ABOUT SWAMIS, PUNDITS AND REVERENDS – THE MUDHILLEEN OF OUR ERA
A Brother from the U.K. says:
With reference to The Majlis’s article titled, “Swami-Pundit Arshad, A Disgrace to Islam,” I have yet to see an evidential/Shar’i negation of The Majlis’s arguments.
People generally fall in to 3 categories when “personalities” are involved
(A) They make reference to adab & wisdom without knowing what either entails. They are easy throwaway terms people use when they are unable to counter the evidence presented.
I will give 3 examples of what people would say is lack of decorum. May be they think Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam and Abu Bakr Radiallahu lacked tact, adab, wisdom and decorum.
Example 1
It was narrated from Ubayy ibn Ka‘b (RA) that a man boasted in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, so he told him to bite his father’s male member, & he didn’t use a metaphor.
The people looked askance at him, so he said: “I can see what you’re thinking, & I can only say this: that Nabi (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) instructed us: ‘If you hear someone boasting in an ignorant manner of his tribal lineage, then tell him to bite his father’s male member, & do not use a metaphor.’”
Example 2
When ‘Urwah ibn Mas‘ood, who came as a negotiator on behalf of the mushrikeen at al-Hudaybiyah, said to the Nabi (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam): “By Allah I see faces, & I see a mixture of people who are most likely going to flee & desert you.” Abu Bakr (RA) said to him: “Suck the clitoris of al-Laat! Would we flee & desert him?” He said: “Who is that?” They said: “Abu Bakr.”
Example 3
Once Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) remarked to a person who looked into the house, that he felt like throwing scissors into his eyes.
(B) The second category of people is those that appeal to authority. This is where they reference the person’s credentials as though he is infallible, i.e. Hadhrat, Shakykh, Principal seemingly makes the person immune from Shaytaan & Nafs. If the scribe of Wahi could make a grave utterance, who is Arshad Madni?
Appeal to authority is not counter-evidence.
(C) Then there is the 3rd category who vainly try to make excuses for clear cut dalliance with kufr. They attempt to find the least plausible or remote reason that defies common sense and logic, which may even work for a layperson who is ignorant, but not for a “Shaykul Hadith.”
(End of the Brother’s analysis)
Our Comment
Our vilifiers and critics – the critics who rail against the Haqq – are bereft of any valid Shar’i basis for their vilification and criticism. They react with base emotion utterly devoid of Shar’i substance. Since they are the cronies and supporters of the mudhilleen, they lapse into emotional diatribes thereby portraying a demented intellect.
These misguided people look at the verbal punishment meted out to the mudhilleen while in entirety casting a blind eye at the crimes of kufr and shirk of the swamis, pundits and reverends. While they take umbrage at our valid and necessary castigation and excoriation, they find it appropriate to accept the kufr and shirk villainy of the mudhilleen whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) feared more than even Dajjaal. They have an inherent aversion for the Haqq. That is why the react irrationally in support of the mudhilleen.
Insha-Allah, the supporters of baatil and of the mudhilleen will never be able to proffer valid Shar’i dalaa-il to even dent our stance on the Haqq. The Qur’aan Majeed states: “Produce your evidence if indeed you are truthful.”
4 Rabiul-Awwaal 1445 – 20 September 2023