Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“The majority of the munaafiqeen (hypocrites) of my Ummah are its qaaris.”

“Singing cultivates nifaaq (hypocrisy in the heart) just as water cultivates plants.”

Yesterday (19th April, 2015) we suffered the calamitous misfortune of our city, Port Elizabeth being darkened with the accursed shadows of three faajirs, faasiqs, hypocrites and clowns. The one crank was billed as a ‘famous Qur’aan reciter”. The above quoted Hadith covers this moron reciter. The other moron quack is a performing vile qawwaal who plunders the Names of Allah Ta’ala and Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) in his songs of nafsaani lust. The third member of the accursed triumvirate is a presenter of Radio Shaitaan, notorious for his filthy, devilish, haraam broadcasts. The venue for the performances of the munaafiq, qawwaal and clown was an outfit, Daarul Jahaalah (the House of Ignorance).

Let it be understood that the singing and the qiraa’t of these unfortunate cranks posing as Deeni personnel are haraam. Whilst the country is aflame, and millions of Muslims suffering all over the world, these senseless morons indulge in haraam merrymaking performances for the haraam boodle and cheap publicity. They pollute the hearts of people and defile the Musaajid with their haraam performances and riya recitals. Entertaining the public with singing is haraam. There is CONSENSUS of all Math-habs on this issue. Singing for public entertainment is HARAAM.

Deceits and crooks attempt to mislead the ignorant and unwary by claiming that such haraam singing is permissible according to the Shaafi’ Math-hab. This is indeed a vile slander flung against Imaam Shaafi’ and the Shaafi’ Fuqaha in general.

The following Hadith explicitly condemns and curses these devilish singers who hoodwink the ignorant masses with the deception of ‘religious’ songs. But these ‘religious’ songs are what is known as Talbeesul Iblees (the Deception of the Devil).

“Safwaan Bin Umayyah (radhiyallahu anhu) narrated that Amr Bin Qurrah said (to Rasulullah – sallallahu alayhi wasallam): ‘I am very unfortunate. I do not see any way for acquiring my rizq except by means of my duff. Therefore, grant me permission to sing such songs which will be devoid of any immorality.’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:”I do not give you permission. There is no honour and no goodness (in what you are saying about singing). O Enemy of Allah! You are a Liar! Most certainly, Allah has ordained for you halaal rizq, but you have chosen what Allah has made haraam for you in place of what He has made halaal for you of the nourishment He has ordained for you.” (Baihqi, Tabaraani, Dailami).

Entertaining the public with even so-called ‘religious’ songs devoid of immorality (fisq and fujoor) is haraam. This accursed triumvirate of clowns, in the words of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are the “enemies of Allah”. They are “liars”, frauds and crooks, plundering the Akhlaaq and destroying the Imaan of ignorant Muslims who flock to these clownish shows and performances for the acquisition of lustful gratification.

Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullah alayh), denouncing these fraud and heretical qawwaals, said: “I left behind in Iraq something which the zanaadiqah (heretics – a class of kuffaar who believe that they are Muslims) have introduced. They call it taghyeer. With it they divert people from the Qur’aan.”

Taghyeer is qawwaali type of singing extolling Allah Ta’ala. It refers to the so-called ‘religious’ songs with which the clown-qawwaals dupe people, taking their minds away from Allah Ta’ala by deception, tricking them into hallucinating that their corrupt spirits are soaring in sublimity in the celestial realms of the Angels, whilst in reality shaitaan is blowing his rijs into their nostrils and excreting in their ears and brains. Imaam Shaafi’ (rahmatullah alayh) branded them zanadiqah (kaafirs-heretics).

Imaam Shaafi’ (rahmatullah alayh) also said: “Singing (ghina) is Makrooh (Tahrimi) lahw (amusement). Whoever engrosses in it is a fool. His testimony is rejected (in an Islamic court).”

Qaadhiyul Qudhaat, Abu Bakr Muhammad Ibn Muzaffar Shaami said:

“Neither is singing permissible nor is it permissible to listen to it, nor drumming with sticks. Whoever attributes permissibility to Ash-Shaafi’ has lied. Indeed, Ash-Shaafi said in his Kitaab, Adabul Qaadhi,that one who persists on listening to singing, his testimony (shahaadat) must be rejected and his integrity (adaalat) would be vitiated.”

