Talk:Ashraf Ali Thanwi/Archive 1

Ashraf Ali Thanvi

As I see it, this article, while having a wealth of information, needs to be cleaned up and rewritten. Some of the issues are:

many, many instances of POV
terminology unclear to readers unfamiliar with the subject area
overlengthy quoting of sources
inconsistency with years used

--BrokenSphere 23:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response: Mawlana is a title, as in 'President Bush' rather than just Bush.

To sort of echo what's written above, this article is dripping with POV and is overly long both from quotations and information that doesn't always seem that relevant. Someone needs to go through this entire article and trim it down so it is more concise and falls in line with the official Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy. MezzoMezzo 04:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am a follower of the above mentioned scholar and i am telling you that he was not a kafir and that he was a sunni muslim. the person to declare him kafir was ahmad raza khan barelwi - the harsh takfiri scholar from india. he declared thanwi a kafir due to a misunderstanding. for more details watch the following video:http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7WUb4Yfp-w0 ps: if you want to know any sect always ask the followers of the sect no its opponents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadakhtar26 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi took bayt with Haji Imdaadullah Makki and has received khilafat in all four silsila. His primary method of teaching was silsila-e-Chishtiya. Maulana Thanwi has written many many books on Tasawwuf. So for you saying he is not a Sufi scholar is totally wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.141.73 (talk) 01:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am utterly unconnected personally with this area of study and know hardly anything about Islam, but have just perused a 17-page article in an Islamic studies journal (Hamdard Islamicus) that elaborately details this guy's teachings on Sufism (see my edits just now, including the addition of a citation to said article). This would seem to call into question the original comment above. AdRock (talk) 15:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

One of the comments above criticizes the article but also says it is very detailed; the article as it stands is not detailed at all, and what has been written attempts to assassinate the character of this scholar. Energyworm (talk) 23:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced one of the former versions and edited inapropriate parts out. There is still some work to be done, but a section about the contoversy between Maulana Ashraf Ali and Maulana Raza Ahmad Bareilvi should be added. The subject is, however, a minefireld, and should be treated in a scholarly, sensitive way. Energyworm (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the real legacy of any scholar is the works, which he published and write during his lifetime. Maulana Asharaf Ali Thanvi's real legacy are his books, not his nephews, their children or grandchildren. I think the first paragraph is a total violation of the biography of this great Scholar.I sincerely fee it is highly inappropriate to mention anecdotal names attached to this famous scholar. If at all someone wants to correct the article, please write about the Maulana's sufistic lifestyle, his books, his critique of writing. His contributions to the world of Knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pakistan Tiger (talk • contribs) 13:32, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Title: Mawlana

About the Mawlānā issue, see this link, which I also added to the article; I agree that the term should not be part of the article title, but am not sure how to rename it. (It would also be nice if diacritics were added to the title). AdRock (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was page moved. @harej 11:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi → Ashraf Ali Thanwi — Compliance with Wikipedia guidelines for naming articles, specifically omitting titles/honorifics. Favonian (talk) 13:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Contested "Criticism" section:

I've been asked to explain the removal of the "Criticism" section. I emphasise that I removed it not because I oppose criticism against Thanwi, but because the below is POV, OR, etc.

Below is the raw edit text.

==Criticism== Thanwi is infamous for his controversial belief, which are been under discussion in different school of thoughts, and considered to be against Islamic Laws, few of them are stated below ===Defiance to Holy Prophet=== According to him knowledge of [[Prophet Muhammad|Holy Prophet Muhammad]] is similar and equal to the knowledge of Animals,Mad and Children.<ref> Hifz-ul-Iman Pg07, Published By: Sheikh jaan Mohammad ala bux kutb uloom-e-mashriki kasmiri bazaar Lahore in June 1934, Printed By: Karimi printing press Lahore, Written By: Ashraf Ali Thanvi</ref> ===Perversion or Kalimah and Durood=== Thanvi gave permission to say [[Kalimah]] ( The basic pillar of Islam ) with perversion, and to say [[durood]] onto himself, which is obvious against Islam and Islamic Belief, sayer of the such perversion is no more Muslim according to [[Shariah]]. Translation of the quote ie provided below ''"To say "La ilaha illallaho Ashraf Ali Rasool Allah" and "Allahumma sallay ala syedna wa nabiina Ashraf Ali" is right and their no objection from Islam on this act.'' <ref>Risala Al-Imdad (Pg34-35, Published By: Imadad-ul-Matabay Thana-Bhawan in Safar 1336 AH, Written By: Ashraf Ali Thanvi)</ref>

