Muslims in America need to understand the “Equality Act” that has just been passed by Congress.
This is a bill that essentially puts gender identity and orientation discrimination on the same legal basis as racial discrimination.
This will have MASSIVE consequences for every single Muslim in the US, whether they realize it or not.
If the bill becomes law, this would mean that mosques and Islamic schools can be sued and also deprived of any public funding or benefits if they do not allow trans people to join single sex facilities. This includes the women’s sections, bathrooms, wudu areas, gyms, etc.
If a person who identities as a woman but has a penis, beard, etc., wants to go to the bathroom with Muslim women, make wudu with them, pray with them, etc., the masjid has to allow that, otherwise face potential law suits, loss of tax exempt status, etc.
If an Islamic school teacher decides to come out as gay in front of the whole school, the school cannot terminate employment for that teacher as that would be employment discrimination.
Muslim businesses, as well, would have to accommodate all kinds of LGBT demands or face crippling discrimination lawsuits.
Muslim families are not immune either because Muslim children will increasingly have to be exposed to Federally mandated pro-LGBT curricula in schools. It is already the case that all licensed psychologists have to peddle LGBT doctrine, but now, even Muslim counselors generally will have to be careful not to violate LGBT ideology for fear of being sued.
This bill basically empowers the LGBT agenda to the n-th degree. If you thought there was an LGBT hegemony in this country before, just wait till this bill is passed.
In this tweet, Ilhan “The Sharia Is Barbaric” Omar gloats over her central role in pushing the bill. Elsewhere, Rashida “My Allah Is a She” Talib also poses with an LGBT flag to show her support.
What do the promoters of Ilhan and Rashida have to say now?
We were told by “scholars” and Unfit Imams that Ilhan and Rashida are role models for the Muslim community.
Yasir Qadhi explicitly supported Ilhan and said that Muslim leaders have no choice but to support her and people like her.
Omar Suleiman went further and wrote in response to her election: “There is something special about seeing yourself in your leaders.” Not surprising to anyone, of course, that Dr. Omar sees himself in his leader, Ilhan.
Dr. Omar’s partner, Dr. Jonathan Brown, wrote in 2019, “I swear to God this brings tears to my eyes no matter how many times I watch it…” in response to a video of Ilhan at an Islamic school. This was long after her rabid pro-fahisha agenda was clear for all to see.
Dr. Brown, of course, has infamously told Muslims that they should affirm and advocate many LGBT rights and gay marriage, and even attend pro-LGBT rallies. His trash article promoting all this and more is STILL available at Yaqeen Institute, misguiding Allah knows how many Muslims and non-Muslims. It is still on their site despite the “scholarly review board” that Yaqeen installed to give naive people the impression that Yaqeen’s articles conform to Islamic standards.
Organizations like CAIR have continued to support Ilhan and Rashida and promote them at every turn. Yaqeen Institute has a picture of Ilhan as a “Black Muslim” icon in their video series on the topic.
Imam Zaid Shakir has no problem appearing at events that feature Ilhan and Rashida. In 2019, long after Ilhan’s anti-Islam, pro-fahisha stances became known, Shakir praised her in effusive terms:
“Ilhan Omar had the courage to raise her voice, despite the risks, and for that I salute her. While I would not endorse everything she advocates, I will say during this time when she needs the support of our community, that I stand with Ilhan. May God bless and protect her.”
These people who position themselves as leaders of the Muslim community have a great deal to answer for. They do not have the option to remain silent because this is what they pushed.
And what makes it egregious is that people were telling them how anti-Islam Ilhan and Rashida were! But they didn’t listen. When people told them to desist, these Unfit Imams were ever more defiant!
In essence, they pushed the LGBT agenda by pushing Ilhan and Rashida. And every single Muslim who donated a dime to their election campaigns now has the burden of all this in their scales, unless they make tawba and right the wrongs. Doesn’t matter if these people have no shame and don’t regret it, they still have to account for the damage that has been caused and continues to be caused. That’s the reality. May Allah guide them and guide us.
All this will be accounted for, if not in this life, then certainly in the next.
In the meantime, Allah protect us and our children.
And by the way, there are many Americans who are protesting this bill. So it is not like the bill has overwhelming public support. Quite the opposite. So there is plenty of room for Muslims to openly reject this stuff. Yet, these Unfit Imams stay silent. Why? What benefits, financial or otherwise, do they receive for their silence? Inquiring minds need to know.
Please comment on the following advice of Hadhrat Maulana Sayyid Abul Hasan Nadwi (Rahmatullah alayh):
“If political understanding is not created in the Muslim Ummah, then what will happen in this land (i.e. India)?
Besides the five times Salaat, if the nation is induced to be 100% observant of even Tahajjud Salaat, but there is no awakening in them of political understanding, and if they are not made aware of the conditions of the country, then it is quite possible that, leave alone Tahajjud, that even the five daily Salaat will be prohibited.”
How should this advice be interpreted?
The advice of Hadhrat Maulana Sayyid Abul Hasan Nadwi (Rahmatullah alayh) is far, very far off the target set for the Ummah by Allah Ta’ala via His Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
The Hadhrat’s emphasis on political perception is misdirected and due to short-sightedness. He has further failed to understand what the fundamental objective of Islam is. Regarding political perception, in this age every Tom, Dick and Harry – every illiterate village dweller – and the vast majority of Muslims in every country are politicized. They are ‘experts’ in the politics of the age.
