A Deobandi Mufti wrote:
“Imam Rabbani Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, quoting Mi’ah Masail and Arba’in Masail of Shah Muhammad Ishaq Dehlawi, writes:
“One is to beseech the Most High that he completes something on account of the holiness of such a such person. This is permissible by consensus regardless of whether this is [done] at the grave or some other place. No one has any objection to this.
“The second is to address the person of the grave by saying, ‘You fulfil my work’. This is shirk, regardless of whether this is said at the grave or away from it. And that which has been mentioned in some narrations, ‘Aid me, oh slaves of Allah.’ In reality this is not isti’anah at the grave but the seeking of aid from the slaves of Allah who are in the desert; in that Allah has appointed them there for some work. So this is not from this (the concept of isti’anah). To bring [this] as proof of permissibility is ignorance of the meaning of the hadith.
“The third is to go close to a grave and say, ‘Oh such a such person, pray for me that the Most High fulfils my work.’ There is a difference among the ‘ulama regarding this. Those who consider it permissible to believe that the dead can hear consider this permissible and those who do not believe that the dead can hear forbid this … However, there is no difference in the hearing of the Prophets (peace be upon them), on account of this they are exempt.”1
1 Fatawa Rashidiyya p.139
“One is to beseech the Most High that he completes something on account of the holiness of such a such person. This is permissible by consensus regardless of whether this is [done] at the grave or some other place. No one has any objection to this.
“The second is to address the person of the grave by saying, ‘You fulfil my work’. This is shirk, regardless of whether this is said at the grave or away from it. And that which has been mentioned in some narrations, ‘Aid me, oh slaves of Allah.’ In reality this is not isti’anah at the grave but the seeking of aid from the slaves of Allah who are in the desert; in that Allah has appointed them there for some work. So this is not from this (the concept of isti’anah). To bring [this] as proof of permissibility is ignorance of the meaning of the hadith.
“The third is to go close to a grave and say, ‘Oh such a such person, pray for me that the Most High fulfils my work.’ There is a difference among the ‘ulama regarding this. Those who consider it permissible to believe that the dead can hear consider this permissible and those who do not believe that the dead can hear forbid this … However, there is no difference in the hearing of the Prophets (peace be upon them), on account of this they are exempt.”1
1 Fatawa Rashidiyya p.139
EXPOSING LIE:
Please note , no where in the whole of
Fatawa Rashidiya has Shaykh Rashid Gangohi quoted Mi’ah Masail and
Arba’in Masail on the issue of Istighatha/ Istianat.
This is what Shaykh Gangohee writes : [ And which our deobandi friend has translated but leaving/mis translating the first two lines which I am mentioning in BLUE ]
This is what Shaykh Gangohee writes : [ And which our deobandi friend has translated but leaving/mis translating the first two lines which I am mentioning in BLUE ]
Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 “It
has already been said that you should look into Mi’ah Masail and
Arbai’n Masail of Mawlana Ishaq Dehalwi on this matter. Since the
question is now addressed to me , it was necessary for me to give a
short reply……"
The above quote is followed is by the answer which my Deobandi MUFTI has quoted . !
Scan
Can Deobandis reply how and why have
they said that this is the answer given by Shah Ishaq Dehalwi ? Where
as, this answer is by the Imam Rabbani of Deobandis Shaykh Rashid
Gangohi!
Miat ul Masail fi tahsil ul fadail bal’a adalatul shariah wa tarq al umoor al mahiniyah
( Miat ul Msail in short)
Miat ul Masail fi tahsil ul fadail bal’a adalatul shariah wa tarq al umoor al mahiniyah
( Miat ul Msail in short)
Please note the manuscript detail as seen in the scan
1 Compiled by Ahmed Ullah bin Dalil Ullah Siddiqui Ul Adnami “.
2 To the Ninety questions originally asked , ten more questions were added by the compiler .
3.Compiler says that he wrote this treatise in 1245 AH ( 1829)
Also note that it says the printed edition of this work was produced in 1877
1 Compiled by Ahmed Ullah bin Dalil Ullah Siddiqui Ul Adnami “.
2 To the Ninety questions originally asked , ten more questions were added by the compiler .
3.Compiler says that he wrote this treatise in 1245 AH ( 1829)
Also note that it says the printed edition of this work was produced in 1877
Based on these information my deobandi friend says
For
us it is enough that Imam Gangohi [r.h], grand-student of Shaykh Shah
Muhammad Ishaq [r.h], has accepted this book. Further, it was shown from
records of Khuda Bakhsh Library that this book indeed is correctly
attributed to Shah Ishaq and no known controversy in their knowledge.”.
Had my friend bothered to investigate into the details of this manuscript or tried to meet those scholars who deal with study of manuscript , he would have have learnt more things.
The other easy way was to take a printed copy of the above work and read its detail.
But when internet is the sole source of information , we don’t bother to meet real scholars.
Please note the following
1.The scan clearly says this book was compiled by Ahmed Ullah bin Dalil Ullah Siddiqui Ul Adnami.
