errors of mufti akmal in clarification clip

the summary of the first nine minutes in the below clip:
---

1. my reply was perfect concerning the couplet/sheyr; because saying: "apni khatir jo banaya" because the Actions of Allah ta'ala are not dependent on anything. [mu'allal bi'l aghraD]

my contention is that mufti sahib did not understand the sheyr in the first place. he assumed that "apni khatir" means "for my need" and hence he considers that it could mean it is an `illat and because Allah ta'ala is not dependent on anything, this sheyr is incorrect.

however, he did add [in the original clip] that a plausible ta'wil [justification] can be made [and thus no hukm]; but, lines as these should not be recited in public.

this much was ok - he had not understood the lines - but the explanation he dived into is the problem, which is being analysed in the other thread.

-----
2. i did not know at that time that it was the sheyr of [mawlana] akhtar raza sahib; you can read this in public because he is an elder

this is a problematic statement for a mufti. if the meaning of the sheyr is deemed incorrect, dangerous - you cannot alter the hukm merely if it was said by a senior scholar. of course, justifications can be made - he chose the wrong words, he was not paying attention, he might be in a state of entrancement [jazb].

the distinction between the couplet and the hukm; while that on the couplet does not change - the hukm on the person saying it will change due to his credentials, this is where the husn-zann part comes in; as the poet is a man known to be cautious and extremely strict in sharayi matters, there is no way he would say something objectionable by the shariah.

so mufti akmal is equivocal here. he insists that his ruling that the couplet implies "Allah is dependent on something" (al-iyadhu billah) and at the same time, due to the brouhaha and that the sheyr is that of a well-known scholar, he has changed his stand: "bilkul padhen. hamare akabirin ke nahin padhenge to kis ke padhenge". [i have retained akabirin as he says it; i have noted elsewhere that it should be akabir].

to be fair, he adds that wazahat bhi karden / if you read this, please clarify the meaning as well.

for the common man, this is confusing. it is an yes and a no answer. was the sheyr incorrect? if it was, and you stand by it - how can you simply gloss over the hukm and permit its recitation in public?

if it was NOT incorrect, then what about the lengthy explanations and implications that you detailed? will you stand by it - or retract?

------
3. before criticising me people should have contacted me
4. some say they contacted me on whatsapp, and i might have even seen it, but that is not enough.

these are contradictory statements - first he alleged that he should not be criticised before he was contacted. then he says: 2 calls and 1 whatsapp message are insufficient for 'itmam e hujjah'

this is creating an unnecessary 'rule'. we live in the age of instant communication and the demands of the age are different. allow me to explain.

there was a time - not so long ago - that a mufti would write a fatwa and send it to the questioner. at best, it would be seen by a handful of people and even those would usually be scholars. if a mistake was perceived in this fatwa, it would be sent to senior scholars for clarification and you can see this frequently in fatawa ridawiyyah (FR). in this case, 99.9% of the public would be oblivious to the mistaken fatwa.

most often, the second mufti would analyse the fatwa and write his own opinion without bothering to ask the first mufti, nor would they wait for 30 years to do itmam e hujjat, except in a very special case, where the mistaken fatwa would result in takfir.

so the fatawa would either be attested or refuted. if they were refuted, the other party would present their justifications and a back-and-forth would follow.

none of those muftis told the other: "why didn't you contact me first?" "did you do itmam e hujjah, before refuting my fatwa?" or even worse: "by refuting my fatwa, you are guilty of isha'at e faHishah and therefore you have committed a major sin (kabirah) and haram."

sub'HanAllah!

that was about written fatawa or books (in fact many such contentious cases would be published by both parties along with their side of the story). now about a speaker who made a blunder in his speech or drew erroneous conclusions. in this case, those present would put that on paper and send it to a mufti saying: "zayd says this and this.. what is the hukm and what is the correct position".

this is also found abundantly in FR. in fact, the very example mufti akmal has cited from FR is of this category.

