@Amir Hamza دیکھیں بھائی نام تو آپ کا مسلمانوں والا ہے مگر خیالات انتہائی افسوس ناک. اس طرح کے خیا لات کا اظہار آپ سوشل میڈیا کی آڑ کے پیچھے سے ہی کر سکتے ہیں. آپ قرآن ترجمے کے ساتھ پڑھیں, اللہ پاک ہم سب کو سمجھ اور ہدایت دے. جنت اور دوزخ دونوں اللہ نے پیدا بھی کی ہیں اور بھرنی بھی ھیں.
Can't agree more till the events of becoming Ali (RA) as 4th Caliph I normally agree with almost each and everything of what Ghamidi sb has said in other lectures/discussions/videos etc, even the views of non coming of Esa (AS), Mehdi etc. And it is worth mentioning here as i am not from a particular sect. In general, I hardly come up with any questions from other videos etc, but by listening this, i have to come up with few questions. Now with the Karbala incident and especially before that the taking of leadership by Ali and then the treason from Muawiya, i have few questions. 0. How can the shura be made in those days and why they have to take in view and opinion from those states which were conquered? Like Iraq, Syria, Iran etc and lets say, if that even made, how could they travel so far and to take the opinion of people there to decide who to become the next calipah ? especially right after the shahdah of the Usman (RA). Then from the six people Umar (RA) thought as those who had the ability to lead/people will follow, and from last 2 remaining, it was Ali (RA) who was the most respected in that area and region? Wasn't that the fact? The center of power was Madinah, so how could they think of taking in account the things in Iran, Syria, Egypt etc where they had the governors, sent by the Caliph (and they were also originated from Makkah/Madinah (almost all of the governors by Prophet (AS), Abu Bakr (RA) & UMAR (RA) were originated from where? Especially during the time of Umar (RA) where Iran and Egypt were also under the rules, so even if the Sa'd Ibn-e-Waqas/Mughira.. (RA) etc could be sent as governor from the Madinah, so the power center was still Madinah, especially considering the communication and traveling problems in 7th Century AD. 1. For a time being if we say that Muawiya was right in his views, where do we place the action of Ayesha (RA) who was even in the same city, why did she come out against the caliph in-charge? Belonging to the same family tree, coming out against her son-in-law and thus opening a door against of treason. I found quite a difference in opinion of Ghamidi sb on that and why is he hesitant in saying wrong, A WRONG. Especially when he says that one cannot disagree with a Prophet (AS) but can be disagreed with anyone else. Why he does not apply the same principle here? 2. The formula, the saying, the order and the principle of AMR o SHURA BYNAHUM, which Ghamidi sb portray the most. Where was the in the doings of Muawiya ? Atleast, it was followed in the Madinah, where they elected Ali (RA) as Caliph but how can it give a right to a person sitting in Damascus a right to make a treason, when he was unaware of the whole incident. Again, lets say that for a time being that Muawya was misguided but where do Ghamidi sb. place the events after, like a deal with Hasan (RA) etc. Please do not see the events in exile, see them in the total of how the so called REVENGE taker (Muawya) dealt with the events after when he became the incharge (what violations did he make) 3. Again with the principle of AMR o SHURA BYNAHUM, how Muwaya got the right of changing the caliph to inheritance ? Doesn't that make him a person who was just hungry for the power, considering that they were from the tribe of those Quraishi people who was once the SARDARS in Makkah but the power table shifted from them to Bano Hashim in the form of Prophet (AS) and to his family. 4. Wasn't the action of Hussain (RA) in the last, and the decision to have a fight was like an authentication, that one has to stand up to stop the WRONG, when it was so obvious that he couldn't win but he made a principle of standing on the right, even if the people against you are so strong and in power. It was like that democratic principle has been abolished from the Islamic state/way of governance and I am against it and no one should ever say that even the grandson of Prophet (AS) was alive, still he remained quiet and silent thus approving the abolishing of the principle of AMR o SHURA BYNAHUM and accepting the heredity leadership in the state. And isn't it a fact that after Ali (RA), Muawya made and followed the same principle of inheritance power, even yet followed in the world, which was once stopped for almost 30 years of golden Islamic era? Wasn't that tragic? Will Ghamidi sb. still defend his actions? 5. I must finally say, it was not the actions of Yazid but the problem was created by Muwaya of destroying the system and thus dividing the Muslims at that time, from where they never remained united even for few years. And we could accept his regime, if that would have brought peace and prosperity or atleast the Islamic values, but they only saw the peak period of Islam, where there was money, prosperity and they had the same in the Makkah, and thus never became Muslim, unless Prophet (AS) conquered them and in order to save their lives, they turned. Thus, please also discuss Muawya's regime and what he had been doing, as not discussing it will never let the people understand the doings of Hussain (RA) and the karbala incident. I hope one can accept these saying as one can disagree with anyone except PROPHET (AS), as been widespread said by Ghamidi sb. May allah give all of us the power to say that right and i hope that interview taker will put these questions in front of such a wonderful islamic scoloar of his time. Jazakallah bilkhair
I could not read whole of your comment due to length. But, I read a bit and what I know from my knowledge of Islamic History(Which may totally be wrong) is as under: 1) Um ul Mominin Syeda Aisha(R.A.) was requested and taken by some Sahaba(R.A.) to get killers of Syedna Usman(R.A.) punished which were almost 2000 - 3000 people and to save themselves they mixed up with Shian e Ali(R.A.). These people often propegated successfully and made majority of Shian e Ali(R.A.) disagree even with Ali(R.A.). That is why when we read the saying of Ali(R.A.); most of the time we find him unhappy with his own followers. For example Maula Ali(R.A.) agreed to punish Killers first but these people along with approx 8000 more disagreed with him. For Example, in one war with Muaviya Bin Sufyan; Maula Ali(R.A.) was about to win the war and things could have been in next few hours, but, these nasty people stopped the war and let the Muaviya and his forces leave. So, Um ul Mominin did not do anything wrong except going herself with forces. 2) Muaviya Bin Sufyan was not a Caliph and it was not Caliphate. No, Muslim group or prominent scholar reffer him as Caliph. He was a King who brought Kingship in Muslim Ummah and brought great losses to Muslim Ummah as well.
Is silsly k baqi lectures bhi pesh kijiye.. Or aik guzarish yeh hy k guftago k doran ghamdi sb agar apni kisi tehreer ya tareekh ki kisi cheez ya kisi bhi doosri cheez ka hawala dyty hain tw uska link video ki description me daal diya karein taa k us ki taraf ruju me asaani ho.. Bht shukriya
Would you mind denying that the law of succession is absent in Islam. This was the reason for subsequent events experienced in the precession system erected by the Quresh. There were unending battles between the leaders and among the tribes. Briefly, mention of Jamal and safin battles suffices. Were these fought between muslims and infidels? Were not three caliphs murdered by muslims? Yes if the forces fighting with the family of the Prophet were not muslims and you accept it, then the question is withdrawn. They torturers and killers were carrying burden of old enemity and the tragedy of Karbala was a brutally cruel personifaction of their revenge against the Ahel-e- bayt before and after the departure of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh from the world. The tragedy of Karbala occurred in this perspective where none else but the Prophet's family (Ahele bait) was martyred mercilessly and unsparingly. Were not the omayyad tribes from Quresh? They were and tortured the family of the last Prophet Muhammad pbuh who brought the Last Word of Almighty Allah for the guidancce of mankind ,beginning from home. [ I am a Sunni by birth ] but neither blindfolded nor self-chained mentally, voluntarily pushing myself to the blind alley of prejudiced mindset. I can see this all myself without pulpitarians' narrative, or for that matter, their ego perversion, which keeps nurturing itself and retaining itself intact in the nursery of bias. No can't do it for being alerted by history and its canvas where an open mind can see how the family of the Prophet was not spared by the enemies of Islam apparently self- branded as muslims, for seizing power. You can't even see it? How! Where there was then the need for reading so much if one avoids telling the truth that too not for anybody's else but for the sake of humanity causes, spurred by the qualms of conscience. The first two caliphs were not from omayyad though but the entire Arab peninsula was occupied by them, in terms of holding important positions in the peninsula. Only the question of appointment of the central ruler of Medina was taken into consideration at Sakifa before honoring the Prophet, when leaving the world. I cannot say burial. then, naturally followed the withdrawal of Ansar from Caliphate or leadership claim. They Ansari tribal leaders knew that the entire Arab was already gone to the other people. You also refrained from discussing who were these other people influencing everything. However They are seen in the pages of history, I have already mentioned above. Bilal was not seen anywhere despite his sacrifices. He remained slave and ultimately ran to Iraq for safety. They were after him whom you call some other people without naming them. You have read khilafat -e-mulokiat and you know the author.
