this is not correct. alahazrat only said that one doesn't become a wahabi merely because he deems sayyid ahmad a 'buzurg'. while this is sufficient proof against those who revel in the guilt-by-association fallacy, it does not mean that alahazrat deemed sayyid ahmad a buzurg. wAllahu a'alam.
Unfortunately, no. the single reply to that comment was: "We will do this when he accepts my invitation to sit down but his intention is with Shaykh Asrar Rashid who he is obsessed with by his actions if you see the ridiculous videos he releases. He must waste hours and hours going through Shaykh Asrar Rashids videos to see if they make one breath out of sync" The one replying(he teaches at a local Fultoli madrasa in Birmingham) makes it seem he is aware of such reference.
I came across a comment on a FB post stating Syed Ahmad Raebarelwi is mentioned in Fatwa E Rizvia Sharif. The commenter wrote: "You should send him the fatwa of Ahmad Raza Khan stating that Sayid Ahmed Shaheed was a Buzurg. It could be found in fatwa razaviyyah"
https://aalequtub.com/hazrat-syed-ahmad-shaheed-qutbi-r-a/ A Muslim perspective (the author views him favorably). The sources are questionable. Edit another one: https://archive.org/details/sayyida...agacyfromthepukhtunperspectivebydr.altafqadir
there is plenty of literature in urdu by our ulama. but unfortunately, they do not write in english. and sunnis who have crisp english do not seem to care (which is partly the reason mediocre translators like myself have a place). this ought to change. sunnis with a flair for writing and gifted with good expression should select books and translate. but where do we start? ---- --- watch this space.
barbara metcalf and usha sanyal writing about wahabis, alahazrat or devbandis and barelwis is like cyril radcliffe drawing out the partition of india. and due to the absence of quality literature among sunnis on these aspsects - metcalf and sanyal are quoted as authorities and their superficial knowledge as historical insights. same thing with the robinson fellow who is an expert without even reading about alahazrat. same thing about the guy faizan interviewed - who wrote a book without even learning about alahazrat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syed_Ahmad_Barelvi from wikipedia: also from wikipedia https://todayspointonline.com/syed-ahmed-barelvi-and-his-jihad-movement/ https://www.firstpost.com/india/sye...ement-in-the-indian-subcontinent-2790982.html https://pscpesh.org/PDFs/PJ/Volume_50/12_Syed.pdf https://archive.org/details/SyedAhm...ushmanByInayatUllahChishtiChakralavi/mode/2up https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...t-as-jihad-launchpad/articleshow/68176836.cms came across this while googling - https://archive.org/details/hindu-society-under-siege-by-sita-ram-goel/page/n12/mode/1up ----- didn't read all the linked articles but one of them seems to suggest that he was more anti-british and anti-sikh rather than just being a blazing wahabi (i could be wrong regarding comprehension of that one piece). i remember reading about him in school but can't seem to find the history textbook online, if i remember well, he was portrayed as a freedom fighter of sorts (pre-2000's NCERT textbooks), and one of the above articles alludes to it that he's to be seen as anti-hindu rather than a freedom fighter - parking the booklist here for perhaps a later search/investigation (i wanna compare the books of pre-bjp era and post-2000) - https://ncert.nic.in/ncertldd/collection/pdf/archive_eng.pdf