Ibn Hajar Haitami (Shaafi’) states: “In two places of Imaam Raafi’s Kitaab, Ash-Sharhul Kabeer, it is mentioned with clarity: ‘Singing is Haraam.’ In Raudhah, Imaam Nawawi adopted this view.”

Explaining with great clarity the prohibition of the type of haraam qiraat-qawwaali gatherings organized for the triumvirate of clowns and cranks, Allaamah Ibn Hajar (rahmatullah alayh) sates:

“Qurtubi (rahmatullah alayh) narrated from Imaam Tartusi (rahmatullah alayh) that he was asked about those people who gather at a place and begin the proceedings with Tilaawat of the Qur’aan-e-Kareem. Thereafter one person stands up and sings some poetry. Then all present lapse into ecstasy and begin swaying (in a form of a dance) simultaneously beating the duff. Is it permissible to join this company of people?

He (ImaamTartusi) replied: ‘According to the Akaabir Sufiya’ this practice is highly erroneous and deviation. Islam means only Kitaabullah and the Sunnat of the Rasool (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). It is never permissible for any person who has Imaan in Allah and the Aakhirah to join such people nor aid them in this unlawful practice. This is the Math-hab of the Four Imaams and of other Mujtahideen. Some people cite the stories of the Mashaaikh in substantiation of dancing and singing………..

The most important argument in this regard is that we do not believe that these stories (which are attributed to the Mashaaikh) are true. It is quite probable that just as the zindeeqs have attributed many fabrications to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), so too have they done with regard to the Mashaaikh. On the assumption that the Mashaaikh did practise these deeds, which obviously they did not, then it should be understood that for us proof is firstly Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), then the Sahaabah, then the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen…”

Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani categorically confirms, by quoting Allaamah al-Qurtubi, that there is no difference of opinion regarding the prohibition on what the deviant sufis have innovated in this regard:

“As for what the Sufis have innovated in this regard, then there is no difference (of opinion)regarding its prohibition. However, the souls full of desire have overcome many people who have attributed themselves to righteousness, to the extent that many of them practiced the acts of lunatics and children. They would dance in uniform motions and continuous abrupt stops. Their disrespect reached a level where some of them considered these actions to be among deeds that draw one closer (to Allah), a righteous action that will earn them an exalted state. In reality, this is from the ways of the disbelievers, and the sayings of the insane, and Allah is the one from Whom we seek aid.” End of Qurtubi’s quote. (Fath al-Bari, vol. 2, p. 570-571, no. 949)

This clinches the argument. The qiraat-qawwaali merrymaking party of the three clowns held at Daarul Jahaalat is among the major sins. People of true Imaan should never participate in such evil merrymaking functions.

All the spurious arguments of the legalizers of singing are adequately answered in our book, Sautush Shaitaan (the Voice of Shaitaan). The book is available from us.

The abode of such qaaris who perform for public entertainment is Jubbul Huzn (The Pit of Grief). Explaining Jubbul Huzn, the Hadith says:

It is not permissible to attend a gathering where a faasiq qaari recites. Shaving the beard is a kabeerah sin which renders the man a faasiq. Every moment the ghadab and la’nat of Allah Ta’ala descend on a person who is beardless as a result of shaving his beard.

To attend such a gathering is to honour the faasiq. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “When a faasiq is honoured, the Arsh of Allah shudders.” Furthermore, these qaaris with their belief that it is permissible to shave the beard are guilty of bid’ah, and regarding a man of bid’ah, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who honours a man of bid’ah, aids in the demolition of Islam.”

When one goes to listen to the qiraa’t of a faasiq qaari, one is in fact honouring him. The faasiq is given front stage, musaafahah (shaking hands) and muaanaqah (embracing) are made with him. He is respectfully addressed. In general he is treated as a guest of honour. Whoever denies this fact, is a liar. Thus the contention that he is not honoured is baseless. Regardless of whether one has the intention of honouring or not honouring, the mere attendance of the function is to aid, support and honour the faasiq qaari who shows absolutely no shame for Allah Ta’ala and the Makhlooq. The actions of the people clearly testify that they are honouring him.

