sunni forum

sunniforum.com - a resource for the propagation of authentic Islamic teachings > General Forums > General Islam > The Truth Concerning the Beliefs of Wahiduddin KhanPDA

View Full Version : The Truth Concerning the Beliefs of Wahiduddin Khan

AYK139907-07-2010, 01:15 AMThe intent here is to merely highlight *some* of the major mistakes written by Molvi Wahiduddin Khan. In no way is this an exhaustive attempt to seek out all of the mistakes he has made throughout his writings over the past few decades. We only hope that the concerned reader will read the below blunders and save himself from this man’s fitnah. It appears that many Muslims are totally unaware of his true beliefs on account of his books being sold by certain Deobandi bookshops such as al-rashad and onlineshariah, and the fact that he graduated from a "Deobandi" madrasah.

Reference #1 and #2:The June of 2007 issue of the "al-Risala" magazine downloadable straight from the official al-Risala website:http://www . A l r i s a l a dot org/Al_Risala_Urdu_Monthly/Yr2007/June2007/June-2007.pdfPlease refer to his "maseeh model ki aamid-i-saani" article in this issue. Also, please see the October of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah" magazine downloadable here:http://www. A l r i s a l a dot org /Al_Risala_Urdu_Monthly/Yr2007/Oct2007/oct-2007.pdfPlease refer to his "payghambar-i-inqilaab" and "deen aur minhaaj" articles in this issue as well.

To start, Wahiduddin Khan states that the model of the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) is no longer applicable in certain partial matters and that we need to instead adopt the model of Christ:"...Muhammadi model zamani haalat ki nisbat se juzi'i taur par QAABIL-E-INTIBAAQ NA RAHEY GA. IS KE BAJAAI' MASEEH MODEL JUZI'I TAUR PAR QAABIL-E-INTIQAB BAN JAAIY GA."

To make his point all the more clearer, Waheeduddin Khan writes that the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) should not be considered to be the “final model” with regards to his minhaaj (pattern/model, i.e. sunnah/qidwah/uswah), but only as the “final prophet” with regards to the deen (religion):"...LAYKIN MINHAAJ KE I`TIBAAR SE AAP FINAL MODEL NA THEI."

Furthermore, he continues by stating that the glorious verse wherein Allah taàla Praises the noble character of the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) in the Qur’an (al-ahzaab:21) by referring to him as having “uswah hasanah” (beautiful model), is actually proof that his model is NOT complete/perfect (i.e. “kaamil”). He states that for one to think of him possessing a model that is “kaamil” (complete/perfect) is “without doubt an incorrect belief”:"Agar is mawqa` par Qur'an main "uswah kaamilah" ka lafz istìmal kiya jaa taa to log ghalat fahmi mai pardsaktey thei...AISA SAMAJHNA BILAA SHUBHA AIK GHALAT FAHMI

HOTI..."

To knock home the point made above, he reiterates by stating that the Prophetic example is not the final example to be followed in every time and age. Again, he says the proof for this lies in the fact that the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) was referred to as having “uswah hasanah” (beautiful model), as stated above, and that Allah taàla did NOT refer to him as having “uswah kaamilah” (complete/perfect model):"laykin AAP HAR SOORAT HAAL KE LIYE AAKHIRI NAMOONA NA THEI...CHUNANCHE AAP KEI LIYE "USWAH HASANAH" KA LAFZ AAYA HAI, NA KE "USWAH KAAMILAH"..."

Moreover, he continues by saying that it is not even possible to have a Prophet that has a “final model” to be followed by everyone in all ages and times:"...PAYGHAMBAR KA FINAL MODEL HONA BHI MUMKIN NAHIN."

He continues onwards to declare that Sayyiduna Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) (Jesus Christ) will not be returning to earth again and that all of the evidences that say he will are actually referring to the “return” of the following of Christ’s (maseeh) model (minhaaj) and NOT the return of Sayyiduna Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) himself. And that the following of Christ’s model by the Muslims will be more applicable and more warranting of followership than the model of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama):"In ke saheeh ta'weel ya hai ke ba`d zamaaney mai jo cheez waaqi` hogi wo MASEEH KI AAMED SAANI NAHIN HAI, BALKE MASEEH KE MODEL KI AAMED SAANI HAI. ya`ni ba`d ke zamaaney main haalat le andar aisi tabdeeliyaan waaqi` hoonge ke haalat ke i`tibaar se hazrat maseeh ka àmaliy model ziyaadah qaabil-e-intibaaq (applicable) ban jaa'igaa."

Additionally, he writes that from the perspective of “minhaaj” (pattern/example/model), the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) was NOT the final model. He ends by stating that this is precisely the reason why Christ will descend again, i.e. referring to Christ’s model. The obvious implication here being that the return of the model of Christ is to abrogate and supplant the model left by the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama): "LAYKIN MINHAAJ KE I`TIBAAR SE AAP FINAL MODEL NA THEI. GHAALIBAN YAHI WAJHA HAI KE HADITH MAI YA PAISHEEN GOYI KI GAIYI HAI KE AAKHIRI ZAMANEY MAI MASEEH DUBAARAH NAAZIL HUN GEY."

Reference #3:This is the August of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah" magazine which can be downloaded here:http://www. A l r i s a l a dot org /Al_Risala_Urdu_monthly/Yr2007/Aug2007/aug-2007.pdf

Please see pages 2-4 for his belief in the Dajjaal being an ideology and not an individual and his belief that the Mahdi (àlayhi al-salaam) is the same individual as Sayyiduna Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam), both of which are not Sunni beliefs:"hadeeth ke muttabiq, us zamaaney main aik "rajul mu'min" uthaiga jo dajjaal ko qatl kareygaa, magar ye qatl jismaaniy ma`non main na hogaa balke fikriy ma`non main hogaa, ya`ni dajjaal fitna ko expose karnaa. Dajjaaliyat aik ìlmiy fitnah hogaa...is main "shahaadat" se muraad gawaahiy hai, na ke jaan ki qurbaaniy. deen-e-haqq ki yahi woh azeem tareen gawaahiy hai jis

ko hadeeth main "qatl-e-dajjaal" kaha gaya hai. Dajjaal akbar ka muqaabalah karney waaley is rajul-e-mu'min ko hadeeth main "mahdi" kaha gaya hai. Ghaaliban yahi wajh hai ke aik hadeeth mai mahdi aur maseeh donon ko aik shakhsiyat bataayaa gaya hai..."

As for topics unrelated to `aqeedah, then one can find many more mistakes written by him in his articles relating to ijtihaad, jihaad, abrogation, etc. IF anyone has doubts concerning the above quotes then please feel free to check the original Urdu in the articles found in their respective al-Risala journals. We urge anyone who has doubts regarding the appropriateness/correctness of the content of these quotes to consult with their local Sunni scholars.Talib8407-07-2010, 02:54 AMAssalamu Alaikum

Are their any problems with his English translation of the Quran?Abu_Uzair07-07-2010, 08:55 AMassalamu alaikumplz see this linkhttp://islamicbookslibrary.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/maulana-waheeduddeen-khan-islam-dushman-shakhsiyat-by-muhammad-mateen-khalid/for a book about vahiduddin khan sb in urdu languageAYK139907-07-2010, 01:18 PMwa alaykum as-salam,

@ Talib84: Unfortunately, I'm unfamiliar with his translation of the Qur'an. But given the fact he completely abuses the meaning of al-Ahzab:21, I would steer clear from anything written by him. Period.

@ Moulana Junaid: JazakAllahu khayran for this link. I was thinking that someone in India must've written against him by now but did not find any literature on my own. I'll be sure to look through this book insha'Allah.

Also, I forgot to mention in my previous post that all of the quotes I posted were sent to Mr. Wahiduddin Khan himself as well as his student, Khaja Kaleemuddin, in hopes they can offer a thorough explanation of these beliefs. No response was ever received by W.K. himself but Khaja Kaleemuddin did reply but with nothing substantial, just mere hollow words. It is important to note here that neither Wahiduddin Khan or Khaja Kaleemuddin ever denied writing such words or recanted/repented from them.maneatinglizard07-07-2010, 10:53 PM:salam:

Man, where do all these crazy opinions come from?a_muslim08-07-2010, 08:13 PM

...AYK139910-07-2010, 04:15 AMwa alaykum as-salam Brother "a_muslim":

I haven't read either of the two books you've mentioned, but in all honesty there's nothing unbelievable or shocking about this. As you know, it's not uncommon for learned men to write a lot of beneficial and correct points within their books. Yet this does not qualify as a 'carte blanche' to then say whatever they please, especially in the public sphere. What worse harm can there be than from a man who after gaining the laymen's trust deceives them by surreptitiously releasing innovative opinions into his discourse? This is why our ulama have said that the biggest mistakes are indeed those committed by the biggest ulama due to the reputatio and rapport they have in the eyes of the public. As for which "Deobandi" madrasah he attended, then as far as I'm aware, he is an alimiyyah graduate of Madrasatul Islaah in Azamgarh (UP). Lastly, I will choose not to publicly display the e-mail correspondence from Khaja Kaleemuddin because I simply believe the details of it to be private and not meant for public perusal. However, if you have any doubt regarding the attributions of those statements to Molvi Wahiduddin Khan, then feel free to e-mail the webmasters of either the al-Risala or Goodword websites and insha'Allah they can respond to your queries.Abu Hamza Deccani10-07-2010, 08:12 AMwa alaykum as-salam Brother "a_muslim":

As for which "Deobandi" madrasah he attended, then as far as I'm aware, he is an alimiyyah graduate of Madrasatul Islaah in Azamgarh (UP). .

salaam,This Madrasatul Islaah in Azamgarh (UP) is not deobandi . Actually its based on Ml Hameeduddin Farahi' s thoughts and I dont think he was Deobandi. This madarsa has been a bastion of Maududist and ghair muqallid ideologies as far as I know from my JIH days.wassalaam,akabirofdeoband10-07-2010, 10:12 AMWhat he seems to be saying is wrong. The muhaqiq sufis tackled this much better.

Mawlana tahanwi (rahmatullahi alayh) has a brilliant discussion on this. He talks about some Sufis who were Musawi and some who were Isawi .

But then he told us the Musawi and Isawi models were 2 ways from the brilliant depth of the Muhammadan(saw) way.

The point sounds similar but the difference is like the distance between the earth and the sky.

The point about the return of sayyidina Isa(as) seems to be rubbish also as the return of Isa in our texts and the xtian texts is not marked by Rahmah but wars and manifestation of Jalal whereas the Muhammadan example is complete rahmah to the aalimeen. And in his post worldly manifestation according to the new testament jesus the lamb is flinging the sinners into hell. According to our understanding Muhammad(saw) makes shafa'ah and frees millions from that torment.

Also has he not heard of al afw ma'al QudrahThis is the highest manifestation of rahmah. When youhave power but forgive, like the conquest of Makkah.

Sayyidina Isa's (alalyhis Salam)life was all makki(so far) And sayyidina Muhammad(saw)'s life was makki and madaniAYK139910-07-2010, 11:10 AMsalaam,This Madrasatul Islaah in Azamgarh (UP) is not deobandi . Actually its based on Ml Hameeduddin Farahi' s thoughts and I dont think he was Deobandi. This madarsa has been a bastion of Maududist and ghair muqallid ideologies as far as I know from my JIH days.wassalaam,

At first glance, I noticed their website indicating that the founder was Ml. Muhammad Shafi, but I'm beginning to think this is NOT Mufti Muhammad Shafi Uthmani. So perhaps you're right brother. Plus, their website had this written as one of their "objectives":"This Madrasah would be the meeting ground of all the various groups and sects of Ahl-i Sunnah wal Jama'h. Hanafis and Ahl-i Hadith would live here together and both Nadvis and Deobandis would teach here together." I'm not aware of how many Deobandis and Nadwis teach there.AYK139910-07-2010, 11:35 AMWhat he seems to be saying is wrong...

Mawlana tahanwi (rahmatullahi alayh) has a brilliant discussion on this. He talks about some Sufis who were Musawi and some who were Isawi .

But then he told us the Musawi and Isawi models were 2 ways from the brilliant depth of the Muhammadan(saw) way....

Based on my experience with reading various articles of his in Urdu in his al-Risala journal, the reason for his bringing in the model of Sayyiduna Isa (alayhi al-salaam) has nothing to do with tasawwuf or whatever Shaykh Ashraf Ali al-Thanvi was discussing in terms of sufis. Mr. Wahiduddin Khan seems to be using this as a means of further supporting his known stance against jihad. Because at the end of the day, he knows that the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) waged jihad on the battlefield himself numerous times and he knows he'd be a fool to deny this publicly because of it being an undeniable fact. Thus, the only recourse he has is to try and adopt the model of Sayyiduna Isa (alayhi al-salaam) and using that ayah as so called "proof" for his viewpoint. So in essence, by him grasping on to the model of Sayyiduna Isa, he

has effectively gotten rid of any *past* precedence set forth for jihad fi sabilillaah on the battlefield by the Prophet (Sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam), at least in his mind. BUT...he has another problem to deal with...the *Future* jihad fi sabilillaah spoken about by the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) that will be waged by Sayyiduna Isa (alayhi al-salam) and al-Mahdi (alayhi al-salaam) towards the end of times as foretold in numerous hadiths that reach the rank of tawaatur as per our Sunni aqaa'id. So how does he now deal with this *future* foretelling of jihad fi sabilillah on the battlefield? He takes that belief of returning to the model of Sayyiduna Isa (alayhi al-salam) one step further by stating that those hadiths foretelling the return of Sayyiduna Isa (alayhi al-salam) and his fighting the Dajjal is NOT referring to his physical return, but merely advocating the return of Muslims to the "model" of Sayyiduna Isa (alayhi al-salam). So by saying this, he has now effectively (in his mind) gotten rid of any *future* foretelling of jihad fi sabilillah on the battlefielf. What remains now is his problem with the narrations discussing the coming of al-Mahdi (alayhi al-salam) and his fighting the Kuffar. And so how does he get rid of this? He takes it one more step further by stating that al-Mahdi is one and the same as Sayyiduna Isa (alayhima al-salam) by relying on to that one obscure and weak hadith in the Sunan of ibn Maajah and ignoring all the others that differentiate between the two. So now, he feels content that he has gotten rid of any past and future precedences and foretellings of jihad fi sabilillah in the shariah, and this is what he is known for in India, as being an extreme pacifist who will do anything, even if it means to demean the uswah of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) to "prove" his viewpoint on jihad. If you really study his recent articles, you will see that all of it comes down to this basic point of his, i.e. jihad. He thinks that anyone who disagrees with this then he does not know what true jihad is and what Islam stands for. He seems to forget that our ulama have explained the fiqh of jihad in great details proving that our religion is the most peaceful religion, that we're the ones who allowed non-Muslims to practice their religion under our guard, and that we're the ones who gave them rights within our judicial systems, and our books of fiqh make it clear that we do NOT use jihad to cause chaos, mayhem, anarchy, and dissensions in the lands even if some absolutely idiotic Muslims today think that this is justified. I mean, how low can one can stoop to to attack the uswah of our Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) in proving their own personal viewpoints? How can a man who proclaims to be a Muslim even wake up in the morning and live a life after having written such trash? May Allah ta'ala Protect us from uttering or believing such baatil, aameen.AYK139910-07-2010, 06:06 PMSee more nonsense here: http://www.eeqaz.com/main/articles/09/20090710a.htm

And here: http://www.eeqaz.com/main/articles/09/20090707.htm

Here's his unsound opinion on the niqaab and you can tell by the article he even somewhat downplays the obligation of hijaab:http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/burqa-not-a-part-of-islam-say-scholars_100235383.html

His questionable interactions with Hindus is well-known amongst Muslims in India:http://www.flickr.com/photos/sanjayausta/4187862402/in/photostream/AYK1399

28-05-2011, 05:29 PMIn his article, "Maseehi Model", Wahiduddin Khan states that it is unislamic to refer to the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) as a 'kaamil model':“aisi haalat main kaamil model kaa lafz aik aysaa lafz hai jo ghayr fitri bhi hai aur ghayr àmli bhi aur nateejatan ghayr islaami bhi".

