<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Deoband.org</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.deoband.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.deoband.org</link>
	<description>Shari&#039;ah, Tariqah, Adherence to the Sunnah and Love of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:49:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mawlid, Deoband and Hanafi fiqh by Abdullatif</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2010/02/fiqh/miscellaneous/mawlid-deoband-and-hanafi-fiqh/#comment-5568</link>
		<dc:creator>Abdullatif</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deoband.org/?p=895#comment-5568</guid>
		<description>MashaAllah very nicely explained in detail.jazakallah khaiur.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MashaAllah very nicely explained in detail.jazakallah khaiur.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on He (Allah) then firmly established Himself over the Throne by bilal hassn</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2009/01/quran/quran-commentary/he-allah-most-high-then-firmly-established-himself-over-the-throne/#comment-5562</link>
		<dc:creator>bilal hassn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 05:11:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deoband.org/?p=16#comment-5562</guid>
		<description>jazakAllah khaira</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jazakAllah khaira</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Understanding Taqlid: Following One of the Four Great Imams by Muhammed Ali Asif</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2010/10/general/taqlid-and-ijtihad/understanding-taqlid-following-one-of-the-four-great-imams/#comment-5561</link>
		<dc:creator>Muhammed Ali Asif</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:59:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deoband.org/?p=2459#comment-5561</guid>
		<description>The book by Mufti Taqi Usmani = The legal status of following a madhab&quot; is a brilliant book as well. It is a must read, clarifies everything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The book by Mufti Taqi Usmani = The legal status of following a madhab&#8221; is a brilliant book as well. It is a must read, clarifies everything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Clearest Rational Argument for the Existence of a Creator by Mohamed</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2010/03/aqida/allah-and-his-attributes/clearest-rational-argument-for-the-existence-of-a-creator/#comment-5559</link>
		<dc:creator>Mohamed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 07:12:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deoband.org/?p=927#comment-5559</guid>
		<description>If we reject the idea that everything begins to exist has a cause, then we are asserting that:

Everything that begins to exist has no cause

Then we will be saying that everything begins to exist out of pure randomness. If we say that things happen out of pure randomness, we are saying that all the infinitely many possibilities that exist in the universe, are all equally possible (that is, after all, what randomness is). It is sort of like a fair die (singular of dice) with infinite sides. With an infinitely-sided die, no matter how many times you roll it, you will NEVER observe a pattern. Even if you have a million infinitely sided dice, and you roll each a million times, you will still NEVER have a pattern, no matter how macroscopic you go. And if a pattern is observed, it MUST be concluded that the die is not fair. This is just based on the rules of prior probabilities (a priori). However, the world we live in has patterns, from our breathing to the rotation of the planets. Therefore, the universe is not random, and the premise that holds that everything that begins to exist must have a cause holds true.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If we reject the idea that everything begins to exist has a cause, then we are asserting that:</p>
<p>Everything that begins to exist has no cause</p>
<p>Then we will be saying that everything begins to exist out of pure randomness. If we say that things happen out of pure randomness, we are saying that all the infinitely many possibilities that exist in the universe, are all equally possible (that is, after all, what randomness is). It is sort of like a fair die (singular of dice) with infinite sides. With an infinitely-sided die, no matter how many times you roll it, you will NEVER observe a pattern. Even if you have a million infinitely sided dice, and you roll each a million times, you will still NEVER have a pattern, no matter how macroscopic you go. And if a pattern is observed, it MUST be concluded that the die is not fair. This is just based on the rules of prior probabilities (a priori). However, the world we live in has patterns, from our breathing to the rotation of the planets. Therefore, the universe is not random, and the premise that holds that everything that begins to exist must have a cause holds true.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hafiz Ibn Kathir and Sufism by Talib</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2012/02/tasawwuf/shariah-and-tariqah-tasawwuf/hafiz-ibn-kathir-and-sufism/#comment-5558</link>
		<dc:creator>Talib</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:22:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deoband.org/?p=3452#comment-5558</guid>
		<description>Jazak Allah never saw anything like this in english before</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jazak Allah never saw anything like this in english before</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Query Regarding the Barelwis by Abu al-Hasan</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2010/07/aqida/deviant-beliefs/a-query-regarding-the-barelwis/#comment-5530</link>
		<dc:creator>Abu al-Hasan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:18:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deoband.org/?p=1650#comment-5530</guid>
		<description>An empty and unsubstantiated comment regarding the Barelwis&#039; actual take on Ma Kan wa Ma Yakun. Do you simply believe the Deobandi Mashaykh -- those who embodied the inner and outward sciences -- were so mundane to not understand what the Barelwis actually meant from Ma Kan wa Ma Yakun. Can you envisage a Mufti giving a fatwa without understanding the actual issue? Were these Ulama void of spirituality, conscience and piety? Instead, we have non-Urdu speakers coming today, 100 years later, assuming an air of expertise and pretending to know what was actually meant. These claims that the difference was linguistic (lafzi) are simply baseless. Here&#039;s what Maulana Ahmed Raza Khan said himself:

