Shihab al-Din Sayyid Ahmad al-Husayni al-Madani al-Barzanji refutes the deviancies of Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِ

أبدأُ بالحمدِ مُصَلِّياً على مُحمَّدٍ خَيِر نبيْ أُرســـــِلا

Arab scholars who were contemporaries of Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi wrote books exposing and refuting the deviancies and heresies of the Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi. One such The Chief Mufti in Madinah is Shihab al-Din Sayyid Ahmad ibn Ismail bn Zayn al-Abidin al-Husayni al-Barzanji (d. 1337 AH / 1919 CE)

أحمد إسماعيل البرزنجي :

هو أحمد بن إسماعيل بن زين العابدين المدنى، شهاب الدين البرزنجى. أديب من أعيان المدينة المنورة، ومن أسرة كبيرة أصلها من شهروز بجبال الأكراد ترفع نسبها إلى الحسين بن على -رضى الله عنهما-. ولد بالمدينة، وتعلم بها وبمصر، وكان مدرس الحرم بالمدينة، وتولى إفتاء الشافعية فيها، وانتخب نائبًا عنها فى مجلس النواب العثمانى بإستانبول. استقر فى دمشق أيام الحرب العالمية الأولى. وله عدة رسائل منها: “المناقب الصديقية”، و”مناقب عمر بن الخطاب”، و” النظم البديع فى مناقب أهل البقيع”، و” النصيحة العامة لملوك الإسلام والعامة”. توفى بدمشق سنة (1337هـ – 1919).

أحمد بن إسماعيل البرزنجي
(….. ـ 1337هـ)

هو أحمد بن إسماعيل بن زين العابدين المدني، الشهير بشهاب الدين البرزنجي.
ولد في المدينة المنورة من أسرة تشتهر بالعلم والفضل، يعود أصلها إلى بلاد شهرزور، ويرجع نسبها إلى الحسين بن علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنهما.
تعلم في المدينة على يد عدد من العلماء حتى برع في فقه الشافعية، وارتحل إلى مصر وتعلم فيها وأخذ عن شيوخها، ثم عاد إلى المدينة ليتولى التدريس في المسجد النبوي الشريف، وإفتاء الشافعية فيها، وقد انتخب نائباً عن المدينة في مجلس النواب العثماني في الآستانة.
خرج إلى الشام في الحرب العالمية الأولى سنة 1334هـ مع من خرج من أهل المدينة واستقر في دمشق، وعاش فيها حتى وفاته عام 1337هـ.
يعد صاحب الترجمة أحد أدباء المدينة وأعيانها الفاضلين، له عدد من الرسائل والمصنفات المفيدة، منها:
مناقب عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه، والنظم البديع في مناقب أهل البقيع، والنصيحة العامة لملوك الإسلام والعامة، وإصابة الدواهي في إعراب إلهي، وجواهر الإكليل في الخديوي إسماعيل، وغيرها.
————————
للتوسع:
الأعلام ـ الزركلي ج1/ص99.

الأعلام ج 1 ـ ص 99
( 000 ـ 1337 هـ = 000 ـ 1919 م )

البرزنجي

أحمد بن إسماعيل بن زين العابدين المدني، شهاب الدين البرزنجي: أديب من أعيان المدينة المنورة من أسرة كبيرة أصلها من شهروز (‏بجبال الأكراد) يرفع نسبها إلى الحسين السبط. ولد في المدينة، وتعلم بها وبمصر. وكان من مدرسي الحرم بالمدينة، وتولى إفتاء الشافعية فيها، وانتخب نائباً عنها في مجلس النواب العثماني، باسطنبول. واستقر في دمشق أيام الحرب العامة الأولى، وتوفي بها. له رسائل لطيفة، منها ” المناقب الصديقية ـ ط ” و ” مناقب عمر بن الخطـاب ـ ط ” و ” النظـم البديع في مناقب أهل البقيع ـ خ ” في الرباط ( 945 ك ) و ” النصيحة العامة لملوك الإسلام والعامة ـ ط ” و ” فتكة البراض، بالتركزي المعترض على القاضي عياض ـ ط ” و ” إصابة الدواهي في إعراب إلاّهي ـ ط ” و ” جوهر الإكليل ـ ط ” في الخديوي.

