Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Critique of Husam al-Haramayn: How a fatwa split the Ummah

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post

    He was definitely a learned scholar upon the Hanafi Madhhab as is clear from his Fatawa work. He lived during a time where the Najdis and other groups where trying to spread their poison among the people of the Indian subcontinent and Taqwiyatul Iman was the starting point for the later Fitan. [/B]
    You know Urdu?

    Kind of ironic you hate MiaW for his takfir, whereas ARK was arguably ten times the takfiri he was.
    You think you know more than my scholar's qiyās? He was more learned than you and all other scholars combined. Yeah, the devil was the greatest scholar too and look where his qiyās of fire being better than tīn got him. Sorry.

    You follow your scholar's qiyās, and I will follow the Qur'ān and Sunnah.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TheHaqq View Post

      This would make sense if you then believe almost all of his current time followers have become much more extreme in their bidah and misguidance and wrongly accuse other of hating the prophet and hating the awliyaa
      My post was specifically regarding the Shaykh Ahmad Ridha Khan (d. 1340 AH) and not necessarily regarding those who say to be his followers - whether rightfully or wrongfully - or those who are regarded - again: whether rightfully and wrongfully - as his followers.
      There is another thing: People who live in the West often have no idea what goes on in their own home countries and have a false view of them and their people. I'm speaking here from experience, because there was a time when I used to have many misconceptions regarding my own home country and its people when I used to live in the West (I was quite SJ minded).

      A person who clearly seems to be upon classical Sunni Ash'ari 'Aqida - and whom a lot of people call as Barelwi - is the Ustadh Asrar Rashid. What's so deviant and wrong about him?

      As for accusing others of hating the Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam -, then let's not point the fingers at the REACTION, rather let's see what caused this reaction:

      When the Najdis and their likes appeared and called whatever Muslims do as "greater polytheism" - to the degree that even praising the Chosen One (peace and blessings be upon him) in poetry* is regarded as "Shirk akbar" by them - and when it was reported that they had uttered** words of disrespect regarding the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), then what do you expect Muslims to do? Say that these people "love the Messenger of Allah" and this while they had uttered the words of disbelief?!?

      Yes, it's wrong to make this accusation against simple laymen, who have not uttered anything disrespectful nor support it, but rather are only influenced by some Najdi ideas.

      * = Note that Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) and his early followers and even the "Salafi Mashayikh" until this very day will claim that a work like al-Burda al-sharif [by Imam al-Busiri (d. 696 AH)] - which is a beautiful poem in praise of our beloved Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) - contains "greater polytheism", which is not just an ugly lie, but also shows what these people are hiding in their hearts against the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.
      This very poem was not just praised by MAJOR scholars of the 4 Madhahib, but they wrote commentaries on it including scholars like Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya al-Ansari (d. 926 AH) and we do not know of a single person saying that it "contains greater polytheism" before these Najdis! Yet the humiliated Najdi dares to call it "Shirk akbar" and is there any other reason other than them having a problem with Chosen One - peace and blessings be upon him - and with his nation!?

      ** = Note also that Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab and his early followers would call the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - as "Tarish", which basically is a simple postman in their dialect. His followers even went as far as to say that "this staff [of mine] has more benefit [for me] than Muhammad (because it can be used to kill snakes)" and the Dajjal MIAW heard this and did not criticize it! This justifies Takfir in accordance to all 4 Madhahib!
      Some "Salafis" today say "we can't find it stated in their works" (this with the knowledge that they haven't printed all of IAW's works!) acting more idiotic than they already are, but no one said that this was stated in their books, rather this was stated in their daily lives and major scholars of their time reported this from their tongues!
      Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 25-11-20, 12:37 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Linkdeutscher View Post

        You know Urdu?

        Kind of ironic you hate MiaW for his takfir, whereas ARK was arguably ten times the takfiri he was.
        No, but some of his works are available in Arabic and some of his statements have been translated into English.

        Then: It's almost impossible to be more Takfiri than MIAW (d. 1206 AH)! The Takfir of Shaykh Ahmad Ridha Khan (d. 1340 AH) was specifically against the false prophet of Qadyan and 4 of those whom Deobandis regard as "great scholars".

        As for his Takfir against the Qadyani: There is no doubt regarding the disbelief of the one who claims prophethood after the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), because our Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - is the Seal of all Prophets and Messengers, peace be upon them. Rather there is no doubt regarding the disbelief of the one, who doubts the disbelief of such a person!

        As for the Takfir against the four persons revered by the Deobandis: They had uttered and / or supported and defended statements that contain disrespect against the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - and even after being warned they insisted on these statements and there is no doubt that this constitutes disbelief.

        I already gave an example from the very translation of the Deobandis themselves [from the PDF p.90 - 91 posted in OP in defense of these persons], which is stated in the context of prayer (Salat): "to expend one‘s determination/focus one‘s mind (Sarf-e-himmat) upon one‘s spiritual guide or anyone similar, even if it maybe the noble Messenger ﷺ, is much worse than focusing one‘s concentration upon one‘s cattle and donkeys".

        The Qadhi 'Iyadh (d. 544 AH) has mentioned the scholars of the Malikiyya who have performed Takfir upon the one who states less than that, so what about the one who is warned and then insists upon this wording? I've already mentioned that even if disrespect is not intended, then it is still disbelief because the wording itself is disrespectful and this has been explained by al-Qadhi 'Iyadh.
        (Please read the following thread, especially the second post: "Qadhi 'Iyadh: Ruling upon seven cases which contain disrepect towards the Prophet ﷺ")

        Note that the person could have made his statement and established what he wanted to establish without disrespecting the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), but he chose to use this disrespectful wording!
        There is one big problem with these type of people: They think that refuting "Shirk" happens by disrespecting the Angels and Prophets of God (peace be upon them).

        The Shaykh Ahmad Ridha Khan was making Takfir upon these type of persons and upon those who knowingly defend these statements. How this can be compared to MIAW (d. 1206 AH) is beyond me.
        Last edited by Abu Sulayman; 25-11-20, 12:33 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
          No, but some of his works are available in Arabic and some of his statements have been translated into English.
          Then: It's almost impossible to be more Takfiri than MIAW (d. 1206 AH)! The Takfir of Shaykh Ahmad Ridha Khan (d. 1340 AH) was specifically against the false prophet of Qadyan and 4 of those whom Deobandis regard as "great scholars".
          As for his Takfir against the Qadyani: There is no doubt regarding the disbelief of the one who claims prophethood after the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), because our Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - is the Seal of all Prophets and Messengers, peace be upon them. Rather there is no doubt regarding the disbelief of the one, who doubts the disbelief of such a person!
          As for the Takfir against the four persons revered by the Deobandis: They had uttered and / or supported and defended statements that contain disrespect against the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - and even after being warned they insisted on these statements and there is no doubt that this constitutes disbelief.
          I already gave an example from the very translation of the Deobandis themselves [from the PDF p.90 - 91 posted in OP in defense of these persons], which is stated in the context of prayer (Salat): "to expend one‘s determination/focus one‘s mind (Sarf-e-himmat) upon one‘s spiritual guide or anyone similar, even if it maybe the noble Messenger ﷺ, is much worse than focusing one‘s concentration upon one‘s cattle and donkeys".
          The Qadhi 'Iyadh (d. 544 AH) has mentioned the scholars of the Malikiyya who have performed Takfir upon the one who states less than that, so what about the one who is warned and then insists upon this wording? I've already mentioned that even if disrespect is not intended, then it is still disbelief because the wording itself is disrespectful and this has been explained by al-Qadhi 'Iyadh.
          (Please read the following thread, especially the second post: "Qadhi 'Iyadh: Ruling upon seven cases which contain disrepect towards the Prophet ﷺ")
          Note that the person could have made his statement and established what he wanted to establish without disrespecting the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), but he chose to use this disrespectful wording!
          There is one big problem with these type of people: They think that refuting "Shirk" happens by disrespecting the Angels and Prophets of God (peace be upon them).
          The Shaykh Ahmad Ridha Khan was making Takfir upon these type of persons and upon those who knowingly defend these statements. How this can be compared to MIAW (d. 1206 AH) is beyond me.
          If Asrar Rashid is truly following ARK, then indeed he was just an ashari.

          What do you say about the belief that the prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is created from light and is noor not bashar?

          They then say if you say he is bashar it is disrespectful!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
            ...
            First of all, his name was Raza Khan, not 'Ridha Khan', no need to hypercorrect his name.

            No, but some of his works are available in Arabic and some of his statements have been translated into English.
            So you really don't know about him, why are you talking about things without knowledge and massive assumptions?

            Then: It's almost impossible to be more Takfiri than MIAW (d. 1206 AH)! The Takfir of Shaykh Ahmad Ridha Khan (d. 1340 AH) was specifically against the false prophet of Qadyan and 4 of those whom Deobandis regard as "great scholars".
            Clearly you are clueless. ARK didn't just make tafkeer of these 4 (which is also unjustified) he made takfir of all Deobandis. And Ahle Hadiths. Including the laymen.

            Literally.All.Of.Them.

            You really are clueless and don't know what you are talking about.

            The Shaykh Ahmad Ridha Khan was making Takfir upon these type of persons and upon those who knowingly defend these statements. How this can be compared to MIAW (d. 1206 AH) is beyond me.
            The 'Shaykh' was making mass takfir of Deobandis and Ahle Hadiths (whom he mislabeled as 'Wahhabis'). You do know about MiAW, you read his works, you got the quotes. It's good if you wanna talk about him. But don't talk about some mass takfiri lunatic you got no clue about.
            Last edited by Linkdeutscher; 26-11-20, 09:11 AM.
            You think you know more than my scholar's qiyās? He was more learned than you and all other scholars combined. Yeah, the devil was the greatest scholar too and look where his qiyās of fire being better than tīn got him. Sorry.

            You follow your scholar's qiyās, and I will follow the Qur'ān and Sunnah.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Linkdeutscher View Post

              First of all, his name was Raza Khan, not 'Ridha Khan', no need to hypercorrect his name.



              So you really don't know about him, why are you talking about things without knowledge and massive assumptions?



              Clearly you are clueless. ARK didn't just make tafkeer of these 4 (which is also unjustified) he made takfir of all Deobandis. And Ahle Hadiths. Including the laymen.

              Literally.All.Of.Them.

              You really are clueless and don't know what you are talking about.



              The 'Shaykh' was making mass takfir of Deobandis and Ahle Hadiths (whom he mislabeled as 'Wahhabis'). You do know about MiAW, you read his works, you got the quotes. It's good if you wanna talk about him. But don't talk about some mass takfiri lunatic you got no clue about.
              ٧٨٦/٩٢
              المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


              You might be be able to mislead other people, but you can't fool me with your ignorant statements. I do speak Urdu and have read the Fatwa of Ala Hazrat in Hussamul Haramayn, where Ala Hazrat declared Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, Qasim Nanotwi, Khalil Ahmad Ambethwi and Ismail Dehlwi to be Heretics and Kafirs, and those who doubt in their Kufr are also Kafirs. This Fatwa was signed by 33 of the 'Ulama of the Haramayn Sharifayn. Were all 33 'Ulama 'mass takfiri lunatics' as well, since they signed the Fatwa. You say that the Takfir of these 'Scholars' was 'unjustified'. You want to talk about knowing Urdu, have you read their works and do you know what they said about رسول الله in their books.

              As for the claim that Ala Hazrat made Takfir of all Deobandis, that is a blatant lie, but I wouldn't expect any better of you. Ala Hazrat stated that those people who are aware of the Kufr written by the Deobandi Molvis, whose names are mentioned in the Fatwa, are aware that such statements have been declared Kufr, and still continue to deny the Kufr of those Deobandi Molvis, then such people are also Kafirs, because to deny the Kufr of a Kafir is also Kufr. You bring proof that the five Khabeeth mentioned in the Fatwa are not Kafirs, I will give direct quotes from their books, in Urdu, where they insult رسول الله .

              Your hate towards Ala Hazrat shows who you really are, you put 'Al-Wahhabi' under your profile name because you thought that would be funny. You thought it would be a joke to take the name of those who have nothing but emnity and hatred for رسول الله in their hearts. Still, I'm giving you a chance to prove your claims, prove that the Fatwa of Ala Hazrat regarding the Deobandi Molvis is wrong and that they aren't Kafirs, and I will prove that it is correct, with evidence of their Kufr from their books. Knowing you, you'll still deny their Kufr, you're a perfect example of those mentioned in the Ayat: صم بكم عمى فهم لا يرجعون.
              Last edited by Sunni Ashrafi; 26-11-20, 09:55 AM.

              Comment


              • ^^^
                Originally posted by Sunni Ashrafi View Post

                ٧٨٦/٩٢
                المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


                I see no benefit in having a conversation with an ignorant fool. As Imam Shafi'i said: 'اذا نطق السفيه وتجيبهفخري من اجابته السكوت', 'If a fool invites arguing with you, then the best attitude is silence, not responding'.

                And when that fool is so ignorant and misguided as to say that the Mujaddid of the Ahlus-Sunnah was 'a person of severe misguidance', then I wouldn't even spit in his direction. May Allah protect the Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jama'ah from the Fitna of the Wahhabis. May Allah's curse be upon the liars.

                What happened now, coward? It's of no benefit when I challenged you but now it's suddenly of benefit eh?

                Grow a spine and stick to what you say.
                You think you know more than my scholar's qiyās? He was more learned than you and all other scholars combined. Yeah, the devil was the greatest scholar too and look where his qiyās of fire being better than tīn got him. Sorry.

                You follow your scholar's qiyās, and I will follow the Qur'ān and Sunnah.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Linkdeutscher View Post
                  ^^^



                  What happened now, coward? It's of no benefit when I challenged you but now it's suddenly of benefit eh?

                  Grow a spine and stick to what you say.
                  ٧٨٦/٩٢
                  المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


                  Don't run away now just because you know you've been caught, Khabeeth. I already know that you haven't read a single one of the books written by those Deobandi Molvis, that's why you're trying to run away, because you know when the Kufr is in front of your eyes, you'll have no choice but to admit that you're wrong. If you're so brave then prove me wrong.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sunni Ashrafi View Post
                    ٧٨٦/٩٢
                    المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


                    Don't run away now just because you know you've been caught, Khabeeth. I already know that you haven't read a single one of the books written by those Deobandi Molvis, that's why you're trying to run away, because you know when the Kufr is in front of your eyes, you'll have no choice but to admit that you're wrong. If you're so brave then prove me wrong.
                    The only one who ran away was you, coward, when I challenged you on your deviant 'Mujaddid' and claimed that it is 'of no benefit' to talk to me.

                    And now you've come running back like a tailless dog.

                    I'll reply to you when you accept my challenge and retract your words. Otherwise stop being a hypocrite and contradicting yourself. Why the hell are you even conversing with me, an ignorant fool according to you, in the first place? As I said, grow a spine and stick by your principles, coward.
                    You think you know more than my scholar's qiyās? He was more learned than you and all other scholars combined. Yeah, the devil was the greatest scholar too and look where his qiyās of fire being better than tīn got him. Sorry.

                    You follow your scholar's qiyās, and I will follow the Qur'ān and Sunnah.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Linkdeutscher View Post
                      The only one who ran away was you, coward, when I challenged you on your deviant 'Mujaddid' and claimed that it is 'of no benefit' to talk to me.

                      And now you've come running back like a tailless dog.

                      I'll reply to you when you accept my challenge and retract your words. Otherwise stop being a hypocrite and contradicting yourself. Why the hell are you even conversing with me, an ignorant fool according to you, in the first place? As I said, grow a spine and stick by your principles, coward.
                      ٧٨٦/٩٢
                      المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


                      My previous statement was regarding your 'Mubahila' on Ala Hazrat, and I stand by that statement, I see no benefit in just talking about whether Ala Hazrat is a Mujaddid or not, but when you deny the Kufr of those who insult رسول الله , then you don't even deserve to be called خنزير. Before it was just abut Ala Hazrat, now it is a matter of the honour of رسول الله , if you're as rightly guided as you claim to be, prove that I'm wrong. فنجعل لعنة الله على الكاذبين

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sunni Ashrafi View Post

                        ٧٨٦/٩٢
                        المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


                        My previous statement was regarding your 'Mubahila' on Ala Hazrat, and I stand by that statement, I see no benefit in just talking about whether Ala Hazrat is a Mujaddid or not, but when you deny the Kufr of those who insult رسول الله , then you don't even deserve to be called خنزير. Before it was just abut Ala Hazrat, now it is a matter of the honour of رسول الله , if you're as rightly guided as you claim to be, prove that I'm wrong. فنجعل لعنة الله على الكاذبين
                        Yadayadayada.

                        Just shut up.
                        You think you know more than my scholar's qiyās? He was more learned than you and all other scholars combined. Yeah, the devil was the greatest scholar too and look where his qiyās of fire being better than tīn got him. Sorry.

                        You follow your scholar's qiyās, and I will follow the Qur'ān and Sunnah.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Linkdeutscher View Post

                          Yadayadayada.

                          Just shut up.
                          ٧٨٦/٩٢
                          المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


                          It's clear to everyone as to who the real coward is now. You realised you made a big mistake by being so bold when you haven't even read a single one of their books, how could you when you can't even read Urdu. Never mind, خنزير, I'm going to post the Kufr of the Deobandi Molvis, in Urdu and English, so that anyone with a shred of Imaan will accept that these Deobandi Molvis are truly Kafirs, as for the rest: صم بكم عمى فهم لا يرجعون.

                          Comment


                          • ٧٨٦/٩٢
                            المستغاث الا حضرت الله تعالي الصلوٰة والسلام عليك يا رسول الله


                            Ashraf Ali Thanwi states in Hifzul Imaan, p.15:

                            یہ کہ آپ کی ذات مقدسہ پر علم غیب کا حکم کیا جانا اگر بقول زید صحیح ہو تو دریافت طلب یہ امر ہےکہ اس غیب سے مراد بعض غیب ہے یا کل غیب اگر بعض علوم غیبیہ مراد ہیں تو اسمیں حضور کی ہی کیا تخصیص ہے ایسا علم غیب تو زید و عمر و بلکہ ہر صبی و مجنون بلکہ جمیع حیوانات و بہائم کے لئے بھی حاصل ہے

                            "If, according to the questioner, the declaration that the Holy Prophet possesses unseen knowledge is correct, then the question put to this person is: by ‘Unseen Knowledge’ does he mean total knowledge or partial knowledge? If his intention were to refer to partial knowledge, then how is there anything unique about the Holy Prophet because of this? Such unseen knowledge is possessed by every ordinary person, every child and insane person, even all animals possess such knowledge."
                            Last edited by Sunni Ashrafi; 26-11-20, 11:08 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Linkdeutscher View Post
                              ^^^



                              What happened now, coward? It's of no benefit when I challenged you but now it's suddenly of benefit eh?

                              Grow a spine and stick to what you say.
                              Sunni Ashrafi is funny he only answers when he thinks he knows what hes talking about loool

                              he ignored my questions on the taweez thread but then answers questions about the mawlid/milad, he picks and chooses all the time, cant help but laugh loool


                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Linkdeutscher View Post

                                First of all, his name was Raza Khan, not 'Ridha Khan', no need to hypercorrect his name.



                                So you really don't know about him, why are you talking about things without knowledge and massive assumptions?



                                Clearly you are clueless. ARK didn't just make tafkeer of these 4 (which is also unjustified) he made takfir of all Deobandis. And Ahle Hadiths. Including the laymen.

                                Literally.All.Of.Them.

                                You really are clueless and don't know what you are talking about.



                                The 'Shaykh' was making mass takfir of Deobandis and Ahle Hadiths (whom he mislabeled as 'Wahhabis'). You do know about MiAW, you read his works, you got the quotes. It's good if you wanna talk about him. But don't talk about some mass takfiri lunatic you got no clue about.
                                i have to agree Abu Sulayman i think you need to read more about ARK in sha Allah, theres a lot more that meets the eye so to speak!

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X