Deoband To Bareilly - Deobandism Facts,PART 2

    Deoband To Bareilly - Deobandism Facts

By:  Allamah Kaukab Noorani Okarvi

Translated by:POWERSUNISAIFI

POWERSUNISAIFI

  

Beliefs of the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi group: *

Books	Authors
Hifzal leemaan.	Ashraf Ali Sahib Thanvi.
Fataawa Rasheediyah.	Rasheed Ahmad Sahib Gangohi.
Aabe Hayaat.	Muhammad Qaasim Sahib Nanontvi.
Tahzeer un Naas.	Muhammad Qaasim Sahib Nanontvi.
Baraaheen-e-Qaati 'ah.	Khaleel Ahmad Sahib Ambethvi.
Taqwiyatul leemaan.	Shah Ismaiel Sahib Dehlvi Phulti Balakoti.
Siraat-e-Mustaqeem.	Shah Ismaiel Sahib Dehlvi Phulti Balakoti.
Tafseer bulghatul Hairaan.	Husain Ali Wan Bhachrani.
Tasfi yatul 'Aqaa’id.	Muhammad Qaasim Sahib Nanontvi.
Risaalah Al Imdad.	Ashraf Ali Sahib Thanvi.

*For details of the exact texts of these forty writings by the Deobandi-Wahaabi 'Ulama and their own Fataawa on them please see my book "White and Black"—Kaukab.

 

1. Al-Laah can tell a lie. (Fataawa Rasheediyah, vol. 1. Page 19).

2. Al-Laah does not know beforehand what His creations would do. Al-Laah comes to know of their doings only after they have done something. (Tafseer Bulghatul Hairaan pages 157 and 158).

3. Shaitaan (Satan) and the Angel of death are more knowledgeable than the holy Prophet is (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam). (Baraaheen-e-Qaati'ah, pages 51 and 52).

4. The Prophet of Al-Laah was not aware of his ultimate fate and of things beyond a wall. (Barraheen-e-Qaati 'ah, page 51).

5. The kind of knowledge and the amount of knowledge of the unseen given by Almighty Al-Laah to the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) has also been given to animals, lunatics and children. (Hifzul Ieemnan, page 7).

 

6. Even the thought of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) occurring during Namaaz is much worse than to be immersed in the thought of an ox or a donkey. (Siraat-e-Mustaqeem, page 86). (But the thought of Thanvi Sahib or any other Deobandi Mullaa coming during Namaaz is justified).

7. The appellation Rahmatul Lil 'Aalameen is not an exclusive attribute of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam). Other saintly persons also can be called Rahmatul Lil 'Aalameen. (Fataawa Rasheediyah vol. 2. Page 12).

8. To the common people, the expression "Khaatim-un-Nabiy-yeen" means the "last Prophet". To the knowing people this is not a correct view. Even if a Prophet was to be born after the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) it would still have no effect on the concept of the finality of Muhammad (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam). (Tahzeerun-Naas, Pages 3 and 25).

9. The holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) learnt the Urdu language from the 'Ulama of Deoband. (Baraaheen-e-Qaati 'ah, page 26).

10. The Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) should be respected as an elder brother. (Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 58). (But to pay exaggerated and undue respects to the 'Ulama of Deoband is justified.)

11. If Al-Laah so wills He can create millions upon millions of the likes of Muhammad (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam). (Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 161). (But it is not possible to find peers of the ''Ulama of Deoband.)

12. After his death, the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) has mingled with dust. (Taqwiyatul Ieemaan, page 59). (But the power of the 'Ulama of Deoband to benefit people ever after they are dead continues.)

13. All Prophets and Messengers are worthless. (Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 29).

14. It is not necessary for a Prophet to be free from, and innocent of, every lie. (Tasfiyatul 'Aqaa'id, page 25). (But nothing but truth comes out of the mouths of the 'Ulama of Deoband.)

15. A Prophet should be praised only as a human being and even less.

(Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 35). (But the 'Ulama of Deobandi-Wahaabi faction should be praised as much as possible.)

16. The bigger ones, that is the Prophets, and the lesser ones, that is the rest of the creations, all are without knowledge and are ignorant. (Taqwiyatul Ieemaan, page 3).

17. The big creations, that is the Prophets, and the lesser creations, that is all other creations, are, in the eyes of Al-Laah, more lowly than even a cobbler. (Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 141).

18. It is permitted to call a Prophet as a Taaghoot (Satan). --(Tafseer Bulghatul Hairaan, page 431).

(But it is kufr (infidelity) to belittle the 'Ulama of Deoband.)

19. A Prophet holds the same status amongst his followers as is held by a chaudhary (headman) or a landlord in a village. (Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 61). (But the Deobandi Mul-laa, Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, is the 'Mutaa'ul Kul' or the overall sovereign.)