He further states in the same article that the Prophet Muhammad's (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) example in some regards are inapplicable for Muslims today and he seems to be implying that the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) knew that this would happen which is why he said that Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) will return, i.e. so that Muslims living in that time should abandon the Prophetic example for the example of Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam):“magar bad key zamaaney main payghmabar islaaam key hawaley sey ye model musalmaanon key liye qaabil-e-daryaaft nahi rahey gaa. Ghaaliban isi liye aap ney is ki waapasi ko maseeh ki waapasi se ta`beer kiyaa.”

He conflates the two personalities of al-Mahdi and Prophet Ìsa (àlayhimaa al-salaam) as one and the same in his article "Qayamat ka Alarm":"...mahdi aur maseeh donon aik hi shakhsiyat key alaamati taur par do alag alag naam hain. Aakhiri dawr main zaahir honey waali aik hi shakhsiyat hai, jis ko kisi riwaayat main rajul-e-mu’min kahaa giyaa hai aur kisi riwaayat main mahdi, aur kisi riwaayat main maseeh".

In this same article he also states that al-Dajjal's killing will not be that of a physical killing but of a symbolic meaning:"hadees main qatl-e-dajjal kaa zikr hai. Is sey muraad dajjaal kaa jismaani qatl nahi hai. Balke dajjaal key fitney ko be-zareeà dalaa’il qatl karnaa hai.”

He also states in the same article that it is a common misconception amongst the masses that Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) will physically descend to earth and then kill al-Dajjal. He further states that both of these are unsubstantiated by the Qur'an and Hadith!:“is bahas se taàlluq rakhney waalaa aik mas’alah woh hai jis ko maseeh ki aamid saani kaa mas’alah kahaa jaataa hai. àam tawr par ye samjhaa jaataa hai ke hazrat maseeh aasmaani main zindah hain aur aakhiri zamaaney main woh jismaani tawr par aasmaan se utar kar zameen par aa’ien gey aur dajjaal ko qatl karein gey. ye tasawwur agarche logon main kaafi pahlaa huwaa hai. Magar woh apni mawjoodah soorat main na qur’aan se saabit hotaa hai aur na aahaadees se”.

Furthermore, he states in the same article that there is no riwaayaat concerning the physical descent of Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam)!:“laykin qaabil-e-ghawr baat ye hai ke un main sey kisi bhi riwaayat main ye alfaaz mawjood nahi ke maseeh jismaani tawr par aasmaani se utar kar zameen par aa’eyn gey. Aasmaan se utarney ka nazriya riwaayaton main mukammal tawr par ghayr mawjood hai."

In his "Qurb-e-Qayamat ka Mas'alah" article in the July 2008 edition of al-Risala journal, he accuses storytellers for interpolating into hadiths that Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) will be physically returning to Earth again and that no such additions were there before in the hadiths and that this is how this belief of his physical descent spread amongst the masses:

“Haqeeqat ye hai ke qurb-e-qiyaamat ki jo àlaamatein hadeeth ki kitaabon main aayii hain, woh bajaa’i khud durust hain. Laykin ba`d key zamaaney main qussaas ney us main par àjooba baton ke idaafey kar dey. Ye idaafay chun key àrabi zabaan main they, is liyey log un ko asal riwaayat kaa hissa samajhney lagey. Us zamaaney main kitaabat kaa riwaaj bahot kam thaa. Ziyaadah tar baathein zabaaniy Tawr par dahraa’iy jaati thein, is liyey yey idaafey nihaayat aasaaniy key saat riwaayaat ka juz ban gayey.”

All in all, it can be clearly seen from the above that this man is wholly ignorant in the sciences of àqaa'id and hadith.

We have made several attempts in contacting both him and his students to further explain themselves for the past 3 years yet none of them have ever furnished a response replying to the points made above.AYK139928-05-2011, 05:55 PMIstiftaa’:

as-salamu àlaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu,Molvi Wahiduddin Khan sahib, of India, has written various articles wherein he states the following points of contention:1.) That the blessed “uswah” (example) of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) is NOT “kaamil” (perfect/complete). 2.) Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) is the “final model” only with regards to the deen (religion) but NOT with regards to minhaaj.3.) The minhaaj (model) of Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) is more applicable for Muslims to follow today than the “uswah” of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama). 4.) Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) will NOT be physically returning back to earth again.5.) Prophet Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) is the same personality as al-Mahdi (àlayhi al-salaam), i.e. they are not two different individuals.6.) Al-Dajjaal will not be a physical being but only an ideology.We would like to seek the fatwa of Darul Uloom al-Madania’s Iftaa’ Committee with regards to if the aforementioned six beliefs are within Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamaàh or not? If not, are they also outside of Islam? We have attached the relevant quotes as well as the original articles as an addendum for your perusal. September 13, 2010

[Here are the references that were sent to Dar al-Iftaa’:- The June of 2007 issue of the "al-Risala" magazine: Please refer to his "maseeh model ki aamid-i-saani" article in this issue. Also, please refer to the "payghambar-i-inqilaab" and "deen aur minhaaj" articles in the October of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah"- August of 2007 issue of the "al-Risalah"- “Maseehi Model” article- “Qayamat ka Alaram” article- “Uswa-e-Hasana” article]

Fatwa:

Assalamualaikum,

The above mentioned beliefs are contrary to Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama`ah, yet we cannot say that those who believe in the above are not Muslim.

Wassalam [Mufti] Husain AhmadSeptember 17, 2010Dar al-`Uloom al-MadaniaBuffalo, NY, U.S.A.AYK139929-05-2011, 02:46 AMDeobandi scholar, Mawlana Nadeem al-Wajidi, writes against Molvi Waheeduddin Khan's deviant beliefs:

http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=3222TapeMonkey29-05-2011, 03:35 AMJust another day at refutationforum.com

By the way, who is Wahiduddin Khan?AYK139929-05-2011, 03:49 AMJust another day at refutationforum.com

By the way, who is Wahiduddin Khan?

On one hand you undermine the contents of this thread and then on the other you admit your jahaalah of what/who is even being spoken about? Amazing...Usman29-05-2011, 03:55 AMMaulana Fadhl Muhammad sahib Hafidhahullah rendered Waheeduddeen Khan a deviant about 20 years ago. Sadly, Darulisha'at , Karachi , still publishes his stuff.AYK139929-05-2011, 11:27 AMMaulana Fadhl Muhammad sahib Hafidhahullah rendered Waheeduddeen Khan a deviant about 20 years ago. Sadly, Darulisha'at , Karachi , still publishes his stuff.

As did Mawlana Yusuf Ludhianwi...who went to the extent of calling him the new age version of Mirza Qadiyaani.xs11ax29-05-2011, 01:16 PMJust another day at refutationforum.com

By the way, who is Wahiduddin Khan?

would you have a problem if mirza qadiyani was been refuted on this forum?Maripat29-05-2011, 02:55 PMJust another day at refutationforum.comBy the way, who is Wahiduddin Khan?:salam:In north India there is a state called UP, Uttar Pradesh, the Northern State. Deoband is located in its western part. It is a big state. In eastern part there is a district called Azamgarh. By and large it is economically weak district and because of that its people have been making forays out side that place. Including places all over the world. People who left that place as workers have risen to the posts of Prime Minister, for example in Surinam. The district has got full grown Madarsas of various schools of thought. Madarsa Bayt-ul-Uloom of Deobandi thought is there. There is a Barelwi Madrasah too, perhaps the biggest one in a place called Mubarakpur. Another madarsa Madarstaul Islah has been mentioned. Maulana Wahiduddin Khan is product of that. He was with Jamat-e-Islami, Hind (JIH) people but now is on his own. He has written lots of books. Their publication quality is excellent. These are available in Urdu, Hindi and English. He is a frequent flier. Brings out a weekly called Ar Risala. He is controversial because of his closeness to detractors of Islam and Muslims.

Does it help?

I think you should value the hard work put in by brother AYK1399.

Wassalamblackflagsarfaraz29-05-2011, 08:01 PMMy God what an eye opener....I was totally unaware of this.

His was one of the first books I ever bought, cant remember the name, it was quotes from the lives of the Sahaba and hadeeth. It was one of my favourite books too.... :(AYK139930-05-2011, 03:16 AMThe attached scan shows an official document released by the Government of Punjab (Pakistan) censoring and banning a book, Shatm-e-Rasool Ka Mas'alah, written by Wahiduddin Khan. Notice the explicit reasons given by the government about the contents of the book:AYK139930-05-2011, 05:36 AMMaulana Fadhl Muhammad sahib Hafidhahullah rendered Waheeduddeen Khan a deviant about 20 years ago. Sadly, Darulisha'at , Karachi , still publishes his stuff.

Brother, can you tell me a little bit more about Mawlana Fadl Muhammad?

I just read a segment by him in regards to Wahiduddin Khan wherein he states the following:"Wahiduddin Khan key muta`alliq main ne Hindustan key `ulamaa' sey poochaa to sab ki ra'iy ye

hay key ye shakhs mulhid hay, bey deen hai, Hinduon ko Musalmaanon sey achaa samajhtaa hey"Translation: "In relation to Wahiduddin Khan, I asked the scholars of India and all of their opinions were that he is a free-thinking disbeliever, without religion, and he thinks of Hindus being better than Muslims".Usman30-05-2011, 10:04 AMBrother, can you tell me a little bit more about Mawlana Fadl Muhammad?

I just read a segment by him in regards to Wahiduddin Khan wherein he states the following:"Wahiduddin Khan key muta`alliq main ne Hindustan key `ulamaa' sey poochaa to sab ki ra'iy ye hay key ye shakhs mulhid hay, bey deen hai, Hinduon ko Musalmaanon sey achaa samajhtaa hey"Translation: "In relation to Wahiduddin Khan, I asked the scholars of India and all of their opinions were that he is a free-thinking disbeliever, without religion, and he thinks of Hindus being better than Muslims".

Due to legal reasons , I couldn't bring the book here. However, Maulana Fadhl Muhammad sahib refuted Waheeduddin Khan as he denied Offensive Jihad against the Kuffar, then a detailed refutation regarding the matter in his book "Da'wat-i-Jihad". I think a few other ulama have also refuted W.K's views in a separate book, I wasn't interested in the subject so I didn't buy it, but it's available I think in Pakistan and india.

As for Maulana himself, he's the Sheikhul Hadeeth of Binori Town, Karachi. Need I say more?Usman30-05-2011, 10:06 AMThe attached scan shows an official document released by the Government of Punjab (Pakistan) censoring and banning a book, Shatm-e-Rasool Ka Mas'alah, written by Wahiduddin Khan. Notice the explicit reasons given by the government about the contents of the book:

the attached image is unreadable, can you plz upload it in zip? |jazakAllahAYK139930-05-2011, 03:52 PMthe attached image is unreadable, can you plz upload it in zip? |jazakAllah

Okay, I'm attaching it in zip, insha'Allah it'll work...Talhah03-06-2011, 06:29 AM:salam:In north India there is a state called UP, Uttar Pradesh, the Northern State. Deoband is located in its western part. It is a big state. In eastern part there is a district called Azamgarh. By and large it is economically weak district and because of that its people have been making forays out side that place. Including places all over the world. People who left that place as workers have risen to the posts of Prime Minister, for example in Surinam. The district has got full grown Madarsas of various schools of thought. Madarsa Bayt-ul-Uloom of Deobandi thought is there. There is a Barelwi Madrasah too, perhaps the biggest one in a place called Mubarakpur. Another madarsa

Madarstaul Islah has been mentioned. Maulana Wahiduddin Khan is product of that. He was with Jamat-e-Islami, Hind (JIH) people but now is on his own. He has written lots of books. Their publication quality is excellent. These are available in Urdu, Hindi and English. He is a frequent flier. Brings out a weekly called Ar Risala. He is controversial because of his closeness to detractors of Islam and Muslims.

Does it help?

I think you should value the hard work put in by brother AYK1399.

Wassalam

Is it the same madrissah where Hazrat Maulana Abdul Ghani Phoolpuri used to teach?Maripat03-06-2011, 06:45 AMIs it the same madrissah where Hazrat Maulana Abdul Ghani Phoolpuri used to teach?

:salam:Hazrat Phoolpuri (RA) used to teach in Madarsatul Islah. After some time he wrote to Hazrat Thanwi (RA) that the environment there is such that he is not feeling at home and would like to leave that madarsa. Hazrat Thanwi (RA) asked Hazrat Phoolpuri (RA) to make efforts to get the things moving in the right direction. After some time he wrote back to Hazrat Thanwi(RA) that he has tried but it is not having much impact. This time he got the permission to leave. That is when he started Bayt-ul-Uloom.

I hope it helps.WassalamTalhah03-06-2011, 06:59 AM:salam:Hazrat Phoolpuri (RA) used to teach in Madarsatul Islah. After some time he wrote to Hazrat Thanwi (RA) that the environment there is such that he is not feeling at home and would like to leave that madarsa. Hazrat Thanwi (RA) asked Hazrat Phoolpuri (RA) to make efforts to get the things moving in the right direction. After some time he wrote back to Hazrat Thanwi(RA) that he has tried but it is not having much impact. This time he got the permission to leave. That is when he started Bayt-ul-Uloom.

I hope it helps.Wassalam

Jazakallah janab! I have heard about Bayt ul uloom in my Hazrat Walaz lectures (who was very closely associated to Hazrat Phoolpuri).. Hazrat wala himself studied in this madrissah.. so howz the madrissah running now? And whoz running it?Hamood10-06-2011, 05:34 PM

Due to legal reasons , I couldn't bring the book here. However, Maulana Fadhl Muhammad sahib refuted Waheeduddin Khan .... As for Maulana himself, he's the Sheikhul Hadeeth of Binori Town, Karachi. Need I say more?

