MuhammedAli

Khawaja Ghulam Farid ko Deobandi be utna hi mantay hen jitna ham. Wesay yeh kitab Maqabees al Majalis kohi motbar kitab nahin heh. Is'see froum par is ka saboot bi mil jahay ga. http://www.ja-alhaq.com/khawajah-ghulam-fareed-aor-maqabees-ul-majalis/ http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/1625-hinduo-ke-devta-ram-krishan-achchy-admi-thy-guru-nanak-musalman-thy-but/

Tajjali kay sari pdf yahan say mil sakti hen ... http://www.tajalli.in/pdfs.asp

Salam alayqum, brother bait karna kohi zeroori nahin. Najat ka talluq sahih Aqahid say heh aur achay amaal say bayt say nahin. Allah kay Nabi ko apna Peer o Murshid kehna wala pagal aur jahil khalis heh. Kissi bi silsilay ki kohi khasoosiat nahin wesay logoon nay apnay Peeroon ka status bananay kay wastay fazeelaten bana leen hen. Joh apnay peer ko direct RasoolAllah ka bayt batahay aur joh Pir apnay aap ko direct RasoolAllah ka mureed batahay, donoon baqwas kartay hen. esa agar dawa Sayyidi Ala Hazrat alayhi rehma kartay toh qadr thee, magar aaj kay dawr kay Pir jin ki ilmi oqat dawani barabar nahin aur taqwa toh heh hee nahin, sirf mureedoon say nazranay batornay khanay peenay ki sufiat say jor-reh hen.

