Mutaale`a e Barelwiyat

[abuhajira]

Assalam o Alaikum WarahamatAllah

I am just finishing the 2nd volume of this book entitled "Mutale`a e Barelwiyat" and wish to ask all the Ala Hazrat Supporters, if anyone has read it. It is written by Allama Sarfaraz , who has written many other small risala in the same field as well.

InshAllah when I get a feedback, I shall ask for clarifications, if any.

Wassalam o Alaikum

[Yaseen]

I know of a rebuttal that has been penned by one of "Ala Hadrats supporters" that answers the allegations made by the author. Also is this not penned by Khalid Mahmood if I remember rightly. This particular scholar was challenged by the Barelvi 'ulama a few years back in Sheffield. According to witnesses at the event Khalid sahib fled without the debate being concluded.

Also is it Sarfaraz Safdar Khan, the author of "Ankhon ki tandak". If so, this particular scholar totally misquoted a verse from Qadi Iyads 'alyhi rahmas As-Shifa according to Dr Gibreel Haddad.

[Muawiyah]

no mutala' e brailviyat is not by Shaykh ul Hadeeth Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar it's by `Allamah Khalid Mahmood. Claims "X fled", "x lost the munazirah" etc. are a dime a dozen in this field, no doubt you'll find supporters of `Allamah Khalid making similar claims.

As for the book, "Aakhon ki thandak", i would recommend it highly, particulary it's third bab which shows the `aqeedah of the fuqaha and the muhadditheen regarding the one who beliefs that Rasoolullah Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam sees and hear everything.

As for the matter of the quote from Sharh ash-Shifaa`, the Shaykh has shown from al-Mawdho'aat al-Kubra that Mulla `Ali Qari did not believe that Rasoolullah Sallallahu `alyhi wa Sallam heard and saw everything and he reffered to those who did as "Ghulat", so according to him, the sentence in Sharh ash-Shifaa' must be a mistake by the katib, because according to the Shaykh, these two opinions are contradictory.
Also see this (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=64536&postcount=12)

[Yaseen]

I have just read an interesting quote from a learned admirer of Imam Ahmed Rida 'alyhi rahma from another forum which also surprisingly disagrees with Dr Haddads translation as well.

[abuhajira]

Assalamu Alaikum

Yes, Jazak Allah for prompt reply, I am reading two books and mistakenly attributed one book to the other's auther. (Dil Ka Suroor A tahqeeq on Mukhtar Qul by Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar...) while the Mutaale`a Barelwiyat is by Allama Khalid Mahmood.

Since someone mentioned about Claim X running away etc... I would like to post from the same book, but translation would take some time so I will just post the jist. In Vol 2 on page 24 before the Muqadama refers to an incident of 27 April 1975 when "Anjuman Khuddam At Tauheed Wa Sunnah, Brimingham" was laid out to judge the Aqaid of "Ala Haz.. Ahmad Raza Khan..." This was on Sunday and 60 Ulama were a jury and they decided in the negative to the Aqaid of Ahmed Raza Khan. the book says.... " Saath Ulama ney bil-ittafaq faisala kya keh Maulana Ahmed Raza Khan aur un ke Pero Har Giz Ahl Sunnat Naheen...."


Wassalam o Alaikum

P.S once again, I do not wish to create fitna, My querries are academic related.

[Muawiyah]

"Anjuman Khuddam at-Tawheed was-Sunnah, Birmingham" prolly didn't have any berailvis in it..


P.S once again, I do not wish to create fitna, My querries are academic related.
but they do create fitnah, so I suggest you drop it or take it to a forum which supports this manner of argumentation

[Aamir]

Bro..where did you get the book from and how many volumes is it... Im looking for it too. Is is fairly simpile urdu

[sudoku]

"Anjuman Khuddam at-Tawheed was-Sunnah, Birmingham" prolly didn't have any berailvis in it..


but they do create fitnah, so I suggest you drop it or take it to a forum which supports this manner of argumentation

Assalaamu Alaikum

didn't talib-ilm say that his reason for posting was academic reasons? so far alhamdu Lillah i haven't seen any situation of a "fitnah" starting, and usually fitnah starts because everyone wants everybody else to agree with their point.