The Shaykh al-Hadith of the Jami'ah is Mawlana Dr. Abdur Razzaq Iskandar (db). Mawlana Fadl Muhammad teaches Abu Dawud and Mishkat to the best of my knowledge.Maripat11-06-2011, 01:51 AMJazakallah janab! I have heard about Bayt ul uloom in my Hazrat Walaz lectures (who was very closely associated to Hazrat Phoolpuri).. Hazrat wala himself studied in this madrissah.. so howz the madrissah running now? And whoz running it?:salam:Difficult to say much since I have not been there. I hear it is Hazrat Phoolpuri (RA)'s son who is running it now. Since I have been brought up on Hazrat Hakim Akhtar Sb (DB)'s books so I understand how you feel.Wassalam

Edit : Hazrat Phoolpuri (RA)'s grandson not son.Abu_Uzair11-06-2011, 06:18 AMThe Shaykh al-Hadith of the Jami'ah is Mawlana Dr. Abdur Razzaq Sikandar (db). Mawlana Fadl Muhammad teaches Abu Dawud and Mishkat to the best of my knowledge.

assa;lamu alaikumdr.a.razzaq sb r.a passed away last year,i dont know who is shaikhul hadis in binnori town now?plz see their website for moreHamood11-06-2011, 10:25 AMassa;lamu alaikumdr.a.razzaq sb r.a passed away last year,i dont know who is shaikhul hadis in binnori town now?plz see their website for more

Wa alaykum assalam,

He is alive and well. You must be confusing him with someone else.Khadimul Islam11-06-2011, 11:09 AMassa;lamu alaikumdr.a.razzaq sb r.a passed away last year,i dont know who is shaikhul hadis in binnori town now?plz see their website for more

:ws:

There were two scholars with the name of Abdur Razzaq at Jamia, I think you're talking about Molana Abdur Razzaq, the teacher of "Tarikhul Islam" (written by Molana Muhammad

Mian :rahim:)

Chancellor and Shaykhul Hadith of Jamia Molana Dr. Abdur Razzaq Iskander Hafizahullah is alive. :alhamd:

let me tell you their website : banuri (dot) edu (dot) pk/en/The-Academi-Council

:salam:AYK139915-06-2011, 02:42 PMSome sisters (may Allah taàla reward them) asked Mufti Abdul Azeem Madani of India about some of the beliefs of Vahiduddin Khan on 06/14/2011 . Please dial1-312-429-0548 and enter pin# 061411 204071 to listen to his answer . The audio is @10 minutes long and there is a 30 second silence ( due to technical difficulties ) before the recording starts. I do not know much about this Mufti but his answer is on point and and he even talks about how he met Wahiduddeen Khan at the latter's home wherein Waheeduddin Khan explicitly criticized Sayyiduna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (raDiyAllaahu ànhu).AYK139919-06-2011, 03:22 PMSome good news to share:A few brothers attended a live talk at a masjid in the U.S.A. by Waheeduddeen Khan and they exposed his deception and deviant beliefs in front of the whole gathering. The brothers challenged him to prove his controversial viewpoints on the blessed Uswah of the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) as well as his viewpoints regarding the physical decent of Sayyiduna Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) and the coming of al-Mahdi (àlayhi al-salaam), and the physical emergence of al-Dajjaal. Vaheeduddin Khan bluntly refused to answer the question regarding the descent of Sayyiduna Ìsa (àlayhi al-salaam) even after a brother exposed his deception by selectively and partially quoting a hadith to suit his beliefs. Afterwards, when asked if he believes the blessed "uswah" to be perfect/complete, he dodged the question by simply saying that his uswah is "authentic". The attendees of the masjid quickly caught on to this man's deviant beliefs and tactful diversions which led to even the general commoners protesting against him. One brother from the crowd said that Vaheeduddeen Khan said the word "Prophet" 9 times but did not send peace and blessings upon the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) even once during his entire talk. Wahiduddin Khan and his followers in the crowd threatened the brothers that they will call the police and said that if they don't ask appropriate questions then they can leave the masjid. When the brothers resisted and continued to ask about his deviant beliefs in a polite and respectful manner the imam of the masjid intervened and canceled the event on the spot. The brothers said that they have been challenging Waheeduddin Khan and his followers to a written or oral debate for the past 3 years on these topics but they did not get even one response in return. In short, Wahiduddin Khan and his ardent followers' ignorance, deviant beliefs, and deception was exposed in front of everyone. Apparently this locality in America has been struggling to combat against his followers and so this was a big win for Ahl al-Sunnah, wa lillaahi al-Hamd.

Lastly, other masjids in America followed suit and canceled their respective lectures with Wahiduddin Khan upon being informed of his unsubstantiated deviant beliefs.

We are aware of his strong influence on the internet and elsewhere so we will be updating this thread in a timely manner to expose this man's beliefs insha'Allah.AYK139923-06-2011, 08:02 PMhttp://www.memri.org/report/en/print5357.htm

<A prominent Islamic scholar of the Darul Uloom Deoband, a renowned Islamic seminary in India, has asked Muslims to keep away from from the speeches and writings of Maulana Waheeduddin Khan, according to an Urdu-language daily. Maulana Shah Alam of the Darul Uloom Deoband criticized Maulana Waheeduddin Khan for having a ‘‘soft corner [spot]’’ for Qadianiat, i.e. the beliefs of Ahmadi Muslims, according to a report in the Urdu-language daily Roznama Sahafat.Maulana Shah Alam leads a campaign against Ahmadi Muslims and in this role is an official of Tahaffuz-e-Khatm-e-Nabuwat, a group that campaigns to enforce the belief that Islam’s Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet of god.Ahmadi Muslims, often dismissed as Qadianis and Mirzais, are criticized for not believing that prophethood ended with Muhammad.Maulana Shah Alam brought up a 1978 article by Maulana Waheeduddin Khan in which he is supposed to have defended Ahmadi Muslims. ‘‘In 1978, Khan, in his Al-Risala magazine, urged Islamic clerics not to denounce Qadianis,’’ he added.Maulana Waheeduddin Khan is an Islamic reformer and an author of more than 100 books on various issues in Islam. He publishes Al-Risala magazine from his base in New Delhi.Source: Roznama Sahafat, India, June 21, 2010>AYK139929-07-2011, 03:43 AMIn his most recent article, entitled "Spirituality vs. Materialism" dated July 11th 2011, Wahiduddin Khan relays an incident that took place in America wherein a man criticized him for not sending salawaat/salaam whenever he mentioned the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) in his lecture. Wahiduddin addresses the man's issue in this article. He writes that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (radiyaAllaahu ànhu) never sent salawat/salam upon the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama) when he said his famous words to Ùmar bin al-Khattab (radiyaAllaahu ànhu) "man kaana ya`budu Muhammadan..." (Whoever worshipped Muhammad...). However, the hadith in "Sahih al-Bukhari" clearly states that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (radiyaAllaahu ànhu) did in fact say the salawaat/salaam after uttering the name of the Prophet (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallama). As can be clearly seen here:http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?bk_no=0&ID=2107&idfrom=3460&idto=3575&bookid=0&startno=18

Furthermore, Wahiduddin Khan, states that the reason why Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (radiyaAllaahu ànhu) did not (allegedly; according to him) send salawat/salam was because "saying so doesn't affect the decision of one's paradise or hell"!!AYK139914-09-2011, 07:20 PMIn his March/1984 article in the al-Risala journal, he writes that the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallam) is NOT "afDal" (Superior) to any other Prophet and that the

religion he brought is not any more "kaamil" (perfect/complete) than any other religion brought by another Prophet. Please see the following for a partial English translation of his words here:http://cpsglobal.org/sites/default/files/March%201984.pdfpluto14-09-2011, 08:32 PM:salam:wrwb, brother AYK1399, :jazak: for the great effort put in.

1. bro, i've heard that WK was once pro-tabligh, then joined the jamat e islami, also became a ghayr muqallid, then joined jamat ul muslimeen, is it true?2. do you know that very recently he has claimed to be hazrath mahdi a.s through his journal, though when i did my own research i found this:

Does Maulana Wahiduddin Khan Claim to be the Promised Mehdi and Messiah?

[Translated from Urdu by S. Arshad, NewAgeIslam.com]

Name of book: Maulana Wahiduddin Khan aur Dawaa-e-Masihiat wa Mehdiviat (Urdu)

Follow up:

(Maulana Wahiduddin Khan and his claim to Messiahism and Mehdism)

Author: Ghulam Nabi Kashaafi

Publisher: Noamani Academy, Lucknow

Reviewer: Zeeshan Ahmad Misbahi

Islam is synonymous with moderateness. That’s why it is called the religion of moderateness or the natural religion. Deviation from this moderateness leads to waywardness, whether it is through exaggeration or otherwise. That is the reason we pray for the straight path (siratul mustaqeem) and seek God’s shelter from the path of the maghzubeen (those who invited the wrath of God) and za’lleen (those who lost the right path).

The intellectual and ideological movement of Maulana Maududi, the Jamaat-e-Islami was based on the agenda of Islamic system/the rule of Allah in the 20th century. To provide ideological fodder to it, Maulana Maududi and his colleagues heaped relevant literature. The literature was based on the principle that whatever is written should be based on logic and research and with an eye on impartiality and not in emulation. This principle was commendable if it adhered to moderateness. But people associated with the Jamaat gradually developed another zeal and that was the zeal to take to task all the revered Islamic personalities right from the Imams of Islam to the Sahaba (the holy companions of the Prophet (PBUH).

Instead of trying to understand Islam through the sahaba, tabeyeen and tab-e-tabeyeen, their examination and criticism was started in their typical ideology. This point of view gave birth to a number of deviations. One of the major deviations was that all the energy and intellectual strength was used on the formation of the rule of Allah and the issues of the use of force were being discussed and, therefore, other tenets of Islam like the devotional aspect (the spiritual relationship between God and man) was accorded a secondary status.

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan who had been associated actively with the Jamaat-e-Islami for the initial fifteen years, realised this deviation and finally had a discussion with the powers that be in the Jamaat , and when he did not get satisfactory answers from them, he presented his intellectual and ideological differences in his book titled ‘Tabeer ki Ghalti’(The interpretation gone wrong). After that it seemed as if unconsciously Maulana’s pen went on to chase the Jamaat, promote moderateness and campaign for a positive way of thinking. It would have been good if it remained confined to that. With a fertile brain and extraordinary power of analysis that he had, Maulana could have rendered great service of intellectual reconstruction of the Islamic nation. But unfortunately, it was not so. Ranting on the positive outlook, a negative mentality overtook Maulana subconsciously. Now he does not find a single considerable personality, except himself of course, in the entire Muslim world. Despite his rantings about the postive outlook, finding fault with the history and personalities of Islam and the Muslims of the past and present became a favrourite pastime of the Maulana. As a result, people who had been impressed and influenced by Maulana’s message of positive thinking gradually turned away from him. He began to be identified as an advocate of non-Muslims against Muslims rather than a reformer of the ummah. In Al Risala in 2007, he fired another salvo by declaring the Christian model more applicable than the Mohammedan model to the modern world. It was also the final violent form of ideological differences with the Jamaat to an extent because Jamaat Islami’s literature laid great stress on jihad. When Mr Khan was not satisfied with his own modern explanation of jihad, he finally declared the Mohammedan way of proselytisation that includes among other things the issue of jihad, faulty and not worthy to be followed.

This journey of Maulana’s thought reached its final stage in 2010.The May 2010 issue of Maulana’s Al Risala came as Qayamat ka alarm (The alarm of Day of Judgment) in which discussing the signs of Qayamat (Day of Judgment), he suggestively and subtly likened himself to Messiah and Mehdi the promised. Not content with that he went on to say in the June issue that ‘signs tell us that the Day of Judgment is imminent and so it would be right to infer that the Dajjal and the Messiah and Mehdi have appeared.’ (Al Risala June 2010; p5)

‘The Messiah or Mehdi who has appeared have the following personality traits:

‘In this situation the first task of Messiah or Mehdi would be to discover a non-military ideology of Islam.’(Al Risala, Aug 2010)

‘The confrontation with Dajjal will be in the sense that Messiah will expose him by intellectually analysing his dajal (mischief). (Al Risala 2010; p53)

‘Contrary to his antecedents, Mehdi will exceptionally be a rightly guided man ……He will neither claim himself to be the Mehdi nor a voice from the heavens will announce that he is

Mehdi and will ask people to believe in him and follow him.’(Al Risala May 2010; p 36)

‘About the Mehdi, the hadith says that ‘his name would be similar to mine (PBUH).’ Here name denotes character.’ (P 38)

‘Mehdi’s task would not be akin to a political revolution but to a revolution on the intellectual level among the individuals. (p 39)

‘From the study of hadiths, it becomes evident that Dajjal or Dajjalism is in fact a fitna (mischief) of the scientific age. It will be for the first time in the scientific age that that some people would create the impression that Truth cannot survive in the face of the progress in learning and knowledge. Then with the blessing of God a man will emerge who will destroy this Dajjalism with scientific arguments’.(P 18)

‘The promised Messiah and Mehdi are symbolically different names of the same personality.’ (P 41)

Anybody who joins all the pieces of the paper will see the picture of Maulana Wahiduddin Khan emerge. Maulana has nowhere mentioned that he is the promised Mehdi and the Messiah but in the same vein he has very clearly written that Mehdi or Messiah will not claim himself to be so. After that he has said everything suggestively.

-----------------more on the website: http://urdutahzeeb.net/articles/blog1.php?p=11824&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1Source:NewAge Islam

3. Later on I also found this:

http://urdutahzeeb.net/articles/blog1.php?p=11871&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Al-Risala issue of May 2011

The article about me is based on misunderstanding. I had never claimed of Mehdiism. I have, as per Hadith, strived to explain the advent of Mehdi (A.S.)

Follow up:

. Such people perhaps do not understand the difference between claim and explanation, although both are totally different things. No doubt scholars have a right to give their academic views about the advent of Mehdi (A.S.), but no one has a right to claim Mehdiism. Only an irresponsible person can claim be the Mehdi (A.S.). A responsible and educated person can never claim anything like this. Mehdi (A.S.) is a divine person with cosmic powers. In such circumstances any claim being Mehdi (A.S.) will be equivalent to enter in Allah’s domain.

Source:NewAge Islam

May Allah SWT save us all from getting gumraah. Summa Aameen.AYK139915-09-2011, 02:19 AMwa iyyaakum bro Pluto.

In answer to your "#1" question, I really don't know. He seems to have gone through many stages throughout the past 40 years or so and so it's often the case that people such as him will have an eclectic `aqeedah.

