Q. Is it permissible to use Musjid premises as vaccination centres?
A. Most certainly it is haraam to use Musjid premises or any other premises for the haraam satanic vaccination plot of the kuffaar. These munaafiqeen are converting the Musaajid into weird temples. In addition, it is kufr in view of the fact that it is the voluntary and happy submission to the kufr of the atheist who along with their mushrik consorts of bygone times are in denial of explicit and emphatic declaration of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) who delivered to the Ummah the Message of Allah Azza Wa Jal, namely: “LAA ADWAA” There is no contagion.” Only one who is ma’loomun nifaaq (whose hypocrisy is confirmed) will dump the crystal clear command of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to lap up the filth and najaasat which these atheists excrete into their mouths. So while these human devils profess to be Muslims, their nifaaq is confirmed. Salaat behind these moron, munaafiq molvis masquerading as Muslims should be repeated. Their nifaaq becomes glaringly conspicuous when they resort to weird interpretation, NOT to reconcile any seemingly contradiction between the Ahaadith, but in order to NEGATE what Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said and ordered regarding plagues and diseases. The brains of these moron and jaahil muftis have been divinely smeared with filth. About these enemies of Islam from within, the Qur’aan Majeed states: “Thus, Allah casts (smears) RIJS on those who cannot understand.” The only factor which negates valid understanding is nifaaq and kufr.
FROM THE MAJLIS VOLUME 26 NUMBER 01
Q. The Ulama in UK are of the opinion that we should attend the Musaajid and observe social distancing and the other covid protocols, They say that we should not make the Musaajid desolate by staying away. Is this opinion correct?
A. We are not in agreement with the view of the UK ulama regarding the Musaajid. It is better that the Musaajid remain desolate than converting them into weird temples. Of greater importance is to observe the Shariah in its original form. If this cannot be executed in the Musaajid, then we can do it elsewhere. Furthermore, the U.K. Ulama are complicit with the kuffaar government in the plot to demolish Islam regardless if their complicity is unintentional or due to short-sightedness. The U.K Ulama have introduced the kufr protocols even prior to the government’s actual imposition, and they are worse than the kuffaar in their enthusiasm to bootlick the government which they demonstrate by rigid enforcement of the kufr protocols of the atheists. The conduct of the UK Ulama is scandalous and treacherous. They are the primary cause for the closure and desolation of the Musaajid. They are among the worst of the evil ulama on earth today. Another fact of great importance is that the Musaajid have been cursing Muslims who were violating their huqooq. The kuffaar government is a tiny cog in the Athaab machinery of Allah Azza Wa Jal. They are being divinely used to inflict punishment on this treacherous Ummah.
Q. A few Musallis of our Musjid have decided to break the lock which the trustees have put on the Musjid door, and have their own Jamaat Salaat according to the Sunnah. Is this permissible?
A. It is permissible and commendable. The Musjid is not the property of the trustee devils. They did not inherit the Musjid from their fathers. The Musallis have the right to dismiss the trustees and to appoint other trustees who will not conduct themselves as these munaafiqeen do.
DISEASE IS AVERTED FROM THE MUSAAJID – SAID OUR NABI (SALLALLAHU ALAYHI WASALLAM)
THE DENIER IS A MORON
Question: The Majlis quoted a Hadith which states that when disease / calamity descends from the sky it is deflected from the Musaajid. An anonymous maulana claims that this Hadith is a false attribution to Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Is the Hadith authentic? Please comment on the claim of the maulana.
Answer: What the moron said is false. Briefly, this maulana character is a moron at the minimum. His stupidity is perfect. He is bankrupt in the knowledge of Hadith. Our advice is that thispaper ‘muhaddith, and moron ‘mujtahid’ should apprize himself of the rudiments of Istinja to ensure that his act of cleansing himself is valid. Invalid Istinja has a detrimental effect on the brains of a person who has gleaned a smattering of ‘knowledge’. In view of intellectual dysfunctionalism, the fellow simply disgorged some egoistic drivel without understanding the gravity of branding a Saheeh Hadith ‘false’ and a ‘lie’.
Nowadays, neo-Salafis and stupid so-called ‘deobandis’ who lack in Ilmi expertise are the victims of moronic Salafi anti-Hadith propaganda. As a result these moron molvis who have become too big for their boots suffer from the malady of deglutition. They lap up just any drivel the Salafis excrete.
