There are repeated requests from within India and outside that Darul Uloom Deoband should express its view regarding the Rujoo (revocation) of Maulana Muhammad Saad from his comments about the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him).

It is hereby clarified that as far as the Ruju of Maulana Muhammad Saad from this particular issue (about Prophet Musa) is concerned it is somehow satisfactory. However, concerns about the intellectual misguidance expressed in Darul Uloom’s position cannot be ignored. Even after many attempts on Rujoo, we have noticed that the incumbent person is still making new controversial statements. The same self-styled Ijtihad, wrong arguments, and incorrect interpretation of Sharia texts on his specific thought about Da’wah are prominent. Due to this, not only the servants of Darul Uloom, but all other scholars of Haqq (righteous scholars) strongly oppose strongly oppose his ideology. 

Those who turn to us in this regard are once again reminded that Darul Uloom Deoband has distanced itself from the internal dispute of Tablighi Jamat and it has declared its impartiality clearly from the beginning. However, whenever people approach Darul Uloom for its views about wrong ideologies and thoughts, Darul Uloom always strives to guide the Ummah considering it its religious duty.

Signatures (Maulana Mufti) Abul Qasim Nomani, (Maulana Mufti) Sayeed Ahmad Palanpuri, (Maulana Syed) Arshad Madani. Date 13/05/1439 AH / 31/01/2018

The post Darul Uloom Deoband’s Clarification on Maulana Saad’s Rujoo 2018 first appeared on Tablighi Jamaat.

We must ask: How can we allow someone who has been issued fatwas to lead this global effort and be the face of Tabligh?

Maulana Saad has tried to counter these fatwas in various ways. Here, we list and answer them all.

Assalamualaykum Brothers, before reading further, please understand that our goal is to protect this effort of Da’wa! We do not promote hate or backbiting. Many people who follow Maulana Saad don’t know what’s happening. They are simply following their local Markaz (Tablighi Centres). The main question is whether one should support Maulana Saad despite these Fatwas, at the risk of dividing Tablighi Jamaat. Isn’t it harmful if such a person becomes the face of Tabligh? Remember, no matter how flawed a Muslim might be, he is still our Muslim brother. We love and dislike only for the sake of Allah.

TLDR; Here are the 10 Ways Maulana Saad Tries to Counter Deoband’s Fatwa:

1. Attacking the credibility of Deoband
2. Claiming that Maulana Saad already repented and made Rujoo
3. Claiming that we should not follow Deoband as Deoband discourages Masturat Jamaat
4. Claiming that Deoband misunderstood his “high-level” speech about Taqwa
5. Claiming that the Fatwas were politically motivated
6. Claiming that they have Ulemas as well, and it is a difference of opinion
7. Misquoting Deoband’s Fatwa #69158, claiming those against Nizamuddin are misguided
8. Misquoting Deoband’s 2017 Clarification, claiming Deoband has cleared Maulana Saad
9. Misquoting Deoband’s older/deleted Fatwas praising Maulana Saad (Fatwas before 2016)
10. Misquoting Deoband Fatwa #152687, claiming Deoband have no issues with Maulana Saad and Nizamuddin

#1 – Attacking the credibility of Deoband

Maulana Saad has attacked the credibility of Deoband to discredit the Fatwa. For example, his supporters have claimed that:

• Deoband is not as “pure” as we think. Deoband itself split into two in 1982 (becoming Darul Uloom Deoband & Darul Uloom Waqf). A false one-sided story of this event is being spread, claiming that the Arshad Madani family was evil and politically motivated.
• Deoband today is not the same as Deoband in the past.
• Deoband has been ‘taken over’.

Our Answer

Deoband is an independent institution. It is not controlled by any government and is more reliable than any government-controlled institution worldwide.

Deoband is also the largest representative of the Hanafi School of Thought, which forms the biggest group within the Ulema of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah today. To simply dismiss it because one disagrees with one of its Fatwas is unreasonable.

The 1982 Deoband Split

Regarding the Deoband split, Darul Uloom Deoband went through an administrative split 40 years ago in 1982. Interestingly, the other branch (Darul Uloom Waqf) has never issued any statement supporting Maulana Saad. In fact, until now, we have not seen a single official Fatwa from any well-known institution countering Deoband’s Fatwa against Maulana Saad in detail.

We should also ask: what is the purpose of spreading this 40-year-old Deoband split history to the public? Is it to discredit Deoband because they have split? Are we trying to reject Deoband completely? Reject the Nizami Dar system? All because they said something we don’t like about one person? If the point is to dismiss Deoband since they have split into two, what about Tablighi Jamaat itself, which has also split into two? Would that discredit the entire movement?

#2 – Claiming that Maulana Saad has repented and made Rujoo

After Deoband’s first 2016 Fatwa, Maulana Saad started a Rujoo (retraction) process. This is often used to prove that Maulana Saad has repented.

Our Answer

We have covered Maulana Saad’s Rujoo in detail here. In summary:

1. Maulana Saad DID NOT complete a full Rujoo. His Rujoo was only limited to his statement about Prophet Musa AS.
2. Maulana Saad continues to make controversial statements even after the Rujoo. Is this a sign that someone has truly repented?
3. Darul Uloom Deoband and many other institutions have not withdrawn their fatwas and stance on Maulana Saad. In fact, in 2023, they issued a new fatwa stating that their previous position on him still applies (See the 2023 Fatwa).

#3 – Claiming that we should not follow Deoband as Deoband discourages Masturat Jamaat

It is known that Deoband has not recommended Women’s Jamaat (Masturaat Jamaat). This is a Jamaat where both men and their Mahram (usually the wife) go together.

This reason has been used to claim that we can be selective in following Fatwas. That is, since we do not follow Deoband’s guidance on Masturat Jamaat, we should also not follow their Fatwa on Maulana Saad.

Our Answer

• First, Deoband has never said we must NOT participate in Masturaat Jamaat. They simply don’t recommend it. This is not the same comparison. For example, a recommendation might be: “I don’t recommend bringing your mobile phone to the Masjid as it may distract you during prayers”.
  
  On the other hand, many well-known institutions have encouraged Masturat Jamaats (Example here).
• In the case of Maulana Saad, Deoband clearly stated that it is not permissible to listen to or share his speeches. If it is not permissible to listen to him, how can one accept him as their leader?
• Second, not only Deoband has issued a Fatwa but many other institutions have also issued Fatwas on Maulana Saad. Some of these institutions have even encouraged Masturat Jamaat.
• Third, we have not seen any Fatwas from other respected institutions defending Maulana Saad in detail against these Fatwas. This is very different from the Masturat Jamaat issue, where many institutions have supported and praised it.

#4 – Claiming that Deoband misunderstood his “high-level” speech about Taqwa

The following claims have been made:

• Maulana Saad’s speech is a high-level speech. They say he is not speaking in terms of “Fatwa” but in terms of “Taqwa” (God-consciousness).
• The Fatwa was issued based on inadequate analysis. Deoband only listened to parts of his speeches.
• The speeches were taken out of context and were misunderstood.

In Indonesia/Malaysia, we have also heard references to the story of Mansour Al-Hallaj, a 9th Century Sufi who was executed for his controversial poetry.

Our Answer

To answer this, let us first ask:

• Is the claim that Deoband made a mistake a fair assessment? Or is it just because some people don’t agree with their Fatwa?
• Does this mean that whenever a person doesn’t like a Fatwa, they can simply ignore it? What then is the purpose of the Ulema? To simply satisfy personal preferences?

Ultimately, is a biased personal opinion more reliable than Deoband’s impartial judgment? Claiming Deoband’s Fatwa on Maulana Saad was wrong is a biased view. It cannot be compared to an objective and neutral assessment from the well-established Daarul Ifta of Deoband.

Also, saying that Deoband only listened to parts of Maulana Saad’s speeches is far from reality. All of Maulana Saad’s speeches are available and sold in Nizamuddin Markets on CDs. Many are even available on YouTube. Deoband took almost 2 years to finalize this Fatwa (2014-2016).

Their recent 2023 Fatwa shows an even more detailed analysis. To claim these Fatwas were not based on proper analysis is completely unreasonable. They have stated:

It seems that the incumbent person continues to insist on his distorted view and self-made ideas. This proves the position of Darul Uloom Deoband that the matter is not a partial misunderstanding of parts of the speech.

Darul Uloom Deoband Latest Fatwa 2023

Using the story of Mansour Al-Hallaj as an example that Maulana Saad’s speeches were misunderstood

The story of Mansour Al-Hallaj is well known. He was a famous 9th-century Sufi who was executed for his controversial statements. Al-Hallaj’s most controversial statement was “Ana Al-Haq” which means “I am the Truth/Reality.” The term “Al-Haq” can also refer to Allah, and some people believed he was claiming to be God with this statement. It was said that when he was executed, his spilled blood formed the Arabic word ‘Allah.’ However, there is no historical proof of this incident, and it may have been exaggerated by his followers.

The problem with comparing Mansour Al-Hallaj’s story to Maulana Saad’s situation is that the circumstances are very different:

1. The Shafi’i judge at that time refused to issue a Fatwa declaring Al-Hallaj misguided. They said that his words alone were not enough to condemn him. This is different from Maulana Saad’s case, where many Fatwas have been issued against him.
2. Al-Hallaj’s execution was politically motivated and was arranged by a Shia administrator at that time. Maulana Saad’s Fatwas were issued by one of the most respected Islamic institutions in the world.
3. Al-Hallaj was expressing poetry, which is meant to be understood symbolically. Maulana Saad, on the other hand, was giving a Bayan (speech) which is meant to be understood literally.

Interestingly, Mansour Al-Hallaj’s story has also been used by Qadiyanis to justify Mirza Ghulam’s words. (Note: we are not suggesting that Maulana Saad’s current deviation is similar to Mirza Ghulam).

#5 – Claiming that the Fatwas were politically motivated

Some claim that Deoband was pressured to issue the Fatwa. There are even false claims that Deoband was paid to write the Fatwa. They allege that many Ulema left Deoband after the Fatwa was issued. They also suggest that the timing of the Fatwa (during a leadership dispute) indicates a political motive.

Our Answer

These allegations are completely baseless. Anyone can make up such stories! These kinds of accusations are also dangerous as they could provoke Maulana Saad’s more extreme followers toward violence.

There is simply no evidence for these claims. The statement that “Many Ulema left Deoband after the Fatwa was issued” is false. There is no proof of this claim.

As for the timing of the Fatwa, Maulana Saad’s ideas in his speeches have been criticized since 2001. Darul Uloom Deoband itself has been receiving complaints since 2005. Their official study of his statements began in 2014. They even sent letters to Maulana Saad to advise him before publishing the Fatwa, as they wanted to protect his reputation and the good image of Tabligh. They waited for a long time, but Maulana Saad simply ignored them. This issue is therefore not new, and claiming the timing suggests a political motive is incorrect.

#6 – Claiming that they have Ulemas as well, and it is just a difference of opinion

Maulana Saad claims that they also have Ulema supporting them and this is all just a misunderstanding or “difference of opinion.”

Our Answer

This reasoning has misled many people. Here, we respond with 5 simple points:

1. The best answer to this is given by our respected Mufti Abdul Malek: “The claim that ‘we also have Ulema’ is highly incorrect and somewhat disrespectful. Shouldn’t we be following the Ulema rather than the Ulema following us?”
2. Just because a group has Ulemas with them does not mean the group is automatically right. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (Qadiyani) also had Ulemas who were Hanafi Darul Uloom graduates supporting him. In fact, his successor (Hakeem Noor-ud-Din) was a scholar as well (*Note: We are not suggesting that Maulana Saad’s current deviation is similar to Mirza Ghulam)
   
   Some scholars support politicians; does the fact that these politicians have scholars on their side automatically make them free from corruption?
3. We are not talking about support from individual Ulema, but from institutions of Ulema. These institutions have studied the matter impartially. In Islam, Ijma of Ulema (Consensus of Scholars) is one of the four valid sources of our religion. Many institutions have issued Fatwas against Maulana Saad. However, there is not a single Fatwa from any well-known institution that has defended Maulana Saad.
4. We need to understand what kind of support an Ulama is giving. If an Ulama is simply visiting Maulana Saad, there is nothing wrong with that, nor does it mean they agree with him. Maulana Saad is still our Muslim brother; there is nothing wrong with visiting or talking to him.
5. A “difference of opinion” can only exist when there is an actual “difference of opinion”! This happens when there are similar numbers of contradictory Fatwas issued on a matter. Until now, there is not a single Fatwa from any well-known institution that counters in detail the Fatwas against Maulana Saad. This therefore cannot be considered a ‘difference of opinion’.

#7 – Misquoting Deoband’s Fatwa #69158, claiming those against Nizamuddin are misguided

In August 2016, Deoband issued Fatwa #69158:

• Those who say the people of Nizamuddin are misguided are the ones who are misguided!
• People who are in Nizamuddin are of the Ahlul Haq (Righteous People) and Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah!

This Fatwa is often quoted claiming that Deoband actually supports Maulana Saad and that those who oppose him are the misguided ones.

Before anything else, please note that this Fatwa has been deleted from Deoband’s website! Check the following link which no longer exists:

https://darulifta-deoband.com/home/ur/fatwa/69158

We have an old screenshot of that Fatwa before it was deleted:

Our Answer:

First of all, as mentioned before, this Fatwa has been deleted by Deoband!

Second, this Fatwa was issued on August 29, 2016. This date is BEFORE Deoband’s First Fatwa on Maulana Saad (which was issued on November 28, 2016). The newer Fatwa was the result of a more thorough analysis and specifically identifies Maulana Saad as having deviated from the path of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

#8 – Misquoting Deoband’s 2017 Clarification, claiming Deoband has cleared Maulana Saad

On August 9, 2017, Darul Uloom Deoband issued a clarification letter stating that they are not involved in the administrative matters of Tablighi Jamaat (i.e., Shura vs. Saad) and remain neutral on this issue.

Click here => Full letter and English translation

Some have claimed that this letter clears Maulana Saad from his errors since Deoband is “Neutral.”

Our Answer

This conclusion is a major stretch. Deoband’s statement does NOT clear Maulana Saad at all. The statement simply says that Deoband has nothing to do with the current Tablighi Jamaat split and supports neither “Saad” nor “Shura” in this administrative matter. This is certainly the proper position for an outside institution to take.

There is also wisdom in Deoband not taking sides on this administrative issue. Deoband is looking at the bigger picture. What if the dispute between Saad and Shura is resolved and Maulana Saad rejoins the Shura? Would this automatically clear him from his problematic statements? Certainly not! The Fatwa on Maulana Saad would still apply as it has nothing to do with Tablighi Jamaat’s administration.

Other Deoband Fatwas on neutrality

Other similar fatwas regarding Deoband’s neutrality concerning the Tablighi Jamaat Split have also been quoted:

• Fatwa #156131 on Deoband’s site
• Fatwa #163359 on Deoband’s Site.

As mentioned previously, being neutral on Tablighi Jamaat’s administration does not mean they have cleared Maulana Saad. Deoband is addressing Maulana Saad’s problematic ideologies, not Tablighi Jamaat’s administrative matters. Even if Maulana Saad reunites with the Shura, the Fatwa would still apply.

#9 – Misquoting Deoband’s older/deleted Fatwas praising Maulana Saad

Some older Deoband fatwas that appear positive toward Maulana Saad have been quoted. These Fatwas were issued before the first 2016 Fatwa on Maulana Saad.

These Fatwas have been deleted! For example:

• 2015 Fatwa #69158 on Tablighi Jamaat (Deleted)
• 2014 Fatwa #52989 on Maulana Saad (Deleted)

We only have a copy of the 2014 Fatwa #52989 which reads as follows:

Question:

About 8 to 10 days ago I had a dream where I saw Maulana Saad. His face was facing north. He asked me to give Karguzari about Nurani Masjid. I told him that we normally meet people at Isha time. We would then bring people to the Masjid and give Da’wa to them. This I would do sometimes. All of a sudden he asked me, “Are you serving the markaz people or not?” I said yes, I do Khidmat as well. Then I woke up.

Deoband’s Answer:

Masha Allah, you are a very good person. Maulana Saad and all the respected elders in Nizamuddin are worthy of praise as the ummah gets many benefits from them. Continue making efforts sincerely and follow the Usool. This is important for everyone.

[End of Deleted Fatwa]

Our Answer

These older fatwas have been deleted by Deoband! The deletion shows how seriously Deoband takes its stand against Maulana Saad.

Many of us at Tablighi-Jamaat.com were once Maulana Saad’s followers. We discovered the truth, admitted our mistakes, and had to set aside our pride to accept it.

#10 – Misquoting Deoband Fatwa #152687, claiming Deoband have no issues with Maulana Saad and Nizamuddin

In Darul Uloom Deoband’s Fatwa #152687, someone asks whether a mosque can prohibit a Jamaat if that Jamaat is affiliated with Nizamuddin.

This fatwa has been partially misquoted as:

It is not right to prevent a Jamaat from working in the Masjid because they are affiliated with “Nizamuddin”.

Based on this, some conclude that Deoband has no issues with Nizamuddin and that the Fatwa against Maulana Saad has been withdrawn.

