Shahid Ali continues public spat with Shaykh Asrar

Discussion in 'Refutation' started by Paradise Seeker, Nov 28, 2021.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    I also think we must not lynch the followers for the sins of the leaders.

    As you noted, there are echo-chambers and comfort-zones - for good or for evil.

    Instead of assuming latent malintent, we must assume lack of information.

    If you noticed it, @Sunni Hanafi was not even sure of the definition of ijma'. And then when he felt need to find out, he reached for an online source, instead of a book on usul. Not that it is a bad thing, but it underscores his state of being uninformed.

    His choice of the source was also telling - he relied upon turab-ul-haqq-sahib (raHimahuAllah). Again, that is a good thing, not bad, but what is important is that he sought a vetted source of information - vetted by the circles he trusts.

    Which is again a sensible thing to do. Not everyone is an interpid explorer of the cyber-seas and we know it's not an advisable occupation either - there are pirates, sharks, hidden reefs, fata-moraganas and sea-storms to deal with. Safely navigating these is not everyone's cup of tea.

    Unless he is proven to be himself an engineer of the echo-chambers and a keeper of it's dark secrets, he deserves our compassion and patient helping-hand rather than condescenion and ridicule.


    Allah knows best.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2021
  2. Ikhwaan

    Ikhwaan New Member

    And yet all these long debates and discussions are not necessary because it is just another moment of madness!
     
  3. TheRidawiWay

    TheRidawiWay New Member

    Ibrahim says that it is not only Mawlana Shahid Ali who has refuted Shaykh Asrar Rashid but Mawlana Naveed Ashrafi and Mawlana Mohammed Ali also.

    Let’s take a look at what Mawlana Naveed Ashrafi has said:

    “Question: can we pray behind Wahhabis or other deviant sects if we don’t know the differences between them and us?

    Answer: No, it is impermissible to pray behind any non-Sunni Imam. Ignorance of the differences will not validate or justify praying behind them, as we know at the very least that they are not Sunni and hence misguided.

    Allahu wa Rasooluhu A’lam.”

    Mawlana Naveed Ashrafi reasons that Salah behind a deviant Imam is impermissible because at the very least, the person in question knows that they are not Sunni and hence misguided.

    Remember that Shaykh Asrar Rashid was speaking of the ignorant commoner (see my previous posts). If the layperson knows that Imam is a Non-Sunni, then he ceases to be an ignorant commoner referenced by Shaykh Asrar Rashid. Thus, using this answer by Mawlana Naveed Ashrafi to ‘refute’ Shaykh Asrar Rashid is moot. Shaykh Asrar Rashid does not disagree that praying behind a misguided Imam is impermissible.

    Let’s now take a look at Mawlana Mohammed Ali.

    Mawlana Mohammed Ali claims that Shaykh Asrar Rashid has to publicly retract from his answer because reading Salah behind a deviant Imam is void regardless of the knowledge of the person praying behind him. He says that Shaykh Asrar Rashid has contravened a fatwa of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan (more on this later).

    Firstly, Mawlana Mohammed Ali If the Salah is void regardless of the knowledge of the person praying in the congregation, then how is the ignorant commoner to know that his Salah is void in the first place?

    Mawlana Mohammed Ali assumes that the ignorant commoner is aware of:
    • correct Sunni belief and deviancy;

    • the ruling that Salah behind a misguided Imam is void;

    • and the particular instance in which he reads Salah behind Imam X that:
      • Imam X is in fact a deviant or is not a deviant;

      • So the ruling applies or does not apply.

    This is why Shaykh Asrar Rashid emphatically encourages this category to learn and then act accordingly.

    Mawlana Shameem, described by Mawlana Shahid Ali as a graduate from Darul Uloom Qadria Ghareeb Nawaz, South Africa, also cited the fatwa of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan that is uploaded on TheSunniWay. He added his own comments, “Before praying behind an Imam, we should investigate and confirm his Aqidah.”

    Again, I have raised questions about this in my previous posts that are yet to be addressed. I shall reiterate some here once more:

    • To what extent is this investigation of an Imam’s beliefs necessary?

    • Investigation and confirmation of correct theology presuppose knowledge of orthodoxy; how is an ignorant commoner expected to undergo this?