The Hadith is authentic and has been affirmed by senior Muhadditheen and Fuqaha who were experts and well aware of the conditions for authenticity of Ahaadith many many centuries prior to this moron molvi appearing on earth. The few lines which the moron has written in his silly attempt to brand the Hadith false portrays his stupidity and total lack of understanding. His expertise in the sphere of Hadith is a conspicuous NIL.
This is a very brief comment on the stupid denial of the authenticity of the Hadith by the anonymous molvi. In view of the pedestal of authenticity assigned to the Hadith by the Fuqaha, there is really no need to waste time with the drivel the moron has disgorged. One of the Signs of Qiyaamah is the denial of Ahaadith which have been accepted and used as Mustadallaat by the Authorities of the Shariah from the era of the Salafus Saaliheen.
The limit of the stupid ‘knowledge’ of all of these Salafi and neo-Salafi morons is Al-Baani who passed away just yesterday.
The acceptance by the Fuqaha of a Hadith is the highest category of authentication which overrides the views of even the greatest Muhadditheen.
15 Jamaadiyu Thaani 1442 – 29 January 2021
“DISEASE IS DIVERTED FROM THE MUSJID” — SO SAID RASULULLAH
(SALLALLAHU ALAYHI WASALLAM)
Question: According to a Hadith published by The Majlis, people in a Musjid are safe from contracting any disease. A Mufti says that it is possible for a disease to be contracted in a Musjid. What is the correct interpretation for the Hadith? Is the Mufti right?
The Hadith in question is: “When disease descends from the sky, it is diverted from the people of the Musaajid.”
Now, when Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that disease is diverted away from the Musjid, it is imperative for the Mufti Sahib to renew his Imaan. His implied refutation of the categorical negation of disease in the Musjid by our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is kufr. The Hadith is sufficient for us, the Mu’mineen. There is no need for lopsided interpretation to accommodate zigzag fatwas which are the inspirations of Iblees, and which are pliantly designed for acceptance by sceptic minds which incline to kufr. What the Mufti said is baseless and stems from doubt and uncertainty.
Disease descending from the sky is turned away from the Musaajid. Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said so with emphasis just as he proclaimed Laa adwaa (Disease is not contagious). This is absolute. Thus, no one will contract the disease in the Musjid as the super-munaafiqeen claim. If a musalli contracts the disease, it does not follow that he had contracted it inside the Musjid. He acquired the disease outside the Musjid by the decree of Allah Ta’ala. So if a diseased person comes to the Musjid it does not follow that he became diseased inside the Musjid. He came from outside with the disease.
There was no need for the Mufti to have embarked on his unnecessary exposition and baatil extrapolation which ostensibly is in refutation of the claim of Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
Furthermore, if a munaafiq becomes afflicted with the disease in the Musjid, it simply means that Allah’s Athaab has overtaken him. There is no place for the munaafiq to hide and to save himself from Allah’s Athaab. While the descending disease dare not afflict the Mu’mineen, the munaafiq is divinely earmarked for Allah’s athaab, hence the Musjid offers no succour for him. The athaab befalling the Munaafiq in the Musjid in no way whatsoever negates the veracity of our Nabi’s categorical claim.
It is correct that the virus will not afflict one in the Musjid because Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said so. Hitherto no one has proved nor can prove that anyone contracted the covid satanism inside the Musjid.
It is incorrect to understand that the plague can enter the Musjid on account of it being a mercy and a cause for Shahaadat. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that a plague will not settle in a Musjid, and this was said bilaa tafseel. The hukm is general, without exceptions, hence may not be restricted, watered down or assailed with zigzaggery by means of personal opinion to titillate the palates of those whose Imaan is riddled with doubt and uncertainty to the degree of kufr.
There is no reason for interpreting away the clear, apparent (zaahiri) meaning of the Hadith. There is no other Hadith conflicting with this Hadith. Hence there is no need for reconciling conflicting narrations with any interpretation. If some decrepit mind conjectures some mirage of conflict based on an oblique vision of realities on the ground, then the safest for his Imaan is to hammer out an interpretation to argue away into oblivion the ostensible contradiction. But never should he resort to an interpretation which will entangle him in kufr.