Our Answer

The answer in Deoband’s Fatwa #152687 has only been partially quoted. Deoband’s complete answer is:

If a Jamaat refrains from exaggeration in their Bayans, Da’wa affairs and observes the etiquette of the Masjid while staying there, then it is not right to prevent the Jamaat from working in the Masjid simply because they are affiliated with “Nizamuddin”. Those who prevent the Jamaat from working in the Masjid despite knowing that the Jamaat will refrain from the above-mentioned problematic behaviors, should not do so.

Link to the Fatwa on Deoband’s Site.

Nowhere in this fatwa does Deoband clear Maulana Saad’s mistakes. In fact, it further emphasizes his issues to such an extent that Deoband recommends placing conditions on such Jamaats.

Conclusion

In summary, it is impossible to refute Darul Uloom Deoband’s Fatwa against Maulana Saad. All the counter-arguments presented are like “trying to fit an elephant into a rabbit hole.” Regardless of whatever counter-arguments are given, our opening statement still holds true:

Would we allow someone with a history of reckless driving to drive our car? This is the blessed work of Da’wa! How can we allow someone who has been issued fatwas against him to lead this global effort? Let alone be the face of Tabligh?

May Allah SWT guide us all.

The post 10 Ways How Maulana Saad Counter Deoband’s Fatwa first appeared on Tablighi Jamaat.

For the Fatwa in other languages:

Original Fatwa (Urdu)

Arabic Translation of the Fatwa – 2023 فتوى دار العلوم بشأن المولوي

মাওলানা সাদ সাহেব সম্পর্কে দারুল উলুম দেওবন্দের ২০২৩ সালের ফতোয়া

The Fatwa

[Question (Page 1)]

بسم اللہ الرحمن الرحیم

“In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.”

To: Respected Maulana Mufti Abul Qasim Sahib Naumani Damat Barkatham and Respected Mutfis of Darul Uloom Deoband

From: Ulema of Madhya Pradesh and Bhopal

Assalamualaykum WRT

It is brought to your kind attention that the level of ignorance is increasing in a famous and high-ranking responsible person of Tablighi Jamaat. Before Ramadan this year, we have presented to you his controversial statements which were delivered at the Bhopal Ijtema of 2022. You expressed concerns, however, no written response was received. Now, a similar controversial statement was delivered in April 2023. This controversial statement has confused the Ulema and administrators of Madrasas. We were surprised that this person is challenging the Ulema and Mashaikhs of the whole world. The following are his exact words:

The Incumbent person’s statement on 29th April 2023

“The Holy Prophet SAW and his successors had made it a habit to refuse wealth that came to them and did not accept the wealth that was offered to them due to their religious services. The Sahaba (Companions of the Prophet SAW) never knew about wages. How do we profit (from these services)? They never thought that it was possible to generate profit from their religious services.

People today are accustomed to taking wages for any religious services they do; Even when they are not in need; Even when they are self-sufficient! The Sahabah served the religion despite being in need. They never accepted wages. Today, in this age, this has become a habit of the people. 

I believe that doing business for a scholar with knowledge of Deen (Religion) is better than doing business without the knowledge of Deen. A scholar knows hadith. It is thus more important and necessary for a scholar and preacher to do business than an ordinary ignorant person who has no responsibility for any religious work. Yet today, we say it is not necessary for them to do business! Where did this idea come from?  Where did the idea come from that getting involved in worldly activities will cause Mashaikhs, Scholars, Muhadditheen and Preachers disruption in their Deen (Religion)? I think that doing business will support their work of Deen. They would sit in the Market and demonstrate to the Ummah how to do business practically. It is a pity that in this era, just like the non-Muslims, Muslims consider it bad to do business with scholars and priests. 

To those who say doing business or engaging in any worldly pursuits is detrimental, I have explained the main point. Doing business for a religious teacher and a scholar is more important and necessary than a non-scholar. Two reasons. 

So that his religious services should be done with respect to the Makhluq (creations of Allah) and other things. What I am saying here is a very important point! The action of Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) shows that even as a Caliph, they were still trying to do business. Imagine being the Ameer of all Muslims. How many tasks will be under their responsibility? Yet they do not consider trading with all these preoccupations as a hindrance to their Caliphate or detrimental to it. Why is it a problem? They do their work (as a Caliph), and they also do their business. This is why I am saying this.

Muslims must have practical connections with worldly fields. Just studying books, I do not consider it sufficient for our Deen. Studying books is not practical learning. Understand that we have limited the non-practical aspects of learning. Studying books is a limited non-practical education. In the time of Hazrat Umar, no one was allowed to open a shop without passing an exam on how to engage in business and its rulings. By allowing shops to be opened in Madinah, we want to teach Muslims how to pray and fast, we want to show them Islamic trade, and come and see Islamic trade in Madinah. So, I am saying that the idea (of being paid a salary for religious workers) is wrong for both the teacher and the student.

By having someone to guarantee their needs, the Mujahada(struggle) of both the teacher and student will be weak. The Mujahada of both the teacher and student will be flawed.  Both the Teacher and the Student will just be happy that everything seems okay. Rich people are taking care of our needs, so why should we do anything? (i.e. we can just have a lax attitude). When Mujahadah is absent, reliance on others becomes the norm. This has been to such an extent that any call to the true Mujahadah is seen as a threat to their means of sustenance. So they reject it.

We strongly conclude that being self-sufficient for education and learning is the attribute of the Sahaba, the Caliphs, and the Prophets. It is not only a requirement, it is an attribute. So I am emphasising that it is an attribute that the prophets trade. Every prophet has adopted a profession. Prophets are also blacksmiths, carpenters, etc. The Prophets have done what is considered to be evil in this age. We have reached a point today where we think even doing a lawful business is considered a defect while engaging it together with teaching and learning.

[End of the Incumbent Person’s Statement]

Dear Respected Brothers,

These statements seem very misleading. In this statement, the incumbent person is openly giving the impression to the common people that he is a dedicated Da’i (thus being someone who must be followed). This is why the scholars oppose him. You (Darul Uloom Deoband) took a big step in issuing a previous fatwa. In another writing, you have written that it is as if they are trying to form a new sect.

Some people who are enemies of Darul Uloom Deoband have started to make absurd accusations against Darul Uloom Deoband and our Akabirs (legendary personalities). They have launched a campaign bringing forward many accusations. Despite all these false accusations, we have full confidence in Darul Uloom Deoband, who cannot be influenced by anyone in matters of truth.

We have sent you his other controversial speeches. In some of his statements, he has dishonoured and disrespected the Prophets AS; and in some of the statements, he claims that the Darul Uloom education system and Da’wah today have deviated from the Sunnah.

Thus so, we seek answers to the following question:

1. Are the statements of the incumbent person according to Sharia? Is it permissible to spread the statements of such a person?
2. What does Sharia say about those who defend such a person and provide false arguments to defend him?
3. Some people are spreading to the public that Darul Uloom Deoband is against the work of Tabligh. Is Darul Uloom Deoband really opposing Tablighi Jamaat?

[Jump to Deoband’s answers to these 3 Questions]

We seek clear answers to these questions. We also want to bring to your attention that due to the absence of an official stand from Darul Uloom Deoband, scholars are facing severe difficulties and a lack of direction on how to confront this new Ideology. Various and contradictory ideas are being spread everywhere. We thus seek answers to these questions and clarifications and correct us if there are any mistakes from our side. Wassalam.

(Signatures of Ulemas)

The Fatwa Answer (Page 3)

بسم اللہ الرحمن الرحیم

“In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.”

Fatwa of Darul Ifta Darul Uloom Deoband

In reference to our last fatwa/writing (issued on 31st January 2018) about the ideology of the incumbent person: 

“Concerns about the intellectual misguidance expressed in Darul Uloom’s position cannot be ignored. Even after many attempts on Rujoo, we have noticed that the incumbent person is still making new controversial statements. The same self-styled Ijtihad, wrong arguments, and incorrect interpretation of Sharia texts on his specific thoughts about Da’wah are prominent. Due to this, not only the servants of Darul Uloom, but all other scholars of Haqq (righteous scholars) strongly oppose his ideology. 

We believe that even the slightest deviation from the ways of the great scholars of the past, may Allah’s mercy be upon them, is seriously harmful. He should be careful in his statements and follow the way of his predecessors. They were never careless in making personal Ijtihads from the texts of Sharia. May Allah save us. From these far-fetched Ijtihads, it seems that they are looking to form a new sect different from the Ahlu-Sunnah Wal Jama’ah and especially from the religion of the predecessors (Salaf).”

(Taken from Fatwa of Darul Uloom Deoband 31st January 2018)

Since the publication of the (above) article until now, we have been receiving complaints from various Darul Ulooms from time to time. From these complaints, it can be summarized that the matter is a matter of wrong ijtihad and wrong understanding of Deen (religion) and Sharia (Islamic Rulings). It is not a mere matter of the incumbent person giving wrong encouragements (i.e. advice based on Fadhail or Taqwa). With his recent statements sent to us by the scholars of Bhopal (including his statement during Fajr Bayan on May 13, 2023), it seems that the incumbent person continues to insist on his distorted view and self-made ideas. This proves the position of Darul Uloom Deoband that the matter is not a partial misunderstanding of parts of the speech (i.e. it is not a speech taken out of context).

Rather, it is a perversion of thought, lack of knowledge and making daring Ijtihad and inferences, despite a lack of competency. This is why we find a continuous series of distortions continue. More dangerous than this is his followers’ baseless arguments and propagating wrong ideologies on social media. They are making it very public and have started a campaign of unnecessary accusations upon accusations on the Darul Uloom. 

So far we have ignored them. 

However, when Ignorance is being spread among the Masjids and masses, derogatory remarks are made against the great scholars claiming they were completely wrong, and a distorted understanding of the Quran and Sunnah is being presented under the pretext of being ‘Lives of the Sahaba’, it becomes an indispensable responsibility to present a correct and clear position to save the Ummah from misguidance.

Before we give our detailed review regarding the incumbent person’s statement on 29 April 2023 quoted in the question, it is necessary to mention that the idea presented by him about people engaging in religious services, is not the first time he presented this deviation. Yes, we affirm that he has already been warned by Darul Uloom Deoband and other Ahl al-Haq scholars. However, despite these warnings, he continues to repeat his twisted views in public Ijtemas (gatherings) from different angles. His recent statement however is even more dangerous than his previous statements. Here, he is making an accusation against ALL scholars, Muhadditheen and has tried to disgrace the prevailing system of public funding of the Ulema and Madrasa (religious schools).

The incumbent person has given the impression to the public that people who are engaged in religious services should also be engaged in business. He claims this is based on the lives of the Sahabah RA, to abstain from the reliance upon Makhluk (creations of Allah), to obtain the completion of Mujahadah, and to show practical examples of how to do business Islamically and perform religious works at the same time. His hard encouragement has given the impression to the public that the present method of students, teachers and servants of Deen in relation to public funding and paying a salary is contrary to the way of the Sahaba.

(Page 4)

This idea and impression given are completely false.  The foundation of the idea is also wrong and to justify them through the lives of the Sahaba is based on ignorance. As a matter of fact, the Sahaba that were engaged in such religious services were provided means of livelihood through a public funding system. There was an established system and stipends drawn from the Bayt-al-Mal. The servants of Deen accepted the stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal. 

According to Allama Aini, during the time of the Sahaba, the issue of stipends for such and such people was discussed. There was a consensus on this. The main reason for not doing business was to avoid business and trade from interfering with their religious services.

This is a lengthy topic to cover. Here, we present a few references as examples:

First of all, it is necessary to look at the interpretations of the Muhadditheen regarding the entire incident of Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) which the incumbent person has made the basis of his wrong conclusion.

“رد أبي بكر الصديق رضي الله عنه المال قصة ردِّه رضي الله عنه وظيفته من بيت المال،أخرج البيهقي عن الحسن أن أبا بكر الصديق رضي الله عنه خطب الناس فحمد الله وأثنى عليه ثم قال: إنَّ أكيسَ الكَيْس التقوى – فذكر الحديث، وفيه: فلما أصبح غدا إِلى السوق فقال له عمر رضي الله عنه: أين تريد؟ قال: السوق، قال: قد جاءك ما يشغلك عن السوق، قال: سبحان الله، يشغلني عن عيالي قال: نفرض بالمعروف؛ قال: ويحَ عمر إِني أخاف أن لا يسعني أن آكل من هذا المال شيئاً. قال: فأنفقَ في سنتين وبعض أخرى ثمانية آلاف درهم، فلما حضره الموت قال: قد كنت قلت لعمر: إني أخاف أن لا يسعَني أن آكل من هذا المال شيئاً، فغلبني؛ فإذا أنا متُّ فخذوا من مالي ثمانية آلاف درهم وردوها في بيت المال قال: فلما أُتي بها عمر قال: رحم الله أبا بكر، لقد أتعب من بعده تعباً شديداً” (حیاۃ الصحابۃ،516/2،مؤسسۃ الرسالۃ للطباعۃ و النشر و التوزیع،بیروت)

[Arabic Translation Work in Progress]

This story has been narrated in different books of hadith and biographies, with small additions and omissions in its wording. The conclusion from these texts is that after Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) became the Caliph, the Sahaba (RA) fixed an agreed-upon salary for Abu Bakr Siddiq RA from the Bayt-al-Mal after he was appointed as Khalifa. Abu Bakr accepted the salary.

الفصل الأول فى أن لكل من شغل بشيء من أعمال المسلمين أخذ الرزق على شغله

ذلك، والفصل الرابع في أرزاق الخلفاء بعده ﷺ ورضى عنهم

[Arabic Translation Work in Progress]

From this incident, Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) has set a precedent for the right to take a stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal, for anyone engaged in the collective religious service of Muslims.

In fact, if we refer to the original source of the text, which is the “Sunan Bayhaqi”, the famous Muhaddith/Faqih Imam Bayhaqi has included this in his book under the chapter:

باب ما يكره للقاضي من الشراء والبيع والنظر في النفقة على أهله و في ضيعته لئلا يشغل فهمہ
The chapter on it is disliked for a judge to buy and sell, and to look into spending on his family and on his property, so that his integrity to judge is not affected

It is Makruh (disliked) for a Qadhi (judge) to take up any other profession or engage in business. This is so that his judging integrity is not affected. Moreover, Allama Aini and other Muhaddiths argued from the same incident that the Bayt-al-Mal should be accessible to everyone who is engaged in religious services to the public. 

(Page 5)

Allama Nabulsi has quoted from Qazi Khan and Allama Ibn Najeem in “Sharh al-Tariqa al-Hamd Yeh” that whoever devotes himself to the teaching of the Qur’an and Sunnah and the collective religious service of Muslims, should receive a stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal. He is entitled to it even if he is already rich and wealthy. 

Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi RA writes that our jurists have written that even if the Qadhi is wealthy, he should also be entitled to a stipend. The reason for this is that if a Qadhi does not get a salary, and he was a Qadhi for ten years, what happens if the Qadhi after him is a poor Qadhi? Complications may arise if a stipend is issued after 10 years of non-issuance.

Shaykh al-Hadith, Maulana Muhammad Zakariya, after quoting the same event in his book “Fazail Tijarat”, has commented with reference to Bukhari Shareef that everyone who is engaged in the interests of the Muslim community, for example, Qadhis, Muftis, Teachers, etc, the same should be the case for them as well. (Fazail Tijarat, Page 67, Maktaba Al-Sheikh, Karachi)

It is clearly seen that Allama Aini, Allama Katani, Shaykh Al-Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakaria and other scholars of Hadith have written about this incident. According to them, anyone engaged in the religious service of the Muslim Community is entitled to receive stipends from the treasury and accept public funding. 

To put it in a larger perspective, Imam Bayhaqi (RA) has declared doing business is abominable for those who are engaged in religious service such as a Qadhi, as it may affect their fair judgement. This is such a contrast to the incumbent person’s view who spoke about this incident and deduced that doing business is necessary and helpful for Deen. He also considers religious engagement without doing business as a flawed Mujahadah and accuses the servants of Deen of violating the way of the Sahaba. What a big difference this is!

Hazrat Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Kandhalvi (RA), in his book “Hayatus Sahaba”, included this incident under a specific chapter to inform the asceticism of the Sahaba (i.e. being disinterested in worldly pleasures). Abu Bakr (RA) left his profitable business and was satisfied with a barely minimum stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal. This shows the high level of asceticism and piety. Shaykh al-Hadith Hazrat Maulana Muhammad Zakaria has also quoted this incident in “Fadhail Amaal” to describe the asceticism of the Companions (Reference: Fadhail A’maal, Part I, Stories of the Companions, p. 57, Chapter Three in the description of the asceticism and hardships endured by the Sahaba, Abu Bakr Siddiq’s (RA) Stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal).

The above-mentioned details should be sufficient. However, it seems appropriate that for further clarification and satisfaction, we would like to mention some other explanations of the Muhadditheen and Fuqahas with regard to the public funding of religious services during the Khair al-Quroon (time of the Sahabah).

In Bukhari Sharif, the sheikhs (RA) used to source their livelihood from the Bayt-al-Mal. Shuraih al-Qadi also used to draw a salary from his service as a judge. Abdullah Bin Saadi (RA) once came to Umar (RA). Umar (RA) asked him: “I am hearing reports that you are doing government work but not taking the given salary?”. He (Abdullah Bin Saadi (RA)) replied in the affirmative. Umar (RA) asked: Why? He said, “I am self-sufficient, I have horses, slaves and other wealth. So I want to spend my service on the Muslims for free”Umar (RA) replied, “Don’t do that. I also intended to do so, but the Holy Prophet (SAW) forbade me”.

