SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN MAKING LIES ON HERE AND ON YANABI.COM!

PROFESSOR SAAB BELIEVES THAT HARAZT ABU BAKAR SIDIQ (RA) ARE AFZAL
JUST LIKE REST OF AHLE SUNNAT WAL JAMAT

THEY ALSO BELIEVE THAT AHLE BAYT (RA) CANNOT BE COMPARED WITH
JUST LIKE REST OF AHLE SUINNAT WAL JAMAT

THEY BELIEVE HAZRAT ALI (RA) IS IMAM OF ALL AWLIA (RH)
JUST LIKE REST OF AHLE SUINNAT WAL JAMAT

PROFESSOR SAAB LOVE HAZRAT ALI MAQAM (RA) MORE THAN EVERY, DOES THIS MEAN HE SHIA? NOWAY! IF YANABI.COM IS MAKING LIE ON HIM THEN THEY WILL SEE PUNISHMENT ON DAY OF JUDGEMENT. THE TRUTH IS THEY A BIG SUNNI AND ONLY BELIEVE SUNNI BELIEF.

You idiotic liar.
Don't make up things.
I have `ibarats of Tahirul Qadri in which the Prophet has been insulted, Sayyiduna Mu`awiya radhi Allahu `anh has been insulted, and the fadiliya of Sayyiduna Siddiq-e-Akbar has been questioned. In addition, there are additional issues with Tahirul Qadri including fake isnad that he claims he has and his violation of `ijma on diyyat.

All can be provided ASAP

plus his love for rafzis is well publicised, they luv him so much they giv him a slot on their own channel Ahl e Bait TV Sky 836

maraqialFalah wrote:
You idiotic liar.
Don't make up things.
I have `ibarats of Tahirul Qadri in which the Prophet has been insulted, Sayyiduna Mu`awiya radhi Allahu `anh has been insulted, and the fadiliya of Sayyiduna Siddiq-e-Akbar has been questioned. In addition, there are additional issues with Tahirul Qadri including fake isnad that he claims he has and his violation of `ijma on diyyat.

All can be provided ASAP

LA HOWLA WA LA QOOWATA ILLA BILLAH!

I CHALLENGE THE WORLD TO PROVE IF YOU WERE MAN!
IF SHAYKH UL ISLAM IS NOT SUNNI THERE IS NO SUNNI IN WORLD!

HE BELIEVES THAT HAZRAT ABU BAKAR SIDIQ (RA) IS NO.1 BUT ONLY DO DAWA TO SHIA AND TALK ABOUT LOVE. MAKE UP YOUR MIND ONE MINUTE YOU SAY HE IS SHIA NEXT YOU SAY HE IS NAJDI

AAP KYA BAKWAS KEH RAHE HO? KHUD BHI SAMAJH NAHIN AA RAHI AAPKO, KE AAP KE BHUT SE KYA NIKAL RAHA HAI!

Mr. Tahir,

You can sit here and challenge us all you want. I really don't care and I don't have time for your idiotic nonsense.

Tahirul Qadri has been refuted more than once by many `ulema on many issues. It's a fact. As for afdaliya, explain the following:

"In dominion, Abu Bakr as-Siddiq was a directly appointed deputy of the Prophet. In spiritualism and saintliness, 'Ali al- Murtada was his directly appointed deputy." (p.7)

And:

"Therefore, the first man of political legacy was Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, the first man of spiritual legacy was 'Ali al-Murtada, and the first men of intellectual and practical legacy were the Companions. So all these legateeswere independently appointed within there own orbits of influence and had no clash or contradiction with one another." (p.8)


Noting what Shaykh Gibril rightly says:

"What is worse in my view is the Preface because it is a crypto-shi`i manifesto sugared over with the thinnest gloss of respect for the Two Shaykhs and hiding behind purported references to Shah Wali Allah and Shaykha Ahmad Sirhindi as one would behind one's little finger.

In reality, the caliphates of our liege-lords Abu Bakr and `Umar were
a qutbiyya of spiritual sovereignty divinely and prophetically conferred by tawatur (and not merely "elected by men") before that of our liege-lords `Uthman and `Ali by agreement of ahl al-sunna beginning with al-hakeem al-tirmidhi then Shaykh muhyi al-Din and others such as al-sha`rani's fatwas from his shaykh the qutb Sayyidi `Ali al-khawwas, and the great treatise of imam ibn `Abidin on the topic of the qutb and ghawth which recapitulates the entire topic."

