Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi
(b.1852CE – d.1927 CE)
Barahin-e-Qatiyah
(Barahin-e- Qatia,Baraheen Qatiyah,Baraheen-e-Qaateah)
Barahin-e-Qatiyah
(Barahin-e- Qatia,Baraheen Qatiyah,Baraheen-e-Qaateah)
(The Arguments in Refutation)
Why did
“Barahin-e-Qatiyah”
Runaway to Jeddah the same night?
Runaway to Jeddah the same night?
Wednesday 21 February
1906 C.E.
---
Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi:
Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi:
"Shaykh, why are you upset with me?"
Read Large PDF Print: Here
Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi:
"Shaykh, is there no pardon for anyone
who makes Towbah from kufr?"
Read Large PDF Print: Here
Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi
“Barahin-e-Qatiyah”
...ran away the very same night to Jeddah?
---
Shaykh Swaleh Kamal's
Letter to Shaykh Sayyid Isma'il Effendi(RA)
Read Large PDF Print: Here
Read Large PDF Print: Here
Shaykh Swaleh Kamal
"... A person came to me yesterday from India. He is called 'Khalil Ahmed. He was accompanied by some Ulama, who were the caretakers of the Holy Haram. He tried to befriend me with sweet talks because he heard that I am very annoyed with him.
He said, " Oh my Master! I have been informed that you are very upset with me."
He came to me because he was aware that I had already informed the Honourable Amir, Sharif of Mecca (May Allah protect him) about his corrupt statements noted in his book 'Barahin-e-Qatiyah.' I asked him if he was 'Khalil Ahmed?
He replied, "Yes I am".
I said to him, "I am ashamed at you for all the filth you have written in your book 'Barahin-e-Qatiyah.' You have legalized lies to be attributed to Almighty Allah and you want to know why i am upset with you! I have indeed Issued a Fatwa of Hersey [Kufr]
upon you for your un-Islamic statements.You are making excuses to me when you published your book 'Barahin-e-Qatiyah.' "
He then said to me, "Oh Master! That is certainly my book but it does not contain the statement of Imkan-e-Kizb. But if this is found in the book then I make Towbah for it and also withdraw all statements found therein that are contrary to the beliefs of the Ahle Sunnat wal Jama'at".
... He began making excuses and said, "If such things are found in 'Barahin-e-Qatiyah.' then they are not my words. I am a Sunni Muslim and have not written anything against the Madhab of the Ahle -Sunnat wal Jama'at."
I was surprised at his denial because it was all found in his book.
His book (Barahin-e-Qatiyah) is in the Urdu language and printed in Hindustan.
I was convinced that he was making Taqiy'yah (Hypocrisy) similar to the Shi'a who regards it as Wajib. I intended to present to him 'Barahin-e-Qatiyah' and call a translator so that I may get an acknowledgement from him of the statements of his book and ask him to make Towbah. He promised to come the next day but instead fled to Jeddah.
Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi's
False Promise and Denial
Read Large PDF Print: Here
wala hawla wala quwwata illa billah
I found it necessary to inform you of this incident and May Allah always keep you well.
Muhammad Swaleh Kamal
28 Dhul-Hijja 1323 Hijri
---
extracted from
extracted from
[Al
Malfuz Al Sharif,Vol: 2, page176-180]
(1918CE)
-----------------------------------
Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi
Barahin-e-Qatiyah
"Oh Master! That is certainly my book but it does not contain
the statement of Imkan-e-Kizb..."
---
---------------------
-----------------------------------
Khalil Ahmad Ambetwi
Barahin-e-Qatiyah
"Oh Master! That is certainly my book but it does not contain
the statement of Imkan-e-Kizb..."
---
Imkan-e-Kizb
Shah
Ismail Dehalvee writes :It is possible for Allah to be a liar.If you do not
accept this , then Human being's ability will be considered more than Allah's
ability. ( It means , since Human can lie and if some one thinks Allah
cannot lie , then this will mean Allah's ability is less than Human ability.)
Khaleel Ambaithwi (Ambetwi)writes :"This
issue of “Imkan e kidhb" is not a recentl issue, but in past people have
discussed whether "Khalf e waid ”(Allah can give Paradise to even sinners like
Pharoah/ Abu Jahal, going against His own ruling) is possible or not. Hence we
find in Durrul Mukhtar it is written Khalf e waid is possible /permissible (
jayaz)or not, and Asharis are in support of it because the Asharis do not
consider it as an imperfection , rather they consider it as a Mercy of
Allah." ( Here we see how Mawlana Khaleel Ambaithvee is bringing a
quote from Durrul Mukhtar on Khalf e waid to use it on Imkan e kidhb.!)
