please give the clrification all the misqouted sentence from sirat al mustakim.is really ismail shaheed(rh) said,in the sight of shariat he (syed ahmad(rh)) is equal as nabi and some time as like as teacher of them.(sirat al mustaqim) .please explain it
Assalam o 'alaykum,
According to the scholars like Mawlana 'Ubaydullah Sindhi, the book Mansab Imamat of our master 'Allamah Shah Isma'il Shahid is better than The Republic of Plato.
ان كتاب منصب امامت لمولانا اسماعيل الشهيد احسن من جمهورية افلاطون
Source: Shah Ismail Shahid - Dr. 'Allamah Khalid Mahmud
Assalam o 'alaykum,
Mawlana Muhammad Habibullah Dayrawi writes in Nur al-Sahab, p.27-28,
"'Allamah Shah Isma'il Shahid (may Allah have mercy on him), in his early days, wrote a treatise on raf’ al-yadayn entitled Tanwir al-‘Aynayn fi Ithbat Raf' al-Yadayn and used to person it [raf’ al-yadayn] considering it better. But, he forsook at last and preferred not to do raf’ al-yadayn as Mawlana Hafiz Hakim Abd al-Shakur Mirzapuri said. But I think that in fact the original Arabic book is not written by him completely and I don't base this upon an unknown narration, rather it is based upon the observation of Mawlana Karamat 'Ali Jaunpuri. He writes with full surety in Zakhirah Akhirat, 2:224, in reply of the fifth question asked by Molwi Mukhlis al-Rahman:
“The book Tanwir al-‘Aynayn fi Ithbat Raf' al-Yadayn has some pages written by Mawlana Muhammad Isma'il about the preference of raf' al-yadayn. Later, Mawlana, due to the conviction of his spiritual guide Hadhrat Sayyid Ahmad Shahid (may Allah sanctify his secret), retracted from his earlier opinion, i.e. forsook raf' al-yadayn. Later, the la madhab people (ghayr muqallidin) incorporated many additions on their own. The khalifahs (successors) of Hadhrat Sayyid do not act upon Tanwir al-‘Aynayn, rather they have written against it." (Al-Tahqiq al-Jadid ‘ala Tasnif al-Shahid, Majidi Press Kanpur, p 14-15, 1 Jan 1931)
Note: Hadhrat Mawlana Karamat 'Ali Jaunpuri (may Allah mercy on him) was khalifah of Hadhrat Sayyid Ahamd Shahid Barelwi (may Allah mercy on him); therefore his testimonial is very much weighty."
Some Berelwis on the net in imitation of Ahmad Rida Khan are claiming that Shah Isma‘il said that to believe Allah is free from direction and place is bid‘ah. Ahmad Rida Khan made this claim in, for example, Qawari‘ al-Qahhar, where he said Shah Isma‘il wrote in his book Idah al-Haqq al-Sarih that the belief in Allah’s transcendence from place and direction is innovation and heresy. And an ebook going by the name of The Preamble to Faith states: "Ismāýīl wrote that it is a heresy to believe that God is without a direction or that He is transcendent from space." Shah Isma‘il, however, did not say this. [Ahmad Rida Khan’s distortions and dishonesty should by now be common knowledge: see here, here, here and here]
To understand the passage in question, it would help to clarify a few of the terms Shah Isma'il explained. His interpretation of “bid‘ah” is based on the hadith, “Whoever innovates in this matter [i.e. religion] of ours what is not from it, it is rejected [i.e. as bid‘ah].” “Religious actions” in this context, he explains, as those deeds which the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) assigned ukhrawi (otherworldly) benefits to, as benefits of the afterlife can only be known through the medium of prophets. Such actions of ukhrawi benefit have particular specifications determined by the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) which he came to teach. To make new specifications or change those specifications established from the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) is what he determines as bid‘ah in this context.
He assigns two categories to bid‘ah: bid‘ah haqiqiyyah (real bid‘ah) and bid‘ah hukmiyyah/‘amaliyyah (effectual or practical bid‘ah). The first is where a specified action is done with the belief that it is part of religion i.e. that the specification has ukhrawi benefit [or a specific action is omitted believing it has ukhrawi harm], when it is in fact not part of the religion i.e. it is not established from the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam) and the general practice of the Sahabah. The second (hukmi bid‘ah) is where an action is done without holding such a belief, but it is done in such a way that gives the appearance of it being done with the belief in its ukhrawi benefit. He gives the example of isal al-thawab to the dead, which is in principle permissible, but to specify the day of death and undergo immense difficulty to perform this act on the day of death despite the many other duties on that day, gives the impression of the belief that this specification (i.e. of the day of death for isal al-thawab) is believed to be of benefit, therefore it is bid‘ah in effect or in practice (‘amali/hukmi bid‘ah), though not in reality (haqiqi).
