In House Takfir: From deobandis upon deobandis
Sullah Kullis are those people who are spreading fitnah in this ummah. They often say that sunni scholars were “too harsh” in issuing the verdict of kufr against those who showed disrespect to prophet ( sal allahu alayhi wa sallam). Sullah Kulli literary means: “promoters of peace”. But in reality these people are hypocrites who are damaging the creed of islam by not calling a spade as spade. These people sometimes go to the extent of calling rafidi shias also as muslim!
These “sulah kullis ” should read the below mentioned verdict of kufr from deobandis upon deobandis and ask Allah to guide them to deen e islam as practiced by ahlus sunnah wal jama’ah. Ameen
The case of Qasim Nanotwi
“Hujjat al Islam” of the deobandis Qasim Nanotwi al deobandi wrote in Tasfiyat al aqaid ( Tasfiyatul aqaid),page 24 , that “ prophets are not free from sins”.
The verdict
Jamat e Islami ( Mawdoodi group) sent this whole discussion from this book to the scholars of deoband, without informing them that it was taken from Qasim Nanotwi’s book.
[Please note: Deobandis often lie when they say that mawdoodi group only sent one sentence. As it can be seen in the scan whole issues was sent to get the fatwa]
Deobandi scholars issued the fatwa (verdict) of Kufr upon the person who said “prophets are not free from sins”.
The Fatwa said: The person having this type of aqida is kafir. Unless he does tajdeed e iman(renews his faith by reciting shahada) and tajdeed e nikah ( renews his marriage) no relationship should be kept with him”.
Later, mawdoodi group informed deobandis that this passage was taken from their own scholar’s book!
See scan:
http://www.falaah.co.uk/wahabi/takfir-fatwa-on-qasim-nanotvi-by-deoband
The case of Ashraf ali thanvi
“Hakim al ummah” of the deobandis Ashraf ali thanvi wrote in Hifzul Iman, page7:
“And then, if it is correct to attribute the knowledge of the unseen (ilm ghayb) to be possessed by Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam, as Zayd says, then it remains to be asked, which one he ( the questioner) refers to.?Is it only a ‘part’ of it (baáĎ) or ‘complete’; if he refers to’part’, then what is extraordinary about Rasulullah in possessing it? Such knowledge ( aysa) of unseen is also possessed by all and sundry (Zayd, Amr); even infants, lunatics and all the animals and quadrupeds
The verdict
1 .Any person who has this belief that prophet had the knowledge of the unseen he is a kafir and a mushrik as per hanafi scholars” ….
[Fatwa Rashidiya, by Rashid Gangohi al deobandi,page 228]
Please note, Thanvee said prophet did have knowledge of the unseen. But he equated this knowledge with lowly creatures.
Since, anyone who has this belief that prophet had the knowledge of the unseen is mushrik and kafir as per Rashid Gangohee , then , Thanvee becomes a kafir as per Gangohee.
2. Three deobandi scholars Manzur Sanbhalî , Murtazâ Hasan Darbhangî and Husayn Ahmad Tandvee- agreed that this statement is kufr.
See scan:
http://www.falaah.co.uk/wahabi/hifzul-iman-and-shaykh-thanvi
3. No human being can deny that the above words bring disrespect when used for any human being.
Rashid Gangohee al deobandi issued a fatwa which states 🙁 Fatâwâ’ Rashîdiyyah, Page 71-72, printed by Muhammad Saeed and Sons, Karâchî, Pâkistân.)
“It is said in Shifâ’: “That, when a person has uttered something when speaking of the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, without intending to insult, neither to offend and nor does he believe it to be but has uttered for the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, words which constitute kufr [like] from cursing him or insulting him or falsifying him or associating that which is unlawful upon him or negating that which is indispensable upon him which for his status are [considered] blemishes, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, like associating a major sin …. or uttered something disrespectful out of sheer ignorance which is construed as a kind of verbal abuse even if his circumstances apparently illustrate that he did not intend to demean the Prophet, salla Allâhu ‘alayhi wa sallam, nor did he rely on it or he uttered it merely through ignorance or due to distress and depression or due to influence of intoxication or due to lack of thought or by his tongue running away from him or uttered it in the heat of the moment. Then the legal ruling concerning such a person without hesitation is death.”
Complete fatwa can be read here
http://www.falaah.co.uk/wahabi/so-called-neutral-scholars-imp/
The case of Rashid Gangohi and Khaleel Ambethvi
Rashid Gangohi and Khaleel Ambethavee, wrote in Baraheen-e-Qati’ah, page 122:
“The final result is: By pondering over the knowledge of the earth possessed by angel of death and satan , one should not use this analogy to prove that prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) also had the similar knowledge, as there is no documentary evidence for this. Isn’t this belief (that prophet also had the knowledge of the unseen) a CLEAR SHIRK, and if not, then which part of Iman (belief) is it?
Because such extensive [knowledge] for the Angel of death and Shaytan is proved from
Quran and Sunnah [nuSuS e qaTyi`ah]. Where is any such absolute evidence to prove the extensiveness of the knowledge possessed by prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam which refutes all absolute documents in order to prove one polytheistic belief?”
And then he continues his attack on the best of the creation ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) and says
“ Hence , mere presence of the soul ( Ruh)of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) in Illiyeen and his being higher than angel of death does not mean that the knowledge of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) is higher than or even equal to the knowledge of angel of death in these fields.
The verdict
Khaleel Ambethvi al deobandi himself writes in in Al Muhannad Alal Mufannad under question 19 that anyone who says that any makhlooq( creation ) is more a’lam( knowledgeable) than Rasulullah sal allahu alayhi wa sallam has commited kufr.
So as per Khaleel Ahmed Ambethavee, he and his teacher Gangohee both are kafir because they both affirmed angel of death to be more knowledgeable than prophet!
Please note:
1. This is the only case in history where someone has issued a fatwa of takfir upon himself and his teacher!
2. These two duo ( gangohee and ambthvi) were habitual liers. A white lie from these two can be seen here with scan
http://www.falaah.co.uk/wahabi/deoband-shaykh-gangohi-and-wall/
—
Abdullah Sabri Chisti
19th Rabi al awwal 1431
6th March 2010