Warning: Lies, distortions, and slanders by Shaykh GF Haddad [Archive] - sunniforum.com - a resource for the propagation of authentic Islamic teachings

View Full Version : Warning: Lies, distortions, and slanders by Shaykh GF Haddad

SeekerOfGuidance

31-03-2012, 12:38 PM

:salam:

As some of you are probably aware, Maulana Muzzammil Husayn has written a number of posts on sunniforum refuting Shaykh GF Haddad, during which clear slanders, distortions and lies have surfaced. I have gathered a few of these statements into one post as an example of the deception perpetrated by this tradionalist scholar who exercises some degree of influence online, to the extent that many brothers have fallen for his slanders against certain righteous ulama. The sample below should be enough to alert brothers to the fact that this scholar is not a reliable source of information. If anyone here has contact with the Shaykh, then he is requested to bring this sample to the Shaykh's attention.

NOTE
Ulama and moderators were consulted before posting this.

The number of lies, distortions and slanders present in just a couple of his articles is astonishing. Only Allah knows how many more distortions would come up if a thorough analysis is made of all of his articles. The wahhabis are castigated for much lesser crimes.

The fact that people can express further love for Gibril Haddad after gaining knowledge of such clear lies, slanders, and distortions, only because he feeds them what their desires wish to be fed, sufficiently explains why the ahlul bid’ah were also referred to as the ahlul hawaa (the people of desires) by the early fuqaha.

LIES, SLANDERS, AND DISTORTIONS by Shaykh GF Haddad
A sample from a couple of his articles

1. GF Haddad said: "It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

The last Mughal sultan of India was Bahadur Shah who came to power in 1837 several years after the death of Shah Isma‘il. Shah Isma‘il did not oppose any jihad.

2. GF Haddad said: "[Taqwiyat al-Iman of] Ismā.īl Dihlawī was also immediately opposed by a host of Indian Sunnī Ulema beginning with his own family and the Ulema of Delhi such as his two paternal uncles Shāh .Abd al-.Azīz Muh.addith Dihlawī (d. 1239/1834) (the son of Shāh Walī Allāh and one of those considered a Renewer of the thirteenth Hijrī century) and Shāh Raf.ī al-Dīn Muh.addith Dihlawī in his Fatāwā""

Shah Rafi‘ al-Din passed away in 1233 H/1818 AD before Taqwiyat al-Iman was even written, so it is not possible he wrote a refutation. Also Shah 'Abd al-'Aziz died in 1824 not 1834.

3. GF Haddad said: "Ismā.īl Dihlawī wrote Taqwiyat al-Īmān in the wake of his H.ijāz years (1236-1239), at which time he had come under the tutelage of Wahhābī missionaries."

In the period Shah Isma'il went to perform Hajj ("his Hijaz years"), the followers of Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab had already been expelled from the Hijaz, and it was under Ottoman rule when the followers of Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab were vilified, and they held no sway in these lands. Besides this clear historical indication that Shah Isma'il most probably had no contact with "Wahhabi missionaries," scholars of his movement find no evidence of any relation or connection between them.

Harlan O. Pearson an academic researcher on Sayyid Ahmad Berelwi’s movement (called Tariqah Muhammadiyyah) wrote while discussing Shah Isma‘il and the Tariqah Muhammadiyyah’s pilgrimage: “The Indian Muhammadi [i.e. the movement of Sayyid Ahmad Shahid and Shah Isma'il] had no apparent connection with the Arabian Wahhabi movement. By performing the pilgrimage, they were performing a basic religious duty in preparation for their later activities.” (Islamic Reform and Revival in Nineteenth Century India, Yoda Press,2008, p. 39)

Muhammad Hedayatullah wrote in his Masters thesis for McGill University on Sayyid Ahmad Barelwi: “His [Sayyid Ahmad’s] relation with the Arabian Wahhabis is not historically proved.” (A Study of the Religious Reform Movement of Sayyid Ahmad of Rae Bareli, p. 26)

4. GF Haddad said: "The night of the Mawlid Sharif is of greater significance and merit than Laylat al-Qadr which is the position of some of the Maliki Imams as cited by Abu al-`Abbas al-Wansharisi (d. 914) in his encyclopdia of Maliki fatwas titled _al-Mi`yar al-Mu`rab wa al-Jami` al-Mughrib fi Fatawa Ahl Ifriqya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib (11:280-285)."

"Some" normally means "more than one," but this encyclopaedia only cites one person stating this view.

5. GF Haddad said: "Secondly, it is patently false that the origin of the two `Eids cannot be attributed to any particular event of history that had happened on these dates as the books of Tafsir are replete with the story of the sacrifice of Ibrahim (as) with his son Isma`il (as) on the occasion of which was offered a huge ram as stated in the Holy Qur'an."

There is no proof that the sacrifice of Ibrahim ('alayhi salam) happened on the day of 'Id (10th Dhu l-Hijjah).

6. GF Haddad said: "As for death anniversaries, the Prophet definitely visited his wife and uncle's graves on a regular basis as well as his mother's."

No such rigorously authentic narration exists which state he visited any of these relatives on a regular basis.

7. Translating a passage from Siyar A'lam al-Nubala', GF Haddad quotes al-Dhahabi as follows: "As for his celebration of the Noble Mawlid al-Nabawi, words are too poor to describe it. The people used to come all the way from Iraq and Algeria to attend it. Two wooden dais would be erected and decorated for him and his wife... the celebration would last several days, and a huge quantity of cows and camels would be brought out to be sacrificed and cooked in different ways... Preachers would roam the field exhorting the people. Great sums were spent (as charity). Ibn Dihya compiled a 'Book of Mawlid' for him for which he received 1,000 dinars. He [Muzaffar] was modest, a LOVER OF GOOD, AND A TRUE SUNNI who loved scholars of jurisprudence and scholars of hadith, and was generous even to poets. He was killed in battle according to what is reported."

The original passage of al-Dhahabi's Siyar does not say "a true Sunni" (sunniyyun haqqan), but just "Sunni". In the deliberately placed ellipsis, al-Dhahabi said: "In them [i.e. the pavilions erected for the mawlid celebration] were musicians and men of play, and he [i.e. al-Malik al-Muzaffar] would come down everyday at 'Asr and stand at every pavilion and watch/take enjoyment from (the music and play)." (wa fiha jawq al-maghani wa al-la'ib, wa yanzilu kulla yawmin al-'asra fayaqifu 'ala kulli qubbatin wa yatafarraj). This was not translated amidst the remainder of the passage for obvious reasons.

8. GF Haddad said regarding the narration in which the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wasallam) prayed at Bethlehem during the Night Journey: "and al-Bazzar [narrated it] with a sound chain as indicated by al-Haythami in Majma` al-Zawa'id"

On the hadith in question, al-Haythami says in Majma' al-Zawa'id: "Al-Bazzar and al-Tabrani in al-Kabir narrated it...In it is Ishaq ibn Ibrahim ibn al-'Ala, considered trustworthy by Yahya ibn Ma'in and weakened by al-Nasa'i."

رواه البزار والطبراني في الكبير ، إلا أن الطبراني قال فيه : " قد أخذ صاحبك الفطرة ، وإنه لمهدي . وقال في وصف جهنم كيف وجدتها ؟ قال : مثل الحمة السخنة " . وفيه إسحاق بن إبراهيم بن العلاء ، وثقه يحيى بن معين ، وضعفه النسائي

And this Haddad claims is an indication of its soundness from al-Haythami though he makes no such judgement.

9. GF Haddad said: "Secondly, the prescription of the commemoration of the birth of Christ *was* prescribed in the early Christian Church, even if its chronological proximity to the pagan commemoration of the winter solstice was co-opted by the political authorities as a means to recycle prevalent social customs in certain regions including those of pagan origins."

In exact contradiction to this statement, the Catholic Encyclopaedia states: "Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. Irenaeus and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feasts; Origen, glancing perhaps at the discreditable imperial Natalitia, asserts (in Lev. Hom. viii in Migne, P.G., XII, 495) that in the Scriptures sinners alone, not saints, celebrate their birthday; Arnobius (VII, 32 in P.L., V, 1264) can still ridicule the "birthdays" of the gods." The Encyclopaedia goes on to mention that the first time it was celebrated was two centuries after Christ. It seems, Haddad's assertion that the commemoration of the birth of Christ was prescribed in the early Church, is simply fabricated and has no basis in fact.

10. GF Haddad said in his review of Kitab al-Tawhid: "Citing another weak narration that “a Companion” said: “Let us all go seek the help of the Messenger of Allâh (qûmû binâ nastaghîthu birasûlillah) against this hypocrite [`Abd Allâh ibn Ubay ibn Salûl who challenged Abû Bakr to ask the Prophet for a major miracle],” whereupon the Prophet said: “Innahu lâ yustaghâthu bî innamâ yustaghâthu billâh * “Help is not sought with me, it is sought only with Allâh.” Ibn `Abd al-Wahhâb references it to al-T.abarânî. [10]
First neither the wording nastaghîthu birasûlillah nor innahu lâ yustaghâthu bî innamâ yustaghâthu billâh is found in any book of h.adîth and there is no chain for them! The reference to “al-T.abarânî” shows blind imitation of Ibn Taymiyya's incorrect referencing of these wordings to al-T.abarânî's al-Mu`jam al-Kabîr in al-Radd `alâ al-Bakrî and Majmû` al-Fatâwâ."

In fact, the exact narration as quoted by Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab was narrated by al-Tabrani. In Majma' al-Zawa'id (Kitab al-Ad'iyah, Bab Fima Yustaftah bihi al-Du'a...vol 10, page 246 Darwish ed.), al-Haythami said:

عن عبادة بن الصامت قال قال أبو بكر قوموا نستغيث برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من هذا المنافق فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم انه لا يستغاث بى إنما يستغاث بالله عزوجل
رواه الطبراني ورجاله رجال الصحيح غير ابن لهيعة وهو حسن الحديث

After narrating it with the wording presented by Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab with "Help is not sought from me, it is only sought from Allah," al-Haytami says: "Al-Tabrani narrated it and its men are the men of the Sahih besides Ibn Lahi'ah whose hadiths are hasan."

:ws:

Bro Hasan

31-03-2012, 12:47 PM

Is this the guy who criticized Mufti Taqi Uthmani sahab ? May Allah swt give him hidaya and us hidaya.

Abdul1234

31-03-2012, 01:14 PM

Is this about Sheikh Gibril Haddad?

Maybe you should forgive his mistakes in this area as he is an Arab and he has probably been fed these things by some of the many Barelvis who follow his Sheikh in Cyprus.

Sheikh Gibril Haddad's pen is always active in his intellectual war against the Salafis, but he has spoken on a number of occasions defending the Deobandis from such things as claims that they are not Sunni.

Have you contacted him and asked him to discuss these things, maybe it is good to do this, even better before you print things, yes?

Ahmad_shakeel

28-04-2012, 04:44 PM

:jazak:

bugmenot

28-04-2012, 04:59 PM

Maybe you should forgive his mistakes in this area as he is an Arab and he has probably been fed these things by some of the many Barelvis who follow his Sheikh in Cyprus.
Sheikh Gibril Haddad's pen is always active in his intellectual war against the Salafis, but he has spoken on a number of occasions defending the Deobandis from such things as claims that they are not Sunni.
Have you contacted him and asked him to discuss these things, maybe it is good to do this, even better before you print things, yes?
He might have changed his opinion on 'ulama of deoband yet his old articles describing them as wahhabi are still present last time I checked.

edit : some parts highlighted here (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?46654-Shaykh-Gibril-Haddad-refutes-Mufti-Taqi-Usmani-on-Mawlid&p=386352&viewfull=1#post386352).

Saad

28-04-2012, 05:25 PM

1. GF Haddad said: "It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

This is hilarious.

3. GF Haddad said: "Ismā.īl Dihlawī wrote Taqwiyat al-Īmān in the wake of his H.ijāz years (1236-1239), at which time he had come under the tutelage of Wahhābī missionaries."

Wahhabi Myths surrounding Shah Isma‘il Shahid

http://www.deoband.org/2010/06/history/distortions-and-lies/shattering-the-wahhabi-myths-surrounding-shah-isma%E2%80%98il-shahid/

Abu_Tamim

28-04-2012, 05:43 PM

GF Haddad said: "It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

This was the exact propaganda that was used by the Brits against Sayyid Ahmed Shahid, that he was a rebel. And the jihad launched by the Mughal Sultan....has me rolling on the floor laughing. Must have been the kind of Jihad that Haddad and company are used to...on the dinner table where they gain complete mastery over fried chicken and chilled coke.

abdulwahhab

28-04-2012, 09:56 PM

:salam:

How can you be a rebel against the British and be opposed to jihaad? The sentence itself is self-contradictory.

Mujib

28-04-2012, 10:39 PM

Abu_Tamim

29-04-2012, 07:29 AM

Alhamdulillah - Shaykh Gibril's service to Islam and Muslims is immeasurable. It is a sign of our times that the children who used to take from his hands think themselves grown up and now dare to say things like "lies" about him. This misfortune is not restricted to one group, and that is a sign to his credit.

We have never taken anything from Haddad or his leaders and minions.
And there is no doubt that he has said things about the elders of Deoband that can only be called lies or else his research is so shoddy that he cannot distinguish between the truth and lies.

silentflute

29-04-2012, 10:16 AM

Abu_Tamim

29-04-2012, 03:11 PM

Salaam,
Instead of making threads like this, is it best not to try and make contact with the individual and put your point across to them ? and share with the rest of the world ?
I was in a recent discussion with someone who I class as a reliable source and he informed me that the sheikh in question is a student of Sheikh Mohammad Yaqoubi.
Jazakallah Khair

Is it not for those who slander our elders to know what they are talking about before going on the net and mouthing nonsense? Why should we go running to them?

Ibrahimhanifa

12-06-2012, 08:58 PM

:salam:

As some of you are probably aware, brother Muzammil Husayn has written a number of posts on sunniforum refuting Shaykh GF Haddad, during which clear slanders, distortions and lies have surfaced. I have gathered a few of these statements into one post as an example of the deception perpetrated by this tradionalist scholar who exercises some degree of influence online, to the extent that many brothers have fallen for his slanders against certain righteous ulama. The sample below should be enough to alert brothers to the fact that this scholar is not a reliable source of information. If anyone here has contact with the Shaykh, then he is requested to bring this sample to the Shaykh's attention:

1. GF Haddad said: "It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

2. GF Haddad said: "[Taqwiyat al-Iman of] Ismā.īl Dihlawī was also immediately opposed by a host of Indian Sunnī Ulema beginning with his own family and the Ulema of Delhi such as his two paternal uncles Shāh .Abd al-.Azīz Muh.addith Dihlawī (d. 1239/1834) Shah Rafi‘ al-Din passed away in 1233 H/1818 AD before Taqwiyat al-Iman was even written, so it is not possible he wrote a refutation. Also Shah 'Abd al-'Aziz died in 1824 not 1834.

3. GF Haddad said: "Ismā.īl Dihlawī wrote Taqwiyat al-Īmān in the wake of his H.ijāz years (1236-1239), at which time he had come under the tutelage of Wahhābī missionaries."

4. GF Haddad said: "The night of the Mawlid Sharif is of greater significance and merit than Laylat al-Qadr which is the position of some of the Maliki Imams as cited by Abu al-`Abbas al-Wansharisi (d. 914) in his encyclopdia of Maliki fatwas titled _al-Mi`yar al-Mu`rab wa al-Jami` al-Mughrib fi Fatawa Ahl Ifriqya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib (11:280-285)."

5. GF Haddad said: "Secondly, it is patently false that the origin of the two `Eids cannot be attributed to any particular event of history that had happened on these dates as the books of Tafsir are replete with the story of the sacrifice of Ibrahim (as) with his son Isma`il (as) on the occasion of which was offered a huge ram as stated in the Holy Qur'an."

6. GF Haddad said: "As for death anniversaries, the Prophet definitely visited his wife and uncle's graves on a regular basis as well as his mother's."

No such rigorously authentic narration exists which state he visited any of these relatives on a regular basis.

7. Translating a passage from Siyar A'lam al-Nubala', GF Haddad quotes al-Dhahabi as follows: "As for his celebration of the Noble Mawlid al-Nabawi, words are too poor to describe it. The people used to come all the way from Iraq and Algeria to attend it.
9. GF Haddad said: "Secondly, the prescription of the commemoration of the birth of Christ *was* prescribed in the early Christian Church, even if its chronological proximity to the pagan commemoration of the winter solstice was co-opted by the political authorities as a means to recycle prevalent social customs in certain regions including those of pagan origins."

NOTE: Ulama and moderators were consulted before posting this.

:ws:

Salam Brother

hope you are well

Can you please give me names of scholars who approved your article?

Sultaan

12-06-2012, 10:48 PM

This is rich coming from Gibril Haddad, who is well-known for his extreme ta'assub towards the Neo-Con Sufi, Hisham Kabbani, one of the biggest stooges for the enemies of Islaam in the West, and he even defended his vile shaykh at Yursil's blog when I asked him about his use of Shaykh Ali al-Hudhayfi's takfeer of the Christians in his khutbah in Medina to incite the kuffar against the "Wahabis" at his website. Also their grandmaster Nazim al-Haqqani asked the Pope to "pray" for him when he visited him in Cyprus. The brother who started this thread should expose his connections to these charlatans.

