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

    That is a perennial problem which also lay at the heart of the taqleed-shakhsi for aami discussions (see the fiqh section). To me it resembles the chicken and egg problem.

    In theory, everyone is obligated to know the daruriyaat-al-deen with a few exceptions (like new Muslims, remote settlements etc.) - but even they are obligated to not deny a daruri aspect when it reaches them (vide Imam Nawawi et al.).

    Further, if I remember correctly, Imam Ghazzali has ruled that people are also obligated to learn about the regional heresies of their respective localities - so that they can protect themselves when they come across them.

    So, in principle, a person will be at-least a sinner for not acquiring this knowledge.

    Now, if a layperson approaches a scholar to learn about this - isn't it the duty of the scholar to teach him? Rather than saying: you don't need to know. do what you like.

    It's not how that layman came to you, or whether he considers you a sunni or not, the very fact that you find him at your doorstep with such a clear question as this makes you culpable for not sharing your knowledge.

    You see, the answers do not revolve around the commoner but the scholar who, as per them, has no grounds for keeping him in the dark.

    Hence, the Muftiyan's umbrage at Mawlana Zayd for wishing to keep things in wraps, and telling people that they are not even mukallaf.

    Now this is all theory, and I concede that it's application is not so straightforward. For one, the world having become connected, heresies don't stay put within geographic limits...

    ofc, one must use hikmah and patience when dealing with people who are spoilt for choice and probably do not bring sufficient interest to the table to allow you to complete your da'wah.

    People don't become wahabis overnight, so why should we expect them to identify with the Sunni narrative in 2 minutes?

    But between hikmah and kitmaan-al-Ilm is a fine line, which sh. Asrar tried to navigate and drew the ire of his colleagues.

    Allah knows best.
     
    Abdullah Ahmed and shahnawazgm like this.
  2. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    Imam Shahid is aware of Shaykh Asrar's clarification but he is not interested in that. He thinks the only thing available to Shaykh Asrar is retraction and mufti Sahib pretty much indicated the same.

    it was Mufti Aslam who requested the stream to be closed and it was Imam Shahid who apologised. If there was an unsatisfactory conclusion, then it should have been mentioned then.

    Yes of course it's not worth their while to discuss in private because Sunnis are really 'confused' and are in danger of being 'misled' by brother Asrar Rashid. There is no other recourse but a public retraction.

    I said it the start, this is just a waste of time and energy, and it only benefits the deviants.
     
  3. Juwayni

    Juwayni Veteran

    Be that as it may, what do we say about the internal issue of the fatwas that do not address how an ignorant layperson would differentiate between a true sunni scholar and a deceitful claimant? It is as if there is an unstated assumption that said layperson can do so.
     
  4. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    This reply suggests a few things:
    1. Sh. asrar's clarification has not reached him
    2. the topic was not settled to the satisfaction of all parties during the meeting
    3. even if not, they do not see it worth their while to pursue it privately

    either there is a terrible communication gap or some deep politics going on.

    May Allah ta'ala keep the Sunnis steadfast upon haqq irrespective of these fiascos.
     
  5. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    also consider that the saa'il is not a layperson - he is a sunni grad of a well known madrasah, has been "in the news" during the irfan shah dispute etc. and has probably the benefit of prior acquaintance and as such hia question will be seen in the light of a "mujahid sunni" fighting a clever incognito "sulh kull" opportunist.

    This is a very common pattern in most places (think padri, azmi, hanif qureishi etc.) and the muftis themselves might have been through similar experiences - so it must have been almost instinctive for them to extend their support and sympathy to a "comrade-in-arms" against the champions of sulh-kulliyat (which, as everyone knows, is a raging fire in itself), thinking, "been there, seen that".

    If on the other hand, they had known that the person being asked about is a bonafide sunni with a very public anti-devbandi, anti-najdi record, they would certainly have exercised more discretion than giving a summary "daal mudill" fatwa.

    Allah knows best.
     
  6. Shadman

    Shadman Active Member

    I always thought Muftis, Qadhi and similar were government appointed positions.
     
  7. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    Not sure if the ummah channel clip was discusssd in the meeting but Mufti Sahib knows what has gone on. As a senior they should have contacted Shaykh Asrar before releasing this video. Now it is just going to give the impression that they are in cahoots with Imam Shahid and their credibility will be seen in the same light.
     
