belives that prophet muhammad s.a.w is an ordinary man just like himself astagfirullah

[Sulaiman84]

this is the true meaning of this ayah it is a shame that ashraf ali thanvi belives that prophet muhammad s.a.w is an ordinary man just like himself astagfirullah

You were doing so nice with your rhetorical questions until now. Try sticking to explaining your beliefs before getting into slinging mud.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

brother people are calling imam brailvi r.a a deviant and you are getting angry at what i say, why dont you try to bringing proof and actually contrbute instead of just saying something irrelevant and going away

[irfan@tabligh]

if he is noor, then that means imam hanbal is noor seen as he could taken the whipping recieved from the evil king at his time when he was only 90 years of age, or bilal radialla ho anho is noor seen as he could handle being dragged over the sand of the scorching sands of arabia and when he said allah feeds me he meant allah sustains me, that does not mean he is noor, Also it is known that Prophet Muhammad once in his delivering the call of Islam, was hit and blood came out of him. And in the battle of Badr prophet Muhammad’s tooth broke, and once Prophet Muhammad was hit by a spear, the rings of his shield went through his chest. A companion came a took them out by his mouth. While taking them out, his tooth broke. After that, that companion looked much more handsome, Subhanallah.

[abdulwahhab]

brother people are calling imam brailvi r.a a deviant and you are getting angry at what i say, why dont you try to bringing proof and actually contrbute instead of just saying something irrelevant and going away

Your Imam Barelvi made takfeer of ulama of deen and he held some beliefs that make him outside the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama'ah.

[abuhajira]

brother this ayah you have quoted i would like to elaborate: the reason why allah told the prophet s.a.w to say this was because the prophets who came before were mistakenly taken as god as when one person done the hifz of the towrah they claimed he was god, when isa alayhislam cured people from blindness some people made him god some made him son of god, because of this allah told the prophet s.a.w to say this so people do not mistake him as a god or son of god.

brother bashara also means skin in arabic so if we take this meansing we see that the profit s.a.w skin is like bashr but in truth inside he s.a.w is noor. that is why the prophet s.a.w could fast for long periods and when asked how he said allah feeds me , the ulama have said that he did not used to get fed he used to see allah and do ziyarah of allah and in this status his thirst and hunger would go

this is the true meaning of this ayah it is a shame that ashraf ali thanvi belives that prophet muhammad s.a.w is an ordinary man just like himself astagfirullah

:salam:

Its funny that you give explanation to this ayah brother. This is what Ibn Katheer mentions about إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ



{قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُوحَى إِلَيَّ أَنَّمَا إِلَهُكُمْ إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ فَمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو لِقَاءَ رَبِّهِ فَلْيَعْمَلْ عَمَلا صَالِحًا وَلا يُشْرِكْ بِعِبَادَةِ رَبِّهِ أَحَدًا (110) } .
رَوَى الطَّبَرَانِيُّ مِنْ طَرِيقِ هِشَامِ بْنِ عَمَّارٍ، عَنْ إِسْمَاعِيلَ بْنِ عَيَّاشٍ، عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ قَيْسٍ الْكُوفِيِّ، أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ مُعَاوِيَةَ بْنَ أَبِي سُفْيَانَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: هَذِهِ آخِرُ آيَةٍ أُنْزِلَتْ (6) .
يَقُولُ لِرَسُولِهِ مُحَمَّدٍ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ (7) : {قُلْ} لِهَؤُلَاءِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ الْمُكَذِّبِينَ بِرِسَالَتِكَ إِلَيْهِمْ: {إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ} فَمَنْ زَعَمَ (8) أَنِّي كَاذِبٌ، فَلْيَأْتِ بِمِثْلِ مَا جِئْتُ بِهِ، فَإِنِّي لَا أَعْلَمُ الْغَيْبَ فِيمَا (9) أَخْبَرْتُكُمْ بِهِ مِنَ الْمَاضِي، عَمَّا سَأَلْتُمْ مِنْ قِصَّةِ أَصْحَابِ الْكَهْفِ، وَخَبَرِ ذِي الْقَرْنَيْنِ، مِمَّا هُوَ مُطَابِقٌ (10) فِي نَفْسِ الْأَمْرِ، لَوْلَا مَا أَطْلَعَنِي اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ
[تفسير ابن كثير ت سلامة 5/ 205]

Allah says to His Messenger Muhammad ,
﴿قُلْ﴾
(Say) to these idolators who reject your message to them,
﴿إِنَّمَآ أَنَاْ بَشَرٌ مِّثْلُكُمْ﴾
(`I am only a man like you.) Whoever claims that I am lying, let him bring something like this that I have brought. For I did not know the Unseen, the matters of the past which you asked me about and I told you about, the story of the people of the Cave and of Dhul-Qarnayn, stories which are true -- I did not know any of this except for what Allah made known to me.

Some other tafaseer are :



{قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُوحَى إِلَيَّ أَنَّمَا إِلَهُكُمْ إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ فَمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو لِقَاءَ رَبِّهِ فَلْيَعْمَلْ عَمَلا صَالِحًا وَلا يُشْرِكْ بِعِبَادَةِ رَبِّهِ أَحَدًا (110) }
يقول تعالى ذكره: قل لهؤلاء المشركين يا محمد: إنما أنا بشر مثلكم من بني آدم لا علم لي إلا ما علمني الله وإن الله يوحي إليّ أن معبودكم الذي يجب عليكم أن تعبدوه ولا تشركوا به شيئا، معبود واحد لا ثاني له، ولا شريك
[تفسير الطبري = جامع البيان ت شاكر 18/ 135]

قُلْ إِنَّما أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُوحى إِلَيَّ أَنَّما إِلهُكُمْ إِلهٌ واحِدٌ، قَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ: عَلَّمَ اللَّهُ رَسُولَهُ التَّوَاضُعَ لِئَلَّا يَزْهُوَ عَلَى خَلْقِهِ، فَأَمَرَهُ أَنْ يُقِرَّ فَيَقُولَ: «إِنِّي آدَمِيٌّ مِثْلُكُمْ إِلَّا أَنِّي خُصِّصْتُ بِالْوَحْيِ وَأَكْرَمَنِي اللَّهُ بِهِ، يُوحَى إِلَيَّ أَنَّمَا إِلَهُكُمْ إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ لَا شَرِيكَ لَهُ»
[تفسير البغوي - إحياء التراث 3/ 222]

قُلْ إِنَّما أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ لا أدعي الإِحاطة على كلماته. يُوحى إِلَيَّ أَنَّما إِلهُكُمْ إِلهٌ واحِدٌ وإنما تميزت عنكم بذلك
[تفسير البيضاوي = أنوار التنزيل وأسرار التأويل 3/ 295]

{قُلْ إنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَر} آدَمِيّ
[تفسير الجلالين ص: 396]

قُلْ إِنَّما أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُوحى إِلَيَّ أَنَّما إِلهُكُمْ إِلهٌ واحِدٌ إشارة إلى جهة مشاركته صلّى الله عليه وسلّم للناس وجهة امتيازه ولولا تلك المشاركة ما حصلت الإفاضة ولولا ذلك الامتياز ما حصلت الاستفاضة
[تفسير الألوسي = روح المعاني 8/ 375]

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

if he is noor, then that means imam hanbal is noor seen as he could taken the whipping recieved from the evil king at his time when he was only 90 years of age, or bilal radialla ho anho is noor seen as he could handle being dragged over the sand of the scorching sands of arabia and when he said allah feeds me he meant allah sustains me, that does not mean he is noor, Also it is known that Prophet Muhammad once in his delivering the call of Islam, was hit and blood came out of him. And in the battle of Badr prophet Muhammad’s tooth broke, and once Prophet Muhammad was hit by a spear, the rings of his shield went through his chest. A companion came a took them out by his mouth. While taking them out, his tooth broke. After that, that companion looked much more handsome, Subhanallah.

brother everything you said there does not prove he s.a.w is not noor.

Imam Tirmidhi wrote that when Prophet (May Allah bless him and grant him peace) smiled, it seemed as if Noor was coming from his teeth.

(Chap on Shamaa’il Tirmidhi)

Allah Ta’ala says in the Holy Qur’an.

“Undoubtedly, there has come to you from Allah a light and a Book, luminous ”.

(Surah Al-‘Mai’dah’ Verse 15).

Imam Tabari and Qadi Shawkani write under this verse that the meaning of Noor in this verse is used for our Prophet Sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam as Zujaag said.

[Tafsir Tabari Tafsir Fathul Qadeer By Imam Tabari and Qadi Shawkani, under above verse]

From the above evidence we conclude that it is permissible to call Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace] “Noor” and it is not Kufr or Shirk as some people consider ir to

this is from alahazrat.net

[abuhajira]

Allah Ta’ala says in the Holy Qur’an.

“Undoubtedly, there has come to you from Allah a light and a Book, luminous ”.

(Surah Al-‘Mai’dah’ Verse 15).

Imam Tabari and Qadi Shawkani write under this verse that the meaning of Noor in this verse is used for our Prophet Sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam as Zujaag said.

[Tafsir Tabari Tafsir Fathul Qadeer By Imam Tabari and Qadi Shawkani, under above verse]

:salam: This is what Imam Tabari starts off with under this ayah..



