mufti nizamuddin's Fatwa on Obaidullah Azmi

[Unbeknown]

Please elaborate...

I have said it in more than one posts that I find it hard to digest that such a fatwa came from the pen of the likes of mufti nizam sahib and allamah muhammad ahmad misbahi sahib. I am singling out these two because I know about them, having been told by the ulema I am in touch with.

I have met mufti nizam sahib and even asked him to pray that Allah ta'ala eases my path to 'ilm-e-deen and in return he blessed me with beautiful prayers. Whatever I have heard about him until now is only good.

Similarly, misbahi sahib. I have seen him during a fiqhi seminar and heard a lot about him form friends who have studied in ashrafiya. Sidi abu hasan mentioned about finding one's shaykh in minhaj ul abideen, the things i have heard about him are comparable to sufis in atleast the outward. One of his hallmarks is his punctuality and extreme consideration for one's and others' time. For instance, once, during a very cold winter afternoon (anyone who knows the winters of u.p will relate to this) he was offered a plate of some hot pieces of charcoal to warm himself up. He returned it saying, "yeh to fursat walon ke liye hai", "this is for those who have leisure"!

These are the people whom I would trust more than myself. You might call this naivety.

You must understand that my judgements are based on what I have heard about them from those whom I trust. I have no other way of finding about them. On what basis should I form my opinions if not on information I have received from trustworthy scholars?

This fatwa. I will not accept that these two people, especially misbahi sahib, have agreed to it, unless and until I see it written in their own hand writing or voice that they have heard each and every of the praises UKA heaped on ram and do not consider it kufr. And that will be a very sad day for me. So until then I will mantain husn zann that something has occurred behind the closed doors of some office in ashrafiya which has unjustly besmirched the names of these shuyookh.

Don't think that i am faulting those shcolars of bareilly who have taken the fatwa and their signatures at face value. They are scholars and have their own reference frames. I am a nobody and I fear to take a wrong step on the basis of the paltry info I have.

I will wait and watch.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

wssalaam.

 

[Unbeknown]

a Jilani Syed, Sunni Hanafi Qadiri, non-deo-supporting

I do not know how you will word the 'I wanted to indict them' excuse in the istifta. The speech does not betray in the slightest any indictment of the hindus.

If I may, i think it will be good if you discuss the istifta that you will be sending with sidi abu hasan and see if the two of you can agree on a common set of questions. That is if abu Hasan is interested and you too think it a good idea.

For myself, I am not in need of another fatwa. I have agreed to the one from bareily.

 

[AbdalQadir]

the one from bareily.

which is general and doesn't mention obaid by name.

please try to understand that we need to compare apples to apples.

we need to contrast SPECIFIC BY NAME fatawa against each other.

we can't contrast one general fatwa mentioning ek shakhs and zayd and bakr against a specific by name fatwa.

obaid's istifta to Nizamuddin sab does NOT imply that the general fatwa given from Bareilly applies to him because of the reasons he stated in the istifta --- 'i wanted to indict hindus, godhra riots, it's a partial quotation, full speech, situation, context and circumstances were ignored' etc. etc. etc. --- that those reasons are lies or not is between obaid and Allah but ANY MUFTI ON EARTH WILL ONLY issue a fatwa based on the istifta presented. don't you see many many many fatawa beginning with "madhkoora bala soorat mein" ... (in the stated situation/circumstances....)???

this is why as far as obaid is concerned, one of the two is required from the ulema of Braeilly if we wish to compare apples to apples -

1 - either a radd of Nizamuddin sahab's fatwa posted in the first post, OR
2 - a specific fatwa on obaid mentioning him by name

you too think it a good idea

sure no worries. you or abu Hasan or anyone else is most welcome to offer your suggestions and i don't have any reservations discussing it with you either.

 

[inquisitive]

This fatwa. I will not accept that these two people, especially misbahi sahib, have agreed to it, unless and until I see it written in their own hand writing or voice that they have heard each and every of the praises UKA heaped on ram and do not consider it kufr. And that will be a very sad day for me. So until then I will mantain husn zann that something has occurred behind the closed doors of some office in ashrafiya which has unjustly besmirched the names of these shuyookh.

The Saheeh Fatwa was mentioned and released in front of Mufti Nizam and Misbahi Sahib on the stage.

As for these two scholars, I respect your Husn e Zann, and I don't want to say anything further although much could be said.

 

[Unbeknown]

The Saheeh Fatwa was mentioned and released in front of Mufti Nizam and Misbahi Sahib on the stage.

this is news to me. what was the event? How did the release of this fatwa take place - I mean was it mentioned that the mustafti has said such things and hence we have given this fatwa? I mean did the public know the background as to why the fatwa was issued?

If it was on stage there must have been nara baazi too, when he was declared "cleared of all charges"?

 

[Unbeknown]

which is general and doesn't mention obaid by name

whether they release a new fatwa or not, Allamah Zia ul Mustafa sahib has said it on record that the fatwa applies to him now that he has admitted that the speech is indeed his. Note that by this time the ashrafiya fatwa was out already and so his excuses had been taken note of but were not deemed admissible.

Refutation of the ashrafiya fatwa, though its needed, I dread to think how much more the bitterness will increase...

 

[inquisitive]

this is news to me. what was the event?

Urs e Azeezi

 

[AbdalQadir]

whether they release a new fatwa or not, Allamah Zia ul Mustafa sahib has said it on record that the fatwa applies to him now that he has admitted that the speech is indeed his. Note that by this time the ashrafiya fatwa was out already and so his excuses had been taken note of but were not deemed admissible.

then it's even lesser work for Zia ul Mustafa sab to put this on paper and sign and seal it saying obaid's stated reasons and context and circumstances are inadmissible - yes or no?

his excuses had been taken note of but were not deemed admissible.

i didn't hear his speech properly. is this your assumption or did Zia ul Mustafa sab say it explicitly that obaid's stated excuses are inadmissible?

---

btw, my reservations on Nizamuddin sab's fatwa are exactly those - regarding the reasons obaid stated and the purported fiqh technicalities between tareef and tazeem, etc. and you or anyone on this forum is very welcome to present my reservations to any scholar from the Bareilly side.

please just wait till my next post. in fact i think i will shut down the browser and compose it in word so as not to be distracted.

 

[Unbeknown]

Urs e Azeezi

jazakAllahu khayran.

usually they video record this event. will it be possible for you to get at least the part when the fatwa was announced?

 

[Unbeknown]

then it's even lesser work- yes or no?

that is irrelevant. Its up to them, if they see the need maybe they will. i have no idea.

is this your assumption or did he say it explicitly that obaid's stated excuses are inadmissible?

listen from 14:00 onwards, the ashrafiya fatwa is quoted and then refuted saying that it's not ta'weel but taHreef to say that he was presenting proofs from their own books to indict them.

Allah knows best.

 

[AbdalQadir]

that is irrelevant.

no way.

a signed and sealed fatwa is a proper hujjah. and i don't see any reason they can be reluctant or not feel the need to put it on paper if that's their official position.

we might be living in the age of audio and video technology but tahreer is still tahreer.

Tajush Shari3ah put his stance on tahir on paper too to establish itmame hujjat. (if i remember his words from memory, "taa ke hujjat tamam ho")

 

[Unbeknown]

I meant it is irrelevant whether it is lesser or more work. What is important is that whether they see the need or not.

 

[Unbeknown]

this is the audio that brother Aqib Qadiri had posted. I thought it was the same as being discussed here but it's not.

It has more perennialist filth:

Again he asks hindus to promote Ram and Krishna!

-------------------

Concerning a query about a person who said that Vedas are like the Qur’ān and just as Muslims act upon the Qur’ān, the Hindus should act upon their Vedas, Alahazrat writes:

To say that the Qur’an is similar to Vedas is kufr; and to ask others to act upon Vedas is to ask them to commit kufr; asking someone to commit kufr is also an act of kufr. In most books, it is written: “To be pleased with kufr, is kufr”.

 

[sherkhan]

very simple solution:
those who oppose Mufti Nizamuddin Sahab's fatwa and consider it wrong - should academically shred it to bits in light of Hanafi fiqh.

What a blunt solution! Will it help bridge building or bridge burning? Ego clash will only shred sunni unity.

I think the best thing to do is to present all and new facts/evidences (videos & audios) which contain Obaidullah's kufriyat to Mufti Nizamuddin. Ask him (and other Ashrafi) scholars to provide definitive ruling on Obaidullah.

(i) If they deem Obaidullah to have committed kufr (in the light of all facts) and ostracize him, then they deserve credit for upholding the law. That will also absolve them of their previous oversight and mistake (may be inadvertent, if they were misled by istiftaa)
(ii) If they dally or excuse themselves from providing fatwa based on new evidence, then the game is clear
(iii) If they again absolve Obaidullah, then they have dug a hole for themselves and have nowhere to hide

Now the million rupee question is - who will bell the cat?

