UNNATURAL DELAYING OF HAIDH

Is fatwa below on fatwa website correct? My wife wanted to know.

DELAYING MENSTRUATION BY INJECTION
Is it permissible for a Woman to have an injection for the purpose of delaying menstruation to enable her go through ibadah like Hajj or Umrah?

Answer
In principle, a woman should not tamper with and alter the natural state of her body as created by Allāh Ta’ala. Generally, a woman would know her monthly cycle and may then make use of calculations to determine a suitable date to perform Umrah.
The use of such injections would, however, be permitted under unavoidable circumstances such as in the case of Hajj wherein a woman would be unable to perform the obligatory Tawāf (al-Ziyārah) before her departure date from Makkah.
This is also provided that it is done under the medical guidance of one’s doctor and is not proven harmful to the body.
Answer
The fatwa is moronic. In the first place it does not answer the question. The question is about permissibility of perpetrating the satanic unnatural act of taking medication to prevent haidh for the purpose of going to perform Hajj and even Nafl Umrah.
The questioner does not ask about specifically Tawaaf Ziyaarat. Since this mufti is in bewilderment and off the track in shoving his own implied question into the Istifta’, he relates the question to Tawaaf Ziyaarat to produce his idea of “unavoidable circumstances”.
He says that the satanism is permissible “under unavoidable circumstances”. What is so “unavoidable” about not going for Hajj and Umrah? Today, even Fardh Hajj should be delayed due to the vaccination and other acts of shaitaaniyat.
Then the mufti speaks more drivel by saying: “This is also provided that it is done under the medical guidance of one’s doctor and is not proven harmful to the body.”
Shaitaan has really convoluted the brains and thinking of the muftis of today. Firstly 99.9% of doctors today are faasiq and even atheists. Their advice is satanic rubbish. The logical conclusion of this drivel is that if the satanic medication is harmful for the body then it will not be permissible. If so, then what happens to her Tawaaf-e-Ziyaarat? In the understanding of this mufti chap, omitting Tawaaf-e-Ziyaarat should qualify the woman for the satanic medication because it does constitute “unavoidable circumstances”, regardless of what her doctor says and regardless of it being harmful to her body. This mufti should answer this question. It is not for us at this juncture to present the answer. We merely point out the contradiction and drivel of his fatwa.
Let it be known and understood well that whatever method / medication is adopted to interfere with the natural process created by Allah Ta’ala is always harmful. It is by the intervention of Iblees. What the fussaaq-atheists doctors say is trash to be compulsorily discarded.
It is haraam for a woman to go for Hajj and even worse for Umrah if she has to resort to haraam

DEMOLITION OF A MUSJID

PAKISTAN – DEMOLITION OF A MUSJID ORDERED BY THE COURT

Question: The supreme court of Pakistan has ordered the demolition of a Musjid (Madina Musjid) in Karachi on the basis of urban zoning regulations having been violated. Is the order of the court valid according to the Shariah? Pakistan is supposed to be an Islamic Republic as is stated in its Constitution.

ANSWER

Understand well, that Pakistan, more appropriately, Napakistan (The Impure Land) is not an Islamic country. The claim of it being an ‘Islamic’ republic is dastardly false. From its very inception in 1947, contrary to the much-vaunted proclamation of the establishment of a Shariah-Sunnah state by the munaafiq politicians who were all agents of Iblees, Pakistan NEVER was an Islamic state, nor was there any sincere attempt by its founders to establish a Shariah state.

However, they succeeded to befuddle even our very senior Ulama with their deception, and to ensnare their support for the establishment of a separate state to fulfil the demand of the conspiracy of their colonial master, Britain. Hadhrat Mufti Muhammad Shafi (Rahmatullah alayh) laments the pipe dream which he too had entertained. But, alas! His cry and lament were expressions of futility. Hadhrat Shafi makes mention of this Pakistani pipe dream in the introduction of his Ma-aariful Qur’aan. However, Mufti Taqi has very conveniently deleted it from the English translation for a very obvious reason: he is in cahoots with the kufr government of Pakistan.

