should we promote Daniel Haqiqatjou?

[Unbeknown]

On the other hand, although I procrastinated on my promised review of DH, I think what everyone has said so far makes it totally unnecessary. The title of the thread can have only one reply - an emphatic no!

Sunni youth should be warned against taking any religious opinion from him. As for political commentary - I think that too is a danger-zone for the layman because its intertwined with religious ideas. It's a luxury that only those who are close to real ulama, and who can quickly get doubts clarified, should indulge in. Otherwise its a case of khatra-e-imaan.

wa Allahu a'alam

 

[Mohammed Nawaz]

istighatha issue -
in this video between 1:36:00 and 1:38:00 he says/implies that Imam Ahmad probably made an ijtihadi mistake and we have the freedom to choose from other imams like Nawawi or Suyuti (two names he did mention) coz we don't agree with his ijtihad on this issue. afaik, there's no evidence from Nawawi or Suyuti either that they held istighatha to be haram; that aside from the fact that Imam Ahmad is a much senior imam than them. (ps. just my luck i accidentally got to that part in this lengthy video)

Ibn al-Jawzi narrates that Ibn al-Muqri', al-Tabrānī and Abu al-Shaykh were hungry with no food. Ibn al-Muqri' stood up and said: Ya Rasūllulah, Hunger!
To which their call was answered by a man who came in and served them, having seen the Prophet ﷺ in a dream.

Along with Ibn al-Jawzī, al-Dhahabī,
al-Suyutī and al-Samhūdī also mention this narration.

Had it been Shirk, would they have attributed Shirk and Ridda to them and stayed quiet about it? Let alone mentioning it in a context of praise??

---------

Imam al-Nawawi (رَحِمَهُ ٱللَّٰهُ) mentions Utbi’s narration as proof in chapter of visiting the grave of Prophet and the Remembrance made there, in his book called “al-Adhkaar”:

He (Utbi) said: “As I was sitting by the grave of the Prophet, a Bedouin Arab came and said: “Peace be upon you, O Messenger of Allah! I have heard Allah saying: “If they had only, when they were unjust to themselves, come unto thee and asked Allah’s forgiveness, and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah indeed Oft-returning, Most Merciful” (4:64)..Then he recited these verses: “O, the most exalted among the buried people who improved the worth of the plains and the hillocks! May I sacrifice my life for this grave which is made radiant by you, (the Prophet,) the one who is (an embodiment) of mercy and forgiveness.” Then the bedouin went away and I fell asleep. In my dream I saw the Holy Prophet (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam). He said to me: O ‘Utbi, the bedouin is right, go and give him the good news that Allah has forgiven his sins.

[Imam Nawawi in Kitab ul Adhkaar, Page No. 179, Published by Dar ul Ma’rifah, Beirut, Lebanon].

Imam An-Nawawi placed this narration below the chapter titled, “Chapter: Regarding Visiting the Grave of Rasulullah (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam) and its Remembrances (adhkaar)”. The publisher “Dar-Al-Huda” from Riyadh, Saudia Arabia changed “Grave” to “Masjid” so as to make it seem one is not to visit the Prophet Muhammad (sal Allahu alayhi wasallam)’s grave.

 

[Khanah]

https://archive.org/details/fatawa_...wi ed - vol.14/page/263/mode/2up?view=theater

Check volume 14 of Fataawa Ridwiyyah, page 263- it is kufr to say a non Prophet is superior to a Prophet and this is from the matters necessarily known from the religion, linked as unsure how to paste a screenshot.

 

[AbdalQadir]

As for political commentary

actually i was thinking a lot about this part due to some other factors, and i was like - wait a minute! why aren't ulama of our times engaged in political commentary? seriously and heavily so?! i think by now we have all seen the pitfalls of ulama avoiding politics. i remember back in the 80's a lot of people chastised maududi and his jamat not for wahabism, but because he and his jamate islami dabbled into politics! in the post wwii, post independence era (not just desis, but worldwide) Muslims seemed to have either fallen for the separation of deen and politics axiom of the west, or decided that it's a vice they'd rather stay away from!

we have all seen the harmful effects of that (no political engagement by ulama) on the post 911 (started in 1990s) resurgence and comeback of active and unabashed colonialism from the west.

maybe this time around, we ought to push the ulama to do political commentaries and activism, that way we wouldn't need daniel or dilly hussein type commentators against the colonialists

Imam Fazle Haq Khairabadi gave a fatwa against the british. Ala Hazrat did commentary too and WARNED Muslims not to follow the bogus "leaders" and "reformers" who thought it's "jihad" to fight the british while joining hands with the mushrikeen. he gave apt political analyses of the hindustan of his day in his fatawa... shame not many people took heed.

ulama need to start issuing fatwas critical of evil tyrant rulers and colonial puppets. if they can't issue against the rulers of their country, maybe issue them against rulers of other nations... either way we got some brainstorming to do on the rapid resurgence of colonialism!

 

[AbdalQadir]

All I could see was a western academic doing what western academics do

i see your glass half empty stance. i'd like to go with my half full one. i think we're both on the same page and make sense on that.

You don't write such a paper overnight

of course. it's a well thought out and researched piece. when i said egotistical weak moment - i implied the moment he fell into their trap and took the bait... from then on he planned the rest of his actions, responses etc to defend himself

It's not easy to write off one's relatives as kafirs going to hell. So maybe he has been researching and coming up with his own justifications for their being Muslims. wa Allahu a'alam.

yes i see that, but for that he'd need a blanket takfeer of all 12'ers (just as qadianis have from a-z) to wish and hope and try for such justifications.

as far as i know, no wahabi or Sunni or devbandi makes that kind of takfeer on 12'ers - saying that any and every single ithna3ashari is kafir!
hence the penning down of that piece and cornering zameel - tell me zameel! do you hold any and all 12'ers to be kafirs?
(mark hanson, the master of deception and cowardice, said that there's no blanket takfeer of ANY group when a qadiani prodded him!)

incidentally, 12'ers hold ALL ismailis to be kafir. the pakistani ones even say that in 1974, ismailis played some dirty politics otherwise they too were on track to be declared apostates and non Muslim minorities along with qadianis. where i live ismailis, are more infiltrated into Sunnis, wahabis, and devbandis than 12'ers! it's surprising that he mentioned that ibn taymiyyah said that perhaps some ismaili common people are Muslims - when at least for present day ismailis it's well known they don't even believe in the pillars of salah and fasting and hajj and zakat, maybe the ismailis of ibn taymiyyah's days were different!

---

aside-

anyways, yes people these days are of course not sahaba, so that could well be an active or dormant reason. i've had my share of arguments with real or perceived born Muslims and converts and the topic of deceased kafirs and invoking mercy on them.

i guess in the west, the converts are entitled to white/black privilege. many real or perceived born Muslims do their part to be "kind". i've been told to say "Allahu a3lam" when saying if deceased kafirs go to hell or not, so that it doesn't pique some fancy convert's feelings. remember, we're commanded to (بشِّروا ولا تنفِّروا)? didn't Prophet 3alaihis salam tell the Muslims not to taunt abu jahl's sons when they entered Islam? so how dare we tell a convert it's kufr to pray for a deceased kafir or that Allah promised those who die on kufr jahannam?

i've dealt with enough people like that with all sorts of results - having seen converts with integrity who value deen, as well as trash cans who are drunk on their colonial attitudes and think they've done a favor to Islam by becoming Muslims and despite knowing full too well, become murtads by deliberately praying for their deceased kafir parents/relos and dragging other brown skinned mureeds with them into their apostasy by chanting "yes brother, aameen, may Allah forgive your [relative]" (buried in christian graveyard with a cross on it!)

bro, we're living in times when wahabis and devbandis take part in the "bid3ah" of Quran-khwani for deceased ismailis (who themselves don't do it), coz remember we can't turn their convert sons/daughters (desis) away from Islam! if i didn't see it myself, i wouldn't believe it. so imagine how much people will fawn over western converts!