القول في تأويل قوله عز ذكره: {قَدْ جَاءَكُمْ مِنَ اللَّهِ نُورٌ وَكِتَابٌ مُبِينٌ (15) }
قال أبو جعفر: يقول جل ثناؤه لهؤلاء الذين خاطبهم من أهل الكتاب:"قد جاءكم"، يا أهل التوراة والإنجيل="من الله نور"، يعني بالنور، محمدًا صلى الله عليه وسلم الذي أنار الله به الحقَّ، وأظهر به الإسلام، ومحق به الشرك، فهو نور لمن استنار به يبيِّن الحق. ومن إنارته الحق، تبيينُه لليهود كثيرًا مما كانوا يخفون من الكتاب
[تفسير الطبري = جامع البيان ت شاكر 10/ 143]

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

pls elaborate and explain in english i am not of the same level as you pls transalate with truth

[irfan@tabligh]

noor just means light or radiance, how does the prohpet having clean teeth prove that hes noor, and in the quranic ayat the word light means guidance, a person to follow, it does not mean that hes noor within him,prophet says in hadoth im only bashr i forgot like u forget

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

the noor of prophet muhammd s.a.w was also placed in prophet adam alayhi salams forhead and prophet adam alayhi salam saw the prophet s.a.w by ibn jowzi

there is many evidence that he was noor by saying bashr it is like saying he s.a.w is like us astagfirullah

[irfan@tabligh]

ofcourse he aint like us hes the best of mukhlooq, the best of mankind, but he is a human, like allah has said he is only but a messenger and i gave u quranic evidence and a hadith, what more do u need, Allah gudies whom he will brother, Allah guides whom he will.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

brother i also quoted ahadith but you still think that the prophet muhammad sallaloalyhi wassalum is a human only which is sad because we are all humans, i belive he is more than just a human he is also noor and we never can reach his ilm or status as ashraf ali thanvi thinks even the insane can get the ilm that the prophet s.a.w got astagfirullah.

as you said allah will guide whom he will

[hmdsalahuddin]

ashraf ali thanvi thinks even the insane can get the ilm that the prophet s.a.w got astagfirullah.

This is a false propaganda by barelwis. Brother Maulan Ashraf Ali Thanvi never thought or stated that insane can get the ilm that Prophet :saw: got.

[hmdsalahuddin]

brother i also quoted ahadith but you still think that the prophet muhammad sallaloalyhi wassalum is a human only which is sad because we are all humans, i belive he is more than just a human he is also noor and we never can reach his ilm or status as ashraf ali thanvi thinks even the insane can get the ilm that the prophet s.a.w got astagfirullah.

as you said allah will guide whom he will

Brother, the concept of noor and bashr is very simple.

Prophet Mohammed :saw: was human. He had needs like all humans have like feeling hunger, thirst, need to sleep, feeling pain etc.

At the same time Mohammed :saw: was a Prophet i.e, messenger of Allah to whole universe and it is through His Messenger Allah sent guidance to the mankind to move away from the life of darkness (evil doing, disobeying, creating trouble to others) to the path of light and righteousness (obeying command of Allah, giving charity, helping the needy orphans and other good deeds.)

Since, the Messengers of Allah are the ones who showed us the right path to mankind on this earth, the prophet hood bestowed on the Messengers of Allah is attributed as 'noor'.

Thus, while Mohammed :saw: is a 'noor' and rahmatul aalimeen, at the same time Mohammed :saw: is also a human.

Note: I am not a scholar or Maulana. If I have made any error or mistake, Maulana / Scholar or any knowledgeable Members please rectify me.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

Brother, the concept of noor and bashr is very simple.

Prophet Mohammed :saw: was human. He had needs like all humans have like feeling hunger, thirst, need to sleep, feeling pain etc.

At the same time Mohammed :saw: was a Prophet i.e, messenger of Allah to whole universe and it is through His Messenger Allah sent guidance to the mankind to move away from the life of darkness (evil doing, disobeying, creating trouble to others) to the path of light and righteousness (obeying command of Allah, giving charity, helping the needy orphans and other good deeds.)

Since, the Messengers of Allah are the ones who showed us the right path to mankind on this earth, the prophet hood bestowed on the Messengers of Allah is attributed as 'noor'.

Thus, while Mohammed :saw: is a 'noor' and rahmatul aalimeen, at the same time Mohammed :saw: is also a human.

Note: I am not a scholar or Maulana. If I have made any error or mistake, Maulana / Scholar or any knowledgeable Members please rectify me.

brother what you are saying is right he is noor and bashr and the brailvis believe that we are allowed to call him noor but the deobandis disagree they say we cannnot call him s.a.w noor

[abdulwahhab]

This is a false propaganda by barelwis. Brother Maulan Ashraf Ali Thanvi never thought or stated that insane can get the ilm that Prophet :saw: got..

:salam:

Barelvis are insane at twisting words and taking words out of context. Even the excerpts that Molvi Ahmad Raza Khan used to get the fatwa of kufr from the Arab scholars relied on his own translations and picking out select sentences without providing context. They have even used an excerpt that made it look as if Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanawi :rahim: was a Qaadiyani when in fact, he was describing Qaadiyani beliefs! If I were to say, Christians believe that Jesus :alayhis: is god and someone misquotes me as saying that I said, "Jesus :alayhis: is god" (سبحان الله), is that not the height of dishonesty? Yet, Barelvi literature is filled with half-quotes and word twisting.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

.

:salam:

Barelvis are insane at twisting words and taking words out of context. Even the excerpts that Molvi Ahmad Raza Khan used to get the fatwa of kufr from the Arab scholars relied on his own translations and picking out select sentences without providing context. They have even used an excerpt that made it look as if Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanawi :rahim: was a Qaadiyani when in fact, he was describing Qaadiyani beliefs! If I were to say, Christians believe that Jesus :alayhis: is god and someone misquotes me as saying that I said, "Jesus :alayhis: is god" (سبحان الله), is that not the height of dishonesty? Yet, Barelvi literature is filled with half-quotes and word twisting.

are you saying that ashraf ali thanvi never disrespected the prophet in anyway

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

How could anyone dissrespect RAsullah (SAW) is beyond me? Dissagreement at scholarly level in noway means dissrespect. Only someone who equates relegious discourse only with emotinal response can say such thing!!
Just last friday I was doing Jummah salaat. this imam of berlevi orientation went mad in his defense of some of the berlewi practice. I don't get how can one use isolated case and personal experience justifies relegious practice for amm. I understood what he was saying but as usual insisted on it. This is what I dissagree with our berlwi brothers just as I find salafist pathological stance deplorable.
Allahualam

brother disagreement in scholarly level is not disrespect, but some of the things that ashraf ali thanvi said were plain even to the layman that it is disrespect to the prophet s.a.w

[hmdsalahuddin]

brother disagreement in scholarly level is not disrespect, but some of the things that ashraf ali thanvi said were plain even to the layman that it is disrespect to the prophet s.a.w

This is a pure lie

[hmdsalahuddin]

brother what you are saying is right he is noor and bashr and the brailvis believe that we are allowed to call him noor but the deobandis disagree they say we cannnot call him s.a.w noor

You have misunderstood deobandis wrongly

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

Please elaborate!! Often things are missunderstood.

some of the disrespect are

ashraf ali thanvi compared the ilm of the prophet s.a.w to the insane and animals (hifzul imaan)

ahraf ali thanvi beleievs that you can gain unseen knowlegde from the dead and he disputes the prophets s.a.w ilm e ghayb

even a layman knows this is gustaakh e rasul

[Nomadic]

yet another example of getting lost in traslation. I think our berlewi brother in their emotional response equates everything to noor. Rasullah SAW was best of creation and a human and Allah's habib. He is not made of noor. But everything about him was noorani in spritual and wordly sense. In a same way Isah (AS) was roohullah, Musa (AS) Kalamullah.

Br.
I find it odd that you being so seemingly spirutually inclinded do not understand the notion of fitra. Most of us are clouded with self and one can say animals are far better because they know who Allah is more then us. Is this another example where people are getting the wrong end of the stick??

As for knowledge of unseen for man is not for all time. If something hidden is revlead it is through Allahs permission. These qualities mainfest in the lives of Prophet as well as in Walliallah. If you search sunniforum, this has been disscussed in detail by scholars in the forum.


Allahualam

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

You have misunderstood deobandis wrongly

explain then

i wish i had a brailvi scholar in this forum who can help me out because there is proof from hadith on all brailvi aqeedah but my knowledge is limited.

if you disagree explian

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

yet another example of getting lost in traslation. I think our berlewi brother in their emotional response equates everything to noor. Rasullah SAW was best of creation and a human and Allah's habib. He is not made of noor. But everything about him was noorani in spritual and wordly sense. In a same way Isah (AS) was roohullah, Musa (AS) Kalamullah.
Allahualam

so is it ok to call him s.a.w noor?

