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
Sign in to follow this  
smrr110

abdul Qadir Jilani / Syed or No?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

As Salam 'Alaikum!

Hope all of you are with the best of health by the grace of Allah. Just would like to have your opinions about the above mentioned topic. Although, It has been discussed several times in other threads but I could not find any conclusion in those threads.

My question is specifically about the opinions of knows Shia Mujtahids or Scholars about Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani(ra). We know Ayatullah Murtaza Mutahari has confimed him a Sayed in one of his book. While in of the discussion threads of shiachat, I found references of other Mujtahids which deny this fact. Ayatullah Jafar Al-subhani was mentioned along with few other names. However, I could not find that what are the opinions of these scholars, neither the person who quoted this information has mentioned this. He just mentioned that these scholars rejects his lineage as a Syed.

I will be grateful if we can share our views on this issue. Moreover, If somebody can provide me a useful online source to few clear verdicts of some shia scholars about this subject. I look forward for your contribution.

Ma'salama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually, there was mention right here on this board that he never claimed to be syed during his own life, hence the title SHEIKH abdul qadir jilani (not sayed), and it was his son who first said that he was a hassani sayed.

also, im not sure dr tijani says he was a sayed, he mentions in "then i was guided" that his followers believe on the mehraaj abdul qadir jilani carried rasool Allah up to the closest part of heaven on his shoulders because hazrat jibrail was too scared or something lol. mind u its been years since ive read that book.

hold up ill do a search

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is untrue that he did not make such a claim. the qaseedah al ghawsiyah by him clearly mentions that he is a descendant of al-hassan (a.s) in the last verses of it.

by not claiming something like lineage openly or in writings, one is not automatically removed from a lineage. majority of the mystics have not said a word about their lineage but that does not make any difference on whatever the facts maybe about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmm i didnt know about him claiming it himself. first time i heard it actually, can you show me an online version so i can read it?

i think the "hes not a sayed" stance is based on the idea people added laqabs and honours to him after his death in order to elevate his status in the eyes of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was a syed as authenticated by all Urafa including the Shia and Sunni. Only the mullah styled (dry fiqh) ayatollahs and maybe a few anti sufi (or jealous) sunnis (who might not be more then a handful) have rejected his lineage. Wsalam

Brother, If I am not mistaken then I have seen your views in a 5 years old thread of shiachat.com in which you are rejecting the claim that he was a hasnai Sayed. Can you kindly clarify?

thanx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm i didnt know about him claiming it himself. first time i heard it actually, can you show me an online version so i can read it?

i think the "hes not a sayed" stance is based on the idea people added laqabs and honours to him after his death in order to elevate his status in the eyes of the world.

Salaam,

Maybe, but I think a more pressing point of finding out is because he exists in certain Shajarah's of Sayed families in Indo-Pak (and maybe others but not sure)

Wasalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats true, however all the shajras i personally have seen him crop up, are sunni, never shia ones. be interesting to see what gets proven one way or another no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thats true, however all the shajras i personally have seen him crop up, are sunni, never shia ones. be interesting to see what gets proven one way or another no?

true or sometimes they have sunnis and shias both in their families, like PM of Pakistan :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My question is specifically about the opinions of knows Shia Mujtahids or Scholars about Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani(ra).

Shia scholars has nothing to do with genealogy

if you want to know such things you have to ask the genealogists, just as if you want to know some thing about cosmology you have to ask the cosmologgists.

anyhow if we looked at the lineage of Abdulqader al-Gelani we will find it false & fabricated

the (fabricated) lineage of Abdulqader al-Gelani is as following

Abdulqader son of Musa son of Abdullah son of Yahya son of Muhammad son of Dawoud son of Musa son of Abdullah son of Musa son of Abdullah son of Hassan son of Hassan son of Ali son of Abi Talib

Noor al-Absar, by Sheblenji, page 320

the famous genealogist Ibn Enba declared that this lineage is false and Abdulqader doesnt belong to Bani Hashim tribe.

Umdat al-Talib, page 129

if you search in genealogy books, you will never find a person with this name (Musa son of Abdullah son of Yahya) because its fabricated character.

our friend Nabil al-Karkhi (may Allah's mercy be upon him) proved the falsehood of Gelani's lineage (Arabic website)

http://tanzeeh.shiaunion.com/trips/iraq_trips/gylanyun.htm

Actually I wrote a book titled as "al-Sahifa al-Khadra" proving in it the falsehood of all the famous Sunni and Sufi scholars lineages.

