mufti nizamuddin's Fatwa on Obaidullah Azmi

@inquisitive we should be polite to all unless there are sufficient grounds to do otherwise. The brother is well-meaning and he is right that we should avoid washing our laundry in public as much as possible. That's not to say that serious issues should be brushed under the rug but we should also take care not to go over board. I wont say much as someone or the other might get offended.

Do note that he called it a 'fitna' and that's not a small thing to say. The information he provided has helped us put things into perspective and we should be grateful to him.

This is just a friendly advice and I am not trying to boss you around.

wassalaam.

 

Errrrrm, maybe cause this was all discussed on the occasion of the urs of hafiz e millat and inevitably, the speech will spread.

Obaidullah has committed kufr and some muftis have deemed it to be not-kufr. its been a month and the scholars in India are still not making advancements to try and resolve the matter.

We don't live in a perfect world where everything goes according to how it should. It has spread outside of India and it was bound to considering Jamiatul Ashrafia is the biggest madrasa in India.

if you were so concerned about it not spreading outside of India then why did you post the message informing us who is which 'side' and other top secret information.

 

What I don't quite understand is, how come is this even being debated over outside of India?

The fitna of here should not have spread across. Only bad things will result of this. If the Deoband came to know about this it will be another set back for the Ahlus Sunnah.

It would be better to remove this topic and let the Ulama here in India sort it out without spreading across. The initial stance is that which imam Ahlus Sunnah has elucidated in fatawa ridawiyyah v14 625. Which is shared by mufti Nizamuddin in his Tabiyyat Iftaa.

Allah Ta'ala knows best.

 

you missed my point. as moderators, you guys are the qudaat and ameers of the forum, whether your like it or not or realize it or not.

it's one thing to take one side in a disagreement (obviously, since this is an internet forum and our tools of the trade here are words, opinions and discussions).

it's something else to start a personal scuffle* or take any side in it, regardless if it is over tahir or obaidullah or something as insignificant as a key-chain. a qadi or an ameer or a khalifatullahi fil internet simply can't enjoy that liberty.

despite your humility that you (moderators) are just like the other posters, if a moderator participates in a personal scuffle, it is seen as bullying. hence my comment to unbeknown previously, and when he clarified his powers, i did concede that it was a level playing field between me and him; and now my comment to Noori.

* i do want to reiterate that even the personal scuffles (at least from my side) or only in the moment in the concerned thread. i really don't have any serious issues with any Sunni brothers. that's why i reply to and like unbeknown's posts as and when i see them, despite our heated arguments on certain issues.

underlined "my point" to reiterate that that's how i see things. i may be wrong. Allahu a3lam.

 

to AQ: i can see your point, but the reason why you find yourself in this position is because of your history. you refused to tone down and were itching to go after what is known as the 'bareilly' camp. you may not see it like that - but almost everyone else on this forum sees it so (we can take a poll if you wish).

----
if your conscience is clear, i suggest you leave the issue there and take the jibes as a part of the bargain; when you criticise you spare no quarter, and you spare no one. so it is natural when it is your turn, people will hold you to your own demands. besides, you resort to ad hominem when your case is weak. invoking the point that noori is a moderator, or that unbeknown is a moderator - will serve you no good. that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the argument.

----
as i see it, those who criticised AQ are piqued at his enthusiasm when criticising the 'bareilly' ulama; though doesn't show the same fervour when talking of the ashrafiyah ulama. his colourful language and blunt kick-sand-in-the-face comments are missing when he talks of the mistakes of ashrafiyah camp. undertone of AQ's critics: "is there more than meets the eye?"

AQ is piqued that he has already accepted and many times over said that the ashrafiyah fatwa is wrong, so he cannot see what the ballyhoo is all about. undertone of AQ's protestation: "guys, are you stupid? looks like your reasoning is worse than pithecanthropus, you başıbozuks. am telling you i disagree with the ashrafiyah fatwa.."

----
perhaps this is the problem with sunnis today. this microcosm of our forum is perhaps an example: instead of arching-over to try and understand the other person's viewpoint, we will arch-over to try and misunderstand and find fault and prove that he is a hypocrite...so long as he does not belong to my shaykh's circle.

-----

so if others don't say it, it means noori is preventing you from saying it? where is your logic AQ? all he said was that YOU are saying so, and HE prefers not to say it.

as i said above, if you hadn't bee that outspoken and demanding in recent months, nobody would have bothered about it. you must take it in your stride - because that is the image you were comfortable with: uncompromising, blunt, outspoken.

let us say, everyone withdraws, and we leave things as they are. in the future, you ought to be quite careful of not lambasting any muftis (from bareilly or outside) because, you have indicated that you will keep quiet about a respectable mufti assuming that he has an explanation. those who are arguing are only asking: 'where is this husn-zann and i-will-remain-quiet-until-the-fog-clears demeanour when you were defending shaykh yasin's book.'

one last thing: the best response in such situation is to withdraw; so long as your conscience is clear, why should you worry about giving clarifications? and calling others as kids, and taunting them for being incompetent moderators is not the way of sincere or just folk. is it that important to prove that AQ is upright and forthcoming? will you lose your sleep, if you KNOW for sure, that a few people think you are a hypocrite?

Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

great answer by the late usayd sahib.

----
usayd sahib was right on the track but the idiot questioner was stuck in his stupid question.

the questions are:

- WHY should you do naman?
- and if it is necessary, then is it a crime NOT to do naman?
- which indian law says that it is necessary to do naman?
- what if you don't do naman? (which the late usayd sahib rightly asked)
- you can say anything, but is india a hindu nation? if not, which is NOT, (because it is secular), then why should we follow the hindu way of naman whatever?
- let us say for example, spitting on the earth is the form of respect some group thinks - why should they not force you to keep spitting as a form of respect?
- none of you should defecate on this "dharti" - consequently, anyone who defecates on open land (which is common in indian villages) should be deemed a traitor and hanged. if you think that feces is your prasad to your dharti-ma, that is another story.

idiots.

 

brother, you're a moderator so please be fair (i'm not talking about any issues, just the posting itself)

what on earth do you mean by you didn't do it with me? show me where i have used bad language for or against the first or the second or the third fatwa!

rather i think this applies to you 'coz i don't know what you're holding against me.

tell me what exactly do you want me to do after stating my position in unequivocal language?

can you please elaborate where exactly on this issue i have taken an ego trip? i have been candidly saying my stances right from the beginning.

it seems the only person who isn't allowed to say that there are politics among the ulama is me.

and if i initially took sukoot on Nizamuddin's fatwa, i'm taking a side.

subhan Allah. i've been trying my best not to be argumentative and avoid it, you drag me into it and then act as if i am arguing and wasting YOUR time, when in fact the opposite is the case.

i would wholeheartedly appreciate and welcome your not engaging with me any further on this issue.

and on any issue of moderation, i kindly request you to please read & understand people's posts properly before taking issues with them in a not-a-bad-mouth way!

was'salam

 

SubhanAllah, I have been deleting/editing/warning the supporters of the first fatwa for bad language, and I didn't do it with you only to avoid this blame. I think you can't get out of your ego and look at things objectively. I have clearly mentioned that I have venerated mufti nizamuddin sahab for his knowledge. I am not sure, but you may only be busy on the forum fighting with your supposed groupies, but I have been prying in my prayers for ashrafyah ulama.

I don't have any firsthand information on inter-ulama politics, which I know does exist, therefore I have/take no interest in it. Go and check Molana Usaid's thread, I went against brother Aqib, and didn't accept that his book 'Hadith e iftiraq' had anything for sulah kulliyat. Yes, I didn't comment on hazrat taj'ush sharia'h's opinion about the book, because I am not a bad mouth like you, and I would like to assume my self mistaken than such an scholar.

