Category Archives: Bid’ah



The Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) says:

They are not among us, ones who hit their cheeks and tear the necks of their clothes. (Bukhari)

The Arabs used to scream, cry, hit their cheeks, tear the necks of their clothes and hit their breasts when a family member died. The Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) condemned this practice in very harsh terms even stating that those who engage in such practices are not among us.

The practices of taazia and maatam are similar to those described above. Therefore even a person of average intelligence can easily understand that they are in contradiction with the teachings of Islâm and are therefore totally forbidden.

The taazia and maatam are so abominable in the eyes of Islâm that not only is it forbidden to practice them but it is also forbidden to attend. Those who do it are to blame and are considered sinners, because their presence encourages those who participate in it. Allah says:

Do not help one another in sin and transgression. (Qur’an 5:2)

As for what happened to Hadhrat Imam Hussain (Radhiyallahu anhu) in Karbala, every Muslim who has a heart must feel deep sadness. But, as already said, this sorrow must be expressed while respecting the principles of Islâm. On this there is no greater example than the behavior of the Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) at the moment when his son, Ibrahim, breathed his last. Holding him in his arms, the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) says:

“The eyes are overflowing with tears and the heart full of sorrow, but we only say what pleases our Creator. Surely we are very sad to be separated from you, O Ibrahim.” (Bukhari)

The Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) did not shout or hit his cheeks or chest and tore the neckline of his clothes. He showed his Ummah that even in sadness (or any other circumstance), one must never forget the order of Allah. This is how a true believer must act.

The Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) is the model of all Muslims. There is salvation by only following his principles.

In addition to taazia and maatam, there are other practices that are observed during the first ten days of the month of Muharram. The scholars of are categorical and all agree that these practices are prohibited.

Here are the fatwas of some scholars on this subject:

Hadhrat Imam Hussain (Radhiyallahu Anhu):

After my shahaadat do not make maatam and do not tear your clothes either. Be patient (Sabr). [Tarikh Ibn Khaldoon]

Imam Hussain (Radhiyallahu Anhu)’s son Hadhrat Zainul Aabidin (Rahimahullah):

When a person named Mukhtaar Thaqafi invented customs on Ahlé Bait,  Hazrat Zainul Aabideen (Rahimahullah) opposed these inventions. He stood near the Ka’bah and cursed Mukhtaar. [Tabaqaat]

Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahimahullah):

O Muslims, it is forbidden to shout and cry during the first ten days of the month of Muharram. If you observe these practices then you will become just like the raafidha. [Matalib-ul-Mu’mineen]

Hadhrat Shaykh Abdul Qaadir Jeelaani (Rahimahullah):

If it were permissible to consider the day when Imam Hussain (Radhiyallahu anhu) attained martyrdom as a day of mourning, then the day of Monday would be all the more deserving because it was that day that Allah gave wafaat to the Prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) and to Hadhrat Abû Bakr Siddîq (Radhiyallahu anhu). [Al-Ghuniyat al-Taalibeen].



Madrasah Arabia Islamia of Azaadville has published an article on the virtues of the Khatame Khwajgan practice  which is observed with such  constancy and fervour that the idea of this practice being Sunnah has been created.  Is this a Sunnah practice?


Although Khatme Khwajgan is a practice consisting of thikr and dua, it has attained Bid’ah proportions. It is most certainly not Sunnah. The format of the practice is inimical to the Sunnah. The abhorrence of a form which has no Sunnah substantiation has been conspicuously portrayed by Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Mas’ood (Radhiyallahu anhu) when he had harshly expelled from the Musjid a group who had initiated a practice of thikr similar to Khatme Khwajgan.

Only morons and bigoted peer-worshippers will have the stupid audacity to claim that Hadhrat Ibn Mas’ood (Radhiyallahu anhu) was anti-Thikr, having “insufficient knowledge, foolishness and having evil thoughts”, as the U.K. Molvi Kholwadia states in the article extolling the virtues of the non-Sunnah Khatme Khwajgan practice.

If Allah Ta’ala wills, we shall publish a detailed refutation of the article of Madrasah Arabia Islamia. The proponents of this practice have presented an exaggerated picture of its virtues, and the importance accorded it has definitely ushered Khatme Khwajgan into the domain of Bid’ah.

