The Curious Case of the MeToo Mufti: Abdullah Nana

[AMusee]

Later, they start planning to take action against the scholar in question.

Azhar Subedar being schooled by an actual person of knowledge. Subedar and Nana apparently never studied namima and qadhf. Rather than acknowledge his ignorance, Subedar makes an arrogant remark like the buffoon he is.

The imam educating Subedar on Islamic basics gets his knowledge from a TV show. But Subedar, the fool deviant who thinks Isa alaihis salam won’t return as a Muslim, is the true scholar in this conversation.

What a brilliant comment there, Azhar. So profound. Don’t preach the Sharia. Understand it. Wow. Deep. Keep the gems coming like this, Azhar, and one day Omar Suleiman might let you write an article about racism for his institute.

What is significant in this screenshot is that Subedar is being corrected by a scholar. Rather than accept the correction, he makes light of it and acts like an impudent brat about the deen of Allah. The scholar responds accordingly, “Are you a child?”

This is the same pattern from these “traditional” scholars, especially Nana, as we have seen above. When scholars correct them, they act like arrogant, entitled brats and respond with the most ugly condescension.

Uh oh. Things are going to escalate. FACE is like a force of nature for Ehsan. No stopping it! Especially when they have trusted partners like Nana.

Increasingly, other group members are getting angered by the clown show.

The brilliant mind of Subedar responds to “Innocent until proven guilty,” with “So you think people are perfect and flawless?” Nana really has a brain trust over here.

You mean a disgruntled ex-wife is not a credible witness? Stop blowing Subedar’s mind.

Subedar getting shut down again. All he can do is whine like a child.

 

[AMusee]

And another beat down. “Twisted hostage situation by anonymous letter.” Just like that, these scholars toss Nana and Subedar’s #MeToo garbage in the trash.

Their khiyana?

Betraying amana, Wasim Khan? You won’t forgive? Say it to Azhar “shut these sh*tholes down” Subedar.

“You should be ashamed of yourself.”

It is always funny to see the self-righteousness of these Imam Hunters. The group which he admins is actively conspiring to ruin an imam’s life based on spurious notions of “secret” marriage, and Wasim is here talking about not forgiving people. The gall of this guy!

Attack ulama, feign concern about modernists criticizing ulama.

According to Nana, ulama do nothing! They just allow rape, abuse, molestation, etc., happen right under their noses and they do NOTHING. Only brave ulama like Nana, Tameem, Wasim Khan, and Azhar Subedar stand up for the victims! Only they get things done!

Also, Nana complains about modernists and feminists lol. They will have “field day on social media,” Nana? Why? Are you planning to share all their posts?

Uh oh. Not talking to Nana and answering questions about your marriage whenever he demands is a RED FLAG. That’s more evidence! So much evidence!

 

[AMusee]

11. The True Target of Nana, Subedar, and Khuddam Founder Mohammed Wasim Khan: The Madrasa System​

Plaintiff=victim. Claim=evidence. #metoo logic

Evidence gathering. “I have evidence,” says Nana again and again, bragging about the rotten fruits of his activities of spying, MeToo storytelling, and “helping” the “victims” to “come forward” to “heal”

Nana support for Sh Tameem Ahmadi, part of In Shaykh’s Clothing, partner of FACE. Becoming proactive to Nana is what we have seen: blasting social media messages with wild accusations.

A shameless trainwreck. Nana has some very interesting recordings, he says. Tripp, Starr, and the very useful Lewinsky are Nana’s exemplars in entrapment to produce perpetrators and “evidence”. Total lack of self-awareness. Maybe he’d like people call him Nana Tripp, instead of John Smith?

How many is many, for the MeToo Mufti?

If there are four separate apples, and one apple is red and the rest green, would we say many are green? For Nana, “many” can mean 3. Can it mean 2? How about 1?

“Many” – Nana’s favorite word.

He can confirm an unknown number of beatings because he remembers a beating of his friend. This is the sort of thing Nana calls “testimony” from “many” people.