معجم المؤلفين
عمر كحالة 1/165
أحمد البرزنجي
(000 – 1332 هـ) (000 – 1914 م)
أحمد بن إسماعيل بن زين العابدين بن محمد الهادي بن زين بن جعفر بن حسن بن عبد الكبير البرزنجي، الحسيني، الموسوي، المدني.
عالم مشارك في علوم مختلفة.
توفي بالمدينة.
من مؤلفاته: رسالة في مناقب عمر بن الخطاب، مقاصد الطالب في مناقب علي بن أبي طالب، النصيحة العامة لملوك الإسلام والعامة، فتكة البراض بالتركزي المعترض على القاضي عياض و هو رد على محمد الشنقيطي، والمناقب الصديقية.
————————
(ط) الفاسي: رياض الجنة 1: 106 -111، البغدادي: إيضاح المكنون 2: 654، فهرست الخديوية 2: 180، فهرس التيمورية 2: 156، 163، 224، فهرس دار الكتب المصرية 5: 365

Available at the Library  of Prophet’s Mosque (check manuscript section) in Madinah al-Munawwarah

الرقم العام 18778
رقم التصنيف 008
التصنيف ب ر غ
اسم الكتاب غاية المامول في تتمة منهج الوصول في تحقيق علم غيب
المؤلف احمد اسماعيل
الشهرة البرزنجي
الطبعة
مكان الطباعة بومباي
المجلدات
الأجزاء 1

Free Online Book :

Complete Book with Tahqiq: (download this book and distribute to your barelwi friends and mawlanas)

Click to access Ghaytul_almaamoul_albarzanjiy.pdf

4shared.com http://www.4shared.com/document/J3SzDvvr/Ghayat_al-Mamul_-_Mufti_Sayyid.html

Scribd : http://www.scribd.com/doc/139513670/Ghayat-al-Mamul-by-Mufti-Sharif-Ahmed-Barzanji-Arabic

Another edition of Ghayat al-Ma’mul can be download below along with Al-Shahab al-Thaqib of Shaykh al-Islam Mawlana Hussain Ahmad Madani.

http://www.4shared.com/document/-g2qWcgR/Ashahab_Asaqib_-_Shaykh_al-Isl.html

Print edition available from here: http://www.neelwafurat.com/itempage.aspx?id=lbb197654-169093&search=books

اسم الكتاب: غاية المأمول في منهج الوصول في علم الرسول

المؤلف: الشيخ احمد البرزنجي الحسيني مفتي المدينة المنورة

الموضوع: تفسير

نوع الغلاف: غلاف

لون الورق: ابيض

19.5 x 13.75 القياس

اللغة: عربية

الوزن: 175 غ

رقم الطبعة: 1

سنة النشر: 2010

ردمك: 9789953204857

السعر:$ 2.75

غاية المأمول في منهج الوصول في علم الرسول

The Chief Mufti of the Shafi’i’s in Madinah al-Munawwara also wrote a book against Ahmad Rida Khan once the reality of his treachery against the Ulama of Deoband, Makkah and Madinah came to light. The full details behind this are mentioned in the book: Cherag-e-Muhammad by Shaykh Zahid al-Husayni. Details are found in an another article. The Mufti in question was Sayyid Ahmad al-Barzanji, who was one of the Ulama who initially signed in favour of Rida Khan’s Husam al-Haramayn. Let us repeat the details behind Sayyid Barzanji’s book and the Ulama who testified against Rida Khan.

Ghayatul Ma’mul fi Ilm Ghayb al-Rasul of Sayyid Barzanji was written in refutation of Ahmad Rida Khan’s views on Ilm al-Ghayb (Knowledge of the Unseen) possessed by the Holy Prophet – sallallahu alaihi wa sallam. Here are some quotes from this book.

