Dr Israr Ahmed said that Deoband movement has entered the decline phase.
My personal feeling is that before Mehdi (AS) Deoband is the last Mujaddid.
Whatever Deoband has taught is still with us while there is a huge turmoil in Ummah but we can not say that teachings of Islam are gathering dust. Of course every single accusation made by Dr Israr Ahmed holds water and is a constant prick in my mind. The issues ignored by Deoband are indeed the focus of my attention.
This in few words is my status report of Deoband but I am all ears if brothers and sisters want to add more things.
report post quote code quick quote reply
Winner x 1
Informative x 3
Muslim Ummah aspires to attain a rightful and honored place among the civilizations of the world and make our proportionate contribution towards international peace, progress and happiness of humanity.
We spend hundreds of hours ensuring you receive a quality service from this site. We do not fall into the advertisement schemes as all the ads contain elements of Haraam including Haraam Islamic links. Please consider setting up a £1 monthly donation. May Allah (swt) reward you.
My personal feeling is that before Mehdi (AS) Deoband is the last Mujaddid
Pretty outrageous claim...
1. Numerous times in the past Allah Taala have sent a SINGLE scholar with whom things were done for the Ummah which is more than what was achieved by the whole Deoband ulema put together. Eg:Imam Shaafi, Imam Ghazzali, Imam Nawawi etc.
2. The Sahabah thought the coming of Dajjal was around the corner, so its natural for someone to 'assume' coming of Al Mahdi is around the corner.
This is not an outrageous claim to say the least. I would argue that the tablighi jamaat is such a unique group that what it has achieved probably rivals the big names you have mentioned in certain ways at least in terms of numbers if one is honest
. I have heard myself the great critique akram nadwi mention that shaykh younis is a greater muhaddith than hafiz ibn hajar rh. About the great names you mentioned than Imam nawawi's most famous books are as follows;
1. Riyad us saliheen- Deobandi rival is fazaail e amaal. On a personal level I prefer riyad us saliheen but I would argue the fazaail e amaal is more widely read than riyad us saliheen these days
Imam nawawi's kitab ul adkhaar second famous book. The number of people reading it is far less than those who do the wird of say somebody like pir zulfiqar or the other awraad of the ulema of deoband
Imam nawawi's third famous book al majmu. The deobandis can rival it with something like awjasul masalik
2. Imam ghazli rh although a giant let us not forget he was extremely weak in hadith. Also his sulook is mostly inapplicable today so to claim that his impact is greater than the ulema of deoband in this day and age is debatable
I am not demeaning any of the great names mentioned above. I myself also believe that the tajdeed of the ulema of deoband has almost come to an end and we await a new savior weather that is another group, hazrat Mahdi or another scholar. Also having said the above I think it is absurd to make comparisons between Imam nawawi and the ulema of deoband etc as they lived in very different times with very different challenges.
It is a very valid question and discussion. I personally feel that the next mujadid needs to work on Islamic governance, giving us a new system of education that combines worldly and Islamic knowledge and removes the scrooge of interest. Whoever can do that will surely have done a lot of the Tajdid work of our times. ALLAH bless. I asked maulana yahya nomani db this question and he said we should work to whatever is in our capacity and not worry about such things about where the next mujadid shall come, which group etc.
A bit silly to compare modern day scholars of today to the giants of the past, I'm sorry brother but there is no comparison. In fact if scholars of today heard that such a comparison was made I'm sure they'll be offended.
To call Imam Ghazzali rahimullah weak in ahadith is naive and forgive me but it shows you need to read up more on him, he wasn't known as 'hujjatul islam' just like that or due to his so called weakness in ahadith.
All mujadids since the start after death of Prophet have worked in and brought reform/revival in various areas, Imam Ghazzali if you read his books and what others have written on him was a legend no doubt and you'll appreciate him more, he virtually single handedly refuted all the atheists and their stupid arguments, he himself transversed on that journey and Subhanallah Allah guides whom he wishes, he came out alright, he himself says it could have easily been the opposite. If it wasn't for him even the muslims today would be engulfed with the arguments of agnostics and for him to deal with it hundreds of years ago and for it later to become a text, a guide for the future muslims says a lot, and that's just one of his achievements.
His tassawwuf is unheard of ? Yet all Ulema love translating and giving lectures on his books. His ihya uloom deen is a master piece to name one. I've heard that if all of ahadith books were to be lost and the ummah went into darkness , then a lot of it could be traced using the works of Imam al-ghazzali rahimullah. That's not a small claim brother. Many old prominent sufis and their old sufi ways of the old are virtually non-existent today or they don't exist on mainstream social media, also every sufi teacher that comes brings reform of some kind to his order, the sufism practiced today has principles from the old yes but its not the same as it was at the time of the ones who are known as pioneers/leaders/ of those respective sufi orders. What ever reason it occurred for well that's another story.