20. Whosoever is named Muhammad or Alee (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa 'Aalihi Wa Ashaabihi Wa Sallam) has no authority over anything. A Prophet or a friend of Al-Laah can do nothing. (Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 41). (But the Deobandi-Wahaabi 'Ulama hold sway over the entire world.)

21. The holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) had lost his wits. (Taqwiyatul leemaan, page 55).

22. A follower apparently excels his Prophet in deeds. (Tahzeerun-Naas, page 5).

23. A Deobandi Mul-laa saved the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) from falling off Pulsiraat (the bridge over which the righteous will pass into Paradise). (Bulghatul Hairaan, page 8).

24. It is satisfying to say Laa'llaaha il-lal Laahu Ashraf Alee Rasool-ul-Laah and Al-Laahum-ma Salli 'Ala Saiy-yidina Nabiy-yina Ashraf Alee and there is no harm in saying so. (Risaalah Al lmaad, page 35) for the month of S. afar 1336 A.H.; and proceedings of a Munuazirah (religious debate) in Gaya, Al Furqaan, volume 3, page 85).

25. Celebrating Meelaad-un-Nabee, Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam (birthday of the Prophet) is like the Hindus celebrating the birthday of their Kanaihya. (Fataawa Meelaad Shareef, page 8; and Baraaheen-e-Qaati 'ah, page 148). (But it is true Islaam to celebrate days of the Deobandi-Wahaabi 'Ulama and their Daarul Uloom.)

26. The holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) and the Daj-jaal both are blessed with life. The traits which characterise the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) are shared by the. Daj-jaal also. (Aabe Hayat, page l 69).

27. The holy Prophet's (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) wish for something to happen is of no consequence. (Aabe Hayat, page 169). (But much happens at the wishes of the Wahaabi-Deobandi 'Ulama.)

28. Believe in Al-Laah alone, and do not believe in anyone except Him. (Taqwiyatul Ieemaan, page 14).

29. Before Al-Laah, all Prophets and all friends of Al-Laah are insignificant specks of dust. (Taqwiyatul Ieemaan, page 54).

30. It is right to call the Prophet as your brother. - (Baraaheen-e-Qaati'ah, page 3). (Even if believing so is against the Qur'aan).

31. Any Musalmaan who regards the Prophet or the friends of Al-Laah to be Al-Laah's creations and bondsmen and yet makes them his advocates and intercessors, calls on them for help, and gives nazr and niyaaz equals Abu Jahl in apostasy. (Taqwiyatul leemaan pages 7 and 27).

32. Durood Taaj is disfavored and. reciting it is .not permitted. (Fazaa'il-i-Durood Shareef, page. 73 and Tazkiratur Rasheed vol. 2, page 117). (But to compose and recite. elegies (marsiyah) on the 'Ulama of Deoband crediting them with much more excellences than those described in the Durood Taaj for the Messenger of Al-Laah (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) is quite right.)

POWERSUNISAIFI

33. A saintly person of the Deobandi faction had been given a bath by Hazrat 'Alec (Radiyal Laahu 'Anhu) and Hazrat Faatimah (Radiyal Laahu 'Anha) had put on clothes on his (naked) body. (Siraat-i-Mustaqeem, Persian, page 164; Urdu, page 280).

34. Meelaad Shareef Mi'raaj Shareef, Giyaarhveen Shareef 'urs Shareef; Khatm Shareef; Soyem, Chehlum, Faatihah Khawani, and leesaal-e-Sawaab, all are unlawful and bad innovations and the ways of the infidel Hindus. (Fataawa Ashrafyah, volume 2, Page 58; Fataawa Rasheediyah, volume 2, pages 144 and 150; and volume 3, pages 93 and 941).

(It should be noted that the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi people who declare that celebrating Meelaad (birth) of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) is a wrong, unlawful, forbidden act of apostasy must be questioned how is it permissible and right to celebrate the foundation-day of the Daarul 'Uloom, Deoband, and to call upon an apostate women to inaugurate it; to celebrate the days and the death anniversaries of their Mul-laas and. their Muftees; to appoint the time, the date and the place of such gatherings; to hold political and non-political demonstrations; to establish institutions in the name of non-Al-Laah; to ask for financial and other kinds of help for the propagation of non-AI-Laah.)

35. To eat a well known indigenous crow is a spiritually rewarding act. (Fataawa Rasheediyah, Volume 2, Page 1301). (But the eating of halwa (a sweet dish) distributed on the occasion of Shabe Bara'at is forbidden).

36. To invoke the friends of Al-Laah even though regarding them as His creations is forbidden. (Taqwiyatul leemaan, 7). (But it is not forbidden if the 'Ulama of Deoband themselves invoke them).