Ibrahimhanifa

13-06-2012, 11:31 AM

Ibrahimhanifa

13-06-2012, 10:31 PM

quick question - are you prentending to be hanafi? like some zionist who pretend to be muslims! Why do you wahabist (sect of christanity & Jamia ) attack other groups behind the hanafi lable?

Saad

18-06-2012, 09:07 PM

Salam Brother

hope you are well

Can you please give me names of scholars who approved your article?

Assalam o 'alaykum,

Why does he need an approval? Lies of G.F Haddad are clear as daylight.

Ibrahimhanifa

18-06-2012, 09:29 PM

Assalam o 'alaykum,

Why does he need an approval? Lies of G.F Haddad are clear as daylight.

WS

1. If I hate GF Haddad i don't need approvals

2. if i want the truth, I ask for approvals

3. Usually people in this forum are lay people, so quoting something like that you must be a scholar or my favourite copy & Paste scholar ( I am one)

4. Finally, The guy who posted the info said the following 'NOTE: Ulama and moderators were consulted before posting this.' This mean I was asking who (names) not why! So If i was to listen to someone like you who has flaws in reading couple of lines (maybe hate?) I have a right to ask Who & Why

Conclusion
I am right to conclude your hate for GF Haddad is clear as daylight? Please stay away from sacred text, what you tell the neo salafist tell yourself! No Offence

Jadeed

18-06-2012, 10:07 PM

It is perfectly fine, apparently, for scholars and students to lie upon shuhadah like Shah Ismail and spread deviance, bid'ah, etc, while clothing it in the name of Sunnah, but if a person on a forum should call a spade a spade then he is liable and it will be termed 'backbiting!'

What madness!

aMuslimForLife

19-06-2012, 08:22 AM

Bugz

19-06-2012, 09:00 AM

Who is this sheikh, nope don't know him.

abul_hussain

20-06-2012, 10:40 PM

I love Shaykh GF Haddad... I haven't come across a scholar that I don't disagree with nor a scholar that is free of mistakes... He has done alot in bringing to light the mistakes and errors of salafism, al hamdullah... For this alone... I love him.... May Allah give him long life and a sit next to the anbiya in jannah... Amin.....

Are there any scholars you know of that has never made mistakes???

Why don't you love Barelwis and Ahbash ? they have done more in bashing salafis than Dr GF Haddad who at many times sided with Salafis like on the issue of Aqida of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani and use of Bi-Dhat.

aMuslimForLife

20-06-2012, 11:50 PM

Why don't you love Barelwis and Ahbash ? they have done more in bashing salafis than Dr GF Haddad who at many times sided with Salafis like on the issue of Aqida of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani and use of Bi-Dhat.

I don't really know who the barelwis are and to be honest I don't really care who they are... And the Ahbash are a little extreme in their anti-athropomorphism approach... They make takfir of Salafis... while I do not agree with the Salafis and their minhaj... I don't feel Salafis are kafiroon (disbelievers)... They are Muslims al hamdullah... While they have mistakes and errors in their minhaj.... to be honest... I haven't met a Muslim who is free from mistakes or errors including myself. With that being said... may Allah forgive all of us for our short comings and misunderstandings and grant all of us jannah.... Amin...

Ibrahimhanifa

07-07-2012, 11:38 PM

[QUOTE=Abu_Tamim;758061]GF Haddad said: "It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

salam

quick question dear brother, where can get this quote from, so it goes back to GF Haddad?

Ibrahimhanifa

07-07-2012, 11:42 PM

Muzzammil Husayn

08-07-2012, 02:59 PM

GF Haddad said: "It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

salam

quick question dear brother, where can get this quote from, so it goes back to GF Haddad?
Last page of this: http://mac.abc.se/~onesr/d/tqi_e.pdf

mh16388

10-07-2012, 09:26 PM

4. GF Haddad said: "The night of the Mawlid Sharif is of greater significance and merit than Laylat al-Qadr which is the position of some of the Maliki Imams as cited by Abu al-`Abbas al-Wansharisi (d. 914) in his encyclopdia of Maliki fatwas titled _al-Mi`yar al-Mu`rab wa al-Jami` al-Mughrib fi Fatawa Ahl Ifriqya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib (11:280-285)."

"Some" normally means "more than one," but this encyclopaedia only cites one person stating this view.

i think what sh. GF Haddad meant was that Abu al-`Abbas al-Wansharisi mentioned the maliki scholars holding this view in his encyclopedia. not that he himself stated this.

Allahualam.

Muzzammil Husayn

10-07-2012, 10:29 PM

i think what sh. GF Haddad meant was that Abu al-`Abbas al-Wansharisi mentioned the maliki scholars holding this view in his encyclopedia. not that he himself stated this.

Allahualam.
Al-Wansharisi only mentions one Maliki scholar - in the singular, not scholars in the plural - holding this view, namely Abu 'Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Marzuq. Whereas GF Haddad suggested that he cited more than one. And that was the point.

mh16388

10-07-2012, 10:37 PM

Al-Wansharisi only mentions one Maliki scholar - in the singular, not scholars in the plural - holding this view, namely Abu 'Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Marzuq. Whereas GF Haddad suggested that he cited more than one. And that was the point.

ok :jazak: for the clarification. maybe this extra detail and the name of Abu 'Abd Allah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Marzuq could be added to the OP

btw does one mailiki scholar believing in this goes against the consensus of the belief regarding comparison between l\mawlid un nabi :saw: and laylat ul qadr?or is there no consensus?just asking.

SeekerOfGuidance

11-07-2012, 07:56 PM

"NOTE: Ulama and moderators were consulted before posting this."

Salam

Just wondering when you are planning to name ullemas who approved 'your comments?' . if i don't hear from you, can i assume you don't know yourself where the info came from, long as it shows GF Haddad got it wrong.

:salam:

The sample of deception and lies were gathered from posts by Muzammil Husayn, which were already on this forum such as those found in the following threads:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?74735-A-critical-look-at-Gibril-Haddad%92s-Review-of-Taqwiyat-al-Iman%26%238207%3B

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?46654-Shaykh-Gibril-Haddad-refutes-Mufti-Taqi-Usmani-on-Mawlid/page10

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?72217-How-Knowledge-of-Ghayb-is-Exclusive-to-Allah-Allamah-Anwar-Shah-Kashmiri

You don't need to be a scholar to be able to notice the clear deception perpetrated by this scholar.

If a scholar was produce multiple slanders against your father by making statements such as:

"..he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

and you know that your father did not even live during the Sultan's reign, would you really need much intellect to decipher that this is a clear slander, worthy of outrage, and that this sort of pseudo-scholar needs to be warned against?

Unfortunately, Shah Ismail Shaheed is not the only victim of such slanders.

Nevertheless, before creating a new thread, posting material already produced on this forum, I thought it prudent to check with some scholars and moderators first. I don't need to name who I consulted.

Our bias and unjustness becomes undeniably clear when we are willing to accept unhesistantly, without verification, lies that are conducive to our tastes, and when the the falsity of such lies are exposed, we overlook such deception frighteningly easily, hardly batting an eyelid. On the other hand, the slightest slip by a 'wahhabi' scholar is treated with outrage, and used to paint all such scholars with the same brush.

:ws:

SeekerOfGuidance

11-07-2012, 07:57 PM

Ibrahimhanifa

14-07-2012, 12:04 AM

:salam:

The sample of deception and lies were gathered from posts by Muzammil Husayn, which were already on this forum such as those found in the following threads:

You don't need to be a scholar to be able to notice the clear deception perpetrated by this scholar.

If a scholar was produce multiple slanders against your father by making statements such as:

"..he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

and you know that your father did not even live during the Sultan's reign, would you really need much intellect to decipher that this is a clear slander, worthy of outrage, and that this sort of pseudo-scholar needs to be warned against?

Unfortunately, Shah Ismail Shaheed is not the only victim of such slanders.

Nevertheless, before creating a new thread, posting material already produced on this forum, I thought it prudent to check with some scholars and moderators first. I don't need to name who I consulted.

Our bias and unjustness becomes undeniably clear when we are willing to accept unhesistantly, without verification, lies that are conducive to our tastes, and when the the falsity of such lies are exposed, we overlook such deception frighteningly easily, hardly batting an eyelid. On the other hand, the slightest slip by a 'wahhabi' scholar is treated with outrage, and used to paint all such scholars with the same brush.

:ws:

Salam!!
First thing, I without doubt condemn Shakyh Gibrill Haddad’s comments/slander/lies etc against certain/all Deobondi scholars back in 2000/ late nineties. If you have any recent comments from GF Haddad slandering, backbiting etc let me know, I will forward it to his website, inshallah hopefully we can get an apology from him and get him to remove the contents!!!!

End of discussion!

Little bit personal there about father? Hmmm…. No problem I can take a hit, inshallah! Let’s move on anyways…….

So, which scholars did you consult? Or are you beginning to go back in your own words? Moderators? Nobody?

If no scholars were consulted, maybe you need practise what you are preaching!

AND YES I CONDEM SHAKYH GIBRILL HADDAD FOR HIS SLANDERS ETC! If you don’t give me names of the beloved Deobandi scholars you consulted, I too condem you for same thing as I condemned GF Haddad for

I feel like I am debating with a wahabi ( Please don’t generate this has debate for your defence!)

SeekerOfGuidance

15-07-2012, 02:52 PM

Salam!!
First thing, I without doubt condemn Shakyh Gibrill Haddad’s comments/slander/lies etc against certain/all Deobondi scholars back in 2000/ late nineties. If you have any recent comments from GF Haddad slandering, backbiting etc let me know, I will forward it to his website, inshallah hopefully we can get an apology from him and get him to remove the contents!!!!

End of discussion!

Little bit personal there about father? Hmmm…. No problem I can take a hit, inshallah! Let’s move on anyways…….

So, which scholars did you consult? Or are you beginning to go back in your own words? Moderators? Nobody?

If no scholars were consulted, maybe you need practise what you are preaching!

AND YES I CONDEM SHAKYH GIBRILL HADDAD FOR HIS SLANDERS ETC! If you don’t give me names of the beloved Deobandi scholars you consulted, I too condem you for same thing as I condemned GF Haddad for

I feel like I am debating with a wahabi ( Please don’t generate this has debate for your defence!)

:salam:

I did not intend to insult you or for you 'take a hit'. I'm sorry if you took it that way. I used an example that makes it easy for you to understand that you do not need to be a scholar to realise when a scholar has perpetrated clear slanders, lies and distortions, to such an extent that he needs to be warned against.

I've noticed you have a lot to say against wahhabis. I assume that if I look through your previous posts you will have attacked the wahhabis and/or their scholars. May I ask, whose permission did you take? Or shall I count that as slanders according to how you appear to be defining it? You've just condemned Gibril Haddad for allegedly slandering the Deobandi Akabir. Which scholars permitted you to make such an allegation against Gibril Haddad on this forum? There are plenty of posts on this forum where brothers have warned against the likes of Tahir al-Qadri and Rabee al-Madhkalee. Do they also need permission?

In any case, before starting this thread, I did consult scholars/moderators to double-check I was doing the right thing.

:ws:

Ibrahimhanifa

18-07-2012, 10:51 PM

:salam:

I did not intend to insult you or for you 'take a hit'. I'm sorry if you took it that way. I used an example that makes it easy for you to understand that you do not need to be a scholar to realise when a scholar has perpetrated clear slanders, lies and distortions, to such an extent that he needs to be warned against.

I've noticed you have a lot to say against wahhabis. I assume that if I look through your previous posts you will have attacked the wahhabis and/or their scholars. May I ask, whose permission did you take? Or shall I count that as slanders according to how you appear to be defining it? You've just condemned Gibril Haddad for allegedly slandering the Deobandi Akabir. Which scholars permitted you to make such an allegation against Gibril Haddad on this forum? There are plenty of posts on this forum where brothers have warned against the likes of Tahir al-Qadri and Rabee al-Madhkalee. Do they also need permission?

In any case, before starting this thread, I did consult scholars/moderators to double-check I was doing the right thing.

:ws:

WS

I am amazed you apologised, you acting contray to wahabis. Then again that's a typical deobandi they do have the best adab!
if you look at my posts, they are very simple! I only ask for proofs, many don't provide this. Abur Raheem Limda too talks against the wahabist. go to his website he refutes utaymeen's (Latter day salafi) laws of fasting (recent article)

as for the parents issue I remeber Riyadhal Haq (purchased audio?) saying, to avoid insulting your parents you should avoid insulting other peoples parents. Although, what you said wasn't direct insult put can be misinterpted to be. Some people don't have parents, imagine the exchange of insults?

Moving forward....I am not convinced you consulted other ullemas, hence you should either remove that statement or your whole post

you can post after Ramadan if you want .....Ramadan Mubarak!

SeekerOfGuidance

19-07-2012, 12:03 PM

WS

I am amazed you apologised, you acting contray to wahabis. Then again that's a typical deobandi they do have the best adab!
if you look at my posts, they are very simple! I only ask for proofs, many don't provide this. Abur Raheem Limda too talks against the wahabist. go to his website he refutes utaymeen's (Latter day salafi) laws of fasting (recent article)

as for the parents issue I remeber Riyadhal Haq (purchased audio?) saying, to avoid insulting your parents you should avoid insulting other peoples parents. Although, what you said wasn't direct insult put can be misinterpted to be. Some people don't have parents, imagine the exchange of insults?

Moving forward....I am not convinced you consulted other ullemas, hence you should either remove that statement or your whole post

you can post after Ramadan if you want .....Ramadan Mubarak!

:salam:

:jazak: for correcting me regarding the parents issue. You've explained my mistake clearly, and I sincerely ask your forgiveness and du'as.

And I don't see any benefit in continuing this discussion after Ramadhan. If you don't believe me about consulting scholars, then I can't do much about it

And may Allah grant you a Mubarak Ramadhan as well.

:ws:

Ibrahimhanifa

25-07-2012, 03:54 PM

Muzzammil Husayn

21-08-2012, 08:46 PM

Another example of GF Haddad's deception:

http://eshaykh.com/halal_haram/imam-abu-hanifa-on-structures-over-tombs/

Question:

It is said in a paper:

” Abu Hanifa is reported to have regarded building over tombs (al-bina ala l-qubur) as legal and not objectionable.57 Unfortunately, neither the Musnad of Abu Hanifa nor the Kitab al-Asl of Muhammed Hasan al-Shaibani have chapters on janaiz, from which one could draw actual statements by the early Hanafiyya on that complex of questions.

[57 Nawawi majmu 5:298; Abu Abd'allah Muhammed Qadhi Safad al-Dimaqshi, Rahmat al Umma fi Kthilaf al Aimma( Cairo,1386/1987), 73; Abd al Wahab al-Sharani, Kitab al Mizan, 2 vol.(Cairo, 1291/1874), vol 1, p.271. Reports that Abu Hanifa approved of tombs without any restriction may have been negative propoganda by other religious schools against the Hanafiyya, but they did circulate widely.]“”

http://archnet.org/library/documents/one-document.jsp?document_id=4216

Is this attribution to Imam Abu Hanifa accurate and correctly referenced ?

Answer:

If Imam al-Nawawi mentions it in al-Majmu` then it is certainly reliable.
See also here.

Hajj Gibril Haddad

He claims the attribution of the opinion that there is nothing objectionable to building over graves to Abu Hanifah is "certainly reliable" based on it being said by Imam al-Nawawi.

Al-Nawawi's exact statement is:

قال الشافعي والأصحاب : يكره أن يجصص القبر ، وأن يكتب عليه اسم صاحبه أو غير ذلك ، وأن يبنى عليه ، وهذا لا خلاف فيه عندنا ، وبه قال مالك وأحمد وداود وجماهير العلماء ، وقال أبو حنيفة : لا يكره

“Al-Shafi‘i and the Ashab said: It is makruh to plaster the grave, and to write on it the name of its occupant or anything else and to build over it. There is no disagreement about this for us and this was the position of Malik, Ahmad, Dawud and the vast majority of the scholars. Abu Hanifah said: It is not [I]makruh.” (Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 5:266)

This apparently suggests Abu Hanifah saw nothing wrong with writing on, plastering and building over graves. But this is a misattribution, as the clear, documented view of the Imam is that it is makruh tahrimi (i.e. close to haram).