so the mufti - alahazrat in this case - would not say:
'who is zayd? can i call zayd, can i talk to him and get a clarification?' OR
'shall i send a couple of my students to zayd to get a clarification' OR
'let me write to zayd and wait for 30 years until he gets time to respond'

instead, he would answer and issue the sharayi ruling within the context of the question. it is here that a mufti should be very alert - and not fall into the trap of a questioner who may frame the question in a manner to elicit an answer favourable to himself. so the mufti should answer only if the question is clear, does not have undertones, doesn't seem to drive an agenda - and if he detects an agenda, answer it in a manner that the agenda cannot be pursued. yes, in some cases, a further clarification would be required - so the mufti replies asking for more information.

in this case as well, the issue would be restricted to a handful of people; upon getting the fatwa, those people would approach the 'accused' and ask him to retract - and if he would not, the fatwa would be publicised and the general public would be made aware of the person's errors.

one cannot be so self-centred that one creates rules on the fly and tries to fix everything from his perspective. nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
if a mufti is asked about an issue - he has no compulsion or restriction to 'wait for 30 years to get a clarification and then answer the query'

---
genuine question: does mufti akmal also wait for clarifications before replying to queries? [think of his backlog if he begins to do this]. secondly, in this very issue - how many times did mufti akmal seek clarification from his critics, before making a video accusing them of having committed kabirah and isha'at e fahishah and haram? as far as i know, the critics took umbrage for not being respectful about taju'sh shariah, and that he had not understood the sheyr. to the best of my knowledge, not even muzaffar shah sahib who is the most vocal critic (in the 10m clip) issued any hukm on mufti akmal's error IN THIS ISSUE (of the sheyr of tajush shariah).

on the contrary, how many of his critics have accused him of committing a haram or kabirah? in fact, the grave charges will be coming in the other thread - which will demonstrate that mufti akmal's basic aqidah about Allah ta'ala is incorrect - and he may have to do tawbah, nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah. to be clear: i do not make takfir or even tabdiy, as these are subtle issues of kalam which can be confusing.

-----
in our age, if a celebrity scholar makes a speech uploads on his social media accounts - youtube, FB - the 'isha'at' has already been made. unlike in the past, when someone would FORWARD the copy of the fatawa or transcribe the speechmaker's error, here it is available first hand 24/7.

the accusation of isha'at e fahishah is itself absurd. it cannot be that he can continue to say what he likes, without remorse or retraction, but others have to wait for 30 years until mufti sahib gets time to see their messages and respond.

once this linchpin of his argument is removed, the rest of his statements hold not water. except that cold water needs to be poured on them, as we will see. in sha'Allah wa bi tawfiqih.

----
a sidenote: in my view, there is no other collection of fatawa to TEACH you how to write fatawa, except alahazrat's superlative fatawa ridawiyyah. it is an amazing resource - and in sha'Allah i hope someday, someone will write a book on how FR is an illustrated manual of rasm al-mufti and using his fatawa as examples/illustrations, write a "an illustrated guide to writing fatawa" - or an al-ashbah wa'n nazayir min fatawa al-akabir. wa billahi't tawfiq.
----

 

take two recent cases.

FIRST:
asad ali and his indiscretion. he is a public figure, with thousands of followers - and his private chats were leaked. we deleted it and said that there is no need for details. however, since his harm to the public is plausible - ulama issued a letter (to which a student like me was also requested to add his name and i did). no details but the public is warned about the danger of this man.

in fact, i have been saying this long before - especially after many brothers (scholars, students and even muftis) forwarded the instagram fatawa of asad ali - this man should have been reined in long ago. but our ulama think 'sharayi hujjat' means wait for 30 years and then take a decision.

there is a fiqhi ruling of interdiction - meaning stopping certain people from their activities to prevent public harm.

an unqualified person handing medicines or treating people - a quack or even an incompetent doctor, who is known to be rash in his treatment and can pose a danger to the lives or health of people.

any of you who forwards quackery on whatsapp on cancer, vaccination, diabetes, heart-disease (guzzle ginger syrup and avoid bypass) and such nonsense should take heed and curb your instinct to forward such messages. it could hurt someone or even cause their death.

====
SECOND:
the case of kichaucha pir and his son. this is again a private indiscretion - and nothing to do with religious issues. so we leave it between them and their Lord Almighty. however, it is prudent to advise people to stay away from them, especially for 'spiritual guidance'.

---
in both cases, general advice is necessary. but going into their details and recounting them with relish or schadenfreude is isha'at e fahishah.


