Q. Is it permissible to use loudspeakers for Salaat?
A. Due to the ignorance of the masses and the inaad (enmity), jahaalat (ignorance), and nafsaaniyat (submission to base desire) of even the Ulama, it is best that we present the Fatawa of the Akaabireen whom even the non-entities accept as Seniors.
- Hadhrat Mufti Mahmudul Hasan Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) said:
“Loud speakers should not be used in Salaat. The Imaam Sahib should put a stop to it.” (Fataawa Mahmudiyyah, Vol.2, page 128)
- In Fataawa Raheemiyyah, Vol. 1, page 209, it is said: “Whether the voice transmitted by the loudspeaker is the original voice or an artificial representation of the original voice (such as an echo), there is difference of opinion among the experts (the technologists). (There is no longer any difference of opinion of the experts on this issue. Besides the consensus of the experts, it is just common sense that the voice which reaches a kilometre away is not the original or actual voice. The voice is ‘rebuilt’ after its ‘capture’, then transmitted. The sound which reaches the ears of the audience, is the sound of the reproduced voice of the speaker. It is never the original voice—The Majlis) If it is the reproduced voice, then the Iqtida will not be valid by following the voice……Even if it is not a reproduction (but is the original voice), then too there is no permission for the utilization of a loudspeaker in Salaat because it is in conflict with the simplicity which is the characteristic of Islamic acts of ibaadat. Hadhrat Shah Waliyullah (rahmatullah alayh) said that encumbrances and pretence in ibaadat are among the factors which alter the Deen. This was the malady in which the priests of the Yahood and Nasaara were involved. In addition, a loudspeaker interferes with the khushoo’ of Salaat. There is more corruption than benefit in using a loudspeaker for Salaat, hence the Shariah does not permit it. Furthermore, there is no need for a loudspeaker in Salaat because the validity and perfection of the Salaat are not dependent on hearing the recitation of the Imaam. An arrangement could be made for relaying the Takbeeraat-e- Intiqaal by means of appointing (human) Mukhabbireen (proclaimers). It is also improper to use a loudspeaker for the khutbah…”
- In an elaborate Fatwa of a number of pages, Hakimul Ummat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thaanvi (rahmatullah alayh) stated the impermissibility of using a loudspeaker for Salaat. (Imdaadul Fataawa, Vol.`1, from page 581 to 600)
- Extract from a lengthy fatwa of Hadhrat Husain Ahmad Madani (rahmatullah alayh): “The Salaat of all those who perform their Salaat on the basis of this instrument is faasid (invalid)….It is therefore necessary to refrain from using it. All the arguments which have been presented for permissibility or preferability of the loudspeaker, from the Fiqhi angle, does not carry the weight of a grain of wheat (in other words, all such arguments are devoid of substance).” Imdaadul Fataawa, Vol.1, page 598 There is consensus of all our senior Ulama on the prohibition of using loudspeakers for Salaat and Khutbah.
THE MAJLIS VOLUME 18 NUMBER 01
Q. What is the ruling regarding musallis sitting on chairs? In our Musjid some musallis sit in the first saff right behind the Imaam. Please comment.
A. If a musalli is able to sit on the floor for Salaat, then sitting on a chair is not permissible nor will the Salaat be valid. However, if he is unable to sit on the floor, then Salaat on the chair is valid.
It is improper for chair-sitting musallis to place their chairs conspicuously right behind the Imaam in the first saff. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that the Ulun Nuha (Ulama, Huffaaz and people who are aware of the masaa-il of Salaat) should be immediately behind the Imaam in case the Imaam’s wudhu breaks, then the mas’alah of Istikhlaaf will apply. People on chairs should sit preferably at the ends of the sufoof (rows). A couple of musallis should come a bit early to the Musjid before the chair-sitting brothers occupy the space behind the Imaam. They should occupy the positions behind the Imaam. The chair-sitting musallis will then have to place their chairs at a distance from the Imaam. The Imaam should also politely offer them naseehat.
