Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 
Top Members

OPINION ABOUT MAUDUDI SAHEB

Jump to page:

You have contributed 19.6% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
To appreciate this topic, click 'Appreciate Topic' on the right.
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#211 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 13:21
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post


I read your post after writing my last post.

Good point. If this is truly your stance (And Allah knows the intentions) then I fully and completely endorse it.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,867
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#212 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 13:26

sipraomer wrote:
View original post

www.muftisays.com/forums/13-articles--stories--more/10369...

Been saying the samre thing it in this thread since 2015 but anyways...

My second point is this (DO NOT READ BELOW IF YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN PART 1, ABOVE).

  1. Ulama have issues warnings against Maulana Maududi (RA) and to avoid him.
  2. These warnings cannot be AS IT IS applied to Jamaat-e-Islami as a whole because Jamaat-e-Islami is a Political group.

Second Reminder: I am NOT asking anyone to Join Jamaat-e-Islami as I have already said. I am saying that the Hukum of Maulana Maududi (RA) does not apply to Jamaat-e-Islami

Now which bit do you disagree withand on what Shariah grounds?



report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#213 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 13:27
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post


May Allah protect you and keep you on the straight path. I love you.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#214 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 13:29
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post


I fully agree.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#215 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 13:33
This sipraomer guy is a hasty chap and a funny one too. Maybe it's the taqaza of his age. He reacts before he reads. Funny one.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#216 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 13:36
This reactionary chap is too emotional that in a hurry he doesn't bother to know what the actual thing is. Please pray for him. May Allah grant him patience and wisdom.

Mistake Admitted.

Forgiveness Requested.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
abuzayd2k's avatar
Offline
Hindustan
1,057
Brother
164
abuzayd2k's avatar
#217 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 14:03
sipraomer wrote:
View original post

You might want to rephrase that to "forgiveness requested."

I am an ESL too, by the way.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,867
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#218 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 14:09

sipraomer wrote:
View original post

No need for an apology Insha'Allah.

Maulana Maududi (RA) and Jamaat-e-Islami inspired ISNA (America) and UKIM (Britain) and I have lots of experience with both organisations and these organisations have a very relaxed view of Sunnah, free mixing is rampant so I would NOT advise anyone to join them.

MSA (USA) and FOSIS (UK) are student bodies again loosely modelled originally after Jamiat Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba Pakistan and their practise of Sunnah differs from university to university.

Today (in 2018) none of these organisations have anything to do with Maulana Maududi (RA) or Jamaat-e-Islami…his name comes up from time to time but that is about it

Thus the Hukum of Maulana Maududi (RA) cannot apply to them. Bundling them with Maulana Maududi (RA) (as Deobandees do) will confuse people…These organisations should be called out for their indifference towards Sunnah and their lax attitude towards free mixing etc.

Maulana Maududi (RA) was a man and he has DIED. Jamaat-e-Islami (Pakistan, India and Afghanistan) are different BUT still they have some encouragement of Sunnah and generally have an unfavourable view of Secularism.

These organisations are not suitable (in my opinion), today because they are based on Secularism and Modernism.Discussing Maulana Maududi (RA) DOES NOT help addressing the main disease of secularism and Modernism in these organisations 

To me the biggest DISEASE today is MODERNISM!

report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Like x 2Agree x 2
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#219 [Permalink] Posted on 28th November 2018 14:49
Look at this sipraomer guy. He always makes a joke of himself.



Halalified YT Audio




report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#220 [Permalink] Posted on 29th November 2018 02:54
@Muadh Khan

Although, I don't want to start another debate but a genuine question is arising in my mind.

In another thread I read that you called Maulana Allah Yar Khan RH as deviant. Please correct me if I have misread as my eyesight is weak. Does not this hadith and "manners and respect which parents teach to children" apply in this case. After all, he was a genuine alim and he defeated many deviants himself.

You can disagree with his Tassawuf methodology. But based upon the opinion of some ulema (and they also didn't declare him deviant as par my info), why should one be harsher to this person who is dead now.

