Shaykh Aslam gets refuted on Namaz issue

Discussion in 'Hanafi Fiqh' started by Jonaid202, Mar 10, 2021.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Sunnisoldier786

    Sunnisoldier786 New Member

    An academic response to Hāfiz Muhammad Aslam and Nūruddīn Rashīd. Discussion on the correct position and Fatwā of the Hanafī Madhhab on 'Amal Kathīr. Verdicts of Muftī Qāsim Zabīdī (Yemen) and Shaykh Lu'ayy Khalīlī (Jordan). Message for Shaykh Sāmir an-Nās (Syria). #Share

    abu Hasan likes this.
  2. Surati

    Surati Active Member

    I felt quite sad and disappointed to see Shaykh Aslam’s deliberate avoidance of the matter (him being someone who day in and day out talks about Adab and the beautiful sunnah of RasulAllah ﷺ) and I (like many others), needed clarity because I was genuinely confused.

    I feel like it’s just common decency not to blank and ghost people (which is often the easier way out).

    If our Ulema themselves cannot demonstrate healthy and respectful ways to respond to conflict and disagreement, then no wonder followers and students are making sly and juvenile remarks on social media.

    It’s not about winning here, but clarifying an important matter. If Shaykh Aslam thinks Mawlana Shahid is wrong then the least he could do (as a brother in Islam) is to address this with him, if not publicly, then at least in private.

    In any case no learning can happen if people aren’t willing to even engage.

    Thought that the points made about ‘functional conflict’ are interesting: 29C8538A-A0CA-4CF5-ADE3-24F73AE6B033.jpeg
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2021
  3. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Active Member

    Very good questions.

    Ive personally noticed that Shaykh Aslam appeals to some laymen who attend Deo circles because he is not known to criticize personalities and or "indulge in subcontinent sectarianism". Im not sure if this is a positive thing or not. (perhaps, maybe it will draw some of those Deos closer to Sunniyat?).

    But this lack of openly stating his views and/or criticisms (if he indeed holds those criticisms), is also why I personally feel less drawn towards him, even if he sometimes quotes Ala Hazrat. I personally feel that Sunni Ulema should openly display their identities and make it easy on lay people to identify them.

    Not to mention, I was a bit disturbed by the lack of his mentioning anything regarding Allamah Khadim Hussain (rA) in his posts, after Allamah Sahib's passing.

    Just some thoughts...
  4. Jonaid202

    Jonaid202 New Member

    Protecting our Salāh, importance of following valid Fiqh rulings & responsibility in Sharī'ah.

  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    btw, what is maulvi aslam's view concerning devbandis and keller?

    or is it sacrilege and haram to ask about it?
    Abdullah Ahmed and abu Usman like this.
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i checked the page, and he too does not seem to understand what he quotes and is unfit to issue rulings. he must go back to shaykh samir and read properly.

    fiqh does not mean copying from books without properly understanding the background, the implication in the immediate case, context of the ruling and the bigger picture and what has now become trendy: 'ikhtilaf'.

    "fiqh", meaning a proper understanding of religion seems to have eluded these people - at least in this issue. nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.

    wAllahu a'alam.
    Abdullah Ahmed likes this.
  7. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    noori bhai has already pointed the tashahhud; not only that, but also the order of salam (right first, left next) confirms it. if it is reversed, that would be a bigger objection on shaykh sab.
  9. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    right hand, see him in the tashahud.
    Abdullah Ahmed and AbdalQadir like this.
  10. AbdalQadir

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

    It is really annoying, boring, and pathetic when Islamic public figures only want the mashaAllah group hugs of Shaykh-life but run far far far away from public accountability or reprimand or cross questioning.

    1) what/where is the evidence that Shaykh Samir Al-Nass saw this salah video, AND confirmed his ruling that what's shown in THIS video is acceptable? so far we just have a claim not evidence.

    2) Regardless if his detractors/critics spoke with adab or without; or rightly or wrongly claimed that there's no difference of opinion - it is simply disgusting, boring and pathetic of celebrity shuyukh to bring out comments like 'they didn't even read basic Hanafi texts, they didn't graduate, they didn't get ijazah' etc.

