[77rexulceme]

Despite all the protestations/claims of some supporters of the so called salafis and even by some non-salafi members on this forum, that the Saudi pseudo-salafis in particular and pseudo-salafis in general follow and respect madhabs, I would like the following clarified.

Why do we see a trend in which people West and other places go to study in Madinah University only to come back with a very ugly strain of ‘salafism’? I can understand them having ‘salafi’ thought and influence, but I can’t understand why they develop a viscious hatred of the Hanafi Madhab also – it makes you wonder what they teach there? Here are just a couple of examples:

In the UK we have an individual by the name of Abu Usamah ath-Thahabi, whose videos are available to see on youtube etc. He has spread nonsense about Imam Abu Hanifa such as, he was a murjiah; he was weak in hadith and even that Imams such as ath-Thawri rejoiced at his death! Alhamdulillah this was dealt with by Sh. Abd ar-Rahim Limbada comprehensively.

Another example is a Bengali ‘alim’ who also studied at Madinah University. His videos are also available on youtube and he makes similar outrageous claims. One in particular I can recall is his claim that Imam Quduri was the first person to proclaim Imam Abu Hanifa as the Imam some 250 years after his death and that he doesn’t have a sanad to Imam Abu Hanifa for his Mukhtasar!! I have searched for other lectures of his and there are some that I found titled ‘Shirk in the books of Deobandi Ulema’!!La hawla wa la quwwa…where do these guys get such nonsense from?

Another question is – can people such as these and those views be considered to be within Ahlus Sunnah? What do the Deobandi ulema say regarding the Ahle Hadith of the sub-continent, especially such as those of the second example (assuming that not all are like him)?

[pymnConyelell]

I can guarantee you that the Islamic University of Madinah or Imam Islamic Universitiy dont ever teach anything against any Madhab. Rather they defend Imam Abu Haneefah against various claims. I see/read this all the time. And they even study Al Aqeedah Al Tahawiyyah, written by Ibn Abi Al Izz Al Hanafi as one of the essential studies, and taught before other Aqeedah books.

I dont know about the people you mentioned, nor about scholars of the subcontinent. From my understanding, some (not saying all) there arent only Hanafis but staunch Hanafis. So many since they are from the region the ones you mention personally had some kind of reaction to it and went from far right to far left? I dont know, just guessing.

As for being weak in hadeeth, I dont think anyone who respects the Imams would put it that way. However, since Imam Abu Haneefah was the first of four Imams (in time), many hadeeths at the time werent collected as they were afterwards. This is one of the main reasons Abu Yousef, Abu Haneefas student, had a different opinion on many different things.

That being said, know that among salafis theres some division with each group accusing the other on issues related to politics. Calling eachother Qutbis, Surooris, Jamees, and so on. Issues of Irjaa' are sometimes brought up, with some deviating from the Sunnah. Even Imam Al Albani was accused of Irjaa' by some (certainly they more like laymen that arent even close to his level).

Actually, the Islamic University of Madinah specifically, is very anti takfeer, which is why some Khawarij accuse them of Irjaa'. And many of the scholars have always defended Abu Haneefah against this claim specifically. This claim was even mentioned by Abu Hasan Al Ash'ari, some of whos followers calling Imam Abu Haneefah and his followers "Murji'at Al Fuqahaa'". But they defend him/them against these claims.

So I dont know where they get their ideas, but certainly its not from the University, I can guarantee that.

So I dont know about the background of the ones you mention. However, the idea that the at Universities are "anti Hanafi", is very wrong. They even have shiekhs who are Hanafi, Maliki, Hanbali and Shafi'is.

[hrthwhr]

Why do we see a trend in which people West and other places go to study in Madinah University only to come back with a very ugly strain of ‘salafism’? I can understand them having ‘salafi’ thought and influence, but I can’t understand why they develop a viscious hatred of the Hanafi Madhab also – it makes you wonder what they teach there?

You see it because they teach it. If they didn't teach it, why would you see the hatred? I know cause i've met alot of people AND I LIVE HERE IN MADINAH. In other parts like Riyadh, even the laymen Hate Imam Abu Hanifa (RA).

Another question is – can people such as these and those views be considered to be within Ahlus Sunnah? What do the Deobandi ulema say regarding the Ahle Hadith of the sub-continent, especially such as those of the second example (assuming that not all are like him)?

Alhamdulillah, our deobandi Ulama are not Fitnah-Mongers, so they don't say much except disagree on Academic terms. But the Ahle Hadith, their Deens from our opposition and stops at our Opposition. They brand us as Mushriks.

[clorkergo]

You see it because they teach it. If they didn't teach it, why would you see the hatred? I know cause i've met alot of people AND I LIVE HERE IN MADINAH. In other parts like Riyadh, even the laymen Hate Imam Abu Hanifa (RA).



Alhamdulillah, our deobandi Ulama are not Fitnah-Mongers, so they don't say much except disagree on Academic terms. But the Ahle Hadith, their Deens from our opposition and stops at our Opposition. They brand us as Mushriks.

Please provide evidence for your claim that ahl al hadeeth brand you as mushriks. Many scholars from ahl al hadeeth visited deoband and only said good about them.

Ahl Al hadeeth beleive asking the dead for help or intercession at their graves is shirk, yes. This is the main messege of Islam as many who worshipped idols only considered them intercessors, and didnt believe that they in and of themselves are God.

According to my limited knowledge this graveworship is not practiced or approved by scholars of Deoband. Am I wrong? If I am correct me please.

[Edqpdnuu]

Im not sure what they teach, not everyone comes out anti hanafi, some people go in hanafi and come out still hanafi

one thing i have noticed though, i don't know if this is solely to do with madinah university's teaching or the company of other students there ( i would guess the company of other students rather than teachings) just how some people in madrassahs turn out bad but its due to the company of other students not what the ulemah teach at these madrassahs, but a trend seems to have emerged where the students of the university come out and start accusing someone or another of being a deviant, sometimes it is other people who also attended the same university and sometimes it is madhabis or sufis whatever it may be they come out with really bad adab

[secondmortgagek]

Assalamu Alaikum

From my experience with them, I realize that all of them come out different. Some of them are strict on the beard, and wearing 3/4 pants, distant interaction with females, against taqleed totally, alwasy refuting, anti nasheeds, while some of them hardly have a beard, where their pants below their ankles, little or no separation between males and females in mosque, mix with all groups, allow daff in nasheeds. Some even teach arabic in Darul Uloom. One convert brother who only spent a couple years said he almost became a sufi while over there, but then some other brother gave him other books to read, and now he is prob what you call 'madkhali'. All of the ones I saw definitely do not follow a madhab though.

[googlopharm]

You see it because they teach it. If they didn't teach it, why would you see the hatred? I know cause i've met alot of people AND I LIVE HERE IN MADINAH. In other parts like Riyadh, even the laymen Hate Imam Abu Hanifa (RA).



Alhamdulillah, our deobandi Ulama are not Fitnah-Mongers, so they don't say much except disagree on Academic terms. But the Ahle Hadith, their Deens from our opposition and stops at our Opposition. They brand us as Mushriks.

Maulana for confirming my thoughts. While I think maybe not all ahle hadith are this way (I may be wrong), there are some very sinister ones like the the Bengali 'alim' I mentioned above.

The problem I am finding is that because these ahle hadith were/are not so prominent in Bangladesh or amongst Bengalis in the UK, suddenly they are being exposed to them through satellite channels such as peace tv. This has in turn led to people questioning the validity of having madhabs etc. Just in the past month or so I havebeen questioned by two persons regarding such. And because they are appearing on such stations people are inclining towards them and others like Zakir Naik.

The subcontinental people are very simpleminded and are easily swayed by celebrity and the 'follow only Allah and the Rasul' rhetoric.

May Allah guide us all.

[ancexttew]

Please provide evidence for your claim that ahl al hadeeth brand you as mushriks. Many scholars from ahl al hadeeth visited deoband and only said good about them.

There is a brand of "Ahle Hadith" in Pakistan / India (i think India) where they brand All Hanafis as Kaafir, as well as Imam Abu Hanifah....

[corsar-caribean]

As for being weak in hadeeth, I dont think anyone who respects the Imams would put it that way. However, since Imam Abu Haneefah was the first of four Imams (in time), many hadeeths at the time werent collected as they were afterwards. This is one of the main reasons Abu Yousef, Abu Haneefas student, had a different opinion on many different things.

and Ramadhan Mubarak

This oft-repeated statement and logic are not totally accurate. So if the Sahabah for example differ in their opinions, because they don't receive the ahadith yet?

I guess a lot of people, including myself, need to learn history of these scholars, who are their companions (with them, debating with them, etc), what issues that they have been debated, etc before saying that they don't receive the ahadith pertaining to that subject etc.

[VIAGRA-VIAGRA]

Maulana for confirming my thoughts. While I think maybe not all ahle hadith are this way (I may be wrong), there are some very sinister ones like the the Bengali 'alim' I mentioned above.

Is this Bengali Alim, Shaykh Motiur Rahman Madani?

