Thread by @grokxai

Ummm
Even if we set aside the question of whether the Ghair-Muqallideen / Ahl Al-Hadith are Wahhabis or not, the same allegation is also made by Barelvis against Deobandis.

There was a Deobandi Mawlvi named Sarfraz Khan Safdar, who was regarded in Deobandi circles as an “Imam of Ahl al-Sunnah.” He wrote a book titled Guldasta-e-Tawheed.

The reference of Sarfraz Khan Safdar is being given because he is connected to both Zindiq al-Kawthari and Anwar Shah Kashmiri. His relationship with both of them will be revealed at the end.

In the first chapter of Guldasta-e-Tawheed, Sarfraz Khan Safdar cited verses from the Qur’an condemning shirk.

In response to the book Guldasta-e-Tawheed, a Barelvi scholar, Ashraf Sialvi who is famous among Barelvis by the title “Imam al-Munazireen” wrote a book titled Gulshan-e-Tawheed wa Risalat (a reply to Guldasta-e-Tawheed).

In response to the verses that Sarfraz Khan Safdar had presented in the first chapter condemning shirk, Ashraf Sialvi writes that Sarfraz Safdar’s intention in citing those verses was to prove that Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama‘ah (i.e., the Barelvis) are mushriks.

Besides this, I also want to present some views of senior Barelvi scholars regarding the Wahhabi beliefs attributed to the Deobandis.

The Barelvis’ “Hakim al-Ummat,” Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi, wrote a book titled Ja al-Haq. On page 13 of this book, Naeemi writes about the Deobandis.

The followers of Ismail split into two groups: one group rejected following the Imams, and they are called Ghair-Muqallid or Wahhabi. The second group realized that presenting themselves like this caused Muslims to dislike them, so they outwardly presented themselves as Hanafi,

These are called “Gulabi Wahhabi,” i.e., Deobandi.

He further writes on the same page:

“Look at the miracle of my master, the beloved of the Most High, Muhammad ﷺ that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said that from there will emerge قرن الشیطان.

In Urdu, قرن الشیطان is translated as ‘Deoband’: deo in Urdu means ‘devil,’ and band means a group or followers. Or it may be an inverted construction, meaning ‘a place of the devil.’

Here, Naeemi has declared the Deobandis to be an instance of the hadith قرن الشیطان 🤣

After this, Naeemi quoted a fatwa of Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, the teacher of Anwar Shah Kashmiri, which is in praise of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.

At the end, Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi writes:

“However, in the present time, compared to the Ghair-Muqallids, the Deobandis are more dangerous, because ordinary Muslims cannot recognize them. In their books, they have spoken about the Prophet (peace be upon him) in such a way that

even an openly polytheistic person would not do so.”

So the statement that Anwar Shah Kashmiri made about the Ahl al-Hadith this is exactly what every Barelvi has been saying about the Deobandis. So does that mean the Deobandis are also Kharijites?

And when the same Qur’anic verses are presented against the Deobandis, they label the one presenting them as a Kharijite but why do they themselves present those same verses against the Barelvis? Why don’t they, by that logic, become Kharijites themselves through this action?

Anyway, the irony in all of this is that the objection Anwar Shah Kashmiri raised against the Ahl al-Hadith is the very same thing that Sarfraz Khan Safdar a student of Yusuf Banuri (who himself was a student of Kashmiri) is doing agenst Barelvis And the one presenting this

Objection is also an andh bhakt of Zindiq al-Kawthari, who was a friend of Yusuf Banuri. So why don’t all these "hypocrites" just declare each other Kharijites?