 

[AbdalQadir]

I see the paper as a hotchpotch of shi'i ignorance, wahhabi stupidity, DIY ijtihad and over-reliance on orientalist interpretations of technical/terse sufi works. He concocts rules out of thin air then builds a mountain over it. At times it felt as if he is a shi'i mole infiltrating Salafi circles to soften the wahhabi youth towards Iran/Shi'ites.

having finally completed reading the article i see better what you say. i had read the first half and the conclusion prior to this.

despite the fact that he still has symptoms of salafiism from past life, like thinking he or others might have better ijtihad than Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal's. we should pray to Allah he recovers fully and these symptoms too disappear!

after completing it i'm compelled to say that those symptoms of salafiism are stronger than i thought... the strongest one being trying to justify and vindicate oneself... so much so that one makes extremely bizarre arguments like iran shah and his tafzili buddies, in fact at times it felt like i was reading a pseudo-intellectual diatribe on yanabi from the old days!

 

[AbdalQadir]

This is the zameel's article that daniel is responding to - where zameel's saying every prophet is greater than every nonprophet.

https://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/1102/superiority-prophets-over-non

---

This is another article where zameel is dancing around nanotvi's diatribes -

https://barelwism.wordpress.com/202...say-followers-are-equal-to-prophets-in-deeds/

 

[Unbeknown]

This is the zameel's article that daniel is responding to - where zameel's saying every prophet is greater than every nonprophet.

https://ahlussunnah.boards.net/thread/1102/superiority-prophets-over-non

in that case, to Daniel's other faults, we will have to add inability or refusal to read what is clearly spelled out even by his shady friends (who usually avoid writing clearly to keep escape hatches open).
When one flies from Ibn Taymiyyah all the way to Ibn e Arabi just to have a straw to clutch at - it shows their desperation and/or willful blindness.

wa Allahu a'alam

 

[AbdalQadir]

political commentary

i once suggested an outlandish fantasy of mine to some Sunni Pakistani ulama (not a part of both these jamats), and they pretty much said, 'nope, not gonna happen. both these jamats are different in their objectives and modus operandi.'

i suggested a "merger" of DI and TLP - in order to maximize the delivery of Sunniyat to the common man as well as for ambitious political power pursuits.

i still think it's a good idea, specially for Sunni power in Pakistan, and may even start a global revolution against western colonialism, with desi Sunnis leading the way!

 

[Mohammed Nawaz]

i once suggested an outlandish fantasy of mine to some Sunni Pakistani ulama (not a part of both these jamats), and they pretty much said, 'nope, not gonna happen. both these jamats are different in their objectives and modus operandi.'

i suggested a "merger" of DI and TLP - in order to maximize the delivery of Sunniyat to the common man as well as for ambitious political power pursuits.

i still think it's a good idea, specially for Sunni power in Pakistan, and may even start a global revolution against western colonialism, with desi Sunnis leading the way!

This is a bad take for several reasons

1. DI is not just active in Pakistan but operates globally. If it were to join politics or take a political stand, it would inevitably attract scrutiny from various state governments. For example, consider the Udaipur incident, which led DI to establish a separate organization or committee to oversee its operations in India. DI's department even promotes nationalism in its teachings and madrasas to avoid unnecessary attention.

2. Merging two entities with distinct lifestyles or ideologies may seem achievable due to a shared goal, but differences in methodology and tolerance for alternative approaches would likely lead to infighting before long.

3.Many Muslims still perceive TLP as a fringe political group that occasionally protests blasphemy issues. Associating DI with TLP could alienate those who currently support DI, damaging its reputation.

I could list a few more reasons, but this idea, while noble in intent, seems impractical at the moment. It would be better to avoid such a merger for now.

 

[AbdalQadir]

sad that his aqidah has to be so messed up and he didn't study with proper Sunnis (deliberately or by luck)... regardless of Barelwis from the subcontinent, the guy has made it abundantly clear that he knows enough about Asharis and Sufis, to manage to investigate further and arrive to the truth in an unbiased fashion, as a - Muslim SKEPTIC

i still think we use people like this for anti-colonial political activism... it's good he has made his manhaj clear so people can make an informed decision on him either way.