On page 28, Shaykh Barzanji said that Rida Khan was: “One who stuck to his deviant beliefs because of his stubbornness and animosity…”

Also on the same page: “(He) acknowledges himself to be a scholar, whereas the thing he claims for himself (ilm) was never given to him….”

“His ta’weel and tahreef (interpretation and wilful changing of the truth) is an example of extreme treachery and obvious ignorance..”

“He (Rida Khan) is an ignoramus…”

These statements were conferred also by the following Ulama:

i) Shaykh Abdal Qadir Tawfiq al-Shalabi al-Tarablusi al-Hanafi, who later resided in Madinah al-Munawwara. He added on page 33 that Rida Khan was a “quarrel monger” and his (Rida Khan): “Beliefs are a pile of lies, false allegations and completely against religious teachings…”
ii) Shaykh Fatih al-Tahiri, Muhaddith and Faqih of the Maliki’s declared Rida Khan to be: “One who strives to create dissension….” and : “Is one of those people who follow their low bestial desires and whatever Shaytan pours in their heart….”

The following Ulama also conferred and agreed upon the rebuttal of Shaykh Barzanji against Rida Khan:

i) Mufti Tajuddin Ilyas al-Hanafi
ii) Shaykh Muhammad Sa’eed al-Dalail
iii) Sayyid Abbas Ridwan
iv) Shaykh Umar al-Hamdan
v) Shaykh Khalil al-Kharbuti

Here is an excerpt from Ghayat Al-Ma’mul fi ‘Ilm Ghayb al-Rasul by Shaykh Sayyid Ahmad al-Barzanji al-Shaf’i:

“Bakr bin ‘Abd Allah al-Muzani said that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said, “My life is better for you. You speak and are spoken to. When I die, my death will be better for you. Your deeds will be presented to me. So, if I see good, I shall praise Allah. And if I see anything apart from that, then I shall seek forgiveness for you from Allah.”

He [Imam al-Subki] then mentioned more hadiths after this, all of which prove that the angels present theSalat wa Salam of his Ummah to him (Allah bless him and grant him peace). He then said after this that: Our purpose in writing all these hadiths is to illustrate the [concept of] ‘presenting’ to the Prophet [may Allah bless him and grant him peace] and the meaning of this is the conveying of the angels to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace)…Hence, these hadiths that Imam Taj al-Din al-Subki has mentioned tell that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is only informed of the Salat wa Salam of that person who is away from his noble grave and the deeds of his Ummah after they are conveyed to him by those angels who are entrusted with this [duty].As a result, if the situation was as Molwi Ahmad Rida Khan has thought is that the knowledge of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) is encompassing all of “what was and what shall be” (makana wa ma yakun) — detailing minute particulars (juziyat) and entireties (kuliyat) — then his knowledge of that would not be dependent on the angels’ conveying [of that knowledge] to him because the inseparable attributes of the above mentioned [claim of] encompassing [knowledge] would be that he (Allah bless him and grant him peace) is knowledgeable that such and such a person is, for example, offering prayers and sending Salutations on him at such a such time, and that such a such a person is doing such a good or bad deed at such a time. If this was the case, then what need would there be for the angels who have been explicitly mentioned in the above mentioned hadiths?”

A THOUGHT PROVOKING CONCLUSION FOR THE OPPONENTS OF DEOBAND

Let us now quote what Rida Khan said in the last page of his Tamheed-e-Iman about the Ulama of Deoband that he declared to be unbelievers unequivocally, and without a shadow of doubt in his mind. He said:

” (3) ANY PERSON WHO WOULD NOT CALL THEM DISBELIEVERS OR WOULD MAINTAIN FRIENDSHIP WITH THEM, OR WOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THEIR POSITIONS AS TEACHERS OR RELATIVES OR FRIENDS WILL ALSO DEFINITELY BECOME ONE OF THEM. HE IS A DISBELIEVER LIKE THEM. ON THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT, HE WILL ALSO BE TIED WITH THEM IN THE SAME ROPE. (4) WHATEVER LAME EXCUSES AND FRAUDULENT ARGUMENTS THEY GIVE HERE ARE INVALID AND FALSE.”