If you have changed your stance about him or if I have missed any post where you have clarified your position and by the word "deviant" you mean any other nice thing then my apologies again. I am not a very good reader as am short of time already.

My question.

a. These are things of the unseen like kashaf, huzuri etc. Neither we can accept them on face value nor we can deny them all together. (I am talking about in a sense Owaisi Silsila promotes and understands it). We may disagree with the methodology or show lack of trust in that methodology. However, this doesn't mean that we must not have Husn e Zann about Maulana Allah Yar Khan Rh. Who knows, he may be really a wali. How will we answer Allah and His Messenger SAWS at the day of judgement if by mistake we call a person deviant and he is in reality not deviant. After all , no one can claim that one has all the knowledge of deen (not even Shaykh ul Islam, not even Mufti Taqi DB and Mufti Rafi Usmani DB can make such a claim). So it is a possibility that it is a hidden silsila which surfaces at times all along the history. Don't accept it but don't oppose it either. Oppose it but don't abuse the person who re initiated it. After all he is dead and "the world is not a box". So what, if his methodology is contrary to the majority of akabireen of deoband. Deobandis alone are not practicing and true Muslims only.

b. If a person like Maudoodi is to be protected from harsh remarks , just because he is dead then Maulana Allah Yar Khan Sahab Rh, deserves a far more respect than him because he is dead also and who knows is on a very high status (Husn e Zann).

Disclaimer!
If you are going to say in response that where did you read that I called him a deviant? Show me the thread. Where have I said that? Please give me proof. And in reality you haven't called him deviant then please forgive me in advance and ignore this post.

Asking forgiveness in Advance,
Yours Respectfully
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
fazmy's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
102
Brother
138
fazmy's avatar
#221 [Permalink] Posted on 30th November 2018 22:02
Hadrat Mawlana Madani Rahimullah mentions the fitna of Maududi in a letter (within the article below)

The Halafi Onslaught

(Translator’s Preface: The manner in which Salafism is being promoted in the West is a cause for concern. The Salafi of the past was hell bent on going for the jugular in promoting his views and deriding Hanafis. However, the Salafi of today, far from being brash as was his predecessor, has adopted a strange methodology in promoting his views.

The Salafi of today operates with a cloak of respect under the guise of being Hanafi while subtly and gradually promoting his views against the four imams, taqlid, the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools, dar al-‘ulums, the ‘ulama and the akabir. Doublespeak is employed in the operations of the Hanafi-Salafi hybrid, and since he insists on being Hanafi, a new word has been coined to describe him: Halafi (pl. Halafis).

Over fifty years ago, the former Shaykh al-Hadith of Darul Uloom Deoband, Shaykh al-Islam Mawlana Husayn Ahmad Madani (may Allah enlighten his grave) wrote a detailed letter to Mazahir al-‘Ulum Saharanpur in relation to a teacher at the madrasah who was relieved of his duties for developing sympathies for non-Traditionalist ideas. In it, Mawlana Madani explains the track of Deoba nd and the harms of Deobandi madrasahsemploying individuals who are not of that track.[1] )

Letter to Mawlana Ri‘ayat-ullah Sahib

Lofty respected Mawlana Ri‘ayat-ullah (may his piety be increased) – Assalamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh.

Your respected letter was a cause of honour. Happiness came having learned about the goodness and wellbeing of Hadrat Mawlana Sadiq and the people of the Madrasah Mazahir al-‘Ulum and the excellent condition of the madrasah.

Respected one! We have always seen the way of our akabir. In the advices of Hadrat Nanotwi (may his secret be sanctified)—which is the charter of Dar al-‘Ulum Deoband—it has been declared necessary that the person [employed within a madrasah] is of the same track in religion (hum-mashrab). Our akabir are muqallid; they are Hanafis, Sunnis and Maturidi-Ash‘ari [in ‘aqidah]. They are people of tariqah—they are Chishti, Naqshbandi, Qadri and Suhrawardi Sufis; they dislike and avoid innovation (bid‘ah). This track has been that of our akabir and predecessors. Those contrary to this track, we do not call all of them kafir, nor do we call all of them fasiq, nor do we have enmity for all of them. However, yes, if a person were to do something that is kufr or fisq, then he will be dealt with accordingly.

