THE ‘DIVORCE’ OF A SECULAR COURT

Q. The following are some questions on marriage and divorce posed by a brother in the U.K. to a South African Mufti. The Mufti’s fatwa is also provided herewith. What is the status of this fatwa?

Q: I want to ask you a few questions before I make a decision about marrying a second wife.
I am not satisfied with my marriage with my first wife. This is due to a lack of affection and neglect from my first wife. I have had this problem for 5 to 6 years now and I have tried to talk to my wife to resolve how I feel but nothing seems to better my situation, and I have now given up. I still care about my first wife and I still want to provide for her and our 3 children. I want to marry a second wife but I don’t want to commit a sin. The UK law does not recognise a second wife. It is actually illegal in the UK to have a second wife, although it is fine to have a mistress. As I am aware that there is an Islamic ruling that I should abide by the law of the country that I reside in.
1. My question is, if I get permission from my first wife, and provided I fulfil both wives rights, will I be committing a sin to have a second wife in the UK?
2. Does a divorce through the UK civil court break the Islamic nikah? (From my own research I have found that it does not break the Islamic nikah)
3. I have met a person from Morroco who has accepted to be my second wife, but to bring her to UK I have to first divorce my first wife through the UK civil court. Can I do this in order to bring my second wife into the UK? I do not want to break the nikah to my first wife.
A: 1. Whether it is UK or US, the laws remain the same. The laws do not change. However, we advise that you do something that is free of problems and worries.
2. If the husband consents or instructs the court to divorce then the divorce is valid.
3. The divorce that is issued is recognised and valid in the shariah.
And Allah Ta’ala knows best. (End of fatwa)
Please comment. Is this fatwa correct? To even a layman it does not seem right.
OUR ANSWER:
The Mufti has acquitted himself most stupidly. He is a liberal, hence he issued a bunkum ‘fatwa’. The Muslim does not and cannot ‘instruct’ the court. He can only petition and ask the court.
When a man asks a kaafir court to annul his civil ‘marriage’, which is not a Nikah in Shar’i terms, he is asking for the cancellation of the secular contract, not for the issuance of Talaaq.
Secondly, he ‘asks’ the court for a ‘divorce decree’. The meaning of ‘divorce’ in the context is cancellation of the civil contract. Only a maajin mufti with fossilized brains (jumood) will ignore the context and the circumstances, and baselessly cling to the ostensible meaning if the term is translated into Arabic or Urdu for the context in which it is used. The court issues such a decree at its will and discretion. It is not obliged to comply with the request of the Applicant.
Thirdly, the applicant does not empower the kaafir court to issue Talaaq. Fourthly, the applicant does not employ the kaafir judge to be his wakeel to issue Talaaq to his wife.
It is crystal clear that the Mufti has acted stupidly, labouring in the state of intoxication due to substance abuse. The ‘substance’ in this context is western liberalism which has been adopted for fulfilment of the demands of Hubb-e-Jah.
Just ignore the drivel disgorgement. It is an insult to the Deen and an insult to the mufti’s brains to have vomited such a blatant stupidity.
Furthermore, while it is only proper to inform the first wife, it is not a condition for the validity of the second marriage, nor is her consent necessary for the validity of a second, third or fourth marriage.
The ‘divorce’ decree issued by a secular court whether the judge is a kaafir or posing as a Muslim as all so-called Muslim judges of secular courts even in Muslim lands do, the decree is NOT a Talaaq.

HARAAM METHODS

Q. I said to an Aalim who teaches in a mixed school that it is not permissible. He said that according to him it was permissible because students in these schools become murtad. Committing a haraam act to save them is therefore allowed because it is the lesser of the two evils. I have seen Ulama nowadays using this argument to justify their commission  of haraam for purposes of da’wah. This aalim also wears a t-cap. When I said that it is not permissible since it is Tashabbuh bil kuffaar/fussaaq, he said the Head Mufti of Jamiatur Rasheed did not say that it is haram. That is why he wears this type of cap. Is his argument valid?
A. The chap is not an aalim. He is a jaahil. The obligation of an Aalim or of any Muslim
is to state the Haqq in a halaal manner. Haraam ways may not be employed to propagate the Deen. Our duty is to state the Haqq, and for this only methods permitted by the Shariah are valid. When Allah Ta’ala has made an act haraam, it is contumacious to utilize that act for propagating His pure Deen.
If someone becomes a murtad, it is ordained in his taqdeer. It never means that the muballigh should violate the laws of Allah Ta’ala in a futile attempt with a haraam stunt. The last naseehat of Hadhrat Maulana Yusuf Binnuri (Rahmatullah alayh) was on this very same subject. He clearly explained the prohibition of using haraam ways for propagating the Deen. Have you seen his article?
The baseless argument about the t-cap further confirms the jahaalat of this so-called aalim. It was the way of Bani Israaeel to follow even the erroneous and baatil fatwas of their Ahbaar and Ruhbaan. Castigating them for this evil obedience, Allah Ta’ala says in the Qur’aan Majeed: “They take their Scholars and their Saints as gods besides Allah, and also for Isaa, the son of Maryam.” When it suits the nafs, these juhala molvis jump on to the bandwagon of stupid taqleed – taqleed of Ulama who are no where near to  the Fuqaha whose Taqleed is Waajib. If the Head Mufti of Jamiatur Rasheed had averred
that the kuffaar cap is permissible, then his fatwa is a gross error. It is not permissible to follow such blatant errors of the Ulama.