Khaleel Ambethvee (Ambetwi)writes: "This is the meaning of Imkaan-e-Kizb (possibility
of telling a lie) that Allah Ta`ala has the power of telling lies but this will
not happen."
Rashid Ahmed writes: " Hence , it is now established that to Lie is with
in the possibility of Allah subhanahu wa taala"
Mahmoodul Hasan Al Deobandi writes: "How can we say that it is out of the power of Allah that
, He cannot perform bad acts."
---------------------
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi (Saharanpuri)
Barahin-e-Qatiyah
Khalil Ahmad Ambethvi writes: "Allah (SWT) can tell lies and that the question of lying (for Allah) has just not raised now but there has always been a debate on this issue by previous Ulema." [ Baraheen-e-Qati’a, page 6] (Astaghfirullah)
Khalil Ahmad Ambethawi says: "After looking at the condition of Satan and the Angel of Death, it can be gained that they possess a great depth of knowledge and this has been proven from the Qur’an and Ahadith. To prove such knowledge for Muhammad Rasulullah (Sallallaho Alaihi wasallam) without proof from the Qur’an and Ahadith, but from common sense, is a falsethought. If, to do so is not a Shirk, then in which category of faith does it fall?" (Astaghfirullah)
Reference - (Khaleel Ambehetvi - Braaheen-e-Qate'a, page 51, Kutub Khana Raheemiya, Saharanpur, 1365 H / 1944 CE- Edition.
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “Satan and Angel of death have more knowledge than he Prophet(Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam).” (Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 51-52-55).
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “The Prophet of Allah doesn’t know what will become of him in the end, and he doesn’t know what lies behind the wall.”(Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 51).
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “Through the contact of the scholars of Deo-Band, the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alaihi Wasallam) learnt Urdu.”(Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 26).
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “To call the Prophet your brother is justified.” (Baraheen-e-Qaateah, page 3-6).
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “Celebrating Milad-un-Nabi is similar to that of Hindu's celebration on birth of their "Kanhia".”
Ref: Barahin-e-Qatia (Pg148, Published By: Muhammad Ishaq Maalik Kutb khana Rahimia Saharanpur in1365 AH, Written By: Khalil Anbethwi)
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “Knowledge of Shaitan and Malakat-ul-Maut is more than the Holy Prophet(Peace be upon him).”
Ref: Barahin-e-Qatia (Pg51, Published By: Muhammad Ishaq Maalik Kutb khana Rahimia Saharanpur in1365 AH, Written By: Khalil Anbethwi)
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “Muhammad (Peace be upon him) doesn't know about his end and what is behind the wall.”
Ref: Barahin-e-Qatia (Pg51, Published By: Muhammad Ishaq Maalik Kutb khana Rahimia Saharanpur in 1365 AH, Written By: Khalil Anbethwi)
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi said: “The Holy Prophet learnt Urdu language due to relation with Ulma-e-Deoband.”
Ref: Barahin Qatia (Pg26, Published -e- By: Muhammad Ishaq Maalik Kutb khana Rahimia Saharanpur in 1365 AH, Written By: Khalil Anbethwi)
Khaleel Ahmed Ambethvi “... held Rashid Ahmad Gangohi in his highest esteem. He had complete reliance on Gangohi and believed that there was nobody greater than him.”
More info:
---
Barahin-e-Qatiyah
Page:6
Page:16
Page:55
Barahin-e-Qatiyah, page:55
---
Kufr of Khalil Ambhetvi
Radd e Baraheen Qatiah
The statement present in Baraheen-e-Qati’ah
which was written in 1303 AH/ 1885 C.E.
Khaleel Ahmed wrote it and Rashid Ahmed not only endorsed it, in fact he provided his inputs also in this book.
This book contains a paragraph which compares the blessed knowledge of Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam with that of the accursed Iblis (satan).
The learned Deobandi writer says that, “Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed never compared the knowledge of prophet with knowledge of angle of death and satan.”
Khaleel Ahmed wrote it and Rashid Ahmed not only endorsed it, in fact he provided his inputs also in this book.
