One feeble attempt in this regard made by Nawasib is to call their scholars as Shia whenever they are left without answer. Same happens in Shaykh Suleman Qundozi al-Hanafi’s case, not being able to prove him a Shia, the best objection that filthy Nawasib belonging to Sipah-e-Sahabah and fnoor websites come up against him is as follows:
“Aga Buzurg Tehrani included his book “Al-Thareea”, which is an Encyclopedia on Shia books. He said [25/290] : “ Even though the Shiasm of the author is not known, but he is Gnostic, and the Book is considered to be one of the books of Shia”
First of all it should be noted that Nawasib deliberately hide the complete name/description of Shaykh Qandozi mentioned by Aqa Tahrani which is ‘Suleman bin Ibrahim al-Hanafi al-Qandozi’ which shall be sufficient to water down the filthy Nasibi attempt to suggest that Aqa Tehrani deemed Qandozi to be a Shia and this is exactly the same said by Aqa Buzurg Tehrani that his affiliation to the Shi’a is unproven . What is clear is he loved the Ahl’ul bayt (as) and in their honour, he complied those narration from his pioneer Sunni sources that highlight their virtues, that is why we happily present this book to show the esteemed station of the Ahl’ul bayt (as) to a Wahabi indoctrinated audience. This is like Muhammad bin Abu Bakr, he was not a son of Imam Ali (as), but due to their mutual love for one another, Imam Ali (as) referred to him as his son. Does this therefore mean that he was indeed a son of Hadhrat Ali (as)?
Another important thing which najis Nawasib of Sipah-e-Sahabah and fnoor website hid and yet accuse Shia of performing Taqqiyah is the clear cut statement of Aqa Buzurg Tehrani about Shaikh Qandozi in Volume 21 page 307:
“Yanabi by Sulaiman bin Ibrahim Al-Qandozi Al-Balkhi Al-Hanafi, was a Sufi Sheikh of Naqshbandi tariqah”
As for the Nasibi notion that inclusion of any author/book by Aqa Buzurg Tehrani in his book ‘al Dharya’ proves the author to be Shia is another ignorance of Nawasib due to the fact that Aqa Tahrani added some popular authors/books irrespective of their religion and there are plenty of non-Muslim or Sunnis works mentioned for example book ‘Al-Qasida Alawia’ by the Christian author Abdulmasih Al-Antaki (v17 p120), Wandidad, the translation of “Avesta” the Zoroastrian’s holy book (v24 p127), Tarikh Ibn Jarir, its a history book by Abi Jafar Muhammad bin Jarir Al-Tabari the Sunni historian & Muffassir (v3 p222), Al-Messehya, by Al-Mu’aez; the Ismaili (v21 p29), book ‘Al-Taji’ by Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin Hilal, who was on Sa’bei religion (v3 p211-212) etc.
Nawasib should develop some rational skills before saying anything, because yet again there disease of literalism comes into play. Worthy of noting is the fact that Suleman Qundozi al-Hanafi was the Grand Mufti of Constantinople and the Chief Justice of the Ottoman Caliphate, the centre of Sunni Islam at the time. Is it really logical that a Shia had would have this position in the Ottoman caliphate? The Ottomans hated the Shi’a and slaughtered anyone with Shi’a leanings, what they have really given the station of Grand Mufti to a man that may have had Shi’a leanings? The slight suspicion of him being Shi’a would have led to his removal and execution. There is no evidence to suggest that he was removed from office or accused of being a Shi’a when this book was written so why has it dawned on Sunnis today? The fact is that Sunni Ulema never deemed Qandozi to be a Shia rather a Hanafi/Sufi. For example:
Sunni scholar/researcher Khair Al-Deen Al-Zarkali in his book ‘Al-Al’am’ confirmed Sheikh Qandozi being a Hanafi:
“(Al-Qandozi)(1220-1270 H)(1805-1853) Sulaiman son of Khuwajah Ibrahim Qubalan Al-Hussaini Al-Hanafi Al-Naqshbandi Al-Qandozi: pious, belongs to Balakh (city), died in Qustantinya (city), he got book ‘Yanabi Al-Muwadah’ which is about the merits of the Messenger of Allah and his household”
Al-Al`am, Volume 3 page 125
About Shaykh Qandozi, we also read:
Sulaiman al-Qandoozi (1220-1294 H)(1805-1877) Sulaiman bin Ibrahim al-Qandozi al-Balkhi al-Hussaini al-Hashmi, Sufi, his books: Ajma al-fawaid, Mushreq al-akwan, Yanabi al-muwada lethouy al-qurba”
Muajam al-Mualfeen by Umar Raza Kahalah, Volume 4
www.almeshkat.net (MS Word, Doc page No.177) – Cached
Another Sunni scholar/researcher Allamah Ismaeel Basha Al-Baghdadi recorded about him in his book ‘Hidyat Al-Arfeen’:
“Al-Qandozi – Sulaiman son of Khowajah Qalan Ibrahim son of baba Khwajah Al-Qandozi Al-Balkhi Al-Sufi Al-Hussaini, resident in Qustantinya (city), was born in year 1220 and deid in yaer 1294”
Hidyat Al-Arfeen, Volume 1 page 408
Also in his book ‘Ezah al-Maknun’ Volume 2 page 731, Allamah Ismaeel Basha Al-Baghdadi records:
Al Qandozi – Sulayman bin Khawaja Kalan Ibrahim bin baba Khuwaja Al-Qandozi Al-Balkhi al-Sufi Al-Husayni. He lived in Qustantinya, was born in 1220 and died in 1294. He authored: Jama’ Al Fawa’ed, Mashriq al Akwan, Yanabi’y al Mawaddat ” on the charactheristics of the prophet [s] and the narrations of AhlulBayt “.
Download from www.almeshkat.net – Cached
Yusuf Alyan Sarkis simply recorded:
More interesting is the fact that Sunni Ulema continue to cite this same alleged Shi’a work in their books. Saaim Chisthi al Hanafi in his book Mushkil kushah cites numerous Hadith from Yanabi al Mawaddah. Moreover leading Hanafi scholars Shaykh ul Islam Dr. Muhamad Tahir ul Qadri (in Hub-e-‘Ali page 28) and Mufti Ghulam Rasool (in Hasab aur Nasab Volume 1 page 191, London) relied on Yanabi al Mawaddah when citing Hadith in praise of the Ahl’ul bayt (as). The question is quite simple:
‘Were these two leading Hanafi scholars so stupid and illiterate that they were citing a doctored Shi’a text to a Sunni readership?’
Clearly when two highly respected Sunni scholars have relied on this book when producing Hadith to their readers and other Sunni biographers deeming him Hanafi/Sufi then Nasibis and illiterate Sunnis have no right to attribute the madhab of Ahlubayt (as) to a mere Hanafi/Sufi and that too without any evidence, just on personal views basis and also by doing so they are in effect discrediting many of their esteemed scholars.
The basic reason behind declaring a Sunni figure as Shia is because staunch Sunnies or should we say Nawasib found it unpalatable that a Sunni Scholar collected traditions in favour of the Ahlulbayt (as) since this could provide an opening with whch to harbour animosity towards certain ‘prominent’ companions that would in turn damage the foundation belief of the Sunni madhab, namely that ‘all companions were just and we just can