mufti nizamuddin's Fatwa on Obaidullah Azmi

Discussion in 'Hanafi Fiqh' started by Unbeknown, Feb 13, 2016.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Arshad ul Qadri

    Arshad ul Qadri New Member

    Yes indeed a retraction comes after an announced verdict/attestion not sooner, what you show is the attestion and what was retracted (after). And a retraction can be verbally, it is not contrary or against the Shariah to base this upon Ulama who work with Sheikhul Hadith and talked and discussed with him, sit next to him, this is your Nizamuddin/Ubaid way of working to state or indirectly claim it is, or to claim it is a slander.

    The unimportant/distracting case your "telephonecall message" accepted (unknown who actually called, if called, when, what actually said and how interpreted (famous team nizamuddin taweelaat) etc etc) or my hearing personally from two of Ashrafia who can be informed anytime.

    Admin is there any way I can block SS from my view (he falsely accuses me and then claims that the "Shariah" orders me to do something based on an untraceable telephone call?!) Furthermore it helps Sjayateen to distract from the effort to protect the Deen of the lie of team Nizamuddin upon the Shariah who did Tahseen of Ram and taught Mushrik how Pawitr the one they worshid actually is.
  2. sunnistudent

    sunnistudent Veteran

    Let us see what is the sharia ruling in this case.

    Allama Abdus Shakoor sahab has attested the fatwa issued by Mufti Nizamuddin Rizvi sahab. This fatwa is available freely on internet as well as has been published.

    Now, if you say that Allama Abdus shakoor sahab has retracted from this fatwa, please bring your evidence. The responsibility of bringing the evidence is upon you because Allama Abuds shakoor sahab's attestation has been published.

    You ask me to "ask" Mufti Miraj and Mufti Shamsul Huda... but you don't accept when I said that Allama Abdus shakoor sahab was spoken directly on phone. Why should I ask them, when the person concerned was spoken to directly?

    So let us leave contacting third person. You bring your evidence I will accept. Hope that should not be difficult. You bring evidence either from Allama Abdus shakoor sahab or Mufti Miraj or Mufti Shamsul Huda. In all the cases, the responsibility is upon you. Once his retraction is proven, I will make sure that it is published. If you can't prove it, make a public apology for accusing a scholar.

    Or one last resort, just ignore my posts. But in future do not make a claim unless you can bring an evidence. You are not the only one on this forum who makes claim but when asked to prove goes angry.And you will not be the last. Stay here and you will find many people like you.

    Please find the page showing Allama Abdus shakoor sahab's attestation.

  3. Arshad ul Qadri

    Arshad ul Qadri New Member

    For your guidance do ask --- and ---- themselves they sit in the same ---- next to ----.
    Thank you for your accusation.

    "He was spoken to directly on phone." Yes a phone trustworthy coming that from you...Rather ask the the two co workers of ---- which can retraced. Asked them also how they harass Ulama to sign and how they pressurize them. Then you will understand in what kind of situation ----- is in.

    I Urge everyone not to give any attention to the distraction, but read the Radd of Mufti Akhtar Raza which I shared post #403. It shows clearly how manipulative and deceptive Nizamuddin works with Shariah and Fatawa. Glorifiying the Qawl and deed of Ubaidullaah and attributing it towards the Shariah. It is a real shame lovers of Ubaid try to hide this and distract people from the real harm towards Islam, and the respect for the Deen. Wish they would have the same heart for Islam than for Nizamuddin and Ubaid.

    When Zaid says, it is this without any hesitation Kufr without any Ihtimaal (when in reality it has Ihtimaal), and when Ubaid says, it is glorified and every option will be looked upon (even if the Qarain are there and many reasons to qubh are there).

    Ram is Pawitr, and Nirala and teaching this to Kuffar in a Majlis where he is considered a god is a good deed? In this way even Laat and Uzza can be called holy and enlighting in front of Abu Jahl, on the fiction it was a historian figure who saved his girlfriend and had 100.000 girlfriends. Iblis in front of Dajjal and Masons in their monthly sessions on the fact of his past deeds.

    But that is not important, what is important is if ---- actually did retract. If I knew there even would be such idiots I would never even posted such an unimportant fact. To then what really is important is to protect precious Ubaid and Nizamuddin rather than the Deen and attributing it as a good deed in the court of Allah Al Mighty.

