Owais Qadri Issue: on 'franchise'

A

AR Ahmed

Veteran
Mufti Qasim Zia seems to be insistent that owais qadri has done gustakhi:




Here is the view of sayyid zulfiqar shah sahib:
 
Last edited:
Owais Qadri's wazahat nama and tauba


Peace be upon you – السلام علیکم
This humble and sinful servant, Muhammad Owais Raza Qadri Barkati Rizvi, by the grace of Allah, has been honored to recite the praises of the Beloved Prophet ﷺ for nearly 43 years. The world largely knows me through the poetry of Ala Hazrat.
Recently, while on a tour of the UK—not in Pakistan or India where Urdu speakers are common—I was addressing an English-speaking audience. In that gathering, while speaking about the generosity of the Prophet ﷺ, I explained a line from Kalam-e-Raza:
“Saath hi Munshi-e-Rehmat ka Qalmdan gaya.”
To help them understand, I said:
“Look, when a person owns something, they often hesitate—should I give it or not? But my Beloved Prophet ﷺ, SubhanAllah, his generosity is such that wherever he gives, he establishes a franchise there. Meaning: he authorises that person.”
I further clarified:
“It is like saying: this area is yours, take care of it—you have been made the representative here.”
Some people objected to my use of the word franchise in that clip. Due to my busy schedule in Rabi-ul-Awwal, I could not consult many scholars, but I did present the matter to two great scholars:
* Mufti Muhammad Raza Khan Qadri Rizvi (Darul Uloom Manzar-e-Islam, Bareilly Sharif), and
* Mufti Nizamuddin Rizvi Misbahi (Jamia Ashrafia, Mubarakpur, India).
Both of them issued fatawa (religious rulings).
—————
The Issue:
Haji Owais Raza Qadri used the word ‘franchise’ in a speech, and some people objected.
The Response:
The word ‘franchise’ literally means ‘permission, authority, or privilege.’ If it is used to mean that the Prophet ﷺ appointed leaders and representatives in different regions, then it is perfectly correct, and there is no issue in Islamic law.
Principles:
1. If a phrase has 99 incorrect meanings and 1 correct meaning, it must be understood according to the correct meaning.
2. A Muslim cannot be declared sinful or blasphemous unless his intention and words clearly prove it.
3. We are commanded to think well of fellow believers. Imam Malik (رحمه الله) said: “If a statement of a Muslim can be taken in 99 ways as disbelief and in one way as faith, it must be taken as faith.”
————-
Summary:
* Owais Raza Qadri used the word ‘franchise’ in its correct and permissible sense.
* Those who object should apply this principle and avoid harsh judgments.
* Unity of the Ummah lies in interpreting doubtful words positively, not divisively.
The respected scholar, Allama Mufti Nizamuddin Rizvi of Mubarakpur, India, issued a fatwa, which is in the possession of Hazrat Allama Maulana Muhammad Nizamuddin Misbahi of Blackburn.
Both scholars did not issue any harsh ruling, let alone declaring it blasphemy. They considered the word permissible.
However, Mufti Nizamuddin Rizvi Misbahi of Mubarakpur offered excellent advice: since to Urdu speakers the word may sound unpleasant, such expressions should be avoided, in light of the Hadith: “Avoid that which the ears dislike.” Therefore, inshaAllah, I will refrain from using this word in the future.
As for repentance—Allah loves repentance. It has always been my habit at the end of every gathering to say: “If in recitation, explanation, or understanding, any mistake occurred, I repent before Allah.” So once again, I sincerely repent before Allah:
Astaghfirullaha Rabbi min kulli dhanbin wa atoobu ilayh.
May Allah forgive me and all my Sunni brothers, and may He allow us to serve His religion together. Ameen, by the honor of the Beloved Prophet ﷺ.
Your humble servant,
Muhammad Owais Raza Qadri Barkati Rizvi
Dated: 3rd September 2025
 
AR Ahmed said:
Mufti Qasim Zia seems to be insistent that owais qadri has done gustakhi:
Click to expand...

i was informed of this issue about owais qadri using the word 'franchise' and the brouhaha surrounding it.

