Why are the Mujlisul Ulama (The Majlis) so harsh towards the Salafis, Barelwis and other deviants? So-and-so Akaabir had praised so-and-so person from a deviant sect, and so-and-so Deobandi website contains ample praise of people from deviant sects. This kind of attitude is creating disunity and drives a wedge between Muslims which is exactly what the CIA and the Kuffaar want???
The issue of dissociating (Baraa’) from people of deviant sects is yet another tenet of the Shariah which was upheld by the Ijma’ (consensus) of Salaf-us-Saaliheen, and which is flagrantly and recklessly neglected by the Ummah as a whole today. Innumerable quotes and incidents of the Salaf-us-Saliheen vividly portray their ‘extreme’ attitude towards people associated with deviant sects, which throws into stark contrast the nafsaani (desire-ridden) attitude of today’s so-called ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’.
The Shariah is crystal-clear and explicit on how we should regard people from deviant sects. This is a ‘wedge’ made Waajib by the Ijma’ (consensus) of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen, not the CIA or other Kuffaar. What so-and-so shaykh or so-and-so website says is powerless and impotent to alter this Shariah position – a Shariah position which has become Ghareeb (strange, lone, forlorn) and unpalatable now, just like most other parts of the Shariah.
Even a perfunctory reading of the lives and anecdotes of the Salaf-us-Saliheen, whom many falsely claim to follow, will bring to the fore their ‘extreme’ ghairah for the purity of the Deen, and their ‘harsh’ and ‘extreme’ attitude towards deviants. In fact, if a complete Jaahil were to observe the massive contrast between the satanic pin-drop silence of the so-called ‘Ulama-e-Haqq’ today, and the deafening noise of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen with their innumerable Fatwas of Tabdee’ (proclaiming as deviant), Baraa’, and even Kufr, the Jaahil might mistakenly assume these worst of times today to be a Golden Age, free from deviances, and the blessed era of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen to be the age of Jahiliyyah.
The Salaf-us-Saaliheen recognised only the paramount importance of maintaining the purity of the Deen. There was no question of ‘unity’ with Baatil as trumpeted by deviants of all breeds today. In fact, the salient sign of the Ahlul Haqq (people of truth) has always been ‘disunity’ and dissociation with Baatil (falsehood), whereas the salient sign of the Ahlul Baatil (people of falsehood) is compromise and toleration of Baatil for the sake of ‘unity’ and ‘avoiding fitnah’. The slightest of deviations from the Haqq was abominable to the Salaf-us-Saliheen. In their eyes there was no such creature as a ‘good’ deviant or a ‘moderate’ deviant. Deviation has no moderation. One person’s stupid idea of ‘moderate’ is another stupid person’s idea of ‘extremism’ – and vice versa.
Furthermore, those who suddenly and conveniently resort to the stupid ‘unity’ slogan are extremely selective regarding the type of deviants they are willing to flirt with. Thus, for example, while the salafi-inclined ‘deobandis’ have no hesitation in proclaiming the Barelwi-like sects as deviants, they will suddenly bury themselves head-first, deep deep into the sand, regarding the clear-cut beliefs of Kufr held by the leading Imams of the Salafi sect, such as Ibn Taymiyyah, which have only recently been thoroughly exposed in a manner that does not leave the slightest shred of doubt regarding their Kufr anthropomorphic nature, mainly as a result of the mass-publishing and mass-propagation of Ibn Taymiyyah’s books carried out by the Salafis of this age.
Just look at the destruction wrought to the Deobandi Maslak and efforts of Deen because of our flagrant and reckless negligence of this vital tenet of Shariah. It is now not uncommon to come across ‘deobandi’ muftis who believe that Allah (azza wa jal) is in the physical direction upwards, sat on the throne. A local ‘deobandi’ Maulana now propounds the Kufr belief expounded by Ibn Taymiyyah (in his final book abrogating his earlier, correct view) and Ibnul Qayyim that hell-fire will eventually shut down even for disbelievers. The most senior and prominent Deobandi Shaykh and Buzurgh in the UK recently instructed the use of Shirk-type Istigaathah “zikr”. Not co-incidentally the said Buzurgh has amicable relations with the Barelwis. Public Bid’ah Zikr sessions, in the manner of the fraudulent ‘sufis’, orchestrated by our Mashaikhs and Buzurghs are now commonplace. More and more ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ are today regurgitating the same fatwas first issued by salafi ‘jihadis’ many years ago, that suicide bombing in public places for a ‘need’, targetting women and children, Haraam ‘jihadi’ promotional videos, and the like are amongst the means through which Jihaad must be fought. Not co-incidentally these ‘muftis’ and ‘maulana’ have an inclination towards certain salafi deviates and squander much of their time indulging in and propagating Haraam ‘jihadi’ videos excreted by salafi ‘jihadis’.
Senior muftis who are known to associate and socialize with deviants and fussaaq of all breeds, were amongst the first Deobandis to issue the grievously ruinous Haraam fatwas legalizing pictures of animate objects, interest (riba), and the like, against the Ijma’ (consensus) of ALL the Akabir of Deoband and the Fuqaha of all ages, and which have now suddenly become the Mash-hoor (preponderant) majority opinion of the ‘deobandis’ today. While countless Ulama all over the world were being swept away by the tidal wave of modernism and feminism that was engulfing the Ummah, the Akaabir of Deoband were amongst the few Ulama who unwaveringly upheld the Ijma’ (consensus) of the 4 madh-habs on the prohibition of women going even to the Masjid, and who were at the forefront of refuting all the modernist-feminist arguments at circumventing that Ijma’. Yet, today’s feminized ‘Deobandis’ are employing the very same “Qur’an and Sunnah” arguments, and stupid innovated logic, first employed decades ago by the feminists and modernists. Innumerable other practices and rulings first adopted by deviant sects, have already become (e.g. following Saudi moon-sighting), or are rapidly on the way to becoming the ‘majority’ opinion amongst the fraudulent ‘Deobandis’ of today.
