Deobandis

Moderate Wahhabis or just plain Extreme ? You decide!

''Verily those who annoy Allah and His Messenger [salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam] – Allah has cursed them in this world, and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating torment.''        al-Qur’an  33:57

Shah Ismail Dehlwi : Taqwiyat al-Iman
Ideology of Intolerance

Gangohi is the 'Christ of our Time'
Fatwa of 300 Scholars [Ulema] against the Deobandi sect

Deoband 'parties'
Deoband Mawlid Controversy & Confusion
Hypocrasy in the name of Religion 
Refutation of Deoband anti-Mawlid Fatwa
Ulama of Deoband refuse to debate
Deobandis hit by Cash for Fatwas scandal

Deoband leaders detained after shooting
Deobandi Cleric held after 2 men shot
Deoband Mosque love triangle murders
More controversy surrounding Riyadh al Haq

The Imrana rape case and the Deoband edict
Deobandis in controversial Rape case fatwa
Protests against Deoband Rape case ruling

More stray & deviated sects :

Wahhabism | Tablighi Jama'at | Qadiani | Shi'ah | Jamaat-e-Islami

Important distinctions - the many faces of Islam
By Marwaan Macan-Markar



BANGKOK - Asia's moderate Muslims have unlikely allies who are giving legitimacy to a view that they asserted after September 11 - that Islam is not a monolithic faith, that there are many Islams.

Their unwitting supporters are a growing chorus of high-profile, neo-conservatives in the United States who are calling on Washington to deem Saudi Arabia an American enemy because of the form of Islam it practices and exports - Wahhabism.


This view has gained currency "within the [President George W] Bush administration - especially on the staff of Vice President [Dick] Cheney and in the Pentagon's civilian leadership - and among neo-conservative writers and thinkers closely allied with administration policymakers," the Washington Post newspaper wrote last week.


This group views Wahhabism as troubling because it sees a strong anti-US sentiment being pushed by its exponents. Adherents of this argument cite well known examples: Osama bin Laden and a majority of the 19 hijackers who participated in the suicide strikes in New York and Washington. Bin Laden, the man wanted by the United States for planning the September 11 attacks, and the majority of the hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and were adherents of Wahhabism.


In shedding light on the dangers of Wahhabism for the United States, the neo-conservatives are implying that a distinction can be made between this form of Islam that has taken root in Saudi Arabia, and the other Islams across the world. But for moderate Muslims in Asia, the problem with Wahhabism has little to do with the US twist and goes back years.


Following September 11, when Islam was pilloried as a monolithic faith that propagated terror, moderate Muslims attempted to offer a counterpoint. They asserted that the faith was far from monolithic, ranging from the more austere and extremist form practiced in the Middle East, particularly Saudi Arabia, and the other strands of Islam evident in Muslim communities in Southeast Asia, South Asia and Central Asia.


"Had the Muslim community been given the chance to choose its leaders, the likelihood is that we would not have chosen a bunch of Wahhabi or Deobandi extremists to speak for the rest of the Muslim community," Farish Noor, a political commentator in predominantly Muslim Malaysia, wrote in an article titled "Who elected you, Mr Osama?" as early as last year. The Muslim community, he added, "is much bigger and certainly more diverse".


Wahhabism emerged in the 18th century and since then became a pillar of legitimacy for Saudi Arabia's monarchy. Its adherents comprise just 10 percent of the world's more than 1 billion Muslims, but its conservatism includes restrictions on women's rights and participation in public life and it has succeeded in convincing the Saudi monarchy to ban all other religious practices in the country.


The Deobandi movement matches Wahhabism in its conservative views on Islam. The school that propagates this interpretation of Islam is based in Deoband, an Indian town, and represents the extreme fringe of the faith in Asia. Afghanistan's defeated Taliban regime was a product of the Deobandi ideology.


Another moderate Muslim voice, Surin Pitsuwan, Thailand's former foreign minister, also reiterated the broad spectrum in Islam and the differences between the faith as practiced in the Middle East and in Southeast Asia.


"This distinction has become a point of controversy ever since Islam arrived in our region over 10 centuries ago," Surin wrote in a newspaper commentary in late September. "Some consider the Southeast Asian brand of Islam less pure, and our Muslims less puritanical and less true to their faith than those in the Middle East."


Asia's moderate Muslims are amply qualified to shed light on the attempt by the Wahhabi movement, backed by Saudi funding, to impose its narrow, intolerant and oppressive views on other Muslims across the continent. This is because Asia is home to many strands of Islam, including those who belong to the two broad categories of Sunni and Shi'ite, those who accept at least two of the four legal traditions of the Sunnis and to those who accept Sufism as a part of their faith.


The Sunnis are the majority among the world's Muslims, while the Shi'ite Muslims make up the minority. The Wahhabis are members of the Sunni majority. This divergence in Islam - one of the first since the death of Prophet Mohammad [Peace & Blessings Upon Him] in 632 - resulted in the Sunnis accepting the fundamentals of the faith and the customs of the prophet. The Shi'ites accepted the fundamentals of the faith and placed additional loyalty to Ali, Mohammad's son-in-law.


Shi'ites make up the majority in Iran, while pockets of them live in South Asia, from India and Pakistan to Afghanistan, and Central Asia. The rest of the region is largely Sunni.


Sufism, on the other hand, is more widespread, with adherents living in Southeast Asia, South Asia and Central Asia.


With regard to the Sunni legal traditions that prevail, Hanafi, the oldest school and often described as the most liberal, is embraced by Chinese Muslims, those in Central Asia, and parts of South Asia. The Shafi legal tradition is evident in Southeast Asia and in South Asia.


In addition, the likelihood of Muslims in Asia having a broader outlook in religion is greater because a number of them live in close proximity to adherents of other beliefs, like Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Jainism and Taoism.


For the Wahhabis, however, much of what passes for Islam in Asia could be considered a deviation from the fundamentals teachings of the Koran, which is anathema to them. The Wahhabis even have an Arabic word that they use to express disgust for any practice they deem "not Islamic" - bida.


The followers of Wahhabism have been trying to make inroads into the world of Asian Islam since the 1970s. This effort, backed by Saudi money, has had two objectives: to ensure that the Wahhabi version of Islam becomes the dominant form and to counter the promotion of Shi'ite Islam by Iran after the Islamic revolution there in 1979.


Hence, Wahhabi enthusiasts today have no qualms combating other Muslims in Asia, attacking their Sufi traditions, condemning those who recite prayers with songs, destroying mosques if they do not conform to the austere regimen of Wahhabism and ridiculing Muslims who celebrate the Prophet Mohammad's birthday.


For the Wahhabis, the ideal Islamic state was the one in Afghanistan ruled by the Taliban, where women were subjugated, laughter and song forbidden, and only one form of Islam permitted.


Moderate Muslims like Noor of Malaysia are well aware of the other torments in the Islamic world. These purists and "defenders of Islam" can "hardly speak for the thousands of other Muslims who have been killed by them in the quest for a model Islamic state," he wrote.


So when the neo-conservatives in the United States draw a distinction between Wahhabism and the other strands of Islam, Asia's moderate Muslims can say: We told you so.

(Inter Press Service)

Ref : Asia Times Online

top

Women wear the full veil, or burqa, in Afghanistan

		By Roger Hardy BBC Middle East analyst

Osama Bin Laden, named by US officials as the main suspect in the 11 September attacks against America, is Saudi-born and a Wahhabi. Many people are accordingly asking about the character of "Wahhabism" and debating whether it is an inherently radical form of Islam.

The term "Wahhabi" is often used very freely.

The Russian media, for example, use it as a term of abuse for Muslim activists in Central Asia and the Caucasus, as well as in Russia itself - rather as the Western media use the vague and derogatory term "Islamic fundamentalism".

In fact, the term is properly used to describe an Islamic revivalist movement which sprang up in the Arabian peninsula in the 18th century.

Like many revivalists in the course of Muslim history, Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, the founder of the movement, felt that the local practice of Islam had lost its original purity.

Wahhabi rules

Saudis themselves do not use the term "Wahhabi", preferring to call themselves Unitarians - believers in one indivisible deity.

Bin Laden supporters have been demonstrating in Pakistan

The modern Saudi state is founded on the 18th-century alliance between the Wahhabi religious movement and the House of Saud - the family that has ruled the Saudi kingdom since its creation in the 1930s.

In daily life, the Saudi religious establishment - the ulema - have imposed strict segregation of the sexes, an absolute prohibition of the sale and consumption of alcohol, a ban on women driving and many other social restrictions.

The rules are enforced by the "mutawa", or religious police, who patrol the streets and shopping centres on the look-out for anyone breaking the rules.

Taleban version

There are some similarities between the Saudi interpretation of Islam and that of the ruling Taleban movement in Afghanistan.

The Taleban, too, represent an unusually strict form of Sunni Islam - and restrictions on women, for example, are even tighter than in Saudi Arabia.

But the Taleban are not Wahhabis. They belong to what is known as the Deobandi movement, named after the small town of Deoband in the Indian Himalayas. It was here that the movement was founded, in the 1860s, during the period of British rule in India.

It would be wrong to see either Bin Laden or the Taleban as typical of modern Sunni movements. They represent a radical fringe, rather than the Sunni mainstream.

Reference; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1571144.stm

Just as Sikhs originated from Hinduism, but are not Hindus, and Protestants came from Roman Catholicism, but are not Catholics, similarly, the Deobandi sect originated in the Sunni community, but are not strictly Sunnis. . . .

The Deobandi interpretation holds that a Muslim's first loyalty is to his religion and only then to the country of which he is a citizen or a resident; secondly, that Muslims recognise only the religious frontiers of their Ummah and not the national frontiers; thirdly, that they have a sacred right and obligation to go to any country to wage jihad to protect the Muslims of that country.

The Deobandi interpretation of Islamic teachings is widely practiced in Pakistan. The Deobandi movement in Sunni Islam, was founded in response to British colonial rule in India and later hardened in Pakistan into bitter opposition to what its members views as the country's neo-colonial elite. The Islamic Deobandi militants share the Taliban's restrictive view of women, and regard Pakistan's minority Shiia as non-Muslim. . . .

Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/

top

In the recriminations that occurred in the aftermath of attacks many Muslims claimed that the terrorists did not represent the 'true' or 'real' Islam. There is no 'true' Islam, no more than there is a 'true' Christianity or a 'true' Judaism. Islam is a complex of competing sects, all laying claim to be the 'true' Islam.

The first split occurred over the succession to the lineage of Mohammed. This created the two major sects, the Sunni and the Shia. These sects have further split into other divisions, as well as there being other, unorthodox groupings such as the various Sufi sects. All of them claiming to be the 'true' Islam.

The two that concern us the most are two Sunni sects, the Wahhabi and the Deobandi.

The Wahhabi were founded by Abd al-Wahab (1703-1791) who claimed that the teachings of Mohammed had been corrupted by decadent influences. He argued that the faith should return to the purity of the Islam of the first two centuries. After his expulsion from Medina Wahab formed a relationship with the Saud tribe. The Saud's went onto conquer Arabia. By 1811 they had established control and created a capital in Riyadh. Wahhabism became the favoured version of Islam. The Saudi reign was challenged by the Ottoman Empire on two occasions. The last was made famous by the film Lawrence of Arabia. This was to mark the beginning of a strange friendship between the West and Islamic fundamentalism. The British formed an alliance with the Saudi's to defeat the common enemy, Ottoman Turkey. The result was the restoration of the Saudi dynasty in Riyadh and the re-establishment of the Wahhabi sect.

However, not all is well in the relationship between the Saud royal family and Wahhabi clerics. Wahhabism is puritan in outlook and shuns the ostentatious display of wealth. As oil money began to spoil and corrupt the royal family Wahhabi clerics began to declaim the corrupting influence of the West. There is now deep division within the Saudi society between the supporters of religious orthodoxy and the supporters of a more pro-western stance.

The Deobandi are named after a Muslim seminary founded in the Indian city of Deoband in 1866. This sect arose largely in response to the perceived corruption caused by the influence of Hindu syncretism and Sufi mysticism. They were also violently opposed to British rule. Like the Wahhabi it seeks to return to a purer version of Islam. For this reason the Deobandi are sometimes incorrectly referred to as Wahhabi.

When Pakistan and India split during the partition Deobandi radicals became influential in Pakistani politics. It is the Deobandi who founded the madrassas, the religious schools that were the source of the Taliban, Taliban simply means 'student'.

The important point to remember is that both of these sects arose as a reaction to the belief that Islam had been corrupted by outside forces, and they arose before oil had been discovered in the Middle East.

As mentioned the Saud royal family are the patrons of Wahhabi sect. The Wahhabi sect has had a powerful influence throughout the Islamic world. Many rich Saudi's regard it as their religious duty to support the efforts of the clerics. This has included the private and public funding of a network of charitable organisations. These organisations helped fund Deobandi madrassas in Pakistan and helped fund Bashir's school in Indonesia. A proportion of this money has also helped fund Osama bin Laden's activities, pursued in the name of Wahhabi religious zealotry.

It is worth noting that Saudi funding of terrorism had been of concern to several intelligence agencies. The CIA however, ignored these concerns for fear of upsetting the Saud royal family. The US continues to this day to tread softly with Riyadh, despite the now obvious connection.

In pursuing their ideological and economic agenda in the Middle East the Western powers have undermined the people most likely to support the creation of a progressive elite within Islam. Instead the West has sided with the reactionary and regressive forces of fundamentalist Islam. By turning a wilful blind eye to Saudi and Pakistani (and Indonesian) funding and military support of such forces, and by funding them themselves, they have allowed these forces to grow in strength. The secular forces that may have been able to successfully counter the growth of radical Wahhabi and Deobandi activists have been weakened.

This is a problem that will haunt the West for a good decade or more.

Source: http://www.integralworld.net/index.html?harris9.html

top

 A.H. Jaffor Ullah  

Let us for once admit it openly that amongst South Asian nations Pakistan is an oddity as far as sectarian and religious violence is concerned.  Every once in a while we read in the Internet or in the print media news that describe in nauseating details the account of a carnage in which Muslim minorities, most likely Shiites, are killed in cold blood.    

Today (May 27, 2005) is no different.  These bloodlettings have become a routine affair in Pakistan .  With regular periodicities, the Wahhabi Jihad brigade undertakes suicide mission often targeting either minority Shiites or Ahmadiyas (also known as Qadiyanis).  The suicide bombers often carryout their jihadi attack on Muslim Sabbath day that falls on Friday.  As minority Muslims prostrates towards holy Ka’aba, bombs are hurled or the suicide bomber detonates the killing device with disastrous results.  

Hours after a serious suicide attack in the northern suburb of Islamabad , the capital of Pakistan , the Internet was abuzz with the news of sectarian killing in a Sufi Shrine.  The BBC also published a short account of the carnage in their website.  Reading all the reports one would surmise that sectarian violence is on the rise in Pakistan — a nation of nearly 165 million impoverished people.  The minorities are at the receiving end of these heinous attacks.  On May 27, 2005, an estimated 20 people were killed in the suicide blasts and about 200 people have received injuries from the bomb blast.  

Let us look into the incidences of extremists’ attack in the last 12 months to get a glimpse of the cancerous growth of jihadi brand of Islam.   

In May 2004, two separate attacks were brought forth in two different Shia Mosques; the total number of deaths was 35.  In October 2004, the scenes of two violent attacks were in Punjab, one in Multan and the other one in Sialkot, in which 70 people were killed.  In Sialkot blast, the target was a Shia mosque.  In March 2005, 43 Shias were killed in a bomb blast in Fatehpur, Baluchistan.   

It is quite clear that the minority Shiites in Pakistan are paying the price of Jihadism with their blood.  The Deobandi Doctrine, which emanates from strict Wahhabi teachings, is fueling the fire of a puritanical movement.  Therefore, some ''Sunni'' men are hell-bent on wiping the Shiites in Pakistan.  In one sense, it is a puritanical movement to wipe out Sufism (Folk Islam), Ahmadiyas, Shiites, and other minor offshoots of Islam from South Asian nations.  The Deobandi Mullahs have spawned a Wahhabi revivalism in South Asia, which dates back to 1940s.  The Tablig Al-Jamaat, which organizes marathon-preaching session in the dry winter season during December through February calling it Ijtema (congregation), is asking the faithfuls to revert to the teachings of Islam’s holy book.  It shuns the ‘Folk Islam,’ which had borrowed heavily from other religions and folklore of Persia, India, etc.  The most ordinary Muslims of South Asia were never perturbed by the presence of myriads of Sufi shrines those dot the rural landscape starting from Sind in the West where they are called Mazars of Kalandars to Eastern part of Bangladesh where they are called Dargah of Awlias.  The Deobandi teachings would like to annihilate the Dargah or Mazar cultures of South Asia.  This monolithic view of Deobandi (read Wahhabi Islam) is in clash with South Asia’s ‘Folk Islam.’  Thus, the killing of twenty Shiites who gathered in a Sufi shrine near Islamabad on May 27, 2005, is a chilling reminder that things could go out of hand if Wahhabi Doctrine is allowed to flourish in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India.  

According to news, hundreds of pilgrims were celebrating an annual festival (most likely an Urs) when the bomb exploded at the Bara Imam shrine, which is just north of Islamabad and near diplomatic and government buildings including the prime minister's residence.  The devotees saw pools of blood everywhere and the bomb scattered body parts inside and outside the shrine.  It was indeed a very gory, and sickening scene, according to eyewitnesses.  Strangely, both the Sunni and Shia Muslims venerate the 17th-century Sufi holy man.  The Sunni devotees gathered on May 26, 2005, to celebrate when the day’s events were not marked by any violence.  However, when Shiites gathered on May 27, 2005, all hell broke loose.  A suicide bomber had detonated a powerful bomb killing 20 Shiite devotees in a matter of seconds.  This week, some conservatives, and a number of religious scholars criticized the Bara Imam celebrations.  They frown on traditional practices by Sufi Muslims, who follow a mystical branch of the religion.  

Does this view surprise anyone that Pakistan has become an extremely violent nation where throwing hand grenades, bombs, suicide bombing, etc., a routine affair?  According to some reports, about 160 people have been killed in 2004.  The government does not perform a thorough investigation to figure out who are behind the sectarian violence.  The president of Pakistan, General Musharraf, is used to the news of these kinds of jihadi activities in Pakistan.  The Islamists also tried to kill Musharraf during 2003-2004.  After hearing the news of the blast, Musharraf expressed “shock and profound grief” and ordered an inquiry to track down the killers.  However, if past is any clue, the investigation will not unearth who are behind the sectarian violence.  The planners of the suicide bombing will again receive impunity as before.  It seems as if Pakistan is paying heavily for Islamization brought on by Gen. Zia ul-Haq in late 1970s and early 1990s.     

Getting back to the story of today’s attack in Sufi shrine, the timing of the attack came right after the visit of US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Christina Rocca, who met with Pakistani high officials in Islamabad.  To protest Ms. Rocca’s visit Islamic hardliners staged mass protests hours before the suicide bomb went off in the Sufi shrine.  The hardliners were protesting against alleged abuse of the Koran at the US detention centre in Guantánamo Bay.  Emotions are running high at this time, anything could have happened.  

In the meanwhile, suicide bombing has become a controversial subject in Pakistan.  The archconservative Mullahs who are devotees of Wahhabi Islam condone killing of deviant minority sects all in the name of jihad against impure Islam.  The same bunch won’t mind blasting of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Murtads (apostates), etc.  However, a group of senior Pakistani Muslim clerics this month declared suicide bombings and attacks on ordinary citizens and places of worship as un-Islamic.  Perhaps the government to make such characterization of suicide bombings goaded these clerics to offer their fatwa or religious edicts.  The practice of suicide bombing became very popular in certain places in Islamic world.  The late president of Palestine, Yasser Arafat, condoned suicide bombing as he launched Intifada II Movement in early 2000s.  

Now a paragraph on Pakistan’s growing schism.  The Sunnis in Pakistan abhor the Shiites.  While the Sunnis accept wholeheartedly Prophet Muhammad as the last Hazrat.  The Shiites do not accept this doctrine.  They revere Ali who was Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law.  Just a week ago, I was listening to a news story from Iraq through America’s National Public Radio (NPR).  In the news piece that described the funeral of some Shiites men killed by Iraqi insurgency (mostly done by Sunnis), the bereaving men where reciting the Kalima repeatedly.  However, the thing that struck me the most was the following: The Shiite men were reciting only the first part of Kalmia Tayib while ignoring the second part, which says that Muhammad is God’s Rasul (the last prophet).  This had been a bone of contention amongst Shiites.  The Sunnis hate Shiites for their non-belief in Muhammad. Amidst the growing schism, the Sufi shrines in South Asia are open to anyone who wants to visit.  Therefore, the Bara Imam shrine serves as a symbol of harmony between the two communities (Sunnis and Shiites).  The same shrine was the scene of violence in February 2005 when assassins from rival faction gunned down its custodian.  

In summary, Pakistan, which has a long history of sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shias dating back to 1960s, is in the news again.  This time, a Sufi Shrine near Islamabad where hundreds of Shiite devotees came to celebrate the life of a mystic by the name Bra Imam was the scene of carnage where a suicide bomber had detonated bomb killing 20 people on the spot and injuring over 200 attendees.  According to a BBC report, more than 40 people were killed and many injured in a bomb blast at a Muslim shrine in the south of the country in March 2005.  The same report had stated that about 4,000 people have been killed in Pakistan over the past several years.  The Pakistani intellectuals should start a dialogue in various parts of the country to explain the inanities in religious war (jihad).  If sectarian violence goes out of hand, it may further destabilize the nation.  America should also help Pakistani government to efface the existing schism between Sunnis and Shiites.  These two factions are in collision course in Iraq with devastating result.  Let us all write articles to stop sectarian violence in Islamic world where things are in a state of flux, to put it in milder tone.

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

Dr. A.H. Jaffor Ullah, a researcher and columnist, writes from New Orleans, USA

top

Harkat-ul-Mujahideen

The Harkat-ul-Mujahideen Al-alami (HuMA; Al-alami, meaning International) is an offshoot of the proscribed Deobandi terrorist group, the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HuM), and was formed sometime in the year 2002 after parting ways with the latter on a dispute over organizational affairs. According to The Friday Times, there was reportedly some pressure on the HuM after its proscription in Pakistan in November 2001 to merge with the Jamiat-ul-Mujahideen, another Jehadi group based in that country. However, this plan met with stiff resistance from within the HuM and reportedly, the dissent led to a group breaking away from the parent outfit and calling itself the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen Al-alami. It is based in the Pakistani port city of Karachi

Read More

TOP

 

Formation

Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), a ''Sunni''-Deobandi terrorist outfit was formed in 1996 by a break away group of radical sectarian extremists of the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), a ''Sunni'' extremist outfit, which accused the parent organisation of deviating from the ideals of its slain co- founder, Maulana Haq Nawaz Jhangvi. It is from Maulana Jhangvi that the LeJ derives its name. It was formed under the leadership of Akram Lahori and Riaz Basra. The LeJ is one of the two sectarian terrorist outfits proscribed on August 14, 2001, by President Pervez Musharraf.

Ideology and Objectives

The LeJ aims to transform Pakistan into a ''Sunni'' state, primarily through violent means. The Lashkar-e-Jhangvi is part of the broader Deoband movement.