Now they discuss their plans to shut down madrasas.

Shut down that madrasa, and shut down that one too. And is so-and-so working at the third? Who does this Nayef think he is?

Nana shows mercy. Gives targeted madrasas the option of overhauling the administration at his command…otherwise, report them to FACE and the media and shut’em down, baby.

Nana to Madrasas: Obey the Khuddam cult team, or get shut down.

A third madrasa to face Nana and the khuddam cult: obey or shut down. Productive MeToo convo here. Calling to shut down three institutes within five minutes.

 

[AMusee]

And then, this one:

Not one to be outdone, Subedar jumps in “Shut these shitholes down.” -Azhar Subedar. Foul-mouthed madrasa attacker.

“Shut these sh*tholes down.”​

Another gem to add to the Subedar list, next to “Don’t preach the Sharia,” and “Jesus will not be Muslim.”

Nana’s friend Sh Tameem Ahmadi of In Shaykh’s Clothing

Subedar says, “Shut these sh*tholes down,” and Nana’s friend Sh Tameem Ahmadi of In Shaykh’s Clothing presents this “solution”?! Is he referring to a specific person or madrasa administration? Or just giving Nana, Subedar, FACE, et al., general tips and guidance? And if a madrasa doesn’t obey the USA Khuddam cult, then what?

After saying what he did about madrasas, Subedar picks a new fight in the group, just for good measure.

Feigning respect for elders. Hasn’t he been saying they are incompetent and doing nothing but shoving things under the rug? Which elder scholar signed off on John Smith, Nana?

 

[AMusee]

11.1 Disparaging Ulama​

According to Nana, “ulama will argue about it for days and never do anything”

Poor Nana, no hope of ulama joining you in your scandal mongering, eh? “Calling for an ethics committee.” That’s what he calls five years of collecting stories….hmm since 2016, 2 years before John Smith and 3 years after.

#metoo folks like Wasim Khan want to give spiritual and psychological help to the “fraternity.” Any takers?

Wasim Khan to the rescue. Wants to actively talk about it for weeks “until we get this nailed out.” How are those talks going?

Nana in favor 100% Assembly of the hearts with Azhar “shut these sh*tholes down” Subedar? Then together you can get rid of bad apples, and bad systems.

12. Nana and Khuddam Founder Wasim Khan Shill for FACE​

On more than one occasion, in the safe space the USA Khuddam group gives him, Abdullah Nana has explicitly pushed his colleagues to collaborate with FACE.

MeToo Mufti promotes FACE: “I would like to make it very clear that I am not a big fan.” Not a “big” fan, but a fan, apparently. One who promotes, defends, and recruits for FACE. Heated discussions from before, you say?

Nana seems to be under the impression that FACE has raised “millions of dollars.” LOL

MeToo Mufti idiotically instructs the ulama: “remain quiet about FACE.” Is that your official position, Nana?

In his recent comments above you’ll notice Nana referred to heated discussions the scholars had previously. In January 2020, the USA Khuddam’s founder and leader Mufti Wasim Khan, who goes by MWK, tried to recruit the scholars in the group to work with FACE. He is from Dallas, Texas, the same city where Alia Salem lives. More on the FACE recruitment below.

Mufti Wasim Khan recruiting ulama to get “more involved” with the Imam Hunters at FACE.

Nana quickly chimes in with his support for Wasim’s recruitment.

 

[AMusee]

Nana sharing FACE’s lies, spreading su’ al-dhann about scholars and imans.

Nana logic: The LGBT feminists and deviants are caused by imams and ulama.

Senior scholars and elder ulama don’t care about abuse and injustice. Only FACE can save us!

Uh oh. MeToo Mufti is not happy about anyone criticizing his precious FACE.

Proof! Evidence! Many such cases!!!

Woah! Prostitution is zina. He knows that, right?

Ehsan provides backup as Nana flounders to defend his beloved FACE.

Nana once again shows that he has fore-knowledge of attacks which proves that he is somehow involved with them.

Ulama are not buying Nana’s garbage.

