The intent here is to merely highlight *some* of the major mistakes written by Molvi Wahiduddin Khan. In no way is this an exhaustive attempt to seek out all of the mistakes he has made throughout his writings over the past few decades. We only hope that the concerned reader will read the below blunders and save himself from this man’s fitnah. It appears that many Muslims are totally unaware of his true beliefs on account of his books being sold by certain Deobandi bookshops such as al-rashad and onlineshariah, and the fact that he graduated from a "Deobandi" madrasah.
Reference #1 and #2:
The June of 2007 issue of the "al-Risala" magazine downloadable straight from the official al-Risala website:
www . A l r i s a l a dot org/Al_Risala_Urdu_Monthly/Yr2007/June2007/June-2007.pdf
Please refer to his "maseeh model ki aamid-i-saani" article in this issue. Also, please see the October of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah" magazine downloadable here:
www. A l r i s a l a dot org /Al_Risala_Urdu_Monthly/Yr2007/Oct2007/oct-2007.pdf
Please refer to his "payghambar-i-inqilaab" and "deen aur minhaaj" articles in this issue as well.
To start, Wahiduddin Khan states that the model of the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) is no longer applicable in certain partial matters and that we need to instead adopt the model of Christ:
"...Muhammadi model zamani haalat ki nisbat se juzi'i taur par QAABIL-E-INTIBAAQ NA RAHEY GA. IS KE BAJAAI' MASEEH MODEL JUZI'I TAUR PAR QAABIL-E-INTIQAB BAN JAAIY GA."
To make his point all the more clearer, Waheeduddin Khan writes that the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) should not be considered to be the “final model” with regards to his minhaaj (pattern/model, i.e. sunnah/qidwah/uswah), but only as the “final prophet” with regards to the deen (religion):
"...LAYKIN MINHAAJ KE I`TIBAAR SE AAP FINAL MODEL NA THEI."
Furthermore, he continues by stating that the glorious verse wherein Allah ta`ala Praises the noble character of the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) in the Qur’an (al-ahzaab:21) by referring to him as having “uswah hasanah” (beautiful model), is actually proof that his model is NOT complete/perfect (i.e. “kaamil”). He states that for one to think of him possessing a model that is “kaamil” (complete/perfect) is “without doubt an incorrect belief”:
"Agar is mawqa` par Qur'an main "uswah kaamilah" ka lafz ist`imal kiya jaa taa to log ghalat fahmi mai pardsaktey thei...AISA SAMAJHNA BILAA SHUBHA AIK GHALAT FAHMI HOTI..."
To knock home the point made above, he reiterates by stating that the Prophetic example is not the final example to be followed in every time and age. Again, he says the proof for this lies in the fact that the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) was referred to as having “uswah hasanah” (beautiful model), as stated above, and that Allah ta`ala did NOT refer to him as having “uswah kaamilah” (complete/perfect model):
"laykin AAP HAR SOORAT HAAL KE LIYE AAKHIRI NAMOONA NA THEI...CHUNANCHE AAP KEI LIYE "USWAH HASANAH" KA LAFZ AAYA HAI, NA KE "USWAH KAAMILAH"..."
Moreover, he continues by saying that it is not even possible to have a Prophet that has a “final model” to be followed by everyone in all ages and times:
"...PAYGHAMBAR KA FINAL MODEL HONA BHI MUMKIN NAHIN."
He continues onwards to declare that Sayyiduna `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) (Jesus Christ) will not be returning to earth again and that all of the evidences that say he will are actually referring to the “return” of the following of Christ’s (maseeh) model (minhaaj) and NOT the return of Sayyiduna `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) himself.
And that the following of Christ’s model by the Muslims will be more applicable and more warranting of followership than the model of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama):
"In ke saheeh ta'weel ya hai ke ba`d zamaaney mai jo cheez waaqi` hogi wo MASEEH KI AAMED SAANI NAHIN HAI, BALKE MASEEH KE MODEL KI AAMED SAANI HAI. ya`ni ba`d ke zamaaney main haalat le andar aisi tabdeeliyaan waaqi` hoonge ke haalat ke i`tibaar se hazrat maseeh ka `amaliy model ziyaadah qaabil-e-intibaaq (applicable) ban jaa'igaa."
