Salafi Research Institute SRI
Compiled by
Abu Khuzaimah Ansari
The deobandi sect is usually very secretive in concealing their internal differences and critical statements against each other or the internal factionalism that exists within their deviated sect. Such differences vary in their type, while some revolve around creedal differences, some regarding methodology and others purely related to their internal politics at their respective Dar ul-Ulums.
I have previously presented a small synopsis of the critical statements and refutation of Jamat ut-Tabligh by the deobandi scholars. Yes, dear readers, the Tablighi Jamat is yet another manifestation of the deobandi sect and what they uphold in terms of their deviated creed, rather claiming the Tablighis are more deviated due to their deliberate ignorance of the Shari’ah would not be an unfair assertion. The following brief article is what I am referring to, The Statements of the Deobandi Hanafi Scholars on Jamaat ut-Tabligh.
[1] The Deception of Anwar Shah Kashmiri; His Claim of Co-authoring Athar as-Sunan – Refuted by Nimawi’s Son, Abdur Rashid Fawqani
Anwar Shah Kashmiri wrote in Nayl al-Farqadayn that he helped and co-authored Athar as-Sunan. Nimawi was the main and known author of Athar as-Sunan Nimawi’s son, Abdur Rashid Fawqani wrote regarding Anwar Shah Kashmiri’s claim, which he made in his Nayl al-Farqadayn he co-authored the book with Nimawi when he said,
“The deceased Shaykh (al-Nimawi) while writing that book would send it to me piece by piece, until I became an aide therein; and I added many things to it after him.”
scan from the Nayl al-Farqadayn (p.56)
The claim of Anwar Shah co-authoring Athar al-sunan has been reproduced by the Deobandi’s and affirmed by Abd al-Fattah Abu Guddah by him reproducing the words of Binnouri in his Tarajim Sittah min fuqaha al-Alam al-Islami, he says
Mawlana Muhammad Zahir Ahsan al-Nimawi (d. 1322/1904), Allah have mercy on him, the famous hadith-scholar, author of Athar al-Sunan, would seek assistance from Shaykh (Anwar Shah al-Kashmiri) with regards to the ambiguities of hadith, by correspondence through letter-writing. He would seek help from him while writing his book Athar al-Sunan and he would present to him what he had written piece by piece. This is what I heard from the revered Shaykh (himself), Allah have mercy on him. He said in his book Nayl al-Firqadayn: “The deceased Shaykh (al-Nimawi) while writing that book would send it to me piece by piece, until I became an aide therein; and I added many things to it after him.” The Shaykh, Allah have mercy on him, at that time was a youth whose reputation was not (yet) manifest to the people while the hadith-scholar al-Nimawi was an experienced scholar, and in spite of this, this was his (manner of) interacting (with ‘Allamah Kashmiri), and this shows his intellectual humbleness and his estimation of men. Allah raise both their statuses. (Tarajim Sittah Min Fuqaha al-‘Alam al-Islami, 29) (translation of Muzammil Husayn deobandi)
Abdur Rashid Fawqani’s al-Qawl al-Hasan in which he answers, clarifies and rebuts the claim of Anwar Shah Kashmiri regarding his assistance in co-authoring Athar al-Sunan, Abdur Rashid also cites reasons and gives examples as to why this is an incorrect notion. These two scans here which show the refutation and rebuttal of the claim of Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi.
Abdur Rashid Fawqani said this is incorrect because when the book was written i.e. the period it was written in, Anwar Shah Kashmiri was still a student as he graduated in 1312H from seeking knowledge of the various sciences. It is however possible that some parts of Athar as-Sunan may have been sent to Anwar Shah Kashmiri after it was completed, where he offered his advice and suggestions. (al-Qawl al-Hasan 19-24)
It is also interesting to note here, that one of the foremost students of Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Muhammad Anwari of La’ilpur expressed his sorrowful anger at the clarification of this reality by Mawlana Abdur Rashid and wrote in one of his letters,
“You did not even control yourself from expressing derogatory remarks about your illustrious venerated father in his praise and nor did you reflect upon ‘do not speak ill of the dead except with their goodness.’ You advocated and took full charge against Shah Kashmiri which will not result in anything except pleasing the opponents.”