37. To supplicate after funeral prayers is not permitted. (Fatwa of Muftee Jameel Ahmad Thanvi, Jami'ah Ashrafiyah, Lahore). (But it is not forbidden if the 'Ulama of Deoband themselves supplicate thus.) ,

38. It is permitted to take gifts distributed on the occasion of the Hindu festivals of Holi and Deewaali. (Fataawa Rasheediyah, volume 2, Page 130). (But to take gifts distributed on the occasion of Faatihah and Niyaaz is prohibited.)

39). There is no harm in eating food, if clean, prepared at the houses of the meanest and the lowliest of people. (Fataawa Rasheediyah, Volume 2, page 130). (But clean and permitted food distributed on the occasion of niyaaz of Giyaarhveen Shareef is altogether prohibited.)

40. Drinking water from the sabeel (kiosk) set up by Hindus (apostates) out of the money earned through interest is permitted. (Fataawa Rasheediyah, Volume 3, pages 113 and 114). (But drinking clean water from the sabeel set up during the month of Muharram for the leesaal-e-Sawaab of Saiyyidina Imaam Husain (Radiyal Laahu 'Anhu) with money provided by the lawful earnings of Musalmaans is prohibited.)

Books by these Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi 'Ulama are replete with many such ranting and faith-destroying utterances. This servant of the Ahle Sunnat seeks forgiveness of Al-Laah Subhaanahu, for my (leemaan) faith is most distressed at reproducing such utterances even though my sole purpose in doing so is that readers come to know the basis of our difference with the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi people.

Believe me, these things are such that a Musalmaan's heart quails at hearing or reading them, and faith testifies that these can be uttered only by one who is an enemy to the Prophet and is faithless. I pray to Almighty Al-Laah that He may, for the sake of His beloved Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam), extend His special protection to us against every insolence and every irreverence of those who make such statements and those who believe in them, and against those who regard those indulging in such writings to be true Musalmaans, and let our end be while we are firm on the Faith. (Aameen)

Dear readers! Do you believe in such writings? Do you hold such beliefs? Are you prepared to believe in such things? You might be wondering who are the people who say such things and who are the people who write such things. Your answer would surely be that anyone who calls himself Mu'min and Muslim can never say such things. But the irony is that such things have not been said by ignorant and crude men, but those who call themselves the most learned of the times Mutaa'ul Kul, Mujad-did-i-Mil-lat and Hakeem-ul-um-mat have said such things in books written by them. Such things have been written by people who not only call themselves Musalmaan but authorities on Islaam.

When the 'Ulamaa-i-Haq pointed out to them that such things were wrong and asked them to repent for doing so, then even after being requested innumerable times the reply of those writing such things was simply that they were in the right in writing what they had written. It was pointed out to them that when they would not tolerate their parents being likened improperly how could they themselves do so in the case of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam), for whom Al-Laah Subhaanahu has commanded utmost respect.

In order to make them understand the gravity of the situation the following line of argument was taken with them. Suppose you are standing somewhere and your father also arrives there. Would you like to be told by one of your acquaintances that you mother's husband had come or that he had come who cohabits with your mother? Although the man saying such thing is making a correct statement, in that your father is, of course, the husband of your mother, and his second statement also is correct, but the manner of his speech is crude, uncivilized and insulting. Of course it would have pleased you if he had said that your dear father or your respectful father had come.

What possible likeness a particle of dust can have with the heaven! Where do we stand and where does the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) stand!

Even if they do not have the utmost love for the Prophet of Al-Laah, the beloved Prophet, the Prophet of Prophets (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam), even then they should not use such similes and words as they use, for the status which the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) holds among the creations of Al-Laah is all too obvious from the Qur'aan.

POWERSUNISAIFI

In the arrangement of the Qur'aan, where the words, Yaa Aiey-Yuhal Lazeena Aamanoo (0 you who believe), first occur, the first command that has been given to men of Faith is that they should show utmost respect to His Prophet even while addressing him, and must not say to him Laa Taqooloo raa'inaa (make concessions to us), but to say to him Wa Qool unzurnaa (please have kind eyes upon us.)

Al-Laah did not even like a word to be used for his blessed Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) which could be, only with a slight change in sound, taken to mean something different. This word was, therefore, declared disrespectful and insolent, and its use was prohibited. So, how could words which are obviously improper be used for the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam)!

The words which they use for that greatest personality, respect for whom is ordained by the True Creator, are most disgraceful. Apart from giving expression to things which indicate infidelity, they have also used improper similes wherever they have used them.

This shows that they have no respect in their hearts and minds for the blessed beloved of Al-Laah (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam). They have no love and no connection with him, although they are fully in the know of the obvious truth that respect and love for the beloved of the Creator and the Cherisher, Ahmad-e-Mukhtaar (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam), is the very essence and soul of Faith (Ieemaan), and without such love and respect it is not possible to be a follower. Thus they are denying Deen by their own utterances and heaping upon themselves eternal damnation.