If there are several chair-sitting musallis, the chairs should not be placed together in the saff. They should be spread out. If the chairs are in a row, it resembles people in a church sitting on benches.
THE MAJLIS VOL 22 NUMBER 7
QUR’BAANI OF TAILLESS ANIMALS NOT VALID – BASELESS STUPID ARGUMENTS
I want to find out, if there are two different views regarding the permissibility of tails on sheep for qurbani.
The view which we follow is that it is not permissible to make qur’baani of animals without tails.
The other view is that docked animals are permissible for qurbani as the tail is not torn off, rather it has been intentionally docked at an early stage of its life due to the intensive farming system which allows the farmers to easily manage their flock in smaller pastures and kraals when housed and it assists them with quickly identifying any maggot, fly strikes and diarrhoea in their flock. So based on the well being, some say that this process is permissible
I want to know, although we follow the 1st view, that is, animals only with tails for qurbani for ourselves and family and never buy without a tail, can we sell animals without tails? A lot of people don’t worry about the tails and are happy to buy them docked based on the fatwa of those Muftis who say that it is permissible. Jazakallah khair
There are no two views regarding the impermissibility of making Qur’baani of animals without tails. For more than 14 centuries since the time of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) there was only this one view of impermissibility.
Molvis a couple of decades ago have seen it fit to subject this mas’alah to their corrupt, nafsaani interpretation, and this was initiated by Ulama in Natal because they do not like to consume goat meat. Goats with tails are available at all times. But because Natalians, including the molvis, generally don’t eat goat mutton, the molvis deemed it appropriate to soothe the palates of the people and also succumb to their own nafsaani dictates, hence they fabricated the permissibility of making qur’baani of animals without tails. They had completely deleted the Shariah and Allah Ta’ala from this baatil equation.
Then they justify this shaitaaniyat with the views of the kuffaar farmers who maintain that the animals remain healthy without tails, thus rejecting the fact that Allah Ta’ala created sheep with tails, and that tails have not been created in idle sport or in futility. The objective of Qur’baani is not merely meat-consumption.
These molvis have based their permissibility fatwa on the kuffaar view which you have mentioned in your letter. They conduct themselves in the same way as these pro-protocol devil molvis who justify all the haraam protocols on the basis of what the atheist scientists and munaafiq/kuffaar doctors say.
Today, some farmers are rearing sheep with tails specifically to cater for Muslim demand on the occasion of Eidul Adha. And, the sheep are healthy, thus debunking the stupid claims cited in rejection of Allah’s creation of tails. This is implied kufr.
You may not sell animals without tails to Muslims if you know that they are buying for Qur’baani. You will be aiding and abetting in haraam. Refusing To sell to them is not a sacrifice. Rizq is pre-ordained and fixed, and you will receive the amount set out in your Taqdeer. Your Rizq is not reliant on selling animals in conflict with Allah’s Command.
22 Zul-Qa’dh 1442 – 3 July 2021
Shariah on Vaccines
| Note: The following is a publicly endorsed declaration by Mufti Ahmad Sadiq Desai and his body of Ulema at Majlisul Ulama of South Africa and other esteemed Ulema. If other Muslim leaders, Imams or Ulema would like to add their public endorsement of the declaration below then contact us by clicking HERE. For additional declarations from other Ulema see by clicking HERE. For a current list of public signatories see by clicking HERE.|
Urdu version of the declaration below now available click HERE
Electronic Poster for the declaration below click HERE
Printable Poster for the declaration below click HERE
DECLARATION ON VACCINES:
Timely Reminder of the Shariah on Vaccines
The Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam said: “Allah has not placed a cure for your diseases in things that He has forbidden for you.” (Baihaqi, Bukhari). And Allah has forbidden constituents that are inextricably harmful as the Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam also said: “There (must be) no harm and no harming.” (Ibn Majah). And hence ‘vaccinations’ as we know them (including the current globally propagated COVID-19 vaccines) are not permissible by the Creator as vaccines contain proven harmful components such as:
bacteria, aborted fetal tissue, cells and blood from animals, harmful chemicals and neurotoxins such as formaldehyde, phenoxyethanol, mercury, aluminum and others.Vaccines can cause serious health problems, including permanent injuries and death.*
“Do not kill yourselves, indeed God is the Most Merciful upon you.” (Qurʾan: 4:29)
“Do not throw yourselves into destruction with your own hands. Do good, for God certainly loves those who do good.” (Qurʾan: 2:195)
Rather than being a treatment for the sick human body, vaccination introduces, in most cases, cancerous and neurotoxic substances. In other words, clearly harmful contents are administered into a healthy body. No case in the acquittal of the clear harmful outcomes of vaccination will have any legitimacy as long as the exponents of ‘vaccination’ fail to rationally respond to the solid medical findings of injurious effects, including permanent injuries and deaths caused by this particular intervention of ‘vaccines’ as known today.