As for his insulting the Prophet (Sal Allahu `alayhi wa salim), this is the following `ibarat from “Firqah Parastī Ka Khatimah Kuyū Nakar Mumkin Hay?”, page 86, first edition January 1985, published by “Markazī Idārah Minhāj al-Qurān”, Lahore, Pakistan:

“When Allāh has not even given the Prophet sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam the authority [or discretion] to implement his own will [or choice] upon anyone in religious affairs then where did any missionary [muballigh] acquire this right that he may rob [or snatch] others of the right to [be entitled to] difference in opinion?”


خالقِ کون و مکان نے جب سرورِ کائنات صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم کو بھی یہ اختیار نہیں دیا کہ وہ دین کے معاملے میں کسی پر اپنی مرضی مسلّط کریں تو کسی مبلّغ کو یہ حق کہاں سے حاصل ہو گیا کہ وہ دوسروں سے اختلاف رائے کا حق چھین لے


I have the scan as well, if you would like.

And insulting Sayyiduna Mu`awiya radhi Allahu `anhu, look what a deviant Minhaji relates that Tahirul Padri says:

Qaid-e-Muthurum then answers this question; he declares that Shahadat (martyrdom) is of two types; zaahiri (evident) and baatini (hidden).

Allah (swt) wanted his Beloved Prophet (saw) to have both types of Shahadat (martyrdom). So He gave the Holy Prophet (saw) two grandsons who were like His own sons in a zaahiri (evident) and baatini (hidden) manner; Imam Hassan (ra) and Imam Hussain (ra).

Mu'awiyah's malice against Imam Hassan (ra) led him to conspire with the Imam's wife Ja'dah, the daughter of Ash'ath. She was made to give the Imam some poison which affected his liver. Imam Hassan (ra) thus succumbed to Mu'awiyah's fatal mischief and attained his martyrdom on 28th Safar. This type of shahadat (martyrdom) links in with the attempt to poison the Holy Prophet (saw) in Khaibar. The Holy Prophet (saw) complained of the effects of the poison for the rest of his blessed life. It is reported that the Holy Prophet (saw) during his illness, just before passing away, continued to complain from the poisoned food he ate at Khaibar.

Similarly, Imam Hussain (ra) was killed on the battlefield by the armies sent by Yazeed bin Mu'awiyyah. This type of martyrdom links in with the injuries that the Holy Prophet (saw) was afflicted with in the Battle of Uhud. Hence, each one of those grandsons filled in for their Grandfather, the most beloved Prophet of Islam, so that he could receive the glory of both types of martyrdom.

In conclusion, the events of Karbala teach us that Imam Hussain (ra) did not compromise with the falsehood. He sacrificed not only his own life but all of his family and children for the sake of truth and to save the glory Islam. This teaches us that commitment to right and truth should be above all other personal benefit and interests. Furthermore, an individual in Islamic society is not an independent individual but rather a person who is integrated in his society and who should perform his duties towards the Islamic message.

There is much that we can derive inspiration from in the anniversary of Imam Hussain (ra); for they did not remain neutral in the face of the reality of oppression and arrogance. We should not move with Imam Hussain (ra) in history, instead we should move with him in reality, revolution and change. We should all have Hussainiat rather then Yaazediat in us. The real tragedy of our Ummah (community) today is that we are facing another Karbala in Iraq or Palestine, but that there are too many Yazids and no Imam Hussain’s (ra) among us. From: www.minhajuk.org/artikelen.php?parent_id=1138676533

Oh yes, you claim it is a mistake in translation. Wastaghfirullah. it is outright fisq for someone to claim something against the saHaba, especially ones who have been granted Jannah like Sayyidina `Amir Mu`awiya radhi Allahu `anh.

And then Tahirul Padri has celebrated Christmas, another act of fisq.

See what Shaykh Gibril says:


Wa alaykum as-Salam,

It is positively impermissible to celebrate Christmas with the Christians as it is the soul of tashabbuh (resemblance) and takes one out of the pale of Islam according to one of two opinions related from the Imams of the early Muslims, the other being that one is an evil person for doing so.

In addition, a report from Sayyidina `Umar, Allah be well-pleased with him, explicitly forbids the Muslims from any connection whatsoever with their festivals.

