This is what was given when we asked for references. These are not even books by the Imām, but works that are against Sufism. Let us take a look at these sources:
1. al-Kashf ‘an Haqeeqat as-Sufiyyah (1/350). There is no mention of Alahazrat
At least some of the pages mentioned here actually mention Alahazrat, but only 2 pages do, the other 4 are about Deobandis.
Not sure what exactly we are supposed to do with these useless references. However, it does show that the screenshot from the Wahhābī site is a lie and a fabrication, no source can be presented for it.
I challenge all Najdīs to show me where the Imām said this.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Many Muslims incorrectly assume slavery is not a "good" thing. It is, and if it was not, then Allāh would not have permitted it, and His Beloved Rasūl ﷺ would not have engaged in it.
They erroneously assume that because freeing one's own slaves can be rewarded, that this somehow means slavery as a whole is evil and ought to be abolished.
Firstly, not all instances of freeing slaves are rewarded, it is only rewarded if done sincerely for the Pleasure of Allāh, otherwise if a person frees a thousand of his slaves without this sincere intention, then though it is valid, there is no reward.
Moreover, if a kāfir does so, there is no reward for him, regardless of his intention.
Secondly, a person is rewarded for giving charity if he does so purely for the sake of Allāh, but does this now mean private property is evil and must be abolished? Must governments take all wealth of individuals by force? Of course not.
In reality, this is modern-day apologetics designed to suit 21st century sentiment regarding slavery and has no basis in traditional Islam.
Today marks the day that one of the greatest Sunni scholars of India left this world: Alahazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Hanafi Qadiri Baraylawi [1272-1340 AH / 1856-1921]
Here is a thread of some of my threads regarding him ad translations of his writings
His detailed definition and discourse regarding worship:
So yes, "Anti-slavery fight is a modern idea, Islam unanimously agreed with this this practice, this is the consensus", this is correct.
I don't know why people struggle with the historical fact that wholesale demonisation of slavery and opposition to slavery in the Muslim world is a recent occurrence thst began in 19thC and that for centuries nobody of any group or sect had any issue with slavery in of itself.
The first who conceptualised an identity was German lawyer, jurist, journalist Karl Heinrich Ulrichs [1825-1895].
Prior to this, the focus was on the act of the individual, whereas activists such as Ulrichs shifted the focus towards the nature of the individual.
In 1867 he attended the Congress of German Jurists in Munich and argued for the repealing of laws which prohibited sodomy, mentioning that nature had implanted this inn them, and thus such laws are discriminatory against them.
The one deserving of Khilāfat is he who possesses the seven conditions of Khilāfat, that is:
1. Man,
2. Sane,
3. Pubescent,
4. Muslim,
5. Free,
6. Capable,
7. Qurashī
These seven conditions are necessary such that if even one condition is missing then the Khilāfat shall not be sound. The elucidation of this is in all books of creed.
Imām Taftāzānī says in Sharh al-Aqā’id:
“{He ought to be from Quraysh, and it is not permissible from other than them} meaning, it is stipulated that the Imām be a Qurashī due to his saying, upon him be blessings and salutations, ‘The Imāms are from Quraysh.’
Muslims ought to remember that Allāh has created cattle for the benefit of mankind, and they are a great blessing and favour from our Lord.
There are numerous explicit verses in the Qur'ān which clarify this, and to oppose this is detrimental to one's faith.
It is necessary not to fall prey to modern ideas of veganism, environmentalism, etc, which claim that benefitting from animals is immoral, harmful, unjust, and is destructive for the environment.