In compliance to your wishes, posting the same thing the second time.
[12:50] And (when this person went back and told the king about the interpretation of the dream), the king said, .Bring him to me. So, when the messenger came to Yusuf, he said, .Go back to your lord and ask him, What is the case of the women who cut their hands?‘ Surely, my Lord knows well their guile.
Evidence 1 (Defending oneself is necessary):
Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) writes in his Tafseer:
The arrangement and strides of Sayyidina Yusuf (AS) towards establishing his innocence from slanderous defamation teach us that it is NECESSARY to take the appropriate steps to ward off slanderous defamation. This is also mentioned as a desirable trait in Ahadeeth and amongst the beneficial qualities (and outcome) is that people will be saved from backbiting and one’s own heart will be saved from chaos.
There is also a lesson (in this story specifically) that although Aziz knew about the innocence of Sayyidina Yusuf (AS) this tactic of seeking to avert slanderous defamation was also meant to strengthen his belief in Sayydina Yusuf (AS)’s innocence.
A question arises that efforts to avert the slanderous defamation could also be averted after the release so why insist on being cleared first (before release)? A reason for this could be that people would believe the innocence more readily (while still being imprisoned). Furthermore, another reason being that the King and Aziz knew the freedom from imprisonment is one of the most cherished wish and if a person is willing to sacrifice it for the sake of being cleared of slanderous defamation then not only the person is absolutely convinced (beyond doubt) of the innocence but also convinced that it can be proven!
Evidence 2 (Defending oneself is Waajib for those involved in Islamic activties):
Imam Abdul-Wahab Sha'rani (RA) is a Mujtahid Imam of the Shaf'ae Madhab. He has authored many books and one of the most astounding books is لبحر المورود في المواثيق والعهود on Tassawuff. In this book Shaykh (RA) describes the pledges taken by him at the hands of hunderds of Mashaykh and the nature of the pledges.
This isn't a book of Shaf'ae Fiqh although some rulings are discussed in the text.
Shaykh (Maulana) Zafar Ahmed Usmani (RA) was the nephew of Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) and his works are a masterpiece of research and adornment. Upon the request of Mashaykh (during Hajj) Shaykh (Maulana) Zafar Ahmed Usmani (RA) started the work on translation and commentary on this monumental work. He painstakingly compared manuscripts and referenced all the Ahadeeth (commented where necessary).
He specially comments if a Mas'ala is according to Shaf'as Madhab in the book and produce the Hanafi ruling.
Shaykh (Maulana) Zafar Ahmed Usmani (RA) writes extensive notes and footnotes and brings the statement of his Shaykh (i.e. Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA)) and in a footnote discussing the need to avert slanderous defamation explicitly lists on his authority this action being Waajib.
Both Imam Abdul-Wahab Sha'rani (RA) and Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) say that this should be done with the intention to save the people from sin of backbiting.
The distinction here is that this isn't about disagreement but about slanderous defamation and taking the necessary steps to avert it. Even if you have trouble obtaining the book it is clearly and categorically mentioned in Tafsser of Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) that it is "Zaroori (necessary)"
Application:
That is a FILTHY SLANDER!
There is every possibility that I am wrong and I have misunderstood, I am human and prone to error but I am MOST CERTAINLY neither lying nor twising nor disrespecting Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai HA) and Allah (SWT) is my witness!
Important!
This is the second time this whole issue has been explained. The first time Hazrat Akaabir Saheb (Damat Baraktuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) CATEGORICALLY requested the thread to be closed.
He then simply remembered Imam Abdul-Wahab Sha'rani (RA) and assumed that the ruling was "Shaf'ae". There may be little difference between words but the same evidence has been used the second time.
Agreement?
Even if you ignore a book of Tassawuff and take the widely available Tafseer the word "ZAROORI (NECESSSARY)" can be very easily shown so either way my action most certainly has precedence in Shariah.
I don't expect Hazrat Akaabir Saheb (Damat Baraktuhum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) to agree despite the ability to clearly show the scans from the Tafseer and usage of the words "ZAROORI (NECESSSARY)".
I expect him to twist this around and say that if its NECESSARY for a Jaahil like me then its NECESSITY is compounded in the case of Shaykh (Mufti) A. S. Desai (HA) and this indeed lends more justification to their actions then mine.
In short, although I have complied I don't expect much good out of this at all, only bad and more persistence and bad blood. I don't even expect recognition that this is the 2nd time I have done this and others can't be questioned, can't be held to the same standards etc.
Jazkallahu Khayran
All you need to understand in plain and simple English is this:
All of the above I swear by Allah (SWT) is TRUE to the best of my human endeavour and ability.
You are committing a MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR Haram by bringing issue which you are neither witness to, nor have any right to and here is the Fatwa to prove it.
Worst case scenario:
Let’s say that whatever I have said above is an absolute and blatant lie and I am committing a sin. It still doesn’t justify you committing a sin in Islam simply because I am committing a sin!
If you want to place your Aakhira on a bet against me, go ahead but when we meet in front of Allah (SWT) don't blame and don't say that I didn't categorically state very clearly.
Jazakallahu Khayran
In order to arrive at a Just and Fair conclusion Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) stated that a person must hear both sides of the story.
You have heard the story and spin of Shaykh (Hazrat) Deoband Saheb (Damat Barakathum Mudda Fuyuzuhum) would you like to hear my side of the story or is the case done and closed?
Although this matter has NO direct corelation to the issue but I am still replying to you and to also let you know that my comments on the blog have not been authorised or approved for 1 1/2 days. Anticipating your second accusation that I am not replying and running away.
Awaiting your response.
For everyone else:
This is an email correspondence posted on Sunniforum on the 5th of April 2013 to Shaykh (Maulana) Huzaifa (HA) , it isn't directed at me at all. The email directed at me was pretty conclusive in dismissing this matter, in fact here is my email from 06th of May 2014 clearly bringing the topic AGAIN as I was unaware of the matter. Notice the following facts:
Similar to the episode listed here where both brothers categorically denied any involvement with each other but the title remains and there are no apologies or regrets. It is in fact justified and lauded as an effort to defend Shaykh (Hazrat) Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA)
I fully complied with the wishes of Brother Abu Mohammad but I already stated that despite the best of efforts I don't expect things to get better, in fact I expect them to get worse.
Conclusion:
It is CATEGORICAL that I knew nothing about this post on Sunniforum otherwise why would I be posting (still) in May 2014 and trying my best to convince him of the matter?
At best I am guilty of not knowing.
Nevertheless as I said the issue is presumptuous slander and there is no cure for it except Hidaya from Allah (SWT).
I don't doubt that people with such actions get spiritually drained!
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
Please wait...