It is not a question of "their Milad, our Milad." Neither milla is actually imitating the other as Christmas existed before Islam, and Mawlid exists obliviously of Christmas. In addition, the celebration Christmas has nothing to do with celebrating the birth of the Prophet `Isa; rather, they celebrate the birth of "the Son of God," with all its Mithraic and Dionysiac connotations. Even though I have nothing but the best memories of three decades of such celebrations, I have to say in conscience that it is a pagan festival. What is more, it is historically rooted in the European pagan winter solstice celebrations which preceded the beginnings of Christian history.

The real and practical question is: Should we return their greetings? As for one's private non-Muslim relatives and silat al-rahm, there must be cordiality and love but there must also be a sincere and consuming desire for right guidance and faithful good advice to them. As for non-relatives then it can be compared to relatives telling you during Easter: "Christ is risen!" One cannot stand mute but rather should answer: He never died in the first place; or take some such stand (such as basic absence from the places and times of such conversations) as clearly demarks one from any type of assent or confirmation of misguidance.

Should we visit them as a matter of protocol, especially in case of a political arrangement of coexistence such as in Lebanon for example? Here also the fatwa of Sh. Muhammad ibn Ja`far al-Kattani in his Nasiha li Ahl al-Islam is an emphatic NO, but the reality of practice in the history of Lebanon, for one, is different. The Mufti of the Republic and other Muslim representatives will even visit churches and sit in their front pews on certain occasions.

But for such to take place in a literally "purely" Muslim country such as Pakistan, all we can say is La hawla wala quwwata illa billah and remember the hadith of the Holy Prophet, upon him blessings and peace: "Two types of drunkenness shall be observed among you [Muslim]: the drunkenness of ample living and the drunkenness of ignorance."

Was-Salam,
gibril
[2006-12-14]

Alahazrat rahmatullahi `alayh writes:

One Who slanders Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) is a dog from amongst the dogs of Hell

Answer from Ahkam-e-Shariyat Az Sayyiduna `Ala Hazrat Imam Ahl-e-Sunnat `Azim al-Barkat Mawlana As-Shah Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Al-Qadiri Al-Barelavi Al-Qandari Nawarallahu ta`ala marqadahu wa radhi Allahu `anhu

Question: Jamadil Ulaa 1337

It must be brought to the notice of the Ulama-e-Ahle Sunnat that today Sunnis sit in the companionship of corrupt sects and have become misled in faith due to a few laws. Even though there are numerous laws explained in your books, this servant has not seen anything relating to this that is why I felt it necessary to query this issue. There issue is that there is a person who refers to Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) as a miserly person.

He says that Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) fought with Hazrat Ali and the family of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam (Hazrat Imam Hassan radi Allahu anhu) and stole the khilaafat from them and he martyred thousands of Sahaba-e-Kiraam to achieve this. Bakr says that he is aware of Ameer Mu'wiyah's (radi Allahu anhu) wrongs and he can not be called and Ameer.

Amar on the other hand says that Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) is from amongst the senior Sahaba-e-Kiraam and the slightest disrespect to him is to be misled. There is another person, who calls himself actually completely ignorant) says that all the Sahaba especially Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique (radi Allahu anhu), Hazrat Umar Farouk-e-Azam (radi Allahu anhu) and Hazrat Usman Zul Noorain (radi Allahu anhu) (Allah forbid) were greedy and miserly, as they kept the blessed bier of the
Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam and then were each engrossed in their own schemes of how to become Khalifa.

Now what is the ruling about these four persons? Can we regard them as being Ahle Sunnat Wa Jamaat or not? What is your (Aala Hazrat's) view on this issue? Please present a simple yet well supported answer.


The Answer: Almighty Allah described the Sahaba of the Prophet SallAllaho Alaihi Wa Sallam in two categories in Surah Hadeed. One group are those who accepted Islam before the Victory at Makkah and who spent their wealth in the way of Allah sincerely and made Jihad. The second group refers to those who ccepted Islam after the Victory at Makkah.

Almighty Allah mentioned in the Holy Quran about both the groups "WaKul'la Wa'd Allahu Husna" wherein Almighty Allah promised both groups good things. In giving this promise of giving them good things, Almighty Allah says in the Holy Quran, "They have been kept a great distance away from Hell. They will not even hear its sound. These are the ones who will live forever in the way they desire. The most difficulty moments of Qiyaaamat will not cause them any sadness, The Angels will welcome
them by saying, This is that day of yours which you have been promised."