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

If the aqidah is correct then ofcourse! If it was not for Rasullah SAW, this existance of this world would make no sense. Allah does not create anything as play.

so there is no argument my brother but some deobandis say it is wrong to call the prophet s.a.w noor and they say he is only a bashr

[abuhajira]

some of the disrespect are

ashraf ali thanvi compared the ilm of the prophet s.a.w to the insane and animals (hifzul imaan)

ahraf ali thanvi beleievs that you can gain unseen knowlegde from the dead and he disputes the prophets s.a.w ilm e ghayb

even a layman knows this is gustaakh e rasul

:salam:

first you say that you are not at the level of understanding academics. Then you say that these intricate issues can be understood by the laymen. Then you even go ahead to judge who gustakh e rasool is, never minding that the person you are levying the allegation at is a scholar of the level that many would only hope to achieve. It is ajeeb that you want us to think Ahmed Riza Khan Saheb as Imam and Mujaddid, but continuously show no level of respect for Ml. Thanvi.

For the record. The above allegation is NOT so simple. Your layman standard CANNOT grasp it. I have discussed the issue with barelwi brothers claiming to be writing SHARAH on Hifzul Imaan or Tahzeerun Naas. Believe me they cannot even understand the coherency of the argument let alone understand the Mantaq and Fasahat of these urdu writeups.

InshAllah I shall find the discussion on Hifzul Imaan. The ilm that is being talked about is a comparative ilm, which is respective to the ilm kulli. If is not kulli then everyone of us posses that ilm e ba'dh. There is no takhsees. If you cannot understand these terms, then how can you understand ibaraat of hifzul imaan is beyond my imagination.

:ws:

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

Rasullah saw is bashr and noorani as well. I think deo scholars only emphasises this because people end up thinking he is made up of light (similar to that of angel). I have no problem with this stance as people can be extreme in their love which leads them in unknown path.
Allahualam

the fact is they say this because they are gustaakh and they hate brailvis i dont know why, national television invited them to speak on the eid ul fitr matter but they refused

[sudoku]

:salam:

Please keep a hold on your gustakh gun. If you want to learn, come with a clear mind, not filled with preconceived notions. Otherwise there is no use in coming and asking when you have already made up your mind.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

:salam:

first you say that you are not at the level of understanding academics. Then you say that these intricate issues can be understood by the laymen. Then you even go ahead to judge who gustakh e rasool is, never minding that the person you are levying the allegation at is a scholar of the level that many would only hope to achieve. It is ajeeb that you want us to think Ahmed Riza Khan Saheb as Imam and Mujaddid, but continuously show no level of respect for Ml. Thanvi.

For the record. The above allegation is NOT so simple. Your layman standard CANNOT grasp it. I have discussed the issue with barelwi brothers claiming to be writing SHARAH on Hifzul Imaan or Tahzeerun Naas. Believe me they cannot even understand the coherency of the argument let alone understand the Mantaq and Fasahat of these urdu writeups.

InshAllah I shall find the discussion on Hifzul Imaan. The ilm that is being talked about is a comparative ilm, which is respective to the ilm kulli. If is not kulli then everyone of us posses that ilm e ba'dh. There is no takhsees. If you cannot understand these terms, then how can you understand ibaraat of hifzul imaan is beyond my imagination.

:ws:

brother the thing with you is you post a reply which sounds very complicated and knowledgable which puts of many people, but the fact is this is not the way forward you should justify yourself in simple terms i know you are a scholar and i respect that but let me tell you they are also brailvi scholars like yourself can challenge you on a higher level i am just trying to learn and i am presenting my points that i have been taught by brailvi scholars. it is simple he did compare the ilm to the insane. and is it the deobandis who belive it is worse to think about the prophet s.a.w in prayer than a donkey.

[abdulwahhab]

brother the thing with you is you post a reply which sounds very complicated and knowledgable which puts of many people, but the fact is this is not the way forward you should justify yourself in simple terms i know you are a scholar and i respect that but let me tell you they are also brailvi scholars like yourself can challenge you on a higher level i am just trying to learn and i am presenting my points that i have been taught by brailvi scholars. it is simple he did compare the ilm to the insane. and is it the deobandis who belive it is worse to think about the prophet s.a.w in prayer than a donkey.

Once again, you're showing that you're here to accuse based on lies and twisting of words rather than to learn. If you were truly willing to learn, you wouldn't reject Ml. Abuhajira's argument as being too above your calibre. If you think they are, then why do you believe the Barelvi molvi lies?

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

Once again, you're showing that you're here to accuse based on lies and twisting of words rather than to learn. If you were truly willing to learn, you wouldn't reject Ml. Abuhajira's argument as being too above your calibre. If you think they are, then why do you believe the Barelvi molvi lies?

brother i said moulana abu hajira is higher than me that dosent mean the brailvis lie you got that completely wrong, i am not twisting words these words are in your books pick them up and read you say these are lies while your ulama try to defend such statments and try to argue, the problem is you are not one in your own maslaq so how can you defend you ulamas views , some say it is ok to do milad some say it is bidda and it is forbidden, some say the prophet s.a.w is bashr only some say he is noor and basher and it ok to call him noor, brother first become one in your own maslaq and then try telling me i am twisting your words.

[abuhajira]

brother the thing with you is you post a reply which sounds very complicated and knowledgable which puts of many people, but the fact is this is not the way forward you should justify yourself in simple terms i know you are a scholar and i respect that but let me tell you they are also brailvi scholars like yourself can challenge you on a higher level i am just trying to learn and i am presenting my points that i have been taught by brailvi scholars. it is simple he did compare the ilm to the insane. and is it the deobandis who belive it is worse to think about the prophet s.a.w in prayer than a donkey.

:salam:

a. I dont need to justify anything hazrat.
b. since you have been taught by barelwi scholar, I can assume you are somewhat knowledgable on the issue. Is that correct?

as for making it simple...

Mr. A runs an ice cream shop.

Amr went to the shop. A gave him a small soft scoop ice cream.
Bakr also went and "A" gave him a small soft scoop ice cream AND a nice big chocolate cone ice cream
Zaid also went there "A" a small soft scoop ice cream AND a nice big chocolate cone ice cream AND then opened his safe and got out a special italian ice cream which only a few people in the world eat.

Essentially ALL of them ate ice cream. But Did Amr eat the same ice cream as Zaid? No. So while ALL of them ate icream, one ate little and other ate more. And not only more, Zaid ate the type which only select few eat. BUT they ALL ate ice cream.

In the aspect of eating ice cream ALL three are same.
But in the aspect of quality, type and quantity of ice cream they are all different.

This is the easiest I can think or making the whole issue.
Everyone of us has been given some knowledge.
Rasulullah :saw: was given from the choiciest of the uloom, wahi from ghaib, maujazaat etc etc.

And in aspect of type of knowledge, quality and its darajah.. Rasulullah :saw: surpasses everyone.
But essentially just as Allah bestowed him with knowledge, in aspect of being given knowledge everyone has been given knowledge.

There is no distinction in this aspect of being given knowledge alone. The distinction is in being given WAHI, And the amount which Allah has granted Nabi :saw:.

I hope that explains.. Ml. Thanvi r.a has merely explained this which many fail to understand.

:ws:

[abdulwahhab]

brother i said moulana abu hajira is higher than me that dosent mean the brailvis lie you got that completely wrong, i am not twisting words these words are in your books pick them up and read you say these are lies while your ulama try to defend such statments and try to argue, the problem is you are not one in your own maslaq so how can you defend you ulamas views , some say it is ok to do milad some say it is bidda and it is forbidden, some say the prophet s.a.w is bashr only some say he is noor and basher and it ok to call him noor, brother first become one in your own maslaq and then try telling me i am twisting your words.

None of the Deobandi ulama say that Rasoolullah :saw: is noor in the sense that Barelvis understand him to be noor. We do not believe he was a physical light. Noor is meant to refer to his teachings. His sunnah is a noor. His physical body is not something that is noor. If you say that, then it is kufr since you're rejecting that he is bashr.

None of the Deobandi ulama say that the milaad is permissible in the way that it happens now. Majority of Deobandi scholars say that milaad is bid'ah because a date is specified.

And if you want to talk about disunity, there are some Barelvis who reject the takfeer that Ahmad Raza Khan did on the Deobandis. These Barelvis even say that if a Deobandi is an aashiq-e-rasool, he is better than a Barelvi who isn't.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

:salam:

a. I dont need to justify anything hazrat.
b. since you have been taught by barelwi scholar, I can assume you are somewhat knowledgable on the issue. Is that correct?

as for making it simple...

Mr. A runs an ice cream shop.

Amr went to the shop. A gave him a small soft scoop ice cream.
Bakr also went and "A" gave him a small soft scoop ice cream AND a nice big chocolate cone ice cream
Zaid also went there "A" a small soft scoop ice cream AND a nice big chocolate cone ice cream AND then opened his safe and got out a special italian ice cream which only a few people in the world eat.

Essentially ALL of them ate ice cream. But Did Amr eat the same ice cream as Zaid? No. So while ALL of them ate icream, one ate little and other ate more. And not only more, Zaid ate the type which only select few eat. BUT they ALL ate ice cream.

In the aspect of eating ice cream ALL three are same.
But in the aspect of quality, type and quantity of ice cream they are all different.

This is the easiest I can think or making the whole issue.
Everyone of us has been given some knowledge.
Rasulullah :saw: was given from the choiciest of the uloom, wahi from ghaib, maujazaat etc etc.

