Belief about People being "Syedis"? [Archive]

Abu Ilyas

30th May 2007, 08:06 AM

Intuitively, my entire sense of egalatarianism rejects the concept of people "being Syedi"...it seems like Assabiyyah.

I know the Asharis/Maturidis religiously believe in people being Syedis, but I want to know what is the correct view on this topic?

Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid said that there is no such thing as Syedi but his fatwa was not that clear and about another topic. So I just want to confirm what the actual and most proper view is. It would be great to get quotes from scholars Insha-Allah.

No such thing as Sayedi? From what I understand is a Syed is a descendant of the Prophet SAWS.

I dont think it goes against egalitarianism, it just means that a Syed should be given some respect for having his lineage just as an old man would be respected for his age.But there is nothing intrinsically better about an old person ar a person with a certain lineage, because old people and Syed could be bad Muslims also.

Allah Knows Best

JayshAllah

30th May 2007, 07:22 PM

Abuz Zubair.......?

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (رحمه الله) says:

“The idea that there are “sayyids” or “walis” (“saints”) whom Allaah has singled out from among mankind for some favour, or that they have a status which other people do not share, is an idea which is based on the Magian belief that Allaah is “incarnated” in people He chooses from among mankind. The Persians used to believe this of their kings (Chosroes), and that this spirit moved from one king to another, through his descendents. This Magian (Zoroastrian) idea spread to the Muslims via the Raafidi Shi’ah, whose origins are Magian – so this idea was introduced to the Muslims. This idea says that Allaah selects some of mankind, to the exclusion of others, for this status, which is the status of imaamah and wilaayah. So they believe in this idea with regard to ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and his descendents, and they add other positions to that, such as sayyid…They said that as this sayyid or wali has this position and status, then they know better what is in our best interests, so we should entrust our affairs to them, because they are better than us, and so they are more entitled…There can be no doubt that this is obviously a misguided notion.”

-----------

I am wondering: are there any quotes from the Salaf to prove that there is such a thing as "being Syedi" ?

Abuz Zubair

31st May 2007, 01:27 AM

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 01:43 AM

I think you're getting mixed up between 'Sayyidi' usage of the word and the term 'Sayyid'. 'Sayyidi' is a term used amongst the Sufis to refer to their Sufi masters (pronounced Sidi - which is really maghribi 'aamiyya and not Arabic).

Sayyid is a term also used to refer to the Prophet's descendants.

I am referring to the second usage, namely that of denoting the Prophet's descendants as "Sayyidis". Where is the proof for this? I find it strange how people boast about being Sayyidi. Is this not Jahiliyyah?

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 01:51 AM

Let me ask you: who is superior? A man who is descended from Pharoah or a man who is descended from Prophet Muhammad [s]? Keep in mind that in this hypothetic situation both of these two men are equal in piety, good deeds, etc. So who is superior?

I find it insulting to my sense of egalatarianism to cogitate that the descendant of the Prophet [s] would be superior.

I think this is against what Islam preaches, and that it is like how the Shia think.

But I don't have any evidence for my view from scholarly opinion, so I was wondering if there were any scholars who disagreed with hereditary superiority of the Prophet's descendants.

Abuz Zubair

31st May 2007, 02:05 AM

Well, you may call them Sayyids, Ashraf or whatever, but they surely have the nobility of being from the Prophet's lineage. Having said that, there may be many from his lineage who are worse than Abu Jahl, and this is where lineage does not help.

But generally speaking, from all the nations, Allah chose the Arabs, from amongst whom He chose the Quraysh, from amongst whom he chose Banu Hashim, from amongst whom He chose the Prophet - SallAllahu 'alayhi wa-sallam. Hence, the Prophet was the best, of the best, of the best of the best.

The Banu Hashim also need to be legally identified since they are not entitled to Zakah.

Abu_Abdillah2000

31st May 2007, 02:10 AM

No-one from Ahl as-Sunnah said that the descendents of the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, have hereditary "superiority" in the sense that JayshAllah seems to understand. If they sin, they will still be punished like anyone else. If they do good, in sha' Allah they will be rewarded. If they are on deviance and bid'ah, their lineage won't save them. In that respect, they are like anyone else.

However, in matters of general courtesy in daily affairs, they should be given priority, for example, given precedence in offering things, being seated, and so on. However, this should not be taken to extremes as some do in the subcontinent, such as non-sayyid adults kissing the hands of sayyid children and honouring "sayyids" who are famous and well-known for their sinfulness and immorality.

So in conclusion, yes the descendents of the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, deserve special treatment by us in this dunya by virtue of their familiy link to the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, himself, HOWEVER that is generally conditional upon them fulfilling their own responsibility to fear Allah and obey Him and thus be truly worthy of the honour of being from the Prophet's descendents.

Having said that...

One example from the scholars is one I remember about al-Imam Malik ibn anas, rahimahullah. The governor of al-Madinah (who was from the family of the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) ordered al-Imam Malik to be flogged because of a fatwa that the Imam gave which upset the authorities. This flogging caused al-Imam Malik to suffer health problems for the rest of his life. While he was in the middle of being flogged, al-Imam Malik kept on repeating that he forgave the governor for giving the order to flog him, because he was too ashamed at the though that a member of the household of the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, should be punished by Allah on his own account.

This shows the tremendous love and respect that al-Imam Malik had for the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, and also his wara' (pre-cautionary avoidance of things for the fear that they might be forbidden) in regard to fulfilling the rights of the Prophet and his household.

Skillganon

31st May 2007, 02:22 AM

Well for me I never have met a syeed or know how they look like to recognise one. It would be stupid to come and tell me "I am a syeed. I might say "so what?" as an honest reply.

All I know it is a term used...(sorry the subject is something I do not know much about)

I recall the story of Nuh and his son...

Oyeah how do you tell between a fake syeed and a real one?

