Gangohi's Fatwa of Wuquu kadhib

the line: "rashid gangohi's fatwa is not in the official collection. hence it is not genuine." earlier, devbandis used to challenge sunnis to produce the fatwa and when we did - now they changed tack: what is the proof that it is his?

as most things, these arguments are made in the absence of the historical context. similar to the israeli travesty. "oct 7!" but it didn't start on oct7. --- the first fact which ANY devbandi cannot deny; rather they proudly defend: "Allah ta'ala can lie" العياذ بالله

to prove this true, they expend every resource at their disposal - brazenly distorting texts, selective misquoting, even bald faced lies. devbandis believe: "Allah can lie" the corollary of this is: "lying is a flaw - this implies that the Creator can have a flaw"

zameel shamelessly claimed once: "where does it say that the Creator cannot have a flaw". it was zameel writing as ibn arabi on our SP forum. more than a century ago, in juhd al-muqill, the first student of devband, mahmud hasan insisted that it was the case.

according to him, "though the Creator does not commit ugly actions, however He has the power to do so." lengthy explanations on why falsehood is included in Divine Power - in other words, why it is possible for Allah ta'ala to lie. insane? yes. but devbandis. what can we say.

all of this started with ismayil's claim that Allah ta'ala can create a billion "muhammads" to which sunni ulama took umbrage and pointed that it would imply falsehood in Divine Speech - instead of modifying his statement or rescinding it, ismayil stuck to his guns

and wrote justifications. one such justification was: a virile man can commit zina; if he refrains, it is praiseworthy. whereas an impotent man cannot fulfil the act, his refraining is not praiseworthy because he has no power to commit it.

ergo, according to ismayil, Allah has the power to lie (al iyadhu billah) but he does not lie. this is better than saying he has no power to lie. ismayil was brash and despite his followers speaking of his "high intelligence" - outright stupid.

then his admirers nanotvi and gangohi took to defending ismail's position come what may and it is during this period, that someone asked gangohi whether a person who claims that falsehood has transpired should be ruled kafir. this was the fatwa of wuquu.

ulama refuted this and allamah ghulam dastgir qasauri took this complaint to the haramayn - and apprised the senior ulama of the time (and teachers of gangohi and nantovi) - sh. rahmatullah kirwani and sh. haji imdadullah .

fatwa of wuqu was published in the country and alahazrat says, even then i didn't do takfir. when i saw the photocopy of this fatwa, then i was convinced and hence did takfir. he said this in husam:




translation of above in preamble: p.80



tamhid on those who deny the fatwa: (from the first edition of tamhid printed in alahazrat's time)




translation of above:


a concise timeline of all these events in an infografic:



the objection: it is not found in fatawa rashidiyyah - so it is suspect. historical context: 130 years ago, muftis would answer on the same paper the question was asked and send it back. some muftis with resources would have copies made, but most didn't

many of alahazrat's fatawa were lost in this manner. until his students realised the treasure that was being squandered. so they began to make copies of the fatawa before returning the original request (paper) with the fatwa. this was also true of other muftis in that time.

if a mufti was well known and had a large circle of admirers/students, they would then gather the fatawa and publish it. in most cases, they would go asking people for fatawa of their sheikh and after an onerous task of collecting it, they would organise and publish.

in case of ftw-rashidyah, the first volume was in the process of being published when rashid gangohi died. becoz first vol is in 1323AH (year of death). the frontispiece declares: "this verse is the chronogram of the death of ..." other prayers also indicate posthumous pub.






the next page also clarifies that the compilers collected the fatawa and assured that they had originals with them.



in the end there is an appeal that if anyone has fatawa of the shaykh, pls have it sent so it can be published [in subsequent volumes].

there is some confusion regarding dates - because some prominent mu'arrikh (chronogrammer) composed "risalah fatawa rashidiyyah" adds up to 1313, even though the actual publication date is 1323. [noted on the same page as: "zeba e ajib o gharib"]

 

Mawlana Nazir Ahmad Rampuri also refuted the fatwa of Wuqu 2 years before Imam Ahmad Rida Khan. Imam Ahmad Rida Khan alludes to his refutation in Tamhid e Imaan

https://t.me/RealityOfTheDeobandis/1329?single