The truth is, these mistakes are just the tip of the iceberg. Maulana Saad made one evil move that caused the biggest destruction to the 21st Century Ummah.
Assalamualaykum Brothers, before reading further, please understand that our aim is to preserve the true history of Tabligh, no matter how bitter it is. As generations come, this history may be forgotten. We do not promote hate, and certainly not backbiting. See our article ‘Backbiting vs Warning‘. A lot of M Saad followers are just following their local affiliations and are InshaAllah, sincere in their Da’wa. We pray that Allah SWT makes them understand that their support of a controversial figure is slowly damaging the work of Tabligh. Regardless, we are all Muslim brothers. We love and hate only for the sake of Allah.
The 1995 signed agreement made it impossible for Tablighi Jamaat to split
We need to understand that it was IMPOSSIBLE for Tablighi Jamaat to split. Why? Because in 1995, all 10 Shura (governing council) members, including Maulana Saad, signed and agreed there be no more Ameer, but a Shura instead.
The details of the agreement are as follows:
- From now onwards, the responsibility of patronizing the work will not be on one individual but a (World) Shura
- Those who reside in Nizamuddin from the (World) Shura will be members of the Nizamuddin Shura. They will manage the work there.
- Bay’ah (Oath of allegiance) will be stopped in Nizamuddin
Haji Abdul Wahab, 72, vividly recollects the events of this Mashwara. He mentioned it in the November 2016 Raiwind Ijtema:
We sat in a Mashwara (meeting) after the demise of Maulana Inamul Hasan. Saad said that if I am appointed as Amir, those who want Maulana Zubayr will disconnect themselves (from this effort). If Maulana Zubayr is made Ameer, those who want me will disconnect themselves (from this effort). Therefore this effort must be run by Mashwara and Bay’ah will not occur there. This matter was agreed upon.Haji Abdul Wahab Sahab, Raiwind, 2016 (Audio)
Maulana Yaqub also wrote in his letter on 28 August 2016:
The Shura established during the time of Hazratji RA had unanimously decided to stop the practice of Bay’ah, with written proof having all signatures of the shura established during the time of Hazratji RA.Maulana Yaqub’s Letter.
The agreement was signed and verbally announced. Copies were not distributed to the public. There were however too many witnesses to this agreement including Haji Abdul Wahab, Maulana Yaqub, Dr Khalid Siddiqui, etc. Even many of Maulana Saad’s core followers do not deny this agreement.
Source 1: Tablighi Markas Hadhrat Nizhamuddin Kuch Haqaiq, Page 3
Source 2: Ahwal wa Atsar, Page 421
Source 3: Maulana Yaqub’s letter
Source 4: Haji Abdul Wahab’s statement
Source 5: Dr Khalid Siddiqui’s Letter
There is, however, a current misinformation being spread. They claim that since there is no hard copy of the signed agreement, therefore the agreement did not take place. This is false because, in Islam and general law, a verbal agreement with witnesses is sufficient for an agreement to take place. There were just too many witnesses to this agreement.
Bay’ah was stopped in Nizamuddin
Before the Shura, many people would go to Nizamuddin to pledge allegiance (Bay’ah) to the spiritual Sheikh there. This concept of Bay’ah was borrowed from Sufism/Tareqas. During a Bay’ah ceremony, a person pledges to do certain good deeds and not commit certain sins under the guidance of the Sheikh. The Sheikh does not need to be an ‘Ameer’ but it is common that such a person is regarded to have the highest position in the Tabligh.
The hereditary chain of Bay’ah is very important. The Sheikh must learn from another Sheikh and that Sheikh from so-and-so Sheikh. This chain is usually traced up to Rasulullah SAW.
The Sheikh accepting Bay’ah must be given Ijaza (Permission) from the other Sheikh through his chain. When he receives this Ijaza, he becomes what is known as the Khalifa of the chain.
Maulana Zubair was the only person who could accept Bay’ah under the previous Ameer
It is extremely difficult to be awarded the Ijaza to accept Bay’ah under a spiritual chain, especially from prominent Sheikhs. Only a select few would receive it after undergoing extreme spiritual training and exercise.
Maulana Zubair was an exceptional person in this regard. He was not only awarded the Ijaza under Maulana Zakariyya’s chain but was also, the only person, awarded Ijaza under the previous Ameer, Maulana Inamul Hasan’s chain.
