Đarūriyāt al-Dīn

in this journalism article khushtar noorani is mentioned in his post further below titled:
NEW TRENDS IN MADRASA JOURNALISM

 

i found out that he is the author of a book of history; see here.

 

May Allah ta'ala protect us. It's amazing how people change. These muftis were debating devbandis, trying to make the public understand truth from falsehood - but now they are siding with falsehood with almost comparable zeal. One article after another is being published to sway public opinion. All for a politician....

I was re-reading some of nuh keller's old articles and wondered how someone who so capably caught selfies' sophistic attempts only a few years ago so suddenly tumbled head over heels into the ditch of fallacies and consciously manufactured untruths.

sigh

 

Ironically, obaidullah's aritcle is the next article in that periodical - page 32

 

on p29, there is an interesting matter:




----
here, he contrasts certain saying which 40 ulama of alamgir's time said: "this person has gone out of the boundaries of islam" which apparently alahazrat said: 'no, he won't'

i wonder if alahazrat also wrote that tawbah was wajib on all those muftis and they were under the rubric of "kufr returns on them".? did alahazrat write: 'anyone who says that such a person is a kafir, becomes a kafir himself'?

ponder. wa billahi't tawfiq.

 

on p23:



so isn't it badeehi (spontaneously known) among muslims that praising hindu idols whom hindus consider as god, is kufr?

 

i was under the impression that khushtar noorani was just a journalist after looking at pictures in which he was beside himself with glee getting photographed with mahesh bhatt and other actors posted on his website. those gallery items are removed or suppressed though you can still catch some of them via google images. [i just checked to make sure.]

http://www.khushtarnoorani.in/artic...rsonalities_1/on-flight-with-mahesh-bhatt.jpg

http://www.khushtarnoorani.in/artic...ersonalities_1/on-flight-with-mahes-bhatt.jpg

http://www.khushtarnoorani.in/artic...rsonalities_1/on-flight-with-shahbaz-khan.jpg

http://www.khushtarnoorani.in/artic...ersonalities_1/on-flight-with-raza-muradn.jpg

http://www.khushtarnoorani.in/artic...rsonalities_1/at-the-delhi-airport-with-m.jpg

http://www.khushtarnoorani.in/articles/wp-content/gallery/personalities_1/with-swami-agnivesh.jpg​

i didn't know khushtar noorani was the greatest living authority on mawlana fazl e haqq khayrabadi. apart from this, mufti sahib frequently speaks [in this same article] with deference to khushtar noorani as if he is some senior mufti/scholar. [i don't know, perhaps he is].

---
and look at the example he chooses. are these people mental or what! now if people begin to deny khatm e nubuwwat and claim ignorance, mufti mutiyu'r rahman will not mind - it will not be on his conscience. is he suggesting that obaidullah khan azmi does not know about raam and his status among hindus?


according to the above [for those who can't read urdu]; zaruriyat=core principles of faith, necessary principles of faith;

together, it should be clear that rejecting zaruriyat and not having knowledge of zaruriyat are two different things. for example, a child was born in a forest - he grew up in the forest and never came to the city; he never went near any oragnisation; he was never in the company of a scholar - and because of this he did not learn about the details of zaruriyat e din. this is 'lack of knowledge' [ignorance of zaruriyat] not rejection.

for example, there is common agreement among all muslims that our master SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is the last prophet; and therefore being* the last prophet is from zaruriyat e din.

now, if someone was born in a forest or a mountain and remained there - and he never attained the company of knowledgeable people, and hence it never occurred to him, nor did he think about it that our master SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is the last prophet or not; this is only lack of knowledge, not rejection. because 'rejection' is related to knowledge,
similar to attestation [ithbat] being related to knowledge - and if someone does not know it, one cannot say that he has rejected it, and therefore he is not a muslim.

yes, if he knows and still does not accept then he will not remain a muslim.​

*muztar sahib's ibarat is a little muztarib here. he means, knowing that he SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam is the last prophet is from zaruriyat.

 

on page 26 the said 'mufti' sahib is all praise for khushtar noorani:
"among contemporaries, if there is anyone who has true knowledge about mawlana fazl e Haq, then it is mawlana khushtar noorani..."



-----
according to mufti sahib, people make takfir for the most frivolous reasons. i cannot say that there aren't any such extremists, but i think this is another shameless attempt to justify indiscretions of those dear and near. sub'HanAllah, more and more attempts to whitewash black deeds.



=======
hopefully, he will write another maqalah in which he will evaluate false and frivolous ta'wils. to wit:

"in our days, people make the most outrageous ta'wils to justify utterly deplorable and actions that are tantamount to kufr. for example, take the case of praising a hindu idol. not more than twenty years ago, even a common man would consider praising ganesha or raama in a public gathering of hindus to be an action of kufr. but nowadays, people are making far-fetched ta'wils and justifications of such a shameful action. they say, that a person who has praised the idol raama (whom hindus worship as god) as a brave man who is preaching to hindus, standing among their midst."​

 

hope he didn't suggest that praising the hindu idol raam was from zaruriyat e din... or praising those who praise raam is from zaruriyat e din!
al-iyadhu billah.

إنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون

 

This may help:
http://www.khushtarnoorani.in/articles/?wpfb_dl=33
Page 21 and onwards discusses this. Mufti Muti ur Rahman's speech scribed.

 

Another point to note: denying those things which are definitive despite the awām not knowing them can also be Kufr if a person is told that such things are definitive and are undoubtedly proven, then rejects them.

 

Those rulings which the awām do not know about - despite their being definitive - are not included in Đarūriyāt e Dīn.

Here is a brief explanation of the proofs of Đarūriyāt e Dīn and Đarūriyāt e Ahle Sunnah.

"Accepted affairs are divided into 4 types:
(1) Đarūriyāt e Dīn - whose evidence is from: The Exalted Qurān or Mutawātir narrations or the Ijmā' which has definitive connotations and clear meanings; regarding which there are no doubts nor is there any space for interpretations.
(2) Đarūriyāt e Ahl e Sunnah - its proof is also from a definitive source however there is a type of doubt or possibility of interpretation in the definiteness of its evidence....." [FR, V29, P386]
​

Allāma Shāmi also briefly mentions those things - which are absolutely definitive - but due to the awām being unaware of them, the denier will not be a Kāfir.

"He also clarified regarding the anathematisation of the denier of affairs which included in Đarūriyāt e Dīn and they are those things which both the khwās and awām know are from the religion. These include things like: Belief in Tawhīd and Risālat, the five daily prayers and their like. Those things [which are not commonly known despite being definitive] then no [anathematisation will be done] such as: the Hajj being invalid by having intercourse before Wuqūf, and the giving of a sixth for the grandfather [in inheritance]. This is referring to those things which only the khwās know are from the religion." [Radd al-Muhtār, V2, P5]
​

I could post more regarding Đarūriyāt e Dīn if anyone is interested but i think brother Ridawi answered the questions very well.

 

daruriyat e din are those matters that every Muslim individual; aalim (khaas) and laymen* (aam) alike know about. such as: the oneness of Allah, Jannat and Jahannam, resurrection, Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) being the final Prophet etc.
To deny any of the daruriyat is undeniably kufr.

*laymen refers to those individuals who aren't scholars themselves but are active in the religion and are associated/in contact with scholars. [fatawa ridawiyyah 1/181] (scan [page 242 in the Raza Foundation edition]: http://goo.gl/NXogxD)
[bahar e shariat 1/172]

The above definition of laymen is important as there are many Muslims who are not connected to the deen in any way and therefore do not know many of the daruriyat. however, them not knowing the daruriyat does not make any of the daruriyat non-essential.

sadr al-sahriah writes:
Those living in isolated unfamiliar villages, and those living in jungles and on mountains, who cannot even recite the kalimah properly - such people not knowing the daruriyat e din will not render the daruriyat as non-essential. [bahar e shariat 1/172] ala hazrat writes similar to this [page 242; link above]

the second type doesn't exist.

daruriyat e din is discussed in length on page 382-386 in fatawa ridawiyyah volume 29 (link: http://goo.gl/UA1hOQ).