Read More

top

top

Deobandi Islam: The Religion of the Taliban

"We have a common task – Afghanistan, the USA and the civilized world – to launch
a joint struggle against fundamentalism. If fundamentalism comes to Afghanistan,
war will continue for many years…Afghanistan will be turned into a center for terrorism"
 Mohammed Najibullah, August 1996 Afghanistan President

(The following month Najibullah was assassinated by the Taliban.
His mutilated body was hung from a light pole for public display in downtown Kabul)

 

"Afghanistan is the only country in the world with a real Islamic system.
All Muslims should show loyalty to the Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar"
Osama Bin Laden, April 2001

 

The International Deobandi Conference, April 2001

From April 8-11 of this year an estimated half-million people converged on a small town outside of Peshawar, Pakistan to celebrate the founding of a religious seminary known as Dar-ul-Uloon (house of knowledge). Dar-ul-Uloon is an Islamic madressa (religious school) that was founded in the city of Deoband, India in 1867. This celebration known as the “International Deoband Conference” acknowledged the madressa’s history but its primary purpose was to affirm a philosophy of a branch of Sunni Islam that has come to be known as Deobandi. From its inception almost 150 years ago the Dur-al-Uloon madressa has expounded a religious philosophy that now bears the name of the city in India where this well-known school resides. The April conference was organized by Jamiat Ulema-I-Islam (JUI), a Pakistani political party with a history of supporting and encouraging radical Islamic groups made up of fundamentalists and religious fanatics. The majority of the delegates to this conference came from Deobandi madrassas in Pakistan. There were also a large number of delegates from Afghanistan as well as India. With the exception of Israel every middle-eastern country was represented, as were representatives from non-Arab Muslim nations.

The highlights of the conference were a keynote address by Libyan leader Mu’ammar Al-Qadhafi, and taped speeches broadcast over loud speakers by the Afghanistan Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar and international terrorist, Osama bin Laden. Mullah Omar’s speech contained the strongest rhetoric. He accused the United Nations of being a tool of Western aggression and accused the West, particularly the U.N. and the United States, of oppressing the Muslims in Palestine, Kashmir, Bosnia and Chechnya. Osama bin Laden in his speech had high praise for the Taliban government as defenders of Islam against “non-Islamic forces” both foreign and domestic. He praised the Taliban government for having the resolve to stand firm in upholding the standard of Islam in the face of international criticism. The Iranian delegation, while comfortable with the anti-American diatribe, were clearly uncomfortable with the Deobandi religious philosophy which runs counter to the Shia understanding of Islam. It is probably for this reason that the Iranians tried to redirect the focus of the conference on the importance of Islamic unity. The Indian delegation, clearly bothered by the radical tone of the conference, pleaded for moderation. Despite these efforts the conference maintained a strong anti-American and anti-Western bias. The food Kiosks observed a ban on American products. Signs advertising Coca-cola were painted over and posters depicting burning American flags were popular souvenir items.

Introduction

The goal of this paper is to shed some light upon the Deobandi movement, the primary religious influence among the Taliban in Afghanistan. While religion is a significant factor it is only one piece in understanding the Taliban and Afghanistan situation. Historical, political, economical, and social factors must also be thoroughly examined. Perhaps most importantly tribal/ethnic divisions (there are more than 50 ethnic groups in the country) and the opium trade are major influences not only on the religious expression but also on the politics of the Taliban in Afghanistan. The reader of this paper is encouraged to investigate these other factors before drawing any conclusions about the Taliban.

Read more : Global Security/Military/Taliban/MullahOmar/DeobandOsamaBinLaden

top

Extracted from 'White & Black' : Facts of Deobandi-ism

 A rejoinder to a series of booklets entitled "Johannesburg to Bareilley

( DEOBANDI-ISM CAUGHT UP IN ITS OWN WEB )

By

Allamah Kaukab Noorani Okarvi Rahm.

Translated by.
S.G. Khawajah

Published by: Maulana Okarvi Academy Al A'lami, South Africa  

Dear readers! My aim is not to indulge in hurtful saying or in speaking lies. May Almighty Allah protect me from every wrong-doing! But I speak the truth when I say that the hypocrites (Deobandi propagandists) say and do things while propagating the Deen, which are most shameful and distasteful. II is amazing that they would like wrong ideas to be explained but they would not like to call a wrong as wrong.

Dear readers! All men of wisdom, thought, intellect and consciousness know that calling bad names is after all calling bad names. Howsoever much you may try to explain them away, you cannot say that calling bad names is wishing well. We, also, say to the propagandists of Deoband that the controversy between us will continue to rage until they accept the idolatrous and disgusting writings of their stalwart ulama to be idolatrous and disgusting even according to the verdict of their own ulama, and until they deny that such writings are valid and laudable.

There is a well-known anecdote. Some villagers went to a religious scholar and asked him to inform them what they should do to purify the village well in which a dog had drowned. The religious scholar told them to draw a number of buckets of water from the well, and then the water would be purified. The villagers went back and drew the prescribed buckets of water but the water continued to be as foul-smelling. Thereupon, they went back to the religious scholar and informed him of the situation. The religious scholar inquired from them if they had taken out the dead dog from the well or it was still there. They said they had not taken the dog out of the well. The religious scholar admonished them that until they took the dog out of the well, the stink would continue to be there howsoever much water they would draw. Therefore, they should first take out the dog from the well, and then take out water (and he specified the number of buckets to be taken out) and then they would see that the stink was removed.

Dear readers! Similar is the case with the Deobandi-Wahaabi propagandists. Unless they end the real reason of the controversy, unless they deny the rationality and eruditness of their erroneous and idolatrous writings, the dispute will continue to the there, howsoever much they may try to explain away things.

Along with this, you should also realise that these people are in the habit of speaking lies, giving false statements and hoodwinking people. They, perhaps, think that the world is populated only by the deaf and the blind. Let us hear about some examples of their lies and decide for yourselves how great liars these people of Deoband are.

On page 2 of part 1 of "Johannesburg to Bareilly", it is written thus: "The ulama of Deoband have nothing to do with Muhammad Ibne Abdul Wahaab Najdi (Imam of the Wahabi faction). They have no concern with his mission, nor he is their spiritual leader, nor did they ever meet him. In fact, the ulama of Deoband belong to the Ahl-e-Sunnat-Wa-Jama'at and owe allegiance to the Hanafi sect."

In this passage, it has been sought to be proved that the ulama of Deoband are not Wahabi, and that they have got nothing to do with Muhammad Ibne Abdul Wahaab Najdi, the Imam of the Wahaabis. This has been contradicted by the writings of the ulama of Deoband themselves, as you will subsequently see.

The famous debater of Deoband, Muhammad Manzoor Nu'maani, has in his book, "Sheikh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahaab and the right-guided ulama of India", published 10 years ago and endorsed by Sheikh Muhammad Zakariya Kandhalvi and Qaari Muhammad Tayyab, sought to prove that there was no ideological difference between Sheikh Abdul Wahaab Najdi and the ulama of Deoband and the Najdi Wahaabi and Deobandis were really one and the same. Here, I am not criticising the book by Nu'maani Sahib. My aim is only to bring to my readers the lies of the author of "Johannesburg to Bareilly" so that readers may know how very fond of lies the author of "Johannesburg to Bareilly" is. On the one hand, their ulama and elders are trying their utmost to prove themselves to be Wahaabi, but the author of "Johannesburg to Bareilly", while stationed in South Africa, is for ever engaged in uttering lies.

Dear readers! Let us examine such other writings of the stalwart ulama of Deoband.

"This title (Wahabi) means a person who subscribes to, or is subservient, to the creed of Ibne Abdul Wahaab". (Imdaad-ul-Fataawa), Page 233.

The Imam of the Deobandis, Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, says, "the followers of Muhammad Ibne Wahaab Najdi are called Wahabi. He held excellent beliefs and his creed was Hanbali. Although he was rather of harsh temperament but he and his followers are good people." (Fataawa Rasheediyah, Page 111, Vol. 1).

Dear readers! You have just seen what the verdict of Gangohi Sahib is on Ibne Abdul Wahab Najdi. Now see what the ulama of Deoband themselves have written about Ibne Abdul Wahab Najdi, and, then, decide for yourselves who amongst them spoke the truth and who uttered lies.

Al-Muhannad, the book of beliefs of the ulama of Deoband, on page 12, contains the following question and answer:

"Question number 12: Muhammad Ibne Abdul Wahaab held the view that shedding the blood of Musalmaans and taking away their property and defiling their honour, all these things were lawful. He also termed them idolaters. He was insolent towards the elders. What is your view of him? And do you (think calling the Ahle Qiblah as infidels is a lawful act? Or do you think that he who does these things belongs to a legitimate sect?

Answer: In our view the same verdict applies to them as has been given by the writer of Durr-e-Mukhtaar. And Khawarij are a band of people who waged war against the Imam because they thought him to be guilty of falsehood, that is, idolatry, which justified waging war. For this reason they take the taking of our lives and our property and making our women captives to be lawful. He further held that they were rebels. He also held that they did not Describe them as infidels because this was a matter of interpretation, though a faulty one. And Allamah Shaami, in his marginal notes on the book, has said, "Like it happened in our times when the followers of Ibne Abdul Wahaab sallying forth from Najd overwhelmed Haramain Shareefain. They described themselves as belonging to Hambali creed, but it was their belief that only they were Musalmaans and whoever was against their belief was an idolater and, so, they justified the killing of the Ahle Sunnat and the ulama of the Ahle Sunnat until Almighty Allah deprived them of their ascendancy."

In "Fataawa Rasheediyah", it is stated that their (Najdis) beliefs are excellent, while in "Al-Muhannad" it is said that they (Najdis) believe that only they were Musalmaans and those who held beliefs contrary to theirs were polytheists, and since such people belonged to the Ahl-e-Sunnat, therefore killing them was lawful.

From this it can be derived that holding all Ahl-e-Sunnat to be polytheists and killing them was lawful and permitted in the eyes of Gangohi Sahib. He also says that the followers of (Ibne Abdul Wahaab) are good men, while all other ulama of Deoband hold them to be Kharijis and rebels. It, thus, becomes clear that Gangohi Sahib believes that Kharijis and rebels are good men.

Also consider this. Hussein Ahmad Sahib Tandvi Madni says: "Gentlemen' Muhammad Ibne Abdul Wahaab appeared in the Najd in the 13th century A.H., and, because he harboured evil thoughts and held wrong beliefs, he waged war on the Ahl-e-Sunnat Wal Jama'at, sought to force his evil thoughts upon them and considered lawful seizing of their properties as the spoils of war, and killing them, and considered all these acts to bring blessings. He was harsh on the people of the Haramain (Makkah and Madinah) in particular and on the people of the Hijaaz in general. He used most foul language against the pious men of the earlier generations. Because of the atrocities committed by him on them, countless people had to flee the holy cities of Makkah and Madinah, and many of them were martyred by his troops. In short, he was a tyrant, a rebel and an altogether evil person." (Ash-Shahaubus Saaqib, Page 42)

Gangohi Sahib says that their beliefs are excellent and he and his followers are good men, while Husain Ahmad Sahib Tandvi Madni says that his views were evil and his beliefs were most wretched. He considered the killing of Ahle-Sunnat as an act, which brought blessings, and justified taking away of their properties as spoils of war and, as such, lawful. He put the people of the Haramain and the Hijaaz to great hardships until they were forced to flee. He was most insolent towards the pious men of the earlier generations. He was guilty of killing thousands of Musalmaans, and was tyrannical, rebellious, blood-thirsty, and sinful.

Now, if Gangohi Sahib is speaking the truth, then Husain Ahmad Sahib Tandvi Madni is speaking the lie. Only one of two can be in the right. Now, a decision about them rests on the followers of the two men.

Gangohi Sahib says that their (Najdis) beliefs are excellent. How excellent can be seen in the writings of the Principal of Deoband, Husain Ahmad Sahib Tandvi Madni, who has listed, serially, examples of the beliefs of the Najdis in F his book, Ash Shahaubus Saaqib! These are:

1. "Muhammad Ibne Abdul Wahaab believed that people all over the world and all Muslims were polytheists and infidels. (Page 44)

2. The Najdis believed, and his followers still believe, that the lives of Prophets (Alaihum-us Salaam) were limited to the times during which they lived upon this earth. Thereafter, in death, they and other faithfuls are equal. (Page 45)

3. This group holds that having a vision of the blessed Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wa Sallam) and visits to his blessed tomb are bad innovations and unlawful. He also holds as unlawful even journeying in that direction for this purpose. According to some of them, even journeying for the sake of paying a visit to the blessed tomb is like committing fornication. May Allah save us from such evil thoughts! (Page 45)

4. The Wahaabis use most insolent language in respect of Prophethood and the person of the beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wa Sallam), and in their insolence, claim to be the equals of the personality of the holy Prophet, and, according to them, only a little benefit accrued from him during the times he was preaching the Messages of Allah, and no benefits flowed from him after his passing away. And because they think so, they consider as unlawful praying for Allah's forgiveness through his intercession. Their elders also said that praying for Allah's forgiveness through his intercession was unlawful. (May Allah save us from having such thoughts)!  But, perhaps, it may be permissible to reproduce such thoughts, for merely reproducing blaspheming words does not by itself constitute blasphemy). They also said that the staff in a man's hand was of greater advantage to him than the glorious personality of the king of the universe (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wa Sallam), for with a staff in his hand one can defend himself from a dog while the personality of the 'Pride of the Universe' (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wa Sallam) cannot do even this much for him. (Page 47)

5. The Wahaabis are against performing mystic rites and sophistic practices-meditating, engaging in the remembrance of Allah and thinking about Him, owing allegiance to spiritual guides and the whole system of spiritual guides, and having a mental rapport with the spiritual guides, believing in the doctrine of annihilation and permanent life etc. etc In their view, al' such things are of no consequence, bad innovations and demeaning. (Page 59, Ash-Shahaubus Saaqib)

6. In Wahaabi belief, following any particular Imam is considered to be blasphemy against the Prophet, and they use wretched and wicked words for the four Imams and their followers, and thus they are alienated from the Ahl-e-Sunnat-Wa-Jama'at and so the non-emulators of India belong to this wicked group. While they claimed to be Hanbalee when they first appeared on the scene, but in many matters they do not follow Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (Alaihir Rahmah)—(Page 62, Ash-Shahaabus Saaqib).

7. Through verses Ar-Rahmaanu 'Alal 'Arshis Tawa etc, the Wahaabis try to prove that Allah physically occupies a throne and also make out His dimensions and, therefore, His bodily presence. - (Page 24, Ash-Shahaabus-Saaqib)

8. The Wahaabis of Arabia have often been heard to harshly denounce the expression, "As Salaatu was Salaamu Alaika ya Rasoolal Laah" (Peace and salutation to you, O Allah's Messenger)", and most scathingly condemn and ridicule its use, and hurl most unbecoming language against the people of the Haramain who use such an expression.—(Page 65, Ash-Shahaabus-Saaqib)

9. The wicked Wahaabis harshly denounce sending repeatedly peace and salutation on the mercy to the worlds, and consider reciting 'Dalaa'ilul Khairuat', 'Qaseedah Burdah' and 'Qassedah Hamziya'h and such like as most detestable and unwarranted. They also consider some couplets of 'Qaseedah Burdah' to be downright blasphemous, as for example the couplet: Ya Ashrafal Khalqi Maali Man Aloozu Bihi Siwaaka Inda Huloolil Haadisil 'Amami (O' the best of creations! I have no one To look up to in perilous times like these) (Page 66, Ash Shahaabus Saaqib)

10. Except for the knowledge by him of Allah's commands, the Wahaabis think the personality of the Last of the Prophets (Alaihis Salaatu w'as Salaam) to be devoid of all hidden and true knowledge. (Page 62, Ash-Shahaabus Saaqib)

1. The Wahabis consider the narration of the birth of the king of the universe (Alaihis-Salaatu-w'as-Salaam) itself to be a most reprehensible act and a very bad innovation". (Page 67, Ash-Shahaabus Saaqib)

Dear readers' the above-mentioned eleven beliefs held by Ibne Abdul Wahaab Najdi and his followers have been listed by the Principal of Deoband, Husain Ahmad Sahib Tandvi Madni, which in the sight of Gangohi Sahib are excellent beliefs. It is, therefore, proved that most foul, most wicked and altogether blasphemous beliefs are reckoned by him to be excellent ones and the excellent and Islamic beliefs are, in his eyes, polytheistic and innovative. What an amazing feat of perverted thinking!

Khirad Ka Naam Junoon Rokh Diya Junoo 'Ka Khirad
Jo Chaahe Aap Ka Husne Karishmah Saaz Kare

(You call wisdom to be madness and madness to be wisdom.
Your miracle making beauty may do whatever it wants).

On Page 45 of Ashrafus Sawaanih, it is stated thus: "A story is narrated of the times when Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib was a teacher at the Madrasah Jaamiul-Uloom, Kanpur. Some women living in the neighbourhood of the Madrasah brought some sweets so that the Qur'aan may be recited and the reward so earned be conveyed. Students of the Madrasah did not do so and ate up the sweets. This created quite a row. When informed of the row, Thanvi Sahib came and told the people in a loud voice, "Brethren! This place is populated by Wahabis. Don't bring anything here for the sake of faatihah and niyaaz."

One Page 192 of the biography of Janab Yoosuf Kandhalvi, it is stated that 'we are staunch Wahabis."

One of the elders of the Deobandi Wahaabi propagandist group, Sheikh-ul-Hadees Muhammad Zakariya Sahib, declares: "I am a more staunch Wahabi than all of you."—(Biography of Maulana Muhammad Yoosuf Kandhalvi, Page 193, authored by Muhammad Saani Hasni and Manzoor Nu'maani).

(It will interest my readers to know that, as they have already seen, the Principal of Madrasah Deoband, Janab Husain Ahmad Tandvi Madni, has described the Wahabis as a "band of evil and foul and filthy people" who are also insolent, but Janab Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Muhammad Zakariya and others say they are very proud of calling themselves Wahabis. With this admission, the reality about them will dawn upon people with greater clarity).

Thanvi Sahib, whom the Deobandis regard as their Hakeem-ul-Ummat, in a letter to his Imam, Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi Sahib, writes: "Although some ulama here regard me as a Wahaabi and some ulama from outside also have told people here not to be deceived by this man (Thanvi) for he is a Wahabi, but it did not have any effect for I had been practically co-operating with the public. But now that I intend not to co-operate even in a practical sort of way, I should expect to face some difficulty." Since Thanvi Sahib used to participate in Meelaad meetings, people did not accept him as a Wahabi, but now that Thanvi Sahib himself says that he would not be attending Meelaad congregations it should be clear to everybody that "he was truly a Wahabi although he had been hiding this fact." (Tazkiratur Rasheed, Page 135).

Janab Abdul Hasan Ali Nadvi in his book "Deeni Da'wat" (Invitation to Religion) has mentioned an episode about Muhammad Ilyaas Sahib, founder of the Tableeghi Jama'at. In 1938, he says, when he had gone to the Hijaaz for the Hajj, he along with his delegation met the Sultan of Najd in connection with the Tableeghi Jama'at.

Regarding preparations for the meeting with the Sultan, he writes: "It was resolved that first the aims and objects of the Jama'at should be written down in Arabic, then it should be presented to the Sultan. Maulana Ihtishaam-ul-Hasan and Abdullah Ibne Hasan, on their own, met the Sheikh-ul-lslam and Sheikh Ibne Bulhead". "Deeni Da'wat" (Invitation to Religion), Pages 97 and 98.

"After two weeks (on 14th March, 1938), the Maulana (Muhammad Ilyaas) along with Haaji Abdullah Dehlvi, Sheikhul Mutaw-witeen, Abdur Rahmaan Mazhar, and Maulvi Ihtishaam-ul-Hasan went to meet the Sultan. The king came down from his throne and received them with great honour and seated the honoured guests from India near him. They then presented their schedule for preaching. Upon this, the king lectured to them most eruditely for forty minutes on the unity of Allah, on the Book, and on the Prophetic traditions and on the need for following the Shari'at. After this, he came down from his throne and with much respect bade them goodbye. The next day, the Sultan wanted to go to the Hijaaz and left for Riyadh. ("Deeni Da'wat", Page 98)

Having obtained the testimonial of approval from the Sultan of Najd, now see how they went about it. He writes: "Maulvi Ihtishamul Hasan prepared a brief note on the objects of their preaching and presented it to Shaikhul Islam and Chief Justice, Abdullah Bin Hasan, who is of the progeny of Ibne Abdul Wahaab Najdi, and the Maulana (Muhammad Ilyaas) and Maulvi Ihtisham Sahib themselves went to see him. He honoured them greatly and gave them much support in every matter and orally promised them sympathy and help". ("Deeni Da'wat" Page 98)

Give your honest thought to this. What was it that prevented them from, disclosing, along with the entire proceedings, the Arabic text of the aims and objects of the Tableeghi Jama'at prepared for presentation to the Sultan of Najd? It is all two obvious. However much they may try to hide facts but facts will be out, after all. And the fact is that the aims and objects much lauded at the king's palace and the promise of total support in disseminating ideas connected with the "Invitation to Religion" were exactly the same as those which the Najdis had raised as their battle cry and, as a consequence, totally destroyed places of undying love and esteem and also the eternal monuments of Islam.

It should be clear to even a person of the meanest intelligence that had the aims and objects been even slightly different from those of the Najdi religion, the Sheikhul Islam and Chief Justice of the Najdi government, who had the blood of Ibne Abdul Wahaab Najdi flowing in his veins, would not have promised the least bit of help and support.

Look at another proof of total affinity in thought and belief between the Wahabi Najdi band and the Tableeghi Jama'at and total mutual co-operation between them which is provided by an incident which happened during the times of Muhammad Yoosuf Sahib, son and successor of Janab Muhammad Ilyaas. (You must have heard about this incident which occurred during the times of Janab Muhammad Ilyaas.) While narrating the story of the delegation of the Tableeghi Jama'at which had gone to Najd from Delhi under the leadership of Janab Abul Hasan Ali Nadvi, the biographer of Janab Muhammad Yoosuf writes (and here you will read of the deep relationship that existed between leaders of the Najdi Government and the said delegation). The story continues:

"Excellent relations were established with Sheikh Umar Bin Al-Hasan, who is of the progeny of Sheikh Muhammad Ibne Abdul Wahaab Najdi, and with Sheikh Abdul Laah Ibnul Hasan, Chief Justice and Sheikh-ul-Islam of the Saudi kingdom and head of the department of dos and don'ts (Amar Bil Ma'roof wa Nahee Anil Munkar) who had very close relation ship with the crown prince of the kingdom, and was his special aid. Because of their understanding the situation fully, those who tried to create doubts about the (Tableeghi) Jama'at dismally failed in such attempts.  (Biography of Maulana Muhammad Yoosuf, Page 414)

Here is another clear proof of the ideological affinity between the two. He writes: "We also met the elder brother of Sheikh Umar Bin Al-Hasan, Sheikh Abdul Laah Ibnul Hasan (with whom Maulana Ilyaas had entered into an agreement) and he treated us with much kindness. Some people tried to give the impression that the (Tableeghi) Jama'at was a band with "wrong beliefs" and they conveyed this complaint to the ulama. Due to our contact with the ulama and the influential people, those complainants were cold-shouldered".- (Sawaanih Maulana Muhammad Yoosuf, Page 414)

There is no need for it to be explained how these People would have pleaded their innocence of holding wrong beliefs before the Qaazis and the ulama and officials of Najd. The nature of a religious mind is such that even a man holding wrong beliefs does not consider anyone to be holding right beliefs until he is proved to be of his persuasion. From this, the Point becomes clearer still that the elite of the Najd already knew that these people did not hold wrong beliefs, they rather held similar views, and that is why [hose who complained about them being people with wrong beliefs could not succeed.

You would have, by now, seen proofs of the fact that the Deobandi propagandists are, in fact, Wahabis. These proofs have been provided by their own pens.

top

The Sunday Telegraph

British Muslims ordered to adopt Taliban teachings
By Julian West and Jo Knowsley
(Filed: 27/07/1997) (p. 13)

Thousands of young British Muslims are being indoctrinated into the Taliban, the hard-line Islamic sect which believes women are the source of evil. The young men study at British mosques and religious colleges, learning the laws of the Deobandi sect, a political branch of Islam that formed the basis of the Taliban movement in Afghanistan.