The regime in Pakistan or Napakistan has abolished the entire Shariah, but persists with the deception of the nom deplume of ‘Islamic Republic’ for the consumption of ignoramuses. The courts in Napakistan are KUFR courts which operate strictly in accord with western law. It is therefore no surprise that the murtad judge decreed the demolition of the Musjid.

Right here in South Africa, some molvis, notably of the NNB jamiat and of the Pork Certifier MJC, had not so long ago, petitioned the kuffaar court to ‘demolish’ not one Musjid, but all the Musaajid throughout the country. These rotten molvis with kufr percolating from every aperture and pour of their bodies, begged and pleaded with the kuffaar court to close all the Musajid in the country. They furthermore had the shaitaani audacity and kufr temerity of branding all the Musaajid to be ‘super spreaders’ of disease.

Relevant to the judge of the Pakistani supreme court, these South African shayaateen posing as molvis and sheikhs are worse. While the judge in Pakistan ordered the demolition of one Musjid, the filthy khanaazeer molvis and sheikhs in South Africa pleaded with the kuffaar court to demolish a thousand Musaajid – all Musaajid and all Jamaat Khanahs of the country.

We are living in an era in close proximity of Qiyaamah. More heart-breaking events are yet to transpire.

16 Jamadith Thaani 1443 – 19 January 2021

DEVOURING HARAAM AND MUSHTABAH FOOD

THE PHYSICAL AND SPIRITUAL RUIN OF DEVOURING HARAAM AND MUSHTABAH FOOD

Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed: “O Rusul (Messengers)! Eat from what is Tayyibaat and practice Saalihaat (righteous deeds).”

Hadhrat Hasan Basri (Rahmatullah alayh), perhaps the most senior Faqeeh, Muhaddith, Mufassir and Wali among the Taabieen, said: “A man may fast every day, spend every night in ibaadat and become as thin as a rake, but as long as he is not careful regarding what he eats, nothing of his ibaadat is accepted.”

Hadhrat Hasan Basri (Rahmatullah alayh) also said: “I have met such people (Sahaabah and senior Taabieen) who had abandoned 70 avenues of halaal for fear of falling into haraam.”

Hadhrat Sufyaan Thauri (Rahmatullah alayh) said that there was a time when with each Aayat of the Qur’aan he recited, seventy facts of Hikmat (Divine Wisdom) would be revealed to him. But “now, even if I recite the entire Qur’aan, not a single avenue of wisdom opens up for me.” This spiritual blockage he attributed to a cup of water given to him by a soldier. Generally, soldiers are juhala and cruel. The jahl and zulm of the soldier had a great detrimental athr (effect) on the water, hence the Roohaaniyat of Hadhrat Sufyaan was polluted with the water resulting in the blockage.

The effect of mushtabah and haraam food is disastrous for a Mu’min. It destroys all spiritual stamina. The ability to combat evil is weakened and even eliminated. The basis of Taqwa is halaal and tayyib food. A lady entrusted her young son into the care of a Shaikh. The Shaikh observed that the boy was progressing swiftly in the sphere of Taqwa. The Shaikh feared that the swift rate of spiritual progress of the lad would overwhelm and even kill him. He therefore devised a method for slowing down the child’s rate of Roohaani progress. The Shaikh bought some food from a halaal restaurant. There was no doubt whatsoever in the food being halaal. It was not Mushtabah (doubtful) food.

After the boy consumed this food, his rate of progress significantly fell. This was the effect of the restaurant food. Despite it being halaal, it was not Tayyib (pure and wholesome). It lacked the ingredients for enhancing spiritualism for the acquisition of Taqwa. Why was the restaurant food not Tayyib despite being Halaal? Fussaaq and fujjaar generally handle food prepared in public places. Their spiritual evil and their dirty hands, etc. contaminate the food, eliminating the property of tayyib.

On this issue, Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (Rahmatullah alayh) explained that food displayed openly in market places is adversely affected by the stares and glances of people, especially by the stares of the poor who cannot afford purchasing the expensive food. This has a detrimental effect on the spirituality of consumers. An evil stare or a bad stare or a stare of sorrow can exercise a detrimental spiritual effect on one’s Roohaaniyat (spiritual fibre).

