MUFTI TAQI’S CORRUPT FATWA

Question
Is it permissible for women to look at the picture of any Aalim, Shaikh or Buzrug whose gives talks on YouTube, television and other social media platforms? All of these buzrugs are na-mahaarem for the women?
Answer
If there is no fear of fitnah or lust then it is permissible for women to look at a video-talk of a reliable Aalim/Shaikh. But, since fitnah cannot be initially assessed, it is therefore precautionary for women not to look at the pictures when listening to the lecturer.
(End of the corrupt fatwa)

COMMENT
The aforementioned ‘fatwa’ to the question posed by a Pakistani lady, was issued by the darul ifta of Mufti Taqi. Every Muslim with healthy Imaan regardless of him/her lacking in Islamic Knowledge can understand the stupidity and invalidity of this corrupt fatwa.
Mufti Taqi is a halaalizer of haraam pictography, hence he and his darul ifta are in tight spots when such questions are posed. In seeking to wriggle out of the tight corner, these muftis adopt stupid fence-sitting stances which highlight the silliness and butlaan (invalidity) of the ‘fatwas’ which they disgorge by way of sucking their thumbs.
Firstly, the Qur’aan Majeed prohibits men and women looking at one another. “Say to the Mu’minaat to lower their gaze and to guard their chastity……” (An-Nur, Aayat 31). The first step towards zina (fornication/adultery) is the look, hence the Qur’aan prohibits looking without restrictive conditions. That is: it is haraam to look regardless of the assumption that the look is without lust. That the look is without lust is a shaitaani hallucination of the nafs. The Qur’aanic command is not abrogated on the basis of the hallucination of the look not being accompanied by lust.
The Qur’aan commands: “Do not come near to zina.” The look takes one near, very near to zina. In all cases, at least zina of the mind and heart is the first effect of the look. Even the moron mufti acknowledges in his fatwa that the Ihtiyaat (safety/precaution) necessitates abstention from looking.
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that the zina of the eyes is in looking… and the heart desires (zina).” But this wayward mufti says that it is permissible. Furthermore, he compounds his haraam, baatil fatwa with the kufr of pictures. Thus, the sin is a compounded double one: The sin of looking, and the kufr sin of believing that the haraam picture is halaal, and deceitfully encouraging women to stare at the ugly snouts of the so-called ‘buzrugs’ who advertise themselves on the worst kind of haraam media such as youtube, facebook and the like.
As far as the prohibition of looking is concerned, the Fuqaha have ruled that if one is aroused by looking even at one’s mahram female, e.g. niece, aunt, etc., then looking at her is forbidden. In one Hadith it is mentioned: “Every eye is adulterous.”
Despite the mas’alah being so palpably clear, the mufti befogs it with his stupid nafsaani answer because he is in a quandary stemming from his halaalizing of pictures.
The correct fatwa is simple and straightforward: Pictures are haraam. It is haraam for women to look at the ugly faces of the stupid molvis, shaikhs and crank buzrugs who appear on the satanic media screens. The sin is of an aggravated kind.

THE MAJLIS VOLUME 26 NUMBER 08

GATHERINGS OF THE FRIENDS

Posted on Fri 27 January 2023
ZINA GATHERINGS OF THE FRIENDS OF IBLEES

A justifiably exasperated Sister from Durban, correctly lamenting about a group of Friends of Iblees operating in Durban with their promotion of Zina in various guises, says:

“I wrote the following message for ulema in Durban, will email Jamiat KZN. Al Ansaar is a well known radio station, organization that allows such gatherings. I am not happy about it. Im not happy about the fact that it seems okay to make Islam modern, and to give promiscuity an ‘islamic’ cover.

Message for the Ulama

“I have a question regarding a very concerned matter.

It has been brought to my attention that gatherings which are not in accordance to Shariah are taking place. A group called FRIENDS has been active for the past 6 years. The initial purpose and intention of this group was to uplift women, give them support, help guide them to the right path, especially divorced women and widows. But now it has become a gathering for the rich. Women who are supposed to be in purdah are exposed to men in these gatherings. There are no precautions taken into consideration. The laws of shariah are being blatantly flouted. There are women who even do match making against the laws of Shariah. They have groups with men and allow the women to chat.

