بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Jazakollah khair thank you for your clarification now your comments make sence........nothing personal!!!
I have had enough of this thread, where people are just running around in circles. However, just to clarify to snaqshi: 1. "ignorant rantings" is the posts by some new members, who have perhaps not read the full thread, nor the full fatawas on Dr Tahir, and they come here to re-discuss the whole issue from scratch. this is wasting everyone's time. my words were not (hasha Lillah) aimed at any scholar. So kindly do not accuse me of the serious crime of belittling our Ulema. I know better than that. 2. "speculation" - again, not by our Ulema, but my forum members. I saw many posts with "ifs" & "buts": this is just giving more fodder to camp of Dr Tahir Padri. The respected Muftis who have given fatwa of "gumraah" (but not Murtad), should be presented with conclusive evidence so they may concur with the truth.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Sallam alykom I have some humility and sincerity by Allah Grace alhamdollillah! If i had a hold of his collar i would have already given him a "lepeloshi", "Sode Tsurikomi Goshi by now" or alternatively if i disliked him a "glasgow kiss". But since hadret sahib makes such a random statement as "should lay to rest all speculation(s), and ignorant rantings", so question (7) is valid namely, "Without atestation, it is the opinion of his eminence Mufti azam Pakistan, Shaykh ul hadith ustazh ul Ulema as Shaykh Ashraful Qadiri that Dr Mad-ri Padri is "batreen Ghumrah", I would like to know if you consider his opinion as "ignorant rantings"". Nothing personal, I have made statements (I hope that most have been fair and correct), I do not take it personal when brothers have sai9d I am lying or have asked me (whatever their intention) to clarify myself. If I have not been clear in what i have said or brother(s) have thought (according to their knowledge and take on things) that I have said something wrong they have a right to question me or clarify myself on that point why should I take that personal? In the same flow of things Brother, Aqib Bhai has made a statement, which i do not agree with and all I have done is asked him to clarify himself, why you would find that problematic i find that somewhat gareeb!!!
@naqshi: this advice still holds. one has to learn humility to learn something; you cannot grab the collar of a person and shake him vigorously for answers and your edification. wa billahi't tawfiq.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Brother I have not personally attacked you or made any personal attack on anyone else, I have not offered "my personal opinion", but that of a world renowned and qualified shaykh in mufti azam pakistan daman barkatom aliyyah, in your post you stated and quote, "should lay to rest all speculation(s), and ignorant rantings", so question (7) is valid namely, "Without atestation, it is the opinion of his eminence Mufti azam Pakistan, Shaykh ul hadith ustazh ul Ulema as Shaykh Ashraful Qadiri that Dr Mad-ri Padri is "batreen Ghumrah", I would like to know if you consider his opinion as "ignorant rantings"". Onus is upon you since you made this quite silly statement re. ignorant rantings to justify your statement. My 7 questions are not an personal attack upon your or anyone else who hold the position of takfir, i respect that alHamdulillah, but is is for clarification for myself first 9and others if they wish to learn and understand). ma3 salamah fii khair ilayki
brother naqshi, just listen to the answer; if you agree its fine: if you do not agree to the answer (ma'azAllah) come up with a scholarly refutation. lets not drag this down, back to "personal" opinions. I simply do not have the appetite / free time to get into this, nor do I want to go around in circles. the truth is manifest. ma'a asSalaamah.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Salaam alaykom brother Aqib al qadiri sahib please can you clarify the following points for me (I am not been cinical, I am asking to further my ownpersonal understanding on the matter) in the absence of an ijma3: (1) Is a Mufti's fatawa binding upon everyone (the whole ummah)? (2) is a Mufti's fatawa binding only upon the person asking for the fatawa or person(s) whom the fatawa might effect? (3) is the mufti's fatawa binding upon those who live in the area where the Mufti resides or is the? (4) Please do not take this offensive or insulting, you refer to mufti sahib damanbarkom aliyyah as "Grand mufti of ahle sunnat", so please tell us who appointed him "grand mufti of ahle sunnat"? (5) Who is greater the "grand mufti" or the "shakyh ul islam", I asked that question to you since Mufti sahib, Hadret Allama Akhtar Raza khan sahib qibla is no longer the Qazi of brailvi shareef (since 2013), his son (maulana Asjad raza Khan daman barkatom aliyyah) has been appointed the qazi, so he is not even the qazi of the area he lives in and you call him Grand Mufti? By the way, the shakykh Ul islam of India is His Eminence Hazoor Shaykh ul Qur'an wal tafseer Muhadithi Kachowchawi Allama Pir Sayyed Muhammed Madani Miyan madazil aliyyah. (6) In the case where the matter is not clear and there is no ijma3 amongst the scholars of ahle sunnah wa ghaira in contrast to such cases as the deobandiyyah and ahmadiyyah where there is a difference of opinion ranging from batreen ghumrah to kuffir on the m,atter, please show me from the nass that taking the position of batreen gumrah is (1) "ignorant ranting" and (2) religiously wrong (onus is upon you to provide the evidence) (7) Without atestation, it is the opinion of his eminence Mufti azam Pakistan, Shaykh ul hadith ustazh ul Ulema as Shaykh Ashraful Qadiri that Dr Mad-ri Padri is "batreen Ghumrah", I would like to know if you consider his opinion as "ignorant rantings". Please do not take any of my comments as insult or offensive, i would appreciate it you could clarify the above 7 points for me jazakullah khair
http://jamiaturraza.com/component/option,com_ask/question_id,11549/view,question/ for those who "doubt" the apostasy of Dr Tahir: the above latest answer from Taj ulSharia, the Grand Mufti of Ahle Sunnah, should lay to rest all speculation(s), and ignorant rantings.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Yes brother you are right that was the time period when he was banging heads with bennazir bhutto's PPP party. At that time he also wrote some disparaging remarks about Hadret Mawiyyah radi allahu ta'ala anho, which are documented in the sunni book "Dafa'3i sayyidina ameer ma3awiyyah".
