Mufti Fazl Chisti and his critics

[abu Hasan]

i agree with some of his positions but some others are moronic.

some of objections that he has raised can't be brushed

i have always said that politics is dirty business and ulama should keep out of it. if at all they need to get involved, they should stop at giving guidance and explaining sharayi limits.

that said, throwing takfir freely is the method of khawarij.

namely the rabid shias; he never called for actions against blasphemers like shias

he should have; if he did not, that does not mean he loved them. only morons will make that deduction.
now fazal chishti should speak against every insulter there is in the world, and every topic that is. else what should we take him to be?

why "Ya Rasullullah" was dropped from Tahreek's name?

personally, i do not like the names of RasulAllah and sahabah in movements of today, because kafirs and enemies abuse those names. just like the kalimah tayyibah in saudi flag. it should be removed. else, you end up like the kalimah flying alongside swedish and danish flags with the cross!

 

[sherkhan]

I am not condoning Mufti Fazl Chishti's name calling (which Mufti Aslam Bandyalwi also referred to in the other video). I just paraphrased the long video for ease of users here.

If he has strong views against democracy, jinnah, modern schooling etc., then he is welcome to maintain his stance. Calling non-compatible views as kufr etc. (although he explicitly says he doesn't consider Mawlana Khadim Rizwi as kafir) is seriously wrong and unbecoming of any aalim.

Notice how Dr Ashraf Jalali dismisses him as "some Chishti with a sing-song voice". It's hard to command respect when you don't accord respect to others. I had the feeling from the outset of following Fazl Chishti's bayaans over last few months that he was a divisive figure who was on the fringes.

Even though AlaHazrat disapproved of muslim leaders' participation in Congress-led movement, he never stooped to name-calling even the politicians, let alone label them as kafirs etc. If Mufti Fazl claims to be following the footsteps of AlaHazrat, then he too should desist from making takfir on trivial issues.

 

[AbdalQadir]

(4) democracy/jamhooriyat is an anathema to core Islamic values and invariably jamhooriyat does lapse into secularism and becomes antithetic to Islam. Mufti Fazl cites Fatwa Bareilly Sharif to support his point.

Ironically, Khadim Hussein Sahab more or less agreed with him.

In this interview, he clearly says Islam is against jumhooriyat (at least the Pakistani style) and we are only using it as a tool to achieve our aims:

 

[AbdalQadir]

I'd also be very curious of his (FC) opinion on Shah Ahmed Noorani sahib who used Pakistan's jumhoori system and got the law passed in the parliament to officially declare qadianis kafirs.

 

[abu Hasan]

Ironically, Khadim Hussein Sahab more or less agreed with him.

no sane person will say that islam is compatible with present form of democracy where na-ahl people can be elected only if they have mindless awaam 'vote' for them.

when the ship is wrecked, and you are drowning, using lifeboats or hanging on to floating timber is not a choice. standing on the deck of a sinking ship, making a grand speech on how robust ships are and why using lifeboats are not the right choice for sailing the seas are not actions of wise men.

democracy on paper might look good, but in practice it is deeply flawed - and we have seen it in all its glory in the US elections. they can be rigged and THEY ARE RIGGED. the system is openly gamed and a pretense of 'for the people, by the people' and a facade of 'equality, liberty, brotherhood' is maintained.

neither are governments - so called democracies - for the people or by the people; nor is there true equality or fraternite.

---
but we have to navigate through this system. muslims need to be disabused of their jahalat and their pining for this 'taraqqi'. personally, i don't think it will happen until imam mahdi appears.

one of the pre-conditions for imam mahdi's arrival is that there will not be muslim rule anywhere in the world. the world will be ruled by christians.

khadim husayn rizwi sahib - may Allah forgive him and have mercy upon him - wanted to rekindle the zeal and iman of the Sahabah from a people far removed from their time!

in a hadith of tirmidhi: "you (sahabah) are in a time if you abandon 1/10th of what you are commanded, you will perish; there will come a time on my ummah, when they will be saved if they manage to fulfill 1/10th of what they are commanded." [hadith slightly reworded]

one has to be realistic.

 

[Noori]

I'd also be very curious of his (FC) opinion on Shah Ahmed Noorani sahib who used Pakistan's jumhoori system and got the law passed in the parliament to officially declare qadianis kafirs.

curious about stupid and aberrant opinions? do we need proof for outright nonsense?

 

[AbdalQadir]

imam mahdi's arrival

Afaik, Imam Suyuti guesstimated it to be around 1425 hijri, Ala Hazrat to around 1841

With the current situation and world affairs, Allahu a3lam how far we are from that time, and how much further south things will head.

 

[sherkhan]

i have always said that politics is dirty business and ulama should keep out of it. if at all they need to get involved, they should stop at giving guidance and explaining sharayi limits.

There are several sobering examples of political forays which didn't end up well. For instance, Allama Hamid Saeed Kazmi ended up being falsely implicated for corruption.