Once when Hadhrat Zunnun Misri (Rahmatullah alayh) was imprisoned for his outspoken Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar (Commanding virtue and prohibiting vice), an old Waliah (Saintly lady) sent some food for him. The warder of the prison brought the food with the message: ‘Hadhrat be assured that I have prepared this food from absolutely halaal money which I have earned weaving cloth. Therefore do not hesitate to consume it.”

Returning the food, Hadhrat Zunnun (Rahmatullah alayh) who was among the most senior and greatest Auliya of Islam, responding to her message, said: “I know that the food is absolutely halaal. However, the container is mushtabah (doubtful), hence I am constrained to return the food.” The ‘container’ referred to the hands of the warder who was a zaalim (oppressor). The effect of his zulm was contagious and was transferred to the food.

This is the lofty concept Halaal-Tayyib food. Hadhrat Allaamah Abdul Wahhaab Sha’raani (Rahmatullah alay) said: “The sign of mushtabah food, is a large variety of food served.” One of the principles for the cultivation of Taqwa is reduction in food and consuming simple food. While this is the emphasis of the Sunnah, the emphasis of scoundrels such as these carrion certifying outfits is the diametric opposite. Just look at SANHA’s newsletters! How these rubbish magazines extol gluttony! Gluttony is regarded a virtue to be cultivated. Since the pursuit of these filthy entities is haraam boodle, they advertise the haraam and mushtabah products of the kuffaar, extolling their ‘fadhaail’ (virtues). They encourage the ignorant masses to become like dogs to devour more and more kuffaar products whereas the Sunnah emphasises the opposite.

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “The kaafir eats with seven intestines while the Mu’min eats with one intestine”. While the Sunnah extols frugality and little food consumption, SANHA, MJC and the rest of the devil’s carrion certifying cartel encourage Muslims to become gluttons. SANHA’s newsletters specialize in the promotion of gluttony, and that too by consumption of mushtabah and haraam.

Hadhrat Abdullah Bin Umar (Radhiyallahu anhu) said: “Do not consume the food of anyone besides the food of the Muttaqeen (people of taqwa). But SANHA, in its insane pursuit of money, uses the Deen to promote the food of the kuffaar, and that too, meat products – carrion passed off as ‘halaal’.

Discouraging his son from much food, Hadhrat Luqmaan (Alayhis salaam) said: “O my son! Stay away from functions of feasting for these functions entice you to the dunya.”

The virtues of frugality and abstemiousness in the matter of food are numerous. The benefits of food reduction, especially total abstention from SANHA-promoted gluttony, are both physical and spiritual. The Sunnah’s ta’leem pertaining to food frugality is in diametric opposition to the satanic propagation of SANHA who extols gluttony and total abandonment of all inhibition for mushtabah and haraam. Every person with a little brains understand the monetary objectives of these carrion certifying khanaazeer, hence SANHA’s promotion of gluttony should be readily comprehensible.

While the Sunnah and the practice of the Sahaabah and Auliya emphasize extreme caution regarding the intake of even halaal food, SANHA goes to great strides to promote meat and chickens sold by kuffaar. Ponder! When the stares of people exercise a detrimental spiritual athr (effect) on even halaal food, then what does the intelligence and Imaan of a Mu’min dictate regarding meat products sold by kuffaar – by atheists – by enemies of Islam and enemies of the Ummah? How can Muslims indulge in such spiritual self-immolation to ruin their Imaan by ingesting meat products acquired from kuffaar?

The masses of Muslims have degenerated to the level of vultures. We say vultures, not dogs, because the ebb of Muslim degeneration is sub-canine. Dogs too shun carrion. Dogs do not consume rotten meat. Yes, vultures do. According to the Shariah, haraam meat is ‘rotten’ – carrion – jeefah. Jeefah – Consumption is the science in which SANHA and its cohorts in the carrion certifying game excel. Over the decades, the accursed ‘halaal’ certifying satanic ulama-e-soo’ outfits have totally desensitized the Imaan of the ignorant masses. The Muslim masses no longer have any inhibition regarding mushtabah and haraam food. Totally insensitive to the spiritual disasters of haraam food, Muslims have lost their Imaani abhorrence for taking meat and even prepared non-meat food from the hands of kuffaar. This evil is abundantly displayed in their gluttonous indulgence on the plane. Every morsel of the plane-food served by the impure hands of impure fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar incrementally tarnishes their Imaan. In fact, in many of these devourers of carrion, there is no longer any Imaan despite the outward profession of Islam.

