should we promote Daniel Haqiqatjou?

Haven't listened to it but the problem with going on this podcast to discuss this specific topic is that it then looks like you're on the same side as DH... Even though this is one of a few points that DH is engaging with the najdis on. Unless the shaykh explicitly disassociated with the other views DH is defending as not being kufr that are in fact kufr, but that he wraps up as part of the same debate he's having with Jake and others, whether in his articles or videos

 

I listened to the entire thing in 2× speed yesterday whilst driving

 

posted some good links to read here.

 

DH's staff author bheria gives his op-ed on the javed akhtar-shamail nadwi debate

https://muslimskeptic.com/2025/12/27/mufti-shamail-vs-javed-akhtar-limits-of-atheism/

he cites that the moron akram nadwi (by name, from shamail's alma mater) as being against debating in general as well as against the specific debate in question

---

he mentions javed akhtar's descension from the lineage of Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi, and very sadly and stupidly introduces him by linking to a dirty, polemical piece by zaleel wherein he tries to refute Asrar Rashid and tries to discredit Allama Fazle Haq's scholarly legacy!



this here is our brother Abu Hasan's rebuttal of that trashy piece by zaleel - https://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/zameel-devbandi-on-imam-fadl-e-haq-khayrabadi.14254/

---

i didn't know javed akhtar wrote the infamous afreen afreen song sung by nusrat fateh ali in the 90's, but i don't see where he explicitly praises the Creator as mentioned in the english translation of the lyrics on the MS website, as well as elsewhere on the net. (if at all the afreen is meant for the Creator, it is implicit; as far as i knew, it only meant a general praise)

apparently, "aafreenindah" refers to Khuda

https://archive.org/details/FerozUlLughat/page/n31/mode/1up



---

@daniel @bheria - if any of you are reading this, and you really believe zameel to be a non-wahabi adherent of Maturidi aqidah and Hanafi fiqh and generally just a person with shame and integrity, ask zameel to dissociate from ibn abdul wahab and disown the wahabis just as passionately as daniel has been doing lately. as we say in urdu, let the milk and water separate!

 

From his telegram channel, he doesn't like wahabis takfiring Asrar Rashid

ps. this is for info, not promotion or defense.

 

Speaking from a North American perspective: why are Sunnis always late to fill the gaps and voids in all fronts (education, dawah, etc.)? There was/is a need to counter the liberal onslaught against Muslims. No one (with fluent English) was doing it. Daniel stepped in to make a contribution and was doing a good job (when he focused on liberalism, secularism, feminism, alphabet crew). If Sunnis had filled this gap, there would be no Daniel or he would have fallen under the tutelage of Sunnis.

True, but at the same time, one needs to have their financial needs met in order to fully focus on things like refuting/debating. DH in particular has burned all bridges for a normal life by putting his name and face out there in a "negative" manner to the American public with his defense of gender roles, marriage, slavery etc. in Islam. He will never be hired for a normal office job with a salary or anything similar, so what else can he do.

----
We need Sunni think tanks filling voids on all fronts - social media, books, debates, etc. Fund and support Sunni scholars so they can give full concentration to these efforts, and extra support for those willing to kill any semblance of a normal life by putting their faces in public to deal with the more contentious issues.

 

More proof that no good comes out from listening to Deviant "Political commentators". Baat baat main they'll unleash their theological poison. Laymen will look at posts like these & think it's a "Win" for Muslims

Sayyiduna Sufyan ath-Thawri رضي الله عنه said;

“Whoever listens to an innovator has left the protection of Allah”

[Shaykh Abu Nu’aym ash-Shafi'i al-Ash'ari رحمه الله in Hilyat al-Awliyah 7/26]

Imām al-Taftazani رحمه الله states:

"And the ruling on the innovator is hatred, enmity and turning away from him, and humiliation, slander, cursing and disliking prayer behind him".

— Sharḥ al-Maqāṣid, 5/231.

In Al-Risalah al-Qushayriyyah :

“An extended period of listening to (any form of) falsehood extinguishes the sweetness of obedience from the heart.”