 

[AbdalQadir]

useful for others, not for himself

 

[AbdalQadir]

this idea, while noble in intent, seems impractical at the moment.

i could have argued about it if Allamah Khadim Hussein rahimahullah was alive (when i originally suggested it). Allah's Will that He took him away. i'm too much tuned out of Pakistani politics to know what exactly is going on right now and how any party is doing.

 

[Unbeknown]

View attachment 9841

sad that his aqidah has to be so messed up and he didn't study with proper Sunnis (deliberately or by luck)... regardless of Barelwis from the subcontinent, the guy has made it abundantly clear that he knows enough about Asharis and Sufis, to manage to investigate further and arrive to the truth in an unbiased fashion, as a - Muslim SKEPTIC

i still think we use people like this for anti-colonial political activism... it's good he has made his manhaj clear so people can make an informed decision on him either way.

majority of sunni scholars today, and arguably in the past

do you see that sweeping statement - without bothering to present any evidence? did you notice a whole cavalcade of them in that notorious paper?

Even though x-salafi yasir qadhi went on record saying that the majority of past and present scholars did istigatha of the "barailwi" flavor.

that is his usual way - since the start - whatever he feels is correct, automatically becomes the majority view - possibly, arguably, most likely, demonstrably, evidently, certainly, rightly, without a doubt ....

that was one of the points I was going to raise - he just presents his view as the default - sometimes the only view on the table - which is a subtle psychological trick - because then the reader tries to fit himself into one of the two-three categories mentioned and is forced to side with him!

Like if you watch a debate between a Christian and an Atheist - you know the atheist is wrong by default, so if you are not careful, you will find yourself nodding your head to some Christian kufr. Or if you are reading a story or a news piece in which one party is grossly immoral and the other an oppressor, unless you identify with the immoral character you can't enjoy or even relate to the story.

The fallacy of false dilemma.

The fight between good-and-evil often has no good side - but that takes time to process and active thinking. Like how people will swing between Left-Right, Russia-USA camps depending on the matter at hand and fail to grasp that there are no good guys.

Hence, this is another reason to warn Sunnis against DH - he uses subtle tricks - deliberately or otherwise, to force people to agree with his narrative.

 

[Alf]

majority of sunni scholars today, and arguably in the past

You are right in exposing him for this, but from the glass "half full" perspective as brother AbdalQadir mentioned, he is actually going against wahabis entirely here. ALL wahabi "scholars" say asking madad from the prophet is shirk, and when he says majority of Sunni scholars deem it haram and not shirk, it looks like he is calling out the wahabis as non sunnis, and perhaps even khawarij. So from being a "salafi" who had to defend himself and prove his credentials as a "salafi" before a wahabi congregation to labelling all of them as non sunni is a big step in the right direction. So based on this, I feel that if sunnis approached him and helped him in his research, who knows, he might abandon his wrong positions and become sunni himself in the future.

 

[Unbeknown]

Muslim SKEPTIC

that is another skin-deep label. Initially I thought he was a true researcher at heart - which I define as: the person follows the evidence wherever it leads, giving up deeply held beliefs in the process, if required.

However, DH turned out to be a skeptic only against his foes, not his friends, as if one change of garbs (which now looks incomplete as well) was more than enough for a lifetime.

Were I to squeeze my review of DH in one word it would probably be - disappointing. He over-promised and under-delivered.

---

Another such "researcher" is Dr. William Lane Craig - who I used to respect for his candid and professional admission of debt to the scholars of Kalam for his seminal contribution to modern religious studies - the KCA.

All that respect evaporated in the first few minutes of his elocution during his debate with M. Hijaab. As the debate progressed further I could not believe my ears - someone so scholarly and talented can act so prejudiced, and frankly, stupid. One has to see it to believe it.