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that in Jahannam there is a valley which daily petitions Allah Ta’ala 400 times to save it from the heat of that valley. The name of this valley in the dregs of Jahannum is Jubbul Huzn. When the Sahaabah asked about those who are destined for entry into this terrible Valley of Torment, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that Jubbul Huzn has been prepared for the Qaaris who display their a’maal. This will be the ultimate destination of fussaaq qaaris who barter the Qur’aan Majeed for this dunya.

The miserable plight of such qaaris is aggravated manifold when their evil is supplemented by the evil of the satanic qawwaali singer who forms part of the shaitaani show. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“Recite the Qur’aan. Do not eat with it.”

Do not make the Qur’aan a source for raking in boodle. This is the profession of the munaafiq qaaris. Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed:

“The life of this world is but play and amusement, and the Abode of the Aakhirah is best for those who fear (Allah). What have you no intelligence?”

30 Jamadiyuth Thaani 1436 (20 April 2015)

Salaat behind modern day Zanaadiqah

Assalamualaykum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh,

Muhtaram Hazrat Saheb,

I refer to Hazrat’s refutation of the group dubbed Difaa ul-Ulama-e-Soo. Hazrat stated, “According to the Ahlus Sunnah, Salaat behind every Birr and Faajir is valid notwithstanding his fisq and fujoor.”

A question came to mind in light of recent events.

Since the introduction of the covid protocols in the Masjids throughout the UK, I had stopped attending any Masjid which imposed the implementation of these satanic protocols.

As Hazrat has mentioned, Salaat in any of these Masjids which had been temporarily converted into temples, is not valid. The displacing of the Ahkaam of Allah with the Ahkaam of the very worst enemies of Allah is Sareeh Kufr which expels the willing perpetrator from the fold of Islam. Most of the Imams and “Ulama” leading the Jamaats in the Masjids in the UK actually believed that the satanic Ahkaam of the atheists are superior to Islamic Ahkaam and that such displacement was Waajib. There can thus be absolutely no doubt that such Imams and Molvis became Murtaddeen.

Virtually all the modernists such as the Maududis, and also other deviate groups such as the Barelwis and the Salafis began to implement these Kufr protocols even before the government began imposing them. In fact, many Masjids continued to impose these protocols even after the government decided they were no longer Fard.

Regarding those who regard themselves to be Deobandi, there appeared to be some difference of opinion amongst them. Some, like the modernists, implemented these protocols of their own accord, independent of the government imposition, whilst others did so only after and due to the government imposition.

I managed to locate a Masjid in another town which had not adopted any of these Kufr protocols throughout the lockdowns, and Allah Ta’ala enabled me to do Hijrah and move to a flat not too far away from that particular Masjid. This was one of only two Masjids which I was aware of in the entire country which had not adopted the protocols of Kufr.

Around 6 months ago, the government decided that these protocols are no longer necessary. Gradually, all the Masjids began to stop implementing these protocols.

However, since none of the Murtad Imams of these Masjids which had been converted temporarily into temples, had made Tawbah and renewed their Imaan publically, as far as I could determine, they remain Murtaddeen. It is clear, in most cases, that these Imams actually believe that the terrible crime they had perpetrated was something truly commendable.

Most times I have no need to go to any of these Masjids where the Jamaat is led by a Zindeeq. However, once in while, there is no Masjid near enough for me to reach the Jamaat other than these Masjids where a Zindeeq is conducting “Salaat”. Even though these Masjids have stopped implementing the satanic protocols, I have been unable to bring myself to pray behind such Imams whom I believe to be Murtaddeen. I feel it would be a mockery of the Deen. Hence, on such occasions, I feel compelled to pray alone.

However, the statement cited above by Hazrat has brought a question to my mind.

Am I correct in assuming that the Faajir referred to applies exclusively to a Faajir with correct Aqeedah, or a man of Bid’ah whose Bid’ah has not reached the level of Kufr?

While there seems to be some ikhtilaaf on whether or not Salaat should be prayed behind the man of Bid’ah whose Bid’ah is not Kufr (most opining on its validity), there appears to be complete unanimity that Salaat is invalid behind one whose Bid’ah is Kufr. The Fuqaha give the example of Jahmiyyah, Mushabbihah, Raafidhis, and those who believe in Khalq-e-Qur’aan. The recent crimes of Sareeh Kufr perpetrated by the modern day Zanaadiqah appear to be at least as vile as those of the aforementioned ancient sects, if not far worse.