Sayyiduna Hasan al-Basri رضي الله عنه said:

“Do not sit with the people of innovation and desires, nor argue with them, nor listen to them.”

[Ad-Darimi Hadith 121]

 

i just wanted to reiterate that i wasn't defending the person or the comment. i certainly wished for brother Abu Hasan, whose judgement on the matter i trust more than my own, to clarify further, which he did. may Allah reward him handsomely. aameen.

actually all of social media is a cesspool. i left facebook back in 2008, never really joined twitter other than maintaining a dummy membership to view a full thread if i need to, and have put my linkedin to hibernation for the last 3 yrs, even in the past just used it for job searches (surprisingly or unsurprisingly, the same kind of "debates" occasionally come up there too)

by talent, i was referring to public speaking & debating, and to some extent researching - all of which can be honed by expending time and effort of course

speaking of debating, a shaykh told me once that it serves no real purpose, and should be avoided. most of the times, even if defeated, the opponent will emerge hardened in his position. the only worthwhile thing is to propagate knowledge/information to the unknowledgeable or the fence-sitters. this can happen inadvertently to onlookers in some debates, but then this can be achieved without debating too. the other thing is sometimes debates can add sensationalism to the matter where there's excitement to watch the two opposing sides duel. maybe just talking about the same points to the uninformed won't grab their attention or publicity! Allah knows best and He guides whom He Wills. i did take the shaykh's point to heart, and believe there is empirical evidence too to prove this point.

just look at the Asrar Rashid/Shahid Ali debate with the devbandi clowns? has their jahl melted?

 

What talent? He just has more "time" than you and me to do what he is up to. Don't mistake the free "time" he has to indulge with social media as some "talent".

These days youtube and other platforms are as much about propagating one's views, as it is about monetising views/subscribers and gaining followers. So much so, that this becomes their full-time vocation. All you need to do to become another DH is to press (and rant about) all the "hot-button" issues that justifiably create so much angst/helplessness among despairing Muslims.

With nearly half-a-million subscribers, I don't think DH needs to do anything else to subsist.

 

This is similar to what engineer mirza did and now his supporters are saying 'he only quoted kufr, he didn't say it from himself'. But he is still committing blasphemy on the grounds that:

1. The specific word he used and attributed to Christians is not an actual word that is used by them. DH is also not quoting blasphemy because no Christian ever phrases their beliefs in this manner so why did DH phrase it in such a despicable and disgusting way?

2. Even if his opponents had said these exact words, quoting it is still kufr in some cases (meaning, if it's not quoted due to a valid shari' reason or without hating the statement etc and only quote what needs to be quoted without adding insults on yourself- which he has done). These are his insulting words, not the words of any Christian he has been debating

 

the issue is that we too say that jesus alayhis salatu wa's salam is the prophet, born of the chaste lady, sayyidah mariyam - is the same person that christians elevated to godhood and god's son.

i do not know how many of you are familiar with mirza ghulam ahmad qadiyani's works, but when he was refuted on his insults of sayyiduna yisa alayhis salam, one of his justifications was: that is not the prophet yisa alayhis salam but the yesu the christians worship.

---
many verses in the qur'an speaks of the same person - alayhis salatu was salam - and do not differentiate as "christian jesus" and "true jesus".



---
the verse tells christians: do not consider jesus alayhis salam one of three and refrain from saying so; he is the Word of God (kalimatullah) son of mary - and that Allah ta'ala is the one God who does not have a son.

so which jesus (alayhis salam) is being mentioned here? isn't it the same blessed person whom the xtians take as one of three (al iyadhu billah)?

---
surah ma'idah, 5:116




which jesus (alayhis salam) is being asked - whether he told people to worship him and his mother as a god?

---

that is not the point. you cannot reply with profanities, just to make a point. what exactly is this verse about?



---
besides DH's answer is stupid. of course, the xtian used profane language - but replying in an equally profane manner without addressing the xtian's accusation serves no purpose other than vent one's frustration. either one should ignore such filthy remarks, or reply clarifying - instead of trading "what about this?".

----

if he had just said xtian belief and left it without using the name of 'jesus' it would be tolerable. but how can he mention the name of the prophet alayhis salam, when it is the same person that both of us refer to?

of course, the xtians do ghuluww and raise him to godhood, and we consider him a prophet.



what is the "kalimatin sawaa" here that the Qur'an tells us to tell the people of the book? and which jesus is referred to here, who should not be taken as a god (among others such as angels, hazrat uzayr etc.) - the christian jesus or the muslim jesus (alayhis salam)?

how exactly do you make this distinction?

----

i may be slow, but i think i understood this much.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

Regardless of whether Daniel believes it or not, I personally find it extremely distasteful feel that anybody , let alone a Muslim, should speak in this manner about a Prophet of Allah. At the end of the day we cannot say that it's ok to disparage a prophet of Allah as long as we are mocking another's belief system.

 

Basically, is it kufr to state a Christian belief about a Prophet where we deem the belief to be inappropriate and disgusting, and to further state that Christians are being inspired by it?

 

Daniel doesn't actually believe that. It's not explicit, but he is saying "David was inspired by [the Christian belief of] the example of the Christian Jesus...". This is implicitly understood by those familiar with his arguments, and why he qualified Jesus with "Christian" i.e., your (the Christians so-called) Jesus did this, not ours/the real Jesus. He's pointing out the absurdity of their beliefs and the absurdity of them trying to mock the sacred and noble marriages of RasulAllah sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam. He is basically stating their kufri belief.

But I can see people that do not follow his work closely can conclude otherwise.

Will let others speak to whether the above does not matter and if the tweet is still kufr.

 

Im not defending the guy or the comment, but that tweet was in response to someone attacking our beloved RasulAllah sal Allahu 3alaihi wa sallam - as an ilzami jawab if you will (even if DH may or may not know what ilzami jawab is, or about his jawab being blasphemous in itself)

https://x.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1992373962958160121?s=20

---

I only maintain that I wish this guy's talent and zeal was harnessed by Sunnis (example, Asrar Rashid). Anyways at this point in time by his own public profile, the guy knows enough about various sects to seek proper guidance and counsel on various manhaj's as well as how to carry himself.

After undoing my liking of "shaykhs" like keller, jifry, yaqoubi, Iran shah et al, it's a no brainer i or anyone else don't need to be swayed by a political commentator like DH.

The only difference is this guy is moving from liberalist kowtowing to the powers that be towards (ostensibly) gheirah for Islam, while in the case of others it was the opposite. If this guy's sincere, we wish and pray he comes to the path of Ahlus Sunnah.

I am reminded of and scared by this hadith



Allah grant us all life and death on iman. Aameen bi jaahi nabiyyil ameen.

---

the other issue regarding all these enemies burning Quran or blaspheming against the Prophet 3alahis salam, we have spoken about the pros and cons of replying to such scum on this forum. the sad reality is until we have scum for leaders it's an incredibly difficult one - silence makes them feel they won and continue to do it with impunity, responses also lead to other blasphemies coming out of them and their cohorts (the chain of tweets is a clear example of that)

 

Unfortunately, this type of tone and manner of speech is EXTREMELY common amongst those who refute Christians etc. And most people will watch and not realise how despicable it is

 

certainly not. it is kufr.

 

https://x.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1992373962958160121?s=20

Is this really appropriate? I think not

 

These nadjis are too thick to deal with DH. They focus on istigatha rather than the actual kufr position on whether the imams are superior to the Prophets alayhim as salaam. Then even on the istigatha issue, they can't make up their minds if it's kufr or not despite saying it's shirk akbar, meaning they'll say it's sareeh shirk but the doer isn't always a kaafir... Yet it's sareeh according to them.

Meanwhile DH has the same mentality where he can't make up his mind if it's shirk or not. Sometimes it's shirk but the doer isn't mushrik, sometimes it's haraam etc... Both sides misguided and misguiding. Hijab and these other guys are the same. No sunni presence in the English language pulling them up for their wrong positions either

 

mentions Asrar Rashid in a positive light... though I dunno which debate he's referring to...

the tweet also shows that he follows AR's online activities...

https://x.com/Haqiqatjou/status/1984773495130124460