Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation Between Sunni Muslim Scholars, Organizations, and Students of Sacred Knowledge

Hold on to the ropeHold fast to the Rope of Allah, all together, and be not divided. (Qur’an, 3:103)

Surely, those who have made divisions in their religion and turned into factions, you have nothing to do with them. Their case rests with Allah; then He will inform them of what they used to do. (Qur’an, 6:159)

In light of the Divine Word, we recognize that the historical nature of Sunni Islam is a broad one that proceeds from a shared respect for the Qur’an and Sunnah, a shared dependence on the interpretations and derivations of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), and a shared respect for the writings of a vast array of scholars who have been identified by their support for and affiliation with the Sunni Muslims and have been accepted as the luminaries of Sunni Islam – as broadly defined.

Likewise, detailed discussions in matters of theology are the specific domain of trained specialists, and proceed on the basis of well-defined principles and methodologies, which are beyond the knowledge of the generality of Muslims.

Our forebears in faith, with all the dedication, brilliance and sincerity clearly manifested in their works, have debated and discussed abstruse and complex issues of creed and practice, and have failed in most instances to convince their opponents of the veracity and accuracy of their positions.

The average Muslim is only responsible for knowing the basics of creed as they relate to a simple belief in Allah, His Angels, Scriptures, the Prophets and Messengers, the Last Day, and the Divine Decree.

Recognizing that the specter of sectarianism threatens to further weaken and debilitate our struggling Muslim community at this critical time in human affairs, and recognizing that Allah, Exalted is He, has given the Muslim community in the West a unique historical opportunity to advance the cause of peace, cooperation, and goodwill amongst the people of the world, we the undersigned respectfully:

– Urge Muslims to categorically cease all attacks on individual Muslims and organizations whose varying positions can be substantiated based on the broad scholarly tradition of the Sunni Muslims. We especially urge the immediate cessation of all implicit or explicit charges of disbelief;

– Urge Muslim scholars and students of sacred knowledge to take the lead in working to end ad hominem attacks on other scholars and students; to cease unproductive, overly polemical writings and oral discourse; and to work to stimulate greater understanding and cooperation between Muslims, at both the level of the leadership and the general community;

– Urge Muslims in the West, especially our youth, to leave off unproductive and divisive discussions of involved theological issues that are the proper domain of trained specialists, and we especially discourage participation in those internet chat rooms, campus discussion groups, and other forums that only serve to create ill-will among many Muslims, while fostering a divisive, sectarian spirit;

– Urge all teachers to instruct their students, especially those attending intensive programs, to respect the diverse nature of our communities and to refrain from aggressive challenges to local scholars, especially those known for their learning and piety;

– Urge our brothers and sisters in faith to concentrate on enriching their lives by deepening their practice of Islam through properly learning the basics of the faith, adopting a consistent regimen of Qur’anic recitation, endeavoring to remember and invoke Allah in the morning and evening, learning the basics of jurisprudence, attempting to engage in voluntary fasting as much as possible, studying the Prophetic biography on a consistent basis, studying the etiquettes that guide our interactions with our fellow Muslims, and the performance of other beneficial religious acts, to the extent practical for their circumstances;

– Finally, we urge the Believers to attempt to undertake individual and collective actions that will help to counter the growing campaign of anti-Islamic misinformation and propaganda that attempts to portray our religion as a violence-prone relic of the past unsuitable for modern society, and by so doing justify indiscriminate wars against Muslim peoples, occupation of Muslim lands, and usurpation of their resources.

Saying this, we do not deny the reality of legitimate differences and approaches, nor the passionate advocacy of specific positions based on those differences. Such issues should be rightfully discussed observing established rules of debate. However, we urge the above measures to help prevent those differences from destroying the historical unity and integrity of the Muslim community, and creating irreparable divisions between our hearts. Further, we do not deny the urgency, especially in light of the situation in Iraq, of efforts to foster greater cooperation between diverse Muslim communities. Hence, this document should not be seen as negating any statements, or declarations designed to foster greater peace and harmony between diverse Muslim communities. However, we feel, as Sunni Muslims, a pressing need to first set our own affairs in order.

In conclusion, having called our brothers and sisters to act on these points, we, the undersigned, pledge to be the first to actively implement them in response to the Divine Word:

Do you enjoin righteousness on the people and refuse to follow it yourselves and all along you are reciting the scripture!? Will you not reflect? (Qur’an (2:44)

We ask Allah for the ability to do that which He loves. And Allah alone is the Grantor of Success.