While SANHA encourages gluttony with its halaal certified carrion and other kuffaar-prepared foods, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“The worse container filled by a person is the stomach. A few morsels suffice for the Son of Aadam (i.e. for a Muslim human being)…..”

Obviously the gluttonous ones resemble the kuffaar who need to fill seven intestines. Filling seven intestines as do the kuffaar, is promoted by SANHA. View its satanic newsletters and you will see the conspicuous adverts goading Muslims to fill seven intestines kuffaar-like. The practice of filling ‘seven intestines’ promoted by SANHA, will have a lamentable sequel even in the Aakhirat.

Once when Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saw a Sahaabi burping due to having ingested much food, he (Nabi – Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“O Aba Juhaifah! Restrain yourself (when eating). Verily, those who are the most filled (by means of gluttonous consumption of food) here on earth, their hunger will be the longest on the Day of Qiyaamah.”

After this stricture, Hadhrat Abu Juhaifah (Radhiyallahu anhu) never again ate much. If he ate in the morning, he would not eat in the evening, and vice versa. The Mashaaikh say that a person who eats thrice daily is an animal. The style of the ignorant masses is twice daily, which is tolerable provided that there is no SANHA-type gluttonous indulgence, and absolutely no carrion.

The preponderance of diseases of a variety of incurable kinds in the community of this era is the direct consequence of filling and over-filling the stomach-container with mushtabah, haraam, junk ‘food’, and rotten CARRION certified by SANHA and the like. The Mashaaikh have said: “The stomach is the headquarters of disease.” And, it is DISEASE which SANHA, MJC and the other scoundrel halaal certifiers are promoting.

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that the food of two suffices for four, and the food of four is sufficient for eight persons. This is another virtue of frugality which SANHA with its adverts promoting kuffaar products denies and negates. Hadhrat Aishah (Radhiyallahu anha) says that Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) never ate twice in one day until the day he passed way.

The very first hurdle which Muslims of today have to clear and surmount is to abandon their addiction of haraam food – haraam products certified by SANHA, MJC, NIHT and the other khanaazeer. The Road to Allah Ta’ala will remain perpetually blurred and unrecognizable as long as the intellect is deranged with the filth and carrion with which people are nourishing themselves. Haraam food disturbs mental equilibrium and blocks the avenue for the acquisition of Taqwa. That is why Allah Ta’ala emphasized so much to His Ambiya (Alayhimus salaam):

“O Rusul! Eat from the Tayyibaat and practice Saalihaat.”

