(vii) British Agent

Another charge against A‘lahazrat is that he was an agent of the British. Such a charge is framed by only those who charge for framing charges against A‘lahazrat. They discharge their duty. They have nothing to do with the background or base.

Nobody can say that A‘lahazrat has ever written a single word in support of the British. Nobody can say that A‘lahazrat has ever spoken even a single word in favor of the British. Nobody can say that A‘lahazrat has ever attended any Meeting of the British. Nobody can say that A‘lahazrat ever invited any British in any of his functions or ever otherwise. It was A‘lahazrat who never allowed any interview to the British. He hated the British so much that he used to affix postage stamps on the envelope in such a way that the head of Queen Victoria, Edward VIII and George V were downward. He carried out this practice not only in case of envelopes but he also wrote address on that postcard by keeping the picture-head of the Queen and King downward. Such envelopes and postcards of A‘lahazrat can be seen in the libraries of Prof. Dr. Mukhtar al-din Arzu at Aligarh and Prof. Dr. Muhammad Mas‘ud Ahmad at Karachi (Pakistan). Some photocopies from the collection of Dr. Mukhtar al-din Arzu being presented here for the readers. A‘lahazrat usually spoke and wrote against the British. His four point economic programme released in 1912 was a big challenge to the British Govt. and their interest in India. Prof. Mas‘ud Dehlawi has written a separate book "Gunahe be Gunahi" in this respect. Through his book "Ulèma-i-Deoband Ki Angrez Dosti" published from Allahabad (UP). Allama Mushtaq Ahmad Nizami has proved that, in fact, bonds of friendship existed amid Ulèma of Deoband and the British Government. Both were hand and glove with each other. Of late, Hazrat Abd al-Naim Azizi, Ex-editor of Sunni Dunya, Bareilly has compiled and published a thrilling book. "Humphery Kay E‘trafat" (Memoirs of Mr. Humphery, the English spy in Islamic countries) which unmasks that the real British agent was Mr. Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahab. The book is a severe blow to the Wahabi world. Allama Arshadul Qàdri has given a unique challenge to the opponents of A‘lahazrat in this regard. He said to the opponents, "what to say of proving this charge from the books of A‘lahazrat or his followers, you cannot prove this even from your own authentic books." It is a challenge as well as an advice. Let such people find out such a charge in the books of Mawlawi Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Mawlawi Khalil Ahmad Ambethvi etc. who were contemporaries of A‘lahazrat. If they fail to prove from their own books, then they should at least be kind enough to feel sorry and withdraw this charge.

(viii) Creation of Differences amongst Muslims

Another big charge against A‘lahazrat is that he created differences amongst Muslims. The sole basis of this allegation is that A‘lahazrat condemned Ghulam Ahmad Qadyani, Mawlawi Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, Mawlawi Khalil Ahmad Ambethvi, Mawlawi Qasim Nanutvi and Mawlawi Ashraf Ali Thanvi as Kafir. It was but natural for these leaders and their supporters to turn against A‘lahazrat. Had A‘lahazrat supported or agreed to the cause of these leaders, certainly there would have been no schism amongst the Muslims. This is what the opponents of A‘lahazrat want to impress upon the people. Here, the following points arise:-

(i) A‘lahazrat had differences with Mawlawi Ismail Dehlawi but he had no differences with Shah Abd al-Aziz Muhaddith Dehlawi. Shah Abd al-Aziz was admittedly an uncle of Mawlawi Ismail. Had Mawlawi Ismail agreed to or supported the cause of Shah Abd al-Aziz, certainly there would have been no rift amongst the Muslims. It is also a point to think over.

(ii) A‘lahazrat had differences with Mawlawi Rashid Ahmad Gangohi and Mawlawi Ashraf Ali Thanvi but A‘lahazrat had no differences with Haji Imdadullah Sahib. Mawlawi Rashid Ahmad Gangohi and Mawlawi Ashraf Ali Thanvi happened to be a Mureed of Haji Imdadullah Muhajir-i-Makki. Mawlawi Rashid Ahmad Gangohi and Mawlawi Ashraf Ali Thanvi agreed to or supported the cause of his own Pir, Haji Imdadullah Saheb, certainly there would have been no split amongst the Muslims. It is also a point to give importance to.

(iii) A‘lahazrat had differences with Abu al-Kalaam Azad but A‘lahazrat had no differences with Mawlana Khair al-din, the father of Abu al-Kalaam Azad. Had Mr. Abu al-Kalaam Azad agreed to or supported the cause of his own father, certainly there would have been no differeces amongst Muslims. It is also a point to give rating to.

(iv) Why A‘lahazrat alone? It always takes two to shake together. If A‘lahazrat is to be blamed for criticizing Deobandism, then the so-called leaders of Deoband are equally to be blamed for criticizing Sunnism. Who made a start, is the only deciding factor. Now it must be remembered that Mawlawi Ismail Dehlawi lashed out at Sunnism and laid the foundation of Deobandism in India at a time when A‘lahazrat was not born. Mawlawi Ismail Dehlawi died in 1830 and A‘lahazrat took birth in 1856.

If books not men are to be counted then Taqviat-al-Iman of Mawlawi Ismail Dehlawi was published in 1824 and Al-Motamad al-Mustanad of A‘lahazrat was published in 1902 who started first, is now clear. Mawlawi Ismail Dehlawi was the first person in India who created differences amongst Muslims by criticizing Sunni ideology and introducing "Deobandi" ideology. Taqviat-al-Iman was the first book in India, which brought about such tumult.

Over and above, even if the condemnation of Deobandism alone is taken as the root cause for Muslim split-up, even then, it shall have to be seen if A‘lahazrat was the first person in this sphere? It cannot be gainsaid the Mawlawi Ismail Dehlawi was first opposed by Shah Abd al-Aziz Dehlawi, Shah Makhsoos Ullah Saheb (nephew of Shah Abd al-Aziz) and Shah Munawwar al-din Saheb (grandfather of Mr. Abu al-Kalaam Azad) All these savants were contemporaries of Mawlawi Ismail Dehlawi and A‘lahazrat was not born by then. It cannot be gainsaid that Hazrat Fazle Haq Khairabadi condemned "Deobandism", wrote "Tahqiq al-Fatwa" ( ), A‘lahazrat was not born by then. It cannot be gainsaid that Hazrat Fazle-i-Rasùl Budayooni condemned Deobandism wrote "if al-Jabbar" and A‘lahazrat was not born by then. As a number of savants condemned Deobandism and as a number of books were written over this issue before the birth of A‘lahazrat, he cannot be said to the first person to condemn Deobandism and thereby create differences amongst Muslims A‘lahazrat only followed Sunni savants and endorsed their views in regard to propagation of Sunnism and condemnation of Deobandism. For detailed study of various charges leveled against A‘lahazrat at and their befitting replies, please see "Adhere say ujale tuk" written by Hazrat Muhammad Abd al-Hakim Qàdri, published from Markazi Majlis Riza, Lahore.

Thus, it would be seen that it was not A‘lahazrat but the above named kingpins of Deoband who opened the floodgates of differences amongst Muslims. No Doubt A‘lahazrat was the torch Bearer of Ahl-i-Sunnat wa Jama‘at in the subcontinent. He fought for the Unity of Muslim Ummah.