IJMA’ OF AKABIR OF DEOBAND ON PICTURE-MAKING, AND THE ALLERGIC REACTIONS OF A MODERNIST MORON

IJMA’ OF AKABIR OF DEOBAND ON THE GRAVE EVIL OF SUWAR (IMAGES/PICTURES) OF ANIMATE OBJECTS

There is Ijma’ (consensus) of all the Akabir of Deoband on the evil and Hurmat (prohibition) of ALL forms of Tasweer (image/picture-making) of animate objects, whatever the means or technology employed in the past, present or future, whether through paint, pens, sculpturing, photographs, digital photographs, holographs, etc. 

In a Fatwa of Hazrat Maulana Zafar Ahmad Thanwi, endorsed by his teacher, Hazrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (rahmatullahu alayhimaa), it states:

“..both the photographer and the one who allows himself to be photographed are guilty of haraam, guilty of a major sin and in the light of some Hadiths they are Mal’oon (accursed) and Faasiq (flagrant sinner). It is Makrooh Tahreemi [forbidden] to follow them in Salaat…since forming pictures [of animate objects] is haraam, then whatever new method of it is invented, it will be haraam. The hurmat will not disappear by altering the name or altering the method of production….

The Prohibition of pictures is established by Ahadeeth-e-Mutawaatirah [such a large number of authentic Hadeeths that it is impossible to reject] and there is Ijma’ [consensus] of the Ummah on this…By changing the name of something haraam, it does not become halaal. [e.g. calling electronically produced pictures, “digital pictures”, or calling electronically produced music, “digital music”, etc. etc.]” (Imdaadul Ahkaam, 4/382-4)

Shaykh Hakeem Muhammad Akhtar (rahmatullahi alayhi), a senior Deobandi Shaykh who passed away recently, provides a glimpse here of the Ulama of Deoband’s complete agreement on this issue, even until relatively recently, and their rigid, “bigoted” intolerance for the so-called “difference of opinion” that has appeared only recently amongst those who fraudulently and deceptively claim to affiliate themselves to the teachings of Deoband:

“A General and Important Notification From Khanqah Imdadiya Ashrafiya. According to the statement of Hazrat Hakimul Ummat Thanwi (rahmatullahi alayh), ‘any khalifa who is publicly found committing major sins then his khilafat will automatically be considered null and void.’ Some examples of these actions due to which the khilafat will be nullified are: (1) Appearing on television. (2) Appearing on the internet with ones picture. (3) Taking pictures of animate objects and or printing them or making films…”

In a special meeting of 29 senior Ulama of Pakistan presided over by Hazrat Maulana Saleemullah Khan (rahmatullahi alayhi), the unanimous Fatwa issued regarding digital pictures, states:

“Change in mechanism and machinery, handmade, mechanical, non-digital, digital, holographic or various other ways to be introduced until Qiyaamah does not alter the Shar’i ruling of prohibition of pictures of living beings…Therefore opening the doors of permissibility by introducing any tv channel or appearance of ‘Ulama on television by claiming and thinking it to be a need for the propagation of Deen diametrically conflicts with the Shariah. It is the illegitimate emulation of modernity & lewdness.”

Allamah Yusuf Binnori (rahmatullahi alayh) stated the following few words regarding television pictures for Dawah, demolishing the stupid modernist-feminist argument of “benefits” being able to transform a satanic Haraam action into a Halaal means:

“If even one person is blessed with guidance after using the permissible means, then undoubtedly our tableegh was successful. However, if on the other hand, scores and droves of people embrace Islam on account of us adopting impermissible methods and means, then this holds no value in the sight of Allah Ta’ala.”