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 02:41 AM

However, in matters of general courtesy in daily affairs, they should be given priority, for example, given precedence in offering things, being seated, and so on.

I don't understand this whatsoever. How do we reconcile this with the Prophet's sayings, as follows:

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “There are indeed people who boast of their dead ancestors; but in the sight of Allah they are more contemptible than the black beetle that rolls a piece of dung with its nose. Behold, Allah has removed from you the arrogance of the Time of Jahiliyyah (Ignorance) with its boast of ancestral glories. Man is but an Allah-fearing believer or an unfortunate sinner. All people are the children of Adam, and Adam was created out of dust.” [At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud]

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said further: “Undoubtedly Allah has removed from you the pride of arrogance of the age of Jahilliyah (ignorance) and the glorification of ancestors. Now people are of two kinds. Either believers who are aware or transgressors who do wrong. You are all the children of Adam and Adam was made of clay… If they do not give this up (i.e. pride in ancestors) Allah will consider them lower than the lowly worm which pushes itself through dung.” [Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi]

And the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “The people of such and such a tribe are not my friends and supporters, rather my friends and supporters are the pious, no matter where they are.”

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “There is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of a white man over a black man, or of a black man over a white man, except in terms of Taqwa (piety). The people come from Adam and Adam came from dust.”

----------------------

So I don't get it. I am asking a question only to clarify my concepts: but would it not be hypocrisy for the Prophet [s] (Allah forgive me for saying this) to have said not to boast about lineages and yet given an exalted status to his own lineage?

The Prophet [s] said that the people are of two types only. He [s] did not say Sayyidi and non-Sayyidi, but rather he said they are of two types only, good-doers and evil-doers.

I seriously do not understand this concept of giving extra respect to people who claim to be Sayyidi. Yes, I can understand respecting the Prophet's daughters and his grand-daughters, but now it doesn't make sense any more...it's been hundreds of years now and everyone is far removed from the Prophet [s] now. Nobody has a close blood-link to the Prophet [s] at all any more.

If I died, I would definitely want people to respect my daughter, my grand-daughter, and maybe even my great grand-daughter. But if I was raised from my grave THOUSANDS of years later, I wouldn't really give two craps if someone claimed that he was descended from me. I'd be like so what--that's such a distant relation now.

I think there is a difference between claiming to respect someone's NEAR relatives and respecting a lineage. The so-called Sayyidis are NOT near relatives. Is it NEAR relatives that we are instructed to love. Why should we respect people who are so far removed, almost hundreds of links/bonds away from the Prophet [s]!? It is no longer then a matter of respecting the near relatives but rather transforms itself into a discriminatory policy of bigotry. I repeat my main point for emphasis: is not the Quranic command to respect the NEAR relatives...those people today who claim to be Sayyidi are at best VERY EXTREMELY distant relatives...

For example, I would say that my first cousin is a near relative. But if I had a fourth cousin who was far removed from me--and related to me in a very complicated fashion--I wouldn't say that he is a near relative. I'd say that I'm barely related to him.

Skillganon

31st May 2007, 02:53 AM

Here is something I found on Islam-qa. EDIT: I don't know if it has any relevance to this topic here i.e wheter it is discussing something else.

Giving zakaah to those who are called Syed (Sayyid) (http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=10527&ln=eng&txt=syed)

Abu_Abdillah2000

31st May 2007, 03:07 AM

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 03:19 AM

JayshAllah: You are confusing the issue of "superiority" (mentioned in the ahadith you quoted) with the obligation of respecting those people and things that have a connection with the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam. Please re-read my earlier post more carefully, in sha' Allah you will understand what I was trying to say.

Brother, I completely understand you. I've had this debate with non-Salafis a million times, so trust me, I understand the justifications behind this belief. I've heard these lines before, such as:

"A pious non-Syedi is better than a sinful Syedi."

But that doesn't answer the question. The question is about two people who are equal in good deeds and piety...who then is superior? And then they will say the Syedi! How can I accept this bigotry?

As for what you have said, you say that this is not "superiority". How is it *not* superiority???? Giving up your seat for a Syedi!?! It reminds me of the bigotry when blacks used to have stand up so white people could sit down.

How can this be acceptable in Islam!?

Again, my argument is that the Quran says to respect the near relatives, and nobody today can possibly be a near relative of the Prophet [s]. They are all SUPER DISTANT at best.

Anyways, I am just playing devil's advocate right now, because I want to clear up my concepts, so I apologize in advance if I sound offensive. I am just trying to get to the truth, and by playing devil's advocate (i.e. giving counter arguments), I can do that.

Abu_Abdillah2000

31st May 2007, 03:43 AM

Ok, I understand your point a bit better. And I do generally agree with you about the issue of modern claimants to being "sayyids".

And it doesn't have to go as far as giving up your seat for them, or even doing as Imam Malik did. And I do strongly believe that if a sayyid were to get upset and outraged at a non-sayyid just because the latter didn't give up his seat for him or the like, then that sayyid would be in the wrong. However, if that courtesy was shown voluntarily and willingly by the non-sayyid to the sayyid, then there is nothing wrong with that, and furthermore if he did it out of the sincere intention to honour the Prophet's (sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam) descendents, then he would be deserving of reward (in sha' Allah).

So think of it more as part of the courtesy to the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, and not because of them as individuals. It should not be taken to the extremes that the shi'ah or many of the pakistanis tend to take it, but neither should it be neglected altogether. I hope this clarifies things.

Madarijas-Salikeen

31st May 2007, 03:56 AM

Yusuf estes said, that he met a person who said 'You cant be muslim, because your not from the family of the Prophet salalahu alayhi wa salam'

Skillganon

31st May 2007, 04:01 AM

Assalamu alaikum wr wb.

Is their anything from the Quran and hadith about such thing? > Sayyid.