Almighty Allah has mentioned the above as the status and excellence of every Sahabi. Now, if anyone says ill about any sahabi, then he wants to belie the word of Allah. To present false and incorrect narrations regarding some of their dealings against that, which Allah has mentioned, is not the manner of the Muslims. In the same verse, Almighty Allah even answered such people by promising good to both the groups of the Sahaba-e-Kiraam (radi Allahu ta'ala anhum). Almighty Allah also says, "Allah knows well, whatever you are to do." (In other words Allah knows everything and has still promised both groups his Mercy and blessings). Now after this, whoever barks or says such things, will go to jahanum (Hell).

Allama Shahabud'deen Khufaji states as follows in Naseemur Riyaz, the commentary of Shifa Shareef by Qaadi Iyaaz as follow: "One who slanders Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) is a dog from amongst the dogs of Hell."

Amongst the four statements (presented in the question), only Amar's statement is correct and true. Zaid and Bakr are liars and the fourth person is the worst and most evil of all three as he is a raafdhi (Shia). To Appoint an Imam (Caliph) is the most difficult task of all difficult tasks. All the issues of the world and religion have connection to this and if the blessed Janazah of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam had to be kept even until Qiyaamat, then there would have been still no possibility of any harm at all. The blessed bodies of the Ambia (alaihimus salaatu was salaam) never become disintegrated. Hazrat Sulaiman (alaihis salaam) remained
standing for one entire year after passing away. He was only laid to rest in his blessed grave after one year.

Now, the Blessed Janaazah of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam was in the room of Ummul Mo'mineen Siddiqa (radi Allahu anha), and it is the same place where the blessed Rauza-e-Anwar is today. The Janaazah Mubaarak was not going to be taken out of that Hujrah. It was a small Hujrah and all the Sahaba wished to be part of the Janaazah Salaah, so small groups of Sahaba-e-Kiraam came in one after the other. They partook in the Janaazah Salaah and went out (and the next group came in). This chain of actions ended on the third day.

Now, if this practice of the Sahaba had to take three years, then the blessed janaaza would have been kept their for three years and this, would have been the reason for the (so-called) delay in placing the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam to rest in his blessed Rauza Mubaarak. If according to this Iblees (cursed person) this was being greedy (power hungry), then the strongest objection would be on Ummul Mo'mineen Siddiqa and Hazrat Ali (Radi Allahu anhum). They were not greedy. The issue of burial and kaffan is the right of the family members. Why did Hazrat Ali and Ummul
Mo'mineen then just wait and do nothing for three days? They are the ones who did this for the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam. They should have done the last rites as well. (All this is being just given as example to allow the ignorant to understand that these could be the objections that they would have to make on great people like Hazrat Ali and Ummul Mo'mineen). Now, it can be established that the objections by these people are baseless and cursed and the issue of not resting the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam in his blessed grave quickly had religious benefits in it
and Hazrat Ali (radi Allahu anhu) and all the Sahaba-e-Kiraam were pleased with this.
These evil cursed people (May Allah destroy them) are not just hurting the Sahaba, but they are causing discomfort to the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam.

It has been mentioned in the Hadith Shareef as follows:
"Anyone who has hurt my sahaba has hurt me and one who has hurt me has caused Allah displeasure and one who displeases Allah, it is soon that Allah will seize him."

The following was also mentioned about Tahirul Padri and the issue of him insulting Sayyiduna `Amir Mu`awiya radhiAllahu `anhu:

اسلام علیکم و رحمۃ اللہ و برکاتہ و مغفرہ
"گستاخ حضرت امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ"

طاہرالقادری کی سیّدنا امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ تعالی عنہ کی شان میں گستاخی

1ـ شھادت امام حسین رضی اللہ عنہ :
حضرت امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کے انتقال کا وقت جب قریب آیاـ تو انہوں نے اس خواہش کے پیش نظر کہ یہ حکومت اور خلافت میرے ہی خاندان میں رہے ـ اپنی زندگی میں یزید کو ولی عہد نامزد کر دیا اور اس کی تخت نشینی کے لیے راہ ہموار کرنے کی کوششیں شروع کردیںـ
میں سمجھتا ہوں اور بلاتامل اس بات کا اقرار اور اعلان کرتا ہوں کہ سیّدنا امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی یہ دوسری زبردست لغزش اور ہولناک سیاسی خطاء تھی جس نے تاریخ اسلام پر بڑے دور رس نتائج مرتب کیے اور امت مسلمہ کے سیاسی تشخص کو خلافت سے اٹھا کر ملوکیّت کی گود میں دھکیل دیاـ ہم ان دونوں غلطیوں کو شرف صحابّیت کے حوالے سے اجتہادی غلطیاں تسلیم کرتے ہیںـ