    Remember, YOU'RE the ISLAMIC public figure. The guy questioning or objecting could just be a curious commoner, an adabless idiot, or a Shaykh of equal or greater or lesser standing... in ALL cases YOU are not absolved of your responsibility of public accountability for your claimed knowledge/position.

    Our elders of the Ahlus Sunnah responded to such questions or objections (often times posed very unjustly and without adab too) without getting exasperated or feelings of entitlement that they are above and beyond defending their position or stance on any matter!

    I just wish someone could send a memo out to all these entitled celebrity shuyukh on public accountability of not just monetary donations collected from their congregations, but also for their knowledge-related stances, opinions, positions, etc.

    It's high time!
    Ghulam Ali, Abdullah Ahmed and Noori like this.
  11. AbdalQadir

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

    just on this specific point, is there any way of ascertaining the camera is/isn't reversed? asking from a videography perspective.
  12. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator



    whoever posted this - whether by guidance of maulvi aslam or dictation of maulvi aslam; or whether they did this of their own volition.
    it is utterly incorrect and the person who wrote this has no clue of the definition of `amal kathir nor of hanafi fiqh.

    now when i refute this, people will then say: oh, maulvi aslam did not write it. someone from his students/muridin wrote it so don't hold him responsible. etc.

    but whether aslam said it or someone else, this mistake needs correction.

    Allah Sees everything and knows everything.
    Ghulam Ali, Abdullah Ahmed and Umar99 like this.
  13. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    been busy with other thread, and i saw this thread and expected that it is a furuyi issue and will be sorted out. but it seems to now become worse and worser. upon a bit of prodding by brothers, i looked into the thread and felt compelled to write.

    "shaykh samir al-nass is a respected hanafi authority"...

    i have not seen maulvi aslam's replies to maulana shahid or other ulama. it is his muridin, handlers or whoever that is replying. is this because maulvi aslam thinks he is far higher than maulana shahid or others, that it is beneath his dignity to reply to them? instead feed it to his students, muridin so there is an aspect of plausible deniability and maulvi aslam is not held responsible for any criticism that arises?

    khoob parda hai ke chilman se lage baythe hain
    saaf chhupte bhi nahin saamne aate bhi nahin.

    is this facebook account an official account of maulvi aslam? if so, then he is responsible for everything that is posted on there. whoever is posting there is doing so either at his behest or at the least, maulvi aslam has knowledge of this. wAllahu a'alam.

    shaykh samir al-nass may be a respected hanafi scholar - even 'authority' according to you, but that does not mean every opinion of his should be taken without questioning? or that his taS'HiH and tarjih is binding upon all the hanafis of this world in this age?

    opinions of mujtahid imams greater than him, even the likes of ibn abidin have been critically analysed and accepted/rejected, given tarjih to some other opinion. so threatening people with the equivalent of "if you contradict aslam - the bogeyman will kidnap you and take you to the wolves..." is very immature.

    now aslam made a video - i had just seen a few seconds in maulana shahid's critique; but since this is being blown up, i decided to watch the full video just now: (also posted below)

    carrying a child is one thing - if the above video is uncut and full, then maulvi aslam does not even know how to pray properly. even if you assume it is two cycles of nafl prayer, look at the number of mistakes he makes:

    - after tasha'hhud, he did not say salawat ala'n nabiy.(i.e. durud sharif)

    - he does not complete qira'ah and goes to ruku'u even before the surah is completed (in both raka'ah).

    - he doesn't complete the second tasbih in ruku' and stands up halfway reciting the tasbih.

    - he doesn't say rabbana laka'l Hamd staying up; instead he completes it near the sajdah (1st rak'ah)

    - why did he raise his left hand for taHrimah? doesn't he know that tayamun is preferred always? even if you assume that he is a left hander, i don't see why he could not carry the child in his left hand for taHrimah.

    - he doesn't say the tas'bih three times always (at least from what one can hear)

    - wearing glasses: does it not obstruct one's nose - accurately the bridge of the nose touching the ground? (full disclosure: i wear glasses too; but they are not as trendy as aslam sahib's.)

    - if you are hypercritical, you could also comment on the way he clasps his hands in salat.

