The Status of the Ghayr Muqallideen in the Shari’ah

The Status of the Ghayr Muqallideen in the Shari’ah By Hadhrat Allahma Mufti Saeed Palanpuri Current Sheikh-ul-Hadith-Darul Uloom Deoband May Allah keep his shadow with us for a long time.
This article was published in the October 2001 edition of Tarjumaan Deoband….
What is the status of the Ghayr Muqallideen and the followers of Maududi in the Shari’ah? What is the proof for assigning this status to them? The discussion to follow will clarify the misconceptions of some people who believe that both these groups should be included amongst the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah. Although both these groups belong to the body of the Muslims, they are not amongst those of the Ummah described in the Ahadeeth as the group to attain salvation (the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah). This is because their differences with the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaa’ah are fundamental and pertaining to principles; not merely restricted to derivations.

Why is the Majlis so harsh?

answer given by a student of deen and approved by hazrat

Why is the Majlis so harsh towards the Salafis, Barelwis and other deviant sects? So-and-so Akaabir had praised so-and-so person from a deviant sect, and so-and-so Deobandi website contains ample praise of people from deviant sects. This kind of attitude is creating disunity and drives a wedge between Muslims which is exactly what the CIA and the Kuffaar want???

ANSWER

The issue of dissociating (Baraa’) from people from deviant sects is yet another tenet of the Shariah which was upheld by the Ijma’ (consensus) of Salaf-us-Saaliheen, and which is flagrantly and recklessly neglected by the Ummah as a whole today. Innumerable quotes and incidents of the Salaf-us-Saliheen vividly portray their ‘extreme’ attitude towards people associated with deviant sects, which throws into stark contrast the nafsaani (desire-ridden) attitude of today’s so-called ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’.

The Shariah is crystal-clear and explicit on how we should regard people from deviant sects. This is a ‘wedge’ made Waajib by the Ijma’ (consensus) of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen, not the CIA or other Kuffaar. What so-and-so shaykh or so-and-so website says is powerless and impotent to alter this Shariah position – a Shariah position which has become Ghareeb (strange, lone, forlorn) and unpalatable now, just like most other parts of the Shariah.

Even a perfunctory reading of the lives and anecdotes of the Salaf-us-Saliheen, whom many falsely claim to follow, will bring to the fore their ‘extreme’ ghairah for the purity of the Deen, and their ‘harsh’ and ‘extreme’ attitude towards deviants. In fact, if a complete Jaahil were to observe the massive contrast between the satanic pin-drop silence of the Ulama today, and the deafening noise of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen with their innumerable Fatwas of Kufr, Tabdee’, Baraa’, the Jaahil might mistakenly assume these worst of times today to be a Golden Age, free from deviances, and the blessed era of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen to be the age of Jahiliyyah.

The Salaf-us-Saaliheen never recognised any such stupid concept of ‘unity’ as trumpeted by deviants of all breeds today. The slightest deviation from the Haqq was abominable to the Salaf-us-Saliheen. In their eyes there was no such creature as a ‘good’ deviant or a ‘moderate’ deviant. Deviation has no moderation. One person’s stupid idea of ‘moderate’ is another stupid person’s idea of ‘extremism’ – and vice versa.

Furthermore, those who pipe the stupid ‘unity’ slogan are extremely selective in the type of deviants they are willing to flirt with. Thus, for example, while the salafi-inclined ‘deobandis’ have no hesitation in proclaiming the Barelwi-like sects as deviants, they will suddenly bury their heads deep deep in the sand regarding the clear-cut beliefs of Kufr held by the leading Imams of the Salafi sect, such as Ibn Taymiyyah, which have only recently been thoroughly exposed in manner that does not leave the slightest shred of doubt regarding their Kufr anthropomorphic nature, thanks mainly to the mass-publishing and mass-propagation of Ibn Taymiyyah’s books carried out by the Salafis of this age.