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was witness upon actions of all nations before his birth and after his birth he was sent as a witness upon entire mankind. The opponents of Islam categorically reject Hadhir Nazir and term it polytheistic belief. They present various arguments to refute Hadhir Nazir and this argument will focus on one such argument. Argument Against Hadhir Nazir: The argument presented is; if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir and Nazir (i.e. present and seeing) on actions of Jinn and mankind then why does the Quran state Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not amongst the Shahideen (i.e. witnesses) at the event of Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) receiving the Law (i.e. Taurat) and this is established from the following verse: “And you, [O Muhammad], were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the Shahideen [to that].” [Ref: 28:44] This establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was/is not Hadhir and Nazir at these events which he should be if he was witnessing the actions of mankind before he was sent as a last and final prophet. Linguistic Meaning Of Shahid And Shahideen: Linguistically the words Shahid in singular form and Shahideen in plural form are used in meaning of witness/witnesses and as present (i.e. Hadhir/Hadhireen). In funeral prayers words are: “اللهُـمِّ اغْفِـرْ لِحَيِّـنا وَمَيِّتِـنا وَشـاهِدِنا ، وَغائِبِـنا ، وَصَغيـرِنا وَكَبيـرِنا ،” In this supplication each word has been is opposite of the other. They are opposites; living (i.e. لِحَيِّـنا) and the deceased (i.e. مَيِّتِـنا), the present (i.e. شـاهِدِنا) and the absent (i.e. غائِبِـنا). In fact in online translation of Ahadith which contain this supplication of funeral all of them have translated the word Shahidina (i.e. our present) as present.[1] Now coming to the verse 28:44; the verse states, during the event of Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) was unfolding, you were not amongst the Shahideen on the Western side of mountain. As demonstrated earlier the word Shahid can be used to mean Hadhireen/Hadhir (i.e. present) and in this context Hadhireen (i.e. present people). Now if Shahideen is in meaning of Hadhireen then according to this meaning physical presence from amongst Hadhireen is negated not the witnessing of the event. Explaining The Verse Of 28:44 By Itself: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And you were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the Shahideen.” [Ref: 28:44] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated denying the presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “And you were not on the western side [of the mount] …” And for further emphasis on denying the presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) on the western side of mountain Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: ”… and you were not among the Shahideen.” In other words the presence is being negated in both places but the wording is different. Alhasil following parts of verses are saying the same thing in their unique way: “And you were not on the western side [of the mount] …” ”… and you were not among the Shahideen.” Explaining The Verse Of 28:44 Quran With Other Verses: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “And you were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the Shahideen (i.e. Hadhireen).” [Ref: 28:44] In verse forty-six of same chapter, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) clarifies in which meaning the presence amongst Shahideen was negated for him, i.e. present: “And you were not at the side of the mount when We called [Moses] but [were sent] as a mercy from your Lord to warn a people to whom no warner had come before you that they might be reminded.” [Ref: 28:46] To be on a site, on a mountain, presence is fundamental because one can be witness without directly being at a place. As an example, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is witness to everything yet his presence on every place and in every place isn’t believed. Comprehensively, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is indicating that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not amongst those who were present on the mountain nor he witnessed the events directly like the present people did. In the following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not resident among the people of Madian: “But We produced [many] generations [after Moses], and prolonged was their duration. And you were not a resident among the people of Madyan, reciting to them Our verses, but We were senders [of this message].” [Ref: 28:45] Here again the physical presence amongst people of Madian is being negated because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) negated his residence amongst the people of Madian and there can be no residence amongst a people if you are not alive and physically present in a community. So in the context witnessing is not being negated but presence amongst people is being negated. This is also in line with other verses such as: "This story which We have revealed to you is a tale of the unseen; for you were not there with them when they collectively conspired and schemed against him" [Ref: 12:102] “This is of the announcements relating to the unseen which We reveal to you; and you were not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Mary in his charge, and you were not with them when they contended one with another.” [Ref: 3:44] Al-hasil Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was negating physical presence on the site of events not witnessing of events nor knowledge of events stated in these verses. Verse 28:44 According Understanding Of Commentators: Numerous commentators of Quran have understood the verse 28:44 in meaning of Hadhireen/Hadhir and some of them will be referenced in footnote with text of commentaries.[2] And other I will mention here without referencing material but providing link to their Tafasir. Zamashkari a Mutazili, widely believed to be one of the great Arabic grammarians, explained Shahideen in meaning of Hadhir in his Tafsir Al Kashf, click. Shaykh Tabrasi a Shia scholar in his Majma Al Bayan, interpreted Shahideen to mean Hadhireen, click. Imam Qurtubi in his understood Shahideen to mean Hadhireen, click. Author of Tafsir Al Kashful Bayan, Allama Muhammad Al-Thalabi interpreted the Shahideen in meaning of Hadhireen, here. Altogether ten commentators have taken the meaning of Shahideen in meaning of Hadhireen and if detailed research was carried dozen or more could be found in support of understanding of Muslims. Objective Of Verse 28:44 Was To Establish Divine Knowledge: The implications of the verse is that, even though he was not present while the events at Western side of mountain were unfolding but despite that he knows what transpired and he knows the events because: “This is of the announcements relating to the unseen which We reveal to you; and you were not with them when they cast their pens (to decide) which of them should have Mary in his charge, and you were not with them when they contended one with another.” [Ref: 3:44] In addition to what is already mentioned in verse 3:44 the following event of Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) is also from news of Ghayb: “And you were not on the western side [of the mount] when We revealed to Moses the command, and you were not among the Shahideen (i.e. Hadhireen).” [Ref: 28:44] The objective of such verses was to argue that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not amongst the people therefore he could not know the events by hearing or seeing them. Nor he could have heard from any other, nor read in any book because he was not able to read and write, therefore it has to be news [of Ghayb] given to him by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)[3] and this meaning is confirmed from the following verse: “We recite to you from the news of Moses and Pharaoh in truth for a people who believe.” [Ref: 28:3] Belief Of Muslims And Implications Of Interpretation Of Verse: We Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not Hadhir with his jism (i.e. body) on the Western side of the mountain mentioned in the verse. Hence negation of his physical presence is not refutation of our creed of Hadhir Nazir. It is obvious that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) could not have been physically present at the mountain like companions and followers of Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) were present because he was not born yet. Conclusion: Ahle Sunnat believe word Shahideen has been used in the meaning of Hadhireen in the verse in discussion and commentators have explained its meaning in accordance with understanding of Ahle Sunnat. The verse is part of set of other verses which negate physical presence in one place or another for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Negation of physical presence does not refute the position and understanding of Ahle Sunnat because we do not believe he was physically present at the events stated in the verse in dicussion. Footnotes: - [1] “When the Messenger of Allah prayed over a dead person, he said: O Allah, forgive those of us who are living and those of us who are dead, those of us who are present and those of us who are absent, our young and our old, our male and our female. O Allah to whosoever of us Thou givest life grant him life as a believer, and whomsoever of us Thou takest in death take him in death as a follower of Islam. O Allah, do not withhold from us the reward (of faith) and do not lead us astray after his death.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B20, H3195] “When the Messenger of Allah prayed a funeral prayer, he would say, "O Allah! Forgive those of us who are alive, and those who are dead, those present and those absent, those who are young and those who are male and those who are female. O Allah! Let those of us to whom You have given life, live in Islam, and let those of us You take back die in a state of faith. O Allah! Do not deprive us of our reward for (supplicating for) him, and cause us not to go astray after him." Narrated by Muslim and the four Imams.” [Ref: B.A. Maram, B3, H590] “It was narrated from Abu Ibrahim Al-Ansari, from his father; he heard the Prophet say, when offering the funeral prayer for one who had died: ‘O Allah, forgive our living and our dead, those who are present among us and those who are absent, our males and our females, our young and our old.’” [Ref: Nisa’i, B21, H1988] - [2] “وَمَا كُنتَ بِجَانِبِ ٱلْغَرْبِىّ } أي: ما كنت يا محمد بناحية الجبل من قبل المغرب { إِذْ قَضَيْنَا إِلَىٰ مُوسَى ٱلأَمْرَ } يعني: إذ عهدنا إليه بالرسالة ويقال: أحكمنا معه وعمدنا إليه بأمرنا ونبينا { وَمَا كنتَ مِنَ ٱلشَّـٰهِدِينَ } يعني: حاضرين لذلك الأمر” [Ref: Tafsir Bahrul Uloom, 28:44]وَمَا كُنتَ } يا محمد، { بِجَانِبِ ٱلْغَرْبِىِّ } ، يعني بجانب الجبل الغربي، قاله قتادة والسدي، وقال الكلبي: بجانب الوادي الغربي. قال ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما: يريد حيث ناجى موسى ربَّه، { إِذْ قَضَيْنَآ إِلَىٰ مُوسَى ٱلأَمْرَ } ، يعني عهدنا إليه وأحكمنا الأمر معه بالرسالة إلى فرعون وقومه، { وَمَا كنتَ مِنَ ٱلشَّـٰهِدِينَ } ، الحاضرين ذلك المقام فتذكره من ذات نفسك [Ref: Tafsir Malim Ul Tanzeel, 28:44] إِذْ قَضَيْنَآ إِلَىٰ مُوسَى ٱلأَمْرَ } إذ كلفناه أمرنا ونهينا، وألزمناه عهدنا. وقيل: أي إذ قضينا إلى موسى أمرك وذكرناك بخير ذكرٍ. وقال ابن عباس: { إِذْ قَضَيْنَا } أي أخبرنا أن أمة محمد خير الأمم. { وَمَا كنتَ مِنَ ٱلشَّاهِدِينَ } أي من الحاضرين [Ref: Tafir Qurtubi, 28:44] { وما كنت } الخطاب للنبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أي وما كنت يا محمد { بجانب الغربي } يعني بجانب الجبل الغربي قال ابن عباس يريد حيث ناجى موسى ربه { إذ قضينا إلى موسى الأمر } يعني عهدنا إليه وأحكمنا الأمر معه بالرسالة إلى فرعون { وما كنت من الشاهدين } يعني الحاضرين ذلك المقام الذي أوحينا إلى موسى فيه فتذكره من ذات نفسك [Ref: Tafsir Khazin, 28:44] { لِلنَّاسِ } لبني إسرائيل { وَهُدىً } من الضلالة { وَرَحْمَةً } لمن آمن به { لَّعَلَّهُمْ يَتَذَكَّرُونَ } لكي يتعظوا فيؤمنوا به { وَمَا كُنتَ } يا محمد { بِجَانِبِ ٱلْغَرْبِيِّ } الجبل { إِذْ قَضَيْنَآ إِلَىٰ مُوسَى ٱلأَمْرَ } حيث أمرنا موسى الإتيان إلى فرعون { وَمَا كنتَ مِنَ ٱلشَّاهِدِينَ } من الحاضرين هناك { وَلَكِنَّآ أَنشَأْنَا } خلقنا { قُرُوناً } قرناً بعد قرن وبيّنا قصة الأول للآخر كما بيّنا لك { فَتَطَاوَلَ عَلَيْهِمُ ٱلْعُمُرُ } الأجل فلم يؤمنوا فأهلكناهم قرناً بعد قرن [Ref: Tafsir Ferozabadi, 28:44] “(And thou) O Muhammad (wast not on the western side (of the Mount) when We exposited unto Moses the commandment) when We commanded Moses to go to Pharaoh, (and thou wast not among those present) there; (But We brought forth) We created (generations) generation after generation, and explained the event of the former to the latter, just as We explained it to you, (and their lives dragged on for them) their lives were prolonged, and when they did not believe We destroyed them. (And thou wast not) O Muhammad (a dweller in Midian, reciting unto them Our revelations) reciting the Qur'an to your people, (but We kept sending (messengers to men)) to past generations and exposited to them the events of those who preceded them just as We explained the events of the people of old to you.” [Ref: Tanwir Al Miqbas Min Tafsir Ibn Abbas, 28:44/45] - [3] If someone else had informed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) he would have bore witness to people that he educated him and therefore his claim of receiving revelation is false and consequently his Prophet-hood. If he was able to read and write before the Prophet-hood it would have known to his family members and to people of Makkah with whom he lived all his lives including his friends. Combination of these facts with magnificence of Quranic expression and unchallenged beauty which even the master Arab poets could not contend with. All this combines as a massive argument in favor of beloved Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that he indeed did receive revelation from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