Shaykh Rashid Ahmad Ludhyaanwi (rahmatullahi alayh) states that it is worse for Molvis to have their pictures taken:

“To take a picture of oneself is haraam in the unanimous verdict of the Ummah. In contrast to the masses, it is more despicable and evil for an Aalim or Mufti to take a picture of himself, for several reasons. First, Divine accountability on the Ulama, the intelligent and seniors is more harsh. Second, transgression by the Ulama emboldens the masses to transgress. Third, hypocrisy by the Ulama will lead to the masses believing that this sin is permissible.” [Ahsanul Fataawa, 8/191]

Hazrat Maulana Yusuf Ludhyaanwi (rahmatullahi alayhi) states that video pictures are worse than hand-drawn pictures:

“These (video) pictures cannot be excluded from the ruling of tasweer (pictures). The most that can be said is that instead of the olden method of picture-making, technological advancement has brought about a new means of picture-making. When Shari‘ah has declared picture-making as haraam, then no matter which methods or means are invented, Tasweer will remain haraam. The humble of opinion of this servant is that in hand-drawn pictures those evil are not found which are found in video and television. As for those who say that so-and-so says this and so-and-so does that, this is not a daleel of jawaaz (permissibility) for us. [i.e. in the face of mass-transmitted Hadiths and the unanimous Fatwa of all the Akaabireen Ulama]”

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallama) states in an authentic Hadith:

“Enjoin people towards good and prohibit them from wrong-doing (e.g.  Expose the evil of Youtube, Facebook, Cinema “scholars”). Otherwise, Allah will place in authority over you the worst of people amongst you (e.g. Bashar Assad, Sisi, Modi, Burmese Monks, Tramp, etc). Then the most pious [e.g. Shaykhs and Buzurghs] amongst you will do Du’a, but their Du’as will not be answered.” [Tabrani, Bazzar, and others]

Please propagate this message through whatever means is available to you and help in relieving the Divine Punishment mentioned in the Hadith above, which is currently afflicting the whole Ummah.

QUESTION

An internet character [Muadh Khan, who dubbed himself as “Colonel Hardstone”] who poses as a mujtahid supporting those ulama who claim digital and television pictures of being permissible, presents the following argument:

“Digital Images are NOT TASWEER and our Ulama have missed the Boat on leading from the front. If you look at the Arab Media there are tons of legitimate (Islamic) Channels with legitimate Ulama (alongside JUNK and POISON) while we got nothing (quality) even from those Ulama who don’t consider digital images to be Haraam because for decades we have been held back due to internal debates and discussions while Baatil has marched on.

Our Ulama opposed Maulana Maududi (RA) and it didn’t really work and he remains influential (globally).

Our Ulama opposed Dr Israr Ahmed (RA) and it didn’t really work and he remains influential (globally).

Our Ulama opposed Dr Farhat Hashmi and it didn’t really work and she has serious influence among young Asian women.

Our Ulama opposed Dr Zakir Naik but it was BJP led Government which put a stop to it, otherwise nothing much was happening.

In the West our Ulama opposed Mufti Menk and Nauman Ali Khan and look where they are to the point where Deobandi Media is promoting them now.

As I have been saying for over a decade these FATWAAS DO NOTHING unless and until you have a unified position and everybody is on the same page (which Deobandees are not).

Is there any Shar’i validity in what this  self-styled mujtahid says?

ANSWER

What this internet paper ‘mujtahid’ has disgorged is trash. In presenting his stock of flapdoodle, he omitted to say:

“Our Ulama opposed Iblees, but he remains globally extremely influential.” 

And the moron ‘mujtahid’ forgot to add:

“All the Ambiya (Alayhimus Salaam) opposed shaitaan, but he remains strong and globally influential with the largest number of followers.”

If this internet character had any valid understanding of the Shariah, he would not have uttered his rubbish ‘daleels’. Of what consequence is the global influence of the agents of Iblees, of murtads and the followers of shaitaan regarding the Shariah’s stance on the hurmat of pictography?  In which way does the global influence of the agents of Iblees negate the Dalaa-il of the Shariah? This fellow dwells in zulmat piled on zulmat, hence he is capable of disgorging such flotsam stupidities which have absolutely no relationship with the mas’alah under discussion.

