(Munazara Thread): Mawlana Shahid Refutes Lying Deobandi Clowns

@HASSAN what perspective is this work from?

 

https://archive.org/details/hakeem-...hatme-nabuwat-sallallhu-alaihi-wasalam_202308

 

There's an ilzami answer besides the tahqiqi answer to this question. The ilzami jawab is as follows: Molwi Abu Ayyub Deobandi (the famous Deobandi munazir) has quoted Hadrat Mujaddid Alfe Sani رحمة الله عليه and Hadrat Shaykh e Muhaqqiq Shah Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlwi رحمة الله عليه saying mashrab-i pir hujjat neest and has begun applying it to Haji Imdadullah Muhajir Makki رحمة الله عليه on Mawlid. When will he use this on Tahdhir al Naas?

Since when is Hakim Tirmidhi a hujjah for the Deobandis that they feel the need to use this to prove the kufriya texts of Tahzir un Naas?

Hakim Tirmidhi and other Sufi buzurgs are not hujjah as per Molwi Abu Ayyub's usul.

 

Could you post the reference for this?

 

@Aqdas could I get more information on this? It's one point from the debate that I didn't quite understand.
I came across Hakim Tirmidhi in my uni days and read like Shaykh Ibn Arabi, he was quite controversial in his time.

 

Or rather, time should be spent on making a video series in English that covers this idea. Structure it so that there are multiple videos, with some providing a matn or concise summary of a topic (for people that do not require details and just need to know key points) and then sub-videos with more details (for people that want in-depth analysis). The series can include common objections from deos and our counter-objections (so when there are future debates and a post-debate analysis is needed, you simply point to these videos).

 

nowhere did allamah lucknawi say that khatam al-nabiyyin does not mean chronologically last.

only nanotvi, his blind sheeple (i.e. the entire devbandi mindless cult) and qadianis.

the rest of the ummah has no problem believing that khatam means chronologically last.

 

Deobandi has written a thread to defend Nanotwi

🧵 Clearing False Allegations on the Pious ʿUlamāʾ of Deoband: Response to Shahid Ali Barelwī on Mawlānā Qāsim Nānautwī and Tahdhir al-Nās

📌 Background

👉 The following is a response to the main objections raised by Shahid Ali Barelwī against Tahdhir al-Nās of Mawlānā Qāsim… pic.twitter.com/fpraJNxXRc

— Ahnaaf Services (@AhnaafServices) November 18, 2025

 

Qadiyani kafir

Maulvi Lucknawi held the exact same view as Maulana Qasim Nanotvi.

Shahid ali had no answer to the Hakīm al-Tirmidhi reference

Usman Iqbal is not a good debater.

— Sami Ullah (@LoverofAhmad1) November 17, 2025

 

Darul uloom Deoband was once send the Ibaarat of Qasim Nanotwi without mentioning whose words it is. They made Takfeer on that Statement. Later they retracted and Aamir Uthmani al Deobandi wrote” jamat e islami aur deoband ki ikhtekef ke haqiqat” giving excuses like”the muftis were tired and busy, so they could not concentrate

https://x.com/TESLAof_Smiljan/status/1583682506859372547?t=cyAYDt4UZ5XP1p6O4MhSvQ&s=19

 

Btw, did the 2 clowns enact nanotwi's LGBT episode, like Shahid asked them to in another YouTube video?

 

Sayyid Alahazrat pe laakhon Salam.

 

Someone needs to do a proper post debate video. Scans of texts and a proper analysis of the deogandi lies.

Usmans stupidity peaked when he quoted malfuz of Alahazrat and giving examples of hadrat Isa Alayhis Salam trying to get a reverse fatwa on Alahazrat. Yet I dont think the fool has come across Jazā’a Allāh Áduwwah bi Ibānati Khatmi’n Nubuwwah

Alahazrat has written numerous works tearing apart qadiyani and shiah fitna. So them trying to say leave the past and move on to refute shias and qadiyanis is an absolute joke.

 

Sorry for using the example below but I just want to demonstrate how Ghaleez Hypotheticals can be

Both of the following are hypotheticals, but one is correct, One is Kufr ;

If there was to be another prophet, it would be Sayyiduna Umar

If there was to be another prophet, It would be Iblees

Any Muslim will be shook to the core by that second statement.

And if that person says: "No I'm absolutely not affirming that another Prophet CAN come, I do believe in the Finality of the Prophethood, this is merely a hypothetical", no one will accept this from him.

Throwing in the word "Hypothetical" does NOT give you the free-pass to say whatever you want.

Usman kept repeating
لو فرض
لو فرض
like a maniac, he even wrote it on the whiteboard

Wo to theek hay, but the actual filth is what was said AFTER that shart,

"If we suppose" is not the problem, what comes after is the problem,

Usman made it seem like we Consider Hypotheticals to be Kufr Mutlaqan. But in Reality we do not Reject ALL hypotheticals, We Reject the WRONG hypotheticals & accept the Right ones

 

https://x.com/tasleemio/status/1990480781102195032?t=VNIaRQBzkKFF3UsfhFyiCw&s=19

Qadyanis are praising Nanotwi one way & saying Deobandis are "way better" than Barelwis in the comments lol

 

Red Herrings should automatically disqualify a person after 3 warnings

 

i asked aqdas the same question and i was told that there was no moderator and the debate conditions were not published.

---
we are not discounting the excellent effort of the three scholars who represented ahl al-sunnah: shaykh shahid, shaykh asrar and shaykh mubeen. may Allah ta'ala reward them for their service.

but in the future, there should be some kind of accountability. i watched some portions live and i could see that osman was jumping like a frenzied monkey, pulling out all kinds of things and i was asking the same questions you have asked: why doesn't the moderator step in and tell him to stick to tahzirun naas? shaykh shahid was composed and at one point advised osman to not become passionate and emotional and rather address the issue objectively.

anyway - appreciation to sh. shahid for picking up the gauntlet and showing up. and for sh. asrar and sh. mubeen for accompanying him.