Additionally, he writes that from the perspective of “minhaaj” (pattern/example/model), the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) was NOT the final model. He ends by stating that this is precisely the reason why Christ will descend again, i.e. referring to Christ’s model. The obvious implication here being that the return of the model of Christ is to abrogate and supplant the model left by the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama):
"LAYKIN MINHAAJ KE I`TIBAAR SE AAP FINAL MODEL NA THEI. GHAALIBAN YAHI WAJHA HAI KE HADITH MAI YA PAISHEEN GOYI KI GAIYI HAI KE AAKHIRI ZAMANEY MAI MASEEH DUBAARAH NAAZIL HUN GEY."
This is the August of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah" magazine which can be downloaded here:
www. A l r i s a l a dot org /Al_Risala_Urdu_monthly/Yr2007/Aug2007/aug-2007.pdf
Please see pages 2-4 for his belief in the Dajjaal being an ideology and not an individual and his belief that the Mahdi (`alayhi al-salaam) is the same individual as Sayyiduna `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam), both of which are not Sunni beliefs:
"hadeeth ke muttabiq, us zamaaney main aik "rajul mu'min" uthaiga jo dajjaal ko qatl kareygaa, magar ye qatl jismaaniy ma`non main na hogaa balke fikriy ma`non main hogaa, ya`ni dajjaal fitna ko expose karnaa. Dajjaaliyat aik `ilmiy fitnah hogaa...is main "shahaadat" se muraad gawaahiy hai, na ke jaan ki qurbaaniy. deen-e-haqq ki yahi woh azeem tareen gawaahiy hai jis ko hadeeth main "qatl-e-dajjaal" kaha gaya hai. Dajjaal akbar ka muqaabalah karney waaley is rajul-e-mu'min ko hadeeth main "mahdi" kaha gaya hai. Ghaaliban yahi wajh hai ke aik hadeeth mai mahdi aur maseeh donon ko aik shakhsiyat bataayaa gaya hai..."
As for topics unrelated to `aqeedah, then one can find many more mistakes written by him in his articles relating to ijtihaad, jihaad, abrogation, etc. IF anyone has doubts concerning the above quotes then please feel free to check the original Urdu in the articles found in their respective al-Risala journals. We urge anyone who has doubts regarding the appropriateness/correctness of the content of these quotes to consult with their local Sunni scholars.
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.
Are their any problems with his English translation of the Quran?
wa alaykum as-salam,
@ Talib84: Unfortunately, I'm unfamiliar with his translation of the Qur'an. But given the fact he completely abuses the meaning of al-Ahzab:21, I would steer clear from anything written by him. Period.
@ Moulana Junaid: JazakAllahu khayran for this link. I was thinking that someone in India must've written against him by now but did not find any literature on my own. I'll be sure to look through this book insha'Allah.
Also, I forgot to mention in my previous post that all of the quotes I posted were sent to Mr. Wahiduddin Khan himself as well as his student, Khaja Kaleemuddin, in hopes they can offer a thorough explanation of these beliefs. No response was ever received by W.K. himself but Khaja Kaleemuddin did reply but with nothing substantial, just mere hollow words. It is important to note here that neither Wahiduddin Khan or Khaja Kaleemuddin ever denied writing such words or recanted/repented from them.
In his article, "Maseehi Model", Wahiduddin Khan states that it is unislamic to refer to the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) as a 'kaamil model':
“aisi haalat main kaamil model kaa lafz aik aysaa lafz hai jo ghayr fitri bhi hai aur ghayr `amli bhi aur nateejatan ghayr islaami bhi".
