Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Anti-salafi

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Anti-salafi

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

705 profile views
  1. Salam alaikum brother

    I think you are well versed with genealogy..I really would like to know how many true Syeds migrated to India-Pakistan and their details if possible. 

    thanks in Advance

  2. According to DNA science the haplo group " J " is for semitic race which Arabs belongs to. a specimen have been taken from a person who is Abdulqader Gilani's descendant, and the resualt was that his haplo group is " T1 " and this is for Persian race, the specimen Kit number is 192703 and it's stored in Family Tree DNA center in Texas, America. So I was right when I said Abdulqader Gilani is Persian and not Sayyed.
  3. dear brother Skeptic You should say that to your self Cause you the one who came up with homemade rules Where is it ? Seems you dreaming my dear brother I asked you to post their testimony to see if they really confirmed his lineage, or just as usual, you claim that they confirmed, while when we check the reference we find totally some thing else I will tell you The basis of Ibn Enba and the others to deny the linage is that Yahya didn’t had a son named Abdullah Do you know that Ibn Enba is from the progeny of Muhammad son of Yahya, who the Qaderis claim that he had a brother named Abdullah ! So Ibn Enba knows very well his forefathers and cousins, and his denial based on solid proof from previous genealogists books who never mentioned Abdullah among the sons of Yahya Ibn Enba loves Abdulqader Gilani, that’s why he used nice words in describing him. Therefore he don’t want for Abdulqader to be a liar, thus he said that Abdulqader he never claimed to be an Alvi, but his grandsons claimed to be Alavis Shatnoofi who supposed to be the first one who recorded the linage of Abdulqader, the Sunni scholar Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali called him a liar (Zail Tabaqat al-Hanabila, page 119) While Ibn Hajar called the grand son of Abdulqader Gilani as immoral & evil-liver (Lisan al-Mizan, volume 13, page 55) These two scholar who you used as reference they weakened your proofs Any how I think the discussion between me & you are useless, cause you not answering the questions which I post in order to prove the lineage of Abdulqader You just want me to accept the statements of some liars such as Shatnoofi & Mullah Ali Qaree without asking for the proof
  4. This is brief comments Thoughts are useless as long there is no eviedent They also thought for centuries that the woman can be pregnant for 5 years I asked you for several times to post their text in Arabic as a proof Still you ignoring and repeating the same thing Mullah Qari is not genealogist thus his statement is worthless Beside that I proved that there is no any ijma nor mass transmission from the Sunni scholars themselves So Mullah Qari is the misguided person, as he also misguided in women pregnancy period as well You are going against the rules, that maks clear you never read a single book in usool or genealogy or deraya You the one who claimed that Gilani is Alavi, so you the one who has to provide the chain Unless if you want me to provide a chain for each Brazilian citizen that he is not Alavi !! What a funny illogical argument you brought up :!!!: Can you back up your argument by quoting from any book ??? This argument is false Because the testimony of the person himself is unacceptable There must be some neutral references or genealogists who confirm his lineage Do you think in the Islamic court if the thief said I'm innocent they will accept his testimony and let him go home ? or they will ask for witnesses ? if you died and some one from the street came and said that you are his father and he need his share of inheritance do you think the judge will let him inherit you, or he will ask for witnesses ? this is useless because Yahaya didn’t had a son named Abdullah Abdullah is just a mythical character I can make now a tree family ends like this: …Muhammad son of Yazid son of Muhammad al-Baqer Imam Baqer never had a son named