Thanks for the information and I've read both of those issues of al-Risala and I too felt that he was trying to make a case for himself but abruptly stopped just short of claiming to be the Mahdi. Insha'Allah we will be updating this thread periodically with more of his mistakes in matters of creed, so stay tuned!Maripat15-09-2011, 05:29 AM:salam:Since his visibility is not very high in recent years can we ignore him now?Please take it as a query.I saw an open letter to him in the quarterly Tarjuman-e-Deoband but at the end I realized that it was a query related to one of his old writings. I have not read all of his books or even the majority of them (why so many people write so many books?-sorry) but I do not find them irritating and my difference with his writing is usually very minor. May be I have missed something but my feeling is that his mixing with communal forces was the only problem (of course very significant one)with him (apart from the complains from extended family -a tricky thing in itself.) I suppose his social activities have stopped bearing fruits. Any comments?Wassalampluto15-09-2011, 10:39 AM:ws:wrwb brothers.

We can't ignore, his fitnah should be known to one & all, so that they don't fall prey to him and his twisted beliefs, my dad has actually met him once 'coz he thought he was this great well known maulana or something, tell me, if my dad had known all this, would he have met him?? of course not.Colonel_Hardstone15-09-2011, 10:41 AM:salam:Since his visibility is not very high in recent years can we ignore him now?Please take it as a query.I saw an open letter to him in the quarterly Tarjuman-e-Deoband but at the end I realized that it was a query related to one of his old writings. I have not read all of his books or even the majority of them (why so many people write so many books?-sorry) but I do not find them irritating and my difference with his writing is usually very minor. May be I have missed something but my feeling is that his mixing with communal forces was the only problem (of course very significant one)with him (apart from the complains from extended family -a tricky

thing in itself.) I suppose his social activities have stopped bearing fruits. Any comments?Wassalam

:ws:

His works are very popular amongst English speaking Muslims in the West and many of the Dawah pamphlets and small booklets are by him.

:jazak:pluto15-09-2011, 10:43 AM:ws:wrwb brothers.

We can't ignore, his fitnah should be known to one & all, so that they don't fall prey to him and his twisted beliefs, my dad has actually met him once 'coz he thought he was this great well known maulana or something, tell me, if my dad had known all this, would he have met him?? of course not.

also, as far as I know, the 'Times of India' newspaper daily regularly quotes him, so there. That paper is spreading fitnah anyways and it hates Darul Uloom Deoband.AYK139916-09-2011, 02:29 PM:salam:Since his visibility is not very high in recent years can we ignore him now?Please take it as a query.I saw an open letter to him in the quarterly Tarjuman-e-Deoband but at the end I realized that it was a query related to one of his old writings. I have not read all of his books or even the majority of them (why so many people write so many books?-sorry) but I do not find them irritating and my difference with his writing is usually very minor. May be I have missed something but my feeling is that his mixing with communal forces was the only problem (of course very significant one)with him (apart from the complains from extended family -a tricky thing in itself.) I suppose his social activities have stopped bearing fruits. Any comments?Wassalam

Brother, I echo the same sentiments expressed by brothers Colonel and Pluto above. There is a need to expose this man due to his circle of influence being rather large. By the way, can you make the article from the Tarjuman-e-Deoband available here?Julaybib16-09-2011, 02:51 PM:salam:wrwb, brother AYK1399, :jazak: for the great effort put in.

1. bro, i've heard that WK was once pro-tabligh, then joined the jamat e islami, also became a ghayr muqallid, then joined jamat ul muslimeen, is it true?

May Allah SWT save us all from getting gumraah. Summa Aameen.

Salaam's.

Here is his Biography makes for an interesting read.

Analysis of the writings of Maulana Wahiduddin Khan - iBy Yoginder Sikand

This article looks at the writings of the Indian ‘alim, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, who has developed his own, in some respects, unique, understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world. It examines how he, as a member of the Indian Muslim minority, has sought to present Islam as well as making it possible for Muslims

As Khan delved deeper into Maududi’s writings, he came to believe that the very basis of Maududi’s understanding of Islam was faulty and mistaken, a reaction to western imperialism rather than emerging from an authentic understanding of Islam. Faced with the challenge of European colonial rule over most of the Muslim world, Maududi, Khan concluded, had developed a quintessentially political understanding of Islam, seeing the Islamic mission as based on political, rather than simply ideological struggle, not ruling out resort to violent means to attain its goals.

Coming to terms with the challenges of modernity has been a major concern of many Muslim scholars and Islamic activists. How can Islam as a universal ideology be expressed in a global order characterised by the nation-state system? What position should the Islamic law (shari’ah) enjoy in a world system characterised, for the most part, by the separation of religion and politics and the relegation of religion to the private realm? Is an Islamic state necessarily an integral part of Islam? How should revelation be understood in the light of reason and science? How should Muslims relate to people of other faiths and ideologies? How can Muslim minorities remain faithful to their commitment to their faith while at the same time lead lives as loyal citizens of their countries where they live? These and related questions are some of the issues that modern Muslim scholars have sought, in their own ways, to grapple with.

This article looks at the writings of the Indian ‘alim, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, who has developed his own, in some respects, unique, understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world. It examines how he, as a member of the Indian Muslim minority, has sought to present Islam in terms that are both intelligent to the modern mind, as well as making it possible for Muslims in India to attempt to create a balance between what have often seen to be their conflicting loyalties to the state, on the one hand, and to their religion, on the other. Although the Muslims of India are Khan’s primary focus, and the development of his own thought must be located in the specific Indian context, Khan seeks to address the Muslim ummah as a whole, and, as the growing interest in his writings in other countries suggests, in this he has registered considerable success.

The first part of this article looks at Khan’s early life and formative influences, arguing that the development of his thought must be seen primarily as a response to the predicament that the Muslims of India found themselves in in post-1947 India, as a beleaguered, marginalised minority, victims of widespread poverty, pervasive discrimination and organised violence

directed against them.

Khan’s own understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world are shown as largely a response to what he saw as the failure or inability of other Islamic groups active in India at the time to provide a proper, and in his view, authentic Islamic leadership to the Muslim community. The second part of the article examines the basic contours of Khan’s Islamic vision, focussing on how Khan attempts to develop a creative understanding of Islam that he sees as fully relevant for our times. In particular, this section looks at how he approaches the questions of peace, inter-faith dialogue and da’wah, or Islamic mission, as well as his critique of the politics of Islamism.

Early YearsWahiduddin Khan was born in a family of Pathan landlords in 1925 at Badharia, a village near the town of Azamgarh, in the eastern United Provinces, now the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. His parents died when he was still a child, and he was brought up by his father’s brother, Sufi Hamid Majid Khan. Although his two brothers were sent to western-style schools for their education, the young Wahiduddin was enrolled at a traditional Islamic seminary, the Madrasat-ul Islam, in Sarai Mir, near Azamgarh, in order to train as an ‘alim. Here he spent six years, completing the‘alim course, graduating in 1944.

After his graduation, Khan returned to his village, instead of taking up employment in a mosque or madrasa, as did most of his class-mates. Back with his family, he seems to have found himself a misfit, sensing a great chasm between himself and his brothers and other relatives, who had received a modern, western, education. A period of great introspection and disillusionment with the traditional understanding of Islam that he had imbibed at the madrasa followed, and Khan even turned to agnosticism for a while, finding that the madrasa education that he had received failed to provide answers to the issues besetting the modern world.

This phase continued till 1948, when, reading the primary Islamic sources in their Arabic original, instead of relying on translations and commentaries, he ‘re-discovered’ his faith in Islam. It was, in a sense, a ‘born-again’ experience for him, affirming a faith that was consciously chosen, rather than one inherited as part of one’s cultural tradition. Clearing away centuries of commentary and interpretation, and approaching the Qur’an and the Hadith directly, he came to believe, held the key to an understanding of Islam that could prove its relevance in the modern world. Khan now set about learning English on his own, reading widely the works of Western writers and philosophers. In particular, Khan claims to have been greatly influenced by Bertrand Russell. His exposure to western literature led him on to realise the pressing need to present Islam in a manner that would appeal to the modern, western-educated mind.1

This period of ‘rediscovery’ of Islam from its original sources coincided for Khan with a quest for a socially engaged spirituality. Coming under the influence of the writings of Abul ‘Ala Maududi, founder of the Islamist Jama’at-i-Islami, Khan joined the Jama’at-i-Islami Hind, the Indian wing of the Jama’at, in 1949, attracted by Maududi’s understanding of Islam as a comprehensive world-view and a call for radical social revolution. His commitment to the Jama’at, his powers of organising and oratory, and, above all, his skilful pen, helped him move rapidly up the Jama’at’s hierarchy, being appointed, in a few years after he joined the organisation, as a member of its central organising committee (markaz-i-majlis-i-shura), and

serving as one of the senior administrators of the Jama’at’s publishing house in Rampur.

Khan wrote regularly for the Jama’at’s Urdu journal, Zindagi (‘Life’), and, in 1955, published his first book, Naye Ahd Ke Darwaze Par (‘On the Threshold of a New Era’). This was soon followed by Mazhab Aur Jadid Challenge (‘Islam and the Modern World’), which was later translated into Arabic under the title Al-Islam Yatahdda, which became a best-seller in the Arab world, being incorporated in the syllabus of several Arab universities. As the titles of these books suggest, Khan was particularly concerned with developing an understanding of Islam that would appeal to the modern mind while at the same time remaining firmly grounded in the original sources of Islam.

Khan did not remain for long with the Jama’at though. Increasingly, it suggested to him that the Jama’at’s own agenda, based as it was on working towards establishing an Islamic state in India, was not only impractical, but, moreover, not in keeping with what Islam expected of the Muslims of India in the situation that they found themselves. As Khan delved deeper into Maududi’s writings, he came to believe that the very basis of Maududi’s understanding of Islam was faulty and mistaken, a reaction to western imperialism rather than emerging from an authentic understanding of Islam. Faced with the challenge of European colonial rule over most of the Muslim world, Maududi, Khan concluded, had developed a quintessentially political understanding of Islam, seeing the Islamic mission as based on political, rather than simply ideological struggle, not ruling out resort to violent means to attain its goals. This understanding of Islam he now began to see as a result of ‘a sense of loss’, of defeat suffered by the Muslims at the hands of the West, rather than as emanating from a deep, genuine spiritual quest. 2

Khan also gradually came to the conclusion that the Jama’at-i-Islami’s political approach was ill-suited to the needs and conditions of the Muslim minority in India. Rather than mobilising themselves to work for establishing an Islamic state, which was not only impractical in the given situation but which would further embitter the Hindu majority, what Muslims needed to do, Khan felt, was to attempt to build bridges with people of other faiths in the country. Khan began airing his differences with the Jama’at’s ideology and policies even while a senior leader of the Jama’at, but as these differences began to grow, he decided to quit the organisation after serving it for fifteen years, in 1962.

Disillusioned with what he calls the ‘political oriented religion’ of the Jama’at, Khan was now attracted to what he saw as the ‘God-oriented religion’ preached by another Islamic revivalist movement, the Tablighi Jama’at. What seems to have struck Khan most about the Tablighi Jama’at was its strict aloofness from party politics, focussing on individual reform, rather than, like the Jama’at-i-Islami, on attempting to establish an Islamic political order. For a beleaguered minority like the Indian Muslims, the Tablighi Jama’at, with its concern with the ‘Islamisation of the individual’, rather than capture of the state, seemed not only to be a more sensible and pragmatic strategy, but also one that was in keeping with the Prophetic practice (sunnah).3

Active in the Tablighi Jama’at for some years, Khan gradually became disillusioned with it, too, and by 1975 had completely disassociated from it. He saw the movement’s hostility to ijtihad, or creative application of Islamic law to meet the challenge of changing social conditions, and what he viewed as its aversion to critical, independent and creative thinking and the rational, scientific

spirit, as placing a brake on his own intellectual development, and as, moreover, a betrayal of the Islamic imperative itself.4 Although he still remained appreciative of the role of the Tablighi Jama’at in creating Islamic awareness among ordinary Muslims, he believed that a new understanding of Islam was necessary to appeal to modern educated Indians, Muslims as well as Hindus and others. Accordingly, in September 1976, he set up his own research institute, the Islamic Centre, based in New Delhi, launching an Urdu monthly, al-Risala, to propagate his own views, which he saw as presenting Islam in a modern idiom.

The journal consists almost entirely of articles written by Khan himself. In 1984, an English edition of al-Risala was started, and this was followed in 1990 with a Hindi edition. The journal today has a fairly large readership both in India and abroad, and several issues of it are also available on the Internet. Besides his journal, Khan has published, to date, over two hundred books, mainly in Urdu, some of which have been translated into European and various Indian languages, in addition to Arabic. Khan also regularly writes for various Indian newspapers on issues of contemporary importance from an Islamic perspective. He is certainly one of the few Indian ‘ulama to seriously engage with the largely non-Muslim ‘’mainstream’ Indian press.

Many years of close involvement in the Jama’at-i-Islami and the Tablighi Jama’at, a deep concern with the growing problem of Hindu-Muslim conflict in India, and the spread of Islamist movements, many of them violent, in large parts of the Muslim world, provide the general context for an examination of the development and maturation of Khan’s own distinct understanding of Islam and of its place and role in the modern world. While his advocacy of a personalisation of the faith, focussing on individual reform rather than on political mobilisation, seems to be a result of the influence of his earlier association with the Tablighi Jama’at, his call for a radical ijtihad, going directly to the original sources of Islam—the Qur’an and the Hadith—by-passing centuries of tradition and interpretation of the primary Islamic corpus, clearly distinguishes him from the Tablighis.5 While he shares with the Islamists an insistence on the urgency of ijtihad, he urges the creative interpretation of the shari’ah for very different purposes.

Khan’s primary concern being to express Islam as a perfectly suitable ideology for the modern age, he deals at great length in his writings with issues related to pluralism, inter-faith dialogue and peace, issues that he sees both the Islamists, with their radical rhetoric, and quietists, such as the Tablighi Jama’at, with their refusal to look beyond formulations of traditional fiqh, as unable, if not unwilling, to seriously consider. To Khan’s own distinct understanding of how Islam can be understood in the modern world, an understanding which claims to be both authentic and at the same time relevant in today’s context, we now turn.

Part 2

Footnotes:1 Interview with Wahiduddin Khan, New Delhi, 1 February, 2001.2 Wahiduddin Khan, “Two Types ofMovements,” www.alrisala.org/Articles/thought/twomvmnt.htm.3 Wahiduddin Khan, The Tabligh Movement, The Islamic Centre, New Delhi, 1986.4 Interview with Wahiduddin Khan, New Delhi, 2 February, 2001.

5 Wahiduddin Khan, Islam Rediscovered: Discovering Islam From Its Original Sources , Goodword Books, New Delhi, 2001, p.70. qMaripat16-09-2011, 03:02 PM:salam::jazak: brothers for the replies.@AYK1399I'll try Akhi, IA.Wassalampluto16-09-2011, 09:35 PMSalaam's.



