mufti nizamuddin's Fatwa on Obaidullah Azmi

I appreciate AQ's points that:

1. Non-indian mufti will require solid evidence to pass a specific ruling. That evidence is available with the accused's signature for only that part of the speech he mentioned in the istifta. For other parts of the speech and the other speeches we will need a witness or some sort of an admission from uka. This is relatively easy for Indian muftis most of all for the ashrafiya muftis as he is a member of it's advisory board.

2. Asking DI for a fatwa can be a good academic exercise and perhaps a hujjat for it's adherents but not for ashrafiya or bareily. Infact DI issuing a ruling on ashrafiya fatwa is all the more improbable since whenever DI needs expert advice/fatwa on a matter they contact the very ashrafiya muftis they are being asked to investigate. So I don't think anything will come out of this.

------------------

But this does not mean that DI/Arab/Turkish scholar cannot issue a ruling at all. See my post below. They can be presented with the entire picture with speeches transcribed and translated into that language and asked for a general ruling on a person who said and did all those things. People can then draw their own conclusions.

If we're not getting anything more than a general ruling then why send just the ashrafiya fatwa alone? What's the point? Why not send the entire scenario transcribed and then get a general ruling on that?

 

The aim is not to get one or the other mufti to declare obaidullah as kafir. Rather, my over-riding concern is that the entire string of events be analysed and on each part of the string an appropriate hukm be given with the riders that:

1. xyz part could not be verified in a manner which would allow one to pass a ruling of kufr but if true then the hukm stands as mentioned.
2. abc part is can definitely be attributed to the accused and so the ruling on it is such and such.

Then people can draw their own conclusions. Infact this will infuriate azmi so much that he will come forward once again and admit it all and that would be the missing proof.

Do note that mufti nizam had issued a fatwa of gumrahi on tahir in SDI's magazine though his only evidence was videos/CDs etc. someone should go back and verify if this is the case and what evidence did he provide as the basis for the ruling.

 

some points about shariah admissible evidences:

1. Ascription of the speech to UKA was contestable when the bareily shareef fatwa was issued.
2. After the fatwa from mubarakpur it is no longer 'just a youtube link'. UKA has admitted to almost the entire speech in writing and even put his signature with name.
3. The rest of the speech could have been ascertained by cross-questioning him but he saved us the work by claiming that he had sent the entire speech. So the accused has admitted before hundreds of people that he had sent the entire speech and the words are his. Once again this is not a youtube link. Anyone who attended in the urs can give the testimony in this regard.
4. This leaves just the last speech uploaded from malegaon. Again for this a sharai witness or obaidullah himself will have to be questioned.
5. Photo-ops and politics part is for the sharai ruling of fisq and the ruling on attending the gatherings of a fasiq. This event was mass-reported in the papers and media besides the scores of witnesses so I don't know how it's authenticity can be questioned.
6. The date reported by the gujrati paper - again someone present in/around the area can testify in this regard.

 

We should also send the updated istifta to Nizamuddin Sahib. I'm sure that our respected brother SunniStudent has access to him and can get it to him.

 

It's fine. You can go ahead and consolidate it or if anyone else wants to help out it would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

Sure I will attach it here. Please just send me a list of the evidences you want to attach to it, links, pics, etc. Please just consolidate them in one post

 

Thanks brother. I will wait for you to send through the inquiry.

 

DI only has a strong presence in India. The scholars from Bareilly are in the thick of this dispute. Yet they are shy to issue a fatwa on obaid by name, so far. I hope in the coming days they will issue one. Otherwise it might raise question marks on their credibility.

 

Brother chisti-raza, your sarcasm is getting the better of you. I told you very clearly us commenting on videos here is one thing, a legal ruling by muftis on a specific matter is something else. Why stop at nazim? See all of our comments here on tahir as well based on his videos. See what I said about obaid based on videos.

----

if you really need to get sarcastic, here's my open challenge to you.

ok we will both make specific by name istifta on obaid. Provide me whatever evidences you need, video links etc.

let us get a fatwa from Azhari Miyan on obaid by name, and also from DI.

is that fair?

what shall we do if we don't get a fatwa from one or both of DI and Bareilly?

 

No worries, even though Dawat e Islami claim a strong presence in India.

Ok. Thanks for putting that out there.

No worries brother that you can't put forward the requested inquiry. Don't worry about it. I'm sure that someone else here can gather this together and post it here so that I can send it to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib for a ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name.

nazim.haqqani.meeting.pope.and.a.certain.person's.comments.just.saying.

Once, again. Anyway don't worry yourself too much about the requested inquiry.

 

i hope you weren't being sarcastic there.

it's not a case of "i won't".

it's a case of "i can't" because i don't have the kind of Shar3i evidences that a mufti would require for his tahqeeq on the matter. i don't think linking up youtube videos, or presenting a clip from a hindu owned newspaper, is a Shar3i evidence for a Qadi to issue a SPECIFIC ruling BY NAME. those who have such evidences can do their part.

 

we were both posting at the same time. i missed this part of your post #259 (or you edited it later)

1. Nizamuddin sab's fatwa isn't obsolete for me yet. i want an independent third party (not Bareilly, not Mubarakpur) verification or rejection of it. (i chose that third party to be a NON-DESI since i don't want any allegations of being aligned to this side or that side from any forum members)

of course, that is as far as i am concerned only. i am only speaking for myself. i am not interested in it for Azhari Miyan's group's sake. i am not interested in it for Ashrafia group's sake. i am most certainly not interested in it for obaidullah's sake.

i am ONLY interested in it for the sake of knowing more about the issue of iman, kufr and takfeer in Islam.

-------

2. again, i have said it time and again, that i eagerly await a specific by name fatwa on obaidullah from Azhari Miyan's side OR a refutation of Nizamuddin sahab's fatwa, so that we can compare apples to apples.

it is ludicrous asking anyone outside of india on a specific by name fatwa against obaidullah when there is no document against him by muftis from his own country! please see the matter reasonably brother.

 

Ok, so you won't be sending the inquiry through so that I can send it to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib to get a ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name who also claim a strong presence in India. No worries. Maybe someone else can gather this together and post it here so that I can send it through.

 

i have no issues with sending an enquiry on obaidullah by name to pakistan or anywhere else. just that i don't have all the Shar3i evidences against obaidullah to present to them. i can send an enquiry to them asking them to attest or reject Nizamuddin sahab's fatwa and that drafted enquiry is in post #258

------------

speaking of by name, i have said time and time again on this forum that i WISH Azhari Miyan's side issues a fatwa on obaidullah by name OR a refutation of Nizamuddin sahab's fatwa so that at least us common people can compare apples to apples.

 

So I guess you won't be sending the inquiry through for me to send to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib to get ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name even though the organisation claims a strong presence in India. No worries. Maybe someone else will draft out the inquiry and I will send it through to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib to get a ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name. In sha' Allah Ta'ala.

Also please read this again.

 

what are you talking about?

see post #258. i drafted the enquiry for you in Urdu

what i mean is that i have enquired from an Arab shaykh for verifying if Nizamuddin sab's fatwa based on the given istifta is correct or not.

i didn't mention obaid or Nizamuddin sab by name because it's irrelevant to the shaykh. i just mentioned the istifta and the fatwa given and asked is the answer correct or not.

i didn't send the fatwa anywhere else in india or pakistan because i don't want people to come back with nonsensical accusations of aligning with this side or that side of the Bareilly-Mubarakpur politics.

besides, what good will a fatwa from DI or SDI serve to Azhari Miyan's side since they don't consider them as adherents of Maslake Ala Hazrat???

 

So I guess you won't be sending the inquiry through for me to send to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib to get ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name even though the organisation claims a strong presence in India. No worries. Maybe someone else will draft out the inquiry and I will send it through to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib to get a ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name. In sha' Allah Ta'ala.

 

the facts:

brother, it's not as simple as it sounds, specially if you send istifta outside of india.

first thing - a mufti anywhere in the world, when presented with something mentioning some specific person by name, will ascertain the facts

according to the Shari3ah -

what is the legal standing of a video uploaded on youtube?
or an mp3 file stored in some file-sharing location?
what is the Shar3i status of a news clip reported by the kafir media?
or for that matter even mainstream "Muslim" media (jazeera, jung group, etc etc)?
are these admissible evidences in the Shari3ah for or against a specific person?
what is admissible to a Muslim Qadi to consider something as fact?

it's very easy for us as awam to comment on videos or audios posted online, but any mufti worth his salt will think like a Qadi (given the circumstances in the Muslim world, the absence of a caliph and a proper authority) and will look for convincing evidences that can be accepted in an Islamic court.

i had sent a GENERAL istifta to pakistan describing tahir's actions, and still was faced with disappointment.

i don't think any worthwhile mufti in the Arab world or Pakistan or Turkey or anywhere else will comment on obaid by name, specially since they don't have all the Shari3ah-qualified evidences they need on him, or know much about him. you probably will get answers if you describe general situations.

the muftis of india of course are in a position to issue a fatwa on him by name.

------

now present:

in any case, the fatwa by Nizamuddin sab (and the istifta) is enough since it includes very basic iman and kufr issues.

i don't see any reason to add further topics (the issues of photo-ops with women etc for political maneuvering are not issues of iman and kufr)

-----

it is first the job of muftis of india to do their due diligence on obaid as a person and comprehensively analyse his speeches etc., and issue a final ruling - honestly, and unbiasedly, without any political or groupie point scoring motivations.

it's something both sides (Bareilly & Mubarakpur) need to take up, along with other Sunni scholars in india.

the fatwa can then be verified from elsewhere like Arab or Pakistani muftis.

it's absurd to expect some mufti somewhere in Pakistan or Syria to issue a fatwa on obaidullah when muftis in his own country haven't issued a fatwa on him!

 

AQ, maybe you did not read this part.

(Meaning I agree with what Unbeknown wrote in #255.

So, Ignore Nizamuddin Sahib and his fatwa from now on. Many of us here are in agreement that his fatwa is now obsolete.

Will you be able to put forward a formal inquiry here so that I can get a ruling from Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib on Obaidullah Azmi by name? Yes or No?

 

brother, there is nothing to put forward in the enquiry other than asking if the fatwa given based on the istifta is correct or not. if not, what is the correct ruling upon the mustafti and the correct ruling upon the mufti (for absolving someone of kufr)?

i have typed it out in Urdu and my Urdu typing and formal composition is not the best in the market. any other brothers are welcome to modify it and make it more formal/academic and tweak it and then you can send it to anywhere you want.

کیا فرماتے ہیں علماےؑ کرام اس مسؑلہ میں کے درج ذیل استفتا اور فتوی صحیح ہیں یا نہیں؟

کیا مستفتی کا پیشکردہ عذر اس کی عدم تکفیر کا سبب بن سکتا ہے یا نہین؟

کیا فتوے میں مفتی صاحب کی پیشکردہ دلیل صحیح ہے یا نہیں؟

اگر فتوی غلط ہے تو مستفتی پر صحیح شرعی حکم کیا ہوگا؟

اور غلط فتوی دینے والے مفتی صاحب پر شرعی حکم کیا ہوگا؟

بینوا توجروا

ATTACH NIZAMUDDIN SAB FATWA ALONG WITH OBAID ISTIFTA

​