Nouman Ali Khan is not respectful about RasulAllah ﷺ

[abu Hasan]

i think we should not mix his personal issues with his opinions and speeches about islam.

i don't really care - nor is it my business - about his personal issues. also with his tafsir lessons, our notice was drawn to this segment by a brother in the first post. hence our comment.

----
if nouman repents and categorically states that he has repented from this disrespect to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, and will edit the portion in the clip (assuming there are no more blasphemies) and a short message to not circulate that segment, we will withdraw.

i will delete my posts/tweets criticising nouman and this particular incident. (tafsirs will stay as they are on another thread).

our objective was to obtain a retraction and if we get it, we will withdraw our protest too.

Allah ta'ala know best. wa billahi't tawfiq.

 

[Aqib alQadri]

This is a call for the people of Ilm who can speak, there is a void which rascals like him are filling.

very true.

Search and you will see his clickfunnel marketing ads all over to sell these sessions in numerous locations including this one bahrain.

he charges USD 11 per month from each member. if he has a few thousand members, just do the maths - he makes millions every year. so this is his business. despite that, he keeps his head empty.

This Dungman Khan is like the crazy self taught baker who packs dung and sells them as hot and fresh loaves of bread.

that's what happens with these ignorant speakers - when they have nothing to offer, they fill the gaps with filth.

 

[abu Hasan]

apparently in a response to brother aqdas post, nouman said:'i repent'

=====
but this is not serious. if he is serious:

1. he should categorically repent from disrespectful statement to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam in that video.

2. renew his faith and publicly say that he has renewed it (and nikah; which is his own responsibility, we will assume he does it)

3. edit the video and remove the offensive segment and publicly put out a statement to not share that segment/ video that contains that segment.

=====

we will keep our word of withdrawing our protest. in sha'Allah.

 

[Aqib alQadri]

apparently in a response to brother aqdas post, nouman said:'i repent'

View attachment 4254

his response seems just an attempt to avoid any headache.

but this is not serious. if he is serious:

1. he should categorically repent from disrespectful statement to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam in that video.

2. renew his faith and publicly say that he has renewed it (and nikah; which is his own responsibility, we will assume he does it)

3. edit the video and remove the offensive segment and publicly put out a statement to not share that segment/ video that contains that segment.

he has a business to run, hence the lip service.

we hope that he will TRULY repent - PUBLICLY, EXPLICITLY. that is what Shariah demands of such an act.

we will keep our word of withdrawing our protest. in sha'Allah.

@brother abu Hasan: if we feel the repentance is sincere, we should post it on the forum.

however, we should NOT remove the posts; that is for everyone to learn from.

 

[abu Hasan]

when was that?

6 hours ago from now.

we should not remove the posts;

i will remove the murtad etc. posts.

 

[Unbeknown]

i think we should not mix his personal issues with his opinions and speeches about islam.

i don't really care - nor is it my business - about his personal issues. also with his tafsir lessons, our notice was drawn to this segment by a brother in the first post. hence our comment.

this might be 'personal' but it is by no means 'private' - we didn't go looking for his personal failings - it's the people who were affected (or claim to have been) who made it public - and he denied the charges initially and we left it at that.

but afaik he did not reply to the screenshots that surfaced subsequently - that they were fake or edited.

we need not close our eyes when something is searingly obvious - it matters who people take their deen from - so when the personal failings of a claimant to knowledge becomes public - and they get proven - we can't be faulted for decrying them.

or so I think.

 

[Unbeknown]

we can't be faulted for decrying them.

and I feel we have a precedent in rasulAllah (peace be upon him) ordering hazrat hassan bin thabit (raDyiAllahu'anhu) to consult with hazrat Abu Bakr (raDyiAllahu'anhu) to learn the lineage of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and leave it out and abuse (hujw) the rest of the quraysh ancestors. These, I think, must not have been the kufr of those people that hazrat hassan (raDyiAllahu'anhu) was supposed to deride, but a sort of character assassination.

This is reported in hadith which are in one of the saHihayn (I forget which). Do correct me if I have misunderstood.

-----

also, our ulama have recorded - or at-least conveyed from the records of the dayabina themselves - the "immoral misadventures" of their demi-gods. Although I personally dislike speaking about these indecencies - I think that those who did, had a sound reason for de-robing the ugliness of these "beauty pageant" contenders.

Allah knows best.

 

[abu nibras]

Mufti Muhammad Akmal on Nouman Ali Khan
https://instaud.io/1AID


Transliteration :

Yeh intihayi jahil tareen insaan hai jo is tarah bole ke ma'azAllah summa ma'azAllah ke nabiy.e.kareem musalman hue hain. Yeh dairah.e.islam se kharij hai isko tajdeed.e.iman tajdeed.e.nikah karna chahiye.

