*Answer by way of Accusation and Accountability*
(In response to the objection to the narrative of public Takfir)

Your writing is ostensibly wrapped in beautiful words of pain, goodwill, and intellectual responsibility, but if it is read with scholarly justice, removing emotions, then a few fundamental accusations and intellectual fallacies come to the fore with full intensity, and in every writing, it is claimed that it is not against any sect, and the name is also mentioned, and in every response of mine, I have been saying this, and instead of answering it, a new thought is generated every time, well, never mind, now remember that this writing is not an attack on anyone's personal intention, but a summary of the narrative you have established.
*First Accusation* You have created an artificial contradiction between Fiqh and the pulpit. You repeatedly give the impression that *Fiqh says something, the pulpit says something else.* This is not proven in its essence but is a hypothesis. Fiqh also says this, and the pulpit also says the same thing: Every difference is not Kufr, every Bid'ah is not Mukaffir, every mistake is not a departure from Islam, but you have picked up a few irresponsible, unrepresentative, and unauthenticated statements and made them the introduction to the entire Ahl-e-Sunnat's pulpit and altar,
This is not scholarly criticism, but a general accusation (Generalization).
*The question is* Are the books of Fiqh against the pulpit? Or is the pulpit against Fiqh? Or have you yourself created an emotional narrative and brought the two face to face?
*Second Accusation* You have presented public slip-ups as a sectarian approach. To say that: all individuals do this, not the sect, and then to declare the same sentence insufficient, is itself an intellectual contradiction, because if the mistake is of an individual, then the correction will be of the individual, if the mistake is of the approach, then its fundamental texts will be shown, you have not proven from: any fundamental book of any sect, any authentic Fatwa, any agreed-upon approach that: the public narrative of Ahl-e-Sunnat is generally based on Takfir, and if you say that it is the speeches of the orators, then this is also present in your circles, why don't they accept you? Here is an accusation, not evidence, and it is like saving oneself and throwing the other into the fire.
*Third Accusation* You have deliberately mixed up Takfir and Tadhlil, in your writing, these sentences come up again and again: misguided, heretical, denier of the glory of the Prophet, and then suddenly a conclusion is drawn, this is tantamount to expelling from the circle of Islam, brother, under what principle did this conclusion come into existence? This is an accusation, this is intellectual dishonesty, I have mentioned in every writing that: every misguidance is not Kufr, every Bid'ah is not Shirk, every denier is not a Kafir, you yourself have admitted that *other sects generally call you heretics, but not Kafirs*
So why does the same principle become a crime here and goodwill there?
*Fourth Accusation* You have brought brotherhood face to face with belief. You present the verse of the Quran *﴿إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ﴾* but you forget that the Quran has established brotherhood after faith, not being independent of belief, the approach of Ahl-e-Sunnat is not to save brotherhood by considering falsehood, but it is to call falsehood falsehood, but caution should be exercised in Takfir, the danger in your narrative is that calling falsehood falsehood is also being considered hatred, this is not brotherhood, but intellectual compromise.
*Fifth Accusation* You have used the term Taqiya unfairly, you say: this is not an accusation, but a diagnostic term, but the reality is that Taqiya has a specific doctrinal meaning, using it in this way is itself an accusatory frame, the difference in belief, Fiqh, pulpit, and practice exists in every society, in every sect, in every era, calling this difference Taqiya is not reform, but the foundation of mistrust.
*What is the real issue?* The real issue is not that Ahl-e-Sunnat do Takfir, the real issue is that: disagreement is not being tolerated, criticism is being presented as Takfir, and intellectual boundaries are being consciously blurred, your pen says, I do not put Fiqh in the dock, but the narrative, but the reality is that in the name of the narrative, you have made the entire approach an accused.
*Last question* Is the solution that:
Silence should be observed on falsehood?
Belief should be sacrificed on soft language? And every rejection should be called hatred?
If not, then the solution is not accusation, the solution is the reform of the pulpit, the solution is scholarly training, the solution is the difference between Takfir and criticism, but erasing this difference
is not a way to unite the Ummah, but to further complicate it, therefore this writing is less a fundamental question and more a narrative accusation, in which there is definitely pain, but no balance, and without balance, neither Fiqh remains safe nor brotherhood, nor the Ummah, then the talk of joining becomes absurd, in this way, only keep claiming, and by taking the name of one sect, then connecting the face to the pulpit and altar, is tantamount to establishing two contradictory things in one place, and the principle is that contradictory things cannot be united, then everything becomes a hypothesis.
I apologize for the delay in the answers, I am a student, and it takes time to write, and my exams are going on in the university, pray that Allah Almighty grants me success, grants me the ability to write the truth and remain steadfast on the truth, grants me a good end with faith, and raises me with the scholars of truth, Ameen Ya Rabb Al-Alameen, by the grace of the Noble Prophet ﷺ

                    *✍️Mutalim Al-Jamiatul Ashrafia✍️*