  8. shahnawazgm

    shahnawazgm Veteran

    And the mighty Imam Ghazali (ra) only managed to be conferred a single title of Hujjatul Islam!

    SubhanAllah, the times we live in today.
     
    Ahmet Tayfur and Shadman like this.
  9. Khanah

    Khanah Well-Known Member

    I agree that is appears as such even though no names were mentioned.

    But if mufti aslam thinks the fatwa of being sulh kulli etc is correct- then what was he doing during the meeting he had with shaykh asrar where shaykh explained his position and everyone seemed to accept it? Then his student makes a public apology and then a public retraction and makes a mockery of the whole situation- and now this?

    If so, he's as contradictory on this issue as his student
     
  10. AbdalQadir

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

    Fazile Jaleel Aalime Nabeel Allamah Mufti to be precise. 6 titles preceding a name ma sha Allah. I thought all those CEng, MBA, CMgr guys on my LinkedIn contacts were showoffs!
     
    Ahmet Tayfur and Khanah like this.
  11. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    At the very least, we can safely assume Mufti Sahib supports his student. They have behaved irresponsibly in this instance and should have discussed with Shaykh Asrar first.
     
  12. Waqar786

    Waqar786 Veteran

    No. The end of the video makes it clear because he says people should refer Imam Shahid's more detailed analysis. What is that analysis? Imam Shahid's latest video against shaykh asrar. To remove any doubt, he also points out the reference to other muftis and their fatwas
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2021
  13. Khanah

    Khanah Well-Known Member

    Mufti aslam did not name shaykh asrar by name in this video. However, due to the context, can we believe that he is not speaking about shaykh asrar and only in general terms? I think not.

    If mufti aslam disagreed with shaykh asrar with respect to the praying behind deviants issue, why didn't he sort this out at the meeting that was held a few weeks ago? Why get his student to give a public apology with respect to those same issues? And then now come out with a video supporting his student when he could have handled this in the behind closed doors meeting?
     
  14. Khanah

    Khanah Well-Known Member

    This just gets worse to be honest.

    Side note- is shahid Ali a mufti now? And an allamah? These lofty titles being given to fresh graduates puts my nose out of joint tbh. If everyone is an allamah, then no one is an allamah.
     
    AbdalQadir likes this.
  15. Paradise Seeker

    Paradise Seeker Active Member

    If there was any doubts on who is pulling Shahids strings.
     
    AbdalQadir likes this.
  16. Brother Barry

    Brother Barry Veteran

    Mufti Aslam Bandyalwi sahibs Fatwa on being ignorant of deviants and praying behind them.

     
  17. AbdalQadir

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

    @Unbeknown @AR Ahmed @Khanah

    wrt my post # 78 (we're strictly seeing the question given to the muftis, about some mawlana in the uk, and the answer they returned. not concerned with the spat between Shahid Ali and Asrar Rashid)

    this is my naaqis analysis. feel free to shoot me down.

    this saail ne kaha (the questioner asked) is followed by the mention of the 3 masjids which includes ek Sunni ek deobandi.

    this implies that the person who questioned this uk mawlana is aware of Sunni deobandi disputes at least at a cursory level. maybe not at the REAL level of differences that Ala Hazrat himself points out (aqaid and basic iman) but rather that outward levels (Fatiha, niaz, urs etc; Ala Hazrat himself says our opposition to the deobandis is not for these things per se despite their being wrong in their daleels)

    or the saail to the unknown uk mawlana could be also well versed in the entire issue at a somewhat higher level

    Shahid then cites the discussion provided by the unknown uk mawlana and says as a conclusion:

    this seems to imply to the muftis that this unknown uk mawlana is implicitly encouraging the common folk not to investigate further into the Sunni deobandi issues despite having some cursory (or higher level) knowledge on it

    here we have 2 separate issues:

    1. knowing the masail of ikhtilaf (the first 2 points mentioned are related to this - that awam is not mukallaf to know the details of imkane kadhib ka masala, nor are they mukallaf to know the gustakhana ibarats of the deobandi elders)

