Post by StudentOfTheDeen on Feb 14, 2015 11:03:27 GMT
The following is a discussion that took place via email between Maulana Ismaeel Nakhuda, and Sajid Umar from the 'salafi' Al Kauthar Institute.
Sajid Umar's comments have been placed as quotations, and the names of both Maulana Ismaeel Nakhuda and Sajid Umar at the end of their comments have been made bold so that the discussion is easy to follow. Some of Sajid Umar's spelling mistakes have also been corrected in order to make it more reader friendly (except for "mujaddith"[?] - I wasn't sure if he intended by it, muhaddith or mujaddid, so left it as it is). Finally, the discussion has not been changed and has been left in it's entirety with nothing being added or omitted except for Sajid Umar's contact details - even the general bold and coloured text from the original discussion has been reproduced. The email addresses of both parties have been removed for the sake of privacy. What follows is an introduction to the discussion by Maulana Ismaeel Nakhuda himself.
Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,
Dear respected Ulama,
I'm sending you a series of exchanges between myself and a tutor with Al Kauthar Institute -- a Salafi organisation that is making inroads within traditional Deobandi/Hanafi communities, such as those within the UK and South Africa, and now also in Reunion.
The individual with whom I exchanged these emails also appears on South African Islamic radio channels. My intention is solely to raise awareness among our contemporary Ulama. There are two emails from myself and three from the Al Kauthar tutor. The emails are long and I recommend reading them all from beginning till end to understand the discussion properly and the double speak with which Al Kauthar operates to rope unsuspecting Hanafis in.
Please pray for me and if there are any excesses on my behalf, then please do not hesitate to highlight.
Kind regards
[Maulana] Ismaeel Nakhuda
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,
Dear Brother Sajid,
I pray this email reaches you well. Jazakallah khayr for the email and the kind words regarding that article. I’m a little bit more than surprised that you fail to remember the person who made those comments, as you were present at that very moment. Rather, it was you who made those remarks and many more. I wonder why you now seem to forget and shed crocodile tears.
There were several people present and all can verify what you mentioned that night. There was a lot more that you said and which I have summarised below in point format:
In all my years in Saudi Arabia and inter-actions with Saudis from across the board, I had never been exposed to such rabid anti-Hanafism. To be honest, it didn't bother me at all. However, your insistence on being a Hanafi – a sort of doublespeak so to say – spurred me to clarify your utterances and draw people’s attention to the modus-operandi.
I look forward to hearing from you. I'm also particularly interested in reading how you will “address this instructor directly, as well as the institute as it is not befitting for any institute to have an instructor mentioning this.”
Please pray for me during the blessed month.
Yours
Ismaeel
Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,
Dear Shaykh Sajid,
Eid Karim. To begin with, I’d like to mention that I also love you for the sake of Allah and that there is nothing personal in this matter. I have found your last email rather intriguing – the verbal acrobats that you indulge in are entertaining.
I notice that instead of addressing my previous email, wherein which I listed a number of contentious issues that you mentioned in Mina, you have written a lengthy and emotional email in which you make several allegations against myself. These allegations, although interesting, can be described as red herrings, designed to divert attention away from the real issue and discredit me. They also lack coherence, something that I intend to exemplify below.
You mention that you have come to learn that I am a madrassa graduate and allege I denied being so when asked. You also mention that we had a “good chat” the next morning over tea and that I mentioned to you my readings of al-Mughni. I firmly believe your memory is failing you, shaykh. I have never seen al-Mughni, let alone read it! Memory failure seems to be a consistent issue in correspondence with you – there is an entire list of contentious issues that you mentioned to me in Mina and which I have produced in my previous email. You seem to have forgotten uttering them and brushed them aside cavalry style.
With regards to the madrasa graduate issue, let me be clear that over our conversation I did not deny being one. Prior to clarifying that, let me place some context in how that conversation went: on the third day of pelting, while I was enjoying a gentle massage on the electric massage chair and indulging in light banter with an elderly Saudi gentleman (in Arabic), you came over, interrupted us and addressing the elderly Saudi asked whether I spoke Arabic. The gentleman answered in the affirmative and you asked me whether I was a maulana or madrassa graduate or something to that effect. I answered, as is the way of our Ulama, that I had studied a little and over the conversation mentioned at which institute. It is not my way or the way of our Ulama in general to wear our qualifications on our sleeves. I also feel this is one of the demands of humility. It is, rather, the way of our Ulama to leave small clues in their answers to give the impression that yes the said person may be a Madrassa graduate – it is then up to the questioner to pick up on that and ask a more specific and less open question to determine this. Failure to understand this is not my fault. I suppose with age will come maturity. However, to then allege that I lied close to the Jamarat is grave.
There are other inconsistencies in your email. For example in several places you exhibit much praise for me, that you found my manner of speech appealing, that the humbleness touched you, that you hold me in high esteem etc. However, at the same time, and in the same breath, your praise is then balanced off with stern criticism and allegations of spreading lies, and that “a brother in your tent was reduced to tears due to the statements of yourself and others with you.” You also mention that other brothers who were in our tent, the majority of whom were very much elated and pleased by your anti-Hanafi diatribe, “recollected that I had to ask so many times 'to have chance to speak' after continuously being interrupted by your travel partner. A name was not produced, but he can be recognized in person or via a picture.”
