Hazrat Sarmad Shaheed: The Naked Sufi Martyr

Mr Naqasbandi,

Let me show you the reason we are so painfull for you, as you wrote: In your article

``Hazrat Sarmad was a perfect intoxicated [majzub] saint. He had no equal in his Islamic knowledge and virtues.``

First: Majzub is intoxicated,

---

Second: Hazrat Sarmad had no equal in his knowledge and virtues, WOW, you are muslim and others are Kafir. What about Holy Prophet?

Comment for others: It is better not to smoke and take of your clothes, before writing an article.

Mr Naqasbandi,

Let me show you the reason we are so painfull for you, as you wrote: In your article

``Hazrat Sarmad was a perfect intoxicated [majzub] saint. He had no equal in his Islamic knowledge and virtues.``

First: Majzub is intoxicated,

---

Second: Hazrat Sarmad had no equal in his knowledge and virtues, WOW, you are muslim and others are Kafir. What about Holy Prophet?

Comment for others: It is better not to smoke and take of your clothes, before writing an article.

#125

You are getting closer to your naked Pir, keep up.

Ustruly,

History is not written by you and me. It is ``Ibn-Hasham`` and ``Ibn-Hasaq`` or other original authors. You can use as many filty punjabi idioms you want, this just shows composition of your mind.

But his is a fact

Mussellemah Kazab, made his kazab claim during the life time of Holy Prophet.

I know exactly the reason why this is so painfull to you; facing the truth; as it demolishes the arguements which you try to build on your misunderstanding of ``Religion has been perfected for you on this day`` on the occasion of Hujat-ul-Wadah.

Anyway, what kind of ``Irfan`` comes from a naked eccentric. I guess to embarassed to answer this.

Urstruly (#124):

Based on what I`ve read here, your conclusion from Rizwan’s posts is baseless and irrational.

Nowhere in Quran Allah allows anyone to punish a person for claims of prophethood. If Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) allowed Muslaima to make his claims, he simply acted in accordance with Quran. This seems to explain Prophet’s (pbuh) response. You need to come up with a better argument.

Your response, or lack thereof, to #118 and #119 indicates you avoid discussion when shown to be incorrect. You are a coward and a hypocrite ... and hence Naqshbandi`s beerader.

Divine Love

Naqshbandi,

As I have already shown (#100), you tend to mistranslate hadith … esp. the word “last”.

If/when your Issa-ibne-Marriam reappears, he too will claim to be a prophet. Does that make him a liar also? Furthermore, your claims against Mirza Sahib remain unsubstantiated … and were refuted by Urstruly himself.

You continue to act like a eunuch. Filth in your words is indicative of filth in your mind. No wonder Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) called ullema in his ummah of latter days “the vilest of Allah’s creations”.

If you are the son of your father ... you`d substantiate your claims. Did you read the actual material ... or are you getting it from some web-site??

Read this for an explanation of Poetics And Aesthetics In The Persian Sufi Literary Tradition and the seeing the Divine in the Beloved
For Muslims and others interested in tassawuf (note Muslims :NOT Qadianis and Mirzais)

Re: # 116

and by the curse Allah put on him, mirza qadiani died of cholera -as testified by his own son--and with excreta coming out of both ends...hence Allah`s Word is proved right after all.

``Verily, thirty liars will be born in

my Ummah;

every one of them will claim to be a prophet,

though I am the last of the prophets,

and there will be no prophet after me.``

-- hadith: Tirmidhi Sharif, page 45, volume 2

Re: # 122

Shabaash; that reminds me of another Punjabi proverb that goes like this ``aggay dhann paleet hai, utooN khotay aan mootria`` (tr: the pond was already dirty and a donkey came and peed in it as well)

So according to your history Abu Bakr (RA) went to war against another apostle whose prophethood was testified by Holy Prophet (pbuh) by himself. Which means that you were allowed to claim prophethood but you weren`t allowed resist the establishment. Please help me understand the logic of interaction between two mutually conflicting prophets here. On a second thought, please dont bother. Why do I even talk to you people - my head is spinning already.

Urstruly (#121),

Regarding prophethood, I mentioned “one of the criterion … mentioned in Quran”. This is not the only criterion … you moron.

The underlying principle in any discourse is that of honesty and integrity. You bungled up when quoting ahadith and when trying to dig up filth against Mirza Sahib. If you are not man enough to admit your mistakes, why should I take you seriously?

When shown to be incorrect, you`ll once again become silent and move on. So what`s the point?

History eror in this talk.

Musselmah, claimed prophethood during the life of Hadrat Muhammad (pbuh) and he was allowed to make such claim by no other then Holy Prophet.

Hadrat Abu Bakar Sadiq (ra) took action against him, as Musselmah revolted against the just established first Muslim state; might be thinking it as an oppertunity to claim power.

Re: # 118

No thanks. We have had this discussion before and we have exploited each and every aspect of this hadith. The intention of my last post was not to engage in any kind of discussion, but to see if you were really serious with your prepostorous criteria of checking the truth of one`s claims of prophethood. Don`t you see what kind of non-sense you blurt out without giving it a second thought. So you are suggesting that in order to check the truth of one`s claim of prophethood we must subject him to a horrible death and in case he survives we must believe him and if he dies.....

That reminds me of a punjabi proverb that goes like this ``siyaana kaaN gooN te hi digda eh`` (tr: Clever crow when falls, falls for the shit)

Ustruly & Naqashbandi, If you have an iota of ``common sense``, wisdom left in your brain, then comment

What sort of ``Irfan`` exists in living naked? If living naked were such a great thing then why were Prophets of God were clothed?

Otherwise Spare Muslims from your destructive ideas.

Urstruly,

In addition to my post #118 … here’s some more.

In #114 you denied making disparaging remarks about Mirza Sahib. This is a lie.

In attempts to disgrace Mirza Sahib, you once claimed that … Mirza Sahib called his opponents … children of prostitutes (I think you said “kanjiron kay bachay” … or something similar). Do you remember?

I asked you to validate your claim … but you avoided follow-up discussion. It turns out that you were wrong about the language (Arabic verses Urdu), the content, the meaning, and the context of the writing in question. You totally blew it.

It was a case of mistranslation by your conniving ullema. They misled you and you ended up putting your foot in your mouth. Instead of admitting your mistake … you are now faking denials.

Are you man enough to admit when you bungle up?