After acquainting oneself with the overwhelming evidence of the clear harm and thus haraam of “vaccines” of the current criminal capitalistic drug manufacturing establishments a true Muslim will never believe that Shifa (healing) is contained in this concoction of neurotoxins and poisons, and, would never forget the irrefutable fact that Allah has not ordained the Shifa of His Ummah in the defiled – in najaasat – and substances which He has made harmful.
If one just takes a look behind the sophisticated veneer of the pharmaceutical industries’ propaganda the published proofs by medical experts conclusively proving the irreparable damage that vaccines cause to the human being are insurmountable. This makes more than clear the impermissibility to inject najaasat into our Allah entrusted bodies. Note it is by clear default according to the plain nass of the Shariah that “vaccines” as currently known are Haraam and thus Muslims will be held accountable by the Creator of consenting to this najaas intaking/injecting brew. For a Muslim supporter of vaccines the onus is on him/her to present an evidenced “fatwa” to make this obvious haraam concoction of vaccination as permissible – this task would be a tenuous one to say the least especially after being apprised of the overwhelming evidence of the clear harm and danger of ‘vaccinations’ since its inception from the late 18th century. Hence it is Waajib to abstain from the rijs (filth) of ‘vaccines’ just like it is obviously Wajib in Islam to abstain from taking/inserting a known poison into a healthy body.
“He makes lawful to them what is good and pure and prohibits them what is foul and impure.” (Qur’an 7:157)
*For References & Resources on the Inextricable Harm/Haraam of “Vaccines” click HERE.
Q. A man has homosexual tendencies. He inclines to men although he understands that this is haraam. He does not indulge in homosexuality. What advice is there for him? What rules of the Shariah apply to him?
A. A man who inclines to males has to compulsorily maintain a distance from men. Since he is physically a normal male, all rules pertaining to males will apply to him. He has to exercise restraint over his nafs just as a normal man has to exercise restraint regarding his lust for women. The natural instinct of a normal man is to incline to women. The desire is to fornicate. But the Muslim man exercises restraint and controls his nafs with his Aql. In like manner should the homosexual do. He should control his nafs with his Aql. His unnatural tendency does not justify the evil of homosexuality just as the natural urge for having sex with a woman does not justify fornication. Since the person is a male, all the ahkaam of the Shariah applicable to males will apply to him. He has to continue practising as a Muslim man is required to regardless of his homosexual tendency.
Question from Mufti Muhammad Wasie, student of Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani:
“Today I visited the august office of my beloved teacher his Excellency Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani and raised a question about the Shariah permissibility of cryptocurrency trading since currently its use is trending for business purposes. So much so that it is becoming the basis for the creation of various financial institutions, and many countries are in the process of regulating it on a state level. So in the current scenario how should the Shariah scholars guide people who are continuously enquiring about its Shariah status?” (May 10, 2021)
Answered by Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani:
“For now we are not satisfied with it. It is mostly being used for speculative purposes. Personally, I won’t recommend it; rather it seems to be impermissible in principle. However, it could happen that in future its use may expand for real trade and we might have to revisit the current decision.