This politically charged Ummah in fact condemns those Ulama who advocate against participation in politics. It is the vast majority of the Ummah in every Muslim country who votes into power fussaaq, munaafiqeen and kuffaar to be the rulers. The press, television and the internet have educated the entire Ummah in the lesson of politics to such an extent that their Imaani bearings are severed. Today the vast majority of the politicized Ummah is in fact kuffaar. It comes in the Hadith: “An age will dawn when the people will gather in their Musaajid and perform Salaat while not a single one among them will be a Mu’min.”
The Ummah is trapped in a cauldron of zandaqah, kufr and nifaaq. And, all of them do generally perform Salaat despite not being valid Muslims. Hence, the call of the times is to rectify Islamic Beliefs and to reform the rotten moral character of the Ummah. But moral reformation is possible only on the bedrock of valid Aqaaid. Islaah of the nafs is not possible on the basis of corrupt beliefs. In the initial period of Nubuwwat in Makkah, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) concentrated on only Aqaaid, Salaat and Islaah. Nothing else was entertained. Discussing politics/Jihaad was expressly forbidden by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
If the Salaat of Muslims is discharged correctly on the basis of correct Aqaaid, then the Ummah will achieve moral reformation to a substantial degree. Salaat performed correctly will engender in the hearts the yearning for the Aakhirah. It will slacken the worldly bond and Muslims will then focus more on Allah Ta’ala and the objectives of the Aakhirah.
When a morally reformed Ummah has perfected its relationship with Allah Ta’ala, then He will create the circumstances for the domination of Muslims. The very such circumstance created by Allah Ta’ala was the Battle of Badr which was not a planned Jihad. The Sahaabah did not go out to fight the kuffaar. However, Allah Ta’ala created the circumstances whereby their backs were against the wall and the enemy in front of them. They had no option to fight nor the inclination to fight. But in Allah’s Wisdom they were now qualified for Jihad.
It is indeed a grievous error in this age for the Ulama to concentrate on politics and to divert the already deviated minds of the masses languishing in the necrosis of corrupt ideologies and convoluted ‘islamic’ beliefs, from the goals of the Aakhirah, among which Salaat is of paramount importance. In fact, the vast majority of professed Muslims, does not perform Salaat five times daily. This fact can easily be ascertained at the time of Fajr and Isha’ when all people are home.
There is no dearth of secular institutions (universities, colleges, schools, etc.) in the Muslim world which concentrate on politics and all branches of mundane education. Political discussion is of great topical importance in all sectors of Muslim society, even among the rustics and slum-dwellers. Hadhrat Nadwi (Rahmatullah alayh) has clearly misunderstood the diseases of the Ummah. His finger was not on the pulse of the Ummah hence the proffered advice is the effect of misdiagnosis.
This advice has been offered in isolation of the innumerable Ahaadith and numerous Qur’aanic Aayaat deprecating indulgence in the dunya and emphasizing the goals of the Aakhirah. The Qur’aan repeatedly proclaims: “The life of this dunya is but play and amusement whilst the abode of the Aakhirah is best for those who have intelligence. What! Do you not have intelligence?” Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Verily, the dunya has been created for you, but you have been created for the Aakhirah. —– Verily, this dunya is carrion.”
The emphasis of the Qur’aan and Ahaadith is on the Aakhirah. If the Aakhirah is our sole objective, Allah Ta’ala will take care of our worldly needs.
Hadhrat Nadwi’s advice of awakening the masses to political understanding is indeed a conundrum. The incremental denial of religious (Deeni) freedom even in Muslim countries, is the consequence of the transgression and rebellion of the Ummah against Allah Ta’ala. It is not the result of being ignorant of politics or of any other branch of secular knowledge.
While Hadhrat Nadwi (Rahmatullah alayh) attributed the current hopeless state of the Ummah to lack of political perception, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) stated the actual reason. He said that a time will dawn when Muslims “will be like the scum of floodwaters whom the kuffaar will devour”. When he was asked if this degenerate state will be the consequence of the paucity of the numbers of the Ummah, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “On the contrary, you will be innumerable, but you will be like the muck of floodwaters. Allah will eliminate fear for you from the hearts of your enemies, and Allah will instill wahan in you hearts.” When asked for the meaning of ‘wahan’, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Love of the world and dislike for Maut.” The advice of Hadhrat Nadwi (Rahmatullah alayh) is unfortunate in that it gravitates the Muslim’s heart and mind towards the dunya. When Hadhrat Umar (Radhiyallahu anhu) was on his way to take possession of the City of Jerusalem, he halted at a place called Jaabiyyah where many Sahaabah and other Muslimeen came to meet him. In a khutbah at this place, he said: “O People! Reform your souls, then your external affairs will be reformed. Practice (make amal) for your Aakhirah, it will suffice for your worldly affairs.”
Hadhrat Umar (Radhiyallahu anhu) did not proffer advice which gravitates the heart towards the dunya. The focus was and should always be the Aakhirah. The Ummah is not in need of political awareness. It is gravely in need of awareness of the Deen and of its objective, which is only the betterment and salvation in the Aakhirah.
1) Hadhrat Nadwi (Rahmatullah alayh) has erred in his diagnosis of the condition of the Ummah. 2) His prescription of creating awareness regarding politics and assigning Salaat secondary importance is egregiously erroneous. 3) He has failed to take cognizance of the absolutely decadent moral and Imaani states of the Ummah. 4) All politics in this age is kufr politics. The need is to remain aloof from politics. 5) Political awareness is not a requisite for our success in this dunya nor for the everlasting salvation and happiness of the Aakhirah. Deeni awareness is Fardh
From being the most powerful, honourable, respectable, chivalrous, pious, progressive, courageous and admirable nation once on earth, the Arab leaders of today have sullied the name and the race of our most noble Prophet Muhammad (may peace and blessings be upon him). The present Arab powers, far from their previous prestige, have indeed greatly deteriorated in stature to such an extent that they are now known for everything un-Islamic. These include their exploitation of labour, oppression of others, opulent and deca dent lifestyles, betrayal of their own race, war mongering, extremism in religion, manipulation and selective application of religion, and the cherry on the top – their open love, alliance, and adoration of USA and Israel. If this love was kept hidden in the heart, one could still be in doubt, but the Arab leaders have demonstrated themselves their willingness to be the Zio-Western underdog and poodle on all levels: economic, social, political and even religious. The only thing now left to change is the Saudi flag. The pure Kalimah (Islamic Creed) should be removed and be replaced by a woman in a bikini.