And in aspect of type of knowledge, quality and its darajah.. Rasulullah :saw: surpasses everyone.
But essentially just as Allah bestowed him with knowledge, in aspect of being given knowledge everyone has been given knowledge.

There is no distinction in this aspect of being given knowledge alone. The distinction is in being given WAHI, And the amount which Allah has granted Nabi :saw:.

I hope that explains.. Ml. Thanvi r.a has merely explained this which many fail to understand.

:ws:

no brother thanvi has not explianed the above otherwise he would have elaborated on it, in all cases he tries to make the prophet s.a.w like himslef he says he is not haazir and naazir just like himself, he says he s.a.w is just bashr like himself , he says he dosent have ilm e ghayb which he thinks he can gain from the dead, thanvi also believes that the ilm of the prophet is like hes. any ilm the prophet s.a.w has is above everyone ilm the knowledge allah bestowed everyone is not the same as the knowledge bestowed to the prophet s.a.w.

why not belive this this makes the rank of the prophet s.a.w higher why try to find ahadith and dalil that proves he is more like us.. why?

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

None of the Deobandi ulama say that Rasoolullah :saw: is noor in the sense that Barelvis understand him to be noor. We do not believe he was a physical light. Noor is meant to refer to his teachings. His sunnah is a noor. His physical body is not something that is noor. If you say that, then it is kufr since you're rejecting that he is bashr.

None of the Deobandi ulama say that the milaad is permissible in the way that it happens now. Majority of Deobandi scholars say that milaad is bid'ah because a date is specified.

And if you want to talk about disunity, there are some Barelvis who reject the takfeer that Ahmad Raza Khan did on the Deobandis. These Barelvis even say that if a Deobandi is an aashiq-e-rasool, he is better than a Barelvi who isn't.

1.brailvis believe he is noor and bashr and it is ok to call him s.a.w noor. no one rejects he is bashr aswell.

some deobandis on this forum belive that he is both in a physical sense and it is ok to call him noor some dont.

2. brother thanvi himslef said milad is a wazeefah and it should be done evryday and some deobandis say it is a biddah and it is forbidden ,

3brother the fact that you said the majority of scolars shows that there is not unity in your maslaq. as for unity in brailvi tahir ul qadri has been expelled from the maslaq by many of our ulama for rejecting takfeer and there has been a fatwa against him, so brother there is unity in brailvis and we will sacrifice anyone to keep unity.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

So let me get this right
You don't tolarate iktilaf even in the issue of furu. This is beginging to sound more like khawarij and I thought such stance are only adopted by salafist.
How is it possible for this ummah to progress when they don't tolarate iktilaf in legitimate matters. I like the deo approach because of their iktilaf. This is comming fromsomeone who was once salafist in mindset!! Brother even if the scholar expelled some of your scholars, they are still scholars and as a laymen you should stay away from it. I am sure they have more knowledge then you!!


Allahualam

i do tolerate ikhtilaf but amongst a maslaqs own scholars, not a deobandi scholar. i know they have more knowleedge then me i was just replying to the ubity which someone accused the brailvis of

[abdulwahhab]

1.brailvis believe he is noor and bashr and it is ok to call him s.a.w noor. no one rejects he is bashr aswell.

some deobandis on this forum belive that he is both in a physical sense and it is ok to call him noor some dont.

2. brother thanvi himslef said milad is a wazeefah and it should be done evryday and some deobandis say it is a biddah and it is forbidden ,

3brother the fact that you said the majority of scolars shows that there is not unity in your maslaq. as for unity in brailvi tahir ul qadri has been expelled from the maslaq by many of our ulama for rejecting takfeer and there has been a fatwa against him, so brother there is unity in brailvis and we will sacrifice anyone to keep unity.

There is something deficient in your understanding.

1. To say that Rasoolullah :saw: is literal noor is not held by any of the Deobandi ulama. If he is, then that is DENYING he is bashr because you're one or the other. I can't say that I'm black and white. I can't say I'm Muslim and Hindu. Similarly, you cannot say that Rasoolullah :saw: is physical noor and physical bashr.

2. Ml. Ashraf 'Ali Thanwi :rahim: said that it should be done everyday and the Deobandis AGREE on this! The issue that me and the others have been repeating for the entirety of this thread is that the bid'ah occurs when a specific day is prescribed or emphasized but you are too blind to see.

3. No, there is no unity amongst Barelvis. I am not talking about Tahir ul Qadri. I'm talking about the ameer of your Dawat-e-Islami. In fact, some of you Barelvis defied him and his laxity on the issue of takfeer and formed the "Sunni" Dawat-e-Islami. And yes, I know of about 2 scholars that do not take issue with the date setting thing, but they take issue with almost everything else associated with the mawlid.

[Aseatic]

:salam:

So... this is what Muslims in India/Pak are quarreling about?

Instead of splitting hairs like this, it is better to make salawat (or durood, as you call it). Allah and His Rasul (saw) will be pleased.

[abdulwahhab]

:salam:

So... this is what Muslims in India/Pak are quarreling about?

Instead of splitting hairs like this, it is better to make salawat (or durood, as you call it). Allah and His Rasul (saw) will be pleased.

:salam:

The problem comes in when one group makes takfeer of another. There are other groups in India/Pakistan, such as the Tanzeem movement but you don't see our ulama criticize the movement as much or attack Dr. Israr Ahmed :rahim:. If the matter between Barelvis and Deobandis was as simple as difference of opinion, I would agree, but when one group says the other is a kaafir and anyone who doesn't agree is also a kaafir, then we have a huge problem.

[Aseatic]

:salam:

The problem comes in when one group makes takfeer of another. There are other groups in India/Pakistan, such as the Tanzeem movement but you don't see our ulama criticize the movement as much or attack Dr. Israr Ahmed :rahim:. If the matter between Barelvis and Deobandis was as simple as difference of opinion, I would agree, but when one group says the other is a kaafir and anyone who doesn't agree is also a kaafir, then we have a huge problem.

Nur or Bashar? Whatever. Looking at it as an outsider, I think this is a small matter, not something for pronouncing takfir or not about.

But takfir itself is very serious, yes.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

There is something deficient in your understanding.

1. To say that Rasoolullah :saw: is literal noor is not held by any of the Deobandi ulama. If he is, then that is DENYING he is bashr because you're one or the other. I can't say that I'm black and white. I can't say I'm Muslim and Hindu. Similarly, you cannot say that Rasoolullah :saw: is physical noor and physical bashr.

2. Ml. Ashraf 'Ali Thanwi :rahim: said that it should be done everyday and the Deobandis AGREE on this! The issue that me and the others have been repeating for the entirety of this thread is that the bid'ah occurs when a specific day is prescribed or emphasized but you are too blind to see.

3. No, there is no unity amongst Barelvis. I am not talking about Tahir ul Qadri. I'm talking about the ameer of your Dawat-e-Islami. In fact, some of you Barelvis defied him and his laxity on the issue of takfeer and formed the "Sunni" Dawat-e-Islami. And yes, I know of about 2 scholars that do not take issue with the date setting thing, but they take issue with almost everything else associated with the mawlid.

1.brother this is where the problem lies , you try to make rasulullah like yourselves, just because you can call yourself black and white dosent mean the rpophet s.a.w is not noor and basher. he can be both,he is both as he is nurallah.

2. thanvi described is at a wazeefah and as i also said before brailvis do it all year and then do it on one day with more pepration because that is the closes guess to the real day, no what is your stance regarding this , because there is no point going in circles.

3. brother i think you are confused the brailvi maslaq does not consist of dawat e islami and tahir ul qadri only there is many more scholars, as for unity in deobandis you guys cant even find the right formula about eid , so some deos do eid in england using a different formula to the deos in pakistan.

[abdulwahhab]

1.brother this is where the problem lies , you try to make rasulullah like yourselves, just because you can call yourself black and white dosent mean the rpophet s.a.w is not noor and basher. he can be both,he is both as he is nurallah.

Allah :taala: has told Rasoolullah :saw: to say that he is bashr. Nowhere is Rasoolullah :saw: referred to as literal noor. To say both about Rasoolullah :saw: is contradictory. It is like saying someone is a truthful liar. Noor is something completely different from bashr. It is the same argument made by Christians about Isa :alayhis:.


2. thanvi described is at a wazeefah and as i also said before brailvis do it all year and then do it on one day with more pepration because that is the closes guess to the real day, no what is your stance regarding this , because there is no point going in circles.

.........

I am seriously doubting your grasp of the English language. I will say this for the last time: Sunnis have no problem with celebrating mawlid every day of the year because the birth of Rasoolullah :saw: was a blessing for the entire humanity until the end of time. To specify or emphasize a particular day is where the problem comes in. There is no proof from either the Sahabas :anhum:, the tabi'een, the tabi' tabi'een, the many generations after that, as well as many of the classical scholars of that time, including the aimmah arba'ah that celebrating the milaad on a particular day is recommended. If anything, all signs point to it being adopted from the non-Muslim belief of celebrating annual birthdays, which does not exist in Islaam. Can you show me where any of the scholars of the past celebrated their own birthdays annually or held any annual celebration to commemorate an event and gave it a religious significance? The Sahabas :anhum: knew best how to celebrate Rasoolullah :saw: after his passing. Are we saying we are better than the Sahabas رضي الله عنهم and we know better? The Sahabas رضي الله عنهم celebrated Rasoolullah :saw: by sticking firmly to his sunnah and his message. They did not celebrate his birthday on an annual basis.