Here comes Mr. Brain Trust with another sharp comment! Does he think rubbing shoulder with LGBTQ activists at FACE will help the problem with youth?

 

[AMusee]

MeToo Mufti can’t keep his story straight.

The tool denies that he is a tool. “Trust me guys, FACE is our ONLY hope!”

Just a webinar. Did you prescreen the webinar, Nana? Have you gone through FACE training already? Did FACE certify you?

Wasim is afraid of backlash for being associated with FACE. So he quietly, secretly slinks around shilling for them, hoping no one will find out. Why do you think there would be backlash, Wasim? Can’t you just give the same talking point Nana is giving? Don’t you believe in FACE? Don’t you believe that they’re the ONLY ones who can save us? Why aren’t you man enough to shout your love of FACE from the rooftops?

Wasim: Don’t lose respect for the LGBT activists just because you don’t agree with them!

Did Nana and Wasim get their “Imams aren’t doing anything!” line from Alia?

 

[AMusee]

Wasim is so disheartened that other ulama are smart enough not to join hands with FACE. He even told them that he himself fears backlash, so what did he expect? lol

Nana getting schooled again.

Wasim poses a question: What if our elder scholars are fussaq?

Wasim didn’t know about the LGBT activism of FACE. But it doesn’t really matter for the mufti because even if they support LGBT, so what? It’s not kufr, right? Reminder: Wasim wants to hold imams accountable but he is only too eager to overlook supporting homosexuality, etc.

Wow, Wasim Khan even breaks out the Hilful al-Fudul reference to justify working with deviants and LGBT activists. I wonder which Compassionate Simp Imam he learned that from!

Poor Wasim Khan. So desperate to recruit just 5 imams who will work with FACE. All of Nana and Ehsan’s shilling just wasn’t enough. Maybe next time!

 

[AMusee]

13. Questions for Hamzah Maqbul, Tameem Ahmadi, and the Khuddam Cult of Harassers​

For Sh Hamzah Maqbul and Sh Tameem Ahmadi, one simple question for each of you. You are both closely associated with Nana. Sh Tameem, Nana referred to you as “our senior.” And during that same attack, Sh Tameem – after one person called Nayef said to shut down multiple madrasas that a person called Ehsan was naming in the group, and after Azhar “shut these shi*tholes down” Subedar uttered what he uttered – you, Sh Tameem contributed to the conversation by advising Nana and others, with these words:

“just remove the bad apple”
“or the bad system”
“change of admin”

Sh Tameem Ahmadi and Sh Hamzah Wald Maqbul, you both must be aware of Abdullah Nana’s multi-year project of attacking ulama and madrasas, spreading slander, and using deception and namima to do his dirty work, not only from this report which demonstrates your knowledge of some of it but also from your close connection to Nana over the years.

Specifically, you are aware of Nana’s social media post and activities in early July when he took it upon himself to get and then post a slander-filled statement which purports to be by an unknown number of anonymous accusers. The statement disparaged and accused two respected scholars and their institutions by name, and also accused others. This statement only reached the public via Abdullah Nana who is the only one to our knowledge who posted it online and has publicly claimed to know its source. Mufti Nana, your close associate, is therefore the one responsible for spreading accusations of extreme (though vague) alleged wrongdoings and sin, none of which Nana witnessed or was a party to. And neither were either of you.

Nana posting this letter or any other accusation to the social media world, or in public settings like large Whatsapp groups of ulama like USA Khuddam run by Nana’s partner, is not analogous to testifying in court when called upon by an authority — and remember, only the one who witnessed can bear witness and testify. By posting that statement he has committed the destructive open sin of qadhf multiple times against many ulama and believers, named and unnamed, associated with the institutes the statement named. And as long as that statement or the like of it remains up on his social media, Mufti Nana is actively continuing in his qadhf.