Instead of khatame khwajgan, adhere to Khatme Qur’aan, Durood Shareef, Istighfaar, Nafl Salaat and Dua in solitude and individually. All these collective/congregational practices which have no origin in the Sunnah, invariably develop into hardcore Bid’ah Sayyiah (Evil Innovation). This has been the downfall of the Barelwi-Qabar Pujaari Bid’atis and of Bid’atis of other hues.  They eventually become “Kilaabun Naar” (Dogs of the Fire).

About the people of Bid’ah, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Verily, Allah deprives every man of bid’ah from making Taubah.” This should be more than adequate for overwhelming the follower of the Sunnah with fear. Before indulging in a practice which has the form of ibaadat, ascertain whether it was Ibaadat during the age of the Sahaabah. If it was not, then stay far from it. What induces men to accord preference to practices which have no Sunnah origin. Shaitaan is our open enemy. Bid’ah is his snare with which he entraps even the Aabideen, hence Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“One Faqeeh is harder on shaitaan than a thousand Aabideen.”

The First Evil Bid’ah

Recitation of the muqtadi behind the imam in salat was considered by the salaf us-saliheen as the first innovation in Islam.

Ibrahim an-Nakha’i, the great tabi’i and jurist said:

“The first thing the people innovated [in religion] was recitation behind the imam – the companions (Sahaba) did not recite behind the imam.” [Ibn at-Turkumani, Al-Jawhar an-Naqi printed on the margin of Sunan al-Kubra of Al-Bayhaqi 2/169]

He also said:
“The first person to recite behind the imam was a person accused [of innovation]” [Muhammad ibn al-Hassan, Al-Muwatta printed with At-Ta’liq al-Mumajjad of Al-Luknawi 1/426 and Al-Hujjah ‘ala Ahl al-Madina 1/120]

Furthermore, as Imam Al-Ayni wrote, it was the opinion of approximately eighty companions that the muqtadi should not recite behind the imam. [See: Umdatul Qari 3/67]

It should be noted that the recitation meant here is that of Sura Fatiha and a part of the Quran while in qiyaam.

Shaikh Ifran Nauyock
Al Kawthari Academy (Mauritius)



What is the status of making Khatam of Bukhaari Shareef during times of anxiety and fear? This is being promoted in certain quarters.

Answer (by Mujlisul Ulama):

While making khatam of Bukhaari Shareef in the manner described, is permissible initially, it can develop into bid’ah. It is not an act of Ibaadat substantiated by Shar’i Nusoos. Furthermore, such a khatam should be a private affair, and not transformed into a public function. In fact, even public and congregational Qur’aan Khatams are discouraged.

The khatam of Bukhaari Shareef is not Sunnah. The Sahaabah, Taabieen and Tab-e-Taabieen had no relationship with Bukhaari Shareef. Promoting this khatam is bid’ah regardless of seniors having practiced it. It has no basis in the Sunnah.

All acts of bid’ah were initially Mubaahaat introduced by the Auliya. They were such permissibilities which had no origin in the Sunnah.

It is unwise to promote this practice. It is essential to adhere to Sunnah Athkaar and to Qur’aan Tilaawat in privacy, not in public and congregational forms. In times of anxiety, resort more to the Qur’aan Majeed, for Allah Ta’ala says: “Behold! In the Thikr of Allah do hearts find tranquility.” 

Any practice which has no basis in the Sunnah should NEVER EVER be given preference over Sunnah Athkaar and Tilaawat of the Qur’aan and plain, fervent dua emanating from the innermost recesses of the heart. Regardless of who has innovated this practice, abstain from it. We should not worship seniority. We respect and honour all our Akaabir. But fettering us to the Shariah, the Qur’aan prohibits us from emulating the Bani Israaeel about whom the Qur’aanic stricture is?

“They took their ahbaar (scholars) and ruhbaan (buzrugs) as arbaab (gods) besides Allah, and also for Maseeh, the son of Maryam (they took as a god).”


By Mujlisul Ulama


Nizamiye Al-Azhar School

Malabar, Port Elizabeth

Your e-mail pertaining to the new bid’ah of ulema iftaar refers.

Please be informed that this bid’ah is not permissible. Where in the Sunnah is there a basis for this confounded practice of riya and israaf. If you have an excess of money, feed the poor and needy. There are innumerable of poor Muslims around you in Port Elizabeth.