Dear readers! You might think that these people might have heeded to this admonition and taken to the right path. But, alas, these people who call themselves 'Ulama not only repeatedly insisted on declaring that their apostate and wrong writings were correct but also began to rationalise their stand.

Every intelligent man knows that justifying a sin is worse than sinning, that is, to try to justify a wrong is like committing one wrong act after another. To deem a sin to be a virtue and try to prove it right is a sin of the worst sort, and to call infidelity (kufr) as faith (Ieemaan) is not what a Mu'min does.

Readers would also surely be wanting to know who are the people who have written and said such blasphemies. You have already gone through the name of the book and page number against every such writing. Now, for your information the titles of the books and the names of their authors are given below.
 

You might say that these writings had been quoted out of context; that the intention of the writers had been something else; that such great scholars could not write such things.is the intercessor on behalf of bondsman Kaukab Noorani Okarvi (Ghufira Lahu) 

Every man with faith and with knowledge and wisdom knows it full well that there is none more excellent than the holy Prophet is (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) among all the creations of Al-Laah. Therefore, any negative word or any vulgar and improper and bad simile used for him cannot, in any case, be the right thing to do. It is better not to use a bad or incorrect word at all than to write a wrong or bad word and thereafter, add a whole paragraph or several pages by way of explanation.

It is accepted by all that an abusive word would not become a benediction or a refined writing by Shah Ismaiel Sahib Dehlvi Phulti Balakoti offering an explanation to it; it will remain an abuse all the same. Wherever wrong and improper words have been used (in these books) they would still remain wrong and improper words whether quoted in context or out of it. The proof is at hand, for these books are available in the market and you can yourselves go - through them, and the meaning of the words or similes would become clear to you inspite of passages before or after. Just one example will do.

Ashraf Alee Sahib Thanvi writes: "Then, if attributing knowledge of the unseen (ghaieb) to his (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) blessed person may be all right according to A, the question' is whether knowledge of the unseen means all knowledge or some of it. If knowledge of some of the unseen is meant, then there is no element of exclusiveness in this for the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam). Such knowledge of the unseen is not only given to A, B and to every child and every madman but even to animals and beasts." (Hifzul Ieemaan, Page 7).

Would you accept such a writing for Thanvi Sahib or for your father, or for the country's President, or for your teacher, or for any respectable person? Just reflect.

If, according to some, knowledge of the unseen is to be attributed to Ashraf Alee Sahib Thanvi, then the question to be asked is, if such knowledge extends to some things or all things. If what is meant is knowledge of some things, then it is not exclusive to Ashraf Alee Sahib Thanvi. Such knowledge is available not only to every Tom, Dick and Harry but to every child and madman and to every animal, including donkey, elephant etc.

Tell me, if it would mean insolence to Thanvi Sahib? You will say, certainly it will be so. It is amazing that similes and improper words should be considered insolent or disrespectful for Thanvi Sahib or for any person respected by you but not deemed insolent or disrespectful in the case of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) although it is established that insolence and disrespect to the holy Prophet (`Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) is, without any doubt, infidelity (kufr).

You might say these persons had not intended to be insolent; their writings meant something different; every word has more than one meaning. Just apply this very concession and interpretation to yourself and then answer the following.

Supposing someone calls you waladul haraam (a bastard), and you get flabbergasted and greatly infuriated, and then that person tells you he had been grossly misunderstood for the word haraam also stands for respect and what he meant was that you were a respectable son and he had not intended any abuse. Would you accept this explanation?

If you cannot accept this explanation with regard to your own persons how can you, then, accept this explanation in respect of the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam)? Remember that disrespect being intended or not being intended has no bearing so far as insolence is concerned. (For details and Fataawa of the 'Ulama of Deoband see my book "White and Black" (Kaukab).

Such writings of the Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi 'Ulama and their being adamant on their stand is the basis of our difference with them. The faith of even the most ignorant of the true Musalmaans cannot hear them with equanimity, much less accept them. So, you would also surely say that he who does or says such things is unworthy of being called a Musalmaan.

It stands to reason that- a crime committed by a knowing person is more cognizable than that committed by a person who is unknowing. This because what an unknowing person says or does is due to his ignorance, while a knowing person commits a crime knowingly, deliberately, and so his punishment also is greater than the former. The heathenish and improper writings you have already gone through have been written and said by these very people who insist on being called profound 'Ulama and on being followed, and their followers do accept them as more profound than all others.

These "Ulama" had been told during their lifetime (and the entire record has been preserved) that since such of their writings were wrong and heathenish so they must show repentance for doing so. But they declared the things written by them to be correct and they stood firmly by their writings.