Salam alayqum, Allah ta'ala aap ko jaza e khair aur ajar e azeem ata farmahay.

Salam alayqum, Hazrat aap nay yeh book kahan say khareedi. Agar ho sakkay toh mujjay bata denh. Dokan waghera ka adress, ya publishers ki details, phone number ... mein nay yeh book kafi talash ki magar milli nahin ... in donoon kitaboon ka internet par hona zeroori heh.

Introduction: This article will refference thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and it is strongly recommended that new readers familiarise with them, here. The capacity in which creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) performs actions and possesses attributes can be understood from thirteen concepts, which are unique to His creation, here. Part 1 - What Prompted Me To Write This: This is clarification of this common misconception which the Wahhabis have about Islamic belief as well as what brother Saeed Imtiaz wrote – presented in next section. Note basis of his misunderstanding is the same misconception commonly held by heretics but he has also managed to evolve it into extremely repugnant, serious allegation against Muslims. Secondly, I took part in a discussion on a forum called IslamicAwakening, subject titled, ‘What Is Ibadah?’, during which I realised that the opponents of Muslims did not understand actual position of Ahle Sunnat and all their objections and antagonism against Islamic teaching were based on lack of knowing what the teaching of Ahle Sunnat are. But the task of having to write the entire methodology was too much to ask at that junction of time hence it was not attempted. Note, this article and the two articles mentioned in the next section are part of material which could have resolved the hundred plus page discussion in, ‘What Is Ibadah?’ thread. Part 2 - Request Of Help From Wahhabi Brother: In the two articles, ‘Ilah-Determining Principles Indicate How …’ and ‘Refuting Khariji Ilah Determining Principles And Interpreting Them According ...’, you have basically stated, possessor of Zaati (i.e. personal) ,Qulli (i.e. absolute), Azli (i.e. eternal), … is an Ilah. You have comprehensively explained your position in article titled ‘Ilah-Determining Principles Indicate How…’, where in section 5.0, you have interpreted the first Ilah determining principle. In other words you believe god is one who is believed to possess Zaati, Qulli, Azli … Zaat and types of Sifaat (i.e. attributes), Afaal (i.e. actions). Therefore I have deduced your understanding is, to believe an idol possesses some, action or attribute independently of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shirk, and this was just a example. You will be aware that polytheists did not believe their gods had what you term [e.g.] Zaati, Qulli, Azli … actions, or attributes. In light of your belief, it could be said that you believe the polytheists did not believe in gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because they did not believe in Zaati, Qulli, Haqiqi, Azli, principles for their idol gods. And as a result of these principles they were/are not guilty of polytheism, nor were polytheists. To put it bluntly, your principles absolve them of their Shirk and Kufr, and you are / would be guilty of Kufr for disbelieving in the Kufr/Shirk of Arab polytheists because it is emphatically stated in Quran. Please note, I do not and am not charging you with Kufr. Part 3 - Polytheism Of Arab Polytheists And Principles Of Ahle Sunnat: Islamicly, one does not have to believe that their, exalted created god being possesses all attributes, actions and his essences in meaning of thirteen concepts to be guilty of elevating a creation to status of a god. Just affirmation with tongue and attestation with heart that a creation is the God or a God from many, is enough to warrant major Shirk, because a creation has been elevated to status of an Ilah by believing a creature is Ilah. And Islamicly creation would be considered as, exalted to status of god, and Shirk would be warranted even if it is believed that this god was creation, was born in time, did not exist prior to creation of soul, and all his attributes, actions, and essence was created, and is dependent upon supreme Deity, and is limited, restricted, after becoming a god. Also if one believes a creation is worthy of worship (i.e. Mabud) then that creation has been elevated to status of god. It makes no difference, from Islamic perspective, to the belief of polytheist, if a polytheist believes their god possess all, some, single, or none of attributes, actions, and essence according to thirteen concept, he will remain polytheist. The only Ilah for whom these thirteen concepts are fundamental requirement is the One, the Only Ilah - Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). These thirteen concepts must be affirmed for essence, for all attributes and actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And to disbelieve in them willfully even when they are part of ones knowledge is to reject Tawheed. Only allowance that can be made is for one who does not have knowledge of these thirteen concepts and has most basic knowledge of Tawheed – such as Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is One, without: mother, father, son, wife and He is eternal, all knowing, hearing, seeing, provider, sustainer etc. Alhasil, only Ilah for whom these thirteen concepts are fundamental requirement is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). One only has to affirm Ilahiyyah (i.e. god-hood) for a creation with all, or some, or single, or none of thirteen concepts which are exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or affirm Ilahiyyah for a creation with all, or some of thirteen concepts which are for creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or affirm Ilahiyyah for creation in all, or some, or none of attributes and actions by combining thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with thirteen concepts connected with creation – like the Christians combined both in doctrine of Trinity. In all three cases, according to Islamic teaching, creation has been exalted to status of an Ilah and major Shirk has occurred. In Sha Allah, in the next section the perspective of Ahle Sunnat as well as position of Ahle Sunnat will be explained in light of what is stated in this section. Part 4 - The Basis Of Dispute And Basis Clarification: Firstly, we Muslims believe thirteen concepts [which are exclusive for Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] are only fundamental in determining Ilahiyyah when there is no explicit, emphatic, direct affirmation of Ilahiyyah for a creation. And when there is explicit affirmation of Ilahiyyah for creation then thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or thirteen concepts according to which attributes/actions of creation are interpreted, do not absolve any from major Shirk. Only time these thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) come into play/action is when Shirk has to be inferred due to absence of explicit affirmation of Ilahiyyah for a creation. And note, Wahhabis s always have to infer Shirk from beliefs of Muslims because we do not attribute Ilahiyyah for a creation, explicitly, nor implicitly affirm Ilahiyyah for creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Hence discussion always turns into Wahhabis alleging; for holding so and so belief you have exalted a creation to status of an Ilah and on the basis of this you are guilty of polytheism. We respond saying, we differentiate between the belief for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) based on thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and believe in it such a fashion that there is obvious difference between the creation and the Creator. When they are refuted with arguments; we do not affirm any of these attributes and actions for Ambiyah and Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) according to meaning of thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but only believe their attributes/actions are according meaning of thirteen concepts of creation. Then the heretics argue, in that case even the polytheists of Arabian Peninsula were not polytheists according to your principles, they too affirmed for their idol/gods thirteen concepts according to which attributes/actions of creation are to be understood. Of course this is a misconception resulting from ignorance of what Ahle Sunnat actually believe. And as a result this misconception has taken hold amongst the proponent of Wahhabism; we Muslims believe an [exalted] Ilah is only for whom some/all of the thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are affirmed, but truth is far from them. Part 5 - Contextual Perspective Of The Articles: Firstly, note this article, ‘Ilah-Determining Principles Indicate How …’, was a written to explain the methodology of Ahle Sunnat employed in following article, ‘Refuting Khariji Ilah Determining Principles And ...’