I did a google search I did not find much on the topic, and the only one I found is that of islam-qa.

I am trying to get to the bottom of this.

defenderofbusharraf

31st May 2007, 04:33 AM

hahahaha
i am a syed alhamdullilah, now take back all ur words bout me....kiss my hand.

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 06:34 AM

Assalamu alaikum wr wb.

Is their anything from the Quran and hadith about such thing? > Sayyid.

This is my main question: I can't find anything from the Quran or Hadith to support such a concept, and in fact I find the Quran and Hadith to refute such a concept.

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 06:42 AM

Ok, I understand your point a bit better. And I do generally agree with you about the issue of modern claimants to being "sayyids".

I am myself a Hashimi by name, but I do not actually believe it. And even if I did believe it, I don't think it would mean anything. I could care less if I was descended from the Prophet [s] or from the Mushrik Hindus. The Prophet [s] was descended from Kaafirs (i.e. his parents were Kaafirs).

And it doesn't have to go as far as giving up your seat for them, or even doing as Imam Malik did. And I do strongly believe that if a sayyid were to get upset and outraged at a non-sayyid just because the latter didn't give up his seat for him or the like, then that sayyid would be in the wrong. However, if that courtesy was shown voluntarily and willingly by the non-sayyid to the sayyid, then there is nothing wrong with that,

Yes, but I think there *is* something wrong with that, namely that it defies the belief that is repeated in the Quran that no soul bears the burden of another soul. In other words, it cannot benefit you in the least at all if you were descended from someone, because it is not what your own two hands did or had any part in.

And also, it is like saying that you don't think white people should be outraged if black people don't stand up for them on the bus, but if they do so willingly, then there is no problem in it. If black people got up for white people at all, no matter what the situation, it is wrong and I would condemn that. If I were the white person in said situation, I would get mad at the black person for getting up just because I was white. Likewise, if someone paid me extra respect just because I am Hashimi, I would get offended by this. Why? Because I was raised as an egalatarian. I would not want to foster bigotry in the least, even if this bigotry benefitted me.

but neither should it be neglected altogether. I hope this clarifies things.

I feel that Islam came and squashed Assabiyyah of the times of Jahiliyyah. So I feel that yes we should "go to the extreme" in rejecting this concept.

Again, I am not sure what the proof is for this belief, and that's what I am looking for. I am not trying to challenge anyone, just trying to clear my concepts and make sense of this, because I am not used to this Islam; I was raised on an Islam that preached strict egalatarianism.

Yasir

31st May 2007, 11:25 AM

In other words, it cannot benefit you in the least at all if you were descended from someone, because it is not what your own two hands did or had any part in.These titles are not used to discriminate others (nor should they be), rather it is to identify themselves amongst the people that such-and-such a family are not eligible for zakaah. It is only used to inform the people that their zakaah would be invalid if given to a Hashimi (who is actually from Bani Hashim and not just happens to use that name).

As for what you have said, you say that this is not "superiority". How is it *not* superiority???? Giving up your seat for a Syedi!?! It reminds me of the bigotry when blacks used to have stand up so white people could sit down.It's not something necessary, and in fact if it is thought to be necessary, then it may be better not to do it, so as to show the people that in fact it is not necessary. But nevertheless, it can be likened to giving up your seat to an older person, or to someone with kids on a train.

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 03:21 PM

But nevertheless, it can be likened to giving up your seat to an older person, or to someone with kids on a train.

No, it really cannot be likened to these two examples. The reason you give up your seat for an old person is only because they have health issues and aches/pains which makes it difficult for them to stand. As for giving a seat to a woman with children, this is because she has many kids and it is difficult to take care of them.

You see, in both of these situations, it is not bigotry.

To give another example: you would preferentially give water to a dehydrated patient over and above a patient who is hydrated. There is nothing wrong in this. But if you were to preferentially give someone water because he/she is white, then this would be bigotry.

Raising people to a status of respect--even if it is just token--because of their lineage is bigotry.

Abuz Zubair

31st May 2007, 04:46 PM

The reason you give up your seat for an old person is only because they have health issues and aches/pains which makes it difficult for them to stand. As for giving a seat to a woman with children, this is because she has many kids and it is difficult to take care of them.

According to Western mentality, yes.

In Islam, he is not of us who does not respect the elders and show mercy to the young. Even if an old person was as strong as Hercules, showing respect to older people means that he vacates his seat.

Raising people to a status of respect--even if it is just token--because of their lineage is bigotry.

You have be careful in what you say, especially when discussing the Prophet and his descendants. The Prophet - SallAllahu 'alayhi wa-sallam - told us that he is the best of Bani Adam, but without taking any pride therein. He also informed us that Allah chose Quraysh from amongst the Arabs, and Banu Hashim from amongst Quraysh, and the Prophet amongst Abu Hashim. Allah mentions in the Quran that he favours people over other peoples in different things. Allah had chosen Banu Israel over all other nations, and this is a fact. It doesn't mean that other nations were inferior. All it means that Banu Israel were given the nobility of being the chosen people. In much the same way, Arabs have been given that nobility in general, and to recognise that is a fundamental aspect of Sunnism.

Another example to remember is how the Prophet made a Muhajir a brother to an Ansari and gave them all equal rights. Yet, the generality of the Muhajirun are more noble than the generality of the Ansar. It does not necessarily make the Ansar inferior. It is only a gesture of recognition of the virtues of the Muhajirun.

Also, remember that you have the right to question the various aspects in Islam in order to find out the wisdom or to refute doubts in your mind. What you should try to avoid is passing judgement on an aspect of Islam without much knowledge. It is dangerous.

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 06:07 PM

According to Western mentality, yes.

In Islam, he is not of us who does not respect the elders and show mercy to the young. Even if an old person was as strong as Hercules, showing respect to older people means that he vacates his seat.

