thank Allah i have never set foot in the actual praying area of a deobandi mosque in my life and i have never prayed knowingly behind one of these wolves. not only do they ruin people's aqida and afterlife but wherever they are in the majority in pakistan or politically powerful they are making life hell for the ordinary muslim and giving islam a bad name. the terrorist organisation sipah-e-sahaba is deobandi in aqidah and many of the lashkars are also deobandits.
thanks for the link... i dont know much about it but given the deos old propensity for changing their answers in front of arabs it doesn't surprise me if the answers written by mr. saharanpuri were in accordance with sunni aqidah. will mr. ibn adam also include in his edition a note quoting what some of the deos actually wrote which led to ala hazrat's fatawa in the first place? a long time ago i came to the conclusion that all deobandis--whether rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth, barking loony-'kufr, shirk, bida'' types like mufti desai or moderate ones like mr. ibn adam--have given their previous elders carte blanche. they may say or write whatever they like and these blind followers will find an excuse for them and how what they really meant wasn't blasphemous at all but in accordance with ahl al-sunnah aqida! poor deobandis, living with schizophrenia 24/7 in front of arab sunnis must be difficult. otherwise how does one explain away the deobandi elders statements like comparing mawlid unfavourably to the birthday of the hindu deity krishna [gangohi i believe] or taqi usmani's infamous online fatwa against mawlid [but still insist that deobandi aren't against mawlid...] the mind boggles! one word summary: hypocrites! "najdiya! sakht hii gandii hai najaasat teri"
I will not call the rafiDi monsters in 'Iraq as people. In Iraq people are not fighting eachother. In Iraq the accursed rafiDi dajals are martyring the Sunnis, and the Sunnis are trying to protect themselves. As for the Kurds they just lost two Sunni politicians of their own to the rafiDi killing. Today another Sunni 'alim was martyred in Iskandariyah, near Karbala, inna LilAllah
by khalil ahmed ambethwi, saharanpuri meant to be a clarification and an answer to the 'deception' of Husam al-Haramayn and by transition imam ahmed raza khan barelwi. --- if there was any doubt about the deobandis and their two-faced behavior, it is now removed; not that there was any in the first place. according to khalil: and thirdly, in the parlance of the people in india 'wahabi' was originally a term describing anyone rejecting the taqlid of our imams raDiyallahu anhum. this term was later extended to include and became common to describe a person who follows the blessed sunnah and rejects ugly innovations [mustaHdithah ash-shani`ah] and ugly rituals particularly in and around bombay. so much so that a person prostates to the graves of awliya'a and circumbambulates it is called a wahabi; even those who point out that usury [interest] is forbidden is a wahabi even if they are elders among muslims and their prominent ones. [the term wahabi] it was then extended such that it became an insult. so, if an indian calls another a wahabi he doesn't mean that the person [one called wahabi] has corrupt faith [fasid al-`aqidah]; rather it means that such a person is a sunni, Hanafi, one who follows the sunnah and abstains from bid`ah; one who fears Allah ta'ala [and hence does not commit] from sins.' --- we now know where ibn adam learns his navigation. --- question the 17th: do you say that the prophet sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam has no superiority upon us except like that of an elder brother upon his younger and nothing more. did any of you write this passage in any book? answer: none amongst us, nor amongst our elders [aslafina'l kiram] believed this absolutely. and we do not imagine a man with the weakest of faith utter such an enormity. and whosoever says that the prophet alayhi's salam has no superiority except that of an elder brother upon his younger, we believe that he is out of the boundaries of faith.' so according to khalil ahmed, either ismayil dahlawi is not among the elders of deoband and either way, he is a kafir. ---- the 19th question: do you consider that iblis the accursed is more knowledgeable than the master of creation `alayhi's salam and has decidedly/ more knowledge [wa awsa'u `ilman minhu muTlaqan]; did you write it in any of your book and what is your ruling concerning a person who says so. khalil ahmed gives his defence but here is the rub. the question is not pointed. the question has too many loopholes. the issue was not a specific article of faith; the issue was that khalil said something and it was kufr. one should have asked whether you said something not whether it is your canonical belief. this part should be judged by ibn Hajar al-haytami's al-iylam li qawaTiy al-islam, not by sharH al-`aqayid or any other affirmative text. Allah ta'ala knows best. --- certainly, one cannot blame the arab-western ulama if they have a good opinion about the deobandis. but for me, well...try convincing me that saddam invaded iraq and the american army went there to stop people from fighting each other.