Yazid, beside that his progeny is only from Imam Jaffar So your case in Abdulqader Gilani is similar to the case above Even if hundreds of scholars lied and said this is an authentic lineage that will not make it a true lineage, because all the genealogists said the progeny of Imam Baqer is from Imam Sadeq, and no any genealogist mentioned Yazid among the children of Imam Baqer If you have a stone in your hand, and all the people lied to you and said it’s a jewel, their lies will not turn the stone into a jewel !! So you have to prove the lineage of Abdulqader by mentioning names of genealogists who said that Yehya had a son named Abdullah Or to post from us from any biography book, the biography of Abdullah son of Yehya ( where he lived, which year he died, how many child he had etc) Can you back up your requirement by a text from any usool or genealogy book says that to deny a lineage you need a chain ? You just threw this word from your pocket We here to discuss according to the standards We proved that Mullah Qari is a liear and there is no ijma Such as the famous sunni scholar Dahabi said æÒÇÏ ÈÚÖ ÇáäÇÓ Ýí äÓÈå Åáì Ãä ÃæÕáå ÈÇáÍÓä Èä Úáí ÑÖí Çááå Úäå Some people added to his lineage and attributed him to Hassan bin Ali You couldn’t provide texts from genealogists Still we demand you to post the Arabic text According to logic To usool To genealogy The testimony of the person himself is unacceptable, because every one can claim that he is Alavi, so in the end the all 6 billion men on the earth can be Alavis Note: I don’t need you to repeat the same words again You are required to answer the following questions 1-mention a reference for genealogy book which says Yehya had son named Abdullah 2-post the Arabic text of the Shiite genealogist who you claimed that they authenticated the lineage of Abdulqader 3-post a text from any genealogist which says to deny the lineage you have to provide the chain of denial 4-post a text from any sources says that testimony or claim of the man himself is sufficient to prove his linage (nasab) So you can leave this topic if you want, cause you said that it was your last post If you want to post again so just answer the 4 questions without repeating your pervious posts
  5. Brother Every time you just repeat the same words which I already refuted before I don’t like to repeat the refutations again & again, the readers can read the previous posts and find the answer. Any how this is the question which you are required to answer Which genealogist said that Yahya had son named Abdullah ? I don’t got any problem with Abdulqader Gilani, if you answered the above question, I will accept Abdulqader's lineage. Just as I'm accepting the lineage of many Shiite and Sunnite scholars.
  6. It makes me understand what I'm reading I believe my eyes Do you know that some Shiite scholars claimed that Imam Suyuti was a Shia !! So shall we believe them and rejects what our eyes seeing If we supposed in sake of argument that these genealogists are Shia So what then ? The author of Thabt al-Masun is Sunni Sufi The Sunni scholars accepted these (Shiite) genealogists statements So I don’t know why you wasting your time in this topic, as long in the end the statement of Ibn Enba and Ibn Taqtaqi is acceptable according to the all Sunnis! any how Ibn Enba is 100% Sunni Sufi in his book page 214 he said ÇáÔíÎ ÇáÌáíá ÓíÏí ÃÍãÏ ÇÈä ÇáÑÝÇÚí The glorified Sheikh sedy Ahmad ibn al-Rifai the word "sedy" means my master No one using such word except for his own scholars I don’t think a Sufi would say sedy Ibn Taymia, nor a Shia would say sedy Abu Hanifa So I believe this is a solid proof which refutes the statements of all those who claim that ibn Enba is a Shia Seems you just copy/paste the other's mistakes The statement " we are isna ashariyya" its not Abu al-Hassan's statement. Its al-Qatee's statement, which is quoted by Abu al-Hassan al-Umari Abu al-Hassan is a Sunni Sufi He said in his book page 94 ÇÈÇ ÍäíÝÉ ÑÖí Çááå Úäå Abu Hanifa may Allah be pleased with So is this a Shiite man statement ? First of all al-Kufi is not a genealogist, he is just a historian second thing i dont got problem with that issue third, these three