Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Topics' started by Mohamed Shah Qadri, Jan 20, 2019.
Where and when did he retract his claims...
all of those are lies and we dare deobandis to have these lies attested by any of their naam-war maulvis; even zameel will do.
and THEN, the burden of proof is on those who make these accusations.
there is a second option. i am willing to do mubahalah with any devbandi maulvi (or all of them put together) concerning the lies spewed below about the imam of ahlu's sunnah imam aHmad riDa khan raDi'Allahu anhu. i say that all of those charges are falsehoods (some are misrepresentations) - let them claim that all of that is truth as stated. and then:
sub'HanAllah, all of this rancour directed towards alahazrat, only because he refuted those who disrespected Allah and His Rasul sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.
وإلى الله المشتكى
So firstly, Abdul Haleem has to accept that Zurqani does mention it and he was wrong to attribute misquoting to Alahazrat.
Let's see his sincerity...
there's a concise and good Urdu explanation here (from 2015), along with the scan of the same page from the sharh of Zarqani that Abu Hasan posted.
PS. i only came across this site when these kadh'dhabin started their pathetic video releases. it seems they want to rehash and revive their old deobandis' tales all over again. maybe they want to keep their lies floating on top of the search results, so they keep recycling them.
it seems the devbandi sewer keeps overflowing with the same lies and filth over and over again. this time for the uk, the baton's been passed on to these two clowns from bradford.
see below one of the comments by a jahil deobandi, on the article link posted by AMQadiri - have a good read of it and see for yourselves the intellectual stature of these 2 youtube dogs of hellfire - what exactly have they researched and just how thoroughly! these dirty dogs deserve nothing less than the most ruthless pound!
(reproducing here for future reference to stuff "we never imagined in our wildest dreams". it seems these 2 dogs are even following the same sequence of "objections" as that listed out below by the other devbandi. expect another few videos pertaining to the other "objections" mentioned in this list below.)
in which language?
What is the translation of Ibn Aqeel's statement?
Found this. To add to the discussion.
yes. for brothers who don't know the meaning of the term 'shab baashi' - it is a rather broad term which is used as a euphemism - unlike the explicit term used by this shaytan:
The crux of the matter is the deos refuse to entertain objectivity whether that is in relation to the works of their elders or their opponent. This Abu Haleem is more crude and drenched in hatred than the shameless Uthsman (bringing shame on a beautiful name)
I now laugh at their quibbling and anger when Shaykh Asrar brought their intellectual capacity into question, when clearly their lack of intellectual credability and objectivity is no longer in question. In an era of cults the deos might yet still set the same shameless standard
as for mr.devbandi's holier-than-thou outburst on talking about parents etc. and making a scene about alahazrat's use of a rather demure word 'shab-bashi', i advise him to please look up deo literature for their treatment of such subjects. hope he has some advice for qasim nanotvi, who examines in this topic in detail his aab e Hayaat. but of course, zameel-e-shaytan will drop from somewhere to justify the most outrageous things devs say, but vilify harmless words said by sunnis. also in cases where both parties have said the same thing (such as the tuu issue), devs vilify sunnis, all the while sitting on a high horse praising the usage of their own elders. la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
download qasim's work here:
1323 edition here: https://archive.org/details/AabEHayatByMolanaQasimNanotvi
while thanawi said that the life of nabiy sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is 'barzakhiyah', khalil flatly refused it in his muhannad. so deos can have a version for the right occasion. and of course, have a middle-ground to link both: "duniyawiyyah-barzakhiyyah" the left-right, the whitest-black.
they try hard to be vague and equivocating - so they can jump over to either side as the occasion demands.
aHmaqon ki kami nahin ghalib
kitne saare to devband hi meiN hain
imam muhammad ibn abdu'l baqi al-zurqani is famous for his sharh of mawahib al-ladunniyyah of imam al-qaSTallani.
he born in 1055 AH and passed away in 1122 AH. his father is the famous maliki scholar, imam abdul Baqi ibn yusuf al-zurqani, the exegete of mukhtaSar al-khalil. among the works of al-zurqani (the son) are: anwar kawakib nahj al-salik sh. muwaTTa' imam malik and sharh al-bayquniyah.
this devvie says that imam zurqani did not say it anywhere. but it can be found in the sharh al-mawahib, v.8 p.358 as shown below. (aqdas had already posted but here is a screenshot of the printed page).
now will he retract? and apologise? (don't hold your breath...)
but there are other mistakes. the devbandi says that they believe in the lives of prophets after their passing. but thanawi said that their lives are 'barzakhiyah'. this has led to an internal disagreement with devs, calling hayati and mamati devs, even though all of them are soulless beings.
notice in the snippet, i have posted from zurqani, that imam subki said (and zurqani affirmed) that their lives are 'haqiqiyah', real, and not just figurative.
also note that alahazrat's statement from al-malfuz speaks in respectful tone, unlike the 'explanation' by the filthy deobandi which are from his own mind - not found in al-malfuz.
thanawi in hifzul iman:
malfuz of alahazrat, dawate islami ed. p.362
I think is about time that sheikh Asrar Rashid makes a video exposing these deobandi liars ... he's been rather quiet recently...
around 3:00 minutes he makes an analogy about parents etc. - that is the stupidest thing I have heard in many days.
If this chap is lucky enough, one day he will read the Qur'an and if his luck holds out a bit longer, he might even chance upon a book of hadith, and then he will swoon and will have to be carried out to the hospital - "Tch, tch ... nervous shock" the doctor will pronounce.
Aren't there even half a penny's worth of sensible people in their sect?