---
as for interdiction, bahar e shariat, v15/p.199-200





translation:

Some people consider that to read, pass an exam and obtain a certificate is sufficient to become a doctor[1]; this a mistake and a huge mistake.​

The second example is that of the ignorant mufti (jahil mufti), that he issues wrong rulings and thereby becomes misguided and a sinner himself and also misguides others. Maulvis (religious scholars) are also turning up like the [aforementioned] doctors.

Concerning learning in religious schools in India these days [2]:

First of all, those who complete the dars-i-nizami syllabus are very few; and then they run through this syllabus superficially, pass the exams and obtain certificates. Even if they complete the entire course, the main objective of this course is to given an education and make the scholar capable enough to read [advanced] books and further his knowledge by striving hard himself.

Otherwise, by merely completing the [syllabus known as] dars-i-nizami, one does not become proficient in issues [3].

We see that some [such maulvis] are so audacious that when someone asks them a question and they do not know the answer, they find it below their dignity to admit it or at least say that they will look it up in a book for an answer. They deem it an insult to say ‘I do not know’ and instead say whatever comes to their mind by guesswork or conjecture.

When we look at the lives of prominent companions and knowledgeable imams, we see that in spite of being exceedingly knowledgeable and having the capability to do ijtihad, they do not dare to do such a thing. If they did not know something, they would simply state that they did not know without any hesitation.

We advise these maulvis to follow up the completion of their dars-i-nizami course by reading copiously books of fiqh, usul, kalam, hadith and tafsir. And [tell them]: do not dare to say something of your own volition; you should say that which is clear and clearly understood and in matters which are complicated or confusing, tarry, think and work on a solution. If the problem is not solved by expending your own efforts, then let seek help from others as one should not be ashamed to ask and learn matters pertaining to religion.

​

---------------------
1. This book was written some 80 years ago when doctors in India were predominantly the Hakim/Tabib, who practiced traditional medicine known as unani and ayurveda. Doctors trained in modern medicine were around but were more popular in urban centers.

2. Remember: this is about 80 years ago.

3. I have rephrased the original statement said as a question for better readability in English: ‘how many matters can one be proficient in, by merely completing the dars-i-nizami?’


---
from an old translation: https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/becoming-an-alim-by-self-study.6845/reply&quote=20102

 

the protection of honour of muslims is paramount. therefore, publicising things that ought to be concealed to preserve their honour is necessary. however, if the issue is in public domain, and is already circulated among all and sundry - especially when one is unrepentant about his stance - it is weird to claim it 'isha'at e fahishah'.

matlab, hum jo bhi karen us par ungli na uThayen warna hum aapko murtakib e kabirah aur aap ka fiyl haram aur tawbah wajib. raha hum ne jo kaha jis par aap tanqid kartay hain, us mein fi nafisihi koyi kharabi nahin balke 'perfect' hai. bas ye aap ka hum par su'al uthana isha'at e fahishah hai.

the above in eng: whoever points a finger at us will be saddled with the ruling of committing a major sin and committing haram which requires tawbah. as for what i said - which prompted your criticism - that is fine in itself; in fact, it is 'perfect'. however, your raising an objection upon us is 'publicising sin'.

---
ajeeb mantiq.

---
either what akmal sahib said was 'ghalat fahish' - but he absolves himself from it and says, 'my answer was perfect' and in another place he says: 'you have not proven my mistake' and also: 'is it a sin?'

if it is not a sin or a mistake - and that clip is circulated by your own team - available on youtube and all platforms - without rescinding it, or even hinting that it should not be circulated.

but anyone who criticises it is murtakib e kabirah. sub'HanAllah.

it appears mufti sahib doesn't understand the meaning or implications of this term.

 

first we need to understand the meaning of 'isha'at e fahishah'.

if someone commits an error or a mistake which is private, or restricted to a small group such as a speaker in a masjid - if this is publicised - this is publicising a muslim's shortcoming. it is haram to name and shame in such cases.

now mistakes can be of various kinds; some are:

1. small sins

2. big sins: the person indulges in ghibah, or drinks wine, or some other

3. personality flaws restricted to one's person: not reliable, does not keep his word, is a hypocrite, is avaricious, selfish, opportunist; or in islamic values: greedy for fame, name, wealth, contradictory public and private lives, boasting etc.