This book contains a paragraph which compares the blessed knowledge of Rasulullah sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam with that of the accursed Iblis (satan).
The learned Deobandi writer says that, “Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed never compared the knowledge of prophet with knowledge of angle of death and satan.”
His point is that, this book “Baraheen-e-Qati’ah”
was written in refutation to another book “Anwaar
e Saatiah” by Mawlana Abdus sami
Rampuri. Everyone knows that Mawlana Abdus
sami Rampuri was a disciple and Khalifah of
Imamdullah Makki. The Deobandi author is not correct when he says that
Mawlana Abdus sami was a follower of Imam Ahmed
Raza Khan RH).
The Deobandi writer says that, Mawlana Abdus sami wrote two things. First, that prophet had the self knowledge ( dhati) of everything and second , the angel of death and satan know the unseen ( ghayb) and since prophet has higher status than satan and angel of death then the prophet must also have the unknowledge of the unseen ( ghyab).
After mentioning this, the author says that, it was only in refutation of these examples Mawlana Kahalal Ahmed wrote “those” statements in Baraheen-e-Qati’ah.
Let us see what “those” statements are and how Deobandi writer has landed up in catch 22 situation!
Khalil Ahmed wrote: “The final result is: By pondering over the knowledge of the earth possessed by angel of death and satan , one should not use this analogy to prove that prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) also had the similar knowledge, as there is no documentary evidence for this.
Isn’t this belief (that prophet also
had the knowledge of the unseen) a CLEAR SHIRK, and if not, then which part of
Iman (belief) is it?
Because such extensive [knowledge] for the Angel of death and Shaytan is proved from
Quran and Sunnah [nusus e qatyi`ah]. Where is any such absolute evidence to prove the extensiveness of the knowledge possessed by prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam which refutes all absolute documents in order to prove one polytheistic belief?”
And then he continues his attack on the best of the creation ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) and says:
“ Hence , mere presence of the soul (Ruh) of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) in Illiyeen and his being higher than angel of death does not mean that the knowledge of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) is higher than or even equal to the knowledge of angel of death in these fields.”
Analysis
How much pain a Muslim gets in reading those lines cannot be realized by those whose hearts has been blackened due to their disrespect for Prophet (PBUH).
Let this fact be known that NO where in his book “Anwaar e saatiah” has Mawlana Abdus sami has said that Prophet (PBUH) had the Self (dhati) knowledge.
Because such extensive [knowledge] for the Angel of death and Shaytan is proved from
Quran and Sunnah [nusus e qatyi`ah]. Where is any such absolute evidence to prove the extensiveness of the knowledge possessed by prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam which refutes all absolute documents in order to prove one polytheistic belief?”
And then he continues his attack on the best of the creation ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) and says:
“ Hence , mere presence of the soul (Ruh) of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) in Illiyeen and his being higher than angel of death does not mean that the knowledge of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) is higher than or even equal to the knowledge of angel of death in these fields.”
Analysis
How much pain a Muslim gets in reading those lines cannot be realized by those whose hearts has been blackened due to their disrespect for Prophet (PBUH).
Let this fact be known that NO where in his book “Anwaar e saatiah” has Mawlana Abdus sami has said that Prophet (PBUH) had the Self (dhati) knowledge.
He said that the knowledge
was given by Allah to His most beloved Prophet
(PBUH).
Deobandi writer is once again wrong in accusing
Mawlana Sami of saying that prophet had self
knowledge.
But for the sake of argument, let me accept the
Deobandi version of the story.
Deobandi version says that it was in Polemic ( Munazara) that Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed compared the knowledge of prophet with knowledge of satan and angel of death.
The truth: Mawalna Abdus sami said that when Allah gives the knowledge of the unseen to his other creations like angle of death then prophet being the most beloved, how can someone say that Allah did not give the knowledge of unseen to Prophet.
Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed said that to have a belief that prophet had
the knowledge of unseen is SHIRK.
Deobandi version: Mawlan Abdus sami said, Prophet had the self Knowledge of the unseen.
The Truth: As per the Deobandi writer, the whole context in Baraheen-e-Qati’ah is a refutation.
Deobandi version: Mawlan Abdus sami said, Prophet had the self Knowledge of the unseen.
The Truth: As per the Deobandi writer, the whole context in Baraheen-e-Qati’ah is a refutation.