My question is, when he says it was discussed and agreed b/w all the leaders. Where was Banu Hashim in those decisions? Specially in selection of first and second Khalifa selection.
Imran Sahab, Sahi farmaaya. Lekin India par to kayi saal chhoti si minority ne hukoomat ki. Isi tarha angrezon ne kayi logon par do sou saal hukoomat ki. Ye tafreqay Allah ki mohlat ke khatam hojaanay ka nateeja hein. Zaalim and jaareh logon ka dastoor kuchh sadiyon ke baad ghayeb ho jaata hai aur zaalim ek doosray se ladnay lagtay hain aur khood zulm ka shikaar ho jaatay hain. Aap mera upar likha huway tabsaray par ghowr farmayen. Ali
I believe when ghamdi sahib says muaaz bin jabal ... What he really wants to say is Saad bin muaaz ( chief of AWS who was shaheed ... While muaaz bin jabal died in 639
Salam. I need to understand Hadees No. 114, in Sahi Bukhari.... related to Haz. Umar RA, at the last moments of Nabi Kareem PBUH. May Allah bless u and us. Aameen
@Amir Hamza Quran ki ayaat aaj science such bta rahi ha tum ghalat track pe ho thora search kr k comment karo Baki mera kaam tha sirf pohancha dena aagy tumhari marzi tum apny deen pe hum apny deen pe
@Amir Hamza jamy huy khoon se ? ghalat translate kr rahy ho, mein apny nazriye ko defend nahi kar raha mein sirf daleel pe baat krta hon aur tum b agar such ki talaash krty ho to mein prove kr sakta hon k Quran ALLAH ki kitab ha lekin us se pehly tumhein Muhammad PBUH ki gustakhi band krni ho gi. agar musalman nahi ho to mat ho lekin 1.5 billion logon k emaan ko gaali mat do aur naa mein tum ko gali di ha
@Amir Hamza 5.5 agar musalman nahi hen to is ka mtlb ye nahi ha k 1.5 billion ko gaali dy sakty hen, agar research krty ho to patience rakhna seekho mein prove karon ga agar sirf gaali deni ha to tumhary agly msg mein pata chal jay ga
@Amir Hamza you are an ignorant fool mene wakat zaya kiya tum se behas kr k Quran mein jis jagah kafiron ko katal krny krny ka hukam ha wo sirf ek ghazwa k liye tha jahan ye ayat likhi ha us ki detail b wahan he likhi hen, aur rahi baat hadees ki to yahan bohot se musalman hadees ko nai maanty lekin Arabic wala Quran sab ka ek ha kisi ek ki translation pe faisla krna tumhari kam ilmi ko waziyah krta ha
Karbala was not event but civil war among 2 rivals in Islam: Hashmite Vs Ummyade to gain power; and Hussein got defeated killed mercilessly by Islamic King Yazid.
1. Hazrat Umar appointed six people from Quresh but at that time the empire was expanding and consist of Persia, Syria and Egypt also. So no consultation was made from those non Arab areas. 2. Umar said that these were the people from whom Rasool Allah was agreed for whole life, so taqwa, sabqat fil Islam, and contribution to the cause of Islam was in his mind, not only democracy. 3. Consensus was made on Usman, so he was chosen third caliph. 4. During the time of fourth caliph Ali, all over Islamic world including Persia, Yemen, Egypt, Iraq accepted except Mavia in Syria, so democracy was also there, but he rebelled. So what will you say? A person was elected traditionally, democratically, and most pious and capable of ruling at the time, but one group is rebelling against him on false excuses, so what can you say to these mutineers. Then after Ali, Mavia grabbed power without consultation and just by brute force, and he is still called khalifa.he should be merely called power grabber or highjacker who derailed the whole system of khilafat. And in the end his son Yazeed was the climax of despoticism and tyrannical rule . Please say the truth in this matter, and you didn't discuss the subject matter of Karbala.
Khilafat qiyamat tak quresh men rahy gi,hades hy.. iski waja Hazrat Ibrahem a.s ki dua thi,ky mery bachy b imam hugy?To Allah ny farmaya haa magar jo zalam hu wo nai hugy,sura baqra k shuro men hy ye. To bat ye hy k qureshi asal mn Hazrat Ibrahem a.s ki ulad hen,ur qyamat tak imam in men sy hi hugu
And no doubt after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ) we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa`da. `Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. Sahih Al Bukhari Hadith 6830 It was not Amrahum Shura Baynahun otherwise why Ali & Zubair disagreed with what happened in Saqifa
E momino zalimon ki taraf mat jhuko warna tumahara anjam qayamat mien jahannam unke sath Kar diya jayega soore hood Ki ayat ghamdi saheb dhyan Se pade is ayat ko
Ap ki bato me tajzye me tazad he,ap to khe rehe hein hz ali bi thik or muawya bi think or ider ap bata rehe ap huzor savs farma geye the k hukomat quresh me ho gi or isi bat asool k mutabik hz abobaker ko mukhalif ne bi man lya.muawya to quresh nei ta,jab muselman ki majlis ashora ne bi hz ali khalifa banaya,muawya ne junge ki muselman shaheed kya pir bi vo hz ali k baraber.jo muselman qatil hoe hz ali k sathi vo kya ap ko ghamdi sab duaein d rehe houngey
Hindoose object me ki aap ke bure ko aap bura nahi kehte Hamare kisi galat ko aap chilla Chilla kar kehte hain hamare Uper behad zulm ho raha hai Jawed saheb aapne bure ko bura Kehna sikhiye aane wali naslone Ke liye behatar honga warna Saree duniya aapki dushman Ho jayegee al qaida taliban Lashkar siphe sahaba real followe are of mavya Hindu ask me who tortures and Murdered mohammad a/s family Who kills many sahabi like Ammmar gaffari you muslim Islam ko hukumat hasil karne Ek naqab aaud liya jo qarbala Mien khul kar samne aagya The love soofees like khwaja By heart panjetane pak Your fore fathers become Muslim because of soofees Not because of so called Khalifas They are absulitly correct Innocent children of faujee kiillled By taliban real followers Of mavya and yazeed
سعد بن عبادہ نے نہ تو پہلے خلیفہ کی بیعت کی اور نہ ہی دوسرے خلیفہ کی بیعت کی. بلکہ حضرت عمر کے دور میں نامعلوم قاتلوں نے حضرت سعد بن عبادہ کو شہید(قتل) بھی کر دیا
me hemesha ghamdi sb se agree kerta raha hun, chey wo nizul e esa ya imam mehdi ka mamla ho lekin jab banu umaya ki history aati hay, ghamdi sb shahid jan bujh k dandi mar jate hen,
Haq yahi hay ka dandi Mari hay, shoro ka biyan thek hay leken baqi akhar me hath kar gai. Haq bolna chaiyay . Me ne comments me kuch sawal kia heen, please answer.
Ghaamdi Sahab bhi hum sab ki tarha insaan hein. Unki bhi prejudices hein, jiska unko ya to ehsaas nahin hai, ya jaisay ek aur sahab ne upar likhha, unki "Target Audience" ka khayaal rakhtay hain. Asl ye hai ke Abu Sufyaan ki dushmani Rasool ke saath khatam nahin huwi. Unki awlaad mein chalti rahi yahan tak ke unki awlaad ne Yazid ke dowr mein Imam Husain ko Qatl kar diya. Ghaamdi Sahab zaheran logic ki baat kartay hain, magar zalimon ke saath hojaatay hein. Isi wajhay se humaray mulkon ka jo haal hai, wo isliye hei ke hum log insaaf se kaam nahin lete. Allah ne 1400 sal ka waqt diya tha. Wo waqt ap khatam hogaya hai.
@@meyou222222 I disagree respectfully, banu umaiya ki dushmani qabaili taasub aur siyasi wajah se tha na ka dushmani e rasool khuda se. Jab abu sufyan islam le aya tu uske islam me shak kar na durust nahi hay, dil ka hal sirf Allah janta hay. Siyasat me bhai bhai ka nahi hota, banu umaiya ne tu umar bin abdul aziz ko zahar dil wa diya taka unki bad mashi chalti rahay.
ghamidi sb ye bataiye aisi kiya jaldi thee ansar wa sahaba ko iqtidar ki k saqifa me jama ho gaye rasool pak k jasad khakhi ko shor kr, us k qafan dafan ka b intizar nhi kiya? meray ilm k mutabiq rasool pak k janazay me sirf 17 banday shamil thay baqi sab saqifa me jama howy iqtidar ki khatir is say andaza hota hai k kitna ye log rasool ko mantay thay our us say sachay thay....
