what then is sulH kullism?

Is there such thing as shia 'amalan or wahhabi 'amalan (to the exclusion of the i'tiqadi aspects of said groups)?

How useful is the 'amalan category for a term often used to make a finding regarding someone's i'tiqadi stances?

 

I've heard things about him re: non-takfir of the deo4, however a general question I have is:

Is an appearance with sunnis and then with deviants a sufficient piece of evidence to draw this inference (below) about a person's state of belief and knowledge in order to term them sullah kulli and thus outside ahlus sunnah?

Furthermore: if sullah kulli can mean: fasiq, ghumrah, or even in its most extreme form, kafir, then how useful is it to use a single term whose intended meaning may be ambiguous?

 

it definitely is a means to make sulleh kulliyat rife. by the way can somebody explain to me what are sunnis ulema doing with deos and sullehs when the shariah does no permit taking shahadah from them.

i just feel in moonsighting issues the sunniway is the best as to how they deal with it in accordance with Maslake Alahazrat.

 

Thank you. I was actually wondering about that because people are saying Noor TV people are sullas as they are sitting with New Crescent Society to establish local moon sighting in the UK.

 

“This knowledge is obligatory, because it prepares you to safeguard your Iman

Sulah Kullis (I.e. 50/50s) with their deceptive behaviour of compromising on Sahih Sunni Beliefs must be exposed

Written by: Mufti Abdun Nabi Hamidi

The academic work of A’la Hazrat Imam of Ahle Sunnat Sayyiduna Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Qaadiri (May Allah be pleased with him) is the main obstacle on the path and plotting of Sulah Kullis (Those being 50/50 in Aqaaid matters). So, at any cost they tend to sideline the works of A’la Hazrat and his teachings. Before they start their corrupt agenda they try their level best to portray A’la Hazrat as an any other Moulana and nothing special, so people’s minds are ready to give less importance to the work of this great Imam, the great Mujaddid of Islam.
Following are the famous lame and worn-out excuses they bring forward to justify their evil 50/50 stance.
▪Why quote only A’la Hazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan why not other Sunni scholars, wrongly painting a picture as if other true Sunni scholars favour 50/50 behaviour.
▪Sulah Kullis will quote those Syrian, Egyptian, African or Yamani scholars etc. who are unaware of the Deobabdi and Wahabi Aqaaid or that they are in compromising situation or that they have turned into Tafdeelis (a branch of Shiaism)
▪Sulah Kullis are often heard saying to the Sahihul Aqidah Sunni Muslims. ‘You Barelwies are extremists, your approach is very hard, you are not accommodating’.
Thus painting a false picture as if befriending those with false beliefs and accommodating them is progressive in Islam.
▪Their slogan is’ “Unity is very important, we must unite not divide”. So, for these 50/50 characters even if unity is achieved by compromising/selling their own and their followers’ Iman and Aqidah, they are willing to do that.
▪Their followers must know how cheaply they are being sold.
▪They are very often heard using vulgar language against Sahihul Aqidah Sunni Ulama that speak out against their actions but are very kind and accomdating towards scholars belonging to the corrupt sects under the banner of “love all and hate none “
▪When caught up with their tricks and having no direction to go to, instead of reforming they seek emotional support, by means of which they actually further expose themselves.
▪They normally join forces with unlearned, character assassinators, transgressors, Neem Mullas (known to be Aalims but unqualified) and yell out at the learned Ulama, as they do not have any 'ilmi merit to come with sound and acceptable proofs in light of the Holy Qur’aan, the Sunnah and the works of the pious Aslaaf (our pious predecessors).”

 

“What brand of Sunniyyat is it?
Written by: Mufti Abdun Nabi Hamidi

We are going through an unfortunate era of deception and fraudulent behaviour by some “prominent Sunni Scholars” running Islamic organisations. They portray an image of pure Sunnism by displaying their participation in Meelad Functions, Urs Shareef and Giyarwee Shareef, recite Salaami with enthusiasm, whilst at the same time embracing those who openly condemn such celebration and label those who do so as Mushriks, Bid'atis and Qabar Pujaaris.

Such nefarious individuals who may have titles of Moulana, Mufti, Hazrath, Sheikh, Allama etc. are nothing but Sulah Kulli. Sulah-Kulli refers to those who embrace all people with corrupt Aqaaid [BadAqeeda] and show displeasure in refuting their false beliefs. They consider all sects to be truthful and strive for unity with these corrupt and false sects.

