Shahid Ali continues public spat with Shaykh Asrar

Mawlana Shahid Ali has made another video on his YouTube channel in which he asserts that Shaykh Asrar Rashid has to publicly repent for yet another egregious wrong-doing. This supposed crime is only one among many others, including Shaykh Asrar Rashid’s consumption of rat poison (or Milk of Magnesia) and his answer regarding an ignorant lay-person performing Salah behind a deviant Imam. I shall speak on this new video here.

Note that none of my previous questions and points have been addressed by Mawlana Shahid Ali and his allies. At most, the only engagement I have received here has been over the use of a term. Discrepancies over a failed testimony provided by Mufti Zahid Hussain al-Ridawi over the Milk of Magnesia allegation, glaring omissions and distortions in queries to Muftis, sensationalist headlines, swift declarations of heresy and other broader points about particular cohorts and a toxic culture have been met with silence. After the previous bemusing claim of ijma’, I suppose that I could follow suit and claim a ‘tacit consensus’ (ijma’ sukuti) on my thoughts.

In his latest video uploaded on YouTube, Mawlana Shahid Ali claims that Shaykh Asrar Rashid mixes with deviants, approves of their misguidance and resolves to further strengthen friendship and camaraderie with them. Shaykh Asrar Rashid must publicly repent from this, Mawlana Shahid Ali argues.

Of course, if any person approves of deviancy, then he himself is complicit in the heresy and thus is a deviant himself. As such, Shaykh Asrar Rashid is a deviant if we are to take Mawlana Shahid Ali’s logic to its inevitable conclusion. Let me repeat: according to Mawlana Shahid Ali and his allies, Shaykh Asrar Rashid is a non-Sunni. He is outside the folds of Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah. This is because he not only mixes with deviants, but more crucially, approves of their misguidance as well.

Before I even investigate Mawlana Shahid Ali’s claims and his reasoning for them, it is once again of note that despite Shaykh Asrar Rashid’s alleged enumeration of multiple crimes, a clear Fatwa has not been stamped upon his head declaring him an outright Sulh-Kulli and non-Sunni. I have deconstructed Mawlana Shahid Ali’s previous queries to Muftis in my previous posts but they were generic answers anyway. Here, I am speaking about a Fatwa by name - similar to the one that Mawlana Shahid Ali played a role in with regards to Sayyid Irfan Shah Mashhadi.

I suspect that no such Fatwa has been forthcoming due to what I had spoken about in my previous posts. It would require a commendable idiocy for Mawlana Shahid Ali and his allies to openly sign a Fatwa declaring Shaykh Asrar Rashid a non-Sunni with their names, loudly and proudly. Nonetheless, I would not put it past them. Some will hide in the background because they fear being outed as incredible laughing-stocks. Others, in their stupid naivete, will persist in doing a foolish public bidding. A scheming attitude of declaring someone as a Sulh-Kulli and non-Sunni in all but explicit and definite terms is disgusting cowardice of the highest order. See my previous posts for more.

Comments on the video to follow.

 

I don't know anything about them myself. Apparently they're followers of syed Ahmed barelwi, whoever that is. And thus not sunni.

There was an event organised where one of the speakers is affiliated with this fultalis group. However, it wasn't obvious that this is the case as there were other legitimate sunni scholars there. Now I think about it, I'm not sure why only shaykh asrar is being called out for sharing the stage with this unknown fultalis guy but the other scholars that were there aren't being mentioned?

 

As expected, that devbandi clown is cashing in on the dispute



I suspect irfanis, tafzilis (paqs), minhajis, wahabis, even qadianis maybe, all are gonna follow suit in some capacity.

Mufti Aslam Bandyalwi sahab should be very proud of his student's services to Sunniyat.

 

I've not delved into fultalis (at least by this name) so dunno abt them. However, what was Asrar Rashid's appearance with them regarding?

I think this is it. If he's trying to score against Asrar Rashid as if he's playing some 20-20 match, then any neutral observer like me will be forced to say this.

 

Another video by imam shahid. This time to refute shaykh asrar for appearing with fultalis. He says that it would be a weak argument to claim he was unaware of their deviance because as a public figure, he should be aware and someone commented in this regard on his fb page anyway.

My question - why did imam shahids teacher invite zayn aqtab to a dastar bandi when he, as a public figure, should have been aware of his deviance? Will imam shahid make videos refuting mufti aslam in order to be consistent?

In fact, imam shahid was present and knew of the deviance of zainul aqtab- shouldn't he have spoken up against him in that gathering as per the principles he espouses in his most recent video?

Don't get me wrong. I think shaykh asrar has made some mis steps especially how he answered the question re praying behind deviants. He didn't need to give a nuanced answer which created confusion. The answer regarding boxing etc was also kind of ludicrous. But if imam shahid wants consistency from shaykh asrar - then I want consistency from imam shahid also. And more than anything, I want him to stop making videos about a sunni and focus on actual problems instead

 

Imam Shahid's refutations of Shaykh Asrar on YouTube get more traction and appear more readily on the deo channel headed by the terrible deo duo, who Imam Shahid (and Shaykh Asrar) had refuted. This should make clear to Imam Sahib about who is actually benefiting from his videos.

@TheRidawiWay point in relation to the kharji mentality of some Sunnis is a powerful one because Islam in general and the Sunni path in particular is all about the middle path. The Veering towards extremism in whatever direction is dangerous, and like we are seeing with the Saudis, extremism breeds just that... extremism. For decades they deployed a puritanical interpretation of Islam and today they are moving at pace in their pontificating of secularism and liberalism.