 

[inquisitive]

http://vocaroo.com/i/s0J80xk2ULUl

Obaidullahs speech, will put things into perspective.



---------------------------------------------
MOD (aH) EDIT: THIS is a new one. not the old 'ram-katha' speech, which can be found here:
http://vocaroo.com/i/s0rxxvS1Nlai
(i edited this post because i had ignored it as, the old ram-katha speech, but after unbeknown's post above, i realised that he is referring to this new one.)

 

[Unbeknown]

"sirajul fuqaha" probably glossed over the praise of ram.

4.42:
is aatankwad ke khilaaf sri raam ne jihad cheRa tha.

3. terming the mythical fight of ram's with ravan as 'jihad'

giving him husn-e-zann: he was misled by obaid's plea that "he was insisting on our jihad in their midst.."

that he is talking of jihad - which nizamuddin sahib has mistaken to clarifying our position is actually an apology. instead of saying jihad means fighting for truth, and also that jihad is Haqq for istiylaa of the name of Allah (but we are not doing it because we do not have an imam with an army).

obaidullah says that ram was doing jihad with ravan, to not only liberate sita but all sitas until judgement day! he has actually mixed up both islamic concepts of jihad and qiyamat - to describe a hindu mythological figure and their purported god.

al-iyadhu billah.

i DO stand by my words that Mufti Nizamuddin Sahab SHOULD have highlighted the bid3ah of misguidance in basic Sunni beliefs that post 911 perennialists have come up with - namely that jihad is only something to be done for self defense. and fwiw, even the Bareilly side should have done it.

6. my gripe is with his portrayal of jihad as something merely for self defense. this apologia a major bid3ah of misguidance in these post 9/11 times. he shouldn't have touched on the topic of jihad in his speech, and even if he did touch on it, deliberately or accidentally, at a sensitive time (riots etc.) fast forward to this day, Mufti Nizamuddin sahab SHOULD have clarified now, that jihad can be offensive too. why should we feel shy from our religion when the kuffar openly state they go to war to spread democracy. Mufti Nizamuddin Sahab should have asked him to do tawba from this bid3a, even if it was committed in distress in troubling times. it may be hubris on my part, but i believe Mufti Nizamuddin Sahab was wrong there for not highlighting an ugly bid3ah of misguidance. i will also get another non-Bareilly and non-Mubarakpur (non-desi) mufti's opinion on his conflating the jihad with ram and sita and qayamat issues.

 

[Unbeknown]

Obaidullahs speech, will put things into perspective.

both nizamuddin sahib and misbahi sahib were on the stage.

I have no more husn zann left. I am not even obliged to maintain husn zann now. If something has gone wrong it is beyond the plausible.


Maulana meraj-ul-qadiri and maulana nazim sahib (both from ashrafiya) are among the signatories of the bareilly-shareef fatwa. They did not submit to bullying though they are surrounded by ukhan's supporters. I salute their courage and pray that Allah ta'ala protect them from ubaid's fitnah.

 

[Unbeknown]

24:00 - mulk ki azadi ke liye jihad hua tha

27:00 - chandrashekhar, gandhi, subhashchandra bose did jihad

29:00 - ISI jihad ki ta'leem madarisoN me di jaati hai

36:00 - he makes a snide remark at his opponents that they have taken "wa antum sukara" ayah out of context and got drunk!

36:41 - an ayah is translated wrongly - and someone is shouting subHanAllah!

37:00 - those who have accused him are "be Iman". Doing Zulm-o-Sitam on Quran and hadith.

 

[Unbeknown]

51:20 - It is the responsibility of Ulema-e-Islam to clarify the TRUE concept of jihad to people

51:58 - You need to do TABLIGH to those people who are not muslim and have not recited the shahada

52:33 - TABLIGH of Islam will be done where false gods are being worshipped

54:30 - in the current state of the country - is there not a need to present the correct picture of Islam?
Should such an opportunity not be sought where we can speak OUR TRUTH on the platform of the kuffar?

54:47 - I will explain the background behind this wrong fatwa

55:35 - I will be indebted to those muftis who pin point my errors

55:47 - He names mufti nizamuddin and Allamah muhammad Ahmad misbahi sahab

56:28 - I told them that I am sending the cassete based on which the fatwa of kufr has been given. Listen to it in full, transcribe it, get each and every word written, if there is even a minutest denigration of the shariah, I will not repent behind closed doors but in front of lakhs of public and scholars Ubaidullah Khan Azmi will repent.