He further states in the same article that the Prophet Muhammad's (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) example in some regards are inapplicable for Muslims today and he seems to be implying that the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) knew that this would happen which is why he said that Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) will return, i.e. so that Muslims living in that time should abandon the Prophetic example for the example of Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam):
“magar bad key zamaaney main payghmabar islaaam key hawaley sey ye model musalmaanon key liye qaabil-e-daryaaft nahi rahey gaa. Ghaaliban isi liye aap ney is ki waapasi ko maseeh ki waapasi se ta`beer kiyaa.”
He conflates the two personalities of al-Mahdi and Prophet `Isa (`alayhimaa al-salaam) as one and the same in his article "Qayamat ka Alarm":
"...mahdi aur maseeh donon aik hi shakhsiyat key alaamati taur par do alag alag naam hain. Aakhiri dawr main zaahir honey waali aik hi shakhsiyat hai, jis ko kisi riwaayat main rajul-e-mu’min kahaa giyaa hai aur kisi riwaayat main mahdi, aur kisi riwaayat main maseeh".
In this same article he also states that al-Dajjal's killing will not be that of a physical killing but of a symbolic meaning:
"hadees main qatl-e-dajjal kaa zikr hai. Is sey muraad dajjaal kaa jismaani qatl nahi hai. Balke dajjaal key fitney ko be-zaree`a dalaa’il qatl karnaa hai.”
He also states in the same article that it is a common misconception amongst the masses that Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) will physically descend to earth and then kill al-Dajjal. He further states that both of these are unsubstantiated by the Qur'an and Hadith!:
“is bahas se ta`alluq rakhney waalaa aik mas’alah woh hai jis ko maseeh ki aamid saani kaa mas’alah kahaa jaataa hai. `aam tawr par ye samjhaa jaataa hai ke hazrat maseeh aasmaani main zindah hain aur aakhiri zamaaney main woh jismaani tawr par aasmaan se utar kar zameen par aa’ien gey aur dajjaal ko qatl karein gey. ye tasawwur agarche logon main kaafi pahlaa huwaa hai. Magar woh apni mawjoodah soorat main na qur’aan se saabit hotaa hai aur na aahaadees se”.
Furthermore, he states in the same article that there is no riwaayaat concerning the physical descent of Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam)!:
“laykin qaabil-e-ghawr baat ye hai ke un main sey kisi bhi riwaayat main ye alfaaz mawjood nahi ke maseeh jismaani tawr par aasmaani se utar kar zameen par aa’eyn gey. Aasmaan se utarney ka nazriya riwaayaton main mukammal tawr par ghayr mawjood hai."
In his "Qurb-e-Qayamat ka Mas'alah" article in the July 2008 edition of al-Risala journal, he accuses storytellers for interpolating into hadiths that Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) will be physically returning to Earth again and that no such additions were there before in the hadiths and that this is how this belief of his physical descent spread amongst the masses:
“Haqeeqat ye hai ke qurb-e-qiyaamat ki jo `alaamatein hadeeth ki kitaabon main aayii hain, woh bajaa’i khud durust hain. Laykin ba`d key zamaaney main qussaas ney us main par `ajooba baton ke idaafey kar dey. Ye idaafay chun key `arabi zabaan main they, is liyey log un ko asal riwaayat kaa hissa samajhney lagey. Us zamaaney main kitaabat kaa riwaaj bahot kam thaa. Ziyaadah tar baathein zabaaniy Tawr par dahraa’iy jaati thein, is liyey yey idaafey nihaayat aasaaniy key saat riwaayaat ka juz ban gayey.”
All in all, it can be clearly seen from the above that this man is wholly ignorant in the sciences of `aqaa'id and hadith.
We have made several attempts in contacting both him and his students to further explain themselves for the past 3 years yet none of them have ever furnished a response replying to the points made above.
Molvi Wahiduddin Khan sahib, of India, has written various articles wherein he states the following points of contention:
1.) That the blessed “uswah” (example) of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) is NOT “kaamil” (perfect/complete).
2.) Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) is the “final model” only with regards to the deen (religion) but NOT with regards to minhaaj.
3.) The minhaaj (model) of Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) is more applicable for Muslims to follow today than the “uswah” of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama).
4.) Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) will NOT be physically returning back to earth again.
