Punk Abu Layth mocks sh. Asrar Rashid

Discussion in 'Refutation' started by AMQadiri, Feb 17, 2020.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. AMQadiri

    AMQadiri Seeker

    From Shaykh Asrar's Facebook page (2/16/2020):

    In the clip posted below, the speaker, N Ajmal, makes his most outrageous and insolent statement to date, at least in public. I dwell on the motives toward the end, but prior to that I want to analyse that which is more pertinent—the speaker’s reasoning and evaluation of religious texts.

    This individual and those who think like him have the common trait of dismissing any religious text of Quran and Hadith that they find disagreeable. This is done by referring to a verse of the Quran or a Hadith that is clear in its import as being allegorical, symbolic or totally meaningless. In the case of Hadith, aside from reinterpreting as symbolic or allegory, he may also dismiss the entire authenticity and validity of transmission of that Hadith. That is the main common theme in all his outrageous statements, whether this statement relates to legal rulings or belief.

    The problem with this is twofold.

    The first problem relates to a lack of being precise in what methodology is being employed in interpreting any religious text. Zero clarity on regulations, methodology, legal theory, principles of jurisprudence, hermeneutics, epistemology, logic and rational thought. This lack of being principled leads to denying whatever one disagrees without any real basis. Case in note: his lack of distinction between a rational judgement and an empirical judgement. A very basic point that any novice in Ashari theology will be able to articulate, never mind a self proclaimed or a “Pakistani Deobandi madrasah” jurisconsult.

    The second problem is zero application of Arabic grammar, rhetoric and any other linguist Arabic devices that are absolutely essential to understanding Quran and Hadith. So, in his denial of life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) in the grave as being literal, he reinterprets the Hadith to mean that the teachings of the Prophet (peace be upon him) will never rot and disintegrate, and therefore he concludes that the body of the Prophet (peace be upon him) is not preserved and he has disintegrated with the soil, alongside with other erroneous statements in that video! Statements that are reminiscent of Ismail Dehlwai. Yet, this individual is unable to give any linguistic reasons. He furnishes no knowledge of Arabic rhetoric or any methodology of interpreting texts.

    This unprincipled methodology, or no methodology at all, means anyone can reinterpret any text of the Quran or Hadith without recourse to principles that are rooted in the Arabic language and legal theory, as was set out by the like of Imam Shafi in his Risala. Applying the epithet ‘Maliki’ or ‘Shafi’ and yet being a total dunce regarding the agreed upon principles of those schools is very sad to say in the least.

    Because this individual cannot delineate his method of reasoning in either; legal theory, his method of reading into a religious text or totally unable to demarcate rules of rhetoric or Arabic grammar, I am totally convinced he is a total ignoramus and vacuous in his claim to any qualifications. This was clearly demonstrated in our discussion, that when being unable to answer simple questions, he simply obfuscated the entire discussion.

    Additionally, in my counter to his claim regarding the return of Isa (peace be upon him), I mentioned one simple question which has been left unanswered to this day. That question is: how does one simply dismiss a Hadith narrated by 28 companions with nearly a hundred chains as a mere forgery? I challenged him to demonstrate the claim that the Hadith is a Christian forgery, as he claims, through an analysis of every chain. He has been unable and will remain unable to prove this, as like many things he has claimed in the past, are just that, claims, with no real substantiation.

    Two common themes you will notice in his outrageous statements, which now many have become desensitised to and thus lost interest, are:

    1. Adenial of the unseen, supernatural or miraculous and;

    2. Outrageous verdicts that are deemed anomalies by normative Islam.

    With regard to the first, which is a denial of the unseen or that which is miraculous, this is based upon the inability (I say inability because I genuinely believe he is unable) to make a distinction between a rational judgement and an empirical judgement. Hukm Aqli and Hukm Adi in Arabic, respectively. I will give a simple example of this so people may understand better.

    If I said to an individual fourteen hundred years ago that metal can fly, he would reject it as impossible. Or if I said I can travel from Makkah to Jerusalem in a short period of time, they would have also dismissed that as being impossible. But this type of impossibility is classified as being an empirical impossibility and not a rational impossibility. The very meaning of empirical impossibility is that we do not observe such a phenomenon. According to the laws of physics or our simple observation of the norm we may deem those things as an empirical impossibility. Yet if we have the means of breaking the norm, or the empirical, then a breach of the norm is possible. So fourteen hundred years later we observe metal flying in the form of an aeroplane and we see that a person can travel from Makkah to Jerusalem in a short period of time. These impossibilities and possibilities are what miracles relate to and not what is termed as a rational impossibility. A rational impossibility, on the other hand, is that which the mind deems as being impossible without any recourse to empirical observation to external phenomena. So when Abu Lahab denied the miraculous night journey of the Prophet (peace be upon him), or when Richard Dawkins mocks the Buraq, it is only because they do not know this distinction or fail to accept this distinction.

    So, with our modern Abu, there is a lack of comprehension of these simple distinctions and subsequently a total denial of the divine being able to suspend the laws of physics. As a corollary to this, the modern Abu, denies anything which he finds credulous, like miracles or the lives of the prophets in their graves.