    • Is predominant conviction based on the apparent insufficient?

    • If it is insufficient, then is suspicion and ill-opinion the default assumption of another Muslim?

    • If a person does not have complete certainty that the Imam of a congregation is a bonafide card-carrying Sunni, then is praying behind him permissible?

    • Would he be obligated to repeat his prayer in the presence of this minute uncertainty?

    • Is the person who prays behind such an Imam in this scenario considered a Sulh-Kulli?

    • How is he assured that the Imam is not engaging in chicanery (taqiyyah)?

    He also added, “May Allah bless our Mawlana Shahid Ali for refuting Shaykh Asrar Rashid at every point of misguidance and may Allah keep us all steadfast on Maslak e A’laHadhrat!”

    Shaykh Asrar Rashid is an alleged advocate of misguidance. In other words, Mawlana Shameem seems to suggest that Shaykh Asrar Rashid is not a Sunni.

    Mawlana Shameem made a further post: “Don’t be misled by the fitnah of those deviating from this path.”

    If Maslak-e AlaHazrat is synonymous with Ahl al-Sunnah, then Shaykh Asrar Rashid is outside the folds of Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah since he is deviating from this path ie. Maslak-e AlaHazrat. Ergo, Shaykh Asrar Rashid is not a Sunni Muslim.

    Mawlana Shameem continued and said, “He [ie. Imam Ahmad Raza Khan] has made us everything clear and thus we don’t find any need to go somewhere else. Indeed, salvation depends on the fact that we remain firm on every single Aqidah of Ahlus Sunna wal Jama’ah even if the sky and the earth get vanished.”

    So, a point of fiqh and practice ie. the impermissibility of reading Salah behind a misguided Imam is a point of creed according to Mawlana Shameem. Of course, the usual bombastic lines accompany the not-so-subtle suggestion of chucking Shaykh Asrar Rashid off the “Maslak” and Ahl al-Sunnah. This is notwithstanding Mawlana Shameem’s disastrous misunderstanding of Shaykh Asrar Rashid’s position.

    A judgement regarding a matter is second to its conceptualisation (al-hukm ‘ala shay’ far’ ‘an tasawwurih).

    I ask Mawlana Shameem, Mawlana Mohammed Ali, Mufti Zahid Hussain al-Ridawi, Mufti Aslam Bandyalwi and Mawlana Shahid Ali’s other allies in the background to state their views loud and proud. “Shaykh Asrar Rashid is a Sulh-Kulli. He is not on the Maslak of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan al-Barelwi. He is misguided, misguides others and is not a reliable Sunni scholar. It is impermissible to read his books and to listen and attend his lectures.”

    I will speak later on the fatwa of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan and how it is being misappropriated and used against Shaykh Asrar Rashid as an alleged ‘refutation’.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 20, 2021
  4. TheRidawiWay

    TheRidawiWay New Member

    Mawlana Shahid Ali and his ilk are celebrating a premature victory parade in their little echo chambers on social media. They are citing a fatwa from Imam Ahmad Raza Khan uploaded on TheSunniWay as an utter death-blow to Shaykh Asrar Rashid - the malevolent chief Sulh-Kulli wreaking havoc in the Ummah. They are unsatisfied with the plethora of clarifications given by Shaykh Asrar Rashid and still insist that he is promoting misguidance and needs to publicly retract and repent. This is all the while ignoring any of the major discrepancies and questions I and others have raised about their case.

    Before we proceed, let’s take a look at Mawlana Shahid Ali’s latest posts. Mawlana Shahid Ali recently posted a picture from TheSunniWay recently that reads as follows:

    “From which heart do I narrate the unjustness of the oppressors
    The oppressors are terribly evil O Ghawth, help us!”

    I am not one to make definitive claims about Mawlana Shahid Ali’s intent but I sincerely hope that he is not playing poor victim, or that the terrible evil inflicted by the oppressor is an allusion towards Shaykh Asrar Rashid.

    Mawlana Shahid Ali’s immature victimhood is further exemplified in another YouTube video uploaded entitled “Asrar Rashid ‘Responds’ with Personal Insults.”

    Mawlana Shahid Ali says that, “Even though my YouTube channel has been removed by those I have refuted, this will not deter me from speaking the truth.” The messiah-complex of our prolific guardian of Sunni Islam is bemusing to say the least.

