devbandi debates from 100 years

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by AbdalQadir, Jan 7, 2019.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    I watched most of the pre-debate conditions video and unfortunately it was a farce. It quickly became apparent that there is not going to be a fruitful discussion, let alone a debate down the line.

    I think Shaykh Asrar was right to halt the discussion because nothing constructive would have come out of it. I liked his suggestion about learned scholars from both sides sitting down privately and examining the core issues in an objective manner using agreed upon principles. It is probably unrealistic but if people are serious about upholding the truth and removing sectarian issues then they need to approach issues in an objective manner.
    Conversely, a lot of people are calling for unity or try to downplay differences between different groups. That is just an attempt to sweep things under the carpet and they would be better served encourging objective discussions on issues of principle.

    Secondly, we should not allow our differences to derail progress on issues of common interest. For example some sunnis might have issues with Shaykh Asrar but where he is working in the interest of sunnis e.g. a debate against a non-sunni then Sunnis should show a unified stance. Similarly, when it comes to dealing with Muslim issues then scholars from different sects should be able to work together.
    In summation, an open heart does not mean one sacrifices their principles but it means that one is able to put their differences aside in matters of common interest.
    Sunnis specifically and Muslims in general shoot themselves in the foot because we too often lean to the two extremes: indifference and intolerance.
    We need an open heart and objectivity to move forward. Unfortunately, today we got neither and hence why things went the way they did.
     
  2. Ibn Rida Safdar

    Ibn Rida Safdar New Member

    I have reasons to believe why there is a strong possibility that the upcoming debate would produce significant results. I say this based upon what happened when Shaykh Asrar had debated ARH on Istighatha:

    I agree when you say that
    In the debate on Istighatha, I felt (It is my personal opinion and one can disagree with it) that ARH seemed to do relatively better in the battle of perceptions amongst their blind followers. Whlist, Shaykh Asrar was initially deconstructing the underline reasoning of the Salafi position (Like, repeatedly asking whether Shirk is muhal aqlan acc. to ARH), the latter occupied his time by repeating their same old arguments based upon *textual misquotations*. For an average Salafi, misquoted narrations seemed to do the trick.

    However, Shaykh Asrar's arguments resonated with many *tullab from segments like Awnis/HT* etc. Here are a few examples:

    https://www.facebook.com/sharif.abulaith/posts/10153515421985841
    https://www.facebook.com/abuyusuf.alhanbali/posts/10154170086348905

    I do not deny the importance of public perceptions but the bone of contention is the continuous defense of deobandis from some non-subcontinental sunni quarters due to their ignorance of the real issues. Real progress is more likely to occur if the reality of deobandis is unmasked in front of non subcontinental ulama. Once that is achieved and we begin to see public refutations of deobandis from their ends, the common public will surely take note and understand the true deobandi creed. Shaykh Asrar knows this. He wants things to result into some constructive which is why he tried tackling the root of issue by proposing that let it be a written debate and Senior non subcontinental ulama can give their Hukm after that.

    Hence, I feel that we can expect things to move in a positive direction in the long run as a result of this debate even if we don't do great when it comes to the immediate public perception.

    I agree that Shaykh Asrar and his team would have to be very careful. The deobandis know that he really wants the debate to take place and they might want to exploit this by coming up with nonsensical conditions knowing very well that he might agree just to let the debate happen.
     
    Unbeknown and Waqar786 like this.
  3. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    am open for a written debate anytime. been open for years.

    verbal debates are as the brother pointed out perception management.

    just look at modi and bjp in india - they are utterly incompetent, utter bald faced lies and try to present their lies as truth. and they get away with it because the general public is ignorant and willing to bet their bucks on the most garish show in town.

    why else does tariq jameel get away with his most idiotic and blasphemous analogies and zameel with his verbal diarrohea?

    ----
    i have been saying what the brother has said today. and if a person like taqi usmani does not have the shame to retract from the lies in his fatawa, what about devbandi tom, dick and harry?

    ----
    i used to think this was ok back then in 2006. [see post #8]

    i then encountered people who can be far more brazen than we used to think they could be. so i thought verbal munazarahs are a thing of the past. (see post #15)

    ----
     
  4. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    @Juwayni
    I agree, which makes today important in terms of making sure the conditions are agreed properly and no loopholes for the Deos to exploit because it wont surprise me if in the debate they bring up things from imaginary texts. 'We will bring up things that you have not even heard of'- yeah because you have just concocted them to suit your agenda.

