If you look above, I have said I was surprised you have not read the epistle, not the enire 'Hawi'. If you had read the entire epistle many of the things we have discussed would not have been brought up. If you have studied with Ulama, can you name them for us please?? And which Ulama from both sides have you queried regarding this issue? Can you please name them for us? Did they not cover the issues that you are asking about on this forum?? If they did not, why don't you go to those Ulama, instead of asking on a forum that you obviously do not hold in any regard? It would be appreciated if these questions could be answered, as then we would know it is worth our time to give a comprehensive reply.
okay brother_786, here are few books for you; this two volume book deals with all the fancy interpretations of blasphemous statements of deobandis, sarfaraz safdar borrowed them from faislah kun munazrah, shiaab e thaqib and other books of nomani, anwbeethwi, chand puri and others. ibaraat-e-akabir ka tahqeeqi jaizah - 1 ibaraat-e-akabir ka tahqeeqi jaizah - 2 this book deals only with thdhir's kufiryah statements and covers all possible tawilaat that has been put forward by deobandis, so faislah-kun-munazrah is also covered khatm-e-nubuwwat or tahdhir an-naas munazrah baraily that took place between manzur numani the author of faislah and mawlana sardar ahmed rahimahullah. taqdees al-wakeel is here deobandi mazhab - at many places it answers the tawilaat of faislah-kun-munazrah also check maqalat-e-kazmi 1 & 2 and khutbaat-e-kazmi, they have some good articles dealing with tawilaat of deobandi kufriyaat and even a follow up to objections on his article on tahdhir. this reading would require quite some time, but don't worry i'll give you more inshaAllah. let us see how sincere you are.
everyone who is following this thread would have noticed by now who mr. brother_786 is, and what is his agenda, but still let us have a little glimpse through his posts, i have made my comments in the end to avoid confusion and show his true color (1) he will not tell you the names of sunni books he has read during his research (2) brother_786 won't list the names of those scholars from sunni ulama he has consulted. (3) where did this poor fellow come across those statements, in explanations by deobandis? (4) at times they go crazy, but they don't hide their true stance, they are not munafiqs who have hidden agenda who post only loads of loaded questions, besides we understand it hurts you as your language reveals your heartburn. (5) which demonstrates that you even don't consider them among innovators, they read their post, but you are trying to find excuses for their kufriyaat, which one is more dreadful sin? . once they are found not guilty, everything should be forgotten, they won't be called innovators, but rather will be referred to as giant scholars whom arabs ulama priase and teach their books. right, this is what you are seeking, aren't you? (6) enlighten us if you have done even superficial research by providing us names of few books of ahlussunah that you have read. (7) husam and swarim are LIKEWISE flawed in your eyes, but muhhannad and faislah-kun-munazrah are sufficient for you to hold back from takfir.this is paradoxical that you acknowledge the breadth of education and erudition of both sides, and you call husam and swarim flawed LIKEWISE, yet the conclusion is that muhannad and/or faislah kun munazrah have poven them not guilty. (8) unbiased researcher - seeking excuses to exonerate rather than understanding the issue. (9)hence proved that their blasphemous statements are not kufr, and those arab ulama agree with what they said, that is what you want to say? (10) old wounds are still bleeding, you may not be ibn-arabi or muzamil, but it's been burning in the heart since long. (11) don't forget he is an unbiased researcher, he want to prove that deobandi elders were not guilty, husam and swarim were flawed, arab ulama teach their books (12) poor unbiased researcher - thinks faislah kun munazrah has been irrefutable, actually he only has read hussam and faislah kun munazrah, if i am wrong name some other names of sunni books you have gone through, and those scholars you have consulted. (13) old wounds still bleeding, and of course patience has a limit. ooops! even i haven't provided the names of refutations to faislah; but you appear to be very accomodating, bear with us for a while, inshaAllah we'll get you some good stuff for your unbiased research. if you still feel that we have been unfair with you, and you really are an unbiased researcher than let us know if you are ready to read some books by ahlussunah before you indulge in debates and exonerate deobandi akabir, or blame hussam being greatly flawed? i pray that Allah subhanu wa'tala guide you to the true path, and drench your heart in the love of His beloved sallallahu alaihi wasallam, and save you from becoming a defender of slanderers. i am sure that since you are doing your research (if indeed you are) muftiyan e kiram will hold their pen form doing your takfir. but think for the sake of your own iman that if you dilly dally until your death then be sure that you will be asked about RasulAllah aliahi afDalus salaat wat-tasleem, and من شك في كفرأعدائه و شاتمه فقد كفر .
and which scholars have you spent time with? Can you please furnish that information before you think about your next post? So that we know your true colour behind the facade of "adab". What have you done to deserve adab?