Iblees will always have the greatest number of followers and agents. The Qur’aan Majeed confirms this irrefutable fact. Hadhrat Nooh (Alayhis salaam), despite his Tabligh of nine centuries, managed to gain only about 70 or 80 followers. Whilst Nabi Nooh (Alayhis salaam) opposed the followers of shaitaan for so many centuries, they were still the most influential and they predominated. When the Malaaikah came to destroy the sodomites, they found only one home – one small family – the family of Nabi Loot (Alayhis salaam) – following the Haqq. The sodomites held the greatest influence. But despite Nabi Nooh’s opposition, they remained dominant.

The dominance and influence of kufr and baatil is not a sign of Haqq or rectitude of argument or daleel. Haqq was always on the side of the tiny minority. This is the Sunnah of Allah Azza Wa Jal for which there is no change. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

  “There will ever remain a group of my Ummah (a small group) fighting on the Haqq.  Those who oppose this group or who abstain from aiding them will not be able to harm them. (And this group will remain on the Haqq) until  the Command (Qiyaamah) of Allah arrives.”

The Fataawa of the Ulama-e-Haqq are immensely pleasing to Allah Azza Wa Jal. The stupid claim that these Fataawa are of no benefit, is akin to claiming that Hadhrat Nooh’s nine century Da’wat  ‘did nothing’ and were ‘useless’. The  paper ‘mujtahid’ has in fact unconsciously likened the Fataawa of the Ulama-e-Haqq with the Fataawa of the Ambiya (Alayhimus salaam) who were rejected by the vast majority of their respective  nations.

The criterion of the Haqq is not in having numerical  superiority. The Haqq is  that which is based on the Dalaa-il of the Shariah, not  the drivel and effluvium percolating from the nafsaani opinions of the ulama-e-soo’. All those molvies who aver that television and digital pictures are permissible, have become entrapped in the snare of Iblees. They  have become agents of shaitaan intentionally or unintentionally regardless of their seniority and popularity. No one enjoys greater popularity and no one has a greater following than Shaitaan, Iblees, La-een.

QUESTION

This same internet character in his endeavour to refute the views of our Akaabir Ulama, says the following:

Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) [1863-1943]: Passed away in 1943, puts a real perspective on the issue doesn’t it?”

Our response:

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) passed away fourteen centuries ago. This puts real and greater perspective on the issue, doesn’t it?

The moron has simply advertised his moronity and jahl-e-murakkab by implying that Hadhrat Thanvi’s fatwa was incorrect because he died in 1943. In terms of this ludicrous stupidity, the Fataawaa of all the Aimmah Mujtahideen and the Sahaabah should likewise be relegated to antiquity. The fellow has merely displayed his jahaalat.

The moron ‘mujtahid’ says:

“Shaykh (Allamah) Yusuf Binori (RA) [1908-1977]:  When Allamah Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda [1917-1997] arrived in Pakistan to attend Islamic conference, he landed in Karachi (from Damacus) with a Yashica Camera hanging in his neck. (Like a dog tied with a chain – The Majlisul Ulama). He asked Allamah Binnori (RA) to pose for a collective picture of Ulama,  Hazrat (RA) refused saying it was Haram. Allamah Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda (RA) famously put the Camera away, stuck his hand out and asked for a Daleel Every Daleel of Allamah Binnori (RA) was refuted (publicly).

In the end Allamah Binnori (RA) had to admit that photography is not Haram but against Taqwa and this is when Allamah Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda (RA) said you can stick to that (if that’s your opinion) but if you say its Haram (then you will have to give me evidence).

If none of you know who Allamah Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda [1917-1997] is and his rank in the Madhab, I suggest you look it up.

This incident is very well known but here is Dr Israr Ahmed (RA) narrating it by one link. Mufti Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi (RA) [1932-2000]:

See above about his teacher and he was aware of this.”