    Unfortunately in a lot of debates public perception plays a key role and as mentioned before, the Deos are not interested in an objective discussion, which will make it hard to get the desired outcome.

    Some Deos pulling out is just an attempt to cover their back in case things dont go to plan in the debate. For them it is a PR exercise to prove their credibility and at the same time blemish the reputation of Ala Hazrat, which even after 100 years is still shining bright. That is what really hurts the Deos.
    They need to prove their sunniness all over again because the Saudi petrol dollars are now being spent on equating the deo with the Brelwi movement in promoting Bida and shirk. It is no longer fashionable or convinient to attach themselves to that school of thought, which again just proves the expediency of this slippery school.
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  5. Juwayni

    Juwayni Veteran

    If he's slowly backing away from this, perhaps he thinks this is going to be verbal slaughter.

    Remember the maxim: deos can't do Kalam.

    One thing our side needs to know is that you don't squash hoodrats by allowing their antics.
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  6. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    I think you have misread my point because I did not indicate that the Sunni side should back out but what I said was that this debate will not garner a conclusive result because of the dirty tricks that the Deos will employ. It is clear that they have no interest in having an objective debate and will just behave in the same manner that the debater behaved in the clip I uploaded. Shaykh Asrar and his team will need to ensure that at the pre-debate stage any Machiavellian behaviour or conditions like that you cannot quote from Deo texts is allowed because like brother @Juwayni said, don't hold your breath for part 2. The deos have already planned an exit strategy with some of their prominent scholars like Yasir Al-Hanafi publicly disassociating themselves from the debate so even if they get done in the debate, they will just say that it is a case of over-zealous youngsters getting carried away and they do not represent the views of the school.

    Don't expect a conclusive debate but In sha Allah it might just halt some of these upstarts in their brazen slandering of Sunni scholars. You said so yourself that the deos are no different to what they were then, so explain why there has not been a conclusive result for over a century.

    The problems with the Deos is encapsulated in that old saying, 'How is someone going to make me understand when I am not willing to understand.'
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  7. Juwayni

    Juwayni Veteran

    Don't hold your breath, Deos are full of hot air - they'll probably just proceed with subterfuge.
     
  8. ramiz.noorie

    ramiz.noorie Active Member

    @Waqar786

    I disagree with you, I expect everything from this debate, Sh. Asrar will challenge the deobandis for their kufr.
    Part 1 of the debate, Sh. Asrar on the defensive (Deobandis charging Kufr on Sunnis)
    Part 2 of the debate, Sh. Asrar on the offensive (Deobandi kufriyaat exposed)

    What makes you think that the deobandis of today are any different than the deobandis of yesterday (the elders), did that make Alahazrat and his students back out because Deos employ dirty tricks.

    I am pretty sure, Deo material which is already posted will be brought into the debate, but those are few isolated statements, and can be easily tackled. Wait for the Part 2 of the debate, i want to see what excuses they will come up to avoid the debate.
     
  9. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    As mentioned earlier I do not expect much from this debate because the deos are not interested (from what I have read and heard) in an objective discussion and what Shaykh Asrar will need to 'smash' is the Machiavellian approach of the Deos . They will employ dirty tricks to undermine the credibility of our elders and twist isolated comments in our books to suit their nefarious agenda. A snapshot of this can be seen in the following video:



    The shameless analysis of an isolated comment in Al-Malfuzat from the deo debater even caused Tahir Gaywi (apparently not known for his scrupulousness in debates either) to nudge him to temper it. When the comment was explained by our side, it was clear what ridiculous length that debater went to, just prove his baseless point. Furthermore, from our side Mufti Muti ur Rahman then asked them to put similar statements from the deo side in context, which drove home the shameless behaviour and lack of objectivity on the side of the Deos. This is why I was perturbed but not surprised that the Deo side have said that Shaykh Asrar and Co cannot quote from Deo texts because it will expose not just their lack of objectivity but the reality of their elders.

    This paradigm shifting attempt of the Deos is to find isolated comments in the works of Sunni scholars and analyse them in a manner that suits their agenda and simultaneously divert attention away from the problematic statements from their elders. This in itself should be sufficient for the objective person to see what game the Deos intend to play- this is what yeoman service these individuals will pay to the deen.

    They forget that like all of us, we have to answer to Allah most High on the day of judgement and not to our Akabir. After all on that day what will be the difference between the power and authority of Ashraf Ali Thanvi and co to every Tom, Dick and Harry, cobbler, madman and other animals. (This is obviously a loaded statement but it aptly critiques the methodology, which caused the centuries old conflict in the first place)

    It is high time that commentators on this divide drop cheap point scoring shots and objectively critique the methodology of the two groups in order to correct the errors and move forward. Do I expect this to happen in this debate- 'we will present statements that you would not even have heard of.' (or words to that effect).

    Zameel and co should spend their time analysing the texts of their elders in the same manner that they analyse the texts of Sunni scholars or analyse our texts in the same manner that they analyse their own because then either way they would not have audacity to call out Sunni scholars or continue to uphold a broken chain (because of the numerous inconsistencies and contradictions) of producing apologist responses for their elders and slandering of Sunni scholars.

    All we ask is objectivity and application of the same standard. Maybe it is impossible to expect a critique of a methodology, when one seemingly adopts a different one depending on the weather at the time. Then again what is impossible in the eyes of a Deo? Hmmm-Mistakes made by their Akabir
     
    Aqdas and Unbeknown like this.
  10. ramiz.noorie

    ramiz.noorie Active Member

    I am hoping that Sh Asrar will smash down deobandis and hoping the debate will be answer to the Deobandi blog run by Zameel ur Rahman barelwism
     
  11. Mohamed Shah Qadri

    Mohamed Shah Qadri Active Member

    Any news on the debate. I saw on facebook that sheikh Asrar Rashid is having a lecture at glamkhol sharif masjid on the 31st.
     
  12. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    about the social experiment you suggested. I find your view rather bleak. Perhaps because you are looking at the lower than the least common denominator.

    I believe that there are many Sunni scholars who are doing a great job of educating the awaam about these issues - and with the internet - their efforts are having real effects at the grass-roots.

    My own journey to sunnism was greatly propelled by the internet - and speeches of sunni ulama. Because truth is out there, I was able to discover it. Which makes me such an ardent proponent of naming the criminals. It's an absolute necessity.

    This point is moot. How many can read Arabic? Yet while refuting the najdis and their ilk our scholars routinely name ibn-taymiyyah and ibn-abdul wahhab and their erroneous positions and lies. Should we stop that too?

    You might say that the case is different since, unlike najdis, the dayabina do taqiyya and present themselves as hanafi-sunnis. If so, then it is all the more important to unmask them since they are even more dangerous!

    Owais Qadri sahab has done and is doing a great job of educating the common people about the najdis and dayabina through the medium of naaths - he routinely names them, whenever relevant. Many from among his audiences are too under-educated to read books, many don't listen to long speeches and would perhaps never have known the true face of the dayabina if not for owais sahab's leveraging the power of naaths and poetry. He deserves commendation for that.

    Again, why set the bar so terribly high? Remember, these are the common people too engrossed in their dunya. If they are able to say in general terms that devbandis and najdis are those who disrespect the awliya and sahaba and prohibit visiting mazaars etc. that should be enough - what is important is that people keep away from them.

    The standards have fallen appallingly low and are falling still. Just who are these people? You will find some of them enjoying television and films with kufri tones and laughing and sharing kufri jokes - al 'iyadu bi Allah. So should we now start structuring our debates to cater to the standards and tastes of this category? And in the process lose out on those who are genuinely interested?

    This generation has a responsibility towards the ones that are coming later - to keep all facets of the truth hoisted atop the highest of the minarets. And so, at pivotal and important gatherings - not withholding information is important.

    Maybe. But then how is it different for Arabic and religious knowledge in general?

    Do not misunderstand me - I do not contest the merit or the soundness of this argument - but I also believe that while there is this category of people - there is another too - if not the majority of the community which calls itself Muslim - then atleast a near majority - for whom it is important to know the names - at least of the group.

    Which means our scholars and debaters have further work to do - more education is needed. It is their duty to simplify and explain things to match the intellectual capacity and interest levels of the audience they are dealing with. Which also means that it is not a fixed standard but rather a fluid line - which will vary depending on the circumstances.

    As for Keller, he has done yeoman service to the sunni cause for the English speaking world, albeit unintentionally. He has unequivocally accepted and supported the attribution of these words to the devbandi "elders". That's half part of our job done. Someone please convey him my thanks.

    No dev-bhakt can now claim that sunnis are lying or making up stuff or mis-attributing statements. No sir, Keller has clearly said:

    "The vehemence of Deobandi writers“defending Islam against shirk,” however misplaced, plainly affected the way they spoke about the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace)."

    "Looking back, one cannot help wondering why Khalil Ahmad’s and Ashraf ‘Ali Thanwi’s own students and teachers and friends did not ask them, before their opponents asked them: When did any Islamic scholar ever compare the knowledge of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) to the depraved,to the mad, or to animals—even to make a point? Few Muslims would suffer such a comparison to be made with their own father, let alone the Emissary of God(Allah bless him and give him peace). But while such words were indefensible breaches of proper respect, they were not kufr, because the intention behind them was not to insult the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), but to defend Islam from what the writers viewed as a serious threat."
    The moment the dayabina agree to debate in favor of those statements - there remains little need to name individuals - since here is a group which openly admits it's authorship and offers to publicly defend them.

    In this scenario, the invalidity of the defense remains the only point which needs be pointed out.

    Allah knows best.
     
  13. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    @AbdalQadir - short answer to your points - there are people and there are people and there are times and there are times.

    Long answer:

    As I have said earlier, I agree with your proposed methodology - but in a limited set of instances. Besides, I believe that there is very little different between the processes you are championing and discouraging.

    On the whole, I find it rather difficult to understand how the two parts are wholly separable - that of debating/exposing/refuting the blasphemies and that of naming the blasphemers - whether the group or the individuals.

    If there is a group or individual who has never heard of devbandis and is likely never to hear of them either - well, there is no need to broach the subject at all.

    If this group is likely to hear of them or meet them in the future and get influenced by them - then it's necessary to forewarn them about the blasphemies - you agree to this, I presume - but what should keep us from pointing out the group at the least? If the person/group is a serious religious type - it would be a disservice to him. If it's a dunyawi type - then it depends on the specific individual and his interests and attention span.

    Now, the people who know about them and meet them everyday - there's no point in keeping out the names. If you tell the person(s) about what specific words constitute blasphemy - he is sure to ask -"why are you telling me all this? who do you think says such things?"

    Won't you answer? The moment you do - he/they might demand proof - and it's your responsibility to provide it.

    That is sort of the point - if you have the resources - you need to present them. Cause if you are leaving a person in the company of heretics - when you could actually name them and then leave him to decide for himself - it's as good as telling him all the characteristics of fire and it's ill-effects without telling him what it really looks like.

    How can you leave a person to be in the company of dayabina - pray behind them and listen to their speeches - and wait for them to "stumble upon the works" of thanawi and co. and then dissociate from them?!

    FR-vol#24-effects-of-company.PNG

    FR-vol#24-keep-away-from-heretics.PNG


    You can't go to a debate and pronounce judgments on specific words and then tell the audience - "hey, that's all. If you ever come across someone saying these things - you know what to think of him"!

    You say people are disinterested and don't care - well that may be so. But a debate is certainly not the place to hold back - cause the people who are attending it are there to listen and understand (hopefully).

    Your point may hold true for speeches and khutbas - that naming people every time may not be the best idea. People do tire of such things - but not so for books and debates.

    At the least you got to point out the defaulting party.

    What I meant is - the awaam will think that sunnis are doing takfeer of devbandis for no reason - unless you prove that the devbandis have indeed said such things - naming and shaming is more often than not, a necessity, not an option.

    tareekh zaleel frequently laments that 'barelvis' call us devbandis kafir for no reason and they have no justification. Which further strengthens the case for naming the offenders that it is being indispensable.

    There maybe times and settings when naming will do more harm than good - maybe - I don't disagree. But the present debate in Birmingham where the awaam is fully exposed to the controversy - does not qualify as a place for silence. IMHO.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
     
  14. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    first real life story - i used to know an over zealous tablighi jamat guy from hyderabad, my flatmate from my younger days in a western nation. during a discussion/argument when i told to him the words of thanvi, he concurred with me and said a general rule and i quote more or less verbatim, "jisne yeh kaha woh bhi kafir hai, aur usko musalman samajhne wala bhi kafir hai, lekin mein yeh nahin manta ke maulana ashraf ali thanvi ne yeh alfaz kahey". i asked him to do just what you mentioned, just make an "if-then" statement with thanvis name in it ("agar ashraf ali thanvi ne aisa kaha hai") and he did say it.

    having newly moved to that country and 3allamah google still in its infant stages and nokia 3310 the smartest phone around, neither of us really had any literature to back up our claims, so we left it at that. but he did refuse to read books that i suggested, saying that it was a waste of time to read to-and-fro tanqeedaat and either of us could easily drop the names of a 100 books for or against each side and even read them, but tanqeed is just about gymnastics on words and tawilaat.

    obviously this individual (at that time) was to be considered a decent Muslim, who was afflicted with some effects of the poison of the devbandis -

    1) on forensic evidence on this matter,
    2) the erroneous fiqh that they propagate and he adhered to (teeja, giyarwin etc. rulings),

    but that erroneous fiqh and forensic evidence is only secondary to the actual daruriyate deen. Ala Hazrat himself attested to that.

    Allahu a3lam if that poison has taken its full effect and today he too has become a full vampire, or if Allah has protected him!

    ===

    second real life story - long story short, similar circumstances, discussion/argument, only this time with a real vampire, but the discussion was not so much in depth, because we couldn't even get to that level. he even refused to make/accept categorical statements on matters of principle as in "if someone says [insert devbandi statement], he is a gustakh and a kafir" (leave alone making a conditional "if-then" statement with any top dog's name in it). he obviously knew what was gonna come next, and was fully aware of the kufriyat of his elders, and had taken an oath to defend them at any cost. he went off on a tangent about how the intricacies and subtleties of the interpretations of the statement needs to be looked at, in addition to those of the language itself that they are uttered in, in addition to understanding the supremely encyclopedic works of fiqh and how citing a rudimentary ruling from a fiqh book is one thing and then interpreting the ruling and applying it considering its tashrihat and tawilat is another matter and so on.

    additionally and incidentally, i have seen modern western perennialists also refusing to accept general principles of takfeer because they know the stances their perennialist akabir like hanson and jifry have taken!

    ===

    it is hard to convert the second kind of people whose hearts have soaked in bid3ah. such people fight their positions tooth and nail due to their egos, and they hold personalities to be identifiers of the truth, rather than the truth defining personalities... unless if any of them are lucky enough to come across the blessings of a Ghawth or a Qutub. but for 99.99% of the cases such guys are gonners! such people are repelled even by generic principles of the truth. i have seen this on more than one occasion.

    the first kind can be helped provided they are given the Sunni tradition of the last 1440 years in the words of upright imams and the sahaba and so on. it is these kind of people that need to be targeted by the likes of Shaykh Asrar, be it inside the debate against dev maulvis (who for the most part, will be of the 2nd type) or outside of it.

    Allah guides whom He wills and He knows best. salams.
     
  15. Juwayni

    Juwayni Veteran

    As Salamu 'Alaykum,

    Good to see that you're still alive and kicking. Slightly different context I'm in. West, university scene, barely any Urdu speakers let alone young readers who can confirm that the kaafir 4 actually said what they said in the books they wrote.

    In this case would it be sufficient for them to believe *if* the kaafir 4 said this stuff then they're definitely kaafir but otherwise withhold judgment as they can't verify for themselves?
     
    Mohamed Shah Qadri likes this.
  16. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    this will certainly happen even if we follow the strategy of clarifying the concepts first and foremost.

    our aim for debates is not/should not be to convert the established bhakts of deoband. if it happens, it's great, but that's not our primary aim.

    our primary aim is to safeguard the neutral and/or confused awam's imaniyat.

    once the hukm is made aware, this will automatically happen as the next step, either by further in-depth study into Sunniyat, or by stumbling upon devbandi literature themselves. but the first and most important step is safeguarding the awam's aqidah thought process.

    if a man dies not knowing what ashraf ali said, nothing's lost. but if he dies believing what ashraf ali did, regardless if he knows of dayabina or not, his hereafter is doomed.