Just look at the destruction wrought to the Deobandi Maslak and efforts of Deen because of our flagrant and reckless negligence of this vital tenet of Shariah. It is now not uncommon to come across ‘deobandi’ muftis who believe that Allah (azza wa jal) is in the physical direction upwards, sat (juloos) on the throne. A local ‘deobandi’ Maulana now propounds the Kufr belief of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Qayyim, that hell-fire will eventually shut down even for disbelievers. The most senior and prominent Deobandi Shaykh and Buzurgh in the UK recently instructed the use of Shirki Istigaathah “zikr”. Not co-incidentally the said Buzurgh has amicable relations with the Barelwis. Public Bid’ah Zikr sessions, in the manner of the fraudulent ‘sufis’, orchestrated by our Mashaikhs and Buzurghs are now commonplace. More and more ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ are today regurgitating the same fatwas first issued by salafi ‘jihadis’ many years ago, that suicide bombing in public places for a ‘need’, targetting women and children, Haraam ‘jihadi’ promotional videos, and the like are amongst the means through which Jihaad must be fought. Not co-incidentally these ‘muftis’ and ‘maulana’ squander all their time indulging in and propagating Haraam ‘jihadi’ videos excreted by salafi ‘jihadis’.

Senior muftis who are known to associate and socialize with deviants and fussaaq of all breeds, were amongst the first Deobandis to issue the grievously ruinous Haraam fatwas legalizing pictures of animate objects, interest (riba), and the like, against the Ijma’ (consensus) of ALL the Akabir of Deoband and the Fuqaha of all ages, and which have now suddenly become the Mash-hoor (preponderant) majority opinion of the ‘deobandis’ today. Relying on the Faasiq-Faajir Saudi government for moon-sighting, permitting women to go to the Masjid, holding Meelad-un-Nabi conferences, and innumerable other practices and rulings first adopted by deviant sects, have already become, or are rapidly on the way to becoming the ‘majority’ opinion amongst the ‘Deobandis’ today.

Our reckless negligence of this vital tenet of Shariah just so that we can squeeze enough room to justify an inclination to a pet deviant of ours, has practically opened the floodgates for every other type of deviant and deviance to enter our ranks and be conferred Deeni respectability. Kuffar domination, which is only a manifestation of Allah’s Wrath and Azaab upon this Ummah is only set to increase. No Divine Nusrat appears to be forthcoming any time soon.

Yes, senior Akabir of Deoband had praised and approved of people from extremely deviated sects such as salafis, fraudulent ‘sufis’, maududis, qutbis, etc. We do not say that such Akabir had Nifaaq in their hearts. Since we know them to be 100% stern upholders of the Haqq, even when Haqq would become extremely bitter, we adopt Husn-e-Zann and say that they were genuinely unaware of the deviation of the person or sect in question. We are convinced that had they become aware of the deviation, they would have adopted dissociation (Baraa’, Bughd fillah, etc.) immediately, unlike the nafs-following ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ of today and recent times.

Many of the Akabir had initially admired and praised Maududi and Sayyid Qutb both of whom were guilty of the most blood-curdling statements regarding the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum). A few of the Akabir had passed away while holding Maududi in great esteem. But after Shaykh Zakariyyah, Allamah Binnori, and others had thoroughly exposed the deviation of Maududi and his sect, virtually all our Akaabir, without the slightest hesitation, dissociated (Baraa’) themselves from the Maududis. Undoubtedly, today’s ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ would have desperately clutched at straws to maintain their Nifaaqi admiration and connection to such a person and group.

Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani once mentioned that only after residing in Madinah did he come across books of Ibn Taymiyyah which were not available in India and which made it clear to him that Ibn Taymiyyah had veered blatantly out of Ahlus Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah. From that time onwards, he was unable to tolerate any respect shown to Ibn Taymiyyah. Now that the Salafis of this age have mass-propagated the books of Ibn Taymiyyah which expound such anthropomorphic beliefs as Allah having a size, a body (jism), limits (hudood), spatial direction (jiha), Allah having the actual ability to sit upon the back of a mosquito, the non-eternity of Hell-fire, and innumerable other abominable beliefs which go against the Ijma’ of the whole Ummah, it is only Nafsaaniyat and Nifaaq which prevent the Salafi-lovers today from recognising the Salafi sect as amongst the worst of Ahlul Bid’ah.