The presence of someone who is not of our track, then we consider that person harmful for the institute and, instead of benefit, a necessary cause of harm. This is our experience. No institute can, in the gatherings of those of an opposing track (ghayr mashrab), bear fruit. The participation of one who rejects taqlid (ghayr muqallid) or an innovator in the administration of an institute, particularly in the teaching and imparting of knowledge, will be a means of harm and destruction. This is the case despite the opinions of these groups not reaching the level of takfir. What will, therefore, be the effect of the Qadiyanis, Shiites and extremists like them? Our akabirhave always disliked not doing taqlid and have been followers of the Hanafi mathhab and taqlid, this is what they called to and to what they gave their hearts. They remained supporters and followers of tariqah and Tasawwuf.

Maududism is more foul and deviant than the rejection of taqlid. Look at the books of Maududi. He not only encourages dislike for Imam Abu Hanifah and the imams and jurists (fuqaha). Rather, he also dishonours the Noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and the great khalifahs. Venom is spurted out regarding the imams of Hadith and the noble mujtahids. If a teacher is of this view, then what type of poison will be given to students—evaluate this yourself. The person who speaks absurd things in relation to Imam Abu al-Hasan Ash‘ari, Imam Ghazali, Mujaddid Alf-i-Thani, Shah Waliullah, Shah ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, Khwaja Mu‘in al-Din Chishti et al and whose writings are full of this, then the teacher who considers him correct, what sort of deviance and error will he be the cause of amid students. Evaluate this yourself.

Because of this, we only say that those who follow this track should definitely not be in an institute. Students or teachers should not look at the books of Maududi—assess this yourself. We have observed such that if someone, despite being of the same track, was either lacking in pious actions (be-‘amal) or whose actions were bad (bad-‘amal), then such a person would be of great harm in the administration of education.

I consider the action of Haji Qa’im al-Din to be correct. If Molwi ‘Abd al-Halim Sahib is of the same view as the Maududis and is in support of them, and he has established this view having read his books etc. then he should definitely be excluded from the institute. What takes place in future is your choice. The announcement we have made regarding the Maududis has been done with thought and understanding having taken into consideration his books and actions and having witnessed his impact. That which has not been written so far and not been published yet is much more. His books are full of deviancy. Be vigilant, be vigilant. Wassalam.

Nang-i-Aslaf
Hussayn Ahmad (may he be forgiven)
Deoband

(Maktubat bi-Silsilah Mawdudi Jama‘at, letter 14, page 101, and also Maktubat-Shaykh al-Islam, letter 14, volume 3, page 89)
report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,867
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#222 [Permalink] Posted on 30th November 2018 23:40

sipraomer wrote:
View original post

No need to seek forgiveness or apologise. I am human and make mistakes and many of them and I will be happy to be corrected.

I need to look into what I said, where, how and when, until I do that; I want you to grasp something and this probably the 3rd time I am repeating this.

1.    I am NOT asking anyone to have Husnud-Dhun towards Maulana Maududi (RA)
2.    I am NOT defending Maulana Maududi (RA)
3.   I am NOT asking anyone to read his books or listen to his talks etc, in fact I am telling people to stick to other authentic Ulama

Do you grasp these 3 points? Please do NOT move below the line until you have read and understood these 3 points, ask me if something is not clear.



Give me time to look into what I wrote and what I said in 2014 when Shaykh Akram Awan (RA) was alive.

Here is the thread:

Refutation of Shaykh Akram Awan and Naqshbandi Owaisi Silsila

www.muftisays.com/forums/27-sharing-portal/8236--refutati...

Here is the matter of your concern:

www.muftisays.com/forums/27-sharing-portal/8236--refutati...

15: Refutation of Shaykh Akram Awan and Naqshbandi Owaisi Silsila

The chain of transmission of this cult like Silsila has been exposed here.

The specific refutation of Shaykh Akram Awan by Darul-Iftaa, Jamiatur-Rasheed (Karachi) has been produced here.
[QUOTE=Jamiatur-Rasheed (Karachi)]Fatwa from Hazrat Shaykhul Islam Allamah Taqi Usmani Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum) on the Tareeqa and Akram Awan's Shaykh can be read here

After the fact that the Tareeqa and the Shaykh is discarded, below is the Fatwa specifically on Shaykh Akram Awan himself:

Question: What is the opinion of Ulama-e-Kiraam regarding Maulana Akram Awan? What is their opinion regarding keeping Islahi connection or even reverence or respect for him?

Answer: After investigation we discovered the following regarding Akram Awan:

This person does Bay’t in Naqshbandi-Owaisi Silsila but there are many absurdities in this person’s Tareeqa e.g
  1. Guaranteed claims to ensure that Mureeds will be introduced to Sayyidina Nabi .
  2. Guaranteed claims that guidance and benefit will be received from the person (inside) the grave
  3. Many other (similar) despicable innovations (Bid’aat)

Thus no Islah (Tassawuff) contact should be maintained with this person at all. Instead connection to Ahlulllah who have the confirmation of Ulamah with them should be sought. If such Mashaykh are not (readily) available then the works and compilations of our Mashykh (e.g. Hazrat Thanwi (RA) and his Khulafah) should be benefitted from.

We are performing further investigations into the ideologies and methods of this man (Akram Awan) and our findings will be published once complete.

The answer is correct!

Verified by

(Mufti) Abu Muhammad Habibullah
(Mufti) Saeedullah
(Mufti) Ahmed Afnaan
14th of Safar 1432

Darul-Iftaa, Jamiatur-Rasheed (Karachi) [/QUOTE]

The condemnation of the entire Silsila by Hazrat Shaykhul Islam Allamah Taqi Usmani Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum) has also been produced.
[QUOTE=Shaykh Mufti Taqi Usmani (HA)]We now produce first Fatwa against this Tareeqa and the Shaykh of Shaykh Akram Awan by Hazrat Shaykhul Islam Allamah Taqi Usmani Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum).

The legal status of Kashf of the graves and witnessing of the Anwaar and Tajalliyat

Question: Maulana Allah yar Khan Saheb has sent his Khalifa Abdur-Razaq Saheb to Naushki (District Shaagi). He is an old Mureed and the Maslak of Maulana Allah yar Khan Saheb is as follows:
  1. Naqshbandi-Owaisi Sailsila in Tassawuff
  2. They categorically guarantee that Kashf of graves will be granted and everything inside the graves will be revealed. Direct contact with Nabi will be established. All within 6 months of becoming Mureed
  3. Kashf of graves is declared a dead Sunnah so whosoever revives it will be rewarded equivalent to one hundred Martyrs
What is the status of joining this Tareeqa? Is spiritual training from Hazrat Owais Qarni (RA) permissible in Shariah or not.

Answer: If Allah (SWT) permits Kashf of the grave and witnessing of the Anwaar and Tajalliyat on a Servant of his then this is not against Shariah but these are neither are requirements nor requisites of Shariat or Tareeqat. The requisites are following of Sunnat and Shariat and reformation of one’s actions and morals. To regard Kashf (and such) as the requisites is Bid’at. Those who claim these requisites should be avoided and instead a Shaykh should be searched who is follower of the Sunnah and the one who concerns himself with the reformation of actions and morals.

(Servant) Muhammad Taqi Usmani
Fatwa number 1211, Volume 32, Fatawa-e-Usmani
[/QUOTE]
The objection to this was how do we know that this refutation is specific to this Silsila and Maulana Allahyaar Khan, here is the response.