 

In the end, Maulana Shahid Ali is amoral. If an appeal to bigotry wins him support, if it is in the interest of his need to be relevant or to be right, he will make those appeals without hesitation or shame. His bile aimed at Shaykh Asrar stems above all from the latter’s positive criticism of him, and is slyly disguised as a “fight for the truth”. He is mimicking the thinking of the “Barelwis” he hopes to attract.

Maulana Shahid Ali’s campaigns against Shaykh Asrar Rashid appear to be matters of pure personal interest, never principle or the good of Sunniyat. If it was, then he would have responded sanely to Shaykh Asrar Rashid’s attempts to contact him and to numerous clarifications provided. He would also have exercised patience and taken Maulana Abu Hasan’s offer to write to Shaykh Asrar Rashid and listened to the advice of the people who urged him to think before acting.

If polarisation works to his interest, so be it. The fact that Maulana Shahid Ali’s hateful stratagems of bigotry and conspiracy are causing rifts and fitna will never cause him a moment of hesitation. Why would they? What matters to Maulana Shahid Ali is Maulana Shahid Ali.

 

Ask yourself, what leading research scholars have they produced? What is their contribution to serious Sunni scholarship? I have heard some even refer to these individuals who live in isolated detached chambers (and literally have contributed zilch to scholarship) as the greatest scholars residing in the Anglosphere. This is often purely on the grounds of the ‘names’ of their teachers and the Khilafats that they have received.

It may be that this insecurity stems from the fact that these individuals inwardly realise they have nothing to offer to the world despite their positions of authority and influence or want thereof. A lack of knowledge, know-how, competence, and so on breeds an inferiority complex no matter how much one may attempt to delude themselves. They thus are forced to retreat into identity politics, sham sectarianism, the run-of-the-mill oratory speeches, social media circuit, nationwide annual tours and cult-think. It is all about consolidating their influence, status quo and public perception.

It reeks of envy when they snipe at someone like Shaykh Asrar Rashid who is not affiliated with any Pir, Khanqah, Astana, Dargah, Shaykh etc. or leeches off inherited acclaim. Rather, he has earned esteem on his own merit. They feel incredibly threatened. Similar is the case with Mawlana Abu Hasan. Some even consider Mawlana Abu Hasan to be ‘unreliable’ because he is ‘anonymous’ (majhul)!

Perhaps they are unaware of what Sadr al-Shari’ah, Mufti Amjad Ali al-Azmi says in Bahar-e Shariat with reference to Radd al-Muhtar of Imam Ibn ‘Abidin al-Shami:

“Issue:- It is seen that Person X is asked religious questions by people and that he answers them. People view him with respect even though they are unaware who the person is and what his background is. Nevertheless, it is permitted to ask him religious questions since Muslims treating him in such a manner is itself evidence of him being a trustworthy individual.”

Moreover, as Shaykh Asrar Rashid noted, they “claim to be Barelwi but have done zero work on AlaHazrat's Arabic heritage.” Or in English or any other language for that matter. These people simply leech off titles and a grand image they have created for themselves while focusing on petty bickering. Mufti X has received Khilafah Z from Shaykh Y or is his son. It is easy to see past their empty rhetoric. Ironically, their self-aggrandisation is met with zero quality work in comparison to the people they try to mock or undermine.

At best, they will bring you something and consider it to be the work of the decade or century. They are so myopic and stuck within a bubble that they are not even aware of how much it is lacking in quality. It pales in comparison to anything the ‘Other’ has done in the same field. Yet still, it is seen as a milestone achievement in our circles because "in the street of the blind, the one-eyed man is called the Guiding Light." Since these people live in isolated echo chambers, all their cronies and supporters who have been kept dull for years and know no better and simply applaud them without honest reflection and feedback. “Naarey Takbir!” “Naarey Risalat!” etc.

Sunnis as a whole should ignore these armchair critics who label them as ‘Sulh-Kulli’ or other terms until they are first able to coherently define them and their parameters. This is not to say that Sulh Kullism is not a major fitnah but the term and others like it has lost value due to it being used inappropriately by these Maslak fanatics. When a Sunni is a Sulh-Kulli then anything goes. Words and meanings ‘explode’. A man is a woman, a woman is a man, a Sunni is a deviant, and a deviant is a Sunni etc.

In practice, they have also created a limbo state between being a true Sunni and a Non-Sunni. “You are Sunni, but not Sunni… enough.” They will keep people at arms length fearing sedition out of paranoia or insecurity. Scholars from the Ummah who are Ash’ari/Maturidi, follow a Madhhab, are Sufi, pious and have no overt creedal problems are treated deficiently as if there is something missing just because they are not card-carrying “Barelwis”.

These people have innovated a 'Manzilah bayn al-Manzilatayn' theology in regards to those who do not meet their particular threshold of Sunni-Barelwi doctrinal practice. The person cannot be Sunni for X reason, but he is not a Non-Sunni either for he, for all purposes, is one. Thus, they confine him to the category of neither Sunni nor Non-Sunni or, paradoxically, both.

For example, let’s consider Shaykh Asrar Rashid. One ‘evidence’ that Shaykh Asrar Rashid is supposedly Sulh-Kulli is that he shared a virtual stage with individuals from other groups such as Hizb al-Tahrir. The topic was on Islamically-informed politics, current geopolitical affairs, and the caliphate. For some, Shaykh Asrar Rashid is a Sunni, and a wonderful representative at that. However, for some of these Barelwi-Ahbash-Khariji-Wahhabi individuals, Shaykh Asrar Rashid is in the Manzilah bayn al-Manzilatayn state - he is a Sunni-non-Sunni for participating on the panel, or for the more brash among them, a Non-Sunni de facto.

There is also the affair of chain takfir and chain tabdi’. Person X will be hastily declared a Sulh-Kulli or deviant. If Person Y considers Person X to be a Sunni Muslim, Person Y will also be declared a deviant. Person Z who is congenial with Person Y will be labelled a deviant. Also Person W who considers Person Z a Sunni Muslim, ad infinitum. This extends as far as even being seen in the same setting with Person X or Person Y.