Therefore, Sh Hamzah Maqbul and Sh Tameem Ahmadi are each requested to make clear his position about Nana’s open activities of attacking ulama and madrasas, spreading slander, and using deception and namima to carry out this project of his, including, specifically, Mufti Nana’s posting that anonymous, statement of slander. Here is the simple question: Do you support Abdullah Nana’s activities documented above and specifically Nana’s posting that anonymous pdf of accusation, and do you think doing that is Islamically correct, or not?

Should be a very simple question to answer. We’re not even asking you to necessarily condemn your friend.

If you don’t say anything, we know what that means. And trust us. Many ulama are going to read this report and see your names and notice your silence.

As for you Wasim, you started this USA Khuddam WhatsApp group and you enabled group members to accuse scholars and call for changing administrations, and you enabled open talk of shutting down madrasas. And this talk got to the point where Nayef openly called for the shutting down of multiple madrasas and Subedar said “shut these shi*tholes down.” And Nana has been doing what he’s been doing.

So it is your responsibility, Wasim, to respond to their statements and specifically the vile statement of your close associate Azhar Subedar who – and it bears repeating – said, referring to madrasas: “Shut these shi*tholes down.” Secondly, it is also expected that you remove them from your group as well as remove Nana for his open plotting and multi-year tajassus. If you do not, the ulama should rightly conclude that you are their partner in this evil activity, agree with them, or at least think that what they expressed and are doing is worthy of your toleration and respect. And finally, along with doing the two items above, you must also clearly pledge not to say anything or do anything — neither individually, with a team, nor allowing others to do it on your group USA Khuddam — to attack and accuse any alim or madrasa again and stop this dirty work of fitna mongering, spreading hearsay and namima, and doing the work of shayatin.

 

[AMusee]

14. Conclusion​

For you, Nana, know very well that we have taken it easy on you in this report and have held back in responding to the evil you have done with a commensurate response that you deserve and have duly earned.

What you have been doing, we can see. But the question now is, what is driving you to do this project of yours of attacking Islamic scholars and imams and Islamic institutions, and using many evil means to do so? First you explain that to us. And do a good job and put proper thought into it, as your explanation will reach many of the imams and scholars who read this report, as it will reach the administrations of the large and small madrasas in the US, Canada, the UK, South Africa, and various other lands and islands across the earth and throughout the seas.

Second, you never apologized for the impermissible and damaging activities you were doing leading up to and during your attack hiding behind the fake name “John Smith.” You only apologized for putting on the John Smith mask. Then, when the ulama unmasked you, rather than having shame and stopping, you have not only continued involving yourself in the same John Smith activities, but have been doing so with more audacity than before.

Now, Nana, you have been threatening for months about terrible things to come for madrasas and ulama. This shows that you are deeply involved with planning and execution of an ongoing campaign. This is clear. So any attack that comes in the near term on any madrasa or any `alim, thousands of eyes are fixed squarely on you. Such coordinated attacks don’t come out of thin air. Your project is stripped naked in front of us and we are all watching.

The project you have been doing is wrong and evil and we reject it. And you should too. You should know very well as a Muslim, and as one who bears the title mufti, that it is not your business to accuse others and gather and publicize claims and stories impugning the honor of believers, our men and our women. The matter is so simple. Simply stop. Be a nice person there in Northern California in the masjid of your senior Sh Tameem and wherever else you live and work, and get your nose and mind out of different states and countries and madrasas and homes in the north, south, east and all across the West. Then, adjust your thinking and understanding to the right track, and make tawba, one that stops you from returning to this path you are on and the MeToo method you practice. Be like the many good muftis who don’t slander and spy, and do what your teachers do and taught you to do.

Realize this well, that if you choose to continue these activities and if you dare say or do something against any scholar or institute again, including those individuals and madrasas or organizations you are currently organizing and plotting against as of today, Muharram 6, 1443 (August 10, 2020), then have no doubt that it will not work out well for you, as it didn’t work out well for those before you.

Alhamdulillah, we are a big Muslim community with countless righteous imams and scholars. They are doing so much work to serve the community. They are people of taqwa, people of tawhid, people of sacrifice.

