Ahmad Shah Abdali was a Wahhabi

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Bismillah

As Salaamu 3alaykum wa Ra7matullah,


We often hear secularists, nationalists and some Sufis praise Ahmed Shah Abdali as the father and founder of Afghanistan.

Little do they know that the charismatic hero and icon of Pashtun people was actually a follower of Shah Waliullah Dhelawi and the Indian proto-type Wahhabis.

In fact the epic defeat of Indians by the Afghan Muslim army was basically because Shah Waliullah Dhelawi wrote to his mureed, Ahmed Shah Abdali to come and attack the Marathas.

There is even a book by shaykh Mubarakpuri with detailed information about the relationship of sub-continent proto-type Wahhabis and the rulers of Afghanistan.

[Badlun]

You are such a kazib, munafiq and rumors monger that by writing one letter by Shah Walilullah to him, Abdali became Wahabi!

Please note that I have studied shah waliullah in detail. I have read his Hujatullah Balighah. He was a rational intellectual. He never claimed or declared that he was a wahabi or ghair muqallid. Some of his pupils like Syed Ahmad Brelvi were Salafis who was the first terrorist of sub continent.

Also what happened after the Marhata wars? Abdali never got the status of an Indian ruler. Indians were weakened and British got the benefit. Abdali do looted India and enriched his treasures but his wars were largely inconsequential from an Afghan or Muslim standpoint.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Bismillah

As Salaamu 3alaykum wa Ra7matullah,


We often hear secularists, nationalists and some Sufis praise Ahmed Shah Abdali as the father and founder of Afghanistan.

Little do they know that the charismatic hero and icon of Pashtun people was actually a follower of Shah Waliullah Dhelawi and the Indian proto-type Wahhabis.

In fact the epic defeat of Indians by the Afghan Muslim army was basically because Shah Waliullah Dhelawi wrote to his mureed, Ahmed Shah Abdali to come and attack the Marathas.

There is even a book by shaykh Mubarakpuri with detailed information about the relationship of sub-continent proto-type Wahhabis and the rulers of Afghanistan.

Shamlawar,

This discussion was partially had here already where Toramana went away intellectually limping:

http://www.pashtunforums.com/showthr...ad+shah+abdali

The discussion continues here with an emphasis on Abadli's ambassadors being sent to China on behalf of Uighar/Turkmens and also planning Abdali had made to seek permission from The Ottoman Sultan (caliph at the time) to consider Jaffarite Shiites as an additional madhab (i.e. he wanted to undo the Safawed travesties and regain Iran).

http://www.pashtunforums.com/showthr...hlight=gommans

I quote directly from preserved letters in Turkey from Ahmad Shah himself in that latter thread.

Gommans went to the primary sources including Terikh e Ahmad Shah (i.e. the original edition manuscript) and other contemporary sources to make his point.

Each time Badlun has an intellectual seizure note that he will claim he is an expert in said individual and has studied Shah Waliullah etc etc etc as if to claim that somehow that is worth noting or even substantive.

Just don't waste time and instead keep cutting and pasting those two threads in your responses and click enter.

Essentially, Badlun is completely incorrect. He would have been horrified since he probably cried when the Bamayan statues were destroyed, to know the zeal with which Ahmad Shah sacked the Armistar Golden temple and even desecrated its waters with dead bodies and cows.

Basically, Badlun would have labeled Ahmad Shah Abdali as a "terrorist" by his applied standards today.

Watch him hedge and become uncomfortable since everyone knows Ahmad Shah was the quintessential Pashtun - a warrior poet par excellance.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Abdali brother, what can I say. This filthy kaafir just insulted our father by depicting him as a pillager.

Thats typical for Jews. When Abdullah the jew proclaimed his Islam the jews started insulting him while moments before they praised him as one of their nobility.

The more we reveal about our history the more explicit the hatred becomes of these secularists for what Pashtuns are essentially all about.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Abdali brother, what can I say. This filthy kaafir just insulted our father by depicting him as a pillager.

Thats typical for Jews. When Abdullah the jew proclaimed his Islam the jews started insulting him while moments before they praised him as one of their nobility.

The more we reveal about our history the more explicit the hatred becomes of these secularists for what Pashtuns are essentially all about.

This is the violent nature of militant secularists. You should read about Iran's MEK group. They are akin to these people. They are in some instance the other end of the armed spectrum that these people strived towards but were stopped from attaining by braver people.

Cult of the Chameleon - Al Jazeera 10/17/2007 - YouTube

They are willing to use any ideology and any people to further their aims and vocal minority notions.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I wonder why Wahhabis always try to claim Shah Waliyullah. So many aspects of Shah Waliullah's thinking run contrary to Wahhabi principles.

Some examples.