Fine, but once again, there is a dramatic differnece between showing respect to elders and showing respect to someone based on his race/lineage. Any Westerner would confirm this for you; no Westerner would be outraged at the idea of respecting the elderly (even if an old man is built like an ox), but they would morally outraged at the idea of blacks giving their seats to whites.

The Prophet - SallAllahu 'alayhi wa-sallam - told us that he is the best of Bani Adam, but without taking any pride therein.

Of course he is the best, but by his virtues and good deeds, those things which he earned by his own two hands. I remind you that he [s] descended from two Kaafirs.

He also informed us that Allah chose Quraysh from amongst the Arabs, and Banu Hashim from amongst Quraysh, and the Prophet amongst Abu Hashim.

Yes, I am familiar with this Hadith, but my understanding of it is simply that Allah chose the Quraysh from amongst the Arabs, but chose them for what? For Prophethood! It is merely a statement of fact. It should be remembered that at that time, the Arabs were considered barbarians, not noble!

Allah mentions in the Quran that he favours people over other peoples in different things. Allah had chosen Banu Israel over all other nations, and this is a fact. It doesn't mean that other nations were inferior. All it means that Banu Israel were given the nobility of being the chosen people.

Allah chose different peoples in different times, but all peoples were chosen for Prophethood or Messengership one time or the other.

In much the same way, Arabs have been given that nobility in general, and to recognise that is a fundamental aspect of Sunnism.

This is what I have a hard time dealing with, the so-called nobility of the Arabs. I am Pakistani, and I hate how the Arabs think of themselves superior. I find it difficult to believe that Islam would advocate such a thing when in fact the Prophet's last words were that an Arab is not superior to a Non-Arab!!!! This was a categorical statement, by the way, and it should be understood as such.

Yet, the generality of the Muhajirun are more noble than the generality of the Ansar.

Yes, but this was because the Muhajiroon preceded the Ansars in faith, were persecuted from the start, gave more sacrifices for Islam more early on, etc. Once again, it was the actions and deeds that these people earned from their own two hands.

suhail

31st May 2007, 07:31 PM

Assalaam Alykum,

Fine, but once again, there is a dramatic differnece between showing respect to elders and showing respect to someone based on his race/lineage. Any Westerner would confirm this for you; no Westerner would be outraged at the idea of respecting the elderly (even if an old man is built like an ox), but they would morally outraged at the idea of blacks giving their seats to whites.

Brother when you are comparing whites and black that analogy doesnt fit here. Lineage is a different issue and race is a different thing.

Of course he is the best, but by his virtues and good deeds, those things which he earned by his own two hands. I remind you that he [s] descended from two Kaafirs.

What are u thinking here? Please ponder before you write my dear brother. The prophet (SAW) was chosen by Allah to become a prophet. You cant become a prophet because you do virtuous deeds. Indeed Prophet sallahu Alyhe wa sallam was the best in virtues and actions but he was chosen by Allah not because of his deeds but Allah chose him to be his prophet. Please correct if i am wrong.

Yes, I am familiar with this Hadith, but my understanding of it is simply that Allah chose the Quraysh from amongst the Arabs, but chose them for what? For Prophethood! It is merely a statement of fact. It should be remembered that at that time, the Arabs were considered barbarians, not noble!

Brother are u even familiar with the history. Arabs were not barbarians as they are made out to be. They had some very noble virtues which made them different from others. I think a book by Maulana Ali Nadvi will sort some of your doubts. I dont remember the name but it goes in detail about the people at the time of the prophet.

Allah chose different peoples in different times, but all peoples were chosen for Prophethood or Messengership one time or the other.

The prophets that we know of are mostly from Bani Israel because they were the chosen people. From the lineage of Ismael (AS) we have our Prophet Sallahu Alyhe wa sallam but Bani Israel had many prophets.

This is what I have a hard time dealing with, the so-called nobility of the Arabs. I am Pakistani, and I hate how the Arabs think of themselves superior. I find it difficult to believe that Islam would advocate such a thing when in fact the Prophet's last words were that an Arab is not superior to a Non-Arab!!!! This was a categorical statement, by the way, and it should be understood as such.

Yes in the eyes of Allah every person is weighed on the scale of deeds there is no question about it. Nobility has nothing to do with deeds. It is the quality of the people and a noble man can also be a kaafir like the Prophets Uncle his granddad. They were very noble but they were kuffar so you are mixing two issues here.

As such it is very hard to know now a days that a person is from Prophet Sallahu Alyhe wa sallam family or not but they are mostly recognized because you cannot give zakah to them.

You dont need to get too worked up on this because i think you are taking this whole thing out of context and proportion. Nobility doesnt mean that he has earned Jannah it is a inherent virtue that people posses. So please calm down a bit and see it in the light how the salaf understood it. You will see how Umar RA treated the family of the prophet even when hasan and hussain were kids. Then i guess you will understand the purpose of loving Ahlul Bayt.

Jazakallah Khair
SUhail

Skillganon

31st May 2007, 08:14 PM

Firstly, Well I do not buy into the syeed business and all that because their is no much proof of such digression, well so far.

So I agree with Jaysallah on that issue, not neccesarily for all his arguments.

So claiming to be syeedi is no value to me. My respect and honour, whatever special treatment is to the believers who enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, not due to syeedi and non syeedi muslim. Simply because Allah(swt) did not make such distinction nor his messenger.

Yasir

31st May 2007, 08:48 PM

Firstly, Well I do not buy into the syeed business and all that because their is no much proof of such digression, well so far.How then do you know whether or not you are giving your zakaah to Bani Hashim?

Skillganon

31st May 2007, 10:18 PM

How then do you know whether or not you are giving your zakaah to Bani Hashim?

Assalamu alaikum wr wb...bro

I thing one should not get my intention wrong, if messenger Allah(Swt) forbade Zakah to bani Hashim or members of his household (As Narrated by Muslim, al-Zakaah, 1784), so I obey, and every ruling comes too because of it, and even to love them. No question asked.