Wassalaamu Alaikum

[abuhajira]

"Anjuman Khuddam at-Tawheed was-Sunnah, Birmingham" prolly didn't have any berailvis in it..


but they do create fitnah, so I suggest you drop it or take it to a forum which supports this manner of argumentation

Assalam o ALaikum

Br. As far as probability is concerned, we could even argue that probably the barlvi did not have much hold among the Ulama of Bredford and surrounding then OR probably There were many "Ahl e Sunnah" at the time, but they didnt regard the Barelvi to be one of them. Such probabilities will increase as one wishes to keep a sectarian rather narrowed approach and forgoes an oppertunity to learn the reality.

I did not claim to be against Brelvi, or To demean them or such, rather put up a general concern as to which the scholors of Ahl Sunnah, who have at times claimed that Ala Hazrat is one of the most pious and mujaddid of the time, do not comment on these texts. Or maybe they have, and I am simply unaware of that.

I also feel that these discussions do NOT create fitna as long as one sits and answers with sincerety rather than defensive modes. I am born and raised in a half-barelvi house, and over the years have grown distant to it. but still am not disrespectable to them, for I am still hopefull my information regarding it might be lacking.

Finally, if there are signs of fitna emerging, Moderators are there to moderate and keep the topic on line.

Secondly....


Bro..where did you get the book from and how many volumes is it... Im looking for it too. Is is fairly simpile urdu

I got this book from Library at my Madressah, however you can look for Dar ul Muaarif, Lahore or,

If in england:
19 Chorlton Terrace Upperbrook St.
Manchester. 13 England

Jazak Allah u Khair
Wassalam o Alaikum

[muslim786]

Assalam o ALaikum

Br. As far as probability is concerned, we could even argue that probably the barlvi did not have much hold among the Ulama of Bredford and surrounding then OR probably There were many "Ahl e Sunnah" at the time, but they didnt regard the Barelvi to be one of them. Such probabilities will increase as one wishes to keep a sectarian rather narrowed approach and forgoes an oppertunity to learn the reality.

I did not claim to be against Brelvi, or To demean them or such, rather put up a general concern as to which the scholors of Ahl Sunnah, who have at times claimed that Ala Hazrat is one of the most pious and mujaddid of the time, do not comment on these texts. Or maybe they have, and I am simply unaware of that.

I also feel that these discussions do NOT create fitna as long as one sits and answers with sincerety rather than defensive modes. I am born and raised in a half-barelvi house, and over the years have grown distant to it. but still am not disrespectable to them, for I am still hopefull my information regarding it might be lacking.

Finally, if there are signs of fitna emerging, Moderators are there to moderate and keep the topic on line.

Secondly....



I got this book from Library at my Madressah, however you can look for Dar ul Muaarif, Lahore or,

If in england:
19 Chorlton Terrace Upperbrook St.
Manchester. 13 England

Jazak Allah u Khair
Wassalam o Alaikum

The book mentioned in the title of this thread has been dealt with already by Hazrat Allama Mufti Abdul Wahab Khan Qadri in his book Saiqat ur Rada , in which he refuted Deobandi Scholar Khalid Mehmood of Manchester, who wrote a book Mutala e Barelwiat against Imam Ahmed Raza and his followers. The book contains answers of all doubts and allegations raised by Khalid Mahmoud and other deobandis scholars against Imam Ahmed Raza and was quite famous in Pakistan and Ulema of Arab did translate it in Arabic as well.

I am originally from Manchester and I regularly go to the so called deobandi and barelvi mosques there, it is quite evident that Dr Khalid has been well and truly refuted from the situation found in Manchester. I studied arabic at the Islamic Academy Manchester, which is Dr Khalid's Mosque, and this book mutale barelviat didnt ever appear to be promoted much, as it is quite shameful tbh.

[Muawiyah]

The book mentioned in the title of this thread has been dealt with already by Hazrat Allama Mufti Abdul Wahab Khan Qadri in his book Saiqat ur Rada , in which he refuted Deobandi Scholar Khalid Mehmood of Manchester
I have my doubts, khayr, to each his own :)

[muslim786]

I have my doubts, khayr, to each his own :)
get a copy of the book and read it yourself.

[abuhajira]

The book mentioned in the title of this thread has been dealt with already by Hazrat Allama Mufti Abdul Wahab Khan Qadri in his book Saiqat ur Rada , in which he refuted Deobandi Scholar Khalid Mehmood of Manchester, who wrote a book Mutala e Barelwiat against Imam Ahmed Raza and his followers. The book contains answers of all doubts and allegations raised by Khalid Mahmoud and other deobandis scholars against Imam Ahmed Raza and was quite famous in Pakistan and Ulema of Arab did translate it in Arabic as well.

I am originally from Manchester and I regularly go to the so called deobandi and barelvi mosques there, it is quite evident that Dr Khalid has been well and truly refuted from the situation found in Manchester. I studied arabic at the Islamic Academy Manchester, which is Dr Khalid's Mosque, and this book mutale barelviat didnt ever appear to be promoted much, as it is quite shameful tbh.

Assalamu Alaikum

As I had said, the point is not refutation, rather see with a logical understanding as to whether the refutations are baseless or sound.

I do agree that I am not overly impressed by the book either, but it is so far a much comprehensive listing of Barelvi writings I have seen. And since you say that there is a refutation to it, I would like to see it. Please let me know where I can get it. It better not be like the other Barelvi redutations I have seen like Rad Bidat or Tablighi Jamat (Wadi e Najd ke bekaar Pathar) etc etc.

The book cannot be shamefull as it claims on its cover that its merely a research and not a refutation. Quite frankly I dont like the term refutation.. as it has holier than thou meaning.. I have seen that many a people have make numerous refutations though not having the ability to. In many cases I have seen they resort to "luchar" fahsh language.. unfortunately this fahsh language is more comon among the Barelvi refuters, as was also present in "Ala Hazrat's Kalam". for example,

Maulana Ahmed Raza writes "Kal Kiamat main khul jayega keh Mushrik Murtid Kafir Khasir kon tha. Saya`lamoon Ghadan min AlKazzaab al-Ashar. Ashar bhi do kissam ke hotay hain, Ash aeli ke zaban is bak bak karay aur ashar fa`li keh zaban se chup rahe aur khabathat se baz na aaye... Wahabiya Ashr Qawli aur Fa`li dono hain" Khalis ul Aqaid Pg 44

Maulana Hashmat Ali khalifa of Maulana Ahmed Raza writes, "Is ka matlab to yeh hai keh tumharay dharam main tumhari joru aur amman donon aik, tumhara baap aur beta sonon aik, GOBAR aur HALVA dono aik, Fereeni aur PAKHANA dono aik, Tumhara Mun aur PAKHANA PHIRNAY KI JAGA aik... Halvay ke badlay pakhana khao, sharbat ke badlay peshab naush farmao..." Tajanab Ahl Sunnah Pg 427

and so on.

I may agree that the writer may go off here and there... but what justification can the Ulama give for such a language.

I hope you give me the comments about what the "Saiqat ur Rada" says about it...

Jazak Allah u Khair

Wassalam o Alaikum

[muslim786]

Assalamu Alaikum

As I had said, the point is not refutation, rather see with a logical understanding as to whether the refutations are baseless or sound.

I do agree that I am not overly impressed by the book either, but it is so far a much comprehensive listing of Barelvi writings I have seen. And since you say that there is a refutation to it, I would like to see it. Please let me know where I can get it. It better not be like the other Barelvi redutations I have seen like Rad Bidat or Tablighi Jamat (Wadi e Najd ke bekaar Pathar) etc etc.

The book cannot be shamefull as it claims on its cover that its merely a research and not a refutation. Quite frankly I dont like the term refutation.. as it has holier than thou meaning.. I have seen that many a people have make numerous refutations though not having the ability to. In many cases I have seen they resort to "luchar" fahsh language.. unfortunately this fahsh language is more comon among the Barelvi refuters, as was also present in "Ala Hazrat's Kalam". for example,

Maulana Ahmed Raza writes "Kal Kiamat main khul jayega keh Mushrik Murtid Kafir Khasir kon tha. Saya`lamoon Ghadan min AlKazzaab al-Ashar. Ashar bhi do kissam ke hotay hain, Ash aeli ke zaban is bak bak karay aur ashar fa`li keh zaban se chup rahe aur khabathat se baz na aaye... Wahabiya Ashr Qawli aur Fa`li dono hain" Khalis ul Aqaid Pg 44

Maulana Hashmat Ali khalifa of Maulana Ahmed Raza writes, "Is ka matlab to yeh hai keh tumharay dharam main tumhari joru aur amman donon aik, tumhara baap aur beta sonon aik, GOBAR aur HALVA dono aik, Fereeni aur PAKHANA dono aik, Tumhara Mun aur PAKHANA PHIRNAY KI JAGA aik... Halvay ke badlay pakhana khao, sharbat ke badlay peshab naush farmao..." Tajanab Ahl Sunnah Pg 427

and so on.

