The claim that he is "of the Shia school"
Unfounded
Claim
Fact
Kuytul has stated his own school many times, in the same sentence: "We are of the Ahl al-Sunnah, we are not Shia. I belong to the Hanafi school."
He also states, item by item, which Shia positions he rejects:
- the doctrine of the twelve imams,
- the belief that the imams are infallible,
- the belief in raj'a (the return),
- the treating of temporary marriage (mut'a) as permissible,
- the refusal to accept the first three caliphs.
His position on the Companions is plain: "We accept all of the Companions as upright. Reviling the Companions can never be permissible."
Nor are these new statements. The same views are repeated in recorded question-and-answer sessions from 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015; in his own words, he has been giving these lessons for "20 to 25 years".
His position on the Companions breaks the claim on its own. He regards the Shia refusal to accept the first three caliphs as wrong, and says that apart from the first two, those among the twelve imams were imams not in the sense of caliphs but in knowledge and piety.
The weight the claim cannot carry is this: to this day no one has been able to point to a single view of his that is contrary to the Ahl al-Sunnah. Yet hundreds of hours of recorded lessons and conferences are openly accessible; if the claim were true, the evidence should be extractable from those recordings.
This claim was raised again on 7 September 2026 on CNN Türk's "Tarafsız Bölge" programme. For the answer to the accusations listed in that programme, taken together: Cübbeli Ahmet's claims about the Furkan Movement on CNN Türk — the full text of the Furkan Movement's statement.
Where did the claim come from?
Its starting point is a single sentence: in one of his talks Kuytul said that the revolution in Iran came about through obedience to the scholars. This was an observation about how the revolution happened. In his own explanation:
"What I said is an observation about how the revolution came about. A revolution happens in Iran, it happens in China, it happens in Russia too. All I did was make an observation about how it happened."
To describe the mechanics of an event is not to adopt the belief behind that event. The claim was built at exactly this point.
What does he say about the Shia?
His view has two parts, and both are plain. First: according to the majority of the Ahl al-Sunnah, the Shia stand outside the Ahl al-Sunnah and, on account of certain positions, have been regarded as people of innovation.
One of the reasons for this is the methodology of hadith. Among the Ahl al-Sunnah a hadith coming through sound transmitters is accepted whichever Companion it rests on. Among the Shia, the presence of one of the twelve imams in the chain of transmission is required. Because of this condition thousands of hadiths that are sound go unaccepted, and one may end up outside the Sunnah.
The second part is the one most often skipped: "This does not mean that all their views are wrong." Most of the positions of the Ja'fari school resemble those of the Hanafis. Here too Kuytul does not lump everything together.
The question of Shia–Sunni conflict
His counsel on this subject runs in exactly the opposite direction to the claim made against him:
"Starting a Shia–Sunni conflict is America's project. One must not fall for this game. At this moment a Sunni who speaks against the Shia, or a Shia who speaks against the Sunnis, is buttering America's bread."
That is, he does not deny the scholarly disagreement; he leaves it to the scholars and to a suitable time. To read this as "sympathy for the Shia" is to turn what was said on its head.
The recording in which he criticises Iran
The recording that breaks the claim most plainly is dated 20 September 2013. On the subject of Syria he criticises Iran directly:
"Iran has done wrong on Syria... Iran must abandon this policy... With what it is doing it comes to look as though it supports the oppressor, and this makes things easier for the takfiris who declare Iran unbelieving. It appears to stand with the oppressor, and that does not befit Muslims."
The man said to be "pro-Iran" publicly regards Iran's most contested policy in the region as wrong.
How is the Ahl al-Sunnah claim to be tested?
Kuytul's proposal is simple and still stands:
"Let those who make this claim name one view of mine that is contrary to the Ahl al-Sunnah."
Hundreds of hours of recorded lessons and conferences are openly accessible. If the claim is true, the evidence should be extractable from those recordings.