There are already Deobandi mosques in Birmingham, Manchester, Bradford and London, together with up to 20 religious colleges. Others have been sent abroad for "training", lasting up to eight years, at Deobandi religious universities. Students emerge without any other qualification and are expected to come back to Britain and teach in mosques and colleges here.

Under the extremist Taliban regime in Afghanistan, executions are carried out in public and criminals have had their hands and feet chopped off. Women have been banned from working and must live in purdah, forbidden to leave their homes unless accompanied by a male relative. In the latest Taliban edict last week women have been forbidden to wear "noisy shoes" so that they can walk more softly.

Deobandis are given to issuing fatwas of this kind regulating tiny details of behaviour. Since the beginning of the century they have produced something like a quarter of a million of them. Most of Britain's Deobandi mosques were funded by money from Saudi Arabia. These include the Al Farouq Masjid mosque in Walsall, West Midlands, which cost an estimated £5 million to build. It is named after the Saudi oil millionaire who put up the money.

Laws enforced at the Walsall mosque are so strict that women members cannot attend their own weddings. Instead, two male relatives participate on their behalf. The religious colleges, mainly situated in the north of England, take students aged between nine and 21 to undergo five years of intensive training. Basic maths and science are taught alongside Islamic studies. Each college has between 250 and 300 students.

It is estimated that about 20 percent of Britain's 1.5 million Muslims now follow Deobandi teachings. These have so far focused on education rather than encouraging militant action. But it is believed that the Saudis are refusing to finance new mosques unless they belong to the Taliban's Deobandi school of Islam.

Ron Graves, professor of Islamic studies at Wolverhampton University, said the increase in Deobandi teachings in Britain was a cause for concern. "The Deobandis are obsessed with fatwas. It's how they control their members and how they would like to control the rest of the Islamic world. Deobandis see their way as the only correct route and are political in their teachings."

Prof. Graves said the Taliban had put a more militant edge to their laws because of the political climate from which the movement emerged in 1994.

Second-generation Muslims in Britain could be tempted to do the same, he said. "If they are struggling to find an identity and remain isolated from British culture, they might find the more militant elements of the Deobandi sect the perfect form of rebellion."

The source of Deobandi teaching is a sprawling university in the small town of Deoband in Uttar Pradesh, northern India. The institution is the second largest in the Muslim world, with 3,000 students. It produces only religious leaders, the imams and mullahs, who leave after eight years of training and go on to teach or found their own schools. There are believed to be dozens of these in Britain.

Many British Muslims studied at Deoband until India recently imposed tighter visa rules. Most now attend an affiliated university, opened at Bury, Lancs. seven years ago, but some still travel to Deoband.

The vice-chancellor of the Indian university, Maulana Marghubu R. Rahman, a mullah in his late seventies, admitted that the schools' aims included propagating their fatwa-driven teachings "throughout the world., including England".

But Dr Zaki Badawi, of the Imams and Mosques Council, suggested that young Muslims in Britain were unlikely to embrace extremism. "Second-generation Muslims want to shed their cultural baggage which often has no relation to being in modern Britain."

top

By SHERI SHEFA
Staff Reporter

TORONTO - Immigration Minister Monte Solberg has apparently heeded the call of Canadian faith groups to ban a controversial British imam from entering Canada to speak at a Muslim youth conference in Toronto.

Sheik Riyadh ul-Haq, formerly the imam at a Birmingham, England, mosque, who has been accused of vilifying Jews, Hindus, and moderate Muslims, was set to speak at the Youth Tarbiyah conference on June 30, organized by the Islamic Foundation of Toronto.

Canadian Jewish Congress national president Ed Morgan said he heard last week through media reports that Solberg had informed immigration officials that ul-Haq should be barred from entering the country because his views could incite terror and hatred. “If it is confirmed, I’ll be pleased with the decision, because it means that the government did the right thing,” Morgan said.

Earlier in the week, the Toronto Star reported that Air Canada’s gate security and ticket agents received a memo from the Canadian High Commission in London that said ul-Haq would be unable to board an Air Canada flight until he contacted the Commission.

A spokesperson for the Canadian immigration office did not return calls for confirmation by The CJN’s deadline.

After news broke that the controversial imam was set to lecture in Hamilton, Montreal and Toronto, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and gay-rights groups wrote an open letter in hopes of convincing Solberg to refuse ul-Haq entry to Canada under anti-hate laws.

“We wrote an open letter to the immigration minister with all the groups who were offended by ul-Haq. I think the force of the four groups – Muslims, Jews, Hindus and gay and lesbian groups – coming together… was quite powerful,” Morgan said.

Following the news, the CJC released a statement commending Solberg’s reported decision to bar the imam from coming to Canada and emphasized the importance of speaking out against those who incite hatred.

“We all felt it was vital to speak with a united voice in order to ensure Canadian society would not be polluted by this man’s dangerous and inflammatory views,” Morgan said.

source:

top

Jihadism, Taliban and Pakistan

One of the worst manifestations of Jihadism are the Taliban of Afghanistan. The evil, manifest in the ideology of Jihadism took a concrete shape in the form of Taliban. The world got the first indication of the shape of things to come and the dangers inherent in allowing this obscurantist ideology to take root when it woke up on the very first day of the Taliban take-over of Kabul (26-27 September 1996) to see the battered body of former communist President Dr. Najibullah in the UN compound.

One of the reasons why any Pakistan government has to tread cautiously while dealing with the Taliban and other Jihadists in the country is that the Taliban have firmed up their relationship with several powerful sections of the Pakistani society. Though a creation of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e -Pakistan, for instance, they have succeeded in mending fences even with the rival Jihadist organisation, the Jamaat-e-Islami of Pakistan. It may be recalled that the Jamaat had called them tools of imperialist powers like the United States and the United Kingdom, when they had first appeared on the scene. But now it has no hesitation in endorsing the Taliban brand of politics, indeed the Taliban version of Islam itself.

The biggest danger of the Talibanisation of Pakistan,. however, comes from the fact that the social and doctrinal roots of the Pakistani army jawans are virtually the same as those of the Taliban. Pakistan army officers may have trained the Taliban and may control them even now to a certain extent in terms of finance, but they are bound to fear them too. For there is a great difference in the secular orientation and the progressive social roots of a majority of the officer class and the obscurantist and mediaeval orientation of the Taliban, even if their objectives coincide at certain points.

But while most of the Pakistan army officers are bound to remain somewhat wary of the Taliban, even while exploiting their ideology for their own nefarious ends, at lower levels in the army there is greater acceptance of Jihadism practised by the Taliban. This is a cause for great worry in the Pakistan army's officers and they are bound to view the possibility of a coming together of the Tailbones of Afghanistan, local Jihadis and Pakistan Army jawans and lower level officers with great trepidation. Who are the Taliban?

This makes it imperative that we pose the question: Who are the Taliban? Describing the social and doctrinal roots of the Taliban, William Maley provides the best answer to this question in his recent book 'Fundamentalism reborn: Afghanistan and the Taliban'. As he points out, the Taliban did not emerge from nowhere, although the precise milieu which nurtured them has not been widely studied. The figure of the Talib is a relatively familiar one in the Northwest Frontier: as long ago as 1898, Winston Churchill penned some cutting remarks about a host of wandering talib-ul-ilms, who correspond with the theological students in Turkey and live free at the expense of the people.'

In Afghanistan, the establishment in the twentieth century of state-supported venues for religious education such as the Faculty of Islamic Law at Kabul University, and state madrassas (Islamic colleges), did not mean the end of private madrassas 'in which the talib, proceeded at his own individual speed with one subject at a time'. The advent of war in Afghanistan in the 1980s saw talibs taking to the battlefield; they were witnessed in 1984 by Olivier Roy in Uruzgan, Kabul and Kandahar.

These students emerged not from madrassas in Afghanistan, but from those run by the Jamiat-e-Ulema-i-Islam, a Pakistani political party headed by Maulana Fazlur Rahman, which offered a conservative religious education to boys from Afghan refugee camps, especially orphans or sons of very poor families. The religious training of these students was heavily influenced by the Deobandi school, which originated in the Dar ul-Ulum Deoband, an institution established in the Indian town of Deoband in 1867. William Maley seeks to explain the inexplicable Taliban behaviour in this way: "The Deobandi school preached a form of conservative orthodoxy, and madrassas under its influence provided the bulk of the Afghan ulema. In this orthodoxy, evil and apostasy could be defined at least in part in terms of departure from ritual - that is, 'action wrapped in a web of symbolism' and it is for this reason that the Taliban emphasise the enforcement of modes of behaviour which to the outside observer seem peripheral to solving Afghanistan's major problems. It is scarcely surprising that the most cohesive organisation in the Taliban~s otherwise -inchoate structure is the much-feared religious police force (Amr bil-Maroof wa Nahi An il-Munkir, the department responsible for the Promotion of Virtue and Suppression of Vice)." The Taliban can, however, be better described as Jihadists as jihad constitutes the central focus around which they are oppressing humanity and destroying Islam as we have known and practised this religion throughout the last centuries. India may he at the receiving end of Jihadism and Talibanism in Kashmir, but it is Pakistan that could be the very first country to fall to this new ideology once it has taken firmer roots in Afghanistan. It seems to me that the ruling elite in Pakistan including the Army officers already realise this, but are at a loss to formulate a clear-cut strategy to deal with this threat to their own power. They have merely decided to deal with the Taliban of Afghanistan as well as their local counterparts with great care. In the meantime they go on merrily providing succour to the ideology of Jihadism perhaps in the hope that as long as Jihadism is busy elsewhere, they are safe. But no one and no situation can save Frankensteins from their monsters for ever. Pakistan army officers would do well to read the story of the central character of one of Goethe's celebrated poems Der Zauberlehrling who fell victim to the forces he had merrily liberated but then could not control.

http://www.integralworld.net/index.html?harris9.html

top

Who are these Deobandi/Wahabi people ?

The biggest threat to Islam from within these days is from the Wahabi, Deobandi, Tablighi, Salafi sects. This threat to an average Muslim is not obvious at all. These days they want to call themselves Sunnis to deceive gullible Muslims. It is worth mentioning to some of the misguided youngsters of the above renegade groups that the four Mazhabs, namely, the Shafi'i, the Hanafi, Maliki and Hambali, all follow the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam and believe in Sunni Aqaa'id, and are not one of the 72 firqas (groups) destined for Hell.

The physical appearance of these renegades may deceive one as they decorate their deceitful faces with the Sunnat of the beard and perform compulsory acts such as Namaaz, in a most convincing manner. However, their corrupt beliefs prove that they have no true love for the Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam and they are the greatest insulter's of the Beloved Prophet and thrown out of Islam.

Who are these Deobandi/Wahabi people? This is the question raised by the Ulama of Masjid-e-Nabawi, Mufti Sheikh Umar bin Hamadan Al Maharassee, who gave a Fatwa of Kufr on Deobandi/Wahabi/Tabligh Jammaat leaders and founders nearly 100 years ago for insulting the Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam. This Fatwa was issued after years of study of Wahabi/Deobandi books and clarification sought from the writers of these books which were never received nor did they repent for their opinions. Some of their Aqeeda and opinions are printed in this bill. 

The Wahabis/Deobandis of today are trying their best to hide what their leaders have said about the Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam. Some of them do attend Meelad, pray Salaam on the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam and even call themselves Sunni to deceive true Muslims. Majority of the Deobandi/Wahabi are not aware of many contradictions within the Wahabi/Deobandi Aqeeda. They do not know that their leaders have a Fatwa of Kufr given on them. Most people know about Ghulam Ahmed Qadiani. They do not know that the Fatwa issued in 1320 A.H. (1900 A.D.) by 33 prominent Ulama of Makkah and Medina Shareef applied to Deobandi/Wahabi leaders: Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Khalil Ahmed Ambetwi, Rashid Ahmed Gangohi and Qassim Nanotvi as well.

No Sunni Aalim, or for that matter any Muslim could think of even one abusive thing that the Wahabi/Deobandis have written, let alone speak or write about it. The Deobandis state that the Sunni Ulama have nothing to do but issue Fatwa. But when one considers the systematic procedure undertaken before giving the Fatwa: years of research on their books of Aqaa'id, opportunity for renouncing the statements or valid reasons sought for the views from the leaders and the refusal by their leaders to respond or repent. After this the Saliheen Ulama of Haram Shareef were then forced to issue the Fatwa before the current present Saudi Wahabi/Najdi forced themselves into power with a lot of blood shed, bombing Makkah and Madina in the process.

The penalty for insulting the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam is death and this is not something invented today but it has origins from the time of the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam who ordered a person to be beheaded in the Haram Shareef itself between Maqam-e-Ibrahim and Zam Zam! The person who doubts his (the person who said Kufr) infidelity is also an infidel. This is unanimously accepted by all Ulama and Mufti and there is no forgiveness for this infidelity. However, there is a way out for those who repent genuinely.

Anyone who doubts the seriousness for insulting the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam or harsh punishment for infidelity should recall the following incident. A Jew and a Munafiq went to the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam to settle a dispute. The Prophet found the decision in favour of the Jew. The two then went to Sayyiduna Abu Bakr radi Allahu anhu who also gave a similar verdict. The Munafiq then asked the Jew that they should go to Sayyiduna Umar radi Allahu anhu. They told him the story and asked for his decision. The Jew, however, told Sayyiduna Umar radi Allahu anhu that the Prophet of Allah had already decided in his favour. Sayyiduna Umar radi Allahu anhu asked both to wait. He went inside, got his sword and chopped the head of the "Muslim" Munafiq! Sayyiduna Umar radi Allahu anhu could not bear the insult of the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam by the Munafiq due to his refusal to accept the Prophet's Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam. He did not even hear out the Munafiq. Some people thought that Sayyiduna Umar radi Allahu anhu had gone too far. However, Qur'anic Ayats were revealed to support his action! 

There is so much uneasiness among the Wahabis about the birth of the Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam or his Meelad that there is no mention of his birth in many of the Wahabi Masaajids. In fact, in one of their Kuthbas, the Imaam mentioned that the Muslims were worshipping idols. This was an indirect attack on shrines of the Saints and the Prophet of Allah that the Sunnis have great respect for. The Wahabis call these shrines idols! The lack of respect and love for the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam by the Wahabi/Deobandi is clear to see. 

Having read about the views and the actions of the Wahabi/Deobandi, one will need to consider his Aqeeda and action he will need to take to put his Aqaa'id on the path of Sirat-ul-Mustaqeem. One may need to take necessary, corrective steps. One cannot, for example, ignore the basic concepts such as Shafa'at of the Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam on the Day of Judgement which the Wahabi/Deobandi leaders have categorically rejected as stated in their Aqaa'id book, "Taqwiyatul Imaan", as Shirk, whilst there is specific mention in support of intercession by Allah Ta'ala in the Quran to this, and the words of the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam in the Hadith and in the books of Sunni Aqaa'id, and all the Ulamas, and Saints all accept intercession and it is part of Sunni Aqaa'id. The evidence in support of intercession is so overwhelming that no Muslim could reject it. 

The Wahabi/Deobandi do not believe or follow the teachings of the Mujaddid Saints and the Awliya of Allah who brought the message of Islam through the centuries. So they have to make up their own Aqaa'id as they go along, mix and match from here and there and for this precise reason they get caught contradicting themselves time and again, issuing Fatwas of Kufr on themselves indirectly. 

With the Wahabis utilising vast resources against Sunni Islam, it is time all Muslims took a very serious view of the Wahabi/Deobandi Ulama and their teachings. Would one entertain these remarks directed at themselves or at their parents, let alone the Prophet of Allah Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam? While people of all religions are praising their Prophets, here we see them degrading our beloved Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam. Would one drink from a tank of water which had only a drop poison or a drop of urine? Certainly not! So how could one dare to say or write even one word of insult against the Beloved and pure personality of the Prophet of Allah? The Wahabis have written volumes of insults. One may find it difficult to extricate oneself from the machinery of Wahabism, his Wahabi friends and Aqaa'id. Like their fathers and founders, the current Wahabi leaders will never change. This could mean a loss of respect and finance from the Saudi Arabian government.

But for the Allah-fearing ordinary Muslim, he needs to make a new start, an important step that every Muslim needs to take to get rid of the Wahabi/Deobandi/Tablighi Aqaa'id. This applies to Sunnis as well who have acquired many wrong beliefs reading Wahabi/Deobandi books.

So, what is stopping Wahabis/Deobandis following the correct Sunni path? Nothing! Each is waiting for one of their friends or relations to make a move, each giving a sense of false support and security to the other when only their own deeds will save them in the Hereafter. It is dangerous to be lethargic in this matter. As stated previously, a person who makes or agrees with the statements like those stated by the Deobandi/Wahabi leaders, commits Kufr and a person who doubts their Kufr or tries to avoid calling them as Kaafirs, he himself becomes a Kaafir. This is not the Fatwa of the compilers of this bill, but the consensus of ALL Sunni Ulema since the time of the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam.

Some Wahabis will listen to a new person in his Mosque whom he doesn't know and who has just been converted to their way of thinking, joined the Tabligh Jammat and thinks that he is on a divine mission to save all Muslims when his knowledge of Islam is almost nil. He will not mind following the young Muslim who has been to a Wahabi madressa/Uloom for a couple of years, who knows a bit of Arabic and a smattering knowledge of Islam and goes about dishing out his own fatwas in local mosques and college and university campus, corrupting the minds of the youth, demeaning the status and the honour of the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam in the process. 

Over the years, Wahabis and Sunni Ulema have confronted each other in Munazara (debates), in South Africa, India, UK, and many parts of the world. The Wahabis have always lost the debate, or not turned up at all. This happened in Blackburn (UK) last year when an audience of nearly 5 000 waited for the Deobandi Ulema who did not turn up for the well-publicised debate. A defeat for them would mean loss of prestige and followers to the Sunnis. A Wahabi/Deobandi is also brainwashed not to listen to Sunni Ulema, read about the Saints and the Wali Allah.

A person who comes to know about the Wahabi/Deobandi beliefs and then does not reject them, then his relationship with his family and fellow Muslims becomes untenable. It is Fardh for everyone to have knowledge and correct belief of Islam and to impart this to his children. The Mufti of Makkah Mukarramah, Mufti Jamaal bin Muhammad Hussain, has stated in his Fatwa that to expose the wrong Aqaa'id is Fardh-e-Kifaya (collective compulsory act) which imposes a duty on all Muslims to make people in their area and influence aware of the Wahabi/Deobandi views. The Ulema, the Imams, the Trustees and the Committee Members of Mosques, Muslim Organisations, Jamaats have a special duty to expose the corrupt beliefs of the Wahabis, by providing resources and Sunni publications and literature in English. 

But we are nowadays surprised to find them joining in our Milad celebrations, doing Fatiha and eating Giyarwee Niaz, and any other way just to get near to us. But they will not celebrate these in their own homes or in their mosques. This is simply a ploy to deceive us. They have had quite bad publicity because of their blasphemous Aqeeda and are trying to win us over. They will never talk about these issues which are fundamentals of Muslim faith and Aqeeda. In fact, some Wahabi/Deobandi Molvis are having Zikr, Baal Mubarak Ziyarat, Khatamul Qur'an, etc. in their Masaajids just to deceive innocent Sunni Muslims. Previously, they regarded all these acts as Shirk and Bid'at and falsely quoted Qur'an and Hadith to show they are correct. Now, all of a sudden, it is O.K. What a deception! Previously, only Ijtima, Ghust, sleeping in a Jamaat Khana and Kitaab reading was a "Sunnah." Why do they do not reject these? 

Insha-Allah, we want to help those who are sincere in their belief, who want to follow the right path and who want to protect their faith from these insolent people and not close their eyes and ears to everything that is written by Sunnis, which is followed by over 90% of all Muslims in the world. This article will also help Sunni readers, who don't read Urdu or Arabic and who have been bombarded with Wahabi/Deobandi literature, to correct and to repent for any aspect of their belief which has not been consistent with Sunni Aqaa'id. 

The beliefs of these Wahabi/Deobandi are taken from their own original books, in Arabic, Urdu or Farsi. We have provided reference to quotations from their books. We have also found that the recent editions of their books have some of the derogatory remarks deleted. 

The Deobandi/Wahabi/Tabligh Jammat beliefs are listed under the relevant headings together with comments and quotations from their own leaders and Aalims who have contradicted their own Aqeeda in many instances, and by doing so they have given a Fatwa of Kufr on themselves. Also, there are very many other points about their belief which we have not been able to include in this article. 

Source: Raza.co.za

top

"We need to form a new sect (Firqa)"

Deobandi/Wahabi leader and founder, Molvi Ilyas Khandalvi, states in his own book, "Deeni Dawat", that whilst speaking to his friend, Maulvi Zahirul Hussein (M.A. Aligarh) he stated: "Zahirul Hassan! We need to form a new sect." (Deeni Dawat, pg. 205)

The founder of the Deobandi/Wahabi leader himself admits to forming a new firqa and this is a fact. 

Molvi Ilyas has also stated: "Hazrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi has done a great job. I am pleased that the religious teachings are his and the method for the tabligh is mine, whereby the teachings of Ashraf Ali will spread far and wide." (Malfuzaat, Maulana Mohammad Ilyas, pg. 57)

It is absolutely clear that the method of propagation of Islam is not that followed by the Sahaba-Kiraams, the pious or the Saints like al-Ghawth al-A'zam, Shaykh Abd'al-Qadir al-Jilani Radi Allahu ta'ala anhu, who was given the title of Muhiyuddin (The Reviver of Islam), or other Mujaddid of Islam, but one which is their own creation. 

Source: Raza.co.za

top

'' We are more Holier than thou ...''

Hardly a Tabligh/Deobandi meeting or congregation would pass without the mention of the verse [Ayaat] from the Noble Qur'an: "Quntum khaira ummati'n ukhrijit lin-nas-e ta'moruna bil-ma'a-roof'e wa tan'haina anil-munkar wa tu'aminnon billahi." The Ayaat mentions the Ummat of the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam as being better than others because the people of the Ummah are asked to do good and stop people from commiting evil. Of course the reward for work of the Prophets attract God-fearing people. 

At the same time the Deobandi/Tablighi are promoting their Tablighi work and Jamaat to gullible Muslims, and their own status. Their leaders, like Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi, have insulted the Prophet and Awliyas as "Worthless little than nothing." (Taqviyatul Imaan, pg 42). And he has further added: "I keep on stating that in these times any person who does a good deed, gets the reward of 50 Abu Bakr Siddiqs radi Allahu anhu." (Ashrafus-Suaneh, Part 2, pg. 99) 

Not to be left behind with his Fatwa, Deobandi's Maulvi Qasim Nanotvi, states "... the followers can exceed the Prophets in their deeds." (Tahzeeru-n-Naas, Page 25)

No doubt! Gullible Muslims fall for his talk and join the Tabligh Jamaat! 

Source: Raza.co.za

top

Denial of the Last Prophet

Madrassa Darul-Uloom Deobandi's Maulvi Qasim Nanotvi writes: "If maybe after the Holy Prophet's era another did come then that would not make any difference to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) being the last Prophet, whether in his own era, his own area or other, another Prophet is proposed."  Source :(Tahzeeru'n-Naas, pg. 25)

The Noble Qur'an states:

Source: Raza.co.za

top

Wahhabi/Deobandi leader boldly declares : "I Have come as a Prophet to You"

Source: Raza.co.za

top

No Proof of Kalima Shareef: "LA ILAHA ILLALLAHO MUHAMMADUR RASOOLALLAH"

Wahhabi and Deobandi Maulvi, Nazeer Hussain Delvi writes: "There is no proof for recitation (wazifa) of the whole Kalima, 'La Ilaha Illallaaho Muhammadur Rasoolallah,' for Wazifa purposes, there is proof for just 'La Ilaha Illallah'." (Fatwa Naziriah, pg. 449) 

The above shows how much hatred they have for the Beloved of Allah Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam. 

