May Allah reward you for defending the Wali of Allah Hadrat Allamah Mufti AS Desai(HA).Allah also will wage war against the enemies of His friends.Abu Hurairah(RAH) narrates the Messenger of Allah said that Allah said:'Whoever takes a Wali of mine an enemy,I will wage war on him'.Hadrat Mufti Rasheed Ahmad Ludhianvi(ra) writes in Ahsanul Fatawa volume-1,page-402:'Asking for dalil is not permissible for a non-Alim(jahil)'.
Salaam,
I bet if this information below was made available with the fatwa or an explanation was given, then there wouldn't be such a discussion.
One of Mufti Desai�s sources inluded an Aalim residing in Pakistan whom he has known for over two decades, an Aalim from Ahsanul Uloom who narrated from a very prominent Shaykhul Hadith, a very senior Mufti from Lahore, a former teacher from Darul Uloom Karachi, who is also a Shariah Court Judge, and others who had sent actual documentary evidence to Mufti Desai of the Vile and Haraam antics.
Not providing the above or giving any sort of clarification when asked is unfair!
You know very well that the comments were made simply because Mufti Saab said he hadn't heard of MTJ. Had this been made clear, it would not have escalated or been such an issue.
Also, what is your stance?
Do you consider Maulana Tariq Jameel to be deviated?
I personally don't hold any opinions except that he shouldn't be intermingling with the Shia. He shouldn't be eating Shia Zabiha either. The rest I leave to Allah.
I'm not a fan of MTJ, I'm not a Tablighi nor do I know him. I've heard a few of his lectures and that's it.
WasSalaam
This comment has been flagged.
Jazakallahu khairan Brother.
Masha Allah You explained well.
I would just like to add my final post on the forum here so that readers can perhaps understand my obstinate, persistent attitude and behaviour ever since I stumbled upon this forum:
This message is addressed to all the readers who might have followed the distressing series of events involving my repeated efforts to demonstrate that the numerous criticisms and attacks on the fatwas, statements, style, and tone of Mufti Desai, were deeply flawed, and were in fact gross misrepresentations.
I hope to make this my final post on this forum. From some of the comments directed at me I have clearly overstayed my welcome.
I request you to understand that I love and respect Mufti Desai, just as much as I love and respect my father, if not more so. If I had come across misrepresentations of the statements of my father, thereby attracting criticism and ridicule of him, I would have reacted just the same.
If however, and I urge you to take note of this, I came across statements that were not misrepresentations, but were clearly justified criticisms for public consumption and ridicule, I would have forced myself to swallow the bitter pill, take it on the chin, and move on. I am a strong believer in the Quranic verse commanding one to adhere to the truth no matter how bitter it may be, even if it goes against yourself and your dear ones.
However, this was clearly not the case here.
In order that you may be able to understand my behaviour I would request you just to imagine for a moment that the following sequence of events over this matter took place with respect to your dear father. Imagine how you�d feel if you had been confronted by just a few of the following statements or sentiments resembling those that I had to deal with (FR1 refers to forum user no.1, FR2 refers to forum user no.2, etc.):
YOU: I was just passing by when I noticed blatant misrepresentations of the statements of my father. The more I browsed the more such crimes I came across. As a result, I feel compelled to stay in order to undo the damage done. I wish to prove that the criticisms of my father are deeply flawed and even slanderous.
FR1: I'm really sorry, we can't allow you to do so. If you want to pursue this, take the issue privately behind the scenes please.
YOU: I�m sorry I cannot. Since such slanderous misrepresentations occurred in public, it needs to addressed and remedied in public. Furthermore, my pain, rage, and ghairah at the injustice committed does not allow me to submit to any request to have this discussion in private.
FR2: You seem to carry a lot of emotional baggage. Why don�t you just calm down for once.
YOU: I will try insh-Allah. Why has my thread attempting to demonstrate the misrepresentations been deleted from public view?
FR3: I requested it since it turned into a debate the moment you posted your very convincing and conclusive post, after several pages of intense debating.
YOU: I demand the right to be able to demonstrate in public the misrepresentations on this forum, since the damage has been caused here right here in the public domain.
FR4: Please pay heed to the following advice: The Messenger (peace be upon him) said: "The gates of Paradise will be opened on Monday and on Thursdays, and every servant [of Allah] who associates nothing with Allah will be forgiven, except for the man who has a grudge against his brother. [About them] it will be said, 'Delay these two until they are reconciled. Delay these two until they are reconciled. Delay these two until they are reconciled.'"
YOU: Please try and understand me. I am only demanding the right to be able to demonstrate that clear and blatant misrepresentations have taken place of the statements of my father.
FR5: Fine, let�s try this one on you: �I guarantee a house in lowest parts of Jannah for the one who leaves off argument even when he is right, and a house in the middle part of Jannah for the one who leaves off lying even if hes just joking, and a house in the highest part of Jannah for the one with good manners�
YOU: Please try and understand me. I am not here to win any arguments or prove that I am right. I am here simply to remedy the gross misunderstanding acquired by the forum readers due to the misrepresentations of the statements of my father.
FR6: This brother is a really stubborn and vindictive one.
YOU: How about I post in a thread and one of the admins close the thread so that no debates take place.
FR7: You really seem to be on an ego trip.
YOU: May Allah (azza wa jal) purify my intentions.
FR8: Why don�t you just GET LOST. We�re not interested in your clarifications.
YOU: Maybe you might not have been duped by the blatant misrepresentations but others have clearly been. Since the attacks of and misrepresentations of my father had occurred in public and have clearly mislead numerous readers of this forum, it is important that my analysis of those slanderous statements remain in the pubic domain, in order that the damage incurred can be remedied to some extent. The sincere readers can then decide for themselves the veracity of those attacks and whether or not blatant misrepresentations had occurred.
FR9: I second the previous brothers� appeal for you to get lost and his Ilmi Ghaybi claim that this seems like an ego trip. Why don�t you instead clarify what you�re doing about so and so.
YOU: I am here simply to remedy the gross misunderstanding acquired by the forum readers due to the misrepresentations of the statements of my father. What I�m doing about so and so is irrelevant to this issue.
FR10: Well I�ve just managed to dig out a reply to the Hadith in your signature. Take this: �'Those who revile one another are two shaytans who accuse one another and deny one another.'"�
YOU: Please try and understand me. I am here simply to remedy the gross misunderstanding acquired by the forum readers due to the misrepresentations of the statements of my father.
FR11: You can blog it and it�ll remain undeleted insha-Allah.
YOU: JazakAllah Khair.
THE END
The above was merely a rough sketch. Far more had happened repeatedly, and I will admit that I have been deeply hurt and enraged at times by the number of unjust statements that I had across on this forum.
Since the blog post demonstrates conclusively the blatant misrepresentations that had been perpetrated with regards to just one fatwa, I sincerely hope there is no need to deal with the numerous other statements and fatwas that I�ve come across that had been misrepresented here. I trust that everybody will merely dismiss any criticisms of the statements of the Mufti if they come across them now.
I do intend however to make a couple more blog posts if only to provide some understanding behind Mufti Desai�s harshness against any deviance.
I sincerely thank the numerous brothers here who did stand up for the truth and backed me up both on this forum and behind the scenes. That includes the respected admins/authorizers.
Jazakumullahu Khairan
Insha'Allah, the matter in this blog will be discussed in small chunks because the comment facility does not give the ability to formulate and articulate the responses well. ***Response 1:*** Darul-uloom Ahsanul-uloom Karachi is run under the guidance of Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) who had some differences of opinion with Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) and these have been exaggerated by Barelwees (search youtube), however these differences were blown away when Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) visited the Darul-uloom on the 27th of February 2012 at the invitation of Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) and the Bayan can be heard here (serveislam.com/Media/JAU/Maulana_Tariq_Jamil_Bayan_27-Feb-2012.mp3 ) . There it is a blatant misrepresentation of facts when the head of Darul-uloom i.e. Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) no longer has any issues and importantly he neither disrespects Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) nor ascribes him to the bedfellow of kuffaar Shiahs...continues
***Response 2:*** The website run and approved by Darul-uloom Karachi under the guidance and Shura of Shaykh (Mufti) Rafi Usmani (HA) and Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) has an entire section dedicated to Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) so again it is a blatant misrepresentation to quote someone from Darul-uloom Karachi to be agreeing with this view when the reality is exactly the opposite, the link is here (deeneislam.com/ur/main.php?iPage=/ur/v4/bayan.php&Muqarrir=5&Title=Molana%20Tariq%20Jameel%20Bayan&checksum=my3bZi2LPibB.)...continues
***Response 3:*** Darul-uloom Jamia Ashrafiyya (Lahore) is one of the most major institutes in Pakistan let alone Lahore. Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) is regularly invited to the Darul-uloom in conferences and here is the link to the Khatme-Nabuwaat conference 2012 (youtube with ID of 7eyIvkja-Cs), again major misrepresentation of the facts when the top Muftees and Ulama either don�t castigate Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) and most certainly don�t ascribe Kuf�r to him or assign him to bedfellow of the kuffaar Shiahs. Importantly this "no name major Mufti" of Lahore remains anonymous! I will now respond to comments of the blogger and then return back to the responses......continues
***Response 1/Comment:*** The comment (response) by the blogger has been read and analysed and since it gives no Academic refutation or logical input but only perpetuates insults and exhortation towards repentance (for who knows what!) no Reponses is deemed necessary. I repent to Allah (SWT) for my sins and seek sincere forgiveness as it is best for my Aakhira but other than that no idea what the blogger means to establish! ......continues
This comment has been flagged.
This comment has been flagged.
This comment has been flagged.
Let us enlist few of hazrat mufti sahib's sources mentioned explicitly in the blog by brother deoband. We will follow with the 'vile' and 'misguiding' response by Muadh khan orchestrated to move away the attention of the public from his grave sin of slandering mufti sahib, holding a negative view (badgumani), suspicion, attacking his personality and creating a wrong 'trigger happy' image of mufti sahib. These all fall into the category of major sins.
1) Aalim residing in Pakistan whom Mufti sahib knows for over two decades.
2) Aalim from Ahsan ul uloom WHO NARRATED FROM A VERY PROMINENT SHAIKH UL HADITH.
3) A very senior mufti from lahore.
4) FORMER TEACHER of Darul uloom karachi and JUDGE OF SHARIAT COURT.
5) Actual documented evidence.
We will insha-Allah go over responses of muadh khan in small chunks in the next few posts.
As-salaamu-alaikum
I agree that laymen should not debate validity of fatawa given by reputable mufti's but rather refer to a mufti or darul ifta that conforms to rulings of our pious predecessors. Every Muslim has a responsibility to be careful with regards to choice of words when referring to a fellow believer especially ulema.
***Response 1***
There it is a blatant misrepresentation of facts when the head of Darul-uloom i.e. Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) no longer has any issues and importantly he neither disrespects Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) nor ascribes him to the bedfellow of kuffaar Shiahs...continues
***Reply***
Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi rajioon. Another baseless, blatant lie and slander by the respected brother. Mufti Zarwali khan db wasn't stated as a source neither by hadat mufti sahib nor by brother deoband.
WHY IS BROTHER MUADH KHAN CALLING IT A BLATANT MISINTERPRETATION? To sidetrack his own lies and slanders?
Please note source number 2:
2) Aalim from Ahsan ul uloom WHO NARRATED FROM A VERY PROMINENT SHAIKH UL HADITH.
Is it stated in ahsan ul uloom's rules that all passout ulama from our institute will conform uncondtionally to mufti zar wali khan's views for the rest of their lives. In addition to this they never narrate fron any other prominent shaikh ul hadith.
First response lie answered
***Response 2:*** The website run and approved by Darul-uloom Karachi under the guidance and Shura of Shaykh (Mufti) Rafi Usmani (HA) and Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) has an entire section dedicated to Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) so again it is a blatant misrepresentation to quote someone from Darul-uloom Karachi to be agreeing with this view when the reality is exactly the opposite,
****response to reponse/slander/lie no 2****
Before brother deoband's blog post, respected brother Muadh Khan had slanderer and lied that most respected mufti as desai damat barakatuhu '' has no research into what he has said''.
After this post he came across mufti as desai's sources. Instead of making tobah and showing remorse he goes with vile responses. Surely and clearly Allah taala has taken away the taufeeq of tobah from this person. His crime is not restrcited to his own self neither mufti sahib rather he has succeeded in polluting the minds of hundreds of innocent awam who look upto muttaqi ulama like mufti sahib.
Clutching to straws to hide his crimes respected brother Muadh Khan states The website run and approved by Darul-uloom Karachi under the guidance and Shura of Shaykh (Mufti) Rafi Usmani (HA) and Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) has an entire section dedicated to Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel.
We ask, so what? Is it forbidden for all ulama and talaba to hold a view that goes against a vague view formulated from a website? Or forbidden to go against the views of Mufti taqi usmani and mufti rafi usmani? It is quite possible they are unaware of the vile and haram antics of maulana tariq jameel. Even if they know, is it necessary they adopt the same stance as mufti desai?
''so again it is a blatant misrepresentation to quote someone from Darul-uloom Karachi to be agreeing with this view when the reality is exactly the opposite,''
May Allah gave hidayat to this person ameen. Again he is slandering and lying without knowledge. To hide one lie 100 lies are being made up. Then the respected brother asks, repent from what? Repent from your slanders!!
Let us examine source no 4:
4) FORMER TEACHER of Darul uloom karachi and JUDGE OF SHARIAT COURT
Brother deoband has clearly stated, FORMER TEACHER!!! It means the teacher has already left darul uloom karachi!!! Clutching to his vile arguments brother muadh khan made a big wretched comment in an attempt to deceive the innocent public again. How does he compare a website with bayans of maulana tariq jameel to the reports of a former teacher of darul uloom and judge of shariat court in Pakistan?
Our question again: how does his response no 2 fit here?
Someone from darul uloom was the source, the fatwa nor the blogpost of brother deoband mentions the source agreeing to the fatwa. Why has brother muadh khan writtenthat it is a blatant misinterpretation to quote..... no one is quoted!!!!
Our question again: is it incumbent on all ulama of darul uloom to conform unconditionally to the view of mufti taqi usmani and mufti rafi usmani for the rest of their lives?
Is it a rule in darul uloom that they can never give information about any alim to another alim or mufti for the rest of their lives?
Our last question , What is muadh khan going on about?
***Response 3:*** Darul-uloom Jamia Ashrafiyya (Lahore) is one of the most major institutes in Pakistan let alone Lahore. Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) is regularly invited to the Darul-uloom in conferences and here is the link to the Khatme-Nabuwaat conference 2012), again major misrepresentation of the facts when the top Muftees and Ulama either don�t castigate Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) and most certainly don�t ascribe Kuf�r to him or assign him to bedfellow of the kuffaar Shiahs. Importantly this "no name major Mufti" of Lahore remains anonymous!
***response to response 3***
Resected Brother Muadh Khan, What were you thinking about while coming up with this response?
Why are you gorging personal attacks against a senior anonymous mufti of lahore who is hidden from your ilmi ghayb? Why? Does your sense of duty of Islam allow you to conjure up personal vile attacks ?
Can you please explain the relation between the stance of jamia ashrifiya and your slander against mufti sahib that he had no research in this matter.
Source no 3) A very senior mufti from lahore.
Not jamia ashrifya. Source of mufti desai's research.
again major misrepresentation of the facts when the top Muftees and Ulama either don�t castigate Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel (HA) and most certainly don�t ascribe Kuf�r to him or assign him to bedfellow of the kuffaar Shiahs.
Which facts? Who misrepresented any facts?
Actually what you are doing is contesting mufti sahib-s fatwa in a different way now and trying to supress the issue of your crimes. Now you are using the same old beaten up theory. - all the ulama and muftis don't know but you know?. This is what you are trying to say to mufti sahib now.
No name major mufti remains anonymous. This is a right Allah has granted him to remain anonymous. Do you want to snatch his right and drag him into your court where you are judge, jury and lawyer?
Continues.
Two more Fatwas of Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias(HA) under the number 10165 and 10208 further build up the case against Maulana Tariq Jameel.
This comment has been flagged.
***Response 1/Comment:*** The comment (response) by the blogger has been read and analysed and since it gives no Academic refutation or logical input
***our comment***
Dear Respected brother, you Read but couldn't analyze. Academc refutation to what? To your slanders? Logical Input? To your lies against mufti as desai? If respoected brother deoband's post wasn't logical then what is logical? It was a very nicely formed explanation appreciated by many people but sadly only you seem to misunderstand it. There is a vast difference in your akhlaaq and brother deoband's akhlaaq.
But only perpetuates insults and exhortation towards repentance (for who knows what!) no Reponses is deemed necessary.
***our comment***
Its pure hallucination that the brother is insulting you into repentance. We'll tell you what your clearly can't see. Ask Allah to remove the curtains from the eyes of your heart.
Mufti as desai damat FUYOOZUHUM, is a well known muttaqi alim of age 75+. He has sepnt part of his life with akabir. He is authorized in tasawwuf by Maulana Maseehullah Khan RA khalifah of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi RA. He spent his life in serving the deen of Allah.
There are currently over 300,000 students studying at Maulana Ahmad Sadeq�s (db) Maktab Madrasahs. He has had ovchildren complete the course so far.