But I couldn’t publish it because the book contain some famous Shia scholars as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting, which scholars did you mention, and what did you say about them? are they descendants of abdul qadir jilani?

although i am inclined to believe that he was not a sayed, if Musa son of Abdullah son of Yahya didnt exist, then who was sheikh abdul qadir jilanis fathers name? and why isnt it mentioned in the chain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well brother i dont like to be questioned cause my time is short, but I will answer your questions this time

which scholars did you mention

if you asking about Suni scholars so they are many such as Ahmad al-Refai, Ali al-Shazeli, Ahmad al-Badawy, Ahmad al-Tijani etc.

and what did you say about them?

I quote the genealogists statements about them, and proved that their lineages is fabricated

if Musa son of Abdullah son of Yahya didnt exist, then who was sheikh abdul qadir jilanis fathers name?

Some genealogists said that his real name is Abdulqadir son of Muhammad son of Jangidost son of Abdullah

well its not important to know who is his real father, the important is that we know he is not the progeny of Imam Ali

and why isnt it mentioned in the chain?

the whole chain is fabricated, he is not from Imam Ali's progeny

every one can make a lineage chain to Imam Ali, and they can fool the common people, but they cant fool the genealogists.

in Egypt you can buy for your self a lineage document to Imam Ali along with the stamp of genealogy center for 5000$

in Iraq you can buy for your self a lineage document to Imam Ali along with the stamp of some Shiite scholars for 3000$

but all these documents are useless cause the genealogists can unearth it and prove its forgery

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for taking the time to answer my questions yaar, when you have more time let me know so i can ask you some more questions? i find the whole topic pretty interesting and u seem to know a fair amount

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well brother i dont like to be questioned cause my time is short, but I will answer your questions this time

Thanx brother! If you can kindly spare sometime to discuss this topic then it will be a great favor. I was badly criticized by many followers of Sheikh when I questioned about his lineage. they used to quote lot of references from the ghunya al talebeen by Sheikh which are seriously controversial or anti shia. While few people claim that this book is fabricated by salafis / wahabis and orginal book is preserved in Iraq in some library. It looks quite strange to me.

Shaheed Murtada Mutahari in a book Light within Me has mentioned him as Sayed while in umdat al talib he has been declared non sayed as you mentioned. It will be nice if we can keenly examine this issue. your provided information is really helpful and we look forward to have more discussion with you. Please share more points with us, specially from you book, if you feel better!

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the brother is going to answer further questions then the most important one i can think of immediately is, which SHIA scholars descend from him and claim to be sayyed. i find that to be of pretty bloody majorly important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
our friend Nabil al-Karkhi (may Allah's mercy be upon him) proved the falsehood of Gelani's lineage (Arabic website)

http://tanzeeh.shiaunion.com/trips/iraq_trips/gylanyun.htm

I visited the website and managed to have some english translation of it, thoug not sure if it is correct or no. Anyway just putting it here:

Kilaon: descent back to the Sheikh Abdul Qadir Gilani, a Persian origin, and necklaces of gems Tadwi Hanbali Husniyya proportions that it is: (Sheikh Abdul Qadir Bin Musa Cengi Douste bin Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Yahya Zahid bin Daud bin Musa bin Abdullah bin Musa Ergun Abdullah bin Hassan bin purely Muthanna Al-Imam Al-Hassan fine, peace be upon him) this ratio can not be bought because Yahya did not have a son named Abdullah pursuer, and Sheikh Abdul Qadir Gilani had not been invited, but this ratio has claimed one of his grandsons