Abdelrahman Helbawi
Abdul Karim Khalil
Abdullah Adhami
Abdurraheem Green
Abdur-Rahman ibn Yusuf Mangera
Abu Aaliyah Surkheel Sharif
Abu Eesa Niamatullah
Aisha Faleh AlThani
Asma Mirza
Cheikhna B. Bayyah
Dawood Yasin
Ebadur Rahman
Faraz Rabbani
Fuad Nahdi
Gul Mohammad
Haitham al-Haddad
Hamza Yusuf
Hasan al-Banna
Ibrahim Osi-Efa
Jihad Hashim Brown
M. Abdul Latif Finch
M. Afifi al-Akiti
Mehdi Kader
Mokhtar Maghroui
Muhammad Alshareef
Muhammad Ash-Shaybani
Muhammad ibn Adam
Omar Qureshi
S. Abdal-Hakim Jackson
Shamira Chothia Ahmed
Siddique Abdullah
Suhaib Webb
Tahir Anwar
Talal Al-Azem
Tanveer Hussain
Tawfique Chowdhury
Usama Canon
Usama Hasan
Walead Mosaad
Yahya Rhodus
Yasir Qadhi
Zaid Shakir



Filed under Religion, Umma

28 responses to “Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation Between Sunni Muslim Scholars, Organizations, and Students of Sacred Knowledge

  1. Masha’Allah wa’l-hamdu li’Llah. This is great news, a great and constructive step for bringing two sides together in common purpose. May Allah accept it, and great dividends will flow from it, inshaAllah. This should be endorsed and taken on board and I am proud to support its spirit and intent.
    wa s-salam, Yahya

  2. Salam

    This is certainly great news! I feel glad in my heart!


  3. hm. i feel like i am missing context. out of what background/incident did this petition grow?

  4. Yakoub Islam

    Urge Muslims in the West … to leave off unproductive and divisive discussions of involved theological issues that are the proper domain of trained specialists


  5. As-salamu alaykum,

    Yakoub: From what I understand, and Allah knows best, this advice about leaving off from the details of theological controversy is not blanket and sweeping in nature but is contextual and conditional. It is contextual in that it comes out a background in which too many Muslims of the West (the main addressees of this pledge) went through a period of accusing each other of kufr (unbelief) on non-primary or derivative or secondary issues of belief on which a diversity of views is possible. This caused considerable problems of excommunicating people from the faith or turning legal issues into matters of faith or non-faith; it caused great discord and division. There are Sufi, Salafi, Barelwi and Deobandi names on this list. The list has important names on it, but it would be very good see many other important figures sign up to it too. Of course that decision is in their hands. But overall this pledge is hopefully the start of a process by which a line can be drawn under that whole previous period.

    This point is also conditional because there is no harm if someone takes their theological studies seriously, then of course they can delve into the intricacies of theology and so on. Some have gone into that study unfortunately with the intention of gold-plating an entrenched and partisan position and have attacked everyone else who differed from them on these details. That didn’t help anyone and caused a lot of confusion. However those who delved into this matter and come to understand how divergences on secondary issues evolved and the principle of primary verses secondary issues in faith, the need to apply the Sunna of discursive register of address (i.e. the didactic principle of talking to people at their level of understanding, and not confusing them), the need to seek unity and co-operation as a good in itself, the need to avoid takfir (excommunication from the religion) and other such matters, then hopefully that kind of wisdom can be passed on to those who enquire about such theological issues.

    Fathima: All I know about the background to this pledge is that some scholars (`ulama’), students of knowledge (tulab al-`ilm) and preachers (du`at) resident in the West, or whose main audience are the English-speaking Muslims of the West decided to come together and work with greater common purpose than was true in the past. This is a community-level initiative, and, from the text of the pledge itself, that is quite self-evident. As such I hope it gets more endorsement and backing.

    MR: I think its great that you are putting up a list of bloggers. I also wonder if there is a central point on the web to which other scholars, students of sacred knowledge and preachers can sign up.

    Please remember me in your prayers, Yahya, wa s-salam

    wa s-salam, Yahya

  6. Rasheed

    MashaAllah for this pledge. In a time when Muslims are being killed for being Muslims and they are under attack in so many ways, this is a much-needed pledge. May Allah ta’ala bless all those involved in this and cause all our hearts to become united. WaSalaam.