- He was A Naqshbandi Sufi; Lamahat and Sata'at are books both dealing with Sufi mysticism and Naqshbandi practice
- He believed in Wahdat ul Wujud and Wahdat ul Shuhud were the same thing.
_ Related point, He favored Ibn 'Arabi and believed he was on Haq, Wahhabis do not do this.
- He wasn't a strict follower of Hanafi Madhab but he believed that Shafi'i and Hanafi Madhab should be combined into a WHOLE new Madhab and everyone should taqlid to that.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I wonder why Wahhabis always try to claim Shah Waliyullah. So many aspects of Shah Waliullah's thinking run contrary to Wahhabi principles.

Some examples.

- He was A Naqshbandi Sufi; Lamahat and Sata'at are books both dealing with Sufi mysticism and Naqshbandi practice

He was Wahhabi in a particular conext. Things that people nowadays define as Wahhabism have been part of traditional Islam for centuries.

ABdul Qaadir al Jilaani is also a Sufi yet, his books Ghunyat Talibeen and his other writings go against the beliefs and practices of modern day Qadiriyyah.

Similarly, Shah Waliullah was a Sufi, yet his practices and his beliefs go against mainstream Sufism.

- He believed in Wahdat ul Wujud and Wahdat ul Shuhud were the same thing.

Do you have any literature with reference for this?

_ Related point, He favored Ibn 'Arabi and believed he was on Haq, Wahhabis do not do this.

The Deobandi school which is considered as moderate Wahhabis are known for their praise for the likes of Ibn Arabi. That doesn't change the fact that by and large Deobandis discourage people from Bidat and shirk to a certain extent.

- He wasn't a strict follower of Hanafi Madhab but he believed that Shafi'i and Hanafi Madhab should be combined into a WHOLE new Madhab and everyone should taqlid to that.

Apart from creating a new madhab, basically thats what Salafi scholars advocate. Everyone is considered a layman and every layman is a muqallid until he is no longer a layman and not a basic student of knowledge, but an advanced student of knowledge or a scholar.

[Khorosani]

i also heard that he was indirectly (without him knowing) helping the english, is that true?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

He was Wahhabi in a particular conext. Things that people nowadays define as Wahhabism have been part of traditional Islam for centuries.

You can say that about anyone; even I have views which may overlap with Wahhabism. For example I don't believe in praying to Saints for intercession actually works. I don't believe that Muhammad(saw)'s "soul" is everywhere. I don't believe in blind adherence to Madhhab. However at the same time I have views which overlap with Sufis too.

But I assure you I am a Neo-Mu'tazilite

ABdul Qaadir al Jilaani is also a Sufi yet, his books Ghunyat Talibeen and his other writings go against the beliefs and practices of modern day Qadiriyyah.

Give a specific passage which contradicts Modern Qadiryyah teachings. Not a Quote a WHOLE passage since quotes can always be taken out of context

Similarly, Shah Waliullah was a Sufi, yet his practices and his beliefs go against mainstream Sufism.

Really? You mean like his belief in the Intercession of Saints? Seems pretty consistent with current Sufism to me.

Have you ever read Alltaf Al Quds? It's about meditating and concentrating the lata'if which is similar to chakra meditation.

Do you have any literature with reference for this?

Sat'at pages 1-7, I can't just copy all of that but if I can I'll scan it for you.

The Deobandi school which is considered as moderate Wahhabis are known for their praise for the likes of Ibn Arabi. That doesn't change the fact that by and large Deobandis discourage people from Bidat and shirk to a certain extent.

"Moderate Wahhabis" ; no only Barelwi call them Wahhabis as a way to mudsling. They have absurd claims none the less but not Wahhabis.

If they praise people that Wahhabis despise how can they be Wahhabi?

Apart from creating a new madhab, basically thats what Salafi scholars advocate. Everyone is considered a layman and every layman is a muqallid until he is no longer a layman and not a basic student of knowledge, but an advanced student of knowledge or a scholar.

Salafi Scholars stress not being Taqlid to a specirfic Madhhab; Shah Waliyullah expressed Taqlid to this new Madhhab.

[DaZahroJaam.]

also a mass murderer and thief who encouraged looting people.

[Badlun]

On Ahmad Shah Baba I will repeat my words which I commented on the thread mentioned above by Dr Barakzai that

Ahmad Shah Baba was no doubt a great Pashtun leader, politician, conqueror, poet and hero. At the same time his Pan Islamism should not be emulated now as this idea is totally dead now. Even at that time he used Pan Islamism as a political move to conquer more lands. That was the tradition of that time.

He being a wise statesman and Realist capitalized on that. Khilafat was still alive although moribund. This way he became an international hero.

But now this is the time of nation states and Islamic world or Khilafa or Umma are but just mere ideas or words far far away from reality.