But being a friend of the devil is no ordinary task. You need to do two things to be afforded this disgraceful privilege. Firstly, you have to sell your religion – a demand which is currently being fulfilled; and secondly, you have to take your Lord and Protector to be the mighty West, the formidable East, or anyone else besides the One Almighty. This has already been done many decades ago. In return, you get protection of your throne and license to kill your own people.
The caricature controversy keeps rearing its ugly head, this time after the murder of a French teacher for showing degrading caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
Every time a Muslim reacts with violence in response to these despicable caricatures, a wave of support for the caricatures spreads across the world in defence of freedom of speech. This is very unfortunate.
Why is the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ caricatured?
What makes the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ significant today is that there are about 2 billion people around the world who love him and have him as their supreme role model. Caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ would be of little interest if Muslims did not follow him. Every time he is caricatured, it is not the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ who is in focus – instead, the focus is on all the Muslims in the world who follow him. The cartoons are not only depicting him as a historical person, but are meant to represent Muslims as a whole.
The “bomb in the turban”
The drawing by the Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, where the Prophet ﷺ is depicted with a bomb in his turban with the Islamic creed (shahāda) inscribed on it, makes one question why he is portrayed in this way. There were no bombs at the time of the Prophet ﷺ, so how can this be a criticism of him? What is the context behind this image? Evidently, there is no visible context whatsoever. The message one is left with is that Islam, bombs, and terrorism are all one and the same, and that Muslims are dangerous.
Where does this caricature come from? Some Muslims are seen committing terrorist attacks, but instead of blaming only these terrorists individually, one wishes to blame all Muslims. To substantiate that all Muslims support terrorism, the Prophet ﷺ is caricatured with a bomb in his turban as a symbol of the inner faith of Muslims.
The obvious message is that all Muslims – at least if they are “good Muslims” – either openly or secretly (through “taqiyyah”) support terrorism.
Therefore, the drawing is Islamophobic
The drawing is a clear Islamophobic racist cartoon, and the reason behind this is that it conveys an extremely negative stereotype that Muslims are terrorists. This is supported by the following arguments:
When the average viewer sees the drawing, the natural impression he is left with is that Muslims are terrorists or support terrorism. This is precisely why this drawing has become so popular in Islamophobic circles, and just as hated in Muslim circles.
The Muslim creed – which defines all Muslims – is written on the bomb. Therefore, the drawing conveys that all Muslims are terrorists or support terrorism, not just a specific person or organisation. If, for example, the terms Al-Qaeda or ISIS were written on the turban, it would have conveyed a completely different message.
The drawing is a caricature of the Prophet of all Muslims, not of, for example, Osama bin Laden. Had it been a caricature of the latter, one could argue that it would not have been Islamophobic. But precisely because it is attributed to the Prophet ﷺ, it is a picture that portrays all of his followers, i.e. all Muslims, as terrorists or supporters of terrorism.
More or less all Muslims, about 2 billion people, experience the drawing as Islamophobic and a violation of their human dignity.
Can the message be explained away?
It is also necessary to emphasise that Westergaard tried to explain away the cartoon as a symbol of terrorists taking the Prophet ﷺ and the religion as a hostage. But, since the drawing from the beginning has been conveyed as a caricature of the Prophet ﷺ, and not one of a terrorist, this is not a credible explanation. Therefore, the drawing remains Islamophobic.
To further exemplify it: If a Nazi makes an anti-Semitic drawing that shows that Jews exaggerated the Holocaust, and the cartoonist says that the drawing is really only meant to criticise some Jews who make too much fuss about the Holocaust, this will be rejected. Why? Because the drawing must be able to convey a meaningful message by itself, without it having to be explained away. If the drawing itself promotes a racist, anti-Semitic, or Islamophobic message, then that is exactly how it should be understood, regardless of how the cartoonist later explains away his intentions.
What about other caricatures of the Prophet ﷺ?
Similarly, when the Prophet ﷺ is caricatured as, for example, a misogynist, the indirect message is that everyone who follows the Prophet ﷺ – namely, all Muslims – abuse and discriminate against women, at least if they are “good Muslims.”
Any caricature of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ that promotes a negative stereotype of Muslims will be Islamophobic because the Prophet ﷺ represents all Muslims.
Aren’t the caricatures a critique of religion?
Some may say that the caricatures are meant to be a criticism of the Prophet ﷺ. To portray the Prophet of the Muslims in Islamophobic stereotypes is quite different from non-Muslims criticising certain actions that the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ did in his historical context. According to the secular world view Muslims must tolerate criticism of their religion, but they do not have to tolerate Islamophobia. That’s why the distinction between criticism of religion and Islamophobia is crucial. One moves from criticism of Islam to Islamophobia when one either:
Stigmatises Muslims as a group by attributing negative opinions, characteristics, or intentions to them; or
Mentions historical events related to Islam and the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ in a stigmatising way without showing the context of the event one wishes to criticise, which leads to stigmatisation of Muslims.