There’s no doubt that this currency is speculative in nature. Even its mass use is not likable either from a Shariah perspective…Initially, paper currency was enforced and now the world is being pushed towards digital currency, which isn’t backed by an asset. The near future plan is maybe to make the economies dependent on these, and subsequently these money masters will financial enslave the weaker economies. Therefore, we cannot encourage it and, as per fiqh, there’s no sound ground devised till yet to grant its permissibility.”
Note from Mufti Muhammad Wasie: “I showed this transcript to his Excellency Mufti Sahab and he endorsed it for general dissemination.”
Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani is a leading scholar of hadith, jurisprudence, economics and finance, and spirituality, and is widely regarded as one of the world’s leading experts on Islamic finance. He currently serves as the Chairman of the International Shariah Council for the Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) and as a permanent member of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy. Previously he was a Justice of the Shariah Appelate Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. He has authored over 60 books in Arabic, English, and Urdu on a range of topics.
In today’s technologically advanced world, we see non-authoritative sources spreading Islamic legal verdicts (fatwas) for the general public who are none the wiser. With one ‘ping,’ misinformation can spread like wildfire and potentially mislead thousands of people. Listed below are common misconceptions regarding menstruation, followed by what Islam actually says about the matter.
Misconception 1: It is not permissible to trim/cut hair or nails while menstruating.
Busted: Whilst it is somewhat disliked (makruh tanzihi) to cut hair or nails in a state of major ritual impurity due to wet dreams, intercourse, etc. (janabah), there is no dislike in doing so during menstruation (hayd) or post-natal bleeding (nifas).
Misconception 2: It is not permissible to use a comb used by a menstruating woman.
Busted: This claim has absolutely no basis in the Islamic law (Shari’ah) and is in fact contrary to a narration mentioned in Sahih al-Bukhari. It is narrated on the authority of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her): “While in menses, I used to comb the hair of Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace)” (Sahih Muslim 244/1)
Misconception 3: It is not permissible to sit on a prayer mat while menstruating.
Busted: It is actually recommended (mustahabb) for a woman to perform ablution (wudu) and sit on her prayer mat while menstruating. She should recite other forms of supplications (adhkar e.g. praises and glorifications) for the duration it usually takes her to offer ritual prayer (salat). This will ensure she remains in the habit of worship, even during the days salat is not due on her. (Manhal al-Waridin p.267)
Misconception 4: You cannot wear the same clothes worn in menstruation after attaining purity.
Busted: They can be worn as long as the clothes have not been soiled by physical impurity.
*See ‘Removing Impurity‘ for further detail.
Misconception 5: Clothes worn in hayd must be washed separately.
Busted: If clothes have been soiled by impurity while menstruating, they are the same as clothes soiled by any other impurity. They do not need to be washed separately. However, it may be advisable to wash any light-coloured garments as soon as possible so the stain does not set in.
*See ‘Removing Impurity‘ for further detail.
Misconception 6: It is not permissible to apply henna in menstruation.
Busted: It is permitted to apply henna, whether on the hands, feet, or hair at any time.
Misconception 7: It is not permissible to take a bath while menstruating.
Busted: Islam advises us to stay clean at all times, and during hayd and nifas, one should make an extra effort to remain clean due to the bleeding that occurs. The Quran mentions, “Allah loves those who keep themselves pure” (Surat al-Tawbah 9:108).
Misconception 8: You cannot use water to clean the private parts when menstruating; it will affect your fertility.
Busted: This claim is completely baseless within the Shari’ah. Menstruating women should take extra care of their cleanliness to prevent the buildup of bacteria, odour, or physical impurity. Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, “Cleanliness is half of faith” (Sahih Muslim 203/1).
Misconception 9: It is not permissible to take a bath after menstruation until pubic hair is removed.
Busted: It is compulsory to remove pubic hair on a weekly basis. Removing it is not a prerequisite to performing ritual bath (ghusl).
*See ‘Basic Hygiene Etiquette‘ for further detail.
Misconception 10: You must offer the prostration of recital (sajda tilawah) for a verse of prostration (sajda) heard during menstruation.