Ahmad Shah Baba like Khushal Baba had a multifaceted personality. He was a Pashtun nationalist, a successful administrator,using Islam for his worldly gains and loots and had a classic taste for poetry. That"s why every body finds inspiration from his personality.

[Tiger Khan]

I dont think anything wrong with him being a wahabi!!!, plus the claim can never be substantiated.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

On Ahmad Shah Baba I will repeat my words which I commented on the thread mentioned above by Dr Barakzai that

Ahmad Shah Baba was no doubt a great Pashtun leader, politician, conqueror, poet and hero. At the same time his Pan Islamism should not be emulated now as this idea is totally dead now. Even at that time he used Pan Islamism as a political move to conquer more lands. That was the tradition of that time.

He being a wise statesman and Realist capitalized on that. Khilafat was still alive although moribund. This way he became an international hero.

But now this is the time of nation states and Islamic world or Khilafa or Umma are but just mere ideas or words far far away from reality.

Ahmad Shah Baba like Khushal Baba had a multifaceted personality. He was a Pashtun nationalist, a successful administrator,using Islam for his worldly gains and loots and had a classic taste for poetry. That"s why every body finds inspiration from his personality.

I think this is a cop out.

Here is why. Its basically a slight of hand and an attempt to say:

If Ahmad Shah Abdali were resurrected today he would adopt Pashtun Nationalism and dance around in a sur khola on his saar with ijragaano quoting Wali and Ghani Khan.

Or more properly its an attempt to claim that Abdali would have emulated the behavior the 1980s opportunists or pulled Abdur Rashid Dostum style moves and act like a chameleon to survive.

The reality doesnt measure up and here is why:

1) Ahmad Shah refers to himself in his letters and in his tarikh has a religious devotee who God chose for the role he was in. He lays claim to the mantle of his ancestor Abdal who was a saint and renounced the world.

2) In a letter to Mostafa III, the Khalifa, he refers to Iranians as "rebels" or rafidah types.

3) Examine the behavior of the Hazaras and their adoption of Shi'ism - it was, as the Safawed Persians had done - a move done to counteract and counterbalance their sunni enemies (In the case of Persians it was blow back against the Arabs). Ahmad Shah Abdali and his clansmen had conflicts with some Ghilzais and it would have been as easy for Abdalis to, when they were in the service of Safaweds, adopt Shiism in the opportunistic way you mention.

He could have even coopted Iran and joined with them to oppose Mostafa III and the Ottomans to his own gain.

But the fact remains he did not and he continued to recognize The Khilafaat and encourage joint operations.

4) One major operation that he sought to get involved in with the Chinese Khojas when the Chinese of Beijing annexed Eastern Turkistan.

Your and the other militant secularists attempt to build a nonexistent image of leaders not interested in the affairs of other ethnic Muslims, But Abdali shoots down and destroys that idea.

Despite the threat to his own empire that would follow putting the finger into the beehive of China, Ahmad Shah "played the leading role in striving to marshal a united Islamic force to push the Manchus back into China."

According to the original sources he championed the "naqshbandi cause."

page 65-66 from the Rise of the Indo-Afghan Empire by Dr. Gommans who translated parts of the Tarikh for his work.

---------------------------------------------------------------

So no Badlun, you have ZERO proof of Ahmad Shah Abdali being such an opportunist that he would join your cause and agree with your belief system.

As we noted, he sacked the heck out of the Armitsaar Golden temple and desecrated it with zeal. The Sikh sources are clear in the rage at his behavior towards them.

-----------------------------------------------------

Why do you I think you Pashtun Nationalist hedge? Because its like Shamlawar said, you constructed a nonexistent history. For example, when you watch Afghan Millat speeches or the adherents of Bacha Khan talk they contrive and confabulate history saying words like "Our ancestors never did harm or had severe confrontations with the Hindus etc. who except Arabs are creating these animosities."

These sorts of liars should have a seekh inserted in their rectum and fried in a huge fire for generating a false history and forgetting Ahmad Shah and his behavior at the golden temple where filled its waters with blood.

So no, militant secularists have no claim over Ahmad Shah Abdali whatsoever with their foolish followup statements of "If he were alive he would have done this or that" when there is no proof of this at all in his behavior in his life time.

The only evidences we have are the behaviors he demonstrated in his life and especially when he became completely independent.

[Badlun]

So you think that if he was alive today he would champion the cause of Taliban or Salafis otherwise the seekh must be penetrated deep and deep in the rectum of these scoundrels! I am compelled to use such a language as you uses such vulgarities in your posts.

Did he do well to desecrate the Sikhs shrines or he was a lunatic fanatic barbarian soul enjoying destroying worship places of others which Islam clearly prohibit. He did it all for creating an impact on Sikhs for his worldly designs being an invader not for a religious cause or you think he was doing all this because Islam authorities destroying temples of other religions.