The members who wish to join these gatherings have to pay towards the expenses of these gatherings. It’s not voluntary. It’s like a high tea-gathering for the elite and not for the poor community.

Are such gatherings allowed by the Shariah?

As a woman I know there is a limit to what I can do and cannot. When such gatherings are becoming so popular. Why are the ulema not stepping in and stopping it? A woman like me can create awareness about it being wrong but these women who are involved in initiating such evil gatherings will not stop unless the ulema tell them this is not allowed. This cannot happen. You are breaking the law of shariah.

There are so many similar incidents occurring and some sisters have reached out to me saying they asked the ulema for help, and nothing was done.

They went to the Jamiat and nothing was done. So this gives the people who are modernizing Islam more advantage because the men are not speaking up.

I feel it needs to be spoken about in the Musjids so that men can tell their wives. It needs to be spoken about in every community.

In this time of fitna and fasad, we have to start standing up against these gatherings because these women are allowing dunya’s glamor to sweep them off their feet.

Below is images of an invitation the group “FRIENDS” created . It will be held at Al Ansaar coffee shop and hall. This week. I urge you to please look into this and do something about it.

This same group, FRIENDS, is having another gathering at a bed and breakfast near the Musjid. They collaborate with Ilmsa.” (End of the Sister’s letter)

COMMENT OF THE SHARIAH

Yes, indeed this stercoraceous group of copro individuals is correctly described as ‘FRIENDS”. They are the FRIENDS of Shaitaan – the Chief Iblees. In fact they could be correctly designated as being the illegitimate progeny of Iblees. Shaitaan does have legitimate children who are devils of his ilk. But, his illegitimate progeny is made up of copro humans whom he fans out into the world as his primary agents to execute his multifarious schemes and conspiracies of fitnah and fasaad. Zaani-aat of the category of this group, not ordinary prostitutes plying their immoral trade, and Zanaadaqah who misinterpret the Qur’aan and Ahaadith to fabricate meanings as cover for their kufr and nifaaq, are among the illegitimate progeny of Iblees.

We find ourselves in this era which is the initial phase of the Age of Dajjaal. In this era of Dajjaaliyat most of the minor signs of Qiyaamah are being enacted in preparation for the final stage when Dajjaal himself will emerge as predicted by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

While we lament and Islamically rant against all agents of Dajjaal and Iblees, we should not be surprised nor weaken our resolve regarding the vital and sacred obligation of Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahyi Anil Munkar which must be perpetuated until the very last regardless of who accepts or rejects. The Ulama should not abandon Amr Bil Ma’roof because of the wide-scale, intensive and extensive prevalence of shaitaani fitnah and fasaad. The process of fitnah is incremental. It will not decrease. We are heading for Qiyaamah, and the dunya has to be destroyed. Our objective is not to provide hidaayat (guidance). Hidaayat is the prerogative exclusively of Allah Azza Wa Jal. Confirming this reality, the Qur’aan Majeed states:

“Verily, you (O Muhammad!) cannot guide whom you love. But Allah guides whomever He wills, and He knows best who are to be guided.”

This ‘Friends’ group as described by the Sister and as their pictures and write-ups further elaborate, is undoubtedly a shaitaani ZINA group of shayaateenul ins (human devils) which Iblees has harnessed to lure stupid women into his snare of immorality, vice and Zina. All the women who are taking a leading role in the implementation of the Zina Plot of Shaitaan are confirmed zaani-aat who are being handled and mishandled by the zaani menfolk. The evil men in whose hands Shaitaan has placed the reins of this extremely jahannami insidious plot of zina has most cunningly trapped the prostitutes into the plot of Iblees.