15 Jamadith Thaani 1443 – 18 January 2021

WOMAN’S NAME

Question
Does a female have to conceal her name? Is it against modesty for a female to mention her name. Can a female reveal her name on twitter? A mufti says that it is permissible for a woman to publish her name. In support of his contention, the mufti says:
“Hence, the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would mention the names of his noble wives and daughters in public, and he addressed and referred to many females by name.”
The mufti also supports his view with narrations of the Sahaabah and other Ulama. He also says that most scholars mention the name of the bride in the Masjid and in many cemeteries the name of the female is written on the grave. He has similar other arguments to support his view of a female exposing and publishing her name. Please comment?
Answer
The arguments of this mufti are moronic and expose his shallowness of understanding. The arguments he proffered have no relationship with the question which pertains to a female revealing her name on brothel-media. ‘Social’ media is pure shaitaaniyat. It is the primary propagator of fisq, fujoor and kufr in this era. It is filth – najaasat and haraam.
The question pertains to a female herself revealing her name on devil media thereby exposing herself to all and sundry – to fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar – to scoundrels of the worst kind. These media excel in pornography and in every satanic art of immorality and vice. Furthermore, the mention of the names of females by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Sahaabah and other Ulama was NEVER the case of women revealing their names to a public drunk with carnal lust. The noble Wives of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not publish their names. They did not advertise themselves as do these shameless, immoral women who advertise themselves on devil’s media. The women whose names were mentioned did not expose themselves. They did not reveal their names. Others mentioned their names.
The moronity, stupidity and puerility of the mufti is quite conspicuous with his stupid ‘daleel’ of women’s names appearing on boards in graveyards. This is no Shar’i daleel. It is plain stupidity. Furthermore, the dead woman buried underground has decomposed into dust. The issue of exposure may not be applied to her. She is not exposed by her name being revealed. Also, the deceased woman did not expose or reveal her name. Others did it, and there is no Shar’i validity and no real need for even mentioning her name on a graveyard board.
As for the bride’s name being mentioned during the Nikah ceremony at the Musjid, this is based on need. The Shariah emphasises the publication of marriages. Furthermore, it is not the woman who is revealing her name. Others mention the name of the bride. There is no link between others mentioning the names of females for whatever good reason they have, and a woman herself advertising her name like a prostitute on media which excel in pornography and prostitution.
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Woman is Aurah.” This applies to the whole of the woman, including her name. It is not permissible for a woman herself to reveal her name to a rotten public on media which are more rotten, filthy and immoral. A woman who advertises herself on these devil’s media is heavily sedated with the tendencies of prostitutes. She is utterly shameless, and more shameless than her is the moron mufti who halaalizes such haraam exposure.
The mufti says: “There is no reason for it to be concealed. No boy will develop an interest or get any feelings for a girl just due to her name.” It is not permissible for a chap so ignorant to issue fatwa. It is not a mere issue of a name of a female. The advertisement of the name comes with other paraphernalia which open the avenue for zina. Females advertising themselves, especially on these immoral, haraam media are prostitutes at heart. The moron mufti has soothed their immoral consciences with his zigzag stupid fatwa.
There is abundant reason for a woman NOT to reveal her name in public. The imperative need is for her to conceal her name. Just what is her motive for self-advertisement? The stupidity of the mufti is colossal. Every act is motivated. Why would a woman advertise herself on immoral, porno facebook and the like? One need not be a repository of baseerat and any erudition to understand the underlying motive of a female who advertises herself. Iblees operates cunningly by degrees. He lures and entangles with such issues which moron, maajin muftis proclaim ‘permissible’, but which in reality ignite the conflagration of sin and vice.
Stupidly and baselessly does the jaahil attempt to justify his haraam fatwa with the name of Hadhrat Faatimah (Radhiyallahu anha). O Jaahil! When did Hadhrat Faatimah (Radhiyallahu anha) ever advertise or publicize or reveal her name. She was the Queen of Jannat who had introduced the Sunnah of FIVE shrouds for the dead body of a female. She was the one who had instructed that people should not be informed of her death, and that she be buried secretly. Only a man whose brains are operating in disequilibrium has the temerity and the stupidity to justify the acts of lewd facebook women with the Name of Hadhrat Faatimah (Radhiyallahu anha).
The jaahil says that in Muatta Imaam Maalik at least 74 names of females are mentioned. Not a single one of these noble females had ever revealed their names. There is utterly no basis for the haraam fatwa of the jaahil mufti in the names of the females in Muatta.
The mufti maajin has not been able to mention one Muslim female – one among the illustrious Ladies of Islam who had advertised or revealed or exposed her name. He has merely disgorged the drivel of some Ulama having mentioned the names of some noble ladies. But this is never a daleel for justifying the exposure which prostitutes are giving to their names on these porno sites and media.

READING TABLIGHI KITAAB IMMEDIATELY AFTER FARDH SALAAT

Q.. Immediately after Maghrib Fardh Salaat, a Tablighi brother reads the kitaab for a couple of minutes. I got up with the intention to perform Sunnat Salaat. Another Tablighi brother prevented me, saying that I am disrespectful and that I should sit and listen to the kitaab-reading. What should I do?
A. Reading the kitaab immediately after Fardh Salaat is bid’ah. It prevents from the Masnoon act of performing the Sunnat Salaat immediately after the Fardh. It is not permissible to engage in anything, not even Tilaawat of the Qur’aan Majeed before the Sunnatul Muakkadah which adjoins the Fardh Salaat. Both the reader and the chap who prevented you are disrespectful to the Deen and are bid’atis. The person who prevented you from the Sunnat Salaat is an ignoramus. Ignore him and perform your Sunnat Salaat. Do not sit to listen to the book-reading after Fardh Salaat.