This article looks at the writings of the Indian ‘alim, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, who has developed his own, in some respects, unique, understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world. It examines how he, as a member of the Indian Muslim minority, has sought to present Islam as well as making it possible for Muslims

As Khan delved deeper into Maududi’s writings, he came to believe that the very basis of Maududi’s understanding of Islam was faulty and mistaken, a reaction to western imperialism rather than emerging from an authentic understanding of Islam. Faced with the challenge of European colonial rule over most of the Muslim world, Maududi, Khan concluded, had developed a quintessentially political understanding of Islam, seeing the Islamic mission as based on political, rather than simply ideological struggle, not ruling out resort to violent means to attain its goals.

Coming to terms with the challenges of modernity has been a major concern of many Muslim scholars and Islamic activists. How can Islam as a universal ideology be expressed in a global order characterised by the nation-state system? What position should the Islamic law (shari’ah) enjoy in a world system characterised, for the most part, by the separation of religion and politics and the relegation of religion to the private realm? Is an Islamic state necessarily an integral part of Islam? How should revelation be understood in the light of reason and science? How should Muslims relate to people of other faiths and ideologies? How can Muslim minorities remain faithful to their commitment to their faith while at the same time lead lives as loyal citizens of their countries where they live? These and related questions are some of the issues that modern Muslim scholars have sought, in their own ways, to grapple with.

This article looks at the writings of the Indian ‘alim, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, who has developed his own, in some respects, unique, understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world. It examines how he, as a member of the Indian Muslim minority, has sought to present Islam in terms that are both intelligent to the modern mind, as well as making it possible for

Muslims in India to attempt to create a balance between what have often seen to be their conflicting loyalties to the state, on the one hand, and to their religion, on the other. Although the Muslims of India are Khan’s primary focus, and the development of his own thought must be located in the specific Indian context, Khan seeks to address the Muslim ummah as a whole, and, as the growing interest in his writings in other countries suggests, in this he has registered considerable success.

The first part of this article looks at Khan’s early life and formative influences, arguing that the development of his thought must be seen primarily as a response to the predicament that the Muslims of India found themselves in in post-1947 India, as a beleaguered, marginalised minority, victims of widespread poverty, pervasive discrimination and organised violence directed against them.

Khan’s own understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world are shown as largely a response to what he saw as the failure or inability of other Islamic groups active in India at the time to provide a proper, and in his view, authentic Islamic leadership to the Muslim community. The second part of the article examines the basic contours of Khan’s Islamic vision, focussing on how Khan attempts to develop a creative understanding of Islam that he sees as fully relevant for our times. In particular, this section looks at how he approaches the questions of peace, inter-faith dialogue and da’wah, or Islamic mission, as well as his critique of the politics of Islamism.



This phase continued till 1948, when, reading the primary Islamic sources in their Arabic original, instead of relying on translations and commentaries, he ‘re-discovered’ his faith in Islam. It was, in a sense, a ‘born-again’ experience for him, affirming a faith that was consciously chosen, rather than one inherited as part of one’s cultural tradition. Clearing away centuries of commentary and interpretation, and approaching the Qur’an and the Hadith directly, he came to believe, held the key to an understanding of Islam that could prove its relevance in the modern world. Khan now set about learning English on his own, reading widely the works of Western writers and philosophers. In particular, Khan claims to have been greatly influenced by

Bertrand Russell. His exposure to western literature led him on to realise the pressing need to present Islam in a manner that would appeal to the modern, western-educated mind.1

This period of ‘rediscovery’ of Islam from its original sources coincided for Khan with a quest for a socially engaged spirituality. Coming under the influence of the writings of Abul ‘Ala Maududi, founder of the Islamist Jama’at-i-Islami, Khan joined the Jama’at-i-Islami Hind, the Indian wing of the Jama’at, in 1949, attracted by Maududi’s understanding of Islam as a comprehensive world-view and a call for radical social revolution. His commitment to the Jama’at, his powers of organising and oratory, and, above all, his skilful pen, helped him move rapidly up the Jama’at’s hierarchy, being appointed, in a few years after he joined the organisation, as a member of its central organising committee (markaz-i-majlis-i-shura), and serving as one of the senior administrators of the Jama’at’s publishing house in Rampur.

Khan wrote regularly for the Jama’at’s Urdu journal, Zindagi (‘Life’), and, in 1955, published his first book, Naye Ahd Ke Darwaze Par (‘On the Threshold of a New Era’). This was soon followed by Mazhab Aur Jadid Challenge (‘Islam and the Modern World’), which was later translated into Arabic under the title Al-Islam Yatahdda, which became a best-seller in the Arab world, being incorporated in the syllabus of several Arab universities. As the titles of these books suggest, Khan was particularly concerned with developing an understanding of Islam that would appeal to the modern mind while at the same time remaining firmly grounded in the original sources of Islam.

Khan did not remain for long with the Jama’at though. Increasingly, it suggested to him that the Jama’at’s own agenda, based as it was on working towards establishing an Islamic state in India, was not only impractical, but, moreover, not in keeping with what Islam expected of the Muslims of India in the situation that they found themselves. As Khan delved deeper into Maududi’s writings, he came to believe that the very basis of Maududi’s understanding of Islam was faulty and mistaken, a reaction to western imperialism rather than emerging from an authentic understanding of Islam. Faced with the challenge of European colonial rule over most of the Muslim world, Maududi, Khan concluded, had developed a quintessentially political understanding of Islam, seeing the Islamic mission as based on political, rather than simply ideological struggle, not ruling out resort to violent means to attain its goals. This understanding of Islam he now began to see as a result of ‘a sense of loss’, of defeat suffered by the Muslims at the hands of the West, rather than as emanating from a deep, genuine spiritual quest. 2


Disillusioned with what he calls the ‘political oriented religion’ of the Jama’at, Khan was now attracted to what he saw as the ‘God-oriented religion’ preached by another Islamic revivalist

movement, the Tablighi Jama’at. What seems to have struck Khan most about the Tablighi Jama’at was its strict aloofness from party politics, focussing on individual reform, rather than, like the Jama’at-i-Islami, on attempting to establish an Islamic political order. For a beleaguered minority like the Indian Muslims, the Tablighi Jama’at, with its concern with the ‘Islamisation of the individual’, rather than capture of the state, seemed not only to be a more sensible and pragmatic strategy, but also one that was in keeping with the Prophetic practice (sunnah).3

Active in the Tablighi Jama’at for some years, Khan gradually became disillusioned with it, too, and by 1975 had completely disassociated from it. He saw the movement’s hostility to ijtihad, or creative application of Islamic law to meet the challenge of changing social conditions, and what he viewed as its aversion to critical, independent and creative thinking and the rational, scientific spirit, as placing a brake on his own intellectual development, and as, moreover, a betrayal of the Islamic imperative itself.4 Although he still remained appreciative of the role of the Tablighi Jama’at in creating Islamic awareness among ordinary Muslims, he believed that a new understanding of Islam was necessary to appeal to modern educated Indians, Muslims as well as Hindus and others. Accordingly, in September 1976, he set up his own research institute, the Islamic Centre, based in New Delhi, launching an Urdu monthly, al-Risala, to propagate his own views, which he saw as presenting Islam in a modern idiom.


Many years of close involvement in the Jama’at-i-Islami and the Tablighi Jama’at, a deep concern with the growing problem of Hindu-Muslim conflict in India, and the spread of Islamist movements, many of them violent, in large parts of the Muslim world, provide the general context for an examination of the development and maturation of Khan’s own distinct understanding of Islam and of its place and role in the modern world. While his advocacy of a personalisation of the faith, focussing on individual reform rather than on political mobilisation, seems to be a result of the influence of his earlier association with the Tablighi Jama’at, his call for a radical ijtihad, going directly to the original sources of Islam—the Qur’an and the Hadith—by-passing centuries of tradition and interpretation of the primary Islamic corpus, clearly distinguishes him from the Tablighis.5 While he shares with the Islamists an insistence on the urgency of ijtihad, he urges the creative interpretation of the shari’ah for very different purposes.

Khan’s primary concern being to express Islam as a perfectly suitable ideology for the modern age, he deals at great length in his writings with issues related to pluralism, inter-faith dialogue and peace, issues that he sees both the Islamists, with their radical rhetoric, and quietists, such as the Tablighi Jama’at, with their refusal to look beyond formulations of traditional fiqh, as unable, if not unwilling, to seriously consider. To Khan’s own distinct understanding of how Islam can be understood in the modern world, an understanding which claims to be both authentic and at

the same time relevant in today’s context, we now turn.

Part 2

Footnotes:1 Interview with Wahiduddin Khan, New Delhi, 1 February, 2001.2 Wahiduddin Khan, “Two Types ofMovements,” www.alrisala.org/Articles/thought/twomvmnt.htm.3 Wahiduddin Khan, The Tabligh Movement, The Islamic Centre, New Delhi, 1986.4 Interview with Wahiduddin Khan, New Delhi, 2 February, 2001.5 Wahiduddin Khan, Islam Rediscovered: Discovering Islam From Its Original Sources , Goodword Books, New Delhi, 2001, p.70. q

:salam:wrwb & :jazak: bro, I'll read this tom :insh:Maripat17-09-2011, 04:23 AMSalaam's.

:ws::jazak: for this. Following comments are general and not directed at you brother. Many people will find the remarks by this sinner pedantic-I plead their indulgence.



It is usually a pleasure to read Yogider Sikand. He is a rare young intellectual with lots of energy who has a sympathetic attitude towards Muslims and Islam. A Barelwi site has used his writings as an argument against the Deoband Minhaj but this sinner doubts that Mr Sikand has any such designs. The only worrisome aspect in this context is that how can a person with so much of knowledge of Islam and Muslims doesn't burst our with Shahadah.

This article looks at the writings of the Indian ‘alim, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, who has developed his own, in some respects, unique, understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world.

This gives an impression that developing one's own understanding of Islam is a rare phenomena. It is not.

It examines how he, as a member of the Indian Muslim minority, has sought to present Islam as well as making it possible for Muslims.

There are many others also who have presented Islam, to Muslims and others. It is a way of life. But of course we get your point sir.

As Khan delved deeper into Maududi’s writings, he came to believe that the very basis of Maududi’s understanding of Islam was faulty and mistaken, a reaction to western imperialism rather than emerging from an authentic understanding of Islam. Faced with the challenge of European colonial rule over most of the Muslim world, Maududi, Khan concluded, had developed a quintessentially political understanding of Islam, seeing the Islamic mission as based on political,

With you sir till now.

rather than simply ideological struggle,

You missed the truth here. Islam is not an ideology-even if sometime we might call it that for sake of making an argument. Islam is a faith, a deen, a belief system. And this is essential to the argument. Maududi, having focussed on a detail called the then political situation of Islam and Muslims, missed the whole picture.

... not ruling out resort to violent means to attain its goals.

This sinner is not a Maududi fan any longer but this point has to be addressed. Is there any ideology that rules out violence? US? No they do not rule out violence-they have the mightiest army, air force and navy in the world and they use them rather frequently-indeed all the time. So the biggest power of the time accepts the inevitability of military apparatus. So does everybody. Including India the land of M.K.Gandhi in spite of latter's ideology.

Coming to terms with the challenges of modernity has been a major concern of many Muslim scholars and Islamic activists. How can Islam as a universal ideology be expressed in a global order characterised by the nation-state system? What position should the Islamic law (shari’ah) enjoy in a world system characterised, for the most part, by the separation of religion and politics and the relegation of religion to the private realm?

Excellent identification of the problem.

Is an Islamic state necessarily an integral part of Islam? How should revelation be understood in the light of reason and science? How should Muslims relate to people of other faiths and ideologies? How can Muslim minorities remain faithful to their commitment to their faith while at the same time lead lives as loyal citizens of their countries where they live? These and related questions are some of the issues that modern Muslim scholars have sought, in their own ways, to grapple with.

Now you know Mr Sikand why we love you?

This article looks at the writings of the Indian ‘alim, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, who has developed his own, in some respects, unique, understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world.

See our earlier comment sir.

It examines how he, as a member of the Indian Muslim minority, has sought to present Islam in terms that are both intelligent to the modern mind, as well as making it possible for Muslims in India to attempt to create a balance between what have often seen to be their conflicting loyalties to the state, on the one hand, and to their religion, on the other.

Good diagnosis again.

Although the Muslims of India are Khan’s primary focus, and the development of his own thought must be located in the specific Indian context, Khan seeks to address the Muslim ummah as a whole, and, as the growing interest in his writings in other countries suggests, in this he has registered considerable success.

Now is the time when our ears will be raised.He has produced a large number of books. Their production quality is surpassed only by the Qur'an Printing Complex products in Jeddah. Out of Fahsha-Munker-Baghi he seems to be involved only in the middle one, that is Munker owing to his hobnobbing with RSS family.

The first part of this article looks at Khan’s early life and formative influences, arguing that the development of his thought must be seen primarily as a response to the predicament that the Muslims of India found themselves in in post-1947 India, as a beleaguered, marginalised minority, victims of widespread poverty, pervasive discrimination and organised violence directed against them.

The later part of above should go as a quotable quote sir.

Khan’s own understanding of Islam and its place in the modern world are shown as largely a response to what he saw as the failure or inability of other Islamic groups active in India at the time to provide a proper, and in his view, authentic Islamic leadership to the Muslim community.

This was the right time to drop a word about partition but you avoided it. Now this sinner suspects you to be a wise person.

The second part of the article examines the basic contours of Khan’s Islamic vision, focussing on how Khan attempts to develop a creative understanding of Islam that he sees as fully relevant for our times. In particular, this section looks at how he approaches the questions of peace, inter-faith dialogue and da’wah, or Islamic mission, as well as his critique of the politics of Islamism.

We might add here that there was another man who dissociated himself from Maulan Maududi's ideology and also managed to reduce the controversies around him-Late Dr Israr Ahmed.



The obvious solution, rather then falling into agnosticism, should have been to use the education gained to look for the way forward. But the remark is rhetoric one. There are madarsas and there are madarsas. We hope that the above mentioned madarsa has got its roots firmly in Islam.

This phase continued till 1948, when, reading the primary Islamic sources in their Arabic original, instead of relying on translations and commentaries, he ‘re-discovered’ his faith in Islam. It was, in a sense, a ‘born-again’ experience for him, affirming a faith that was consciously chosen, rather than one inherited as part of one’s cultural tradition. Clearing away centuries of commentary and interpretation, and approaching the Qur’an and the Hadith directly, he came to believe, held the key to an understanding of Islam that could prove its relevance in the modern world.

Deja vu.When people start talking about Qur'an and Sunnah one's heart should warm up but it does not. The reason is that this phrase has become a preamble to cut oneself away from pious predecessors. Maulana Maududi did it and others are still doing that.

