(Original Title:) The Nasibism of Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib! – authored by Shahriyar Ali Shaikh in Urdu and copied from Facebook.
(Translator’s Note: The article below was translated from the Facebook post of brother Shahriyar Ali Shaikh refuting Moulana Saifullah Mohammedi on an important issue. We have translated it into English here because of the benefits it contains. We do not endorse calling Moulana Saifullah Mohammedi a Nasibi or ‘Nasibi influenced’. May Allah accept our good deeds and forgive our mistakes.)
Brother Shahriyar Ali Shaikh wrote:
(Context: Regarding a video of Shaikh Saifullah Mohammedi wherein he was asked can we call Ali (Radi Allahu Anhu) as ‘Mawla Ali’? He answers that it is impermissible. Language: Urdu.)
Just as Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib meticulously delves into the propaganda of the Rafidhis, he ought to also consider the propaganda of the Nasibis. But why would he consider it? Because he himself is involved in the Nasibi propaganda.
Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib has baselessly and unfairly leveled accusations against the questioner. The questioner had merely asked: “What is the ruling on calling Hazrat Ali (Radi Allahu Anhu) as ‘Mawla’?” and also mentioned the Hadith: “Man kuntu Mawlahu fahadha Ali Mawlahu” (Whosever’s Mawla I am, Ali is also his Mawla).
Now, the question is: where is the justice in accusing someone of being influenced by Shi’ism based solely on this question? Does Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib not know that, Islamically, falsely accusing a Muslim, slandering, and calumniating are extremely grave sins and forbidden acts?
The Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said: “Whoever says something about a believer that is not in him, Allah will make him dwell in the filth of the inhabitants of Hell until he retracts what he said.” 📚 (Sunan Abi Dawud: 3597)
First Objection: Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib stated that the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said: “Whosever’s Mawla I am, Ali is also his Mawla.” He then questioned: “Have you ever heard anyone refer to the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) as ‘Mawla’?” This objection is unfounded (and baseless). The Quran mentions several attributes of the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam), but the Sahaba (companions) did not address the Prophet with every single word. For example, Allah called the Prophet (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) “Rahmatun lil-‘alamin” (Mercy to the worlds), but did the Sahaba ever call out “Ya Rahmatan lil-‘alamin”? No. Therefore, this question is baseless.
Second Objection: Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib claimed that the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) also referred to Sayyiduna Zayd ibn Harithah (Radi Allahu Anhu) as ‘Mawla’. Yes, he did. And if someone calls Sayyiduna Zayd ibn Harithah (Radi Allahu Anhu) ‘Mawla’, there is no harm in it. The problem is, if someone calls Sayyiduna Ali ‘Mawla’, why does he (Saifullah Mohammadi) have an issue?
Third Objection: This is where Nasibism openly manifests. He said: “‘Mawla’ means friend, and the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) said: ‘If I were to take a close friend (Khaleel), I would have taken Abu Bakr.’ Therefore, calling Sayyiduna Ali ‘Mawla’ is impermissible.” Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji’un (Indeed, to Allah we belong and to Him we shall return). Here, Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib has caused severe confusion of concepts. The Hadith states: “If I were to take a Khalil (intimate friend), I would have taken Abu Bakr as a Khalil, but he is my brother and my companion.” Here, the word Khalil is used, which means an intimate friend, a highest-grade companion. This Hadith states the virtue of Hazrat Abu Bakr (Radi Allahu Anhu); how does it prove that calling Sayyiduna Ali (Radi Allahu Anhu) ‘Mawla’ is impermissible? And did the Salaf (pious predecessors) derive the same meaning from this Hadith as Saifullah Mohammadi is deriving? “Khalil” and “Mawla” are two distinct concepts. Confusing them is ignorance. And most importantly: if calling Sayyiduna Ali ‘Mawla’ was indeed impermissible, then why did Sayyiduna Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (Radi Allahu Anhu) call Sayyiduna Ali ‘Mawla’? It is not proven that the Sahaba referred to Sayyiduna Zayd ibn Harithah (Radi Allahu Anhu) as ‘Mawla’ in this specific manner. However, it is absolutely proven from Hazrat Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (Radi Allahu Anhu) that he addressed Sayyiduna Ali as “Peace be upon you, O my Mawla.”
Rabaah bin Harith (Radi Allahu Anhu) narrates: “While Ali (Radi Allahu Anhu) was sitting in Ar-Rahbah, a man with signs of travel came and said: ‘Peace be upon you, O my Mawla.'” Ali (Radi Allahu Anhu) asked: “Who is this?” The people said: “This is Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (Radi Allahu Anhu).” Then Abu Ayyub (RA) said: “Indeed, I heard the Messenger of Allah (Salallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam) say: ‘Whosever’s Mawla I am, Ali is also his Mawla.'”
📚 (Narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah (32736), and Ahmad (23959), and authenticated by Al-Hasani in his book “Al-Jami’ Al-Musnad As-Sahih” 2796)
Now the question is: What will Saifullah Mohammadi Sahib, who claims to be on the “Manhaj of the Salaf” (methodology of the pious predecessors), say about the fact that Sayyiduna Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (Radi Allahu Anhu) himself called Sayyiduna Ali ‘Mawla’? Was he also (Allah forbid) using an impermissible title? End of the note.
[Translator’s Note: The narration of Abu Ayyub al-Ansari was translated from Urdu, in the original urdu text after Ali’s name ‘Alaihis Salam’ was mentioned. I made it ‘Radi Allahu Anhu’ to not confuse the people regarding another issue, i.e. ‘Can we use Alaihis Salam for the Sahabah or Ahlul-Bayt?’, the answer is ‘Yes’, but this isn’t the place to discuss that.]
–Shahriyar Ali Shaikh. (Translated by Mohammed bin Thajammul Hussain Manna from Urdu to English.)
Saheehus-Seerah 