"Infamous" is not an encyclopedic word. Highly subjective
"Considered to be against Islamic law" by whom? No cite given to prove that point.
"Holy Prophet" is POV, use instead "Mohammed" or if context is needed "Islamic prophet Mohammed"
"Perversion" is a decidedly biased word, did Thanwi himself describe it as "perversion"?
The two Thanwi quotes given have no context whatsoever. As a neutral reader, I wonder "what did Thanwi mean by that? Did he have a larger point which is being taken out of context?" This is why presenting these quotes as proof of "heresy" is OR (original research) since the editor adding the quotes is implying heresy/heterodoxy without any context.

What would be appropriate in the above is to state: "Imam So-and-So, head of Al-Azhar in 1943, issued a fatwa against Thanwi, alleging that Thanwi violated the following Islamic principles..." What we have instead is a non-neutral description of Thanwi's controversial claims, with two quotes from Thanwi with zero context as to what his point was. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Mathew, please advice, if the following critics are neutral so that I could post on the artcile --Ibne Adhi (talk) 11:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

Many controversial believe are related to Thanwi and are been under discussion in different schools of thought

Thanwi gave fatwa in response to a question asked to him regarding the knowledge of unseen of Prophet Muhammad. exact context are provided below

Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib, says: "If Zaid (meaning anybody) holds the belief that the Prophet Muhammad had the knowledge of the unseen is true, still the question is: does this knowledge of the unseen encompass all things or is it confined merely to some of them? If it means knowledge of only a few unseen things, then how is it that He (Prophet Muhammad) bears the stamp of distinction in this respect? Such knowledge of the unseen is also possessed not only by a Zaid or an Amar (any Tom, Dick and Harry) but by the epileptics and the insane, the animals and the beasts as well" — (Hifz-ul-lmaan, Page 7 & 8, by Janab Ashraf Ali Thanvi.)

Fatwa Against Thanwi by Barelwi School

A prominent Barelwi Scholar namely Ahmad Raza Khan issued fatwa of Kufr (polytheists) against Thanwi for being insolent to Prophet Muhammad.

Greetings, the first portion is still WP:OR, in that you are arriving at a conclusion from material, as opposed to citing someone's else's conclusion. The best way to cite controversy is something like "The head of Al-Azhar university stated in 1938 that Thanwi's beliefs..." To draw a parallel, if I were to quote Abraham Lincoln's "...our forefathers brought forth..." and use it as evidence that he was anti-female for not saying "foremothers", that'd be inappropriate since I'm not an expert who can judge Lincoln's intent/beliefs based on fragments of his work.

The second portion is something worth noting, though the term "insolent" is definitely very biased (since not everyone in the world would agree Thanwi was "insolent"). So I'll make some modifications and add it to the article, though it still needs a footnote to a reputable source. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Matthew, thanks for adding criticism on the article, but what it is very short to understand why ?, since the fatwa of Kufr was imposed to Thanwi because of that answer which he gave in return of a question, how about we just add the exact sentence of the fatwa which he gave, and people could conclude why Ahmad Raza Khan imposed fatwa upon him, we are not adding any commentary on it, we just quote exact sentence what he wrote. --Ibne Adhi (talk) 09:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a bit touchy, because again to select a Thanwi quote risks choosing a quote out of context, in which case the editor's bias is portraying a certain, carefully chosen aspect of Thanwi. Far safer to just directly quote or neutrally summarise the fatwa itself, making it clear that any positive/negative judgements are those of the fatwa writer, not the editor.

Remove Mawlana

I wanna request about Mawlānā issue in the link. I agree that the term should not be part of the article title, but am not sure how to rename it. So please remove Mawlana from Ashraf Ali Thanvwi's wiki link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.44.235 (talk) 00:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Sj2003, 29 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi a pure Muslim?

