alahazrat's ijazah to the famous muhaddith abdu'l Hayy al-kattani

Seems their website has undergone changes. Here's the fiile for the English version.

 

the ijazah is mentioned on these links too -

https://howiyapress.com/وفاة-العلامة-المسند-الكبير-عبد-الرحمن/

https://islamspedia.com/?p=157

https://al-maktaba.org/book/31617/21280#p15

 

Words from Imam Abdulhayy Al-Kattani on Imam Ahmad Rida رحمهم الله, along with the chain of the Qadiriyyah order, and a foreword produced by the Dar Al-Imam Yusuf Al-Nabhani team in English, Arabic, and Turkish:
http://dar-alnabhani.com/

 

An interesting find on the site.
http://www.daralhadith.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Barzanji-Ilm-Ghayb.pdf
Shaykh ahmad barzanji's treatise on 'Ilm ul ghaib.

Deobandis present another work of shaykh barzanji's whose original manuscript is unknown and gives an inaccurate representation of shaykh barzanji's views on ilm ul ghaib.

Mufti monawwar atiq of the UK explains this https://scholarsink.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/knowledge_of_the_unseen_theology1.pdf (pages 27 and 28). He mentions the work Risalah fi al-Ilm al-Nabawi. is that the same as the work above (Risalah fi ilm al ghaib)?

 

kakazai is a very moderate British Pakistani deobandi, this is my opinion. He is the type of Hamza KaramAli and Faraz Rabbani's students like Salman, who do not call themselves as deobandi, but would like to remind the staunch deobandis of their misunderstandings in the case of the akabr e deobandi, who they deem followed correct Sunnism; but kakazai has respect for 'Ala HaDrat's scholarship more than the others mentioned in this post due to probably two reasons that I can think of considering his daily encounters

 

http://www.daralhadith.org.uk/?p=205

Al-Kakazai wrote;

He must be aware of the disgusting lies written by Lakhnawi in Nuzhat al-Khawatir;

If he was unaware of what was written in Nuzhat al-Khawatir he would not have written

This article was written in 2008, a full year before he posted the extract from Nuzhat al-Khawatir, on Sayyid Ahmad-i Nuri (radiAllahu 'anh).
His tone and what he has written does seem to suggest that he does not agree with Lakhnawi in relation to the slander he penned in Nuzhat al-Khawatir regarding Sayyidi A'la Hazrat. He mentions the author/commentators of the aforementioned books of Hanafi Fiqh as

I think maybe the latter 'akabir' he mentions in the article are the akabir 'ulama of the Deobandis, seeing as this article seems to be addressed to them, or atleast to a group from amongst them.

The entire article seems to be in refutation of Deobandis who call tawassul shirk and Sunnis grave worshipers. He also quotes from al-Muhannad at the end. All in all it seems very clear that he is absolutely a fence sitter.

 

maybe you see things that i don't do. please help me here.
----
first about the biography on alukah. i didn't see anything that proves your claim that he differed from the sunni path on the matter of sifat. about his praise for ibn taymiyyah, he is not alone; many ulama whom we respect - suyuti and ibn abidin included have called him shaykh al-islam and praised him. i personally don't like ibn taymiyyah, but i have made peace with the fact that many great sunni ulama have reconciled with the conflict that iT was a prominent Hafiz and hadith scholar, but at the same time had aberrant opinions.

in shawahid al-Haqq itself, a citation by sayyidi ahmad zarruq sums up the dilemma and a fair standpoint: that he was a major hadith scholar, but he had aberrations in certain issues. we do not follow him in his aberrant opinions.


---
on the second link, i didn't find any mention of ibn abd al-wahhab (unless by kingpin, you refer to ibn taymiyyah).

there is this purported letter by al-kattani apologising for his comments in his taqriz upon nab'hani's shawahid al-Haqq. i don't know of the authenticity of the letter (apart from the observation, that citation on that page appears to be incomplete and chunks seem to have been omitted from the missive). firstly, all of these claims of his becoming a salafi are those of his descendants and students who seem to have become enamoured of ibn Taymiyyah.

yet, from that very citation, it is clear that sayyid abd al-Hayy al-kattani never wavered from the mas'alah of visiting RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam; he also defends sufis from the criticism of ibn Taymiyyah and refuses to accept anything from him concerning them:

