The last two weeks or so had seen the Nouman Ali Khan scandal ( with various hashtags such as #NAK #NAKScandal #MakeDuaMyHotFantasy ) trending on the Muslim social media, particularly in North America. When it came out, it immediately captured everyone's attention as Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan enjoys such a high and stellar reputation. His work on making the Holy Quran accessible in the English language is unparalleled in the modern times.
Of course, he denied all allegations, while claiming to be never a perfect man. And to be fair to him, there were really no allegations - simply slander, innuendo and hearsay. Spread mostly by feminist blogs, all the accusers were mute on what he exactly did or stands accused of, except that they called him an 'abuser' or a 'predatory daee'.
Now at that time, after remaining silent for some time, I released a video.
At the time the scandal broke, we only had one duty. We had to presume our brother was innocent, and we MUST demand a proper evidence from the accusers, and an exact accusation. This was the summary of my video.
One of the bloggers, someone whom I have a lot of respect for the work she does otherwise, later stated: "The public revelation regarding NAK was not handled in an ideal manner."
Exactly.
When making an accusation against someone with a stature like Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan, there should be no ambiguity, and the accusation should be crystal clear. If the accusers had come out straight away and said exactly what they accused the preacher of, and the witnesses, and time of alleged incidents, there would no fitnah, and they would be following the proper way to do things. Instead, we had a huge mess, and the community was "either you support a molester and you are anti-women" or "you hate Islam and are trying to take down one of the men of God".
On October 3, 2017, a statement was released by a few prominent Muslims on this scandal.
This statement should certainly make anyone pause. While you defend your brother, you must also keep an open mind when an evidence is presented. Here, very strong, credible people are saying your brother has done something wrong, so their statement must be given proper weight.
However, while this statement is a step in the right direction, there is still a lot of innuendo. What exactly is "spiritual abuse"? Also, the scholars should have listed the exact behaviour they found "conduct unbecoming of any believer". For example, if you strictly believe in zabiha slaughter, if I eat a Big Mac at McDonalds is that "conduct unbecoming of any believer"?
Thus, if the original victims are NOT ready to come out and say exactly what they are accusing the preacher of, then this discussion is still moot. those who "broke" the original story: you should not have said anything unless the 'victims' are ready to come out and say it. Until they are ready to be public, this is a private matter and best left private.
I do not subscribe to this mentality of hiding the victims' name. Nor do I even know for sure if they are victims, or spurned women now out for revenge. This is not a "bro club" thing. It is following proper process. The women who are involved with the Ustadh, allegedly, were not forced or coerced into a relationship. They went in with full eyes open, supposedly. They are adults. This notion of hiding the names of women accusers, believing them blindly, and blaming the man all the time is a very extreme feminism trait. If we are to support the victims, we have to know who the victims are and how they have been victimized.
You have to ask yourself, at the end of all of this mess, what exactly has been achieved? How has justice been supported? What is the end game?
The only thing that is remaining is a big, holy mess.
Of course, he denied all allegations, while claiming to be never a perfect man. And to be fair to him, there were really no allegations - simply slander, innuendo and hearsay. Spread mostly by feminist blogs, all the accusers were mute on what he exactly did or stands accused of, except that they called him an 'abuser' or a 'predatory daee'.
Now at that time, after remaining silent for some time, I released a video.
My thoughts on Nouman Ali Khan "Allegations", the curse of feminists
At the time the scandal broke, we only had one duty. We had to presume our brother was innocent, and we MUST demand a proper evidence from the accusers, and an exact accusation. This was the summary of my video.
One of the bloggers, someone whom I have a lot of respect for the work she does otherwise, later stated: "The public revelation regarding NAK was not handled in an ideal manner."
Exactly.
When making an accusation against someone with a stature like Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan, there should be no ambiguity, and the accusation should be crystal clear. If the accusers had come out straight away and said exactly what they accused the preacher of, and the witnesses, and time of alleged incidents, there would no fitnah, and they would be following the proper way to do things. Instead, we had a huge mess, and the community was "either you support a molester and you are anti-women" or "you hate Islam and are trying to take down one of the men of God".
On October 3, 2017, a statement was released by a few prominent Muslims on this scandal.
This statement should certainly make anyone pause. While you defend your brother, you must also keep an open mind when an evidence is presented. Here, very strong, credible people are saying your brother has done something wrong, so their statement must be given proper weight.
However, while this statement is a step in the right direction, there is still a lot of innuendo. What exactly is "spiritual abuse"? Also, the scholars should have listed the exact behaviour they found "conduct unbecoming of any believer". For example, if you strictly believe in zabiha slaughter, if I eat a Big Mac at McDonalds is that "conduct unbecoming of any believer"?
Thus, if the original victims are NOT ready to come out and say exactly what they are accusing the preacher of, then this discussion is still moot. those who "broke" the original story: you should not have said anything unless the 'victims' are ready to come out and say it. Until they are ready to be public, this is a private matter and best left private.
I do not subscribe to this mentality of hiding the victims' name. Nor do I even know for sure if they are victims, or spurned women now out for revenge. This is not a "bro club" thing. It is following proper process. The women who are involved with the Ustadh, allegedly, were not forced or coerced into a relationship. They went in with full eyes open, supposedly. They are adults. This notion of hiding the names of women accusers, believing them blindly, and blaming the man all the time is a very extreme feminism trait. If we are to support the victims, we have to know who the victims are and how they have been victimized.
You have to ask yourself, at the end of all of this mess, what exactly has been achieved? How has justice been supported? What is the end game?
The only thing that is remaining is a big, holy mess.