بنی سقیفہ میں بنی ہاشم کا بالکل کوئ کردار نہیں تھا۔ ان کو مجبور کیا گیا کہ اس فیصلہ کو مانیں۔ یہ بالکل قرانی طریقہ نہیں ہو سکتا۔ حضرت عمر کی خلافت کے معاملے میں غامدی صاحب کی دلیل انتہائ بودی لگتی ہے۔ چاروں خلفاء کرام کا طریقہ مختلف ہے اور کوئ بہی طریقہ قران سے ثابت نہیں اور اس کی شاید ضرورت بھی محسوس نہیں کی گئ اور اسے ایک دین سے ہٹ کر ایک خالص سیاسی معاملے کے طور پر حل کیا گیا۔
حضور صلی اللہ علیہ والہ وسلم خود انصار کو اھمیت دے رھے تھے۔اگر قریش کا ذکر ھو تو آپ ص نے خود قریش سے انتخاب کیوں نہیں کیا؟ اگر حضورص نے قریش کا زکر کیا تو پھر قرآن امروھم شورھو۔۔۔۔کی کیا اھمیت رھ گئی؟انصار کھاں کئے؟جمھوریت؟
He is trying to change the history, he knows history, word by word about three Khalifas but don’t know about Karbala!!even he never talk about fazail of mola Ali , Ali was the Molod e kabah,he did not open his eyes until prophet Mohammad came to see him ,Ali was the Fatah e kheber, Ali got the zolfaqar from Allah .......Ghamdi sb we can not accept ur history because we got the history from our 12 Imams!! Ghamdi ab u need to open ur eyes n accept the truth
کوئی ایک بھی دلیل نہیں سب وراثتی اور سنے سنائےتصورات۔۔ دلیل ایک بھی نہیں۔ اس بات سے سوچ کا آغاز کہ میں نے ماحول سے جو سن رکھا ہے وہ تو ہے دو سو فیصد سچ، اب دوسرے کی بات سنو اور یہی گمراہی کی ابتدا ہے
مخبوط الحواس انسان ھیں غامدی صاحب ہتہ نہیں انہیں سکالر کا درجہ کس نے دے دیا.. سیاست اور دین کو کیسے مکس کر کے خدا کے دینی نظام کی دھجیاں اُڑا رھا ھے یہ انسان دین صرف آپ کی ذاتی رائے کا نام نہیں ھے جناب!
اور حضرت ابو بکر رض کو خلیفہ نامزد کرتے ہوئے کیا یمن عراق شام مکہ اور دیگر عرب کے مسلمانوں سے ان کی رائے لی گئی تھی کیا ؟ اگر نہیں تو پھر صرف سقیفہ بنی سعدہ میں موجود مُٹھی بھر مسلمانوں کی موجودگی ( جب کہ سقیفہ بنی سعدہ میں بھی اچھی خاصی دھینگا مشتی ہوئی سب لوگ وہاں بھی قائل نہیں تھے ) سے خلیفہ اول کی خلافت کو کیسے ساری امت پر تھوپا جا سکتا ہے دوسرا اسلام جیسا عالمگیر مذہب جس نے قیامت تک قائم رہنا ہے یہ کیوں کر ممکن ہوا کہ اس مذہب میں وراثت کا کوئی مسلمہ طریقہ کار ہی موجود نہیں کہ کیسے نبی ص کی جانشینی آگے منتقل ہوگی اور پھر کیسے ایک خلیفہ کے بعد دوسرا خلیفہ بِنا کسی باہمی جھگڑے اور اختلاف کے مسند خلافت تک پہنچے گا اور وراثت کا کوئی کرائیٹیریا بھی نہیں ہے کہ کہ کون خلیفہ بنے گا کون نہیں ۔ اتنا کمزور نظام کہ اللہ کے رسول ص کی آنکھ بند ہونے کے پچاس سال بعد ہی یزید جیسا شخص خلافت کی مسند تک پہنچ گیا اور اس نظام میں اتنی صلاحیت نہیں تھی کہ یزید جیسے کو روک سکے ایسے میں حسین ابن علی کو اس کا راستہ اپنے اور اپنی اولاد کے لہو سے روکنا پڑا ! کیا اسلام اتنا کمزور سیاسی ڈھانچہ رکھتا ہے اب آپ اپنی رائے کو اپنے انداز بیاں کے اسلوب کے ملمعہ میں لپیٹ کر چاہے ادھر پٹخیں یا ادھر پٹخیں اصلی سوال وہیں کھڑا ہے جو مجھ جیسی فکر رکھنے والے جوانوں کو آسیب بن کر ڈراتا رہے گا کہ اسلام جیسا غالب دین اپنے اندر ہی اتنا کمزور کے اپنے نام کی ریاست کی بقاء کے لیے ہی کوئی ایسا کارگر نسخہ کیمیا نا دے سکا کہ ایک خلیفہ کا انتخاب کن بنیادوں پر اور کیسے کیا جائے ؟ اور کون سے لوگ اس عہدے کے لیے موزوں ہیں اور کون نہیں ؟ جب میں مروان بن حکم جس کے باپ اور اس کو اللہ کے نبی ص نے مدینہ بدر کر دیا تھا ، ولید بن عقبہ کو جو کہ عقبہ کا بیٹا تھا جس کو اللہ کے نبی نے بدر کے قیدیوں میں سب کو معاف کر دیا اس کا سر اڑوایا کیونکہ یہی وہ شخص تھا جو رسول اللہ پر اوجڑیاں ڈالا کرتا تھا دوران نماز ، عمر بن العاص ، عاص بن وائل کا بیٹا جس نے اللہ کے نبی ص کو بے اولادی کا طعنہ دیا تھا اور اللہ نے اپنے حبیب کی تسئلی کے لیے سورہ کوثر اتار دیا جب ان تینوں کو مصر کوفہ اور مدینہ کا گورنر دیکھتا ہوں یعنی اللہ کے رسول ص اور اسلام کے بدترین دشمنوں کی اولادیں اسلام اور اسلامی ریاست کے کرتا دھرتا بن گئیں وہ بھی اللہ کے رسول ص کی وفات کے پندرہ بیس سال کے اندر اندر ، تو یقین جانیے سوال تو پھر بنتا ہے نا کہ یہ سب کیونکر ہو گیا ؟ کتنی آسانی سے یہ سب ہو گیا کربلا کا واقع تو ان سب حالات و واقعات کا منطقی انجام تھا کہ نظام شرفاء اور پرہیزگار لوگوں کے ہاتھ سے نکل کر بنو امیہ کے اوباشوں تک کیسے پہنچ گیا ؟ کیا اللہ نے اپنے دین کی سرفرازی کے لیے اتنے ناقص انتظامات کر رکھے تھے کہ دین اور ریاست دونوں ان حالات کو پہچ گئے کہ اسلام اور اللہ کے رسول ص کے بدترین دشمنوں سے مدد لینی پڑی دین کی کشتی پار لگانے کے لیے نبی ص کے دیں کو تمنا تھی سرفرازی کی حُسین سر نا کٹاتے تو اور کیا کرتے
Mr. Javed Ghamidi" is hell-bent to propagate moral corruption against the teaching of the Quran, by hook or crook, will justify anything he wants with the help of academic [trickery] argument. For example, A committed Secular trickster called Chief Justice Manir of Pakistan in 1956 wittingly caused SHIRK & He engineered the Title Deed of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan instead of Dar-ul-Islam of Pakistan. Pakistan officially is called the Islamic Republic of Pakistan'' Subsequently, the shirk Justice Munir manufactured becomes clear only when you look at the definition closely, it means people & Allah share supreme legislative power over the state of Pakistan. Although the 1971 constitution of Pakistan contradicts power-sharing with God & refutes Republicanism, the damage Justice Munir deliberately caused has never been corrected since 1956 by any Pakistan Parliament. Therefore it is the wicked secular minority lobby, who have ruined the success of Dar-ul-Islam becoming a law bidding unitary community in Pakistan. Pakistan records show Justice Manir knew the Republic's definition. Therefore Muslims must stay alert of these Secular centric academic tricksters, they are extremely sharp, they are foot soldiers of Satan, they will never mend their ways. Unless Pakistan legislators change the official Title Deed of Pakistan, we all stand collectively guilty of committing a national Shirk-e-Khafi. If you look closely at Ghamidi's silence against the practice of Usury, it amplifies his wrong priorities & motives behind his worldwide centers in the garb of Quranic teachings centers. Quran talks of gold & silver currency that holds its intrinsic values. Ghamidi failed to contribute any national effort to ban Usury. A once of gold today will buy the same level of goods or services as it did 100 years ago. On the other hand, the fiat paper currency is unstable and it's value continually decreases & the poor masses around the globe are in dire need of fairness & the capitalist are exploiting cheap labor & causing havoc on the masse disparity between Rich & Poor. he's dead silent on usury. He just wants to Hellenize naive Muslims to become under the secular sphere of influence so that secular minority can swell their numbers in Pakistan, Ghamidi has no right to manipulate naive Muslims who are the potential assets of becoming more pious servants of Lord Almighty God. The Incorrigible neoliberal secular Ghamidi bitterly slanders even the gallantry orthodoxy of Ghazali for his successfully holding back the Dujjalic Secularism onslaught on1.8 billion Muslims since the 11th century. After carefully listening to Mr. Ghamidi's misconstrue constructions on Islamic Banking, Male Beards & Female outer-garment. I can safely repeat that all of his corrupt suggestions are fallacious & full of academic prejudice. Mr. Ghamidi sinfully denies the divine law & asserts that the law is only for Prophets pbuh wives. He is attempting to water-down Quranic Law & misleads Muslims in favor of secular ideology which constitutionally rejects the Quran & negates the successful Rightly