    Mawlana Shahid Ali continues, “Asrar Rashid preaches that one must not insult or swear during dialogue with Deobandis. Asrar Rashid’s ‘response’ as he wrongly claims it is valid for laymen to pray behind deviated sects out of ignorance! Why the need to insult Sunnis? Is it because you don’t have the correct answer? What about the Sunni Muftis, scholars and public who also take issue with your wrong position? Is it no wonder that your closest disciples are known for insulting others too? Asrar Rashid must retract his open errors so that the public is not misguided.”

    Mawlana Shahid Ali causes a fuss that Shaykh Asrar Rashid referred to him as an “imbecile” in a clarificatory Q/A but it behoves him that he has insulted Shaykh Asrar Rashid by declaring him a Non-Sunni and Sulh-Kulli. His antics add further insult to injury. What is worse? Referring to someone as an “imbecile” or declaring someone to be a “misguided Non-Sunni”? Is Mawlana Shahid Ali revealing his own Sulh-Kulli biases by suggesting that negating a person’s cognitive abilities is far more dreadful than affirming his deviance? Hmm.

    Mawlana Shahid Ali citing the other Muftis is moot and will be ignored. I have addressed that before.

    Mawlana Shahid Ali and co. continue to fuel social media controversy by recycling old news while not answering any questions. It has also not gone amiss that the original video of Mawlana Shahid Ali against Shaykh Asrar Rashid contained many allegations, not just the issue about reading Salah behind a misguided Imam.

    Instead of whining like a man-baby because Shaykh Asrar Rashid referred to him as an “imbecile”, it would be very welcome if ‘Allamah Mawlana Mufti Shahid Ali could first substantiate the allegation regarding the consumption of Milk of Magnesia from his trustworthy sources at TheSunniWay which has hitherto been unaddressed.

    To remind our readers, the head Mufti of TheSunniWay, Mufti Zahid Hussain al-Ridawi, is the source for Mawlana Shahid Ali’s allegation that Shaykh Asrar Rashid engaged in public deception and consumed Milk of Magnesia. Mufti Zahid Hussain al-Ridawi claims that he had heard this from another source. However, during the supervised meeting in which Mawlana Naveed Jameel and Mufti Aslam Bandyalwi were present along with Shaykh Asrar Rashid and Mawlana Shahid Ali, the source denied saying anything of that sort whatsoever.

    The alliance takes an interesting hue when we also consider that members in this forum have mentioned that Mufti Zahid Hussain and the “Rizvis from Preston” hold a long-standing grudge with Shaykh Asrar Rashid that precede this debacle.

    After first establishing his original claims, Fatih-e Deobandiyyat, ‘Allamah Mawlana Mufti Shahid Ali preferably could make an account on Sunniport by name and engage with the questions posed like Shaykh Asrar Rashid rather than continuing to reupload stale snippets on YouTube channels and posting WhatsApp statuses and Facebook posts crying both victim and victory. It may be the case that the great Conqueror of Deoband does not have the fortitude like Shaykh Asrar Rashid to engage directly with the dynamism of the real world and hence has a tendency to regurgitate disingenuous allegations on social media preaching to the already converted.
     
    Khanah and Abdullah Ahmed like this.
  5. TheRidawiWay

    TheRidawiWay New Member

    To demonstrate this, observe how Hanafi Sunni criticised Aqdas’ categorisation of matters into “actual furu’ and agreed upon muharammat” by citing two respected scholars such as Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan and Mufti Zia ul Mustafa. He then says, “And i believe that these awliyah especially the likes of Mufti e Aazam and Ahsanul ulama would never make a mistake on such an important issue.”

    Aqdas correctly categorised issues but Hanafi Sunni could not accept this since he believes that:
    1. The scholars who he follows are the greatest scholars on earth.

    2. The scholars who he follows are also saints.

    3. These scholars would ‘never’ make a ‘mistake’ on issue X.

    4. Ergo, what these scholars say is incontrovertibly correct since [1]. [2] and [3].

    5. These scholars considered X to be prohibited.

    6. Therefore, considering X to be permissible is a grave sin that warrants punishment in Hell.

    7. Even if the interlocutor has theological or juristic grounds to disagree with these scholars, they are wrong and their evidences is inadmissible since [4].