The Beloved Prophet Muhammad Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam has said: "Those who do not believe in my intercession will have no part in it." And also, "You will be with whom you love in the next world." So if you die living with Deobandi/Wahhabi friends and Aqaa'id, you will be with them in the Hereafter. But beware! You will not find the Prophet of Allah, the saints [Awliya] of Allah and the lovers of the Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam in that company!

May Allah give Tawfiq and true love of our Most Beloved Prophet, Sayyiduna Muhammad Mustafa Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam to us all. Aameen.

With Courtesy from SUNNI WORLD. P.O. BOX 48928. QUALBERT. 4078

www.raza.co.za

top

Some of the Beliefs of the Deobandi, Tablighi & Wahabi groups

Dear readers! What is hardheartedness? Hardheartedness means the wrong placing of things. In simple words 'zulm' (cruelty) is to punish 'B' for stealing while 'A' is the one who has in fact, stolen the thing. To change the word and directions of God, to alter their meanings at one’s own whim, to add or subtract something from them and to prove that a particular Ayat (verse) is addressed to him who is not the real addressee. All this is 'zulm' and one does it is a Zaalim (hardhearted).

In Bukhari Shareef (Book of Hadiths) a hadith attributed to Sayidina Abdullah (Radi allahu Anhu) the son of Hazrat Sayidine Umar Farooq (Radi allahu Anhu) who says that the worst of all created beings are those who attribute those Ayats (verses) to Muslims, which are addressed to deities and idolators (Mushrikeen).

At the time of the companions (Sahaabah) of the Beloved Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi wa sallam), the group of Khawarij (those ousted), hypocrites (munafiq) used to do like that. Even today, it is a routine matter with those who are called Maulvis, they attribute to Prophets, Saints (Awliya) and believers, those Ayats that are addressed to idols and idolaters (Mushrikeen). The readers and listeners do not know the cause of its revelation and neither do they know that this particular Ayat was revealed at what point of time and about which particular personality. They listen to that Maulvi and are led astray due to their ignorance. But pitiable are those who call themselves Maulvis and consider themselves the authorities on religion, they despite their knowledge, commit this mistake and lead the people, off the right path. Hazrat Abdullah Ibne Umar (Radi allahu Anhuma) has declared this group the worst of all human beings, and according to him they who make this mistake, along with those who follow the Munafiq Khawarij, lie lowest in all creation.

I request the youngsters of Islam who are getting away from spiritualism and the essence and spirit of Islam due to this rubbish talk of the Maulvis, to think for themselves as they too have discerning power. Do you think it is a fight over the yield? Not at all! Remember, that everything is known by its opposite. The day is known by the night. Stench reveals the reality of perfume, and such avaricious Maulvis are a sure measure to find out the scholars of the truth. Do you think that falsehood is on equal footing with the truth? Not at all! Believe it, this is the only bone of contention. Our difference of opinion with the Deobandi, Talighi and Wahabi groups is not on negligible points and so it is not unjustified. It is on basic issues and is a matter of principles. You would surely like to know why we differ from each other. See for yourself why we differ, and then by Allah and by the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) be just and tell, can you accept these things?

01. Allah can tell a lie.

     (Fatawa Rasheediya, page 19 V 1).

02. Allah does not know before hand what people will do; after people do something, Allah comes to know about it.

     (Tafseer Bulghatul Hairaan, page 157, 158).

03. Satan and angel of death have more knowledge than the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam).

     (Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 51,52).

04. The Prophet of Allah doesnt know what will become of him in the end, and he doesnt know what lies behind the
      wall. (Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 51).

05. The knowledge that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) has received from Allah is the kind of knowledge
      that animals, lunatics and children have. (Hifzul Eeman, page 7). 

06. During namaz (salaat) if you think of the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam), it is worse than thinking of an ox
      or a donkey. (Sirat-e-Mustaqeem, page 86).

07. The expression "Mercy for the Worlds" (Rahmatul Lil Aalameen) is not associated with the Prophet exclusively;

      besides the Prophet, saints (Buzurgs), too, can be called "Mercy for the Worlds" (Rahmatul Lil Aalameen).

     (Fatawa Rasheediyah, page 12 VII).

08. Only to the general public, the finality of Prophethood (Khatamun Nabiyeen) means the last Prophet, this is not
      the correct meaning of the term, for the knowledgeable people. Even if a Prophet comes after the Era of
      Muhammad, it will make no difference to the end of prophethood that is associated with Muhammad
      (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). (Tahzeerun Naas, page 3, 25).

09. Through the contact of the scholars of DeoBand, the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) learnt Urdu.

     (Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 26).

10. The Prophet is to be respected only as an elder brother.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 58).

11. If Allah so wishes, he can create millions like Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam).

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 16).

12. The Prophet died and became dust unto dust.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 59).

13. All Prophets are useless.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 29).

14. The Prophet is not beyond all lies, and he is not innocent.

     (Tasfiyatul Aqaa’id, page 25).

15. Praise the Prophet, only as a (ordinary) man.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 35).

16. The Prophet and the ordinary people are unaware and ignorant.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman,page 3).

17. As compared to the pomp of Allah, the great creation Prophet and the ordinary people are lower than the
      lowest. (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 14).

18. The Prophet can be called Taaghoot (Satan).

     (Tafseer Bulghatul Hairaan, page 43).

19. The Prophet among his group of believers (Ummat) has the same status as a leader (Chaudhary) and landlord
     has in his community and village.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman,page 61).

20. Muhammad or Ali do not have authority over anything. The Prophet and the saint (Walee) cannot do anything.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 41).

21. The Prophet was at the end of his wits.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 55).

22. Apparently, an ordinary follower can be superior to the Prophet in practice.

     (Tahzeerun Naas, page 5).

23. Deobandi Maulvi saved the Prophet from falling (into Hell).

     (Bulghatul Hairaan, page 8).

24. There is no harm in saying "La Ilaha Illalahu Ashraf Ali Rasoolullah" and "Allahuma Salli Ala Sayidina Wa
     Nabeeyina Ashraf Ali". (Risalah Al Imdaad page 35, month of Safar 1336 H, Roodaad-e-Munaazirah ‘geya’, Al-
     Furqaan V 3 page 85).

25. To celebrate the birth of the Prophet (Meelaad-e-Nabee) is like Hindus celebrating the birthday of their deity

      Kanhaiya. (Fatawa Meelaad Shareef page 8, Baraheen-e-Qaateah page 148).

26. "To be living" is the quality of the Prophet, as well as Dajjal. The characteristic of the Prophet is the same as
      that of Dajjal. (Aab-e-Hayaat, page 169).

27. Nothing happens at the wish of the Prophet.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 56).

28. Believe in Allah, do not believe in anybody except him.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 14).

29. As compared to Allah, all Prophets and saints are non-entities.

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 54).

30. To call the Prophet your brother is justified.

     (Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 3).

31. Even if a Muslim calls any Prophet or saint for help (taking them as created and considering them his defender)
     and he thinks he (prophet or saint) can favour him in front of Allah or if he (the Muslim) does nazar wa niaz he
     is equal to Kafir Abu Jahal in the sin of worshipping more than one God (shirk).

     (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 7, 27).

32. For Deobandis, Durood Taaj is disliked (not permissible).

     (Fazaa’il-e-Durood, page 73).

33. A Deobandi Maulvi was given a bath by Hazrat Ali and his clothes were changed by Hazrat Fatimah.

     (Siraat-e-Mustaqeem Urdu page 280).

34. Meelaad Sharif, Meiraj Sharif, Khatam Sharif, Giyarween Sharif, Urs Sharif, Some Chellum, Fateha Khwani and
      Essale Sawaab all are unjustified, wrong practices and the way of the Hindus.

     (Fatawa Ashrafiyah, page 58 V II; Fatawa Rasheediyah page 144, 150 V II, page 93, 94 V III).

It is to be remembered that those call the Meelaad of Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) wrong, unjustified, unlawful and infidelity, they (Deobandis, Tablighi and Wahabis) ought to be asked, how is it justified to celebrate the anniversary of Darul Uloom of Deoband and inviting an infidel (Mushrikah) woman to inaugurate it? Observing the days and anniversaries of your Maulvis and Muftis? Fixing the date and venue for gatherings and holding meetings (Ij’timaa)? Bringing out political and non-political processions? Establishing organisations in the name of someone (beside Allah) and collecting funds from people to organise that "someone"? How, on earth, can all this be justified and right?

1. "Eating crow brings reward (sawaab)" sweet dish (Halva) of Shabe-Baraat is not justified.
   (Fatawa Rasheediyah, page 130 V II).

2. To call the saints (Auliya) of Allah (eve after considering them the created beings) for help is like committing the sin of worshipping more then one God (shirk). (Taqwiyatul Eeman, page 7).

3. To pray after the namaz-e-janazah (funeral) is not permissible. (Fatwa Mufti Jameel Thanvi Lahore).

4. "It is justified to have sacred food (parshaad) of Hindu’s Holee and Divali" but not permissible to do so at Fatihah and Niaz. (Fatawa Rasheediyah, page 123 V II).

5. "If clean (paak), it is permissible to have food at the (Choohre Chamaar) low cast’s home" but food of Gyarween Sharif (Esale Sawaab for Hazrat Ghaus-e-Paak) is not permissible. (Fatawa Rasheediyah, page 130 V II).

6. To drink the water of the sabeel which has been set by a Hindu’s money of interest is permissible, but to drink the water of the sabeel of Imaam Husssain (Radiallahu Anhu) put with the "white money" of a Muslim in the month of Muharram is prohibited (Haraam). (Fatawa Rasheediyah, page 113, 114 V II).

7.  

The books of Deobandi/Tablighi scholars are full of this kind of non-sense and faith destroying passages. I, the humble slave of the people of Sunnat, beg forgiveness of Allah Subhanahu, because even quoting all this terrifies my faith. Though the purpose of quoting these passages is to show the point of difference between them and us. Believe me that these writings scare you to the point of trembling and the inner voice of your faith tell you that all this can be uttered only by some faithless enemy of the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam). I pray to Allah Subhanahu to save us, for His Prophet’s (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) sake, from the evil of the writers of those passages and from the evil of their followers and those who consider them true and justified. May Allah Subhanahu wa ta'ala bring our end while we have our faith intact and unspoiled?

Dear readers! Tell me, can you place your faith on these passages. Do you have such beliefs? Are you ready to accept? You would be surprised to know who has written these things. You would say he who calls himself Muslim could, in no way, write this. But the pity is that all this has not been written in the books of ignoramuses but in the books of those who call themselves scholars of their times and thinkers of the nation. It has been written those who consider themselves authorities on Islam. When the "scholars of the right path" told them that these things are wrong, and they should repent for this, they did not listen to it. Even when they were told innumerable times, they replied at "whatever we have written is right". They were told this too that you do not tolerate a vulgar simile even for your parents and, as regards the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam), we are ordained by Allah to observe the highest respect.

If you are standing somewhere and seeing your father coming, someone says: "Here comes he who makes love to your mother. Would you like it? Though all what he is saying is true. But his expression is insulting, disrespectful, unsophisticated and uncivilised. Had he said: "Here comes your respectful father", it would have pleased you greatly. Even if you do not have the relation of love with the Prophet of Prophets (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) you must not use such contemptuous words for him, as what status the Prophet has amongst human beings is obvious from what is written about him in the Qur’an. In the Qur’an it is categorically said that "the people of faith" should be extremely respectful when they are addressing the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam). Do not say to him "Do us this favour", rather say, "Cast the eye of kindness on us". About whom Allah Subhnahu tells us to be respectful, your words are extremely crude. Not only your infidel views but your similes too have been ill suited. This shows that you do not have any respect for the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Though you know it well that the love of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) is the heart and soul of faith. So, by being disrespectful to the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) you are earning eternal curse for yourself.

Dear readers, you must be thinking that these people must have paid heed to this advice and, as a result, must have mended their ways. Alas, it was not so. These scholars started rationalizing these writing and insisted on their being right. Everybody knows that to give reasons for a wrong act and to try to justify it is even worse than the act itself. To consider sin a virtue is the height of sin. A true Muslim will never try to defend infidelity and call it faith.

The readers would like to know the names of those who have written and said these things of infidelity (Kufr). You have already read the title of the books and the page numbers. Now you can see the names of authors, as well.

Hifzul Eeman : Ashraf Ali Thaanvi

Risaalah Al-Imdaad : Ashraf Ali Thaanvi

Fatawa Rasheediyah : Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi

A’ab-e-Hayat Muhammad : Qasim Nanotvi

Tahzeerun Naas Muhammad : Qasim Nanotvi

Tasfiyatul Aqaa’id Muhammad : Qasim Nanotvi

Baraheen-e-Qaateah : Khaleel Ahmad Ambethvi

Taqwiyatul Eeman : Ismaiel Dehlvi Baalakoti

Sirat-e-Mustaqeem : Ismaiel Dehlvi Baalakoti

Tafseer Bulghatul Hairaan : Husain Ali of Wan Bhachran

You might say that they have been quoted out of context. They must have meant something else. How can such great scholars write this? But it is very easy to prove. The books are available on the market. You can go through them. Even if you read the above quoted statements in the context, the will have the same meanings.

As an example, see this:

Ashraf Ali Thaanvi writes: "And then attributing the knowledge of the unknown to that sacred person the Prophet… if it is true, the question is what is meant by this? Does it mean the total knowledge of the unknown, or the partial knowledge of it? If it means partial knowledge, then there is nothing special in this. Such knowledge is available to every Tom, Dick and Harry; even a child, a lunatic and all animals have this kind of knowledge".

Would you accept this statement if it were about Ashraf Ali or your father or the president of the country or, for that matter, about any respectable man. The statement would run thus: "And then attributing knowledge t Ashraf Ali… if it is true the question is, what is meant by this knowledge. Total knowledge or partial knowledge? If it is partial knowledge, then there is nothing special about Ashraf Ali’s knowledge. Every Tom, Dick and Harry, even every child, every madman and donkeys and elephants have such knowledge".

Now, is it not being disrespectful to Ashraf Ali Sahib? Sure, it is. So a statement that becomes out and out rudeness to Ashraf Ali or anybody worthy of respect; is it not rudeness to the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam). And this goes without saying that being disrespectful to the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) is, in itself, infidelity (Kufr).

You might say: "He did not intend to be rude, by these statements he may have meant something else". Every word has more than one meaning. In this case, apply it on yourself and then reply.

Somebody calls you a bastard (illegitimate child "Waladul Haraam"). When you get angry you says: "Bastard (Haraam) also stands for respect. What I meant was, you are respectable". Would you accept this rationalisation? If this rationalisation is not acceptable to you, then how can you accept it for the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam)? Always remember, as far as rudeness is concerned, intention does not mean anything.

Such writings of Deobandi, Wahabi and Tablighi Maulvis and sticking to them are the basis of our differences. A true Muslim, no matter how ignorant he is in other respects, will never ever listen to this nonsense. Surely, you will also agree that those who write such things and those who accept them cannot be called Muslims.

It is logical that the crime of a scholar is more serious and deserves harsher punishment than the crime of an ignorant man. An ignorant does it out of ignorance, but a scholar does it knowingly. You have read what has been quoted and all this has bee written by those who are called great scholars. According to them, following them is a must. And those who follow them do not consider anybody else a greater scholar.

These so called scholars were told in their lifetime (and it is recorded) that all this what you say is wrong and is infidelity (Kufr), you should repent for this. But they stuck to what they wrote. So, when all reasoning was exhausted, they were declared infidels (Fatwa-e-Kufr). When the declaration of infidelity was published, they said those who have declared us infidels would have been infidels themselves, had they not done so. This proves that they knew what they were writing, deserved the label of infidelity (Kufr), but they did not repent. The reason for this is obvious. They had done this on the backing of the non-Muslims. How could they annoy their non-Muslim masters? They did not come to think of it that they were earning eternal damnation by annoying Allah and his Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), and leaving behind discord in the Ummah. When they who wrote all this, left the world, their followers were told to throw the books, containing these passages, into the fire or sea, but their followers, too, did not avail the opportunity to repent and stuck to the view point that these statements carried the truth. Therefore, according to the Qur’an and Sunnah, the decision of the true scholars is that those who support infidelity (Kufr), they themselves become infidels (Kaafir).

Some people say: "Although these passages are wrong and lead to infidelity, but what will we get by calling the writers of these passages Kaafirs (infidels)? Why should we find faults with those who have died? Then, you never know, they might have repented before their deaths.

The answer to the above question is this: to differentiate between Kufr (infidelity) and Islam is one of the necessities of religion. Do not call anyone Kaafir, but when his Kufr becomes obvious, he has to be called Kaafir on the basis of his kufr. So as far as this question goes: "They have died why should we find fault in those who are dead?" In reply to this I would like to say that the paternal uncle of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), Abu Lahab, who became rude and disrespectful, Waleed Bin Mugheerah and other insolent people will be cursed till the day of judgement. For whosoever has been rude to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) will be denounced and not appreciated. If, at all, they repent for this, then any of their followers, who know about it, should announce and publish this repentance. And their followers too, should announce that they do not own these writings, which are wrong and carry the label of infidelity. If they do this, there will be no feud anymore.

Some people object to this decision and say that those who wrote this wrote many other right and correct things as well; so they should not be declared only for a few statements. For them, we can only say this: "Satan was worshipping Allah Subhanahu for millions of years before he refused to prostrate himself before Hazrat Adam (Alaihis Salaam). So as far as knowledge is concerned, Satan was a teacher of angels and he had a tremendous belief in the unity of Allah Subhanahu. He refused the orders of Allah Subhanahu and gave the reason that Hazrat Adam (Alaihis Salaam) was a human being, made of clay. This refusal was considered as a refusal to pay respect to Prophet hood. At this point, Allah Subhanahu did not consider the years of worship, his knowledge and his belief in the unity. He (Satan) was condemned forever for only one rudeness and disrespect to Prophet hood. Now, till doomsday he will stand accused. I have stated that to be a true believer (Momin) one has to accept all aspects of religion, but to become an infidel (Kaafir) it is sufficient to refuse just one decree. If Satan could not keep the grace of Allah Subhanahu with millions of years of worship, and whole of his knowledge and belief in unity, then how can these scholars be saved by a few years of namaz (Salaat), knowledge and belief in unity? Satan was being disrespectful to the Prophet, and these scholars have said such things in regard to the Head of all Prophets, which cannot be tolerated even as regards to your elders, so there cannot be ay doubt that these scholars too, are condemned and cursed.

And let it be said that the grace of Allah depends on correct beliefs and not on acts and knowledge. See what Ashraf Ali Thaanvi wrote himself. Janaab Abdul Majid Daryabadi a scholar of Deoband quotes the fatwa (religious legal opinion) of Thaanvi Sahib in his book "Hkim-ul-Ummat" on page No. 457 about Allamah Shibli No’mani the author of the famous book "Life History of the Prophet" (Seerat-un-Nabee) and about another scholar of Deoband Hameeduddin Farahi:

"Moulana Thaanvi’s fatwa has been published that Moulana Shibli No’mani and Moulana Hameeduddin are infidels (Kaafirs). And as Madrasatul Islah belongs to them so this Madrassah is an institution of infidelity and godlessness. Those scholar who attend the meeting of this madrassah are also renegades and irreligious".

After going through this fatwa, Abdul Majid Daryabadi Sahib wrote a detailed letter in which he tried to justify Shibli No’mani and Hameeduddin Farahi and said, in this regard, that these people offer their prayers and even offer their non-obligatory prayers, as well. They are in fact scholars and righteous in their ways. In reply to this, Thaanvi Sahib wrote: "All these are acts and conditions; beliefs are different things. Incorrect acts and conditions can stand together with correct beliefs and correct acts and conditions cannot stand together with incorrect beliefs".

Same Thaanvi Sahib wrote: "When an irreligious man talks of religion, his religious conversation is also darkness and so is the case with his writings. So one should not keep company with irreligious people and neither should one read their books". (Kamalat-e-Ashrafiyah, page 55).

What is Thaanvi Sahib to the Tablighi Jamaat? Just see. The founder of the Tablighi Jamaat, Muhammad Elyaas, said: "Hazrat Maulana Thaanvi Sahib (peace be upon him) has done something great. What I wish is that his teachings could have my manner of preaching, in this way his teaching could spread far and wide". (Malfoozaat, page 57).

The founder of the Tablighi Jamaat told himself that the aim of his preaching was to spread the teachings of Thaanvi Sahib. This clearly shows that Ashraf Ali Thaanvi is the mastermind behind the Tablighi Jamaat’s viewpoint. And this ‘mastermind’ himself says that the acts and states are different from beliefs. His explanation is that if somebody has wrong beliefs it does not mean he will have wrong acts and states, as well. It means an irreligious man who has beliefs may be someone who offers his namaaz (Salaat) regularly. And someone who is not a Namaazi may have right beliefs. He himself has made it clear that the real thing is not Kalemah and Namaaz, it is right beliefs. If beliefs are not correct, then Namaaz and Rozah (Salaat and Fast) have no value. He who does not have right beliefs is irreligious. His speech and writings are misleading. When he talks in favour of religion, even then he is wrong. You should avoid his company and should not read what he writes. It may lead you astray too. The madrassah of people who have wrong beliefs does not lead to faith; rather it leads to infidelity and ‘non-religion’. Those who are associated with this madrassah and attend its meeting will become atheist and irreligious.

Just think Thaanvi Sahib called the scholars of his own group infidels (Kaafir), because of their wrong beliefs. He never considered the merit of their namaaz, knowledge and services. He called their madrassah, the madrassah of infidelity. Keeping company with them and reading their books, he considers as atheism and non-religion. If, in fact, Thaanvi Sahib is behind the viewpoint of the Tablighi Jamaat, then according to him, whoever has wrong beliefs, offers namaaz (salaat) in vain. Keeping company with him and reading his books is atheism and non-religion. Scholars of Deoband have themselves said about the members of the Tablighi Jamaat that they are ignorant and their beliefs are wrong. The people of Tablighi Jamaat go beyond limits. So the base of the Tablighi Jamaat, i.e. Ashraf Ali Thaanvi and other prominent scholars of Tablighi Jamaat prove, with their own reasoning that to keep company with the Tablighi Jamaat and to read their books is relegation, non-religion and going astray.

Dear readers, when we say this they don’t like it, though they should blame their elders. See these passages from the books of the scholars of the Tablighi Jamaat. The author of Baraaheen-e-Qateeah Khaleel Ahmad Ambhetwi’s Caliph and founder of the Tablighi Jamaat Muhammad Elyas and his son Muhammad Yusuf and prominent Deoband Scholar Abdur Raheem Shah says:

"Those who are not acquainted with religion want to do the work that is supposed to be done by scholars. These people, due to their ignorance and low state and bad characters, are looked down upon in society". (Usool-e-Da’wat-u-Tablighi, page 4).

He further said: "By god, I am analysing them with a reluctant heart, just because it is my religious duty to tell whether of not someone accepts it, that these immature followers have started addressing public meetings, which they are not allowed to do and they have taken this act beyond limits, at the expense of other departments of religion. They have been reprimanded time and again by those who felt responsible, but they refused to listen. So, it is my responsibility to explain the real situation". (Usool-e-Da’awat-u-Tabligh, page 52).

Dear readers, in the above passages, somebody who knows them inside out is telling that those who belong to the Tablighi Jamaat cross limits and start preaching without knowledge. Everybody knows that by reading books on medicine no one can become a doctor. If just after reading medical books someone tries to be a physician he will surely kill the patient. To become a doctor, you have to be trained and taught at a medical college, under the supervision of experienced teachers. Every chemist knows which tablet is to be used for fever. But why is there fever? For this you have to consult a doctor and not a chemist. Only he, who is well suited for the work, looks good doing it.

Allah Subhanahu has also sent the Prophet with the Books. The Prophet teaches the Book and wisdom and only then one understands.