This type of gluttony in the name of the Deen is a satanic inspiration. There is no such stupid practice as an ‘ulema iftaar’. Iftaar is for all Muslims alike, and the Masnoon method is only Iftaar with dates or water or dates and water, not gluttony with pies, samoosas and devouring food like animals. The Qur’aan Majeed says that the kuffaar eat like animals. But nowadays the molvis and Muslims in general also devour food like animals, hence they no longer distinguish between halaal and haraam.

You should have at least some Islamic conscience to think about the suffering Muslims. Instead, you give vent to nafsaani lust by innovating a silly bid’ah and feeding obese characters who masquerade as ‘ulema’. Wasting money in such bid’ah practices transforms you into ‘brothers’ of the shayaateen’ according to the Qur’aan Majeed.

It is our dua that Allah Ta’ala guides you and opens up your clogged brains to understand that the Deen and its practices are not designed for merrymaking. The a’maal of the Deen are for gaining Allah’s Pleasure and Salvation in the Aakhirah. What type of molvis are you people? Did you learn about ‘ulema iftaar’ at the Madrasah where the molvi certificate was doled out to you? Did any of the Akaabir of this Ummah from the time of the Sahaabah to this day organize a stupid, confounded riya practice of ‘ulema iftaar’?

Have you no shame and no conscience to organize a stupid  feast for fat characters who daily resort to gluttony at their homes while excluding the poor who cannot afford the sumptuous dishes you intend preparing for those who are not in need of it?

Ramadhaan is a month of greater Imaani emotion and love for Allah’s suffering Makhlooq. So why don’t you rather organize a feast for the destitute – Fuqara and Masaaqeen – thereby gaining thawaab and Allah’s Pleasure? Why feed fat characters who will only gluttonously devour the food and excrete. Instead of thawaab, you are deserving of Allah’s punishment for israaf and riya.

Did the Sahaabah ever have an exclusive ‘ulema’ iftaar? Did any other among the Salafus Saaliheen or even among our recent Akaabir Ulama ever have a stupid, exclusive iftaar programmed for ‘ulema’. Those who will have the misfortune of devouring the contaminated food you will be providing cannever be Ulama in the true meaning of the word.

It is absolutely ludicrous, to say the least, that during this Mubaarak month, and at the time of Iftaar when Allah Ta’ala’s Special Presence is the closest to us that you, masquerading as ulama, deem it valid and appropriate to waste this Mubaarak occasion and time in silly merrymaking with the bid’ah so-called ‘ulema’  gluttonous feast, deceptively dubbed ‘Iftaar’.

Open the kutub and edify yourself regarding the meaning and method of Iftaar. It is palpably clear that you lack the haziest idea of the Sunnah concept of Iftaar.

May Allah Ta’ala guide you and all of us to understand and appreciate this Deen and this glorious Month.


  • Shaykhul-Hadeeth Mufti Muhammad of Jaami’atur-Rasheed, Karachi.

The month of Rajab is of much importance due to the fact that Nabee (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) after sighting the moon of Rajab made this du’aa,


“Oh ALLAAH grant us Barakah in the month of Rajab & Sha’baan & make us reach Ramadhaan.”

 Grant us such ability that we reach Ramadhaan & perform the Fasts & Worships in Ramadhaan. This riwaayat (narration) is acceptable at the least even though its not completely saheeh (authentic), but it can be used for the purpose of Fadhaail (Virtues). Except this everything that is being narrated with regards to Rajab is not proven through any mustanad (authentic) sanad (chain).

Generally this has become famous that 27th of Rajab is the night of Me’raaj. And on this night (of 27th Rajab) ALLAAH Ta’aalaa granted this precious bounty to Nabee (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) of travelling through the heavens & interacting with ALLAAH Ta’aalaa in person. And Salaah was also gifted at that moment.This assumption (of 27th Rajab being the night of me’raaj) is not substantiated by any saheeh riwaayat (authentic narration).


Whereas (regarding the date) there are lot of different opinions. Here are some differing opinions,

  1. Did this journey take place before the Nubuwwat or after the Nubuwwat..?

If it was after Nubuwwat then there are 7 different opinions regarding the year.

  1. If it was before Hijrah then varying from 6 months to 5 years there are 8 nay 9 different opinions regarding how much period prior to Hijrah.

This in all together sum up to 18 different opinions.

1. Regarding the birth of Nabee (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) there are 2 different opinions i.e. Rabee’ul-Awwal or Ramadhaan.