Our Response:

If the narrative above, is factual, and not a blatant lie, then too, it is devoid of Shar’i significance regardless of the stature and status of Shaikh Abu Ghudda and Hadhrat Maulana Yusuf Binnori.  The very fact of a Shaikh with a camera strung around his neck like a faasiq lout, renders him persona non grata. His desire (if reported correctly) for taking a collective picture of the Ulama exhibits his nafsaaniyat  and diversion from the Goals of the Aakhirat.

If Hadhrat Binnori had failed to adequately answer Shaikh Ghudda, it does not follow therefrom that pictures of animate objects are halaal. The Shaikh had in fact missed the boat on this issue and lacked in foresight, hence he paraded around with a device to which some of the worst sins of immorality are attributed.

The episode between the aforementioned two Ulama is NEVER a Shar’i daleel for permissibility of the major sin of pictures of animate objects. The propounders of the permissibility view should present their dalaa-il and logically in terms of Shar’i principles refute our dalaa-il. Only then will it be possible to accord attention to what is being said. If Hadhrat Binnori was silenced – which is difficult to believe since the words of fussaaq are not acceptable – it does not mean that others too can be silenced by stupid counter arguments. The ‘reflection’ argument is a massive deception and a stunt of shaitaan which has befuddled many short-sighted Ulama who fail to correctly apply their minds. The story presented by the paper ‘mujtahid’ entity is simply not a daleel of the Shariah.

The paper ‘mujtahid’ says:

“Maulana Saleemullah  Khan (RA) [19xx-2017]: Tons of his students agree with digital photography including Mufti Rafi Taqi Usmani (DB), are you telling me that in the entire city of Karachi where he taught for 60-70 years he only found “29” Ulama to agree with him?

Our Response:

This is another stupid averment of a stupid self-proclaimed ‘mujtahid’. Even if  the honourable Maulana Sahib had not found a single Molvie to agree with his view of prohibition, it would not have detracted from the Haqq  proclaimed by Maulana Saleemullah Khan.  The Haqq is not reliant on numbers, especially when it is a Qur’aanic fact that the vast majority will always be those who plod the path of baatil. Thus, the ‘tons’ of molvies who surrendered their brains to the dictates of the mudhilleen are morons.  Tons of chaps believing in the permissibility of haraam pictography are not a Shar’i daleel, even if the tons happen to be molvies.

This episode ‘argument’ is bereft of even an iota of daleel. It is never a daleel. It is the flotsam outpouring of a moron who is academically bankrupt. Even a mediocre Molvie should understand what a daleel constitutes of. Story-telling is not a daleel.  The ‘tons’ of  imbecile molvies, the baseless argument of Sheikh Ghudda and the alleged silencing of Hadhrat Binnori are not Shar’i dalaa-il.

The paper ‘mujtahid’ says:

“Mufti Rasheed Ahmed Ludhyanwi (RA) [1922-2002]: Many Ulama in his time and even now disagree with him. Isn’t AzanTV (Karachi) run in consulation with some of the Ulama who were his students?”

Our Response: 

The “many ulama who disagreed and even now disagree with Mufti Ludhyanwi, and  the “Azan TV” stupidity are not Shar’i dalaa-il. The moron, paper ‘mujtahid’ should present the dalaa-il  of the  ‘many ulama’ to enable us  to place these in the glare of scrutiny to correctly assign their dumb and stupid daleels to the sewerage gutters of jahaalat.

Mufti Rashid Ludhyanwi had  presented dalaa-il which the  many moron molvies have failed to demolish. Being  ‘many’ is never a daleel. And, the filth of Azan TV is never a daleel for permissibility of the kabeerah sin of haraam pictography.

The internet character says:

“I had a discussion with a “Super Deobandi” and I asked him for an example of where there is unanimous opinion amongst Ulama (no disagreement) from the highest authority of the (Hanafi) Madhab on the matter. He quoted “Taliban” and said that judgment of Ameer overrides the differences of Ulama. His statement is true but his facts are false.