Khan now set about learning English on his own, reading widely the works of Western writers and philosophers. In particular, Khan claims to have been greatly influenced by Bertrand Russell. His exposure to western literature led him on to realise the pressing need to present Islam in a manner that would appeal to the modern, western-educated mind.1

This period of ‘rediscovery’ of Islam from its original sources coincided for Khan with a quest for a socially engaged spirituality. Coming under the influence of the writings of Abul ‘Ala Maududi, founder of the Islamist Jama’at-i-Islami, Khan joined the Jama’at-i-Islami Hind, the Indian wing of the Jama’at, in 1949, attracted by Maududi’s understanding of Islam as a comprehensive world-view and a call for radical social revolution. His commitment to the Jama’at, his powers of organising and oratory, and, above all, his skilful pen, helped him move rapidly up the Jama’at’s hierarchy, being appointed, in a few years after he joined the organisation, as a member of its central organising committee (markaz-i-majlis-i-shura), and serving as one of the senior administrators of the Jama’at’s publishing house in Rampur.

Perhaps Markazi Majlis-e-Shura. And perhaps by the publishing house it is meant the Idara-e-Tehqiqat-o-Tasneef-e-Islami (The Institute of Islamic Research and Publications) that is now in Aligarh.

Khan wrote regularly for the Jama’at’s Urdu journal, Zindagi (‘Life’),

The current publication New Life (Zindagi-e-Nau) must have its origins in that publication.

and, in 1955, published his first book, Naye Ahd Ke Darwaze Par (‘On the Threshold of a New Era’). This was soon followed by Mazhab Aur Jadid Challenge (‘Islam and the Modern World’), which was later translated into Arabic under the title Al-Islam Yatahdda, which became a best-seller in the Arab world, being incorporated in the syllabus of several Arab universities. As the titles of these books suggest, Khan was particularly concerned with developing an understanding of Islam that would appeal to the modern mind while at the same time remaining firmly grounded in the original sources of Islam.

Strange are the ways of Allah(SWT). Ali Miyan (Syed Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi(RA)) too was doing the similar things-only slightly earlier. The strange thing is that the Arab world reads these books but still has chosen not to come out of the black hole of nationalism.

Khan did not remain for long with the Jama’at though. Increasingly, it suggested to him that the Jama’at’s own agenda, based as it was on working towards establishing an Islamic state in India, was not only impractical,

Does it mean that he, Maulana Khan, made his next move out of defeat?

but, moreover, not in keeping with what Islam expected of the Muslims of India in the situation that they found themselves. As Khan delved deeper into Maududi’s writings, he came to believe that the very basis of Maududi’s understanding of Islam was faulty and mistaken, a reaction to western imperialism rather than emerging from an authentic understanding of Islam.

Question is whether our friends from JI accept it or not. Most probably not. This is perhaps the fault line between JI and others.

Faced with the challenge of European colonial rule over most of the Muslim world, Maududi, Khan concluded, had developed a quintessentially political understanding of Islam, seeing the Islamic mission as based on political, rather than simply ideological struggle, not ruling out resort to violent means to attain its goals. This understanding of Islam he now began to see as a result of ‘a sense of loss’, of defeat suffered by the Muslims at the hands of the West, rather than as emanating from a deep, genuine spiritual quest. 2

Seems like an appropriate diagnosis by Maulana Khan.


Disillusioned with what he calls the ‘political oriented religion’ of the Jama’at, Khan was now attracted to what he saw as the ‘God-oriented religion’ preached by another Islamic revivalist movement, the Tablighi Jama’at. What seems to have struck Khan most about the Tablighi Jama’at was its strict aloofness from party politics, focussing on individual reform, rather than, like the Jama’at-i-Islami, on attempting to establish an Islamic political order. For a beleaguered minority like the Indian Muslims, the Tablighi Jama’at, with its concern with the ‘Islamisation of the individual’, rather than capture of the state, seemed not only to be a more sensible and pragmatic strategy, but also one that was in keeping with the Prophetic practice (sunnah).3

Might have over heard it but nice to revise it any way.

Active in the Tablighi Jama’at for some years, Khan gradually became disillusioned with it, too, and by 1975 had completely disassociated from it. He saw the movement’s hostility to ijtihad,

TJ itself is Ijtihad. Ijtihad on Ijtihad is tricky thing to say the least. (Comments to be completed, IA.)

or creative application of Islamic law to meet the challenge of changing social conditions, and what he viewed as its aversion to critical, independent and creative thinking and the rational, scientific spirit, as placing a brake on his own intellectual development, and as, moreover, a betrayal of the Islamic imperative itself.4

There are different departments of deen. You can be active in one without being antogonistic to other departments. Can't we keep the things simple? Saying that TJ has not done this and that and that creates confusion that is totally unwarranted.

Although he still remained appreciative of the role of the Tablighi Jama’at in creating Islamic awareness among ordinary Muslims, he believed that a new understanding of Islam was necessary to appeal to modern educated Indians, Muslims as well as Hindus and others. Accordingly, in September 1976, he set up his own research institute, the Islamic Centre, based in New Delhi, launching an Urdu monthly, al-Risala, to propagate his own views, which he saw as presenting Islam in a modern idiom.


Many years of close involvement in the Jama’at-i-Islami and the Tablighi Jama’at, a deep concern with the growing problem of Hindu-Muslim conflict in India, and the spread of Islamist movements, many of them violent, in large parts of the Muslim world, provide the general context for an examination of the development and maturation of Khan’s own distinct understanding of Islam and of its place and role in the modern world.

I suppose he is asking the right questions. The thing that divides us is whether his solutions are right or not.

While his advocacy of a personalisation of the faith, focussing on individual reform rather than on political mobilisation, seems to be a result of the influence of his earlier association with the Tablighi Jama’at, his call for a radical ijtihad, going directly to the original sources of Islam—the Qur’an and the Hadith—by-passing centuries of tradition and interpretation of the primary Islamic corpus, clearly distinguishes him from the Tablighis.5

Strange. There are many people who want to short circuit the people who came in between them and Rasoolallah :saw:. This includes short circuiting the Companions (RA). And it is not so innovative also. Mostly JI people too say the same thing.

While he shares with the Islamists an insistence on the urgency of ijtihad, he urges the creative interpretation of the shari’ah for very different purposes.

Be creative in implementation of Shariah and be conservative in its interpretation.

Khan’s primary concern being to express Islam as a perfectly suitable ideology for the modern age,

This is a noble goal.

he deals at great length in his writings with issues related to pluralism, inter-faith dialogue and peace, issues that he sees both the Islamists, with their radical rhetoric, and quietists, such as the Tablighi Jama’at, with their refusal to look beyond formulations of traditional fiqh, as unable, if not unwilling, to seriously consider. To Khan’s own distinct understanding of how Islam can be understood in the modern world, an understanding which claims to be both authentic and at the same time relevant in today’s context, we now turn.

Waiting for that.

Part 2

Footnotes:1 Interview with Wahiduddin Khan, New Delhi, 1 February, 2001.2 Wahiduddin Khan, “Two Types ofMovements,” www.alrisala.org/Articles/thought/twomvmnt.htm.3 Wahiduddin Khan, The Tabligh Movement, The Islamic Centre, New Delhi, 1986.4 Interview with Wahiduddin Khan, New Delhi, 2 February, 2001.5 Wahiduddin Khan, Islam Rediscovered: Discovering Islam From Its Original Sources , Goodword Books, New Delhi, 2001, p.70. qIt was very informative overview. Thanks YS.abdlashay17-09-2011, 06:32 AMA person asked regarding reading the of Maulana Wahiduddin Khan sahib's.

Hazrat Mufti Mohammad Taqi Usmani sahib db said that his initial books were fine. However, now it is uncertain at what depths of misguidance he has reached.Maripat17-09-2011, 08:31 AMSigns of DoomsdayandIdeas of Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan

Author: Maulana Nadeem-ul-Wajidi

For a long time well known and famous writer Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan has been writing such things in the pages of his monthly magazine Ar-Risala and his books that are expressly against the Book and Sunnah. Recently he has claimed that the warnings in the Holy Qur'an about the doomsday are of figurative nature and do not belong to the realm of actual reality. Maulana Nadeem-ul-Wajidi has examined this claim with logical arguments. In the preface to the book under consideration, Signs of Doomsday and Ideas of Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan, Maulana Abdul Hameed Naumani writes that the author has encompassed the topic under consideration that the whole matters becomes absolutely clear to the reader. Apart from explaining Maulana Wahidudden Khan views about Dajjal Calamity, Gog and Magog, Hadhrat Isa (AS) and Hadhrat Mehdi the author has also tried to clarify the majority opinion of scholars about these matters. This book will help in removing the fog and misconceptions that Maulana Wahidudden Khan has spread about the signs of doomsday.

Available At: Darul Kitab, Deoband.Price : Rs 25Maripat17-09-2011, 08:52 AMAn Open Letter to Maulana Wahidudden Khan

Muhtaram Janab Ghulab Nabi Kashafi

Hadhrat Maulana Wahidudden Khan Sahab Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullah

In the article published in Ar-Risala, March 2008 issue under title Global warming or Dowson Warming you have written regarding the end of world in the context of scientific findings that:

"Twentieth century scientists had told, on account of the law of entropy found by them, that the energy of the world is constantly decreasing and this act can not be reversed. So the present world will cease to exist after a time. Now twenty first century scientists are telling us on the basis of their investigations that the end time is coming very close. May be this duration is either ten or twenty years. (Ar-Risala, March 2008Ac, p.29)[Translators Note: Maulana Wahidudeen Khan has got a faulty understanding of the scientific findings. The gullible public and the religious scholars can be impressed by anybody claiming to be knowing or being a reader of scientific literature. The relevant facts are as follows. Energy of the world is not reducing. It is constant. This is called the law of conservation of energy. The entropy of the world is increasing but entropy is different from energy. Entropy is a measure of disorder in the world. So disorder is increasing and order is decreasing. And yes this increase of entropy is an irreversible process. There is a possibility that we might reach a stage where the disorder is so much that no life can exist to evolve. This may be called end of living activity but this can not be called annihilation of the world. Science has not said anything definite about the end of the world. In short Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan has not got the science quite right.]In the excerpt the scientists' point that this duration can be even less than 10 or 20 years does not carry much weight or surety for nobody can definitely tell the time of destruction of the world. In

Qur'an there is detailed information about destruction of the world and doomsday but the time of doomsday is known to none other than Allah(SWT). At one place Qur'an ordains: Verily doomsday is coming but I want to hide it so that everyone gets the return for his deeds. (Taha:10)Allama Ibn-e-Katheer narrates many traditions in his commentary on this Verse:Hadhrat Ibn-e-Abbas(RA) used to recite this Verse as-(If it was possible then I'd have hidden doomsday even from myslef). He says that nothing can be hidden from Allah(SWT). In the reading of Hadhrat Abdullah ibn Mas'aood (RA)-Allah(SWT) says that if it was possible to hide dooms day from all creatures then I certainly would have done it. Hadhrat Qatada(RA) says that in this Verse hiding also can be read as that I swear by myself that (time of) dooms day has been hidden even from angles and Prophets(AS).(Tafseer Ibn-e-Katheer: 194.3]

In this context two very important Verses of the Holy Qur'an are also quoted: People ask you about Judgment Day-say that its knowledge is with Allah only and who knows it might be nearer.[Al-A'raf 187]

Though both of the Verses are clear in their purport and meaning and do not need any explanation butthe last mentioned Verse uses the word nearer. What does this mean? After revelation of Qur'an till now 1400 hundred years have passed. But till now no writer of exegesis has fixed a clear time period for this. Allama Qurtubi(RA) has concluded that this indeed means nearness in time and he further writes that the time of Qiyamah has been kept hidden so that a slave is always ready for it. [Tafseer-e-Qurtubi 221:14]

This word has (also) come twice for Qiyamah itself [Al-Anbiya 1, Al-Qamar 1] but there also no one has given definite meaning of it. No one knows hoe many more centuries will come to pass before Qiyamah is established and this world will be destroyed. For me this word nearer means that Prophet of Islam :saw: is the last Prophet :saw:. And there shall not be any more prophets or new Shariah. Thus according to the Verse like the end of the prophet-hood end of world is also near but its time has not been fixed. No one knows the (exact) end time and it has not been told to anybody. In this context a Tradition is like this:

Hadhrat Sahal bin S'aad narrated that Rasoolallah :saw: said that me and Qiyamah have been sent together like this and Rasoolallah :saw: extended his index and middle finger to demonstrate.

Similarly it has been told in the Traditions that the knowledge of Qiyamah is with Allah(SWT) only.Prophet of Islam :saw: repeatedly impressed it that Qiyamah will surely be established and this world will end but when? Knowledge of that was not given to him too. In a famous Tradition, known as the Tradition of Gabriel the Prophet of Islam :saw: answers to a question asked about the exact time of Qiyamah that the person answering (Prophet :saw:) does not know more than the the person asking (Gabriel(AS)). This again emphasizes the assertion that exact time of Qiyamah has not been told to anybody. Nevertheless what ever He :saw: told about Qiyamah in the Traditions are its signs and indications and not the fixation of its time. No doubt the appearance of its signs has begun but many of the predictions have not taken place. For example

it has been stated in Traditions that Islam will cease to be and will be confined to Madinah and so much so that Qiyamah will not be established till the last person remembering Allah will not die. Thus Qiyamah will be established on bad people devoid of belief and faith. In this context we present some Tradition to support this argument:

(To be continued, IA.)

Tarjuman-e-Deoband, May 2011, p.54AYK139918-09-2011, 02:59 PMAn Open Letter to Maulana Wahidudden Khan




"Twentieth century scientists had told, on account of the law of entropy found by them, that the energy of the world is constantly decreasing and this act can not be reversed. So the present world will cease to exist after a time. Now twenty first century scientists are telling us on the basis of their investigations that the end time is coming very close. May be this duration is either ten or twenty years. (Ar-Risala, March 2008Ac, p.29)[Translators Note: Maulana Wahidudeen Khan has got a faulty understanding of the scientific findings. The gullible public and the religious scholars can be impressed by anybody claiming to be knowing or being a reader of scientific literature. The relevant facts are as follows. Energy of the world is not reducing. It is constant. This is called the law of conservation of energy. The entropy of the world is increasing but entropy is different from energy. Entropy is a measure of disorder in the world. So disorder is increasing and order is decreasing. And yes this increase of entropy is an irreversible process. There is a possibility that we might reach a stage where the disorder is so much that no life can exist to evolve. This may be called end of living activity but this can not be called annihilation of the world. Science has not said anything definite about the end of the world. In short Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan has not got the science quite right.]


