mufti nizamuddin's Fatwa on Obaidullah Azmi

oops! seems the ahsrafiya fatwa too has multiple versions!

where exactly is the phrase 'with these words'? point no and line no please.



see? we too know how to use red-lines

 

ss posts:

#129 was at 12:34 am IST

#156 was at 4:32 am IST

it seems sunnistudent has been up all night. And yet he has come up with nothing substantial.

he has been running after chimeras. the sooner he realises this the better.

yes, and he had said:

at that time I really believed him that he did not know much about ubaid. But now, seeing his defence of ashrafiya fatwa and knowing how well-known ubaid is to all who have any connection to ashrafiya I seriously doubt that he was as clueless as he appeared.

he also wrote this:

seems like ss only knows to deal in threats.

Tajushshariah and Muhaddith e kabeer have done their duty by the sunni awaam and came out clean.

The "Pandora's box" has burst and , ironically, it is sunnistudent himself who got whacked by the flying debris!

ALL PRAISE IS DUE TO ALLAH, RABBIL 'AALMEEN.​

Ram has no share in it!​

 

for other brothers watching this thread, i did a search on SS posts and found this, therefore it seems that UKA has been an issue for some time.

 

oh dear! he will not, he already has decided that this fatwa-editing is forgery, and he won't tell the story he knows until we tell him that how did this forgery happen with precise chronology.

he should not, and i cannot talk to a mad man. pardon me if i have made another discrepency or forgery in this post, because i will not respond to you any further, and i am thankful to you that you already have declared that you won't continue any further.

 

In the perfect world, both sides should be made to watch/hear recordings of Obaidullah's utterances and then neutrally pass the judgement (and I can't see how any side would dare to differ then). It is unfortunate that Ashrafiya fatwa relies on incomplete and misrepresented facts. Any difference between two camps need to be buried and energies should be focused elsewhere.

 

I am not making any more posts in this thread in near future.

Sincere readers can go through this thread and concentrate on posts made by inquisitive, Noori and Unbeknown. Just look at the difference in their stories. From "both the fatwas of Azhari miyan being correct" to "The correct one is the one with Taajush Shariahs signature' to " there might have been mistake and it might have been corrected".

I do hope that the "other fatwa" of Azhari Miyan ( Since both the fatawa of Azhari miyan are correct) will be found out.

 

I suggest that SS present the real story (if that's so sensational) behind the fatwa. That will save everybody lot of time and energy. SS, no sarcasm intended here. Tell us the story if that's going to help us understand the issues better.

So far I believe that the so-called "story" is a red herring. Real issue is that Obaidullah can't/shouldn't be absolved. How will the "story" change Obaidullah's crime? Is it an alibi?

Nonetheless, SS should present the story, if that helps provide the necessary context.

 

I find you really amusing. You really miss the sarcasm in posts.

The inverted commas, I presumed, would give it away but you really are too intelligent for me.

You win. Now can you tell us the " real story" since you are the only person in the whole world who probably knows it.

 

Compare this with the following

 

You are embarrassing yourself...

 

I speak for myself. I don't represent any one.

Respected brother Noori is an honest moderator. I don't know whom he represents , but these are his remarks worth reading

 

@abu Hasan I request you either ban this rambling fool or make another thread for him where he can do as he likes without stalling this discussion.

@sunnistudent I don't know the "real story" about the Fatwa and I don't know anyone who does. Hope that puts you at peace, alhamdulillah that means you won't talk about the Fatwa and no one cares.

 

How easily people forget their own post!

Post 69

Compare this with what Unbeknown said:

But let us chose to ignore all this, as it will led to more lies. Isn't it? No one will question about "both the versions" of azhariya miyan.

 

Why are you making it personal?I too can make remarks about your comprehension , right from school days up to degree level. You might not know my age, but that does not mean I do not know anything about you. You should be ashamed of making this personal remark. Remember you started it all. I am letting it go because I don't want this thread to become personal fight. It will then become a valid excuse for the thread to be locked.Now don't ban me.