Aur aise jahil admi ko hargiz speeches ke liye na bithaya jaye aur na hi iski speeches me jaya jaye jo itna gumrah hai jo isko yeh tak nahin maloom hai bewaqoof insan ko.

Translation

As salam alaykum, This is an extremely ignorant/jahil person who says that ma'azAllah summa ma'azAllah that the merciful prophet became Muslim/converted.

he is expelled from Islam and has to renew his faith (shahadah) and renew his nikah.

And such an ignorant person should not be called to deliver speeches neither should one go to his speeches, for he is so deviated that he is not aware of such things (basics).

 

[abu Hasan]

i have heard some imbeciles making false ta'wils of this explicit insult.

some molwi wanted to be holier than NAK himself and he said:

"As for the Prophet alayhi assalatu wassalaam accepting islam then that is jahala not kufr because he has misunderstood the linguistic meaning of eemaan to be the technical meaning. i.e. amaana r rasool refers to the linguistic meaning of eeman not the technical meaning and he took it as the technical meaning"​

this is sheer idiocy or an attempt to appear oversmart. where from thin air did he conjure up this eeman / amana technical thing? my retort to this molvi sab: in all probability, nouman knows more arabic than you.

leave this technical non-technical claptrap: nouman explicitly said the same as "converted, reverted, took shahadah..." regardless of how you want to flip it, the result of nouman's insulting statement was that RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam was not a muslim and became a muslim. al-iyadhubillah.

if this does not make your blood boil or offend your senses - you should be ashamed of your lack of self-respect. doob maro.

---
my sincere advice to these cowed molvis is to read shifa sharif.


---
PS: tell this molvi sab what would he tell someone who said that his father grandfather were all kafirs and say: "technically, kafir means a farmer as said in the qur'an..."

what a dolt.

 

[Aqib alQadri]

i have heard some imbeciles making false ta'wils of this explicit insult.

some molwi wanted to be holier than NAK himself and he said:

"As for the Prophet alayhi assalatu wassalaam accepting islam then that is jahala not kufr because he has misunderstood the linguistic meaning of eemaan to be the technical meaning. i.e. amaana r rasool refers to the linguistic meaning of eeman not the technical meaning and he took it as the technical meaning"​

this is sheer idiocy or an attempt to appear oversmart. where from thin air did he conjure up this eeman / amana technical thing? my retort to this molvi sab: in all probability, nouman knows more arabic than you.

leave this technical non-technical claptrap: nouman explicitly said the same as "converted, reverted, took shahadah..." regardless of how you want to flip it, the result of nouman's insulting statement was that RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam was not a muslim and became a muslim. al-iyadhubillah.

if this does not make your blood boil or offend your senses - you should be ashamed of your lack of self-respect. doob maro.

---
my sincere advice to these cowed molvis is to read shifa sharif.

my suggestion to those rascals is "revert to Islam first, convert to Islam first, take shahadah you know, then re-enact the Nikah, then read the Shifa Sharif............." - or else, simply go to hell (with NAK).

 

[abu Hasan]

before anything else, i think we should make shifa compulsory for all public speakers. if he/she has not read shifa sharif of qaDi iyaD, they should be refused to speak.

every pipsqueak who can speak - essentially the ruwaybiDah - is a star today and keeps blabbering without any restraint or second thought.

--
in the hadith: a time when truthful will be belied, the liars will be attested as truthful...

when 'ruwaybiDah' shall become speakers / or 'ruwaybiDah' wll speak. when asked who the 'ruwaybiDah were, he SallALlah alayhi wa sallam said: "trashy, worthless, insignificant, contemptible, useless folk [rajul al-taafah] who will speak on important matters".

in another narration: 'foolish, impudent, profligates' [safih] talking on matters concerning the generality.




---
talkhis of dhahabi from mustadrak al-Hakim:

mustadrak of al-Hakim:

also in mushkil al-aathar of TaHawi: (in a printed edition, DKI, it is #449-450)

 

[abu Hasan]

in shifa sharif, it is said (see TKM)

 

[abu Hasan]

some deobandi apologist for nouman apparently used tafsir tabari to explain nouman's blasphemy and hinged on the 'in a sense' that nouman inserted. ok smarty, what about the "converted, reverted, took shahadah" comparison? and thereafter the rest of the derisive piece - he calls 'tafseer'.

NAK's bottom line was that RasulAllah SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam became muslim - al iyadhu billah when the angel appeared.

===
shame on scoundrels who have no adab when talking about RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

---

 

[abu Hasan]

the idiot doesn't know the difference between "not knowing the meaning of yiman in detail" and "becoming muslim". someone send this apologist - the rest of the tafsir what "la tadri" ACTUALLY means. i posted upwards of 30 tafsirs that explain what "la tadri" actually means.

there is no doubt that nouman is being derisive about the Prophet sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam - and demeaning him. he tries every bit to rub it in - by gestures, eyes, snickering....

"did not have a clue" is a derisive, belittling translation. in sayyiduna umar's time, this wretch should be flogged for such a translation. only a man with filth in his diseased heart will make such a translation. these are all scoundrels who wear beards and act as religious people but are shameless shayaTeen. that is filth they were fed on from the temples of deoband and their high priests.

if any of these wretches had read proper tafsirs and seen the adab exercised by mufassirin, they would perhaps have learned the adab of mentioning RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

---
when one speaks of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, one should choose words carefully - and avoid words that diminish his lofty status.

 

[abu Hasan]

imam tabari DID not say what nouman ali khan did.

stop lying and misleading - just to save the skin of shameless preacher.

nouman says @ 22:30: "and Allah is letting him know, that when Gibril first came. alayhis salam. when Gibril first came, even the messenger, had to accept islam. like you know we say somebody converted to islam? somebody reverted to islam? somebody took shahadah? well the messenger alayhis salatu was salam also had to...in a sense...become muslim. "

what he says thereafter is just filling in the image. he explicitly lays out the blasphemy. al-iyadhu billah. that the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam had to 'convert'. al-iyadhu billah.

if you watch the clip, look how smugly he demeans the station of RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam - by using figures of speech and words to portray him as someone who 'had no clue' and was shocked to learn about all this. astaghfirullah.

===
nouman says:

when the angel came he has no idea what is going on. he has no clue, what this is yet. when he is being shaken and when he is told iqra'a 'read, read' he has no idea (nouman snickers here) what is going on. ma ana bi qariy. this is an incredible scene.​

this is a lie. nouman is lying on the messenger of Allah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam.

====
this utter jahil - he doesn't even know the opening hadith of SaHiH bukhari that describes the "beginning of waHy":

in this hadith, it is clearly said: 'that RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was on the religion of sayyiduna ibrahim.."

as explained in fat'h al-bariy, what yataHannath means: "it means yataHannaf; that is, he was among the Hanafiyyah who followed the religion of ibrahim..."

and in the hadith itself there is [mudraj] that it means worship.

 

[abu Hasan]

read the rest of the tafsirs to understand what "la tadri" means. that is, if you are capable of reading a proper tafsir AND understanding one. (nouman's tafsir doesn't count).

NAK is a terrible mufassir and takes poetic liberties that previous mufassirs didn't; and knowing arabic grammar alone cannot make one a mufassir.

this is madness - demanding common people to 'understand' the qur'an by learning arabic language. it is wrong. Allah ta'ala did not make common muslims mukallaf to learn arabic - else learning arabic would have become farD ayn.

====
yes, it is good to learn arabic - but everyone who learns arabic should not dream of becoming a mufassir on their own. and those who dream of becoming mufassirs, should know that there are scores of associated branches of knowledge one should be an expert in, before becoming a mufassir.

at the least one should have read four classical works on ulum al-qur'an:

1. itqan of suyuti
2. burhan of zarkashi
3. jamal al-qurra' of alamuddin sakhawi
4. funun al-afnan of ibn al-jawzi

i can list dozens of books on qur'an sciences - and alHamdulillah, i myself refer to when i have to research something. and then there are books on nasikh mansukh, differences of qir'aat, asbab al-nuzul, iyjaz, gharayib, etc. but the above four are essential reading for anyone to understand how tafsir works.

disclaimer: i do not claim nor imagine myself to be a mufassir, in case someone accuses me of doing so.

---
the safest bet, is to rely on earlier mufassirin - cite an earlier mufassir instead of trying to strike a new path. and even if you do it, your tafsir should be consistent with sunni aqidah, fiqh and hadith. which means you must know enough of sunni aqidah, fiqh and hadith to detect any possible incompatibility.

-----
instead of trying to learn arabic and become a mufassir oneself (which will take dozens of years of dedicated study and a sharp mind to recollect and make the connections) - it is far more useful to read a reliable tafsir. and more important is to learn the correct aqidah - and read shifa to learn the right of the messenger SallALlahu alayhi wa sallam upon us.

wa billahi't tawfiq.

 

[Aqib alQadri]

some deobandi apologist for nouman apparently used tafsir tabari to explain nouman's blasphemy and hinged on the 'in a sense' that nouman inserted. ok smarty, what about the "converted, reverted, took shahadah" comparison? and thereafter the rest of the derisive piece - he calls 'tafseer'.

NAK's bottom line was that RasulAllah SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam became muslim - al iyadhu billah when the angel appeared.

===
shame on scoundrels who have no adab when talking about RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

---
View attachment 4266

View attachment 4267

the senseless donkey defending the rascal NAK is speaking non-sense.

the kufr of NAK is established even if he says "in a sense"; in no sense of the word can Rasul-Allah be ever considered to have "become a muslim" after receiving the first waHy. and NAK has uttered much, much worse before he said "in a sense" (he probably said it when he saw the shock on the faces of his audience). that does not absolve him from the crime.

the jaahils who are defending NAK have totally ignored the Hadeeth of Bukhari Shareef (referenced by brother abu Hasan) explaining how the waHy started which shows that it did NOT come "suddenly" to him.

Syedah Aisha Siddeeqah, the Mother of the believers, reported: The beginning of the revelation to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was in the form of good dreams which came true like bright daylight; then, the love of seclusion was bestowed upon him. He used to go in seclusion in the cave of Hira where he used to worship Allah continuously for many days until he desired to see his family. He would take with him food for the stay and then come back to his wife Khadija to take his food again, until the truth came to him while he was in the cave of Hira.

The truth came to him refers to the first revelation of the Qur'an through Jibreel (alayhe as-Salaam)

(Wahhabi rascals purposely mis-translate it "the truth suddenly came to him", although the first part itself makes it clear.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: molvi "abu Hafsah", deobandi brother in faith of NAK, inserted the words "you didn't have a clue about what" to purposely mis-translate the tafseer of Tabari. a standard deobandi sleight of hand.

may Allah ta'ala descend a sudden, violent punishment on these blasphemers, when they do not have a clue, when they have no idea what hit them.

 

[abu Hasan]

the event: "ma ana bi qariy"

in fat'h al-bari: [below is a summary, not verbatim transl.]
he was told thrice: 'read' and thrice he replied "ma ana bi qariy". so if one asks, why was the question repeated thrice, abu shamah offered the following explanation: " the first time "ma ana bi qari" means "i cannot read" [imtina'a]; the second time "i am not read (or reading) [nafy] and the third time: "what shall i read" [istifham].

that it was a question "what shall i read" is reinforced by a report from abi'l aswad in his maghazi narrates a report from urwah that corroborates this view, as the wording in that report says: "how shall i read" / "kayfa aqra'a". in a report ubayd ibn umayr from ibn is'haq: "what should i read" / "ma dha aqra'a?" in a mursal report of zuhri in dalayil al-nubuwwah of bayhaqi: "how shall is read" / "kayfa aqra'a".

all these reports bolster the view that the 'maa' is istifhamiyah (i.e. he said: 'what/how shall i read'?)

---

shaykh abd al-Haqq dihlawi explained this beautifully: [the persian text seems to be a poor scan that all the g's are showing as kaafs; guft is kuft...so be warned; am adding urdu translation ] ash'iatu'l lam'at, v4 p274:

the shaykh said:

"i cannot read" or "i am not able to read"

it is quite possible that he SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said this due to the appearance of the angel and an intense amazement and the gravity of the station and the fear [of the immensely important responsibility that was impending] upon his blessed heart. not because of the apparent reason that he SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was untaught [ummi].

because, an ummi or an untaught person cannot read by himself; but to read after someone [essentially, repeat someone else's words] is not difficult for an untaught person, particularly someone who is immensely eloquent and articulate person [khuSuSan az faSiH dar ghayat e faSaHat].

that which prevents [contravenes or negates] for a ummi is the skill of writing and to read something that is written.

in al-qamus it is written that ummi is a person who does not know how to write, or read something that is written.

in some narrations it is said, that jibril alayhi's salam came with ornate scroll [SaHifah] on silk brocade with jewels embedded in it, and handed to RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam and said: 'read'. at this RasulALlah SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: 'i cannot read that which is written on this; how can i read when i am not even looking at it'

this appears to be a more suitable explanation. Allah ta'ala knows best.

​

thus is the iHtiyat of ulama when discussing this delicate matter. not the way slovenly slobs talk about it, or uncouth clods explain it or grungy barbarians defend the boorish speech of dowdy gabbers.

la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.

​

below is the urdu trans. of ashiyatu'l lam'at by mawlana abdul hakim sharaf and mufti muhammad khan (vol.7 p.201)

 

[abu Hasan]

in ikmal al-mu'lim, qaDi iyad says under this very hadith:

there is no difference of opinion among research scholars that our Prophet SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, like all other prophets before their [announcement of] prophethood have their hearts [lit. bosoms] opened for monotheism [tawHid] and faith in Allah; it is not suitable that they should have any form of disbelief [in their faith] or doubt or even ignorant of it. nor is there any dispute concerning their immunity from it contrary to those who allowed it.​

 

[abu Hasan]

qaDi iyad's advice: read shifa.