Barelvi'ism and Christianity: similarities and the possible reasons why

For anyone who has spent time reading the disputes it becomes evidently clear, over time, that each innovation and kufri belief that these sects came out with was a bandage upon the previous false belief, which Sunni ulama refuted.

Take this belief of Nanotvi et al of creating another final prophet:
The truth is that anyone with common sense will then question the Quran (ayah of Khatam Nubuwwah) and hadith (la Nabi Ba'di).

In order to suture this gashing wound in their false aqeedah the deos (bandage 1) kept the belief of Allah can lie and (according to them) ergo, the Nass of the Quran is not requiring alteration and (bandage 2) Anbiya are not masoom. With this strategy the ugly aqeedah of Nanotvi et al can be kept on life support.

Like this you will find that all their beliefs which renegade from Ahl Sunnah are natural regressions to the underworld of shirk (ismail's belief that tawheed means humans can help one another because they are capable of it therefore asking one passed away is kufr as he is no longer "capable" of it).

Wa Allahu aA'lam

 

a question please. Isn't this the same belief as that of nanotvi. If he is saying that Allah has power over creating another final Prophet then isn't he believing in the imkan of it and hence is it kufr to doubt this kufr and deem him a kafir?

 

he attributes this to that same work:

• Dawlatu al Makkiyyah

This book was written during his second trip to Makkah for ḥajj in 1905. The Imāms of the ḥaramain who were employed by the ottoman government were not able to answer some of the questions posed to them by the Wahhabis so they requested that Ahmed Riḍa write a response which he named Dawlatu al Makkiyyah (Cassim, 2010).

 

My bad brother, I missed seeing it.

 

Yup, I had already found his LinkedIn and posted it in the first post. Would prefer to contact him via other platforms.

 

For career freaks always try linkedin first -
https://sa.linkedin.com/in/dr-nouman-hussain-15a39219b

 

On a related note, Shaykh Asrar has consistently stressed the urgency of producing a robust English refutation of Ehsan Zahir’s screed—a work whose lies have had disturbingly far-reaching consequences. Its tentacles have extended deep into the contemporary anti-Baraylawi narrative, and much of the recycled drivel directed at Alahazrat can ultimately be traced back to that very source

One cannot help but think that had a comprehensive and scholarly rebuttal been made available in English shortly after its translation, we may well have stemmed the tide of misinformation early on. Perhaps we would not now be contending with the likes of Nouman’s incoherent and ill-sourced diatribe, nor the enduring spread of distortions masquerading as “research”

I had actually begun the task some time ago, but like many things, it was unfortunately derailed by other commitments

 

If anyone is able to find Nouman on Twitter or Facebook, or find his university email, please do share.

 

one of the reasons i never wanted to pursue further studies - the sheer phoniness of academia is mind-boggling. i have seen it first hand with my own eyes. even in STEM fields, people re-write and rehash "original research" just changing and tweaking elementary physical units, or changing one parameter of an old research experiment, only to market it as a new research, and all sorts of quackery that makes its way through "peer review".

expectedly, it's especially bad in the "humanities" "management" and "business studies". just have a read of that moron hosin nasr's quackpot theories, or mark hanson, or sherman jackson

---

a rough idea from deepseek on careerism in academia (shown below, red color). it's all about accumulating more 'peer reviewed' publications. i've witnessed it first hand.

(in Islam too some people flaunt their x number of ijazah's in y number of tariqah's (case in point, tahir and others) and senior mutasawwifeen have always warned that accumulation just for the sake of accumulation has no bearing on your spiritual journey. of course genuine acquisition of knowledge and learning from many genuine teachers etc. for genuine advancement is praiseworthy)

---

What is the number of peer reviewed papers needed to be an assistant professor, associate professor, and professor?

The number of peer-reviewed publications required to advance through academic ranks (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Full Professor) varies significantly depending on:

1. **Discipline** – STEM fields often expect more papers than humanities.
2. **Institution Type** – Research-intensive universities (R1 in the U.S.) require more than teaching-focused institutions.
3. **Country/Norms** – Standards differ globally (e.g., U.S. vs. Europe vs. Asia).
4. **Impact of Work** – Quality (journal prestige, citations) often matters more than quantity.

### **General Estimates (Research-Focused Universities, STEM Fields)**
| Rank | Peer-Reviewed Papers (Typical Range) |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------|
| **Assistant Professor** | 5–15 (often including 1–2 high-impact) |
| **Associate Professor** | 15–30 (with consistent productivity) |
| **Full Professor** | 30–50+ (with leadership & citations) |

### **Key Considerations**
- **Assistant Professor (Tenure-Track):**
- Often hired with a strong PhD/postdoc record (~5–15 papers).
- Must show potential for independent research.
- **Associate Professor (Tenured):**
- ~15–30 papers, with some high-impact work.
- Demonstrated funding, mentoring, and service contributions.
- **Full Professor:**
- ~30–50+ papers, with major contributions to the field.
- Leadership roles (grants, editorial boards, PhD supervision).

### **Exceptions & Variations**
- **Humanities/Social Sciences:** Fewer papers (e.g., 3–10 for tenure), but longer monographs.
- **Medicine/Engineering:** May require more due to collaborative work.
- **Elite Universities:** May prioritize *Nature/Science* papers over quantity.

### **Bottom Line**
There’s no universal number—**quality, impact, and independence** matter more than sheer volume. Always check specific departmental guidelines.

Would you like insights for a particular field or country?

 

I will now stop here. I made these points as I worked through the paper due to its initially professional presentation and formal publication.
That superficial professionalism gave the impression that it might merit a considered and substantive reply.

However, having now waded through 45 pages of the text, it has become abundantly clear that whatever vestiges of scholarly pretence the paper was thought to have possessed have long since deteriorated—disintegrating into a clumsy pastiche one would expect from an overzealous fourteen-year-old Wahabi on Twitter, rather than from someone claiming academic credibility.

What began as a purported exercise in academic inquiry has devolved into a lamentable spectacle of misattribution, historical illiteracy, and crude sectarian bias—devoid of intellectual discipline and utterly unworthy of serious engagement.

It appears that Dr Nouman’s time amidst the Wahabis of Madinah University has left a lasting intellectual imprint—one that now manifests in the form of this shambolic attempt at academic research. One cannot help but sense that he is itching to hurl the familiar Wahabi epithets of kāfir, mushrik at al-Imām Aḥmad Riḍā Khān, yet refrains from doing so only in deference to the conventions of academic discourse.

Rather than offering an impartial study, the paper functions as little more than a cloaked denunciation, poorly concealed behind a scaffold of misread sources and theological distortion. It is a striking example of a poor man's polemic dressed in the borrowed robes of scholarship—transparent to any reader of discernment.

It is not merely the content that is lamentable—the writing itself is riddled with clumsy phrasing, erratic punctuation, and spelling errors that would scarcely be acceptable at high-school level, let alone in a postgraduate submission. One is left genuinely perplexed as to how the University of Birmingham allowed this to pass as academic work? One wonders as to who the supervisor entrusted with overseeing this project was, and how such a manifestly substandard piece escaped even the most basic editorial scrutiny?

 

some retard in birmingham. this confirms our first thesis that he was downing pints in a pub.

 

Going back slightly, Nouman says:

2.2.3 Other main teachers of Ahmed Riḍa
He studied with the likes of:
● Mawlana Shah Rahm Ilahi Muglori
● Mawlana Sayed Basheer Ahmed Aligarhi
● Mawlana Zahurul Hussain Rampuri
● Ahmed bin Zayni Dahlan (Cassim, 2010);

No information is present about these teachers and only their names are mentioned.
​

A brother kindly located the work Nouman cites and shared it with me. To be fair, I had not encountered these names in any of the standard biographical sources on al-Imām Aḥmad Riḍā Khān either, so I returned to the referenced text to verify the claim for myself. I searched for the list of teachers Nouman presents—yet, quite remarkably, the passage he references, and the names, are entirely absent from the source he cites.

This naturally raises the question: Where exactly did Dr Nouman extract these names from? And why are they nowhere to be found in the work he attributes them to?

 

Thus far the research has explored and examined the situation that surrounded in order to find possible reasons for the resemblances.
​

Not a single valid 'possible' reason has been given in the work thus far.

 

Therefore, aforementioned are the beliefs of Ahmed Riḍa, one should note that the work of Ahmed Riḍa have been explored to extract his beliefs. It is important to return back to the work of Ahmed Riḍa so to get a good idea of his beliefs and to be sure that these beliefs were propagated by him and not that which has been attributed to him unjustly.
​

How ironic

 

One can begin to understand how strong these beliefs were in the heart of Ahmed Riḍa as he would make takfr of anyone who did not agree with his stance.
​

Liar

 

Hawaii al Bakhshish (1907)
​

LSD in Hawaii

 

Salat as Safa fi nuri al Mustapha (1985)
​

The book was obviously not written in 1985

 

Hidāiq Bakhshish
In this book Ahmed Riḍa mentions his beliefs about saints generally, but specifies Abdul Qādir Jilāni.
​

It's a poetry anthology, not a book as such, you imbecile.

 

Some claim that the British used Dahlan to weaken the Muslims in the Arab peninsula and they used Ahmed Riḍa to weaken the Muslims in the Indian subcontinent (Mahmood, 2012).
​

Deobandi fabrications

 

Given Nouman's shambolic track record so far, I just knew this was coming soon:

In addition to these teachers, Mirza Ghulam Qadir Baig, who is mentioned to be the brother of Ghulam Ahmed Qādiyāni who believed himself to be a Prophet after Prophet Muḥammad (Zaheer, 2011), was from his first teachers. Sanyal (2005, p. 55) mentions that Ahmed Riḍa “retained a lifelong affection, sending him fatāwa whenever he requested”.​