It is also noted that Mufti Sahibly 2 hours daily, and spends the rest of the night in ibadah. So mucmusallah has HOLES in them now..
~ and respected brother muadh khan has the audacity to slander and lie about mufti sahib that he has no research on the matterand gave a fatwa based on an email? Who gave him the right to slander a mufti?
''And I have spent the past decade and a half REFUTING these groups but my Islamic sense of duty demands of me to disagree with you publicly where your opinion is public.''
You spent the past decade and a half refuting these groups so now you have the green signal to slander and lie about a ahle haq mufti ? Your islamic sense of duty demands of you to accept your mistakes not slander senior muftis who have spent their lives in deen. Not on the internet.
And your islamic sense of duty demands of you to keep your accomplishments and your service of deen between yourself and Allah. Mentioning your past decade's refutation and using it as a vile license to refute mufti as desai is ''unfair'' in the least.
I repent to Allah (SWT) for my sins and seek sincere forgiveness as it is best for my Aakhira but other than that no idea what the blogger means to establish! ......
***our comment***
Make tobah in the darkest corner of your house in the darkest part of the night and ask Allah to show you your crimes.
You still have no idea means something is wrong somewhere.
JazakAllah
Assalaamu 'Alaykum
This has turned into a complete circus. If any of you here believe you are serving Din then think again!
Neither is the conduct reflected above in accordance with the Sunnah or the manhaj or mizaj of the Ulama of Deoband.
Fear Allah.
Was-salaam
Ahle haq
Hazrat (HA) admits that he doesn�t know this �chap� called Tariq Jameel, has no research into what he has said andYET chosen to remove the title �Maulana� on the basis of an email and ascribed him to a bedfellow of Kuffar Shiahs all based on an email
****Our Comment****
Much time has passed but the brother has still not repented from his slanderw (buhtan) on Mufti as desai. Our niyyah (intention) is not to Insult him into repentance but rather the innocent awaam, the ummah owes an apology from th. Brother into misleading them about a god fearing Mufti of deen and Allah knows how many people have developed bad thoughts and feelings about mufti sahib because of respected brother muadh khan-s slanderous comments.
Comming back to his slanderous comments, there are two slanders and blatant lies in his post.
1) ''Has no research into what he has said''
Mufti as desai's book called ''status of makshufaat jamaat-' on page 23 it is mentioned:
''In the perpetration of crass ghulu,one senior of the Jamaat,Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding.He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq,we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
The above paragraph clearly renders muadh khans comment as a slander. As itself mentioned in the fawa - wehave been hearing and the book is a proof enough to show that mufti sahib had much research into the matter.
2. �...chosen to remove the title �Maulana� on the basis of an email� (note the singular, "AN email").
Self explanatory.
Here is a Q&A between the alleged and Mufti AS Desai.
Query (05MAY2014):
Asslamo Allaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakartuh Hazrat,
First and foremost I request your duas. I have known your work and Fatwaa for many years and also inquired about your rank and stature from South African Ulamah [sic] and also read their opinions about you.
As you well know that I regard you as an Alim of Taqwa, knowledge and Seniority, Masha'Allah.
You also know that I (after consultation) with Ulamah [sic] severely disagree with your language, tone and mannerism towards others (particularly Ulamah [sic]) and I consider it disrespectful.
I am not a graduate of a Darul-uloom and neither do I consider myself knowledgeable but after discussions with many South African (and Non-South African) Ulamah [sic] I disagree with some of your Fatawaa and most certainly with the language and mannerism.
I have wrote in opposition to these matters on the blog with the greatest respect, Adab and dignity.
However, I failed on the forum and suggested the following about you:
1. I am SHOCKED by some of things being said about Ulamah [sic] and such things should NOT be tolerated
2. You should be CHALLENGED HEAD ON and STRONGLY REFUTED by the Ulamah [sic] of South Africa on Fiqh matters where your opinion DOES NOT conform to Deobandi Ulamah [sic]
My harsh (unreasonable and out of line) words were pointed out by others and I retracted, apologized and sought forgiveness publicly.
I now seek your forgiveness (directly) for using words which are not suitable for an Alim of your caliber and I request that you forgive me for the sake of Allah (SWT) as I committed a mistake.
I will not stand down in highlighting issues which I see to be problematic with your stance and mannerism but I do offer an unreserved apology and seek forgiveness for anything and everything which I may have said which is in contradiction to the Sunnah.
Some brothers are insisting on debating with me online about your Fatwaas while clearly declaring that they don't understand your Fatwaas, their basis or reasons at all. I am bringing it to your attention that I will debate/discuss with them although they acknowledge their lack of knowledge of Islamic Shariah and correct understanding of your Fatwaas.
If you wish for me to call South Africa and discuss the matter with you on the phone, please let me know.
Hazrat, I will continue to disagree with you where I find your opinions in contradiction to Shariah as per my duty in Islam. I am NOT a Salafi, NOT a Ghair-Muqallid, NOT a Modernist and I have spent the past decade and a half REFUTING these groups but my Islamic sense of duty demands of me to disagree with you publicly where your opinion is public. Please give me permission to make your response to this email public.
Your son,
Muadh Khan
Jazakallahu Khayran
Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) Response (06MAY2014):
6 Rajab 1435 (6 May 2014)
Abu Salih Muadh Khan
Respected Brother,
Your e-mail dated 6 May refers.
There is no need to apologize to me for anything. I am not even aware of what your have written, said or publicized as I never search for anything on the internet. In fact, I don't know how to use the internet.
You believe that your criticism is the Haqq. Hence, you should continue to propagate what you believe to be the Haqq. If you believe that I am on baatil, then feel at liberty to criticize and condemn me even utilizing the same strident stance which I have adopted to criticize others. Allah Ta'ala will judge on the Day of Qiyaamah who is plodding the path of baatil.
Feel at ease regarding my attitude towards you. I harbour absolutely no rancour towards you for any type of criticism which you or any of my detractors may be desirous of. Execute whatever you believe is your duty. Feel free to debate, scrutinize and condemn on line whatever I say or whatever happens to be my views. It is your right to dissect and refute whatever you feel is baatil. Thus, when you believe that any of our fatwas are baatil, feel free to dissect, condemn and refute same.
Your criticism and suggestions numbered 1 and 2 should not be of any concern to you. There is no need to apologize for these two statements you have made. Your statements are legitimate, acceptable and mild criticism of a person whom you believe is plodding the line of baatil. Do as your "Islamic sense of duty demands" of you.
Do delete the letter 'h' from the end of the word 'Ulamah' [sic]. It is a glaring error. Feel free to make public my response in any way you deem appropriate.
May Allah Ta'ala guide and protect you.
Was-salaam
A.S. Desai
Further clarification (06MAY2014):
W-Salam Hazrat,
I have a Bayan of Hazrat Maulana Qari Muhammad Tayyib Qasmi (RA) and in this Bayan he talks about respecting and honoring others based on any strand of "superiority" and you are superior to me in multiple areas i.e. age, Seniority, Taqwa, knowledge and experience and I am not just stating it based on humility but actual facts. Therefore, I can never think of adopting harsh and disrespectful language towards you at all and there is no reason for it. However, I have learned from our Akabir to state, express and above all practice "Haqq" and this is what I have done close to 2 decades and shall continue to do so.
I shall keep the spelling of "Ulama" in mind in the future. There are three further matters which I want to bring to your attention, as follows:
1. I did download your old Bayans cleared the static (and disturbance) thus improving the quality and sent them to the person who is in charge of your website as samples and also made suggestions on the improvements to website in response to our discussions on the matter last year.
2. Your stance on the Qiblah (in America) is used by "Ahbash" of USA to justify their misguidance as there is no other Hanafi Alim in the world who backs this opinion so I had no choice but to refute your opinion as thoroughly as my limited abilities could muster. Alhumdolillah that you have made your stance a lot clearer and publicly stated that a person may follow other Ulama if he/she believes their opinion to be valid and this is against Ahbash who categorically call every other opinion (on the matter) misguidance. Your opinion is based on your research but their opinion about changing the direction of Qiblah in Lebanon and USA is based on choosing a path divergent from Ahlus-Sunnah Wal-Jamaat!
3. In your booklet "THE KUFR AND SHIRK OF IBN TAIMIYYAH" on page 4 you have referred to Abdullah Hariri as "Shaikh". Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Harariyy [عبد الله الهرري الحبشي] (1910-2008) is the founder of a sect called "Al-Ahbash". Since it is a Middle-Eastern phenomenon our (Deobandi) Ulama from Indo-Pak have neither encountered them nor investigated or issued Fatawaa on them but it is well known to Arab Ulama. Hazrat (HA), I request that you consult South African Ulama with knowledge of Middle-East affairs about this group. In USA this group is known as "Association of Islamic Charitable Projects" abbreviated as AICP. This group also maligns and slanders Sahabah (RA) and here is the testimony of Shaykh (Mufti) Hussain Kadodia (HA) from South Africa who is the student of Shaykhul-Hadeeth (Maulana) Fazlur-Rahman Azmi (HA):
They are a Lebanese group, followers of Sh. Abdullah al-Harari al-Habashi, originally from Ethiopia. They hold a number of errant views, including classifying those Sahabah who fought against Hadhrat Ali as rebels, takfir of Ibn Taymiyyah etc, rather takfir of nearly anybody who disagrees with them.
You will find Fatawa against them, by many senior Sunni Scholars of the Arab World. To improve their relationship with India Sunnis, they first tried to join up with the Barelwis. When the noticed the ghulu(extremism) of the Barelwis, especially on the issue of Ilm al-Ghaib, they dropped them like a hot coal!
Their Shaikh even wrote a refutation of this belief.
They then tried to get some support from our Deobandi Ulama.
So they sent a representative to our Darul Ulums here in SA about 2 years ago.
He was allowed to address our students and explained the Salafi problem to them very well. The problem was, part of his dars included insisting that the students all say "Ibn Taymiyyah kafir" Ibn Taymiyyah kafir"! which they of course refused and which he couldn't bear.
They are very open about they beliefs and openly call hadhrat Muawiyah a rebel etc
Since I know about AICP, I had no choice but to ensure that you are distanced away from this heretical group and my Islamic Ghayrat did not allow me to see the title of "Shaikh" next to a person who directly insults Sahabah (RA). I strongly request that you consult South African Ulama and inquire about their visit to South African Darul-ulooms and the reality of these Barelwee heretics!
I cannot tolerate to see any association of our (Deobandi) Akabir or you with any Sahabah slandering Barelwee heretics, I had no choice but to act!
Request for your duas and guidance as always.
Jazakallahu Khayran
Assalaamu 'Alaykum
This has turned into a complete circus. If any of you here believe you are serving Din then think again!
***wa 'Alaykum Assalaam
To call this a circus is detrimental to one's deen. Haq is being propagated, a public slander on a reliable senior deobandi muttaqi mufti is being refutated and you have the 'guts' to call it a circus? Ask any reliable mufti if this is kufr or not and renew your imaan and nikah.
''Neither is the conduct reflected above in accordance with the Sunnah or the manhaj or mizaj of the Ulama of Deoband.''
***either you are living in delusion or deliberately trying in vain to mislead the awaam again. It is a grave sin and crime to falsety attributed something not to be from Sunnah, or the manhaj and mizaj of ulama of deoband.
It is exactly the manhaj and mizaj of deoband to repel , rectify, dissect the 'baatil' and propagate the haqq.
Do you sincerely believe that the mizaj and manhaj of ulama of deoband swallow and digest the slanders of a jaahil against such a reliable and authentic muttaqi muftiof deoband?
Do you believe the ulama of deoband let a jaahil sweet talk them into letting his venmous slanders published for innocent public viewing and the jaahil in return praises them in being open minded and tolerant?
One question for you: is it from sunnah to lie and slander a senior pious alim mufti? Is it from sunnah to keep your eyes closed on such crimes because the liar/slanderer has an experience of refuting batil for ' a decade and a half' in his arsenal?
Assalamu alaykum . I am around on this site for a while and i have to admit how shocked how juhala are able to issue their own interpretations of fatawa and proclaim falsehood and hurl out insults at other mumineen. And honestly i ask myself how such unacademic and childish behavior has been tolerated and backed up for so long and mureeds of the respected aalim have been attacked and duped as shameless individuals, high school drop outs, followers of a cult, fake nurses and many other things the respected readers here witnessed.
I have to say that so far whatever the mufti issued is done in accordance of supplies of evidence in any form. Be it in regards to medicine, tariq jameel or other issues. Even though his words are harsh but the truth and
concern for this stray ummat can be seen and felt in it.
Even the respective mufti taqi is harsh in his tones. My husband could relate some experience during his study in darul uloom. But this does not find way in such forums and his respective students comply with his at times firm and harsh tones.
Hadhrat thanvi r.a. Was worse in his harshness and proclaiming the truth. Once a brother complained to hadhrat Thanvi r.a. That islam is too difficult for him. So hadhrat got up and slapped him in his face stating to leave as islam does not need such people.
Nowadays every jahil with a computer, smart phone and a internet connection seem to believe that he/she is qualified to comment and disrupt fatawa and statements of the ulema and their mureed while being driven with a full load of takkabur on the back.
We live in pakistan and I can only confirm the viles and evil behavior of MTJ. We have to leave aside nationalism and high personalities and focus on facts and sharia. The biggest ulema err, slip and fall. Pride and the want for name and fame, luxury and is the biggest enemy to an aalim.
And look around. How many so called ulema have luxury cars, drivers, mansions, made haram halaal and fit fatawa to the public desire. An aalim represents the ambiya a.s.. Now reflect on that.
How much sins and crimes have been committed on this forum toward the sincere ones ? And outside this electronic nutshell. May Allah reward you for putting out the correct informations and the admin for finally
letting it be seen to all.
Its not for the laymen to question the hukm of Allah and the fatawa given. It has been mentioned here on this site by that brother : so a doctor who spent 8 years studying medicine is stupid?.. On that vaccine forum. ..So my question is an aalim who studied more than a doctor, and that brother, and became khalifa of
hadhrat maseeullah khan r.a. At the age of 17 during his studies is not qualified and does issue fatawc without proof and investigations???
Its sad that the ulema on this site could not step in in the vaccine forum and this incident as well as others in regard to this brothers
tone of voice and what was said and to whom . And let it be said , criticism toward the brother muadh has not be hurled out as because of whom he is but because of what he writer and how and to whom. I have no idea who this brother is , neither anybody never we know. But i know that his behavior is not like insaaan has to present himself. Wa salaam
This comment has been flagged.
Why would a fatwa written by someone sitting in South Africa affect someone sitting in Pakistan? Pakistan is blessed with very high-calibre muftis. If I wanted to know a position about someone from Pakistan then I would seek the opinion of a mufti in Pakistan and not someone thousands of miles away in South Africa.
Becausr the muftis of Pakistan have adopted silence as a code of life.
Because you follow in Pakistan the deen revealed in Arab.
Because the only alim e haq who has the taufeeq to proclaim the haq is sitting in South Africa.
Because you seek fatawa about afghanistan from muftis sitting in pakistan.
Because seek fatawa about syria from ulama sitting in europe.
The same logic should be used .....
This comment has been flagged.
Hard to fathom why so much brouhaha over Hadrat Allamah AS Desai(HA)'s 'bedfellow of kuffar shiahs' comment on Maulana Tariq Jameel if it doesn't affect someone sitting in Pakistan.Why only Hadrat Allamah AS(HA) is singled out for slander and insult for the comment when even Hadrat Allamah Sarfaraz Safdar(ra) has called Maulana Tariq Jameel an agent of baatil sects on page-53 of his refutation CHAND GHALAT TAWEELAT(Kalimatul Haadi),and Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias(HA) has honored Maulana Tariq Jameel with the comments like;in question 8399:So called Deobandi Alim,totally confused,perhaps not mentally well,he is a babbling bunkum,he could be a hidden Shia-expose him by name so the general public are aware,this person does not know simple basics,this person is lost and trying his utmost to loose others.Expose him totally so that the Imaan and Islaam of others are protected.In question 8402:This person does not know his own History,lack of proper knowledge leads to such drivel,this is voicing Shiaism.In question 8403:This person is silly,nonsense-which Darul Uloom has this person studied in? What exactly has the objector done for the service of Deen in any field? Show us what you the objector has achieved? This person is highly confused between Shiaism ans Maududism and is making a wrong claim of being from the Ahlus Sunnat wal Jamaat.Stay far from him.In question 8408:This person cannot be a Deobandi Sunni Hanafi.In question 8409:Separate the wood from the trees is not difficult but not for this person.In question 10165:There is absolutely no precedence for such a ludicrous act.In question 10208:The Tabligh Jamaat should distance themselves from the wrong views of Moulana Tariq Jameel.Can read this on alislam dot co dot za.Maulana Tariq Jameel should think before voicing Shiaism.Hadrat Allamah Sarfaraz(ra) writes in Irshaadush Shiah page-210:'Whoever hesitated in the kufr of Shiah,he is also a kaafir like them only'.
This comment has been flagged.