(Page 6)

Imam Bukhari has mentioned a hadith under the chapter “Nufqat al-Qayyim for Waqf” that the Holy Prophet SAW said: “My heirs should not take a dinar or dirham. Everything I have left behind, excluding the provision for my wives and my employees (freed slaves), should be spent in charity”. According to this hadith, Mulla Ali Qari in “Mirqaat” and Shaykhul Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakaria both narrated that this particular incident refers to the land of Banu Nazir which was allocated for the Prophet SAW directly from Allah SWT. Specifically, it was a portion of the land of Khyber and half of the land of Fadak obtained by the people of Khyber after the conquest of Khyber. The Bukhari commentator Allama Ibn Battal has written that the phrase “Mu’na Aa’mili” mentioned in this hadith, means that the Prophet (SAW) has specifically allocated a part of his leftover wealth to Aa’mil or Khaleefatul Muslimeen, the person who is engaged in the community service of Muslims. This implies, that anyone who engages in community services for the interests of all Muslims, such as scholars, judges, muezzins, etc., will also be entitled or deserve to receive a salary from the Bayt-al-Mal just like the Caliphs.

Ibn Kathir has written that Umar (RA) once addressed the Muslims and said: “You people know that I am a businessman and my family expenses were being met by my Trade. However, now I am unable to do so due to my service to the people. So what is your opinion about taking from the Bayt-al-Mal?”. Ali (RA) replied: “O Ameer-ul Mu’mineen! All of us Muslims have already agreed that you should take whatever is necessary for you and your family”. Thus Umar (RA) started taking a salary from the Bayt-al-Mal. Ibn Kathir writes that it can be clearly seen in this hadith that whoever engages in the collective work for Muslims should be entitled to a stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal.

Hazrat Maulana Fakhrul-Hasan Gongohi writes in “Quds Surah Hashiya Abu Dawood” that from this hadith we can clearly see that it is permissible to take a salary from the Bayt-al-Mal for all kinds of religious services provided to the Muslim community, such as teaching, being a Qadhi (Judge), etc. Therefore, it is necessary for a busy imam (for example) to be given a stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal.

Allama Barkawi Hanafi has established a chapter on this topic in his famous work “Al-Tariqa Al-Muhammadiya”:

الفصل الثاني في التورع والتوقي من طعام أهل الوظائف من الأوقاف أو بيت المال الخ

According to him, avoiding the stipend of the Bayt-al-Mal on the basis of suspicion or doubting its purity is ignorance. At the end of the chapter, he wrote that the provision of stipends from the Bayt-al-Mal during the Rashidun Caliphate was clearly established.

لا فرق بين الوقف و بیت المال وبين غيرهما من المكاسب في الحل والطيب إذا روعي شرائط الشرع ولا في الحرمة والخبث إذا لم تراع بل الأولان أشبه وأمثل في زماننا

There is no difference in the purity of income between the Bayt-al-Mal, donations, or any other sources of livelihood, i.e. it is wrong to say that the income of the Bayt-al-Mal, etc. is purer.

Hafiz Ibn Abd al-Barr has quoted in “Al-Istiyab” with Daleel (evidence) that Umar (RA) used to supply Muawiya (RA) ten thousand dinars per year for governing the province of Syria. It has always been the practice of the Caliphs of Islam that whoever engages in the collective service of the Muslims, will be entitled to a stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal. Thus stipends have been fixed for Qadhis from the Bayt-al-Mal. It has been narrated that Umar (RA) also used to give stipends to religious teachers.

(Page 7)

Allama Zalai has written in “Tabeen Al-Haqqaiq”, that the reason Qadhis are given a stipend from the Bayt-al-Mal is that his life is being restricted due to his service to the Muslim community and his inability to earn. Abu Bakr (RA) himself and the caliphs after him used to take a barely sufficient salary.

On the contrary, Hafiz Sakhavi has written that some of the righteous Salaf (pious predecessors) used to do business only for the purpose of spending their income on the Ulema and Muhadditheen. They understood that the Ulema and Muhadditheen had spared their lives for the dissemination of Ilm and did not have the opportunity to have a means of livelihood. 

Abdullah Ibn Mubarak once said to Fazil Ibn Ayyad that if it were not for you and your companions (referring to Sufyan Thauri, Sufyan bin Ainiyyah, etc.), I would have not been involved in business. 

Ibn Asaqeer (571 AH) has narrated in Tarikh Damascus that three teachers used to give religious education to children of Madinah and Umar (RA) used to give each of them fifteen dirhams for food every month.

Abu Ubaid Qasim bin Salam has written in the “Book of Wealth” in the Chapter “Al Farz Ali Taalam al-Qur’an and Al-Ilm” that Umar (RA) wrote to some of his workers that you should give stipends to people for learning the Qur’an.

This Muslim historian, Qazi Athar Mubarak Puri (RA) writes: During the time of the holy Prophet SAW, there were arrangements for food and accommodation for both the local and foreign students. The Prophet (SAW) and the Sahaba used to invite them to their homes and feed them. The Sahaba kept dates and water for them in the Prophet’s Mosque. Abu Hurairah (RA) and Mu’adh bin Jabal (RA) were responsible for them. The incoming people and delegations were usually accommodated in Darul-Bint-Harith, which was also known as Darul-Ziyafta. It had the capacity to accommodate six to seven hundred people. Bilal (RA) would be responsible for arranging their food and accommodation. There were other places used for accommodation as well. (Reference: The religious schools of the Khairul-Quroon, p. 142)

In another place, he writes: “When the teaching and learning of Deen became common practice, private and individual Madrasas were opened in cities, villages, deserts, and tribes. Each Madrasa arranged the sustenance and wages of the teachers accordingly”. The best of generations (Khayrul-Quroon) had religious schools and a system of teaching and learning.

Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) has done detailed research in his updated book “Revolution of the Ummah” with regard to the issue of taking a stipend while doing the service of Deen. He wrote in detail about the practices of Abu Bakar Siddiq (RA), Umar Al-Khatab (RA) and the Sahaba in light of what the Fuqaha had written. The summary is as follows:

“Giving financial support to scholars, students and people engaged in religious service is an obligatory and necessity for the Muslim Community. This is one of the most important types of obligation that is not given enough attention by the people. The Fuqaha have said that financial support is like paying a penalty. Take the example of the Qadhi. Since his whole life has been restricted due to providing a service to the Muslim community, his financial support must come from the wealth of the Muslim community, in this case, through the Bayt-al-Mal. Similarly, providing financial support for scholars and students is also obligatory for the Muslim community. These gentlemen engage in religious service for the community. Think logically if there is no doctor in the community, common sense tells us that it is necessary for the community to train a few in this art and ensure those people can sustain their livelihood. Otherwise, the whole community would suffer

(Page 8)

In the past, as the Bayt-al-Mal system existed, funding was received from the Muslim Community through it. Now, since there is no more Bayt-al-Mal in general, it is the duty of the Muslim community to serve and provide for the students and scholars, by giving financial support to the madrassa or to the students and scholars directly.

It is mentioned in the holy Quran:
للفقراء الذين احصروا في سبيل الله لا يستطيعون ضربا في الارض

Translation: (Your charities should be preferably meant) for the needy who are confined in the path of Allah, unable to travel in the land

This verse of the Quran is clear proof of our argument. The letter Laam (“lil”) means entitlement. The word “Ahsoroo” means those who have been confined to their religious services. The phrase “Fi Sabeelillah” (In the path of Allah) indicates it also includes the student. “Laa Yastati’u’na Dharba” is a reference to those who do not have the opportunity to earn. With all these, it is strange to ask students and scholars to manage their own livelihoods as they are on the contrary entitled to financial support.

According to Imam Shafi’e, there is no need to issue a Fatwa on this as this is obligatory for the Muslim community. In the Hanafi Madhab, this is considered a mandatory penalty payment for service. The notion that the Ulema must engage in a separate work (or business) is unacceptable. A person who is engaged in earning his livelihood won’t be able to serve the Deen effectively as a person who is free from it. This is proven by experience which one cannot deny. The Quran also uses the phrase “Laa Yas Tati’oon” which implies that they were not physically disabled. Rather, rather they were engaged in the service of Deen to a large extent. (Reformation of the Ummah: 190/2 to 193, Zakariya, Deoband, see the original words of Hazrat Ashraf Ali Thanwi under references)

Hazrat Ashraf Ali Thanwi also said in a sermon: “From this verse “Lilfuqarah Allazee Na Ahsoruu Fi Sabeelillah, La Yastati’oona Dharba Fil Ardh”, it can be derived that such a group should not be involved in any means of livelihood at all. The phrase “La Yastati’oona Dharba Fil Ardh” indicates that there is no doubt in this matter that the Ulema (religious scholars) are “disabled” for their financial needs. An implied meaning is that one man can’t do two jobs at a time, especially a job that needs a full-time engagement.” (Al-Ilm and the Ulema, p. 161, with reference to the rights of knowledge, p. 15)

On the similarity between a king’s salary received from the treasury and the people working in Madrasas, the respected Ashraf Ali Thanwi says:

“A king needs to receive money from the treasury because he is confined to the work of his nation because the king is the one whom the nation agrees to rule. Thus he has to sustain himself from the nation’s royal treasury. Now, try and understand what exactly is “Treasury”. In reality, “Treasury” is nothing more than the donations gathered from the whole nation e.g. a penny from Zaid, a penny from Amr and a penny from Bakr. All of them are then stored in a closet called “Treasury”. In reality, it is nothing more than donations and the nation’s contributions where the king receives his compensation. By mere use of the word “Treasury” it sounds prestigious. People call it a ‘Royal Treasury’, but in reality, it is nothing more than contributions from the nation. This is the exact system of funding used for the compensation of the Ulema.” (Al-Ilm and the Ulema, p. 129, with reference to Tabligh 72/20, Institute of Afadat Ashrafiya, Lucknow)

All these clarifications make it clear that supporting those who are engaged in religious services is the responsibility of all Muslims in general. Accepting such financial support is not just permissible but also a requirement in Sharia. It is recommended in this era just as how it was established in the era of the Sahaba.

(Page 9)

The pious predecessors (Salaf) have historically proven this permissibility. Also, our legendary founders of Darul Uloom Deoband have exerted tireless efforts to establish a strong, stable and functional Madrasa system based on public funding. This foundation has been laid down in two out of the eight founding principles of Darul Uloom Deoband by Sheikh Muhammad Qasim Nanautavi (RA) which states: 

We are to encourage public donations and strive to upgrade the quality of our students’ meals and accommodation. This is so that preserving and spreading the Deen can be done with ease and peace of mind. 

The incumbent person’s call to those engaged in religious services to do business is based on his ignorance regarding the lives of the Sahaba. He claims on the basis of the completion of Mujahadah and freeing oneself from the reliance of Makhluk (creations of Allah).  On the contrary, we have concluded that accepting a salary for religious services gives a person peace of mind. It is better than engaging in business and trade. 

According to Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi, there is a double reward in this:

• The reward for spreading the knowledge of Deen.
• The reward for carrying out his duty to earn for his family and children.

(Shami Bab al-Azan, Akhtri Behishti Zawar, Part 11, p. 138)

Furthermore, it has been declared advisable to accept a salary even if a person is not in need of it. Sahib Hidayah has described the special reason for accepting a stipend in the case of a wealthy Qadhi (Al-Ilam wal-Ulama p. 172, with reference to Al-Kalaam al-Hasan p. 23, Institute of Afadat Ashrafiya, Lucknow)

Shaykhul Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakaria writes in “Fazail Tejarat”:

“I have written earlier that doing business is a preferred profession because in business a man is master of his own time. Thus, he is freed to teach, preach, etc.; However, if his profession is already a religious service (e.g. being a teacher), this is actually better than doing business. His intention must be for the religious work and not for the salary. The legendary scholars of Deoband were highly focused on their religious work. Their intention was never for the salary. They saw the salary as a gift from Allah SWT. If someone doing religious work is offered a higher salary, he should not leave the work just because of the salary.”

Shaykhul Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakaria further writes:

“I have always advised Madrasas (schools) and Institutions of Deen not to employ teachers without paying them a salary. This has been my stand for many years. In the beginning, I did not believe so. Once, in my school, I recruited a person as an assistant teacher. He would teach some lessons and spend the rest of his time in his business. After a year, this person lost all interest in teaching and was fully absorbed in his business. I do notice that in general, teachers who were not paid are more lax and lack the commitment versus those who are paid. This has been the norm for our legendary elders. For example, Hazrat Gangohi initially taught children for a salary of ten rupees in Saharanpur. It has also been said that Hazrat Nanawtawi (RA) took a salary for teaching hadith and correcting books.” (Fazail Tejarat p. 52 to 62, Maktab Al-Sheikh, Karachi)

(Page 10)

Moreover, the incumbent person’s idea (against students and scholars with regard to their livelihood), has also been addressed by a contemporary scholar of our time, Hazrat Maulana Mufti Muhammad Taqi Uthmani. He writes:

“Some people have suggested with good intentions and sympathy, that religious schools should also teach handicraft skills and technical training. This is so that the scholars who graduate from there are viable for employment. Instead of being a burden to society, the scholars can manage their own livelihood with skills from their own hands. They can then perform religious services without any compensation. 

No matter how well-intentioned this suggestion may be or how pleasant it seems, it is far from reality and is impractical. 
Firstly, the purpose of religious schools is to produce scholars who have insight into the knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah. These sciences require full-time dedication and service. The modern world today has become so complicated that merely learning a technical skill is not enough. Continuous practical experience is required. Therefore, even after learning a particular technical skill, the average person will not be fully competent in it.

We have seen some students take their own initiative to learn technical skills outside their religious studies. Regardless, practical experience is still required. If such a student after graduation was employed in religious studies, it would be impossible for him to focus on both skills. If he engages in technical skills, it would be impossible for him to remain connected with his religious knowledge. Therefore, it is neither possible nor appropriate for Madrasas which are established to produce scholars of high calibre to provide technical training to their students along with religious knowledge.

Secondly, there is this strange idea that if a person is receiving a wage or salary by fulfilling the religious needs of society, then he has become a burden to society. The commonly accepted norm is that any person who renders a service to society by acquiring expertise in that field will draw his livelihood from that field as well. Thus, he receives a wage or salary for rendering his service to society in his field. In such a case, there is no question of him being a burden to society. Rather, it is an integral part of our social system on which our entire humanity is based. If a doctor, engineer, economist, or scientist provides a service to the community and people have to pay them for their services, is it correct to say that they have become a burden to society?

Doesn’t a Muslim society need scholars who can fulfil their religious needs? Doesn’t a Muslim society need scholars who can guide them in religious matters? Who can give religious education to their children? Who can devote their lives to preserving the future of our Deen? Who can effectively defend against attacks on our Deen?  This is a primary need of a Muslim society and no one can deny that! What will happen to our youth if our society fails to provide these services? What will happen to the knowledge of Deen? And where does this idea come from that scholars are a burden to society and should engage in a separate skill for their income? (Hamarat Alimi Nizam p. 88 to 90, Zamzam Book Depot, Deoband)

The Verdict/Conclusion (Page 11)

It has been made clear that the far-fetched Ijtihad (ideology) and interpretation made by the incumbent person from the incident of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq (RA) are completely wrong. In the chapter regarding the Prophet SAW, there is no connection between his interpretation and the actual incident.

How bold is his claim that in all these centuries, the great Ummah has deviated from the methodology of the Sahaba and against the Sharia?

How bold is his claim that the interpretations in centuries of the ummah were under the influence of wrongful scholars?

Is he claiming that the chain of transmission of knowledge and Islamic Scholarship were somehow disconnected?

What can be a greater slander against our elders and predecessors than this? 

The followers of the incumbent person have become so fanatical with his perverted interpretations that they do not tolerate the truth. Rather, they resist and oppose it. 

One great concern is that the public blindly believes every word the incumbent person says. After listening to his statement, these people will only value scholars who are engaged in business. Scholars who do not do business will be looked down upon. They do not meet their standards and will be considered unworthy in their eyes. The idea that accepting a stipend for religious services will make Mujahadah flawed is an indictment on great figures such as Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) and Umar (RA) as they themselves accepted public funding. By Allah! Their Mujahadah was far from flawed. It was due to their extreme level of dedication that they abandoned trade and engaged in the service of Muslims for a bare minimum salary. There is no doubt whatsoever that Scholars who spend their entire lives in the preservation and dissemination of religious knowledge for a modest salary, leaving a luxurious worldly career, are following the footsteps of the Sahaba.

Comments regarding his other misguided statements

This article so far was about the statement made by the incumbent person on the 29th of April 2023 mentioned in the question. It has become lengthy due to the sensitivity of the matter. It is however necessary to evaluate the overall concern of his false argument being spread on social media by his followers. After this, there is no need to review any of his further statements. So, a summary review is offered here to complete the argument.