These zaani-aat are satanically camouflaged as self-esteem coaches, psychiatrists, reflexocologists, coprocologists, najaasatocologists, sataniocologists, dajjaalocologists, etc., etc. Understand well, that all ‘psychiatrists’ and ‘counsellors’ are agents of Iblees. Whatever they dole out as ‘advice’ and ‘therapy’ are satanic ‘sciences’ inspired by Iblees. Only such ignorant Muslims whose Imaan dwells in the doldrums of moral corruption, who are bereft of any Yaqeen in Allah Ta’ala, visit such she and he-devils for advice. These villains who are qualified in the satanic ‘science’ of psychiatry and the like are in the same category as fortune-tellers and satanic astrologers. Your Imaan dangles by a thread when you visit these shaitaani rubbishes, and your Imaan says ‘goodbye’ to you after you emerge with confidence from these agents of Iblees.

The Sister is justified for her extremely mild criticism of the Durban Ulama for their silence. She mentions that this ‘Friends’ group of shaitaani zaani-aat has been inexistence in Durban since the past six years. It was therefore necessary for the Ulama to have castigated and excoriated this haraam, zina group operated by the Illegitimate Daughters of Iblees. The silence of the Ulama is a primary cause for sin and vice becoming indurate and embedded in the community.

While most Muslims in this age are absolutely jaahil, corrupt and evil, numerous among them are sincere and genuinely astray. Amr Bil Ma’roof will benefit such ignoramuses. As for the zaani-aat who are executing the plot of Iblees and who are operating under the appellation, ‘Friends’, there is no hope of reformation for them. They are not like ordinary prostitutes who are in the business only for money. While there is always hope for the reformation of commercial prostitutes, there is no hope whatsoever for such ZAANI-AAT who are the agents of Iblees – whose function it is to entrap other stupid women who have the tendencies of prostitutes.

The Qur’aan Majeed negates hope of reformation for these kind of copro-hybrid human-devils. In regard to the progeny of Shaitaan, Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed:

“We have created numerous humans and jinn (specifically) as fuel for Jahannam.”

The Qur’aan describing the fodder of Hell-Fire variously epithelizes them as “Wuqooun Naar and Hasabu Jahannam.

The shameless intermingling of the sexes, the satanic match-making, the shaitaani glamour of tea parties, and the very satanic attitudes associated with this shaitaani group of copro individuals are some of the factors which even stupid Muslims can understand why this group is HARAAM and why their shaitaani functions are HARAAM.

“O People of Imaan! Save yourselves and your familes from the Fire… (Qur’aan)

Do not fall into the shaitaani trap of this shaitaani “Friends’ group consisting of human devils.

5 Rajab 1444 – 27 January 2023

Ulama Retirement Fund

Posted on 

Ulama Retirement Fund

QUESTION

Please comment on  Darul Iftaa Mahmudiyya’s  proposal of a retirement fund for Ulama. Does this fund have Islamic credibility? Something does not seem right with this fund. Please study the attached proposal.

ANSWER

It is your Imaani conscience which indicates to you that “something is wrong” with the retirement proposal. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Sin is that which agitates  your conscience.” It is a proposal  in conflict with both Islamic teaching and  Islamic spirit. The proposal sets Allah Ta’ala aside.  It fails to understand that the Rizq of all creation is the responsibility of Allah Azza Wa Jal, and that Rizq is predetermined and sealed, hence Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: 

“Rizq is sealed, and the  one of greed is deprived.”

The proposal is the effect of doubting the Razzaaqiyat of Allah Who is the Sole Provider.  He says in the Qur’aan Majeed: “Many are the animals  which do not load their rizq on their backs. It is Allah Who provides their rizq and your rizq.” 

The proposal is in keeping with kuffaar ethos and the capitalist system.  The proposal is remarkably oblivious of the objective of Ilm-e-Deen and of the Darul Ulooms. In fact, the Darul Ulooms of today are largely ignorant of the Maqsood of Ilm, hence Deeni Knowledge is imparted for the sake of the dunya, for the attainment of mundane goals. The Darul Ulooms have become signs of Qiyaamah. According to the Hadith, among the signs of Qiyaamah, is that the Knowledge of the Deen will be imparted for purposes other than the Deen, and acts of the Deen will be for the sake of worldly gains.