The caricatures of the Prophet ﷺ do exactly this because they portray the symbol of the ideal Muslim as a terrorist and misogynist, without showing any real historical context. The context is crucial for distinguishing between criticism of religion and Islamophobia.
Therefore, the caricatures are Islamophobic, in line with claims such as Muslims inwardly support terrorism, good Muslims oppress women, or that Muslims secretly want to conquer Europe, etc. This is the same rhetoric found in right-wing extremist circles and organisations that promote the idea that to be a good Muslim, one must support terrorism, murder, and the oppression of women.
Should the caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ be defended as freedom of speech?
The distinction between criticism of religion and Islamophobia is crucial in this debate. Precisely because this distinction has not been clear enough, we see that many defend Islamophobic caricatures in the name of freedom of expression.
Islamophobia is still a new concept for many, so it is important to point out that Islamophobia is a branch of racism. When we see these caricatures in the context of Islamophobia, it is easier to see the moral reprehensibility of saying that Muslims must tolerate being portrayed in this way. For instance, we would not say that Jews must tolerate caricatures of Moses being portrayed as a greedy man with a big nose (a typical anti-Semitic stereotype). It is morally reprehensible to make such anti-Semitic portrayals of Moses a symbolic struggle for freedom of speech.
But it has taken the world many years and many lost lives to really understand the dangers of anti-Semitic propaganda. We must learn from the mistakes of history. Now, in 2020, we understand the phenomenon of Islamophobia much more than society did in 2005 when the caricature controversy first started.
It is now time to put these caricatures in their right context. Defending the drawing, printing, or publication of Islamophobic caricatures is not a defence of freedom of speech – it is a defence of Islamophobia.
Question:What does the Shariah say about boycotting Israeli goods? If a group organizes such a boycott, does it become incumbent on the community to observe the boycott? Is it permissible to pressurize people to observe the boycott, and to label them traitors for not observing the boycott?
Answer: Firstly, it is necessary to ascertain who the people are who initiate these boycotts. The initiators are all faasiq and faajir men and women whose relationship with the Deen is extremely deficient. The type of activities they indulge in to highlight their boycotts of Israel, confirm their fisq and fujoor. They descend to hooliganism and haraam acts. There is no regard for the Shariah’s commands and prohibitions.
The very first disqualification of a movement or an activity is the fisq and fujoor of its leaders/ initiators. If the initiators are fussaaq and fujjaar, the movement stands condemned. It will be…
A few weeks ago, social media was abuzz at an incident that took place at a Masjid in Johannesburg. The Imam, a well-known knowledgeable, selfless and humble personality, had just polished off his biryani after conducting an excellent Jumu’ah service, and was about to lay down for his well-deserved afternoon siesta when he received a phone-call from the one-man show trustee of his Masjid. The said trustee wasn’t even present at the Jumu’ah, and so acting on the words of his “perfect” son, proceeded: “Maulana, I’m letting you know that you’re fired.”
“It’s fine with me, but be courteous enough to inform me the reason please,” asked the rather amused Imam.
“My son told me that you went against Masjid protocol by saying that by taking precautions against Covid-19 in the Masjid, you can still contract it. You said that social distancing doesn’t necessarily protect one, but Allah alone should be trusted.”
“So what’s wrong with that? You checked my lecture script yesterday,” queried the Imam, getting frustrated with an ignorant trustee who didn’t understand the basics of tawheed and tawakkul (beliefs in the Oneness and Trust in God).
“You’re fired because I said so, and that’s it. Come collect your money from my shop.”
“With pleasure. My last few month’s envelopes are still with you, so whenever I’m around, I’ll gladly do so.”
And that was it. Eight years of sterling service terminated by a mere phone call at the whim and ego of an ignorant autocratic trustee.
This article is not targeting any Masjid or trustee in particular, but if the caps fits, wear it. Nevertheless, it highlights the rather common trend on how some abusive trustees ill-treat scholars and Imams, not following any Islamic protocol or labour law imperatives when taking any decision. Some of these trustees are disgustingly scholars and Imams themselves which actually compounds the problem. It’s well known that government and world affairs are today led by the worst of people, the most corrupt, with the worst human rights record and with very little knowledge or morals, but hidden in plain sight are the leadership of some of our Masajid and Islamic institutions too.
Masaajid and Islamic institutions are today, by and large, not seen as a centre of service to humanity, but as a status symbol. So, those who have the ability of funding it, or who have social or political status, aspire to run them – and they run them just like their businesses, bereft of any moral compass, knowledge base and etiquette. Our Masaajid stand at the very forefront of our identity as Muslims, at our progress as a Muslim ummah, it plays one of the most pivotal roles as far as our role in this world is concerned, and our destiny in the hereafter. Our life and death revolves around the masjid, and it’s the yearning of many to die in a Masjid, on a Friday, whilst in sujood (prostration). It’s no ordinary building, and that’s why the first structure to be erected by our noble Prophet Muhammad (may peace and blessings be upon him) when reaching Madinah, was a Masjid.
If the Masaajid is so pivotal to Muslims, then their trustees should be the most knowledgeable, the most pious and elite, and the most decent. Is this the case? How many attend five-times daily salaat in their own Masjid, are not involved in interest-based loans, do not behave nor appear according to the sunnah, who conduct community affairs with transparency and shura (consultation), and who have a dignified demeanour? A community who has such trustees ruling their affairs should remove them and replace them with better suited candidates. If this can’t be done because many Masjids are today built and owned by rich and arrogant individuals and families, then build an alternate Masjid and run it according to proper Islamic principles. Those who support clannism, elitism and exclusivism in the name of Islam can support the crooked Masjid and continue beguiling their fantasies, whilst those humble souls who genuinely want to serve Islam and obtain correct guidance, can attend the second one. The choice would be yours.