  1. With regards to Hijrah there are 2 different opinions. That Hijrah took place after 10 years or 13 years of Nubuwwat.

All of these add up to 36 different opinions or even more.

  1. Regarding the month (of Me’raaj)  there are 8 different opinions.
  2. Regarding the date there are more than 9 different opinions.
  3. Regarding the day there are 3 different opinions of Friday, Saturday or Monday.



Hadhrat ‘Allaamah Ibn Katheer (rahimahullaahu ta’aalaa) says,

Haafiz ‘Abdul-Ghani (rahimahullaahu ta’aalaa) has narrated this in his (kitaab on) Seerat,

“Annal-Israa-a kaana lailata Saabe wal Eshreen min Rajab”

(This journey of Me’raaj took place on 27th of Rajab)

     “Wa qad aurada hadeethann laa yassihhu sanaduhu.”

(He has narrated a Hadeeth for this but its sanad (chain) is not saheeh (authentic).)”

Accordingly  ‘Allaamah Qastalaani, ‘Allaamah Zurqaani (rahimahumullaahu ta’aalaa) says,

“Wa ammaa lailatul-Israa-i falam ya-ti fee arjaheeyatil-‘amali feehaa hadeethun saheehun walaa dha’eef”

(There is neither any Saheeh nor any Dha’eef Hadeeth specifying any special deed or Fadheelat (virtue) of any deed carrying more reward in this night)

          “Wa lidhaalika lam yu’ayyinhan-Nabiyyu (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) liashaabihi walaa ayyanahaa ahadum-minas-Sahaabah.”

(And regarding that (night) neither did Nabee Kareem (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) specifically informed it (which night) to his Sahaabah nor did anyone amongst Sahaabah specified it (exactly which night).)

Furthermore ‘Allaamah Zurqalaani (rahimahullaahu ta’aalaa) challengingly says,

          “Walaa Sahhah ilal aan walaa yassihhu ilaa antaqoomas-saa’tu feehaa shai.”

(Until now (centuries have passed by) we haven’t found any Saheeh Riwaayat (authentic  narration) & nor will it be found until qiyaamah)

Because if it would have ever existed then it would surely have been found in the early era. And when there wasn’t any Saheeh Riwaayat (authentic narration) available during the early eras then how will it be available in the later times..?

So he further says,

“Walaw ta’allaqaa bihaa naf’unn lilummati walaw zarratann la bayyanahu lahum Nabiyyuhum (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam).”

(And if there was any benfit or harm relating to it (night of me’raaj) for the Ummah then Nabee (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) would have definitely informed about that.)

But Nabee (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) didn’t inform any such thing.


So be it kundey of 22nd Rajab or Fast of 27thRajab there is not a single riwaayat (narration) with saheeh sanad (authentic chain) to substantiate it.


  • To act within the confines of the Sharee’ah is called Deen.
  • That is to follow & act upon authentically proven practises.
  • To follow according to one’s desires is not Deen but to surrender & submit oneself (to the commands of Sharee’ah).
  • Only those nights are considered virtuous regarding which Nabee (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) has conveyed any virtue & those nights regarding which Nabee (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) hasn’t conveyed any virtue then they hold no virtue whatsoever.

And people have also invented some new practises specifically for that (occasion of me’raaj), for which they also present some narrations but all of which are either dha’eef (unreliably weak) or maudhoo’ (fabricated).


May ALLAAH Ta’aalaa grant us Muslims the taufeeq to follow upon the pure & pristine Deen as Revealed, Taught & Demonstrated by Rasoolullaah (Sallallaahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam), Practised & Propagated by Sahaabah (radhiyallaahu ‘anhum) and Explained & Codified by Fuqahaa (rahmatullaahi ‘alayhim)…

And safeguard us from following the transmogrified version of Deen adulterated with our whims & desires thus earning the Wrath & Curses of ALLAAH Ta’aalaa…aameen



Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“He who honours a man of bid’ah has aided in the demolition of Islam.”


“I would be grateful if The Majlis could provide some valuable comment on the following Malfooz: 

“Hakim al-Islam Qari Muhammad Tayyib Sahib (rahmatullahi alayhi) relates:

‘I witnessed Mawlana Thanawi (rahmatullahi ‘alayhi) differering with Mawlana Ahmad Ridha Khan marhoom in many issues, such as qiyam, ‘urs, milad etc., but whenever mentioning him in a gathering he would say “Mawlana Ahmad Ridha Khan Sahib”. Once a person in the gathering said “Ahmad Ridha”, without using the title mawlana. Hadhrat rebuked him and said angrily, “He is still a scholar, even if we differ with him. You are disrespecting his position; how is this permissible? Our difference of opinion is in its place. It is a different matter that we consider him to be wrong and do not agree with him. But what is the meaning of humiliating him and disrespecting him?”