Consequently, the right-guided 'Ulama of the Ahle Sunnat, not only in the subcontinent but also in Makkah and Madinah and the 'Arab countries, after exhausting all dialogue with them, gave the verdict of heathen-ness against all those 'Ulama who had written such things and refused to repent, as well as on such of them who had been on their side. (For details, see Fataawa Husaamul Haramaien.) After the verdict of heathen-ness against them was published, the 'Ulama who had indulged in such writings themselves said that if those who had given the verdict against them not done so on the basis of their writings they would have themselves become heathens.

See what Ashraf Alee Sahib has to say on the question of pronouncing the verdict of infidelity on somebody's infidelity. He says: "People say that Maulvees turn Musalmaans into infidels. O cruel people! How are the Maulvees at fault when you yourselves become infidels? How can a Maulvee be at fault if he pronounces you an infidel because of your indulging in such monstrous things? Maulvees do not turn people into infidels; people become infidels on their own. All that they (the Maulvees) do is to pronounce the verdict on them of being an infidel, ask them to repent to Al-Laah, and renew their faith and their marriage. In short, they (Maulvees) do not turn anybody into an infidel but only point out to them their infidelity." Khutbaat-e-Hakeemul Um-mat, page 40, parts "Mahaasin-e-Islaam". Mufti Muhammad Shafi Sahib has also quoted the writing in his book "Ieemaan and Kufr" (For details on the subject see my book "White and Black" (Kaukab).

POWERSUNISAIFI

This makes it very clear that these Wahaabi 'Ulama of Deoband themselves had been aware of the infidelity of their writings. And yet they did not repent over their writings. The reason for this was that they had done so at the instance of and assistance from, non-Muslims. So, how could they annoy their (non-Muslim) masters? They did not realise that they were earning eternal damnation for themselves by displeasing Almighty Al-Laah and His Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam), and were leaving behind them chaos and confusion in the Um-mat.

After those who had written these pagan things left this world, their successors had been asked to either burn or drown into sea books in which such pagan things occurred and repent over such writings. But their successors also shut upon themselves the door to repentance and chose to remain adamant on their standpoint, and still maintain the position that those writings are not at all wrong but are rather absolutely correct. So, basing themselves on the principle laid down in the Qur'aan and the Sunnat, the right-guided 'Ulama gave the verdict that "endorsement of heathenism also is heathenism"

Some people ask us, 'reward for how many units (rak'aat) of Namaaz would accrue to us by calling as infidels the writers of such wrong and heathenistic things and those who believe in them? Why should we condemn the dead? Do we really know that those dead had not repented?'

In reply, it should be pointed out that making distinction between infidelity and Islaam is among the necessities of Deen. You may not call an infidel an infidel but when his infidelity becomes manifest, it is incumbent on the believers to call him an infidel as such for this infidelity. And the principle is that not to believe that an infidelity is an infidelity is itself infidelity.

(For details, see my book "White and Black" (Kaukab).

As for the question why should we condemn them now that these people are dead, the reply is this. Abu Lahab, an uncle to the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam), indulged in insolence, and so did Waleed Bin Mugheerah and others. So, these insolent people will continue to be cursed till Doomsday because of being insolent to the holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam). Surely they would not be praised and lauded but condemned!

Regarding the plea that they might have, repented, let me say this. First of all, only he can think of repenting who acknowledges these writings to be pagan. But when the present set of' Deobandi-Wahaabi-Tableeghi 'Ulama do not acknowledge such writings of their elders to be heathenistic then where is the scope for repenting.

Even so, if some of the followers of those Wahaabi 'Ulama of Deoband know that their leaders had repented for writing these heathenistic things their repentance should be published and made public and all their followers themselves should repudiate such wrong and heathenistic writings and announce their non-acceptance of these wrong and heathenistic writings and acknowledge such writings to be wrong and heathenistic. And so the controversy would resolve itself. *

Some people have said that since the rest of the writings of those who had written such things are correct it is not right to pronounce them infidels on the basis of some things or just one thing. **

