Shaykh Saeed Foudeh on Imkan al-Kadhib

Whichever brothers run that reality of deobandis telegram channel, you need to post your observations on Sunniport and X (twitter) as well and the influencers among you also need to make a video on YouTube refuting that devbandi clown

There were some good observations today from Shaykh Saeed's book and shows that devbandis like always have been kicking up hype. It's always a case of khoda paharh Nikla Chuha with them!

 

The "Reality of the Deobandis" Telegram page has a Sunni student of knowledge's feedback on Shaykh Saeed's book

https://web.telegram.org/k/#@RealityOfTheDeobandis

If someone can copy and paste the relevant parts here it will be great

Just today Shaykh Saeed Foudeh declared himself a mubtadi3i by the standards of that devbandi donkey and zameel, let that Usman guy call out his bid3ah and take him to task



From the Sunni brothers' telegram page

 

i disagree a bit, it was very easy for him to ascertain this blame of deobadies because ad dawlah and anba al hay, which is a direct refutation of barzanji's risalah, are in arabic, he can be excused for not able to read urdu books or not believing in the translations, but it is very hard to believe that he would have not known about ad dawlah which barzanji's quote talked about.

 

I completely understand your point and definitely agree.

I was just pointing out the irony of his mentioning that "Al-Baraylawi" also made mistakes and was just another scholar and not free from error. The difference is that "Al-Baraylawi" was actually not the one who erred in this matter...

 

i don't know about other countries, but one of the first things i learnt in driving was you must assume that everyone on the road other than you is blind and careless and it's your job to ensure your safety

this is specially true in our times for Sunnis

devbandis are of course keeping their end of the deal being lying degenerates and enemies. you only expect ambushes and attacks from an enemy, only a fool will expect decency from the enemy

as for Foudeh or other Arab ulama like him, maybe devs worked hard on him, as they did with keller. he's human too and in line with the driving example, don't expect nondesi ulama either to not be complacent or immune to lapses, don't expect present day anyone to be as meticulous as ulama of the past. technically yes it's his mistake to not get an accurate reading of the imams position, but how much have the barelwis worked to do "tashkeel" of him (a tb buzzword)?

we can't expect to fight the devs based on karamats alone. not gonna happen. the sahaba fought with hard work for the deen. we want to achieve results? we gotta do the hard yards for it without expecting either a wali's karamat or expecting everyone in the world to do everything right

i was talking to an entrepreneur yesterday and he said a great thing which another businessman gave him as a rule of thumb - until you spend 10000 work hours on your gig, you don't have the right to say it's not working out, and if you make it before that, it's luck, not you! of course we have the akabir who wrote voluminous books and tirelessly did work for deen and all, but as a generality among today's ulama, can you show me a Sunni aalim who can show you such an effort with x number of hours logged in the service of deen, be it writing books, translating Ala Hazrats books, lobbying with government against qadianis, anything, even reading Sunnis own books?

 

Very irresponsible of him…sure Barelwis are to carry the brunt of the blame (if you wish to see it that way) but don’t assume that the Arab Ulema are completely innocent and are free to write what they will without doing their due diligence…

 

ah! shaykh saeed fudah believing in lies without verifying from imam's works, I wonder if he has read al dawlah al makkiyyah. he is buying it from ghayat al ma'mul which is only printed by deobandies

 

Anyways I don't want to shift the topic away from Sh Saeed's book and get accused if being anti barelvi because I'm not. It would be good if brothers who have contact with Sh Asrar and Mufti Monawwer can send the PDF to them. Mufti Monawwer is mentioned in the book btw

Also look forward to see what aH says

 

No I blame ourselves. I don't like the notion of pointing fingers at others for something we could have quelled ages ago. I don't know where exactly we got it wrong in the last 100 years but Deos decided to publish Arabic works, build Darul Ulooms, make quality scholars and what did we do? Well I don't want to go into that incase I get abused but I felt like we could have prevented all this mess if we did the work in the first place.

 

they are not worthy of blame according to you?

 

Btw I don't blame (if that's the right word) Sh Saeed Foudah for anything in his book, he seems quite open-minded and is willing to look at more evidence from our side and I don't blame Deobandis aswell, they did what they had to do. I blame our side for being late to the party. The Deobandis have made solid connections and have contributed in scholarly endeavours well before us. Only recently with the likes of Daral Nabhani, DI, Daral Malik, Mufti Aslam Sheywani etc... have we done anything significant in publishing Arabic works.

 

Did the devbandis present it to him to gain a comprehensive insight into their flip flop aqaid?

Did the Barelwis present it to him?

You can't expect a non desi to be aware of every single Urdu work by any sect.

Besides, how many of our OWN ulama can give a talk or write a sharh on Subhan As-Subbuh? This is what happens when you replace knowledge seeking with consumerist and commercial naatkhwani based Sunniyat and shakhsiyat parasti.

 

Also I don't understand why Usman is still quoting Imam Barzanji when Imam Barzanji clearly states that lying is impossible in both Nafsi and Lafzi.

Also I feel like Sh Foudah could have engaged with other Deobandi works more, not just Al Muhannad. Juhd Al Muqill by Mahmood Hassan Deobandi is in Arabic if I'm not mistaken, he should have commented on that too.

 

Welcome to the devbandi world of irrelevant hype - khoda paharh, nikla chuha

Plus don't forget, it seems he has been misinformed with standard muhannad lies. Anyways I need to read properly before talking further.

 

Disclaimer before I comment on the book. I'm not a student of knowledge, I don't claim to be but if people see me as one, just know that I'm not a very good but these are my comments. Looking forward to what aH and other scholars have to say

I think deos are blowing it out of proportion. What's there actually new in the book?

He said a minority of Asharis said its possible in Kalaam Lafzi but we already knew that. He didn't say whether their position was a valid one in the Madhab.
He disagress with the Deobandi position but he doesn't give a verdict. Is this belief misguided, an innovation, what the hukm?
Even some of the Asharis deos quote, Sh Foudah said Deos can't use them as proof, like Taftazani
He didn't really comment on the Al Muhannad passages. He should have commented on the difference between Khulf al Waeed and Kizb but he didn't.
As for the Gangohi fatwa, it's still on Barelvis to prove that fatwa exists/existed.
He said the majority position was it's impossible in Lafzi and this was the stronger position.

So is it actually revolutionary? Idk

 

Dr Sa'īd Fūdah's book -
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yOW3A0KOVyEigiZdngSeB3h8QK5C_a_4/view?usp=drive_link

 

shaykh hashmat ali rahimahullah has refuted it in raad al muhannad, and provided evidences from al muhannad that this passage was an addition after the endorsements, otherwise there would be clear contradictions in the endorsements.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if it's the latter case. Just a few years back, you could see some of the young "Arab Ulama" who were confused about the issue of Imkan al Kadhib. Alhamdulillah, they retracted after Sh. Salek's video. This just goes on to show the ineptitude of many speakers and their blind following of popular faces in such issues. Given that the case, it would be disastrous, if a 15th century Faudah makes a claim that there is a valid Khilaf on this issue. Expect many to simply blind follow such a popular face from ilm al-kalam.

 

which sunni arab ulama?
whoever signed it either didn't read it - or if they signed after reading it, then their knowledge in kalam is poor.

---
if a thousand ulama of 15th century contradict a sanusi or a razi, it is 1000 ulama of our age whose knowledge is patchy.
besides, khalil ahmad did big time khiyana in the signatures and in fact lied about shaykh barzanji. i came across the risalah of barzanji quoted in al-muhannad, and it clearly refutes khalil and his shameless sect. i am trying to find the risalah in full - in sha'Allah. and they more lies of devs will be seen.