The blind flock is quiet because if they do proclaim the haqq it would highlight their own flaw which is not an easy task. It is from sunnah to accept your mistake and rectify it infront of those it was made like the incident of Ghazwa tul Badr when Sawwad radhiallah unhu asked for his haq from the nabi of Allah sallallah alayhi wasallam. And the nabi of Allah felt no shame in giving him his haqq. Indeedit is very difficult for the flock to accept their mistake of letting loose I.e why they are acting all cool nothing happend. It is the very reason nations lead into halakat themsleves due to a load of takabbur on their backs. The attitude on the vaccinne forum was shameful also like this slander against an alim . Those who assisst him in this slander are going against ayat of quran wa la taawanu alal ismi wal udwaan.
Just imagine if a poor user had done the same to muadh khan. The poor user would be insulted to death and chased away from the forum by the blind flock acting so pious. But everyone is quiet now. May Allah save us from takabbur. Ssurely takabbur leads to hellfire.
This comment has been flagged.
Mufti a.s desai has many times reminded us of akabir in the true sense morely of our rasoolullah sallallahu alayhi wsallm in never taking personal revenge or responding or getting angry on personal insults, slanders, llies. Mufti sahib was informed about criticisms against him online. His reply was:
"Our tareeqah is never to respond to or refute personal criticism. When we are personally criticized, we adopt silence. We vociferously stand up only for the Deen, never to defend ourselves."
The two attitudes are poles apart. One of humility other of ego pride. May Allah give us hidayat.
There's no point in such debates and arguments when things can only get worse.
Everyone please stop for the sake of your own akhira.
Allah says in the Noble Qur'an:'Malice against a people should not prompt you to avoid doing justice.Do justice.That is nearer to Taqwa.Fear Allah.Surely,Allah is All-Aware of what you do'.The Messenger of Allah said:'Verily,a person entitled to the right speaks out'.The devotees of Hadrat Maulana AS Desai(HA) had to step in when the cruel mockery of him exceeded all the limits.
Comments on this blog and censored and removed and no opportunity is being given to objectively respond to any of the slanderous remarks. This is not only unIslamic but also immoral. Shariah gives the right for all parties to represent their views. The comment section is filled with hate, slander and accusations while my blog is "disagreement" with Shaykh (Mufti) A.S.Desai (HA) for all to see and evaluate. Least the blogger should do is do is permit free and fair exchange of ideas
Before moving onto further examples of falsities and misrepresentations perpetrated by you, please substantiate the lies in just the example analysed in this post. Let's start with the first one:
1) The lie that Mufti Desai "...has no research into what he has said.�
Even if the fatwa did not explicitly state that Mufti Desai had come across the Haraam and Vile Antics of Maulana Tariq Jameel, this would stil have been a horrendous allegation.
The lie has become even more apparent since, as brother Akabir has pointed out, well before that fatwa, Mufti Desai stated in his book, ''status of makshufaat jamaat-' on page 23:
''In the perpetration of crass ghulu, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
THIS IS PROOF AVAILABLE PUBLICALLY FOR ALL TO VERIFY THAT MUFTI DESAI POSSESSED AMPLE INFORMATION REGARDING MAULANA TARIQ'S DEVIANCE WELL BEFORE THAT FATWA.
Anyway, let us get back to the first of your 'falsities'. Please explain exactly your methods of verifying and coming to the conclusion that Mufti Desai "...has no research into what he has said.�
Answer the question please and do not attempt to mislead the readers with answers that have no relevance to the slanders committed.
Lastly, please do not try to avoid this simple question. I repeat, substantiate your horrendous accusation (one of many that we will discuss now) that Mufti Desai possessed no research into what Maulana Tariq Jameel has said.
Im more than surprised how respected brother muadh khan has swtiched to denial mode and fail to see such a simple point. Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi rajioon.
.... this is not only unislamic but immoral. Shariah gives the right for all parties to represent their views ....
*** the irony *** and its perfectly islamic and moral to slander a muttaqi mufti in public domain. Shariah doesn't give this right to anyone!
Shariah gives the right for all parties to represent their views but as brother deoband stated earlier this right was taken away from him through humiliation and clear violation of 'shariah' by the concerned parties.
Brother muadh khan has the venue of blogging open for him to respond to any injustices he claims to be perpretuated against him. Hallucination should not be taken as valid substantual claim of ilmi ghaybi. There is no hatred, slander and accusations against brother muadh khan in any comments.
Lest your eye should shy away from examining the mark on your face. We make dua to Allah swt to show brother muadh khan the reality of his mistakes.
This comment has been flagged.
Brother Muadh, I request you to stop trying to get this blog post deleted. I have not slandered you. Rather, I take your allegation against myself that I have committed continuous "abuse, slander and accusations", as a slander itself.
You are free to comment here. I have not censored any comments thus far. If Mufti Yasin or any of the admins think that I should not have approved any of the comments above, then they are free to inform me and I will delete them inshallah.
However, I have yet to come across any comments that comes close to the crimes that you have committed against Mufti Desai. Remember this is just ONE example. There are many others. Please open your eyes with regards to this one example. Everyone can see that you have made a tragic error. It is terribly sad that everyone can also see that you appear to be completely unrepentant.
Please ask any sincere friend of yours who is not afraid of speaking the Haqq and losing your friendship, regarding the truth behind the horrendously erroneous misrepresentations and falsities that you have committed in just this one example.
I wished only to limit it to just his one example and not move onto other instances of your crimes. I hoped this one example would be sufficient to open your eyes and the eyes of those readers who may have been fooled by you. However, it appears that I may have to bring more examples of your horrendous misrepresenations of the statements and fatwas of Mufti Desai.
Just yesterday an Aalim residing in an Arab country contacted me thanking me, and saying that he had also been completely fooled by the negative and false propaganda against Mufti Desai - such negative and false propaganda committed by the likes of you.
If you wish not to repent for your crimes and wish to continue, then you are free to comment here. And again, do not accuse anyone of censoring or deleting comments unless you possess Ilmul Ghayb.
Thus far I have not yet censored any comments. The reasons why I did not censor any comments thus far are:
1) Anyone is free to reply or address any comments they feel are incorrect. What one person may feel incorrect may be deemed correct by another person. A good example that demonstrates this is that many people had unjustly gained the horrendously erroneous impression that some of the statements and fatwas of Mufti Desai were completely incorrect when in reality they were not. I did not want to adopt a policy of censorship for this comments section.
2) I have not seen anything worse than some of the misrepresentations and 'falsities' perpetrated by brother Muadh with regards to the statements and fatwas of Mufti Desai. The blog post analyses ONLY one example. There are other examples on the forum which have remained uncensored for many many months. Up till now, I did not want to highlight or address them, since I felt that just this one example is sufficient deter the sincere readers from taking seriously any inept criticism by a layman of the fatwas of a senior Mufti.
Nevertheless, if the admins/authorizers believe that certain comments should have been censored then they are free to override me and/or give me guidelines on what kind of comments need to be censored.
An advice of Hadrat Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi(ra)
This advice is taken from Hadrat Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi(ra)'s letter ''Criticism And The Right Of Criticism'' for the guidance of Ummah.This advice is not directed at any particular person.
He writes,''You know that the Ulama of this Ummah have carried out their duties whilst disregarding all obstacles. They have been sworn at; they have been painted with all types of labels; they have been ridiculed; they have been pierced with the arrows of accusations; but they (the Ulama) had to carry out their duty, and have verily tried to do so. As long as they have life and the power of speech in them, it must not be expected that they will refrain from committing the "offence" of calling a spade a spade, or day a day, and night a night.
There is a proverb in Arabic: 'For everything that falls, there is one who will find it'. Everyone surely finds someone with whom one shares common ideas and thoughts.
Tanqeed is an Arabic word which means to gauge, assay, examine, inspect, test and to ascertain the truth from untruth. In the Urdu asuage it means to be catious, seize on trifling faults, reveal shortcomings: i.e. Tanqeed will mean that after examining a thing, an error is ascertained, then its weak precints are proclaimed. When we say that a certain person criticised someone, then nothing else will be understood besides that the weak points of the person criticised are brought to light. That person was examined and all faults and shortcomings were revealed.
Whatever thing or person that is the centre of criticism, the first picture that comes to mind regarding that thing or person is that it or that person is not reliable, hence it or that person needs examining. Only after an examination could it be ascertained whether this thing or person is reliable, because that which is hundred percent reliable does not necessitate an examination. I am sure you have not yet seen a wise person in this world, who goes around examining reliable things. It is an accepted fact that, there is no necessity to test or inspect reliable things or personalities. Those things that are wothy of criticism, are not reliable.
Do you know that when one criticises another, what is meant by this? Listen, if the knowledge of a person is criticised (even if it is regarding one Mas'alah or an affair), it will mean that in this Mas'alah the opposite person's view is incorrect, or the knowledge of the criticiser is superior. If the understanding of one is attacked, it will mean the criticiser's understanding is superior. If the deeds of a person are attacked, it will mean that the deeds of the criticiser is of a higher standard. In short, for whatever reason the next person is criticised, it will mean that the knowledge, deeds, intelligence and understanding of the criticiser is superior.
At times the criticiser is truly better than the opposite, but the criticiser in self vain imagination and aggrandisement regards himself to be superior. In Islam this is called 'Kibr' or 'Takabbur'. This is the same 'Kibr' which overtook Iblees, and through this wrong self aggrandisement, instead of being a 'Muallimul Malakut', he was cursed till the day of Qiyaamah
I would say this, that the motive of criticism is always that one feels 'Ana khayrum minhu' (I am better than him). It one is really superior to another in knowledge, understanding, deeds and morals, then verily one has the right to criticise another who has a lower standard. If one on his own accord feels superior, and if this is his motive, then every Mu'min should beseech Allah for His protection
Now in reality if the criticiser is superior in knowledge, understanding, deeds, Taqwa etc. than these whom he has criticised, then, without doubt he has the right to cirticise them, But if in comparison to these ulama, he really is lower, and has the urge to criticise, then what can his motive be besides high mindedness, arrogance, self-conceit and Takabbur?
May Allah Ta'aala give us and the entire Ummah the Tawfeeq of following this golden advice, and keep us on the straight path. (Aameen).��
Muhammad Yusuf Ludhianvi (Shaheed - Rahimahullah)
I am not attempting to get the blog deleted but requested Maulana to delete slanderous, and disrespectful comments and to ensure that my comments are not deleted and I have now been given that assurance. You have the right to disagree (ofcourse) so let�s discuss this again in a comprehensive manner and Insha�Allah all of your responses will be discussion. Firstly Shaykh ***(Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA)*** on July 8th 2012 (on youtube look for v=LppxNhdnpxQ) gave a talk in which he said that Tableeghees informed him of the �visiting the Shia� incident and Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel Saheb (HA) himself came to his Darul-uloom and asked for his mistakes to be rectified and he will be honoured by this. Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) said that in 40 years he has not been affected by a Bayan nor has he cried this much and he said Allah (SWT) has placed the love for Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel Saheb (HA) in the hearts of the creation. This is the reality of the relationship between the two Ulama so first and foremost present your evidence about Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) as you have claimed. Jazakallahu Khayran
Before proceeding further, I would like to point out that neither the original Fatwa (The Majlis Volume 22/Number 3) given around September 2013 nor the longer Fatwa given around February 2014 (entitled TARIQ JAMEEL�S BAATIL �TABLEEGH�) has any mention of Darul-uloom Ahsanul-uloom or Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA), this matter has been introduced by Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum). The opinion of ***(Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA)*** on July 8th 2012 (on youtube look for v=LppxNhdnpxQ) is exactly opposite of what Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) is publicizing and the important note is that Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) is neither quoting it nor mentioning it! Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) should at least clear this matter and prove this theory which he has expounded by associating his thinking with the name of both Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) and Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) in his blog. ****SECONDLY*** and most critically and crucially my blog is about the original Fatwa (The Majlis Volume 22/Number 3) given around September 2013 and there is NO MENTION of any Alim or any associated Fatwa as admitted by Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) himself
MUADH KHAN SAID:
However, he is not authorising comments and feedback on his blog as per the policy of Muftisays and censoring the debate and this is against your policy. Detailed comments on his blog have been deleted so the HATRED has merely moved from the forum to the blog.
He wanted censorship and impunity and he has got it on the blog.
END QUOTE
This is another blatant lie and slander of yours, against myself, offered to the admins. Where is your proof that I censored any of your posts? Or is it another one of your repeated Ilmi Ghaybi claims? Answer this question please.
Stop evading answering for your slanderous claims.
I shall soon focus on one 'falsity' at a time so that you will no longer have the opportunity to mislead the unwary.
Before we begin our discussion, I would like to request you not to propagate the �falsity� that I did not wish to engage you in a discussion. Surely, you are aware of the multiple threads that I had opened requesting permission from the admins to have a PUBLIC discussion with you?
The ONE thread, and I repeat the number ONE, in which I requested no discussion was only after multiple threads had been closed or had disappeared based on reasons such as someone having requested it due to it having turned into a debate or that you were being slandered (which is actually a slander against me). I even stated this reason explicitly in that very thread � i.e. the reason for avoiding �discussion� in that ONE thread was because discussion in all the other threads eventually became reported as �debate� or �slander�, resulting in sudden closure or disappearance of that thread.
Any post such as the blog post here, which conclusively proves your obscene crimes, was immediately interpreted as 'slander' by you, and immediately reported for closure or instant disappearance. And you have the audacity to claim that I wished to avoid a public discussion with you.
I even requested you directly to seek the same provision for yourself that you had gained from the admins for a public discussion with brother al-Qasim.
What is your purpose in feigning ignorance of my repeated requests to the admins of engaging you in a PUBLIC discussion? Is it to mislead the unwary?
If you are attempting to mislead the unwary then let me state that it�s clearly not working.
A few of the commenters here have criticised your friends, described as �blind flock�, for adopting silence in the face of your crimes. However, I�d rather give credit to your 'blind flock', if they even exist, for not demonstrating even the feintest support for you. That's how clear your crimes are.
It�s been a couple of weeks since this blog post has been published. Within a couple of days there were thousands of views and multiple comments. Yet, not one person, not even your closest friends, have come out in defense of you, or demonstrated any outrage at the alleged �slander� that I had committed against you. The admins have clearly not seen any slander in my blog post. This in itself demonstrates how clear the crimes committed are. And where does this place your allegation of slander against myself? Another slander against myself?
Now that you're here for good, we shall focus thoroughly on every individual 'falsity' and get to the bottom of each crime you are guilty of.
As far as I can see, you are the only one to constantly pester the admins into submitting to your continuous, incessant demands. I do not see any of your �blind flock� following you anywhere, or even expressing the slightest outrage at the blog post above.
Anyway, you are here now, and I can have the public discussion right here � the one that I REPEATEDLY sought from the admins in multiple threads. I assure you that I will take special care to approve all your posts.
I hope you will not leave prematurely since I wish to address not only the horrendous misrepresentations and falsities that you had perpetrated with regards to the fatwa above, but also your crimes committed with regards to other fatwas and statements.
Deoband did **NOT** even mention Mufti Zar Wali Khan in the blog, nor in the comments.
Muadh Khan is either extremely weak at following arguments, or he is using Mufti Zar Wali Khan as a red herring to confuse people. This is a very poor standard of discussion.
This comment has been flagged.
This comment has been flagged.
This matter�as we see it is a test from couple of dimensions. A test for the admins of the forum, for brother muadh khan, for brother deoband and for all those who adhere to the teachings of hazrat mufti as desai.
The admins had to make sure that lies and slanders against a muttaqi mufti by layman was not allowed to be displayed in the public domain. But sadly it was allowed and still up there. This criticism is not accepted by the shariah. Alulama warathatul ambiya. A layman does not have the right to slander or, crticise unjustly, make up lies against an alim albeit of such stature.
Logical lies and irrational dalail were expounded to refute mufti as desai's fatwas. It is claimed that these were academic refutations but for the trained eye it was bereft of any academic substance. The unwary public (and learnes in some cases) were the most effected. We reiterate again that the effect was not limited to some gaining stature and increasing their acceptance in unsuspectible minds by supposedly refuting a high caibre, but these refutations by laymen cause a much larger ripple in the minds of the unwary (and wary) to take them farthest from the truth.
This criticism should have been blocked in the first place but it wasnt. Test ***** passed???
Second test was for brother muadh khan which we will deal in comprehensively simple terms at the end of this post.
The test for brother deoband was how he conducts himself in light of the crimes perpetrated against an alim he believes to be the torch bearer of the haqq. alhamdulillah he exercised great caution and displayed commendable akhlaaq in comparison to the other concerned (and non concerned) parties. This blog post might become zariya e nijat for brother deoband as he has defended the haqq through it.
The spectators (as defined by brother deoband in the comments above) have failed miserably again and again by trying in vain to move the matter into the shadows. They sided with the clear baatil using ambiguous and deceptive notions believing themselves to be upright in justice. If you cant stand up for the haqq nor can you support it theb remain silent.