Scholars, Imams, ‘Ulema, Shuyookh etc would also make a choice as to which Masjid to serve in. If they choose to be lapdogs and sellouts of the rulers and the rich, let them sell their souls to the devil in the Masjid for a few extra rands. Believe you me, there are hundreds like these around, including some of the Imams of the Grand Haram in Arabia! When they get a grand kick from their evil masters one day, they’ll know if they mounted a horse or a donkey. The more sincere ‘Ulema, on the other hand, should seek out Institutions which are run closer to the ideal, and if such Institutions are not to be found, they have one of two choices, and a no-choice as follows:
They could either rally like-minded in the community behind them, and build their own Masjid and Islamic institutions. There is no unity on falsehood and evil. Such unity is actually a deception, because it will cause further harm to Islam down the line, endorsing rotten people, and their rotten apples. If this is not possible, they should serve Islam in their private capacity, and seek their livelihood via business or some other trade or skill. In this way, they will serve the religion with dignity, and without compromise.
The no-choice option would be to continue serving under the rich and arrogant, unhappily, whilst compromising the religion. Many scholars of the past, and till today, continue exercising patience in such positions “for the greater good of the community,” but they do not realize what they can achieve via another structure, or the harm they are causing the community in the name of Islam. Interestingly, many local scholars are not towing the line anymore, so the despotic trustees hire foreigners with no command of the English language, with no understanding of the local dynamics, who willfully take orders, and who are happy to slog for a measly 30 happy meals per month. What a disgrace upon such trustees who dishonor Islam in such a way!
Let’s ask a basic question here: Will the CEO of a huge hospital which handles many critical patients, be a non-doctor? Did you ever meet the head of an accounting firm who’s not a CA or highly qualified in his field? Can a person running a tyre shop or a construction company, who flunked out of basic Madrasah, be made the head of an IT company. The answer is “no”, but you’ll sadly find these in two situations: in politics, and in religion. The Masjid trustee will boss around the learned scholar, but will not know how to even recite Surah Fatiha with tajweed (rules of pronounciation). Many trustees, if asked the following basic questions, will not be able to answer. Go on, go quiz them a bit:
What are rules and regulations pertaining to waqf (Islamic endowments) in Islam, the broad difference between Zakaat and Lillah and how should they be disbursed. Is there proper financial record keeping, and no criminal record or incidences or fraud or indecent behaviuour in their social and private life?
What are the principles of shura (mutual consultation), how is it administered, is it inclusive, and is the outcome according to Islam or not?
What are the principles of labour law, or contracts, in Islam and SA law? Remember that the Imam is more knowledgeable than you and has been employed to lead the community. Do you feel threatened by his authority and guidance, and want to dictate to him how things must be done? Will you “work him out” if he doesn’t toe the line because you pay his salary? Does his salary cover his needs, and if it doesn’t, do you feel threatened by his “side hussle” that will slowly make him independent of you? Sadly, most hired Imams make less than what the rich give their kids for school lunch.
Pertaining to ghusl (bathing), wudhu (ablution), and salaat (prayers), what are the faraa’idh, sunnah, nafl and musthabbaat. Do they have the capacity of rectifying the Imam in salaat, or continuing the salaat if the Imam breaks off mid-way?
Lastly, hats off to those trustees who fit the above bill, and who run the show properly. If not, maybe it’s time you allow for others to get involved. Your Masjid may be suffering due to you. You may think you’re the solution, but you’re actually the problem. No one owns the Masjid, even if you donated every cent of the R20 million it cost. It belongs to the Ummah.
Insulting God and His Prophets is not an invention of the contemporary world. For eons, forgotten losers of old have levelled abuse at the Divine and His notable representatives on Earth, not least of all at the Prophets of God. It is undoubtedly clear that the champions of paltry ideologies that reduce man to a measly composition and movement of chemical compounds cannot salvage their philosophical wreckage except by scorning those who know life’s greater purpose. Despite its laïcité, France stands as the “most depressed nation on earth” and has the highest suicide rate western Europe. Scorning definitely distracts from confessing that others may be right.
Many Prophets were killed, crucified, or insulted, yet they are in bliss and their legacies remain. Their killers or scorners are, at best, dust, awaiting a much longer chastisement and humiliation in the Hereafter. The history of the final Prophet, Muhammad (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam), is replete with how his scorners faced abysmal and humiliating ends whilst his immaculate status was forever preserved. Allāh has promised:
“Surely We will be sufficient for you against the mockers…”
During the international phase of the da’wah, the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) wrote to invite both Khosrow (of Persia) and Caesar (of Rome) to Islam. Both abstained from accepting the message. Caesar, however, honoured the letter and emissary of the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Allāh strengthened and stabilised the Kingdom of Caesar. Khosrow, on the other hand, tore apart the letter and mocked the Messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and his emissary. The Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) later said: “Khosrow has just torn apart his own dominion.”
A short time later, Khosrow’s son, Kavad II, killed his father to take over the throne. Through successive ignominious defeats at the hands of the Byzantines and the Muslims in the Caliphate of ‘Umar (rady Allāhu ‘anhu), Khosrow’s empire was indeed irreversibly torn into pieces.
Al-Suhaili reports: “Heraclius (610-641 AD) kept the Prophet’s letter sheltered in a gold reed-like object in its honour and kept passing it down from one emperor to the other. It finally ended up with the ‘King of the Franks’ over Toledo, before being inherited down. Some of our companions told me that Abd al-Malik b. Sa’īd, one of the Muslim commanders, met that king. In their encounter, he showed him the Prophetic letter. On seeing it, he was overtaken by emotion and knelt across (to kiss it), but was not given permission.”