Guided Khulafa-e-Rashideen & devalues the truthful successors of God's Messenger pbuh. Quran 33;٥٩ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لِأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰ أَنْ يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا59 O Prophet! Tell your wives, and your daughters, and the women of the believers, to drape their outer-garment over them. That is more proper, so they will be recognized and not harassed. God is Forgiving and Merciful. Quran 33;59 O Prophet, speak unto thy wives and thy daughters, (((and the wives of the true believers))), that they cast their outer garments over them when they walk abroad; this will be more proper, that they may be known to be matrons of reputation, and may not be affronted by unseemly words or actions. God is gracious and merciful. Mr. Ghamidi sinfully asserts that the above divine Order is only for Prophets PBUH wives & is not for the other Muslim women, despite, a clear express statement that commands the messenger [pbuh] to tell your wives & your daughters and women of Believers to drape [cover] themselves with outer garment when they go out. Subsequently, Mr. Javed Ghamidi is guilty of slandering the Quran of double standards. I see Mr. Ghamidi as a secular shill, acting deceitfully under their Hellenistic sphere of influence, he will lend support to Godless Western ideals, he stands carelessly, affecting to be seen of modern academic, wavering between faith & infidelity, and adhering neither unto these nor unto those: Sadly he is professionally attempting to prejudice Muslim Orthodox beliefs via Imimitaing Greek Secular ideology. This is unacceptable to any intelligent Muslim society. Pakistan Police authorities must stop wicked secular propaganda agents operating on the national media platform & the government must prosecute all NGOs who are taking foreign funding covertly to weaken Islamic values within Dar-ul-Islam Pakistan. Quran 33;36 It is not fit for a true believer of either sex when God and His Apostle have decreed a thing, that they should have the liberty of choosing a different matter of their own: and whoever is disobedient unto God and his Apostle, surely erreth with a manifest error
رسول اللہ ص کی آنکھ بند ہوتے ہی پاور پلے شروع ہو گیا تھا واقعہ کرطاس و قلم ، لشکر اسامہ پر ، سقیفہ بنی سعدہ کی دھینگا مُشتی پر آپ کیوں گفتگو نہیں فرماتے ؟ جب آپ گفتگو فرما رہے ہی رہے ہیں تو پھر پوری گفتگو فرمائیے غدیر خم کے مقام پر نبی اکرم ص نے کیا خطبہ فرمایا ؟ غدیر میں کیا ہوا ؟ کیوں نہیں بتاتے لوگوں کو لوگوں کو حقیقت بتائیں
Yahan bt sirf intekhabat ki ho rahi hai. Mola ali k fazail apko sunne hen to plz fazail wali video search karen wahan milegi apko. Yahan haqeeqat aur ilm o Shaour ki bat hai.
Ahsan Ali ye kesi aqal hai ye kesa shaoor hai k haqeeqt ko chupa diya jayay .... Bad e Rasool saww ummat kee behtareen shakhsiyyat har lehaz se Ali ibn e abi talib hain kisi bhi fazeelat aur khoobi k lehaz se ,,,, bahaduri, ilm, sakhawat , hikmat phir Nabi saww Ali as kee wilayat ka ailaan bhi kar k gayay saari diniya ko ghadeer main wasiyyat kar gayay us k bawajud kamal maharat se musalman khutba e ghadeer tareekh se hazaf kar gaya.... aur khutba haj tul widaa ko aakhri khutba qarar de diya gaya ,...... jab allah k nabi saww ka aakhri khutba, khutba e ghadeer hai to haj tul wida ko aakhri khutba kun mana gaya kya chupa rahay hain ye sawal hai Aur behtar k hotay huay kam tar ka intekhaab kis criteria par ???
![Qissa e Aadam-o-Iblees [Adam, Satan and Beginning of this World] | Javed Ahmad Gahmidi](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LVZnjjczjOI/mqdefault.jpg)
ماشاء اللہ۔ اللہ علم و عمل میں برکت عطا فرماے
Excellent talk. JazakAllah khair Ghamdi Sb. He is the best scholar who logically explain the things.
@Amir Hamza phir Tu yaha kia kr rha ha
@Amir Hamza hahahaha ...aise chutiupa se kuch nahi ...logical sawal karo Ustad Muhtram Ghamidi aap ka jawab diegay. Misconception due karegay
@Amir Hamza 9
@Amir Hamza دیکھیں بھائی نام تو آپ کا مسلمانوں والا ہے مگر خیالات انتہائی افسوس ناک. اس طرح کے خیا لات کا اظہار آپ سوشل میڈیا کی آڑ کے پیچھے سے ہی کر سکتے ہیں.
آپ قرآن ترجمے کے ساتھ پڑھیں, اللہ پاک ہم سب کو سمجھ اور ہدایت دے.
جنت اور دوزخ دونوں اللہ نے پیدا بھی کی ہیں اور بھرنی بھی ھیں.
شکریہ جناب جاوید احمد غامدی صاحب
اللہ آپ کو صحت و سلامتی والی زندگی عطا فرمائے۔۔ هل يستوي العمى والبصير...
MashaAllah described very logically n correctly
اللہ غامدی صاحب کو اچھی جزا دے امین ۔
ماشاءاللہ بہت زبردست
Ghamdi saheb, great man great source of knowledge....MashaAllah
Hassan kya khoob urdu bol letay hain..
Ghamidi sahab and Hassan,,aala combination.
Ghamidi sb is great
♥
Excellent.... Hassan sahib.....plz ask more refined questions....
Beautiful explanation
بہت شکریہ
غامدی صاحب
JazakaAllah
Salamat rahen
Concept quite clear
Can't agree more till the events of becoming Ali (RA) as 4th Caliph
I normally agree with almost each and everything of what Ghamidi sb has said in other lectures/discussions/videos etc, even the views of non coming of Esa (AS), Mehdi etc. And it is worth mentioning here as i am not from a particular sect. In general, I hardly come up with any questions from other videos etc, but by listening this, i have to come up with few questions.
Now with the Karbala incident and especially before that the taking of leadership by Ali and then the treason from Muawiya, i have few questions.
0. How can the shura be made in those days and why they have to take in view and opinion from those states which were conquered? Like Iraq, Syria, Iran etc and lets say, if that even made, how could they travel so far and to take the opinion of people there to decide who to become the next calipah ? especially right after the shahdah of the Usman (RA). Then from the six people Umar (RA) thought as those who had the ability to lead/people will follow, and from last 2 remaining, it was Ali (RA) who was the most respected in that area and region? Wasn't that the fact? The center of power was Madinah, so how could they think of taking in account the things in Iran, Syria, Egypt etc where they had the governors, sent by the Caliph (and they were also originated from Makkah/Madinah (almost all of the governors by Prophet (AS), Abu Bakr (RA) & UMAR (RA) were originated from where? Especially during the time of Umar (RA) where Iran and Egypt were also under the rules, so even if the Sa'd Ibn-e-Waqas/Mughira.. (RA) etc could be sent as governor from the Madinah, so the power center was still Madinah, especially considering the communication and traveling problems in 7th Century AD.
1. For a time being if we say that Muawiya was right in his views, where do we place the action of Ayesha (RA) who was even in the same city, why did she come out against the caliph in-charge? Belonging to the same family tree, coming out against her son-in-law and thus opening a door against of treason.
I found quite a difference in opinion of Ghamidi sb on that and why is he hesitant in saying wrong, A WRONG. Especially when he says that one cannot disagree with a Prophet (AS) but can be disagreed with anyone else. Why he does not apply the same principle here?
