A mufti was sent an istifta and he gave an answer. Both of them are mentioned below, and also I have presented any explanatory notes in brackets in color.
Can you please say if the mufti’s answer is correct and what according to you is the ruling on the mustafti and the answering mufti.
AQ
Below is the translation ad quotation of the istifta and the fatwa. Anything in MAROON COLOR is AQ’s comments.
------------
ISTIFTA SENT TO MUFTI:
A speech was made in the following circumstances:
I
(the mustafti is a Muslim politician in India, he is also a graduate of a religious seminary and a Muslim scholar) made a speech in a town of Gujrat
(a state in India) when there was a lot of tribulation in Gujrat
(riots between Muslims and hindus) and a lot of Muslims were losing their lives, their properties, and their honor. But in the Rann Kuchch area of Gujrat, Morari Bapu
(a hindu leader who is also a maddaah for hindu idols) made lot of efforts and maintained peace and order in the area, so much that not a single Muslim even suffered a scratch, even though there are a lot of Muslims in this area
(Rann Kuchch). He had organized a gathering of "ram katha"
(a gathering of hindus where they sing and narrate praises of their false deity “rama”) in a town called Gandhi Dham
(also in Gujrat), where he invited all people and asked them to present their thoughts according to their point of views. In those days, my programs for 12th
(Indian Muslim way to say 12th Rabi3ul Awwal, Mawlid An-Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم) and 11th
(Indian Muslim way to say 11th Rabi3uth Thani, popularly believed to be death anniversary of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani and marked in reverence by Indian Muslims) were being held in those areas. People invited me and the Sunni Muslims of that area insisted to me that I should participate in this gathering
(of "ram-katha") because Morari Bapu has established a good environment here of peaceful mutual co-existence, and because of my participation, this environment
(of peaceful coexistence) will be further strengthened and it will be beneficial to Muslims.
Upon insistence by those people
(Muslims) and considering the delicate situation in that area
(civil strife and riots between hindus and Muslims, in which many Muslims were suffering many losses of life and property) in those days, I participated in that gathering.
Because this gathering was associated with the name of "ram", I presented to them the peace-loving, clean, pure character image of "ram" as they
(hindus) themselves perceive it, and established hujjah and goaded them to abstain from bloodshed and rioting and live their lives in peace and civility.
There are many enemies, and Muslims, and sectarian mischief-makers who are busy trying to portray terrorism as jihad and spoil the image of Muslims. That’s why, I defended Islam and Muslims by explaining the real meaning of jihad, and made it manifest that those who claim to follow "ram"
(that is, hindus) are themselves not following the ways of "ram". I present that necessary part of my speech here so that the reality manifests itself:
How I, as a Muslim, saw "shree ram" (the word “shree” is an indian salutation in the hindi and Sanskrit languages it can also mean “Mr.” or “Ms.” when referring to any person; at the same time the hindus use this in the sense of “muhtaram” or “muqaddas” or “shareef” or “qadasah” when using it for their idols, like when they say “shree krishna” or “shree ram”). My history and urdu literature how it made me know and see "ram", I will present a couplet from a poem of Dr Sir Muhammad Iqbal, the title of the poem itself is “ram” (Dr. Iqbal was an Urdu poet who died around 1938)
“Hindustan (India) is proud of the wujood of "ram"
The people of expertise consider him as an imam of hind (india)” (these 2 lines are by Dr. Iqbal from his poem)
"shree ram"’s existence is so pure and clean, his character is so unique, sweet, and without similitude (in Urdu he said “bey-mithaal” meaning bila mithaal in Arabic) that the intellectual class, those people who go into the depths of things and try to acquire the ma3rifah of their realities, they accept "shree ram" as the imam of hind (india).
"ram" is the name of the truth that subdues lies. "ram" is the name of compassion to transgressed (“mazloom” in Urdu, Arabic and Hindi, this is the word from the speech) and sad people, which catches the neck of transgression (“zulm” has same meaning in Urdu & Hindi, this was the word used). "ram" is the name of that sunshine that removes darkness. "ram" is the name of that moonlight through which people find tranquility. "ram" is the name of that cool breeze that is refreshing shade for people on a hot sunny day. I only know that "ram" who gave no message of hatred to humanity. Instead of hatred, he ("ram") showered clouds of love, restored to mankind his lost dignity.
