THE DECEPTION OF “DYNAMIC IJTIHAD”
(By Hazrat Maulana Ahmad Sadeq Desai)
A CONCERNED BROTHER WRITES:
Please comment on the following views and method adopted by Ahmed Sharif, an active member of the Tabligh Jamaat:
“OK, let me present some facts. You are in a tableeghi jamaat for 40 days. You have been asked to stay in Musjid for 10 days. The condition of the locals is worst (deplorable). When you visit the Musjid you find such bid’ah which you have never seen in your life. Also, you get the news that earlier jamaats were thrown out of the town for not participating in bid’ah. Now my dynamic ijtihad will be to stay in the Musjid and with a heavy heart participate in the bid’ah of the local Musjid. With every participation offer two raka’ts of Taubah. Stay in the Musjid and give da’wah to locals who have never visited the Musjid and who have never recited the Kalimah. They don’t even know the Faraaidh of ghusl. The zealots will suggest: ‘Pack your baggage and leave the town. You are not responsible for giving da’wah to the locals. You shall never be questioned. But if you get involved in bid’ah, you shall be questioned.’ If my act of placing a chaadar (a flower sheet which covers the whole grave) on a grave of a wali helps in the hidaayah of just ONE person, I shall do it. I won’t bother about arm chair executives calling me mushrik or a kaafir……I haven’t done anything wrong to do taubah.” (End of the Brother’s letter)
We trust that the concept of “dynamic ijtihad” evolved by Ahmed Sharif or by whoever else is not official Tabligh Jamaat policy or principle. The butlaan (falsity) of this concept is too glaring and too self-evident for incomprehensibility by even a Muslim minor child of good mental discernment. It is lamentably surprising that an adult Muslim who despite professing that bid’ah is haraam, is able to contaminate himself, his Imaan and his da’wah activity with the Rijs (Filth) of bid’ah and shirk.
The fundamental error of the proponent of ‘dynamic ijtihad’ which in reality is dynamic shaitaaniyat, better known by the designation of Talbeesul Iblees (Deception of Iblees), is his implied belief that Allah Aza Wa Jal is not the Sole Prerogative of Hidaayat. The consequence of this subtle latent idea, is the ghulu’ of the belief that the methodology of the Taligh Jamaat is the sole repository of hidaayat. The Tabligh Jamaat thus displays a flexibility for accommodating baatil similar to the perversity of the allembracing stance of the interfaith movement which offers total accommodation for all brands of religions and ideologies.
But such flexibility which compromises and undermines even one facet or tenet of the Shariah is abhorrent. It is essential for the safety of their Imaan that the proponents of dynamic shaitaaniyat should not view their specific da’wah methodology subjectively. The proponents of this conspicuously erroneous concept of satanism have forgotten that the Ambiya who were the highest and loftiest Institutions of Da’wat and Tableegh were commanded by Allah Ta’ala to declare to their audiences:
“Upon us is only to deliver the Clear Message.”
“I am not a guard over you.”
Placing the Mission of Nubuwwat in proper perspective, Allah Ta’ala said to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam):
“You are not a guard over them.”
Numerous Qur’aanic Aayaat clarify that delivering Hidaayat is not within the power of the Nabi and Muballigh. After almost a millennium, Hadhrat Nooh (alayhis salaam) had a meagre following of about 80 persons. Even his son and wife had rejected him, despite all the efforts and duas of this great Nabi.
There will be a Nabi who will enter Jannat without a single Ummati. He did not fail in his mission. He discharged the obligation of Nubuwwat par excellence without dubious diplomacy, baseless hikmat and mixing and contaminating the Haqq with baatil. But in Allah’s eternal wisdom, his people were not destined for Hidaayat.
We are commanded in the Qur’aan Majeed to follow the Sunnah of Nabi Ibraaheem (alayhis salaam). Now what was the method of his Da’wat and Tableegh? Did he mince his words? Did he speak with a forked tongue? Did he compromise the Ahkaam of the Shariah? Did he pander to the whims and fancies of the people of baatil and shirk in the hope of placating them to achieve the objective of Hidaayat which any way, never was in his control.
Regarding Nabi Ibraahim’s methodology of Da’wat, the Qur’aan Majeed informs us:
“(Remember) when he (Ibraaheem) said to his father: ‘O my father! Why do you worship such an object which cannot hear nor see nor benefit you in any way whatsoever? O My father! Verily, there has come to me from Knowledge which has not come to you. Therefore, follow me, for I shall show you the Straight Path. O my father! Do not worship shaitaan. Verily, shaitaan was unto (Allah) Ar-Rahmaan (an insolent) transgressor. O my father! Verily I fear that a punishment from Ar-Rahmaan will overtake you, then you will become for shaitaan a friend.” (Maryam, Aaayaat 42 – 45)
To gain a favourable audience, Nabi Ibraaheem (alayhis salaam) did not resort to pandering and accursed ‘hikmat’. He proclaimed the unadulterated Haqq, as commanded by Allah Ta’ala:
“And, so not cloak (confuse) the Haqq with baatil nor conceal the Haqq whilst you are aware (of it).” (Al-Baqarah, Aayat 42)
Now liken Nabi Ibraaheem’s Da’wat to a group who enters a town and finds people indulging in such “bid’ah as you have never seen in your life”. He is commanded by Allah Ta’ala to proclaim the Haqq to such people. Rejecting him as the bid’atis of the town rejected and expelled the Jamaat, Nabi Ibraaheem’s father warned:
“Do you turn away from my god, O Ibraaheem? Most certainly, if you don’t desist (with your da’wat), then for a surety I shall stone you. Be gone from me forever!” (Maryam, Aayat 46)
“(Ibraaheem) said to his father and his people: ‘What are you worshipping?’ They said: ‘We worship idols, and we shall resolutely worship them.’ He said: ‘What, do they hear you when you call (them), or do they benefit you or harm (you)?’……..He said: …..‘You and your forefathers, verily, they are my enemies…” (Ash-Shu’raa, Aayaat 71 – 77)
We do not discern a semblance of “dynamic ijtihad” in the method of Da’wat of the Ambiya. The reaction of the kuffaar and mushrikeen was always to expel the Ambiya – to throw them out. This type of reaction for the Haqq is standard procedure of the mushrikeen who are followed by the Bid’atis.
So what did Nabi Ibraaheem (alayhis salaam) do when he was being “thrown out”? Did he resort to “dynamic ijtihad” as advocated by the Tablighi brother? On the contrary, he packed his bags and set out to journey elsewhere in the Path of Allah. He said in response to his father’s order of expulsion:
“Salaam on you. Soon shall I seek forgiveness for you from my Rabb. Verily, He is most Merciful to me. I shall leave you and the object which you worship besides Allah, and I call unto my Rabb.” (Maryam, Aayats 47 and 48)
When Nabi Loot (alayhis salaam) addressed his people with the Haqq, what was their response? The Qur’aan says in this regard:
“Their response was nothing but to say: ‘Expel the Family from your town.” (An-Naml, Aayat 55).
Loot (alayhis salaam) did not adopt the confounded “dynamic ijtihad” which is today being advocated by personnel of the Tabligh Jamaat. He packed his bags and departed.
And what was the Tareeqah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on the occasion of his Da’wat to the mushrikeen of Taaif? When they mocked, jeered and threw him ignominiously out, drenching him in his holy blood, did, he resort to “dynamic ijtihad” thereby compromising the Message of Tauheed to gain the favour of those who were not prepared to listen to him? Rather, Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), departed from the people and place of shirk.
Brother Tablighi! This should be your tareeqah – the pure, unadulterated Tareeqah of Nabi Ibraaheem (alayhis salaam), the Tareeeqah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Tareeqah of all the Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) and the Tareeqah of all the Sulaha of all ages.
Allah Ta’ala explicitly mentions in the Qur’aan Majeed that if He had so willed, all mankind would have been rightly guided. The intransigent rejection of the Truth by the kuffaar and their refusal to believe brought immense grief to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Consoling him, Allah Ta’ala said:
“Perhaps you will destroy yourself with grief (hankering) after them because they do not believe in this discourse.” (Kahaf, Aayat 6).
His duty was only to deliver the Message and leave the Hidaayat aspect to Allah Ta’ala, for He (Azza Wa Jal) says in the Qur’aan:
“Verily, you (O Muhammad!) cannot guide those whom you love. But Allah guides whomever He wills. And, He knows best who is to be guided.”
The Qur’aan, the Ahaadith and the practical Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), of the Sahaabah and of all the Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) are replete with Nusoos defining the pure Tareeqah of Da’wat and Tableegh which proscribes the confounded concept of “dynamic ijtihad” (dynamic shaitaaniyat). The employment of shaitaaniyat for a noble end is “dynamic ijtihad”. But in Islam there is absolutely no scope for shaitaaniyat of any hue and kind. Indulgence in bid’ah and shirk is pure shaitaaniyat which is the very antithesis of Tauheed.
The Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) were despatched to mankind precisely for the eradication of shaitaaniyat. But “dynamic ijtihad” accords acceptance and respectability to shaitaaniyat. Pandering to the whims of the people of Bid’ah and Shirk has never been the methodology of the Ambiya and the Sahaabah. Thus the muballigh’s obligation is to only deliver the Message of Haqq, and not to indulge in baatil, fisq, fujoor, bid’ah, kufr and shirk labouring under the misconception of such haraam indulgence securing converts for the Haqq. The delivery of the Message of Haqq is lawful only by ways and means lawful in the Shariah.