Ibn Hajar reports, on the authority of Said al-Din Falih al-Mansūri, that the King of the Franks showed him a box lined with gold containing a gold pen case. He opened the case and pulled out a letter, the ink of which had faded, attached to a silk rag. The king then said: “This is your Prophet’s letter to my grandfather the Caesar that continues to be inherited down until now. Our father advised us that so long as we preserve this letter, our kingdom will be preserved. We thus protect it with utmost effort and honour it, concealing it from the Christians so that our dominion may persist.”
Abu Lahab and his son ‘Utbah were once preparing to head for al-Shām (the Levant). Before they left, ‘Utbah promised: “I will (first) go to Muhammad and mock his Lord.” ‘Utbah approached the Prophet and daringly said (invoking a Qur’ānic passage from Surah al-Najm out of mockery): “I have disavowed the one ‘who got close and drew near, and was at a distance of two bow lengths or nearer.’” Hearing his mockery of Allāh’s words, the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) invoked: “Allāh, send upon him a dog of your dogs,” and turned away.
‘Utbah returned to his father who asked: “Son, what did you say to him?” ‘Utbah related the account, then Abu Lahab asked: “And what did he say back?” He replied: “Allāh, send upon him a dog of your dogs.” Abu Lahab then said: “Son, by Allāh, I do not feel safe from (the manifestation of) that supplication.”
They both took off until they reached a land near al-Shām full of lions. Addressing his travelling group, Abu Lahab said: “By the right of my age and position, that man (Muhammad) supplicated against my son that I do not feel protected from, so gather your belongings and go to that monastery and put my son in the middle of your belongings and surround him.” They did as he ordered. Moments later, a lion approached and roamed around the camping group, sniffing and searching until he hopped on top of their caravan and jumped directly onto ‘Utbah, vigorously attacking him until he ripped his head off. Abu Lahab said: “I knew that he would not escape the supplication of that man.”
In his book Thail Mawlid al-‘Ulamā’, Al-Kettāni mentions that during the era of the Caliph al-Hākim, there emerged a man who called himself Hādi al-Mustajībīn (the Guide of the Accepters) who would call to the worship of the ruler. It was said that he insulted the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and spat at the Qur’ān. When he entered Makkah, its residents complained to its Emir, but the latter defended the man and sought to excuse him by claiming he was repentant. The people insisted that such a sin cannot be made up by mere repentance. They gathered in the Haram, collectively beseeching Allāh. Thick dark smog filled the atmosphere then cleared, leaving over the sacred house a bright ray, visible day and night. This persisted until it was brought to the attention of the Emir of Makkah, who summoned Hādi al-Mustajībīn and executed him.
In his book Al-Shifā, Qādi ‘Iyād writes that the jurists of Kairouan in present-day Tunisia – and companions of the jurist Sahnūn b. Sa’īd – had issued an edict to execute Ibrahim al-Fazāri, a skilled poet and master of multiple sciences who would frequently mock Allāh and his prophets, including the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). The jurist Yahya b. Umar ordered for al-Fazāri to be killed and crucified. As he hung facing the Qiblah, historians mention that the firmly grounded wooden pole was later found in its place, but facing another direction!
The 20th century scholar Ahmad Shakir mentions that he attended a sermon in which an articulate orator wanted to praise the leadership for showing courtesy to the writer Taha Hussein, who was blind. In his speech, he said: “(The leader) did not frown or turn his attention away when the blind man came him,” invoking but deforming the verses of Surah ‘Abasa. Ahmad Shakir said: “This criminal’s retribution came in this world before the next. By Allāh, I saw him after a few years with my very two eyes, after his haughtiness and position… as a docile and humiliated servant looking after people’s slippers at the door of the masjid.”
In other instances, Allāh protected His Messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) through imperceptible barriers, through angels, and through fear thrown into the hearts of those who intended to cause him harm. It was reported that Ghawrath b. al-Hārith, who was a polytheist, vowed to kill the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) whilst the Prophet was sleeping under a palm tree with his sword hung up on it.
Ghawrath held a sword over the head of the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and threatened: “Who will protect you?” The Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) answered: “Allāh!” Jabir, the narrator, says: “The sword fell out of his hand and the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) picked it up and said: ‘And who will protect you’? The man replied: ‘The best of the two who grabbed (the sword).’ The Prophet asked: ‘Do you bear witness that none is worthy of worship besides Allāh and that I am His Messenger?’ The man said: ‘I promise to not fight you, nor to assist anyone who fights you.’ The Prophet let him go.” In other narrations, the Prophet had given him the sword on the man’s request and, on grabbing it, his hands shuddered and he dropped it. The Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: “Allāh stood between you and what you sought to do.”
Abu Huraira reports that Abu Jahl asked his friends whether the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) ‘places his face on the ground’ (in sujūd) in their presence. They answered in the affirmative. He said: “By Lāt and `Uzza! If I see him doing that, I will trample his neck or smear his face with dust.”
Abu Jahl approached the Messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) as he was in sujūd and pressed ahead to step on his blessed neck. On nearing, Abu Jahl stumbled back with glaringly wide eyes, petrified and looking as if he were repelling something with his hands. It was said to him: “What is the matter with you?” He said: “I saw a ditch of fire, terror and wings had emerged between me and him.” Allāh’s Messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would later say: “If he were to come near me, the angels would have torn him to pieces!”
