Shia Association Defies Kashmir Grand Mufti Summons

(MENAFN- Kashmir Observer) Srinagar: A fresh row has erupted in Kashmir after the J&K Shia Association, led by Molvi Imran Reza Ansari, outrightly rejected a summons issued by the Office of Kashmir's Grand Mufti, declaring that the body has no rightful authority over Shia religious matters.

The Association reaffirmed that it would not appear in any proceedings initiated by the Mufti's office, framing its refusal as a principled stance aimed at safeguarding core beliefs rather than an act of evasion.

The controversy began after remarks by Imran Reza Ansari drew strong public reaction and widespread social media debate. In response, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Ulama (MMU) - the umbrella body of major Sunni and Shia religious organisations in J&K - convened a meeting on July 15 to address the issue.

Chaired by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, the MMU unanimously reaffirmed that the sanctity of the Sahaba - the revered companions of Prophet Muhammad (​P​buh) - and the Ahl al-Bayt - the Prophet's noble family - is a foundational belief shared by all Muslims.

“Differences in theology must never become an excuse for disrespect,” the Majlis said, warning that unity built on centuries of coexistence in Kashmir is a moral and religious obligation. The MMU welcomed the public stance of senior Shia clerics distancing themselves from Ansari's comments, emphasising that such views were personal and contrary to the guidance of top Shia Maraji, who forbid any disparagement of Sunni sacred figures.

Read Also Kashmir Clergy Raise Alarm Over Rotten Meat Scandal Video: Kashmir Clergy Raise Alarm Over Rotten Meat Scandal

To ensure accountability, the MMU resolved to constitute a panel under Grand Mufti Nasir

Islam to summon Ansari for clarification on August 13 and to also question others accused of derogatory remarks towards the Ahl al-Bayt.

However, cracks appeared soon after the MMU resolution. Three senior Shia leaders - Agha Syed Hassan Al-Moosvi, Agha Syed Muhammad Hadi Al-Moosvi, and Maulana Masroor Abbas Ansari - issued a joint statement rejecting a subsequent press conference by the Grand Mufti. They accused him of making a“unilateral” and“fabricated” statement that deviated from the council's joint resolution.


Copy of the summon issued by Grand Mufti's office

Reaffirming their commitment to the agreed position of mutual respect between sects, they cited edicts from Shia authorities prohibiting derogatory speech against Sunni sacred figures, particularly the Rightly Guided Caliphs. They also criticised what they saw as the Mufti's endorsement of a historically controversial figure and stressed the need to protect Kashmir's centuries-old inter-sect harmony.

Shia Association refuses summons

Against this backdrop, on Thursday the J&K Shia Association issued a defiant statement refusing to appear before the Grand Mufti's panel. The Association declared that the Mufti's office had“no rightful authority over Shia religious matters” and that its stance was rooted in the protection of its core beliefs, not in evasion.

The Association accused the Mufti's office of“selective engagement.”
“What is even more troubling is the selective vocality of the Office of the Grand Mufti - prompt in addressing certain matters, yet conspicuously silent when Hazrat Abu Talib (a) was maligned from the pulpit. This inconsistency raises questions not merely of principle but of motive,” it alleged.

The statement also expressed disappointment at the stance of senior Shia clerics Aga Syed Hassan Al-Moosvi and Aga Syed Hadi, who, it claimed, despite having the same beliefs, have on multiple occasions aligned themselves with the Office of the Grand Mufti.

“Such alignment, in our view, risks undermining the very beliefs they are meant to uphold. While unity is noble in aspiration, it cannot be pursued by eroding the foundations of your own faith,” the statement said.

The Association further hinted at the possibility of external ideological and political influences shaping certain religious positions, pointing to perceived alignments with a neighbouring country as an area warranting scrutiny.

“Given these patterns, one is compelled to inquire whether such actions are driven by external influences, particularly in light of the evident ideological inclinations and political leanings towards a neighbouring country. The possibility of such external orchestration cannot be dismissed without due scrutiny,” it said.

Underscoring its position, the Association added:“Our responsibility is to safeguard the beliefs that define us. No political convenience or external pressure can compel us to dilute our faith. We will continue to stand firm against any attempt to undermine our religious identity.”

MENAFN14082025000215011059ID1109929567