57:30 - I am grateful to Allah 'azzawajal that the ulema of asharfiya have PROVED that my speech was harmless and error-free.

57:47 - Alahzrat was CHEATED, a wrong ref was attributed to fatawa ridawiyyah

58:04 - These are 'Iman ke Chor' 'Robbers of Faith'

58:31 - The riots that took place in Gujrat was a result of the MISCONCEPTION OF JIHAD!!

59:39 - People tell "He sits with Hema Malini", "He sits with Jaya Prada", I said, "These are the people who sit there. Whom should I sit with?"
"It is because of sitting with these people that we got the holiday for eid-milad"
"Had I not sat with them we would not have got that Holiday till this day"

NARA-E-TAKBEER !!!

 

[Unbeknown]

60:45 - Kuchh saadhu is mulk me rawaNdaari ke eitibar se - Hindu-Muslim SADBHAVNA ke eitibar se achchhe hote hai.
Unhi Achche logon me ek naam hai Murari Bapu.

61:24 - Agar aese log mulk me maujood ho aur unke saath hindu-muslim rawaNdari ko Qaaim karne ke liye koi JOINT MEETING KI JAAE - to ye musalmano ke Haq me hai ke nahi?

61:48 - Morari bapu RAM-KATHA kar rahe haiN aur UNHO NE har mazhab ke logon ko bulaya hai........Agar aap unke Ram-Katha manch par thodi der ke liye boliyega to musalmano ke liye badi siyasi madat ho jaaegi.

62:00 - Aur gaya bhi to bola kya? Agar koi angrez intellectual hamre yahan aae to AngrezoN ne jo Islam ke khilaf baateN likhi hai uske hawale se bolega ya jo Islami muarrikheen ne tareekh likhi hai uske hawale se bolega?

62:45 - Mai jab satge pe gaya aur RAM ke hawale se bolna tha mujhe, mai kiski tarikh ke hawale se bolta? Mujhe jo maujooda malumati tareekh mili hai useeke hawale se bolta.
Woh tareekh kya kehti hai?:

ram bahadur THE
ram samaji nyay ke --- THE
ram ne zulm ke khilaaf JIDD-o-JAHAD kiya, JIHAD kiya
atankwadi tha rawan, us atankwadi ke khilaf ram ne JIHAD kiya

63:25 - Is lafze jihad ko usi stage par sabit karta huN. Ke har daur me buraai ke khilaaf apne apne dhang se jiddo-jahad huwa hai.
Isliye Islam ke jihad ko --- na kiya jaae.

65:33 - Phir uske baad-
Ram naam hai Mohabbat Ka
Ram naam hai takat ka
Ram naam hai insaf ka
Ram ke naam ko manne wale, nafrat ki agar siyasat karenge ...to ram ke PAYGAAM se KHULI HUi ADAWAT HOGI

65:56 - sab kuchch TAFSEEL se bola huN. Aur bhai logon ne kya kiya? jitni baat apne matlab ki thi - UNKO TO MUJHE KAFIR BANANA THA - MUSALMAN BANANE KI TAUFEEQ TO HUI NAHI INKO PUREE DUNYA ME KISIKO.

"hahahaha"

islam ke daai to kaafiron ko musalmaan banate haiN, ye kaise daai haiN jo musalmaano ko kafir banate haiN?

Meko bana diya kafir aur ahsrafiya ke ulamae haqq ne apna fatwa jaari kar diya ke mai kafir nahi alhamdulillah. TOH FIR KAAFIR BANANE WALA MUFTI KYA HOGA?

AlHamdulillah mai galti se bach gaya.

Nabi-e-kareem (sallallahu'alayhi wasallam) ne kis tarah taswwure jihad diya tha? Huzoor (sallallahu'alayhi wasallam) ke tasawwure jihad se dunya ki har qaum ne bil wasta ya bila wasta fayada uthaya hai.

Gaurav-Pandav ki jang, usme Krishna ne apne nukta e nazar se jihad kiya tha

Mai use islami jiahd nahi kah raha huN (the voice is not clear, I guess this is what he said)

magar bhai logon ne kya kiya?
Ram ko paak kar diya - Ram bhi paak aur Quran bhi paak? ye kehke gumrah kiya jata hai.

Mai kahta huN - Allah bhi paak, Allah ke rasool bhi paak

Alhamdulillah - maine us raat me Islam ke nazariyae jihad ki hujjat qaim karte hue, Allah ke rasul (sallallahu'alayhi wasallam) ne jo insano ki khidmat ka dars hame diay hai use bhi bayan kiya