According to Dr. Abdel-Gawad Al Tamah Alchledar in writing (Studies Atalibien parameters to explain the book "the secret of the top genealogy" of Abu Nasr al-Bukhaari) a lot of evidence on the Abolition of the alleged descent of the upper Sheikh Abdul Qadir Gilani, said in a page (81): [Abu Sharif said, system in favor of religion Obaidullah captain Wasit Alastrae Husseini in his bibliography protected by tree-Sharif Ahmad bin Mohammad al-Amidi Alnsabp Husseini and he called the "Almcjr KASHAF supervision of the assets of Gentlemen," the entire text: Having attributed to Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Yahya said Sheikh Abdul Qadir Gilani ( generated in the year 470 AH) said: Abdul Qadir bin Muhammad bin Cengi Douste bin Abdullah said, and did not call that Sheikh Abdul Qadir is one of his children, but started this case, the judge in his son was born Abu Saleh Nasr bin Abi Bakr bin Sheikh Abdul Qadir. That Abdullah Hijazi said a man did not come out of the Hijaz, and I mean this Cengi Douste Oagami frank as you see. The age of the Mcjrath: They quoted the Sheikh Mohiuddin Abdul Qader Al to Abdullah bin Mohammed bin turkeys are said to his son Roman Empire, as they say Muhammad said, did not call, Sheikh Abdul Qadir is not one of the descent, but his children and his son began to Abu Salih bin Abi Nasr Bakr ibn Abd al-Qadir was not the evidence is not known to him that one of Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Ali Hijazi, a man did not come out of the Hijaz a strong name I mean Cengi Douste Oagami frank as you see it through to prove this descent, but the evidence just has crippled the judge in favor of the father and was accompanied by by the lack of consent of his grandfather, Sheikh Abdel-Kader and his sons, and God Almighty knows best. Sharif ended the transfer of the deceased Serageddin Rifai in Baghdad in 885 e].

In page (82), we read: [transfer Taj Din Ibn Al-Sharif Al-Husseini, the flower of the deceased captain Alnsabp Aleppo in 700, one of the contemporary immigration judge in favor of Abu Nasr ibn Abi Bakr ibn Abd al-Qadir and the claim of descent from the Mongol era Aharifvi after the extinction of the Abbasid Caliphate furry story of this claim in his book (a very brief news in the upper houses saved from the dust), p. 29, said: (and to claim descent Ergun built house of Sheikh Abdul Qadir Gilani of Baghdad Alazj buried the door may God have mercy on him, claiming descent to Muhammad ibn Musa bin Daud bin Abdullah bin Musa Ergun. A sons of Sheikh Wonderland and tell him the news is not true belief can not be transferred, and some after the extinction of the Abbasid Caliphate and the possibility of a claim of all claims ratios of good and peace be upon him Sbt Fasht Dawahmoahl ratios do not say and say they are vigilantes. and Sheikh Abdul Qadir may God have mercy on him was a man of great good not let this rate, the alleged grandchildren, one of the stomachs Bchtbr bin Faris, God and the world].

Said page (83): [Al-Sharif in the Rifa `i in his book" Sahah News "p. 17-27, said: It is known that the father of Saleh Bakr bin Abi Nasr Abdul Razak bin Sheikh Abdul Qadir Al-Jaili what started this case, opposed by the descent of the scientists did not not aware of the legitimacy of the case remained under the folded Sajaf denial of reasons, including: the proportion of alleged bin Abd al-Razzaq al-Nasr writes that his father Sheikh Abdul Razak bin Abdul Kadir bin Abi Salih (Mohammed) Cengi Douste-bin bin Musa bin Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Yahya which is true when the issue of all scientists that Abdullah, who they accused of Cengi Douste is the son of Mohammed bin Abdullah Al Yahya, the son of Mohammad is known as the son of Greek did not comment, but his brother, which was followed by Yahya bin Muhammad bin Yahya, it is the different names and placement Balaqim denied the rate.

One of the reasons of denial, Abdullah bin Mohammed bin attributed to the Greek Cengi Douste died in the city at night in four hundred and sixty to be exact and was buried in the old Bakie day of his death, without the twenty-one did not comment as saheeh by al-Sharif and Alavtts Amidi and Gelihama. It is also understood that the birth of Shaikh Abdul Qadir in four hundred and seventy-migration.

Continue Sahah the news, saying in response rates: (and then the transfer of any system in favor of Abu-Sharif, religion Obaidullah captain Wasit Alastrae Husseini in his book in the genealogy above what the son of Sharif Memon Alnsabp book in answer to a book written by Judge Abi-Saleh, who asked him to Entered in the wooded Beni Hassan al. This is the text of the book Sharif Memon, Ibn Abi Alnsabp to the benefit of grandchildren of Sheikh Abdul Qadir and in this regard: (Peace be upon you and the mercy of God be upon you, or you are a judge or Frvannak Cuba Abdul Razzaq al-Faqih, who is in favor of your grandfather and the Sheikh Abdul Qadir Sheikh is Sophie Itbrk evaluated and the benefit of prayer requests and proportions Bchtbri as you fired in some of your books to the end of the abdomen Bchtbr Heramsp Pfars Vatq Hashimiyah to God and let the people).]