DEVIATION OF MUFTI TAQI

DEVIATION OF MUFTI TAQI

Mufti Taqi Usmani has presented several arguments to justify the covid protocols. Please respond and comment on the validity/invalidity of his arguments.

No.1

He says: The Hadith does not reject the fact that a disease MAY spread to another. The hadith rejects the aqeedah that a disease WILL spread to someone. In support of this he uses the Hadith of fleeing from a leper.

Response

His argument is baseless. What he says is his personal opinion sucked from his thumb to appease the kuffaar Pakistani government which has been co-opted by the atheists to further their satanic covid plot. Firstly, he presents his own convoluted interpretation in support of the protocols of the atheists. The atheists such as Fauci, Bill Gates & Pharma who have bribed and subdued the governments who are in control of the brains of even molvis and muftis of today. What need does Mr.Taqi discern for justifying the protocols of the enemies of Islam? 

Is Taqi Sahib ignorant of the action and reaction of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the Sahaabah and the Salafus Saaliheen during epidemics? Surely he is not so ignorant as to be unaware of how Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah conducted themselves during a plague. All arguments regardless of how ‘logic’ they may appear ostensibly, pale away into oblivion in the face of the Sunnah. 

Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah were more aware of the issue of lepers, yet they did not behave so recklessly and emulative of the mushrikeen as do Taqi Sahib and all the zigzag muftis who bootlick the kuffaar, following blindly whatever haraam, kufr protocols the atheists excrete for the consumption of the juhhaal. 

Rasulullah’s response to the Bedouin who believed like Taqi Sahib is an emphatic rebuttal of his (Taqi’s) claim. The A’raabi believed that the healthy camel WILL contract the disease if a diseased camel mingles with it, hence he (the A’raabi) queried this issue. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) rejected his understanding and belief – the selfsame understanding which today Taqi and his ilk are propagating at the behest of their governments and the atheists. The popular belief has always been of contagion – that the disease WILL be contracted if in contact with a diseased person. The ‘may’ and ‘will’ argument produced by Taqi Sahib is for befuddling ignoramuses. 

The aqeedah of the juhhaal masses is that the disease WILL be contracted. Taqi’s interpretation serves to entrench this false belief. The issue of it ‘may’ be contracted is Taqi’s personal opinion inspired by obedience to the government and to the atheists with whom he is enamoured. 

“Fleeing from the leper” is firstly not an incumbent directive. Secondly, the Sahaabah did not flee from the plague nor from lepers. They did not observe any moronic protocols which Taqi and his ilk are describing as protective strategies. These protocols are artefacts of Iblees designed to abrogate the Masnoon and even Waajib teachings of the Shariah. 

Thirdly, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) himself ate together with a leper from the same plate/bowl. Fourthly, lepers were not banned from the Musjid. Fifthly, when Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) informed the leper that he should not come for the bay’t (pledge of allegiance), this leper was not placed in satanic quarantine as Taqi Sahib advocates. He remained with the delegation, and mingled with all the people, and attended the Musjid for Salaat. 

The Hadith pertaining to the leper may not be presented in refutation of the explicit NO CONTAGION (Laa Adwaa) declaration of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). An interpretation which denies the La Adwaa contention is mardood (rejected). Nor may this solitary Hadith and any other similar Hadith be presented to cancel the Sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah, viz., their tareeqah during the plague. The leper Hadith must incumbently be interpreted to blend in with the Sunnah. It may not be cited in negation of the NO Contagion declaration and in negation of the Sunnah observance during plagues.

DEVIATION OF MUFTI TAQI

Download book

Copyleft 2018 The Majlis.