3. brother i think you are confused the brailvi maslaq does not consist of dawat e islami and tahir ul qadri only there is many more scholars, as for unity in deobandis you guys cant even find the right formula about eid , so some deos do eid in england using a different formula to the deos in pakistan.

So are you saying that Dawat-e-Islaami is not Barelvi?

And we are talking about issues of aqeedah, not fiqh. Differences in Fiqh does not make one a deviant. Differences in aqeedah can. If Dawat-e-Islami refuses from outright takfeer of Deobandis, then they are going against Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi. Also, I'd like to mention that Shaykh Muhammad al-Ya'qoubi, who you claim is a supporter of Barelvism and holds the same beliefs of takfeer regarding Deobandis, then why does he hang around with Tahir-ul-Qadri, who does not believe in takfeer of Deobandis? So, does Shaykh Ya'qoubi like to hang around with kuffaar, because, according to Molvi Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi, anyone who rejects the takfeer of Deobandis is also a a kaafir and Tahir-ul-Qadri rejects the takfeer?

[Student of Truth]

Sunnis have no problem with celebrating mawlid every day of the year because the birth of Rasoolullah was a blessing for the entire humanity until the end of time. To specify or emphasize a particular day is where the problem comes in.

Assalamu Alaikum brother.

I aplogise for getting involved in this thread, however I could be wrong here, but I'm 99.9% sure that celebrating the birthday of anyone is BID'AH. If the Prophet Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam didn't celebrate his birthday so why are you celebrating his?

[Aram]

Assalamu Alaikum brother.

I aplogise for getting involved in this thread, however I could be wrong here, but I'm 99.9% sure that celebrating the birthday of anyone is BID'AH. If the Prophet Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam didn't celebrate his birthday so why are you celebrating his?

"celebrating" means different things to different people
some people will make a cake, put up decorations and fairy lights, wear new clothes, make special food etc.

other people mean they celebrate his brith everyday by sending durood upon him :saw:...by reading over his seerah....by following his sunnah

[abdulwahhab]

Assalamu Alaikum brother.

I aplogise for getting involved in this thread, however I could be wrong here, but I'm 99.9% sure that celebrating the birthday of anyone is BID'AH. If the Prophet Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam didn't celebrate his birthday so why are you celebrating his?

:salam:

Yes, celebrating birthdays is bid'ah but what is meant by celebrating here is to be grateful for Allah :taala: sending us the best rahmah in the form of Rasoolullah :saw: every day, not just specifying a day, and to celebrate it in a manner befitting Islam. Rasoolullah :saw:, for example, fasted on Mondays because he said he was born on a Monday. Therefore, it is a sunnah to fast on Mondays because he fasted on that day and because he was born on that day. The only meaningful celebration of Rasoolullah :saw: is to become strict adherents to his blessed sunnah. By following the sunnah, we are celebrating the birth and the life of Rasoolullah :saw:.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

Allah :taala: has told Rasoolullah :saw: to say that he is bashr. Nowhere is Rasoolullah :saw: referred to as literal noor. To say both about Rasoolullah :saw: is contradictory. It is like saying someone is a truthful liar. Noor is something completely different from bashr. It is the same argument made by Christians about Isa :alayhis:.



.........

I am seriously doubting your grasp of the English language. I will say this for the last time: Sunnis have no problem with celebrating mawlid every day of the year because the birth of Rasoolullah :saw: was a blessing for the entire humanity until the end of time. To specify or emphasize a particular day is where the problem comes in. There is no proof from either the Sahabas :anhum:, the tabi'een, the tabi' tabi'een, the many generations after that, as well as many of the classical scholars of that time, including the aimmah arba'ah that celebrating the milaad on a particular day is recommended. If anything, all signs point to it being adopted from the non-Muslim belief of celebrating annual birthdays, which does not exist in Islaam. Can you show me where any of the scholars of the past celebrated their own birthdays annually or held any annual celebration to commemorate an event and gave it a religious significance? The Sahabas :anhum: knew best how to celebrate Rasoolullah :saw: after his passing. Are we saying we are better than the Sahabas رضي الله عنهم and we know better? The Sahabas رضي الله عنهم celebrated Rasoolullah :saw: by sticking firmly to his sunnah and his message. They did not celebrate his birthday on an annual basis.



So are you saying that Dawat-e-Islaami is not Barelvi?

And we are talking about issues of aqeedah, not fiqh. Differences in Fiqh does not make one a deviant. Differences in aqeedah can. If Dawat-e-Islami refuses from outright takfeer of Deobandis, then they are going against Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi. Also, I'd like to mention that Shaykh Muhammad al-Ya'qoubi, who you claim is a supporter of Barelvism and holds the same beliefs of takfeer regarding Deobandis, then why does he hang around with Tahir-ul-Qadri, who does not believe in takfeer of Deobandis? So, does Shaykh Ya'qoubi like to hang around with kuffaar, because, according to Molvi Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi, anyone who rejects the takfeer of Deobandis is also a a kaafir and Tahir-ul-Qadri rejects the takfeer?


shaykh muhammal al yaquobi sits in the same masjids and next to the same imams who you call takfiris. you talk about classical scholars read this

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

“Those people who celebrate Milaad through the love and respect of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace], will be rewarded by Allah.

[Iqtidaa’ us-siraat-il-Mustaqeem, page 294]

He also writes that:

If someone celebrates Milaad with the love and respect of Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace], he will have a “big reward”. He says that in Muslim communities, Milaad-un-Nabi gatherings are only done with the respect and love of the Muslims for the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace]

[Iqtidaa’ as-siraat-il-Mustaqeem, page 297, by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah]

Hafidhh Ibn Kathir wrote that:

There was once a King, Abu Sa’eed Malik Muzaffar - a man of good deeds. In his kingdom, wherever he saw a lack of water, he would build a well. He also established many Islamic study centers. Every year, he would spend half a million dinars on hosting a gathering of his people to celebrate the birthday of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]

[Tareekh Ibn Kathir, see story of King Abu Sa’eed, Volume 13]

i said before there is nothing wrong for doing something with more ihtimam on the 12 rabiulawwal which is the best guess.

[abuhajira]

shaykh muhammal al yaquobi sits in the same masjids and next to the same imams who you call takfiris. you talk about classical scholars read this

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

“Those people who celebrate Milaad through the love and respect of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace], will be rewarded by Allah.

[Iqtidaa’ us-siraat-il-Mustaqeem, page 294]

He also writes that:

If someone celebrates Milaad with the love and respect of Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace], he will have a “big reward”. He says that in Muslim communities, Milaad-un-Nabi gatherings are only done with the respect and love of the Muslims for the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace]

[Iqtidaa’ as-siraat-il-Mustaqeem, page 297, by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah]

Hafidhh Ibn Kathir wrote that:

There was once a King, Abu Sa’eed Malik Muzaffar - a man of good deeds. In his kingdom, wherever he saw a lack of water, he would build a well. He also established many Islamic study centers. Every year, he would spend half a million dinars on hosting a gathering of his people to celebrate the birthday of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace]

[Tareekh Ibn Kathir, see story of King Abu Sa’eed, Volume 13]

i said before there is nothing wrong for doing something with more ihtimam on the 12 rabiulawwal which is the best guess.

:salam:

so do you accept Hafiz Ibn Taymiya r.a to be a classic scholar?

:ws:

[irfan@tabligh]

Thats just the opinion of ibn taymiyya, it aint what the sahabahs done, or the tabiee, or tabi tabiee, or the many generations after that and how do you know the milad ibn tayymiya is reffering to is the milad most deviants participate in. Its funny how the christians celebrated christmas, isa (alay salams) birthday and now the deiant barelvis are celebrating prophet Muhammad S.A.W birthday. Coincidence by any chance?

[abuhajira]

shaykh muhammal al yaquobi sits in the same masjids and next to the same imams who you call takfiris. you talk about classical scholars read this

Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

“Those people who celebrate Milaad through the love and respect of the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace], will be rewarded by Allah.

[Iqtidaa’ us-siraat-il-Mustaqeem, page 294]

He also writes that:

If someone celebrates Milaad with the love and respect of Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace], he will have a “big reward”. He says that in Muslim communities, Milaad-un-Nabi gatherings are only done with the respect and love of the Muslims for the Prophet [May Allah bless him and grant Him peace]

[Iqtidaa’ as-siraat-il-Mustaqeem, page 297, by Hafidhh Ibn Taymiyyah]



:salam:

aik to bhai aap jawab naheen detay.. :)

I want to actually reproduce this small piece of Hafiz Ibn Taymiya r.a. Please someone take time to translate this. I will do so myself, but no time at moment. I have highlighted the pertinent parts to understand the context. In short, Br. SMD dont get too excited.. he is still calling you a Bid'ati :)

If some can atleast take time translate the bold red part.. it would be nice.