---
owais used this word to mean 'generosity'. clearly he does not seem to be an english speaker and at any rate, not at the level of a native speaker. as the context is clear - he used this word as he understood it, and as he explained it in urdu which is not at all disrespectful in THAT context. it is clear from his clip (which is now controversial) that he used the word for the meaning as he understood it.

hence, it is neither gustakhi, nor any hukm can be attached to it. secondly, the word in itself is not that abhorrent or disrespectful; such as the word "illiterate," which has extremely negative connotations.

however, since this word can be unsuitable (na-munasib) due to its implications - it should be avoided.

owais should issue a statement thus: "i used the word "franchise" and i did not know the implication of the word. i thought that it means 'opening a branch' - that is an extension of his generosity. i will avoid this word in the future."

and get done with it.

---
ulama who do not speak or understand english should not state their opinion based on english-urdu dictionaries or based on the translation/interpretation of engineers, professionals, doctors, etc ostensibly taken as "english-daan hazarat".

---
i saw the clip of shah sahib and while he is reasonable, he has mixed up the meaning of 'franchise' as in 'voting rights' 'exercising their franchise' with the 'franchise' in the meaning owais has used ("opening a franchise"). i was surprised to learn that some mufti sb. extended this to mean: 'giving nubuwwat' - and am curious to know which mufti sb. said this and where did he say this and on what basis he has said this.

i saw the shorter clip of mufti qasim and didn't find anything useful. he was probably justifying his own fatwa (i assume) and in the absence of the original fatwa, this clip does not make sense to me. so i tried the longer video. apparently, it is a rejoinder to the clip by zulfiqar shah sahib so i would still not understand whats happening here.

in the second clip mufti qasim's citing the fatwa of alahazrat regarding the word "yateem" is out of place. using the word 'franchise' is not the same as using a disrespectful word as 'yateem'. the analogy is simply false.

mufti qasim is over reacting and he is mis-applying alahazrat's fatwa on owais. in fact, i couldn't help but notice, that he struggles to read the fatwa and skips some words or misreads some others. it could be in his excitement, but the important thing is this is his very premise is incorrect to apply this fatwa. use of the word 'franchise' is not insulting per se; it is not the same as using 'anparh' or 'yateem' or 'faqeer' or 'bechara'.

he has to first establish that the word 'franchise' is insulting, before he can cite alahazrat's fatwa as proof for his argument.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

---
it is no secret that i am not a fan of owais - and long time members of this forum know that i have been a critic for decades. from his behaviour on-stage to commercialising and glamorising naat, we have criticised owais. he is a good artist and for better or worse, he has helped transform a solemn activity to an art form and a halal entertainment business, which has unfortunately led to replacement of wa'az and tilawat gatherings with na'at gatherings.

some views about owais here:

https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/fazail-of-the-stage.15888/#post-82881
https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/owais-qadri-website.1731/
https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/charging-for-deeni-khidmaat.4998/#post-13473
 
Last edited:
AR Ahmed said:
1. If a phrase has 99 incorrect meanings and 1 correct meaning, it must be understood according to the correct meaning.
Click to expand...
this is either incorrectly phrased or poorly translated.

if a word with multiple implications and connotations - and 99 of which may be incorrect [that is meaning that tantamounts to kufr], but one of them is correct, we should lean towards the one correct meaning [i.e. not kufr] - so long as there are no indications that the speaker has intended to use one of the 99 incorrect meanings.

AR Ahmed said:
2. A Muslim cannot be declared sinful or blasphemous unless his intention and words clearly prove it.
Click to expand...
this is not absolute. the excuse of absence of intention is not acceptable in explicit words.

AR Ahmed said:
Imam Malik (رحمه الله) said: “If a statement of a Muslim can be taken in 99 ways as disbelief and in one way as faith, it must be taken as faith.”
Click to expand...
not absolute again and only when the statement is not explicit.
but the essence of the statement is, we must strive to give the benefit of doubt and exercise caution.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

AR Ahmed said:
The word ‘franchise’ literally means ‘permission, authority, or privilege.’
Click to expand...
i do not know which dictionary was consulted to arrive at this conclusion.

franchise has two broad meanings:

1. permission to carry out a commercial activity, usually a franchiser granting permission to franchisee for a share of profit.

2. the right to vote as in "adult franchise". (i am sure owais was not even thinking of it, nor did he even know that the word has this meaning)

unfortunately, urdu speaking ulama seem to misunderstand both by taking only a portion of the word. the first, as "permission" ignoring the commercial aspect in which it is commonly used. and the second, "right" dropping the "to vote" portion.

