Ibn abdel barr, ibn hazm, and ahmad al ghumari all say that 10s of sahaba preferred imam ‘Ali to sayedina Abu Bakr رضي الله عنهم . Making preference a matter of ‘Aqida is a later political thing. I respect everyone’s opinion but I don’t find this to be binding at all. https://t.co/uuaVUeCVsK— sa3eed (@saeedkhalifeh40) February 7, 2025
Asalam Alaikum brother, can you provide the evidence for this. Ila al-Sunan is considered one of their [deos] "greatest works" in defense of the of the ḥanafī school. If Zafar Thanwi did take this from Malik al-ʿulamā' who is Aʿla Hadhrats khalifa then this would indeed be a major blow to the deos.
Firstly Ila alSunan of "Shaykh" Zafar Ahmad Uthmani Deobandi is taken from the work of hazrat mawlana Zafar ud-din bihari رحمة الله عليه called sahih al-bihari. the author of ila al-sunan admits to that. there are books such as 'Allama Sa'idi رحمة الله عليه 's Sharh Sahih Muslim, Tibyan ul Quran, Ni'mat alBari Sharh Sahih al Bukhari. Mawlana Sharif Kotlawi رحمة الله عليه has a book on Hanafi adillah entitled Arbai'n al Hanafiyya To say 'Barelwis' have no contribution isn't accurate.
Dear brothers I see there is no point in showing link to Wahhabis or salafis... Salafis/wahabis have a problem of takfir (sin) or wrong understanding of aqida but DEOBANDIS have serious issue of belittling or insulting, even the statements of Ismail dehlawi are very derogatory, who uses such language ? These insults take you outside Islam vs takfir (merely a sin) If you ask me I would consider salafis/wahabis thousand times better than DEOBANDIS... DEOBANDIS claim tasawwuf (they talk about wahdat Al wujud) and claim to follow hanafi madhhab yet the statements of Ashraf Ali Thanawi or Ismail Dahlawi are very ridiculous, the way they talk or discuss the issue in a mocking and demeaning way.. Ya shaykh if you disagree, you can politely say I don't agree.. why use defamatory language ???!!!!
https://archive.org/details/ashraful-sawaneh-vol-1-abdul-haq/page/n48/mode/1up pg 45 of book, 49 of file
If I’m not mistaken, was there any statement by one of the Kandhalvis in which he says he’s the biggest wahhabi or something along those lines?
deobandis keep lying shamelessly. every one of them. they will not even examine it and point out where the "distortion" is and what is the correct translation of thanawi, nanotvi, gangohi statements.
in this article, a deobandi maulvi has refuted manzoor nomani's claims and tries to prove that deobandis are anti wahabi. haven't seen the urdu original. apparently it is a translation. On Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab — A Critical Examination of Manzoor Nomani’s View in the Light of the Statements of Ulama-e-Deoband | by Rizwanul Islam | Medium
But according to the Tehqīq of Mawlānā Manzūr Nomānī ؒ that Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī ؒ did NOT say this in 'Faid Al-Bāri'.Rather this particular comment was added by the compiler of the book, Badr Alam Meeruti.(3/3)— أبو أسامة ابدالي الديوبندي (@AbuAlPashtun) August 13, 2024
deobandis have books and opinions for all seasons. if they want to deceive ulama of shaam and egypt, they will present "al-muhannad" and give an impression that they are not wahabis. but they will not tell them that khalil ahmad ambhetvi renounced those positions after wahabis gained power in haramayn. ghatiya qawm. no priniciples. lies, hypocrisy and shamelessness. that is the description of devband. and oh yes, jahl murakkab.
someone post this: surely this fellow cannot be more knowledgeable about deobandis than manzur nomani? https://archive.org/details/ShaikhMuhammadBinAbdulWahabOrHindustanKUlamaEHaq/page/n7/mode/2up he affirms that both ismayil dihlawi and miaw were of the same colour: hum-rangi p.65 p68: while he acknowledges some differences - he insists that they are of the same manhaj. p.74. he repeats that they are similar. i.e. miaw and deoband. p.79-80 he absolves husayn tandwi's remarks on miaw. in fact, he himself changed his colour once the aal saud came to power. shameless turncoats. and read the mealy mouth excuses why he "bad-mouthed" miaw... manzoor nomani is the worst of the later devbandis and the stink can be felt in the zindiq zameel who lifts stuff from manzoor for his screeds and diatribes. regardless, we will examine the khabees devbandi manzoor paleed, in sha'ALlah and his excuses and lies. if "kamina" had a face, it would be manzoor nomani. ===== on p.110 he disagrees with anwar shah kashmiri who apparently had some harsh words for miaw. inter alia he notes that fayd al-bari is not his written work, but notes of badr e aalam. this is a very good technique - parade the work as anwar shah's greatness in hadith scholarship; and all the flaws be attributed to badr e aalam. meetha meetha hadap hadap, kadwa kadwa thuu thuu.
Our scholars advise avoiding association with the Deobandis, no matter how pious or righteous they may appear. Why? Because associating with them, whether knowingly or unknowingly, leads to a dangerous normalization—the normalization of diminishing respect (adab) for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. This normalization implies the idea that someone who outwardly appears righteous and performs good deeds can be excused for lacking respect or love for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. However, the reality is that the strength of one’s faith is directly tied to the extent of one’s love and respect for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. This love and reverence are among the fundamental indicators of true faith. The Deobandis, whether intentionally or unintentionally, undermine the gravity of disrespect towards the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. They argue that what may seem like disrespect is not intended as such, or they dismiss it as a misunderstanding arising from “excessive love” on the part of others. This perspective portrays the necessary love and reverence for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ as exaggerated or unnecessary, gradually eroding the very foundation of faith. Over time, this mentality can render a person indifferent to acts of disrespect and lead them to believe that piety and belief in Allah alone suffice, neglecting the critical importance of love and respect for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. This erosion of adab is why our scholars strongly warn against associating with the Deobandis. Their influence may make them appear harmless or even virtuous, but in reality, they redefine faith in a way that undermines its true essence, which places the love and respect for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ above all else. The Qur’an warns that merely raising one’s voice above the voice of the Messenger ﷺ in his presence can render one’s deeds void without realizing it. Similarly, the Deobandis’ disregard for proper adab risks nullifying their deeds, despite their outward appearance of piety. For this reason, Sunni scholars emphasize maintaining a clear distance from the Deobandis. Many Arab scholars or others outside the Indian Subcontinent may be unaware of their history, beliefs, or the subtle dangers they pose, either due to language barriers or judging them based on appearances alone. However, the scholars of the Subcontinent, who deeply understand these matters, have repeatedly warned against associating with them. Those who ignore these warnings will be held accountable for their stance on the Day of Judgment. The safest path is to follow the approach of the Barelwis, who uphold true love and reverence for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ as the cornerstone of faith.
Red handed : https://x.com/chevronmarked/status/1881831045458518196?t=vrFLNfeOS64trOI-N_XO9Q&s=19 Such clear highlights of deo hypocrisy are pretty effective, Even non barelvi non Desi sunnis liked the Post
https://twitter.com/hwmaqbul/status/1881792635163001236?s=46&t=Bogt1NkiqNgZUv_vkVBi4w Is this correct?
Currently on Twitter, Deobandi Hamzah Wald Maqbul, the infamous defender of the donkey statement, is having a mental breakdown after Twitter users (even pro-Deoband users) are pointing out links between Deoband and MIAW