Kufr has become a norm in the Ummah. There is an imperative need for extra-diligence when dealing with Ahaadith which appear contradictory to minds scarred and jarred by the flotsam of kufr spewed out by the university education. While the Qur’aan emphatically declares: “This is the Kitaab. There is not the slightest doubt in it”, the brains of Muslims of this era have become necrotized with doubts, uncertainly and even downright kufr, hence the stupid apologetic baseless interpretations in the kufr bid to appease the convoluted brains of the modernist zindeeqs such as the KUFFAAR medical doctors whose kufr, the juhhaal molvis are lapping up. Allah Ta’ala says:
“The Haqq is from your Rabb, therefore, do not become of the doubters.”
While HIZBUSH SHAITAAN, bootlicking the Atheists says that the Musjid is a ‘super-spreader” of disease, Allah Ta’ala, via His Nabi says that disease which descends from the sky is diverted away from the Musjid.
6 Jamaadiyu Thaani 1442 – 20 January 2021
WHAT THE KUFFAAR AND THE MUNAAFIQEEN SAY……..
THE MUNAAFIQEEN OF HIZBUSH SHAITAAN (The Legion of the Devil) SAY THAT THE MUSAAJID OF ALLAH TA’ALA ARE
“SUPER SPREADERS OF THE DISEASE”.
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT SAYS THAT THE MUSAAJID ARE
ALLAH TA’ALA SAYS IN THE QUR’AAN:
“WHO IS A GREATER ZAALIM (TYRANT/OPPRESSOR)
THAN THE ONE WHO PREVENTS THE THIKR OF ALLAH IN THE MUSAAJID WHILE HE STRIVES TO RUIN THE MUSAAJID?
HIZBUSH SHAITAAN (THE LEGION OF SHAITAAN)-
- TAQI UTHMANI
- TAHA KARAAN
- REVEREND ABRAHAM BHAM
- ZUBAYR BHAYAT
- SOLOMON RAVAT
- EBRAHIM DESAI
- NNB JAMIAT OF FORDSBURG
- MJC (CARTEL MUNAFIQEEN)
- UK WIFAAQUL ULAMA
- UK BRITISH BOARD OF IMAMS AND SCHOLARS.
SO BEWARE OF THEM!
BEWARE OF THE SCOUNDRELS WHO PILLAGE AND PLUNDER
IMAAN AND AKHLAAQ!!!
20 Jamaadil Awwal 1442 – 4 January 2021
DECIMATION AND DESECRATION OF OUR MUSAAJID, MADAARIS AND MAKAATIB
By A Brother from U.K.
‘They have taken their rabbis and their monks-as well as the Maseeh, son of Mary-for their lords beside Allah, although they had been bidden to worship none but the One Allah, save whom there is no deity: the One who is utterly remote, in His limitless glory, from anything to which they may ascribe a share in His divinity!’ (Glorious Qur’an, 9:31)
Today we are witnessing the total transformation of our Masaajid and Madaris into Theatres/Stages for the final appearance of Dajjal. Neither our Masaajid nor our Madaris any longer appear to have a spiritual link to the Office of Nabuwwat and the Maslak of our Salf-e-Saalihoon (pious predecessors).
Copies of the Glorious Quran have been removed, by Muslims themselves, from shelves and placed in storage – out of bounds. No atheist government official nor any law enforcement officer entered our Masaajid to even suggest let alone remove them. A conglomerate of Munaafiq Councils and treacherous Maulvis/Muftis masquerading as senior scholars and shuyook issued disgraceful bootlicking guidelines, verdicts, posters and categorised even the wearing of Shaytaan’s niqab as Waajib. Like supine and spineless morons, other Imam’s, Maulvis, trustees, committees and Muslim medical personnel latched onto these guidelines like vultures and scared witless, implemented them without question.
O Muslims! Not a single person is observed reciting the Glorious Qur’an in our Masaajid now – it has been snatched away from our hands whilst there are thousands of Huffaz and Maulvis in our midst.
If this rate of degeneration continues, how long before it is snatched away from our hearts?
In reality, it already has for the overwhelming majority of Huffaz who remain are now Ramadhaani Hafiz – they can only swat up the few Rukus they are due to recite in Taraweeh – and with calls for lockdown to continue until next Ramadhaan, the damage to this unique institution of Hifz will be dramatic as calls are heard to reduce Taraweeh from 20 Rakaats to 8.
This was the first time in history of Haram Shareef and Masjid An Nabawee where only 8 Rakaats of Taraweeh were recited. Elsewhere in Arabia, the Wahaabi/Salafi had managed to reduce it to 8 Rakaats – but even they had not dared to instigate such measures in Haramain Sharifain until today.