Tarjuman-e-Deoband, May 2011, p.54

salaam brother, where can I read this in Urdu online?AYK1399

18-09-2011, 03:00 PMSigns of DoomsdayandIdeas of Maulana Wahiduddeen KhanAuthor: Maulana Nadeem-ul-Wajidi

For a long time well known and famous writer Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan has been writing such things in the pages of his monthly magazine Ar-Risala and his books that are expressly against the Book and Sunnah. Recently he has claimed that the warnings in the Holy Qur'an about the doomsday are of figurative nature and do not belong to the realm of actual reality. Maulana Nadeem-ul-Wajidi has examined this claim with logical arguments. In the preface to the book under consideration, Signs of Doomsday and Ideas of Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan, Maulana Abdul Hameed Naumani writes that the author has encompassed the topic under consideration that the whole matters becomes absolutely clear to the reader. Apart from explaining Maulana Wahidudden Khan views about Dajjal Calamity, Gog and Magog, Hadhrat Isa (AS) and Hadhrat Mehdi the author has also tried to clarify the majority opinion of scholars about these matters. This book will help in removing the fog and misconceptions that Maulana Wahidudden Khan has spread about the signs of doomsday.

Available At: Darul Kitab, Deoband.Price : Rs 25

Same goes for this, where can I read this or buy this book? Is it online?AYK139918-09-2011, 03:01 PMA person asked regarding reading the of Maulana Wahiduddin Khan sahib's.

Hazrat Mufti Mohammad Taqi Usmani sahib db said that his initial books were fine. However, now it is uncertain at what depths of misguidance he has reached.

salaam Brother, can you please provide a source/reference for this quote by Mufti Taqi? I would highly appreciate it. jazakAllahu khayran in advance.Maripat18-09-2011, 03:08 PMsalaam brother, where can I read this in Urdu online?:ws:May be you can request nadimulwajidi at gmail dot com nicely.Wassalam

PS: (:(Sorry for the delay in translation.)umar_italy18-09-2011, 08:51 PM[Translators Note: Maulana Wahidudeen Khan has got a faulty understanding of the scientific findings. The gullible public and the religious scholars can be impressed by anybody claiming to be knowing or being a reader of scientific literature. ]

So true..dr7619-09-2011, 05:08 AMAn Open Letter to Maulana Wahidudden Khan




"Twentieth century scientists had told, on account of the law of entropy found by them, that the energy of the world is constantly decreasing and this act can not be reversed. So the present world will cease to exist after a time. Now twenty first century scientists are telling us on the basis of their investigations that the end time is coming very close. May be this duration is either ten or twenty years. (Ar-Risala, March 2008Ac, p.29)[Translators Note: Maulana Wahidudeen Khan has got a faulty understanding of the scientific findings. The gullible public and the religious scholars can be impressed by anybody claiming to be knowing or being a reader of scientific literature. The relevant facts are as follows. Energy of the world is not reducing. It is constant. This is called the law of conservation of energy. The entropy of the world is increasing but entropy is different from energy. Entropy is a measure of disorder in the world. So disorder is increasing and order is decreasing. And yes this increase of entropy is an irreversible process. There is a possibility that we might reach a stage where the disorder is so much that no life can exist to evolve. This may be called end of living activity but this can not be called annihilation of the world. Science has not said anything definite about the end of the world. In short Maulana Wahiduddeen Khan has not got the science quite right.]


Tarjuman-e-Deoband, May 2011, p.54

:salam:

:mash: That refreshed my physics class.. the last thing i remember in the universe section was asking the prof about the consequence of entropy in a black hole.. and something to do with a guy called penrose.. wonder what that was..

:jazak: for the post.. wahiduddin khan is a deviant no doubt.. a person who chose to abandon the company of Hazrat Maulana Syed Abul Hassan Ali sahab Nadwi :rahma:

duas..

wa assalam..Maripat19-09-2011, 07:25 AM:salam:

:mash: That refreshed my physics class.. the last thing i remember in the universe section was asking the prof about the consequence of entropy in a black hole.. and something to do with a guy called penrose.. wonder what that was..

:ws:Physicians escape our trap rather early. But even then I am impressed with your prof. Black hole thermodynamics, where the entropy of black hole enters the discussion, is not usually taught to would be doctors. And Penrose is another surprising name. Hawking and Penrose did essential work in the context of black hole formation. So hats off to this prof.

:jazak: for the post.. wahiduddin khan is a deviant no doubt.. a person who chose to abandon the company of Hazrat Maulana Syed Abul Hassan Ali sahab Nadwi :rahma:

duas..

wa assalam..Ameen.Some people end up doing a lot for themselves-if not Islam, Muslims or for the society. We have one such example here. WassalamAYK139911-11-2011, 12:13 PMFatwa Issued by Mufti Nawal al-Rahman concerning certain beliefs written by Wahiduddin Khan in his al-Risala articles:http://www.shariahboard.net/shariahboard/viewfatwa.aspx?QuestionID=17236AYK139913-11-2011, 05:45 PMPlease find the following two Fatwas attached herein:

- "Fatwa by Darul Iftaa' al-Masriyyah": This contains Fatawa issued by the highest office of Fatwa in Egypt, and one of the most respected in the Muslim world. This department is chaired by one of the greatest scholars alive today and also the current Grand Mufti of Egypt, Mufti `Ali Jumu`ah. More information regarding him can be read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_GomaaThe Fatawa contained in this document can also be found on the internet by using the search engine at their homepage: http://www.dar-alifta.org/default.aspx

In our istiftaa' to Dar al-Ifta' al-Masriyyah, we intentionally left out the name of Wahiduddin Khan and just focused on his presenting his statements without any names attached.

- "Fatwa by Darul Iftaa' of Darul Ùloom Karachi": This contains the original Fatwa written in Urdu and Arabic by the office of Fatwa at one of the most prestigious and popular madrasahs in the world today; namely, Jamiàh Darul Ùloom Karachi, founded by the late Grand Mufti of Pakistan, Mufti Shafi` Usmani, and currently under the patronage and leadership of his two sons, Mufti Rafi` Usmani and Mufti Taqi Ùsmani. The Fatwa in this document was written and endorsed by four eminent, senior Muftis of this institution including Mufti Ashraf Mahmood Usmani, the nephew of Mufti Taqi Usmani. Given that Wahiduddin Khan’s original writings were written in Urdu and that Darul Ùloom Karachi operates primarily in Urdu, we sent the original al-Risala journals in their entirety to the Office of Fatwa. We have also appended an English translation of the entire Fatwa at the end of the original Fatwa.AYK139908-12-2011, 04:31 AMMufti Muhammad Saèed Khan's refutation of Wahiduddin Khan's bizarre defense that Mirza Ghulam Qaadiyaniyy never claimed nubuwwah explicitly. Moreover, Wahiduddeen claims that no ONE ever explicitly claimed prophethood after the passing of Sayyidunaa Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallam), not even Musaylima al-Kadhdhaab!:

http://www.seerat.net/Books/Maulana-Waheed-ud-Deen-Khan-sahib-ki-bekhabri/Maulana-Waheed-ud-Deen-Khan-sahib-ki-bekhabri.pdfpluto08-12-2011, 05:10 AMMufti Muhammad Saèed Khan's refutation of Wahiduddin Khan's bizarre defense that Mirza Ghulam Qaadiyaniyy never claimed nubuwwah explicitly. Moreover, Wahiduddeen claims that no ONE ever explicitly claimed prophethood after the passing of Sayyidunaa Muhammad (Sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallam), not even Musaylima al-Kadhdhaab!:

http://www.seerat.net/Books/Maulana-Waheed-ud-Deen-Khan-sahib-ki-bekhabri/Maulana-Waheed-ud-Deen-Khan-sahib-ki-bekhabri.pdf

:jazak: bro for ^

:ws:Maripat13-04-2012, 04:21 AMFour or five days ago there was an editorial page article by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan in Urdu daily Roznama Rashtriya Sahara of New Delhi. He was arguing that in modern times Dawah is the method to adopt and not any other method. (Sorry I disposed my collection of newspapers the day before yesterday.)AYK139913-04-2012, 02:57 PMFour or five days ago there was an editorial page article by Maulana Wahiduddin Khan in Urdu daily Roznama Rashtriya Sahara of New Delhi. He was arguing that in modern times Dawah is the method to adopt and not any other method. (Sorry I disposed my collection of newspapers

the day before yesterday.)

Please refrain from using the title of "maulana" before his name. We know all about what his "da`wah" entails as per this thread.Maripat13-04-2012, 03:19 PMPutting me in a difficult position akhi? The usual demand here is to show respect to Scholars.

But of course I stand corrected by the Scholars.

And Allah (SWT) knows the best.shajratutooba13-04-2012, 04:19 PMIn one of the issues of AlFurqan, Movlana Sajjad Nomani DMB clarifies most of the misconceptions created by this person. I think it was the August issue of 2011 or maybe September.Abdul123413-04-2012, 06:10 PMSheikh Wahiduddin Khan may have gone down a strange and unattractive path lately, but some of his older books like God Oriented Life & Religion and Science are still very valuable and insightful.Maripat14-04-2012, 04:02 AMIn one of the issues of AlFurqan, Movlana Sajjad Nomani DMB clarifies most of the misconceptions created by this person. I think it was the August issue of 2011 or maybe September.:jazak:Now I got to look for it.

Sheikh Wahiduddin Khan may have gone down a strange and unattractive path lately, but some of his older books like God Oriented Life & Religion and Science are still very valuable and insightful.Since he got his education in JI institution he inherited all the desirable and undesirable traits. It is apparent that in the circles of that group Islam is a mere idea and ideology and not a way of life, let alone a faith. The result is that in spite of those seemingly interesting books the lives of these people are not very inspiring.pluto14-04-2012, 12:05 PMBrother Maripat, watch 'My Favorite Threads' page #6 [my post] where I'll be chronicling Abu bhai's demolitions ;):ws:Abdul123414-04-2012, 12:32 PMdoes anyone know if his son (the author of many childrens' Islamic books), whose name I will not try to spell from memory, has also gone down the same road as his father or not - because he always seemed such a nice man.

dr7614-04-2012, 12:56 PMdoes anyone know if his son (the author of many childrens' Islamic books), whose name I will not try to spell from memory, has also gone down the same road as his father or not - because he always seemed such a nice man.

:salam:

Yes.. Saniyasnain Khan is in the same league... deviants inc.. check this (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?69051-Maulana-Wahiduddin-Khan) Post #6.

wa assalam..AYK139923-05-2012, 09:36 PMAttached is a fatwa of kufr upon Mr. Wahiduddin Khan. Please see pg. 4.pluto24-05-2012, 09:25 AMAttached is a fatwa of kufr upon Mr. Wahiduddin Khan. Please see pg. 4.:salam: :jazak: bro........Abul Lais24-05-2012, 09:38 AMBrother Maripat, watch 'My Favorite Threads' page #6 [my post] where I'll be chronicling Abu bhai's demolitions ;):ws:

Pluto bhai

whats this my favourites u are talking about. Pls guide me to the page, jazakallah..Abul Lais24-05-2012, 09:41 AMAttached is a fatwa of kufr upon Mr. Wahiduddin Khan. Please see pg. 4.

Bro jazakallah khairan katseeran.

I think I posted this a while ago, and it got lost when a war broke out over Hadhrat A S Desai's SEEMINGLY-harsh tone in some other thread, and now you "revived" the fatwa!!!

Great job...pluto24-05-2012, 10:11 AMPluto bhai

whats this my favourites u are talking about. Pls guide me to the page, jazakallah..

Bhai Abul, visit this (http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?86102-My-Favourite-Threads&p=747011&viewfull=1#post747011):ws:

At Tayyib02-10-2012, 08:17 AMBlasphemy in Islam: The Quran does not prescribe punishment for abusing the ProphetMaulana Wahiduddin Khan | Oct 2, 2012, 12.00AM IST

In Islam, blasphemy is a subject of intellectual discussion rather than a subject of physical punishment. This concept is very clear in the Quran.

The Quran tells us that since ancient times God has sent prophets in succession to every town and every community. It says, moreover, that the contemporaries of all of these prophets adopted a negative attitude towards them.

There are more than 200 verses in the Quran, which reveal that the contemporaries of the prophets repeatedly perpetrated the same act, which is now called 'blasphemy or abuse of the Prophet' or 'using abusive language about the Prophet'. Prophets, down the ages, have been mocked and abused by their contemporaries (36:30); some of the epithets cited in the Quran include "a liar" (40:24), "possessed" (15:6), "a fabricator" (16:101), "a foolish man" (7:66). The Quran mentions these words of abuse used by prophets' contemporaries but nowhere does the Quran prescribe the punishment of lashes, or death, or any other physical punishment.

This clearly shows that 'abuse of the Prophet' is not a subject of punishment, but is rather a subject of peaceful admonishment. That is, one who is guilty of abusing the Prophet should not have corporal punishment meted out to him: he should rather be given sound arguments in order to address his mind. In other words, peaceful persuasion should be used to reform the person concerned rather than trying to punish him.

Those who adopt a negative stance towards the Prophet will be judged by God, who knows the innermost recesses of their hearts. The responsibility of the believers is to observe the policy of avoidance and, wishing well, convey the message of God to them in such a manner that their minds might be properly addressed.

Another important aspect of this matter is that at no point in the Quran is it stated that anyone who uses abusive language about the Prophet should be stopped from doing so, and that in case he continues to do so he should be awarded severe punishment. On the contrary, the Quran commands the believer not to use abusive language directed against opponents: "But do not revile those whom they invoke instead of God, lest they, in their hostility, revile God and out of ignorance" (6:108).

This verse of the Quran makes it plain that it is not the task of the believers to establish "media watch" offices and hunt for anyone involved in acts of defamation of the Prophet, and then plan for their killing, whatever the cost. On the contrary, the Quran enjoins believers to sedulously refrain from indulging in such acts as may provoke people to retaliate by abusing Islam and the Prophet. This injunction of the Quran makes it clear that this responsibility devolves upon the believers, rather than holding others responsible and demanding that they be punished.

[B]Looked at from this angle, the stance of present-day Muslims goes totally against the

teachings of the Quran. Whenever anyone - in their judgment - commits an act of 'abuse of the Prophet', in speech or in writing, they instantly get provoked and respond by leading processions through the streets, which often turn violent. And then they demand that all those who insult the Prophet be beheaded.

Muslims generally advocate the theory that freedom of expression is good, but that no one has the right to hurt the religious sentiments of others. This theory is quite illogical. Freedom is not a self-acquired right. It is God, who, because of His scheme of putting man to the test, has given man total freedom. Then the modern secular concept of freedom is that everyone is free provided he does not inflict physical harm upon others. In such a situation, the above kind of demand is tantamount to abo-lishing two things: firstly, to abolishing the divine scheme, and secondly, to abolishing the modern secular norm. Neither goal is achievable.

So the hue and cry against the so-called abuse of the Prophet is simply untenable. By adopting this policy, Muslims can make themselves permanently negative but they cannot change the system of the world.

There is a relevant Hadith in which the Prophet of Islam has said: ''Min husn Islam al-mar tarkahu ma la yanih'' (A good Muslim is one who refrains from indulging in a practice that is not going to yield any positive result). This Hadith applies very aptly to the present situation of Muslims. They have been making noise for a very long time against blasphemy, but it has been in vain. Muslims must know that they are not in a position to change the world, so they must change themselves. There will be two instant advantages of adopting this policy: they will save themselves from becoming victim of negative sentiments and will be able to devote their energies to constructive work.

The writer is an Islamic scholar and founder of the Centre for Peace and Spirituality International.

TOI (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/opinion/edit-page/Blasphemy-in-Islam-The-Quran-does-not-prescribe-punishment-for-abusing-the-Prophet/articleshow/16631496.cms)Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

Home Mail News Sports

Finance Weather Games Groups Answers Screen Flickr Mobile More

Yahoo! Groups Yahoo! Groups

Sign In Mail Browse Groups

Terms Privacy Guidelines Feedback Help Blog

Advocates of Socially Engaged Religion o

o Restricted Group,o 229 members

Conversations Photos Files More

About Help

Back View Next Previous

Maulana Wahiduddin Khan on Kashmir Conflict

Expand Messages

yogi sikand

Message 1 of 1 , Aug 9, 2007

View Source

Based in New Delhi, Maulana Wahiduddin Khan is a notedIslamic scholar and prolific writer. Not new tocontroversy, he was recently in the news over protestsin Kashmir against an article that he had written inhis magazine Al-Risala. In this interview withYoginder Sikand, he talks to Yoginder Sikand aboutthis latest controversy and about his own views on theKashmir conflict.

NOTE: THE INTERVIEWER DOES NOT AGREE WITH EVERYTHINGTHAT MAULANA KHAN HAS TO SAY IN THIS INTERVIEW.HOWEVER, HE RESPECTS THE RIGHT FOR EVERYONE TO AIR HISOR HER OWN VIEWS IN A DEMOCRATIC MANNER, INCLUDINGBOTH MAULANA WAHIDUDDIN KHAN AS WELL AS HIS CRITICS.

Q: Some days ago some groups in Kashmir accused you ofapostasy and of allegedly denigrating the ProphetMuhammad. They even insinuated that you had ceased tobe a Muslim because of what you wrote, alleging thatyou did not believe the Prophet Muhammad to be thefinal and ideal role model for Muslims. They alsoasked for the government to ban your magazine. What

exactly is this controversy all about?A: This has to do with an article that I wrote in theJune 2007 issue of my Urdu magazine, Al-Risala. What Iactually was trying to say through article has notbeen understood properly by those who have used it tocondemn me. Instead of issuing such statements theyshould have specified exactly where they think I havegone wrong, and should have given shariah-basedarguments for this. In any case, I must clarify that,contrary to the impression that some people have, theydid not issue a fatwa against me but just a pressstatement. Some of them have called me an Indian�agent. But that is a political issue, not a religious�issue concerning the shariah.

Q: What did you argue in that article?A: Basically, what I was trying to say was that weMuslims should work actively for peace and, in apeaceful environment, devote all our efforts to dawahor missionary work, telling others about Islam, whichis a fundamental duty for all Muslims. Only in aclimate of peace and good relations with othercommunities can we able to do dawah work. Only in suchan environment will others be seriously willing tolisten to what we have to say about our religion. So,to clarify this point I argued that here we can learnfrom the example of Jesus, whom all Muslim deeplyrevere as a prophet of God. Jesus used peacefulmethods to propagate his message and Muslims, too,should do that.

There are two models that we can follow in relating topeople of other faiths. One is the peace-based ordawah-based model that I just mentioned. The second isthe war-based model. Unfortunately, for the last 200years or so, many Muslims have taken to the lattermodel. So, they fought with the British, the Hindus,the Americans and the Jews. Were all of them doingthis for Islam, or was it that, for some of them,Islam was just a slogan to whip up emotions? What cameof this, save destruction for the Muslims themselves?Islam itself says that violence can be resorted toonly in self-defence and that the general norm ispeace, violence being allowed only under exceptionalconditions. But those Muslims who base their relationswith people of other communities on confrontation and

conflict ignore this. Rather than seeing non-Muslimsas fellow beings who also require the message ofIslam, they see them as inherent enemies. They seethem as people who should be dominated over, ratherthan to be approached through love and kindness withthe true message of Islam.

My point in arguing that Muslims should adopt themodel of Jesus was simply to say that we should adoptpeaceful methods of dawah. I did not mean, in any way,to denigrate the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).I have written numerous books in praise of theProphet, holding him to be a model for all humanity,and so I cannot be accused of this. Muslims believethat both Jesus and Muhammad were prophets of God.What I was trying to argue was that we should take thepeaceful methods adopted both by Jesus and Muhammad asour model. On some occasions, the Prophet Muhammad hadto take recourse to violence in self-defence, undervery trying conditions, when he and his followers hadto face tremendous oppression on account of theirfaith. But today we enjoy freedom of religion, and sothe situation that demanded violence in defence ofones faith does not exist. Today we have the freedom�to practice, preach and propagate our religion. In theProphets time this freedom was denied to the Muslims�and this, and the fierce oppression that he and hisfollowers had to face, forced them to take to arms inself-defence in some situations. But this was only inexceptional conditions, which do not prevail today.Hence, we need to take full advantage offered to us bythis freedom to peacefully propagate Islam, in thesame manner as Jesus did or the Prophet did, forinstance, while in Mecca.

Q: Do you also advocate non-violence because you feelthat violence would be counter-productive from theMuslim point of view?A: In most cases, this would be the case. We are muchweaker than the West, so why continue this disastrousstrategy, especially when it can only result in damageand massive loss of life, especially for Muslims? Itis certainly counterproductive for us, as has beenshown by the failure of this method in so manycountries.

I believe there is Islamic sanction for my position onthis point. Muslims believe that all the prophetstaught the same religion or ad-din, as it is called inArabic, which is surrender to God, or al-Islam inArabic. Jesus and Muhammad taught the same din. Themethods or minhaj of the prophets may have differed.This means that the method of propagation must dependon the situation. So, for us, we need to use thepeaceful method used by Jesus because todays�situation demands this. The Prophet Muhammad usedprecisely this method in most cases, except in verytrying conditions, when, faced by violence andoppression inflicted by his enemies, he was forced totake up arms in defence of the faith. So, when Italked about adopted Jesus method, I was talking only�about his minhaj, and I was certainly not advocatingthat Muslims should adopt the Christian religion orabandon their din, which I, as a Muslim, also believein and know to be eternal and unchangeable.

I think some of my detractors in Kashmir have notunderstood this distinction I was trying to makebetween the eternal din on the one hand, and theminhaj, on the other, which depends on the situation.At the same time, they have acted on the sameprincipal which they accuse me of advocating. TheProphet Muhammad and his followers fought battlesusing swords and sitting on camels, but militants inKashmir have adopted a different methodusing guns and�bombs.

But let me come to come back to my point about violentconfrontation being largely counter-productive fromthe Muslim point of view. We are living in an age ofweapons of mass destruction. Islam imposes certainrestrictions on the conduct of war. For instance, itsays that non-combatants, including women, childrenand priests, cannot be killed. But in a war thatinvolves weapons of mass destruction how can onedifferentiate between combatants and non-combatants?You just cannot. This means that such a war willinevitably involve massive loss of innocent lives,which Islam does not allow. This demands that Muslims,for their part, have to reconsider the wholesituation.

From the point of view of Islamic missionary work,which is a fundamental Islamic duty, too, peacefulactivism is far more effective, while armed conflictcan only result in making non-Muslims even moredistant from Islam, reinforcing false negativestereotypes about Muslims as inherently violent andopposed to people of other religions.

Q: In Kashmir, many people see you as advocating theIndian position on the conflict there. What exactlyare your views?A: I have written about the Kashmir issue severaltimes, including a longish piece that is part of myUrdu book Aman-e Alam (Universal Peace). I have� �studied the historical records relating to Kashmir. Atthe root of the problem was the fate of princelystates following the Partition. It was generallyunderstood that the political future of the princelystates would be decided by what the majority of theirinhabitants wanted. If the majority was Hindu, theywould obviously opt for India, and if the majority wasMuslim, they would probably choose Pakistan. Only twostates presented a dilemma: Muslim-ruled butHindu-majority Hyderabad and Hindu-ruled butMuslim-majority Kashmir.

Pakistan wanted to take Kashmir and it also wanted toannex Hyderabad, and the Razakars, under Qasim Rizvi,launched a movement for that. Sardar Patel, who wasprimarily responsible for the integration of theprincely states into the Indian Dominion, sent amessage to the then Pakistani Prime Minister,Nawabzada Liaqat Ali Khan, making the very sensiblesuggestion that Pakistan could keep Kashmir and Indiawould take Hyderabad. Had Liaqat agreed, there wouldhave been no problem. But he refused. He wanted tohave both Kashmir and Pakistan but in the end gotneither. And today we allIndians, Pakistanis and the�people of Jammu and Kashmirare paying for this folly.�As the Japanese saying goes, If you run after two�rabbits, you will lose both.�

Q: This is new to me. Where did you get thisinformation from?A: It is mentioned in several books. I havent cooked�it up on my own. It is mentioned, for instance, in a

very well-researched book written by Sirdar ShaukatHayat Khan, a leading Pakistani politician, who wasin-charge of Kashmir affairs soon after Pakistan cameinto being. He was the son of the Unionist Partyleader and Premier of Punjab, Sir Sikander Hayat Khan.

In his book, The Nation That Lost Its Soul, which� �was published a little more than a decade ago inLahore, Sirdar Shaukat writes that when Mountbattenarrived in Lahore he passed on to Liaqat a messagefrom Patel, wherein Patel had mentioned that Pakistanshould abide by the rule agreed upon previously by theCongress and the Muslim League that states whosesubjects were mainly Hindu and which adjoined theIndian Union should join India, and that states withMuslim majorities and adjoining Pakistan should jointhat country. Accordingly, Patel offered that Pakistancould take Kashmir and India could take Hyderabad.

Sirdar Shaukat Hayat Khan then writes that in hiscapacity of being in-charge of Pakistans Kashmir�operations he told Liaqat that since the Indian Armyhad entered Kashmir, Pakistan was not in a position toannex Kashmir using the tribesmen from the Frontier orits regular troops, which were inadequate. Hence, headvised, Pakistan should accept Patels offer. In�response, Liaqat told Sirdar Shaukat, and here I quoteverbatim from Sirdar Shaukats book, �

Sirdar Saheb, have I gone mad to give Hyderabad�State, which is much larger than the Punjab, for thesake of the rocks of Kashmir?.�

Sirdar Shaukat writes that he was stunned by� �Liaqats response and what he calls his ignorance of� �our geography and his lack of wisdom. He adds, I� �thought he was living in a fools paradise and did not�understand the importance of Kashmir to Pakistan whilehoping to get Hyderabad, which at best was onlyquixotic wishful thinking, because Hyderabad was not�connected with a border with Pakistan. In protest,Sirdar Shaukat at once resigned from the position hewas holding in Pakistans Kashmir operations.�

Now, you see what the historical cause of thisconflict is and how we are paying for this great

blunder.

Q: What do you feel is the solution to the conflict inKashmir?A: I personally think that the only realistic solutionis for both countries to accept the status quo andconvert the Line of Control into an internationalborder. There is no realistic alternative. Some peoplemay not like this, but then there is no option savefurther destruction and loss of life, especially ofinnocent Kashmiris. India is too strong militarily.The Prophet Muhammad did not want to leave Mecca, buthe was forced to do so by the oppression that he andhis followers were facing there. Sometimes you must dowhat you dont want to doand this applies both in an� �individuals personal life as well as in the life of a�people.

I visited Kashmir in 1989, a month or so beforemilitancy broke out there. At that time there wasalready talk about azadi, about nizam-e mustafa beingestablished there and of Kashmir becoming part ofPakistan. I went with some Kashmiri friends to avillage near Srinagar. We were sitting near a streamand, pointing to the stream, I said to my friends,See, God is saying something to you through this. I� �said, The stream comes down from the mountains. It�faces massive boulders on its way to the river. Butinstead of fighting with these boulders and breakingits head on them, it gently flows over them or goesaround them and succeeds in the end. That principle,�I said, can be used in searching for a suitablesolution to the Kashmir conflict.

During this trip to Kashmir I also gave a lecture atTagore Hall in Srinagar. There I mentioned aninteresting incident in the life of the Prophet. Oncea man came into the mosque and urinated there. Insteadof scolding him, the Prophet arranged for the spot tobe washed clean. The man was overwhelmed by this nobleexample of the Prophet. When he returned to his peoplehe told them about the gentle way that the Prophet hadtreated him. They, being greatly impressed, came tothe Prophet and accepted Islam.

I mentioned in my speech that what the Prophet

achieved by splashing water in the mosque some groupswere trying to achieve through shedding blood and thatthis would end only in death, destruction and chaos.

Q: How have your views been received in Pakistan?A: Many of my books have been printed in Pakistan. MyUrdu magazine, Al-Risala, is widely read there. Ourwebsite www.alrisala.org is probably accessed by manypeople in Pakistan.

Let me also add here that on the question of Kashmir Ihad addressed a letter to President Pervez Musharrafway back in mid-2001. I told him that politics is theart of the possible. I said that the violence inKashmir had achieved nothing but the loss of thousandsof lives and that it had also further strengthened thewrong impression that many non-Muslims have of Islamallegedly being a violent religion. This, I said, hadcontributed to stop the ideological march of Islamthrough dawah or missionary work. I told him that itwas time that in place of violence we should adopt thepeaceful dawah approach, including in solving theKashmir dispute.

Peace, I wrote to Musharraf, allows others to study orlearn about Islam. I referred to the Treaty ofHudaibiya, which the Prophet signed with the Qureishof Mecca. The terms of the treaty appeared to havebeen loaded against the Muslims, but it actuallyprovided them a period of peace, during which theProphet and his companions engaged in peaceful dawahwork. As a result of this, many Arabs who had opposedthe Prophet became Muslims. This would probably nothave happened in the absence of the period of peacethat the treaty brought about. I also told Musharrafthat he should learn a lesson from the late Charles deGaulle, who decided, against the will of mostFrenchmen, to withdraw from Algeria. As a result, hefailed to get elected for a second term but today heis still remembered for what he did.

What I am trying to say is that sometimes we have totake what appear to be harsh decisions for the largergood, which we can only understand years later.

Sukhia Sab Sansar Khaye Aur SoyeDukhia Das Kabir Jagey Aur Roye

The world is 'happy', eating and sleepingThe forlorn Kabir Das is awake and weeping

____________________________________________________________________________________Need a vacation? Get great dealsto amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.http://travel.yahoo.com/

sunni forum

Documents

model of christ

maseeh model ki

uswah hasanah beautiful

prophet sallallaahu

final prophet

alayhi wa sallama

wahiduddin khan states

final example