REFUTING THE ABDULLAH SABIRI'S DISTORTION OF HISTORY OF IMAM OF FIRQAH KHAIRABADI

AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH,AHLUSSUNNAH VAL JAMAAH

Refuting Distortion of History ‘Ima:m of Sils-lah Kh:aira:ba:di by “ABDULLAH S:A:BIRI: REFUTATION OF RESPONSES OF “ABDULLAH S:A:BIRI ‘AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMA:”AH1

SOME MISCONCEPT WERE DELIBERATELY MADE BY A HERETIC “ABDULLAH S:A:BIRI: IN REGARD TO ‘AHLUSSUNNAH DEOBAND , ‘IMA:M ‘AHLUSSUNNAH ‘ASH SAHA:H ‘ISMA:”I:L ‘ASH SHAHI:D , AND HIS FOLLOWERS. THE ARE CRITICALLY AND LOGICALLY REFUTED AND ANSWERED.

Page 2 of 33

Seek KnowledgeHomeLibraryRefutation

Fazle Haq Khairabadi and Fazle Rasul Badayuni: December 8, 2008/0 Comments/in Refutation

http://www.islamieducation.com/fazle-haq-khairabadi-and-fazle-rasul-badayuni-1/ Please note: We have used the Noun ‘Ahlussunnah Val Jama:”ah /’Ahlussunnah Wal Jama:”ah for the followers of ‘Ima:m ‘Ahlussunnah Shah ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d and His followers. As our opponent does not consider us as Muslims and out of folds of ‘Ahlussunnah, he cannot use this term for us. Rather he uses this term for his sect Rad:a’ism [Sect of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a: of Ba:ns Barailavi. But in our RESPONSUM we use the Word ‘Ahlussunnah for Us. In general we do not exclude the followers of S-ls-lah Kh:aira:ba:di out of the folds of Sunnism, and interpret there differences such that the may not be excluded from ‘Ahlussunnah. But for the followers of ‘Ahmad Rad:a: of Ba:ns Baralavi , they are different and we have a different Fatava:s for them depending upon their believes. Since not all followers of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a: are alike. Some do dispute with him on certain issues which are highly Objectionable.

But if “Abdullah S:a:biri: has the right to declare us as Ka:fir or outb of the fold of ‘Ahlussunnah , we have equal right to say that we are Sunnis and ‘Abdull-h S:abiri is a heretic, deviant and out of folds of ‘Ahlussunnah. How ever to declare some one as Ka:fir /Infidel is a diifernt issue and it requires more proof. ‘Ah:mad Rad:a of Babs Baraili used to declare Muslims as Ka:fir, Sunnis as Non Sunnis, but we are not .

Please study the work with care and consentration.

Refuting Attack on Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi and Allama Fazle Rasul Badayuni

Refuting Distortion of History ‘Ima:m of Sils-lah Kh:aira:ba:di by “ABDULLAH S:A:BIRI: S:a:biri’s Response Deobandi claim has been posted in red

RESPONSUM Page 2 of 33

Page 3 of 33

Our refutation of Claims of S:a:biri: are in COPPER BLACK FOND AND IN THE COLOUR OF THIS SENTENCE IN GENERAL.But some time we have changed the pattern. Our answers are under the title Responsum. The quotation attemted to be abswered ab “Abdullah S:a:bir: are written under the title “Quotation” and the responses of “Abdullah S:a:biri: are written under the title “S:a:biri’s Response”.

PLEASE NOTE IT AGAIN. The final response to “Abdullah S:a:biri: is under the Title “RESPONSUM”.

One may see the response ofn Heretic “Abdullah S:a:biri and then study our Responses under the title Responsum.

Quotation Dr. Allamah Khalid Mahmud writes: “Fazl-e-Rasūl Badāyūnī worked for the British and his plan against the Hadīth scholars of Delhi remained unsuccessful. Hadhrat Shāh Walī Allāh was not alone in propagating tawhīd (monotheism) and the sunnat, and opposing shirk and bidat. Among his students were famous pious people such as...

S:a:biri’s Response From where has Dr Mahmud al Deobandi taken this? What is the reference?

Those who want to know the truth can cross check this fact that Fazle Rasul Badayuni was actively involved in writing against British missinary and government

RESPONSUM The question is what he was doing before the War Of Independence Or IDIAN Sepoy Mitiny. He might have written some time during the Solar year 1857 CE. But what was before that.

S:a:biri’s Response

Page 3 of 33

Page 4 of 33 . Later Mawlana Abdul Majid Badayuni (rh) was chosen as the president of Khilafat committe, unanimously by sunni as well as deobandis.

RESPONSUM First of all ;Ahlussunnah Deoband are Sunnis and ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: are Sunnis . As in regard to Kh:airabadis they are not declared out of the folds of Sunnism in general unless and otherwise they believe in some of the issues controversial between ‘Ahlussunnah and Heretics like Omnipresence of Holy Prophet, Omnivolence Of Holy Prophet [ Mukh:ta:rulcull] etc.

Quotation

Fazl Rasul Badayuni also spread his venom against Imam Shah Waliullah Delhwi [r.h], as he says: “The conclusion of everything that Shāh Walī Allāh has written shows that he is against the Ahl al-Sunnat wa al-Jamāat. Shāh Walī Allāh’s pious children [he is being sarcastic here] have not published and distributed these types of books (by Shāh Walī Allāh), and have kept (these books) hidden. It is as if they have veiled those words of their father that were unveiled.”

S:a:biri’s Response Can any Deobandi prove this or even name the book where Fazl e rasul Badayuni (rh) said this ?

The other option is to post what ever we like on internet , without reference and let the members of our forum get fooled.

That is why people should visit marifah forums so that what ever they read , it has reference and proof,unlike other forums.

RESPONSUM Fad:l Rasu:l was a Heretic and Not a Sunni. Even if he did not said such sentences his heresy cannot be denied. But suppose that the ‘Ahlussunnah Scholar did commit a mistake by ascribing this to the Fad:l Rasu:l Of Badaiyun, such statement are ascribed to some alleged Sunni Scholars by “Umar Chharvi a prominent Barailvi Scholar in Paskistan.

Quotation Fazl Rasool Bayaduni didn’t even spare Imam Rabbani Mujaddid Alf-e-Sani [r.h] and wrote alot of filth against the great Imam

S:a:biri’s Response Another deobandi style statement without any reference

Page 4 of 33

Page 5 of 33

Quotation Amir Shah Khan sahab mentions on page 76 of Hakayat al-Awliya that Qasim al-Uloom Mawlana Nanotwi [r.h] narrated that there was a very senior alim in Lukhnow [khan sahab forgot the name] and a mudarris in one of the masjid. One day Fazl Rasul Badayuni came to him before Dhur or Asr salat and read to him his work against Mawlana Shah Ismail shaheed

S:a:biri’s Response Another fancy story from Arwahe Thalatha ( hakayat e Awliya) !

RESPONSUM IT MUST BE NOTED THAT OUR CRITIC RESPECTED S:A:BIRI: IS NOT GOING TO ACCEPT ANY REPORT FROM OUR BOOKS JUST AS TWELVERS DO NOT ACCEPT ANY REPORT FROM HOLY BUKH:A:RI , MUSLIM. BUT IF SO THEN RESPECTED S:A:BIRI: MUST HAVE TO CONFESS THAT EVEN HE HAS NO RIGHT TO USE THE BOOKS OF WHICH WERE KEPT UNPUBLISHED FOR SEVERAL DECAYS AFTER THE DEATH F THEIR AUTHORS. TO THE SAID CRITIC ANY THING IN THE BOOKS OF OUR ‘AHLUSSUNNAH IS A FICTIOUS STORY. IS THIS THE STANDARD OF RESEARCH? IF THIS STORY WAS NARRETED BY ANY BARAIVI REPORTER SAY ‘AH:MAD RA:D:A OF BANS BARAILI ETC. OUR RESPECTED CRITIC WAS FIRST TO BELIEVE IN IT. LET OUR TEPECTED CRITIC BE ASKED , THE FOLLOWING QUESTION. WHAT IS THE BASIC REASON THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE FALSE? THE ONLY ANSWER IS THAT IT IS A TRADITION THAT IS OUT OF THEIR CIRCLES. THIS IS THE REASON. BUT IS THIS NOT AN OBSCURE METHOD OF SELF STYLED SCHOLARSHIP? ASK THE CRITIC.

