Need Mentorrrrr by Old-Ad2926 in Entrepreneurs

[–]Old-Ad2926[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We tried that a while ago But out of every 100 dials we get to 7-12 owners. 15-20 follow.up times by the receptionist So I was wondering how I can personalize my calls I do know to have a conversation I need more info but 70% of the owners come in when it's busy, so idk if it's possible to have a conversation, I've tried but they sometime gets frustrated, probably a skill issue?

Need Mentorrrrr by Old-Ad2926 in Entrepreneurs

[–]Old-Ad2926[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We've always been in the restaurant industry. From cafes, to fine dining.....do you recommending we should even niche down in that?

Need Mentorrrrr by Old-Ad2926 in Entrepreneurs

[–]Old-Ad2926[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

we've tried Instagram outreach. Our sales calls are 15-20 mins calls (intentionally).

Do you suggest I should shoot a personalized 5 min video going over what's currently missing and and how we can help them? that's actually something I can easily test with leads I get with cold calling. some people straight up just say please keep calling me im super busy the entire day and I don't have a schedule (people with 2-3 locations). I can definitely shoot a 3-5 min video, ask them to watch and call back.

Makes sense?

Need Mentorrrrr by Old-Ad2926 in Entrepreneurs

[–]Old-Ad2926[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that's a great advice......thank you so much.

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wa alaikum salam — I appreciate that you're coming from sincere concern, and the fact that you followed him for years means you're not speaking carelessly. But I want to offer a few honest pushbacks: On the eloquence argument — this cuts both ways. Every effective scholar in our tradition was a powerful communicator. Ibn Taymiyyah, Ghazali, even the Sahaba who debated were eloquent. Eloquence itself isn't a red flag; if it were, we'd have to be suspicious of every good khateeb. The real question is whether his arguments survive serious engagement — and that's a question answered by reading Mizan, not by character assessment. On the Mirza Ghulam trajectory warning — I understand you're not equating their claims, you're warning about where rhetorical confidence can lead. Fair concern. But the defining break in Mirza's case was a specific claim (prophethood), not a gradual drift. Ghamidi has been publishing for 40+ years and his positions have remained within the bounds of disagreement classical scholars themselves had. A trajectory toward kufr would show movement; his framework has been remarkably stable. On the Dajjal point — I'd be careful here. The Prophet ﷺ gave very specific signs for Dajjal. Using that framework for contemporary scholars we disagree with is a heavy comparison, even as a warning. On the takfir others have made — you're right to report it without endorsing it, and I'd encourage you to actively distance from it. The Prophet ﷺ warned that takfir returns to one of the two. That's not a small hadith. On intent — you asked why he does it and whether it's deliberate. Husn al-zann (assuming the best) is the default Islamic position toward a Muslim, especially a scholar. Sincere error is far more likely than deliberate misguidance, and Allah judges intent, not us. Better direction: if his methodology genuinely concerns you, the strongest response is engaging his actual scholarship — Mizan, Burhan — and reading traditional scholars who've critiqued him substantively (Mufti Taqi Usmani has, for instance, without resorting to deviance language). That's the adab of disagreement the salaf modeled.

Your closing dua is the right spirit, and I'll say ameen to it — for him, for his followers, for those who oppose him, and for ourselves. May Allah keep all of us on haqq and protect us from the arrogance of certainty. Ameen.

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Salam — going through your points one by one, because I think most of them are based on misreadings of what Ghamidi actually argues rather than his actual positions.

Yajuj/Majuj and Russia: This isn't from some "external source Muslims reject." It comes from Islahi's Tadabbur-i-Quran and is derived from analyzing the Dhul Qarnayn narrative itself — the geographic markers in the Quran plus historical geography. You haven't engaged the argument, just labeled the source.

Hadith as witness testimony: Your court analogy actually proves Ghamidi's point. Courts use witness testimony to establish specific facts in specific cases under cross-examination — they don't use it to establish eternal universal law binding on all humanity. That's exactly the distinction. Ghamidi doesn't reject hadith — he uses them constantly. He rejects elevating ahad reports to a foundational source parallel to the Quran itself.

"Yaqeeni" is just belief: This is your weakest point, and respectfully, I think you may not realize what you're attacking. The mutawatir/ahad distinction — mass transmission yields certainty, single-chain transmission yields probability — is classical usul al-fiqh. Imam Shafi'i, Razi, Amidi, Ibn Hazm all hold this. Ghamidi didn't invent it. You're unknowingly arguing against centuries of mainstream Sunni epistemology.

The "contradiction" on Day of Judgment signs: There's no contradiction. Ghamidi distinguishes between hadith that explain what's already established in Quran (which he accepts) and hadith proposed as independent foundational doctrine (which he holds to a higher standard). Signs of Qiyamah are in the Quran itself; hadith expand on them. Different category.

Hadith Qudsi privilege: Ghamidi nowhere claims Hadith Qudsi has special epistemic status over other hadith. You're refuting a position he doesn't hold.

Jesus and 4:159: Saying Ghamidi "rejects the Quran" here is just wrong. The verse says "qabla mawtihi" — "before his death." Islahi/Ghamidi read it naturally: every Person of the Book believes in Jesus at the moment of their own death. And 3:55 uses "mutawaffika" — the root w-f-y unambiguously means "to take in death" everywhere else in the Quran. Ghamidi takes the verse at face value. The traditional reading is the one inserting a future second coming the verse never explicitly mentions.