Shaykh Rashid Ahmad Gangohi and other senior Mashaykh did praise Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. We do not say that they had Nifaaq in their hearts. Without any doubt, they were genuinely unaware of his deviation and the deviation of the Arab Salafis in general. However, now that it is open knowledge that he was of the deviant Salafi aqeedah of Ibn Taymiyyah, and that he had made Halaal (Mubaah-ud-Dam and Waajib-ul-Qatl) the blood of thousands of Muslims just like the Salafi-influenced ‘jihadis’ are doing today, then to proclaim him as a ‘Mujahid’ or a ‘Reviver’ is undoubtedly, according to the Shariah, aiding in the destruction of the Deen, and a result of pure Nafsaani Nifaaq lurking in the heart like a filthy thief.

Sacrifices for the Deen do not exonerate a person from a deviant sect. The original Khawarij were unmatched in their passion for the Deen, their willingness for Jihaad, their concern for the Ummah, their Ikhlaas, their night-vigils, their Ibaadah, and even their honesty. Yet that did not alter in the slightest their status of being the Dogs of Hell-fire – the worst of Ahlul Bid’ah with whom dissociation is Waajib.

Shaykh Zakariyyah himself and other senior mashaikh had great admiration for and close ties with Muhammad al-Alawi al-Maliki who was from one of those deviated Arab fake ‘Sufi’ sects. There is no doubt, Shaykh Zakariyyah was unaware of al-Alawi’s barelwi-like aqeedah, otherwise he would have been the very first to do Baraa’ of him. Shaykh Zakariyyah passed away without becoming aware. Once it is clear that a person is from a deviant group, the Shariah is crystal-clear that it becomes Haraam to honour and praise him, and to do so aids in the destruction of the Deen. Yet, stupid ‘muftis’ and ‘maulanas’ and ‘deobandi’ websites today use Shaykh Zakariyyah to justify their admiration for this Bidati and other similar deviant Arab ‘Sufis’.

Lastly, even assuming that any of the Akaabir were aware of the deviance of a deviant whom they had praised, this would not alter in the slightest the truth behind Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) statements that to honour a deviant aids in the destruction of the Deen and causes the Arsh of Allah (azza wa jal) to shudder.

May Allah (azza wa jal) grant us the Tawfeeq to adopt and have full Yaqeen in the efficacy of every single tenet of Allah’s glorious Shariah even if the ‘wisdom’ behind that tenet escapes are puny, miniscule and chaotically varying intellects.

Was-salaam

Addendum: Why We Warn Against Wahhabism

FacetoFloor's Weblog

Addendum to “Why We Warn”

In the initial post here: http://facetofloor.wordpress.com/2012/07/17/why-we-warn-against-wahhabism/  four points were mentioned about the dangers of Wahhabism (quasi-Salafism).  There is another that is important to keep in mind.  Although it was alluded in the first post, i think that it needs to be elaborated on some more.  The Wahhabis (quasi-Salafis) sever the Muslims from their historical and scholarly heritage.  The (moderately informed) Wahhabis know that what they follow does not match up with history.

Prior to the era of European colonialism and the rise of Wahhabism in central Arabia in the mid 1700’s C.E.—or even more recently prior to the founding of the Saudi-Wahhabi state and discovery of petrol in Arabia, what were the Sunni Muslims following around the world following?  The Muslims of North Africa, of the Indian subcontinent, the Sunnis of Iraq and Ash-Shaam (Greater Syria), the Sunnis of Malaysia and Indonesia, the…

View original post 1,376 more words

TAQLID IS NOT “BLIND FOLLOWING

By Abu Yusuf

In a recent discussion with a talib al ‘ilm (student of knowledge) he argued both the linguistic (lughawi) and istilahi (technical) meaning (ma’na) of taqleed is effectively “blind following”.

I was disappointed how he deliberately distorted the lughawi wordings (lafz) of taqleed in the classical books. It was his own interpretation in adding that word “blind”, which was not there! The literal (haqiqi) of qalada is “to bind”, “to tie”, “to hold tightly”, “leashed” etc

What the scholars do say when explaining (in meaning) those linguistic wordings of taqleed, it is taking something without thinking (tafkeer) or pondering (tadabbur). In the general Arab Bedouin usage was to trust, to respect, to rely upon etc. Some fuqaha used analogy that is of a blind-man is to imitate one in whose report he has confidence with respect to the Qibla (direction of prayer) because he is not able to do more than that. But some like to reinterpret these to mean “blind-following”, which has negative connotations.

They jump to this as that serves their interest to demean the position and to mock the person that does Taqleed.

As to the istalahi meaning this is derived by ijtihad since taqleed has a legal ruling (hukm) of mubah and fard. One cannot give rulings to it without defining it from the Islamic legal texts. It was clear he misunderstood why the fuqahah added “Laisa Hujjah” or “Bila Hujjah” (ie absence of evidence) in its istilahi (technical) meaning. They added that as the follower cannot understand the primary evidence (hujjah), if he did he would be a Mujtahid and no need to refer to another mujtahid (i.e do taqleed)

If he had studied how definition (tahrif) are derived he’d be aware of al jaami wa a maani. For example, Qur’an has an istalihi meaning (linguistically it’s “to recite”). The usuliyyun related everything (jaami) included in it and everything that must be excluded.

Hence the istilahi meaning of Qur’an was derived from the legal text which has a comprehensive definition.

TARIQ JAMEEL & THE DAJJAALI CARTEL

TARIQ JAMEEL & THE DAJJAALI CARTEL

A Brother from Pakistan, lamenting the villainy and evil of molvis of the likes of Dajjaal Taroq Jameel, says:

“Tariq Jameel, in a bayaan about some incidents mentioned in Fazaail-e-A’maal, labelled them as extremism and unfit for being presented as Deen. (Pandering to the Arab Salafis and the modernist Zanaadaqah – The Majlis)

Another notorious Youtube ‘mufti’ is also calling to get Fazaail-e-A’maal replaced by Muntakhab Ahaadith (authored by Molvi Sa’d). (Part of a satanic conspiracy to placate Salafis – The Majlis)

Basically what they are saying is: For years they have been calling people towards a ‘baatil extremist deen’ and now they have hit their epiphany and realized that it was all wrong. (From one ghulu’ to another ghulu’. The Tabligh Jamaat’s gravest malady is its ghulu. It is this evil malady which has ruined the Jamaat by deflecting it from the Straight Path of the Shariah. – The Majlis)

Do they even realize what they are telling the public? They stood on a mountain of sand all these years? Nobody realizes, not even their close aides, and no one bothers to ask them. So for all these years you were wrong and now you realize you are right? How can we trust you? (The proof of untrustworthiness is conspicuously portrayed by the two factions standing with daggers drawn to slit each other’s throat. They have cast off their mask of deceptive passivity by demonstrating their true nature par excellence in Bangladesh and elsewhere. – The Majlis)

I feel even though they are giving 2-3-4 bayans daily, and taking Allah’s name on youtube, facebook, videos, tv, in reality they have forgotten Allah, so Allah has made them forget themselves.

The book that brought millions towards deen should be replaced now.

Why is it that when these maulanas and muftis become celebrities, their views start to change, they adopt a moderate ‘deen’; a lot of haraam becomes halaal. They start to believe they are divinely inspired and they know everything because they are dealing with public, because they are ‘famous’. They refuse to listen to anyone.