The literary mechanisms you employ in structuring arguments and levelling criticism covertly are interesting – I noticed that while speaking with you during Haj. While studying journalism, one whose writings I often read was a professor in media sociology, Teun Van Dijk. Van Dijk identified how the British media, during the 1980s and 1990s, moved away from overt racism, as was the norm in the 1970s and 1960s, and headed towards covert racism. He also highlighted how those with prejudices would often use specific literary mechanisms to veil their racism. For instance, they would carefully structure their racism with a qualifier that could then be used later to counter any allegations of racism. The argument would, in a dumbed down fashion, go thus: “I have lots of black friends, but why are so many black people criminals or rapists?” So, if someone were to later level a charge of racism, one would counter by saying, “No, I have lots of black friends.” Although that example is confined to a single sentence, they can get more sophisticated and such mechanisms can be employed across several paragraphs. Your criticism of me is of the same ilk and your criticism of Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimahullah) on that fateful night in Mina was also of the same fashion. While claiming to be Hanafi, praising the fiqh of Imam Abu Hanifah, mentioning Hanafi Ulama who praised you (all qualifiers to lend weight to your criticism), you then indulged in severe criticism of the mathhab, those who follow it, the Hanafis’ supposed lack of understanding of Hadith, the Salafi-esque understanding of the Imam’s saying that if a Sahih Hadith were to appear then abandon my mathhab etc., and the claim that Imam Muhammad’s prowess in Hadith only came after he went to Imam Malik. You mention in your email that your discussion revolved around the need “to respect other math-habs.” What has the above to do with respect in differences of fiqh?
I call this smooth talking and smooth-operating. It is nothing save double-speak, employed to confuse the general masses and remove trust from the Hanafi mathhab and Deobandi Ulama. The untrained eye may not easily be able to understand this, but those who have some sort of familiarity with the Islamic sciences would easily be able to identify the problem. You mention yourself you had no idea I was a Madrassa graduate, I think you got caught off guard on this occasion. You also mention that I hardly know you, yes, this is the case. But I have seen enough to form a judgment regarding how much of a Hanafi you are, and the contempt in which you hold the Hanafi Mathhab, its adherents and maulana-types.
Regarding a brother in our tent being reduced to tears, let me make clear I have no recollection of this. You failed to mention this at that time, nor did that brother identify himself to me. I am interested in learning who that brother is and which statement made him cry. During my time with the Etqaan Haj group, apart from those who were with me, I only explained the Hanafi fiqh pertaining to the manasik to one person. That person was a South African Gujarati brother who had noticed we were Gujarati, had spent the night in Muzdalifah and pelted the Jamarat on the first day of pelting after sunrise and spoke to me. During our conversation, this brother explained he was from South Africa, Hanafi because he came from a Hanafi background and that he had done the manasik as advised by the English-speaking alim (who it later transpired was yourself) and that this involved jam’ bayn al-salatayn in Arafah in the tent, leaving Muzdalifah at midnight and pelting before sunrise. Over the course of our conversation, he also mentioned how his aunt was performing Haj with a South African group and had explained to him that he should have, as a Hanafi, performed the manasik according to the mathhab, which is also according to the Sunnah. This brother was clearly distressed and in worry. I explained to him the Haj according to the mathhab and said I was unclear in how to remedy his problem. I explained that seeing his aunt is here in Haj (and that a prominent South African mufti was providing fiqhi guidance to the group), that he should contact her and explain his predicament. I’m assuming this brother then went back to you.
Later that evening, after Isha, you came and began your discussion. Regarding this you mention that your “whole discussion was not to hang my hanafi fiqh, but express to you all the need to respect other math-habs as well.” You also mention that other brothers who were in our tent – the majority of whom were very much elated and pleased by your anti-Hanafi diatribe – “recollected that I had to ask so many times 'to have chance to speak' after continuously being interrupted by your travel partner. A name was not produced, but he can be recognized in person or via a picture.”
Regarding the above, let it be clear that your comments contained severe criticism of the Hanafi mathhab, as mentioned in my previous email, maulana-types and madrassahs. It definitely wasn’t a flowery explanation of the need to respect mathhabs etc but rather a sophisticated session in Hanafi bashing. A few laudatory comments regarding the Hanafis does not set that right. In fact, such were your oratory skills that one of the Hanafis who was with me later became worried and asked whether our Haj was correct. I cannot recall one of my travel partners asking questions and interrupting. None of us interrupted, rather we asked constructive questions. Let it also be clear that it wasn’t a speech or a khutbah, but you had come, indulged in some light banter and then began discussing the manasik and then moved on to the Hanafi mathhab. I never once interrupted, rather I humbly requested opportunities to speak and all of my questions revolved around utterances you made regarding the Hanafi mathhab and were, in a very layman fashion, designed to advise you of the fallacy of your comments. You mentioned that the Hanafis don’t know Hadith, at which, in a layman fashion, I asked a question: well what about the Hanafi Darul Ulooms? They teach the Sihah Sittan from beginning to end, something that hardly happens outside the sub-continent. You mentioned that Imam Abu Hanifah didn’t have access to Hadiths. So I mentioned, in a layman fashion: Well how could he have been a mujtahid, one of the requisites of a mujtahid is having stupendous knowledge of Hadith. You mentioned that the there is no ijtihad in the Hanafi Darul Ulooms, so I asked, in a very simplistic and dumbed-down fashion: Well what about Mufti Taqi Usmani, he’s described as the Hanafis biggest Mufti, he’s doing all this ijtihad in Islamic finance. All of the Darul Ulooms have Darul Iftas, what happens there? You mentioned something else about Hadith and the Hanafis, at which I mentioned that the Hanafi mathhab was formulated, according to Allamah Shibli Numani, by Imam Abu Hanifah and 40 of his senior students and that there were experts in all fields sitting there when that happened.
There were many other issues that were touched upon and after a short while, clearly frustrated by my questions, you ceased to allow me to speak. You might describe the above questions as interruptions. I, however, don’t. In your email you ask why I did not correct you, or offer advice. The simple answer to that is that those questions were there to advise you. You, however, failed to take them on board and ceased to give me the opportunity to speak. It quickly dawned on me that you were set in your ways and that there is little opportunity to actually engage; for me adhering to the Quranic injunction, fa qalu salama, became the most apt thing to do.