. The first article comprehensively indicates the concepts which would be required for a belief to warrant legitimate charge; Muslim has exalted a creation to status of god-hood, or has committed major Shirk, and to indicate the methodology employed in second article. Second article scripturally refutes the non-Islamic principles held by brother Zia Bashir, translated into English, here. And these principles are within frame of Khariji methodology of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. I strongly recommend that you read both articles, in same order which you find them linked. Secondly, contextually both these articles were written in an effort to explain position of Ahle Sunnat against allegations leveled by Zia Bashir. He accused the Muslims of elevating creations of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to status of gods and this is evident from each of his principle. His accusation could be based have been based upon two foundations, i) explicit affirmation of a Muslim that so and so is god, ii) or implicit, or deduced, or reasoned basis – by establishing we believe creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does these actions on basis of thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Of course no Muslim would ever emphatically state that I believe so and so is god besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and remain Muslim. None from the Ahle Sunnat believes a creation such as a: prophet, saint, angel, is god besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Therefore he attempted to imply ‘our belief’ of god-hood of creation with his principles and attempted to impose his non-Islamic principles upon Muslims. It was explained, for Muslim to be guilty of elevating creation to status of god and be guilty of major Shirk, on basis of his principles. The Muslims must believe in his stated principles for a creation according to thirteen concepts which are exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and which we do not. If the beliefs mentioned in Zia Bashir’s principles are held for a creation in terms of Atahi (i.e. granted), Baaz (i.e. limited), Hadis (i.e. temporal) … then the creation is not elevated to status of god-hood nor major Shirk is not warranted, and this is true Islamic understanding in light of teaching of Tawheed and Shirk. In other words attempt was made to explain to him that according to understanding of Tawheed; if we the Muslims believed in his stated principle beliefs in the meaning which we the Muslims and he believes for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then creation is elevated to status of god-hood. Thirdly, in the article which you referenced the following was stated in section 3.0: “(i) To believe a creation is an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or the Ilah then the creation has been elevated to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (ii) To believe a creation has the right to be worshipped is to elevate the creation to status of an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). (iii) To worship a creation, with intention of worship, without believing one being worshipped is an Ilah, is taking the being to be an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).” From this it becomes clear; we, the Muslims, do not believe principles stated in section 5.0 are the only Ilah determining principles. Rather these thirteen and sixty-five more principles as well as three mentioned in section 3.0 are part of Islamic methodology of Ilah determining principles. In fact if all these principles are comprehensively and in totality are explored in light of ninety-nine names and attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then I am certain these principles would amount of thousand plus Ilah determining principles. Part 6 - True Tawheed And True Shirk: The thirteen concepts [such as Zaati, Qulli, Azli …] are from perspective of Islamic understanding of Tawheed and Shirk. We believe essence, attributes, actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are according to the mentioned principles and this is distinguishing feature of Islamic monotheism. Shirk is opposite of Tawheed hence true Shirk only is what is opposite of Tawheed. So fundamentally the belief and the philosophy of polytheists that their idols were god-partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is invalid because their belief x,y, and z are gods was based on invalid principles – limitations unbefitting true Ilah; dependency [upon true Ilah], coming to existence from non-existence, being exalted to status of god after being ordinary creation, [and much more …], and these concepts are against concept of Tawheed, hence against concept of God-hood. To truly exalt their idols to status of God they needed to affirm for their x, y, and z idols Islamic principles of Tawheed - which they affirmed for their supreme Deity, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). These thirteen principles highlight that true Ilah is only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Like you stated none of the polytheists of Arabia believed their idols were gods with these principles. Islamicly, and even in philosophy of polytheists their gods cannot be the Gods because they believed their gods are creation who were exalted to status of god-partners of Allah (subhnahu wa ta’ala). Polytheists did not contemplate over their belief of polytheism. Had they truly thought about what they believed about Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then they would have understood what truly Shirk was/is - opposite of what they believed for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). As a result they would have formulated a better form of polytheism - opposite of Tawheed, which of course would not have been any less Kufr/Shirk in Islam then what it already is. Note, Christians attempted to formulate their polytheistic doctrine of Trinity using some concepts of monotheism but even that did not fully comply with comprehensive monotheistic principles. Christians believe, the Father is God, the Son is God, Holy Spirit is God, not three persons/gods, but one person/god. The Father, the Son, Holy Spirit are all believed to be eternal, not three eternals but one eternal and it goes on. Alhasil, polytheism of Arabs was foolishness of worst type compared what they could have had - a bit more intelligent form of polytheism like of something which Christians attempted. Part 7 - Polytheism Of Arab Polytheists According To Muslims: After reading the preceding section it would be clear; according to Ahle Sunnat, Arabian polytheism [excluding Christians] was the worst type of polytheism. To postulate and attribute to Muslims the idea; we believe Arabian idol worshippers were not guilty of polytheism, is nothing but concoction of a mind which has not grasped Islamic methodology, which indicates routes leading to major Shirk. Part 8 - Directly Responding To Saeed Imtiaz’s Email: Your confusion results from single misconception and that is your understanding that we Muslims believe Ilah is only for whom thirteen exclusive concepts of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are affirmed. Second is the charge based on the misconception that methodology of Muslims absolves the polytheists from major Shirk and negates their belief in gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Firstly, you misunderstood the objective of section five because you did not associate it with the context of the discussion with brother Zia Bashir. Objective was to explain in the context of his principles, or his principles can only be valid Ilah determining principles and be valid basis for accusation of major Shirk against Muslims, if one holds to the beliefs stated in principles of Zia Bashir, in meaning of thirteen concepts which make the essence, attributes, actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) unique to Him. The article, refuting Khariji Ilah determining principles, was completely devoted to explanation of this position of Tawheed. Secondly, your second point is based on lack of knowledge regarding position of Ahle Sunnat. We do not believe Ilah is only one for whom one, or more, or all thirteen concepts, exclusive of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are affirmed. Rather we believe if Ilahiyyah is affirmed: with, or without thirteen concepts exclusive for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or with thirteen concepts according to which actions, attributes and essence are unique to creation, even then a creation has been exalted to status of an Ilah, and major Shirk is warranted. In part six and seven, it was demonstrated that according to understanding of Ahle Sunnat, polytheism of Arabs was worse kind of polytheism and this was established from the very same principles about which you alleged due to your misconception that methodology/principles of Muslims absolve the polytheists from major Shirk and negates their belief of many god partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Lastly, anyone who disbelieves in Kufr/Shirk of Arab polytheists is indeed guilty of major Kufr which invalidates ones belief in Islam but this does not apply to us because we do affirm; Arabs were polytheists and neither do our principle methodology vindicate them of Shirk. Conclusion: Fundamentally, an Ilah is anyone who is believed to be an Ilah by a person, or one who claims to be an Ilah, and this belief has home in the heart. An Ilah is appointed if one deems a creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to be worthy of worship along side Him or believes worship is exclusive for exalted creation. Thirteen concepts which determine exclusivity of essence, attributes, actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are not an essential requirement when Illahiyyah is explicitly affirmed for a creation nor are essential in context of Arabian polytheism. In context of Ilahiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or context of Tawheed of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) these thirteen concepts are essential for detailed understanding of Tawheed. As a Muslim it is imperative to believe Arabs of pre-Islamic era were polytheists due to worshipping idol as gods, and to disbelieve in this is Kufr, which invalidates ones belief in Islam. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Salam alayqum, Jahan taq khadam ko ilm heh kutub e illahi ka Allah ki taraf say behja jana aur kalam Allah hona, donoon par aqeedah rakhna zeroori heh.