How hypocritical. You claim "sincerity" for yourself but don't allow others to claim it for themselves? Do you know what lies in people's hearts? How hard was it for you to simply provide the info in this post beforehand? You claim you are "busy" but you have time to make posts personally attacking my knowledge and not providing any substance in addressing my questions. You have all the time in the world to correspond back-and-forth with mud-slinging, buhtan-mouthed, takfeer-laden, tabdee'-laden, tafseeq-laden commoners on this forum but you don't have the time to address pointed questions from a petitioner who repeatedly expressed himself to be an "outsider" looking in, a "sincere" asker who admitted time after time that he may not have understood this whole debacle correctly and would like to be advised and corrected. Is this how you treat people with questions? You ask them to first prove how knowledgeable they are about a given subject or how well-read they are before getting off your high-horse to stoop down and answer their questions? Was all this because I initially praised some of the works of the Deobandis? If so, then you only proved the point I made earlier that it "irks" you to hear that internally. How sad...it irks you to hear that Muslims were able to produce books of benefit just because you hate them and disagreed with them. I don't know you, but what I do know is that you haven't spent much time with scholars and you are just a well-read person who has a penchant for reading. That's it. I don't have to know you at all to know this. It's very obvious by the way you conduct yourself that you have not spent enough time with true scholars to take from their adab in dealing with people from all walks of life. If you think my analysis is wrong, then come forth and tell me how much time you spent face-to-face with scholars. And also, fear Allah for the day you will be asked about why you provided a platform for common folk to hail all sorts of criticisms against scholars without any moderation whatsoever. You conveniently didn't answer my question before so I'll ask again: What is the hukm for a commoner to hurl all sorts of criticisms to scholars publicly? They could've used any other podium on the entire internet to spew their criticisms, but they chose this place because you welcomed it, promoted it, and supported it. Read the chapter on disputations in the ihya again. Don't think you won't be asked about this...fear Allah and make amends before it's too late!
I did read the tanzeeh fatwa but not the entirety of al-hawi. Anyway, I'm going to back and read more from al-hawi including al-mu'taqad, and taqdees as you two have advised. It might take me a while but I'll be back after that. In the meantime, I will check-up on this thread to see if the refutations of faisla are ever posted and if the protocol of soliciting the endorsements for husam and sawarim are ever explained. Thank you and goodbye for now.
Its in 'alHawi lilFatawi' vol 1. I'm surprised that you haven't even read the epistle of Imam Suyuti and yet you quote from it!! It is obvious you haven't read from it as you would have been able to answer my questions. Allah alone knows who is sincere and who is not, whether we claim it for ourselves or not.