S:a:biri’s Response Fazle haq khairabadi (rh) was among the top scholars of india during his time. Who was the scholar with whom he met in Lucknow to get approval for his fatwa? This scholar must have been a famous scholar and his name is not metioned? Biogrpahy and travel memoirs of Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi (rh) has been printed and available in manuscript form also. No such incidence is mentioned. Ferozuddin ruhi al deobandi even wrote in his book Ainae sadaqat , page 15 , that Imam Ibn Abidin Al Hanfai (rh) took money from government to write against Najdis! This is a simple deobandi pricnciple : If you don’t agree with us , we will accuse you without proof .

RESPONSUM There are some mistakes in the S:abiri Answer. First:= This is not about Fad:l Haqq of Kh:airaba:di:, but Fad: Rasu:l Badayuni .

Page 5 of 33

Page 6 of 33

But the Respected “Abdullah S:a:biri: assumes that the tradition about Fad:l Rasu:l. Why? BECAUSE he wanted to refute the tradition with some Power and he knew very well that if it is about Fad:l Rasu:l Badaiyuni: he could not refute it as such.

Second: This is the simple Principle of “Abdullah S:a:biri to accuse ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband of any thing without fear. Perhaps he is somehow confirmed that no reader will try to study his answers in detail and critically.Third he does trust the alleged Biography or alleged Autobiography of Fad:l Haqq Kh:airabadi: .We donot since none of these books were published during his life time. He died in Exile in Andaman /Indaman Island in the Solar year 1861 CE. These books were published a Subcontinent away from the place he died.

Now ask any neutral scholar , what is the credibility of such books and what is the impossibility of Corruption [Tah:ri:f] ?

Quotation

On the contrary, Shaykh Abdul Hassan Ali Nadwi [r.h] translated Taqwiat al-Iman into Arabic with preface and hawashi [footnotes] at the order of Shaykh al-Hadith Mawlana Muhammad Zakariyya [r.h]

S:a:biri’s Response Yes he did and it is available in Indian market for Rs 30. Can any Deobandi post scan of that edition? Don’t they know that even this edition of Taqwiyatul Iman is fabricated with many passages removed and many words re arranged ! We are talking about taqwiyatul Iman which was written by Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi , not its fabricated version flooded into the market by Deobandis and Wahabis.

RESPONSUM Tqviatul ‘Ima:n is free from all allegations of Fad:l Rasu:l and ‘Ahmad Rad:a Khan Ba:ns Barailvi. Even in the Language Ri:khtah /Urdu no sentence of the work under discussion is objectionable. Objections of Maula:na Fad:l Haqq, Fad:l Rasu:Badayuni, Maulavi ‘Ah:mad Rad:a Ba:ns Barailvi, Na”i:muddi:m Mira:dabadi are already been refuted. For those who have not discussed each and every objection on sentences of Taqviatul ‘I:ma:n, we offer them to compare the objections and answers to objection themselves. As the matter of fact the basic meaning of the Urdu Text and the Text of the “Arabic Translation are one and the same. At most Respected S:abiri may argue that the controversial sentences were not translated properly. He cannot go beyond that. But when there are different meanings of a sentence and Respected S:a:biri and his supporters want to take the incorrect meaning , once again there is a dispute of translation. At least Respected S:a:biri must have to accept that atleast some translations of the such sentences are not objectionable. So far so good. The book Taqviatul ‘Ima:n was attacked by a number of books written by Heretics who alleged to be ‘Ahlussunnah , one some sentences as well. Each and every sentence has been discussed so far and there is practically no sentence left upon which an objection is made and the objection is not refuted. But Respected S:abiri wants to take the meanings ascribed to them by Fad:l Rasu:l, ‘Ahmad Rad:a Ba:ns Barailvi, Na”i:muddi:n Muradabadi: etc. These were the people who found the book so attractive for representing true ‘Ahlussunnah believes and feared that people may drift from their Psedu –Sunnism , so they attempted to distort the meaning of some Sentences so that people may not read the entire book and may discard it is blasphemous just one there verbal objections.

As a final proof Respected S:abiri will not accept any book which has no controversial sentences but preach the Teachings of Taqviatul ‘I:ma:n. Every thing is Exposed from this mere fact.

Page 6 of 33

Page 7 of 33

Quotation Taqwiat al-Iman covers issues like tauheed, shirk and numerous biddahs that were prevalent during the time of author

S:a:biri’s Response The division of topic and its content is taken from Kitab at Tawhid of Ibn Abdal wahab Najdi.( For proof see taqwiytaul iman aur ismail dehalvi by Alla Zayd faruqi (rh) , whose library has old editions of Ibn Abd al wahab najdis book)

RESPONSUM Taqviatul ‘Iman is an independent book.It refutes the Shirk and Innovation of Devients and Heretics who tried to borrow Heresy in Sunnism. In this case there may be some similarities between the two books since both deny DShirk. But there are some differences as well. Where Respected Vahhab Najdi was a Salafi, Sha:h ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d was an ‘Ash”ari and Ma:turidi Amalgum.

But we find a number of false allegations on Sha:h Shahi:d in the works of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a Barailavi and Na”i:muddi:n Mura:daba:di borrowed from FasL Rasu:l Bada:yu:ni.

What our learned critici has to say in regard to this.

S:a:biri’s Response . Even the sub chapters are named sameThe biddah of reciting Bukhari sherif in order to remove difficulty was not yet prevalent in India , neither the ugly belief of calling Allah a liar was prevalent.

RESPONSUM ANSWER:

Some similarities does not imply the alleged case of Borrowing. Actually this is not his personal invented argument but is borrowed by some Anti Isla:mic Objection Makers, who allege that the Events of Dh:ul Qarnain Narrated in Holy Qur’a:n is borrowed from the Alexander’s Romance [Na”u:dh:billah]. It is responded that if some similarities do exist between two books , borrowing is not implied by the latter. Similarities may ocuur independent of one an other. A very powerful logical reply to those who believe that just similarities are the proof of borrowing. But if one may the Respected S:abiri that why he is using the principle invented by Anti ‘Islamic Objection Makers against Taqviatul ‘I:ma:n. To our readers who want a neutral research please look at the point. If a Principle is invented

by Anti ‘Islamic Objection Makers and is used against the Holy Qur’a:n, what does this mean.

This mean that the Principle is invalid,incorrect and wrong. Now if the very principle is wrong and incorrect , then why Respected S:a:biri is using this principle against ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband and ‘Ahlul H:adi:th: . Or he is going to defend his position by saying that the principle is correct yet misused by Anti Islamic Objection Makers.

Page 7 of 33

Page 8 of 33 Which biddah made Ismail Dehalvi to write that “one day prophet will die and get mixed with soil?

RESPONSUM Much discussion is found upon this allegation. The word MILNA in Urdu/Rikh:ta does not mean to Mix Necessarily. It has several meanings. It may mean to bury in soil and this is the meaning taken by all the Sunnis and not Brelvis and Badayunis who claim to be Sunnis. They text of the sentence does not mean that the Holy Prophet shall be mixed.

The word “Milna” translated as to be mixed [heterogeneous mixing or not] is not the ONLY meaning of the WORD. It may aalso mean to meet or to touch. So this meaning taken by a Barailvis is discarded . But if Respectes S:a:biri is so confirmed that this is the only meaning of the word in the sentence then , how can he response to the Objections on the F-s:u:s: ‘Al H:-KM where the texts of sentences are more problematic and require more interpretations. How does he defend sentences of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a: Ba:ns Barailvi [Not Rai Barailvi] found in some of his books.

S:a:biri’s Response Which Biddah made him to say the status of elevated creations ( prophets and awliya) is like cobbler in front of Allah?