In page (84), we read: [and then to say in his book Al-Sharif Refa'ee "Sahah News:" Mr. Ahmed said the Dean of the debt-Najafi Alnsabp: The names of these caused the judge Abu Saleh Mohammad Bin Yahya had no impact upon the health Alnsabin Sayers and a group of adherents Aljhal Sheikh Abdul Qadir way and some of the pea or Sufi scholars who can not stand them aware of descent).]

The Tqtki son, who died in 709 H, in his book Alasili, p. 95: (I know that House of Abdul-Qader Al-buried Alazj door claiming to be Mohammed bin Musa bin Daoud Abu Omar II ibn Abd-Allah ibn Musa Ergun, and my father tells about a victory in favor of him to judge the judges felt : (We are one of the best sons of Hasan) means Hassan bin Ali peace be upon them, and to this date and the month of Ramadan the year ninety-eight hundred and did not substantiate the legitimate health, why not to).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

salams bro

(1) which shia scholars say he is a sayyed, and what does this mean if they are wrong? are there sayed scholars who descend from him?

(2) what is the actual shia view of him, was he a good man?

(3) what question would you like me to ask, that hasnt been asked, which you would have wanted to answer?

many thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks brother!

My question is the same as brother malang has asked. I would only like to add :

1- Some sunnis claims that his book Ghunya Al Talebeen is fabricated by wahabis and actual book is preserved in some library in Iraq. What are your views about this book and which book is currently used by his followers?

2- Can you tell about the scholar who is mentioned by Dr. tijani in his book "thumma ahdayto" ? The scholar who did research on Abdul Qadir?

3- I am very keen to know the view of our top 'ulema about him.

4- As brother malang has said, please share with us anything which you feel important about this subject.

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really sorry brothers for responding late to your questions, actually I got busy so I couldn’t log in

(1) which shia scholars say he is a sayyed, and what does this mean if they are wrong? are there sayed scholars who descend from him?

Actually I never heard from a reliable Shiite scholar that he is sayed

Yes there is some low educated Shia students/inexpert junior scholars who said that he is sayed, but their claims is proofless

I never saw a Shia scholar who is a descend of Abdulqader Gilani, I only saw some Shia junior scholars who are a descend of Ahmad Rifai (actually they were revert Shia)

Those who claim that Gilani is sayed while they are mistaken, actually it’s a big problem cause Allah said { When you received it with your tongues and spoke with your mouths what you had no knowledge of, and you deemed it an easy matter while with Allah it was grievous.}024.015 { Not a word does he utter but there is a sentinel by him, ready (to note it).} 050.018

While those who claim that they are from Imam Ali's progeny, they are in bigger problem, cause there is a hadith in al-Kafi and other books even Sunni books, that who ever attributed him self to a lineage other than his true lineage, then he is kafir

(2) what is the actual shia view of him, was he a good man?

There is no actual Shia view about him, cause he wasn’t born yet during the 12 Imams era

Therefore each Shiite scholar got different view about him, and it’s a relatively matter, cause no one is 100% bad.

1- Some sunnis claims that his book Ghunya Al Talebeen is fabricated by wahabis and actual book is preserved in some library in Iraq. What are your views about this book and which book is currently used by his followers?

I never heard from a reliable source that the book is fabricated by the Wahabis, and I don’t got any evident supporting that.

However the Hanafi sunnis are not pleased with this book, because Gilani declared in his book that the Hanafis and Abu Hanifa will go to hell because the Hanafi sect is a false sect.

2- Can you tell about the scholar who is mentioned by Dr. tijani in his book "thumma ahdayto" ? The scholar who did research on Abdul Qadir?

I don’t know him, but there is many scholars who made researches about Abdulqadir Gilani

3- I am very keen to know the view of our top 'ulema about him.

The best way is to send your question to them through their websites

4- As brother malang has said, please share with us anything which you feel important about this subject.

According to the official statistics of some foundations in Egypt, there is 50 million man and woman nowadays around the world who claims that they are the progeny of Imam Ali (a).

While according to our rough statistics that the actual progeny of Imam Ali (a) in our time is between 120 000 – 150 000.

Which means only 0.003% are true Alavis, while the rest 99.997% are fake Alavis.

