Awais88

I am sorry to tell you , but you have mentioned those points in this post which has no place in the argument. I do not wish you get involved in those points which are off the topic. So I will address only those points which are relavent here. To prove that this book is biased you need to bring evidence. Mere opinion won't work. You will have to prove from another history book or record that Hayat e tayyiba is biased . Tarikh Ibn Kathir was written by Imam Ibn Kathir [ a student of Ibn Taymiyya]. We don't reject it on that basis , but we check the authenticity of its narration by analysing the chain or other historical reports. Please employ a smiliar methodolgy in rejecting Hayat e Tayyiba. This is another mistake on your part. It is not a book of Fiqh that you will not take its ruling since it is from a dfferent school of fqh . I presented a historical work and if you are not satisfied with it , please prove that it is wrong. If I ask you , do you know what is the speed of light ? Then ask you to prove me this answer from a muslim , muqallid's research! You won't be able to do that. so my brother please stop beating around and don't bring this muqallid verses non muqallid on this issue. Let us say , I agree your view that Mirza Hayat was a ghayr muqallid . But to prove that he wrote wrong historical records and was biased against a particular set of people , you need to being evidence , not your opinion. You are wrong again. Mirza Qadyani has been proved wrong. So his books are not authentic. Buy you fail to realize that Mirza Hairta's book has not been proved wrong. And you want me to accept that his book was not correct , just because he was a ghair muqallid and you say so! Please stop moving away from the topic and prove me from historical records/ book that this book is not correct.

Thanks . Brother, I stated in the begining that we are not diverting the topic. It does not matter whether Ismail Shahid Dehalvi [Rh] followed a school of fiqh or not. I am not discussing what is the ruling on those who dont follow any school of fiqh. I am discussing Fazle Haq in historical perspective. Pease note Hayat Taiyabbah is not a book of doctrine. It is a historical/ biographical work. I don't have to prove why and how it is authentic. It is you who have to prove that it is unauthentic and with reasons. Any book on its default is accepted , unless otherwise proved to be wrong. I once again request you not to move away from the topic and start discussing muqallid and gair muqallid issue in this thread. Lets discuss everything in historical perspective [ If you wish you can transfer this thread in english section ,since I am more comfortable in english]

I am muslim and follow Hanafi school of fiqh. I am against all type of Shirk and Biddah. I am here to have meaningful discussion on different topic. I request to stick to one topic at a time and not bring irrelavent points. I was told about this forum on paltalk and I hope my questions will be answered here. The brother whom I met on paltalk was discussing about Fazle Haq Khairabadi and he was trying to potray Fazle haq as a righteous man ! Now I present my proof that Fazle Haq was against Ismail Shaheed [Rh]. Mawlana Shah Ismail shaheed was barred for 40 days from preaching in public because of fear for so-called fitna. After that Shah shaheed wrote to the mayor of Dehli and mentioned 80 reasons why he should be allowed to preach. Mayor was convinced and signed an order and told Mawlana Fazl Haq Khairabadi to issue this order. After few days when Mawlana Shah shaheed received no reply to his letter he went to meet the mayor. Mayor appologized and mentioned that I have signed a new order allowing you to preach. At this Mawlana shaheed mentioned that he has received no such order. It had been six days and Fazl Haq Khairabadi was suspended for three months for not following the orders. He left Dehli for Rampur. This incident had a great impact on the general public and more and more people joined the lectures of Shah Ismail shaheed. [Hayat Tayibah, 105-106] This incident took place during the reign of Akbar Shah II, second-to-last of the Mughal sultans. He ruled from 1806 to 1837 My question is How can some people priase this man who did this type of act?