2. The formula, the saying, the order and the principle of AMR o SHURA BYNAHUM, which Ghamidi sb portray the most. Where was the in the doings of Muawiya ? Atleast, it was followed in the Madinah, where they elected Ali (RA) as Caliph but how can it give a right to a person sitting in Damascus a right to make a treason, when he was unaware of the whole incident. Again, lets say that for a time being that Muawya was misguided but where do Ghamidi sb. place the events after, like a deal with Hasan (RA) etc. Please do not see the events in exile, see them in the total of how the so called REVENGE taker (Muawya) dealt with the events after when he became the incharge (what violations did he make)
3. Again with the principle of AMR o SHURA BYNAHUM, how Muwaya got the right of changing the caliph to inheritance ? Doesn't that make him a person who was just hungry for the power, considering that they were from the tribe of those Quraishi people who was once the SARDARS in Makkah but the power table shifted from them to Bano Hashim in the form of Prophet (AS) and to his family.
4. Wasn't the action of Hussain (RA) in the last, and the decision to have a fight was like an authentication, that one has to stand up to stop the WRONG, when it was so obvious that he couldn't win but he made a principle of standing on the right, even if the people against you are so strong and in power. It was like that democratic principle has been abolished from the Islamic state/way of governance and I am against it and no one should ever say that even the grandson of Prophet (AS) was alive, still he remained quiet and silent thus approving the abolishing of the principle of AMR o SHURA BYNAHUM and accepting the heredity leadership in the state. And isn't it a fact that after Ali (RA), Muawya made and followed the same principle of inheritance power, even yet followed in the world, which was once stopped for almost 30 years of golden Islamic era? Wasn't that tragic? Will Ghamidi sb. still defend his actions?
5. I must finally say, it was not the actions of Yazid but the problem was created by Muwaya of destroying the system and thus dividing the Muslims at that time, from where they never remained united even for few years. And we could accept his regime, if that would have brought peace and prosperity or atleast the Islamic values, but they only saw the peak period of Islam, where there was money, prosperity and they had the same in the Makkah, and thus never became Muslim, unless Prophet (AS) conquered them and in order to save their lives, they turned. Thus, please also discuss Muawya's regime and what he had been doing, as not discussing it will never let the people understand the doings of Hussain (RA) and the karbala incident. I hope one can accept these saying as one can disagree with anyone except PROPHET (AS), as been widespread said by Ghamidi sb.
May allah give all of us the power to say that right and i hope that interview taker will put these questions in front of such a wonderful islamic scoloar of his time.
Jazakallah bilkhair
I could not read whole of your comment due to length. But, I read a bit and what I know from my knowledge of Islamic History(Which may totally be wrong) is as under:
1) Um ul Mominin Syeda Aisha(R.A.) was requested and taken by some Sahaba(R.A.) to get killers of Syedna Usman(R.A.) punished which were almost 2000 - 3000 people and to save themselves they mixed up with Shian e Ali(R.A.). These people often propegated successfully and made majority of Shian e Ali(R.A.) disagree even with Ali(R.A.). That is why when we read the saying of Ali(R.A.); most of the time we find him unhappy with his own followers. For example Maula Ali(R.A.) agreed to punish Killers first but these people along with approx 8000 more disagreed with him. For Example, in one war with Muaviya Bin Sufyan; Maula Ali(R.A.) was about to win the war and things could have been in next few hours, but, these nasty people stopped the war and let the Muaviya and his forces leave.
So, Um ul Mominin did not do anything wrong except going herself with forces.
2) Muaviya Bin Sufyan was not a Caliph and it was not Caliphate. No, Muslim group or prominent scholar reffer him as Caliph. He was a King who brought Kingship in Muslim Ummah and brought great losses to Muslim Ummah as well.
Certainly ghamdi sb have very soft corner for bani umaya and sufiyan family.what's'nazah' hyporacracy only one among both could be on Right path
He is hesitant because it will be difficult for him to connect with his target audience.
Agreed
@Amir Hamza Basically you are agreeing with Yazid and Muwavia and Abu Sufyaan. :)
Great teacher sir ghamidy
kindly update part 4.... Mashallah great scholar
Excellent.
بسيار عالي
Ghamidi sahib is a great aalim
Masha allah very nice explication of karbala event.
and thanks janab ilyas bhai for silentaftre questions.
Very nice
Please release the next part. I’m still waiting for it
JazakAllah for so good clarification,Qasim from Bahrain
Great scholar ghamdi shab!
Is silsly k baqi lectures bhi pesh kijiye.. Or aik guzarish yeh hy k guftago k doran ghamdi sb agar apni kisi tehreer ya tareekh ki kisi cheez ya kisi bhi doosri cheez ka hawala dyty hain tw uska link video ki description me daal diya karein taa k us ki taraf ruju me asaani ho.. Bht shukriya
Very clear and informative
Would you mind denying that the law of succession is absent in Islam. This was the reason for subsequent events experienced in the precession system erected by the Quresh. There were unending battles between the leaders and among the tribes. Briefly, mention of Jamal and safin battles suffices.
Were these fought between muslims and infidels? Were not three caliphs murdered by muslims? Yes if the forces fighting with the family of the Prophet were not muslims and you accept it, then the question is withdrawn. They torturers and killers were carrying burden of old enemity and the tragedy of Karbala was a brutally cruel personifaction of their revenge against the Ahel-e- bayt before and after the departure of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh from the world.
The tragedy of Karbala occurred in this perspective where none else but the Prophet's family (Ahele bait) was martyred mercilessly and unsparingly. Were not the omayyad tribes from Quresh? They were and tortured the family of the last Prophet Muhammad pbuh who brought the Last Word of Almighty Allah for the guidancce of mankind ,beginning from home.
[ I am a Sunni by birth ] but neither blindfolded nor self-chained mentally, voluntarily pushing myself to the blind alley of prejudiced mindset. I can see this all myself without pulpitarians' narrative, or for that matter, their ego perversion, which keeps nurturing itself and retaining itself intact in the nursery of bias.
No can't do it for being alerted by history and its canvas where an open mind can see how the family of the Prophet was not spared by the enemies of Islam apparently self- branded as muslims, for seizing power. You can't even see it? How! Where there was then the need for reading so much if one avoids telling the truth that too not for anybody's else but for the sake of humanity causes, spurred by the qualms of conscience.
The first two caliphs were not from omayyad though but the entire Arab peninsula was occupied by them, in terms of holding important positions in the peninsula. Only the question of appointment of the central ruler of Medina was taken into consideration at Sakifa before honoring the Prophet, when leaving the world. I cannot say burial. then, naturally followed the withdrawal of Ansar from Caliphate or leadership claim. They Ansari tribal leaders knew that the entire Arab was already gone to the other people.
You also refrained from discussing who were these other people influencing everything. However They are seen in the pages of history, I have already mentioned above.
Bilal was not seen anywhere despite his sacrifices. He remained slave and ultimately ran to Iraq for safety. They were after him whom you call some other people without naming them. You have read khilafat -e-mulokiat and you know the author.
G
G
Kindly uplod other parts
Waise to hum Israr Ahmad sahab k fan hain lekin aaj Ghamdi sahab ki izzat badh gayi.
Ap new converts ko target kijiye tabhi badlaw ayega
MashaAllah
Axcelnt you tube service
My question is, when he says it was discussed and agreed b/w all the leaders. Where was Banu Hashim in those decisions? Specially in selection of first and second Khalifa selection.
Can you share the link to Umar’s (RA) speech?
اگر سبق حاصل کرنا ہو تو سانحہ بنگلہ دیش کو دیکھ لیں۔ جب اکثریت کا فیصلہ تسلیم نہیں کیا گیا۔
Imran Sahab, Sahi farmaaya. Lekin India par to kayi saal chhoti si minority ne hukoomat ki. Isi tarha angrezon ne kayi logon par do sou saal hukoomat ki. Ye tafreqay Allah ki mohlat ke khatam hojaanay ka nateeja hein. Zaalim and jaareh logon ka dastoor kuchh sadiyon ke baad ghayeb ho jaata hai aur zaalim ek doosray se ladnay lagtay hain aur khood zulm ka shikaar ho jaatay hain. Aap mera upar likha huway tabsaray par ghowr farmayen. Ali
I believe when ghamdi sahib says muaaz bin jabal ... What he really wants to say is Saad bin muaaz ( chief of AWS who was shaheed ... While muaaz bin jabal died in 639
AoA . Hasan bhai pls compete the discussion n upload as soon as possible. We all are waiting ?
I can't find part 4 or further, is this the last one?
Please try to fix audio quality.
Iam waiting for part 4
Pasemanzar may be attached with the last meeting of prophet (pbup) at ghadeer
Sir plz plz upload part 4....
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
The interviewer knows what Urdu is.