If we want to have an accurate statistic so the number of Imam Ali's progeny might be less than 100 000, due to the brutal extermination which been committed by Umayyad and Abbasid regime against the progeny of Imam Ali.

Right now some of honest Shia scholars and I trying to identify the true & fake Alavis, and I found some Shiite scholars who are true Alavis and their lineages is 100% correct, such as

Muhammad Hussain Fadhlulah (Imam Hassan's progeny)

Muhammad Shirazi (Imam Hussain's progeny)

Muhammad Sadeq al-Sader (Imam Hussain's progeny)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However the Hanafi sunnis are not pleased with this book, because Gilani declared in his book that the Hanafis and Abu Hanifa will go to hell because the Hanafi sect is a false sect.

Funny because half the world's hanafis are Qadiris, followers of Sayidna Shaykh 'Abdal Qadir Jaylani radiallahu 'anhu

He is both Hasany and Husayni, mashallah

Edited by Sijistani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny because half the world's hanafis are Qadiris, followers of Sayidna Shaykh 'Abdal Qadir Jaylani radiallahu 'anhu

Yes very funny, actually the contradictions in Sunni school never ends

He is both Hasany and Husayni, mashallah

Can you prove this ? or any one in this world can attribute himself to any tribe he likes !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you prove this ? or any one in this world can attribute himself to any tribe he likes !

What's the point of posting proof. You have already made up your mind. Also, you claim that sunnis dismiss the book Ghunya because it says that Hanafi will go to jannahnam. If you read the context of that it doesn't say all hanafis will go to hell. It says majority will go to hell because of their sins. As for dismissal this is not the reason. I have stated the reason before. Since you don't know it i wonder if its even worth debating any issue with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's the point of posting proof.

Allah said {Say: Bring your proof if you are truthful.}

You have already made up your mind.

No I didn’t, I just accept the statement of the genealogists (Sunnites and Shiites)

If the geographers stated that Asia is the largest continent, while some low educated senior Islamic scholars stated that Oceania is the largest continent

Who you gonna believe ?

Also, you claim that sunnis dismiss the book Ghunya because it says that Hanafi will go to jannahnam. If you read the context of that it doesn't say all hanafis will go to hell. It says majority will go to hell because of their sins. As for dismissal this is not the reason. I have stated the reason before. Since you don't know it i wonder if its even worth debating any issue with you.

Why the Sunnis never hesitate of telling lies ?

Abdulqader Gilani was talking about the 72 false sects which will go to hell, and he mentioned the Hanafi sect among them.

so dont try to mess with me, cause i know every tiny issue in Sunni school and Sunni books

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Allah said {Say: Bring your proof if you are truthful.}

The first one to deny the genealogy is a shia scholar himself. This scholar came 300 years after. Can you give me any proof that existed before that ?

Abdulqader Gilani was talking about the 72 false sects which will go to hell, and he mentioned the Hanafi sect among them.

so dont try to mess with me, cause i know every tiny issue in Sunni school and Sunni books

Abdul Qader was talking ? Shows how much you know about the book. What is your proof that even wrote this book ? Also if you know so much about the book then why would you assume that this is the reason we are against this book ? Can't you give me the main reason ?

so dont try to mess with me, cause i know every tiny issue in Sunni school and Sunni books

Don't try to intimidate me with your lip service. These tactics were used by brother Taair-al-Quds too. Today he is longer a shia and his latest post agrees to the syed linage of Ghous Al Azam (ra).

Edited by Abdaal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The first one to deny the genealogy is a shia scholar himself.

Ibn Enba is not a Shiite geneaolgest, beside that there is many other genealogists who denied the lineage of Abdulqader Gilani, such as Hussain Zurbatti, Ibn al-Taqtaqi, Abu Nasr al-Bukhari, Ahmad Amiduldeen etc.

Ibn Enba said:

æáã íÞã ÚáíåÇ ÈíäÉ æáÇ ÚÑÝåÇ áå ÃÍÏ

There is no any evident would support it nor any one (genealogists) recognized his lineage.