Imam Muhammad says in Kitab al-Athar:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ ، عَنْ حَمَّادٍ ، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، قَالَ : كَانَ يُقَالُ : " ارْفَعُوا الْقَبْرَ حَتَّى يُعْرَفَ أَنَّهُ قَبْرٌ فَلا يُوطَأَ " . قَالَ مُحَمَّدٌ : وَبِهِ نَأْخُذُ ، وَلا نَرَى أَنْ يُزَادَ عَلَى مَا خَرَجَ مِنْهُ ، وَنَكْرَهُ أَنْ يُجَصَّصَ أَوْ يُطَيَّنَ ، أَوْ يُجْعَلَ عِنْدَهُ مَسْجِدٌ ، أَوْ عَلَمٌ ، أَوْ يُكْتَبُ عَلَيْهِ ، وَنَكْرَهُ الآجُرَ أَنْ يُبْنَى بِهِ أَوْ يَدْخُلَ الْقَبْرَ ، وَلا نَرَى بِرَشِّ الْمَاءِ عَلَيْهِ بَأْسًا ، وَهُوَ قَوْلُ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ

Abu Hanifah reported to us from Hammad from Ibrahim, he said: It used to be said: “Raise the grave in order that it is known that it is a grave so is not trampled over.” Muhammad said: We adopt this [position], and we do not approve of adding [extra soil] to what comes out of it [i.e. the grave], and we deem plastering it with gypsum or clay, or constructing a mosque near it, or a signpost, or writing on it, makruh [tahrimi]...And this is the opinion of Abu Hanifah. (Kitab al-Athar 2:190-191)

The Hanafis approve of tasnim which is to raise the grave a little above ground in the shape of a hump, rather than make it completely flat (tarbi'/tastih).

The prohibition of plastering the graves is also mentioned in Kitab al-Asl of Imam Muhammad from Abu Hanifah (1:378).

It says in Sharh Mukhtasar al-Karkhi by al-Quduri:

وكره أبو حنيفة البناء على القبر وأن يعلم بعلامة

“Abu Hanifah deemed building over graves and marking it with a sign makruh [tahrimi].” (Quoted in the footnote to Kitab al-Athar, 2:191)

Abu Hanifah’s view on the matter is therefore clear and explicit, that building over graves is makruh tahrimi. To not put down al-Nawawi’s misattribution to an error is another example of Haddad’s deception, as there is little doubt that he has access to the above-referenced works.

AYK1399

22-08-2012, 10:58 AM

Another example of GF Haddad's deception:

http://eshaykh.com/halal_haram/imam-abu-hanifa-on-structures-over-tombs/... To not put down al-Nawawi’s misattribution to an error is another example of Haddad’s deception, as there is little doubt that he has access to the above-referenced works.

With due respect, to call this specifically an "act of deception" is jumping the gun. Given the high standing of al-Nawawi and the fact that the shaykh himself is a shafi`i, one could easily understand his reliance on this point without feeling the need to research further despite having access to the works you referenced. Surely you must across the many slips of prominent scholars whenever they have referenced a Hukm of another madhhab by stating its ruling based upon the words of a scholar from their own school. Would you call every instance of this "deception" too? Have a little Husn al-Zann, it won't hurt you.

Ibrahimhanifa

25-08-2012, 10:56 AM

Another example of GF Haddad's deception:

http://eshaykh.com/halal_haram/imam-abu-hanifa-on-structures-over-tombs/

He claims the attribution of the opinion that there is nothing objectionable to building over graves to Abu Hanifah is "certainly reliable" based on it being said by Imam al-Nawawi.

Al-Nawawi's exact statement is:

قال الشافعي والأصحاب : يكره أن يجصص القبر ، وأن يكتب عليه اسم صاحبه أو غير ذلك ، وأن يبنى عليه ، وهذا لا خلاف فيه عندنا ، وبه قال مالك وأحمد وداود وجماهير العلماء ، وقال أبو حنيفة : لا يكره

“Al-Shafi‘i and the Ashab said: It is makruh to plaster the grave, and to write on it the name of its occupant or anything else and to build over it. There is no disagreement about this for us and this was the position of Malik, Ahmad, Dawud and the vast majority of the scholars. Abu Hanifah said: It is not [I]makruh.” (Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 5:266)

This apparently suggests Abu Hanifah saw nothing wrong with writing on, plastering and building over graves. But this is a misattribution, as the clear, documented view of the Imam is that it is makruh tahrimi (i.e. close to haram).

Imam Muhammad says in Kitab al-Athar:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ ، عَنْ حَمَّادٍ ، عَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ، قَالَ : كَانَ يُقَالُ : " ارْفَعُوا الْقَبْرَ حَتَّى يُعْرَفَ أَنَّهُ قَبْرٌ فَلا يُوطَأَ " . قَالَ مُحَمَّدٌ : وَبِهِ نَأْخُذُ ، وَلا نَرَى أَنْ يُزَادَ عَلَى مَا خَرَجَ مِنْهُ ، وَنَكْرَهُ أَنْ يُجَصَّصَ أَوْ يُطَيَّنَ ، أَوْ يُجْعَلَ عِنْدَهُ مَسْجِدٌ ، أَوْ عَلَمٌ ، أَوْ يُكْتَبُ عَلَيْهِ ، وَنَكْرَهُ الآجُرَ أَنْ يُبْنَى بِهِ أَوْ يَدْخُلَ الْقَبْرَ ، وَلا نَرَى بِرَشِّ الْمَاءِ عَلَيْهِ بَأْسًا ، وَهُوَ قَوْلُ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ

Abu Hanifah reported to us from Hammad from Ibrahim, he said: It used to be said: “Raise the grave in order that it is known that it is a grave so is not trampled over.” Muhammad said: We adopt this [position], and we do not approve of adding [extra soil] to what comes out of it [i.e. the grave], and we deem plastering it with gypsum or clay, or constructing a mosque near it, or a signpost, or writing on it, makruh [tahrimi]...And this is the opinion of Abu Hanifah. (Kitab al-Athar 2:190-191)

The Hanafis approve of tasnim which is to raise the grave a little above ground in the shape of a hump, rather than make it completely flat (tarbi'/tastih).

The prohibition of plastering the graves is also mentioned in Kitab al-Asl of Imam Muhammad from Abu Hanifah (1:378).

It says in Sharh Mukhtasar al-Karkhi by al-Quduri:

وكره أبو حنيفة البناء على القبر وأن يعلم بعلامة

“Abu Hanifah deemed building over graves and marking it with a sign makruh [tahrimi].” (Quoted in the footnote to Kitab al-Athar, 2:191)

Abu Hanifah’s view on the matter is therefore clear and explicit, that building over graves is makruh tahrimi. To not put down al-Nawawi’s misattribution to an error is another example of Haddad’s deception, as there is little doubt that he has access to the above-referenced works.

Salam

I recall your swift answer to a question i posted in this forum but not addressed to you. Anyways, How do you know Shakyh Gibrill Hadddad didn't make a mistake? And how do you know it's deception?

look forward to your swift answer!

Ibrahimhanifa

25-08-2012, 11:04 AM

With due respect, to call this specifically an "act of deception" is jumping the gun. Given the high standing of al-Nawawi and the fact that the shaykh himself is a shafi`i, one could easily understand his reliance on this point without feeling the need to research further despite having access to the works you referenced. Surely you must across the many slips of prominent scholars whenever they have referenced a Hukm of another madhhab by stating its ruling based upon the words of a scholar from their own school. Would you call every instance of this "deception" too? Have a little Husn al-Zann, it won't hurt you.

Salam

Well said, i ve asked him how does he know its deception and not a mistake?

Also, what i can recall Shakyh GF Haddad is Hanafi. he was a shafi according to this interview he had. I think his changed now.

Also, apologise if you know but If you don't know the SF user called seekersguidance first comment is deception etc. He claims he got permission from Ulemas before posting the comments about Shakyh GF Haddad. As of yet not one scholars name, not even a SF moderator been provided to back up his claim.

Ibrahimhanifa

25-08-2012, 11:06 AM

Last page of this: http://mac.abc.se/~onesr/d/tqi_e.pdf

who's the publisher for this book? And where can I buy it from

Ibrahimhanifa

30-08-2012, 09:06 AM

:salam:

:jazak: for correcting me regarding the parents issue. You've explained my mistake clearly, and I sincerely ask your forgiveness and du'as.

And I don't see any benefit in continuing this discussion after Ramadhan. If you don't believe me about consulting scholars, then I can't do much about it

And may Allah grant you a Mubarak Ramadhan as well.

:ws:

salam

what SF's rules about slander and more important in the Quran etc? Also, why would you not give me any names of scholars you supposed to have consulted? seen some of your posts, and your asking people about info. That just proves you have very little relationships with scholars.

So stubborn to admit you got caught red handed! Maybe next time you make some thought about the words you post!

Ibrahimhanifa

30-08-2012, 09:32 AM

Assalam o 'alaykum,

Why does he need an approval? Lies of G.F Haddad are clear as daylight.

below is one of you posts i ve found.
Originally Posted by SeekerOfGuidance

1. GF Haddad said: "It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."
This is hilarious.

Originally Posted by SeekerOfGuidance

3. GF Haddad said: "Ismā.īl Dihlawī wrote Taqwiyat al-Īmān in the wake of his H.ijāz years (1236-1239), at which time he had come under the tutelage of Wahhābī missionaries."
Wahhabi Myths surrounding Shah Isma‘il Shahid

http://www.deoband.org/2010/06/histo...0%98il-shahid/

your question to me and my answer to you in this thread is Hillarious ( the very word you use)

Rahmaniyyah

30-08-2012, 03:01 PM

:salam:

You're doing a very good job bumping this thread every so often. Please keep it up.

huzoor

30-08-2012, 04:03 PM

I was searching on the internet for something and I came across the these posts by brother Abir on GF Haddad & Kabbani. Has Dr. GF Haddad replied to these articles ?

================================================== ==========================

THE GOLDEN CHAIN : The Broken Naqshbandi Chain

This is the chain of shaykhs through which the Naqshbandi secrets and tariqat have supposedly been handed down from one generation to the next. It is often mentioned at the back of most of Nazim's books and can also be seen at the naqshbandi.org site.

The chain is actually broken in at least two places. Jafar as-Sadiq is listed as the 5th shaykh in the chain. We are told that he lived between 83-148 A.H. and that he "passed on the Secret of the Golden Chain to his successor, Tayfur Abu Yazid al-Bistami." The naqshbandi.org site mentions that Abu Yazid al-Bistami was "over seventy years old" when he died in 261 A.H. (actually, from al-Bistami's statement at the end of his biography it is clear that he was 74 years of age when he died). This means that al-Bistami wasn't born until around 187 A.H., some 39 years after Jafar as-Sadiq had already passed away.

The other break relates to al-Bistami's successor, Abul Hassan al-Kharqani. We are told that the "secret of the Golden Chain was passed from Bayazid al-Bistami to Abul Hassan al-Kharqani". Al-Kharqani died in 425 A.H. and we have already seen that al-Bistami died in 261 A.H. Their dates of death are therefore separated by 164 years. It is impossible that al-Kharqani physically met al-Bistami unless al-Kharqani himself lived for over 164 years.

The Naqshbandi's attempt to gloss over these defects by suggesting that the secrets were passed on beyond the grave in the world of spirits.

The Naqshbandi tariqat gets its name from the 17th shaykh in the chain, Muhammad Baha'uddin Shah Naqshband. According to the naqshbandi.org site he died 791 A.H., yet his successor, Ala'uddin al-Bukhari al-Attar, apparently wasn't born until 18th of Rajab, in the year 802 A.H. Even more confusing is that the sites gives al-Attar's date of death as "20th of Rajab, 802 A.H." a mere two days after his birth. No doubt this is an oversight.

See the chain here http://www.naqshbandi.org/chain/names.htm

================================================== ==========================

huzoor

30-08-2012, 04:09 PM

I was searching on the internet for something and I came across the these posts by brother Abir on GF Haddad & Kabbani. Has Dr. GF Haddad replied to these articles ?

================================================== ==========================

Interesting new article....

---------------

September 2002

OBSERVATIONS ON HISHAM KABBANI'S AND GF HADDAD'S METHODOLOGY AND CREED

PREAMBLE

Below are nineteen observations (some already available on the Internet, some new) on the creed of one of Sufism's modern day exponents, Shaykh Hisham Kabbani. Also described are teachings promoted by Kabbani's spiritual mentor, Shaykh Nazim al-Qubrusi, from whom Kabbani has a "license to teach Islamic spirituality". Both are adherents of the Naqshbandi Sufi sect. At the naqshbandi.org site, founded by Kabbani, Nazim is known as the "Owner of the Throne of Guidance" and that "Seekers circle the Kabah of His Light". At least one of the works cited below was co-edited by GF Haddad, who writes extensively for Hisham Kabbani's sunnah.org web site and describes Kabbani as "my teacher and the light on my path" and Nazim as "our teacher Mawlana al-Shaykh Nazim".

There will always appear in the actions of those who have strayed from the Prophetic way something which acts as a clear indicator that all is perhaps not right. This is so that Allah may allow us to differentiate between His true allies and those who mimic some of their characteristics. One should not, therefore, be duped by the apparent orthodoxy of some of what Hisham Kabbani and GF Haddad preach. Such orthodoxy is rarely found in other works they've authored. Kabbani's work Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety is littered with outlandish beliefs (see below) and fabricated hadith. This work was co-edited by GF Haddad. Haddad turns a blind eye and has no qualms about his own teachers citing spurious and baseless hadith and presenting bizarre ideas in the name of Islam yet he can't help but lambast (through his Internet articles and newsgroup posts) anyone and everyone, young or old, that happens to disagree with their views.

1. KABBANI BELIEVES ALL SUFIS, INCLUDING HIMSELF, ACCOMPANIED THE PROPHET (S) AND ABU BAKR (R) DURING THEIR MIGRATION FROM MAKKAH TO MADINAH.

In a work co-edited by GF Haddad, Kabbani teaches that all Sufi groups were in the presence of the Prophet (s) and Abu Bakr (r) when they stopped in the cave during their migration from Makkah to Madinah; all Sufi saints and their followers were called spiritually to that cave (Ali ibn Abi Talib [r] was also summoned). Among other things Allah commanded the Prophet (s) to order each saint to put his hand over the hands of his followers; Abu Bakr (r) and Ali (r) placed their hands over all the Sufis; the Prophet (s) then placed his hand and finally Allah placed His Hand last of all! This, Kabbani claims, is the secret meaning of Surah al-Fath, verse 10, and that in fact Allah Himself recited this verse at the time of this incident and all of them were "hearing God's own words".

You will find this on pp.39-40 of Kabbani's book Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety.

The next day when the Prophet (s) and Abu Bakr (r) continued the journey to Madinah, all of them, Kabbani and all other Sufi followers, migrated with the Prophet (s) and Abu Bakr (r)! (ibid, p.41).

2. SUFIS HAVE ACCOMPANIED 124,000 PROPHET ADAMS (AS)

Kabbani believes there have been 124,000 Adams (as) and that the Adam (as) we know of is the last of the 124,000. Likewise there are 124,000 Sufi saints presently on earth and along with their followers they have accompanied each of these 124,000 Adams (as)! (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, p.46)

3. ALI IBN ABI TALIB'S (R) OUTER-SPACE ADVENTURES

Kabbani teaches that the Prophet (s) ordered the Companion Ali (r) to project himself outside of the earth's atmosphere to combat alien life forms! He writes:

"There are powers that stand outside human nature... Imam Ali was the only one permitted to use these powers. He was ordered by the Prophet (s) in every given period of time to project himself outside the limits of our earth. If such a power had not been in existent in Sayyidna Ali, the earth would have been erased from existence because of other creatures existing out of the limits of this world and desiring to bring our planet under their control... Sayyidna Ali was ordered to defeat these creatures by using miraculous powers he was given and conquering the other planets so that they would not bring their tyranny to this earth. Were it not for him, we would have been in the powers of other planets a long time ago." (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, pp.86-87)

4. ALI IBN ABI TALIB (R) HAS SECRET KNOWLEDGE WHICH 'UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB (R) DID NOT HAVE AND WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND

Kabbani's and Haddad's teacher, Nazim, writes: "Grandsheikh told me that one day Sayyidina Ali said to Sayyidina Omar, regarding the secret knowledge that had been opened to him: 'Oh Omar, if i would speak to you from the secret knowledges which have been opened up to us, you would instantly cut my head off with your sword; you wouldn't be able to let me get up from my seat if i told you from the secrets of the Way, the creation, the religion, prophethood and the secrets of Allah Almighty - you can't even listen.'" (Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Hidden Treasures, p.36)

5. DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN THE KHULAFA AR-RASHIDIN (CRITICISING 'UMAR [R] AND 'UTHMAN [R])

About Uthman ibn Affan (r), their spiritual guide, Nazim, says: "Grandsheikh was saying about the third Khalipha, Othman, that he was of a very high degree among the Sahaba and was the most modest of the Prophet's companions... In spite of this, Othman didn't attain the spiritual ranks attained by Abu Bakr and Ali because he sometimes held firmly to his own desires instead of putting them completely in line with the Prophet's. This was also one reason for his martyrdom: misfortunes befell him as a result of his not being able to totally leave his own desires behind." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Hidden Treasures, pp.38-39)

Concerning Umar ibn al-Khattab (r), they say: "Yet, despite these most admirable characteristics of Sayyidina Omar, he did at times set his will against the will of the Prophet. Often Omar would be quick to unsheathe his sword and ask permission to decapitate hypocrites, but the Prophet would say: 'No. Omar, put away your sword.' This sort of thing may happen a few times, but the effect is that the soul is kept from awakening, it remains passive." (ibid, pp.43-44)

So we are told that Uthman ibn Affan (r) didn't attain the spiritual ranks of Abu Bakr (r) and Ali (r) because "he sometimes held firmly to his own desires instead of putting them completely in line with the Prophet's" and that Umar ibn al-Khattab (r) "did at times set his will against the will of the Prophet" and as a result the soul is "kept from awakening, it remains passive".