A terrorist who tried to commit an act of terror against "sita jee", we know him by the name of "ravan" (in hindu fictitious mythology, "sita" is the wife of "ram". The salutation "jee" used after a name in Hindi language refers respectfully to the person, as in “Mr” or “Mrs” or “Lady” or “Sir”; according to hindu mythological stories from their religion, "ravan" kidnapped "sita" and took her to sri lanka. According to their stories, their so-called god "ram", fought a war against "ravan" to rescue his wife "sita" ). "shree ram" initiated a jihad against this terrorism. There is one thing called terrorism, by which our entire nation is in pain, not just our nation, the entire world is in pain due to it. Terrorism is terrorizing someone, and he who does this, he is a terrorist. The antidote for this terrorism, and fighting against this terrorism, in the Arabic language this is called jihad. Impure and unclean people have made so impure and unclean the word of jihad, so much that the fight (he is referring to jihad) which is a weapon against terrorism, people have called that same weapon as terrorism!
Jihad is the name of jadd wa jahd (same meaning in Urdu and Arabic) – struggle/hard work. Struggle in the positive way is called jihad. Struggle in the negative way is called terrorism. When "ravan" struggled in this same negative way, then "shree ram" did jadd wa jahd against him to safeguard the respect of humanity. It was not just a question of the honor of "sita jee" but rather the question of the honor of all those “sita’s” (that is women) to be born until the morning of Qiyamah (he used the original word qayamat. It’s also strange to mention this because hindus don’t believe in Yaum al-Qiyamah, and they believe in multiple re-incarnations) because of whose honor "ram" took his step of jihad (he used the exact word jihad attributing it to hindu mythological "ram"). Saying this great name (he said “3azeem naam” in Urdu; the meaning of “3azeem” in Urdu and Arabic is same) ends hatred immediately. Where this name (of "ram") is taken and despite that, in society there is hatred, then it means that we take the name of "shree ram" by our tongues, but in our actions, our attitudes, and our values, we do not include "shree ram". Then in this gathering today, I won’t speak much, I will only speak this much.
In light of this speech, I want to know this:
For any Muslim, nothing is greater than iman. If kufr is proven, I believe in tajdeed of Iman as fard, but does a ruling of kufr apply to my speech when this speech was done to establish hujjah on others
(ie kafirs) by showing & telling them their own perceptions?
--------
MUFTI’S ANSWER:
Our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم has forbidden us from takfeer of a Muslim until the reason for kufr is not as manifest as sunshine, and there isn’t the minutest/faintest reason left to rule as Muslim, فإنا الإسلام يعلو ولا يعلى
It is clear from the transcription of the speech that narrating the non-Muslims perceptions, hujjah has been established upon them using themselves, and this is the proof of good oratory on the part of the khateeb. This does not affect the faith of the khateeb, but rather this is a sign of his Iman that he went to a gathering of others
(ie not from our Muslim community) and established hujjah against them by their own sayings.
It is permitted to establish hujjah and blame upon the opposition by using a statement that is against reality
(the mufti used khilafe waqe3 in Urdu meaning خلاف
الواقع ). The mufassireen have deduced this from the Quran Al-Kareem itself. Imam Qurtubi says in his Jami3 Al-Ahkam Al-Quran
وَلِهَذَا يَجُوزُ عِنْدَ الْأُمَّةِ فَرْضُ الْبَاطِلِ مَعَ الْخَصْمِ حَتَّى يَرْجِعَ إِلَى الْحَقِّ مِنْ ذَاتِ نَفْسِهِ، فَإِنَّهُ أَقْرَبُ فِي الْحُجَّةِ وَأَقْطَعُ لِلشُّبْهَةِ
(QURTUBI 21:62)
Under this axiom, the part of the speech that the speaker has quoted, it is not kufr or haram, but rather a defense of his own religion
(Islam) and establishment of hujjah against others
(kuffar). There is not a single ihtimal of kufr in this and the speaker is certainly not outside of Islam. He is a Muslim.
---------
I have left out some parts of the istifta and the fatwa that are not relevant here, like “should people be prevented to listen to my speeches?”, and “some people gave a fatwa of riddah upon me” and so on.
My concern is with the istifta presented and the mufti’s answer given in regards to if the speaker retains to be Muslim or not.
Jazakum Allahu khayraa
AQ