[QUOTE= Summary Shaykh (Mufti) Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) as he]

Maulana Allahyar Khan Chakralwi and his Dalailus-Sulook

Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed is considered amongst the Akabir of Deobandi Ulamah of last century, His stature, rank, knowledge in both Fiqh and Tassawuff is undisputed. Hazrat (RA) wrote a book entitled “The ideologies of the Modernists of our time” and in it none other than Maulana Allahyar Khan Chakralwi and his book Dalailus-Sulook Is mentioned by a chapter dedicated to their exposure and refutation.

Before reading further it must be noted that Hazrat Mufti Saheb Shaheed entitles them as “new discoveries” and this implies that these were not previously known to the earlier Deobandi Ulamah. This automatically answers the queries of praise by earlier Deobandi Ulamah as Maulana Ahmed Ali Lahori (RA) because Hazrat couldn’t have known about the views of Maulana Allahyar Khan Chakralwi.

Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) writes that Maulana Allahyar Khan Chakralwi cut his teeth on refutation of deviant groups and cults and then turned his attention to Tassawuff and authored Dalailus-Sulook but did he answer objections to Tassawuff or plant doubts in the minds of the people about Ulamah and Mashaykh. Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed praises the effort of the writer but deduces that this compilation isn’t strictly on Tassawuff by more on Ilumul-Kalam. Some of the excerpts of this book blatantly put down Ulamah and Mashaykh based on their own yardstick of the superiority of Tassawuff as Kashf of graves are as follows:


...This discussion has become lengthy. The reality is that when some of our new associates speak about Kashf of the graves the discussion proceeds but those devoid of the illumination of the Baatin become upset. Khaleefas, claimants of Waliyat, Majaz, Peer-e-Tareeqat and who knows what sort of title holders when hear claims of this nature (from beginners of our Tareeqa) then they (internally) become embarrassed as they are unable to achieve them but outwardly to hide their lack of ability and to keep their respectability and credibility make up all sorts of things... (Page 123)


Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) comments that the tone, language and mannerism not only doesn’t suit the topic of Tassawuff but also degrades the writer. This passage provides credibility for the new adherents of the this Tareeqa and prepares them for debates with the “opposition”


Tassawuff is part of Religion and rejection of a part is rejection of the whole. Thus rejection of Tassawuff is (certainly) equivalent to rejection of Religion (Page 13)


Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) comments that no doubt Tassawuff (as in reformation) is an important and integral part of building an Islamic personality but to give a Fatwa that rejection of Tassawuff is rejection of Islam is a major leap particularly coming from someone whose includes Khashf of graves etc as his definition of Tassawuff and considers it a yardstick. This places the belief (Eemaan) of thousands of not only laymen but Scholars in serious jeopardy who are devoid of this “blessing” according to the author


Sufiya have an additional capability as compared to Fuqaha (Islamic Scholars) and it is that they are people of Kashf and Ilhaam (intuition). Fuqaha (Islamic Scholars) deduce Islamic rules and regulations based on personal opinions while Sufiya deduce them in the divine light of Kashf and Ilhaam (intuition) and it is obvious that divine light is better than personal opinions (Page 33)


Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) merely laments and states, “Deduction of Fuqaha (Islamic Scholars) is personal opinion and devoid of divine light???”

Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) further quotes from the same page:


I personally consider the Ijtehaad and opinion Fuqaha (Islamic Scholars) as superior since all the Sufiya were Muqallids of Imams (of Fiqh) (Page 33)


Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) further laments, “I can only wish that Maulana Allahyaar Khan was blessed with Kashf with regards to Fuqaha (Islamic Scholars), their rank and stature so he would have been prevented from making such ambiguous ,conflicting and controversial statements!”

Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) further produces to quote the definition of “Shaykh-e-Kamil” and quotes:


The one who spiritually connects a person with Nabi who is the only Waasta between the servant and His Lord . This humble servant doesn’t take Bay’ah on my own hands but simply prescribes and then after the initials lessons places the beginner in the court of Nabi who is the Peer (of Tassawwuff) of the whole world. There are no hollow claims that the Peer merely talks about placing the Mureed in the court of Nabi but the Mureed must witness and know that he is in the court of Nabi and taking Bay’t at his hands. Anyone who has no reach to the court of Nabu is a fake and conman and most importantly understand this difference between Kamil (and incomplete) Shaykh of Tassawuff and know it very well. (Page 38)

Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) states that if the writer is indeed able to take a Mureed from the beginning and place him in the court of Nabi it is a blessing but our Ulamah and Mashaykh don’t make these claims while in the state of sleep or while awake and not only don’t make this claim out of respect, reverence and humility they don’t even talk about it! But we must make exception to this new yardstick of being a “Kamil Shaykh” because over the centuries we are certain that not many Mashaykh would have reached these “dizzying heights” as the author further writes:


I have previously stated that when a person with sincerity and for seeking the truth comes to us then within 6 months he will only see the spirit of Nab i but will also converse with it

No comment is necessary!

In some passages the author suddenly flares up in anger and tries to destroy the foundations of classical Islamic Academia and writes:


Some try to envelope their jealousy in the guise of Academic discussions! They say that Kashf is a subjective matter and has no important, it may be true but tell us are the Mas’ail described in Islamic Fiqh definite? Are the declaration and distinguishing of authentic narrations from weak definite? Are the Fiqh definitions of Fardh, Sunnah, Nafil definite? If you want to undermine the importance of Kashf of the grounds of being subjective then what would you do with Islamic Fiqh? (Page 123)


Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) writes that I have never met the Maulana nor did I have any knowledge of him prior to reading this book so it’s impossible to be jealous! It is unjust (and absurd) to compare and equate classic Islamic knowledge and tradition to Kashf and then force people to believe in both of them equally and consider them both equally valid.

Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi Shaheed (RA) writes that Maulana Allahyaar Khan Saheb’s emotional and extremist reliance on the status of Kashf places the entire religion of Islam and its legacy (of knowledge) in danger as he writes: Who says that there is a chance (of being mistaken) in Kashf? We have responded that the entire religion is transmission and transmission has inherent dangers of being correct (or being false) so on account of the “possibility” of an error should we leave the whole religion?(Pages 123/124)[/QUOTE]


Q & A on the topic:


www.muftisays.com/forums/27-sharing-portal/8236--refutati...

Abdur Rahman ibn Awf wrote:

I think it would have been better and probably more productive to stick, to writing a refutal of Akram Awan, rather then extending it to the entire Silsilah, and Hazarat Maulana Allah Yaar Khan (RA)

Response by Abdullah bin Mubarak:

www.muftisays.com/forums/27-sharing-portal/8236--refutati...

As per other ulema mufti Yusuf ludhviani Shaheed ra etc, the ulema of Deoband the mainstream ones disagreed with him on his definitions of what actually constitutes a shaykh etc and on many other things, some even say he was not a deobandi. A refutation was done on Sf as well buy not one follower chose to answer, their only reply was come join our zikr, there was a brother from this forum who was also a ex mureed I believe.

InshAla one of the others should know better, read it on one of the old Sf threads.

Response by me (2014):

www.muftisays.com/forums/27-sharing-portal/8236--refutati...

I didn't write it, Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi (RA) and Mufti Taqi Usmani (HA) did.

Jzk

Important Point:

Let’s suppose that I am inconsistent and biased and taking sides. The point which I am trying to make is that it is Sunnah to not speak ill about the dead.

Let’s suppose that I did speak ill of the dead (on the forum or in real life) and I committed this error. Is your role model me OR Nabi (Sallallaho Alaihe Wassallam)? If I commit a wrong does it justify you also committing the wrong? When we were kids and our elders used to punish us they used to say, “If he jumps into the well, will you also jump into the well?”

I still do NOT know what I said, how, where and when BUT your job is to point out that I made a mistake and I should not have done so which would be good of you, NOT to justify that its ok for you to speak ill about the dead just because I “supposedly” did.

