on ghumaris

Discussion in 'Refutation' started by shahnawazgm, Apr 1, 2018.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the point is that whether in khatib's tarikh, or some other hadith ulama who unfairly criticised imam abu hanifah - is a different matter. all dusted and settled by various commentators.

    for the sake of argument, even if he did, his final stance was that shaykhayn were afzal.

    as for the ibanah quote:
    sub'HanAllah. is ibanah to be trusted blindly? and should these statements, even if true be taken literally?


    shaykh wahbah ghawuji wrote a short epistle on this issue: "nazratun ilmiyyah": an informed viewpoint and and academic analysis of the fact whether the existing ibanah is untampered and can all of it be attributed to imam abu'l hasan ash'ari?

    PDF here.

    see p.10 onwards for an analysis of the forgery in ibanah cited by nawaz. anyone with a sound understanding of hanafi works and imam azam's works in aqidah will know that the accusations (vide ibanah) are frivolous and untenable; and patently false as demonstrated by sh.ghawuji.

    ghaw, p10.png

    ghaw, p11.png

    ghaw, p12.png

    it is a small book of about 100 pages. in spite of your lack of time, do read this book and you will get plenty of tips on how to analyse reports and examine contexts.

    wa billahi't tawfiq.
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2018
  2. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    I wish I had the time, however, sufyan al-thawri changed his opinion later in life when he moved to basrah but prior to that his opinion was the same as "his colleagues" in Kufa that Imam Ali (as) was afdal.
    as for the other matter, unfortunately, sufyan al-thawri was antagonistic towards Imam al-'Azam. Even Imam abu al-hasan al-ashari, who is a hujjah unlike al-ghumari, states the following terrible statement without criticism in his aqidah work al-ibaanah: al-Ashari on Imam Azam.png
  3. IsmailHusaynQadri

    IsmailHusaynQadri New Member


    I know many Tijanis in real life. I have studied their works and I know their teachings well. This is utter falsehood. The things which the Ghumaris and Ahbash call "kufr" in Tijani works are comparable to the things which the Wahhabis call kufr in the works of Sufis generally.

    As for some of the present adherents of the Tijani tariqah, the main complaint I have heard is that a few of their muqaddams in the west have Tafzili leanings, like Fakhri Owaisi, who is in fact a student of the Ghumaris. The Tijanis from Senegal and Morocco I have met are among the best, most pious Muslims I have ever met, and their aqeedah is pure Sunni. Unlike the Ghumaris, they all believe in the Noor of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam)

    Also, Sh. Ahmad Tijani has no writings.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2018
    Unbeknown likes this.
  4. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    while he explodes upon kawthari's statement about a sahabi (which as i have said is not justifiable either, but kawthari was still respectful of hazrat anas raDiyAllahu anhu and ghumari projected it in the most ugly and dishonest manner).

    look what he says about hazrat muawiyah raDiyAllahu anhu in his ju'unah:

    ju'nah, v1p9.png

    he made a big song and dance about kawthari criticising bukhari and other salaf (as i said, i don't justify kawthari) and clean forgot that no less than hazrat ibn abbas raDiyALlah in the same bukhari said that hazrat muawiyah was a SaHabi.

    where is the outrage and raving like a madman?

    la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
    Aqdas, Noori and Bazdawi like this.
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    ghumari is a rabid fanatical anti-abu hanifah. look what he says on p59:

    mufghum, p59.png

    you are a people who have no religion, except the opinion of abu hanifah and his statements - he is the lord god you worship, and your prophet who was sent forth!

    and i swear by Allah - am true in this without being foul of such an oath - that if Allah ta'ala sent his Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam once again, and he spoke to you by his own (blessed) lips that abu Hanifah was wrong, you would disbelieve him and you would reject his message; just as you reject his shariah and sunnah by this disgraceful abuse (or playing with religion/sunnah).

    i have NEVER read a book so full of abuses as this one. i didn't think much about ghumari as i had not read much by his pen, and i ignored criticisms of him. but this is depressing. ghumari under the guise of supporting 'salaf' against kawthari's abuses, freely abuses imam abu hanifah.

    we ask Allah ta'ala to protect us from the disease of ta'SSub.

    disclaimer: we have said before and we repeat that we do not support kawthari's bad-mouthing elders and senior scholars. our imam, alahazrat, taught us to respect our elders - even those who criticised our madh'hab and our imam, abu Hanifah. may Allah ta'ala forgive us and them and be pleased with all the scholars of ahl al-sunnah.

    nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.
    Umar99, Ghulam Ali, Unbeknown and 2 others like this.
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    shaykh ahmad ghumari has the weirdest approach. he belittles and berates ali al-qari calling him "ignorant of hadith sciences" and kawthari for his ghuluw, fanatic admiration of imam a'azam. and calls them names etc - even accusing them of 'parting from the path of muslims'.

    see bayan talbis al-muftari, p.12:

    mufghum, p12.png

    now, imam kawthari was unfair in attacking shafiyi ulama, but in this specific case ghumari is attacking him for (and ali al-qari) saying that the hadith: 'if iman were hung in pleiades, a man (or men) from persia would attain it' applies only to imam a'azam; and that they said "ilm" instead of "iman" or "din" as in saHiHayn. and that kawthari apparently rejected that 'aalim of madinah' is only imam malik and 'aalim of quraysh' is imam shafiyi. that is a different issue, and if kawthari said so as ghumari accuses him of saying, he was wrong.

    BUT... is it such a big issue that kawthari is chucked out of the jama'ah?

    if qari and kawthari can be termed jahil, ghulat etc for such a small issue of fadayil, then what should ghumari be called for his tafzili beliefs? but the pattern is consistent. if a man doesn't care about a saHabi, and an imam like sufyan al-thawri - then what about those who came after?

    by doing so, he has opened the door for attacks on himself. no one should complain if ahmad ghumari is called jahil or ignorant of hadith, when his mistakes in hadith are found out. unless of course, he is ma'Sum. al-iyadhu billah.

    what about ghumari himself and the tafzilis who contradict the jama'ah in the case of tafzil of shaykhayn and abusing hazrat muawiyah raDiyALlahu anhu?

    this is what he says - even albani and his followers are a more respectful with scholars of 4 madh'habs, where ghumari just accuses them all of having abandoned sunnah!

    mufghum, p12b.png

    if this is not arrogance and ignorance - i don't know what it is.

    oh, yeah. taqlid is bid'ah but speaking without restraint about sahabah is true sunnah....according to ghumari logic.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2018
    Ghulam Ali, Unbeknown and Bazdawi like this.
  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    yes. ghumari amongst other dishonest or ignorant people took the report from Hilyah of abu nuaym.

    why do i say this?

    first of all Hilyah has some reports that are very difficult to take them at face value even if reported through a sound chain. for example, this accusation is made about imam abu Hanifah and attributed to imam sufyan al-thawri in Hilyah, p16:

    hilyabunuaym, v7p16.png

    yusuf ibn asbat says: i was with sufyan al-thawri when the news of the passing of abu Hanifah came, and he said: "alHamdulillah; he was assailing (and damaging) the bonds of islam one by one"

    a lot has been written about this. so we need to understand the quote presented by ghumari in proper context. and also refute a false allegation made by him, implicitly. in the same Hilyah, p27:

    hilyabunuaym, v7p27a.png

    two reports in the above clip:

    1. what a good healer was sufyan al-thawri! when he went to baSrah, he spoke of the merits and praise of ali; and when he entered kufa, he spoke of the greatness, merits and praise (faDayil) of uthman.

    2. sufyan (al-thawri) told me: when i am in shaam (syria) i will speak of the greatness, merits and praise (manaqib) of ali; and when i am in kufa i will speak of the greatness, merits and praise of abu bakr and umar.

    this is because, in kufa, the popular opinion was in favour of ali and hostility to abu bakr and umar - so he spoke of their greatness; and in basrah, where there was hostility to mawla ali, he spoke of the greatness of mawla ali.

    contrary to ghumari's suggestion that sufyan al-thawri flowed with the tide, the fearless imam spoke the truth AGAINST popular opinion. and as if it were not enough, he explicitly spoke of syria as well when he said: 'if i were in shaam, i will speak of the manaqib of ali"

    but those who think ghumari knows better may swallow it.

    i trust imam sufyan al-thawri.


    and oh, that which ghumari didn't tell you, (whether because he didn't know, or whether he wilfully suppressed it, we do not know) is that sufyan al-thawri considered it a disease that needed to be cured, for a person who said that though he loved abu bakr and umar raDiyAllahu anhuma, he felt love for mawla ali that he didn't feel for the shaykhayn.

    hilyabunuaym, v7p27c.png

    and he said, he feared that a person who considered mawla ali superior to shaykhayn, that such a person's good deeds may not be accepted:

    Hilyah, p.27:

    hilyabunuaym, v7p27d.png

    also: Hilyah, p28:

    hilyabunuaym, v7p28a.png

    Hilyah, p.31:

    hilyabunuaym, v7p31b.png

    and specifically for nawaz: he deemed it a great virtue to be clear of ill-will against all the sahabah. (hilya, p27):

    hilyabunuaym, v7p27b.png

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2018
    Ghulam Ali, Noori, Bazdawi and 3 others like this.
  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    in hilyah of abu nuaym, vol.7 p.31 the quote is mentioned.

    hilyabunuaym, v7p31a.png

    it says: "sufyan al-thawri held the opinion of the kufans, that he considered ali superior to abu bakr and umar; when he went to baSrah, he reverted from this opinion and (thereafter) consider abu bakr and umar superior to ali and considered ali superior to uthman."

    this was mentioned by ghumari in his ju'natu'l attar.

    we will discuss this in sha'Allah, presently, but first look what ghumari had to say: he said:


    i say: " if he stayed in shaam (syria) or andalus, he would have considered mu'awiyah superior to ali! but Allah ta'ala saved him."

    nawaz says that ghumari was quoting abu nuaym; true, but ghumari was sneering on imam al-a'azam sufyan al-thawri. as if ghumari of the 14th century is far more pious, righteous and religious than thawri!

    in other words, ghumari is saying: 'thawri accepted whatever was the popular opinion'.

    this is not only ugly, but also distortion on the part of ghumari.

    so the charge that ghumari made an 'incorrect attribution' can be debated, but that he insulted and sneered at imam sufyan al-thawri, making petty and cheap remarks is obvious.

    nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2018
  9. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    al-Ghumari, amongst others, took that report of the opinion of Sufyan al-thawri from Hilya al-awliyah of Imam Abu Nu'aym al-Isfahani.
  10. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    It appears to me that @Ibn Hadi is here on an agenda or an ego trip or a fatal combination of both.

    He throws around random statements and names, makes outrageous comparisons and tops it with some soured salad dressing of "I prefer what I heard to what is documented proof".

    The only verifiable evidence he has presented so far is for his inability (or is it unwillingness?) to understand both Arabic as well as plain English.
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  11. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    that is why i lamented that people don't think.
    Unbeknown likes this.
  12. Ibn Hadi

    Ibn Hadi Ya Ghaus e Azam Dastageer

    I wouldn't recommend them to people obviously.
    But they are useful and a knowledgeable shaykh could separate the wheat from the chaff.

    I guess the best way to treat them is like we do with Ibn Hazm, Shawkani, etc.
  13. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    what about their books?
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  14. Ibn Hadi

    Ibn Hadi Ya Ghaus e Azam Dastageer

    I am not claiming that Ghumaris have no errors. But I just wanted a fair analysis. And I prefer what I heard from their direct students.

    (Many works of Shaykh Talidi have been tampered with by Wahhabis as well.) Regarding madhabs, all of the shuyukh follow the Shafi'i school in general.

    The Ghumaris criticism of Shaykh Kawthari comes from the fact that he accused Ibn Hajar Asqalani of being weak in memory and chasing women on the street. (Imam Al Kawthari wrote this work in response to Imam Juwayni's Mugith Al Khalq which was a biased attack on Hanafi school)

    Despite their differences these ulama respected each other. The Ghumari view on Taqlid is that one should not have Taasub in following a madhab.
    This is no different then what the likes of Imam Al Bouti and Imam Wahbah Zuhayli have mentioned.

    People misinterpreted their stance as an attack on Taqlid altogether.
    And again, nowhere did they claim to be mujtahid mutlaq.
    They wanted scholars of Morocco to study other madhaib as well instead of sticking rigidly to Maliki madhab.

    Aside from Tafzil and their stance on Amir Muawiyah, the other allegations against them are mostly baseless.
    Their style is reminiscient of Ibn Hazm.

    They showed a lot of arrogance in some of their work. (Which is a common trait of many Huffadh of hadith. There is a very old saying that "If you find a muhaddith who is humble, then he is rarer than red sulphur")
  15. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    that was my first response. because he praises hilali and on page 11 he gloats about ibn qayyim's 'ijtima al-jaysh' and claims that it is all beneficial and nur, and excoriates the ash'aris. he says that ibn qayyim was not like his teacher ibn taymiyyah. even though this book is worse than his teacher's heresies, and actually make them more explicit.

    one would think that by calling imam tajuddin subki, an "ashari madman" (or insane ashari' or "mad about ash'aris") the author was probably criticising only the son, and respects his father imam taqiyuddin; and i saw elsewhere in the book that imam taqiyuddin is also mentioned.

    the radd of ibn zafil was penned by the father, not the son. raHimahumAllah wa nafa'ana bi barakatihima.

    in the opening letter, hilali is termed "ustaz" and the recipient is advised to follow hilali's aqidah approach. see p11. this letter is signed 14th rabiy al-thani, 1372. (rabiy al-aakhir, that is)

    ghum, p11a.png

    yet on page 37, he calls hilali as an ignoramus, obstinate, recalcitrant heretic and slams him for spreading his heresy in the maghreb. unless of course, it is some other hilali. note the date of this letter. 3rd muharram, 1372.

    ghum, p37.png

    in the space of about three months, according to this book, shaykh ahmad had gone from considering hilali a renegade ignoramus to 'ustaz' whose views on aqidah should be followed, and whose exposition on ibn qayyim's deplorable anthropomorphist work to be studied!