Ahmad Rada Khan Barelwi writes, “It is without a doubt that the Almighty has given His Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace) the complete knowledge of everything from the first till the last. From the east to the west, from the Throne till the earth, everything was shown to him. He was made witness to the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth. From the very first day till the last day all of the knowledge of what was and what shall be (ma kana wa ma yakun) has been shown to him. From all of the above, not even an iota is outside the knowledge of the Prophet. Great knowledge has been encompassed by the Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace). It is not just of a summary type but what is small and big, every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness of the earth are in their entirety known to him individually and in detail. Much praise to Allah. In fact, that which has been discussed is not, never, the complete knowledge of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace and send peace on his family and companions, all of them); but this is a small part of the Prophet’s knowledge …” (Anba al-Mustafa, p.486)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An empty and unsubstantiated comment regarding the Barelwis&#8217; actual take on Ma Kan wa Ma Yakun. Do you simply believe the Deobandi Mashaykh &#8212; those who embodied the inner and outward sciences &#8212; were so mundane to not understand what the Barelwis actually meant from Ma Kan wa Ma Yakun. Can you envisage a Mufti giving a fatwa without understanding the actual issue? Were these Ulama void of spirituality, conscience and piety? Instead, we have non-Urdu speakers coming today, 100 years later, assuming an air of expertise and pretending to know what was actually meant. These claims that the difference was linguistic (lafzi) are simply baseless. Here&#8217;s what Maulana Ahmed Raza Khan said himself:</p>
<p>Ahmad Rada Khan Barelwi writes, “It is without a doubt that the Almighty has given His Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace) the complete knowledge of everything from the first till the last. From the east to the west, from the Throne till the earth, everything was shown to him. He was made witness to the Kingdom of the heavens and the earth. From the very first day till the last day all of the knowledge of what was and what shall be (ma kana wa ma yakun) has been shown to him. From all of the above, not even an iota is outside the knowledge of the Prophet. Great knowledge has been encompassed by the Noble Beloved (Allah bless him and grant him peace). It is not just of a summary type but what is small and big, every leaf that falls and every grain in the darkness of the earth are in their entirety known to him individually and in detail. Much praise to Allah. In fact, that which has been discussed is not, never, the complete knowledge of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace and send peace on his family and companions, all of them); but this is a small part of the Prophet’s knowledge …” (Anba al-Mustafa, p.486)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Principle of Blocking the Means by Hamid Khan</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2011/12/general/principles-of-fiqh/the-principle-of-blocking-the-means/#comment-5529</link>
		<dc:creator>Hamid Khan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:59:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deoband.org/?p=3415#comment-5529</guid>
		<description>Masha Allah! Founded and knowledge-based arguments are always easily recognized.
What a splendid job of the aalim. May Allah bless them all, all the time. Aaameen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Masha Allah! Founded and knowledge-based arguments are always easily recognized.<br />
What a splendid job of the aalim. May Allah bless them all, all the time. Aaameen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Shaykh Muhammad Shafi‘: The Mufti of Pakistan by nayzaw</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2011/12/history/biographies-of-scholars/shaykh-muhammad-shafi%e2%80%98-the-mufti-of-pakistan/#comment-5528</link>
		<dc:creator>nayzaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 10:33:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deoband.org/?p=3353#comment-5528</guid>
		<description>Jazakallah</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jazakallah</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Clearest Rational Argument for the Existence of a Creator by Yusuf Mullan</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2010/03/aqida/allah-and-his-attributes/clearest-rational-argument-for-the-existence-of-a-creator/#comment-5522</link>
		<dc:creator>Yusuf Mullan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 04:48:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://deoband.org/?p=927#comment-5522</guid>
		<description>I re-read the proof again after over a year. Seems clear to me. This equality vs. non-equality point was explained in several different ways in the article itself. So, the question was in what sense are the 2 equal? Here&#039;s the very simple reply:

