We spend hundreds of hours ensuring you receive a quality service from this site. We do not fall into the advertisement schemes as all the ads contain elements of Haraam including Haraam Islamic links. Please consider setting up a £1 monthly donation. May Allah (swt) reward you.
This issue is known to Dallas Muslims for a while. We should give NAK full benefit of the doubt, nevertheless picture the whole situation.
The community has been dealing with this silently for about a year. The sisters (allegedly) affected by the matter have their own reputation in tatters. Them and their families wish to be left alone and want some privacy.
NAK and Bayyinah have access to solicitors and anything marginally malicious will be hit with a lawsuit. Under the circumstances, the only compromise was to have some sort of control on the situation and everybody hoped that (for the sake of Islam) a compromise was reached.
What NAK has (allegedly) done isn’t a crime (in America) but defamation is a matter open to civil litigation.
You cannot reveal details without brining testimonies of Sisters (allegedly involved) to public knowledge. Which Muslim sister do you know how would want to be Monica Lewinsky?
At the same time, Muslims have to be warned some how
We have people in UK who are guilty of child pornography (PROVEN) and yet they come on facebook issue a few statements, do an Interview and things go back to normal.
In a highly charged (American legal system) which itches to sue you for damages, it is extremely difficult to deal with issues like this. I know, because I have seen it in Masjids. Most Mosques don’t want to pay damages so they try to wash their hands off and the Imam moves away.
Abu Usamah (Green Lane Mosque) was proven guilty beyond doubt of multiple fornications. If he would have stayed in America, he would have been killed (that was the only solution), he simply moved to Birmingham (UK) and started again and nobody knows any better.
It’s all good and proper to say that all details should be revealed but its not that simple. Yes there is every chance that NAK is being framed but people like Navaid Aziz WILL NOT come out in public and say things if there was no smoke to this.
May Allah Ta'ala reward you for even consider my post.
Now consider this.
In a Sunnah run mosque you will NOT have access to any woman, let alone come anywhere near her to be looking at anything. That's the whole point.
My dear brother in Islam,
I have asked you this qeustion in the past, I am asking it again (with respest).
Elgin has thousands of Muslims around and these stories don't happen in vaccum.
Sister Eman Ally is a well known (Deobandi Social worker) in Chicago and the first complaint was through her. Her Islam, her family background is known for decades in the area.
She is neither Salafi, nor Modernist, nor Feminist and she didn’t gain a penny out of the whole scandal.
Maulana Abdullah Saleem was one of our elders and well known for decades as well. He (ABSOLUTELY) deserves benefit of the doubt and NO assumptions should be made.
At the same time, those from the community making accusations and people like Sister Eman Ally are also well known and their reputation and background is also known.
In a fair and unbiased (non Hazrat worshipping world) Chicago Ulama (who know very well what happened) would come forward and advise the community.
However, the focus of our Ulama is to protect the Darul-uloom and the school. They believe that people's Eeemaan will be affected so they will brush anything and everything under the carpet with the intention of protecting "Islam".
My question to you (as before), is there a reason why you tend to ignore local community members and tend to get your news from Social Media from people who don't have access to on the ground facts but rather speak from a (removed) principled point of view?
The reputation of NAK, Maulana etc should be protected and they should be given the benefit of the doubt BUT it doesn’t mean that we throw the reputation of normal Muslims under the bus. (Local) communities tend to know people best, for example people have known me for decades and if I ever make such accusations there are hundreds who can testify about my character, my motives.
Of course people change and there is every possibility that a good, upright sincere person can all of sudden make false accusations for fame or money BUT in Chicago area where there is a lot of tradition a woman really has to be getting a billion dollars to destroy her reputation and that of her family.
One again, I end by saying that NAK and Maulana should be given the benefit of the doubt but it should also be extended to those who are making allegations.
P.S: I have very close family in this area.
I have read this before and I read it again, in case I had missed something previously, here is a better link:
I agree that NAK should be given the benefit of the doubt and also agree that the matter shouldn’t be given to exaggerations and fanciful imagination.
In the past few decades, I also know very well how easy it is to get petitions and endorsements from senior Ulama (if you are in the circle).
My answer to all of the above is what I have said before.
Just because NAK has been to Shaykh Akram Nadwi and asked “curious questions” and therefore deserves benefit of the doubt. So does the Sister. In this case, there has been no (US) criminal violation but inappropriate (Islamic behaviour) so it’s we can speculate that there will be no criminal proceedings or FBI investigation because there is nothing to investigate. There will not be any independent investigation for us to fall back on. All I am saying is NAK and the Sister both deserve our sympathy. Just because NAK is a celebrity and Ulama have joined (hands together) to defend someone from their fraternity doesn’t mean that the Sister is lying! There is every possibility that she could be lying (note the distinction).
None of those who have signed this statement (so far) have any idea what has been happening in Dallas for close to a year! Many of these personalities (I know very well).
By saying NAK has come to my house and asked curious question, these individuals have not been impartial and it’s crystal clear from comments. They should have just spoken against slander and left the matter. They have actually praised NAK (repeatedly) thus showing bias and thus taking the reader in a specific direction.
My point is that BOTH deserve benefit of the doubt.
My question (directly to you) is entirely different and on a different topic. Maulana Saleem Saheb is/was an elder and once again Ulama will jump to defend him and tell us to give him benefit of the doubt. My question to you, “What makes you dismiss well established and good decent people who have made the allegations against him or supported in bringing them to light?” You often quote TED or philosophically stilted opinions but why not look into the community and see what is actually happening on the ground?
I asked the same questions about Didsbury Mosque (Manchester) and I am asking again about Elgin (Chicago). Both of these are well known Muslim communities and it isn't very difficult to investigate and try to get actual facts from those close to these incidents.
By quoting Daniel on the Chicago story you have actually not been impartial but tried toast doubt and that is my point. If you want to be impartial, say you don’t know the facts and wouldn’t like to speculate and leave it at that.
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.