In fact, on that very night, you mentioned that the coaches on the morning of the third day of Jamarat would be leaving early in the morning at around 8am and that all pelting should be done after fajr. You also explained to us, that as Hanafis we shouldn’t have a problem with this, as there is a view of Imam Azam to this effect. This view, Shaykh Sajid, is actually a weak and marjuh opinion of Imam Azam – I didn’t know this at the time and only researched this much later. However, I firmly resolved not to pelt the Jamarat before noon. I expressed this to you and you mentioned that the group wouldn’t have transport to Jeddah. So I said there are many taxis about. We’ll stay in our tent, pelt the Jamarat and make our own way home. The next day, you came and mentioned that we wouldn’t be allowed to stay in our tent in Mina as there is a Shiah procession to take place on our street and the Civil Defense and Haj officials have ordered all tents in our street to close, that pilgrims have to pelt early and that no Hajis would be allowed to stay in their tent. I found this claim extremely strange. Nevertheless, to give you the benefit of the doubt, we made arrangements to leave Etqan’s tent for a friend’s tent several kilometres away where we rested. We then walked several kilometres back to the Jamarat, pelted and then trekked back to collect our belongings and then head back to Jeddah. On our way to the Jamarat and on the way back we chanced past the Etqan tent and lo behold, the tent (in fact all tents on that street) were open, with pilgrims and organisers inside. The street was not closed and pilgrims were freely moving. I mentioned the above to several Saudi friends in Makkah (who work in the Haj) and Haj officials (working in the Saudi media gave me the opportunity to become acquainted with people across the public and private sectors), they all said no such procession would be allowed! Shaykh Sajid, what explanation do you have for this?
You also mention that no one from your friends “could bear testimony to your accusations, and the general feeling is that the witnesses you can provide are those that attended hajj with you and were your companions.” The same argument could be used in a reserved fashion and I could easily say the same about your friends. Very interesting use of language indeed.
I also find it intriguing that you wish to write a response to those allegations against the elders of Deoband. My advice is to preach closer to home. There is, for example, Shaykh Tousif Rahman in Jeddah, who is known for his anti-Deobandi comments, and Shaykh Abu Usama at-Thahabi, imam of Green Lane Mosque, who has been on record criticising Imam Abu Hanifah. The fact that you also hold talks at Green Lane should put you in good stead to advise the misguided.
Finally let me make clear, I have no personal beef with you. Your (unnamed) friend, from up north and currently in Saudi, may tell you otherwise, but I have no personal beef with you. My heart is clean; you are a talented young man with many capabilities. I believe channelling your energies elsewhere will benefit you and the Ummah. There are certainly clear misconceptions in your mind regarding the Hanafi mathhab, its adherents, and the institutes that espouse this methodology – perhaps openly and without double-speak engaging senior muftis may help you.
Yours
Ismaeel
PS I wish I had recorded the conversation.
Sajid Umar's comments have been placed as quotations, and the names of both Maulana Ismaeel Nakhuda and Sajid Umar at the end of their comments have been made bold so that the discussion is easy to follow. Some of Sajid Umar's spelling mistakes have also been corrected in order to make it more reader friendly (except for "mujaddith"[?] - I wasn't sure if he intended by it, muhaddith or mujaddid, so left it as it is). Finally, the discussion has not been changed and has been left in it's entirety with nothing being added or omitted except for Sajid Umar's contact details - even the general bold and coloured text from the original discussion has been reproduced. The email addresses of both parties have been removed for the sake of privacy. What follows is an introduction to the discussion by Maulana Ismaeel Nakhuda himself.
Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,
Dear respected Ulama,
I'm sending you a series of exchanges between myself and a tutor with Al Kauthar Institute -- a Salafi organisation that is making inroads within traditional Deobandi/Hanafi communities, such as those within the UK and South Africa, and now also in Reunion.
The individual with whom I exchanged these emails also appears on South African Islamic radio channels. My intention is solely to raise awareness among our contemporary Ulama. There are two emails from myself and three from the Al Kauthar tutor. The emails are long and I recommend reading them all from beginning till end to understand the discussion properly and the double speak with which Al Kauthar operates to rope unsuspecting Hanafis in.
Please pray for me and if there are any excesses on my behalf, then please do not hesitate to highlight.
Kind regards
[Maulana] Ismaeel Nakhuda
Assalamualaikum akhil kareem...
I pray this mail finds you to be in the best of health and highest of Islamic spirits...
I found your email on the list of emails pertaining to all those who were in the tent specific to English speaking hujjaaj during the hajj of 2009.
I came across this article
www.deoband.org/2011/04/hadith/principles-of-hadith/imam-abu-hanifah-and-hadith/
Masha Allah very good translation and pertinant knowledge shared.
Would it possible to share the name of the instructor with the alkauthar institute that mentioned to you Imam alaa'tham, Abu Haneefa being weak in hadeeth, and not being capable except in 17 hadeeth.
I am connected to the alKauthar institute and find these statements highly unacceptable and would like to address this instructor directly, as well as the institute as it is not befitting for any institute to have an instructor mentioning this.
Jazakallah for considering this email and your strong endeavour towards clarifying misconceptions.
I love you for the sake of Allah.
Wasalam
Akh Sajid.
Ps. Are you still based in Jeddah and using the same mobile number you passed onto me during hajj. Please pass salams to the other brothers that were with you as well.
I pray this mail finds you to be in the best of health and highest of Islamic spirits...
I found your email on the list of emails pertaining to all those who were in the tent specific to English speaking hujjaaj during the hajj of 2009.
I came across this article
www.deoband.org/2011/04/hadith/principles-of-hadith/imam-abu-hanifah-and-hadith/
Masha Allah very good translation and pertinant knowledge shared.
Would it possible to share the name of the instructor with the alkauthar institute that mentioned to you Imam alaa'tham, Abu Haneefa being weak in hadeeth, and not being capable except in 17 hadeeth.
I am connected to the alKauthar institute and find these statements highly unacceptable and would like to address this instructor directly, as well as the institute as it is not befitting for any institute to have an instructor mentioning this.
Jazakallah for considering this email and your strong endeavour towards clarifying misconceptions.
I love you for the sake of Allah.
Wasalam
Akh Sajid.
Ps. Are you still based in Jeddah and using the same mobile number you passed onto me during hajj. Please pass salams to the other brothers that were with you as well.
