KR

The most interesting attempts I've seen at nuanced takes on the most recent lynching in Pakistan are along the lines of "yeah, we should condemn lynching but maybe you should not use mean words to describe the lynch mob."

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم refused to kill Ibn Salul, when he was well within his rights to do so. He fatally undermined Islam and the Muslims - repeatedly. The Prophet's wisdom was simple: he did not want misinformation to spread across Arabia like wildfire, that he kills his own Companions. Looking at the narrations, it seems that this was genuinely a personal and political decision on his part, and not subject to wahy intervention. This decision would be akin to military strategy on the battlefield, or handing down judgement in court - no corrective wahy would have been forthcoming if it was the least favourable course of action. What was the result? At the end of his life, the tribes across Arabia flocked to Madinah, then to Hajj, to accept Islam. This gave a huge assist to the expansion of Islam after the Prophet's passing. Had the Prophet killed him, Islam may not have gained the widespread acceptance that it did towards the end of his life. At worst, Islam could have endured a fate of decades - or even centuries - of Arab infighting within the Peninsula, with little prospect of mass expansion to neighbouring non-Arab regions for many decades, all because of that potential misinformation and distortion to the image of Islam. Fast forward to today. What you have is a concerted effort by some ignorant extremists who are hellbent on killing innocent people - or people who have not been afforded due process - all under the banner of defending the Prophet. This is now a daily occurrence on Pakistan, and has become a huge barrier in da'wah. This has never been a Pakistan-only issue. This is a global problem that every Muslim must be concerned about. The distortion of Islam at the hands of the TLP and its acolytes (basically anyone who attended Khadim Rizvi's funeral) is of a pressing concern.

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم refused to kill Ibn Salul, when he was well within his rights to do so. He fatally undermined Islam and the Muslims - repeatedly. The Prophet's wisdom was simple: he did not want misinformation to spread across Arabia like wildfire, that he kills his own Companions. Looking at the narrations, it seems that this was genuinely a personal and political decision on his part, and not subject to wahy intervention. This decision would be akin to military strategy on the battlefield, or handing down judgement in court - no corrective wahy would have been forthcoming if it was the least favourable course of action. What was the result? At the end of his life, the tribes across Arabia flocked to Madinah, then to Hajj, to accept Islam. This gave a huge assist to the expansion of Islam after the Prophet's passing. Had the Prophet killed him, Islam would have barely expanded beyond the Hejaz. At the most, it would have endured a fate of decades - or even centuries - of Arab infighting in the Peninsula. It would have become a ethno-centric religion, like Judaism or Hinduism. Fast forward to today. What you have is a concerted effort by some ignorant extremists who are hellbent on killing innocent people - or people who have not been afforded due process - all under the banner of defending the Prophet. This is now a daily occurrence on Pakistan, and has become a huge barrier in da'wah. This has never been a Pakistan-only issue. This is a global problem that every Muslim must be concerned about. The distortion of Islam at the hands of the TLP and its acolytes (basically anyone who attended Khadim Rizvi's funeral) is of a pressing concern.

I genuinely wonder why anyone would want to admire a gustakh-e din and be so smitten by him long enough to attend his janazah with a huge carbon footprint. وإن العبد ليتكلم بالكلمة من سخط الله لا يلقي لها بالا يهوي بها في جهنم A servant speaks of a word triggering the wrath of Allah - to which he gives no heed - through which he will land himself in the Hellfire. (Bukhari) It's very easy to accuse nobodies of gustakhi and murder them on the streets of Pakistan. Try applying this to this grandad of yours for a change. عامله الله بعدله

A glimpse of Rizvi Sahib's ugly sectarianism https://youtu.be/InC3rD-PRac?si=7fvoxbLFDEc7M9B9

It is noteworthy that whereas Sufis (Deobandis, Barelwis, etc.) consider Albani to be mutashaddid, the Hadith purists on the Manhaj of the Mutaqaddimun (like Juday', Abdullah al-Sa`d, Hatim al-Awni, et al) consider him to be mutasahil. The latter camp is absolutely correct in its analysis. The former on the other hand has unresolved grievances with Albani for having undermined their positions on some key issues they consider to be part of their identity.

This is an interesting article by Sh. Hatim al-Awni on his strong attachment to Sh. al-Albani in his early years and how that evolved over time. https://www.dr-alawni.com/m/articles.php?show=183

He also offers his assessment on the reliability of Sh. al-Albani's hadith grading and areas of disagreement.