Now we come back to muadh khan's test. After refuting baatil for the last decade and a half and advertising it (his amaal) he suddenly gained the right to slander a ahl e haq reliable authentic mufti buzurg who reminds you of salf e saliheen. He found it his islamic sense of duty to refute mufti as desai and save the public from the evils of mufti desai's fatwas. What was required from him was to humble himself and leave the matter as a difference of opinion. The most correct stance to adopt morally and islamically was to utilize the insitution of sipplence in such matters - say khair or be quiet. This was his test. But muadh khan could not contain himself and slandered mufti saheb opebly in public I sulting him many a times. Im surprised how this disrespect was allowed to be displayed and it is still up for everyone to see. He painted mufti saheb as some fool who doesnt know a spoon from a bowl. Inthe refutation of qibla fatwa muadh khan severely disrespected mufti desai by lying that mufti desai thibks the world is flat. No one took notice at this severe disrespect.
The refutations are bereft of all academic substance and use logical (illogical) and irrational emotional arguments to turn the unwary into believing what he claimed as the haqq.
How can a jaahil (layman) compare to a mufti who s his life in ilm e deen? Now if we call him jaahil he finds it slander and disrespect to himself and tries to get these comments removed. The irony****
Inshort muadh khan has failed miserably in his test. Now we will examine the matter of this blogpost decisively showing what muadh khan is doing is gathering more dirt into his nama e amaal.
********
Mufti desai issued a fatwa against Maulana Tariq Jameel in the following words:
We do not know who this chap Tariq Jameel is. However, we have been hearing lately of his vile and haraam antics. If what you have attributed to this character is correct, then undoubtedly, he is a bedfellow of the kuffaar Shiahs. When your Shaikhul Hadith issues the necessary Fatwa, do forward a copy to us.�
******
Mufti as desai explicitly mentioned that we have been hearing lately of his vile and haram antics.
Now muadh khan's islamic sense of duty did not let him sit quietly when he saw this fatwa. His ghairah obliged him to make the following slanderous comments against mufti sahib.
Hazrat (HA) admits that he doesn�t know this �chap� called Tariq Jameel, has no research into what he has said and YET chosen to remove the title �Maulana� on the basis of an email and ascribed him to a bedfellow of Kuffar Shiahs all based on an email��
Before dissecting the lies in this comment we would like to state that it is indeed sad that the same spectators who were quoting hadith and digging up old signatures for brother deoband, they adopted complete silence over this grave slander and lie against the last living sign of akaabir e deoband. Atleast show some ghairah for the same akaabir we take the names of. He who remians silent from speaking the haq is a dumb shaytaan ~ quote.
**** now let us analyze muadh khan's comment:
... has no research into what he has said!!!
This claim (from ilme ghayb) is a blatant lie portraying the honorable mufti sahev as a trigger happy unreliable mufti!!
2) ... all based on AN email!!!
Another lie!! Muadh khan the torch bearer of islamic morals and justice twice slandered mufti as desai in 5 lines.
This comment amply proves that muadh khan firmly believed (and made others believe) that mufti desai has no research into the matter of maulana tariq jameel and showed irresponsibility by giving a fatwa based on one email.
17th november 2013 was the date this comment was made. For 5-6 months muadh khan was unaware of any of mufti desai's research and sources until brother deoband decided to post the above blogpost mentioning only a few of mufti desai
Sources of research.
The matter was clear as day now. Muadh khan lied that mufti desai had no research. Brother deoband mentioned mufti as desais sources abd kater it was proved beyond doubt by written evidence (text from his book makshoofat jamaat) that mufti as desai had prior research about maulana tariq jameel.
Instead of accepting his crime and retracting his words and apologizing to the unwary awaam muadh khan switched to denial mode, took out bew ammunition and started a new barrade of accusations and slanders. This time he decided to attack the sources and some scapegoats which were a figment of his hallucinations. Brother deoband is also being attacked with unacceptable indignity ~ the taunts damatbarakatuhum mudda fuyoozuhum.
Some more lies of muadh khan (to hide one lie you have to make up 100 more lies)
Comments on this blog and censored and removed and no opportunity is being given to objectively respond to any of the slanderous remarks. This is not only unIslamic but also immoral.
It does not make any sense either for brother muadh khan to cry about comments being censored he has considerable amount of infuence on the admins of the forum. He can make a blog and/or he can create a thread to discuss this matter freely voicing his views and opinions. Just like he did with brother al-qasim.
*** brother deoband has categorically stated that he has not censored removed or deleted any comments.
Again an attempt to deceive the public.
Continued
I really don't understand you guys.
Muadh Khan has clearly stated that his comments are based on the earlier fatwa which was very vague for anyone to comprehend.
QUOTE:
****SECONDLY*** and most critically and crucially my blog is about the original Fatwa (The Majlis Volume 22/Number 3) given around September 2013 and there is NO MENTION of any Alim or any associated Fatwa as admitted by Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) himself
END QUOTE:
Yet you guys are beating around the bush trying to convince others that Muadh has misrepresented everyone with his comments.
Those of you calling his "Flock" names too have back bitten them too and those allowing these non-sense comments are part and parcel of the said crime.
So one can only thank Allah for your rewards being handed over to them and for taking away theirs ;)
Talk about "BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION"
THE CENSORSHIP SLANDER AND A CLEAR SIGN OF GUILT
**********************************************
MUADH KHAN SAID:
**********************************************
However, he is not authorising comments and feedback on his blog as per the policy of Muftisays and censoring the debate and this is against your policy. Detailed comments on his blog have been deleted so the HATRED has merely moved from the forum to the blog. He wanted censorship and impunity and he has got it on the blog. ***********************************************
END QUOTE
I testify that the above statement is a blatant lie and slander against myself. I have not yet censored a single comment here. The numerous comments that have suddenly been deleted recently is a result of Muadh�s constant pestering of the admins.
Despite coming across numerous blatant slanders committed against Mufti Desai, and against myself, I have not requested from any of the admins (as far as I can recall) to delete or censor any comment/post/thread. I feel confident I can demonstrate the true nature of these slanders to the sincere reader.
The one thread in which I requested forum users not to �discuss�, and which Muadh clings to desperately for his agenda, came only after several attempts of mine�s to expose these slanders publically had been censored. Thread after thread disappeared due to �someone� desperately reporting such threads to have turned into �debates� or containing slander. It's not too hard guess who that 'someone' might have been.
Since exposing these slanders for what they truly are would naturally also reveal the true nature of Muadh who perpetrated these slanders, it is in the interest of Muadh for as much as possible to be censored as possible.
Right from the time this blog was posted, he made requests for it to be edited or deleted. If Muadh truly believed that I had slandered him, then he is perfectly able to expose these slanders without the need for any censorship.
In conclusion, Muadh�s latest slanderous accusation against myself that I have censored information, actually fits him perfectly.
We have noticed that our comments have been deleted. It is indeed sad because our comments were not comprised of any slanders, lies, hatred, abuse or disrespect. What we find most astonishing is the fact that the forum admin being a mufti cannot accept disrespect of a jaahil (layman) but disrespect and lies by the same jaahil about a senior authentic mufti has been put up on display for a long time.
***quote by muadh khan
Our dear respected Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) is presuming Earth to be flat and this argument doesn't require refuted in this day and age.
***
The revert german sister was abused, insulted, and bullied all in the name of Islamic ghairah and morality. All that was acceptable.
We do not ask the admins to delete the lies and slabders against hazrat allamah mufti as desai because we firnly believe that Allah swt is the best of the judges and there will be a day when everything will be laid down dry and sundry. Let these blogs and disrespect of mufti as desai be witness on the day of judgement against those who committed them.
We repeat this is not about mufti as desai or the "cultish mentality". This is about defending the true alim e haq of our times which inturn is standing up for the haq.
Bismillaahi ta'ala
Assalaamu 'alaykum warahmatullah all.
Brother Deoband (and others here), I appreciate what you're trying to do because I know where you're coming from.
Now, I do not "know" many of you (i.e. from forum interaction) as most of the names here are unfamiliar to me. If you know who I am in terms of my posts you will be aware of my online disagreements with brother Muadh on such issues (I say �such issues� because otherwise I have a deep respect for his online work).
The reason I have decided to post after following the blog since I came across it, is that I feel with all my heart that we (as an online community) are not benefitting the deen of Allah ta'ala in any way whatsoever by the direction in which these type of discussions go. We may even be party to the ploys of shaytaan in creating disunity and in keeping people away from our respected and beloved Ulama and Mashaikh and may Allah ta'ala protect us from that!
I truly believe that you were right to stand up to what you believe to be slanderous statements against none other than a renowned, highly acclaimed member of the Ulama. However I feel I must mention something for the sake of Allah ta'ala to stop this developing any further into a situation with which shaytaan will be immensely pleased.
After my own experiences in similar situations and after giving it deep thought, I have come to believe (Unfortunately the realisation came too late) that once the stand has been made and the correct information has been stated against objectionable statements against respected Ulama/Mashaikh, the discussion should not be continued to the extent where all sides become a source of fitnah, badghumaani and to say it in crude terms, a "circus". We are all after all, on the same �side�. We are not dealing with deviants or atheists here.
Regarding Brother Muadh:
As for my brother Muadh, I have to mention that I truly believe he has deep sincerity and therefore he does what he does with firm conviction that it is the right thing to do in the same way that brother Deoband, myself and others have felt the need to make a stand. This is apparent in all his online work and may Allah ta'ala grant acceptance however in situations such as this present topic regarding the ahlullaah, I believe Brother Muadh needs to rethink his stance for his own sake and for the good of the ummah at large.
The questions we should all be asking ourselves (Myself included) are, are we, by our online work/statements pleasing Allah ta�ala? Are we bringing the straying ummah closer to the Ulama which is a great need in today's climate or are we distancing them? This is not in any way an attack on anyone because I myself have been a party to discussions which should have been curtailed for the sake of Allah ta�ala. If I am incorrect in my understanding of the situation then may Allah ta'ala correct me.
Request to both sides: please let it go for the sake of Allah ta'ala!
PS as for the editing of comments on the blogs, I do not see an option for it. I do not think its even possible. We are given only two options, one of accepting and the other of deleting. I do not know who can �flag� the comments or how, as I do not see an option for that either.
Since our dear respected Brother and elder Hazrat Deoband (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) is bringing comments from the forum into this discussion and confusing the issue, let me repeat again that some of the comments are missing from this blog. I raised two issues with Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA) which are: Firstly, Slander and disrespect and Secondly, comments not being authorized. Our dear respected Brother and elder Hazrat Deoband (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum)has said that he hasn't deleted them and in the same thread (on the forum) it has been stated that it could be due to technical issues so I take that on face value in order for the discussion to proceed further. The abuse, slander and disrespect will continue to be censored (as should). If you have any responses please let me know so we can settle this before proceeding further and discussing issues. I will be flagging every post to the attention of Maulana (as agreed) because we can discuss Insha'Allah but there is no room for disrespect.
Secondarily, the disagreement here between me and our dear beloved and respected Deoband (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) aka SeekerofGuidance and now with our dear beloved and respected Akaabir (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) here and now also taken to the main forum is NOT between me and Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) at all but between me and primary individual (SeekerofGuidance) whom I happen to know personally. Therefore the slander, disrespect and accusations of a layman disagreeing with an Alim are inadmissible and irrelevant and according to forum guidelines and rules and thereby liable to be reported. The same method is also open to our dear beloved and respected Deoband (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) aka SeekerofGuidance and our dear beloved and respected Akaabir (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) to report and have action taken. They can equally click on a post, comment or blog and report it, Insha�Allah. For the record a) I have NEVER met Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA), b) I have NEVER EVEN spoken to Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA) so to accuse him that somehow he is on my side and favouring me is PURE SLANDER to an Alim and all those who Masha�Allah respect Ulama (and we should) should take action on slanderous remarks on the character of Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA) [forum Ameer] and Brothers Abu Muhammad [forum Authoriser]. Our dear beloved and respected Deoband (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) happens to be a Moderator at Sunniforum so he should know what it feels like to be accused in this manner. So I request everyone reading this to DROP the Slander here (and on the forum) against Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA), if you have a problem with me (lets discuss) but no need to get emotionally charged up and started dragging XYZ into the discussion. So far I am still waiting for someone to justify the dragging of Darul-uloom Ahsanul-uloom (Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan HA)) into it without proof! I have provided proof of his opinion on the matter and the reason I responded is because it has been said that Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) relied on him (see post on 12th by our dear beloved and respected Akaabir (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum)). Then the issue of the German Sister is being brought up which can also be easily explained! I am waiting for anyone to discuss the fundamental point which is the �original Fatwa� but if people want to drag Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA), Abu Muhammad, Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) and the German Sister that�s fine we can also discuss them to see how shallow this discussion is (by those who chose to clarify). This is the 6th or 7th attempt our dear beloved and respected Deoband (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) aka SeekerofGuidance at trying to clarify the same thing and every single one so far ends with him complaining that the whole world is stacked against him and biased. This time I am disadvantaged at not been able to formulate my responses accurately and correctly but Insha�Allah the Help and Assistance of Allah (SWT) is requested. For the record and for the umpteenth time, I have NOTHING against Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) I communicated with him (this morning)! The issue here isn't between me and him but between me and our dear beloved and respected Deoband (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) aka SeekerofGuidance in his 6th or 7th attempt! Insha'Allah he is our beloved brother and I will keep on urging him to describe his feelings and I have also offered him multiple times to discuss whatever is on his mind in a candid manner (before I even knew who he was). He is my elder and my Senior, Insha'Allah but insults, disrespect and slander will not be tolerated. The blogs disagreeing with Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) are there for all to read and witness, nothing needs to be added about them.
CONCLUSIVE ANALYSIS OF LIE/SLANDER NUMBER ONE
��has no research into what he has said�
OVERWHELMING PROOFS FOR THIS STATEMENT BEING FALSE
1) It is absolutely impossible for Muadh to have been monitoring every single correspondence, email, reports, books, pamphlets, audio, video footage, etc. received in the personal office of Mufti Desai, during the months before that fatwa was finally issued, in order to have been able to make such a horrendous allegation designed to tarnish the integrity of any Aalim.
2) An Alim of Taqwa such as Mufti Desai would without a shadow of doubt have had received multiple reliable reports from reliable sources of the Haraam and Vile antics before issuing such a fatwa.
3) The few lines in the fatwa itself states explicitly: �we have been hearing lately of his vile and haraam antics.� !!!!!!!
4) In the book, Makshufaat Jamaat, published well before that Fatwa, it is stated: �'In the perpetration of crass ghulu, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
5) An Aalim and close mureed of Mufti Desai has personally informed me that Mufti Desai had received much information on the Haraam and Vile antics of Maulana Tariq Jameel before issuing that fatwa. The Aalim mentioned just a few of the sources which are found in the blog post.
************************************************
************************************************
LAST RESORT TO BE TAKEN IF THE TRULY BLIND STILL FAIL TO SEE THE SLANDER
Mufti Desai is always reluctant to defend himself. Nevertheless if I feel it absolutely necessary I will give enough convincing reasons to persuade him to answer the following possible query:
POSSIBLE QUERY TO BE MADE AS LAST RESORT
************************************************
�Hazrat, it is claimed that before issuing the fatwa in The Majlis Volume 22/Number 3 you had no research into what Maulana Tariq Jameel has said. Please forgive us for having the audacity to doubt your integrity, but could you please confirm whether or not you issued such a fatwa of kufr and deviance without having �any research into what he has said.�
We know that the perpetrator of that outrageous allegation did not possess Ilm Ghayb, nor did he have access to all your documents, correspondences, emails, reports, audio, video footage, etc. for the months before issuing that fatwa.
Furthermore, you explicitly stated in your short fatwa, �we have been hearing lately of his vile and haraam antics.�
Furthermore, we have found the following statement in your Makshufaat published well before that fatwa: �'In the perpetration of crass ghulu, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
Furthermore, your close Mureed, [name omitted], also confirmed to me that you had received much information on the Haraam and Vile antics of Maulana Tariq Jameel, well before that fatwa.
Despite all this, there are some who are still insistent that the horrendous allegation that you had no research into what Maulana Tariq Jameel has said is not slanderous!
Not only that, they continue to defend and justify such an slanderous allegation as merely a friendly 'disagreement'!
And of course the perpetrator of this horrendous allegation (and many other allegations to come) says he loves and respects you.
So we would be truly grateful if you could answer the shameless, silly, redundant question on whether or not you had research into what Maulana Tariq Jameel has said before issuing such a strong fatwa of deviance.
JazakAllah Khair
************************************************
END OF POSSIBLE QUERY TO BE SENT AS LAST RESORT
*** brother deoband's quote
I am grateful to Allah (azza wa jal) that many eyes have opened so far with regards to the reality of these lies and slanders. The fact that even Ulama have been contacting me from various parts of the world to thank me and express their appreciation for helping them finally open their eyes with regards to the various horrendous allegations demonstrates how valuable and worthwhile this whole endeavour has been and continues to be. Alhamdulillah!
****
To affirm what brother deoband has stated we can provide you with a few concrete examples as to how this blog has tremendously helped people join the ranks of ""ghuraba". It is a the effect of ikhlaas of the brother that the haqq has echoed in the hearts and minds of those who were corrupted due to the negative image painted of mufti desai.
