The son of Hadhrat Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, Maulana Abdul Quddus Sahab writes in his book
“…The enemies of deen and deeni orientated but simpleton brothers, under the label of modernisation are hot on the heels chasing our traditional curriculum.
Presenting bogus proofs, they are trying their utmost to show our curriculum as useless. It is surprising that such bogus reasoning is influencing even our elite.
A person who had been praying behind me for a long time suddenly started to place his hands on his chest. When I enquired the reason, he said that such and such person told him that below the navel there is present impure hair, that’s why the hands should not be tied below the navel. That’s why he stopped placing his hands below the navel.
By such bogus proofs the layman might be influenced but the surprising thing is, people of good, mature understanding are speaking against our syllabus, having been affected by similar type of bogus reasoning and proof.
From the opposition has come the propaganda that in the traditional syllabus there exists old books on philosophy and now modern science has made progress, therefore there is no need for these old books on philosophy. Our people, having been influenced by such, have removed Maibuzi from the syllabus. Whereas the need was, that along with it, Sadraa and Shams Baaziga also be taught and included. Which used to be taught and were, for a long time a part of the syllabus. Even now students wishing for completion in that regard, study it. The inclusion of Maibuzi in the syllabus was not just because of it’s containing old philosophy but because books on Aqaaid, like Sarh Aqaaid, Khiyaali, Sharh Muwafaq and books on Usool al-Fiqh at-Tawdeeh wa at-Talweeh, Musallam at-Thuboot and tafseers, Tafseer Kabeer, Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’aani, Tafseer Baydhaawi etc and in the discussions in commentaries of hadeeth- concerning the Mu’tazila and others and Imaam Bukhari’s refutation’s of the Jahmiyyah and others, so that in these books, the refutation of the viewpoints of the Mu’tazila and others, done therein could be understood, as the philosophical principles on which these deviant groups based their objections on the Ahlus Sunnah wa Jama’ah could be comprehended and in the like manner answers given or at least the answers that were given could be comprehended.
I have by the grace of Allaah taught Sharh Aqaaid more than ten times, each time before which, I have taught Maibuzi due to which I did not find much difficulty in teaching Sharh Aqaaid and making the class understand it.
Last year I taught Sharh Aqaaid, after Maibuzi was removed from the syllabus, the students had such difficulty understanding it’s discussions that never before did they experience such a difficulty.
Hidaayah al-Hikmah, Falkiyaat Jadeedah, Al-Haiaat- As-Sughra, Al-Kubra can in no way fill the gap, rather Falkiaat and al-Haiaat have a complete different purpose and style and they can in no way fulfil the objective that was wanted from Maibuzi etc.
However, our decision makers, without paying attention to this aspect have, after being affected by propaganda removed Maibuzi from the syllabus.
Now the voice echoing is, that the panel of Wifaq al-Madaaris al-Arabiyyah are intent on removing Kaafiya and Sharh Jaami from the syllabus and replacing them with Alfiyyah Ibn Malik and Sharh Ibn Aqeel.
It can be admitted that these two, in comparison to Kaafiya and Sharh Jaami contain more nahw, but our elders have along with specifying books have also kept in view and specified their method of teaching. For example in Miata Aamil along with teaching it’s nahwi content, emphasis is placed on it’s tarkeeb (analysing and parsing the sentence) likewise the teaching of Kaafiya and Sharh Jaami is also distinct.
After the masaail have been understood from Nahw Meer and Hidaayatun Nahw the manner of teaching completely changes in Kaafiya, along with the nahwi masaail the authors intent, the conciseness of text is indicated and the ellipsis discussed etc and other benefits are derived, and through such a method the students are familiarised and made use to such a style so that in Tafseers and Commentaries the student can understand the purpose of the authors bringing and using such wording and expressions in their books.
In the present time and era, the writings of some prominent and well-known individuals are surprising. They present a particular statement in support of their viewpoint but in reality that very expression was brought by the author to refute the very viewpoint that this person is trying to make with it. The only reason for that is, this individual did not understand the purpose and intent of the author in using such an expression.
Alfiyyah Ibn Malik and Sharh Ibn Aqeel cannot, not at all achieve the benefits of Kaafiya and Sharh Jaami that our elders kept in view.
From what I know at this point, is that the decision makers at Wifaaq al-Madaaris al-Arabiyyah, Pakistaan, have removed the Muqaddimah of Sharh Jaami from the syllabus, but this reality is not at all hidden from the teachers (of Sharh Jaami) that the Muqaddimah of Sharh Jaami is the actual soul and substance of the book.
Also among the students the notion is being spread that what is the point in Mantiq, it is simply a pain in the head for no reason, it should be removed. The ones spreading this propaganda are not revealing their real intentions.
Amongst our acquaintances there is an elderly man whose son wanted to set up another business telling the father that, lets open another shop and we’ll get more profit. The father replied to him, telling him that it’s not due to profit that you want to set up another business, but rather you’ve become tired of serving your elderly father and elderly mother, so want to separate, so go ahead, separate from us happily.
The strategy of the Propagandists is somewhat similar. As it’s not our heads becoming painful that concerns them, but their real objective is to remove you from the understanding of the works of Hadrat Shah Waliullah, Shah Rafi’uddin Shah Abdul Aziz, Shah Ismail Shaheed and Qaasim ul-Uloom wal Khayraat Hadhrat Maulana Qaasim Nanotwi R.A. and other elders similar, in which the Mantiqi terminology and definitions used therein are the very terminologies used in the books which are included in the syllabus.
Even though in this present time and era the books of these elders would be understood by about 2 to 3 percent of the people, but even that is not acceptable to them, they want to end this story, full stop.
Our elders have with great wisdom selected such books for the syllabus, which, between them, they have an important link. My respect father (that is Hadrat Maulana Sarafaraz Khan Safdar) whilst speaking to a group of Uaama mentioned that our syllabus is like a tasbeeh (rosary) if the string is snapped at any point then it becomes difficult to control the beads. (Alluding to the point that just as the beads of a tasbeeh need to be linked to each other in order to use and benefit from it, likewise the syllabus books need to remain linked to each other, in order to benefit and make sense of them. When the tasbeeh is snapped the beads go out of control and easily scatter, thereby rendering the tasbeeh useless, likewise if syllabus is broken at any point then that has a knock on effect on the other books. Etc. –Suhail)
I advise those in charge, that to keep the students occupied and involved as much as possible, then no doubt make additions to the syllabus but the popular traditional syllabus should not be changed. We can only advise, we can’t force their decision making pen. Hence, we advise the students that even though important books are removed, you should in order to broaden and make firm your knowledge study these books from an Ustadh, so that you are not completely deprived of understanding Tafseers and Commentaries and the books of our elders. Rather if you can, then study Hadhrat Nanotwi’s books from an Ustadh, so that you can partake of the treasures of knowledge.”
(Ad-Duroos al-Waadihah Fee Sharh al-Kaafiyah pg.24, printed 2005)
When Hadrat Shaykh Zakariyya R.A drafted the syllabus for Darul-Uloom, Bury, England. He sent a copy, among others, to Mufti Aashiq Ilahi, Muhajir Madani R.A. for his opinion. Mufti Aashiq Ilahi was his khalifah and a Senior Aalim.
His book Zaadut Taalibeen is included in the syllabus in many places throughout the world.
Mufti Sahab was very concerned about the Madaaris, especially the government involving itself in the affairs of the Madaaris in Pakistan.
Mufti Sahab was another personality vehemently against change to the traditional syllabus.
I only mentioned the above as it was asked in the above posts “what do the Ulaama say…”
For syllabus reform, then many statements and viewpoints of the scholars both FOR and AGAINST, IN BETWEEN and BEYOND can be reproduced.
For those not knowing on this issue, I didn’t want an impression to be left that as Wifaq al-Madaaris have instituted such changes and as, a lot of Madaaris are under their umbrella that might leave the impression that there is unanimity amongst the Ulaama in this issue. Accepting, is one thing, agreeing, is another.
Excuse the errors and excesses in the translation.
Requesting Your Duas
Too bad brother Suhail's other posts have been deleted for some reason.