scholars declared in their own books at the same paragraph that they derived their statement from hadith books. So as long we know the exclusive source which they relied on, we can evaluate their statement. If the hadith is true, so their statement is acceptable If the hadith is false, so their statement is unacceptable I'm following the rules of genealogy, until now I didn’t contradicted the rules of genealogy. Seems you dreaming You provided nothing Which evident you provided so far which says Yahya had son named Abdullah ? Post the Arabic text please I looked at Ibn Enba's book and I couldn’t find such thing I proved for you that I'm not double standards The statements of genealogists which is based on hadith, I can reject it because such thing we have to refer it to hadith scholars. While the statement of the genealogist which is based on genealogy methods, I will accept it, unless if its contradicts other genealogists statements So where is the double standard in this ??? How did you know this ? Each scholars says different thing, each one gives different lineages Even Abdulqader's father name is different, some says his father name is Musa, while other says he is Abdullah, while other says he is Abu Saleh Please post the Arabic text, we dont need words from your pocket Please post the Arabic text, we dont need words from your pocket Imam Sharani is not genealogist second Katani said he is Hussaini, so shall i use same your twisted technique and say that you choose and pick !! Ok very good Now one of these people are liar If you couldn’t prove that Yahya had son named Abdullah, so one of these people are liar Just as the weak hadith, when the content of the hadith is unreal, so one of the narrators are liar I will check the biography of each person later, so maybe I find out the liar by my self How there is ijma while the author of thabt al-Masun who is an authetic Sufi genealogist denies the lineage How there is Ijma while Dahabi and Ibn Rajab rejects the lineage brother please prove for us that Yahya had son named Abdullah that will ends the debate
  7. As the readers can see, he still running away and unable to prove the lineage of Abdulqader I just will comment to clarify the misunderstood of brother Skeptic, and then I will leave the thread until he answer my question No, I reject the statement of Abbas al-Qumi Even if one hundred Shiite scholar said that Ibn Enaba is a Shiite, I will reject their statement because Ibn Enaba's book is showing clearly that he is not Shia So shall I reject a solid proof from Ibn Enaba's book himself and believe some baseless claims from some Shiite scholars ? Ibn Enaba for several times in his book he said ÔíÎäÇ ÇÈæ ÇáÍÓä ÇáÚãÑí Our Sheikh Abu al-Hassan al-Umari Sheikh Abu al-Hassan al-Umari is a Sufi scholar, so Ibn Enaba clearly attribute himself to Sufism I already quoted in the previous posts from Ibn Enba's book what proves that Ibn Enba is not a Shiite No brother its not the same basis I reject these 3 Shiites genealogists testimony for two main reason 1- they declared that their testimony is derived from hadith books, so when I checked the hadith books, I realized that all the narrations are weak. So I rejected their testimony because I know the source which they relied on. 2- their testimony contradicts the majority's testimony who declared that Um Kulthom wasn’t married to Umar such as al-Hassan bin al-Amdi al-Alavi who died in 400's, and Ibn Shadqam al-Hussainy. So I rejected their testimony because I have other genealogists testimonies So my basis is different than yours You claimed there is ijma While these scholars testimony is clear that only some people (the minority) attribute him to Ali bin Abi Talib If you know Arabic language you can figure it out Brother Why you don’t post for us what is written in these two books ? Do you know why you don’t post Because these two scholars only recorded the lineage of Abdulqader as the Qaderis introduced it, without confirming the lineage nor examine it Therefore these two books are out of standards in proving the lineages Non of it confirms, because non of it concerned in genealogy or proving the lineages I will quote what he said