4. personality flaws that may harm others: he drinks, he is known to cheat, he cannot be relied upon in transactions, he lies in his dealings, he has no scruples in doing haram deals, etc.

5. errors made in religious issues: these are various kinds as well:

- issues that are kufr or lead to kufr
- errors in aqidah
- fiqh errors
- mistakes in citations, hadith, aayat, fatawa etc.
- myriad issues differed upon - fuqaha have differed upon; one party considers it a mistake, but can be justified from another standpoint.​

====

the general rule is - so long as a person's word or deed does not harm others, and there is no sharayi compulsion to speak on it, one should ignore it.

for example, we know that a person drinks wine. we ignore it. but if someone asks us if they can consider him as a suitor to their sister or daughter - we should tell them that he has this personality flaw. if a Hakim/ruler, person in authority sees him - it is wajib for him to punish him. but it is not necessary for others to report his transgression.

====
isha'at e fahishah is a broad term. if one distributes fuhsh - obscene stuff - it is isha'at e fahishah. similarly, sharing lewd or profane videos also come under this. making movies, sponsoring them, sponsoring movie stars, arranging for events where men and women freely mix, and a hundred and one such things come under isha'at e fahishah.

the literal meaning is: publicising obscenity, profanity, sin. or publicly humiliating muslims etc.

----
however, if people do it themselves. publish it, print it, record their talks and put it in public - it is difficult to call that as 'publicising' because the person has HIMSELF publicised it.

criticism of any such things done in public cannot be considered isha'at e fahishah. it was already there in public - and if there is potential harm from it, it is the duty of scholars to highlight it and warn the public.

i will come to specific points of akmal sahib which also shows how poor his fiqh is - and i highly recommend that he take a sabbatical and read bahar e shariat.

speaking of which, if mufti akmal consistently and repeatedly says things which appear to belittle or dismiss the significance of a book like BeS, we are bound to refute him. akmal sahib may think he is above criticism, but it is our duty to point out that he has erred.

i can cite dozens of instances where great ulama - even sahabah - were publicly commented upon an error and they didn't mind. nor did they accuse their critics of committing kabirah and isha'at e fahishah.

====
apart from this - we live in a different world. many rulings which would be valid until 30 years ago may not apply in our case.
the speed with which disinformation and misinformation spreads on social media - we do not have the luxury of waiting for 30 years until the errant mufti finds time to 'clarify'.

 

the gist of akmal sahib's 31 minute bayan is:

anyone who criticises me is committing haraam, kabirah and tawbah is wajib on him. when i criticise others, it is for Allah and there is no possibility of suu-zann/ suspicion. but if anyone else criticises me, they are committing suspicion and for everyone who criticises me, i will cite qur'an verses and accuse them of haram and kabirah repeatedly.

if necessary, i will misquote alahazrat - i am a mufti after all - and i will cite him selectively to prove that anyone who criticises me is committing haram, kabirah, isha'at e fahishah. (repeat half a dozen times).

he thinks that it is all about himself - he is a great man, doing great work on an international level, and everyone else is jealous of him and they want to come up only by using his name. so whatever he does, he is above criticism. if at all he commits a mistake, and you ask for a clarification, you have to wait for 30 years before he can answer and then you are free to do what you like. if you don't wait, you are commiting HARAAAM, kabirah and isha'at e fahishah.

also, i forgot to tell you criticisng akmal sahib is isha'at e fahishah, and committing haram, it is a kabirah and tawbah is wajib upon anyone who criticises akmal (but he is free to criticise anyone).

sub'HanAllah

wa laa tadri bi annaka la tadri

 

i will go to the analysis of the first clip presently - where mufti akmal has made aqidah errors - but this is important to refute as well because akmal sb is trying to preempt any criticism by selectively quoting passages and trying to intimidate critics.

my sincere advice to mufti sahib is that he should first learn to read fatawa ridawiyyah - this is the second time he has quoted FR out of context; i tried to ignore it, but it keeps ringing in my head and i need to get it out of my system.

nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah

 

this is a clarification clip of mufti akmal where he made more mistakes, made the issue about himself and it is a case study on bad reasoning and poor comprehension.