Yes the Ulema of Deoband have great work and hats off to them and have produced many leading pioneers and illuminaries, and to be honest they're jamaat also can be argued as being one of the most successful today compared to others of today globally, however the only people who follow the deobandi manhaj today are the people of the sub-continent (majority desis) no one else virtually does and even that is a smaller number, truth is they're will probably be more brelvis then deobandis, its certainly like that for Pakistan anyway.. Yes another thing is that they done well was the preservation of the haqq.
In regards to tabliigh jamaat then yes I belive Maulana Ilyas rahimullah was also a mujadid, his effort has spread to the four corners of the world today and millions are benefitting, a grass roots effort and much needed especially when people started to forget total deen and even the kalima. An effort much needed in today's time.
So the comparison of recent scholars to old is a bit foolish, I don't think the new ones are any where near the old. Different time's, different places and different needs of the Ummah during those times and Allah sent mujadid's accordingly.
I agree with you the comparison is not correct to begin with. About Imam ghazali's weakness in hadith this is well known. He was a huge scholar no doubt but hadith was not his strong point as is well known about other sufis expect as shaykh younis who rightly points that that shah waliullah and his heirs (ulema of deoband) were generally well versed in hadith despite being sufis. I actually agree that Imam ghazali was the mujadid of his time and there is no doubt he was a great person. About Imam ghazali's work it is not unheard in the sense of translating etc but in terms of practicality. There is a famous saying amongst scholars that the ghazali way of extreme hunger and mujahidah is not applicable and there are very few who can teach and apply Ihya. About the ulema of deoband not being well known outside the indopak well amongst the ulema they are well known. Even Imam ghazali and imam nawawi would be hardly known to the awaam of the world though Imam nawawi's riyadh us saliheen does seem to have a greater acceptance amongst all peoples and cultures. I also agree that to make comparisons between earlier and later generations is not correct and nobody can compare to imam junaid baghdadi, imam abu hanifa, imam shafi etc. Still I do believe that some of the later scholars can achieve a high rank like they say of imam mosa bazi rh, imam anwar shah kashmiri, imam abdul hayy lucknawi and in today's time shaykh Younis. I think the scholars that I mentioned at least in the field of hadith excelled many of their earlier contemporaries.
May Allah reward them all for the good they have done.
Perhaps a separate thread should be set up for the works of deoband and their is no denying that in the good they have done, if it weren't for them we'd be dancing at graves and involved all kinds of shirk in the name of tawassul and what not and when our youngers would ask for daleel we'd say 'oh our elders used to do it'.
Just the comparison was a bit unnecessary. I still don't think none of the new schoalrs can surpass the old no matter what and that's just my own belief.
The question is how far back? So let us take imam mosa bazi rohani. If someone says his book on the names of Rasulullah sallahualahiwasalam is more detailed than imam suyuti's book on the subject is that incorrect or would such a comparison be ok?
London bhai to say imam ghazzali is 'very weak' in hadith is an OUTRAGEOUS statement! Very weak? La hawla wala quwwatta illa billah.
Its well known that ihya uloomdeen contains weak hadith just like fazail e amaal. But to say Al Ghazzali as 'very weak' is bit too far. Imam Ghazzali was a good Faqih of eastern school of Shaafi fiqh. You cant be a good Faqih if you are 'very weak' in hadith. Be careful while talking abt ulema.
In order to be a faqih, Ulama say that a person must have a basic understanding of the various sciences of Ahadith as well as many other preconditions. Imam al-ghazzali rahmatullahi 'alaih was and is recognized as a faqih so he coudn't be "extremely" weak in Hadith. One of the reasons Ulama gave for his weakness was that he was focused more on the inner sciences and refuting batil philosophies during his time, which by the way, paved way for the entire ummah to immensely benefit (including salafis who use his material to refute batil philosophical beliefs) from his work till this day...
On the other hand, for good reasons, I don't think it's wise to compare and contrast our latter predecessors with earlier ones regarding tajdid of the ummah. It opens up many problems. Each group has their own time. Let's respect that, insha'Allah...
They were a group who have passed on. To their benefit will be the actions they have earned and to your benefit will be the actions that you earn. You will not be questioned about what they did. al-Baqarah:134
Those who come after them say, "Our Rabb! Forgive us and our brothers who passed before us with Imaan. And do not place any impurity in our hearts against those who have Imaan. O our Rabb! Indeed You are the Most Forgiving, Most Merciful. al-Hashar:10
report post quote code quick quote reply
Agree x 1
Winner x 3
الشكر قيد الموجود وصيد المفقود
Shukr binds the present (bounties) and traps the absent (bounties)
molana yahya nomani told us not to worry about the identity of the next mujadid and i think its fair to say we shouldnt be comparing scholars either. I mean are we running an analytical centre or something.
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
We apologise but you have been denied access to report posts in this thread. This could be due to excessively reporting posts and not understanding our forum rules. For assistance or information, please use the forum help thread to request more information. Jazakallah