| Author | Topic |
hkhan
UNITED KINGDOM
|
 Topic initiated on Wednesday, January 7, 2009 - 11:43 PM 
critics
Dear Sister
Please look at this article and let me know your comments.
http://www.tariqjamil.org/Forum/deviant-groups/fitna-e-gamdi/0/?action=printpage
Salam
Ibrahim
salam br
This is just one of the loads of rubbish we can see about scholars when the senders of such objections have actually not spent time to read the opinion and work of the scholar personally and would get involved with a circulated propaganda. As you are aware I have been working closely with Mr. Ghamidi's students including the Renaissance Editor Shehzad Saleem on the lines of the research work done by Mr.Ghamidi since a few years now, I have not found a single issue where I could say he is deviating from Qur'an or the Sunnah of Muhammad sws. Hence at best I can say is to ignore such and to go through the hard work these people have been doing in sincerity to bring the facts to the world from the original sources of Islam.
rgds
h
AOA Brother,
I went through the same kind of stuff on a different website and decide to jump in the debate. Rather than refuting whatever was published on that site, i just asked for the evidence of whatever they have written. And the end result was that despite my protests they took the whole forum away from their website while my argument was that this debate shoud remain on the website so that the viewers can decide on their own:
a) The language they used and the kind of morality shown from most senior members of their website.
b) The evidence of their FATWA against a person.
c) Evidence in their own school of thougt.
So these kinds of things not only show the intellectual condition of the religious people but also their tolerance level and hence the conditions of the muslims.
Please take the points raised in the forum one by one and try to find out what actually have been said by the Ghamdi. I am not saying that you will or should agrre to it but at least try to find out what actually he is saying (if you are really interested).
To be honest i would have liked to jump into the discussion with these people but i guess I am upto more positive and constructive activities to do for the sake of Allah.
If you would to discuss these points or have any further concerns then maybe we can work together for any betterment.
W/salaam
Imran |
|
Nadir
SAUDI ARABIA
|
Posted - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - 5:57 AM 
quote:
As you are aware I have been working closely with Mr. Ghamidi's students including the Renaissance Editor Shehzad Saleem on the lines of the research work done by Mr.Ghamidi since a few years now, I have not found a single issue where I could say he is deviating from Qur'an or the Sunnah of Muhammad sws.
It is totally insignificant!
Because anyone says similarly about their likings! Even non-muslims like Hindus, Christians, and Jews etc have exactly the similar views about their Gurus, monks, beliefs and faith etc. |
|
lofty
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Thursday, January 8, 2009 - 10:40 PM
| OMG, this article has loads of crap and lies about Mr. Ghamidi and Mr. Islahi. They are calling Mr. Ghamidi "rejector of hadith", where as Mr. Ghamidi has been teaching Hadith on TV. At one point I had completely rejected Hadith (after reading scholars like sir syed ahmed khan, ghulam pervaiz, edip yuksel etc), only after reading Mr. Ghamidi, I reaslied the importance of Hadith in Islam. These uneducated, illiterate maulvis do not have the ability to face Mr. Ghamidi in a debate, as a result they resort to false propoganda about him. I have read so many scholars but there is no one like Mr. Ghamidi. These uneducated Maulvis are not even worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them! |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Friday, January 9, 2009 - 1:35 AM
quote:
I had completely rejected Hadith (after reading scholars like sir syed ahmed khan, ghulam pervaiz, edip yuksel etc), .......... These uneducated Maulvis are not even worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them!
Lofty,
Expecting one scholar or his student to untie the shoe thong of another is not suggested in any of the Islamic Traditions.
If you had rejected Hadith it was due to blind following of the scholars. Everyone who read Sir Syed did not become 'Quranites'.
When you turned to reality and searched for Truth, Alhamdulillah you were directed accordingly by the Almighty Himself but again you are turning to 'hero worship' as is clear from your writings.
And when did Sir Syed ahmed khan and his likes become Maulvis, that too of the uneducated lot?