How individuals who have never come forward into the field and uphold their scholarly duties with respect can say Shaykh Asrar Rashid is a ‘Sulh-Kulli’ or is misguiding people is beyond me. This is the more deadly ‘poison’ circulating among our ranks. This is the actual ‘stunt’ and ‘deception’.

People should earn their merit. Parasites sucking the life and blood from Ahl al-Sunnah by their nefarious actions, behaviour and words should not get a free-pass. Parasites is an apt metaphor for these individuals because they are killing the very host entity upon which they existentially survive. Without the efforts of those whom they hate, where would Barelwism even be?

These are the individuals Imam Ahmad Raza Khan was alluding to when he said, “Those capable of doing work don’t have the means/support; those who have the means are utterly incapable.”

na kaam karo, na kaam karne do

Neither do work yourselves, and stop others from doing so too

Who has taught Sunni Muslims the correct Sunni creed regarding the necessary, impossible and possible attributes of Allah and His prophets? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who popularised Sunni theology and it’s study before these folk had any idea what it is? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who has popularised a studious culture within the Barelwi community? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who has represented Muslims against atheists, skeptics and agnostics and has written a work that meets the demand of the time? Shaykh Asrar Rashid.

Who has represented Muslims against Christian missionaries? Shaykh Asrar Rashid. .

Who has represented the Ahl al-Sunnah in multiple debates against anthropomorphists and the Salafiyyah? Shaykh Asrar Rashid.

Who has wonderfully dismantled the Kadhhabiyyah? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who has represented the Ahl al-Sunnah in both word and deed against the Deobandis? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who bore the collective responsibility of representing the Ahl al-Sunnah when Shi’ites challenged us? Shaykh Asrar Rashid.

Who refuted the tafdili fitnah whilst it was still taking root? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who shredded Shaykh Nuh Keller’s ‘Iman, Kufr and Takfir’? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who has refuted ‘razor-punk’ Abu Layth and other modernists? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who refuted the Neo-Mu’tazili and quack Hanafi, Atabek Shukurov? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who tackled the issue of perennialism and The Study Quran? Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan.

Who debated and critiqued the Salafi ‘Abdur Rahman Hasan and ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Dimashqiyyah? Shaykh Asrar Rashid.

Who has written a wonderful book on the Sirah of the Beloved Messenger [peace be upon him]? Mawlana Abu Hasan.

I have missed more than I have listed, and I could go on and on but fursat kahan keh is ki tamanna karey koi. Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Abu Hasan have done more beyond polemical contributions but I have only listed an incomplete list about those since it is the only thing these people ‘appreciate’.

And we are now meant to accept that Shaykh Asrar Rashid, who has done more work for the Ahl al-Sunnah than these Muftis and Khulafa’ of X, Y and Z is a Sulh-Kulli? Absolutely hilarious.

It is not that I revel in such critiques and criticism but some things need to be said. My tone may be harsh but so too is the truth. al-Haqq murun wa law kana duran. If anything I have said is wrong or incorrect, then do not beat around the bush. Do come and engage me on this forum, Sunniport. Perhaps Sunniport is 'biased', or maybe anonymous folk are not worth responding to; because that would actually mean addressing the point rather than attacking the individual.

—

tum ho aapas meiN ghazabnaak woh aapas meiN raheem
tum khaTa-kaar o khaTa-beeN; woh khaTa-posh o kareem
chahtey sab haiN ke hoN auj e surayya pe muqeem
pahle waysa koyi payda to karey qalb e saleem
takht e faghfur bhi unkaa tha, sareer e kay bhi
yuN hi bateN haiN, ke tum meiN woh Hamiyyat hai bhi?

you are angry towards one another; and they (the early exemplar muslims) were kind to one another
you are sinners and eager to find others' faults - they concealed the faults of their brothers and were gracious
everyone wishes to rise as high as pleiades
but one should first develop such a sound heart
[thus the early muslims] ruled over the chinese and persian thrones
but you? you are only talk - do you have that determination and zeal?


khud kushi sheywa tumhara, woh ghayur o khud-daar
tum ukhuwwat se gureyzaN woh ukhuwwat pe nisaar
tum ho guftaar saraapaa woh saraapaa kirdaar
tum taraste ho kalee ko, woh gulistaN ba kinaar
ab talak yaad hai qawmoN ko hikayat un ki
naqsh hai Saf'Hah e hasti pey Sadaqat un ki

you display suicidal traits and are killing yourselves, but they (the early muslims) were self-respecting and dignified
you avoid and keep distance from your brothers - but they sacrificed everything for brotherhood
you are only talk from head-to-toe, and they were action from head-to-toe
you impore and entreat for a single bud and they basked in lush gardens in full bloom
all nations remember their stories until now,
their truthfulness is etched on the pages of history

 

In response to @Abdullah Ahmed,

I am not here to defend Shaykh Asrar Rashid nor do I agree with everything that Shaykh Asrar Rashid has said. Rather, the broader point that I am highlighting is the streak of extremism that exists within certain factions of the Barelwi community that I have spoken of before.

No attempt is made to think of possible excuses for a fellow Muslim or understand what Shaykh Asrar Rashid is trying to say. The principle of charitable interpretation (tawjih) seems to have been wholly absent in the supposedly stellar training of the critics. This is a sign of scholarly aptitude and knowledge rather than an ability to pick faults with statements.

Nasha pila ke girana to sab ko aata hai
Mazah to tab he ke girton ko thaam le saaqi!

Spiking their drinks and knocking them drunk is easy work
True ecstasy is in providing a helping hand to the flailing drunks, winekeeper!