Last Khutba of Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) final sermon was delivered during the Hajj of the year 632 C.E., the ninth day of Dhul Hijjah, the 12th month of the lunar year, at Arafat, the most blessed day of the year. There were countless Muslims present with the Prophet during his last pilgrimage when he delivered his last Sermon. Extract From the Last Khutba ‘After praising, and thanking God, the Prophet, may God send His praises upon him said: ‘All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab; white has no superiority over black, nor does a black have any superiority over white; [none have superiority over another] except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves’

Then how Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi so renowned and acknowledged religious person could had said or wrote about things which are against teaching of Islam and Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) who had clearly informed the world, about equality of humans and those who do not followed the teachings of Mohammad(PBUH) cannot be considered a follower of Islam and Then how Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi could be considered a true Muslim and religious personality of Islam if he himself didnot followed Mohammad(PBUH).

Sj2003 (talk) 11:56, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Welcome and thanks for wanting to improve this article. I've removed what appears to be a duplicate text above and changed the formatting to allow the first paragraph to be read without scrolling. The editsemiprotected template allows non-autoconfirmed users to edit a semiprotected article using an autoconfirmed fellow editor as a proxy. It requires a specific request with a 'please change X to Y' degree of detail and reliable sources for any factual changes. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 16:02, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.pasmandamuslims.com/2008/08/caste-and-social-hierarchy-among-indian.html. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bias view against the Scholar Ashraf Ali Thanwi

Supporters of Raza Khan are editing this page and showing much bias against the scholar Ashraf Ali Thanwi. It is well know, and i have previously posted proofs to this fact, that Raza Khan false document and duped many scholars of Makkah and Madina into thinking the scholars of deoband held these beliefs. So he gained verdicts of disbelief for people who hold these views. How he returned to India and spread the word that the scholars of the holy lands have issued verdicts of disbelief against the scholars of Deoband. A document my the name of 'Al Muhannad alal Muffannad' was prepared by the scholars of Deoband making clear the beliefs of the school of Deoband. These were then presented to the scholars of the Holy lands of Makkah and Madinah and they retracted their verdicts, and said that Raza Khan had presented a a fabricated document. Ashraf Ali Thanwi was from the school of Deoband therefore he also fell under attack from the scholar Raza Khan and the Brelwi followers. So if the section on the Kufr fatwa (virdict of disbelief) is to be added to this section then this clarification should also be added. But when it is added it is removed. So I would say remove this whole section, if not, all this clarifiation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.40.185 (talk) 19:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the statement ' attained by the epileptics and the insane, the animals and the beasts as well ' is a lie. Ashraf Ali Thanwi did not make this statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.40.185 (talk) 04:52, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Khan gave his fatwa on the basis of Thanwi's belief that the "knowledge of unseen" possessed by Muhammad could be attained by the epileptics and the insane, the animals and the beasts as well

Raza Khan made this fatwa. Yet Ashfar Ali Thanwi did not ever say such a thing. He had great love for the Prophet Muhammad as is obvious from his books, his speeches. His deputy Doctor Abdul Hai Arifi wrote a book 'Seerat e Rasool' of the Seerah of Muhammad, covering every aspect of Muhammads life. his was learnt from Ashraf Ali Thanwi. Many have written about how Thanwi followed Muhammad in every aspect of life as closely as possible, and his deputies that he left behind continued to teach this to the muslims, and their deputies are present today to, still living to confirm this. So this statement is a fabrication from the part of Raza Khan. It is not encyclopaedic, and should be addressed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.40.185 (talk) 05:41, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Muhannad

Muhannad was not a book intended to be a book on believes. Rather it was to clarify the views of The Inlamic Institution of Darul Uloom Deoband. As Raza Khan had laid accusations against them. These were 26 answers to clarify the true position of the University. The question were by scholars living in the Arab land. Yet, as they are question regarding Islamic Believe, it can be regarded as an islamic text in that regard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.40.185 (talk) 01:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements needed at "Fatwa of kufr and its refutation"

This section has been a source of contention, so best we address it here. A few suggested points:

The current section contains zero neutral, reliable footnotes. All it has is WP:Primary source footnotes, but what we want are scholarly secondary sources addressing the debate itself. Our goal for this section should be to have no primary source links, except perhaps a footnote/link, one each, to a reliable website containing a copy of the fatwa, and a copy of the rebuttal. The other footnotes should be to neutral scholars objectively describing the controversy.
Whether Raza Khan's "epileptics, insane, etc." phrase is true or not (that is, whether RK made an accurate statement or no), it is still encyclopedic since it is public and documented criticism by a major religious figure. So it should be mentioned, but the rebuttal should be given similar weight.
Any debate about the comparative validity of Thanwi and RK, or Deoband and Barelvis, etc. is not in the scope of that section. The goal is simply to describe an accusation and rebuttal, and give some sense of who took who's side in the debate.

