Huzoor Taajush Shariah on Their Picture Being Taken

Discussion in 'Multimedia' started by Aqib alQadri, May 11, 2015.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    The Holy Prophet (Allah's blessings and peace Be Upon Him) said: “Take benefit of five before five: your youth before your old age, your health before your sickness, your wealth before your poverty, your free-time before your preoccupation, and your life before your death.” (Hakim)
    Noori likes this.
  2. IslamIsTheTruth

    IslamIsTheTruth Well-Known Member

    AQ give up. Your acting almost cult like. The very thing you so eagerly accuse others of.
    Go put your feet up and watch madani channel.
    If your lucky you might just be in time for the quiz show.
    AbdalQadir likes this.
  3. AbdalQadir

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

    no that's cool. maybe something went amiss on me or you. i don't think that either of us is free of error and right every single time.
  4. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    so many fallacies in your replies, that i won't respond. you are free to assume that i am using the escape route and i won't challenge you.
  5. AbdalQadir

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

    i didn't spin off into anything. i merely snipped the "if they want to interview" part because that goes without mentioning. obviously, if they don't want to interview a scholar, they won't. the other crime might have been to snip the going to his mosque, office, etc. or calling him to studio, mosque, office etc. part, which is redundant anyways. so here's what unbeknown said:

    i ask

    to which you say

    videos are a new issue. so on what grounds should anyone accept unbeknown's pulling out such exacting rules or guidelines out of thin air? (talking in the context of Islamic videos)

    why should someone take his word that Islamic tv channels (qtv or Madani or any other channel) shouldn't approach scholars for interviews at public events and places?

    i fully support respecting the boundaries of consent and that those scholars who don't want to be filmed shouldn't be filmed. (unless they are shot unintendingly, like you film a big crowd and some scholar's picture comes in by chance. this can be likened to the same scholars passing through areas with cctv cameras or something)

    if perhaps there was a fiqh conference where both pro-video and anti-video scholars got together and formulated some guidelines on the rules or ethics of Islamic tv channels, it might have been a different story.

    even if only the anti-video scholars issued some guidelines to the pro-video people on how to behave around them that too would be fine. (i still haven't listened to the Q&A list by Azhari miyan that unbeknown posted)

    even on issues they believe to be haram?

    if you believe something to be haram, or a matter of principle, you will bluntly say a yes or a no, unless you lack courage. besides, blunt doesn't mean you are ill-mannered.

    consider all of these situations, and that you are in a level playing field and not coerced and don't fear losing life or limb or getting arrested or your family getting harassed due to your stance on an issue (not in a place like iran surrounded by shias or saudi arabia surrounded by wahabis, or at the minhaji ibadatgah surrounded by tahir's thugs)

    1. 3aqidah/imaniyat - someone asks you if you consider tahir as shaykhul Islam and an upright Muslim, and you are surrounded by a mixed crowd of tahiris as well as Muslims - will you say a yes or a no?

    2. haram qat3i - you find yourself signing a deal with a company in europe and to celebrate they take out a bottle of champagne - will you not tell them bluntly 'gentlemen, i'm a Muslim. i don't drink'? what if it was a situation in your college days and a bunch of guys (Muslim or not) handed you a bottle and cheered you on "do it, do it, do it..."? another one - you attend a Milad gathering where women freely mix with men with little regard for purdah, will you stay or leave?

    3. non-qat3i haram - you are at a gathering of Muslims, and had no idea they planned a qawwali. will you sit and listen or say 'you guys consider it halal but no i don't participate in gatherings with qawwalis. i consider them haram'?

    4. mubah - your child throws a tantrum asking you to buy some new toy that you don't want to. yes in such a situation, you might give in to pressure.

    in all these situations, even if you hate something in your heart, not saying no means you consented to it, regardless if it was done joyfully or if you only acquiesced reluctantly.

    coming back to the non-qat3i haram - if you believe videos to be haram, just how hard can it be for you to stand for your principles in this case if in the first two matters too (imaniyat and qat3i haram*) you will boldly stand for your principles?

    it is not a pressure situation of a distant auntyjee emotionally blackmailing someone at a family gathering (for some matter mubah in itself) and he reluctantly agrees only to hate himself for doing so!