    2. knowing the beliefs of the imam who is leading the namaz (the third point is related to this - that not all deobandi imams of the uk are aware of the kufriyat of the deobandi elders, effectively saying that the person leading the prayers might not himself be aware of the kufriyat of the 4 tawaghit)

    then Shahid closes off the question:

    based on this, in my "aapko ulama pe tanqid karne ka haq nahin hai" opinion, Mufti Aslam Raza's answer seems the most apt of the three muftis shown in that video.

    he (Aslam Raza saab) says it is based on gumrahi and the awam is mukallaf to ask the scholars. this is obvious. if a guy who has at least a basic idea of Sunni deobandi ikhtilafat and is even concerned about who he prays behind (as shown in the question) and he is asking this unknown uk mawlana, he ought to have given a better answer than the one presented in the istifta.

    however, in my opinion (now, sitting calmly as an armchair critic) maybe he (as well as the other muftis) could have asked the mustafti if this excuse presented that not all deobandi imams in uk are aware of the kufriyat of the 4 top dogs... is this the dominant majority among the uk devbandis or a minority?


    he says that "lagta hai" ("lagta hai" is not a fatwa wording, it's only a hunch) that this unknown uk mawlana too holds such views that all these differences are meaningless squabbles. there is no Shar3i hukm that entertains a "lagta hai" on a person being a mubtadi3 or kafir

    one of the other muftis accused him of tahreef upon the meanings of the Quran. that was strong language but it eventually says the same thing every Sunni says for wahabis - that they present verses out of place and out of context.

    deobandism with the actual kufriya ibarat of their elders is kufr, not just misguidance but still within the bounds of Islam - in that regard since the word deobandi was mentioned in the istifta along with imkane kadhib and gustakhana ibaraat, it's really only a bit off and uncalled for but still within tolerances for the esteemed muftis to call this unknown uk mawlana as dall mudill and sulah kulli without investigating a bit more about him from the mustafti.

    my 2p as a common person, as i see it now as a stand alone question and stand alone answer to it (regardless of Shahid Ali and Asrar Rashid).

    Allah knows best.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2021
    Ghulam Ali and Unbeknown like this.
  18. AbdalQadir

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

    i take it you don't have very many desi Sunni friends :)

    the points you raised require a full fledged treatise on who or what a Sunni is in our times and what exactly is Maslake Imam Ahmad Raza. good luck getting it out of the current crop of scholars and peers.
     
  19. TheRidawiWay

    TheRidawiWay New Member

    Moving forward, even if we were to hypothetically suppose that the question was completely accurate and contained all the appropriate information, then the answers still raise important questions.

    Mufti Aslam Raza said that, “Common people are not obligated to know theological disputes in detail. However, common people must be aware of deviants by seeking guidance from Sunni scholars.”

    Mufti Fida Husayn al-Ridawi said that: “Even though they are not obligated to know detailed theological disputes, they are obligated to ask Sunni scholars.”

    From this, we gather that the former two Muftis agree in principle with Shaykh Asrar Rashid that a common person is not obligated to know of theological disputes in detail.

    These comments by Mufti Aslam Raza and Mufti Fida Husayn al-Ridawi beg the question however: how is a totally ignorant common person (category (b)) able to discern a Sunni scholar in the first place, to then seek guidance from him, given his status as an ignorant commoner? An ignorant commoner by definition is ignorant of the particulars of theological disputes.

    Consider the current global modern context where not only are groups claiming to be Ahl al-Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah or Barelwi but also pay lip-service to its details ie. Ash’ari/Maturidi/Athari + Hanafi/Shafi’i/Maliki/Hanbali + Tasawwuf/Tazkiyah/Ihsan; or they say they are ‘Barelwi’ but hold heretical beliefs such as shi’i/tafdili//hululi/khariji/perennialist etc. tendencies.

    How is an ignorant commoner to discern that Scholar X is a true Sunni and Scholar Y is a fake if he himself is ignorant of theological details? Add the highly divisive mudslinging within Sunni ranks too, that Barelwi Scholar X is not ‘Sunni’ enough!

    If the ignorant commoner is able to discern who a Sunni scholar is and who is a non-Sunni, then it is presupposed he has enough knowledge of theology to be able to make that distinction. As such, he ceases to be an ignorant commoner referenced by Shaykh Asrar Rashid and would be classed as a knowledgeable commoner (category (a)).