The headlong plunge of taking the Madrasah atmosphere away from the Cave of Hira and onto online platforms has already seen traditional Madrasah Talabah Numbers and attendance dramatically reduced.
Enter the ubiquitous ‘Koran Club;’ where hybrid Munaafiq Maulvis, Apas and Muslim Teachers treat the Glorious Quran, with connivance of Muslim Parents as another subject in the curriculum to be taught as an act of convenience so everybody is free by 5pm. What atheist education officials had tried for centuries to achieve, namely cut the Muslim child off from the Glorious Quran and Maktab, Muslims themselves have enacted with their own hands.
Some jerk has already rendered Juz Amma into a comic version and it has circulated within Ulama Forums without a murmur. Offer some naseehah to any of these celebrity shaykhs and their lackeys will raise a furore – but not a word from any Maulvi when the Glorious Quran is either withdrawn, shelved or reduced to a comic. Now online lessons are replacing the age-old Maktab system. Websites are springing up offering diplomas and certificates, all for a fee. Pictures of Celebrity Shaykhs and Female Tutors appear (sometime superimposed together) on glossy posters and flyers, approving all these businesses, programs, seminars, workshops, etc, etc.
As Masjid donations and Madrsah fees continue to drop, Maulvis have come up with promoting Maulviwood (televised programs) to welcome the ‘return’ of Makshoofaat into our Masajid.
The rulings and fatwas of Ameerul Mumineen t and Umm ul Mumineen t prohibiting Masjid attendance for Ladies are brushed away by liberal Maulvis themselves. They will not hesitate to use gender-equality, LGBT and a host of other atheist government laws to hoist upon the Masaajid their ploys. To attract ladies and remove all barriers, it was necessary for these Celebrity Shaykhs to first enter Muslim homes via the media of YouTube, Netflix, Facebook and WhatsApp.
Under guise of promoting Islamic Values, History, Heroes, Heroin’s and the ubiquitous call for Islaah, Turkish Drama’s and Tours to Balkans were widely promoted within Muslim Circles (at a national and international level) by this new breed of Maulvis, Muftis and Shuyookh.
Such Celebrity Shaykha will embark on an all-expense paid tour with a film crew (Khuddam) in attendance – to photograph, video-record and write up these grand tours, revival of the Ottoman Empire and ‘Halal Holidays’ in Balkans, Bodrum, Antalya, Marmaris, Masjid Aqsa, etc., etc.
Surreptitiously, Muslim minds are being conditioned to accept the appearance of firstly, Makshoofaat and thereafter Dajjal in these bizarre temples. The majority of men, especially the Huffaz, Maulvis and Tableegh Jamaat brethren have for one nafsaani reason or another – stopped attending Masaajid – the void will now be filled by Makhshoofaat. Anarchy will reign – as this gender fights its way incrementally onto Masaajid and Madrasah Committees with their promise of donations, jewellery, gifts and picnic hampers.
In desperation, mercenary Maulvis, Imams, Crank Sufis and Vainglorious Trustees will accept all their demands – quoting fictitious government rules, regulations and guidelines. Token separate entrances and screened areas will be designated as a precursor to full intermingling and the appearance of Dajjal.
First, we witnessed the appearance of gawdy TFT Monitors on Masaajid Walls, apparently to display Salaah Times and Sunnah Du’a. Now, these very screens are being used to promote collection and appeal for so-called worthy causes. Already Qira’at, Naat, Nazm, Islaahi Programs and Tours of Celebrity Shaykhs are being broadcasted. Thereafter so-called Islamic Drama Programs will follow.
The Masjid will open a few minutes before a sham performance of Fardh Salaah – despite many congregating outside before and after, nobody will be able to stand together in Jamaat, or perform Tahayatul Masjid or Wudhu herein. Immediately thereafter the handful of Musallees who attended will make way for the exit and the Masjid is locked. Before our Masaajid were scented with perfume – now these temples are sprayed with alcoholic desanitizers. Even the humble Madrasah bench (patla) is wiped umpteen times and despoiled with chemicals before a child may place his kutub thereupon. Priests will argue over the percentage content, source of alcohol and permissibility thereof and the fiqh ruling of Covid 19 measures – but the reality is every single act of defilement possible has already been enacted.