Ibn al-Taqtaqi said:

áã ÊÞã ÇáÈíäÉ ÇáÔÑÚíÉ ÈÕÍÊå¡ ÝáÐáß áã íáÍÞå

There is no any legal evident which could support it, therefore its not acceptable

Ahmad Amiduldeen said:

áÇ ÃËÑ áåÇ ÚäÏ ÇáäÓÇÈíä æÇáÞÇÆáæä ÈÕÍÊåÇ ÌãÇÚÉ ãä ÇáÌåÇá ÇáãÊãÓßíä ÈØÑíÞÉ ÇáÔíÎ ÚÈÏ ÇáÞÇÏÑ

Its not recorded by the genealogists, and those who claim that his lineage is correct actually they are some ignorant followers of Sheikh Abdulqader

This scholar came 300 years after. Can you give me any proof that existed before that ?

Can you mention a name of one genealogist who existed before that and claimed that Abdulqader's lineage is correct ?

I believe reaching the stars is much easier for you than proving the lineage of Abdulqader Gilani

What is your proof that even wrote this book ?

The Sunni scholars such as Zarkali attributed the book to Abdulqader Gilani, and no one stabbed in the chain of narration of the book, and no one had doubt about the book.

So I think this is a sufficient proof, because this is the method of scholars

Also if you know so much about the book then why would you assume that this is the reason we are against this book ? Can't you give me the main reason ?

I'm not assuming

The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Ali al-Qari in his book "Sharh al-Feqh al-Akbar" criticized the statement of Abdulqader Gilani

The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Zahid al-Kawthari wrote a book titled as "Taneeb al-Khatib" criticizing all the Sunni scholars who assaulted Abu Hanifa

Don't try to intimidate me with your lip service. These tactics were used by brother Taair-al-Quds too. Today he is longer a shia and his latest post agrees to the syed linage of Ghous Al Azam .

Don’t compare me with the others

Try me and you will see a horrible bolides over your head

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scholar Sheikh Ali al-Qari i

Sheikh Zahid al-Kawthari

All these names flying around without anyone of the internet scholars here knowing who these 'sunni scholars were' or what their books were. Seems nothing but copy paste by teenagers

Imam Zahid al-Kawthari and Sheikh Ali al-Qari are both infact Qadiris from deeply Qadiri areas with their teachers being Qadiri too as well as their students

It is pretty much unanimous among sunni scholars, and concensus among sunni spiritual scholars that Sayidna Abdal Qadir Jaylani is both Hasani and Husayni. So so many chains from Mauritania to Indonesia in the Sunni universe filled with spiritual masters who take knowledge from the Qadiris. This thread makes it clear there is no difference between you know who

Edited by Sijistani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe reaching the stars is much easier for you than proving the lineage

No reaching the taken-for-granted internet database is

The Sunni scholars such as Zarkali attributed the book to Abdulqader Gilani, and no one stabbed in the chain of narration of the book, and no one had doubt about the book.

Who is this 'zarkali' 'the sunni scholar', did he disagree with the genealogy too?

no one had doubt at all, really no one?

So I think this is a sufficient proof, because this is the method of scholars

which method?

I'm not assuming

yes yes for sure you are not doing that but something else

Don�t compare me with the others

Try me and you will see a horrible bolides over your head

because I am the invincible anti-salafi, the internet master, unbeatable, unbreakable internet scholar par excellence. such a nincompoop

Edited by Sijistani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
telling lies ?

Hanafi sect among them.

so dont try to mess with me, cause i know every tiny issue in Sunni school and Sunni books

i know their back and front, their top and bottom, what passed them and what not passed them, I am the jin inside Aladdin's lamp, you don't know me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's the point of posting proof. You have already made up your mind. Also, you claim that sunnis dismiss the book Ghunya because it says that Hanafi will go to jannahnam. If you read the context of that it doesn't say all hanafis will go to hell. It says majority will go to hell because of their sins. As for dismissal this is not the reason. I have stated the reason before. Since you don't know it i wonder if its even worth debating any issue with you.

let me cut the debate, or as someone else said in another thread, cut the [Edited Out]

'Ghunya' , mentions the Hanafiyya sect

does anyone of the teenagers know what that is? :!!!:

did any teenager get the idea? :!!!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All these names flying around without anyone of the internet scholars here knowing who these 'sunni scholars were' or what their books were. Seems nothing but copy paste by teenagers

aha, so you are the brilliant scholar here ?

ok Mr. scholar, we will see now who is the teenager here

Imam Zahid al-Kawthari and Sheikh Ali al-Qari are both infact Qadiris from deeply Qadiri areas with their teachers being Qadiri too as well as their students

This is the first lie from Mr. scholar, and he been caught red-handed

Sheikh Zahid al-Kawthri is a Naqshibandi, and he declared that in his poem "al-Nuzm al-Atid le Tawasul al-Murid" and in his commentary on the poem which is titled as "Edgham al-Murid"

While Ali al-Qari is a Jeshti, as Sheikh Muhammad Abdulhalim al-Jeshti stated in "al-Bed'a al-Muzjat" volume 1, page 28

Next time please provide references, cause the scholars never talk from their pockets

Ok Mr. scholar !