This letter is 2 pages which Abdur Rashid answered in 6 pages, in which he further clarified his stance and position with more clarifications and evidence, that during the time Athar as-sunan was authored, Anwar Shah Kashmiri was a student. However, when he (Anwar Shah) was appointed as a teacher in Delhi, he (Nimawi) might have sent his research to him after 1313H and sought his opinion in draft form. We found this letter and the response to the earlier letter which Abdur Rashid penned himself in an edition of al-Qawl al-Hasan. We thought it was appropriate to correct and clear the misunderstanding that was suggested in the passage of Nayl al-Farqadayn and hence the reason to mention this here.
[2] Mahmud al-Hasan Deobandi Disparaging Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s Ability as a Hadith Author
Mahmud al-Hasan was the first rector of deoband and the teacher of Ashraf Ali Thanwi. When Ashraf Ali Thanwi expressed desire to write a book validating the hanafi madhhab through hadith like Athar as-Sunan. The 6 page letter which Abdur Rashid Fawqani wrote cited earlier, he writes in it while responding to the defender of Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Muhammad Anwari La’ilpuri
“Mawlana Muhammad Sahul of Bhagalpur who was the Principle of Madrassah Shams al-Huda in Patna, Azimabad, mentioned to me in directly, “We were sitting in a gathering of Shaikh ul-Hindh Mawlana Mahmud Hasan in Deoband when someone said that Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi is writing a book in the same way that Athar as-Sunan was written. When Shaikh ul-Hindh (i.e. Mahmud al-Hasan) heard this he said “Mawlana Ashraf Ali is also my student but he cannot write (a book) like Athar as-Sunan.”
So, this was the opinion and thought of the respected teacher about his foremost student, clarifying his inadequacy and weak understanding of hadith, essentially his diminished capability in defending his hanafi madhhab in view of the deobandi mindset.
[3] Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s Lack of Proficiency in Hadith – Passing Hadith Tasks to others and Emergence of Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali
When he eventually began writing a book on hadith defending and proving the hanafi madhhab he was unable to pass the chapter of prayer. He then followed this work with another explanatory work which was also to the chapter of prayer. He later realised the need to expand the book to all masa’il of fiqh and realised his weakness and lack of proficiency in hadith. He passed the task of writing to Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali
[4] Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali Deobandi and His Deviation from the Hanafi Deobandi Madhhab
As Ahmad Hasan progressed with this task, Ashraf Ali Thanvi would progressively review and revise the work and he corrected or changed things. When Sanabhali reviewed and revised the book he altered many things to the extent he even changed the corrections of Ashraf Ali Thanvi, to such an extent the original and initial criteria and methodology of writing the book changed. (i.e. compiling hadith supporting the hanafi madhab and reconciling hadith with the madhhab)
After the printing of the first volume Ashraf Ali Thanwi stopped the publishing of the book due to the numerous gross errors and mistakes because the methodology of the book was not defending the hanafi madhhab. So, Ashraf Ali Thanwi then passed the task on to Zafar Ahmad Uthmani Thanvi.
[5] Zafar Ahmad Thanwi Uthmani’s Obstinate criticism of Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali and asks Allah to Destroy him
Zafar Ahmad Uthmani Thanvi first wrote a refutation of his fellow Deobandi hanafi Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali. He publish a clarifying supplement on the first volume of Sanabhali and his gross errors which he titled, ‘al-Istadrak al-Hasan A’la Ihya as-Sunan.’