It's one of those reminders - never trust anyone unless you have studied them for decades and found them fair and consistent - at the least.

And Allah knows best.

 

[Unbeknown]

but from the glass "half full" perspective as brother AbdalQadir mentioned, he is actually going against wahabis entirely here. ALL wahabi "scholars" say asking madad from the prophet is shirk, and when he says majority of Sunni scholars deem it haram and not shirk, it looks like he is calling out the wahabis as non sunnis, and perhaps even khawarij.

but brother, whatever he says, he has to provide evidence!

And his refusal to fully identify with wahabis may not be entirely due to some 'transformative journey to truth' that he is supposed to be traversing - it might entirely be an old old carefully considered position, for very different reasons (hint: shi'as do all that 'shirki' istigatha too).

You should also consider that there exist devvie groups who are as anti-wahabi as any tanatan Sunni. And so are shi'ahs.

I for one consider his latest paper a long delayed 'coming out'.

So from being a "salafi" who had to defend himself and prove his credentials as a "salafi" before a wahabi congregation to labelling all of them as non sunni is a big step in the right direction

Was that a strategic move? He has recently said that he felt 'humiliated' by 'wahabi-friends'. Why did he not tell that aloud then? Waiting to gain enough followers before he could afford to go his own way? Are we seeing the birth of a part-shi'a-part-salafi chimera?

Time will tell.

May Allah guide him to bonafide Sunni Islam.

wa Allahu a'alam

 

[AbdalQadir]

Even though x-salafi yasir qadhi went on record saying that the majority of past and present scholars did istigatha of the "barailwi" flavor.

wow. you got a link? i probably missed it.

that is his usual way - since the start - whatever he feels is correct, automatically becomes the majority view - possibly, arguably, most likely, demonstrably, evidently, certainly, rightly, without a doubt ....

this is the usual way for anyone raised in USA. everyone is so confident about their positions on anything it's anything from comical to scary.

The fight between good-and-evil often has no good side - but that takes time to process and active thinking. Like how people will swing between Left-Right, Russia-USA camps depending on the matter at hand and fail to grasp that there are no good guys.

He over-promised and under-delivered.

what did he promise? lectures of aqidah? bayat at the hands of a Sunni shaykh? what did he deliver?

this was my point from the beginning. we just live our lives in real time and in the anti-colonialism framework, we use him or others like him in the right context.

so yeah, my reason for this post was not to be his defense advocate or a fanboy. most of us on this forum are a more experienced than that

maybe it's our desi attitude of wanting all or nothing out of life and people.

though i agree that everyone has their own subjective judgments on people. i can't bring myself to supporting that rafidi mehdi hassan, but then again, his supposedly "anti-colonial" narrative is pretty much a western woke leftist narrative.

I for one consider his latest paper a long delayed 'coming out'.

1. could well be. within the context of the members of this forum, irfan shah's about face was much more surprising than this.

2. the anti-istighatha stance could also be the influence of devbandis or his Egyptian wife. Egyptian common public, if they're "skeptic" of the puppet establishment, admire Qutub (a wahabi the madkhalis themselves promoted when they needed him, and now suddenly he's a khariji hate-monger).
i had alluded to regarding the general Arab scholars who share his worldview, as well as the kind of scholars the awam has access to, right in post # 2 of this thread (specially true for Egyptians, in my observation; could be right or wrong)

in my observation he's drawn to the Arab scholar crowd that is similar to his own temperament - iT fans who are respectful and accepting of Asharis AND also oppose modernism and colonial hegemony (in fact this crowd is ostracized by the madkhalis who for all their love of the west and liberal tolerance and pluralism, accuse these guys of making peace with grave-worshiper mushrikeen! go figure!)

this is my own observation of Arab scholars, i may be wrong - the bulk majority of those whom the awam has access to, are Asharis who are soft on ibn Taymiyyah followers; or ibn Taymiyyah followers who are soft on Asharis (lets say 80% are these neutral all-rounder types) - the tanatan Asharis/Maturidis Sufis (example) are a very small number (lets say 8%), the ghatiya, paleed, ibn othaimeen, ibn baz types who hate Sunnis are a somewhat larger percentage than the tanatan Sufis (12% lets say), but diminishing very rapidly, ... even many of those who cite othaimeen or albani, remain tight lipped about Sunnis now