‘The Mawlana opposed to Mawlana Thanawi (rahmatullahi ‘alayhi) was extremely disrespectful. But Mawlana Thanawi (rahmatullahi ‘alayhi) was from the people of knowledge. Whenever someone was mentioned, he considered respect to be imperative, even though it is of an open opponent. One should not lose hold of respect.’

This Malfooz is being propagated with great relish by Mudaahins (spineless, toadish psycophants and bootlickers) who have a Nafsaani inclination to a pet deviant or to some deviant group(s). Numerous websites have cited this Malfooz within a short space of time.

The term ‘respect’ can have various connotations. However, it is clear that the Mudaahins who are exploiting this Malfooz intend the meaning that is Haraam according to the Shariah. One popular modernist “Maulana” who is liberal in his praise for, and interaction with certain segments of the Ahlul Bid’ah, issued the following message to accompany this Malfooz:

The term “Mawlana” is an honorific title and it’s used for respect. The following anecdote, in the Urdu picture, is a good exemplification of respect despite having differences.”

Rather than resorting to a variety of Ta’weels (interpretation) that can easily be made in regards to this incident that occurred in a private setting, in order to exonerate Hazrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi from the act of conferring respect to a man of Bid’ah, the Mudaahins are exploiting this Malfooz to justify transgressing a well-known ruling of the Shariah whilst also attempting to implicate Hazrat Maulana Thanwi (rahmatullahi alayh) in their crime.

The Fuqaha have conveyed Ijma’ on the prohibition of conferring respect to a Mudhil (one who misguides), even if he is from Ahlus Sunnah, let alone one who is outside the fold of Ahlus Sunnah. Imaam Ghazaali (Rahmatullah alayh), one from many who could be quoted, said:

All of them (i.e. the Salaf-us-Saaliheen) reached consensus on manifesting hatred for the oppressors and innovators, and all who disobeyed Allah with a sin that extends from himself to others because, verily the evil of the kaafir is not contagious, for verily, Muslims are aware of his kufr, hence they will not heed what he says since he does not attribute Islam to himself nor the belief of Haqq. However, the Bid’ati who calls to bid’ah and believes that he is calling to the haqq, is a cause for the deviation of people, hence his evil is contagious.  Despising him, vilifying him for his bid’ah, and to inculcate aversion in people for him are of greater importance (than disparaging the kuffaar).”

Even if, for argument’s sake, no possible Ta’weel could be provided to exonerate Hazrat Maulana Thanwi, then to exploit this incident to justify transgressing a rule of the Shariah, rather than set it aside as an error, is the very essence of Hazrat-worship. (The jaahil opportunists are not worshipping Hadhrat Thanvi. In fact, they have no affinity with him. They are merely misusing Hadhrat Thanvi’s malfooth for justifying their compromise with baatil and its votaries. –The Majlis) In fact, this trend of extracting a Haraam interpretation from statements of  the Ulama, which can be subject to various legitimate interpretations, in order to override the Shariah is becoming increasingly common today. Furthermore, the liberals (those suffering from the malady of compound ignorance – The Majlis) of this age have made a vile habit of scavenging for the slips and tafarrudaat (isolated eccentricities) of senior Ulama from the past. Then they employ such tafarrudaat to justify baatil and bid’ah, thus flagrantly violating even those rulings of the Shariah which have been established by the Consensus of the Fuqaha.

In response to this Malfooz, one Mufti issued the following message:

“In Muhannad, Ahmad Rida Khan is referred to as a “Muharrif” (distorter) and a “Dajjal-Makkaar” (scheming dajjal). Hazrat Thanawi was a signatory of Muhannad. (This fact alone cancels the ambiguous malfooth. It is tantamount to a retraction by Hadhrat Thanvi – Rahmatullah alayh – The Majlis)

In al-Shihaab al-Thaaqib, Hazrat Madani refers to Ahmad Rida Khan as “Mujaddid al-Takfir”, “Dajjal”, amongst other terms.

This attitude makes more sense from the perspective of expressing bugdh for Ahl al-Bida and those who call to misguidance.