It is a great achievement in terms of akhirah for brother deoband. The burden of disunity in the ummah is on the other side. Baatil always propagates itself and refute others with a firm belief to be on the haqq. Maulana maududi believed himself to be on the haqq while maulana yusuf ludhinvi ra wrote pages refuting him. Maulana maududi's followers and even maulana tariq jameel has appreciated and praised the deeni work maulana maududi did in the masses but only the far sighted ulama could differentiate the truth from baatil.
Our most respected brother muadh khan has elusively evaded the simple question repeatedly and instead he is trying to create rifts between the ummah by dragging maulana yasin and others. They are being taken as shields to take fire. We are sure Allah has given them enough intellect to see truth from the batil and recognize this new ugly cheap tactic.
We expressed our concern that the slander and lies against mufti a s desai should not have been tolerated in the first place but every good horse also slips in the race. It was a brotherly concer.
A matter we want to make very clear is regarding mufti as desai and his defense. It should be clear thst yes we will get emotional and we will defend him against all slanders, lies, misrepresentations of his fatwas, any attempts at painting him in bad light will not be tolerated by us in any way. Whether anyone likes it or not or calls it a cultish mentality or emotional baggage it doesnt matter what you think or what you call it. Any and all academically bereft comments and refutations of his fatwas will not be taken lightly. This forum is by ulama e haq for upholding the integrity of ulama e haq. Ulama can disagree with mufti as desai as much as they want to but this right is not given to juhaal by the shariah.
In regards to slanders against our non existant selves and any personal Injustices or name (label) calling will be inshaAllah ignored by us and we will let go of our islamic right to be blessed by a house in the middle of the jannat as per the basharah of the hadith.
Forum ameer and other admins might not be able to recognize the batil due to human defeciencies but we inshaAllah will fulfill our duties as muslims by the taufeeq of Allah Ta�ala.
No response has been given so let me reiterate my point and ask again before proceeding. Do you agree that Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA) has nothing to do with this discussion and he has actually provided you with a platform to address your concerns. The basic premise of your argument revolves around respecting Ulama so do you agree that this should be extended to Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA). Slander and lies should be avoided against all Ulama so do you agree that since Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA) is also an Alim he should also be protected? Insha'Allah I hope that you will see the reasoning behind this request and address those commenting on the matter. You have the right to disagree with me but not to drag the honor and dignity of other Ulama into this discussion. Insha'Allah we will continue after you (and everybody reasonable Insha'Allah) agrees that Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA) the Ameer of this forum should NOT be dragged into, your discussion is with me and you are already targeting me (and that's fine). Discussions will resume once you have shown reasonable agreement to respecting all Ulama. EVEN if I am guilty of disrespect (which I am not) and committed a sin, others don't have the right to do the same Insha'Allah.Again, I hope that the matter is clear and understood and then we can carry the discussions onwards.
Also one more clarification, Islam asks me to seek a direct response so I am asking. Is our dear beloved and respected Deoband (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) aka SeekerofGuidance and our dear beloved and respected Akaabir (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) two people or the same person? This query alone doesn't require more abuse, disrespect or deflection merely a clarification while we are discussing the specifics of the Fatwa. Its a straight query so a straight answer is required.
Let me reiterate the 3rd time I didn't ask the blog (or differences to be deleted) but I did ask (and still standby) disrespectful, slanderous comments to be censored and I am admitting it. I am not saying that you have accused Maulana Yasin (HA) single handedly rather said that anybody who makes these sort of accusations towards ANY Ulama this should be refrained from (whoever does it). ***Do you agree or disagree with respect of Ulama to be universally applied and slander of Ulama to be universally condemned?*** Jazakallahu Khayran for your clarification I have followed Shariah and asked a straightforward question and you have responded to the query and plus more (which is between you and Allah (SWT). Once you agree to the uniformality of respect towards Ulama we can continue to discuss, Insha'Allah
CONCLUSIVE ANALYSIS OF LIE/SLANDER NUMBER TWO
�...chosen to remove the title �Maulana� on the basis of an email�
[i.e. note the singular 'an email' signifying just one email]
OVERWHELMING PROOFS FOR THIS STATEMENT BEING FALSE
1) It is absolutely impossible for Muadh to have been monitoring every single correspondence, email, reports, books, pamphlets, audio, video footage, etc. received in the personal office of Mufti Desai, during the months before that fatwa was finally issued, in order to have been able to make such a horrendous allegation designed to tarnish the integrity of any Aalim.
How on Earth did the perpetrator of the allegation make the Ilmi Ghaybi judgement that 'Maulana' was removed based on just one email?
2) An Alim of Taqwa such as Mufti Desai would without a shadow of doubt have had received multiple reliable reports from reliable sources of the Haraam and Vile antics before issuing such a fatwa and removing the title 'Maulana'.
3) The few lines in the fatwa itself states explicitly: �we have been hearing lately of his vile and haraam antics.� !!!!!!!
Those vile and haraam antics conveyed to Mufti Desai before the email would most definitely have played a role in prompting him not to use the title 'Maulana'.
4) In the book, Makshufaat Jamaat, published well before that Fatwa, it is stated: �'In the perpetration of crass ghulu, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
These Imaan-threatening views of which Mufti Desai was cognizant of well before the fatwa, most definitely would have played a role in him not using the title 'Maulana'.
5) An Aalim and close mureed of Mufti Desai has personally informed me that Mufti Desai had received much information on the Haraam and Vile antics of Maulana Tariq Jameel before issuing that fatwa. The Aalim mentioned just a few of the sources which are found in the blog post.
Such information again would have been more than sufficient to have prompted Mufti Desai to avoid using the title 'Maulana'.
Thus this horrendous allegation, camouflaged as friendly 'disagreement', is another blatant lie designed to tarnish Mufti Desai's integrity and to portray him as a trigger-happy and unfair Mufti in front of the awaam.
************************************************
************************************************
LAST RESORT TO BE TAKEN IF THE TRULY BLIND STILL FAIL TO SEE THE SLANDER
Mufti Desai is always reluctant to defend himself. Nevertheless if I feel it absolutely necessary I will give enough convincing reasons to persuade him to answer the following possible query:
POSSIBLE QUERY TO BE MADE AS LAST RESORT
************************************************
�Hazrat, it is claimed that in the fatwa on Maulana Tariq Jameel in The Majlis Volume 22/Number 3 you had removed the title 'Maulana' based on just that one email - the perpetrator of this horrendous allegation used the words �...chosen to remove the title �Maulana� on the basis of an email�.
Please forgive us for having the audacity to doubt your integrity and fairness, but could you please confirm whether or not you issued such a strong fatwa of deviance, and removed the title 'Maulana' just on 'an email'.
We know that the perpetrator of that outrageous allegation did not possess Ilm Ghayb, nor did he have access to all your documents, correspondences, emails, reports, audio, video footage, etc. for the months before issuing that fatwa. Such access would have been necessary for the criminal to have been able to make such a horrendous allegation that portrays you as a trigger-happy and unfair Mufti.
Furthermore, you explicitly stated in your short fatwa, �we have been hearing lately of his vile and haraam antics.�
Furthermore, we have found the following statement in your Makshufaat published well before that fatwa: �'In the perpetration of crass ghulu, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
Furthermore, your close Mureed, [name of Maulana omitted], also confirmed to me that you had received much information on the Haraam and Vile antics of Maulana Tariq Jameel, well before that fatwa.
Despite all this, there are some who are still insistent that the horrendous allegation that you removed the title 'Maulana' based on just 'an email', is not slanderous!
Not only that, they continue to defend and justify such slanderous allegations as merely friendly 'disagreement'!
And of course the perpetrator of this horrendous allegation (and many other allegations to come) says he loves and respects you.
So we would be truly grateful if you could answer the shameless, silly, redundant question on whether or not you had avoided using the title 'Maulana' for Maulana Tariq Jameel based on just one email, and that the Haraam, Vile, Bizarre, Imaan-threatening views of Maulana Tariq Jameel which you had already come to know of well before the fatwa, did not play any role in such a decision.
JazakAllah Khair
************************************************
END OF POSSIBLE QUERY TO BE SENT AS LAST RESORT
On reading this blog and most of the comments what I feel is brother "Deoband" and "Akaabir" are deaf, dumb and blind when an error & mistake is pointed in fatwaa issued by mufti A.S Desai (HA).
Instead they are justifying those mistake.
This doesn't mean I agree with brother "Muadh Khan".
When a person gets maqbooliyat of Allah subhanahu wa taala some people are unable to bear this and victimise a person.
This is what happend to Maulana Tariq Jameel (H.A). He was made a victim and a lengthy book was written against him.
Most of the poeple who are deeply drowned in sin, first of all don't realise that what they are doing is sin because they have no knowledge of Allah and Islam.
So first introduction of Allah and his beautiful deen is given. When this is done, 'sinners' automatically realise their mistake and leave it. This what tableeghis do and this what Maulan Tariq Jameel does in all his bayans.
But this is time consuming and in some cases it takes years, beacuse Hidyat is not in our hand. It is with Allah subhanahu wa taala. Is this action "haraam"?
Rememeber that no person is free of mistake, however big Mufti or Maulana he is and which ever sect/group/jamaat they belong too.
I am suprised that "Deoband" and "Akaabir" are not able to recognize this.
May Allah protect us all from all type of fitnah.
**** quote from brother muadh khan
Do you agree that Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA) has nothing to do with this discussion and he has actually provided you with a platform to address your concerns. The basic premise of your argument revolves around respecting Ulama so do you agree that this should be extended to Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA). Slander and lies should be avoided against all Ulama so do you agree that since Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA) is also an Alim he should also be protected? Insha'Allah I hope that you will see the reasoning behind this request and address those commenting on the matter. You have the right to disagree with me but not to drag the honor and dignity of other Ulama into this discussion. Insha'Allah we will continue after you (and everybody reasonable Insha'Allah) agrees that Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin (HA) the Ameer of this forum should NOT be dragged into, your discussion is with me and you are already targeting me (and that's fine).�
#end of quote
**** our comment
Respected brother, We request you as brothers in Islaam to stop vile attempts at creating rifts between muslims. Maulana Yasin was neither slandered nor disrespected. Concern was shown upon the display of your blatant lies about mufti as desai. As muslims we are entitled to show disapproval or dislike over a clear matter of injustice. This does not entail a disrespect or slander. Read the incident of Hazrat Umar radhiAllah anhu and the old lady. If maulana yasin and other admins of the forum feel dishonoured by any of our comments they can inform us in public or in private and we will happily retract our comments and offer an unreserved unco ditionally apology for disrespecting Maulana Yasin and other muslims. But if our criticism was just then it is incumbent on the other party to retract their position and clear the matter in this world.
The maqsad of the forum is not to create rifts between muslims or waste our time in futile arguments bereft of any worldly or ukhrawi benefit. The maqsad of an islamic forum should be the cultivation of taqwa and increment in amaal e salihah. We have restrained our nafsaani emotions of getting into an argument with you inspite of having the power to do so but our maqsad of life does not allow us. We do not want to burden ourselves with additional carriage for the day of judgement.
You on the other hand are guilty of crimes that are not small by any measure of the unit. Branding slanders as academic differences is a gross crime. The grave consequences have made roots far deeper than your misguided sense of understanding could fathom.
We request you to stop dragging respected maulana and others into this discussion as shields. They are irrelavant to your crimes. We will entertain your repeated attempts of discussions only if it pertains to the topic at hand nothing else is worth discussin with you. We assure you that there is no campaign against your personal life and we are in 'cahoots' with no one. We want to save the unwary from your venemous vile attacks and slanders against a muttaqi alim of haqq.
***** qoute of muadh khan
and our dear beloved and respected Akaabir (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum)�
#end of quote
**** our comment
Islaam demands us to directly inform you that we dont like the labels you are putting with our name. Specially when the labels are devoid of any sensible meanings and come across as taunts (mudda fuyuhum - whatever fuyuhum means). You may have a genuine intention and in reality they may not be taunts but we feel obliged by shariah to inform you politely to stop using them with our name.
And Islaam demands you to stop putting labels with the names of your muslim brothers when they dont like it. It was hinted before but we not taken heed of.
Lastly Islaam demands us to ask you directly one straight forward decisively simple question without complicating things:
How did you arrive at the conclusion that mufti as desai had no research on what he said, removed the ttitle maulana and declared maulana tariq jameel to be the bedfellow of the shias all based on ONE email.
Were you justified in this lie and slander without you possessing ilm e ghayb nor did you bother asking mufti sahib DIRECTLY as Islam demands youto do?
Answer my simple question.
How can mufti sb(H.A) pass on fatwa on person based on materials available online while saying he knows nothing about the person upon whom he is giving a fatwaa.
On reading this blog and most of the comments what I feel is brother "Deoband" and "Akaabir" are deaf, dumb and blind when an error & mistake is pointed in fatwaa issued by mufti A.S Desai (HA).�Instead they are justifying those mistake.�
*** respected brother hmdsalahuddin
We will respond to you inshallah with hope that you understand for the sake of your own akhirat.
If you believe us to be dumb deaf and blind and you advocate the methodology of maulana tariq jameel then it is incumbent on you morally to atleast adopt the same methodology with us to call us to the straightpath and not be harsh on us by calling us dumb deaf and blind. We are not offended on the least Alhamdulillah.
As for your comment it is as ambiguous as that of your your friend. You should understand one point that this blog is not a discussion of mufti as desai's fatwa about maulana tariq jameel. This blog is about defusing the slander and lie of your friend and his attempt at tarnishing a muttaqi alim of haq.
No mistake or error was pointed out in the fatwaa of mufti desai. If it is the case then we ask you to provide us with the academic details of the presumed (supposed) mistake and error of mufti desai's fatwa. Which mistake and error are we trying to justify? We can take it as a slander and lie on us yet we will not waste our time in answering personal attacks nor will we complain to the admins. Allah is the most just and everyone can see who is on the haqq and who is attacking muslims.
Request 1) Provide us with the academic details of the mistake and error of mufti as desai's fatwa which you have mentioned on your comment. Also present to us the evidence of your claim that we are trying to justify those mistakes.
**** continued
There are two comments on your response (before we continue with the discussion). Even if what I have saying is a red herring, if I was to ask do you agree with me that Sayyidina Nabi (Sallallaho Alaihe Wassallam) IS the last Prophet! Would you ignore this statement to say that it�s a red herring? Similarly, I am asking you to confirm your stance that you agree in the principle that ALL ULAMA should be respected and honoured and by this definition this extends to Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA). Do you agree with this matter, yes or no? Secondly, how do you know that my honouring with a title is devoid of any real meaning? Have you checked my intention and looked inside my heart? The title was written in Masjid Farooq (Walsall) on the board to honour Shaykh (Maulana) Yusuf Motala Saheb (Datamat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) and very commonly written for Ulama and if you don�t know what it means or never heard of it then I am not sure how to react to it? Would everything needs to be confirmed by you to be valid? How would you know if I am honouring you or demeaning you? There is an incident of a famous Sahabi (RA) who killed a person after he had recited the Shahada Nabi (Sallallaho Alaihe Wassallam) chastised him to say that did you know his intention? So my question to you (after establishing this title)? Google Shaykh (Maulana) Abrarul-Haq (RA) and you will find this title used next to his name on his site and he was the last Khaleefa of Hazrat Thanwi (RA). So in summary two question, do you agree with the stance that ALL ULAMA should be respected and secondly how do you know what my intention is???
When a person gets maqbooliyat of Allah subhanahu wa taala some people are unable to bear this and victimise a person.�This is what happend to Maulana Tariq Jameel (H.A). He was made a victim and a lengthy book was written against him.�
****
This my brother is wholesale badgumani with a group of ulama and a slander against them in their absence. This is unacceptable by shariat. If what you said is true then your statement falls under gheebat but if what you said is false then it falls under buhtan. And remember 'the meat of ulama is poisonous'.
This blog is proving to be an exposition of so many of our faults. It is proving to be a mirror. We should reflect how shallow our deen and our taqwa is.
***
So first introduction of Allah and his beautiful deen is given. When this is done, 'sinners' automatically realise their mistake and leave it. This what tableeghis do and this what Maulan Tariq Jameel does in all his bayans.But this is time consuming and in some cases it takes years, beacuse Hidyat is not in our hand. It is with Allah subhanahu wa taala. Is this action "haraam"?�
***
The fatwa in discussion does not relate to the methodology of dawah of maulana tariq jameel. He was not ascribed to be the bedfellow of the kafir shias because of his dawah. But it was rather relayed because of his vile and haraam antics. Do not attempt to divert the topic at discussion. The topic which the blogpost touches is the blatant lie and slander of mufti as desai by muadh khan. The topic is not the fatwa of mudti as desai. Whatever genuine reservations you have with the fatwa you can email mufti as desai and ask him directly
****
Rememeber that no person is free of mistake, however big Mufti or Maulana he is and which ever sect/group/jamaat they belong too.�I am suprised that "Deoband" and "Akaabir" are not able to recognize this
****
Alhamdulillah we are able to recognize this infact we are the first ones to recognize the crimes perpretated by brother muadh khan but you clearly fail to see it as it is. And incase of maulana tariq jameel his maqbooliyat is curtaining you from recognition of the clear truth.
****
May Allah protect us all from all type of fitnah.�
****
Ameen.