Such people should be asked to tell us how Shaitaan, the accursed, who is, according to one tradition, reputed to have worshipped Almighty Al-Laah for six hundred thousand years and, according to another, for three million years or so and prostrated before Him on every single spot of the earth; was reputed to be the teacher of the angels by dint of his knowledge; was a firm believer in the unity of Al-Laah; had erred only once when he did not prostrate himself before Hazrat Aadam ('Alaihis Salaam) as, according to him, Aadam ('Alaihis-Salaam) was made of clay; and thus denied the greatness of Prophethood. The prostration, which Almighty Al-Laah had commanded to be made to Hazrat Aadam ('Alaihis-Salaam), was a prostration meant for showing respect, and when Shaitaan refused to do the prostration, Almighty Al-Laah, notwithstanding all his worshipping and his learning and his belief, condemned him for all times for only once being insolent and disrespectful to Prophethood; and now he stands totally condemned till Doomsday.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*An organization in Lahore called Majlis Seyaanatul Muslimeen, which should really the called Majlis Khiyaanatul Muslimeen as befits their deeds, has suddenly adopted the tactic of altering these heathenistic writings on their own. This means that the old, original heathenistic writings are, indeed, heathenistic in the eyes of the Deobandi-Wahaabi 'Ulama, otherwise where was the need for altering them. If the present Deobandi-Wahaabi 'Ulama consider the writings of their elders to be heathenistic, then why don't they admit this in clear terms. Is not knowingly hiding heathenism of others by itself heathenism? The present Deobandi-Wahaabi 'Ulama should look at what their own Sheikh Muhammad Zakariya Kandhalvi has to say on the subject. He says: "How is it permitted to effect any change in a book written by someone else?"—"Problems regarding the book on Fazaa'il and answers to them"; page 53.

**Ashraf Alee Sahib himself writes: "He who has even one heathenistic trait is accepted on all hands to be a heathen. Ifaazaat-e-Yaumiyah, volume 7, Page. 234.

-----------------------------------------

I have already said that for one to be a Mu'min it is necessary to believe in all the essentials of Deen, while for becoming an apostate it is enough to deny only one of the essentials of Deen.

Just consider this. When millions of years of Namaaz and worshipping and all his learning and belief in the unity of Al-Laah could not save Shaitaan, the accursed, from being condemned and cursed, how, then, can several years' of their Namaaz, their learning and their belief in the unity of Al-Laah save these Ulama? Shaitaan had shown disrespect to a Prophet and these 'Ulama also have made such utterances against the Prophet of Prophets (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) which one would hate to utter even for his elders.

In such a situation, can anyone doubt that Almighty Al-Laah's wrath will surely encompass these 'Ulama and those who believe in such accursed writings. And know it well that redemption depends upon the correctness of beliefs, not on acts and knowledge. They should now see a testimony to this in the writings of Ashraf Alee Sahib Thanvi himself.

The fatwa of Thanvi Sahib on the author of the famous book Seeratun-Nabee, Janab Shiblee Nu'maani, and another 'aalim of Deoband, Janab Hameedud-deen Faraahi, has been quoted by an 'aalim of Deoband, Janab 'Abdul Maaiid Daryabadi, on 457 Of his book Hakeemul Um-mat.

He writes: "Maulana Thanvi's fatwa has been published and Maulana Shiblee Nu'maani and Maulana Hameedud-deen Faraahi have become polytheists, and since the madrisah (religious school) carries on the mission of both of them, Madrisat Ul-lslaah is a school of polytheism and evil, so much so that even the 'Ulama participating in the meetings of this madrisah themselves become atheistic and irreligious."

After reading this fatwa, Janab Abdul Maajid Daryabadi wrote a detailed letter to Thanvi Sahib in which he pleaded for Shiblee Nu’maani and Hameedud-deen Faraahi, saying that both of them not only used to say their Namaaz regularly but also used to say Tahajjud (late night Namaaz and were very virtuous and learned men.

To this, Thanvi Sahib replied: "All these are acts and conditions, and beliefs are some thing different from them. Correct beliefs can go with evil deeds and conditions and wrong beliefs and conditions can go with correct conditions and deeds. --Hakeemul Um-mat, page 476.

At another place, the same Thanvi Sahib writes: "Even if-an irreligious person were to talk about religion, such talk will still be laced with darkness and his writings will also have the same trait. So, keep away from the company of men who have strayed from religion, and, also, do not ever read books written by them. This, because reading of books has the same effect as keeping the company of their authors, and reading of books written by an irreligious person has the same effect as keeping his company." Kamaalaat-i-Ashrapyah, page 68.

Now, just see, what status this Thanvi Sahib holds in the eyes of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at.

The founder-of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at, Muhammad Ilyaas Sahib says: "Hazrat Maulana Thanvi Sahib has accomplished a great feat. I only wish the teachings would be his and the manner of disseminating them be mine, and, thus, his teachings would become popular." Malfoozaot, Page 57).

The founder of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at himself has revealed that the purpose of founding it and of its dissemination (Tableegh) is to popularise Thanvi Sahib's teachings. It is apparent from this that Ashraf Alee Sahib is the basis of the ideology of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at.

The same Thanvi Sahib says that "acts and conditions" are different things, and "beliefs" are quite distinct from them. And this explanation is also given when he writes that wrong acts and conditions do not necessarily flow from wrong beliefs.

This means that a person who has wrong beliefs and is irreligious can be devoted to Namaaz and a person who does not say Namaaz can hold right beliefs.