(حصہ اول صحفہ 13)

جب ہم واقعہ کربلا کا تصور کرتے ہیں تو ہمیں معاویہ یاد آجاتا ہےـ

(صحفہ 52)

2ـ محبت امام حسین رضی اللہ عنہ :
حضرت امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ ان کے دور حکومت کی نسبت ہم حضور صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم کے صحابی ہونے کی وجہ سے حیاء کو اور خاموشی کو فرض جانتے ہیں اور زبان کھولنے کو پسند کرتے ہیںـ اور گناہ سمجھتے ہیں ـ لیکن آگے جب یزید کا باپ آتا ہے تو یزید پر ہزار بار لعنت بھیجتے ہیںـ جو کچھ میں نے عرض کیا ـ اہل سنت کی عقائد کی تمام کتابوں میں اور ائمہ تاریخ ہمیشہ بیان کرتے چلے آۓ ہیںـ سیاست معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کا فتنہ آج پیدا ہوا ہےفقط اہل بیت پاک اور حسنین کریمین اور حضرت علی رضی اللہ عنہ کی خلافت کے خلاف بغض اگلنے کے لیے اس فتنے کو اجاگر کیا گیا ہےـ

طاہر القادری کی عبارات کا جائزہ :
طاہر القادری کی مذکورہ عبارات سے واضح طور پر ظاہر ہوتا ہے کہ اگر طاہر القادری کو یہ خوف نہ ہو کہ مجھے علماء اہل سنت شیعہ اور رافضی کی طرف منسوب کریں گے تو وہ کھل کر امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی شان میں تنقیص کرتاـ جیسا کہ اس کی مذکورہ عبارات اس کی شاہد ہیں کہ وہ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کے بارہ میں وہی اپنے مافی الضمیر کو ظاہر کر رہا ہے کہ جو مودودی نے اپنی کتاب سیاست و ملوکیّت میں ظاہر کیا ہےـ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ نے امت مسلمہ کے سیاسی تشخص کو خلافت سے اٹھا کر ملوکیّت کی گود میں دھکیل دیا ہے ـ اور طاہر القادری تو مودودی سے بھی بڑھ کر زبان کھول رہا ہے کہ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی سیاست ایک فتنہ تھی ـ جس کا واضح معنی یہ ہے کہ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی سیاست اگر فتنہ ہے تو پھر امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ اس کے ساتھ موصوف ہوۓ کیونکہ صفت موصوف کے بغیر وجود نہیں رکھتی ـ تو امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی ذات کو فتنہ کہنا یہ انتہائی جرات ہے ـ اور جو یہ بار بار کہہ رہا ہے کہ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کے خلاف زبان کھولنے سے صرف اس لیے حیاء آتی ہے کہ انہیں صحابی کہا جاتا ہےـ تو یہ اس کا کہنا بھی بے معنی ہےـ جبکہ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی ذات کو فتنہ کہہ رہے ہیںـ تو پھر کون سی حیاء باقی رہ گئی ہے اور پھر واضح الفاظ میں کہہ رہا ہے کہ میں بلا تامل اس بات کا اقرار اور اعلان کرتا ہوں کہ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ نے ہولناک سیاسی غلطیاں کی ہیںـ لیکن انتہائی افسوس ہے کہ کاش طاہر القادری سلف صالحین اور اپنے اکابر شیخ عبدالحق محدّث دھلوی اور مجدد الف ثانی وغیرہ کی تحریرات جو کہ انہوں نے سیّدنا امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی شان میں تحریر کی ہیںـ ان کو سامنے رکھتے ہوۓ ان کی اتباع کرتے ـ اور سیدنا امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی شان و مناقب کرتے نہ کہ ان کی شان میں طعن و تنقیص کرتے اور اعلی حضرت عظیم البرکت فاضل بریلوی رحمۃ اللہ علیہ کی کتاب احکام شریعت حصّہ اول ص 55 کو اگر طاہر القادری صاحب پڑھ لیتے اور پھر اعلی حضرت سے جو وہ اپنی عقیدت کا اظہار اور دعوی کرتے ہیںـ پھر یہ امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ کی ذات میں طعن و تنقیص نہ کرتےـ کیونکہ اعلی حضرت نے اس جگہ یوں لکھا ہے ـ " جو امیر معاویہ رضی اللہ عنہ پر طعن کرے وہ جہنمی کتّوں میں سے ایک ہےـ
مگر جو دشمن صحابہ خمینی ہے اس میں طاہر القادری کو کوئی نقص نظر نہیں آیاـ اور اس کی تعریف میں نواۓ وقت بروز جمعرات 3 ذی القعدہ 1409 ھ ، 08 جون 1089 ء میں اس عنوان کے ساتھ خمینی کی تعریف کی " امام خمینی کا حینا علی رضہ کی طرح اور مرنا حسین رضہ کی طرح ہےـ یہی وہ خمینی ہے کہ جس نے حضرات صحابہ کرام رضی اللہ عنہم کی توہین کرتے ہوۓ یوں کہا ہے " جتنی قربانیاں میرے ماننے والوں نے دی ہیںـ یہ قربانیاں صحابہ رسول بھی نہیں کرسکے" ـ بلکہ اپنی مشہور کتاب کشف الاسرار ص 121 میں ہر قاری کو مشورہ دیا کہ حق و باطل کے امتیاز کے لیے ملا باقر مجلسی کی کتب کا مطالعہ ضروری ہےـ اس صفحہ پر " حق الیقین" کا بار بار ذکر کیاـ اس کتاب میں حضرت عائشہ رضی اللہ عنہا اور حضرت ابوبکر و عمر رضی اللہ عنھم کی شان میں گستاخی کی گئی ہےـ