    Admin is there any way I can block SS from my view (he falsely accuses me and then claims that the "Shariah" orders me to do something based on a telephone call?!) Wish team nizamuddin would pressurize Ubaid and show effort to demonize his deed and Qawl. But it seems Ubaid and Ram-praising is very dear to them.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 21, 2016
  4. sunnistudent

    sunnistudent Veteran

    Again" we"? Do you feel insecure speaking for yourself?

    Deception 1: You have not proved correctness of Nagpuri fatwa.

    Deception 2: The point is about being" Kafir" and not about ram katha gathering. Any one can read this thread and see. But you chose to ignore the main issue, because you cannot prove it.

    Deception 3: Arshad al qadri makes a claim and is unable to bring evidence to support his claim. This is in case you consider him in your " we".

    I don't threaten. I make valid points. An example can be seen here:

    If you have understood something from that scan posted by Arshad al qadri, please explain here in support of your argument. Or else, if you are happy just because Mufti Akhtar Raza wrote it, then I can't do anything.

    Yes, you do.
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2016
  5. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    yes. we are not allowed to point out your deceptions. sorry.

    threats and more threats. like the "whole story" and the difference between "tahseen" and "tareef" and a 100 others.

    I am done with your "exposes". Start as many threads as you like. I'll make sure I bypass them.
    Noori likes this.
  6. sunnistudent

    sunnistudent Veteran

    Two books were released at urs e ridawi trying to refute fatwa of Mawlana Abdul haq Khan, Mufti nizamuddin rizvi and Mufti Mutiurrehman. First by Mufti Shamsahd badayuni and second by Baharaichi baba.

    Both the books have been refuted.

    I don't like playing link-link. If any one is capable and feels confident that those two books have refuted the fatwa of the above mentioned three scholars, then please feel free to present those points here on the forum. Otherwise posting scans and links without explaining, will not be of any use.

    See how you are trying to deviate from the topic. The issue was the fatwa from Nagpur, which said that the person has gone outside the fold of islam and is kafir. You have failed to prove its correctness as per maslak e ala hazrat.

    But this is not something new from you. Just wait, when I will start a thread regarding Mufti Ghulam Mohammad Khan Qadri rh, regarding whom Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan has declared that "kufr returned on him", 13 years after his death!! When Mufti Kausar Hasan refuted Mufti Akhtar Raza, Mufti Kausar Hasan rizvi is now being called " Molvi Kausar Hasan"! Just wait .

    Meanwhile,if any one thinks that the Nagpuri fatwa is correct, let him present his points in simple English. I will reply. I am not responding to links .

    Arshad al qadri sahab: It is your shari'i responsibility to bring evidence.
  7. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    jazakAllahu khayran brother. May Allah ta'ala reward you for your efforts.

    I really wished that someone would write a proper refutation to that deceptive "speech" and I am glad that hazrat did it himself. Some people were questioning whether hazrat had endorsed the Nagpur fatwa. His stance must now be clear to everyone.

    Reading those horrible words again and reading the numerous subterfuges that had been employed to mislead the listeners was very painful indeed. To think that a senior sunni mufti could stoop so low is mind boggling!

    My only fear now is what will those students who study under nizamuddin say to sunni muslim masses, especially the youth, once they graduate from Ashrafiya. Will they too tell in jumuah khutbas that, "gandhi and nehru did jihad", "ram did jihad", "the shariah does not allow muslims to question the existence of ram because his existence is proven by 'tawatur-e-hunood' which alahazrat has said is mu'tabar"?

    Will they, like sunnistudent, tell their congregations that ramkatha is a "function to unite hindus and muslims"? That it's a good thing to attend this gathering of kufr to spread the message of harmony? That opportunistic sadhus like morari are "manawta-wadi"?

    Maybe some pet students will go a step further and say, "stop fighting the hindus over babri masjid. 'Tawatur-e-Hunood' proves that it's 'ram-janm-bhoomi' and so muslims can't oppose them!"

    inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un
  8. sunnistudent

    sunnistudent Veteran

    He was spoken to directly on phone. He denied it.

    Now please bring your evidence to support your claim. Either you, your professor sahab or any Mufti whom you trust, ask him to bring an evidence. If you cannot do it, please retract and make an open apology.