RESPONSUM Once again the word Cobbler is a mistranslation . The actual word is Chama:r . A race of people who use to recycle the Hide of animals. He did not mean any Prophet who so ever he may be or prophets. What he mean that each and every Created Suppositum or each and everyCretion/Creature is no match to the Divine Glory and in compare to Glory of Divine Essence each and every Creation is less then a low cast of people in India called Chama:r.

One may see weki pedia for the word Chamar:= 1]Chamar is one of the untouchable communities, or dalits, who are now classified as a Scheduled Caste under modern India's system of positive discrimination. As untouchables, they were traditionally considered outside the Hindu ritual ranking system of castes known as varna. They are found mainly in the northern states of India and in Pakistan[1][2] and Nepal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamar 2] Chamars who have adopted the weaving profession and abandoned tanning and leathercraft, identify themselves as Julaha Chamar; R. K. Pruthi suggests this is in the hope that they might in future be considered as Julaha by other communities in the future.. They believe that leatherwork is "degrading" when compared to weaving.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamar

3] : a member of a low Indian caste whose caste occupation is leatherworking Page 8 of 33

Page 9 of 33

1. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chamar 4] Hindi camār, from Sanskrit carmakāra leather worker, from carman skin, leather + -kāra worker, from kṛṇoti he does, makes; akin to Latin corium leather https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chamar The meaning of Chamar in English and in Urdu is the same.

4] हहनदद | Hindi meaning of chamar (a low hindu caste)

http://www.khandbahale.com/hindi-dictionary-translation-of-chamar%20(a%20low%20hindu %20caste)

As Chamar were considered as low cast in Mugh:al Era, it was to teach the relation of Divine Status to the Creation Status. The relation of Divine Essence to the Created Essences is Even Lower to Relation of high rank community to Lower rank community of human beings. Additionally it is a general sentence which does not imply any particular Group of Creations.

The literal translation is as follow: Every Creation whether Big or Small is more Inferior then a Chamar [Leather Worker] in reference to the Glory Of Divine Essence. The word Bar:a means Big, Large, Great ,High etc. and the word Chhota means Small, Low, Less , an opposite of the word Bar:a. So it does not state Prophets and Angels.

Dh:ali:l [Zali:l] is an antonym of “Azi:z. It means weak, lesspoerful, light in weight,Powerless, Under Power, Under Some one’s else authority,fallen,Glory-Less ,Inferior. Some time it means with out any pride or completely with out pride, pride-less , not worthy of respect,Unimportant ,Insignicant , trifling.

This word may be used in some unwanted meanings as It also mean Despicable , Humiliate , mean etc

These enemies of ‘Ahlussunnah have agreed upon to choose such unwanted meanings and not to choose any suitable meaning.

Page 9 of 33

Page 10 of 33

“Azi:z means Powerful, Supermacy, Superiority , Respectable, Powerful .

So the correct meaning is as follow:

“Every Creation [Makhlu:q] whether it be Big [Bar:a] or Small [Chhota] in respect to Divine Glory [Sha’n] is more Unworthy of Respect [Dh:ali:l/Zali:l] than a leather worker” .

An Other Meaning Every Creation Whether It Be Great or Small in Comparison to the Glory of Divine Essence [‘ALL-H] is more Unimportant then a Leather Worker is [In Comparison to Higher Classes of Indian Society].

Exlaination:= The following words are understood hence not written.

If these words are supplied the meaning becomes as follow: A GLORY OF A CREATION WHETHER IT IS BIG OR SMALL IN COMRARISION TO THE GLORY OF DIVINE ESSENCE IS more Un Worthy Of Respect then the Status of a Leather Worker in comparison to the status high class of People say Royal People, Saiyid, Shaikh: in Mislims, Brahmans in Hinduism. A perfect sentence to convey the actual message to the Indian Minds.

The word Chamar does not mean a Cobbler , even if many chamars are Cobblers. But this cannot change the Original Meaning of the word used in the 19th and 20 th centuries CE. A similar objection is made against Shaikh: “Abdul Qadir Jilani RH: .

He did say : << My Foot is on the Necks of Aulaia’ >> He is criticized as follow: As Each and Every Prophet /Nabi is a Vali: [Singular of Aulia] , this implies that his foot is on the neck of ……….. [Na”udh:ubillah].

Such Anti Islamic Objection Makers are responded as follow: Some words are general in apparent but not General In Meaning. The same Answer is applicable to ‘Asha:h ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d.

[We shall discuss this sentence in a separate article ‘Insha: ‘ALL-H].

Quotation In Sirat-e-Mustaqeen, Mawlana Shah Ismail shaheed [r.h] compiled the malfuzaat of his master in tasawwuf and jihad Imam Syed Ahmad shaheed [r.h].

S:a:biri’s Response Not correct. Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi wrote Sirat e Musatqeem contaning his views also, like” getting thought of prophet in salah is worse than getting thought of Ox and Horse.

RESPONSUM

Page 10 of 33

Page 11 of 33

Once again the learned Barailvi scholar has repeated the most repeated allegation. This allegation has been discussed several times and it is necessary to discuss some details of this objection.

The objection that thought of Holy Prophet is worse then the thought of an Ox during the prayers is the most repeated objection and also the most answered objection to S:ira:t: Al Mutaqi:m. We shall response this objection in a separate article. But for the present discussion it is out of the context. The meaning of the sentence is distorted by “Abdur Rasu:l Badaiyuni: , and ‘Ahmad Rad:a Bans Barailvi: .It this was the meaning then why Fad:l Haqq who alledgely written two books against Taqviatul ‘I:ma:n remained silent as if he is fully ignorant of S:ira:t: Al Mustaqi:m . The answer is EITHER these books are also fabrications or corrupted forms of some Manuscripts , OR he understood correctly the sentence which Maulavi: Fad:l Rasu:l Badauni: could not OR both.

How ever it is a Mystic Problem concern with MEDIATION [Mara:q-bah] during prayers and not just ordinary thoughts. A Mediation is generally with Somnolence the starting level of meditation. A person who starts

meditation often enters a somnolent or sleep state (ghanood ‫)غنود‬. With the passage of time, the person goes into a state between sleep and wakefulness. The person can remember seeing something but not specifically what it is.( 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muraqaba If some one need to research further we shall provide more research but for those who do not want to go deep in discussion WIKIPEDIA is quite sufficient.

This is a very accurate description of Mediation. Through out Sub Continent this thing happen in all sort of Mediation. If a Mediation of any Created Rational Suppositum [Person] is done while performing Prayers [S:ala:h] it no longer remains a Prayer [Act Of Worshipping].Even opponents of Sha:h Shahi:d do know that this is not a problem of thought or deep thought but a Mediation in which Somnolence is the INTEGRAL and INITIAL Part. Sha:h Shahi:d is Comparing Somnolences Of Mediations with Simple Thoughts to Make them know the Error of Mediation during Worshipping. S:ufies/Mystics began to practice Maraq-ba:t during offering S:ala(v):h [Worshipping ] and this was an innovation. S:ufies could practice this Maraq-ba:t [Mediations] outside the prayers. They are not the part of acts of worshipping but a Practice to achieve the Demands of Shar”aiah. So the above exercise of Mediation can negate the very prayer itself and make the prayer to cease. It is not the ordinary Thought , not even a deep thought but some ting in regard to S:ufism and their correction. Saiyid ‘Ah:mad Shahi:d in his lectures tried to correct the errors of S:ufism. But his way was different. Instead of some Anti S:ufi Scholar , he himself was a S:ufi. So he wanted to correct them in such a way that they may exercise this Mediation while not praying and having separate time for such activities.

Page 11 of 33

Page 12 of 33

S:a:biri’s Response This is not a malfuz ( letter ) of Ahmed Barelwi ,but it is a writing of Ismail Dehalvi. Scans have been posted on this forum for everyone to read.