My point was regarding the superior complex and attitude towards it, that one should kiss their feet, and sit up for, and treat them better than non syeed. Which is their is no much clarity to go to such digression.

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 11:19 PM

Assalaam Alykum,

Wa Alaykum As-Salam.

Brother when you are comparing whites and black that analogy doesnt fit here. Lineage is a different issue and race is a different thing.

How in the world is it a different thing? It is very much the same thing. I think that many Easterners have a difficult time understanding how similar these two things are, but to those who grew up in the West, it is very much similar; I think that's why I found it pointless to discuss this issue with Easterners, who are usually more willing to accept inequality, bigotry, etc, as these elements are more common in their societies. (It is there in the West as well, but not as open as in the East.)

You cant become a prophet because you do virtuous deeds.

The Prophet [s] was the best of humanity. He [s] was the best of humanity because of his personal qualities and traits, not because he was descended from the right womb. Think of it like selecting a candidate for admission to your university: should you choose a candidate based on the fact that he is intelligent or based on the fact that he is the child of one lineage??? It is a bit frustrating how you people cannot understand such a simple concept.

Brother are u even familiar with the history.

No need for insults, brother. :flower:

Arabs were not barbarians as they are made out to be.

They were Jaahils. They used to bury their young, worship dates, etc. Not only this, but from a global perspective, they were barbarians and thought of that by the world, including by the Romans and Persians.

They had some very noble virtues which made them different from others.

Yes, it is true that not everything of the Arabs of Jahiliyyah was bad. They were, for instance, a brave folk, they were generous, they were loyal, honest, etc. I am not denying this. But all in all, they were backwards and a primitive people, and it was only through Prophet Muhammad [s] that they emerged as a super-power.

Nobility has nothing to do with deeds.

I disagree. He who is pious is noble in my books.

you cannot give zakah to them.

I see nothing wrong in that.

Nobility doesnt mean that he has earned Jannah it is a inherent virtue that people posses.

Inherent? This sounds like Nazi stuff, whereby people claimed that the whites were inherently superior to blacks.

You will see how Umar RA treated the family of the prophet even when hasan and hussain were kids. Then i guess you will understand the purpose of loving Ahlul Bayt.

I think loving Ahl al-Bayt and the Prophet's near relatives is very important. The Prophet's grandsons are his NEAR relatives, but people alive today who claim to be Syedis are not NEAR relatives but super mega ultra distant far-removed persons from the Prophet [s]. There is a difference between respecting a man's near relatives on the one hand and creating a royal line on the other.

The bottom line point is that it is unfair that any person get an advantage over another person based on anything other than his own virtues, traits, qualities, personality, good deeds, actions, etc. It is unfair that someone should be considered "noble" just because he is from one womb and not another. Bilal [ra] was from a lineage of slaves, and yet he is more noble in my books than any of today's so-called Syedis.

And where in the world does this word come from, i.e. Syedi? Yes, the Prophet [s] called certian people Syedi but this does not mean their children are Syedi, just like the Prophet] called Abu Bakr [ra] as "As-Sadiq" but this does not mean that all his offspring for the rest of time are also Sadiq. One does not inherit such titles, but rather works for them and is awarded them due to one's own personal good deeds and traits/qualities.

Where is the proof from the Quran and Sunnah of "Syedi" ? Without the proof, how can we accept this belief?

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 11:31 PM

Anyways, I apologize for my thread. Just ignore it from now on. I don't mean to offend anyone. Just something very difficult for my mind to grasp or accept. But I do not mean to crap on any of the scholars, etc.

Take care and forget I made this thread Insha-Allah.

suhail

31st May 2007, 11:32 PM

Assalaam o Alykum,

Brother you are getting too worked up on this issue. There is nothing in the eyes of the easterners about arabs being superior. Actually easterners are more away from this notion.

Also in the subcontinent where you have caste system people see this with there very own eyes and abhore it. When you categorize easterners as people who are like this and that then you are creating another prejudiced view yourself. So be just my brother. Easterners are same human being as westerners .

Regarding the thing regarding sayyids you are mixing one issue with others. Bilal(RA) and other non arabs sahabis were better then all those arabs who didnt embrace Islam and you are right in that. They were very noble people and who is disagreeing on that point.

Even then we are not disagreeing on the point that we should not show love just based on ones lineage. It depends on the taqwa of the person.

When a person talks about the Sayyid he has to keep in mind about what is right and what is wrong. You just cant go ahead and dismiss everything based on your whims and thoughts.

Let me ask you a question? Did you research this issue deeper meaning what are the views of scholars on this issue? What did the salaf think about this issue? Did you care to ask a mufti about it?

If you didnt then you should go ahead and discuss this with them. I really am not interested in discussing this issue because neither you nor me are knowledgable enough to discuss this and at the end we will throw tantrums at each other which is of no use.

Jazakallah khair
Suhail

JayshAllah

31st May 2007, 11:37 PM

Let me ask you a question? Did you research this issue deeper meaning what are the views of scholars on this issue? What did the salaf think about this issue? Did you care to ask a mufti about it?

No, that's actually why I posted this thread, to see if there was any support for my beliefs amongst Salafis. Usually I find Salafis to be egalatarian, and I was hoping that the Salafis would refute the position of the Asharis/Maturidis on this topic.

If you didnt then you should go ahead and discuss this with them. I really am not interested in discussing this issue because neither you nor me are knowledgable enough to discuss this and at the end we will throw tantrums at each other which is of no use.

Agreed. That's why I say just ignore the thread now Insha-Allah. I see there might not be any support for my views, and I shall have to take up my issues with a scholar and see what range of opinion is acceptable on this issue.