Zafar Ahmad Thanwi Uthmani did not just stop there but rather continued refuting Sanabhali throughout the book. He said in I’la al-Sunan “Some people say (Qala Ba’dun Nas)” he then mentions the position of Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali and refutes it with great vigour and rancour. In fact, in the introduction of the second edition Thanvi writes about the methodology and position of Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali that,
“To the extent that he altered the book from its initial methodology and changed its original purpose and intent.” (Muqaddimah I’la al-Sunan, 25)
Meaning, the original manhaj or methodology of the book was the defence of the hanafi madhhab but Sanabhali continued to support and conform to the position of the scholars of hadith i.e. the Ahlul Hadith and changed the original and main purpose of the book. It was such audacity of Sanabhali that let Zafar Ahmad Thanwi Uthmani to write at one instance,
“May Allah destroy him” (I’la al-Sunan 7:94)
Sanabhali said concerning the report “There is no Jumu’ah or tashriq except in urban cities/towns” that Abu Ishaq as-Sabi’i narrated it and he became forgetful, to which Zafar Ahmad Uthmani replied,
“Oh to wonder what a waste of literacy, did you weaken the hadith just because of Abi Ishaq al-Sabi’i?” (I’la al-Sunan 1:1)
He further wrote in the introduction to I’la al-Sunan,
“When I say ‘some people said in their ‘Ihya’ or If I only say ‘some people say’ then I intend by this the author of ‘Ihya al-Sunan’ ie Al-Sanabhali, in this book of his he has brought some intricate allegations on the hanafi’s and some of the salaf based on hatred, enmity, ignorance and gross errors and thus I have answered them.” (Qawaid Ulum al-Hadith, 472)
Meaning that Sanabhali rebelled against the hanafi madhhab and therefore Zafar Ahmad Uthmani answered him in a hostile way.
These are the bigoted elders and Hazrats of Abdul Haleem and Usman Iqbal, their hatred and animosity for each other was based on their blind love and ignorant partisanship for the hanafi madhhab above the hadith of Allah’s Messenger, so much so they refuted, rebuked, and ostracised Ahmad Hasan Sanabhali! (Adapted from I’la as-Sunan F’il Mizan, with my additional notes)
[6] Another Sanabhali – Muhammad Isma’il on the Criticism of Abu Hanifah
The two youtubers, Abdul Haleem and Usman Iqbal made several videos on Salafis and Abu Hanifah. Here their own Hanafi scholar in on record accepting the Salaf and some scholars criticised Abu Hanifah for his memory. Muhammad Isma’il Sanabhali wrote,
From the statements of those [scholars] which prove the Imam [Abu Hanifah] had a deficient memory and was weak in hadith, can be listed as the following
Dhahabi, Nasa’i, Ibn Adiyy, Bukhari, Daraqutni, Bayhaqi, Ibn Jawzi, Ali bin al-Madini, Khatib Baghdadi, Hafiz Ibn Abdul Barr, Hafiz Ibn Hajr, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Qadhi Abu Yahya Zakariyyah bin Muhammad, Mawlana Shah Waliullah Dehlawi, Waki bin al-Jarrah, Tawus, Zuhri, Abu Ishaq Fazari, Imam Muslim, Tirmidhi, Hisham bin Urwah, Abu Dawud, Abu Hafs Umar bin Ali, Abdur Rauf Munawi and Jalal ud-Din Suyuti (Taqlid Ai’mah Aur Maqam Abu Hanifah, 117-118)
This book was endorsed by the hanafi, Mufti Atiq ur-Rehman Uthmani – Nadwatul Musannifin, Jami Masjid Delhi 1397H/1977CE and Rashid al-Wahidi al-Qasimi of Jami College Jamia Islamiyyah New Delhi, 1975CE.
The author acknowledges the criticism of the scholars cited above concerning the memory and position in hadith of Abu Hanifah. It is a different matter that he attempts to answer them which would be something expected of most hanafi madhhabists.