When the mushrikeen of Makkah had requested Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasalam) to adopt a similar ‘dynamic ijtihad’ policy for delivering his Message of Tauheed, Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) stated the methodology of the Haqq:
“If you put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left hand, I shall not desist…”
[REAL REASON FOR USING HARAAM MEANS FOR TABLEEGH AND DAWAH]
The actual reason for the “dynamic ijtihad” or dynamic shaitaaniyat is the attitude of Istikhfaaf (treating Allah’s sacred prohibitions lightly) regarding the crimes of Bid’ah. The preponderance of bid’ah and shirk has desensitized most people regarding the villainy and extreme abhorrence of these vile acts. Will the proponent of “dynamic ijtihad” extend this concept to include all other deeds of sin?
If, for example, a community of Muslims has fallen to such an ebb of degeneration that eating pork, drinking wine and committing zina have become quite acceptable as was the case of the Bosnian Muslims, will the Tablighi brother apply his “dynamic ijtihad” to this scenario as well? In other words, will he participate with the people in the consumption of pork, liquor and indulgence in zina for the purposes of da’wat?
We believe that it is safe to say that the brother will not perpetrate any of these acts which are still viewed with revulsion by Muslims, even by bid’atis. From this perspective, we ask: What is the difference between consuming pork and participating in acts of bid’ah? Why will “dynamic ijtihad” not apply to pork while it applies to bid’ah? If the Tablighi brother avers that his specific mode of da’wah tolerates extension of his “dynamic ijtihad” to embrace pork and liquor consumption, and commission of fornication, then obviously, we shall have no further comment other than saying in the words of the Qur’aan Majeed:
“For you is your deen and for us is our Deen.”
But, we still believe that “dynamic ijtihad” has yet not evolved to embrace pork, liquor and zina, hence the pursuit of our argument holds valid. Among the bid’ah practices of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah, primarily the Qabar Pujaari sect, are acts of graveworship such as sajdah and tawaaf of the graves. Acts of shirk such as praying to the inmates of the Quboor for fulfilment of hopes and desires. Bid’ah also relates to a wide range of innovations which alter and displace the original Sunnah acts of Islam. Bid’ah is worse than consuming pork, liquor and committing fornication. Hence, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“Verily, Allah deprives every person of bid’ah of Taubah.”
Bid’atis are also described in the Hadith as Kilaabun Naar (the Dogs of the Fire). The objective of Da’wat is to propagate the Deen as it was revealed by Allah Ta’ala. The objective is not to ensure and confirm hidaayat for the audience. A noble end does not justify despicable and haraam methods. It is a subtle and a terrible plot of shaitaan to dupe the muballigh with the deception of securing the noble end by means of haraam, bid’ah and shirk.
The employment of haraam methods in fact is tantamount to the tabligh of such vile methods. When the muballigh employs haraam methods, he confers respectability to acts prohibited by Allah Ta’ala. The ignorant audience justifiably assumes the permissibility and nobility of the employed haraam methods. The malady thus becomes further grounded.
This is adequately borne out by the acts of bid’ah of sects such as the Barelwis and others. The innovations of urs, meelaad, qiyaam, etc. were actually initiated by sincere, well-meaning, but shorted-sighted, Auliya – genuine Buzrugs, not quacks and fakes as we find nowadays. Whilst initially these innovated acts were maintained within the bounds of the Shariah, the gradual downslide into the dregs of hard-core bid’ah and shirk commenced with the departure of the Buzrug. Just as the initial permissibility of pictography had culminated in idolatry, so has the initial innovated practices of some Auliya led to the hard-core bid’ah and shirk which we observe today.
Da’wat by means of haraam methods is like washing garments with urine. The more the garment is washed, the filthier it becomes. Similarly, Imaan becomes more contaminated and the brains become more vermiculated and convoluted with the employment of haraam methods. What Allah Ta’ala has made haraam cannever be made halaal regardless of the noble objective being pursued.
The Mushrikeen of Makkah had not requested Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to participate in their kufr and shirk. But to ensure peace, they requested that Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) desist from reviling their idols. Since, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) considered such vilification of idols a necessary corollary of Da’wat of Tauheed, he very resolutely rejected their request.
Hadhrat Ibraaheem (alayhis salaam) displayed the very same attitude of bluntness, devoid of dubious diplomacy, convoluted ‘hikmah’ and compromise with baatil for capturing followers for Tauheed. Thus the Qur’aan Majeed states:
“He (Ibraaheem) said: ‘What! Do you worship besides Allah objects which neither benefit nor harm you in any way whatsoever? Fie on you and the objects which you worship besides Allah! What! Do you have no sense?” (Al-Ambiya, Aayat 67)
In many Verses, the Qur’aan Majeed explicitly negates any compromise with baatil. Actual indulgence in haraam, bid’ah and shirk is the worst form of compromise which undermines the Deen.