    Allah ta'ala Knows best and He turns hearts and minds from and towards the Truth. we seek His refuge and ask Allah to keep us on the straight path, and keep us facing the path toward His Mercy and Goodwill.

    just to clarify, this is apparently a collection of letters (maktubat) of shaykh ahmad; so it is not a single topic. but there ought to be consistency in the overall approach even if the letters are spread over many years, though most letters are from a short time span.

    below (on p11 and quoted by abu hamza below as well) is a most irresponsible statement, and that which could be spewed only by a most ignorant wahabi; that we often witness on blogs and forums in our time:

    ghum, p11b.png

    whoever wrote that, is utterly ignorant. and quite pompous. as if scholars of fiqh, hadith, tafsir, aqidah for more than a thousand years were all in darkness and someone 1000 years later knows better than all of them combined!

    nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2018
    Unbeknown likes this.
  16. ibn hadi and umar99

    sayyid muhammad alawi praising ghumaris is not proof just like sayyid muhammad alawi praising deobandis and kawthari abu ghudda praising deobandis. Did they address the deobandi ghumari deviancies and heresies?

    we all know either you are muqalid or mujtahid? so what was the madhhab of the ghumaris or maddhab of mahmud said mamduh?

    bakhubza or abdullah talidi, whatever, all i know is GAME OVER DEO
  17. Ibn Hadi

    Ibn Hadi Ya Ghaus e Azam Dastageer

    A note regarding this book. The section pertaining to Aqeedah where he appears to be insulting Asharis is written by Abu Khubzah.
    This guy is a Wahhabi jahil.

    This is what I heard directly from the student of Shaykh Hasan Siddiq Al Ghumari (d. 2010)

    And regarding Taqlid, he is basically saying that the door to ijtihad can never be closed. And that a person is either a Mujtahid or he is someone who follows another Mujtahid.

    The stuff regarding Ibn Al Jawzi is found Shaykh Abdul Haqq Muhaddith Delhvi's books as well.

    When it comes to Ahmad At Tijani, this man's tariqah has many deviant followers and many works of his contain kufr, but they may have been tampered with.

    And I have seen Hafidh Ahmad quote Shah Waliullah in other works.

    The stuff about Ibn Hajar Makki though does show his Shia leaning.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    this book of ghumari is rambling of an extremely unorganised mind.

    years ago i used to wonder why hanafi ulama and indian curriculum insisted upon logic* and philosophy as core subjects to learn. and having come from a math/science background,** i had taken this skill for granted. but as i began to read and interact, i realised that very few people have an innate talent for logical and structured thinking.

    ghumari was just saying what came to his mind, without thinking. because, if one does, one will ask:who, when, what, how, why, where, why-not-x, what-if, etc.

    wAllahu'l musta'an.


    * i am told that these subjects in madaris are taught like others - rote memorisation without learning it. the weird logic and fallacies in some rasayil of contemporary 'scholars' and 'muftis' is evidence that logic is not taught as a skill to be put to use.

    **unfortunately, in our time, even many from math/science background do not have the capability to think logically or form a sound argument. and twitter/facebook has spawned the whataboutery culture as a standard response to objections.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2018
    Unbeknown likes this.
  19. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    in the same book he accuses hanafis of worshipping abu hanifah! see p.72:

  20. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i had already mentioned sh.gibril's article as caution, in the original thread; am posting it here again as we have split the thread.

    please do read shaykh gibrils note on ghumaris.

    to reiterate, ghumari's book was posted for the specific reason of proving 'nuzul of sayyiduna yisa alayhi's salam' and that he listed numerous hadith. and i posted the link to sh.gibril's article lest people are not misled to think that i am endorsing ghumaris.

    most modern sunni-turned tafdilis from our lands, rely on literature by ghumaris or their students for their claims and proofs of tafdil. sh.mamduh is one such hadith scholar who is a student of shaykh ahmad al-ghumari if i remember well.

Share This Page