After a thorough examination of the other statements submitted by the scholars of Bhopal and others, we clearly see that the incumbent person’s method is to make a reference to the Seerah (biography) of the Sahaba and draw his personal opinions and distorted views projecting it to the Ummah. He makes his best effort to create newly invented ideas from his own intellect by taking directly from the Seerah (biography) and the history of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen (Pious Predecessors). To make his point, he invites the Ummah to directly reflect (and draw conclusions) from the Seerah.

(Page 12)

Look at the phrases he uses:

• “Just contemplate upon the Seerah (biography)…”
• “I am saying this firmly; read the Seerah…”
• “I am emphasising, Seerah! Seerah! The progress and safety of both the work (of Da’wah) and the worker (of Da’wah) lie in it…”
• “Mujahadah (struggle) must be in accordance with the Seerah of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and his Sahabah (Companions)”. 
• “The most basic thing is to make your Mujahadah (struggle) and work subject to the Seerah”. 
• “I was talking about the Seerah. Ignorance and unawareness of the Seerah and acting in the light of one’s own experience and Amaal (practice) puts a man contrary to the Sunnah. This should be feared”. 
• There was no concept of Da’wah without Nafr (going out of the home, city, or land) in the era of Sahabah. You can see it in the Seerah yourselves…”
• “I have thought deeply that following the Sunnah of Da’wah was the only reason in the Seerah of the Sahabah that destroyed falsehood”
• “I also said yesterday that whatever is said, look for it in the Seerah of the Sahaba. Because, the more you delve into the Seerah, the more insight you will have into the work (of Tabligh).”
• “How can I emphasise this more? The reason for our hardship today is that we want to carry out the work of Da’wah with our intellect and understanding. It is everyone’s responsibility to see the work of Da’wah in the lives of the Sahabas, in the lives of the Sahaba, in the lives of the Companions! Delve into it yourselves!”
• “I have fully concluded that there is no example of the displeasure (of Allah and his Prophet) in the history of the Sahaba as there was the displeasure to delay going out in the path of Allah.”

This is the root of all his deviations. If we look deeper at the origins of his wrong concepts, we will usually find an event of Seerah and history, which was either misunderstood or other traditions of the Seerah were not presented or lack of command over the principles of Islamic Jurisprudence (Usool-e-Fiqh). This results in the erroneous “Istinbat” (deriving conclusions from the Quran and Sunnah). Sometimes he takes the “Ma’lool” and “Munkar” hadiths as correct and authentic. His latest example is the misunderstanding and baseless assumptions derived from the mentioned tradition of Abu Bakr (RA), and using it to criticise the entire education (Darul Uloom) system.

Translator note: Ma’lool is a type of hadith that has some form of hidden defect or deficiency that may affect its authenticity. Munkar is a type of hadith in which the unauthentic narrator goes against an authentic narrator in the Sanad (chain of transmission) of the text of Hadith. Weak or rejected hadith can also be categorised under Munkar.

The incumbent person has crafted an artificial, self-made and fabricated sketch of Deen (religion) and Da’wah in his mind. This is what he considers the Sunnah and Seerah. He publicly negates all other permissible ways and methods of Ta’leem(education) and Tarbiyah. He and his followers believe that in the Prophet’s era, the entire system of Ta’leem and Tarbiyah was run and organised from the Masjid. Since this system was transferred outside the Masjid, ignorance has spread among the people. He boldly claims that in today’s world, Da’wah and Ta’leem have globally deviated from the ways of the Sunnah. He claims that the system of Da’wah and Ta’leem outside the Masjid is neither useful nor effective because it is against the Sunnah. In order to prove his concept, he presents a wrong picture of the Prophet’s era in front of the Ummah. Just look at his statements: 

• “The Holy Prophet (SAW) established a system of Ta’leem (education) and Tarbiyyah (nurturing) and the Prophet (SAW) connected this system of Ta’leem and Tarbiyyah with the masjid like an Ibadat (act of worship). To separate and take apart the education system from the Masjid is to differentiate between Ta’leem and Tarbiyyah. Our point needs a lot of attention from all of you because these two things are related and dependent on each other in such a way that without Ta’leem and Tarbiyyah. The Holy Prophet (SAW) brought the system of Ta’leem and Tarbiyah in such a way that the whole system was completely connected and integrated with the masjid.”
• “I swear by Allah that if Amr-bil-Ma’ruf (enjoining good) and Nahi an al-Munkar (forbidding evil) come in accordance with the Sunnah…”
• “It is with profound sadness and concern that I express my observations regarding the Ta’leem (education) and Da’wah, which are the two main duties of the Prophet’s mission. I am saying that on a global scale, it appears that these two fundamental responsibilities have strayed from the ways of the Sunnah. Ta’leem seems to have strayed away from the Sunnah, lacking in Tarbiyah, and Da’wah has deviated from the Sunnah. Therefore there is no Imaan (faith), perfection in Imaan and perfection in Ta’leem. It is evident that the world at large is witnessing a universal shift away from the Sunnah.”
• “Listen to me carefully! Salat (prayers) is a secondary activity of the Masjid (mosque)! Salat is a secondary activity of the Masjid! Salat is a secondary activity of the Masjid! Halaqah of Imaan (circles of faith) and Ta’leem were going on in the Masjid, and the prayers would occur in between. While addressing his subjects, Umar (RA) said “Now pray”. This means that Salat (prayers) used to come between the circles of Ta’leem.”

(Page 13)

• “If you think my words are extreme, consider the tradition of Tirmidhi Sharif. Allah commanded Yahya (AS) to gather Bani Israel in Bait-ul-Maqdis and convey five important things to them. You should think about this. The first lesson from the hadith is to gather the people. It does not mean that you should write the date of the meeting or the date of the gathering in a newspaper or publicise the meeting that there is a gathering on a specific date. The second point emphasises gathering in the Masjid, not in a field, in a hotel, or in a house, but the order is (emphasising) where to gather.”
• “Perfection in prayer will come from two crucial elements: Imaan (faith) and Ilm (knowledge). Both are essential to excel in every act of worship, ensuring acceptance of our deeds. The place of learning for both of them is in the Masjid. Ilm and Imaan are there. The place of learning Ilm and Imaan is in the mosque. Such was the power of Ta’leem from the Masjid that when a companion heard in the Masjid the command of the Hijab (veil), he went and announced it in the neighbourhood. The women of the entire neighbourhood immediately obeyed the order of the Hijab.”
• “Let me tell you the truth: those non-believers who fled the battlefield seeking the safety of their lives were not taken and tied as slaves by the Sahaba, but rather they were brought and included in the circles of the Qur’an and made them sit in the environment of good Amaal (actions) in the mosque. The intention was to expose them to the teachings of the Quran so that when the sound of the Qur’an reached their ears, the darkness of disbelief would dispel from their hearts and they would accept Islam. Listen to me attentively!”

The fact is, there were examples in the Seerah when the system of Ta’leem (education) and Da’wah was established outside the Masjid. For instance, In Madinah itself, a house was set apart for quranic learning which was outside the Masjid. 

The famous Muhaddith Abdul Haye Al-Kattani in his famous book “Nizaam Al Hukoom Annabawiyah / At Tarteeb Ad-Dariyyah” (The prophetic government system / Administrative Arrangements) has written under the chapter “Preparing a house for readers of the Quran and deriving the concept of Madaris from it”. He has mentioned with reference to Hafiz Ibn Abd al-Barr’s well-known book “Al-Istiyab Fi Ma’rifat Al-Sahhab” and “Tabaqat Ibn Saad” that Abdullah bin Umm Maktoum (RA) visited Madinah accompanied by Musab bin Umayr (RA) after a short period of the Battle of Badr. They stayed in a house named Dar-al-Qara. Dar-al-Qara was the house of Mukharama bin Nawfal (RA) where Ta’leem was given there. Scholars have taken this event as an argument for the establishment of Madrasa. Allama Katani has also quoted from the book of Ibn Qudama “Al-Istbasar” that Musab bin Umayr (RA) stayed at the house of Asad bin Zararah (RA)  in Madinah. There, they would both visit different houses of the Ansar, teach them the Holy Quran and call them to Allah.

Here it is crucial to clarify that the life and actions of the Sahaba (RA) are without a doubt the source of evidence and guidance in religion and Sharia. However, there are principles and conditions for correctly understanding the Quran and Sunnah. In the same way, taking a specific incident from the life of the Sahaba and applying it to the current situation (as a general example for the Ummah) has its own rules and principles as well. Establishing a ruling by the Jurists requires adhering to the comprehensive compilation of Islamic knowledge and detailed branches of all fields of Islam. The basis is the Quran, Sunnah, sayings and actions of the Sahaba and all of this must be supervised by the Mujtahideen and the methodologies from the four Madhabs (Schools of thought). The Sahaba also had differences in their opinion and this has to be accounted for as well before making an Ijtihad.

Therefore, to ignore the Fiqh (jurisprudence) and make conclusions purely from the sayings and events of a single Sahabi alone, especially without sufficient knowledge, is as dangerous as opening the doors to great Fitnas.

(Page 14)

Allama Munawi in his well-known book “Faidh Al-Qadeer” has quoted that Imam Razi wrote in his book that it is from the Ijma’ that people should be prevented from directly following the Sahaba (without knowledge). (Faiz al-Qadir: 210/1 Misr, Minhaj Sunnah al-Nabawiyya: 175, 171/3, Usool al-Ifta wa Adaab p. 256).

This does not mean that the Sahaba are not worthy of being followed. This is because there is a complexity and strong possibility of misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the actions and sayings of the Sahaba. It is quite possible that a person from his lack of knowledge and ignorance fails to understand correctly the lives of the Sahaba or a saying of a Sahabi. The differences in opinions between the Sahaba need to be taken into account. This is one of the complexities that has been systematically addressed in the four Madhabs (schools of thought). (Al-Jumu’ Sharh al-Muhizb Lalnawi: 91/1, Fasl fi Adaab Al-Mustafti, Al-Burhan fi Usool Fiqh Lalju Yani).

Take the example of how the incumbent person took the events of Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) and derived his own conclusions from it. If we look at the basis of the Fuqaha(jurist)’s statements, it will become clear why they were prohibited. The incumbent person purely relied on “Hayatus Sahaba” quoting this particular story.

The incumbent person clearly did not look at the actual source. His failure to collect all the other narrations on this particular topic and chapter was also a problem. The difference between Sahih(authentic) and non-authentic, valid and Ma’lool tradition and the effects of quoting the meaning of a narration (روایت بالمعنی) requires academic significance and expertise. The incumbent person crossed the line when he added several things to the narration. For example, he added: “The action of Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) shows that being a Caliph should not stop him from doing business”.

The incumbent person only derived his conclusion from the mere fact that Abu Bakr (RA) was going to the Market. He did not take into account the fact that Abu Bakr (RA) agreed to Umar (RA) and other companions’ advice and the fact that Abu Bakr (RA) abstained from doing business during the entire period of his caliphate. It can be clearly seen that Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) considered business a hindrance to his job as the Caliph. He clearly said:

لقد علم قومي أن حرفتي لم تكن تعجز عن مؤنة أهلي، وشغلت بأمر المسلمين

Translation: My people know that my profession is not well enough to overcome the needs of my family.

On top of that, the incumbent person falsely claims something which Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) did NOT even say! He claims:

“Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) said: Why would business disturb me? I will also do this work (i.e. being a Caliph), and do business as well”. 

This is a false attribution to Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) which he has committed. It is not the first time he is doing something similar to this. He does so to emphasise the fabricated rulings invented by him. He freely makes changes and additions to the hadiths, traditions of the Sahaba, and the Seerah.

His transgressive attitudes in his statements include:

1. Unable to do research about the narrations related to the event.
2. Making additions to the narrations. 
3. Due to a lack of knowledge and understanding, made superficial and wrong ijtihad, claiming that all the earlier and later scholars came to a conclusion against the Fuqaha (jurists). 

I wish! he would consider the words of Umar (RA):

لو كنت أطيق الأذان مع الخليفي لأذنت

If I had the opportunity to call the Athan being the Caliph, I would have (taken the responsibility) to call the Athan. (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaiba, Number: 23)

Umar (RA) considers himself incapable of taking the responsibility to call the Athan due to the burden of the caliphate. So how can the incumbent person say that Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) is capable of handling the affairs of the caliphate while doing business and trade? What a strange thing he is saying!

(Page 15)

From the details provided, it is evident that the incumbent person possesses a limited understanding of the Qur’an, Hadith and the events of the Sahaba, which results in his wrong conclusions. This is the reason why sometimes his style of narration puts the prophets in an unworthy position.

While narrating an event (.e.g the story of the prophet) the incumbent person tends to create additions without proof. He has adopted a dangerous path of putting the prophets in an unworthy position. The stories are narrated in such a way as to point out the mistakes of a prophet, that a prophet made a transgression in that particular incident. He is indicating for that particular event, the prophet should not be followed and one should not be like the prophet (for that isolated case). For example, he says:

“Prophets were also given Asbab (means) as a test. Listen to what I am saying! prophets were also given Asbab as a test. So what is our position? Allah also gives means to prophets as a test. Listen carefully, Allah also gives Asbab to prophets as a test. Allah wants to see whether they remember me because of these Asbab or they disregard my command. Think about it, prophet Suleiman (AS) was granted by Allah such beautiful, noble and rare horses, which were not in this world before Suliman (AS) and will never be after him. These horses flew in the air, carried the rider, swam powerfully in the sea and ran on land. Sulaiman (AS) got so busy looking at his beautiful horses that the time for Asr prayers ended and sunset had started…… The point is that what Allah has created is to create the impression of creation. It is not made for, rather, it is made to create the impression of the creator. Only disbelievers are those who are entangled in the creation and the Muslims are those who are influenced and impressed by the creator. The creation of Allah is to introduce the creator. At that time, he, while remembering Allah got (interrupted and was) busy looking at horses and the time for Asr prayers had ended. He (Sulaiman AS) ordered to take out the sword and slaughtered and destroyed all the horses, leaving none left for future generations; because the Asr prayer ended due to him looking at these horses. Think about those who were saddened by the loss of their good deeds, Allah never wastes their good deeds. He (Sulaiman AS) took the sword and killed all the horses saying I want to offer today’s Asr prayer, I don’t want horses, I want Asr”

Look at the manner in which the incumbent person has presented the story of Sulaiman (AS) and the conclusions he has made from the incident! The dangerous consequence of what he has said could not be overstated. First, he says that it is the actions of the non-believers to be affected by the Asbab (Means). Then he tries to prove that such a great prophet was affected by the Asbab (Means)! See how dangerous the matter has reached? Nauzubillah (May Allah protect us). 

Allah SWT himself has described the incident of Sulaiman (AS) using such words of praise! From the verse of the Holy Qur’an:

وَوَهَبْنَا لِدَاوُودَ سُلَيْمَانَ نِعْمَ الْعَبْدُ إِنَّهُ أَوَّابَ إِذْ عُرِضَ عَلَيْهِ بِالْعَشِي الصَّافِنَاتُ الْجِيَادُ فَقَالَ إِنِّي أَحْبَبْتُ حُبَّ الْخَيْرِ عَنْ ذِكْرِ رَبِّي حَتَّى تَوَارَتْ بِالْحِجَابِ رُدُّوهَا عَلَيَّ فَطَفِقَ مَسْحًا بِالسُّوقِ وَالْأَعْنَاقِ

And we blessed Dawood with Sulaiman. He was an excellent slave (of Allah). Surely, he was great in turning (to Us, in penitence and praise). (Worth remembering is the incident) when the swift of high breeding was presented before him in the evening. He said, “I held the love of the good things (i.e. these horses) dearer than the remembrance of my Lord until it (the sun) went behind the veil. Bring them back to me and he started passing his hands over the shanks and necks (Translation: Ma’arif ul Quran, Mufti Muhammad Shafi).

(Page 16)

The incumbent person should consider his statement:

“Sulaiman (AS) got busy looking at his beautiful horses that the time for Asr prayers ended and sunset had started…….. The point is that what Allah SWT has created is to create the impression of creating. It is not made for (us), rather, it is made to create the impression of the creator. Only disbelievers are those who are entangled in the creation and the Muslims are those who are influenced and impressed by the creator. The creation of Allah is to introduce the creator. At that time, he, while remembering Allah, got (interrupted and was) busy looking at horses and the time for Asr prayers.”

This statement means that Sulaiman (AS) was influenced by the Asbab (means) and failed the test. Instead of looking at the horses and glorifying the creator, he got overly involved in the horses. Nauzubillah!

Such a statement indicates the incumbent person’s absolute lack of understanding and awareness of the sensitivity and depth of the issue of prophethood and the infallibility of the prophets. This is why he speaks as though he is a Mujtahid on the events of the prophets with blatant courage and boldness. He did not even hesitate to give the impression that a prophet should have done so and so instead.

The incumbent person often says phrases like: 

• “This is a wrong understanding” 
• “This idea has been misunderstood in this era”
• “This is a common misconception”
• “It’s everyone’s collective fault”
• “This is a completely false concept”. 

With the above statements, he freely criticises others. It is obvious that when a person criticises despite having adequate knowledge, his intentions are to assert his superiority of knowledge and understanding.

By stating that Da’wah and Ta’leem have deviated from the Sunnah globally, the incumbent person has indirectly implied that he understands the prophetic method of Da’wah and Ta’leem more so than the righteous scholars of that time. 