Each scholar is specialized in his own field of research and is known for the useful reforms he brought about in a particular field. Take what is good from them and leave the rest between them and Allah. In the end the a'maal will be weighed in the scale of Justice by the Lord Himself. If their / our good deeds outweigh the shotcomings no one can come in the way to prevent them / us from entering Paradise by the Mercy of Allah.
Edited by: aboosait on Friday, January 09, 2009 1:41 AM |
|
sabaha
INDIA
|
Posted - Friday, January 9, 2009 - 10:52 AM
quote:
OMG, this article has loads of crap and lies about Mr. Ghamidi and Mr. Islahi. They are calling Mr. Ghamidi "rejector of hadith", where as Mr. Ghamidi has been teaching Hadith on TV. At one point I had completely rejected Hadith (after reading scholars like sir syed ahmed khan, ghulam pervaiz, edip yuksel etc), only after reading Mr. Ghamidi, I reaslied the importance of Hadith in Islam. These uneducated, illiterate maulvis do not have the ability to face Mr. Ghamidi in a debate, as a result they resort to false propoganda about him. I have read so many scholars but there is no one like Mr. Ghamidi. These uneducated Maulvis are not even worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them!
very good lofty!
you have well defined who are worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them! |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Friday, January 9, 2009 - 1:35 PM
Sabaha, you wrote:
quote:
very good lofty!
you have well defined who are worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them!
But Lofty had written,
quote:
These uneducated Maulvis are not even worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them!
Then who according to you are worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals?
By the way is your Shaikh unable to use his own hands for such things?
Please recall what aboosait wrote earlier.quote:
Lofty,
Expecting one scholar or his student to untie the shoe thong of another is not suggested in any of the Islamic traditions.
Edited by: aboosait on Friday, January 09, 2009 1:43 PM |
|
lofty
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Friday, January 9, 2009 - 3:02 PM
quote:
Sabaha, you wrote:
quote:
very good lofty!
you have well defined who are worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them!
But Lofty had written,
quote:
These uneducated Maulvis are not even worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. Shame on them!
Then who according to you are worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals?
By the way is your Shaikh unable to use his own hands for such things?
Please recall what aboosait wrote earlier.quote:
Lofty,
Expecting one scholar or his student to untie the shoe thong of another is not suggested in any of the Islamic traditions.
Edited by: aboosait on Friday, January 09, 2009 1:43 PM
I used a metaphorical statement which implied that Mr. Ghamidi is far superior scholar than those who are criticising him. For some reason you took it in literate sense. I did not call sir syed ahmed khan uneducated, I would never do that! I called those Maulvis uneducated who do not have the competence to conduct research by themselves. All they do is read few books written by medieval scholars some 1000 years ago, and consider that to be divine.
On the Day of Judgment, you shall be answerable not for following any particular Jurist's opinion, but for searching and submitting to whatever you believed and understood to be God's truth. All scholars, Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi, Ibn Hanbal, Ibn Taimiyyah and all others were great scholars of Islam. However, even in their greatness they were all human beings and prone to making human errors in their judgments. Thats's what these so called "Ulema" cant comprehend or dont want to comprehend. |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 2:09 AM
quote:
I used a metaphorical statement which implied that Mr. Ghamidi is far superior scholar than those who are criticising him.
How does one judge the Superiority of a scholar? |
|
Nadir
SAUDI ARABIA
|
Posted - Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 10:45 AM
quote:
I used a metaphorical statement which implied that Mr. Ghamidi is far superior scholar than those who are criticising him.
It is totally insignificant!
Because anyone says similarly about their likings! Even non-muslims like Hindus, Christians, and Jews etc have exactly the similar views about their Gurus, monks, beliefs and faith etc. |
|
lofty
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 3:16 PM
quote:
quote:
I used a metaphorical statement which implied that Mr. Ghamidi is far superior scholar than those who are criticising him.
How does one judge the Superiority of a scholar?