‘Abdullah b. ‘Abbās (rady Allāhu ‘anhu) reported that a group of the leadership of Quraish gathered in the Hijr (the Sacred House) and vowed by their idols (Lāt, Uzza, Manāt, and Isāf) that if they were to see Muhammad (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam), they will collectively kill him. Fātimah (rady Allāhu ‘anha) was made aware of their plan and rushed to her father, the Messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam), weeping. He said: “O daughter, bring me water for ablution.” He then washed and entered the Masjid. When the leadership of Quraish saw him, they lowered their heads and avoided making eye contact; not a man approached him. The Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) advanced, knelt, and filled his palm with dirt and threw it at them, exclaiming: “May these faces be deformed.” The narrator of this event said that everyone in the vicinity of that pelted dirt was killed years later on the Day of Badr.
Allāh protected His Messenger from scorners by diverting insults to other than his noble self. The Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) used to say: “Does it not astonish you how Allāh protects me from the abuse and curses of Quraish? They abuse Mudhammam and curse Mudhammam, while I am Muhammad (and not Mudhammam).” Ibn Hajar explains: “The disbelievers of Quraish would, out of sheer hate, insult the Prophet using Mudhammam (the lowly one) other than his name, Muhammad (the praised one)…but Mudhammam is neither his name, nor is he known by it, and thus their insults were naturally diverted away from him!”
On other occasions, Allāh would alter the laws of nature in defence of his Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Zaynab bint Hārith presented meat that she had packed with poison to the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). On placing the meat in his mouth, and without swallowing it, he said: “The bone is telling me that it is poisoned!” On inquisition, Zaynab admitted to poisoning the meat. The laws of nature were altered in two ways: by the poison having no effect on the Messenger, and by the bone informing the Messenger of the poison!
Allāh would transform the hearts of the Prophet’s enemies to friends on their first direct interaction with him. The starkest example of this is in the story of Abu Sufyān b. Hārith, the Prophet’s milk-brother who loved the Prophet during his childhood but became a stern enemy following the prophethood. Abu Sufyān would frequently insult the Prophet and his companions, but rather than humiliate him, Allāh softened his heart to Islam.
Abu Sufyan said: “Allāh put Islam in my heart, so I travelled with my wife and child until we reached al-Abwa’. I covered my face and approached until I was face to face with the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam). When he saw me, he turned away, so I repositioned myself so that I was facing him again.” The narrator said: “Abu Sufyan kept following him (the Prophet) everywhere he would go… until Abu Sufyan said: ‘By Allāh, the Messenger shall give me permission (to speak to him) or I will take my son’s hand and die of hunger or thirst.’ When the Messenger (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) heard of this, his heart softened towards him and he allowed him to enter.”
Subhān Allāh, the One who humiliates the scorners of the Prophet in this life before the next, averts their insults to useless caricatures or objects, and transforms the heart of the Prophet’s haters to become humbled at his door begging for his pardon! His mockers fail to reduce from his veneration. They are like sloths who spit at the sun: dirtied by their own splutter. They are tarnished in this life before more humiliation in the next.
“Surely those who offend Allāh and His Messenger are condemned by Allāh in this world and the Hereafter. He has prepared for them a humiliating punishment.”
In the Name of Allāh, the most Gracious and most Merciful. All praise belongs to Allāh. May the peace and blessings of Allāh be upon His Final Messenger, Muhammad (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam), his family and his companions.
Khutbah (Part I)
It is important for us as Muslims to be aware of what is happening to Muslims not only locally but also around the world – both near and far. Muslims are one body, and our strength comes from our unity.
Al-Nu’man ibn Bashir reported: The Messenger of Allāh, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “The parable of the believers in their affection, mercy, and compassion for each other is that of a body. When any limb aches, the whole body reacts with sleeplessness and fever.”
It is important for us as Muslims to understand why things are happening around the world. We should learn to look past the sensationalist speeches so that we can properly understand what is happening and how we need to respond.
“They plotted, and Allāh planned, but Allāh is the Best of planners.”
What has been happening during the last few days and weeks in France has saddened and shocked Muslims around the world.
Yesterday, three people were killed in Nice in France. Nine days ago two sisters in hijab were knifed beneath the Eiffel Tower. Two days before that a teacher Samuel Paty, was killed in France for showing cartoons of our beloved prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) to his pupils. None of these killings and attacks can be condoned.
Furthermore, it is unbelievable for the French president Macron to take the unfortunate murder of the teacher and use it to re-publish the demeaning and derogatory cartoons of our beloved Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and to further display the cartoons on the largest buildings in France – and then to criminalise anyone who criticises this action – all in the name of freedom of expression!
Let us call this what it is. It is double standards and has nothing to do with freedom of speech! What happened to freedom of speech when the 80-year-old Maurice Sinet, a cartoonist with Charlie Hebdo for 20 years, was fired in 2009 for his anti-Semitic cartoons mocking the relationship of former French President Sarkozy’s son with a wealthy Jewish woman?
This single act of criminality of the murder of the teacher is now being used to stigmatise 10 million Muslims in France and collectively punish them. It is being used as an excuse to stoke racism and claim that Islam is in crisis! This murder was wrong, but its cause does not come from Islam and the books of fiqh. It comes from the anger of how France is treating millions of its citizens! This is not a justification – it is contextualisation!
These acts are hypocritical of France, a country that committed barbaric crimes against the nations it was occupying! In over 130 years of French occupation of Algeria, millions of people were killed – not 1 teacher, but millions – for daring to exercise their freedom! Algerian men, women, and children were slaughtered at the hands of the French colonialists.
This is part of a bigger plan to control Islam and Muslims, and it is part of Macron’s plan for re-election by appeasing the ever-growing far-right in France.