in shazrat al-zahib ÇáÔíÎ ÚÈÏ ÇáÞÇÏÑ Èä ÃÈí ÕÇáÍ Èä ÚÈÏ Çááå Èä Ìäßì ÏæÓÊ Èä ÃÈí ÚÈÏ Çááå ÚÈÏ Çááå Èä íÍíì Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÏÇæÏ Èä ãæÓì ÇáÌæä ÇÈä ÚÈÏ Çááå ÇáãÍÕä Èä ÇáÍÓä ÇáãËäì Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä Úáí Èä ÃÈí ØÇáÈ ÇáÌíáÇäí Sheikh Abdulqader son of Abu Saleh son of Abdullah son of Jangi doust son of Abo Abdullah Abdullah son of Yahya son of Muhammad son of Dawoud son of Musa al-Jon son of Abdullah al-Mahdh son of al-Hassan al-Muthana son of al-Hassan son of Ali bin Abi Talib That’s all what he said, he didn’t confirmed the lineage nor examined it He just quote it as the Qaderis introduce it But we notice that in each book of which you referred to, they got different lineage of Abdulqader. Ibn Emad al-Hanbali in his book shazrat al-zahib considered Jangi doust as a name not a nickname, therefore he said Abdullah son of Jangi doust son of Abo Abdullah Abdullah While in another reference from those which you referred to they gave different lineage al-Safadi said ÚÈÏÇáÞÇÏÑ Èä ÚÈÏÇááå ÇÈí ÕÇáÍ ÇÈä Ìäßí ÏæÓÊ ÇÈä ÇÈí ÚÈÏÇááå Abdulqader son of Abdullah Abi Saleh son of Jangi Doust son of Abi Abdullah We see here that Safadi also considered Jangi Doust as name not nickname, but he contradicted Ibn Emad al-Hanbali in his father name Safadi considerd Abu Saleh as nickname, while Ibn Emad considered it as a name and different person While Sheikh Yusuf al-Nabhani in his book "Jame Karamat al-Awlyia" volume 2, page 204 he gave different lineage ÚÈÏÇáÞÇÏÑ ÇáÌíáí Èä ãæÓì Èä ÚÈÏÇááå Èä íÍíì Èä ãÍãÏ Èä ÏÇæÏ Èä ãæÓì Èä ÚÈÏÇááå Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä ÇáÍÓä Èä Úáí Abdulqader al-Gilani son of Musa son of Abdullah son of Yahya son of Muhammad son of Dawoud son of Musa son of al-Hassan son of al-Hassan son of Ali So we notice here that Nabhani didn’t mention Jangi Doust at all, and he also considered Musa as the father of Abdulqader So this is also a different lineage while al-Katabi (who died in 764 AH) gave different lineage in his book Fawat al-Wafyat ÚÈÏ ÇáÞÇÏÑ Èä ÃÈí ÕÇáÍ Èä Ìäßí ÏæÓÊ¡ íäÊåí äÓÈå Åáì ÇáÍÓíä Èä Úáí ÑÖí Çááå ÚäåãÇ Abdulqader son of Abi Saleh son of Jangi Doust, his lineage eands to Hussain bin Ali may Allah be pleased with them Here al-Katabi attributed Abdulqader to Imam Hussain, while the others arrtibuted him to Imam Hassan Therefore there is disagreement about the lineage of Adbulqader, and according to the standards of genealogy and Usool al-Feqh, that who ever his lineage is contradictive, consequently his lineage is false As we can see clearly, those scholars who brother Skeptic consider them as references, each of them provided different lineage According to what I cited so far we noticed that there is disagreement about Abdulqader's father identity, is he Musa, or Abdullah or Abu Saleh ? There is disagreement about Abdulqader's grandfather, is he Jangi Doust or Abdullah ? There is disagreement about his great grand father, is he Jangi Doust or Abi Abdullah or Yahya ? There is disagreement about which Imam he belongs to, Imam Hassan or Imam Hussain ? Thabt al-Masoon book is an authentic book, its re-published recently in UAE, and the book is acceptable and authentic in all Sunnis sight. this book has nothing to do with Sihah al-Akhbar and Abu al-Huda al-Rifai No I don’t, cause mentioning the lineage is not a confirmation Beside that, every one quotes a different lineage There is no Ejma, many Sunni scholars wrote a biography about him without mentioning that he is Hassani or Hussaini Such as Ibn al-Mulaqan in his book Tabaqat al-Awlyia Sheikh Yusuf al-Nabhani he is just a normal Sufi Sheikh, he is not genealogist Post the Arabic text post their texts You provided nothing I asked you from the beginning to prove the lineage of Abdulqader by posting a statement from any genealogist testifying that Yahya had a son named Abdullah Until now you running away by posting some book names only, and when we check the books we find things against your belief Dahabi and Ibn Rajab rejected the lineage The other scholars who didn’t comment, each one provides different lineage So you proved nothing ! You even cannot prove the name of Abdulqader's