    8. Disagreeing with these scholars/saints entails disrespect of them.

    9. Disrespect of scholars/saints invokes the wrath of Allah.

    10. Ergo, those who disagree with these scholars are damned since [1], [2], [8] and [9]

    11. Those who disagree then, must disagree due only to non-ethical reasons such as ignorance or worldly gain, and at worst, due to heresy and deviance.

    When these people are unable to argue their for their far-fetched claims in a rigorous and scholarly manner, they resort to an anti-intellectual corner of guising to be spiritual aspirants (salikin) having undertaken the pledge of true Sufi allegiance (bay’ah al-iradah) with their Shaykh. They believe that they are obligated to adhere to every pronouncement of their Shaykh such that they are like “dead corpses” in front of him. For example, they will quote statements such as “The command of the Murshid is the command of the Messenger (peace be upon him) and his command is the command of Allah, the All Powerful” and “Any person who says 'why' to any word of his Shaykh will never achieve success." We can see such reasoning echoed by narrow-minded folk elsewhere and is by no means limited to this particular case or person:
    1. I am a disciple of Shaykh X.

    2. Since I have pledged true allegiance to Shaykh X, I may not question Shaykh X in anything.

    3. Shaykh X says Y (e.g., that the issue of photography is prohibited by consensus and is an usuli issue, or that it is impermissible for even scholars to read the Tafsir authored by Ibn Kathir).

    4. Therefore, I cannot even entertain questioning Y since [1], [2] and [3].

    One can see how weak and flimsy this logic is. It is not based on any serious argument but rather, upon flawed appeals to authority and emotionalism. Absence of substance is masked by rhetoric. Some may even acknowledge internally that their reasoning is weak or flawed but they subsequently deceive their own selves by using such shoddy reasoning to compensate for the embarrassment. It would be somewhat tolerable if they kept this to themselves. However, they are often the first to vehemently lambast anyone who disagrees from a pietistic high-horse. If you are to do that, then be sure to come with something of actual substance.

    The companions differed with one another without considering their disagreement to be a case that is destined for the torment of Hell. The successors differed with some of the companions based on their understanding of evidence. Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad al-Shaybani differed with their teacher, Imam Abu Hanifah. Imam Ahmad Raza Khan differed with the likes of Al-Allamah Ibn al-Humam, Al-Allamah Ibn Nujaym, Al-Allamah Ibn Abideen al-Shami and others. Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan and others have differed with Imam Ahmad Raza Khan based on the demand of the era. Mawlana Sayyid Madani Miyan has differed with Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan and so on. This will continue as part of scholarly discourse.

    One does not have to follow every single ruling or dicta of Taj al-Shari’ah or any other scholar for that matter even if the person is a disciple (murid), since pledges of allegiance nowadays are predominantly for blessings (bay’ah al-barakah) as Imam Ahmad Raza Khan has outlined in his fatawa. This is notwithstanding genuine mishaps that may transpire with any fallible human being.

    Mawlana Abu Hasan aptly summarised it, “with due respect to taj al-shariah rahimahullah, it is not obligatory to agree with every opinion of his; and neither is disagreeing with him on a verifiable ilmi issue disrespectful.”

    To differ with a Shaykh is not disrespecting him, in fact, some disagreement is, in reality, paying homage to the high rank of whom they differed with. Navigating differences with appropriate measures is true testament. It is not that one obliterates scope for valid disagreement afforded to us by the Shari’ah and the imperative of the law, and thereby condemning vast swathes of Sunni Muslims to Hell due to personal preference.

    I will not address the other ludicrous arguments made in the other threads on related topics simply because the shallow reasoning is front-and-centre for all to see.
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2021
  6. TheRidawiWay

    TheRidawiWay New Member

    Since my last post, the forum has diverged into multiple topics that are tangentially related to the points and questions raised therein.

    Unbeknown replied that he appreciates most of what was said by me but was concerned that some of the labels used in the post may cause unneeded drama.

    To this, I say that the Khariji-Ahbash etc. labels are not terms that I have concocted but were used because Shaykh Asrar Rashid has mentioned them within his answers on Sunniport. I understand that it may provoke sensitivities though our Sunni brethren must note that this is not an indictment upon them but rather to those who fester with such ideologies in our midst. You can feel free to use the term pseudo-Sunni/Barelwi or other terms as you wish. I will take care not to cause undue offense yet we should also move past labels and concern ourselves with the actual substance of matters.

