Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Topics' started by abu Hasan, Jan 30, 2018.
raise awareness of his potty mouth and his lack of adab concerning anbiya alayhimu's salam.
He should be boycotted and people need to be warned of his dangers
nak is coming touring Europe soon in particular visiting Birmingham.
someone shared a video on whatsapp
this is apparently nouman ali khan - unless of course it is a doctored recording; disclaimer because, the "give him benefit of doubt" "did you call him to verify" brigade will get upset with me.
looks like NAK has a habit of insulting anbiya. at 3.50 he says (ma'adh Allah/astaghfirullah): "ibrahim alayhi's salam was kicked out of his house".
la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.
he is not a preacher - he is utter poison. is this how a muslim should refer to anbiya alayhimu's salatu wa's salam? then why should NAK's followers (dumb fools and sheeple) get upset if we call him, 'that wretch', 'that kameena', 'that potty mouth khan'?
they want respect for this scoundrel, but he can talk about anbiya and use examples of impoverished 'homeless'!
this video drips with irony: NAK is not success. those who have been given "glasses of faith" can clearly see that popularity, glory, big following, money is not success. success is staying close to the manhaj of ahl al-sunnah and our elders.
Nalayeq Aur Kameena
and many more can be made.
Najasat Aur Khabasat
actually, NAK has a very limited vocabulary. I noticed this in his other lecture too - the one in which he slandered al-Mustafa (peace be upon him).
Our scholars have written books by the truck-loads, and more sublime expressions and moving words cannot be found even if you ransacked the entire repertoire of world literature - be it any language.
Your Aristotles and Socrates and your Shakespears and Chaucers are no match for their words pregnant with emotions and yet far from the baseness of fiction and hyperbole.
That we have become tone-deaf to their beauty and fail to perceive with our sinful ears the ethereal calls from the deep oceans of gnosis that surge in their words, that we have become inert to all their goodness and our hearts do not feel their paternal tugs upon it - is due to our own folly, heedlessness and confinement in the pits of materialism.
And yet, they did not have to resort to balderdash, slang, vulgarity, lies and disrespect - to affect the people around them. When they spoke - and spoke the truth - their audience would be transported to the desolate valleys of grief or the dark but fiery caves of terror or the enchanted gardens of love and sublime beauty. They changed people for good.
Can NAK or any modern day preacher do half as much? Not if they lived and blabbered another thousand lifetimes.
For the words of the pious are inspired and are rooted in sincerity rather than affectation and drama. That is the philosophers stone that would melt hearts and grey the hair of youth - and that stone seems to have gone missing for Allah knows how many years now.
Now all we have is callow words and empty boasts.
kyun raza aaj gali sooni hai
uth mere dhoom machaane wale
Can a Sunni scholar please do a full video refutation or book against this idiot?
Or challenge him to a debate.
Him and his institution are misguiding many people in the USA. They are presenting a watered down version of Wahhabism.
But occassionally they will say explicit kufr. I lived in the USA most of my life. The situation there is dire. 75% of the mosques are under control of pseudo Salafi/Wahhabi/Deobandi/Muslim Brotherhood etc
NAK is the main guy for the young muslims.
This man is a kafir. A complete ignoramous who fools young American muslims. (It is mostly converts or western born youngsters that are his audience).
He is like the Americanized version of Tariq Zaleel.
Anthropomorphism, lack of adab for Prophets, and terrible jokes which can lead to kufr.
He can't answer basic questions.
"I don't know where Allah is. It isn't an issue."
nouman khan's descriptions appear more like that of a christian missionary and less of a muslim preacher.
notice, NAK says:
this would imply that hazrat aadam alayhi's salam didn't bother about his mistake and "Allah didn't give up on him".
aadam alayhi's salam was immediately repentant. he did not stray and 'gave up on himself' as implied by a jahil preacher.
in fact, he cried - cried so much that no one else has wept as much as he did. for one error of judgement, done in forgetfulness. do not equate this with your own indiscretions and bad judgements and blunders.
nas'alu Allaha al-afiyah.
He had better gone to sleep rather than jotting down his failures in comprehending Quran. He earned to himself endless punishment in the hellfire rather than a sound sleep of few hours.
see, he is shameless and remorseless. and arrogant.
first learn some adab of addressing your elders - then you can stay out all night to ramble and post something so inaccurate.
while one can do linguistic gymnastics to justify one's own recklessness in speech, one should remember that they will be held to account on judgement day.
the above clip is from a lengthy hadith of tirmidhi (see arbayin al-nawawiyyah, #29).
mu'adh ibn jabal is asking RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam of actions that will keep him away from hellfire and he tells him about prayer, fasting, charity, and other things; finally, the master SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam says:
"shall i not inform you of something that is a key to perfection of all these actions [mentioned previously]
and i [mu'adh ibn jabal] said: "why not ya RasulAllah"
he then caught his own tongue and then said: "withhold this one" [or "be careful of this"]
i said: "ya nabiyAllah! will we be held to account for [everything] that we say?"
he replied: "your mother has lost you! will people be cast in the fire on their faces - or their noses - except for the harvests of their tongues?
just because Allah ta'ala has given you the ability to articulate (by writing, typing out or by speaking) doesn't mean you are given license to say whatever you want. think of it like a drivers' license. just because you got one, and you got a fancy sport-car doesn't mean you should drive on city roads like you are a formula one driver.
one should be careful in analogies and words that one chooses to mention or describe anbiya'a alayhimu's salatu wa's salam. and avoid expressions that may appear disrespectful. when ignorant preachers use colourful expressions, which amplify small errors of our elders, it is unfair and zulm.
