Mufti-e-Azam Pakistan Mufti Rafi Usmani (HA) on being Deobandi!

24 Hours later, no "Deobandi" has attempted to translate the speech or offered any explanation of calling themselves “Deobandi”.

Deoband was established in 1866, DO NOT obfuscate and switch to “Hanafi Madhab” as it is a separate argument.

Please refute Mufti Rafi Usmani (HA), his father Mufti Shafi Usmani (RA) and those before him who DID NOT identify themselves as “Deobandi” because there is NO SUCH THING!

Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) NEVER called himself a "Deobandi" when he was a direct graduate of DU Deoband and he was in the middle of arguments with Maulana Raza Khan Barelwee (RA). In simpler words, he had a reason to distinguish himself from “Barelwees” because he was arguing with him (in real life) much more than any of the “Deobandees” on this forum.

The honourable sister can twist and turn all she wants instead of addressing the issue but I genuinely mean that “we live in a democracy” and she (and others) can call themselves whatever they want; just DO NOT involve Islam in it!

Identity Politics:

If you believe that from the time of Islam to 1865 you had no reason to use a label but from 1866-2018 you now need to identify yourself as “Deobandi”, the argument in itself leads to splintering as we now have “Hayati Deobandi” and “Mamati Deobandi”. Those who think that this is FICTION here is Darul-uloom Deoband Fatwa that praying behind a “Mamati Deoabndi” is Makrooh

www.darulifta-deoband.com/home/ur/Islamic-Beliefs/38882

www.banuri.edu.pk/readquestion/%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%A6%D9%84%D...

If you believe that “1866 Deobandi” is an extension of Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamaat (earlier) then you need to provide:

1. What was the title they used before “Deoband”?
2. Why was that title abandoned?
3. What was the purpose of abandoning that title and now changing to “Deoband”?
4. If they did not use any titles before 1866 then would you at least accept that this is a brand new development in Islam?

The issue here is Allah Ta’ala calls you M-U-S-L-I-M but you have chosen to abandon that and chosen a title from 1866 (not from Salaf).

Let’s see how much more changing the subject people can do to try divert attention to “Hanafi Madhab” etc

You are arguing about an identity tag from “1866” and not from the time of Sahaba (RA), somehow make yourself come to this painful realisation! The Salafees are ascribing themselves to “Salaf” while you are ascribing yourself to “1866”…Calling oneself Salafi is equally wrong using the same arguments which I have made but at least it GOES BACK TO SALAF, not 1866 (India)!

Azhari or Nadwi vs Deobandi

Those who study at Jamiatul Al-Azhar are called “Azhari” and those who graduate from Nadwa are called “Nadwees” but they do not identify themselves as a sect or ideology, simply their alma mater. Laymen who follow these scholars do not call themselves as “Azhari” or “Nadwi”

V-E-R-S-U-S

1. “Deobandi” is being identified as a sect/cult/ideology against being a “Barelwee”…Right or wrong is a different topic
2. Laymen are calling themselves as “Deobandi” when they have never attended any Darul-uloom thus it is a sect/cult/ideology
   

These two points are which has the stench of sectarianism which Mufti Rafi Usmani (HA) is referring to.

All those calling themselves “Deobandi”, know every well that they call themselves Deobandees as opposed to “Barelwees” or “Salafees” etc