****
How can mufti sb(H.A) pass on fatwa on person based on materials available online while saying he knows nothing about the person upon whom he is giving a fatwaa.
****
Respected brother, you are committing the same crime which this blog addresses. I suggest you read the blogpost by brother deoband 4-5 times to understand the answer to your redundant question. In addition to that read the comments to increase the clarity of the answer to your question.
****
Secondly, how do you know that my honouring with a title is devoid of any real meaning? Have you checked my intention and looked inside my heart?�
****
It is most unfortunate that you emind me of a malfooth of hazrat hakeemul ummat ra while reprimanding a person he said something to the effect that May Allah give jaza e khayr to the aimmah mujtahideen for making deen easy for us.imagine what would happen If it was left for the likes of you with such thick brain who dont understand even simple points.'
I will repeat what I said in plain simple comprehensible English:
Specially when the labels are devoid of any sensible meanings and come across as taunts (mudda fuyuhum - whatever fuyuhum means). You may have a genuine intention and in reality they may not be taunts but we feel obliged by shariah to inform you politely to stop using them with our name.�And Islaam demands you to stop putting labels with the names of your muslim brothers when they dont like it.
I clearly mentioned that you may have a genuine intention. After this statement there was no need to get offensive and misquote hadith and other incidents. I as a muslim brother made a simple request to stop using labels with my name. Islam demands you to stop hurting your muslim brother when requested regardless of what your intention is. It is between you & Allah.
****
and if you don�t know what it means or never heard of it then I am not sure how to react to it?
****
I would request you to scroll up and read your comments. Not once did you type "mudda fuyuzuhum" . You have been writing "mudda fuyuhum" again and again. Let me copy paste your exact words ~
Is our dear beloved and respected Deoband (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) aka SeekerofGuidance and our dear beloved and respected Akaabir (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) two people or the same person?�
***I request you to stop using labels and tiyles with my name whether it is mudda fuyuhum or mudda fuyuzuhum regardless of what your niyat is and how I perceive it. I can show you ample examples from hsdith that instruct you to stop using labels with my name.
You avoided answering my questions.
How did you arrive at the conclusion that mufti as desai had no research on what he said, removed the ttitle maulana and declared maulana tariq jameel to be the bedfellow of the shias all based on ONE email.�
Were you justified in this lie and slander without you possessing ilm e ghayb nor did you bother asking mufti sahib DIRECTLY as Islam demands youto do?�
Again, let�s try to discuss the secondary matters which you have brought up before discussing the primary matter which have stated repeatedly that we will get to, Insha�Allah. Firstly, I have asked you to repeatedly confirm that ALL Ulama should be respected and you have brought in the issue of �Noor Zaman� and Maulana Tariq Jameel (HA) when I specifically mentioned Shaykh (Maulana) Yasin Saheb (HA) and none of the other two. There is a thread open on the first and the second will be discussed in detail here (once you can hold off bringing ancillary subjects) into the discussion. The issue which is being asked of you is to confirm that ALL ULAMA should be respected and if you wish then quote after quote of Hazrat (Maulana) Asharf Ali Thanwi (RA) can be brought in to substantiate the point. Your accusation that I am using ***taunts (mudda fuyuhum - whatever fuyuhum means)*** here are the responses �26MAY2014 is the first time this word is used and it is spelled as (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum), 27th of May 2014 you say ***the taunts damatbarakatuhum mudda fuyoozuhum***29MAY2014 again it is used as (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) in the first comment and I admit that in the second comment is MISSPELLED as (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuhum) and it is a typo but your taunts starts from the 27th of May2014 so the question remains who did you consider it a TAUNT when its correctly spelled? So your accusation of TAUNTS and SECOND GUESSING started way before the TYPO! The question still remains what authority and insight do you have to be able to SECOND GUESS people�s intentions? Everybody should clearly read the 26th of May 2014 comment and your response and NOTE that both in the comment and your response it is spelled EXACTLY how you have laid it out! Please answer these two issues and we have already stated that we can discuss the primary matter. The first point is fundamental to the discussion while the second is another an accusation which is proven false! What is the problem with confirming that ALL ULAMA should be respected!
Below are just a few of the extra lies and red herrings Muadh has brought up while desperately avoiding answering the simple questions regarding his lies and slanders against Mufti Desai:
1) Mufti Zar Wali Khan. Previous to Muadh, no-one mentioned the name of the Mufti. Muadh lied again by claiming that there has been a blatant misrepresentation. How can there be a blatant misrepresentation or even a correct presentation when no-one even mentioned the name of Mufti Zar Wali Khan before him?!
2) The view of Darul Uloom Karachi with regards to Maulana Tariq Jameel. Muadh again lied here claiming that there has been a blatant misrepresentation. How can there be a blatant misrepresentation or even a correct presentation when no-one even mentioned the view of Darul Uloom Karachi before him?!
3) Darul Uloom Jamia Ashrafiya (Lahore). Muadh again lied by claiming that there has been a blatant misrepresentation when no-one even mentioned that Madrasah before him! How can there be a blatant misrepresentation or even a correct presentation when no-one even mentioned the view of Darul Uloom Jamia Ashrafiya before him?!
Brother Akaabir has adequately refuted the above red herrings, although some of the comments have since then been deleted as a result of the constant efforts of Muadh for censorship.
4) Then Muadh blatantly lies with the following statement: �Comments on this blog and censored and removed and no opportunity is being given to objectively respond to any of the slanderous remarks� Least the blogger should do is do is permit free and fair exchange of ideas �
Another blatant lie. For Muadh, �free and fair exchange of ideas� precludes exposing his lies and slanders.
5) Then he produces another false statement towards me: �This is the reality of the relationship between the two Ulama so first and foremost present your evidence about Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) as you have claimed.�
Nowhere have I mentioned Mufti Zar Wali Khan.
6) Then he talks about �original fatwa� and longer fatwa. I have not even hinted towards any other fatwa other than the one fatwa in the blog post. This appears to be another red herring to confuse people � which seemed to actually work judging by one of the comments.
7) Producing another lie with regards to Mufti Zar Wali Khan, Muadh stated: ��this matter has been introduced by Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum). �
I have never introduced Mufti Zar Wali Khan into this discussion!!
8) Muadh continues to repeat and re-iterate the same lie again with the following statement:
�Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) should at least clear this matter and prove this theory which he has expounded by associating his thinking with the name of both Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) and Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) in his blog�
I have never introduced Mufti Zar Wali Khan into this discussion at all!!!
9) In another blatant lie offered to the admins about myself, Muadh states:
�However, he is not authorising comments and feedback on his blog as per the policy of Muftisays and censoring the debate and this is against your policy. Detailed comments on his blog have been deleted so the HATRED has merely moved from the forum to the blog. He wanted censorship and impunity and he has got it on the blog. �
I asked him how on earth did he make that false Ilmi Ghaybi claim about myself, especially since I have stated categorically that I will not censor any comment. Rather, from the beginning Muadh knows that he has been doing everything in his power to censor this blog, threads, posts, comments,etc.
With every lie I confront him though, he merely avoids answering and moves onto the next lie!!!
10) After lying continuously and avoiding answering for every single lie, Muadh now produces the latest red herring asking us whether we respect all Ulama. Of course, we respect all Ulama, and of course we respect Mufti Yasin and the other admins here.
However, anyone that reads the list of lies and red herrings listed above used by Muadh will understand why I will, and I request Akaabir to, no longer entertain any more red herrings from him, until he answers for the lies and slanders he has perpetrated against Mufti Desai AND ALL the lies he has committed, listed above, whilst desperately attempting to cover up his original lies.
As I advised Muadh before, Allah (azza wa jal) has already disgraced him and will continue to do so until he repents for and retracts publically each and every individual slander he has perpetrated against a true Alim of Haqq who lives the life of a Wali of Allah.
Jazakallah brother muadh khan for such a detailed analysis you have provided us with specific dates. It proves you are elusively evading the primary issue which holds the most relevance to latest fatwa designed to dupe the unwary again.
We will comment on it in a moment but first we will answer your red herring in an attempt to get you back on track of following your own fatwas.
**
What is the problem with confirming that ALL ULAMA should be respected!�
**
We have already stated practically that we respect not only ulama but every muslim. You can get the answer to your decoy question in my previous comments.
Now your latest fatwa and slander. The venue is here not the forum.
***
I would usually comply with your request and ask about the Shaf'ae Fatwa but unfortunately my time is mostly taken up trying to protect myself against a barrage the abuse, slander and allegations which keep coming thick and fast from a number of well intentioned coordinated Brothers (meticulously planned and executed) and Shariah DEMANDS me to do my utmost to protect my character. Therefore, positive engagement has become difficult lately and most of my time is taken up in negative circular debates and discussions (which are ZERO importance and significance to most people) but WAJIB upon me as per Islamic Shariah.
***
Our comments**
We will ignore your slanders and more lies in the above para. We leave that matter to Allah.we donot hold the view of wujoob of protecting our chara ter What we will concentrate on is how your actions defy your own fatwa. Your fatwa is of wujoob of protecting your character and shariah demands you to utilize your utmost. Instead what we see from you is a grave negation of shariah (your own view) and your own fatwa by evading and avoiding the simple questions asked repeatedly here. You have erected a couple of bogeymen and scapegoats to practically destroy your own fatwa and the demands of your own self supposed shariah.
I repeat the questions, please fulfill your obligation by replying in a simple straight forward manner as shariah demands you to:
How did you arrive at the conclusion that mufti as desai had no research on what he said, removed the ttitle maulana and declared maulana tariq jameel to be the bedfellow of the shias all based on ONE email.��
Were you justified in this lie and slander without you possessing ilm e ghayb nor did you bother asking mufti sahib DIRECTLY as Islam demands youto do?��
Sincere readers are requested to read the long list of lies committed by Muadh (2 comments above) in just trying to evade answering for his slanders against Mufti Desai in just this one fatwa.
Any true friends of his who have some courage are requested to proclaim the Haqq to him no matter how bitter it may be.
JazakAllah Khair
Mufti Zarwali Khan(HA) in Juma bayans about Maulana Tariq Jameel after 2nd March 2012 to 30th May 2014
This is presented to debunk the misrepresentation that Mufti Zarwali Khan(HA) has no issues,differences with Maulana Tariq Jameel.
1)The circle of explaining the hurmat of photography limited to you only,because even good contemporary ulama have become soft in this issue.When a man like Tariq Jameel is getting photographed regularly on the occasion of Hajj,and with him the ever-smiling,ever-blooming pictures of the Indian actor,Shahid Afridi have adorned internet.Anyways,the person you named is not reliable.He is making mistakes in different occasions.Secondly,wrong is wrong,whether Tariq Jameel does it or someone else Abdul Jaleel does.A mistake is not forgiven for anybody.An individual may be wrong,Shariah is unalterable.>Date:2 November 2012.Time:50:30 - 51:21 minutes
2)Haji Abdul Wahhab is a tablighee man.Let him first control Tariq Jameel,who is presenting a new Islam.And just this is not enough that he is not allowing him to speak in Ijtema.Tariq Jameel�s speech and his bayans are filled with poison,and what are the Aqaaid and views he is spreading now.Bhai Abdul Wahhab should first perform such an action that this fistula is removed from tableegh.And may Allah free the society from the attacks being carried out by our peoples on atmosphere and Aqaaid and a�maal.>Date:5 July 2013.Time:59:19 - 59:52 minutes
3)Is this incident correct that an old woman used to throw dirt on Rasoolullah.When she stopped throwing dirt,he visited her,then she became a Muslim.If this incident is correct,narrate again.No,I don�t know which is the incident.That Tariq Jameel is talking such rubbish.He is engaged in it nowadays,got it? Don�t know from where he narrates;Rasoolullah went to mother�s grave and sat like this and cried like this.All these are baseless views,silly.These are neither in Ahadith nor in authentic books.He narrates from nonsense.>Date:12 July 2013.Time:53:36 - 54:18 minutes
4)Some people think that Jihad is not needed in present age rather the purpose of Jihad is raising the Word of Allah.This purpose is achieved through Da�wah and Tableegh.Simply you go after tableegh people.I didn�t believe that anyone says like that.Few days back I listened to a speech of Tariq Jameel;it made me very much sad that he has studied in madrasa,he is an alim and he is prepared for such lying.He was saying the same thing that Jihad causes murder,mischief,and Tableegh is good;this and that.This is an inappropriate view.Tableegh has its own need,Jihad has its own need.This is as if someone says one should offer Salats and not fast or says just offer Nafls abundantly,don�t go for Hajj.May Allah give him hidayah.Muhammad Ahmad Bahawalpuri used to say these things,ulama-e-Deen were very angry with him.Now he also started these things under his training.And very clearly it seems these people will even call Badr,Uhud,Khandaq after few years that Ma�adhallah,Astaghfirullah it has happened wrong.A�oodhubillahi minash Shaitaanir rajeem.Anyways,I regret very much that besides others,now I have to start refutation even of our people.I�m very sad about it but I don�t do mudahanat.When I hear his wrong views,I refute him.He said even this thing in the same speech that the greatest alim of the universe after Ambiyaa is Hadrat Ali.This is purely Rifdh,purely Shiahism,nothing else.Such a sentence will not be found in the whole world.>Date:30 August 2013.Time:48:33 - 50:18 minutes
5)Badr and Khandaq cannot become proof for Jihad of nowadays.Our example is not found even in Seeratun Nabi rather our example is of Bani Israil.Fir�aun slaughtered children in front of a great Nabi like Musa,he didn�t do any Jihad.Are these views correct according to Shariah? Such views are dangerous.Nowadays Tariq Jameel expresses such views.These are very inappropriate views.I�m afraid if his Imaan is not stripped off.>Date:20 December 2013.Time:52:58 - 53:28 minutes
6)Tariq Jameel has said that one doesn�t become kafir by declaring Sahabah kafir.Is this correct? The views of Tariq Jameel are weak,baseless and regrettable.>Date:28 February 2014.Time:59:03 - 59:13 minutes
اللهم ارنا الحق حقاً وارزقنا اتباعه وارنا الباطل باطلا وارزقنا اجتنابه
The opinion of ***(Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA)*** on July 8th 2012 (on youtube look for v=LppxNhdnpxQ) is exactly opposite of what Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakatuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) is publicizing
*****
If the above is not a lie/slander then what is? It is time for reflection for many of us. Some are still claiming that there is no slander or lie and it is just academic disagreement.
Alhamdulillah brother muhammad Idrees has amply proved above the point of view of Mufti Zarwali Khan. Exactly opposite to what muadh khan misrepresented and completely in line with Mufti as detai.
Brother had salahuddin should also contemplate on what he said. Will he now say that Mufti zar wali khan is also jealous and made an error & mistake?
Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) said that in 40 years he has not been affected by a Bayan nor has he cried this much and he said Allah (SWT) has placed the love for Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel Saheb (HA) in the hearts of the creation. This is the reality of the relationship between the two Ulama so first and foremost present your evidence about Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) as you have claimed. Jazakallahu Khayran
Firstly no one even claimed anything about mufti zarwali khan sahib secondly the true relationship is shown above. Muadh khan's scapegoat just fell off the cliff. This is Allah's way of justice. The red herring used by muadh khan was destroyed by Allah to show the reality. I wait for muadb khans answer what will he come up with now.
LOVE AND RESPECT WHILST SLANDERING SOMEONE???
The lies and slanders committed misrepresenting the fatwa analysed in the blog post portrays Mufti Desai as a trigger-happy Mufti who proclaimed the deviance of Maulana Tariq Jameel without any prior research and based on just ONE email.
Since the falsity of such horrendous allegations have been proven without any doubt, and Muadh has repeatedly evaded answering for such crimes, we shall move onto other horrendous lies and slanders committed by the same individual under the deceptive slogan of �academic disagreement�.
There are many more slanders/misrepresentation committed by Muadh, but we will focus now on one that exposes the reality behind Muadh�s repeated claims to �love and respect� for Mufti Desai, and that his repeated attacks are merely �disagreement�.
The claim to love and respect someone whilst repeatedly slandering or tolerating such slanders is merely a hollow one. If one�s father were to be slandered or lied about publically and portrayed in a negative light, then you will observe what kind of reaction is induced by real love and respect.
The following slander was publically viewable for a while before the thread was taken to the �debates� section and is still viewable there. The slander was read and digested by innumerable viewers. No public retraction and repentance has yet to take place with regards to any of these slanders that had been digested and continues to be digested by innumerable viewers.
Mufti Desai had written a refutation against Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah based on the book of a deviant �Shaykh� called Abdullah Harari. Someone subsequently brought it to Mufti Desai�s attention the fact this person and his group, the Ahbash, were complete deviants.
Regarding this incident, Muadh produced the following blatant slander:
ANOTHER SLANDER BY MUADH:
************************************************
"When the issue was brought to his attention instead of saying that yes I made a mistake and I mistook the group he went on to normal offensive (and foul) mode."
************************************************
END OF SLANDEROUS QUOTE
Readers and admins are requested to ponder over the above slander and ask what kind of horrible impression it is designed to give, and what kind of �love and respect� and �disagreement� such a statement falls under.