Some more distasteful quotes:

Ahmad Rida Khan said: “If anyone admires Darul Ulum Deoband, or does not believe in the corruption of the Deobandi’s and does not scorn them, THEN THIS IS SUFFICIENT TO MAKE A JUDGEMENT FOR HIM TO BE A NON-MUSLIM!” (Fatawa Ridwiyya, 6/43 of Rida Khan).
A Barelvi by the name of Didar Ali declared in his Tafsir Mizan al-Adyan (2/270): “The Deobandi’s are heretics and straying. They are the most wicked of all the creatures of Allah!!” (I say doesn’t this mean that this Barelvi believed that Deobandi’s are worse than all the wicked groups of unbelievers, even the animals and Shaytan himself? What kind of person could say such a thing – please decide for yourself?!)

Rida Khan in his Malfuzat (pp. 325-6) said: “IF THERE IS A GATHERING OF HINDU’S, CHRISTIANS, QADIYANI’S AND DEOBANDI’S, THE DEOBANDI’S ALONE SHOULD BE REJECTED, FOR THEY HAVE COME OUT OF THE FOLD OF ISLAM AND DEFECTED FROM IT. AGREEMENT WITH THE UNBELIEVERS IS FAR BETTER THAN THE AGREEMENT WITH THE APOSTATES!!”

Let us finish off with one more quote from Rida Khan: “THE WORKS OF THE DEOBANDI’S ARE MORE UNCLEAN THAN THE VARIOUS WORKS OF THE HINDU’S. THE DOUBT ABOUT THE HERESY OF ASHRAF ALI DEOBANDI AND SUSPICION ABOUT HIS PUNISHMENT IS ALSO UNBELIEF. TO CLEANSE THE IMPURITY WITH THE PAPERS OF THE WORKS PRODUCED BY THE DEOBANDI’S IS NOT LAWFUL, NOT BECAUSE OF THE RESPECT FOR THEIR BOOKS, BUT BECAUSE OF THE REVERENCE OF THE LETTERS WITH WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN WRITTEN.” (Fatawa Ridwiyya, 2/136, Faisalabad, Pakistan).

Some scanned pages from the book with endorsement of scholars :


and from the last pages which shows the endorsements of many scholars from Madinah al-Munawwarah.

Also,  there is another book by this Shaykh Ahmad Barzanji which also refutes Ahmad Rida Khan Barelwi called

كمال التثقيف والتقويم

Kamal al-Thasqeef and al-Taqweem

The second book by Sharif Sayyid Ahmad ibn Ismail al-Barzanji al-Shafi al-Madani is in defense of Muhadith Khaleel Ahmad Saharapuri in response to Ahmad Reza Khan Barelwi’s accusation of imkan kidhb.

قال الإمام أحمد بن إسماعيل البرزنجي في رسالته (كمال التثقيف والتقويم) وهي غير الرسالة التي في علم الغيب المسماة بـ “غاية المأمول” , بل هذه رسالة أخرى كتبها مدافعا عن الشيخ السهارنفوري عام 1329 وصدّق عليها علماء المدينة المنورة , حيث قال :