From the Ummah, there are those who have been misguided from the right path. One of the reasons for their misguidance is their distrust and parting ways with the Imams of Ijtihad, Salaf-e-Saliheen and the contemporary Ahl-e-Haq scholars. They adopted their own opinions, self-reliance and self-determination.

Therefore, Darul Uloom Deoband had warned about this in their writing on January 31, 2018. It was based on the fact that the incumbent person adopted his own way of Ijtihad of the Qur’an and Hadith and went far-fetched in it despite him having a lack of knowledge and acting alone. The usage of “Shaz” and “Munkar” narrations are continuously used one after the other. This has resulted in misleading ideologies.

NOTE:
*Shaz is the hadith or tradition in which an authentic narrator, narrates hadith which goes against the same hadith narrated by other authentic narrators
*Munkar is the hadith or tradition in which an inauthentic narrator, narrates something against the Hadith narrated by authentic narrators

It is a crucial responsibility of religious scholars to prevent the people with “Hikmah” (wisdom) and “Husn-e-Tadbeer” (tactfulness) from falling into wrong ideologies and thoughts. Hafiz Sayooti in his book “Tahzeer Ul Khawas Min Akazeeb Qussas” and Ibn Al-Jawzi in his well-known book “Kitab Al-Qasas Wal-Muzkereen” harshly criticise preachers who talk about Munkar and unknown traditions to attract people to their side. They are creating a wrong image of Islam in the people’s minds.

Hafiz Ibn Qutiba highlighted that because of the public’s general lack of knowledge, they tend to like speakers whose speech contains outlandish and out-of-the-ordinary things. The Sahaba and Tabi’een took harsh actions against these types of speakers.

(Page 17)

Now, to answer your questions: 

1. The received statements of the incumbent person are not correct according to Sharia. The majority of his statements were a result of his personal interpretation of Sharia texts and inaccurate interpretations of the Qur’an, Hadith and the lives of the Sahaba (Companions of the Prophet SAW). It is not permissible to propagate them by any means. The speaker must refrain from such statements and adhere to the interpretations of the pious predecessors and esteemed scholars. He should avoid any action that may cause confusion and distraction. Staying focused on the path of safety and righteousness will be beneficial for everyone.
2. To those who are deliberately propagating such statements, leading astray the simple people while defending the incumbent person, their conduct is regrettable. They will be answerable to Allah SWT for their actions.
3. Darul Uloom Deoband has never been opposed to Tablighi Jamaat as a Jamaat (Group). It was founded by the Akabir (legendary personalities) of Deoband. It has significant importance to the preaching and spreading of Islam.

Darul Uloom Deoband has diligently fulfilled its religious and Sharia duty before by issuing a comprehensive statement and publishing a detailed position to the scholars. It still stands by its position and now it is presenting this more detailed position to the scholars. It is advisable for people to seek guidance and consult their local Ulema in matters of Sharia. May Allah SWT  keep us on the straight path and safeguard the ummah from all kinds of evil and harm. Ameen.

Arabic References

Signatures

Phone: +91-1336-222429

Fax: +91-1336-222768

Website: darululoomdeoband.com

Email: info@darululoomdeoband.com

The post Maulana Saad Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa 2023 Latest (English Translation) first appeared on Tablighi Jamaat.

Below is a list of Darul Ulooms and Institutions’ stances (mawqif), articles, and Fatwa on Maulana Saad Misguidance.

1. Madrasah Shah Waliyullah 2025 Fatwa – Maulana Saad’s deviations are getting worse! – 2025 October 11
2. Darul Uloom Karachi Fatwa – An Incorrect and dangerous statement – 2025 March 23
3. Darul Uloom Deoband 2025 (Clarification) Stance on Maulana Saad – There has been no change in Saad’s attitude – 2025 January 14
4. Ulema of Assam – 2,500+ Ulema and Muftis agreed on a stance against Maulana Saad – 2025 January 14
5. Jamiatul Ahlia Darul Uloom Moinul Islam Hathazari – it is not permissible to follow Saad until he sincerely repents – 2024 December 22
6. Jamia Malibagh, Dhaka, Bangladesh – Declaring the deviation of Saad following the Tongi Ijtema Attack 2024 – 2024 Deceember 22
7. Maulana Saad’s Incorrect Statements at the South Africa Camperdown Ijtema 2024 [ENGLISH] – Part1, Part2, Part3 – 2024 October
8. Majlis-ul Ulama South Africa 2024 [ENGLISH] – Controversies P1, P2, P3, Musa AS – 2024 October 5
9. Kashful Ghubaar (Ulema Group of Africa) – Problematic Statements of Maulana Saad [ENGLISH], The Reality of Maulana Saad’s Rujoo (Part 1) [ENGLISH], The Reality of Maulana Saad’s Rujoo (Part 2) [ENGLISH], Changes introduced by Ml Saad to the detriment of Dawat and Tableegh [ENGLISH] – 2024 October
10. Declaration of Concerned Ulema of South Africa – Signatories from many Darul Uloom Principals, Muftis and Ulema of South Africa – 2024 September 27
11. Mufti Taqi Usmani on Maulana Saad – Declaring something as Fardh A’yn is wrong! – 2024 May 14
12. Darul Ifta Jamia Rahmania Arabia, Dhaka – It is not permissible to participate in or support their activities! – 2024 January 19
13. Darul Uloom Farooqia Karnataka – Critical Analysis on Maulana Saad’s Controversial Speeches in Bhopal Ijtema 2023 – 2023 December
14. Markazud Dawah Islamia LATEST FATWA 2023 [UDRU] – Fatwa on Maulana Saad – 2023 July
15. Darul Uloom Deoband 2023 Fatwa on Maulana Saad – It is not permissible to propagate Saad’s Views – 2023 June 18
16. Majlis Ulama of Kashmir [URDU] – Our Stand on Maulana Saad Kandhalwi’s Ideology – 2023 March 16
17. Mufti Abdul Malek, Markazud Dawah Islamia, Bangladesh (Article on Maulana Saad) – Maulana Saad’s Errors and Controversial Rujoo – 2020 August 8
18. Muftionline.co.za South Africa – The view of the Ulama in regards to Moulana Saad ~ 2018/2019
19. Board of Ulama of Banglore City, Karnataka, India – The matter has worsened and reached a worrying level! – 2018 October 25
20. Jamiat al-Baqiyat al-Salihat-e-Islamiyya, Vellore, Tamil Nadhu, India [TAMIL] – Stand against Maulana Saad – 2018 October 25
21. Jamia Imam Abu Hanifa, Bangalore, India – 3 Reasons for the current crisis! – 2018 October 25
22. Group of Ulama from Azamgarh, Jaunpur, Ambedkaringar, Sultanpur Region, India [URDU] – 2018 October 25
23. Ulema of Mumbai, India – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – 2018 October 24
24. Mufti Habibur Rahman Khairabadi – Hidayat is only in the hands of Allah! – 2018 September
25. Ulama of Bangladesh – Following Maulana Saad is not permissible! – 2018 July 28
26. Ulema of New York – Supports Deoband Fatwa – 2018 July 19
27. Mufti Masood Ahmad Qasmi, Dhule – Dangerous intepretations of Seerah! – 2018 July
28. Ulama Council of New Zealand – Maulana Saad is the cause of the Tablighi Jamaat Crisis – 2018 April 27
29. Darul Uloom Hyderabad (Darul Ifta Jamaa Islamia) – Supports Deoband Fatwa – 2018 April 27
30. Board of Ulama of Allahabad – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – 2018 April 25
31. Inkishaf Haqeeqat [URDU] – Revealing the truth, compiled M Saad’s own father-in-law (Maulana Salman Mazahiri)! – 2018 March 26
32. Wifaqul Ulama Al Hind (Article on Maulana Saad) – Maulana Saad’s Errors – 2018 March
33. Darul Uloom Deoband Clarification on Maulana Saad’s Rujoo 2018 – Ideological divergence of Maulana Saad cannot be ignored! – 2018 January 31
34. Majlis-ul Ulama South Africa 2016/2017 – Kufr Ideology of Maulana Saad, Various queries on Maulana Saad – 2017 May 30
35. Board of Ulama of Giridih District and Jharkhand, India – 2017 March 12
36. Majlis-ul-Ulama Andhra Pradesh – Supports Deoband Fatwa – 2017 January 19
37. Mufti Ebrahim Desai (AskImam.org) – Serious statements cast doubt on his Aqaid! – 2017 January 1
38. Idara Nahi Anil Munkar, Karnataka, India – O Allah! Save the Ummah from the mischief of Saad Kandhlawi
39. Madrasah Taleemul-Deen, Ispengo Beach, South Africa – Stand against Maulana Saad ~ 2017
40. Jamia Ghaithul Huda Bangalore, Karnataka, India – Remain steadfast on the World Shura ~ 2017
41. Darul Uloom Moinul Islam, Bangladesh – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – 2017 January
42. Al-Jamia Al-Islamia Masih Uloom, Bangalore, India – Stand against Maulana Saad – 2016 December 29
43. Madrasa Dargah Hazrat Syed Sultan Shah Rehmatullah on Maulana Saad, Karnataka, India – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – 2016 December 29
44. Darul Ifta wal Irshad Mumbai – Shura or Ameer – 2016 December 28
45. Ulama of Belgaum District, Karnataka, India – Hundreds of signatures in support of the elders of Tabligh! – 2016 December 27
46. Jamia Talha Bangalore, India – Stand against Maulana Saad – 2016 December
47. Darul Uloom Dabhel, Gujrat, India – 2016 December
48. Darul Ifta, Madrasa Ihya-ul-Uloom, Vanambadi – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – Signature 4 – 2016 December
49. Jamia Al-Fikriya – Our Muftis support Darul Uloom Deoband’s Fatwa on Maulana Saad – 2016 December
50. Darul Ifta Madrasa Rafiq ul-Uloom, Ambur – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – Signature 3 – 2016 December
51. Darul Ifta Miftahul Uloom, Melapalayam – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – Signature 2 – 2016 December
52. Darul Ifta Madrasa Kashiful Huda, Madras – Supports Darul Uloom Deoband Fatwa against Maulana Saad – Signature 1 – 2016 December
53. Ulama/Muftis Of Kanpur City, UP, India – Maulana Saad is becoming the founder of a new sect! – 2016 December
54. Madrasah Deenyah Wasiyat Uloom, India [URDU] – Stand against Maulana Saad – 2016 December 21
55. Majlis Tahaffuz Madaris Jambusar – Supports Deoband Fatwa on Maulana Saad – 2016 December 18
56. Majlis-e Ulama Marathoda Aurangabad, India – Stand against Maulana Saad – 2016 December 12
57. Jameah Mahmoodiyah South Africa – 2016 December 13
58. Darul Uloom Deoband’s Stance on Maulana Saad’s First Rujoo – Maulana Saad must do a proper Rujoo! – 2016 December 12
59. Muftis of South Africa – Signed by Mufti Radha Ul Haq (Most senior Ulama of South Africa) – 2016 December 8
60. Darul Uloom Saharanpur – Includes signature of Maulana Saad’s father-in-law (Maulana Salman Mazahiri) – 2016 December
61. Darul Uloom Deoband’s 2016 (First) Fatwa on Maulana Saad – Maulana Saad has strayed from the path of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaa’ah! – 2016 December 6
62. Board of Ulama, Bangladesh – Maulana Saad must accept the Shura! – 2016 October 25
63. Maulana Hakeem Abdul Rasheed Qasmi and Group of Scholars – Even before Deoband’s First Fatwa – 2016 August 3
64. Nadwatul Ulama [URDU] – Stance that predates Deoband’s First 2016 Fatwa! – 2015 April 1
65. 2014 Letter to Maulana Saad predating Deoband’s Fatwa – A extremely detail analysis of Maulana Saad’s Errors even before the Deoband’s first 2016 Fatwa – 2014 January 23

Indirect Fatwas

• Maulana Yunus Jaunpuri – O’ Allah protect this Ummah from the Fitna of Saad
• Darul Uloom Deoband 2017 Fatwa – Darul Uloom Deoband has nothing to do with the current internal disagreement of Tablighi Jamaat
• Does Allah SWT himself take the soul of a Martyr in a sea journey? [ENGLISH/URDU] – Maulana Saad’s love of quoting fabricated hadith to impress people – 2018 August
• Mufti Selangor, Malaysia [BAHASA] – It is wrong to claim our Iman is stronger than the Iman of the Sahabas
• Mufti Pahang, Malaysia [BAHASA] – Maulana Saad’s error in his speech with regard to the Status of Baitul Maqdis
• Binori Town, Karachi, Pakistan – Shura with rotating Faisala is permissible in Islam
• Darul Ifta Jamia Uloom Islamiah – One should be cautious listening to such statements
• Mufti Habibur Rahman Khairabadi – The sharia status of going in Jamaat
• There is no Hadith: those who don’t follow Ameer, Satan is their Ameer – Mufti Shakeel Mansoor Al-Qasimi

General Talks/Views

• Mufti Abul Qasim Nomani: Maulana Saad’s statements are worse than before – 2025 February 23
• Mufti Saeed Ahmad Palanpuri on Maulana Saad – The Saadists will be worse than the Barelvis [ENGLISH]
• Mufti Taqi Usmani Speech on Tablighi Jamaat Split – 2025 January 29
• Maulana Tariq Jamil speech on Maulana Saad – Shura = Unity, but he refused this!
• Habib Umar speech on Maulana Saad – He disconnected himself from his teachers!
• Maulana Abdul Hamid Ishaq – Principal of Darul Uloom Azadville South Africa – There is a limit to supporting the wrong
• Mufti Zaid Palanpuri – Detail proof and exaplanation of Maulana Saad’s Mistake
• Ulama of Kashmir as testified by Mufti Shabbir Ahmad Qasmi [URDU]
• Maulana Ziaul Haq Hospuri – Maulana Saad in the footsteps of Mirza Qadiani
• Maulana Yaseen Mazahiri’s Letter to Maulana Saad
• Mufti Nizamuddin Qasmi [URDU] – How Maulana Saad has deviated
• Maulana Hafiz Noumani – Breaking Idols is Necessary to Save Tablighi Jamaat
• Mufti Khizr Mahmood Qasmi [URDU] – His accounts on how Deoband prepared the Fatwa on Maulana Saad
• Ulema of Pakistan – Following the Shura is the Ijma of Ulema!

The post A collection of 60+ Fatwa/Stance on Maulana Saad: Deviation from Ahlus Sunnah first appeared on Tablighi Jamaat.

1. Technically, Maulana Saad DID NOT do a full Rujoo. His Rujoo was only limited to his statement on Prophet Musa AS.
2. Maulana Saad continues to make controversial statements deemed outside Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah even after the Rujoo.
3. Darul Uloom Deoband and many other institutions have not retracted their fatwas and stance on Maulana Saad. In fact, in 2023, they issued a new fatwa on Maulana Saad claiming their previous negative remarks on him still hold (See the 2023 Fatwa)
4. As of November 2025, Maulana Saad still continues with his deviated ideologies. 32 new Fatwas have been issued by various instituitions since the wrap of his Rujoo with Deoband (January 2018).

What is a Rujoo?

A Rujoo is a formal process, in which an individual demonstrates his repentance, in order to make peace with an institution (in this case Darul Uloom Deoband) for making remarks which were deemed heretical or contradictory to the institution’s standpoint.

A Rujoo is not the same as a Tawbah, which is repentance to Allah SWT whereas a Rujoo is towards an institution.

A Rujoo is not to be taken lightly

A person may not simply make an erroneous statement publicly and thereafter vindicates himself by making a Rujoo overnight. Such abuse of Rujoo is abhorred. Rujoo conditions have thus been meticulously set in the past to ensure the sanctity of the process.

The Conditions of Rujoo

A Rujoo’s condition varies between institutions but the following conditions are typical:

• The individual must admit and show strong remorse in ALL of his contradictory statements.
• The individual must issue a retracting statement in the same manner as how the contradictory statement was issued. For example, if the contradictory statement was published in writing, the retracting statement must also be published in writing as well.
• The individual must never repeat his contradictory statement again.

Maulana Saad Rujoo: First Attempt (Before Fatwa was released)

NOTE: Before reading further, please understand that our aim is to preserve the pure doctrine (Manhaj) and 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‘. No matter how bad a Muslim is, he is still our Muslim brother. We love and hate only for the sake of Allah.

2016 November – Before Darul Uloom Deoband issued their Fatwa on Maulana Saad publicly, they sent him a letter to reprimand and inform him of their intention. They wanted to protect his name and honour before releasing the Fatwa.

2016 November – Maulana Saad sent a delegation to Darul Uloom Deoband saying that he was prepared to do a Rujoo. They gave his delegation a list of all his controversial statements which was deemed outside Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

2016 November 30 – Maulana Saad sent his first official Rujoo Letter to Darul Uloom Deoband. In this letter, he admitted his errors with the following statement:

“This lowly one considers it his Deeni responsibility and wants to make a clear Rujoo from his previous Bayans (speeches) that has been referred to. May Almighty Allah forgive him”

However, at the end of the Rujoo, Maulana Saad seems to accuse Darul Uloom Deoband of having bad thoughts. He is alluding that this is why they are being critical of him. Worse, he even tried to argue that he has references for his controversial Bayans. He writes:

This lowly one considers it a very disappointing matter the ill thoughts that important people like yourselves have, who are responsible for an International academic centre. This ill thought, regarding the ideologies, positions and methods of this lowly one and his associates, show uncooperativeness with the blessed effort of Dawah and Tabligh and its Markaz.