I request Hazrat’s Duas,

7 Rabiul Awwal 1444 – 4 October 2022

Respected Brother,

Your e-mail refers.

Yes, the faasiq-faajir refers to one with correct Aqeedah. It does not refer to such a faasiq-faajir who subscribes to beliefs of kufr.

The state of the Ummah is absolutely deplorable. If we have to resort to takfeer, then logically almost the entire Ummah of this era will have to be branded kaafir. This is indeed most difficult for us. We therefore confine ourselves to pointing out what is kufr, without generally resorting to takfeer unless there is a real need.

My advice is that when you are in a situation where no other Musjid is available, then without making enquiries about the Imaam and his beliefs, simply join the jamaat. If you then feel agitated, simply repeat your Salaat alone.

May Allah Ta’ala always guide and protect you and the family.





Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“If you knew what I know (of the Qabr and Qiyaamah), you will laugh little, cry much and not derive any pleasure from your wives, and you would flee into the wilderness……”

Yes, if you knew what our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) knew, you would not organize a merrymaking stupid “Youth Program”.

Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed: “The life of this world is but play and amusement while the Abode of the Aakhirah is best for those who fear (those who have Taqwa and fear Allah Ta’ala).”

It is indeed lamentable that the Madrasah in Skeerpoort is disgracefully emulating the ways of the modernist deviates and even Ulama are promoting the haraam “camping, wrestling, swimming, archery and much more” –whatever this may mean – program organized by the misguided management of this Madrasah. While the Ummah universally is ablaze with jahaalat, misery, poverty and suffering of a variety of kinds – all facets of the Athaab of Allah Ta’ala – the Madrasah, totally impervious of all the misery and suffering, indulges in merrymaking. Instead of creating awareness of the Aakhirah in the youngsters – instead of instilling fear in them for the Qabr and Qiyaamah, the Madrasah is recklessly diverting the youngsters from the Deen and casting them into the jeefah (carrion) cauldron of the dunya.

The terms, wrestling, swimming and archery are used as decoys. Since these acts are praiseworthy in terms of the Hadith, the juhala molvis have latched on to them to bamboozle the ignorant and the unwary – to deceive them into understanding that the merrymaking kuffaar style camping is a Deeni program. But in reality, it is a far, very far call from the Deen. The lecture by Molvi Kajee and the Qiraat by some miscreant qaari are mere red herrings. In fact, the bayaan and the qiraat at this merrymaking camping program are like reciting Tasmiyah when consuming pork and wine.

What has happened to the Aql of these molvis and qaaris? Are their brains so clogged with love for the dunya’s jeefah that they so miserably fail to comprehend the evil and villainy of the merrymaking camping program? Allah Ta’ala, calling Muslims to open their clogged brains for understanding naseehat says in the Qur’aan Majeed:

“And on earth there are (numerous) signs (for deriving lesson), and even in yourselves. What! Have you no intelligence?”

Only such molvis who are bereft of Nooraani Aql are blind to the reality of the moral corruption and spiritual harm of these merrymaking programs. To the Sahaabah, wrestling, swimming, archery and fencing were not sporting activities. These were not merrymaking and fun programs such as the khuraafaat which molvis organize today.

After Isha, the children and even the adults have to be incumbently in their homes, not is the streets and not in the bush making merry with laughter and gluttony. And from whence did these molvis acquire the epithet “Youth Program”? Is there any such program substantiated in the Sunnah or in the Qur’aan or in the lives of the Salafus Saaliheen? Did they amuse their youngsters with kuffaar style merrymaking programs?

The term ‘youth’ has now acquired a pejorative hue. It portrays the desire for tashabbuh bil kuffaar. In fact, it will not be an exaggeration to say that the word ‘youth’ in these contexts has become a stupid swear-word. It portrays the brainlessness of these molvis who use this stupid kuffaar term for their programs. The word ‘youth’ is much in use in kuffar forums. Now Muslims too, due to their bootlicking disease, deem in honourable to employ this term and to lick the boots of even their youngsters to create stupid name and fame – to show that they are moving with the times – the times of the kuffaar. Women’s empowerment and youth programmes are among the salient features of today’s atheist kuffaar. The bootlicking Muslims are also insanely aping the ways and styles of the kuffaar in all spheres of life.