    Mufti Fida Husayn al-Ridawi also said that “a person should only pray behind an Imam when he has certainty (yaqin) that he is a Sunni.”

    This begs the same question raised above. How is an ignorant commoner to know if an Imam is Sunni when he is wholly unaware of the particulars of Sunni theology himself?

    However, even if this point was ceded, then:
    1. What constitutes ‘certainty’ here? Is predominant conviction based on the apparent sufficient ie. seeing a Muslim man appointed as an Imam by a group of people who reads his prayer like a normal Sunni Muslim?

    2. 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?

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

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

    5. Is a common person required to investigate the beliefs of the Imam prior to beginning the prayer with a series of Q/As?

    6. Is he to bring forward Hussam al-Haramayn and the heresies of deviants and ask the Imam to endorse it or for his thoughts before beginning his prayer behind him?

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

    8. How applicable and practical is this to a commoner living in metropolitan urban cities across the globe who sees Muslims congregating for prayer and joins them to fulfil his daily obligation?
    Mufti Rashid Mahmud al-Ridawi said that “such a person is misguided (gumrah) and faithless (bey-din) who says that it is not obligatory upon commoners to know the heretical beliefs (‘aqa’iyd-e kufriyyah) of the Wahhabiyyah-Deobandiyyah.”
    1. Is Mufti Rashid Mahmud al-Ridawi suggesting that commoners are obligated to know of detrimental statements of disbelief and heresy?

    2. And that whoever disagrees with this ie. point [1], is misguided himself?

    3. If so, to what extent are commoners obligated to know of these heresies?

    4. Moreover, is it deviancy to disagree with the view that commoners are obligated to know of these blasphemies and sectarian problems?

    5. Are commoners obligated to know of the specific disparaging passages present in Kitab al-Tawhid of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, Taqwiyat al-Iman of Isma’il al-Dihlawi or Hifdh al-Iman of Ashraf ‘Ali Thanwi, etc.?

    6. What is the ruling upon scholars who are unaware of controversy X?

    7. What about misguided passages found in the books and speeches of other deviants who are not limited to the Deobandi dispute like Ibn Hazm, Ibn Sina, Ibn Taymiyyah etc. to al-Harari, Hassan al-Saqqaf, Amina Wadud, etc.?

    8. Are scholars themselves aware of the many modern heresies and their chief ideologues of today?

    9. Or are commoners only obligated to know the general tenet that offense and insult of Allah, His Messengers, and the religion is disbelief - and not the particular passages per se?
    Mufti Aslam Raza and Mufti Fida Husayn al-Ridawi have said that commoners are not obligated to know theological disputes in detail whereas Mufti Rashid Mahmud al-Ridawi states that claiming commoners are not obligated to know such-and-such grave dispute makes oneself misguided. Clarification around who is a Sulh-Kulli and its parameters is necessary. Especially if we are to consider Shaykh Asrar Rashid as one the way some people are wanting us to believe.

    The Sulh-Kulli label is thrown around nowadays without any justification being provided. On the off-chance that any reason is provided, then it is often very weak, flimsy and does not hold to scrutiny (see case-in-point). If people are called Sulh-Kulli without any proof being provided, especially scholars like Shaykh Asrar Rashid, then this renders the term meaningless and it all becomes a futile joke. It ‘poisons the well’ as to who a real Sulh-Kulli is, and by extension who a Barelwi and Sunni is.

    I hope individuals who wantonly use these terms without standard and thought can provide these necessary answers.
     
    Ghulam Ali and abu Hasan like this.
  20. Paradise Seeker

    Paradise Seeker Active Member

    All those that are bringing up the poison issue 2 years after the event in public, clearly have an intolerant extremist, petty mindest.

    How many incidents have there been of people emulating Shaykh Asrar and making poison challenges? None!

    Shaykh Asrar himself made it clear in his post debate video that people shouldn't drink poison or jump off a cliff etc, it's is impermissible in sharia especially if you know you're not going to survive.

    He's not endorsing it and it is clear from the debate it happened in the moment, yet some want to go on about. I can only assume there is another agenda at play.
     

Share This Page