Even my choice of word 'excuses' betrays the true intent of the skill. Instead of considering a meaning that would allow for Shaykh Asrar Rashid's statement to be true and compatible in lieu of all that he has said before and holds to be true himself (even though he may not have worded it the best), these amatuer literalists still insist for a public retraction and repentance based upon an ambiguity and dismiss all subsequent clarifications.

As I had mentioned before, we could hold these individuals and their scholars according to the measure of their own grandiose titles. Likewise, one can easily hold another mirror to their faces. This would be to subject their own innocuous statements and speeches to the most awkwardly pedantic and hypercritical standards. In reality, this is atrocious decorum (su' al-adab) with scholars and knowledge. I could present examples from our classical heritage to demonstrate this. After all, these individuals betray all their talk of respect and veneration outside of their own cliques.

The first thing that comes to mind for the polemical Khariji-Barelwi mind is to try and crucify Shaykh Asrar Rashid or engage in a smear campaign against him. This is because they do not know anything else and are products of a toxic culture themselves. Do not be fooled into thinking that the spreading of the "Milk of Magnesia'' rumour was anything less than an attempt at character assasination by those who have had long-standing grudge matches against Shaykh Asrar Rashid. We are all aware of the failed testimony provided by Mawlana Shahid Ali's allegedly trustworthy sources. Shaykh Asrar Rashid is not the first nor will he be the last in this firing line. Anyone who poses a threat to their backwards way of thinking is an Other; an enemy to be suspected, blacklisted and cancelled.

The above is what distinguishes the etiquette and mannerisms of people of knowledge and foresight from fakes. Mawlana Abu Hasan has mentioned that he disagrees with Shaykh Asrar Rashid on issues. I do too, and I am sure others do as well. However, navigating disagreement and understanding priorities, the weight of issues etc. is a mark of wisdom and common-sense tact. Do you see Mawlana Abu Hasan behave like a wanton Khariji-Barelwi polemicist? Not at all. Does he fan the flames of unnecessary discord on the pretext of ambiguities or unfounded allegations? No. This is the sign of a true scholar.

Imam Ahmad Raza Khan, with his saintly prescience, writes regarding these very parochial people: “We talk of unity amongst the scholars but the ‘Market of Envy’ is thriving. If there are even slight murmurs that someone is gaining popularity then these “paragons of truth” will rush to oppose him. They will side with deviants in insulting him and cursing him, and they'll say—“What?! People are honouring him and not us!” Now you tell me, this group who cannot even recognise the talented from amongst their own; how on earth will they hone the weak and deficient from them thereby making them capable and complete?” See al-Fatawa al-Rizwiyyah.

Ah! These words are like music to my ears. These people have hardly ever read Imam Ahmad Raza Khan despite their acclaim. All they know of AlaHazrat is from the same lacklustre and bog-standard speeches which they hear every year. The same pomp, emotional rhetoric and so on without real substantive engagement with his work. All of a sudden, they become experts on AlaHazrat and his scholastic approach and claim a monopoly over him; simply because they may even be disciples in his Sufi chain. They only know of a smoky 'image' and a chimera of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan. To understand a scholar, you must engage with him by reading his works in depth, his contemporaries, forebears and the wider tradition that he is situated in; understanding his contexts and subtexts, analysing them and diving deep inside the ocean of knowledge that he brings.

If Imam Ahmad Raza Khan was alive, I am certain that he would lament the Barelwi situation and distance himself from these types. He would declare himself free from them but knowing how these Khariji types work, they would have already cancelled him before he got a chance.

I am reminded of what Imam al-Subki writes in the Tabaqat which I shall adapt for our purposes:

“There is extremism amongst them which is not present in others. It is that they permit lying if done to support their own group and lying against those who do not. They believe that only they are true Muslims and only they are the true Ahl al-Sunnah. If you counted the number of their scholars - and there is no real scholar in their ranks anyways - then they would not reach a number that can be taken seriously by any measure. They brandish scholars of the Ummah as heretics or lukewarm Sunnis. They attribute themselves to Imam X but he is free from them.”

Imam al-Subki was speaking of the anthropomorphists from amongst the Hanbalis but his description is not far-off from some camps amongst Sunnis.

He continues and says, “I saw this in the writing of Taqi al-Din ibn Salah that Allah has trialled two Imams by their followers:

1. Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal - who has been tested by the Mujassimah;
2. Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq - who has been tested by the Rafidah”

I add:

3. Imam Ahmad Raza Khan - who has been tested by Khariji-Barelwis and the like.

Whether people like it or not, Shaykh Asrar Rashid is an outspoken representative of Barelwis in the UK and in the Anglosphere at large. This is despite Shaykh Asrar Rashid not calling himself a 'Barelwi'. Does it even matter, when for all intents and purposes, Shaykh Asrar Rashid has resuscitated a largely failing community that has been stuck in the stronghold of Pirs, ignorance and the Mawlid/'Urs circuits since the 60’s? Maybe this is what irks them - that it is a ‘Non-Barelwi’ who has done the most service for ‘Barelwism’ whilst they have been busy proudly championing ‘Barelwism’ merely by and in name.

These hyper-literalists assume that raising the word of Barelwism (i’yla-e barelwiyyat) means raising the literal word ‘Barelwi’. They spend their time and expend all their energy talking about the ‘Barelwi’ moniker rather than actually being one. How much have they propagated and worked on the actual works of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan? They use the label as a skin hiding a lifeless corpse lying underneath.

If you want to be a Barelwi then forget ‘calling’ yourself one and engaging in identity politics - be one by educating yourself, learning and teaching sacred knowledge, authoring useful works and continuing the masterful legacies of the scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah, from the east and the west. Make Barelwis known for scholarship like their opponents are known for.