“Youth” is silliness and deprecated by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) who said:

“The best of your youngmen are those who emulate oldmen, and the worst of your oldmen are those who emulate your youngmen.”

The teaching of Islam is to emulate pious oldmen, not act like the mad, fussaaq, fujjaar youth of today. The molvis too are using the ‘youth’ for despicable nafsaani motives.

Far from understanding even the very rudiments of Islaah-e-Nafs, these camping and merrymaking haraam programs only aggravate nafsaaniyat. Islaah of the nafs is acquired only in the suhbat of the Saaliheen, not in stupid merrymaking camping programs graced by molvis who have lost the Path of Jannat.

And what is so ‘special’ about the ‘lecture program’ of the molvi who will be giving his talk to the morons? The molvi should examine himself to understand the special nafsaaniyat which motivated him to participate in the stupid, silly, haraam merrymaking camping ‘youth’ program organized by the miscreant management of the madrasah.

While Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) ordered sleep or ibaadat after Isha, forbidding unnecessary conversation, the molvis of the merrymaking camping are training the youngsters to do the exact opposite. After Isha’ they will be engaging in laughter, joking, and stupidity in general. It will be just eating and indulging in merrymaking. And such is not meant for those who have any understanding of the imminence of Maut, the torments of the Qabar and the horrors of Qiyaamah.

To crown the villainy of the merrymaking, they have a R50 haraam fee for participating in nafsaaniyat. Shame yourselves! You are a disgrace to Islam!

24 Safar 1444 – 21 September 2022


Q. It is mentioned in the Hadith that when Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) had completed hifz of Surah Baqarah, he sacrificed a camel out of happiness. On the basis of this will it be permissible to serve food when making khatam of the Qur’aan Shareef?
A. The act of Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) is not a basis for any of the customs in vogue among people. Hadhrat Umar’s act was not in fulfillment of a custom. It was done spontaneously as a result of his happiness when he had accomplished the hifz of Surah Baqarah in eight years. He did not organize a party nor was his act an ostentatious gathering of waste such as the jalsahs of the present day.
If a person wishes to gain thawaab and give Sadqah to the poor in gratitude to Allah Ta’ala for the Ni’mat of Hifz, he is free to do so. But what is the need to organize a party, have speeches, sing songs, invite wealthy and bloated people to participate, etc., etc. Such gatherings are far—very far—from the simple act of Sadqah of Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu). There is no resemblance between the extravagant parties of show (riyaa) and Hadhrat Umar’s simple deed of Sadqah. By all means give Sadqah in abundance and unostentatiously. There is no need for publicity and advertisement. There is no need to feed people who eat five times a day. The nafs presents deceptive arguments to substantiate bid’ah and shaitaaniyat.
Numerable Sahaabah made hifz of the Qur’aan Shareef. Did anyone of them organize a jalsah, a party or any type of gathering? Did anyone of them follow the act of Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu)? Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) was a Haafiz of the Qur’aan. Did he repeat his performance of sacrificing a camel when he completed hifz of the Qur’aan? Did he invite people to a feast? Did he organize a jalsah?
The sacrificing of a camel by Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) was a personal preference in a moment of extreme delight. It never was the intention to initiate a custom, hence no one ever followed him in this act. If there was a need for feasting and merrymaking on the occasion of a khatam, then such practices would have gained prominence during the Khairul Quroon. Hifz of the Qur’aan is not something new or peculiar to this age. Personal preferences of the Sahaabah were not transformed into regular customs to be observed by the Ummah.
At most it can be said that it is good to give Sadqah as an expression of gratitude to Allah Ta’ala for a ni’mat. But giving Sadqah is in many forms. No particular form may be established as a custom to be observed with incumbency, ostentation, waste, riya and pride which grace the jalsahs, gatherings and so-called Deeni ceremonies of our times. And, if someone is over-eager in the desire to emulate Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu), then when he completes the Hifz of Surah Baqarah let him sacrifice a camel or its value in money. Let him give this amount in Sadqah to the poor and refrain from any jalsah when he completes Hifz. He will then have some resemblance with this Sunnat which was the peculiarity of Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) alone.