I may agree that the writer may go off here and there... but what justification can the Ulama give for such a language.

I hope you give me the comments about what the "Saiqat ur Rada" says about it...

Jazak Allah u Khair

Wassalam o Alaikum

join the site yanabi and ask them about it they are ardent followers of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan or the people on sunnipath, or even better ask Sidi Munnawar Ateeq Rizwi who occasionaly answers questions on sunnipath and his site is as follows http://scholarspen.blogspot.com

[Aamir]

The mod's on the above mentioned on the YB website are not the right people to speak to.. very biased, implolite and genreally they will bash anything that berely critises brelwi viewpoints.

Brother Talib e ilm..u mentioned that u werent very impressed with the book.. i take it you wouldent recommend it it then?? coas as you know i wanted to get a copy..

Have nay of you guys heard Allam Khalid speak..he's on another level..his speesches are very ilmi in the sense that you have to know ur stuff to understand him, [clip]

Also whata re the chances of these two great groups ever uniting...Inshallah taalah.. - the biggest stubling block was is and will always be the takfir of the 4 shayks of deoaband.. - if we could sort that out (very unlikely) then the issues of Haadir Nadhir, Noor BASHAR , Ilm e ghayb , Mukhtar e qul etc would all fizzle out..

Waht do you bothers reckon

[Muawiyah]

i'd say the biggest stumbling blocks are the issues of Hadhir wa Nazir, `Alim ul ghayb, Mukhtar-e-Kul, noor in the meaning of denial of bashariyah etc. Takfeer of the Deobandi shuykh is just desperation

[godilali]

Excuse my ignorance, but what is Mukhtar e kul?

[slave of allah]

salaam

Mukhtar e kul refers to sharing power with allah. some extreme brealwis believe allah has granted the prophet (saw) power over his creation.

i agree with bro aamir yb site is a filthy khaawrij site and should be boycotted. also this refutaion buisness never ends. to every book brealwis or deobandis write on one another the other groups claims to have refuted it. ~

[Muawiyah]

Some berailvi `ulama have described "mukhtar-e-kull" as the quality of being Mutasarrif in matters of Takween, the author of "Noor-e-Hidayat" for example.

[tazkiyyah]

if you goto sidi munawwar ateeq's page, you will find that in his article
on Kufa...he refers to mawlana Binnauri (the deobandi aalim)
as Allamah Binnauwri

[tazkiyyah]

Also,it is interesting that other shaami shuyukh had strict opinions on bid'a
just like the deobandis do.
If you read sidi munawwar's article on hadeeth, you find

M: Al-Lakhnawi has great contributions in the Hanafi Madhab, both in fiqh and hadith....
Ustadh Abdul Fattah Abu Ghuddah has beneficial footnotes to many of his books though he is cold-hearted with Sufis.

[iqadeer]

if you goto sidi munawwar ateeq's page, you will find that in his article
on Kufa...he refers to mawlana Binnauri (the deobandi aalim)
as Allamah Binnauwri

Yet in the same article, he laid the following charge against Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadvi, arguably the most famous of pro-Deobandi 'alim in the recent times:

His works such as Madarij Tabaqat al-Hadeeth, Muneer al-Ayn and al-Nujuwm al-Thawaqib show his mastery in hadith. He commentated on twenty two hadith books which yet remain as manuscripts. See my all-inclusive article on ‘Imam Ahmad Ridha’s Mastery in Hadith Sciences’ for a detailed answer to the following comment in Nuzhat al-Khawatir[2] added by Mauwlana Ali Miyah al-Nadawi ‘he i.e. Imam Ahmad Ridha, had no expertise in hadith and tafseer’. May Allah destroy their injustice, and He Most High alone gives guidance.

[Muawiyah]

have any of the brothers read any of his hadith works?

[faqir]

This is a well founded charge.