Like the incident of Tariq Jameel with Aamir Khan, the actor you wrote about. The ulama told him: Hazrat this is your field you know best what to reply.” Then Tariq Jameel was ‘divinely’ inspired while engaging in wudhu. (They are Devil-Incarnate, hence Rasulullah –Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) – feared these ulama-e-soo’ more than Dajjaal – The Majlis)
Did the ulama around him feel any shame in saying “this is your field”. What have you ulama been doing all these years? What did you do in Madrasah for so many years? (They are shayaateenul ins. Devils, especially human devils are bereft of even a vestige of shame. –The Majlis)
The result is that Tariq Jameel believes no one knows the public, the actors, the film industry, musicians, politicians, rulers better than him, and no one can give them dawah better than him. He will sit with Imran Khan and his wife on the same table and have ‘iftaar’ and dinner, and ulama will clap and kiss his forehead. (What else can be expected from an Agent of Dajjaal – The Majis)
When Tariq Jameel’s mistakes are pointed out, the usual defence is that he is a ‘khateeb’. Does being a khateeb mean that you are not a Muslim? You won’t be answerable on Qiyaamat day? You are free to say anything you want to, and that the Shariah doesn’t apply on you?

(This dajjaal is an atheist – The Majlis)
I read a hadith along the lines that the safest person in times of fitnah will be the one who nobody knows. When he shifts from one place to another nobody asks about him in the previous neighbourhood. It seems that the maqsad of these people is to make everything halaal, undermine ibadaat, nafl ibadaat, taqwa, zuhd, and indulge in all kinds of haraam, futility, haraam and mushtabah food, facebook, youtube, movies, make everything halaal and ridicule those who want to live a life of taqwa. (Nothing surprising. Agents of Iblees have no other occupation other than the profession of undermining the Deen. – The Majlis)
The fatwa you posted from Jamiat-ur-Rasheed in which they stated that watching the Turkish drama is permissible, is a prime example of their hearts being sealed. These muftis have become so blind that they don’t even realize that Allah has made them blind. Therefore, they are unable to differentiate between halaal and haraam. They make everything halaal in the guise of ‘dawah’. Their logic is make deen ‘easy’; don’t make deen difficult. They ridicule even the semblance of Taqwa which other sincere Ulama have – the Ulama who are firm on Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar. Please comment.

(End of the Brother’s lament)
COMMENT

The following Hadith of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is adequate comment for the villainy, filth, fisq, fujoor and kufr of the vast majority of molvis and bunkum muftis of this age:

“An age will dawn when nothing of Islam will remain, but its name. Nothing of the Qur’aan will remain, but its text. The Musaajid will be ornate structures devoid of hidaayat. Their Ulama will be the worst under the canopy of the sky. From them will emerge fitnah, and the fitnah will rebound on them.”

A Buzroog commented that: under the canopy of the sky there are even the Yahood, Nasaara, Mushrikeen apes and pigs.” Thus these types of fraud molvis and dajjaali muftis are worse than even the kuffaar, apes and swines. Apes and swines do not tamper and destroy Allah’s Deen. But this Ibleesi task has fallen to the lot of these ulama-e-soo’ who have surpassed the ulama-e-soo’ of the Yahood and Nasaara in villainy and kufr.

They are absolutely bereft of the slightest vestige of Khauf-e-Ilaahi. That is why they are able to so brazenly and flagrantly trample on the Sunnah and undermine the Shariah most recklessly and shamelessly. With their shaitaaniyat they convey the idea that they will not die – there will be no accountability for them. Deep in their hearts is embedded nifaaq. These shaitaani molvis and muftis are in fact worse than the juhala westernized zanaadaqah who parade as Muslims. The harm of these shaitaani molvis and muftis far exceed the damage caused to the Deen by the Zanaadaqah modernists – the secularists who have set themselves up as ‘mujtahideen’.

The scenario is not set to improve. We are on a head-on collision with Qiyaamah. The Signs of Qiyaamah mentioned by our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) have to materialize. The cartel of Dajjaals such as Tariq Jameel, Menk, Suliman Moolla and numerous other Apes and Khanaazeer will incrementally preponderate in the world while Islam and the true Muslims will come within the purview of the Hadith:

“Islam began ghareeb (forlorn and friendless). Soon will it return ghareeb. Therefore glad tidings for the Ghuraba.”