Nazeer bamana jesa istimal huwa heh. Agar kohi kahay ... falan kuttay ki nazeer heh... to yeh mana hoga kay kissi sift meh tashbih dee ja rahi heh ... kehna kay falan kutta heh ... is mein tashbih nahin aur mana hoga kay us zaat ko kutta tehraya ... shirk ki nazeer kehna ka mafoom huwa kay ...shirk jesa heh ... aur esa kehna amaal ki mumalisat ki waja say heh ... keun kay sajdah e tazeemi joh ahle aabr ko keeya jata heh woh asnam ko bi kia jata heh. Shirk tehraya nahin ... shirk ki nazeer ... amaaal joh quboor par juhala kartay hen ki waja say bataya. Jistera rasool allah ko insaan ki adam alay hissalam ki nazeer kaha jahay toh ya bashriat mein hoga ya nabuwat ki waja say magar adam alayhis salam kehna murad nah hoga.

Jee zeroor Islah hogi aur kar leeh aur ussee kay mutabiq ki joh Sayyidi nay apni kitab mein likha. Yehni, yeh nazria qaim keeya kay Nabi e kareem sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam ki nazr lawh mafooz kay har pehloo par heh.Is say pehlay joh nazria thah, woh yeh thah; tamam uloom e lawh al mafooz ata huway, parwa deeyeh gahay, aur RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wass'sallam) bhoolay nahin. Abh yeh bi sabat kar doh kay yahi hamara nazria AwliyahAllah kay baray mein bi heh, aur har ek kay baray mein yahi heh, aur Imam Hussain radiallah ta'ala anhu aur Imam Hassan radiallah ta'ala anhu kay baray mein bi yahi heh. Allah ta'ala haq sach qabool karnay ki aur tofeeq qabool ata farma-hay, ameen.

Sawal gandam aur jawab channa. Likha yeh thah: "Ham toh nah Imam Hassan radiallah ta'ala anhu, imam hussain radiallah ta'ala anhu balkay ham toh RasoolAllah kay leyeh bi har waqt sari lawh e mafooz ko mulaiza hona ka nazria nahin rakhtay." Joh ibarat aap nay pesh ki woh Hadhir Nazir kay mozoo par heh. Ibarat woh ho jis mein har waqt lawh al mafooz kay har juzz par nazr honay ka likha ho.