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,
Dear Brother Sajid,
I pray this email reaches you well. Jazakallah khayr for the email and the kind words regarding that article. I’m a little bit more than surprised that you fail to remember the person who made those comments, as you were present at that very moment. Rather, it was you who made those remarks and many more. I wonder why you now seem to forget and shed crocodile tears.
There were several people present and all can verify what you mentioned that night. There was a lot more that you said and which I have summarised below in point format:
- You claimed to be Hanafi and to support this mentioned a whole host of Deobandi/Hanafi Ulama who host you in South Africa and the UK and have praised your in-depth knowledge of the Hanafi school.
- You also in intensely criticised myself and those who were with me for spending the night in Muzdalifah and said we should have, like yourself and the rest of the group, left for Mina at midnight, thrown stones at the first Jamarat before fajr (on the night of the 9th), done the stoning ritual before noon over the next two days (for which you cited the extremely weak and marjuh opinion of Imam Azam Abu Hanifah (ra)), and done the Tawaf al-Ifadha and Tawaf al-Wida together in a singular Tawaf on the morning of the third day (a Jama‘ bayn al-Tawafayn so to speak). All of this would have been against the Hanafi mathhab.
- You also heavily criticized our decision to perform the Tawaf al-Ifadha before we had done the Jamarat of the second and third day of stoning.
- At one point you also spoke about the Hanafi mathhab, how it was weak and needed to be reformed.
- You also mentioned the Darul Ulooms and Maulana-types who you said were out of touch and blind imitators, and then — while sitting in Mina, just a stone throw from the Middle Jamarat in the days of Hajj — criticised Imam Abu Hanifah’s (ra) knowledge of hadith, saying he only knew 17 Hadiths. What, however, made your remarks all the more poignant was your insistence on being a Hanafi.
In all my years in Saudi Arabia and inter-actions with Saudis from across the board, I had never been exposed to such rabid anti-Hanafism. To be honest, it didn't bother me at all. However, your insistence on being a Hanafi – a sort of doublespeak so to say – spurred me to clarify your utterances and draw people’s attention to the modus-operandi.
I look forward to hearing from you. I'm also particularly interested in reading how you will “address this instructor directly, as well as the institute as it is not befitting for any institute to have an instructor mentioning this.”
Please pray for me during the blessed month.
Yours
Ismaeel
Assalamualaikum moulana ... and Eid Mubarak ...
Dear moulana, and please allow me to call you such as alhamdulillah after a bit of research I have to come to find out that you are a moulana, masha Allah...This is even though you said you were not a graduate of any darul uloom when I asked, and we stood just a stone throw away from the Jamaraats...
In any case, I was saddened by your email, especially as I aspired to take from your character and conduct. The way you spoke appealed to me. The humbleness you portrayed touched me.
In all honesty I have been hearing some reports of a certain person warning against me which I supposedly met in Hajj, during travel to Southern Africa ... It was actually said that I had met a moulana ... to which I could only recall meeting a gentlemen like yourself and dismissed the reports.
May Allah make all easy.
Alhamdulillah there is a brother from up north and based in Saudi currently that has confirmed that you have a 'beef' with me, and informed me of your previous job and your current job. Thus the delay in response as I truly wanted to be sure it was you- given the high esteem I hold you in and really wished I had the names mixed up.
I was hurt during this month of Ramadaan to learn of your statements against me and also decided to send your email to some of the brothers that were with us during our conversation to seek their advise as to whether I would say such lies about our imam- as you have attributed to me.
Alhamdulillah, no on could bear testimony to your accusations, and the general feeling is that the witnesses you can provide are those that attended hajj with you and were your companions.
It was also recollected that I had to ask so many times 'to have chance to speak' after continuously being interrupted by your travel partner. A name was not produced, but he can be recognized in person or via a picture.
Other things were mentioned as well regarding the general feeling of the other companions of the tent with regards to yourself and those that you were with, which are not relevant and I will leave out.
With regards to the 17 hadeeth you have slandered me with - By Allah I could not have said this - but at most mentioned is as a misguided statement of those that disrespect our great Imaam....You opted to hear the parts you wanted to hear...
And with regards to the fiqh points you cited and claim to be evidence against me ... Wallahi it worried me, and after recollecting the facts with others, it was deduced that my whole discussion was not to hang my hanafi fiqh, but express to you all the need to respect other math-habs as well, especially since a brother in your tent was reduced to tears due to the statements of yourself and others with you.
In any case, as I complete my final fast- I do not want to address the other slanderous statements you have cited as I have understood that you have chosen what you wished to hear, and acted accordingly.
My dear moulana ... we had a good chat the next morning whilst you sipped your tea and mentioned to me your readings of mughni! You had every chance to correct me since you made yourself hear lies about me...instead you chose to smile at me openly and hate me inwardly and not even advise me...laa ilaaha illallah...I seek Allah's forgiveness from the sins which has caused me to have such opposition.
Advice...Subhaanallah- Is this not what a sincere muslim does? Is religion not sincere advice?
I would love you to correct me and not backbite or slander me....
Alas. you are who you are, and have done what you have done, and I ask Allah to protect me from all evil.
Any one who knows me- knows my love for abu Haneefa, and in fact I have been accused of being too inclined, and based on your statements- I am glad you cannot say you know me, because you really do not.
You have not sat my alKauthar courses, nor travelled with me, nor stayed with me, nor heard my lessons and programs...
I never thought I would say this, but I must exclaim....Alhamdulillah. I ask Allah to protect me from those whom hear my words and understand the opposite.
With regards to alKauthar- it is felt that you are trying to damage them because you mentioned me as an AK instructor without need. AK respects the mathhab of abu haneefa, and we have other hanafees that work and support the institute...you definitely have made a manifest a habit of acting on the unconfirmed; however- rest assured that no legal proceedings will take place. AK policy is to lift the image of Islam and the muslims for the sake of Allah, and not publicly operate like you have done.
Once again- may Allah protect us all from all evil ...
Wallahi moulana- your statements shook me, I could not believe this- but alhamdulillah Allah opened the way for due process and allowed for verification.