Well if he asking questions from scholar then he should at least know the basics
Salam. I need to understand Hadees No. 114, in Sahi Bukhari.... related to Haz. Umar RA, at the last moments of Nabi Kareem PBUH. May Allah bless u and us. Aameen
It would be better if it is in easy urdu or english.we Indians understand urdu with many hindi words
Second part???
Why hazrat Saad bin obaada ra did not put bait(بیت) on hand of hazrat Abu Bakr ra?
???
@Amir Hamza Quran ki ayaat aaj science such bta rahi ha tum ghalat track pe ho thora search kr k comment karo
Baki mera kaam tha sirf pohancha dena aagy tumhari marzi tum apny deen pe hum apny deen pe
@Amir Hamza jamy huy khoon se ? ghalat translate kr rahy ho, mein apny nazriye ko defend nahi kar raha mein sirf daleel pe baat krta hon aur tum b agar such ki talaash krty ho to mein prove kr sakta hon k Quran ALLAH ki kitab ha lekin us se pehly tumhein Muhammad PBUH ki gustakhi band krni ho gi. agar musalman nahi ho to mat ho lekin 1.5 billion logon k emaan ko gaali mat do aur naa mein tum ko gali di ha
@Amir Hamza 5.5 agar musalman nahi hen to is ka mtlb ye nahi ha k 1.5 billion ko gaali dy sakty hen, agar research krty ho to patience rakhna seekho mein prove karon ga agar sirf gaali deni ha to tumhary agly msg mein pata chal jay ga
@Amir Hamza you are an ignorant fool mene wakat zaya kiya tum se behas kr k Quran mein jis jagah kafiron ko katal krny krny ka hukam ha wo sirf ek ghazwa k liye tha jahan ye ayat likhi ha us ki detail b wahan he likhi hen, aur rahi baat hadees ki to yahan bohot se musalman hadees ko nai maanty lekin Arabic wala Quran sab ka ek ha kisi ek ki translation pe faisla krna tumhari kam ilmi ko waziyah krta ha
Karbala was not event but civil war among 2 rivals in Islam: Hashmite Vs Ummyade to gain power; and Hussein got defeated killed mercilessly by Islamic King Yazid.
Hehehe interesting. This war was fought with 50,000 army against 72 un armed personals.
Interesting
Interesting argument
@@Aimanshah110 This was Civil War. Hussein & his men were armed with swords.
@@anahaqq I want to have depth discussion on this topic. Plz oblige me
غامدی صاحب سعد بن معاذ رضی اللہ عنہ کا نام لینا چاہتے تھے تو معاذ بن جبل رضی اللہ عنہ کا نام نکل گیا منہ سے ۔
Where is part 4...???
1. Hazrat Umar appointed six people from Quresh but at that time the empire was expanding and consist of Persia, Syria and Egypt also. So no consultation was made from those non Arab areas.
2. Umar said that these were the people from whom Rasool Allah was agreed for whole life, so taqwa, sabqat fil Islam, and contribution to the cause of Islam was in his mind, not only democracy.
3. Consensus was made on Usman, so he was chosen third caliph.
4. During the time of fourth caliph Ali, all over Islamic world including Persia, Yemen, Egypt, Iraq accepted except Mavia in Syria, so democracy was also there, but he rebelled. So what will you say? A person was elected traditionally, democratically, and most pious and capable of ruling at the time, but one group is rebelling against him on false excuses, so what can you say to these mutineers.
Then after Ali, Mavia grabbed power without consultation and just by brute force, and he is still called khalifa.he should be merely called power grabber or highjacker who derailed the whole system of khilafat.
And in the end his son Yazeed was the climax of despoticism and tyrannical rule .
Please say the truth in this matter, and you didn't discuss the subject matter of Karbala.
Can someone share path for the next part?
Part 4???
واقعہ کربلا سیاسی جنگ تھی
اگر یہ۔مان بھی لیں تو میں اس جنگ میں سیداشہدا کا حمایتی ہوں کہ وہ سچ کی معراج پر تھے۔ پر تمہارا کیا بنے گا کالیا؟
Jung mien dono fareeq lartay hain aik nahi
Where is Kerbala in this long conversation?
اس ساری گفتگو میں کربلا کہاں ہے؟
Sir yeh part 3 hai, aap ko Karbala ka pass-e-manzar btaya ja rha hai ke waqya paish kaise aaya, samjhne ke liye sare parts dekhiye
غامدی صاحب کربلا کے بارے میں بات نہیں کرنا چاہتے۔
@@bluemountain8595
غامدی صاحب کے ساتھ کربلا والا واقعہ ہو چکا ہے پاکستان میں،
Next episode please...........
امراہم بین شوری ھم۔۔ اکثریت کی رائے میں بنی ھاشم کو کیوں شامل نہ کیا گیا اور وہ nomination تھی۔ آپ اپنی رائے سے رجوع کریں۔
Khilafat qiyamat tak quresh men rahy gi,hades hy..
iski waja Hazrat Ibrahem a.s ki dua thi,ky mery bachy b imam hugy?To Allah ny farmaya haa magar jo zalam hu wo nai hugy,sura baqra k shuro men hy ye.
To bat ye hy k qureshi asal mn Hazrat Ibrahem a.s ki ulad hen,ur qyamat tak imam in men sy hi hugu
And no doubt after the death of the Prophet (ﷺ) we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa`da. `Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. Sahih Al Bukhari Hadith 6830 It was not Amrahum Shura Baynahun otherwise why Ali & Zubair disagreed with what happened in Saqifa
E momino zalimon ki taraf mat jhuko warna tumahara anjam qayamat mien jahannam unke sath
Kar diya jayega soore hood
Ki ayat ghamdi saheb dhyan
Se pade is ayat ko
next episode......... still waiting
Very nice jokes video hahhah
Ghamdi sir is alright ..?? i mean he is looking ill ..
Ap ki bato me tajzye me tazad he,ap to khe rehe hein hz ali bi thik or muawya bi think or ider ap bata rehe ap huzor savs farma geye the k hukomat quresh me ho gi or isi bat asool k mutabik hz abobaker ko mukhalif ne bi man lya.muawya to quresh nei ta,jab muselman ki majlis ashora ne bi hz ali khalifa banaya,muawya ne junge ki muselman shaheed kya pir bi vo hz ali k baraber.jo muselman qatil hoe hz ali k sathi vo kya ap ko ghamdi sab duaein d rehe houngey
Next episode plz
اس سے اگلا حصہ نہیں ملا یعنی چوتھا حصہ؟؟؟؟
"Agar Imran khan ki maut hojaye" 😅 PTI walo ko takleef hui hogi
Zabardast aalim Deen ❤️
Your comment shows you are a patwari
Hindoose object me ki aap ke bure ko aap bura nahi kehte
Hamare kisi galat ko aap chilla
Chilla kar kehte hain hamare
Uper behad zulm ho raha hai
Jawed saheb aapne bure ko bura
Kehna sikhiye aane wali naslone
Ke liye behatar honga warna
Saree duniya aapki dushman
Ho jayegee al qaida taliban
Lashkar siphe sahaba real followe are of mavya
Hindu ask me who tortures and
Murdered mohammad a/s family
Who kills many sahabi like
Ammmar gaffari you muslim
Islam ko hukumat hasil karne
Ek naqab aaud liya jo qarbala
Mien khul kar samne aagya
The love soofees like khwaja
By heart panjetane pak
Your fore fathers become
Muslim because of soofees
Not because of so called
Khalifas
They are absulitly correct
Innocent children of faujee kiillled
By taliban real followers
Of mavya and yazeed
Kya Saad bin Obada (ra) ne Hazrat Abu Bakr k haath bait kar li thi?
Nahi kee aur un se mutalbah bhi naheen kiya gaya.
aur bait ki zarort bhe kya the ja wo khud agree ho k apny apko dastbardar ker gaey
سعد بن عبادہ نے نہ تو پہلے خلیفہ کی بیعت کی اور نہ ہی دوسرے خلیفہ کی بیعت کی. بلکہ حضرت عمر کے دور میں نامعلوم قاتلوں نے حضرت سعد بن عبادہ کو شہید(قتل) بھی کر دیا
Hehehe aur phir umar bin khattab ka dour ma qatil kr dia gya.
@@Aimanshah110 hehehe lanat tugh par rafzi
me hemesha ghamdi sb se agree kerta raha hun, chey wo nizul e esa ya imam mehdi ka mamla ho lekin jab banu umaya ki history aati hay, ghamdi sb shahid jan bujh k dandi mar jate hen,
ایک نسل پرست غامدی صاحب کا موقف نہیں سمجھ سکتا.
