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 23

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:aism [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:

Deobandi claim has been posted in red

Our refutation of Claims of S:a:biri: are in COPPER BLACK

FOND AND IN THE COLOUR OF THIS SENTENCE IN
GENERAL

Page 2 of 23
 Page 3 of 23

Dr. Allamah Khalid Mahmud writes:

Fazl-e-Rasl Badyn worked for the British and his plan against the Hadth scholars of Delhi
remained unsuccessful. Hadhrat Shh Wal Allh was not alone in propagating tawhd
(monotheism) and the sunnat, and opposing shirk and bidat. Among his students were famous
pious people such as...

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

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

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

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.
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.

Fazl Rasool Bayaduni didnt even spare Imam Rabbani Mujaddid Alf-e-Sani [r.h] and wrote alot of
filth against the great Imam

Another deobandi style statement without any reference

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

Another fancy story from Arwahe Thalatha ( hakayat e Awliya) !

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

Page 3 of 23
 Page 4 of 23

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.
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 dont agree with us , we will
accuse you without proof .

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 .
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 Auto-
biography 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] ?
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
Yes he did and it is available in Indian market for Rs 30. Can any Deobandi post scan of that edition? Dont
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.
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, Nai: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, Nai: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

Page 4 of 23
 Page 5 of 23

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.

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

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)
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 Ashari 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 Nai:muddi:n Mura:daba:di borrowed from FasL Rasu:l Bada:yu:ni.
What our learned critici has to say in regard to this.
. 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.
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 Qura:n is borrowed from the
Alexanders Romance [Nau: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 Qura: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.
Which biddah made Ismail Dehalvi to write that one day prophet will die and get mixed with soil?
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.
Which Biddah made him to say the status of elevated creations ( prophets and awliya) is like cobbler in front
of Allah?
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

Page 5 of 23
 Page 6 of 23

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

1.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chamar
4]

Hindi camr, from Sanskrit carmakra leather worker, from carman skin, leather + -kra
worker, from krnoti 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] | 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.
Page 6 of 23
 Page 7 of 23

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 ones 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.

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 [Shan] 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 .. [Naudh: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.
Page 7 of 23
 Page 8 of 23

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

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].

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.

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 ). 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 Sharaiah. 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

Page 8 of 23
 Page 9 of 23

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.

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.

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: Ala: 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 Ala: 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.
List of books of Mawlana shaheed.

This is not agreed upon. Different Deobandi scholars have given different list. Mawlana Hakim mirzapuri has
counted 17 books from Ismail Dehalvi.

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.

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]

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 Dont bring food for Niyaz here , Wahabis stay here

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

Page 9 of 23
 Page 10 of 23

Ima:m Ibn Taimiah. It is used for any one who exercise Rafayadain 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.

Sunnis dont consider the views of Allama Iqbal as proof. But let us see what Allama Iqbal said about
Deobandis

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 didnt the sky collapse on them, the sky should
have collapsed on them!

What is the source. Now ask Respected S:a:biri. If Vahabis lie what
Barailvis DO?
2. The origin of qadynaism and deobandism is one
( Allama Iqbal)

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 10 of 23
 Page 11 of 23

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

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

Mere posting cannot make a book reliable.
British knew that to stop the movement of Syed Ahmad shaheed and his followers, the easiest
way is to label them Wahhabis.

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

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

It is requested Please 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.

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.

No comments Necessary. Go to the books

and study them in detail.
See attached document in post 11 above and scans in post 13.

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

As per this author , Imam Fazle haq Khairabadi (rh) loved Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi !

Page 11 of 23
 Page 12 of 23

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: .

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.

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.
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!

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: Mui:nuddi:n Ajme:ri: a Kh:arabadi scholar even wrote a book of Noun

Tajalliya:t e: Anva:r e: Mui: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.

Page 12 of 23
 Page 13 of 23

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.

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

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.
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]

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]

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

CONTINUED
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?

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:

Page 13 of 23
 Page 14 of 23

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?
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?

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.

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.

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.

Of course after he was accused of Insurrection he ceased to be an official

in Company rule .

Page 14 of 23
 Page 15 of 23

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.
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 .

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?

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

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

Page 15 of 23
 Page 16 of 23

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].
The Officla Deoband website says

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.

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 rulers 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.

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

Page 16 of 23
 Page 17 of 23

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
thing about Fatva: . Lastly he was ordered to be freed. What evedences
were produced to get the order of his freedom ?
ANY ONE CAN CROSS CHECK THIS ON OFFICIAL DEOBAND WEBSITE.

OUR AIM IS TO DEFEND ,IMAM AHLUSSUNNAH SHA: ISMA:IL SHAHI:D

,GREAT SCHOLARS OFAHJLUSSUNNAH DEOBAND IN PARTICULAR AND
FOLLOWERS OF ASHA:H ISMA:I:L ASH SHAHI:D , AND NOT ANY ONE
WHO DEFENDS THEM.
It clearly shows how much Imam Khirabadi (rh) was against British !

He may have became against the company rule during the year
1857CE. But if he was Against the Rule of British East India
Companys 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:ns Book. If he
does not accept any Ahlussunnah Deobands 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.
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.

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

Page 17 of 23
 Page 18 of 23

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 andImam 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.
Now the question is why didnt Imam Khairabadi mention this mis match in his last book ( Al Sauratul
Hindiya) which he wrote in prison?

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.
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) !

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 18 of 23
 Page 19 of 23

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]

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.

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.

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.
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 !

This is a self refutation. When he himself acknowledges that this book

became an apocryphal 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

Page 19 of 23
 Page 20 of 23

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
He must accept that the False Fatva: of Excercising Falsehood ascribed to
Maula:na: Rashi:d Gungu:hi: /Junju:hi: was a concoction andImam 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:

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 !

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

Page 20 of 23
 Page 21 of 23

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
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 MaulaviAbdul 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
Page 21 of 23
 Page 22 of 23

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?

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.

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.
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

Page 22 of 23
 Page 23 of 23

Alahazrat.net
Alahazrat Network
Islamic Academy
Copyright 2

(1) Somnolence

This is the starting level of meditation. A person who starts meditation often enters a somnolent
or sleep state (ghanood ). 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 23 of 23