This is an interesting article by Sh. Hatim al-Awni on his strong attachment to Sh. al-Albani in his early years and how that evolved over time. https://www.dr-alawni.com/m/articles.php?show=183

S. Yunus on the akabir differing over a particular hadith, whether it refers to Tarawih or Tahajjud

‘Why can we definitively say that? Because psychology often does not meet the five basic requirements for a field to be considered scientifically rigorous: clearly defined terminology, quantifiability, highly controlled experimental conditions, reproducibility and, finally, predictability and testability.’ https://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-xpm-2012-jul-13-la-ol-blowback-pscyhology-science-20120713-story.html

الكلام على حديث ابن عمر في فضل زيارة قبر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لعبد الله بن عبد الرحمن السعد ذكر المؤلف أنه من خلال بحثه لم يجد من أهل الحديث المتقدمين من قوى هذا الحديث، وأما المتأخرون فمنهم من قواه ومنهم من ضعفه وكان ممن قواه تقي الدين السبكي في كتابه ((شفاء السقام)) وساق المؤلف كلام السبكي في ذلك ثم جاء بعده بكلام ابن عبد الهادي في كتابه ((الصارم المنكي)) والذي رد فيه على السبكي وضعف فيه حديث الزيارة. ثم بدأ المؤلف بعد ذلك - بعد أن رجح كلام ابن عبد الهادي بأن هذا الحديث منكر ولا يصح بحال - بدأ يشرح علل الحديث وذكر أنه معلول بأربع علل وهي: ١. ضعف موسى بن هلال ٢. ضعف عبد الله بن عمر العمري ٣. تفردهما برواية الحديث ٤. أن أصله لعله حديث ابن عمر رضي الله عنه في فضل المدينة. وقد تكلم المؤلف عن كل علة من هذه العلل بالتفصيل وبينها بيانا كافيا، وتوسع في ذلك ونقل كلام الحفاظ في الحكم عليه، فكان الكتاب دراسة حديثية تفصيلية لهذا الحديث.

The author/lecturer here is doing his utmost to prove that this hadith refers to Tahajjud and not Tarawih, as per the distinction between the two (in his view). But this begs the question why the hadith is in the section called كتاب التراويح. Not exactly a good look, is it?

We are the Ummah of Isnad. I have isnad. Oh please. Isnad for you is just symbolic ceremonialism, conveniently discarded when it is uncomfortable to your sectarian identity, upon which your ideological proclivities are based. It certainly is not a living and breathing subject matter for you. You are the one who propagates fabrications against the Prophet from the walls inside the House of Allah. What happened to isnad there?

So and so scholar said x hadith is hasan Even though it is weak, this hadith is hasan due to corroborating routes In scholarly discourse, such statements are unserious if the underlying data cannot - or is not - scrutinised. This isn't Fiqh where the scope of subjectivity is dramatically broader. Have the data ready at hand and assess it objectively, or go home. If someone is doing taqlid of another in tahsin and is not prepared to have a discussion on scrutiny, don't waste your time with them. Their opinion is worthless. Move on.

من غباء #اليوتيوبر_مشمش 🍑 يذكرني بمسيلمة الكذاب، كلما أراد أن يزعم معجزة جاءت عليه بالعكس. بصق في بئر فصار ماؤها مالحا، وتوضأ مرة فسقى بوضوئه نخلةً فيبست، ومسح على عين رجل لوجعٍ فعمي !. كذلك مشمش 🍑 كلما أراد أن يفعل شيئا تشبها بالعلماء جاء عليه بالعكس. تصدر بالمشيخة فجاء بالطوام والفضائح من لحنٍ وأخطاء نحوية وجهل بأبجديات العلوم، تظاهر بسمت العلماء فأخرجوا له صورا من أيام مراهقته بالعود، مثل دور الغيور على عقيدته فطعن بأعراض العلماء، فهجم عليه قومه وأصدقاؤه وبهدلوه، صور نفسه من كبار العلماء، فابتلاه الله بطلاب من فئة متابعي الأنيمي وألعاب الفيديو، ادعى أنه طالب علم من وقت مبكر، فأخرجوا صوره الرومنسية الغبية وهو يتأمل شروق الشمس، أكثر من الفيديوهات والشروح على اليوتيوب حتى يقال عنه أنه عالم جليل، فوصفه شيخه الخليفي باليوتيوبر بنفس ما يصفه مخالفوه، يطعن في الأشاعرة ليل نهار، فانتبه بسبب ذلك بعض الشباب لجهله وسمع للأشاعرة فترك الوهابية، أراد أن يدخل عالم المناظرات لكي يقال أنه في كل مجال بحر، فجاء فيها بالفضائح والمضحكات، ويهجم عليه كل الوهابية قبل غيرهم وجهلوه واتهموه بالضعف. ولن تقف هذه المسرحية الكوميدية إلى هذا الحد، ستستمر إلى ما شاء الله، حتى يكبر متابعوه الأطفال في العمر ويتخرجوا من الثانوية والجامعة فيدركوا حماقته وجهله فينفضوا عنه، وبعد ذلك سيكون مضربا للمثل في الحمق والتندر مثل جحا وأبي دلامة وهبنق وتوما الحكيم !. وهذا أقل جزاء يجازى به من أفلت لسانه المسعور في العلماء متشبعا بعلم لم يعطه، وسمعة يحاول أن ينالها بكل طريقة ليقال أنه عالم. ومن لم يدرك أحدا من أغبياء التاريخ فقد أدرك شبيها بهم فاقهم وبلغ بالحمق كل مبلغ !!.