( وبعد اطلاعك على هذا البيان الشافي , وإدراكك له بالفهم السليم الكافي , تعلم أن ما ذكره الفاضل الشيخ خليل أحمد في جواب الثالث والعشرين والرابع والعشرين والخامس والعشرين , كلام معروف في كثير من الكتب المعتبرة المتداولة لعلماء الكلام المتأخرين , كالمواقف والمقاصد وشروح التجريد والمسايرة , وغيرها , ومحصل تلك الأجوبة التي ذكرها الشيخ خليل أحمد موافقة علماء الكلام المذكورين في مقدورية مخالفة الوعد والوعيد والخبر الصادق لله تعالى في الكلام اللفظي , المستلزم للإمكان الذاتي عندهم مع الجزم والقطع بعدم وقوعها , وهذا القدر لا يوجب كفراً ولا عناداً ولا بدعة في الدّين ولا فساداً , كيف وقد علمت موافقة كلام العلماء الذين ذكرناهم عليه كما رأيته في كلام المواقف وشرحه الذي نقلناه قريباً , فالشيخ خليل أحمد لم يخرج عن دائرة كلامهم )
ثم قال :
( لكن أقول مع هذا نصيحة له ولسائر علماء الهند أنه ينبغي لهم عدم الخوض في هذه المسائل الغامضة وأحكامها الدقيقة التي لا يفهمها إلا الواحد بعد الواحد من فحول العلماء المحققين , فضلاً عن غيرهم من عوام المسلمين , لأنهم إذا قالوا أن مقدورية مخالفة الوعيد والخبر الإلهي لله تعالى مستلزمة لإمكان الكذب في الكلام اللفظي المنسوب إليه تعالى بالذات لا بالوقوع , وأشاعوا ذلك بين عامّة الناس , تبادرت أذهانهم إلى أنهم قائلون بجواز الكذب في كلام الله تعالى , فحينئذ يكون شأن أولئك العامة متردداً بين الأمرّين : الأول يتلقوا ذلك بالقبول على الوجه الذي فهموه فيقعوا في الكفر والإلحاد , الثاني أن لا يتلقوه بالقبول وينكروه غاية الإنكار ويشنعوا على قائله غاية التشنيع وينسبوهم إلى الكفر والإلحاد , وكلا الأمرين فساد في الدين عظيم , فلأجل ذلك يجب عليهم عدم الخوض في هذه المسائل إلا عند الاضطرار الشديد , مع توجيه الخطاب إلى ذي قلب يلقي السمع وهو شهيد )

the above translates as:

Imam Ahmad ibn Isma’il al-Barzanji said in his treatise Kamal al-Tathqif wa l-Taqwim, which is different to the treatise on ‘ilm al-ghayb called Ghayat al-Ma’mul, rather, this is a different treatise written in defence of Shaykh Saharanpuri in the year 1329 H (1911 AD), and was approved by the ‘ulama of Medina:

“After reading this satisfactory explanation and your comprehension of it with a sound and adequate understanding, you will know that that which the learned scholar Shaykh Khalil Ahmad mentioned in answers 23, 24 and 25 [of al-Muhannad ‘ala l-Mufannad], is a well-known opinion in many of the reliable widely-circulating books of the late kalam-scholars, like al-Mawaqif, al-Maqasid, Shuruh al-Tajrid, al-Musayarah etc. The upshot of the answers which Shaykh Khalil Ahmad mentioned in accordance with the said kalam-scholars of Allah’s capacity to contradict [His] promise, warning, truthful statement in the Spoken Speech (al-kalam al-lafzi), necessitates, according to them, an intrinsic possibility (al-imkan al-dhati) [of falsehood] while [having] resolve and certainty of its non-occurrence. This much does not necessitate kufr, obstinacy, or bid’ah in the religion, or corruption. How [can it necessitate these], when you are aware that the kalam-scholars we mentioned agree with it, as you have seen in the speech of al-Mawaqif and its commentary which we just quoted? Thus, Shaykh Khalil Ahmad does not come out of the domain of their speech.”

Then he said:

“But, despite this, I advise him and all the ‘ulama of India that they must not discuss these obscure matters and delicate issues which none understands besides one after one of the outstanding research-scholars, let alone others from the Muslim laymen, because when it is said that Allah’s capactity to contradict [His] promise, warning, Divine statement necessitates the possibility of falsehood in the Spoken Speech attributed to Him (Exalted is He) intrinsically not in occurrence, and they spread this amongst the laity of the people, the [factual] possibility of falsehood in Allah’s Speech would come to their minds, and then the state of those lay people would waver between two states: first, they will receive that with acceptance in the manner they understood so they will fall into kufr and apostasy; second, they will not receive it with acceptance and will reject it to the utmost degree of rejection and will denounce the one who professes it to the utmost degree of denouncement, and will accuse them of kufr and apostasy. Both states are a great corruption in the religion. Due to this, it is incumbent on them to avoid discussion about these matters except under severe pressure, while addressing the answer to one who has a heart, gives ear and is a witness [an allusion to Qur’an 50:37].”