(i have seen the urdu text of this translated statement/fatawa)

----
AR Ahmed said:
* Owais Raza Qadri used the word ‘franchise’ in its correct and permissible sense.
Click to expand...
this is wrong. the word franchise almost always commercial. a license to sell the product or service for a fee.

AR Ahmed said:
“If in recitation, explanation, or understanding, any mistake occurred, I repent before Allah.” So once again, I sincerely repent before Allah: Astaghfirullaha Rabbi min kulli dhanbin wa atoobu ilayh.
Click to expand...
alHamdulillah. may Allah ta'ala accept from us and from him.
 
Anwar.H said:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/3170361669805525/
Click to expand...
some things are fine but the speaker here is over-reacting. and the speaker in the next clip is labeled as "mufti azam europe" but this is the first time i have seen him or heard him or heard about him.
---
Anwar.H said:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/802160408843388/
Click to expand...
most of it is personal and his extrapolation that franchise would mean that "it is an attack on khatm nubuwwat" is an extreme negative ta'wil!
 
abu Hasan said:
some things are fine but the speaker here is over-reacting. and the speaker in the next clip is labeled as "mufti azam europe" but this is the first time i have seen him or heard him or heard about him.
Click to expand...
I hope it was clear, and I know he is wearing a different style of head covering in each video, but both clips are actually of the same person. The second clip is in response to people's reactions to his first clip, where apparently many people were requesting him to take the video down.
 
Anwar.H said:
but both clips are actually of the same person.
Click to expand...
yes that is obvious, but when i said "the speaker in the next clip" i meant, "the speaker says in the next clip - and is labeled as "mufti azam..."

---
his extrapolation is absurd because a franchiser does not give away the business to the franchisee nor make them a partner in the traditional sense. the franchiser only lends its name to the business for a fee. so the franchisee capitalises on the name and brand of the franchiser, such that in spite of being responsible for operating the business, it is seen as a 'part' of the overall franchise. also, the franchisee is bound to follow rules and restrictions imposed by the franchiser.

thus, the word becomes unpalatable because the franchiser stands to benefit and make financial gains by granting license to the franchisee.

---
if you take out the financial part - as an analogy or metaphor, even though i do not like to describe it thus - the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is the owner of the 'franchise' (metaphorically, islam) - and all franchisees adhere to the rules and regulations and become a 'part' of the franchise, and deliver the product/service according to the specifications and standards of the franchiser. except in this case, the franchisee does not give anything in return to the franchiser; instead it enjoys all the privileges and benefits of being a part of this franchise.

i reiterate that i do not like such analogies - but i am trying to clarify and demonstrate that it is not as bad or even offensive as some people are making it out to be.

Allah ta'ala knows best.
 
masha Allah brother Abu Hasan gave comprehensive analysis to everything.

this Mufti Mushahid Hussein Sahib said it without naming names and this needs to be said - fatwa should only be given by sahib-e-fatwa mufti, and imo, Dr. Qasim Zia sahib doesn't act like it by a long shot. this utter incompetence masked by the name of Ala Hazrat or Fatawa Ridawiyya needs to be called out for what it is.

 
i don’t know about india, but particularly in pakistan, as soon as the students graduate from the madrasa, they become muftis, even though they cannot properly read the text.
 
Noori said:
i don’t know about india, but particularly in pakistan, as soon as the students graduate from the madrasa, they become muftis, even though they cannot properly read the text.
Click to expand...
These very Muftis are producing more of themselves by running online ifta courses.

Mufti zia himself has produced many Muftis by teaching ifta himself. You can search for his students graduation ceremonies online where ifta certificates were granted.
 
by the way, my comment was a general observation and not directed at anyone in particular.

this is actually the first time i've heard of mufti qasim, as i only know a few scholars from the uk, mainly through discussions on sunniport.

that said, my comment does apply to mufti qasim in the sense that his opinion in this matter is very weak and not what one would expect from a competent mufti.
 