So, the same Abdur Raheem Shah says: "Just imagine, no one can become even a compounder without being certified for the same, but as regards religion, anyone can deliver a speech on the subject. You do not need any qualification for this. As an unqualified doctor is a great danger to your life, so is an unqualified religious scholar to your faith". (page 54).

They are told that when they will leave home for preaching (Tabligh) they will earn this much of sawaab or grace of God.

Little do they think that when an ignorant man preaches he becomes a danger to the faith of people as when he sits on the driving seat who is absolutely unacquainted with driving. This is why the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), who knew the things to come, told before hand that when the knowledge will vanish from the world, people will take their problems to ignorant men. The ignorant men will give wrong answers and as a result, both parties will go astray (Bukhari and Muslim Shareef). The Beloved Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) also said that when the unqualified start working for religion, the doomsday is at hand. It means that those un qualified preachers will bring about the destruction of people. The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) has declared it as one of the signs of doomsday. You can see it for yourself that those who belong to the Tablighi Jamaat are regular in offering their prayers (namaaz) but because they are far from the essence of religion they are misled and, due to this, mislead others.

Abdur Raheem Shah says: "One who does not pray, harms himself but one who preaches (without qualification) harms the whole generation". (page 54).

It means that he who does not offer his prayers does no damage beyond himself, but someone who is regular in offering prayers but, at the same time, spreads wrong beliefs, destroys the people in general. His disease does not remain limited to him only, but becomes contagious and harms others as well.

Another teacher of Deoband says about Muhammad Elyaas way of preaching: "As far as I have gained knowledge of this way of preaching, I am not satisfied with it" (Tambihaat, page 12).

Abdur Raheem Shah wrote about Tablighi Jamaat and Fazaail-e-Tablighi: "It is a strange contradiction, somewhere it is declared that it is the way of the Prophet (Sunnat-e-Nabvee) and somewhere Hazrat Maulana Elyaas is considered the founder and initiator of it". (Page 50).

What Ehteshaam-ul-Hasan Sahib Kandhalvi, brother-in-law of Muhammad Elyaas and also a life long friend and associate of Elyaas Sahib wrote at the of his book (Zindagi ki Siraat-e-Mustaqeem) under the heading "Necessary Warning" (Zuroori Intibaah) is to be read carefully.

"The present way of Tablighi of Nizamuddin Basti, as far as my knowledge and understanding go, is neither in keeping with Qur’an and Hadith nor it is in accord with the way of Hazrat Mujadded Alf-e-Saani and Hazrat Shah Wali Ullah Muhaddis Dehlvi. The fist responsibility of those scholars who are in this kind of Tabligh is to bring it in accord with Qur’an and Hadith and the way of the Scholars of the right path (Ulama-e-Haqq). It is beyond my comprehension that what was considered wrong (Bidat-e-HasanaH) in the lifetime of Maulana Elyaas (though it was done with certain principles, then) how can it be considered the world’s most important work now when it has lost even those principles which it initially had … after inclusion of ‘denials’ (Munkaraat) it cannot be called even wrong (Bidat-e-Hasanah). All I want is to be relieved of my burden (by telling it)".

In reply to the above passage, Deo Bandi scholar Mahmood Hasan Gangohi wrote to Ehtesham-ul-Hasan Kandahlvi:

"Uptil now, I thought you gave up residing in Nizamuddin and decided to live in Kandhala, due to bad health. That is why you could not take part in Tablighi activities. But this supplement revealed that you do not consider this Tabligh a religious work, rather you think it is something that spoils religion". (Chashma-e-Aftab, page 7).

The scholar Qamruddin Mazahari, who compiled the book "Chashma-e-Aftab", wrote in his preface:

"Maulana Ehtesham-ul-Hasan Kandhalvi is one of the pioneers of this movement, but recently he has criticised the Tablighi Jamaat and declared it a group (Jamaat) that misleads people". (page 3).

In the same book Shaikh-ul-Hadith Muhammad Zakariya wrote in his letter on page 11:

"… though I have heard that some caliphs and chosen people of Hazrat Thaanvi Sahib do not like it (Tablighi Jamaat)".

Abdur Raheem Shah wrote in his book: "Right beliefs are the base of salvation, acts are not the basis of salvation". (Usool-e-Dawat-o-Tabligh, page 64).

Respectable Readers, you have read what the prominent scholars of Deoband and the Tabligh Jamaat have to tell about their true selves. They do not need further comments or any "fatwa" (legal opinion) from us. Their own pens have proved them wrong. Now it depends on Deobandis and Tablighis, if they declare themselves on the right, then their elders are proved wrong, and if they feel their elders are right, then they themselves are on the wrong path. Those who have read the above quoted passages will realise that all of them are wrong. We, who are Ahl-e-Sunnat Wal Jamaat and are called Bareilvi by Tablighi Deobandi, are considered "bad" by them because we bring their own writings to them and ask them: "which voice is your voice?" Instead of replying they start using foul language. They label true Muslims; "Mushrik and Bidaati, but nature has its laws; what we do, they themselves do the same things".

They practice, what they themselves call unjustified and unlawful. This doubles their crime. Their first crime is to call unlawful what is lawful and second is to do what they consider unlawful. This is the curse of Allah Subhanahu on them, in this world.

Dear readers, you must be having one thing on your mind, i.e., these people (of Tablighi Jamaat) go everywhere and advise others to observe fast and offer prayers (Namaz and Rozah) at every doorstep, how can they be wrong? You have already read what Thaanvi Sahib said in this regard, i.e., "If a wrong believer should talk on religion, even that would mislead others". In simple words I would put it like this: If somebody invites you to his place and prepares such a food for you which has all the ingredients that are essential for good taste and flavour, but he mixes a bit of poison in it, would you take it? On your refusal, he will mention the ingredients and praise them and will say that you can see all these, but poison is nowhere to be seen, so why hesitate? You will naturally say that because of one bit of poison, whether it can be seen or not, all the rest has become harmful. Other tasty and good-for-health ingredients will not compensate the damage done by poison.

It is the same with Deobandis, Tablighi and the like. Apparently it is all good and impressive, but this preaching is founded on such incorrect beliefs and viewpoints, and the disrespect towards the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) that it ultimately becomes a deadly poison for the faith. As the poison I harmful for the body, so is rudeness to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and saints for the faith, and you have already realised that salvation depends on right beliefs and not on right acts. If you do not have right belief, a million years of worship will bear no fruit.

A Deobandi scholar Ahmed Ali Sahib has explained the position of Maulana Maudoodi in such a parable in his booklet (Haqq Parast Ulama Ke Maudoodiyat Say Naaraazgi Kay Asbaab), page 80, I am quoting this to confirm my standpoint:

It goes somewhat like this: "If a man puts a piece of pork in a pot that contains 10Kg of milk, and then offers a Muslim to drink milk out of that pot, the Muslim will surely refuse. If the man defends his positions by saying that it is only a small piece of pork, while the milk in the container is much more in quantity. The Muslim will say that the whole of the milk has become undrinkable (Haraam) because of that one piece. Same is the case with the writings of Maulana Maudoodi. When a Muslim will read this sentence of his: "There is filth and ignorance all around Kaaba (Baitullah)", he (the Muslim) will never be pacified, till such time that Maudoodi Sahib takes his words back. This sentence is like the piece of pork in milk".

Dear readers, what decision has been taken by Deobandi scholars for their own Maudoodi Sahib, same decision we make for Deobandi Tablighi scholars and their followers. So long as Deobandi Tablighi do not repent for these un-Islamic writings of theirs, and so long as do not disown them and "make-good" for their beliefs until then the Muslim Ummah will not change its decision towards them. This, too, has been decided by Deobandi scholars that salvation depends on beliefs not on acts.

The only way to patch up with them is that all Deobandis and Tablighis should admit that those scholars of Deoband and Wahabis who have written these passages are because of not disowning them, Kaafirs and Zindiqs (infidels and irreligious). And anybody who accepts these viewpoints is just like them, an infidel.

The martyrdom of Ameer-ul-Mo’mineen Hazrat Usmaan Ghaani (Radiallahu Anhu) was the result of the conspiracy of this group.

This group spread their preaching members to the four corners of the Islamic empire. The work was passed from one generation to another. They realised that the Muslims adore their Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and this adoration reaches to such an extent that they (Muslims) lay down their lives and properties in the name of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Such extreme love is always the result of the qualities of the beloved. The same is true in the case of the Muslims’ love for their Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). This anti-Islamic group of hypocrites and its agents came to the conclusion that unless they finish this feeling of love, the power of Muslim unity will remain, and they will not achieve their goal. They had already convinced the Jews and Christians of their loyalty to them, so the Jews and Christians were helping them with all their resources.

The reason for Islamic victories was the love for Allah’s Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and the passion for the holy war (Jihaad). This group of conspirators and its followers decided to bring out such issues in Islam, which can become a source of discord among Muslims.

This will turn their passion for holy war against one another. They started changing the meaning of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and started declaring, "allowed" what was prohibited and vice versa. Against the principle of religion (Din), their scholars were given the status of Imams and those who opposed them were labelled "idolaters" and "misled". Many false Prophets sprang up. Disrespect and rudeness towards the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), his wives (Azwaaj-e-Mutaharaat), his companions (Sahaaba-e-Kiraam), his family members (Ahl-e-Bait) and saints (Auliya Allah) began. The reason for doing this was that when people will learn about their (fabricated) shortcomings, it would destroy the relation of love and respect. Naturally, when people will be told that saints and prophets do not have any exceptional quality, which can place them above the masses, the love and emotions will be over. Lack of love will take away the power to act, and will ultimately lead to an indifference to the holy war (Jihaad).

The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) who, by the grace of Allah Subhanahu, had the knowledge of unknown knew all this beforehand. He had already told the world about this group and its activities. The moment the Deobandi Tablighi will accept this, all contention will be over. But alas, whenever they and their followers were told to do this, they refused. When Deobandi Tablighi are adamant about what they say then how can the decision of Qur’an-o-Sunnah prevail over them. Those whose hearts have been hardened and who have gone astray beyond limits and who cannot differentiate between truth and falsehood are the sort of people who have been addressed in the Qur’an: "For you your religion, for us our religion".

Respectable readers, you would like to know why the Deobandi Tablighi stick to such un-Islamic writings of theirs, and why are they so obstinate about their wrong beliefs. Why don’t they admit this fault and bring this discord to an end. In all honesty, I tell my readers that Jews, Christians and Hypocrites, all are enemies of Allah Subhanahu and his Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Qur’an has revealed what they are in reality. It is something natural that when someone’s true colours are revealed he gets hurt. So much so, that he becomes vindictive. Jews and Christians felt humiliated by losing their central places such as Khyber and Jerusalem to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and his true followers. They saw the expansion of the Islamic state and witnessed their own defeat and downfall. When they realised that they cannot compete with the Muslim state, they got together and conspired against Muslim. The history of their conspiracies is recorded in books. These anti-Islamic groups decided that as their weak position will not be able to stand the strength of Muslims, so the only way out is to divide the Muslims and break the fraternity of Islam. This can be done only by becoming a Muslim in name and sticking to their wrong beliefs and viewpoints. Just by reciting Kalemah and offering Namaaz we will get back our cities. We will chalk out such plans, which will break the unity of Muslims. It will distract their attention from us and they (Muslims) will stand against one another. We will take advantage of such a situation and will recapture our lost territories. This will place us in a honourable position again. So, Abdullah Bin Sabaa led this movement and all his followers became Muslims in a deceiving way. This group of conspirators became active after the death of Hazrat Umar Farooq (Radiyallahu Anhu). Therefore, in authentic Hadiths it is quoted that once when the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) was distributing the ‘war booty" (Maal-e-Ghaneemat), Harqoos Bin Zohair who was called Zul Khaisrah said: "O Prophet of Allah, you have not done justice". This disrespectful statement flared the lovers of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Hazrat Umar Farooq (Radiyallahu Anhu) sought permission to kill the rude man. The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) did not allow Hazrat Umar to do that. The Prophet (Swallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) turned to the man and said: "May your mother lose you, I am the Prophet of Allah, if I do not do justice, who would?" Then he addressed his companions (Sahaabah), "He will live and his descendants will keep growing, generation, till such time that the people of his last generation will join the army of Dajjaal and they will be killed by the best people of my Ummah. People of his progeny will be recognised by the following signs: they will remove the hair of their heads, they will have the bottom of their dresses rolled much above their ankles, they will offer prayers of extra ordinary length, so other people, as compared to their prayers, will consider their own prayers inferior, they will recite Qur’an excellently but the message of Qur’an will not reach their hearts, they will have honey on their tongues but they will be hard hearted like wolves, they will appear virtuous but will be out of the religion as an arrow is out of the bow, they will be evil people and they will spread evil".

Dear readers, be just and look around you. Don’t you find such people with these signs? These signs have been described by that Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) through whom we recognise Allah and believe in Him. Through the same Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) we believe in the Qur’an and accept it. This was the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) who gave us the recognition of Qur’an and Hadith. He uttered Qur’an, and Hadiths too, are words of his mouth. Whoever has complete faith in the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), he would and should believe in what the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said. The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) has told everything explicitly. These people, no matter in what disguise they come, whatever name they give to their movement, have been revealed to us in the minutest details. They come under the pretext of teaching Kalemah and Namaaz to the simple hearted Muslims, but in fact they are taking the Muslim Ummah to the brink of destruction. If these robbers of faith, who act against Islam with the cooperation of Jews and Christians, are not true and faithful to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), how can they be our friends and well-wishers. They are the people whose God can lie. For them, the knowledge of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) resembles the knowledge of animals. Dear readers! You can well imagine what damage their writings must have done to the Muslim Ummah.

The youth in particular, should think that in this age of science and modern devices when man has reached the moon, how far away from spirituality the writings of these maulvis have taken the followers of that Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) who cut the moon into two with just a slight movement of his finger. This group, which is involved in smuggling and drugs under the pretext of preaching is never seen resisting the government on the issue of ‘interest’. The members of these groups are never seen in the red-light areas of Beirut, Bangkok and Bombay trying to stop people from committing the acts of lechery and perversion. They are never seen preaching in the compounds of cinema houses. They don’t go and teach Kalemah to those who roam about on nude beaches. So much so, that they leave their families open to corruption and go preaching for months. They don’t act on the sayings of the Qur’an and Sunnah which openly advise us to take care of our families first as "the charity begins at home". These people take the male members out of those families where old parents and youthful sisters and wives are left alone. They do not consider the fact that Hazrat Owais Qarni was a contemporary of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) but owing to the responsibility of his old mother, he did avail the opportunity of becoming the companion (Sahaabi) of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) used to turn his face towards Yemen saying: "From this direction comes the aroma of love". They don’t remember what the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said as regard Hazrat Owais Qarni. These writers of misleading books preachers of their maulvi’s point of view who try to belittle the status and love of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), are bent upon taking you to the brink of destruction and wrath of Allah.

They don’t preach against Judaism and Christianity. They don’t preach against the unjust shedding of blood of seven million Muslims in Iran and Iraq. They don’t declare Holy war (Jihaad) against the excess of Zionism in Jerusalem and Masjid-e-Aqsa. All they want to do is to reach your heart under the excuse of mending your ways as regards Kalemah and Namaaz and then take away all your spirituality by declaring that being respectful to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) is like worshipping some other God beside Allah (Shirk). Do you think they can convert non-Muslims into Muslims by preaching all this nonsense?

Just think if they go to a gathering of international level, where people of all religions, creeds, colours and races have come. At that meeting, Hindus, Jews, Christians and our Tablighis seek the permission to preach their respective religions and are allowed to do so. The rule of meeting is that whosoever convinces the listeners can convert them to his religion. The Hindus gets up first and says that their Ram Chardarjee was a man full of wonders. He was so brave and strong that to seek the hand of Seeta Rani he, by bending it, broke the bow made of iron. So, all men should follow this wonderful Ram Chandarjee.

After this, the Christian gets up and says that he is a follower of Christ who had such a miraculous personality that mere touch of his hand could bring the sight to him who was born blind. He could heal the leper in the same way. He could even bring the dead back to life. He had miracles and his teachings are good. So everybody should become a Christian.

Then it is the Jew who gets up and says: "I believe in Moses (Moosa Alaihis Salaam). Look at his wonder working. He hits the stone with his stick and a stream starts flowing. He takes his hand out of his armpit and it shines like the moon. His teachings are good. All of us should be Jews".

At last, the Tablighi man of Nizamuddin Basti who is called a Muslim gets up and says: "I am the follower of Hazrat Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Our Prophet was a man like us. He made mistakes and had no powers. The only difference between him and us is that he could get the revelations from Allah, while we do not have that power. His teachings are good. Everybody should be a Muslim".

Dear readers! It is up to you to do justice. What will that crowd deduce from the statements of this member of the Tablighi Jama’at. The Christian, the Jew and the Hindu are proving greatness of their chiefs while; you have already read what a Muslim has to say in this regard. Will the crowd be impressed? Even a Muslim will not be proud of being a Muslim, after hearing this, as all those gathered will say that if the Prophet of Muslims was just an ordinary man then the leaders of others are proved to be greater and better. They will ask the Muslim that if, according to you, your Prophet had no extraordinary quality and was devoid of all powers then why do you want us to become his followers?

This has been, and would be the result of their preaching. According to their own propaganda, thousands of Deobandi scholars participated in the 100^th anniversary celebrations of Dar-ul-Uloom of Deoband. Instead of a religious scholar, these celebrations were inaugurated by an infidel Hindu (Mushrikah) woman. This clearly shows which way the wind of these misleading Dar-ul-Uloom blows. The speech of that Hindu lady, Mrs Indira Gandhi, further proves that the points of Hindu and Deobandis are very much in harmony. She came in their gathering as a Hindu and left as a Hindu. These people, who make such tall claims about preaching, could not convert one woman. In the same India, the moving spirit of ours ‘people of Sunnah’ (Ahle Sunnat) Hazrat Khwaja Syed Moinuddin Hassan Chishti (Khareeb Nawaaz) Radiyallahu Anhu, came all-alone, but when he departed, there were nine and half millions Muslims in India.

In the above mentioned international gathering, if there is a representative of ours ‘people of Sunnah’ (Ahle Sunnah Wal Jama’at), he, the slave and lover of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam)would speak : "I am a Muslim and we believe that only Allah is worthy of our worship and He is the creator and sustainer of everything. He (Allah) created the Ram of Hindus and he created Hazrat Isa and Hazrat Moosa (Alaihis Salaam). We believe in Hazrat Isa of the Christians and Hazrat Moosa of the Jews, and we also believe that they worked wonders. We believe in all this because Allah says that if He had not created our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), He would not have revealed Himself. So the whole universe is created because of our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Suffice it to say that all blessings of this world, which includes the wonder working and greatness of Prophethood of others, have come to us due to our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). The name of our Prophet is Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam).

The meaning of his name, to begin with, tells that He is the one who has been praised the most. The Creator of our Prophet, i.e. Allah, praises our Prophet. Whosoever praises our Prophet, Allah praises him too. Our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) has been praised by Hazrat Moosa and Hazrat Isa also. Our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) has been mentioned in the old and new testaments. The book revealed on him has been mentioned. His ‘wonders’ have been mentioned. Hazrat Moosa and Hazrat Isa had miracles to show, but our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) himself was a miracle. Allah bestowed many blessings upon Hazrat Moosa and Hazrat Isa. Hazrat Moosa used to talk to Allah on Koh-e-Toor (Hill of Toor). Allah took Hazrat Isa alive to the skies and called our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), in his human body, to the highest sky to show Himself and say salam to the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). The same angel who brought revelation to Hazrat Moosa and Hazrat Isa, came to our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) with the last code of human life i.e. Qur’an was revealed to him. It will remain a constant source of guidance up to the last day. The Bible (Injeel) has not come down to us in its original form, neither is there anyone who has committed it to memory, while each and every word of the Qur’an has been preserved in its original form and setting and there are millions of people who have committed it to memory. So it will remain in its original form forever. In the Qur’an, which has been revealed to our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), idolatry is prohibited. Whoever worships any other god besides Allah is a mushrik. These man-made idols can neither give nor take anything away from man. Idols cannot move a finger, whereas man, who makes these idols, is more powerful than them. Hindus worship idols and consider them god. Our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) showed the right path to thousands of those who were worshipping false gods. He made them bow down to Allah, who is the Creator of the earth and sky, who controls life and death, who has created the universe, who raises the sun from east and sets it in the west. He has given us body and soul, intelligence and consciousness, besides other innumerable blessings. To man, He has given the highest status in all beings and created him in the image of eternal beauty. He sent prophets so that they teach us good manners, give us knowledge and wisdom, make our lives useful and direct towards an aim. Allah has sent about 124 or 224 thousands prophets. Some prophets are superior to others. Our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) is complete and most superior of all prophets. The attributes and status that he has been given is the highest and unique. In knowledge, wisdom, seriousness, generosity, grace, looks, character and courtesy no one is like him. He came in the world as a man but such a man that no one can be like him in the whole universe. He is the light of Allah. Allah Subhanahu loves him so much that He, the Creator, praises him and holds him in very high esteem. Allah Subhanhu does not love anyone else so much. He (Allah Subhanahu) sends Durood (blessing) and Salaam (Salutation) to the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). He swears by the age of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), by his city and by his era. Allah Subhanahu says, "When you love the Prophet, you love me. When you are faithful to him, you are being faithful to me". Allah Subhanahu sent him as the glowing proof of His existence, so that the whole of creation could see and judge the greatness, the height and the status of this sacred man and Prophet. The judgement day would help them understand Allah Subhanahu. They would realise the greatness of Allah Subhanahu by knowing the greatness of his Prophet. After all, Allah Subhanahu has created him. Allah Subhanahu has declared that whosoever loves and follows his Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), pleases Allah and achieves success in both worlds. By sending His Prophet in this world, Allah Subhanahu has blessed us all. For this, we should be grateful to Him as our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), is the cause of creation of the whole universe. It is through him that the created knows the Creator. Allah Subhanahu has prepared heaven for the believers and followers of His Prophet, and He has created hell for those who negate him and become disrespectful to him. A true slave of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) becomes the master of the world, and he who leaves the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), deprives himself of all the blessings of Allah Subhanahu.

The afore gathering has been told by the Hindu that his Ram Chanderjee was an extraordinary man. He was strong enough to bend and break a bow of iron. He must have done that but there is nothing so great about it. There are countless strong men and wrestlers in this world. They have demonstrated their strength in spellbinding ways. To break the bow of iron is one of these things. What our Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) did is beyond comparison. While in Makkah, he broke the moon in two pieces by just pointing towards it with his finger. On the way to the castle of Khyber, he brought back the sun, which had set already. Someone else could have done what Ram Chanderjee did, but breaking the moon and bringing the sun back are things, which only our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) could accomplish. Hindus cannot do this even if they seek the help of their idols.

The Christians addressed the same crowd and said that Hazrat Isa (Alaihis Salaam) had many miracles. Sure he had miracles and his miracles have been mentioned in the Qur’an and we believe in them. The Christian told the crowd that his ‘Jesus’ could restore the sight of the blind and cure the leper by the touch of his hand. But the qualities that our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) possessed were much greater. The sand that was touched by the sleepers of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) became a sure cure for leprosy. The wind that passed through the cloak of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) became a remedy for the sick. Hazrat Isa (Alaihis Salaam) could bring the dead back to life. This, no doubt, is something great, but our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) could give power of speech to stones and wood. This is like giving life to inorganic things. The saliva of our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) could turn the saline water of a well into fresh water. It could heal the broken limbs, cure the infected eyes and could increase the amount of food. What Hazrat Isa (Alaihis Salaam) did was wonderful, but what our Prophet Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) did is something that even Hazrat Isa would envy.