… despite this lowly one’s lack of Ilm, he will attempt to send references and explanations with regards to the objections raised against the speeches of this lowly one

Maulana Saad’s First Rujoo Letter, November 30, 2016

Source: Da’wah and Tabligh Crisis, p17

Maulana Abdul Malek, a well-renowned scholar from Bangladesh, states in his article regarding Maulana Saad’s First Rujoo:

Is there a need for Rujoo if someone assumes they are correct and has evidence to support their statements? Can this be considered as valid ruju? or will it be considered that they are trying to unjustly prove they are correct? Obviously such an act defeats the very objective of the Rujoo!

Source: Da’wah and Tabligh Crisis, p18

2016 December 6 – Darul Uloom Deoband thus did not accept Maulana Saad’s Rujoo and published their first fatwa.

2016 December 8 – Darul Uloom Deoband issued a supplementary writeup (Link: Urdu, English) explaining why his first Rujoo was not accepted

Maulana Saad Rujoo: Second Attempt

2016 December 11 – Maulana Saad sent his second Rujoo letter. The letter was similar to the first letter without the controversial points mentioned earlier. Due to the need to avoid further Fitnas, they decided to be very lenient and accept his Rujoo purely on this written letter.

2016 December 13 – Two days later, Darul Uloom Deoband prepared a letter to Maulana Saad to inform him that his Rujoo letter was accepted. They sent two messengers to personally deliver their response to him.

However, on the way to Delhi, evidence reached Darul Uloom Deoband that Maulana Saad had repeated his objectionable statement regarding Prophet Musa (AS) that very day in his Fajr speech. Moreover, he also made a controversial statement regarding Prophet Yusuf (AS). Thus, Darul Uloom Deoband decided not to send the letter and called back their messengers.

Within two days, Maulana Saad did Rujoo only to repeat the very same statements. It is as if his Rujoo is just a matter of play and games! He was never serious about his Rujoo in the first place.

Maulana Saad Rujoo: Third Attempt

2017 January – About a month later, Maulana Saad sent his third Rujoo letter to Darul Uloom Deoband. In this letter, regarding the matter of Prophet Musa (AS), he argued that whatever he said could be understood from a different context. He tries to prove that he is correct in this very aspect. He claimed his statements were only Marjuh (relatively weak) and not Baatil (false). He even blatantly declared his Rujoo upon the statement:

Even if my words are not Baatil, I make Rujoo regardless.

Maulana Saad’s Third Rujoo Letter

This is such a slap on the face! He directly admits that his words are correct, but wants to make Rujoo regardless. He even insisted on presenting arguments for his controversial statement. Can this be considered a valid and sincere Rujoo?

Mufti Abdul Malek writes

Na’udhubillah. This was his third Rujoo? Decide for yourselves if it is valid or not. Can this be considered a valid Rujoo?

Source: Da’wah and Tabligh Crisis, p23

2017 February – Darul Uloom Deoband replied by sending a letter rejecting his Rujoo’ and refuting the arguments that had been presented. They pointed out that he needs to show sincere repentance. They also pointed out that since his statements were made in public (in front of hundreds of thousands of people), the Rujoo must be done in public as well.

Maulana Saad Rujoo: Fourth Attempt

2017 (Possibly around June) – Maulana Saad sent his fourth Rujoo letter admitting his mistakes on the third Rujoo.

2017 (Possibly around July) – Darul Uloom Deoband replied in writing that they do not accept any more of Maulana Saad’s Rujoo if it is in the form of a letter. By this time, his Rujoo has been rejected three times. Many false accusations have also been propagated against Darul Uloom Deoband. In Darul Uloom’s writing, they stated that as the speeches were given publicly, the Rujoo needed to be public as well.

Typically, one of the conditions of Rujoo is, “The retractive statement must be made in the same manner as how the contradictory statements were made“. In the first three Rujoos, Darul Uloom Deoband was very lenient on this but seeing how three Rujoos have already been rejected, they decided to enforce this matter.

2017 December 25 – Maulana Saad did his first public Rujoo. During the Taleem of Hayatus-Sahabah, he openly declared his retraction on his statements with regard to Prophet Musa AS.

2018 January 11 – Maulana Saad did his second public Rujoo in front of his followers in Kakrail Masjid. He openly declared his retraction on his statements with regard to Prophet Musa AS.

Deoband finds Maulana Saad Rujoo insincere as he continues his deviation despite the Rujoo

2018 January 31 – Darul Uloom Deoband issued an official clarification on their position concerning Maulana Saad’s Rujoo.

In a nutshell, the Rujoo was only accepted for his statements on Prophet Musa AS. That was the only Rujoo he made! Darul Uloom Deoband expressed great concerns regarding the divergence of Maulana Saad as he continued to make controversial statements despite the Rujoo. The original 2016 Fatwa was never retracted.

We have made a comprehensive list of Maulana Saad’s controversial statements.

Below is the English translation of Darul Uloom Deoband’s Letter Clarifying their stance on Maulana Saad’s Rujoo.

Clarification of Darul Uloom Deoband about Maulana Saad Kandhlawi (Maulana Saad Rujoo)

31 January 2018

There are repeated requests from within India and outside that Darul Uloom Deoband should express its view regarding the Rujoo (revocation) of Maulana Muhammad Saad from his comments about the Prophet Musa (peace be upon him).

It is hereby clarified that as far as the Ruju of Maulana Muhammad Saad from this particular issue (about Prophet Musa) is concerned it is somehow satisfactory. However, concerns about the intellectual misguidance expressed in Darul Uloom’s position cannot be ignored. Even after many attempts on Rujoo, we have noticed that the incumbent person is still making new controversial statements. The same self-styled Ijtihad, wrong arguments, and incorrect interpretation of Sharia texts on his specific thought about Da’wah are prominent. Due to this, not only the servants of Darul Uloom, but all other scholars of Haqq (righteous scholars) strongly oppose strongly oppose his ideology. 

Those who turn to us in this regard are once again reminded that Darul Uloom Deoband has distanced itself from the internal dispute of Tablighi Jamat and it has declared its impartiality clearly from the beginning. However, whenever people approach Darul Uloom for its views about wrong ideologies and thoughts, Darul Uloom always strives to guide the Ummah considering it its religious duty.

Signatures (Maulana Mufti) Abul Qasim Nomani, (Maulana Mufti) Sayeed Ahmad Palanpuri, (Maulana Syed) Arshad Madani. Date 13/05/1439 AH / 31/01/2018

Maulana Saad Deoband Visit 2025

On 20th February 2025, Maulana Saad Kandhlawi visited Darul Uloom Deoband today including the Darul Ifta.

The followers of Maulana Saad were quick to claim that since Darul Uloom Deoband allowed him to visit Deoband, this means the Deoband is no longer against Maulana Saad and the Deoband Fatwas are no longer valid.

Maulana Saad’s followers also claim the Maulana Saad’s visit to the Darul Ifta was to make Rujoo.

A few day later, Mufti Abul Qasim Nomain clarified the mis-information spread when a questioner asked him.

“Darul Uloom’s stance remains firm and unchanged, completely intact. In fact, his (Maulana Saad’s) recent statements are even worse than before. They are challenging the Ulema, saying that people should abandon fatwas and instead follow their hearts. These are the kinds of statements they are making. He has not made Ruju from anything”.

his recent statements are even worse than before!

Mufti Abul Qasim Nomani 2025

For more details, see: Maulana Saad Deoband Visit 2025

The post Maulana Saad Rujoo Controversy: Did Maulana Saad do Rujoo? first appeared on Tablighi Jamaat.

Deoband mentions: “The Ideological divergence of Maulana Saad which Darul Uloom Deoband has pointed out in its Stand cannot be ignored at all“.

In 2023, Darul Uloom Deoband issued another fatwa on Maulana Saad.

NOTE: Before reading further, please understand that our aim is to preserve the true doctrine (Manhaj) of Tabligh. As generations come, this may be forgotten. We do not promote hate, and certainly not backbiting. See our article ‘Backbiting vs Warning‘ and ‘Adaab of Ikhtilaf‘. Most of M Saad’s followers are InshaAllah good and sincere people. They are only following their local affiliations, being unaware of the truth. At the end of the day, we are all Muslim brothers. We love and hate only for the sake of Allah.

According to Wifaqul Ulema Al-Hind, Maulana Saad’s errors can be categorized into three:

1. Ghuloo’ – Excessive exaggeration in matters of deen
   • Allah SWT will take such work from us that had not been given to the prophets
   • Working for a Halal Rizk is wrong if Muslims are becoming Murtad (leaving Islam)
   • The greatest sin of the Sahaba was to delay going out in the Path of Allah
   • Nizamuddin is likened to Madinah, and leaving it is like being Murtad (leaving Islam)
   • Learning science causes Shirk (idolatry)
   • Without Gasht, our Imaan will not be perfect
   • Those that don’t go Khurooj are similar to Munaafiqs
   • Helping Deen is only through Da’wa. Helping via wealth and Intellect is not.
   • M Saad claims that giving Sadaqa (charity) without Da’wah will increase the love of Dunya and is against Sunnah
2. Deviating from the Ijma – Directing away from the true beliefs of the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah.
   • Our Imaan is stronger than the Sahaba, Prophets, and Angels
   • Hidayah (guidance) is not in the hands of Allah
   • The help of Allah does not come through Imaan but through obedience
   • Shuras are the biggest Fitna
   • Mashwara is more important than Salat
   • Leaving Mashwara is a bigger sin than leaving the battlefield
   • Nikah is essentially the meeting of two shameful private parts
   • Wearing long tight pants invalidates Salat
   • It is against Sunnah to give Da’wa outside the Masjid
   • Being paid for any religious work is wrong. Scholars should do business instead. If not their Muhajadah is flawed
   • There is only one way of Da’wa
3. Self Ijtihaads – Personal deductions from the Qur’an, Hadith and Seerah.
   • “IntansurUllah” (Helping Allah) is only restricted to Da’wa. Charity and Defending against enemies are not.
   • M Saad disrespects Prophet Suleiman indirectly comparing him to the non-believers for missing Salat
   • The effort of deen cannot be carried out without deception and Ta’wil (manipulation)
   • The Munafiqeen (who built Masjid al-Dirar) were actually believers!
   • M Saad makes incorrect remarks about the Holy Prophet SAW
   • Staying in Nizamuddin is Hijrah Battah

Statements of Ghuloo/Exaggeration

#1 – M Saad claims that Gasht is compulsory in Islam

In several of his speeches including a most recent speech in the 2025 USA Ijtema, M Saad made claims that doing Gasht is compulsory. In that speech, M Saad claims:

Bringing Muslims to the mosque through gasht is such a command of Allah that if there is delay in it, Allah’s punishment may descend…

…Going door-to-door and gathering Muslims in the mosque is such a command of Allah, such an order of Allah Almighty, that if there is delay in this, Allah’s punishment will come…

… Can there be a threat of punishment for leaving a recommended act? Can there be a threat of punishment? Do you consider punishment and divine punishment for recommended (Mustahab) acts to be unimportant?…

…Is there a threat of punishment for doing a recommended (Mustahab) act first? Is there a threat of punishment? …

Full analysis and audio clips can be foudn at Mufti Arshad’s explanatory video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SP4OvHTgFs

Mufti Taqi Usmani has also reprimanded him for claiming ‘Gasht is Fardh Ayn’ (See: https://tablighi-jamaat.com/en/mufti-taqi-usmani-maulana-saad/ )

#2 – M Saad claims that Allah SWT will take such work from us that had not been given to the prophets

In a speech in Sudan in 2017, while STILL in the process of Rujoo, Maulana Saad mentions that if one performs the work of Dawa with Ikhlas (sincerity), Allah SWT will take such a work from him which had not been given to the prophets.

His translated words (See video for full Urdu speech):

If Allah the Almighty takes work from Ababil, to eliminate Abrahah, will you be jealous of Ababil? Yes. Are you jealous of Ababil? This is HIS nature. If you work with Ikhlas, Allah SWT will take work from you, from which Allah did not give to the Prophets. This is Takaza Qudrat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpoLs6Yhq6Y

This is a very strange statement, and claiming such under the context of going out in Tabligh is nothing short of extremism.

#3 – M Saad claims that working for a Halal Rizk is wrong and not Ibadah if Muslims are becoming Murtad

M Saad mentions in one of his talks that it is wrong to assume seeking Halal Rizk is an Ibadah when people are leaving Islam. While the context is on the importance of Da’wa, the way it is put is unprecedented and is a concern for exaggeration and extremism. These are some of the aspects that Darul Uloom Deoband has raised.

Aside from that, it is mentioned in a Hadith (Mishkat), by the authority of Abdullah bin Masood (RA), the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: “Seeking halal and pure Rizk is Fardh, after the Fardh (Salat)”

M Saad says:

When the Ummah is going towards the fire of hell, how can people say seeking Halal Rizk is an Ibadah? When a Muslim becomes an apostate, it is wrong to seek lawful sustenance! Allah will ask you. You should not be happy when you earning a living and happily giving provisions to your children. You shouldn’t be happy. Allah SWT will hold you accountable.

How is it, that when the ummah that was built on hardship, now in the state of apostasy, that you, by sitting at home and earning a living, you say this is Deen? Allah will question you on the Day of Resurrection!

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/sWPf18cG28U

#4 – M Saad claims that the greatest sin of the Sahaba was to delay going out in the Path of Allah

In December 2018, in the Bulandshahr Ijtema UP, M Saad in an exaggerated statement (Guloo’), claims that from the story of Kaab Ibn Malik, the greatest sin of the Sahaba was to delay going out in the Path of Allah. M Saad Says:

اللہ اکبر ! کعب بن مالک کا واقعہ لوگ نہ سنتے ہیں نہ بیان کرتے ہیں اور نہ اس سے دعوت کی نقل و حرکت کی اہمیت سمجھتے ہیں، مجھے نہیں ملا سیرت میں کوئی صحابہ کا ایسا بڑا جرم جس پر حضور اکرم ﷺ اور تمام صحابہ ان سے ناراض ہو گئے ہوں سوائےاللہ کے راستے میں نکلنے میں تاخیر کرنے کے، دیکھو غور سے پڑھو وہ قصہ

Allahu Akbar! People do not want to hear the story of Kaab bin Malik, nor do they want to understand the importance of movements in Da’wah. I have not found any greater sin of the companions in the Seerah than this. The Prophet Muhammad SAW and all the companions were angry with them only because they delayed going out in the Path of Allah. Look and read that story carefully.

Maulana Saad, Bulandshahr Ijtema, Dec 2018

It is wrong to derive such grand and simplistic conclusions without taking into account the circumstances and the status of the Sahabi involved (Kaab bin Malik). Darul Uloom Deoband has admonished M Saad for this particular speech in their most recent 2023 Fatwa.

#5 – M Saad indirectly likened Nizamuddin to Madinah and leaving it is likened to becoming Murtad (leaving Islam)

In one talk, M Saad strangely says:

Today, against my regular routine, I read a story today about a Fitna that befell upon the Sahaba. In this age, it is considered that apostasy is to leave Islam. They say… listen to what I am saying… everyone should listen attentively… it is considered in this era that apostasy means turning away from Islam. The Sahaba considered leaving Madinah and going to their locality as and act of apostasy (leaving Islam). The Sahabas were so united in their work (of Deen), so much so that they consider it an apostasy to go back to their locality after coming to Madinah Munawarah. You people don’t read books. Staying in Nizamuddin is not a small thing.  I have been contemplating on this since morning. I refer to the story of the tribe of Banu Aslam who fell ill after coming to Medina. He (the prophet SAW) said to them: You people have fallen ill after coming here as the weather here is not suitable for you. Therefore, go back to your villages for a few days for your health. They replied: O Messenger of Allah, we do not want to become apostates. He (the prophet SAW)  said: No. This is not apostasy, we are sending you to be treated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmmNSKuZgFM&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=37

Here, he first made a reference to a story that was taken out of context, claiming that the Sahaba understood that to leave Madinah is to become Murtad (Leaving Islam). Then he added “Staying in Nizamuddin is not a small thing” making it clear the context of his speech is with reference to Nizamuddin. This is without any doubt an exaggeration (Ghuloo) in Deen. He puts the context of leaving Nizamuddin together with leaving Islam!

To our dear M Saad followers, who are no doubt our brothers in Islam: Picture someone else saying something like this in your local Masjid!

#6 – M Saad says learning science causes Shirk

Picture a man entering your Masjid claiming ‘Don’t learn science!.. Science is Shirk!.. Science is Shirk!.. Science destroys Imaan’. We will immediately think that this old man is fanatic and mentally deranged.

Well, this is exactly what M Saad said in a recent 2023 Bayan. Here are his exact words (translated into English):

If you think about it, science teaches shirk… teaches shirk… science teaches shirk. Muslims in the past, learned (science) understanding that science produces shirk. Because we all understand… (we all) really understand… the conclusion from science is that the system of the universe is controlled by the universe itself. This is the conclusion from science. I am telling you something important here! The system of the universe implies to us this. Nauzubillah. I am warning you all about this conclusion. Science teaches atheism. Just to gain (professional) income (from learning science), the Iman of Muslims have become corrupted.