[kazinopartnerkae]

I can guarantee you that the Islamic University of Madinah or Imam Islamic Universitiy dont ever teach anything against any Madhab. Rather they defend Imam Abu Haneefah against various claims. I see/read this all the time. And they even study Al Aqeedah Al Tahawiyyah, written by Ibn Abi Al Izz Al Hanafi as one of the essential studies, and taught before other Aqeedah books.

I still have to see the remaining of the thread, but I paused here to correct this misconception.

Do you see how easily you cited Ibn Abi Al Izz as Hanafi and presented it to be a completely acceptable Aqeedah Sharah. Whereas it is completely filled with Athari ideologies. In our class of the books on aqeedah, this particular book was pointed out as one of those books which are to be completely avoided for aqeedah issues.

[CarmenSanches]

good to see your all making good use of your ramadhan mashAllah.

I have never heard any salafi/ahlal brand deobandis as mushrikeen, they usually dont have a problem praying behind deobandis whereas they wont pray behind barelwis.

I attend classes of many madinah grads from many persuasions and organisations and most of them are preaching for unity between deobandis and salafis and they only dispute academicly on certain issues while advocating mutual love, cooperation, respect, non name calling, working in common good etc.

I agree laymen from both sides are attacking the other side but inshAllah we should all work togetehr to bring abaout more unity betwene the two groups inshAllah

[Hlennisal]

Anyone ever wonder Saudi's have not built/funded world class Universities around the world?

[Sniliabiz]

There is a brand of "Ahle Hadith" in Pakistan / India (i think India) where they brand All Hanafis as Kaafir, as well as Imam Abu Hanifah....

Interesting. Jazak Allah khair. If this is accurate, "Ahl al hadeeth" in Madinah would certainly not even recognize them as being ahl hadeeth or even Sunnis.

Jazak Allah khair again.

[valiumnopresc]

Interesting. Jazak Allah khair. If this is accurate, "Ahl al hadeeth" in Madinah would certainly not even recognize them as being ahl hadeeth or even Sunnis.

Jazak Allah khair again.

Yes though the mianstream Ahle Hadith do reject them, but they are an off-shoot sect of the Ahle Hadith in India..

If you have Facebook, type in All Hanfis are Disbelievers - they run this page. It maybe a closed group im not sure...

But several months back i was invited in their group and i tell you ------ Laaa Hawla Wa Laa Quwwata Illa Billah! I left.

[didrexx]

I still have to see the remaining of the thread, but I paused here to correct this misconception.

Do you see how easily you cited Ibn Abi Al Izz as Hanafi and presented it to be a completely acceptable Aqeedah Sharah. Whereas it is completely filled with Athari ideologies. In our class of the books on aqeedah, this particular book was pointed out as one of those books which are to be completely avoided for aqeedah issues.

He was a Hanafi and so was his background/family (many of whom were judges etc). Yes at the time there was a discussion/debate between him and another Hanafi on the issue of Taqleed for which he wrote "Al-Ittiba'". So yes I can see how this can become a point of lengthy discussion, however, it cannot be accurately said that he wasnt a Hanafi. Anyway the point was not to discuss Aqeedah or Taqleed which can be lengthy discussions, but the point was that theres nothing against Imam Abu Haneefah, or against "Hanafis" for simply being Hanafis in Fiqh. This is very inaccurate. Jazak Allah Khair.

[spoddersedpn]

He was a Hanafi and so was his background/family (many of whom were judges etc). Yes at the time there was a discussion/debate between him and another Hanafi on the issue of Taqleed for which he wrote "Al-Ittiba'". So yes I can see how this can become a point of lengthy discussion, however, it cannot be accurately said that he wasnt a Hanafi. Anyway the point was not to discuss Aqeedah or Taqleed which can be lengthy discussions, but the point was that theres nothing against Imam Abu Haneefah, or against "Hanafis" for simply being Hanafis in Fiqh. This is very inaccurate. Jazak Allah Khair.

Your point doesn't make sense.

He wasn't even regarded as a famous Hanafi whom the 'Ulama would refer to in their Fatawa. Infact many Hanafi Scholars have spoken against him also.

His Sharh is not even accepted in the Hanafi School - nor the other Schools - with the exceptions of today's Ahle Hadith / Salafis - because it helps advance their cause in 'Aqeedah. So obviously they would teach it.

If a brelwi could use a Salafi Kitab to advance their cause they would.

[Cyclicymn]

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...ghlight=al-Izz

[MADwanker]

Can we stop discussing this topic for the sake of Ramdhan...

[cypedembeda]

Can we stop discussing this topic for the sake of Ramdhan...