RESPONSUM Malmu:z does not mean Epistle. It may be a sermon or a lecture. One may not go in further detail. Just a single proof is sufficient. There is a Book called “Malfuz:a:t E: ‘A”la: H:ad:rat (H:azrat)”. This is not a book of Epistles of Maulavi ‘Ahmad Rad:a Bans Barailavi but a book of his reported Sayings. This is the book in which the Sayer reveals his belief that “ ‘Al Ka:a:m ‘An Nafsi: and ‘Al Kala:m ‘Al Lafz:i: are not two Divine Attributes but one and the same Attribute, and declare all those who consider them as two are in error. [Part 4 of Malfu:z:a:t ‘A”la: Had:rat].

Respected S:abir: must have know this book. If he has then he must know that the word Malfu:z: does not mean Epistle in Necessary. This means he is providing incorrect information deliberately.

Quotation List of books of Mawlana shaheed.

S:a:biri’s Response This is not agreed upon. Different Deobandi scholars have given different list. Mawlana Hakim mirzapuri has counted 17 books from Ismail Dehalvi.

RESPONSUM But this is not a problematic issue. It is still not known what is the actual list of works of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a Barailvi. The Fata:va: of ‘Ahmad Rad:a: Barailvi , Fata:va Barailvi was initially in six volumes , which is now expanded to more then Thirty Volumes. So this must be noted by the Barailvi and Rad:a:’i: scholar .

Before making any comment on Saiyiduna: ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d. he must see his leader ‘Ah:mad “Rad:a: Barailvi.

Page 12 of 33

Page 13 of 33

Quotation Janab Aijaaz ul-Haq Quddusi who is a famous historian and a sharih of Dr. Allamah Iqbal [r.h] writes while discussing Ulama-e-Soo of the time: “British were aware of the influence of Ulama. They took fatwas from Ulama-e-Soo in which Syed Ahmad shaheed and Mawlana Ismail shaheed were declared Wahhabis and secular. British were declared to be ligitimate rulers [in those fatwas]…It was declared wajib to show allegiance to the British.”

[Iqbal aur Ulama Paak wa Hind, p 35]

S:a:biri’s Response A white lie .!

No fatwa was ever paased by any scholar just for declaring Ismail Dehalvi as “ Wahabi”. Can any Deobandi give reference for this? Who issued the fatwa and when and in which book? Any one can open Fatwa Rashidiya of Shaykh Gangohi al deobandi which has questions from normal people asking” who are wahabis” ? Shaykh Ashraf ali thavee one said in Kanpur” Don’t bring food for Niyaz here , Wahabis stay here”

RESPONSUM The word Vahhabi is used in several meanings in Indian Subcontinent. It is used for Those H:anafites who disbelieve that Holy Prophet is Omnipresent [‘Al H:a:d:ir Van Na:z:r] , Omnivolent [Mukh:ta:r ‘Al Kull], Omniscience [“A:lim ul Kull/ “A:lim ‘Al Gh:aib], etc. It is also used for those who who do not follow any Ima:m. It is also used for Ima:m Ibn H:zm and ‘Ima:m ‘Ibn Taimiah. It is used for any one who exercise Rafa”yadain etc. So in such case the choosen meaning is very important.

But as Respected S:a:biri does know that he is free to say any thing he likes and an his readers may not go in details of his deliberate distortion of Truth, and they may not be detected by the readers on Internet. Some times To say some thing as a White Lie is it self a Black Lie. This is one of them.

S:a:biri’s Response Sunnis don’t consider the views of Allama Iqbal as proof. But let us see what Allama Iqbal said about Deobandis

Page 13 of 33

Page 14 of 33 1.Dr Iqbal was taken aback after hearing the impudent statements of the Deobandis and said “Mawlana [ Hamid Raza Rh] these statements are so impudent, why didn’t the sky collapse on them, the sky should have collapsed on them!”

RESPONSUM What is the source. Now ask Respected S:a:biri. If Vahabis lie what Barailvis DO?

S:a:biri’s Response 2.

The origin of “ qadynaism and deobandism is one” ( Allama Iqbal)

RESPONSUM Before arguing any thing from the works of Dr Muh:ammad ‘Iqba:l the Barailvi respondant is requested to study the Reconstruction of Thoughts in ‘Isla:m , Third Lecture where he advocates that the Divine Knowledge doeth Not Comprehend all the Possibilities.

Let us ask who is the author of the book and from whom he is reporting these two alleged statements of Doctor Sir Muh:ammad ‘Iqba:l.Mere scans can not prove that these statements are correct. Further there are some questions in regard to Sir Muh:ammad ‘Iqba:l and his allegedly quoted statements. But what if Sir Dr Muh:ammad ‘Iqba:l erred in regard to ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband].

There are many statements where Sir Doctor Muh:ammad ‘Iqba:l has said very good sentences about some Ahlussunnah Deoband Scholars. We shall write a detail discussion in regard this topic ‘Insha: ‘ALL-H. If Dr Iqba:l really said these words then it means he had not studies ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband .

I personally cannot accept such words and sentences ascribed to Dr Muh:ammad ‘Iqba:l . But it also be noted that Dr Muh:ammad ‘Iqba:l some time did not work on Many ISSUES like thw Second Coming of Saiyiduna: “I:sa: “AS Etc. So he cannot be quoted as an authority in this case.

CONTINUED Page 14 of 33

Page 15 of 33

S:a:biri’s Response

See the scan ( am not posting on forum to keep the article short) http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=N4sL-IHPDFo

RESPONSUM Even if is posted it was not from a reliable book.

Mere posting cannot make a book reliable.

Quotation British knew that to stop the movement of Syed Ahmad shaheed and his followers, the easiest way is to label them Wahhabis.

S:a:biri’s Response I had to read this statement 3 times to make sure I am reading the same thing what I am understanding! This is one of the biggest lie we can have on internet. Ahmed Barewli was working for british and he openly said ‘ we are safe under british “. Ismail dehalvi said “ there is np jihad against briitish”

RESPONSUM But he was engaged with Sikhs. He could not fight on two fronts. What Respected S:a:biri: wanted that he would have fought with British first and then with his beloved Sikhs.

He neglects the time factor. Different Laws of Shar” were applicable on Foreign rules during different period of time.

Additionally the word British is confusing. The Rule of British East India Company is different from The Rule of British Crown as known to every student of Indian History. Further different laws of Shar” were applicable to Company rule in different period of time.

Page 15 of 33

Page 16 of 33

If any one can prove that Ahmed Barelwi did Jihad against british, I will retire from Internet.

RESPONSUM

It is requested not to retire. Respected S:a:biri is always welcome on internet. But can some one prove that prove there was any Fatava against East India Company before 1857 CE. It may be noted that Sult:a:n Tipu lost the war in the year 1799 CE From 1799 CE to 1857CE there Are 58 Solar years. Is there a Fatva: against the Company Rule with in this Pe+riod 2 from Fad:l H:aqq or any one else. If not then Why? If yes then provide any evidence if there is any. For 58 years they were acceptable and then all of sudden a Fatva:was published. Why? The simple answer is that the Company Rulers began to to exercise such activities which made Scholars to publish a Fatva: after 58 Solar Years. See ‘Asba:b Bagh:a:vat e Hind by Sir Saiyid ‘Ah:mad Kha:n. A reliable book of Indian History. But ir is presumed that Respected S:a:biri shall reject it as a fabrication. He only accepts those sources which his theological background permits. The same is true for Sharf Qa:diri the alleged scholar who distorts the truth with out any Justice and Reason.

S:a:biri’s Response Let the readers go to different websites and forum and bring this evidence. This is a big lie present on internet and those who base their knowledge only from internet should take a note of it.

RESPONSUM No comments Necessary. Go to the books and study them in detail.

See attached document in post 11 above and scans in post 13.

Quotation Ahle Biddah always use Mawlana Fazl Haq Khairabadi [r.h] as proof against Mawlana Shah Ismail shaheed [r.h].

S:abiri:’s Response As per this author , Imam Fazle haq Khairabadi (rh) loved Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi !

Page 16 of 33

Page 17 of 33

RESPONSUM Not Initially but after realizing his errors. This is the way all scholars are supposed to adopted. Once they realize their mistakes if some they do not insist on them, as in the case of Maulavi: Fad:l H:aqq Kh:airaba:di: .

S:abiri:’s Response Trust me ,those who know history will laugh at this. Imam Fazle haq (rh) refuted shaykh Ismail Dehavli on the matters of Rafa yul dayn and saying Amin loudly in Salah. Then he also refuted Ismail Dehalvi by writing Imtinaun Nazeer refuting the belief of Shaykh Isamail dehalvi on possibility of ‘possibility of another Muhammad { sal allahi alay hi wa sallam} to exist’.

RESPONSUM Let

S:a:biri be not trusted at all. Since he confuses many things

Does dispute means to hate some one. Perhaps it is with in the circle of Barailvis. But it is not so in the circle of scholars. Even latter Khairaba:di scholars were not like Barailvi:s .

Fad:l Haqq was not a Barailvi. He had different thoughts from Ahmad Rad:a: Of Barailvi and his followers.

The dispute about the Omnipotence of Divine Essence [Dh:a:tul Ba:ri:] is that Kh:airabadi: school of thought believed That Divine Essence [‘ALL-H] Doeth not Have the Omnipotence to Create an other Prophet in the perfect likeness of Holy Prophet PBUH. When argued that Divine Essence Hath this Power /Omnipotence the Kh:airabadi: School of thought claimed that an other prophet in Perfect Likeness of Holy Prophet ia Absolute Impossible [Per Se Impossible] and no Per Se Impossible is in Divine Omnipotence. Now it was replied that it is Neither Absolute Impossible nor Per Se Impossible but Per Se Possible and Relatively Impossible and Per Quod Possibe. In more clear words in is Per Se Contingent. Since If Divine Power is over a thing then the thing is Per Se Contingent. Cleverness of Respected S:a:bir: may please be seen that what he wanted to hide from his readers that it is the consequence of dispute over Divine Power over an Exactly Alike Suppositum {Naz:i:r].

S:abiri:’s Response

Page 17 of 33

Page 18 of 33 Then in 1240 AH , Imam Fazle Haq (Rh) wrote Tahqeeq al-Fatwa fi Ibtal al-Taghwa,( scan provided earlier) in which he took signature of seventeen Ahlus sunnah scholar to isshe fatwa upon Ismail Dehalvi!

RESPONSUM [1240AH is approximately 1824 CE]

The Barailvi Scholar is requested to read the problems of Tah:qi:q ‘Al Fatva:. It is a manipulated book first published in 1979CE approximately 160 years after it was allegedly written. Who is going to believe in this book which was an Apocryphal work for 160 Solar years. Still our Baraivi scholar “Abdullah S:a:biri is insisting to believe in it as conserved and at it is. Is this reasonable.

Kh:airabadi:s do dispute fro ‘Ahlussunnah and ‘Ahlul H:adith: on several issues and in some issues agree with the believes of Ba:ns Barailvis ,yet they disagree from the verdict of Takfi:r, as issued from the Founder of [Ba:ns] Barailavi: sect . They are regarded as neither Barailavis nor ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband. They are between the two. Similarly Fangi Mah:lis are also neither the two yet not Kh:airabadis.

No prominent Kh:airaba:di: scholar has ever declared ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband as Ka:fir or even out of the folds of ‘Ahlussunnah and H:anafites.

Maula:na: Mu”i:nuddi:n Ajme:ri: a Kh:arabadi scholar even wrote a book of Noun “Tajalliya:t e: ‘Anva:r e: Mu”i:n in refutation of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a of Bans Barailavi.

In this book he referred great ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband Scholars , which annoyed the followers of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a Ba:ns Baralavi.

“Abdush Sha:hid Kha:n Sh-rva:ni was from Kh:airabadi cult. He in the preface of the book ‘Ath:th:-ratul Hindiyah have written good words about Sha:h ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d inspite of all the disputes of Kh:airabadis and Sha:h Shahi:d and His Followers. This annoyed Sharf Q:adiri: a Bans Baralavi [Not Rai Baraliavi] scholar of Pakistan to an extent that he said some disgrace words in regard to him.

If the ‘Ima:m of Kh:airabadis was so opponent of ‘Ash Sha:h ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d then this must be known to such scholars independent of any alleged Fat-va: . Since they were either his direct students or students of students. So they either had the first hand knowledge or the had the knowledge from those who had the first hand knowledge. But none of them hold such views. This makes serious and irrefutable doubts in the contents of the works like “Tah:qi:q ‘Al Fat-va: and ‘Imtina:” ‘An Naz:i:r which are independent proofs that they are neither credible nor reliable , nor trustworthy. Corruptions are most probably made in them if not with certainty.

S:a:biri’s Response Page 18 of 33

Page 19 of 33

If some one still wants to believe that Imam Fazle Haq (rh) loved Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi then it is upto them.

RESPONSUM Based on Tah:qi:qul Fatva: if the Barailvi scholar wants to believe that Maulavi Fad:l Haqq was an opponent of Sha:h ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:l its up to him.

QUOTATION When British took over the sub-Continent many Ulama revolted against them. One of them was Mawlana Syed Fazl Haq Rampuri [r.h]. His name appeared in the newspapers as one of the rebels of British Mawlana Khairabadi himself mentioned: “Fazl Haq is this another individual and I have been arrested instead of him.”

[Tahreek Dehli, June 1920 p12]

S:a:biri’s Response

Imam Fazle Haq Khairabadi (rh) was among the first muslim scholar to issue fatwa of Jihad against the British. He was sent to prison in Andoman Islands where he died on 12 Safar 1278 AH [ 1861]

RESPONSUM THIS IS A VERY CONTROVERSAL ISSUE AND THERE IS NO CERTAINTY ON THE CLAIM .AT BEST THERE ARE PROBABILITIES. SO ANY JUDGEMENT IS JUST BASED ON PROBABILITY AND NOT UPON CERTAINTY’ LET IT BE DISCUSSED IN SOME DETAIL. We shall discuss the issue separately ,but the book ‘Ath:th-vratul Himdiah is perfectly silent about this Fatva: [Vedict]. As this is an Autography of the auther and skips the main events ascribed to him Page 19 of 33

Page 20 of 33

in regard to the Fatva: serious doubts in regard to Fatva:become irrefutable.

CONTINUED S:a:biri’s Response The above quote is a classic example of “ not doing home work”. It is a blatant lie. First see the referene!

What is Tahreek Delhi? A news paper , a book or a magazine? After Imam Fazle Haq Khairabadi (rh) died in 1861 , then who gave this reference after sixty years?

RESPONSUM 1]Monthly Tah:ri:k [Movement] is reffered by Sharf Qa:diri a Barailavi Scholar in the Second Pereface of the Book Ba:gh:i: Hindustan on page 25 as a footnote. It was published from Delhi. The issue of the monthly Tah:ri:k is June 1960 CE . For further informations “Abullah S:a:biri: must ask Sharf Q:adiri: on this isuue or his descendants. This does shew the mentality of our Respected Scholars that he at times shew his ignorance from Weeklies and Monthlies which are even quoted for references by other Barailavi: Scholars .

2]Very good. Apply this law on the following two books. 1] Tah:qi:qul Fatva allegedly ascribed of Maulavi Fad:l Haqq Kh:airaba:di which was published after 160 Solar Years after it was allegedly written, 2] Imtina:” An Naz:i:r first Published in 1899 CE 38 SOLAR YEARS after the death of Fad:l Haqq in Exile.

3]Even Baraivis acknoledge these facts, see the preface of Sharf Qa:diri on Tah:qi:q Al Fatva:. But our learned respondant knows that not all readers will go in such details. So he is arguing irregularly and hapazadly which is more problematic for his sect.

4] Our Friend “Abdull-h S:a:biri has not done the class work, what to mension about the homework?

S:a:biri’s Response In which Book is it written? Who wrote it? There was no newspaper with the name Tehreek” being published from new delhi in 1920. Can some one please tell what” Tehreek” is?