5.) Prophet `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) is the same personality as al-Mahdi (`alayhi al-salaam), i.e. they are not two different individuals.
6.) Al-Dajjaal will not be a physical being but only an ideology.
We would like to seek the fatwa of Darul Uloom al-Madania’s Iftaa’ Committee with regards to if the aforementioned six beliefs are within Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah or not? If not, are they also outside of Islam?
We have attached the relevant quotes as well as the original articles as an addendum for your perusal.
September 13, 2010
[Here are the references that were sent to Dar al-Iftaa’:
- The June of 2007 issue of the "al-Risala" magazine: Please refer to his "maseeh model ki aamid-i-saani" article in this issue. Also, please refer to the "payghambar-i-inqilaab" and "deen aur minhaaj" articles in the October of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah"
- August of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah"
- “Maseehi Model” article
- “Qayamat ka Alaram” article
- “Uswa-e-Hasana” article]
The above mentioned beliefs are contrary to Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah, yet we cannot say that those who believe in the above are not Muslim.
Contrary to the collective belief of the ummah, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan says that the second coming of Christ is in fact not his real, physical coming but the coming of his role. He says that it is generally believed that Jesus Christ is alive in the Heavens and will come down physically on earth in the final phase and kill Dajjal (anti-Christ). Though this belief is widespread, it is proved neither by the Quran nor Hadith in its present form. In the books of hadith, there are two dozen reliable narrations which talk of the re-appearance of Christ but it is noteworthy that none of them explicitly states that Christ will descend physically from the Heavens. In fact the second coming of Christ means the coming of the role of Christ. In other words, when in the final years, Dajjal will appear, a member of the Muhammadi ummah will rise and playing the role akin to Christ’s, face the trials of Dajjal and finish him off. (Al Risala, May 2010, Page 46)
It is evident from the excerpt that Maulana Wahiduddin Khan does not believe that Jesus Christ is alive in the Heavens. I am not sure if he believes also in the ascension of Christ or not, or like Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani believes that Jesus has expired and is buried in a neighbourhood in Srinagar (Kashmir, India). The Maulana does not even believe that Jesus Christ will descend physically from the Heavens. He only believes that his descent means the coming of his role or character which he will play on the appearance of Dajjal for which his physical presence is not needed.
A member of the Muhammadi ummah will rise and fight him. Maulana Wahiduddin Khan claims that this is not his personal point of view but subscribed also by Fakhruddin Raazi, Jamaluddin Afghani, Mufti Mohammad Abdah, Sheikh Syed Rasheed Raza Misri, Sheikh Mohammad Shaltut, Dr Mohammad Iqbal, Maulana Obaidullah Sindhi, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Sheikh Mohammad Bin Ahmad Abu Zahrah, Sheikh Mohammad Al Ghazali.
But he has not written in which books and in what words have they presented their points of view. Even if we suppose that these few personalities also do not believe in the physical descent of Christ, it does not have any bearing on the core of the issue as the belief of the descent of Christ is an established belief of the Ahl-e-Sunnat Wal-Jama'at which is based on the Quran and Hadith. Maulana Wahiduddin Khan’s claim that the physical descent of Christ is not proved by the Quran and the Hadith is false.
The truth is that the descent of Christ around the Day of the Judgement is proved by the Quran as well as Hadith. Let’s consult the Quran first. The tale of Jesus Christ is narrated in a little detail in surah Al-e-Imran and surah Al Nisa in which it is also stated that God protected Jesus Christ from the evil of the Jews; he could neither be slain nor crucified but he was lifted towards the Heavens alive.
This has been stated clearly in two verses of surah Al Nisa: “And they neither killed him, nor crucified him, but they fell in doubt.”(Al Nisa: 157). In the next verse it is said: “But Allah lifted him towards Himself” (Al Nisa: 158).
It is said that the Quran mentions ‘ascent to heaven’ but does not mention ‘descent to earth’. It gives the impression that it’s a fabricated story. The answer is that the Quran has its own style. It states many things in brief, sometimes giving only hints which have been explained by Hadhrat Mohammad (PBUH) in his sayings. If the Quran does not mention it, it makes no difference.