And in Allah do we place all trust.
Moving on ...
Below is an email produced by a group that can cross boundaries. I want to respond clinically to this 'fitna' that is being caused and need your help ...
Since you have a great presence and possess great strengths in translations- could you please help me verify all stated below, and maybe share some of the contexts in which these statements were said to assist my response.
If you wanted- you could respond to it yourself and I will send it through...
It will be an honour to work with you...
Wallahi moulana- despite all, I love you for the sake of Allah- and ask your forgiveness for my mistakes and all the hurt I have given you ... Rest assured, you have understood evil of me and it was not intended. Also rest assure, that this will not be a case in the court of Allah, as I have forgiven all mistakes as well.
And Allah knows best-
Your brother
Sajid
Dear moulana, and please allow me to call you such as alhamdulillah after a bit of research I have to come to find out that you are a moulana, masha Allah...This is even though you said you were not a graduate of any darul uloom when I asked, and we stood just a stone throw away from the Jamaraats...
In any case, I was saddened by your email, especially as I aspired to take from your character and conduct. The way you spoke appealed to me. The humbleness you portrayed touched me.
In all honesty I have been hearing some reports of a certain person warning against me which I supposedly met in Hajj, during travel to Southern Africa ... It was actually said that I had met a moulana ... to which I could only recall meeting a gentlemen like yourself and dismissed the reports.
May Allah make all easy.
Alhamdulillah there is a brother from up north and based in Saudi currently that has confirmed that you have a 'beef' with me, and informed me of your previous job and your current job. Thus the delay in response as I truly wanted to be sure it was you- given the high esteem I hold you in and really wished I had the names mixed up.
I was hurt during this month of Ramadaan to learn of your statements against me and also decided to send your email to some of the brothers that were with us during our conversation to seek their advise as to whether I would say such lies about our imam- as you have attributed to me.
Alhamdulillah, no on could bear testimony to your accusations, and the general feeling is that the witnesses you can provide are those that attended hajj with you and were your companions.
It was also recollected that I had to ask so many times 'to have chance to speak' after continuously being interrupted by your travel partner. A name was not produced, but he can be recognized in person or via a picture.
Other things were mentioned as well regarding the general feeling of the other companions of the tent with regards to yourself and those that you were with, which are not relevant and I will leave out.
With regards to the 17 hadeeth you have slandered me with - By Allah I could not have said this - but at most mentioned is as a misguided statement of those that disrespect our great Imaam....You opted to hear the parts you wanted to hear...
And with regards to the fiqh points you cited and claim to be evidence against me ... Wallahi it worried me, and after recollecting the facts with others, it was deduced that my whole discussion was not to hang my hanafi fiqh, but express to you all the need to respect other math-habs as well, especially since a brother in your tent was reduced to tears due to the statements of yourself and others with you.
In any case, as I complete my final fast- I do not want to address the other slanderous statements you have cited as I have understood that you have chosen what you wished to hear, and acted accordingly.
My dear moulana ... we had a good chat the next morning whilst you sipped your tea and mentioned to me your readings of mughni! You had every chance to correct me since you made yourself hear lies about me...instead you chose to smile at me openly and hate me inwardly and not even advise me...laa ilaaha illallah...I seek Allah's forgiveness from the sins which has caused me to have such opposition.
Advice...Subhaanallah- Is this not what a sincere muslim does? Is religion not sincere advice?
I would love you to correct me and not backbite or slander me....
Alas. you are who you are, and have done what you have done, and I ask Allah to protect me from all evil.
Any one who knows me- knows my love for abu Haneefa, and in fact I have been accused of being too inclined, and based on your statements- I am glad you cannot say you know me, because you really do not.
You have not sat my alKauthar courses, nor travelled with me, nor stayed with me, nor heard my lessons and programs...
I never thought I would say this, but I must exclaim....Alhamdulillah. I ask Allah to protect me from those whom hear my words and understand the opposite.
With regards to alKauthar- it is felt that you are trying to damage them because you mentioned me as an AK instructor without need. AK respects the mathhab of abu haneefa, and we have other hanafees that work and support the institute...you definitely have made a manifest a habit of acting on the unconfirmed; however- rest assured that no legal proceedings will take place. AK policy is to lift the image of Islam and the muslims for the sake of Allah, and not publicly operate like you have done.
Once again- may Allah protect us all from all evil ...
Wallahi moulana- your statements shook me, I could not believe this- but alhamdulillah Allah opened the way for due process and allowed for verification.
And in Allah do we place all trust.
Moving on ...
Below is an email produced by a group that can cross boundaries. I want to respond clinically to this 'fitna' that is being caused and need your help ...
Since you have a great presence and possess great strengths in translations- could you please help me verify all stated below, and maybe share some of the contexts in which these statements were said to assist my response.
If you wanted- you could respond to it yourself and I will send it through...
It will be an honour to work with you...
Wallahi moulana- despite all, I love you for the sake of Allah- and ask your forgiveness for my mistakes and all the hurt I have given you ... Rest assured, you have understood evil of me and it was not intended. Also rest assure, that this will not be a case in the court of Allah, as I have forgiven all mistakes as well.
And Allah knows best-
Your brother
Sajid
admin edit: lengthy out of context quotes removed to avoid confusion
Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,
Dear Shaykh Sajid,
Eid Karim. To begin with, I’d like to mention that I also love you for the sake of Allah and that there is nothing personal in this matter. I have found your last email rather intriguing – the verbal acrobats that you indulge in are entertaining.
I notice that instead of addressing my previous email, wherein which I listed a number of contentious issues that you mentioned in Mina, you have written a lengthy and emotional email in which you make several allegations against myself. These allegations, although interesting, can be described as red herrings, designed to divert attention away from the real issue and discredit me. They also lack coherence, something that I intend to exemplify below.