The reason why Allah Ta’ala has highlighted in the Glorious Quran the treachery of the Banu Isra’eel Ulama is to warn the Maulvis of this Ummah not to follow in their footsteps; not to commit the same blunders of compromising and diluting Deeni Ahqams; not to bootlick the wealthy and affluent for pecuniary gain. If Maulvis continue to do so, the same fate which affected the Banu Israeel awaits us…
‘And do not overlay the Haqq with falsehood, and do not knowingly suppress the Haqq…’ (Glorious Qur’an, 2:42)
11 Safar 1442 – 29 September 2020
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“Laughing in the Musjid will be zulmat (darkness) in the grave.”
“Conversation in the Musjid devours good deeds just as cattle devour grass.”
Numerous among the Ulama and the Tabligh Jamaat are lamentably oblivious of the prohibition of conversing and laughing inside the Musjid. At times their talk is so loud as to be a befitting sign of Qiyaamah.
Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that among the signs of Qiyaamah is that “voices will become loud in the Musaajid.”
The worst culprits in this misdeed are the so called people of piety –
molvis and tableeghis.
Even whilst the Athaan is being proclaimed, they continue private discussions right inside the Musjid.
Laughter and worldly talk are sacrilegious inside the Musjid.
When even reciting the Qur’aan Majeed loudly in the Musjid is not permissible when musallis are present, how can indulgence in worldly conversation and laughter ever be permissible? The total indifference in this regard renders these misdeeds kabeerah (major sins).
They say history is the biography of great men and women. Well, history is also the story of great buildings. This case is rarely more painfully obvious than when it comes to identity of The Hagia Sophia or Aya Sofia (“the Holy Wisdom”).
Church, Mosque, Museum: the Aya Sofia has lived under many guises over the years and each transformation came hand-in-hand with momentous political change. This year, it was no different.
By reverting to the previous designation of Aya Sofia into a mosque, the Turkish courts have set off a firestorm of controversy across the world. It is understandable that faithful Christians would object. The sense of loss they must feel is the same feeling that many Muslims get when they see the Grand Mosque of Cordoba’s conversion into a cathedral. However, what is confusing is that some Muslims are also conflicted – or even downright hostile – to the idea of the Aya Sofia being used as a mosque.
Why are they upset? Is there weight to their feeling that this was an act that was against the laws and spirit of Islam? How true is it that this was pure political theatre?
A summary of the arguments are detailed below as each point reveals a great deal about us as Muslims today and our current mentality:
1. “It should just remain a museum…”
The Aya Sofia IS remaining a museum. The ruling states and the government echoes that it is a mosque and museum but, unfortunately, if you read the headlines you will be given the impression that the museum is being destroyed. This is not the case.
The world is full of buildings with dual functions. The White House is the seat of government and the residence of the President. The Vatican is a museum, a church and the home of the Pope. St Paul’s Cathedral is a tourist attraction as well as functioning church. If Muslims alone were somehow exempt from the ability to combine museum and mosque in one building, then that would be very strange indeed. Yet that is exactly what opponents of the mosque designation are saying.
What opponents for the reversion of the building are arguing for is not for the preservation of the museum – in fact, it will be more accessible than ever by becoming free and open till the late evening – but for the prevention of worship in a building that was built and intended for that very purpose.
2. “It was illegal to turn it into a mosque in the first place…”
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing: many Muslims quote the example of Umar (R) and his treatment of the Church of The Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. In fact, this is the number one excuse used by many so-called Muslim intellectuals who lazily have projected their own biases on to our pious predecessors. They say, not without a little pious sanctimony, that Umar (R) exemplified that Islam is not a triumphalist religion and – though he could have converted the church into a mosque – he chose not to.
For most of history, it was common practice that any conquering army gained full ownership of the conquered lands. Islamic law was actually quite progressive in this regard, stipulating that property in surrendered lands would remain with their owners and not the conquerors. It was only if a land was taken without surrender, according to Imam Al Qurtubi amongst others, should their properties be forfeit. Jerusalem surrendered and Damascus surrendered. Constantinople – despite multiple attempts requesting it to do so – did not. Therefore, Islamically and according to the norms of the time, the conversion of the Church into a mosque was legal.
This is highlighted by the case of a district of Constantinople called Psamatya (present day Koca Mustafa Pasha) whose residents surrendered to Muhammad Fatih separately. The area had the highest density of extant churches, since none were touched or taken over.
3. “But it has been a museum for so long now, so why turn it back?”
Some sources say that they have found evidence of the Church being purchased by Muhammad Fatih with his own money. The evidence has yet to be verified by external sources although it is accepted by the Turkish authorities, but even if you withhold it, the established status of the entire complex as a Waqf (Islamic endowment) is definitive. Waqfs cannot be unilaterally taken over or converted to another use.