وكذلك ما يحدثه بعض الناس، إما مضاهاة للنصارى في ميلاد عيسى عليه السلام، وإما محبة للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، وتعظيمًا. والله قد يثيبهم (4) على هذه المحبة والاجتهاد، لا على البدع- من اتخاذ مولد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عيدًا. مع اختلاف الناس في مولده. فإن هذا لم يفعله السلف، مع قيام المقتضي له وعدم المانع منه لو كان خيرًا. ولو كان هذا خيرًا (5) محضا، أو راجحًا لكان السلف رضي الله عنهم أحق به منا، فإنهم كانوا أشد محبة لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتعظيمًا له منا، وهم على الخير أحرص.
وإنما كمال محبته وتعظيمه في متابعته وطاعته واتباع أمره، وإحياء سنته باطنًا وظاهرًا، ونشر ما بعث به، والجهاد على ذلك بالقلب واليد واللسان. فإن هذه (1) طريقة السابقين الأولين، من المهاجرين والأنصار، والذين اتبعوهم بإحسان. وأكثر هؤلاء الذين تجدهم حراصًا (2) على أمثال هذه البدع، مع ما لهم من حسن القصد، والاجتهاد الذين (3) يرجى لهم بهما المثوبة، تجدهم فاترين في (4) أمر الرسول، عما أمروا بالنشاط فيه، وإنما هم بمنزلة من يحلي المصحف ولا يقرأ فيه، أو يقرأ فيه ولا يتبعه وبمنزلة من يزخرف المسجد، ولا يصلي فيه، أو يصلي فيه قليلًا، وبمنزلة من يتخذ المسابيح (5) والسجادات المزخرفة، وأمثال هذه الزخارف الظاهرة التي لم تشرع، ويصحبها من الرياء والكبر، والاشتغال عن المشروع ما يفسد حال صاحبها، كما جاء في الحديث: «ما ساء عمل أمة قط إلا زخرفوا مساجدهم»
واعلم أن من الأعمال ما يكون فيه خير، لاشتماله على أنواع من المشروع، وفيه أيضًا شر، من بدعة وغيرها، فيكون ذلك العمل
خيرًا (1) بالنسبة إلى [ما اشتمل عليه من أنواع المشروع وشرًا بالنسبة إلى ما اشتمل عليه من] (2) الإعراض عن الدين بالكلية كحال المنافقين والفاسقين (3) وهذا قد ابتلى به أكثر (4) الأمة في الأزمان المتأخرة، فعليك هنا بأدبين:
أحدهما: أن يكون حرصك على التمسك بالسنة باطنًا وظاهرًا، في خاصتك وخاصة من يطيعك. وأعرف المعروف وأنكر المنكر.
الثاني: أن تدعو الناس إلى السنة بحسب الإمكان فإذا رأيت من يعمل هذا ولا يتركه إلا إلى شر منه، فلا تدعو إلى ترك منكر بفعل ما هو أنكر منه، أو بترك واجب أو مندوب تركه أضر من فعل ذلك المكروه، ولكن إذا كان في البدعة من الخير، فعوض عنه من الخير (5) المشروع بحسب الإمكان، إذ النفوس لا تترك شيئًا إلا بشيء، ولا ينبغي لأحد أن يترك خيرًا إلا إلى مثله أو إلى خير منه، فإنه كما أن الفاعلين لهذه البدع معيبون قد أتوا مكروهًا، فالتاركون أيضًا للسنن مذمومون، فإن منها ما يكون واجبًا على الإطلاق، ومنها ما يكون واجبًا على التقييد، كما (6) أن الصلاة النافلة لا تجب. ولكن من أراد أن يصليها يجب عليه (7) أن يأتي بأركانها، وكما يجب على من أتى الذنوب من الكفارات والقضاء والتوبة والحسنات الماحية، وما يجب على من كان إماما، أو قاضيا، أو مفتيا، أو واليا من الحقوق، وما يجب على طالبي العلم، أو نوافل العبادة من الحقوق.
ومنها: ما يكره المداومة على تركه كراهة شديدة.
ومنها: ما يكره تركه أو يجب فعله على الأئمة دون غيرهم وعامتها يجب تعليمها والحض عليها والدعاء إليها.
وكثير من المنكرين لبدع العبادات والعادات تجدهم مقصرين في فعل السنن من ذلك، أو الأمر به. ولعل حال كثير منهم يكون أسوأ من حال من يأتي بتلك العبادات المشتملة على نوع من الكراهة. بل الدين هو الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر، ولا قوام لأحدهما إلا بصاحبه، فلا ينهى عن منكر إلا ويؤمر بمعروف يغني عنه كما يؤمر بعبادة الله سبحانه، وينهى عن عبادة ما سواه، إذ رأس الأمر شهادة أن لا إله إلا الله، والنفوس خلقت لتعمل، لا لتترك، وإنما الترك مقصود لغيره، فإن لم يشتغل بعمل صالح، وإلا لم يترك العلم السيئ، أو الناقص، لكن لما كان من الأعمال السيئة ما يفسد عليها العمل الصالح، نهيت عنه حفظًا للعمل الصالح.
فتعظيم المولد، واتخاذه موسمًا، قد يفعله بعض الناس، ويكون له فيه (1) أجر عظيم لحسن قصده، وتعظيمه لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، كما قدمته لك أنه يحسن من بعض الناس، ما يستقبح من المؤمن المسدد. ولهذا قيل للإمام أحمد عن بعض الأمراء: إنه أنفق على مصحف ألف دينار، أو نحو ذلك فقال: دعهم، فهذا أفضل ما أنفقوا فيه الذهب، أو كما قال. مع أن مذهبه أن زخرفة المصاحف مكروهة. وقد تأول بعض الأصحاب أنه أنفقها في تجويد (2) الورق والخط. وليس مقصود أحمد هذا، إنما قصده أن هذا العمل فيه مصلحة، وفيه أيضًا مفسدة كره لأجلها. فهؤلاء إن لم يفعلوا هذا، وإلا اعتاضوا بفساد (3) لا صلاح
فيه، مثل أن ينفقها في كتاب من كتب الفجور: من كتب الأسمار أو الأشعار، أو حكمة فارس والروم.
فتفطن لحقيقة الدين، وانظر ما اشتملت عليه الأفعال من المصالح الشرعية، والمفاسد، بحيث تعرف ما مراتب المعروف، ومراتب المنكر، حتى تقدم أهمها عند الازدحام، فإن هذا حقيقة العلم بما جاءت به الرسل، فإن التمييز بين جنس المعروف، وجنس المنكر، أو جنس الدليل، وغير الدليل، يتيسر كثيرًا
[اقتضاء الصراط المستقيم لمخالفة أصحاب الجحيم 2/ 123]

[Aram]

lol the fatwa of ibn taymiyyah is online somewhere in english too, they quote the bit of his fatwah which suits them and leave the rest...the particular quote posted by SMD straight ater that sentence it says something along the lines of "they will not be rewarded for their bidah"

SMD does a lot of this half quoting things, takes the bits that seem like they are in favour of his belief and leaves the rest...he even does it with quran and hadith so doing it with fatwas of the ulemah is no big deal!

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

lol the fatwa of ibn taymiyyah is online somewhere in english too, they quote the bit of his fatwah which suits them and leave the rest...the particular quote posted by SMD straight ater that sentence it says something along the lines of "they will not be rewarded for their bidah"

SMD does a lot of this half quoting things, takes the bits that seem like they are in favour of his belief and leaves the rest...he even does it with quran and hadith so doing it with fatwas of the ulemah is no big deal!

SMD is right in what he is saying

It is a requirement of the Holy Quran to show respect on the Meelad of Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). Allah Ta'ala says: "In the bounty of Allah Almighty and His Mercy, in that, let them rejoice, that is better than the wealth they accumulate". (Surah Yunus: 58) Almighty Allah had ordered us to rejoice on His Mercy and Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) is the greatest Mercy of Allah Ta�ala to all the Worlds.

In the time of Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), the period of the Sahabah and in the period of the Tabi'in, Meelad was not celebrated as it is done in the present form. But the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), Sahabah or Tabi'in did not prohibit it as well. This is an accepted principle of Shari'ah that the performance of something is proof of Jawaaz (permissibility), and not doing it is NOT the proof of its prohibition.

The Meelad celebration is not compulsory. It is Mustahab (recommended). Imam Jalaaluddin Suyuti (radi Allahu anhu) said that it is Mustahab for us to celebrate Meelad of the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) as to thank Allah. (Ruhul Bayaan)

[zuby13]

SMD is right in what he is saying

It is a requirement of the Holy Quran to show respect on the Meelad of Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). Allah Ta'ala says: "In the bounty of Allah Almighty and His Mercy, in that, let them rejoice, that is better than the wealth they accumulate". (Surah Yunus: 58) Almighty Allah had ordered us to rejoice on His Mercy and Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) is the greatest Mercy of Allah Ta�ala to all the Worlds.

In the time of Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), the period of the Sahabah and in the period of the Tabi'in, Meelad was not celebrated as it is done in the present form. But the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), Sahabah or Tabi'in did not prohibit it as well. This is an accepted principle of Shari'ah that the performance of something is proof of Jawaaz (permissibility), and not doing it is NOT the proof of its prohibition.

The Meelad celebration is not compulsory. It is Mustahab (recommended). Imam Jalaaluddin Suyuti (radi Allahu anhu) said that it is Mustahab for us to celebrate Meelad of the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) as to thank Allah. (Ruhul Bayaan)

Here you go again, repeating the same things over and over. I have read all your posts, you make no sense at all. Everybody here has given you enough proofs, yet you act ignorant. brother, seriously..all this debating won;t do u any good. Instead spend that time doing worship. You love nabi saw so much that you celebrate his bday, then why dont you follow his sunnah and stay away from useless argumentation. Please, give yourself a break.

