Some questions regarding kufr and takfir

My apologies. I know I promised to not comment anymore on this thread but this was important that is why i am commenting.

May Allah forgive me. I was wrong. May Allah forgive me for talking without knowledge about a senior mufti sahab. He was talking about believing in a jism unlike the creation. The brothers can provide guidance as to whether this is correct though or not in sha Allah.

 

salam
When it is said that you don't make any taweel in the case of "sarahat", what does "sarahat" mean?
So for example,
Zayd was teaching people evolution and said "people say that oh evolution is just a theory but it isn't just a theory," in his heart he made an intention of evolution in animals, which I have heard is not kufr to believe in) but said the above statement to not sound "different".
or
Like what Hamza yusuf the prime minister of scotland said when asked do you believe homosexuality is a sin, he said "no. if I can just be crystal clear on that." but then later on goes on to say,"I can't change what's in certian faiths. I can't change what's in scripture. But what I will tell you the approach that I will take which is that I won't let personal faith to be the basis of legislation."
regarding the second statement, hamza yusuf (on america, hanson) said: "in our religion it is very clear that homosexuality is a sin. But the debate is with regards to those outside the faith. Is it a sin for them. We don't know what he intended" so we shouldn't jump to takfir.

Or Zayd was asked do you believe in Allah, and he said "Where is Allah"?

What I mean is that does sarahat mean that one is unequivocally and deliberately giving the impression of a kufr belief and denying the daruriat e deen even thought the statement might mean more things but it is clear the impression he is trying to give and on this basis hukm of kufr will apply to them all and it is necessary to consider them all murtad. Is this correct?

 

Is this something that can be discussed here on the forum or is it a discussion which is too sophisticated for the general public?

 

جزاك اللّٰه خيراً Sidi @abu Hasan. I think I had some unrelated misconception regarding jumhur hence my bullheadedness. I'm sorry.

 

bhai meray. read the posts. neither. it is a minority opinion among sunnis.

 

you have mentioned karam shah's tafsir. no wonder it is so bloated. he has written two pages that are nowhere related to tafsir. i checked 30 tafsir of ulama (latest being ibn ashur, alusi and sadrul afadil) before posting this, and none of them go into a monologue like this.

it is just that karam shah sahib was showing off his literary skills - ability to string words to form a flowery passage that appears profound, but adds zilch in value to your knowledge. even though he came up with some imaginary objection (nothing to do with the aayat at hand) in the end and came up with some answer - practically it is a waste of two pages.

----
"they ask you about the crescents."

this was revealed when two ansari sahabah, muadh ibn jabal and tha'alabah ibn anamah asked RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam: 'why does the moon start as a thread and then waxes and becomes round and then wanes and disappears unlike the sun" and Allah ta'ala revealed that it is to keep count of months, and they can keep count of their fasts, and the waiting period for their women (divorcees and widows) and other such matters that require counting the month - such as the month of dhi'l hijjah for hajj.
(summarised)

in another narration: why was the moon created?

in another narration: the jews asked tell us why the moon waxes and wanes. and the two sahabah came to ask the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam.

===
then tafsir discuss the word hilal - why it is called hilal? why is the month called "shahr"
why is plural mentioned (ahillah, instead of hilal) and such things.

----
but karam shah's tafsir of that particular snippet is nowhere related. check it out:

 

Also the same as my general understanding despite admittedly not having read a lot of Bahar e Shariat. I meant to ask about the specific case of minority opinion regarding Sayyidah Maryam [& the three other pious women (ra)]. Is it "misguidance"/"gumrahi"?

 

I promise in sha Allah that this is the last question I will ask on this thread. By "yes" I am assuming you mean that yes it kufr luzumi and not iltizami unless one says that the sifat of Allah is makhluq. But in zia al aqaid (by mufti qasim zia sahab), it says that to believe Allah's sifat to be makhluq is kufr luzumi. I can send the passage if you want but he also says it in the video lectures of his (I don't have the original but the videos are available). So can one avoid the takfir of an individual by acting on the qaul in zia al aqaid?
Promise this is the last question. Pakka Promise

 

it depends on the issue. there is no fixed rule.
it can be misguidance, bid'ah or kufr. for examples, you can read bahar e shariat carefully. hazrat uses gumrahi, bid'at or kufr as it warrants. i have tried to clarify by way of footnotes in my translation.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

we ask Allah ta'ala to forgive us for our errors.

 

This was exactly my understanding as well. Which is why I was confused. But so, is the label of "misguidance" appropriate, without going so far as bidah or kufr?

 

sorry for that. I will try to be more careful next time in sha Allah. Jazak Allah for your efforts

 

in all issues that are not related to aqidah. as for aqidah, mistakes can be deadly.

 

yes. unless one explicitly says that the sifat of Allah is makhluq. this is a lengthy discussion.

maybe he has evidence for the statement; regardless, it is kufr to believe that Allah ta'ala has 'limbs' jawariH.

--

ulama have said that the "wali walidayya" in the dua can refer to hazrat aadam alayhis salam. unless one intends to pray for murtad with certain knowledge that he/she is a murtad, it is not kufr.

---

i too do not consider him a muslim for a number of reasons - but some ulama withhold out of caution. refer to my earlier posts. thus sunni ulama who refute him, but withhold from takfir, are also exempt.

---

"zaleel kia" is an ugly description; and in a different age, it would incur a ruling of kufr. but since imran is not well versed in urdu and he doesn't understand the import of words, takfir can be avoided on THIS SPECIFIC issue, based on the context of the statement. though ulama have informed me that there are graver matters with imran. so i trust them. Allah knows best.

clarified.

--
we are reaching the end of this thread - you are coming up with numerous use-cases and the rule of thumb is stated already. if you have very specific queries, you must consult a senior mufti and get clarifications. and even after clarifications if you have doubts, i suggest you ask learned people. i am wary of discussing this in public because common people will be disturbed needlessly and these questions can serve as a springboard for further variations that can border on dangerous territory.

nas'alu Allah al-aafiyah.
na'udhu billah min shururi anfusina

 

Sidi @abu Hasan: And an ijtihadi mistake cannot be termed "misguidance" because the person who made the mistake will still get a reward for doing ijtihad, correct?

 

salam.
Jazak Allahu khaira hazrat abu hasan for all you efforts

Note: the following question is not regarding famous kufr sareeh such as tahrif ul qur'an, or finality of prophethood etc, but rather about statements of an individual.
Sorry again for so many cross questions. But a lot of the times, I have seen contradicting opinions from ulama regarding the takfir of someone. For example:
i) in dawat e islami farz uloom course, they said that the one who believes in khalq ul qur'an, according to us he is a kafir. Then I found out that this is kufr luzumi.
ii) From what I understood after reading the thread on tajsim is what to say that "Allah has a limbs but unlike the creation" is explicit kufr. But in zia al aqaid of mufti qasim zia sahab, it says it is kufr luzumi.
iii) I read that if one's parents died murtad then to read the dua which is normally read in salah is also kufr, but then Mufti akmal sahab said that with the intention of quoting, it is not kufr.
iv) Muzoor Muhaddis e kabeer said that tahir ul qadri is a kafir (I believe he also said that to doubt his kufr is kufr) but a mufti sahab (I will not name him but he is a senior mufti who is considered reliable by all scholars in england, he is from Pakistan but lives in england) takfir is not done of him, only tazleel. I asked him in urdu.
vi) Allama khr sahab said that imran khan's statement that "Allah ke habeeb (sallallahu alaihi wa alihi wasallam) the. Lekin kitni mukhkilat ka samna karna pada. Logon ne mazak kia, zaleel kia, ostracize kia" is sareeh toheen. I asked the mufti sahab above and he said "it is not kufr but one should be cautious of one's wording" (though I don't think he knew about Allama khadim hussain rizvi sahab's video on this matter or that the one who said it was Imran khan). I asked him in urdu and he replied in urdu
vii) And then recently, the issue of Hazrat maryam being a prophet.

I am very anticipated for your answer on this matter. Since after waiting for clarification from a Mufti sahab, we are not allowed to doubt it being kufr, but it has happened to me so much that some scholars have said something to be kufr sareeh (or at least given this impression) and later on I find that, No it is not kufr sareeh. So, even if one thinks they have certianty in a kufr said by an individual, internally (would they willing to bet their life on that being kufr due to these past instances) since what if in the near future, it turns out that it wasn't kufr and he has been calling someone a kafir wrongly. If one is not willing to bet their life on something being kufr (or be bravely willing to say that "May the curse of Allah be upon me if zayd is not a kafir") due to certianty and another person being a kafir due to a Mufti's fatwa, then how can he claim to have yaqeen.
As a way of summary, if one hears zayd say something wrong and a mufti sahab say that this is kufr sareeh. It could be possible that later on he hears about an opinion that this is not kufr. What should one do in this scenario since one is suppose to pay utter most caution whilst doing takfir?

 

it is minority opinion - actually one or two ulama - based on the jawaz. we cannot term it as bid'ah when it was said by ash'ari-maturidi ulama, especially prominent ulama. in this case, some ash'ari imams allowed it. and since this does not clash with any fundamental principle of aqidah, it is deemed a secondary or tertiary issue where an ijtihadi mistake is ignored.

of c, one may mention the aayah: "and we did not send (as messengers) except men (rijaal)" and that belief in a woman prophet is against this, and opposed to the qur'anic aayah. laazim aayega - it then follows that it is against the qur'an.

the answer is: in which case, there are aayats that say wahy, and istifa (in case of sayyidah mariyam) are mentioned - whcih could mean nubuwwat. thus those who deny nubuwwat for mariyam may also come under "contradicting the qur'an"

therefore, it is an ijtihadi mistake that can be ignored.

Allah ta'ala knows best.
---

in the umdatu'l murid snippet cited by the brother (in arabic) it is mentioned:

sayyidah mariyam, sayyidah aasiyah (wife of firawn), sayyidah sarah and sayyidah hajar (hajirah).

 

So it's neither bidah nor kufr, just misguidance? Or is it still bidah?

Btw who are the other 3 (or more) Sidi @abu Hasan or anyone else?

 

urdu books were free from this nonsense - but of late, even urdu books are filled with their hindu propaganda under the guise of teaching diversity.

 

unfortunately.
but also, if you do not pass the exams and get degrees - your chances of employment become even lesser in an already prejudiced country.
---
these are challenges of a modern world, we have to navigate. not that we love to say these things - rather we just mention them as said in their books or theories for the sake of exams and move on. in most cases, children do not even understand the import of the those answers - they just memorise them and write them.

 

Brother wouldn't that too fall under the ruling of "unnecessarily citing kufr", even if you mention 'according to scientists, vedas etc.' as ghulamTaha is asking?

Does citation of kufr always have to be for refutation only or only informing or teaching other Muslims? Indian schooling involves stories from their religion left, right and center.