He has made it clear that a man's faith is not dependent upon reciting the Kalimah and saying Namaaz but, in truth, it is dependent upon holding correct beliefs. Keeping up Namaaz and fasting has no importance if one's beliefs are not correct.

He has, also, said that he who holds wrong beliefs is irreligious and his writings and his speeches lead to deviations, and if he talks about religion that too, would lead to deviations.

So he advised people to shun the company of such persons, as also to avoid reading their writings or else they, too, would be led astray. He has also said that even a religions school set up by people with wrong beliefs is not a school of Ieemaan and reformation but a school of infidelity and evil, and those who associate themselves with this school or participate in their deliberations would themselves become atheists and irreligious.

Just reflect. Thanvi Sahib has labeled famous 'Ulama of his own faction as kaafir because of their wrong beliefs. He did not give any importance to Namaaz said by them, or to their learning or to their services, and called their school the school of infidelity, and declared keeping their company and reading their books as atheism and irreligiousness. *

------------------------------------------------

*The 'Ulama of Deoband should read with open eyes the following fatwa of their own Ashraf Alee Sahib and say if it is not injustice to call 'A'laa Hazrat Maulana Shah Ahmad Raza Khan Bareilvi (may Al-Laah have mercy on him) Mukaf-firul Muslimeen (one who declares Muslims to be infidels) because he had issued the fatwa of being infidels against some 'Ulama of Deoband after exhausting all arguments with them. The fact is that it is not in us, the Ahle Sunnat, but in the Deobandi-Wahaabi 'Ulama, to call true Musalmaans as polytheists, innovators and infidels, etc.

--------------------------------------

POWERSUNISAIFI

If Thanvi Sahib is really the ideological base of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at, then, according to Thanvi Sahib himself, he who holds wrong beliefs cannot benefit from Namaaz in the least. And Thanvi Sahib further says that keeping the company of such persons and reading books by them is atheistic and irreligious. The 'Ulama of Deoband themselves have said very clearly about the stalwarts of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at that they are ignorant and their beliefs are not correct and they are transgressors. So, it is proved that keeping the company of the people of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at and reading their books is irreligious and waywardness, according to Thanvi Sahib, the ideologue of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at, and even according to the stalwarts of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at itself.

Dear readers! When we say the same things they hold us guilty, although they should, in all fairness, condemn their own elders. Those whom they call their own foundation have themselves declared them to be in the wrong and exposed them.

Therefore, please see references from the 'Ulama of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at themselves. The Deobandi 'aalim, Abdur Raheem Shah (the person who worked for long with Muhammad Ilyaas Sahib, founder of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at who was a successor (khaleefah) to Khaleel Ahmad Ambethvi, author of Baraaheen-e-Qaati'ah, and with his son, Muhammad Yoosuf), says:

"A job which should be done by scholars is being attempted by those who are not only unacquainted with Deen but are looked down upon by the entire society because of their meanness and ignorance and bad deeds. This is like a crow becoming the head of a people; he will show to them ways which would lead to their destruction."

(Usool Da'wat-Tableegh, page 7)

He further says: "I (Abdur Raheem Shah) swear by Al-Laah that I am making this analysis of the Jamna’at reluctantly and with a heavy heart and with the realisation that doing so is one of the essentials of Deen. This, because when immature followers began to give public addresses which they have not been allowed to do by the Sharee'at, and went beyond the limits about the excellence of those works and openly curtailed the other departments of Deen, and despite being asked to desist from doing so by responsible persons they have not ceased doing so, or perhaps they themselves did not desist, then in such a situation it is a matter of responsibility that the reality be told whether one accepts it or not." Usool-e-Da 'wat-o-Tableegh, page 52.

The reputed Deobandi-Wahaabi debater, Manzoor Ahmad Nu'maani Sahib, criticising the TabIeeghi Jamna’at of his own creed, says: "The wrong is generally committed that such persons are made to address public meetings who are not fit to do so but are rather not equipped for the job, and do not remain within the limits of their knowledge. The fact is that such a wrong occurs very frequently and this must be a matter of concern to men of responsibility." Tazkiratuz-Zafar, page 244.

Janab Abut Hasan 'Alec Nadvi says: "One concern of the Maulana (Ashraf 'Alec Thanvi) was as to how those people (those belonging to the TabIeeghi Jamna’at) would do tableegh (preaching) without acquiring knowledge. But when Maulana Zafar Ahmad Thanvi (Maulana Ashraf Alee's sister's son) told the Maulana that the preachers (of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at) do not touch upon anything except those about which they had been ordered then the Maulana (Thanvi) felt fully satisfied." Deenee Da'wat, page 126.