You mention that you have come to learn that I am a madrassa graduate and allege I denied being so when asked. You also mention that we had a “good chat” the next morning over tea and that I mentioned to you my readings of al-Mughni. I firmly believe your memory is failing you, shaykh. I have never seen al-Mughni, let alone read it! Memory failure seems to be a consistent issue in correspondence with you – there is an entire list of contentious issues that you mentioned to me in Mina and which I have produced in my previous email. You seem to have forgotten uttering them and brushed them aside cavalry style.
With regards to the madrasa graduate issue, let me be clear that over our conversation I did not deny being one. Prior to clarifying that, let me place some context in how that conversation went: on the third day of pelting, while I was enjoying a gentle massage on the electric massage chair and indulging in light banter with an elderly Saudi gentleman (in Arabic), you came over, interrupted us and addressing the elderly Saudi asked whether I spoke Arabic. The gentleman answered in the affirmative and you asked me whether I was a maulana or madrassa graduate or something to that effect. I answered, as is the way of our Ulama, that I had studied a little and over the conversation mentioned at which institute. It is not my way or the way of our Ulama in general to wear our qualifications on our sleeves. I also feel this is one of the demands of humility. It is, rather, the way of our Ulama to leave small clues in their answers to give the impression that yes the said person may be a Madrassa graduate – it is then up to the questioner to pick up on that and ask a more specific and less open question to determine this. Failure to understand this is not my fault. I suppose with age will come maturity. However, to then allege that I lied close to the Jamarat is grave.
There are other inconsistencies in your email. For example in several places you exhibit much praise for me, that you found my manner of speech appealing, that the humbleness touched you, that you hold me in high esteem etc. However, at the same time, and in the same breath, your praise is then balanced off with stern criticism and allegations of spreading lies, and that “a brother in your tent was reduced to tears due to the statements of yourself and others with you.” You also mention that other brothers who were in our tent, the majority of whom were very much elated and pleased by your anti-Hanafi diatribe, “recollected that I had to ask so many times 'to have chance to speak' after continuously being interrupted by your travel partner. A name was not produced, but he can be recognized in person or via a picture.”
The literary mechanisms you employ in structuring arguments and levelling criticism covertly are interesting – I noticed that while speaking with you during Haj. While studying journalism, one whose writings I often read was a professor in media sociology, Teun Van Dijk. Van Dijk identified how the British media, during the 1980s and 1990s, moved away from overt racism, as was the norm in the 1970s and 1960s, and headed towards covert racism. He also highlighted how those with prejudices would often use specific literary mechanisms to veil their racism. For instance, they would carefully structure their racism with a qualifier that could then be used later to counter any allegations of racism. The argument would, in a dumbed down fashion, go thus: “I have lots of black friends, but why are so many black people criminals or rapists?” So, if someone were to later level a charge of racism, one would counter by saying, “No, I have lots of black friends.” Although that example is confined to a single sentence, they can get more sophisticated and such mechanisms can be employed across several paragraphs. Your criticism of me is of the same ilk and your criticism of Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimahullah) on that fateful night in Mina was also of the same fashion. While claiming to be Hanafi, praising the fiqh of Imam Abu Hanifah, mentioning Hanafi Ulama who praised you (all qualifiers to lend weight to your criticism), you then indulged in severe criticism of the mathhab, those who follow it, the Hanafis’ supposed lack of understanding of Hadith, the Salafi-esque understanding of the Imam’s saying that if a Sahih Hadith were to appear then abandon my mathhab etc., and the claim that Imam Muhammad’s prowess in Hadith only came after he went to Imam Malik. You mention in your email that your discussion revolved around the need “to respect other math-habs.” What has the above to do with respect in differences of fiqh?
I call this smooth talking and smooth-operating. It is nothing save double-speak, employed to confuse the general masses and remove trust from the Hanafi mathhab and Deobandi Ulama. The untrained eye may not easily be able to understand this, but those who have some sort of familiarity with the Islamic sciences would easily be able to identify the problem. You mention yourself you had no idea I was a Madrassa graduate, I think you got caught off guard on this occasion. You also mention that I hardly know you, yes, this is the case. But I have seen enough to form a judgment regarding how much of a Hanafi you are, and the contempt in which you hold the Hanafi Mathhab, its adherents and maulana-types.
Regarding a brother in our tent being reduced to tears, let me make clear I have no recollection of this. You failed to mention this at that time, nor did that brother identify himself to me. I am interested in learning who that brother is and which statement made him cry. During my time with the Etqaan Haj group, apart from those who were with me, I only explained the Hanafi fiqh pertaining to the manasik to one person. That person was a South African Gujarati brother who had noticed we were Gujarati, had spent the night in Muzdalifah and pelted the Jamarat on the first day of pelting after sunrise and spoke to me. During our conversation, this brother explained he was from South Africa, Hanafi because he came from a Hanafi background and that he had done the manasik as advised by the English-speaking alim (who it later transpired was yourself) and that this involved jam’ bayn al-salatayn in Arafah in the tent, leaving Muzdalifah at midnight and pelting before sunrise. Over the course of our conversation, he also mentioned how his aunt was performing Haj with a South African group and had explained to him that he should have, as a Hanafi, performed the manasik according to the mathhab, which is also according to the Sunnah. This brother was clearly distressed and in worry. I explained to him the Haj according to the mathhab and said I was unclear in how to remedy his problem. I explained that seeing his aunt is here in Haj (and that a prominent South African mufti was providing fiqhi guidance to the group), that he should contact her and explain his predicament. I’m assuming this brother then went back to you.
Later that evening, after Isha, you came and began your discussion. Regarding this you mention that your “whole discussion was not to hang my hanafi fiqh, but express to you all the need to respect other math-habs as well.” You also mention that other brothers who were in our tent – the majority of whom were very much elated and pleased by your anti-Hanafi diatribe – “recollected that I had to ask so many times 'to have chance to speak' after continuously being interrupted by your travel partner. A name was not produced, but he can be recognized in person or via a picture.”
