Wahabi Molvi Talib ur Rahman's new fatwa - Nikah with Sister is Allowed

Discussion in 'Islam in General' started by puremuslim, May 12, 2010.

  1. puremuslim

    puremuslim New Member

  2. ibnRobert

    ibnRobert Member

    why does his video continoulsy repeat itself without allowing "wahabi molvi" to reply? y does that stupid brelwi stand and shout to make his point... these juhall bralwees may ALLAH guide them and you !
  3. puremuslim

    puremuslim New Member

    Last edited: May 13, 2010
  4. ibnRobert

    ibnRobert Member

    No u listen to the video again... do u even know which one talib ur rehman is?if not find out who he is and then c if he even says one word throughout this whole repeated bralwee propaganda crap...what is a wahabi by the way oh mr PURE islam?
  5. ibnRobert

    ibnRobert Member

    maybe my punjabi is rusty where has he tried to justify this haram action ?? this whole video is being filmed by a bralwi so u can not see what talib is saying dont be insincere to the truth in your hate of wahabis...
  6. I watched the complete debate .... so mr impuremuslim dont try to fool people and even i asked this question to sheikh talib ur rahman personally... THAT FATWA WASA REGARDING RAZA'EE SISTER.... where suppose there are two suckling brothers born to different women... so one can marry the others sister...
  7. puremuslim

    puremuslim New Member

    talib ur rahman is the one with the white long beard...

    YOU CANNOT MARRY YOUR RAZA'EE SISTER!!! UR GOING AGAINST HADEES!!!! U DIDNT EVEN KNOW WATS THE PROPER MEANING OF RAZA'EE!!!! even if she is the sister of the raza'ee brother still she like our own sister!!!

    r u sure u watched the whole debate? why dont u tell us that wat happened in the debate, Hanif Qureshi proofed that wahabi books contain shirk and kuffr, and mujahid24 is sayin i hate wahabis, lol

    go on tell us wat happened at the end of the debate, how talib ur rahman himself said those wahabi scholars who said these kuffr and shirk things shud be called kafir...

    YouTube - 29. Mufti Hanif Qureshi Qadri (Sunni) Vs Talib-ur-Rehman (Wahabi Ahlehadis) CD-5/7 (6)

    this part of the debate itself shows how much kuffr and shirk these wahabi scholar write...
    Last edited: May 13, 2010
  8. Assalaamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu,

    This seems like a typical bashing of groups based on a number of tools of propaganda. This is known from the People of Innovation who love to pinpoint particular things and magnify them in a way that is deceiving in order for it to confuse/mislead the masses. Not only is this a disgusting quality in any Muslim, but it also shows the lengths that the people of falsehood will go to, in order to make fitnah. Allaah protect us from losing our principles for the sake of fitnah, Ameen.<O:p</O:p

    What are our principles?<O:p

    1. Establishing certainty through facts: This is agreed upon clearly from many verses, ahaadeeth and principles outlined by the scholars. Whenever a claim is made, it needs to be proven, it also needs to be established in its utmost details of claim. I.E: everything needs to be proven to have been said, as claimed, in the context of the claim and in the manner of the claim, or it is blameworthy for slander. The claim also has to be reflective of exactly what happened and not a "reading between the lines" or "filling in the blanks" using our own reasoning.<O:p</O:p

    2. Good assumption, husn adh-dhann: We always have a good assumption of another Muslim, especially one known for sticking to the texts and to the usool as-Sunnah. If a person is accused of something, we cannot just assume it to be true, but also if it does turn out to be true, what are the possible reasons for it? We are commanded to go by the lenient excuses for any matter being said. This is a key principle in Jarh wa Ta'deel also, if there are a number of possibilities of explanation we take the best, most dignified one, not the worst case scenario.

    3. Forbiddance of relaying information until the issue has been addressed: This links to the first point I mentioned, because we dont know of what exactly was said or what was meant, what really occurred, to further publicly speak about it is equally haraam also.

    4. If all of these cases apply to an individual, we must hear his explanation and exemption from blame: For example, if it turns out that this in its explicit and direct claim is in fact totally true, then we must directly question the person involved, ask what he means by it, ask for an explanation as to why he concluded it as his point. This is because he may have a reason for having that opinion, a hadeeth, a scholarly understanding or a purpose, you cannot simply dismiss it as "Kufr" and "wrong" until you have reviewed the evidences of the opposing party. This is also from the Ahkaam regarding Jarh wa Ta'deel and differing in opinions.

    5. Is it a matter in which there is difference of opinion?: I mean here that there may be some scholastic reasoning behind the taking of a particular view. Just because it may be worded in a direct sense in the Qur'an, it does not mean that it is completely based on that alone. EG killing a believer is described as disbelief in many places, but we know that killing is not kufr al-Akbar. So if there is a difference of opinion, we can say the person is incorrect based on evidences, but we cannot censure him for taking that opinion as there is a difference between ulamaa on it.