    To chalk up the criticism that Shaykh Asrar Rashid has been subjected to as an occupational hazard of any public calling would be underdetermining the issue. Sure, naysayers and detractors will always exist; though, internal opponents that seek to nefariously undermine Sunni scholars, institutions and work based on haughty and incorrect (mis)conceptions of the religion and the “Maslak” ought to be addressed lest the problem metastasize any further. People are tired of this mudslinging. If it is not addressed and merely ignored as any other occupational hazard, then we will continue to witness the exodus of individuals from Barelwi environments.

    Aqdas replied that “we must differentiate between furu’ and agreed upon muharramat.” This is clear and I do not disagree.

    However, as responses to his reply demonstrate, (which were later moved to a separate thread), there is a large contingency of Barelwis who consider furu’ matters to be otherwise. In fact, Noori Amjadi (now, Hanafi Sunni), went so far as to argue that these matters are not of furu’ but of usul upon which ijma’ has been established by the greatest saints and scholars of the time. He even said that these matters are considered furu’ because of people’s desire for ease and convenience ie. due to whim (al-hawa). In other words, contravening his categorisation of what is considered furu’ and usul renders you a misguided individual because you have breached an agreed-upon usuli matter!

    I am sure that blindly claiming a binding ijma’ based on the judgement of a few North-Indian scholars was quite humorous to observers. Personal preferences are being guised as morally binding Shar’i rulings.

    Citing "The Awliya’ Card" in the absence of coherent judicial reasoning and answering pertinent questions reveals the vapidity of these types of individuals. I had alluded to the fallacy in my other post. This card is invoked by ignorant people and cults because it is rhetorically convincing.

    We, as Sunni Muslims, respect all scholars and saints. However, the ideologues attempt to play on this sentiment by giving the impression that disagreement with the opinion of Person X is tantamount to disrespecting Person X and saints in general. This is blatantly not the case and is the way of those who cannot observe the protocol of disagreement (Adab al-Ikhtilaf). Perhaps this is a projection of their own black-and-white thinking.

    First of all, claiming that Shaykh X is a saint with utmost certainty is epistemologically unsound. It is not admissible evidence in a discursive context nor does your average layperson come to even know who the elite saints of God are or are not. One cannot definitively claim that so-and-so is a saint. At best, it is something revealed via Kashf to an individual, or is a good assumption about the outward state and behaviour of a person but is not a source of evidence to be used in an argument; nevermind claiming ijma’ based on it. For example, were the Ahnaf disrespecting the stalwart scholars and saints of the other Madhhahib in their disagreement with their opinions, and vice versa? Was Imam Ahmad Raza Khan disrespecting al-Ghawth al-A’dham, Shaykh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani by not following the Hanbali school of law?

    The Awliya’ Card is also useful for cults to solidify their stronghold upon vulnerable people and to marginalise the Other. As I had mentioned before, it is often wielded to make snide insinuations against those who disagree with Shaykh X ie. since Shaykh X is a saint, and Person Y disagrees with him, then he is not a Shaykh, nevermind being a true saint. It is as if disagreement entails that sainthood is completely precluded for the interlocutor as we saw in my previous post about a remark made by a Mufti against Mawlana Ilyas Attari. It further entrenches the belief that our Shaykh(s) are the best and final authorities on everything.
     
  7. Khanah

    Khanah Well-Known Member

    [MOD: be mindful common courtesy please]. How many videos can you release about one small issue?

    In that time, he could have been releasing videos on stuff that is actually useful. Or at least he could spend that time learning English spelling, vocabulary and grammar before he decides to release poorly translated material.

    Maybe he thinks he is imam Al ghazali refuting the philosophers. Perhaps he thinks if he releases ten videos on the same subject, he'll become known as shaykh ul Islam since he is already an allamah and mufti. The title of hujjat ul Islam is only 20 videos away. If he reaches 30, he'll replace mujaddid alf thani.

    Luckily, he only gets a few hundred views and they seem to be dwindling.