I am not "scared" or "afraid" if you catch me of my English mistakes. The most, I will learn and correct my self. But that will not help you in any ways, because I will still continue to show inaccuracies in this thread and in your post.

Why do you 'warn' people? Why do you ban people? Using what authority? You show your ownership power when you want and when a fabricated fatwa is posted on your forum and some one asks you to investigate about it, you feel offended!

Coincidentally, Noori has said in this very thread that he has "undeleted" the post . ( See 113) It is a clear proof of his having special privilege because of being a moderator. He deleted the very post about which the discussion was going on ( post sequence). And when I mention this privilege, you accuse me of accusing Noori!

Why are you concerned about Noori? Can't he talk for himself ? Don't tell me this is your authority as a forum owner !

I said I can still show discrepancy in his honest admission. I still stand by it. I can prove it. Later you jumped in , without being able to show where I mentioned "post sequence".

Should I show you where all your forum members have passed fatwa on sunni scholars? Some fatwas were so effective that scholars had to remove their face book posts!! Feel free to ask for it, I can pin point those threads.

Are you still not ashamed that you knowingly made a negative remark about a sunni scholar without bothering to confirm with him? Don't you remember this remarks of yours?

Tanvir can locate Vol 14, page 625/ 626, but Mufti Nizamuddin Rizvi can't. Right? Why? Because Tanvir can speak better English? So Tanvir says that mufti sahab" assumed " it! Please stop assuming about others. Its not good.

I am not interested to know what some one does in Mysore or UAE.


----

See above.

Keep your daring with you. You will need it, when we will discuss the fatwa, which will happen only when whole fatwa story is posted by Inquisitive or any other member. Until that happens I won't answer anything, just because you want. Be happy with your assumption ( which you love to) that those words do not make any difference and Tajusshariah was wrong in getting that corrected ( as per Inquistive).

Get this straight, Until the fatwa story is shared here, I am not answering any question related with fatwa. I have made this clear in post no 110 ( Now you can say that you didn't read that. But I have said that in my other posts too)

Please understand the matter before making nonsense comment. Mufti Nizamuddin was sent the original fatwa in the form of istifta by Obaidullah Khan. How will he come to know who made changes later? He said it clearly that ' with these " words it is not found.

You can assume things, but I can't ask about authenticity of a forged fatwa. Do I need to show you how you " ask" questions and then finally ban people?

Wait for the fatwa story before I answer this. In the meanwhile those who have issued the fatwa of kufr can answer this.

Stop writing anything which you feel like. I have been consistent on my topic. I said before that when fatwa story is shared here, I am ready to discuss everything. I highlighted the fabrication in the fatwa. I can show how you changed your stance and did admit it.

You are waiting to see my response and I am waiting to know the fatwa story.

No questions, until my question is answered. I mentioned this condition , even before you were made aware about the difference between istifta fatwa and the one uploaded by inquisitive. But you are deliberately ignoring it.

The problem with you is that you 'understand' too much, especially when it suits you. Noori made that remark in the negative sense, as if I am enjoying by arousing people's interest and then hiding what I know.

---

I too can use such words. Now, go and make a post in tasawwuf thread.

Not suddenly,they always were. Just look at the warnings issued by you. A forged fatwa is circulated on your forum, the member who did this does not reply and one of your moderators gives his opinion that the title should be changed to 'siraj al-fuqaha''s ghalat fatwa'. This is not sufficient . He goes on to say about scholars of Ashrafia that "it looks as if they are becoming secular". You and your team are really doing a great job.

Why do you not have the same opinion about others? I see a fabricated fatwa posted on your forum and want to know about its authenticity. Just because you do not want it to be answered,means I should stop asking about it?

Why not ask the person who posted it?? I have not been playing hide and seek. I raised genuine questions from my first post and highlighted everything which appears to be fabricated.

fatwa story please.