[PRE-MEDITATED TAUBAH AFTER COMMITTING HARAAM]
The “dynamic ijtihad” (dynamic shaitaaniyat – talbeesul Iblees) concept of ‘taubah’, is in fact a mockery of Taubah. In this concept, the mock ‘taubah’ is premeditated. It is not the effect of remorse and regret which follows in the wake of unplanned sin. A Mu’min’s sin is not consciously premeditated. He sins in a moment of weakness, and his Taubah follows sincerely. But to sin on the basis of following it up with ‘taubah’ displays reckless and total preterition for the gravity and notoriety of sin.
It is an explicit display of Istikhfaaf for the Ahkaam of the Shariah. To view any tenet of the Shariah insignificant (Istikhfaaf) is kufr. The Mashaaikh say that the one who views sin or any law of the Shariah as being insignificant whether by intention, word or deed, regards Allah Ta’ala as being insignificant, Nauthubillaah! It is pure satansim to commit zina on the basis of an intention to make Taubah after the sin. Such a person displays mental derangement.
It is extremely unintelligent, to say the least, to ruin one’s own Imaan in an endeavour to guide others. Indulgence in haraam, bid’ah and shirk is not a requisite for imparting knowledge of the Faraaidh of Ghusl to ignoramuses. A person who is genuinely concerned with this state of affairs, will explore lawful/halaal avenues and methods for da’wah and tableegh.
Ahmed Sharif claims that his “dynamic ijtihad” is the effect of “guidance from a famous Ahle-karamah” – Buzrug who has died. His act is indeed weird. Guidance is sought in the Sunnah and the Shariah. If an act/method of any Wali is in conflict with the Shariah, it will be haraam to adopt it. We are obliged to follow the Shariah, not the haraam acts and advice of some Buzrug who had erred in his Ijtihad or who was acting in the light of some ilhaam applicable specifically to his peculiar circumstances.
Thus, Hadhrat Khidhr’s (alayhis salaam) killing of the boy may not be presented as a daleel for permissibility. The tawaaf of a Hindu mandir made by a certain renowned Buzrug is not a daleel to justify dubious diplomacy and convoluted hikmah for indulgence in haraam, bid’ah and shirk for achieving a noble end. The Proofs of the Shariah are confined to the Qur’aan, Sunnah, Ijma’ and the Qiyaaas of the Fuqaha. The personal acts and opinions of a Buzrug, be these the effects of Ilhaam and Kashf, may not be proffered as Shar’i evidence or in justification of any act which is in conflict with the Shariah. Thus, the claim in regard to the ‘Ahle Karaamat’ is devoid of Shar’i substance. The criterion is only the Shariah.
The attempt to justify dynamic shaitaaniyat on the basis of Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi’s lighthearted statement to the Shiahs is baseless and the analogy is false. Firstly, Hadhrat Thanvi did not grant the Shiahs ‘ijazah to carry on with the shirk and bidah of Muharrams. The Shiahs were not in need of Hadhrat Thanvi’s permission to indulge in their bid’ah of Taziyahs. The fear was that the entire village of ignorant Shiahs would become Christians as a result of the propagation of the missionaries. The Shiahs refuting the suspicion of them ever becoming Christians, retorted: “We are the people who make Taziyahs”. In other words: How is it possible for such ‘staunch’ Muslims who make Taziahs to become Christians? In response, Hadhrat Thanvi said: “Continue with your Taziyahs”. In other words, ‘Don’t ever embrace Christianity.’
Secondly, Hadhrat Thanvi did not participate in any act of bid’ah when he addressed the Shiahs. On the contrary, the proponent of dynamic shaitaaniyat is fully prepared to indulge in bid’ah and shirk for the sake of his da’wat. Thirdly, Hadhrat Thanvi’s statement was not a policy nor promoted for adoption by others. Fourthly, Hadhrat Thanvi’s statement was merely a personal opinion devoid of Shar’i substance. Fifthly, the probability of error is attached to Hadhrat Thanvi’s statement. An argument against this expression will be valid. The statement detracts from the gravity of the evil and sin of Taziyahs. It can therefore be validly argued that there was no imperative need to encourage the Shiahs with this quip. For example, in response to the Shiah’s contention of Ta’ziyahs it could have been said: “At all cost, remain Muslims.” Or, “Your firmness is commendable.”, etc.
Allaamah Sha’raani (rahmatullah alayh) as well as other authorities of the Shariah, said: “He who clings to the rare/obscure views of the Ulama, verily, he has made his exit from Islam.” Thus the statement of Hadhrat Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) is not a daleel for halaalizing bid’ah and shirk.
We advise the elders of the Tabligh Jamaat to be watchful and to diligently combat ghulu’, for the ultimate consequence of ghulu’ is the derailment of the Movement of Haqq from Siraatul Mustaqeem.
TARIQ JAMEEL’S BAATIL ‘TABLEEGH’ SATANISM IN THE GUISE OF TABLEEGH
It is mentioned in the Hadith, that there are some creatures who are shayaateen (devils) in human form. They beguile the ignorant and the unwary with their glib tongue disgorging haraam and baatil coated with a deceptive ‘deeni’ veneer. One such shaitaan in human form, is the character Tariq Jameel who is causing much damage to the Tablighi Jamaat. He is an enemy from within the ranks of the Tabligh Jamaat. The sooner the Jamaat weeds him out, the better. His propagation of haraam and baatil is undermining not only the Jamaat, but Islam itself.
In exposition of Tariq Jameel’s deviation, a Brother wrote:
“The following are some of the excerpts of the speech this deviate Tariq Jameel, delivered in the Central Masjid, Birmingham on 19th November 2013, and in the Baitus Salam Masjid DHA, Karachi on 15th September 2013. In these two foul speeches Tariq Jameel speaks of meeting the Indian actor, Amir Khan, and in this context he advocates baatil in the name of Tabligh. He said:
‘One of our members, Jawwad Waseem sahib who used to indulge in dramas spent four months in Jamaat .When he came to meet us, there was a Moulvi saheb with us, he was saying, “Moulana (Moulana Tariq Jameel’s teacher), this is Jawwad saheb, he used to work in dramas. Now that he spent four months in Tabligh we are telling him to quit dramas. Moulana replied, “Who will raise those who are lying there, who will raise them’. In order to anger him, he said, ‘Moulana, girls dance nude there’. Moulana replied, “They are our daughters only, our daughters.” He said they are our daughters only. I have learned the Qur’an from this teacher. They have taught us love – to give love to people. Give love, give love. (A concept of ‘giving love’ which accommodates dalliance with nude, dancing girls is zina and prostitution – The Majlis)
I met Amir Khan (the Indian actor). I didn’t tell him anything about Deen. It was just love. Still I receive his messages. (The moron is over-awed by the messages of a cinema-owner – The Majlis) He said he was never influenced by anyone. I am the one by whom he was influenced. Did I do any magic? It was just love. (It was satanistic ‘love’. – The Majlis)
Give love to people. They will come close. There was no way for meeting (the Indian actor). He didn’t know me, I didn’t know him. I was not getting any opportunity to meet (him). (What is so extraordinary in meeting a cinema-owner? This character betrays his mental inferiority complex. – The Majlis)
Allah sent Shahid Afridi (Pakistani cricketer) who is our cricketer. He had a friendship with the actor. I told him over phone to arrange a meeting with him. He arranged the meeting. He said that we have half an hour. I said OK. I went. He (Amir khan) was fearful that a Moulana came. He did not know what to expect. (A faasiq neither fears nor respects a bootlicking molvi who grovels at his feet. – The Majlis)
Would he say: “What you are doing is Haraam. Dancing and singing are haraam. Therefore repent otherwise hell will be your lot. He did not know what would happen. He was afraid. As soon as I sat down, I started speaking about films. (If this bootlicking moilvi had to visit a prostitute, the first thing he would have done would have been indulgence in zina, for such indulgence finds room in his concept of deceptive ‘tableegh’. – The Majlis)
After sometime I felt that from 1960 to 1972, he didn’t know the film industry as much as I knew. (He testifies to his own fisq and fujoor. – The Majlis) So he was awed by my knowledge. (Knowledge of fisq, fujoor and Satanism – The Majlis) It was the knowledge of his profession. He was amazed and tense. Sometimes Dilip Kumar was mentioned, sometimes Raj Kapoor, sometimes Mehboob saheb, and sometimes Madan Mohan. That half an hour passed like that. After half an hour, I said, “Our time is over, let us go, let us sit there at the dining table’. We went and sat there. Again the same conversation started. When all his fear had vanished and he was relaxed, 45 to 50 minutes had passed in that conversation. Then I said, “Amir bhai, you have come on Hajj, shall I tell you the Hajj of our Nabi if you permit?’ He replied, ’Yes, surely tell’. Then I spoke for one and a quarter hour, and he was sitting and listening. He didn’t move from his place.