As Maulana Zubair was the most qualified to be the next Ameer, Maulana Saad heavily suggested to stop Bay’ah in the 1995 agreement
The 1995 agreement prohibited Bay’ah. This is because such would signify the existence of a single Ameer. As mentioned by Haji Abdul Wahab Sahab, it was Maulana Saad himself that heavily suggested this.
This was a sinister move by him. If Bay’ah was to continue, it was clear that only Maulana Zubair would be qualified to do so. Maulana Zubair had received the direct Ijaza from his father, Maulana Inaamul Hasan (the third Ameer of Tabligh), and also Ijaza from Maulana Zakariyya Khandhlawi.
Maulana Saad treacherously violated the 1995 agreement, restarting Bay’ah in 2014.
In 2014, Maulana Saad treacherously violated the 1995 agreement by restarting Bay’ah in Nizamuddin. This Bay’ah was a proclamation of a new single Amir. No notice and no Mashwara was made with the then-existing world Shura Haji Abdul Wahab, nor with the elders of Nizamuddin.
There is an audio recording of Maulana Saad proclaiming himself as the Ameer and cursing those who don’t accept him to Jahannam (hell).
There is no 2-sided argument! Maulana Saad is CLEARLY at fault.
With this evidence alone, it is concluded that Maulana Saad is the one to be blamed. There is NO two-sided argument. It is but a single man’s treacherous action that has damaged the great effort of Da’wa. The 1995 resolution clearly states there be no more Bay’ah and no more single Amir. Maulana Saad violated this. It is as simple as that.
Note: The author would like to point out that he went through this shift of paradigm. At first, without any knowledge, the author simply assumed the ikhtilaaf was a two-sided argument. Since the Sahaba also had disagreements, both of them have their side of the story, right? Well if that’s the case, does it mean that every disagreement between Islamic bodies in the future means that both are right, without looking into the evidence? Where is justice then?!
Darul Uloom Deoband has recently released a Fatwa with regards to Maulana Saad. They pointed out that one cannot simply derive conclusions based on the stories of the Sahaba (such as the conflict between Ali RA and Mu’awiya RA) without applying the correct methods of Sharia.
Was the 1995 agreement a “Temporary”?
One misinformation being spread was that the 1995 agreement was “temporary”. With this statement alone, one can ask:
- How long is this “temporary” arrangement? Were there any conditions?
- Was it clearly stated that once all Nizamuddin Shura members pass away, the last remaining Nizamuddin Shura would automatically become the World Ameer?
- Was it also stated that the appointment of the World Ameer does not need to be ratified or approved by the World Shura?
There are so many loopholes to this absurd claim!
Any derived understanding of an agreement can never override clear clauses. The agreement clearly states there be no more Ameer and no more Bayah. Maulana Saad violated both these terms.
What’s even more sad is that he did this at the expense of damaging and dividing Tablighi Jamaat!
Maulana Saad had to enforce his leadership by force
There were too many loopholes to Maulana Saad’s absurd claim as the new World Ameer. Many elders did not agree with him. Due to this, on the unfortunate day of 19 June 2016, Maulana Saad did the unthinkable: He initiated a violent purge on Nizamuddin Markaz. This barbaric act was done on the 13th night of Ramadhan!
Anyone who was not in line with Maulana Saad was severely beaten. Blood splattered everywhere. 14 people were so severely beaten that they had to be rushed to the ICU. The screams of the women and the cries of frightened children were heard from inside Markaz’s residential complex. Even the Hufaz and the Ulema were not spared.
We have written a separate article on this: Nizamuddin Markaz’s First Ever Bloodshed – The day our elders left.
Maulana Saad’s treachery has damaged the largest Islamic Movement of the 21st Century
Maulana Saad’s treacherous violation has damaged the largest Islamic Movement of the 21st Century. He took away a large portion of the 100 million+ workers of Tabligh. Many devotees have even stopped doing Tabligh altogether seeing the Fitna that was caused.
In our humble opinion, this is one of the most destructive Fitna of the 21st Century. The effect is a big blow to the largest Islamic movement of this era. All due to one man’s ambition to be the Ameer (leader) at whatever cost.
May Allah SWT protect us all.