Perhaps this is why out of the four Khulafa Kabbani mentions only Abu Bakr (r) and Ali (r) when he said: "We ask Allah to guide all Muslims in their belief and to bring all who have strayed back to the truth... back to the guidance of Abu Bakr and Ali..." (Kabbani, Islamic Beliefs & Doctrine According to Ahl al-Sunna, Vol.1, p.3).

What happened to the guidance of Umar (r) and Uthman (r)?

Elsewhere, Kabbani unnecessarily draws attention to how Umar (r) and Uthman (r) were excluded from certain key events. He writes:

"Before leaving Mecca for Madina, the Prophet (s) put someone in his bed because the ignorant people came to his door intent on killing him. He put Sayyidna Ali in his bed, which means that he made Sayyidna Ali his representative. He did not put Sayyidna Umar, he did not put Sayyidna Uthman, none of the sahaba, but someone of his own blood and his flesh. And he took with him as company that other image, sayyidna Abu Bakr, to the cave." (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, p.32).

Is it really necessary to keep repeating what Umar (r) and Uthman (r) didn't attain?

6. THEIR SUFI GROUP HAS POWERS WITH WHICH TO COMPLETE THE SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPHET'S (S) COMPANIONS IN THEIR GRAVES BECAUSE SOME OF THE COMPANIONS WERE 'INCOMPLETE'

Nazim wrote: "This lecture about Satan and Adam, and about the Sahaba was given by Grandsheikh after the morning prayer, and in the afternoon on the same day Grandsheikh told me: 'Oh Nazim Efendi, this morning's lecture has been heard by the companions of the Prophet in their graves, and they were very pleased with it, as we have been given a miraculous favour from the Lord that if we notice an incompleteness on the part of anyone, and point it out, it will become complete. When i was pointing out that some of the Sahaba were sometimes using their own wills and not putting their desires in line with the Prophet's thus causing their incompleteness, at that moment Allah Almighty completed for them their development there in the grave, and so, they are very happy indeed." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Hidden Treasures, pp.66-67)

7. THE PROPHET'S (S) EGO!

Nazim has said: "As we know of the Holy Prophet himself, his ego appeared to him as 'Buraq', the heavenly winged steed that bore him from Earth to Heaven." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Endless Horizons, p.61).

Apparently, Nazim's and Kabbani's teacher, Grandsheikh, also rode the same Buraq that carried the Prophet (s). In his biography Grandsheikh is quoted as saying: "Then I sat in meditation, connecting myself through my Shaykh, my uncle, to the Prophet. I saw the Prophet coming to me with 124,000 Sahaba (Companions)... Then I saw the Prophet hugging me and I saw myself disappearing in him. As soon as I disappeared in him I saw myself ascending from the Dome of the Rock, the Bait ul-Maqdis, from which the Prophet ascended in the Night Journey. I saw myself astride the same Buraq which carried the Prophet and I saw myself carried up in a true vision, to the Station of Two Bow-lengths, where I could see the Prophet but not myself. I felt myself to be a part of the entirety of the Prophet. Through that Ascension I received the Realities that the Prophet poured into my heart from what he had received on the Night of Ascension... I heard a voice coming from the Divine Presence saying, "Approach, O my servant, to My Presence." As I approached through the Prophet, everything disappeared, even the spiritual reality of the Prophet disappeared. Nothing existed except Allah, Almighty and Exalted... Then I felt my uncle shaking my shoulder, saying, 'O my son, it is time for Fajr prayer.'" (see biography below)

8. NAQSHABANDI'S REACHING THE LEVEL OF THE PROPHET (S)

Nazim says: "The Naqshabandi Order teaches the very highest good manners, manners which make its followers lovely to their Lord and to all good people. It gives them subtle and exact perception which enables them to arrive at the very essence of any matter; that is the level of the Holy Prophet himself." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Endless Horizons, pp.85-86).

9. MANKIND IS UNCREATED

Nazim says:

"Allah Almighty is greatest. He is timeless, ever ready, without beginning. He is king. And yet you cannot find a king without a kingdom. Without subjects his kingship has no meaning. Just as there can be no meaning for a prophet without an ummah (nation). Therefore, Allah was ready without beginning, and his servants also were ready without beginning. If there were no people, to whom was He Allah? Was it to Himself? No! A hadith relates: 'I was a secret treasure and wanted to be known.' His people were part of this treasure... When people come to this world, they have the appearance of beginning, but in reality they were with Allah always, without beginning." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans: 1980, p.13)

What Nazim cites here as a hadith (see also Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, p.23), namely, "I was a secret treasure and wanted to be known...", is not at all from the words of the Prophet (s) as ibn Hajr, az-Zarkashee and as-Suyuti confirmed centuries ago. Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi includes it in his collection of fabrications (al-Asrar al-Marfu'a, #353) and says its meaning is correct based on Qur'an 51:56 but he was opposed by Muhammad as-Sabagh in his footnotes to the same work. Al-Ijluni adds: "This saying occurs often in the words of the Sufis who have relied on it and built upon it some of their principles." (Kashf al-Khafa, #2016).

Nazim goes on to say on p.82 of the same book:

"A disciple commented, 'You gave us a good lesson, Maulana, when you told us that there is no king without a kingdom, no prophet without an ummah, no creator without creatures. Allah is uncreated, and servants are also uncreated. But when we come to this life, we forget.' 'Yes', replied the Shaykh. 'It is enough. You cannot go too deep without sinking!'"

Mankind is uncreated? Without subjects Allah's kingship "has no meaning"?

10. ULAMA DON'T HAVE ANYTHING

Well, according to Kabbani they don't: "In Montreal, Muslims are now taking their names out of directories, because tablighi people come knocking at their doors! Ulama like to run after people to bring them to their classes because they don't have anything. But saints have everything and therefore come one time." (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, p.57)

11. GF HADDAD AND HADITH

Haddad unashamedly passes over hadith fabrications in Kabbani's works, yet attacks with a vengeance any hadith that might support an opponent's point of view. But why does he even bother to ascertain the authenticity or weakness of any hadith ascribed to the Prophet (s)? His teacher, Nazim, has already declared that:

"If a trustworthy Alim says or writes in a book that such and such is a hadith, you must believe... If you find any learned man in whom your heart believes and trusts, you must believe any hadiths he tells you. This is the way of students and also of common people. But Awliya, to whom Allah Almighty has given light, are different... when Awliya are reading, they may see those hadiths which are exact, shining from the page. They are the words of the Prophet (peace be upon him), coming with light, filled with light. When a man can see this, he is not in need for the opinions of another as to which hadith is strong and which is weak. So many Alims are denying this or that hadith while Awliya say that those hadiths are all right... Also, if any book has hadiths from the Prophet (peace be upon him), we accept it out of respect for the Prophet (peace be upon him). If it is an incorrect hadith, there is no responsibility for us if we accept it. This is a high adab, or good manners. If someone says, 'This is a hadith', we believe it out of respect to our Prophet (peace be upon him)." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans, p.117).

The approach that Haddad's teacher outlines is devoid of any objective reasoning and reduces hadith science to personal whims, having no principles and reference points. Perhaps this is why Haddad's own articles are often supported with baseless and questionable hadith. But then why, when defending his own and his teacher's creed, does Haddad highlight that his adversaries have used, in his opinion, weak or fabricated hadith or that their chains contain discredited narrators? By his teacher's own standards Haddad is not respecting the Prophet (s) if he questions the validity of any hadith, since even if the hadith happens to be incorrect it should still be believed and accepted.

12. THE 'GOLDEN' NAQSHBANDI CHAIN

This is the chain of shaykhs through which the Naqshbandi secrets and tariqat have supposedly been handed down from one generation to the next. It is often mentioned at the back of most of Nazim's books and can also be seen at the naqshbandi.org site.

The chain is actually broken in at least two places. Jafar as-Sadiq is listed as the 5th shaykh in the chain. We are told that he lived between 83-148 A.H. and that he "passed on the Secret of the Golden Chain to his successor, Tayfur Abu Yazid al-Bistami." The naqshbandi.org site mentions that Abu Yazid al-Bistami was "over seventy years old" when he died in 261 A.H. (actually, from al-Bistami's statement at the end of his biography it is clear that he was 74 years of age when he died). This means that al-Bistami wasn't born until around 187 A.H., some 39 years after Jafar as-Sadiq had already passed away.

The other break relates to al-Bistami's successor, Abul Hassan al-Kharqani. We are told that the "secret of the Golden Chain was passed from Bayazid al-Bistami to Abul Hassan al-Kharqani". Al-Kharqani died in 425 A.H. and we have already seen that al-Bistami died in 261 A.H. Their dates of death are therefore separated by 164 years. It is impossible that al-Kharqani physically met al-Bistami unless al-Kharqani himself lived for over 164 years.

The Naqshbandi's attempt to gloss over these defects by suggesting that the secrets were passed on beyond the grave in the world of spirits.

The Naqshbandi tariqat gets its name from the 17th shaykh in the chain, Muhammad Baha'uddin Shah Naqshband. According to the naqshbandi.org site he died 791 A.H., yet his successor, Ala'uddin al-Bukhari al-Attar, apparently wasn't born until 18th of Rajab, in the year 802 A.H. Even more confusing is that the sites gives al-Attar's date of death as "20th of Rajab, 802 A.H." a mere two days after his birth. No doubt this is an oversight.

See the chain here http://www.naqshbandi.org/chain/names.htm

13. NAZIM CLAIMS TO RECEIVE SPIRITUAL TRANSMISSION FROM ALLAH, VIA THE PROPHET (S) AND HIS GRANDSHEIKH

On one occasion, Nazim claimed: "I was intending to speak on a different subject altogether but this lecture came instead. This is proof that i don't speak as i would like to but as inspiration comes to me from Allah by means of spiritual transmission. He Almighty instructs His Prophet, the Prophet instructs Grandsheikh and Grandsheikh relays the message to me - even now from the other world. Yes, my Grandsheikh directed me to deliver such a talk and it contains what is not to be found in books. It is 'new news'." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Endless Horizons, p.91)

Elsewhere, Nazim writes: "Now i shall speak, God willing, as my Grandsheikh inspires me to speak upon this topic; and he and his Grandsheikh bring me these inspirations from the heart of the Prophet..." (ibid, pp.33-345)

If Kabbani's and Haddad's teacher's lectures are directly inspired by Allah through the "heart of the Prophet" does this mean that Kabbani and his ilk are beyond reproach? Apparently so, since Nazim wants from his followers that: "... the Murid shall put his belief in the one who is his Shaikh and Guide, and should proceed as indicated by him. The Murid may not ask his Shaikh any question referring to anything which he may order him to do." (The Naqshabandi Way: A Guidebook for Spiritual Progress [Preface and Commentaries by Sheikh Nazim] 2nd Edition, p.19).

14. BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE SPIRITS OF THEIR FOLLOWERS

Kabbani wrote concerning Nazim: "Mawlana Sheikh Nazim can control you from where he likes because he received custody of your spirit when you took initiation from him." (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, p.113).

15. HOW TO GET HOLY PEOPLE TO VISIT YOU
Nazim teaches: "You may take a shower. Then pray 2 rakats, clear your heart and ask for the presence of a holy person. If you do this excercise for 40 days, one of them must reach to you. Don't be afraid if they touch you!" (Nazim, Star from Heaven, pp.41-42)

16. SEEKING SUPPORT FROM KABBANI'S AND NAZIM'S TEACHER

Nazim wrote: "May He Almighty cause us to benefit from Grandsheikh's blessings and teachings, and from his spiritual care for us even from his grave. We derive our spiritual power from his heart center. If he cuts us off we are stranded. Every breath that our Grandsheikh turns towards us from his spiritual breaths is like a warm breeze which blows on the bare branches of trees, causing buds and blossoms to burst forth... Therefore, we seek our Grandsheikh's support by saying: 'Meded Ya Sayyidi, Support, oh my Master.' You must call upon your Grandsheikh in such a manner when you are in need of support, then that support may reach to you. The more you feel yourself to be weak and in need of support, the more support he will extend to you." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans Divine Sources, pp.9-10)

17. CAN WE SEE INTO PEOPLE'S HEARTS? NAZIM: 'NO.' KABBANI: 'YES!'

Nazim was asked: "So do you think that the outside appearance is more important than the condition of the heart?" He replied: "We are not prophets, so we cannot look at what is going on inside, but we see the outside and it does not make me happy..." (Nazim, Power Oceans of Light, p.94)

Nazim rightly affirms that humans are unable to see into people's hearts (though he makes an exception for Prophets). This is contradicted by Kabbani: "There are one-hundred and twenty-four thousand saints on this earth, running here and there to look into people's hearts, to bring them back to God." (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Short of Safety, p.4)

18. SAINTS ARE THE SAME AS PROPHETS

In some specific instances, Kabbani and Nazim have placed Saints and Prophets on the same level.

Saints, like Prophets, are able to speak about the future (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Short of Safety, p.25)

Only Saints and Prophets have "entered the ocean of knowledge of Allah Almighty". (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Short of Safety, p.89)

The Prophet Muhammad (s) said that he who saw him in a dream has in fact seen him because Shaytan cannot assume the Prophet's (s) form (Bukhari). In the same way, Nazim writes that: "The sheikh may give his orders by dreams, as it is prohibited for jinns and devils to appear in the form of the Prophet or the sheikh." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans Book 2, p.20)

Allah has prohibited the earth from consuming the bodies of the Prophets (Abu Dawud, an-Nasa'i). Likewise, says Nazim: "The earth is prohibited from devouring the bodies of the Prophets and Saints." (Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Endless Horizons, p.134). See also Kabbani's Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety (p.54).

19. PREDICTING FUTURE EVENTS, INCLUDING THE TIME OF THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT

Nazim said on April 22nd 1978 in London: "Allah Almighty will send to each camp a head, a leader. In our books we call one of them (one of such leaders) Mahdi, who will lead man to Allah Almighty... Before this camping will be a great war... The greatest war that history will witness will ensue... These signs that have been given us indicate that the last day is coming, is nearly exactly now. I don't know if this will happen today or tomorrow, this month or next month, this year or perhaps the second year. We shall witness that great event within two years." (Mercy Oceans: Serendib Edition: Part One, pp. 18-19)

History was to prove otherwise. The greatest war that mankind would witness, and during which the Mahdi would appear, did not occur "within two years."

Some years later in 1986 in Cambridge, England, Nazim said: "There must be a Great War between East and West... This year it will not be because this year is not Hadj ul-Akbar... And 1988 will be the year when Israel is 40 years. We do not think that they will be more than 40 years old. During the war Mahdi Alehi Salam will come... In these next 2 years dangerous and big things are expected." (Nazim, The Secrets Behind the Secrets, p. 142)

Nothing happened. Actually, Nazim believes the Mahdi has already been born, sometime between 1930 and 1940 (ibid). That would already make him between 62 and 72 years of age. Nazim tells us that he met the Mahdi some years ago. The Mahdi, he says, presently resides in a "big, deep cave" protected by jinn who electrocute to death anyone who approaches that cave (ibid, p.132-133)

More dates were given years later. Nazim again said about the year in which the War would occur: "It can come in 1996, or in 1997, or in 1998 or in 1999. It will not wait for the year 2000." (Nazim, Secret Desires, p.116)

Later he sounded a little less certain and said: "Another world war will maybe come before the 21st Century." (ibid, p.134)

When asked at which time Jesus (as) would come back, Nazim replied: "He will come soon. In a few years. The year 2000 will not be completed. It is impossible for the year 2000 to be completed. He will be with us before then." (Nazim, The Secrets Behind the Secrets, p. 22)

Jesus did not come before the year 2000. Did he? Kabbani also draws attention to the year 2000: "All saints now are waiting for the year two thousand. The ones who have passed away knew that in two thousand some great event would occur on this earth." (Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, p.11)

Finally, Nazim predicted that the Day of Resurrection would occur in the 21st Century. He categorically stated: "The Day of Resurrection will be in the 21st century." (Nazim, Secret Desires, p.42 and p.83)

CONCLUSION

Is there any justification for the beliefs outlined above? Is this heterodoxy cloaked in an ultra-thin orthodox garment? Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know (Qur'an 16:43).

