Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Hanafi Fiqh' started by Unbeknown, Feb 13, 2016.
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!
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.
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.
Your questions are irrelevant SS. Make another thread about how the fatwa is "fabricated" or "forged", don't spam this thread.
The more people write here, new things will keep cropping. Now we have "BOTH VERIONS" of azhari miyan's fatwa!! Where as it can be seen in the fatwas that only one fatwa has the signature of Azhari Miyan! Every one can see .
Just read previous posts, how inquisitive has said and Noori has assumed/ guessed/ deducted that once the "mistake' was noted in the original fatwa, it was corrected and then Tajushshariah signed it .
But now "Both versions" of azhari miyan's fatwa are said to be correct. I will wait to see the "other" one. Hope one night is sufficient to arrange it.
You just added a new twist to the story that "both versions" of azhari miyan's fatwa are correct. You decide with Inquisitive ( and Noori,if needed) and let me know.
as salamu 'alaykum.
disclaimer: while i composed this, there were a number of posts. haven't read them.
aw come on. if i had time i could also go into "reading" between the lines and begin attributing malicious intent to your posts. i will just try this reply, and i will say it bluntly that your comprehension is either poor or you are over-reacting. if i begin to catch you for your english expressions, it will be a long night - and i don't know how old you are, but i am too old for such games.
let it go.
look at your demeanour. you are speaking in clues and hints - and accusing us of insincerity and all the time denying that you are not playing hide and seek! why should *i* interrogate inquisitive?
in this line you are accusing us that we are false. as for veiled allegations:
for example, here you accuse noori of making changes unfairly:
you are saying that he is not entirely honest.
here you are accusing of Allah-knows-who of wanting to be a mufti.
obviously, you are not accusing that i am a mufti, but it is a snide remark.
as i said, i don't have all night to waste. but i am humouring you.
so what about it? where is your usual garrulousnes here?
i dare mufti nizamuddin or any mufti to say that the fatwa with changed words or unchanged words (we will call it v1 and v2) is not congruent in spirit and meaning to the fatwa in fatawa ridawiyyah.
why did mufti nizamuddin summarily dismiss in his fatwa in ambiguous words. honest and sincere mufti will not play like this. he will show how it is incorrect or point out that there is a fatwa in fatawa ridawiyyah, EXACTLY on that page, but the v1 fatwa is cited incorrectly. look what mufti nizamuddin says:
"haaN main ne fatawa razwiyah mutarjam wa ghayr mutarjam donoN meiN is maqam par woh ibarat talash karney ki koshish ki magar na mili. yahaN fatawa razwiyah ka Hawalah ghalat diya gaya hai. wAllahu ta'ala a'lam."
a lay reader based on mufti nizamuddin's reputation will think that it does not exist AT ALL. whereas, the fact of the matter is that it does not exist VERBATIM. which i noted. and i gave him the benefit of doubt that he used this 'heelah' of 'non-existing' based on "non-existing verbatim".
given that you are asking so many questions, why didn't mufti nizamuddin point out that it was taHrif shudah or whatever? why wait until it was posted on a forum and discussed?
why should only you be asking questions?
is it not a mufti's responsibility to clarify, or is it sufficient for him to just take the literal word and issue a fatwa and get done with it?
when it suits you, we are ignorant; when it suits you we are wilfully misrepresenting it.
i have said it plainly, that in spirit, and in conveying the meaning, the first fatwa in both v1 or v2 versions, is congruent to alahazrat's fatwa referenced. you seem to see a huge difference. fine. i am waiting to see your proof that there is the difference of the sky and the earth between these two versions.
in the meantime, here is a short istiftaa for mufti nizamuddin or sunnistudent:
kuffar ke devtaaoN ki ta'areef karna kaisa hai? kya ye sareeH kufr hai? masalan, kya darj zayl alfaz kufr haiN?
"sri ram ka wujud aysa paak aur pavitr wujud hai; unka character itna nirala, pyara aur be misaal hai, ke jo intellectual class hai, jo cheezon ki gahrayi mein utar kar un ki haqiqatoN ki ma'arifat hasil karta hai, woh sri raam ko imam e hind maanta hai.
raam naam hai sach'chayi ka, jo jhoot ko parajit karta hai.
raam naam hai mazluum aur dukhi logoN ki Himayat ka, jo zulm ki gardan pakaRta hai.
raam naam hai sooraj ki us raoshni ka jiskey zari'ey andhere door hotey hain.
raam naam hai chand ki us chandni ka jiskey zari'ey logoN ko sukun milta hai.
raam naam hai us ThanDi hawa ka, jo jhulsati huwi dhuup meiN insan ke liye chatar chaya ban jaati hai."
of course, you are playing hide and seek. if you cannot understand the meaning of that english idiom, it is not my problem. you probably need to spend some time with an english teacher. as for my "politeness", thanks. i appreciate the compliment.
don't act stupid. why are moderators suddenly the most important people around?
we have clearly mentioned, and everyone who visits the forum knows that moderators do not claim to be special. it is just that it is cumbersome for us to have two logins - one with mod access and another without. we need mod-access to do housekeeping etc. and we have said it time and again that we are like other posters when it comes to discussions.
this is no exception. when you have already asked that question (and i assume you know why already) what do you expect us to do? regardless, that question is not important for me at least. i have only two points: obaidullah's attending ram-katha and his ram-bhakti and that mufti nizamuddin gave him a clean chit.
my world does not revolve* around contemporary personalities. if i see something which is wrong in my opinion, i make it known assuming that it is a responsibility to do so. wa billahi't tawfiq.
ok then, i am as a moderator asking you: what do you know about it? why have you been hiding this all along? is it not playing hide and seek? if you thought that noori was saying that you were counting to 100 in a corner, you are sorely mistaken.