Question: According to Shaikh Ibn Taimiyyah, Shaikh Uthaymeen and even Imaam Ahmad Hambal it is permissible to have special forms of greeting on the Day of Eid, e.g. ‘Eid Mubaarak’. According to them, the Sahaabah, when meeting one other on Eid would Taqabbalallaahu minna wa minka. So why does The Majlis say that it is bid’ah? And what is the status of musaafahah on the Day of Eid?

Answer: We say that it is bid’ah because in reality it is bid’ah notwithstanding what is said in the article you have sent.

Firstly, the argument does not pertain to the dua, Taqabbalallaahu……. The argument concerns the ingrained greeting of ‘Eid Mubaarak’ which has become a grounded custom which has perhaps greater importance on Eid Day than even the Masnoon Salaam.

There is no basis for the ‘Eid Mubaarak’ greeting. Why do they present as daleel the Taqabbalallaahu narration? Why don’t they rather say Taqabbalallaah…..’ ? Why abandon what they say is Masnoon for a greeting which is not Masnoon?

If the Taqabbalallaahu dua was of importance, the Fuqaha would have enumerated it in the Mustahabbaat of the Day of Eid. But whilst they list the Mustahab acts for the Day of Eid, absolutely no reference is made to the dua or greeting. None of our Akaabireen had practised any greeting/dua act on the Day of Eid.

Why did Imaam Ahmad (Rahmatullah alayh) not initiate the Dua although he would respond? He did not initiate it because it was not Sunnah to do so. We are under no obligation to follow Imaam Ahmad (Rahmatullah alayh) in responding to a greeting which we consider to be bid’ah.

“‘The views of Uthaymeen and Ibn Taimiyyah are of no significance. They are deviant Salafis who have abandoned the Math-habs of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah. When even a well-established Sunnat is accorded a status close to Wujoob (compulsion), then it becomes bid’ah. This principle will have greater application for an act which is not even Mustahab such as the Taqabbalallaahu…. dua. Ibn Taimiyyah’s argument is exceptionally weak, in fact baseless. It is sufficient for abstention that a practice is not Masnoon.

Our Akaabireen have always ruled that musaafahah on the day of Eid is bid’ah despite hand-shaking being Mustahab. This is because of the Wujoob factor.

30 Ramadhaan 1443 – 2 May 2022





Please comment on the following statement made by a modernist:

“It is a settled Shariah principle that a Muslim citizen residing in a modern non-muslim constitutional state, based on the rule of law, enters into an explicit or tacit agreement with the state, in terms of which he or she is obliged to obey all neutral laws and regulations, enacted in the public interest, which fall within the very wide category of mubah or what is described as merely permitted or neutral matters, examples are traffic and town planning laws.”

The modernist backs up his claim with a reference from Ad-durul Mukhtaar which says: “…Because obedience to the Imaam in things which are not sinful is Fardh. The action of the Imaam centres on expediency.” The objective of the modernist is to convince Muslims that it is a requirement of the Shariah for them to obey the government’s corona protocols, and if they disobey, they will be sinful.

Is this correct in terms of the Shariah? Will a Muslim who disobeys the laws of the kuffaar country of which he is a citizen be deemed sinful in terms of the Shariah?


The brains of the modernist is convoluted with kufr, hence he is not blessed with the bounty of brain-application. What he has disgorged in his statement is rubbish. It is clear that this chap is a bootlicker of the kuffaar. In his bootlicking, he seeks to appease his kuffaar masters with his egregious misinterpretation of the texts of the Shariah.

The statement which the moron has ripped out of Ad-Durrul Mukhtaar has no relationship with a kuffaar state. It applies to an Islamic state, and none of the present Muslim lands governed by kuffaar regimes is an Islamic state, not even Afghanistan where currently the “Taliban” have treacherously betrayed the Ummah by violating their Covenant with Allah Azza Wa Jal.

The “Imaam” mentioned in the quote by the moron modernist refers to the Khalifah or the Sultan or the Haakim of an Islamic state. It does not refer to the president or regime of a non-Muslim country. It is absolutely preposterous to understand that it is Fardh for a Muslim to obey man-made laws, and disobeying such laws being sinful, thereby making him liable for Jahannam in the Aakhirah. The consequence of disobeying Fardh is Jahannam, and its denial is kufr.