Its very simple, you read and listen the view points of different types of scholars. Then you will be in a position to make a distinction between them. Its not rocket science! Ghamidi's research is very deep and his arguments are logical & powerful. |
|
lofty
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Saturday, January 10, 2009 - 3:18 PM
quote:
quote:
I used a metaphorical statement which implied that Mr. Ghamidi is far superior scholar than those who are criticising him.
It is totally insignificant!
Because anyone says similarly about their likings! Even non-muslims like Hindus, Christians, and Jews etc have exactly the similar views about their Gurus, monks, beliefs and faith etc.
I agree with the fact that Hindus etc have similar views about their gurus, faith etc. What is your point? |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 1:34 AM
quote:
Its very simple, you read and listen the view points of different types of scholars. Then you will be in a position to make a distinction between them. Its not rocket science! Ghamidi's research is very deep and his arguments are logical & powerful.
If the arguments of the writer/speaker appear logical & powerful.you will surely be in a position to make a distinction between them. But what is the criterion by which you would judge the Superiority?
Edited by: aboosait on Sunday, January 11, 2009 1:36 AM |
|
lofty
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 5:34 AM
quote:
quote:
Its very simple, you read and listen the view points of different types of scholars. Then you will be in a position to make a distinction between them. Its not rocket science! Ghamidi's research is very deep and his arguments are logical & powerful.
If the arguments of the writer/speaker appear logical & powerful.you will surely be in a position to make a distinction between them. But what is the criterion by which you would judge the Superiority?
Edited by: aboosait on Sunday, January 11, 2009 1:36 AM
It is his life long research that makes him superior than others. He conducted his research in a critical manner and analysed his own views for long time before he wrote them down. Ghamidi's deep knowledge of classical arabic, world's history, religion, philosophy and poetry makes him superior than others. His logical and powerful arguments make him superior than others.
Mr. Ghamidi lived in seclusion for 20 years to reach the truth before he started propogating it. You can not compare Mr. Ghamidi with these stupid Mullahs who hardly know anything about Islam. These Mullahs are not even worthy to untie the thong of Ghamidi's sandals. I am using words of John the baptist that he used to describe the greatness of Jesus Christ. Dont take it in literate sense. |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 9:48 AM
quote:
........... Dont take it in literate sense.........
Lofty,
Here in India it is the local Mullahs who use phrases like "jooti ki khak" meaning "dust on the shoes" to praise their Shaikh and we ignore them. I therefore feel the use of such phrases in a scholarly discussion sort of out of place. |
|
raushan
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
|
Posted - Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 11:34 AM
quote:
The language they used and the kind of morality shown from most senior members
W/salaam
Imran
This is perhaps the best treatment you can expect from people living in a world of whims.There are examples of much humiliation,beating and even killing done to those who try to speak their mind in the past. And very recently ,It took 400yrs for pope to realisethat galilio was a man of faith and right.
I read a book long back and may I recommend this to everyone here to read "malfoozaat'' of late maulana ashraf ali thanvi published from deoband,India.This book has details of on spot answers and quotes on various issue.The answers are full of wisdom and reflects the high level of intellect of the revered maulana. In one of the sittings when someone asked him what he has to say about those who issued a fatwa of ''kufr'' against him.He replied "jiske paas jo cheez hoti hai woh wahi baant ta hai''.In some other place he said'' there is a XXXXsaheb of bareilly who abused me throughout of his life but Alhamdullillah "mujhpe koi asar nahin hua''.
Anyone can mark how simply he answered the most controversial questions and also shown an example how not to take any kind"asar''of such things and continue his job.
You will find one more instance on how to deal with differences in the last part of the book where his mentor and ustaad clearly knowing praised him though it was against his opinion on participation in khilafat movement.''ke jisko sari duniya bhi apne iraade se na hilaa saki woh bhi hamari jamaat se he hai''.
3:63 (Asad) And if they turn away [from this truth] - behold, God has full knowledge of the spreaders of corruption. |
|
aboosait
INDIA
|
Posted - Sunday, January 11, 2009 - 11:53 AM
|
 Reply to Topic 
Printer Friendly |
| Jump To: |
|
|
|