Once this is understood, Shah Isma‘il’s discussion in the section in question can be understood. A rough translation of this section with a small part left untranslated (in ellipses) is as follows:
On the explanation of those things which are included in real bid‘ah (haqiqi bid‘ah): First Issue: It should be known that discussing the issue of wahdat wujud and shuhud, and discussing the tanazzulat khamsa, and discussing the sadir awwal and discussing tajaddud amthal and kumun and buruz, and likewise the (philosophical) discussions of tasawwuf, and likewise the issue of the Almighty being abstract and simple in accordance with one’s mind, meaning abstract from time, place, direction, mahiyyat, tarkib of the logical/philosophical kind, and the discussion of attributes being part of Allah’s essence or additional to the essence, interpreting the mutashabihat, and to affirm the vision of Allah without direction or opposition, and affirming atomistic philosophy while negating hylomorphism or vice versa, and to discuss the issue of qadr...all of this is from the category of real bid‘ah (haqiqi bid'at) if they are considered as established beliefs of the religion and are taken as part of religion. And if one does not believe them to be part of the beliefs of religion, still such theories and investigations are definitely included in effectual innovations (hukmi bid'ah) in this age. This is because to exert effort in order to understand the reality of these matters and to assess them and to include those who discuss these matters as scholars of religion and lordly sages and to praise them because of this just as truly religious perfections are praised is not only rampant amongst the commoners but this type of talk is found in the elite also. (Idah al-Haqq al-Sarih)
It is clear that in this entire passage Shah Isma‘il is not discussing “beliefs” per se, rather, he is discussing the act of studying these issues related to kalam, tasawwuf and philosophy, while having the belief that these issues are established elements of Islam. In effect, he is censuring the study of the peripheral and abstract issues of kalam, philosophy and tasawwuf. If it is done with the belief that these peripheral matters are established issues of Islamic belief, this is real innovation, as it is specifying an act in religion that was not specified by the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alahyi wasallam). However if this is not the belief, then he says that in our time, this is effectual innovation due to these elements being treated in such a way by the Muslims that it gives the impression they are more important to them than real religious matters.
Shah Isma‘il’s qualification “in this age” clearly indicates that he believed that these areas of study are not in and of themselves blameworthy. Only when they are done with the belief that they are intrinsic elements of Islam (in which case they will be haqiqi bid'ah) or are treated in such a way (in which case they will be hukmi bid'ah), are they considered innovations. However, his explanation allows for these discussions in the correct context and with the correct belief and treatment. In fact, he himself discusses many of these issues in another work called al-‘Abaqat, where he for example discusses the harmonisation between Wahdat al-Wujud and Shuhud, and he affirms Ash‘ari and Maturidi doctrine, and he negates direction from Allah (see here).
Note: In this tract, Shah Ismail does not disown his traditional training at the hands of his uncles. In fact he quotes one of them, Shah 'Abd al-'Aziz, to support one of his contentions and refers to him as "Ra'is al 'Ulama."
Last edited by Muzzammil Husayn; 09-01-2012 at 05:38 PM.
Assalam o 'alaykum,
Shaykh Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali al-Nadwi summarised the biography of Shah Isma‘il al-Dihlawi from his father’s Nuzhat al-Khawatir and included it in the introduction to his translation of Taqwiyat al-Iman. A translation of this short biography follows:
The shaykh, the magnificent ‘alim, the great scholar, the warrior in the path of Allah, the martyr, Isma‘il ibn ‘Abd al-Ghani ibn Wali Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahim al-‘Umari al-Dihlawi, one of the unique personalities of the world in intelligence, understanding, honour, self-strength and firmness in religion.
He was born in Dihli on the 12th of Rabi‘ al-Thani in the year 1193 and his father died in his infancy, so he was brought up in the cradle of his paternal uncle, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir ibn Wali Allah al-Dihlawi. He read with him the traditional books of study, and he benefited spiritually and academically from his two paternal uncles, Shaykh Rafi‘ al-Din and Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz also, and he accompanied them for a long period. He became a bountiful ocean in rational and transmitted knowledge. Then he accompanied Sayyid Imam Ahmad ibn ‘Irfan al-Shahid al-Berelwi, and he took the Spiritual Path from him. He travelled with him to the two Noble Sanctuaries in the year 1237 and performed Hajj and Ziyarah, and then returned with him to India. He travelled the lands and villages by his command for two years and he benefited a great multitude thereby. Then he travelled with him to the Frontiers in the year 1241 and he fought with him in the path of Allah. He was a vizier to the Imam. He prepared the armies and rushed into great battles himself until he was martyred in Balakot from the land of Yaghistan.