we have come across accounts of unsavoury shenanigans of nouman ali khan - what if everyone begins to address him as a womaniser?* will he like it? will he accept it as just and fair? will he accept the justifications of those who call him a womaniser? what if someone says: 'oh, i did not mean that he indulged in adultery. by womaniser, i only meant that he was playing hanky-panky with girls'. is that kind to him?
this is about a third-grade preacher who is mostly inaccurate just shooting off his mouth, and his indiscretions.
al-iyadhu billah, how should one speak about anbiya'a alayhimu's salatu wa's salam - who are so noble and exalted by Allah ta'ala - sub'HanAllah, are CHOSEN by Him in the first place! how will you face them on judgement day - and if Allah ta'ala asks you about it?
talking lightly about these esteemed personages and using coarse and squalid language - as if they were one's buddies (al-iyadhu billah) - is unbecoming of a muslim, much less a person of knowledge. only those who are raised on a culture of impudence and are ill-mannered will say such things.
the story of adam alayhi's salam does not begin with failure. if it did, then nouman khan is accusing of Allah ta'ala of not knowing what He has created. Allah ta'ala says (surah baqarah, v30):
[not exact translation, but reworded explanatory translation:]
when Allah ta'ala said: 'I shall place a vicegerent on the earth'
the angels said: 'will you make someone [a deputy] on the earth, who will cause strife and shed blood?'
Allah ta'ala said: "indeed, I know that which you know not".
now, adam alayhi's salam slipped and this was the basis for us inhabiting this earth and the ages that passed, and all kinds of people who came and lived on this good earth - including third-rate preachers who make cartloads of money by defrauding gullible muslims.
if it were not for sayyiduna adam alayhi's salam's error of judgement, none of this probably would have come into existence. Allah ta'ala knows best. this was a part of the Divine Plan.
in the hadith of abu hurayrah - in both bukhari and muslim:
there was a debate between adam alayhi's salam and musa alayhi's salam.
musa alayhi's salam said: 'are you not the same aadam, whose mistake caused him to be ejected from paradise?'
aadam alayhi's salam said: 'you are that musa, who was chosen by Allah taala as a messenger and Spoke to you; do you blame me, censure me for something that was ordained for me before i was created?"
RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: "thus aadam prevailed over musa". he said that two times (in another narration, three times).
saHiH bukhari, #3409 (about prophets) ; also, see #4738 (tafsir surah taha) and #6614 (on destiny)
nouman probably wanted to describe the merits of humility and repentance. and that our great grandfather bowed down in humility and asked forgiveness of Allah ta'ala. but this is not the way to say it. nouman says:
only a person who has lost a screw in his head will use the analogy of a bolt or an app for "ijtaba".
the root of ijtiba is jaba. meaning 'collected' or harvested as they say: 'jababtu'l maa' fi'l HawD' / i collected water in the tank.
and when it is said: 'ijtibaa Allah' - it means, that Allah ta'ala has made special a certain slave of His, and close to Himself, and chosen to bestow upon him, His Divine Grace, by which that slave receives various gifts and bounties without any effort on the part of the slave himself. this is only for His prophets and those who are closer to them in rank among martyrs and the righteous people. [see raghib's mufradat]
this is not finding the right wrench for a bolt. this is Divine Grace bestowed upon special people and those chosen by Allah.
if you are desperate for an analogy, you can say - just as one would pick up a most splendid diamond placed among rocks.
nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.
this is incorrect. sayyiduna aadam alayhi's salam did not commit some egregious sin. al-iyadhu billah. a few verse prior, when describing this incident, Allah ta'ala Says that 'he forgot'.
sayyiduna aadam alayhi's salam made an error of judgement. in his desire to stay close to Allah ta'ala, he made this error, and for goodness sake, "he forgot" he did not deliberately disobey Allah ta'ala. to portray it as 'fallen' and drawing parallels with the arrogance of the devil is not only false but also abominable.
but, yeah. it is a very juicy expression in a speechmakers toolbox. nouman cannot excite people by simple and respectful expressions - he has to make it very colourful and dramatic - even if it means slipping in a few lies. who will come to his theatre, if he speaks like an academic?
there is no equivalence or parallel here for even our failures, let alone the failure of the devil. for all the indiscretions of nouman, or even small slip ups how will he feel if we describe it as: "nouman khan's failure/mistake error is similar to the failure of the devil".
will you or your fanboys take it kindly?
imam razi in his tafsir says after explaining the meaning of "sin" "misguided" [`aSa, ghawa] that Allah ta'ala is the Creator and He can say whatever He likes. it is not permissible for others to use the same expressions for anbiya'a.
ulama have said: 'and he was misled' [fa-ghawa فغوى] means, he did not find what he expected; i.e. eternity in paradise. or that he was deceived by the speech of his enemy (i.e. the devil).
one cannot say that aadam alayhi's salam was a sinner. because that word is used for someone who keeps doing it - not someone who slipped for once. if a man would stich his cloth, you would say: 'a person stitching his cloth' [khaaT] not a "tailor" [khayyaT]. [see ma'alimu't tanzil, tafsir kabir etc.]
*disclaimer: i do not. and i was forced to mention it here to knock some sense into that thick head - if he ever reads this.
NAK is a kāfir.
Not a surprise, Wahhābīs are infamous for their lack of adab and respect, and if somebody does show the necessary adab and respect he is considered an extremist and perhaps even a mushrik by them.
He's got a habit of lack of adab.