After, reading and pondering over Muadh�s slander, respected readers and admins are requested to read Mufti Desai�s actual reply to the person who brought Abdullah Harari�s deviance to the attention of Mufti Desa:
ACTUAL REPLY OF MUFTI DESAI
*************************************************
"Respected Brother,
Your e-mail dated 1 May 2013 refers.
I sincerely thank you for the information. May Allah Ta'ala reward you abundantly. Jazaakallaah. I was not aware of all the evil and deviation related to the sect pointed out by you. I am therefore, grateful for the information.
However, our criticism of Ibn Taimiyyah is not based on entirely what Al-Harari says about him. Our criticism is based on the statements of Ibn Taimiyyah himself, and on the views and claims of other reliable senior Ulama.
May Allah Ta'ala keep you with aafiyat."
*************************************************
END OF REPLY BY MUFTI DESAI
***************
We will respond to you inshallah with hope that you understand for the sake of your own akhirat.
If you believe us to be dumb deaf and blind and you advocate the methodology of maulana tariq jameel then it is incumbent on you morally to atleast adopt the same methodology with us to call us to the straightpath and not be harsh on us by calling us dumb deaf and blind. We are not offended on the least Alhamdulillah.
*****************
Assalmu alaikum waRahmatullahi waBarkatuhu
My sincere apology for being harsh.
******************
As for your comment it is as ambiguous as that of your your friend. You should understand one point that this blog is not a discussion of mufti as desai's fatwa about maulana tariq jameel. This blog is about defusing the slander and lie of your friend and his attempt at tarnishing a muttaqi alim of haq.
No mistake or error was pointed out in the fatwaa of mufti desai. If it is the case then we ask you to provide us with the academic details of the presumed (supposed) mistake and error of mufti desai's fatwa. Which mistake and error are we trying to justify? We can take it as a slander and lie on us yet we will not waste our time in answering personal attacks nor will we complain to the admins. Allah is the most just and everyone can see who is on the haqq and who is attacking muslims.
Request 1) Provide us with the academic details of the mistake and error of mufti as desai's fatwa which you have mentioned on your comment. Also present to us the evidence of your claim that we are trying to justify those mistakes.
******************
Brother you have requested for academic details of the mistake and erroor mufti as desai's fatwa which you have mentioned on your comment.
First of all I have no doubt on the taqwa of mufti A.S Desai (D.B).
If you read the fatwaa there is nothing academic in it. And if you have read fatwaas of other ulemas from the masalak e deoband, whenever they have been asked about a concerned person whom they don't know, they have declined to pass fatwaa and ask the concerned person to contact local mufti / ulema.
This is where mufti A.S Desai (D.B) has made a mistake.
*********************
This my brother is wholesale badgumani with a group of ulama and a slander against them in their absence. This is unacceptable by shariat. If what you said is true then your statement falls under gheebat but if what you said is false then it falls under buhtan. And remember 'the meat of ulama is poisonous'.
*********************
It is a very well know thing that today many there is no unity among many of the ulemas. In deobandi ulemas are in tableegh, sufisim, jihad, deeni education, politics and many more field.
But sad thing groupisim exist among ulemas and consider others to have deviated. This is reality which has caused huge damage and such ulemas are more poisonus.
Warning about this to others is not gheebat and neither buhtaan since this is not false. I will stop here, because talking more on this issue will cause layman to hate ulemas.
*********************
This blog is proving to be an exposition of so many of our faults. It is proving to be a mirror. We should reflect how shallow our deen and our taqwa is.
*********************
True, the best is the one who corrects himself. May Allah show us all the right path.
********************
The fatwa in discussion does not relate to the methodology of dawah of maulana tariq jameel. He was not ascribed to be the bedfellow of the kafir shias because of his dawah. But it was rather relayed because of his vile and haraam antics. Do not attempt to divert the topic at discussion. The topic which the blogpost touches is the blatant lie and slander of mufti as desai by muadh khan. The topic is not the fatwa of mudti as desai. Whatever genuine reservations you have with the fatwa you can email mufti as desai and ask him directly
********************
Insha Allah will mail mufti sb and take maximum guidance and benefit from him
******************
Alhamdulillah we are able to recognize this infact we are the first ones to recognize the crimes perpretated by brother muadh khan but you clearly fail to see it as it is. And incase of maulana tariq jameel his maqbooliyat is curtaining you from recognition of the clear truth.
******************
Alhamdulillah, I neither supportive or against anyone here. All my post are my own influenced by none.
Be it Muft A.S Desai (D.B) or Maulana Tariq Jameel (D.B). I came to know both of them through internet and I have same love and respect for both maulana (D.B) for their service they are doing for this ummath.
Even with uncle Muadh with whom I communicate a lot in private, have disagreed many times and I find this blog as baseless accusation against him.
This is a Q&A from sister Maria al-Qibbtiyah.
My Question:
On the forum some people are saying that if we describe the bad deeds of others but do not insult or ridicule them, then It'll not be ghibah. Is that really so?
Answer:
ASSALAMU ALAIKUM
8 Rajab 1435 (8 May 2014)
Maria
Your e-mail dated 7 May 2014 refers.
In fact all these internet forums are basically gheebat forums where
every person indulges in gheebat and buhtaan. What they say is
baseless. Speaking ill about a person is gheebat even if the statement
about him/her is true.
Was-salaam
A.S. Desai
For
Mujlisul Ulama of S.A.
Of course this is the opinion of a great Shaykh. So how comes we find others who claim to be ardent followers of the Tareeqah of Mufti A.S. Desai and read, participate on forums?
04JUNE2104@ 10:25: 72 hours and my comments are still not visible so perhaps there is some technical error; therefore I will try again in smaller chunks...As I said we will discuss issues one by one so our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) has a chance to respond. An accusation against me is that I introduced Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) into the discussion which IS NOT true the blog reads *** an Aalim from Ahsanul Uloom who narrated from a very prominent Shaykhul Hadith*** I merely pointed out that Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) is the Mohtamim of Darul-uloom Ahsanul Uloom and in his Bayan (July 2012) not only discusses Shaykh (Maulana) Tariq Jameel Saheb (HA) and the Shia issue but also exonerates him on ***THE SHIA ISSUE*** which is the basis of the original Fatwa issued by Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) by in Sep/Oct 2013...This comment is written in plain English and self-explanatory.
04JUNE2104@ 10:35: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...Our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) has made a second accusation that I have misspelled the honorific title bestowed upon him. Please see my comment on the 26th of May 2014 and Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum)�s response on the 27th of May. There is no misspellings, no slander, no sarcasm and YET Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) rejects it so the question remains that Nabi (Sallallaho Alaihe Wassallam) questioned the Sahabi (RA) who killed a man on reciting the Shahada that he didn�t have the ability to look inside the heart therefore couldn�t judge intentions so what capability does Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) possess to be able to second guess my intention? Is his second guessing compatible or incompatible with Islamic Shariah? Again this is also written in plain and simple English for people to understand decipher.
04JUNE2104@ 10:37: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...Our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) has made an issue out of me asking if him and our dear beloved Akaabir Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) are the same people, why? If our readers would like to google �Did Harris Hammam Claim to be a Former Jew?� they will note that Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) made presumptuous guesses and was proven to be WRONG! What is the status of this endeavour in Islamic Shariah. In on the other hand, didn�t presume, didn�t slander but asked in a straightforward manner so according to which daleel is my action wrong and his right? Not only Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) was WRONG he was also FORCED to change the original article! This is also written in plain and simple English for all to understand.
04JUNE2104@ 11:28: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...Our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) is continuing to bring issues from the forum and comments this blog conflating the two and when I respond he keeps saying that I am answering queries which are not relevant. The issue of me asking whether the two are the same people was raised on the forum and I merely showed an example of where our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) engaged in speculation, presumption and slander VERSUS I merely asked the question...Google *** Did Harris Hammam Claim to be a Former Jew?***. This message is written in plain and simple English for all to clearly understand what is being articulated.
04JUNE2104@ 11:38: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...Our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) has made a topic about this comment ***"When the issue was brought to his attention instead of saying that yes I made a mistake and I mistook the group he went on to normal offensive (and foul) mode."*** Before I begin to answer the query why is it that I am being accused of bringing issues which are irrelevant while our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) can bring any random topic into the discussion and try to put his SPIN on the matter and it is permitted? Would our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) admit that this topic has NOTHING to do with the subject and I will then proceed to actually proceed and respond to every accusation/slander thrown my way.
04JUNE2104@ 11:42: Our respected elder Aapa Ummi Talib has some disagreements with me as she has tried to have her way on many occasions. We have a disagreement but that SHOULD NOT distract her from her responsibility of being truthful to Allah (SWT), I DID NOT slander anyone but I disagreed with Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA), I clearly communicated to him and I have his permission. She needs to keep her hate to herself and it SHOULD NOT blind her from making cryptic statements, I don�t know her and neither does she know me at all but as a Muslim she has a duty to be answerable for her words in front of Allah (SWT). She is a Muslim FIRST and a Sufi SECOND! If she is a Muslim then the command for her is to evaluate both sides of the story and NOT go on a one-sided tangent simply because her HATE dictates such a course of action. Wait for the discussion to finish and then make up your mind and save the HATE for someone else! This is written in clear and simple English for everyone to read and comprehend.
CONCLUSIVE ANALYSIS OF LIE/SLANDER NUMBER TWO
MUADH'S STATEMENT
***********************************************
�...chosen to remove the title �Maulana� on the basis of an email�
**********************************************
END QUOTE
[i.e. note the singular 'an email' signifying just one email]
OVERWHELMING PROOFS FOR THIS STATEMENT BEING FALSE
1) It is absolutely impossible for Muadh to have been monitoring every single correspondence, email, reports, books, pamphlets, audio, video footage, etc. received in the personal office of Mufti Desai, during the months before that fatwa was finally issued, in order to have been able to make such a horrendous allegation designed to tarnish the integrity of any Aalim.
How on Earth did the perpetrator of the allegation make the Ilmi Ghaybi judgement that 'Maulana' was removed based on just one email?
2) An Alim of Taqwa such as Mufti Desai would without a shadow of doubt have had received multiple reliable reports from reliable sources of the Haraam and Vile antics before issuing such a fatwa and removing the title 'Maulana'.
3) The few lines in the fatwa itself states explicitly: �we have been hearing lately of his vile and haraam antics.� !!!!!!!
Those vile and haraam antics conveyed to Mufti Desai before the email would most definitely have played a role in prompting him not to use the title 'Maulana'.
4) In the book, Makshufaat Jamaat, published well before that Fatwa, it is stated: �'In the perpetration of crass ghulu, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
These Imaan-threatening views of which Mufti Desai was cognizant of well before the fatwa, most definitely would have played a role in him not using the title 'Maulana'.
5) An Aalim and close mureed of Mufti Desai has personally informed me that Mufti Desai had received much information on the Haraam and Vile antics of Maulana Tariq Jameel before issuing that fatwa. The Aalim mentioned just a few of the sources which are found in the blog post.
Such information again would have been more than sufficient to have prompted Mufti Desai to avoid using the title 'Maulana'.
Thus this horrendous allegation, camouflaged as friendly 'disagreement', is another blatant lie designed to tarnish Mufti Desai's integrity and to portray him as a trigger-happy and unfair Mufti in front of the awaam.
************************************************
************************************************
LAST RESORT TO BE TAKEN IF THE TRULY BLIND STILL FAIL TO SEE THE SLANDER
Mufti Desai is always reluctant to defend himself. Nevertheless if I feel it absolutely necessary I will give enough convincing reasons to persuade him to answer the following possible query:
POSSIBLE QUERY TO BE MADE AS LAST RESORT
************************************************
�Hazrat, it is claimed that in the fatwa on Maulana Tariq Jameel in The Majlis Volume 22/Number 3 you had removed the title 'Maulana' based on just that one email - the perpetrator of this horrendous allegation used the words �...chosen to remove the title �Maulana� on the basis of an email�.
Please forgive us for having the audacity to doubt your integrity and fairness, but could you please confirm whether or not you issued such a strong fatwa of deviance, and removed the title 'Maulana' just on 'an email'.
We know that the perpetrator of that outrageous allegation did not possess Ilm Ghayb, nor did he have access to all your documents, correspondences, emails, reports, audio, video footage, etc. for the months before issuing that fatwa. Such access would have been necessary for the criminal to have been able to make such a horrendous allegation that portrays you as a trigger-happy and unfair Mufti.
Furthermore, you explicitly stated in your short fatwa, �we have been hearing lately of his vile and haraam antics.�
Furthermore, we have found the following statement in your Makshufaat published well before that fatwa: �'In the perpetration of crass ghulu, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Tariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta�ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah''
Furthermore, your close Mureed, [name of Maulana omitted], also confirmed to me that you had received much information on the Haraam and Vile antics of Maulana Tariq Jameel, well before that fatwa.
Despite all this, there are some who are still insistent that the horrendous allegation that you removed the title 'Maulana' based on just 'an email', is not slanderous!
Not only that, they continue to defend and justify such slanderous allegations as merely friendly 'disagreement'!
And of course the perpetrator of this horrendous allegation (and many other allegations to come) says he loves and respects you.
So we would be truly grateful if you could answer the shameless, silly, redundant question on whether or not you had avoided using the title 'Maulana' for Maulana Tariq Jameel based on just one email, and that the Haraam, Vile, Bizarre, Imaan-threatening views of Maulana Tariq Jameel which you had already come to know of well before the fatwa, did not play any role in such a decision.
JazakAllah Khair
************************************************
END OF POSSIBLE QUERY TO BE SENT AS LAST RESORT
04JUNE2104@ 12:05: Continuing to discuss issues one by one... our dear beloved and respected elder Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) aka SeekerofGuidance and Hazrat Akaabir Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) was asked to confirm that ALL ULAMA should be respected and honoured. Since I cannot post links in comments, Users can google �Tolerance and Respect in Matters of Ikhtilaf� and read the article on ilmgate. This issue is ABSOLUTELY relevant to the discussion and if it has been answered I apologise for the oversight and seek forgiveness but please point it out to me. This is written in plain and simple English for everyone to read and understand.
If you read the fatwaa there is nothing academic in it. And if you have read fatwaas of other ulemas from the masalak e deoband, whenever they have been asked about a concerned person whom they don't know, they have declined to pass fatwaa and ask the concerned person to contact local mufti / ulema.�
This is where mufti A.S Desai (D.B) has made a mistake
*****
Brother hmdsalahuddin. Actually this is a grave mistake on your part and I will tell you why.
...whom they dont know.
Do you mean dont know personally or dont know through his writings or bayans or through corrspondence or through any other means. What you have stated is correct that if the ulama dont know they do not issue a fatwa. But what does knowing mean here?
Im sure you will find a thousand fatwas where ulama never knee any personal personally. The latest fatwa being against mufti abu layth. Does mufti ebrahim desai know him personally? Or the mufti who issued the fatwa know him personally spent time with him or did they base their fatwa on the email that was sent to them mentioning some of the views of mufti abu layth.
Similarly Shaykh noorzaman was refuted here. Does anyone know him personally? No.
Similarly the views of maulana tariq jameel were presented to mufti as desai or the ulama who wrote that other boom with proper references to sayings of maulana tariq jameel. Hence the fatwa.
Do you accept this fact? Or are you moulding shariah to the norms of today's society that for the mufti to issue a fatws he should have a HD video recording of the person in each and every case.
Or are you suggesting that each and every mufti should spend a chilla with the person before giving a fatwa against him.
If this requisite is made incumbent the I suggest you first burn all the books ever written in refutation of firaq e batilah by ulama e deoband as they never knew the people personally.
Do you think anyone of our ulama ever met muhammad bin abdul wahhab personally? Why is there mention of muhammad bin abdul wahhab in radd ul muhtar by allamah shami. What did he base his view on?
The new opinion which you are imposing on a mufti is baseless.
****
Warning about this to others is not gheebat and neither buhtaan since this is not false. I will stop here, because talking more on this issue will cause layman to hate ulemas.�
****
According to the fatwa of your nafs? Do you know the alim/ulama who wrote the boom against maulana tariq jameel. Can you take qasam that it was written because of jealousy?
****
and I find this blog as baseless accusation against him.
****
To find something baseless yoh must be able to recognise it. Can you pinpoint exactly which accusation in this blog is baseless? Dont be vague thag brother deoband has slander3d and muadh khan hasnt done anything. Copy/paste the words from the blog which you consider a basless accusation on muadh khan.
SLANDERING SOMEONE WHILST CALLING IT 'DISAGREEMENT'
Respected readers and admins are requested to note how Muadh repeatedly and desperately endeavours to avoid answering for any of his crimes. The latest one he avoided is the following:
The claim to love and respect someone whilst repeatedly slandering or tolerating such slanders is merely a hollow one. If one�s father were to be slandered or lied about publically and portrayed in a negative light, then you will observe what kind of reaction is induced by real love and respect.
The following slander was publically viewable for a while before the thread was taken to the �debates� section and is still viewable there. The slander was read and digested by innumerable viewers. No public retraction and repentance has yet to take place with regards to any of these slanders that had been digested and continues to be digested by innumerable viewers.