He was a rare gem from the gems of time, and a marvel from the marvels of excellence. He turned to Allah with his body and soul. He was engaged in benefitting [people] and worship, with humility and good character, generosity and chastity, and self-honour and firmness in religion, and good companionship. He was a powerful orator, possessing eloquence and sobriety. When an ill-mannered individual would sit with him or someone who had some deviancy in religious matters [sat with him], he would produce magical speech by which he brought together water and fire, until [the person who sat in his company] did not part from him but was satisfied with him. Shudders and earthquakes erupted in those of his time from him, and his matter became legend. Many troubles occurred in his lifetime and after his death. The people became divided in two regarding him. Some of them made him less in rank than what he deserved, rather accused him of enormities, and some others exaggerate his praise and show favouritism towards him like the first group are prejudiced against him. This is a common theme in all who rise above the people of their time in a matter.
Shaykh Muhsin ibn Yahya al-Turhati said in al-Yani‘ al-Jani (completed in 1280 H/1863 CE): “He was the strongest of them in Allah’s religion, and the most aware of the Sunnah from them. He would become angry for its sake and call towards it, and criticise innovations and its adherents.”
Siddiq ibn al-Hasan al-Qinnawaji (1248 - 1307) said in al-Hittatu bi Dhikri Sihah al-Sittah under the notice of Shaykh Wali Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahim al-Dihlawi: “Indeed his grandson, Muhammad Isma‘il the martyr, followed the footsteps of his grandfather in both word and deed, and he completed what his grandfather began. He fulfilled [the duties] that were upon him, and [the rewards] that are due to him remain, and Allah Almighty will recompense him for his good deeds and decisive statements and sound states. He was not one to invent a new path in Islam as the ignorant people claim. Allah Almighty says: ‘It is not [fitting] for a mortal that Allah gives him the Book and Wisdom and Prophethood, and then he says to the people: Be worshippers of me besides Allah, but [he will say]: Be saintly men because of what you know from the Book and because of what you have studied.’...He, Allah Almighty have mercy on him, revived many dead sunnahs, and brought death to many polytheistic and innovated practices, until he acquired the high level of martyrdom. He acquired amongst his contemporaries the highest lot, and he reached the utmost of his desires and his furthest destination.”
As for his works, they are many. The nicest of them is his book al-Sirat al-Mustaqim in Persian in which he gathered what is authentic from his spiritual master, the sayyid and the Imam, of word and deed. In it are two chapters from the compilation of his companion, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hayy ibn Hibat Allah al-Siddiqi al-Burhanawi.
From them is Idah al-Haqq al-Sarih fi Ahkam al-Mayyit wa al-Darih on the explanation of the reality of Sunnah and bid‘ah.
From them is Mansab Imamah on verifying the role of prophecy and imamate, and it is an unprecedented [work].
From them is his treatise on the topic of the possibility of an equal [to the Prophet (peace be upon him)] and the impossibility of an equal, all in Persian.
From them is a short work of his in Arabic on the principles of jurisprudence.
From them is a treatise by him in Arabic on refuting polytheism and innovations (Radd al-Ishrak wa al-Bida‘), which he arranged in two chapters.
From them is Tanwir al-‘Aynayn fi Ithbat Raf‘ al-Yadayn in Arabic.
From them is Silk Nur in Urdu.
From them is Taqwiyat al-Iman a popular book of his in Urdu which is the translation of the first chapter of the treatise Radd al-Ishrak.
From them is the book ‘Abaqat on philosophy and theosophy, in which his sharp intelligence is manifest, as is his ability in this science.
Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Muttaqi al-Dihlawi [Sayyid Ahmad Khan, the modernist founder of Aligarh University] said in Athar al-Sanadid: “He has a treatise on logic in which he claimed that the fourth figure of syllogism is from the most obvious of self-evident matters, while the first figure of syllogism is its opposite. He erected for this claim irrefutable proofs, and none of his contemporaries dared to refute him.”
Shaykh Isma‘il was killed in the path of Allah when six days of Dhu al-Qa‘dah remained in the year 1246 H in the Battle of Balakot, and his grave is easily recognisable and well-known there.
(Risalat al-Tawhid, Mu’assasat al-Sahafah wa al-Nashr, Lucknow, 1393 H/1974 CE, pp. 15-18)