Busted: If a menstruating woman hears a verse of sajda from someone else, it is not necessary for her to offer sajda tilawat, even after she attains purity.
Misconception 11: You cannot leave your newborn during nifas.
Busted: There is nothing mentioned in Shari’ah to prohibit a woman from leaving her newborn during nifas.
Misconception 12: You cannot leave your house during nifas.
Busted: There is no specific ruling mentioned in Shari’ah that prohibits a woman from leaving her house during nifas.
Misconception 13: You cannot tell your father you are menstruating.
Busted: In many cultures, it is considered inappropriate or immodest for a girl to tell her father she is menstruating. From a young age, girls are discouraged from discussing emotional and physical changes they may be going through. If a young girl needs help from her father to purchase sanitary pads, she should feel comfortable asking him. Fathers are there to care for their families; it’s their job. Menstruation is a completely normal part of everyday life. A father will understand that, and would never want his daughter to feel too embarrassed by something so natural as menstruation that it prevents her from asking him for help. There is no problem if there is shyness from either or both parties, but when she needs help, she should be able to ask.
Misconception 14: You cannot write Qur’anic verses while menstruating.
Busted: It is unlawful to write a Qur’anic verse while menstruating, unless the writer creates a barrier between her hand and the paper she is writing on. A menstruating woman should place a tissue or another piece of paper under her writing hand, so that her hand does not touch the paper on which the Qur’an is written.
Misconception 15: Menstruating women must keep their distance from other members of their household.
Busted: Islam is a religion of moderation and walking a balanced path; unlike many other faiths, it does not cast out menstruating women as unclean or unhygienic. Women are not expected to physically distance themselves from members of their household, including their spouse. There is no religious basis that prevents them from using the same utensils or sleeping in the same bed, although restrictions for intimacy remain.
SANHA denies the charge of extortion and charging exorbitant fees for the services it renders. Vindicating itself against the charge, SANHA says: “For information purposes SANHA fees are commensurate to the work required in maintaining the Halaal programme. Therefore the amount on the contracts willingly entered into will vary. SANHA’s average current certification fees in the categories stated are:
|Butcheries||R550.00 per month|
|Take Away/Restaurants||R500.00 per month|
|Beef Abattoir||R 5.00 per carcass|
|Sheep Abattoir||R 2.00 per carcass|
|Poultry Abattoir||from R1 500 per month|
|Retail Bakery||R500.00 per month|
Is there truth in SANHA’s claims? Please comment.
The aforementioned charges are a part of the carrion scheme of fees. SANHA has perpetrated deception in mentioning only a portion of the fees. SANHA is also silent on the massively exorbitant fees it charges Rainbow Chickens. In its carrion fleece-fee chart, is mentioned: “Poultry Abattoir from R1,500 per month”. SANHA dare not mention the limit – from R1500 to what? Besides the several types of haram gangster type taxation, SANHA should inform of the actual amount of carrion tax it extracts from Rainbow Chickens.
Further, SANHA should not attempt to deceive people by saying “R5 per carcass and R2 per carcass”. SANHA should declare the total sum of the protection tax it acquired from these two ‘carcass’ fees. There is no basis in the Shariah to charge even 10 cents per carcass. SANHA does no slaughter the animals. It does not contribute physically to the slaughtering or to any other aspect related to the slaughtering, skinning, packing, etc., etc. These “per carcass” fees are haraam, having absolutely no basis in the Shariah.
It should also be understood that the ‘services’ rendered by SANHA are of its own volition and are imposed in a haraam manner on traders and animal-killing plants. It is haraam to charge fees for unsolicited ‘services’. The fees of SANHA in terms of the Shariah are extortion and haraam.
We have explained the evil system of SANHA’s extortion in a booklet several years ago. The title is: SANHA’S HARAAM FLEECING FEES. The booklet is available on our website. Hard copies are also available.
The following is an extract from the booklet to show the falsehood peddled by the Carrion Purveyor.
