Dr. Shadee on Deobandis

Discussion in 'Refutation' started by Adham12, Mar 30, 2022.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

  2. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Well-Known Member

    uk7866 likes this.
  3. Ahlesaabiqoon

    Ahlesaabiqoon New Member

    Hey Dr. Shadee, what are your thoughts on these articles. what do you think of https://barelwism.wordpress.com/202...ge-of-the-prophet-ṣallallahu-alayhi-wasallam/ and https://barelwism.wordpress.com/202...ef-of-ilm-jami-ma-kana-wa-ma-yakun-explained/
  4. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Well-Known Member

    The video was made private...
  5. Shadee

    Shadee New Member

    Assalamu alaykum,
    Message from Dr. Shadee on this: "If I remember correctly, I believe that I was able to convince Dr. Brown to retract that statement. On the Hijab podcast. I said that principle of being ok with people insulting the Prophet ﷺ is itself kufr. And he agreed and took the statement back."
    uk7866 likes this.
  6. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Not openly refuting isn't necessarily a problem.

    The problem is calling on others to not refute heretics, praising them, encouraging Sunnis to take from them, associating with them, penning poems in their honour, giving them sanads.

    This is sulh kulli.
    Noori, Hassan_0123 and Abdullah Ahmed like this.
  7. Hassan_0123

    Hassan_0123 HhhhhhhM_786

    100% agree with you Shadman. That's exactly how the Deobandis got in front. They didn't translate Tahzeer, Hifz Ul Imaan, Baraheen etc... into Arabic but other scholarly work which impressed the Arab scholars. We should have done the same with our scholars, not just Imam Ahmad Raza Khan. But there's no harm in translating polemical works into Arabic too... What have Deobandis been spreading around for the last 100 years? Al Muhannad. It absolutely baffles me that our ulema have not translated 'Radd Al Muhannad' by Mawlana Hashmat Ali Khan into Arabic yet. There is no harm in translating polemical works into Arabic or at least warning the Ulema behind closed doors... where do you think they (Arab Ulema) got the image of Ala Hazrat being a 'Takfiri'? Or the 'Barelwis' being some wacky sect from the subcontinent? From the scholarly works the Deos have translated? Nope
    Abdullah Ahmed likes this.
  8. Shadman

    Shadman Active Member

    Did the deobandis translate their blasphemous work into Arabic? If not, what's the point of translating their blasphemous text when they'll just deny it. If they did, where are the works? An Arab scholar should be able to dismantle their heresy right away if their work is present in Arabic.

    I think a better approach is to defend by translating sunni masterpieces for the Arabs and the biography of the individual who wrote the piece.
    Abdullah Ahmed likes this.
  9. Hassan_0123

    Hassan_0123 HhhhhhhM_786

    It looks like Shaykh Saeed Foudah حفظه الله is willing and has always been willing to speak out against deviancy (refer to the video). I don't blame him for anything he said in the original video, the fault is ours. We should have done a LOT better at warning those from outside of the subcontinent about the Deobandi sect. Whilst we were busy fighting amongst ourselves on petty issues, Deobandis flew ahead and spread their maslak... that's why many Arab ulema praise Deobandi scholars. So instead of pointing fingers at the Arab ulema, we should point fingers at ourselves for not warning them of the Deobandi sect in the first place.

    But I still believe we can warn the Arab Ulema of their deviancy. There is stuff in Arabic that can be shown to them but a lot more needs to be translated into Arabic. if they are willing to speak out against deviancy like they claim they do, then the Deobandi fitna will decrease In Sha Allah but its all upon US.
    Abdullah Ahmed likes this.
  10. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Well-Known Member

    this is the video being referred to:

    Shaykh Saeed Foudah is being very vague and he does not explicitly mention anything with specifics. He just generalizes and says that Imam Ahmad Ridha “made mistakes.”
    Such a statement from Shaykh Saeed Foudah without clarification is not helpful at all. Nor is his statement in any way conclusive regarding deobandi-brelwi issue. He needs to expound on such a statement especially when he is clearly making a huge mistake by erroneously including deobandis within Ahlusunnah. It would have been better that he remained silent especially since he does not know the urdu language. (Unless I’m mistaken, and he indeed does know Urdu).

    Also, I perused through the channel and the various videos on that channel. It seems that this channel is run by a deobandi since there are many deobandis/deviants promoted on that channel including but not limited to Hamza Mardood.
  11. AbdalQadir

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

    I'm assuming you're the Dr. Shadee being talked about on this thread. If that's the case, thanks for personally taking the time out to clear the air.

    One thing the brothers (including myself) mentioned on another thread and not here is your support for Jonathan brown about his theory regarding letting people talk nonsense about the Prophet 3alaihis salam (i can dig it up from twitter for exact comments, but you probably know what I'm talking abt). Even Daniel Haqiqatjou called you out on that.

    That is a greater evil then perennialism. Plus if you consider that statement re thinking of the donkey in salah as kufr, how is it logically possible to support Jonathan brown on his patently kufri proposition?

    Can you please elaborate on that.

    This was the Sunniport thread where i cited that twitter thread, that now doesn't exist -

    Last edited: Apr 11, 2022
  12. Khanah

    Khanah Well-Known Member

    Thanks for coming on here to clarify. However, there are a few points I would like to point out:

    1. When speaking about Imkan al Kadhib, there are actually two issues:

    a. Imam Ahmad Rida Khan made takfeer on Rashid Ahmad Gangohi because Gangohi claimed that zayd is not a kaafir for believing Allah has lied. Now, the deobandi's actually deny Gangohi said such a thing. Since this is part of the back and forth of 'did fulan say x or y', let's ignore it as indeed I can see why you are not in a position to delve into this, especially 100 years after the fact.

    b. The deobandi's (as a whole) believe that Allah can lie but doesn't. Not a single modern deobandi preacher that I can think of denies this. This is NOT part of the 'did fulan say x or not' controversy because even their modern teachers/writers/preachers/'scholars' affirm this explicitly. We can show you several videos/articles/etc from deobandi's in english to support this but it seems you have already seen a couple of them. It cannot be debated that they hold this belief.

    As a result, isn't this belief of theirs enough to make them a heretical sect that we should shun (and by shun, I mean tell the lay public to avoid them and the like)- and if not, why not?

    2. Whilst it's all well and good that you are unable to delve into what some urdu speaking indians said 100 years ago- there are modern claimants to the deobandi school who clearly and unequivocally stand by the kufr statements (the statements that you have agreed are absolute kufr). And these modern deobandis have supported these statements in English. For example, see what Hamza Maqbul and abdur raheem limbada say here:



    No doubt you're able to contact someone like Hamza Maqbul and abdur raheem limbada directly and ask them if they think the same statements are kufr if you were inclined to do so. However, my questions are:

    2a. Why would these modern deobandi's be defending such disgusting statements if this isn't actually the position of their forefathers?

    2b. Why haven't the modern deobandi's distanced themselves from the likes of abdur raheem limbada and openly come out and said the statement is kufr? Don't delve into the debates of a century ago if you don't want to- there are modern people repeating the same thing as their founders in English.

    3. Since perennialism is kufr and the perennialist is a kaafir, on what basis is Hamza Yusuf to be respected despite supporting such kufr (and actually refusing to call perennialism as kufr)? See here:


    He says abrogation of previous religions is 'almost' known necessarily from the religion and considers it ta'weel ba'eed etc. It certainly doesn't sound like he agrees with your view that perennialism is kufr.
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2022
  13. Shadee

    Shadee New Member

    • I knew their points on imkan al-kadhib and thinking about the donkey in salat and my public statement on those haven't changed; and it's the opinion of our shuyukh, not mine. Both statements are kufr.
    • What i am not obligated to do is investigate who said what. I have been shown manuscripts defending both sides and I'm not obligated to get to the bottom of which transmission is sound, one proving Fulan said it and the other showing Fulan didnt mean it or took it back. I'm not obligated by Sharia to judge those claims.
    • Perrenialism is kufr and the perennialist is a kafir.
    • On the Deobandiyya & Brelviyya I defer the judgement to Sh Saeed Fouda, who is among the foremost mutakallimeen of our time. It is on Muhammad Umar Mustafa's youtube channel.
    • On the Tabligh, what I refered to are those who simply do dawa and dont delve into theology. They are many, and having husn al-zann with them is appropriate in my opinion. Al-Habib Umar said many good things about their founder and welcomed them when they came to Dar al-Mustafa and hence I follow on that.
  14. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Well-Known Member

    He says
    “Prove to me by shariah that I have to make tahqiq”

    can someone please provide this proof
    جزاك الله خيرا
  15. Khanah

    Khanah Well-Known Member

    My quick thoughts on his answer:

    1. I think we all agree he doesn't need to research who said the statements as he isn't obligated per se.

    2. Since he is aware of certain statements, all he has to do is ask these deo's he encounters if they agree with imkan kizb, etc. He doesn't need to ask what their founders believed- just what the deo preacher standing in front of him believes. Even if he did that, he'd realise these people are not sunni.

    3. He makes taqleed of Sh. Saeed Fodeh etc but Sh. Saeed doesn't have a fatwa himself on this issue. I have seen the video he is referring to- what if Sh. Saeed is also one of those who hasn't done research, so on what basis can I do taqleed of him on this issue? I would suggest this is an 'argument from authority' at play here and thus the logic is fallacious.

    4. I don't like how he says 'this would be kufr according to the malikis'. No, it's kufr according to everybody (not talking about imkan kizb which isn't the cause of the takfeer in the first place but is certainly cause for tabdee').
  16. uk7866

    uk7866 New Member

    1:24:47 time stamp

    Answer by Dr Shadee on the Deo matter. 31/3/22.
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2022
  17. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    who cares if you are upset or beaming with joy about an issue at a personal level - what is the hukm of the shari'ah about a repeating offender and a manifest purveyor of kufr?

    So what if he was your "first teacher"? Does the shariah have special dispensations for "first teachers"?

    Imam Ash'ari's first teacher, who was also his step-father, guardian and long standing mentor, was none other than the prominent Mu'tazili philosopher Abu Ali Jubbai himself. Unlike sound-bytist hanson, Jubbai was an erudite theologian.

    Did Imam Ashari tell people to keep clear of his "first teacher" or did he tell them, "i disagree with him, but hey, he is a good guy, show him respect"?

    If you read that Twitter thread, shadee is actually comparing his differences with Hanson and salafis to those between the sahaba!

    And you expect this person to leave the devs?

    I am not holding my breath.

    wa Allahu a'alam
    Umar99, Noori and Abdullah Ahmed like this.
  18. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    so what if he praised Alahazrat? Shaykh yaqubi praised Alahazrat and called him a mujaddid too (even claimed to have met him in a dream after reading his malfuzat) and we all know that the talk was just that and no more.

    a lot of deviants praise Alahazrat too - so what? Do they become sunnis just by praising Alahazrat?

    Forget about devs and wahabis, he still has to do public tawbah for this.

    And his latest "virtue with Hanson" comment is another indication that he is not keen on upholding the supremacy of of the shari'ah.

    When you praise a deviant, you aid him in destruction of the deen.
    Umar99, Noori and Abdullah Ahmed like this.
  19. uk7866

    uk7866 New Member

    Live now so anyone can ask Qs
  20. uk7866

    uk7866 New Member


    Attached Files:

Share This Page