THE DEFAMTORY MENTION OF BRO HAJII AND ABU HANIFAH
Bro Hajji in also on record for agreeing and acknowledging the criticism of the scholars of hadith on Abu Hanifah. It is either hypocritical of the Deobandi duo to ignore the position of their friend (Bro Hajji) or they have deliberately turned a blind eye to it because their unity and cooperation with their so called “athari’ friend is based on hatred and animosity for the Salafis. We learn from this that both parties, namely the youtube trinity combination have bigoted partisanship for the hanafi madhhab.
[7] Enter the Majlisul Ulama of South Africa – on Jamiatul Ulama of Transvaal
This faction of the deobandis is particularly vitriolic. In this book the deobandi hanafis lashed out at their fellow deobandi hanafis, namely the Jamiatul Ulama of Transvaal for opening a radio station and the inner happenings of what that entailed. They say,
“The Jamiatul Ulama of Transvaal, has undergone a satanic metamorphosis. From its position of Haqq, it has turned course, deviated from Seeratul Mustaqeem and betrayed the Sunnah of Rasulullah ﷺ to collude with modernists who purport to be Muslims, but who are in reality the kuffar, munaafiqeen and enemies within.” (Betrayal of Islam – The Debacle of Radio Shaytan – The Somersault of the Jamiatul Ulama Transvaal, 1)
This book is riddled and filled with every possible word an individual can use as a disparaging remark for their fellow deobandi hanafis, in fact they make clear takfir of their fellow deobandis
[8] Majlisul Ulama or known as The Majlis on Taqi Uthmani
The Majlis refer to Taqi Uthmani as,
Deviation of Mufti Taqi, the glaring kufr of Taqi Uthmani, Mudhil Mufti, Mudhil Mufti who’s objective is hub-e-mal (love for wealth) Hub-e-jah (love for name and fame), Taqi Uthmani has degenerated into a cesspool of kufr inequity, He is responsible for the destruction of the Imaan and Akhlaaq of countless jaahil Muslims whom he has misguided with his zigzag baatil fatwas. At the behest of his handlers in the Pakistani government whose miserable agent he is, he has issued a list of kufr protocols in furtherance of the Bill Gates agenda. It is our intention to respond and refute in some detail each kufr protocol with which this unfortunate, miserable mudhil mufti is advising the juhala masses. Mufti Taqi Uthmani – He too has lost his Imaan, his most unfortunate and miserable ‘mufti’, in his latest statement on the hallucinated ‘second wave’ of the covid satanism, has displayed his jahaalat which is tantamount to kufr. He has rejected by implication everything instructed and commanded by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). He has rejected the Deen at the behest of the atheists whom he (the ‘mufti) has appointed to be his leaders. This miserable miscreant member of the ulama-e-soo’ fraternity has now fully embraced the ideology of the atheists in total rejection of Allah’s Ideology as propounded in the Qur’aan and Ahaadith. Following in the footsteps of Iblees and his atheist masters whom he is bootlicking, he finds the Musaajid and the Madaaris to be the fertile fields for the disease. Responding to the Zindiq… (Refer to themajlis.co.za)
Thats certainly a lot of adjectives!!! For good measure they produced the following work from among others refuting their beloved deobandi mufti
[9] The Majlisul Ulama on every Deobandi Hanafi
On their website this Deobandi organisation has not spared anyone and every single line is either takfir or tabdi. In one edition they say, “The kufr fatwa of the moron U.K. Muftis” this is obviously referring to their own Deobandi muftis. These traits are only with the deobandis of making mass takfir and mass tabdi, absolutely reckless.
[10] The Splitting and Fighting of Jamat ut-Tabligh
This is well known and quite public that Jamat ut-Tabligh have now had a major spilt in the various countries with two factions and this has come at a price of discord and open fighting. In some countries there were violent clashes and both factions drew blood from each other. Fights have broken out at their various masajid around the globe and this bitter feud between the deobandis is well documented.
This shows you the reality of the true face of these deobandis and so making statements against us Salafis is a continuation of the mindset of their hanafi Deobandi
