Defending Hifz al-Iman against the Lies of the Innovators

[Saad]

Defending Hifz al-Iman against the Lies of the Innovators

Question: Do you believe that the knowledge of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) is equal to the knowledge of Zayd, Bakr and beasts or are you innocent of such [a belief]? Did Shaykh Ashraf 'Ali al-Thanawi write such content in his treatise Hifz al-Iman or not? How do you judge one who believes this?Answer: I say: this too is from the inventions and lies of the innovators. They distorted the meaning of the statement and, in their hatred, they produced the opposite of what the shaykh (Allah lengthen his shadow) intended (Allah confound them! How they are perverted!).Shaykh 'Allamah al-Thanawi in his treatise called Hifz al-Iman, which is a small treatise in which he answered three questions he was asked: the first is in regards to the prostration of respect (al-sajdat al-ta'zimiyyah) to graves, the second is in regards to circumambulation (tawaf) around graves and the third is in regards to the unqualified usage of the term 'alim al-ghayb (Knower of the Unseen) for our master, the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace).

Read the entire article...

[Taliban1]

where can i download online muhannad

[ahmed_abdullah]

There is a huge difference to what many take the meaning with when ilm of ghaib is discussed.If one sees it through on a scale then it varies so much, one would be lost as to what it means.But it should be noted the ilm of the unseen was given to rasulallah salellahualaihiwasalam, it wasn't like on his own the knowledge but was bestowed salellahulaihiwasalam.It was Allah who bestowed the unseen knowledge to rasulallah salellahualaihiwasalam, which distinguishes the chief of the prophets salellahualihiwasalam from others.

[Usman]

There is a huge difference to what many take the meaning with when ilm of ghaib is discussed.If one sees it through on a scale then it varies so much, one would be lost as to what it means.But it should be noted the ilm of the unseen was given to rasulallah salellahualaihiwasalam, it wasn't like on his own the knowledge but was bestowed salellahulaihiwasalam.It was Allah who bestowed the unseen knowledge to rasulallah salellahualaihiwasalam, which distinguishes the chief of the prophets salellahualihiwasalam from others.

the topic of discussion/article was not to prove whether the Prophet SallAllahu alaihi wasallam was/is given the knowledge of the unseen or not, the topic was to show that Ahmed Ridha and his followers are a bunch of liars who , upon losing intellectual debate with Maulana Thanvi (Rahimahullah) started misquoting him and obtaining fatawa of kufr.

[Saad]

where can i download online muhannad

http://www.4shared.com/document/deTO...i-Deoband.html

http://www.4shared.com/document/poiR...-Mufannad.html

[The Fake Shaykh]

http://www.4shared.com/document/deTO...i-Deoband.html

http://www.4shared.com/document/poiR...-Mufannad.html

[Mujib]

As-Salamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

I don't know the Urdu or Arabic of these works, but judging by this English translation, this does more to confuse the reader than offer a defense.

Firstly, in terms of argument, presenting the two extremes -- all knowledge of the unseen (the Creator's Knowledge) and any ("some") knowledge of the unseen -- is not a valid argument. It is hard to see what is the point of this statement. It sounds like a double straw man. And secondly, in this English translation, the statement amounts to a comparison even after "'such' (eysa)" is qualified. The qualification only transfers the comparison from the knowledge to the possession of the knowledge. One is left wondering, what was the need for mentioning madmen and animals and beasts in such a discussion? More fitting words could have been used in a discussion on the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace).

And lastly, in regards to footnote 3, the words quoted therein are not at all similar to the words translated from al-Muhannad (translating Hifz al-Iman).

I usually ignore the charges of kufr that are based on these words, and so this is the first time I have truly read these words like this. It would be better to move past this old, tired issue. A response to the actual takfir, if necessary, would be much better than a defense of these statements.

[Ansari]

As-Salamu `alaykum wa rahmatullah

I don't know the Urdu or Arabic of these works, but judging by this English translation, this does more to confuse the reader than offer a defense.

Firstly, in terms of argument, presenting the two extremes -- all knowledge of the unseen (the Creator's Knowledge) and any ("some") knowledge of the unseen -- is not a valid argument. It is hard to see what is the point of this statement. It sounds like a double straw man. And secondly, in this English translation, the statement amounts to a comparison even after "'such' (eysa)" is qualified. The qualification only transfers the comparison from the knowledge to the possession of the knowledge. One is left wondering, what was the need for mentioning madmen and animals and beasts in such a discussion? More fitting words could have been used in a discussion on the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace).

And lastly, in regards to footnote 3, the words quoted therein are not at all similar to the words translated from al-Muhannad (translating Hifz al-Iman).

I usually ignore the charges of kufr that are based on these words, and so this is the first time I have truly read these words like this. It would be better to move past this old, tired issue. A response to the actual takfir, if necessary, would be much better than a defense of these statements.

Have you even read the article? If you would have, you would have known that Mawlana Thanwi did not refer to the knowledge of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) at ALL, but he referred to the term 'ilm al-ghayb' which can be applied to everyone if you hold the opinion that everybody knows ghayb.

So there is no need to even discuss the word 'aysa.'

[Mujib]

As-Salamu `alaykum

Have you even read the article? If you would have, you would have known that Mawlana Thanwi did not refer to the knowledge of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) at ALL, but he referred to the term 'ilm al-ghayb' which can be applied to everyone if you hold the opinion that everybody knows ghayb.

Brother, his entire discussion translated in the above article is concerning the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and his knowledge. He is discussing the application of the title `alim al-ghayb.

So there is no need to even discuss the word 'aysa.'

Shaykh Thanwi (rahimahullah) does. See footnote 2, from which I quoted.

[Ansari]

As-Salamu `alaykum



Brother, his entire discussion translated in the above article is concerning the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) and his knowledge. He is discussing the application of the title `alim al-ghayb.

Wa alaykumussalaam wa rahmatullah,

Then what is your objection if you are admitting here that he is talking about the title, not the actual knowledge of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam? There is NO referral to the actual knowledge of the Prophet.

The analogy was made because the other party was giving examples of devils, animals and other lowly creatures. They were trying to prove that since so many creatures have knowledge of ghayb, the Prophet should know about it too!

So there, the discussion of the term 'ilm al-ghayb' started.

Many Barelwi Ulama gave in their discussion of Ilm al-Ghayb examples of the devil and other wretched deeds such as zina and black magic.

Read the quote again without your prejudiced glasses.