We ask the followers of Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi , will the above statements of Allamah Sayyid Barzanji render him kafir just like Deobandis ?

A Barelwi distorter who was previously caught of distortion (see Shaykh Zameelur Rahman Muzammil Husayn posts)

Barelwi in a state of denial thinking his AlaHazrat Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi is infallible and cannot make mistakes wrote:

I was much amused when I read on some website that Deobandis are trying to look for the original manuscript of Ghayat Al-Ma’mul supposedly written by Shafi mufti Sayyid Ahmed Al-Barzanji.

The reason for the amusement is that these Deobandis are totally unaware of what thet are talking or backing! I am sure they know that when Imam Ahmed Raza Khan met Mufti Al Barzanji, that time mufti has lost his eye sight! That is why he could not read Ad dawalatul Makkiyah , and heard it when it was read in front of him. So how could he ‘write” a book when he lost his eye sight? And if the deobandis say that it was dictated by him and some one else wrote it , then the least which the Deobandis must do is to find out who was the Katib ( scribe)? That is the minumum criteria to accept any manuscript and deopbandis have to estabalish the ‘sama’at” for this , as stated by Imam suyuti in the criteria for accepting manuscripts. To add more fun to the story , we have Deobandis going to “middle east manuscript centers” in search of this ‘missing manuscript’! They do not know that as per the Deobandi version of the story this original manuscript was taken from Mufti Barzanji and brought to India ! (and it was never returned!!).
Now who brought this manuscript to India and who published the book written from this manuscript for the first time , is something which all the Deobandis should tell to this world! And if they fail , then I will have to bring the fact on web world! For the time being I am keeping a track of that deobandi search and want to see how much they can try to fool their Deobandi folks! Let me add one more point here. The methodology which Deobandis stated for tracing the manuscript is wrong. When a book has been printed , then the first step is to read the first edition of that book and find out , what was the source of that book? If it was a manuscript then the author mentions the details of the manuscript , like its location etc.

So Deobandis must look for the First printed version of Ghayat Al-Ma’mul and tell this world that what was the source of this manuscript? And if they are still bent upon proving their aqidah , they should provide PRESENT details of this manuscript.

For the time being I will jus wait for any Deobandi to provide these details.

And where did you get the above details from ? Which book or manuscript ? Let’s apply the same standards to your claims and it will prove that you are in a state of denial. Can’t you see the stamps on the book ? Have you even read the book ? The barzanji family lives in Madinah ? Have you checked with them and you will come to know that your fake scholarship is just another Gulam Qadiyani trick.

Sources:

[*] http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?35715-Ghayat-al-Ma-mul-fi-Ilm-al-Rasul-by-Shaykh-Barjanzi-An-incorrect-allegation

[*] http://mdinah.net/main/articles.aspx?selected_article_no=2464 & http://www.ahbab-taiba.com/vb/showthread.php?t=16965

[*] http://www.taibanet.com/showthread.php?t=2749

[*] http://www.aslein.net/showthread.php?t=15077

[*] http://www.aslein.net/showthread.php?t=2812&page=3

[*] http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:of2l46bLUh0J:cb.rayaheen.net/showthread.php%3Fpid%3D161910+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk

[*] https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.149971155027943.22617.114385091919883&type=3

السادة الأشراف آل البرزنجي بالمدينة المنورة — مخطوطة السادة البرزنجية

[*] http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=123374 & http://www.makkawi.com/Articles/Show.aspx?ID=757
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:bjBcx29sDScJ:www.aslein.net/attachment.php%3Fattachmentid%3D1117%26d%3D1192396566+&cd=27&hl=en&ct=clnk