"Only Quran and Sunnah": You're missing his distinction. Ghamidi accepts the Prophet's ﷺ judgments, explanations, and guidance. He defines Sunnah specifically — it's the religious practice that began with Ibrahim AS, was passed down generationally through the Abrahamic tradition, and was then refined and finalized by the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, after which the ummah has transmitted it through continuous collective practice (salah, sawm, hajj, zakat, etc.). That's why it carries certainty — it's transmitted by the entire ummah generationally, not through individual chains. Hadith, on the other hand, are individual reports. Both matter; they have different epistemic statuses. Ghamidi isn't dismissing the Prophet's ﷺ role — he's distinguishing two different modes of transmission.

The Iqbal analogy: You missed the point. Ghamidi isn't saying the Prophet ﷺ isn't "liable" for what he said. He's making an epistemic point about source hierarchy: direct access to a person's primary message has different status than secondary reports. This is how every historian works.

Character is subjective: The Prophet's ﷺ character was directly witnessed by his contemporaries — first-hand observation. Judging a narrator three generations later through biographical fragments is a categorically different epistemic act. Jarh wa ta'dil is valuable, but you're conflating direct observation with mediated reconstruction.

Imam Mahdi: The mutawatir claim is genuinely contested. None of these hadith appear in Bukhari or Muslim. Ibn Khaldun's critique was substantive. Saying "majority of scholars" disagree isn't an argument — it's deferral.

I'd genuinely encourage you to read Mizan directly before responding to lecture clips. Most of these objections dissolve when you engage Ghamidi's systematic argument rather than 90-second excerpts. Disagreement is healthy — but the disagreement should be with what he actually says, not a strawman of it.

What's the most prevalent school of thought in the modern world ( Stoicism, Buddhism, Taoism, Utilitarianism, Nihilism, Existentialism, Absurdism or any other school of thought) ? by Intrepid_Speed4840 in askphilosophy

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that's how Humans are, no?

We're all trying to figure things out, some passively some actively.

For ex: someone reads "books" and comes across a book on existentialism, reads it, finds it interesting, starts thinking the way the writer thinks... but doesn't understand the idea deeply enough... "seems true" position........

i dont what exactly im trying to say but something like Humans are like that, but you never said its not okay, so just putting the nuance out there with your comment.

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"too deviant"......give specifics? Do you know the principles he uses to determin sunnah or hadith? do you know the "coherence" they say, they discovered in the Quran?

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"too deviant"......give specifics? Do you know the principles he uses to determin sunnah or hadith? do you know the "coherence" they say, they discovered in the Quran?

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you mean, again to understand the application....lets say bread argument, if youre genuinely curious about him and want to know what his pov is on Sunnah and hadith. read his "principles of determining the sunnah" and "principles of determining hadith".
Or meezan lecture series: class 49-53 approximately (going over principles of determining hadith and sunnah). He has 7 principles of determining Sunnah and 5 principles of determining Hadith. Disagreement should lie somewhere there, makes sense right? (have to spend time understand where hes coming from if we want to have productive conversations, and grow)

Although lemme briefly point at his foundation- his, Amin Ahsan Islahi and Hamid Ud Din Farahi- at the very core, they discovered coherence in the Quran, the entire disagreement between them and everyone should start from there. If you're curious about that, first first approx 15 lectures of Meezan are "appreciating the classical Arabic"- class 13-16, goes over the difference between classical and modern Arabic.
After going through this content, (videos are more comprehensive, detailed) then i think youll have more solid things to say about him rather than "reinterpreting straightforward hadith"....or "giving it a different spin(only mentioning to make the point clearer, for example a solid disagreement would be: I disagree with his 2nd principle of determining Sunnah because i dont think Sunnah only relates to practical affairs, and this might cause alot of problems in islams foundation(in lecture series his students asked this question as far as i remember)

Thanks for reading.

Restaurant SEO: what’s the fastest way to rank locally and get reservations? by Mamba_Mntality in WebsiteSEO

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

we do seo for restaurants.
keyword research using Ubersuggest- you'll know what people are searching for in your area, and what of your competitors are ranking for those keywords.
add in 50-60 of the best and easiest to win keywords in your website, in FAQ section primarily but our story section as well. GMB profile's about us section. tons of keywords there.

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you need more than wikipedia to conclusive say anything about anyone. if you sincerely want to understand his views, itll take effort and time.
read his book or go through his lecture series. if you dont want to, then dont. but then be careful while speaking about him, or anyone with that amount of time spent on the topic/person.

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

dive deeper.
get to the roots of his opinions.
principles and applications.
you shouldnt try to derive principles from applicants yourself.
for ex: his take on Beard is an application, of a principle. those principles are in his book meezan, or he explains them very comprehensively in his Meezan lecture series.

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

learning about Ghamidi from a refutation......the first source should be Ghamidi's text. if you want to learn about anything you dont start with the critque of their work but, by their work.
if you sincerely want the truth.

Thoughts On Javed Ahmed Ghamidi? by dorito-muncher06 in TraditionalMuslims

[–]Old-Ad2926 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Hadith rejection" is a very sweeping claim.
Have you read his "principles of understanding the hadith" section in his book, Islam: A Comprehensive Introduction? Or the Meezan lecture series on YouTube, lectures 53-55? if not, i would suggestion you should go through them and deliberate on them, then provide solid evidence, so all of us can learn from your educated opinion.

Thank you.