Thus, in terms of the convoluted logic of the moron modernist, a Muslim who denies and rejects the hallucinated fardhiyat of traffic and town planning laws enacted by those who wallow in janaabatnajaasat and kufr becomes a murtadd.

Also, the term fardh in the context of the statement cited from Ad-Durrul Mukhtaar does not have the technical Fiqhi meaning. It merely conveys the importance and essentiality of obeying the MUSLIM IMAAM in all rules/laws which are permissible in Islam. Disobedience of such laws enacted by even the Imaam of the Islamic state is not sinful. It is not punishable in the Aakhirat.

While Ad-Durrul Mukhtaar is concerned with the Imaam of an Islamic State, the moron rips out a Shar’i issue from its context to apply it to a “modern non-Muslim constitutional state”.

At least the modernist has saved his skin from the fatwa of kufr by predicating the obedience to “neutral laws and regulations” which are presumed to be such enactments which are not in conflict with the Shariah. No one has any issue with such rules and regulations which are not in violation of the Shariah. However, despite the beneficial objectives of such rules and regulations, disobedience is not sinful in terms of the Shariah. Thus, his claim that the Muslim “is obliged to obey” such laws should not be understood to mean that it is technically Waajib, and that disobedience of such manmade laws is sinful.

The modernist moron, dwelling in confusion states that the Muslim citizen living in a non-Muslim state “enters into an explicit or tacit agreement with the state” to obey all the trash enacted by the state. Here the fellow mentions two opposites: explicit and tacit. What are his grounds for claiming an explicit agreement between Muslim citizens and the state? Which document of obedience, which sacrament of allegiance do Muslim citizens pledge obedience, the violation of which will render them fussaaq? The moron should explain the basis for claiming that there exists an explicit agreement.


Download book


Every now and again there arise in the community persons with modernistic leanings endeavouring to introduce their opinions and fancies into the Shariah. They are bent on creating problems and controversies among Muslims. They have deviated from the Sunnah, hence they attempt to introduce their un-Islaamic practices under Shar’i guise. One such example was the recent delivery of the Jumu’ah Khutbah in English by a certain misguided sheikh in one of the Masjids in the Transvaal.
He was asked to deliver the Khutbah. Little did the musallis suspect him to introduce his bid’ah. After he recited the Khutbah in English, the local Imaam repeated the Khutbah in Arabic. A controversy was the logical consequence.
To avoid such controversies, the Imaam or the mutawallis of Masaajid should not request just any tom, dick or harry to lead the Salaat or the Khutbah. It is essential to first ascertain the credentials of a visiting sheikh/maulana. His leanings and views have to be ascertained before the Masjid platform is granted to him. If this is done, unnecessary controversies will be obviated. Further, a platform for baatil and bid’ah is provided by offering the Musallaa to every roving non-entity.
People who are out to scuttle the Sunnah or bring about changes in the fourteen hundred year practices of the Ummah should never be permitted to mount a platform in the Muslim community. These people who wish to diverge from the Sunnah are out to destroy the Deen. They gnaw at the foundations of the Deen by subtle tampering with the Ahkaam of the Shariah. The ultimate result of the misinterpretations of the modernists is kufr. The Ummah cannot tolerate the slightest deviation from the practices established by the Ijma’ (Consensus) of the Ummah. It is indeed sad and ludicrous that non-entities in this belated age in such close proximity to Qiyaamah have deemed it appropriate to alter the practices of Islaam. Unwary Muslims, either because of their gullibility or ignorance, fall prey to the snares laid by these deviates. Deeni matter cannot be trifled with. Muslims should be more careful and beware of shayaateen masquerading as learned men of the Deen.
If there was a need for the Jumu’ah Khutbah to be delivered in the language understood by the people, the Sahaabah who were the first and greatest Muballigheen of Islaam would have adopted this measure unhesitatingly. There was a greater need for Tableegh of Islaam in the early days when Islaam had not yet reached the masses in the various lands. However, despite this need, the Sahaabah did not consider it Islaamic to introduce a non-Arabic Khutbah. The Khutbah was always retained in the Arabic language although there were non-Arab Sahaabah. It is abundantly clear from the evidence of the Shariah that it is not permissible to recite the Khutbah in any language other than Arabic.