‘al-Ibrah bi’l Maqasid wa al-Ma’ani wa laysat bi l-Alfadh wa l-Ma’bani’.

What is important are the aims and meanings, not words and forms.

Nevermind Barelwis, people of different denominational backgrounds and persuasions recognise Shaykh Asrar Rashid as a voice of reason and representative of the Barelwi community.

'al-fadl ma shahidat bihi l-a'da'u'.

Real acclaim is when even the enemy testifies for you.

This is why Shaykh Asrar Rashid is invited to panels and podcasts to represent the traditional Sunni Ash'ari-Sufi paradigm. On many facets, especially on a public intellectual front, Shaykh Asrar Rashid has done great service for the Sunni Barelwi community. Note: You do not have many such individuals, and beggars can’t be choosers. Are Mawlana Shahid Ali, Mufti Zahid Hussain al-Ridawi and the other Muftis mentioned in this drama who are based in the UK and the Anglosphere recognised on such a scale? With all of Shaykh Asrar Rashid's shortcomings, would you even want Mawlana Shahid Ali and his allies to represent Sunni Muslims? I surely would not.

Is the reward for all of Shaykh Asrar Rashid’s hard work in trying to elevate Sunni discourse and edifying the masses, representing the Barelwi community and giving them a 'face' that is worthy or being shown that he be baselessly called a Sulh-Kulli and a Non-Sunni? Is that what any Muslim deserves let alone a Sunni scholar?

Why is it that these detractors in the shadows are undermining Sunni individuals but are yet to openly voice a declaration of their deviance by name? Is it because they fear that names will then be finally assigned amongst cowboys, so instead they grovel in the shadows? Mawlana Shahid Ali is a pawn in this circus; a sacrificial lamb, and by the time he realised it, a cheap-cut mutton curry was brought to a simmer and served up as langar to the gullible Sunni masses.

Sowing the seeds of discord and conflict are hobbies for these folk. This is their fuel. They thrive off it just as a parasite feeds off its host. A true Hujjah al-Islam, one upon whom the title fits right, Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali says in Bidayat al-Hidayah:

“Because they are just waiting for adversity to befall you, wallowing in jealousy. They shall hack you with their misgivings. [...] They will not aid you when you stumble nor forgive you your missteps. They won’t hide your faults and call into account every big or small thing. They will be envious of everything, whether a little or a lot. They will provoke other brothers to censure you. They will attribute far-fetched things to you and slander you.” [taken from the RidawiPress]

Could Shaykh Asrar Rashid have answered in a more clear manner? Yes. Was his answer perfect and detailed? No. Did it warrant the blowback that it has received years later? No. Did the smear campaign by Muftis internal to Barelwis stop after clarifications? No. Have allegations within the campaign even been established? No. Does the answer of Shaykh Asrar Rashid make him a Sulh-Kulli or a promoter thereof? No.

Shaykh Asrar Rashid was on TV. He is not speaking directly to the questioner but a larger audience that is not restricted to just him. Thus, we can surmise that Shaykh Asrar Rashid was mindful of the wider audience and saw it fit to provide an answer that functions as a heuristic ie. something that is applicable in other contexts. Shaykh Asrar Rashid prefaced his answer by dividing the Ummah into three groups. Al-Allamah Sayyid Ahmad Saeed al-Kazmi also outlined this three-fold categorisation. The answer is not incorrect but perhaps Shaykh Asrar Rashid should have been mindful that people within the Barelwi community are preying to find any ambiguity to lynch him on a heresy tree - they only appreciate simplistic and homogenous answers.

These folks have been around for some time and have been a thorn in the sides of Sunni scholars for several decades. They masquerade as our own but work to undermine the Ahl al-Sunnah in the long-run.

The khalifah of AlaHazrat, known as ‘Muhaddith-e A’zam-e Hind’, Mufti Sayyid Muhammad al-Ashrafi al-Kichawchawi sent a question regarding one such person to Sadr al-Shari’ah, Mufti Amjad Ali al-Azmi:

“Question: Zayd calls sincere Sunni organisations who work to aid the religion and raise the banner of the Ahl al-Sunnah as ‘Nadwis’ [aka Sulh-Kullis] and tries to poison the minds of Sunni Muslims against these organisations.

The very same Zayd has already falsely labelled honourable scholars as ‘soft/lenient’, ‘slippery’ and even accused them of being members of the ‘Muslim league’ in an attempt to turn the Sunni Muslims against them. He is yet to show any signs of stopping this behaviour. What is the legal ruling on his modus operandi?

Answer: What Zayd is doing is completely impermissible and forbidden.” See Fatawa Amjadiyyah.

It seems as if Mufti Sayyid Muhammad al-Ashrafi al-Kichawchawi was alive in our times and writing against the Khariji-Barelwi ilk who nitpick against Sunni scholars and movements unjustly.

 

Some people might think the madkhalis are soft on Mawlid and Sufis and getting some common sense now. It may seem so to a lot of us, however it's only an incidental benefit to us Sunnis coz they're working towards a bigger agenda of massaging the egos of their puppet masters, so they can't pull the bid3ah card on us anymore if they're actively promoting valentine's day and halloween

It's very tragicomic that they've proscribed the tablighis as qutubis. these are guys who loved to lick the boots of the wahabis, and this is what they got rewarded with. i think that dhobi ka kutta proverb should be officially changed to 'maslak ka devbandi'

 

that's what, conservatively speaking - 80% of the desi Urdu/Punjabi speaking Muslim? in effect, a neutral, for all practical intents and purposes. for the aam aadmi, a "Barelvi" is someone who puts a chadar on a dargah and DOES listen to qawwalis. and a "deobandi" is someone who doesn't do teeja, chaliswan, etc. that's IN the subcontinent

outside the subcontinent, it'll be even more murky.