@KashmeerKhan Aap in kay leyeh ziyada mehnat nah karen. Aap joh tehreeri kam kar rahay hen us par dattay rahen. Apna keemati waqt barbad karen gay. In ka Allah hafiz heh, agar Islam kay noor nay in kay kufr kay dil ko munawwar karna huwa toh ho kay rahay ga aur agar Allah nay Kufr par mawt likh deeh heh toh aap Quran in ko suna denh in-noon nay phir bi noor ko handera hee batana heh aur handeray ko noor. Allah ta'ala aap ko aur towfeeq deh deen ki khidmat ki.

Lawh Al Mafooz par nazr hona esa heh jesa aap ki nazr ka kitab par hona heh ... jistera aap ki nazr sari kitab kay har saffay aur har lafz par nahin hoti, sirf jis saffa aur jis line par chahen hoti heh, is'see tera awliyah-Allah Kamileen ki nazr kissi ek pehloo par hoti heh. Aur Jistera aap chahen toh kitab kay kissi saffay ko dekh saktay hen, Quran ki jis ayaat ko chahen par saktay hen AwliyahAllah bi lawh al mafooz par saktay hen. Lawh e Mafooz par nazr honay ka mana yeh nahin kay sari lawh e mafooz par har waqt nazr hoti heh, balkay sari lawh al mafooz taq rissahi hoti heh, joh masla jahan say chahen dekh lenh. Rahi baat kamil AwliyahAllah ki nazr ki toh us ka lawh e mafooz par hona is ayat say sabat heh: "Indeed, it is a noble Qur'an. In a Register well-protected; None touch it except the purified." [53:79] Hamaray nazria ka ki bunyad Quran say sabat heh, bey-iman ho kar munkir ho saktay hen, wesay nahin. Aap kay point ka jawab, Mufti Sahib nay lawh al mafooz meh tamam kaynaat kay uloom kay likhay janay ka zikr keeya heh. Aur likha heh Sheikh Abdul Qadir rahimullah alayhi ta'ala nay esa farmaya. Aap kaheen say yeh sabat kar denh kay hamara nazria yeh heh kay kamil Wali Allah ki nazr sari lawh e mafooz par har waqt hoti heh aur qaynat ki kohi baat kissi bi waqt us say poshida nahin hoti. Ham toh nah Imam Hassan radiallah ta'ala anhu aur nah imam hussain radiallah ta'ala anhu kay leyeh har waqt sari lawh e mafooz ko mulaiza hona ka nazria nahin rakhtay. Hamara nazria yeh heh kay Allah kay izn say woh jab chatay joh chahtay mulaiza farma letay. Agar Mufti Sahib nay ilm mein nah hona ka likha heh toh kon sa hamaray nazriyeh kay khilaf likha, aur agar lawh e mafooz par Seikh Abdul Qadir ki nazr hona ka likha toh kon say khilaaf likha? Hamaray maslak kay khilaf tab hoti jab hamaray maslak yeh hota kay Awliyah Kamileen ki nazr puri lawh al mafooz par bey-yaq waqt hoti heh aur hamesha hoti heh. Hamara nazria toh yeh heh kay jab tawajoh lawh e mafooz par ho toh jis waqia ko maloom karna chahen nazr samnay ho jata heh. Yeh hamaray maslak kay mizaaj kay khilaf kesay huwa? Aap say manwa nahin sakta, sirf samja sakta hoon, aur behtreen tareeqay say aap ko samja deeya.

Deen kay wastay Ulamah ka haath thamen, Kohi bi banda joh Ahle Sunnat ka Aalim nahin aur jis say majority/aksiriat Ulamah e Ahle Sunnat raazi nahin, us banday, maulvi, pir, alim, zalim, jahil, anparh, ki kissi baat par dehan nah denh, nah suneh, nah kissi aur ko kissi essay ki sunahen. Jistera kissi nay farmaya heh: Rukh e mustafa heh woh aaina ke ab esa dosra aaina Na hamaray bazm e khiyaal meh nah dokam e aaina saaz mein. Is'see tera aap Ulama e ahle Sunnat meh gum ho jahen: Ulamah e Ahle Sunnat hen woh aaina ke ab esa dosra aaina Na hamaray bazm e khiyaal meh nah dokam e aaina saaz mein.

Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala Shaheed Mumtaz Qadri alayhi rehma kay darjat buland karay aur har ek Sunni ko esa mujahid aur jazba atah karay, ameen.

is munazray meh Deobandiyoon nay Ala Hazrat ko Kafir sabat karna thah ... in kay kufr kay dalahil kuch istera kay thay ... tarjuma kunz ul iman meh fehrist mazameen publish huwi ... Deobandiyoon ka yeh thah kay Ala Hazrat nay publish ki ... fehrist meh Nabiyoon ki list mein Shaytan ka zikr heh ... is waja say Kafir hen. Mufti Mufti Ur-rehman nay sabat keeya kay yeh fehrist Ala Hazrat ki nahin balkay un kay pass joh Quran kay tarajuma heh us meh fehrist mazameen nahin ... balkay puranay nuskhoon meh nahin. Yeh baad meh dakhal kee gaee ... magar Deobandiyoon nay bas ek hee ratt laga rakhi ... in kay pass kohi daleel nahin thee jis ki bunyad par yeh Ala Hazrat ko Kafir sabat kartay ... bas apna waqt pura keeya. Essee zillat huwi kay ilaqay kay logoon say chupatay rahay munazray ko ... magar suniyoon nay khoob pehlaya aur awaam ko bataya kay dekho in kay kartoot.