The 2 are equal in NOT BEING REQUIRED by the very nature of the being.

There&#039;s nothing in the nature of the being that requires either. Left to itself, the thing would remain a possibility without occurrence and this state would need to maintain forever until something comes along to prefer one over the other (since it&#039;s very being is not doing it, otherwise it would have been existent since eternity past).

The idea is complex and the reason for the complexity is the axiom was self-evidently true to begin with (this was stated in the article). This is what happens when obvious things are proven deductively.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I re-read the proof again after over a year. Seems clear to me. This equality vs. non-equality point was explained in several different ways in the article itself. So, the question was in what sense are the 2 equal? Here&#8217;s the very simple reply:</p>
<p>The 2 are equal in NOT BEING REQUIRED by the very nature of the being.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s nothing in the nature of the being that requires either. Left to itself, the thing would remain a possibility without occurrence and this state would need to maintain forever until something comes along to prefer one over the other (since it&#8217;s very being is not doing it, otherwise it would have been existent since eternity past).</p>
<p>The idea is complex and the reason for the complexity is the axiom was self-evidently true to begin with (this was stated in the article). This is what happens when obvious things are proven deductively.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Difference between Tasarruf and Karamah by Talib</title>
		<link>http://www.deoband.org/2012/01/aqida/prophets-angels-and-companions/the-difference-between-tasarruf-and-karamah/#comment-5521</link>
		<dc:creator>Talib</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 04:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deoband.org/?p=3427#comment-5521</guid>
		<description>Does Ittihaadi Tawajjuh come under tasarruf? 

&quot;Regarding such transference of spiritual and celestial energy and ability, known to the Masha-ikh as Tawajjuh, there are four kinds:

4. Ittihaadi (Unification): In this type of Tawajjuh, the Shaikh diffuses his rooh into the rooh of the mureed to such a degree that both souls are united into a single soul. It is quite obvious that this form of Tawajjuh is the strongest. As a result of the unification of the two souls, the mureed is not in need of repeatedly seeking spiritual gain. The Sufiyaa regard this form of Tawajjuh to be of great importance although its incidence is rare.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does Ittihaadi Tawajjuh come under tasarruf? </p>
<p>&#8220;Regarding such transference of spiritual and celestial energy and ability, known to the Masha-ikh as Tawajjuh, there are four kinds:</p>
<p>4. Ittihaadi (Unification): In this type of Tawajjuh, the Shaikh diffuses his rooh into the rooh of the mureed to such a degree that both souls are united into a single soul. It is quite obvious that this form of Tawajjuh is the strongest. As a result of the unification of the two souls, the mureed is not in need of repeatedly seeking spiritual gain. The Sufiyaa regard this form of Tawajjuh to be of great importance although its incidence is rare.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

