Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miscellany' started by snaqshi, Nov 17, 2014.
Who is the author of "khatre ki ghanti" and has anyone had a read?
What is it about?
DI issued a fatwa in 2005 stating Tahir ul Qadri is Gumraah. Then states that for more information on him read "Khatre ki ghanti".
Dawateislami dont claim they have a darulifta, they have one alhamd ulilaah
Listen , first clear the point, who asked the question, what was the question, and what answer was given?
Whenever i have asked a question dwi have always given a clear answer, i dont know what your on about.
Theres a lot of other BIG SCHOLARS (no names mentioned) who also have this habbit which you attribute to dawateislami muftis.
Please tell me what the question was, who asked and what the reply was.
Ninowy Saheb present he was also. English understands he does. Happily in proceedings partook he. Muhadith claims he to be. Should have known hadith twisting of but no objection from him came.
Salaam all....I have to say that prof.sahib has overstepped all boundaries ..I was never a minhaji but I used to defend prof.sahib from assaults against his character and way of explaining Deen..even when the insults were turned against myself. I watched the whole Wembley event and my jaw dropped..i couldn't believe what I was watching. He twisted the Hadeeth Mubarak about the christians of najran to suit his collective prayer agenda..he openly invited non muslims to commit shirk and call upon other than Allah Ta'ala..he said that Allah is just the name we use and you can call upon brahma, jesus, buddha etc..by implying that the greatest caller to monotheism Sall Allaahu Aleyhi Wa Sallam also encouraged this shirk is just insane and shows to what extent he will go to further that agenda. No mention was made of the Qur'anic verses where these same christians were challenged to a mubahilah as this would have soured the "collective prayer" atmosphere and gone against the spirit of his "inclusive Deen".
I have chosen to totally abandon prof.sahib and those that support him..minhaj has become yet another personality cult where it's leader can say and do what he pleases whilst his supporters blindly follow and applaud him.
...inter-faith discussion is fine - but those involved should always ensure it's a source of dawah to present the truth to the other participants and not a get together to form a pick & mix religion.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
whats this some kind of interrogation .........LOL
are your suffering some kind of inferiority complex or something? get off your soap box ....LOL
but who asked you for your personal opinions? i didn't.
i asked you what you know on the topic. please tell me from your research into the works of the masters, quoting them and citing references
lets start with the first one
can you state in one sentence what are the matters in Islam on which difference of opinion is valid or not?
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
sallaam brother, "my personal opinions" has no relevance to matter, since islam is not based upon "my opinion", but what constitutes adaalutush share3a. haram and halaal (joowz wa yajeewz) has been clearly defined in the Qur'an and sunnah. However, 2 different people can interpret those facts within a defined frame work differently, hence 2 differing fatawa's, take the example of hallaj and Hadret dealing of tat matter.
The Prophet sallahu allayhi was salam said: "Whoever says there is no god but Allah enters Paradise even if he commits adultery and even if he steals (i.e. even if he commits great sins)."[Nasa'i, Tabarani and others from Abu al-Darda' - sahih.]
The Prophet sallahu allayhi was salam: "Whoever witnesses that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Messenger, Allah forbids the Fire from touching him."Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari, book of riqaq ch. 14 (1989 ed. 11:324) says that the hadeeth of "Allah forbids the Fire from touching him" are even more explicit than those of "Allah will enter him into Paradise" in establishing that the one who declares Allah's Oneness is saved even if he does not heed the orders and the prohibitions.
Now if a person held some opinion which was against the adaalatush share3a, name Allah can lie (astagfirullah , nauzzubillah) or that there can be another prophet after nabi kareem sallahu allayhi was salam, then they would have negated the islamic faith since there is ijma on such matter re. qadiani's ahmadiyyah etc
regarding the akaabireeni deoband they have been declared by the majority of scholars of islam to be kaffir, so my question to you brother, what you going to call a person who says he is deobandi, but neither holds their belief or does not open express their kufr, but just attends a deobandi centre are you going to make takfir upon him?
Regarding the ahle tasheeyu, which shiah are you referring to?
Bazighiyyah- who believed that Ja'far al-Sadiq was God.
Dhammiyyah- who believed that Ali was God and Muhammad was his appointed Messenger and Prophet.
Ghurabiyya- who believed the angel Gabriel was mistaken when passing on the prophecy to Muhammad instead of Ali.
Ya’furiyyah- who believed in reincarnation and that a man named Mu’ammar al-Kufi was their Lord.
Kaysaniyyah- who believed in the Imamate of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah after the death of Husayn Ibn 'Ali Ibn abu Talib.
Hurufiyyah, who believed God is incarnated in every atom, reminiscent of the Alevi-Bektashiyyah.
Soldiers of Heaven (جنود الجنة) - who believed that their former leader Dia Abdul Zahra Kadim (died 2007 CE) was the Mahdi and reincarnation of Ali ibn Abi Talib.
Dukayniyya- who believed Muhammad’s followers fell into unbelief after his death because they did not uphold the Imamate of Ali.
Jarudiyya- who believed the companions were sinful in failing to recognise Ali as the legitimate Caliph. They became extinct in Iran and Iraq but still survive in Yemen under the Hadawi sub-sect.
Khalafiyya- who believed in a unique line of Imams after Zayd ibn Ali ibn Husayn Ibn 'Ali Ibn abu Talib, starting with a man named Abd al-Samad and continuing with his descendants.
Khashabiyya- who believed that the Imamate must remain only among the descendents of Hasan and Husayn, even if that Imam is ignorant, immoral and tyrannical.
Tabiriyya/Butriyya/Salihiyya- who believed the companions, including Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman, had been in error in failing to follow Ali, but it did not amount to sin.
Imami/pre-Twelver Shia sects
Fathites- who believed Abdullah al-Aftah was the succeeding Imam after his father Ja'far al-Sadiq's death.
Muhammadiyyah- who believed that Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi was the true 11th Imam, rather than Hasan al-Askari.
Tawussiyyah- who believed that Ja'far al-Sadiq was the Mahdi and that he was alive and did not die.
Waqifiyyah- who believed in the Imamate of Musa al-Kadhim but refused to accept the Imamate of his successor Ali ar-Ridha.
Hafizi- who believed the ruler of the Fatimid Empire, Al-Hafiz, was also the Imam of the Time.
Sevener- who believed Muħammad ibn Ismā'īl al-Maktum, the son of Ismā'īl ibn Jaʻfar al-Sadiq, would return as the Mahdi.
snaqshi, can you state in one sentence what are the matters in Islam on which difference of opinion is valid or not?
is the Sunni-shia issue a difference of opinion?
do you know the difference between usool and furoo3?
it's interesting your avatar says "no deviants, no exceptions".
who are deviants according to you?
which deviants are so deviant that they have left the folds of Islam?
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Not at all brother, you are badly mistaken, may be you should adjust you glasses a bit. The point of what i was getting at was there is difference of opinion in Islam, you take which ever according to your understanding and comprehension of Islam is correct and regarding you comments about gongohi and myself. shame on you that you would use such words and analogy for sunni share3 muslim brother in such away, but then again this is the level of islamic scholarship and customs, milign and insult those who dare to have a differing opinion............LOL
the keyword in this statement is: matters of jurisprudence.
unless of course, you think that it is a fiqhi matter to invite kafirs under the banner of RasulAllah ﷺ and then encouraging them "to proclaim the name of your god in your own tradition" - some chanting 'hare krishna' and others proclaiming 'jesus son of god' and a muslim crowd cheering them.
tahir's issue is not a matter in which difference of opinion is valid.
as aqdas said, you are mixing up issues - and for a good measure, running them in a blender.
if you don't watch it, you will sound like gangohi who said about a person who claimed that Allah ta'ala has lied (wuqu'u e kazib) to not say anything about him. because (according to gangohi) this is a matter on which difference of opinion exists. thus to say that Allah ta'ala can lie or has already lied is a matter of small difference - like that of Hanafi shafiyi, according to gangohi.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
One well known scholar said the following which i feel sums up current islamic scholarship, "It is well known that differences of opinion among the Jurists over the matter of Jurisprudence was never an issue in Ahlus sunnah wal jamah. The scholars, who disagreed on the matters of Jurisprudence , wrote refutation of each other, but at the same time maintained respect and love for each other.They never resorted to personal attack or abuse. It is an irony of this 15th Islamic century that, disagreement in the matters of Jurisprudence has made certain Molvis to attack and abuse...."
just in case, as you probably don't know - i have very close friends in DI and i have very good relations with them. we have supported and defended DI when some other sunnis attacked them citing baseless charges - we consider DI as a jama'at of sunnis (regardless of criticism on certain actions or their operational methods by sunni ulama).
but as janab aqib sahib has said, this is not a matter of personal preference. we aren't asking what DI does with the money or how they appoint office-bearers (as we have husn-zann about them and we trust they are doing it right, and they do all this in good faith).
let us go back to alahazrat for a while. what did alahazrat do all his life? as one deviant taunted: "apparently, he wrote fatawa..."
and yes, indeed. most of his written work is fatawa. even those 200-300 page works which are classics are all as a response to one question or the other. where most muftis would have answered in a few paragraphs or even 2-3 pages, alahazrat would seal the discussion on that topic with extensive research and proof; to say that he was a mufti's mufti is an understatement.
he took fatwa as his responsibility. instead of writing all these fatawa, if alahazrat busied himself with writing commentaries instead, he would have amassed a huge corpus which would be unrivalled from his time onwards - as he was erudite, eloquent and he was the master of all that he surveyed. while such things are also necessary, alahazrat being a mufti deemed it his responsibility to answer the challenges of his time.
in summary, if you assume the responsibility of being a mufti, you are bound to answer. particularly in matters of such import, in such times of confusion and widespread disinformation. if a mufti (or a dar al-ifta'a) cannot take a stand, why blame the common public?
tahir's shenanigans are no secret - and if a mufti is undecided or cannot take a stand on his heresy and kufr, they are engraving their names until qiyamat that there were people - ignorant or cowards - who did not take a stand against such a shayTan, playing with the deen.
refuting heresy is wajib and those who know, yet do not demonstrate their knowledge in the face of such heresy in times of tribulation (such as ours), Allah ta'ala will not accept either your farz nor your nafl.
Allah ta'ala knows best.
The noble Mufti did not GIVE an 'alternative' fatwa. He re-iterated Ala Hazrat's and Huzur Mufti Azam's fatwa, so it was actually the other way round.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Brother i do not think I am mixng issues a, the point i was trying to allude to is that islam covers a wide specrum of idea and understanding, some which we may agree with and some not, if DI or any other tanzeem (sunni), khanaqah etc choose to take a particular position then that is their choice maybe they have some valid reason(s) according to their understanding (whether right or wrong) that is their choice.
lets take the example of Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar Misbahi and his ikhtilaaf with Mufti Akhtar Radha (may allah bless them) regarding ‘Irfan e Mazhab wa Maslak’. Mawlana Yaseen went on record saying that if there is anything in his book which is against the teachings of Ahlus sunnah then he will not only delete it in the next edition but will also seek public tawba (repentence). I heard from one Indian brother that it has got to such a degree that Maulana Hussaini Rizwi Nagpuri recently issued an oral summation at an urs gathering that donations to Jamia Ashrafia Mubarakpur are haram!!!
Or lets take the example of the issue surrounding "salah on a moving train". At the 20th Fiqh Seminar of Majlis e Shari, Al Jamiatul Ashrafia Mubarakpur, held at Aligarh from 17 to 19 May 2013, it was agreed with consensus that performing Fard Salah in a moving train, in India during present time is permissible and this Salah need not be repeated. Yet Mufti Akhtar Raza et al gave an alternative fatawa and in turn started attacking Mufti Nizamuddin, who is the Chief Mufti of Al Jamiatul Ashrafia, so where do we (the awaam) go?
Difference of opinion amongst scholar is allowed and is valid, its down to an individuals own understand, perspection and comprehension of the deen to choose for himself which is the right position for him. End of the day you will go to your own grave no one else is joining you, all we can hope is that the adab we have and showed to our buzurgh is enough that when we make ziyarah of the Beloved of Allah sallahu alayhi was saalam that we can show the right adab there.....
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Salaam brother, my comments were not meant as any "personal views or self made principles", because when it comes to actions there is a very broad spectrum behaviour that one can observe. If they ore anyone else for that matter choose to take a more relax or neutral position (for whatever reason), should we berate them? there could be some valid (in there eyes) for this position, shouldn't we rather try to understand the reason behind "why", rather then hit them with our sowtees saying your not "real brailvi's" or "pakay sunni's" because you do not openly make takfir of such and such a person?
reminds of an incident where a person went to a darul ifta and asked the head mufti for a fatawa regarding listening to qawaali and he gave the fatawa that is was "haraam", so they went to the head of the madarsah who was a very famous alim, shaykh ul hadeeth and asked him since he listen to qawaalis. He alayhi rehma said that mufti sahib's fatawa was good and correct, the man replied but you listen to qawaali, he (the shaykh) replied that i follow another fatawa (before anyone asks I heard this from one of the ulema).
So when you say,"this is a matter of deen", in many ways you are right, it is a matter of "deen", but according to your own personal understanding of the deen and my personal understanding of the deen and every other persons understanding of the deen and share3atullah. All I can do is to address you with respect and give you an opinion FROM my understanding of the matter visa versa, I cannot see with your eyes visa versa.
In islam there is a spectrum of thinking, ideas and understanding, we have been ordered to follow the majority (al jama3atu reHmaton wal firrqu azabon), the middle way, so if you do not like a particular position or point of view, don't follow it...simple really, la iqraha fid deen........if you do not like it don't follow it!!!!
The previous referral to the Fatawa of Mufti Waqar ud Deen shows that DI Darul Ifta are ready to support existing Fatawa from Ahl ut Tahqiq even if individuals like Padri are named - all they have to do now is issue an upto date answer referring to the Fatawa of the contemporary akaabir already circulating.
Snaqshi: you're mixing issues. No one said dwi don't do any good. Only their stance of not issuing clear fatwa against open kufr is being discussed.