Why Does Saudi Arabia Imprison Islamic Scholars? Understanding the Sahwa Movement

On August 2, 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, causing an international uproar. Under the guise of fearing an Iraqi attack, the Saudi regime invited American troops to protect its borders. This was the first time the Kingdom allowed non-Muslim forces into the land of the Haramain, the Two Holy Mosques. This decision gave rise to a group which stood in opposition against the royal family: the “Sahwa” (short for al-Sahwa al-Islamiyya, “The Islamic Awakening”).

The thing that distinguished the Sahwa Movement was its ability to attract tens of thousands of young men to denounce the American presence. What started as an outburst of anger was soon organized into a Movement, and two leaders, Safar al-Hawali and Salman al-‘Awda, came into prominence. After publishing a ‘Letter of Demands’ and forming a ‘Committee for the Defense of Legitimate Rights,’ the state responded by imprisoning hundreds of Sahwa activists along with several of its leaders, including al-‘Awda and al-Hawali.

The Movement came to an end in 2017 when the new crown prince assumed power. He declared an end to the Sahwa Movement by imprisoning its scholars once again and declaring a return to “moderate Islam.”[1] Apparently the Saudi state’s idea of ‘moderate’ Islam is one in which Halloween is celebratedconcerts are proliferated, and hedonistic festivals involving the Statue of Liberty are legitimated.

To understand what the Sahwa Movement is; and why the Saudi regime perceives it as a threat, we must first venture back in time to understand its emergence, its ideas and the threat it poses against the Saudi project of liberalization.

The Muslim Brotherhood

The Muslim Brotherhood was established in Egypt in 1928 by its founder, Hasan al-Banna (1906-1949), who was a student of Rashīd Ridā. Ridā was a fierce opponent of freemasonry’s introduction into Egypt by Jamāl al-Dīn al-Afghānī and his student Muḥammad ‘Abduh. He was also a staunch opponent of the Zionist Movement, and these anti-Western ideas inspired the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood.

For more on these three individuals⁠—and Muḥammad ‘Abduh in particular—see: Muhammad ‘Abduh: Leading 19th Century Modernist Reformer

In the December of 1954, the Brotherhood was accused of being behind an assassination attempt against Gamal Abdel Nasser which led to a series of repressive measures, and in 1965 the movement took a decisive turn that would forever change its image. Nasser had set up concentration camps for the Muslim Brotherhood members, and it was there that the thoughts of Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966) developed.

Contrary to al-Banna, who believed that preaching (da’wah) was the path to society’s reform, Qutb believed that the structural barriers which prevent the shari’a from being implemented must be removed first:

Those who have usurped the authority of Allah Almighty and are oppressing Allah’s creatures are not going to give up their power merely through preaching; if it had been so, the task of establishing Allah’s religion in the world would have been very easy for the Prophets of Allah.[2]

The Arab Cold War

During the decolonization years following World War II, authoritarian nationalist regimes came to power in the Middle East. These regimes were weary of the growing popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood. They subjected the movement to harsh repression, and many of its members had to flee in order to survive. Following Nasser’s first wave of repression in 1954, many Brotherhood members found refuge in Saudi Arabia.

Until the late 1950s, the Brothers in Saudi Arabia remained politically inactive, but as the geopolitical situation changed between the West and the Soviet Union, regional rivalries increased. Saudi Arabia sided with the United States, while Nasser’s Egypt sided with the Soviet Union. The development marked the onset of the Arab cold war where the Brotherhood became a pivotal player on the Saudi stage.[3]

To counter Nasser’s pan-Arab socialism, king Faysal made Islam the kingdom’s chief symbolic resource. With the help of the Brothers, he introduced ‘Islamic Unity’ as an alternative to Nasser’s Arab nationalism. To further this goal, he established the Islamic University of Medina in 1961 to be run by those “who have been driven from their country after having been robbed, abused and tortured,” a direct reference to the Muslim Brotherhood members.[4]