These are our ulama and they are not trying to hurt women. Non-Muslims can learn from our imams the proper treatment of women. Imams have been maintaining justice for our communities for centuries now, going back to the Prophet ﷺ.

It is only the modernists, the feminists, the reformists, the deviant fahisha mongers who cast aspersions against the ulama and claim that the Ummah has been rife with abuse of women for 1400 years and it is only the advent of modern feminism that can save us. This is the lie that Nana and his ilk peddle, self-appointing themselves as scholars of ethics and accountability, while working hand-in-hand with fussaq and deviants, promoting them and rubbing shoulders with them at every turn.

Indeed, those who malign Allah and His Messenger, Allah shall curse them in this world and in the Hereafter.
And He has prepared for them a disgracing torment [there].
Moreover, those who malign the believing men and the believing women [by charging them] with [wrongdoing] that they have not earned shall truly bear the burden of [commiting both a grave] calumny and a clear sin.
(Quran 33:57-58)

 

[AMusee]

Appendix 3: Notes on Qadhf and #BelieveAllWomen​

A3.1 Believe All Women?​

The infamous #believeALLwomen hashtag went viral due to the so-called #metoo movement that started in 2017. But this idea that all the accusations of abuse from women should be believed far predates 2017.

The idea that women who make accusations of “abuse” should be automatically believed and regarded as “victims” defies, not only Islamic and even secular ethics, it actually defies basic common sense, not to mention mountains of empirical data and fundamental life experience.

For one to truly “believe all women,” one is required to believe that no women would ever lie about being mistreated. Ever.

Does anyone truly believe that? Does anyone truly believe that no woman would ever lie? Just posing the question is ridiculous.

Yet, we have Imam Hunters who behave as if that is what they truly think, namely, that no woman would ever lie.

It just leaves one dumbfounded to imagine the kind of imbecile who could possibly think this or claim to think this. (Most of them actually don’t believe it but pretend they do, as evidenced by the fact that many of the simps pushing #believeALLwomen have a quick change of heart when a woman accuses them of “misconduct.”)

Consider the most severe type of accusation: Rape.

Countless examples could be given of women lying about being raped for their personal gain. We could, for example, cite a meta-analysis done by Professor Claire Ferguson, which concluded:

The meta-analysis of seven relevant studies shows that confirmed false allegations of sexual assault made to police occur at a significant rate.

In alignment with this conclusion, a 1979 study found that out of 1,198 accusations of rape, nearly 20% were false accusations. Numerous other studies confirm these results: Women making false accusations of being assaulted is not rare. It is actually quite common.

But the most salient example of a false accusation comes from the Quran. The great prophet Yusuf was falsely accused by a woman and her sly deception is recorded in Surah Yusuf as an example for the ages.

So given the reality of female liars, as attested to by the Quran, where does that leave #believeALLwomen?

Clearly, it should be rejected as a bogus principle. We do not believe the claims of women automatically because they might be overtly lying or their accusations might be false for other reasons (they made a mistake, had a false memory, etc.).

 

[AMusee]

A3.2 Spreading Accusations of Sexual Misconduct​

In Islam, accusing someone of zina requires four upright male witnesses who give their testimony to official Islamic governmental authorities.

“And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses – lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient.” [Quran 24:4]

For a third party to accuse someone of zina without meeting that requirement is called qadhf and it has its own hadd punishment in Sharia, as mentioned in the above ayah. As mentioned earlier in the report, qadhf is one of the major sins.

Allah says in the Quran, Surat an-Nur 12-16:

“Why, when you heard it, did not the believing men and believing women think good of themselves [i.e., one another] and say, “This is an obvious falsehood”?
“Why did they not produce for it four witnesses? And when they do not produce the witnesses, then it is they, in the sight of Allah, who are the liars.
“And if it had not been for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy in this world and the Hereafter, you would have been touched for that in which you were involved by a great punishment
“When you received it with your tongues and said with your mouths that of which you had no knowledge and thought it was insignificant while it was, in the sight of Allah, tremendous.
“And why, when you heard it, did you not say, “It is not for us to speak of this; Subhan[Allah] this is a great slander”?

These ayat are crystal clear.

Notice that Allah says when you heard it. So as soon as you hear such accusations of sexual misconduct from third parties, your IMMEDIATE reaction is: This is great slander (buhtan adhim). Allah did not say to investigate first, let a neutral party complete a report, etc., and then, after that if the accusation doesn’t hold up, call it slander. Rather, the required immediate response is to denounce it.

There is HUGE wisdom in this.

For one, it protects innocent people from getting their reputations tarnished. As mentioned in the report above, if people spread rumors about so-and-so committing immoral actions, that is a bell that cannot be unrung. We see how many men and women’s lives have been destroyed because they were labeled as fornicators, rapists, etc., and then it turned out they were completely innocent. But they can’t get their reputation and honor back. The supreme wisdom of Islam — not found in other religions — is to protect the innocent from this specific type of injury, while directing legitimate claims to official judicial authorities.

On a broader societal level, there is also great wisdom in not spreading hearsay about sexual indiscretion. If people spread accusations of zina, then this will destroy the morale of the community. It will also psychologically prime Muslims into thinking that zina is something that Muslims are secretly engaging in at a high(er) rate, which can make a person more likely to commit zina himself.

Numerous studies in psychology and sociology attest to this reality. People are more inclined to engage in stigmatized behaviors if they believe others are engaged in it, especially if they believe others are secretly engaged in it. This is called “norm perception.”

In the field of applied psychology, researchers and marketing strategists have long theorized how to manipulate norm perception in order to induce desired behavior in a population, such as conserving water, drinking alcohol “more responsibly,” or taking certain pharmaceuticals.

Perhaps the most widespread example of this is with homosexuality. The concept of “being in the closet” or “being on the down low” has been spread through mass media with thousands of articles, new reports, interviews. The idea is that there are countless people who are gay, but they are engaged in gay behavior in secret. Furthermore, they claim that the people who are most opposed to homosexuality are themselves secret homosexuals, i.e., they are hypocrites.

This is a powerful recipe for changing norms, changing psychology, and changing behaviors. This is a big part of the reason for the spread of LGBT fawahish in society.

And this is exactly what Allah says in Surat al-Nur. After the ayat cited above, Allah says:

“Indeed, those who love that fahisha should be spread among those who have believed will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter.” [24:19]

We might wonder: How is spreading rumors and slander (buhtan) about sexual immorality connected to spreading fahisha? The tafasir of this ayah explain that many of those who spread such rumors and accusations do so because they are munafiqin who want to destroy Muslims and get Muslims to engage in exactly those immoral behaviors. Talking about wrong behaviors can induce such behavior, as discussed above.

But Allah tells us exactly how to prevent the munafiq from causing this damage. Simply shut him or her down. Don’t entertain the rumor. Don’t even listen to it. Immediately denounce it as terrible slander.

Another teaching of Islam regarding this is not to advertise one’s private sins. The Prophet ﷺ said:

“All of my ummah will be forgiven except those who sin openly. It is a part of sinning openly when a man does something at night, then the following morning when Allah has concealed his sin, he says, ‘O So and so, I did such and such last night,’ when all night his Lord has concealed him and the next morning he uncovers what Allah had concealed.” [Bukhari and Muslim]

Again, we see the same wisdom. By talking about the private sin, one is contributing to normalizing the behavior by chipping away at the perceived stigma. Someone might be doing this intentionally — in order to get others to fall into his sin so he doesn’t feel bad about it — or unintentionally. Either way, the damaging effect is the same.

What we can also understand is that those hypocrites that love to see fahisha spread in the Muslim community would strategically go after those who are seen as religious figures and upholders of religious morality. Basically, they would target those Muslims who are prominent and known as pious and upright Muslims.

This is why we should call them “Imam Hunters.”

 

[AMusee]

This is exactly what happened in the case of al-Ifk, where hypocrites accused Aisha, may Allah be please with her, of committing zina. They targeted the wife of the Prophet ﷺ deliberately.