…………. We are confronted here with compound extortion – and much of it is ambiguous since the amounts to be extorted will be calculated in future when the mock inspection transpires. (v) The story of the mock inspection and fleecing fees has still not ended. In addition to the aforementioned ‘inspections’, there is another inspection about which the agreement states: “Inspections will be carried out at SANHA’s discretion at least once per calendar month.” The expenses of this inspection is also borne by Rainbow. Since large amounts of money are extorted for each inspection separately, what is the monthly licence fee for? And, what are the carcass fees for? (vi) The Fleecing Fees extortion racket also provides for the company to pay SANHA’s supervisors separately. Although the supervisors are executing services for SANHA, the carrion company pays the salaries of the supervisors.
Now that Rainbow pays separately for SANHA’s inspections, supervision and administration, what are the confounded monthly licence fees for? And what are the carcass fee for? Answering this question, the fatwa states: “The fee which is charged for inspections and supervisions is in actual fact in lieu of the fuel used by them for inspecting the outlet.” Someone must have been perpetrating some type of substance abuse when making this stupid statement. Or the mind is befogged as a consequence of devouring SANHA’s carrion chickens. Does SANHA use R50,000 every month for fuel to inspect one carrion plant twice or thrice a month? This is the approximate amount which SANHA charges for licence fleecing fee and inspection fleecing fee every month.
Furthermore, the fatwa fails to distinguish between ‘inspection’ and ‘supervision’. While the inspectors come to the carrion plant twice a month using about R100 fuel per time, the supervisors are paid a full wage separately by Rainbow. What are the R50,000 monthly confounded fees all about? It is all about extortion and fleecing the company. The fatwa then draws a plainly stupid and baseless analogy between the carrion fleecing fees and the fee a hunter pays to hunt in a game farm. Says the fatwa:
“We can regard this (SANHA’s carrion) transaction taking place between the hunter and the game farm owner as an Ijarah (lease) transaction. In other words, the hunter is paying a fee for utilizing the facilities provided to him by the owner such as using their roads etc. The animal that will be hunted in this case will be a gift from the owner.” In this false analogy, who is the ‘hunter’ and who is the ‘game farm owner’ in relation to SANHA’s haraam agreement with Rainbow? In the game farm scenario, the hunter coughs up the money, hence in the light of the corrupt analogy, Rainbow is the ‘hunter’, and SANHA is the ‘game farm owner’. However, the ‘gift’ element is lacking in the carrion transaction. SANHA presents no gift or bonus to Rainbow in lieu of the huge sums of money it extorts from the company.
Whilst the example of the hunter and the game farm also requires some rebuttal, for the sake of brevity we shall not deal with it in this discussion. The hunter pays the owner of the farm, a simple, flat one-off fee for the utilization of his facilities. But the ‘hunter’ (Rainbow) in the chicken carrion scenario is loaded with a variety of elements of extortion. Rainbow does not pay for any services rendered to it. Rainbow pays exorbitant sums of money for a range of phantom ‘services’. Inspecting the plant by a carrion purveyor is not a ‘service’ ordered by Rainbow. It is a condition imposed by SANHA for issuing its carrion certificate. All the other hallucinated ‘services’ which we have already discussed and refuted, are not services ordered by the Carrion Company. They are conditions which SANHA imposes on Rainbow to dupe the Muslim community – to make us believe that the carrion is halaal.
SANHA publicizes itself as a non-profit ‘deeni’ organization rendering service to the Muslim community. If the community accepts that SANHA is indeed rendering it a service, then it is the duty of Muslims to bear the expenses of the inspections, supervision, etc., and this will be light years away from the tip of the iceberg, i.e. the R50,000 monthly licence and corruption fees. Far from this miserable carrion outfit being a ‘non-profitable’ and a ‘deeni’ body, it is Islamically corrupt. Its greed for haraam boodle is insatiable. It extorts millions of rands for haraam and luxury expenditure. It misappropriates the Deen and the Halaal logo for monetary objectives, then it flaunts the naked audacity of claiming to be a ‘non-profitable deeni’ organization.