Abd al-Haqq Marshall

31st May 2007, 11:46 PM

No, that's actually why I posted this thread, to see if there was any support for my beliefs amongst Salafis. Usually I find Salafis to be egalatarian, and I was hoping that the Salafis would refute the position of the Asharis/Maturidis on this topic.

This isn't an issue of Ashari/Maturidi aqeedah. It is simply a matter of respecting the household of the Prophet. You're clinging to a very western, very American idea of equality.

moubeen

31st May 2007, 11:59 PM

You're clinging to a very western, very American idea of equality
There's equality and then there's justice. For me justice entails putting everyone in their deserved place/station. The pious knowledgable people in their place and the criminals and sinners in theirs.

Whereas equality in a western context usually means putting everyone on the same level. Like in a western democracy everyone gets an equal vote, whether he be pious, religious, disbeliever, criminal, murderer, rapist - they all get the same voting influence. In a society with more criminals and "bad" people - you would expect "bad" rulings/rulers to come in...... anyway.........

on this topic we need to recognise the fact that those who are from the descendents of the family of the Prophet (saw) have been favoured in this regard. Just as others have been favoured by Allah in other ways. And as for those people who claim to be Sayyids today, especially those from the sub-continent, the burden of proof is upon them to prove what they claim.

Other than that we would also need to know who they are from the point of view of knowing who the Zakah can be made paytable to.

JayshAllah

1st June 2007, 12:05 AM

There's equality and then there's justice. For me justice entails putting everyone in their deserved place/station. The pious knowledgable people in their place and the criminals and sinners in theirs.

Whereas equality in a western context usually means putting everyone on the same level. Like in a western democracy everyone gets an equal vote, whether he be pious, religious, disbeliever, criminal, murderer, rapist - they all get the same voting influence. In a society with more criminals and "bad" people - you would expect "bad" rulings/rulers to come in...... anyway.........

It's quite frustrating having this talk with people who refuse to be honest about the issue and instead choose to conflate issues. I commend your patriotism towards scholarly opinions, but I think you should call a spade a spade.

You say there is justice and equality. How is giving nobility to people based solely on what womb they came from a part of justice!?! Or equality??? It is neither just nor equality!

And as for those people who claim to be Sayyids today, especially those from the sub-continent, the burden of proof is upon them to prove what they claim.

Yes, because Arabs are the superior race, the ultimate race, the elites.

Abd al-Haqq Marshall

1st June 2007, 12:13 AM

What's hard to understand about the fact that the Prophet's lineage is the most noble among humanity? I suppose you don't believe there's such a thing as a noble lineage, because you have this borderline Marxist idea of equality.

moubeen

1st June 2007, 12:30 AM

What People did the Prophet (saw) come from?

What language did he speak?

What language was the Quraan revealed in?

What language are all your rememberances in salaah made?

What language do the Arabs speak????

You could mention countless Ayats and narrations answering these questions. That tells us, it is quite significant for Allah to mention these things specifically.

So to be an Arab - means you have been favoured in this regard as things are made slightly easier for you... in terms of language. Then there is the issue of identity - and Islam came to the Arab first - The Prophet (saw) dressed as an Arab. So this along with other things means they have been favoured in this regard.

Does this mean Arabs are superior on that alone? No, because we know about other narrations that inform us of who is superior in the eyes of Allah. We know that many Arabs chose to disbelieve in the message.

The simple fact is sometimes Allah favours people with certain bounties. He can favour some with wealth, others with their lineage, others with beauty, other with knowledge....and we can not count the bounties that Allah has bestowed upon his creation. You should know, these favours in themselves do not make people better than others, in fact sometimes they can be used against the people who were favoured with them. Perhaps you could say those close to the Prophet (saw) by desecendency should be more rigerous in their follwoing of him? The Arab speaker should have less excuses of not understanding what the core message of Islam is, and therefore have less excuse of not accepting Islam. The wealthy man will have to carry the burden that wealth carries. The one blessed with a lot of knowledge may be burdened with acting upon it.... And less knowlegable person might be better because of his deeds he did... These are the ways that some are favoured over others.... not neccessarly making them superior by those things alone.

So is knowledge better than ignorance - Yes - And the proofs are mentioned in the Quraan and ahadith. Does a more knowlegable person on that alone become better than those with less knowledge? It depends, on his actions, his piety. And the proofs are in the Quraan and Ahadith.

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “There is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of a white man over a black man, or of a black man over a white man, except in terms of Taqwa (piety). The people come from Adam and Adam came from dust.”

So is it better to be from the Prophet (saw) family or not ? No doubt, It is better to be from his (SAW) family. Why? Because of the proofs suggesting that, from the Quraan and the Sunnah. Does it neccessitate a person from the Prophet (saw) is superior in every way to someone who is not? No. Who was the best of people after the Prophet (saw)? Abu Bakr as-Sideeq (ra)

ibnYaseen

1st June 2007, 12:31 AM

Perhaps you need to re-read this part of Abuz-Zubair's post:

You have be careful in what you say, especially when discussing the Prophet and his descendants. The Prophet - SallAllahu 'alayhi wa-sallam - told us that he is the best of Bani Adam, but without taking any pride therein. He also informed us that Allah chose Quraysh from amongst the Arabs, and Banu Hashim from amongst Quraysh, and the Prophet amongst Abu Hashim. Allah mentions in the Quran that he favours people over other peoples in different things. Allah had chosen Banu Israel over all other nations, and this is a fact. It doesn't mean that other nations were inferior. All it means that Banu Israel were given the nobility of being the chosen people. In much the same way, Arabs have been given that nobility in general, and to recognise that is a fundamental aspect of Sunnism.