Page 20 of 33

Page 21 of 33

RESPONSUM This is a garlic example of asking question when some one does not have proper response. S:a:biri: is advised to consult Sharf Qa:diri: an other Barailavi: scholar who have referred to Monthly “Tah:ri:k” in his Preface of his book Ba:gh:I Hindusta:n published in 1997 CE. He must ask him first.

Tah:ri:k was a Monthly published from New Delhi India. For further details “Abdullah S:a:biri is requested to ask his Barailavi Brother Sharf Qa:diri before asking others.

See Fifth Edition 1997 CE NOV. MAKTABAH QA:DIRIYAH DATA DARBA:R ROAD LAHORE PAKISTAN.

Quotation British army mistook Mawlana Khairabadi for this alim of Rampur and arrested him even though he was an offical in the British government and had nothing to do with the revolt against British.

S:a:biri’s Response Another mistake.

Imam Fazle Haq Khairabadi (rh) was presented infront of Judicial Magistrate in 1275 AH ( 1858) . At that time he was not an official in British Government.

RESPONSUM Of course after he was accused of Insurrection he ceased to be an official in Company rule . It may be asked that if Maulvi: H:ad:l Haqq Kh:aira:ba:di: was sentenced for his life why he was released ????

Were his sons able to convince the Judges and the Jury that he neither wrote a Fatva: nor signed a Fatva: in regard to the Indian Sepoy Mutiny 1857 CE????

S:a:biri’s Response The other Fazle Haq was Fazle Haq Shahjahanpuri ( not Rampuri) . This Fazle haq Shahjahanpuri commited some crime . But the British official accused Imam Fazle haq khairabadi of these crimes, which Imam denied.

Page 21 of 33

Page 22 of 33 Then the magistrate then asked Imam , have you given fatwa of Jihad against british ? The Imam replied “ yes” . The british judge used to respect Imam Fazle Haq kahirabadi a lot. ( Imam Khiarabadi rh had earlier taught some Juruspudence matter related with Islam to this Judge). Imam Khairabadi (rh) said “ that fatwa is from me and I have written it”. The Judge made many request to Mawlana to change his statement , but Mawlana struck to truth .

RESPONSUM Kh:airabadis are not Barailavis. They constituted a different cult. They were moderate inspite of all disputes with ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband and Followers of Sha:h Shahi:d. A part from few issues they did not have major differences. That is the reason they are held with respect by Scholars of ‘Ahlussunnah ‘AlDiuband [Deoband]. So there is nothing in accepting any thing graceful in regard to their Scholars in general and their Founder in particular. However if some research shew on the contrary the research must be studies critically before being accepted or rejected. But People like Respected S:a:biri: rejects every thing good in regard to Supporters of ‘Ash:Sha:h ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d.RH: and ‘Ash Shahi:d ‘Sha:h ‘Isma:”i:l himself. At times our Friend S:abiri: does not trust British historians and at times he believes in British Jurisprudence . What a multi-standared?

S:a:biri’s Response

Any one who wants to cross check my words , PLEASE READ “ Naqsha Hayat” ,autobiography of Mawalan Hussein Tandvi al Deobandi. ( A DEOBANDI BOOK )

RESPONSUM This is one of the Garlic example to accept any thing from any one if the rext is in support and to reject any thing from any one if the text is not in support. If ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband are reliable writers then they are reliable every where . As for us not every one who is an Ahlussunnah Deoband and is a writer is a credible . A writer may incorporate some weak reports and unproved matter. Since a writer is also a human being. He is not infallible.

But as for Respected Sa:biri: he has a single criterion FOR HIS CLAIMS . If any content of a book supports his view he accepts it and if any content of a book rejects his views he rejects it. For others he has a verity of other criteria.

Quotation After the arrest Mawlana Khairabadi was sent to the island of Indimaan. From there he sent a

Page 22 of 33

Page 23 of 33 letter to Nawab Yusuf Ali Khan, ruler of Rampur, explaining the mismatch in names and his wrong arrest. After this letter the order of his release was given but by the time this order reached the island, his soul had already departed.

[See Jang-e-Azaadi p 555 by professor Muhammad Ayyub Qadri]

S:a:biri’s Response Another lie. During his stay in prison Mawlana wrote his classical book (in Arabic )on Indian revolution under the name “ Al Sauratul Hindiya”. This book is the best book of that period by any Islamic scholar describing the revolt by Indians. It deals with socio economy condition and also the cruelty done by British on Indian population and also British plan to convert people to christinaity. This book was translated into Urdu under the name ‘ BAGHI Hindustan” and was published in 1947 . It is available in market. Mawlana Abul Kalam Azad wrote in its preface” this is the best book of that period. Mawlana did a great job by LEADING this freedom struggle. A hand written copy has been sent to my father who is in Makkah “

RESPONSUM WE SHALL DISCUSS ON THIS BOOK SEPERATELY. PLEASE DO NOT CONSIDER THAT THIS BOOK IS NOT PROBLEMATIC FOR RESPECTED “ABDULLAH S:ABIRI:. HE IS NOT THE ONLY PERSON TO HAVE BOOKS OF OTHER SECTS THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLES AS WELL WHO POSSES THE WORKS OF THEIR OPPONENTS. When this book is not free from Corruption with certainty , any argument from this Apocryphal /Hidden book is weak.

It must be asked that:= 1] Did ‘I:ma:m of Kh:aira:badi: cult mensioned his signature on the Fat-va: in this book of Noun “ ‘Ath: Th:-vratul Hindiyah.

2] Did he mentioned that he was one of the pioneers of the Fat-va: of Insurrection in this book. Why he did not write such important events of his life????

Some time an incorrect argument fires back.

[We do not say whether this argument is correct or not but just want to shew that some times an argument fires back].

S:a:biri’s Response The Officla Deoband website says

RESPONSUM Page 23 of 33

Page 24 of 33

It must be noted that ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband are not enemies of Kh:airabadis. They only dispute with them on some issues. This does not mean that they are not going to distort history or to reject history one the basis of such disputes. “

S:a:biri’s Response

Maulana Fazl-e-Haq Khairabadi who had been sentenced for life and transported to Andaman-Nicobar Islands for the guilt of issuing a Fatwa of jihad of 1857, writes: “The English prepared a scheme to Christianize all the Indian inhabitants. It was their belief that the Indians would not be able to find any helper and cooperator, and therefore save submit and obey, they would not have the nerve to defy them. The English had thoroughly realized that the ruler’s variance from the ruled on the basis of religion would be a great stumbling block in the way of domination and possession. Hence they began to indulge in all sorts of wiles and chicanery with complete diligence and assiduity, in their willful attempt to obliterate religion and the sense of nationhood. To teach small children and the ignorant and to inculcate their language and religion, they established schools in towns and villages and made an all out effort to wipe out the old sciences and academic attainments”.

RESPONSUM One must know the inner nature of our Respondant. When some one favours him he is going to accept him and his work , who so ever the author may be and when some one opposes him he is going to reject him and his work who so ever he may be. This is the nature of oRespected S:abiri. If this is the nature of him he loses all the credibility.

This is a passage of the work “Ba:gh:I Hindusta:n”. This was initially written by “Arabic ( ‘Ath:-vratul Hindiyah ). But can it be an accurate work or it is a corrupted book. A book which was once again in possession of “Abdul H:aqq Khairaba:di and no one else. If some contents of it were changed or added or substracted , no one was there to prevent the only possessor from doing so. Respected S:a:biri: wants to deny the reports of Ami:r Ar Rava:yat just because it was written by some one who had a soft corner for Scholars of Deoband and wants all to affirm a book which remained so long in isolation and occultation that its trustworthiness and credibility ceased. But he is insisting so. Is this not a Multi-Standard scheme.

The very same book does not mention about issuing the Fatva: . Why MaulaviFad:l H:aqq Kh:airaba:di did not write the most important issue of of all times? Did he wrote this book to shew that the did not know any Page 24 of 33

Page 25 of 33

thing about Fatva: . Lastly he was ordered to be freed. What evedences were produced to get the order of his freedom ?

S:a:biri’s Response ANY ONE CAN CROSS CHECK THIS ON OFFICIAL DEOBAND WEBSITE.

RESPONSUM OUR AIM IS TO DEFEND ,’IMAM ‘AHLUSSUNNAH SHA: ‘ISMA:”IL SHAHI:D ,GREAT SCHOLARS OF‘AHJLUSSUNNAH DEOBAND IN PARTICULAR AND FOLLOWERS OF ‘ASHA:H ‘ISMA:”I:L ‘ASH SHAHI:D , AND NOT ANY ONE WHO DEFENDS THEM.

S:a:biri’s Response It clearly shows how much Imam Khirabadi (rh) was against British !

RESPONSUM He may have became against the company rule during the year 1857CE. But if he was Against the Rule of British East India Company’s rule before 1856 or before 12\31\1856CE can it be proved so? I do not think that such an eveidence can be provided.

He was a Sharastadar when the Mugh:al Government was under the Company Rule. Do we need to repeat the entire Indian history and the Company Rule till 1857 CE. One may need to study the ‘ASBA:B BAGH:A:VAT E HIND [REASONS OF INDIAN MUTINY] by Sir Saiyid ‘Ah:mad Kh:a:n. Perhaps Respected S:abiri: is once again going to say that he does not believe in Sir Saiyid ‘Ahmad Kh:a:n’s Book. If he does not accept any ‘Ahlussunnah Deoband’s Book, any Book of ‘AhlulH:adi:th:, any book of any British Historian, then it means that he only believes in the books of Barailvis. So he is a denier of a large part of Indian History. But then he cannot compel any one to accept the History of India written by Barailvi and Kh:airabadi: Historians as well. Some times a gun fires back.

Page 25 of 33

Page 26 of 33

[From the birth of Maulavi Fad:l Haqq Kh:aira:ba:di: to the year1856 CE Fad:l Haqq did not say a word against the company rule . Why? Because during this time Company rulers were had not committed great mistakes.If he was not a supporter of Company rule before 1857CE he was also not against them . Otherwise he would have declared a Jiha:d before 1857 CE].

S:a:biri’s Response Readers can check online national archives of India and UK to cross check these facts. Just type “ Khairabadi” and we can see the truth.

There is no evidence of that non existing letter quoted by Ayyub Qadri. Many scholars and historian have refuted Ayyub qadri on many issues.

RESPONSUM AIYU:B QA:DIRI was a Barailvi yet he was a scholar. He did researches on may issues. As a scholar he may be attempted to be refuted as well as attempted to be defended. This is no problem. But Aiyu:b Q:adiri: is reporting that he has seen a letter. If he is considered as a liar then he may not be believed but if he is not supposed to be a liar he then shall be believed. The question is why he is not believed . Only because what he is reporting is against the views of Respected S:a:biri. If he had reported otherwise the very same Respected Peson would have accepted it as ultimate truth or probably as Eternal Truth.

He has claimed that the letter is non Existing. So far so good. Now he must remain loyal to this principle.

He must accept that the False Fatva: of Excercising Falsehood ascribed to Maula:na: Rashi:d Gungu:hi: /Junju:hi: was a concoction and’Imam of Bans Barailvism Maulavi ‘Ahmad Rada: of Bans Baraili committed the same mistake has Respected S:a:biri ascribes it to Aiyu:b Qa:diri: . Other wise it shall be proved that he has several standards in regards to several issues.

[Note if the original Manuscript of the Epistle ceaseth to exist it does not mean that it never existed. If this condition is imposed than one may ask that each and every Fatva of ‘Ah:mad Rad:a: of Ban:s Baraily may please be shown in his manuscripts. Otherwise all the six volumes which are now expanded to more then 30 volumes are not reliable] . Can we claim that the Present Tah:qiqul Fatva did not exist during the life time of Maulavi Fad:l H:aqq Khairabadi: ?

S:a:biri’s Response Page 26 of 33

Page 27 of 33 Now the question is why didn’t Imam Khairabadi mention this “ mis match” in his last book ( Al Sauratul Hindiya) which he wrote in prison?

RESPONSUM If Maulavi Fad:l H:aqq has not mensioned it , it does not prove that there was no such letter. He is using the argument of Silence which is a weak argument . But he is using a weak argument as if it is a Powerful Argument and this is a Deliberate fallacy.

If Fad:l H:aqq Kh:airabadi did not write about the most important event of his life this means that this event did not occur. Who can know it better THEN the alleged author himself. Our his sons subtracted it from the alleged manuscript.

S:a:biri’s Response The author should investigate more into any matter before posting on internet . Again , the author is same person who provided the non existing quote of Imam Suyuti (rd) !

RESPONSUM We shall not defend any particular author who attempt to defend ‘Ahlussunah Scholars. We shall defend our Elders not all those who attempt to defend them. So it is up to the said author to defend himself. But this does mean that Respected S:abiri: did not have any Posative and definite answer to the question he wrote in his response.

Let us see how he respond to the following ARGUMENT:= If he had signed or or pioneered [or both] a Fat-va: in regard to the Insurrection he must have mentioned it in his book. If he did not then this means he did not do any one of the stated above act. Since he did know his own acts more than any one else, and more that all other scholars of latter period who wants to ascribe the Fat-va: to him in one of the senses or others.

An argument used by those who deny his participation in the issuance of Fat-va: stated above.

Page 27 of 33

Page 28 of 33

QUOTATION Now interestingly, Mawlana Khairabadi blamed his arrest on his oppostion to Mawlana Ismail shaheed. He said: “I made a big mistake by opposing Molwi Ismail saheb. He was without a doubt on haq and I erred in this matter. This tribulation that has came upon me is punishment of these actions of mine. If I was close to Mawlana shaheed, today I would have been martyred with him. But what can be done, these people of Badayun [like Fazl Rasul Badayun] incited me against Mawlana shaheed…”

[Ameer al-Rawayaat p 16 ba-hawala Shah Ismail shaheed by Dr. Allamah Khalid Mahmud]

S:a:biri’s Response

Here author has put entire blame on Dr Khalid Deobandi. So he smartly mentions his reference as ‘ ba – hawala”, which means Dr Khalid Deobandi has quoted this incidence from “ Ameer al –rawayat” and our author has not seen this book , neither tried to find out who wrote this book.

RESPONSUM Once again the learned Respondant is not believing in the contents OF ‘Ami:r ‘Ar Rava:yat. If you do not believe in a book you may declare it false. But in this case he must agree that he has no right to quote from any Kh:airaba:di or Baralivi book. For example consider the book Insurrected India [Ba:gh:i: Hindusta:n] . Is this a reliable book. Who Known , not even the Respected “Abdullah S:abiri since Maulavi Fad:l Haqq died in 1861 CE in Exile in Andaman Islands. When his Son reached there he saw that his body is in a coffin and is going for its final destination. So the question is whether a dead man give his son his allegedly written book. Was he resurrected for some time to present a copy of his book to his son. Certainly Not. Then who told him that this book was written by Maulavi Fad:l H:aqq Khairaba:di. Could it be the case that it was written by some one else and was incorrectly ascribed to him as a conspiracy. Very thing is possible. But as Our Friend is going to accept every thing that is in his favour ,we can just say “ There is just one Standard ,but he has multi standards depending on his needs. We have repeated that it is oour responsibility todefend the Elders and not all those who attempted to defend them. But what Respected Friend S:a:biri: is doing. Trying to convince his reader to believe in doubtful books.

Dr Khlaid al deobandi has been refuted twice on this forum with scans.

RESPONSUM

Page 28 of 33

Page 29 of 33

This is a controversial issue and the scans cannot refute him so easily, keeping the methodology and Multi Standard of Respected “Abdullah S:a:biri. The methodology of refutation is based upon the bases of Multi Criteria.