You can't change your habit. You have raised an istifta even in this post !

which rule book?

Do one thing. Count the number of questions which you have asked me and compare it with one question which I have been asking right from the beginning.

Aren't you ashamed of using such words? Next time when you make a post in tasawwuf thread, recall your behavior with others. Those who have signed the fatwa from Ashrafia , have more ghayrat than you. Trust me. Stop posing as Bayazid of this age.

I have highlighted your noble words. Look who has accused whom. Look who has been mean and disheartening.

you are doing all this to take the focus away from the wrong fatwa issued by mufti nizamuddin sahib.

You are the most well mannered muslim on internet. Please feel happy.

Just count how many questions you have asked me in this thread.? ( aida?)

Look who started it. Just because others won't reply you, doesn't mean no one will reply you.

I said why don't you all ask inquisitive. Just because some one's English is good doesn't mean his comprehension is good as well. Often wonder how can people not get an engineering seat in Karnataka and then finally have to be happy with a B.Sc degree

You need to learn basic manners and learn to read carefully because making remarks about others. I asked a direct question in post 110 and in earlier posts about the tampered fatwa.

After abusing and making personal remarks , you tell me in the end, that you are not interested in it. You could have said this right at the beginning and I would not have asked this question.


I have a sincere advise to you. Try to be decent. Look at the remarks which you have made. But if I too make such remarks, what will be the difference between you and me?

 

I think issue of tampered fatwa is a red herring here. That Obaidullah Azmi has made several kufriya utterances is for all and one to see and hear. That's what makes SS' defense of Mufti Nizamuddin's fatwa so indefensible. That's where Ashrafiya despite its stature has lost its plot. If Mufti Nizamuddin's fatwa absolved someone who made one mistake (or uttered an ambiguous statement just once), then SS would have had my sympathy. But Obaidullah appears to be a serial offender.

Setting aside the fatwas (forged or not), does SS believe that Obaidullah has committed kufr? If someone were to present all the kufriya statements of Obaidullah to Mufti Nizamuddin, would the latter still absolve him? (aH has made a summary istiftaa; SS please present this to Mufti Nizamuddin)

Obaidullah presented his istiftaa to Ashrafiya knowing fully well that he would be absolved. Whether this was done because Obaidullah presented (or misrepresented) his partial statement, or whether he was given a benefit of doubt purely of grounds of his "reputation" is anybody's guess. It seems one side is defending personalities without any regard to the law.

 

SS is a kid, he is a bad representative of mufti nizam sahab.

i'm really sad about this situation, i would also honestly like to tell that i didn't link the jeer of the person (probably the recorder himself) in the audio when allamah sahab was mentioning the signatories of the ashrafya fatwa, nevertheless allamah sahab was presenting correct charges. he (the recorder) should have felt sorry that it is happening to sunni ulama.

 

you old polite gentleman, you. it is a madcap rambling.

 

you are wasting your time. for your information, i doubt that any of the moderators know the story. i don't know where the forum owner is these days. perhaps he is just watching.

thought for your addled mind: none of the moderators or the forum owner started this thread. the first post in this thread is about a fatwa and in the course of this discussion, it was mentioned that the fatwa by mufti nizamuddin was a response to ANOTHER fatwa (as cited by obaidullah azmi in his istifta).

you jumped in from somewhere (btw, i did not mention your veiled accusation that i will close the thread; what you said between the lines was: "it will become hot and moderators will hit the escape button".) and raised this issue of variance. i hadn't seen it, and i acknowledged it. so did many others - but suddenly you are making out THAT to be the main issue.

praise of rama is a secondary issue now!

----

 

Who on earth said any of the two is 'Ghalat'?

They could have changed it solely because they thought it to be MORE accurate.

Request to @abuHasan please make a separate thread for SS to allow him to discuss his conspiracy theory.