No announcement yet.

A Question Regarding Qasida Al Burdah

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    After reading the following letter, which was written by a Deobandee follower in response to a critique done upon them by Sh. Yasir Qadhi,
    you will find the position of the Deobandee sect regarding Imam Busairi's statement :
    And who else there, besides you, who I can call out, at times of distress and problems?

    (ie. it doesn't mean to implore the intercession which will be granted exclusivley to the Prophet (SAWS)on the Day Of Resurrection)

    In this letter, in an attempt to answer Sh. Yasir he replies to him by showing their deviant beliefs & defending them

    (I hope the letter doesn't cause confusion as the author in this article attacks Sh. Yasir, Salafiyyah and the concept of Tawheed propagated by Ahl-us-Sunnah wal Jamaah)

    (by addressing/criticising Sh. Yasir this person is not merely attacking him on an individual basis- he is infact attacking /criticising the the Salafi dawah - I hope someone doesn't misinterpret my words.... I'm not trying to say that Abu Ammar Yasir Qadhi is infallible).

    (After,reading the following letter, please scroll below its ending. After the end of the letter you will briefly find out how they misinterpret the book of Allah (SWT) to advocate their deviant belief of calling out to the messenger (SAWS) for aid - blatant shirk ! )


    Salamu `Alaykum Most are already aware of Shaykh Yasir Qadhi due to his contentious rant against Shaykh Sayyid Muhammad ibn `Alawi, which provoked strong outcry from many (***). It was indeed outrageous to see such character assassination taking place in the name of tawhid against one whose scholarship was acknowledged from east to west and whose ijaza’s came from some of the greatest `ulema the 20th century had ever seen. Even though Shaykh Yasir Qadhi refused to offer any sort of apology, rather reiterating at a conference to one of my close friends that he stands by what he says and would have allowed his post on the Al Maghrib forum to remain if he had his way, this is not the time or place to discuss his slander and attack on the awliya. It would not be worth my time to defend the Sayyid against such people. When they reach his level we will listen to what they have to say. Now, Shaykh Yasir Qadhi is upto something different and it has to do directly with some of the Deobandis and the “moderate” sufis. Thus, as a Deobandi, I feel that people should be aware of these tactful ploys on the part of the Salafi’s which serve merely to further their own goals and purposes by sugar-coating their approach with an intellectual and accepting attitude which some see through and others, unfortunately, do not. I had been hearing for quiet some time that Shaykh Yasir Qadhi was speaking to some Deobandis regarding specific issues. I also was aware that many of the Deobandi `ulema were researching up on Shaykh Yasir Qadhi to evaluate his stances and to see whether he generally fell into what we categorise as Traditional Sunnism. It is important to note here that Shaykh Yasir Qadhi did not consider Shaykh Nuh and his murids to be “moderate” sufis, thus, effectively throwing them out of his “unity” advocacy. I think Shaykh Qadhi may have forgotten (or most probably was simply ignorant of) the fact that Shaykh Nuh has good relations with a few of the most senior and representative individuals of the Deobandi manhaj: Mufti Rafi` `Uthmani and Mufti Taqi `Uthmani, not to mention many of the Deobandi `ulema who have read his works consider him to be nothing other than a traditional, high ranking Sunni scholar. This is an addition to the fact that many of the concepts Shaykh Nuh propogates as a part of tasawwuf are also propogated by the Deobandi Akabir. khayr…

    The simple thing i would like to convey at this point, without getting into too many details of the “actual” talks, is that the Deobandis simply cannot and will not accept Shaykh Yasir Qadhi’s proposal, nor his stances, nor his methodology, or beliefs. Rather, the Deobandis should be considered as engrossed in shirkiyyah and deviant beliefs as Sayyid Muhammad ibn `Alawi supposedly was according to Shaykh Qadhi for a number of reasons:

    [1] We are proponents of the soundness of the Ash`ari and Maturidi schools of belief and define Ahly Sunnah as one who follows either. Contrast this to Yasir Qadhi’s “refutation” of Ash`ari’s here.

    [2] We are proponents of taqlid of the four schools of fiqh. Taqlid is to follow someone without knowledge of the proofs. Yasir Qadhi rejects this in numerous places with the typical rhetoric of following the “Qur’an and sunna“.

    [3] We promote following a spiritual path by giving bayah to a spiritual guide. Contrast to this Yasir Qadhi’s statement: “Since there is no evidence to support such a bay’ah, and this bay’ah has religious connotations, it must be labeled an innovation.” And: “To summarize, there are in the present day and age no organized Sufi tariqahs that are error-free.”

    [4] Within the spiritual path we believe in concepts such as wahdat al wujud, karama (miracles), kashf (unveiling), ilham, sama’ (poetic recital) with ecstacy and other overwhelming experiences of the soul.

    [5] We believe the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) was the first creation, and a light (nur) before a body, and that if it were not for him Allah would not have created anything. We agree with Imam Busayri’s statement, ” “And of your generosity is the creation of the Wolrd and its co-wife (i.e. the Hereafter)…” which Shaykh Yasir considers as a statement of shirk.

    [6] We believe in his viewing of the deeds of his ummah, praying for them, and witnessing.

    [7] We believe in his authority to act as our intermediary in this life and the next. This intermediation can be done through imploring Allah through his status, honor, and right, calling out to him infront of his grave, seeking his aid, and so forth. We attest to the statement of Imam Busayri, “And who else there, besides you, who I can call out, at times of distress and problems?” Contrast this to Shaykh Yasir’s statement: “If any person openly proclaims such beleifs, then he has contradicted numerous explicit verses in the Quran, and there is no serious need to show his deviancy. He has placed himself to a level similar to some groups of the Christians” And his statement regarding the Burda: “However, that doesn’t change the fact that there is blatant shirk in all three categories of tahweed in that poem: shrik in ruboobiyyah, uloohiyyah and asma wa sifaat.”

    [8] We believe he (Allah bless him and grant him peace) is alive in his grave and his life in his grave is stronger than what we conceive as life on earth.

    [9] We believe that the area he (Allah bless him and grant him peace) is buried in is the most holiest and noble of all lands and creation, ever more so than the `arsh and the ka`aba. (see: imadad al fatawa)

    [10] We believe that visiting the grave of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace), the awliya, and the `ulema is a prasieworthy religious practice. Shaykh Yasir states that making it a primary intention to visit such sites is a bida`.

    [11] We believe that within their relics lie baraka and shifa’.

    [12] We believe in his knowledge of the unseen (`ilm al ghayb) and we believe that his knowledge encompasses “the knowlege of the Tablet and the Pen.”

    [13] We believe in the possibility of the visitation of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and the awliya to righteous, living Muslims in a wakeful state i.e. a return of their souls to the world or gazing upon the Prophet’s barzakhi body, or his light and so forth.

    [14] We believe in the countless miracles of the awliya such as their walking on water, disappearing from sight, the worlds folding up for them, their peering into hearts, and so forth.

    [15] We believe in the hierarchy of their ranks such as the ghawth, qutb, abdaal and so forth.

    [16] We attest to the righteousness of the likes of shaykh al akbar Ibn `Arabi, Mansur al Hallaj, Imam Shadhili, Moinuddin Chishti, Imam Suhrawardi, Imam Rifa`i, Imam Busayri, Imam Jazuli, our master al hajj Imdadullah Muhajir Makki, and others from the great saints of Islam whom people consider as deviated (we seek refuge!). Contrast this to Shaykh Yasir’s statement: “However, later more radical beliefs crept in, such as wahdat al-wujud (manifested in people such as al-Hallaj, Ibn Arabi and Ibn Sabi’an), and these poeple Ibn Taymiyyah considered non-Muslims.”

    [17] We believe in the practices prescribed by the spiritual masters such as doing specific amounts of dhikr - loud or silent -. We permit movment with this dhikr and do not condemn any modality of such remembrance. Contrast this to Shaykh Yasir proving the unsufiness of Ibn Taymiyya by stating he was against:

    “Sufi awrad which each and every tariqah, without exception, is guilty of.”

    Yasir Qadhi while mentioning some of the “mistakes” of the sufis, quoting Ibn Taymiyya, states: “Regarding Ibn Taymiyyah’s relationship with ‘Sufism’, really it all depends on how one wishes to define this rather ambiguous term. If Sufism is purely about tazkiyah an-nafs, then who amongst the Muslims does not wish to purify his soul? But the reality is that the group which identifies itself with these words also manifests mistakes in a number of areas, and Ibn Taymiyyah was a very vocal critique of all of these mistakes.
    So, for example, he was against:

    - group dhikrs
    - Sufi awrad which each and every tariqah, without exception, is guilty of
    - the unconditional veneration of saints
    - traveling to visit the grave of any saint or prophet
    - believing that the Quran has a ‘batin’ (hidden) meaning that has nothing to do with its epxlicit meaning, and which Allah blesses His chosen servants with
    - believing that the Sunnah of the Prophet salla Allah alahyi wa sallam is somehow insufficient for worship and hence extra acts need to be added on to the relgion (such as the Mawlid)
    - looking down upon studious scholarship with the presumption that real knowledge is not gained through rigourous study but rather thru khalwa
    - taking one’s beliefs and acts from sources such as dhawq, kashf, and ilhaam (all Sufi terminoligies)
    - believing in the existence of a hiearchy of ’saints’ awliya, qutb, ghawth, etc (again a belief each and every Sufi tariqah is guilty of)
    - believing that it is necessary for a person to become a ‘murid’ and have a ’shaykh’ whom he must unconditionally obey or give bay’ah to etc.”

    And as can be seen there are quite a few aspects above which we Deobandis staunchly believe in. As such, what exactly does Shaykh Yasir mean by “moderate” sufi? What he proposes as a moderate sufi is in reality the same person who propogates “blatant shirk” and innovation according to him. This should be a warning and a sign to all Deobandis. We will not compromise the beliefs of our akabir, or their practices, for such people in whose eyes the akabir were guilty of bida` and shirk. It is a warning of the dangers of the Salafis and their inherent opposition to the true manhaj of Ahly Sunnah. Such people are guilty of promoting animosity towards the awliya through their methodologically challenged outlook.

    <<<<<<END OF LETTER>>>>>>>

    Sentences made in the letter cited above, clearly depicts their deviant beliefs which clearly constitute major Shirk.
    For instance, it says in the letter :
    "We believe in his authority to act as our intermediary in this life and the next. This intermediation can be done through imploring Allah through his status, honor, and right, calling out to him infront of his grave, seeking his aid, and so forth. We attest to the statement of Imam Busayri, “And who else there, besides you, who I can call out, at times of distress and problems?

    By the "statement of Imam Busayri", the author of the letter is implying the infamous Qaseedah Burdah Shareef,

    Here are some extracts from a forthcoming book "The Sufism of the Deobandis and Jamat ut Tabligh", which show how the improper/deviant
    Tafseer of the renowned Mufassir of the Deobandee sect, Shabbir Ahmad Uthmani leads him to approve of calling out to other than our Rubb for divine help :

    Shabeer Ahmad Uthmani wrote in his Tafseer of the verse of Surah Al-Fatihah: “You (Alone) we worship, and You (Alone) we ask for help (for each and everything).”

    “This noble verse shows that it is not permissible to ask for help in reality any other than His pure Essence. Yet, seeking help in apparent from a Maqbul man (accepted saint of Allah) considering him as a mean of the mercy of Allah and considering him as not being Mustaqil (independent of Allah) is permissible because it is in fact this seeking of help is in fact seeking help from Haqq Ta’ala (Allah).”

    Comment: Even the Mushriks of Makkah did consider their idols as intermediary and not real sustainors and creators. They never considered their idols as Mustaqil (having powers independently from Allah). Allah described the conditions of the Mushriks as such:

    Surely, the religion (i.e. the worship and the obedience) is for Allah only. And those who take Auliyaa' (protectors and helpers) besides Him (say): "We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah." Verily, Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ”. (3 : 39)

    And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: "These are our intercessors with Allah." Say: "Do you inform Allah of that which He knows not in the heavens and on the earth?" Glorified and Exalted be He above all that which they associate as partners with Him!” (18: 10)

    The Mushrik believed in Allah and invoked Him in time of difficulties:

    And when a wave covers them like shades (i.e. like clouds or the mountains of seawater), they invoke Allah, making their invocations for Him only. But when He brings them safe to land, there are among them those that stop in the middle, between (Belief and disbelief). But none denies Our Signs except every perfidious ungrateful”. (32:31)

    They believed that Allah was the only creator, sustainor, and Allmighty and did not claim their Idols had powers independent from Allah:

    Say "In Whose Hand is the sovereignty of everything (i.e. treasures of each and everything)? And He protects (all), while against Whom there is no protector, if you know.They will say: "(All that belongs) to Allah." Say: "How then are you deceived and turn away from the truth?" (88-89: 23)

    And if you ask them who created them, they will surely say: "Allah". How then are they turned away (from the worship of Allah, Who created them)?” (87 : 43)

    So invoking Awliya whether one believes them to have powers from Allah or independently is both Shirk, as Awliya do not have these powers that only Allah possesses, neither do they have the power to hear the call of those who call them afar. One can also see in this a clear hint to Wahdatul Wujud, as for these people, the Awliya are manifestations of Allah, and invoking them is invoking Allah…Astaghfirullah. counted it a little thing, while with Allâh (SWT) it was very great. [24:15]


    • #17
      asalaam alaikum

      bro abuz zubair replies on the issue here;


      • #18
        To clarify :

        In my previous post I was referring to the wrong beliefs held by the Deobandee subsect, "Hayatee", which is the mainstream version

        I'm not aware of the stance of the Maamties towards this. counted it a little thing, while with Allâh (SWT) it was very great. [24:15]