The reality is that the conversion of the Aya Sofia from mosque to museum was a highly contentious decision taken in a manner that went against the then legal, moral and spiritual standards. It was a state sanctioned action to satisfy a political objective of the hyper-secular post-war Government. This was an injustice and it is not a good look to say that an injustice should be allowed to continue because it has been there for over eight decades.
4. “We don’t need more mosques in Istanbul…”
Would anyone think it reasonable if their local mosque was taken over unilaterally by the Government and then, when they ask for it back, they are brushed off by officials saying, “there are lots of mosques in the city and many are half empty: we are keeping this one.” Of course not. So, if it is not good enough for you, why should it be good enough for anyone else? In fact, this was the argument used by the RSS in taking over the Barbari mosque in India.
A mosque is not a property like every other. It is owned by Allah and not something we are allowed to rationalise or barter away. Allah has no need for even one mosque, but that does not mean we should stop building them or start giving them away. To go by the utilitarian argument, then anything that is not in full use by its owner is fair game for someone else to usurp. We would never accept this for our possessions so how can we accept it for something that does not belong to us?
5. “This is all a politically motivated…”
Every decision in a public sphere is political, or can be construed to be political, in some way. Building the Aya Sofia into a magnificent cathedral was a political decision by Justinian. Turning it into a mosque upon conquest was also a political decision by Muhammad Fatih. Stopping prayers in the mosque and converting it into a museum was a political decision by Mustafa Kemal. And now, returning the building to use as a mosque and museum is also a political decision by the current Turkish state.
The question is not whether it is a political act to convert the building: it will always have a political dimension. The question is whether you like the politics of someone who was praised by the Prophet ﷺ in a hadith and turned it into a mosque (Muhammad Fatih) or someone who insulted that same Prophet ﷺ as an “immoral Arab” and turned it into a museum (Mustafa Kemal.)
Pick a side.
6. “This will hurt the feelings of non-Muslims and make us look bad.”
This is perhaps the only real argument of them all that has any weight to it. All the previous arguments are intellectual (and less than intellectual) smokescreens for the desire to not hurt the feelings of others – especially when we need all the friends we can get. This is understandable given our current geopolitical situation. This is also why you are more likely to find those Muslims living as minorities objecting to the change of status, reflecting their own precarious situations in their respective countries.
However, if looking at it objectively, we see that this argument also has limitations. Muslims are equally if not more hurt at the ethnic cleansing that took place in Andalusia. Does that mean we get the Al-Hambra or the Cordoba Mosque back? What about the Parthenon – since that used to be a mosque – conquered by the same Muhammad Fatih? What about the Kremlin, where St Basil’s Basilica was made from bricks of a Tatar mosque? And can we have the Philippines back while we are all trying to not offend each other?
Making decisions such as these on the highly subjective grounds of causing offence is not only impractical, but untenable. Many expressions of Islamic faith outside a narrow paradigm of what is palatable to specific audiences, can be seen as offensive to some. If we were to make decisions based first and foremost to protect the comfort of others, you would end up with a set of groundless rituals rather than a faith. It is the equivalent of changing your name to Bob instead of Muhammad since you were worried that even Mo was too exotic. Sometimes, the proper practice of our faith and upholding of our cultural and historical traditions will upset others not because what we are doing is deliberately offensive or wrong, but because we have different values and different standards.
What is most upsetting about the change of use for the Aya Sofia is the double standard at play. Athens has not even one mosque whilst Istanbul has hundreds of churches and synagogues: yet the Greeks are calling the Turks intolerant. The Roman Catholics plundered the Aya Sofia of all treasures and took them to St Marks church in Venice (where they still are to this day): yet it is the Pope that says that he is distressed at the Muslims – who preserved the Byzantine inheritance- for turning it into a mosque and Catholic churches calling for a day of mourning.
All the commentators calling for it to not be converted back into a mosque are also correspondingly mute regarding the Granada Cathedral built on site of a mosque, or the Barbri Mosque turned temple in India, or the Al Ahmar Mosque turned into a bar in Palestine.
But this is human nature and they will shoot their shot. Nonetheless, as Muslims, if we are against the reversion of the Aya Sofia to be a mosque again, then we really need to take a long hard look at ourselves. Just as Muhammad Fatih conquered Constantinople, we need to conquer our own ignorance, our own inferiority complex and our own insecurities.