    This materialist and sensory approach of Abu lies of course in his educational background and association with Isha’at alUlum and the nefarious Younas Numani, a rabid ‘mamati’ Deobandi. A brand that denies lives of the prophets in their graves vociferously and is condemned by other ‘hayati’ Deobandis. His educational background of nearly a decade in Pakistani madrasahs has immensely affected his psyche, and anyone who has an inkling of understanding regarding this madrasahs will know what I am alluding at.

    However, I believe, his current stand, as it is clear from his atrocious ‘verdicts’, is that of an atheist, who cannot profess his atheism or agnosticism as of yet. For whatever reason he pretends to be a Muslim is a secret known to himself.

    I posted on his diatribe on a WhatsApp group:

    This man, in the video, claims numerous Quranic and Hadith texts are symbolic or allegorical. In the video below, he states that the Hadith on the isthmus life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) are symbolic, and therefore believes foul things, similar to his ancestor Ismail Dehlawi and worse (listen to clip). This individuals problem is that he cannot delineate an epistemology or even suggest what rules of rhetoric (balagha) he applies to religious texts. This is due to a few factors, including compounded ignorance of any science and a desire to remove any meaning to Islam as a whole.

    This individual, I believe, is an atheist who doesn't have the courage to openly denounce faith. His inability to demarcate a methodology, in language or rationality, means speech has no real meaning. So if I say 'Someones mother ate haram when she conceived him, or Satan sired him', and then deny this has any literal meaning or import, and it is allegorical in meaning, then words have no substance. The only cure to this miscreants diabolical behaviour is to either ignore him or insult his mother and then utilise his own method (or no method?) and say it isn't literal!

    The real Maliki, not the plastic “Maliki’ like Abu, Sayyid Muhammad Bin Alawi Maliki wrote:
    It is established that our Prophet ﷺ possesses an isthmus-life that is greater and more perfect than that of any other, of which he himself told us. It is equally established that he is intimately connected with the Community, fully cognizant of their states, seeing their actions, hearing their speech, replying to their greetings, and the hadiths to that effect are numerous.

    Full article: https://www.livingislam.org/o/prb_e.html

    https://www.facebook.com/ShAsrarRashid/posts/2586872358267610
     
  2. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Also, Abu Lies, if sticking to Munazarah Rashidiyyah was such a big issue, why did Usman agree to it? Both parties agreed to Rashidiyyah so what's the point of you acting like a clown and going on about it?
     
  3. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Each science has principles, usul. Abu Lies himself would have studied usul al fiqh and usul al hadith. Similarly, munazarah is a science and it's principles are details in books like adab al bahth wa'l munazarah and munazarah rashidiyyah.

    What Shaykh Asrar was saying is, 'I'll only debate you according to the principles of debate. Otherwise, the debate will have no structure or rules.'

    So it's the same as someone coming to discuss Arabic sentence structures and then refusing to apply the rules of sarf and nahw.
     
    Ghulaam, Ghulam Ali and CHISHTI like this.
  4. CHISHTI

    CHISHTI Well-Known Member

    Abu Layth understands well that his fame increases when the waters are muddied and truth has not been made apparent..he will hit the people with many different opinions and then say "look..these men differed..so what's wrong with me differing".....and his superficial target audience laps it up...he has to get rid of ijma, the reliability of Bukhari shareef, miracles etc..otherwise his whole circus show comes to a grinding halt....he knows full well that most people aren't going to check up his sources..they can't read Arabic/Urdu...so he plays on their ignorance and packages it up as being modern and progressive...whilst condemning everybody else as village maulvis and as advocates against reason.

    He's a pop culture virus who will infect and destroy the iman of all those who seek his opinion. He won't debate because he can't debate..he knows he will be trapped and made to look like the fraudster he is..
     
  5. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    a scholar was once touring a village.

    a village idiot asked him, "sir, what benefit did knowledge give you?"

    scholar: it taught me to think with logic and reasoning.
    village idiot: what are logic and reasoning?
    scholar: let me show you by example. do you have a dog?
    village idiot: yes.
    scholar: does the dog guard your home?
    village idiot: yes it does.
    scholar: from this i can deduce that you want to protect your home. is that correct?
    village idiot: correct.
    scholar: from this i can deduce that you probably have a family whom you would like to protect. do you have a wife?
    village idiot: yes.
    scholar: from this i deduce that you're straight and not gay.
    village idiot: yes, of course.
    scholar: this is the benefit of logic and reasoning. notice how i came all the way from the dog to saying you're a straight man.
    village idiot: thank you. i now understand what logic and reasoning are.

    the village idiot then starts going around his village telling people he knows logic and reasoning. another person takes him up on it.

    other villager: what's logic and reasoning?
    village idiot: let me show you by example. do you have a dog?
    other villager: no.
    village idiot: (baffled) hmm, ok. you're gay.
    other villager: no, i'm not. you speak rubbish.
    village idiot: yes, you are. this is based on the principles of logic and reasoning. if you don't have a dog, you're gay.

    ==

    if you guessed usman iqbal to be the useless village idiot here, you're on the money. abu layth is not the village idiot here.







    he is the village idiot's dog!
     
    Shadman, Ghulaam, Ghulam Ali and 2 others like this.
  6. ramiz.noorie

    ramiz.noorie Active Member

    madman abu layth nahiem ajmal
    mocks sh asrar regarding usman deobandi debate



    may Allah protect us from these types
     

Share This Page