These Sulah Kulli types of individuals appear on social media promoting their charitable works and thrive on public praise and admiration. To the innocent Sunni masses they are portrayed as sincere devotees of Ahle Sunnah doing good work but they have no scruples in embracing those scholars who regard celebration of Meelad un Nabi {ﷺ} as Bid’ah and Salaami to be Haraam and standing in Salaami to be Shirk. Those who regard us as grave-worshippers, Urs Shareef as bid’ah and Haraam. They oppose Giyarwee Shareef etc.

These Sulah-Kulli scholars not only embrace but they make dua for the continued success for the Badh-Aqeeda Gustakh-e-Rasool صلى الله عليه وسلم. Is this not ludicrous? Are they not ashamed? On one side they sing the praises of the Beloved Rasool {ﷺ} and on the other side they make Dua of success for the insolent Deobandi group whose Akaabireen have hurled insults at the same Beloved Rasool {ﷺ}. Where is the shame and modesty?

Should we sit back and accept someone who claims to be Sunni making dua of success for those who are striving to mislead our people and destroy our true aqeeda? And when that is coupled with public praise of such individual who he may not agree with in private - but commits a double sin: like a person eating carrion bought with money earned from haraam source.
They deem everyone to be on the "correct path". They say that all are Muslims no matter whatever corrupt beliefs they hold. They do not accept the Hadeeth of the 73 sects, with only 1 going to Paradise; thus, the result is that they accept the contradicting statements of Haq and Batil to be equal, even if the baatil is explicit Kufr.

A Sulah-kulli in fact accepts the kufriyyat of ALL the deviant sects - and is the worst of them all. Imagine the disbeliefs of all deviant sects rolled into one large package.
We are duty bound to make the Ummah aware of such deceptive display in order to protect our true Maslak. All sincere Sunnis should condemn such corrupt actions and support those who take a stand. Being friendly and accommodating to the people of corrupt beliefs under the misinterpreted banner of “love all and hate none” is the corner stone of Sulah-kullism.

Amirul Mu'mineen Sayyiduna Ali رضى الله عنه narrated that Rasulullah {ﷺ} said [part of a lengthy Hadith]:
"...Allah has cursed the one who accommodates an innovator [Badmazhab]..."
[Sahih Muslim, Hadith no. 1978]

May Allah عز و جل protect the unsuspecting Sunni Masses from such fraudulent unscrupulous individuals posing as spiritual leaders.”

 

the biggest problem with some or most who promote love for all is their hate for Sahih ul Aqida Sunni Ulama who are active and successful in refuting and fulfilling their obligations and commitments.

so in that sense it is not sullah kulli. it is love for all and hate for Sunnis.

 

How exactly does this work? Meaning, how is love for the fellow Muslim reconciled with avoidance of the innovators?

For example:

1. Can you ask for mercy after saying the name of an innovator, such as ibn taymiyyah? I can understand not calling him shaykh

2. People use quotes like don't give them salaam, etc. But isn't salaam for every muslim?

I know I'm slightly off topic- because joining hands with deviant groups shouldn't be done, I can understand that aspect of it and we shouldn't promote them in anyway, scholars should speak against them, etc. But how to generally treat them is what I'm trying to get at

 

You can nurture love for Ahlus Sunnah (Sunnis) and you can nurture love for the Ummah (Muslims). The latter may lead to being called Sulh Kulli however there is evidence for its merit as well evidence that one has compromised his deen in some cases.

Personally I can't see a real way of telling the better position. There is drawbacks with both as well since the Ummah is split into sectarian divides each having dislike for sulh kulli's in their sects own way. A person who tries to love the Ummah will face hardships with loneliness and even this can fall into two categories (ultimately a proper loser or paka clean heart in the path of Allaah)


So on that basis atleast some forms of love of the Ummah will ultimately be wrongly called out as Sulh kulli. Also the love of the Ummah may lead to some forms of over compromise. Also the issue of under compromising from the lens of unity is an obligation.

Looking for other opinions on this subject if anyone has the time.

 

"Sulh-Kulli refers to those who show displeasure in refuting the deviants and apostates. They consider all sects to be truthful and strive for unity with them. They remark that time refuting and disproving the deviant could rather be exerted in doing ‘useful’ things. These thoughts and views are extreme deviance; in fact they are the roots of apostasy."

Maulana Muhammad Kalim (Preston)

 

I think people don't always know who is a sulh kulli and who isn't. I myself didn't know that a lot of people were problematic until recently...

 

afaik, it gained currency during Akbar's reign.

See this (first result on google).

jstor

 

Imam Al Ghazzali's beautiful denunciation of sulH kullism - he considers it the "greatest bidah":

Partial translation of a passage from "The Alchemy Of Happiness": http://vocaroo.com/i/s00jksM79GPo

yes, hanson totally missed these glaring passages. He was too busy observing the 'nuances'.