In this Hadith are the glad tidings of Allah’s Pleasure for those who struggle and remain firm on the Sunnah during the times of Fitnah. While we may lament and grieve over the satanic developments engineered by these followers of Dajjaal and Iblees, we should not be surprised. It is to be anticipated.

23 Zul Qa’dh 1440 (26 July 2019)

SALAFIS SEEK AID FROM MUFTIS

COPROCREEP SALAFIS SEEK AID FROM MUQALLID MUFTIS

WOMEN LECTURING TO MEN?

Question

Is it permissible in our time for females to give lectures to men if the woman lecturer is screened from the males by a barrier?
In response to this question, Salafis in the U.K. have based their fatwa of permissibility on a fatwa of Mufti Kifaayatullah (Rahmatullah alayh). In his Fatwa, Mufti Kifaayatullah states:

“The holy Shariah of Islam does not prohibit women from any Islamic service of which they are capable. Along with guarding Purdah, a woman may give a lecture to a gathering of men.”
Please comment on this Fatwa which the Salafis are using to create confusion.
Answer

Salafis are COPROCREEPS. In addition they exhibit Shiah tendencies, especially taqiyah (holy hypocrisy). The juhala Salafis, while portraying themselves as ‘mujtahids’ higher in calibre than even the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen of the Salafus Saaliheen era, are academically bankrupt and spiritually barren.

They descend into the dregs of ludicrousness by vacillating between extremes. While they claim to deduct the ahkaam of the Shariah directly from the Qur’aan and Ahaadith since Taqleed of the Aimmah Mujtahideen is a capital sin according to these coprocreeps, their academic bankruptcy compels them to resort to Muqallid Muftis of this era which is far, very far from the age of even their Imaam Ibn Taimiyyaah, and even further from the noble era of the Salafus Saaliheen.

The attempt to seek daleel for their coprocreep view from the Muqallid Mufti Kifaayatullah (Rahmatullah alayh) for an issue which has no resemblance to the original mas’alah, is a vivid commentary of their jahaalat. It is indeed ludicrous and laughable when a Salafi seeks daleel from a Muqallid Mufti whose fatwa is out-dated by half a century, and which no longer holds Shar’i substance due to the satanism with which the issue under discussion is bedevilled today.

There is no contention regarding the validity of the Deeni service of a capable female. There is similarly no contention regarding the validity of the Deeni service of a male. Impermissibility has not been predicated to such services whether executed by males or females. However, only a moron Salafi coprocreep and the modernist zindeeqs will cling to the original unadulterated mas’alah even when satanism has become attached to the mubah (permissible) act.

Women performing Salaat in the Musjid was permitted by even Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). However, when satanasim became associated with this original permissible act, the Sahaabah unanimously banned women from the Musaajid. Similarly, on account of the accretion of satanism, all the Fuqaha of Islam of all Math-habs have declared that it is no longer permissible for women to attend even Walimahs or bayaans to listen to lectures delivered by Ulama. Attending any kind of function is no longer permissible for women.

Mufti Kifaayatullah’s view is not a Shar’i daleel. For daleel, we have to resort to the Fuqaha, especially the Fuqaha of the Salafus Saaliheen era. All of those illustrious Souls have issued the Fatwa of Prohibition. Thus, it is imperative to set aside Mufti Kifaayatullah’s view.

Furthermore, the situation during Mufti Kifaayatullah’s time was not as rotten and stinking as it is today. In our time, faasiqaat and faajiraat are generally the ones who deliver copro-lectures to males who attend to cast lustful stares at the faasiqaat/faajiraat, and to derive nafsaani gratification from their voices. There is an incremental preponderance of faasiqaat/faajiraat in the public domain. This vile and rotten phenomenon has also been given great impetus by the wayward Tabligh Jamaat with its women’s wing.

It is HARAAM in this age for women to give lectures in gatherings of males. The dalaa-il for this prohibition in a nutshell are:

The Ijmaa-ee ban on women attending the Musjid issued by the Sahaabah.
The Fatwa of the Fuqaha of Islam.
The evil shenanigans of women and men in our present era.
22 Zul Qa’dh 1440 – 25 July 2019