correct me if i sound wrong.

i'm not teaching anyone to suck eggs, but this is similar to the typical SaaS-bahu problem in every home. even the wahabis have the good and bad wahabis and some of their common folk are confused about who the real torchbearers are of maslake ibn taymiyyah or iaw

the madkhalis are the typical bhakts of the khaleeji governments, as well as the sulah kullis of their manhaj - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madkhalism

the qutubis are the reformists and the revolutionaries. at one point in time, the wahabis promoted qutub and even gave an award to mawdudi - now they're the black sheep of wahabism and the punching bag and the boogeyman who are the declared kharji deviants by kharji deviants (yup this is similar to when you go to agra pagalkhana and madmen point a finger at their comrades and call them madmen!) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutbism

the sahwis are in a way similar to the qutubis, but they don't actively function as activists, rather their dissent is limited only to intellectual discussions in the drawing rooms (as far as i understand) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahwa_movement

the jihadists are the typical isis and al-qaeda types, proscribed worldwide by all Muslims, who believe that fiqh rules and regulations can go take a hike, they just need to pick up arms and shoot blindly - this is a sort of a post-qutub qutubism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_jihadism

the madkhalis and qutubis use the other's eponym in a very pejorative manner, and are known for kicking each other off of the maslak and the manhaj, just as we do in sweet home UP

so yeah, it's a universal problem in every group. after a certain passage of time, conflicting people will appear who will claim to be on the right path of the said group

 

Surely, Imam Shahid should be considering his position at the JTI affiliated masjid he is the Imam of. By inviting Syed Irfan Shah to their annual Mawlid, after learning about the fatwa on them, Syed Ahsan Shah have indicated the fatwa placed on Shah Sahib was incorrect.

Why has Imam Shahid not refuted this? This has happened on their watch. Surely, Imam Sahib is indirectly being paid by someone who by his standards is a 'sullah kulli'.

 

Just a little side note to this discussion. Imam Shahid Ali's attitude towards this issue with Shaykh Asrar is very similar to how most of the ulema dealt with the Jalali Sahib issue. Every attempt at clarification was met with derision and a 'contradiction' was pointed out. Nothing less than repentance and an apology would do. No interest in understanding what the mutakallim meant. If I remember correctly, it was Imam Shahid and his teacher who intimated this incorrect treatment of Jalali Sahib. What has changed now?

Tomorrow when someone brings up an issue about Imam Shahid, which in this day and age is an occupational hazard for a public speaker. We will not listen to any clarifications or an attempt to contextualize the issue. We will expect a public apology and repentance. Imam Shahid may even claim that he would not hesitate to do so but it's a different ball game when you are put in that position.

 

this is not so problematic. in one sense it is correct.

We know that things like "ihtiyaat", "muftah bihi", "raajih", "taqwa", "awla", "afzal" do exist - and it's possible to differentiate between various people who may all be eligible for imamah.

it's standard fare in fiqh works.

if a group of people are very particular about following Alahazrat in all matters of usul and furu' - because of their conviction that his methodology is the soundest and most rigorous in its pursuit of truth - then I see no way to blame them for limiting themselves to certain types of Imams.

Indeed, for us desis, it saves a lot of headache in selecting a congregation if we know that the Imam is a staunch follower of Alahazart - and doesn't deviate from his fatwaa even in furu' - it affords a level of itminaan like nothing else. Because then we know that we are on safe and familiar grounds.

And this "narrow mindedness" - if that be the word, is not limited to any ethnic or religious group. People all over the world, of all persuasions and in all walks of life, prefer to move in familiar circles. That's human nature.

The problem can only be when this is used to look down upon, discriminate against and profile people into "good sunni", "bad sunni" categories.

But that again is a malpractice in which, a subset of almost all groups tends to indulge. There can hardly be said to exist a group which doesn't have a chunk
of its adherents involved in this injustice of "othering".

The Qur'an says that Allah ta'ala distributed people into groups and tribes "li ta'arafu" - for recognition.

But that doesn't prevent some Muslims from being racists and tribal snobs or the rich from looking down upon the poor.

There are sufi groups and organisations who will not appoint an Imam from a rival group - even if he is better qualified for the post.

That is unfair - but this unfairness is a universal disease to which few groups, if any, can be said to be immune.

I rest my case.

Allah knows best.

 

what if the common man refuses to learn. says he is busy with life and cannot understand all this kizb and nazir business, for all he knows, nazir bhai is the local mithai waala who makes excellent jalebi.

 

ما شاء الله
جزاك الله خيرا for that beautiful explanation

i have a question in order to enhance my own understanding:

When questioned about 3 different masajid being referred to by name (i.e Sunni masjid, Deobandi masjid, etc), why would the answer simply not be "Sunni masjid." Especially since the questioner asks while specifically referring to the masajid with their respective labels?

Wouldnt Shaykh Asrar's answer have made more sense if the question was:

"There are 3 masajid in my neighborhood. I have no idea who they are. Where do I pray?"

In the above scenario Shaykh Asrar's answer and then your further expounding upon it would then make much more sense (to me at least).

Your thoughts?

 

An example of doubt that Imam Ahmad Raza Khan provides is when someone informs you that Imam X is a heretic or deviant, “such as when you have heard from someone that the Imam is a wahabi.”

I have spoken how this information will be of futile use to the ignorant commoner. However, I want to point your attention towards something else now.