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

Here you go again, repeating the same things over and over. I have read all your posts, you make no sense at all. Everybody here has given you enough proofs, yet you act ignorant. brother, seriously..all this debating won;t do u any good. Instead spend that time doing worship. You love nabi saw so much that you celebrate his bday, then why dont you follow his sunnah and stay away from useless argumentation. Please, give yourself a break.

So when you have no answers you result to talking about people having breaks and there is no argument etc. This proves that you are wrong , i would like to request something can i talk to one of your scholars on thier own , as i want to get some things clarified, is that possible?

[Sulaiman84]

... i would like to request something can i talk to one of your scholars on thier own , as i want to get some things clarified, is that possible?

The last time one of your own challenged a scholar on this forum, he ended up using foul language and academically embarrassing himself.

He also began with sayings things like, "Do you believe xyz?", "I want to understand some things about xyz issue" "I want to get some things clarified"

He ended up using foul language, telling everyone what they believed and made takfir across the forum.

You gonna do that too?

[StrengtheningMyDeen]

The last time one of your own challenged a scholar on this forum, he ended up using foul language and academically embarrassing himself.

He also began with sayings things like, "Do you believe xyz?", "I want to understand some things about xyz issue" "I want to get some things clarified"

He ended up using foul language, telling everyone what they believed and made takfir across the forum.

You gonna do that too?

No i am not going to do that as long as i dont get attacked by people on this forum, but i want to speak to the scholar alone.

[xs11ax]

No i am not going to do that as long as i dont get attacked by people on this forum, but i want to speak to the scholar alone.

post in the sensetive section.

[Sulaiman84]

No i am not going to do that as long as i dont get attacked by people on this forum, but i want to speak to the scholar alone.

You could use the search engine, these issues have been discussed many times on the forum, from so many different angles.

An easier way is just to look at the post history of SMD.

[rafaybaloch]

Assalam-O-Alikum All, First of all let me clear that I am not a bralvi, deobandi, ahlehadith etc I am simply a muslim, next I have been researching regarding the ikhtilaaf of Bralvi and Debobandi's for a year now. Every thing revolves around Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H being a Noor or Bashar. If we believe that he is a bashar than we also need to believe that he did not posses ILM-GAIB and we will also need to believe that he is not Hazir-O-Nazir, So before talking about Eid-UL-Milad Ul Nabi and other issues, I would like to talk about Noor OR BASHAR.

There is a common verse quoted by Bralvi's , when proving that RASOOL is NOOR-RUMIN-NOORILLAH.

6699


'O people of the Book! Undoubtedly, Our Messenger has come to you who makes clear to you much of that which you had hidden in the Book and pardons much. Undoubtedly, there has come to you from Allah a light and a Book, luminous."

According to them the Noor or light here is referred to Muhammad SAW, Now here is why Noor here does not means Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H

First Reason:
The Noor here means the Holy Quran, because Quran is a source of Hadiyah. It means that Quran is a book too and a Noor (light) of guidance.

Second Reason:

If you read the complete Ayah, you find that Allah has mentioned Prophet P.B.U.H in the previous ayah, If Noor here is Prophet P.B.U.H, then why did Allah mention him in the previous Ayah.

Now here is Surah Kaif's 110th Ayah, which clearly explains that RASOOL SAW was a bashar not a Noor.

قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُوحَى إِلَيَّ أَنَّمَا إِلَهُكُمْ إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ فَمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو لِقَاءَ رَبِّهِ فَلْيَعْمَلْ عَمَلا صَالِحًا وَلا يُشْرِكْ بِعِبَادَةِ رَبِّهِ أَحَدًا

Allah says to His Messenger Muhammad ,
﴿قُلْ﴾
(Say) to these idolators who reject your message to them,
﴿إِنَّمَآ أَنَاْ بَشَرٌ مِّثْلُكُمْ﴾
(`I am only a man like you.) Whoever claims that I am lying, let him bring something like this that I have brought. For I did not know the Unseen, the matters of the past which you asked me about and I told you about, the story of the people of the Cave and of Dhul-Qarnayn, stories which are true -- I did not know any of this except for what Allah made known to me.

But bashar exactly not like us, Let me give you an example, Stone is also the one which is used to built up a road and stone is also the one that is more precious than any other stone i.e. Diamond, So we all are normal rocks and Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H is like a Diamond.

Quran Says that no two ayahs of Quran will contradict each other, By looking at both Ayah's which one do you find to be more descriptive, The first one of second one.

Some more refrences regarding the proof that Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H is a Bashar:

"WA MA MAN NA-AASA AYYUMINU IZ ZA AHUMUL HUDA ILLA AN QAALU AB ASALLAAHU BA SHA RAR RASOOLA"


TRANS: AUR NAHI MANA KIYA LOGON KO YAH KI IMAAN LAAYEN JIS WAQT AAYI UNKE PAAS HIDAYAT MAGAR YAH KI KAHA UNHONE BHEJA ALLAH NE AADMI KO PAIGHAM PAHUNCHAANE WAALA


(BANI ISRAEL 94)


PHIR ALLAH FARMATA HAI-

"KAH AGAR HOTE BEECH ZAMEEN KE FARISHTE CHALA KARTE ALBATTA UTAARTE HUM UPER UNKE AASMAAN SE FARISHTE KO PAIGHAM PAHUNCHANE WAALA KAHA UNHONE NAHI TUM YAH KI, BAND KARO HUM KO US CHEEZ SE KI IBAADAT KARTE BAAP HAMAARE TO LE AAO HAMAARE PAAS KHULI DALEEL"



PAIGHAMBARON NE APNI BASHARIYAT KA SABOOT DETE HUE ISTARAH KAHA HAI-


"UNKE RASOOLON NE(ISKE JAWAB ME) KAHA KI HUM BHI TUMHARE JAISE AADMI HI HAIN LEKIN ALLAH APNE BANDON ME SE JIS PAR CHAAHE EHSAAN KARE"


(IBRAHEEM 11)


ALLAH KA IRSHAAD HAI-


"AUR AAP UNKE SAAMNE EK KISSA MATLAB(EK BASTI WALON KA KISSA) US WAQT BAYAN KIJIYE JABKI US BASTI ME KAI RASOOL AAYE, YANI JAB HAMNE UNKE PAAS (PAHLE) DO KO BHEJA TO UN LOGON NE (PAHLE) DONO KO JHOOTA BATAYA PHIR TEESRE(RASOOL) SE MALUM KIYA TO UN TEENO NE KAHA KI HUM TUMHAARE PAAS BHEJE GAYE HAIN, UN LOGON NE KAHA TUM TO HAMARI TARAH MAAMOOLI AADMI HO"


(YASEEN 13-15)


EK AUR AYAT MULAHIZA HO


" TO UNKI QAWM ME JO KAFFIR RAEES(MAALDAAR) THEY WO KAHNE LAGE KI YAH INSAAN SIWAAY ISKE KI TUMHARI TARAH EK MAMOOLI AADMI HAI AUR KUCH NAHI ISKA MATLAB YAH HAI KI TUMSE BARTAR HOKAR RAHEN AUR ALLAH KO(RASOOL BHEJNA) MANJOOR HOTA TO FARISHTON KO BHEJTA, HAMNE YAH BAAT APNE PAHLE BADON ME NAHI SUNI, BAS YAH EK AADMI HAI JISE JUNOON HO GAYA HAI TO KHAAS WAQT TAK USKI HAALAT KA INTEZAAR KARO"


(MOMINUN 24-25)


AUR AAGE DEKHIYE


"BAS YAH TO TUMHARI TARAH EK (MAMOOLI) AADMI HAI, YE WAHI KHATE HAIN JO TUM KHAATE HO AUR WAHI PEETE HAIN JO TUM PEETE HO AUR AGAR TUM APNE JAISE EK (MAMOOLI) AADMI KE KAHNE PAR CHALNE LAGE TO BESHAQ TUM GHAATE ME HO"

(MOMINUN 33-34)


AUR EKA WAALON NE BHI HZ SHOAIB AS KO IS TARAH KAHA THA-

"AUR TUM BHI KYA HO SIWAAY HAMAARE JAISE EK AADMI KE AUR HAM TUMKO JHOOTON ME SAMJHTE HAIN"


(SHURA 186)



ALLAH KA IRSHAAD HAI


"AUR YE LOG MATLAB ZAALIM LOG(AUR KAFFIR) CHUPKE CHUPKE KAANAFOOSI KARTE HAI KI YAH(NABI SWS) SIRF TUM JAISE EK AADMI HAIN TO KYA TUM PHIR BHI JAADU(KI BAAT) SUNNE KO UNKE PAAS JAOGE JABKI TUM JAANTE HO"


(AMBIYA 3)


AUR ISKE JAWAB ME ALLAH KA IRSHAD HAI


"AUR HAMNE AAPSE PAHLE SIRF AADMIYON HI KO PAIGHAMBAR BANAYA JISKE PAAS HUM WAHIY BHEJA KARTE THEY TO(AIY INKAAR KARNE WALON) AGAR TUM KO(YAH BAAT) MALUM NA HO KITAAB WALON SE MALUM KAR LO"


(AMBIYA 7)


AUR ALLAH NE AAPKO HUQM DIYA KI YE KAHEN


"AAP KAH DIJIYE KI MAIN TO BAS TUMHARE JAISA HI INSAAN HUN MERE PAAS TO BAS EK WAHIY AATI HAI KI TUMHARA MABOOD EK HI MABOOD HAI"

Lastly if NOOR is afzal then why did Allah ordered the Angels bowed down to Hazrat Adam.

