Deobandi!!?!?!?
- Thread starter Sufi_Shahbaz
- Start date
- Status
:salam2:
Please people refrain from insulting each other, and in addition to this from insulting the 'Deobandis' as they are called here (In a derogatory manner). Majority of the ulema in South Africa who are firm on deen and respected world over have graduated from this so called 'Deobandi' madrassas. The name Deobandi originated from the mere fact as to distinguish the true ulema in India when deviated sects started coming about. The ulema amongst them never referred to themselves as 'Deobandis'. I urge on and all to first examine both sides of the coin before coming to any rash decisions (Visit the *!*!*!*!*!*! website if you want more information).
Please people refrain from insulting each other, and in addition to this from insulting the 'Deobandis' as they are called here (In a derogatory manner). Majority of the ulema in South Africa who are firm on deen and respected world over have graduated from this so called 'Deobandi' madrassas. The name Deobandi originated from the mere fact as to distinguish the true ulema in India when deviated sects started coming about. The ulema amongst them never referred to themselves as 'Deobandis'. I urge on and all to first examine both sides of the coin before coming to any rash decisions (Visit the *!*!*!*!*!*! website if you want more information).
:salam2: Akhi Irshad,
So i guess your exams are over now ?
I would just like to say politely that that "Deobandi" is not a derogatory term.
The people who ascribe to this school of thought call themselves Deobandi even today in the Indian subcontinent. In fact you could even find books written with the keyword "Deobandi" by the scholars of Deoband themselves.
Although, there are derogatory names for Deobandis and Ahl E Hadees in the Indian subcontinent used mainly by the Barlevis.
Also, there is derogatory name for Barelvis used by Deobandis and Ahl E hadees in the India.
But, I don't see any point in typing those names here.
I hope people maintain adab and not throw tantrums on discussing Deobandis and tableegh jamaat.
If there is anything that they think is quoted wrongly they need to point it out politely!
:salam2:
I hope, the thread will not get closed before I have posted my reply.
Although I have my own problems with Deobandis and Tablighi jamaat, I have never thought, there is any fault in their creed. As I do not subscribe myself to any sect and try to 'turn to the original Islam', I can maybe try to settle things being a third party. I do not even subsribe to the fatwas, which urge people to change their names from muslims to anything else and I consider their passion of differentiating themselves in name from other muslims because of slight differences as one of the causes of the fitnah of takfeer, which is taking so many innocent lives today.
I believe (and I believe so because of Quran), that everybody who believes in Allah tries to do good deeds out of the responsibility of accountability before Allah on the day of judgment, has got the hidaayah, which our beloved Prophet
brought to us. We may differ in one or the other point but if this basic direction is correct, then I am sure the good deeds of those who do them because of fear of Allah will never get spoiled and Allah will decide among us on other minor issues we have between each other. I have to add, that it is in starch contrast with sister Samiha's noble interpretation of that hadith of 73 sects, according to which she is seeing all other sects going to hell, except the one she belongs to herself.
It is exactly in this context, that I find it unfortunate, that certain discussions ever got started among muslims and caused nothing good but further division of muslims. Looking back in past from today, it seems such a redundant issue to discuss, whether Quran is part of the Creator or his creation. Although, I wouldn't have agreed with mutazillah but I find it unfortunate, that we talk about them as if they were all destined to fire. So I have no problem in accepting that Zamakhshri was one of the greatest linguists in the history of muslims. And we are all proud of muslim scientists of the abbaside period for their services to humanity, although most of them were mutazillah.