So what
refutation did Mawlana Khaleel provided?
He said “the knowledge
of the unseen ( ghyab) possessed by angle of death and satan has been proved by
quran and sunnah”.
The fact is there is NO source from Quran and
Sunnah which says that angle of death has SELF knowledge. All the
text says they have knowledge given to them by Allah. And if not then, we
have to accept that Mawlana meant that angel of death and satan have
knowledge given to them by Allah. This is clear that in his refutation Mawlana Khaleel Ahmad was talking about “given knowledge (atai) and not ‘self knowledge’ (dhati).
And from this simple analogy it is clear that Mawlana Abdus sami spoke about the knowledge given
to prophet by Allah.
Anwaar e satiyah is easily available in the market. Those interested can check and see that NO WHERE has mawlana Abdus sami claimed SELF knowledge for prophet.
The Deobandi author has lied Here!
Deobandi version : Mawlana Abdus sami compared the knowledge of prophet with knowledge of angle of death
The truth : Mawlana Abdus sami praised Prophet (PBUH) when he said when lower creatures (with respect to prophet) like angel of death are given knowledge of unseen by Allah , then how can someone say Prophet is not given knowledge of unseen by Allah?
Deobandi version : Mawlana Abdus sami compared the knowledge of prophet with knowledge of angle of death
The truth : Mawlana Abdus sami praised Prophet (PBUH) when he said when lower creatures (with respect to prophet) like angel of death are given knowledge of unseen by Allah , then how can someone say Prophet is not given knowledge of unseen by Allah?
Where as Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed compared the knowledge of prophet with knowledge of satan and angel of death and that was not enough for him , so he went further and said “ prophet being higher does not mean he has more or even equal knowledge when compared to angel of death in these fields”
Now analyse this:
It is clear that Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed was talking about the text from Quran and Sunnah which say that angel of death and Satan have GIVEN knowledge of unseen from Allah...
And what did he say?
He said, the knowledge given to angle of death and satan from Allah is proved from Quran and Sunnah, but if someone thinks that prophet also was given knowledge of the unseen from Allah , then IT IS SHIRK!
Not only did Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed compared the knowledge of angle of death with prophet’s knowledge, he in fact lowered the knowledge and status of prophet.
As per Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed to accept that Allah gave knowledge of unseen to angel of death is permitted, but to think that prophet was also given the knowledge of unseen from Allah is SHIRK!
All these argument which the Deobandi writer has brought is from the book:
“As shahbus saqib”
written by Deobandi Scholar Mawlana Huseein Tandvee.
It seems the learned writer is not aware that this book containing wrong
logic and wrong tawil was
refuted by many Ahlus Sunnah scholars of India. I am using one such book
to reply to these claims!
The learned Deobandi author then mentions the statement of Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed which is present in Al Muhannad. A man commits a murder and later writes a book that killing is a sin.
The learned Deobandi author then mentions the statement of Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed which is present in Al Muhannad. A man commits a murder and later writes a book that killing is a sin.
Will it help that man?
Or say, in future he writes a book and accepts his
crime; will that acceptance remove that
murder charge from him?
Then why is this Deobandi author even bringing this book Al Muhannad which was tailored to get fatwa from
scholars of Makkah and Medina.
If any Deobandi wants to use Al Muhannad , then read this fatwa present there
“It is our ( deobandi) belief that anyone who says that so and so has more knowledge then prophet , then such a person is KAFIR” .
And then recall what Khaleel Ahmed said
“ Hence , mere presence of the soul ( Ruh)of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) in Illiyeen and his being higher than angle of death does not mean that the knowledge of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) is higher than or even equal to the knowledge of angel of death in these fields (Bariheen Qatiya).
---
Kindly find the scans from Barhaeen Qatiya written by Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed and Mawlana Rashid Ahmed.
If any Deobandi wants to use Al Muhannad , then read this fatwa present there
“It is our ( deobandi) belief that anyone who says that so and so has more knowledge then prophet , then such a person is KAFIR” .
And then recall what Khaleel Ahmed said
“ Hence , mere presence of the soul ( Ruh)of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) in Illiyeen and his being higher than angle of death does not mean that the knowledge of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) is higher than or even equal to the knowledge of angel of death in these fields (Bariheen Qatiya).
---
Kindly find the scans from Barhaeen Qatiya written by Mawlana Khaleel Ahmed and Mawlana Rashid Ahmed.