Furthermore, it is incumbent to proffer some advice to the honourable Mufti Sahib who has endorsed the corrupt ‘fatwa’ of his student. The honourable Mufti Sahib should understand that operating a Darul Ifta with student ‘muftis’ under his wing is a sacred responsibility. The students training under him are an Amaanat. It is absolutely imperative for the honourable Mufti Sahib to abandon whatever other activity he may be involved in to enable him to contribute 100% of his time and mind to the shenanigan ‘fatwas’ which his incapable students are fabricating. The ‘fatwa’ which we have just now discussed is not a Fatwa. The student has simply put together a very unprofessional essay, and it appears that the honourable Mufti Sahib had lackadaisically scanned over it and endorsed it without applying his mind. The ‘fatwa’ is scandalous and portrays the incompetency of the student who has compiled it. It will be salubrious for the honourable Mufti Sahib and his Ifta students to re-study Rasmul Mufti, etc. with minds and hearts fully applied. If the honourable Mufti Sahib acquits himself with laxity regarding the fulfilment of his obligation of correctly nurturing his students, both academically and morally, then we can assure him that they – his students – will become haatibul lail characters labouring in the self-deception of them being expert muftis when in reality they will be one-eyed juhala misleading others and themselves.
It is ludicrous to equate the range of complex fleecing fees extorted by SANHA with a simple, reasonable monthly fee to cover necessary expenditure which any how should not be an expense for Rainbow. It should be an expense for the Muslim community IF it is established that the carrion clique is able to distinguish between haraam and halaal.
We trust that the honourable Mufti Sahib will set his Darul Ifta in order and drill real academic ability in his students, and this is not possible without inculcating Taqwa in them. (End of extract)
The aforementioned naseehat is from our booklet published several years ago. We can now safely say that the mufti implicated in this carrion scandal is a mudhil who has betrayed Allah Ta’ala, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam), Islam and the Muslim community with his rubbish zigzag fatwas.
There are two evils attendant to the Fleece Fees which SANHA and other Carrion Halaalizers impose on traders:
(1) Extortion (2) Exorbitant charges.
The fees are in terms of the Shariah Extortion. It is the unjustified imposition and extraction of money in a bloodthirsty, parasitic manner from traders who mistakenly have been led to believe that their business will suffer if they do not cough up the haraam tax imposed on them by SANHA, MJC and the other members of the satanic cartel of carrion halaalizers.
Fees charged by these Carrion shayaateen are just like protection tax charged by gangsters. Carrion fees are a glorified form of gangster ‘protection tax’. There is no Islamic validity for this haraam extortion which is pure zulm. The ‘service’ provided by SANHA & Carrion Co. is a hallucinated, baseless, unsolicited, hated ‘inspection’ required by the smokescreen dubbed ‘supervision’. In reality there is no supervision. Supervision is another fake designed to mislead, deceive and bamboozle ignoramuses. Our booklet on hallucinated supervision is also available on our website.
Regardless of the fee amount, even if just R1, according to the Shariah it is haraam extortion. There is no concept in the Shariah into which this haraam, gangster tax could be fitted into. The charge per carcass is abhorrent and pure extortion of a vile kind. The silly chart of charges presented buy SANHA for public consumption is a poor red herring which does not secure SANHA’s objective of convincing anyone of the alleged justification for levying such haraam gangster protection tax on traders who fear for their business suffering adversely by the maliciously designed comments of SANHA regarding such traders who refuse to apply for a carrion certificate.
The one and only objective of the halaal certification racket is to line the pockets of the carrion cartel gangsters. It is a satanic profession devoid of even a vestige of Islamic altruism.
Furthermore, the haraam carrion tax is literally exorbitant. It is an extravasation – sucking parasitically – money from traders to enable the members of the carrion cartel to live in opulence. But they should not bask in the comforts and luxuries the ill-gotten taxes allow them, for Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“The Fire has a greater claim over a body nourished with haraam.”
11 Shawwaal 1442 – 24 May 2021