  7. Yakoub Islam

    I have to confess, I stopped at the “proper domain of trained specialists” phrase and internally exploded. However, I think the pledge does provide sufficient room for folks like me who are pursuing avenues of thought that are felt to be dissenting. Astaghfirullah. In a sense, I am sort of glad I went pop because it just reminded me I am still floating around without found a happy home – intellectually speaking – within Islam. Insha Allah, this is something I need to pursue further.

  8. Qadhi `Abdul-Jabbar

    Dear Mr Birt,

    I was pleased to hear of the recent pact of sunni unity- so pleased, in fact, that my grave opened its ponderous marble jaws and let me out to inform you of my joy- but, upon closer inspection I was outraged. Why, do you ask? Simply because my own school of thought, long considered ‘heretical’ by other sunni groups wasn’t represented in this most ecumenical of conclaves. Furthermore, the pact itself made no reference to said group, which I found rather offensive, bearing in mind the significant role that said group has played in Islamic history, and the incalculable influence it has exerted upon other sects e.g. the Shi`a. I send this message to you, in the hope that this most excellent of agreements might be extended in scope to include some of the more ‘outlandish’ theological schools.

    Yours sincerely

  9. stopoppresion

    Is this another Global Peace and Unity Event but the petition version?- based on desperate needs whilst ignoring the simple fact that there are some fundamental issues that really need discussing and rejecting.

    We’re not here to say takfir etc on people, but I’m afraid if someone is promoting something blatantly anti-sunnah then it must be rejected.

    Since when was the order of commanding the good and forbidding the evil only a duty of the scholars? (PS – I am not a member of the HT group).

    A nice idea, but lacks foresight (just like the GPU).

  10. Qadhi Abdal Jabbar: Why is it that no-one writes under their own name? Anyhow leaving that aside for one moment, this is not some anti-Shia front. This is attempting to put some intra-Sunni problems in order. On the UK side, there is an initiative under the leadership of Dr Saeed Bahmanpour and Dr Musharraf Hussain to estblish a UK Sunni-Shia Forum. Many of the more senior figures on the list have already signed the Amman Initiative process, started in 2005, which included eight schools of Islamic thought, only four of which were Sunni. Hopefully this is a first step to tackling anti-Shia prejudice in more recalcitrant quarters. And Allah knows best.

    stopoppression: Yet another person not writing under their own name! Perhaps the issue here is that you think that everyone has to apply one standard approach to judging what is pro- and anti-sunna or not. There are different approaches to assessing this among the authorities in religion whether it is Ibn Taymiya or al-Izz ibn Abdus-Salam or others. An understanding of usuli differences would have to be undertaken first before one would even get to the matter of individual cases (furu).

    Such pledges by definition have to be broad to get all these people on board. It is what people then do afterwards that makes the difference.

    wa s-salam, Yahya

  11. SSK

    “Our forebears in faith, with all the dedication, brilliance and sincerity clearly manifested in their works, have debated and discussed abstruse and complex issues of creed and practice, and have failed in most instances to convince their opponents of the veracity and accuracy of their positions.”

    So even while calling for a cessation of attacks on Muslim scholars, the “arrogant” streak of we-know-more-than-everyone-else is still alive and pumping. Scholars who failed to convince contemporaries of the veracity and accuracy of their arguments have fallen out of the records of history. Our fore bearers in faith who survived in the collective memory of traditions over the passage of time were anything but failures.

    I suppose genuine respect, rather than popularity damage control, is too much to expect from a list that includes the likes of Fuad Nahdi among “scholars of Islam.”

  12. derwish

    Since when was Fuad Nahdi a scholar?

  13. As-salamu alaykum,

    SSK: Yet another person who won’t put their real name to a comment! The internet is a public space and we should be prepared to identify ourselves publicly with our opinions, otherwise how can we exercise civility and restraint in the things that we might like to say?

    But to the meat of your point. I don’t follow your train of thought here. Disagreement not agreement characterises the discussion of many issues of law and theology in Muslim intellectual history. That being that case why would the inability to convince all of one’s intellectual opponents be seen a sign of failure?  Human reasoning and assessment of the source-texts is the norm except for basic matters of the faith that are necessarily part of the religion and would be known to any child. At the end of the day that is why the traditional response at the end of any attempt at theological, juristic  or scriptural reasoning — and God knows best — was so widespread. That as you suggest would constitute humility as does this document by recognising that one’s school of thought doesn’t necessarily have all the answers and that one’s erstwhile theological opponents have made a sincere effort to get at the truth of things, and that they may very well be right. As for the ultimate stature of any one Muslim scholar that is not even ultimately a matter of human historical judgement but one for the next life.