S:a:biri’s Response Surprisingly this book ( Ameer al Rawayaat) was written by a deobandi scholar from Khoja , who said that he has a copy of “ Imtinaun Nazeer” in which Imam Fazle Haq Khairanadi (rh) has accepted his fault on the matter of “ Imkan e nazeer a mohammedi “ ( impossibility of another mohammed ) ( sal allahu alayhi wa sallam ) . That means as per this deobandi scholar Imam Fazle Haq ( rh) later accepted the view of Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi ( that there is a possibility of another prophet ( sal allah hu alay hi wa sallam) .

When the sunni scholars asked him to show this copy , he could not bring !!Because the manuscript of that work was with the son of Imam Khairabadi (rh). This lie was refuted in those days itself! Our Dr Mahmood al deobandi should have done his research in a better way !

RESPONSUM This is a self refutation. When he himself acknowledges that this book became an apocryphal [hidden] book and was in the possession of just a single person , its matterials could easily be corrupted, added and subtracted. In this response he has accepted that even the opponents of Sha:h Shahi:d did not have any copy of this allegedly written book. The only Copy or all the coplies if more then one were in possession of the Son of Maulavi Fad:l H:aqq Namely/Nounly “Abdul Haqq Kh:aira:ba:di. It was kept in such a secret that even the followers of Maulavi Fad:l H:aqq Kh:airabadi: were unable to see a copy/manuscript of this book. So far so good. Now if this is the case that no one had any copy of this book then the credibility of this book is lost and the certainty of its ascription to Fad:l H:aqq is lost one for all sempiternities .

TO SAY THAT THE SCHOLAR WAS PROVED TO BE A LIAR BECAUSE HE WAS UNABLE TO SHEW THE MANUSCRIPT IS AN INCORRECT CLAIM. HE CANNOT BE PROVED TO BE A LIAR JUST BECAUSE HE WAS UNABLE TO SHEW SOME THING WHICH HE EITHER HAD IN PAST OR HAD STUDIED IN PAST. This means that if some one possessed a book in past and is lost in the present , and the person says something from his memory that this was written in the book he can be declared as a liar just because he does not posses it at present. What a beautiful Principle invented by S:abiri.

I may repeat an argument stated above which is applied here with some modification Page 29 of 33

Page 30 of 33

He must accept that the False Fatva: of Excercising Falsehood ascribed to Maula:na: Rashi:d Gungu:hi: /Junju:hi: was a concoction and’Imam of Bans Barailvism Maulavi ‘Ahmad Rada: of Bans Baraili committed the same mistake which Respected S:a:biri ascribes it to ‘AMI:R ‘ARRAVA:YA:T . Other wise it shall be proved that he has several standards in regards to several issues.

Similarly Maulavi Sharf Q:adri must have to confess that some of his own arguments were wrong when he claimed that Maulavi Fad:l Haqq asked one of his student to refute Taqviatul ‘I:ma:n while he was being send to Andaman Islands. Since this tradition is rejected by the very same principle Sharf Qa:dir: and S:abiri: two Baraivis used against ‘Ahlussunnah.

Note: We do not use to accuse all Barailvis but only those who use fallacious techniques to deceive those readers who do not know the subject of refutation of Barailvi Allegations thoroughly.

However we defend the objection .

S:a:biri’s Response When the sunni scholars asked him to show this copy , he could not bring !!Because the manuscript of that work was with the son of Imam Khairabadi (rh). This lie was refuted in those days itself! Our Dr Mahmood al deobandi should have done his research in a better way !

RESPONSUM Suppsoe that Fallowers of Kh:airabadi school of thought did ask tha sated above author to shew the copy he claimed to have read. But he was not able to shew it to them . I t may be the case that he did study a copy borrowing from some one else say a son of Maulavi Fad:l H:aqq but latter on the son realizing that it has some contents which are against his believes kept it in secret and did not allow any access to the book not only ‘Ahlussunnah but also to the scholars of Khairabadi Cult. If it is supposed that the author did possess a copy of the manuscript which must be a manuscript in itself , he may have lost it , or it might have been misplaced by him somewhere. There are Logical Possibilities and Practical Possibilites. Perhaps such Possibilities are also Muh:a:l Bidh: Dh:a: and out of the Divine Power as according to the Respected S:a:biri. So it is not a lie . Even on the standard of S:abiri: it may be truth and not falsehood. But he is not going to point out that it may be truth. Respectable “Abdullah S:abiri: has advised Dr Mah:mu:d that he should have done his research in a better way, and the adviser is advised that he must have done is excogitation in the better way.

Not only this book which was made an Apocrypha by the followers and sons of Page 30 of 33

Page 31 of 33

Fad:l H:aq even the book which is renamed as Ba:gh: Hindusta:n had a similar fate. A copy of it was send to the Father of Maulana: ‘Abul Kala:m ‘A:za:d by the handwriting of a son of Fad:l Haqq Nounly/Namely “Abdul H:aqq. Do we believe that Maulavi “Abdul H:aqq was less relable and less trustable then the Author of ‘Ami:rur Rava:ya:t? Is the Credibility the Attribute of only people like Maulavi“Abdul H:aqq ,Maulavi Fas:l Rasu:l etc. It must be noted that this Booklet was first published in 1946 CE just one year before the division of Subcontinent ,Eighty Five Solar Years after the Death of its author in Andaman Islands. Do our respected Critic is researching according to his the advise which he used to give it to others?

S:a:biri’s Response Page 31 of 33

Page 32 of 33

Imtinaun nazeer was written By Imam Khairabadi (rh) in persiaa. It has been trabslated into urdu as well.

A very good book on Ilmul kalam as well.

RESPONSUM A BOOK WITH DOUBTFUL CONTENTS AND PROBABILITY CORRUPTION [TAH:RI:F]. IT MAY BE GOOD TO A ONE SIDED SCHOLAR BUT NOT FOR A TRUE SCHOLAR. EVEN IF A BARAILVI SCHOLAR WITH JUST MIND CANNOT BELIEVE IN THE CREDIBILITY OF THIS DOUBTFUL CAN POSSIBILY CORREPTED BOOK. A Critique of fundamental arguments of this books shall be uploaded ‘Insha: ‘ALL-H. It was published much latter after the death of its alleged author and kept in isolation. How much alternation did occur only Divine Essence Knoweth.

DEFENDERS OF ‘AHLUSSUNNAH

Email

     

Facebook Twitter Google LinkedIn Pinterest Tumblr

        Dawat-e-Islami  Faizan-e-Raza  Nafs-e-Islam  Faizan-e-Attar  Noor-e-Madinah  Alahazrat.net  Alahazrat Network  Islamic Academy Copyright © 2

Page 32 of 33

Page 33 of 33

(1) Somnolence

This is the starting level of meditation. A person who starts meditation often enters a somnolent or sleep state (ghanood ‫)غنود‬. With the passage of time, the person goes into a state between sleep and wakefulness. The person can remember seeing something but not specifically what it is.

This is a very accurate description of Mediation. Through out Sub Continent this thing happen in all sort of Mediation. If a Mediation of any Created Rational Suppositum [Person] is done while performing Prayers [S:ala:h] it no longer remains a Prayer [Act Of Worshipping].Even opponents of Sha:h Shahi:d do know that this is not a problem of thought or deep thought but a Mediation in which Somnolence is the INTEGRAL and INITIAL Part. Sha:h Shahi:d is Comparing Somnolences Of Mediations with Simple Thoughts to Make them know the Error of Mediation during Worshipping.

http://www.islamieducation.com/fazle-haq-One of the Scholar of the series of Kh:airabadi @@@@@@@ has written a preface on an the book Gh:azvatul Hind. In this book he did prays Shah ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d in good words inspite of allthe differences Khairabadis had with Sha:h ‘Isma:”i:l Shahi:d.

If Sha:h Shahi:d was such a Heretic , @@@@@ COULD NOT have used such words. Infact the words are so good that the Barailvi Sharf Qadiri who wrote a second preface was very furious on him. How ever it is not evident that he had read Imtina:” An Naz:ir. He may have only heard the book or might have seen the corrupted version published in 1905CE or a Corrupted manuscript prior to the publication. khairabadi-and-fazle-rasul-badayuni-1/

Page 33 of 33