The Jew addressed the same crowd and mentioned Hazrat Moosa’s (Alaihis Salam) miracles. No doubt, Hazrat Moosa had tremendous powers and could do miracles. It is true that he could bring out a stream by just hitting a stone with his stick. But what we would humbly like to say is that streams, in natural conditions come out of rocks and mountains. On the other hand, our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) did this on the way to Tabook and Hudaibiyah; it was extremely hot and the army of Islam ran short of water. They requested the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) to do something as there was no water to drink, to bathe and to do wuzoo (Ablution) and no water for the animals. In scorching heat the situation was becoming terrible. The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) asked them to bring a container and in that container he put his hand (the hand about which Allah Subhanahu says ‘It is my hand’). Thousands of people witnessed that all five fingers of his hand became the source of five streams of fresh water. The army drank this water, took bath, did wuzoo, gave it to the animals to drink and stored it in their personal containers. This is the miracle of our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and it is much more awe inspiring than what Hazrat Moosa (Alaihis Salam) did.

The Jew said that when Hazrat Moosa took out his hand after putting it under his armpit, the hand shone like the moon. This is right but our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) was light personified. His face could outshine the moon. His teeth had such sparkle that when he laughed in the dark, there was illumination all around. His Holy wife Hazrat Ayesha (Radiallahu Anha) could find her sewing needle from the light of his teeth. Once two companions of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) were so absorbed in the conversation that they got late. It was a rainy night. The companions humbly said to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), "It is dark outside and due to rainfall it will be slippery all the way. We will have a tough time on our way back. The companions had a walking sticks in their hands (To have a stick in the hand is the habit of our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), and his companions out of love followed in all his ways). The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) touched the stick and said, "This will enlighten you way". When the companions came out, the sticks started giving light like a torch. They walked in this light, till a point came when they had to go on separate ways. He who had the stick touched it with the others and it lit up that one too. Ultimately they both reached home safe and sound. Hazrat Moosa (Alaihis Salam) could lighten his hand only but our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) touched the stick and lightened it. Not only this, when that stick touched the other, that too started shining. This miracle is a speciality of our Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) had such a marvellous personality that if an ordinary man like me start writing about his marvels, he will exhaust his age, his voice and his knowledge but he will not be able to describe all what he has. His teachings are an ocean full of pearls, which will always guide us to success and higher destinations. It was the association with our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) that made the nomadic tribes of the desert superior to angels. Before the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) these desert people buried their daughters alive, robbed one another and led a life of cruelty and ruthlessness. But when they became associated with our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), loved him and followed his religion, they became rulers of the world and beloved of Allah Subhanahu. I invite you to associate yourself completely with our religion and our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). This will give you the best of both worlds.

Dear readers, be just and tell me when the Hindus, Christians, Jews and the rest of the people will hear the reasoning of the Sunni Muslim, will they not be speechless? Definitely they will be and thus they will accept Islam. The saints and prophets of Allah Subhanahu converted unbelievers to Islam but Tablighi, Deobandis and Wahabis are turning Muslims into unbelievers. You can see the difference between Tablighi and Sunni beliefs.

In this age of material progress, these people who deny the spiritual heights are helpless against the inventions of science. They accept these wonders of the non-Muslims but do not believe in the marvels of the prophets and saints of Allah. When the inventor of radio Markoni hears what Hazrat Umar Farooq (Radiallahu Anhu) was capable of doing, but those who call themselves Muslims are using all their energy to negate the marvel of Hazrat Umar Farooq (Radiallahu Anhu). Same is the case with other miracles and marvels. It is a pity that non-Muslims are learning so much from the miracles of our Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and other prophets and saints (Radiallahu anhu) that they are developing new devices with the understanding of these miracles. These inventions, which are adding to human convenience, are making them superpowers and those who call themselves Muslims are spending their lives in negating these miracles and are wasting their spiritual powers.

A dear reader, the Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) is the beloved of Allah Subhanahu. He is the chief of all prophets. Following him and becoming his slave is our success and salvation. We came to recognise the Qur’an, Ramadaan and even the merciful through him. It is because of him that we do not face the wrath of Allah Subhanahu, as the earlier group did and our faces are not distorted and we are not turned into animals. It is not an ordinary thing that because of him we have been given a night which is better than a thousand months. It is our relationship with him that has made us the best of all Ummahs (communities). We owe this honour to him.

This beloved of Allah Subhanahu has given us everything. If we do not hold this blessing and grace in high esteem, we will not please Allah Subhanahu. Our worships will not bear fruit. They claim to love Allah Subhanahu and being disrespectful to his beloved is not a sign of faith. All around you, someone is abusing the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), someone is abusing the holy wives of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), someone is abusing the companions of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and someone is abusing the saints of Allah Subhanahu. Naturally, you ask whom should we follow?

I invite you to the realm of love. Follow the Qur’an and Sunnah. He who the Prophets of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), who loves the family members, the holy wives and companions of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Aalihi Wa Ashaabihi Wasallam), who loves the saints of Allah (Radiallahu Anhum) and believe in their wonder working and miracles, and consider this love the only way to salvation. He who does all this, follow him.

Look at it this way; about a hundred an fifty years back, there were no Deobandis and Tablighis in the subcontinent. These groups are created and backed by the enemies of Islam, who just for money and ‘ego satisfaction’ are being insolent to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), his descendants and companions (Radiallahu Anhum). They have forgotten in the end they are going to meet, neither do they remember the wrath of Allah Subhanahu. We thank Allah Subhanahu that we, the people of Sunnah and Jama’at stand for the truth. The basis of all our beliefs is the Qur’an and Sunnah. Our beliefs are proved true even by the books of Deobandis. We do not differ from them because of any ‘ego problem’; our dispute with them is for Allah and his Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and under no conditions compromise with their enemies. It is a pity that we consider our near and dear ones more important than Allah and His Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). This is the reason why we are divided and lost. If we do not love the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and do follow him completely, we will remain devoid of stability, peace and prosperity. The true followers of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) conquered the empires of Rome and Iran, but today just four million Jews are humiliating one billion of those who make false claim to faith. This is what the Jews and Christians want, to lead the Muslims away from the love of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and to let them (Muslims) dispute with one another so that they (Muslims) do not stand united against the Jews and Christians. If Muslims, with all their intelligence, do not understand this, then we can only feel pity on their intelligence. One who is out for his own destruction, nobody can stop him. Those who give them the freedom to preach know it quite well that these people who roam about hither and thither with bedding on their shoulders can do no harm to them. They know what sort of Muslims these Tablighis ‘make’.

They clearly understand that they can only be harmed when Muslims once again create the atmosphere of Badr, only three hundred and thirteen Muslims, having faith in the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), crushed the better equipped army of one thousand soldiers. Today, the Jews and Christians are doing everything to deprive Muslims of this strength of faith. For this purpose they have set Muslims against Muslims, as they know that the enemy within is more dangerous than the enemy without.

It is high time that you differentiate between friend and foe. Be strong in your love and relation with the true followers and lovers of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Become one, in the name of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). This will make you such a wall, which cannot be demolished by the enemy. Believe me, if we are united, we will have all the blessings of Allah Subhanahu. We will have respect and prominence and prosperity because it has been declared openly that:

If you are faithful to Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam),
I (Allah) am yours (we will give you the whole universe)

This world is nothing; we will give you the pen and the slate (to write your own fate)

 (Poet of the East, Allama Muhammad Iqbal)

‘Kee Muhammad Say Wafa Toonay Toe Hum Taray Hain

Yeh Jehaan Chees Hay Kiya Lauhu Qalam Taray Hain"

Wama Alaina Illal Balaagh

Wasallal Lahu Ala Habeebihi Sayidina Muhammadiyun Wa Aalihi Wa Ashaabihi Wabaarik Wasallim.

Deoband to Bareilly : The Truth

By

Dr. Allamah Kaukab Noorani Okarvi

 4 Theological degrees (sanads)

2 from Pakistan and

2 from the Arab world 

Doctorate in Literature

Translated by: Saghir Mallal

top

As-salaamu `alaykum

(i) That some of them committed kufr. Ala Hadrat Mawlana Shah Ahmad Ridâ [or: Radâ] Khan Bareylwi [d.1340H] (r) was not the originator of refutations of the Deobandis.

Many had written against the `Ulama' of Deoband prior to him, such as: - Mawlânâ Fadl al-Haqq Khayrabâdî (r), in his work "Tahqîqul-Fatâwâ"- Hadrat Fadl al-Rasûl Badayûnî (r) in his "Sayful-Jabbâr" and others.

- the "Deobandis" have rejected the majority of the statements ascribed to them and have even changed the texts of some of the original books to show this. It may seem dishonest to tamper with texts but if they insist that they don't believe in those things, we should trust them and understand it means they don't and call it quits. If they have been unfaithful and have been lying all this time, it is between them and Allah. The fatwa that was pronounced was not on furû`î issues, which are usually discussed (often without adab) in books and now over the net, but on `usûlî issues which are the fundamental requirements of a Muslims faith. These issues are not usually what is discussed over the net nowadays, but the hostilities are as though they are `usûlî issues. Why? The Deobandi brothers should stop cursing Imam Ahmad Ridâ Khan (r) since very few of them seem to have even read any of his works.

top

• 1 Rise to power
  • 1.1 Conspiracy theory
• 2 War with the Northern Alliance
• 3 Life under Taliban government
  • 3.1 Treatment of women
  • 3.2 Drugs
  • 3.3 Oppression of the Hazara ethnic group
• 4 Buddhas of Bamiyan
• 5 Relationship with Osama bin Laden
• 6 U.S.-led invasion and displacement of the Taliban
  • 6.1 Alleged Inconsistencies in FBI Information Management
  • 6.2 Prelude to Invasion
  • 6.3 American Attack
• 7 Resurgence of Taliban
  • 7.1 2006
  • 7.2 2007
  • 7.3 Taliban mini-state?
• 8 Etymology
• 9 See also
• 10 Further reading
• 11 Footnotes
• 12 External links
  
  

A member of the Deobandi Taliban's religious police beating a woman in Kabul on Sept 26th 2001;
photograph taken from footage filmed by the Revolutionary Assoc'n of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA)
The footage can be seen here.

top

Shaykh Nuh & Husam al-Haramayn [The Sword of Haramayn]

The current discussion is undoubtedly an issue of extreme importance to the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah. We welcome Shaykh Nuh’s attempt’s to understand the disputes between the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah & the Deobandi-Tablighi movement but deeply saddened by the outcome of his research in his essay. The dispute is certainly over a decade old & one that will not be decided or concluded based on a contemporary Scholar’s review.

It is unfortunate & distressing that a Scholar of his repute & piety should need to raise his pen on this issue without consulting & referring to any of the senior research Scholars of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah. Alhamdu lillah, not only do we have ‘Ulama’ from the Sub-Continent capable of communicating with the Shaykh in the ‘Arabic language but also ‘Arab research Scholars in the Middle-East who have a thorough understanding of the century old conflict.

The former Director General of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs & Endowments, Dubai, UAE, Khadim al-‘ilm ash-sharif, Shaykh ‘Isa bin ‘Abd Allah bin Muhammad bin Maan’i al-Humayri, for example could perhaps have been consulted. Not only is he an ‘Arab Research Scholar but he also speaks the Urdu language & is well known amongst the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah ‘Ulama’ & the Deobandi School.

We strongly believe that when such tribulations arise we must remain steadfast & be positive in rooting some good out of it. We must exhaust all efforts in representing the truth which we sincerely believe as such. Only then will our efforts, comments & sentiments be acceptable as pious deeds. The current discussion will inevitably lead to heated exchanges for the whole conflict is focussed around the Person of the Beloved Prophet, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam.

The ignorant sects chiefly the Deobandis & Wahhabis allege that the Imam of Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah, the Imam of ‘Ishq & Mahabbah, Imam Ahmad Rida Khan of Barayli, ‘alayhi al-rahmah w’al-ridwan, was extreme & ‘exotic’ in his affectionate love for the Beloved Messenger of Islam, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam. They also ignorantly allege due to this his temperament was fiery & aggressive towards his opponents. Upon research one will find that the case was not as such.

We the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah believe this LOVE to be the Halaawah; Sweetness of Iman, the essence & soul of Iman as identified in the Qur’an & Sunnah. We the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah, are the as-Sawad al-A’azam; the Great Majority, the Majority of TRUTH by its very essence, nature & strength. The TRUTH is plain & clear. Neither complicated nor obscure. The TRUTH is communicated through the Qur’an & Sunnah & the Divine Sacred Laws known as Shari’ah. The ‘Ulama’ Mufassirun, Muhaddithun, Mutakallimun, Fuqahaa’, Mashaa’ikh-e-Awliya’, Shuhadaa’ & the Sulaha have been the bearers of this TRUTH. The orthodox ‘Ulama’ in each sacred science have thoroughly researched the Primary sources & outlined the Methodology & Principles respectively.

We loudly ask Shaykh Nuh & the Deobandies, was that which enraged the Muslims world over during the Rushdie & Danish cartoons affair a display of ‘extreme’ or ‘exotic’ love for the Messenger of Islam, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam? As the latter hurt Allah, the Most Glorious & Sublime, His Beloved Messenger, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam, & the faithful Muslims the world over – likewise, the insolent & disparaging remarks, arguments & widely published books – most still readily available, unedited & endorsed till today indeed hurt, offended & justifiably enraged the Muslims of the Sub-continent & the world over till today!!! Shaykh Nuh himself acknowledges these passages to be disparaging & discourteous towards the Beloved Messenger of Islam, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam, consequently raising his amazement to such as he remarks as unprecedented comparisons & choice of unambiguous words.

The belittling, disparaging & faith negating writings & discourses by the Deoband School founding & leading ‘Ulama as mentioned by Shaykh Nuh are undefendable & certainly not interpretable. The words applied by the Deobandi ‘Ulama were clear & explicit in their meanings & contextual inference in the Urdu language, for which Shaykh Nuh relied upon translations into the English language!

Imam-e-Ahl-e-Sunnat, Imam Ahmad Rida Khan, ‘alayhi al-rahmah w’al-ridwan, was the beacon light for those on the verge of sinking in kufr through belittling & disparaging our Beloved Rasul, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam. The Imam was the Guardian of Faith, the Imam was the Khalifat-ur-Rasul, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam, the Imam re-ignited & resurrected the flame of the Prophet’s love, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam, the Imam enriched & deepened our dying love for the Prophet, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa aalihi wa sahbihi wa sallam. The Imam’s love was faith rendering, exemplary, illustrious & sacrificial. The Imam was the Reviver of our Din. This being his sole motive & purpose.

Shaykh Nuh’s essay is of course neither the full account nor the works he relied upon sufficient source material for such an independent analysis. The ‘Ulama of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah have been informed & positive & constructive steps will be taken to ‘inform’ the Shaykh of his errors & more appropriately make more printed material available to him. It is sad to apparently see the lack of Shaykh Nuh’s research on this matter. Hardly a fair examination or analysis if someone had honestly asked for one. The Shaykh is also not one appropriate for such an independent impartial study either since his thinking may be susceptible to some level of bias when he enjoys a warm relationship with the Deobandi ‘Ulama’ & frequents their centres globally.

The essay however, especially on the issues discussed are generally in support of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah. The fundamental contention being the takfir of the founding members of the Deoband school as articulated & accounted in the Husam al-Haramayn [the Sword of the Two Sacred Sanctuaries]. It is clear Shaykh Nuh has over looked some important principles of Shari’ah which the ‘Ulama’ will highlight in due course. There are also sadly some illogical & unsubstantiated remarks by the Shaykh to which we will give him the benefit of doubt for since it is highly likely such comments perhaps were inspired by the adversaries of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah. The content is fore mostly the ancient rhetoric we have been accustomed with for many years by the heard-hearted Deobandis. The difference being we hear it today from a Scholar whom many revered & relied upon as a Scholar of utmost integrity & repute. The classical texts & principles which Shaykh Nuh refers to & elaborates with are only a drop in comparison to the encyclopaedic in nature memorised by Imam Ahmad Rida Khan, ‘alayhi al-rahmah w’al-ridwan. It is sheer ignorance & a gross failure on the Shaykh’s account to assume & allege the eminent Imam was unaware of the principles he addresses & infers upon.

Finally, we ask our fellow Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah brethren to remain patient & await the authoritive response from the ‘Ulama’ of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jama’ah on this matter for it is their responsibility alone & only they have the in depth knowledge to do so:

Hadith:

“Every one of you is a shepherd [raa’iy] who is responsible for [that which is in his custody].”
Sahih Bukhari

And:

“Allah, [the Most Majestic & Sublime] does not burden a person with what is beyond his capacity.” Al-Qur’an 2:286]

Kindly do not speculate or fall into conjecture for, as Allah, the Most Majestic & the Most Sublime, commands:

“ O Ye who believe, avoid much suspicion [zann] for some [varieties] of suspicion are sinful.” Al-Qur’an 49:12

And:

“O Ye who believe, if a transgressor [fasiq] comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest you harm people unwittingly and then regret what you have done.” Al-Qur’an 49:6

And a Hadith declares:

“The person who knowingly argues [for] what is false shall remain afflicted with the wrath of Allah until he ceases [his false argument] and desists from it.”

[Musnad Imam ibn Hanbal]

And, Allah, the Most Knowledgeable & the Most Consummate, Knows best.

www.islam786.com  

Next ---> Radd-e-Nuh ba Fatwa Rashid-e-Gangoh

top

Radd-e-Nûh ba Fatwâ’ Rashîd-e-Gangoh

Rebuttal of Nûh Keller from the Fatwâ’ by Rashîd Ahmad of Gangoh

Rabbanâ iftah baynanâ wa bayna qawminâ b’il-Haqq wa Anta Khayr ul-Fâtihîn

The following fatwâ’ has been translated from the original Urdû book: Fatâwâ’ Rashîdiyyah, Page 71-72, printed by Muhammad Saeed and Sons, Karâchî, Pâkistân.

The fatwâ’ was written by Rashîd Ahmad Gangohî, co-founder of Dâr ul-‘ulûm Deoband and Spiritual Shaykh of many senior Deobandî scholars. Rashid Ahmad is one amongst those whom the Imâm of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah, Imâm Muftî ash-Shâh Ahmad Ridâ Khân of Baraylî Sharîf, ‘alayhi al-rahmah w’al-ridwân, charged with kufr & which the ‘Ulamâ’ & Mashâ’ikh of Haramayn Sharîfayn; the Two Sacred Sanctuaries, endorsed in Husâm al-Haramayn [Sword of the Two Sanctuaries]. 

Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller in his essay outlined the legal criteria for unbelief; words that entail leaving Islâm quoting from al-Hadiyya al-‘Alâ’iyya, 424-425, authored by Imâm ‘Alâ’ al-Dîn ‘Âbidîn, Hanafî [D1306H]:

“……. “Disbelief” includes:

(1) reviling the religion of Islâm, or Allâh Most High, or the Prophet (Allâh Most High bless him and give him peace);

And:

(9) sarcasm about any ruling of Sacred Law, or quoting a statement of unbelief – even jokingly, without believing it – when one’s intention is sarcasm [about religious matters];

Also:

(10) demeaning any prophet, or saying that prophethood is acquired [by spiritual works];

(11) calumny against ‘Â’isha the wife of the Prophet (Allah Most High bless him and give him peace);  …..”

He further elaborates:

“….. Let us now look more closely at three examples of fallacies of takfir all too common in the present day: (1) the fallacy of hearsay evidence, (2) the fallacy of imputed intentionality, and (3) the fallacy of guilt by association.”

And regarding the second example above which is relevant to our rebuttal he asserts:

“The Fallacy of Imputed Intentionality

Words are judged by what the speaker intends, not necessarily what the hearer apprehends. If an utterance is unambiguous and its context plain, there is normally only one possible intention. … The need to contextualize words to establish their intent is even more imperative in possible utterances of kufr that insult Allâh Most High or the Prophet (Allâh bless him and give him peace). Something might be said that while outwardly offensive to Allâh or His Messenger (Allâh bless him and give him peace), was nevertheless intended by the speaker to make a valid point, not as an insult.”

Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller then further elaborates upon a distinction which he finds relevant and quotes an apparently relevant text:

 “Offending” however - as the mujtahid Imâm and hadîth master (hafidh) Taqi al-Din al-Subki says in his al-Sayf al-maslul, a more than five-hundred-page work on the legal consequences of insulting the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) – may be either intentional or unintentional, while only if a person intends giving offence to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) has he thereby committed kufr:

One must be aware of this rule, giving due consideration to the intention behind the offense (adha). For a person might do or say something which offends another that he did not have the slightest intention to offend him by, but rather intended something else, not thinking that it might give offense to the other, or understanding it would necessarily do so. Such cases do not entail the legal consequences of “giving offence”…  

Furthermore, Nûh Keller in his essay erroneously argues and contends that the Imâm of Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah was mistaken in his judgement of takfîr & overlooked the above important principle of Sharî’ah. He alleges:

“Knowledge of the above principle could have probably prevented much of the ‘fatwa wars’ that took place around the turn of the last century in India between Hanafi Muslims of the Barelwi and Deobandi schools.”

Before we present the translation of the fatwâ’ let us observe Nûh Keller’s personal comments in his words concerning the excerpts which he and the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah jointly consider derogatory:

“….. only one issue remains that offers either side a pretext for takfîr; namely, whether some words written by Deobandi scholars constitute insulting the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) or not. …..

…..Their response was strident and hyperbolic, comparing the knowledge of Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) to that of various lower creatures in a way that probably no Muslim had ever compared him before, and giving the offence whose kufr or iman we are discussing in this section. …..

….. In the heat of argument, some of them met what they deemed exaggerated statements about the Prophet’s knowledge (Allah bless him and give him peace) with equally exaggerated statements about of his lack of knowledge; reaching a degree that, by any ordinary measure, can be only be described as far below the standards of normal Islamic scholarly discourse. …..

….. Thus the Deobandi scholar Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri wrote in his al-Barahin al-qati’a [The uncontestable proofs] that there is no clear, unequivocal text in the Qur’ân to support the belief that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) has vast knowledge, though there is such evidence in regard to Satan and the Angel of Death. …..

….. that believing the Prophet’s knowledge (Allah bless him and give him peace) to encompass the terrestrial realm, and to be incomparably vaster than the Devil’s or the Angel of Death’s, constitutes “an act of shirk,” and “rejecting all the scriptural texts.”

….. Moreover, it is difficult to see how the attribute of knowledge that Khalil Ahmad ascribes to Satan and the Angel of Death should become “shirk” when affirmed of the Messenger of Allâh (Allah bless him and give him peace): either it is a divine attribute that is shirk to ascribe to any creature, or it is not.

But even if we overlook these mistaken innuendos, Khalil Ahmad’s point as a whole, denying that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) had vast knowledge, after affirming it of the Devil and the Angel of Death, is erroneous, …..

….. In sum, Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri’s disadvantageously comparing the Prophet’s knowledge (Allah bless him and give him peace) to Satan’s, the vilest creature in existence – regardless of the point he was making – is something few Muslims can accept. Whether Khalil Ahmad regarded it as a feat of ingenuity to show that because the Prophet’s knowledge was less than the Devil’s, it was a fortiori less than Allah’s, or whatever his impulse may have been, he badly stumbled in this passage. In any previous Islamic community, whether in Hyderabad, Kabul, Baghdad, Cairo, Fez, or Damascus – in short, practically anywhere besides the British India of his day – Muslims would have found his words repugnant and unacceptable. ….

….. Aside from Thanwi’s artless comparison of the highest of creation with the lowest, the very point of saying it in refutation of Reza is not plain …..

….. and finally outright anathema (takfir) of those who had emphasized the Prophet’s humanity (Allah bless him and give him peace) with what appeared to be at the expense of his dignity. …..

….. the Deobandis’ words are interpretable as “having a valid meaning,” for they can be construed as making a distinction, however crudely, between Allah’s knowledge of the “absolute unseen” and man’s knowledge of the “relative unseen.” …..

….. In this instance, “due consideration” means that if it is possible that Deobandi scholars intended something besides insult to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)  - for example, a heated rebuttal of supposed innovation (bid’a) – this legally prevents the judgement of kufr against them. …..