A SEPARATE HOME- A WIFE’S RIGHT

Q. I am faced with a dilemma and I’m hoping for your esteemed advice. In today’s day and age we hear from many Ulama that newly wed couples should stay separate from the husband’s parents. In our economically depressed country, what happens to youth who are newly graduated and just started working? Starting salaries are ridiculously low in our economy today.
What happens to young men such as myself? Young men who recently graduated, earning around R7000 as a starting salary in a company that increases salaries by a measly 8% a year and whose families can not afford to support a second household?
And the only way to make Nikaah is to stay with my parents for the first few years? To wait to earn a salary that is enough for a separate house will take many many years.
Are we advised and expected to wait until then to make Nikaah?
A. The Shariah has granted a woman the right to have her own private quarters to live where her in-laws may not intrude without her permission. Most in-laws labour under the impression that a daughter-in-law is a free maid. Innumerable marriages collapse and end in divorce due to incompatibility, dispute and enmity between the daughter-in-law and her mother-in-law.
If a woman is not prepared to marry a man who is unable to provide her a separate home, then no one can force her to marry that man. If she is agreeable to live with her in-laws, it is her choice. Hence, the issue is with the woman. If she insists on living separately, no one can compel her to stay with her in-laws.
Regardless of your urgent need to get married, you do not have the right nor the authority to demand that the woman lives with your parents, if she refuses. There is no one who can compel her. Such compulsion is haraam.
There is nothing the Ulama can do. They can not compel a woman to marry a man who is unable to provide her a separate home. If she of her own accord agrees to live with the in-laws, it is her own choice. If the woman is not prepared to live with her in-laws, she will be within the ambit of the Shariah. This is an issue which has to be decided between the parties before marriage. Whether to marry a man who is unable to provide a separate home or not to marry him, is the woman’s choice and right. No one can pressurize her to accept living with her in-laws. Such pressure is zulm.
Allah Ta’ala knows why He has granted her this right. In the vast majority of cases, mothers-in-law and even sisters-in-law subject the daughter-in-law to a reign of tyranny. Her life is regimented in her husband’s house. She can not claim that the house where she has to live is her home. Her freedom is vastly curtailed and tasks of others are imposed on her. The mother-in-law, like a hawk watches how she cooks, dresses, and packs her kitchen and bedroom cupboards. Her life becomes miserable under the dictation and domination of her in-laws. That is why Allah Ta’ala has bestowed to her the right of a separate home, entry into which may not be gained by the in-laws without her permission. Intrusion into her privacy is standard procedure in most homes where the daughter-in-law has to live with her in-laws.

RUINING CHILDREN’S IMAAN AND OTHER CHILDREN RELATED ISSUES FROM THE MAJLIS

Q. A government school in our town has arranged an educational trip to visit various places including several historical sites. They include certain temples with ancient statues which are venerated by Buddhists as well. Some Muslim parents are planning to send their children too, though the school has not made it compulsory. The parents say it’s part of education and will create understanding between communities. Is it right for Muslim parents to send their children to visit these temples with idols?
A. This shaitaani understanding will create destruction of the Imaan of these children who are being exposed to shirk indoctrination. Firstly, attending the government/secular school is haraam. Visiting the kuffaar temples is a greater haraam act. It is darkness compounded with darkness. Parents are paving the path for the ruin of the Imaan of their children by allowing them to be exposed to kufr and shirk.
Instead of abhorrence for idolatry, the visit and the commentary of the teachers will dilute the villainy of the shirk. In fact it will imbue congeniality for kufr and shirk in the minds of the children. The rijs (filth) of idols will become subconsciously acceptable to the children. The Qur’aan refers to idols with the designation of RIJS (FILTH).
It is not permissible to visit even such places which Allah Ta’ala had destroyed with His Athaab, e.g. the Dead Sea region where the nation of Nabi Loot (Alayhis salaam) was wiped out by Allah’s Punishment. Such places are perpetually under the La’nat (Curse) of Allah Ta’ala. Hindu temples and all temples of shirk and kufr are worse than the areas destroyed by the Punishment of Allah Ta’ala. The Curse of Allah Ta’ala perpetually descends on places of idol-worship. Those who visit these abodes of shirk and kufr will be destructively affected by the La’nat and Ghadhab of Allah Azza Wa Jal.
Parents and teachers are opening the avenue of shirk and kufr for the children with such haraam visiting. This type of education is satanism (shaitaaniyat) and haraam.

Q. Recently I heard that if a child has clothes, toys etc. and we hand it over to someone else then we need to reimburse the child. Is this true? I didn’t think of this before. How do we reimburse? What sort of value do we give to used items?
Another question I had is what about when we encourage children to give to others or to charity and they chose to give their items like this. Is it okay? 
A. If there is any real value for the items, then pay that amount. If there is no real value, then give an amount you think is reasonable. It is always advisable not to make the children the owners of the clothes, etc. The parents should remain the owners. Then there will be no problem when the parent instructs the child to give an item to charity. However, if the child has already been made the owner, and if the item is still in the child’s use, it will not be permissible to give it away or to tell the child to give it away. If it is given away, it has to be replaced with a similar or a better item.