People are hungry for love, but you start giving Fatwas. I learned about Junaid Jamshed (ex-Pakistani singer) that Tablighi members don’t have food at his home because his earning is Haraam. He is very disheartened. He had just recently come into Tableegh. I had a journey ahead. We were going in Jamat. We had to go via Karachi, so I phoned him to inform him that I would be coming and that I would have food at his home. He said; “At my home?” I said, “Yes, at your home”. He again said, “At my home?” I said, “Yes, at your home”. He repeated: ’Really at my home?” I said, ‘Really at your home’. (Devouring haraam has completely disfigured this molvi’s spiritual countenance. His brains and heart are soiled and corrupted with all the haraam he consumes and in which he so much relishes. – The Majlis)
I was sitting in Raiwand when a person came and said: The owner of Mubarak cinema which was in Lahore, will be coming to Raiwand for a few days. Today he (the cinema-owner) brought something from home and gave it to someone in Raiwand. But he refused to accept it, saying that he could not eat it as his (the cinema-owner’s) earning is Haraam. The cinema-owner was really embarrassed. I said: “Make haste, and bring him to me.” When he came, I asked his name. He said: “Haroon.” I asked about his occupation. Lowering his head, he said that he had a small business. I asked about the type of business he had. He said that it was a small business. I said: Brother, at least tell me what kind of business is it.” He said: “It is a cinema” I asked: “Which cinema is it?”. He replied: “Mubarak cinema, Mubarak.” I said: “Mubarak?” He said: “Yes”. I said: “The one in which I had seen (the film) Shama Parvana’? Mubarak sahib was its owner. His photo appeared . He had died. His sad music used to be played.” He (Haroon) looked at me in amazement.
In this way I befriended him. When I saw him again after some time, he was spending four months (in Tableegh) and he had a big beard. People are hasty in issuing Fatwas. If someone has 100 virtues and one defect, they write off all the virtues. When we left after the meeting of two hours, Amir Khan came down to see us off. I asked if there shall be another meeting after today? He said sure. Thereafter I received his message that he had gone to Madinah, and he apologised. I informed him that I would come to Madinah. I had been to Madinah before Hajj, so he said come on 14th. He had fixed the time from 4-6 pm for me. So Junaid, another member (Tablighi) and I went there at 4pm. At 4:15 pm our sitting with him The deception of “dynamic ijtihad” 8 started. From 4:15 pm to 10:15 pm, 6 hours continuously, and he did not even frown or display any sign of being bored. (We wonder what had happened to Asr, Maghrib and Isha’ – The Majlis)
Then we got up, ready to leave. But he was not happy for us to leave. Give love. Then I faced a test. Last year I was in the Ijtima of Raiwand. I received his message that his film ‘Talaash’ is being released. And that I should pray for its success. I thought: “What now?” Replying is also necessary and prayer also cannot be done. When I received the message, some 10-12 ulama were sitting before me. I asked: “Brothers, I have received this message. Give a response.” They said that this was not their field and that only I should reply. I had been thinking all the day. I didn’t understand what to reply to save me as well as answering. (Because you are a faasiq moron! What was the conundrum? What was the mystery which could not be unravelled? When public indulgence in fisq and fujoor – sitting in a cinema, praising fussaaq and fujjaar, praising evil films, dancing with nude dancing girls, etc., etc., are all valid in the wretch’s concept of ‘tableegh’, then why is praying for the success of the pornography not permissible? What is so difficult about this? – The Majlis)
Then, the next day also passed. I didn’t understand anything (because your brains are fossilized with fisq and deception – The Majlis). I was making wudhu of Asr when suddenly Allah put an idea in my heart. So I immediately texted him the message, “Amir bhai, Allah rarely gives a creative mind to someone. He doesn’t give it to everyone. This will be a great gift of Allah. In the time I had spent with you, I saw that Allah had given you a creative mind. You are a creator (of haraam, fisq and fujoor –The Majlis), and the people who are of this kind, don’t care about success and failure. They are only concerned with their work.” .Immediately I received his response. “You are right, you are right.”
(The following is a different incident). I messaged him (i.e. the Indian actor Amir Khan) that I am Tariq Jameel and am in Hong Kong. Could I call him? If I don’t get his reply, I don’t call him. Sometimes he himself calls me; sometimes he sends me a message that I could call him. So after a while he phoned that he was in Delhi. He was in a conference (with the devils – The Majlis). He had come out when he saw my message. Now he would speak to me. While speaking he said his film (Talaash) succeeded as a result of my dua. I said I had not prayed.
Brothers, distribute love. …. Pleasure is when you hold someone falling down. What is difficult in calling an evil person evil. Holding the hand of the evil person, and taking him out of the evil is the actual work. Madrasah is the (place for) the language of Fatwa. The language of the mimbar (pulpit) is not Fatwa. The language of pulpit is persuasion, winning the hearts. If Fatwas are issued against each other from here too, then what is now happening will happen.” (End of the moron’s disgorgement of ghutha (baatil rubbish))
Distribution of Muhabbat (love) which is integral to the Qur’aanic methodology of Da’wat and Tableegh commanded in the aayat: “Dispute with them with wisdom”, and in the aayat: “Call to the Path of your Rabb with wisdom and beautiful calling..”, never ever envisages commission of zina with a prostitute in order to please her and to entice her into joining the ladies tabligh jamaat. It (Muhabbat) does not countenance consumption of liquor with a drunkard in order to befriend him for bringing him into the path of Islaah (reformation). It does not permit the perpetration of fisq, fujoor and haraam to hook flagrant sinners into tableegh activities or to the path of moral reformation.