[ja alhaq]

Assalam-O-Alikum All, First of all let me clear that I am not a bralvi, deobandi, ahlehadith etc I am simply a muslim, next I have been researching regarding the ikhtilaaf of Bralvi and Debobandi's for a year now. Every thing revolves around Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H being a Noor or Bashar. If we believe that he is a bashar than we also need to believe that he did not posses ILM-GAIB and we will also need to believe that he is not Hazir-O-Nazir, So before talking about Eid-UL-Milad Ul Nabi and other issues, I would like to talk about Noor OR BASHAR.

There is a common verse quoted by Bralvi's , when proving that RASOOL is NOOR-RUMIN-NOORILLAH.

6699


'O people of the Book! Undoubtedly, Our Messenger has come to you who makes clear to you much of that which you had hidden in the Book and pardons much. Undoubtedly, there has come to you from Allah a light and a Book, luminous."

According to them the Noor or light here is referred to Muhammad SAW, Now here is why Noor here does not means Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H

First Reason:
The Noor here means the Holy Quran, because Quran is a source of Hadiyah. It means that Quran is a book too and a Noor (light) of guidance.

Second Reason:

If you read the complete Ayah, you find that Allah has mentioned Prophet P.B.U.H in the previous ayah, If Noor here is Prophet P.B.U.H, then why did Allah mention him in the previous Ayah.

Now here is Surah Kaif's 110th Ayah, which clearly explains that RASOOL SAW was a bashar not a Noor.

قُلْ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُوحَى إِلَيَّ أَنَّمَا إِلَهُكُمْ إِلَهٌ وَاحِدٌ فَمَنْ كَانَ يَرْجُو لِقَاءَ رَبِّهِ فَلْيَعْمَلْ عَمَلا صَالِحًا وَلا يُشْرِكْ بِعِبَادَةِ رَبِّهِ أَحَدًا

Allah says to His Messenger Muhammad ,
﴿قُلْ﴾
(Say) to these idolators who reject your message to them,
﴿إِنَّمَآ أَنَاْ بَشَرٌ مِّثْلُكُمْ﴾
(`I am only a man like you.) Whoever claims that I am lying, let him bring something like this that I have brought. For I did not know the Unseen, the matters of the past which you asked me about and I told you about, the story of the people of the Cave and of Dhul-Qarnayn, stories which are true -- I did not know any of this except for what Allah made known to me.

But bashar exactly not like us, Let me give you an example, Stone is also the one which is used to built up a road and stone is also the one that is more precious than any other stone i.e. Diamond, So we all are normal rocks and Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H is like a Diamond.

Quran Says that no two ayahs of Quran will contradict each other, By looking at both Ayah's which one do you find to be more descriptive, The first one of second one.

Some more refrences regarding the proof that Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H is a Bashar:

"WA MA MAN NA-AASA AYYUMINU IZ ZA AHUMUL HUDA ILLA AN QAALU AB ASALLAAHU BA SHA RAR RASOOLA"


TRANS: AUR NAHI MANA KIYA LOGON KO YAH KI IMAAN LAAYEN JIS WAQT AAYI UNKE PAAS HIDAYAT MAGAR YAH KI KAHA UNHONE BHEJA ALLAH NE AADMI KO PAIGHAM PAHUNCHAANE WAALA


(BANI ISRAEL 94)


PHIR ALLAH FARMATA HAI-

"KAH AGAR HOTE BEECH ZAMEEN KE FARISHTE CHALA KARTE ALBATTA UTAARTE HUM UPER UNKE AASMAAN SE FARISHTE KO PAIGHAM PAHUNCHANE WAALA KAHA UNHONE NAHI TUM YAH KI, BAND KARO HUM KO US CHEEZ SE KI IBAADAT KARTE BAAP HAMAARE TO LE AAO HAMAARE PAAS KHULI DALEEL"



PAIGHAMBARON NE APNI BASHARIYAT KA SABOOT DETE HUE ISTARAH KAHA HAI-


"UNKE RASOOLON NE(ISKE JAWAB ME) KAHA KI HUM BHI TUMHARE JAISE AADMI HI HAIN LEKIN ALLAH APNE BANDON ME SE JIS PAR CHAAHE EHSAAN KARE"


(IBRAHEEM 11)


ALLAH KA IRSHAAD HAI-


"AUR AAP UNKE SAAMNE EK KISSA MATLAB(EK BASTI WALON KA KISSA) US WAQT BAYAN KIJIYE JABKI US BASTI ME KAI RASOOL AAYE, YANI JAB HAMNE UNKE PAAS (PAHLE) DO KO BHEJA TO UN LOGON NE (PAHLE) DONO KO JHOOTA BATAYA PHIR TEESRE(RASOOL) SE MALUM KIYA TO UN TEENO NE KAHA KI HUM TUMHAARE PAAS BHEJE GAYE HAIN, UN LOGON NE KAHA TUM TO HAMARI TARAH MAAMOOLI AADMI HO"


(YASEEN 13-15)


EK AUR AYAT MULAHIZA HO


" TO UNKI QAWM ME JO KAFFIR RAEES(MAALDAAR) THEY WO KAHNE LAGE KI YAH INSAAN SIWAAY ISKE KI TUMHARI TARAH EK MAMOOLI AADMI HAI AUR KUCH NAHI ISKA MATLAB YAH HAI KI TUMSE BARTAR HOKAR RAHEN AUR ALLAH KO(RASOOL BHEJNA) MANJOOR HOTA TO FARISHTON KO BHEJTA, HAMNE YAH BAAT APNE PAHLE BADON ME NAHI SUNI, BAS YAH EK AADMI HAI JISE JUNOON HO GAYA HAI TO KHAAS WAQT TAK USKI HAALAT KA INTEZAAR KARO"


(MOMINUN 24-25)


AUR AAGE DEKHIYE


"BAS YAH TO TUMHARI TARAH EK (MAMOOLI) AADMI HAI, YE WAHI KHATE HAIN JO TUM KHAATE HO AUR WAHI PEETE HAIN JO TUM PEETE HO AUR AGAR TUM APNE JAISE EK (MAMOOLI) AADMI KE KAHNE PAR CHALNE LAGE TO BESHAQ TUM GHAATE ME HO"

(MOMINUN 33-34)


AUR EKA WAALON NE BHI HZ SHOAIB AS KO IS TARAH KAHA THA-

"AUR TUM BHI KYA HO SIWAAY HAMAARE JAISE EK AADMI KE AUR HAM TUMKO JHOOTON ME SAMJHTE HAIN"


(SHURA 186)



ALLAH KA IRSHAAD HAI


"AUR YE LOG MATLAB ZAALIM LOG(AUR KAFFIR) CHUPKE CHUPKE KAANAFOOSI KARTE HAI KI YAH(NABI SWS) SIRF TUM JAISE EK AADMI HAIN TO KYA TUM PHIR BHI JAADU(KI BAAT) SUNNE KO UNKE PAAS JAOGE JABKI TUM JAANTE HO"


(AMBIYA 3)


AUR ISKE JAWAB ME ALLAH KA IRSHAD HAI


"AUR HAMNE AAPSE PAHLE SIRF AADMIYON HI KO PAIGHAMBAR BANAYA JISKE PAAS HUM WAHIY BHEJA KARTE THEY TO(AIY INKAAR KARNE WALON) AGAR TUM KO(YAH BAAT) MALUM NA HO KITAAB WALON SE MALUM KAR LO"


(AMBIYA 7)


AUR ALLAH NE AAPKO HUQM DIYA KI YE KAHEN


"AAP KAH DIJIYE KI MAIN TO BAS TUMHARE JAISA HI INSAAN HUN MERE PAAS TO BAS EK WAHIY AATI HAI KI TUMHARA MABOOD EK HI MABOOD HAI"

Lastly if NOOR is afzal then why did Allah ordered the Angels bowed down to Hazrat Adam.

one simple question if the quran is noor then why does it say 'noor and a book' noor wa kitab' the quran has been ,mentioned clearly but what is the noor, indeed it is the prophet s.a.w.

TERAY NASLE PAAK MEIN HEIN BACHA BACHA NOOR KA, TU HEIN AIN E NOOR KA TERA SAB GHARANA NOOR KA

[imran1976]

the Kuffars are beating the hell out of Muslims , up down left right and we are still stuck with non issues - i don't know when this "Sas Bahu" dispute between Brelvis & Deobandis will end; at least I am fed up of this.

[mh16388]

the Kuffars are beating the hell out of Muslims , up down left right and we are still stuck with non issues - i don't know when this "Sas Bahu" dispute between Brelvis & Deobandis will end; at least I am fed up of this.
:thumbsup: