Warning: include() [function.include]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in /data/32/1/9/44/1987859/user/2172762/htdocs/en/Literature/English/Articles/white&black/5.php on line 47
Warning: include(http://www.nafseislam.com/en/Controls/MenuList.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in /data/32/1/9/44/1987859/user/2172762/htdocs/en/Literature/English/Articles/white&black/5.php on line 47
Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening 'http://www.nafseislam.com/en/Controls/MenuList.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/services/vux/lib/php') in /data/32/1/9/44/1987859/user/2172762/htdocs/en/Literature/English/Articles/white&black/5.php on line 47
|
Warning: include() [function.include]: URL file-access is disabled in the server configuration in /data/32/1/9/44/1987859/user/2172762/htdocs/en/Literature/English/Articles/white&black/5.php on line 59
Warning: include(http://www.nafseislam.com/en/Controls/Banner.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: no suitable wrapper could be found in /data/32/1/9/44/1987859/user/2172762/htdocs/en/Literature/English/Articles/white&black/5.php on line 59
Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening 'http://www.nafseislam.com/en/Controls/Banner.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/services/vux/lib/php') in /data/32/1/9/44/1987859/user/2172762/htdocs/en/Literature/English/Articles/white&black/5.php on line 59
|
|
On pages 127 and 152 of the same book
<<
Articles In English
P-1
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
P-9
P-10
P-11
P-12
P-13
This passage occurs on page 139-40
of Arwaah-e-.Salaasah compiled by Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib: "The Prophet of Allah
(Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) had perfect power to benefit, so his teachings
alone were sufficient IO reform the companions (Sahaabah) inwardly and they had
no need for the reforms introduced by the soofiya (mystics). After the demise of
the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) this power got weakened, so much
so that the soofiya had to make use of the exercises introduced by them, like
zikr bil jahr, habs-e-dam, paas-e-anfaas etc. These exercises were not there
during the tomes of the Prophet of Allah (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam), so they
were bid'at (innovations). But they were not bid'at-fid-deen (innovations in
Deen); they were rather bid'at-fid-deen (innovations for the sake of Deen). This
is to say that they had not been included in Deen, but were acts permitted under
the Shri'at were made use of for acquiring Deen. So they were exercises for the
attainment of Deen, rather than being included in Deen. This should be
understood in this way. A physician prescribes Sharbat-i-Banafishah (syrup) for
a patient who needs it, but it is not available in the market. So he collects
wood, lights a fire, fetches a pot, gets hold of sugar, brings water, and puts
banafshah and there things, and cooks sugar and banafshah after putting all
these things in a pot, and thus prepares the prescription Sharbat-i-Banafshah.
This collecting wood and lighting fire etc would not be called addition to the
prescription, but completion of the prescription. In the same way, all such
means permissible under the Shari'at should be made use of for reforming self,
and such means will not become part of Deen but a means to attain to Deen"
Here, it must be explained for the
benefit of the readers that the principle is that the non-existence of a thing
or its non-mention cannot be deemed to be proof of it not being permissible.
That is to say that if it is non-obligatory and non-necessary, it would not mean
that this act is not permitted and not correct. If something being prohibited or
made unlawful is not proved by the Qur'aan and the Sunnat, then that thing or
act cannot be made unlawful or wrong by somebody only on the basis of his
personal opinion. Otherwise, he who does so will be committing Ahdaas-fid-deen,
for to declare any good and permitted act to be bad or wrong is not a good act
but is a serious mistake and a bad innovation.
The present
Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi band, who are self-proclaimed right-guided ulama, do
not at all fear Almighty Allah, otherwise knowing people know it full well that
to apply one example of any new affair to another is in the tradition of the
Imams. But it is the practise of the ulama of Deoband whose tongues wag in such
matters that they issue fatwa if somehow they find a text to favour them, and
because of their ignorance pay no heed to the other texts, rules, explanations,
and the correct statements of knowing people, and the sayings of the holy
companions of the Prophet and their true followers. Asked to define bid'at, they
said: "Things which are existing now but were not there during the times of the
holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) are bid'at." But when the fault in
their tongue was pointed out to them and they found that their definition was
hurting themselves they changed their words and began saying: "Whatever act was
not done during the times of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) and
was done afterwards is a bid'at". This definition also could not save them from
being called bid'ati. Then they began to say: "Bid'at means making additions to
Deen". Even with this they could not prove what was meant by additions, for
everything which they call addition to Deen, is proved by their own books and by
their own acts. So, they once again resorted to such tactics as "because",
"consequently", "suppoing" and "that is". But reality has a habit of getting
itself acknowledged, so these Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi ulama had to write that
there are two kinds of bid' at, good as well as bad.
It would not be without interest
to readers that the meaning of bid'at has always been a controversial matter
among the ulama of Deoband. So, Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi Sahib described his
spiritual guide and teacher, Hajji Imdaadul Laah, as non-knowing and declared
his standpoint to be erroneous, and opined that it was the duty of the disciple
to correct his spiritual guide. The same Gangohi Sahib also called Thanvi Sahib
to be in the wrong. The author of the series of booklets "Johannesburg to
Bareilly" and the present breed of ulama of Deoband hold Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib
to be "Mujaddid-i-Millat" and "Hakeem-ul-Ummat", while Janab Rasheed Ahmad
Gangohi Sahib, in one of his letters to him, says thus: "You have not yet
understood the meaning of bid'at". — (Tazkiratur Rasheed, Page 122.)
Readers would have fully
understood by now that these people only want the protection of their own
persons; they are not at all concerned with preserving the golden principles of
Islam. Call it a miracle but the fact is that they themselves persistently and
vehemently do the same acts on account of which they accuse us, Sunnis, as being
practising bid'at. This servant of the Ahle Sunnat has already said, and says it
with full confidence and honesty, that he has in his possession documentary
proofs of the fact that these Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi people themselves hold
Meelaad, commemorate the martyrdom of Saiyidina Imam Husain, take out
processions, hold Faatihah and recital sessions of the Qur'aan, annual death
anniversaries, and visit graves, but they issue fatwa of being bid'atis only
against us, Sunnis. This clearly means that if they do things which even in
their own judgement are wrong those acts become justified, but they turn out to
be unlawful if done by others.
Dear readers! Don't you think this
is mocking Deen? Despite this, they claim that they are the right-guided ulama
although it would not be wrong to call them the predators of Deen. We pray to
Allah that He may protect us from their evil'
Dear readers! This servant of the
Ahl-e-Sunnat has already said in his booklet "Deoband to Bareilly: the truth"
that their aim is to deviate Musalmaans from the spirit of Islam, and they are
doing this job with encouragement and support and connivance of their non-Muslim
masters. The simple Musalmaans, who are caught into his web of the conspiracies
laid out by these clever people, are not aware to what abyss of destruction they
are guiding them to. Admonishing to say prayers is only their apparent
stratagem. Let me advance a proof from the writings of Muhammad Ilyaas Sahib,
the founder of the Tableeghi Jama'at. On page 6 of his book Da'wat he says:
"Miyan Zaheer-ul-Hasan! No body has been able to understand my mission. People
think that it is a movement for the establishment of Salaat (Namaaz). I say it
on oath that it is not a movement for the establishment of Salaat." One day,
while in despondent mood, he said: "Miyan Zaheer-ul-Hasan, We have to produce a
new nation." What say the ulama and the generality of Deobandi Wahaabi Tableeghi
band about this statement by their own Ilyaas Sahib? Who is right? If Ilyaas
Sahib is held to be truthful then all those Wahaabi Tableeghi people who call
the Tableeghi Jama'at a movement for the establishment of Salaat and think
themselves to be truthful, then their founder would be declared a liar. And
readers will know that all these, big or small, are liars. May Allah protect us
from them!
Some time ago, criticisms were
levelled by these very Deobandis against the book Fazaa'il-e-A'maal (which was
previously called Tableeghi Nisaab) by Deoband's Sheikh-ul-Hadith, Muhammad
Zakariya Sahib Kandhalvi. Among the criticisms was that the people of the
Tableeghi Jama'at are ignoring books by the stalwarts of Deoband, and
destroying them. Individuals belonging to the Tableeghi Jama'at keep with them
only the book Fazaa'il-e-A'naal, not those by Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Husain Ahmad
Madni and others. Replying to this criticism, Sheikh-ul-Hadith Muhammad Zakariya
Sahib and Muhammad Shaahid Saharanpun said, "Books included in the Tableeghi
curriculum are in accordance with the basic aims of the Tableeghi movement and
have been written keeping in view the principles and goal of the movement." They
say, "It is no secret that our aim is to make people Deobandi", that is to say,
in the words of the founder of the Jama'at, Maulana Muhammad Ilyaas Sahib, to
make than adhere to Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Maulana Muhammad Ilyaas." They
further say, "One of the old and original aims of the Tableeghi Jama'at is that
problems (Masaa'il) should not be discussed at Jama'at's meetings or Tableeghi
rallys." The reason for this, according to them, is that "discussion on problems
might create apprehensions and cause disaffection, and once this happens people
would not attend Tableeghi rallys."— (Condensed from the book "Doubts about
Fazaa'il and their replies" and "some general criticisms against Jama'at and
detailed answers to them".)
The author of the booklet
"Johannesburg to Bareilly" and his cohorts among the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi
people must be fully aware of these sayings of their elders. Would they even now
declare the Tableeghi Jama'at to be a movement for the establishment of Salaat
(Namaaz)?
Dear readers! How can truth be
expected of those whose fundamental aim is not to inform people of the commands
of the Qur'aan and the Sunnat? Just realise for yourselves what would be the
reaction of those of the Tableeghi Jama'at who wander about from place to place
preaching! The Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi Jama'at's people do not have the same
exterior and interior. The example of the elephant's teeth fits them
admirably—one for eating and the other for mere show. This is called hypocrisy.
May Allah protect us from them and from their evils!
Just look at another of their
criticism and its answer. The author of the booklet "Johannesburg to Bareilly"
has, on page 9, part 2 of the booklet, printed a facsimile of page 12 of A'laa
Hazrat Maulana Shah Ahmad Raza Khan Bareilvi's (Rahmatul Laahi Alaihi) published
Wasaaya Shareef and levelled a criticism, although this person who is devoid of
all wisdom failed to see that the same facsimile contained a conclusive answer.
It is true that those afflicted with prejudice and enmity cannot see the truth,
because unfounded grudge and enmity not only destroys wisdom but also makes one
lose all good points of intellect. These Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi people were
under the impression that their nefarious doings would succeed in South Africa
because Muslims in South Africa were not aware of facts. They thought that their
lies would remain under a smokescreen. But they did not know that they would
themselves become the targets of the salvos that they had turned towards true
Musalmaans. Thus, see the following.
In the last paragraph of Wasaaya
Shareef, the Imam of the Ahle-Sunnat, A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi, a facsimile of
which has been printed on page 9, part 2, of "Johannesburg to Bareilly", "says:
"Raza Husain, Hasnain and all of you should live in love and harmony and, as far
as possible, do not cease following the Shari'at and Deen. It is the most
important of all the obligations to be firm on my Deen and mazhab, which is
clearly mentioned in my books. May Allah give you the capacity to do so.
Was-Salaam". The author of "Johannesburg to Bareilly" has objected to only two
words occurring in this paragraph, which are, "my deen". On the basis of these
two words, the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi band wanted to prove that A'laa Hazrat
Bareilvi (Allah forbid) had invented a new Deen.
In principle, this objection is
not at all valid, because the full sentence as it appears on page 9, part 2 of
"Johannesburg to Bareilly" is this: "My Deen and Mazhab which is obvious from my
books". If only a few books out of the over thousand written by A'laa Hazrat
Bareilvi are perused, then nobody would be able to deny the fact that A'laa
Hazrat Bareilvi was undoubtedly a true preacher of the Qur'aan and the Sunnat, a
true defender of the Islamic faith and a true well-wisher of the Musalmaans. If
even one thing is not proved to be against the true doctrines and rules of Islam
in all his writings, then to say that "my Deen" means anything other than the
Deen of Islam. To do so would be rank foolishness and ignorance. The, A'laa
Hazrat had not used the words "my deen" only, but the full sentence is this: "my
Deen and Mazhab which is most obvious from my books" and before this sentence he
has urged strict following of the Shari'at. If the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi
Jama'at people are even now averse to acknowledging facts, then they should see
the state of their own house and realise that while they cannot see the beam in
their own eyes, they arc trying to find a mole in other's eyes.
By way of reply, let us consider
the following:
In the minutes of a meeting Sheikh Muhammad Zakariya Saharan Puri held on 19th
Ramadaanul Mubaarak, 1390 A.H. (a Deobandi A'lim) Taqiyud Deen Nadvi Mazaahri,
has written thus: The ulama of Deoband, Manzoor Nu'maani and Abul Hasan Nadvi,
also participated in the meeting. He said, "Hold on firmly to the Deen
established by our elders, Hazrat Gangohi (Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi) and Hazrat
Nanotvi (Muhammad Qaasim Nanotvi). The likes of Rasheed and Qaasim will not be
born again, so you should go on following them with devotion".—
(Suhbat-e-Ba-Aulyia, Page 125)
Dear readers! Please pay attention
to the above-mentioned words—"the Deen which was established by Gangohi and
Nanotvi"—said by the head of the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi Jama'at, Sheikh
Muhammad Zakariya Sahib Khandhalvi.
On the basis of these words, if someone were to say that Gangohi Sahib and
Nanotvi Sahib had established a new Deen, then the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi
band should never attempt to prove, by pointing to these books written by them,
that the two used to preach Islam. Firstly, because books by those two contain
polytheistic writings and, secondly, after the words "the Deen" Zakariya Sahib
mentions only two names, that of Gandhi’s and Nanotvi's, whose books are not
mentioned. Moreover, Zakeriaya Sahib is urging people to follow only Gangohi and
Nanotvi, and not the Shari'at.
Also listen to what is said on
page 113 of Tazkaratur Rasheed: "By Allah, the Great, drinking the wash-water of
Maulana Thanvi's feet brings about redemption in the next life".
Readers should note how much
emphasis has been laid on this sentence by beginning it by swearing in the name
of Allah. Therefore, the Deobandi- Wahaabis should now feel free to discard
Deen, Imam, and rozah (i.e. religion, faith, prayers and fasting). All that they
now have to do to seek redemption in the next life, according to their Mufti, is
to drink the wash-water of the feet of Thanvi Sahib.
Please also note another saying of
Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi Sahib. He says: "Remember that truth is only what flows
from the tongue of Rasheed Ahmad. And I swear to you that I am nothing but
guidance in the present times, and redemption depends upon following me".—
(Tazkiratur Rasheed, Page 17, Vol. 2.)
These words have been said with
such definiteness that if someone were to say that "truth is only that which
Gangohi says" and whatever have been said by not only all the Prophets,
companions, friends of Allah and the right-guided ulama who have appeared in the
world, but also by all the Wahaabi-Deobandi ulama throughout the world is not
the truth, then recourse must be taken to such words as "because",
"consequently", "if", and "supposing". Nor attempts should be made to prove
Gangohi Sahib to be innocent, otherwise the Deobandi -Wahaabis will be put into
double jeopardy. Rather it should be straight away accepted that this statement
by Gangohi Sahib is another lie, for a lie is something which is said in
opposition to a fact, and these words of Gangohi Sahib are, undoubtedly, not
facts. When it is proved that Gangohi Sahib is speaking a lie, then, you tell me
yourselves, is it possible for such a thing to happen, much less guidance and
redemption, could take place by following a liar?
Dear Readers! This servant of the
Ahl-e-Sunnat submits that the ulama and ordinary members of
Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi band are inimical to us, Ahl-e-Sunnat-Wa-Jama'at,
only because we hold a mirror to them through books written by their own
stalwarts. When they see in the mirror that their own faces are pockmarked, then
only two options remain open to them: either they should wipe out the pockmarks
from their faces or break the mirror. Books by their stalwarts are the mirrors
and their undue criticism against us is the pockmarks. A rope may burn out but
wouldn't give up its twists (that is to say, habits take long to die) is a
famous proverb. (Another proverb of this nature concerns the tail of a dog. But,
by the grace of Allah, the tongue and pen of this sinner cannot tolerate such
improper way of saying things). These people behave in like manner; they would
neither destroy worthless hooks by their stalwarts nor would they stop levelling
unfounded allegations against us, Ahl-e-Sunnat. Their attitude seems to be 'I
will not accept however strong your argument be', which depicts their
intransigence.
And now, let me explain the words,
"my Deen" of A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi (Alaihir Rahmah) in the light of the Qur'aan
and the Sunnat. In the holy Qur'aan, Almighty Allah says: Alyouma Akmaltu
Lakum-Deenakum—"Today I have completed your Deen for you". When Almighty Allah
Himself says "your Deen", then to say "my Deen" on the part of any Musalmaan
cannot be wrong.
According to a hadith contained in
Muslim Shareef and Bukhaari Shareef, angels would put three questions in the
grave. The second of their questions would be Ma Deenuka (What is your Deen),
and a Mumin's reply would be this: Deeniyal-Islam (My Deen is Islam). It is
requested of the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi ulama and general public that when
they go into their graves they should plainly tell Munkar-Nakeer (angels) that
they did not have any Deen Or else all Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi should accept
that the criticism levelled by them against A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi (Radiyal Laahu
Anhu) is based on nothing but enmity with A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi.
The author of "Johannesburg to
Bareilly" utters another lie on page 25 of part 2 of his booklet.
After quoting part of the Imam of Ahl-e-Sunnat, A'laa Hazrat Maulana Shah Ahmad
Raza Bareilvi's (Rehmatul Laahi Alaih) Wasaaya Shareef the author of
"Johannesburg to Bareilly" says: It is interesting to note that Ahmad Raza Khan
does not say that these things be given to the poor, and the reward of it be
conveyed to me. Nor he says, send these things to me". Subsequently, in his
usual vitriolic and insolent language, such that I have nothing Lo say except
Lanat-ul-Laahi 'Alal Kaazibeen ("Allah's curse be on liars"). After this reply
put in the Words of the Holy Qur'aan, let me tell my readers that A'laa Hazrat
Bareilvi (Alaihir Rahmah) told his relations in his last will, "as far as it is
easily possible for you to do so, give faatihah for the redemption of the soul
on good things". And, in this connection, he mentioned a few dishes, which are
considered tasty. But while dictating his direction with regard to Faatihah and
feast for the redemption of the soul, he clarified certain matters.
Listen to this in his own words:
"Do not give anything out of the food of the feast of Faatihah to the
well-to-do, but give it to the poor and that, too, with due respect to them, and
by way of hospitality, not by rebuking them. Thus, nothing should be done which
is against Sunnat".
Immediately after this comes the
writing of A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi, the facsimile of which the author of
"Johannesburg to Bareilly" has printed on page 27, part 2 of his book but has
omitted the sentence "the food of the feast of Faatihah should not be given to
the well-to-do but to the poor".
Readers will themselves realise
how much perfidy and the author of “Johannesburg to Bareilly” has demonstrated
lies. Even so, the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi ulama call themselves
right-guided ulama. They should be ashamed of doing this.
Having known about such acts and
forfeit beliefs of these Deobandi -Wahaabi is it possible for anyone to imagine
that these Deobandi-Wahaabis who dabble in all sorts of lies and indulge in
making a mockery of Deen have anything to do with truth or purity? By no means.
Mufti Muhammad Shafee Sahib, a
Deobandi himself, says: "Distorting somebody's writing against his intention is
to charge him with false allegation and a calumny, and nobody should be in any
doubt about doing such a thing being unlawful".— (Sunnat and bid'at, Page 10.)
Dear readers ! Can people
indulging in unlawful acts be called "right guided"? You will also be certainly
of the opinion that such people cannot be called right-guided. These
Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi ulama can never be called right-guided ulama, rather
with their filthy beliefs and bad actions they are, without any doubt,
ulama-e-soo' or bad ulama.
Look at their hypocrisy. Thanvi
Sahib has also drawn up his last will which, inter alia. says: "After I am of
gone, those with whom I had been concerned during my life-time should dominate
your thoughts. I will that if twenty people should make themselves responsible
for the payment of a rupee a month to her (Thanvi Sahib's wife) then she would
no be in any difficulty".— (Tambihaat-e-Vasiyyat, Page 2.)
While A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi
admonishes his relatives "to take care of the poor and not to do anything
against Sunnat of the holy Prophet", Thanvi Sahib of the Deobandis does not rely
on Allah and so he is urging non-Allah about his family members and has no
concern with the poor.
In his life-time, Thanvi Sahib was
concerned only with himself. So, listen to what he had been doing all his life.
He himself says: "When a guest arrives I take a frugal meal with him. When there
is no guest, besides the usual, I take such food which provides strength to me,
like milk and halwa (a kind of sweet dish).—
(Al lfaazaut-ul-Yaumiyah, Vol. 7, Page 71.)
His usual practice with guests
around suggests that Thanvi Sahib used to dupe his guests with simplicity for
show. Not only this. Also see how he dealt with gifts given to him. He himself
says: "Somethings are such that they are made use of as soon as they come. But
there are certain things about which I had to think what should be done with
them. I either gave them away to someone or when miserliness dominated me then I
began to think why should I give them away for free. Let me sell them and thus
make same money from them".— (Ashraful Ma'moolaat, Page 15.)
The author of "Johannesburg to
Bareilly" would be fully aware of the saying of the holy Prophet about a miserly
person. He should take cognisance of the fact that Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib who
used to say that he followed the Sunnat is himself saying "if miserliness
overpowered me." This means that miserliness was a habit with him but sometimes
it overpowered him and when it was so he used to trade in the gifts and
presents.
Moreover, Thanvi Sahib says: “My
whole life has been spent as a parasite. First, I was a parasite to my father's
earnings. Then, for sometime I lived on a salary. Afterwards, I reverted to the
same condition of being a parasite. This is to say, for a long, long time I
lived on presents. I have neither to do any work, nor earn a living".—
(Al If aazaat ul-Yaumiyah, Vol. 3, Page 296.)
While the Imam of Ahl-e-Sunnat,
A'laa Hazrat Maulana Ahmad Raza Khan Bareilvi, in his last will, is issuing
instruction for honouring and respecting the poor, and to feed them with tasty
dishes, the Hakeem-ul-Ummat of the Deobandi Wahaabis does not find the time for
anything but to fill his own stomach.
Listen to what the Imam of the
Deobandi Wahaabis, Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi Sahib, used to do. "Someone requested
Hazrat Gangohi to get a new set of teeth made for himself. To this, he said, in
that case he would have to again chew. At present, people took pity on him
because he had no teeth and so he was being fed on soft halwa (a kind of
sweet).— (Al Ifaazaat ul-Yaumiyah, Vol. 2, Page 23.)
Also see this. The veteran Imam of
the Deobandi-Wahaabi-ism, Isma'iel Dehlvi Balakoti says: "My supplications are
of no effect without (Mithaa'ee) sweets"— (Arwaah-e-Salaasah, Page 72.)
Furthermore, see this. "Hazrat
Husain Ahmad Madni Ji, used to say, Haji Sahib (Badrud-Deen), why did you not
bring sweets with you? When I would say, respected sir, I had no money to buy
it. Then, Hazrat (Husain Ahmad) would order his students to search me, and then
all the students would pounce upon me (Haji Badrud-Deen), and if any money was
found on me all of it was used to buy sweets which were distributed amongst
them. And sometimes the Hazrat would snatch away my Sherwaani (outer apparel)
and keep it with himself and would say it would be returned only when I would
give money and I had to give money"—
(Sheikh-ul-lslam Number, Al-Jami'at, Delhi, Page 95.)
The Deobandis call this Husain
Ahmad Tandvi Madni Sahib as the Shaikhul Islam. This is the Husain Ahmad Tandvi
Madni, who, when he gave a fatwaa against the ideologies of the Qur'aan, was
condemned by the Poet of the East, Allamah Muhammad Iqbaal, and publicly accused
this Sheikhul Islam of Deobandis of being unaware of the status and station of
the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) and of saying things which Abu
Lahab used to say.
Dear readers! Every action has a
reaction. These Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghis had been most insolent to the
beloved Prophet of Allah (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) and had gone to the
extent of practising polytheism, with the result that for being insolent to the
beloved of Allah (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) they were punished in this world
and the punishment which will be inflicted upon them in the next world will be,
Insha Allah, seen by all the creation of Allah. When Waleed Bin Mugheerah showed
insolence to the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaih' Wasallam) then Almighty
Allah degraded him to the extent that He recorded ten of his faults (which can
be seen in Qur'aan Soorah Noon-Wal-Qalam, Part 29).
It is, therefore, proved from the
Qur'aan that those insolent to the holy Prophet were condemned and all their
faults recounted. The incidents related in the Qur'aan are before us. Namrood
claimed godhead, and so did Fir'aun. Almighty Allah gave them a long rope, but
they behaved insolently towards those loved by Him, i.e., Allah's Prophets.
Namrood who proclaimed himself to
be Allah died on account of an affliction caused to him by a mosquito and
Fir'aun was drowned with his entire army.
A favourite disciple of the Imam
of the Deobandis, Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, named Husain Ali Sahib wan Bhachranvi,
*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* In "Johannesburg to Bareilly", pan 2, page 1, a foolishness of
theirs has been mentioned by themselves. It is written: "This is the first tune
that we have heard of this book Bulghatul- Hai'raan".
If those who
propagate and defend Wahaabi-ism in South Africa are not aware of their own
ulama and of the books written by them, then they have no right to criticise
others while remaining unaware of their own house. The irony is that while
pretending to be unaware of the book Bulghatul-Hairaan, the author of
"Johannesburg to Bareilly" is trying to prove as correct the writings in
Bulghatul-Hairaan. If this is not foolishness on his pan, then what is it?
For the information
of the readers, I must state that whenever we, the Ahle Sunnat Wa Jama'at, show
to these Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi band the writings of their own veteran
ulama, then they begin to look askance at each other. Only if they had been
interested in knowing about their own house and reading the writings of their
own big-wigs, they would not have dared to level false and unfounded allegations
against us, the Ahl-e-Sunnat-Wa-Jama'at. The sincere advice of this servant of
the Ahl-e-Sunnat to the entire band of Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghis is that, if
possible, they should get acquainted with the writings of their own bigwigs and
before they criticise us they should also find out what their standpoint is
about such criticism. Thus they would perhaps be saved from undergoing disgrace
and ignominy. Or else we will go on answering your allegations in the light of
the writings of your own big-wigs so that people may become cognisant of the
fact the Deobandi-Wahaabi-ism is a mere bundle of lies.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
used to behave most insolently. You have already seen some of his writings in
his book Bulqhatul-Hairaan quoted by me my in book "Deoband to Bareilly: the
truth". Let us see what happened to him. A few days before his death, his
entrails became such that his stool would come into his mouth, and sometimes he
would throw it out of his mouth and sometimes he would gulp it down and his legs
had become such that when urinating his urine would get sprinkled on his face.
His disciple, Ghulam Khan of Rawalpindi (the Deobandis call him
Sheikh-ul-Qur'aan Ghulam-ul-laah Khan) was more insolent than his teacher.
Before his death, it so happened that his whole tongue stuck out of his mouth
and there were very ugly spots on it, and his face had become like that of a
dog. The news that "under doctors' instructions it is written on the coffin that
his face is not worth seeing" was printed in Pakistani papers in bold headlines.
It happened only a year ago that a
Wahaabi aalim, Habeebur Rahmaan Yazdaani, addressed a public meeting at Lahore
and said, "Sunni Bareilvis say that Daata (Ganj Bakhsh) can do many things. If
he can do anything, then he should demonstrate his power by breaking my legs."
Subsequently, people witnessed the spectacle that very evening that his legs
were broken, and he got punished for his insolence to Hazrat Daata Sahib
(Radiyal Laahu Anhu).
Dear readers! Stories about the
fate of insolent people are related only so that people should be warned and
should neither, in anyway, be insolent to those who are beloved of Allah nor
should they praise and support such insolent. But, alas, these
Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghis have no time for doing anything else but praising
and adulating those who are insolent to the beloved of Allah. These practices of
the Deobandis have earned for them Allah's wrath and displeasure.
Thus, the Imam of the Deobandis,
Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi Sahib, says: "Uttering the polytheistic words and
advancing arguments to prove them and rebutting the arguments against them is
itself argument for belief and, if it is not belief then also it is unlawful and
brings the wrath of Allah. For example, somebody calls you an ass or a swine or
if somebody were to call you bad names, it is apparent that that person does not
'relieve that you are an ass or a swine or you are like that which he is saying
by calling you bad names. But tell me, would you or would you not be angered? Of
course, you would be. Thus you should consider polytheistic words. They will
surely bring wrath of Allah, because Allah Almighty is more self-respecting than
the most self-respecting of Musalmaans"— (Tazkiratur Rasheed, Page 94.)
The ulama of Deoband should ponder
over the writings of their own Imam. They not only say by their tongue words
which are polytheistic and unlawful, according to the fatwa of their own Imam,
but also propagate them and try to prove them correct through arguments.
According to their own Imam, doing so proves their belief in these words, and in
case this is not their belief even then uttering such words is unlawful and all
the Deobandis are doing this unlawful act. A thousand pities that they are
involved in acts which, according to their own Imam, are polytheistic, yet these
Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi ulama who claim to show light to others are not
conscious in what depth of darkness they themselves are vallowing. So, may Allah
protect us from their evil!
Another allegation against A'laa
Hazrat Bareilvi made on page 10, part 2 of "Johannesburg to Bareilly" proves the
utter ignorance of these Deobandi-Tableeghis. A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi (Rahmatul
Laahi Alaih) has composed poems in many forms of poetry in honour of Hazrat
Mahboob-i-Subhaani Ghaus-i-A'zam Sheikh Abdul Qaadir Jeelaani (Radiyal Laahu
Anhu). A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi has composed many a quatret, in one of which he has
mentioned the name of Hazrat Saiyidina Ghaus-i-A'zam (Radiyal Laahu Anhu) that
is Abdul Qaadir, with much reverence and devotion. (The fourth and the seventh
word of the name of Hazrat Saiyidina Ghaus-i-A'zam (Radiyal Laahu Anhu) is "A"
and the last word is "R" and this is the word which has been interpreted to mean
the end). The author of the booklet "Johannesburg to Bareilly" has reproduced
only one couplet of the quatrain. Had he been honest, then he would have
reproduced the full quatrain, but he knew that if he did so all the learned
people would come to know that the criticism of the author of "Johannesburg to
Bareilly" was merely because of his own ignorance and his enmity with A'laa
Hazrat Bareilvi.
Here I deem it most essential to
tell it to my readers that all the stalwart ulama to Deoband have held that
every verse of the poetry of A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi is saturated with devotion to
the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam). No stalwart aalim of Deoband
ever found any fault with the poetical works of A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi. It may be
that the author of the booklet "Johannesburg to Bareilly" thinks himself to be
the greatest of ulama, and, therefore, because of his great knowledge, he is
providing the means to demean himself! *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author of the booklets "Johannesburg to Bareilly" is well
versed in English but completely lacks knowledge of Arabic and Persian. He
should see what his leader, Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib, has said about English. He
says: "English is no branching of knowledge what can it possibly have to do with
Deen. Rather, those who read it often become unconcerned with
Deen."—Karnaalaa'-i-Ashrafiyah, Page 70.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear readers, please see below the complete quatrain of A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi of
which only one couplet has been reproduced by the author of "Johannesburg to
Bareilly" in order to be able to make a calumny against him.
Bar Whdate 'uoo Raabe' Abdul
Qaadir
Yak Shaahid-o-duo Saabe' Abdul Qaadir
Anjaam-e-Wae A'ghaaze Risaalat baashad
lenak go ham taabe' Abdul Qaadir
The translation of this quatrain
is as follows: "The fourth letter 'A' of the name of Abdul Qaadir i.e. Hazrat
Ghaus-e-A'zam (Radiyal Laahu Anhu), is witness to the Unity of Allah Almighty
and the seventh letter of the same name 'A' is a second witness. The name Abdul
Qaadir ends with 'R' which is the first letter of the word 'Risaalat'. So, it
can be said that the excellence of the name of Abdul Qaadir (word wise) is such
that all these points are subservient to the blessed name of Abdul Qaadir, and
are derived from the blessed and loved name of Abdul Qaadir".
Otherwise also, this is a fact
that what A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi is saying in the last couplet of his quatrain is
this. Hazrat Ghaus-e-A'zam Sheikh Abdul Qaadir Jeelaani (Radiyal Laahu Anhu) is
the head of the loved ones of Allah, and where the dominion of Saiyidina
Ghaus-e-Paak (Radiyal Laahu Anhu) ends that of the Prophets of Allah Almighty
and their station begins.
The dishonest author of
"Johannesburg to Bareilly" and the propagandists of Deobandi-Wahaabi-ism in
their ignorance and unawareness translate the last couplet thus: "Prophethood
will be revived after Sheikh Abdul Qaadir, and the new Prophet will also be
subservient to Sheikh Abdul Qaadir." In reply to this, I will only say what a
famous Arabic proverb purports to say—he who has absolutely no knowledge of
Islamic jurisprudence has become the author of a book on Islamic jurisprudence.
It is their utter misfortune and
the punishment for their evil deeds that these propagandists of
Deobandi-Wahaabi-ism do not have the capacity to understand the works of the
Imam of Ahl-e-Sunnat, A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi. They level I allegations and heap
calumny against A'laa Hazrat Faazil Bareilvi only because I of their ignorance,
and thus themselves provide the means to their own degradation. Since these
so-called ulama of the Deobandi-Wahaabi school are I unable to understand the
meaning of the first couplet of this quatrain so they put wrong and tortuous
meanings to the second couplet in order to be able to criticise A'laa Hazrat
Bareilvi (Radiyal Laahu Anhu) and thereby earn for themselves the wrath of
Allah.
The author of "Johannesburg to
Bareilly" has written thus: "Since A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi calls himself
"Qaadiri", so he is subservient to Sheikh Abdul Qaadir. Thus, A'laa Hazrat is
claiming to be a Prophet." This undoubtedly is a great calumny against A'laa
Hazrat Bareilvi. The author of "Johannesburg to Bareilly" and his supporters
will, Insha Allah, be punished for this calumny.
Let those who level false allegations against A'laa Hazrat Maulana Shah Ahmad
Raza Khan Bareilvi (Radiyal Laahu Anhu) see with open eyes this fatwa of A'laa
Hazrat Bareilvi which he has given in his book on Khatm-e-Nubowwat.
He says: "Almighty Allah is the
Truth and His Book is true. In the same way as it is incumbent upon a Musalmaan
to believe that there is no deity but Allah, that He is the One, the
Independent, and He has no partner in His dominions, so it is incumbent upon him
to believe that the holy Prophet of Allah (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) is the
last of the Prophets, and also to believe that no Prophet will be sent either
during his own times or afterwards, and to reject any such idea as definitely
impossible and false. The definitive Qur'aanic text is: "Except for the Prophet
of Allah and the last of the Prophets." Not only he who denies this, but he also
who has any doubt about it or has even the slightest doubt about it is a
polytheist, and irrevocably cursed and one who will be roasted at the fire. Not
only such a person is a polytheist, but he also is a polytheist who does not
acknowledge such a person as a polytheist and he also who shows any doubt or
hesitation is acknowledging him to be a polytheist is himself a
polytheist."—Page 6.
Levelling false calumnies against
A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi (Radiyal Laahu Anhu) even in the face of a whole book by
him on " Khatm-e-Nubowwat." and his fatwa is a clear proof of the inner evil and
lying faculty of the author of the booklets "Johannesburg to Bareilly" and of
the Deobandis as a whole.
Here I must present before my
readers the idea that they should go through the book Tahzeerun Naas if they
want to see the door to Prophethood opened up. The veteran leader of the
Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi group, Muhammad Qaasim Nanotvi Sahib, does not
acknowledge the beloved of Allah, the holy Prophet of Allah, Hazrat Muhammad
(Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam), to be the last of the Prophets. In his book
Tahzeerun Naas he writes: "To interpret "Khaatim-un-Nabiyyeen" as the "last
Prophet" is a misconception in the minds of the general public. This meaning is
not correct in the eyes of the learned
Nanotvi Sahib goes on to write:
"Even if a Prophet were to be born after the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi
Wasallam), the finality of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) will
not be affected in any way". It is obvious from this writing of Nanotvi Sahib
that in his view the door to Prophethood remains open even after the demise of
the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) and it is possible for a new
Prophet to be born.
What a pity that the
Deobandi-Wahaabis cannot see their own polytheism as polytheism, while they arc
all the time engaged in trying to dub true Musalmaans as polytheists. The author
of "Johannesburg,, to Bareilly" should see the saying of the big-wig of
Deobandi-Wahaabi-ism, Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib, which fits him and others of his
ilk. On page 337 of part 4 of Al'lfaazaatul Yaumiyah, he says: "You are unaware
of the insects that arc infesting your body, and yet you are keenly observing
flies sitting on somebody else's clothes! Just look at yourself in what stale
you arc".
The author of "Johannesburg to
Bareilly" and his supporters should also see this. Their Thanvi Sahib says:
"Some go into a garden to have a walk there some to smell the fragrance of
flowers, and some to eat of the fruits. But it a swine were to go there, he
would only search for some filth, for some kind of refuse. This applies to any
critic who tries to find only defects in a person who is otherwise gifted with
much good". Would the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghis who make impious allegations
against A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi look at their faces in the mirror that has been
provided them by their own Thanvi Sahib, and correct themselves accordingly.
This servant of the Ahle Sunnat
has been trying to show the reality to these Deobandi-Wahaabis and doing so
through the writings of their own big-wigs. At present, these propagandists of
Deobandi-Wahaabi-ism, in order to earn money, are posing themselves as the
defenders of "Khatm-e-Nubuwwat", and as fighters against Qadianis. The big-wig
of the Deobandi-Wahaabis, Nanotvi Sahib, has accepted it as a possibility that a
new Prophet may be born after the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam)
and because of this polytheistic belief of his he has lost his Imaan The
present-day Deobandi-Wahaabi ulama do call the Qadianis to be polytheists, but
they also not only call their own Nanotvi Sahib to be Mu'min but a monopolist of
Deen despite his having beliefs similar to the Qadianis. Perhaps, the author of
"Johannesburg to Bareilly" also regards the Qadianis as polytheists, but he
should carefully go through the fatwa contained on Pages 7 and 8 of Vol. 1, of
Fataawa Daarul Uloom, Deoband, and tell us what opinion should be formed of the
Deobandi-Wahaabis.
"Question: Can anyone who regards
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian to be a Musalmaan after becoming aware of the fact
that he himself claimed to be a Maseeh and a Mahdi, and yet remains a Musalmaan?
Answer: (Fataawa of the Daarul
Uloom, Deoband): The reprehensible beliefs of Mirza of Qadian are such that
knowing the facts no person can call him a Musalmaan. But it is possible for him
who has no knowledge of his reprehensible beliefs or who interprets them in some
other way and he does not call him a polytheist. However, having gained
knowledge of his pernicious beliefs, the said Mirza must be called a polytheist.
He, and those following him who holds the same beliefs as he, must not be called
Musalmaan. He was not a Musalmaan, as is evidenced by his books. Regarding a
person who does not call him a polytheist, he should also not be called a
polytheist, because in matter of interoperation it is better that the verdict of
polytheism should not be passed".— Azeez-ur-Rahmaan, Mufti, Daarul Uloom,
Deoband.
Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib says:
"Great caution should be taken in declaring somebody a polytheist. What harm
would it do if we do not call such a person (a polytheist) a polytheist?"*
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* For the information to the readers it is submitted that making
a distinction between infidelity and Islam is one of the essentials of Deen. You
may not call an infidel as an infidel all your life but when the infidelity of
the infidel becomes apparent this it is absolutely necessary to regard him as an
infidel and to call him by this appellation. Therefore, this is also the Fatwa
of the ulama of Deoband: "He who does not call an infidel as infidel is himself
an infidel".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, he says: "Thus, if the polytheists are infect polytheists and we do
not call them as such would we be held to account on the Day of Judgement? Or if
we call polytheists as polytheists, then what good can accrue on account of
it?"—
(Kamaalaat-i-Ashrafiyah, Page 347 and 348.)
Look at another fatwa: "To be
insolent to the Prophets (Alaihis Salaatu-was-Salaam) is, of course, polytheism,
but he does not become a polytheist if he interprets it to mean something
else".— (Imdaad-ul-Fataawa, Page 126, Vol. 4.)
The founder of the Daarul Uloom,
Muhammad Qaasim Nanotvi, has not recognised the meaning of
"Khaatim-un-Nabiyyeen" to be the "final Prophet" and has held it possible for
another Prophet to be born after the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi
Wasallam). And the Muftis of this very Daarul Uloom have given the fatwa that a
polytheist should not be called a polytheist for if explained it does not remain
polytheism, that it is better not to call a polytheist as a polytheist, and that
there is no harm in not calling a polytheist as a polytheist. Instead of
answering these writings on his own, this servant of the Ahle Sunnat, is
reproducing the writings of the ulama of Deoband.
Janab Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib
says: "In important matters of Deen an interpretation (Ta'weel) is no defence of
polytheism." — (Al Ifaazaatul Yaumiyah, Vol. 7, Page 60.)
The same Thanvi Sahib says: " "If
somebody has in him even one thing of infidelity, then he is an infidel in the
eyes of all".— (Al Ifaazaatul Yaumiyah, Vol. 7, Page 234.)
Also see this: "Talking about
Qadianis, a Maulvi Sahib asked Hazrat-e-Waala (Thanvi Sahib) to give religious
verdict on such Musalmaans who do not subscribe to the view that the Qadianis
are polytheists. And Thanvi Sahib said! 'There are two situations in which the
Qadianis cannot be declared polytheists. One of them is that they declare that
they (the Qadianis) do not believe in what they are said to believe in and,
thus, declared polytheists. The other situation is that they hold these beliefs
but still they are not polytheists. Now he who thinks like this is also a
polytheist. He may not call polytheism as polytheism, but under judicial laws
(Ahkaam-i-Qaza) he is a polytheist. But only Allah knows what he is under the
laws of honesty (Ahkaam-i-Diyaanat). It may be that he has some unknown reason
in his mind."—
(Al'lfaazaat-ul-Yaumiyah, Vol. 6, Page 318.)
In the above mentioned writing of
Thanvi Sahib, the preachers of Deobandi-ism should deeply ponder over the
difference between judicial laws and laws of honesty, and also reply to us.
The compiler of the Fatawaa of
Daarul Uloom, Deoband, Janab Mufti Muhammad Shafee Sahib, writes; "The holy
Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) has informed us that he (Sallal Laahu
Alaihi Wasallam) is the one with whom the chain of Prophets will end and there
can be no Prophet after him. And the information has been given to us by
Almighty Allah that he (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) is the one who concludes
the chain of Prophets. And the ummah is unanimous on this that this saying is
based on its obvious meaning and that understanding which comes to us through
its obvious meaning also means the same thing without any interpretation or
particularisation. Thus, there is no doubt about the polytheism of those who
deny it, and this is the final and unanimous belief."—
( Khatam-un-Nubuwwat Fil-Aasaar, Page 8.)
The same Mufti Sahib on page 21 of
his Hadiyatul-Mahdiyeen, says: "Of course it is the unanimous and final verdict
of Arabic lexicon that the Khaatam-un-Nabiyyeen occurring in the Qur'aanic verse
only means "Last Prophet" and nothing but this ... The Muslim Ummah is unanimous
on this meaning. So that he who goes against this unanimity (on the agreed
meaning of "Khaatam-un-Nabiyyeen") is a polytheist, and if he persists with this
(i.e. on going against the unanimous verdict) he should be put to the sword."
After the fatwa of Mufti Muhammad
Shafee Sahib, please also note the following Fatwa by Janab Muhammad Idrees
Kandhalvi Deobandi. In his book, Miskl-ul-Khitaam, he writes; "To deny that the
holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) is the last Prophet is to deny the
fundamental of Deen. And it is obvious that denial of the fundamental of Deen is
out-and-out polytheism".— Page 29
Dear readers! you have observed
that the ulama of the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi group heaped a most fifty
calumny against A'laa Hazrat Bareilvi (Radiyal Laahu Anhu), and, because of
this, the miracle came to pass that all of them were punished, in that all of
them were pronounced polytheists by fataawa pronounced one against another.
(Here I would like to inform my readers that the brother of Abul Kalaam A'zad
(Deobandi) had praised Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. For this, see
Hayaat-i-Tayyibah, written by Abdul Qaadir, Saudagar Mal, and page 369. Also
know that the nikaah of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was performed by a famous
Wahaabi aalim, Nazeer Husain Muhaddis Dehlvi.— (Hayaat-i-Tayyibah, Page 76)
A renowned stalwart spiritual
leader of the Deobandis, Janab Abdul Qaadir Raipuri, believing in the false
inspirations coming to the Dajjaal and liar and polytheist and apostate, Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, requested him for instructions and guidance and said his
prayers behind the Qadiani polytheist and apostate Imam. Readers should get
acquainted with all these.
The present head of the
Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi Jama'at, Janab Abul Hasan Ali Nadvi, on page 55 of
his book, Sawaanih Maulana Abdul Qaadir Raipuri, says: "In those days Mirza
Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani's claim and invitations were much talked about, specially
in the Punjab, where few Musalmaan localities were free of such talks and
discussions would continue. Near the home-town (Dhudiyan) of Hazrat (Abdul
Qaadir Raipuri) is a place called 'Bhera'. An aalim there, who was also a
student of the family elders of the Hazrat (Raipuri), Hakeem Noorud-deen
(Qadiani), was a close devotee and assistant of Mirza Sahib (Qadiani) and had
permanently settled in Qadian to be of help to him (Mirza Qadiani) in achieving
success for him and for the sake of his companionship. There was much talk in
his circle of devotees and in his sphere of influence of the claim of Mirza
Sahib to be a person favoured by Allah and for his being blessed with acceptance
of his supplication. The Hazrat (Raipuri) had read it somewhere in Mirza Sahib's
(Qadiani's) writings that Allah had inspired in him the saying, Ajeebu kulla
duaa'ika illaf shurakaa'ika (I will grant all your supplications except those
made for your partners), So The Hazrat (Raipuri) in a letter to Mirza Sahib
(Qadiani) from 'Afzal Grah' referred to this very inspiration and promise and
requested him that since he had no partnership with him (Qadiani) he should make
supplication so that he may be given guidance and his breast be opened up. A
letter from there written by one Maulvi Abdul Kareem Sahib informed him
(Raipuri) that his letter had been received and much supplication had been made
for him. So, he should keep reminding about it occasionally. The Hazrat
(Raipuri) used to say that in those days a post card cost one Pisa and so he
would occasionally post a card to Mirza Qadiani by way of a reminder for
supplicating on his behalf."
More about the special disciple of
Janab Shah Abdur Raheem Raipuri, Janab Abdul Qaadir Raipuri (whose real name was
Ghulam Jeelaani). On page 62 of his book, Abul Hasan Nadvi Sahib writes: "Giving
an account of the meetings held by Hakeem Sahib (Noorud-deen Qadiani), he (Abdul
Qaadir Raipuri) said 'I used to watch him (Hakeem Sahib) recite every now and
then the Qur'aanic verse La ilaaha illa anta Subhaanaka inni kuntu minaz
zaalimeen with such compassion that one felt drawn towards it. Then, I would
think how a person possessing such ecstasy and nearness to Allah can be so
ignoramous? But at the same time I would think in my heart that if Allah is most
compassionate and most merciful, and He is undoubtedly so, He cannot leave him
in such ignominy". During this journey, he also met Mirza Sahib (Qadiani), and
he (Abdul Qaadir Raipuri) used to say that he would sometimes say his prayers
behind him (Mirza Qadian) and sometimes separately."
This servant of the Ahle Sunnat is
presenting to his reactors some more of the writings and, while reserving for
myself the right of comment and opinion, would request readers to please let me
know of their honest opinion and that they should themselves decide with justice
and equity about the reality behind Deobandi Wahaabi-ism. For this purpose I am
quoting from the writings of the Qadianis and also from the writings of the
Wahaabis of Deoband, which have remarkable similarity, one with another.
The writings of the Qadianis
* "Allah is one and Muhammad
(Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) is His Prophet and he is the Last of the Prophets
and greater in rank than all the creations. After him, there is no Prophet but
only he upon whom the mantle of Muhammadiyat has been bestowed, for the slave is
not separate from his Master, nor is the branch from the seed from which it has
sprouted. Thus, he who having dissolved himself totally in his Master receives
the title of a Prophet from Allah cannot be said to interfere with (the doctrine
of) the finality of Prophethood. —
(Kishti-ye-Nooh, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, Page 33.)
"Such Prophets may come who, in
relation to the Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam), stand as his
shadows... The coming of such Prophets makes no difference to his being the Last
Prophet." —
(Da'wat-ul-Ameer, written by Mirza Basheerud-deen Mahmood, Page 25.)
* "A thousand Prophets can be born
after the Last Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam). —
(Aik ghati ka Izaalah (Eradication of a wrong), by Mirza Qadiani, Page 3.)
"Goats or things invoked in the
name of a godess or Sheikh Saddo and such others are quite un-lawful". —
(Tafseer-ul-Qur'aan Dars by Hakim Nooruddin Mirzai, page 66, vol. 2.)
* "Can a proof be found in the
Quran for the saying "Ya Sheikh Abdul Qaadir Jeelaani Shai'anlil Laah? Who,
then, invented this as part of daily worship." — (Paighaam-e-Sulh, Lahore, 11th
February, 1952.)
* "One day when I finished my Isha
(night) prayers, I was neither overpowered by sleep, nor I felt any sign of
being unconscious, but I felt sick. Suddenly I heard voices and with that the
door began to rattle. Some time later, I saw such of those who had knocked at
the door coming towards me with quick steps. Of course, these were the Panjtan
Paak that is to say Ali with his sons. I further saw that Faatimatuz-Zahra has
placed my head on her lap and was gazing at me."—
(A'eena-e-Kamaalaat-e-lslam by Mirza Qadiani, Page 473.)
* "Everybody can progress and
attain to the highest rank. So much so that he can rise even higher than Hazrat
Muhammad (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam)."—
(Alfuzl, Qadian, 17th July, 1922.)
* "Allah Almighty can commit a
wrong or a foolishness." — (Haqeeqate-Wahy, by Mirza Qadiand, Page 103.)
The writings of the
Wahaabis of Deoband
* "So far as the general public is
concerned, they take the finality of the Prophethood of the holy Prophet of
(Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) to mean that his times came after the earlier
Prophets and he is the last of the Prophets. But it would be clear to people
with understanding that no excellence per se attaches to being earlier or later,
then how can the saying that Wa Laakir Rasoolal Laahi Wa Khaataman-Nabiyyeen be
deemed to be correct."
"It will make no difference to the
finality of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) even if a Prophet
were to be born after the times of the Prophet of Allah (Sallal Laahu Alaihi
Wasallam)."
* "The finality of the holy
Prophet (Sallal Laahu Alaihi Wasallam) is retained as usual, even if a Prophet
were to be born somewhere in his times." —
(Tahzeerun Naas, page 3, 13 and page 24, by Muhammad Qaasim Nanotvi.)
"There is no harm in saying
'La-Ilaaha-Illal-Laahu Ashraf Ali Rasoolul Laah' and Allahumma Salli Ala
Saiyidina wa Nabiyyina Ashraf Ali"'. —
(Risaalah Al Imdaad, Page 35, for the Month of Safar, 1366 A.H., by Ashraf Ali
Thanvi.)
|
|