:salam:

I noticed that someone has asked the brother for proof in the comments bit regarding this charge but there is no reply from sidi munawwar as yet...

The one against whom the charge is being made is the son of the author of the book Nuzhat al-Khawatir is he not?

Anyways, tbh, I don't really care about all this Deobarandelvi stuff. I love em all! ;) :p

[iqadeer]

The one against whom the charge is being made is the son of the author of the book Nuzhat al-Khawatir is he not?

Yes, that's right, Ali Mian aka Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadvi's father is the author of 'nuzhatul khawatir'. Hazrat was a well-respected figure among both Salafi and Sunni scholars in that he never took sides against anyone. His writings reflect his well-balanced approach where he gives due credit to the work of dawah by well-known Saints such as Hazrat Abdul Qadir Jilani while recognizing the monumental service by Allamah Ibn-e-Taimiyah in fighting the heresies of his time.

[Aamir]

Do bother these groups not claim to follow HAZRAR Mujadid e alif sani, Shah Waliullah, Shah Abdul Aziz (rahimullah)? , If so then why cant they use books of thes eulama to sort ther differences out.

Also bro Muawiyah - i still think the fatwa of kufr is the single biggest issue - why do you think otherwise please to enlighten me..Jazakallah

[sudoku]

Assalaamu Alaikum

BTW br Aamir, I think talib-ilm posted two places where you can get the books from, England and Pakistan...you can also get it from Maktaba Sayyad Ahmad Shaheed 1o Al-Kareem Market Urdu Bazaar phone #7228272

Wassalaamu Alaikum

[godilali]

"have any of the brothers read any of his hadith works?"

If you mean Shaykh Ahmad Raza's, then not many people have. This is the Barelwis own fault, since they haven't been publishing many of his works, but focusing more on sectarian issues.

[muslim786]

"have any of the brothers read any of his hadith works?"

If you mean Shaykh Ahmad Raza's, then not many people have. This is the Barelwis own fault, since they haven't been publishing many of his works, but focusing more on sectarian issues.

This is indeed very true. And it would seem it is widespread amongst their scholars, ie they have not really published or promoted much of their scholarly works, which is actually quite vast in number.

[abuhajira]

Assalam o Alaikum


I have heard that Maulana Ahmad Rida Khan's literary work has gained acceptance among Sunni scholars, and as such, he commands at least my respect. Although, I strongly differ with him on the issue of takfeer and other matters related to hadir nadir, ilm-e-ghayb, etc. Walaho Alam.

I started this post with the intention of NOT debating, NOT arguing as to who is correct and who is not. I also asked the moderator at that point to be watchful so that as soon as people sway away from topic, the thread could be moderated. But It seems that hasnt been done.

I accept the above coment, the works of Ml. Ahmed Raza Khan are given much importance among the scholors of Ahl Sunnah, but are, if not tremendously but to a much extent rebuked among the deobandis. The reason is simple, the deobandis are well aware of the situation in which those books are written.

My question in the thread was... why did Ahl Sunna (namely all the shuyukh such as Sidi Faraz, Nuh Keller, Hadad etc.) give him such a lofty state, whereas the writings from him have at places serious lacking. The point is not whether he is correct on the masala of Hadhir Nadhir. rather how he has tackled the situation. My question is not, why he wrote what he wrote...rather how did the Ulama who are so well grounded in academic accept such writings which contain shamefull words. I gave one example before I do not wish to give more.. but the book is full of them.

So once again. please roll back to the topic (without deobandi-barelvi mindset) and ask the respected Ulama (for those who are close to them) why they have tolerated the shamelessness in the writings of Barelvi Ulema. And even if they do tolerate them, why do they raise his status to as that of a "reformer" or Mujaddid.

P.S As a non-biased point, keep Barelvi seperate from Ahl Sunnah and look at the writing originating from Barelvi Maktaba. term Barelvi is not a synonym to Ahl Sunnah. Neither is deobandi.

Wassalam o Alaikum WarahmatAllah

MOD NOTE: Some posts have been removed to this (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4403) thread. There are many forums where these debates go on (and on and on), but we as SF kindly requested that you please keep these discussions off of SF.

:jazak:.

Thread locked till further notice, as members are not able to stay on topic, nor are mods currently able to waste more time on these issues =)