The books of hadiths mention it. And these hadiths are not one or two, ten or twenty but more than hundred in which the Holy Prophet (PBUH) has given us the tidings of the second coming of Jesus Christ in the world stating in detail the event of descent and the circumstances to evolve thereafter. But if one insists to see the prediction of the descent in the Quran, he may see this verse:” And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them; (Al Nisa: 159).
Just another day at refutationforum.com
By the way, who is Wahiduddin Khan?
In north India there is a state called UP, Uttar Pradesh, the Northern State. Deoband is located in its western part. It is a big state. In eastern part there is a district called Azamgarh. By and large it is economically weak district and because of that its people have been making forays out side that place. Including places all over the world.
People who left that place as workers have risen to the posts of Prime Minister, for example in Surinam. The district has got full grown Madarsas of various schools of thought. Madarsa Bayt-ul-Uloom of Deobandi thought is there.
There is a Barelwi Madrasah too, perhaps the biggest one in a place called Mubarakpur. Another madarsa Madarstaul Islah has been mentioned. Maulana Wahiduddin Khan is product of that. He was with Jamat-e-Islami, Hind (JIH) people but now is on his own. He has written lots of books. Their publication quality is excellent. These are available in Urdu, Hindi and English. He is a frequent flier. Brings out a weekly called Ar Risala. He is controversial because of his closeness to detractors of Islam and Muslims.
Does it help?
I think you should value the hard work put in by brother AYK1399.
Maulana Fadhl Muhammad sahib Hafidhahullah rendered Waheeduddeen Khan a deviant about 20 years ago. Sadly, Darulisha'at , Karachi , still publishes his stuff.
Brother, can you tell me a little bit more about Mawlana Fadl Muhammad?
I just read a segment by him in regards to Wahiduddin Khan wherein he states the following:
"Wahiduddin Khan key muta`alliq main ne Hindustan key `ulamaa' sey poochaa to sab ki ra'iy ye hay key ye shakhs mulhid hay, bey deen hai, Hinduon ko Musalmaanon sey achaa samajhtaa hey"
Translation: "In relation to Wahiduddin Khan, I asked the scholars of India and all of their opinions were that he is a free-thinking disbeliever, without religion, and he thinks of Hindus being better than Muslims".
A few brothers attended a live talk at a masjid in the U.S.A. by Waheeduddeen Khan and they exposed his deception and deviant beliefs in front of the whole gathering. The brothers challenged him to prove his controversial viewpoints on the blessed Uswah of the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) as well as his viewpoints regarding the physical decent of Sayyiduna `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) and the coming of al-Mahdi (`alayhi al-salaam), and the physical emergence of al-Dajjaal.
Vaheeduddin Khan bluntly refused to answer the question regarding the descent of Sayyiduna `Isa (`alayhi al-salaam) even after a brother exposed his deception by selectively and partially quoting a hadith to suit his beliefs. Afterwards, when asked if he believes the blessed "uswah" to be perfect/complete, he dodged the question by simply saying that his uswah is "authentic".
The attendees of the masjid quickly caught on to this man's deviant beliefs and tactful diversions which led to even the general commoners protesting against him. One brother from the crowd said that Vaheeduddeen Khan said the word "Prophet" 9 times but did not send peace and blessings upon the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) even once during his entire talk. Wahiduddin Khan and his followers in the crowd threatened the brothers that they will call the police and said that if they don't ask appropriate questions then they can leave the masjid.
When the brothers resisted and continued to ask about his deviant beliefs in a polite and respectful manner the imam of the masjid intervened and canceled the event on the spot. The brothers said that they have been challenging Waheeduddin Khan and his followers to a written or oral debate for the past 3 years on these topics but they did not get even one response in return. In short, Wahiduddin Khan and his ardent followers' ignorance, deviant beliefs, and deception was exposed in front of everyone. Apparently this locality in America has been struggling to combat against his followers and so this was a big win for Ahl al-Sunnah, wa lillaahi al-Hamd.