At King Abd al-Aziz University in Jeddah and its annex in Mecca which became Umm al-Qura University in 1981, the Muslim Brotherhood was in the majority from the beginning. Among the most famous faculty members was Muhammad Qutb, Sayyid Qutb’s younger brother. A significant number of the most renowned members of the Muslim Brotherhood thus became teachers in Saudi Arabia and dominated the institutions during the 1970s and the ’80s. They also made up the majority of the personnel within the secondary schools:[5]

Saudi Arabia in the 1960s thus experienced a massive influx into the local religious field of an exogenous tradition, that of the Muslim Brotherhood and the establishment of institutions that were largely in its service in both form and content. This transplantation was the source of a vast social movement that produced its own counterculture and its own organizations and, through the educational system, soon reached almost all the fields of the social arena.[6]

The Emergence of the Sahwa

This social movement was known as al-Sahwa al-Islamiyya (The Islamic Awakening), or just the “Sahwa.” The ideology of the Sahwa was a kind of mix between two different ways of looking at the world: the legacy of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and the legacy of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The tradition of the Muslim Brotherhood is primarily political and was constructed against the imperial west. The legacy of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab on the other hand was primarily focused on his understanding of tawhid and thereby purifying Islam from the innovations (bida’) that had been introduced into Islam, which were unknown to the first three generations of Muslims (as-Salaf as-Saaliheen).

The two traditions were thus completely distinct and had their own areas of focus. They complemented each other and laid the groundwork for the emergence of the Sahwa through the Saudi educational system which was dominated by the methods and thinking of the Muslim Brotherhood who, in their Saudi variant, had adopted the ‘aqida of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.

The intellectual father of the Sahwa Movement is Muhammad Qutb. Born in Egypt in 1919, he grew up in the shadow of his older brother Sayyid Qutb. After spending six years in prison and witnessing the death-by-hanging of his brother in 1966, he decided to emigrate to Saudi Arabia in 1971. Here he was appointed professor at the Faculty of Shari’a in Mecca.

Qutb was very successful in merging the legacy of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and that of his older brother. He added a fourth pillar to the original three forms of tawhid described by Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, which he called tawhid al-hākimiyya, meaning that Allah alone must be sovereign. What he meant by Allah alone being the sovereign was that any hākim (ruler) who ruled by other than what Allah had sent down, was violating the tawhid of Allah.

This was in direct violation to the international system established in the wake of the first world war, where the Caliphate had been dismantled and the Islamic Empire had been broken up into several nation states that were governing by other than what Allah had sent down, opting instead for secular constitutions formed on the script left behind by the Western colonizers.

This notion of tawhid not being complete until the shari’a had sovereignty over the ruler, was an idea that would later dominate the Sahwi thinking and their criticism of the Saudi regime.

RELATION: The Logical Necessity of the Caliphate

An Opposition Begins to Take Form

Inspired by the ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, a new generation of Saudi citizens grew up. They had attended the youth camps set up by the Sahwa, where the focus had been on Islamic tarbiya, invoking pride in the Muslim identity and a sense of responsibility towards Muslims around the world. They had been infused with the idea that religion and politics were not two separate entities but rather that Islam was to be viewed as a holistic way of life, encompassing all areas of society.

Traditionally, the political arena had been allocated to the Al-Saud (Saudi ruling family), but with a new generation of intellectuals, scholars, and activists who felt sidelined by the political and religious elites, a new sense of responsibility and confidence in their right to speak out against injustice began to take form.

On August 13, 1990, the Council of the Committee of Senior Ulema (Hay’at kibar al-‘ulama) held a meeting in which they issued a fatwa supporting “the actions decided on by the leader to call upon qualified forces possessing equipment provoking fear and terror in those who would like to commit aggression against this country.”[7]

The Sahwi ulema reacted vehemently against this fatwa. They denounced the religious authorities’ support for the move to bring US forces to the land of the Two Holy Mosques and challenged the fatwa directly.

