Recently, I visited the grave of Peer Mehr Ali Shah in Golra Sharif (in Islamabad). This thread has been started to discuss the maslik of the shaykh. Peer Mehr Ali was a khalifah of Peer Qamar-ud-deen siyalwi. He later attained khilafah from Hadhrat Haji Imdadullah Muhajir makki (I think this was an honorary khilafah) when shaykh was on a visit to makkah. Haji sahib also instructed him to return back to india soon since Allah willed to take some enormous service of deen from him. This was an indication to the work of refutation of qadiyanism. Peer sahib did splendid work in this field. Even Hadhrat Ashraf Ali thanwi and Hadhrat Anwar Shah kashmiri praised and recommended one of his books (on the life of Hadhrat Eesa a.s., if I remember correctly). Also, peer sahib was also the first shaykh of Hazrat Ataa-ullah Shah Bukhari.
Brother Saad khan previously pointed out that peer sahib considered the attribution of bashariyat to the nabi s.a.w. as a dignity and respect. (link: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...r-Pir-Mehr-Ali). This view is contrary to the view of barelwi clerics who deem such attribution as a blasphemy (gustakhi) against nabi s.a.w.
I myself am not pretty sure about the maslik of the shaykh so I tried to find a bit about it during my short visit to the mazar. The conclusion which I could draw was that the shaykh was neither a deobandi nor a barelwi but rather in some way between the two groups. Having said that, let me share what I myself could find regarding the subject:
Firstly, I’ll mention about the mazar. In the hanaf/deobandi view, the building of tombs etc on graves is impermissible (this has been discussed previously on SF in another thread) but there was a huge mazar of peer sahib. This mazar seemed to me a bit better than other mazars which I have previously seen (the mazar of Hazrat Farid ganj shaker in pakpatan and of Hazrat Ali hajweri in lahore) or heard of since I could not see anyone prostrating or doing any such act near the grave of peer sahib. Infact, there was a message written on a board from the caretakers of mazar prohibiting anyone to prostate or do tawaf of the grave. Also, the women were not allowed to enter the mazar (the place where the grave of the peer sahib was located) either.
I also tried to read a few pages of Mehr-e-Muneer (from a book shop), a detailed book written on the biography of shaykh. So hereunder are some of the things which I could find:
1. It was mentioned at a place (under a chapter about barelwis and deobandis) that shaykh held the opinion that the aqeedah of ataai ilm-e-ghayb and istimdad from ambiya is correct (though no quotes from the shaykh concerning this were mentioned in this chapter. Also, the former claim does not specify whether the sahykh believed in the same belief as that of raza khan which was that the prophet knew everything of what has been, what is and what will be).Also, the shaykh wrote in a letter (mentioned in the same book) that the preferred view is that the nabi is present in the homes of the believers (this is what I could understand from the complex urdu shaykh used).
2. However, I could not find the shaykh agreeing with raza khan in the takfeer of the ulama of deoband. (Infact in many books published there, words like rahmatullah ‘alay can be found with the names of deobandi ulama. This can also be seen in some of the pages in the following link: http://razakhanimazhab.weebly.com/urdu20.html). Also, in the matters of difference between Deobandis and Barelwis, it seems that the shaykh was not very keen to express his opinion and incases where he did so, he did not attack the other side either.
3. Other than this peer sahib also held believes which the majority of the barelwis will not agree to. For example it was stated in the same book (mehr-e-muneer) regarding cursing of yazeed that although peer sahib did not deem it to be impermissible but said that its wrothless (bay sood hay. page 143). This view is similar to the one held by majority of our ulama (i.e. deobandi ulama). Similarly, he said regarding Allamah ibn taymiah and ibn qayyim that theres no doubt that they were great scholars and servants of islam (khadim-e-islam) but they adopted extremism in a few agreed upon issues for the sake of Tauheed (baaz ijmai masail may riayat-e-tauheed k zu’m may tashaddud ikhtyaar kr gay. Page 142). I think that no barelwi can use such respectful words for the shaykhayn.
This is what I could find about the maslik of Peer mehr ali shah but there may be many flaws in some of my find-outs and conclusions since the above mentioned details are a result of a very short and surface research. So if any brother has some knowledge about this subject, it will be much appreciated.
Muhammad Talhah ‘afaa Allah ‘anh