“Whoever shows respect to a Saahib Bid’ah has aided in the destruction of Islam.” (i.e. whoever does this in a public way)” – (In fact, even in privacy – The Majlis) – (End of the Brother’s letter)

OUR RESPONSE (By Mujlisul Ulama):

Ahmed Ridha Khan was an incorrigible Bid’ati – a destroyer of the Sunnah and a demolisher of the Deen. About such bid’atis, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who respects a man of bid’ah aids in the demolition (destruction) of Islam.” Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) also said: “Bughd (hatred) is for the Sake of Allah.”

When a man is involved in the elimination of the Sunnah and the structuring and introduction of Bid’ah, he is the enemy of Allah Ta’ala.  Bid’atis are referred to in the Hadith as Kilaabun Naar (The Dogs of the Fire). How is it possible to abrogate this Hadith with an error or an opinion of a senior?

The instruction to have hatred for the sake of Allah Ta’ala, brings within its purview Bid’atis, and to a greater degree Bid’atis of the calibre of Ahmed Ridha Khan who was the imaam of Bid’ah, a Muharrif (an interpolater of falsehood), DajjaalMakkaar (Deceit), Mujaddid-e-Takfeer (Renewer/Reviver of branding Muslims kaafir), etc. These were designations conferred on him by some of our Akaabir Ulama.

Furthermore there is Ijma’ of the Fuqaha on the issue of not honouring a Bid’ati. In the light of  the Ahaadith and the Ijma’,  the  view of Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh)  has to be incumbently set aside as an error based on lack of information  regarding the true beliefs of Ahmed Ridha Khan, or an idiosyncrasy. Even great Fuqaha sometimes display peculiar views as an effect of their tabiyat (natural disposition) which sometimes overshadows reality and rectitude. Regarding such idiosyncratic views, Allaamah Abdul Wahhaab Sha’raani (Rahmatullah alayh) as well as other illustrious Fuqaha, said:

“He who holds on to the nawaadir of the Ulama, verily, he has made an exit from Islam.”

Some decades ago, Maulana Manzoor No’maani (Rahmatullah alayh) had visited South Africa. He was our guest. He was famous for his debates with the Bid’atis. He personally mentioned to us:

“I went to visit Hadhrat Thanvi in Thanabovan.  Hadhrat Thanvi said to me:

‘It appears to me that misinformation has reached him (referring to Ahmad Ridha) about us, hence the misunderstanding. How is it possible for him to accuse us of so much falsehood despite being an Aalim?’

From this statement, it is clear that Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) had no clarity of the shaitaaniyat of Ahmed Ridha Khan. Maulana Manzoor No’maani then responded as follows:

“Hadhrat! It is not an issue of misunderstanding. The fact is that Allah Ta’ala has made maskh of his aql.  Hadhrat Thanvi then did not comment further.”

Maskh means disfigurement. In other words, Ridha Khan’s were convoluted to the extent of totally blinding him of the Haqq and understanding baatil to be haqq.

On account of this deviate’s profession of takfeer and slander of great Auliya, his intelligence suffered from the pangs of satanic convolution. Thus, his ability of distinguishing between Haqq and baatil, Sunnah and bid’ah was extinguished His deliberate lies and mutilation of the texts of our Akaabireen to cloak it with his fabricated theories of kufr, clearly reveals his dajjaaliyat. Whatever rubbish he had attributed to the Ulama of Deoband, and on which hallucinated basis he had branded these Auliya and Ulama as ‘kaafir’, was glaringly false. There is not an iota of truth in what he had claimed.

The spineless molvis of today who labour to strike up haraam dalliances with the Qabar Pujaaris and with every group of deviates of whatever kufr persuasion they may be, despite their academic and spiritual bankruptcy, are fully aware of the fact that the mujaddid of shaitaani bid’ah, Ridha Khan, had branded all of the Ulama of Deoband, Akaabir as well as Asaaghir, as kaafir. This alone conspicuously evidences the divine disfigurement of his brains and the ruin of his heart. A wicked transmogrification of his intelligence was effected by his inherent Satanism.

Now what do these spineless juhhaal expect from the Ulama-e-Haqq? Do they expect us to elevate and propel the jaahil Ridha Khan into the loftiest spatial and celestial heights on the basis of Hadhrat Thanvi’s error of judgment? If Hadhrat Thanvi advised a person to prefix the name of the mudhil agent of Iblees with the honorific title of ‘Maulana’, it never ever justifies respecting and honouring the devil when Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had categorically prohibited the conference of accolades to those who are designated as Kilaabun Naar. The Arsh of Allah Azza Wa Jal shudders and the plot to demolish Islam is set in motion when a bid’ati is praised or honoured. Said our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam):

“He who honours a man of Bid’ah, aids in the demolition of Islam.”

These moron, spineless cranks who are seeking to extravasate capital from Hadhrat Thanvi’s error, are enemies of the Sunnah, hence they seek to  honour morons and deviates who conspire to undermine the Deen, and the  way of  achieving this satanic objective urinated  into their brains by the devil is  to the Ulama-e-Haqq a target for criticism. These Ulama are the bulwarks of Allah’s Deen. They should understand that the errors of the Ulama regardless of their lofty status, never constitute Shar’i daleel. The Sunnah is not scaled on the personal preference or attitude of an Aalim even if his soul happens to flutter around the Arsh. The Haqq is measured and ascertained on the Standard and Scale of the Qur’aan, the Sunnah and the Dalaa-il which the Aimmah Mujtahideen formulated on the basis of these two primary sources of the Shariah.

Maulana Manzoor No’maani (Rahmatullah alayh) was well aware of the intricacies of the shenanigans of these Bid’atis and of Ridha Khan. On the other hand, Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) lacked such information which confirms the true evil bid’ati status of Ridha, hence his mild approach. Hadhrat Maulana Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri, Hadhrat Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, Hadhrat  Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani and the many other senior Ulama of Deoband were more aware of  the personality of the bid’ati dajjaal, hence they named and branded him with the epithets which were most deserving of him. The spineless molvis and deviates who are at pains to collaborate with bid’atis, heretics and zindeeqs seek justification for their haraam and miserable attitude on the basis of an error of Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh). They cast themselves into deliberate blindness regarding the beliefs of kufr, bid’ah and shirk of these Qabar Pujaaris – they pretend to be unaware of the notoriety of their rotten characters and their factory of takfeer – they overlook all the Satanism of the fraud, Ridha Khan, but they deem it appropriate to criticize and malign those who uphold the Sunnah.

The moron spineless molvis are stupidly using the personal idiosyncratic preference, in fact error, of Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) to scuttle the Ijma’ of the Ummah on the prohibition of honouring/praising a man of bid’ah. For these morons, Allaamah Sha’raani sounded an adequate warning: “He who grabs hold (as daleel) of the nawaadir of the Ulama, verily has made an exit from Islam.”

Even if we have to assume that Hadhrat Thanvi had in fact held the view of addressing the Bid’ati with a title of respect, it will be haraam to make taqleed of such a glaring error. All Ulama, regardless of their lofty status, even Aimmah Mujtahideen err. It is haraam to make taqleed of their errors. The Qur’aan Majeed explicitly forbids this practice of stupid ‘taqleed’ by means of which Bani Israaeel scuttled the Tauraah with corrupt fatwas of their Ulama.

At one stage, Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) used to attend the Meelaad functions of the Bid’atis in Kanpur. He would only give a bayaan of the Seerat and leave. When Hadhrat Gangohi (Rahmatullah alayh) was informed of this, he wrote a long letter explaining the grievous error of attending the function of the Bid’atis. In several letters to and fro, Hadhrat Thanvi accepted his error and abandoned attending such functions.

There are many issues on which Hadhrat Thanvi had erred and for which he had issued retractions. The juhala molvis of our time who are traitors to the Deen and who spinelessly participate in all functions of bid’ah, fisq and fujoor, search for the errors of the seniors, which they stupidly and satanically use as ‘daleel’ for their haraam views and bid’ah activities. They will ignore the Ijma’ of the Fuqaha and cling to the error like a dog clings to bone to deceive themselves and mislead others.

It is haraam to cite Hadhrat Maulana Thanvi’s error to scuttle the direct command of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on which is based the Ijmaa’ of the Fuqaha. When all the Fuqaha and the Ahaadith prohibit honouring and respecting a man of bid’ah, then it is  contumacy bordering on kufr to attempt to cancel this Ijma’ on the basis of an isolated view or an error of a senior. Thus, the view expressed by Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) in the Malfooth cited by you, has no validity. It is haraam to refer to the Bid’ati Dajjaal with a title of honour. It has to be incumbently set aside.