What about Tahirs book? Doesn't he say that he found something erroneous statements but I still regard him a Sunni? Doesn't it say in this book that: I not only consider praying become Deobandis/Shias as permitted but when I get the chance, I also pray behind him.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Salaam brother, (1) do you know how long it took between the first publication of the deobandi risalahs/books and the first fatawa of the ulema of haramayn sharafayn? (2) and between that time period do you know what Asta 3ala Hadret was doing? by answering these 2 question you will add some context to your point, which will benefit eveyone, barakollah
I said It is possible that if DI last fatwa about padri was Post Wembley then the Mufti at the time of writing it could have been unaware of the stuff that amounts to kufr on the part of padri so he may have just addressed the questions that were asked and in his answer to those questions by repeating the fatwa of mufti Waqar ud din he answered the questions asked with full correctness. As I have pointed out I am not a urdu reader so can't tell you if the fatwa is Pre or Post Wembly, perhaps you could join the dots on that so we get clarity on it. As far as I am aware the position of DI on Tahir post Wembley is that They follow the fatwa of Mufti Akhtar Raza as do the Ashrafies and many others. Like the brother mentioned before we don't necessarily need every tanzeem/jamaat/organisations to issue a fatwa, what we need is to make sure is that they all back a fatwa against padri, Which Di & the Ashrafies do from my understanding as ulama from both organisations have said they back the fatwa of Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan. But if someone still wants to ask DI about padri post Wembley then they should write into the Darul ifta and ask the relevant questions and im sure they will answer you. Expect 1 of 2 replies either they will give their own fatwa answering your specific questions or they will reiterate the fatwa of Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan on this matter... either way you should get a response that is in no way in padris favour.
let's start a new thread and explore the different aqwal of the ulama. it will be a great exercise for all of us. let's keep this thread focused on building a rock hard case against tahir let's start 2 new threads please on 2 main topics- 1. what are Shar3i evidences/proofs? what are their definitions? and what are the rulings related to modern technological innovations and their usage as primary or corroborative evidences? - audios/videos taken by personal mobile phone cameras, websites, social media like facebook, twitter etc., cctv footage recorded by authorized security agencies, websites vs paper publications, are they the same, dna & paternity tests, medical examinations and technologies used to establish/deny various crimes like substance abuse, alcohol consumption, sexual crimes, court registrations & legal documents from kafir countries like notarized affidavits, news reportage by mainstream media like ndtv, ptv, fox news, al-jazeera etc - can we accept it to issue a ruling/statement/accusation? etc. etc. etc. what could be acceptable to a Islamic court of law if there was a proper khilafah, or a Sunni mufti? ----- 2. what were the evidences used by Ala Hazrat to issue takfeer of the deobandi elders? on what grounds and based on what evidences did he refrain from takfeer of ismail paleed?
Dear Brother Abdal Qadir, Is the publication accepted as shari evidence or not? Because most of the fatawas on deobandi wahabi elders were given on their publications and they are accepted without any doubt. Because in each and every fatawa of kufr on deobandi kafirs you see the references of publications only and there were no mention of two sworn in testimonies over there. One of the biggest example is Fatawa al Harmain. You will not find any mention of two sworn in testimonies in that.
brother Aqib, ok. i apologize. i just re-read Tajush Shari3ah's fatwa, and his fatwa is actually based on tahir's previous publications calling deobandi and rafidis Muslims/Sunnis, and verbal evidence given to him, and also talks about tahir's videos openly available to the youth on the internet. (see attached clipping from his own fatwa) so it is not based on videos alone, but rather it is based on a more holistic analysis of tahir and their various different direct and corroboratory evidences including videos. i unconditionally correct my stance on evidences used by Tajush Shari3ah's as a basis of tahir's takfeer. once again, in any case, this is a moot point. the larger point is that he helped Sunnis against tahir, and that we should be expending our energies in sweeping the floor with tahir and his minhajush shaytan.
dear AQ, please get the facts correct:- a) TajushSharia does not accept videos as sharayi proof. The fatwa he gave is based on verbal evidence given to him. b) It is well known that TaJush Sharia is unfortunately unable to see: this is since 4 years. It was very weak, even much before. So it is impossible that he could have - just for the sake of getting first hand info - seen the video. Even if his eye-sight was perfectly OK, he would not look at it. c) The evidence of the Wembley event, is not only on video! The entire episode is available, freely on their minhaaji website, with the dajjals speeches and with the sound recordings and the rubbish counter-arguments, for all to listen to & to read. this is the link : http://www.interfaithrelations.com/english/index.html d) Tahir Jhangvi does not deny holding the wembley circus, nor say that the videos are fake, nor say that they be accepted as evidence. He insists, (on video or without), that what he did is correct: and even lies that the Holy Prophet allowed such kuffriyyat.. ma'azaAllah. e) The Wembley circus was attended by thousands of people - and many upright Sunnis, who gave evidence. f) Plus, the dajjal's previous kufriyyat and his dirty books are also ample evidence. Apart from all this, I found the fatwa from Ghosi Shareef to be more useful, and conclusive. @ brother Barry Since you seem to give the benefit of doubt to DI, and we all know that DI considers videos as Jaaez, isn't there ample evidence available for them to give the fatwa?? the evidence in the form of sound, video and literature - is all proudly displayed HERE
brother, tahir's statement saying 'christians are believers', is only available on videos, in english. afaik, it is not available in a written format in his books or a document signed by him so it couldn't be that the fatwa for saying this statement makes him apostate, is based on something other than the videos secondly, Tajush Shari3ah's fatwa itself (or another document) says that the youth who are into the internet are aware of these statements of tahir. right now, it escapes me, if he used the word "youtube" or not. if tahir has it written somewhere saying "christians are believers" and Hazrat's fatwa uses that as a evidence for his fatwa, then please correct me and i will gladly accept my mistake. this is a moot point because the important thing is that Hazrat has issued a fatwa against tahir, and helped many many people against his fitnah brother i was only addressing imranaybani and his post didn't suggest so. again, was only addressing imranaybani and his rambling. no need to say sorry. of course i don't. my questions regarding khabar and its admissibility were not rhetorical. also they were not sarcastic indicating i know the matter. they were genuine queries and thinking loudly to understand the issue further and put all of our thinking caps on. as brother sunnistudent said - our only aim is to solidify the case against tahir and protect the awam by getting as many ulema as possible to extinguish his fitnah. brother sunnistudent, this is not the scholar's issue. it is your issue. tahir's saying "may every religion keep its fragrance" translates to "tamam adyan (deen) ki khushbu ..." mazhab in urdu of course can have multiple implications to either religion or Sunni mazhabs of 4 imams, or even mazhabs of bid3ah like wahabis, shias etc.
This is unbelievable! It's Yaum al-Aashura and you are debating this in this manner! You people will go on and on and on until ... ! Who said that he did? Regarding Hazrat Mufti Muti' ur Rahman; we love and respect him. Yeah. The others aren't? Sorry, but it is clear that you don't in this context. And to be brutally honest, in all my years here as a member of Sunniport, I have not come across anyone here with a solid grounding in Fiqh. Yeah, you can talk like you can but honestly, everyone here is a work in progress ... If there are Sayyids on this forum, please forgive me and pray for me.
AllaH Subhanhu wa ta'ala says in the Quran sheriff إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِندَ اللَّهِ الْإِسْلَامُ Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam. Tahirul Qadri said at the Wembley conference [ as seen and heard on the video] [Nauzbillah] May the fragrance of all religion remain on this earth. ( astagfirullah) Any one who has an iota of love for Tahir should check on his self. --- I encountered a problem with this issue long back. I was sitting with a very senior and aged scholar. I told him this kufriya statement of Tahirul Qadri ( in English) so he asked me to translate it into Urdu which i said : : nauzbillah : Tahirul qadri ne kaha " Meri khwaish hai tamam mazahib ki khushbu is ru e zameen per barkarar rahey" The scholar replied : " May be by 'mazaahib' tahir meant " all four school of thought"!! Then i had to explain him that religion is different from mazhab used in fiqh terminology. It is 'mazhab' as used by people for Islam/ Hinduism/ christianity etc. That adds one more reason for what i suggested.