فلا أقبل أنا في مثل ابن العربي والشاذلي وابن الفارض مائة ألف من ابن تيمية، مع إقامة العذر له، والعلم بأنه لو اطلع على ما اطلعوا

----
from the same citation (reiterating that i am unaware of its authenticity):

فسلكت أنا ذلك المسلك، وبينما نحن نستقبح مسلك النابغة نعمان الألوسي في "جلاء العينين"، ومبالغته في بعض المواضع، إذ ظهر ذلك الشيطان المارق المفتون عن دينه ودنياه، المتلاعب بدين محمد تلاعب الرياح العاصفة بالشجرة اللينة العزيزة في الجبل العالي، صاحب "غاية الأماني في الرد على النبهاني"، انظر كيف عمد إلى الغزالي وإمام الحرمين وابن السبكي وأولاده وحزبه، والسيوطي وابن حجر المكي، والسيد المرتضى خاتمة الحفاظ، الذي ما أتى بعد تلاميذ العسقلاني أعلم منه بهذه الصناعة، فلمز أعراضهم، ونقض فضائلهم، وشرح مثالبهم التي خلقها وولدها. وانظر كيف عمد إلى محمد عبده ورشيد رضا والحلبي صاحب "التعليم والإرشاد"، فجعلهم كالأيمة الأربعة، وجعل الدليل على فضل ابن تيمية مدح هؤلاء له. وانظر كيف خاطب الشيخ عبد القادر الجيلي، والأستاذ الرفاعي وأمثالهم؟. هل يسوغ لمسلم السكوت عن ذلك أو تحمله؟. فإن كان جمال الدين القاسمي ممن يرضيه ذلك فسأعلمه بأني مباين له في المشرب، ومعاد لهذا المذهب وأهله​

----
about ibn abd al-Hadi and his screed:

يشهد بأن ابن عبد الهادي صاحب "الصارم المنكي"، صنع شيئا ما هو إلا مختال خابط خبط عشواء، عالم بالجرح غافل عن التعديل، يتمسك بالإطلاق ويغفل عن التقييد، يتمسك بالألفاظ ولا يحكّم معانيها ومقاصدها​

-----
Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

Muhammad Abd al-Hayy al-Kattani quotes Shaykh Nabahani or Shaykh Abd al-Aziz al-Dabbagh isn't proof of anything, because the deobandis also do quote. Infact deobandits have translated Ibriz of Shah Abd al-Aziz al-Dabbagh, then again that's not a proof of sound itiqad of Deobandits.

The problematic issue is his position on Asma wa Sifat and his love for Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.

You can read his biography authored by Wahhabites here http://www.alukah.net/culture/0/27301/

and you can also read Kattani's defence of Wahhabi kingpin

http://www.azahera.net/showthread.php?t=1294


رسالة للسيد عبد الحي الكتاني للمكي بن عزوز
رسالة للسيد عبد الحي الكتاني وجهها للمكي بن عزوز يبين فيها وموقفه الجديد من ابن تيمية ومن المتعصبين, أنقلها هنا كما نقلها السيد حمزة الكتاني في روض الرياحين:
قال الحافظ الشيخ عبد الحي الكتاني في رسالة منه للعلامة المكي ابن عزوز رحمه الله حول هذا التقريظ:
خطبت وده - الشيخ النبهاني - أولا بمكاتبته، فكتبت مستجيزا من أستاذنا الوالد، وشيخنا الأخ، والفقير، فوفقت في إجازتهم له وأجزته أيضا، واستجزته. فلما سافرت للحج كان نزلي في مصر بمنزل العلامة السيد أحمد الحسيني، فأوقفني على هذا الكتاب "شواهد الحق"، قبل إكماله، ورغبني في تقريظه، فصدر مني ما صدر من التوغل والإفراط في ذم ابن تيمية شيخ الإسلام، وأتباعه، لموجبات أوجبت لي ذلك، أعظمها: أني إذذاك لم أتمكن من مطالعة كتب شيخ الإسلام حق المطالعة، ولا استوعبت واحدا منها، لأنها ما وصلتنا لفاس، لأن أرباب الكتب لعلمهم بأن سوقها غير نافذ، لا يجلبونها إلا بطلب خاص".

 

in post #14, the citation is from jamiy karamat al-awliya of nab'hani - in sayyidi abd al-Hayy kattani's words:

 

on p.89 he mentions sayyidi abd al-Aziz dabbagh; as if salafi-wahabis love ibriz and fondly quote from it! besides, this is about seeing RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam with waking eyes!