I would suggest that our immediate goal should be to re-write the section based on scholarly sources vice religious websites, who may be supporting one faction or the other. I suggest too that we simply say "ARK issued this fatwa for this reason, had following supporters. Deoband scholar issued this refutation for this reason, had following supporters." There is no way we can simply leave out the issue, so do folks agree that this would be the most neutral way to cover it, and that all actually footnoting (save some quick links to original document for reference) should be from scholarly sources? MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maulana ashraf ali thanvi.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Maulana ashraf ali thanvi.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Maulana ashraf ali thanvi.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ashraf ali thanvi.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Ashraf ali thanvi.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Ashraf ali thanvi.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit warring (as of August 2014)

User:MohaddesTop, recently there has been a dispute on this article. I'm tagging you here so you can see it on talk and respond here.
As is clear on the history page, you made a large number of edits to the article. I initially reverted these edits because after checking the sources which were actually reliable in the Google Books link you provided, I found that the sources didn't confirm the claims you were making. I did my best to make that clear in the edit summary. You reverted my revert after that, telling me to read the sources (despite my making it clear that I had already done so). I again explained that I read the sources and they weren't confirming the claims you've made, and your next revert didn't contain any explanation in the edit summary at all.
During this time, I warned you on your talk page twice about the pitfalls of such behavior, as did User:Jim1138 here. Please discuss the dispute here and the reasoning behind your edits before continuing any further.
Also, please understand that there is hesitation about such major changes for a reason. A large number of POV pushers and sockpuppets attacked articles relating to the Barelvi-Deobandi conflict, with multiple users eventually ending up banned. As a new user, it's understandable that you were not aware of this. Just keep in mind that these articles (and the other one's where you are currently edit warring) are considered contentious for a reason. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ashraf Ali Thanwi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:26, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After reading all above nonsense and use less explanation must visit the below link, may allah protect us from ulloooma of deoband and their kufriya beliefs.

http://letsknowtruth.blogspot.com/2010/01/ashraf-ali-thanvi-analysis.html?m=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:E08C:4EBF:91F:9B1:2C5F:3A55 (talk) 18:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Ashraf Ali Thanvi.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:27, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions - some things that may be added to the article

Introduction

To whom it may concern, I leave behind this info so that it is of benefit, in shaa ALLAH ta-'ala.

Maulana Asharaf Ali Thanvi has been conferred the honorary title of "Hakimul-Ummat Mujaddid-e-Millat" by many people and scholars (The meaning of the term is of significance. The first part, Hakimul-Ummat, means "Spiritual Physician of the Muslim Ummat", and refers to his approach to Tasawwuf.)
Part of Maulana Asharaf Ali Thanvi's legacy are his works or the works reliably attributed to him (the myriad of books is said to number above a thousand) and esp. his approach to Tasawwuf. His works have been translated to many languages, esp. in Bangla by Maktabatul Ashraf.
Many of his contemporaries also sought his advice and held him in high esteem. For example, when the Indian scholar, historian and linguist, Sayyid Sulaiman Nadwi, wished to seek Islamic spirituality, he went to Thana Bhawan. Another Indian scholar, Abdul Majid Dariyabadi, did the same.

Books Cited in a Biography of his that can be found here

Alwi, Mas‘ud Ahsan. Ma‘athir-e Hakim al-Ummat. Lahore: Idara Islamiyyat, 1986.
al-‘Asqalani, Ibn Hajar. Al-Isti‘dad li Yawm al-Ma‘ad. Cairo: Dar al-Bashir, 1986.
Jones, Kenneth W. Socio-Religious Reform Movements in British India. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1989.
Khawaja, Ahmed Ali. Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi: His Views on Moral Philosophy and Tasawwuf. Delhi: Adam Publishers, 2002.
Metcalf, Barbara Daly. Islamic Revival in British India: Deoband, 1860-1900. Princeton: Princeton University, 1982.
Masud, Muhammad Khalid, ed. Travellers in Faith: Studies of the Tablighi Jama‘at as a Transnational Islamic Movement for Faith Renewal. Leiden: Brill, 2000.
Naeem, Fuad S. “A Traditional Islamic Response to the Rise of Modernism.” Islam, Fundamentalism, and the Betrayal of Tradition: Essays by Western Muslim Scholars. Ed. Joseph E.B. Lumbard. Bloomington: World Wisdom, 2004. 79–120.
Nawawi, Abu Zakariyya Muhyi ’l-Din ibn Sharaf. Tr. Aisha Bewley. Bustan al-‘Arifin: The Garden of the Gnostics. Leicester: Al-Faruq, 2001.
Qurayshi, Muhammad Iqbal. Ma‘arif-e Gangohi. Lahore: Idara Islamiyyat, 1976.
‘Uthmani, Mufti Muhammad Taqi. Akabir-e Deoband kya the? (Who were the Elders of Deoband?). Karachi: Idarat al-Ma‘arif, 2000.

———. Hakim al-Ummat ke siyasi afkar (The political views of Hakim al-Ummat) in Islam awr Siyasat. Multan: Idara Ta’lifat-e Ashrafiyya.
———. Irshadat-e Akabir (Sayings of the Saintly Elders). Multan: Idara Ta’lifat-e Ashrafiyya, 1998.

Zayd, Muhammad. Dini da‘wat-o tabligh ke usul-o ahkam. Multan : Idara Ta’lifat-e Ashrafiyya, 1994.

Links to some unsourced info which may be found in actual sources

--Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 17:09, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removing a reference

@AafiOnMobile: Aafi 2022 is not a reliable source. Kindly restore the reference or explain its removal. - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 14:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AafiOnMobile: Since you mentioned in my talk page that the issue is with my claim that Bahishti Zewar is not the book of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi as accepted by Islamic academia (which you disputed), I offered the following explanation

In a footnote on page 167 of the Chapter on Fasting in the book 'Bahishti Gawhar' (published by Maktabatul Bushra Karachi, Pakistan), 'Allama Zafar Ahmad Usmani (the nephew of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi) wrote:

مولوى احمد على صاحب مؤلف بہشتی زیور

Meaning: Maulvi Ahmad Ali Sahib is the compiler of "Bahishti Zewar"

The same footnote has been added to page 135 of the 2nd volume of 'Imdadul Fatawa' (a book compiling the fatawa of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi) published by Zakaria Book Depot, Deoband and to page 166 of the version published by Darul Uloom Karachi. The book has been published using the arrangement and setting of Mufti Muhammad Shafi Deobandi. This shows us that the book is actually attributed to an Islamic scholar named Ahmad Ali by Islamic academia. If that isn't enough, then we can look at what Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi said in a Fatwa of his that can be found in the compilation of his Fatawa, 'Imdadul Fatawa'. He was asked about the expiation of a broken fast as mentioned in the Chapter on Fasting in the 2nd Volume of Bahishti Zewar. In reply to that question, he wrote:

بہشتی زیور کی سند میں تو اس وقت کوئی روایت نہیں ملی مولوی احمد علی صاحب مرحوم نے معلوم نہیں وہ مسئلہ کہا سے لکها

Meaning: "I have not found any narration supporting the mentioned masa'il in Bahishti Zewar. I do not know where Marhum Maulvi Ahmad Ali sahib took it from." (Imdadul Fatawa, Zakaria Book Depot Deoband, 2/136; Maktaba Darul Uloom Karachi, 2/166]

Finally, let us now identify who this "Ahmad Ali" Sahib was. He was actually a Maulana and the first Khalifa of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi. Maulana Ahmad Ali Sahib actually compiled "Bahishti Zewar" upon the command and supervision of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi. That is probably why the book camde to attributed to Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi. Later on, various important topics and discussions written by Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi rahimahullah himself were added to that book. More on the life of Maulana Ahmad Ali rahimahullah can be found in the biography of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi rahimahullah named 'Ashrafus Sawaneh'. - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 14:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would just like to update that I would like to retract my first statement about the Aafi 2022 reference. I did not know how the Sfn template worked and after checking how it worked, I've updated the References section. - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 08:11, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the latest modifications hoping that it would be less confusing to people like me. - Sulṭān ʿAbdullāh al-Hindi ^Talk 08:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on dates

I was just looking at this page and would like to suggest that the corresponding Gregorian dates be given in parenthesis after the AH dates in the 'Birth and Education' section as it would give a clearer timeline. Equally, adding the AH dates in the section 'Opposition by Barelvis' might be worthwhile. Gusfriend (talk) 11:36, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]