what is mafhum e mukhalif?
what is mafhum e mukhalif?
I am sorry but currently I am running for madrassah, will inshAllah answer your post in detail later..
however, As far as Aqeeda kitab is concerned I posted info from Qaseeda Badi' Amaali of Imaam Siraajud din Suleman Temi.
Also since we are talking of Deobandi understanding of it, I posted the notes of Mufti Raza ul Haq Saheb who is a senior deobandi.
As for Sharah Aqaid Nasafi, inshAllah I will post in tafseel the views of Mufti Yusuf Saheb Tawalwi who has taught Sharah Nasafi in Darul Uloom Deoband for over 20 years. and that he promotes Maulan Gangohi's view that Sukoot is Ahwat.. But inshAllah that will be later on..
respected abu hajira sahib,
frankly, those scholars you mention are perhaps learned but the fact remains yazid has declared kafir by majority of our aslaaf. i have already seen from your writings the flavour of what is to come; it more of exoneration of yazid. if you are going to do sukut then your speaking about them is a contradiction in terms. to remain quiet means to remain quiet and not defend yazid. therefore any discussion on kufr or not kufr of yazid follow your 'theory' and remain quiet otherwise we will think that you are saying one thing and doing the other!
The scholars who considered Yazid kafir can be counted on fingers.
Majority of Ahle Sunnh didn't declare him a kafir.
You have taken the stance of Sharah Aqaid Nasafi.. and by that he is not a Kafir.. why are you picking and chosing ...
Sukoot means you rest his case to Allah.. You shouldnt disgrace him because that which is attributed to him is not concrete enough to make jarah of him. I dont understand why you guys push words down the Ulama's throat when they wish to remain silent on the matter
which sharah are you talking about? i am talking about imam taftazani's sharah. and you very well know that there are many more you can even 'shaykh google' it.
sukut means agreement. like sunnah taqriri, ijma sukuti or when in sharie nikhah when the bride does sukut, it means agreement.
however, if you can deny tawatur of yazid's kufr then what can i say. i am just on the side of Mawla Hussain(A) and you can be on the side of yazid!
read biographies of Imam AZam(R) when imam zaid bin Ali al-shaheed(A) did khuruj against mansur abbasi then Imam AZam told people to fight for Imam Zaid and issued fatawa that whoever fights on the side of Imam ZAid(A) it is like fighting for Rasul Allah(S)'s side on the day of badr. due to our imam azam's love and muwaddat for ahl al-bayt that he martyred in prison by banu abbas.
go and do some reading your self rather than relying on munharaf an ahl al-bayt crew. alhamdolillah, we are with the wariseen e jannat. this is the end from me. i ahve done itmam e hujjat. dont deny it on day of judgement.110.
1. I already showed one instance where sukut is NOT for agreement from Hidaya before.... similarly sukoot can have many meaning especially when the mutakalim is explaining taujeeh of his sukoot.
2. Your such statements as above show a bias in your reading.. You said before that you do not accept mafhum e mukhalif.. then why do you think that since I dont do la'nah on Yazeed I am against Hazrat Husain r.a. THAT IS mafhum e mukhalif.. lest you didnt know..
I do retract the statement about his kuft in Sharah Aqaid Nasafi.. I was refering to its Sharah by Mufti Yusuf Saheb mistakenly.. In all cases the thread IS about Deobandi Ulama on Yazid.. so your comments will only be good if they are from deobandi Ulama.. lest deobandi Ulama made tashreeh of these Aqwal of Aslaaf in its radd or other manner...etc
i couldnt help it so i am back just for the last time, why dont you translate that one isolated 'instance' of sukut? so everyone can have a look at that profound exception....even if you count that al-qaleelo kal ma'doom.
as for sharah, dear brother wallahi it is my honest advise to you. please think out of the box as i fear that this strand of reactionary to shia teaching will take you away from ahl as-sunna and our aslaaf. decide about the matter within the first 1000years of ahl as-sunna scholarship and you will understand.
about deobandi ulema check qari tayyab, muhtamim dar al-uloom deoband's book on it, lal shah bokhari sahib's istakhlaf e muawiya wa yazid and there some more. there are two types of deobadi scholarship on this so read those that quote the past majority scholars on this rather than saying there are rawayaat about it but i think it must have happened like this!
Khuda hafiz. best wishes in your studies. Read everything for yourself and dont take other peoples word for it. read all classical literature on it, there are 22 shaih hadith on Imam Hossein(A)'s shahadat being foretold and imaarat al-sibyaan ahadith on yazid as well as yazid's christian mother maysoon and how he was brought up in his nanhaal and his son's speech about his Dad. if you add up all the various takfeeri reports about yazid they add up to well over 100 different reports. read about bibi umm kalsoom calling him a kafir. his poetry. his relatives. ibn ziyaad remained a governer of kufa and basra after killing Mawla Hossein(A) and his admission yazid told him kill Hossein(A) and read from beginng to end. from request of ba'yah and if not then kill....right through various different people testifying against yazid even the byzantine ambassador's witness.....there are so many that volumes have been written. if people can deny miracles performed by Prophets(A) then this is nothing. read hanafi fiqh and qazi abu yusuf's fatawa that if says 'i dont like kaddoo' because its sunnah then that person becomes kafir...why coz it gives aza to rasul Allah(S)...
read about Medina and Makkah invasions and killing of hundreds of sahaba and horses urinating in masjid nabawi(S) and burning of the ghilaaf e kaaba. read mohaddiseen and historians about it and all the rawayaat YOURSELF...it is only when you read or hear from secondary sources that the problem arises. there are books written with references just on these matters. listen to objective Egyption writers of today brother.
Further still, weren't the majority of Ulema silent on the matter, and did not seek to "balance" the reports of his fisq and his role in the martyrdom of Hadhrat Husayn (ra) with those of alleged good service to Islam?