Our Response:

Assuming that there is no unanimity of the Ulama on the prohibition of television and digital pictography, it will not detract from the validity of the hurmat of these pictures. The hurmat is the effect of Shar’i daleel, not ‘unanimity’, especially  when  unanimity is sought from liberal molvies of deficient academic expertise such as the ‘tons’ of molvies  parading as  Ulama in this  era in close proximity to Qiyaamah.

Furthermore, even if unanimity cannot be secured, it does not follow that those who have based their case of hurmat on solid Shar’i grounds, should submit to the baatil of the liberals as has been allegedly attributed to Hadhrat Maulana Binnori by the paper internet ‘mujtahid’.

It should also be noted that there is Ijma’ of all our Akaabireen of Deoband that all forms of pictures of animate objects, including television pictures, and pictures which will be manufactured by technology in the future, are HARAAM. The Molvies of Deoband of the current time are not necessarily Ulama of Deoband. Salafi’ism, liberalism, modernism and worldly objectives are diseases which are gnawing at the Imaan and Maslak of Deoband.  

Most Madaaris which are nowadays aligning themselves to Deoband, have extremely little in common with the Darul Uloom and Maslak established by the Akaabir more than a century ago. In fact, innumerable of these fictitious ‘deobandi’ madrasahs are in the field for the pecuniary and nafsaani objectives of their founders. Thus, the true Ilm of the Deen is smothered and even extinguished in these institutions which are manned by corrupt mercenaries. Ilm is no longer being imparted for the Aakhirat, hence Taqwa is a strange, alien and even abhorred concept to them.

 All of the Molvies who claim television and digital pictures halaal, are agents of Iblees without exception. They are the very same evil cabal of ulama-e-soo’ who  produce ‘halaal’ riba products for the riba capaitalist banks, and they are the same  miscreants who halaalize carrion. They  are the aimmah mudhilleen for whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had expressed dread and fear, for they are the agents of shaitaan who have destroyed the masses of the Ummah. They are the  “Devils in human bodies”  who  harm and undermine the Deen. They are worse than  ordinary fussaaq who shave their beards and drink liquor.

 The paper internet ‘mujtahid’ further exhibits his stark ignorance by agreeing with the ‘super deobandi’ that the “judgment of the Taliban Ameer overrides differences of the Ulama.”  On what basis did this moron  claim that this statement is ‘true’.  Firstly, in matters of Ilm, the  pivot is Shar’i Daleel, not  the authority of the Ameer. Secondly, it is absolutely ludicrous and  laughable to  believe that the Ameer of the Taliban  has the authority  to override the Fataawa of the Ulama.

Thirdly, the Taliban is a political entity fighting a Jihad against the kuffaar. It is not an Ilmi institution.  The Ameer of the Taliban is not a man of Ilm. He has no maqaam in the firmament of Shar’i Uloom. In fact, these ameers in terms of Knowledge are laymen.

Fourthly, the Ameer of the Taliban while having the authority to override the differences among his commanders and subordinates in the Jihad field, has no such authority in the dimension of Ilm.

Fifthly, even an Aalim, Mujtahid and Allaamah of the stature of Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah alayh) does not have the authority to utilize his seniority  to override the differences in Ilmi matters of his subordinate Ulama. Thus, we find innumerable differences of opinion between Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah alayh) and his August Students. Seniority has not been invested by the Shariah with the authority to silence other Ulama who base their fataawa pertaining to Shar’i ahkaam on solid Shar’i Dalaa-il.  Dalaa-il can be neutralized by only valid Shar’i Dalaa-il, not by any Aalim’s amaarate (leadership) nor by the Khalifah of the entire world of Islam.  The stupidity of the internet paper ‘mujtahid’ should thus be manifest.

The paper character says:

Taliban permitted photography on passports and when you crossed the border you were issued ID cards (with Photos) for Journalists, Visitors…How else will you check that Muadh Khan is actually Muadh Khan when you are visiting a country?