father rather than his lineage ! Subhan Allah !! Who is the person who wasting the time and dodge around the topic I said from the beginning if some one proved that Yahya had son named Abdullah, then Abdulqader's lineage will be accepted, as long no one can prove that so his lineage will be considered as false So instead of answering this simple question, you brought up Ibn Enba's doctrine, Um Kulthom marriage etc. While these things has nothing to do with the lineage of Abdulqader Any how seems we both don’t have time to waste So if you got an answer for this question, post it and end the debate If you don’t got, then take a break a search for an answer
  8. Dear brother As you know my time is short so I cant keep discussing some issues which has nothing to do with Abdulqader's lineage Our topic is Abdulqader's lineage so try to focus on it If you reject Ibn enaba's book so you the ONLY Sunni in this world who rejects Ibn enba's book. Any how I will accept your rejection, but provide me a solid proof Post for me from any genealogy book which says that Yahya had a son named Abdullah Its very simple question, why you avoiding it by discussing Um Kulthom and other topics which has nothing to do with this thread As I said, according to the rules of genealogy (and Usool too) when there is variant statements, they accept the most popular and abandon the odd ones. So the majority of genealogists says that Um Kulthom was married to Muslim ibn Aqil Only three Shia genealogists says that um Kulthom was married to Umar and two of them based their statements on hadith books The hadith of Um Kulthom marriage is weak so their statements is unacceptable. This is a solid proof for rejecting this part of their statement First of all there is no ijma Second the scholars statements is unacceptable in genealogy Third, non of these scholars examined the lineage of Abdulqader, and I asked you to post a text from those books which you mention it, but you didn’t So I will post some as example to let the readers be aware of your… I don’t want to sat cheating, but these books is only mentioning Abdulqader as the Qaderis introduced him, because these books recording the biography of many scholars without examining their lineages. For example you said In the same book volume 39 page 87 Dahabi said æÒÇÏ ÈÚÖ ÇáäÇÓ Ýí äÓÈå Åáì Ãä ÃæÕáå ÈÇáÍÓä Èä Úáí ÑÖí Çááå Úäå Some people added to his lineage and attributed him to Hassan bin Ali So Dahabi after quoting the lineage which is provided by Qaderis, he declared his rejection for this lineage because it’s a fake lineage in the same book he said Åä åÐå ÇáÇÓãÇÁ ÇáÊí ÇáÍÞåÇ ÇáÞÇÖí ÇÈæ ÕÇáÍ ÈãÍãÏ Èä íÍíì áÇ ÃËÑ áåÇ ÚäÏ ÇáäÓÇÈíä æÇáÞÇÆáæä ÈÕÍÊåÇ ÌãÇÚÉ ãä ÇáÌåÇá ÇáãÊãÓßíä ÈØÑíÞÉ ÇáÔíÎ ÚÈÏ ÇáÞÇÏÑ These names (of lineage) which been attributed by Qazi Abu Saleh to Muhammad bin Yahya do not exist in genealogy books, and those who claim its correct (lineage) they are a group of ignorant followers of Sheikh Abdulqader in the same book he says æÈÚÖ ÇáäÇÓ íÐßÑ äÓÈå Åáì Úáí Èä ÃÈí ØÇáÈ ÑÖí Çááøå Úäå And some people attribute him to Ali bin Abi Talib SOME not all, which means there is many who rejects his fake lineage, and Ibn Rajab himself rejecting Abdulqader's lineage because he recorded his full name without attributing him to Imam Ali These is few examples from the references which you copy/paste it every time without knowing what it is about, and avoid posting it in the thread There is disagreement about these two books, if its fabricated or not But the double standers comes from you Do you know why ? Because those who claimed that the book is fabricated, they accused Abu al-Huda al-Rifai While you citing Abu al-Huda Rifai reference, here so how you rejecting the book which is published by abu Huda al-Rifai because he fabricated it, and then you used Abu Huda Rifai as reference !! By the way Abu Huda Rifai rejects the lineage of Abdulqader, so quoting his book as reference is kind of lie or let say you don’t know what is in these books still we have an authentic sunni reference Umar bin Muhammad al-Ashtari who is a Sunni Sufi died in 787 AH, he declared in his book (al-Thabt al-Musan) that the lineage of Abdulqader