It is pretty much unanimous among sunni scholars, and concensus among sunni spiritual scholars that Sayidna Abdal Qadir Jaylani is both Hasani and Husayni. So so many chains from Mauritania to Indonesia in the Sunni universe filled with spiritual masters who take knowledge from the Qadiris. This thread makes it clear there is no difference between you know who

We are talking about lineage, not about a hadith or feqhi issue to tell me about the Sunni scholars opinion.

If you want to prove his lineage, you have to provide me a name of one genealogist who confirmed his lineage.

No reaching the taken-for-granted internet database is

So why you don’t mention a name of a genealogist who confirmed his lineage ?

What's wrong Mr. scholar ?

Is it that much difficult to end the debate by providing a single reference ?

The lineage of the Shiite scholar al-Sharif al-Murtadha was mentioned by many Sunni genealogists

So why Abdulqader's lineage is not mentioned by the Sunni genealogists ? or even the Shia ?

Who is this 'zarkali' 'the sunni scholar', did he disagree with the genealogy too?

He is not a genealogist to talk about the lineages

He is specialized in other majors, logic, history etc.

no one had doubt at all, really no one?

This is the second lie by Mr. scholar

How you dare to say that no one doubt, while already the genealogists declared that his lineage is false, such as Ibn Enba, Ibn al-Taqtaqi and the others ?

which method?

as long you are Mr.scholar so you should know

because I am the invincible anti-salafi, the internet master, unbeatable, unbreakable internet scholar par excellence. such a nincompoop

Do you know why I'm invincible ?

Because I never tell lies..

Keep telling the truth, and you will be invincible

So let us see if these pathetic people can prove the lineage of Abdulqader Gilani, or they will keep barking just like the Christians who cannot prove the lineage of Jesus either

I don’t want some one to waste my time by pathetic comments

If there is some one serious, he should post reference, otherwise silence is gold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you mention a name of one genealogist who existed before that and claimed that Abdulqader's lineage is correct ?

I believe reaching the stars is much easier for you than proving the lineage of Abdulqader Gilani

I will have to look into it.

The Sunni scholars such as Zarkali attributed the book to Abdulqader Gilani, and no one stabbed in the chain of narration of the book, and no one had doubt about the book.

So I think this is a sufficient proof, because this is the method of scholars

Here is a bunch of scholar who don't believe its his book.

1. imam ibn hajar makki in 'fatawa hadeesiya'

2. Allama hamza shanwari in 'wajood o shahood'

3. hazrat faqir noor mohammed kalachwi in 'makzan ul asrar'

4. Allama mohammed abul aziz parharwi in 'al-nibras sharh aqaid'

5. Allama multani in his 'haashiya nibras'

6. shaykh abdul haq dehlawi quoted in persian translation of ghunya tul talibeen

7. Allam ghulam rasool saidee in 'tauzeul bayan'

8. Allama abdul hai lakhnawi (deoband alim) in 'al-rafah wal takmeel fi jarah wa taideel'

9. Allama nizam ul deen multani in 'fatawa nizamia'

10. Dr. tahirul Qadiri in 'falsafa shahadat imam hossain'

For the last reference dr. tahir qadiri sahib writes in the book mentioned on page 272 that Ghunyat-e-Talibeen:

1. it conflicts with fundamental beliefs

2. Hanafis are considered as murjiya.

3. it endorses and advocates mutazila beliefs.

4. it is a bunch of lies attributed to ghaus paak, his aqeeda was not like it presents.

I'm not assuming

The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Ali al-Qari in his book "Sharh al-Feqh al-Akbar" criticized the statement of Abdulqader Gilani

The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Zahid al-Kawthari wrote a book titled as "Taneeb al-Khatib" criticizing all the Sunni scholars who assaulted Abu Hanifa

Thanks for the references.

Anyway, I will ask another brother to help me out with the genealogy. I know Mufti Ghulaam Rasool wrote about on this issue. However, the book is in urdu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...