3. could also be a strategic "middle path" sort of thing to consolidate the personal branding and fanbase. you go full on Sunni, you turn the wahabis AND SHIAS against you in a heartbeat. you go full on wahabi, you turn the shias against you in a heartbeat and Sunnis/Asharis (common people) against you in one-two heartbeats. you go full on shia, you lose wahabis and Sunnis in half a heartbeat. it's a safer bet to position yourself as a generalist of sorts.

4. could also be anything else we're not thinking of.

nonetheless it certainly showed willful or unwitting ignorance to the positions of the scholars he was citing. eg. Ibn Abidin's position on those who cuss the Shaykhayn specifically.

Time will tell.

yes.

this could be a one-off exposition of his personal manhaj as he was cornered by madkhalis. for the most part (afaik), so far his personal theology was out of politics

(this time around it was not just him, but a lot of us worldwide, due to the recent nazi genocide in Gaza and the hand the shia have been playing all along. they say they're on the Palestinian side, but we will know in the next 2 to 3 months what their short-term game plan is vis a vis Palestine, just crocodile tears to lure in Sunnis, or anything else)

could be part of a journey from anti-colonialism influencer --> real or perceived sheikh of xyz sect

remember nouman ali khan - from youtube comedian --> ustadh --> motivational speaker --> "mufassir" & ummahpreneur making $ 10 M/year)

could be part of a journey from all american secular shia to salafi to reformist to [now] to future proper Sunni.

he could also stay static on his current personal manhaj plus public denouncing of the empire

Allah knows his personal journey and we wish him and ourselves and everyone else to be on Ahlus Sunnah and the best.

---

we have all seen mark hanson's journey from wahabi days trashing the west to Ashari to a full blown lobbyist for the powers that be

ali jifry / yaqoubi going from Sunni du3at to puppets of more than one entities

nuh keller going from a respected Shadhili shaykh to being cast under the spell of not just devbandis, but also the above mentioned puppets of the empire

iran shah going from theologically anti-paqs to solemn mureed and endorser

harun yahya (adnan oktar) from being an anti-evolutionist pan-Islamist to a pan-turkic to a holocaust denier to an outright pervert & sex criminal and a demagogue making insinuations of him being Mehdi to being accused of treasonous espionage

on the other hand, we've also seen people who are a bit more stable in their right or wrong persuasions.

we ask Allah to make our journeys and theirs end on the right path.

 

[al-Boomah]

I procrastinated on my promised review of DH, I think what everyone has said so far makes it totally unnecessary.

I too was going to write a review about DH, however it looks like everybody on this website, and on many of the social media circles, have now seen the reality of DH. I also remember writing a refutation of some of DH's deviant views and connections, around 2 years ago- what is strange is that he has changed his views so much it almost looks like my refutation was against another person entirely. This is a refutation by some liberal-type Madkhali of the old DH: Daniel Haqiqatjou & the Extremists You Never Knew - YouTube

I remember someone saying something along the lines of "if only we had made DH our man against liberalism", well if he had become a Sunni, just imagine right now what Wahhabis like Mr. Brancatella would be saying- just hear what he says after 24:15 in this video: Daniel Haqiqatjou Defends the Kufr and Shirk of the Shi'a? - YouTube. The Devs it seems are very unhappy with Daniel's views on the Shia and they have become a laughingstock: Dan is currently engaged in a Telegram war with the Bradford Deobandis. | X Cancelled. I would link their telegram channel, but it contains so much rubbish it's best that I don't.

 

[al-Boomah]

wow. you got a link? i probably missed it

Here: Majority Of Scholars Endorse Istigatha And Tawassul - Yasir Qadhi. This video seems to contain something that sounds like music at times- you have been warned.