@@taimurahmad8430 میاں نسل کی بات کہاں سے آ گئ
Haq yahi hay ka dandi Mari hay, shoro ka biyan thek hay leken baqi akhar me hath kar gai. Haq bolna chaiyay . Me ne comments me kuch sawal kia heen, please answer.
Ghaamdi Sahab bhi hum sab ki tarha insaan hein. Unki bhi prejudices hein, jiska unko ya to ehsaas nahin hai, ya jaisay ek aur sahab ne upar likhha, unki "Target Audience" ka khayaal rakhtay hain. Asl ye hai ke Abu Sufyaan ki dushmani Rasool ke saath khatam nahin huwi. Unki awlaad mein chalti rahi yahan tak ke unki awlaad ne Yazid ke dowr mein Imam Husain ko Qatl kar diya. Ghaamdi Sahab zaheran logic ki baat kartay hain, magar zalimon ke saath hojaatay hein. Isi wajhay se humaray mulkon ka jo haal hai, wo isliye hei ke hum log insaaf se kaam nahin lete. Allah ne 1400 sal ka waqt diya tha. Wo waqt ap khatam hogaya hai.
@@meyou222222 I disagree respectfully, banu umaiya ki dushmani qabaili taasub aur siyasi wajah se tha na ka dushmani e rasool khuda se. Jab abu sufyan islam le aya tu uske islam me shak kar na durust nahi hay, dil ka hal sirf Allah janta hay.
Siyasat me bhai bhai ka nahi hota, banu umaiya ne tu umar bin abdul aziz ko zahar dil wa diya taka unki bad mashi chalti rahay.
To pher yazeed ke government be shi the ap ka video k mutabik ???
اصل موضوع پر بات ہی نہیں ہوئی، یعنی واقعہ کربلا پر
ghamidi sb ye bataiye aisi kiya jaldi thee ansar wa sahaba ko iqtidar ki k saqifa me jama ho gaye rasool pak k jasad khakhi ko shor kr, us k qafan dafan ka b intizar nhi kiya? meray ilm k mutabiq rasool pak k janazay me sirf 17 banday shamil thay baqi sab saqifa me jama howy iqtidar ki khatir is say andaza hota hai k kitna ye log rasool ko mantay thay our us say sachay thay....
Aray bolna kya chahta ha
Politics of mavya followed
By trump netanyahoo modi
Ziaul haq aurangzed
Todays politics not related
To deene islam same character
Destinity same
Shame on you
بنی سقیفہ میں بنی ہاشم کا بالکل کوئ کردار نہیں تھا۔ ان کو مجبور کیا گیا کہ اس فیصلہ کو مانیں۔ یہ بالکل قرانی طریقہ نہیں ہو سکتا۔ حضرت عمر کی خلافت کے معاملے میں غامدی صاحب کی دلیل انتہائ بودی لگتی ہے۔ چاروں خلفاء کرام کا طریقہ مختلف ہے اور کوئ بہی طریقہ قران سے ثابت نہیں اور اس کی شاید ضرورت بھی محسوس نہیں کی گئ اور اسے ایک دین سے ہٹ کر ایک خالص سیاسی معاملے کے طور پر حل کیا گیا۔
Sakifa m H.Ali shamil nahi thy . Un ka intizar q nahi kia .
Chalakiyaan😅😅. Balay o balay. Taqreer fir sunyo kitnay shakook paida kar gayee. Baina shurahum ka itlaq 😅 acha cover karnay ki koshish
بہت احترام کے ساتھ محترم غامدی صاحب اپنے ہاتھوں کو بچھو کے ڈنک کی طرح کیوں شکل دیتے ہیں؟
@Amir Hamza sabit karen
You are changing defination
Of islam this is politics
Not related to religeon
حضور صلی اللہ علیہ والہ وسلم خود انصار کو اھمیت دے رھے تھے۔اگر قریش کا ذکر ھو تو آپ ص نے خود قریش سے انتخاب کیوں نہیں کیا؟
اگر حضورص نے قریش کا زکر کیا تو پھر قرآن
امروھم شورھو۔۔۔۔کی کیا اھمیت رھ گئی؟انصار کھاں کئے؟جمھوریت؟
Qus moli anz piyaz
Sawal yazead and hussian ra ki Jung ki bat ya sahudi pet cnt tell true
He is trying to change the history, he knows history, word by word about three Khalifas but don’t know about Karbala!!even he never talk about fazail of mola Ali , Ali was the Molod e kabah,he did not open his eyes until prophet Mohammad came to see him ,Ali was the Fatah e kheber, Ali got the zolfaqar from Allah .......Ghamdi sb we can not accept ur history because we got the history from our 12 Imams!! Ghamdi ab u need to open ur eyes n accept the truth
جو کچھ آپ نے بیان کیا اس سے کیا ثابت ہوتاہے؟
کوئی ایک بھی دلیل نہیں سب وراثتی اور سنے سنائےتصورات۔۔ دلیل ایک بھی نہیں۔ اس بات سے سوچ کا آغاز کہ میں نے ماحول سے جو سن رکھا ہے وہ تو ہے دو سو فیصد سچ، اب دوسرے کی بات سنو اور یہی گمراہی کی ابتدا ہے
You can't learn anything in your life except ignorence.
@@hajranoorkhan64 .. and you are the living example of that
Muhammad Asif Mehmood iss sey ye sabit hota hai ke app ki aqal per pardey pardey hoye hain
مخبوط الحواس انسان ھیں غامدی صاحب ہتہ نہیں انہیں سکالر کا درجہ کس نے دے دیا.. سیاست اور دین کو کیسے مکس کر کے خدا کے دینی نظام کی دھجیاں اُڑا رھا ھے یہ انسان دین صرف آپ کی ذاتی رائے کا نام نہیں ھے جناب!
Tum rafzi sirf imam
اور حضرت ابو بکر رض کو خلیفہ نامزد کرتے ہوئے کیا یمن عراق شام مکہ اور دیگر عرب کے مسلمانوں سے ان کی رائے لی گئی تھی کیا ؟ اگر نہیں تو پھر صرف سقیفہ بنی سعدہ میں موجود مُٹھی بھر مسلمانوں کی موجودگی ( جب کہ سقیفہ بنی سعدہ میں بھی اچھی خاصی دھینگا مشتی ہوئی سب لوگ وہاں بھی قائل نہیں تھے ) سے خلیفہ اول کی خلافت کو کیسے ساری امت پر تھوپا جا سکتا ہے
دوسرا اسلام جیسا عالمگیر مذہب جس نے قیامت تک قائم رہنا ہے یہ کیوں کر ممکن ہوا کہ اس مذہب میں وراثت کا کوئی مسلمہ طریقہ کار ہی موجود نہیں کہ کیسے نبی ص کی جانشینی آگے منتقل ہوگی اور پھر کیسے ایک خلیفہ کے بعد دوسرا خلیفہ بِنا کسی باہمی جھگڑے اور اختلاف کے مسند خلافت تک پہنچے گا
اور وراثت کا کوئی کرائیٹیریا بھی نہیں ہے کہ کہ کون خلیفہ بنے گا کون نہیں ۔
اتنا کمزور نظام کہ اللہ کے رسول ص کی آنکھ بند ہونے کے پچاس سال بعد ہی یزید جیسا شخص خلافت کی مسند تک پہنچ گیا اور اس نظام میں اتنی صلاحیت نہیں تھی کہ یزید جیسے کو روک سکے ایسے میں حسین ابن علی کو اس کا راستہ اپنے اور اپنی اولاد کے لہو سے روکنا پڑا !