Regarding the above, let it be clear that your comments contained severe criticism of the Hanafi mathhab, as mentioned in my previous email, maulana-types and madrassahs. It definitely wasn’t a flowery explanation of the need to respect mathhabs etc but rather a sophisticated session in Hanafi bashing. A few laudatory comments regarding the Hanafis does not set that right. In fact, such were your oratory skills that one of the Hanafis who was with me later became worried and asked whether our Haj was correct. I cannot recall one of my travel partners asking questions and interrupting. None of us interrupted, rather we asked constructive questions. Let it also be clear that it wasn’t a speech or a khutbah, but you had come, indulged in some light banter and then began discussing the manasik and then moved on to the Hanafi mathhab. I never once interrupted, rather I humbly requested opportunities to speak and all of my questions revolved around utterances you made regarding the Hanafi mathhab and were, in a very layman fashion, designed to advise you of the fallacy of your comments. You mentioned that the Hanafis don’t know Hadith, at which, in a layman fashion, I asked a question: well what about the Hanafi Darul Ulooms? They teach the Sihah Sittan from beginning to end, something that hardly happens outside the sub-continent. You mentioned that Imam Abu Hanifah didn’t have access to Hadiths. So I mentioned, in a layman fashion: Well how could he have been a mujtahid, one of the requisites of a mujtahid is having stupendous knowledge of Hadith. You mentioned that the there is no ijtihad in the Hanafi Darul Ulooms, so I asked, in a very simplistic and dumbed-down fashion: Well what about Mufti Taqi Usmani, he’s described as the Hanafis biggest Mufti, he’s doing all this ijtihad in Islamic finance. All of the Darul Ulooms have Darul Iftas, what happens there? You mentioned something else about Hadith and the Hanafis, at which I mentioned that the Hanafi mathhab was formulated, according to Allamah Shibli Numani, by Imam Abu Hanifah and 40 of his senior students and that there were experts in all fields sitting there when that happened.
There were many other issues that were touched upon and after a short while, clearly frustrated by my questions, you ceased to allow me to speak. You might describe the above questions as interruptions. I, however, don’t. In your email you ask why I did not correct you, or offer advice. The simple answer to that is that those questions were there to advise you. You, however, failed to take them on board and ceased to give me the opportunity to speak. It quickly dawned on me that you were set in your ways and that there is little opportunity to actually engage; for me adhering to the Quranic injunction, fa qalu salama, became the most apt thing to do.
In fact, on that very night, you mentioned that the coaches on the morning of the third day of Jamarat would be leaving early in the morning at around 8am and that all pelting should be done after fajr. You also explained to us, that as Hanafis we shouldn’t have a problem with this, as there is a view of Imam Azam to this effect. This view, Shaykh Sajid, is actually a weak and marjuh opinion of Imam Azam – I didn’t know this at the time and only researched this much later. However, I firmly resolved not to pelt the Jamarat before noon. I expressed this to you and you mentioned that the group wouldn’t have transport to Jeddah. So I said there are many taxis about. We’ll stay in our tent, pelt the Jamarat and make our own way home. The next day, you came and mentioned that we wouldn’t be allowed to stay in our tent in Mina as there is a Shiah procession to take place on our street and the Civil Defense and Haj officials have ordered all tents in our street to close, that pilgrims have to pelt early and that no Hajis would be allowed to stay in their tent. I found this claim extremely strange. Nevertheless, to give you the benefit of the doubt, we made arrangements to leave Etqan’s tent for a friend’s tent several kilometres away where we rested. We then walked several kilometres back to the Jamarat, pelted and then trekked back to collect our belongings and then head back to Jeddah. On our way to the Jamarat and on the way back we chanced past the Etqan tent and lo behold, the tent (in fact all tents on that street) were open, with pilgrims and organisers inside. The street was not closed and pilgrims were freely moving. I mentioned the above to several Saudi friends in Makkah (who work in the Haj) and Haj officials (working in the Saudi media gave me the opportunity to become acquainted with people across the public and private sectors), they all said no such procession would be allowed! Shaykh Sajid, what explanation do you have for this?
You also mention that no one from your friends “could bear testimony to your accusations, and the general feeling is that the witnesses you can provide are those that attended hajj with you and were your companions.” The same argument could be used in a reserved fashion and I could easily say the same about your friends. Very interesting use of language indeed.
I also find it intriguing that you wish to write a response to those allegations against the elders of Deoband. My advice is to preach closer to home. There is, for example, Shaykh Tousif Rahman in Jeddah, who is known for his anti-Deobandi comments, and Shaykh Abu Usama at-Thahabi, imam of Green Lane Mosque, who has been on record criticising Imam Abu Hanifah. The fact that you also hold talks at Green Lane should put you in good stead to advise the misguided.
Finally let me make clear, I have no personal beef with you. Your (unnamed) friend, from up north and currently in Saudi, may tell you otherwise, but I have no personal beef with you. My heart is clean; you are a talented young man with many capabilities. I believe channelling your energies elsewhere will benefit you and the Ummah. There are certainly clear misconceptions in your mind regarding the Hanafi mathhab, its adherents, and the institutes that espouse this methodology – perhaps openly and without double-speak engaging senior muftis may help you.
Yours
Ismaeel
PS I wish I had recorded the conversation.
Wa alaykum salaam wa rahmatullah wa barakaatuhu...
Taqabbalallahu minna wa minkum saalihal aamaal...
Eid mubaarak.
Moulana... I said what i had to, and definitely see great benefit form the ummah in you, thus ended my email stating I love you for the sake of Allah.
I meant it ...
With that, this will not be a long reply ,,,
I am pleased at your reply as it makes clearer to me even further who you are.
To be honest it is a cliché that you are the person in question and accusing me of losing my memory. I will not say the same you. However I am grateful to Allah that you described the massage moment and am confused as to why you do not recall me asking you the question again in the tent in front of all after learning your good grasp of our mathhab.
Secondly- i was carefully putting together words in my email ... Masha allah, i will take this as a compliment coming from you especially given your profession.
Thirdly- i am pleased you have your witnesses.
Fourthly- You accuse my witnesses as those that thrive at hearing ill about the hanafi mathhab. Moulana, please think good of your muslim brothers, not the worst, which seems to be a pattern with you.