wasalaaa,

mahshallah brother maraqialFalah subhanallah, nice peice of work, minhajioo paro sono samjo realise aapka rangnai wala tahir gustaak hai gustaak.....

new naraa............lol

tahir tahir............gustaak hai gustaak hai....

Naraye Takbeer, Naraye Risalat, Naraye Tahkeeq, Naraye Haidri, ...............

MashaAllah some very good and useful posts. I just want to add something, it has been said that Tahir ul Qadri sahib believes that :

THEY BELIEVE HAZRAT ALI (RA) IS IMAM OF ALL AWLIA (RH)

This is not a belif shared by many Suffiya this includes Qutub al Irshad Syed Abul Hassan Ahmed al Nuri Hussieni Alavi Fatami, who is the Pir Bahi of Ala Hazrat RadiAllah Anhu, and also his Ustaaz in Ilm e Jaffar. He also gave Ala Hazrat Khalifaat. He is the Murshid of the son of Ala Hazrat Mufti al Azam Imam Mustafa Raza Kha RadiAllah Anhum

He writes in 'Siraaj ul Awarif fil wasaya wal muaarif' in the 45th Noor

Question What is the station of wilayah that no other station exceeds?

Answer It is the station of Qurb. This is situated between the station of Nabuwaat and Siddiqiyaat and is exclusive to Syedenaa Abu Bakr RadiAllah Anho. Therefore Shaykh al Akbar Muhiyy al din ibn Al Arabi RadiAllah Anho explains in ‘Futuhaat e Makkiyya’ that the rank of Qurb is situated between the maqaam of Nabuwaat and Siddiqiyaat. This special station is for the Afrad . It is situated below Nabuwaat and above Siddiqiyaat. In the region, divine secrets were entrusted to the heart of Syedenaa Abu Bakr RadiAllah Anho which raised him amongst the sidiqeen. These secrets are not the condition of Siddiqiyaat or its pre-requisites. Since there is no place between the Holy Prophet may salaam be upon him and Syedenaa Abu Bakr RadiAllah Anho , therefore no sidiq shares these secrets with Syedenaa Abu Bakr RadiAllah Anho. For this reason he is the Imam of the Sidiqs and Afdaal albashar baad al anbiya (best of human after the Prophets).

mahshallah very good.........aik aur naraa hojaye

tahir tahir............gustaak hai gustaak hai....

Naraye Takbeer, Naraye Risalat, Naraye Tahkeeq, Naraye Haidri, ...............