    If this is the level of graduates we're producing, then we're in dire straits indeed.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 20, 2021
    Ahmet Tayfur likes this.
  8. AbdalQadir

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

    By...?
     
  9. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Veteran

    Jawab to the claims of Mawlana Shahid Ali
     

    Attached Files:

  10. AR Ahmed

    AR Ahmed Veteran

    this person (molana muhammad ali) claiming to be a mawlana clearly cant hear or is a blithering ignoramus
     
  11. Ibrahim

    Ibrahim New Member

    Mawlana Shahid has done another refutation video of Shaykh Asrar's latest comments.

    He said Shaykh Asrar must retract on giving the awwam the ruling of "LA YUKALIFULLAHU NAFSA ILA WUS'AHA" ie every person is tasked in accordance to own knowledge.

    He said that this is against the teachings of Alahazrat and Shaykh Asrar held that position in all his previous clips such as Ummah Channel and the Paradigm Shift talk so he must retrract and make tawba.

    Why? Because he made it seem permissible to the general public that if they do not know then they can pray behind them. Being unaware of a haram act does not give a person the permission to do it.
     
  12. Shadman

    Shadman Active Member


    In the real world it's not always black and white scenario. Ascertain the individual's beliefs rather than doing a blanket statement on the superficial appearance. Some "Deobandi students" don't know about their elders' heresies. When conversing with them and you give a scenario of a hypothetical Moulvi who says [insert Deobandi heresies without ascribing it to Deobandis], they are, not surprisingly, repulsed by it. It shows they natural rebuke it. Unfortunately, some become brain washed as they continue to take from their elders.
    [​IMG]
     
  13. Sunni Jaag

    Sunni Jaag Active Member

    This is real progress. Can admin lock the thread?
     
    Abdullah Ahmed and Unbeknown like this.
  14. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Btw, Shaykh Asrar has brought more devs to Ahl al-Sunnah than most (if not all) ulama in the UK.
     
  15. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Shaykh Asrar on salah behind devbandis.

     
    Khanah, Adham12, shahnawazgm and 2 others like this.
  16. Sunni Jaag

    Sunni Jaag Active Member

  17. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Saw this on FB.

    FB_IMG_1639769539274.jpg
     
  18. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Well-Known Member

    agreed. It’s definitely a priority. And the other matters are still definitely also on that same list

    obviously. The answer of where to pray doesn't apply to a Murtad.

    I know a few people who claimed to have left Islam and consider themselves atheist. That’s a whole other discussion. I even bought several copies of Shaykh Asrar’s commendable Book to give to them and have already given one to an atheist الحمد لله

    but that’s not a reason for me to get hopeless and decide to avoid understanding other aspects of the religion I.e Sunni-deo matters, where to pray etc,

    agreed
     
  19. Surati

    Surati Well-Known Member

    The murtad
    Whilst no one is denying the importance of debating and teaching about sunni-deo conflict, we should ask ourselves if it’s the current utmost priority when we have young people leaving Islam at a rapid rate.

    they are not even muslims, telling them they need to go to a sunni mosque makes no difference to them—they don’t care. They’ll probably look at you and think you’re deluded which will reinforce what they already think about the religion. If you have any experience with seeing someone leave the religion, you’ll understand what I’m saying.

    Get out of your cocoon and actually talk to young people to understand the reality of what’s happening on the ground which is that they couldn’t care less about sunni-deo conflict because they don’t even believe in Islam.

    We should first get them to come back to Islam, learn fard ayn. we can then teach and focus on sunni-deo differences.


    The confused lay person
    If a layperson comes to you and asks should I pray in a deo or sunni mosque, sure tackle it because presumably the person wants to know more. Explain the issues so that they understand why they need to pray in a sunni mosque.

    Redirect them to or teach them Aqida courses too.
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  20. Adham12

    Adham12 Active Member

    It wasn’t meant to be reply to your comment.


    With that said, I think our Ullamas should tackle their balance on “real life” issues and also continue with educating the public regarding deviants. I think we definitely do need Ullamas like Shaykh Asrar tackling the issues such as atheism, LG and etc. But at same time, we shouldn’t ignore the issue of deviants and sulh.


    Apologies for quoting your message. I’m replying on a phone and with limited screen space and slow data.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 17, 2021

Share This Page