[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]