Salam alayqum, Hazrat, yeh kohi munkir e ilm e ghayb nahin, balkay yeh ek ghali 'Sunni' heh. Us ka nazria heh kay Allah aur RasoolAllah kay ilm kee miqdar mein kohi farq nahin, yehni Allah aur RasoolAllah ka ilm ghayr muntahi honay mein barabar heh, kehta heh kay farq sirf yeh heh kay Allah ka ilm Zaati heh aur RasoolAllah ka Atahi. Sawal yeh heh kay: Jis banday nay Allah aur RasoolAllah kay ilm ki quantity/miqdar mein masawat qaim ki woh Mushrik heh ya Muwahid? Khadam nay us kay nazriyeh ko Shirk aur ussay Mushrik tehraya aur Sayyidi Taajush Shariah nay us kay aqeedeh par Kufr ka hokam jaari keeya. Keun kay us banday ko Sayyidi Taajush Shariah say nafrat heh aur keun kay mein fareek e mukhalif hoon is waja say woh mannay par tiyar nahin aur apnay aqeedeh ki islah nahin kar raha. Is waja say yeh masla aap hazraat ko pesh keeya keun kay aap ba-hasiyat e ghair janab-dar ho kar fesla denh. Is iraday say kay shahid woh islah kar leh.

Salam alayqum, Agar kohi likhay kay Surah Jinn ki ayaat 26 mein Allah nay apnay Qull ilm ka zikr keeya heh, yehni Allah apna Qull ghayb kissi ko ... Aur kehta heh kay Allah nay agay kohi takhsees nahin kee baaz ilm ki, aur farma deeya kay, atah nahin karta siwa-hay chunay huway Rasool kay, yehni alim ul ghayb apna QULL ghayb atah nahin karta siwahay chunnay huway Rasool , jistera yeh engrezi meh likhta heh: "We have seen this prove many times but we never notice that this evidence proves that Rasul صلی اللہ علیھ وآلھ وسلم posses complete knowledge of Unseen, now we'll see from this angle: ... Surah Jin: ... Now just tell me here in this verse Allah is talking about less or incomplete knowledge, or Complete all knowledge? Allah said in this verse He is the knower of Unseen, so does this means He knows less incomplete (Maz-Allah) or Complete ? I hope ur answer will be complete becz there is nothing Hidden from Allah, He Knows All complete knowledge of Unseen. Now without changing this condition without any type of Modification in the quantity of knowledge that is discussed in verse number 26, without any change in quantity Allah Directly said in very next verse that is Verse number 27: ... So dear reader it is now 100% clear that Allah discussed complete knowledge of Unseen in verse 26 and without modifying without changing its quantity without using any word like partial limited incomplete etc Allah directly said and made it clear that He has also blessed this knowledge (whose quantity is mention in previous verse) to none except His most beloved and dearest Prophet ..." Yehni yeh nazria rakhta heh kay Allah nay apna QULL ilm e Ghayb RasoolAllah ko ata farma deeya, yehni quantity mein farq nahin donoon zaatoon kay ilm meh, sirf Zaati aur Atahi ka farq heh, aur yeh us'see ki takhsees heh, jis ki ibarat quote nahin kee. Aur apnay nazriyeh ki tafseel meh likhta heh: "Ab ager koi nadaan Rasul صلی اللہ علیھ وآلھ وسلم kay ilm mai kami keray tou yaad rakhay wo Rasul صلی اللہ علیھ وآلھ وسلم kay ilm mai kami nahi ker raha wo Allah kay knowledge mai kami ker raha hai (Astagfirullah) kay Allah pehlay ye yakeen delata hai kay Zaati tour per wohi kul ilm ka malik hai na kisi ki majal kay usay kuch ata keray na kisi ki jurrat kay Us say lay sakay, mager Allah jisay chahay usay apnay Zaati ghaib say ataa kerday Apna zaati ghaib zahir kerday Ye Allah ki shaan hain or Us nay aisaa kiya tou apnay Habib-e-Mukaram Rasul-e-Do-Alam Huzur (صلی اللہ علیھ وآلھ وسلم.) kay liye kiya. Yani Allah ka jitna zaati Ghaib hai Allah nay Apnay Habib صلی اللہ علیھ وآلھ وسلم ko us say agaah ferma diya. Jab khud Rab na chupa Huzur صلی اللہ علیھ وآلھ وسلم say tou kia koi baat wo chupata rahay ga?" Agar kohi yeh aqeedah rakhay, kay Allah ka jitna bi Zaati ghayb thah Allah nay Nabi e kareem ko atah kar deeya toh sawal heh, ke esay banday nay Shirki aqeedah apnaya ya tawheed wala? Forum kay Ahle Ilm Hazrat including, Allama Saeedi sahib aur Maulana Khalil Rana sahib zeroor rehnumahi farmahen. Baqi Sunni baee apna nazria bi batahen.Mein apna mowaqif ussay bata chuka hoon aur samja chooka hoon aur Sayyidi Taajush Shariah ka Fatwah bi bata chuka hoon magar banda man-nay par nahin tiyar. Mera kia nazria heh aur Sayyidi Taajush Sharia ka Fatwah kia thah batana nahin chahta taqay aap logoon ko influence nah kar sakoon. Mujjay yaqeen heh kay woh manay ga phir bi nahin magar us kay khilaf ek hujjat qaim ho jahay gi.

Original: "Or take their fridge as their Ilah? Certainly not because a person understands they do not possess godly qualities and cannot benefit or harm. Alhasil, Ilah is taken when it is believed the one taken as Ilah has ability to hear/see, is able to harm/benefit and an intelligent being will not take a creation to be Ilah if one does not expect any harm/benefit. Hence naturally if one is worshipped then belief of Ilah must pre-exist in the heart of worshipper.[7] Correction: "Or take their fridge as their Ilah? Certainly not because a person understands they do not possess godly qualities and cannot benefit or harm. Alhasil, Ilah is taken when it is believed the one taken as Ilah has ability to hear/see, is able to harm/benefit or at the very least one whom the idol represents is able to do hear/see and harm/benefit. An intelligent being will not take a creation to be Ilah if one does not expect any harm/benefit. Hence naturally if one is worshipped then belief of Ilah must pre-exist in the heart of worshipper."

Is Munazray ka aakhiri hissa suna ... Deobandi munazir kehta heh kay Ala Hazrat ka aqida thah kay shaytan ka ilm RasoolAllah kay ilm say ziyada heh. Yeh banda kitna bara haram un nasal o asal heh kay is ka andaza wohi laga sakta heh jis ko is kay is jhoot ka ilm ho. Apnay Deobandi kufri aqeedeh ko Ala Hazrat say mansoob keeya. Yeh haram ul asal Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri musanif Baraheen e Qatia ka aqeedah o nazria Ala Hazrat par chispan kar raha heh.