that i did not want to was a sincere intention, but when you were taking this thread away, i was compelled to post. and the reason why i didn't want to get involved at the present is only because i am busy with something else - not that i forswore debating on this issue. --- secondly, you started with the suyuti objection - if you are sincere, you should read that short book - hardly 10 pages before getting confused about an issue and based on that false premise ask a whole lot of questions. i have read this book previously, and yesterday morning i read it once more again. this is in the first part of hawi and i have extracted it for you. --- in the first place, the "STATEMENT" of the imam of Tulun mosque said something as a slip of tongue and you can look up the meaning and connotations of the word 'عثر' [try taj 12/524]. this was in the first place, dislikeable - not blasphemy - therefore imam suyuTi in his first instance [when he did not know who the person was] merely gave a ruling of censure and reprimand. and when he learned that the person was a pious and upright man, who stumbled - he relaxed it and justified the relaxation. remember: the issue mentioned in tanzih, was NEVER one of blasphemy. because no single scholar disagreed that the punishment of blasphemy [sabb and adha] is death and according to malikis-hanabila without accepting his repentance. secondly, 'people of standing' are forgiven silly lapses - not that they will be forgiven the hudud. suyuTi mentions a hadith and if you take the literal meaning and apply it as you have done, it would mean that if a mufti - al-iyadhu billah - commits zina or riddah, you have to look other way without enforcing hudud. go ahead, read the risalah and you will understand what i mean. thirdly, abu bakr siddiq raDiyallahu anhu and all others (after all he is the imam of the ummah after the Prophet sallAllahu `alayhi wa aalihi wa sallam) said that: "the punishment for the saabb does not resemble any other hadd". it is a special case and the ummah is unanimously agreed upon this ruling. only a person without faith or knowledge will argue against it. [i will not elaborate on the issue of blasphemy at present regardless of who asks a question, in-sha'Allah]. with devbandis, those statements were about EXPLICIT insults which are the second category in the 7 mentioned by qaDi iyaD; cited by imam faDl ar-rasul badayuni in his mu'taqad. you should read it as KS has advised. plus read shifa and a couple of shuruh - qari and khaffaji. wAllahu a'alam wa `ilmuhu atam --- brothers, someone post the links to radd-e-faisla-kun. --- salam.
AH just taks stabs at me for what I don't know in his last two posts. Why don't you show what you know by answering the questions that I posed that have nothing to do with understanding the fiqh of tawba? Go ahead and show your knowledge by addressing what the protocol of soliciting the endorsements were and what judgment was given to those who were solicited but did not endorse. Go ahead and tell me the names of the refutations of faisla. These quesitons have nothing to do with knowing the fiqh of kufr or tawba but are questions related to what historically occurred. For God sakes you can at least provide some beneficial info rather than just personal attacks. Have you ever been able to ever have a conversation with anyone without taking it personally and attacking them for subsidiary issues rather than sticking with the substantive matters of the discussion?! You know very well that the one who cannot control his anger and nafs should avoid disputation. I've said from the outset that I'm relaying what I know and am asking questions sincerely and have all the time maintained that I may have misunderstood by always using phrases like "in my understanding". yet, you don't give a damn. All you want to do is throw anyone and all, like a rabid dog, down in the dirt and smear them until your nafs says "let him go, he's had enough for now...wait until he gets back up". Either provide the answers for the questions i've asked or remain quiet. If you don't have anything good to contribute then remain silent. Ever heard the hadith on the benefits of remaining silent? subhanAllah! may Allah protect us from knowledge that doesn't benefit! Oh wait, I forgot, you were (supposedly) done posting on this thread a while back ago
Just taking stabs at me for what I don't know. Why don't you show what you know by answering the questions that I posed that have nothing to do with understanding the fiqh of tawba? Go ahead and show your knowledge by addressing what the protocol of soliciting the endorsements were and what judgment was given to those who were solicited but did not endorse. Go ahead and tell me the names of the refutations of faisla. These quesitons have nothing to do with knowing the fiqh of kufr or tawba but are questions related to what historically occurred. For God sakes you can at least provide some beneficial info rather than just personal attacks. Oh wait, I forgot, you were done posting on this thread a while back ago.
I've been sincere, truthful and patient. Maybe I got ahead of myself and misunderstood, but at least I have the sincerity and guts to admit it. I don't need to turn around and be hell-bent and fanatical about my stance and bark at anyone who even remotely questions it as abu hasan and others do. Anyway, you, on the other hand, have helped me and so I thank you for that. I will heed your advice and move on from here and perhaps I will come back after reading mu'taqad with more questions. In short, before parting, can you just finish off explaining why the quote you posted is inapplicable or show how it should be understood in light of mu'taqad? All I'm asking for is some guidance on how to understand the text when I read it and keep your words in mind when I read it so that when I come across it I can readily relate the two together. I'm not asking you to be my "secretary" (only an arrogant person would accuse a petitioner with such a description), but asking for guiding hints to keep in the forefront of my mind whilst reading. That's all.
both your posts were full of attacks against me and has nothing to do with the susbtance of the discussion. By the way, I thought you said you're done posting on this thread? You spend all the time attacking and didn't answer a SINGLE question. Let the readers take note of that. You didn't even have the decency to suggest me the names of those refutations of faisla that you said you would even after i asked for them. Thanks for nothing.
