[PekHyvac]

I think you are usually tired in most of your posts.
Please take some rest in between your posts.

I don't think the brothers first language is English, so why is everyone all of a sudden jumping on his grammatical mistakes or way of speaking while for years "Sunni" Forum has had non native speakers constantly making similar if not worse mistakes, and no one said a thing?

Because he is highlighting a perceived contradiction in the Deobandi Madhab that's why...

Whether he's right or wrong he would have to prove, but don't judge that on his English language abilities because that has nothing to do with what he is saying.

[foltdan]

It seems there is a misunderstanding on what brother junfrared has said and what he means.

As far as I've undertand his quotes (please correct me if I'm wrong, junfrared), he was just saying, that the same accusation of being a mujassim that was made against Allama Ibn Kathir (ra) by this particular barelwi scholar, this same accusation is sometimes labelled against him or against his teacher Allama Ibn Taymiyya (ra) and his followers by scholars who are obviously not barelwi. If i've correctly understand, junfrared seems to talk about some scholars who follow the Maturidi path in Aqeedah, maybe some of them have graduated from Darul-Uloom linked to the Deobandi Maslak, but I would like to extend it to other hanafi scholars who are not from the subcontinent and so neither deobandi nor barelwi.

So, maybe he -junfrared- was trying to say, we must be careful when putting this kind of things up cause those who opposed the deobandi can show those same statements which labelled those scholars as having a mujassim view (may Allah protect us against holding such aqeedah and also against making such statement on scholars) and used it against us, so someone can come and say to us : "look at up about what this "deobandi" scholar say on such and such scholar... do you ascribe to this view too ?".


He -junfrared- also tried to say, since many major scholars like Shah Waly-Ullah, Shaykh Abdul-Hayy Al-Luknowy, Shaykh Anwar Shah Al-Kashmiri and Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thânwi (rahimahumullah), and scholars of Darul-uloom Karachi (and maybe he was specially thinking to Mufti Taqi (hz)) (and I would like to add to the list Shaykh Abul-Hasan An-Nadwi (ra)) have all say in their statements that the Aqeedah on which Ibn Taymiyya and his illustrious students (rahimahumullah) was upon is a correct aqeedah, we must refrain from continuously talk about those polemics which help none.

As for the view of Mufti Taqi (hz) on this subject, we can refer to this (which was previouly posted on other threads) :
http://www.deoband.org/2010/04/hadit...utes-of-allah/

[PekHyvac]

It seems there is a misunderstanding on what brother junfrared has said and what he means.

As far as I've undertand his quotes (please correct me if I'm wrong, junfrared), he was just saying, that the same accusation of being a mujassin that was made against Allama Ibn Kathir (ra) by this particular barelwi scholar, this same accusation is sometimes labelled against him or against his teacher Allama Ibn Taymiyya (ra) and his followers by scholars who are obviously not barelwi. If i've correctly understand, junfrared seems to talk about some scholars who follow the Maturi path in Aqeedah, maybe some of them have graduated from Darul-Uloom linked to the Deobandi Maslak, but I would like to extend it to other hanafi scholars who are not from the subcontinent and so neither deobandi nor barelwi.

So, maybe he -junfrared- was trying to say, we must be careful when putting this kind of things up cause those who opposed the deobandi can show those same statements which labelled those scholars as having a mujassim view (may Allah protect us against holding such aqeedah and also against making such statement on scholars) and used it against us, so someone can come and say to us : "look at up about what this "deobandi" scholar say on such and such scholar... do you ascribe to this view too ?".


He -junfrared- also tried to say, since many major scholars like Shah Waly-Ullah, Shaykh Abdul-Hayy Al-Luknowy, Shaykh Anwar Shah Al-Kashmiri and Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thânwi (rahimahumullah), and scholars of Darul-uloom Karachi (and maybe he was specially thinking to Mufti Taqi (hz)) (and I would like to add to the list Shaykh Abul-Hasan An-Nadwi (ra)) have all say in their statements that the Aqeedah on which Ibn Taymiyya and his illustrious students (rahimahumullah) was upon is a correct aqeedah, we must refrain from continuously talk about those polemics which help none.

As for the view of Mufti Taqi (hz) on this subject, we can refer to this (which was previouly posted on other threads) :
http://www.deoband.org/2010/04/hadit...utes-of-allah/

Jazak Allahu khair, that's exactly what I understood from him as well, just didn't have time to type it all out.

[surefireinvest]

Lo jee Dr Sahab people are coming out slowly I'm waiting for faqir

Sorry for last night I was too tired, I did too much mistakes.

Once I get spare time, I'll describe this issue.

Describe it to your heart's content. But do it in a fashion that we can understand what you are trying to say. Take your time.

[rozneesitcn]

Firstly, of what benefit is it to go around "peeking" into other forums and reporting it here?

Secondly, the title of the thread is inaccurate. Where does it say that he was a Wahhabi?

Imam Ibn Kathir's (rahimahullah) status is known.

Someday they will come out with a fatwa saying This is absolutely unnecessary. Make your points/arguments without mentioning the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) in such a way.

[wJswn5l3]

Someday they will come out with a fatwa saying that Huzoor (saw) was a Wahhabi.

these are very harsh words brother. i kindly request you to please delete or edit your post.