Mufti Desai had written a refutation against Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah based on the book of a deviant �Shaykh� called Abdullah Harari. Someone subsequently brought it to Mufti Desai�s attention the fact this person and his group, the Ahbash, were complete deviants.
Regarding this incident, Muadh produced the following blatant slander:
ANOTHER SLANDER BY MUADH:
************************************************
"When the issue was brought to his attention instead of saying that yes I made a mistake and I mistook the group he went on to normal offensive (and foul) mode."
************************************************
END OF SLANDEROUS QUOTE
Readers and admins are requested to ponder over the above statement and then read Mufti Desai's actual reply below to the person who brought Abdullah Harari�s deviance to the attention of Mufti Desai.
NOTE: This particular example of slander is so clear and self-evident that no explanation is required at all. The shocking thing to note is that these slanders being exposed are merely a sample.
ACTUAL REPLY OF MUFTI DESAI
************************************************* "Respected Brother,
Your e-mail dated 1 May 2013 refers.
I sincerely thank you for the information. May Allah Ta'ala reward you abundantly. Jazaakallaah. I was not aware of all the evil and deviation related to the sect pointed out by you. I am therefore, grateful for the information.
However, our criticism of Ibn Taimiyyah is not based on entirely what Al-Harari says about him. Our criticism is based on the statements of Ibn Taimiyyah himself, and on the views and claims of other reliable senior Ulama.
May Allah Ta'ala keep you with aafiyat."
************************************************* END OF REPLY BY MUFTI DESAI
06JUNE2104@ 20:09: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...There is a delay of day sometimes a day and a half etc between my comments being authorised which gives the impression that I am not responding in time to our brothers and sister. I have tried to put the date and time stamp but still it doesn�t show the true nature of the delay. The issue of me slandering Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) is absolutely baseless because what is not been told to the readers is that the response dated 1 May 2013 is actually from a Sunniforum post entitled �Important Announcement� and a thread posted by a User entitled �(Huzaifah)�, this is neither an email to ME nor posted far and wide. Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) is engaging in great deception because he knows that I have been banned from the forum for almost two years and even if I wasn�t there is no indication that I read this response at all. The evidence that I was absolutely unaware of this response is show in my email exchange blogged under the title ***Disagreement with Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) [The Majlis]*** Note the email on the 06th of May 2014 clearly trying to articulate the issue ONCE AGAIN to Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA). Therefore not only is this a massive slander on behalf of Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) but OPEN DECEPTION!
SINCERE AND EARNEST REQUEST TO READERS AND ADMINS
Respected readers and admins note that I have shortened the blog post so that it is an easier and more concise read. In addition I have also added more evidence that has come to light recently that proves even more conclusively that Muadh's 'analysis' or 'disagreement' of that fatwa consisted of blatant lies and slanders. Remember that these slanders are merely a small sample of crimes that have been perpetrated by the same individual. I sincerely and earnestly request respected admins to take appropriately strong disciplinary action against the unrepentant perpetrator of such crimes which involves devouring the flesh of an innocent Aalim.
06JUNE2104@ 21:03: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...1) It has been conclusively proven that Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) engages in deception. 2) It has been conclusively proven that Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) is unable to prove anything from Ahsanul-uloom and unable to provide any evidence! In fact the principle of the Darul-uloom Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan (HA) actually changed his mind on the matter! 3) It has been conclusively proven that Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) acts AGAINST the fatwa of his own Shaykh by not only participating but also Moderating in a forum 4) has been conclusively proven that Hazrat Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) doesn�t really answer anything but continues to abuse and spew more abuse!
Brother hmdsalahuddin. Actually this is a grave mistake on your part and I will tell you why.
...whom they dont know.
Do you mean dont know personally or dont know through his writings or bayans or through corrspondence or through any other means. What you have stated is correct that if the ulama dont know they do not issue a fatwa. But what does knowing mean here?
Im sure you will find a thousand fatwas where ulama never knee any personal personally. The latest fatwa being against mufti abu layth. Does mufti ebrahim desai know him personally? Or the mufti who issued the fatwa know him personally spent time with him or did they base their fatwa on the email that was sent to them mentioning some of the views of mufti abu layth.
Similarly Shaykh noorzaman was refuted here. Does anyone know him personally? No.
Similarly the views of maulana tariq jameel were presented to mufti as desai or the ulama who wrote that other boom with proper references to sayings of maulana tariq jameel. Hence the fatwa.
Do you accept this fact? Or are you moulding shariah to the norms of today's society that for the mufti to issue a fatws he should have a HD video recording of the person in each and every case.
Or are you suggesting that each and every mufti should spend a chilla with the person before giving a fatwa against him.
If this requisite is made incumbent the I suggest you first burn all the books ever written in refutation of firaq e batilah by ulama e deoband as they never knew the people personally.
Do you think anyone of our ulama ever met muhammad bin abdul wahhab personally? Why is there mention of muhammad bin abdul wahhab in radd ul muhtar by allamah shami. What did he base his view on?
The new opinion which you are imposing on a mufti is baseless.
*********************************************
I had a talk with mufti sb of my area on the issue of isssuing fatwaa on a person. He answered my questions patiently and I accept my mistake here.
*********************************************
According to the fatwa of your nafs? Do you know the alim/ulama who wrote the boom against maulana tariq jameel. Can you take qasam that it was written because of jealousy?
********************************************
When sounds bitter you call it "Fatwa of your nafs?".
I didn't wrote or claim that the book was written because of jealousy. Read my comments above.
Even because of misunderstanding a book can be written and I do hold copy of that book. I find no reference for those talks. Can you help me in locating it?
A Clarification concerning Mufti Zarwali(HA) on Maulana Tariq Jameel
Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi raji�un
It's being repeated zillions of times that Mufti Zarwali(HA) has exonerated Maulana Tariq Jameel in July 2012 bayan,whereas the bayan was delivered on 2 March 2012.The refutation of Maulana Tariq Jameel ''CHAND GHALAT TAWEELAT WA TAJAWAZAT AUR UNKA ILMI WA SHARI'I MAHASBA'' is still on Mufti Zarwali's Madrasa Jamia Ahsanul Uloom�s website in the miscellaneous category of the books section.Brother Muhammad Idrees� post should suffice to reveal the truth.
06JUNE2104@ 20:09: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...Responding to the response on the 6th of June 2014 comment. ***Lets try this again in plain and simple English***Firstly, I said that I wasn�t aware of the Sunniforum comment but went by what was emailed to me (personally), do you get this simple point? I cannot possibly be aware of what gets written on a forum with 10,000 Users, do you also get this simple point? Secondly, google �Disagreement with Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) [The Majlis]� blogged on the 7th of Mary 2014 and note the email entitled �Further clarification (06MAY2014):� and note my attempts on trying to further clarity the matter and Hazrat (HA) HAS NOT responded stating that the issue has been resolved! We have had several email conversations since and this issue HAS NOT been brought up. The original booklet entitled �the kufr and shirk of ibn taymiyyah� is still on majlis website and page 4 of CHAPTER ONE still reads ***�Shaikh Abdullah Al-Harari�*** in the last paragraph. So lets summarise the issue 1) Booklet on The Majlis website 2) Clarification on Sunniforum by a Maulana under the title �Important Annoucnement� 3) Booklet still ON the website with the same error....***Lastly, you STILL haven�t been able to prove anything from Darul-uloo Ahsanul-uloom or Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) DESPITE your best attempts at brining in XYZ and SLANDER!
SINCERE AND EARNEST REQUEST TO THE ADMINS
Respected readers and admins note that I have shortened the blog post so that it is an easier and more concise read. In addition I have also added more evidence that has come to light recently that proves even more conclusively that Muadh's 'analysis' or 'disagreement' of that fatwa consisted of blatant lies and slanders. Remember that these slanders are merely a small sample of crimes that have been perpetrated by the same individual. I sincerely and earnestly request respected admins to take appropriately strong disciplinary action against the unrepentant perpetrator of such crimes which involves devouring the flesh of an innocent Aalim.
06JUNE2104@ 12:25: Continuing to discuss issues one by one...Responding to the response on the 6th of June 2014 comment....***Another SLANDER of Hazrat Deoband (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) caught handed*** . The book entitled �CHAND GHALAT TAWEELAT WA TAJAWAZAT AUR UNKA ILMI WA SHARI'I MAHASBA� has a release date of 12/02/2011 while the Bayan of Shaykh (Mufti) Zarwali Khan Saheb (HA) is in 2012! We now quote the exact statement of Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) issued on 3 Sha�baan 1435 (2 June 2014) and can be googled as �Sins/Mistakes of the past and Reminders Muftisays� It is improper to cite a retraction to convey the impression that the view, i.e. the retracted / former view, is still extant. To do so is khiyaanat and not permissible. It is fitnah.
It's being repeated zillions of times that Mufti Zarwali(HA) has exonerated Maulana Tariq Jameel in July 2012 bayan,whereas the bayan was delivered on 2 March 2012.The refutation of Maulana Tariq Jameel ''CHAND GHALAT TAWEELAT WA TAJAWAZAT AUR UNKA ILMI WA SHARI'I MAHASBA'' is still on Mufti Zarwali's Madrasa Jamia Ahsanul Uloom�s website in the miscellaneous category of the books section.Brother Muhammad Idrees� post should suffice to reveal the truth.
****
Brother muhammad idrees was mentioned again and again. I fail to understand hiw muadh khan can overlook brother muhammad idrees's comment.
Firstly, I said that I wasn�t aware of the Sunniforum comment but went by what was emailed to me (personally), do you get this simple point?�
****
Do you get a simple point that islamic shariah does not allow you to slander muslims and advertise their *sins* (if we consider it a sin by your standards) which went on in a private email exchange.
Secondly I request you to allow us to write to mufti as desai to forward us your mail and his reply which would make things clear as sun. If you dont allow us then you can request mufti desai to forward you that exact email which you used as basis of an open license in contradiction of your islamic and moral standards to ruin the reputation of a muslim esp that of an alim in public.
Remember Allah ta'ala will not let this go and will expose you on the day of qayamat. Even if mufti as desai did not accept it (which is a baseless claim by you) you have no right to make a comment on his behaviour in public.
To brother hmdsalahuddin:
Alhamdulillah you accepted your clear mistake. It was based on the clear slander of muadh khan.
****
When sounds bitter you call it "Fatwa of your nafs?".�
****
It wasnt a fatwa that was related to me so by no stretch of imagination can it sound bitter to me
****
I didn't wrote or claim that the book was written because of jealousy. Read my comments above.�
****
You implied the exact thing by claiming when people get famous it is not easy for others to digest it.
*****
Even because of misunderstanding a book can be written and I do hold copy of that book. I find no reference for those talks. Can you help me in locating it?
****
Read the preface of the book. Everything is explained there very clearly that many hours of recording of maulana tariq jameel was provided to the author which was then written Down.
Anyways this is not the topic of the blog. If you wish to discuss the matter more then use the debates section please.
It would have been different if Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) knew about all of the (matters) above or read the testimony of Ulamah compiled together with�diligent research and presented to Senior Ulamah�of Pakistan. In the absence of all of this and candid admission that "Maulana" Tariq Jameel (HA) is not even known is problematic and in this case it isn't merely a discussion but which Usools (principles) have been used to ascribe Kuf'r
If Shaykh (Mufti) A.S. Desai (HA) had known about the issue, the person and then given the Fatwa then it would have been a case of disagreeing with an Alim (still harsh language) but understandable.
Right now its�baseless,�callousand�harsh
**** Muadh Khan
Now it is pretty clear that mufti as desai knew about the vile and haraam antics prior to issuing the fatwa. Now will brother muadh khan retract his statement.
This comment has been flagged.
I would just like to add my final post on the forum here so that readers can perhaps understand my obstinate, persistent attitude and behaviour ever since I stumbled upon this forum:
This message is addressed to all the readers who might have followed the distressing series of events involving my repeated efforts to demonstrate that the numerous criticisms and attacks on the fatwas, statements, style, and tone of Mufti Desai, were deeply flawed, and were in fact gross misrepresentations.
I hope to make this my final post on this forum. From some of the comments directed at me I have clearly overstayed my welcome.
I request you to understand that I love and respect Mufti Desai, just as much as I love and respect my father, if not more so. He was the only one who had helped me out in certain difficult circumstances that I found myself me in, when there was no-one else willing to do so. If I had come across misrepresentations of the statements of my father, thereby attracting criticism and ridicule of him, I would have reacted just the same.
If however, and I urge you to take note of this, I came across statements that were not misrepresentations, but were clearly justified criticisms for public consumption and ridicule, I would have forced myself to swallow the bitter pill, take it on the chin, and move on. I am a strong believer in the Quranic verse commanding one to adhere to the truth no matter how bitter it may be, even if it goes against yourself and your dear ones.
However, this was clearly not the case here.
In order that you may be able to understand my behaviour I would request you just to imagine for a moment that the following sequence of events over this matter took place with respect to your dear father. Imagine how you�d feel if you had been confronted by just a few of the following statements or sentiments resembling those that I had to deal with (FR1 refers to forum user no.1, FR2 refers to forum user no.2, etc.):
YOU: I was just passing by when I noticed blatant misrepresentations of the statements of my father. The more I browsed the more such crimes I came across. As a result, I feel compelled to stay in order to undo the damage done. I wish to prove that the criticisms of my father are deeply flawed and even slanderous.
FR1: I'm really sorry, we can't allow you to do so. If you want to pursue this, take the issue privately behind the scenes please.
YOU: I�m sorry I cannot. Since such slanderous misrepresentations occurred in public, it needs to addressed and remedied in public. Furthermore, my pain, rage, and ghairah at the injustice committed does not allow me to submit to any request to have this discussion in private.
FR2: You seem to carry a lot of emotional baggage. Why don�t you just calm down for once.
YOU: I will try insh-Allah. Why has my thread attempting to demonstrate the misrepresentations been deleted from public view?
FR3: I requested it since it turned into a debate the moment you posted your very convincing and conclusive post, after several pages of intense debating.
YOU: I demand the right to be able to demonstrate in public the misrepresentations on this forum, since the damage has been caused here right here in the public domain.
FR4: Please pay heed to the following advice: The Messenger (peace be upon him) said: "The gates of Paradise will be opened on Monday and on Thursdays, and every servant [of Allah] who associates nothing with Allah will be forgiven, except for the man who has a grudge against his brother. [About them] it will be said, 'Delay these two until they are reconciled. Delay these two until they are reconciled. Delay these two until they are reconciled.'"
YOU: Please try and understand me. I am only demanding the right to be able to demonstrate that clear and blatant misrepresentations have taken place of the statements of my father.
FR5: Fine, let�s try this one on you: �I guarantee a house in lowest parts of Jannah for the one who leaves off argument even when he is right, and a house in the middle part of Jannah for the one who leaves off lying even if hes just joking, and a house in the highest part of Jannah for the one with good manners�
YOU: Please try and understand me. I am not here to win any arguments or prove that I am right. I am here simply to remedy the gross misunderstanding acquired by the forum readers due to the misrepresentations of the statements of my father.
FR6: This brother is a really stubborn and vindictive one.
YOU: How about I post in a thread and one of the admins close the thread so that no debates take place.
FR7: You really seem to be on an ego trip.
YOU: May Allah (azza wa jal) purify my intentions.
FR8: Why don�t you just GET LOST. We�re not interested in your clarifications.
YOU: Maybe you might not have been duped by the blatant misrepresentations but others have clearly been. Since the attacks of and misrepresentations of my father had occurred in public and have clearly mislead numerous readers of this forum, it is important that my analysis of those slanderous statements remain in the pubic domain, in order that the damage incurred can be remedied to some extent. The sincere readers can then decide for themselves the veracity of those attacks and whether or not blatant misrepresentations had occurred.
FR9: I second the previous brothers� appeal for you to get lost and his Ilmi Ghaybi claim that this seems like an ego trip. Why don�t you instead clarify what you�re doing about so and so.
YOU: I am here simply to remedy the gross misunderstanding acquired by the forum readers due to the misrepresentations of the statements of my father. What I�m doing about so and so is irrelevant to this issue.
FR10: Well I�ve just managed to dig out a reply to the Hadith in your signature. Take this: �'Those who revile one another are two shaytans who accuse one another and deny one another.'"�
YOU: Please try and understand me. I am here simply to remedy the gross misunderstanding acquired by the forum readers due to the misrepresentations of the statements of my father.
FR11: You can blog it and it�ll remain undeleted insha-Allah.
YOU: JazakAllah Khair.
THE END
The above was merely a rough sketch. Far more had happened repeatedly, and I will admit that I have been deeply hurt and enraged at times by the number of unjust statements that I had across on this forum.
Since the blog post demonstrates conclusively the blatant misrepresentations that had been perpetrated with regards to just one fatwa, I sincerely hope there is no need to deal with the numerous other statements and fatwas that I�ve come across that had been misrepresented here. I trust that everybody will merely dismiss any criticisms of the statements of the Mufti if they come across them now.
I do intend however to make a couple more blog posts if only to provide some understanding behind Mufti Desai�s harshness against any deviance.
I sincerely thank the numerous brothers here who did stand up for the truth and backed me up both on this forum and behind the scenes. That includes the respected admins/authorizers.
Jazakumullahu Khairan