Our reckless negligence of this vital tenet of Shariah just so that we can squeeze enough room to justify an inclination to a pet deviant(s) of ours, has practically opened the floodgates for every other type of deviant and deviance to enter our ranks and be conferred Deeni respectability.
Kuffar domination, which is only a manifestation of Allah’s Wrath and Azaab upon this Ummah is only set to increase. No Divine Nusrat appears to be forthcoming any time soon.
Yes, senior Akabir of Deoband had praised and approved of people from Ahlul Bid’ah, such as Salafis, fraudulent ‘Sufis’, Maududis, Qutbis, etc. We do not say that such Akabir had Nifaaq in their hearts. Since we know them to be 100% stern upholders of the Haqq, even when Haqq would become extremely bitter, we adopt Husn-e-Zann and say that they were genuinely unaware of the deviation of the person or sect in question. We are convinced that had they become aware of the deviation, they would have adopted dissociation (Baraa’, Bughd fillah, etc.) immediately, unlike the nafs-following ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ of today and recent times.
Many of the Akabir had initially admired and praised Maududi and Sayyid Qutb both of whom were guilty of the most blood-curdling statements regarding the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum) – statements which the new generation of spineless, desensitized ‘deobandis’ attempt to minimize the severity of. A few of the Akabir had passed away while holding Maududi in great esteem. But after Shaykh Zakariyya, Allamah Binnori, and others had thoroughly exposed the deviation of Maududi and his sect, virtually all our Akaabir, without the slightest hesitation, dissociated (Baraa’) themselves from the Maududis. Without a shadow of doubt, today’s ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ would have desperately clutched at straws to maintain their Nifaaqi admiration and connection to such a person and group.
Shaykh Husain Ahmad Madani once mentioned that it was only after having taken residence in Madinah that he had access to books of Ibn Taymiyyah which were not available in India and which made it clear to him that Ibn Taymiyyah had veered blatantly out of Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah. From then onwards, he was unable to tolerate any respect shown to Ibn Taymiyyah. Now that the Salafis of this age have mass-propagated the books of Ibn Taymiyyah which unambiguously expound such anthropomorphic beliefs as Allah having a size, a body (jism), limits (hudood), spatial direction (jiha), Allah having the actual ability to sit upon the back of a mosquito, the non-eternity of Hell-fire for disbelievers, and innumerable other abominable beliefs which violently conflict with the Ijma’ of the whole Ummah, it is only Nafsaaniyat and Nifaaq which compel the Salafi-lovers of today to desperately bury their heads in the sand, and which prevent them from recognising the Salafi sect as amongst the worst of Ahlul Bid’ah.
Shaykh Rashid Ahmad Gangohi and other senior Mashaykh did praise Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. We do not say that they had Nifaaq in their hearts. Without any doubt, they were genuinely unaware of his deviation and the deviation of the Arab Salafis in general. However, now that it is open knowledge that he was of the deviant Salafi aqeedah of Ibn Taymiyyah, and that he had made Halaal (Mubaah-ud-Dam and Waajib-ul-Qatl) the blood of thousands of Muslims just like the Salafi-influenced ‘jihadis’ are doing today, then to proclaim him as a ‘Mujahid’ or a ‘Reviver’ is undoubtedly, according to the Shariah, aiding in the destruction of the Deen, and a result of pure Nafsaani Nifaaq lurking in the heart like a filthy thief.
Sacrifices for the Deen do not exonerate a person from a deviant sect. The original Khawarij were unmatched in their passion for the Deen, their willingness for Jihaad, their concern for the Ummah, their Ikhlaas, their night-vigils, their Ibaadah, and even their honesty. Yet that did not alter in the slightest their status of being the Dogs of Hell-fire – the worst of Ahlul Bid’ah with whom dissociation is Waajib.
Shaykh Zakariyya himself and other senior mashaikh had close ties with Muhammad al-Alawi al-Maliki who was from one of those deviated Arab fake ‘Sufi’ sects. There is no doubt, Shaykh Zakariyya was unaware of al-Alawi’s barelwi-like aqeedah, otherwise he would have been the very first to do Baraa’ of him. Shaykh Zakariyya passed away without becoming aware of al-Alawi’s Aqeedah. Once it is clear that a person has deviated, the Shariah is crystal-clear that it becomes Haraam to honour and praise him, and to do so aids in the destruction of the Deen. Yet, stupid ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ and ‘deobandi’ websites today use Shaykh Zakariyya to justify their praise for al-Alawi and other similarly Barelwi-like deviated ‘Sufis’.
Lastly, even assuming that any of the Akaabir were aware of the deviance of a deviant whom they had praised, this would not alter in the slightest the truth behind Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) statements that to honour a deviant and Faasiq aids in the destruction of the Deen and causes the Arsh of Allah (azza wa jal) to shudder.
May Allah (azza wa jal) grant us the Tawfeeq to adopt and have full Yaqeen in the efficacy of every single tenet of Allah’s glorious Shariah even if the ‘wisdom’ behind that tenet escapes our puny, miniscule and chaotically varying intellects.
[Answer approved by Hadhrat Maulana Ahmad Sadeq Desai]