Generalisation and individualization allow for a balanced and full understanding of a topic while offering a contrasting perspective. Individualization recognises unique conditions and various perspectives, whilst generalizations assist find trends and patterns.
A quick search on platforms like YouTube reveals numerous videos where certain individuals [I won't name them out of respect], including some scholars, have engaged in derogatory remarks towards Mufti Akmal.
Instead than launching personal assaults, the emphasis should be on addressing the specific topic at hand, offering scholarly arguments, and providing references to back up one's position.
It is crucial to remember that a few faults (which should be remedied) overwhelm Mufti Akmal's wider body of work and achievements. Regardless of disagreements or differences, it is critical to recognise and respect the beneficial influence and vital knowledge he has contributed within the Sunni community.
If a position such as Abu Bakr al-Siddiq's afzaliyyat is held, jumhur will take one out of the fold of Ahle Sunnah wa Jamaat. Then this is a significant matter, and scholars are determined to hold him accountable and inform awam [lay people] of his deviation. which Syed Zulfiqar Shah did correctly.
Rather than making assumptions or relying on personal impressions, it is beneficial to engage with scholarly works and sources directly to assess the depth of a scholar's knowledge. Constructive criticism and scholarly discussions should focus on the substance of their arguments and teachings, rather than making sweeping judgments based on isolated incidents or personal biases.
Perhaps you didn't understand the position mufti akmal was taking when he said that some people will try to do their own ijtihad and draw conclusions from one book, whereas there are numberical hanafi fiqh books like Radd al-Muhtar and Fatawa e hindiyya, that muftis use to make a decision and write a fatwa. Furthermore, BeS does not explain any usool, therefore one cannot grasp how to do ijtihad.
It may be ideal for a scholar to explicitly mention and praise all relevant sources, it is not always feasible or practical to do so within the context of their speeches, lectures, or discussions. Mufti Akmal, like other scholars, may assume that his audience is familiar with foundational writings and expects them to turn to comprehensive works alongside.
He undermines it and still refers to it in many of his ahkam e shariat. That is, without a doubt, hypocritical!!
I brought this up because several scholars were debating it without keeping husn e dhan. For example, mufti saheb from the UK stated that if an expert in fiqh of your generation wrote anything, you should not criticise it. In another video, a scholar stated that the fact that these lines of poetry were composed by Tajusharia is proof enough that they are correct.
I'm no scholar, I'd like to see your whole rebuttal, and if this one issue makes him a deviant or you can establish he's practising sulah kulli, I'll stand corrected.