is false. please post the full Arabic text so now Don’t use escaping forward technique You are demanded to prove the lineage of Abdulqader by posting a text from any genealogy book which says that Yahya had son named Abdullah As long you cant provide us this, so according to genealogy standards Abdulqader's lineage is false And I want the readers to notice that our brother Skeptic will not answer the question, verily he will keep running away by discussing and arguing in sub-side issues which is not related to Abdulqader's lineage So I will not reply his posts anymore as long he running away and not providing the proof Cause my time is very short and I don’t want to waste it with some one running away from the questions. The inability of answering my question is a clear proof that Abdulqader's lineage is false and fabricated
  9. First of all they not more qualifed than me, because these people also consider al-Masoodi as Shia although the Sunni scholars declared that he is a Sunni such as Imam Subki, Hassan al-Saqqaf and Mahmooad Saeed Mamdouh in addition Masoodi's books shows that he is Sunni the same case we have here, Ibn Enaba in his book showed that he is not Shia so do you reject the statement of Ibn Enaba himself and follow a website written by unknown ? you are really strange and running against the rules Seems I'm talking to a wall not to a human I tolled you many times ago, that there is some standards for using a book as reference to prove the lineage of some A- the book must be genealogy book B- the lineage in the book must be examined not just copy/paste So can you post a text from any of these books which you repeating it every time Don’t lie to your self Each book, each letter, each poem got a particular chain of narration You cant mix it up with the chain of Taryiqqa There is no any problem in their disagreement about Ali and Ahmad, because we not discussing the progeny of Ali and Ahmad We discussing Abdullah, is he real character or fabricated character Ibn Enaba and Ibn al-Taqtaqi didn’t mention him at all, the other genealogists also didn’t mentioned him either So we conclude that Abdullah is fabricated character and do not exist. Not only these two Ibn Zuhra al-Refaei, who is Sunni Sufi died in 753 H, he declared that the lineage of Abdulqader is false Umar bin Muhammad al-Ashtari who is a Sunni Sufi died in 787 AH, he declared in his book (al-Thabt al-Musan) that the lineage of Abdulqader is false. Seraj al-Deen al-Refai who is Sunni Sufi died in 885 AH he also denied the lineage of Abdulqader These are three Sufi genealogists who denied the lineage of Abdulqader Also the famous Sunni historian Ibn al-Saee who died in 674 AH in his book "Mukhtasar Akhbar al-Khulafa" he denied the linage of Abdulqader Instead of accusing me by such things Prove for the people the lineage of Abudlqader Answer my simple question WHICH GENEALOGSIST MENTIONED ABDULLAH AMONG THE PROGNY OF YAHYA If you answered this question, the debate will be over As long you running away from this question but talking about the beliefs of Ibn Enba and Um Kulthom so that shows Abdulqader's lineage is false These people denying the lineage of Abdulqader, so how you claim that they said he is sayed !! For example Allama syed mohammed bin ahmed bin ameedudden al-hussaini an-najafi said: Åä åÐå ÇáÇÓãÇÁ ÇáÊí ÇáÍÞåÇ ÇáÞÇÖí ÇÈæ ÕÇáÍ ÈãÍãÏ Èä íÍíì áÇ ÃËÑ áåÇ ÚäÏ ÇáäÓÇÈíä æÇáÞÇÆáæä ÈÕÍÊåÇ ÌãÇÚÉ ãä ÇáÌåÇá ÇáãÊãÓßíä ÈØÑíÞÉ ÇáÔíÎ ÚÈÏ ÇáÞÇÏÑ These names (of lineage) which been attributed by Qazi Abu Saleh to Muhammad bin Yahya do not exist in genealogy books, and those who claim its correct (lineage) they are a group of ignorant followers of Sheikh Abdulqader I don’t want to say you telling lies, but as I said before, next time don’t post any thing without reference The author died in year 709 AH, and its true he believed that Um Kulthom was married to Umar, but he notified the reader in his book that he rely on the traditions (hadith) which been narrated in hadith books Which means he not 100% sure, because he even mentioned some other possibilities that the marriage didn’t take a place. Anyhow there is a Shiite genealogist who named al-Hassan bin al-Amdi al-Alavi who died in 400's AH and he denied in his book the marriage of Um Kulthom to Umar. Ibn Enaba declared that Um Kulthom was married to Muslim ibn Aqil Many Shiite genealogists declared that the marriage didn’t take a place. So according to the rules of genealogy and also usool al-Feqh (because both are similar in this case) the statement of the author above is unacceptable because 1- its odd statement contradicting the majority of genealogists statements 2- the author himself declared the source of his statement, so we can evaluate his opinion because we already know his proof (as long his proof is from hadith book so here we have to refer to hadith scholar, if the tradition is true so the statement of the author is reliable, if the tradition is weak so the statement of the author is unacceptable) so can you now stick to our topic and mention a name of a genealogist who mentioned Abdullah as son of Yahya ?
  10. Unfortuantly brother Skeptic is running away from my questions by asking some questions which is not related to Abdulqader Gilani lineage Ibn Enba and Ibn al-Taqtaqi relied on some ancient books to prove the lineages, cause in every century the genealogists completing the works of the previous genealogists because in every century a new progeny born so its needed to be recorded and attached to their forefathers Some lineages there is disagreement about it, just like some hadiths of prophet (s) there is disagreement about it. In general the disagreements about the lineages is few and limited. So as I mentioned before, if we found a disagreement we will look at the other genealogists statements, and via that we can know who is right and who is wrong. Ali and Ahmad aren’t our topic, so no need to waste time by quoting other genealogists statements to see who is right We have to ignore them Because those scholars are specialized in jurisprudence, Quran etc. While genealogy is totally a different science, and they never studied the science of genealogy, so how you want us to accept their statements ? Beside that they only posted the lineage of Abdulqader as the Qaderis claimed They didn’t examined the lineage, nor they quoted the lineage from a genealogy book So we have to ignore them as you ignoring the marriage of Um kulthom although tens of Sunni scholars confirmed it Can you post a statement from their own books admitting that they are Shia ? I already posted some texts from his book shows clearly that he is not Shia So post a statement from any genealogists saying that Yahya had some named Abdullah, and that will end the conflict This is not acceptable, because every book and poem has its own chain of narration, and usually the chain is written on the manuscripts So we need the chain of the poem, not the chain of the Tariqah The chain of the Tariqah is some thing different Beside that its not mu[Edited Out]ir as you claim, because the mu[Edited Out]ir needs to be narrated by ten students at least from Abdulqader Gilani himself You have to learn the rules of Mu[Edited Out]ir you the one who claim that Abdulqader is Alavi, so you the one who needed to provide proof not me what's wrong to you ? don’t you know the rules of debate ? the first rule, proof is required from the claimer I checked Abu Nasr al-Bukhari book, he even didn’t mention Um Kulthom at all, he only mentioned the male progeny Seems you arguing without knowledge First you said Ibn Enba sayd that Um Kulthom was married to Umar, and when I checked the book, it was written that she was married to Muslim bin Aqeel Please bro next time post the texts and don’t throw words blindly, because I don’t like to discuss some one who has no knowledge Our topic is Abdullah So don’t run away to another topic Ali and Ahmad can be considered as "Nasab Mawquf" at least they were mentioned some where But Abdullah is not mentioned at all which means both are right in Abdullah's issue Ok post for me the statement of one genealogist which says Yahya had some named Abdullah No need to waste time by running to other topics