Q. When writing school exams, is it permissible for the Muslim child to answer with kufr, e.g. Darwin’s theory’ and the ‘big bang’ theory? The origin of the universe and mankind are based on these kufr theories. What should Muslim school children do?
A. It is firstly haraam to attend these secular kuffaar schools. Both Imaan and Akhlaaq are ruined in the immoral kuffaar school environment. It is kufr for the students to repeat the kufr in their writings even if they do not believe in it. If a baaligh child writes such kufr, he/she loses his/her Imaan. Their parents will join them in Jahannam for their kufr since these evil parents have chosen Jahannam for their children by casting them into the cauldron of kufr and immorality.

Q. I am a female physician. Is it permissible for me to attend to an 18 year old boy?
A. If a Muslim male physician is not available, then the boy should be referred to a non-Muslim male. If a suitable non-Muslim male physician is not available, then a Muslim female physician may attend to him observing Hijaab to the best of her ability.

Q. Is it permissible for a Maulana to teach Hifz to a boy who shaves his beard?
A. It is not permissible for a Maulana to teach Hifz to a boy who shaves his beard or who openly violates any law of the Shariah.

BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
(TREATY OF ROME STATUTE, ART. 15.1 AND 53)

Based on the extensive claims and enclosed documentation, we charge those responsible for numerous violations of the Nuremberg Code, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression in the United Kingdom, but not limited to individuals in these countries.

Mr Prosecutor,

1. This communication and complaint is provided to the office of the Prosecutor pursuant to the United Kingdom’s accession to the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations on October 4, 2000.

2. We have tried to raise this case through the local English police and the English Court system without success, we have been unable to even get the case registered either with the police or with the court after several attempts. The statute for the ICC declares that “The ICC is intended to complement, not to replace, national criminal systems; it prosecutes cases only when a State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution (Article 17(1)(a)). This is such a case which is why we are addressing the ICC directly.

Download full document

THE KUFR OF CONTAGION

Q. A person takes a Covid test. The test shows positive. Either they are symptomatic or asymptomatic. There are 4 questions that arise:
(A) They, in accordance with government guidelines, isolate for the stated period in the belief of indiscriminate contagion. What is the state of such a person’s Imaan and Nikah?
(B) Some argue, that Islam teaches us to take reasonable precautions and this constitutes a reasonable precaution. This in reality is a disingenuous argument to cover for their belief in contagion contrary to the explicit teaching of Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam. What is the state of such a person’s Imaan and Nikah?
(C) Persons in above 2 categories then tell others that they should test themselves and isolate if need be. In other words they are pushing their ideology on to others. How should a Muslim deal with such requests which are constant?
(D) There are many “Muslims” who hold such beliefs. Does this mean a whole swathe of them exit the fold of Islam?

A. 1) If the isolation is self-imposed, not forced by the zaalim government, and if this person has been informed that disease is not contagious, then his belief based on what the atheists inform him, is kufr. He should renew his Imaan as well as his Nikah.

2) While Islam advises laymen such as us to adopt reasonable, lawful precautions, it NEVER advises adoption of kufr. Kufr is not a precaution. It is satanism. If these protocols of the atheists are valid precautions, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah would have adopted same on the command of Allah Ta’ala. However, the Qur’aan and Sunnah emphatically negate these acts of shaitaan being precautions. Please read the numerous articles and booklets we have published on this subject. All are available on our website.
3) Their ideology and advice to others are kufr with the same consequences mentioned in No.1 above.
4) Most certainly it “means that a whole swathe of them exit the fold of Islam.” And, this is not surprising because Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had predicted this type of kufr which cancels Imaan. Hadhrat Abdullah Bin Amr (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrated the following Hadith:
“An age will dawn when the people will gather in their Musaajid and perform Salaat whilst not a single one will be a Mu’min.”

FROM THE MAJLIS 26/03