….. The vehemence of Deobandi writers “defending Islam against shirk,” however misplaced, plainly affected the way they spoke about the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace). …..

….. This does not mean that the words chosen by these writers were acceptable, even if “retorting against bid’a,” or “fighting shirk.”…..

….. Looking back, one cannot help wondering why Khalil Ahmad’s and Ashraf ‘Ali Thanwi’s own students and teachers and friends did not ask them, before their opponents asked them: When did any Islamic scholar ever compare the knowledge of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) to the depraved, to the mad, or to animals – even to make a point? Few Muslims would suffer such a comparison to be made with their own father, let alone the Emissary of God (Allah bless him and give him peace) . But while such words were indefensible breaches of proper respect, they were not kufr, because the intention behind them was not to insult the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), but to defend Islam from what the writers viewed as a serious threat. …..

….. Khalil Ahmad’s and Ashraf ‘Ali Thanwi’s comparisons of the Prophet’s knowledge (Allah bless him and give him peace) were offensive in their wording, and certainly not of the “ordinary scholarly discourse” acceptable among Muslims. …..       

THE FATWÂ’

Rashîd Ahmad Gangohî, in reply to a question writes:

Question No: 30        A poet who in his poetry uses words as idol or statue or calamity of Turks tragedy of Arabia in his compositions of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, what is the legal [shar’îy] ruling on this? Elaborate and be rewarded!

Answer:                      The person expressing these ill words although does not intend the actual real apparent meanings rather intends the metaphorical and figurative meaning, nevertheless, [such words] are not void of inference of insolence, blasphemy and offence of the Unblemished Self of Allâh, Most Exalted and the Messenger of Allâh, salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. For this very reason, Allâh, the Exalted, prohibited the [Prophetic] Companions from uttering Râ’inâ and instructed the usage of the [substitute] word of Unzurnâ. When in actual fact the purpose of the Companions, Allâh be well pleased with them all, was not by any means to intend the meaning which the Jews [deliberately mockingly] intended but since it was a means of pleasing the Jews and carried implications of hurting and offending the Messenger [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam] thus, the ruling communicated:

“Say not [to the Messenger, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam] Râ’inâ but say Unzurnâ [Do make us understand]” al-Qur’ân 2:104

…… and likewise the speaking of the eminent Companions [Allâh be well pleased with them all] in the presence of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam, with a raised voice was not, ma’âdh Allâh, intended to harm or offend, on the contrary it was merely due to their nature and character. However, since it carried implications of offending and disregard of honour and respect the ruling was thus given:

“O you who believe! Raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam], nor speak aloud to him in talk as you speak loud to one another, lest your deeds may be rendered fruitless while you perceive not.” Al-Qur’ân 49:2  

What an unambiguous ruling that though your intention was not to disparage however by doing so your deeds would become wasted and you wouldn’t even be aware of it. Also the same is in a Hadîth: “Kunya [nomen] yourself with the kunya Abî’l Qâsim” which was [later] prohibited during the Noble lifetime [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam] for offending the person of the Master of the World, in that if someone was to call someone [with the same kunya] then thy will assuming thyself to be addressed confer attention even though the caller did not whatsoever intend to offend the Messenger of Allâh, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam. And, Ibn Mâjah reports that when Ash’ath bin Qays Kundî arrived he enquired, “O Messenger of Allâh, are you not from us?” And this enquiry, and knowledge of ghayb is with Allâh, was simply because all ‘Arabs from Quraysh till Kunda are from the Banû Ismâ’îl. So thee replied, “Do not accuse our uncles of adultery and do not negate our lineage from our fathers, we are the progeny of Nadar.” Behold! This word merely carrying a far reaching implication - to what extent the Prophet [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam] rejected and prohibited and insisted on good manners of speech. ….. In sum, these words carried apparent insolence and offence hence to utter such words will be kufr:

“Verily those who annoy Allâh and His Messenger [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam] – Allâh has cursed them in this world, and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating torment.”

al-Qur’ân  33:57

… It is said in Shifâ’: “That, when a person has uttered something when speaking of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, without intending to insult, neither to offend and nor does he believe it to be but has uttered for the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, words which constitute kufr [like] from cursing him or insulting him or falsifying him or associating that which is unlawful upon him or negating that which is indispensable upon him which for his status are [considered] blemishes, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, like associating a major sin …. or uttered something disrespectful out of sheer ignorance which is construed as a kind of verbal abuse even if his circumstances apparently illustrate that he did not intend to demean the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, nor did he rely on it or he uttered it merely through ignorance or due to distress and depression or due to influence of intoxication or due to lack of thought or by his tongue running away from him or uttered it in the heat of the moment. Then the legal ruling concerning such a person without hesitation is death.”   

[Qâdî ‘Iyâd bin Mûsâ Mâlikî D544H ash-Shifâ’ Vol 2 Page 203-204 Published by ‘Abd at-Tawwâb Academy, Multân]

Hence, it is required that the writer of such kufr [entailing] words be severely reprimanded and if possible [to do so], if he does not stop then he should be killed because he is the harmer and offender of the Grandeur of the Exalted and His Messenger and Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

And Allâh, the Exalted is Most Knowledgeable.

Servant Rashîd Ahmad Gangohî     

We can only but say:   “On such a very vocal protest thy own testimony is severe enough”

As for the examples from the Qur’ân & Sunnah which Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller expands upon – there is no contradiction or restriction which he implies. Where the adhâ [offence or harm] was made during the lifetime of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ta’âlâ ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam, the Messenger of Islâm, salla Allâhu ta’âlâ ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam, exercised and enforced his personal right to either pardon or reprimand as explained by the classical mujtahid scholars of Islâm. May Allâh, the Most Compassionate reward them all.  

This is the official & authorised response of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah ‘Ulamâ’ & Mashâ’ikh-e-Haqq of UK to the essay compiled by Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller. Since, Nûh Keller decided to write his treatise without consultation with the ‘Ulamâ’ & Mashâ’ikh of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah & simply relied on certain Deobandî students for translations & references, the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah do not deem it necessary to lengthen this matter any further. The essay is neither recognised to be impartial nor thorough in its detail. The Deobandi fatwâ’ clearly rebuts and contradicts the fiqhî principles and methodology identified and personally adhered by Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller. The author of the fatwâ’ incriminates himself by his own set principles from the blasphemy which Nûh Hâ Mîm set out to justify and defend. The above fatwâ’ is sufficient food for thought for the writer & those who petitioned for its publication. We finally leave it for Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller, his Deobandî students & murîds to decide in their own arena as to who - they or their notable scholar Rashîd Ahmad Gangohî and his like were mistaken & created the social problem which concerns them so. And we also leave it to them to decide if the issue of insulting the Prophet, salla Allâhu ta’âlâ ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam, and its legal consequences are “central enough to be necessarily known of the religion”.

The sad irony in this was and is that the Deobandi’s like the Salafiyya wahhabiyya in their alleged denunciation of shirk unleashed the greatest Wahhabi bid’a of all, takfîr of fellow Muslims, at as Nûh Keller agrees, the expense of the Beloved Prophet’s, Honour and Dignity, salla Allâhu ta’âlâ ‘alayhi wa âlihî wa sahbihî wa sallam, which to guard and observe is an obligation clearly articulated in the Qur’ân:

“… and that you assist and honour him [salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam] …” al-Qur’ân 48:9

Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller has an open invitation to meet the ‘Ulamâ’ & Mashâ’ikh-e-Haqq of the Ahl as-Sunnah w’al Jamâ’ah in the UK to personally discuss such matters should he have the need to do so.  

An invitation as such will be personally & privately extended to Nûh Hâ Mîm Keller in the near future at the appropriate time.

Wa salâmun ‘alâ man ittab’a al-hudâ

And, Allâh Alone is All-Knowing & Wise.       

Authorised by the ‘Ulamâ’ & Mashâ’ikh-e-Haqq of Jamâ’ah Ahl as-Sunnah [UK]

top

The deobandi leader Moulvi Ashraf Ali Thanwi defines Bid'at in following words: "Reality of Bidat is this, that someone takes it as Deen, if someone has taken it as a remedy than it is not Bidat. Therefore, one is IHDAAS LID DEEN (innovation for the Deen) and other is IHDAAS FID DEEN (innovation in the Deen). The meaning of IHDAAS LID DEEN is Sunnah, and the meaning of IHDAAS FID DEEN is Bidat". (Malfoozaat Hakimul Ummat, Vol. 1, pg. 230, Idaara Taaleefaate Ashrafia, Multan, Pakistan)

Deobandi Ulama use many tricks to define Bid'at, so they can come out clean when questions are posed about Bid'at. They know that they also commit many Bid'ats, so to justify their Bid'ats. They regard it as IHDAAS LID DEEN (Bid'at for the Deen) and the practices of those people who do not approve Deobandi/Wahaabi teachings are regarded as IHDAAS FID DEEN (Bid'at in the Deen).

In fact, to divide Bid'at into IHDAAS LID DEEN and IHDAAS FID DEEN in itself is Bid'at. It is against the correct Ahadith and the sayings of the Sahabah, Jurist Imams and Muhaddithin. Rasoolullah (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wa Sallam) said, "Every new thing is Bidat." (Mishkaat, Babul I'tesaam).



In this Hadith,there is no condition of Bid'at for the Deen or Bid'at in the Deen. In fact, every new thing is described as Bid'at. 'Bid'at is Bid'at', may it be for the Deen or in the Deen! Therefore, Deobandis are Bid'atis as well!

Mufti Abdun Nabi [South Africa]

top

MOULVI ASHRAF ALI ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE IS A BID'ATI

Moulvi Ashraf Ali Thanwi says: "Nowadays people have mischief in their natures. Therefore, I created a new Bid'at (innovation) for the sake of correction". (Malfoozaate Hakimul Ummat, Vol. 5, pg. 208, Idaara Taalifaate Ashrafia, Multaan, Pakistan)

I suppose that the 'Ulama-e-Deoband' have been granted special permit by the Shari'ah to do things (Bid'ats) which Rasoolullah Salla Allahu 'alayhi wa Sallam, the Sahabah, Jurist Imams and early Muslims did not do.

top

Moulvi Ashraf Ali writes a story about Moulvi Rashid Ahmad Gangohi: "Khan Sahib said that Moulvi Gangohi told me himself, ‘When I came to stay in the Khanqah of Gangooh I never used to relieve myself in the Khanqah. In fact I used to go far in the jungle because this was the place of my Shaikh (Peer-o-Murshid). I never had courage to lie down and walk with the shoe'". (Arwahe Salaasah, pg. 306, Islaami Akaadmi, Lahore, Pakistan)

In fact it is Bid'at to relieve oneself in the Khanqah of the Shaikh or not to walk there with the shoe because this is not mentioned in the Qur'an or in the Hadith that you should respect the place of your Peer-o-Murshid in this fashion. Sahabah 'I kraam [Noble Companions] lived in Makkah and Madinah with Rasoolullah (Salla Allahu 'alayhi wa Sallam) and they did not do this type of practice as a sign of respect. Therefore, Moulvi Rashid Ahmad Gangohi is a Bid'ati.

Whatever response the Deobandi Ulama give here in order to protect Moulvi Gangohi they must take the same as an answer from the Ahl al-Sunnah w'al Jama'ah for the validity of Milad, 'Urs, Ghiyaarwih, etc.

Mufti Abdun Nabi Hamidi [S. Africa]

top

The Deobandi principle regarding Bid'at is: If a Muslim does anything which was not in the first three periods, it is Bid'at. Based on the above-mentioned principle, Moulvi Rashid Ahmad Gangohi has refuted the Milad function. He writes: "This Milad assembly is a evil Bid'at. It is sufficient proof for its being Na Ja'iz (unlawful), that it was not done in 'Qoroone Oola' (first three Islamic periods)." (Fatawa Rashidia, pg. 114, H.M.Saeed Company, Karachi, Pakistan)

The Ulama-e-Deoband have made Milad function unlawful based on the above-mentioned principle. Let us examine, in light of this, the very same principle; how many Bid'ats and Haraam acts are committed by Deobandis?

The activities mentioned below were not there in the early Islamic periods, therefore, are these not evil Bid'ats and Haraam (unlawful) according to the teachings and principle of Ulama-e-Deoband:-

(1)  Formation of the Tablighi Jama'at,

(2)  Annual Tablighi Ijtima,

(3)  Gasht (moving house-to-house),

(4)  Going for three days, forty days, and four months with Tablighi Jama'at,

(5)  Appointing the book "Tablighi Nisaab" as a source of learning for the members of Tablighi Jama'at,

(6)  Organizing the ladies Ta'leem programs,

(7)  Making Tabligh to the Muslims only, since Sahabah 'I kraam used to do Tabligh to the Kuffaar,

(8)  Establishment of Darul Uloom Deoband, 

(9)  Setting up syllabus in the Darul Ulooms and Madrassas, 

(10) Teachers and Imams working on salary in Darul Ulooms, Madrassas and Masjids,

(11) Setting up papers and dates for Madrassa and Darul Uloom examinations, and

(12) Working out holidays for Madrassas and Darul Ulooms, when to open and when to close, etc.

These are just a few examples. In fact, there are many more. None of the above mentioned 'religious activities' existed in the first three periods of Islam. Therefore, they are all Haraam and evil Bid'ats according to the same Deoband principle.

Dear readers, please think carefully! The Deobandi sect have given Fatwa of Bidat and Shirk on Muslims for every little thing and activity, but all the Bid'ats they commit are Ja'iz (permissible) for them. It seems as if the Shari'ah is their slave girl. They dictate to the Shari'ah on what should be Halaal and what should be Haraam, and Shari'ah gives the ruling according to their desire! (Allah forbid)!

In conclusion, I say, that those who themselves are Bid'atis have no right to fire the Fatwas of Bid'at upon others.

Mufti Abdun Nabi Hamidi [S.Africa]

top

Taqwiyat al-iman: Strengthening of the Faith

by Shah Ismail Dihlawi (1193-1246)

Translated by Unknown. 
Ryadh: Darussalam Publications, 1995.

Book review by GF Haddad

Muhammad Ismail Dihlawi (1193-1246) was the son of Shah 'Abd al-Ghani (d.1203) the son of Shah Wali-Allah Muhaddith Dihlawi (d. 1176/1762) the son of Shah 'Abd al-Rahim (d. 1131/1719). He eventually strayed so far from the Sunni and Naqshbandi Sufi path of his illustrious forefathers that he became what the Indian Hanafi and Maturidi Shaykh, Fadl al-Rasul al-Badaywani (1213-1289) in his al-Mu'taqad al-Muntaqad (1270) calls 'the chief Najdi, (kabir al-najdiyya) of India and their patron' (mawlahum). Al-Badaywani is among the earliest Indian Ulema to refute Ismails books that form the basis of Wahhabism in that country such as Taqwiyat al-iman (1240), idah al-Haqq, al-Sirat al-Mustaqim, etc.

Those Who Affirm that Allah Can Lie

Ismail Dihlawi was the first of the Wahhabis of India to forward the heresy of imkan kadhib or the possibility of lying - (on the part of Allah Most High!)[1] and was imitated in this belief by the Deobandis ''Shaykhs'' Ahmad Rashid Gangohi (d. 1323/1905) in his Fatawa-e-Rashidia and his apologist Khalil al-Saharanfuri (d. 1927) in his al-Barahin al-Qatia. Among others, refutations were published by Mulla Sahib Baghdadi, Mawlana Fadl al-Haqq Kayrabadi, and Imam Ahmad Rida Khan (1272-1340) who wrote:

Al-Badaywani said the following on the issue:

Note that Ibn H'azm used the same spurious logic to assert in al-Fis'al fi al-Milal wa al-Nih.al ' in violation of the Consensus of the Salaf and Khalaf ' that having a mate and child is necessarily within the Divine power also, because, otherwise, He would be powerless ('ajiz) and creatures would possess a power which the Creator does not![3]

In the same way as the proponents of imkan kadhib defended their belief with the pretext that Allah can do anything, they also held the belief, as in Chapter Five of the English translation of Taqwiyat al-iman [p. 85]' that 'He [Allah] may bring into existence millions of Prophets, saints, jinns, angels, and entities equal to Gabriel and the Prophet Muhammad " in terms of status. When Ismail al-Dihlawi was taken to task for this statement (by Mawlana Fadl al-Haqq al-Khayrabadi), he argued in his Yak Rozi ('One-Dayer') that he was referring not to the Will of Allah' 'but to His Capability to bring something into existence,. adding, by way of a further example, that the birth of a person of the stature of the Beloved Prophet " was a distinct possibility![4]

Al-Baydawani continues:

One of his [Shah Ismaill al-Dihlawi's] followers went on in this disgraceful manner with words that are of no avail to him and shall lead him straight to Hell to the point that he had to admit the possibility of attributing to Him ignorance, impotence, and the generality of defects, shameful traits, indecencies, and disgraceful aspects, laying himself and his camp bare with all kinds of scandals....

Imam Ibn al-Humam said in al-Musayara: 'Defective traits are impossible for Him  'exalted is He!' such as ignorance and lying'.

[Kamal al-Din Muhammad ibn Muhammad] Ibn Abi al-Sharif [al-Shafi'i d. 905] said in his commentary [al-Musamara fi Sharh' al-Musayara]: 'More than that, it is impossible for Him 'exalted is He!' to be attributed any trait in his book Yak Rozi (p. 145 according to the URL http://members.tripod.com/okarvi/W_B.html).

that consists in neither-perfection-nor-imperfection, because each and every single Divine Attribute is an Attribute of perfection.... Nor is there any difference in this respect between the Ash'aris and the rest, in that all that denotes imperfection with respect to creatures, the Most High Creator is transcendant beyond and absolutely exempt of, such an attribute being an impossibility for him 'exalted is He!' And lying denotes imperfection with respect to creatures.

It was also stated in [al-Taftazani's] Sharh' al-Maqasid:

And in [al-Jurjani's 2,300-page] Sharhal-Mawaqif:

And in Kanz al-Fawa'id:

And in al-Dawani's Sharhal-'Aqaid:

And in Sharhal-Sanusiyya [= Tali 'al-Bushra 'ala al-'Aqidat al-Sanusiyya al-S'ughra by Ibrahim ibn Ahmad al-Marighni al-Maliki]: 'As for the demonstration of the obligatoriness of their [Prophets'] truthfulness 'upon them blessings and peace' it is because if they were not considered truthful, then His Report ''exalted is He! '' [about them] would by necessity be deemed a lie, and lying is an impossibility for Allah because it denotes lowliness..[5]

Those Who Disparage the Prophet "

Ismail Dihlawi is also notorious for affirming in his purported 'Straight Path' (al-Sirat al-Mustaqim) ' apparently co-authored with his close associate Sayyid Ahmad Barelwi [6] that 'Becoming absorbed (sarf-e-himmat) in the Prophet Muhammad," were it to occur during Salat, is much worse than to become absorbed in the thought of an ox or a donkey..[7] It goes without saying that such a statement constitutes clear disparagement of the Prophet ", which is passible of death in all four Sunni Schools.

The Condemnation of Taqwiyat al-iman

Ismaill Dihlawi wrote Taqwiyat al-iman in the wake of his Hijaz years (1236-1239), at which time he had come under the tutelage of Wahhabi missionaries. Ostensibly a work on Islamic monotheism (tawhid), it relies on an original understanding of some of the Qur'anic verses and Prophetic narrations that pertain to Tawhid in studied or forced omission of any of the previous works authored by the established authorities in the field, much in the same way as Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab produced his Kitab al-Tawhid' The two books show equal ignorance of the two Sunni Schools of Islamic doctrine, simplistic and largely cursory treatment of the Qur'an and Sunna, harping on specific themes that are obviously problematic to the authors, and committing doctrinal errors the like of only one of which is enough to characterize its author as heretical. Just as Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab raised a storm of controversy and was refuted by a host of Sunni Ulema from the Hijaz and elsewhere beginning with his own brother Sulayman ibn .Abd al-Wahhab, Ismail Dihlawi was also immediately opposed by a host of Indian Sunni Ulema beginning with his own family and the Ulema of Delhi such as his two paternal uncles Shah 'Abd al-'Aziz Muhaddith Dihlawi (d. 1239/1834) (the son of Shah Wali Allah and one of those considered a Renewer of the thirteenth Hijri century) and Shah Rafi al-Din Muhaddith Dihlawi in his Fatawa, Shah Ahmad Sa'id Dihlawi, Mawlana Sadr al-Din the Grand Mufti of Delhi, Mawlana Fadl al-Rasul al-Badaywani in al-Mu'taqad al-Muntaqad and Sayf al-Jabbar, Mawlana Fadl al-Haqq Kayrabadi, Mawlana 'Inayat Ahmad Kakuruwi [5] Al-Badaywani, al-Mu'taqad al-Muntaqad (Waqf Ihlas offset repr. p. 64-66). [6] Sayyid Ahmad Barelwi had declared a jihad against the Sikh rulers of the Punjab. He and his followers were eventually betrayed by their Afghan allies and defeated by Ranjit Singh, the Sikh ruler of Northern India, and killed in 1246/1831 in Balakot. The Tawarikh-e-'Ajibah (p. 182) states: 'In this biography and by his letters it is clearly evident that Mr. Sayyid [Ahmad] had no intention to wage a war against the British. He thought of their government as his government. Undoubtedly, if the [British] government was against him he would not have received any [financial] aid [from them]. But the government wished to break the strength of the Sikh [rebels].' The Hayaat-e-Tayyibah (p. 302) states that one day, as Ismail Dihlawi was lecturing on jihad against the Sikhs in Calcutta, a person asked: 'Why do you not give a fatwa to wage jihad against the English?' He replied: 'It is not wajib in any case to fight against the British. First, because we are their subjects; second, they do not interfere in our religious affairs and we have all kinds of freedom under their rule. In fact, if any one attacks the British, it is the religious duty of Muslims to fight against them and protect our (British) government.. [7] Siraat-e-Mustaqeem (p. 86=p. 150). [3] (author of 'Ilm al-Sigha), Shah Ra'uf Ahmad Naqshbandi Mujaddidi, and others. Mawlana Hashmat 'Ali Khan adduced the names of 268 Ulema verifying the fatwa of the takfir or the author of Taqwiyat al-iman and his supporters in work titled al-Sawarim al-Hindiyya (Muradabad, 1345/1926) while Husam al-H'aramayn lists the endorsements of 301 Ulema from the Arab world and the Sub-Continent, all in utter disregard of the desperate fatwa that 'The one saying kafir to Mawlawi Ismail Dihlawi, the writer of Taqwiyat al-iman, is himself a kafir!' [8] Taqwiyat al-iman contains the following aberrations among others:

'The attribution of shirk to the majority of the Umma in the first lines of Chapter One [p. 42-43] and the statement in Chapter Six [p. 109]: 'Presently, all kinds of shirk (both the ancient and news ones) are rampant among Muslims. What the Prophet "prophesied earlier seems to be coming true now. For instance, the Muslims are treating Prophets, saints, Imam and martyrs, etc. polytheistically..

The attribution of shirk to the majority of the Umma is an unmistakable signature of the heresy of the Khawarij, who did not hesitate to brand as mushrik the rank and file of the Muslims including the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. As for the prophesies related to polytheism at the end of time, they pertain to the very last phase of the Major Signs (al-'alamat alkubra) before the rising of the Hour. Such does not occur until after the killing of the Dajjal at the hands of 'isa #, followed by his death and the disappearance of all believers from the face of the earth. The author of Taqwiyat al-iman knows this full well since he cites a hadith from Sahih Muslim to that effect at the end of his Chapter Six [p. 110-111]!

Until then, the Prophet "said that his Umma was protected against error and that his greatest fear for us was not shirk but worldly competition and scholarly impostors. Thus the charge that 'the Muslims are treating Prophets, saints, Imam and martyrs, etc. polytheistically' is supported by inapplicable evidence and is overwhelmingly false. In fact, this charge is only a camouflage of the very real disrespect of Prophets and Saints for which Wahhabism and its sectarian offshoots stand.