Fifthly- the raajih and marjooh concept is relative, please further research that which is mashhoor.
Sixthly- you judge me guilty because i spoke at green lane masjid . Moulana are you serious? Is this your mathhab as a journalist or usool when deriving rulings.
Seventhly- i am a believer in building bridges, and not burning them. Have you met abu usama or asked him his position with abu haneefa despite some of his academic reservations regarding the imam? Also, if it makes you feel better, I did not get a chance to even be introduced to him, and even though, i will not cut ties with a muslim brother because he swore our imam, even though he did not, according to my knowledge.
During that trip, I made it a point to meet sheikh Zahir Mahmood. Amazing man. Hanafi, but works closely with iera, a salafi group, and carries the same philosophy I carry when working with alkauthar. In the few moments I was with him.... All I can say is WOW! And even though I spoke at green lane, he did not attempt to character assassinate me, both in person and absentia.
Write an email to alkauthar, and ask them one of the fundamental roles i have with them. As a journalist I am surprised you have not. They will happily tell you how they respect the hanafi mathhab and how they wanted help doing justice to the South African public, and acknowledge mistakes at the beginning of their quest in South Africa due to their beginnings not being hanafi. If they were anti hanafi and mathaahib, why would they have giants like sheikh Yawar Baig working with them.
Also, there are other instructors that have deobandi backgrounds in the org. So please be fair with them.
Further more, i agree with you...i wish the conversation was recorded! And Allah is all wise.
Moulana- are you refusing to help me with the response? You have greater knowledge of the Urdu language and can verify in greater detail that piece.
In any case, if I am not afforded the opportunity of working with you on this- i ask Allah to bring someone else.
You have said, charity begins at home, i agree with you- but then again, you do not know me!
Last but not least, I am pleased you do not have a beef with me, because you are someone i respect. Your work is amazing and i have a lot to learn from you. I follow the blog with great interest.
By Allah! Please keep it up, and increase your work load within reason, and teach others your strengths so they can follow on after you. I am willing to be a learner from you if you afford me the opportunity.
From the bottom of my heart, please forgive me for all the hurt I have caused you. Please do not distant me, slander me or accuse me, but forgive me and teach me and guide me and verify. If you are ever in Zimbabwe or Riyadh, please let me know, and when I am in Preston, I will ask moulana Maqbool to bring me over to you...if you don't mind.
I pray we can put this behind us and work towards becoming close friends and look at these emails in the future and smile...
I end off by saying ... Uhibbuka fillah.
Your brother, Sajid.
Taqabbalallahu minna wa minkum saalihal aamaal...
Eid mubaarak.
Moulana... I said what i had to, and definitely see great benefit form the ummah in you, thus ended my email stating I love you for the sake of Allah.
I meant it ...
With that, this will not be a long reply ,,,
I am pleased at your reply as it makes clearer to me even further who you are.
To be honest it is a cliché that you are the person in question and accusing me of losing my memory. I will not say the same you. However I am grateful to Allah that you described the massage moment and am confused as to why you do not recall me asking you the question again in the tent in front of all after learning your good grasp of our mathhab.
Secondly- i was carefully putting together words in my email ... Masha allah, i will take this as a compliment coming from you especially given your profession.
Thirdly- i am pleased you have your witnesses.
Fourthly- You accuse my witnesses as those that thrive at hearing ill about the hanafi mathhab. Moulana, please think good of your muslim brothers, not the worst, which seems to be a pattern with you.
Fifthly- the raajih and marjooh concept is relative, please further research that which is mashhoor.
Sixthly- you judge me guilty because i spoke at green lane masjid . Moulana are you serious? Is this your mathhab as a journalist or usool when deriving rulings.
Seventhly- i am a believer in building bridges, and not burning them. Have you met abu usama or asked him his position with abu haneefa despite some of his academic reservations regarding the imam? Also, if it makes you feel better, I did not get a chance to even be introduced to him, and even though, i will not cut ties with a muslim brother because he swore our imam, even though he did not, according to my knowledge.
During that trip, I made it a point to meet sheikh Zahir Mahmood. Amazing man. Hanafi, but works closely with iera, a salafi group, and carries the same philosophy I carry when working with alkauthar. In the few moments I was with him.... All I can say is WOW! And even though I spoke at green lane, he did not attempt to character assassinate me, both in person and absentia.
Write an email to alkauthar, and ask them one of the fundamental roles i have with them. As a journalist I am surprised you have not. They will happily tell you how they respect the hanafi mathhab and how they wanted help doing justice to the South African public, and acknowledge mistakes at the beginning of their quest in South Africa due to their beginnings not being hanafi. If they were anti hanafi and mathaahib, why would they have giants like sheikh Yawar Baig working with them.
Also, there are other instructors that have deobandi backgrounds in the org. So please be fair with them.
Further more, i agree with you...i wish the conversation was recorded! And Allah is all wise.
Moulana- are you refusing to help me with the response? You have greater knowledge of the Urdu language and can verify in greater detail that piece.
In any case, if I am not afforded the opportunity of working with you on this- i ask Allah to bring someone else.
You have said, charity begins at home, i agree with you- but then again, you do not know me!
Last but not least, I am pleased you do not have a beef with me, because you are someone i respect. Your work is amazing and i have a lot to learn from you. I follow the blog with great interest.
By Allah! Please keep it up, and increase your work load within reason, and teach others your strengths so they can follow on after you. I am willing to be a learner from you if you afford me the opportunity.
From the bottom of my heart, please forgive me for all the hurt I have caused you. Please do not distant me, slander me or accuse me, but forgive me and teach me and guide me and verify. If you are ever in Zimbabwe or Riyadh, please let me know, and when I am in Preston, I will ask moulana Maqbool to bring me over to you...if you don't mind.
I pray we can put this behind us and work towards becoming close friends and look at these emails in the future and smile...
I end off by saying ... Uhibbuka fillah.
Your brother, Sajid.