Note that investigation of an Imam’s belief is not the default state. Imam Ahmad Raza Khan conditions investigation upon doubt. This is important to consider because with the Khariji mindsets of some of these individuals, according to whom even Sunnis are Non-Sunnis (such as Shaykh Asrar Rashid, a chief Sulh-Kulli), then it is obligatory upon every Tom, Dick and Harry (regardless of their knowledge) to interrogate an ostensibly ‘Sunni’ Imam X and be sure to confirm his beliefs because Person Y has alleged that he is otherwise.

Person Y in this particular instance can be said to be Mawlana Shahid Ali, his allies, and Mawlana Shameem.

These individuals employ a severe hermeneutic of suspicion upon fellow Muslims, even those who are Sunni. It becomes nigh-impossible to act upon the part where Imam Ahmad Raza Khan has said, “If there is no reason for doubt, then pray salah [behind the Imam].”

This is because according to these types of individuals, there is always often a reason for doubt. Merely hurling an unfounded label Y at a Sunni Imam is enough to warrant an interrogation by the self-appointed gatekeepers of Ahl al-Sunnah. Even Shaykh Asrar Rashid has not been left unscathed by their false allegations. Nay, despite clear-cut clarifications and his history which speaks for itself, the Khariji-Barelwi mob is left unsatisfied until a public retraction and repentance is not conducted upon the hands of the Conqueror of Deoband, ‘Allamah Mawlana Mufti Shahid Ali and his allies.

In sum:

1. Salah behind a Sulh-Kulli is impermissible.
   
   
2. Shaykh Asrar Rashid is a Sulh-Kulli.
   
   
3. Ergo, Salah performed behind Shaykh Asrar Rashid is impermissible.
   
   
4. Even considering Salah performed behind Shaykh Asrar Rashid to be permissible is grounds for your own Sulh-Kulli charge of heresy.

Rather, to some, if Imam X considers photography to be a subsidiary issue then you cannot perform Salah behind him because he is contravening a mujma’ ‘alayh haram and is at minimum a fasiq. They may even go further and allege that he is contravening a view of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan, and therefore is not upon the “Maslak”. Since Maslak-e AlaHazrat is synonymous with Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah, then the logical conclusion is that the Imam is a Non-Sunni. Thus, Salah behind this Non-Sunni Imam is impermissible. By extension, if you consider Salah behind this man to be valid, you will also be implicated in the chain of heresy and deviance.

In sum:

1. Maslak-e AlaHazrat is synonymous with Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah.
   
   
2. Whosoever contravenes Maslak-e AlaHazrat is a Non-Sunni.
   
   
3. Deeming photography to be impermissible is a core opinion of Maslak-e AlaHazrat such that considering it permissible renders you not upon Maslak-e AlaHazrat truly.
   
   
4. Person Y opining photography to be permissible is not upon Maslak-e AlaHazrat truly.
   
   
5. Ergo, Person Y is a Non-Sunni.
   
   
6. Salah performed behind a Non-Sunni is impermissible.
   
   
7. Therefore, Salah performed behind Person Y is impermissible.
   
   
8. Even considering Salah performed behind Person Y to be permissible is grounds for your own charge of heresy, or impression thereof.

Others may provide another answer in which they may make a khaas/’aam distinction between Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah as the larger body of Sunni Muslims and Maslak-e AlaHazrat as a specific, exclusive subgroup of the former comprising of staunch and supreme followers of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan. For these people then, Salah performed behind Imam X may be invalid totally; or, if they are more charitable then it will be permissible though not as virtuous as Salah performed behind Imam Y who is a 1-1 adherent of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan. Perhaps then, an interrogation will lead one to forego Salah behind a Sunni Imam X when it is concluded that, “Sure, Imam X is a Sunni but it is better to read Salah behind Imam Y because he is truly upon Maslak-e AlaHazrat.”

In sum:

1. Maslak-e AlaHazrat means to staunchly follow the rulings of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan.
   
   
2. Maslak-e AlaHazrat is a specific subgroup within Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah.
   
   
3. Imam X is a Sunni but he is not upon Maslak-e AlaHazrat.
   
   
4. Imam Y is upon Maslak-e AlaHazrat and by extension is also a Sunni.
   
   
5. Salah performed behind an Imam upon Maslak-e AlaHazrat is better and more virtuous that Salah performed behind an Imam who is a Sunni but is not upon Maslak-e AlaHazrat.
   
   
6. Ergo, Salah performed behind Imam Y is sub-optimal, unideal and thus not preferable in the presence of Imam X.

 

Imam Ahmad Raza Khan concludes by saying that “and if it is later proven that he was, for example, a wahabi, then repetition is obligatory.”

Notice how Imam Ahmad Raza Khan uses the word ‘proven’. Matters can only be proven to those able to understand. This applies to learned individuals and the ignorant commoner referenced by Shaykh Asrar Rashid. Of course, once the ignorant commoner learns and is aware, then he must adhere to the rulings too.

This is not a gung-ho approach by Imam Ahmad Raza Khan. There is a methodological procedure that he has outlined. Legal procedure for common application is bread and butter for a real jurist. In contrast, those who claim to be his sole and best representatives seem to display and operate by anarchy and nepotism. For these types, ‘proven’ just means ‘alleged’/’claimed’/’I heard’/’it was said by Mufti Z’ etc. Or, the metric for what constitutes a deviant is totally flawed in and of itself.

Shaykh Asrar Rashid has repeatedly said that he does not consider prayer behind deviants to be valid. He has said it on Instagram, he has said it on Sunniport and has said it in multiple speeches. Now, those who want to falsely force their own opinions onto Shaykh Asrar Rashid and make allegations against him are free to do so. We will not take them seriously or consider them as trustworthy transmitters of people’s stances.

Their modus operandi? Bludgeon others into a heresy so we can remain alone on the Truth.

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said, “If you have no shame then do whatever you want.” See the Sahih of Imam al-Bukhari.

Shaykh Asrar has a wider appeal and reach than the typical Barelwi preacher therefore he often answers questions bearing his audience in mind. His audience is not limited to people who know of the conflict from the Indo-Pak Subcontinent. Non-Muslims, new Muslims, irreligious Muslims, ignorant Muslims, learned Muslims and so on listen to him. Therefore, he answers this question by taking all stratas of society into consideration. Graduates from insular ethnic ghettos may only preach to a homogenous crowd so they may be unable to understand this.

Mawlana Shahid Ali claimed in his latest video that Shaykh Asrar Rashid was “waffling” and providing a “wishy-washy” answer. For dull-minded folk who only understand sweeping homogenous answers, then approaching an issue with the various modalities (jihat) in mind is perceived to be confusing.

Mawlana Shahid Ali also took issue with Shaykh Asrar Rashid using the term ‘Dayabinah’ instead of Deobandis. This is clutching at straws and nitpicking at its finest. Shaykh Asrar Rashid made it abundantly clear exactly who he is referring to by the term when he mentioned the books that contain the passages of blasphemy by name. If a shoe fits, it fits. Quibbling over terms once the signified has been made clear is the way of pedants.

 

As I had mentioned before, Mawlana Shahid Ali, Mawlana Mohammed Ali and Mawlana Shameem have been citing a fatwa by Imam Ahmad Raza Khan as a defeater against Shaykh Asrar Rashid. The fatwa is on TheSunniWay website. Note that I am not disagreeing with the fatwa of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan but I will show how the detractors of Shaykh Asrar Rashid are grossly misapplying it as a ‘refutation’ against him.

It is expedient to use pre-translated verdicts and manipulate them against individuals conveniently. Unfortunately, the gullible masses will see a fatwa by Imam Ahmad Raza Khan promoted by these scholars in their social media groups and view it as a proverbial nail-in-the-coffin against Shaykh Asrar Rashid. Understanding the fatwa however, in lieu of this debacle, is another domain altogether that Mawlana Shahid Ali and his allies seem unfamiliar with. Tafaqquh doesn’t refer to mindlessly copying and pasting a fatwa while stripping it of all contexts and considerations. Then again, what do I know? All these detractors are Muftis after all!

Let’s take a look at the fatwa of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan.

Imam Ahmad Raza Khan is asked about whether confirming the theological beliefs about Imam X before praying Salah behind him is necessary during one’s travels. Imam Ahmad Raza Khan answers that:

• If there is reason for doubt, then investigation is necessary.
• If there is no reason for doubt, then investigation is not necessary.
• If it is known after investigation that Imam X is a deviant, then repeating one’s Salah is necessary.
• If otherwise, then proceed as normal.

Imam Ahmad Raza Khan is responding to a question posed by a learned individual. The questioner is a certain ‘Molwi ‘Abd al-Rahman’. The istifta explicitly states that the questioner is a teacher (mudarris). This is important to point out because it seems as if detractors are unaware that the manner in which one answers a question is affected by the nature of the questioner (see Shaykh Asrar Rashid on answering a learned person (whether scholar or commoner) vs. an ignorant one).

The context of Shaykh Asrar Rashid’s answer was split per the nature of the person asking. He differentiated them into three types as I have expounded on before.

So let’s take a look at Imam Ahmad Raza Khan’s fatwa in light of this. We will realise that Shaykh Asrar Rashid’s answers are not contradictory to the fatwa of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan at all. Shaykh Asrar Rashid has repeatedly said that reading Salah behind a misguided Imam is impermissible and should be repeated if it is in fact prayed behind one.

Imam Ahmad Raza Khan says that “It is necessary [to confirm the Imam’s aqidah] if there is a possibility of doubt.”

Imam Ahmad Raza Khan conditions investigation upon the presence of doubt (shubhah). What does ‘shubh’ mean? Let’s take a look at Lisan al-’Arab: ‘shabbaha alayh’ - the matter became confusing for the person such that one thing became confused with another.

An ignorant commoner isn’t even aware of what is correct or incorrect for things to be confusing for him. The ignorant commoner, due to his ignorance, does not understand theological discussions. He does not understand who a deviant is. If he does, then he does so only superficially; and does not know what constitutes one. Neither does he know what Barelwi or Deobandi is, or a Salafi, Ash’ari or Maturidi. All he understands is that he needs to pray Salah - preferably in congregation.

Why would he have any reason to doubt an Imam leading a Muslim congregation in prayer when all is ostensibly normal for him? What would impel him to begin an investigation and confirm the beliefs of Imam X? And how would an ignorant commoner even proceed?

To labour the point home, how is an ignorant commoner referenced by Shaykh Asrar Rashid able to (a) investigate and (b) confirm the theology of the Imam? He would not even know where to begin his investigation, nevermind confirming correct or incorrect belief thereby.

What is incumbent upon this person is to gain knowledge of correct theology and the rulings which relate to his everyday life. This is his immediate responsibility and obligation. This is what Shaykh Asrar Rashid has stated as well. Once he has done this, then he is able to investigate and confirm. Only then is he able to know that Imam X is indeed a deviant and thus Salah should not be prayed behind him; and if he has, then repeating it is necessary.

As such, doubt and its consequent investigation and confirmation is only conceivable when it concerns the other categories of people: those who have a familiarity or knowledge with theology such that (a) they are aware of the creed of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah (b) can investigate in the presence of doubt and (c) confirm the beliefs of Imam X whom they are praying Salah behind. These people (scholars or knowledgeable commoners) must do their best to ascertain the belief of the Imam if there is reason for doubt. They should do their due diligence before appointing a person as their Imam in Salah. As for the ignorant commoner, then he should learn. Once he has learnt, then he can proceed as has been outlined.

 

Refined jawab
Was sent to mawlana shahid Ali