# Does Mufti Abu Layth have any scholarly precedent for his views?

*Reply to the critic: lying, and the precedents of al-Burzuli and subcontinent hadith scholars*

- URL: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/zz85auzek5w/s/31/
- Date: 2021-04-06 · Kind: lesson · Transcript tier: machine · Recording: Monday Nights with Mufti #209 | Q&A Unscripted & Unrestricted! 😉 | Mufti Abu Layth (3:10:56–3:14:46)
- Status: latest answer on its topic; general teaching
- Watch from the start of the segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ85AUzeK5w&t=11456s
- Recording page: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/zz85auzek5w/

**Topics:** Responses to critics; Hudud and punishments; Speech and everyday conduct

**Summary (not a quotation; machine-made, unchecked):** His views have respected precedents: al-Burzuli, a Maliki Shaykh al-Islam, held that punishments change with the age, and the subcontinent scholars he quotes were Ahl al-Hadith, not heretics. Not every untrue statement is a sin punished with hell.

## Longer summary

On lying, Mufti Abu Layth says he has a full video, and that believing every statement that does not match reality means God must burn a person in hell is foolish, giving the example of saying one is drinking Pepsi when drinking water. He says the critics cannot decide whether he invents his views or has precedents whom they then call heretics, and that the scholar they treat as unknown, Abu al-Qasim al-Burzuli [?], was the Shaykh al-Islam of the Malikis some six or seven hundred years ago, whom Mufti introduced to them, and who held that punishments change with the age, a fatwa he says later scholars endorsed and rulers applied. He says Ibn Ashur is no deviant, and that the subcontinent scholars he quotes, such as Abdul Karim [?], were Salafi hadith scholars of the Ahl al-Hadith tradition, in the circle of Sanaullah Amritsari [?], not Malikis, called heretics only for using the voice of reason.

## Sources and names cited

- al-Burzuli [?]
- punishments change with the age
- Ibn Ashur
- Abdul Karim Athari [?]
- Sanaullah Amritsari [?]
- Ahl al-Hadith
- zindiq

## Transcript (machine tier, 3:10:56–3:14:46)

[3:10:24] I mean, it's not that you see, it's not that I'm not saying those things, but they're distorting it in a context. Like, they'll cut it short. They'll kind of show certain things and then obviously misrepresent as well. So, here, if we go back, we've got there they are lying is haram. And the question about the heck am I harming people is that's I'm I'm serious.

[3:10:55] So first of all lying. Now this is there's only a few things I'm going to comment on. Now this is just a very brief uh summarized version. Now I've got a whole video explaining this. Now they're not you know just because they believe that to state something as it doesn't correlate with reality means God must burn you in hell is stupid you know like if I said now I'm drinking water and I said I'm drinking Pepsi and I said yeah somebody asked me oh are you drinking something I said yeah I'm drinking Pepsi God's going to now burn

[3:11:34] me in hellfire that's just dumb But anyway, believe lying is haram. Um, and but when he attributes it to someone, oh wow, so like a classical sheh says this. Yeah, you look it up. It's like a guy that passed away a couple of decades ago that no one knows about, you know, a zind like him. Let's take Oh.

[3:12:02] Oh, sorry. Sorry, man. Sorry, man. Sorry. Sorry, man. Yeah. So look, they can't make up their mind. So on one occasion, what they say is Muy Abu comes up with the weirdest nonsense himself. [snorts] On another occasion, they say, "Oh, no, actually he does have a precedent." But uh and then they'll say, "No, but that precedent person is also a Zindik." [laughter] Even though But then they'll say, "No, but we don't that person isn't even know.

[3:12:35] We don't even know who they are. But but we but we do know they too are a zindik hidden kafir. But first of all he don't and he says this in his other uh clip as well that oh he'll quote a source like one person and he he's making reference to Abu Kasim Buruli who was the Islam from 600 700 years ago of the Malika.

[3:13:02] He wasn't just an anybody. And he's like, "Oh, I came across." And he did not come across him. I mentioned him. That's why he learned about him. [laughter] It's not like and and I had highlighted Abu Kasim al- Burulli had said that the punishments in the day and age of Islam change. So, and this isn't me saying it. I was highlighting that Maliki Don had said this. And first of all, they said nobody has said this.

[3:13:27] Mu made this up. This is just nonsense. But then I show it in the classical sources. I show the books. I show the references. I show how dozens of scholars afterwards endorse it. They practice it. Kings ruled by that fatwa. I mean, it's like and then they say, well, oh, so they're all deviants anyway. But Abulassimul is not just anybody. He's like a renowned sheh Islam of his time.

[3:13:54] I mean it's ridiculous to assume these people are deviants Ash is not a deviant by any standard. He was the Islam of the Malikia you know and they're going to say oh he quotes uh you know these scholars from the Indian subcontinent. Oh, whether I've quoted molan Abdul Karim, who by the way was actually Salafi, [laughter] he was actually Salafi that Abdul Kharimi, he's from the Hadith of the Indian subcontinent, a student of in Molana in uh Wazirai who was uh who was a

[3:14:33] contemporary of uh Amritsari, the great Aul hadith scholar from Dilli and and and in that So you see that they were actually hadith scholars. They weren't even Maliki. But just because they use some of them use their voice of reason. Oh, they too must be zindik. But okay, now or something like let's Oh yeah.

## Cite

Mufti Abu Layth Archive, segment zZ85AUzeK5w/s/31. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/zz85auzek5w/s/31/

Not a fatwa: these answers were given to specific people at specific times. Ask a qualified scholar about your own situation.