کیا اسلام اتنا کمزور سیاسی ڈھانچہ رکھتا ہے
اب آپ اپنی رائے کو اپنے انداز بیاں کے اسلوب کے ملمعہ میں لپیٹ کر چاہے ادھر پٹخیں یا ادھر پٹخیں اصلی سوال وہیں کھڑا ہے جو مجھ جیسی فکر رکھنے والے جوانوں کو آسیب بن کر ڈراتا رہے گا کہ اسلام جیسا غالب دین اپنے اندر ہی اتنا کمزور کے اپنے نام کی ریاست کی بقاء کے لیے ہی کوئی ایسا کارگر نسخہ کیمیا نا دے سکا کہ ایک خلیفہ کا انتخاب کن بنیادوں پر اور کیسے کیا جائے ؟
اور کون سے لوگ اس عہدے کے لیے موزوں ہیں اور کون نہیں ؟
جب میں مروان بن حکم جس کے باپ اور اس کو اللہ کے نبی ص نے مدینہ بدر کر دیا تھا ، ولید بن عقبہ کو جو کہ عقبہ کا بیٹا تھا جس کو اللہ کے نبی نے بدر کے قیدیوں میں سب کو معاف کر دیا اس کا سر اڑوایا کیونکہ یہی وہ شخص تھا جو رسول اللہ پر اوجڑیاں ڈالا کرتا تھا دوران نماز ، عمر بن العاص ، عاص بن وائل کا بیٹا جس نے اللہ کے نبی ص کو بے اولادی کا طعنہ دیا تھا اور اللہ نے اپنے حبیب کی تسئلی کے لیے سورہ کوثر اتار دیا
جب ان تینوں کو مصر کوفہ اور مدینہ کا گورنر دیکھتا ہوں
یعنی اللہ کے رسول ص اور اسلام کے بدترین دشمنوں کی اولادیں اسلام اور اسلامی ریاست کے کرتا دھرتا بن گئیں وہ بھی اللہ کے رسول ص کی وفات کے پندرہ بیس سال کے اندر اندر ، تو یقین جانیے سوال تو پھر بنتا ہے نا کہ یہ سب کیونکر ہو گیا ؟ کتنی آسانی سے یہ سب ہو گیا کربلا کا واقع تو ان سب حالات و واقعات کا منطقی انجام تھا کہ نظام شرفاء اور پرہیزگار لوگوں کے ہاتھ سے نکل کر بنو امیہ کے اوباشوں تک کیسے پہنچ گیا ؟
کیا اللہ نے اپنے دین کی سرفرازی کے لیے اتنے ناقص انتظامات کر رکھے تھے کہ دین اور ریاست دونوں ان حالات کو پہچ گئے کہ اسلام اور اللہ کے رسول ص کے بدترین دشمنوں سے مدد لینی پڑی دین کی کشتی پار لگانے کے لیے
نبی ص کے دیں کو تمنا تھی سرفرازی کی
حُسین سر نا کٹاتے تو اور کیا کرتے
Hello
How can I copy
Abay sari jazbati aur fabricated battaien karty hoo
@@dgreen9653 جتنی باتیں میں نے کی ہیں ان میں سے کسی ایک فیبریکٹڈ بات کی نشاندہی کر دو
Was this principle followed after 1st caliphate also? Shame on you talking as if you were yourself present there in sqifa.
Mr. Javed Ghamidi" is hell-bent to propagate moral corruption against the teaching of the Quran, by hook or crook, will justify anything he wants with the help of academic [trickery] argument. For example, A committed Secular trickster called Chief Justice Manir of Pakistan in 1956 wittingly caused SHIRK & He engineered the Title Deed of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan instead of Dar-ul-Islam of Pakistan. Pakistan officially is called the Islamic Republic of Pakistan'' Subsequently, the shirk Justice Munir manufactured becomes clear only when you look at the definition closely, it means people & Allah share supreme legislative power over the state of Pakistan. Although the 1971 constitution of Pakistan contradicts power-sharing with God & refutes Republicanism, the damage Justice Munir deliberately caused has never been corrected since 1956 by any Pakistan Parliament. Therefore it is the wicked secular minority lobby, who have ruined the success of Dar-ul-Islam becoming a law bidding unitary community in Pakistan. Pakistan records show Justice Manir knew the Republic's definition. Therefore Muslims must stay alert of these Secular centric academic tricksters, they are extremely sharp, they are foot soldiers of Satan, they will never mend their ways. Unless Pakistan legislators change the official Title Deed of Pakistan, we all stand collectively guilty of committing a national Shirk-e-Khafi.
If you look closely at Ghamidi's silence against the practice of Usury, it amplifies his wrong priorities & motives behind his worldwide centers in the garb of Quranic teachings centers. Quran talks of gold & silver currency that holds its intrinsic values. Ghamidi failed to contribute any national effort to ban Usury. A once of gold today will buy the same level of goods or services as it did 100 years ago. On the other hand, the fiat paper currency is unstable and it's value continually decreases & the poor masses around the globe are in dire need of fairness & the capitalist are exploiting cheap labor & causing havoc on the masse disparity between Rich & Poor. he's dead silent on usury. He just wants to Hellenize naive Muslims to become under the secular sphere of influence so that secular minority can swell their numbers in Pakistan, Ghamidi has no right to manipulate naive Muslims who are the potential assets of becoming more pious servants of Lord Almighty God.
The Incorrigible neoliberal secular Ghamidi bitterly slanders even the gallantry orthodoxy of Ghazali for his successfully holding back the Dujjalic Secularism onslaught on1.8 billion Muslims since the 11th century.
After carefully listening to Mr. Ghamidi's misconstrue constructions on Islamic Banking, Male Beards & Female outer-garment. I can safely repeat that all of his corrupt suggestions are fallacious & full of academic prejudice. Mr. Ghamidi sinfully denies the divine law & asserts that the law is only for Prophets pbuh wives. He is attempting to water-down Quranic Law & misleads Muslims in favor of secular ideology which constitutionally rejects the Quran & negates the successful Rightly Guided Khulafa-e-Rashideen & devalues the truthful successors of God's Messenger pbuh.
Quran 33;٥٩ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لِأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰ أَنْ يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ ۗ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا59 O Prophet! Tell your wives, and your daughters, and the women of the believers, to drape their outer-garment over them. That is more proper, so they will be recognized and not harassed. God is Forgiving and Merciful.
Quran 33;59 O Prophet, speak unto thy wives and thy daughters, (((and the wives of the true believers))), that they cast their outer garments over them when they walk abroad; this will be more proper, that they may be known to be matrons of reputation, and may not be affronted by unseemly words or actions. God is gracious and merciful.
Mr. Ghamidi sinfully asserts that the above divine Order is only for Prophets PBUH wives & is not for the other Muslim women, despite, a clear express statement that commands the messenger [pbuh] to tell your wives & your daughters and women of Believers to drape [cover] themselves with outer garment when they go out.
Subsequently, Mr. Javed Ghamidi is guilty of slandering the Quran of double standards.
I see Mr. Ghamidi as a secular shill, acting deceitfully under their Hellenistic sphere of influence, he will lend support to Godless Western ideals, he stands carelessly, affecting to be seen of modern academic, wavering between faith & infidelity, and adhering neither unto these nor unto those: Sadly he is professionally attempting to prejudice Muslim Orthodox beliefs via Imimitaing Greek Secular ideology. This is unacceptable to any intelligent Muslim society. Pakistan Police authorities must stop wicked secular propaganda agents operating on the national media platform & the government must prosecute all NGOs who are taking foreign funding covertly to weaken Islamic values within Dar-ul-Islam Pakistan.
Quran 33;36 It is not fit for a true believer of either sex when God and His Apostle have decreed a thing, that they should have the liberty of choosing a different matter of their own: and whoever is disobedient unto God and his Apostle, surely erreth with a manifest error
Shame on you......
You and your zakirs were present there?
رسول اللہ ص کی آنکھ بند ہوتے ہی پاور پلے شروع ہو گیا تھا واقعہ کرطاس و قلم ، لشکر اسامہ پر ، سقیفہ بنی سعدہ کی دھینگا مُشتی پر آپ کیوں گفتگو نہیں فرماتے ؟
جب آپ گفتگو فرما رہے ہی رہے ہیں تو پھر پوری گفتگو فرمائیے
غدیر خم کے مقام پر نبی اکرم ص نے کیا خطبہ فرمایا ؟ غدیر میں کیا ہوا ؟ کیوں نہیں بتاتے لوگوں کو
لوگوں کو حقیقت بتائیں
Yahan bt sirf intekhabat ki ho rahi hai. Mola ali k fazail apko sunne hen to plz fazail wali video search karen wahan milegi apko. Yahan haqeeqat aur ilm o Shaour ki bat hai.
Ahsan Ali ye kesi aqal hai ye kesa shaoor hai k haqeeqt ko chupa diya jayay .... Bad e Rasool saww ummat kee behtareen shakhsiyyat har lehaz se Ali ibn e abi talib hain kisi bhi fazeelat aur khoobi k lehaz se ,,,, bahaduri, ilm, sakhawat , hikmat phir Nabi saww Ali as kee wilayat ka ailaan bhi kar k gayay saari diniya ko ghadeer main wasiyyat kar gayay us k bawajud kamal maharat se musalman khutba e ghadeer tareekh se hazaf kar gaya.... aur khutba haj tul widaa ko aakhri khutba qarar de diya gaya ,...... jab allah k nabi saww ka aakhri khutba, khutba e ghadeer hai to haj tul wida ko aakhri khutba kun mana gaya kya chupa rahay hain ye sawal hai
Aur behtar k hotay huay kam tar ka intekhaab kis criteria par ???
All fabricated story. See lie no left from Bacar Ashab there was immam Ali (as)alive .so one lie is enough to cancel his all argument
Farhat Khan pls urdu mein batao, kuch samaj nhi ayi