RED underlined
part says: Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith dehavlvee has
narrated (a hadith) that (prophet said) I was not aware of what was behind the
wall””
Translation of blue underlined part:
“The final result is: By pondering over the knowledge of the earth possessed by angel of death and satan, one should not use this analogy to prove that prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) also had the similar knowledge, as there is no documentary evidence for this. Isn’t this belief (that prophet also had the knowledge of the unseen) a CLEAR SHIRK , and if not , then which part of Iman (belief) is it ?
Because such extensive[knowledge] for the Angel of death and Shaytan is proved from
Quran and Sunnah [nuSuS e qaTyi`ah].Where is any such absolute evidence to prove the extensiveness of the knowledge possessed by prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam which refutes all absolute documents in order to prove one polytheistic belief?”
And then he continues his attack on the best of the creation ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) and says:
“ Hence , mere presence of the soul (Ruh)of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) in Illiyeen and his being higher than angel of death does not mean that the knowledge of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) is higher than or even equal to the knowledge of angel of death in these fields.”
---
Respected reader, this is what Shaykh Abdul Haqq Muhaddith Dhalvee ( Rh) writes:
At this point a doubt is often put forward about a narration that prophet said that he was not aware of what was behind the wall. The answer to this doubt is that this narration is a lie and there is no truth in it. ( Madarijun Nabuwwah , vol 1 )
See the links below:
Don’t just see the fabrications by these Deobandis , but
Translation of blue underlined part:
“The final result is: By pondering over the knowledge of the earth possessed by angel of death and satan, one should not use this analogy to prove that prophet (Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) also had the similar knowledge, as there is no documentary evidence for this. Isn’t this belief (that prophet also had the knowledge of the unseen) a CLEAR SHIRK , and if not , then which part of Iman (belief) is it ?
Because such extensive[knowledge] for the Angel of death and Shaytan is proved from
Quran and Sunnah [nuSuS e qaTyi`ah].Where is any such absolute evidence to prove the extensiveness of the knowledge possessed by prophet, sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam which refutes all absolute documents in order to prove one polytheistic belief?”
And then he continues his attack on the best of the creation ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) and says:
“ Hence , mere presence of the soul (Ruh)of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) in Illiyeen and his being higher than angel of death does not mean that the knowledge of Rasul Allah ( sal allahu alai hi wa sallam) is higher than or even equal to the knowledge of angel of death in these fields.”
---
Respected reader, this is what Shaykh Abdul Haqq Muhaddith Dhalvee ( Rh) writes:
At this point a doubt is often put forward about a narration that prophet said that he was not aware of what was behind the wall. The answer to this doubt is that this narration is a lie and there is no truth in it. ( Madarijun Nabuwwah , vol 1 )
See the links below:
Don’t just see the fabrications by these Deobandis , but
THINK !!
WHY ? WAS!
This fabrication done!!
There is no use for deobandis to quote Al
Muhannad, as no deobandi agrees to talk on that book!
It was written after all these books were written.
It was written after all these books were written.
It has no weight.
If a thief commits theft daily
and then writes a book "stealing is a bad act",
his crime of theft does not go away".
---
Also note:
Imam Ali al Qari Al Hanafi (rh ) writes:
" This hadith that I am not aware of what is behind this wall" , Imam Asqalani has said that there is no truth in this narration'( Maudhuate Kabir , page 60 )
Imam Ibn Hajar Makii ( rh) says:
" The chain of narration for this hadith could not be traced" (Afdalul Qur`a)
Also note:
Imam Ali al Qari Al Hanafi (rh ) writes:
" This hadith that I am not aware of what is behind this wall" , Imam Asqalani has said that there is no truth in this narration'( Maudhuate Kabir , page 60 )
Imam Ibn Hajar Makii ( rh) says:
" The chain of narration for this hadith could not be traced" (Afdalul Qur`a)
---
See
this fabrication which "Imam
e rabbani" of the deobandis did!
He
quotes
a mawdu hadith and the scholar wom he quotes
(Imam Abdul Haq Muhaddith al Dehalvi ) said " there
is no basis for this hadith".
See
scan
But the deobandi scholar did not quote
this part!
WHY
NOT?
more scans Here
---
---
wala hawla wala quwwata illa billah
(Astaghfirullah)
---
ADHM