    - he added surat ikhlaS in both raka'ah. while this is not makruh in nafl, is it the same in farD salat without need or compulsion? however, we can give him the benefit of doubt that he did not do it deliberately. doing so spontaneously even in fard is not makruh.​

    pointed question to aslam: will you pray your farD salat like this?

    now you may say that: "saying tas'bih more than once is only a sunnah". or that tayamun is only a sunnah. or that hastening in salat is only makruh (adam tumaninah)

    the child is old enough fo run away and is mostly docile - not crying or in pain. where is the need to carry him/her? maulana shahid is right in pointing out because this sends a wrong message to common people who only watch videos and do not read the arguments of tarjih in books of fiqh.

    one can fish out numerous juz'yiyyat from books of fiqh - i.e. exceptional cases - where x or y is allowed - but making a video and putting it there without proper context, is playing with the faith and prayer of common people.

    nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.

    thank aslam sahib.
    apparently carrying a child in salat is the only sunnah that people had abandoned in our time. rest all the sunan and mustaHabbat have been completed and become second habit. so aslam sahib decided to revive this sunnah.

    wa billahi't tawfiq.
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2021
  14. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    it is also clearly mentioned in the excerpts that aqdas posted from fatawa shami, here is a loose translation

    - in Durr al Mukhtar imam Haskafi said that it is makruh to hold a child in prayer when there is no need

    - imam Haskafi rahimhullah said that the hadith of Umamah bint Zainab raDiyAllahu a'nhuma is abrogated by another hadith that the salah itself keeps busy (from replying to your salam)

    - imam ibn A'bidin commented on it that this reply is not acceptable because the hadith of Umamah is chronologically later then the hadith of ishtighal (busyness) in prayer

    - ibn A'bidin quoted another answer given in badaiy' of al-kasani that it was not makruh for RasulAllah alaihi afDalus salaat wat tasleem because he was in need as there was no one to take care of Umamah raDiyAllahu a'nha, or he sallallahu alaihi wasallam did it to make it legal that this action does not invalidate prayer.

    - kasani further said - similarly, in our time, it is also not makruh for anyone of us if there is a need, otherwise it is disliked (makruh)

    then ibn A'bidin quoted ibn Amir Haj from his Halbah that this (action by RasulAllah sallallau alaihi wasallam) was to legalize* it by his action, this is the correct opinion that we should not turn away from (or ignore) as imam nawawi has explained, because some of the ulama have said that legalizing by action is better than by words, so this action was to demonstrate that it is permissible (noori: if there is a need as ibn A'bidin quoted before)

    * otherwise people would not know that this is permissible when there is a need.
  15. Surati

    Surati Active Member

    Key point: when there is no need.

    Think the difference of opinion here is also whether the onlooker is limited to what Maulana Shahid explained?
  16. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    well, it is not an issue of aqidah. Nobody is doing takfir or tafsiq of the molana sahab (only the first time I came to know about him), it is a fiqh issue and there can be different opinions in the 4 madahibs or even among hanafi fuqaha, but mere a difference of opinion does not mean that people can take any route at their on discretion, they need to ask for what is preferred (rajeh') opinion and what is not (marjuh'), otherwise you will find the difference of opinion in almost every matter whether it is an article of faith or a fiqh ruling.

    the least that can be said is that it is disliked, Molana Amjad Ali rahimahullah states in bahar e shariat ibarat that it is makruh, when there is no need , to pray while carrying a child who can hold herself. So, this MAY hint that if muSalli has to hold the child, even if there is no filth, then the salah is invalid, and if it does not then the ibarat is clear that it is makruh.
    Surati likes this.
  17. Surati

    Surati Active Member

    C0445AC6-0DAE-45E0-9DA4-436A7EAF4E00.jpeg C0445AC6-0DAE-45E0-9DA4-436A7EAF4E00.jpeg
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 17, 2021
  18. Khanah

    Khanah Active Member

    Could it not be the case that there is a difference of opinion on the issue at all or how amal kathir is to be interpreted in practice?
  19. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    Maulana Amjad Ali Azmi rahimahullah was not an ordinary mufti, I shared a quote from bahar e shariat, in which he mentions only rajeh' positions, and he clearly states that it is makruh if the child is not carrying najasah and can hold to the muSalli by herself.
  20. Surati

    Surati Active Member

    This is getting very confusing for us lay people...


Share This Page