    ===

    our dna is not the strategy we employ. our dna is the manhaj of the Ahlus Sunnah.

    will you go to Hajj by a ship and camel caravan, taking the sacrificial animal with you? will you go to war with swords and horses or even a 1950's rifle or would you set a semi-automatic as a bare minimum standard?

    likewise, their dna is kufr and dalalah, not the strategy they employ.

    just look at their modus operandi. they never badmouth the qabarpujaris when they recruit a new novice to their jamat. they attack him at a conceptual level, teach him their flawed manhaj. once the person is solidly grounded in their manhaj, then he is made into a bhakt of their akabir, and only after that is he taught how to be sleazy with the qabarpujaris, starting with his own family! do you see tariq jameel propagating these devbandi fatawa at large gatherings on tv? in fact he congratulates people on Mawlid!

    if our aqidah and manhaj of the last 1440 years and the sayings of the celebrated Sunni akabir is made crystal clear to them, it will never happen.

    it won't take more than 10 minutes for them to read a passage from the works of our Sunni elders, and place it against the works of the imams of kufr of deoband, and see who's right and who's wrong

    ===

    do this social experiment - on any random friday, pick any 10 random common guys from a random deobandi mosque, and pick any 10 random common guys from a random "Barelvi" mosque (i use inverted commas not to be sarcastic at ourselves, but rather at them - to emphasize that we are Ahlus Sunnah and they euphemistically call us "Barelvis")

    ask these 20 people

    1. can you read and write proper Urdu? how good is your vocabulary in Urdu?
    2. do you know what exactly the Barelvi-devbandi conflict is about? can you give a definition of a Sunni?
    3. do you know the major works of your elders on this topic and can you explain them to another common guy from the crowd?
    4. are you aware of the other side's major refutations on these works?
    5. have you read and understood those refutations, regardless whether you agree with them or not?

    if you so wish, repeat with a larger sample size for proper empirical evidence! at least get 500 Barelvis and 500 deobandis from each of the 10 major Muslim populated cities of india.

    my hunch is that 70-90% of the people wouldn't answer a yes just to the first question, regardless of which side they're on. Urdu is orphaned in india, like it or not. don't fool yourself into thinking it's not the case after watching a youtube video of rahat indori's mushayra. it is no longer the elite status symbol it once was, when even kafirs took pride in knowing Urdu. i've personally met old hindus and sikhs who used to write letters in Urdu to members of their own immediate family. these days it's hard to find common Muslims who can read a translation of the Quran in Urdu, and i'm talking UP-walas!! especially anyone born in the 1970's and onward, in fact most 1960's born people i know are equally as bad! the situation with the west is worse, which is what Asrar Rashid is dealing with!

    with such a level of Urdu, do you honestly expect people to grasp the length and breadth of the conflict? they'll probably turn to nuh keller for a judgment!

    assuming you get past the first handicap, what do you think most people will say in response to the next 4 questions? how many people actually read religious books? we'll talk about understanding later.

    pakistanis are not lacking on Urdu, but i'm not too hopeful that majority of their awam will properly answer the next 4 questions, regardless of which side they're on.

    Allah knows best. was-salam.
     
  17. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    While I agree with this the other fact is that the fatawaa of takfeer were passed on specific individuals with their names and their affiliations to the Madrasah at devband clearly spelled out. Sunni literature is awash with references to these individuals.

    This is a dagger struck right deep into the breast of dayabina and they will keep screeching in pain at frequent intervals of years.

    So besides learning the hukm on the utterances, the awaam is also faced with the question - were these names really guilty of such heinous crimes against Islam?

    So the necessity of naming names cannot be discounted - sunnis have two sets of things to prove. Until then the awaam will remain in a state of confusion and skepticism, even suspicion, against sunni scholars.

    Besides, our scholars down the ages have been naming the offenders due to necessity - an example closer in time would be ibn abdul wahhab najdi.

    Allah knows best.
     
    Noori likes this.
  18. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    the sad reality of things is that this dispute is a 100+ years old and it's not doing justice to the awam by overwhelming them with the forensics of he said this, he replied that, he counter-replied with that, and so on.

    i'm not suggesting Shaykh Asrar is not aware of the literature of both sides, but it is easy for someone to fumble on matters of what was said in which book in the last 100 yrs; notwithstanding that such talk is dry and boring to the awam and adds further to their confusion. one minor and inconsequential slip on andaman & nicobar being southwest or southeast of the indian peninsula will invite howls of "Asrar Rashid is a liar".

    deobandis are champions of sleaziness and diverting the topic and doing their utmost to spread misguidance. they will do their utmost to sidetrack the debate

    in my humble opinion, any Sunni-devbandi debate should be only at a conceptual level and about actual aqidah points and concepts, with other Sunni ulema as judges (like Arab Sunnis) with some basic guidelines like -

    1. whoever violates the daruriyat is a kafir
    2. whoever violates ijma3 is also kafir or heretic
    3. disputes on intra-Sunni matters of non-ijma3 are acceptable, be they detailed aqaid related matters (like Ash3aris and Maturidis) or fiqh matters.

    the above guidelines and the points of discussion should be proven from the works of celebrated Sunni akabir along with the obvious proofs from Quran and Ahadith

    and then general declarations on such points must be handed over in writing from both sides

    for example - a person who says that the knowledge of the Prophet, 3alaihis salam, is like that of kids and madmen (wal 3eyadhu billah), such a person is more worthless, useless and uglier to Muslims than a statue of ganpatti and he and his books should be visarjan-ed into the sewer! no need to prove thanvi did or didn't say it.


    this is the only way it will benefit the awam and offer them some clarity, rather than citing refutations and counter refutations and counter counter refutations in Urdu from the last 100 years worth of literature. it won't benefit the awam much.

    plus the initial call to debate (video deleted) was the devbandi's claim that Imam Ahmad Rida is gustakhe Rasool, 3alaihis salam, wal 3eyadhu billah.

    Asrar Rashid should impose to the devs that he will debate only this point for now and the rest of the points will be debated only after a closure is reached on this. anything other than this, and Asrar would be falling into the devbandis trap of sidetracking and goalpost shifting and confusing the awam.


    it doesn't have to be in the same venue

    the dev can live stream his allegations in a specified time slot (2 hrs are sufficient) on a specific date. then Asrar Rashid can live stream his response for an equal amount of time, on the same day.

    about 3 sessions of such to-and-fro are enough, probably.

    if the dev has the first word, Asrar should have the last.

    =======

    plus it will also help Sunnis to get the raw devbandi creed straight from the devbandis mouth, by combing through their official positions officially stated on their website. it's amazing how such openly available devbandi positions are hidden from non-desi Sunni scholars

    if that devbandi has any shame or courage, tell him to take these fatawa to Arab and Turkish or other Sunnis

    http://www.darulifta-deoband.com/home/ur/Islamic-Beliefs/8732

    http://www.darulifta-deoband.com/home/ur/Islamic-Beliefs/1886

    this mardood has properly said "intrinsically possible" with his "mumkin bidh-dhaat" as opposed to keller's "not intrinsically impossible"

    http://www.darulifta-deoband.com/home/en/Innovations--Customs/20428



    let them take this fatwa to the Arab Sunni scholars and lambaste them for following a christian invention

    http://www.darulifta-deoband.com/home/ur/Innovations--Customs/69520

    let them lecture the Sunnis of the world regarding "tamam musalmano par is se ijtenab zaroori hai" if they have any decency.

    http://www.darulifta-deoband.com/home/ur/Interest--Insurance/59260

    once again, "mumkin bidh-dhaat" - and don't talk about it in front of awam! keller wept.



    http://www.darulifta-deoband.com/home/ur/Innovations--Customs/147952

    this poor soul didn't hear anything about kanhaiya

    whereas this chap did- https://barelwism.wordpress.com/2013/02/05/another-example-of-abu-hasans-distortions/#comments

    he cites his high priest thusly (his citation and his translation)

    Allahu Musta3an.
     
    Noori, Unbeknown and Aqdas like this.
  19. YaMustafa

    YaMustafa Well-Known Member

    Allama Saghir Ahmad Jokhanpuri (Khalifa e Mufti e Azam e Hind) will be in the UK soon. He is one of our senior debators in India alongside Muhaddith e Kabir and Mufti Muti ur Rahman. He was present in the famous Itarsi debate and Bihar debate. Perhaps someone can organise a meeting between Shaykh Asrar and Allama Saghir Ahmed Jokhanpuri. He is our learned elder and from our senior scholars in India who has debated the Deobandis.
     
    Mohamed Shah Qadri and CHISHTI like this.
  20. Tālib ul-Haq

    Tālib ul-Haq New Member

    31st December in Birmingham the pre-debate will be recorded.
     

Share This Page