    SSK and Derwish: Why are you singling out Fuad Nahdi in particular? I suspect there are some other axes being ground here. I know that he would not describe himself as a scholar of Islam, although he plainly has the traditional respect for scholarship. I suspect many others on the list would similarly decline to define themselves as scholars of Islam as well. Some of the signatories are preachers, some are students of the Islamic sciences and some are scholars of varying ranks of seniority. In any case this is all rather irrelevant. The pledge articulates some general principles that the signatories and others who hear its call are promising to try to live up to. One doesn’t have to have completed the dar-i-nizami or an Azhari doctorate to sign up to it or to attempt to live by it.

    I would like to know what you would suggest as an alternative to this pledge? The status quo?

    wa s-salam, Yahya

  14. SSK

    Yahay, I am sorry you cannot see “my train of thought” maybe you are sitting too close to the screen. The problem I have with the language of the Pledge document is that it describes a known historical phenomenon of “mutual respect for differences” (adad al-ikhtilaaf) among scholars as “failure to convince”. That is not the kind of language you would expect in a document aspiring to unite people from diverse backgrounds. This should have been picked up by the scholars who signed it and it indicates that the document may have had input from you and Mr Nahdi, if this is so, then I suggest you mind your advice on making everything public. I will answer your other question in due course.

  15. As-salamu alaykum,

    SSK: No need to get personal. I think I’m the requisite health and safety distance from my computer screen! Your still choosing to remain anonymous, why is that? I’d prefer comments not to be anonymous.

    I had nothing to do, directly or indirectly, with this pledge, including any role in drafting it. But I am happy to sign up to it. From what I understand some of the more senior scholars were involved in drafting it at the instigation of Sheikh Abdullah bin Bayyah.

    I still find your reading of the text unconvincing. The forumula that these scholars are abiding by is neither (a) relativism, all answers are correct nor (b) positivism, there is only one right answer and all the others are wrong but (c) a hermeneutics that accepts there is true meaning to the text that may be discovered by human intellectual effort, but accepts that the multiple attempts to find it will not finally resolve that search in this world, as God will reveal the truth about what was differed on. This doesn’t include cases where the text is clear in meaning and is graded to be of unimpeachable authority in evidential terms.

    This pledge upholds position (c) and not (b). It is asking the scholars, students and non-scholars to lay off from takfir and sectarian polemics and to be more accepting of the “broad mosque” within Sunni Islam. Other than that they may retain their intellectual convictions on the issues/interpretive methodology they employ. This all sounds eminently sensible and laudable to me.

    And most importantly the signatories are not referring to their themselves but to their intellectual forebears of the past who did not resolve some of these issues then, so why would the signatories think that they would be able to resolve them now? I can’t see that as an expression of arrogance at their own prowess, but an expression of admiration and loyalty to their ancestors.

    Perhaps it might be better if you put your enquiry directly to one of the signatories who may be easily be reached online like Sh. Yasir Qadhi or Imam Suhaib Webb. I’d be surprised if they would read that phrase in the manner that you suggest.

    But then again, maybe I’m wrong and you’re right. And Allah knows best.

    wa s-salam, Yahya

  16. SSK

    Yahya, Can you honestly put your hand on your heart and say that you publicize your name with all your activities? I don’t know why you are trying to suggest that Sh. Suhaib Webb is one of the people who wrote the Pledge document when there is a clear statement on his website saying: “I did not write this pledge. This pledge is the work of our Sh. Bin Bayyah and the senior duat in the West such as Imam Hamza, Sh. Zaid…”

    The reason I am asking you about it, is because (a) your post of two weeks ago on this blog hoping for “unity” seems to be a build up to this document, (b) the document was presented to Sh Bin Bayah during a Radical Middle Way trip to the UK organized by your friend, Fuad Nahdi and (c) the document contains tell-tale hermeneutic dismissive treatment to history.

    Finally, you last comment is revealing. I am not so sure that Sh Bin Bayah would agree with your reading of hermeneutics into his intentions. Perhaps you should clear with the scholars first before trying to put words into their mouths.


  17. As-salamu alaykum,

    Dear SSK,

    Allah is my witness, I am telling the truth that I had nothing to do with the pledge either directly or indirectly. It was just one of those things that the article I wrote some weeks ago seemed well-timed to trail the pledge. I’m not surprised that you might draw that conclusion, but nonetheless it is true that I — like you — did not see the pledge until it was released on the internet. I did hear that something like this was in the offing, and not too long before the pledge was released.

    On Imam Suhaib Webb, I suggested his name to you not as a drafter of the document but as a signatory who was happy to sign up and endorse the text as it stands. As I did Sh. Yasir Qadhi’s, again as a signatory. I don’t know what role he played in drafting the document. Both I recommended as they are normally quite approachable through their respective websites. I feel that you are determined to find me guilty of something, although it is not quite clear of what exactly. Perhaps it might be better if you spelt that out.

    Again Allah is my witness, I didn’t know anything about the pre-publication history of the pledge document or who handed what to whom, and where and when this might have been done. The facts you present in point (b) are news to me.

    I’m not quite sure what point you making about hermeneutics. To clarify, I’m using the term in a non-technical sense just to mean the science of textual interpretation, and not in any self-referential post-modernist sense that doesn’t take account of historical context or something like that. We are both at the end of the day are in exactly the same position: we are reading the text of the pledge as we understand it. I think it is reasonable and you have some problems with it.

    Before we carry on this conversation further, I’d like you identify yourself for the reasons I outlined earlier. I don’t think it is right to make such accusations anonymously.
    wa s-salam, Yahya

  18. Musab Bora


    For sister SSK and others who are interested, I suggest she looks at the following article.

  19. sajjad

    i believe the group/term that ‘dare not speak its name’ in a sunni context to which ‘qadhi ‘abdul-jabbar’ was referring (the name of the late great qadi al-qudat gives it away) is mu’tazili. better a proper mu’tazili than one of these new-fangled neo-mu’tazilis i say..

    ikhtilaf takes many forms – not just opinion but also argumentation, reasoning, method.
    it’s good that you chaps are trying to sort yourself out – there’s little point as i see it for commonalities across the madhahib without some internal cohesion. as for the anti-shia element, i doubt the recalcitrant salafis and deobandis would sign up anyway (the problem is often more the hard core pakistani related deobandis – indian deobandis are slightly different).
    anyway keep at it – how do you find the time to write so much?

  20. Salams, Sajjad, it’s more a case of feel the bandwidth not the quality of the signal!

    Wa s-salam, Yahya

  21. Lee

    As-Salaamu’Alaykum Brother Yahya,
    I guess it is the Occupational Hazard of a Blog-writer to get aggressive comments. Alhamdulilah – May Allah bless all the efforts of the signatories of the pledge InshaaAllah. I was just listening to the lectures from “The Summer Bank Holiday Conference”, and I was reminded of your appearance there. I love you for the sake of Allah. Wasalaamu’Alaykum 🙂

  22. I’m a bit perplexed by all this Yahya.

    – “Urge Muslims to categorically cease all attacks on individual Muslims and organizations whose varying positions can be substantiated…”

    Which can be interpreted as – don’t disagree with the MCB when it takes a stance.

    – “….to cease unproductive, overly polemical writings and oral discourse; and to work to stimulate greater understanding and cooperation between Muslims, at both the level of the leadership and the general community;”

    No one’s allowed to write opinion articles any more? Not even to criticise the government or Muslim inaction over Darfur/

    – “Urge Muslims in the West, especially our youth, to leave off unproductive and divisive discussions of involved theological issues that are the proper domain of trained specialists,”

    Surely Ziauddin Sardar would disagree?

    – “… and we especially discourage participation in those internet chat rooms, campus discussion groups,”

    This is the most amusing. Do internet chat rooms and polemical writings include blogs? So… in other words young Muslims are not allowed to write opionion on blogs and partake in a discussion with other Muslims or non-Muslims?

  23. Dear Sunny,

    This pledge is addressing theological intolerance and the tendency that a lot of ordinary Muslims as well as some religious leaders got into in the UK and the US — the attempt to cast other Muslims outside the realm of the faith. The fact that religious scholars who were once bitter rivals have got together to denounce this is to be welcomed in the broader scheme of things.

    The pledge is not addressing normal political discussions, which might legitimately include public criticism of bodies like the Muslim Council of Britain, the Sufi Muslim Council, the British Muslim Forum, the Muslim Association of Britain, British Muslim Initiative or anyone else who would claim to represent Muslims.