 

i read this book not very long ago, and i don't remember having seen this "confession". i just browsed through right now, and starting from the author's preface, and ran through it twice, but i didn't see it. if anyone has a reference, please do. i doubt that it would figure in shamayil.

however, he does mention sufiyah in his work that would be anathema to even the mildest "salafi" and the person whose copy was scanned has the following comments - notice that shaykh kattani "asked" the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, and the salafi scribbler is indignant:

 

This is new to me; however, the works of the likes of Shaykh Muhammad b. Ja`far al-Kattani and others are pretty much the total opposite of Salafi creed. Take for example the points mentioned in his muqaddima to Salwat al-Anfas [regarding awliya]? Or his Jala' al-Qulub [on Prophetic knowledge]?

 

A deobandi told me that Kattani scholars are Salafi Wahhabi in Aqidah. I did not believe him until I did my own research and I came across
https://ar-ar.facebook.com/elkettani.ma/posts/563620323685847


ذكر الشيخ عبد الحي الكتاني عن نفسه في "منية السائل في اختصار الشمائل"، انه سلفي العقيدة ، و ذكر في "المظاهر السامية في النسبة و الطريقة الكتانية" ان الكتانيين اشاعرة على مذهب "الابانة" لا على مذهب المتكلمين، و ذكر جدنا محمد المنتصر الكتاني في تقديمه ل"الرسالة المستطرفة" ان مؤلفها جده الامام محمد بن جعفر كان سلفي العقيدة و كان يرى ان الاشاعرة و الماتريدية انما اولوا بحسن نية تنزيها لله تعالى، و ذكر الامام ابن جعفر في "نظم المتناثر في الحديث المتواتر" فصولا في اثبات عقيدة اهل السنة و نقل فيها كلام شيخ الاسلام ابن تيمية من كتبه، و وصفه بشيخ الاسلام. و كذلك دعا جدنا محمد المنتصر في "فتية طارق و الغافقي" لتدريس الناس عقيدة اثرية مستمدة من الكتاب و السنة و ترك كتب الكلام، و قال لي بأنه على عقيدة اهل الحديث، و كذلك كان شقيقه المحدث محمد الناصر كما في كتابه "عيون الآثار"، و صنف العلامة محمد ابراهيم بن احمد بن جعفر رسالة قيمة و هي "سلفية الامام مالك"، و قرر فيها عقيدة اهل السنة بكلام جميل.
فهؤلاء هم آل بيتنا، و قد كانوا اوسع من مذاهبهم و مشاربهم، همهم رفعة الاسلام و شريعته، و قال لي والدي علي بن المنتصر : كان وادي يقول لي: قال الامام مالك: اهل السنة من لا اسم لهم سوى السنة.

I think we should avoid Kattani and Ghumari Scholars. They are salafi wahhabi in aqidah

 

http://www.daralhadith.org.uk/?p=124
----
shaykh muHammad ibn abi bakr al-mulla raHimahullah.

if our assessment is right, five of his shaykhs from Hijaz are signatories to Husam al-Haramayn (unless of course, these are contemporary ulama with similar names):

----------
3- Sh. Saeed al-Yamani (#19 in Husam)

4- Sh. Abu Hafs Umar bin Abi Bakr Ba Junaid al-Makki (#8 in Husam)

12- Sh. Muhammad Ali bin Hussein al-Maliki (#10 in Husam)

13- Sh. Abu Hafs Umar bin Hamdan al-Mahrasi (#28 and #29 in Husam; as he wrote TWO attestations)

14- Sh. Abd al-Qadir bin Tawfiq al-Shibli al-Madani (#34 in Husam)

----
ijazah from alahazrat

15- Sh. al-Sharif Muhammad Abd al-Hayy al-Kattani

Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

it would be an issue if devbandis boldly proclaimed their true aqidah instead of acting like hypocrites that they are. may Allah give them a just recompense, these munafiqin went to arabs as sunnis and to this day do a two-face.

 

Sayyid Ibrahim al-Ahsai took ijazat from Qutb e Madina. However, he also took from Kandehlawi.

 

http://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/deobandi-liars.7454/#post-28905

http://www.falaah.co.uk/refutation/wahabi/111-fazle-rasul-badayuni-and-deobandi-methodology

the exact passage can be read on the devbandas' forum - it's obnoxious and brimming with lies so I won't be posting the link here.