    Now from these principles we have established how our stance should be.
  9. Back to this post, the scandal and the video<O:p</O:p

    A. All we are shown is some random paper, with urdu on it that apparently shows Taalibur-Rahmaan's fatwa for saying a person can marry his sister. We do not see it, nor the information on it, nor are we presented in this forum, any transcript for that very fatwa. Yet the brother is adamant that Taalibur-Rahmaan said this. So we dont even know if thats what Taalibur-Rahmaan said.

    B. The video itself has been clearly uploaded by a proponent of the Qadri camp, as such the person has deliberately captioned the entire discussion. This is also very questionable. Why has the person cut out the responses to the claimant? We know that the debate is not finished there and there is much more to it. So why not fulfill the requirements of establishing the proof, by allowing the full discussion, atleast at that moment to be shown? SubhaanAllaah Dawud [alayhis salaam] made sajdah of tawbah for not hearing both parties in issuing a decree, but these brothers are "establishing kufr" upon a person without even showing the remaining discussion!<O:p</O:p

    C. The good assumption allows us to maintain that Taalibur-Rahmaan has an explanation as he always has a backing for his opinions as is seen from him in general. So in the meantime we cannot go around on an internet fitnah campaign discrediting him on this till he explains himself and this opinion as: 1. True or not, 2. Misconstrued or not, 3. Based on evidences or not. Until then we need to be careful about our speech as it falls into the category of slander. Also the Brelwis are known for doing propaganda campaigns against people of Sunnah by distortion and misplaced slanders. If a group is known to be deceptive doesnt that require us to be even more diligent and analaytical of their accusations?

    D. We have in this post a brother "Puremuslim" who has broken the bonafide principles within our deen in order to propagate fitnah against this "Wahhaabi" Imaam because he opposes him with so much enmity that it glosses over his understanding of the principles Islaam came with. Also, this brother also starts self analysing the event by adding more fuel by saying that a person on the Ahlul-hadeeth camp was justifying it. Where is this seen on the video? All we see is a person who was among them saying words back to the claimant. This does not equate to justification of the claim it is just a man saying words back to a person accusing his Imaam of committing kufr in such an inherently deceptive way.<O:p</O:p

    E. What equally shows the disgusting nature of the people of bid'ah is that this issue has become rampant now on the internet. Just by typing a search you see a link to these cut and edited videos everywhere, articles talking about this snippet, speaking without any sense of principle on this issue. They are also, quite noticeably all sites that are linked to the camp that brought the claim in the first place!<O:p</O:p

    SubhanAllaah is this justice and dhabt fid deen? Allaahu Musta'an.
  10. Implementing our Principles<O:p</O:p

    - Bring the full discussion to the table. Lets see what was said in totality. Lets see Taalibur-Rahmaan's response to this.<O:p</O:p

    - Present all the proofs of the exact statements of Taalibur-Rahmaan about the issue he is accused of. Take it to the scholars of the Sunnah and ask them for advice concerning it.

    - Analyse that using the Qur'an and Sunnah based on the understanding of the Salaf. What is the strongest opinion on it?

    - Conclude whether the claimant infact lied against Taalibur-Rahmaan in which case the person's evil nature is clear to the masses. Or whether his claim is true which would mean we would leave the incorrect opinion and follow the truth. Since we are not like the people of innovation, we always follow the truth whether some of our scholars were wrong or not. It doesnt matter to us, if Abu hanifa made the mistake or Ibn Taymiyyah, a mistake is a mistake and must not be followed.


    Let us remember that there are people out there bent on deceiving the masses by argumentation, by false proofs, and by twisting words to distort meanings. People have distorted the Names and Attributes of Allaah, so its obvious they will distort ahaadeeth, aayaat, statements of the scholars and people of the Sunnah to fulfill their worldly aims.<O:p</O:p

    Let us remember that all people make mistakes big or small, this does not disprove a person's scholarship per se. An-Nawawi made mistakes on categorising bid'ahs, Abu hanifa made mistakes concerning belief in eemaan and many fiqh issues, Maalik also made mistakes on usool al fiqh, this does not mean we abandon them or warn against them but we look at their contributions as a whole:

    <O:p</O:pi. Are they generally people who always follow Qur'an and Sunnah as understood by the Salaf?

    ii. Are they generally calling to innovations and deviations?

    iii. Are they basing knowledge on solid principles and proofs or vague points and strange interpretations?

    iv. Are they submissive to evidence, i.e amend their mistakes and admit it and correct it or bent on their ways regardless?