No one has ever disputed the method of calling people to the Path of the Deen with love and kindness, and with tender words. But, to deceive a transgressor and to minimize the major sins in which he/she indulges by casting oneself into the dregs of Satanism and flagrant sin, is deception piled on deception. It is pure Satanism. It testifies for the fact that this miserable Tariq character is firmly enmeshed in shaitaan’s tentacles. He propagates Satanism whilst labouring under the satanistic deception of his shaitaani method being valid Tableegh. His jahl-e-murakkab is indeed mind boggling.
Contrary to the averment of this moron, the mimbar in fact is the valid and best platform for the dissemination of fatwas – the fatwas of the Deen – the fatwas of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Fatwas are not meant for assignment into antiquity or for oblivion in the kutub or for wiling away the time in academic and technical hair-splitting and atom-splitting argument in Madaaris. The objective of Fatwa is amal to gain Allah’s pleasure and for Najaat (Salvation) in the Aakhirah.
But for the moron with his hideous idea of ‘tableegh’ which embraces all shades of fisq, fujoor, baatil and kufr, the masaa-il of the Shariah are a past-time hobby not intended for practical implementation. His jahaalat is colossal. To win over a person who is plodding the path of sin and baatil, it is never permissible to consume his haraam food, as this vile Tariq moron advocates and practices.
If a cinema-owner or a prostitute or a gambler, etc. is engaged in discussion with a view to invite him/her to the Path of Islaah, no one advocates being rude and harsh with them. They are not to be despised. Denying them the display of good conduct is not promoted. But, participating with them in their sins or consuming their haraam food is never ever allowed in the Shariah. The moron’s brains and heart appear to be totally corrupted as a consequence of devouring the haraam gifts offered to him.
When refusing the haraam gift of a person, it is not said that the person should be humiliated or embarrassed. In privacy, the person should be politely and affectionately explained. Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar is Waajib, and this obligation can be discharged beautifully with muhabbat.
Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not participate in the shirk and idolatry of his kinsmen in order to entice them to the Tauheed of Islam. He was commanded by Allah Ta’ala to proclaim the Haqq without the slightest ambiguity. Words may not be minced. It is haraam to speak with a forked tongue thereby casting the audience into doubt, uncertainly and even dhalaal (deviation).
The Haqq is crystal clear. It may not be contaminated with the darkness of the bestial nafs and the deceptive methods of ‘tableegh’ which Shaitaan inspires into the clogged brains of the likes of the Tariq Jameel character. The Ummah is not in need of deviate morons such as Tariq Jameel to teach Muslims his rubbish methods of satanic propagation. There is a wealth of guidance and a plethora of examples in the glittering Ways of our Akaabir Auliya and Ulama who had practically demonstrated the Qur’aanic methodology of calling to Islaah with Beautiful Aquittal.
Once Hadhrat Ibraahim Bin Adham (rahmatullah alayh) passed by a man who lay sprawling on the ground. Foam was gushing from his mouth. He bent down to inspect. The man was ‘dead’ drunk. Overcome with grief, Hadhrat Ibn Adham with his handkerchief wiped the foam from the mouth of the drunkard. Whilst wiping, he sadly said: “Allah Ta’ala has bestowed the bounty of the tongue for His Thikr.” After wiping the foam from the man’s mouth, Hadhrat Ibn Adham departed.
That night, in a dream he sees a Vision of Allah Ta’ala exclaiming: “O Ibraahim! For My Sake, you cleaned his mouth. Now, for your sake, I have cleansed his heart.” When the drunkard had sobered up, people who had witnessed the episode, informed him. Hadhrat Ibraahim’s statement struck a responsive chord in his heart. He hastened to the Shaikh, made taubah, took bay’t and joined the Jamaat of the Sufiya.
To achieve this objective of Islaah, Hadhrat Ibraahim (rahmatullah alayh) did not consume liquor. He did not have to beat about the bush and convey the idea that liquor is halaal as Tariq Jameel had created the satanic idea of haraam food and haraam earnings being halaal, and of music and cinema being halaal. Regardless of the moron’s intention, his ostensible acquittal is kufr for he, by his practical action, traded the idea that music, haraam food and the fisq and fujoor of the cinema-owner are all halaal. He should renew his Imaan and also his Nikah.
Beautiful Preaching never means forked-tongued ‘tableegh’ which leaves a man to flounder in the zulmat (darkness) of jahaalat. “Giving love” of which he pretends to be having a monopoly, must never compromise the clear and glittering Haqq of Allah’s Shariah. Consorting with baatil is not Mauizah Hasanah (Beautiful Preaching). On the contrary, it is Satanism. It is talbees-e-iblees.