Safar al-Hawali published a paper called Leading the Ulema of the Umma out of Confusion. Herein he criticized the Saudi ulema for not having a proper understanding of fiqh al-wāqi’, meaning they did not have an accurate understanding of the geopolitical reality, which was leading them to an erroneous conclusion regarding the matter.

Salmān al-‘Awda delivered a lecture titled “The Causes of the Collapse of States,” in which he presented a vision of Saudi politics, emphasizing what a state should not do if it wanted its legitimacy to endure. Drawing on the writings of Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), he described twelve causes that were likely to lead to the collapse of a state, among which were the moral and economic corruption of its governing apparatus, the oppression imposed by its leaders and the absence of consultation (shura) in decision making. In a not-so-subtle allusion to the regime, he stated:

Some states were founded on the basis of religion, to protect and propagate it, to implement the principle of commanding right and forbidding wrong, and to apply shari’a… As long as a state [like this] remains faithful to its foundation and to the purpose for which it was built, it cannot fail to remain powerful, respected, and unconquered, because it has the support of its population. But if it moves away from its founding rationale … it loses the reason for its existence, and its first supporters abandon it… while it shows itself unable to win new support, which causes its collapse.[8]

The state responded by cracking down on the Sahwa Movement and imprisoning both al-‘Awda and al-Hawali. In the end, what the Sahwa wanted was to advise the Saudi Kingdom and warn them against the path they were on, but the regime interpreted the Sahwa demands as a threat and as interfering in their domain of politics. For the first time in its history, the Saudi Political arrangement was shaken. An arrangement that had seemed stable since its inception in 1932.

A Generation of Consumers, Not Thinkers

With the latest crown prince, the regime decided to end the Sahwa Movement once and for all. The new government had spared no one, not secular activists and certainly not Islamic activists. Anyone that was deemed to be a threat to Vision 2030 of liberalizing Saudi society has been preemptively neutralized. This includes al-‘Awdah, al-Hawali, Ali al-Omari, Awad al-Qarni and many others who have once again been imprisoned following a crackdown in 2017.

RELATED: Saudi Arabia’s Dystopian Line City: Can Technology Replace Nature?

The regime decided to remove the voices of those that advocate for real change in the Kingdom. Instead of real reform, the regime has decided to rely on an illusion of reform, where it feeds the youth with endless streams of entertainment and superficial changes that pose no threat to the royal family. Instead of fostering a generation of independent and strong Islamic thinkers, they are fostering a generation of Netflix-watching, roller coaster riding, rock concert listening superficial citizens sedated into compliance and obedience.

Those who are defiant have been decisively scared off by the example that was made of Khashoggi and the arrest of those ulema who are critical of the Saudi liberalization project. With those actions, the regime made it clear that no dissenting voices would be tolerated.

The Islamic Awakening has officially ended, but you cannot extinguish an idea. The idea that Islam has a role to play on a societal level. That Islam came as a complete way of life and not something to be relegated to the four corners of your home. We long for a true Muslim society today where the shari’a is above the ruler, and this is not something that is unattainable. We had it once before (al-Khulafā al-Rāshidūn), and we can have it again, in shā Allah.

RELATED: The Concept of Khilāfah in Islam

Notes

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/24/i-will-return-saudi-arabia-moderate-islam-crown-prince

[2] Sayyid Qutb, Ma’alim fi-l-tareeq (Milestones), p. 68.

[3] Lacroix, Stéphane. Awakening Islam, Harvard University Press, 2011, p. 40.

[4] Ibid., p. 42.

[5] Ibid., pp. 44-45.

[6] Ibid., p. 51.

[7] Charles Kurzman, Pro-U.S. Fatwas, in MIDDLE EAST POLICY, VOL. X, NO. 3, FALL 2003, p. 157.

[8] Salman al-’Awda, ”Asbab suqut al-duwal,” recorded lecture, August 28, 1990.

MuslimSkeptic 

Practicing On The Ahaadeeth Without The Supervision Of A Teacher

If someone feels that he is capable of practicing the Qur’aan and Ahaadeeth without an ustaad after having studied a little Arabic or after residing for a while in an Arab country and learning elementary Arabic, or due to him having a good ability of understanding and reasoning, then he has fallen into deception. This is irrational and foolish. It is imperative to study under the guidance of an ustaad. There are so many Ahaadeeth that cannot be understood without an ustaad (teacher).