  11. Brother please try to understand In genealogy there is particular standards for considering the reference as evident The references which you provided is not acceptable by the genealogists because those book copy/paste the lineage of Abdulqader Gilani only Its not examine the lineage of Abdulqader as genealogy book. To make it easy for you, if there is a chainless hadith, so this hadith is unacceptable even if it was recorded in hundreds of reliable book. I hope you get the point I posted some texts from their books shows that they are not Shia So can you post from their books some thing proves that they are shia ? This is not a defect History books been written hundreds of years after prophet Muhammad Hadith books been written hundreds of years after prophet Muhammad So what is the problem in that ? I checked Ibn Enba's book but I couldn’t find that !! On the contrary in page 32 it was written that Um Kulthum was married to Muslim bin Aqeel You have to provide me a genealogist who said that Yahya had a son named Abdullah, and I will accept the lineage of Abdulqader Its so simple Both of them agreed that there is no son named Abdullah, and this is our point :D but running away from this point to other points which is not our topic i dont think its helping you Because both of them agreed that Muhammad is the son of Yahya While they disagreed about Ahmad and Ali. According to genealogy method and usool method, we will look at other genealogists statements, if they mentioned Ahmad and Ali so we will consider them as progeny of Yahya. If they doesn’t mention them so we will not consider them as progeny of Yahya. If the other genealogists disagreed (some says as the statement of Ibn Enba, while others says as the statement of Ibn Taqtqi) Ahmad and Ali will be considered "Nasab Mawquf"
  12. Dear brother Skeptic, its my pleaser to have a dialogue with a polity person like you, but my time is very very short particularly this month and next month, therefore I hade to cut down the dialogue and make it a short debate focusing on the main points only to reach to a final conclusion as soon as possible. So if you like to have a dialogue and discuss every tiny issue, I will be ready for it when I get free in the end of April.
  13. No, I mean the Ba Alwis rely on Ibn Enba to prove that the Ba Alwi lineage is correct --- As the readers can see by their own eyes The Sufis are unable to prove the lineage of Abdulqader Gilani and they run away from my question by twisting the dialogue from Abdulqader Gilani to other topics I will not waste my time by answering questions which has nothing to do with the topic which is (abdul Qadir Jilani / Syed or No?) Waiting for some one to answer my questions about Gilani's lineage I'm pretty sure that no one can and no one could since hundred years ago
  14. First of all, these two names were only examples, cause its not logical to mention hundred of names But if you need to know more, so the Ba Alwys Sufis in Yemen rely on Ibn Enba The Hasanis in Morocco rely on Ibn Enba Please Sunnis, don’t waste my time by asking childish questions I posted 4 questions which will end the debate So answer the 4 questions to prove the lineage of Abdulqader Gilani
  15. As every one can see These Sunni guys unable to prove the linage of Abdulqader Gilani and they just repeating the same statements again Listen By answering my questions the debate will be ended. This is my questions again, give a direct answer, I don’t want rubbish talks post a paragraph from any genealogy book which is mentioning the following points 1- Yahya's progeny, which the genealogist mentioning Abdullah among Yahya's sons 2- Abdullah's progeny, which the genealogist mentioning the progeny of Abdullah and mentioning Musa among them. i will add extra questions post the chain of narration of the poem post the book's chain of narration I would like to notify the reader to that he will not give direct answer, because answering these questions means disproving the lineage of Abdulqader by himself, and we will see that he will keep running away from these questions I would like to notify the readers to the cunning way which he use in dialogue, he rejecting Ibn Enba and Ibn al-Taqtaqi in excuse of being Shia While all the Sunnis & Sufi rely on Ibn Enba So look at the double standards
×
×
  • Create New...