Because I considered many such discussions redundant and I always thought, Tawheed existed before the kitaab ut tawheed was written, I never cared about finding the exact difference between ashari belief and the beliefs of todays salafi sect, until I have seen that much of hatred against ashari and maturidi beliefs, that brother thehumblewun was banned at once. I have read most part of the following document, which describe the ashari beliefs to check, what really those beliefs are.
http://alghazzali.org/resources/articles/ashariAqeedah.pdf
I accept, I am not an expert in taking beliefs under convex lense but from what I could understand from that document, there is only one point, where I have my difference of opinion and everything else looks fine to me. The only point, where I differ in my opinion is the point 1.3c in that document, which deals with "The Prior Predisposition of People". Otherwise, the Tawheed, as described in that document is acceptable to me and somebody really has to explain to me, where they are "deviating" from the original Islam brought by our beloved Prophet
On the other hand I have noticed, that I am uncomfortable in accepting some interpretations of the verses, which, in my opinion, should be considered to be mutashabihaat. Trying to fix their meanings is a dangerous terrain. Who can deny that Allah is Omnipotent and because of the limitations of human understanding Allah would speak of his "hands" or his "eyes". But we should remain within our limits and should not try to derive more from that. I must clearly say, I have great respect for all scholars but I don't agree in creating new identities among muslims because of their fixing of the meanings of some mutashabihaat. I hope the wise would get my point and I don't want to go into more detail because it is a dangerous terrain, where I don't want to move.
The last point, Deobandis, even though there is some sufism in them do not subscribe to wahdatulwujud, which, in my eyes is an ignorance sold by shaitaan to muslims, sugar quoted in tawheed. They subscribe to a modified version of it, called wahdat ush shuhood, which is very much acceptable to me and I don't consider it equivalent to wahdatulwujud. Wahdat ush shuhood is "observing" the exalted power (qudrat) of Allah in everything. Aren't there signs of Allah in every atom of this universe? Is not every atom of this universe praising their Lord by obeying His laws? So I consider them to be very much cleaned up from the baatil of Sufism. When I was a young boy, I had that feeling, and I still have that feeling to some extent, that they are closest of all other sects to ahl al hadith, who are a subcontinental version of Salafis. Some great scholars of Deobanis have got much respect by the Saudis like Maulana Kairanwi or Abu 'lhasan nadawi. Things on ground are not as dark as they appear in this forum. I hope my mail will help to reduce some tension.
I hope, the thread will not get closed before I have posted my reply.
Although I have my own problems with Deobandis and Tablighi jamaat, I have never thought, there is any fault in their creed. As I do not subscribe myself to any sect and try to 'turn to the original Islam', I can maybe try to settle things being a third party. I do not even subsribe to the fatwas, which urge people to change their names from muslims to anything else and I consider their passion of differentiating themselves in name from other muslims because of slight differences as one of the causes of the fitnah of takfeer, which is taking so many innocent lives today.
I believe (and I believe so because of Quran), that everybody who believes in Allah tries to do good deeds out of the responsibility of accountability before Allah on the day of judgment, has got the hidaayah, which our beloved Prophet
brought to us. We may differ in one or the other point but if this basic direction is correct, then I am sure the good deeds of those who do them because of fear of Allah will never get spoiled and Allah will decide among us on other minor issues we have between each other. I have to add, that it is in starch contrast with sister Samiha's noble interpretation of that hadith of 73 sects, according to which she is seeing all other sects going to hell, except the one she belongs to herself.It is exactly in this context, that I find it unfortunate, that certain discussions ever got started among muslims and caused nothing good but further division of muslims. Looking back in past from today, it seems such a redundant issue to discuss, whether Quran is part of the Creator or his creation. Although, I wouldn't have agreed with mutazillah but I find it unfortunate, that we talk about them as if they were all destined to fire. So I have no problem in accepting that Zamakhshri was one of the greatest linguists in the history of muslims. And we are all proud of muslim scientists of the abbaside period for their services to humanity, although most of them were mutazillah.