Maulana Saad 2023 (Audio received 11/9/2023)

This is a clear Ghuloo/extremism.

#7 – M Saad claims that without Gasht, our Imaan will not be perfect

In October 2022, in the Malaysian Ijtema, M Saad indicated that Gash (aka Jola/Jawla i.e. visiting people door to door) is required for the perfection of Imaan.

While his speech was in reference to the importance of “Amaar Bil Maaruf Nahi Anil Munkar” (enjoining the good and forbidding the evil), M Saad made a clear reference that he was referring to Gasht when he blatantly said:

When these two obligations (Ammar Bil Maaruf Nahi Anil Munkar) is Fard, and completing these two obligations is in itself important for Imaan, how can Imaan be perfect without Gasht?

Without Gasht, the perfection of Imaan cannot be produced!

Maulana Saad in Malaysia Ijtema October 2022

Such a manner of speech has been criticized as it creates a sense of superiority and extremism amongst his followers. Those with weaker minds and knowledge of Islam may start taking it literally and propagate this absurd notion.

A well-known institution, Darul Ifta Jamiatul Uloom Al Islamiah, has issued a Fatwa regarding his absurd statement:

Assuming the need to do Gasht for perfecting Imaan is wrong. 

….. continues ….

We must be careful in listening to such stories from people who have deviated from the way of the Salaf and follow their own Aqal (understanding) and interpretation. The Elders of Tabligh must stop such people from delivering such bayans.

Mohamad Yusuf Binnori Town

Fatwa number: 144404100873 Darul Ifta Jamia Uloom Islamiah

#8 – M Saad says that those who don’t go Khurooj are similar to the Munafiqeens.

On the 9th of September 2018, during the Fajr Bayaan of the quarterly Mashwara in Nizamuddin, M Saad likened those who didn’t go Khurooj to the Munafiqeen (hypocrites) of Madinah.

M Saad says:

A disease of the Munafiqeens (hypocrites) was that they would refuse orders by giving excuses. They used to refuse orders by giving excuses. They like to give excuses even though they agree that in order to go out in the Path of Allah, a single person alone is not possible. A Jamaat is required. They understand that the Jamaat of Muslims are upon obedience and harakah (movements). Listen to me carefully here! In the time of the Sahaba, the Harakah (movements for Deen) were not done by any particular group. (It is was never understood) that only a group of Muslims should do this work. This is a misunderstanding of this era that there should be a specific group (only) that would do this work (of Da’wa). During the time of the Sahaba, 100% of the Muslims were going Khurooj and Harakah (movements for Deen). There was thus no room for the Munafiqeens to not go in the path of Allah. This is why they had to give false excuses. They used to say ان بیوتنا عورۃ meaning “the condition of our houses is not good and unsafe”. Sometimes they used to make excuses on the basis of “piety”. But, there was no piety. It was merely an excuse to not go for Khurooj. Listen to me carefully here! “فمنهم من يقول ائذن لی ولا تفتنی”, which means, “Among the hypocrites, there are those who say: Don’t take us out in the path of Allah. Don’t take us out of the path of Allah. Let us stay here. We fear that we may be tempted (by the beauty and wealth of the Roman Empire). If we go out in the path of Allah, we may succumb to our temptations. Brothers, listen carefully! They said that since we fear that we may fall into the temptations (from seeing the wealth of the Roman empire), please allow us to stay in Madinah. Listen carefully, brothers! Because we are being sent towards Rome, where there are such worldly temptations, let us stay here instead. We do not want to be subjected to such temptations. Let us stay here instead. We want to avoid these tempting trials. Hazrat (referring to someone outside this context), is used to say that if due to any reason or circumstances (such as fear of Fitna) one avoids going Khurooj, such will be the attribute of the hypocrites. Denying the order to go out (in Khurooj), because of any excuse, is a very big matter.

M Saad, 9 Sept 2018, Fajr Bayan, Quaterly Mashwara, Nizamuddin

Imagine saying something like this in front of an audience! What perception would people think? Those who are workers of Tabligh will have a sense of Ghuloo (extremism) and those who are not in Tabligh will be highly offended!

To those who are followers of M Saad, picture someone else saying something like this! Such a statement is nothing short of extreme!

#9 – M Saad claims that helping Deen is only through Da’wa. Helping via wealth and Intellect is not.

During an after Fajr Bayan on the 24th of June 2018, in a statement of exaggeration (Ghuloo’), M Saad claims that the Nusrat of Deen is only restricted to Da’wa. Using one’s wealth and intellect is not considered helping Deen. Such a statement is not only extreme but is also against the understanding of Scholars from the lives of the Sahaba. Some Sahaba were rich and some were also intellectual, were they not giving Nusrat of Deen using their abilities?

میں نے عرض کیا نصرت دعوت کے ساتھ ہے، نصرت دعوت کے ساتھ ہے۔کیونکہ دعوت یہ اصل دین کی نصرت ہے ، یہ اصل دین کی نصرت ہے، دعوت اصل دین کی نصرت ہے، دعوت اصل دین کی نصرت ہے، ورنہ جس کے پاس مال ہے، وہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ ہمارے پاس دعوت کا شعبہ یہ ہے کہ ہم مال خرچ کریں گے، جن کے پاس عقل ہے، وہ یہ کہیں کہ ہم اپنی رائے اور مشورے سے مدد کریں گے ۔ ایسا نہیں ہے۔ بلکہ حقیقت یہ ہے کہ خود جا کر دعوت دینا ، خود جا کر دعوت دینا، کہ خود جا کر دعوت دینا اس پر اللہ کی مدد آوے گی ، اس پر اللہ کی مدد آوے گی ، اس پر اللہ کی مدد آوے گی ، آپ صحابہ کے واقعات پر غور کریں، اس سے معلوم ہوگا کہ اصل دین کی مدد کیا ہے، خود جا کر دعوت دیے بغیر اتمام حجت نہیں ہوتا ، خود جاکر دعوت دیے بغیر ذمہ داری اداء نہیں ہوتی ،خود جا کر دعوت دیے بغیر ذمہ داری ادا نہیں ہوتی ، ذمہ داری ادا نہیں ہوتی۔

(بیان بتاریخ ۶/۲۴/ ۲۰۱۸ ، بعد فجر )

I am saying that Nusrat is through Dawah. Nusrat is through Dawah. Da’wah is the Nusrat of Deen. It is the original Nusrat of Deen. Da’wa is the original Nusrat of Deen. Otherwise, whoever has wealth will think that Da’wah to them is through spending wealth; and those who have intellect will think that they can help the Deen through their opinions and advice. This is not (Nusrat of Deen). Rather, the fact is that if you go and give da’wah yourself, if you go and give a da’wah by yourself, the help of Allah will come to you, the help of Allah will come to you, the help of Allah will come to you. Look at the life of Companions! Analyze their events! From this you will know what is the original Nusrat of Deen. Without going Dawah yourselves, the responsibility (of Deen) will not be fulfilled.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rioBo2-aTqk&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=33

To M Saad followers, who are our brothers in Islam: Picture someone else saying something like this in a Bayan! Not only it is extreme, but is wrong!

#10 – M Saad claims that giving Sadaqa (charity) without Da’wah will increase the love of Dunya and is against Sunnah

During a 2023 talk in Nizamuddin Markaz, Maulana Saad says the following:

This is a very important message which I want to convey. If a Muslim spends money on charity, whether for their own people or others, without the invitation to Allah (Da’wah), it will cause the love and greed for wealth; and not for religion. The love for wealth will increase, and not the love for religion. If a Muslim spends money on charitable works without Da’wah, it will create a greed for wealth among people, not a desire for religion.

Why? Because the Sunnah is that you should give charity and spend money along with Da’wah. Giving Charity without Da’wah is against the Sunnah.”

Statements Deviating from the Ijma

#1 – M Saad claims our Imaan is stronger than the Sahaba, Prophets, and Angels (2019)

The following is a transcript of his speech in Amravati Ijtema, India 2019. Maulana Tariq Qasmi has criticized this statement as it is an insult to the prophets, Sahaba, and Angels. Such a person claiming this should immediately make Tawbah (Repentance).

Listen to me. The Prophets, Sahaba (and angels). Muslims today do not understand, the Imaan given to us is better than the Imaan of these three groups (Prophets, Sahaba and angels). There is an authentic hadith (on this). Let me tell you about this. Today Muslims are so negligent about Imaan, yet they are not negligent with their Amaal (Practices). In reality, without Imaan one cannot be steadfast in Amaal (Practices)…..

M Saad, Amravati Ijtema 2019

#2 – Maulana Saad claims that Hidayah (guidance) is not in the hands of Allah

In one speech, Maulana Saad says:

Allah Ta’ala has made us the means of humanity’s guidance and sent us to this earth. We have the habit of saying “Brother! Hidayah is in the hands of Allah. If He wished He will grant Hidayah, otherwise not.’

No! This is not the case! Instead, you should remember that only a human being can be the means of another human being’s guidance. Man alone is the reason for another man’s guidance.

Maulana Saad’s Speech (Source: Wifaaqul Ulema Al-Hind, Page 8-9)

Maulana Saad was heavily criticized for this speech. Such a statement means that Hidayat is not in the hands of Allah and goes against the Quran 28:56: “Verily you cannot guide whomsoever you wish to, rather Allah Ta`ala guides whomsoever He pleases”.

According to our sources, this controversial speech occurred around 2010. M Saad has never made Rujoo on this old statement of his.

#3 – M Saad claims that the help of Allah does not come through Imaan but through obedience

During Fajr Bayan on the 22nd of October 2022 in Malaysia, Maulana Saad, in an attempt to brainwash the masses into submission to his leadership, blatantly claims that the help of Allah does not come through the perfection of Imaan but through the perfection of Itaat (obedience).

The following is a short translated transcript of his speech. The full Urdu is in the YouTube video.

Today people say that the supernatural help of Allah SWT that came to the Sahaba was due to the the perfection of their Imaan.

…..(continued further)….

I would like to inform those that are involved in the work of Dawah, THAT IS WRONG!

…..(continued further)….

It is necessary to understand that the supernatural help received by the Sahabah is not due to the perfection of their Imaan but due to the perfection of their Itaat (obedience).

Please listen to what I have to say1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoH32HYjidI

#4 – M Saad claims that Shuras are the biggest Fitna

In 2019, Maulana Saad boldly claimed that Shuras are the biggest fitna. This is not only a baseless exaggeration but is against the consensus of the Ulema where Shuras are an essential part of Islamic administrations.

Not only that, Maulana Saad contradicts himself by forming Shuras in various countries worldwide. For example, in Pakistan, he formed a new Shura in 2022. The Shura had 8 members and 2 Faisals (Maulana Haroon Qureshi and Maulana Usman). He also formed Shuras in many countries in Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Malaysia, etc.)

His exact words (translated):

This is the path of disputes. Here (in Nizamuddin) there is no need for Shuras. The whole country is needed here. The whole world is needed here. Instead of forming a shura, we form an ummah. THE FORMATION OF SHURA IS SOMETHING THAT CAUSES DISPUTES. Form the Ummah. Form the Ummah. Instead of forming a Shura, form the Ummah. THE BIGGEST FITNA IS THE FORMATION OF THE SHURA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOfPucFtQg4

#5 – M Saad claims that Mashwara is more important than Salat

In 2022, M Saad blatantly claims that Mashwara is more important than Salat while speaking in Arabic.

MASHWARA IS A PRACTICE THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SALAT, MORE IMPORTANT THAN SALAT, MORE IMPORTANT THAN SALAT, MORE IMPORTANT THAN SALAT.

This is understanding against the Ijma of the Ulema.

#6 – M Saad claims that leaving Mashwara is a bigger sin than leaving the battlefield

M Saad says:

We are all bound by the Mashwara and we have to give Taleem (teaching) about the Mashwara. When someone presses their opinions, disagreements will arise. If someone presses his opinion, other people who have the same view as him will be with him. I say LEAVING AND RUNNING FROM THE BATTLEFIELD IS A VERY BIG SIN BUT LEAVING MASHWARAH IS A BIGGER SIN THAN THAT. Listen to my talk here with full concentration! People fail to understand this deeply! Understand the meaning of my talk here! Leaving Mashwara is a greater sin than leaving the battlefield!

M Saad (See Audio below):

This understanding is wrong and against the Ijma of the Ulema.

#7 – M Saad degrades Nikah as essentially the meeting of two shameful private parts

During a talk in an Ijtema, in front of thousands of people, M Saad lewdly degrades the Sunnah of Nikah as the meeting of two private parts.

Here are his exact words:

لوگوں کا خیال یہ ہے کہ نکاح خطبہ نکاح کو کہتے ہیں، حالانکہ نکاح اصل شادی کو کہتے ہیں، اصل شادی کو نکاح کہتے ہیں، میاں بیوی کی ملاقات کو نکاح کہتے ہیں، دو شرمگاہ کے ملنے کو مولانا یوسف صاحب عجیب بات فرماتے تھے مخلوق کو خالق سے جوڑنے پر مال خرچ نہیں کرتے، دو شرم گاہوں کے جوڑنے پر مال خرچ کرتے ہیں، مخلوق کو خالق سے جوڑنے پر مال خرچ نہیں کرتے؛ بلکہ دو شرمگاہوں کے ملنے پر مال خرچ کرتے ہیں، دیکھو توسہی، نکاح کا خلاصہ تو یہی ہے، نکح سے مشتق، دو شرمگاہوں کے ملنے کو نکاح کہتے ہیں، اس پر لوگ مال خرچ کرتے ہیں، حالانکہ یہ کتنا گھٹیا کام تھااور یہ کتنا اچھا کام تھا کہ سارے عالم میں پھرتے اور اس پر مال خرچ کرتے”۔

People think that the main essense of Nikah is the Khutba of Nikah. Although Nikah is the real marriage and the real marriage is called nikah, in reality, Nikah is actually the intimate meeting of a husband and wife. Maulana Yusuf Sahib said something interesting about this “meeting of two private parts”. People don’t (want to) spend money on connecting the creations to the Creator, but they spend money on connecting the two shameful (private parts). They don’t (want to) spend money on connecting the Creation with the Creator; Rather, they spend money on the meeting of two private parts. Understand this! Because this is the essence of marriage. It is derived from Nikah. The meeting of two private parts is what marriage is. People spend money on it, even though it is a lowly thing. Yet how much does it costs? People should spend money travelling around the world (for Khurooj) instead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtBwWOBwxfs&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=18

#8 – M Saad claims that wearing long tight pants invalidates Salat

In a very recent Bayan in September 2023, M Saad made his own fatwa regarding wearing tight pants in Salat:

How tight the dress that is worn, (long) pant is worn, I am swearing by the name of Allah his solat is not valid. You can ask any Masa’il, you can make any interpretation. The reason is that the ruling for a person wearing pant is considered naked. Naked. All parts of the body is exposed.

Maulana Saad, 6 September 2023

While it is disliked to wear tight clothes in Islam, to claim that one’s Salat is invalid is totally against the Ijma (majority of the Scholars) of the Ahlu Sunnah Wal Jamaah. It is Makrooh (disliked) but does not invalidate Salat. What’s even more absurd is that M Saad swore in the name of Allah despite going against the Ijma!

Ibn Qudamah mentions in his book of Al-Mughni 1-414 that if the clothes cover the skin colour of the Aurat, the prayer is still valid even if the clothes reveal the shape of the body. Seeing the shape of the body is something that cannot be avoided even if the clothes are thick.

#9 – M Saad claims it is against Sunnah to give Da’wa outside the Masjid

M Saad claims that Da’wa outside Masjid (i.e. in shops or houses) brings no benefit and is against the Sunnah. With this understanding, he introduced the DTI (Da’wa Taleem Istiqbal) method into Tabligh. With this method, Da’wa inside homes are discouraged as it is against Sunnah and according to him, brings no effect.

میں بار بار نظام الدین سے یہ بات ساتھیوں سے بھی مجمع سے بھی عرض کر رہا کہ ہمارے گشتوں کا مقصد مسجد میں لانا ہے، گھروں پر، دکانوں پر، چوپالوں پر پارکوں میں ، ہوٹلوں میں باتیں کرنا یہ خلاف سنت ہے، نہ یہ صحابہ کا طریقہ ہے، نہ یہ نبیوں کا طریقہ ہے، بلکہ مختصر دعوت دے کر ہر شخص کو مسجد کے ماحول میں لاؤ کہ ہم آپ سے بات مسجد میں کرنا چاہتے ہیں، کیونکہ اللہ قرآن میں فرمار ہے کہ اللہ رب العزت مسجد کے آباد کرنے والوں کے دلوں سے اپنے غیر کا خوف نکال دیں گے اور اللہ فرمار ہے کہ فعسى أولئك أن يكونوا من المهتدین کہ یہی وہ لوگ ہوں گے جو اللہ کی طرف سے ہدایت پانے والے ہوں گئے۔”

I have repeatedly addressed this issue from Nizamuddin to my friends and to the congregation. The purpose of Gasht is to bring people to the Masjid. It is contrary to the way of the Prophets to talk at houses, shops, parks, hotels, etc, but to bring everyone into the Masjid environment by giving a short Da’wa that we want to talk to you in the Masjid. Allah says in the Qur’an that Allah will remove the fear of others from their hearts, the one who stays in the Masjid; and Allah says that فعسى أولئك أن يكونوا من المهتدین that these will be the people who will be guided by Allah.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WH7GZPO0Y2E&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=28

#10 – M Saad claims that being paid for any religious work is wrong. Scholars should do business instead. If not their Muhajadah is flawed.