    Let this forum not be a place where people make a claim and when asked to bring evidence they disappear.
  9. Arshad ul Qadri

    Arshad ul Qadri New Member

    Please feel free to ask them yourself. Ask ----- and -----, who sits next to ------ in the ----- and talked to him continuously about this matter. Even he testified this, and yes they also harass him continuously to sign the fatwa but rejected every time. ------- is an old man, very soft of heart he doesn't want a campaign against him like is done with the ones who signed the takfeer fatwa.

    I urge people not to go into zatiyyat or try to hide corruption. In islam we dont change or soften rules because he or she is a friend or a close one, like in the case of ubaid in which his kalam and deeds were praised into the heaven by nizamuddin and kufr was returned towards the Ulama?!. Please read the book of Huzur Taajush Shariah, it will elucidate this very thoroughly.

    Again I urge everyone to read the radd of Azhari Mian. DjazakAllah. Don't be distracted in a baseless debate if one did Ruju or not, Haqq stands upon its own, which is that even though one has igtilaf about the feel and kalam of ubaid, there is no question in its haram being and harm for islam and future generation. The fatwa which supports and does tahseen of Ubaids deed and qawl is a corrupt one and Iftiraa upon the sacred shariah and upon Allaah and His noble Prophet Peace and Blessings be upon him.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 21, 2016
    Unbeknown likes this.
  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i said this in post # 401 below.

    sunnistudent sent me a private message correcting that he has already mentioned it in another thread:
    and indeed he has. the error is regretted. my apologies to sunnistudent.
  11. sunnistudent

    sunnistudent Veteran

    Arshad ul Qadri sahab,wrote on 17th April 2015. ( post no 306)

    And today, on 13 Jan 2016, Arshad ul Qadri sahab writes: ( post 403)

    Verification was done earlier itself. No such thing found. Why did you not bother about verifying in April 2015,when you made that post?

    Arshad sahab, Sheikh al hadith Hazrath mawlana Abdus shakur sahab was spoken to directly and he denied showing any regret for signing the fatwa. His attestation is still valid , as is publicly available.

    Now, it is your shari'i responsibility to bring evidence for your claim which you mentioned on 17th April 2015. Or ask that "professor" to help you. In case you both can't do this, forum is open and active for you to retract.

    was salam.
  12. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    This post has been edited and the reasons duly stated.

    it's post #249.
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2015
  13. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    not at all, he is well aware. but for some reason, he decided not to mention this 'new development' in public, and kept flogging the "why did they alter the fatwa?" line.
  14. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    apparently, the great 'guys who atleast substantiate their allegations' are not aware of this bit of the sequel either.
  15. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    sorry for re-opening the pandora's box yet again but I think this is important.

    I have "heard" that ubaidullah was asked to do tawba after he was done with his urs hafidh-e-millat "speech". Can anyone confirm this? Plus I would like to know what he was asked to do tawba for? what were the words he was directed to employ? an audio proof would be best.

    I also wonder why he was asked to do tawba? Note that the justifications for the first 'sahih' fatwa came out in the form of an audio lecture by mufti nizam, articles by ansari (B.A) and a fatwa by mufti mutíurraHman' AFTER the alleged tawba at the 'urs. All of these people are unanimous that ubaidullah is a die-hard champion of Islam and was fearlessly defending it's 'concepts' in a gathering of hindus.

    SO the question is was he asked to repent for 'defending Islam'? And why have the esteemed writers failed to take note of the tawba in the articles/fatwas they subsequently published? Why did mufti mutíurraHman not inform us of this development?
  16. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    your understanding is incredible. mantiq (not mantaq) is logic, 'fan e mantiq ki zabaan mein' would mean 'according to the science of logic'. you even don't know this and you are going to prove how sidi abu Hasan is wrong, subhanAllah.
  17. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    just in case, someone misunderstands this to mean fork threads: justifications arguments which are side-issues and not the main topic of this thread.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i have split this thread to prevent the discussion from getting washed away in a deluge of who said to whom; as sunnistudent is analysing my posts, i have moved it here:

    also abdalqadir and others, please understand - if you have to make justifications, arguments whatever, please start a new thread, reference this main one and proceed in that separate thread. i hope you understand.
  19. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    with due respect to the forum owners and abu Hasan, i also use Sunniport as a parking lot (in addition to a Sunni hangout, and a place for exchange of religious ideas). sorry brothers, not saying it in a degrading way.

    there are bunches of videos i need to watch, audios i need to listen or pdf's i need to read (be it linked by me or linked by others). many a time i post links of stuff only to come back to it later (sometimes running into months or even years and the thread/discussion has died a natural death by then), if it is an issue that needs analysis, exertion, and serious thought, as opposed to general comments on news etc.

    not saying this to diplomatically walk a tight rope away from the feud between the scholars' camps or to avoid being flamed with grilling questions. i have only quickly read/listened thru the content i have myself posted/linked in posts #362, 363, 364, and 375 without giving it any serious thought or contemplation at all. been too busy away from the forum/internet.

    indeed, for all of us to properly understand the issue, i said in post #360

    what about praising contemporary hindu idols in front of those who worship them - like the dead and rotten mukhannath "sathya sai baba"?

    let us try to see this in the case of this sai baba guy ---

    some hindus worship this sai baba guy who died in the recent past.

    so if obaidullah were to address a gathering of those hindus and say sai baba (according to his bhakts) stood for honesty , compassion to poor, blah blah blah, would it still be ruled kufr by those who rule it kufr for obaidullah to praise ram for his universal good qualities listed out in hindu books? if yes, they're being consistent in their approach regardless of right or wrong in the answer. if no, then they're being inconsistent and need to state what makes ram different from sathya sai baba.

    heck replace ram with rajnikant, a film actor whom some hindus in the south have made a temple for and placed his idol in it (afaik). so if obaidullah addressed those particular bhakts of rajnikant and said he's a great actor, he does great fight sequences, he's honest, gives charity blah blah blah, would it be ruled kufr or not????


    as for the 'jihad is only self defense' mantra - that's a blatant bid3ah of misguidance. period. anyone who peddles that line (in any sequence of words) needs to read some basic Muslim theology, fiqh, seerah and history.


    i think tahir is the perfect litmus test as far as decent Sunni awam is concerned, for we all know him for the fitnah he is.

    i think both these camps need to organize a conference or munazara and say just what makes obaidullah different from tahir. what makes obaidullah right and a spokesperson for Islam/Sunniyat and what makes tahir wrong? (of course the against camp will say what makes him just like tahir and give their evidence for that)

    some muftis might not rule against tahir for lack of trust-able eyewitness testimonies and might consider this a vain exercise. we respect the constraints of our mazhab that that can indeed be the case for they might not have credible testimonies from people who witnessed in person tahir committing blasphemies. newspaper clippings, youtube videos etc. might not count as hujjah or evidence in serious ifta and qada (as opposed to us awam on forums). we can get by that and present to them a bio of tahir and his antics, but with a generic zaid or bakr name.

    present this character to them and ask them what makes this character wrong and obaidullah right (also present to them a bio of obaidullah and his purported crimes.)

    what are the differences between obaid and tahir (or a tahir-like character)?

    as far as we awam are concerned, that will explain the issue to us much more clearly rather than scholars on both camp presenting fiqh quotes to and fro.


    i think the scholars on both sides should organize a munazara and sort this issue out.

    most importantly, as far as the awam is concerned, it's not about the personality of obaidullah per se. we as indian Muslims HAVE TO be involved in the political process and discourses with kuffar as far as our times and circumstances are concerned, so the awam needs a benchmark and a set of guidelines on what goes and what doesn't. (those general istifta questions i had in mind are still pending in my list of things to do)

    i think the scholars on both sides need to be problem solvers for the awam.

    i'll PM you on some other things i don't wish to say publicly.


    for you.

    for me, maulvi sahab is fine for him (regardless of obaid issue). each to their own.
  20. Abu Hamza

    Abu Hamza Well-Known Member

    No, we 'both' dont know what the reality is, it is used in a negative tone at times but not always, check how many times it is used in a respectful manner in fatawa ridiwiyyah, AQ doesnt have to be from amongst the Ulema but he is obliged to adhere to their way, stop cherry picking, big Ulema have been referred to by their names many a time on this forum without the inclusion of the words "Allama" or "Shaykh" yet no malice or disrespect was intended. In any case, there's no consistency on this forum so theres no point in getting all worked up.

    And let me assure you, I do not need you to entertain me, i'm actually quite amused that you thought you were.

    Allah knows best.

Share This Page