If some Arabs today feel superior to other races it is down to nationalism and jaahil concepts, do you really think you'll meet a pious Arab brother who'll believe he is better than non-Arabs simply because the Prophet (SAW) was Arab? There are many Paki's that I have come across who believe Pakistan is a gift from Allah, thereby making all Paki's the "chosen" people -- in reality it's nationalism and patriotism fuelling this baseless feeling. This trend that we see in our people in the different Muslim countries should not be a factor of understanding this simple concept regarding the lineage and descendants of RasoolAllah.

Skillganon

1st June 2007, 12:42 AM

I thing people are conflating the issue from a simple matter.
I think I have my view clear on the previous post.
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showpost.php?p=30445&postcount=27

The claimiant of sayeedi does not require special treatment or anykind of foot massage. Their is nothing in Islam (as far as I am aware) of syeedi being better than a non-sayeedi, or giving special treatment because of it and that you get more reward for it.

What I am afraid of the two extreme, over exaggeration of them and it's opposite, especially when this can easily arise from such argument and rebutals.

Abuz Zubair

1st June 2007, 02:39 AM

Banu Israel were chosen as a nation amongst all other nations. Allah clearly says: Faddaltukum 'ala al-'aalameen - I favoured you over the rest of the world. Faddala comes from tafdeel which means to prefer/choose/favour one over the other.

Not all Banu Israel were Prophets, only a handful (most usually ONE) at every instance in time, while the rest were just the normal Banu Israel.

Was Allah a racist, JayshAllah?

JayshAllah

1st June 2007, 03:32 AM

Banu Israel were chosen as a nation amongst all other nations. Allah clearly says: Faddaltukum 'ala al-'aalameen - I favoured you over the rest of the world. Faddala comes from tafdeel which means to prefer/choose/favour one over the other.

Yes, Allah chose them by making a line of Prophets come from them, just as at different times, He chose different nations for that honor. It is not racism because all peoples/nations were selected at one time or the other for this honor.

muwahhid786

1st June 2007, 06:49 AM

All of Mankind are the Children of `Adam and Hawwa'

Allah the Exalted declares to mankind that He has created them all from a single person, `Adam, and from that person He created his mate, Hawwa'. From their offspring He made nations, comprised of tribe, which include subtribes of all sizes. It was also said that `nations refers to non-Arabs, while `tribes refers to Arabs. Various statements about this were collected in an individual introduction from the book, Al-Inbah, by Abu `Amr Ibn `Abdul-Barr, and from the book, Al-Qasad wal-Amam fi Ma`rifah Ansab Al-Arab wal-`Ajam. Therefore, all people are the descendants of `Adam and Hawwa' and share this honor equally. The only difference between them is in the religion that revolves around their obedience to Allah the Exalted and their following of His Messenger . After He forbade backbiting and belittling other people, alerting mankind that they are all equal in their humanity. Allah said,

[يأَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَـكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنْثَى وَجَعَلْنَـكُمْ شُعُوباً وَقَبَآئِلَ لِتَعَـرَفُواْ]

(O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you may know one another.) so that they get to know each other by their nation or tribe. Mujahid said that Allah's statement,

[لِتَعَـرَفُواْ]

(that you may know one another.) refers to one's saying, "So-and-so the son of so-and-so, from the tribe of so-and-so.'' Sufyan Ath-Thawri said, "The Himyar (who resided in Yemen) dealt with each other according to their provinces, while the Arabs in the Hijaz (Western Arabia) dealt with each other according to their tribes.''

Honor is earned through Taqwa of Allah

Allah the Exalted said,

[إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عَندَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَـكُمْ]

(Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa.) meaning, `you earn honor with Allah the Exalted on account of Taqwa, not family lineage.' There are many Hadiths from the Prophet that support this meaning. Al-Bukhari narrated that Abu Hurayrah said, "Some people asked the Prophet , `Who is the most honorable among people' He replied,

«أَكْرَمُهُمْ عِنْدَ اللهِ أَتْقَاهُم»

(The most honorable among them with Allah is the one who has the most Taqwa.) They said, `We did not ask you about this.' He said,

«فَأَكْرَمُ النَّاسِ يُوسُفُ نَبِيُّ اللهِ، ابْنُ نَبِيِّ اللهِ، ابْنِ نَبِيِّ اللهِ ابْنِ خَلِيلِ الله»

(Then the most honorable person is Yusuf, Allah's Prophet, the son of Allah's Prophet, the son of Allah's Prophet, the son of Allah's Khalil.) They said, `We did not ask you about this.' He said,

«فَعَنْ مَعَادِنِ الْعَرَبِ تَسْأَلُونِّي»

؟ (Then you want to ask me about the Arab lineage) They said, `Yes.' He said,

«فَخِيَارُكُمْ فِي الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ خِيَارُكُمْ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ إِذَا فَقُهُوا»

(Those among you who were best in Jahiliyyah, are the best among you in Islam, if they attain religious understanding.)''

From tafsir ibn katheer.

From the last couple of sentences it says if you are of more taqwa you are better. But if you are of arab lineage then if you are muslim you are better than a person of non-arab lineage if he is a muslim also if they have the same taqwa?

I'm confused now.

muwahhid786

1st June 2007, 06:54 AM

And what about the following hadith?

It is transmitted by at-Tabarani and al-Hakim that in one incident some people spoke very lowly about Salman al-Farsi. They spoke of the inferiority of the Persian in relation to the Arabs, and upon hearing this the Messenger of Allah (saaw) declared,

"Salman is from us, the ahl al-bayt (the Prophet's family)."

JayshAllah

1st June 2007, 07:04 AM

I'm confused now.

Me too, brother. Me too. :'(

JayshAllah

1st June 2007, 07:08 AM

Anyways, I'd like to apologize to members of this forum. I know that it seems like I always take differing opinions from the mainstream, but this is actually not the case at all. I in fact take a minority opinion on very very very few topics: it's just that these are the topics I choose to post about since these are the ones I am confused about (i.e. confused on the majority opinion). Because that's all I post about, it seems like I am always taking minority opinions, but trust me, it's not true. Only 1% of my views are minority opinions, and it's just that it's only that 1% I post about because I wish there was a way to get rid of even that 1%. My style of posting is just confrontational because I always play "devil's advocate" in order that I may hear the counter-arguments.

