Most of their believe system stems from Ibn Arabi. His book, ‘Essence of Wisdom’ was read to at-Talmasani who said: “This book of yours goes against the Qur’aan.” To which he replied: ‘The whole Qur’aan is associationism (Shirk), Tawheed is only found in our writings.” Then it was said to him: “If all existence is only one, why is a wife Halaal to a man while his sister is Haraam?” He said: “Both of them to us are Halaal, but he who is veiled says, Haraam! And so we say Haraam for you.’ In the book Irshaadul-Mulook, a letter written by Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi to his Pir, Imdadullah Muhajir Makki, has been mentioned in which Rasheed Ahmad Gungohi writes at the end, “In reality I am nothing. It is only Your Shadow – only Your existence (i.e. Allah’s existence). What am I? I am nothing. Only He is. You and me are Shirk upon Shirk.” Comment: In this letter, Rasheed Ahmad Gungohi informs his Pir, Imdadullah Muhajir Makki of his well being, and then says that in reality neither he, nor his Pir exists. And to differentiate between the Creator and the created is Shirk. Creation is only the Shadow of Allah. So, then who is writing the letter to whom? Self-contradictions!! In Shamaaim-e-Imdadiyah, a story of a Fakir who believed in Wahdat al-Wajood is mentioned. After approving the Aqeedah of the Faqir, the author says: “It is Shirk to differentiate between the worshiper (Aabid) and the Worshiped (Mabud)… To summarize, based upon the explanations of our predecessors, we understand that this position is Haqq (true) and there is no doubt about it. However, its reality is experienced only when a disciple becomes distant from his own self by striving hard and ignoring every danger. Because when a person becomes unaware of his self, he is unaware of everything. Nothing remains in his thoughts or his sight except Allah. Therefore, all concentration of the disciple is upon Allah. When nothing distracts his attention and he meditates his mind on Allah; then when he opens his eyes, he sees nothing but Allah. (At this stage) the Dhikr of Hu Hu (He He) turns to Ana Ana (Me Me). This stage is called Fanah der Fanah … (Similarly) from the special Ummah, Ba Yazid Bastami said: ‘Subhaani maa Aadhaam-Shaani (Glory be to me, Far removed am I from all imperfections, how great is my state) and Mansoor Hallaj said: ‘Anal-Haqq’ (I am the Truth). Moulana Zakariyah says: “Hazrat Shaikhul Islam, Moulana Madani said that the same kaifiyat (spiritual state) which constrained Mansoor al-Hallaj to proclaim: “Anal Haqq (I am the Truth i.e. Allah) prevailed for six months on Hazrat Mainji (Nur Muhammad) [who was the Pir (Shaikh) of Imdadullah Muhajir Makki].” Ashraf Ali Thanvi says: “You are amazed at people who claim Prophet-hood… People have claimed Lordship. However, nobody must think that Hussain bin Mansoor (al-Hallaj) in his saying, ‘Aanal-Haqq’ [I am the Haqq (Truth meaning Allah)] claimed Lordship (i.e. claimed to be Allah). Because upon him was a condition, otherwise he also believed in Abdiyaah (the state of being a worshiper) and therefore he offered Salaah. Someone asked him (al-Hallaj): “Since you are Allah, to whom do you prostrate?” He (al-Hallaj) answered: “I have two states, one outward and the other inward. My outward self prostrates to my inward self.” Once, Moulvi Muhammad Ahsan, a resident of Mecca, expressed his skepticism on the issue of Wahdat al-Wajood to Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi. He (Moulvi Ahsan) remarked that this issue seems to oppose Eemaan. Ashraf Ali Thanvi replied: “Someday listen to my lecture on this issue, then you will yourself say that Eemaan cannot be complete without the belief in this (i.e. Wahdat al-Wajood).” Then, Ashraf Ali Thanvi gave a speech of two hours on a Friday morning. After the lecture, Moulvi Ahsan could not help saying: “Belief in this (Wahdat al- Wajood) is so crucial that without it Eemaan cannot be understood.” The biographer of Ashraf Ali Thanvi comments, “Ashraf Ali Thanvi declared the belief of Wahdat al-Wajood as the completion of Eemaan. But Muhammad Ahsan went much further by saying that Eemaan rests on the belief in Wahdat al-Wajood.” Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi said, “He (Imdadullah Muhajir Makki) used to say that the human being is outwardly a slave and inwardly (Batini) the Haqq (Allah).” Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi further elaborates, “The batin is the reality which is manifest in the human, and the batin should not be considered a part of the human… ” Backing down from the extreme concept of Wahdat al-Wajood was the later innovated concept of Wahdat as-Shuhood. The Majlis ul- Ulema, the Deobandi lobby of Port Elizabeth, describes the believer in Wahdat ash-Shuhood as, a high ranking Wali whose soul dwells in a lofty state of Divine Presence and Perception. Moulana Muhammad Qasim, the founder of Darul-Uloom Deoband says in a poem, which has been recorded in Fazaail-e- Aamaal, “Because of the huge amount of sins even the dogs treat my name as an abuse, but I am proud of your name and your relationship (Allah’s Messenger )... and I desire that my name may be included as a dog of (the streets of) Medina… May I live with the dogs of your Haram and when I die may my corpse be eaten by the vultures of Medina.” Moulana Zakariyah advises a person in a letter that when he goes to the Prophet’s grave he should also say: ‘One black Indian dog (Moulana Zakariyah Kandhalvi) also sends his salaams.’ Moulana Ilyas signs his letters addressing himself as THE DOG OF PROPHET’s CITY. Another incident mentioned in Irshaadul-Mulook states, “Hazrat Hafiz (Dhaamin) Sahib was fond of doves. One day when he approached the cage to feed the birds, one of the doves sang such a rapturous rhapsody that Hazrat Hafiz Sahib fell unconscious into an ecstatic swoon”. Moulana Zakariyah says that Akhlaq is ‘to regard oneself as the most inferior…’ This has also been quoted as a saying of Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi. Check out:- Imdadul-Mushtaq ila Ashraful-akhlaq. Maqtoobat wa-Malfoozaat Ashrafeeyah (Writings and Sayings of Ashraf Ali Thanvi), a biography by one of Thanvi’s Khaleefahs, Moulana Muhammed Shareef, Mashaikh-e-Chist. People who did not consider themselves worthy of being called humans and referred to themselves as dogs, now consider themselves to be Allah. It will be appropriate on the occasion to clarify that the beliefs of Imam Abu Haneefah as mentioned by Ibn Abil-Ezz al-Hanafee (in the explanation of “Al-Aqeedah at- Tahawiyah”) are contradictory to the ideas of these Deobandi scholars!
Posted on: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 18:52:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015