The Shooting Meteor on the Deserving Liar - Mawlana Madani on Ahmad Rada

[bugmenot]

Could you name me an example or two? I hope you are not going to go along the lines of Sh's al-Qaradawi, al-`Uthaymin, az-Zindani, al-Munajjad, al-Fawzan and the Aal-ash-Shaykhs...

The arab world is not restricted to najdi vs sufis scholars as some internet-addicted newbie muslims would think, so indeed brother Ahmad_shakeel has a point. Rather there are loads of Arab 'ulama, who are virtually unknown but locally represent the 'traditional' way.

[muhammadkaramahmed]

I feel sad to hear that you Deobandis are so obsessed with maligning alaHazrat that you forget your own Molvi's words. Let me remind you, shall I?

From the book 'Adab aur Ikhtilaaf-e-Rai' - Respect and Differences of Opinion, being a rendering of a speech delivered by the vice principal of Dar-ul-Uloom Deoband, Qari Molvi Muhammad Tayyib Qasmi :

Molwi Ashraf `Ali Thanwi and Shaykh Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi (rahimahullah)

I have witnessed the fact that Molvi Ashraf `Ali Thanwi differed on numerous subjects from Shaykh Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi (rahimahullah). Their differences covered the topics of Qiyaam, Urs, Meelad etc. But in spite of this, whenever his name happened to be mentioned in a Majlis (gathering), he used to say, "Moulana Ahmad Raza Khan Sahib."

On one occasion an individual sitting in the Majlis mentioned his name without adding the title Moulana to his name saying, "Ahmad Raza Khan." Molwi Ashraf `Ali Thanwi became angry and scolded him saying, "He is an Alim after all in spite of the fact that there are differences of opinion between us, you are disrespecting the position he has been granted. How can this be correct? Differences of opinion is another matter altogether. It is a seperate issue that he considers me to be upon error pertaining to certain issues. What is the meaning of such condescension, such disrespect for him?"

[a_muslim]

...
1) Most of these debates and discussions are emotive based, the language quoted is just as bad as the barelvi language used against deobandis. I find it quite hard to believe that such words have originated from the likes of Hazrat Shaykh Husain Ahmed Madani (rah), a person who has been held in high regard by many non deobandis.
...

maybe itll be easier to believe if u think of ur self being in his position. when sumbody accuses u and ALL of ur teachers and mashaaikh (who give their lives for the srvice of islam, literally) as being kafir. not only that but he changes their words and accuses them of all sorts of stuff. i just read a tiny bit from 'mutala'a e barailwiyat' of Allamah Khalid Mhmud the other day, and he quotes Moulana Ahmad Rada Khan, and in probably about 3 or 4 lines he calls the deobandi ulama munafiqs, mushriks, donkeys of dajjal, sumthing (dont know what the urdu word means) of iblis and theres also other unbelievable stuff. And this book (Hadrat Madani's rh) is directed to this person.
if another alim such as Hazrat Thanwi rahimahullah still forbids others to say anything bad about Moulanai Ahmad Rada Khan and to stil respect him then that is obviously really good and his way of looking at it (who am i to judge wot the akabir think. im just givin my opinion of this difrent attitude). maybe Shaykhul Islam Mawlana Husain Ahmad Madani (rahmatullahialaih) simply cudnt accept the extent to which Maulana Ahmad Raza Khan went to, just to prove other ulama, (who remember included himself and his beloved teachers and mashaaikh and also the blessed madrasah wherein he studied and taught) as kafir. Wheras others thought its better to respect him, especially for the general ppl (awaam) who Hadrat Thanwi rahmatullahialaih was probably talking to.

maybe sum1 who understands wot im tryin to say can expand a litl coz i dont know how to xplain it properly

i apologize for any mistake or if u feel i am being disrespectful to u.

May Allah Ta'ala forgive and guide us all. Ameen.

wassalam

[suleimanibnsalim]

There are many arab shuyukh who are neither sufis nor salafis (or may be a bit salafi in fiqh) yet they condemn in more stern words the sufis than the salafis.

No one is saying that they don't exist. What does a bit salafi in Fiqh mean? The main problem the Asha`irah have with the Salafiyyah is their leaning towards Tajsim in `Aqidah. Fiqh is a secondery matter of difference. And why would a reliable Shaykh blanketly condemn Sufis? In the past, the word Sufi was a term of praise. Look at the works of Tabaqaat.

[abul_hussain]

is there english translation of Al-Shihab al-Thaqib ‘ala al-Mustariq al-Kadhib – The Shooting Meteor on the Deserving Liar ( Ahmad Reza Khan Barelwi ). and Ghayat al-Mamul of Mufti Sayyid Ahmad Barzanji al-Shafi in refutation of Ahmad Rida Khan and his ‘aqida of ilm al-ghayb.


Also, can someone post the fatwa of Shaykh Mufti Abdul Rahim Lajpuri from Fatawa Rahimiyyah which discusses barelwi claims.

[Saad]

Also, can someone post the fatwa of Shaykh Mufti Abdul Rahim Lajpuri from Fatawa Rahimiyyah which discusses barelwi claims.

Assalam o alaykum,

Fatwa on the Fitna of Barelwi's, by Mufti, al-Sayyid, Abdur Rahim Qadri Lajpuri.

PART ONE

This is a Fatwa on the fitna and lies of the Barelwi sectarians of the Indian subcontinent. The answer was given by a descendant of Shaykh Abdal Qadir al-Jilani (ra). The author is also a Hafiz of Qur'an, a Qaari and a Sayyid. He was born in 1903 CE. I am not sure if he is still alive. I was aware that he was alive in 1993. He has a well-known Fatwa collection that has been available in English since 1975. It has been published in three volumes in English (translation by Prof. M F Quraishi), published by Darul Ishaat, Urdu Bazar, Karachi, Pakistan. The Fatawa collection has been endorsed by many Indian scholars and is commonly known as Fatawa-e-Rahimiyah. What follows is from Volume 1, pp. 2-9, 1992 edition.
The following question was asked to the Mufti saheb:

Q: Some so called moulvies aver that Maulana Rasheed Ahmed Gungohi, Maulana Muhammad Qasim Nanotvi, Maulana Khalil Ahmed Sahranpuri, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and other religious divines are infidels and apostates, faithless and heretic, accursed and denizens of hell etc; they instigate the people to call them like this and to curse them, asserting at the same time THAT HE WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE THEM TO BE UNBELIEVERS AND EVIL IS HIMSELF NOT A MUSLIM. Please discuss this in the light of the Quran and the hadith.

Answer from Mufti Lajpuri:

The unholy endeavour of vilifying and maligning men of truth and the impermissible act of creating bad blood against them among the people is not something new; it has always been the practice of men of falsehood and egotists. Prophet Noah (peace be upon him) was called a 'misguided man' was and ordered to be stoned (to death). Prophet Hud (peace be upon him) was called a 'dolt and a liar'. Prophet Saleh (peace be upon him) and his companions were declared inauspicious. Prophet Lut (peace be upon him) was threatened with banishment. Prophet Jethro (peace be upon him) was warned: "Enter our religion, else we will extern you and your companions from the town." Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) was falsely pronounced guilty and consigned to the fire. Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) was called 'a juggler and a lunatic.' Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) was adjudged to be an imposter and was sentenced to be crucified: his saintly august mother was calumniated and his companions were considered inauspicious and threatened with stoning. Prophet Zachariah (peace be upon him) was called 'a madcap and a liar' and was severely chastised. The Prophet of Islam (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) once said: "No other Prophet has been persecuted so much as I."

The religious doctors (ulama) are the true heirs of the Prophet's (on whom be peace) and so it was but necessary that they too received a share of such "pious acts".

The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) has observed: "The greatest sufferers of affliction amongst the people are the Prophet's then those who are inferior to them in rank and then those who are superior to others." And it actually happened like this. The Rawafiz (shiites) adjudged the first three Caliphs to be the enemies of the Prophet's descendants and called them infidels. The Khawarij (Seceders or, as Muir calls them: 'Theocratic Separatists' - I Karim say: This seems to be the words of the translator Prof. Quraishi) declared Hazrat Ali to be an unbeliever and the egotists accused Hazrat ibn Abbas of misinterpreting the Holy Quran.

It was alleged about Hazrat Zaynul Abidin - "The Ornament of the Devout" (ob. A.H. 99 or 100/ AD 718) that he used to talk like idol-worshipers. Hazrat Abdullah ibn Zubayr (ob A.D. 692) was called "a knave and a hypocrite". Khwaja Hasan Basri (ob. 110/728) was accused of disbelieving the doctrine of pre-destination. The Imam Abu Hanifa (ob. 150/767) was called 'a misguided man, an enemy and a devil of the umma' (Muslim Community) and (may Allah protect us!) to assassinate him was considered superior in merit (thawab) to seventy holy wars (jihad's). (Vide: Haqiqatul Fiqh, Hyderabad, Deccan)..... (The Mufti gave other examples in a long paragraph - let us go to the next paragraph for the actual topic matter):

The innovators of this century are only a link of the same chain of oppressors; for the sake of their bread, they pronounce atheists and disbeliever's the preachers of Divine Unity (tauhid) and the protectors of the Sunnah - the Shaykhs who professed orthodox beliefs, viz; Maulana Rasheed Ahmed Gungohi, Maulana Muhamamd Qasim Nanotvi, Maulana Khalil Ahmed Ambetvi Madani, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, and other religious doctors.

These august men, by (the) Grace of God, had complete faith in Divine Unity, the Institution of Prophethood, Resurrection, Paradise and Hell, the Cessation of Prophethood and the other requisite religious tenets; they were all Ahl as-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah (members of the traditional community). As regards the "roots" (usul) and tenets of faith, they followed Imam Abul Hasan Ashari and Imam Abu Mansur Maturidi; in subdivisions (furu'at) of faith and practice, they followed the Imam A'zam and had also connections with the Chistiyyah, Naqshabandiyyah, Qadiriyyah and Suhrawardiyyah Sufi orders. Being men of perfection and divine grace (karamah), they all rigorously conformed to the Sunnah and sincerely loved the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Their judicial decrees (fatawa), their books and the practice of their proselytes bear ample witness to the truth of the above assertion. Thousands of accomplished ulema and Muslims were their proselytes and hundreds of thousands of Muslims in and outside India used to acknowledge, and still consider, them as their religious guides and leaders.

It is stated in a noble hadith that entry into Paradise becomes incumbent for a dead man whom the righteous and the devout remember with kindness and testify to his faith (iman) (Bukhari, vol. 1, p. 183).

These august men were, in fact, the true vicegerents of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), real heirs of Prophets and saints, and apt illustrators of the saying: 'An elder is to his tribe, what a Prophet is to his Ummah.' Their entire lives passed in quoting Allah and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), in preaching Islam and in serving the firm religion. According to a hadith, the ink of their judicial decree has had more significance and value than the martyr's blood. To consider and call such august men infidels, denizens of Hell and (Allah protect us!) accursed, is to mar one's own future life in the Hereafter.

A noble hadith says that if a man calls another man an infidel when there is nothing of infidelity in the latter, infidelity returns to the alleger, i.e. the alleger himself becomes an infidel. (Mishkat, p. 114).

The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) has said that: 'As long as the words spoken by your brother can be interpreted in a good sense, you should not try to impute them to falsehood.' (Durr-e-Manthur(of Suyuti)).

It is on account of this that the jurisconsults assert that if a problem concerning unbelief (kufr) has ninety-nine probabilities of unbelief and only one probability negates them, the jurisconsult (mufti, faqih) and the judge (qazi) should take into account the negatory probability and refrain from issuing a decree (fatawa) of unbelief (Sharh Fiqh al-Akbar, p. 199 (of Mulla Ali al-Qari)).

PART TWO:

Mufti Lajpuri continued:

THE AFORE-SAID ULEMA HAVE REPEATEDLY, DURING THEIR LIFETIME, ANNOUNCED ORALLY AND IN BLACK AND WHITE THAT "OUR BELIEFS ARE NOT SUCH AS THE INNOVATORS ALLEGE THEM TO BE; ON THE CONTRARY, WE CONSIDER THE CHERISHER OF SUCH ANTI-ISLAMIC BELIEFS AN INFIDEL."

The actual statements of these august men may be gone through below:

1) MAULANA GUNGOHI'S answer to a question:

Q. : What do the religious doctors say in the matter whether the Being of Allah (glorified be His name!) is attributed with the attribute of lying or not? Whether Allah lies or not? And what sort of man is he who thinks that Allah is a liar?

A.: (As given by Maulana Gungohi): "THE HOLY BEING OF ALLAH THE MOST HIGH IS EXEMPT AND APART FROM BEING ATTRIBUTABLE WITH LYING. (ALLAH FORBID!). HIS SPEECH IS NEVER, NEVER BLEMISHED WITH FALSEHOOD. THE MOST HIGH HIMSELF HAS SAID: 'AND WHO CAN BE MORE TRUTHFUL THAN ALLAH IN UTTERANCE?" (Sura V Women: 122). THE MAN WHO ENTERTAINS SUCH A BELIEF ABOUT ALLAH OR SAYS THAT ALLAH LIETH IS ABSOLUTELY AN INFIDEL, AN ACCURSED PERSON AND AN OPPONENT OF THE QUR'AN, THE HADITH AND THE CONSENSUS (Ijma) OF THE UMMAH; HE IS NOT AT ALL A BELIEVER." (Reference): Fatawa Rashidiyya, vol. 1, p. 18.

2) MAULANA QASIM NANOTVI:

"WHOEVER HAS HAD ANY DOUBT REGARDING INTINA BIL GHAYR. THIS IS OUR FAITH AND BELIEF. THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY OF THERE BEING A PROPHET AFTER OUR HOLY PROPHET (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). THE MAN WHO HESITATES IN BELIEVING IN THIS IS, IN MY OPINION, AN UNBELIEVER." (Munazira-e-Ajiba, p. 103).

3) MAULANA KHALIL AHMED AMBETHVI:

"I AND MY TEACHERS CONSIDER SUCH A MAN AN UNBELIEVER, AN APOSTATE AND AN ACCURSED PERSON WHO SAYS THAT ANY CREATURE, LET ALONE SATAN (CURSED BE HE!), POSSESSES MORE KNOWLEDGE THAN THE HOLY PROPHET (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)." (As-Sahabul Midrar, p. 49 : Maulana Murtuza Hasan).

4) MAULANA THANVI'S CLARIFICATION ABOUT AN EXPRESSION IN THE HIFZ UL-IMAN:

"I NEVER WROTE THIS VICIOUS ARTICLE IN ANY BOOK, WRITING APART, EVEN THE THOUGHT OF THIS ARTICLE NEVER CROSSED MY MIND. THE MAN WHO ENTERTAINS SUCH A BELIEF OR, WITHOUT BELIEVING, SPEAKS LIKE THIS EXPLICITLY OR IMPLICIUTLY, HE IS, IN MY OPINION, OUTSIDE THE PALE OF ISLAM." (|Bastul Banan, p. 10).

I Karim say: The book Bastal Banan has been printed along Maulana Thanvi's Hifz al-Iman, along with another booklet - the book is in print and has been edited by the late Maulana Manzur Nu'mani who debated the Barelwi's in written form - he did so after the barelwi's failed to attend a verbal debate back in the 1960's. I ask the barelwi's to check Bastal Banan for more clarification about Thanvi's statement in Hifz al-Iman, that Ahmed Reza Khan and his cohorts misinterpreted and used as a basis to call Maulana Thanvi a Kaafir, as well as to deceive the ulama of Hijaz!! The above quotes are enough to disprove the falsities of the innovators and their slanderers. The rest of the fatwa by Mufti Lajpuri deals with refraining from attacking these Ulama based on scholarly sayings and Hadiths.

[London786]

Well…shaykh bouti is 1 example….he criticizes the sufi taweel of quranic verses….and practics such as tasawur-e-shaykh…the same is true of dr wahba az zuhayli….actually there are many such arab scholars….there are many arab sufis who give sufis a bad name…and dear brother suleimanbinsalim there are many who take different approaches…e.g. the mauritanian ulema….anyway the point is that its true there are loads of fake sufis out there who give tasawuff a bad name….and we should search for the true sufis…and obviously these exist in the arab world too….but the brother is right…its not black and white like the internet people make out…actually most issues are never that clear….

[Saad]

Assalam o alaykum,

Hakim al-Ummah Mawlana Thanwi (may Allah have mercy on him) on 'Ala Hadhrat',

"Khan Sahib saw a dream that he was given the key of Hell in his hand. His followers and adherents interpreted that 'Ala Hadhrat', by his fatwa, can send anyone to Hell. When I came to know the interpretation, I commented that interpreting the dream in this way is sheer mistake, who has power to send anyone to Hell? Rather the dream means that he has been the opener of the gate of Hell as he has spoiled the beliefs of people."

Mawlana Thanwi writes about Barelwi differentiation between 'iyyaka na'bud' and 'iyyaka nasta'in',

"Ahl al-Bi'dah held a function in Bareily. One of the speakers interpreted the verse iyyaka na'bud and iyyaka nasta'in (You alone do we worship, and from You alone do we seek help) that Allah and the Messenger will be present in the Day of Reckoning, they will turn to Allah and say iyyaka na'bud and will turn to the Messenger and say iyyaka nasta'in. He was highly applauded to present such a ‘valuable’ point."

He further writes,

"People think that bid'ahs (innovations) are only three or four like fatiha, niyaz and ‘urs as they think that the sins are also only two-four like adultery, theft and drinking, and the other things are lawful. The innovators are of two types: Barelwi and Railwi."

[a_muslim]

Assalam o alaykum,

Fatwa on the Fitna of Barelwi's, by Mufti, al-Sayyid, Abdur Rahim Qadri Lajpuri.

The answer was given by a descendant of Shaykh Abdal Qadir al-Jilani (ra)...

Mufti Abdur Raheemm Lajpuri (rahimahullah) was a descendant of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani (rahimahullah)??!?!?!?!
Wallahi, just earlier today for some reason I was wondering to myself if there are any descendants of Shaykh Jilani around today, i can't remember how that thought came to my head though!!!

[abul_hussain]

See the books about Barelwism here http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...878#post463878

Some barelwis claim that the below quotes are not said by Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi and are not in his books,

"A woman is capable of committing fornication. Then according to the opinion of your leader and teacher, it is necessary that your God too should be capable of committing fornication - otherwise the prostitutes of the brothers of the Deobandi's would laugh at Him and say: 'How do you claim for Godhead? You are not capable of doing which even we can do?' This naturally implies that your God must possess a female sexual organ - otherwise where will be the sexual intercourse?" (Ahmad Raza Khan in his Subhan al-Subbuh. P. 142)

"Barahin-e-Qati'a, the work of Gangohi, is DIRTIER THAN URINE, and full of unbelief. If anyone does not believe this (statement) is an atheist!" (Subhan as-Subbuh, p. 134)

Can someone verify the existence of these quotes.

if anyone has scanned page please upload it.