On the 29th of April 2023, during the Bhopal Ijtema, in front of thousands of people, M Saad controversially said:

So, I am saying that the idea (of being paid a salary for religious workers) is wrong for both the teacher and the student. By having someone to guarantee their needs, the Mujahada(struggle) of both the teacher and student will be weak. The Mujahada of both the teacher and student will be flawed.

M Saad, Bhopal Ijtema 2022

This statement of his has been heavily criticized by Darul Uloom Deoband. Darul Uloom Deoband says:

His recent statement (referring to the above statement) is even more dangerous than his previous statements. Here, he is making an accusation against ALL scholars, Muhadditheen and has tried to disgrace the prevailing system of public funding of the Ulema and Madrasa (religious schools).

Darul Uloom Deoband 2023 Fatwa, Page 3

See Darul Uloom Deoband’s 2023 fatwa.

#11 – M Saad claims there is only one way of Da’wa.

According to the Majority of the scholars, Da’wa can be done in many ways. It is not restricted to one particular way. For example, Da’wa can be done through speaking, teaching, debating, writing, etc.

There is nothing wrong with saying that for me, this way of Da’wa is best (under certain circumstances). There is nothing wrong in explaining why going out for Da’wa in the method of Tablighi Jamaat is beneficial. However, to say that there is only one way and only my way is the Sunnah way, is wrong. It is also wrong to say that other methods of Da’wa are against the Sunnah. It is from the consensus of the Ulema that Da’wa is not restricted to a particular method.

In November 2018, in the Bhopal Ijtema, M Saad said:

میں اس لیے بات دہرا رہا ہوں کہ جیسے زمانہ گزر رہا ہے لوگوں میں اصلاح وتربیت کے اور دین کی بات پہنچانے کے نئے نئے طریقے زندہ ہورہے ہیں،، یہاں تک کہ امت یہ سمجھ بیٹھی کہ کوئی مخصوص طریقہ نہیں ہے تبلیغ کا، بلکہ جس طرح چاہو دین کا پیغام پہنچا دو۔ یہ میں بہت اہم بات عرض کر رہا ہوں ۔ امت یہ سمجھ بیٹھی ، بڑی غلط فہمی ہے کہ کوئی مخصوص طریقہ نہیں ہے تبلیغ کا ، جو جس طرح چاہے کرے۔ نہیں ایسا نہیں ہے، بلکہ جس طرح محمد ﷺ  کی عبادت اور ضرورت کی لائن کی سنتیں متعین ہیں، اس طرح آپ کی دعوت کی لائن کی سنت بھی متعین ہے ، وہ سنت یہ ہے کہ آپ بذات خود جا کر دعوت دیں ، وہ سنت یہ
ہے کہ آپ بذات خود جا کر دعوت دیں۔

I am repeating this because as time passes, new methods of Islah, Tarbiya, and conveying the message of Deen are being introduced. The Ummah today says that Da’wa is not just one specific way. One can conveying the message of Deen in any way they want. This is an importing thing I am saying here. The Ummah today has a misunderstanding that there is no specific way of Da’wa to be followed. No, this is wrong. Just as the Sunnahs of worship and limitations defined, so is Sunnah of Dawah is also defined. You should go and and give Da’wa by yourself .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYgBXGNKCkA&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=49

Here, M Saad clearly said that it is wrong to believe that there is no specific way of Da’wa. This is against the understanding of the majority of the scholars.

Self Ijtihaads of the Quran, Sunnah and Seerah

#1 – M Saad claims the Quran verse “IntansurUllah” (Helping Allah) is only restricted to Da’wa. Sadaqa and defending against enemies are not.

In a statement of exaggeration + self-interpretation of the Quran, M Saad claims that the verse “IntansurUllah” is only restricted to Da’wah. Defending against the enemies, donating money, and spending money for Islamic causes is not helping the Deen of Allah in this context!

“اللہ نے جو شرط لگائی  إِنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللَّهَ اس نصرت سے،اس نصرت سے مسلمانوں پر مال خرچ کرنا مراد نہیں ہے،اس نصرت سے مسلمانوں پر مال خرچ کرنا مراد نہیں ہے یا اس نصرت سے اغیار کے خلاف قوت جمع کرنا، ان سے مقابلے کے لئے یہ مراد نہیں ہے۔تمہیں میری بات بہت توجہ سے سننی پڑے گی۔اس نصرت کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ تم اللہ کے بندوں کو اللہ کے دین کی طرف دعوت دو،اس لئے کہ مال خرچ کرنا، مال خرچ کرنا یہ اسلام کی نصرت نہیں ہے،مال خرچ کرنا اسلام کی نصرت نہیں ہے،مال خرچ کرنا مسلمان کی نصرت ہے،مال خرچ کرنا مسلمان کی نصرت ہے”

The condition that Allah imposed, إِنْ تَنْصُرُوا اللَّهَ, does not mean to spend money on Muslims nor does it mean to gather strength against the enemies or battling them. This is not the meaning. Listen to me very carefully! The meaning of this Nusrat is that you invite people to Allah, to the religion of Allah. Spending money is not helping  Islam. This is not helping Islam. Spending money is not helping Islam. Spending money is helping a Muslim, spending money is helping a Muslim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQV1lcxMXjQ&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=1

#2 – M Saad disrespects Prophet Suleiman indirectly comparing him to the the non-believers for missing Salat (2023)

In June 2023, Maulana Saad in a bayan mentions the following:

Suleiman AS was so busy inspecting his horses, that he had to Qada (missed) his Asr prayer. While looking at his horses, the sun had already set. Allah is the creator. The real purpose for Allah’s creations is not so that the creations are affected by other creations but so that the creations are affected by the creator. The disbelievers are those who are impressed with the creations and the Muslims are those who are impressed with the Creator. Creations are meant for us to recognize the creator. That time was the time to remember Allah but inspecting his horses had caused Suleiman AS to be so busy and missed his Asr prayers.

M Saad Bayan, June 2023

This matter has even been addressed by Darul Uloom Deoband itself in their latest 2023 Fatwa (Page 15).

Darul Uloom Deoband’s reply:

Look at the manner in which the incumbent person has presented the story of Sulaiman (AS) and the conclusions he has made from the incident! The dangerous consequence of what he has said could not be overstated. First, he says that it is the actions of the non-believers to be affected by the Asbab (Means). Then he tries to prove that such a great prophet was affected by the Asbab (Means)! See how dangerous the matter has reached? Nauzubillah (May Allah protect us). 

Darul Uloom Deoband 2023 Fatwa, Page 15

#3 – M Saad claims that the effort of deen cannot be carried out without deception and Ta’wil (manipulation)

In one of his controversial speeches, by making an unorthodox deduction from the story of Abdullah bin Rawahah, M Saad blatantly mentions that the work of Dawa cannot be carried out without deception and Takwil (manipulation).

M Saad says:

The story of Abdullah bin Rawahah RA with his wife has been reported in the book Hayatus Sahabah. One day, he slept with his female slave. His wife (upon finding out) was angry at him and brought a knife to kill him. In those days, husbands were allowed to sleep with female slaves like wives. He (Abdullah bin Rawahah) asked his wife on why she brought the knife. She says that she wants to cut his chest open. “Were you not sleeping with the slave girl?” (She said). He (Abdullah bin Rawahah) then answered that I will read the Quran to you. If I had slept with the slave girl, how can I read the Quran (as it it impermissible to read the Quran in an impure state)? He (Abdullah bin Rawahah) then, instead of reading the Quran, read several lines of poetry in Arabic. His wife than said what she saw was wrong.

A believer cannot lie. What Allah and His Messenger said is true (said his wife). A believer cannot read the Quran while in an impure state.

Look, if without takwil (manipulation) and deception like this, a house cannot be united, can the whole world work together (and unite)? Think about it. This was only for a husband and wife affair, without it (takwil, manipulation and deception) a household relationship cannot be good. If a house of only two people can’t be together, without thinking well of others and denying what we see, what about this very big effort (of Dawah)? (Can it be carried out) without deception and takwil (manipulation)?

#4 – M Saad claims that the Munafiqeen (who built Masjid al-Dirar) were actually believers!

While narrating the incident of Masjid al-Dirar, a Masjid that was built by the Munafiqeen (hypocrites), M Saad claimed that the ones who built the Masjid were actually believers.

This is very wrong as ‘Abd Allah ibn Ubayy’ a staunch enemy of Islam, also known as the leader of the hypocrites was involved in building the Masjid as well. Allah SWT himself calls the masjid “Kufran” (Masjid of Disbelief) in the Qur’an.

میں تم سے صاف کہ دیتا ہوں جب بھی تم لوگ جمع ہو گے کسی اختلاف کو ختم کرنے کے لیے خدا کی قسم یہ اختلاف اور بڑھے گا، اور بڑھے گا تم سو بار بھی جمع ہو کر دیکھ لو، اللہ کی قسم کھا کر کہتا ہوں اختلاف اور بڑھے گا، کیونکہ جو اختلاف کی بنیاد پر جمع ہوں گے، اُن کے اختلاف میں اُن کے جمع ہونے سے اور زیادتی ہوگی ، ہم تو بھلائی چاہنے، ہم تو کام چاہنے کے لیے جمع ہوئے ، بھائی کام چاہنے کے لیے تو کام کرنے والوں کے ساتھ جمع ہو گے ، تب تو کام چاہنے والے بنو گے اور اگر کام چاہنے کے لیے کام کرنے والوں سے الگ ہو کر جمع ہو گے، تو اس سے اختلاف اور افتراق اور بڑھے گا، شیطان الٹی ہی سجھاتاہے، کہ ہم توخیر پرجمع ہورہے ہیں، ان اردنا الا الحسنی ، کہ جی ہاں یہ کہا تھا، مسجد ضرار والوں نے یہ کہا تھا ان اردنا الا الحسنی کہ بھئی ہم تو یہاں اس مسجد میں جمع ہوئے نا، ہم تو اصل میں کام کے نفع کے لیے ہی جمع ہوئے ہیں، یہ میں قرآن کی آیت کا ترجمہ کر رہا ہوں، میری بات دھیان سے سنا، ان اردنا الا الحسنی ہم تو کام ہی چاہتے ہیں، بھلائی چاہتے ہیں، کہ ہم تو بھائی خیر ہی چاہتے ہیں، مسجد ضرار میں جمع ہوئے ، آپ نے فرمایا صحابہ سے، جاؤ لکڑیاں اکھٹی کرو اور اس مسجد کو آگ لگا دو، جہاں لوگ جمع ہوئے ہیں ایمان والوں کے درمیان تفریق پیدا کرنے کے لیے جا کے وہاں آگ لگا دو، گئے صحابہ ،لکڑیاں جمع کی ، اس مسجد کو آگ لگادی، حالانکہ مسجد تھی ، حالانکہ مسجد تھی۔ جی ہاں۔ کہ وہاں سب نہیں جمع ہوں گے، وہاں تو مخصوص لوگ جمع ہوں گے، میں آپ کو کھل کر کہہ رہا ہوں آج سب سے، یہ کیا تھا بعض لوگوں نے اور یہ نہیں کہ وہ کفار تھے۔ نہیں۔ ایمان والے تھے، کفار نہیں تھے، مسجد بنائی تھی ، الگ جمع ہوں گے، الگ جمع ہو کر سوچیں گے”۔

I am telling you clearly that whenever you people gather together to end a disagreement, by Allah, this disagreement will just increase. It will increase. Disagreements will increase because those who will gather on the basis of disagreement, there will be more excess in their disagreement than their gathering. If you gather with those who work, then you will become those who want to work, and if you gather apart from those who work for the sake of wanting to work, then differences and differences will increase. But Satan will let you go in the opposite direction, believing that we are gathering for a good purpose “ان اردنا الا الحسنی”, this was what they said. The people of Masjid Al-Dirar said it “ان اردنا الا الحسنی”, which means we have gathered here in this Masjid for the benefit of the work. I am translating this Quranic verse, listen to me carefully. “ان اردنا الا الحسنی”  We only want to do good work, we want good, that we only want good brothers, gather in Masjid Dharar. He SAW said to the Companions, go collect wood and burn this Masjid. People have gathered there to create differences between believers. Go and burn it down. The Companions went, collected wood, and burned the Masjid, even though it was a Masjid. Yes! Not everyone will gather there, certain people will gather there, I am telling you openly today, this was done by some people and they were not disbelievers. No. They were believers! They were not disbelievers, they built a mosque. However, they gathered separately, and were indifferent in their thoughts.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdsiFh3HTF4&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=9

#5 – M Saad makes incorrect remarks about the Holy Prophet SAW (2018)

During the Aurangabad Ijtema, India, in February 2018, Maulana Saad talked about the need to not be wasteful in Walimahs.

He narrates the usual practice of the Holy Prophet SAW which was to prepare simple food such as cheese and dates during a Walimah. On one exclusive occasion, the Holy Prophet SAW prepared bread and meat instead, in due to this the Holy Prophet SAW went through a lot of difficulties.

Maulana Saad has been criticized for his deduction and the way he presented the story. It was outright dismissive and inappropriate, as it gave the impression that Holy Prophet SAW was wasteful.

But most of all, the Ulemas have criticized his version of the story:

1. This was not the only time that the Holy Prophet SAW prepared bread and meat during a Walimah (Umdadul Qari, volume 20, page 155, Fathil Bari, volume 9, page 146 under hadith commentary number 5171)
2. There is no proof that the Holy Prophet SAW only prepared cheese and dates during his occasional Walimah. This shows a blatant fabrication from Maulana Saad.
3. There is a Hadith encouraging us to perform Walimah EVEN if you can provide a single goat.

Maulana Saad says:

Avoid extravagance in weddings! Avoid extravagance in weddings! The more extravagant, the more the hardships will there be. In all of his weddings, the Holy Prophet (SAW) sometimes fed cheese, sometimes distributed dates, and sometimes scattered chawri (dry dates). Today, if someone bring dry dates to the Walimah, no one will accept it, no one will consider it as a Walimah, even though it is the same Sunnah, it is the same Sunnah. Not just one marriage, but all marriages were like this. All, except for the marriage of Hazrat Zainab (RA). In that wedding, the Prophet SAW arranged meat and bread. Hazrat Zainab used to be proud that meat and bread were arranged in her wedding. Subhanallah, yet because of this marriage that was different (extravagant) from his usual practice, he (the Holy Prohet SAW) had to face a lot of difficulties due to this.”

Maulana Saad Speech, Aurangabad Ijtema, India, February 2018

#6 – M Saad claims that staying in Nizamuddin is Hijrah Battah (2018)

On the 10th of September 2018, Maghrib time, M Saad claimed that staying in Nizamuddin is Hijrah Battah, a word reserved for any Hijrah (migration) to Madinah to join the Prophet SAW!

یاد رکھو! عالمی سطح پر تقاضے وہ لوگ پورا کر سکیں گے جو ہجرت ہاتہ پر آئیں گے، کس پر آئیں گے؟ ہجرت باتہ پر، باتہ یہ ہے کہ مرکزی مقام پر رہو زائد وقت، کہاں رہو؟ مرکزی مقام پر، یہاں نظام الدین میں، صاف بات ہے، تب آپ کو پتہ چلے گا عالم میں کیا ہو رہا ہے؟ علاقے میں رہنے سے علاقائی مزاج بنے گا، یہاں رہوگے، تو سارا عالم تمھارے سامنے ہے۔

(بیان بتاریخ ۱۰ ستمبر ۲۰۱۸ ء ، بعد مغرب ، سه ماهی مشوره )

Remember (brothers)! The requirements to satisfy this work of Deen at a global level will only be met by those who has come for Hijra Bata, I repeat! Hijrat Bata. That is to stay in a Markazi Maqam (Central Markaz, referring to Nizamuddin) and stay there for the most of the time. In this central place. Here in Nizamuddin. This (can’t be any) clearer. This is the only way you will know what is happening worldwide. Staying in your own area will create a regional mindset. Stay here and the whole world will be in front of you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBOdKfvWTp0&list=PLXhtUbm2e9_pNr8K_38ohNld36TDSnUVa&index=31

In Sharia, Hijrah Battah is a word reserved specifically for migrating into the company of the Prophet SAW in Madinah. The opportunity to do Hijrah Battah ended after the conquest of Mecca. In a Hadith mentioned in Tabrani, it is clearly narrated that Hijrah Battah refers to migrating and living within the company of the Prophet SAW in Madinah.

M Saad freely interprets and modifies the meaning of predefined words in Sharia for his own benefit. The status of Nizamuddin Markaz has been placed together with the position of the Prophet’s Masjid. Na’uzibillah, he indirectly compares himself to the Prophet SAW!

The term “Hijrah Battah” was even used by Malaysia’s Sri Petaling Markaz in their official letter written by the de facto Shura leader Abdullah Cheong.

The post Maulana Saad Bayan: Controversial Speeches first appeared on Tablighi Jamaat.