My error does not give you or anyone else the right to make the same error. You will not be able to present my behaviour as evidence of deviating from the Sunnah on the day of judgement.

I have thousands of posts and you can probably point out thousands of errors in them. Point out my errors by all means in the hundreds and I will NOT back down from correcting and apologising when my errors is clear, I make loads of mistakes.

P.S: I end by saying, I really need to look into what I said, how and when I said it etc.

report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#223 [Permalink] Posted on 1st December 2018 04:38
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post


www.muftisays.com/forums/27-sharing-portal/10388-the-trut...

Here you are calling him deviant because of his claims.

What is the meaning of the word deviant?
Is calling someone deviant an insult?
Major ulema disagreed with tassawuf methodology of Maulana Allah Yar Khan Rh but considered him deobandi, naqshbandi and an alim. Did they also call him deviant?

Since, the Maulana (Rh) is dead, is it still fair to call him deviant? If calling someone deviant is not an insult then (ignore this sentence). [English isn't my first language]

Google tells me the meaning of deviant: departing from usual or accepted standards, especially in social or sexual behaviour.
Merriam Webster Dictionary App: different from what is considered to be normal or morally correct.

If by deviant you mean that his aqaid were sound, he was a deobandi alim but erred in tassawuf then I think (I feel) that deviant is a harsh word , especially for someone who is dead and was an alim and who didn't insult prophets AS, sahaba RA and other buzurgs of deen.

If by the word deviant you mean he erred then will you use the same word for Maudoodi Sahab who didn't correct his own books in his lifetime and held what he believed till death (Unless he didn't do taubah in secret). Maulana Allah Yar Khan Rh may have said something odd about some aulia rh but he didn't disrespect any nabi or sahabi where as Maudoodi Sahab have said many bad things about the Anbiya, Sahaba and Akabireen. This makes Maudoodi's crime (forgive me: mistake) bigger than Maulana Allah Yar Khan Rh. So if you used the word deviant for Maulana Allah Yar Khan RH, isn't it fair that you use a bigger word with bigger emotion for Maudoodi Sahab?

Honestly speaking, I only read the chapter about Maulana Allah Yar Khan RH in Shaykh Yusuf Ludhianwi's RH book. However, in the contents the name of Dr.Israr Ahmed Rh was also mentioned. I don't know what he wrote about him in the very same book. Do you agree to him whatever he said about Dr.Israr Ahmed Rh also? (I personally love Dr.Israr Ahmed Rh)

I personally feel that "deviant" is a harsher word if your criteria is to be seen and if the hadith you quote is to be considered.

Why I apologize Repeatedly?

I don't know any member of this forum personally. I thought you were given a nick name of Colonel Sahab in sunniforum and here and it got famous. However, I read Abu Zayd's post in which he mentioned that you have a military background. So I guess you were an army officer in British Army since you are a British National. If my observation is correct then it explains about your harsh tone because I have experience of people from military background. (However, I have noticed that from some time your tone has become polite compared to your previous posts : Alhamdulillah ).

Also, it is my guess that you are a madrassah graduate (Perhaps after retirement you got admission to a madrassah) as you have also mentioned that you have muftis and maulanas as your students. Maybe you teach something else in some university or college or so. I am not sure.

After reading your posts, I can safely conclude that even if you didn't study dars e nizami, still you are a very well read person Ma Sha Allah.

Also from another thread, I deducted that you are a mureed of Shaykh Kamaluddin DB.

So considering your age, knowledge and status you deserve my respect. I sometimes become sarcastic because of my reactionary nature but after a while I realize my mistake (Alhamdulillah).

I don't want any ill feeling in your heart and I don't want your curse against me and I don't want to burn in hell because of disrespecting and hurting you. That is why I apologized to you.

Also sometimes, I do somethings to humble my self.

I know that you don't mean to invite anyone to study Maudoodi or join his party. Nor you support his views. I know that. There is no need to repeatedly state this. I know where you are coming from and that is why I apologized after I realized that I was on the wrong.