There was a valid question raised that why a fatwa after 10 or more years on Uka, but new information makes this question void, therefore it is just an assumption that the fatwa is because of inter-ulama politics, specially if you realize what great fitnah the second fatwa can cause among masses.

Since you have re-iterated that you wholeheartedly accept ruling upon USA, and that the politics among ulama is a seceondary issue, therefore I think that all other posts by you are useless, and wsate of time, there I won't engage with you any further on this issue.

 

just to shut you up, kid - despite my feisty "one strike and you're out" remark, i tend to look for more than a single gaffe or two by people before i run my mouth on them. i even refrained from keller for a good long while, i think 1-2 years maybe, even after his IKT. i dunno what you know of Nizamuddin as a sulah kulli or a congress agent or a bjp agent or something or if you know more about his track record and he has routinely been 'pulling a tahir'. in my case, afaik, he has a great past record and credibility as a mufti, so i call this a blunder. you don't believe me but if it was Mawlana Akhtar Raza or Zia ul Mustafa sab too in his place, i would have called it a blunder. if i do see a trend of compromise on deen, i assure you, i will say the same things about him (or anyone else). i have no reason to like or dislike this or that side other than deeni issues.

you can have a last word if you insist on arguing. but i'm not gonna say any more on this topic (unless there's some really spicey new developments in india).

 

what is the Sunni ulema's ruling on singing "vande matram"? (i might have asked this question before on the forum but forget now)

 

http://twocircles.net/2009nov09/drama_deoband.html

if politicians are not kept away then this is the way ahsrafiya might end up.

Hafidh-e-Millat's life long hard work will erupt in flames of a political blaze.

wa Allah-ul-Musta'an.

 

many thanks for the info.

just the thing I was saying for so long CLEAR AS DAYLIGHT.

It's not SOMEONE vs Ashrafiya.

its some supporters of uka vs EVERYONE ELSE.

jazakAllahu khayran brother.

 

Obaidullah is a kafir. we dont need Mawlana Shams to explain why he is not.

 

if it was anyone else apart from Mufti Nizam, it wouldn't only be a blunder but he would be a murtad, zindiq, western agent etc etc

 

Noori sab, rather it is you who is tarnishing his image as a moderator. i suggest you read properly and then offer your invaluable comments! i don't have a problem with insults as such, but i do have issues with false allegations.

let me alert you to what happened:

post #295 - i state unequivocally that i believe obaid is a murtad and the fatwa by Nizamuddin sahab on him is a blunder, as it is a blunder on the part of all the attesting shuyukh, and that my previous posts should be discarded (which were because i was genuinely in a limbo regarding the interpretation of obaid's words/actions as indictment of hindus).

post #299 - inquisitive tries to provoke me by saying i ran away only because i didn't sing a qaseeda in praise of the mufti issuing a rebuttal of the Nizamuddin fatwa

post #300 - i tell him that i'm not running away from anything. there's nothing to comment on the fiqh aspect of it, as i have already said the same thing (just so you don't miss it, i will say again, obaid is murtad in my opinion, Nizamuddin blundered in his fatwa.) - i just added that the politics between the esteemed shuyukh is clearly visible to me at least and i'd rather not comment on it, and that it's a secondary issue!

post #301 - inquisitive again looks for an argument.

post #302 - i tell the kid off.

post #303 - you quote me regarding the same "politics" (earlier post in the thread) that i now say i'd rather not comment on; and offer your gems of wisdom that i'm running on groupie emotions, and that i haven't "wholeheartedly" accepted the comments of a shaykh i trust myself, and that i'm trying to divert the thread, all when i'm trying to not respond to inquisitive's deliberately argumentative posts! it seems like inquisitive, you too are looking for some argumentation just for the sake of it!

what you should have done as an older brother and moderator, was to tell inquisitive not to argue just for the sake of it but rather post something constructive

subhan Allah. when i call it a blunder and say they must be informed and told to do ruju3 (#295) and that obaid is murtad based on the opinion i accept from a shaykh i trust - i am a groupie thread diverter!

i don't know what you're trying to allege! why on earth should i give excuses for a fatwa i agree with wholeheartedly? (a stand alone fragment of a speech praising ram being labeled as kufr, if that's what you're referring to by the first fatwa)

i don't need to prove my bipartisanship to you mr. Noori, but since this is a discussion forum and we're both adults - my "excuses" for Nizamuddin's fatwa were a genuine confusion on if obaid's stated context can be construed as an indictment of hindus according to their own precepts or if at all his excuse of trying to promote civil order could be deemed acceptable or not. when that confusion was removed, i honestly stated what the shaykh informed me, and statted my stance clearly and unequivocally.

furthermore, my comments at the "politics" and "game of chess" are aimed at both sides, not just one. hope that abundantly clarifies it to you.

and i don't know what point of chisti-raza you're referring to. that playground fight thing you quoted was aimed at inquisitive!

 

Salaam just for the information, there are two groups right now on Ashrafia.

Mufti Miraaj, Mufti Nazim Ali, Mufti Shamsul Huda, Mufti Jalaluddin are amongst those who stand against the fatwa in its current form of mufti Nizamuddin. Other Ulama don't have the courage to speak out.

The Sheikhul Hadith Abdus Shakur regrets that he signed.

The fatwa of Takfir upon the one who praises Raam of mufti Nizamuddin (markaz tabiyyat Ifta v2) was torn off the wall. Someone made posters and put it on the walls. There is even one student who was excluded from the exams for speaking out against the fatwa which he deemed corrupt.

There is Igtilaaf upon the Takfir of Uka, but the Ulama are unanimous that his words are kufriyyah and should be condemned. Unlike the mufti Nizamuddin party.

An advise to all is to refrain from doing Takfir there are a lot of aspects which are unknown for the Awaam, instead try to consult with a Mutakallim such as mufti Shamsul Huda Sahib. He can elucidate very clearly why and when Takfir is possible.

The biggest problem right now is that the Awaam is taught that the praising of Raam is jaiz if there is a bogus maslihat. This will reproduce Ulama such as tahir ul qadri. A disease for the Ummah.

From India Mubrakpur Ashrafia.

 

I think we should let AQ and his pet theories of 'starry-eyed murids' following 'chess-playing-pirs' alone.

we know the correct ruling so lets not give this matter further attention unless something noteworthy comes up. let the parties sort it out among themselves.

why not bury this hatchet for now?

 

no dear, chisti-raza has raised a valid point, you haven't given any excuse for the signatories of the first fatwa, while for the 2nd you have thrown around all sorts of excuses. it only proves that you have been playing groupie here instead of looking at the matter objectively.

 

dear brother it is mainly you who is only tarnishing his own image because of this groupie emotions. it seems that you haven't accepted the ruling upon uka wholeheartedly, and neither the response from that arab jilani sayed hafizahullahu ta'ala. if you ignore everything and only read sidi Abu hasan's posts then you will not have to beat your brain out. it is you who is not seeing the issue objectively, and (un)intentionally trying to divert the thread into another direction. it is you brother who is trying to portray it as ashrafyah/baraily politics issue. how do you define 'objectively'?

i was not following this thread after post # 259 on page 3, now is see there are many posts and you are still acting like you are not the same AQ who has been posting against heretics so harshly that even some of our sunni brothers had to complain.

i believe nobody in this thread who is responding to you would be happy with this situation. we all would love that asharfyah ulama realize their gross mistake, do ru'ju, and you will see us giving them due respect they deserve. let us all pray for the situation to become better for sunnies. kindly leave politics-among-ulama-issue aside and think/talk about the fatwa objectively (yes, i am sarcastic).