'expect you to explain': YES. because it is YOU who is making hte commotion that ta'rif karna and i'yzaz have a huge difference. so we are asking you how.
look, look. who speaks.
which rule book?
as if you are prompt and as if i am demanding you to answer or else i will send a death squad to your door. what rubbish. learn to talk like an adult.
not my business and i am not interested. i am not interested in pir/madrasah politics. i am a muslim - a proud muslim. i see that a politician who claims to be a muslim and apparently is a faarigh from madrasah, as a muslim praises hindu gods; my ghayrah is perturbed. when a mufti gives him a clean chit, i am offended as a muslim. and i will protest.
if you do not have ghayrat e islami, it is not my problem.
go ahead. it is free and you have been using plenty of credits. accusation is free.
and by the way, where did i accuse you of hiding someone? just asking because, i don't remember accusing you of 'hiding someone'. please correct me.
you are mad.
trust me, i won't lose sleep over your readiness or your opinion. don't think too much about yourself.
did i tell you that i am informing you? i only stated my case. why is this becoming a you vs. me debate?
why do you accuse us of knowing this?
don't be an idiot. who is avoiding who? which is the fabricated fatwa? is the fatwa by mufti nizamuddin, a fabricated fatwa? or if you are referring to the fatwa #1 which is apparently tampered or altered - i am telling you one last time. i don't care.
You fool of a took! I meant the one signed by Muftis of Bareilly and [those of] [edited by noori: no personal attack] of Mubarakpur.
Of course not at all! But you do have right to accuse others.
I am not interested to know how you know or what you make from whose posts. I said what you wrote.
I have asked again and again, who forged the fatwa? I said, the moment it will be discussed here, I will start the discussion. I raised the question first, which needs to be answered first. Why are people shying away?
You must have misread or misunderstood .
I will wait until you, or any other moderator or the forum owner brings the fatwa story here. Once you do that we will discuss the fatwa.
In case you have not read my questions in the previous posts, I will mention again. ( This is valid for inquisitive as well)
1. When was the first fatwa signed ?
2. Who noticed the wrong reference to fatwa ridawiya in the fatwa first?
3. Who made changes in the original fatwa?
4. When Tajusshariah signed the fatwa ( after correction, as per inquisitive ) , what was the time gap from the issuance of first fatwa to Tajusshariah's signing the fatwa?
These are very simple questions. More so, because Inquisitive said
Notice 'either' of the fatwas, as if they signed two times. Anyways, brother Inquisitive, please contact your trusted brothers and get us the answer. Once you do that I am here , in this thread, discussing everything which Unbeknown wants.
Now,Unbeknown does not need proof from this forum where sunni scholars have been called non-sunni. So I will not mention that again.
Inquisitive, please help us. Just get me the answers to those simple questions and we begin. Please keep in mind that Obaidullah Khan had access to the original fatwa. He read it so carefully that he was able to pin point the wrong reference towards fatwa ridawiya in his istifta. FYI, the seminar at Nagpur finished on 24th Feb 2015. The first fatwa bears the date 25 Feb 2015. Please tell these things to your friends and ask them when did Tajusshariah sign the fatwa.
Simple. You answer these questions and in sha Allah, we begin issues raised by abul Hasan and Unbeknown. Your answer will help all of us. I have noted that you do not consider any difference between those words and abul Hasan will let me know his answer, soon. In sha Allah.
this is the first impression I had when I read obaid's istifta - that by adding the rest of the part he had only dug his grave deeper.
Allamah sahib has explained clearly that 'tahseen' is 'ta'reef' and thus BOTH VERSIONS of azhari miyan's fatwa ARE CORRECT - and based on direct references from Al ATAYA AN-NABAWIYYAH FIL FATAWA AR-RIDAWIYYAH!
sunnistudent, your burden lessened. no need for your 'real' story. keep it to yourself.
I am off to bed. good night.
Following on from this, have also confirmed via Mawlana Ashiq Saheb that Huzur Taajush Shari'ah has indeed signed this.
then its not incumbent upon me to chase wild horses when I don't want to ride them.
that inquisitive lives in the uk, I surmised from some of his posts. I don't know for sure.
oh yes I will! I have been wanting to do this since that other thread. But not before you break that suspense.
you promised to break the silence at night, I am in India, it's night time now, and I have been waiting all day.
you said you knew the 'real' story:
I have nothing more to say to you until you begin explaining the differences between ta'reef/ta'zeem/tahseen.