    This will give us some idea as to whether that person is infact a sincere and honest person or one who is corrupt and wishing to corrupt others. May Allaah allow us to be fair and just in our affairs, Ameen.<O:p</O:p
  11. Musaafira

    Musaafira Aafia Siddiqui

    Here is an extended version of the Video, even though the Brelvi Imam has no etiquette of debating.. He asks a question then he needs to pause for a response.

  12. Wild Wild West

    Wild Wild West لا تعتذر اليوم

    So what is the conclusion (for those of us who don't know Urdu/Punjabi)?
  13. al-Tahawi

    al-Tahawi formerly abdullah12321

    The conclusion is don't waste your time with this rubbish which actually decreases a persons intellect and knowledge.

    IA is becoming a new place for the Ahle Hadith vs Deobandies vs Brelvies polemics. This should be put an end to!
    justabro and Ismail Ibrahim like this.
  14. Wild Wild West

    Wild Wild West لا تعتذر اليوم

    I agree, but if people are going to promote (or condemn) such people then we ought to know why -- but then again you are right in that we will never be told that anyway.
  15. Wild Wild West

    Wild Wild West لا تعتذر اليوم

    This is just a phase we are going through. Inshallah we will get through this.
    Abu Hurairah likes this.
  16. MuhammedAli

    MuhammedAli <A HREF="showthread.php?t=70991"></A>

    First of all Talib didn't issue the fatwah of it's permissibility. it was the old man sitting close to him. He is at 8th second, with red hat, facing Talib, on bottom left corner.

    Razai brotherhood/sisterhood is established when a child from two different couples is breast fed by another, this establishes brotherhood/sisterhood for that child with the children of woman who has breast fed.

    To illustrate,

    Akhtar & Saima = couple, children; Matt, Simon, Zoe

    Saiqa & Jhangeer = couple, children; Tony, David

    Saima breast feeds, Tony. Now Tony is Razai brother of Matt, Simon, Zoe. They are in Sharia real brothers and sisters as genetic brothers/sisters are. Now Tony cannot marry Zoe in Islamic law cause she is his sister. David can marry Zoe cause no breast feeding has taken for him. A Hadith mentions its prohibition with evidence from Quran:

    "Narrated Aisha" (regarding) the Verse: 'And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans...' (4.3) It is about the orphan girl who is in the custody of a man who is her guardian, and he intends to marry her because of her wealth, but he treats her badly and does not manage her property fairly and honestly. Such a man should marry women of his liking other than her, two or three or four. 'prohibited to you (for marriage) are: ...your foster-mothers (who suckled you).' (4.23) marriage is prohibited between persons having a foster suckling relationship corresponding to a blood relationship which renders marriage unlawful." [Ref: Bukhari, Book 62, Hadith 35]

    Permitting marriage between them is nothing less then kufr because it violates the nas-a-qatti and if the old man dies without repenting he dies Kafir. Pray that he repents and dies a Muslim.
  17. Ismail Ibrahim

    Ismail Ibrahim Formerly Harris Hammam

    Ban them all. Can't have an SF style mentality overrunning this place.
    justabro likes this.
  18. Wild Wild West

    Wild Wild West لا تعتذر اليوم

    Fine, but why did he do so and why did Talib not object to this kufr? (Did the old man have some kind of 'daleel')?

    OK, we should do, but don't you agree that the Deobandis have a point when they are highlighting this?

    [PS: Forgive me if I missed anything because I don't understand Urdu/Punjabi]
  19. justabro

    justabro Salafi (Retd.)

  20. MuhammedAli

    MuhammedAli <A HREF="showthread.php?t=70991"></A>

    There is no daleel for its justification only logical deduction and based on this logical deduction old man permitted it. His logical deduction was, not genetic bro sis therefore okay to marry. MY OWN logical deudction based on old mans principle, wives of Prophet sallallahu alayhi was'sallam are mothers of believers but not genetic hence can marry them. Wrong!!! Muslim could cannot marry the wives because they are mothers ... no wife of Prophet sallallahu alayhi was'sallam married after prophet sallallahu alayhi was'sallam passed away cause they are mother of believers declared in Quran; Wa azwajuhum ummahatu ... Deen isn't logic and deen isn't rationalism, deen is Quran and Sunnah.

    Brother of course the issue raised by Mufti Haneef Qureshi the BARELWI is important. He had charged the old man of kufri innovation. But how a point should be made is important. Its not Ghair Muqalid aqeeda or fiqh issue. Its just a old man loosing plot in his old age. Its a belief of few men from Ghair muqallideen and not ijmahi belief of entire jammat and it should be presented as such. Should not be presented as belief of entire Jammat danger of presenting it as opinion of Jammah is the foolish of Jammah will accept it as valid due to partisanism.
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2013

Share This Page