Our Response:

To recognize ‘Muadh Khan’ is ‘Muadh Khan’, there is no imperative need for haraam photos. Passport and visa photos are acts of the kuffaar. There is no compulsive reason for adopting this practice in a genuine Islamic state. If Muadh Khan is an imposter or a zindeeq or a munaafiq, etc., he will be recognized without the need of a haraam photo. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“Beware of the firaasat of the Mu’min, for verily, he looks with the Noor of Allah.”

And, the Qur’aan Majeed says:

“If you have Sabr and Taqwa, never will their plot harm you in any way.”

Allah Ta’ala suffices for those who have true Tawakkul on Him.

The actions and ideas of the Taliban are NOT Shar’i dalaa-il. But the moron is too dim in the brains to understand this simple fact.

The Jaahil internet paper ‘mujtahid’ says:

“There is no doubt that there are “individual Fatwaas” of Ulama. For every individual Fatwa there are Fatwaas and examples of Ulama (on the opposite). The bodies of Islamic Scholars (worldwide) on the other hand have a fairly settled opinion as I have quoted.”

Our Response:

That which the jaahil terms ‘individual fatwaas’, are in reality the Fataawa of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), of the Sahaabah, of the illustrious Fuqaha of all Four Math-habs and of all the Ulama who had flourished on this earth for almost fourteen centuries. It is only recently that the flotsam and jetsam ‘fatwas’ of the agents of Iblees have surfaced.

The ‘fairly settled opinion’ to which the moron refers, is the inspiration of Iblees. It is the absolutely baatil opinion of the permissibility of the organs of shaitaan – television, video, digital pictures. It is the plot of shaitaan urinated into the brains and hearts of those who halaalize what Allah Ta’ala has made haraam. The Devil-in-Chief is  manipulating all these modernist, liberal  ulama-e-soo’  for  destroying the Imaan and Akhlaaq of the Ummah by the trap  of halaalizing the institution of pictography  which is the fundamental basis of pornography and a host of other evils all leading to zina and  sexual perversity.

The miserable paper character says:

“Also notice the era of the Ulama whose opinions are being quoted.”

Our Response:

This Averment is a subtle rejection of the Finality of Nubuwwat. It is a stratagem of shaitaan. The ‘era’ has absolutely no bearing on the issue of pictography. The moron  has implied that Islam is out-dated, in fact antique and should be assigned to the museum, hence the  moron is  stressing the ‘era’ of the Akaabir of Deoband. Simply because Hadhrat Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) has issued his Fatwa in the 1940’s, the moron internet character   seeks to convey the idea that it is outdated.  If the truth of this Deen is reliant on the views and stupid opinions of the stupid ulama-e-soo’ who abound in our midst, then the moron should boldly proclaim a complete overhaul of Islam as the modernist zindeeq kuffaar university shayaateen are calling for.

The Fatwa of prohibition of pictography is not at all reliant on ‘era’ and ‘age’, just as Salaat and Saum are not depended on era and age. There is no difference between the hurmat of zina and the hurmat of pictures. Liquor will perpetually remain haraam regardless of the most advanced technological methods of production. Liquor will not become halaal on the basis of the methods of production of this age being different and technologically advanced than the method of production fourteen centuries ago. In exactly the same way, the modern and technological methods of producing pictures will not render the haraam pictures permissible. Only the followers of Iblees whose brains are soaked with insoforia are capable of such stupid, irrational and haraam reasoning which transforms haraam into ‘halaal’.

We say to all these haraam halaalizers in the words of the Qur’aan Majeed:

“Bring forth your proof —-In fact most of them do not know the Haqq, hence they  turn away (into error manifest).”

[Response by Hazrat Maulana Ahmad Sadeq Desai]

…………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………..

Related Articles:

REFUTATION OF MUFTI TAQI’S FATWA
(By Hazrat Maulana Ahmad Sadeq Desai)

Digital Images – An Invitation to Mufti Taqi Sahib
(By Mufti Imraan Vawda)

THE EVIL OF DIGITAL PICTURES OF ANIMATE BEINGS
(A Clear Analysis of the Daleel-less Fatwa of Mufti Taqi Sahib)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *