mufti nizamuddin's Fatwa on Obaidullah Azmi

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

​

 

Yes brother I agree with you.* As AQ said previously,

. So what's better than asking your own murshid and his organisation for a ruling?

AQ, please (this is a request), or if anyone else can put forward the inquiry for a ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name, send through your question here and I will send it through to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib** for a ruling. A brother is prepared to put his name on the request for a ruling and publish it.

I will also try to send the question to Hashmi Mian Sahib to get a ruling from him on Obaidullah Azmi by name.

* That we seek a new ruling based on the facts that are now present.
** AQ's murshid and his murshid's organisation

 

Yes brother I agree with you. As AQ said previously,

. So what's better than asking your own murshid and his organisation for a ruling?

AQ, please (this is a request), or if anyone else can put forward the inquiry for a ruling on Obaidullah Azmi by name, send through your question here and I will send it through to Dawat e Islami and Ilyas Qadiri Sahib for a ruling. A brother is prepared to put his name on the request for a ruling and publish it.

 

to brothers AQ, chisti-raza, Aqib alQadri: Sending the old fatwa and seeking a ruling on it is utterly pointless and will achieve exactly nothing.

Whether you send the istifta to bareily, baghdad or karachi you cannot turn a blind eye to the latest developments. It's no use going back to the Jurassic age!

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

The istifta should include of the following things at the very least:

1. UKA's speech at gandhidham, if the speech is more than 9mins then it will be better if someone can get the entire speech. I don't know if it would be a good idea to order the katha#734 from here.

2. UKA's speech uploaded by the person from malegaon.

3. UKA's 22nd March Urs Speech at Ashrafiya

4. If people really want this, the ashrafiya and bareily-shareef fatwas.

5. Point out that one day after the asharfaiya fatwa was issued the mustafti claimed that he had sent the entire speech to the muftis and the muftis did not deny this, neither then nor as yet.

6. It has now emerged that the istifta sent to/written at ashrafiya contained a lie - that the speech was given in 2003 in the aftermath of the godhra riots. The fact is that the speech was given in the vestiges of 2013, perhaps to gain hindu votes in other places, or perhaps to woo Sharad Pawar (the tyrant who has always been an enemy of the muslims and was responsible for the murder of several muslims during the riots of the 70's) whose NCP party he joined in july 2014. See him with pawar here.

7. What is the wisdom behind the principle stated in jami al-aHkam. How does it explain Sayyiduna Ibarhim's ('alayhis salaam) actions and how can it be used and abused. Please explain it with examples.

8. UKA's campaigning with non-mehrams, posing for photo-ops with them and shamelessly bragging about it.

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

unless the new istifta contains all of the above details it will remain incomplete and alienated from ground realities and therefore any fatwa issued on it's based will be inconsequential and pointless.

Allah ta'ala know best.

 

brother, why should the question specifically be by me.

besides, DI and Ilyas Qadri sahab are urdu speakers. they can easily be forwarded Nizamuddin sahab's fatwa and asked is it correct or not; that is -

based on what the mustafti said in the istifta and the reasons and excuses cited, is the fatwa given by the mufti based on the daleels he gave - correct or not? if it is not correct, what is the ruling on the mustafti; and what is the ruling on the mufti issuing the fatwa?

it's that simple.

 

AQ, can you please send me the question to submit to Dawat e Islami and Iyas Qadiri Sahib so that we can obtain a fatwa from them on Obaidullah Azmi by name? You can post the question here. A brother here is prepared to send it to them using his full name for the fatwa.

 

google translate

everything from the speech is quoted so it IS the same speech.

 

which also means that instead of iqamate hujjat for Islam and muslims, he gave the hindus themselves a hujjat - they can now say, "look even muslims agree that ram existed and he is the IMAM of India"

wonderful application of the principle from Imam Qurtubi's jami al aHkam

a round of applause for KHATEEB-UL-HIND....

 

right then, here are some quick facts:

this is the official list of all kathas with their dates and venue.

The last entry for 2013 is No. 734, venue: Adipur, Gujrat date: 28.12.2013 - 05.01.2014

Adipur is in gandhidham (use google maps). The dainikbhaskar article was published on 30.12.2013

The news piece heading is: Ram is the Imam of Hidustan, Mawlana Azmi

A question: why would the paper publish a decade old article right in the midst of an on-going ram-katha and that too in precisely the same location?

too many similarities to be coincidences?

 

'nice' pose: http://i10.dainikbhaskar.com/thumbnail/320x278/web2images/www.divyabhaskar.co.in/2013/12/30/7792_untitled-33.jpg



Editing Notes:

1. This post was edited on 13/09/2015 because I noticed that the image had been quietly taken down from the original link (I noticed this when I wished to show the image to a scholar).

2. The only deeni platform where this image was posted was sunniport or atleast this was the first one (to the best of my knowledge). This would mean that a forum visitor noticed this and alerted the people (ir)responsible for having it removed. I have a strong hunch that it was sunnistudent or one of his 'friends' who run the infamous blog floated with the sole purpose of bad mouthing ulema-e-deen, even if it means supporting the praise of demi-gods.

3. Finally this means that the closet of obaidullah camp is bursting with skeletons and the proverbial 'tinka' is glaringly visible in the pretentious beard of the 'chor'.

4. Note how stealthily they work for their cause and on the other hand fool the masses by raising an unholy ruckus over a minor alteration (intentional or otherwise or perceived) in the wording of the correct fatwa.

5. Here is a list of places where the image is now available:

http://imagebin.ca/v/2FVBWBHCwZ9J

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=t8vxg5&s=8#.VfViRRFViko

http://s30.postimg.org/azfutw7vh/obaid_azmi_ramkatha.jpg?noCache=1442144872

 

well, this is certainly an interesting find.

just to be sure, how do you know that the speech was given in 2013 and not that the article was published in 2013?

I am asking because I don't understand gujrati much and the article just states a few things about uka praising ram and meeting morari (based on the little I could make of the gujrati words).

if found to be true I can only imagine the repercussions this would have.

I think it must not be too difficult to ascertain if we can get in touch with someone living in gandhidham....

 

http://m.divyabhaskar.co.in/news/Bh...speak-in-gandhidham-ramkatha-4478962-NOR.html

the speech took place in 2013

 

in his article 'behr e faqhat kay durr e shahwar' published in jahan e mufti e azam on page 442 (pdf version 444)

 

What book is that extract from?

 

mufti nizam sahab himself admits that they do this due diligence, but unfortunately not in uka's case;

 

another noteworthy passage on FR page 10669: