The Muslim scholars, will not declare him as a disbeliever, because out of 21 shades of meaning 20 went towards disbelief but one came towards Islam. They will exercise due care and give him the benefit of the doubt and consider this good aspect unless it is proved that Umar had the intention of expressing one of the 20 shades of disbelief. This sort of care and benefit of the doubt cannot be extended to an insolent man, who says that Allah’s words are lies or uses insulting language about the Prophet of Islam صلى اله عليه وسلم, because this matter is so serious that he must be called a disbeliever. Not to call him a disbeliever is to accept disbelief as Islam, Anybody who accepts disbelief as Islam is himself a disbeliever, Earlier on, we have heard that authentic books like Shifa, Bazazia, Darar, Daher, Naher, Fataawa-E-Khairlyah, Majma-ul-Anher and Durr-E- Mukhtar etc, have stated that any person who insults the Prophet صلى اله عليه وسلم is a disbeliever, and that a person who doubts his disbelief will himself become a disbeliever. It is a different matter that the Jewish type of people change the meanings of words by tearing them out of their context and by attributing false statements to the great scholars.
“Those who do wrong will come to know by what a great reverse they will be
To quote from Sharah Flqah Akbar:
“Verily they have mentioned if an issue related to Kufr has 99 aspects directed towards Kufr and one against it, it is most appropriate for the Mufti and the Qadi to act in favour of the aspect which is against Kufr.”We find this in Fataawa Khulasah, Jami-UI-Fasooleen, Muheet and Fataawa Alamgiriyah.
“If an issue is many faceted necessitating condemnation (Takfeer) and one aspect prohibiting condemnation, the Mufti and Qadi has to incline towards that one aspect and not to issue a decree of Kufr against such a person, having good faith in a person’s Islam. Then if their intention of the one who utters those words confirms to the aspect that prohibits condemnation, he will be regarded as a Muslim, and if it is contrary to that then the Muftis attempts to explain his statement from that angle which does not necessitate (Takfeer) condemnation will be futile in his case”. In the same way it can be seen in Fataawa Bazazla, Baher-ur-Raalq, Majma-ul-Anher and Hadeeqah Hadiyah. Tatar Khaniah, Baher, Sal-al-Hisam and Tanbih-ul-Walat etc, also show as under:
A person will not be condemned as Kafir in a case involving possibilities because condemning as Kafir is the ultimate in punishment which demands extreme case in crime and in a doubtful case there is no case of final punishment.”
Baher-ur-Raaiq, Tanveer-ul-Absaar, Hadeeqah Nadiyah, Tanbih-ul-Walat and I Sal-ul-Hisam etc, show as under:
The statement reads, “A Muslim will not be condemned as Kafir if there is a possibility of
interpreting his statement bordering on good intentions.”
See that there are a number of possibilities involved in one word. The matter becomes far more complicated and serious when some statements of a man are to be examined. But the Jews change and misinterpret the meanings.
(Tamheed Ul Iman by Ala Hazrat radi allahu anhu)