You get blind in your worship of Taliban , Islamism and Salafism.

Is it Islamic that he got his authority from Abdal? How can you say that he was chosen by God. Was he a prophet as only prophets are chosen by God not mass murderers and invaders.

Is it Islam to kill other fellow Muslims like Safavids? Is it Islam that he was an authoritarian dictatorial ruler by that time. Except invading others, looting others, killing Hindus and Sikhs and his fellow Muslims what else he did for Islam. His sending letters or troups to China is not the same as invading Iran or India?

[Badlun]

For your champion of Islam who killed his own Muslims, Pashtuns ,Indian Sunni Muslims,and Afghans read this

And so, Ahmad Shah's reign of terror began. With his newf ound powers, Ahmad Shah seized the opportunity to make his mark. He captured Ghazni from the Ghilzai Pashtuns and then Kabul from the local ruler. He forced himself upon those areas, moving in like a parasite would and depleting the regions. His invasions brought forth waves of chaos and havoc. The people of Ghazni and Kabul—and later on Herat as well as other regions—desperately fought back as they did during the invasions of Changiz Khan. For those people, there was no difference between the atrocities committed by Changiz Khan and those committed by Ahmad Shah about six centuries later. He murdered innocent women and children, destroyed families and homes, and stole everything in sight because he had no honor. Human life meant nothing to him as he left piles of dead bodies in his wake. In a civilized society, a criminal like Ahmad Shah would have been punished for his crimes.

Apart from invading Punjab three times from 1747-1753, Ahmad Shah also captured Herat in 1750 after almost a year of bloody conflict and seized both Nishpar and Meshad in 1751. To this day, the people of North India, Panjub, and Sindh of Pakistan which include Muslim, Hindu and Sikhs associate the name Abdali with the Devil.


Ahmad Shah and his tribesmen tortured, killed, looted, and raped the people of today's Eastern Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Northern India. They took back their booty to Kandahar and enjoyed their stolen goods. In the course of his criminal career, he raided India nine times, stealing the valuable treasures of the Mughul Empire and everything else he could get his hands on. His raids would last for days with unending turmoil; nobody was left with clothes to wear or food to eat; many died from inflicted wounds or even by committing suicide while others suffered in the harsh climates because they had lost their homes. Their livelihood, their grains, their possessions were taken by the looters and sold back to them at exorbitant prices.

On his way back, he couldn't resist attacking the Golden Temple in Amristar and filled its sarovar (sacred pool) with the blood of slaughtered cows and people. The Golden Temple is to the Sikhs what Mecca is to the Muslims so his transgressions were of great proportions. Now, what kind of honorable man would commit such an atrocious act? He had no reason to attack the Golden Temple but did it purely because of the evilness that ran in his blood. He knew that cows were considered sacred by the Sikhs but he disregarded their beliefs and their values.


Over the course of 25 years, he weakened India and its Raj and local government. He ventured into India numerous times and each time, he returned with gold, camels, women, etc. He left a great number of people dead, destroyed cities and lives and families. All of this seemed like fun to him and his people. Therefore, when he died in 1773, his descendants began fighting over the throne. The British took this moment of weakness to step in and create more division. Abdali's sons were busy fighting against and killing each other and the British aided the brothers in staying enemies and gradually they weakened the state and took over. It is because of Ahmad Shah and his gang of marauders who crushed the indigenous people of the regions—the Marathas and the Mughuls—that the entire subcontinent of India including today's Afghanistan was colonized by the British for the 19th century and well into the 20 th century.

http://afghanmirror.tripod.com/id23.html
References:
Monshi Mahmud Al Hussien Al Monshi Ben Ibrahim Al Jami. Tareekh Ahmad Shahi Volume 1 and 2.

• Caroe, Olaf. The Pathans.
• Alqawi, Mirza Mohammed Yaqob. Yadasht hay dar Bari Afghanistan.
• Kashani, Abul Hussain Ghafari. Gulshan ul Morad, Tareekh Zayed.
• Nafsi, Sayeed. Tareekh Ijtemai wa Syasi Iran Dawrahi Mahasir. Vol. 1&2.
• Gandom, Pori Shir Mohammed. Tareekh Khorshidi Jahan Sana 1311 Hejri.
• Mahmud, Mahmud. Tareekh Rawabiti Syasi Iran va Englis.
• Panipat ki akhiri jang (Unknown Binding) by Kashi Raj
• Marathas : Rise and Fall B R Verma and S R Bakshi
• Ali, Mubarak. “Yes, he did massacre and plunder Indians.” Dawn. August 30, 2003.
• Singh, Daljeet and Kharak Singh. “Ahmad Shah Abdali’s Invasions.” Sikhism, it’s philosophy and history.
• Singh, Sirdar Kapur. “The Golden Temple: Its Theo-political Status.”