----------------

Bibliography

Kabbani, Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety. Haqqani Islamic Trust, Michigan, USA, 1993

Kabbani, Islamic Beliefs & Doctrine According to Ahl al-Sunna Vol.1. As-Sunna Foundation Publications, California, USA, 1997

Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Hidden Treasures (Teachings of Sultan ul-Awliya Sheikh Abdullah ad-Daghistani An-Naqshbandi), no date or publisher given.
See here http://www.naqshbandi.org/library/hidden/index.htm

Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Endless Horizons. Sebat Offset Printers, Konya, Turkey, 1982

Nazim, Mercy Oceans. No publisher given, 1980

Nazim, Mercy Oceans (Book Two). Sebat Offset Printers, Konya, Turkey, 1980

The Naqshabandi Way: A Guidebook for Spiritual Progress (Preface and Commentaries by Sheikh Nazim). Sebat Offset Printers, Konya, Turkey, 2nd Edition, 1988

Nazim, Star from Heaven. Zero Productions, London, UK, 1996

Nazim, Mercy Oceans' Divine Sources. Sebat Offset Printers, Konya, Turkey, 1984

Nazim, Power Oceans of Light. Zero Productions, London, UK, 1995

Nazim, Mercy Oceans: Serendib Edition, Part One. Arafat Publishing House, Sri Lanka, 1987

Nazim, The Secrets Behind the Secrets Behind the Secrets. Duru Offset Print, Berlin, Germany, 1987

Nazim, Secret Desires. Zero Productions, London, UK, 1996

Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi (d. 1014 A.H.), Al-Asrar al-Marfu'a fi al-Akhbar al-Mawdu'a. Maktaba al-Islami, Beirut, 1986

Al-Ijluni, Ismail ibn Muhammad, Kashf al-Khafa (2 volumes in 1). Cairo, n.d.

Biographies

Hisham Kabbani
http://**so**/about/shaykh_muha ... abbani.htm

Nazim al-Qubrusi
http://www.naqshbandi.org/chain/40.htm

Grandsheikh, Abdullah ad-Daghestani
http://www.naqshbandi.org/chain/39.htm

huzoor

30-08-2012, 04:11 PM

I was searching on the internet for something and I came across the these posts by brother Abir on GF Haddad & Kabbani. Has Dr. GF Haddad replied to these articles ?

================================================== ==========================

Outwardly, it would seem that Shaykh al-Dagistani's creed on al-Asma wa al-Sifat resembles a more literal approach than that expounded by his student Hisham Kabbani. a couple of his statements are worth considering in this regards.

Nazim al-Qubrusi said:

"We believe there is a Face for Allah Almighty," says our Grandshaykh, "But, a description of His Face is not imagination. You may imagine one face, and he, another, and so on. If yours is right, what about ours? We cannot describe all the attributes of Allah Almighty, we just know that He has them." (Nazim al-Qubrusi, Mercy Oceans: 1980, p. 11)

He also said: "O Nazim Effendi," says our Grandshaykh, "I was dreaming today of the eyes of my Lord! I cannot describe the beauty of his eyes! They are not like anything." (ibid p.44)

The last quote is interesting. Here Shaykh al-Dagistani dreamt of Allah's eyes, he described them as being beautiful but words failed him beyond that.

Note: Shaykh al-Dagistani is Nazim al-Qubrusi's immediate predecessor in the Naqshbani chain.

huzoor

30-08-2012, 04:13 PM

I was searching on the internet for something and I came across the these posts by brother Abir on GF Haddad & Kabbani. Has Dr. GF Haddad replied to these articles ?

==================================================

Al salam al 'alaykum

I thank Allah Most High for sending His beloved Messenger (s) as a shining lamp through whom the light of guidance spread from east to west. A Messenger (s) who, by virtue of his eloquence, compassion and perfect example left his nation on a path so clear that night and day became alike. A Messenger (s) about whom it was said that "there is not a bird flapping its wings in the sky except that he mentioned some information about it," an allusion to the absolute completeness of his instruction and mission.

After considering the works of Nazim al-Qubrusi and Hisham Kabbani it appeared that a distinct contradiction was apparent between their way and the belief and methodology of the massive-majority of Muslims comprising the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama'a. It is not a condition for the Awliya of Allah to be free from mistakes and error. Quite the opposite. It is perfectly possible that some Shari'a knowledge escapes them or they contradicts it unknowingly or are confused about something so much so that they believe it forms part of Islam when in fact it never has done. In this regards, many followers find themselves mistaken. Once someone is, rightly or wrongly, designated a Waliy they feel that he is beyond reproach and criticism. A claimant to Wilaya who propagates religious rulings, whether related to creed or jurisprudence, may not hide behind a smokescreen, saying "My Wilaya precludes the possibility of my instruction being questioned."

A respondent in one forum was so taken by the quiet tone of the original article that he thought it was posted in favour of Nazim al-Qubrusi and Hisham Kabbani rather than a critique of their beliefs and methods. Consequently, he refuted the article from the point of view of trying to further establish Nazim's and Kabbani's errors. One moderator promptly took down the article calling it "very disrespectful" yet soon after posted another which described a recognised scholar as "a servant whom Allah abandoned, misguided, blinded, deafened, and humiliated." This is perhaps indicative of the level of impartiality one is faced with from those sympathetic to Nazim's and Kabbani's brand of Sufism..

Hajj Gibril has offered an interesting reply. It contains definite hints of sobriety once, that is, one has managed to wade through the countless lines of disingenuous posturing. Someone on a message board actually found his reply "funny" whilst another deemed it an attempt at "humour".

Is a response to Hajj Gibril's reply necessary? For the most part he skates around the concerns expressed in the article rather than tackling them head-on. Perhaps this is the best one can hope for when faced with the task of substantiating some quite bizarre doctrines. It's plainly obvious that, in effect, what Hajj Gibril has done is nothing more than reaffirm the Naqshbandi-Haqqani-Kabbani view and so in this respect he tells the reader little more than what was learnt from the initial article. He opens for us the books of Naqshbandiyya and tells us that, yes, what the article says is in fact Naqshbandi teaching (at least one strand of Naqshbandiyya that is). This is hardly a convincing approach and would prove satisfactory only for those already converted. Telling us what the article already stated is not an answer, it is merely a repetition of the question.

Nevertheless, here are some observations on Hajj Gibril's reply.

PREAMBLE

>Hajj Gibril:
>May Allah reward those who took the
>time to copy those quotations painstakingly,
>providing page references, a
>bibliography and even website links.

Amin. May Almighty Allah accepts its truthfulness and cause any errors to be corrected.

>Actually, I clarified more than once
>that Shaykh Hisham Kabbani's
>Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine contains
>mistakes on certain issues, including
>spurious hadiths, and have posted
>detailed corrections.

And where might one find these detailed corrections? Perhaps this confirms what someone once posted, that the reliability of Kabbani's works largely depends on "whoever his assistants and collaborators" happen to be at the time of preparation.

[1] KABBANI BELIEVES ALL SUFIS, INCLUDING HIMSELF, ACCOMPANIED THE PROPHET (S) AND ABU BAKR (R) DURING THEIR MIGRATION FROM MAKKAH TO MADINAH.

>It is well-known that the Naqshbandi
>Sufi path, which is taught by Mawlana
>al-Shaykh Nazim al-Haqqani and
>Shaykh Hisham, considers the cave
>in which the Prophet (saws) sheltered
>himself with Abu Bakr (ra) during the Hijra
>as its spiritual birthdate.

Yes, this was understood from the excerpt cited. But this doesn't address the concerns the article expressed.

>As for language such as "Allah placed
>His Hand" and "hearing God's own words"
>it is essentially Qur'anic, just
>as Imam Ahmad al-Rifa`i's expression
>"The one who remembers Allah is His
>sitting-companion" (al-dhaakir
>jalees al-Haqq) is essentially from the hadith.
>Objecting to such expressions shows the
>probable influence of Mu`tazili or Jahmi beliefs
>since those sects habitually reject the
>Qur'anic verses and hadiths
>containing such language.

The point has been well and truly missed here. The objection didn't concern the "expressions" but the claim by Kabbani that he along with all Sufis were in the cave with the Prophet (s) and that Allah Himself placed His Hand over the group, that the group heard His Words and that this event signifies the meaning of a specific Qur'anic verse. The objection should not be taken as a "reject[ion] [of] the Qur'anic verses and hadiths containing such language" but rather a question about the genuineness of the event itself.

[2] SUFIS HAVE ACCOMPANIED 124,000 PROPHET ADAMS (AS)

>This is from the Futuhat al-Makkiyya,
>see al-Sha`rani al- Yawaqit wal-Jawahir
>on this issue. It is not an integral
>part of a Muslim's `Aqida.

It is an unproven 'Aqida for which no basis has been shown.

[3] ALI IBN ABI TALIB'S (R) OUTER-SPACE ADVENTURES

>I withheld judgment on the above
>until I read something very similar in
>the Ibriz of Shaykh `Abd al-`Aziz al-Dabbagh
>on the multiplicity of the selves
>(dhawaat) of Anbiya' and Awliya' for
>the execution of tasks that lie outside the
>power of normal human nature.

Nazim al-Qubrusi himself states this possibility in his books. What Kabbani presents is an unconfirmed report that specifies an order of the Prophet (s). Is Kabbani prepared to submit that report to the accepted standard's of hadith transmission? Without this, it runs the risk of being relegated to that category of report labelled "baseless". Kabbani's asserts a power that "only" Ali (r) was permitted to use. It only adds to the problem if, as per Hajj Gibril's reply, we are to now accept that others had similar abilities.

[4] ALI IBN ABI TALIB (R) HAS SECRET KNOWLEDGE WHICH 'UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB (R) DID NOT HAVE AND WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND

>Sayyiduna `Ali's *state* did not
>merely say this to Sayyidina `Umar
>but shouted it outloud to the totality of
>the Sahaba. This holds true even if
>some of them may have possessed
>what he himself did not possess. Al-Khidr
>taught Musa what he did not know -
>upon our Prophet and them blessings
>and peace - although Musa is above
>al-Khidr in rank and also knew what
>al-Khidr did not know. Similarly, the
>superior ranks of Abu Bakr and `Umar
>are not open to discussion even as
>`Ali - Allah be well-pleased with all of
>them - was the only one who could say:
>"Ask me anything!" Hence Imam Ahmad
>al-Rifa'i gave him the loftiest names apart
>from the rest of the Four. This is part of the
>knowledge of the Sunna, which the
>Shuyukh of Tasawwuf know from
>inside as well as out.

Accepted. But the report itself hasn't been established, one would assume that that would be the first place to start. Ali's (r) supposed claim is also denied by him personally as per the report in al-Bukhari that neither he nor Ahlul-Bayt were granted secret knowledge to the exclusion of the larger community.

[5] DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN THE KHULAFA AR-RASHIDIN (CRITICISING 'UMAR [R] AND 'UTHMAN [R])

>We already addressed this passage
>in posts on the usenet group soc.religion.islam
>and the mailing-list msa-ec. "The good
>deeds of the righteous are the bad
>deeds of those brought near."

Any chance of a repeat posting here?

>This is in meaning in the Sahih, hadith
>None of you truly believes until....

And 'Umar and 'Uthman both fell short of that hadith?

[6] THEIR SUFI GROUP HAS POWERS WITH WHICH TO COMPLETE THE SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPHET'S (S) COMPANIONS IN THEIR GRAVES BECAUSE SOME OF THE COMPANIONS WERE 'INCOMPLETE'

>Here it should be pointed out that
>Shaykh Nazim never wrote the above
>but it was written and published by
>American Murids from talks he gave
>(may Allah ever reward them).

Okay, so Nazim al-Qubrusi didn't "write" it. Let's leave it to the fact that he "said" it.

>However, it must be understood in
>light of the sahih hadith of the Prophet
>(saws) that there are some Awliya' in
>the latter days that will attain the reward of
>fifty of the Sahaba. At the time he
>(saws) said this it was difficult to imagine;
>reportedly, some of the Sahaba
>even sought to correct his wording (saws)!
>(See its full text and takhrij in our
>webbed reply titled The "Salafis" Unveiled.)
>It is possible that among those rewards
>are the Naqshbandi khasa'is that "if we
>notice an incompleteness on the part of
>anyone, and point it out, it will become
>complete." If this is the case, then the
>benefit of this Karama covers the
>entire Umma (even the angels if Allah
>wishes), including the believers in their graves,
>and Allah knows best.

A huge, unfounded assumption. Hajj Gibril takes a hadith that talks about later generations receiving great rewards and takes this to include the possibility that Naqshbandi's are gifted the ability to complete the development of the Prophet's (s) "incomplete" (to use Naqshbandi terminology) Companions. I guess if one tries hard enough, one can justify anything one likes. This understanding also stands in contrast to Jamal al-Zahawi's assertion, in a work whose English edition was prepared by Kabbani and co-edited by Hajj Gibril, that the dead "do not hear with a beneficial kind of hearing" (al-Fajr al-Sadiq, p.101, of Kabbani's English edition). Al-Zahawi explains that the verse "You cannot make those who are in the graves hear" and "You cannot make the dead hear" is not a denial of hearing in the absolute sense but evidence for "denying hearing for those who benefit thereof". Compare this with the claim that Naqshbandi lectures benefit the Prophet's (s) Companions in their graves.

[7] THE PROPHET'S (S) EGO!

>This is symbolic language based on
>(1) the Prophet;s (saws) statement
>that Allah had helped him make his
>shaytan submit; (2) the hadith that
>the dunya is the best mount to akhira;
>and others. The early Sufi Imam
>al-Hakim al-Tirmidhi said in Adab al-Murid,
>the stronger the heart the weaker the
>ego, and the stronger the ego the
>weaker the heart. This is all for seekers
>to understand that there are ways and means
>for the Isra' and Mi`raj of the Umma,
>since Allah Most High can very well raise
>the Prophet (saws) wherever He wishes without
>Buraq and without Sayyidina Gibril (as).
>Understanding this makes the difference
>between fiqh and illiteracy. The Sufi
>Shuyukh address needs with fiqh, while
>fools narrate with the last energy but do not
>get the first word of what they read.
>May Allah reward the Malamatis
>for drawing attention to this through
>their careful selective quoting.

Hiding behind the insults in the last few lines doesn't overcome the problem of describing the Prophet (s) as having to ride his ego! Dishonourable words, particularly those that result from deliberation, are rarely excusable.

>This is why the Shuyukh said that
>the Salat is the ?Mi`raj of every Mu'min.

But this incident does not concern Salat at all. And did the Shuyukh also say that we ride the very same Buraq that the Prophet (s) rode and whatever else was seen in this meditative state? As to the meaning of the words "even the spiritual reality of the Prophet disappeared" it is left to the reader to find an explanation. Certainly Hajj Gibril hasn't offered one.

[8] NAQSHABANDI'S REACHING THE LEVEL OF THE PROPHET (S)

>The verse of company with the
>Nabiyyin, Siddiqin, Shuhada, and
>Salihin is not to say that one has "reached
>their level" but that one shares it.
>Allah Most High gives His favor to
>whomever He wills. Whoever gives thanks,
>gives thanks for himself, and whoever
>disbelieves, then Allah is in no need of him.

The verse talks about "companionship" whereas Nazim talks of one's "perception" reaching the "level of the Holy Prophet himself". See the difference?

[9] MANKIND IS UNCREATED

><snip>
>In reality, said the Ulema, there is
>no disagreement as long as the right
>phrasing is that these Attributes are
>"beginninglessly potential" (saluhi qadeem)
>and "accomplishing in time" (haadith tanjeezi).
>Hence the Maturidis said: "the Attributes
>are neither the Essence nor different
>from it" which terms everything OTHER
>than the Attributes (meaning also
>other than Allah Himself) as created
>without the shadow of a doubt and never
>to be described as "without beginning."
>Therefore, I tend to think that the above
>excerpt is an incomplete argument that
>Mawlana is citing only as a flashy preamble
>to a clarification that was left out, either
>from the quotation, or from the original
>American/European transcript that was
>published as _Mercy Oceans_.

Here is the full quote:

"Allah Almighty is greatest. He is timeless, ever ready, without beginning. He is king. And yet you cannot find a king without a kingdom. Without subjects his kingship has no meaning. Just as there can be no meaning for a prophet without an ummah (nation). Therefore, Allah was ready without beginning, and his servants also were ready without beginning. If there were no people, to whom was He Allah? Was it to Himself? No! A hadith relates: 'I was a secret treasure and wanted to be known.' His people were part of this treasure. He is God to His people, and to each of them He gave a private station in His Divine Presence. There we are always worshipping without need of eating, drinking, or marrying. It is a reward for the sons of Adam (peace be upon him). These Heavenly stations are fixed. When people come to this world, they have the appearance of beginning, but in reality they were with Allah always, without beginning. We come from Allah and return to Him. You cannot say that we are part of Him. We are only an appearance of His power - no more. All things are an appearance of the attributes of power. He says, 'Kun fu-yakun!' ('Be - and it is.') Thus, we have our realities in His Divine Presence. Now, in this world, we have only a representation of that reality. This body, and all things of this world, have their origin in the reality of the Divine Presence. We are like a photograph. We, ourselves, are not on the paper - only an image. A rocket is sent into space. Is the power that sent it here on earth, or there with the rocket? The power is here, though we may see that rocket going back and forth, seemingly on its own."

Mankind's "without beginningness" dominates the entire passage.

>Al-Qari is a Mujaddid and an
>accomplished authority in more than
>one of the sciences of the Shari`a including
>hadith. To place stock in in an
>unknown student's critique of an
>established master is to place the cart before
>the ox: you will get nowhere.

No. Rather ibn Hajar's, al-Zarkashi's and al-Suyuti's declarations were referred to in that the hadith is not at all from the words of the Prophet (s). To that one can add ibn Taymiyya's identical verdict. Ali al-Qari himself mentions this. More on this hadith below.

>In fact, al-Qari uses the very
>same hadith to prove a
>point in his Sharh al-Fiqh al-Akbar.

Because he held its "meaning" to be correct.

>The "Yes" of the Shaykh refers
>to the very last phrase, which is
>essentially Qur'anic, while his warning
>that "you cannot go too deep
>without sinking" refers all-too-gently to
>the inanity of the phrase "servants
>are also uncreated," which is the soul
>of contradiction, like saying "self-made ant."

The point to note is that the disciple understood from the lecture that "servants are also uncreated" like "Allah is uncreated" and that there is "no Creator without creatures". There is no obvious denial of any of this, rather Nazim's words positively encourage this understanding.

[10] ULAMA DON'T HAVE ANYTHING

>No true Ulema run after people to
>try to bring them to their classes, and
>"if the Ulema are not the Awliya of
>Allah then Allah has no Awliya" (spoken
>by Abu Hanifa and al-Shafi'i). So Shaykh
>Hisham must have been speaking
>of empty Ulema, just as there are fasle
>claimants to wilaya, false claimants to Sunnism,
>false claimants to Sufism, false claimants
>to Ash'arism, and so forth.

Okay, since he mentioned "tablighi people" let's leave it at that. Tablighi people don't have anything! Hardly an improvement is it?

[11] GF HADDAD AND HADITH

>It should be easy to provide examples
>- if the above were true...

Since you asked, here are six examples all from the same work:

1. Kabbani, in a work co-edited by your good self, cites the hadith (as previously mentioned in the article): "I was a hidden treasure and wanted to be known and so i created this universe." (Mercy Oceans Shore of Safety, p.23, referenced to: Razi, Suyuti, Qari, 'Ajluni, Ibn 'Iraq)

Ali al-Qari al-Hanafi includes it in his collection of fabrications (al-Asrar al-Marfu'a, #353) confirming that ibn Taymiyya, al-Zarkashi and ibn Hajar said it is not from the words of the Prophet (s) and no authentic or weak chain is known for it, as was also said by al-Suyuti and others (Kashf al-Khafa, #2016). Ali al-Qari continues by saying its meaning is correct based on Qur'an 51:56 but was opposed by Muhammad as-Sabagh in his notes to the same work. It is likewise collected in other compendiums of spurious hadith, such as al-Sakhawi's al-Maqasid al-Hasana (p.327) and by Muhammad al-Maliki al-Azhari (d.1228H) in al-Nukhba al-Bahiyya fi al-Ahadith al-Makzuba 'ala Khayr al-Bariyya (#245) calling it "baseless". Al-Ijluni adds: "This saying occurs often in the words of the Sufis who have relied on it and built upon it some of their principles." (Kashf al-Khafa, #2016).

2. Kabbani cites as evidence the hadith: "The heart of a believer is the house of God." (ibid, p.30, referring to al-Lu' Lu' al-Marsu'). Actually, an alternate wording given by Kabbani isn't translated which is the hadith: "Neither My heaven nor My earth can contain Me, but the heart of My believing servant can contain Me."

As for the first hadith, Ali al-Qari cites al-Sakhawi who says it has no basis from the Prophet (s), al-Zarkashi said "baseless", ibn Taymiyya said "fabricated" (al-Asrar al-Marfu'a, #331). Ali al-Qari goes on to say its meaning is correct based on another hadith (Kabbani's second version, see below). Muhammad al-Maliki said "baseless" (al-Nukhba al-Bahiyya, #232); al-Ijluni said: "It has no basis from the Prophet (s)" (Kashf al-Khafa, #1885); al-Suyuti said: "It is not from the words of the Prophet (s)." (ibid). As-Saghani cites as a fabrication a similar hadith: "The heart of a believer is the Throne of Allah." (al-Mawdu'at, #70)

As for Kabbani's second version, al-Iraqi said in Takhrij al-Ihya (#2599): "I don't find a basis for it (he mentions an alternate version, see below)." Ibn Taymiyya said: "It is mentioned among the Israelite traditions, there being no known chain for it from the Prophet (s)." (al-Asrar al-Marfu'a, #423). Al-Manawi said: "It has not basis" (Fayd al-Qadir, #2375); Muhammad al-Maliki said: "Futile, it has no basis in the Sunnah." (al-Nukhba al-Bahiyya, #305).

An authentic hadith reads: "Verily, Allah has vessels from the people of the earth and the vessels of your Lord are the hearts of His righteous servants. And the most beloved to Him are the softest and most tender." (Cf. Takhrij al-Ihya, #1799 & #2598)

3. Kabbani cites as evidence the hadith: "Whatever God poured into my heart I poured into the heart of Abu Bakr." (ibid, p.33, referenced to: Maybudi, Razi, 'Ajluni, Qari, Suyuti)

Al-Shawkani lists it in his compendium of spurious hadith, al-Fawa'id al-Majmu'a (#1055), and says: "Recorded by the author of al-Khalasa who said: 'A fabrication'." Ibn al-Qayyim records it in al-Manar al-Munif (#240, notes by Abdul Fattah Abu Ghudda) under the heading of hadith fabricated in favour of the excellence of Abu Bakr al-Sidiq (r).

4. Kabbani cites as evidence the hadith: "Abu Bakr does not surpass you for fasting or praying more but because of a secret that took root in his heart." (ibid, referenced to: Ghazzali, Hakim)

Whilst Kabbani references the hadith to Hakim [al-Tirmidhi], the very same work records it as a statement of Bakr ibn 'Abdullah al-Muzani (d.108H) yet Kabbani insists that the Prophet (s) said it. (Cf. al-Asrar al-Marfu'a, #415). Al-'Iraqi said: "Recorded by at-Tirmidhi al-Hakim in al-Nawadir as a saying of Bakr ibn 'Abdullah al-Muzani. I do not find it as marfu' [traced back to the Prophet (s)]." (Takhrij al-Ihya, #73). Again, ibn al-Qayyim lists it under the heading of hadith fabricated in favour of the excellence of Abu Bakr (r) with the wording "Abu Bakr does not precede you..." (al-Manar al-Munif, #246)

5. Kabbani says: "... the Prophet (s) said in one of his Divine sayings, (The Wahhabis usually cut off the end of that hadith but we will recite it to the end.) The Prophet (s) said on his Lord's behalf: 'As long as my servant or slave approaches me through voluntary worship--not obligatory, but through remembering, through reciting, through good manners--I will be, at that time, the ears that he can hear with, the eyes that he can see with, the hand that he can feel with, the feet that he can walk with. I will be him, and he can say to something, 'Be,' and it will be' (Bukhari, Ibn Hanbal)." (ibid, p. seventy-eight)

This is an interesting one. Kabbani begins by accusing those who apparently cut off the end of the hadith, yet himself cuts off the start of the hadith which mentions the obligatory duties.

Hajj Gibril, a quick question: Where in Bukhari and ibn Hanbal (Kabbani's references) can one find this hadith worded as per Kabbani's citation, in particular the concluding line "I will be him, and he can say to something, 'Be,' and it will be"?

6. Kabbani says: The Prophet (s) said: "Human beings are sleeping, nothing wakes them up except death." (ibid, p.110, referring to: 'Iraqi, 'Ajluni, Qari)

Al-'Iraqi said: "I do not find it as marfu' and it is attributed to 'Ali ibn Abi Talib [as his saying]." (Takhrij al-Ihya, #3611); likewise 'Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar al-Marfu'a (#555), states that it is actually a saying of 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (r), as does al-Shawkani (al-Fawa'id al-Majmu'a, #765) and Muhammad al-Maliki (al-Nukhba al-Bahiyya, #396).

It is to be noted that often the reference Kabbani offers actually explains that the hadith is spurious or baseless or said by someone other than Allah's Messenger (s) yet Kabbani still has no qualms about putting these words directly into the mouth of the Prophet (s) himself. Despite al-Nawawi's advice that:

"Specialist scholars of hadith and other branches of knowledge have agreed that for a hadith which is weak one may not say: 'Allah's Messenger said/did/commanded/prohibited...' or any other such statement indicating certitude." (al-Majmu', 1:63).

A quick example of one of Hajj Gibril's own use of inauthentic hadith is found in the soc.religion.islam post titled Comments on Mufti Taqi Usmani's Fatwa on Mawlid in which he writes:

"Al-Bayhaqi also narrated in Shu`ab al-Imaan (6:201 #7901) that the Prophet (saws) said: 'Whoever visits the grave of his parents or the grave of one of them every Friday, he will be forgiven and [his name will] be written among the pious sons.'"

Whereas al-Suyuti said: "Weak." (Jami' al-Saghir, #8718); al-'Iraqi said: "Related by al-Tabarani in al-Saghir and al-Awsat from the hadith of Abu Hurairah, as well as by ibn Abi Dunya in al-Qubur from the report of Muhammad ibn al-Nu'man in marfu' form and it is disconnected (mu'dal). Muhammad ibn al-Nu'man is unknown whilst his shaykh, Yahya ibn al-'Ala al-Bajli, as per [the chain in] al-Tabarani, is abandoned." (Takhrij al-Ihya, #4431); Muhammad al-Hindi al Fattani says in Tadhkirat al-Mawdu'at: "It contains 'Abdul-Karim ibn Abi Umaya who is weak." (Book of Knowledge, Chapter: Death and the Excellence of its Rememberance...); likewise al-Haythami said: "Related by at-Tabarani in al-Awsat and al-Saghir and it contains 'Abdul-Karim Abu Umaya and he is weak." (Majma' al-Zawa'id, #4312); al-Suyuti adds: "'Abdul-Karim is weak and Yahya ibn al-'Ala and Muhammad ibn al-Nu'man are unknown." (al-La'ali', 2:234); ash-Shawkani records it in his collection of fabrications, without the words "[his name will] be written among the pious sons." (al-Fawa'id al-Majmu'a, #849)

Although 'Abdul-Karim ibn Abi Umaya is weak, the narrators Yahya ibn al-'Ala and Muhammad ibn al-Nu'man give greater cause for concern. Of Yahya ibn al-'Ala, for example, ibn Hajar says: "Accused of fabricating." (at-Taqrib, #7618); Imam Ahmed said: "A liar, he fabricated hadith." (adh-Dhahabi, al-Mizan, #9591); an-Nasa'i said: "Abandoned in hadith." (Du'afa wa al-Matrukun, #658).

A similar fabrication says: "Whoever visits the grave of his parents and recites [Surah] Ya Sin on Friday, he will be forgiven." Recorded by ibn al-Jawzi in al-Maudu'at (3:239). See 'Amr ibn Ziyad's biography in al-Dhahabi's al-Mizan (#6371).

>As for pointing out weak hadiths,
>we did and we do even if we put them
>in practice nevertheless, such as kissing
>thumb-nails during adhan or using salt
>before or after meals: both hadiths being
>forgeries, nevertheless, if the Sufi Masters
>recommend it it does not mean it
>becomes binding on all.

Thank you for confirming that some of your practices have as their foundation spurious hadith. It really does throw the rule-book out the window. What is the point in differentiating between authentic and weak hadith if, as Nazim says, you are obliged to accept it anyway even if it is incorrect? Lies, which after all is what a hadith forgery is, put into the mouth of Allah's Messenger (s) should be censored by everybody including Sufi Masters. That is the clearest way of showing respect to our beloved Prophet (s) rather than giving currency to spurious concoctions falsely ascribed to him.

>As a matter of fact this is literally
>what `Abd al-Rahman ibn
>Mahdi and Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani
>said about the top
>levels of hadith Mastership.

But they hardly encouraged acting on spurious hadith. Al-Hafidh's conditions for implementing weak hadith categorically rules out forgeries.

[12] THE 'GOLDEN' NAQSHBANDI CHAIN

>There is near consensus among
>the hadith Masters that al-Hasan al-Basri
>never heard any hadith directly from
>`Ali (ra), much less took the Sufi cloak
>(khirqa) from him. Yet the chain of all
>the major Sufi paths claim this link

So the argument is: Other Sufi chains are broken, so what's the problem with the Naqshbandi chain being broken as well?

>Al-Sakhawi said: "This chain is broken, but
>I narrate it for its baraka."

In other words, it has no legal validity, but i narrate it for its baraka.

>When I was in Morocco I asked
>the Shadhili Shaykh Sidi Mustafa Basir
>about Shaykh Ahmad al-Ghumari's
>book al-Burhan al-Jali on the nisba
>(affiliation) of all Sufi Tariqas to
>`Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Manaqib of `Ali -
>RadiyAllahu `anh - in which al-Ghumari
>claimed that the Naqshbandi chain is
>broken because it contains three
>spiritual "Uwaysi" links, and that it is
>impossible that al-Qasim ibn Muhammad,
>for example, can receive khilafa
>from Salman since the latter died when
>al-Qasim was only five years old.

That's three, possibly four, breaks altogether now and, interestingly enough, all of them occur in the first half of the chain. Is the Naqshbandi link to the earliest generations slipping? Was it even there to begin with?

Another problem not previously highlighted is that al-Khidr is supposedly the tenth person in the chain. Whether he was alive until that generation and, indeed, whether he lived until the Prophet's (s) generation has been the subject of great debate with people falling on both sides of the fence. Al-Bukhari refuted the view that he survives and Abu al-Hussain ibn al-Munadi (d.336) authored a work to that effect; Abu Hayan said the majority view is that he has died; and ibn al-Qayyim ruled that all hadith that speak of al-Khidr still being alive are lies (al-Manar al-Munif, #123). Ibn al-Jawzi explained that the proofs confirming that al-Khidr does not surivive are known through the Qur'an, al-Sunnah, consensus of the researching scholars and reasoning. In the latter category alone he lists ten proofs.

A point worth considering is that the purpose, we are told, for al-Khidr's place in the chain between Yusuf al-Hamadani and 'Abdul Khaliq al-Ghujdawani was so that he could preserve the chain's reality until such time that "the next link in the Chain, 'Abdul-Khaliq [al-Ghujdawani], could assume his destined station". Yet we are also told that al-Ghujdawani received the secret "directly from Yusuf al-Hamadani as well" anyway. In other words, al-Khidr's insertion between al-Hamadani and al-Ghujdawani is unnecessary since the latter had received the secret from al-Hamadani directly without need for al-Khidr. However, without al-Khidr in the chain, Nazim would not be placed at the fortieth position. I wonder whether this is the real reason for al-Khidr's inclusion?

>I heard from Dr. Samer al-Nass
>that the late Shaykh Ahmad Harun of
>Damascus received his spiritual khilafa
>from a man who had died hours
>before and whom he temporarily
>resuscitated, with the grace of Allah,
>because he had arrived too late to
>meet him when he was still alive.

Proof, if you can call this proof, that the link needs to be maintained and transmitted from one living individual to the next. The Naqshbandi chain falls short of this in more than one place.

>`Ala' al-Din undoubtedly met
>Shah Naqshband as an adult
>and took from him.

Not according to the dates given at the naqshbandi.org site. Baha'uddin Naqshband died 791H whilst Ala'uddin al-Attar was *born* 802H.

[13] NAZIM CLAIMS TO RECEIVE SPIRITUAL TRANSMISSION FROM ALLAH, VIA THE PROPHET (S) AND HIS GRANDSHEIKH

>Imam Ibn `Abd al-Salam said of
>the discourses of Ibn `Ata' Allah:
>"This kind of speech is fresh from Allah,"

Meaning what? That it has come through the isnad: Allah Almighty - the Prophet (s) - Grandsheikh, which is how Nazim claims he receives material for his lectures? Or that it was delivered by the "Postman of the Prophet" which they state elsewhere?

>What is next, Imamiyya infallibility?

You said it.

[14] BEING ABLE TO CONTROL THE SPIRITS OF THEIR FOLLOWERS

>Shah Naqshband said that in the
>Naqshbandi Tariqa the Shaykh has to
>know the states of his Murid in the three
>times: past, future, and present,
>otherwise he is not qualified to be his
>Shaykh. Further, he said, "Whoever is
>connected to our friendship, we know
>of his states wheresoever he is and
>he must receive our assistance as long
>as he keeps the path of imdad clean of
>worldly attachments and filth." This is found
>in most of his biographies by the
>Shuyukh of the past, notably those of
>the Syrian and Daghistani branches
>apart from the branch of Mawlana al-Shaykh
>Nazim, Allah be well-pleased with him.

Nothing new here.

[15] HOW TO GET HOLY PEOPLE TO VISIT YOU

>In the same way, keep disparaging
>the Awliya and you will get the devils
>and jinns to visit you, and be afraid
>when they touch you.

Hajj Gibril equates questioning with disparagement. This scare mongering ignores the unfounded religious practice referred to in this and other sections of the article. It reminds one of the incident when two ladies accepted Islam and were told by Shaykh Nazim/Grandsheikh that they needn't pray but only prostrate at certain times of the day along with the claim that this instruction had just been received directly from the Prophet (s) in contrast to what the Prophet (s) was known to have taught his nation. There can be no better way of diluting the Shari'a. Given that the *only* yardstick with which to measure the truthfulness of someone's Wilaya is adherence to the Shari'a, propagating teachings that have no basis whatsoever in Prophetic hadith is the surest way of exposing oneself to rightful criticism.

[16] SEEKING SUPPORT FROM KABBANI'S AND NAZIM'S TEACHER

>Similarly, Imam Ahmad al-Rifa`i in
>his Hikam said :"Whoever approaches
>people with pride and arrogance
>will be stranded and rejected ;
>whoever approaches them with a
>broken spirit will receive every good
>from them." From our connection to the
>Awliya we hope for every good and
>learn adab to this effect. This connection is in
>essence unaffected by their passing
>from life on earth to life in barzakh.

Nothing new here.

[17] CAN WE SEE INTO PEOPLE'S HEARTS? NAZIM: 'NO.' KABBANI: 'YES!'

>Mawlana al-Shaykh Nazim meant
>"we do not have a mandate" but when
>the mandate is given it is
>a different matter.

No. Nazim said "we are not prophets" and that is why we can't look at what is going on inside. Kabbani said otherwise.

[18] SAINTS ARE THE SAME AS PROPHETS

>Only simpletons would derive
>from the above examples the
>conclusion that "Saints and
>Prophets are the same."

Only simpletons would ignore the first sentence that read "In *some specific instances*, Kabbani and Nazim have placed Saints and Prophets on the same level". In the examples cited Saints have been placed on a par with Prophets.

[19] PREDICTING FUTURE EVENTS, INCLUDING THE TIME OF THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT

>{And they say: When (will) this
>promise (be fulfilled), if ye are truthful?}
>{Would they (now) hasten on Our doom?þ}

Surely Hajj Gibril doesn't intend by this verse to justify the permissibility of predicting the Day of Resurrection? The other failed predictions speak for themselves. There was no attempt to comment on the "big, deep cave" protected by jinn who electrocute to death innocent wayfarers for no other crime except they chanced across the location that houses, so Nazim tells us, the promised Mahdi. This sounds a little alarmist to say the least.

CONCLUSION

>How is this heteredoxy and how
>can an anonymous accusation be
>itself not heterodox in the first place?

A few days after the article was first posted someone, who i assume had previously questioned the Haqqani-Kabbani movement, said on a mailing list that flyers were personally written against him. Similarly, a few years prior someone else wrote: "Over the past few months of exposing this Kabbani cult that seeks to hijack and subvert Islam, I've received death threats, email bombs, promises to use sihr against me and my family, abusive hate filled email, and threats of legal action from cult lawyers. They've used language that even the lowest dirtiest kafir would be shy to use, and they've engaged in racist, wicked slander." This is hardly the response of people who are confident they are on truth. Yet Hajj Gibril still questions why people prefer anonymity! Perhaps Naqshbandi moderators and webmasters have since mellowed over the years.

Wal-Hamdulillah.

[End]

See all replies here:

http://forums.soundvision.com/showthread.php?postid=281765#post281765

huzoor

30-08-2012, 04:15 PM

Continuation:

==================================================

And Haddad has again since been responded to:

>Hajj Gibril:
>The anonymous poster has tried
>to justify his/her anonymity
>by mentioning unverifiable (and
>unheard-of) stories of
>death-threats and abuse.

See below.

>Then he demands accountability
>in hadith documentation and accuses
>others of disingenuous skirting!

At least Hajj Gibril took the time to read the reply before deciding not to respond. Of course, the first article was also anonymous yet he replied and in fact positively asked "Allah [to] reward those who took the time to copy those quotations painstakingly, providing page references, a bibliography and even website links" since it provided, in his view, a "golden opportunity for presentation and discussion of some aspects of the Most Distinguished Naqshbandi Tariqa."

Coming back to the stories of abuse:

[1] A brother who welcomed the recent article explained on a mailing list that he himself had previously fallen victim to flyers authored against him personally. There's no reason to doubt his honesty.

[2] Someone else once wrote: "About a year ago, I exposed the above named person (Fouad Haddad), on America Online. I caught him using various screen names, which he used to deliberately create the impression of a multiplicity of persons, with a uniformity of thought. What is interesting about Haddad is that he attempted to 'camoflage himself' by displaying two different means of approach, one mild, the other vicious. Moreover, he would address letters to his other screen name, or make comments in the third person, praising what he posted! Yet as is always the case, such people usually in the blind frenzy of their enthusiasm, are bound by necessity to make embarrassing blunders which reveal their real identity."

See details here:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Se ... fouad.html

[3] For abuse, hate filled emails and more, see here (whilst i don't at all agree with the language used on both sides, the analysis provided does give food for thought):

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=kabba ... au&rnum=14

or here:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Se ... /thugs.htm

[4] Someone wrote: "The e-mail forger is a member of cult that follows a man named Hisham Kabbani... In addition to these incidents described above, there is the incident with the forged e-mails, as well as other reports of mail bombs, virus attacks and telephone and e- mail death threats against those that the cult believes are their enemies. I have appended to this post what I feel is pretty explicit death threat against me that I recently received from one of their devotees that I received after I posted the letter from Erol?s."

See the net-abuse forum link for details of this and more:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=kabba ... com&rnum=2

or here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=7c ... put=gplain

[5] Someone wrote: "Some days ago, I posted an e-mail documenting the deceptive practices of a pioneer figure within the Naqshbandi cyber universe. Below is a lenghty post displaying the results of msa-net's investigation two years ago to track down the origin of accounts the Naqshbandis claimed were the administrators of their "msa-ec net". InshaAllah, we intend to reveal very shortly, how these deceptive Naqshbandi practices did not cease two years ago, but on the contrary, have since been taken to an entirely new plateau where they thrive today non-stop."

See here:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Se ... decept.txt

[6] In answer to the statement "The mureeds of the Naqshbandi Tareeqa are good people" someone wrote in reply: "Because they ran out of arguments, some have just flushed my mailbox with 1500 mails."

See here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&l ... a.best.com

[7] A brother explains that "the Kabbani cultist who was forging my e-mail account has been rooted out and shut down" along with an apology from the Internet Service Provider.

See the net-abuse forum link here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=kabba ... com&rnum=1

[8] The webmaster or whoever was in charge of the Naqshbandi site's mail@naqshbandi.net email account blitzed a couple of hundred random discussion groups with a series of Naqshbandi URLs and offers of help with "ambient ancient chantings". To which someone at soc.culture.kenya replied: "why is it that you have to resort to such lowly activities as newsgroup spamming to force the hand of God in moving peoples' money into your deep pockets?" whilst someone at alt.aviation.safety retorted in anger: "If you wish to preach, do it elsewhere! This group is for the discussion of proactive and reactive aviation safety measures! If you choose to continue to SPAM this group with your religious beliefs, you will be turned in to your internet provider!"

Spam-cancels were then issued for the offending Naqshbandi post, deleting it from 268 groups. See here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=mail% ... .us&rnum=1

And from a further 33 groups here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=naqsh ... .ca&rnum=2

A month after the Spam warning, they were at it again, posting in lists not previously covered. This time with the disclaimer: "Sorry, if we bothered you. But we really are trying to clean our big list and keep only the interested." As an example, see here:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=mail% ... com&rnum=3

[9] Someone wrote: "Instead of attempting to refute the allegations academically, Kabbani's Ahlus Sunnah Foundation attempted to "email bomb" me by sending my [sic] a series of massive TIF (large graphics files) files along with a series of taunting email messages."

See here:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Se ... utdown.txt

Admittedly, some of the above claims, apparently made by a few individuals, may require further verification and Nazim al-Qubrusi and Hisham Kabbani themselves can't necessarily be blamed for the actions, if confirmed, of some zealous followers. Nevertheless, the examples cited show a distinct historical trail and trend. Consequently, there is no problem whatsoever in erring on the side of caution.

Wal-Hamdulillah.

See it all here:

http://forums.soundvision.com/showthread.php?postid=282321#post282321

SeekerOfGuidance

01-09-2012, 03:34 AM

salam

what SF's rules about slander and more important in the Quran etc? Also, why would you not give me any names of scholars you supposed to have consulted? seen some of your posts, and your asking people about info. That just proves you have very little relationships with scholars.

So stubborn to admit you got caught red handed! Maybe next time you make some thought about the words you post!

:salam:

I've already answered you that I do not need to mention who I consulted. You only need to press the report button in the opening post to get a clear indication that it is fine with the moderators and ulama who monitor this forum. The number of lies, distortions and slanders present in just a couple of his articles is astonishing. Only Allah knows how many more distortions would come up if a thorough analysis is made of all of his articles. The wahhabis are castigated for much lesser crimes.

You yourself have accused him of making "comments/slander/lies etc against certain/all Deobondi scholars back in 2000/ late nineties." Can you name me the scholars who permitted you to publicly making such an accusation? Gibril Haddad has still yet to publicly repent for those crimes.

Since you clearly have a huge concern regarding naming ulama who were consulted before exposing the clear-as-daylight misconduct of a scholar, I can dig out threads for you where brothers have exposed similar crimes committed by wahhabi scholars & others, which probably has escaped your urgently needed attention. Then you can demonstrate your justness by demanding of the brothers there with the same passion, the same thing you are demanding of me.

:ws:

Ibrahimhanifa

26-09-2012, 07:16 PM

:salam:

I've already answered you that I do not need to mention who I consulted. You only need to press the report button in the opening post to get a clear indication that it is fine with the moderators and ulama who monitor this forum. The number of lies, distortions and slanders present in just a couple of his articles is astonishing. Only Allah knows how many more distortions would come up if a thorough analysis is made of all of his articles. The wahhabis are castigated for much lesser crimes.

You yourself have accused him of making "comments/slander/lies etc against certain/all Deobondi scholars back in 2000/ late nineties." Can you name me the scholars who permitted you to publicly making such an accusation? Gibril Haddad has still yet to publicly repent for those crimes.

Since you clearly have a huge concern regarding naming ulama who were consulted before exposing the clear-as-daylight misconduct of a scholar, I can dig out threads for you where brothers have exposed similar crimes committed by wahhabi scholars & others, which probably has escaped your urgently needed attention. Then you can demonstrate your justness by demanding of the brothers there with the same passion, the same thing you are demanding of me.

:ws:

I asked you for names of ullema you claim to have consulted before putting your copy and paste stuff. I can’t see any names to the word shakyh yet, so this means you er still ducking and diving ( no answer). Actually you confirm this to me anyway (Thanks! Read your own post)

Lol! Wow moderators are fine? Look at Saad, he got caught doing the same thing as you! Ullema monitor this? Please give me some names of ullema (assuming you have non – you er not real!) Also, I love how you shifted things from consulting ullema to ullema monitoring your copy and paste post from a ‘brother’ not a scholar!!!

I didn’t know I accused GF haddad of slandering etc. its fact GF Haddad shouldn’t have called him a wahabi when he is pro taqleed etc. AS for using the words slander etc. If I hadn’t of used those words you would still be bashing me about not condemning GF Haddad like you are still bashing GF Haddad about a Public apology.

You want names from me? Hahahhehehehohohhihih it doesn’t mean we forgot about your slander , lies etc. Nor will it disappear

By the way the scholar I got the information from was GF haddad!! Check his websites out also ask your Arabic grammar (not scholar!!) buddy Muzzammil Husayn. He even does copy and pasting (nothing wrong with it, at least give a reference).

Why hasn’t GF Haddad repented publicly? Same reason as why you haven’t repented publicly

Dig out the threads, the slander sin sticks with you not me! I ve been on many Breliws websites doing what I do with you. You don’t need to be an alim to expose slander etc!

I ve exposed you, so no further comments from me to you!

Ibrahimhanifa

30-10-2012, 09:04 PM

9. GF Haddad said: "Secondly, the prescription of the commemoration of the birth of Christ *was* prescribed in the early Christian Church, even if its chronological proximity to the pagan commemoration of the winter solstice was co-opted by the political authorities as a means to recycle prevalent social customs in certain regions including those of pagan origins."

In exact contradiction to this statement, the Catholic Encyclopaedia states: "Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. Irenaeus and Tertullian omit it from their lists of feasts; Origen, glancing perhaps at the discreditable imperial Natalitia, asserts (in Lev. Hom. viii in Migne, P.G., XII, 495) that in the Scriptures sinners alone, not saints, celebrate their birthday; Arnobius (VII, 32 in P.L., V, 1264) can still ridicule the "birthdays" of the gods." The Encyclopaedia goes on to mention that the first time it was celebrated was two centuries after Christ. It seems, Haddad's assertion that the commemoration of the birth of Christ was prescribed in the early Church, is simply fabricated and has no basis in fact.

10. GF Haddad said in his review of Kitab al-Tawhid: "Citing another weak narration that “a Companion” said: “Let us all go seek the help of the Messenger of Allâh (qûmû binâ nastaghîthu birasûlillah) against this hypocrite [`Abd Allâh ibn Ubay ibn Salûl who challenged Abû Bakr to ask the Prophet for a major miracle],” whereupon the Prophet said: “Innahu lâ yustaghâthu bî innamâ yustaghâthu billâh * “Help is not sought with me, it is sought only with Allâh.” Ibn `Abd al-Wahhâb references it to al-T.abarânî. [10]
First neither the wording nastaghîthu birasûlillah nor innahu lâ yustaghâthu bî innamâ yustaghâthu billâh is found in any book of h.adîth and there is no chain for them! The reference to “al-T.abarânî” shows blind imitation of Ibn Taymiyya's incorrect referencing of these wordings to al-T.abarânî's al-Mu`jam al-Kabîr in al-Radd `alâ al-Bakrî and Majmû` al-Fatâwâ."

In fact, the exact narration as quoted by Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab was narrated by al-Tabrani. In Majma' al-Zawa'id (Kitab al-Ad'iyah, Bab Fima Yustaftah bihi al-Du'a...vol 10, page 246 Darwish ed.), al-Haythami said:

عن عبادة بن الصامت قال قال أبو بكر قوموا نستغيث برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من هذا المنافق فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم انه لا يستغاث بى إنما يستغاث بالله عزوجل
رواه الطبراني ورجاله رجال الصحيح غير ابن لهيعة وهو حسن الحديث

After narrating it with the wording presented by Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab with "Help is not sought from me, it is only sought from Allah," al-Haytami says: "Al-Tabrani narrated it and its men are the men of the Sahih besides Ibn Lahi'ah whose hadiths are hasan."

NOTE: Ulama and moderators were consulted before posting this.

:ws:

GF Haddad's replied to No9

http://eshaykh.com/hadith/christmas-lessons/

so, which scholar are you going to consult? Muzammil (haddeth master?)?

Ibrahimhanifa

30-10-2012, 09:14 PM

Just incase the link is not working

Regarding the statement:

<<{Narrated as part of a longer hadith from Anas by al-Nasa’i with a sound chain}: Note, he does not mention who considered the chain of al-Nasa’i sound. Al-Nasa’i's chain of narration contains two narrators that were criticised: Yazid ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Malik (d. 130 H) of whom al-’Asqalani said “reliable, sometimes erring” (saduq rubama wahim) (Taqrib) and Ya’qub ibn Sufyan said “there is weakness in his hadith” (fi hadithihi lin), although other narrator-critics praised him.>>

This is an Albani-type selection of what fits their agenda in trying to discredit a hadith narrator. In reality Yazid b. `Abd al-Rahman b. Malik is “trustworthy” (thiqa) by general agreement, period. This was declared by Abu Hatim al-Razi, al-Daraqutni, al-Bazzar, al-Barqani, Ibn Hibban and al-Mundhiri so the lone aspersion by Ya`qub b. Sufyan should not
have been promoted as if it were the last word when in fact it is not taken into account. Hence al-Arna’ut in Tahrir al-Taqrib rejects Ibn Hajar’s verdict of “truthful, sometimes erring” and states: “Rather, he is trustworthy (thiqa) and a faqih.”

Then the objector goes on to try to discredit another narrator of the same hadith, Makhlad ibn Yazid — one of the narrators of al-Bukhari and Muslim. Such elementary mistakes are committed on a regular basis by self-made “analyzers” due to over-reliance on Ibn Hajar’s Taqrib, which was never meant to be a precise tool for narrator-criticism. (See Tahrir
al-Taqrib on Makhlad also.)

Hence al-Wallawi, the author of the 40-volume commentary on al-Nasa’i's
Sunan entitled Dhakhirat al-`Uqba fi Sharh al-Mujtaba, graded this hadith as sahih.

There is more to say about the objector’s ignorance of hadith but the above is enough.

I had stated that “the prescription of the commemoration of the birth of Christ *was* prescribed in the early Christian Church,” to which that person objected:

“Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church…” The Encyclopaedia goes on to mention that the first time it was celebrated was two centuries after Christ.

So he admits that Christmas was celebrated two centuries after Christ, which means at the time of the early Christian Church, which is defined as the period from the first to the fourth century CE. Furthermore, the actual commemoration of the birth of Christ occurs even within the text of the Injil and actually forms 10% of the entire Gospel of Luke.

Hajj Gibril Haddad

SeekerOfGuidance

03-11-2012, 08:13 PM

GF Haddad's replied to No9

http://eshaykh.com/hadith/christmas-lessons/

so, which scholar are you going to consult? Muzammil (haddeth master?)?

:salam:

:jazak: for pointing this out. I will bring this to Maulana Muzammil's attention when he returns from Hajj. At first glance, what appears to be most telling is that the Shaykh completely evades what appears to be the clearest and most unambiguous instance of misrepresentation perpetrated by himself on this issue:

Narrated as part of a longer hadith from Anas by al-Nasa'i with a sound chain and from Shaddad ibn Aws by al-Bayhaqi who declared it sound in Dala'il al-Nubuwwa (2:355-357), and by al-Tabarani in al-Kabir and al-Bazzar with a sound chain as indicated by al-Haythami in Majma` al-Zawa'id and Ibn Hajar in Mukhtasar Zawa'id Musnad al-Bazzar (1:90-91 #32)

I will repeat again for emphasis:

The number of lies, distortions and slanders present in just a couple of his articles is astonishing. Only Allah knows how many more distortions would come up if a thorough analysis is made of all of his articles. The wahhabis are castigated for much lesser crimes.

By the way, I find it quite difficult to make sense of most of your posts. I get the impression you are just trying to have a laugh. In any case, I see your main usefulness on this forum is to bump threads such as this one that requires people's attention. :jazak: for the important role you are playing.

Till the next bump.

:ws:

Ibrahimhanifa

04-11-2012, 10:18 PM

:salam:

:jazak: for pointing this out. I will bring this to Maulana Muzammil's attention when he returns from Hajj. At first glance, what appears to be most telling is that the Shaykh completely evades what appears to be the clearest and most unambiguous instance of misrepresentation perpetrated by himself on this issue:

I will repeat again for emphasis:

By the way, I find it quite difficult to make sense of most of your posts. I get the impression you are just trying to have a laugh. In any case, I see your main usefulness on this forum is to bump threads such as this one that requires people's attention. :jazak: for the important role you are playing.

Till the next bump.

:ws:

Salam

wow, after all this time Muzammil is shakyh (just revealed, I should have asked him since I got a lot of Questions)? Assuming he's the only one you consulted before posting? If yes , change ulema (plural) to scholar (singular)? Also, is that only shakyh you can ask? You must be ignorant or deodandi shakyhs havn't got time for your nonsense?

yes your right i am having laugh at your expense, look at yourself from the first post in this thread to this one now, looks like you have been hit once and you keep hitting one pillar after another. This is how hypocrites behave, exposed again!

here's a challenge

can you read the below info in arabic?

"Narrated as part of a longer hadith from Anas by al-Nasa'i with a sound chain and from Shaddad ibn Aws by al-Bayhaqi who declared it sound in Dala'il al-Nubuwwa (2:355-357), and by al-Tabarani in al-Kabir and al-Bazzar with a sound chain as indicated by al-Haythami in Majma` al-Zawa'id and Ibn Hajar in Mukhtasar Zawa'id Musnad al-Bazzar (1:90-91 #32)"

Have you got the text book to the above? Has any scholars gave you lessons about hadeeths? That's why you don't call yourself a scholar!

conclusion

Please have some some credibility when critizing a scholar & posting info, so your emphasis doesn't matter

PS can't wait to expose more lies of yours!!

SeekerOfGuidance

05-11-2012, 03:26 PM

Ibrahimhanifa

05-11-2012, 08:38 PM

:salam:

Brother Ibrahim, just to convince you that this is not a joking matter, and to prevent you from causing further harm to yourself, I will only reveal this much that I had also consulted a few others including two quite well-known scholars, one of whom reads this forum often and is probably feeling quite sorry for you now.

Regarding the excerpt you have asked about, I will come back to analyse it later, which I hope will demonstrate that even the layman has been given sufficient intellect to recognise blatant misrepresentation when it occurs. Discarding even this level of intellect will mean that none of those people who are blindly following the countless charlatan Shaykhs out there, despite their knowledge of their Shaykhs’ misdemeanours and deviance, will be held accountable by Allah.

The fact that people can express further love for Gibril Haddad after gaining knowledge of such clear lies, slanders, and distortions, only because he feeds them what their desires wish to be fed, sufficiently explains why the ahlul bid’ah were also referred to as the ahlul hawaa by the fuqaha.

:ws:

scholars names mentioned in this tread by you

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?93570-Love-for-Ahlus-Sunnah-groups-from-deobandi-affiliated-Muslims

And this thread, no ulemas name **NOT** mentioned. So its still slander!

you said-"two quite well-known scholars"

I said - again no names but the above thread has names - you er a clumsy liar!

You said - "I will come back to analyse it later"

I said, what tools/skills do you possess to analyse the excerpt? Also, see your previous post(s), you already hit the conclusion button on it.

I find it totally amusing from your statement where we have scholar(s) reading post(s) but not writing in thread(s), instead you are doing the writing . it should be the other way round, you read and scholars write! From Deoband scholars I always hear they do copy and paste (that’s what makes them so great!) and you talk about your great intellect

Sober (no you don't drink!) yourself before responding, purchase the audio titile Jaa from R Haq, that should fix you up!

SeekerOfGuidance

06-11-2012, 01:30 PM

scholars names mentioned in this tread by you

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?93570-Love-for-Ahlus-Sunnah-groups-from-deobandi-affiliated-Muslims

And this thread, no ulemas name **NOT** mentioned. So its still slander!

you said-"two quite well-known scholars"

I said - again no names but the above thread has names - you er a clumsy liar!

You said - "I will come back to analyse it later"

I said, what tools/skills do you possess to analyse the excerpt? Also, see your previous post(s), you already hit the conclusion button on it.

I find it totally amusing from your statement where we have scholar(s) reading post(s) but not writing in thread(s), instead you are doing the writing . it should be the other way round, you read and scholars write! From Deoband scholars I always hear they do copy and paste (that’s what makes them so great!) and you talk about your great intellect

Sober (no you don't drink!) yourself before responding, purchase the audio titile Jaa from R Haq, that should fix you up!

:salam:

I don't mind if you repeatedly accuse me of lying. I only claim as many good deeds from you that will be sufficient to save me from the Hell fire. The rest, I forgive you. Please pray that it's not too many that I need.

The layman has been given enough intellect to spot clear deviance and errors propagated by a charlatan Shaykh.

There are many blind-followers of scholars such as Tahir al-Qadri, Ahmad Raza Khan, al-Albani, etc. who will insist on taking their Shaykhs as authorities despite clear knowledge of the numerous errors and falsehoods propagated by them.

I get the feeling from you that the lies, slanders, and distortions propagated by Gibril Haddad in that sample gathered from just two of his articles are not clear enough for you and others. So for your benefit I will break down all the examples in that sample, in subsequent posts :insh:

:ws:

Ibrahimhanifa

06-11-2012, 03:40 PM

You said – “I don't mind if you repeatedly accuse me of lying. I only claim as many good deeds from you that will be sufficient to save me from the Hell fire. The rest, I forgive you. Please pray that it's not too many that I need. “

I say - You er in the losing corner that’s why you fired that statement at me! Allahu Akbar!

You said – “The layman has been given enough intellect to spot clear deviance and errors propagated by a charlatan Shaykh.”

I say – That’s a pathetic statement particularly the context I used in the past post, that’s why you now made it generic, you er clumsy liar. ! I see you haven’t got the tools to analyse!
Sign of a hypocrite is he keeps lying!

Also, where’s the names of the two scholars/ulemas you supposed to have consulted?

Hello!!!

You said- “There are many blind-followers of scholars such as Tahir al-Qadri, Ahmad Raza Khan, al-Albani, etc. who will insist on taking their Shaykhs as authorities despite clear knowledge of the numerous errors and falsehoods propagated by them. “

I say – deobodis say - Maulana Ahmed Reza Barelvi's (rahimahullah) research on Subh Sadiq

http://www.wifaqululama.co.uk/18-degree-articles-fatwa.html

Hanbli - http://www.htspub.com/

Imaam Ahmad Ridaa’ Khaan

1272-1340 AD/1856-1921 AD. A Shaikh ul-Islam of his time and one of the great renewers of Islam in India in particular and of the Muslim world in general

I never touched his books

You said - I get the feeling from you that the lies, slanders, and distortions propagated by Gibril Haddad in that sample gathered from just two of his articles are not clear enough for you and others. So for your benefit I will break down all the examples in that sample, in subsequent posts

Read the thread from A-Z. I haven’t touched on the scholarly side ( you will need to look for another offensive – you er cornered), I spoke against the info I still demand from you, a 2 year old asks me what I am asking you!!

Game over again!!

Abu Jahid

07-11-2012, 11:05 PM

Assalamu 'alaykum,

here is a fatwa of GF Haddad regarding Syria and whether the Nusayri (!) and Ba'thi (!) Taghut Bashar - qatalahullah - is disbeliever or not:

Question:

assalaamu alaikum,

Is the kufr of the Syrian ruler, Bashar al Assad, apparent and clear ? If yes, has Jihad against him become obligatory ?

Answer:

wa `alaykum salam,

None of the forty or so Syrian `ulema who have spoken out so far about the events in Sha`aban and Ramadan of 2011 have said what you suggest. Their majority have only said that “We consider the leadership [of the country] to bear the greater part of responsibility in the bloodshed since it is the more powerful side” and has called for peace from all sides and respect for the sanctity of mosques and worshippers. This was stated by the 11 signatories of the 7th of August, 2011 petition of the `ulema of Aleppo (http://www.akkam.org/?type=3505) – including the two muftis of Aleppo and Dr. Nur ad-Din Itr – and by the 20 signatories of the 1st of August, 2011 petition of the `ulema of Damascus (http://www.islamsyria.com/news.php?action=details&NID=77) – including Shaykh al-Qurra’ Kurayyim Rajih, Shaykh Hisham Burhani, Shaykh Usama and Shaykh Sariya al-Rifa`i. Shaykh Muhammad al-Ya`qubi has been vocal in defending the right of the people to demonstrate peacefully against injustice while others – such as Dr. Muhammad Sa`id al-Buti and Shaykh Abd al-Hadi Kharsa – have stated that the demonstrations against the regime are unlawful and a fitna. Those affiliated with the two main schools of Damascus – Abu an-Nur and the Farfur Shaykhs at Ma`had al-Fath – appear closer to the latter stance, and Allah knows best.

Hajj Gibril Haddad

Source: http://eshaykh.com/uncategorized/kufr-of-syrian-president/

It seems that being a traitor like al-Buti is now regarded as a valid ikhtilaf among the wannabe-traditionalists... wallahul musta'an!!

May Allah ta'ala protect our brothers and sisters in Syria and give them victory against Bashar al-Kalb and his supporters!!!

Mujib

08-11-2012, 07:29 PM

Wa `alaykum as-salam

here is a fatwa of GF Haddad regarding Syria and whether the Nusayri (!) and Ba'thi (!) Taghut Bashar - qatalahullah - is disbeliever or not:

Why present this as Shaykh Gibril's personal opinion (adding exclamation points to further sensationalize it) when all he does in that answer is present the statements of the scholars of Syria?

It seems that being a traitor like al-Buti is now regarded as a valid ikhtilaf among the wannabe-traditionalists... wallahul musta'an!!

Where does it say that? Shaykh Gibril has been vocal in his support of Shaykh al-Ya`qoubi.

If we build up enough boogeymen, perhaps they will run!

SeekerOfGuidance

10-11-2012, 01:08 PM

NeednoName

10-11-2012, 01:51 PM

:salam:

Here we go, for the benefit of ibrahimhanifa and other like-minded brothers:

Analysis of Number One

GF Haddad said:

"It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

Shah Ismail Shaheed passed away in 1831, around 6 years before the last Mughal, Bahadur Shah, came to power in 1837.

It is impossible to rebel against a non-existent rulership.

Thus this remains a great slander on Shah Ismail Shaheed :rahma:

:ws:

I don't think one needs to be a scholar or have any scholar's approval or consultation to spot such a blatant error.

One simple google search is enough to refute the slander against Shaykh Shah Ismail Shaheed (ra). I just did. Brother IbrahimHanifa could also do it instead of trying to deviate the actual purpose of the thread.

Ibrahimhanifa

10-11-2012, 10:05 PM

I don't think one needs to be a scholar or have any scholar's approval or consultation to spot such a blatant error.

One simple google search is enough to refute the slander against Shaykh Shah Ismail Shaheed (ra). I just did. Brother IbrahimHanifa could also do it instead of trying to deviate the actual purpose of the thread.

Salam

Have you read the thread? Please quote me? if you er slandering me or my memory is poor.

Look forward to your answer. check out what i am about to send seekerguidance, that may able to help you with youer query!

Ibrahimhanifa

10-11-2012, 10:55 PM

Salam

wow, after all this time Muzammil is shakyh (just revealed, I should have asked him since I got a lot of Questions)? Assuming he's the only one you consulted before posting? If yes , change ulema (plural) to scholar (singular)? Also, is that only shakyh you can ask? You must be ignorant or deodandi shakyhs havn't got time for your nonsense?

yes your right i am having laugh at your expense, look at yourself from the first post in this thread to this one now, looks like you have been hit once and you keep hitting one pillar after another. This is how hypocrites behave, exposed again!

here's a challenge

can you read the below info in arabic?

"Narrated as part of a longer hadith from Anas by al-Nasa'i with a sound chain and from Shaddad ibn Aws by al-Bayhaqi who declared it sound in Dala'il al-Nubuwwa (2:355-357), and by al-Tabarani in al-Kabir and al-Bazzar with a sound chain as indicated by al-Haythami in Majma` al-Zawa'id and Ibn Hajar in Mukhtasar Zawa'id Musnad al-Bazzar (1:90-91 #32)"

Have you got the text book to the above? Has any scholars gave you lessons about hadeeths? That's why you don't call yourself a scholar!

conclusion

Please have some some credibility when critizing a scholar & posting info, so your emphasis doesn't matter

PS can't wait to expose more lies of yours!!

The challenge........

:salam:

Brother Ibrahim, just to convince you that this is not a joking matter, and to prevent you from causing further harm to yourself, I will only reveal this much that I had also consulted a few others including two quite well-known scholars, one of whom reads this forum often and is probably feeling quite sorry for you now.

Regarding the excerpt you have asked about, I will come back to analyse it later, which I hope will demonstrate that even the layman has been given sufficient intellect to recognise blatant misrepresentation when it occurs. Discarding even this level of intellect will mean that none of those people who are blindly following the countless charlatan Shaykhs out there, despite their knowledge of their Shaykhs’ misdemeanours and deviance, will be held accountable by Allah.

The fact that people can express further love for Gibril Haddad after gaining knowledge of such clear lies, slanders, and distortions, only because he feeds them what their desires wish to be fed, sufficiently explains why the ahlul bid’ah were also referred to as the ahlul hawaa by the fuqaha.

:ws:

Challenge accepted.......

:salam:

I don't mind if you repeatedly accuse me of lying. I only claim as many good deeds from you that will be sufficient to save me from the Hell fire. The rest, I forgive you. Please pray that it's not too many that I need.

The layman has been given enough intellect to spot clear deviance and errors propagated by a charlatan Shaykh.

There are many blind-followers of scholars such as Tahir al-Qadri, Ahmad Raza Khan, al-Albani, etc. who will insist on taking their Shaykhs as authorities despite clear knowledge of the numerous errors and falsehoods propagated by them.

I get the feeling from you that the lies, slanders, and distortions propagated by Gibril Haddad in that sample gathered from just two of his articles are not clear enough for you and others. So for your benefit I will break down all the examples in that sample, in subsequent posts :insh:

:ws:

First shot fired, "layman has skills", he has just reduced his competence (backdown!)!

:salam:

Here we go, for the benefit of ibrahimhanifa and other like-minded brothers:

Analysis of Number One

GF Haddad said:

"It is also a remarkable revision of history to represent Ismā.īl Dihlawī as a reviver of jihād. In reality, he was a rebel bāghī who opposed the jihād against the British declared by the last Mughāl Sultan of India."

Shah Ismail Shaheed passed away in 1831, around 6 years before the last Mughal, Bahadur Shah, came to power in 1837.

It is impossible to rebel against a non-existent rulership.

Thus this remains a great slander on Shah Ismail Shaheed :rahma:

:ws:

Since when did that become the answer to the challenge? Looks like you have backed down, again!
Please have some respect for yourself, by staying silent

SF user noneedforname - For your info

Sulaiman84

10-11-2012, 11:01 PM

Ibrahimhanifa,

These matters ain't a game. So it'd be good if you stopped posting like it is one...

Ibrahimhanifa

11-11-2012, 03:18 PM

Ibrahimhanifa,

These matters ain't a game. So it'd be good if you stopped posting like it is one...

Another user hasn't read the thread, read the thread then reply back to me. Some people are eager to shoot off with a comment without going through the tread. If you can't be bothered reading it, don't address me

actually quote me where i am playing a game!?

SeekerOfGuidance

13-11-2012, 06:56 PM

:salam:

Brother Sulaiman and others, I request everyone not to waste any time on ibrahimhanifa. I can't help but feel sorry for someone who can spend valuable time to write such posts which I don't think anyone would really bother attempting to decipher.

Just ignore him and his bait unless he induces you to do something beneficial - just as he has induced me to break down properly the examples in the sample of lies/slanders/distortions to cater for those who are truly blind or are in denial.

Other than that benefit, his presence on this thread is serving three other useful purposes.

:ws: