AQ's ulterior motives

brother I am working on it. I hope it won't take more than an hour.

------

Besides, i Just talked to a scholar who says he's gone through the book in question and couldn't not find any ideas that would directly link it to sulHa kullism. As such I am not making any judgements about Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar or accusing him of anything yet. More info is needed in this regard. In the same breath I will add that I do not doubt Allamah sahib and Azhari miyan's uprightness and erudition. So far this case is inexplicable to me. Many things are going on in the background which are elusive to even the scholars I am in touch with.

Another scholar I talked to just now has expressed exasperation at the way sunni unity is being trampled on and has advised me to mantain silence without harboring doubts about any senior shuyookh on either side and let the fitnas die their natural death. I hope to follow the advice and except for the info requested by ss I will add nothing to this. I request fellow sunnis to exercise discretion since both sides are ours and somewhere cunning wolves are involved. This is not for AQ lest he come back saying 'stop telling me what to do'.

Wasslaam.
 
inquisitive said:
Has a istifta been given to the scholars mentioned above? how do you know they don't regard him as a bad mazhab?

I do not say they regard him as a non sunni. I am merely asking, do you know they don't. Leave this two Shuyukh to the side.

What is the ruling on anyone who says such things?
Click to expand...

First,please bring the evidence of your claim.

We are not wahabbis where every individual becomes a mujtahid and issues fatwa. The jama'h of the scholars in any given time will never agree on dalaalat or misguidance. The general population of ahlus sunnah has relied and followed the sunni scholarship since 1300 years and we will continue to do so. Sadly, the accusations go unchecked.

You need to bring the evidence first.
 
Unbeknown said:
brother I am working on it. I hope it won't take more than an hour.
Click to expand...

In sha Allah, I can wait.

------

Besides, i Just talked to a scholar who says he's gone through the book in question and couldn't not find any ideas that would directly link it to sulHa kullism.
Click to expand...

If the scholar thinks that there are 'indirect' links to Sullah kullism, then please let me know . Also,please inform that scholar that in the last Urs of Ala Hazrat at Bareilly Sharif, Muhaddith e Kabeer, made open and public accusations on this book. I will be happy if any one can enlighten me with sharii evidence.

As such I am not making any judgements about Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar or accusing him of anything yet. More info is needed in this regard. In the same breath I will add that I do not doubt Allamah sahib and Azhari miyan's uprightness and erudition. So far this case is inexplicable to me. Many things are going on in the background which are elusive to even the scholars I am in touch with.

Another scholar I talked to just now has expressed exasperation at the way sunni unity is being trampled on and has advised me to mantain silence without harboring doubts about any senior shuyookh on either side and let the fitnas die their natural death. I hope to follow the advice and except for the info requested by ss I will add nothing to this. I request fellow sunnis to exercise discretion since both sides are ours and somewhere cunning wolves are involved. This is not for AQ lest he come back saying 'stop telling me what to do'.

Wasslaam.
Click to expand...

May AllaH Ta'ala strengthen ahlus sunnah wal jamaah. Ameen. Nothing is confidential in matters of dispute now a days. Many scholars are using whats App and face book do upload every minute details. The murideen of many scholars who are not aware about the ground reality or the real issue under consideration are accusing senior scholars of being 'non sunni'.

Are we not ashamed that a molvi has written a book against Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar misbahi in which he has called him " yazeed" and ' dajjal" ( because Misbahi sahab has lost sight in one eye). The irony is that the 'other' group is now calling this scholar ( the writer of this filthy writing) as " Allama" and 'Mufti' and one of them has bestowed his khilafat to this molvi!

Closing eye is not a solution. We need to discuss these things if it becomes a source of confusion among sunnis. I personally do not like to start these things, but when it becomes necessary , we have to participate.
 
brother ss the scholar said 'no direct links' just for the case that something might have slipped his attention. But he was very critical about ubaidullah khan. Further to this he categorically told me that he runs out of time just refuting the wahabis and deobandis so where's the time to go into intra-sunni disputes? He told me specifically that I should take care not to utter anything disrespectable about any scholar for it is not fard for me to entangle myself in issues that I have scarce info about so at this stage I do not agree with calling mawlana yasin akhtar dajjal or yazeed. As for allamah sahib's speech in the barielly shareef I have reason to believe that there is more to it than meets the eye or ears. This are indeed trying times for the sunnis and I don't want to get hanged for no sin of mine just by harbouring ill opinions about upright shuyookh.

you seem to be saying that allamah sahibs speaking against the book can only be out of insincere or selfish motives and there can be no innocence on his part. If so, that's your opinion with which I strongly disagree.
 
brother ss the scholar said 'no direct links' just for the case that something might have slipped his attention. But he was very critical about ubaidullah khan. Further to this he categorically told me that he runs out of time just refuting the wahabis and deobandis so where's the time to go into intra-sunni disputes? He told me specifically that I should take care not to utter anything disrespectable about any scholar for it is not fard for me to entangle myself in issues that I have scarce info about so at this stage I do not agree with calling mawlana yasin akhtar dajjal or yazeed.
Click to expand...

I do not agree to using these type of language for any sunni muslim. But sadly, some one wrote it and others have praised it. But that is not the issue here.

Have all scholars who are refuting wahabbis ( some using screens and video clips) have refuted Tahirul Qadri as well? If not, why?? Why is that they are not asked to refute Tahirul Qadri openly ??

As for allamah sahib's speech in the barielly shareef I have reason to believe that there is more to it than meets the eye or ears. This are indeed trying times for the sunnis and I don't want to get hanged for no sin of mine just by harbouring ill opinions about upright shuyookh.
Click to expand...


Please inform me what is that which is not known to awwam and me in particular which made Muhaddith e Kabeer to directly attack Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar Misbahi. He not only attacked his book ( irfan e mazhab wa maslak ) but called him " dark" and "one eyed' indirectly. The speech is available on internet. Please listen to it. I am not interested to know why he made personal remarks upon Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar Misbahi. That is between them and Allah. What I am interested to know is that what is the shari'i proof that the book Irfan e mazhab wa maslak is a " door to sulah kulliyat"?

you seem to be saying that allamah sahibs speaking against the book can only be out of insincere or selfish motives and there can be no innocence on his part. If so, that's your opinion with which I strongly disagree.
Click to expand...

I respect your disagreement and agree to disagree. But then anyone can say anything and go unchecked. So we will adopt an Islamic methodology and what ever be the decision we have to accept it. You have said that you know a scholar who does not find anything supporting sulah kulliyat directly in Misbahi sahab's book. I told you that Muhaddith e Kabeer has some problem with this book and he thinks this book opens a door to sulah kulliyat. Are we not supposed to know the reason, especially when every one involved in this issue is alive.

So it is not the issue of who is 'innocent' and who is not. It is very very simple. Any one who makes an accusation should prove it with sharii evidence. If he cannot, then his mureedeen are free to have an opinion that our peer sahab must have had some reason which he does not wish to disclose. But then , the same thing is said by followers of Mr Nuh Keller ??
 
please hold your horses - calling it "buhtan" by senior scholars' is a buhtaan in itself, unless it transpires that there is actually no truth in it. so be patient. maybe it is not just about Misbahi sahab's book.

you would not expect the senior mashaykh not to know the rules, that we already know. sometimes mashaykh will wait for years and not open the "pandora's box" - just for the sake of benefit to the ummah unless they are forced by circumstances.
Click to expand...

brother, with the greatest respect, you are not an authority in deen for me.

so please do not ask me to not call the act of leveling accusations without providing proof as buhtan UNLESS you can bring a ruling from known authorities in deen that such and such people are allowed to make accusations without being required to provide evidence.

please also bring a definition of who those such and such people are. eg. government officer of the sultan can make accusation without providing evidence. (x book of fiqh) ok. so what is the fiqhi definition of 'government officer of the sultan'?... etc.

if you can't do that, then what's sadder still is that rather you are calling pointing out to something blatantly obvious as buhtan! there's a saying for it in urdu that do not wish to repeat here.

i find it strange that some ulema need to level charges of sulah kulliyat against a Sunni alim "just for the sake of benefit to the ummah" and yet not provide any evidence for it. so apparently, calling someone a sulah kulli without evidence (leaving the awam to guesswork) doesn't open up a pandora's box, but providing the evidence does!

sulah kulliyat is the prelude to dajjaliyat. why don't we also start calling tahir a dajjal but not give any proof for it?! if an alim-e-deen is warning others against someone who is bitten by the dajjalic fitnah of sulah kulliyat, why would he not want to substantiate his claim, and what would lead him to believe people will just take his word for it and stay silent?!

would you say the same thing if Yaseen Akhtar Misbahi Sahib said the same about Muhaddithe Kabeer? just suppose for a second that he called Muhaddithe Kabeer as a sulah kulli, would you still say "you would not expect the senior mashaykh not to know the rules, that we already know. sometimes mashaykh will wait for years and not open the "pandora's box" - just for the sake of benefit to the ummah unless they are forced by circumstances."

mashayekh are not ma3soom, regardless if they are Ilyas Attar sahib or Yaseen Akhtar Sahib or Azhari Miyan or Muhaddithe Kabeer or anyone else. knowing the rule is one thing, acting on it is something else.

-----------

People like AQA remind me of computers. Want to make everything appealing to the brain and logic. Have some heart as well.
Click to expand...

so you want me to appeal to something other than brain and logic?! fascinating...

and yet i am the one being accused of having a cult mindset.

i do have a heart, but as Sunnis and Muslims our hearts only aid and support the brain and logic, not conquer them, or else we would have become wahabis or shia or anything else

i have said unequivocally

Tajush Shari3ah's brave stance against padri tahir is commendable and admirable. the Muslims of the subcontinent should acknowledge that and be indebted to him for that.
Click to expand...

that alone is more than what i or my father or grandfather have done for subcontinental Sunnis - warning them against the dajjalic fitnah of tahir

however that does not undo the buhtan of sulah kulliyat leveled against Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar Misbahi Sahib Qibla.

ps. if you insist on using the word "Attari" vitriolically to mention me, can you try giving me some other initials or any other vitriolic nickname of your choice, other than "AQA"... those initials make me very uncomfortable. besides they can even imply Aqib Qadri Akhtari.
--------------

I request fellow sunnis to exercise discretion since both sides are ours and somewhere cunning wolves are involved. This is not for AQ lest he come back saying 'stop telling me what to do'.
Click to expand...

what makes you think i'm with the cunning wolves or that both sides are not mine as well?

regardless if i'm Misbahi or Attari or Akhtari, i'm still a Sunni and Qadiri - or have you declared that only Akhtar Raza Sahab and Muhaddithe Kabeer's mureeds are Sunni?!

my request/advice to you is to please be objective, rather than going by way of ad hominem, personal attacks, and temper tantrums. it really gets boring after a while taking personal jabs at each other.
 
Last edited:
AbdalQadir said:
what makes you think i'm with the cunning wolves or that both sides are not mine as well?
Click to expand...

This statement did not refer to you in any way. Wonder what makes you think it did.

Only thing I said: The advice is not directed at you. That's it.

regardless if i'm Misbahi or Attari or Akhtari, i'm still a Sunni and Qadiri - or have you declared that only Akhtar Raza Sahab and Muhaddithe Kabeer's mureeds are Sunni?!
Click to expand...

Don't know what you are on about.

------
@ss: If I knew the exact reason I wouldn't have been keeping it from people so long, would I? I don't neither do the scholars I know so no point asking me.

My only concern is: Atleast three senior shuyookh are involved and the safest path for people like me is silence. If you think you can answer for your actions on the morrow then I have nothing more to say to you.

Peace.
 
@ss: If I knew the exact reason I wouldn't have been keeping it from people so long, would I? I don't neither do the scholars I know so no point asking me.

My only concern is: Atleast three senior shuyookh are involved and the safest path for people like me is silence. If you think you can answer for your actions on the morrow then I have nothing more to say to you.

Peace.
Click to expand...

If any one one this forum knows that what is the shari'i evidence for calling the book Irfan e Mazhab wa maslak as 'door to sulah kulliyat/ promoting sulah kulliyat etc, then please provide the reference. The need for evidence is important for many reasons. First, it is a sharii requirement to provide the evidence. Second, Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar Misbahi is afraid of akhira and wants to do tawba, if he has promoted sulah kulliyat. Third, those who know the evidence and are not disclosing are also committing a sin by making a muslim to remain on his sin and not helping him in tawba. Fourth, unless we ask for evidence the lay person will continue to make accusations . We have a live example in this thread. Where a person made a claim upon someone and when asked to provide an evidence or at least a fatwa from a sunni mufti, he was answer less.

This is a forum and not a blog where one writes anything and is not answerable. Whoever makes a claim, must try to prove it or else it will be a bad reflection of sunni scholarship.
 
@ss: the brother I spoke of is out of town and I am unable to contact him. I am afraid, you will have to wait for a day at the most. I will provide the info as soon as possible and if it turns out that I am wrong I will take back the statement with an unmincinced apology. The hereafter is more important to me than momentary reputation (that too when I am mostly unbeknown).

When I asked you to contact 'Misbahi sahib' I meant Allamah Muhammad Ahmed Misbahi, the principal of the jami'ah. I have utmost respect for him. I have been told that though he stays quiet he disapproves of a lot of things going on at there. I am sure he will be able to confirm this AFTER I have told my story.

For now, good-night.
 
Only thing I said: The advice is not directed at you. That's it.
Click to expand...

ok. jazak Allah khayr. let this be an end to any personal argumentation between us. i still love you as a brother, and if need be, we can talk objectively about this or other issues.
 
I personally think this matter and claims/counter-claims have gone too far. Moderators have been guilty of giving this and similar threads too long a rope. If un-parliamentary language (such as "bitching", "bloody"...) are deemed fit to be expunged, so should the threads like these. To hell (is this an unbecoming word!) with correctness and being fair; where there is need to stamp any mischief or bad-blood, step in and put a stop to all nonsense. If someone shouts at my doorstep, I have the right to ask the nuisance creators to either pipe down or else I'll shoo them away; and so should the moderators at the first sign of fitna and recrimination close that thread down. I'm sure there are lot of other sites where these slanging matches can be carried ad-nasueam. I'm not sure sidi aH created, nursed and then revamped Sunniport, only to see it serve this purpose.

Who does this thread benefit? Does this show Barelvis (Ridawis, Ashrafis, Mubarakpuris, Madanis etc.) in good light? Internecine wars and friendly fires are as dangerous as the fitna of outsiders/deviants. By all means cuss the minhajis, sullah-kullis etc., please spare me/us this all-out name calling of those we respect and hold dear. If we have suspicions, we hold fire (until that figure comes clear in open) rather than shoot indiscriminately from the hip. We only end up doing ourselves a great disservice with conducts like these.

-----
PS: I didn't see AQ's last comment before mine, but the point still holds.
 
Last edited:
was (or is) not Ubaidaullh Khan Aazmi also a member of the "Ulema Council" which was a mixture of Rafidis, Wahabis, Deobandis etc?
 
Ubaidullah is a well known politician, and very much the champion of Sullah Kulliyat - nay Sullah Kufriyaat. He draws parallels from books of Hindus (Vedas, Geeta etc), and utters filth.

A sample of his speech, can be found here.

So why do Misbahi sahab and others put such a fitna on the stage of Ashrafiyya?

They would be better off without him: I am sure the Rooh of Hafiz e Millat is not pleased.
 
A sample of his speech, can be found here.
Click to expand...

brother, can you please bring a refutation or radd of this politician from the words of Muhaddithe Kabeer or Tajush Shari3ah?

what have they spoken against him or written against him?

i'm just curious what Tajush Shari3ah and Muhaddithe Kabeer say about him and the kind of speeches of his that you've linked.
 
Let me remind the respected members regarding this thread. I joined in to talk about the book Irfan e Mazhab wa Maslak and our brother Inquisitive said


Do you know history of a man called Ubaidullah Khan ( I read about him on SunnaForum) who said the Murtad Khomeyni is a representative of the Prophet Muhammad Peace and Salutations upon him in abundance and some Ulema like Shaykh Yaseen regarding him as sunni sahih ul Aqiyda.
Click to expand...

So Inquisitive was not aware about Ubaidullah Khan Azmi until he came to know about him on Sunnaforum. Fine. But look at his confidence, when he made this post

I have made this claim. I don't know when he said it and I don't know where but I know he did say it.

If I cannot provide evidence then ask Ubaid Khan to take an oath and he is free from my accusation.
Al-Yameenu ala man ankara.
Click to expand...

I have never met Ubaidullah Khan Azmi nor do I like politicians. Let us not divert this thread from the sharii daleel regarding the book irfan e mazhab wa maslak promoting sulah kulliyat.

Those who wish to talk about Ubaidullah Azmi, I have a suggestion. Please consult Tajushshariah and Muhaddith e kabeer regarding this. When the pandora's box will open,things will come out in open which might not be liked by a few people.
 
just a reminder lest ss thinks I have gone back on my word- I have contacted a couple of friends and they've promised to try their best to find out. So I'll need some more time.

But I don't want to keep anyone hanging on the cliff so one thing I'll clear up for now: this did not occur at ashrafiyyah! It was another event that occurred at ashrafiyyah which my friend witnessed and which is equally incriminating. More on this later as right now my pc is giving trouble and I am typing from a smartphone.

All the same, here's my apology as promised:

Ubaidullah Khan's statement in which he referred to khumayni as 'naibe rasul' or something to that effect was NOT uttered on the podium in ashrafiyyah, so far as I have been able to acertain. So my claim that it did was rather irresponsible in as much as I did not double check before posting. I mixed it with another event. And so I sincerely apologize to everyone whose shar'i rights my claim might have directly or indirectly albiet UNWITTINGLY infringed upon - especially those scholars of the jami'ah who abhor ubaid from the depths of their heart but for some reason or another are unable or unwilling to act against him - If at all my statement had such an effect

------
Lest people run away with fancy conclusions:

1. Ubaid did utter those detestable words. Where and when? Lets see if I can find out.

2. An event did take place in ashrafiyyah which shows his reality.

3. In the course of this I've found some more of his antics which I'll write about later.

4. That he keeps coming to ashrafiyyah and is seen on stage with other famous sunni muqarrirs is a sad reality.

Do these things have any bearing on the text of the book being discussed? I don't know since I haven't read it. Why then am I talking about him? Because someone brought him up and I joined in so I'll have to complete it before I am done.

Some closing replies to ss and AQ and I'll be quitting the discussion.

Wassalaam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top