Sadly, you will be shocked to learn that the truth is: it wasn’t the murder of the teacher that began this crisis. On October 2nd September 2020, two weeks before the murder of Paty, Macron announced a new set of laws “against separatisms”, which solely focused on policing and controlling Muslim communities.
The plan, announced by Macron, included:
– Labelling of imams (which would have to be approved by the Government)
– Powers granted to local authorities to dissolve Islamic organisations without any legal proceedings
– Taxing the Hajj to finance “anti-radicalisation” programs
– Prohibition of any non-religious activities for religious organisations
– Coercive controls on all Islamic organisations through the use of security, tax, and legal inspections to close organisations that do not support the government, and
– Criminalisation of organisations that combat Islamophobia.
Right now in France:
– 51 charities are currently being investigated, with a view to dissolving them.
– 72 schools, madrasas, and Muslim-owned businesses have been shut down already this year.
– The government wants to raid 123 Muslim homes and organisations – 56 raids have already been conducted. These have nothing to do with the killing – they are only there to “send a message”, according to the French Minister of the Interior.
The French government instrumentalised the murder of the teacher Samuel Paty for racist purposes. The government labelled two civil society organisations as “the enemy of the Republic”. The organisations were the Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF) and BarakaCity.
CCIF has a special status with the UN and is a key NGO within the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. CCIF is widely respected by all of its partners across Europe and helps thousands of victims a year.
BarakaCity is a humanitarian charity that helps 2 million people all over the world with poverty alleviation and clean water provision. Sadly last Tuesday, BarakaCity was forcibly closed down by the French government even though they are totally unrelated to any attacks in France!
Let us be clear: this is not about freedom of expression – this is about racism and Islamophobia!
”They took vengeance on them only because they believed in Allāh the Almighty, the Praised.”
But what is the solution?
President Macron claims that ‘Islam is in crisis!’
It is in fact France that is in crisis because of French nationalism coupled with secular fundamentalism and extreme arrogance. France is a divided nation that has continued to disenfranchise its poor and minorities. France has let racism dictate how it treats its own citizens. Non-Whites live in ghettos outside of the main cities and are denied equal access to proper work and education, all in the name of secularism. France has created this fear of the ‘other!’
Did you know that since 2017: 212 Muslim owned cafes, 15 mosques, 4 schools and 13 cultural associations have all been closed! Frances Muslims have been enduring these hardships for a long time.
Secularism is in crisis. People moving away from religion, and people living far away from God – a Godless society based on following desires and not guidance. Islam is the solution to every problem for every society!
إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ الْإِسْلَامُ
“Verily the only acceptable way of life with Allāh is Submission.”
“Whoever seeks a religion other than Submission, it will not be accepted from him; and in the Hereafter, he will be among the losers.”
We say to haters like Macron: ‘People come and go, and you too shall leave this earth. Nations rise and fall, and a time will come when France itself shall not exist. But rest assured, the legacy of the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and the love that all Muslims have for him shall continue to live long after you and your nation are all relegated to the ink of history books.’
أقول قولي هذا وأستغفر الله لي ولكم من كل ذنب فاستغفروه إنه هو الغفور الرحيم
Khutbah (Part II)
It is clear from the response (and silence) from world leaders where their loyalties lie. But where do our loyalties lie? Our loyalties must lie with the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam)! We should feel angered and hurt by the disgusting photographs, more than if the photos were of our own parents!
But this should not lead us to do anything the Sharia does not allow! We cannot become vigilantes and take the law into our own hands. We should defend the honour of our beloved Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) with our words and actions. We can defend our Prophet by following his Sunnah and his way. Other actions we can do include to:
Recognise that this is a test from Allāh – how will we respond and behave?
Make du’ā to Allāh – to make us worthy followers of the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) – who can pursue do his justice and defend him
Promote the positive image of the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) through his teachings
Solidarity and unity – we are one ummah. Right now our community in France is hurting and in fear. We must stand shoulder to shoulder with them. Send messages of support to CCIF, BarakaCity and other Muslims. Let them know their brothers and sisters everywhere are with them!
Take heed and build unity here and now – this type of dehumanisation of Muslims can also happen in the UK. We must come together leaving aside all differences and uniting to build our strength as a community!
Boycott all French products. This is the very least we can do. Some people argue that it will not do any good. Macron has already asked Gulf states not to boycott French goods – because he knows it will hurt French businesses. When it begins to hurt. As a prominent Muslim scholar has already said: – after insults against the Holy Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) by France and its president, will we still continue buying and selling and importing French products? If a shop owner insulted our mother, we wouldn’t buy from them ever again. This is the very least we can all do to protect the honour of our beloved Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam).
Call people to Islam. People are in need of this religion, the religion of Allāh. Mankind is in search for the true religion. Depression and suicide are on the rise, but Islam will establish happiness for all. The family system is broken, but Islam holds family values to be essential to a good life.
Raise your voice in support of Rasulullah (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and against those that insult him – tonight at 7pm GMT, join a twitter storm using the hashtag #StopMacron
We praise Allah Ta’ala and send salutations on Nabi Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam who perfected the Deen for us until the last day, leaving us with no qualms, indecision, doubt, or reference to others as to how to lead our lives and solve any issues, be they individual or collective.
Allah Ta’ala states: ‘Today I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed my blessing on you, and chosen Islam as Deen for you.’ (Surah Al-Maida, verse 3)
Hadhrat Abdullah bin Abbas Radiallahu Anhu and others explain that perfection of faith refers to the perfection of all limits, obligations, injunctions and refinements in personal and social behaviour as necessary for the true faith. Now there is no need to add to it, nor there remains any probability of a shortfall.
This document will address the following issues:
(1) Virtues of Masajid (2) Voluntary and premature wide…