Utterly pathetic and shameful... clutching at straws... wrong time and place to one-up against your seniors

While the advice is sound, ulama should not endeavor ifta for times, places, circumstances, languages, cultures, they are unaware of - in this instance they were SPOT ON - and this ustade Noorani Qaida should just count his losses and move on

Second advice is also sound, but unfortunately at the wrong time and place - naatkhwans should focus on naats only and not act like ulama, even on this forum we have said Owais Raza should do what he does best and not punch above his weight with shuruh and masail of fiqh etc - sadly for him, in this instance no case of gustakhi can be built against Owais Raza... even otherwise, to be fair to Owais, he's never teetered on the edges of adab towards RasulAllah dal Allahu 3alaihi wa sallam, just that his narcissism gets the better of him when he expounds on masail and fazail.

 
abu Hasan said:
if you take out the financial part - as an analogy or metaphor, even though i do not like to describe it thus - the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is the owner of the 'franchise' (metaphorically, islam) - and all franchisees adhere to the rules and regulations and become a 'part' of the franchise, and deliver the product/service according to the specifications and standards of the franchiser. except in this case, the franchisee does not give anything in return to the franchiser; instead it enjoys all the privileges and benefits of being a part of this franchise
Click to expand...

Dear Mawlana Abu Hasan,

Although what you say in essence makes sense, it is important to note that in the minds of the masses (who was the audience on the day) the term franchise cannot be divorced from the financial gain aspect in its meaning. Therefore, the best approach rather than all this back and forth would probably have been for Alhaj Owais Qadri to have retracted and moved on.

Maalik e konain hain, go paas kuch rakhte nahin;
Do jahaan ki nematain hein unke khaali hath mein​

Side note: I miss the days of just reading naat sharif directly without the interruptions midway with tashreeh after almost every sh'er.
 
Ikhwaan said:
Therefore, the best approach rather than all this back and forth would probably have been for Alhaj Owais Qadri to have retracted and moved on.
Click to expand...
there are a few issues here:

1. should the word be used?
no. because it is not agreeable. (not insulting though).

2. did owais use the word knowingly?
no - as is apparent.

3. is this word disrespectful?
no. it is not suitable, but it is certainly not insulting.

4. is the accusation of blasphemy correct, valid?
no.
​
---
people should not overreact and it is extremely short-sighted, and i would say that those creating a scene are ignorant of the qur'an and sunnah.

attributing 'trade' or 'business' to the prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is not insulting - in fact, trade and business was deemed a respectable occupation. why is it insulting?

Ikhwaan said:
it is important to note that in the minds of the masses
Click to expand...
this is another exaggeration. the masses are neither sensitive nor so delicate nor so sharp to pick out things. no one would have even thought about it, if those who raked it up had also ignored it. the only reason it become an issue is because some people carried it to the extreme and needlessly escalated it and unnecessarily crafted meanings and implications of the word that did not exist in the first place.

if we do not refute these young maulvis and "muftis" - none who seem to have native english skills - we will see terror unleashed upon the rest of us based on shallow understanding of delicate matters and even lesser empathy towards others.

---
my argument is that the word is not insulting in the first place. and such an analogy - of trade and profit - is found in the noble qur'an itself. such a word cannot be deemed "insulting" and blasphemeous, just because someone did not understand it.


إِنَّ ٱلَّذِینَ یَتۡلُونَ كِتَـٰبَ ٱللَّهِ وَأَقَامُوا۟ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَأَنفَقُوا۟ مِمَّا رَزَقۡنَـٰهُمۡ سِرࣰّا وَعَلَانِیَةࣰ یَرۡجُونَ تِجَـٰرَةࣰ لَّن تَبُورَ

a trade (i.e. the profit of which) shall never perish.

---

یَـٰۤأَیُّهَا ٱلَّذِینَ ءَامَنُوا۟ هَلۡ أَدُلُّكُمۡ عَلَىٰ تِجَـٰرَةࣲ تُنجِیكُم مِّنۡ عَذَابٍ أَلِیمࣲ

"...shall i guide you towards a trade that will rescue you from a painful torment'


إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ ٱشۡتَرَىٰ مِنَ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِینَ أَنفُسَهُمۡ وَأَمۡوَ ٰ⁠لَهُم بِأَنَّ لَهُمُ ٱلۡجَنَّةَۚ

indeed, Allah ta'ala has traded/purchased from the believers, their lives and their wealth, for paradise (in return).

---
what is insulting about the word per se?
 