[1]
[2]  Ahmad Rida Khan, Fatawa al-Haramayn bi Rajf Nadwat al-Mayn (Waqf Ikhlas offset repr' p. 11-12).
[3] Ibn H' azm, al-Fis. al (2:138).
[4] Yak Rozi (and p. 151).
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]

This is just a small extract of the book.

Book review by GF Haddad

Also see Tablighi Jamaat

top

The "Sheikh-ul-Hind" of Deobandis, Janab Mahmood-ul-Hasan, sought remedies for all his needs from the 'Imam of the Deobandis', 'Shaykh' Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi Sahib with the supplication:

"Ghaus" means one who redresses one's grievances and Mahmood-ul-Hasan Sahib addresses Gangohi Sahib not only as "Ghaus" but as "Ghaus-e-A'zam":

Mahmood-ul-Hasan Sahib declared Gangohi Sahib to be not only all these things, but also as "Murrabiye-Khalaaiq" (The Educator of all creatures) "Maseehaa-i-Zamaan (The Christ of this time), Qaseem-i-Faiz-e-Yazdaah (The Distributor of Divine outpourings), the equal of the founder of Islam, host to all creations, Muhyud Deen Jeelaani, the fountainhead of all beneficence, without any parallel, the object of veneration and reverence in this world and in the next, the light through and through, and Allah alone knows what else besides. In the compendium of his poetical works, he says :

— From the marsiyah (elegy), published by Raashid Company, Deoband." *

Source: White and Black

top

''The Deobandi founders & scholars, because of their contempt and insult, in their acts of worship, against many saints, Prophets, the Beloved Prophet Muhammad [Peace & Blessings of Allah upon him] and even Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, are considered murtadd and kafir. Their apostasy and heresy is one of the worst kind, for someone who declares that they are pious muslims. Muslims should be very cautious of them, and stay away from them. Let alone praying behind them, one should not let them pray behind one, or allow them into mosques, or eat the animal slaughtered by them, or join them on happy or sad occasions, or let them come near one, or visit them in illness, or attend their funerals, or give them space in Muslim grave-yards. To sum up, one must stay away from them completely.''

(See the Unanimous Fatwa of Three Hundred Ulama, published by Muhammad Ibrahim of Bhagalpur)

top

Refutation of Mufti Taqi  [Deobandi] Fatwa on Mawlid by GF Haddad

{ Obey Allah, and Obey the Messenger and those in authority among you} .

"None of you is a believer until he loves me more than his own soul." (Sahih al-Bukhari)

On http://www.albalagh.net/taqi.shtml, a page in English devoted to Mufti Taqi Usmani says verbatim that "[He] is one of the leading Islamic scholars living today. Author of more than 40 books, he is an expert in the fields of Islamic law, Economics and Hadith. For the past 35 years, he has been teaching at the Darul-Uloom in Karachi that was established by his father Mufti Muhammad Shafi, the late Grand Mufti of Pakistan. He also holds a degree in law and is a Judge at the Sharia Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. He is a consultant to several international Islamic financial institutions and has played a key part in the move toward interest free banking and the establishment of Islamic financial institutions. He is the deputy chairman of the Jeddah based Islamic Fiqh Council of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC)."

On http://www.albalagh.net/general/rabi-ul-awwal.shtml another page in English features Mufti Taqi Usmani's fatwa on Mawlid.

From the latter page I've excerpted the following statements as they were posted verbatim as of 11 July, 2000, in their order of appearance in the text. I've numbered them for easier perusal and reference. After each excerpt, I've added a few comments according to need, in conformity with the duty enjoined on us by the Prophet of Nasiha - sincere faithfulness to Allah and sincere, faithful advice to the Muslims.

These comments were written in the light of what I have learnt through the immense mercy of Allah Most High at the hands of our Sunni Naqshbandi Shuyukh - may Allah grant them long life and health - at their forefront Mawlana al-Shaykh Nazim al-Haqqani, shedding much-needed light on the numerous misconceptions and misrepresentations of this fatwa.

It is left to the Muslim reader to verify firsthand to what extent such a fatwa by Mufti Taqi Usmani is based on fact and on the sources of Islam which are Qur'an, Sunna, Ijma` and Qiyas. And may Allah send uninterrupted blessings and peace on the first and foremost subject of these lines, Sayyidina Muhammad, and grant him the Wasila and Highmost Station of Intercession for Mankind, and upon his Family and all his Companions. Amin.

Mufti Taqi Usmani said:

Comment: This is true, yet the author further down (item #17) annuls the benefit of his own statement by denying the validity of any specific day of that month as an appropriate or preferable date for celebrating Mawlid and goes so far as to condemn the choice of that date as a reprehensible innovation. Then he castigates the highlighting of that month to celebrate Mawlid as well!

Comment: This is a confession by Mufti Taqi 'Usmani that the night of the Mawlid Sharif is of greater significance and merit than Laylat al-Qadr which is the position of some of the Maliki Imams as cited by Abu al-'Abbas al-Wansharisi (d. 914) in his encyclopdia of Maliki fatwas titled _al-Mi'yar al-Mu'rab wa al-Jami' al-Mughrib fi Fatawa Ahl Ifriqya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib (11:280-285).

Similarly, the Maliki Hadith Master and Imam, al-Sayyid al-Sharif Muhammad ibn Ja'far al-Kattani stated in his book _al-Yumn wa al-Is'ad bi Mawlid Khayr al-`Ibad_ (p. 21): "The two nights of the distinguished noble birth and the magnificent Prophetic Ascension appear to be the very best of the nights of the world without hesitation nor doubt... and if this is the case then such as these two nights [ MAWLID and MI'RAJ] deserve to be taken henceforth each as a recurring festival among other recurring festivals ('Eid min al-A'yad) and as a seasonal celebration (mawsim) among other seasonal celebrations devoted to good deeds and striving. Therefore those dates should be respected and venerated, the Book of Allah should be recited in them, and in their honor deeds should be performed that indicate joy and happiness at their immense merit as well as thankfulness to Allah Most High for His blessings and favors in them. This the Law in no way denies nor condemns, and no reprimand nor prohibition can be directed at those who perform this whatsoever."

Comment: This is a Wahhabi misconception of Usul which was refuted notably by the Ghumari Shuyukh (see item #23), namely, that Tark (not doing something) is NOT a proof that something is condemned or that it is not praiseworthy, as the Prophet did not, in his lifetime, do absolutely everything that was praiseworthy or permissible. The same goes for the early generations. Rather, the criteria for judging if something belongs on the accepted side of Shari'a and is endorsable by the Sunna or not, is to evaluate it in the balance of the Qur'an and Sunna: whatever is confirmed by them is part of them and whatever violates them is rejected.

Read more

top

In 1320 A.H the deobandi disbelieving statements were printed in a single volume along with a convincing refutation. At that time some Muslim leaders contacted the head of these insolent people to ask him some intellectual questions. These questions completely flabbergasted the insolent people very much. You can ask from those who saw them how worried they looked. But they could neither disown their statements nor re-invent any new meaning. Their leader said that he had not come to take part In a debate. He further said that he did not want a debate to take place because he and his teachers were ignorant in the art of debating.

His final word was that he would continue to say the same thing over and over again, even if others convinced him to the contrary.The questions together with a detailed account were printed on the 15th of Jamad-al-Akhir 1323 A.H. and this document was handed over to the head and his insolent followers. Many years have passed after this event and we haven't heard a single voice in reply. Under the circumstances their fraudulent denial is just like saying that the insolent people who have used insulting language for Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Beloved Prophet Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam were not born in this world, and nothing can be done because it is all unreal. May Allah give them a sense of self-respect!

There is another fraudulent argument, which the deobandis give; they blame the scholars of Ahl-as-Sunnat w'al Jama'at branding others as disbelievers. This shows the helplessness of the disgraced and impious people. They lack moral courage to seek forgiveness from Allah AImighty and His Beloved Prophet Muhammad Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam for their printed insulting and blasphemous words as well as arrogant attitude. They should refer to these words as Allah's Most Beloved Messenger Salla Allahu ta'ala 'alayhi wa 'aalihi wa Sallam says:

When you do a wrong thing, you must immediately seek forgiveness:

Secretly for your secret action and openly for your open action

 

Imam Ahmad reports in Zuhd & Tibraani in AI-Kabeer & Baihaaqi in Shuab on the authority of Muaaz, son of Jabal through a genuine sanad.

                                               top

Islamic school hit by ‘cash for fatwa’ scandal
Web posted at: 9/20/2006 8:1:39
Source ::: AFP

LUCKNOW • A prominent Islamic school said yesterday that it plans to regulate the issuing of fatwas after a television sting caught clerics issuing religious edicts in return for cash.

“To stop the misuse of edicts, we are seriously considering constituting a body that can regulate the issue of fatwas,” Maulana Shahid Rehan, a senior official at the school in northern India said.

“It is really a matter of shame that a few clerics are misusing their power and are issuing fatwas by accepting money... it is most un-Islamic,” he said. Three clerics, including the chief of the Dar-ul-Uloom Deoband seminary’s fatwa department, have been caught up in the undercover sting.

The seminary’s vice chancellor, Marghoobur Rehman, said cleric Mufti Habibur Rehman was suspended from the fatwa department on Sunday after the television report, according to a Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency report.

The vice chancellor said a committee would investigate the matter and, if found guilty, the cleric would be sacked. The clerics were shown on television allegedly agreeing to issue fatwas on credit card and camera phones use, acting in films and watching television, in return for money. Experts in Islamic law said that the haphazard issuing of fatwas had reduced their weight among community members.

“Fatwas are issued on religious matters but the fatwa loses its importance once clerics start issuing it on mundane matters,” Jaffaryab Jilani, a member of the powerful All-India Muslim Personal Law Board, said.

The school in Deoband town, northern Uttar Pradesh state, is one of the oldest seminaries in India. It attracts students and scholars from across the world.

Source

top

Muslim cleric held after two men shot

Jeevan Vasagar
Wednesday March 19, 2003
The Guardian

A Muslim cleric was arrested yesterday after police searched his father's home for firearms following a shooting in Birmingham which left one man critically injured.

Protesters gathered in the Highfields area of Leicester after the raid. Police are believed to have arrested Riyadh ul-Haq, a cleric at the Birmingham [deobandi] central mosque.

Police said the raid was prompted by an incident on Monday night when a row between two groups of Asian men culminated in a 31-year-old man being shot in the head and another man being hit in the shoulder. The former was said to be critically ill.

Police said: "This is not being treated as a random shooting which placed the community at risk but a dispute between two specific groups of people which culminated in a firearm being discharged."

A spokesman said no firearms had been found at the home. By yesterday afternoon, officers had made two arrests in Birmingham and one in Leicester in connection with the shooting.

A local Muslim source said six people had gone with police for questioning from the house. Four of them were brothers, including Mr ul-Haq, who was visiting his father, Mohammed Gora Pirbhai, a cleric at a Leicester mosque.

Muslim neighbours were angry that Mr Pirbhai's home had been raided and that police used dogs, which they regard as unclean. The source said they ended the protest after Mr Pirbhai called for calm.

source: Militant Islam Monitor

top

The religious edict or fatwa was issued by the Darul-Uloom Deoband, a powerful Islamic school which was established more than 150 years ago.

The Deoband school promote a radical brand of Islam which is said to have inspired the Taleban in Afghanistan.

But other Muslim bodies in India have opposed its latest ruling. The alleged rape attracted widespread attention after reports that reports that a Muslim council of community elders had ordered the victim to marry her father-in-law. On Friday, the alleged victim failed to appear before a Sharia court set up by Darul-uloom Deoband to hear the case, the Press Trust of India reports.

Earlier reports quoted her as saying she would abide by the fatwa.

Protests

A body of Muslim women said the Deoband ruling was "against the spirit and essence of Islam, which gives equal rights to women".

"The Islamic clerics have failed to differentiate between sex by consent and rape by force," Shaista Amber, president of the All India Muslim Women's Personal Law Board, is quoted as saying by the Asian Age newspaper.

Feroze Mithoborwala of the Muslim Youth of India described the fatwa as absurd. "Why should she be punished for no fault of hers?" he told the Times of India newspaper.

She had a physical relationship with her father-in-law. It does not matter if it was consensual or forced Mohammad Masood Madani ''Deoband cleric''

Another Muslim women's organisations, Awaz-e-Niswan, said the fatwa was "shocking".

"We will mobilise public opinion against this fatwa," Hasina Khan of the Awaz-e-Niswan said.

Fatwa

On Thursday, women's groups protested in the northern city of Muzaffarnagar, where the alleged rape took place. It coincided with the visit of a team from India's National Commission of Women, sent to investigate the case. "We want justice for the woman," NCW head Girija Vyas told journalists after meeting the alleged victim.

In its ruling the Darul-Uloom Deoband did not endorse the village council's order that the victim had to marry her father-in-law but said she could no longer live with her husband.

"She had a physical relationship with her father-in-law. It does not matter if it was consensual or forced," Mohammad Masood Madani, a cleric at Deoband, told Reuters.

Hardline takeover of British mosques

Riyadh ul Haq, who supports armed jihad and preaches contempt for Jews, Christians and Hindus, is in line to become the spiritual leader of the Deobandi sect in Britain. The ultra-conservative movement, which gave birth to the Taleban in Afghanistan, now runs more than 600 of Britain’s 1,350 mosques, according to a police report seen by The Times.

The Times investigation casts serious doubts on government statements that foreign preachers are to blame for spreading the creed of radical Islam in Britain’s mosques and its policy of enouraging the recruitment of more “home-grown” preachers. Mr ul Haq, 36, was educated and trained at an Islamic seminary in Britain and is part of a new generation of British imams who share a similar radical agenda. He heaps scorn on any Muslims who say they are “proud to be British” and argues that friendship with a Jew or a Christian makes “a mockery of Allah’s religion”.

Seventeen of Britain’s 26 Islamic seminaries are run by Deobandis and they produce 80 per cent of home-trained Muslim clerics. Many had their studies funded by local education authority grants. The sect, which has significant representation on the Muslim Council of Britain, is at its strongest in the towns and cities of the Midlands and northern England. Figures supplied to The Times by the Lancashire Council of Mosques reveal that 59 of the 75 mosques in five towns – Blackburn, Bolton, Preston, Oldham and Burnley – are Deobandi-run.

It is not suggested that all British Muslims who worship at Deobandi mosques subscribe to the isolationist message preached by Mr ul Haq, and he himself suggests Muslims should only “shed blood” overseas. But while some Deobandi preachers have a more cohesive approach to interfaith relations, Islamic theologians say that such bridge-building efforts do not represent mainstream Deobandi thinking in Britain. The Times has gained access to numerous talks and sermons delivered in recent years by Mr ul Haq and other graduates of Britain’s most influential Deobandi seminary near Bury, Greater Manchester.

Intended for a Muslim-only audience, they reveal a deep-rooted hatred of Western society, admiration for the Taleban and a passionate zeal for martyrdom “in the way of Allah”. The seminary outlaws art, television, music and chess, demands “entire concealment” for women and views football as “a cancer that has infected our youth”.

Mahmood Chandia, a Bury graduate who is now a university lecturer, claims in one sermon that music is a way in which Jews spread “the Satanic web” to corrupt young Muslims. “Nearly every university in England has a department which is called the music department, and in others, where the Satanic influence is more, they call it the Royal College of Music,” he says. Another former Bury student, Bradford-based Sheikh Ahmed Ali, hails the 9/11 attacks on America because they acted as a wake-up call to young Muslims. This, he says, taught them that they will “never be accepted” in Britain and has led them to “return to Islam: sisters are wearing hijab . . . the lion is waking up”.

Mr ul Haq, the most high-profile of the new generation of Deobandis, runs an Islamic academy in Leicester and is the former imam at the Birmingham Central Mosque. Revered by many young Muslims, he draws on his extensive knowledge of the Koran and the life and sayings of the prophet Muhammed to justify his hostility to the kuffar, or non-Muslims.

One sermon warns believers to protect their faith by distancing themselves from the “evil influence” of their non-Muslim British neighbours. “We are in a very dangerous position here. We live amongst the kuffar, we work with them, we associate with them, we mix with them and we begin to pick up their habits.” In another talk, delivered a few weeks before 9/11, he praises Muslims who have gained martyrdom in battle and laments that today “no one dare utter the J word”. “The J word has become taboo . .. The J word is jihad in the way of Allah.”

The Times has made repeated attempts to get Mr ul Haq to comment on the content of his sermons. However, he declined to respond.

A commentator on religious radicalism in Pakistan, where Deobandis wield significant political influence, told The Times that “blind ignorance” on the part of the Government in Britain had allowed the Deobandis to become the dominant voice of Islam in Britain’s mosques. Khaled Ahmed said: “The UK has been ruined by the puritanism of the Deobandis. You’ve allowed the takeover of the mosques. You can’t run multiculturalism like that, because that’s a way of destroying yourself. In Britain, the Deobandi message has become even more extreme than it is in Pakistan. It’s mind-boggling.”

In some mosques the sect has wrested control from followers of the more moderate majority, the Barelwi movement.

A spokesman for the Department for Communities said: “We have a detailed strategy to ensure imams properly represent and connect with mainstream moderate opinion and promote shared values like tolerance and respect for the rule of law. We have never said the challenge from extremism is simply restricted to those coming from overseas.”

source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2402973.ece

top

Here is a tale of two young British Muslims who travelled to Pakistan.

Yasir is 19, comes from Rotherham, supports Liverpool FC and is studying Islam in a Pakistani madrassa that will teach him to hate the West.

There are two reasons why he should not be in a Deobandi seminary in the teeming, dusty backstreets of Karachi. The first is that Pakistan banned all foreign students from its religious schools in 2005 after it emerged that two of the bombers responsible for the July 7 attacks on London that year had spent time in the country. And the second? Yasir is miserable. He told The Times last month that he was desperate to “get home”, was struggling to cope with life in Karachi and uncomfortable with the seminary’s anti-Western agenda.

Yasir was seven months into an eight-year course of study when he met The Times and during the brief interview his eyes were continually darting from side to side as if in fear that his words might be overheard. He was at first hungry for news of home — what were Liverpool’s coming fixtures, how were England doing in the cricket? — but his strong Yorkshire accent often dropped to a barely audible whisper.

Why was he here? “I don’t know that myself.” What was wrong with Karachi? “It’s crap.” What did he miss about Britain? “Everything. It’s too hard for me here. I don’t like to live here, man. You can’t do anything here. It’s not England. It’s Pakistan.”

The former engineering student gave no explanation as to why he was at Jamia Binoria, whose principal, Mufti Mohammad Naeem, challenged The Times to inspect the seminary to “see if you can find any terrorists”. There were no bomb factories, but for incendiary rhetoric there was Muhammed, a young man from Manchester who was visiting a friend in the seminary’s fatwa (religious edict) department.

Muhammed, who would not give his full name, teaches English to asylum-seekers and, in stark contrast to Yasir, exemplifies Deobandis’ deep hostility towards the West. He was eager to tell The Times that the public had been entirely misled about the real perpetrators of the July 7 attack on London. According to Muhammed, the Government, Mossad, assorted Jews, freemasons and Scotland Yard had conspired to commit mass murder to demonise Muslims. “These are not my opinions. These are facts. The aim was to create terror in the hearts of the British people in order to control them,” he said.

The media were also part of the cover-up. “Why don’t you tell the public that they are being brainwashed and that there is a conspiracy to destroy Islam, as the Prophet told us? Why don’t you tell them that the media is controlled by Jews, that the word ‘British’ is a Jewish word? “If someone attacks your house, you have a right to defend what is rightfully yours. We follow the way of the Prophet. We will defend Islam. We will defend the Koran.”

Yasir and Muhammed illustrate the complex challenge that Britain’s security services face in countering the threat posed by Islamic radicals. More than 400,000 people travel from Britain to Pakistan each year. The great majority of them go for innocent reasons but some young Britons do go to study in jihadi madrassas and train in terrorist camps. And then they return to Britain. Jamia Binoria has 3,000 students, 500 of them foreigners from 29 countries, including Britain and the US. In its crowded halls children as young as 5 sit in groups on the floor, rocking back and forth as they recite the Koran.

Mr Naeem insisted that his seminary did not train students for military jihad, but added somewhat ambiguously that none of his charges was allowed to fight in Afghanistan “without permission”.

At a second Deobandi seminary, Darul Uloom Karachi, the vice-president estimated that 20 to 30 British Muslims were among his 4,000 students, although The Times was not allowed to meet any of them.

Mr Naeem and Mr Usmani insisted that Sir Salman Rushdie should receive the death penalty for writing the Satanic Verses, and said that his knighthood could only be interpreted as a calculated insult to Muslims.

Millions of pounds are raised by British mosques and sent to support terrorist groups in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir. One, Jaish-e-Mohammed, is thought to get £5 million a year from British donors. Close ties also exist between JuB, the representative body of Deobandi scholars in Britain, and JuI, a powerful Deobandi political party whose leader has been called Pakistan’s “patron of jihad”.

The JuB (Jamiat Ulama e Britain, or Council of Muslim Theologians in Britain) claims to have 500 affiliated institutions, including mosques and schools. Its general council includes Deobandi scholars from Bradford, Leeds, Dewsbury, Rotherham, Wakefield, Oldham, Burnley, Nottingham, Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Cardiff, Crawley, Luton and London.

The JuB’s general secretary, Sheikh Mohammad Ismail, who lives in Sheffield, is a graduate of Jamia Uloom Islamia, in Binori Town, the same Karachi seminary that spawned Jaish-e-Mohammed. The International Crisis Group calls it “the fountainhead of Deobandi militancy countrywide” and says that “a generation of former students has spread a web of similar jihadi madrassas across Karachi and beyond”.

Several young Muslims from Bradford are students at the Binori Town seminary, which has close ties with the Taleban and has fuelled internal sectarian violence.

The JuB’s website has links to both of the Karachi seminaries visited by The Times. It also carries speeches by Fazlur Rehman, who heads the most powerful faction of the JuI (Jamiat Ulema e-Islam), the Deobandi political party in Pakistan. In one speech, Mr Rehman responds to the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad with an impassioned attack on the West. Muslims will only satisfy the West, he says, “when we give up our Islamic teaching, civilisation, morals, worship and religion”. He also laments Pakistan’s support for America and Britain in Afghanistan. “They have turned Pakistan into a dog. They have become our masters and we are their slaves . . . if they attack our civilisation then we will attack them back.”

Mr Ismail told The Times that the JuB, founded in 1962, was an independent organisation, opposed to “any kind of political violence”. But he said:

“You’re trying to link us with terrorism. What about all those masonic and Zionist organisations? What about Palestine, what about Iraq? Where are those weapons of mass destruction? You never, ever talk about that.”

Deobandis run 8,350 of Pakistan’s 13,000 madrassas, which educate 1.5 million children, mostly from poor, rural families. More than a third of the Deobandi seminaries are directly affiliated to Mr Rehman’s JuI. Mr Rehman, a regular visitor to Britain, told The Times that although his party and the JuB were not affiliated organisationally, “we have a unanimity of thought and ideology”.

Khalid Masud, the chairman of Pakistan’s widely respected Council of Islamic Ideology, despairs that medieval thinking still dominates Islamic discourse and acts as a rigid barrier against integration in Britain.

He was “saddened but not surprised” to read a sermon in which Riyadh ul Haq, a leading Deobandi preacher, urged British Muslims not to make friends with Jews or Christians.

“This is a very normal thing that you hear in sermons here as well. He is not in a minority. They \ are in the Koran and in our literature, but the historical circumstances have changed,” he said.

“These are medieval teachings, yet even for people living in Europe they have not become irrelevant. That is what surprises me. These are worrying times for all of us.”