Because I considered many such discussions redundant and I always thought, Tawheed existed before the kitaab ut tawheed was written, I never cared about finding the exact difference between ashari belief and the beliefs of todays salafi sect, until I have seen that much of hatred against ashari and maturidi beliefs, that brother thehumblewun was banned at once. I have read most part of the following document, which describe the ashari beliefs to check, what really those beliefs are.
http://alghazzali.org/resources/articles/ashariAqeedah.pdf
I accept, I am not an expert in taking beliefs under convex lense but from what I could understand from that document, there is only one point, where I have my difference of opinion and everything else looks fine to me. The only point, where I differ in my opinion is the point 1.3c in that document, which deals with "The Prior Predisposition of People". Otherwise, the Tawheed, as described in that document is acceptable to me and somebody really has to explain to me, where they are "deviating" from the original Islam brought by our beloved Prophet
On the other hand I have noticed, that I am uncomfortable in accepting some interpretations of the verses, which, in my opinion, should be considered to be mutashabihaat. Trying to fix their meanings is a dangerous terrain. Who can deny that Allah is Omnipotent and because of the limitations of human understanding Allah would speak of his "hands" or his "eyes". But we should remain within our limits and should not try to derive more from that. I must clearly say, I have great respect for all scholars but I don't agree in creating new identities among muslims because of their fixing of the meanings of some mutashabihaat. I hope the wise would get my point and I don't want to go into more detail because it is a dangerous terrain, where I don't want to move.
The last point, Deobandis, even though there is some sufism in them do not subscribe to wahdatulwujud, which, in my eyes is an ignorance sold by shaitaan to muslims, sugar quoted in tawheed. They subscribe to a modified version of it, called wahdat ush shuhood, which is very much acceptable to me and I don't consider it equivalent to wahdatulwujud. Wahdat ush shuhood is "observing" the exalted power (qudrat) of Allah in everything. Aren't there signs of Allah in every atom of this universe? Is not every atom of this universe praising their Lord by obeying His laws? So I consider them to be very much cleaned up from the baatil of Sufism. When I was a young boy, I had that feeling, and I still have that feeling to some extent, that they are closest of all other sects to ahl al hadith, who are a subcontinental version of Salafis. Some great scholars of Deobanis have got much respect by the Saudis like Maulana Kairanwi or Abu 'lhasan nadawi. Things on ground are not as dark as they appear in this forum. I hope my mail will help to reduce some tension.
As Salaam Alaykum Akhi Saif,
I agree that some of the Deobandis donot subscribe to the dodgy Soofi Aqeedah of Wahdat Ul Wajood.
Specially, the Scholars from University of Nadwa in Lucknow like Ali Miya Nadwi and Salmaan Nadwi.
But, many many Deobandi Scholars like Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Zakariya Kandhalvi do.
They even praise and revere people like Mansoor Al Hallaj and Ibn Al Arabi in their books who had invented this dodgy concept in Islaam
I agree that some of the Deobandis donot subscribe to the dodgy Soofi Aqeedah of Wahdat Ul Wajood.
Specially, the Scholars from University of Nadwa in Lucknow like Ali Miya Nadwi and Salmaan Nadwi.
But, many many Deobandi Scholars like Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Zakariya Kandhalvi do.
They even praise and revere people like Mansoor Al Hallaj and Ibn Al Arabi in their books who had invented this dodgy concept in Islaam
:salam2:
Before leveling accusations at Ml Thaanvi (Rahamatullah) please verify. I implore you to go and ask whatever you have on your mind about him to askimam . org. After getting a response than decide (Mufti Desai is a prominent South African scholar who responds to queries there).
Before leveling accusations at Ml Thaanvi (Rahamatullah) please verify. I implore you to go and ask whatever you have on your mind about him to askimam . org. After getting a response than decide (Mufti Desai is a prominent South African scholar who responds to queries there).
:salam2: Akhi Irshaad,
InshaAllah I will scan and post the pages where Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Zakariya Kandhalvi say about Ibn Al Arabi and Mansoor Hallaj.
I hope you can read urdu.
I don't know how soon I would be able to do that though.
Ok Brothers, see you on Monday inshaAllah. Have FUN!
- Status