Hypocrites know that their aim of spreading fahisha is best served by dragging the names of prominent pious people through the mud. Some of the hypocrites themselves may be engaged in fahisha and, as a way to cope with their own self-loathing, try to pull others down onto their level. Others want to normalize fahisha and destroy its stigma, so that their own misdeeds will not be looked down upon.

There are deep psychological mechanisms behind this fitna mongering.

It must also be noted:

It is qadhf and haram for third parties to spread accusations and speak as if the accusations are true. How would a third party know that the accusations are true? The only legitimate way to know is through four upright male witnesses or an unambiguous confession (and even that has conditions).

This is important because as we have seen, feminist fitna mongers and #metoo muftis “advocate” on behalf of what they call “victims” by spreading accusations of zina and sexual misconduct. THIS IS QADHF and these feminist orgs and their male enablers (simps) would be liable for hadd lashing by an Islamic government.

“But what if my favorite celebrity imam confirmed it?”

That is still qadhf.

“But what if I talked to a really trustworthy friend/family member and he said it was true?”

That is still qadhf.

“But what if a mufti I know said he has lots of evidence and knows many cases?”

That is still qadhf.

“But what if MuslimMatters wrote a really serious article about it and a bunch of Compassionate Imams and pro-LGBT shaykhaz signed it?”

That is still qadhf.

This is not some “minority” opinion, by the way. All schools of fiqh are unanimous. This is because the Quran is unequivocal on the issue and the sirah further clarifies the matter.

Now what about those who spy on Muslims, pry into their private lives to get information about their intimate relationships?

This is also haram by consensus and counts as tajassus (spying).

Some fools might argue that the community should be allowed to “look into” the private lives of imams and scholars because “they are held to a higher standard.” This is an absolutely moronic claim that has no basis in any part of the Sharia.

These imbeciles will try to argue by mentioning the high standards set for hadith narration. If a particular narrator was seen to act unethically, ahadith narrated from him would be deemed less reliable. This is the science of Jarh wa Ta`dil: criticism of hadith narrators.

But you will never find a criticism of a hadith narrator concerning what happened in his private home. You will never see a hadith narrator accused of sexual misconduct because he was being spied on in his private affairs. There is no such thing because the scholars of hadith did not entertain qadhf or tajassus. They were actual scholars, not the half-wits of today who simp for feminists.

Note: For the those who wonder how the four witness requirement applies to cases of rape, read this explanation from Mufti Zameelur Rahman.

 

[AMusee]

A3.3 The “Where There’s Smoke, There’s Fire” Bias​

The Imam Hunters know very well that people have a cognitive bias. When people in general hear about some major misdeed that someone allegedly committed, even if they don’t believe in 100% of the accusation, they still believe that there must be something wrong with that person. After all, where there is smoke, there must be fire. If the person were completely innocent, why would there be such big accusations made against him? If there isn’t a fire, why would there be smoke?

This cognitive bias is taken advantage of by Imam Hunters and fitna mongers, in general. They make sure to inflate their accusations as big as possible. But this can create legal liability and generate libel suits, so what the Imam Hunters do is make their smear campaign vague.

They say things like, “The imam engaged in inappropriate interactions with women.” Or, “The imam was abusive toward many people.” Or, “The imam engaged in sexually inappropriate conduct.”

These are all vague. A “secret” marriage according to these deviants is abusive and sexually inappropriate according to their feminist #metoo ideology, even though such a marriage is 100% valid in Islam, no matter what the Simp Imams say. So the Imam Hunters use these vague terms to smear their targets knowing that onlookers will imagine the worst, i.e., rape, prostitution, etc.

This is yet another wisdom why spreading rumors of sexual matters, no matter how credible they may sound to you, is strictly forbidden in Islam, is a major sin, and is punished with 80 lashes.

https://muslimskeptic.com/2021/08/15/the-curious-case-of-the-metoo-mufti-abdullah-nana/#post-7026-_Toc79885947

 

[AMusee]

 

[Taij4an]

Man wrote a essay as his post