It wasn't placed in the first place for it to be re instated, that is in the case of luzum. Based on what? This is not about what we think, but rather it is based on thorough, rigorous, integral methodology. This is clearly outlined in the books of the scholars of ahl alsunna.
Sidi Abu Hasan is right. It has been amply demonstrated that you are out of your depth here. Maybe you should read the books we have been mentioning, and then we can discuss this matter. At the moment you have admitted not knowing the implications of luzumi kufr, and how tawbah should be made. Because from your posts, it seems you want us to do a lot of homework for you. For instance: With all honesty brother, I think you should read 'alMutaqad alMuntaqad', 'Taqdis alWakil', and other books before we can continue this discussion. Theres some guys who use Deobandi blogs (Like the one against Sidi Abu Hasan) and then have a superficial understanding. Rather than doing that a person should sit with Ulama and read the books that cover this topic in depth.
there is no point in arguing with clueless or ignorant albeit curious cats - you don't even know the basics of tawbah, but you here seek to argue about delicate matters of takfir. perhaps you should read those 'shining' books of deobandis (than just naming them) on the tawbah for a sin that is said in public or printed and published. and come this method of asking questions, may sound pretty smart way of not being accountable and at the same time poisoning the pond. we know the routine quite well - but we will let you wallow in your delusion. --- your methodology is like the person who wants to examine whether the phlegm that someone spat in the milk is healthy - because then, it would not matter if anyone drank it. just spend time examining the phlegm for infection. or perhaps ascertain the milk that a poisonous cobra drank from is safe. because, as we all know, unless the venom is ejected, the mere kiss of a serpent - or even a little sting - will not kill you. obviously you are quoting from imam suyuTi's risalah. and it is also obvious that you have not read it - just picked up a few lines from here and there and trying to act smart. otherwise, tell us that you have read the entire risalah and then we will discuss how much you have understood it. and in the middle of that discussion, perhaps you will realise why your mentioning this quote for devbandi defence is stupid. or perhaps not...when have devbandis ever acknowledged Haqq?
you can read it in both urdu and arabic and inform us. if you are that sincere a seeker, a couple of google searches or scribd or even this very forum will help you. we are not your secretaries.
Okay, I just looked this up and it seems as though Shaykh Ghulam died in 1315, which was around 5 years prior to the publication of Shaykh Ahmad Raza Khan's al-mustanad. So he couldn't have been a signatory of husam let alone sawarim. But does anyone know if he did takfeer of Shaykhs Khaleel or Rasheed in his his taqdees al-wakeel?
My understanding is that he is to repent by doing exactly what al-suyuti said to do: [FONT=Arial","sans-serif]أَنْ يُظْهِرَ النَّدَمَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ ،وَيُنَادِيَ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ فِي الْمَلَأِ بِالْخَطَأِ ، وَيُبَالِغَ فِيالتَّوْبَةِ وَالِاسْتِغْفَارِ ، وَيَحْثُوَ التُّرَابَ عَلَى رَأْسِهِ ،وَيُكْثِرَ مِنَ الصَّدَقَةِ وَالْعِتْقِ وَالتَّقَرُّبِ إِلَى اللَّهِ تَعَالَىبِوُجُوهِ الْبِرِّ ، وَالِاسْتِقَالَةِ مِنْ هَذِهِ الْعَثْرَةِ[/FONT] [FONT=Arial","sans-serif]But what I don't know is how that is to be done and when and in front of who. What the logistics of that is. Hence, why I said earlier that my understanding is that if these forms of tawba are not carried out then it's not that takfeer gets reinstated upon his head. I would think that it would be enough for him to admit that the qasd was not that of adhaa, given his stature prior to expressing the contentious statements in order to bypass takfeer. or, in the alternative, offer an explanation of what his qasd was and why adhaa is not to be taken from it. [/FONT]
I wrote previously: I've not answered this. I have left it for now. That will be discussed after the two questions prior to this are answered. This will be raised once we have agreed to categorising the aqwal of the Deobandi elders. As prior to that we will have to go through some fiqh elaboration.