Anyways, apologies to all the members; I do not mean to ruin the mood of this forum by always creating arguments and dissension. I love the scholars who follow the way of the Salaf, and all my life I have been searching for a group of scholars who were like this, and I finally found it. So don't get me wrong on that.

Fi Aman Allah.

Abuz Zubair

1st June 2007, 07:56 AM

Yes, Allah chose them by making a line of Prophets come from them, just as at different times, He chose different nations for that honor. It is not racism because all peoples/nations were selected at one time or the other for this honor.

So if Allah favouring Banu Israel over all other nations was not racism, why then is it racism for Allah to favour Arabs over all other nations?

JayshAllah

1st June 2007, 08:50 AM

So if Allah favouring Banu Israel over all other nations was not racism, why then is it racism for Allah to favour Arabs over all other nations?

Brother, I am saying that Allah favored the Arabs by making a Prophet from amongst them. This is my understanding of Allah favoring the Arabs. And let us now look at the context of this. The Jews of Arabia had for a very long time been waiting for their Prophet, and they had always taunted the Arabs about his arrival. Just because Allah had blessed Bani Israel with Prophets, the Bani Israel got haughty and arrogant, thinking of themselves superior to the "lowly" Arabs. But when their expected Prophet actually came, it turned out that he [s] was himself an Arab! This was not a story of racism, but rather the antithesis of racism.

Anyways, the favoring of Allah refers to being entrusted with a Prophet from amongst their ranks. At least this is my understanding. How can it mean anything else when the Prophet's LAST SERMON was that an Arab is not superior to a Non-Arab!?

Abuz Zubair

1st June 2007, 09:05 AM

You are confusing superiority with the concept of being chosen or favoured by Allah. If the Banu Israel were favoured over rest of the creation, it didn't mean that they are superior and others are inferior. It simply means to acknowledge that Allah chose them out of all people in the world.

Banu Israel remained the chosen people even when there were no Prophets amongst them. They were - as a whole - God's chosen people. And for you to say that this wa sonly by the virtue of Prophets being chosen from amongst them then this is your own guesswork.

If you have no problem with Banu Israel being the chosen people, how can you then have problems with Banu Hashim being the chosen ones?! Don't you see yourself somewhat more accommodating for Banu Israel than Banu Hashim?!

muwahhid786

1st June 2007, 06:35 PM

JayshAllah

1st June 2007, 09:07 PM

I find this contradictory.

This:
So a muslim from the Banu Hashim is not better or more superior than a muslim from outside.

Is contradicted by this:
It just means we should respect the fact that they were favored because they were chosen.

How can a person reconcile this contradiction?

Yes, you could argue they are not contradictory, but that's just putting your head in the sand. Let's call a spade a spade.

Abd al-Haqq Marshall

2nd June 2007, 12:17 AM

I find this contradictory.

This:

Is contradicted by this:

How can a person reconcile this contradiction?

Yes, you could argue they are not contradictory, but that's just putting your head in the sand. Let's call a spade a spade.

Quit trying to force a Western ideal of equality onto the Deen.

JayshAllah

2nd June 2007, 12:52 AM

Quit trying to force a Western ideal of equality onto the Deen.

The problem is that I don't actually think of it as a Western concept at all, but rather something strongly mentioned in the Quran.

The Quran declares that on the Day of Judgement everyone’s familial connections will be cut off: “so now all relations between you have been cut off” (Quran, 6:94)

And then Allah says: “one soul shall not avail another” (Quran, 2:48) And again: “one soul shall not avail another” (Quran, 2:123)

The Quran categorically states that no soul shall have an effect on another: “no soul benefits except from its own work, and none bears the burden of another” (Quran, 6:164)

And again, Allah repeats it “that no bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another–And that man shall have nothing but what he [himself] strives for” (Quran, 5:38-39)

As well as: “that every soul delivers itself to ruin by its own acts” (Quran, 6:70)

Allah says “O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honorable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has Taqwa [piety].” (Quran, 49:13)

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) declared that people were born inherently equal “except by piety and good action (Taqwa). Indeed the best among you is the one with the best character (Taqwa). Listen to me. Did I convey this to you properly?… Each one of you who is here must convey this to everyone not present.” (Excerpt from the Prophet’s Last Sermon as in Baihiqi)

Islam came and destroyed this concept of hereditary rank. The Quran declares that people are created inherently equal and differ only based on their Taqwa (piety): “Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is he who is the most righteous of you.” (Quran 49:13)

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “There are indeed people who boast of their dead ancestors; but in the sight of Allah they are more contemptible than the black beetle that rolls a piece of dung with its nose. Behold, Allah has removed from you the arrogance of the Time of Jahiliyyah (Ignorance) with its boast of ancestral glories. Man is but an Allah-fearing believer or an unfortunate sinner. All people are the children of Adam, and Adam was created out of dust.” [At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud]

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said further: “Undoubtedly Allah has removed from you the pride of arrogance of the age of Jahilliyah (ignorance) and the glorification of ancestors. Now people are of two kinds. Either believers who are aware or transgressors who do wrong. You are all the children of Adam and Adam was made of clay… If they do not give this up (i.e. pride in ancestors) Allah will consider them lower than the lowly worm which pushes itself through dung.” [Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi]

And the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “The people of such and such a tribe are not my friends and supporters, rather my friends and supporters are the pious, no matter where they are.”

The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said: “There is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab, or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of a white man over a black man, or of a black man over a white man, except in terms of Taqwa (piety). The people come from Adam and Adam came from dust.”

Abuz Zubair

2nd June 2007, 06:51 AM