Lastly, other masjids in America followed suit and canceled their respective lectures with Wahiduddin Khan upon being informed of his unsubstantiated deviant beliefs.
We are aware of his strong influence on the internet and elsewhere so we will be updating this thread in a timely manner to expose this man's beliefs insha'Allah.
A prominent Islamic scholar of the Darul Uloom Deoband, a renowned Islamic seminary in India, has asked Muslims to keep away from from the speeches and writings of Maulana Waheeduddin Khan, according to an Urdu-language daily. Maulana Shah Alam of the Darul Uloom Deoband criticized Maulana Waheeduddin Khan for having a ‘‘soft corner [spot]’’ for Qadianiat, i.e. the beliefs of Ahmadi Muslims, according to a report in the Urdu-language daily Roznama Sahafat.
Maulana Shah Alam leads a campaign against Ahmadi Muslims and in this role is an official of Tahaffuz-e-Khatm-e-Nabuwat, a group that campaigns to enforce the belief that Islam’s Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet of god.Ahmadi Muslims, often dismissed as Qadianis and Mirzais, are criticized for not believing that prophethood ended with Prophet Muhammad .
Maulana Shah Alam brought up a 1978 article by Maulana Waheeduddin Khan in which he is supposed to have defended Ahmadi Muslims. ‘‘In 1978, Khan, in his Al-Risala magazine, urged Islamic clerics not to denounce Qadianis,’’ he added.
Maulana Waheeduddin Khan is an Islamic reformer and an author of more than 100 books on various issues in Islam. He publishes Al-Risala magazine from his base in New Delhi. Source: Roznama Sahafat, India, June 21, 2010
In his most recent article, entitled "Spirituality vs. Materialism" dated July 11th 2011, Wahiduddin Khan relays an incident that took place in America wherein a man criticized him for not sending salawaat/salaam whenever he mentioned the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) in his lecture. Wahiduddin addresses the man's issue in this article.
He writes that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (radiyaAllaahu `anhu) never sent salawat/salam upon the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama) when he said his famous words to `Umar bin al-Khattab (radiyaAllaahu `anhu) "man kaana ya`budu Muhammadan..." (Whoever worshipped Muhammad...). However, the hadith in "Sahih al-Bukhari" clearly states that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (radiyaAllaahu `anhu) did in fact say the salawaat/salaam after uttering the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallama). As can be clearly seen here:
(link of hadith doesnt work from orignal post)
(Audio link) Listen from 0:57 ( Jazakumullah khair to colonel sahab for providing link of the talk. He begins admonishing for usage of "ghair Qaum" to non muslims, saying it is against spirit of dawah ..and goes with the talk quoted in the post)
Furthermore, Wahiduddin Khan, states that the reason why Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (radiyaAllaahu `anhu) did not (allegedly; according to him) send salawat/salam was because "saying so doesn't affect the decision of one's paradise or hell"!!
In his March/1984 article in the al-Risala journal, he writes that the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) is NOT "Afdhal" (Superior) to any other Prophet and that the religion he brought is not any more "kaamil" (perfect/complete) than any other religion brought by another Prophet. Please see the following for a partial English translation of his words here:
What differentiates Wahidudin Khan from other deviants is that he is a very good writer and his articles are not too intellectual. Rather they are designed to be read by the common person. What he also does quite cleverly is write motivational and uplifting articles whilst at the same time, injecting his deviant beliefs.
The UAE a few years ago even had an Islamic event with some major names present, a few years ago... And Wahidudin Khan was guest of honour and was presented with a lifetime achievement award.
In Birmingham the IPCI bookstore has been selling his books for years.
Herein lies the problem... Maulana Waheeduddin Khan Sahab writes for the laity, but uses the methodology of the ghair muqallideen (those who reject tradition). In trying to buttress his inclusive world view, he presents academically unsound interpretations. Since he does not turn to anyone for theological and spiritual guidance, his well meaning efforts end up strengthening the forces of baatil (falsehood).
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