Salam alayqum, Bas windows xp ki CD talash kar raha thah ... file install karni thee. Meri problem Urdu meh ilfaz likhna heh. Urdu par achi khasi sakta hoon, likh nahin sakta ... only - say ray fey = sirf, ya sawad ray fey = sirf, ya seen ray fey = sirf ... lol mera matlab samaj gahay hoon gay, mujjay ilfaz ki spelling nahin pata ... aam ilfaz toh likh leta hoon magar, jesay, apna, aap, mein, tum, waghera ... magar nafees Urdu kay ilfaz ka likhna nahin aata. Allah karam karay ga, abh likhni seekhni paray gee. Aap bahi dua keren, Allah ta'ala mujjay apni murad par pauncha deh aur joh kam shoroon keeya heh woh muqamil karoon.

Ameen

Salam alayqum, Khadim nay Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Ghakharvi ki Kitab Rah e Sunnat ka Tafseelan jawab likhnay ka irada keeya heh magar keun kay khud Urdu likhnay say ajiz hoon [keun kay Urdu mein likhna ata nahin] is leyeh romanised Urdu meh likh raha hoon. Aur masla dar paish heh kay is material ko Urdu meh transfer kerna peray ga aur is mein aap bahiyoon ki madad ki zeroorat hogi agar kohi bahee is mein madad kerna pasand karay toh mujjay pm message keray. Dosra issue heh, kay Maulana Sarfaraz Khan nay Ulama e sabiqa zamanay ki kutub say dalahil pesh keeyeh hen aur mera ilm sirf Quran o Hadith taq hee mehdood heh Ulamah kia likh gahay hen aur kis ka kia nazria thah is par kabi tawajoh nahin keeh. Is wajah say esay hawalajat ka verify kernay ka aur ibaraat kay tarjumein meh madad bi chahyeh hogi aur Ulamah kay asal muwaqif ki tehqeeq bi. Is leyeh tawaqoh kerta hoon kay is forum ahle ilm hazraat madad keren gay. Khas request heh kay agar kissi kay pass esa material heh Rah e Sunnat kay kissi pehloo kay radd meh madad ker sakta heh toh barahay mahirbani pm per zeroor share karen. Neechay khadim nay joh bab banday hen un ki list paish e khidmat heh. Asal mein jis numerical order meh bab hen ussi meh likhay hen, magar rawani qata ho rahi thee jis waja say color coding kar dee taqay jis mozooat ka direct ek dosray say talluq heh woh wazia ho jahay. Aur yeh sections kohi khatami list nahin sirf Maulana Sahib kay safa 12 say 15 mein joh kuch likha heh us par rad e amal heh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Kitab: Sirat E Quran O Sunnat Bajawab: Rah E Sunnat. --------------------------------------------- 0.0 - Allah Aur Rasool Ki Atahat: 0.1 - Ikhtilafi Masail Mein Allah Aur RasoolAllah Ki Taraf Ruju Kerna: --------------------------------------------- Qanoon Saazi Ka Mansub Ka Ikhtiyar: Maulana SKS Ghakharvi Ka Nazria e Qanoon Saazi: Maulana SKS Ghakharvi Kay Nazria e Qanoon Saazi Par Tanqeed: Maulana SKS Ghakharvi Kay Nazria e Qanoon Saazi Ki Islah: --------------------------------------------- 1.0 - Allah Ka Deen Islam Heh: 1.1 - Deen Akmal O Mukammil Heh: 1.2 - Deen e Islam Akmal O Mukamal Ulamah e Islam Ki Nazar Mein: 1.3 - Man-Pasand ‘Islam’ Aur Essay Mazhab Ka Mardood Hona: 2.0 - Islam Ki Akmaliat Meh Kon Sa Nazria Nuqs Sabat Karta Heh: 2.1 – Ijtihadi Islam Akmaliat e Islam Meh Nuqs Sabat Nahin Kerta: --------------------------------------------- 3.0 - Nau Ijad Sunnat e Hasana O Khaira Kay Ajar Ki Khabr: 3.1 - Nau Ijad Sunnat e Zalala O Shar Kay Gunnah Ki Khabr: 4.0 – Lafz Sunnat Ka Istimal Quran O Hadith Ki Roshini Mein: 4.1 – Nau Ijad Sunnat Ka Islam Mein Dakhal Keeya Jana Biddat Ka Dakhal Islam Keeya Jana Heh: 4.2 – Lafz Sunnat Bator Lafz Biddat Ka Mutabadil: 4.3 – Biddat Ka Hasana Hona Baqawl Hadhrat Umar: 5.0 - Sunnat e Hasana O Zalala Ka Tayyun Quran O Hadith: 5.1 – Sunnat e Hasana Ka Sunnat e RasoolAllah Hona Zeroori Nahin: 5.2 – Sunnat e Hasana O Zalala Par Tafseeli Wazahat: --------------------------------------------- 6.0 – Maulana SKS Gakharvi Ka Feham e Akmaliat Aur Is Ka Hasil: 6.1 – Maulana SKS Gakharvi Kay Nazriyeh Ki Islah: 6.2 – Maulana SKS Gakharvi Ka Naqis ‘Islam’ O Iman: 7.0 - Deen e Islam Akmal O Mukamal Ulamah e Islam [Barelwi] Ki Nazar Mein: 7.1 - Ulamah e Islam [Barelwi] Ka Akmaliat Par Iman Aur Is Kay Nataij: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salam alayqum, Kissi waja say aap ko pm nahin behij pa raha, idhar hi paste karta hoon. Aap download kar lenh toh batayeh ga, link remove kar doon ga. [Link Removed] Download karnay kay leyeh link kay PDF walay hissay par click karyeh ga us ki position tasweer meh point kar deeh heh.

Kitab online par mil gahi heh. is ka musannaf Hafiz Abdul Qudus Khan heh. Agar kissi ko online ka link distiyab ho toh pm meh rabta karay.