After quoting the above incident, 'Abdush-Shakoor Sahib Tirmizee, the biographer of Janab Zafar Ahmad Sahib Thanvi, in his book Tackirat-uz-Zafar, says: "When this Jamna’at (TabIeeghi) and its preachers begin to talk about things other than the basics of preaching (Tableegh) for which they had been given the order then the very basis on which Hazrat Thanvi Sahib had felt satisfied falls to the ground, as it is generally noticed that the ordinary (TabIeeghi) roving groups have abandoned this principle and preachers with little knowledge talk about unrelated matters and reel out tales and fables, and often times go beyond the limits of their knowledge.',—page 242.

Janab Zafar Ahmad Sahib Thanvi himself says: "In short, the present method of public preaching (by TabIeeghi Jamna’at) fails absolutely in creating excellence in religious knowledge and in providing expertise in working for different departments of Deen''—page 252.

He further says: "Preaching by the deficient ones is not at all reliable." page 253.

Special attention should be paid to the following sentence:

On page 241 of this very book, Janab 'Abdush-Shakoor Tirmizee says: "Hazrat Maulana (Zafar Ahmad Thanvi) never thought of joining TabIeeghi Jamna’at and working in conjunction with it to be sufficient for bringing about reforms."

Dear readers ! In the above quoted writings an insider makes it plain that the people of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at have exceeded the limits and, like frogs during the monsoon, each one of them croaks and goes on a preaching errand without acquiring any knowledge. The preachers of the TabIeeghi Jamna’at are imperfect people, their preaching is not reliable, and no reform is possible by joining the TabIeeghi Jamna’at and working with it. When they themselves cannot be reformed how then others can be reformed! Deobandi 'Ulama are themselves not satisfied with the TabIeeghi Jamna’at of their own creed and with its work.

Everyone knows it well that books on medicines are available in the market. If someone were to open a clinic after reading some of them, the result will be that he will be prescribing tablets which will ultimately result in patients' death. This, because only by reading books on medicine on his own nobody can become a physician or a surgeon unless he were to acquire knowledge and training in a medical college or under the guidance of expert teachers. Every owner of a drug store knows which tablet is to be prescribed for pain or fever, but he cannot tell the cause of pain or fever unless a physician is consulted. As the saying goes: "Only he should do a job which is his exclusive domain and if some one else undertakes to do it all his effort will end in frustration."

Almighty Al-Laah Himself did not only send a Book but also sent a Prophet who taught the Book and the Wisdom and then only the Book could be understood.

Syed Abdur-Raheem Shah Sahib says: "Considering that nobody can become even a compounder without first acquiring a certificate for engaging in the job, it is preposterous for people to think Deen to be so easy and simple that anybody wishing to do so could stand up and make a speech, and no certificate would be required. For such an occasion, it has been apply said: "A quack medicine-man is a danger to life and a quack-Mul-laa is a danger to Deen." Usool-e-Da'wat-o-Tableegh, page 54.

Dear readers! These people are told that when they step out of their homes for the sake of preaching they earn a great reward, but such people do not reflect that like the passengers being in danger of losing their lives if an unknowing person is at the driver's seat, people are in danger of losing their faith (Ieemaan) if an ignorant person is assigned the task of preaching.

The master (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) who, with Al-Laah's leave, had the knowledge of the unseen, has, therefore, said: "When learning dissipates, people will take to the ignorant ones and get guidance from them for problems facing them and those ignorant ones will give wrong guidance which will result in themselves becoming misguided and mislead others as well." (Bukhaari and Muslim).

The Holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) has also said: "The day you find people unsuited to the job being given tasks which concern Deen you should await Doomsday." That is to say that these inept people will say things because of which people will be completely ruined. The holy Prophet (Sallal Laahu 'Alaihi Wa Sallam) also declared it to be one of the signs of Doomsday. We are, therefore, witnessing that people belonging to the TabIeeghi Jamna’at, although seemingly talking about the Kalimah and being regular in saying Namaaz are far from the true religion and, therefore, mislead themselves and also cause ruination to others.

Abdur-Raheem Shah Sahib writes: "The evil of a person who does not say Namaaz is confined to himself, and the evil of the other one (i.e., the ignorant) is contagious and harms a Whole generation." Usool-e-Da'wat-o-Tableegh, page 54.

This means that a person who does not say Namaaz harms himself only and the person who though he says Namaaz but preaches wrong beliefs destroys a whole generation. The loss caused by such a person does not remain confined to himself but, like an epidemic, envelops others as well.

Another teacher at Madrisah Deoband, writing about the proposal "to adopt Muhammad Ilyaas Sahib's technique for working among the populace", says: "I am not satisfied with his technique of preaching". Tanmbeehat, page 12.

POWERSUNISAIFI

END OF PART  2  WA SALAM POWRSUNISAIFI

18-2-13

PLEASE READ NEXT PART    3  THANX