My only question was that should we not apply the same principle on Maulana Allah Yar Khan RH, since he deserves more respect?
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
-9,867
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#224 [Permalink] Posted on 1st December 2018 12:53

sipraomer wrote:
View original post

Have you understood this? I did NOT call him deviant, I said his Tareeqa (or views) has deviancy...

Exact Text:

www.muftisays.com/forums/27-sharing-portal/10388-the-trut...

His deviancy stems from his claims which have no basis and substance. If he was an excellent writer or refuter (not much evidence to suggest that he was) we are back to a Maududi type scenario.

So if Deobandees are willing to ignore Maulana Allah Yaar Khan Saheb (RA)'s primary deviancy in favour of his writing/refutation skills than lets give the same credit to Maulana Maududi (RA).

Clarification & Apology:

I did not call Maulana Allah Yaar Khan Saheb (RA) a deviant in the thread but I called this Tareeqa and his views “deviancy” and from my perspective it was crystal clear in my head and my views as elaborated many times in the thread were based on the analysis of Mufti Yusuf Ludhyanwi (RA) and others.

In fact, I have said repeatedly that I am not an expert on Tassawuff and quoting the experts of Tasawuff on the topic. 

www.muftisays.com/forums/13-articles--stories--more/10369...

If the words were not clear years ago, let me make it abundantly clear TODAY.

  1. It is Sunnah to not speak ill of Muslims who have passed away. If my words come across as speaking ill of Maulana Allah Yaar Khan Saheb (RA) it was not my intention and I seek sincere forgiveness from Allah Ta’ala and sincere apology from all those who have been hurt. I am Sorry and I believe that my words have been misunderstood but I am retracting even my misunderstood words and replacing them with certainty.
  2. I continue to believe that this Tareeqa is based in deviancy and Muslims should avoid participation in it and refer the matters to authentic Ulama and well established Mashaykh.
  3. I give the same advice regarding Maulana Maududi (RA). In this thread, we were having Academic discussions about Maulana Maududi (RA). As far as the advice for laymen and Muslims is concerned, let me repeat for the umpteenth time…There is NO REASON to listen to or read the works of Maulana Maududi (RA) or Jamaat-e-Islami instead refer to authentic, reliable and trusted Islamic scholars.
  4. I have the same opinion about Maulana Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwee (RA) and Shaykh Al-Albani (RA), let Allah Ta'ala deal with them...for the layment their works should be avoided
  5. I have the same opinion about Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (RA) based on the account of his sincerity as described by Maulana Qasim Nanotwi (RA) and others. The scientific opinions of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (RA) are based on his rudimentary knowledge of Newtonian Physics of his time and we are now in the era of Quantum Physics. He (RA) tried to reconcile some of the concepts of the Qur’aan according to his understanding of emerging physics and FAILED! I see no benefit in laymen referring to his works or Tafseer
  6. Same for Syed Qutb (RA) and others

Turn to the Ulama whom you trust and take their guidance on whom you should be listening to or reading the works of.

Let those who have passed away be judged by Allah Ta’ala.

I still maintain the Fatwaas regarding individuals cannot be applied to Jamaats which follow them in most cases e.g. Fatwaas regarding Maulana Maududi (RA) cannot be applied to Jamaat-e-Islami because it is a group which is a diverse group of individuals with differing beliefs and practises.

Let me end AGAIN by saying for the umpteenth time that I am not telling anyone to listen to or read Maulana Maududi (RA) or join Jamaat-e-Islami but somehow I am not sure if this will be the end of the discussion.

report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
MARS
2,170
Brother
301
#225 [Permalink] Posted on 1st December 2018 14:29
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post


For me this is the end of discussion. For others, I can't say anything. Jazak Allah for your clarification, effort and time.
report post quote code quick quote reply
back to top

Jump to page:

 

Quick Reply

CAPTCHA - As you are a guest, you are required to answer the following:


In the above image: What colour is the text 'ABC' written in?