2. The famous La Madhabi historian and scholar ( whom deobandis always quote) Shaykh Abdul Hayy in his biographical work Nuzhatul Khawatir has counted this book as a work of Maulvi Ahmed Ullah bin Dalil Ullah Siddiqui Ul Adnami AND NOT shah Ishaq.
3 What were those ten questions which were added by Ahmed Ullah bin Dalil Ullah Siddiqui Ul Adnami.?
If my friend would have taken a printed copy of this work he would have found out.
4.The author (Ahmed Ullah bin Dalil Ullah Siddiqui Ul Adnami.) himself writes
“Out of these ten questions , six questions are the same old questions which were asked to the scholars of Delhi during the time of Shaykh Nizamuddin Awliya rd[Died 725AH] .Since no new answer is required , the answer to these question is taken from the book by Asmatullah bin aazam saharanpuri”.
6. Allama Fazle Rasul Badayuni [rd] wrote a refutation to this book with the name Tau see al masail in 1266 AH.[1850]. This was published by his relative Mawlana Faiz Ahmed badayuni (rh).
It also makes it clear that the first printed edition of Miat ul Masail was already in market before 1266. The first edition was published around 1262 AH , and Mawlana Ishaq (rh) was already dead by this time.
5.Basheer ad deen Qannauji ( a wahabi scholar and a student of Shah Ishaq) refuted the Tau saa al masail of Allama Fazle Rasul Badayuni and wrote “Tafhee al masail” .
In preface to this book, Basheer ad deen Qannawji himself writes
“ Miat ul masail is not authored by Shah Ishaq , instead it is only ascribed towards him”
Since Allama Fazle Rasul Badayuni pointed out many mistakes in Miat al Masail, all edition of Miat al Masail printed after 1266 AH were changed .
Allama Fazle Rasul Badayuni then wrote Fayuz e arwahe quddusi[persian] and listed all the changes made in the two editions .
6.Mawlana Mohsin Turhati was a student of Shah Abdul Ghani Mujaddidi, who in turn was a direct student of Shah Ishaq .
Mawlana Mohsin Turhati writes in his book ( Arabic) “ As sayan Al husna”
( page 77)
“ Masa’il arbaeen and miat al masail , both these books have many mistakes and are ascribed towards Shah[Ishaq] Sahab. Few senior scholars have informed me that there were few bad people among shah sahab’s student. Shah Sahab had husn e zan towards them.When ever any fatwa (question) used to be brought in front of Shah Sahab , he used to ask any of these student present their to answer these questions. These people usually used to incorporate their views in the answer. These answers were then compiled and ascribed towards shah Sahab”
7 The above quote of Mawlana Mohsin Turhati is also supported by Nazeer Hussein Dehalvi , who was a student of Shah Ishaq and the biggest wahabi scholar in India.
Nazeer Hussein writes in his book Al Hayaat Baad al mamaat ( page 56-57)
“ In order to test my progress and to satisfy those who used to come with questions , Shah [Ishaq] Sahab used to ask me to write answers to those questions”
As far as manuscript details are concerned, please note
The manuscript DOES NOT have any stamp or signature of Shah Ishaq. It’s name was not suggested by Shah Ishaq. Its foreword or end note was not written by Shah Ishaq. It has been listed as a work of Ahmed Ullah bin Dalil Ullah Siddiqui Ul Adnami by all the scholars.
Those interested can see the website from where that scan was taken by my deobandi friend.
Look at other manuscript with information like “With stamp of so and so on the cover page or signature of so and so on the end page “etc
This manuscript has no stamp or signature.
Though this post has nothing to do with Istighatha , but it is necessary to know all this so that people are cautious when they read post made by these people.
Since my Deobandi friend has nothing to say , he said
"
Lastly,
what is mentioned in these two books is similar to what was mentioned
by his predecessors such as Shaykh Ismail shaheed [r.h], Imam Shah Abdul
Aziz [r.h], Qadi Sanaullah Pani Pati [r.h], Muhaddith Shah Rafiudeen
Dehlawi [r.h] and Imam Shah Waliullah Dehlawi [r.h] on these hot topics"
Ismail dehalwi can be a hujja for them. The scans [with translation] from works of Shah Waliullah Muhaddith (rh) , Shaykh Abdul Aziz (rh) and other scholars have already been posted on this website.
When the Deobandi Mufti and party were caught lying they had no option but to speak more lies! Readers can see the original scan from Haft masla posted at this link:
Since the deobandis were proved to be a fabricators, another deobandi wrote:
"Our Beralwi brethren, as usual, have half quoted Hajji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki's [r.h] Faisla Haft Masla.
They left out the relevant portions from the same page which clearly
shows Hajji sahib's opinion on impermissibility of calling dead from far
with the belief that they can always hear us."
How much truth is present in this accusation should be checked by every reader by clicking the above link!
You will find complete scan.The deobandis had to resort to lying in order to save their belief!
Please read
Deobandi beliefs and the correct Islamic beliefs { needs a relevant link in falaah.co}
Abdullah Chisti Sabri