Conveying the vile notion of nude dancing girls being acceptable in Islam, speaks volumes for this man’s deviation from Siraatul Mustaqeem. He lacks the ability of distinguishing between left and right, hence he is capable of uttering such blasphemous rubbish. Falling head over heels to curry favour with a wealthy cinema-owner bears testimony to this man’s greed for the dunya. He further suffers from gross mental inferiority.
Did he ever search for a faqeer in some squatter camp or someone sleeping in the streets for his tableegh? But he went out of his way to gain the favour of a faasiq of wealth. His efforts in this direction are tantamount to bootlegging and bootlicking. Under guise of tableegh he pursues the dunya. Thus, coming within the purview of the Hadith:
“With the amal of the Aakhirah, they will pursue the dunya.”
This is among the Signs of Qiyaamah. He bootlicks the wealthy fussaaq while ignoring the poor fussaaq. He accords obsequious attention to the wealthy fussaaq. But for the poor who are surrounding him, he has a different approach and treatment. A scholar at the door of the wealthy is indeed a vile character.
This vile character proudly displays his knowledge about haraam films. He excelled even the cinema-owner in this haraam science of fisq and fujoor. And, he is proud of it. His concept of love and tableegh requires the lauding of praise on fussaaq and fujjaar actors, prostitutes and scoundrels in direct conflict with the Ahaadith. Invite the sinners to the Path of Islaah without making a hash of the Deen. The ‘give love’ concept of Tariq Jameel is a lot of hogwash.
“Moving for four months in jamaat”, is not a halaalizer of haraam food. For the sake of enticing a man into four months, haraam food does not become halaal. It is the abundant consumption of haraam food which has corroded the thinking process of this moron ‘tablighi’.
When an ignoramus requests that dua should be made for the success of his zina, fisq and fujoor, there is no need to wait for kashf (divine inspiration) for understanding what the response should be. But, this moron was in a quandary for a couple of days when he was requested by the cinema-owner to make dua for the success of his zina film. He had to hallucinate some weird response which he attributes to divine inspiration for placating the cinema-owner. His fossilized brain failed to understand the simple logical command of Amr Bil Ma’roof to be beautifully acquitted. A response which further solidifies the haraam indulgence of the cinema-owner is a satanic response.
This utterly shameless, impostor molvi proudly advertises that he had “watched the sharma parvana film”. He furthermore praises the haraam photo and the haraam music which the moron describes as ‘sad music’. What kind of devilish ‘tablighi’ is this mudhil (one who deviates others from Siraatul Mustaqeem). Regarding such vile specimens of deceit and misguidance, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“Verily, I fear for my Ummah the aimmah mudhilleen.”
So-called scholars who mislead people are among these ‘aimmah’ for whom Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) expressed fear.
Uttering a blatant lie, Tariq Jameel said: “If someone has a 100 virtues and one defect, they write off all.” From whence did he suck out this blatant falsehood. He should cite specific examples to bolster his baseless contention. If one abstains from eating the haraam food of a cinema-owner, it does not follow therefrom that he has been written off and consigned to Jahannum. If people do not associate with a prostitute, it does not follow that she has been condemned to Jahannam.
Dissociation from flagrant sinners is a Shar’i command. Such dissociation is not necessarily the effect of pride. The flagrant sinner is not being despised when he/she is ostracized. We say ‘flagrant’ because everyone is a sinner. But there is a vast difference between those whose sins are hidden, and those who display blatant disregard for Allah’s commands. They recklessly sin and rebel against Allah Ta’ala in public. They advertise their villainy. They are proud to display and promote their fisq and fujoor.
If a faasiq comes forward and expresses the desire to enter into the Path of Taubah and Islaah, no one will despise him/her. On the contrary, he/she will be welcomed. Yes, a moron mudhil has to be written off for safeguarding the Imaan and Akhlaaq of Muslims. No one objects to ‘holding the hand of the evil person and taking him out of his evil’.
The episode of Hadhrat Ibraahim (rahmatullah alayh) mentioned earlier, adequately portrays the Tareeqah of our Tableegh. The objection is directed at the one like this moron who indulges in the evil of the one who is trapped in evil. He indulges in the evil with the ludicrous and haraam justification of ‘tableegh’. He participates in the fisq and fujoor of the person whom he supposedly invites towards virtue. It is his participation which is abhorrent, haraam and objectionable, not his ‘holding the hand of the evil person’.
Muslims should beware of this fake ‘muballigh’. He is a threat for Imaan. He is a halaalizer of haraam. With his forked tongue he seeks to deviate people to take the path of Jahannam. It is not permissible to listen to his lectures. His speeches are ‘zukhruful qaul’ (satanically adorned speech) according to the Qur’aan Majeed.