    Of course many Muslims don’t follow the teachings of traditional Muslim scholars but that doesn’t mean that they are without real influence as many do follow them, and to that extent it is important that they take a positive lead in reducing intra-Muslim sectarianism. It is hardly surprising that they will view traditional scholastics as the scholarly standard to which all interpreters of Islam should aspire: one would expect them to articulate that view. And you are right, there is no doubt that Zia Sardar wouldn’t agree.

    Fundamentally the significance of the pledge is not the debate about traditional or reformist means of interpreting Islam but about a theological ceasefire between certain sectors of the faith. It’s better than potshots.

    Of course it won’t end debate on the net, and I don’t think this is even the pledge’s intent. That would be unrealistic to say the least. Rather it is trying to put a cap on intra-Muslim theological intolerance on the net not a cap on debate on the net. If I understood it to be against debate per se I would never have supported it. However taking a stand against theological intolerance is laudable aim that I support, which is the reason for my putting the pledge up. A ceasefire is better than war in these circumstances. Respect and recognition across boundaries, e.g. basic civility, is actually a precondition for the formation of the public sphere in the first place. And this I thought was what Zia Sardar was also getting at in a talk he gave with Iftikhar Malik at City Circle in September 2006: “Bringing Salafis, Sufis and Secularists Together: Rearticulating Civil Society in Islam”. The link is here:
    All the best, Yahya

  24. Salaam

    hmmm, don’t know about this. There is one thing in recognising others as Muslims in line with Al-Ghazzali’s broad views on the subject and even uniting across sectarian divides for the purpose of solidarity and common faith and political causes, but it’s another thing altogether recognising a sect- Salafys as being part of the Ahle-Sunnah-wal-Jamaat.

    I was actually having this discussion with my father-in-law last night about how do you define a sect. I explained that although certain secondary issues may be legitamatly differed on, when a group takes a radically new stance on a major issue they either become a sect or kafir. In this case the Salafys inheriting Abdul Wahab Najdi’s innovation on the subject declare anyone performing tawassul or tabarruk as mushriks which is clearly a huge difference to the concept of shirk held by the Ahle-Sunnah throughout history and is a major root issue, not a minor branch one.

    In fact this is even the case with the Brelwi-Deobandi dispute, Imam Ahmed Raza Khan pronounced takfir on the ulema of Deoband because he believed that their writings amounted to insulting the Prophet (PBUH). Contrary to popular opinion this wasn’t because they disagreed with on branch matters- in the opening to many of his refutations to their positions he openly admits that they are legitimate differences between the Ulema on these subjects, e.g. in his book on the question of the salvation of the Prophet (SAAWS) parents (RAA). It was rather because he felt the language they had used in making some of their arguments was tantamount to insulting the Prophet (PBUH). Please note i’m not trying to reignite this argument rather explain it’s proper parameters.

    Of course all the involved parties are with their Lord now, he will decide between them and concerted efforts are being made to overcome the Brealwi-Deoband divide today. However this is on the basis that they all follow legitimate opinions within Ahle Sunnah not that we widen the concept of Ahle Sunnah everytime a group emerges with a large following in an attempt to co-opt them. Especially when they consider us mushriks (trust me i’ve been called it a few times).



  25. Asalamua Alekum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

    Ma’shallah the “Mutual Respect and Cooperation between Sunni Muslim Scholars” is a great development!

    May the Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamat continue to progress and be successful.


    The Middle Awakening

  26. Yahya Birt


    Two anonymous posters, whose comments I can’t put up because they didn’t comply with the new comments policy (on the right-hand sidebar on the front page). One didn’t give his full name or hometown. The second didn’t give his hometown or a valid email address.

    One, a Sunni and a Sufi, reports that at an Eid gathering in Greenford Park in London, al-Fitrah, a Salafi organisation, which, according to the poster, was handing out literature that attacks the beliefs and practices of Sufis as shirk. Apparently this organisation is linked with some signatories of the pledge. Obviously this report has to be corroborated further.

    The second poster refers to a long refutation of the pledge from, a Salafi disucssion forum. Their main target is Yasir al-Qadhi. Interestingly they also reproduce a post from a Deobandi rejecting the pledge on the grounds that Yasir al-Qadhi have not changed their fundamental positions.

    The link is here:

    If people want to get their posts posted up then please do follow the comments policy. The policy is laid out in detail here:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s