    *likewise for the opposite case, i'm sure for obligations like salah or fasting, you will stand your ground and do your duty regardless of how much someone tries to prevent you from doing it.

    coming to Shah Sahab's issue:

    firstly, afaik from mutual acquaintances, he is a very pious and scrupulous man, so i'm in no way insinuating that he doesn't practice what he preaches or that he can't or doesn't stand up for his principles. i'm just saying that when he says "phas jata hun" he probably means that he uses discretion in appearing in front of camera. if he was filmed only on Madani channel or if that was the first time he was ever filmed, it could have been said that the situation was taken advantage of or that they behaved unethically. but given that he has willingly consented to being filmed for news anchors as well as in various different gatherings, it shows that he isn't an all out no-video person despite his fiqh stance; and that the Madani channel reps just tried their luck and saw if they could get him to say a few lines.

    i say again, Shah Sahab has taken principled stances in large gatherings like walking out of a gathering that involved naats with zikr, lambasting politicians or some policies etc. it simply would be no big deal for him to say "please don't film me" and also no big deal for any pakistani Sunni to switch the camera off if he said so.

    i don't agree with your 'it's difficult for people to say no in our culture' line. peer or group pressure runs across cultures, but people who value principles, do step their foot down for the sake of principles. doesn't the first video of Azhari miyan testify to that? (afaik, he has only ever been photographed without his knowledge)
    Last edited: May 11, 2015
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    [have just caught up after a hectic 10 days. am still busy, and this was composed morning which i didn't post]

    AQ is losing badly without realising it.
    my advice: when you dig your heels to take a position (instead of willing to move to the right one), you will clutch at straws to stay where you planted yourself.

    one should be fair always. you snipped off his premise and spin off on something else;notice what unB said:
    so the conditional was lopped off and made into a generic statement; and AQ demands proof for it!

    i pity your desperation.
    as for your use-cases and examples, i don't agree. many times, people unwillingly are part of something - blame it on eastern culture.

    it is difficult for people to say 'no' in our culture; even though, i have trained myself to say 'no', i still get stuck in situations, which i could avoid by saying no. though i feel like kicking myself afterward, at that point i would have said 'yes' even though my inside is screaming 'no'. it is a weakness, but don't think everyone can be as blunt as AQ...and ALWAYS.

    it is said, [perhaps a hadith reworded:] that exploiting this weakness of people to obtain something is similar to doing so by pointing a sword (i.e., extortion). [the exact wording eludes me now. but i will try to find it, in sha'Allah.]

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
  7. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    shah sahib's audio is saying otherwise. Either you are wrong or he is.

    so basically you are telling me that I should not expect any better etiquette or responsible behavior from a sunni tv channel crew than from the dunyadaar news reporters. fine.

    yes, I misunderstood you. sorry about that.

    as if these are sensible questions for me to try to answer.

    rather you should provide a daleel for:
    it is completely jaiz for someone who believes that video is allowed to pull up any passerby, point his camera at him, and ask him to answer 'deeni' questions even if the passerby considers video to be haram.

    my contention is that: No sunni muslim should put another sunni in a tricky position by cornering him with a camera without asking for his consent well in advance. If you are already armed with cameras and ready to shoot and then ask permission in front of 20 onlookers then the consent received can only be called acquiescing reluctantly to avoid argumentation and fitnah in front of people.

    acquiesce = accept something reluctantly but without protest.

    shah sahib's audio statement is sufficient evidence that this is what actually transpired. Sunni channel crew should know better, atleast that is what I expect.
  8. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    you got it all wrong. haven't I been denying this very charge all this time?!

    the 'point' does not end at the word 'camera'. It is NOT true that I am saying that he was duped.

    the 'point' is THIS:

  9. AbdalQadir

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

    my final comments -

    this point wasn't lost on me and that's exactly what i have a problem with. see post #95. you believe that Shah sahab or others can be tricked/duped/conned etc. by Madani or any other channel to appear on camera. i say they can very well refuse.

    Shah Sahab has vocally protested against things he does not believe to be correct and even walked out of gatherings. if he doesn't want to appear on camera, unless someone takes a video from a hidden camera, there's no way anyone would film him if he refused to be filmed.

    if they don't want, no one can make them. it's that simple. ulema are not kids that people can easily trick them into doing something.

    that's not a point of contention (between me & you) to start with.

    there are lots of ikhtilafat between Sunnis on furoo3i issues. this is not the only thing Shah sahab has distanced himself from in regards to DI. he also does not think it is correct of them to publish pictures of body parts without faces (a man seen from the back, wearing an imama; an individual hand; etc.); afaik, it was due to his protest and daleels that DI took the position that naats with zikr are haram (i may be wrong on this).

    he has a right to disagree with the usage of Madani channel or think that it doesn't serve a religious purpose. i never said he is in love with Madani channel.

    no. i am saying that you (not Shah sahab, i'm arguing with you here) don't live in the real world if you think that you can get out of your house and not be held up rightly or wrongly by any number of people. a Sunni tv channel could just be one of them. the media works outdoors and at public events too, you know.

    please do elaborate. there's

    1. consent - you agree to do something

    2. denial - you don't agree to do something

    3. coercion - you are forced to do something

    4. you could be tricked into doing something as a result of someone lying or cheating etc., (you can count this under coercion or separate from it)

    if you think an action could be done outside of these three or four levels of cognizance, please tell me how.

    no insinuation at all. i am just curious. in fact it is just baffling to me how you deduced that from my question.


    you are yet to provide the daleels for

    1. the fiqh rules/Islamic ethics for video-graphy that Sunni tv channels should only film scholars in mosques, offices, homes, studios, etc. and not approach them in public places or events.
    2. "when in public a person might sometimes agree to things he doesn't consider 100% correct"
    2a. please also elaborate the extent up to which this axiom can be applied.

    i will wait for your fiqh daleels if you post them. otherwise, see you on another thread.
  10. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    okay my post-final comments:

    aq seems to be going off on a tangent. the point being made is not that shah sahib never appears on camera but it was only due to madani channel muballighs 'duping' him that he appeared on camera.

    the point is this:

    1. Shah sahib has sat for the camera various times (which is why I said I was surprised that his position was anti-video)
    2. Mawlana Farooq rizvi regularly arranges for video lectures.
    3. Mawlana Waqar Azizi's few bayans are also available on yt (dunno if he was aware that he's being filmed)

    BUT that does not mean they will want to appear on camera every time and for everyone. Shah sahib did not and mawalna waqar did not.

    see what shah sahib said:
    sare raah jaise hota hai na..koi chalte phirte koi poochh woh bhi bade nape tule mere jumle hai ke......kisi ki tareef kisi ki tauseef me main koi ek baat bhi nahi kahi

    that is called 'leaving no stone unturned' in distancing himself from the channel.

    oh so you begin at news reporters and end at mc cameras? you seem to be saying that I (or shah sahib) have no problem with news reporters stopping us and shoving cameras at us but cannot stand it if its mc cameras and a deeni question is asked. That's about as bad as unfounded accusations get.

    sorry but that simply simplistic and also surprising coming from someone who regularly lectures people around on being realistic and real-life and what not.

    another insinuation- that I have problems only with madani channel and no one else. see my reply above.

    edit: actually I was searching for a particular naath recitation by owaiz qadri when I accidentally landed on the video- the same user has uploaded a naath too. I did not write the title to that video and neither do I agree to using those words. Which is why I did not write the title in text.
    Last edited: May 10, 2015
  11. AbdalQadir

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

    please also provide a fiqh reference to how far does this "agreeing to things he doesn't consider 100% correct" axiom go?

    as an example, you blast tahir on the forum. if i asked you in a public gathering what you think of him (off camera), will you just call him a wali or perhaps an upright Muslim or an erudite scholar only because you don't want people around you to go berserk?

    i don't know but maybe that is the reason Shah sahab's Darul Uloom Amjadia was so adamant NOT to publicly issue a fatwa against tahir after his wembley gig.

    i'm going by Shah sahib's ACTIONS both on Madani channel as well as a whole long list of other channels and other videos from gatherings - which obviously don't match up to his words.

    people can indeed decide for themselves and try to figure out just how astoundingly hard it can be for him to simply say "i don't come on camera. please turn it away from me".
    Abu Hamza likes this.
  12. AbdalQadir

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

    then the scholar in question should match his words with his actions. when he is filmed in a 100 other videos AND also professionally on media outlets (something that IS done with prior appointments and consent etc) then it simply doesn't hold any weight to say that he doesn't like cameras after he CONSENTED to be filmed, regardless how many stupid people said he has aspirations to appear on tv.

    then you don't live in the real world. people will stop passersby for anything - from wahabis and dobbies asking people to join their durus, to the media stopping people to give their opinion on modi's new policy, to people asking for chanda for anything, to what have you. Allah forbid if some fellow Sunni stopped someone for what IS a good cause.

    and then people wonder why Sunniyat is in shambles!

    you try googling just "consent" in a legal context, even in fatawa Ridawiyya if you care. i'm not a literature enthusiast and your comment there is nothing but a cop-out! one either gives consent or he doesn't!


    as an aside - has Shah sahab been filmed by other people or other channels AFTER that Madani channel piece and his audio linked by ub?
  13. AbdalQadir

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

    yes. please.

    and since you've put a number, please also define what according to Shah sahab or other scholars like him is the ruling on videos - 90% correct or 50% jayiz or 35% correct or what?
  14. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    final comments:

    no it is not. The post is there for all to read. It doesn't suggest duping/cheating/conning at all unless you use a different dictionary. What it suggests I have said plainly in the other post below.

    on the contrary what IS apparent is his discomfort. that's why he ended it quickly and moved away. then his own statement which I quoted below proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt. There's something called 'consenting unwillingly' (try googling "consent unwillingly shakespeare" if you care).

    that's right wonder why he didn't do it.....

    no, that and the fact he considers putting up tv screens in the masjid haram shows why he might want to distance himself from the channel.

    you want me to quote a fiqh book to prove that when in public a person might sometimes agree to things he doesn't consider 100% correct?

    if you are a rep of a channel which claims to work for the deen then you are expected to take every precaution not to cause the slightest inconvenience to any sunni scholar. He should be informed beforehand and his permission sought, particularly if you know he doesnt like cameras. This is exactly what I meant by 'shoving cameras in the face'. I will get infuriated if someone did it to me.

    that's simply a ludicrous statement which makes no attempt at even trying to understand the things being discussed.


    lastly, shah sahib's own words are worth more than a 1000 videos and that's what I will be going by for now. There's the video and his views about it in the audio. People can decide for themselves.

    I am out.
  15. AbdalQadir

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

    some more fiqh or related queries -

    1- for those who believe videos to be najayiz - what is their ruling on buying tv's? or watching tv?

    the argument that the tv is just a tool and it depends on the user if he uses it for good or bad DOES NOT apply to the video-haram team because a tv in and of itself is a device for playing videos and in their view, even videos for deeni purposes are haram.

    2 - what about buying and using computers? we could argue that a computer can be used for things other than videos and the height of taqwa might be to disconnect from the internet so as to avoid being linked up to youtube and so on - fact of the matter is if you use a computer, you can't avoid videos. one could argue that the banner ads on websites, or the videos on the youtube sidebar (assuming you only listen to audio bayans without pictures on youtube) are no different than the bollywood posters on streets in india and hence out of our control, but using the computer in itself is STILL under your control and you can do without it.

    the same argument goes for modern smartphones, but using mobile phones in general could be given away to basic necessity in these times.

    3 - it seems a lot of the followers are all busy watching youtube videos of tahir to identify his follies, or they will watch ary qtv or Madani channel and comment on various things. (i'm not talking about the full on haram stuff like bollywood etc).

    a - do any advanced students have a special rukhsa for this? like maybe an advanced student or munazir is permitted to read nahjul balagha or dehlvi's books only to dissect the arguments of the shias or wahabis. likewise some advanced followers might have been granted permission to watch Madani channel or qtv or one of the many wahabi channels or youtube videos only to keep up to date with the heresies of the real or perceived non-Sunnis, i don't know.

    b - or is there an open rukhsa that buying a tv and watching the videos made by others for the purpose of identifying their mistakes and/or violations of the manhaj of Ahlus Sunnah is a-ok only so long as you don't get behind the camera yourself? how would someone know what Madani channel or qtv or peace tv are up to unless you watch it yourself?! (this kinda reminds me of that modern parable i heard in college. a person tells his friend "you were at the pub the other night", and the friend replies with "yes, i was there, but you couldn't have known about it if you weren't there yourself")
  16. AbdalQadir

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

    coming to your message and the larger fiqh issue concerning the awam:

    says which bab of which fiqh book?

    why can't i stop a person in an Eidgah or a Milad Juloos or some other event and ask his views on xyz topic if i believe in videos to be permissible? i don't see that as getting stuck. if the person believes videos to be impermissible, he can simply tell me, please don't film me.

    if the same Milad Juloos or gathering has women reciting naats in front of men or women violating purdah rules, i know people who have walked out of such Milad gatherings and said that Milad is a mubarak gathering and can't involve haram and therefore they refuse to participate in such a mockery of Milad gatherings. Shah sahab himself has protested and walked out of gatherings with zikr wali naat's

    as for being in control of situations, that's simply a ludicrous argument. i can show you wedding videos where religious people have put their hands in front of their faces when the camera was pointed at them, and explicitly telling the cameraman "don't film me". politicians and celebrities get hawked by the media and avoid the camera when they really have to. college kids who get raided on in rave parties do a fine job of avoiding camera. i'm not comparing scholars to politicians or kids at rave parties, but saying that anyone who seriously needs to avoid the camera for some very strong reasons, can and does do it.

    sorry you simply can't suggest that a scholar who adheres to the videos-haram view is so utterly incapacitated to say a simple "no" when someone films him (i'm talking about people filming him and he is consciously aware of it, not about people sneakily shooting videos from hidden camera phones and so on)

    does this condition of "being in full control of situation" also apply to other facets of Islamic life? what if Shah sahab or any other scholar was in the commissioner's house meeting him or returning from Eid prayers or in a public gathering, and some people just came up to him and asked him to chair a Milad gathering in their neighborhood, or just shot a blunt question on what he thinks of tahir in front of a 1000 minhajians, or if someone just invited him to dinner?

    agreed 100%.

    they can't edit someone's audio/video and/or throw some spin on it thereby changing his message or stance or position. that's simple common sense. fiqh wise it would fall under attributing some falsehood to someone

    2 points you mentioned

    1. they should only film scholars only in studios, mosques, offices etc. - you need to provide daleels for this to impose this condition on them.
    2. they should not distort someone's message or the context. yes indeed. but you need to give evidence for where and how Madani channel did this.
  17. AbdalQadir

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

    with the greatest respect to Shah Sahab, again, it's just as easy as saying "please turn the camera away from me" given his respect and standing in pakistan; PLUS in other videos like the one where he actually gave interview to a news anchor professionally filming it, it simply isn't a case of getting stuck. that's why i said that he probably thinks and behaves realistically and uses discretion as far as coming on camera is concerned (similar to ulema taking pictures for passports etc.)

    it is irrelevant of you to quote the second half of his comments because i agreed that it is indeed idiotic for someone to suggest that he wants to appear on tv or Madani channel or any other channel, just because he answered a simple question to reporters on Milad Sharif.

    that however does NOT indicate that he was "stuck" or cornered in front of the camera, as is apparent from the video itself.

    oh yes it is. if he agrees to be filmed and does not object or protest, it is "willing consent" and nothing other than that, regardless how much he believes the act to be haram. check with any Muslim qadi or a secular lawyer what is and isn't consent in a legal context.

    i dunno who said "khule dil se pasand karna" (maybe the purported people in uk) but again, it's simply idiotic to say he loves Madani channel khule dil se, only because he WILLINGLY CONSENTED to appear in front of the camera and give a short answer on the Milad Sharif.


    it is also irrelevant to bring in the question of zakat for Madani channel. Shah sahab is anti-video, but a mufti may very well be pro-video and still say that zakat funds are meant for the fuqaraa and not tv channels even if they do da3wah and tableegh.
    Last edited: May 9, 2015
    Abu Hamza likes this.
  18. AbdalQadir

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

    i didn't put any words in your mouth. i said that that's the message your post gave, and i stand by it.

    and your point makes no sense because Shah sahab's consent is more than apparent in the alleged video (lest he was lied to)
  19. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    The message that I purpotedly failed to get across:

    If DI cameramen wish to get a scholar to give an interview (howsoever short) for the channel they should either invite them to their studio, mosque, residence etc. or go to the scholar's residence, office, mosque etc. Because in both these cases the scholar is in full control of the situation and can consent or refuse without having to care about any maslehat or such things. And even after that they should inform them what parts of the conversation they would be broadcasting and also take their express permission for it. Failing to do so is violating the scholars' personal boundaries. Yes, secular media reporters do this all the time but the representatives of a channel working to spread the deen and shariah should know better.
  20. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    I wrote:

    Both these things are borne out by shah sahib's reply in the video and the case with mawlana waqar (I can't locate the video on youtube now. It was shot in Gujrat, India a year or two ago. I saw it live on madani kahbren).

    AQ wrote:

    In response I'll quote what Shah sahib said in the video:

    Question: hamare yahan uk me jo ye dawate islami wale mashhoor kar rahe hai ke aap madni channel pe aa rahe hai ya aap ka dawateislami walon je saath taalluk hai ye khabar jo yahan pe youtube ke zarie chal rahi hai ye, huzoor zara farma de ke ye kahan tak sahi hai.

    dekhiye janaab asal baat to ye hai ke mai kabhi bhi madani channel par na gaya na madani channel par jane ki meri koi khaish hai na kisi aur channel par jaane ki khaish hai. is maamle me mera nuktae nazar wohi hai jo qibla tajushshariah hazrat allama maulana akhtar raza khan damat barkatuhumaaliya ka aur hazrate muhaddithe kabeer damat barkatuhumaaliya ka mauqif hai. Mai us mauqif se nahi hatta. ye alag baat hai ke meri akhbaron me photo chhapti hai. ya meri video banti hai ya aati hai. mai isko zaati taur pe pasand nahi karta aur insan hu mai kabhi kabhi PHAS jata hu. kuch yahan ki zaurate hai. madani channel par aane ki na mujhe koi khaish hai na tamanna. mujhe agar kisi channel par aane ki khaish ho to bade bade channel hai jo ek ek sau aur do do sau mumalik me chalte hai q hai, ary wagairah wagairah aur jiski inki dawat dene par bhi mai kisi ke studio nahi jata. Ye to ek meeting thi commisioner karachi ke yahan aur usme ye meeting bhi juloose miladun nabi (sallallahu'alayhi wa sallam) ke munakid karne ke silsile me ye meeting thi waha mera khayal hai ke inka koi aadmi aa gaya..janab kuchh miladun-nabi ke hawale se bayan karein aap us video ko dekh lijiye ke usme yahi hai ke ye ek ba barkat din hai, milad shareef ka din hai
    hum sabko chahiye ke bade ehteraam aur ikraam se isko manaae..phir ye koi..mera khayal hai ek minute bhi nahi balke chand secondon ka ye paigaam hai. Ab is paighaam ko leke log ye smajh le ke mai madani channel me aa gaya ya madani channel me jaane ki meri khaaish hai ye logon ka nuktae nazar jo hai wo bilkul galat hai aur aap wahan iski tardeed kar dein ke koi aisa mas'ala AlHamdulillah mere saath nahi ke mujhe koi khaaish ho madani channel par jaane ki ya usme taqreer karne ki... mai apne muamalaat me magan huN mujhe kisi channel
    ki zaroorat nahi hai..wo meri zaroorat nahi. maine wazahat kar di hai, ummeed hai ke log agar ye mehsoos kar rahe hai ke mai madani channel me...mai madani channel kabhi bhi nahi gaya na unke yahan recording(?) hai to bilkul aap usko dekhle..sare raah jaise hota hai na..koi chalte phirte koi poochh woh bhi bade nape tule mere jumle hai ke......kisi ki tareef kisi ki tauseef me main koi ek baat bhi nahi kahi

    carefully read the highlighted parts. He said it no less than five times that he did not appear on the channel. Clearly then, he is trying his utmost to distance himself from the channel. He says that sometimes he gets "stuck" and has to face a camera. This cannot be called a willing consent anymore than 30 secs worth of words can be called 'khul-e-dil se pasand karna'.

    These are some more of his views:


Share This Page