Last edited:
abu Hasan said:
the masses are neither sensitive nor so delicate nor so sharp to pick out things.
Click to expand...
Ikhwaan said:
franchise cannot be divorced from the financial gain aspect
Click to expand...

to add to what brother Abu Hasan said, Owais said a word (franchise; not disrespectful) spontaneously, in the spur of the moment.

in hindsight, you and i can brainstorm and wax lyrical to no end over what would be the best word to describe

Huzoor 3alaihis salam's warathah (awliyaa and scholars) being present in different corners of the globe disbursing all the magnificent heavenly glory he 3alaihis salam brought for the world

in fact, let's see all these reactive "muftis" do an extempore speech on any topic a random person from the awam gives them - they should come up with at least 3 references from each of Quran, Hadith, Tafsir/Hadith Sharh & Fiqh - with either an executive summary conclusion on the topic or an add-on sharh of their own, connecting it to circumstances surrounding our times and places

it's very easy to prepare a speech 3 weeks in advance or calmly prepare a "rebuttal" to something and upload it on youtube. speaking unprepared is the true measure of an aalim! let's see how much he has in his internal memory and how efficient is his search bar and its algorithms!

---

and its even dumber to somehow draw a connection from it towards Khatme Nubuwwat. like seriously, then in Urdu too, hundreds of books talking about Huzoor 3alaihis salam عطاء wouldn't be safe from such nonsensical outbursts.
 
abu Hasan said:
there are a few issues here:

1. should the word be used?
no. because it is not agreeable. (not insulting though).

2. did owais use the word knowingly?
no - as is apparent.

3. is this word disrespectful?
no. it is not suitable, but it is certainly not insulting.

4. is the accusation of blasphemy correct, valid?
no.
​
---
people should not overreact and it is extremely short-sighted, and i would say that those creating a scene are ignorant of the qur'an and sunnah.

attributing 'trade' or 'business' to the prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is not insulting - in fact, trade and business was deemed a respectable occupation. why is it insulting?


this is another exaggeration. the masses are neither sensitive nor so delicate nor so sharp to pick out things. no one would have even thought about it, if those who raked it up had also ignored it. the only reason it become an issue is because some people carried it to the extreme and needlessly escalated it and unnecessarily crafted meanings and implications of the word that did not exist in the first place.

if we do not refute these young maulvis and "muftis" - none who seem to have native english skills - we will see terror unleashed upon the rest of us based on shallow understanding of delicate matters and even lesser empathy towards others.

---
my argument is that the word is not insulting in the first place. and such an analogy - of trade and profit - is found in the noble qur'an itself. such a word cannot be deemed "insulting" and blasphemeous, just because someone did not understand it.


إِنَّ ٱلَّذِینَ یَتۡلُونَ كِتَـٰبَ ٱللَّهِ وَأَقَامُوا۟ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَأَنفَقُوا۟ مِمَّا رَزَقۡنَـٰهُمۡ سِرࣰّا وَعَلَانِیَةࣰ یَرۡجُونَ تِجَـٰرَةࣰ لَّن تَبُورَ

a trade (i.e. the profit of which) shall never perish.

---

یَـٰۤأَیُّهَا ٱلَّذِینَ ءَامَنُوا۟ هَلۡ أَدُلُّكُمۡ عَلَىٰ تِجَـٰرَةࣲ تُنجِیكُم مِّنۡ عَذَابٍ أَلِیمࣲ

"...shall i guide you towards a trade that will rescue you from a painful torment'


إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ ٱشۡتَرَىٰ مِنَ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِینَ أَنفُسَهُمۡ وَأَمۡوَ ٰ⁠لَهُم بِأَنَّ لَهُمُ ٱلۡجَنَّةَۚ

indeed, Allah ta'ala has traded/purchased from the believers, their lives and their wealth, for paradise (in return).

---
what is insulting about the word per se?
Click to expand...

Agreed with what you have said, mawlana, may Allah increase you in your knowledge.

There isn't anything insulting about the word per se, however, it is the negative connotation to which I was alluding to and which should be avoided. I think what I am trying to say is that when I heard the term it was distasteful to hear (and yes that is subjective, however, in the blessed court one should avoid the subjectively unpleasant).

Also agree that mufti Qasim Zia sb is overreaching here, especially considering that alhaj owais qadri has retracted, so why go on about it?
 
Back
Top