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
i think you mean to say: they're rationalizing this to NOT be sinful! this is what happens when you have the all american adab of mark hanson and ali jifry, for christian popes. you will tend to rationalize on lack of adab for the Prophet 3alaihis salam. look at zameel. he has adab for everyone except his Creator and the Master of the Worlds sal Allahu 3alaihi wa sallam, and because of that, also enmity to Ala Hazrat and Sunnis. a man who has too much adab for his wife or sister or daughter or mother, will be bound to have ghayrah for them and punch another man who tries to mess around with the women of his household. on the other hand, a guy who has too much adab for all the scoundrels on the street will certainly display dayyuth behavior if they mess around with the women of his household. i guess a person's adab can also be defined by the law of conservation of energy. the total amount of adab a person has remains constant, it can only be transferred or transformed from one side to the other.
https://x.com/ZouhairsMurid/status/1809157279318708458 I don't understand how non-urdu speaking Sunni Muslims are rationalizing this to be sinful even when in English it is clearly disrespectful\heretical.
Saw this Pretty rich coming from the same people who give a run for the money to the Rafidhi when it comes to doing Taqiyya. Aren't these the same people who wear the Hanafi cloak just to deceive Arabs and non-Subcontinent scholars and people alike? There are full-blown Deobandis on social media and in institutes who only post or identify as Hanafi because they are aware of the reputation of their elders. They explicitly don't call themselves Deobandis but Hanafis. However, whenever anyone criticizes the blunders of their elders, they come to their rescue.
i personally think they didn't publicly attest. similar to many arab sunni ulama today - who are 100% congruent with us, but they just stop at takfir.
@abu Hasan would Mawlana Anwarullah Farooqi and other Ulema who abstained from Takfir come under the ruling من شك في كفره و عذابه فقد كفر؟
may Allah ta'ala forgive him, but he side-stepped takfir partly because the devbandi group were his pir-brothers. shaykh anwarullah faruqi was the murid and khalifah of haji imdadullah muhajir makki. all of his aqayid and practices were concordant with sunni ulama and he respected alahazrat. --- there was a to-and-fro between alahazrat and shaykh anwarullah faruqi on the issue of "adhaan in the masjid", which was an issue on which ulama of bada'un also differed. mawlana muyinuddin, principal of darul ulum muyiniyyah usmaniyyah wrote a risalah: "al qawl al-az'har fi ma yata'llaqu bi'l adhaani inda'l minbar" in which he claimed that it is ijmaa to say the adhaan in front of the minbar. this risalah was claimed as being written upon the "command of fazilat jung anwarullah faruqi" --- when this risalah came to alahazrat, he wrote to shaykh anwarullah asking him whether it was indeed the case. shaykh anwarullah replied that: 'the risalah was shown to him and there was nothing new in it, and when asked about it, he permitted it being printed - but they added: 'by the command of". anyway it is a fiqh issue and though alahazrat ignored some of the errors of shaykh anwarullah due to his stature, mawlana hamid raza refuted him nevertheless. in the following risalah: ajlaa anwar e raza. ---- notice how alahazrat and fazeelat jung allamah anwarullah faruqi address each other:
Utilizing the insights from Jamia Nizamiya Deccan's ulama and traditions to elucidate why the Takfir of the Deobandi Akabir was made. Anwar ulla Farooqi rahimaullah serves as an exemplary figure who never resorted to takfir of the Deoband elders. Instead, he meticulously referenced their works to illustrate where their beliefs may be erroneous, possibly bordering on kufr. This approach fostered a more nuanced understanding among the graduates of Jamia Nizamiya, leading to compromises on foundational matters (usooli) and a noticeable proliferation of Deobandi doctrine in masjids across Deccan.It's evident that many graduates of Jamia Nizamiya now view the Sunni-Deobandi disagreement as primarily pertaining to subsidiary (furu) matters. Moreover, the influence of Tablighi Jamaat has led to a convergence towards a lifestyle and certain beliefs reminiscent of Wahhabism, albeit veiled under Deobandi taqiyya.
Give them the story of Dhul-Khuwaysara - He was a man who asked the Prophet ﷺ to be fair when distributing to which the Prophet ﷺ said: "Woe to you! Who will be fair if I am not fair? You will be doomed and lost if I am not fair." ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb also asked for permission to behead him.... the Prophet ﷺ said:They will pass out of Islam as an arrow passes out of the prey. Then look at the case with Jahm bin Safwan, he was declared a Kafir by Imām Abū Ḥanīfa. What was the reason: because he had negated the attributes of Allāh ﷻ. The question to this person should be asked what is his position on those who declared Hadhrat Ali رضي الله عنه to be Kafir, does he consider them to be muslim or out of the fold of Islam. If it is the latter then he has no case for the deobandis as they insulted one who is greater than ʿAlī, the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ. Ask him the question on what his position is one who attributes lying to Allāh ﷻ Ask him the question one who attacks the Finality of Prophet Hood what is his position on such a person (and this paved the way for Mirza Ghulam of Qadiyan) Ask him the question on what his position is on some who compares the knowledge of the Prophet ﷺ to Satan or even madmen and animals.(Naudhubillah) Better yet send him a copy of Shaykh Abū Ḥasans The Killer Mistake and let him have read of that and it will show ʿAla Hadhrats fatwa and those who followed him in this is in fact correct. Allāh Knows Best
I think the Barelwis are more correct than the Deobandis in most issues. But their takfir of the Deobandis is completely unwarranted. If they didn't takfir I would have supported them but, takfir is a big thing and its not to be taken lightly— Afala_taqilun (@afala_taqilun) April 11, 2024 Someone qualified should give a calm and collected answer to this tweet, highlighting as to why the Takfir of the Deobandi Akabir was made
https://x.com/almuntasirin/status/1776053255011012789 Hisham Kabbani randomly inventing a hadith and Gibril Haddad casually sitting there.
Yes, they seem to have Deo backgrounds and some brothers have described them as Awnists. This channel is comprised of I think three members. Recently they have tried to portray Alahazrat as a takfiri.
I already responded. He was proven wrong. I offered to send him the full PDF but he wasn't willing to read it. I showed him clearly the question which mentions the statement of Barahin e Qatiah and then I showed him Shaykh Attar mentioning the statement himself. I showed him I didn't mistranslate as I have the full fatwa himself and I responded to his claim of his signature in Al Muhannad.
They dont need to write books in arabic. That is not their target audience. It is like saying why dont the sunni scholars in the arab world write a book in urdu. ʿala hadhrats fatawa is testament to how great of a scholar he is. If this is criticism from the dev side then the only reason their scholars wrote work in arabic was in refutation of Mubarakfuri and Azimabadi. Even so he wrote al-Dawla tul-Makkiyah at the request of the Arab Scholars. Allāh knows best