For example, it appears in one hadeeth that Nabi Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam said, ” An excellent person is he who does not possess a flourishing business, unknown to others and engages in ‘ibaadah (worship) in seclusion and in the open.” Thereafter the narrator said, “Nabi Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam tested the quality of the coin.”

One will unable to understand the meaning of testing the quality of the coin without professional guidance. The Ustaad will explain in ancient times people used to place the coin between the thumb and middle finger and click their fingers causing the coin to give off a sound, through which the quality of the coin would be understood. In the similar manner, Nabi Sallallahu Alaihi Wa Sallam clicked his fingers, indicating the speedy departure of the this person from the world. Only a few will cry over him and he has a very small estate. (Mishkaat Vol.2 Pg 442)

Similarly, in the past there was no tradition of placing nuqtaa (dots for the alphabets). The names of several narrators are such that when written without dots they appear identical. For example, one narrators name is حبّاط Habbaat. A second narrators name is خيّاط Khayyat and a third’s name is حنّاط Hannat.

When these names are written without dots, they all appear identical . How will one be able to differentiate between them without the guidance of an ustaad? There are some names that will be confusing even if dots are placed. One narrator’s name is أسيد – Aseed. A second narrator’s name is أسيد – Usayd and a third’s name is أسيّد Usayyad. The names seem alike despite the dots being placed and only through the ustaad (teacher), will one be able to identify the name.

Pg 138, Malfoozat Of Faqeehul-Ummah

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,
Was-salaam,

ASSALAMU ALAIKUM
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.

Was-salaam

A.S.Desai

SALAAT AND SAUM IN ‘ABNORMAL’ TIME ZONES

SALAAT AND SAUM IN ‘ABNORMAL’ TIME ZONES

In some regions in proximity to the North Pole, e.g. Norway, the times in relation to the rest of the world are abnormal. Some days after sunset and even before disappearance of shufuq abyadh (the whitish glow in the western horizon after the redish glow), the sun rises. Thus, the time of Isha does not set in. In some regions the sun remains above the horizon for six months, and in some places it is night for six months.

       The classical Fuqaha had discussed and elaborated on this issue. According to one group of Fuqaha, Isha and all other Salaat remain obligatory and have to be performed in view of the command of five Fardh Salaat daily, which is substantiated by the Sunnah.

       The Sunnah has not excluded any land from this obligation. These Fuqaha base their ruling on the Hadith which says that during the era of Dajjal there will be a day the equivalent of one year. It will be a long day. The Sahaabah queried the performance of Salaat on that day. Will only five Salat be performed in that marathon day of a year? Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) explained that the times of Salaat will be calculated. That is: Five Salaat for every 24 hours.

       According to the other Fuqaha, the five Salaat are conditional with their five specific times. If the incidence of a specific Salaat time does not develop in a region, then that particular Salaat is waived. They present the analogy of Wudhu which has Four Fardh acts according to the Hanafi Math-hab. If both feet have been amputated, the fardh of washing the feet falls away. Similarly, the Fardh Salaat will be waived if its time does not develop in many regions.

       Regarding the Hadith pertaining to the era of Dajjaal, these Fuqaha are of the opinion that since it is in conflict with Qiyaas (Analogical Reason), it may not be presented as a basis for a ruling. In terms of the Usool of Fiqh, the Khilaaf-e-Qiyaas narration shall be confined to its original purpose and not be used as a basis for extrapolation for extending the ruling to another issue.

       Shaikh Akbar Muhayyuddeen Ibn Arabi (rahmatullah alayh) has elucidated this issue in his Futuhaat.  According to him, the event of the long day during the era of Dajjaal will in reality not be one year literally. The times of Salaat will be normal. However, due to the deception of Dajjaal people will not observe the movement of the sun, sunrise and sunset. The people will perceive this day to be as long as a year.

Download booklet